[00:00:01]
OKAY, WITH ALL OF US ARE SEATED AND COMFORTABLE.
HOPEFULLY WE WILL KICK OFF THE MEETING.
THE TIME IS NOW, UH, ONE 11 ON 24 JUNE, 2022.
UH, IF WE WOULD, LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
FROM THE CITY'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
SAVITA RYE AND FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
AMIN TOMAS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR DANNY LIGA, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
ALICE G**O, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MANAGER, ESTHER ORTIZ, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SPECIALIST.
AND MYSELF, JENNIFER MARTINEZ, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT TWO CHAIR.
UH, LET'S HAVE, UH, SPANISH INTERPRETATION, IF WE COULD PLEASE.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE SILENCE ALL CELL PHONES OR ANY OTHER ITEM THAT MIGHT DISRUPT THE MEETING.
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND STAFF AND THE SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ENCOURAGE OPEN CONVERSATION DURING EACH AGENDA ITEM OF ALL MEETINGS.
THERE WILL BE DEDICATED TIMES FOR COMMENT, AND WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE FORMAT JUST A LITTLE BIT.
AND THE DEDICATED TIMES WILL BE, AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EACH INDIVIDUAL CODE, WE'LL OPEN THAT UP FOR CONVERSATION FOR PUBLIC, UH, ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE MAY HAVE.
UH, FOR, UH, PUBLIC PURPOSES, THE MEETING IS BEING, UH, BROADCAST TO THE PUBLIC SO THEY CAN, UH, TUNE INTO WHAT WE'RE HAVING TO SAY.
UH, ANYONE THAT WANTS TO TUNE IN CAN, UH, TUNE INTO SAN ANTONIO, OR PROVIDE INPUT BY EMAIL CAN PROVIDE THAT INPUT BY, TO SAN ANTONIO, S A C O D E SAN ANTONIO CODE@SANANTONIO.GOV.
OR CALL 2 1 0 2 0 7 3 9 0 4 FOR INPUT.
UH, WE HAVE RECEIVED COPIES OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING.
UH, I THINK THERE WAS ONE ADDITION TO THE INDIVIDUALS WHO PARTICIPATED FROM THE PUBLIC.
UH, SO WE HAVE CORRECTED THE MINUTES ACCORDING TO THAT PARTICULAR CHANGE, UH, CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES WITH CHANGE.
MR. CHAIR, I MOTION THAT WE, THIS IS FRED ANDERSON.
I MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES WITH ALL CHANGES.
AND SECOND, ANY CONVERSATION OR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MINUTES? ALL IN FAVOR? ACCEPTING THE MOTION? SAY AYE.
WITH THAT, THEN, DENNY, WE'RE GONNA TURN IT OVER TO YOU AND LET YOU GUIDE US THROUGH OUR DAY'S ACTIVITY.
FOR THE RECORD, I'M DANNY LEGAS, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
UM, WE'RE GONNA GO OVER A FEW ITEMS HERE TODAY.
UM, DISCUSS THE PROPOSED, UH, INTERNAL AMENDMENTS.
UH, HOWEVER, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT TO QUICKLY DO A QUICK UPDATE ON WHAT ACTIONS WE'VE TAKEN SO FAR, UH, FOR ALL THOSE THAT ARE VIEWING.
UH, SO AS WE GO THROUGH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS, UH, THE S A P M C UPDATE, UH, THERE'S BEEN 66 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED.
UH, OF THOSE INTERNAL 24, WE HAVE APPROVED 19.
AT THIS POINT, UH, ONE ITEM WAS TABLED AND THERE'S STILL 46 PENDING REVIEW.
UH, OF COURSE ARTS YOU, AS YOU KNOW, THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE AFTER THE COMMITTEE AGREES ON, ON THE REVIEW.
UH, IT WOULD BE TO SUBMIT IT ALL BEFORE THE FULL B S B FOR FINAL APPROVAL, UH, WITH THE ANTICIPATION OF TAKING IT BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, UH, BY MAY, 2020, UH, ONCE IT'S APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THEN THERE'LL BE A 90 DAY GRACE PERIOD BEFORE WE ACTUALLY BEGIN THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE 2021 SS A P M C.
