Parking Advisory Board - Regular Meeting

following some technical difficulties we'll call the meeting to order at 6 15 of uh regularly scheduled meeting of the parking advisory board that will give us a full call okay

We need to go into recess if we need to.

No, that's okay. We're just going to move forward. Okay. Alana Rosenwasser? Here. John David Carson?

Here.

Dr. Ray? Here. Bryna Miller? Here.

Bobby Warren? Here. Javon Mardin?

Here.

Kelvin Romanozo?

Here.

Mary Hayson? Here. You have four.

We will next move to our citizen comment period. Person is pushing to participate or speak during the citizen comment portion of the meeting. Must email staff prior to 12 p.m. the day of the meeting. Am I going to read the rest of that? We do have a citizen here today. We welcome your comments at this time. We do observe a three-minute time limit, so I'll just give you a break.

Hi, my name is Amanda Phelps. I'm one of the owners of the Tavern on the porch downtown, and I'm one of the businesses that sponsors my parking when we do the major revamp of Kissing Alley and the parking space. So I'm deeply concerned about my daytime lunch traffic where people can park as well as my staff. So I've spoken to a couple of downtown business owners, especially retail kind of in the area with me and everyone that I've spoken with, including Rachel Montardi at Wolf Soul Exchange, one of the little vintage places downtown, agrees that the all day free parking on the weekends is really detrimental to our business. So I know we're talking about moving to paid parking and what these kind of options look like for the late night business. But when people come in for the river, during the summer and stay all day long. We have no turnover on what should be our two busiest days of the week. So this is kind of my perspective as a business owner, hoping that you'll consider moving to some kind of hybrid paid parking program. It could be a parking deck. It could be what we have downtown already on the weekdays where the first two hours are free and then it moves to pay. Does anyone have any questions for me?

We would love to, but I think we can only take moments at this point. Thank you so much for your comments. You do have some more time if there's anything else you'd like to say. That's kind of it, in a nutshell.

Yeah.

We appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. If you have questions or want a little more dialogue with the board, we have citizens... questions and answers with the press and public, so if you have any additional questions related, you can stick around for that if you would like, or you can just email me. you know any questions i can send it to the board and they can either avoid it to be an agenda with accidents meeting and then call it to know um or i think his yeah thank you thank you so much with that we will move to the item

Number 3.1, consider by motion the approval of regular meeting minutes for the May 18, 2026 meeting.

Motion? I need a second first.

Second.

Second to line up. And discussion, Elena? I actually wasn't there. So, sorry.

I like getting credit for things like that.

So if the board members in attendance strike a name for the vote, it would be under absent.

Yes.

I think we need you to send your motion and restate it or do an amendment.

I'd like to amend my motion to remove Alana Rosenwasser's name from the attendance list.

I second.

Any other questions, comments, discussion on the minutes? Seeing none online, we can all vote on the motion. Alana Rosenwasser?

Yes, who's here this time?

John David Carson?

Yes.

Dr. Ray?

Yes. Rhonda Miller? Here. Yes. Gabby Moore? Yes. Javon Hardy? Yes.

Commission passes.

Next item is moving to the report on the section board questions, if any, regarding the monthly reports from enforcement, which are going to hit this month.

Are there any questions from the board? What comments?

And we did update the record items that has the ones that you received in the chart that should be in line with what you're seeing.

I'll just make an observation to get a bit of a wall on our progress, at least it looks like in terms of payments made within the last month down to 26%.

Same observation. We're about three days shy from a month of doing a barnacle.

Just because of not being able to identify a vehicle that qualifies to be barnacled or is there some other reason?

Okay, the problems, the problems.

Oh, yeah.

You all the problem, but the minutes, the Texas state is no longer going to try the recession.

You won't get your first barnacle in like four weeks a day today.

And it is also this is this is our first 12 months of actually being on this new reporting system. So in terms of seeing any of the seasonality in terms of things that would if we didn't have the not the ones on the screen with the one that says citation by month.

Right. Any other questions or comments on enforcement? Move to the next report item, which is present the updated parking income statement.

I know we generally did this quarterly, but staff mentioned that finance had sent it over, so we decided to include it since we had it. Amy or Pete or anyone else wish to provide any commentary before we get any questions on the statement?

Well, I, I did want to bring something up for the board, which we had discussed offline, which is that city marshals office and public works got together on several occasions and talk through. Where the parking manager truly should be housed. In the city, our organizational structure, so we put forward a proposal to the city manager's office to move. The parking manager position from public works into. The Marshall's office, so it could directly oversee parking enforcement and parking management. That proposal has been accepted. And so you may see a change to this. A financial report related to that, and so that'll be effective October 1st and in the meantime. We'll do all the work behind the scenes with HR and finance, and then we'll move to hire somebody. Hopefully soon, like, we'll probably get the position back up. I'd say within about 3 weeks now, or about 2 of now. Yeah, we'll look to find the person because it may take some time. You know, we're looking for a very specialized technical individual to come in and lead that role.

So just to say what you said, three weeks from now, the job will be posted.

That's that's my hope. And yes, yes. Yeah. Yeah. Not not three weeks after October 1st, but three weeks from now. And a couple more things about that, so it's going to provide that that management support for parking enforcement. It's what we're trying to do is create a a 1 stop parking shop for residents and visitors and this really does that. You know, there's 1 department to go to. So, anyway, I just wanted to update the board. It'll be business as usual for all of us in this room. But I think it'll make it a lot easier for residents and visitors to understand. Everything will be in one shop, so to speak. It's very exciting.

