City Council - Regular Meeting

Oh, yeah.

It rotates like at the beginning of the month. I started with four. I'm a referee at football.

I'm going to be in Cowshoe Parish. I'm going to be the next two prizes.

Yeah. Well, tomorrow I'm going to be there. I did. You did. Yeah, I did. So I have...

Pender and Westlake tomorrow, or Friday.

Usually what the, all the money goes to the White House, but, you know, 90% of the White House is, you know, and, you know, most of the White House. And I'm not sure how they, I don't even know how they do it.

They're showing his model's money, so it doesn't show up as much as how that's communicated to them.

Yeah.

This is easier.

You don't have to, you know, get your check before the game and give it to the lockdown. Mm-hmm. Some of the guys don't Thank you.

Thank you.

That's what the computer had you set up for me last week. It's going to run all this stuff. It'll record and take it all up. It's a monster. You know what I'm saying?

It's a monster. You want to go to my house? Yeah. I've worked with you all your life.

We do? Okay. Okay. But he didn't say what it was. I'm not sure. I think it might. I think maybe he and Chris are going to talk about the deal.

Okay. I'm thinking. Okay. Well, I'll let him. Okay. Thank you. Oh, no. We're great. I'm not sure why they talked about it.

I think we might have to do some papers in design.

I think this paper, I thought this paper came from

I don't think I think maybe we had to pay for some of that, but I thought Jeremy took care of that.

I saw that in the news article and I was surprised.

You know, maybe because it's passed through on, we get the money.

I have.

That's probably what it is. It's a grant. I don't like that shit. That's a good question, but that's what I'm thinking.

It's like, I got to take care of all the aid and then you're dealing with something that I do. When I gave it to somebody, you know, they draw a rebound. The world should stop. So much. That's a good idea. I went to Houston yesterday.

So she was having a procedure yesterday. I don't know, it went. No, my grandma, my dad's not.

Like they had to do CPR, she's been on a ventilator.

I was telling them I'm a little bit late for a text.

80 minutes now that she's off the bat. It gets harder.

Thank you. John, those two PowerPoints, I put them on the desktop. So that's where they're running from. Just in case it comes up.

Yeah, I even printed it in color so it stands out.

Hey, Katie, you're back.

Hi, Mr. Mike, I got a question. You know the guy that was, the guy in the blue suit over there?

I think he killed it. Oh my God. That's the story of the year. But I'm pretty sure it is.

When do you want to do it?

No, he's not here.

Before we get started, after roll call maybe? Okay.

We'll do it after the... Call.

Mr. Harvey.

Good.

Where's your son? Is that King Miller? Adam's really sensitive.

Is he enjoying it? How long has he been there? How long has he been there? That's what I thought.

Okay, so he's still got time for them to grind him down.

Get the good paycheck, pay off some loans, whatever you got to do.

Once you get burnt out, you'll get a little better quality of life. That's my cousin. She just finished in Georgetown, so she's going to Houston. Same thing. Georgetown? She enjoyed it. I actually looked at doing my LLM there a little bit, but decided it wasn't worth it for what I was doing.

Um, let's see if, um,

the prayer and Mr. Finley could you lead us in the pledge please?

Please bow your head, please. Father God, we come to you tonight asking for you to just simply be able to make clear-cut decisions, Father God, which are in the best interest of the community, the city as a whole, and every constituent that we represent. We ask that you allow us to build better relationship, purpose-driven leadership, Father God, and we ask that you please allow us just to make the best decisions that will move this city forward, onward and upward. In Jesus' name, we pray by saying amen. Amen.

United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right, roll call, please.

Mr. Bilbo?

Here.

Mr. Young? Here. Mr. Harvey? Here. Mr. Weatherford? Here. Mr. Visano? Here. Mr. Condell? Here. And Mr. Marks? Here. We have a quorum.

All right, for everyone's information, we'll be deferring items three, four, and five to the October 7th meeting. And we're referring item number seven to the September 16th meeting. So if you're here to speak on those items or address those items, we will not be discussing those tonight. Has everyone reviewed the minutes? Any questions or concerns about them? If not, please vote. All right, public hearings. In the arts, art, and demolition, in our other city of Lake Charles, entering an agreement for demolition of a structure located at 23. Yes, sir. I'm sorry, yeah. Mayor. Yes, sir.

Good evening members of the council today. I'd like to Take an opportunity to have a point of personal privilege to recognize one of our own miss Katie Harrington Could you come up here for a second? As you all know, Katie is the city's public information officer. She gets out all the news and the good things that's happening in the city. But part of her job is also to make sure that I keep my political promise of transparency in how our city government works. So last week, this last week, huh? Katie just returned from the National Information Officers Association. That association is dedicated to advancing excellence in public information and government communication to keep the public informed. It provides opportunities for all public information officers around the country to share knowledge, develop professional skills, and also they take the opportunity to recognize outstanding work in the field. So at its annual awards program, which just occurred last week, they honor innovation, innovative and effective communication efforts that demonstrate excellence in serving and informing the public. And I want to say that Katie Harrington here, our public information officer, has been doing a series. city shift one late charles at work video series where she highlights different people aspects of the city our workers it gives people a inside look at our heart everyone works to make this city run what is uh repelling from a with the fire department from a building or riding with the uh with the police department to uh street sweeping after parade uh looking at finance and budgets It kind of gives everybody an idea of what we do as a city and especially highlights our workers and what they do. I'll give special mention to one shift that we usually have a lot of people upset about paying their water bill. So Katie did a series with the water department showing what it takes to get clean water. And it opened a lot of eyes as to what that takes, what we take for granted. So that said, Katie was recently awarded the 2026 National Information Officers Association Best Use of Video Award for the CityShift Series. She won the National Award for the National Information Officers Association on behalf of the City of Lake Charles for the CityShift Series. So now Katie's done these series and you've received a lot of feedback from a lot of residents and I've heard them because people never knew what it took to work for the city and do certain things for the city. And a lot of them say they'd like to see more videos come out. They come out monthly, so please, please watch them. And with that said, if you don't mind, we'll show a little, just a little clip to show what the quality of the work that you've put out.