[00:05:10]
SO, AS WE GET STARTED HERE, I JUST WANNA REMIND, UM, EVERYONE TODAY, IF WHEN YOU DO SPEAK UP, IF YOU COULD SPEAK INTO THE MIC, HOLD THE PRESS BUTTON DOWN.I THINK EARLIER WE'RE DOING ROLL CALL.
SOME OF YOU GUYS WERE JUST, UH, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S BEING RECORDED ACCORDINGLY.
SO WE'LL GET STARTED ON THIS FIRST ITEM.
ITEM NUMBER 14 WAS TABLED DURING THE LAST DISCUSSION.
UM, 1 0 8 0.4 PROHIBITED OCCUPANCY.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT WAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO KEEP THE S A P M C AS WRITTEN.
UH, HOWEVER, DURING THE DISCUSSION, THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE, UH, I BELIEVE THE WORD ORDERED, UH, AND IT WAS ASKED TO BE TABLED FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
SO WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
THE, I I ACTUALLY DON'T RECALL WHO, WHO OPENED THAT, UH, CONCERN, BUT IF YOU RECALL WHO DID, OR IF YOU WERE THE PERSON OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT, UH, PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME.
UH, UH, I HAD ACTUALLY, UH, ASKED, UH, THIS IS SAVI RAI WITH LEGAL.
UH, I HAD ASKED FOR IT TO BE TABLED.
THE CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND THE SAMPLE NOTICE TO VACATE, UH, WAS, UH, THE WORD ORDERED AND THE NOTICE TO VACATE.
UM, SO I WANTED IT TABLED SO THAT I COULD DISCUSS IT, UH, WITH MY CLIENTS AND REVIEW IT.
AND, UH, PER DEPUTY, UH, DIRECTOR TOMAS CONSENT, UH, WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE, REMOVE THE WORD ORDERED ON THE NOTICES TO VACATE AND, UH, SUBSTITUTE WITH, UH, YOU ARE HEREBY ON NOTICE.
SO THAT'LL BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY AS OPPOSED TO THE CODE ITSELF? EXACTLY.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? GO AHEAD.
UH, I THINK IF THE RECOMMENDATIONS KEEP AS WRITTEN, UH, THE CODE SAYS THAT THE OFFICIAL, UH, THE PERSON IS GONNA BE ORDERED AT THE, THE VACANCY, IF YOU READ IT, SAYS SAFETY OR WORKFLOW SHALL BE VACATED AS ORDERED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL.
AS BY THE DISCUSSION WE WERE HAVING.
I THINK THIS TABLE BECAME, BECAUSE I WAS DISCUSSING THIS WITH LEGAL, THAT A CODE OFFICIALS DO NOT ORDER TO VACATE THE DOSE.
THEY JUST NOTIFIED ABOUT THE, THE, THE ORDER, THE, THE, THE VACANCY.
UH, SO THAT WAS MY CONCERN, THAT THE, IN THE CODE, WE ARE, UH, GIVEN ARGUMENT THAT CODE OFFICIALS DO ORDER, UH, UH, UH, THEY WILLING FOR BE VACATED.
SO IF, IF WE'RE GONNA BE CHANGING, AND THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO, MAYBE WE SHOULD CONSIDER EITHER CHANGING THE 2018, UH, VERSION AND ELIMINATED THE, THE, THE WORD ORDER INSTEAD OF ORDER ADDING, NOTIFYING, OR CONSIDERING THE 2021 VERSION IN A DIFFERENT MATTER.
SO BASICALLY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WORD OF ORDERED VERSUS NOTIFIED, AND THEN THE ISSUE IS THEN THE SECOND LINE, WHICH IS FAILURE TO VACATE AS ORDERED.
THOSE TWO WORDS THEN ARE GONNA HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH IN SOME WAY.
UH, AND THE RECOMMENDATION YOU HAD WAS, AGAIN, REMOVE ORDER TO REMOVE.
JUST TO REMOVE THE WORD ORDER.
