Council - Regular Meeting

I'm going this way. I'll go this way. How are you today? Why would you do that?

Momento, mayor. Good to see you. learning. Oh, cool.

That's Mike. Ready? Mike, stand up. Stand up. Mike, stand up. Say hi to Rita. Say hi, Rita. Hello, Councilwoman. Hi, Mr. Sullivan. Go ahead. Public hearing with discussion, consideration, and possible action to approve a resolution declaring the structures located at 10,324 St. Patrick Drive, a dilapidated building buildings as defined in Midwest City Ordinance Section 9-3 and aaitment accordingly to the municipal code at setting date to demolish and remove the structure structures from the site. Mr. Stro,

thank you, sir. As you guys see from the pictures attached, the property is in very bad shape. Um, we did send new notice to the owners and um, well, let me back up. They've had a few different notices. They did make contact with us in May that they were going to demo it themselves. Um, nothing had been done. So, we started the process to put it in front of you. They did make a call to our permitting department to obtain a demo permit um July 9th, but that is as far as it's gone as the phone call. There is no permit pulled. So, I I could guess that they may proceed like last month did and get it before the 30-day timeline, but I am asking you to sign the resolution like you did. And so for an update for you, um, out of the three I brought you last time, the one did get a remodel permit, the one that was going to move his children in, the one that, um, said he would do the work himself had to get a refresher threat from our chief building official showed up and got the permit the next day. And then the other one, we have a contract down to get it down. So,

it's public hearing. Hold on, hold on. This is a public hearing. Does anyone have anything to bring before council concerning this item hearing or seeing none? Go ahead, Miss Maxwell. to approve. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor indicate saying I.

Opposed? Extension. Motion carries. Item number 11, Mr. Sullivan. Public hearing with discussion, consideration, and possible action to approve resolution declaring the structure structures located at 9603 Southeast 4th Street a dilapidated building buildings as defined in Midwesty Ordinance Section 9-3 and abatement accordingly to the municipal code and setting dates to demolish and remove the structure structures from the site. Uh, Mr. Stro, sorry.

That's right. this property. We've had no contact with us at all. Um taxes are overdue and they owe the city taxes for weed leans. Um we anticipate us doing the demo on this one 100% if you'll sign the resolution. I have a question I'm just going to throw in there and I had brought this up to the city attorney before, but on some of these properties before they get demolished, is it possible to allow for the removal of useful items from the home, i.e. doors, cabinets, anything like that? No, ma'am. Not by us. We don't own the property. The demo company that gets the bid does have that a right to remove whatever, but we usually deal with that. They just I just I see it go away in the

past practices when we did the large apartment complex on 29th Street for the shopping center. That demo contractor did and offered people to come in and buy windows. I've managed a lot of demo contracts working for the city and I will tell you with most certainty that demolition contractors bid on those demolitions based on what can be salvaged and what they work directly with folks that reclaim a lot of that stuff and they let them come in first and remove it. And that's exactly what I was looking for, Mr. just a little because the one that was removed um fairly recently just to uh the west and on the south side of 15th west of Key that house was taken down and you know huge chunks of that were going out in the uh the demo dumped

uh trailers type of thing behind the mice and I was just thinking to myself I'm like you know seems a shame that they don't have the opportunity to salvage things that could be used for example you know um so I I appreciate that fact I just it was just a question I'm sorry but no We get asked a lot belonging us to allow them and I can't give them permission to trespass onto the property and take stuff off somebody. When we were removing homes in the original mile as that being what it was, we actually had to have PD intervene in some situations where people were unauthorized to remove things that the demo contractor should have been reclaiming value and repurposing and uh they had to get involved. So, sorry.

