City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, I've got six o'clock so six o'clock I call this meeting a second on City Council or please rise for the pledges

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 justice for all.

Honor the Texas flag.

I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible.

Thank you. Please be seated. Next item is the invocation. We have a reverend here. I do not see anyone. Is there anyone who is feeling so moved to do the invocation from the audience, from the dais? Anybody? Chief, please.

Pray with me. Gracious Heavenly Father, thank you for all the wonderful blessings you bestow on us every day. Never let us forget the sacrifices made on our behalf. Be with the first responders and our military across the world. Be with the leaders here today as they make decisions that affect our community and all these things we pray. Amen.

Thank you. Item 1D is audience participation. That is covered on the screen. You may speak on any item that is on the published agenda. Chief of Police over there, there's a form you can fill out and speak on any item. Please let us know.

Moving forward to consent and agenda.

A is actually regarding minutes from May 19th. B is actually regarding minutes of June 2nd. C is actually regarding sewer easement agreement with DOS Project LLC for 455 Sampson Boulevard. D is actually regarding rewarding a proposal for municipal engineering services. And that is it. Questions, comments on the consent agenda? If not, I'll entertain a motion.

Mayor, make a motion we approve the consent agenda as read. All.

Brack, second. Please cast your votes. Motion passes. Let the record reflect. We have a quorum. Full house. Thanks for coming, folks. Moving forward to 3A. Gabe, recognitions, presentations, what do we have?

Mayor, we don't have any recognitions tonight. I want to remind everybody that a week from Saturday we'll have our fireworks event. So a new addition this year is a wiener dog race. I'm told that we're at capacity for racing participants. The somewhat sad news, but our reigning champion for the soft taco eating contest apparently is in retirement. Though Felipe's training someone to succeed him to the throne. So hope to see everybody out there a week from Saturday. Hear, hear.

All right, 3B is budget workshop, 2026-2027 budget. Kim Quinn, finance director.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council. We'll each meeting go through a few funds at a time so we don't bombard you all at once with our preliminary issues and start to get you familiar with what the issues are by fund. We'll go over four funds tonight. Two of them, the funding sources are sales tax.

Mm-hmm.

And I'll remind you that the city collects two cents in sales tax total. One cent is just the regular portion that goes to all city general funds. The other one cent that is discretionary, I guess you would call it, um is split up a half cent of that goes to the general fund to offset property tax rate and then the other half is split um three eighths of a cent to ccpd and one eighth of a cent to street maintenance but kim i pay over eight cents for my sales tax where does the rest of the money go the state the state takes all that money what do they do with it

Sorry, I'm being rhetorical. I wish the city got more, but we only get two cents. Thank you for reminding us that.

That's right. We get the max that is allowed, which is two cents. So that's the primary source of revenue in the CCPD. This fund pays for 12 officers, one jailer, and a record supervisor. That's in the general fund. This year we're proposing to replace three patrol vehicles. It also pays for the technology used by the police department, the body cameras, tasers, the MDTs in the vehicles, and interview room equipment. This is where we will continue to fund the flock cameras. There is a proposal for additional training software in the budget for next year and the replacement of ballistic shields. All of the graphs are similar to what I've used in the past, so you've got a set of bars for revenues, a set of bars for expenditures, and it's showing you the current year adopted, the current year revised, the current year estimate, and the next year proposed. The numbers, the green and the purple bars will change throughout the summer as we get better numbers. revise our estimates to try to get them closer to how we think we'll end the fiscal year. And then as decisions are made, the proposed will change somewhat as well. And then for those of you who like the numbers behind the graphs, That's what each of the funds are. And as you get when you get your budget binder, you'll get even more line item detail. But this is just to give you an idea of the numbers that we're looking at. I'll tell you that the year to date is through May. And for your information, that would be 67% of the fiscal year to help you see where we are as far as the percentage of year to date. I'm not gonna go through the line items, but I'm happy to answer any questions if you have any on CCPD. Okay, if not, we'll move on to the Police Expendable Trust Fund. This is where we account for the confiscated property and forfeitures. The revenue sources obviously is pretty erratic. It's hard to determine what we're gonna have. So normally we just budget for interest earnings and then we'll adjust the year end based on the collections for the fiscal year. And the expenditures that we fund out of this fund are for the K-9 unit.

I have a question for the chief. So I know there's a lot of rules around what we can and can't take. Can you just explain that, remind us what those are, how that works?

I'm sorry, what was the question? I couldn't hear you.

Well, confiscating an asset, we can't take everything. There's only certain things we can take. And what are the rules around that?

So, well, you're really putting me on the spot there. Those laws change and modify, and we deal with it so seldomly that I can't tell you right off the top of my head exactly where that falls. I can do some research on that and get back to you.

We haven't talked about this in a while, and I was just curious.

And maybe Brian can answer a little bit of that as well, as far as the specifics. Let's put Brian on the spot. I'm going to have to research it as well.

So I can tell you in general, I mean, I don't know the specifics for the law, but the confiscated property are like is found money. If someone is in jail, we'll take their money until they're released. And then if it's evidence, and then I think it's 90 days that the person has to request the refund of that, like for lost money or found money. And then the forfeiture is what's awarded to us by district court. And in general, there may be more specifics to it, but in general, it needs to be used for something public safety related. Thank you. Okay, any, and again, We've got the adopted, revised, estimated, and proposed. And the reason that that green bar is so much is because we had cash that we received last year that we needed to refund to the person in the current year. So we refund them plus their interest that has been earned. And I'll tell you, we're earning quite a, quite a nice little bit of interest in text pool. So we probably ended up making money off of it versus if he had it in a savings account or something. So, um, anyway, any questions on police expendable trust fund? And these are the numbers behind that. Okay. Not we'll move on to the street maintenance fund. Again, this is where 1 8th of a cent of the sales tax goes. I'm estimating about 671,000. Sales tax is looking pretty good this year. We're about 6% higher than we were at the same time last year. So we traditionally are pretty conservative in our sales tax estimates. We'll estimate next year what we think we'll collect in the current year. So for street maintenance fund, it's about $670,000. On the expense side, we must use this for of existing streets and sidewalks so we can't build new streets or sidewalks out of this funding source. We are adding a line item next year for street restriping. We're gonna put $100,000 in a line item for that so we can try to keep up with the restriping that's necessary throughout the city. What else? We have 350,000 proposed in the budget for maintaining or milling and overlaying residential streets. The locations will be determined when we get our pavement management study back. I think they're pretty close to presenting that to the city council. And...

One of the questions I got is we're taking a half cent out for keeping our city roads up to up to snuff, so to say, right? So can we do it with a half a cent? Or not a half, an eighth cent.

One eighth.

One eighth. So we are waiting on the new assessment to come back, the treat assessment. From talking with Trent last week, it looks like we've come up about 3%, maybe, to the good. But we'll have the final report back to me, hopefully, next week. And then I can pull the streets out, and I've got to get a letter to the county.

And Randy, you and I have had some discussions about striping costs. Do you want to explain that? Because it sounds like they've gone way up.

Striping costs are very expensive. And we have to subcontract that out. We don't do it ourself. Certain times of the year they can do it, depending upon weather. Right now is the time to do it.

we're measuring and identifying the streets that need striping and we'll be targeting those first with east mcelroy having some temporary stuff that we're fixing to put in i don't know if trenton is planning on presenting the um the study at the next council meeting but i do know the cip update is next council meeting as part of the budget workshop so that might be his intention

Yeah, I feel we actually have to have that for the workshop in order to figure out where that eighth sentence.

I have to have it back before I can send my letter into the county. So he's aware of that. So they've had it back and then sent it back to them because they didn't like some of the stuff that was in the report. So they redid it and sent it back out.

And this is a voter authorized percentage, right?

Yes, sir. And I'm trying to think.

When's the last time we did it?

It's due for renewal in 2027.

CCPD or streets or both?

The CCPD. All of that's kind of grouped in together, but it'll be renewed again for 10 years on 2027.

I don't think the street maintenance is on the same schedule. Is it not? Do you know, Vicki? Okay. But we keep track of that. Every election cycle, we're will be on it. I don't, I can't tell you when we, when it's up. Yeah.

So it's just important. The voters have authorized us to do this. That's correct. We have to spend it on what the voters told us to spend. Yes. And the bottom line.

And like I explained, that's why we have different funds to make sure that we're complying with what the, what we're supposed to be spending specific revenue sources on.

And I guess part of my point is on street maintenance, we could spend other general fund money on street maintenance? Absolutely, we do. But this is just, this pot of money is specifically for that.

That's correct. And then there's $200,000 proposed to replace concrete panels along Jarvis and North Watson. So that would be the industrial streets that are being identified. And then we also have in the budget design for Opal Street phase two. Phase one is in the current budget, but because of the utility relocation, more than likely it'll get rolled forward, at least part of it, into next fiscal year to finish that. And then I think the streets that the county was gonna mill and overlay for us, which in this fiscal year was Lottie Lane and Southern from Opal to Wofford Way, may be delayed as well based on the county's schedule. But as I mentioned, we'll update throughout the summer the estimated and the proposed so whatever is not going to get spent this year will get rolled forward into next year any other questions on street maintenance fund Okay, and we will move on to our last one, which is the drainage utility fund. The drainage utility fund's primary source of revenue is the fees, the monthly fees that are on utility bills. Residential fees pay, residences pay $6 per month. Commercial and industrial also pay a fee, but there's a calculation based on the impervious value of their property. The expenditures in the drainage utility fund go to pay for two drainage maintenance workers, half of the environmental manager and half of the environmental specialist. And then the drainage utility fund also pays for indirect costs to the general fund. The expenditures or special requests that are proposed to be funded next year include accessories for the excavator that was purchased in the current fiscal year. They've been using it and would like to use it even more. And then there are certain accessories that would make it more efficient for them to use. So that's proposed. As well as a service truck and a low water crossing in Willow Creek Park. So those are the special requests in that fund. We have in the current year budget, the million dollars is for the final design of the Saginaw Boulevard drainage system phase or system three phase one. So that is one of the projects that may get carried forward into the next year. The idea was that's gonna be that phase three is a huge project. So the idea was that they would start designing it and hopefully breaking it into smaller projects that we can start chipping away at. Any questions in the drainage utility fund? Okay, this last slide is just a reminder of the schedule. As I mentioned, we'll have budget workshops in each of your regular council meetings. The next one in first meeting in July will be over the CIP update. And then you can see we have the proposed budget. Your budget retreat is scheduled for Saturday on July 11th. We'll get final values on the 24th. We'll revise the proposed budget based on the actual tax rate calculations. And then we have a couple of special meetings to have public hearings and to adopt the budgets and the tax rates.