UH, JUST JUST A REMINDER AGAIN, CAN YOU KIND OF PRESS THE BUTTON SPEAKING TO THE MIC, PLEASE? SO, CHAIR? YES, SIR.
ON THE, UH, ON THAT SAME, UH, UM, SECTION, UH, IT SAYS, UH, ANY OCCUPIED STRUCTURE DETERMINED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL.
DOES THE CODE OFFICIAL ACTUALLY DETERMINE THAT THE STRUCTURE IS A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE FROM THE INSPECTION? THE ANSWER IS YES.
HE WOULD BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT.
MAY I JUMP IN HERE FOR A SECOND PLEASE? CAN YOU, WHEN YOU GUYS, UH, REFER TO THESE, CAN YOU REFER TO 'EM AS EITHER 2018 OR 2021? BECAUSE THIS IS BEING TAPED AND THEY DON'T HAVE A COPY OF WHAT YOU'RE READING.
SO, ON THIS, SO WHEN YOU DO IT FOR THE RECORD OF THE TAPE SIDE OF THIS, CAN YOU PLEASE REFER TO THAT AS EITHER 2018 OR 2021, PLEASE? THANK YOU.
AND AS A REMINDER ALSO FOR ALL OF US, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO MOTIONS, WE NEED TO ALSO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR OF WHICH ONE WE'RE REFERRING TO.
SO IT'S APPLICABLE IN BOTH DISCUSSION AND MOTIONS.
UH, THE, THE, THE REAL QUESTION IS, DOES A CODE OFFICER HAVE THE
[00:10:01]
AUTHORITY TO ORDER A VACATE AND BASED ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE STRUCTURE ITSELF? UH, ACTUALLY IT'S NOT INTERPRETATION BASED ON THEIR VISION OF THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.THEY KNOW WHETHER THE BUILDING IS SAFE FOR OCCUPANCY OR NOT.
UH, AND PERSONAL OPINION WOULD BE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY OR SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO ORDER A VACATE.
UH, I NOW REFER THAT, I GUESS, TO LEGAL OR TO ADMINISTRATION STAFF.
MAY I JUMP IN REAL QUICK? UH, ON AN ORDER IS ONLY GIVEN BY THE BOARD.
A A REQUEST IS GIVEN BY THE OFFICER.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO THAT DEFINES THE ORDER PART OF IT.
AN, AN OFFICER CANNOT ORDER AN EVICTION.
HE CAN ASK US TO ORDER THE EVICTION.
UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT EVICT, UH, VACATE, VACATE, VACATE.
THEY CAN ONLY, THEY DON'T ORDER THE VACATE.
THEY ASK US TO ORDER THE VACATE.
UH, WHAT I HAD SAID, ANN, UM, IS THAT CODE ENFORCEMENT DOES NOT EVICT.
UM, UH, PLEASE DO NOT USE THAT.
UH, AN EVICTION IS BASED ON, UM, UH, BREACHES OF THE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT.
UH, B S B AND CODE ENFORCEMENT VACATE, UH, BASED ON, UH, THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
UH, THE SECOND QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED, UH, MR. CHAIR, UH, DOES THE CODE OFFICIAL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE, UH, THAT, UH, PROPERTY, UH, REQUIRES VACATE? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
UM, BY COMMON LAW, BY CASE LAW, UH, THERE'S CASE LAW DATING BACK TO, UH, 1823, PROVIDING THAT AUTHORITY.
BUT, UH, THE ISSUE, YES, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NOTICE TO VACATE AND, UH, AN ORDER TO VACATE BY THIS BOARD.
AND SO, UH, WHAT I HAD STATED WAS, UH, THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR HAD AGREED TO CHANGE THE WORD ORDERED TO, UH, NOTIFIED AND THE SECOND ORDER TO BE CHANGED TO DIRECTED.
UH, SO I'D JUST LIKE TO, SORRY.
I'M A RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS DISTRICT ONE.
