City Council - Regular Meeting

I now call to order the city council regular meeting Thursday, December 11th, 2025, 6:30 p.m. in the council chamber, city hall, an announcement of quorum at 6:35 p.m. We're going to have the pledge and invocation by council member Jacob Powell, district number five.

Please join me in the pledge. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Now the Texas flag. Honor

the Texas flag. I aliance to thee, Texas. One state under God, one and indivisible. If you would please join me in prayer. Dear God, we just thank you for today and we thank you that we have another opportunity to just gather and to discuss how we can uh just build a better Baytown together, God. And we pray that you do just lead and guide us in each of our discussions we have this evening, each of the decisions we make, God. I pray that ultimately everything we do here this evening glorifies you, Lord. And um God, I just I thank you for this season that we get to celebrate um the coming of your son that was born on the earth as a man, God, that he would um years down the road go to a cross and and give us a way that we could be forgiven of our sins and and live with you eternally, God. And so we just thank you for everything that Christmas um means, Lord. And we pray all these things in in your son, Jesus's name. Amen.

Amen. Start off with citizen comment. We have a few citizens signed up to speak. The purpose of citizen comment is to give all interested citizens the right to express their views. Everyone desiring to speak should have either signed the appropriate list in the forer or email the city clerk prior to the posted time of this meeting. Each citizen shall give his or her name and address in order to provide proper record of these comments. The rules allow each person one minute to speak. A citizen may pass his or her time to another person who has requested to address council. However, no citizen remarks shall exceed three minutes in total. Either the one minute or the three-minute limit may be extended by a majority vote of council. I encourage everyone to be as brief and to the point as possible. Please keep in mind council cannot discuss or deliberate items for which public notice has not been given on this agenda. We're going to start with Mr. Troy Whitneck. Please state your address for record. Troy Whitneck 9946 Bayou Woods Drive. I understand that 62 people walked into a polling place trusting the pole workers, trusting the city clerk of Baytown, trusting city council, and unknowingly trusting uh Houston city clerk and their votes were disenfranchised. And who did everybody blame for that? They blamed the voters themselves. I understand that u you looked at the vote in your workshop. Uh, these people deserve a big apology from the city. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Whiteneck. Next, we have James Kilburn. Please state your address for record. Good afternoon. I'm James Kilburn, 501 Ashwood Drive here in Baytown. I had asked the city clerk to distribute a copy of a posting that was made by the city of Baytown on January 24th, I believe it was, of this year, referencing signage that was to be placed at the railroad, several of the railroad crossings. Uh, nothing's been done yet this past week. Hold on one second. We need to set the timer for you. You know, I'm good without it.

Oh, no. We're not good without it, though. I understand. Thank you. Yes. This past week, Tuesday, coming down Hold on one second. We haven't said it yet. Let's The clerk is Now you're good to go. Thank you.

This Tuesday when I was coming down Decker Drive, I was passed by a Baytown ambulance running lights and siren. He went past the 3:30 offramp, came around the curb, there's a train blocking the track. He had to make the Uturn, go back up to Bayway, U-turn again, come down to get up on the 3:30, go down to Rolling Brook, get off, make the Uturn, come back up to Baker, and take a right to go to the ambulance. This entire time he's running lights and sirens. Folks, City of Baytown posted that this was going to be placed, that these signs were going to be put into place in January. I don't know if any dirt has been turned anywhere yet for it, but I encourage you, can we please get something put up to warn of these trains blocking the track? Or could the police department start issuing tickets when they're sitting there for an hour at a time non-stop or I'm sorry, stopped? Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have Crystal Sarm. Sarmto. Good job. I got it right. You did. It's a mouthful. slaying my husband. [laughter] Just a real quick note, she is one of our city c fellow council members from Manville, Texas. Yes, sir. Thank you. Appreciate that. What am I doing here from Manville? Well, I need your address first. Yes, sir. So, my name is Crystal Deon Sarmento or Sarmento and my address is 6531 Sam Rburn Drive, Manville, Texas 77578. Thank you.

Yes, sir. Thank you so much. First of all, this lady has a beautiful smile. Secondly, I'm here visiting um to say that I am your candidate for Congress for this newly redrawn district map. Um I want to make it a priority to meet with whoever wants to meet with me. I sent an email um to the council to just ask for coffee, have a meeting. I think that it's important to know what the issues are that your constituents are are saying that they have from a federal level. Man, that was fast. Oh, 30 seconds. Okay, it's a it's a warning there. We give three minutes. So, um so anyway, I just wanted to come and just introduce myself and let everybody here know as well as the citizens of Baytown that I will be working hard to earn the vote of every citizen here, not just the 25% of the citizens in District 9, but the 100%. And so, I would welcome a meeting. And so, thank you so much for this time. Kudos to whoever decorated outside. It looks great. Thank you guys. Have a blessed evening. Thank you. There being no one else desiring to speak, this concludes our citizen comment portion of the agenda to a consider approving the minutes of the city council work session in municipal de development district and city council regular joint meeting held on November 13, 2025. I need a motion.

Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Recognitions and citizen comments. 3A. We're going to recognize City of Baytown employees for their years of service. Mr. Lopez.

Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, we're going to recognize some December employees, including the high milestone of 140-year employee that I think a lot of you, if not all of you, will recognize. Tim Lankin, 25 [music] years, public works and engineering, associate project manager, too. Before joining the city of Baytown, Tim graduated in 1988 with a degree in journalism, and in 1990 answered a [music] higher call to serve by joining the United States Army. He deployed to Desert Storm, serving in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, [music] and Kuwait, where he earned a letter of commendation for his dedication and performance under pressure. In November 1995, he began his career with the city in water distribution. [music] From those early days in the trenches, he advanced to equipment operator and later senior equipment operator. After resigning in September 2000 following a DWI, he [music] made a life-changing decision. He quit drinking that Christmas. Just days later, on December 26th, 2000, he returned to the city, this time to the sewer side, determined to rebuild, [music] grow, and serve with renewed purpose. and his career path reflects that commitment. [music] He promoted to lift station operator in 2006, became the city's [music] first private sewer line inspection supervisor in 2007, served [music] as crew chief of water distribution in 2011, utility construction foreman in 2013 and ultimately utility superintendent in [music] 2016. In 2023, he brought his field experience and leadership skills to engineering, where he now [music] serves as an associate project manager, too, plan reviewer and consultant. Throughout his career, he has been on [music] the front lines during hurricanes, freezes, major water breaks, and emergencies of every kind. He worked 24 [music] hours straight during Hurricane Rita, despite having a broken hand, performed lift station rounds during historic [music] storms, and managed countless high-risisk sewer

incidents, including one that cost him [music] part of his ear. He responded to major water mane ruptures, including a 16-in Bayway [music] break that sent him to the hospital. No matter the challenge, he showed up with determination and unwavering commitment to the citizens of Baytown. [music] His proudest achievements, however, have always been about people. Mentoring crews, working lawn nights to repair lines, [music] tracking sewer stoppages, and supporting teams throughout the hardest conditions. As superintendent, one of his most meaningful traditions was his Thursday smiley happy faces meetings. [music] Created to remind his staff that they mattered in their work had purpose. Outside of [music] his service to the city, he is proud to have his name on the glass wall at the Texan stadium as an original permanent seat license holder. He also treasures his family [music] life, having married his wonderful wife, Vicki, in March 2009. Thank you, Tim, for 25 years of outstanding service, dedication, and leadership in our community and beyond.

Wes Dobbins, 25 [music] years, fire and EMS, fire captain. Wes began his career with Baytown Fire Department in December of 2000. [music] After completing his initial training, he was assigned to station 5 where he served for 15 months before [music] transferring to station 4. In 2004, Baytown Fire received the national grant to establish a 13count regional hazardous materials [music] hazmat team and he had the privilege of joining the first hazardous materials [music] technician class ever held in Baytown. That opportunity laid the groundwork for what would become one of the most meaningful and enduring aspects of his career. Wes remained at station 4 until his promotion to engineer operator in 2007. [music] Thoring a short assignment at station 3, he returned to station 4 to continue serving alongside a team he deeply respected. When station 7 opened in May 2013, [music] the entire crew transitioned together, bringing with them their experience, passion, and commitment to the hazmat [music] program. He was promoted to lieutenant in August of 2017, just two weeks before Hurricane Harvey struck the [music] Texas Gulf Coast. leading through such a historic disaster tested it in ways he will always remember while also reinforcing his dedication to both the department and the community it protects. In 2023, Wes was appointed Baytown Fire's hazmat coordinator, a role he proudly continues to hold. [music] Today, he serves as captain and hazmat coordinator on Engine 7, where he focuses on training, mentorship, and enhancing the department's [music] specialized response capabilities. Thank you, Captain Dobbins. For 25 years of dedicated service to our organization and the Baytown community, [music] your commitment, heart, and tireless efforts have made our lasting effort in the lives of those you serve.

Mike [music] Wills, 30 years, fire and EMS fire captain. Captain Mike Wills [music] began his career with the Baytown Fire Department in 1995 at station 5. In 1996, he married his wife, Amanda, and together they later welcomed two children who have been a steady source of [music] pride throughout his career. In 1997, Mike transferred to station 1 where he became deeply involved in high angle rescue and auto [music] extraction. Over the years, he continued to build significant expertise in [music] these areas along with extensive experience in self-contained breathing apparatus operations. His technical knowledge and calm approach have made him a dependable resource for firefighters across [music] the department. As a supervisor, he is known for helping develop the firefighters [music] under his command. Many of them have gone on to promote through the ranks, including into chief officer [music] positions. His leadership and commitment to training have made Station One a consistently sought-after assignment with firefighters often asking to be placed on a list should [music] any vacancies arise. In addition to his operational contributions, Mike has supported community focused programs including assisting with fire [music] safety education through the beat alley program. since 2017. He has [music] also served as an instructor at the Sanino College Fire Academy where he teaches recruits the fundamentals [music] of the firefighting profession. A significant moment in his career came in 2019 [music] when he served as a key member of the rescue team responding to the Greenpeace protest on the Hartman [music] Bridge. His expertise and steady leadership contributed to the safe and successful resolution of that incident. [music] For his actions, he received the distinguished service ribbon. That same year, he was honored with the fire chiefs [music] award for his dedication to the department and the citizens of Baytown. Outside of work, [music] Mike values time with his family. His daughter, Haley, is expecting a child, and Mike looks forward to becoming a grandfather [music] in April 2026, a milestone his family is excited to celebrate. Captain [music] Wills, thank you for 30 years of dedicated service to

the Baytown Fire Department and the community of Baytown. Your professionalism, experience, and commitment have made a [music] lasting impact on our organization. David Offford 40 years police assistant police chief. Assistant Chief David Offford's story is once shaped by service, perseverance, and a deep love for his community. He grew up in Baytown and attended Ross S. Sterling High School. [music] After graduation, he enlisted in the United States Marine Corps. Upon completing his active service, David returned home to Baytown and joined the Baytown Police Department, where he worked patrol, served as a field training officer, [music] and became a member of the Special Weapons and Tactics Unit. In 1991, Sergeant Alfred answered the call once more and re-entered active duty military service in support of [music] Operation Desert Storm before returning yet again to Baytown to continue protecting and serving the citizens he loves. Across the course of his policing career, David earned numerous awards and commendations, including twice being recognized as officer of the month. His service was further honored with the Law Enforcement Appreciation [music] Medal from the Sons of the American Revolution, VFW Police Officer of the Year, and Baytown Chamber of Commerce Law Enforcement Officer of the Year. Under the [music] department's modernized award program, he received three life-saving medals. The Taser International John H. cover medal for terrorism, the Chief's Commenation Award, and the Chief's Unit Citation Medals. It's hard for him to believe 40 years have passed, and though no place, person, or profession is perfect, David considers himself profoundly blessed to have spent [music] his life serving the department and this city. His career, marked with achievement and honor, was also touched by deep personal loss when his first wife Lesie passed away. [music] In time, he was blessed to find love again and remarried. He and his wife Cindy share five children in an active life of faith. David profoundly professes Jesus Christ and serves as a deacon at Rolling Brook Fellowship, [music] Baytown's First Baptist Church.

After retirement, he plans to continue serving as a peer supporter, a calling that has shaped his heart and will guide his next chapter. His uniform may one day come off for good, but his service never will. Thank you, Chief Alford, for 40 years of devoted service to our community and for the many ways you continue to make Baytown a better place. Your dedication and genuine care inspire us all.

Cancer Awareness Month. ahead down here. And if y'all want to be in the photo after this, feel free to come join me. Oh, you're amazing. Open invitation.

