Council - Regular Meeting

We've filed an application with the Oklahoma Film and Music Office in hopes of becoming certified as a film-friendly city. There have been many scenes shot in our community, many of you probably did not know that, by both film and television producers, and we hope by achieving this designation we will draw even more attention to those industries. We hope to hear something back on our application before September City Council meetings, so stay tuned. As you know, Labor Day is coming up soon. Monday, September the 7th, all city offices will be closed. If that is your normal trash or recycling day, please wait and put that out the following Wednesday, September the 9th. The compost facility will also be closed that weekend in honor of Labor Day. Kind of an iconic... Playground in our city the spirit playground is being evaluated and we're going to undergo some renovation associated with that and there's going to be a very important open house and associated with the renovation and reconstruction of that facility on September the 8th at 6 p.m. across the way at the community center. So we still have a lot of folks in this community who participated in the original design and construction. Some of the young people that participated in that are grown adults with kids now. So we would love to have folks that were involved in the first Spirit Playground come and be a part of that open house, and we'll discuss plans for the future there. Get Ready Community is becoming a very popular event in our city. Super Recycler will be coming back in October, so stay tuned for more information. We won't talk about pizza boxes or any of that stuff, but it is coming to a Polycart near you soon. Special event announcements. August, Mid-America Street Fest. Let's see, that is, oh, okay, these are announcements for August. I misread that, I apologize. October the 3rd is Mid-America Street Fest at WP Bill Atkinson Park. That is a Saturday from 11 to 3. We'll have a full slate of food trucks already lined up. We do have a few vendor spaces left. If you are a vendor and would be interested in participating in that event, you can see more on the event page at midwestcityok.org. Veterans Day parade is always on Veterans Day, November the 11th in Midwest City at 10 a.m. Street closures will start at 9.30. Those of you who have businesses along that route, start making your plans now. This year's theme will be Heroes Among Us, and our parade marshals will be all of the veterans employed by the city of Midwest City. That's cool. Really cool idea. Our staff came up with that, so kudos to them. Parade registration is now open on our website at midwestcityok.org. Go to the event page and you'll get more information. Convincing Visitors Bureau cruise in for coffee is continuing. It's every third Saturday morning or every third Saturday morning of the month. We have two left, September and October. Cruise in for coffee. There were 132 cars there. That is in the Santa Fe Restaurant parking lot every third Saturday through October. Reed Convention Center, things have been very busy over there the last couple of months. They've hosted events like Miss Oklahoma Pageant, Miss Oklahoma Teen Pageant, HorrorCon. a large Tinker Air Force Base hiring event, Tinker in the Primes, huge event, and some upcoming events include Miracle Con, ANIM Oklahoma, another acronym that I will not... be able to pronounce, but the group is the Oklahoma Municipal Clerk Treasurer's and Finance Officials Association. So, good job to the Reed Center and the Delta Hotel staff. A lot of good stuff going on over there. And that's all I have, Mr. Mayor.

Outstanding. Next item on the agenda is the consent agenda. Before I ask if anybody's going to want to pull anything, I think what I'm going to do going forward in the future is any consent agenda item that is appointing somebody to a board or a commission, I'm going to recognize that person after we voted on it, because we have a few, and I don't want to necessarily pull an item just to vote on it separately in the interest of time. aside from that, do you guys have any consent agenda items you want pulled?

Mayor, just item seven, please.

Item seven, anybody else? All right. Then I will entertain a motion for all consent agenda items except item C7.

Move to approve.

Second. A motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? There being none, I would like to recognize Tammy Cook, who was just appointed to the Board of Adjustment, Phyllis Bennett to the Midwest City Historical Society, Avis Bonner to the Midwest City Historical Society, AJ Bailey to the Tree Board, and Shane Bernard to the Arts Council. And I want to thank all those people. Are any of them here? nope all right um item c7 discussion consideration possible action of approving a contract with arledge and associates miss banna

Mr. Thank you. So this is again the same company that's been doing our audit for going on to what, six years possibly?

Yes, correct.

Okay.

Well, no, because I've been here five and a half, so no.

so five and a half i think this is going on this is either their fourth or their fifth i apologize and rfp was put out for this particular contract am i accurate correct okay how many people responded to that um if i had them all i think it was at least four or five four or five and we opted for this company again

Because not only were they the lowest, they also offered the most hours that they were going to give to it. It moves us up as being number one. If we went with the other ones, we wouldn't be top of their list. We'd be very, very, very, very, very low on the priority list. So one of the main reasons why it's great that we have Arledge is that they know who we are. They have experience with us. We are staying high on their list. If we were to go out, not only would our price significantly go up compared to when we did the RFP, I can only imagine how much more higher it would be. Anywhere from between, I think the next closest from off the top of my head was somewhere in the range of like $20,000 more, and the highest was about double of what we're currently paying. Okay.

I'm not one to give financial advice to anyone. I just do recall reading about best practices, switching them out. I understand and respect that them working with the city gives them more knowledge about how the city's finances operate. uh... an experience of working with some of the staff i do think having fresh eyes review financial records can be insightful sometimes with that said i fully trust this body to proceed i do not expect any of you guys to vote against this particular item i would just like to abstain for the principle that i stated i'd just like to see us rotate not just because of having fresh eyes review the records, but also from a public perspective that it does not look like we consistently only give contracts to one particular company.

Right. And I totally respect that. I would know that there's always fresh eyes on it when the auditors come in. We don't have all of the same. They don't have all the same personnel. We are lucky to have some of the upper management to always review it. There are always fresh eyes that are put on it every single year for a minute. I totally get where you're coming from. I would agree, in my experience, of where it's a good idea to change it out. I thought that was the case until I have been involved heavily in government accounting, where I do not hold that now is my personal opinion. But I respect exactly where you're coming from as well.

And I just want you to know I trust you most with financial guidance and advisement. And should I need an advisor, you'd be the guy I go to. So just know that I don't have any doubts about our finances or any accountability measures. I want to be on record for that. But just because. I appreciate it.

Thank you. Tia, at one point when we discussed this, when I don't know the guy's name, call him Jake, when he was here. Correct. He did offer to have somebody else look at this stuff. Is that not correct?

I'd have to remember from that. Knowing from what Jake has already talked to you about before, there's a whole lot of behind-the-scenes stuff of where it is not only looked at with fresh eyes and drilled down to and heavily scrutinized to a level that none of us, not even including myself, have it. I have a deep appreciation of it, of how deeply it is scrutinized. We are really scrutinized. And so if there's any doubt of that, Please be relieved of it because it is very brutal on us when we go through the audit.

And I have no evidence of that, just so you know.

It might be beneficial to this body and its citizens if when he comes and gives his briefing the next time, he explains some of what goes on behind the scenes because I don't think that's ever happened.

Okay, I'll make sure he does that. I know when he comes and he talks, he'll have a meeting with the mayor, he'll have a meeting with Tim, and if any of you guys are around and would like to speak to him during it, we'll make sure that he is completely available to disseminate any concerns at all. Thank you.

Thank you.

Make a motion to approve.

We have a motion. Do we have a second?

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Abstain. With Ward 5 abstaining.

Sarah, I don't need to do a roll call with that, do I?

Don wants us to. Don wants us to? All right. So we'll do a roll call vote. Ward 1. Ward 2? Yes. Ward 3? Aye. Ward 4?

Yes.

Ward 5?

Abstain.

Ward 6? Yes. And the mayor votes aye. Thank you. Can the members of the public hear us okay? Our monitors are not working, so we're hearing kind of a weird echo up here. And if you guys can't figure it out, it's not that big of a deal. It's good enough, but I see you working. Thank you. They're working on it, Mayor. They're working on it. All right. Next item on the agenda would be discussion item number one, public hearing discussion consideration possible action to approve a minor plat for the property located at 111 Richards Avenue.

Matt? Thank you. This is a minor plat application. The applicant is proposing to subdivide one existing residential lot, residentially zoned lot, into two single family residential lots. The current size of the lot in question is about 0.39 acres. And if approved, the plat would subdivide the property into two lots that were each about 8,400 square feet each. The plaque complies with all of our zoning regulations and subdivision regulations. We did do notice in accordance with state and local requirements, and there were no public comments that staff received either by phone call, email, or at the public hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission did unanimously recommend approval of this item, and action is at the discretion of counsel.

Mr. Summers, if I'm not mistaken, maybe two years ago this is the same property that intended to put a veteran's home in there, homeless veterans or some sort of a... facility like that there's an abandoned church next to it is that do you know what the current what they plan to do with the property once the plat adjustment is agreed to my understanding is that once the platting is complete they would just build two single family homes on it whether it's the current owner or they would maybe sell one or both of the lots alright thank you

Any other questions or comments? This is a public hearing. Is there anybody in the public that wants to speak on this? Yes, ma'am. If you'd please approach the podium and give your name and address.

Connie Chance, 112 North Richards Avenue. That street, that property is across Caddy Corner from my house. I've lived there for over 50 years. That also is the site of a BPA Environmental Protection Superfund cleanup site that they told us, the feds, when we were evacuated.

This has been 35 years ago.

