City Council - Regular Meeting

online. All right. Ready. Recording in progress. Good evening. This is uh May 5th, 2026 uh snow covered city council meeting. Um can we get a roll call, please? Council member Kern, Mayor Pro Tim Hamington, sorry, here. Okay. Council member Coopermanman here. Council member Dickinson here. Council member Hfner here. Council member Fehey here. Mayor Lee here.

Would you join with me in the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Great. Um, can I have a motion for approval of the agenda? So, oh, second. Um, all in favor? I I Any opposed? Okay.

Um, the next part of our meeting is, excuse me for just a second. um is public comments on items not on the agenda and items on the consent agenda. Do we have any of those tonight? We do. First up is Scott Maroy, Jennifer Henderson, Leo Franks, and J.R. Kettlesen.

All right. I will use the opportunity to um just mention that when you come up, if there's a bunch of you um coming up, um please identify yourself and whether you were a Lewisville resident, you have three minutes or you can pull your time if you identify somebody who is with you. Um, if everybody can refrain from um booze and claps and all that kind of stuff, that easier, I think, for everybody to breathe easier when they're um talking. So, you can talk about anything you want as long as it's not on the consent or as long as it's either on the consent agenda or not on the regular agenda. Who's first?

All right. Thank you, Mayor Lelay, and and council members. My name is Scott Mroy. I'm a resident of Lewisville. Have been since 2015, but I've been in Colorado since 1982. Um, and I'm the chair of the museum advisory board. And we wanted to talk to you this this evening about the plans to commemorate uh Colorado's 150th birthday and the country's 250th birthday. Um, as you know, the museum has been in business for 40 40 years. Been um spent a lot of that time collecting the history of all of Lewisville. Um and and I think particularly now is being especially dynamic uh in terms of reaching out to the whole community trying to be very inclusive, get everybody the benefit of of those things. And so in conjunction with with um the cultural advisory board who people are here, the history foundation and of course the staff that works with those things. We've been working staff's been doing most of the work um uh on celebrating and commemorating those two events. And so we wanted to share with you today um and pool our time um those various uh events that we have planned to take place. Um and I think Jennifer is going to go next.

Hi, I'm Jennifer. I'm a resident at Lewis in Lewisville and a volunteer for the Lewisville History Foundation. and we're excited to be here with this collective to share with you some of the events which are on the city's web page. Uh but one of the ones I've attended that I've really been enjoying is the history happy hour. These are a series of events that bring people together in local pubs and cafes and provide kind of a social opportunity for people to get together and learn about uh Colorado and Lewisville history. We also wanted to alert you to the upcoming Colorado Day on August 1st. There's going to be two events and I'd like to turn it over to the cultural services to talk about one of those events.

Yes. My name is J.R. Kettlesen. I'm a resident of Lewisville. I'm also the chair of the cultural advisory board and and we're doing we're doing great teamwork here today to bring you this information. So, Colorado uh day on August 1st, we're going to have our second annual oldtime fiddle contest and that'll be that'll be at the farmers market. It was very well attended last year. Um it was a lot of fun and we're hoping it'll be, you know, a bigger event this year. Uh this brings young kids together to play oldtime fiddle all the way up to, you know, seniors. And so, it's a great event and I would just encourage everybody to come out and that's going to be on August 1st, um you know, Colorado Day. Thank Thank you so much for your time. I also want to add that on Colorado Day, there's going to be a Colorado Day festival at the museum campus. It's going to have reenactors, family games, hands-on history, and it should be a really fun intergenerational um celebration of Colorado heritage. And in addition to this, the museum's hosting moments that made us exhibits and those are going to be rotating in the front windows of the museum throughout the year and they're going to focus on defining moments in Lewisville and Colorado history. So the real goal there is to connect uh local stories to state and national milestones. And we're just excited to be in this partnership. And I think it's these cultural events really bring a lot of economic uh drivers here to our town and economic studies really show the attendance and uh cultural these cultural impacts have um people that want to spend extra dollars in our restaurants and transportation and other things when they come down to Lewisville. So we're excited about the opportunities this year. I'm going to turn it over to these folks here.

Hi, I'm Leah Franks. I'm a volunteer on the cultural advisory board. Um just wanted to share three public art projects that are coming up um in conjunction with the 150250 um planning. The first is the Mary Ting um uh public art installation. Um it will be installed in Memory Square Park. It's honoring um resident um Mary Tbing who is an aviation specialist in the United States Air Force. And that's a a statue that's going um up soon. the Find the Pomodoro art scavenger hunt um which is eight separate um public art installations that are going up throughout the um uh city with a theme of tomatoes. Um it's a city-wide in installation inspired by Lewisville's Italian-American heritage, inviting residents and visitors to explore historic sites and neighborhoods around town. and the Lewisville Lens Community Photo Project um which is a community photography exhibit encouraging participants to capture people, places, and moments that reflect Lewisville today. So, a bunch of different um residents have cameras and they will capture their daily lives and what they're experiencing throughout the day. And that will all come together for um a photo project for everyone to to see. So, all different ages and demographics. Um and uh yeah, we're excited about all those projects coming up. And there's two more programs um associated with this um by primarily by the museum. The first is a passport program both for America 250 and Colorado 150. I'm supposed to say it in Latin, but I can't. I'm so I'm going to leave it at at that. Um but there's a passport program for both the state to get uh folks different places around the state and different events and Lewisville has formed its own uh

passport program with different events uh and attending things in which you get a reward in the event um you make it to enough. Um, and then lastly is the museum's 40th birthday party over Labor Day weekend, which um will have a variety of events and celebrations. Uh, and it's to celebrate the museum, but it's also to say thank you to the city leaders, the volunteers, and everybody that has supported the museum over the years. So, with that, thank you. You very much appreciate the teamwork on that. You didn't have to pull. You actually could have had 12 minutes, but I'm not gonna, you know, bring

I expect you all have some work to do. All right. I Thank you so much. That was a great story. Thank you. Thank you so much. Really good summary. Next up is Don Parcher.