at work. Each month, I hit the road from City Hall to check out the work that's powering One Lake Charles through one of our different departments or divisions. So basically, my words made it. Oh gosh, turn the hips. I'm gonna have to come do this again. I've got the judge, my driving skills, on camera for everybody to see. Have I got an adventure for you. Come with me. Are y'all going to let me off when I take somebody down in the target parking lot? So you're saying, if the mayor says I need to come to something else, y'all will take me on your cruise?

I'm getting activated for a SWAT call out. You're coming with a SWAT call out.

You ever thought working so hard could be so much fun and be so transformative for our people? So Katie, congratulations. Please say something.

Well, I'm caught off guard and shows you how observant I was. I didn't even notice it went missing out of my office. I just want to thank the administration, Mayor Simeon, city administration. They give me the latitude to do things like this. I'm a very small part of one big team. This wouldn't happen without the video crew. for media posts that really brings the stories to life. And thank you to the department heads for letting me come and interact with your staff and cause a little chaos for about an hour during the day. And then thank you to our employees because they've trusted us to tell their stories. And without them, none of this would work. And I see two of my police officers back there in the back corner who were gracious enough to let me ride along with them. And again, and I just want to recognize some other sneaky people. A significant other and my parents are here tonight. So y'all really got me good. Thank you very much.

Katie, this is a new one for me. Good luck to you guys. I want y'all smile like you like each other. Very good. Congratulations.

Thank you, Mr. President.

All right, thank you. All right, moving on. Item two. In the art of our demolition of the state of Lake Charles, I entered an agreement for demolition of the structure located at 2344 C Street. Marlene Marks, Markecia Elise Marks, and Kendall Wayne Marks, owners.

Mister has good evening Council in this structure you can send the pictures of some roof damage to the structure. Some exterior wall damage one damage. I was supposed to the interior to severe weather damage to the structure and the owner did secure the property and clean it up.

I'm offering a record photographs of the property for service through certified mail this year from July 1st.

Mister president, if I remember correctly, we were waiting for this. It was some issue with the uh, it was it was being sold and I forget was a short sale or slow sale or something like that. We had extended the time so that they could um, she could do it. It was two properties and I think this one was still left last time. Her daughter came and read into the record. So my understanding is we were supposed to be given the time. I don't know if that time has ran out.

Yeah, I have in our notes at the July 1st meeting she had hired a title company to quiet title and we were to have an update by.

Is anyone here for this property. 2344 C Street.

The resident lived in Houston.

The realtor reached out by title is apparently almost complete with their.

It's not my district, I was just passing the information.

I'm going to recommend we defer for 30 days. She actually communicated about a week ago through email. So I'm asking that we defer for 30 days. All right.

Please vote.

Seven in favor.

Well, item six, an art or an demolition RSA Lake Charles to enter an agreement for demolition structure located at 621 Bank Street. Earl Melvin, Anthony Wills, Daniel Malo Wills, and Monique Michelle Wills, owners.

And this is a residential storm damage structure and you can see in the pictures this one has quite a bit of roof damage to it. Exterior wall damage has some broken windows. It's open to the public all exposed in the interior to severe weather damage of this structure.

Offer the record photographs subject property and for service to the marshals office. This is a rehearing from August 5th and I believe sounds here to speak on this one.

Do we have someone here to address this property? We don't have a card on it, but if someone is here to address 621 Bank Street, if you could approach one of the microphones, state your name and address for the record.

Does that look like we have anyone here?

Ms. Wilson actually came last time and they was having some other issues that probably is not going to be avoidable. I recommend normal delays.

All right, normal delays. Please vote.

7 and 5.

All right. Ordinance for final action. Final action. Number 8. An ordinance for Lake Charles to accept the best proposal received from the request for proposals issued for developer design, build, finance, own, operate, and maintain a food and beverage and recreational establishment on one acre more or less to be leased in track 3 of the lakefront of the city of Lake Charles are in accordance with as authorized by Title 41, Section 1214 of Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950 as amended. I believe we have a presentation. Mr. DeLong, y'all.

Yes, and Mr. President, as you recall, the city issued a request for proposals for the track that used to be the former wildlife and fisheries building on the lakefront for a food and beverage establishment with entertainment and a bar. And we had one response to that request that met all specifications. That was by Mr. Chris Lonya. So he has a presentation of the development that he's proposing to put on this particular area of the lakefront.

All right, as well. Good evening, Mayor, council members, city administration. I'm going to for brevity and clarity. I'm going to read through this pretty fast and go through this presentation. Does anybody have a clicker for me? Yeah, thanks. I hope everybody gets excited about this because I am. Thank you for the opportunity to present Loyoles on the lakefront. This is a vision of a permanent waterfront dining and entertainment district. Our goal is simple. Create a place that brings people to the lakefront throughout the day, the week and the year. Lake Charles already has a beautiful lakefront. This project would create a permanent gathering place for residents and visitors can meet, eat, relax and spend time near the water. I also want to recognize the city's investment in Port Wonder and crying Eagles commitment to the lakefront. Those projects

All right. Are we ready? Any other discussion? Please vote.

Seven in favor.

Thank you. Thank you. And I remember nine also the city of Lake Charles entered in agreement with Southwest Communications to provide phone services for the city of Lake Charles. We have someone to address this item.