Okay, man. Go ahead. Good evening, Mayor Charles Johnson, council members, and community leaders. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. My name is Anish Senth, and I'm here on behalf of the American Lung Cancer Screening Initiative, or ALCSI, a national nonprofit working to increase awareness and access to life-saving lung cancer screening. The opportunity to be here with you all is truly important because with your help, we can work together to save the lives of our Bettown citizens. to share a little bit about who we are. ALCSI is a national 501c3 nonprofit focused entirely on raising awareness about lung cancer screening. Over the past few years, we've held more than 12,200 educational events and spoken with over 70,000 people across our country, about the importance of early detection. Our organization brings together more than 700 volunteers across North America. Students like me, physicians, survivors, families, and advocates, all united by the mission to save lives through early detection. We now have over 130 chapters across the United States and Canada. Each one works closely with local hospitals, schools, and city leaders to spread awareness and expand access to screening. What we're doing here, what what what we're doing here today in Baytown is part of a much larger growing movement, a movement built on community leadership and the belief that health should never depend on awareness alone. Throughout this effort, we've had the privilege of partnering with mayors, governors, and members of Congress to record public service announcements and speak directly to residents. When trusted leaders speak up about screening, people listen and take action. That's why proclamations like the one you're issuing today are so meaningful. They spark conversations at kitchen tables, in waiting rooms, and within families who may not otherwise

have heard about lung cancer screening. So far, more than 625 proclamations have been issued across all 50 states and Canada recognizing the importance of lung cancer screening. When Baytown joins this effort, it doesn't just raise awareness locally. It sends a national clear message that our community values early detection, prevention, and the lives of our residents. And this truly matters because lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer related death in the United States. It claims more lives each year than breast, colurectal, and cervical cancers combined. The heartbreaking reality is that most cancers are discovered late at a point when treatment becomes far more difficult. But it doesn't have to be this way. Screening allows us to catch lung cancer early, long before symptoms appear when treatment is most effective and survival rates improve drastically. Nearly half of lung cancer cases in the United States are diagnosed only after the cancer has spread to other parts of the body. At that point, the 5-year survival rate drops to around 7%. But when lung cancer is caught early, lives are saved. That's why that's what makes screening so powerful. Here in our own region, this [clears throat] impact is deeply felt. In Harris County, an average of 259 residents are diagnosed with lung cancer each year. And across Texas, more than 13,500 people face a lung cancer diagnosis annually. These aren't just numbers. They represent parents, grandparents, neighbors, and friends. They remind us why awareness and early detection matter right here in our own community. The good news is that we have a solution available. Lung cancer screening uses a quick, painless, lowdose CT scan covered by insurance for people who qualify. Just as mammograms transformed early detection for breast

cancer, CT screening is one of the most effective ways we have to reduce deaths from lung cancer, lowering mortality by 20% or more. And yet, despite how effective this test is, screening rates remain incredibly low. In Texas, only about 12% of people at high risk are getting screened. That means nearly nine out of 10 people who qualify for a life-saving test are missing out, often simply because they've never heard about it. That gap is where awareness, education, and community leadership make all the difference. There are several meaning ways a community like Baytown can help close that gap. One is by helping us connect with local groups, senior centers, civic clubs, and community events where we can share information directly with residents. Even a short conversation can change someone's life. Cities can also include screening information in newsletters, websites, or email updates, reaching thousands of people with just a few sentences. We would also love to collaborate with Beethon's public health leaders, clinics, and hospitals to spread accurate information about screening. Partnership is how we make access easier and awareness stronger. Another incredibly meaningful action could be a brief public service announcement recorded by the mayor encouraging residents to get screened. A 30-cond message from a trusted city leader can influence more people than any flyer or statistic ever could. And finally, proclamations like the one being issued today carry real impact. They raise awareness, inspire action, and honor those affected by lung cancer. So, I want to say thank you to Mayor Charles Johnson and the entire Baytown City Council for recognizing the importance of lung cancer screening and for choosing to be a part of this national effort to save lives. Thank you all for your time, your leadership, and your commitment to the health of the

community. Together, we can ensure that more people in Baytown, Harris County, across Texas, across the United States get the life-saving screening they need. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you so much for your time. Okay. Any questions? Sure. Yes, sir. How old are you? I'm 15 years old. Yeah, that's impressive. That's impressive. Thank you. I couldn't do better myself. Thank you for coming. [clears throat] Thank you. Any more questions? Okay. Well, let's get this done. You have a good job. You want to read this?

Okay. Proclamation City of Baytown lung cancer awareness month. Whereas lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States and in Baytown in 2024, accounting for more deaths than colon cancer, breast cancer, and prostate cancer combined. And whereas according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 13,484 new lung cancer cases in Texas between 2017 and 2021 and 8,450 deaths due to lung cancer between 2018 and 2022. And whereas screening high-risk individuals for lung cancer using lowd dose computed tomography can lead to the earlier detection and save lives reducing mortality by 20% compared to chest x-ray screening in the national lung association screening trial and reducing the risk of death at 10 years by 24% in men and 33% in women as demonstrated by another large randomized trial. And whereas funding for lung cancer research continues to lag behind that of many other cancers and increased investment is urgently needed in early diagnosis, screening and treatment, including research on lung cancer affecting women and lung cancer health disparities. And whereas women diagnosed with cancer, lung cancer, are more likely to be younger and never smokers, lung cancer incidents and mortality rates in women are rising relative to men. More women die from lung cancer than from breast cancer each year. And by 2035, it is projected that more women than men will die from lung cancer. And whereas, as the last one, I promise, organizations working in the Baytown

community, such as the American Lung Cancer Screening Initiative and the Women's Lung Cancer Forum, are committed to educating the public about lung cancer and lung cancer screening rates in Baytown. Now therefore, I Charles Johnson, Mayor of Baytown, do hereby proclaim the month of November as lung cancer awareness month in the city of Baytown and recognize the ongoing need for research on lung cancer affecting women and lung cancer health disparities and encourage all citizens to learn about lung cancer and the importance of early detection through screening. Good job. Go all the way.

No, you all are perfect. I need everybody else to squeeze. Ready? Here we go. All right. Here we go. One. Oh, yeah. Your glasses. Sorry about that. Good job again.

You said it to yourself. Oh boy. Now we're on to public hearings. The public hearings today are being held for the purpose of giving all interested persons the right to express their views regarding the subject of the public hearings. Everyone desiring to be a part of today's public hearing should have either signed the appropriate list of four year or email the city clerk prior to the posted time of this meeting. Each participant shall give his or her name and address in order to provide a proper record of these hearings. The rules allow each person three minutes to present information. However, I do encourage everyone to be as brief and to the point as possible. If you are a group of persons wishing to address the council on the same subject, please select a spokesperson to present the information. And if anyone has any questions, please direct them to me. for a conduct a public hearing and consider a request for a proposed text amendment to chapter 111 unified land development code of the Baytown Code of Ordinances to revise divisions 2.21 2.31 2.32 2.33.22 3.42 7.210 and 10.2 2 of the ULDC regarding garage offsets, shipping containers, and general corrections in inconsistency with the previous code and the 2025 code. It is now 7:04 p.m. and I call to order this public hearing concerning the request for the proposed text amendment to chapter 11, unified land development

code of the Baytown Code of Ordinances and Revised Divisions 2.21, 21 2.31 2.32 2.33 3.22 3.42 7.210 and 10.2 of the ULDC. I feel like I need to play the lottery now. It was easier than listing out all of the titles. Yeah, it's all good. I now I would now now like to request staff to summarize the subject of this public hearing. Mr. Scribner.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um, for the record, Martin Scribner, Planning and Development Services. So, um, as you know, over the past year or so, we've been working on some updates, um, tweaks, amendments to the ULDC that went into effect in January. Uh, because we're we're finding that there are certain things that either didn't carry over or things that we're finding out as we use the code that these maybe didn't work quite the way that we wanted them to. Um, and and again, we we have some uh sometimes it's members of the uh building and development community that come to us and say, "Hey, is there any way we can take a look at this?" So, I'm going to go over some of those tonight, but that that's what we're doing tonight. Some of these are housekeeping. Others are things that we were looking at because of of our um again our public coming in and talking to us. One of the things that we are uh going to skip tonight in the title of the item is shipping containers. We um uh my understanding is that council would like to have a more in-depth conversation about that. So, we will bring that one item back to you in January just for discussion. So, tonight um staff is removing that from the uh from the amendment request. So, for tonight, we'll kind of skip over that. You'll see a couple of of slides here. I'm going to skip right past those. So, um, we'll start with, um, also in your staff report, you're going to see that these are listed in order of where they land in the code. I'm going to present them more along the lines of these are the ones that are kind of simple um, housekeeping things and then we'll get to the very last one is the one that's the most complicated. So if you have any questions, it might be easiest to stop me during the presentation um because there's quite a lot here. So um so we'll start first with uh development landscaping. Um we would like to remove the foundation planning

requirements from estate residential, suburban residential, mixed residential and alternative res residential districts. That is because that type of a foundation planning requirement is really aimed more towards commercial and apartments. It's appropriate for those. It is not appropriate um for us to tell somebody who's building a single family home that they have to have so much landscaping at the foundation of their home. That's that's just not we're not we don't want to regulate that. So, we'd like to remove that and leave it for the commercial and um and apartments. Um next is the development review table. Um so right now a replplat would have to go through the entire process. So say there's a minor um change to a an a plat that was already done and approved. So say there's a lot line moved or there's a lot removed or uh some of the amenities detention something like that changes on the plat. Uh this ordinarily right now would go through the planning and zoning commission for approval. Most of the time when we see these replat requests, they're very very minor. And so what we'd like to do is to give plan director and staff to approve these administratively uh rather than take them to P&Z. We feel that that would uh save them some time. It it would some clarify a little bit of confusion that is currently in the process. Now, if the rat the replat needs a public hearing, so if there's a if there's a variance request or there's some sort of a public utility um issue, then those would still go to a public hearing in front of planning and zoning commission for their approval instead of the planning director.

Question if the if the is denied, what's the appeal process? Um if the replat is denied then they would take they could take it to planning and zoning commission as a matter of course. So so there is

there still is that that release valve. Yes. [clears throat] Next um is we wanted to add a couple of definitions and clarify another one. So right now the definition of townhouse is in the code uh and does not clarify the number of units and it becomes a little bit confusing because there's also there's a couple of other uses that do list out the number of of units. So we'd like to just clarify that it's six to eight units in the in the code. Uh we'd like to add a definition for mobile home. Uh as some of you may or may not know, we have a manufactured home and the there is a difference between a mobile home and a manufactured home legally. And that is from a um from a legislative act that happened in 1972. So if the mobile home was if the manufactured home was built before 1972, then it's actually considered a mobile home. And the reason that is even relevant is because there are different regulations for mobile homes on a federal level. So, um, so we'd like to make sure that definition is in there. The other definition that we'd like to have in there is container or shipping container. Right now, that that you won't find anything about shipping containers in the code at all. And so, this was the beginning. So, this aside from everything else we discussed that that I mentioned that we're we're taking off the table, I'd like to leave this definition going in. It is the definition that was in the the 2014 ULDC code. So, it's just taking that and moving it into our current code. It won't affect how it's administered. It just gives us a definition to work from. Uh residential residential district dimensions. So uh let's see dimensional standards.

Right now in the use table there is a and in the dimensional standards there are two different uses that get confused all the time. We have one that's single unit attached use and we have townhouse to staff. Those are the same thing. And so we we we had a bunch of conversations about this when the ULC was being formulated by the consultant. And to be honest, we've not seen the need for separating these. These are the same thing. We treat them the same. So in order to get rid of some of that confusion, we'd like to remove any references to single unit attached use from the code wherever it lies. So the first one is in this um table 2.21-4 um which is the mixed residential dimensions how how that's all laid out. Um we'd also in that table we'd like to add uh just a clarification on lot width. It's a per dwelling unit. Um, so if it says 20 feet of lot width for town houses, we're saying per dwelling unit. So if it's six dwelling units, then it's 120 ft. Right now the code does not specify that, but that that is how we administer it. And then we'd like to add some table notes uh at the bottom to just clarify lot area calculation and the again the number of units for multiplex and uh townhouse uh consolidated use table. So again, this is that single unit attached use. We'd like to just remove all references to. So that is what we're requesting here is to just get rid of it from that table. We also have a section in the code that is standards that are specific to a particular use. So there are uh uh there

are two different ones in there that we have kind of dealt with. Uh one is vehicle and boat sales rental and leasing and we have already we in our last update we changed that um the the way the limitations are. We had a 13,000 you guys may remember we had this 13,000 pound limitation and that is neither realistic or able to be measured by staff. We have no way to enforce that. Um, we were shown a picture a while back of two different trailers that looked identical and he said one of those is 8,000 lb, the other one is 15,000 lb. The only way he could tell the difference was because the number of lug nuts on the wheels. So that having that 13,000 lb limitation in there did not didn't make a lot of sense. So we've already changed the language under vehicle and boat sales. We'd like to mirror that language under tools, rental of excuse me, sale or rental of tools, tractors, or equipment. So, it's the same language. Um, it it meets the same purpose. Um, the second piece of that has to do with shipping containers. We're removing that tonight. We'll deal with that later. This is also shipping container, shipping container, and shipping container. Okay. So, here's the one that's probably the most complicated. I'm going to show you. I promise I'm going to show you some some drawings that hopefully will will help to to clarify this a little bit. So, this is regarding garage orientation, where the garage doors are allowed to be in a new single family home according to where the front of the house is. So, the current, this was, again, this was new in January, um, says the garage must be at least 5 feet behind the front house face. So, as you can see, it's very very simple drawing that shows the the garage door itself and that the face of the house being offset by 5 ft.