Good evening, Don Parcher of Lewisville. Um glad to be here. Um, preparations are going well for the Lewisville Spring Get Together, the first maybe the first annual, we don't know. Um, and that's May 16th in Memory Square Park Saturday, a week from the Saturday. So, that's 1 to 4. And I I just emailed to city council and I guess city manager um the flyer and site plan for that. Um, I have uh extra copies if anyone's interested. Uh, I'm still we still have spots available, exhibitor spots. um mostly what's nonprofit and government so far. No, businesses. I I talked to Jillian with uh the the chamber and she says businesses aren't doing so great right now. So, it's hard for them to afford having a person, even one person out of the office or out of the store for three hours or whatever it is. So, that's unfortunate. Um maybe things will be better and next year. Um I've arranged for good weather. Um, and I'll say I've been tracking it. I've had terrible luck with block parties. It's like either it it uh it's forecast to have a thunderstorm and it keeps people away or we had a thunderstorm right be like in a half hour before a block party. So, I've been I've been tracking the weather. So, it's looking good so far and I'll say more about that uh later um about community event sponsorships uh later this evening. Also, August 4th is National Night Out. Um, I've mentioned this to city council before. Superior does a nice event with, you know, the fire truck and police and what have you and and booths. Um, I I would ask that Lewisville at a minimum um encouraged residents to go out and walk around. That's kind of the idea is to to be out and about on that night to discourage crime and to bring people together. So,

I'd recommend uh the city maybe specify a time um that recommended time for people to go out and walk their street or their neighborhood and hopefully hook up with other other residents there. So, thank you. Thank you, Doug. Can we have a motion for the approval of the consent agenda? So moved. Second. All in favor? I I

Any opposed? Um the next item is councilformational comments and committee reports. Do we have any of those? First, council member Fee.

Thank you, mayor. I just wanted to uh announce I guess the number of things that are being celebrated in the month of May nationwide locally. There are I'm I'm just going to read the ones that I am aware of. uh mental health awareness month, AsianAmerican and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, JewishAmerican Heritage Month, Cinco de Mayo is today. Uh Mother's Day will be on the 10th, Memorial Day on the 25th. It's also wildfire awareness month. Uh public works week is May 17th. Uh and this is drinking water week. uh and also older Americans month and we'll be celebrating that at the senior center on Wednesday the 13th with a lovely lunch. So, and they have a lot of performances also at the lunch. So, I just wanted to say there are so many things to celebrate in the month of May and I hope you are participate whenever you can.

Thank you. other reports. Uh, seeing none, I've got one um that I want to take some time with. Um I think I've sent um or I have mentioned in past council meetings um that one of the groups that we are affiliated with and that I attend and that um our deputy city manager Sema Fox uh provides staff support to is called the Northwest Mayors and Commissioners um coalition. Um that is a group of primarily mayors. There's some um city council members that have been I think appointed by the mayors of their various towns. It that includes Erie, Westminster, Broomfield, Lewisville, Lafayette, Longmont, um Superior, uh Boulder, and Boulder County. And I think I said Broomfield, right? Yeah. Um I think those are it for now. Um we may be expanding um to Brighton but we haven't done that yet. Um but it's a group that was formed originally in the early as to um I think in the wake of um the effort to install the HOV lane in Highway 36 which had raised some concerns uh back then and this group formed out of that and then continued and has been doing um both lobbying at the state house and nationally around ground transportation primarily um grants and programs and so forth. And

uh the group has been very successful in part because it represents or the people who serve on it represent hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people. And it is um always amazing for us to go say to um Washington DC which we do annually and which uh I I did and uh director of public works Kurt Coh uh was the staff member who went along. Um uh it is always a matter I think of curiosity when uh members of Congress who we meet with and me, uh senators and sometimes committee staff see this group of people together um that represent that many people because it is not typical. We've been told that it's not typical in Colorado. It's not typical elsewhere. And so um that's kind of a pretty interesting uh earmark of what has been done. As I said, it was it's mostly been ground transportation that we have concerned ourselves with. Um this year the NW NWMCC um uh actually expanded its reach uh to cover at least some issues around air transportation particularly with respect to some issues that have arisen um around uh the Rocky Mountain um Metropolitan Airport RMMA um which is having uh impacts We would probably describe them as externalities that they're imposing without an awful lot of um input from any other um neighboring jurisdiction.

In fact, with pretty much no input from neighboring jurisdictions um and um their safety concerns in particular. So that's that's one of the things we added to the list this year. But I wanted to just review what we did and give you some takeaways from the meeting that meetings that we had. Um this was about not quite two weeks ago. Um we usually go in on a Wednesday and there's usually meetings on Thursday and Friday and then everybody comes home. Um and on Thursday primarily it's meeting with members of the Colorado delegation. Um we met either together or in splinter groups where there were meetings scheduled at the same time with Congressman Noose and Congressman Peterson. Um um I'm trying to think of of the others that we met with. Um, we met with staff of uh Senator Hickinlooper and Senator Bennett. Um, why am I forgetting the name of the congressman from Brighton? Um, I sorry about that, but we met with all of them uh to try to talk with them about um the issues around safety. Um because one of the things that the current administration is very supportive of is uh highway safety particularly and a number of us um of course have great concerns about that. Um particularly on highway 7 and highway 287. Um it was, you know, it it's a um it's

not lost on any of us that many people who work here or um who work elsewhere um but live in Lewisfeld travel those uh routes um have encountered the dangers um and particularly on 287. And so we spent some time talking with um uh folks about that. Um one other thing we did is uh on the the um airport or air uh transportation um uh point is we met with uh house um subcommittee on aviation. Um the committees have long names which I will not uh try to regurgitate right now, but we met with um the majority staff of that committee and talked about safety issues and arising from um having um uh the flight schools flying a lot of um their training flights over Lewisville. um sometimes um right over schools in the western side of our town, Cole Creek and Fireside particularly and over um you know fairly populated areas and that was of some concern. Um there have been other situations in other cities. Broomfield had a um an accident which you may remember from last year which resulted in two fatalities there. Um, we learned um about, and this was shared last night at our Superior Lewisville uh

city council and town council uh meeting that there was a jet that flew very very low under 300 feet above uh the city or the town of Superior. Uh people in the town I think were terrified that it it sounded like a missile. It was so close and there was a m a malfunction and you know there's some concern about safety issues. There's plenty of concerns about other issues as you know but um these are um things that we talked a little bit about with committee staff and then um also with the FAA. Um I think up until the very last moment, we didn't know whether the meeting with the FAA was actually going to happen. Um but we had a meeting with 12 people from the FAA, about half of whom were um administration officials and about half of whom were regional um folks, folks from Denver and the area in different parts of the bureaucracy that is the FAA. Um, and that was also a really interesting uh meeting and and again I think they were fascinated by having that many people in one place representing that many residents. Um the takeaways that I I got out of all of this were uh that we shared this um the concerns about safe safety in particularly training flights over densely populated areas and schools um and those um imposing safety issues on all of us. The FAA I think was very receptive to that concern. I understand that there