I've been there a long time. They would never be sold and nothing would ever be built there because they dug that place out to bigger than regional park pool. And then they refilled it with new dirt. They hauled it away. The guys in the hazmat were there. Tinker was there. Mr. Dennis, who owned that property, had stolen pesticides and chemicals and God knows what all the decades he lived there and stored it in a 40-foot freight trailer on the property for decades. Anybody wanted to look up? It would be in the news on Channel 4 probably. um in the newspaper as i said we were evacuated my uncle joe b barnes this park is named for is where we evacuated to because we never were to go for two weeks me my husband my kids everybody in the neighborhood three or more blocks of area my mother lived up the street aunt knuckle around the corner on smith hardware i don't know if you're familiar it's older but um We took our St. Bernard and our cat. We were told, take all of our animals, because we may not get back for a month. So be prepared. And they blockaded it. They barricaded it. They brought in dumpsters, bulldozers, everything you could imagine. And they dug it. And they hauled all that dirt away and covered dump trucks, one after the other, over and over and over until they completely unloaded the dirt there brought in new dirt and we were told I was told I guess everybody was that those who had wells which I do had to have our wells checked every two at least twice a year to make sure it was still safe being that I was on the opposite street that was opposite side of the street and it was a little downhill for me I was probably in good shape but um Of all the vacant, and they're saying that it's going to be homes built there? That's a lot. I've got all this paperwork this idiot oil company sent me about putting a fracking operation there. Fracking across the street from my house.

No. No. Matt, can anything commercial go there?

The site is zoned R6, so even if there was the possibility that there be drilling on the site, that would come back before this body as a special use permit. Or sorry, it would go before the Board of Adjustment.

I'd be happy for you all to see all these certified things. Wait, wait, wait.

Hang on a second, ma'am. For permits on that. And you have in your possession documents saying they plan on putting a well on that site?

A fracking well, yes.

Understand, if I may, that is governed obviously by the Corporation Commission. Right. The city has zero to do with that, except that we do receive notice of those as well.

Okay, ma'am. Let me see your document. I know. Let me see this document. All right.

Go ahead and go.

No, I'm looking for a notice that this is going to be turned into an oil well. And if that doesn't say that on here, then that's what I'm... This document that you've handed me says nothing about fracking or oil. Ma'am? So you've handed me 50 pages and you want me to read this right now. Okay, then I'm going to hand this back to you. What I'm saying is I would like you to show me where it says that property is going to be turned into an oil well. I understand fracking well, but they're going to do drilling on that property because I don't believe they can. is that a notice that they want to buy your mineral lease okay but that doesn't mean that they're going to put a well on that property it means that they're doing horizontal drilling under all of the properties in the whole neighborhood yeah but they're not putting a well on that property Okay. Ma'am, the way it's zoned, they cannot put that equipment on that site. They cannot. Everybody's heard that. I'm now on public record. The way it's zoned, they cannot put that equipment on that site. However, I will tell you that most everybody in Ward 3 and Ward 2 and Ward 6 have received a notice of horizontal mineral leases, similar to what you just showed me, wanting to buy or lease mineral rights from people for the entire forced pool, which is under most all of Midwest City. But that doesn't mean that that lot is going to have a well put on it. I tell you what, once you get back to your seat, if you could go through your papers and find that singular document, I'd like to see that. If you want, I'm willing to put this matter on hold while you look for those documents, but I'm only going to put it on hold for the duration of this meeting. This meeting will take another hour or so, so it'll give you some time. But I would be very concerned if an oil company is telling you that directly across the street at 111 Richards Avenue they plan on putting an oil well. And I would like to see that document.

An oil racking rig. It's different than an oil rig.

Now, I don't believe, Don, I don't believe I need a motion to table this. I think I can just pass it and then come back to it.

You're allowed to take items out of order, so you can set this aside and come back to it before the end of the meeting. Does anybody else have an issue with that?

Oh, no, I don't have an issue with that. I want to ask Matt something, though. Yeah, that's fine.

Right. Well, the documents that she just showed me are the same notice that I got at my house.

But it's not the company. It's JLB Exploration. It's not.

What's it called? I think it's JLB. No, but the other one that we've been dealing with.

It was from a law firm. It was from a law firm. But Carol was the one that's doing it off of Post Road.

Right.

You and I have been dealing with it.

Right. Yeah, that's a different issue. Okay. So we'll look at that. We'll come back to D1. I'll make myself a note.

And then... We had two questions. I think Raymond's got a question and I've got one.

Matt, does the hazardous waste cleanup have any impact on this?

That obviously would have an impact on somebody trying to construct a house on the site. It's not really something that's covered by the zoning regulations or the subdivision regulations. Those mostly have to do with permissible uses going forward that are within the city's jurisdiction.

Would that be something we look at if they... applied for a building permit to build a house there? Would that come up then?

I mean, we can certainly look into it, yes. Do what? I'm sorry. We can look into it and see what, you know, DEQ may have on record for that site.

As I recall, when a buyer chooses to buy a property, they can, at their own expense, have an EPA certification done. And I think there's four levels, EPA 1, 2, 3, and 4. The first one's not very expensive. They get more and more expensive the deeper they dig. But we don't have any.

history yeah I mean we like I said we can we can look into it it's not something that we typically look for when we do our review versus the zoning regs or the subdivision regulations just because that's that's not really a component of of those regulations but we can look into it I met do we know if the applicants here um i don't i don't know

All right, why don't we pass this item? Let's move on to D2. Discuss it while she looks through her documents. I will say I was on city staff 35 years ago. Vaughn was on the council 35 years ago. Neither of us remember that incident. It has to be older than 35 years ago. The last Superfund site I remember was across I-40 next to Tinker.

And that happened while we were on staff. I was on staff.

Yeah, it has to be more than 35 years ago because, yeah. And I don't doubt you. I don't doubt you at all. But I am exceedingly curious to see if you have a letter saying that they're going to put a well on that lot. Because I think they already have the well. They only use legal addresses. Right. Right. Okay. All right. Item D2. I understand. OK. Item D2, public hearing, discussion, consideration, possible action on an ordinance to redistrict from plain unit development PUD to amended plain unit development for Timber Ridge Point addition. Matt? Mayor.

Wait, Matt. Hold on a second. I'm sorry.

Yeah, I apologize. Because this involves me directly, I'll be stepping off.

I understand.

And Mr. Mayor, we've already had discussion on this last. This is an item that was tabled. So we need to pick up from that tabling discussion.

What's new? That's what I was going to say is the staff report, other than the date on the staff report changing, the staff report is the same because, as Don mentioned, this item was tabled. There is no new information in the staff report. My understanding, however, is that the HOA did conduct some sort of vote. I do not know the results of that.

Just to be clear, if we vote yes, we're voting to put the swimming pool in. If we vote no, we vote for the swimming pool. If we vote yes, we vote for the pickleball court. Is that correct?

Correct. Yes. I mean, depending on how the motion is formed, yes.

OK.

The item before us is to amend the PUD. The amendment would allow a pickleball court.

Yes, the mayor is correct on that.

Right. Okay. It is public discussion. Is there anybody here who wants to address the council? Name and address, please.

Mayor, Councilmember, Jason Justice. I live at 13135 Shumard Oak, there in Timber Ridge. So I missed your meeting on the 28th. I was out of town for some other work requirements out of Tinker. But we went out as requested. No new information. Met with the board members when I came back. Watched the video a couple of times to kind of get a feel of the board members and what was needed. We did go back out and get more votes and reach out more to the community. We did send out a letter to each one of the neighbors in the neighborhood, and then also did door knocking and knocked on every one of the doors. Like you said, man, either they come to the door or they don't, and we were able to kind of get the votes that we needed. that you guys requested. Out of 201 that were eligible to vote, we had 112 people that responded to us. Of those 112, 29 of those voted for the poll, and then 83 of those voted for the park. i can break that down a little more when we did it went around and did the sign petition knocking on everybody's door we had 11 people that said they wanted the pool talking to them face to face and then 48 of them that voted you know for the pickleball court in the rec area and for the most part we just went around and just kind of asked them if they received their letter asked them to please vote as this was important working to be good stewards of the money that they pay in each year as you know as the board members presented to you all last on the last meeting so no new information to give you other than what you requested that during last meeting is to go out and and do 100 reach out to the neighbors that were eligible to vote and that's what we did i have a question about the vote just for clarification of the numbers that you've provided us how many of those votes came from ideal homes as landowners

this is all the homeowners none of these were ideal homes no okay thank you is there a representative from ideal homes here yes sir could you come up need your name and address certainly Richard McCown 4409 Cannon Drive Norman I got a couple questions I need to ask you I've gone back and looked at, I was thinking one way last meeting. After listening, I actually went back and read all the PUDs that had been ahead of this one. When did you guys, when did Ideal Homes actually purchase that development?

I am getting caught up on this. There have been numerous folks that have worked on this over the years. We are the fourth owner. I believe we actually bought the raw land in 2021. However, we were buying lots from the developer, the third developer. So we've been active in the neighborhood before then.

We were selling houses in 20... Maybe May of 2019, according to...

We were selling houses in 2019.

You were selling houses in there? Okay. When you guys bought this development, were you aware that there was a pud in place that called for a pool?

Yes, we were. In a clubhouse?

Yes. Okay. How many homes or lots has Ideal Homes sold since you purchased the development?

I have no idea. I apologize. I can't answer that, but I truly have no idea.

Would 109 sound familiar or pretty close according to the assessor records?

I'm going to take your word for it. I have literally not worked on this project until this item has come up.

When you guys sold these homes or lots, have you marketed the pool and the clubhouse?

Probably.

Okay. Since you have owned it since, let's go to 21, May of 21 versus September of 19, do you have any plans for the pool or the pickleball court? Have you all done any plans yet?