My name is Brad during the I T director for the city literals.

Any questions. The other discussion.

Please vote.

I am 10 hours, I say like Charles entered an agreement with blocks works LLC to provide cyber security services for the city of Lake Charles.

Also me.

Yes, ma'am. Is this just a new extended contract or something?

So for both contracts, it's replacing former services with new providers, but essentially similar services.

Mr. Marks. Yeah. Does this protect if any of the administration or workers are bringing home laptops as well?

Yes, sir. OK. All right.

Any other questions? Please vote.

Seven in favor.

All right item 11 in ours adopting operating capital budget for fiscal years beginning October 1st 2026 and then September 30 2027 and we discussed the budget are. For last agenda meeting. Are there any other questions or comments on operating budget. Mr. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thank you, Mr. President. I think this is a really fiscally responsible budget, Ms. McDaniel, so I want to thank you for putting it together. And if you could come just answer one question for me. I think after looking through this, there's one thing that it's very clear to me is that the next year is going to be very much about infrastructure. I saw a lot of investment in roads and drainage, which are very much needed, and water and wastewater. the public at large is going to be very happy to see these needed improvements. But over the last week, I've seen a couple of headlines that I think have caused some alarm. It's an $80 million more budget than last year. I understand that that 80 million is primarily toward capital. We're keeping our operating budget. We're not growing government. But would you mind just explaining some of the major improvements that are going to be funded by that additional 80?

Absolutely. Thank you for asking the question. In the budget, you will see an item for installing the southern wastewater loop. And that project we're adding this year, we're adding about $34 million to that project. But that funding is coming mainly from a DEQ loan, which is at a 0.95% interest rate, as well as a coordination with this Kaoksi Parish Police Jury. They're going to be funding a part of that project as well. And then another larger project that's in here is a West Prairie and Lake Road pedestrian bridge for $4 million. And that money is coming to us from a grant that we received through TAP program with DOTD. They're funding the majority of that grant for us. That will be an amazing project that will happen along West Prairie and Lake Road to help citizens who have been crossing that bridge by foot in a very precarious way. It will give them the opportunity to cross that bayou much safer. also in addition you'll see some things that are happening in here where the city is gearing up to participate in the cni project which is on lake street and so our participation in that is also reflected in this budget and the cnf that's the Choice neighborhood neighborhood. Yes, sir. And after just kind of looking at it and talking to you today, I did want to say that if you look on page 236, it shows all the revenue revenue sources for the capital. And of the 89 million, 22 million is intergovernmental. 27 million is that DEQ loan. So that's 49 million of the 89 million. So without that other governmental funding, it would be only 40 million, which would be about city funding. So you can see even the city funding in the capital budget is staying relatively flat. We just have an influx of grant and other federal and state money coming in.

That answers my question. CHRIS RODGERS. Thanks for asking that question. DAVID BURRAGE. Thank you. CHRIS RODGERS. We discussed that as well.

DAVID BURRAGE. While she's there, Mr. President, I got three questions. One, the grant on the bridge, is that something we got to pay and then be reimbursed? Is that?

CHRIS RODGERS. Yes, sir. Most grants, almost every, 99.9% are refundable grants, yes. DAVID BURRAGE. OK.

The second thing is, what is the split between us and the police jury for the Sioux Loop? I know I keep hearing the money we putting, but how much are they putting?

well the southern sewer loop goes across the east and west sides of the parish so on one side that they are contributing more on the west side than they are on the east side and so I don't really have the percentages but I can get those to you but it is a shared it's a CEA that was entered into back in 2017 and I don't know if John wants to fill in on that one but

Well, my concern is just often, since I've been on the council, I hear about partnerships that we do with the police jury. And we always, in my opinion, we come out on the short end of the stick. So I'd like for us to know what we're spending before we get into it. I know it's already been done. But I'd just be curious for the council to know.

This is what's in the budget right here is the city's portion with $8.3 million of it coming from the police jury. But then I don't readily have the information of what they're spending on the west side.

OK. Mr. Marks, if I may, in this particular project, as Ms. McDaniel mentioned, on the west side, it's being managed and handled by the police jury. We're participating with them on that project. And on the other side, we're managing that side of the project, and they're participating with us. And most of it's based on a percentage of how much is outside the corporate limits, how much is inside the corporate limits. And as a reminder, this came about quite a few years back when we were looking at having to upgrade the Sarver Street lift station and run parallel lines in order to help facilitate Morgan Field University area and some of these areas that had a need for additional sewer capacity. At that time, it was an expensive project, and we said, is there something else that we can do besides just upgrading the lift station running parallel lines that can provide for future growth in the future both inside the city and outside the corporate limits and because of the extensive cost back then we got together with the parish and they agreed to participate because this opens up future development so it develops properly so when you say managing that's basically our project and we got them on they coming on as a partner yes sir and on on the on the west side they're managing it they're designing it they're going out for bids and we're participating with them on that project but ultimately the entire sewer loop will connect to plant d which is our sewer plant off tank farm road and all of it will be owned and operated by the city okay let me turn over the city for operation and maintenance

And one thing I was curious about, Emily, I was reading through the budget and I seen that I think it's $3.8 million for 18th Street. That's the CNI project? Part of it?

Part of it. Well, the 18th Street improvement is improving the roadway, drainage, water, sewer, as well as the bridge that crosses over that lateral that leads to Creole Street. And so we are receiving some grant funding for that project. And then some of it's city cash. We had to do it in two phases. Phase one was supplied by the city and phase two will be supplemented with city cash.

So that wasn't included in the whole project when it first came about. This is something we took on.

It's benefiting the infrastructure of the CNI. We agreed that the project would benefit the project as a whole. So we're undergoing that rehab of that street and that bridge to benefit that project.