was a report that was issued last year by the F uh the FAA concerning RMA RMMA's um operation and uh some of the safety issues that had arisen the most um was at the time the uh most unsafe uh general aviation airport in the country. They have, as many people know, rerouted some of the traffic uh more to the west of Lewisville and they have said uh at the FAA that that has resulted in some positive gains for safety. Um I haven't seen any statistics, but I I hope they are right on that. Um both the the subcommittee staff and folks at the FAA um were concerned when we talked about the externalities relating to safety being imposed on uh many communities without any input. um they both used the term um needing to have a seat at the table. Um I was really happy we didn't use that term. people me mentioned that and I think pretty supportive not necessarily with their jurisdiction because they don't necessarily have any control over that but I think they observed that these are legitimate and important concerns and um I think that's important. Another takeaway is we learned a bit more about how the agency functions, who handles what within the uh AFAA because it's, as I mentioned before, a pretty complex uh bureaucratic

um uh entity and there are a lot of pieces to it and they don't all necessarily work closely. there's some silos there and particularly with respect to safety and air traffic control. Those are two that we learned quite a bit about. Um and we learned about uh some of the operations in the area that we can contact with some of the concerns that we've raised. Um there was a letter from the NWMC back in November we sent concerning some RMMA issues. Um, that also spawned or or prompted a letter from the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners to also write uh the FAA um asking for some clarification about their authority. Um, so it was a ripe time to talk about these things. Um, we asked about that, whether they were going to respond to it. No answer on that, but we'll follow up. Um we discussed capacity issues whether the airport was at capacity and if not who's the person who decides that and on what basis. Um so that is um something we didn't get an answer to either at this meeting but we'll be following up. So um those I think are um the highlights. Um, and anybody who wants to have further information, I'm glad to provide it. I've uh largely gave this report to u with Mayor Lasis of Superior last evening at our joint meeting. Um, so council has kind of heard this once before, but uh the community hasn't, and if there are any questions, don't hesitate to reach out. Are there any other reports before we move on? Okay. Thank

you for the indulging me in that lengthier presentation. All right. Do we have city manager report?

All right. Thank you. Um we put out a notice today about the hydrant flushing that'll take place this week. I will send talking points to council as to why it's important to do this even though we are looking at um drought conditions. Also, due to the weather, the drinking water week tour has been rescheduled to next Wednesday. Uh, note that LRC will be virtual tomorrow morning. And so, um, not a hybrid, not in person. It'll be all virtual. And then just to note, additional recognitions during the month of May. Thank you to Council Member Fehey for noting some. Um, we do have Vanessa online, so we must mention small business week is May 3rd through 9th. Uh, May 4th through 8th is economic development week. We have Municipal Clerks Week on May 3rd through 9th, National Police Week May 10th through 16th, and National Public Service Recognition Week May 3rd through 9th. I think this is important example of why we're not bringing proclamations to council because it's so easy to miss things and so um we we're appreciative of everything that everyone does and we'd like to recognize all. Thank you. um you forgot my wife's birthday, but um now I I I appreciate all of that and thanks for both of you for bringing these to our attention. Um so um we'll move on to our items of regular business. The first is ordinance number 1924 series 2026 an ordinance amending title 7 of the Louisville municipal code concerning accessory dwelling units ad ADUs and compliance with house bill 24152. This is on for first reading to set the public hearing. Um a couple of things. one, this is um an ordinance and we're here just for first reading, which means

there's not going to be any public comment tonight. Um the council will primarily be hearing a presentation just like the public and offering um any amendments um as well as any questions and any suggestions um for additional information that staff should bring uh with them when we deal with this at the public hearing which we will set tonight if we choose to move this forward. So with those things in mind, um let's go to Jeff.

Thank you and good evening. Yeah. So this is a targeted uh update to our accessory dwelling unit ordinance to address compliance with state law. Um the issue is that the state law requires explicitly that our ordinance must permit an ADU a minimum of 750 ft in size in most cases. The specific issue with our code that was adopted about a year ago now is that we cap the size of an ADU to 75% of the size of the primary home. And so in a narrow universe of scenarios, that being if the primary unit is less than 1,000 square ft, we're actually in violation of the state law for those unique circumstances. So if a home is less than 1,000 ft, technically our ADU ordinance says your ADU has to be less than 750 ft. And so hence the issue that we're addressing. So, it's narrowly focused on addressing that one specific issue with this ordinance. So, the proposal is to essentially override the 75% rule um and allow up to 750T ADU in all cases except if the primary unit is is 750 ft. Um so, uh these are all um sort of to comply with state law. Um none of the other size restrictions or other standards as it relates to ADU are touched as part of this. So, um, it's really just about that scenario where if the unit the primary unit is less than 1,000 square ft. And so, to show an example of how this ordinance plays out. So, under the current conditions, so if your primary unit is 900 ft, for example, under the current code, it says that your ADU can only be 675 ft. That's the violation of the state law right there. Um, under the proposed code, it would say you can be 750 ft with your ADU in that scenario. Um, however, if your primary unit is less than 700 square feet, so 700 or 750 ft², if it's 700 square feet, the ordinance just basically says its ADU

has to be smaller than that primary unit and that's allowed by state law. So, that's basically it. Staff's recommending approval of the ordinance for public hearing and happy to answer any questions. All right, council. Any questions? Yes, Council Member Cooper. I think just one question. Um, is there any way that someone could sort of swap which is the which is the ADU and which is the primary um and sort of use that to basically build something larger?

Yes, you could. Yeah, you you could do that. So, whichever one is smaller essentially is the ADU if it meets these requirements. So, if you wanted to flip it, um, so there'd be a couple processes that we would want to look at. So, if it was an existing unit and they wanted to build another unit that's bigger and then the existing unit becomes the ADU, we have a certificate or um basically a process they go through to acknowledge that as a as an ADU. So, to be a safety inspection and things like that. So, but there is so there's a process, but the answer is yes, that's possible. Yeah.

Any other questions? All right. Um, I think we're ready for a motion. I move that ordinance number 1924 series 2026 pass on first reading and the public hearing be set for Tuesday, May 19th, 2026 at 6 pm. Second. Uh, any discussion?

All in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes. The second item on our agenda is another ordinance. Um this time one that's on for second reading and public hearing. Ordinance number 1922 series 2026 an ordinance amending title three of the Louisville Municipal Code to establish a business assistance program for small businesses and to change approval thresholds for BAP agreements. Second reading and public hearing. Um I'm going to open the public hearing and um are there any disclosures on this? Okay. Uh if not um do we have a staff presentation?

