City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the July 20th, 2026 meeting of the Storer City Council. This time I'll call the meeting to order and I'll ask that you all stand and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

All right, let's jump right in. Item three is the consent docket. Counselors, questions, comments, or action on the consent docket?

Motion to approve the consent docket.

Second. We have a motion and a second to approve consent. Please vote. There's a vote of four to zero. The consent docket is approved. Item 6, public hearings. 6A, receive public comment regarding a request for a map amendment to rezone property addressed as 524 West 10th Avenue from two-family, multi-family to small lot, single-family residential zoning district, CC-26-127. Ms. Carley, do we have good notice on this item?

Yes, we do.

Mr. Beebleheimer.

Yes, sir. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Councilors. My name is Henry Beebleheimer, and I'm with Development Services. And we're here tonight to talk about a requested map amendment to rezone a property from RTM, a residential two-family multifamily, to small single-family residential, or RSS. This property is on the northeast corner of 10th and Knobloch. As you can see from this aerial, the property is outlined in pink and there's an existing single family house in the structure. The property owner would like to tear down the existing structure and rebuild a single family house. As a single family house is not an allowed use in the RTM zoning districts, because that's focused on two-family and multi-family developments, the applicant is requesting to rezone to allow for a single family house. So here's the zoning map. As you can see, the current property is zoned RTM, residential two-family multifamily. The applicant did discuss potentially doing some sort of multifamily on the slot, but it is a very small parcel. The current lot is only 4,000 square foot. The minimum lot size for RTM, residential two-family multifamily, which is the leftmost column in this, is 20,000 square foot. The minimum requirement for RSS, or small lot single family, is 5,000. So this parcel is smaller than we would allow them to create or what we could approve being created in either one of those zoning districts. It is allowed to continue as a parcel since it's an existing lot. So yeah, this decreases the extent of the nonconformity for the lot size. The future land use map does call for moderate density residential at this location. moderate density residential primarily focuses on missing middle housing, which is anything between like a duplex and a large apartment complex, everything in between there. Single family detached homes on small lots can fall within the moderate density residential category, which this would be. I'm open to answer any questions if you have any.

Councilors, any questions for staff? Seeing none, I'll open the public hearing. I don't think I have anyone signed up to speak on this item. Is anybody here to speak for this on this zoning item? Yes, sir. Please introduce yourself at the podium.

Hello, BJ Bellatini from Kingston, Oklahoma. My wife and I are intending to use this property to build a personal home. We came up for the games for our children, so that is the purpose of our intent for this.

Excellent. Thank you.

Appreciate you being here.

No one else here to speak. I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Henry, was there a recommendation on the item?

Yes, sir. On July 7th, 2026, with a vote of 5-0, Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the map amendment as presented.

Thank you so much. Councilors?

I move to approve the Planning Commission recommendation.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please vote. That item is approved with a vote of 4-0. Texas item 6B, receive public comment regarding a request for a map amendment to rezone property address to 799 East Mercury Avenue from commercial shopping and neighborhood transition zone to two-family residential zoning district, CC-26-128. Do we have good notice on this item?

Yes, we do.

Take it away.

Yes, sir. This property is located at 799 East Mercure Avenue, and the applicant is requesting to rezone from CS and NTZ to RT, residential two-family. Here's the property outlined in pink. There has been a minor subdivision that is approved and filed. I probably just forgot to update the image. But the lot line is now right here. So this pink parcel is two parcels with a lot line right down the middle. So these onlines have been changed since the screenshot was taken. So this property is located a quarter mile east of Perkins, about a quarter mile north of Lakeview. Here's a zoning map where you can see the existing NTZ or neighborhood transition zone, which buffers the single family neighborhood to the south. And then we see the CS commercial shopping, which is the red right here. The applicant is requesting to rezone this property outlined in pink to RT, residential two-family multifamily. Now, we don't see NTZ or neighborhood transition zone very often, so we did want to jump into an explanation of that just a little bit. NTZ or neighborhood transition zone is intended to buffer single family residential neighborhoods from existing higher intensity uses like for example CS or commercial shopping. So when you look at the allowed uses for NTZ which is on the far right column on the screen, the very bottom of that is those allowed uses which is conventional single family, two family duplex and townhomes. So it's residential uses intended to buffer that existing single-family neighborhood from the commercial district. Now if you look in the column to the left of that, those allowed uses are very similar to those allowed in RT, residential two-family, which is why staff's recommendation at Planning Commission was to recommend approval because we thought RT was a very similar intensity as NTZ. So there's some other comparisons that are on the screen. A full comparison table is in your Packets. Here's the future land use map in the comprehensive plan, which calls for moderate density residential. Moderate density residential is again primarily for missing middle housing, which is generally your duplexes to your small scale apartment complexes. This property being zoned RT would allow for duplexes, which fits within this category. I'm open to answer any questions if you have any.

Council, any questions for staff? In the packet, it was noted that this is the only instance of NTZ in the entire city. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

Okay, and it's not planned to be around after we rewrite all the codes?

At the current stage in the code, it is not planned. All right. But it can always change. Thank you.

The biggest difference I noticed in the comparison is the height restriction. Yes, sir. Where the NTZ is the average height and the other's 35 feet. I would assume the average height on the existing single family is like one story or are there two stories there?

I believe it's one story.