We haven't designed any plans to my knowledge.

Okay. Is there a reason why you haven't gone and at least come up with a plan or a name?

I think the monitor's on. Is there a reason it's testing? Is that testing, Ryan?

We have a mic open. Go ahead and shut it down. Just let it pass. IS THERE A REASON WHY YOU HAVEN'T GONE FORWARD WITH THE PLANS FOR THAT? THAT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT TIME.

NO DOUBT. AND I WISH I COULD ANSWER THAT. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN OF NUMEROUS POOLS AND CLUBHOUSES AND OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT WE'VE BUILT. I COULDN'T EVEN TELL YOU WHERE THIS ONE IS PLANNED TO GO. I APOLOGIZE. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PERSONNEL TURNOVER. WE'VE HAD ONE YOUNG MAN, WE LOST TO BRAIN CANCER. SO I'M SO SORRY, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT AS A LEGITIMATE QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING AND I'M JUST TOTALLY UNPREPARED TO ANSWER IT. HAD I KNOWN, I WOULD HAVE TRIED TO GET SOME ANSWERS BEFORE I'm glad he knows where it's going to go.

Can you understand my skepticism? Today right now, this is the 10th time that we voted on a putt in that neighborhood. The Planning Commission has voted five times over the last 21 years. Okay. And the City Council has voted four times. This is the fifth time. And I went back and looked at all the puts with the exception of one. But I saw the one after that that I couldn't get. It says in every single one of them. The pool is an integral part of this neighborhood being felt. I will tell you that when I originally saw this kind of felt sorry for the people that we may be ending up forcing the increase rate because if we vote to let the pool go forward that's going to increase the rates. but for 21 years the people that have lived there have been promised a pool and i know you're the last group but there has been no effort at all to come up with plans or any engineering or any bids or anything to show this is what it's it's been 21 years so those people that have been living there for 21 years that were promised a pool And when they bought the property, he just admitted that, yeah, you market it, and it's not there. Understood. So that would be an issue for me. That is-

That is completely legitimate. I totally understand where you're coming from. It's my understanding that as we started working through this particular final plat, which is the streets are in, the water, the sewer, storm drainage, all these lots are completed, and this triggered that it was time to build the pool. And it's my understanding that that kicked off the conversation with the Property Owners Association. And Angela Garcia is here with Sea Solutions. She manages lots of property associations that are neighborhoods that we built throughout the metro. And it's going to be way more expensive to operate a pool and clubhouse than another kind of amenity that doesn't have to have the water checked four times a day all throughout the summer season and that that sort of thing so as those discussions started to happen and the homeowners association said we've been debating this for years it's going to cause us to have to raise our dues really significantly we just want to support our the the homeowners association we're going to spend four hundred thousand dollars either on building a pool in a clubhouse or a different set of amenities that cost less to build we have it budgeted it was at their request it's my understanding i wasn't involved in these discussions but that is my understanding of how we got here today and we're trying to be supportive we're not trying to get out of something

And I I respect that here's my issue too is this body here us this put has been in place for 21 years. I don't want us to set a precedent, you know this has been a year or 2. I don't think there be any discussion, but this has been since 2005. understood so and it wasn't this isn't the first amendment to this pud this is the fifth time it's come back to us and if we go back in my opinion i think we would be setting a dangerous precedent for any future council that hey they can wait and delay and delay and delay and delay and eventually it'll change the pud and one of the according to our ordinance one of the things that makes a pud so unique in a selling point is the amenities that's why that it specifically says in there amenities are what's really important so i have an issue with the fact that it's been 21 years and that's that's my spill

I have one more thing you know, I've been in the neighborhood for 7 and a half years now.

I have kids but I like to have a pool. Yes. But when we went around to talk to our neighbors do of the ones that voted for the the rec area. The biggest thing was is the raising of the news. I pay a 60 on the gate. I think it's a 60 on the gated side and on the non gated side. They pay they pay for something for 5460. uh if it goes up another two to four hundred bucks that's what a lot of neighbors kind of pointed at i know what the pug says you know and times have changed i think john lewis kind of said it best you know it's it's really not about the the pool and the rec area it's about the finances that we can handle in the neighborhood and a lot of neighbors with the information that we provided that's what they kind of keyed in on they don't want their dues to go up would they like to have the areas yes we have a lot of neighbors in our neighborhood we see them out all the time i'm really big on trying to bring in that communication and just let everyone know that we we're trying to be really good stewards of their money uh and to raise to raise the cost in today's age of inflation and stuff another neighbors kind of want to do that

I have a question.

As a representative for the Homeowners Association, if we voted against the pool, Would the homeowners association then be willing to accept financial responsibility to pay, I think it was the 39 people who want the pool, the commensurate value of the pool versus no pool? So let's say having a pool increases the value of your home by $2,500. Will the homeowners association write a check for $2,500? to all the people who said they want a pool?

That part I can't answer on my own. I mean, it takes a community decision to make. And I'm not willing to make that commitment for them. I mean, there was only- Well, that's the point.

You don't have the ability to make it for them. They signed a contract with a builder to buy a home in a neighborhood that was going to have a pool. And you are now arbitrarily taking, you're trying to quash the contract for them. They have a contract in place that entitles them to a pool. And even though that inconveniences you somewhat, it does not negate the fact that they have a contract to get a pool. They signed up for that. They have a legal right to that. And they can sue for that. And if you get in there and say we want to take that right away from them, I'm going to assume that you open yourself up to some legal issues and financial issues with the people who are in favor of the pool and are entitled to the pool.

Yeah, totally understand that. And for the most part, you know, when I came onto the board, it was only to help out in the neighborhood and be a part of the community. Getting a chance to be on the board and see where our finances sit and what we spend out. I mean, that's what I'm looking at is trying to be good stewards of the money and letting them know what's going to happen if we were to take this on.

What if you found out that it would be cheaper for the neighborhood if you blocked off an entire road and told them they could no longer drive on it? I mean, that's feasible, isn't it? You won't have to maintain their blacktop and the heck with them. They can stay home all the time.

Right.

That's feasible. And you think you have that power?

Once again, I don't think it's...

I don't think you do.

I don't think it's the power thing.

Because they have a contract with the builder from that road, access to that road, just like they have a contract with that builder for access to a pool. So in my opinion, the homeowners association is taking a role here way beyond the scope of their responsibilities.

I look at it as we're not trying to take that away. I think we're presenting them with information that talks about what the cost is going to be to the neighborhood.

All right. But unless it's unanimous, you're taking somebody's rights away. Correct?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Rick Favors, 13131 Schumard, Oak Drive, Choctaw. I'm personally for the change in the PUD. I say it reluctantly because I think that the equipment and what they've presented is of lower quality than what I think our residents deserve. I don't support it, one, because I have a swimming pool in my own backyard. Two, I've lived there since 2016. I know that they've talked about a pool since I've been there since 2016. But I think some of the responsibility lies on the city whenever we allow a developer to come in to do a PUD. We've known about it since 2005, but we've taken, we, not the body right here, but council in and of itself has not enforced the PUD, or should I say the city has not. And the reason I say that is if they say that they're going to build a swimming pool, it should have been addressed whenever it initially started back in 2005. We shouldn't be talking about it in 2026. And so Matt, I'd had a discussion with you earlier, if I may. So is it the responsibility of the city, whenever a developer asks for a PUD and they say, we're going to build a swimming pool, is it not the city's responsibility to say, OK, you've started developing this area now. You need to build it by x date. I mean, is that the city's responsibility?

uh yes I would I would say yes the applicant or I guess any applicant with the pud that pud becomes a part of the ordinance that changes the zoning on a property and so a violation of that pud would be treated as any zoning violation so yes if there was an agreement to build an amenity it would be the city's responsibility to make sure that amenity that was approved actually was

Okay, but I've got a question on that because we just approved two months ago that whole neighborhood across the street from it's on Anderson. I can't remember the name of that project. Right. You notice three sisters. In that project, they've talked about boutique shops. They've talked about amenities and things like that. And it's my understanding that the cost of upkeep for neighborhoods such as yours is generally funded through homeowner association dues. And you're not going to put a pool in when there's only five homes built because you can't pass that cost on to five homes. You have to wait until you have sufficient homes built to then support financially the implementation of that thing. But you're also saying that you think the city should enforce PUDs, which is opposite of what you're asking us to do. I'm confused.

No, all I'm saying is if we're going to pass PUDs, then the city needs to enforce what we approve.

Well, I don't have a problem with that, but I don't know how you can make them build a pool immediately before you've got 200 homes.

So a lot of times what happens, and you can call the developer back up here, is normally developers will foot the bill until they turn it over to the HOA. Once it's turned over to the HOA, then it becomes the HOA's responsibility to pay the bills.

Yes, but a developer can turn it over to the HOA upon their discretion. So they build 10 homes and a pool and say, now I'm turning it over to you. And each home is spending $10,000 a month.

and and uh i mean i understand what you're saying yeah but there's got to be development that goes along with the increased size of the neighborhood yeah so my question i guess to the council would be something for us to think about in the city to think about is in the future should we ask the question or make the statement or have the developer say, we will build, if it's a swimming pool, we will build a swimming pool by either 10 homes or X date or something to that effect and hold them to that where we don't run into a 21-year problem.

Sure. And I get that. So I guess whatever it is that the council votes on tonight, whether it ends up being pool or pickleball court, we could hold ideal homes. You're going to have to build that first before we give any more building permits on any more homes. We could do that.