And as it relates to the income statement, the main change then will be, as opposed to there being a public works expense allocation, or maybe there'd still be some allocation, but the majority of that will move into personnel. Yes. The manager role.

Yes, and all of the resources that Charles had in public works will also transfer to the Marshall's office in support of the mission.

Yeah, thank you for that. Anything else from staff? I have a couple of questions, but I want to make sure we.

Ask Grace to be extended as I attempt to learn what Pete knows, what Amy knows, and we figure out how to dance together. I'm sure that we're going to have some, whether it be stepping on toes or it's going to be clunky, but we will smooth it out. So just bear with us, please.

Yeah. It's not going to be just a quick transition. Amy and I have committed to continuing to work with the board, of course, as long as needed until everybody is comfortable in the Marshall's office with this arrangement. And anytime thereafter, right? So you have to put up with me for another 18, 24 months. I don't know. But anyway.

Just a couple notes from myself and then others can jump in and say, but on the parking enforcement, it has a periodical 42% collection rate there, which doesn't necessarily line up with the other collection rates that we've been doing. So I would see to recommend that the Get an understanding of how that was calculated by finance or move it just to be patient. Also, the city paid parking pilot program, the numbers there are significantly lower than what has been reported to us before. This is like $128,000 in paid revenue versus I think it was like $210,000 is what we heard last time. So something's not quite right there. We had asked to include this line item, whereas it wasn't there previously. This is probably something only John David will hear about, but I would also recommend that the parks pilot program part of the CP3 program, CP5 program, whatever it's called, be placed at the bottom under other in-home next to part of because right now it's not really part of our base operations entirely. It functions a little differently. So I think that would provide a little clearer picture. picture on the income statement. Two more things. Software says New Park next to it, which is a little confusing because they're not on New Park anymore. It also begs the question, that's not the right way to use that term. But anyway, it also brings up the point of is that software including the software that we are using for City Park or is it just our other software? Is there a difference? I think we could bring that up a little bit. That concludes my comments. I would note that the net income number looks different this time because of the inclusion of the city park lot. So if you took that out, it would still be positive, but not $30,000 positive.

I can make a comment on the difference between what was reported in this. It's probably just a delay in what is being did in the bank. So when we pull the number for City Park, when we report it to you, it's coming from the system itself. It's not what's being hit, what's hitting the bank. Does that make sense?

Yeah, so this is like cash accounting where they're showing it when it actually hits the check. Right.

So we pull it as like what's actually happening. Like in real time, they're going to be a little bit delayed because they have to cash the check, we have to cash the check, you know. sure so that's probably going to be what is the difference there but i will ask for clarification um i know we have this issue in transit um that exact same issue so this is something that makes sense it is like as much so i don't know if they're that delayed on processing which is possible

And yes, a little bit down operational question on that end, who in finance specifically prepares this report.

County manager, thank you.

We have a online question from.

Hey, just 2, 2 questions 1 on the position, given the amount of. Outreach and campaigning that is happening and I know this is a discussion item later. I promise this is about the position. is part of the task for this job going to have a kind of outreach and marketing side or does is that at all being changed by going from marshals to parking board and then the other question is just um city park seems super low for may do we know why you know

you're coming out of phase so hold on one moment i'll try to suggest that it's not you it's us okay uh okay yeah is that better yeah yeah yeah whatever you do so dr ray i think i heard

Your question number 1 is, will the parking manager position take the primary role in communications relating to parking? Yeah, communications communications would still be the primary, but would work in coordination with the parking manager as has happened in the past.

Okay, I'm just thinking that, like. even more than what Charles has done so far, selling paid parking is going to require a lot of like staff expertize. And I'm wondering if that's something that the people will bring in. And then the other question was just I would have expected the city park to be a lot higher in May. Is this about graduation or and or what is what drops drops the the amount in in May?

Great question. It's silly.

I think it's the city park line item that is still to be investigated and could be a delay in receipts from when they get it from the vendor. So I don't know that we can draw too many conclusions from the May number. If you had a different question and I misunderstood, please ask it again.

No, I thought yours was about in general, not just about May. But if that's the explanation, then we're good. Cool.

Thank you. Good, good notes, questions.

I also have one more that's written in bold at the top of my screen that I forgot to say. I would also note that while we've included the parks lot revenues, we don't have any allocation of the parks department's time, which I think we have heard is significant. So I don't know how we really capture that, but that's another reason to kind of bring it up below the line in terms of other income or if they want to get some sort of estimate or allocation, we welcome it. This is obviously a very informal report.

Yeah, I know they hired a part-time person, position, to deal with the majority of the transactions. So, Amy, what I think we would do then is we would capture that with that part-time position's personal expense. That's definitely a firm number because that's all they do.

You know that that's.

Any other questions or comments on this report continues to evolve. And like I said, there's a little bit of a jumble, but I think it's still helpful to have some sort of dark board and some of the operations are coming. All right, we'll move on to our next item, which is to receive an update on the flyer to help educate new Texas state students on downtown parking.

Okay, so on this one, communications has lost multiple people. They are showing the shortstop. We did get a draft on late Friday afternoon. It just wasn't ready to bring to the board. I'm going to meet with our communications person this week, and I will send out a draft to the board once we are at a point where we're ready to share. It just wasn't ready to share. And then we can talk about it during the July meeting and have it go out in August. Like I said, once we have a draft certificate to the board for this week, and then we can have a discussion on that.