Remember that we had a conversation during the UL DC adoption about keeping the 25 ft garage setback. In all of the examples I'm going to show you tonight, the 25- ft garage setback is in place. We're not proposing to change that at all. So, keep that in mind. the the setback for the face of the house is 15 feet. So, it all depends on where you place the garage and how you want to to make that work. So, um the previous code basically allowed there was no offset requirement. So, as you can see here, you could have the garage be way out front and that's that was allowed by the code. Our current code does not allow for that. So, we uh a few months ago had several local builders come to us and say, "Hey, this is a problem for us." Um, we do one or two infill buildings uh building houses uh per year and we have one or two different um floor plans that we use and the the new code regulation causes an issue for us. And so we listened to them and we said, "Okay, well, what we are thinking then is a compromise." And so the compromise would, and I'm going to kind of come back to why the the code is the way it is. I'll come back to that in a second. The compromise is to allow the garage to be up to 5 foot in front of the front house face. as you can see in this drawing. So, it does kind of lend itself to being a little bit garage forward, but not like 25 ft out front where you drive down the street and all you see are garage doors. So, um staff brought this to the group of builders that we spoke to and they uh explained to us that they felt that that alleviated about 95% of their concerns. So, staff felt that this was a good way to uh to compromise with the builders. It's not ideal. Um, but it's also a step for

Baytown where we're we're being a little bit more particular about design, but then listening to the local folks and saying, "Okay, well, we we can adjust this a little bit." So, why did the new code have this 5 foot offset? It really is about aesthetics more than anything. Um, if you've heard the phrase snoutous, so where where basically that's you drive down a street and all you see is garages uh lined up along that street. Um, that's not considered great planning. Um, it's not something that really has a great visual appeal or or the aesthetics when you drive down the street. It doesn't lend itself to neighborhood character. Um, we have some neighborhoods here in Baytown that that have that or at least have some of those. And so, uh, kind of through encouraging some thoughtful design, um, encouraging that to to, uh, enhance property values and market appeal, uh, promoting the walkability and safety. Staff feels that that that and and there are other cities around Texas and around the country that have this type of of, uh, of regulation. Uh, we do feel that that is something that brings value to the city. Um, so I'll give you some examples. Um, these are houses that exist here in Baytown currently. So, this is what the current looks like. It's 5T behind the house face. There are builders that can do it and and they do it. Some of the larger builders that have lots and lots of different designs, they they have no problem doing 5 foot behind the house face and it can be up to 20 feet behind the face of the house. Um, this is only for attached garages. So, keep that in mind as well. This is the previous This is what I was kind of mentioning. This is something that's very very garage forward. You can't see the front door. You drive down the street and maybe all you see is garages. This does not really lend itself to uh neighborliness and you know saying hi to your hi to your neighbor as

you're coming out your front door. You don't use your front door. You use only the garage. Question Martin if you go back to that slide because I'm just curious how so on the if any of these are any of your houses. I apologize. I didn't take the picture. [laughter] I don't think No, this is not my house. But I'm just curious. Um, so like on that bottom the bottom right, uh, is it measured to that to the actual front door or to that roof line where it has a little bit of a front porch? I I'm going to guess that this was permitted under the old code. And so it's a bit of a loaded question, but if I were measuring it, I would say on this one because it's so narrow that it's to the front door. Okay. I was just curious,

the new code, the new code also has a limitation as to how wide the garage what percentage of the front of the house the garage door can take up. So, as you can see, this one takes up about 80% of the of the front of the house and the current code has um has a 40% limitation.

Okay? So when you say, "Okay, I can only put," So let's say under the current code, I've got to put that front door 5t in front of the front the where the garage is. Well, what do you have down the side of the house? Because you've got a very narrow lot. What do you have down the side of the house? You have a a hallway that is really pretty much wasted space for the homeowner. And so and and it's extra cost in terms of building materials and design. So, that was really that was one of the the issues that the local builders brought up was, you know, if we do this, number one, we got to redesign our our plans, but number two, it leaves us because we do all these narrow lots, it leaves us with this space that we can't do anything with, and people don't want that. So, it makes it uh difficult to market some of those homes. So, one of the other pieces of this is to remove that 40% limitation, excuse me. And we we look at at on a case by case by the width of the lot and the design and how to how to make that work.

Does that make sense?

So the proposed is up to 5T in front of the house face. Again, these are not the we didn't go out and measure these, but by eyeballing these, we're figuring these are all about 5 foot. Now, they could build it. It still allows them to build the garage behind the front house face or right up to it. they just can't build past that 5 foot mark in front of it. So that's what you're looking at here. You still get a little bit of a garage forward design, but it doesn't create the the visual barrier uh that having the garages that those snout houses really u presents. So, um, all in all, um, staff and planning and zoning commission, uh, we we had this, uh, public hearing in November, and, uh, the planning and zoning commission, uh, voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendments to the ULC. Uh and so again, uh if you make a motion to approve tonight, uh staff would ask that you that you uh specify the criteria by saying we're we're approving everything except for anything uh that had to do with the shipping containers. Save the definition. So with that, uh that's my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Any questions or comments? Just a comment for me, mayor. [clears throat]

I can get my There we go. Um I was one of the ones that asked about waiting on the shipping containers and um I know especially within my district that I have a lot of just empty slabs and um some new businesses that are opening up as shipping containers. Um, I know we saw some at ICC that is a national brand that uses a shipping container actually uses two shipping containers stacked on top of each other. And so I I don't want to discount those. We're looking for new development or new businesses in the area where a shipping container may be a little less costly for them to set up shop. So, I want to have [clears throat] more conversation around that, which is one of the reasons that I wanted to to kind of wait on that one. But,

if I could give you a little bit of a heads up on kind of what staff is thinking for that conversation. We are looking at coming back in in January to have a full conversation, but we need a little bit of time to get some more information because we want to see what other cities are doing with shipping containers. Um, we I we don't think it would be a great idea to just allow people to drop shipping containers wherever they want. So, what regulations do we need? What would that look like? What does that mean? What does enforcement look like? What are the other cities around the state and around the country doing with that? What are the trends? So, that's the that's what we're going to be bringing back to you in a work session to kind of talk through. And then after we get some feedback from council, we will come back later with uh changes to the code to to reflect that.

I appreciate that. And because I know that when council member Presley was here, he took us on a tour uh to a business. It's a restaurant out at um what was it? Discovery Green. That's actually a shipping container. Um so just wanted to keep that window open for further discussion. Anything else? Yes, sir.

Something to add on that as well. I'm I'm one of those. I'm going to be advocating for us to be less restrictive with the shipping containers from the perspective of if if a property as a property owner, if I want to go up to one of the local hardware stores and purchase a corrugated metal storage building and I can put it on my lawn, we need to also consider that shipping containers would could be used for that purpose. The limit is they're 8 foot wide and if you only have if you have less than eight foot on the side of your house, you can't get a shipping container back into your backyard. So you wouldn't you would be procluded from using that. But if you got a 100 foot wide lot and you want to put a 8 by 10 foot shipping container in the back as a storage shed, if a storage shed is allowed, why couldn't they use that? So I want to keep that perspective because it's a lot more structural than than a regular

thing. But there's some, you know, restrictions to it because if you can't get it past the edge of your house, you can't have it. But if you can and you're allowed to have another, you know, storage facility, you know, storage building in your back, we should look at that should be allowed. really tempted to get into the meat of it tonight, but we when we staff brings it in to to discuss with council, we're we're going to be looking to you guys for that direction for the code itself. So, if that's what is the consensus, then we'll we'll work that into it.

So, I but I agree with Councilman Counciloman Laura Alvarado that you shipping containers are starting to be used in a variety of ways. I've seen a lot of new housing that's built. They bring shipping containers in and configure them and then build around them and the houses are huge and beautiful. You'd never know it was shipping containers since you hadn't seen the construction. So, we need to be a little more flexible with those things. So, that that's my only comment. Bill, anyone else? Now, is this 4B at the bottom here?

Um, Lord have mercy. Cecil Cece, did anyone sign up to speak on 4B as in boy? Okay, that would be 4 A, sir. 4. Oh, yeah, that's right. Well, now we know we don't have anyone from B. It's terrible. Read that.

All right, good deal. Well, Martin, I appreciate um presentation. We're now on to 4B. Consider an ordinance authorizing a request to amend chapter 111, unified Land Development Code, ULDC, of the Baytown Code of Ordinances to revise,

oh, you know what? You're right. It is now 7:27 and I close this public hearing. 4B, consider an ordinance authorizing a request to amend chapter 111, unified Land Development Code, ULDC, of the Baytown Code of Ordinances to revise divisions 2.21, [clears throat] 2.31, 2.32, 2.33, 3.22, 3.42, 7.210, and 10.2 two of the regarding garage offsets, shipping containers, and general corrections inconsistency with the previous code and the 2025 code. Anyone signed up to speak on 4B? Good deal. All right. You had a comment?

No. Okay. I need a motion. Motion to accept item 4. um with the exception of the shipping containers uh and only the definition. Second. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you. No, I had it written here. No, I said this. That's why I was like waiting.

4 C. conduct a public hearing concerning a request to approve a special use permit to allow short-term rental use within the Suburban Residential Zoning District located at 5111 Ashwood Drive, Baytown, Texas, 77521. It is now 7:28 p.m. and I am I will call to order this public hearing concerning the request to approve a special use permit to allow the short-term rental use within the suburban residential zoning district located at 511 Ashwood Drive, Baytown, Texas 77 521. I would like now to request staff to summarize the subject of this public hearing. Mr. Scriber.

Thank you, Mayor. So, you're probably looking at this one uh since it it came up in November and ended up getting tabled uh and saying we've never seen this before. And that's you're correct. You have never seen this before. So, um this would be something new for you as a decision-making body. So, with that, I'm going to give you a little bit of an introduction to why it's here and kind of what what we're dealing with. So, in the old code, uh short-term rentals, Airbnb, Verbbo, things like that, they were not permitted. they were interpreted as hotels uh which of course are not permitted in residential districts. They operated anyway. So we believe that legally prohibiting prohibiting them all together is probably not going to fly. Um but we can regulate them. So, uh, given the current trends around the state, around the country, the 2025 ULDC includes a provision that does permit short-term rentals in most residential districts as long as they meet certain criteria. So, one of them uh, being a special use permit. So, the first one is before you tonight. So, as you can see from the clip on the screen, this is from the ULC. The SUP is required anywhere that this use is allowed. Plus, there are five conditions that need to be met as well. And that is that they they do have to pay the hot tax that the in order to be considered short-term rental, uh they can only be rented for up to 28 days. They cannot use an accessory structure as a uh as a short-term rental. The principal use of the of the building must be a single unit dwelling and the use has to be conducted in such a way that the residential character is still what is enjoyed by the by the neighborhood. And that's a little on the vague side, but that kind of does also give us some some

room to uh uh to slide around with that. But basically, it has to it's a home. It has to look like a home, smell like a home, act like a home, even though you've only got people in there for short times. Before I give you the details of the request tonight, I do want you to understand that there are already quite a few short-term rentals out there that we know of, probably 90 or more around the city. Um, so we do expect there to be a lot more of these coming in over time. uh unless I know that we do plan on having another conversation about short-term rentals and how they're handled um sometime in the near future. Until then, this is the process that is dictated by the code. So, one thing that needs to be clarified right up front and kept in mind, um many of our neighborhoods do have deed restrictions and covenants that would prevent this type of use or potentially prevent this type of use. Uh some of those deeds, deed restrictions and covenants are not super clear. Some of them are a little on the vague side. Um city staff does not interpret deed restrictions or covenants. We don't account for those restrictions. We don't review them. Um the reason is we don't have the authority as a city to do that. Those are a private agreement

between the the the HOA and all of the people who own homes there. Um, so we can't consider that as part of this special use permit as an argument for or against. It is not in our authority as a city to do so. That means you can't consider it as part of the special use permit. I don't want you to get caught up in that argument because that is a big piece of why uh planning and zoning commission said they didn't like it. And I'll get more into that as well. Um there are a lot of legal issues potentially to consider in in that sort of a situation. Uh and so it's really up to a judge to make that call. It is not up to us. Um and and I would I will I will always look to our city attorney uh Mr. Lamont to to back up everything I just said.

We'll take that his smile means that that uh everything I said was was at least on the face true.

Mr. discriminous as he mentioned a moment ago um leasing is considered to be a fundamental property right in the state of Texas. So banning these altogether um is almost certainly unconstitutional. However, we do have the right to regulate them. I will say that there is no Supreme Court decision on on these. There there are appellet court cases. So we have looked at this issue extensively. Um there's no statute that tells us we can't do this or how to do it. So this is not a field that has been preempted by the legislature. So they have not addressed this uh in a way that would prohibit us from regulating short-term rentals. I I do know of some other cities in Texas, particularly touristy um cities out in western Texas, uh that use the special use permit process for exactly this. And they're doing a,000 to,200 of those across the city. So, um, that this is not something I want to do a thousand of, but if it's something that helps us regulate and helps us keep track of them, um, and kind of keeps them, um, I think keeps the the operators of the short-term rentals, um, accountable, on their toes, then then this this to us does speak to that and and say that that this is something that makes sense. Um, the other piece that I want you to keep uh in consideration is that the special use permit tonight, if it gets approved, does not supersede the deed restrictions or the covenants. Okay? So, what happens tonight, those deed restrictions and covenants, if they are enforced by the people who are parties to them, those

would override the special use permit. So, I want you to keep that in mind. This does not override those deed restrictions or covenants. Mayor, can I ask a question? Yeah,

Martin on when you say the regulate the the if there's 90 Airbnbs in the city and council doesn't want to have to go through an SU for 90 different Airbnbs. Can they ask staff to put proposed regulations in place to change the ODC to not be a US u SUP, but to have stiff regulations that can be annually uh reviewed by staff to meet those regulations? That way, they're not coming back to council each and every time. And that can also be checked on and have proper regulatory authority for these Airbnbs or short-term rentals.

Uh it can Okay. And um so that you know many cities and I believe we use it to some extent at least for the hot tax um keeping track of hot tax. Many cities use an outside source to to do that to enforce the regulations to keep track of them and to do a regular um search for you know they go through all the different short-term rental apps to see what's out there and and then check up on those and they so um if if we were to do that then we would probably look at some budget adjustments next year to correct something like that.

From our conversations and for council's knowledge there are many processes to to look at here. We've seen cities that charge2 to $3,000 a year to be able to get this permit for a short-term rental. That pays for the outside company to monitor to also do security for these uh venues. Uh they have high insurance requirements uh to make sure that they're it's a way to make sure that things don't get out of control at a short-term rental because the more problems that you have at these short-term rentals, the higher the insurance costs are going to be. Um, and so it's a way to keep some of these things in check, but it opens up a gambit of conversation for the city council when it we wouldn't be doing our duty if we didn't have all that available to you. But this is just the first SUP that has come to the city council for consideration.