Yeah, well, and that's what I'm saying to the council. One, I just wanted to tell you, I personally don't want it. I think it's fair for the HOA to come back to the council because, and the reason being is because For the PUD to be changed, the developer has to ask for it. The HOA can't come and ask for it, right? So we asked the developer to do that. They did it because they went for a vote. They put it out to everybody in there and they say, hey, your HOA dues are fixing to go up. They could go up as much as we're guessing, $200 to $400 a year. I don't want to pay that personally because I live in a gated side. My dues are already $860 a year, okay? I don't personally want that. But we have to get the developer involved to change the PUD to make the request. There was a vote. The majority of the people voted for The amenities to be changed to the new PUD request and not the swimming pool. And I understand what you're saying. They had a contract. I don't know that any of the contracts that they signed would have said that there's a guarantee that a pool is going to be built. I don't know that. That would be a question for the developers.

You brought up an interesting thing and I don't realize what you did, but you basically got city staff to admit that we're responsible for them not putting in a pool. So now it's on us to either make them do what they said they were going to do or change it and then just hope that we spend a dice and nobody doesn't sue us because we didn't do our jobs.

Well, I felt that that was important to bring up because, yeah, because I think... We're just dealing with it now.

Yeah. It should have been dealt with a long time ago.

100%. And had they built the home back in 2019, or excuse me, not the home, but the swimming pool, back in 2019, what we had kind of talked about, if I recall right, I think the cost was... going to be approximately one to maybe $200 additional. And I would pay, you know, I might pay an extra $200, but if it's going to be $400, I'm probably putting my home up for sale and moving. So, thank you.

I do like what Councilman Favors said in regards to having a little bit more oversight and accountability to make sure that we're holding developers accountable because there are a lot of things that are promised that aren't delivered. I will tell you if I was a family who bought that home 20 years ago with that concept of access to those amenities and my kids are now 20 and never got to enjoy it, I would be extremely upset. And I also would like to see developers, if they haven't developed the entire lot fully, that they take on the cost of the promises that they're making until their dream and vision comes through by building more homes and being able to sell them. I have seen such communities in June, and you followed, I forget the name of the community, acreages of land the lands were plotted there was maybe about eight homes cabins that were already built one which we rented there was an entire pool pickleball and everything my assumption is that the five to seven ten houses that were built weren't carrying the cost of maintaining that because that was something i wondered about but that the developer who is making these promises has to you know make that investment initially to fulfill the vision that they have But Mr. Summers, thank you for that clarity, and hopefully we will do better. I don't think any of this has been intentional, but I think this has raised our awareness that we can hold companies accountable.

Sorry, I'm just going to get up. May I?

You may. Thank you.

Name and address, please. 13209 Sawtooth Oak Road. I just want to get up here. JJ is a great president.

JJ is a great president.

Our HOA board, they're phenomenal. They do a great job for our neighborhood. I want to put that out there. We had a HOA meeting. Me and Jake, we've had a lot of discussions after the fact. We're trying to come to understanding. I believe that you guys understand where I'm coming from and other people, where they're coming from. I think they put in a lot of effort to get the knowledge out there. I think, Pat Burns, you kind of revealed one of my concerns that I had of where's the plans, what's the estimates, what does it look like? From my point of view, it's hard to get information out to the people in the neighborhood if that information hasn't been provided. Like, what does the size of the clubhouse look like? What does the size of the pool look like? WHAT DOES THE GYM LOOK LIKE? WHAT DOES THE PLAYGROUND LOOK LIKE? WHAT KIND OF THINGS ARE IN THAT? WHAT DOES THE NATURE TRAIL LOOK LIKE? SO THESE ARE THINGS OF WHERE I'VE BEEN ASKING THE CURRENT BOARD TO GET THOSE FROM THEM, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY JUST HAVEN'T HAD THEM. SO THAT'S JUST MY FRUSTRATION. BUT I GAVE MY WORD AT THE HOA MEETING, LIKE, WHATEVER THE VOTE WAS, I'M GOING TO TRY AND GET THIS BALL ACROSS THE GOAL LINE HERE SO WE CAN DO SOMETHING. And so I'm not trying to railroad my neighbors. I am still frustrated about how there hasn't been plans presented to us about what does this look like if we would have had the pool versus if we would have had pickleball court, club, all that other stuff. So I would hope that at this point where I think from our last HOA meeting, we were all at least united as a neighborhood of where we would like to at least have ideal homes held responsible for things that whatever way it goes, what does that look like? What's the cost look like? Because some of my conversations in asking for what do the plans look like if this goes pickleball court playground, well, what are the costs? Well, when Ideal Homes tells the HOA board, who then tells me that, well, they don't know what the costs are because the company that they were looking to purchase their stuff from for the playground closed down, that's a concern for me. So I'm like, okay, hold on. Maybe there's too much telephone game here. I'm not talking ideal homes directly. You guys are. So it's like, what's happening, okay? So those are just my concerns of where I hope of where I would like to us be good neighbors. I want to be a man of my word of where I want to move forward with them. because I believe the HOA board has done a good job to get out the best that they could with the knowledge that they had about the educate people that's out there, despite still from my opinion of where I wish they would have provided more information of what that would look like and what those costs would look like. So I would appreciate if Ideal Homes could help my concerns on what those costs would have looked like.

i find it a simple question but maybe again i'm not privy to that so i'm i possibly am just assuming too much then so okay so thank you something mr favors did point out is whatever we do we can get ideal homes to build the amenity before we approve other building permits down the road so that five years from now we're not having the same discussion so whatever we vote on whether it's pickleball or pool right we can get started on that immediately yes i would hope so so thank you and if being part of that to be able to hold them responsible for that ideal is welcome to reach out to me too because obviously i'm the one raising the stink about this is why we're here

But by all means, I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask, what do the plans look like?

Right. And for city staff going forward in future developments, we need to look at what's a reasonable timeline for the inclusion of amenities based upon the number of homes built. If you're planning on 400 homes, At what point does a pool or pickleball court get installed? You don't do it for the first home, but you might be waiting too long for 300 homes. So we could probably use some feedback on that in the future, but in this situation, we can address that now.

I think amenities probably went to higher up on the list because we used to look at drainage. I guarantee you we're going to start looking at, okay.

It's a nice discussion to have.

I know, but we need to. We do need to address it.

Mr. Mayor, could we, before we take our vote, could we have Ideal Homes, the company, give us an assurance that they will start construction on either the pickleball or the pool, whichever way we go?

Yeah, Matt can actually answer that because we can hold building permits on any more homes until they do that because we can force compliance with the PUD as Mr. Favors said. And we should. But yes,

Would you consider holding certificates of occupancy? It's going to be a whole lot easier.

When would the pool or pickleball court get started?

Immediately, as soon as we can get it permitted. So we've got to get it designed, and then we've got to get it through the permitting process, and then we've got to get it under construction. It would be a lot easier if we could build whatever we're going to build while we have crews in the neighborhood building houses. So if you wanted to hold certificates of occupancy, that would help a lot.

The nice thing for you on that issue is that's not up for a vote. tonight we can't address that staff can but mr. favors who's on your side and raise the issue and I think it's a valid point that especially going forward we need to hold more developers accountable for amenities promised and I think about that the three sisters project it was beautiful but before three sisters came to us they were actually talking about manufactured homes and we said no so they came back with something much nicer that I actually want to see come to fruition and this situation has made me afraid that 21 years from now we're still going to be waiting for some of those amenities and I don't want that to happen so in the future we need to

UNDERSTOOD. AND IN SOME OF OUR OTHER PUDs IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, IT'S CLEARLY SPELLED OUT. BY SECTION 3, THE POOL AND CLUBHOUSE OR WHATEVER, PICKLE BALL COURT, THE AMENITY PACKAGE WILL BE BUILT. SOMETIMES IT GETS BUILT RIGHT OFF THE START, DEPENDING ON WHAT WE EXPECT THE SALES VELOCITY TO BE IN TERMS OF THE HISTORIC SALES VELOCITY IN THAT AREA. SO, YES, WE WILL START IT IMMEDIATELY.

But you see the situation? I certainly see the situation. We've got homeowners who are going to get hurt either way. One group is going to have increased expenses that they don't want or maybe can't afford. Yes. The other group is being denied a service that they were promised and contracted for.

Yes.

Either way, it's a lose situation. Somebody's going to lose. Yes. And that's the delay in implementing this pool is what has led us to this point. And they're a community divided now.

I completely understand. And they both affect value. Because when you look at the total cost of home ownership, those homeowners association dues have to get factored in. And so it doesn't necessarily always raise the value of a home if you have an amenity package that causes the dues to have to be significantly increased. So I do realize it is a tough situation.

That's not my area of expertise.

this is a situation where one feels like no good deed goes unpunished we were trying to be helpful to the property owners Association so can I ask while you're still here sir so would there be any way possible because I have a feeling the council's leaning a certain way well you've changed my mind Well, whatever way. If the pool is designed and that's what's going to be taken over, would the builder be willing to not turn that over to the HOA until, say, a certain amount of homes were built? Is that something I can ask?

And I have no idea what the answer is. I don't know the answer. I apologize, I did not get prepared to answer that. OK.

Thank you.