OK. Any questions for Kim? Thank you, Kim. Appreciate it. Again, this is just one of the initial steps of our budget process. There'll be more to come. Item 3C, work plan update. City Manager Gabran.

Mayor and Council, we have our monthly update on our work plan projects, which are the City Council priorities. So I'll kind of run through them fairly quickly. Our employee personnel manual update, we have contracted with a company called Air Mason. We have had two meetings with them and more scheduled on the staff side to discuss the actual policies we want to change and amend and then the next steps after we go through that, which sounds easy enough, but each department sort of has some specifics and it's taken a lot of time. Our last meeting, we talked about comp time, and I think I had to drink two coffees during that to try to process everything. A lot of different concerns, different schedules, but we're making good progress.

So are we, do you feel we're on track?

Yeah, I think so. I think we've got a, I think we decided instead of taking the whole policy, we'll go like topic by topic, and then eventually when staff has the recommended edits, we'll send it to the city attorney for review and A nice part about this platform is it's cloud-based, so new employees can get quick access, and then each department can kind of tweak things as they're specific.

How many sections are there in it?

Do you remember? Eighty-eight pages. Eighty-eight pages? Yeah.

Eighty-eight pages, that's... Yeah.

Yeah. And then probably the biggest carve-outs are police and fire, public safety, so specifics.

Police and fire, so the carve-outs. Sorry, I'm just trying to figure out whether I feel we're on track to have this. Are we going to have, since you're doing it in sections by sections, are we sending, as we get done with that section, are we... send in that section over to legal, or are we trying to save it all up? It seems like to me if we save it all up and send it over to legal in one big waterfall, it's going to bog them down. We do have a bulk discount.

A bulk discount? Yeah. However you want to do it.

There are no toast discounts. Don't say that. We know better.

That's a good point. I think we can send it kind of in real time as we review.

Yeah, I'm just trying to keep us from hitting a bottleneck. Yeah, understand. We know the way lawyers are. They'll read it for years. Right. We'll go to Air Mason first, and then they'll finish what they need to do, then it'll go to them.

Yeah, so it'll go back to Air Mason, they'll reformat, and then we'll send it. All at once or section by section?

All at once. All at once, they get all prepared, and then they'll go back to Air Mason and finish it up. So when we say legal fourth quarter then does that mean it's going to them the first the first quarter fourth quarter? So that means first of October October 1st it Well, okay because I definitely know it's going to take them more than the day to review that that big of a document But they might get it in three months and that's a quarter, right?

The next project is finished. However, I've had some conversations with you all and the mayor about doing kind of a follow-up mailer or video to show progress for our bond projects. So we're getting to the last pieces of our 21 bond before we start in on our recently authorized projects. So no surprise to anybody, but people pay attention to videos. That seems to be the best path forward. Moving on. Friends of the Park. The park's really no substantial. I think future meetings are going to discuss this again. They're having some talks about who may be interested in serving on the Friends of the Parks or the nonprofit. So not much change. Not much change here. We had estimates from Savitree and Davitree. Apparently the city of Fort Worth is using Savitree, so I think... Are we waiting to hear what Fort Worth's going to do on the tree assessment? We're waiting for their estimate. For their estimate, yeah.

So that's. We're waiting on our whole, I mean, we're doing our whole city, right? Correct. Yeah. I'm assuming we're not holding up on everything. We're just waiting on the, just the outline areas that bump up against Fort Worth, right?

No, I think we're doing citywide. Yeah.

So we're not doing anything until we hear back from Fort Worth?

Fort Worth is using this vendor. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, when does a vendor say they'll be done? I mean, Fort Worth is a huge city. Count all their trees. They may be there in 30 years.

Yeah. No, I don't think we're beholden to Fort Worth for the project scheduling. We're waiting for the pricing so that we can piggyback on a similar scope. Makes sense. Yeah.

So we've counted the number of trees and stuff we think we need?

We'll have Bryn do that. In fact, if he could excuse himself, he can get a start. You might recall the was it last meeting two meetings ago. We've had two workshops related to signage We'll have another one soon. Not a whole lot of movement here other than we've got a Susie's been in contact with someone about the Signage plan it was the desire of the council to have like a Comprehensive plan so that we don't implement it piecemeal. So the components of that would include concepts the fabrication specifications And then installation I think we'll have a future workshop here Probably July and then pick a number and move forward so The next step after that, once we have our template and are approved, everybody's good with, is figure out which locations we want to do first. And then, of course, that all costs money. So kind of next steps there. Pedro's working on a steering committee. He may be able to.

Yeah, so this is the moment of the city council portion of participation. So the working group, we haven't thought of a cool name. I've talked to Susie about that. But we're going to have industrial reps, entrepreneur rep, a local business rep, a school rep, a college rep, and I need two city council member representatives. I've talked to the mayor. He's one of the reps, and I think this is the time when who wants to volunteer.

Anybody so interested in economic development would like to be part of it?

Thank you. That's the end of my participation portion.

So the goal of this working group is take a look at the existing plan, which is from 2016, I believe, and then maybe make some recommendations to make changes going forward. And that will be another workshop in the future. I think I saw Thomas Weaver maybe at the concert. I think, is he on it?

Yes, Thomas Weaver.

Thomas, yeah. So we've got some familiar faces.

So you've got your committee evidently picked to do this. So you're... You're about halfway through Q three right right now. So that means you've got about four months to get your committee together, make the recommended changes and present it to council and get it approved.

The good thing is I remember when we're having these conversations of timelines were flexible on it. So I appreciate you all letting me know that ahead of time. So there might be some flexibility there.

Yeah, and I think when we talked about this, I don't know that we necessarily need to reinvent the wheel. Some of the things, me personally, that would probably be of interest when we look at redevelopment, we may want to...

It might go pretty quick.

Yeah, I think so. Yeah, we're not starting from scratch. We may discuss redevelopment sort of priorities or specific incentives for certain tracks. So, yeah, I think we're in good shape. Uh, street maintenance fee. So Fort Worth, uh, had a study to, uh, two years ago, I believe, or last year to implement a street maintenance fee council at the time chose to table it. It's my understanding that they're looking to bring that back through this, um, budget year. So we would follow the same path. You have to hire an engineer to do a calculation. It would be very easy to copy or come close to copy what's being done in Fort Worth. I was at a city management or statewide city management conference last week. Everybody's dealing with street maintenance with limitations on the tax rate. Streets are expensive.

Can you back up and just sort of give a reason for why we're doing this and what it's meant to accomplish?

Sure. So the thought is there's no reasonable way we can add up staff to have a standalone street maintenance crew. And the way it works now in public service is uh corey um corey smith's the superintendent they get pulled off on a lot of different things so if we had dedicated funding for street maintenance we could have a dedicated street maintenance crew and then potentially more money to do maintenance activities that would be similar that what you heard about with our our sales tax funded street maintenance so um that sound fair Yeah, another thing that's expensive, we have one person in public works who's a dynamo, right? He does our concrete, but we probably could do a lot more contracting out for panel replacements, which is costly. Crack ceiling. Yeah, we just need the resources and the people to do it. I feel like, at least from reading the articles, the Fort Worth Council is pretty comfortable with the because I'm sure that they're getting complaints from residents as you all get complaints related to street maintenance. So it makes it easy when the precedent is there with the big city in our region to follow suit or do something similar.

So are we waiting around to 4th to finish Thursday, whether they pass it or not?

Yeah, I think so. That would be my thought. And then if we want to move forward, we would hire – you have to have a calculation for the fee so that it would stand up to pretty much it's the residential fees fairly easy to to figure out but the big industrial uses your big commercial users it's all roughly try tied to vehicle trips which kind of makes sense more traffic you're generating the greater the impact so do we have any i mean so are we gonna i'm assuming for us already did the calculations because they tabled it last year yeah i think we can do uh i might put kersey on the spot but we might be able to do a workshop and just kind of show the framework pretty soon uh but yeah i think they've got their do you know do they have their fees rough okay nick are you thinking about budget

Yeah, well, I'm thinking about if I've got the numbers and I can put it together, do I even care whether or not Fort Worth passes it or not?

Yeah, I mean, if the will is here with our council, then, yeah, we certainly could move forward. I mean, I feel like lots of other cities are going to follow suit just because. Our tax rate limitations.

I just feel like probably the number one complaint is streets. Everybody says, why are they spending money on this when the streets are falling apart? And I think it's a valid thing. So I think, yeah, why wait?

Yeah, we can move it up.

If Fort Worth has already did the heavy lifting, we can use, I mean, streets are streets. Right. I mean, we can use their numbers to come up with numbers for us. And it makes sense for our citizens. I'd say let's pull the trigger on it.

Yeah. No, we can do that. So this, our facility rental fees, deposits, I think we're going to talk about food truck related fees and changes in law this evening. This will be a future council meeting, probably sometime in July. So really nothing new there. No news here on hotel recruitment and the study.

None since the last meeting.

Yeah. No Hilton coming yet?

You know, the Ritz Carlton kind of called, but we had to say no to them. Yeah, there you go.

Four seasons.

Lowe's is going all over Arlington. Yeah.

That was actually at the Texas City Management Association. They demoed one of the older hotels in Arlington, so that was kind of cool. Sure is. Shared, yeah. And I think Lowe's might have bought that site or something. They're expanding.

They've already started a new hotel right on that property.

OK. Yeah, that's pretty interesting.

I actually got, they actually did bought me a dynamite. Yeah, they imported it. And I asked Dan, what do you mean? I would have loved to went and seen it. He said, oh, yeah. Didn't tell me.

Big city amenities.

That's right, yeah.