Hi mayor and city council. Thanks for having me. Sorry I can't be there in person today, but we are here for our second reading of um to amend our business assistance program. As some background, our business assistance program is the citywide incentive program that is administered through economic vitality and through city council. It provides incentives to new or expanding businesses into the city of Lewisville. um predominantly acts as a rebate program with sales tax rebates, use tax rebates, building permit rebates, sign fee rebates. Um there's also components that have addressed vacancy bonuses. So if someone's going into an empty building, if they meet the qualifications, they can get up to $100,000 depending on the building square footage. They we also adopted late last year an enhanced assistance portion of our BAP program that helps offset some of the costs for these highly intensive, highly unique, highly specific businesses that might be moving in that have above average, you know, startup costs. staff also works with other city programs as well as you know partners locally through federally nationally to align our incentive policy with both business needs but also to make sure that these programs are all working together to support our business needs and not duplicative or working against each other. Some background as it relates to the specific amendments we're talking about today. Um March 6, 2025 was the first economic vitality um committee discussion. May 8th, 2025, EVC provided direction. December 11th, 2025, the EVC provided our recommendation to city council. And the first hearing of city council is April 21st of this year.

There are two program amendments that this ordinance would address. a small business addition for a tiered rebate as well as amend administrative approval limits. All other program parameters and approval processes would remain the same. For the small business edition, we are proposing a cutout for new and expanding businesses into the city of Lewisville that have a total square footage of 3,000 square ft or below and have no more than five locations. And as part of this incentive, they would automatically um or administrative get approval for a tiered rebate incentive. So year one, they would get 90%, year two 70 and then 50 30 10. Effectively this would give them a 50% rebate for five years which is our most common form of incentive. Um but this would allow the business to receive a greater incentive in these first years where the startup capital and the cost of getting open and operating are more extensive. Additionally, we are um proposing an administrative approval amendment that would increase the administrative approval by the city manager from $50,000 to $100,000. This will align with the city manager's current purchasing policy authority and would would apply for all incentive types within our BAP program. Questions?

Uh, council members, do you have questions? Yes, council member Coopermanman. Yeah. Um, just one question. um for someone to get administrative uh approval of a BAP um they will have to besides the the the the amount um that it's worth they'll have to meet all of the standard criteria. So if there are any deviations from those criteria then it would come to council. Is that correct or?

Um, so the way our administrative approval process works is they would apply just like anyone else would and then should the total amount of the of the incentive between all of the different variables that you could get as an incentive. So like the sign permit rebate, the building permit, construction use tax, whatever that total amount is. If it is under or $100,000 or under, it can get approved by the city manager. $100,000 and $1 and up will have to still come back to city council for for approval.

Okay. I guess what I mean is, you know, on occasion we've had businesses come in and ask for sort of more than the typical 50% um over some number of years. Um, and so e even if that were totaled less than 100,000, it could still be administratively approved. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, Council Member Dickinson.

Um, I know the answer because of our last meeting, but just wanted to clarify for the public that businesses can still request something different like the 5050. They don't have to do the 90 70 50 3010. Um you answered that question last time, but just kind of putting in the record for everyone that that's an option they have is to work with you on a different break breakdown, right? Yes, they could choose um to move forward with just like 50 for um or move forward with this tiered rebate. Thanks.

Okay. Yes. Wait, now he now I have a question because I think I'm understanding this differently. So to to follow up on council member Coopermanman's question, I I had thought the way the ordinance work is there's a not to exceed percentage and and what I'm I think what you answered is as long as the dollar amount is under 100,000 they could request different percentages. say for example 100% for 5 years as long as it doesn't go over 100k and that would be administrative that could be administratively approved.

Um it could be that is um unlikely. There are additional parameters within um the program that talk about length and rebate amount. Um the agreement would still be negotiated but you know the same way all agreements are. Um, and someone could come in and say, "I want a 100% rebate for 5 years." We would tell them no. Um, but they could come in and ask that and then through the negotiation process, we would land at what the city would be comfortable with giving them and then depending on the amount threshold, it would go to city council or the city manager.

Go ahead. Maybe for clarification for Dietrich, is is it any different than our current system for 50K? So is all we're doing is changing what we already do from 50 to 100 or we changing two things at the same time because if it's how we've been administering it at a 50k level, I'm okay letting staff go to 100K if it's the same way. But can you confirm, Vanessa, if it's the same approach you've been using?

It is the same approach we've been using. Yeah, my my confusion is I just thought it was a not to exceed percentage- which to me means you can't go above that. And what I'm hearing is it's like a it's a sort of a guideline but not an actual hard ceiling. Um Kathleen has her hand raised. Kathleen.

Yes. Um so I'm looking at the ordinance and um in section 3 uh 27.050 050 A2 it has the 90% in the first year 70% in the second year 50% in the third year so on that cannot be changed unless by the city council approves it by ordinance because the ordinance specifically has those percentages as part of what the council's adopting and this is something new in the ordinance Does that answer question?

It answers DRI. And what it changes is that if someone wants 50% straight across the board, they'd actually have to come to council. They can still get it. Or if they want 75% for 5 years or 50% for 10 years. If they want anything different than 9750 3010, they have to come to council. They would and it would council's approval would need to be by ordinance. It wouldn't necessarily be an ordinance that amends the code across the board for everyone, but that deviation from the ordinance would also need to be approved by ordinance under the equal dignity doctrine.

So, so if I may, I think I'm somewhere in between the things that are being talked about. Like I like the idea of flexibility. if they don't want if they don't want the sort of declining waterfall, I don't know that we need should be in a position where to have two hearings on an ordinance to give them 5050 5050. Um I also think that we shouldn't go higher than essentially the equivalent of 50% for 5 years without talking about it. Um, like I do think that's probably good for us to just check in about. Um, because I I think it's good for everybody to have some skin in the game in terms of the the tax piece. Uh, so I don't know what exactly what that means for an amendment, but I think that's sort of my thinking.

Are you Let me try to clarify that. Uh, again, I've I've got the draft ordinance up. Um it's par or page 33, but it's section 327050. Um a um and it's the second one in particular. Are you suggesting um council member Hefner that you're uncomfortable with two Romanet one and two or because that I mean it reads a rebate of city sales tax and amounts not to exceed and then there are five options.

No no no something else. I I am just agreeing with council member Dickinson that the way it works right now is you get an even amount across it's half across 5 years or up to half across 5 years. We've restructured it which I think will be good for many to give a greater benefit upfront and less of a benefit on the tail end. I think the question is if somebody comes in and says no I don't want I don't want 90% in the first year. I just want I want it the old way, 50% for 5 years because for whatever reason that's better for my business. I think what the city attorney just said is we would have to pass an ordinance specific to that business to accomplish that and I'm worried we're sort of maybe being a bit narrow if that's the case. Go ahead.

Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, I would I would love if it's simple enough, just an amendment to this um ordinance that says, you know, with staff approval, an applicant can get up to a 50% rebate over a 5-year period with, you know, a flexible uh structure within that five years. an example being 97 50 3010 or 50/50 or 80 60 50 40 20 doesn't matter but it can't exceed 50% without it coming to council for the for the five years right so like pre-approved 5 years under 100k 50% rebate with any structure annually that staff and the applicant want to work out is that a simple enough amendment that we don't that we can do that tonight attorney I'm not sure. We need to have the actual text of the amendment and I can try to work on some language that I think will meet your goal. Um, but you know, we've talked about this before when we're going to amend ordinances on the fly before adoption, we should have some specific language. So, if anybody has that specific language, I think that would be good to talk about. Are are we able to have it just be very specific that up to 50% rebate over the five-year period and staff can do that however they like what

so director.