This is a public hearing. Does anyone have anything to bring forward council concerning this item? Hearing or seeing none, the chair to entertain a motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. I have a motion in a second. Any further discussion? All in favor indicate by saying I. Opposed. Extension. Motion carries. Item number 12. Thank you, Mr. Sullivan. Discussion, consideration, and possible action of approving an ordinance amending the Midwest City Municipal Code. Chapter 15, Fire Protection and Prevention, Article 2, in general, division one, generally section 15-22, location of fire hydrants and providing for repealer in severability. Mr. Streets,

honorable mayor, council, von Sullivan, this the acting city manager. I wanted to make sure to stand in. Doug couldn't be here this evening. So I kind of wanted to talk through some of the important changes that are part of this because it isn't just for fire. It actually affects public works engineering planning. Currently folks are allowed to develop parcels and leave deadend mains which often create some challenges not only for pressure and volume but also some issues with water quality from the from the public work side of things. This ordinance is going to help close some of those gaps and what will ensure not only the what's most important pressure and volume to fight fires but also address some water quality issues for public works. I think the memo is pretty self-explanatory. Would you have any questions? Be happy to help answer them. Move to approve.

Second. I have a motion and I have a second. Any further discussion? All in favor indicate saying I. Opposed? Extension. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Item number 13, Mr. Sullivan. Discussion, consideration, and possible action of approving an ordinance amending the Midwest City Municipal Code. Chapter 2, Administration Article 2, City Council, Section 2-11, Time of Regular meetings of council and providing for repealer and severability. Mr. Msh,

members of the city council, good evening. Uh what this ordinance change would do would be to take the months of January and May and remove the two meetings we have currently scheduled in the ordinance and move it back to one which would be the fourth Thursday of the month. Um it would we would retain two meetings uh in the month of June for budget. This does not remove in any way, shape or form the ability to schedule special meetings which is available to the the council uh pursuant to the open meetings act. But this does this does now uh take back and uh would just move us back to one meeting per month uh in all those months. Uh this was taken before the ordinance review committee that did recommend approval. I'm happy to answer any questions

before we get off of this deal. I know it's not actually covered in what we're fixing to discuss, but Mr. Mayor and Mr. Acting City Manager, would it be and Mr. City Turn would be outside the scope to make sure everybody knows that there's a date change in November? because we can't talk about if we can't talk about it. Currently in the ordinance right now that this is modifying November and December are not the fourth Tuesday of every month. It's the second Tuesday of every month.

That's why I'm bringing it up. Just so if we can't talk about it, I won't bring up the fact that we're going to have to move the one meeting in November to Wednesday. That will be that is one of those where we would end up having to cancel the meeting and schedule a special meeting because it fall it if that's the will of the city council to do that due to Veterans Day. We cannot discuss it any further than that at this time. I'm really glad that Pat didn't bring that up. Um move to approve a second. I have a motion and I have a second. All in favor saying I oppose. Extension motion carries. Next item number 14. Number 14. Miss City Clerk. Okay. Yes. Make sure I'm still on the right track here. I did that on purpose.

I noticed discussion, consideration, and possible action on an ordinance amending Midwest City Code. Chapter 9, buildings and building regulations. Article 9, tornado shelters, section 9-596. Definitions, section 9-597. Permits required section 9-598. Approval of plans specifications section 9-599 permit issuance fee section 9-600 standards and specifications and section 9601 violations and providing for repealer inseparability Mr. Summers. That was a mouthful. Such a roll.

9-601. Is that correct? Thank you. Sorry about that. Such a roll. That's a That's a mouthful. Thank you. Uh this this amend this proposes to amend our tornado shelter regulations uh to bring them into comp to align them, I should say, uh with what's in ICC. Um our current standards were written in the 70s. uh they're outdated uh as far as current building code and they don't acknowledge at all that any shelter might be built above ground. Um it also makes a very small uh change in the application fee uh for tornado shelters. Mr. Summers, do you feel like the cost is reasonable, the new cost, the proposed cost? Yeah, it I mean it does not take that much staff time to review tornado shelters. Uh so it would be adequate to Thank you. Can I ask a question?