Okay, so that would allow two story housing to back up to this one, okay. Yes, sir. All right. Councilors, further questions? All right. At this time, I'll open the public hearing. I do have Mr. Stephen Gose signed up.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors. Stephen Gose, Gosen Associates, 113 East 8th Avenue. I hear, like Henry said, asking, to rezone this property to RT from the commercial shopping and the NTZ. Our client wants to do duplexes on it, and so the RT is what's necessary to get that on the entire piece, not just the NTZ piece. And after this, should it get approved, we'll come back to Planning Commission with a preliminary plat, and then once that's approved, improvement plans. There were some concerns at Planning Commission about drainage and traffic and all of that. Those will be addressed with the preliminary plat and the reviews with the city staff at that time. Like Henry said, the future land use plan calls for something similar to what is being proposed with that missing middle housing and the intensities thereof. Any questions? Or I can wait till after the rest of the public hearing.

Do you anticipate the difference in height restrictions to be an issue? Do you anticipate that you'll build a tower taller than that?

Our client's plan right now is a single-story structure, but with the map amendment, it's just a straight map amendment to allow those uses.

The plan is for single-story duplexes? Currently, yes. Other questions, counselors?

Thank you, sir.

I don't have anyone else signed up to speak on this item. Was there anybody else here who was planning to speak? Please come forward. Just introduce yourself at the podium. And if you can, well. We do have forms to fill out, so if you are planning to speak on this item, we'd appreciate it if you could come over and sign up real quick. But you can go ahead and kick us off and just give us your name and address and let us know your thoughts.

I'm Sherry Boleyn. I live on Warren Lane, just to the south of the proposed development. I think what my hope is is for the NTZ area to be rezoned to something that would protect migratory birds and wildlife. Excuse me. I have looked it up and it doesn't look like Stillwater even has areas except they list Boomer Lake and McMurtry and I guess Lake Carl Blackwell, and then the Teal Ridge wetlands area. And I just would hope that our city is forward thinking enough to see how important are migratory birds. And even the ones that stay around, like the turkeys and cardinals, things like that, are. Since 1970, America has lost approximately 3 billion birds, breeding birds. And we have to at some point acknowledge their importance in our ecosystem. That's my hope.

Thank you for being here. Thank you for your comments. Thank you. If you could just fill out the form just so we have a record of your speech, we'd appreciate it. Sir, introduce yourself and name and address, please, and let us know your thoughts.

Hello. First, I'd like to thank you guys for taking the time to listen to me and listen to the rest of the people that live in the neighborhood that's going to be affected by this. My name is Travis Rollins. I live in Lauren Lane as well. My neighbor, Sherry, was absolutely right about about the migratory birds is we do have a an astounding amount of migratory birds that come through but really i'm just going to keep this very simple because i brought up most of these points previously so our major concerns for most of us are going to be those drainage security because there is a capability that these this area can be two-story and it's already at a higher elevation so there's there's definitely some Some security concerns there as well as privacy, especially since most of those homes on the Lauren Lane have great windows into either living rooms, dining rooms, kitchens, master bedrooms, master bathrooms, or a combination of all of them like our home. So from our fence line, you can see all the way through our entire house. But anyway, so yeah, so we have drainage issues we have physical security we have privacy issues and then there's also Traffic issues as well because if this addition gets a road built to Marine Drive, which on the other side of it is North Grandview Then there's going to be increased traffic through our own neighborhood because that intersection is a blind intersection and so We could already tell from the previous construction where Lakeview was closed that traffic skyrocketed through our streets and it wasn't in a calm or or normal manner they were flying down our our street and And we're not used to that. And we don't want to really get used to that. And change happens. We understand that we would rather see single family homes built. I think that's more prudent to the area. I think it matches the area more closely as single family homes. But I personally can't deny the fact that this is still better than commercial shopping. And then it would be nice to have a buffer area, like she says, for most of the migratory birds since all of the trees are mostly basically right behind our houses and that's going to be torn down in the case of this development. Either way this goes, our homeowners association looks forward to working with the Planning Commission and the developers in making sure that whichever way this goes, that it gets built correctly with those drainage, traffic, environmental studies in place. Thank you.

Thank you. Was there anyone else here who was planning to speak on this item? Mr. Ghost, would you mind coming back up for just a second? Yes, sir. Is there a reason why you're applying for changing the RTZ zoning instead of just changing the commercial shopping? It was just to make it consistent.

I mean, the practice in town has been if you've got a piece of property and you're doing one development, even though it may be allowed in one, instead of changing just part of it, you just change the whole thing. And talking to staff with this being the one little strip of NTZ in the city, This was the route we all are walking down.

Yeah, and that makes sense. I mean, we shouldn't just have a little strip that doesn't make any sense with anything else in town. I do think the height restriction issue is probably the one that's the only thing that I would see being a difference, really, for the neighborhood.

I mean, the two differences I saw were the height restriction and the NTZ also allows you to put more than one principal structure on a lot. So you could do a horizontal apartment complex, basically. But that's not the intent. Sure, understood. But the lot size, the density, the setbacks, those are all the same.

All right. Thanks. Thank you. Appreciate it. Seeing no one else here to speak, I'll close the public hearing. Henry, what was the Planning Commission's recommendation on this?

Yes, sir. On July 7th, 2026, with a vote of 5-0, Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the map amendment as presented.

Thank you. Councilors, questions, comments, or action?