And the purpose of this is?

So this is the flyer that we're going to have at student housing complexes and like student-oriented businesses and locations or like the rec centers. It's going to have information about where they can park. Hey, there's off-street parking. There's four-hour parking. Remember, you can't park in the two-hour thing for more than two hours.

It's just something that we've never done before.

Yeah, I've never seen it done. But it's just something that we're going to try to see if we can.

But there's nothing new that we're telling them about. We're just telling them what is. Yes. But we haven't changed anything. No. Right, right. It's just like an educational flyer. I was thinking that we already had one.

But that's what I think happened.

Yeah, we're going to be on Instagram and. We can post it where, like, once it's either the city can post it on any social media. We're also going to put transit on it, just highlighting the transit downtown and stuff like that.

Thank you.

One of the other benefits of potentially this position moving to the city Marshall's department is we have a different cons person. So I'm not certain if that will change. I'll stop short of advocating that it does, but I think that may. As well, since this does touch on.

So, I think. And the supplier that's going to have all of this in one place. Is there a place on our website that has all of these things that they need to know in one place?

Yes, ma'am. So, there's, like, the main parking webpage, which is, like, samrcx.gov slash parking. It's going to have information for employees for downtown businesses. We're going to park if you're a resident of downtown. We're going to park if you're shopping downtown. There's maps. There's enforcement information on if you get a ticket. We do have, like, a one-stop shop for people.

And do we have Cindy working on that?

Yes, it is linked because there's a 7th.

I don't know if this is on topic, but are we going to present at Oregon.

No, it's a new scene orientation. Yeah, they started like. All going as well. Yeah, my nephew starts on Pennsylvania.

So it's also just really research about who can I write.

So they won't even let us compete. We tried for years to talk about, obviously, and. You can also any box or this won't this won't happen.

That students who are coming back who have tickets on their cars. They need to know what to expect. From those outstanding tickets. In fall, right?

So this flyer is not going to address that. That's going to be our reinforcement. Reissue tickets, putting information on their card. What they do. Who said reissue tickets? Oh, I've just issued another ticket.

And they'll get back in the week.

Yeah. Yeah.

Is there, I don't know about this, but is there any value and I, we haven't seen flyer yet. Maybe we can talk about this next time, but, you know, for the month of September for 2 weeks or something, if you get a citation will attach the. And the flyer, I mean, I guess if it's directed solely at students, that might be a little presumptuous, but if it is a flyer that is. Can you get a large amount of information? Like, sorry, you have this issue. Here's some things you might want to know.

The tickets itself have a link at the bottom that says it takes you straight to that website.

And that's already given out currently. Good.

right we'll look forward to that and uh hope to see you next time and we'll do our best if we get something we'll be an email to provide comments um in advance the next meeting so that hopefully we can if there's any action and direction to be able we can do it not just like whatever okay seeing nothing else on that item or someone else looking to speak we'll move to item number four receive an update on the city park paid parking pilot program

This one, because our meeting last month was so late and this month is so early, there wasn't an updated number just yet. If we do get an updated number earlier this month, I can pitch. So that I'll obviously, but just based off the timeline between the two, it's still going to be sitting at that $34,000. Once I get an updated number, I can send it to the board.

We'll just say I'm so happy that you pointed it out because it seems like an awful short period of time since we were here.

I have a question, and it's not about something that's on the agenda, but it's something I think it used to. We used to get a report of some type. starting the parking lot where we go have seats with business owners that would tell us how many businesses and how many spaces. Am I missing a separate email or did it used to be? I needed that information a few days ago and I went, oh, we had that.

I just forgot to add it on the email. Charles would send it on the email that was like the original reminder like, hey. It was on the email. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

I should.

I will not.

But we can get the numbers and send it out tomorrow. Yeah.

And it can always be agendized if needed, and I can refuse from that conversation if there's a question.

I just need to know what the numbers are. For a totally different conversation.

Thank you.

Anything else on...

We will move into our discussion item section.

Discuss staff and parking advisory board members presenting to outside stakeholders to get feedback on the downtown parking benefit district recommendation.

But we decided to put this on the agenda because there's some mechanics we need to think through as we transition from the work that the Explore Pay parking committee or whatever it's called, nobody's quite sure, and the outreach committee. One of the things that we talked about was having the joint conversation, which Amy quickly, astutely pointed out would be a quorum issue. And so that handoff either needs to be discussed You know, today you're in 1 of these meetings all the weeks and post it. There are sort of 3. Order items of business that I thought through that I'll just put out there and then I'm welcome to discussion as to how we move forward from the rest of the board in particular those of us that serve on those committees. The 1st is developing a presentation. Um, because the document is unruly and I won't take part of primary responsibility for that. But, and he has offered to have staff go ahead and put together a 1st draft. Public presentation that can be communicated to other boards and commissions as well as other organizations based off the document summary, et cetera for us to then comment on and improve. Prove or approve of. whichever the case may be, we suggested that staff wait on that until after this meeting so we have the benefit of our discussion when we're out on the next item. The second one is just actually scheduling with boards and commissions and the other organizations. My humble recommendation there would be that we ask the staff liaison to reach out to the appropriate member of Main Street, Josie, obviously, and Parks, Chief Jane Lee, et cetera, just to request to be agendized for their next Meeting a reasonable amount of time at parks is meeting next week. Let's not do that one. And then the outreach committee, I think hopefully we'll be able to. Take care of scheduling something at the downtown association with South square collective. The chamber and the, and I think they also need staff assistance with the appropriate contact to Texas state just to inform them. And then the 3rd item is. If there is interest for the Outreach Committee in having one or multiple members of the Paid Parking Committee attend the first couple of visits, not to be in the lead position, but to be there when there are questions about the document or the proposal, etc. So if that is the case, then I think we just need a general note that anytime there is the Outreach Committee is going to be presenting to a board or outside organization will probably need to post for the potential for the forum just so that the public is advised of that potentiality and has the opportunity for that. And I guess we might need to get the agreement of like the non-profits and non-city boards that they're okay with us posting them. Those are the three things that I had outlined. I think otherwise this Is there any of some discussions in terms of how to move forward with rolling out this, which is also be a little presumptuous that we actually adopt anything.