Cybersecurity, audit risk, this is complete. Minimum property standards, we're kind of monitoring. We don't have any, I don't think we have anything of note.

No, just remain focused. Yeah. No pertinent updates.

Strategic plan, we'll wait until the end of the summer when we're finished with our budget discussions. And we'll do this again next month, so happy to answer any questions.

Appreciate it, Gabe.

Sir?

Are we still okay with having this once a month? Yeah. It seems like we're not, not everything is, has update once a month. I was thinking, do we want to do it every other month? You guys like once, y'all like once a month? I like it once a month.

I like it once a month.

All right. There you go. We'll keep doing it. All right. Thank you, Gabe. All right. So two things, two housekeeping. We're going to four, which is public hearing. So during a public hearing, anyone can speak. You don't have to fill out a form, but I will call for them at the appropriate time. So we'll housekeeping there.

So at...

633. We're in a public hearing. Consideration of acts regarding a specific use permit to allow operation of an ice water kiosk at 345 Morse Saga. That is Susie Victor-Trofino. Welcome.

Yes. Mr. Mayor and Council, as a reminder, we have seen this item just in a different version. We had this item in being just added to the permitted use table point blank because we did not have an I slash water kiosk use point blank. Since then, y'all have voted to approve the addition of this use both in community commercial and neighborhood commercial through an SCP. So because of that, we have an SEP application before you for an ice slash water kiosk at 345 North Saginaw Boulevard. As a reminder, a ice slash water kiosk will be defined as a self-service machine or booth where people can purchase ice and or water, typically located outside stores, gas stations, and parking lots. 345 North Saginaw Boulevard is part of the Saginaw Boulevard Overlay District, as well as in Community Commercial Zoning District. P&Z did see this last Tuesday, and they voted to recommend that the city council approve the SUP request four to zero without any added stipulations. With that, the applicant is here to have a deeper dive into their specific business, but if y'all have any questions for me, please let me know.

Any questions for Susie before we hear from the applicant?

Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am. Y'all want to come on up? Sure. Welcome, y'all.

Thank you. Thanks for having us again. I'm just going to pull up mine since my notes are not on mine and not on the screen. How's it going?

Howdy.

I'm Jennifer Craver. Thanks for having us. This is my husband, Scott Craver. And as Susie mentioned, we are here to discuss adding an ice and water vending machine. I do just wanna, for wordsmithing, I know that it is listed as a kiosk in the documents, but the particular company that we are looking at within their company, they call the different size machines different. ONE IS AN ICE HOUSE, ONE IS AN ICE KIOSK AND ONE IS JUST AN ICE VENDING MACHINE. I DIDN'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY CONFUSION WHEN WE WERE TALKING THROUGH THE PRESENTATION. Well, again, as I mentioned, my name's Jennifer, and this is Scott, and we're here for a special use permit to place an ice vending machine on the property my family's owned since 1958. This is a use that is not currently defined, or is currently defined on the city chart based on our last meeting, and now we're here for just a special use permit.

Go ahead.

As mentioned, it's family owned since 1958.

Hard to get good help, isn't it?

I know.

Oh, OK. So approximately two acres located within the established commercial corridor, historically used for small businesses and community serving purposes. Also, this request is just for approval of a low impact neighborhood serving ice and water vending machine. Oh, mine's so much cuter. I don't know why it didn't go. That's okay, so I have to click faster through mine. Again, the ice and water vending machine, it's a self-service, low-impact use, no outdoor storage. There's no staffing required, no employee parking. There's minimal traffic generation, no drive-through stacking, and no amplified sound with the machines. And it provides an essential daily service. This slide shows the detailed site plan on where we want to place this and it is on the corner of West Northern Avenue and North Saginaw Boulevard. The next slide will show a little bit more detailed PLACEMENT OF THE ACTUAL MACHINE. SO WE WOULD LIKE FOR THIS TO GO IN THE CORNER OF THE PROPERTY JUST BECAUSE IF WE DECIDE TO DEVELOP THAT LATER, IT WOULD STILL BE OUT OF THE WAY OF ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OR IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE IT, WE COULD ALWAYS DO THAT AS WELL.

SO IT IS SEMIMOBILE OR MOVABLE?

It is movable, so it will come all together, and one big machine will have, it'll travel from Georgia, and then it will be lifted up with a crane and placed onto a pad that we would prep before it arrives, and then we would do some additional work Add adding of the pylons that are as you see in this picture It may not look exactly like that But that's our intent is to have pylons around the building just so no one moved might crash into it There was one before at the blazing hospitality was and they actually sold it whenever that land was getting redeveloped so it's definitely

That was one of my questions. In the future, if you want to develop that area or do something, you could move that to another location or that's, it's not fixed there forever.

Correct. Absolutely. We just actually have one by our house that was just moved. So I looked into why it was happening. Sometimes when people retire, they sell them to others and they move them to a different location. So we actually got to watch it be picked up by the crane and moved onto a truck and then moved out. And of course, that pad is still there and the pylon. So then those are different structures that would have to be removed separately. But I just wanted to note on the overlay benefits here. This particular item does occupy only one or two parking spaces. It preserves the open space just in case we do want to develop around it. And then it allows for enhanced landscaping if we choose. And it has a minimal visual impact from the boulevard. THERE ARE LOCATIONS LOCATED AROUND THE CITY, THERE ARE SEVERAL IN THE FORT WORTH AREA AND THE SURROUNDING CITIES THAT PEOPLE DO MODIFY THEM SO THEY MIGHT PUT A BRICK OVERLAY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THEM OR I'VE SEEN A STUCKO ONE, A FEW DIFFERENT OPTIONS. WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO KEEP IT CLEAN, SIMPLE AS IT COMES BECAUSE we feel like it's nice visually. So just want to point that out. why it fits this proposed structure. It's small scale commercial amenity. It has limited visual mass, architecturally compatible. It enhances landscaping opportunities, no large building footprint. Again, compared to typical commercial uses, there's less traffic, less pavement, less signage, less lighting, less noise, and less visual intensity. An independent market validation is that there are 26,000 projected annual events for this particular location. That was done by a report which is an independent third party analysis that demonstrates whether the proposed use is supported by the market and the surrounding community. This third-party analysis confirms that there is a strong demand and capability for this location. In fact, above 30% of the top bins in the area, this would fit within based on the number of cars that drive on the boulevard daily. So it would be a positive. The impact... Again, two parking spaces about the amount of footprint that it would take up. There's one to three minute dwell time. It's self-service, no staffing, low trips, minimal site circulation as compared to the typical retail where you would need 10 to 30 parking spaces depending on the size of the retail. Again, each visit would occupy 10 to 30 minutes. staffing, continuous traffic flow, and internal circulation required. I just also popped in a little comparison chart that shows the things that I just talked about. Again, we would not have employees. The only employees that would really work within this kiosk would be those that are coming if something was going wrong. And we can monitor that with an app. So it tells us if things are not producing correctly, or if it's down, or if the temperature is too high inside the building, all of the things. It monitors it for us. So I did want to show a couple of the different options, because we will take a look, hopefully, if this passes, on which one we would want. This is the one we want to have. It's the ice house. It's got a larger footprint. You can see it's 8 foot 4 inches wide. It's 24 inches deep and 15 feet in height. roughly two parking spaces. It produces bulk bagged ice and filtered water. So the difference in the two, this, if you bring your cooler, you can put it up underneath the chute and it'll shoot ice directly into it. The next one only does bagged ice. This is just another design of one that I pulled to put on there. And this is their, and when I say their, I mean Twice the Ice, which is from Ice House America, the company that we would really look at getting our kiosk from. This is the difference. They are approximately six feet wide, and then it could be 12 or 16 feet deep. and only 13 feet high so it doesn't take as much electricity it occupies fewer parking spaces and again as mentioned it only does bagged ice and filtered water so The technology behind it, it's on-site production. There's a filtration system that guarantees freshness of all the ice and the water that's going out. And again, there is an app integration so we can monitor everything on that. And the dispensing options are different. The tech behind it, it's remote monitoring. And then we can also manage the assets that are coming out of there. And again, house versus kiosk. And on the PowerPoint that you all have, you can also click and you can see how it works. It's kind of a long video. I didn't want to play it today, but it gives you all the ability to look at it. Again, listing existing local precedent, there has been two similar ice and water vending machines previously approved. These facilities have demonstrated compatibility with the local development patterns. And with that being said, one was placed in an area that was then further developed so they had to move it out of the way so that it was a thoroughfare that needed to go through in the development. So there is one remaining smaller machine in the parking lot where Taco Casa is right behind the Valero. So we're here for the request for approval. Again, this shows that it serves a demonstrated community need, generates minimal traffic, creates virtually no noise, odor, or operational impact. It supports the goals of the community and commercial district. It can be enhanced with landscaping, architectural screening to complement the Boulevard Overlay District. It represents one of the lowest impact commercial uses available within the district. Independent market analysis again confirms the location is highly suitable for this type of business and for these reasons. We are here to respectfully request that you approve the specific use permit for the 345 location on the boulevard. I do want to mention that we also, as a family, own that adjacent property, so we do have two lots there. This would only take up a portion of 345.

So you're doing the ice house.

That is what we would like to do, is the ice house. And it's really going to depend on questions, comments from you all, and then also what's available. Like we had an ice house that was Available, but we missed out on it because it was already built it was being refurbished because someone retired It was still relatively new. It was only a 2018 model, so Really just availability and what we find out if we get further into the process when as far as like other Permitting parking spots dealing with TxDOT all those things that will we would do as we go further along in the process Council questions

You mentioned it can be landscaped. Do you have a plan to landscape?

I think the majority of the landscaping would come from if we decide to develop further. But I'm sure my husband can attest that I'm quite the landscaper. So it's really just going to depend on how it sits on the lot and what the possibilities are. So we would definitely look into getting some information from city staff if they're some ideas of how they would like to see it landscaped, we're happy to do that.

Yeah, that would be my question really for Susie is I know the overlay district has certain rules about the landscaping. Does that apply to this? Would they have to do that? Okay.

I didn't hear the response. What did Susie say? She's right behind you, Larry. Come on over.

Yes, any structure on the boulevard, it would apply to that.

Mary, do you have a question?