UM, AND I'M HERE JUST REPRESENTING MYSELF AND MY INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT THE COMMITTEE'S ATTENTION TO SECTION 1 0 6 0.4 OF THE SS A P M C, WHICH DOES SAY THAT, UM, THE, THAT ANYONE WHO DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE SHALL BE FINED UPON CONVICTION.
SO, SAYING THAT, UM, THE NOTICE IS, IS NOT AN ORDER THAT A CODE OFFICIAL DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO ORDER SOMEONE TO VACATE IS A BIT LIKE SAYING THAT A, UH, POSTED SPEED LIMIT DOESN'T ACTUALLY STOP YOU FROM GOING OVER THE SPEED LIMIT.
BUT IF YOU DO DO IT, YOU'RE GOING TO GET PULLED OVER AND FIND, WELL, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.
1 0 6 0.4 DOES SAY THAT UPON SOMEONE FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE NOTICE, THEY SHALL BE CONVICTED, UH, SHALL BE FINED UPON CONVICTION.
SO, I, I DON'T THINK THAT JUST LEAVING IT UP ADMINISTRATIVELY TO CHANGE THE WORDING ON THE NOTICE ITSELF IS SUFFICIENT.
BECAUSE, AGAIN, EVEN, YOU KNOW, IN, IN FUTURE YEARS, IF THERE'S NEW ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF THAT DECIDES TO CHANGE THAT WORDING, THAT THIS, UH, SS A P M C LANGUAGE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO CHANGE IT BACK TO HOW IT IS NOW.
UM, SO I, I I THINK IT'S, IT'S, AND I I AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT, UM, THAT COUNSEL MADE THAT CODE OFFICERS CAN'T EVICT BECAUSE THEY CANNOT PHYSICALLY REMOVE SOMEONE FROM THE PROPERTY.
ONLY THE B S B CAN MAKE THAT ORDER TO PHYSICALLY REMOVE.
HOWEVER, UNDER SECTION 1 0 8 0.4 OF THE SS A P M C, THE CODE OFFICER CAN PROVIDE AN ORDER TO VACATE.
AND IF SOMEONE FAILS TO COMPLY, THEY SHALL BE FINED UPON CONVICTION UNDER 1 0 6 0.4.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YOUR LAST, THE, EXCUSE ME AND,
[00:15:01]
NO, SORRY.UH, SO THE PROPOSAL WAS FROM STAFF TO ACCEPT OR TO KEEP, UH, 2018 WITH THE TWO MINOR WORD CHANGES.
UH, ONE WOULD BE NOTIFIED AND THE OTHER WOULD BE, UH, DIRECTED.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOTION THAT WE, UH, KEEP THE 2018 S A P M C WITH THE TWO EDITS.
UH, CHANGING THE FIRST ORDER TO NOTIFIED AND THE SECOND ORDER, UH, TO, I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS IT? UH, DIRECTED.
AND THE SECOND, UH, ORDERED TO DIRECTED.
THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO, UH, KEEP THE 2018 SS A P M C CODE WITH TWO WORD CHANGES.
THE FIRST WORD ORDERED WILL BE MODIFIED TO NOTIFY, WOULD BE MODIFIED TO NOTIFY, UH, TO THE WORD NOTIFY.
AND THE SECOND WOULD BE AS, UH, AGAIN, WHAT WAS THE WORD WE USED? DIRECTED.
DIRECTED ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 21, SECTION ONE, 12.2 ISSUANCE.
UH, IT'S STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P M C AS WRITTEN.
UM, THE CHANGES INCLUDES CHANGING, UM, A TO THE UP, REMOVING, DOING, AND CHANGING IT TO PERFORMING.
EVERYTHING ELSE WOULD STAY THE SAME.
THE RECOMMENDATION TO IS TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P C CODE.
UH, CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I HAVE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE 2018 SS A P M C WITH THE WORD CHANGE FROM DOING TO PERFORMING.
UH, YOUR RECOMME YOUR MOTION WAS TO ACCEPT THE 2018 SS A P M C.
UH, AND THE WORD CHANGES WERE FROM DOING TO PERFORMING THE MOTION IS TO MAINTAIN OR TO KEEP THE 2018, UH, S A P M C CODE WITH CHANGING THE WORD FROM DOING TO PERFORMING DISCUSSION.