I'm just trying to get that possibility.

Got it. Okay. I guess what would what would help Amy and I is if

the board would provide us a list of who they want to meet with. I mean, you just stated several.

I think the implementation plan, which Irish has up for us right now.

Oh, okay. I see it.

The paid parking committee recommended it, and then we would certainly appreciate the outreach committee's addition to that if they see so fit. But otherwise, I'll kind of defer to them on my recommendation.

Got it. And the outreach committee is...

That's too, and I think Joe on great.

Okay. Excellent.

Hey, it's been.

Well, we will work to create a. 10 1215 slide slide deck and provide it prior to the next July meeting. For everyone to look at ahead of time, so you can kind of get an idea of what we've put down and then we can modify as needed. Great, you know, we can get you started right? Like, here's the outline and rough draft and. And you just let us know how you want to we'll hand it. We'll hand the PowerPoint off to you guys. And then we'll be in these meetings with you. Of course, we'll go. Yeah, we'll be there.

Appreciate you confirming that that very important assumption.

Yeah, we'll be there.

Um, is there anyone that has an objection to any of the boards or organizations that's on that implementation right now? I'll leave out if it helps get the small parks for main street or downtown association, South square collective and informal with. Represent an appropriate representative, Texas state. The chamber and or the Hayes Caldwell economic development operation.

I have a recommended that that would be the neighborhood commission.

Yeah, generally things that end up in council's lap goes through the neighborhood commission.

I don't have any objection to that.

I'm just, I don't know, but maybe consider planning and zoning commission. I don't know. I may talk myself out of it, but I'd like it to be a conscious decision. We said it didn't need to go there. Then, oh, okay.

Yeah, I didn't think about it. Well, in scheduling with all of these, it's going to take a little bit of time too. So. I think the more personally staff feels like the more feedback you get the better, right? Like, the more consensus you get the better.

All.

Conferred to others in the Outreach Committee. I've seen the case for it. They're not, I guess they wouldn't generally see this as a recommendation.

It may be that that's not something that's in their realm.

The other thing we can do is we can run this list by our, and I'll get this wrong, but we have a manager who does community navigation and resource support. So that might be an opportunity to ask her if there's an organization, you know, for some of the underserved that might serve a purpose here to present to them. I think that might be something that could be considered too.

I think I know that SNPD is currently in the invite with the other departments to join in different sector meetings and they're doing one on one.

If there's any value.

No, because I think the neighborhood commission. Is where the feedback will come from for on behalf of the neighborhoods that are adjacent.

Sure.

Well, the other thing is. Those meetings are sectors, but. But it's like a, an annual thing and so if we were saying, well, we'll gather feedback from 1 or 2 sectors, then we're working well. Yeah.

Yeah.

Forgotten.

I didn't hear it.

Nobody's listening to you.

I'm going to go cry in the car.

I would also think it would be great if the outreach committee, I know I have, it's not a part of this, but it's fine. I would encourage you all to maybe like within the next week or so, maybe just have a quick little 15 minute Zoom or phone meeting or something.

I love beers.

You don't need to do what we've been doing, which is meet weekly. I'm looking forward to deleting that meeting from my calendar, even though I love everyone that's on it. It's going, but I don't think so.

Yeah, I think it would be great if y'all could connect and just make sure.

Yeah, why don't you connect us with the communications person that's in the flyer? We're going to go about with that, too. I can also bust that out in five minutes. We won't be too long.

going to have, Claude didn't.

Amy's being nice.

Yeah, I like Claude. Yes, I know.

Oh, we're not going to that topic.

Oh, yeah.

Anything else on the outreach? I feel better about the conversation that we've had that we'll have a presentation for next time. We'll go ahead and start getting I would say if we, if we postpone a vote on the future, I'm here, I would say, let's not start booking meetings. We do have a vote on this future item today and then we can go ahead and start. Oh, so probably stay with the audience.

Well, what we could do is just kind of pre can. The idea with everyone. so that they're all thinking about, all the board liaisons are thinking about when they might be able to place this in an agenda over the next couple of months. We can do that for sure.

Yes, we can, like, great job. Well, it's like we're not going to be in the first board meeting this month, obviously, so Thursday. So we can start conversations, be there any longer. I don't know if it's today, July, or maybe August, to give us a little bit more information.

Anything else on this side?

All right.

We'll move on to our action items. Discuss and consider by motion the approval of a recommendation resolution for the downtown St. Marcus parking analysis and parking benefit district recommendation. This is an action item, so I do need a motion of some kind.

I think it's got to be a motion to approve or deny.

Second. Second, thanks, Dr. Ray.

