Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Commission this morning. It is officially 9.05 and I am establishing that we have a quorum present. I will ask, we've got quite a few members of the public here today. Some of your faces are familiar, there's some that are not. I do ask that if you have your cell phone with you, please keep it on silent and keep conversations amongst yourselves to a minimum. I know it doesn't sound like a lot where you are, but it does echo quite a bit up here, and then we have a hard time understanding some of the questions or concerns that you may be addressing. If you are signed up for public comment, when

Appreciate it. And if you are not aware, that little beep was our timer, so anyone that is going to be coming up for public comment, we're allotting the same amount of time for each person to speak. Okay, perfect. So we will close public comment.

Wonderful. With that being said, we will open public comment back up. And this public comment is directed specifically on page two. to item F, which is the update on the Northeast Sector Master Plan, which currently states discuss and consider adopting the new Northeast Sector Master Plan. Again, there won't be discussion, but any public comment is allowed at this moment. Do we have any public comment signed up?

Okay. Thank you for sharing your opinions with us this morning. On that note, we will reclose public comment and move on to approve the consent agenda. The commission may request the consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for presentation and public comment, otherwise the consent agenda will be considered in one vote. All items on the consent agenda have been recommended for approval by staff with no opposition received to date. Since some items on the consent agenda may require public hearing, the Commission will accept public comment on any item on the consent agenda in one pu

Okay. So with that, we've got the meeting minutes. Consider approving from July 20th as well as RP26-13, the first replat of ES Kirby subdivision block 6 and 7. SMD number four. Request for first replat of ES Kirby subdivision six and seven to create two lots within the CN zoning district located at 902 West 19th Street. Do I have any comment from commission or anyone like to make a motion to approve both items on the consent agenda?

I will make a motion to approve meeting minutes and item number two. Okay, motion from Linden.

Second from Liz. All in favor? Aye. Okay, so both items A and B from the consent agenda do pass going forward. And that is a 6-0 vote. And we will move on to our regular agenda. So first item on our regular agenda is the subdivision plats. The Planning Commission has final authority for approval. Appeals may be directed to the City Council. We are gonna do this a little different, so for those of you who are following along, we are gonna read in item number one under subdivision plats, and then we are also going to read in Let's see, item five, where are you? Which is on your second page, so u

Any questions for Nick? No? Okay. Okay, so no questions from the Planning Commission on that item, and then are we moving to public comment now, or?

Okay. Russell, you good? Okay, so let's go ahead, Commission, and we'll take a vote on this first item, and then we'll have Nick read in our next, okay?

I'll make a motion to approve as presented.

Second. Motion from Linden, second from Candy. All in favor? Aye. Aye. So that FP26-15, Subdivision Platt passes 6-0. And Nick, go ahead. You are good to move on to the next.

All right. Thank you, Nick. And no public comment? Russell Gouley. All good? Okay. Thank you. We'll close public comment and make a motion or open for more discussion.

All right. Motion from Lyndon, second from Mark. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay, we're back to page one. Our last subdivision plot that we'll discuss this morning is item number two, which is FP26-16, Baker Ranch, section seven, which is SMD number one. a request to final plant 21 lots over 7.627 acres within the single-family residential RS1 and low-rise multifamily legacy RM1L zoning districts in a request for full variance not to extend Twin Mountain Drive.

Okay, Aaron, can you go back to the just aerial map, please? Okay, so does the owner of the land on ruth lane are they the same owner as the owner of the other side of twin mountain currently yes so basically as a planning commission if we were to say no you do not need to develop twin mountain later on unless they sold off southwest track or south track they would essentially still have to develop it they just don't want to do it now

And how many homes can be adequate without having a fire safety issue? Because we've looked at this in other developments, and there was temporary turnarounds required and all sorts of stuff that weren't just glitchy. It was like paved.

I'm trying to load the future thoroughfare map, and of course it's Monday and my internet doesn't like me. What is Twin Mountain considered? Is that a minor collector? Is that a major collector?

The only reason why I'm asking the question is we always talk about not deferring development costs on to the next guy. And I just want to make sure that when we make this decision that we're not just kicking the can down the road like we discuss in every single meeting.

All right. That's all my questions. Anything from any other members? No? Okay. All right. We'll go ahead and open up public comment.

And as far as the sidewalk item number three, you guys are on the same page with city staff on this?