Not a question. Just a comment that I had mentioned in a prior meeting. This looks fine for community commercial, per se, but not in the Overlay District. The Overlay District is a special district that we are trying to upgrade the look of and have a vision for it and want to attract high-end retail and sit-down restaurants. this really isn't appropriate for the vision we have for the overlay district in my opinion council other questions

Brett? This might be a question for Susie, but was the existing water supply, was it in place before the overlay district was created and then the overlay district got created and so it falls within the overlay district now? Or was it approved after the creation of the overlay district?

So it technically, again, it was not allowed from what we consider the permitted use table today. So it shouldn't have been allowed on the Boulevard District at all. I believe when we did our research, it was there before the creation of the district.

If my memory serves me correct, it was there before we did an overlay district. Overlay district is relatively recent.

All right.

And I would like to just say that if you could do the larger one, and the reason why is because the ones that I've seen where they don't do it, what ends up happening is the construction workers, the lawn care workers, the plumbers, the guys that come out and are doing that work, they end up taking the bags, dumping into their cooler, and then they just go, right? So we don't want to trash up the boulevard. We don't want to trash up the lot, the neighbors. So I think the larger one would be the way I would go. That's just my two cents.

And I agree with that wholeheartedly.

Other questions, council? You answered a couple of my questions. My question was, we put it here now, we approve it. You put it here now, in the future, you get an offer on the land or something. We bring something to you, and you're like, cool, but it can be moved. I thought it might be permanent, and we could not do it.

So correct. And I respect Councilman Copeland's opinion on that. But right now, we have nobody wanting that property. I mean, if you look to the north, you have a hotel that's not appealing. You have another business that's not appealing. And then to the south, you have a strip center that's been built that's been sitting vacant for over a year. You've got one business in it. So we're trying to get this to start, and that's why we're putting it where we're putting it so we can move it once the development, if we develop that piece of property.

And I agree with that. That would be my thought. You can do that something. This is a, I don't want to say temporary, this is a today fix and then in the future something else. You still got that, you can move it. So that was my biggest concern. So thank you for clearing that up. Sure. Other questions?

Just a comment. The previous one that was where a firehouse substance that is now that had that brick wrap on it and to me it was a lot more eye appealing. I drove past one of these today on Meadowbrook in Fort Worth and it just I appeal you know it's like putting a big billboard up now.

So I have a question. How far is the boundary for the overlay district? Is this like as far north as it goes pretty much or is there more north of that?

In terms of just how long the boulevard district, it covers all of Saginaw Boulevard as long as the property has frontage or access to the boulevard. So it's extensive throughout, within our city limits, of course. Excluding the square.

Other questions, council?

I think folks appreciate it.

I do have one comment that we got from this. I will read this for the record. This is from Deborah Hill. She says, in favor. There are no other comments on it. So just for the record, Deborah Hill, in favor. And that is she is a neighbor who owns property, I guess, adjacent to this property. So for the record. Other questions, comments before I close out this public hearing? Anything else? Any other questions for Susie? All right, then. At 6.54, I take us out of the public hearing. I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve 4A as presented.

So I'll give a second. Valerie, second. Please cast your votes. Looks like 1, 2, 3, 4. Motion passes 4 to 3. All right. Thank y'all, folks. Good luck. Thank you. Wish you the best. We are at 6.54. We're back in a public hearing. Consideration of action regarding a specific use permit to allow operation of a convenience store with fuel sales at 520 Saginaw Road. Louisa. Welcome, Louisa.

Good evening, Mayor, Council. We received an application for a specific use permit request to allow the operation of a convenience store without fuel cells at 520 South Saginaw Boulevard, Suite 100. The shopping center in which that suite is located is zoned as community commercial and is within the Saginaw overlay district. This district's where we have a higher concentration of convenience stores, giving its proximity to Saginaw Boulevard, of course. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting last week, the applicant indicated that they will be now operating from a different suite within the same shopping center to allow for more floor space. The new suite address is 522 South Saginaw Boulevard. It is a suite, it just has its own individual address. We did consult it with our legal team to ensure that that change would be appropriate and notices for the public hearing were also made to ensure that an address change within the same shopping center would be permissible. The applicant's proposed business hours for the convenience store would be 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. seven days a week with an estimated four to six employee count for operations. Products to be sold include fresh produce, prepackaged meals, coffee, yogurt, other prepackaged snacks, household essentials, health and beauty products, state lottery tickets, scratch-off games, amongst others. The applicant will also be selling tobacco products at the location. and noted within the application that only 10% of the floor plan will be composed of tobacco products. For the new suite that he would be operating from, that is 5,000 square feet total in size. The 10% of the floor plan equates to 500 square feet for coverage of tobacco products. Prior to an application being submitted, the applicant did approach staff to confirm what the appropriate use would be for his business proposal and disclosed from the beginning that the intent was to sell 10% of tobacco products from the total floor plan of the business. Based on the definition that we have for convenience stores with or without fuel cells and tobacco shops It was determined that the convenience store without fuel cells was the appropriate use for his proposal just for reference for you guys's consideration tobacco shop definition is a retail establishment for which more than 50% of the gross floor area is dedicated to the display and retail sale to the public of tobacco products, including electronic vaping devices and related accessories. On June 9th, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of the SUP application as presented. The applicant did provide a list as well of the tobacco and nicotine related products to be included, but he's also here present at today's hearing to speak on a little bit more detail about what those products would entail and examples.

Before you step down, Louisa, any questions for Louisa before we let you go?

Sorry, and we are just going to go get the applicant. I think he had to step out for a minute.

Any questions for Louisa before the applicant comes in?

I'm trying to figure out. So are they asking for more space now than what was in our packet?

What was that, sorry?

Are they asking now? We had a packet. Is this the exact same or were they asking for more space or?

So after the agenda had been posted, we were notified by the applicant that they would be moving to a new suite that became available and is larger in space. And he did provide renderings for that new location that we sent over to our city secretary this morning. I'm sure she forwarded over or if Pedro could pull it up as well for you guys to look at the new renderings of reflecting the size change of the suite.

It's in the same shopping mall, just a bigger.

Yes, it's just a bigger suite.

Council, other questions for Louisa? I'm assuming it doesn't say that there will not be any sexually oriented products for sale. Is that?

That was not listed as any of the products on their product list.

If it's not listed, that means they can't sell it? Is that how that works?

Yes, out of an abundance of caution, if you want to add a prohibition to the motion, if you want to approve it, I would recommend it.

I mean, that's the thing. I mean, I sent some questions in, and definitely there would have to be restrictions put on this. I'll just state them. One, no sexual devices. Two, and I'd almost say I would... I'll probably move the table this until we can get lawyers consultation on this. But I'd like to see how, I'm not a lawyer, but paraphernalia. So I got no problem with them selling tobacco. I got no problem with them selling e-cigarettes. I got no problem with them selling the packets that go into e-cigarettes. But all the other profanity that gets tagged along with it, things, I'm not an expert in this, I don't know, but they call them bongs, they call them water. I somehow want it worded where they can't sell that. Anything like that, okay? I also want it where they can't have any pictures of marijuana leaves or anything like that out there. And I also, I know it's a lot, but hey, I also want in there to where they can't have these gambling or pseudo-gambling prices. Yeah, right. Like, I'm going to play this game and I'm going to get a teddy bear and I'm going to trade the teddy bear in on a dollar. We just don't want it. So I don't know how to do that. I don't know how to put it all together. I don't know if we have enough. I definitely am too ignorant within all of these things to put it together. I know what I want. I need you to format that into a lock type.

here you go sure i can actually do that um i talked with louisa earlier today and i said my main problem is i'm not a drug paraphernalia expert so i can't help you with the uh the names of the items but if you come up with the list i can certainly word it so that they're prohibited those things we just add to the motion correct correct are you okay with that so the motion do you want to take my question about tabling is because

We've already published it, all that good stuff. They went through P&Z. Would that become their P&Z again? I don't think they do, but that's my questions I have about a table.

And we're just going to retable it. We don't have to take it back to P&Z, right? You do not have to take it back. Okay.

Do we have to publicize it again, put another ad? How does that work?

No. So if we hold the public hearing today, which you've opened, then once you close it, we've satisfied the public hearing requirement, and then we can table it for however long you want.

So we don't have to do the public hearing again? No.

Oh, okay. No. You've checked that box.

Thank you. Well, here's my thing. I'm okay voting on it today, okay?

But we'd have to have the correct person.

We don't have the correct person. You know why I'm voting. Would it be beneficial to go into an executive session now? Yeah.

Well, what can...

I don't know. That's what I don't... Would it be beneficial to go into an executive session now to... We could.

I just received a note that the applicant had a medical emergency and is not here to answer any of your questions. So I don't know if that means we just need to table it anyway.

Yeah, we can just table it and continue the discussion next time.

Then maybe you could get us the correct verbiage that we want. The correct verbiage that we want.

Mary, yes.

Amen.

Before we make a motion to table, I wanted to get this on the public record that, once again, I feel like this use is not acceptable for the overlay district. I just wanted to get that in the record. We're trying to upgrade the look. We're trying to upgrade the things that are offered there. This just doesn't go along with our vision of the overlay district, so I just wanted to let my opinions be known about that.

Thank you, Mary. Other questions for Louisa before we do any kind of public hearing? I do have one comment, a reply form I'll read for the public record. It's from Trey McKenzie at 424 South Hampshire. He's opposed. He says his comments are it is too close to families for safety reasons along with maintaining residential home values. It will increase crime and eventually run good families out of the area. It will turn I can't read this. Oh, it will turn ghetto quickly. I'm reading, that's not my word. I'm reading the comment. So this is for the record from Trey McKenzie, opposed. All right, any other questions for Louisa?

Just a comment. I'm not sure if this is the same applicant. A few years ago we approved a tobacco sales shop and it turned into everything a whole lot more than that and it kind of concerns me that you know code enforcement had to go in they were selling sexually oriented stuff um and it was a lot more than cigars and tobacco that was it was sold to us on and you know to nick's comment seeing you know marijuana leaf on the sign and stuff just that's the kind of stuff we don't need in the city especially in the overlay district

You have anything else?