Yes. Um this is such a public safety issue here in Oklahoma. Um, and just tell me generally, do we do any oversight to make sure like the shelters that are put in are actually valid or would you so that this process would actually all the the plans are all stamped by a licensed engineer. Okay. Um, so that's sort of our assurance is that that licensed engineer has reviewed those plans and and is stamped. So, would it be fair to say that residents who opt to put one in in the city of Midwest City have a better chance of not being scammed by somebody's who's basically selling him a shelter? I'm trying to learn for my own sake.

It's hard it's hard I guess it's hard to say. Um, you know, I mean, the the plans for the shelter might be, you know, very adequate. I've been stamped engineer. I mean, there's always, you know, some something, you know, somebody might sell them for an extreme markup or, you know, maybe there's an issue with installation. I don't want to promise you that, okay? you know, they're necessarily more likely than another city that's also reviewing them to the same standard. Okay. Well, I I thank you for whatever and you guys are doing to make sure our residents are getting a better deal. I just know past post one of the tornadoes, there were so many people who were getting scanned by these out of state companies who were promising them, you know, safe shelters that ended up getting flooded and all sorts of things. So, thank you. Move to approve. Second.

I have a motion and a second further discussion. All in favor indication saying I opposed. Extension. Motion carries. Number 15, Mr. Zeldman. Thank you, Mayor. Discussion, consideration, and possible action on an ordinance amending Midwest City Code Chapter 9, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article One in General Section 9-5, Incorporation by reference 9-16 reserve and providing for repealer and severability. Mr. Summers,

thank you. Uh, this also, uh, touches on chapter 9. Um it incor it would incorporate the 2018 IPMC uh by reference into chapter 9. It's already incorporated into chapter 20. And really what this would do chapter 20 is the the the housing code chapter uh in our regulations uh whereas chapter 9 is the building code. And we we just wanted to make sure that folks didn't have the misconception that just because the IPMC is in the housing chapter that we would still apply to commercial industrial properties etc. Any questions? Move to approve. Second. I had a motion and a second. All in favor saying I. I. Opposed? Extension. Motion carries. Number 16. Thank you, mayor.

Discussion, consideration, and possible action of approving an ordinance amending the Midwest City Municipal Code. Chapter 10, Child Care Centers and Adult Daycare Centers. Article 1, in general, section 10-3, definitions. Article 3, standards and requirements. Section 10-36 compliance with code and 10-39 minimum standards providing for repealer and severability and effective date. Mr. Mish,

good evening again. This uh these changes in city ordinance are brought uh before the city council uh as a required set of changes as required by changes in state law concerning uh large family child care homes and family child care homes. Those two terms are defined and we've added those definitions within our city ordinance. Uh family child care homes would be seven or fewer children. Large family child care homes would be 8 through uh 12 children. What the state statute basically said is they must comply with international code and no additional requirements are necessary. So we modified our ordinance to come into effect with that so that uh we make sure that all international codes apply to these facilities moving forward. Since that bill goes into effect on November 1st, we make the effective date for this ordinance and these amendments if approved to go into effect November 1st of 2025. This does not affect zoning in any way of where either uh family childcare homes or large family childare child care homes could be located. Though all those zoning requirements are still in effect. Uh and with that, I would be happy to take any questions. educate me please. This what I understood and maybe wrong um that there's almost like a sense of deregulation going on or is the international code more more strict or

it's not more strict in some ways it is a bit of deregulation what it it's more making the the requirements uniform across the board across the state in other words saying everybody must meet the international code requirements. Now, some of these international code requirements can be very stringent and uh if uh our state our city fire marshall were here, he could go into what many of those are. Fire chief building official were here, he could go into what many of those are because those are what apply and those are the two groups that handle and oversee those on on behalf of the city whether they're international building codes, international fire codes and all and the applicable codes that would apply in these situations. Some of them can be quite stringent as I said but what it does is it creates uniformity across uh all jurisdictions and it will keep at least for these two items keep municipalities or any uh local governmental entity from opposing something unique on them. Uh that is maybe not covered by the international codes

but it would be a misinterpretation to think that there's going to be less safety requirements. That that would be a misinterpretation. Yes. Thank you. Move to approve. Second motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor indicate saying I opposed. Extension. Motion carries. Number 17. Mr. Mr. I did it.