Yeah. So um this may need a little more discussion but I want to flag something is that there's a you know this ordinance is doing a couple things. It's creating a new chapter 13. Um, it's a it's a new chapter 3.27, but it's also amending so if you go down to the ordinance a bit, and Vanessa, please correct me if I'm wrong, but then it's also amending a portion of chapter 3.24. So there's there's different options where we're trying to carve something out for small businesses where they could do this tiered thing, but if they don't want to do that, they could go under our normal not the small business BAP, but the the regular BAP, if I'm understanding this correctly, and I I'll want Vanessa and the city attorney to confirm that. So I think if they didn't want to do that tier, they don't have to participate in that section that's being created by that chapter. they could go through the normal BAT process I believe and then do a different percentage under that chapter.

That was the intent that at the time of application they select which portions of the BAP they want to participate in and they could click sales tax like they do now normally or they could click this small business edition. It's how we have it set up too currently for like the enhanced insistence or vacancy bonus. Like you opt in to the one that you choose and in this instance it would be sales tax and it would go through the process we normally go through now or it would be the small business one where that tiered rebate is is automatic but we were still trying to give them the choice that they could choose which one they wanted to participate in.

Yeah. So I I think uh if you qualify under the definitions under 3.27 then you can take part in that. Not all you know not all businesses are going to take part in that but if that business can choose to participate under 3.24 if I have that number right if they wanted to regardless of what type of business they were. Council, are you comfortable with that clarification? Um, okay. Um, I'm looking online. I don't see anybody online who's raising any question about that. All right. Um, thanks for the explanation. Um, that helps. Um, any other questions that council members have about anything else in this? All right. Um, it's an ordinance, so we take two rounds of public comment. Uh, first round is now. Do we have anybody who would like to make a public comment or not? Nope. Okay. Then we can come back to a first round of council comments. Any thoughts? concerns. Okay, back to the public. Um, are there any public comments about the measure? Right. Um, come back to council one last time. Make a motion, please. Um, I'd move that we pass ordinance 1922 series 2026.

Okay. I'm going to close that public hearing. Second. Good. Um, we'll need any any other comments by council on the motion. All right, can we get a roll call, please? Mayor Prom Hemington, yes. Council member Cooperman, yes. Council member Kern. Council member Hefner, yes. Council member Fehey, yes. Council member Dickinson, yes. Mayor Lee,

yes. Right. Um, the next item is resolution number 42 series 2026, a resolution adopting a revised community event sponsorship policy. Um, do we have a staff presentation? We do. Thank you, Mayor. Please, Jenny, are you able to put it on the screen?

Awesome. Thank you. So, we're going to tag team this. I'm going to talk about the um policy. Samma Fox, deputy city manager, and Mindy Ochre is going to talk about the awards for this cycle. A little bit of background, this program establishes a process for organizations to apply for sponsorship and to qualify for events. It is a new program for the city. This is a pilot funded for one year at this point in time and for council consideration. We first adopted this in September 1, 2025 and we've done two cycles. This is our second cycle. We have learned a lot in this first cycle. Um, a new process has been learning. We want to thank all of the applicants and all of the cross departmental staff who've worked on this. Currently, the policy is a little bit unclear and complex because of the sheer number of opportunities for engagement and support here. It's created some confusion for the applicants and it's also been burdensome for staff. So, we'd like to present some simplifications of the policy that are in line with how we've used it so far and we think will be beneficial for all parties. We'd like to recommend we offer monetary awards only. Those monetary awards can then be used for people to pay for permit fees or costs for police or things like that. We'd like to include the award cap that council talked about in discussions actually in the policy. This was discussed and used but not in as part of the policy. And that would be 50% of the cost of the event up to 1,000. We'd like to clarify when funds are distributed. So, we'd tie things throughout this to the issuance of the special event permit. This would avoid confusion because we know we'd have a confirmed special event permit. And then we aren't funding events that for some reason don't come to pass or have a permitting issue. We'd also like to clarify that for events that council award sponsorship for the marketing as in inclusion in some social media and things like that is included and we'd

ask for that copy the content at the time of the special event permit. We'd like to generalize the timeline in the policy. It's specific to these years right now. That way it could be evergreen. And we'd like to add some provisions to event changes because we do this twice a year. Things evolve. Right now, as long as someone is still meeting the intent of the policy and there are only minor changes, we would recommend still supporting it. If there are major changes, such as leaving the city of Lewisville, then we would recommend not supporting it. We'd like this to be at the discretion of the city manager, who could of course escalate to a policy consideration for council if needed. Um, and that is the end of our policy revision conversation. If council is supportive of this, we'd like to move forward with the second round of applications assuming these policies are in place.

I have one question um on this. I I don't know there others have any questions. Any questions? Yes, Council Member Cooperman. Um could you just remind me so in the first round when people asked for inkind donations, we counted that towards their 1,000 maximum. Correct? Yep. Okay. Which resulted in us um issuing more monetary sponsorship than in kind sponsorship,

right? Um and then my other question, could you also remind us so in the policy we say that um the applicant has to be a nonprofit or a neighborhood organization or something like that? Um how well did we align with those provisions with the first round of awards? I can't Yeah, I think we aligned well. We left the provisions pretty general. you could be a school or other sort of I mean the the point was having not providing funding for for-profit organizations. Um so I think we aligned well in that first round.

Okay. And I mean it maybe getting ahead of ourselves but it seemed like some of the applicants for the second round maybe do not strictly fall into those categories. Um but you haven't you haven't put forward any suggestion that we change those categories. So, I'm just kind of wondering about that situation. Sure. It's pretty common for these types of sponsorships to be for notfor-profits or community type organizations. I think it gets a little bit sensitive when you're using taxpayer money for for-profit organizations. And so, that's why we've made that recommendation here in the policy.

Thank you. Yeah, the question that I had really had to do with the two parts of the year. Um, we've allocated $10,000. Um, this year is the idea that there's 5,000 sort of designated for the first half year and then 5,000 for the second. That's correct. Yes, that was the original intention, though we did not use the whole 5,000 for the first half. So, council could consider that in the second half if they'd like to.