No, since it's table, just FYI, during our next meeting, you guys will be able to add that verbiage to set those limitations within your approval if it were to be approved.

That's okay. And it is a public hearing, and anyone who wishes to speak on this at this time can approach the microphone. So if there's any audience who wishes to speak, now is your turn. If not, at 7.06, take us out of a public hearing, and I will entertain a motion.

Mayor, I move that we table this.

Do we want to see how long the table, or can we leave it open-ended?

You can leave it open-ended, but we might want to give staff some direction on when to bring it back.

When you get it, when you get that pencil whipped together for us. I'll still need someone to supply me with the list of the taboo items. So once I have them, I can have them. We're going to have to find somebody that knows that stuff, because I'm as ignorant as you are. That's right.

The old man right there. He sits in that corner.

I think that's going to be interesting to note, though, because it's not paraphernalia until it's used in a manner that makes it paraphernalia. So when you're talking about bongs and water pipes and things of that nature, those can be used for legitimate tobacco purposes, not necessarily illicit purposes. So trying to identify that as paraphernalia is going to be the key to that, and you're going to have to tie it back to some kind of illicit drug or activity.

So we'll just leave it open-ended for now. Yeah. So I have a motion. Do we have a second? She's second. Valerie's second. OK. Discuss your votes. I see Nick, Valerie, and now Valerie's vote. Nick and Mary have not voted yet.

I pushed it about eight times.

Oh, mine's not voted either. Well, son of a gun. How do you vote, Nick?

Yay.

Mary? I vote yay as well. Motion passes. It is tabled.

Oh, there it went.

It's slow.

Okay. How can we do it? Now we voted.

We voted a lot. Early and often. There you go. Okay.

All right. Thank you, folks. We're moving on to 4C. So at 7.08, we're back in public hearing, considering section regarding a textual agreement to the standards and development plan for track one of the square plan development. And this is Maria. Welcome, Maria.

Yes, sir. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I have a couple slides. So we received a request to update the square plan development. Specifically, we will be discussing tract one, the 1.3 acres that you see on your screen right now that is outlined with red. This is located at the intersection of Saginaw Boulevard and Saginaw Square. If you could go to the next slide. Oh, I'm sorry. I have the clicker. So the zoning is based off of community commercial. They aren't requesting any changes to the standards. They are only updating the conceptual plan. So this is the original PD that was proposed and approved in 2019. So the original intent was to have a multi frontage building. So what you're seeing on the bottom of your screen is that building that has entrances on three sides and that you have frontage off of Saginaw Square and Saginaw Boulevard. So that was updated in 2024, but the property that we're looking at today was not updated. So this is just a visual of what the original intent looked like, right? You have parking on all three sides and you have the frontage. So you have multiple entrances and the intent of this was to allow a more walkable shopping experience. And it also allowed for maximum visibility for any surrounding properties. So the proposed conceptual plan is a strip center-like building. So it would include five suites, and it is an increase from 4,857 square feet to 9,200 square feet. So there is a little bit of an increase. They are proposing one restaurant, one donut shop, in addition to retail, food services, and personal care tenants.

Maria, you said a restaurant. Can you be more specific? Is it a sit-down restaurant? Is it, say, fast food? Is it a fast casual?

So within their narrative, they didn't specify. I believe they don't have a tenant currently that they are talking to, but that is what they're hoping for, a restaurant. However, today you can specify whether you want a sit down or a different type of restaurant. So there are, as I stated before, there are no additional changes to the standards. This is the proposal that you see on your screen. So let's go to the next one. So the, let me go. the proposal did go through staff review and through the drc review staff suggested that the layout be modified so that it was aligned better with the current pd and you had instead of one entrance on one side you had a multi-frontage building however what you see before you is what the applicant is proposing they did express during that review and during the planning and zoning commission meeting that the reason why we are proposing these changes is to allow for additional tenants and for businesses that occupy bigger spaces to be able to come into this property. So they would be limited with the current PD. So after review at last week's PNC meeting, there were two stipulations that were added in their recommendation for approval. The first one, so they envisioned this property to have an outdoor amenity. Specifically, they stated that they would like to see an outdoor patio, an activated amenity space, or outdoor sales area. and we did have run this by the building department just to verify that this is something that is allowed within this property and they stated that there aren't any ordinances that prohibit these types of uses however they did want to note that because this property is on the boulevard that um this may come conflict conflict with the overlay district and so This would be your opportunity if you would like to limit what type of cells are provided at this property. This would be the time to make those specifications.

So we can add those within the motion? Correct.

Yes.

Questions for Maria?

So when you say outdoor patio, what size are we looking at here?

So I can go back.

Because I didn't, I mean, I've seen there on the side, it looked like you might have a decent patio, but nothing in the front of each one of the stores.

Correct. So it would be, and I have a, so what you see outlined in that blue box, that is what is labeled as outdoor amenity space. So it would only, it would only really affect that corner tenant.

So really then, I mean, sitting here trying to think, okay, so you got to, I guess it could be covered, but it probably wouldn't be because it's going to be bloody hot. And to me then, maybe that last one would utilize it. Correct. The other one, two, three, four probably wouldn't utilize it.

Yeah and within your motion you can specify that you would like that to be a shared space or if you want it to be gated and it could only be used by that corner tenant.

I was just trying to see how practical it was to put that in there. I don't know.

And the applicant did express that they are interested in having an outdoor patio so that is something that they would be interested in looking into providing for the tenant.

I definitely know outdoor patios are nice, definitely if they're covered, and definitely in the spring and fall around here. And I've seen some smaller businesses, if they'd had outdoor patios and be able to serve stuff, they would do better. But this is kind of like all the way to the end.

Yes.

I'm sure the thought is that last end cap is a restaurant of some sort. Yeah, right. Absolutely, that would work then. Mr. Mayor, that is correct.

I'm speaking with the real estate agent on this property. And their goal is for that last unit to be a restaurant with a patio.

Okay.

They don't have anybody in mind. They are talking to different folks. I just want to remind you all, as well, there's a 380 agreement on this development that requires them to have three restaurants. Two of those have to be a table service restaurant. I just want to state that out there.

That's anywhere on the property, though. Anywhere on the property.

Yeah, not just this.

The more, the better.

So this has basically five retail locations or whatever. Five suites, yes. permanent walls or if a tenant came in and wanted two spaces, can they open that up?

We would have to discuss with the applicant to see if that is an option that they would be willing to accommodate for a bigger space.

So just if I came in and the applicant said, yeah, you can rent both of those and we're okay with you tearing the walls out, they would have to pull a demolition permit or whatever it is. Correct.

They would go through the normal process with the building department.

There's nothing in the city ordinance that would stop that from happening to say, no, we can't do it.

So I would have to double check with the building department. I am not familiar with.

There wouldn't be anything to stop them to do that as long as that wall is not on

As long as they're up to code, they're probably good.

So in addition to the outdoor space, they also expressed concern for... Let me go back to that slide. So they also expressed concern for visibility of any neighboring properties if we were to go to a strip center-style building. And to address those concerns, they suggested that there be a double frontage. So... what you see on exhibit B, right? That you would have the frontage off of Saginaw Boulevard in addition to those glass windows on the side that would be off of Saginaw Square.

What do you all think of that?

So staff remains neutral to this proposal. However, we did recommend during the DRC process, as I mentioned, that the layout be modified so that there is a possibility for walkability and multiple frontages.

So you recommended to P&Z or you recommended to them?

No, we recommended to the applicant during the DRC process.

Okay, so what do we have to say in our motion to make that a reality?

So if we go back to the P&Z recommendation, just adding that stipulation that there is a double frontage.

There is a what?

Double frontage.

Double frontage. Number two. Oh, so number one and two. Yes. Can you go back to that? Yeah.

Gotcha. The one and two. This is what we're talking about. Essentially, this is what PNZ said, but if we want this in the SEP, we need to add this to the motion.

So could we say whoever made the motion, we could make the motion with the recommendations from PNZ? That's right. You don't have to read them out. If you want all of them, that's all you need to say.

Suzy?

I do want to point out, so Maria, if you can go to the next slide. One more, sorry. So that specifically says per exhibit B, this would be part of the PD itself within the documentation. So they would follow that glass installation for the frontage. Obviously, there are stipulations when it comes to signage itself, but the intent would be to add that glass portion so that it feels like there's a double facade. Alternative, I'm sorry?

So this glass portion, there's no glass portion in one or two, right, for the P&Z? So this would be something we'd have to add, right?

P&Z did recommend that. Yes, so that's number two.

That's what they're fronting, double fronting. Yes.

Double fronting. See, that's my ignorance. I thought double fronting meant a bigger sidewalk.

Yes.

And so just to clarify for number one, I know that we were talking about covered patio. If we wanted for the only thing to be included on that concrete pad to be a covered patio, you can make that a motion so that we... are then kind of implying that it has to be a sit down restaurant or a table service restaurant of some sort. If you allow the other options, then it can be one or the other. Just want to point that out as well.

So I have a question. So driving by that area now, it looks like lot two and lot three that there was a change from what was originally proposed to this kind of strip mall looking building that's there now. Are we kind of, it feels like, was that a change? When was that change made?

So we wouldn't be able to specifically talk about that just because it's not within this, but it was approved by PNC and city council.

Right, okay. Okay, I just, all right.

In 2024.

That's, thank you. Yes. So what does council think about in the motion putting in that that last stall has to be a sit-down restaurant?

I mean, I'm concerned. I wanted the whole thing to be a sit-down restaurant. And I looked at the previous, I know it's outside of this, but it feels like we're kind of chiseling away as we go to going to all strip centers. And that's not what I want. I mean, that's just me personally. It's not what, I don't think the citizens want that either. We want sit-down restaurants. I would rather see it stay like it is.

And we do have the applicant present if you have specific questions for them that you would like to address.

Frank, you have a question?

Yeah. Was there a difference in the parking availability between the two? Did the parking remain the same and the footprint just change? Or did they increase parking spaces? Did they lose parking spaces?

I would have to go back and look at our site plan. I do believe that they are within the required spaces, so that wasn't a concern that was brought up.

Okay.