Mr. Sullivan. It's okay. Discussion, consideration, and possible action on an ordinance amending Midwest City Code, chapter 23, manufactured homes, trailers, manufactured home parks, etc. Article one in general sections 23-1 through 23-22. Article 2 licenses and permits sections 23-23 through 23-42. Article 3 manufactured homes and trailer regulations section 23-43 through 23-73. Article four, manufactured homes and travel trailer park. Section 23-74 through 23-191. Article 5, manufactured home subdivisions section 23-192 through 23-198 and providing for repealer and severability. Did you get all the dashes in there that time disease?

I think so. I'll call the city attorney again. You weren't even listening and I got them all in there. Someone I was just confir. I asked him. You did tell him he doesn't have to read all this, right? You can just say as written number 202 as Do we need a motion to that or you do such an excellent job. I appreciate that. But I can do without Bonnie. This is Bonnie Walker's bed ridden. I'm just I'm just trying to honor the position of the man who normally holds this seat. Okay. Any discussion? Any questions for Mr. Summers?

I have questions for Mr. Summers because this has been such a contentious issue with some of the um trailer home park owners. Could you just generally and briefly itemize some of the changes we're making through this ordinance?

Yeah. Uh yes, we we certainly can. And I do want to make sure you know that I think we had a a series of departments that have been kind of working with us on this. Uh the city attorney, the city clerk, uh public works, fire, neighborhood services. Uh we've all been meeting regularly for a year, maybe a little over a year at this point, uh to try to bring this this chapter up to date. So, um you know, as you as you probably remember, um ear earlier this year when we had uh our discussions about um a certain mobile home park here in in our community, uh you know, our ordinance was last updated in 1985. Some parts have been a little more recent, you know, little adjustments here and there around the edges, but a lot of the regulations had not been touched since 1985, and we needed to, you know, bring them in the language that's in them um uh up to date. So, some of it does involve, you know, we we did a lot of edits in the definitions. Uh we got rid of the word travel trailer since that's not really a common usage anymore. You know, all those references are now recreational vehicles as we now uh refer to those. Um we also clarified and updated some of the language in there just to reflect how uh state statute defines certain things. Um we we clarified the processes as far as notices of violation, um the timings, how those are are served, things of that nature. Um there's still, you know, annual licenses that are required for mobile home parks. Uh and we did update the fee, you know, as again that fee had not been adjusted since 1985. So we uh looked at what that would be like if we had applied uh inflation to it. And so that fee went from $150 annually for a mo for an entire mobile home park uh to $430. Um and we we added a section that requires that if you're bringing a new mobile home in, you have to get a permit basically to to transport that on city streets. That way if you know there are needs for us to you know ensure that there's um you know adjustments to signals or things like that that we can kind of coordinate those efforts. Um we we require that or would require that um new mobile home or manufactured homes uh

placed in Midwest City be at least uh 5 years uh old or well I should say less than 5 years old. Um now that's not to say that if somebody has one currently that's 10 years old that they have to remove it. that really only applies when somebody's getting a permit to, you know, to set a new one inside city limits. Um, there's also numerous exceptions, including some that reference specific uh property addresses that are exempt from regulations, and we we did check that, you know, those manufactured homes that existed in uh 1985 that were carved out as exceptions are no longer there. We removed those exceptions uh from from the regulations. Um, let's see. We got rid of uh numerous outdated or duplicated regulations. There's some things that are uh that were duplications between the the zoning regulations and and chapter 23 items. We removed some of those. So that's that's a lot of what we did. Uh like I said, we sat down, you know, monthly for I for it was like 90 minutes uh a month uh to kind of go through it line by line as you know various departments making sure that you know if we were removing or changing things that that wasn't going to have adverse impacts for other departments uh and things of that nature. And and I love that because there are so many departments in a city when there's issues at one that have to uh cooperate and collaborate together at any point. And I only asked this because between the Riverside Mobile Group and then the other lady whose name I don't recall right now with the other issue, I found myself to be educated so much. I mean, it's a very unique type of business. I didn't know much about it. I learned a little bit, but there's just so much more to learn. And I know I chatted with Don a lot and they each had their own attorneys and there seemed to be somewhat different interpretations at times of what how they understood the law. Have are we talking to some expert? Is there like a national or a local expert on these homes? Um are we copying maybe what Oklahoma City and other municipalities have or are we like is this some original drafting that we're doing here?