So can we, sometimes we approve these with restrictions. Could we approve this one with a single-story limitation in the NTZ?

don't think so no it's usually what we do we can do that on a special use permit but not on a zoning all right and that yeah I mean I think that's the the one issue that I would think would be nice if we could do something there but I think there are also benefits this zoning is is actually better in some ways than the RTC and I will just make comments just to address some of the issues that were brought up you know as a City Council we don't have the ability to mandate that private property owners keep their property open space. We do have a lot of green space and open space in Stillwater, and it's something that I think is a concern and a question that we want to make sure we're maintaining as much as we can. but certainly not something we as a council can say, this should stay open. It's private property and it's zoned for development and so there's not a lot we can do about that in this specific area, but certainly is in the public parks and the other green space that we have, we want to certainly maintain and expand if possible. But given the fact that this is already zoned for places to be built, And we need the housing and certainly need the missing middle housing. It certainly seems like a reasonable request from from my perspective at this point

I think to the fact from a planning perspective, to go from single family residential into something like duplexes is a really, it's the kind of transition that we like to see in housing, kind of from a buffering perspective. It's just a little higher density than single family, but not necessarily straight to apartments and certainly not to commercial zoning. I think that's um it's important that we build in some of those transitions and buffers and it seems like this will not only provide some of that housing that our community so desperately needs but also provide a buffer to that community in the single-family homes that are there so um i you know we're just deciding the zoning right now certainly encourage the residents to continue to interact with the planning commission and to make sure that, you know, the traffic studies and the drainage and things like that. Certainly, anytime new development comes in, it changes very hard. But it's important that we're supporting the neighbors as development comes in and making sure we're not exacerbating any existing conditions that are there. And there's avenues for them to do that.

Counselors, anything further? Or action on the item?

Motion to approve Planning Commission's recommendation.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve the recommendation. Please vote. Planning Commission's recommendation is approved with a vote of 4 to 0. Takes us to item 6C, receive public comment regarding a petition to annex approximately 33.64 acres, generally located one quarter mile south of 19th Avenue and one quarter mile east of Range Road. Address is 5599 West 19th Avenue, CC-26-129. Do we have good notice on this item? Yes, we do. Henry?

So, as you said, this is a request to annex approximately 33.64 acres and zone the property as RSS or small or single-family residential. This property is located at 5599 West 19th Avenue. Here's the property, which I outlined in yellow this time, because this red line is the city limits line, which we don't see in these maps very often. So this is our city limits line that comes down.

It's the property on the north.

the east this diagonal piece as well as on the south so it's surrounded on three sides by existing city limits this property is a quarter mile west of a quarter mile south of 19th avenue and a quarter mile east of range road this property is just south of the existing golden oaks residential neighborhood and is proposed to be an extension of that golden oaks neighborhood Here's the zoning map where you can see the property to the north is zoned RSS or small lot single family residential with a PUD. To the east and to the south we have RSL or large lot single family residential with it abutting agriculture A to the southeast. The applicant is requesting to zone the property RSS or small lot single family residential to align with the residential neighbor to the north, which is that Golden Oaks. If a PUD is required, that would come before Planning Commission City Council at a future date. That's not what's being considered at this time. It's just straight zoning to RSS. The future land use map we see low density residential to the Northeast and South with some agriculture abutting it to the Southeast with the requested zoning of RSS. We are also requesting to update the future land use map to include this property if the annexation were to be approved as low density residential so that future land use map in the comprehensive plan would be updated. Low density residential is primarily for single family houses. I'm open to answer any questions if you have any. Councilors, any questions?

I have some questions.

Yes, ma'am.

Just more just for information. I'm trying to think if we've done an annexation since I've been on council.

It's been a while, for sure.

So maybe just some knowledge for those of us that haven't participated in one before. Can you talk a little bit about what... as we if we annex this land like what any other responsibilities that the city has and kind of what that looks like from a just procedural perspective yes ma'am that's a great question so what that means for the city and what the services we would provide for example police and fire would start to immediately cover the site so

they would now be covered by the police and fire protection. And then once the property is developed, they would be able to tie into the city sewer, wastewater, electric system, and our trash services would also run through that area. So all those services are available to the property when it's developed, and those police and fire services are extended right away.

Do we have any concerns with being able to provide those services?

We have confirmed with police, fire, as well as utility companies that there are no concerns providing that to this area.

That's the only question I had.

Yes, ma'am.

Any further questions for staff? Thank you, Henry. At this time, I'll open the public hearing. I don't have anyone signed up to speak on this item, but if you're here to speak on this item, please introduce yourself, name, and address at the podium.

Hello, I'm Aaron Ferguson with Bancroft Design at 923 South Lowry. And as Henry talked about, there's an existing PUD over Golden Oaks, and this is planned to just be an extension of that PUD, which will come at a later date. And the purpose for the annexation is so we can access city utilities, which run up right to the boundary line of the property to be annexed. Thank you. Thank you.

Seeing no one else here to speak on the item, I'll close the public hearing. Henry, what was the recommendation?

Yes, sir. On July 7th, 2026, with a vote of 5-0, Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the annexation as presented. Thank you.

Councilors? I move approval of Planning Commission recommendation.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to approve. Please vote.

Recommendation is approved with a vote of 4-0. Takes us to item seven, general orders. 7A is the airport rates and study presentation and proposed fiscal year 27 rates and charges. No action will be taken on this item. It's just for information purposes. Kelly Reed.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors. My name is Kelly Reid. I'm the Stillwater Regional Airport Director. Tonight we want to talk to you and give you an update on our rates and charges study that we completed at the airport. We began this study last late summer, early fall. When we went through airport records, we didn't identify a thorough rates and charges study in airport history. recent history in the last five to ten years. So our goal was to undergo a better understanding of airport rates and charges and as well as our operating and maintenance expenses for the airport. So we selected KSA as the consultant for this study. After we got KSA onboarded, we provided a public open house for airport tenants, airport users to come understand why we underwent a rates and charges study. And then KSA helped us go to work and look at all of the costs that the airport has to operate and to maintain the airport. They helped us separate those costs into cost centers to separate out general aviation costs, airfield costs, terminal costs, and ensure that those costs are applied to appropriate parties. And then we held a second public open house this past June and invited tenants and airport users out to understand the study, to provide the results of the study to our tenants. and to review the proposed rates and charges changes that came out as a result of this study. We did bring the rates and charges study findings to our Stillwater Regional Airport Advisory Board, and they recommended that we go ahead and bring this forward to council for review. So I'd like to introduce Paula Jordan with KSA to review the findings of our study.