Okay, with that, if we don't, we'll close public comment. Open for discussion or motion.

Erin, I do have a question based on something Russell said about this Largo Vista Drive. Would you go back to it? Yes. Is that the street right there?

So currently they're just left to stub out. They're not required to do anything additional to...

Okay. Thank you so much, Eric. Okay. With that, do we have a motion or any other discussion? Okay. We did close public comment. I just need to confirm that we're okay with opening public comment again. Okay. Please come ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Darnell. Okay, we're closing public comment again and open for discussion or motion from Planning Commission.

A second from Jennifer, all in favor? Aye. All right, six, zero. Okay, our next item of discussion today is item B, which is rezonings and the comprehensive plan. Gosh, I can't even talk today, hello Monday. City Council's final three for approval of rezonings and amendments to the comprehensive plan. We have multiple items today to discuss on this. Our first is number one, which is Z26-13, 3 East 19th Street, which is SMD number 3, a request for a zone change from General Heavy Commercial, CGCH, to General Commercial, located at 3 East 9th Street.

Would you go back to the... Yeah, that one's fine. That's Chadburn, correct? Yes. So it faces 9th Street, not Chadburn, and the property on Chadburn is... as you called it, CGCH, correct? And so this would be within a change, whether it be commercial. But also, you said it was a burned-out house?

So really, we're just down to them. We're taking the heavy commercial off the table for the applicant. Yes, exactly. Okay.

OK. All right. Thank you, Nick. Do we have any public comment on this? So we will close public comment and open up for discussion or motion.

Okay. First from Candy. Second. Second from Liz. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All right, motion passes. Next item we have Austin presenting is Z26-15, 2412 Paint Rock Road, which is SMD number four. Request for a zone change from the single family residential RS1 zoning district to zero lot line twin home and townhome residential, which is RS3, located at 2412 Paint Rock Road.

Okay. All right. Do we have any public comment, Ray? Vicki Vines?

Thank you, Erin. And I believe the applicant's here, but I'll do my best to answer a few things. So first off, any time you're building in and around a floodplain, and again, I'm not an engineer by any means, but I've worked alongside builders through some of these projects. you have to follow very, very, very specific FEMA guidelines. So as far as the height of the homes, disrupting actually the flow of natural water through there, it's very, very specific. If there's any... sewer lines or anything that would have to go through there. They would have to be encased per FEMA standards. So it's

Right. Well, and again, that's all stuff that the city will sit down with the applicant and with their specific engineer and make sure, again, the water lines are adequate, the sewer lines are adequate, you know, because the standards when... stoneham and stonewall were built compared to the standards that the city expects now are different so that's all stuff that they'll take care of for sure so and again i think the applicants here that might get up and speak a little bit so okay thank you thank you so much aaron okay roland anderson morning i'm not a speaker but uh

Again, that would be something that the engineer and the applicant would discuss. I think it's going to depend also, again, on the FEMA guidelines on what they will allow. But, again, the applicant probably can answer some of the unknowns. I'm just going off of previous floodway maps I've looked at.

So we've owned property over there. I know this. So, you know, parts progress.

Yes, sir. And again, anytime that you build near a FEMA floodplain, there are very specific standards as far as the grade of the home, all of that, as far as like if it needs to tear up. what you're actually allowed to dig in within the floodplain. You can't make ponds or retention or anything like that. It's very, very, very specific. And as far as your concern on level of traffic, again, we completely understand that. St. Angelo is a growing community. We do need more housing. But again, the city will sit down with the applicant and with their engineer and make sure that there's adequate inf

Thank you. Okay. Do we have any other public comment? Russell Gillespie. Okay. Mr. Russell. You can speak about drainage a lot better than I can.

Thanks, Russell. OK. OK, we're going to go ahead and close public comment on this item and open up for discussion or a motion. Personally, I understand some of the public's concern in regards to this. This has been land that has sat vacant for a very, very long time. And I am happy to see some of the development on it. And I think that, again, going back to all the conversations we've had about affordable housing, um this definitely gives some options um whether you know the owner decides to keep them as rentals and rents to maybe some military families that are right there or if they decide t

Stonewall being the only exit right now. So I just have a concern that there needs to be some other way to egress out of that area as a concern.

Can we go back to the slide? I agree. I think it's going to cause a lot of...