UM, AND I STATE THIS BECAUSE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I HAVE ONE RIGHT NOW THAT HAS A STOP WORK ORDER POSTED ON THE BUILDING.
DOES THAT MEANS ANYBODY WHO APPROACHES THE BUILDING CANNOT WORK ON THE BUILDING? IS THAT CORRECT? BUT YET IN HERE, IT DOESN'T SPECIFY THAT, DOES IT STOP WORK? MEAN STOP WORK? IT SAYS IN THIS PARTICULAR PIECE THAT IT HAS TO BE PHYSICALLY WRITTEN AND HANDED TO THE PEOPLE, BUT YET NOTHING ABOUT POST-IT OR ANYTHING ELSE.
SO HAVE WE CHANGED THAT? 'CAUSE WE POST IT RIGHT NOW, IF WE CAN'T FIND PEOPLE, ARE WE ALSO SENDING TO THE ADDRESS? ARE THE PHYSICAL PROPERTY OWNERS, DID I STUMP SOMEBODY? NO.
NOW IT'S A, A CODE DOESN'T, UH, OR D S D, UH, TO SEND MAIL IT, IT POSTS IT ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, MS. ANDES, I CAN SEE, UM, WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM FOR THAT.
UH, I WOULD RECOMMEND, UM, THAT Y'ALL CONSIDER, UM, CHANGING THE WORD GIVEN TO THE OWNER, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, UH,
[00:20:01]
TO ISSUED.BECAUSE I SAY THAT BECAUSE, AND THAT INCLUDES POSTING.
WE ISSUE EVERYTHING ELSE IN WRITING AND ON THE PROPERTY.
BUT IN THIS ONE, YOU'RE KIND OF NOT, YOU'RE SAYING PHYSICALLY, WHICH NOW GIVES THEM A LEGAL REASON THAT THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE IT.
SO THEY CAN STILL WORK, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE, WE PHYSICALLY TRY EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO GET THEM, LIKE A SUMMONS AND ALL THAT.
WE PHYSICALLY SEND IT TO THEIR ADDRESS.
IF SOMEBODY'S ON THE PROPERTY, YOU PHYSICALLY HAND IT TO 'EM.
YOU TRY EVERY MALE ASPECT POSSIBLE.
BUT YET IN THIS ONE, YOU KIND OF DROP THE BALL, IN MY OPINION.
THIS IS AMIN, TOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
I MEAN, TECHNICALLY THIS, THIS ONE, WHEN WE POST THE STOP WORK, WE ARE POSTING THE STOP WORK FOR THAT SPECIFIC STRUCTURE.
SO ALL THE OTHER CASES YOU MENTIONED THAT WHEN WE MAIL NOTICES, BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE MAIL THE NOTICE TO THEIR MAILING ADDRESS, WHICH COULD BE DIFFERENT THAN THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, THE STOP WORK IS FOR THAT PROPERTY.
SO WHEN I POST ON THAT PROPERTY, THAT IS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE.
NOTICE I DON'T HAVE TO MAIL IT ANYWHERE.
ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO WORK ON THAT PROPERTY WILL SEE THE NOTICE AT THE ENTRANCE AND IT STATES STOP WORK.
WELL, THIS ONE HERE DOESN'T SAY POSTED ON PROPERTY.
IT SAYS HANDED, GIVEN TO, GIVEN TO, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE PHYSICALLY HAVE TO HAND IT TO SOMEBODY.
UH, NO GIVEN INCLUDE, UH, GIVEN THE WORD GIVEN, UH, INCLUDES POSTING.
SO, UH, THIS DOES NOT SAY IT HAS TO BE HANDED TO, UH, GIVEN NOTICE INCLUDES ALL METHODS.
UH, IT WILL BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, IF THE OWNER, OWNER'S AGENT OR THE PERSON PERFORMING THE WORK, THEY WILL ALSO BE GIVEN A COPY.
BUT PRIMARILY THE STOP WORK ORDER IS POSTED ON THE STRUCTURE TO GIVE NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC.