So with that, if it's okay with my other committee members, I'll just maybe set the stage of the very long packet that you have in front of you, and then we can make sure it's up on the screen and go through just a couple of items. So we have a resolution, which is the first item, which is up. um happy to come back to this and we can look at each particular point um but just in broad strokes the idea is that it outlines the history of our request to council to investigate this issue again spending a few years looking into it stating some very high level uh statistics that we found from the occupancy observations that were made as well as some other Items that were learned, and then noting that council did approve another ordinance that allows for the establishment of a parking benefit district. And then going into the recommendations that are on the top of the next page are 2. The 1st is the parking advisory board adopts the attached. downtown st marcus parking analysis so the district recommendation report which is what about here in a moment then the second is that the advisory board recommends council implement a parking benefit district for downtown st marcus as laid out there so that's the resolution you have comments or uh issues with any of those uh points let's come back and discuss them the next thing i just want to highlight um irs if you can keep advancing us is the document itself There is a slightly longer executive summary now that we worked on the prior version and looks like it's scrolling on its own. Casper is driving. You ended up right where you needed to be. There is now an existing conditions analysis, just giving the summary of the work that was done to assess the situation. There's also a table, as if you or Casper can into the next couple of pages that just sort of outlines the main issues that were observed. We're not quite there on the screen that we are. And then what some of the objectives that the committee and potentially the advisory board were looking to. I would like to highlight the italicized statement there afterwards, which is that generating general fund revenue for the city was determined not to be an objective of this. The parking advisory board's overarching end goal is to have a downtown public parking policy and assets that support equitable access to a vibrant downtown for all citizens and visitors. So I just think that's important to state. There is revenue that would be potentially generated. The idea is that that will support the downtowns. This is not something to fill a gap in the city in general in terms of this recommendation. Moving on to the recommendation itself, this has been slightly reformatted to sort of state the big points in the headers and then have the details below. So the first recommendation is to create three downtown parking zones, which you'll all be familiar with. The Core, North Hopkins, and South of Hopkins. Obviously the map itself is within the report, but it's not the same here just for space concern. The second is to continue to provide free parking time, especially for residents. This outlines that in the downtown core and North Hopkins, those are recommended to have 30 minutes of free time during the weekdays from 8 AM to 5 PM and 60 minutes all other times south of downtown would get 60 minutes of free time at all times and then residents uh that register their parking session would be able to get an additional hour of free time i will say we did get some some good comments from the mayor which i went through a little bit um which i think improved this last part a little bit uh to be a little bit more clear that that additional 60 minutes is per day um that they're able to use utilize this once per day um

And there's some other peanuts that I'll get.

the next uh the next page then the comment is to i guess i didn't say the last part of that which is just noting that in the south zone that will essentially mirror the existing policy of having two hours of free parking as long as you're a resident um so not that that benefit if you're not a resident but for residents parking in the south zone provided they register their vehicle um they would they would basically have no change in the current amount of things However, then there would be an introduction of paid time for longer stays. The baseline rate is $1 per hour. In the core zone only, after the first paid hour, it would go to $2 an hour to promote turnover, which I think we heard from somebody that has a business in the core zone, and our citizen comments kind of illustrate why that's the case. Introducing a maximum stay that extends from two hours now to eight hours in the core and 12 hours. However, that would, you know, incur fees for those longer periods. And then paid overnight parking to dissuade downtown residents from using on-street parking for long-term. The next big bullet is to expand regulations to Thursday and Friday nights and all day Saturday. I've spoken about that a lot, so I'm not going to go into detail right now. Both points are there. Create free programs for at-risk groups and spillover effects. So that's maintaining free parking for all the accessible spaces. Creating a free parking system for economically disadvantaged residents, which would be validated by some sort of existing city support program, which is not completely defined. That would be part of the implementation process. And then having the parking benefit district downtown offset any cost of a residential parking zone that wishes to be created or already exists within a quarter mile. So again, that is the idea that, okay, now parking is paid for the downtown. If people are willing to just walk a little further, then they get into the residential districts. We have a mechanism for that, which is the residential parking zones, but that does have some cost to those residents and administratively. The recommendation is that that cost would be resolved and taken on by the parking benefit industry. So those residents wouldn't pay. I know it's nominal, you know, a dollar or two it is for $5, I think, a year. But nevertheless, it's something. And then the next bullet is to expand options for downtown businesses. That's both providing an opportunity for business to validate their customer's parking at a discount. So if they wanted to go in more detail in the report, if they want to pick up the tab for their restaurants, for their parking for their guests, they can do so. They'll pay a little bit less. Introduce a limited number of on-street permits for downtown businesses in limited areas, which is an addition that I recommend you before we get to the mayor's comments. And then expanding the employee parking program. And then the last is to spend excess revenues on downtown. So it says basically alongside any other future parking benefit districts such as the river parks, the first thing is if there's revenue, reimburse parking operations for their parks. So this is going to require a lot more enforcement and cost on marshall's office will say now since we have that clarity um whatever loss they run would first get paid back at the end of the year to zero that out and then whatever excess is left over the ordinance that the city passed and that it has to be at least eighty percent the recommendation from the committee that we would suggest to the board is that a hundred percent of any excess revenues stay downtown versus any part portion of it Um, because all of that can be a little bit of a lot, there's also just a description of the executive summary of an example parking session. And then on the next page, if we can just go to it, there is a table. That's good. That shows, yeah, this was a last-minute act, and I think it kind of helps. So here's the parking session's lengths from 30 minutes, an hour, two hours, et cetera. The current policy would be it's free for 30 minutes, it's free for an hour, it's free for two hours, but then it's prohibited all these other times. There is a footnote. That does state that we do have some limited for our zones, but that was a lot to communicate within a small table. So that's the general note. But then under this proposal, what you would have in the south zone is you would essentially have the same. And this is for a resident. So then that's stated there. You'd have the same amount of free available time, but now you could pay $1, $2, $3, or $4 to stay up to six hours downtown on a spot, and it states what the maximum is. In the North Zone, in the Core, you only get 30 minutes because of the university effects, we'll just call it. But then you would have those payment options with even a longer max. Of course, the Core Zone does get more expensive because of that turnover. The financials are not gone into in significant detail. There's a wide range given here, but just in summary, the model that we put together says roughly between $500,000 and $1.4 million per year could be generated for the downtown to use. There's a lot of caveats around that that are to divide the doctorate itself. And then there's a note about the personnel and technology recommendations, just stating that there will be new hires that are required for this. And then a few notes about technology. That's a long section. We may have gone too much in detail, but I thought it was important that we note that we are recommending that there still be some physical meters, that they have multi-language support, and that there's an opportunity to consolidate some of our back-end processes, because right now we have certain portal that you use for signing up for residential permits. We have, you know, the anyway, just trying to get that consolidated. I'm going to go into much more detail there and then a small mention about the implementation timeline. That is the executive summary. That is all that I'm going to speak to as to the report unless there are questions. Beyond going through the good comments we got from the mayor, which we will return to. And then I would just ask Iris, I don't know if this is a PDF that you're on that you can jump to a page, but if you could go to page 131 of the packet. packet does i should say have now have all of the appendices completed so we did slot in all the survey responses um mayor we did add a thank you for catching that we didn't have the city-wide survey in there that is now included there's a paragraph in the main document as well as it's slotted into the surveys we just used this to the scientifically significant version of it which was the one that was mailed out to 3,500 residences. But the last appendix to the report is this application to establish a parking benefit district. And thank you, Elena, for jumping in to help us put together. This just goes, as we went through the ordinance that creates the parking benefit districts, saw what was required, and then at least just completed that in a way that references, that states the general commentary that's required and then references the specific portion of the main report for more information so this has A quick little note about where the executive summary can be found. It discusses the proposed boundaries. The entire map is included on the next page. I guess if you can scroll on page two so that that's very clear. Page three references the areas you can go to for justification for the rate table and a little bit of an extended explanation of the revenue allocation plan discussing how the The city marshal's office, as it will be, would be reimbursed for the funds that are for issues that they have 1st, before anything is paid into the district. And in the last page is just referencing surveys, financial projections and the legal policy framework. We did also reference the parks board has a application in draft. but they're not completed yet. So we did reference that it has a little bit of the same spirit. So that simply can carry over for the future market. So that concludes the committee's sort of notes before we go into some of the comments that we got. But I want us to stop there and see if there are any questions, concerns or comments.