And I feel like giving them the option that zero lot line, twin home, townhome, it will allow them to have better flow you know whether you know when they get to an actual development concept maybe it's a big loop that goes around that but again having some of those zero lot lines will allow them to have better placement of homes within the very unusual piece of property that they're working with so with that i'm going to go ahead and i am going to make a motion in favor of staff one second First from myself, Brittany, second from Candy. All in favor? Aye. Aye. That's 6-0, thank you. Okay, so

Okay, so I did hear from a few people that they never actually received notices that live in that vicinity. So that's my only concern.

Okay, I just want to make that on the record.

So Aaron, in our cleanup project, is this an area that's going to be looked at in the future?

major arterial? That's correct. Is that owned by TxDOT?

Sorry, I'm trying to look on my map what that other road that you said doesn't currently connect is.

But what would the road be it would run into?

If you'd like us to make a motion before we open up.

Okay. Well, I was just going to make a few comments really quick because I know that there's some controversy in the public. One, I just want the general public to understand that the current zoning on this property is heavy. Tomorrow, somebody could put in... a very heavy mechanic store that is doing tires and doing all the things at all sorts of hours. They don't have to follow the same restrictions as a residential area. The other thing is, I just want to say how proud we are as a community, or at least myself, I know a lot of other people feel the same way, to have Goodfellow Air Force Bas

Yeah, we had the, it was four, five months ago maybe, the Eola development. There was something that was shot down that was over on Old Christoval and Chadburn, kind of behind the stripes. It was, I think it was a storage unit. That was probably a year, year and a half ago. And the watershed didn't make sense for that project. But again, if we look at it, there's a barber shop, there's those newer apartments, but there hasn't really been any other development over there other than the Edgewood development, which I don't know, but I think there's like 10 units or so going down there.

Okay. So are we, Commissioner, are we good to open up public comment? Okay. All right. Who do we have first? Jim Raymond. I'm sorry, say that again. Jim Raymond. Jim Raymond. Okay. Good morning, Jim. We're almost afternoon.

So they're all commercial leases, correct?

Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Okay. Next up, Ginger Moore. Good morning, Ginger.

Our next. Doug Wilde. Doug Wilde. Hi, Doug.

I had one. So these will be potential rentals and not each individually be a sold property?

Thank you, Brian. Any other questions for Brian? Is that in the public?

You don't run over on time very often. We got you this one. Thank you, Russell. Does anyone have any questions for Russell?

And that might be something maybe during certain hours it's right turn only or anything. And I'm not trying to make a public joke about this, but think about the traffic jam at Chick-fil-A, like how many of us line up to take that right turn into there. It's gonna be a similar thing and it's just us getting used to the traffic pattern on a major street like that. Any other questions for Zane? Okay. Thank you. Closed public comment? All right. We are closing public comment. And this was a very long one, Aaron. So can you please refresh the commission on how we're taking two separate votes? Is t

Okay. And refresh our memory on the zone change. Does that stay with the land or the applicant?

Okay. Perfect. With that, I will open up for discussion or motion. for the zone change and then we'll vote on the next.

I agree, Liz. And, you know, if you actually meet some people that are going to Goodfellow and, like, you know, for instance, the wives call and they're distressed because they can't find housing. The amount of housing on the base is not adequate for the amount of people coming, and it's stressful. Think about moving across the country, never seeing St. Angela for the first time, and you've got a family and you need somewhere to go. I think that this is... very, very, very needed. On another aspect, if we look at the economics on this, we want to grow as a city. We want to keep our St. Angelo.

Okay. Any other thoughts or comments from the commission before we move forward with the motion? Okay, would anyone like to make a motion?

First from Liz. I will second that. So we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Okay, 6-0 on item Z26-16 and CP26-03. And now we are going to take a motion on the next item, which was C, yes.

Okay. And again, the applicant had already provided a rough sketch, but it will get finalized further with the city and along with the landscaping plan, which, you know, it will be nice to kind of break some of that and that will also help with some dirt.

And again, what the applicant is proposing is less units than what is actually allowed.

vehicles coming in and out of there and so that's why we've we've kind of looked at this and said okay well this makes a little more sense uh to do it this way okay thank you aaron okay and again since we did all our public comments so we're just making a motion or opening for discussion are we good with opening public okay

And is that from the apartment complex down?