Um I I wouldn't say that it's original drafting so much as we went through I mean the structure of it remains mostly the same. you know, the parts that talk about, you know, licensing or violations still talk about licensing violations. We just went through and updated what was there to to reflect. So, it's not that we borrowed ordinances from another city per se. And there was there anyone from this industry who could be given the credibility of expertise involved in this process whatsoever. Uh we did not consult uh any manufacturing home or park experts. No.

And and listen, I have so much respect for your office code enforcement. I mean this is not your type of industry right however you have more knowledge of it in order to regulate and oversee it right but at the end of the day it's not what you guys do for a living right you know right and run mobile homes you don't know everything there is to know about the business and trade I really wish there was some inclusivity and it doesn't mean that I want a lobbying entity from the mobile homes telling you how to write the policies but that rather that there's some understanding of some of the conflicts that seem to exist between our policies and I don't know practices and their practices Um, so we don't pass this and then like two months from now there's all these angry mobile home owners, you know what I mean, with the new policy. Uh, with that said, like I I thank you. I just feel like I don't understand enough about the industry and there seems to be a lot of updates. I mean I I would say I mean along those lines like you know while this this ordinance doesn't necessarily dictate um how mobile home parks are to operate themselves. I mean you know they're sort and in some ways free to establish their their own business models. What it does establish are you know that they have to get licenses. They have to provide certain contact information uh to us so we know who's the the manager. They have to you know how they connect to our water and sewer systems. things things like that that we that we do know and and and can um apply our you know various departments expertise to.

I'm going to abstain from this vote simply because I just don't know better. Right. Um and I would like to talk to some of those business owners and and therefore I don't want to vote one way or another and then later find out I messed up on something I don't understand. Okay. Thank you just for understanding. Chair to understand a motion. I have I have a I have a thought. I have a thought. So the the what we're approving tonight is for new trailer parks coming in or we're not going to go back and put this on the people that's already

I mean it's it is some of those are like the the licensing is is an annual licensing that they that they renew. Um there's no I would say we're not going to go, you know, next month and require existing parks to, you know, reconstruct or anything of that nature, but sort of the way that our non-conforming clauses typically work, at least in in the zoning regulations, would be if you know a structure was damaged 50% or more, um they would be, you know, any rebuild would have to be in conformance with our regulations. So if if somebody was to redesign their park, you know, due to a a natural disaster or something like that, they would have to rebuild it to to code. To code. Yes.

To code. So So an existing park, trailer park um can be penalized uh using these new standards that we're trying to approve. I mean, I I would say I would say they they probably could in in some cases. So, you know, if they if if they tried to bring in a new manufactured home that was 10 years old, this would keep them from doing that, right? The new the new regulations where we don't have that in our current regulations.

Well, that's not retroactive. What it But what uh Matt is talking about is if they brought in if there was not a manufactured home there right now or they had one that had that they demolished and they removed and they wanted to bring in another one, a new one, a different one. Right now it has to that new one that specific new one not the park that just that specific new one since it is new it would have to meet current requirements which would mean it would have to be less than 5 years old and and make all the connection requirements that are required out of this that wouldn't apply to the whole park. It would apply to just this one facil this one unit. So so the problems or concerns that we've had in the past about the parks kind of generated us to look at updating this policy because Yes. Yes. And that's one of the things

Sarah. Yes. You've been looking at all the ordinances. It's just not this one. You start there was a list that was like five or six pages long. It's just taken a while to get to this and the timing just and and and s so my experience is it sounds like we have not had a schedule where we review these these standards consistently. We have not we have not until I'm glad to know and that's I think this is so important that you're doing it. But I also think that we need to have a schedule that we look at these these um codes every two years, every three years instead of waiting.