And just one, that's going to be in addition to what we've already contributed to that project?

Yes, sir.

That's all I have, Mr. President. All right.

Anyone else? And the next three or four hours are related to the budget. Please vote.

I'll stay here if you want me to. Seven in favor.

All right. Number 12 an orange or so like Charles Inerton agreement agreements for programs related to special arts and cultural events exhibits authorized by our operating capital budget for the 2627 fiscal year. The questions on this item. Please vote.

7 in favor.

All right, item 13, although I say Lake Charles-Edmonton, architectural and engineering agreements on all projects outlined in the approved capital improvement program, CIP, funded in fiscal year 26-27 capital budget. Questions? Yes. Yes, sir.

Go ahead. Whoever said yes.

I think it was just.

Oh. I've always had a problem with us approving a group of things together. In my opinion, I think we need to separate this and have them bring every A&E agreement to us as they come up. Because once we approve all of this, the city council is taken out of it. At that point, we've basically given them approval up front to go forward with everything. And I think that we should have the opportunity to hear about these projects before we decide whether or not we're going to go forward on it. and that's my opinion on it and i'd like to have it amended so that it won't group all of them together for a whole year of projects mr cardone if i may respond and i'll let ms mcdaniel jump in here and expand on this

But all these are typically done each and every year when we adopt a budget. Those capital budget, the projects that's being approved for A&E for us to move forward, those projects are in the budget. So you know what those projects are already. So this isn't projects that's not identified under the budget and the capital improvement program. These are in the package as we speak.

So anything new or anything that may have to be amended comes before us?

Yes, sir. That's not part of the budget.

The names of the of the who has the projects are in the capital budget right now. The names of the people who know doing the work.

So the one that's before you right now is a any agreements with allows us to enter into architect engineering agreements for projects that's identified in the capital budget.

And those projects are being, yes, is what we've gone over with you.

No, and the contractors aren't approved. And whenever it goes out for bid, we will have to approve, ultimately approve the bids on those projects.

Absolutely. My concern in this is if anything changes, it comes back before us.

If it's a project that's not identified, yes, sir. If it's something y'all don't know about, then it comes back before the city council. Okay.

And basically we have a list, we try to rotate those and of course we pick the ones that, some engineers can do certain types of jobs and others cannot. Some are civil engineers, some aren't. If it's a building, we're building.

Based on the experience and qualifications, we want to make sure.

And certainly if there's any engineering or architectural firms out there that want to participate, we encourage them to come in and get the package and submit their name so that they can be on the list to be considered.

Any other questions? Comments?

So is it amended or as is?

There wasn't a motion to amend or a second, so it's as is.

Yeah, I didn't want to amend it once. Mr. Cardone explained that if anything changes with these projects, it comes back before us. I'm good with that. OK, good.

All right, thank you. Please vote.

Seven in favor?

All right. Item 14, an ordinance authorizing Lake Charles to enter into any right-of-way agreements for the approved fiscal year 2026-2027 capital improvements projects and or for right-of-ways and to acquire land in our compliance with the site trial ordinance of fiscal year 2026-2027.

I have a question, Mr. President. In the fact sheet for number 14, it says, During the fiscal year 2026, 2027, the mayor is hereby authorized to negotiate and execute right-of-way agreements on behalf of the City of Lake Charles, which are necessary to implement capital construction projects authorized pursuant to current or prior year capital budgets and projects implemented during the performance of the ordinary activities of the Department of Public Works, including but not limited to activities of the sewer, water, street divisions. What is considered ordinary? That wouldn't be like, as an example, the enterprise extension wouldn't be considered in this. So ordinary would be like day-to-day operation. Gotcha.

Any other questions? Please vote.

Seven in favor.

All right. We're on resolutions now. I know that in a minute we're going to pull 23. 21, we have to. appointed chairman. So any do we want to be any other items to pull individually. All right, let's go to item. Let's go ahead and go to item 23 then. A resolution many resolution number one 32 dash 15 were in the rules and regulations come a city Council save like Charles with regard to citizens addressing the City Council agenda meeting with their concerns now is our proposed amendment to that.

Yes, the You have the sheet in front of you, but number four was supposed to be zero days. I want to amend that resolution or ordinance to reflect zero days to appear for the agenda meeting, just like we have now, as opposed to somebody having to wait 15 days before they come back to the agenda meeting. And I want to just revise that portion of it, taking the 15 day.

We want to remove it because currently that's the council rule. You want to amend that council rule? Yes.

Okay.

To zero, not three? Yes. Okay. Any input from the administration?

You want to amend the resolution as it's the amended resolution as proposed?

Well, the amended was supposed to be, you're talking about this sheet here that we were given? Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, that was supposed to be a fact sheet. And when I talked to the city attorney about it, I told him to remove the 15 days. But he put three in here. And we could use that if I'm willing to compromise if some of the council don't feel that it should stay like it is and use the three. Because the three would coincide with if anybody had a problem at a meeting like today. they would have Thursday, Friday, and Monday before they can come and speak at the agenda meeting. But I think 15 days, it infringes upon, I think, the public having the right to come and speak. Or if you're sitting in an agenda meeting and you hear something spoken about and you want to make a comment at that time, you should be able to fill out a card and speak on it. You shouldn't have to wait 15 days to come back and talk about what was going on in the meeting at the time. But my original was to take the 15 days off.