So, what I'd ask you to do is to concentrate on the criteria that's in your staff report tonight to make your decision. That is what staff has that's what the code says we're supposed to be looking at. I know that you're going to hear from uh some people here tonight uh that that have other concerns and obviously you have to listen to that and take that into account as well. But from staff's standpoint, the criteria are the the piece that kind of says, okay, this either this either meets our our standards or does not. So, um I want to get into the details of the application that you're hearing tonight. So, all that was general knowledge stuff. Now, we're going to get into the actual request. So, this is located as a property located at 5111 Ashwood Drive in Country Club Oaks. It is zoned suburban residential. As you can see here, uh that's a mid a midsize lot, single family detached. Uh as you can see, that whole area is also zoned uh SR. Um I'm going to show you just a few pictures of the the u the property itself and some of the other nearby properties. So, you can see this is a well-maintained home. You can see the white arrow pointing at the actual house uh at 5111. And you can see that uh the neighborhood uh your kind of standard suburban neighborhood. Um it's very nice. Uh again, here's the house kind of looking the other direction looking southeast. And then this is just looking straight on to the property uh in the request. So, um this was heard by planning and zoning commission in November, excuse me, in October and uh planning and zoning commission heard um lots of folks that that were testifying for and against uh this property becoming uh short-term rental. And it was it was really kind of split. Um but the planning and zoning commission did have some pretty major

concerns and some of them were things that they heard from the public. Some of them are ones that they that they espoused at the deis. So um one commissioner uh talked about the required distance for public notice. They wanted the entire neighborhood to know about this. Um we have a requirement. We follow that requirement. It is more than what the state requires. And so we we don't generally go over and above that uh unless there's a change to the ordinance. Um, somebody mentioned this is basically a bed and breakfast. It's not consistent with the residential nature of a neighborhood. Uh, that there are difficulties with monitoring this unless they're being observed by the surrounding neighbors. Uh, the enforcement of the short-term rental regulations was brought up as a concern. Uh, the potential for neighborhood nuisance was also a big concern. Um, group gatherings, parties, things like that. Um, this applicant has an ad uh for the rental that kind of made it sound like maybe this was a place that they would be encouraging parties or allowing parties. Um, there somebody said, you know, if this was in my neighborhood, I would have concern not knowing my tenants. Are there criminals that live that would be in there doing nefarious things? Of course. Of course, that could be anybody uh in any house, but that was a concern that was brought up. And then again, like I said, that potential conflict that's created by the SUP approval itself with the homeowners assoc association um that would require them to sue the homeowner um to just to enforce that HOA regulation restriction. Again, that was something we told them multiple times. This is not part of your of your process of it's not in your authority to make a decision based on that. But they still they did voice that quite loudly. So, uh, staff had recommended approval

of the special use permit. Planning and zoning commission recommended unanimously to deny the special use permit to allow short-term rental at 511 Ashwood Drive. Um, that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer questions. The applicant, uh, Mr. Dah is also here tonight and I believe, uh, would be addressing you as well. D, I have a question. Yes, sir. Um, can we go back about four slides? Two more. One more right there. Um, it was five. My bad. [laughter] Um, yeah,

you read my mind. That's what I said right there.

Yeah. The use shall be conducted so that it does not unreasonably interfere with the peace and enjoyment of surrounding homes as places of residence. How are we defining peace and enjoyment? Well, I can understand music, loud noise, things like that. But um I would imagine someone may complain that there's an obscene amount of cars in the driveway or on the road. Although we have that going on in just about every neighborhood. If would that fall under interfering with the peace and enjoyment of the surrounding homes as places of residence?

It it could uh as as with any neighborhood, the enforcement process is going to be the same. If there's a lot of litter and debris, if there's noises, if there's cars parked in the street, then many of those are going to be calls to the police for immediate, hey, come on out here and take a look at this, which sometimes they can do something, sometimes they can't. If it's noise, again, that's if it's

6:00 on a Wednesday, there's probably they're not going to do much about it. If it's 11:00 on a Sunday, that might be a different that might be a different story. Um this I believe um we often say that the uh the ULC doesn't have a lot of common sense stuff in it. I think this is one of those common sense type of things where if we get enough complaints then that's something where we can look at it and go okay this no longer smells acts or feels like a house. This is something else now. So I know Mr. Lamont had something.

So council and Mr. Mayor, to get back to your question, if you recall the comment I made a moment ago, that leasing property is a fundamental right.

So, in terms of the use, although we're talking specifically about short-term rentals, what we're really talking about is the use, which is to lease your home, which is fundamental. So the issues of noise or too many cars or trash, those are the same issues that come up when your neighbors sell their house to somebody else or lease it for a year or two years. So in this instance, what we're really talking about is the lease of the property for 28 days or less.

Okay? And I think in and to piggyback on what Mr. Loman just said, one of the things that we also heard about this was does this not now become a commercial use? Does this not now become a business? And the answer is from the law's perspective from standing outside the house whether you lived there for a day or 5 days or 5 years, it's still a house being lived in by you know x number of people. So that that has to be again first and foremost in your mind. This does not become a commercial use. It becomes it's still a house. It's still being used as a house. It's still being having people live there. They're just not there as long. So um again to kind of piggyback on on the legal side of things, it it it is what it is.

Got you. Questions or comments? So you know, kind of going back to this the character. So it's not so, you know, [clears throat] we're talking about moving forward that they would most likely be a, you know, they'd be paying an annual permit, annual fee to maintain this. But right now, that's not part of that. Like if we're going to talk about doing that, that's something that if you're getting constant calls and this is happening, your permit is revoked to to operate that place. We don't have that in place right now at this moment. If that was in place, this would be a different scenario. That is not in place yet. So, that was my feedback to y'all.

Yeah, it's not in It's not in place yet. So, I that um that exact thing, I'm not trying to get involved in the conversation here. I'm trying to clarify what I was trying to

say to y'all. This is one of those because it's brand new. It's it's a novel thing for the council. This is one of those things where the council can say we're tableabling this until the regulations are put forward by the planning uh development team that y'all agree on. And so that if because there are a multitude of ways to to to look at this and uh Mr. Franco to your point some cities have if you you violate it once you know shame on you. If you violate it twice, you get you're suspended. After the third violation within a year time frame, you are no longer allowed to apply for a short-term rental permit for a year. And so that those are the steps that are put in because to Mr. Lan's point, you can't you can't bar them as we currently see it in the law. Um, but you can regulate them and the regulations haven't been put in place. And once you do this SUP as Mr. Uh, scrier said you will have 89 more to do. Um, because the other 89 by this would be uh required to come do this SUP process because they're not operating legally how we currently have it set up right now.

It it's already required. They just haven't come forward. And um this particular case was spurred by a complaint that um we then went out to figure out, you know, find out what was going on and we spoke to the owner and and we said, "Okay, this is the process you got to go through." Yeah. And once we open that box, everybody's to come before we put the regulations in. I mean, it's already open to be [clears throat] honest. I get it. And right now, as it's coming in, we can keep tableing them or deny them until we get the regulations in. That that is your purview. Exactly.

Question, Martin. Boy, I hate I hate regulations. How quickly, [laughter] how quickly could you reasonably bring us a full package of as has been indicated, you know, some type of not only these five, but it has to they have to have an annual permit uh with the restrictions of you get one, two, three strikes in a 12 consecutive month period and then you have a year suspension so forth and so on. How quickly could you and your staff bring that forward? My my initial response was going to be two years just to get your reaction, but I'm not saying that. Um

that quick. [laughter] Um so

once we have something like we would have to do some research again, see what other cities I don't want to reinvent the wheel. So I want to see what other cities are doing. Um, and then we could likely lift some rigs from another city if we like them. And then the question I have a couple of questions on that that uh lead into your your timeline question. And that is do we come back here to say do you like these? Because if they're in the DC, I got to go back to PNZ with those regulations before you decide on them. So if you're saying staff, you know what we want, go forward and get this done. then we could have this in front of P&Z if not January February then we could have those regulations to you the first meeting after PNZ let's say February let's say end of February at this point

and and you know that's my concern because right now we got we have rules and regulations right here in front of us that we should be complying with as a city we set these so if we set them and somebody complies with them here we are dragging our feet that we don't want to comply with the rules that we've established Mhm. That gets a little monotonous, you know, and and again, it's some of those, you know, hindsight's 2020. We should have thought about this before we approve something like this, but it's here. So, if we can move forward as expeditiously as possible, do your research. I mean, we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Obviously, there cities that are doing this now.

Grab what they've got, clean it up, bring it to us, and let's move forward. I agree with regulating them. I also agree with our city attorney that that [clears throat] we're going to get in legal Yeah, we are trouble real quick if we try to prohibit this. So, let's regulate them and we may get in legal trouble anyway because we have rules that says they can do this according to our rules. Councilman Leser, I I also, as we were standing here talking, it it occurred to me there is a release valve for that as well that's built in. And that is that right now the SUP says if you do not follow these criteria, the planning director has the ability to basically pull your SUP.

Okay. Now, that that means you have to you have to trust me to to make that call. Um, but it's it is better than the alternative, which is nothing at all. and and I appreciate the relief valve, but that puts you in a precarious spot because it's not real clear, again, number five, residential character. It's not real clear as to what causes them to default and and that really puts staff and the city in a position that we don't need to be in. Yeah. But that's that's my over I was leaning towards not necessarily approving the SUV tonight, but after hearing some of this stuff is kind of we're really in a in a catch 22.

Yeah. And if and if you can tell if you're telling me that we could get back in the next 60 90 days, preferably closer to 60 days pushing it to have appropriate regulations that we can apply and then be able to regulate because I don't want to have 90 of these things in front of me either. I'm willing to possibly table it for 60 days and let's push through this thing through. If you're telling me it's gonna be 90, 120, you know, six months, I'm going to be caught saying I'm going to have to go with what we've got on the books because we put it on the books. Yeah, we do.

And and we get hammered all the time that we're difficult to work with and this and that. And part of that is we put stuff down on paper and then we don't adhere to it. That's right. I I would put I mean, it's tough place for us to be as well tonight. I would put one other little caveat to that and that is that Mr. Reynolds had mentioned that, you know, if we were to use a third party for this, that could end up taking us a little bit longer because uh quite frankly, I I'm not sure if if we had to enforce a whole bunch of these. I'm not sure we have the staff time to do that to add on to our, you know, our mantra has been to try and

Galveston Island does a pretty good job with this. They have a pretty good plan already in place. They use the parks board because these do pay towards tourism uh the hot fund and all the applications go to the parks board parks and tourism board in Galveston. Those are approved by them and regulated uh through the code officers. Uh there's there are numerous processes in place and uh to Martin's point we don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are a bunch of processes already in place that probably be extradited. I don't know how but it's a fair point comment on that mayor. Yeah, I if we can shortterm delay this and move it where because it's not fair to the applicant. It's not fair to the the residents to to keep dragging this out. Um but if we can

two years was good, right? Like getting a permit, right? U but uh if if [clears throat] we can do something pretty expeditiously um or if we just want to if if we approve this tonight and then we bring those rules forward would it be retroactive to those that have an SUP? I let's say we approve this tonight. I think you could make it part of your approval probably.

Then when we come up and we do an annual permit process, can we go back and add that the ones that we have approved to that permit process? I I would agree with Martin if that's the plan. I would say have a clause in there that uh the SUP um that that one of the provisions to be complied with is that uh when and if new SUP ordinances are adopted that uh the the owner will comply with the new ordinances.

The owner is here tonight. So, um, you might you might ask the owner that question if he'd be willing to to be okay with those with that, um, you know, that compromise. Um, but I I'll leave that to him. And, you know, I'm still going to stay, you know, going with five that, you know, it's chuck duck. So, that does not necessarily interfere with the peace and enjoyment of the surrounding homes and place. And we have a lot of people on Ashwood saying it's not going to enjoy, they're not going to it's going to interfere with their peace and enjoyment. So that we we have them that have already stated that and already told us that. So we're going to go ahead and call um speakers.

So So again, Mr. Dah is here and so I'd like to bring him up and have him kind of he has something prepared for you. Okay. Well, let's Oh, over there. Okay, good deal. Come on up. No, thank you very much for the opportunity. How much time I have?

Uh, good evening. My name is Sandep Tal and I'm a resident of 2432 Atame in Leander, Texas, 78641. Uh, and I'm the owner of 5111 Ashewood Drive. I want to address valid uh safety concerns. First, I take wedding seriously. My Airbnb uh listing requires guests to have positive reviews and that has been uh being done a by Airbnb almost everywhere in the world in the same way. But I have also submitted to planning department all the rejections I have done as an evidence just when I suspicious of any party or any event taking place. So I have submitted various rejections which I did and I uh refused uh those applications. Now there are new tools which I would go even further than these five parameters which you have mentioned here. The sixth can be last time somebody said you know sex offenders I said there are in I use a software called hospitalitable to manage my property. That software has another uh thing called as ID verification and another one as a $2 for sex offender check. We can add that as into this as six or seven if needed to make sure that the hosts check all these things before approving the uh any booking. Now another thing which I wanted to mention here is that one council member last time said uh that the gathering house English is my second language. Uh uh honorable members I speak very well English but still I thought gathering house in my opinion was people meet as families together and that's what it was five bedrooms I thought you know they will enjoy togetherness that was my meaning I have removed that name from

there. Uh then the third second thing another uh member said that uh I must have done some massive plumbing uh project to make it as a big project. I want to put on record I have not done any plumbing or any small or big project onto that house. It is as I bought it is still as the same. I want to request you to consider a regulation with this five or any additional uh requirements. I will abide by all the rules. I would uh I have also put this house on sale right now. If I'm not able to meet uh this thing because mortgage requirements for myself as well as my housekeeper gets she's a Baytown person. I don't live in Baytown but she my cleaner and housekeeper depend their livelihood on this and they work on that and then I think most of the people who come are project people family people they live here they come here for a week or somebody who is a travel nurse they come and work in the uh medical offices

okay thank you any questions well yeah I want to extend this time to motion motion to yield. Is two minutes good? Uh any any So I I just wanted to make make sure that Hold on a second. Hold on a second. We're motion time motion. Is two minutes good? Two minutes. Good. A motion to yield two minutes to Mr. D. Second. All in favor? Any oppose? Motion carries. You have two minutes.