Thank you, Kelly. Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and counselors for the opportunity to speak on the rates and charges study. I know I've got a limited amount of time. I wanted to take a few minutes and walk you through what we did in the process. Just to give you an idea, this is actually the presentation that was used at the public meeting. And I talk a lot, but I talk slow, as you can tell by my accent. So I'm going to try to breeze through this pretty quickly and give you some good information along the way. We first look at the federal regulation and the oversight policies and legislation for airports, and most of that comes from the FAA. We look at the rising operating costs that airports are seeing across the country, and then we look at the cost recovery. How well is Stillwater recovering the cost to operate the airport? And we do that by looking at cost center allocations. And that way, it applies those costs to the areas that the users are using those services so that they're applied to that category. Real quickly, the FAA pretty much mandates everything that airports can do. Once you accept a federal dollar, airports are required and have to sign on to a use the rights and charges portion of the grant assurances. Grant Assurance 24 is the one that applies most of the rental fee structures to airports. And a lot of that has to do with trying to make airports as self-sustainable as possible. We all know that airports the size of Stillwater have a very hard time in doing that. So don't feel bad that you don't meet those sustainability requirements. The airport just requires that you make every effort to ensure that you're trying your best to be self-sustainable. And you look at the balance of that with the market competitiveness. There is a limit to what you can charge users for the airport. So all of that is a balance so that you get reasonable and fair rates and charges. This is just a quick example of Stillwater's history from 23 up until 26 to show that we all know costs have gone up over the last five years. Rates and charges, it's very hard to keep your revenues up to the level that the operating costs are rising. So this is just an example. The orange are the expenses and the blue are the revenues. And this gives you an idea of how we're trying to balance that through these rates and charges recommendations. This is a real busy slide, but it basically just says that we look at the market demand, we look at your costs, we look at the social environmental impacts, and then the regulatory compliance to make sure that all of those line up for the best opportunities. For airports the size of Stillwater, we look at primarily these five cost centers. We look at the airfield, which is your landing fees, your terminal determines the rent per square foot, which you've got the new terminal coming on board, which is very exciting. You look at land side, which doesn't sound like hangar rents, but that's part of what's generally included in the land side opportunities. And then we look at parking and then administrative, which is your indirect overhead costs that are applied. Okay, next we're just going to take a quick look at what our recommendations were for fiscal year 2027. This gives you a quick look at the airfield. If we took the operating expenses today plus the capital expenditures and then applied the maximum gross landed weight of what is landing at Stillwater, your landing fee would be $29.52 per 1,000 pounds. And that is not feasible by any means. So what we want to do with that is to show some increases over time, nothing drastic to begin with, but start trying to move the needle While Kelly and her group do a great job of trying to contain those costs, we all know that those are increasing. And so the revenues need to increase in some form over time to at least minimize the gap. And the gap doesn't get bigger between what you're recovering and what you need to. So signatory rates, we're recommending 95 cents to $1.50. Non-signatory would be a 25% premium. And then no fees for landing of 5,000 pounds aircraft and less. This is well within the market study of what we have done. I know that you all have both this presentation and then also the actual study. The study has the full market study in the back of it, so you can look at all the airports that we compared. For the tie-downs, we recommended an increase to $15 for overnight and $150 per month. These were also within the market. For the terminal, the net terminal rate would be $213.07 if you recovered all of the expenses and capital for the terminal divided by just the rentable square footage. And it's pretty common, especially in a new terminal, to be upside down like that. But what you want to do is to create a rate that is marketable to the airline. and to the other tenants of the terminal. You've got your rental cars. And then we're recommending that that rate be $25 per square foot for all the rentable space. And then one of the new rates that we've started to see at some of these size airports is an employment fee. And we're recommending a 75 cent per in-plane passenger fee. And this will be applied to all the passengers. And it covers the public areas and the areas that aren't rentable. but that the passengers are using. So it gives you a little bit of additional revenue for some of those costs of maintaining those public areas. Vehicle parking. One of the things that airports have been reluctant to implement are parking fees. It can be controversial, but there are things that you need to do to try to maintain a handle on your cost against your revenues. And Because it is a use, and people do use the parking lots, it's been a common practice on these size airports to charge a fee for overnight parking. And so those, we're recommending a $5 per day fee, and it only applies to the close-in parking lots of parking lot one and two. And then the more remote lots, three and four, would still give the public an option for free parking in those locations. Hangar fees. This includes the T-hangers, which we're recommending $300 a month for the smaller size, $325 for the larger size, and then the port-a-ports, a $200 a month fee. The hangar fees tend to be a little bit low in all airports, even those we looked at the market, because it is... sensitive area for for those hangers but when you look at the fact that those rents have not been raised in over five years maybe close to double that of any significance and that they're really under market value you know some of the things that we looked at along that line was that you know you could spend more renting a storage facility downtown for a boat or all of your belongings than what it costs to use an airport T-hanger. And there are a lot more costs associated with the airfield and the airport than what a storage facility has downtown. And While that's a different market, it still shows you that tea hangers are still well within their market range based on this recommended rate. We also recommend on all of these fees that you do either an annual or biannual increase, at least periodically. That's one of the things that the FAA really looks at, especially when you're not self-sustainable, is are you working towards that? And if you don't make those small increases along the way, then the gap just will continue to get bigger. And so we encourage you to consider that as you move along through the next few years. These are fees that are new to the industry in some ways, especially for smaller commercial service airports. And we've got several of these included in our actual study. At this time, they're not recommended to be implemented by the airport management or the advisory board, but they are things that can offset some of those administrative costs when you charge a fee for a permit and those are becoming very common among airports because there is a fee to someone in administrative duty to perform those tasks and also for permits for various functions. The other fees are Wait fee list. If you've got a wait list for hangers, sometimes we find at airports that those are not necessarily as long as you think they are. If you charge a small fee each year to keep someone on the list, then you kind of have a better idea of who actually is serious about wanting that hanger. And that helps you determine what your market is for any development in the future to sustain and support that wait list. based aircraft fees were $100 a year. I mean all of these are fairly minimal, but they add to the bottom line and they help support sustainability. And this is just a summary of all of those sources of revenue, what the current rate is, what the calculated rate is, and then looking at what the market average is for airports in your region and then what we're proposing for the 2027 year and then what that actual increase is to give you a quick summary. Not all of those are, I think, proposed in your rights and charges that you're going to approve, but they're there for future use. And to close, I'll just say that all of these changes in the small incremental fees that have been added and increased It's reduced the, I think the proposed 2026 budget was a little $2.5 million deficit for the operating expenses. But implementing most of these fees will get you down to closer to just a little over a million. So it's making a small dig in that deficit that if you continue to use this study as you go forward, then hopefully you'll begin to bridge the gap. And we all know that money's, tight in every budget but we've had a in the airport world we've had an abundance of capital dollars through the bills act the infrastructure bill that passed after COVID and those monies are starting to dry up so you're going to be pushing harder and getting the federal dollars for your airport and i think the more you can show self sustainability and your ability to provide those matching funds the more opportunity you'll have to to take advantage of some of those dollars and in closing i just want to say a big thank you to the airport staff to kelly reed and her group and to Christy Cluck for their participation in the study. We sometimes struggle at airports and cities to get information and to have them participate in the process and they were very helpful and very active in that process and I appreciate that very much from our standpoint and it was a pleasure to work with you and we thank you for that. That's all I have unless you have any questions and