This is probably more of a question for Brynn. Can we stipulate, I'm tired of hearing the complaints about the nail salons and the donut shops and stuff like that. Can we put in the motion to restrict those, prohibit those businesses from going in there?

Yes, I don't know what the PD currently looks like. They would have to be authorized initially in the PD in the first place. If they're not, then there's no need to prohibit them in an amendment to the PD.

I can read out the uses that were stated within the PD that are prohibited in Tract 1.

Please.

So they are the auto service station, auto rental, cosmetic tattoo establishment. We also have auto repair garage, auto sales, auto service, auto rental, non-depository financial institution, rental store, and repair small engines.

So we would have to add, and on the list we need to add this to the list. Which we can if we so choose.

Well usually a PD will indicate what uses are allowed by right. Either directly stating them or by incorporating an underlying zoning district and saying all the uses allowed in this zoning district are allowed here. So we kind of need to know that too.

Yes, so it is the base zoning is community commercial.

And would nail salons be allowed in community commercial? Yes. By right? Yes. Okay, so then we would want to restrict it. If we do not want to allow it.

Restrict, you mean put it in the motion? Put it in the motion. Okay.

That's right, because you're taking more pieces off the table that are otherwise entitled to it.

I'm trying.

Our residents, you know, when the plan development was approved, everybody got excited about restaurants coming. We're going to tick people off if we come back and tell them that we're not giving them the restaurants that they've been asking for.

But also a couple things to remember. This is just one piece on this piece of property. This is not the whole thing. There are still other opportunities for it. And you're right. We have promised restaurants. We offered them incentives to bring restaurants that we're not going to pay until we see restaurants. So that is definitely a high priority for this council.

Yeah, the thing that Sean brought up is it's almost like they've been chipping away. They don't bring it all at once for the whole. They're just a little piece for years. So it's almost like we're slowly but surely biting away at the original concept.

And I certainly don't mean it to be disrespectful, but those lots are the ones that are on the boulevard. So those are the ones that everybody's going to see. And they're going to say, why did we allow this to happen? That's the concern for me.

Other questions? Maria? If not, I do think we'd love to hear from the applicant. Welcome.

Good evening. Thank you, Mayor and the City Council.

Will you introduce yourself, please?

Yeah, my name is Kevin Cho. I'm the owner's rep for the property.

Okay. My name is Chang San, architect for this project.

So when the PD was first created back right before COVID-19, I believe, if my memory serves us correct, and we've had a multiple discussion actually with Gabe and others at city council. At that time, well, actually, the intention of wanting a restaurant, we totally understand that. And we're not trying to get rid of restaurant at this location. Like you said, I think it's at South. Yeah, the footprint changed, and we're trying to match that same footprint, and we feel like this is the best use for the property, especially with the land size of 1.3 acres. If we put in a 4,800 square foot, I mean, as far as an economic to the ownership, I think there's a pretty... Big economic impact for us. However, we do understand that the City Council representing these citizens wanted a restaurant and I do understand that The South property we are currently talking with minimum two restaurants Okay, and then and then as far as this one minimum would be one restaurant at that corner Obviously, it has not been approved, so we, you know, have not been heavily marketing or trying to lease the space. But if it gets approved and that's the plan that we have, then definitely that corner probably, I mean, the maximum is also five. It might reduce down to maybe four. If it's a sit-down restaurant, I think each individual space is give or take about 1500 square foot-ish. But in order to entertain a patio, I think most restaurants will probably want, I'm guessing, 2,000 or plus square foot. And we are going to be targeting, I mean, if it's some kind of a carry-out place, I mean, what are they going to do with the patio, right? So we do definitely want a sit-down restaurant, minimum one at that corner, utilizing the patio. And we envision that they will build some type of a... awning or coverage, maybe it'd be a nice table with umbrellas, but I think a little more structural. I mean, we did develop another property down in Grand Perry. It was a sports bar and they've added a very nice overhead closure with mist systems and that sort of stuff. So we're kind of envisioning that usage for that patio area so I mean definitely understand that the restaurant usage and knowing that and I was part of the ownership group back then so I definitely know how that process got approved and like I said the south property there's I think two specific restaurants that they're talking with and also we're probably going to try to put in at least at least one in that corner specifically. And I think at P&Z, they said they definitely want to see that concrete pad be utilized. Minimum, if it's not a restaurant, some kind of a sales area. I think the example they talked about is maybe some kind of a barbecue retail store. And they put their merchandise out on the patio. But I don't really envision that. But anyways, that concrete pad is going to be utilized. But I envision more, 99%, that it's going to be a restaurant that will probably put gates around it. More than likely, they will have an overhead awning of some structure, Texas summer heat structure. I don't think any restaurant wants an open, whether it be a pergola or however architecturally they design it. But that is the intent.

Questions for the applicant? Mary, go ahead.

So I feel like the patio is there to incentivize a restaurant to come.

Correct, correct.

So I mean that would make it more attractive for a restaurant to come if they saw that there was built in patio space.

Correct. And more than likely on our lease deal, we probably wouldn't charge for that space. Although if we've built the structure, you know, that would be an economic plus for the ownership. But typically, and that's pretty large. I believe it was about 20 feet. 1,000 feet. So I don't know if they could use the whole thing, but it is 20 feet deep, I think, give or take. So it's a good size patio. It's not going to be a little bistro, you know, a little strip. But that would be, like Mary said, some kind of an incentive. Number one, we won't charge the full rate, whatever the base rate would be for that 1,000 square foot of patio space, as well as incentivize that they could utilize that space as an outdoor attraction, which was the intent when we first got the PD, was the city wanted some type of kind of an entertainment, walk around, restaurants. So we try to keep that theme going.

Council, other questions? Yeah, I think we're definitely aligned. We are eager or hungry, a pun definitely intended for food and sit-down type restaurants.

Yeah, me too. I'm hungry.

We eat a lot of food in Saginaw. Yeah, so I think that is definitely something that is very high on our list, and I appreciate your comments to that, and I think the outdoor space would be a perfect segue into something like that. But it's certainly what this council wants and what the citizens have been telling us they want for many years. Any other questions, folks? Anything else? All right, thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. All right, again, this is a public hearing, so this is open for anyone in the audience to speak. So right now is the time. If anyone has any comments to make or questions to ask, now is the time to approach the microphone. If not, Bree, do you have anything else to add?

Yes, Mr. Mayor. So we were looking at the permitted use table. And if you want to restrict the nail salon, you would have to specify that a barber shop, beauty salon, and other personal shop will be prohibited. That is how a nail salon is defined within our permitted use table. In addition to that, for a donut shop, if you also want to restrict that and prohibit it, it is labeled within the bakery retail confectionery use, but this would also apply to a regular bakery.

That's if we would de facto be prohibiting a bakery as well.

Correct, yes.

So because it's planned development, you can also finesse the definitions. You don't have to.

I can be more specific.

I can say a donut shop. You can prohibit this use, but limit it only to donut shops. I mean, unfortunately, we don't have a definition for donut shop. So we just need to be careful and carefully crafting it, but it is possible.

And you'd help us correct that?

As long as you make a motion on it. Yeah.

This is turning into the Brin Show.

I know. Honestly, I'm not a baker either. So I don't know if I could get it just right. But what I could do is if you all have a creative definition, I will insert it into the ordinance.

OK. Council, other questions for Maria? Anything else?

You could also require it by SUP. And then that way, they can come before you. And if it's a donut shop, you can turn it down. And if it's a traditional baker, then you can approve it.

That's probably the best way to handle it.

How would we phrase that? We wouldn't prohibit the use. We would say this use is now only permitted by SUP. And state the use.

And state the use, yes. And I'll defer to Maria once again, because I forgot already.

So we could do that as well with The nail salon, because, I mean, getting a hairstylist shop or something might be nice, but another nail shop in town? That's right.

That's right. So that way you can take it on a case-by-case basis. Yeah.

And we just might want to do the same thing for a vape shop as well.

I think a vape shop already is an issue, P.A., isn't it?

Tobacco shop, yes.

Yeah, tobacco shop. That would not be an issue here? Okay. Do we have enough information to make a, to craft a motion? Okay.

We'll stumble through it. Okay. All right.

So Maria, anything else from staff?

Yeah, so with that, if y'all decide to add that extra language, that's just an added. But I would keep in mind that P&Z made some recommendations. So if y'all want to make any modifications to that as well, let us know. And that way, we're drafting this ordinance as properly as y'all are wanting it to be. So that number one, again, if y'all only wanted it to be a covered outdoor patio space, y'all would specify that and then remove the other two if y'all are OK with it being All three, that's another option. But as a reminder, Mr. Hernandez did say that outdoor sales can get a little bit blurry, because technically, what do we want to have out there? And then the second portion, as we explained, is in terms of exhibit B, which is that rendering with the double glass.

I think we're good with number two. I think it's number one we would want to modify a bit. All right. Any other questions? If not, 735. I take us out of a public hearing. I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we deny 4C. Okay. Is there a second? I didn't hear what the motion was. I make a motion that we deny 4C. Second.

All right.

Second.

All right.

All right, motion fails, two to five. Okay, I will entertain another motion.

Oh, I'm sorry. Mayor, I make a motion that we approve 4C with the P&Z recommendations and that nail salons and I don't know what else, other nail salons. Yeah, Maria can help us out.

Nail salons would be within the barbershop, beauty salon, and other personal shops.

And donut shops, bakeries, and...

bakery retail confectionery.

Retail confections. BSPs. SUPs. Is that good? That's good. Oh, one more. I got one more to add, if you don't mind.

On the P&Z recommendation, would you be willing to make the motion to limit to the outdoor patio and remove the activated amenity and outdoor sales as a condition. Because PNZ included that in their recommendation. But I think the intent is that we want a restaurant.

We don't want a barbecue sales, grill sales going in there. With that motion. And that the building, or not building, the area What do you call that? Suite. The suite adjacent to the patio must be a sit down restaurant. We okay with that?

Good. I'll second that. Valerie second.

Mr. Castro votes.

Mine's doing the same thing.

We have some glitches. There we go. Just be patient. And I believe motion passes. I'll have to do some math, but I think it's five to two, motion passes. Yeah, so. All right, thank you, folks. Moving forward, we are at 5A, consideration and action regarding the adoption of a citizen concern response policy. Pedro Zambrano, Director of Economic Communities.