Okay. So I I would request you all to please consider the full economic impact uh last on me but by my uh housekeeper as well as all these families and professionals like some of these people who have come and stayed with us are the people who have uh say uh a plumbing leak in their house. I get so many inquiries for people who have uh insurance uh disaster in the house or somebody who is traveling or somebody who has a uh family event and they want to live with their uh kids or for some uh taking care of their grandkid or something. So there are certain families who are moving also in these. It is not only for uh Airbnbs are not cons only for people who are partying. You know if you go to safe so social media you will see all those kind of things but there are so many things happening uh uh for and this provides a safe neighbor safe place for these people who want to live in neighborhoods and uh enjoy uh the neighborhood and the community feeling and live like they are living in their own homes. That's the that's the that's the purpose of their own uh purpose and I will abide by any of these or any additional requirements and I will answer any questions sir.

Yes sir. Um as the city attorney mentioned would you be willing if we added a number six I like you to add your number six on there as far as doing the background check. I think that's great. That'll relieve some concerns. But if we added a number seven that said that as we develop the new regulations on this, you would be willing to comply with the new regulations. I will comply with all regulations now and future.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. James Kilurn, please state your address for record. Good evening. My name is James Kilburn. I live at 50001 Ashwood, block and a half down the road from this house. Um, first off, like to thank Mr. Doll for coming and we'd appreciate him being a supporting member of our uh, Country Club Oak Civic Association. We are not an HOA. Uh, I have concerns of additional traffic and I realize it's one house, but we have a we have people now that go driving down these roads very fast and a lot of these roads don't have stop signs or anything on them. They're they're young children out on the roads. Uh, I I have a concern for that safety factor on there. We had an Airbnb in the neighborhood several years ago. As police chief may remember, uh, some of the officers I think were frequent visitors, frequent had frequent parking permits in that area because they were there so often. Uh, I think there were gunshots, litter, partying, different things going on. Uh, we do have that concern. Um, and I I found Mr. Scrier and I believe the solicitor made the comment about this not being considered a business. And yet, I'm looking at this table that's up here. Um, short-term rental number one, a hotel motel occupancy tax to be collected. I think that's a business. If not, I would appreciate somebody please telling me why Sheran or Marriott is not considered a business. Thank you very much for your time and appreciate you're considering both sides of this.

Thank you. Is that uh Schultz? What is your first name? Kenan. Kenan Schultz. Please state your address.

Thank you. It's Kenan Schultz, 50008 Ashwood Drive. And of course, a lot of the things that have already been said um about the safety and things. What we're seeing in our neighborhood there, this is a it's a nice established area. People been around there a long time. A lot of old families live there. And as a result of that, a lot of those families, the people that live there, they get old, they pass away, pass down to their children, the houses get sold. In our neighborhoods, we have a lot of homes that are being sold, renovated. I actually live in a house that was sold and renovated under that same kind of criteria. Um, but if you start putting B&Bs in there or Airbnbs, what happens is is that where does the slippery slope end? those neighborhoods that are nice and established and have families and even a few leases in there where they're long-term and those people that are leasing have a vested interest in that area as opposed to like an Airbnb where it's only weeks or days at a time. they have a investment in that property and my concern is is by putting something in here and allowing that to start propagating itself, when will that neighborhood no longer be a nice family neighborhood? And those are my biggest concerns on that because I do live there. I've been living there for 10 years. And one of the things I like about my neighborhood,

Marie Danowski, Country Club Oak Civic Association President, 4705 Burning Tree. Good evening, mayor and council members. I am here on behalf of Country Club Oak subdivision and the Country Club Oak Civic Association. Our deed restrictions specifically state the lots in country club Oak shall be used for single family resident purposes only and no business as we have already seen a hotel. Trade or activity of any kind shall be carried on upon any of the lots in this subdivision. Nor shall anything be done which may be or become an annoyance to this neighborhood. For these reasons, we respectfully ask that you deny the special use permit to operate an Airbnb or any other short-term rental property within our neighborhood. A neighborhood is more than a cluster of houses. It is a community. It is a place where people know one another, form lasting relationships, watch out for each other, and take pride in their homes. It's where a neighbor waters your plants or feeds your pets when you're away. That is the spirit that has always defined Country Club Oaks. Allowing a short-term rental undermines that spirit. A constant turnover of unfamiliar visitors eliminates the opportunity to build connections, erodess stability, and weakens the shared sense of responsibility that makes the neighborhood strong. The property owner has suggested that short-term rentals will bring economic benefits to Baytown. Respectfully, we disagree. Short-term guests contribute very little. Maybe a meal or a few purchases, but not the consistent investment that full-time residents provide. Families who live here year round support our grocery stores, buy clothing and furniture, purchase school supplies and electronics, contribute in countless other ways. They invest in Baytown because they belong to Baytown. And importantly, Baytown already offers excellent options for temporary visitors. The hotels along Gar Road are

well equipped for extended stay guests, including plant workers and business travelers. They have kitchens, business centers, and comfortable living spaces, amenities that single family homes cannot and should not be expected to provide. The property owner has not demonstrated how a short-term rental would bring any meaningful benefit to Country Club Oaks. Benefits that a long-term homeowner doesn't already offer. Instead, it would introduce instability, unease, and a revolving door of strangers into a community that has always been a close-knit and steady. So, tonight, I ask you, Mr. Mayor and council members, to consider your own neighborhoods. Would you want a commercial mini hotel functioning next door to you, your home, or in close proximity to your home? I don't think you do. On behalf of the residents of Country Club Oaks, I urge you to deny this special use permit. Protect our community, preserve our neighborhood, and help keep Country Club Oaks the kind of place we are proud to call home. I'm going to add this extra. We've had uh people come here the last meeting which was cancelled. We do have people here tonight from the subdivision and I wish you would read a couple letters that were emailed to you about other uh short-term rentals that we had and the problems that those neighbors had

and I'm asking for an extra minute because you gave him an extra time. That's your Let me go through it. But I'm got let you know that's your time. I make a motion to extend your time by two minutes. Okay. Yeah, he motion. All in favor? I. Any oppose? You have two minutes.

Okay. Um, doing this. Okay. Comments from emailed to you and I hope you read those comments that were emailed to you because these are people that have experienced having uh VBOS's right there that we had experienced with several years ago that we had to have closed down. Um, why destroy established neighborhoods like this? If you put one of these in, you're going to have two, you're going to have three. Country Club. Country Club has a lot of large homes and that's what's going to happen to them. Someone's going to come in and want to put VRBOS. And let's face it, most of the people coming in here are coming from the plants and they're staying there. Um, why not put short-term rentals outside of established neighborhoods? Why ruin your established neighborhoods? Country Club, Country Club Cove, um, Lakewood, all of the neighborhoods are going to start losing if you start allowing these things happening. Thank you,

Cal Rhodess. Kyle Rhodess 5111 Glenn Haven. Um, thank you for your time. Thank you for your service. Uh, firstly, I'd like to state that, uh, I did not receive a mailed letter this time about this being on the agenda. I'm within the 300 foot. I received it on the prior notification. Um, so that needs to be looked at. Mr. Scribner, the city council has already addressed. Um, one of my concerns is that there are lack of regulations and people to enforce these regulations. Uh, I'm also a little confused that you have a commercial use, not a residential use, and that with hotel tax, and that does not make it a business. The neighborhood was started in 1959. The area this is in is a 100x 120 foot lot. This is a large home. Um, parking is going to be a concern. It is an established neighborhood. It is an old neighborhood. Prior to this year, it was not allowable by the city code to do this. I think this was a mistake. I understand that other cities are doing this and I understand that the regulations need to be in place ahead of time. I urge you not to retroactively do this. If you have 90 cases already in

existence operating illegally according to the code, those permits should be allowed to be pulled by development ahead of time and not be considered for one year. My advice on this is graduate studies, economics, geography, and three bachelor's degrees including accounting, management, and history. Thank you for your time. Cecil,

no Cecil, no Cece. Good evening. My name is Cecil Carroll. I live over in the uh residential area of country club 509 uh interlocking street. Um basically just like all the other people had brought attention to one of the major that it is in that area is residential residential and the children and so forth and the people the families that are there that uh how do I put it uh that live there and of the values that they have of being there being in Baytown. I grew up in Baytown. I'm very familiar with Baytown. I've uh gone on and uh you know, of course went uh uh California, come back to California, been to different states around, but something always pulled me back to Baytown. and my wife and I, she went to one high school and I went to the other one. But to shorten the story up, the main concern that we do have are myself and my uh family is that uh family is family. When we start bringing businesses in next door to family, it presents a problem. If you're prepared for that, you know, when you go and buy uh property,

uh you know, it's in a sense of I'm going there to get residential property. But if I'm going commercial or industrial, completely different, completely different. And this is all I all I know to say or ask is that you will take everything into consideration, please. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Any comments or questions? Yes, sir. [clears throat] Is that all the speakers?

That's That's all the speakers. Yeah.

Yeah. So when I initially came into this, I I thought I knew what decision I was going to make and then I heard the the lawyer say that word property rights and I had to take a step back and [clears throat] then I heard another term, you know, this is a business and and then I I had to I get logged back in. And I guess the issue is here is, you know, this is a modern day issue with with these Airbnbs. It's it's it's we're 15 20 years from this. We're dealing with we're grappling with, [clears throat] you know, our our federal laws and our federal rights and we're grappling with our zone zoning. [clears throat] I believe this is a business. It's operating as a business and I feel that it's benefiting from a loophole. um to operate as a business in neighborhoods. Um it's such a I would like to get more regulations, sit back and and really I know you don't like the word regulations. I don't like the word reg I don't like the word trampling on people's property rights either. So the this is where we're at and um it is it's in my mind this this is a business. we're we're collecting top uh hot taxes for them. It's as a business and and and it's a business. It's not somebody's [clears throat] um uh doesn't come somebody's home. It comes a a place of business in commerce for them. So, um I I don't don't Sir

I'm sorry, sir. Finish your comment. I was hoping to piggyback. Yeah, I don't I guess I want to hear from you legal, but you know this wouldn't that constitute a business? I think that's a a great question and uh I'm going to answer it first by saying under the current ULDC, this is an allowed use and it's not defined as a commercial use. I will also say that when we talk about fundamental property rights, we are talking about the Sir, we we're not going to have the outburst.

Point of order. It says right there commercial use. Don't tell me.

So, as I was saying, council, under the current, this is a uh use that is allowed uh and it's not defined as a commercial use. Um when we go to the issue of fundamental property rights um we are talking about cases that have been decided by both the Texas Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. And what they have said is that in that bundle of rights that you have as a land owner is the fundamental right to lease your property. And yes, you're right. We are in a new era of uh short-term rentals, something that has not been contemplated in the past. But the courts have been taking up this issue. And on those occasions where they've taken up the issue, they have stated first that leasing of your property is fundamental. So the government is not going to be able to ban these types of uses outright. What we can do is place reasonable restrictions on them. And I know that it's not a definitive answer, but it's the best answer that we have sitting here at this moment. And of course, we can go back and talk uh more in depth about uh the constitutional cases that that sort of make up this new body of law and we can consider any potential regulations that staff comes up with. Uh would you want to take this up again? But uh at least for the public section uh at this moment, that's the best answer I have for you,

Mr. Lamond. I would I would also add that I've I've worked in other states where this type of use basically the the state legislation took it up and said these are now Texas hasn't done this. Okay, so let me be real clear. Texas has not made this determination but other states have made a determination where they've said okay now they're allowed anywhere houses and cities you can't regulate them. Would Texas do that? It's possible but that's just something to to have in your brain. And yes, sir. I got a comment. I'm sitting here thinking talking about short-term rental.

There's no opposition to long-term rental. And I was sitting there thinking I chuckled because I've got two personal friends that own 20 or 30 rent houses. And let me tell you, that's a business. Yeah. So long-term rental versus short-term rental. I got I got the concerns. It's not an investment to the neighborhood because they're there short term. But but long-term rentals, you one year, two-year leases, it's a business as well. It is. I mean, if you want to look at it from a rentals perspective, because again, I got one friend that's got 20 houses here in Baytown, and they do well. Yeah,

they do very well. So, again, it goes down to the the ultimate property rights. Short-term, this is a new age. I mean, short-term rentals weren't even discussed 15, 20 years ago or whatever. So, it's something new. If if we're allowed to regulate it and build in some SUPs and build some safeguards that if it starts to be a nuisance or whatever, then then we can suspend or or, you know, punish the the violators a little bit. That's where we need to go with it. But, you know, what I'm hearing is we would be hardressed to just say no.

And and that's my concern. But they did. I chuckled that again, my friends that own lots of rental property in town, they do long-term rentals. It's a business to them and they run it as a business. So, and I know we can't regulate that. Yeah. I I have a counter question that is we don't we don't collect hot taxes on long-term rentals. No, I don't know. But we can we could

I I don't think we can. I think I think um the the hot tax is set up specifically to capture 30 days and and shorter and we do have definitions of hotel and extended stay and and so forth in the current uldc. So I'm not suggesting that there is no way to regulate the commercial aspect of what's going on. I'm just suggesting that as it sits here today, this is not a commercial use.

Remember, too, that as a special use permit request, if you think there's something specific to this property that makes it more sensitive in certain ways, you can add conditions to it that are reasonable. So, I'll just throw that on the table as well. that that would be with every single SUP that comes in. You can add conditions to it if you deem that that's necessary.