Councilor's questions?

If you think of them later, Kelly's got my email. I'm happy to have a conversation with you, but I appreciate the time.

We can usually come up with a few questions.

Well, we're happy to answer those.

We appreciate you being here and appreciate the work that you've done on this. Councilor's questions at this point?

Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. I do have one while you're here.

Okay.

When you're looking at, you were talking about sort of the projections for what income will look like with new fees imposed. Does that account for potentially, because frankly I've heard from folks who have said these fee increases are too much, I'm not going to be able to use the airport as much or I might have to look for another place. Does that account for a drop in demand due to increased fees?

Not perhaps directly but indirectly and that's why we do the market study and we look at competitive and comparative. Comparative is looking at airports that are most similar to yours in operations. Competitive looks at your neighbors and those that are within the competitive distance where someone might take their aircraft elsewhere. And that's why we tried to keep those rates within that competitive ballpark. Although some airports, most airports, there was a study that our firm did for the state of Oklahoma. And it was a market rent study for the entire state of airports. And that study, which was separate from this study, showed that most of the especially tea hanger rates and those types are all under market of what they should be. But no, it's like anything else. Nobody wants to be the first to bump it up and take the criticism. But at some point, you know, I think you have to look at what your costs are and Part of the cost centers that we develop helps determine those costs because it applies only to those users. The terminal cost, everybody's looking at the new terminal, those costs are not in the airfield. So anybody flying or operating a T-hanger, you're not paying for anything related to the airline. It's all kept very separate in cost centers, and you can still see where the needs are. So I would say yes, they are in consideration, but there's no way to predict behavior. But we think that because they are within the market that there shouldn't be a major shift.

And I believe, yeah, it's that point. I think we have, what, 37 people on a wait list for the T-hangers.

I think there's more than that by now, from what I've heard.

They're not paying to be on the wait list, so we don't know if that's real or not.

That's another benefit, too. You don't want to lose tenants. You absolutely do not. But at some point, you have to pay for the services that you use. And we all do in every other face of life. So the airport's no different.

Appreciate that. Just one other minor thing. In the table of competitive airports, it says Cushing Municipal, but it says location Durant.

Yes.

Is that just a typo, or is this airport in Durant called Cushing? No. Which one was it? Cushing? Not the Durant airport?

I thought we fixed that.

But we looked at Cushing or Durant. Yes. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. Is that it?

Anything to add?

We're grateful for KSA's support in this process and helping us truly look at the cost to operate the airport and break those down into fair cost centers. We have a model after this rates and charges study that we can continue to look at when we get more development on the airport and that brings in more revenue. It helps us look at the costs overall and balance that in the future. So if we get a lot of new T-Hanger development or we get a new broad revenue source, that helps us look at rates in the future and look at where we can adjust and lower in the future. So it helps us manage our finances a little bit better moving forward. And I did want to mention at the second public open house we did have public comment or comment from our tenants. We received some comments as well and the airport has responded to those and provided education and understanding of questions and concerns tenants had.

So I got a question maybe for you Kelly or for Brady. Where do we go with this? So we've got a study, where do we go with it?

The next item on the agenda is a resolution that we'll be looking at to adopt these fees if the council so chooses.

Kelly, the rate study talks about paid parking. Can you talk a little bit about what the recommendation is on paper?