And I know it's a time issue and my background is writing policies and procedure. So I I understand that. But we need to be consistent on we we should never look back and say we haven't looked at a policy since ' 85 97. That's why we've established the ordinance review uh committee and it'll be a standing committee and as new legislation comes down we go back and look at everything and make sure we are up to snuff on state statutes and everything or new building policies and things that come down. That's why we go back and revisit that. So you're right up until 2016 we hadn't looked at anything but now we've established that policy and it will remain back. And I would I would I would encourage us to put a time frame on it because even back in the days I was doing DOC, we knew that every year we had to look at this policy. Every two years we had to look at that policy and it just generate the the time frame instead of us sleeping it because we're busy. We can sleep a policy, but if you have that setup where you know you're going to look at something because we should never have a policy that we haven't looked at in years. We agree.

So I I commend y'all for that. Y'all know that's one of my Thank you. my things. I think we've found a new member for the committee. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. I'm sorry. Go ahead. All in favor in case saying I made Wait, hold on. Who made the motion? Well, there's an extension, too. So, yeah. Okay, we do need to do a roll call. Favors made the motion. Who seconded it? Thank you. Do a real call. Can I first just finish my thought just out of courtesy type of thing? Would that be okay,

Councilwoman? I was actually speaking to you and what I was saying was we have worked in a time renewal on the different ordinances we've been taking up with regard to rate changes to make sure that those are timely getting revisited which isn't something that we per se do with other things that come before the ordinance review committee. Um we don't specifically say okay now we're going to come see those again in you know three years or etc. But we've been making that initiative with regard to the rate based changes. Just wanted to share that. Thank you. I feel better now. Yes. Okay, go ahead. Eids. Yes. Burn. Yes. Maxwell, yes. Thompson, yes. Bana, abstain. Favors. Yes. Mayor,

yes. Motion carries. Next item. Item number 18. Mr. Sullivan. Discussion, consideration, and possible action on an ordinance amending Midwest City Code, Chapter 31, Healthc Care Facilities. Article 2, Hospitals and Ambulatory Surgical Care Facilities. Section 31-27, Hospitals. Section 31-28, Ambulatory Surgical Care Facilities. Section 31-29, Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories. section 31-30 diagnostic imaging center and providing for repealer and severability. Mr. Summers,

thank you. Uh this uh chapter 31 deals with a permitting process that's outside of uh zoning and building for four types of uh medical facilities. Um what we're proposing with this ordinance is to uh move that permitting process from being handled by the city clerk's office uh to move it to community development. um we already process lots of applications that require public hearings and and it seems to make a lot of sense to move it to to my department. Uh the other thing that it does is propose to uh simplify and the the fee structure for those permits and make it a flat fee. So, currently it's a a 1% uh of the capital construction costs for these applications um with a minimum of $1,000 and a maximum of $75,000 with the possibility that we would refund part of that application fee that's not used to process the application at the end. So, what we're proposing is to just set that at the current minimum of $1,000 for the application fee. Uh I think that would be uh adequate to cover uh the staff cost to process these applications and and bring them before council. Uh the ordinance oversight committee uh did recommend approval of this item uh in July.

Move to approve. Second. Before we do, I I'd like to have Von repeat cardiac cathodization laboratories three times very quickly. You're out of order. We have a motion in a second. All in favor indicate saying I I oppose. Motion carries. Mr. tops. I'll have you know I practiced that for 30 minutes this morning just so I was definitely going to read the whole thing for us to get done. Mayor, I would like to ask that we just pass on reading the rest of the discussion items. Just call for I second that. Well, if that's the will of the council, then that's exactly what we'll do. Number 19, read it or do whatever you want to do. Nope, we're pass. Yeah, I don't know how to do that. Just say as written.