If we added [clears throat] I think it needs to be across the board. I would not be doing them for individual pieces. Um, and and you're right, we I mean I have several Airbnbs in my neighborhood and I wouldn't look my neighborhood in with an established neighborhood. Um, I mean, there were there in the early 1900s and so we're very established and we have short-term rentals. We do have Airbnbs and most of them are for the plant workers. Um, some of them have been called to attention because they do have stacks of people who are [clears throat] working at the plants and there's tons of cars, but I don't see that anymore. Um, so whoever called it to their attention or whatever may have happened, it is no longer happening. Um, I mean, I I did go back and look at all the Airbnbs in Baytown when this first came up and and you're right, there's quite a bit of them. Um, I am cautious as well to to just do a blanket. No. Would I rather just not do anything and and just let the Airbnbs operate as they do now with no restrictions? Probably not. I mean, if we have an opportunity to add restrictions and to add guidelines, then I would rather do that. Um, but what I am worrying about is the regulation portion of it and and the staff that would be doing this and the time that's allowed. And I do understand um, Mr. City Manager, you said that it would fall under possibly the parks and wreck board. And so what kind of I mean these

are volunteers, these are constituents as well themselves. And so what would they be running into? I was just saying that Galveston.

Yeah, you just did that as an example. But for me, these are just volunteers and you know, people in the community and what would they face out in the community from those that feel like you know, you didn't regulate this one, right? Why did you allow this one? and and not that one. And so I'm kind of cautious about that. I I think I want to give it some more time. I do appreciate everyone who has come out to speak and and um voice their concerns. I did read through uh the list of items um that were presented and not knowing, you know, who would be moving in. Um I have a house for sale down the street. I I don't know who's going to move in there. I hope it's someone nice. I hope it's someone good, but ultimately I'm not going to know who's going to move into that home. Um, and I did go through and read all of the letters and everything that was sent to us. Um, and so I want to take a little bit more time just so we figure out all of the rules and regulations that we're going to set up. I know we've already been discussing this for this is probably the second meeting and y'all had it at PNZ even before that. Um, so like Mike, I I don't want to take too much more time. Um, but leaning on what state law has said in terms of property rights, I just want to take a little bit more time reviewing the regulations.

I want to thank everybody from Country Club who came out to speak and and and I'm I'm going to go back to again five. It does not unreasonably interfere with peace and enjoyment of surrounding the homes as places of residence. That's a part of the SCP permit. It's one of our criterias and we've clearly heard it's going to interfere with the peace and enjoyment of the surrounding homes. Yeah. And that is why I'll be voting no.

Yeah. And and honestly, when it first came up, if this was the only one that came to us, I would have said, "Drop it. It's not our purview because the deed restrictions don't allow it. And I I wouldn't have even seen it here. I wouldn't have wanted to see it here because their deed restrictions would would not um would not allow this type of use, but there are others. This isn't the only one. And so um I want to take a little more time to review. Yeah. So yeah, I also to that point I Well, let me close the public hearing and then we'll come back and and do that. That's good.

I'm going to go ahead and close this public hearing. It is now 8:28 p.m. And this public hearing is closed. You can still have your comment. Okay. But we're going to go to D. Got you. Consider an ordinance to approve a special use permit on an approximately point or 0.28 acre parcel located at 511 Ashwood Drive, Baytown, Texas, 77521 to allow short-term rental use in the suburban residential zoning district. Go ahead with your comment. Yeah. Uh because kind of acknowledge

not yet. We can have comments still, right? We typically do take the motion first, but we're still okay. We're still okay if we don't. Yeah. Yeah. So, I guess in in the spirit of just addressing the issue of deed restrictions, as stated before, the city doesn't enforce deed restrictions.

We do not enforce deed restrictions. That's a civil agreement. So, [clears throat] you know, the the tough thing is with places like neighborhoods like Country Club and Lakewood, which this is an issue for Lakewood, is they don't have a governing HOA to hold um their residents accountable to their deed restrictions. Um this means that they they'll try to look at the city to do that. We cannot do that. I wanted to stress that to um those who came up here. Thank y'all for coming. But understand your deed restrictions are not for the city to enforce. It is for your LCA or HOA to enforce civily uh with with the private citizen. So, that's just something to to think about even moving forward in other issues is that your deed restrictions are are are civil agreements with those who move into your neighborhood um to to enforce civily in a in a civil court um if needed. So, that's that's all I want to say.

All right. Thank you. So, um after hearing everything, Jacob. Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe it's

all right. Um no, I just want to make a few comments. I mean, this this for me, I mean, you've heard me on on previous items. Um, I take everything back to um the, you know, the rights of the property owner. Um, as much as we can within established ordinances, right, within established code, whatever it may be. Um, in this case, we have a process, we have uh a special use permit if there are certain items that are followed. Um and it appears in this case that they are being followed. Um and so I I mean for that reason I do believe we need to approve this uh as they're as they are f as he's following the owner is following the established um regulations as they currently are. Now, I do think though if we can within 60 to 90 days sh that up a little bit, add some additional regulations, um I think that m may be um the best case. Um and I I I do hear I mean I appreciate all of y'all that came out and spoke. Um a lot of the things that were mentioned, traffic, street parking, whatever, maybe gun I think gunfire got mentioned, loud music. um those aren't really zoning issues or special use permit issues. Those are all things that we have

we have enforcement through other means to address all of those things. Um and so these aren't introducing anything new that we don't already have enforcement for. Um and I know one thing was said, consider if this were in your neighborhood. Um I had a rental right next door to me. It wasn't shortterm. Uh, I wish it was shorter. Um, we had a renter next door. I mean, they were loud. They they had folks over all the time. Um, and so, yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, you might not like what your neighbors do. I would have to ask myself, is that the responsibility of the government to take care of that? Um, because if I mean, if we do that in this case, then where does it stop? Um, I mean, you might not like the paint color. your neighbor chooses. Um, some neighborhoods put restrictions in place on that. You've got to get your paint colors approved. Um, but that is the neighborhood deciding those things. It's not the local government. Um, and so I just think I understand all of your concerns. To me, it's just it's fundamentally is this an item that the government needs to restrict? Um, and in this case, I think it's not. Um, I think we're allowed to put some regulations and so I think we need to to, you know, have some further discussions on that, but I don't think we should just outright, you know, deny it at this point.

S. Yes, sir. Okay. Mayor, I have a question for you if that's all right. Yeah. Go ahead.

Before you take a vote, um, I'm just looking at this. I'm I'm hearing the message, which is we do want to shore up the regulations. We do want to come back and have another conversation on this to make things more clear so that this process can go can either change directions or can go easier in the future. So, um my intent would be to bring back a couple of options. If one of those options included not having an SUP process as part of this, but including some more hardcore regulations in terms of like we really list things out and then we just go through the normal enforcement process. Is that something that could be an option? Is that something that this council would be willing to to look at or should we focus on keeping the SUP and [clears throat] the additional regulations?

Well, let me make my comments and then we can answer that. Absolutely.

Okay. Um I thought I had my mind made up coming here. Honestly, I I really did. And I've said this plenty of times. I've changed my mind at this DIS a lot of times. People would probably wouldn't believe how many times I've changed my mind after hearing from my colleagues. Um, property owner rights, long-term, short-term. The one thing, the two things that are really sticking with me. People say that they don't want the government involved in their business. and we have people asking us to get involved in people's business and um case law. What you talked about with the state of Texas, how they've ruled on these things and the one thing that I do not want to do is set us up to where we're being sued because we're not following law. Okay. Um, I have neighbor I actually have a couple of I had an Airbnb across the street counter corn county corner from me and they were better neighbors to me than the people who had been there next to me for 10 years. Honestly, the the um the landlord was very responsive. if he listened to when people called and had concerns as far as traffic flow. Um, if we got people coming in and staying purchasing a new home or a long-term rental and they have five kids like I do and everybody has a car, you're going to have traffic flow issues for a long time. Believe that. Um,

this this is tough. We we we we hear you. Believe me when I say we hear you. We hear your concerns. But I got to echo what you just said, Jacob. A lot of these concerns are things that are going to be there. A lot of these things are things we're going to be dealing with regardless. I've had to deal with gunshots in my neighborhood recently and chief had some officers come out. Ken came out. We've talked about it. And that was from someone that stayed in our neighborhood long term. I'm going to side with regulations to be honest with you, but I'm not going to say do it in a hurry. I'm going to say take your time so that we're not having to come back and make amendments to what we decided in ordinance. Take your time, get it right. If it's going to take a little bit longer than 60 days, I don't mind. I just want us to get it right. Bring something back to us that we can pass. Because if we bring it back in 60 days and there's some things we don't agree with, guess what's going to happen? You're going back to the drawing board to take care of it again anyway. But if we can regulate it, we can hear from the citizens, let us know what you like and what you don't like so that we can make a the best decision for you all and and satisfy your concerns. That's what I'm going to lean towards. It's time to take this vote. Y'all ready?

Yeah. Yeah, that's and I'll be more than willing to try to piece it together. Let's go. Move that we approve the SU based on the original five requirements plus two additional requirements. Number six would be the background sex offender screening. The owner indicated he'd be willing to do that. And seven would be that this SUP would comply with future regulations as they're developed. No, I have a question on the background check. Good question. He said he uses an an external program to do that. But when they do the background check, every new renter,

are we going to require them to bring show proof of that background check to us to make sure it's happening or are we just going to take their word on it? That'll be part of the new regulation that they come up with. We don't have that in place right now. So, Okay. Okay. I think we have he already does an initial screening, but he'd be willing for a few dollars more to do the sex offender screening. I thought that was a great option. I I don't need to see that. But if it's challenged or there's an issue, then he would have to provide it. But then the seventh one would be to to whatever become compliant with any new regulations that are developed.

And I'll say over the next 90 I don't want to put a time frame on just whatever new regulations are developed. That also, as my council uh colleague indicated, if we have another SUV comes up, then those seven would also apply and and any new SUP would have to also come into compliance with any new regulations as we develop them. Okay, that's my motion. Need a second. Second. All in favor? Any oppose? N. Motion carries. Thank you, residents. Thank you, Mr. Scrier. Thank you residents for showing up and voicing your concerns. Did that cover it? Yes, sir. I got it.

Now we're on to 5A proposed ordinances considering ordinance authorizing a chapter 212 agreement between the city of Baytown and Walmart stores east LP including provisions for payments to the city. Mr. Brian Moran.

Hey uh good evening mayor and council. Brian Moran economic development. Um the Baytown Ford team has been working closely with Walmart um to renew their existing industrial district agreement and trans transitioning into a longer term um chapter 212 agreement. Um we believe that uh this agreement really represents a significant step in securing uh long-term um stable growth and continued investment um for the city while also serving and continuing to serve as a strategic hub uh for Walmart's continued operations. Um the proposed agreement is a 45-year term um extending through December 31st of 2070. As part of this agreement, um Walmart will be providing an annual payment to the city of approximately 1.64 million. Um over the life of this um agreement, um the city will receive um approximately 74.2 million um to the general fund. Um Walmart is one of Baytown's um major employers. um their operations in Cedarport Industrial Park uh currently employs uh roughly 1,300 um employees annually um contributing significantly to our workforce and consumer spending in our community. Um tonight uh we do have two representatives uh Mr. Ronnie who is the site uh general manager as well as Mr. um Ted SAM um from Walmart's corporate office and they're here to have any um a couple brief remarks uh for you. All right. Uh good evening uh council members, Mr. Mayor, and city staff. My name is Ted Sme and I'm here with Ronnie Jimenez uh from our import distribution center. Uh we appreciate uh you giving

us uh the time on tonight's agenda. Uh Walmart has been part of the Baytown communities for many years and we value the relationship we've built with the city. Uh we want to continue being a great partner uh with the community and alongside Baytown as the community grows. So we're grateful uh to be here with you um tonight. I also want to thank uh take a moment to thank uh Brian Mur. Um Brian's Brian approached us early on in the process and has been great to work with. Uh so we appreciate your support and uh commitment to reaching out and continuing the partnership uh we've built over the years. Um like Mr. Brown had said, uh this agreement uh between Baytown and Walmart is part of a long-term partnership and we want to continue being a great partner with the community. Uh once again, thank you for having us tonight. Good evening, uh, council. So, my name is Ronnie Himenez. I'm uh the general manager of the, uh, import distribution center here in Baytown, Texas. Uh, we've been here for a very long time. Uh, I myself have been in the leading role for a very long time as well. We're happy to continue to do business here. Uh, we value Baytown in the past. We have worked closely together. Uh, and we have a healthy relationship. So, we continue to look forward to uh, doing that. Um, as uh Mr. Moran indicated, we do employ about 1300 associates uh and we continue to invest into our community. So, we're looking forward to that. Thank you.

Questions and comments. Good deal. Well, Mr. Moran,

I do have one question. Yes, sir. You say we employ you all employ 1300 employees. That's correct, sir. Well, that's a lot of people. It's a lot. I actually have heard a lot of people saying that they work at Walmart, but I didn't realize it was 1300. Yeah. the distribution center alone employs 1300 uh associates and uh obviously that's outside of the stores right so this is the distribution center and then uh next year we're also bringing the Sam's Club to Baytown which as you already know uh is going to be so we're going to be there supporting that as well we're looking forward to that as well good deal excellent yes sir

I want to clarify I think I know the answer to ask the question 1.64 64 million approximately a year. That's based on the minimum value that's stated in the contract. That is correct. As that value goes up, and I would hope for everybody's sake that it does. I mean, it would be great for y'all. It's great for us. Then that annual payment also increases. Correct. Perfect. I'm good with that. It's not bad. All right. Um, we need to approve this. Yeah, I need a motion. Second. All in favor? Any oppose?