Thank you.

And I'll see you from doctor and she is back with us.

It's like. We had a. Jump in this thing.

If it's okay, if you don't mind, I'll go through the notes that you sent through, and I know, our apologies, I think you had version 12, and this is version 14.

I know, I had the really old one, but.

That's okay. The good news is there were a couple of ones on the front end that I think we corrected already, but. That's good. If we go back, Iris, if you don't mind, to the executive summary.

2,000 pages. Okay.

Yeah, and I had asked Ms. Finn, and she sent it to me a long time ago, and I didn't catch it. So I didn't get started on this until late yesterday.

I appreciate that you just said the comments there. There's some good ones there for sure.

Page 15 would be great of the PDM.

Here's probably the one that's here.

So the first bullet,

I changed instead of saying no longer stay options believed to harm downtown. Sorry, let me just read it. The second bullet. Currently rates low availability, limited turnover, no longer stay options believed to harm downtown. Now that's not true because there are some four hour zones. And so the change is to change from no to few. Few longer stay options.

And these are just the insights that we had. So that was the first change that I would recommend we make.

What does believe to harm downtown mean there?

Well, this is mainly from, I guess it's from the stakeholders and the survey responses. There was a number of people that felt that those three issues were restricting downtown businesses.

Yeah, I think the word harm is a little strong. And downtown, I mean, downtown, hinder downtown businesses. There you go.

That's the doctor that now changed to say low availability, limited turnover, and few longer stay options believed to hinder downtown businesses. Well, that's lovely. Wonderful.

Okay. So this is currently up for adoption.

Yeah, we're going to have to come pick all these back up, I would imagine, with some sort of an amendment or something. Right. We're going to do that.

I have to write this. Sorry.

Tender downtown businesses.

And you're not far.

Oh, okay. I will also tell you that there is a live track changes actually with what I will be sending you, but I do also encourage you to write down what's here and up to you.

That is so much better.

Low availability, limited turnover, and longer stay options for me to enter downtown businesses.

Or even downtown business commerce.

Process of doing business, not so much the business itself. Does that make sense?

I think I changed it to business commerce.

It looks for the one is. Eastern always comes back.

It does. If you'll just scroll down to the

Page four, which is the next page.

There is. Whatever it's ready.

Continue and maybe it's actually the next page.

No, that's it right there. Well, it actually perfect stop right here. OK, so that third bullet I mentioned previously was a little confusing because it didn't say how to do. like if that was per day or if it was per session, et cetera. And so assume that entire bullet is struck and rewritten as I would propose the following. Residents that register their parking session would receive an additional 60 minutes of free parking time per day, excluding the north end core zones during the weekday peak to curtail university-related use, period. This results in a two hour. This results in two hours of free parking for residents in the south zone, which is the same as her applause.