Yes, sir. Just name and address, please. Kim Morfis, 2517 Scarlet Oak Court. And been in the neighborhood 18 years, been on the board most of that time. And I think, as one of my colleagues said last time, it's all about the money. And I understand and agree with everything that's been said here. People are going to be unhappy no matter what happens. But I'm just stating a fact that I believe our dues, we can only raise them 20% per year. So if a pool were built next year and handed over to us, we can't afford it. So we've got to cut something back. Our estimate is we'd have to raise 20% next year, 20% the year after that, 20% the year after that, and who knows what costs are by then. To me, it's It has a possibility of decreasing value in the neighborhood because it could possibly, if we quit mowing the yard or whatever.

You know, I have to point out, though, the ironic nature of what you're suggesting. You're suggesting that we vote to change rules. No. No. You're suggesting that we vote to change a PUD because your association can't vote to change its rule on the 20%.

Well, I believe that we are, someone said, I think the can has been kicked down to the point where we have 200 houses now, but 200 houses won't support it.

But the colleague that you referenced that spoke last time didn't tell us that his wife worked for Ideal Homes.

No, she does not. She is a secretary for the HOA. She does the bookkeeping for the HOA, but she does not work for Ideal Homes.

Then you're talking about a different person than I'm talking about.

Yeah, I'm talking about the man that got up and said it's all about the money.

One of the members of your board spoke, and his wife is employed by Ideal Homes. I didn't discover that until after. Council meeting was over. Okay, it's that kind of Sways a little bit of that opinion Everybody's got a dog in this fight. Somebody wants a pool. Somebody doesn't want to pull somebody bought their home because they were promised a pool Somebody doesn't want to pay extra dues because they already have a pool. I totally understand everything that you're saying I really do but we are being asked to change an ordinance a PUD to accommodate a change because time has gone by. But an interesting thing that Mr. Favors said is, I believe that we need to hold developers accountable and stick to our PUDs, but at the same time, he wants us to change this PUD. That's the problem that we're facing. I understand. We are being addressed by people that have an interest. You're telling us, hey, I've got a rule that says that we can't pay more than 20 percent increase on our dues, so please change your PUD. We could adhere to the PUD and ask you to change your association rules. Nobody wants to change rules.

Well, we could change the rules and say we can increase news 50% a year.

Right.

And people would move away.

Right. Or not buy houses. And we don't want people to move away, but we also want people to get what they bought. And there's a problem with that. I keep bringing up this development that came to us two months ago. We asked them to make it nicer, and they came back and they did. And it's supposed to be very nice. I don't want them coming back in five years saying, All the residents here don't want it to be as expensive, so we want to change the rules and allow something less nice. And that's weighing on me considerably. Last month, I really considered, well, democratic process, if everybody doesn't want a pool, I get it, however, We've been being asked by multiple people in our community, we want nicer homes with nicer amenities. And now we're being asked, well, but not my neighborhood. And that's a hard pill to swallow. So what do I do? Do I encourage nicer neighborhoods with nicer amenities? Or do I allow every neighborhood to do what they want once they get the bill? And I'm not picking on you. You just happen to be the next person at the podium.

Yeah, I understand. I'm fearful for the future of the neighborhood because I believe we could get out of control. But anyway, I appreciate your time.

Mayor, I think you would agree with me. The issue is much more complicated and complex than I think we even thought last time. But we are grateful, right, to the homeowners association members who did connect with their neighbors regardless of how this vote goes. You applied democracy, you got to meet some of your neighbors and tried to be more inclusive. So regardless of how this goes, thank you for being that neighbor.

Anybody else in the public? I'm going to close public discussion at this point.

I'll make a motion to deny the change.

All right. So your motion is to deny the amended PUD, meaning if you deny it, you're supporting the pool.

Well, yes, but I'm supporting what the PUD is. It's already in place. Correct.

And if we take a vote on that, an aye vote supports your denial, correct? Correct. All right. We have a motion to deny the amended PUD. Do we have a second? I second that. We have a second. We should do this by roll call. Ward 1, if you vote aye. Aye. you're essentially voting for the pool if you vote nay you're voting for pickleball okay and just to double check the deny is voting for the pool is that correct correct okay so if i say aye then i'm you're voting for the pool okay aye word two aye word three aye word four aye word five aye and the mayor votes aye this uh issue has been denied Next item on the agenda, D3. Let the record reflect that Ward 6 has returned to his chair. And we don't want you to move away. Yeah. We do need to see dirt turning in the pool. Before I go into D3, ma'am, did you find what you were looking for?

The only thing in there that specifically says 111.

Come up to the microphone. I can't hear you. Sorry.

The only thing that says in the paperwork 111 North Richards Avenue in that term is from you guys.

The notice.

Yeah. Everything else is a legal description.

Then why don't we go back to D1. All right D one public hearing discussion consideration action to approve a minor plat for the property located at one one one Richards Avenue. Matt you've already explained it we've already had some public discussion. Is there anybody else in the public who wants to discuss that issue further is an item D one. There being none do we have a motion.

Motion to approve.

Do we have a second? I second. Motion and second. Do all those in favor signify by saying aye? Aye. Any opposed? Abstain. There being none. Six will abstain. Six is abstaining. We need to do a roll call vote. Ward 1. Aye. Ward 2. Aye. Ward 3. Aye. Ward 4. Aye. Ward 5.

Aye.

Ward 6 abstains. Mayor votes aye. Thank you very much, ma'am. Before she leaves, Mr. City Manager.

Yeah.

got and let him do some research. Right.

Well, I was going to say, if we get a request from anybody to put equipment on there, we need to be notified immediately so we can put a stop to that.

I cannot speak to oil-filled equipment. I did find an EPA website that listed cleanups here in Midwest City, and that site was not listed on the EPA website. Right.

And I would say, I don't think it's possible for that size of lot to to put an oil well on a fracking well but if that were to start you let us know immediately and I would ask that you talk to Matt after the meeting give him your information Matt's the gentleman standing right here and he can talk to you about what you have but also keep in touch with you in case we do get another notification of something so well that's but that's for today's hearing that we we summoned you to That's gonna be for in for a mineral rights lease right, but we all got that so Yeah, everybody wants everybody wants to pay you money for your mineral rights Right Yeah, all right item d3 Public hearing, discussion, consideration, possible action on an ordinance to rezone the subject property from single family detached plan unit development for the property in Ward 6. Matt, tell me about this one.

Yes. This is a rezoning application to PUD with a proposed underlying zoning of RMD. It's a medium density residential zoning district. The project site is about 39 acres in size, and it's located on the west side of Westminster Road and on the east side of Windsong in the water treatment plant. The site is currently zoned R6, which is a single family detached residential zoning district. The PUD proposes to have primary access off of South Westminster Road, and the applicant proposes modifications. to the development regulations as part of the PUD, while also proposing amenities in some of the common areas to make them more park-like. So amongst the development standards that they're requesting revisions to are the minimum lot size, the masonry requirements, the requirement for J drives, and the setbacks on the front side and rear. The applicant is proposing six common areas. There's one that's designed for a playground. There's one that's designed for either basketball or pickleball. And then there's some buffer areas that the applicant is proposing around the southern side of the property, the northern side, and a portion of the western property boundary. We did comply with state and local notification requirements. we have heard from several a couple of neighbors i believe they were all from the windsong edition who were opposed to the application and the planning commission did recommend a denial of this application with a 6-0 vote with one member abstaining action is at the discretion discretion of council matt can you uh clarify on page five now that we're talking about amenities yes um there there is yes and i'm glad you brought that up there there is an error on page five of this staff report that was a holdover from a an early edition of the staff report the staff report near the bottom does erroneously state that the applicant is requesting relief from amenities and that is not the case the applicant is proposing to provide amenities in terms of the parkland and improvements you know such as the playground and the the basketball or pickleball court

Do you know why the Planning Commission voted to deny?

If I recall correctly, the Planning Commission cited that they felt like the list of things that were being requested relief of was longer than they liked, and they felt like some of the quality of homes in Midwest City was being asked to be decreased. I think that was what Mr. Dawkins cited.

Are any of the individuals who spoke out against this or wrote? I see they're back there. I assume you've signed up to speak on this. I'd like to hear why you are opposed to it.

Should we have the developer step forward first?

Sir, before you come up, let's have the developer speak. That's our ordinary course.

Good afternoon, David Box, 525 Northwest 11th Street. Here on behalf of the developer, Zach Roche, also here with me, who is the developer. this is uh it's a pud and you know typically puds are viewed as a negotiation and yes we are looking to relax some of the rules that would otherwise exist under the current zoning we believe that we have provided a better product than would otherwise be permitted under the current zoning by the increased amenity packages that we're going to provide now on the list of the things that we're seeking to relax on the masonry masonry requirement We're happy to abandon that request and adhere to your 85% requirement. So we can amend the PUD from the floor to not seek to amend in any way your mason requirements. What that really leaves is we're trying to reduce the lot size to 5,000. the J drive and then modify the setback slightly and in exchange for that we are proposing to specify amenities in a manner as your staff says that is above what would be expected and required under the R 6. So we think we will provide a better neighborhood if I don't know if staff can display our site plan but that neighborhood to the west. We do have a 50 foot buffer along our western border where we are adjacent to that street and so we have a 50 foot buffer and then that street we believe all of these things lead to a better product than your straight zoning code would allow and we would ask for your approval happy to answer any questions or discuss further

Mr. Box, can you explain so the council understands what a J drive is and why you're asking the variance from that?