Thank you, Zane. Okay. Closing public comment and, again, opening for discussion or motion within the commission.

I'll second. First by Liz, second by Linden. All in favor? Aye. Okay, 6-0. Okay, we are going to try and finish getting through this morning. We are gonna read in item number four, which is Z26-17-3302, Grape Creek Road, which is SMD number two, a request for a zone change from single family residence RS1 to small lot residential, which is RS4, located at 3302 Grape Creek Road.

Do we have any questions for the commission for Austin? And again, one in support, no in opposition? Yeah. Okay. Do we have any public comment?

Okay, thank you both for being here. With that, we'll close public comment and open for discussion or a motion. First from Candy. Second from Jennifer. All in favor? Aye. Okay, pass is six, zero. And we already read in item five on Cato. So we are gonna jump down to conditional uses. The Planning Commission has a final authority for approval of conditional uses. Appeals may be directed to the city council. CU 26-15, 1706 Shad Road, which is SMD number one. Request for approval of conditional use for short-term rental located at 1706 Shad.

Is there any other applicants within the radius?

Okay. Do we have any public comment, Ray?

Can I ask a real quick question? I know you said the police were out. Were the police at the residence that's for sale currently that's applying for the... Yes. Do we have a record of any of this? No? Do we know if that's currently being... I don't think it's... I think it's still for sale.

I don't believe it is transferred ownership yet, so that would have been, I believe, and don't quote me because I could be wrong, I believe it would be the current owner. Now, the jet skiers, are they, again, were they from that home, or are these just random people on the lake? Because there's a lot of random people on the lake that don't listen. No, they're not from that home.

And how's our clock? Okay. So do we have any other public comment? Okay. Thank you so much for your time this morning. Were you able to pull that up? Yes.

Is it pending? Is it closed? It's active. Okay. It's pending, but is it things? It's funny. I looked at that a while back.

It's things, isn't it? Okay, so I'm going to just say this really quickly. Short-term rentals on the lake are some of the most controversial short-term rentals that we ever see. I've been on the Planning Commission for over seven years, and we have seen a lot of short-term rentals come through and a lot that haven't. One thing that we have to understand is a short-term rental falls – Under some specific guidelines set by the city, so they not only have to go through their safety inspection They have to pass a parking guideline to make sure that there's adequate parking and making sure that the

So Lyndon did just look on the MLS system, and it is showing active. So that does not mean that's necessarily accurate. It could have a contract on it pending approval of this. We don't have that information. But whoever is the owner of it would be the one that is responsible for whoever has been parking and causing ruckus in your neighborhood at the moment. Well, it's whoever owns the property right now. You can look that information up on the public tax record? Yes. It is not transferred ownership yet.

no we understand yeah no we understand we understand okay okay so we've closed public comment any other questions or is anyone ready to make a motion I just want to make a comment um I appreciate the conditional use process and the ability to review short-term short-term rentals on an annual basis

Or is the person who is going to be managing the Airbnb, are they here?

We'll have to ask, yeah, we'll have to open up public comment, unfortunately, because we're on the record. So you would have to come to the podium. You'd have to open that up.

So that means you think it's, well, obviously it's being used as a short-term rental.

But it is still actively for sale. The status of the property per what we're able to locate right now has not changed.

Yeah, it's just showing that it's active. It doesn't even show that it's pending or under contract with a contingency.

So to our knowledge right now, From the information we have, it would be the current owner that is allowing people to come there, not the applicant, I would assume, unless they have some unwritten agreement. I do agree with Liz. I feel like if you're going to operate a business, you should spend your Monday morning with us. So let's just go back to our options. We can table this until next month. We can deny it or we can approve it.

I'll second. Okay. I agree. And so first from Candy, second from Linden. All in favor? Aye. Okay. So CU 26-15-1706, Shad, has been tabled until the next meeting. Hopefully we have more information regarding staff. Can you work on the police phone call that apparently happened? And hopefully we can reach out to the applicant and ask them politely to come to Monday morning meeting. Wonderful. Okay. We are done with conditional uses since we have already read in the one on South Chadburn. We're going to right-of-way abandonments. Our city council has final authority for approval of right-of-way a

Sorry, there's a large utility easement coming up through Dakota, right?