Do you have? Can I go first? No, you can go first. Okay. Actually, I agree with Mr. Marks in maybe the three compromise. I hadn't seen a copy of the signature upfront, but my original thoughts were, I think that council members need to be available to the public at all times, but I don't know that every issue needs to come before the full council on the spur of the moment. I think having this process in place to some degree allows city staff to address the issues while they're at their desk with their code of ordinances and knowledge base and files and folders that they can refer to, rather than having to come up to the podium and kind of fire at the hip. I also think that there's a little bit of frustration whenever we don't enforce this with people who come to the podium who have been waiting for a while to talk to the council. And at the end of that, we have to say, I'm sorry, we're going to have to look into that, and we'll have a department head get back with you. So I think the process of them requesting to appear and having three or four or five days go by, and then they actually come back where they can come to the podium At that point, if it's not being addressed by city staff, we can hold staff accountable. We can say, well, this was somebody did reach out to us three plus days ago. They should have at least been contacted by now. And if it's not a simple solution, at least the staff will have some recommended path forward. They'll have been able to investigate it, look into it, and give us substantive information that we can then make a decision on. So if you want to reduce the number of days, I'm agreeable with going along with that. But I do think that the process of requesting to appear is really important when it actually, in my opinion, makes it a little bit more efficient.

Well, I think that the council is mixed up in the fact that we always think that somebody is coming to report a problem. Some citizens just come to voice their opinions. And they shouldn't have to wait 15 days to voice their opinions. I think that it's our job to regulate how long we give them and make sure that everything falls in order. But to have someone, even if it's a problem, You know, we tell them to call the action line. If they call the action line, that's three days. If it's not happening, we say give them another couple of days. Let's say somebody reports a problem and 10 days pass. Now we come back to the agenda. Once they hear in 10 days that the problem is not solved, now you've got to fill out a sheet for 15 days before you come speak. So this could go on and on and on and on. So I think that the public, we should continue like we have been doing since I've been on the council. I was made aware of that 15-day rule just a couple of meetings ago. And I think that if we do our job and regulate the time frame and conduct the meeting the right way, you know, it could continue that way. I just don't want to make the public wait any amount of days for them to have to get what they have to say off the chest.

CHRIS JERRAM, Now, we're setting the agenda, right? on those meetings. That's what we're doing. That's one part of the meeting. That's one part of the meeting. The other part is for public comment. Is that normal? Or is the intent just to set the agenda?

It depends on the municipality's rules. Not every municipality has an agenda meeting. Some do.

I would state that that's public comment.

I'm sorry. Could you say that again? I messed something here.

Not every municipality has an agenda meeting in our format. Some do, some don't.

We're not required to have an agenda meeting, right?

Not, I mean, y'all could always change that rule.

But that's part of the, if I'm not mistaken, that's part of the charter, isn't it?

No? Okay, so at a regular meeting, the public can't speak?

They can speak, but they have to speak on the agenda. Right.

But if I can, I want to, and I don't disagree with you on, but I think even when that, how long has that rule been in place?

I think it was 2015 when it started.

So 11 years, and I think, I understand the purpose of it, and I was going to read it so everybody understands that, so these things can be handled administratively or through their city councilman, and maybe get a resolution quicker. Because I know we all get phone calls, and I try to take care of it right away, because I'm getting older, I'll forget. So I try to take care of it right away. And that rule has been on the books. I think we can, I'm not opposed to, and altering it or amending it, but I think you gotta give administration or the police department or the public works department some time to collect data and answer the questions. And if it's going through the city councilman, get back to me so I can resolve it for them. I've done this four times this month just on a few little things. And I think if we keep the rule in place and we exercise it with, the the goal is to help people understand what's going on in the city and to get their problems resolved and i don't think anybody here if if mr fondell said i want to take a and forgive my ignorance on this a personal privilege or whatever because mr smith would like to come talk about this particular item I don't see, in my experience here, anybody's ever going to say, no, no, no, we don't want him to speak. Even though it's going against a rule, Mr. Marks wants somebody to come talk about this particular topic. Mr. Marks, he represents that gentleman and let him speak. If I want to let somebody speak on something. So I think there's always an avenue to let them voice their opinion or ask a question or whatever, even with that rule in place. But it kind of keeps it on a keel where somebody just didn't come in here and blast the Public Works Department about trash when they didn't even contact the Public Works Department to let them know that there was a problem. I've seen that time and time again just in my year here. So I do understand you want to make it open for the citizens to come and I think we could do that through our work.

Well, to rebut what you're saying, if it's that simple, then when somebody come up here, you can say, hey, listen, give me time to check on this, and I'll get back with you. You can say that. But when you put a rule in place, that restricts them.

Well, the rules benefit.

But the rule, as precedent set, where two presidents, two sitting presidents of the city council refused to do that at the time that they were in turn. So there's been contention upon it. But that's why we were running the meetings like we have been for the years. For the four years I was on the council and going into these two years, we've always done it where the public had the right to come up, as long as they fill out a card, follow the procedure, they could speak on that item. I just don't want us to get into the mindset to think that the public is always coming to report a problem. Sometimes the public just want to be heard. And if we put a time limit on that, I mean, 15 days is a lot to take. Oh, we can't talk to you now for 15 days. When we can just hear them out, ask councilmen if we got the issue, more often than not, we know somebody's come and talk already before they come. So, hey, look, this is your problem. Give me a little bit of time so I can get with the public works or whatever department it is, and I'll get back with you. I would much rather us saying that as a councilman instead of just saying, hey, 15 days, hear from me. That's just my stance on it.

Well, I agree with you, and I think if we handle that before the meeting, somebody calls you, you know, then you don't need to come. And if you don't hear back from me, shame on me, now you can come talk.

But it's- I do think, though, that three days is- I just don't know if that's a good time to really do your diligence. We've been getting a free fall of comments just three days just to give us some warning what's coming up. I have to agree with that.