So we're asking for the ability to have a front facing. The J drive is a design feature. There were comments made at Planning Commission about the quality of these homes. What Zach tells me is the starting price for any home in here will be $350,000. So just because we don't have a J drive does not mean that we're in any way modifying the quality of these homes. These homes will be quality. The neighborhood will be quality. It's just design features. It's the craftsman style home that's really popular. And the J drive, unfortunately, does not allow us to build a home that we believe that the market is demanding.

And a J drive is more for the driveway. So a car could have to pull in from the side instead of pulling straight in for is that correct correct. And so you would have to have wider lots to be able to have a J drive. That's right, yeah.

We're trying to get away from these little lots.

Yeah, so the 5,000 square foot lot, although smaller than what your code would allow.

What does our code currently allow?

I believe it's 6,000. Yeah. Understand the concern. Our hope is that the smaller lots with a heavier amenity package is viewed as a reasonable trade-off. So we've committed to two set, well, there's multiple common areas, but two separate amenity areas with playground equipment. The other will have either basketball or pickleball court. We're happy to launch into the discussion of timing and no pool.

Yeah, you're timing.

It's not great, but here we are.

It's randomly assigned.

I was very interested sitting there from a legal perspective of what was happening here, so.

I'm not worried about you taking 21 years to build a pickleball court. I'm not. I will tell you, I'm worried about minimum lot size. In your dad's day, because I was there, after the May 3 tornado, we debated minimum lot size a lot. I mean we debated it a lot because a lot of the homes that were destroyed were in Ward 1. were original mile homes and they had exceedingly small homes they didn't even have garages on many of them they were all straight garages or soft surface parking and we decided that if somebody owned a lot owned a house they could rebuild because their grandfather but we decided then that we wanted minimum masonry and minimum lot sizes. And we did that for a reason because we wanted to start getting away from the really small homes.

Yeah. So I was there. I understood.

And so was Vaughn. And I don't want to go back there.

Lot size does not always dictate the home size. The The smaller the lot is less maintenance that a homeowner has to deal with. What we're seeing across the entire metro from not just this client but all of my clients is pushing that down and not necessarily pushing down the home size. In Oklahoma, I know this is not a city, but in Oklahoma City, developers are routinely pushing it down to 4,400 square foot lots. 40 footers because the market is demanding that that is what the market that the sweet spot seems to be the the concern often is smaller lots going to equal worse quality bad product long-term maintenance problem with the things that we're committed to i don't think that those concerns are justified

But if we want smaller homes. We just approved a bunch of townhouses and to us that's the way to do it not stand alone houses on smaller lot. Yeah, that's certainly different model that a different market and where we just approved is one mile from where you're proposing and I don't want to immediately approve several new housing additions of all smaller homes. So I'm concerned about the small lot size. I was gonna jump all over you about masonry. So I appreciate that you already threw that out there.

Yeah, understood. And again, our belief is that committing to certain amenities provides a better overall community than meeting your standard zoning.

If I'm hearing it right, we're not actually talking about smaller homes. We're talking about smaller yards.

Correct.

And the home itself, the square footage of the house is, if it's a $350,000 house, we're talking about a 2,000 square foot house or more.

Hello, Zach Roach with the developer 14001 North Macaulay. It's going to have a product offering that's going to be in the range, probably going to average 15, 16, 1700 square foot. You'll dip up to well over 2000. But echoing what David's comments were, was the square footage of the home is not driven by the lot size. It is reflected a little bit the setbacks because when you have a smaller lot we are asking for those setbacks to come in but the the home size is going to be fit for the lot and it's going to be primarily driven from a maintenance basis because what we're seeing with the market right now on that lot size people do to your point want the same kind of square footage the same kind of homes that they've been accustomed to but they want to have less maintenance and they want to be able to enjoy those common areas and so i've done developments all over the city. And as we continue to have this wave after wave, people want to have less yard to maintain and they want to have more amenity and quality of life driven components where they can have that shared space.

But if you give them J drives, they have less lawn to mow.

So the 55 foot wide lot, I mean, it's I'm being facetious.

Yeah, I'm being facetious. If you want less grass to mow, make more driveway. Add that with the J drive, but you can't do it with the smaller lot size. I get it. I get it.

Yeah, and it's a market-driven thing, too. And so what I'm coming from you guys today is I'm trying to meet where I think the market is at on that, whether it be J-hook drives, whether it be 5,000 square foot lots, and provide that product while maintaining the concerns that you voiced with quality and, to a certain extent, price point, and just hopefully assuage some of those concerns.

And who is your average, who's your target market here? Is it families, young single parents, or young single couples with no kids, single individuals? Who do you see as your target market?

well anybody who'll buy one first of all okay fair enough but uh you what you see in this when this range is your nurses your teachers your firefighter your police i mean this is this is typically a young family demographic that's buying here we'll sell to anybody but the uh that the end user is just going to be primarily in that young move up family stages who typically buy us homes like this all right well thank you i'm really interested in this conversation um

I keep hearing you say, both of you, that this is a market driven thing. This is what the consumer wants. Is there some sort of a survey done amongst the consumer? Is there a specific study that you can refer me to that says home buyers in Oklahoma prefer no yard these days?

Sure. So that's a great question. And so there's a couple ways to slice that. The first one I would direct you to would probably be the MLS report.

I'm sorry, what?

The MLS report. And so when you start looking at the price points of the market and days on market, you're going to see a sharp drop off. month to month, under $400,000. And then the closer you get to 250 or 200, it's even thinner. And so what the data is telling us is that this is the sweet spot for the market. So we're trying to match the product that we're bringing to market to the demand that is right there.

Is that the only study?

So then the other things I could point to, and this is generally speaking, so I've personally read the city of Oklahoma City and the city of Tulsa's customer survey. I've read Norman's, but it's been a few years. I don't know if Midwest City's got one. But in the top three of at least those cities, affordable housing is one of the number one concerns that all of their citizen surveys are coming back. I gotta believe Midwest City's gotta have something like that, although I can't point to it. here in Midwest City. But what I can tell you is that across Oklahoma, whether it's in Jenks or Bixby or wherever we're doing development stuff, that continues to be that price point sensitivity is something that people have absolutely pointed to that is important to them. And we're seeing that in the sales velocity in this price point.

I'm sorry, can I finish some of that? Sorry, Vice Mayor. So I heard you, but that doesn't distinguish that Oklahomans per se want smaller lots because they're too lazy to cut the grass and they don't enjoy having a backyard and family barbecues and having children who have playgrounds in their own but rather that Oklahomans are currently struggling with the inflated home prices that have gone up about 50 to 75% for existing homes, let alone new builds. So they're sacrificing, they're getting less for their money. And please tell me if I'm wrong, but my observation has been, particularly with these mass developers, is that the recognition has been that if you cut down the yard size, for 50 homes, then in place of what would have been accessible yard space for those young families that you're referring to, you can slap on two or three additional houses in that neighborhood and therefore your profit margins go up on top of the inflated house prices that exist today.

Would never argue that we're a for-profit developer, 100%. Totally agree with that. But what I would add to that, and so there's a couple of things. And if I could, because I heard you ask, I think, two questions. And I just want to make sure I'm addressing them correctly. So I heard about the quality of life question in terms of kids and backyard barbecue. And then the motive as it comes to the market. I think those are the two questions I heard. Did I sum that up correctly?

Well, I feel like there's a misrepresentation with selling the idea that what is more appealing to your typical family these days is no yard. When the fact, I would argue, is that the reason people are buying that house that doesn't have yard isn't that they don't like the yard or they don't enjoy mowing their yard or doing things that we as Americans have taken for granted for years, like having a barbecue in your backyard, putting a playground in the backyard for your children as they grow up.

but rather that they can't afford to have what has now become a privilege an accessible backyard for your children so i would i would direct you to institutions like the urban land institute that's part of the one of the areas where we've seen that be a talking point that tracks trends across cities and urban areas across the united states i don't have a google on me right now but i'm pretty sure in about six seconds i could start pulling studies that talk about that that trend especially for this target segment of the market is is moving the maintenance from the in hard yard maintenance to the common area the hoa maintained yards and that's just a trend across the united states wouldn't argue with you about the affordability at all but what i would say is is that going back to the lots and the lot sizes one of the when it comes to building a home a stick a stick of lumber is what a stick of lumber is a nail is what it is the only Possible chance that you have to pass on savings to a customer to help with that affordability is actually lot width. Because lot width drives the bottom price of the home. So I'm going to go back to that $350,000 number that Dave was talking about. These lots are going to average about $70,000 to $75,000 a lot, just on the lot size. So when I can help increase the efficiency in the development, what I can do is I can actually lower the cost on the lot size. Well, that has an outweighed impact on the final home price because the financing rules in the state of Oklahoma, generally, you're going to get about five times the value of your lot from your bank. So if I have a $70,000 home, a bank will start financing at about $350,000. It's not exact, but it's a round number.

so if i can help by being more efficient within the boundaries of the development that is a direct cost i can pass on a customer and help those prices and so that's something we do absolutely want to achieve i i just want i've been watching the mls for nearly two years mass majority of homes that exist in oklahoma have what we i think would take for granted or normal lots where you had adequate backyard space unlike many other states many Over 2,000 square foot homes here in this state actually have the privilege of having three garages instead of two. What I have noticed is that homes that are being built 2019 and beyond is where we see the reduction in the access to the play space, the green space, as well as a poor quality in whether it's a wood or the artifacts you all use to build homes. I'm not blaming you for that. That's just a trend. Everybody blames COVID for it. That may be the reality. I see those same older homes 2019 prior with the yard space being sold at the same rate as the newer homes it's a matter of affordability so I guess what I just don't want pushed is the idea that your typical Oklahoma just doesn't want a yard anymore and therefore that's what we're doing it is my maybe biased perception that what developers have figured out is that if you cut down the yard space yes you can maybe keep that home price more affordable and then you can I would never would never argue with you that that can't be the case in some places for sure. This is something I want to bring up and I'm Mister streets you wake up. I know you don't have a bow tie on in Matt. You don't have a tie on either.