Be happy to read it again, because I know that's a lot.

Do you want to take me to you and back? Charlie?

Yep. Right. Okay. And I'll just make the amendment if we get to that.

That works. Just technology over here.

Reading it again, it would now read, residents that register their parking session would receive an additional 60 minutes of free parking zones, excluding the north and core zones during the week AP to curtail university-related use. This results in two free hours of parking for residents in the south zone which is the same as the verb also. Yes, ma'am.

Instead of saying excluding, because then I would be scrambling and going, wait, which one does it apply? Maybe say including whatever only.

Is that giving us the same end result? Because we've all got three zones, right?

Four north and south.

You would say...

Go ahead. Well, I I think it I think that that we would it would actually get more confusing because. Though there's also the weekday peak and not because on the weekends all the zones actually. Will be normal, right? Or will be two hours. It's just when the university is happening. That North End core excluded, so I think it's easier to have the exclusion in this particular case because it's smaller than the other.

Any other comments or questions on that change?

The next one is then on the fact you just continue to scroll down to the next page and most of them are up front. Y'all don't worry, we're not going 150 pages. Expand options under that one. Expand options for downtown businesses and employees. That's the second last same category from the bottom. The second bullet says currently introduce A limited number of on-street permits for downtown businesses. The question was where? And I think that's a good question. So now it reads, introduce a limited number of on-street permits for downtown businesses in select lower occupancy blocks.

That's actually not what the where meant.

Okay.

Where do you get your permit? Okay.

Well, then there's multiple.

If that's covered someplace else, then we don't have to put it here.

It is in the document itself and we're a little bit involved. I would say it's OK for the executive summary. And I will also say. He's in the document, and it may need to actually happen differently once the new manager and implementation, you know.

Or maybe we could say C section whatever sub 12 subtitle A or something, just so that if people are reading this and they want to go, and see what that is. Just reference it and don't duplicate anything. Then you're covered.

See page 28 is what I will put. It is a subsection. We did not do the sensible section that you're referencing there. And that may be a little less than I think. We can go back.

Page 28 would be lovely.

Is all APA free?

Yes. That's what I thought.

It is free.

It is still subject to the maximum times. So if you are parking in an accessible space for longer than the 8 or 12 hours, then you would be subject to a ticket.

Maximum time applies. Thank you. Do we have this here somewhere? Got it here.

Under the public surveys, which is page 8, which is three pages down from where you are now. Yeah, right there.

So if you go just back up. So we have a little bit of a preamble here, which talks about the context of the surveys that was put in place just to say the surveys say something marketing is a passionate topic and people have different expectations than maybe a reality sport at the downtown. If you could go back up, Iris is actually just a tough automotive next. It may have been a little bit strong. So I have rewritten it in some of these comments we received earlier today. So you can just go up just a little bit further. It says survey contents. Great. So that whole first paragraph is still similar, but I did make some changes. Among them, there's a point there where someone could read it as though the city were going to demolish parts of downtown to create service parking lots. So let's just, that's gone. So it reads now, and I'll look for consensus on if this is worth including, but despite its seemingly dull nature, parking in America has become a passionate topic for many. The car-dominated landscape of contemporary development can also create an impractical expectation for parking in downtowns and other compact areas. Desires for convenient parking often do not consider the spatial realities of historic urban cores built before the dominance of automotive transportation. The expansive, free-surface parking found in sprawling suburban areas is geometrically impossible in compact urban cores without the loss of the densely situated buildings which create the character so many love. And yet, the suburban experience colors perspectives and desires. It is therefore understandable that the average driver has come to expect abundant free parking at all times and places.

That is beautiful. Much, much better. It was a little strong the first time. Yeah. Oh, this is the second version.

That was the second version. You can see the first version, and you can compare it.

My note was it was just, there's too much negativity in there. There's a problem we're trying to solve, but it was harsh.

Is that also update the first sentence of the next one to say very, very small, but it says now acknowledging the resulting difficulty for a survey of public opinion to be a primary guide apart from policy common continues.

Seems like everyone's okay with that change. Beautiful.

Um, DASM. which was at one point in time known as DTA, I was on the court, was not actually defined. So on the top of the next page where it said 2018 DASM stakeholder parking survey now says 2028 Downtown Association of San Marcos parentheses DASM survey. The 75% within that paragraph has also been typed out properly at 75% and the percentages in parentheses.

My English teacher said you don't start a sentence with a number.

I appreciate it.

It may be old school.

This Miss Weatherford was my great teacher. I think he would have been unhappy with that as well.

All right, all the way down on page 12 of the Word document. Thank you. I'll set you up, sorry. Page 12 of the document and instead of going for. It's actually not. Yeah, we're doing some 1243.

Sorry.

Yes, I'm sorry. I think that age numbers change when I did the track changes. Yes, stop referencing.

Somewhere around. Hey, Julia.

I appreciate everyone. I think this is improving it.

It's a little tedious, but it's going to be better than having a whole other meeting.

Next page. Just say it that way.

No, that's not true.

Is anyone else freezing? Yes, I was going to like, I was going to turtle, but I felt. Is there a way to change?

Yeah, I'll text the guy that can control it. Do you want to turn it up? I mean, two degrees.

28 degrees, yeah. Wait, okay. Gosh. Yeah.