Well, I mean, you're entitled to whatever you want to vote for. I'm just telling you why I'm bringing it up, because I believe it hinders the public from having a right to speak on an issue when they want to speak on it. I understand if y'all saying if all of these things that they were talking about was problems and public works or whoever it is needs time to fix it, if that was the only issues, then yes. But that's not how we've been running these meetings, and that's not what the public's perception of it is. I got a time where I can come in here and say, look, I'm unhappy with whatever's going on in the city. And here's how I feel about it. And we give them that, and we let them vent. If it's something for me, I could tell them, hey, it's going to take me a little time to figure this out. But I just feel like we're infringing upon, not infringing. Well, we started something, and we've been going with it that way. And all of a sudden, something changed because we went back and realized that the rules say 15 days. So that's all I'm saying. Like I said with Mr. Young, I'm willing to compromise my perspective on three days. That sounds fine. But 15 days?

15 days is a little exorbitant.

I'll go with that.

Well, here's another compromise. Could we make it seven days a week?

I'm not going for anything other than that now, but I can get outvoted. Three days is enough to get from one meeting to the next meeting. Seven days, we back to the same thing again. I agree with the three days.

Three days is good. Also, I just want to point out the exception. This rule doesn't apply if it's a matter of public health, safety, welfare, or an emergency. So it can come on that day anytime.

mr harvey yes mr president um for various reasons i agree with every councilman's perspective but the reason why i'm i'm going to be in favor of the shortened time is because i know it's our councilman's responsibility to be able to get back to the constituents but oftentimes even as a councilman i can't get the information that i need to be able to convey back to my constituents so pushing it back for 15 days is only going to frustrate the constituent especially in the time frame that some people just can't make it here on tuesday or wednesday to be vocal about what their issue is. And sometimes when they're calling their council member or emailing a council member, I can't convey that information back because I haven't gotten back the information that I needed to be able to properly educate them or inform them on what's going on. So I do feel like shortening the time period is a great idea. But I also think that we shouldn't present this notion that, to me, like we're trying to muffle the public. It's a public meeting. At the end of the day, we're voted into these seats by the public and by our constituents. So the same way we are able to come up here and voice our concerns, I think we should allow them the same opportunity. That's just me.

And not to mention, Mr. President, when they do have to come fill this out, we're going to have to make doggone sure that the place where they fill it out is working, that we got all the proper documents, that somebody didn't drop the ball and this person filled the form out in time but got here. And somebody say, oh, well, I didn't get the form. And now what you do then?

all right also want to be too just to be can we make a change that people that do fill out the form do it during normal business hours not at 11 or 12 o'clock midnight because it could be missed that well i mean i i think everything is doing business how they do it like that and it may be missed if it's that late and not doing regular business hours

And I'm glad Ms. Renee brought that up because some people can't make it doing business hours. They have to do it online. So now we're creating another scenario where if it doesn't get to where it needs to get to in time, some more time is added on to it. So I think by putting it on the, I think when it's public comment time in the meeting, it puts it on the resident to have to be here to speak. If they're not here to speak, that's a different story. But if now you can do it online or you can come up here, we subject to miss something.

I also think too, we all know we're in this digital age, but some constituents and residents are just, they don't have the capabilities to go online to be able to complete forms. When they come in here and they're physically here, it's easy to pick up a card from the left or the right door, print something and present it to Ms. Renee, but some people, I can speak for a lot of my seasoned constituents, they don't have the capabilities, whether it be Wi-Fi technology or just the mentality to be able to log onto a computer and submit a request. So I also think, too, that's enabling people, too, whether they can just physically come in. But when you tell somebody to go online, everybody's not equipped to perform in the digital age.

Most of the time, like Craig said, that you know when somebody coming. So I think that the three days, or if I know somebody coming, it should be maybe on us to notify that they coming within that time frame.

But like you just said, if one of my constituents show up and I want them to speak, I can ask the council to allow them to speak with no prior notice at all.

But you don't have to worry about that if we doing like we doing now. Fill out a card, come speak.

But if we amend it to three days, then how does that work?

In my opinion, I'm willing to compromise on the three days. But the three days presents the same challenge as the 15 days because you got to fill it out. You don't have a meeting every three days. Well, but you got to fill it out. You got to fill out the card. Back to what Ms. Renee said about you may have to do it online because everybody can't come during the day.

I think you make a good point. If you use good judgment, or certainly if someone's complaining about the trash not being picked up, that's something you say, okay, we need to give public works time to address that. But yeah, you just have to, I think in some of this stuff, you just have to use some common sense and courtesy, both from us as a council and from the public. Right. Yeah. Address things as my offer and writing is a sometimes agreed to disagree agreeably. So but we do have two cards. We have a car first. So we have a car for Miles Brown deferring his time to Mr. Delafaz Mac Delafaz. And so we have Mr. Delafaz would like to address this and he would have six minutes.

afternoon good evening council mcdowell false 1917 19th street and i agree with mr marks with the exception of the compromise i think you shouldn't be creating barriers for your constituents or the citizens to come up here and speak if you did if i can offer an option to you guys if it's the property standards portion that you're concerned about and you want to give the public a chance, I'm sorry, your staff a chance to look into something, I can see maybe the three days working that way. That way you've given your staff a chance to look into that particular issue. Now, I can see an administrative nightmare also because you could, how does the citizens log their complaints? Do they come up here the first time on the agenda meeting? Give you a car and say here then the three day starts there or when does the three day start? Is it going to have to be something done online? So I just think we have to be practical on how we look at this but I believe a citizen should be able to come up here and talk without filling out without waiting 15 days and we've been operating under those conditions of zero days for as long as I can remember so the the I think we've become accustomed to being able to fill out a card and come speak. I think for the most part you would say that most of these discussions are pretty fruitful and they're not adversarial when they come up here. So I think the citizens ought to be allowed that opportunity to come up here and voice their concerns. I guess I don't know what are the biggest issues that is prompting the review of this to go to 15 days. I don't know what has happened that has created that, but I think we have a process that's worked. And like I said, if you want to do anything, I can see the property standards portion maybe being looked at as to give your staff an opportunity to look at a little further. and i guess i if this only applies to agenda meetings is that specifically

Yes, because the rule is already in place. When you come talk, like today, you're talking on a specific item that's on the agenda. Other than that, you don't have no public comments here.