Here's my issue in we need developments. We really do, but the cutting down the square footage of the lots means that there's more rooftops Correct.

Sure. You're going to have 162 in this development.

Yes. More rooftops means more runoff. More runoff means more drainage issues for us, the city. And that's my concern. There's a reason that we set the limit at 6,000, because that's kind of a happy medium where we can have quality homes and not acre lots or 2 acre lots, but then there's enough grass in yardage yards to handle some of the water is that not accurate.

Mister streets. He's our public works guy.

And Matt, is that not an accurate statement? That it helps with the drainage, which is, up until today, was the number one problem. Now it's amenities.

Yes, the yard would allow for more infiltration of stormwater.

Which makes it easier on our stormwater. On our storm system, yes. That's the issue I've got. So can I address that issue? Sorry, Mr. Councilman.

So obviously, as part and parcel with the engineering plans that we submit, we will have to meet code for all of that. And so when you start looking at hard surface counts, street counts, detention pond counts, all of that is baked into the cake of the communication that we have with the city. So does intensity go up a little bit? Yes, it goes up a little bit. We can we do those rate of runoff calculations do we have to show our homework to the city to make sure that we are counting for that every time or else I can't get a building permit or I can't do any kind of dirt worker grading or paving to be able to do that and so they will make sure to your concern that I'm doing my job on my end.

Vice mayor, one of the things though that I would kind of I understand 100% where you come from and I agree with you on a lot of those things. only thing is is are we going to stop allowing duplexes now because if you look at the if you look at well no duplex doesn't have as much yard as what he's even asking for i mean if you go over to those on 10th and post we've got more asphalt and you know concrete there than you do have any grass So I understand your argument on the smaller lots and everything. One of the things that I would argue, though, is if you think about it, if he makes bigger homes or bigger lots, I would assume the homes that you build on that would then be bigger again, right?

Typically translates to higher coverage ratio, yes.

Which the cost of the home would then go from 350,000 to probably 450,000. Yes. So, which would be nice, it'd be great, but I can tell you, as a former mortgage lender, my wife's a realtor, we see the market right now. She's got 11 listings that have set on the market, some almost up to a year, because people are not buying homes. they can't afford just like you said they can't afford the homes and I know I'm going off course there a little bit but but my concern is is if that makes it to where he can make the lot smaller put the homes on we're getting a 350,000 as a mortgage lender, I can tell you somebody that's going to be able to afford that type of home is probably going to be making 80,000 or more a year.

Okay, but Everything that you've said is correct. Everything you've said is correct. That's not the issue before us. The issue before us is do we deviate from our code and do we deviate from the recommendation from the Planning Commission? If we want to allow smaller homes, we need to address that on a different agenda item on a different day. for the philosophical stuff that you're raising. If we want to stick with minimum lot sizes, then we need to follow our original plan and stick with original minimum lot sizes. I understand everything you're saying, and I don't disagree with you, but that's not for them.

It is worth noting real quick that staff recommended approval. In the Planning Commission staff report, staff's recommendation on the PUD, based upon the amenity package and everything else, was to approve it. Right.

But the Planning Commission voted it down.

And that's why you guys were elected to make the real choice.

Well, and that's the other thing is... I mean, I understand where you're coming from. No, no, no.

I don't disagree with you. I'm saying if we're going to start deviating, then at some point we need staff to make recommendations to us in the future about changing our code so that we don't have to keep necessarily having this same debate. Are we willing to go back to a minimum lot size? 30 years ago, we said no. We did not want lots smaller than 6,000 square feet. And I get that. If it's time to now revisit that, we need to revisit that.

Yeah. And we make deviations all the time.

We do. So we need to. I'm sorry? Is there a movement off the 5,000? Yeah.

And it did not change.

So 5,000 is as tight as I can get it and make the envelope work. So going back to the backyard discussion, I know it doesn't give quite the backyard that the councilwoman has brought up, but my building pads in there are when I'm at, if I can get 20 feet building on setback, if I have a 70 foot building, a building pad that gives me a 25 to 30 foot backyard, depending on what the, the concrete does on the back patio. So unfortunately I, I, 5,000 is as tight as I can make them and still hope to have some sort of quality of life for the residents to live there, or else they're going to have their back fence, you know, right on the back patio.

It is, and we haven't gotten there yet. So one more comment, then we have members of the public that want to talk, so. Oh you like I was there to questions if there's any more members of the public. I believe you raise your hand Sir, come on up name and address, please.

My name is George pop one 1700 somewhere line live in one song and at the last meeting the group didn't like the idea for the for the losing of the brick and the lot size, the driveway, just everything where they wanted to get away from that you all have set in rules they were against. That was the main drive of that. I'm against it because I don't want to see smaller. I want to see the brick. I know he talked about changing that. To me, Midwest City, like you said, the neighborhoods that are coming now seem to be cheaper built. The apartment's going on 29th Street. I drive by there. I believe I could be wrong. I know it's still under construction. Looks like it's all wood, no brick. It's just everywhere. It seems you go. The quality is going down in Midwest City. It just amazes me. And you was talking about the duplexes. They're going to put the duplexes right next to this, what he's wanting to build, because that's right behind my house. And I disagree with that, but it's going in. And I also disagree with this. I think it's. When song used to be one of the best neighborhoods and now you're building all these little houses duplexes right behind us right around us and they're going to do across the street. A combination I gets duplexes and the shopping, I'm not sure what all that turned in on the corner of the 15th and Westminster on the I guess that'd be the southeast corner. uh so i mean it just seems everything's shrinking to me i could be wrong i don't know but that's just the way i feel and i like it to stay as a normal outside normal house and i mean building who can build go there uh to me if it's a 350 000 house you're just talking about quality and all that My house is bigger than that. I live in Windsong. My house won't appraise for that. So if I'm a person shopping for a home, I'm not going to go buy a 1,500-square-foot house when I can go buy a 1,900-square-foot house and save $70,000, even though it is 37 years old. And it's in good shape. I don't. They might not sell them. The used houses may be selling. I don't know. I'm not in real estate. But in my mind, when I go to spend my money, I'm going to look for my biggest buck, my biggest bang. And I just don't see it that way. But that's just my opinion. Sure. Yes.

you've been around for a while kind of like me yeah I'd like your opinion when you when you see a house and you say to yourself man that's a nice house are you looking at just the house are you looking at the yard the trees the driveway the flowers which what do you see when that makes it a nice house

The first thing I see is the house. It's a good-looking house. Then I look at the yard and look at the flowers and look at the trees. I look at all that. It's kind of a package deal, isn't it? Yes, and I'll make another comment. On Air Depot between 15th and 29th, They built a new house or tore down a house and built a new one there. I don't know if you know what I'm talking about. It'd be on the east side of the road. And it's all brick with a double car garage. They squeezed it in there. And even though it's small and a lot of small because they can't change the lot size, that is a very good looking house for air depot. Solid brick. The whole thing is brick. I don't know if you've seen it. I have. Yeah, it's it's out of place there. It's a very nice looking house because it's brick. But no, I like the whole package. I do. Thank you, sir. Anything else?

Hi, my name is Wanda Martin and I live on 1901 Meadowlark. And I just agree with what he said. That's my neighbor.

Did you say you agreed with? I agree.

Well, I'm not for this. The smaller lot sizes. Absolutely not. And of course, I'm the one that's going to be looking at this neighborhood because it's I'm on Meadowlark. Right. And we're going to have a 50-foot barrier and I just wanted to be good quality homes Midwest City ought to be an invitation for people to come I understand low income we're going to have the duplexes right there you got the boys home and let's put in something nice there and not lower the quality and I'm sorry but families are looking for a place for their children to go play and not a yard where you walk from here to there and that's what we're building and it's it's you know it just it's got to be better it's all i'm going to say all streets front and center please

While Paul saunters on up, is there any other member of the public that wanted to say anything on this? Okay, I'm going to close public discussion. Go ahead. Mr.

Streets, the Director of Public Works, this housing addition, if it's approved, will back up to the water plant.

I'm ignoring you.

Is that an issue? Yes, sir. That is an issue. The setback isn't adequate. Unfortunately, it got missed in the review done by staff before it was pushed forward. It cannot go forward with. There's no setback on the lots that back up to the water plant, and that's a problem that was not addressed during staff review.

Wait, wait. What would that entail? We see hustling over there by Mr. Box. Was it addressed?

There's not adequate space, in my opinion, in staff's opinion, our engineering department head, the assistant public works director, Dr. Kerry Evenson, there is not adequate spacing between the back of those lots and the water plant property. And yes, maybe we should have purchased the property, then we would have total control, but that wasn't an option. So what I will tell you is that in its current state, I absolutely support the planning commission's recommendation for denial.