Welcome, Pedro.

community mayor and council uh if you remember back in 2025 we have a work plan uh project list and one of them was the recall of the work order system used for potholes uh highways and grass uh something's wrong uh there's birds in my trees some uh et cetera and general requests from citizens uh we currently use a system called i work so we're moving to a new system called mygov and one of the concerns the city council had was not a lot of things were being updated. Some tickets were left open. And we have the new system, like I said, that's gonna be starting pretty soon in the summer. But we are coming to you guys with a policy, a generalized policy that staff will like to follow. in order to achieve that transparency and efficient service for our residents. I will not read each sentence of this policy. I did send it to y'all on Friday, so hopefully we could just go through it and generalize it. And if y'all have any questions, I am open to suggestions.

I already sent my suggestions back. It was in the thing. I didn't mark up the actual document. I can later. But I did send them back in my general questions to the response. Did you get those?

Yeah, you stated that Section 5, where it states one business day for urgent. My apologies. Let me read the whole thing. All concerns submitted through the platform shall receive an acknowledgement within one business day for urgent and safety concerns and four business days for standard concerns.

uh we picked those dates because it's a brand new system we're still getting used to it but yeah i'll take so the way the system the way the system should work is an acknowledgement back and so since this is an automated system the minute i hit submit i should immediately get enough i should immediately get a knack back and it should give me a unique identifier yeah so okay so so the way this is working it says you can take up today to get that acknowledgement back Me the in all the acknowledgement that I submitted it should be almost instantaneous and I should get a unique identifier and then after that the You should be able to within one day Okay, one day being 24 hours one business day be able to then route that to the correct to correct business. And when it gets routed to the correct business, the person who submits should get an acknowledgment that it's been routed to whichever department.

Yeah, so just to rephrase what you said, or just walk you through the process. So we go online, and we're going to report a pothole in front of City Hall. Once I take a photo, or you don't have to take a photo, but you could drop a map on there, as soon as I click Submit, I will receive an email with a ticket immediately. That's the MyGov system. And then the acknowledgement, I did write a definition saying it's a confirmation that the concern has been received by the city and assigned to the appropriate staff.

And you're saying it takes one day?

That is, if it's one business day.

I guess the acknowledgement that the city's received it is the minute I hit submit.

Correct, but what I mean, that's the definition you're going with, but the definition we went here means the department has seen it, because once the ticket hits, you'll receive the email saying the city has received it, but it could be a Saturday, and then on Monday, the department won't be able to acknowledge it until Monday, saying, hey, I've actually seen it, we've seen the photo, and it has been Shift it to the right department.

Yeah, so it's just like ticketing software that you know It gets populated the eight the user gets a ticket number, but then it gets assigned to an agent So this would be an assignment I'm reading it as if 5.1 is all concerns submitted through the platform shall receive a staff acknowledgement.

We can add wording to that if that's what you all agree with.

So when does the clock start ticking?

For what?

To count how long the ticket's been open.

I mean, immediately, as soon as they submit it. That's right.

Not when the staff recommends it. So to me, the clock's starting. That's when I'm going to start measuring it. So to me, when you say get an acknowledgement that the city's received it, that's when it hits into a bucket. And that bucket is a minute I hit submit and I get a unique identifier.

Yeah. So that's when you'll get the acknowledgement that the system has received it.

You've got a purgatory there.

I think we're getting hung up on nomenclature because I don't, I think what you're saying, I'm not because we've had this problem now in that it gets caught up in the sorting there. Let's say that, the person's doing like two or three jobs okay and the they're saying after that person's after that person sorts it it gets one day so it you got this area from the minute i submit it to they do it as it's just it's just there and that's what happens now they can sweep up i literally have no i agree there for like months

No, and I agree, but that's why it says here that it would be one business day for that turnaround, for an urgent thing and four days for a statement.

For them to acknowledge that they've received the ticket.

No, you get that and you get the turnaround. No, but what it says right below that, number two, it says the acknowledgement by staff will include assigning it to a department, and an estimated timeline for follow-up. So acknowledgement, if you're reading it, yeah, acknowledgement is just there, that first step, part one, but then part two defines acknowledgement, is what Pedro was saying. So I believe that it's covered by this.

If you like, we could change the wording to say assigned. That's just a thought in my head right now, maybe the word assigned to a department within one business day for urgent and safety concerns, four days for standard concerns. I get what you're saying, the acknowledgment.

So let me ask you this. Within this tool, there should be standard buckets, which we automatically know, well, that goes to public works, and it would just automatically sort it straight to Randy. If somebody in there says... Waters leaking then we know that goes to rain. We shouldn't have to wait.

You're absolutely correct But I get phone calls for different apartment stuff. So that's why we're having this Oh, yeah, what I meant was like somehow some people will say oh this is not a pothole this is a something else and then the actual pothole gets sent to planning and zoning. So planning and zoning has to now move it to public works.

They either move it back up to the bucket or they move it if they don't know where to go.

But yeah, the system does allow it. So when you click pothole, it will go to public works.

So there is a certain percentage of these that will be auto-sorted, go straight, doesn't have to wait for a human to lay eyes on it. It'll research it and it'll send it straight on.

Yeah, this is very more guided to, we have one called general. I'm assuming every single request, the majority of them, will go to general because what do we do when we accept a new iPhone or whatever? We just scroll through everything. We don't care and click accept. That's what's going to happen. People are going to click the first one. It's going to go to general. So now I'm going to get potholes and everything from the generalized. So this is what I'm trying to help out is moving people into the right departments. All I'm saying, this is what we're trying to figure out is trying to get people to the right department. But yeah, a sign might be a good one, but I just refer to y'all. Mary, go ahead.

Number four, general standards and under general standards number three.

Are we going to jump around? Sorry, Mary. Are we going to jump around? Because I want to fix five first. I don't want to move around. I apologize. We're not done with five? I just want to make sure we're done with five.

I actually have something on five. Okay. Okay. We'll come back to Mary in a second. I apologize.

Okay. Number four.

We'll go back to Mary in a second. Let's do five first. I'm sorry. I wasn't clear. What now? Let's do five. Let's finish five before we go to you. But we'll come back to you. I'll be quick.

So number five under an earlier number.

on the acknowledgement timeline, just because it was the first thing that got mentioned. So finish that one, get it to completion, and then move on to the others. Okay. So generally, I agree. I just wanted to... To me, four business days... uh sounds like a really long time if i as a citizen have a an issue um we're already kind of on a shortened work schedule so this is really more like a full week is going to pass before i hear back that yeah we're we're looking into this we've got it addressed i i would like to see that come down a little bit okay um you report something on a friday you're looking at business days you're almost into the end of the week yeah you're looking at thursday the next week before you know there's even hey we've got staff working on this we're looking at it I'd like to see that be two or, at the most, three.

OK. So the reasoning behind the four was it's a brand new system. We're all going to learn. The 18th, which is this Thursday, we're going to get our first hands on it, fully integrated. 25th is another training. And the 6th of July is also another training. So that's why I added four, just in case, to give us some grace on that.

but yeah the two or three and what again i just refer to the council on that decision what would you want two or three i like two two um let's put two and then on the escalation policy again two weeks before it starts escalating seems like pretty far out there and i'm just saying from a public perception perspective if we're in an instant society and so if I have to wait two weeks that you might as well just make me wait for a year that's just kind of how I perceive that people are gonna look at this and they're gonna go they have two weeks before that before supervisors even gonna find out that somebody's not doing their job And it's not that bad, but I would like to see that cut pretty much in half to five business days. I feel like it needs to escalate. If we can't get to it in a week, then it needs to escalate, and we need to be more responsive than that.

Yeah, okay. Yeah, I can see that. And just again, just want to reiterate, it's part of that grace period of us learning the new software. Multiple staff members wear different hats. We keep adding hats ourselves.

I'm just reasoning why the 10 business days happened. At the beginning, we're going to have some snafus and we're going to trip over a few. There's going to be some bumps. And then what about the 20 business days? Once we understand what's going on, I don't think these timelines are as efficient as they could be.

Okay. So what about the after 20 business days?

You want to change that as well? I like cutting all three of those in half.

Okay.

No, I think our staff is well equipped to tackle these on and meet even better standards. But, yeah, is that the wish of everyone? I just want to make sure we all consensus.

Yeah, I mean, I think 579 is good. And, again, this is, it's policy, so it's going to be up to the department.

So 579?

One thing to think about is we, the council, are going to hold their feet to the fire on this. So that's why I'm asking, I'm looking at staff, is there heartburn about this? Now's the time to speak up. Yeah, please, the department heads, please weigh in. Is there heartburn? We're going to come back here in a year and say, you didn't meet these five days or three days or whatever it is. And we're going to have a graph and say, this is the X percent of time you didn't meet this. So I don't want to set us up for failure.

But on the same token, I don't want oh, I've got 10 days to do this, and then wait till the ninth day to do it.

That doesn't happen. So here's the reality. You report the concern, right? And it's pretty immediate, within a day or two. You're all going to get complaints if somebody reported a concern and they don't get it. There would be repairs, like a concrete repair, for example. There's no way we could guarantee a two week or a three week. We can relay that to the person, but we're getting bogged down in the weeds here. The intent is to say, hey, I've got a concern, report it, we're right.

And this doesn't, this is not a, we're going to have it done by. Right. It's an acknowledgment of it. I can't see where.

An acknowledgment wouldn't be, you know, why we'd have to wait two weeks, so.

Yeah, that's what we're getting at. It's just 579, it'll just go up to that or anything.

Yeah. So we're good with 579? I'm glad y'all didn't say six, seven, nine. Nope. I'm looking at you, Council Member St. Clair, as the parade.

Does any department have heartburn with those days? Speak now or forever.

I would love to know.

We value y'all's opinions. Anybody have any issues with these dates?

I think Pedro made the point. We're going to go through some training, and we may have better input after we do that. A lot of staff is going to participate in that. I couldn't tell you what the system looks like and what the navigation looks like.

That's a great point. Whatever we go through now, let's revisit it after six months of use and see if this is realistic. Does that make sense? I think that would be a wise thing to do for us and for staff. penalizing people unnecessarily and we're being as efficient as we can.