Right. One one question I had on that, and it's just a policy question. I'm not sure we need to deal with it tonight, but um sometime well I I'm wondering what kind of incentives that creates um for some events later in the year to go earlier um and seek some funding in the first part and some in the second part because I know you know there's a limit as to the entire amount folks can seek. I don't think I want to really raise that right now, but uh because I I think we can we need a little bit more um kind of road underneath us before we handle that. But I just I I appreciate that. Um I don't think there's there's not anything that that we need to do to adjust the policy to split the pot that way, right? That's

I don't believe so. Usually doing. Okay. Um, any other questions from council members? Okay, so with that, I'm going to turn this over to Mindy Ochre in our city manager's office who's going to go through the July applications.

Thank you, Sam. Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Prom, and Council. So, continuing with our presentation here, I will talk about our applications. For this round, the application period opened in March, the 1 of March, and then it closed 1st of April. As a reminder, the criteria uh to be eligible for sponsorship, an event must provide direct benefits to Lewisville residents, agree to promote the city's sponsorship of of the event, be open to the general public, and have the majority of that event located in Lewisville. needs to contribute to the economic vitality of the city. Events must have proper permitting and liability insurance coverage. And then events serving religious or political purposes are not eligible. Applicants can be nonprofit organizations, neighborhood groups, or school organizations. So a cross departmental team reviewed and provided feedback on the six applications that we received for this round. Four of those six met the criteria and staff recommends awards for those. One out of those six requires additional review and council consideration and then one of those is not recommended for award by staff. Okay. Okay. So, based on past president and potential economic benefit, staff recommends sponsorship awards for the events in green. So, Cenus' Lewisville Downtown Critz, uh the Lewisville Turkey Trot, uh Endurance's Monster Dash Run, and then the homemade pie contest. staff um does not recommend the item

highlighted in pink there, the education and acupuncture 30th anniversary celebration. Though we recognize their outstanding accomplishment of 30 years in business, this event seems closely tied to the promotion of a business. And then the yellow item, the Davis Finny Foundation is the event that we would like council to consider primarily since that event would be held at a private location. That is the end of this portion of the staff presentation and we are happy to take questions. Okay. Council questions. Yes, council member Cooper.

Um I guess I'll follow up on my previous question. Um so like on the chart of um events um right so a few of the ones that are green um you know if you look at their application they're not a nonprofit or a neighborhood organization um and I'm I'm just curious what staff thought about the status of those. Um, I could I mean I don't know if I could call one out, but I don't know if I want to. Um, you know, I mean like the turkey trot, which we funded last time around, right, is technically organized by a public benefit corporation. So it I mean it maybe that's a marginal case or something, but it's not technically I guess a nonprofit. And so I'm just wondering how staff thought about that status uh when reviewing the applications.

Sure. Yeah. Sure. In that in that example, we looked at the Turkey Trot as something that supports a nonprofit and is was supported by council in the past. So, we're trying to be thoughtful of those considerations as we review these applications. Okay. Um, other questions for council? Okay. Uh the only question I'll ask is um about the turkey trot. Um how much did we uh award them last year?

I believe last year outside of the program. This program was not in place at that time. I think it was a $2,500 sponsorship if I recall. Sam, does that it was and we waved a number of fees which brought it to about a $5,000 level of support. Okay. All right. And one other question is the the homemade I'm not sure I quite understand the homemade pie contest it already see received city support um and um is just to be clear is that one you're recommending

okay in addition to the support that's already given. Yeah, I believe um if I recall this one correctly, they were hopeo they were doing this each year and they were receiving funds from the city after they would spend all the money for all the supplies then they would be reimbursed. I think this time they're doing it in reverse order know how much it is total.

So I'll add a little bit to this and I'll invite our cultural services director Brandy to feel free to add anything she would like to here. Um, this is part of our Labor Day and fall festival event and so there is some staff support as well already from a setup and table and chairs perspective and things like that. Staff has reviewed this including that event staff and does recommend this additional support as something that would be supported from a staff perspective. Do we have a sense of how much in kind?

I don't do you have a Good evening, mayor, council. Um, the homemade pie contest is part of our fall festival planning. Traditionally, this has received monetary support out of the arts and events budget that um is additional to the money that we put aside to support fall festival, Labor Day parade, senior dinner. So with this ask, we are looking to move the financial contribution into the community event sponsorship program, but continuing the staff support for things um like health and safety, but also the logistics and planning for the event. So it would remove that from our budget um for operating and into the community event sponsorship budget.

Is there still money that is being used for the fall festival from the arts and culture budget? Yes, the rest of the fall festival which is um you know 34 to 45 different vendors in the setup in the of the actual festival footprint that is still coming out of operating. This process is actually a communityrun organization or communityrun event that is enveloped into the fall festival. So we don't run the pi contest um that is run by a community organization or community group.

Okay, any other questions? All right. Um, why don't we take public comment if we have any? None. All right. U, bring it back to council. Um, thoughts from council. Oh, we got Sorry about that. Looks like I'm so sorry. Sorry, Don. Don Parcher.

Yes, Don Parcher. Good evening. of Lewisville. Uh, good evening again. Um, I'm not here to complain or u request additional support, but I wanted to recommend a few things on this program. Um, and I'd be happy to consult with anyone who applies or or the staff about some of these. Anyway, I'd recommend that the probable cost and hoops that applicant has to go through to complete the whole process be described in a description of the program. Um, and along with that, I recommend that after uh receiving an application that someone from the city meets with the applicant. Maybe that's being done. It wasn't for me. Um, to discuss those hoops and costs um involved with with that spe particular um event that they're proposing. And I think the spring uh get together might be a little bit unique in that it's it's in a city park and it's you know we're expecting over 300 attendees. So um so I just want to mention that um for an example um I was approved for $625 altogether. That's cash and waiver of fees. Um but I didn't realize I'd have to pay uh $549 for this special uh permitted event. um permit, whatever. And um $84 for the park fee, uh $220 for a additional porta potty, and um $363 for insurance. So that's like altogether $600 more than I was granted. So just just to let you know. Thank you.

Thanks, Don. Those are good suggestions. Um anyone else? Okay, we'll take it back to council. Um why don't we take the um since the deputy city manager mentioned um the pickle ball for Parkinson's um why don't we take that one and um what comments do council members have about that one in particular? Anything? Yeah,

I'm fine with the suggested $4,940 total for those five grants, including the Davis Finny Foundation. I of course I'm assuming it's still in the city of Louiswisville, just in a private location within the city of Louisville and that the event is a fundraiser for that Parkinson's Foundation. That's correct. And they've indicated on the application that it would be open to the public. Yeah. So, I I've think they're all great and great work and I would even make a motion if you wanted me to, mayor. I have a couple of things to say about it when time comes. Go ahead.

Do we need to make a motion on resolution 42 uh before the proposal the awards? My preference would be that you move on the policy before the awards, but either way is fine. I'd move that we pass resolution 42 series 2026 uh a resolution adopting a revised community event sponsorship policy. Second comments. Yes. Council member Coopermanman and then council member Hefner.