Oh, my wheels are spinning there. I definitely agree with you as far as our Master Thoroughfare needs to be reevaluated. The future roads that are all over the place cutting through people's land doesn't make a ton of sense. So hopefully that will be addressed in the near future. Any other questions or thoughts for Erin before we open up public comment, if there is any? Oh, wait, do we need to read the other one in?

Yes, but just in general, just so I know. Okay, okay. Okay. Sorry, you want a motion on this and then? So our other item is the Master Thoroughfare Plan amendments. MTP 26-01 Adobe Drive SMD number one, a request to amend the Master Thoroughfare Plan for the minor collector designation of Adobe Drive and its future extension.

I think it's just the applicant. Did the applicant have anything to add? Nope. All good, Russell. Thumbs up. Closing public comment. Okay.

Go Red Hood. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the abandonment. I'll second.

Okay. First by Candy, second by Linden for right-of-way abandonment. All in favor? Aye. And for...

I will make a motion to approve the approval of the Master Thoroughfare. The amendment to the Master Thoroughfare. For Adobe.

Okay. First by Linden. Second. Second by Candy. All in favor? Aye. All right. So we've got two more cases today on the right-of-way abandonments. ROW 26-06, Alleys Pierce and Fillmore, SMD number 5, a request for the City of St. Angela to abandon a 0.103-acre alleyway between South Pierce Street and South Fillmore Street.

Oh, sorry. They didn't tell me that earlier. Sorry. I apologize. Okay. And then also, ROW 26-09, alleys Fillmore and Taylor, SMD number 5, request for the City of San Angelo to abandon a 0.084 acre alley between South Taylor and South Fillmore.

No, it's that old base housing looking thing by Mr. Booth. That's Borough Guard right there. Those apartments, yeah, those two-story red.

So they're just wanting it for more private use than public?

Yes, I have a question. Go back to the... Right there. These are parking carports. The fencing, as you're calling it, is it going to be like just connecting those two carports with some kind of a gating, or is it going to be a fence all the way to the street?

The residents that park in there or store things in there, um is it you say fence is it going to be something that how are they going to get in there it would be gated yeah i think that's what i want to make it more private just for them that that's what i wanted to hear okay thank you you answered my question thanks austin any other questions for austin do we have any public okay uh karen maury maury

Okay. Did we have a record of that? I might have missed that.

Okay. And so you were saying the fence was right up against the property line, like at the street?

So by them purchasing the alley abandonments, can they basically do whatever they want to on the fencing other than not going in front of the setbacks?

No, just in general because obviously they put the fence maybe where it shouldn't have been. Did you guys go see the fence before when it was up?

So if the neighbors had issues with, or the tenants had issues with the parking, then they would be contacting code enforcement or city staff?

Okay. And obviously the other structures are carports, so they're corrugated metal or whatever. Do we have an idea with the fencing? I mean, it doesn't look like a compound.

Okay. Okay. So if there is an issue with parking for the tenant or for you as a neighbor, you would contact code compliance or the city staff. Since they are purchasing the alleys, that would give them the ability to kind of do whatever they wanted fencing-wise on their property as long as it didn't fall in, like, where that, if you look at the,

Picture here where the white sign is they could not put a fence all the way up to that sidewalk It would have to follow where the buildings were and that would be a building setback line, which is typically 25 feet or so So your concern was whenever I used to live right over there a long time ago and so I do know that that corner floods quite a bit on Taylor and Fillmore whatever the cross street is no more and So that's what y'all were using? Is that what I was understanding? Whenever that corner floods, y'all were utilizing?

Sorry, I misunderstood. That's why I was asking for clarification. Thank you. Thank you so much for your time today.

And again, the fire marshal has no issues with gates because they don't like gates. Fire is here if you want to question. Sorry.

We have public comment if there's anything.

An item like that, that's not something that, unfortunately, the Planning Commission has any authority over, so that would be getting with the building owner on how that's set up, if it's an additional cost or if they're just doing it for additional safety for the residents.

Again, that would be taken up with the condo association. Unfortunately, there's multiple condo associations, HOAs in San Angelo. We don't have the bylaws or anything, and we're not able to act on that. All we're able to basically do today is say, yes, this makes sense to abandon the alley into the private structure or not. So any of those other concerns would be with the condo association and the owner or the... Yeah, I was going to say that I don't think we can put that as a stipulation, but it would be nice.