I can. We came to council several months ago with the idea to bring in revenue parking at the airport. We've been working with Park Mobile to look at bringing in that opportunity. We still have a little bit of legwork on our end to look at staffing for enforcement of parking, but our goal is to move forward with revenue parking in lot one and lot two. That'll be the newly redeveloped parking lot that's right across the street from the new terminal and our smaller existing terminal parking lot. after the terminal moves on August 12th is our soft opening date to the new terminal our grand opening is August 19th we are hopeful to bring in that revenue parking early next year and then as we mentioned previously lots three and four our existing gravel lot and then our newest lot that's funded through grant funding with the FAA that will be free parking as well for the useful light of life of the lot

And one thing I think we mentioned at the previous time we talked about this at City Council was the support that we have heard for creating revenue so that we can do maybe possibly covered parking and premium parking options that customers have been asking for at the airport. Yep.

That's, yeah, just wanted to make sure we... I know we talked about that before, but still plenty of free parking. There is. Two-thirds will remain. Including paved free parking.

Two-thirds will remain free. Over two-thirds. One lot is gravel. One will be paved. That lot is scheduled to be completed in December of this year.

Thank you. All right. That takes us to... Item 8, resolutions. Item 8A is resolution CC-2026-19, a resolution amending the city of Stillwater book of fees by establishing fees for mobile food establishments and adopting a Stillwater Regional Airport fiscal year 2027 rates and charges schedule. Anything you'd like to add to that?

That's exactly what it does. The only thing I'll add just from kind of like an administrative perspective is moving forward with the book of fees, because we have one book of fees each time that we approve changes to it, it'll be a sister resolution on SUA. So although the only thing changing tonight is adding those mobile food establishment fees as well as adopting the new airport rates and charges schedule, it is also on the other agenda.

Councilors, questions or comments or action on the resolution? I move adoption of Resolution CC-2026-19. Second. We have a motion and a second to adopt the resolution.

Please vote. The resolution is adopted with a vote of 4-0. Item B is Resolution CC-2026-20, a resolution authorizing the City of Stillwater to accept local funding from the 2025 State Homeland Security Program in the amount of $1,311,613 to designate and to designate the state of Oklahoma, specifically the Oklahoma Office of Homeland Security, as the agent for the local share of grant funding for the purpose of funding planning and operational oversight costs of the Oklahoma Counterterrorism Intelligence Center and soft targets and crowded places funding for the purpose of enhancing security measures and GIS system maintenance and enhancements, and authorizing the mayor or vice mayor to execute the memorandum of understanding.

So this is an annual approval to assign the city's local share of state Homeland Security Program funds to the state of Oklahoma for funding support for the Oklahoma Counterterrorism Intelligence Center. The funding supports the State Fusion Center Program as well as Soft Targets and Crowded Places Program. Assigning the local share to funding support for statewide homeland security capabilities allows pooling of resources for Oklahoma to sustain specialized programs and services that are difficult and cost prohibitive for many individual jurisdictions to develop and maintain independently. So approval of this resolution would accept and assign our local share in the amount of $1,311,613 to the state of Oklahoma for those purposes. Rob Hill is here to answer any questions you may have.

Do you have a second, Rob? I just would love to hear a little bit about how the city uses the state programs that this money funds.

So every time we call the Fusion Center and ask them for background history on any type of potential terrorism, every time we have a special event and we reach out to them and ask them, hey, what particular players do we have that we need to be watching out for? What types of threats, whether they're local or national or international? could be potential issues for us at our special events. So every, just think of it this way, every time we have a special event in town, no matter how big or how small, when they're contacted, they provide us this service. And basically what we're doing is we're taking our funding instead of us doing it here locally, And putting all that time and effort and energy into it, we provide this money to the state. They do it on our behalf. But also, we are the beneficiary, but also is the rest of the state of Oklahoma. And this is a very recognized practice for all communities in the state to do this.

So things, football games, homecoming, those big events we have in town. Absolutely.

Block 34 events. Those types of events.

I appreciate that.

You bet. Counselors, further questions, comments, or action on the resolution?

Motion to adopt resolution number CC-2026-20.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote. With a vote of 4-0, a resolution is adopted. Item C is resolution CC-2026-21, a resolution of the Stillwater City Council approving submission of an application for fiscal year 2026 airport infrastructure grant funds administered by the Federal Aviation Administration for airport infrastructure improvements at Stillwater Regional Airport, approving associated budget amendment for the required sponsor match and authorizing the mayor or vice mayor to execute the grant documents.

This is a resolution approving submission of grant application for FAA fiscal year 2026 airport infrastructure grant funds. The eligible project is funding to support the design and rehab of runway 1735 and taxiway A. Estimated total project cost is $175,502. Cost share is FAA grant funds in the amount of $166,726 and local match of 5% in the amount of $8,776. $776. Sorry, I thought I read that wrong. Approval of the resolution would authorize submission of the grant application, approve the associated budget amendment for the sponsor match, and authorize the mayor or vice mayor to sign related documents.

Councilors? I move adoption of resolution CC-2026-21.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please vote. With a vote of 4-0, that resolution is adopted. Item D, resolution number CC-2026-22, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Stillwater to retain McAfee and Taft as its council to pursue claims related to fire truck manufacturers and other possible defendants for any trust violations and other claims and to authorize the mayor or city manager to execute any documents in connection with future litigation or settlements.

So this resolution would approve retaining the law firm of McAfee and Taft to represent the city of Stillwater to pursue claims related to fire truck manufacturers and other possible defendants for antitrust violations. The litigation has taken shape much like the PFAS and opioids. The fire truck antitrust litigation generally involves claims that fire truck manufacturers and other companies engaged in unlawful market consolidation and price fixing that resulted in inflated prices with the price of a pumper truck or ladder truck doubling over the last decade. The city of Stillwater has purchased five fire trucks during the eligible period and therefore can participate in these claims. Approval of the resolution would just retain representation of McAfee and Taft to represent the city. Any settlements or other actions would require further approval by the city council.