Um actually a sort of a question um for staff. Um, given Don Parter's comments, do you think there are any uh other changes we should consider in the in the policy that might help applicants with some of the issues that he raised or or not? Sure. Yeah, I'll give a thank you to staff here to director Cummings and as well as um Mindy Ochre here. We have put together a sort of checklist followup for people after they go through this award process which will help take people through some of that information. I don't think it needs to be in the policy, but we have updated the supporting documents.

I just have two comments on the policy. Um, one has to do with the question Council Member Cooperman asked about for-profit entities. I think it would be helpful to clarify that language. Right now, I think if you read the policy, it it pretty clearly suggests that you have to be a nonprofit or community group to get funding. I think if we're going to be awarding funding to others, we should say so in the policy and and try and explain sort of on what basis if you're, you know, if you're involved with a community group or it's a community event, whatever whatever the case may be that we're actually doing, I think we should try and describe that accurately. The the other piece that that continues I think I asked about this last time that continues to give me a little pause is the exclusion just sort of the blanket exclusion of religious events. I think we're okay on legal footing as I understand it from the city attorney. Um but but the city does you know we sponsor the parade of lights which is a you know has a lot of Christmas tie-ins. It's you know maybe it's not a religious event but it certainly if you're not a Christian it might seem like a religious event. Um, and I think we just need to be thoughtful that we're not sponsoring some forms of religious events and not others. I don't think that's what we intend with that language. I think if there was some other event equivalent to a parade of lights that had a, you know, a Jewish tie-in or Muslim tiein or whatever the case may be, but in a sort of community serving pop culture way, I I'm sure we would consider it. But if there was a way to capture that in a language so that it see I don't want to give the impression we're trying to exclude religious groups um or events that may have religious themes that are not in and of themselves religious events. So those would be my two asks for the policy. I don't have language for them. Um but but perhaps it's something we can consider.

Um yeah. Yeah, I like I like the idea of adding maybe just the language or you know directly benefits a nonprofit. So like it is either a nonprofit local organization or the event directly benefits a nonprofit. So I'm thinking of obviously a turkey trot, you know, helping a community food share. Um and so yeah, if for example, Fox Property Management wanted to host a fundraising event for a nonprofit, that would be the purpose of like, hey, that's what we're trying to do. and maybe maybe they don't need money, but um you know, I think if the event is to benefit a nonprofit, I think that would be enough for me if that loosens some the ability to do it. Why don't we take each of those? Those are separate concerns. Um uh I guess I would I would love to have the city attorney's um feedback on the comment that u council member Hefner raised just a minute ago.

Sure, mayor. As council member Hefner noticed not uh noted, it's not a legal issue. um you know events like the parade of lights and you know Christmas tree lightings those have been considered and found by courts to be secular and not religious events. So I think what council member Hefner is asking the council to do is from a policy standpoint um maybe soften the boundaries around events that may involve religions other than the ones that you know people may associate not from a you know not from a legal sense but from a policy sense with Christian holidays. And council member Hefner please feel free to jump in if I'm mischaracterizing um Couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you.

Is let me be um do you have uh or could you um propose any language there uh city attorney or is that again mayor? May I make a recommendation? Pardon me. May I make a recommendation? Uh sure. If council is supportive of these changes tonight, staff could take the time to update this and put it on a consent agenda in the future. bring you back the resolution.

I think that makes that makes sense. Um I guess first do we um support the suggestion that um Council Member Hefner made. If you've support it, just give the thumbs up about that one. Or we now you can put that we can roll that into the motion, I think. Um we'll roll that into the motion. Um, I have a a second question that um and it has to do not so much with intra intrareligious um uh events, but whether treating religious groups versus non-religious groups causes um any um constitutional issues that is um you know I I I am conscious that sometimes you know there are religious groups that say they're sort of being treated differently than non-religious groups u because of their support. you know, we could get a religious group that applies for funds and there's a um a community, I guess, purpose to that. Um but I I wonder if that's that's a slightly different issue, I think. Yeah. Council member Hefner.

Yeah. I mean, I think part of my point is, as I understand it, we're we're not doing that. Um, and the policy isn't intended to do that. And I guess my only ask is just some language making clear it's not about who's putting on the event. It's not we're not going to deny your event if it has, you know, some relation to religious events. The thing we're not going to do is do essentially city sponsorship of events that are, you know, prostilitizing type, you know, we're going to convert you to whatever religion type events, which I think would be inappropriate.

Yeah. I mean, and I think I I think probably um staff, including the city attorney, can come up with language. I just want to make sure we address all of that. Um, good. And then Council Member Dickinson's point had to do with events that might be sponsored by um a for-profit or even like a uh a BC corporation um and whether we ought to be looking more at the beneficiary as opposed to the um the the sponsor. And I guess I'm interested, you know, how people are thinking about that. Um, it appears that city attorney has a thought about that. So maybe I'll start with her.

Well, I just wanted to suggest some language for that line in the policy. Um, and maybe council can discuss it. I think a an easy revision there would be um in that bullet point to say are organized by or benefit nonprofit organizations, neighborhood groups or school organizations.

I I like that. Are there do we getting some thumbs up on that one? Do you have questions, Council Member Cooperman and anyone online? Um I guess I'm just so if we like um if we look at the applications that we have before us um in particular the Louisville Downtown Critz and the Monster Dash um as far as I know those are not benefiting a particular nonprofit or cause right but they're they're providing athletic events right for the community. Um, and I'm not clear that those type of events are covered by that language.

Any thoughts about from staff about that one or those? I guess sure I can add. I think if council, if you are supportive of supporting these type of events, we can look at language that would be broad enough to cover this. Okay. We have and I see that council member or excuse me Hanington is on the line. Uh don't know whether she's nodding or not. I'm in agreement with what you all are proposing. Okay. Thank you. Yep.

Um on I just want to raise a question about the turkey trot. Um actually it may be and the Finny Foundation. Um this is an interesting collection that you've brought to us. They all raise um interesting issue and the homemade pie contest for different reasons. Um the turkey trot um we supported to the tune of you know 2500 in monetary and $2,500 in inind contributions last year. Um I have I guess reason to believe that the other communities or other communities are supporting that at probably the same level. I don't know that absolutely for sure. I think if we knock our um our amount down to a thousand um especially when we've got extra money that is still um available um because it hasn't been spent elsewhere. I I don't particularly um like that. I I think that in particular is a really a signature event that the community is very supportive of and it goes to a great cause that is a Lewisville cause. Um, and I'm, you know, I guess I can either suggest that the amounts are, um, perhaps not large enough, or that, um, either in this context, in the decisions that we're making now, or perhaps uh, in a separate discussion on its own, I'd rather do it in here. um propose that we increase that um to what our um

what our uh amount was last year and and we're still in the first trunch of awards. So, some, you know, if we didn't want to do a full $5,000, we could do 2500 now and potentially if they put in an application if and only if um we could consider that one. But I I'm interested in what people think about that one. I think the Finny Foundation is an odd one um because it is in a private place, but again it's kind of like um you know the you know it's we're it happens to be in a private place. Um you know I that seems tangential to the point we're trying to make with these grants. Go ahead.