Well, it's a heck of a time to hear this at the city council, given we deferred this many times. worked with staff, like the idea that we're hearing this today, I don't know if I've ever had this in my 17 year career, that staff is going against staff's recommendation to approve the PUD. I'm not entirely sure what he's talking about in terms of setback, but of course this is zoning, we'll have to plat it. If approved and at the plat, perhaps there's a regulation that staff can point to that we don't adhere to that we would have to modify or design.

Well, I do know it was in the news two weeks ago that all communities are being looked at securing water plants because of terrorist threats that have just recently come up. And I read about that on some national news websites. But I will tell you that this question came up because we were looking at the photographs and then started asking about the water plant, and that's what drove the question. It's not something that we were planning on ambushing you with. I agree that it's a little unorthodox to do it this way, but it is a concern. And the question that I asked of the assistant city manager, it's like, why don't we own that land? because I wanted to know about possible water plant expansion in the future, things like that, and there is an issue there that then raised other issues.

So I guess what would be the desired setback from the property line?

1,000 feet. You asked.

Mr. Mayor, if we were to take no action on this right now. and let them, Matt, Paul, and the developer and his attorney get together and see if there's a compromise. Because if we vote, we turn this down, it's how long before they can come back?

Well, listen, if there's any change at all, they've got to go back to Planning Commission, correct?

Any change to the PD? Well, we have to plat it.

Right. No, no, I get that. But... I understand what you're trying to do, and I'm trying to clarify if they're going to have to go back to Planning Commission with what you want to do.

The answer would be not necessarily. It'll all depend on what the change is. If the change is something that is recognized within the PUD. To give an example, Mr. Box here said, we're willing to waive the masonry requirement change that we We don't need to go back to you can do that here from the floor if the change were to be. We're going to put in 3 story buildings that you know something I got OK, I will tell you.

Yes, if we took no action, you would be able to talk and then come back next month to see if we could reach. Some consensus between city engineers and public works people that clearly a discussion needs to occur in just a

The west side of our...

Your western boundary...

Which is further away than the existing homes are to the water plant. Correct.

It is, but some people weren't around when that decision was made. We don't want to make it worse by boxing it in.

We do, in all seriousness, we do have more national security concerns that have been raised since Winsong went in about water plant encroachment. It's a new topic.

I will say I'm not opposed to the development, but obviously I think we need to revisit some of our concerns.

I'm not a fan of minimum lot size being shrunk. Although I do agree with you that I believe that we need to have, I wish we could have I wish the comprehensive plan had dealt with that, but that predated my election. And I wish the comprehensive plan had addressed minimum lot size in certain areas and minimum lot size in other areas so there was a little bit more consistency. I kind of wish that had happened, but it didn't.

I mean, I would agree with

vice mayor is to table it give them some time to discuss that and see if they could come to an agreement or not and i would tell you a vote to table means then it is automatically put on the agenda for next month and it then we don't have to do notice if you take no action then new notices will have to go out okay so there's no idea when so we could we could vote to table in the future though if we have any development that is going to be adjacent to city-owned property i would like the

The calm dev people to talk to the public works people to see if any of these issues should be discussed before it even goes to the planning commission so that Mister box won't get ambushed again.

Well, Mr. Vox, we're obviously trying to work with you and your client and not kill this, because right now I think if we voted it would be no, which would mean you'd have to wait six months to come back. What we're asking you to do is table it. and you guys talk and see if there's an agreement.

Yeah, and just to be candid, the issue we have is if that whole western row of lots is going to be compromised by, you know, a public works need, we have to go back to the seller to go figure out a way forward.

And I get that. And it's not the entire western border. It's this bottom half of your development.

Yeah, so we're happy to go talk. If we get tabled, is there a date certain?

You said it's the next meeting, which is when? September 1st. No, that's a Friday. That's the strategic planning meeting. September 22nd. September 22nd. Yeah, that's fine. Can we talk to staff about minimum lot size? I'm okay with the J drive issue, a waiver on that. I'm a big fan of the masonry, but you've already addressed that. Maybe a compromise on your request on the lot size, maybe?

I'll have to ask. I mean, again, now, if we're losing a whole bunch of land, it may not be economical to even move forward with the project, just to be clear.

I understand. I understand. You can put your pickleball down in the bottom of your detention pond.

Well, I don't want the balls to end up in the water. That's the problem. OK, we'll table it, and we'll deal with public works.

Wait, wait, wait. Hang on one second. Ma'am, are you raising your hand because you want to say one more thing?

If you're gonna yeah if you're gonna ask No, it's not a deciding factor it's something that just needs to be looked at But understand it's very very important and I agree but it seemed like everything shifted to everything's tabled now but I do agree.

Just for one month to let our public works people talk to our engineering people.

But since you're back what would be an accommodation that you would be willing to would you think is fair your view from from your home and into this addition assuming that they're going to build something there right so you're going to have a neighbor across the street the the how it's zoned now right so you you so you what would you how would you like them to change it to make it prettier for you

Just nicer homes, like you said, with brick and, you know, bigger yards, more appealing.

Okay. Well, they've conceded on the brick, so that one's pretty much done, I think.

I'm not opposed to them building over there. I just want it to be just nice to miss the city. I understand, and I agree with you. The duplexes are fine. we're trying to quantify it though and it's so hard you know when you yeah because there's some place small places that are just absolutely gorgeous and then there's some big places that are right and you know there are people who can't afford bigger homes I understand that we just got to have a good balance that we don't go down too much and so I just appreciate y'all I really do I appreciate y'all y'all got the hard job thank you

motion to table the discussion to have a motion to table we have a motion in a second all those in favor aye aye any opposed there being none item d4 d4 discussion consideration possible action approving ordinance amending municipal code on peddlers and solicitors mr mace this is cleaning up a mistake

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. Yes. Out of the ordinance review committee, there was a request that the permit for portable buildings be 30 days with an additional 30 days. We did that in the ordinance. The problem is as the able city clerk told me after she reviewed it, was that we didn't change the permitting fee for it. So this goes back in and cleans up the permitting fee and makes the permitting fee for a 30-day permit for portable homes with the same fee for an additional 30-day permit.

Any questions for Mr. Mace? Motion? Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? There being none. D5, discussion, consideration, possible action of approving the ordinance related to Parkland Review Committee. Mr. Mace?

Yes. This was brought up before the Ordinance Review Committee at their last meeting. It was a discussion concerning what to do with the Parkland Review Committee. The Parkland Committee is a committee that is required by our charter. It is actual provision in our charter that requires this. In discussions with the Ordinance Review Committee as opposed to everybody having to appoint somebody to that, currently it's basically four appointments or four members from different boards and then one appointment by the mayor. opposed to trying to change it to seven and appointing new people most of these issues are addressed by the Park and Recreation Commission or Park and Recreation Board so the determination was to just move these duties and responsibilities as well to the Park and Recreation Board much like we do here you do City Council you do authorities they will do Park and Recreation issues and then they'll also be able to sit as the Parkland Review Committee. I'll be happy to take any questions. Any questions, Mr. H. Oh, this was a recommendation of the Ordinance Review Committee.

Sarah has stepped in.

I make a recommendation to approve.

All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? There being none, and Ward 5 has stepped down. New business public discussion. Is there any member of the audience that wishes to address the council? There being none, we'll move on to the municipal authority agenda. I'm going to call the authority to order. First item on the agenda is the consent agenda. Motion to approve. Wait. Yeah, but we don't vote on it, right? Yeah. Fine. We've adjourned the city council meeting. Now, municipal authority agenda. Motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. oh i'm sorry would somebody please tell sarah who made the motion right because she was too busy telling me i didn't do the last one right i made the motion i made the motion i want the minutes to reflect that the city clerk fell down on her job because she was too busy admonishing the mayor

I want you to know the city clerk did an able and professional job, did a wonderful job covering the city of Tarke, who's the one who made the mistake.

We are adjourned. All right. We're adjourned. Ben is still not here. Did you get the motion? and the second all right all those in favor aye any opposed there being none uh public discussion for the municipal authority and any member of the public want to address the authority there being none we will adjourn that meeting next meeting is the hospital authority i'm going to call that to order first item on the agenda is the consent agenda

Second.

We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Next item on the agenda is the discussion item number one, discussion consideration possible action to reallocate assets. No action is needed, so next item on the agenda is D2, discussion consideration of entering into a contract to purchase 600 national. This is a city manager issue. Robert's coming down.

Mr. Coleman will handle the item, please.

There we go.

I hope you've read the narrative on this item. I did. We've been chasing properties over in Plaza 62 for some time now. This one will actually go to the University of Oklahoma Board of Regents at their September 15th and 16th meeting. We have agreed on a price. We've agreed on basic contract terms. However, I would like in your motion to give the chairman some flexibility if they come back and they have minor changes to the agreement that don't affect the total price. And I will entertain any questions that you may have on the item.

I have a statement on this. I know this has been a lot of work on both you and the city manager and the city attorney. So thank you for being diligent to get this done. We needed this piece of property, and it's taken a lot of effort to get it. I appreciate the work that's gone into getting this piece of property.

would you please make a motion that if I if I might suggest a motion.

Okay, make a motion it's good for the buyer and seller, I think and we appreciate that Mister vice chairman something to approve the sale or the enter into the contract and give the chairman the authority to make adjustments to the contract as we had printed here today that has done price that does not include the price.

is that good mr coleman i love it okay second and we have a second all those in favor all right any opposed there being none public discussion is there any member of the public that wishes to address the authority there being none i'm going to adjourn that meeting and i don't believe we have any other meetings we're done all right we are good thank you all jeff don't leave