Counselors, questions, comments, or action on the resolution?

Motion to adopt resolution number CC-2026-22. Second.

So motion to second. Please vote. Resolutions adopted with a vote of four to zero. Item E is resolution number CC-2026-23, a resolution authorizing the assignment of the Stillwater Regional Airport T-Hanger number one lease agreement between the City of Stillwater and Stillwater Flight Center Inc. to Stillwater Flight Center LLC, providing lessee consent to collateral assignment and leasehold mortgage as required by the terms of the lease agreement and authorizing the city manager to sign related documents necessary for such purpose.

So the next four resolutions are all related, so I'll introduce them together and then request action on each one of them. Airport staff is here if there are additional questions, as well as I believe a representative from the company. So these resolutions, if approved, would provide the required consent for a proposed change in the controlling ownership of Stillwater Flight Center at Stillwater Regional Airport. WW Aviation LLC is acquiring 100% ownership. of Stillwater Flight Center, which operates the FBO at the airport. There are currently four lease agreements that would be impacted by this change of ownership. Each of those agreements contains a provision that requires prior written consent of the airport before assignment of the leases and additionally for any mortgage of the leasehold improvements. So in connection with WW Aviation's acquisition of Stillwater Flight Center, it will concurrently or immediately after closing assign each of those leases to Stillwater Flight Center LLC, which will be the entity that assumes all of the rights and obligations of the lease agreements. The four leases include, and I'm going to go on the order they're in the agenda, a ground lease, excuse me, a T-Hanger number one lease agreement. It's for the lease of T-Hanger one for the purpose of maintaining offices and or storage for fueling and aircraft servicing operations. A ground lease agreement dated July 9, 2007 for the purpose of storing, maintaining, building, rebuilding, restoring, and servicing aircraft as well as hangar storage for transient aircraft activity. A building lease agreement dated July 6, 2020 for the lease of hangar number two for the purpose of maintaining offices and or storage for its fueling and aircraft servicing operations. A terminal building lease and land lease agreement dated April 2, 2018 for a certain leased area in the Stillwater Regional Airport old terminal building in adjacent areas for the purpose of maintaining retail sales facilities, offices, and our storage for fueling and aircraft servicing operations and an additional 528 square feet for the use of a pilot lounge. So approval of each resolution would consent to the assignment of that particular lease agreement to Stillwater Flight Center, LLC. It would consent to collateral assignment of the lease to Interbank and further filing of a leasehold mortgage and authorizing the city manager to sign related documents, including any addendums that would be necessary and appropriate for those purposes. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions, and airport staff is here if you have additional questions.

Thank you. Councillors, any questions? There's a lot in all of this from a legal and sort of lease standpoint, business standpoint. In reviewing all of this stuff, I'm excited about the business that's being expanded out at the airport and excited to see some investment happening with airport business through this acquisition. So I'm excited to see it. Action on resolution 26-23, which is the assignment related to T-hanger number one.

I move adoption of resolution CC 2026-23. Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote.

With a vote of 4 to 0, that resolution is adopted. Item F is resolution CC-2026-24, which is authorizing the assignment of the Stillwater Regional Airport ground lease. Councillors?

Motion to adopt resolution number CC-2026-24.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please vote. That resolution is adopted 4-0. Resolution CC-2026-25 is a resolution authorizing the assignment of SILTA Regional Airport Building Lease Agreement. Councilors?

I move adoption of resolution CC-2026-25.

And I'll second again.

Motion and a second. Please vote. That resolution is adopted with a vote of 4-0.

And we have resolution CC-2026-26, a resolution authorizing the assignment of the Stillwater Regional Airport terminal building and land lease agreement.

Motion to adopt resolution number CC-2026-26. Second.

We have a motion and a second. Please vote. That resolution is also adopted with a vote of 4-0. Item 9 is ordinances. On first read, we have ordinance 3617, an ordinance rezoning attractive land located at 524 West 10th Avenue from two family and multifamily to small lot single family. This is from earlier this evening.

Motion to advance ordinance number 3617 to second read.

Second. We have a motion and a second to advance the ordinance. Please vote. With a vote of four to zero, ordinance 3617 is advanced to second reading. Also on first reading, we have ordinance 3618, an ordinance rezoning attractive land located at 799 East Mercury Avenue from commercial shopping and neighborhood transition zone to two-family residential. Councilors?

I move to advance ordinance 3618 to second reading.

Second.

For a motion and a second, please vote. With a vote of four to zero, ordinance 3618 is moved to second reading. Also in first reading, Ordinance 3619, an ordinance annexing into the City of Stillwater territory generally located one quarter mile south of 19th Avenue and one quarter mile east of Range Road that contains approximately 33.64 acres upon petition, pursuant to Title 11 of Oklahoma Statute, Section 21-105, designated land use zoning district classification for properties located within the territory annexed by this ordinance, providing that effective date of the annexation shall be September 17, 2026, and providing perseverability. Councilors?

Motion to advance ordinance number 3619 to second read.

Second. With a motion and a second, please vote. With a vote of four to zero, ordinance 3619 is advanced to second reading. Item 10 is appointments. We have a couple of seats that are up for appointment on the Planning Commission. Both of the folks in those seats are willing to continue serving, and I think they've done a great job on the Planning Commission so far. So I'll move that we reappoint Jana Phillips and Riley Williams to terms on the Planning Commissions, both of which would expire July of 2029. Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote. With a vote of four to zero, Jana Phillips and Riley Williams are both reappointed to the Stillwater Planning Commission. We thank them both very much for their service. And if you're interested in serving on any of our boards or commissions, please go to the website and see what's available. That takes us to reports from the board. Ms. Carnley?