So the way this would work is because it's listed as an agenda item, we can fill out a card and speak on it, correct? On a regular meeting, yes. So once we go through, I guess, your second portion of the agenda meeting is when you ask for general comments. Anybody want to come up? That's what this applies to, correct? Right. So my standstill is the same. I think zero days. We should amend the resolution for zero days. I just think that it works for the citizens. I understand that if a citizen wants to come speak, one of the council members can allow that, but then you get into whether they wanna let them speak or not, and then you just got a whole bunch of other things that I think enters the equation. So I just think you all should look at continuing with the zero days as we- And if I may add- I'm sorry.

If I may add something, Mr. President, I think a lot of people feel like if I can come and talk to the mayor and the administration face to face, that just make it's something about that makes them feel that much better you know what i'm saying and i know they could do it in 15 days but it sometimes it quells a lot of things for us as councilmen when they come and they can just come in and you know without having to do all that stuff preliminary they come in say what they got to say and they go on about their business you know i mean the rules i mean

We're talking about amending our, because our rules say the 15 days, so we're actually talking about changing our, potentially changing our rule, which is fine. That's what this discussion is about.

It's a portion of it, yeah, a portion of it.

So essentially, I guess you all have been operating outside of those rules. Yes. And I think, like you said, we've come accustomed to the zero days. And I just don't think you create more barriers. And I'm not sure how your three days or 15 days at work. And I think why not be able to listen to your constituents right then and there? That's when the problem arise. That's when they want to know what the solution is. And at that point, you say, hey, and as the president, he has a lot of leeway because it's his meeting that he's running. Is that look, give us a chance to give this to property standards or whoever it is, whatever the issue may be. and come back in in 15 days at that point so i think you do give some options there and i think from the decorum of the meeting the president has that right to set the stage on what what is being said if it's disrespectful or what the case the president has that right to to shut that down so that's all i have i just want you guys to consider that thank you yeah so um mr president

so you got two two deals going here one where somebody is actively complaining about a city service okay correct and then there's another one where it's just free to come up and say anything you want to say for both of them they're free to come and talk about any of them But anything you want to say not not necessarily a city. Service know it could be it could be something I didn't yet. Yeah, and another thing our rules is that is that not the part where where you just say anything where the public can address the council. Any on any subject that they want right. Is that right. Yes. And that's what that agenda is The agenda meeting is set up for.

The purpose of the agenda meeting is to decide what is going to be talked about in a much more concise manner at this meeting.

The purpose of the agenda meeting is to set the agenda.

So, see that's what I'm getting confused when I talk to the... Because there's... Go ahead. When I talked to the attorney, he was saying that the agenda meeting, the intent was to come to set the agenda. So the other portion, nobody has dealt with where the public just feel free to comment on any subject and say anything that they want. It has been dealt with. That's where the 15 days come in. I just think we should know which way. I don't know. I don't know.

So we should know what they're going to be prepared to discuss. Yes.

I mean, but you don't know that now.

But the thing I don't know. I'm just trying to figure out what we're trying to decide.

We're trying to decide. In the rule now, it states that in order for somebody to come and speak at an agenda meeting, you have to give 15 days notice. That's the only portion that I'm concerned about. The rest of the agenda meeting is as it is. We're only talking about the public comment portion of the rule.

That's right. And so... he's saying the intent wasn't just to comment on anything. The intent was to comment only what is going to be on the agenda. No, no, no.

They do that at this council meeting.

The agenda, what he said was the agenda meeting. The purpose of the agenda meeting is to streamline and set what's going to be in the regular meeting. But a portion of our agenda meeting consists of public comment. Okay.

And the rule is basically, because someone won't put something on the agenda. It may be something that we don't want aware of that may need to be addressed. And the public can speak freely about that. And if two councilmen want to put it, well, if If a council wants to put it on the agenda and no one objects, it goes on the agenda basically by acquiescence of the other members for not speaking up and say, hey, I don't want that to go on the agenda. If that would be the case, then you would have to have four or more councilmen agree for it to go on the agenda. Exactly.

Well, actually, since this rule has been in place since 2017 and it was 15 days, I say let's go down to three. And if three becomes not efficient, then we go down to zero.

If the public has the right to speak, they don't need to wait because there's nothing.

By the rule, they say 15 days now.

There's nothing to solve. They're coming just to talk. To speak, yeah. So we don't need to know. They're just coming to talk. So that's two different things.

I understand that. This is going to give you three days to know what they want to come talk about.

But the only thing I'd say about this is, whether it's three days or 15 days, we still need to make sure that their ability to be able to make that notice It's consistent. We talked about if you do it online and something get lost or some people can't do it online or whatever the case, then it starts all over again. That's why I say just take that off the burden off of any administration or any worker and put it on the resident. He has to come in here on that Tuesday, fill out a card and wait to speak.

Currently, the process I do believe there's a request to appear online and it's tracked as soon as you feel that. I tried it today just to test it because I'm a nerd. It goes directly to Renee and to Katie, and then it's tracked by the administration and the city council clerk. So that's why I said I think having the process of the request to appear form is paper trail and it's good documentation for us because when they do get to the agenda whether it be three days or whatever at least we know what they're coming to talk about we're prepared to answer and if somebody's dropping the ball and not getting back with them we can address that as well let me clarify so they would have to fill out that form three days before the agenda meeting right three working days three working days before the agenda meeting

That's what that's what the orange current says that we can amend.