And so just make sure that I heard correctly, there is a method for remediation if

So, and I'm sure in your, and I don't know if the condo associations changed hands over the years or whatnot, but it looks like maybe there's some representatives, maybe not the owner here, that would be information that they should be able to provide you. Thank you much. Thank you so much.

Would one of you mind coming and just kind of answering maybe a few questions for the members that have sat here with us all morning? Good afternoon, council.

Can you speak a little bit more into the microphone?

you guys wanting to keep the property secure and your your people residents secure so as far as and i don't know if you can show us on this or not but um are you planning like from red building left to red building right putting a fence with an operational gate that people can drive through is that the plan i think it's just there there's some confusion on clarification

So I think it's more the residents are concerned that the gate will not give them access to their parking space or their belongings, from what I've gathered. Is that what everyone else has understood?

So just to make sure that we're clear, We're not talking about fencing. We're talking about specifically a gate on either side of those carports coming from one end of that alleyway to the other end of that alleyway for the protection of the carports, the storage, and to keep out unwanted. Is that correct?

Can you put the other aerial view of that alley on there? Because now I'm confused.

But I think unless each of those carport sides were gated off for like, oh, I thought they were concurrent.

But somebody still could walk down the alley from Fillmore and break in, right?

Right, so wouldn't it be more logical to have two gates, one on each end?

Right, but my question is, if a homeless person... can't access one side on Taylor, they're gonna walk around.

So that's where the problem is starting, okay.

If two is possible for us, we'll do that. I just think it would be more reasonable if it's for protection, to keep people from stealing anything, it would be a gated parking area.

A gate on Taylor on this end and Fillmore, so that's two gates. And then another fencing on the other section of carports on Pierce and on Fillmore. So in that case, you've got four gates. That's how we see so that the tenants can drive in from Taylor or they can drive in from Fillmore. Correct. And by closing both ends of that carport, you keep out the unwanted traffic and otherwise. So we're talking or understanding four gates and you said two.

For the safety purposes of what you're saying, you want to do is put a fence up, or a gate, I'm sorry, to protect people's belongings, their safety, parking, and so forth. It's only logical to put it on both sides of the carport. And that's what we work on. So that would equal four gates. Anyone that's going to walk on Taylor that's going to be deterred is just going to walk around half that block and go into Fillmore if they're doing something. That's right.

Well, I think we're beating the deck horse right now. I think that the biggest thing is we're either allowing the alley abandonment or we're not. What is the staff's recommendation, please? Can you pull that back up? Thank you, sir. Thank you. Oh, closing public comment. Oh, ma'am, sorry.

Public comment again. I'm so sorry. It's so hard to hear up here.

Okay, that's good to know. Thank you, ma'am. So I think the width of the alley and everything is up to the owner. I think it's just the fact is, does it make sense? Is this an alley that is utilized outside of the current owners and tenants? And it doesn't appear that it should be, in my opinion. It looks like that should be. You know, that's not something that... the city needs to maintain or anything like that, I think that having the owner purchase the alley makes sense. So they've got to do the quick claim deed and all the stuff through the real estate office, correct? Okay. And then as fa

It can't go further than the same. Okay. With that being said, can we have a motion or further discussion?

Well, if this is about our choice today is about allowing the abandonment of two different alleyways, then I'll make a motion for both the alleyway of Pierce and Fillmore and Fillmore and Taylor. to be abandoned and then we'll have to go from there.

Yeah, because again, the applicant's only putting in for the abandonment. We don't have the ability to tell them what kind of fencing or gates or whatever you want to call it. Okay, so first from Candy. Do I have a second? Second. Second from Lyndon on both items.

Yes, on both items. Okay. So we have a first and a second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. So we are wrapping that up. And then we've already discussed item F, update on northeast. Okay. So our last item today will be the planning director's report, Mr. Aaron.

No, thank you guys today. I do have a question. I did get an email in regards to the subcommittee, I think on Wednesday, Development Task Force. Am I correct or incorrect stating that there can only be so many members from council, or... THAT'S CORRECT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE COMPLIANT AND NOT HAVING ANY ISSUES. OKAY. PERFECT. Any other items that the Commission wants to discuss openly? No? Okay. Well, with that being said, it is 1152, just in time for lunch.

All right. I've got a first and a second, and hopefully everyone's got a burger waiting for them. Thank you for all the members of the public coming today, and thank you, staff, for all your hard work as always.