As written. Number 19, as written. Move to approve. Second. I have a motion in a second. All in favor indicate saying I. I. Opposed. Quit. Mr. Mike. I guess I can go home now. No, you can't. Um, did we vote? We didn't vote. All in favor saying I. I. Opposed. Extension. Motion carries. Item 20 as written. Move to approve. I have a motion in a second. All in favor indicate saying I. Second favor. I didn't I didn't say nobody seconded it. There's the question. Hold on. Is there a rate increase involved?

I thought that was number 21 usage rate. Okay. You you guys want to blow through this now? We're calling him back up here. It's your fault. This is why he has his tile on.

No, actually, thank you Von for noticing, but that comes a little later. So, I want to point out, I know this is probably a little confusing, but on an annual basis, we have to change this based on our cost for the meters. So, this is the cost that we pass directly on to whomever buys a meter for a new business to put it in. You'll notice that all of those, if you look at the spreadsheet or the table that's in the in the memo, it just explains what it was previously, what it is now, and it's strictly based on the cost of the meter. We're not making any money. It's a pass through cost. The only exception is the last meter. because of its size. Typically, market determines what that cost is and we can't publish it because it could change the the the change could be pretty pretty dramatic and then it would be absorbed by taxpayers as opposed to the business and that's not how we want to do business. So,

okay, I'm still moving to approve this item. It's number 21 that I needed the explanation for. Second. I have a motion to second. All in favor indicates saying I opposed. Extension motion carries. Thank you. Wait, don't leave ma'am. Sorry. Nope. It's Sarah's, but I but we actually this is one that she wrote for us. I'd be more than happy to talk through it if you 21 is written.

So I I want to take a brief moment. A lot of times there are residents or customers in our city that don't have all of our services. Sometimes they may only have water. They may only have sewer. They may only have trash. In this particular case, it's a situation where we have a calculation that has to be done for the sewer. And typically those get mailed out and very few get returned. And it's a lot of effort and like work on the part of customer service to get that information back. And ultimately they end up having to change. All those that choose not to respond get the maximum cost for sewer. And then when they come in, they go, "Oh my gosh, my rate went up." They have to come back in and get it changed again. What this does is simplifies the process so that when somebody comes in and start service, the number of people in their household determines their sewage cost, their rate, and it stays that way until they move out and somebody else comes in and decides to occupy that that resident. They open, they they start services, that rate gets changed based on the number of people in the household. I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but Sarah definitely has the deets on this one. So the only issue I see is that we trust people not to change the number of resident number of occupants in their residents during the course of their uh water contract.

And I would tell you that that uh Councilman Thompson that if if it was a much bigger number, in other words, if the number of customers that we were that were affected here was higher, like somewhere around the two to 5% range, we'd probably look at it a little differently. We had some discussions with city leadership to decide what kind of impact we had based on the labor costs in customer service to do the leg work versus the actual revenue collected. And ultimately this looked like the better decision to simplify it. All right. I make a motion to approve. Second. A motion and second further discussion. All in favor indicated by saying I

opposed. Extension motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Stre. We now move into new business public discussion. U does anyone have anything to bring for the council? Hello, I'm Charles Williams. Yes, sir. Please say your name and address for this. Charles B. Williams, Pro3 East Ricker. Okay. Um, pardon my tire. Four minutes.

Um, I was here concerning uh codes uh parking enforcement uh about on lawns on front lawns. I brought a couple pictures of it. Uh I've made complaints to the code enforcement department once in the July the last the third week of July and the fourth week of July and then the fifth the first week of August and uh it's to my attention that it takes 30 days for a complaint to be made before the person has to uh rectify the situation. I could be wrong but uh this was like I said in July and and both third week and fourth week and then the first week of August now we're about to be we uh first week of September is coming up. So, I didn't know if uh if there's a policy where uh they don't have to is is the policy that people are allowed to park on their front lawn. That's my question. Well, unfortunately, this isn't an agenda item, so I can't engage back and forth discussion with you. What I will do is refer you back to the gentleman in the far back corner. His name is uh Mike Strow and he can get you up to speed on our part our soft surface parking ordinance.