But that's only if they have a lot they want us to provide a comment here period request to appear they got to fill out that form. That's the quick to request last year they asked you would City Council to find out.

But that that's not what we're saying we're saying that there's a portion of that meeting where the the citizen has a right to address the council right anything that they want right. So we don't, I mean, they can bring up any kind of, how will we stop them? It's not a specific issue. So I don't see the point in changing the rules at all, man.

Because it takes 15 days for them to do that.

Yeah. We want to amend it to three.

All I'm saying is if we amend it to three, We need to have a plan in place when there's an error and the three's been messed up for some reason or another. Somebody didn't get it. Somebody didn't do whatever.

Well, that's my point. We always have that option to allow them to speak. Even if they didn't fill out a court, we can decide, vote, and say, yes, we agree. Maybe there was a problem. We're going to let you speak.

But my thing is, most people that call me, they have an issue. It's an ongoing issue. They notified me that they come into the agenda meeting. So we know about most people's problems. They done called the city multiple times before they come up here. So that part of it is Most people are frustrated that they didn't get an answer. That's why they come most of the time. OK, so but the part where is is free to address the council. You can't stop a citizen from that right to address the council on whatever they think. Well, that's what the rule will do.

Well, I'll call a question.

So what is it?

So this is what?

Right. So so so this is so what we're voting on is this is no. Are you want to make a motion to change it to?

That's what I said at the beginning. The motion was zero. OK. Now, you know, if we go back.

All right, so we have a motion is zero. So we have a motion before we call the question. We have a motion. So do we have a second second? We have a second. Okay. Any discussion on the amendment?

Clarity on the yes vote. Clarity on a no vote. Yes.

Yes. Would be to change it from 15. We're changing it wherever we do. We're changing 15 days to

The current, as it's proposed and written and what you could vote on right now, absent any further amendment, would be to amend it from 15 days to three days. The motion is to amend the proposed amendment from three to zero. So if that motion passes, then you'd be voting on whether or not it's 15 days or zero days.

Well, I just want clarity, Mr. Stutes. I drafted this. And there was an error in the fact of the three days. I said, I'll take the three days. If we came to three days, I'm willing to amend it to three days. But my amendment, and thinking about it just for clarity, I'm making a motion to amend this resolution to reflect from 15 to 0.

And he got a second. So that's what we're voting on. Right.

Correct.

Any other discussion?

Clarification on the vote again.

Yes would be to amend it from 15 to 0.

This don't matter no more?

No. Well, it started at 15. But I guess what we originally had in front of us was a resolution for it to be three days instead of 15. But per Mrs. Stutes, it's 15.

What we doing now is voting on the resolution to be amended to reflect 15 to zero. That's the first thing we voting on now.

And if, just if I may, and if that would happen, if it passes, it passes, and then you vote on as amended. If it fails, then somebody else can bring an amendment and bring back 15 to three or whatever you choose to do.

Right. Okay, are we ready to vote?

Okay, so we have four yes votes. We have Mr. Harvey, we have Mr. Weatherford, we have Mr. Fondale, and Mr. Marks. Those against were Mr. Bilbo, Mr. Young, and Mr. Visano.

So it's zero.

I believe you would have to vote on as amended.

Yes. Yes. So you have to make the same. Now we're voting because the resolution reads from 15 to zero. Right. We amended it.

We amended it.

So we voted for the amendment. It's a resolution. It's not an ordinance. That's right. That's right. It stands. Okay. All right. All right.

All right. Yeah, let's see. We do have item 21. Residents are so like Charles out of the seal bits purchase downtown. Like Paul at Christmas Reese and Garland.

Mr. Harvey, would you like that item?

Oh, yes. For the for the chairman for light pole at Christmas Rethink. OK. All right. Go ahead and read the rest of our items. Residents of the City of Lake Charles, advertisers receive sealed bids on certain projects outlining the improved capital improvements program CIP funding the FY 2026 2027 capital budget. Residents accepting project number CP 3277 state project number H. 013870 Enterprise Boulevard Overlay 12th Street to Broad Street is substantially complete and authorizing advertising for a 45-day lien period. Item 17 through 19, the hearing date will be October 21, 2026. Resolute setting date for public hearing, accommodation structure located at 1817 Eleanor Street, Drury B. Webb, Jr., owner. Resolute setting date for public hearing, accommodation structure located at 2712 South General Wainwright, Lily Mae, Washington, owner. Resolute setting date for public hearing, accommodation structure located at 733 Cleveland Street, 1 Lantern Group, LLC, owner. Residents today are probably hearing concerns for the Lake Charles Planning Zoning Commission's decision to deny a request for variance in order to maintain an existing unpermitted shed 2 feet 11 inches from rear setback versus the required 5 feet within a residential zoning district at 5464 Milan Rouge Drive. Russia's are silly Charles participating couch you Paris multi jurisdiction hazard mitigation plan update 2026. And adopting said plan is saved by Charles had admitted hazard mitigation plan. So those were already considered item 23. So please vote on items just read. Please vote. All right, items 24 through 32. We ran into the record the day Paul is meeting 1 p.m. in these chambers.

Yes, ma'am. Can you put on a record that the hearing date for number 20 is October 7th, 2026. And we need to appoint a chairman on 21.

OK, we did. Mr. Harvey's chairman on 21. And the hearing on date on the 20th is what day? It's October 7th. Okay, so do we need to go ahead and do we just need to note that or do we need to revote on? We're good, okay. All right. Meeting adjourned.