Let's do this. When's it rolling out?

Louisa is the one that knows the dates and she left.

I'm thinking mid-July, I believe. Let's say the end of July. How much training we got to do? A quarter?

Say that one more time.

How much training?

How much training have we done now?

Do you have people ramped up?

Oh, so we have training on the 18th, 25th, and the 6th. The 6th is going to determine if we need more training after that. Okay.

So let's say we roll it out to end of July. Everybody should be totally ramped up by the end of August. Do you agree with that?

Yeah, I believe our staff can make that.

So then we should start taking metrics the 1st of September.

That's not even, about the first two months of metrics is two months of grace, basically.

Yeah, that you're leaving that out to ramp them up and work out the kinks.

And then let's say by the end of the year or January, we come back here and discuss where we are and if we need to make any changes. Yeah, absolutely. Everybody good with that? That realistic? Yeah.

So before we close five, I want to make sure the 5-1 acknowledgement, are we keeping an acknowledgement or are we changing it before we move on to it?

Can we change it to staff acknowledgement? Staff acknowledgement. That way it's indicative of a person, not just an automated response.

One more.

Department acknowledgement.

Because that's really what you're doing.

They're pushing it to the department.

So department acknowledgement?

Yeah.

Okay.

All right, now, Mary, you had something.

Are we done with five? I believe we are done with five. All right, now, Mary, please, thank you for waiting.

And I actually had something under number five also. Okay, we're going back to five. Which is number two, under number five.

Five two?

The third bullet, tracking or reference number when available. When would a tracking or reference number not be available?

Wouldn't that always be available? This policy was created as a generalization, not specifically for myGov. So there's always going to be a tracking number.

So when available, it shouldn't be there.

Well, I just added it there because technology is technology at the end of the day.

If there's not a tracking number, then there's not an incident the way I look at it.

You're absolutely correct. If someone does have a Social Security number, they don't exist. That's right.

If I don't have a Social Security number, I don't exist.

All right, Mayor, you got your question on number four?

And then the fourth bullet under number two, under number five, estimated timeline for follow-up, if known. I think there should always be an estimated timeline.

The reason that is there is because, for example, I'm going to use potholes as an example. If there's no budget to fill that pothole, we don't know when we're going to get the monetary or when staff is going to get to it because there might be other things going on. So let's say Public Works says, you know, usually we like to cover that in, I don't know, Randy, I'm not even going to put you on the spot, Randy. I'm just going to take it back. let's say it's on average three weeks to fill a pothole, but let's say there's no more funding for that. So we don't know when we're going to get equipment or the funding to fill that pothole. That's just an example I'm going to use. That's why I said when, if no.

The weather can affect that as well. But you still always have an you should still always have an estimate and if you go over that estimate you replan and you push it out. I mean you can't put it in purgatory.

And if there are unknowns as to what the estimate should be I think there should still be an estimate but move it out farther and and like Nick said it can always be updated. But I don't think you should ever not have an estimate. That's just my thought. And then up to number four.

Well, hold on, Mary. So are we going to keep if known? Because I would like to state if known is very important for staff because... A great example, we told people we're opening up a park on X amount of date. We opened it up three months later. We, as your PR person as well, I've received backlash on that. So if we tell people a timeline, people are gonna hold us to the fire for that, even if there's a weather event or something outside of our control.

But even if it's an estimate, an estimate is an estimate.

An estimate is an estimate. But unfortunately, some people are going to see it as yes. That's why we put if no.

I 100% agree with Mary here. We put our best estimate in. If rain happens, it's our responsibility to let our citizens know. So whoever is on that ticket, if it's going to slip, they go back in, they update that ticket so that individual gets known. They say, this is going to slip two weeks because of rain. Change the expected due date, hit submit. The end user finds out that it slipped two weeks and they get why. I can tell you, that's the way it should work. If we're going to shoot for best practices on something like this, that's the way it should work. Putting in there unknown and just leaving it set there, all that's going to do is tick somebody off. One of our citizens.

Again, I just refer to you all. Again, lovely number 11 states we can always change the policy.

We will. You're trying to get a get out of jail free card.

I'm just trying to give staff enough time to be able to get things going. So that's what we're trying to figure out.

Staff picks how long it's going to take them. Staff can push the date. You're not trying to give them enough time to do it. What you're trying to do is give them an unended date to where they cannot be held to anything.

Just change the wording with an estimate. What are we doing here? We've got a draft policy. We're going to come back. I mean, let's move through. Let's bring this home. So we'll change that with an estimate at the end. That's fine.

All right, let's go to four, Mary.

Let's move this along.

And then number three under number four. And you are probably not going to like this one either.

Mary, what section are we on again? Sorry, you said three and four.

And number three under number four.

Section four, number three.

that whenever appropriate you know department shall document updates actions taken and final resolution notes within the platform whenever appropriate it's always appropriate okay so we want to remove that yeah is that the consensus yes all right yeah okay anything else mary are we done with four okay all right anything else yeah we have uh we've beaten this section 10 discourse

I mean, I personally think that this should be integrated into Public Works Monthly Report to Council. And there should be some KPAs. We don't have to figure the KPAs out right now. You all can. But to me, I would like to see arrival closure rate. You know, aging summary report. Do you have a ticket out there that's open 995 days? Some basic metrics.

One more time. So you said agent summary report?

Yeah, agent summary report, arrival closure rate. I know I sent a list of...

So whatever's in your email? The email that you sent? The email that you sent, so you want that list?

I don't know what I'm talking about. But another one is a customer satisfactory rating. There should be some way that if a customer wants to, they can rate their experience.

Do you want to revisit that in about six months? Because I want to know how the software works to see if it allows customer service rating.

I'm just saying these are. So we'll do six months. I'm assuming that we're not going to start gathering these metrics immediately. Oh, absolutely. I think we said wait until almost the end of the year, right? We said two months before we do any metrics, and at the end of the year we'll revisit. Yeah, you're right. So I think it was like September we kind of thought. If the actual people coming up to speed or integrating this into the system takes longer, then we'll push off gathering the metrics longer. So when I read this, I look at, okay, we've got this totally integrated. Everybody's trained. We're running smooth. Now let's start gathering metrics. Here's the metrics we're going to gather.

All right. Sounds like a plan.

And let's be clear. We're picking a lot of this apart, but this is going to be 10 times better than where we are today. Oh, yeah. Much better than where we are today. Much more responsive. So we can review it again at the end of the year to see where we are, what the experience is, staff's experience, council's experience, citizen's experience, and then we can revisit it. This is a living document. Keep that in mind. We can revisit it.

I can tell you, again, I am extremely impressed with the metrics that the team did to pick this company. We went through it and reviewed it. I was very impressed. I'm excited about this.

Excited enough for a party? A launch party? I'll invite you. We'll go to your house.

I also would like to see the same thing we talked about with all these days, number seven to the 20 business days. I'd like to see that shortened as well to 10.

I do not know what section you're talking about. Say that one more time.

Section seven, number two.

Updates should be provided at least every, I would like to see it say 10.

I was going to make the same point, but then I read about the rest of that sentence is unless circumstances require more frequent communication. And I think that a little leeway there is good because it's not just constantly updating tickets every two weeks. So I'm actually in favor of the 20 to 20 of leaving it every 30 days. Basically, once a month, once a month updates on things that don't require more updates. Updates more frequently than that. I think once a month is a good cycle. As I initially, I agree. But then. when there's those tickets that are more urgent than that, they're going to get updated faster than that. And so I don't want staff having to constantly go through and look at, okay, we've got to answer every ticket. We've got to provide an update every two weeks. Yeah.

I mean, it's easy to sort by when it was last updated and just hit the few that are outstanding and say, hey, we're still working on this. There's no movement.

Again, we could always revisit it in six months or the time frame y'all gave us.

We'll see how many there are and then we can change it.

All right. I'm ready to wrap this up. Going once, going twice. Everybody good? All right. Thank you for your direction. All right. So we're going to take a vote. You got what you needed, right, Pedro? That's all we needed.

You got everything you need? You're clear? I'm crystal clear. And we'll be going in Council Member Lawson's house for the launch party for that. Okay.

I predict that we'll be doing a party at my house in August.

Oh, there you go.

Big roast party.

All right.

So I will entertain a motion.

Mayor, I make a motion that we approve the adoption of the citizen concern response policy with the changes we discussed.

I'll pass the second.

Hey, it worked. Motion passes. All right, thank y'all.

Thank you, folks. Staff, I appreciate a lot of work on this. I appreciate it.

5B, review and discussion regarding public changes related to HB House Bill 2844, mobile food unit. Deborah Thomas and Vicki Weldon. Welcome, y'all. And Chris, too.

I'm making an audible. Sorry. All right.

So.

Huh?

No, so we'll go through our questions. If that's okay with you, go through our questions and you'll answer one by one.

Okay.

Yep, that works for me. I'm Annabelle Ackley, and I'm from the city attorney's office. Nice to be with you guys tonight. Welcome. Thank you.

Thanks for being here.

So thank you, Mayor and Council. So we're here tonight basically just to try to smooth out the waters if we can as far as this new House Bill 2844 comes out. There's been some questions, concerns. maybe some proposals or some recommendations to come forth to you tonight. Just so we make sure that whenever we do write this ordinance that we're doing it one time and not multiple times throughout the process, right? So to head it off, I'm going to let Deborah kind of Okay, I'll go ahead and ask the questions then. So we have a couple of pages here for legal questions. Can we still issue a permit or require a mobile food unit to register with the City of Saginaw?

So we cannot require anything like a permit or a license or anything like that to operate. That is all going to come from the State Department now starting July 1st.

Okay, great. So being with that's being done, I think the following items are kind of a mute point. Ask for copies of state mobile food unit permits from them to operate in the city.

Right. So all of these items are going to be handled through the state department who's going to require these items. If the city does have a reasonable suspicion that there's a violation of this state law, then they can then do an inspection and then report those suspected violations to the State Department who then investigates and then either decides to either do a revoking of the permit, suspending it, or denying it at that point. But yeah, virtually everything's going to be handled through the State Department going forward.