Um yeah, they've contacted me several times and uh like I said, it's been over 30 days since this uh address has been uh notified and towed, I suppose. And uh I just don't like how long they got. Do they can they continue 6 months? Is the policy enforced? Is it not regulatory? Uh can anybody just park in their front lawn anytime they want? Because it feels like it's impeding the the the neighborhood and this ain't the Dix Hazard. This is, you know, come county, Oklahoma. I will assure you. It's got the attention of the council member directly. Elon Mcker, I'm a council woman. Yes, council woman. My uh email address is Wline City.org. It's on the website. And if um the council will still indulge me for just a second, I'll get your contact information. I'll reach out and talk to you. And thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Okay. Uh like I said, I apologize for my entire

Thank you for coming up and talking about this. Appreciate I appreciate your time and effort. Does anyone else have anything to bring forward council? Hearing or seeing none, we hereby adjourn. I call to order the Midwest City Municipal Authority. We have a consent agenda. These items are placed on the consent agendas of trustees by unanimous consent and approve routine items by one motion. If any trustee request an item be uh request discuss an item or if there not unanimous consent then the item will be removed and heard in regular order. Chair to entertain a motion to approve. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor indicate saying I opposed. Extension motion carries. We have one discussion item as written. Is there any questions?

Mr. The only thing I'll note for everybody this agenda item is not only on the municipal authority but on the hospital authority and on EDA. The reason for that is we're taking money from each one of those for this project. So Dat as trustees of each one of those you'll be approving the expenditure of funds for this project under each one of those authorities. Does anyone have anything for Mr. Street? I make a motion to approve. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor in case saying I opposed. Extension. Motion carries. Thank you. We now move into new business public discussion. Does anyone have anything bring for the authority hearing or seeing none, we're hereby adjourn.

I'll call order the Midwest City Hospital Authority. There is a consent agenda and as usual, these items are placed on the consent agenda. of trustees by unanimous consent and approve routine agenda items by one motion. If any trustee requests discuss an item or if unanimous consent cannot be received then the item will be removed and heard in regular order. Chair to entertain a motion to approve to approve. Second whatever. I've got a motion and a second. All in favor indicate by saying I I opposed extension motion carries. We have two discussion items. Uh item number one as written. We we need no reallocation. Is that correct, Mr. We need no reallocation? No action on item number one. Correct. And item number two is the same one we had on the other previous agenda. Correct. Chair to entertain a motion to approve. Move to approve. Second.

I have a motion and a second. All in favor saying I. Opposed. Extension. Motion carries. We have uh I call to order the Special Economic Development Authority. Public discussion. Thank you so much, city clerk. We move into new business public discussions. Anyone have anything to bring for the authority? Hearing or seeing none, I call to order the Special Economic Development Authority. Uh we have two discussion items. Uh one as written to approve the minutes of the last meeting. Move to approve. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor indicate saying I. Opposed. Since your motion carries. Item number two is the same one we just talked about on the previous agenda as written. Motion to approve. Second.

I have a motion and a second. All in favor indic. I opposed. Stension motion carries. We now move into public discussion. Does anyone have anything bring forward the Dory? Mayor. Mayor, if you don't if you don't mind, all of you know the amazing staff we have at this at this great city. This agenda is an amazing amount of work. And it is I can't even imagine the hours that go into producing an agenda like this here. And I just want to for all the support you've given me as I pinch hit here. Thank you staff for all the help you've given me the last couple of days to help me understand. [Applause] They're they're amazing and they knock it out of the park every day.

Every day. Every day. So, with that being said, does anybody have anything else? I would like to say that you did a great job tonight. I apologize. I'm not trying to hurt your feelings. No, I I was just trying to speed the process along before it's past my bedtime, sir. But I want to remind you when we defer from our routine, we get things jacked up.