Thank you mayor. I just wanted to clarify we're actually in the second trunch. So these are events through the second half of the year. That is true. We used just under 3500 in the first round. No, you're right. You're right. Um,

we've got that concern. I think you know the the pie contest one I I don't like uh I don't like the taste of that one. Um the that seems like a budget reallocation dressed up as an allocation for a grant and I'm uneasy with that. I think it it seems like that's part of another event and it's getting um you know potentially paid for here. Um I don't know. I I don't know how others feel about those three, but that's those are my three asks. Um I I think we should support the Finny Foundation. Um I think you're that's that's my suggestion. I think I I'm not going to die on the hill, but I'm a little um concerned about the homemade pie allocation, but I really think we should support the tur turkey trot at its requested level. Yes, Council Member Hefner.

I guess I think there's a motion pending and like to see if Council Member Dickinson has has any changes to his motion based on the discussion and then um I'm I'm ready to vote. I'm glad to propose them as friendly amendments if you like. Maybe I'm confused. Did we actually pass the I don't we not pass I don't think we've actually we're still on the policy. Yeah, we're still on the policy. You're right. So on the policy. All right. I'm jumping the gun. Let's go. Let's Do we have any other questions? Thank you. Well, so here here's a question. We spent 3500 in the first trunch. We're looking at nearly $5,000 in the second.

So, do we have $1,500 left over that we're allowed to spend? Does the policy say you can spend 10,000 a year or does it say you can spend 5,000 per tunch? Does it say you can go over 10,000 if you wanted to? Sure. The policy is generic to that, so it's up to council. We have 10,000 budgeted for this program, so you could spend the difference of it. If you go above that, you're above what we've budgeted. That would need a budget amendment at some point.

Um, so I mean, I'm I think I'm fine with the policy. Generally, I'm concerned, mayor, that looking 30 seconds ahead that, you know, if you wanted to do $5,000 for the turkey trot, you would have to be cutting other things in order to get there, right? Or you need a budget amendment. So, you know, I'd be curious. I think we should pass the policy. I think there's still an opportunity for other conversations around other things we support like we not part of this we support the street fair not part of this we probably do things for the farmers market and decreased costs and things and so I think we could probably still do something for the turkey trot that isn't within this program if we wanted to do other things for the turkey trot separately but I think this community the way I see it right I used to run events like this myself simple I can come and ask for up to 1,000 bucks and I got to be one of the five they like. We happen to only have five right now that we like. So that's helpful. But I Anyways, I'm I'm fine to pass policy as is and then we can talk about these.

Yeah. And and I'm I'm fine with dealing with it that way. It's when I raised it initially, it was gee I don't know whether it's time to raise this here or separately, but I think maybe we deal with turkey trot separately. And um what I would say on that and then I'll um uh reach out to both the mayor prom and and to council member Hefner is um that um you know um we did we did treat turkey trot differently last year as I'm recalling. We dealt with the turkey trot in the same meeting as we did the policy. And so we dealt with the turkey trot right before we put the policy together, which was kind of um took care of that. But this year it's a little more complicated.

Um first, um Council Member Hefner and then Mayor Brook. Yeah. So ju just on the on the policy piece and and I apologize for not saying this. More formally, I I would I would request that we include as a as a friendly amendment the language the city attorney proposed for benefiting nonprofits, what whatever that language was, as well as a to be determined staff edit to make clear we are not attempting to exclude religious groups or events with a sort of incidental religious tie like the Parade of Lights. as a friendly amendment to the Yes.

Thank you. Okay. Uh, Mayor Prom, um, Council Member Hefner answered my question. I wanted the, um, resolution restated since we kind of veered off course for a little bit. So, thank you, Council Member Hefner.

Okay. Um, I think that, um, does everybody remember the language that was proposed by the city attorney? And I think otherwise the um the language, let's see, um there's the change that uh was made that council member Dickinson described which was I think um it's either organized by or for the benefit. Yeah, I I what teacher keer said. That's

right. Um is everybody clear on the on the motion? Anybody not clear? All right. Um, all in favor? I I Any opposed? Okay, good. So, this doesn't need a movement, correct? This just needs direction. I I would direct staff to do this 4940 plus an additional 1,500 for turkey trot from our first trunch. Second. Any other comments, concerns? All right. All in favor? I

I Any opposed? Okay. Let's move on to ordinance.

Ordinance number 1923, series 2026. An ordinance vacating in access easement located within lot one block three red tail ridge filing number one first reading set public hearing. Do we have any recusals or disclosures? Yeah, I have a professional conflict of interest on this one. So, I'm going to excuse myself and unless anybody would like me to return, I don't plan on it. Thanks everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Council Member Hefner has left the room and I think it's time for a staff presentation.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. This is Emily Klein Gibson with a staff presentation. This is a first reading for ordinance 1923 series 2026. This application is a request to vacate a portion of an access easement that's located on lot 1, block 3 in Redail Ridge. This easement was originally established with the Red Tail Ridge filing number one subdivision in 2024 and provides access for city maintenance staff from Rockrest Drive to the lift station property which is located on track K. A new easement will be dedicated via a separate instrument and will provide continued access from Rock Crest Drive to track K. The easement vacation and dedication provides a shorter, more direct route from Rock Crrest Drive to track K. And the changes will remain as lot one block three is developed. This slide provides an image of the easements. The red area represents the portion of the existing easement that will be vacated with this proposed ordinance. The blue area represents the new portion of easement that will be dedicated via separate instrument. And the green represents the existing easements that will remain unchanged. And with that, staff recommends approval of ordinance 1923 series 2026 to vacate a portion of the existing access easement with the condition that the new easement be dedicated concurrent with the vacation to maintain that continued access. This concludes the staff presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Council questions. Okay. Can we get a motion? Uh, I move that ordinance number 1923, series 2026 pass on first reading and the public hearing be set for Tuesday, May 19th, 2026 at 6 pm. Second. Any discussion? All in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Uh, city attorney's report.

I have no report. Thank you. Okay. Any uh upcoming agenda items and identification for future agenda items? All right. Can we get a motion to adjurnn? So move. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you very much. Good evening. Stay warm. Stay safe. all around another century old cottonwood tree to a moderately rolling green.