Thank you. We're actually looking forward to that, Sams. Thank you. Get it done quick, huh? Yeah. Happy about proposed resolution 6A. Consider a resolution to resolve by settlement Centerpoint Energy Houston Electric LLC's application for authorization to enter into a new temporary emergency electric energy facilities T lease. Mr. Lamont

Council, this is a resolution that uh asked for authorization to settle a matter with Centerpoint. Uh this was brought to us again by the Texas Coast Utilities Coalitions of Cities uh of which we are a member. Uh it involves a May 27th, 2025 application by Centerpoint to authorize it to enter into the leases of small mobile generation facilities which are also known as temporary emergency electric energy facilities. So I will be referring to those as TES from this point forward. In that application uh centerpoint asserted that uh the TES are necessary to restore power to the company's customers whenever there is a significant power outage. However, in that application, Centerpoint never stated how much these facilities will cost or the impact of adding these leased facilities may have on customers monthly bills. Uh, centerpoint also asserted that this is not a ratemaking proceeding before the public utilities commission and therefore participating cities like Baymont uh Baytown are not entitled to reimbursement of expenses for challenging uh centerpoints actions. Nevertheless, uh TCU intervened in the matter and was able to come to a proposed resolution with Centerpoint. The resolution uh includes the following. Centerpoint will maintain records that pre-identify locations that are suitable for the deployment of TESS.

uh center point uh following any event that necessitates the deployment of TES will upon request provide details regarding the types of customers and customer facilities where TESS were deployed and the types of customers and locations in which TESS were not deployed due to design customer facility limitations, electrical or other deployment related reasons. Centerpoint will also uh when the deployment of TES become reasonably foreseeable provide upon request uh details regarding the types of customers and customer facilities where Centerpoint uh is proposing to deploy the TES and if known the types of customers and locations where Centerpoint proposes it will not deploy TE facilities. ities and that it will provide the reasons for not uh deploying those TE facilities. Centerpoint will consult with city and county offices of emergency management and any effective areas on the prioritization of TE deployment when the deployment of TE facilities becomes reasonably foreseeable uh during significant power outage events. Centerpoint will coordinate with critical load customers. Uh critical load customers meaning residential public safety or industrial customers who have essential needs such as life support. uh providing public safety services or critical industry processes uh which would uh depend heavily upon uh

a continuous flow of electricity. Um and while this does not guarantee uninterrupted power, it does uh mandate or or it does uh centerpoint would uh provide special notifications and priority restoration during uh power outages. So that's what mean when we uh refer to critical load customers. So, Centerpoint will coordinate with critical load customers when there is a potential need for deployment of the T facilities when they become reasonably foreseeable to uh restore service to the critical load customers uh during significant power outages. And finally, Centerpoint will notify the coalition of cities and commission staff uh if it plans to renew any of these TE lease agreements. We recommend uh approval under these circumstances.

Okay. Um have these locations been identified? Not yet. that was part of the um criticism that the coalition had with this application. Mhm.

So as part of the settlement um before uh TES are deployed once it becomes reasonably necessary to do so then Centerpoint will start coordinating with uh the cities the counties and critical load customers and then following the event uh they will provide upon request uh a list of customers to whom whom the teach were deployed, customers to whom they were not deployed, and the reasons why. So, do we have a time frame on when we may know these things?

Well, I'm asking because we normally get a hard freeze now sometime in January. Well, the the administrative proceeding is going on right now. So um the coalition is asking uh its members to approve the settlement. Then there will be a final settlement negotiated in the PUC proceeding uh and it will become effective. When that is I don't know but I would say within the next 30 days perhaps. Okay.

All right. Good deal. Any questions or concerns, comments? I need a motion. Second. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Lemon. Um 6B and 7A have been pushed to the next meeting at the request of the developer. So, we are going on to 7B. Receive and discuss a presentation regarding the cost recovery permit fee model. Mr. group card.

All right, so after that last hour or so, I'm going to move on to something really fun and we're going to talk about fee increases. Everybody's favorite topic. Okay, so as you know, we did just go undergo a recent update of the development fees. This did not include building permits or any other kind of permits. It was just things like reszones and variances and uh subdivision plats, things that were related to larger development. Uh the last change we did to the actual permit fees was back in 2019. And what uh we we had uh assistant city manager uh Brandt Gary had given uh city council a quick presentation on uh the possibility of moving forward with a cost recovery uh model of fee increases uh over the next five years uh at your June 8 uh excuse me June 27th um work session. So, some of this you'll see should look familiar. Um, again, we are including tonight uh some comparable cities and what their fees look like and how we rank within those cities. And then, uh, again, the goal here is a an 80% cost recovery, which is one of the numbers that was thrown out when we did the update of the development fees back in I think January, February. Uh, and this would be proposed as an incremental ramp up over five years. So again, this is the uh this is the slide that Mr. Gary showed you back in June. Uh again, this kind of shows the revenues versus expenditures on how those are currently weighted and how they would end up uh again over the course of five years getting up to around that 80% point. So any that that's basically the costs of the planning development services department. Um, we would like to see the cost of our efforts covered by about 80%

by fees themselves. Currently, it's more like 45 46%. So, where do we rank? Um, this shows just uh uh examples of so there's four different kinds of permit that were used to make this chart. So, you got development type permits, uh, commercial permits, residential permits, and then inspections, which is as part of that as well. Um what you can see is that all the way over on the left uh and these are ranked lowest to highest. Lowest being a one, highest being a seven. So the lower that bar is on the chart, the lower it ranks, uh within this within those seven categories. And what you're seeing is Baytown current, Baytown proposed, and then five other cities. You'll see Periland, League City, Galveston, Missouri City, and Sugarland. These are the same cities we showed you with the development fees earlier this year. So, um, as you can see, currently, uh, we consistently rank as the lowest fees out of all of the the comparable cities. What we're proposing, uh, to do with this over the next uh, you would see this in January uh, is to be somewhere in the middle. Um, again, we want to get to that 80% mark over five years. And what you're seeing here would be uh that we would be looking at next year our fees would be comparable in some areas, a little higher in other areas, a little lower in some, but never the highest out of all of the cities that we have marked here tonight. And with that, we show we combined and did averages uh across several of the larger uh permit categories. And what again what you see is ranked lowest to highest. And you can see left to right the current our current permits on average are about the lowest out of the comparable cities. And what we're showing with the increase would be right about the middle. So we'd be fourth from the top. Uh and that is

right there in the middle in the yellow. Um a few examples. Again this is just a smattering. The the number of permits we have is pages long. So I didn't want to show you all that tonight. So, we took some of the ones that we have the most applications for on an annual basis. These numbers are based off of last fiscal year. Uh, so what you're seeing is you you see some of the trade permits that we get quite a few of, but the the the permit rate uh the fee rate is is very low. And so you'll see um a contrast between that and say new commercial builds where you have a high a high fee but you get less of them. So again you had 832 electrical residential permits then it's it's more about uh uh the the quantity than than how much we charge per. But anyway you get the idea. So um what you're seeing there is again kind of some of our our method in in making these determinations. And what you're seeing is just about a 12% increase across the board. Uh I think one of the things that Mr. Gary had mentioned uh back in June was that some of the lesser used and some of the uh applications that don't that don't get applied for a lot or also ones that are say a homeowner wants to come in and and get a um I don't know a plumbing or not plumbing that's probably not a good one but like a swimming pool or a fence something like that things that we don't see a ton of then we tried to keep those um increases low and offset it with some of the higher cost, higher numbers ones. So commercial, we might have bumped a little bit more to kind of make up for that. We don't want the burden to be on our our homeowners who are doing small jobs and remodels and things like that. We want to put the the the burden of of at least some of the burden on some of those bigger projects. Does that make sense?

And that's not across the board. there was some judgment calls in there to say that these are lower numbers and again um issues that we didn't want to hit your sort of everyday homeowner. So, um what again we we looked at this 5-year goal to achieve an 80% cost recovery roughly. Uh for the average increase, we're looking at about 12% per year roughly. Um we would also be considering a an annual in uh inflation rate to go with that. uh again over 20 as fiscal year 27 to 30 we would be seeing around 12 to 15% annually. We would want to consider those fee increases as part of the annual budget process. So what we're looking for tonight is a a sort of a general direction from council that says yes, we like this method and this is something we want to achieve. Uh we do have a public input meeting scheduled on January 13th in this room to get uh any input that we might get from the folks that this does affect. Um and then we'll bring that information uh back to you for an adoption of the new fee schedule on January 26th with an effective date. Right now we're proposing for April 1st if there are delay. We want to give everybody a little bit of a chance to get used to the new fees. Uh and we also we need time. uh this would be a considerable change to our electronic system. So, we need some time to make sure we not only get the numbers in, but uh check it for bugs and make sure we got everything correct because there's a lot of moving parts there. So, we're looking at at least April 1st. If for some reason adoption gets moved back, we would look to move that effective date back as well, not only for the uh for the applicants, but also for staff. And with that, uh I'm happy to answer any questions.

One question, Martin. Um, if this ends up, you know, this effective date is April 1st or even slides past that, would you be looking I know you haven't here, it'll be considered as part of the annual budget process. So, will the goal be going forward that it would always just occur on October 1st when we hit the new budget cycle? Um, yes, that would be the intent. And maybe if we're if we're enacting it later than April 1, maybe we're pushing the entire program back to October 1st to say, "Okay, this won't become effective, you know, so we can do an annual, right?" Um, but you would see those anticipated fees or proposed fees as part of the budget. Okay. So, you would have a chance to review and ask questions.

Yeah. No, that's good. And you I think you understood where I was going with that. I mean, if this slides too far past April, I don't know that we'd want to increase it and then immediately turn around and do it on October 1st, but we can see when we're able to get these effective and then where we are in budget planning for the following year. Yeah, I would agree with that. Any more comments or I guess the input you were looking for was I agree with the direction you're going. I think is what you're Yes, just a general thumbs up across. I'm going to say that the um going back to the slide with the fees. Yeah, right there.

That's not much at all. Honestly, just looking at just looking at them, I [clears throat] really thought it was going to be a lot more on the increase on each than what it is. So, um I think we're going to be in the in the right position. [clears throat] It it it's obviously going to depend. Um the higher the value of a like the ones that are going to take the biggest hit are the the big commercial pro projects. The higher the value, the higher the fee. Yeah. That is how we and most cities around us gauge what the fee is for the permit review.

So, and I and I'll give you an idea. The permit review fees for say Sanino marketplace are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. So it it can have a a pretty big effect on particular projects when they head that direction. But that said, across the board, we don't have a lot of those. So that that's something that we can work with, I think. And we can we can look at those bigger projects and and set, you know, something specific for them. Got you. All right. Well, yeah, it does sound good. I think you know what we like, right? I'm good. Good deal. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Now we will move on to consent agenda. Um items A through Z. Does anyone have anything they'd like to pull? You do? No. Kenny's laughing because I joked with Kenny earlier. You pull it. I'll kill you. Nothing. What? Okay. All right. Good deal. Well, I need a motion. A second. All in favor?

Any opposed? Motion carries. Now we're [clears throat] are on to appointments. Consider two appoint two city manager appointments to the civil service commission.

Mayor, council, uh the recommendation uh is to appoint Dave Gerald to the commission board for another term. Mr. Gary has been consistent in attendance and mentor to other board members and and is respected by the fire and police employee groups. Uh for the vacancy, the recommendation is to appoint uh Caitlyn Pal to fulfill the uh remaining term period through December 31st, 2027. Uh Caitlyn was the only application received for the board during the past six months. She was given an overview of the duties of the commission and interviewed for the vacancy. Miss Pal is eager and willing to serve in this role and we believe she would be a great addition. Good deal. I need a motion.

The addition of Miss Caitlyn Pal and um we appoint Mr. Gerald. Second. All in favor? Any oppose? Motion carries. 9B. consider a resolution authorizing five appointments to the planning and zoning commission. Miss Jackson. Oh, I got you.

Angie looked at me so like you guys haven't seen enough of me tonight. Um I I I think that I don't have them up on the screen, but I I do know that three of your current members would like to continue. Um and you have um Mr. Chapa, who has actually said that he Mr. Mr. Chapa said that he he would like to um serve the city, but he also understands that he's been missing a lot of the meetings and he has not he has told us he's not looking to be reappointed. Um and then um Mr. Harlo um he has also missed several meetings because of his uh business life and his travel. Um he would we believe he would like to stay on but again we do know that he's um he has quite a lot of scheduling conflicts. So, um, Miss Scott, uh, Mr. Laredo, and Miss Wheeler, they do all seek reappoint and staff is, uh, recommending that.

Good deal. So, we want to take all these at once or one at a time? One at a time. Okay. Well, for my appointment, I do want to reappoint Miss Scott. So, I need a motion. Motion to approve. Second. All in favor? I. Congratulations, Miss Scott. Next, we have at large Mr. Oscar Chapo's position and we have two applications here. Recommend like to thank Oscar for everything he's done. He's been a great him and and his wife.

Yeah, I know there's he's busy. It's an ETJ. It has to be an ETJ appointment on the at large. It doesn't say Oscar city. Yeah, Oscar's not an ETJ. He's on Country Club View. Yeah.

It does say that right there. Okay. Can we go through the others? Yes, we will. Yeah. Uh, Mr. Laredo, District 1. I will be reappointing Mr. Laredo. Need a motion. Motion to approve. Second. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Motion carries. District three, Mrs. Wheeler. [clears throat] Um, I know Miss Wheeler seeks reappoint. Um, I've reported her uh my during my first term. However, uh this time around, I wanted to take a different direction and replace her with uh Jeff Walters.