Page 17 and 54 in Word document. Page 29. Yes. So originally we have the phrase, despite substantial, despite these improvements in enforcement since 2019, The 2024-2035 data demonstrate deteriorating conditions, yada, yada, yada. Deteriorating might be a little strong of language. So that has been struck to now instead just say, demonstrate increasing utilization far above recommended industry targets.

So simplify that in a little bit less, just a little.

I think the answer to this is having more early morning classes. It helps with room utilization at the university.

They used to have 70 classes. Okay.

So, Mayor, you had a comment I'm just going to address broadly first, was that sometimes we use the phrase public curve, and sometimes we use the phrase on-street parking. And I believe the phrase public curb is generally used when it's talking about the concept of other things could be there other than parking, like a bike lane. However, there was one area where that was not the case, which is a page that I need to tell you about.

Yeah, if it's correct, then that's fine. It seemed like they were kind of interchangeable, like something was pulled from one source and something was pulled from another source, and they were just using different terminology. Yeah.

And it was intentional, but there was an area where it was not.

If it's intentional, then I get it.

36 of the PDF. Where it says hours, the third bullet point.

And The recommendation is to change it from eliminate free overnight parking to ensure residents of downtown properties are not utilizing on-street parking and strike the public curb for long-term parking storage to the detriment of downtown businesses and organizations.

Oh, that was it.

Surprise.

Unless there are other comments or changes that people would like to see before we move on.

So I think that in the application on page 131, there are a lot of references to various pages in the document. I think we can measure.

I will say this 14 version is much better just in its tone and much better.

Yes, the document was written over a two-year period.

It was nice to have a moment to go through and try to I see Dr. Ray has her hand up. Thank you for that comment there.

I there's a very small one. I wish I could tell you which page it is on. I think it's like the first or second in the executive summary. It's right above that. That comment about residents will now have will have two hours the same where we're defining the zones. And we just need an ING. I swear it's the tiniest comment, but it says remain is the South instead of remaining is the South. I'm trying to find the page very quickly.

You describe it again. You the connection dropped when we're speaking. One sec.

It's the executive summary. I think maybe the second the they could just go slightly down. It's where we're saying where we're defining the zones for the first time. I see it. I got it.

Yep, that one.

Yeah, that's it.

bullet third bullet for where it says south of hopkins as opposed to the remain area south of hopkins it should be a jaron i guess the remaining area of south south of hopkins is that it dr red that was it everything else is beautiful this is the bottom page one of four

Oh, I guess the executive summary is four pages. Is that the deal? No, no, no, no, no.

It's on page 16 of the PDF. I'm with you. Which is page four of the document. There are, it says create three downtown parking zones and is the third bullet just says remain and should say remain.

In the PDF document. The PDF is page 16.

And you're giving them a track changes version.

OK.

Administrative question for you, Amy.

Do you want me to go back through each of those and reread them into the record? Or can I make an amendment to say that the changes as discussed and as forwarded to you attract changes?

I'm happy to do either way.

Thank you.

Can he make it in a minute and just say, as discussed, or does he need to read out every change?

He's already read out all of the changes, and that's going to be in the recording. So I've done, and for everything I've just said, the last 30 minutes. or something. The amendments as proposed during the meeting, the fact that you're going to use the track changes to actually put those out there is not necessarily relevant to the motion. Okay.

So I would move that we amend the motion to include the changes to the document just discussed as discussed in this meeting to be verified by staff and the track changes version since and also any page number references updated to reflect the appropriate page and the following.

I second that motion. Thank you.

So now we need a vote on the amendment please. We need a motion.

Okay, so we're just voting on the amendment right now. Alana Rosenwasser. Yes. David Carson.

Yes.

Dr. Ray.

Yes.

Yes. Ida Miller. Yes. Gabi Moore. Yes.

Javon Murray.

Yes.

The amendment is approved.

Other discussion and comments, questions before we vote on the

I'm in the motion. So.

A lot of response, sir.

Yes, John David Carson. Yes, Dr. Ray. Yes. Yes, probably more. Yes. To buy money. Your message passes.

I think I guess John is the most appropriate Indian to this. No, you don't need to apologize. I think it was appropriate. All right. Well, great.

We will then move on on our agenda to future agenda items.

Well, one needs to be review of the slide deck. Yes. For the Outreach Committee.

When did we move on? July. July.

Oh, sorry. When are we going to make? Can we meet after the meeting to look at the plan for that?

We're going to meet and make the meeting.

Yeah.

All right. Put something on the calendar.

We will not make an agenda on this agenda. We will have an item to discuss the presentation, and I think also one which we already discussed, which was to see the communications department's informational flyer.

Yes, you will see that before this meeting by the end of the week, but you can discuss it.

And because we did sort of discuss it this meeting, if you all need us, are you going to take action on it, such as just putting it directly on?

Yeah, you like it.

Informational.

All right. If anybody thinks of anything else they would like to put on the agenda, please email staff or Jovan. Yes, ma'am.

You didn't talk about potential changes to the resolution. Was that included in that? That was included in that discussion.

We need to reopen the item three.

I don't have any. I just want to draw that your attention. But if everybody's good with it, then we're already good on the resolution.

Yeah, the vote was on the recommendation resolution.

No other future agenda.

As I was saying, just please email staff or myself if you'd like to add anything else on. Question and answer session with the press and public. Let's see if we have any. So with that, there being no further business on our agenda, I will adjourn us at 7.32. Thank you all. Thank you.

Thanks.