Request for an executive session pursuant to 25 OS section 307B1 for the purpose of discussing employment, hiring appointment, promotion, demotion, disciplining, or resignation of City Manager Brady Moore, City Attorney Kimberly Carnley, and Municipal Judge Tonya Rahn.

Thank you. Mr. Moore.

Yes, just a reminder. Did you know that city services are available 24 hours a day on stillwaterok.gov? Whether you need to start utility service, pay a bill or ticket, check your waste collection schedule, apply for a job, report a power outage, view these public meetings, and... And so much more. You can see events at Block 34 that are upcoming, and you can follow progress on so many of our city projects. So our website is that kind of one stop for a lot of that information. I will add that today I had to go for the first time and apply for new service from another community, which was different for my college student that is not attending school here in Stillwater. And it was a little bit of a chore, and so I'm proud of the services, the online services that we provide here at the City of Stillwater. So I encourage you to bookmark StillwaterOK.gov and take advantage of all the information and convenient services that are there.

Excellent. Thanks so much. Vice Mayor.

It is hot outside. With temperatures and indexes soaring into the triple digits, we encourage residents to stay cool and take advantage of our splash pads at Boomer Lake Park and Southern Woods Park. Both splash pads are free, open daily from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m., and only close during inclement weather or for maintenance. Beat the heat, have fun, and stay safe this summer. We'll definitely need that this week.

Yes, for sure. Councilor Clark. As already mentioned, save the date and join us on Wednesday, August 19 at 10 a.m. as we celebrate the grand opening of the new Stillwater Regional Airport Terminal. Come experience the new terminal, explore its modern amenities, and help us celebrate this exciting investment in Stillwater's future. For event updates and airport news, be sure to follow Stillwater Regional Airport on Facebook, Instagram, and X.

Thank you, sir. I, um... I feel like the opening of the terminal is not gonna be a big enough deal just because I don't know if it can be a big enough deal. Just because it's so, so huge and such a longstanding need in our community. I'm really, really excited about that. Please come out and join us on the 19th to celebrate. Councilor Hardin.

Yes, back to school season just around the corner. Meridian Technology welcomed students back on August 11th, Stillwater Public Schools on August 13th, and OSU and NOC. In Stillwater, start the fall semester on August 17. As students, parents, and educators prepare for a new school year, we encourage everyone to plan ahead and stay alert for increased pedestrian and vehicle traffic. No kidding, there'll be more traffic. Here's to a safe and successful new year.

Thanks, sir. I took my newly permitted driver through the new parking lots at the new Stillwater High School this weekend. And it's good. She did great. That building is amazing. That school facility is really cool. But certainly a lot of traffic pattern changes around the high school and in that area. So be paying attention when school starts. I will offer my congratulations, all of our congratulations really, to our outstanding finance department on receiving the highest recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting for the 44th consecutive year. Presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada, this prestigious award recognizes excellence in government accounting and financial reporting. This achievement reflects the city's longstanding commitment to transparency, accountability, and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars. Under the leadership of Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer, Christy Kluck, and Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Jared Thulin, our finance department continues a remarkable tradition of excellence and exceptional service to our community. Thank you all so much for the amazing work. I've gotten to read this announcement, I think, every year for the last, gosh, eight years now. So keep it up. We've got a couple more, and then somebody else can deal with it.

You know, I serve as the city council representative on the audit committee, and the auditors during the last year mentioned that we are blessed to have two CPAs on staff. That's not common for a city our size. So thanks to both of you.

I mean, really, 44 years is a pretty amazing and consistent time. you know, work that, that our fantasy does. And I think that again, probably is not enough recognition out there to, you know, to, to understand that. So thank you all. All right. At this time, I'll move that we recess the city council prior to item 13 on the agenda. Second.

We have a motion and a second, please vote.

With a vote of four to zero, the Storage City Council will now be in recess. And while we are, I will call to order the Storage Utilities Authority meeting for July 20th, 2026. Trustees, questions, comments, or action on the consent docket?

I move approval of the consent docket.

Second.

Motion and a second. To approve the consent, please vote.

With a vote of four to zero, the SUA consent docket is approved. Item five is resolution SUA-2026-4, a resolution amending the city of Stillwater book of fees by establishing fees for movable food establishments and adopting the Stillwater Regional Airport fiscal year 2027 rates and charges schedule as previously explained by the city attorney. Trustees, action on the resolution.

Motion to adopt resolution SUA-2026-4.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote. With a vote of 4-0, that resolution is adopted. We have nothing else on the agenda. Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. We have a motion and a second to adjourn. SUA, please vote. With a vote of 4-0, the store utilities authority meeting is now adjourned. At this time, I will reconvene the store city council. Prior to item 13 on the agenda, is there a motion to enter executive session for the reasons requested by the city attorney?

Motion to enter executive session.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Please vote.

With a vote of four to zero, the Stoder City Council will now be in executive session.

Is there a motion to reconvene in regular session? Second. We have a motion and a second. Please call the roll.

Mayor Joyce?

Yes.

Vice Mayor Jalowski? Yes. Hawkins? Oh, sorry. Councillor Clark? Yes. Councillor Hardin? Yes.

We'll go to 4-0. We'll be back in regular session. There's no recommendation of any action from executive session. Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved.

Second.

We have a motion and a second to adjourn. Please call the roll.

Mayor Joyce? Yes. Vice Mayor Jalowski? Yes. Councilor Clark? Yes. Councilor Hardin? Yes. 4-0.