I need a motion. Move to approve. I need a motion. I move to approve. Okay. I need I need a second. I need a second. Three times, right? Last time I need a second. Okay, that dies on the vine.

And um district five at large. Uh I'm going to have I I know you said you weren't able to contact Mr. Harlo and I know he's missed the meeting. So I'm going to have a conversation with him and just see if he's able to improve his attendance in the next uh year. If not, um, I'll I'll work to get some additional. Okay. So, we'll revisit that and Yeah. more time on that one. I got you. Excellent. So, congratulation to all those who were reappointed. Um, we are now on to nine. Point of clarification.

Yeah. on the district three appointment. Then if there's not another appointment um nominee, then um Miss Wheeler would stay in place until that is a until she's replaced. Yeah. And when can we express a clarification on Mr. Chapa? Okay. Because I know he's not ETJ. Okay. Thank you. So, so is there no appointment renewal on Mrs. on my appointment? I mean, so I mean what happens now? Does she

she's she's holding over until you can make a motion to to reappoint if you wanted to or you can wait and look for another uh applicant. I want to ask council what's what's the reserves with my appointment? Maybe for me you had another district three appointee. I I would Well, it's it's not district specific. It's that large. So, I think

I get it. I understand. But I I would like to see us represent our people representing from our districts. Council, I would ask that if you're going to go into specifics about any candidate that we consider that a uh personnel matter to discuss in executive session. I got you. Makes sense. Unless the individual requests that it be discussed in public session. Sounds good. Thank you. We are now on to 9 C. consider a resolution authorizing six appointments to the community development advisory committee.

We're going to take these individually. We're going to start with district one. Um I am not ready at this time. I've had some conversations with Mr. Hannah Hosa and he would like to see new people and we didn't get any applicants for my district and so we're going to have a conversation there. He's still willing to serve but he also wants to entertain getting some new people in there. So So he's going to be a hold over for now. He's going to be a hold over for now.

Got you. Um, district two. Um, she's not here, so we're going to Yeah, we're going to hold over on that. District three. District three. Oh, I'm going to reappoint Anita Nichols everybody. District four. Uh, I'm going to leave Kim Booker on. She's This is her first term, so she'll be going to with her second term on this one. So, kind of give her another chance on that. She hasn't missed any meetings and the forward that she's been able to that she's been called to. Okay, good deal. And district five,

I'm going to request some additional time on this one as well. Okay. On um the atlarge position, I would like to nominate Roer Brown. Applications second page. Yeah. It was written backward there. Brown wrote it. I got you. Um, I need a motion.

So, those that have been indicated, yes, district and at large. I need a second. Second.

All in favor? I. Congratulations to those who are appointed to the community development advisory committee. Now we're on to 9D. Consider the mayor's appointment of one representative and one alternate to the transportation policy council and one representative and one alternate to the 2026 technical advisory committee. Um, we're not going to make any changes to the technical advisory committee. I think y'all are doing an excellent job. I actually made a phone call in to um, HGAC and everything's looking good. TPC, I've spoke with everyone and I'm going to thank Mr. Jacob for his service um, and Mr. Reynolds for his service also on TPC. But I am chomping at the bits to get back involved with that. That was one of the first committees I was appointed to when I was on council. And um I'm gonna nominate myself and Mr.

Griffith. Griffith. Man, I forgot your name for a minute. I'm getting old. Um that forgettable name. Yes. Yes. And Mr. Griffith says that he thinks he's ready to serve in a much in a bit more of a capacity representing council. That's correct. And um so those are my two nominations. Me as the point person and him as the um alter alternate. [clears throat] Sounds good. I need a motion. Motion to approve. Second. All in favor?

Any oppose? Motion carries. Congratulations, Mr. Griffith and Mr. Johnson. Thank you. Um, now to 9E. Consider a resolution casting the city of Baytown's ballot for the election of a representative to serve on the board of directors of the Harris Central Appraisal District. Mr. Lamont.

Yes, council. Uh if you recall, we had the uh uh nominations for the appraisal districts before you at uh one of our previous meetings, and you'd asked for some additional background on the candidates. We did receive some information from uh both the Harris Central Appraisal District as well as Chambers County, which will be the next item. And we provided those uh resumes that were available to you. Although I don't believe either district provided uh resumes on 100% of the candidates, but uh they both told us they don't normally uh keep those types of records. So they they kind of did us a solid.

Good deal. Thank you. So we tabled this. We brought it back. Are we ready to make this vote? Good deal. I need a motion. Motion to consider the six votes um as presented for Harris County Appraisal District. Well, we have to Yeah, we're going to be it's going to I mean, we have to decide where how we're going to distribute those votes. So, it can't just be it's not across the board. [clears throat] We need to I believe we have six votes and we need to distribute them across

who one candidate can get all six or we can distribute them across the various candidates. So,

well, I'd like to the only person I really know and I did look through all the applications. Um, I would be okay moving forward with Miss Melissa Noriea. Um, I know she was presented as a nominee in September. Um, we were missing some resumeéumés and bio bios. Um, and I cannot remember which ones those were. Let's see.

Mr. um Jason Morris Isn't there two of them? Well, we have two. I mean, we show that we not there were two nominated, Martina Lamont Dixon and Melissa Noriega, but Melissa is not on the ballot that came back to us. So, I don't know what what that means. If there were some threshold of nominations or there's a Joey Noriega. Yeah. Yeah. I I think that is a typo because on the ballot on the ballot because the information that we received

from the appraisal district was that it was in fact Melissa who was on the the ballot and she is a returning or she is a current member of the board who uh is looking to have her appointment extended or renewed. Okay. Well, I guess we're discussing it. I mean, I would be okay splitting our six votes, three and three, between those two individuals. Um, be okay. Martina Lemon Dixon and uh Melissa Nora. I'm okay with that. Um, the only thing I discussed is that I wish we would get someone that was either from Baytown or closer to Baytown.

Um, but one of them is connected to Baytown. Yes, they are. Yes. Yeah. Um but in a roundabout [laughter] but either way um I am okay doing the split. I need a motion. Motion to do a three and three split between the two presented uh nominees, Miss Martina Lemon Dixon and Melissa Nora. Second. All in favor? I.

Any oppose? Motion carries. Congratulations to those two. And F, consider a resolution casting the city of Baytown's ballot for the election of a representative to serve on the board of directors of the Chambers County Appraisal District. Mr. Lemon.

Uh, councel, this is a companion resolution. This one is for Chambers County Appraisal District. Uh, as stated before, we did receive uh information from the district regarding the the nominees for appointment. I will say these uh the information we received from this district was probably less inclusive than the information we got from Harris County.

Um there wasn't much there. Um, but with six names and six votes without additional information. I mean, we got what we asked for. I I'd make a motion we just spread our votes uh evenly across the six individuals. Well, sounds good. Can I get you to do that? Because I I believe I know Mr. Tan Williams and uh he he he would represent us well in Chambers County. Okay. Are you okay splitting it six ways? like to give him a little more lean than that. But if we want to do a six way, then we can give them all six. I mean, give them all six. I read through the info and I didn't really have anything.

Yeah, but I think all if I'm not saying all six are currently serving. Is that right? It looked like at least the the majority of them were. I think they you know what? I'm not sure. Let me see if I have that information. Yeah, they all appeared to be currently serving. gives a little volunte kind of Yeah. No, dilutes it down. I didn't have any additional information to go off of. Sounds like you do. So, I I take your word for it. We trust you. You're starting [clears throat] to look like Santa Claus, so we'll trust you. Ho ho ho ho. I got my naughty list. So, what are we doing?

We're going to spread them and we're going to give him one more. We're going to have to take one from somebody. Right. So, if you can do it, see them all safe. I'll withdraw my motion. You make a motion. Yeah. You're going to put that on me. Council, I do have the list of current board members. uh Joe Crumpler who's also uh listed in the resolution, Alicia Turner uh who's also there, Joey Presnol who's also on our resolution, Everett Williams, uh Tan Williams who we just discussed, Lorie Payeyton who is here as well, and John is. So yes, they are all current members. We just keep

following. I guess with that if they're all current members is this splutter vote. Get a motion. Motion to take off. So moved. Second. All in favor? Any opposed? Tried to keep it simple. Motion carries. Manager's report. Mr. Jason Reynolds. Mayor and council. I have a few things for you. First, uh the police department was recently recognized at the 2025 Southeast Texas Law Enforcement Awards for its strong commitment to traffic safety. Between September 24 and September 25, our officers made 342 DWI arrest. Been busy on the streets.

Uh, Officer Eric Swash Schwash received the Mad Enforcement Hero Award for leading the department with 131 DWI arrest. Uh, an honor he has earned almost every single year. So, a third of the year he's uh getting somebody for DWI. That's a lot. Um, officer Christopher Calhoun received the outstanding service award for his work in DWI enforcement and prevention with 52 DWIS while maintaining a full patrol schedule. He is also one of only 60 drug recognition experts in the state and serves as a DR instructor helping train officers statewide. You know I am too. Did you know that, John?

Crazy facts, [laughter] right? Uh the 77th annual Baytown Christmas Parade was held on December 4th with the theme Boots, Bells, and Holiday Yells, a true Texas Christmas. Despite the chances of bad weather, the parade was a great success, featuring 121 total entries, 226 vehicles, and 1,735 walkers. We extend a special thank you to all city departments and partners whose support was essential in making this year's parade safe, smooth, and truly memorable. And big thank you to Cliff and his team u and everybody else that was involved. and it's fantastic every single year. Uh the 2025 Beao uh Beo Baytown Geo Tour community celebration demonstrated geocaching's value as a tourism driver for Baytown. This travel-based hobby brings participants into the city to explore parks, landmarks, and local businesses as part of the geoour experience. The Brunson Visitor Center was filled with geocachers from cities like College Station, Spring, Clear Lake, Orange, Missouri City, and many more. Special thanks to Baytown Bert for co-hosting and for their continued support. So, thank you again for the to the tourism team. Are your kids at home with nothing to do? Do you have last minute holiday shopping? This is an advertisement. Doing my best radio voice if possible. Uh then shelf your elf.

Your kids get a day of fun and you get a day to get things done. The Eddie V. Grey Wetland Center staff and Epic Club members are hosting two parents day out events at the Wetland Center on December 22nd and 23rd from 10:00 a.m. to 400 p.m. each day. The cost per child per day is $30. Activities include animal encounters, crafts, and holiday themed STEM games. Registration closes on December 18th, next Thursday. And finally, this year marked the 26th year of the city's Baytown uh Baytown's Angel Tree, and the spirit of giving uh shown brighter than ever. Together, we've provided 152 gifts to children from our four elementary schools, a child care center that supports low-income families and atrisisk students in GCC ISD, junior highs, and high schools. The kindness of staff across the city made all of this possible, bringing joy, comfort, and sense and a sense of community to children who needed it most. A big thank you to everyone who participated and made this a great success. Martin, to your team, Sharon, Stephanie, really putting this together. Mayor, council, citizens, if y'all could have seen it today, this place was full of gifts. Um, and it's pretty spectacular. And when you look at the registration list, you have multiple employees uh from Baytown that that sponsored four, five, six kids in some instances and uh really getting people involved. So, a big thank you for for spearheading that and to all the employees that took part and helped a child in need and to their and helped those families. So, mayor and council, that's all I have.

Council member district report, District 5, Mr. Jacob Powell.

All right. Uh, we're seeing some exciting progress on several new businesses in District 5. I'll just run through these quickly. Uh, out on 146, we have a new Milano Nail Spa. Uh there's also the Swift 146 fuel station. It's the same. They're also building the Swift at Shlander and I 10. I'm also have the new apartments out on 146 as well. That's that's the uh Canm development. You know, this the Starbucks is open there now. Uh Community Resource will be putting a new credit union in there. So, that area will continue to develop. Um Plaza shops at Baytown on North Main. Uh Baytown 10 Commerce Center out on I 10. uh street rehabilitation project on Shosonyi Street is moving along moving along well and is nearing completion that's in um in Pinehurst. Uh the private lift station that was located at the Texico location has been taken offline with the completion of the Chambers common lift station. So that's the same area out there on 146. Um we have a new larger lift station that's really going to help the development continue in that area. Uh contractors are working on a SCADA project. Uh and that's all related to um various lift stations as well. Um not the most glamorous thing, but we've got to have that infrastructure. Um and then parks. We had the 2025 turkey trot took place on November 22nd at Jenkins Park. Um, even with the rainy weather, we had nearly 400 participants in the 1K and 5K runs, joined by several community partners, including Goose Creek ISD, Light Fiber, Pirates Bay Fitness Connection, and Tom's Traveling Coffee. Um, so thank you to everyone who helped make that event a success. Um, and one other thing I wanted to mention, I don't see Thomas still in the room, but um, I was able to to sit in on a meeting. He has quarterly meetings with Union Pacific and I've heard a lot recently uh

in District 5 as as well. I know others here about train issues. Um but District 5 has got a few rough crossings. Um and we seem to have issues with with trains blocking crossings. Um seem to have picked up recently and we had a really good meeting with with Union Pacific this week. Uh like I said, Thomas has those quarterly. uh but sat in on it and and they recently made some changes to just operationally to try to alleviate some of that. Um they're going to send us some verbiage over that public affairs can put out. I won't attempt to summarize what all was said in that meeting because I know I'll butcher it, but um hoping to see some improvement with just limiting the number of blocked crossings there through D5. Um and so uh that is all I have. I guess uh if we don't have another meeting the rest of the year, everyone have a very merry Christmas.

You go Army. Thank you. Good deal.

We will now recess into and convene an executive session session executive session pursuant to Texas government. I now reconvene our open meeting of the Baytown City Council and announced that in accordance with section 551.102 of the Texas Government Code, no action was taken in executive session. Having exhausted everything on this agenda, I adjourned this meeting at 12:08 a.m. Up.