AND THOSE STEPPING ONTO THE PROPERTY.
SO GIVEN COVERS A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENT DELIVERY VEHICLES.
ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? I'M JUST SAYING, BECAUSE WHEN YOU FIRST READ THIS, THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S INTERPRETED.
MR. ANDES, THIS IS RAY MORALES.
WOULD IT HELP, UH, JUST, UH, TO MAKE IT CLEAR, UH, TO CHANGE THE WORDING THERE AND SAY, SHALL BE ISSUED TO THE OWNER AND POST IT ON THE PROPERTY? I THINK IT HAS TO BE, BECAUSE SOMETHING THAT GIVES THE PERSON, 'CAUSE IF IT'S GIVEN, THEN THEY'RE ASSUMING YOU'RE HANDING IT TO 'EM, NOT IN THE CONTEXT THAT WE UNDERSTAND IT AS GIVEN A CITATION LIKE A METER, YOU CAN BE GIVEN A SUMMONS ON A CAR FOR VIOLATION OF A METER.
BUT IN HERE, THEY CAN TRY TO SKIRT, LIKE, I HAVE ONE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NOW THAT'S BEEN RED TAGGED, AND THEY'RE SKIRTING THE HOUSE.
SO THEY DON'T SEE THE TAG BASED UNDER THIS.
IT'S, THEY'RE GONNA ASSUME A PHYSICAL HANDING.
SO, SO WITH THAT, UM, IF THEY INTERPRET GIVEN AS POSTED AS WELL, THEN THAT'S, BUT MOST PEOPLE DON'T ASSUME THAT IS GIVEN IN YOUR INTERPRETATION.
WELL, IN THE INTERPRETATION, IT SAYS SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT AGAIN, THE WORD GIVEN IS AN INTERPRETATION WORD COMMENT.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO BRING THE COMMITTEE'S ATTENTION TO, UH, SS A P M C 7 1 0 7 0.1, 1 0 7 0.2, AND 1 0 7 0.3.
UM, THAT DO STATE THAT ANYTIME THERE IS A VIOLATION OF THIS CODE, THAT NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER.
UM, IT HASN'T BEEN CLEAR TO ME, UH, IN MY REVIEW OF THE SS A P M C OR IN THIS COMMITTEE'S DISCUSSIONS WHETHER 1 0 7 0.1 0.2 AND 0.3 APPLY TO STOP WORK ORDERS.
I IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD, BECAUSE IT DOES SAY THAT, UH, I MEAN, A STOP WORKER CAN ONLY BE ISSUED IF THERE'S A VIOLATION.
AND 1 0 7 0.1 SAYS THAT IF THERE'S A VIOLATION NOTICE MUST BE GIVEN IN THIS MANNER.
AND THE SAME APPLIES TO A NOTICE TO VACATE UNDER 1 0 8 0.4 OR 1 0 9 0.1.
UM, I THINK IT, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, THE CITY COUNCIL'S, UH, INTERPRETATION OF, OF THESE RULES IS, BUT IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT 1 0 7 0.1 0.2 AND THREE APPLY
[00:25:01]
ANY TIME THE CITY BELIEVES THAT SOMEONE IS VIOLATING THE CODE, INCLUDING WHEN THEY ISSUE NOTICES TO VACATE AND STOP WORK ORDERS.SINCE WE HAVE AN INTERPRETATION FROM, FROM LEGAL STAFF ON THE WORD GIVEN ITSELF, FRED, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SAY THE GIVEN IS PROBABLY AN ACCEPTABLE WORD AND IT'S USED IN OTHER PARAGRAPHS ALONG THE WAY.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? YES, I I, GO AHEAD.
UH, MY QUESTION IS, IF THERE IS CLEAR, UH, MIS MIS MISINTERPRETING OF THIS, UH, CODE, UH, INCLUDING A PERSON FROM THE BOARD, A VOTING MEMBER SHOULD, SHOULDN'T WE, UH, CLARIFY THE CODE IN A WAY THAT IS NOT MISINTERPRETED ANYMORE? UH, UH, SHOULDN'T WE CHANGE THE CODE SO IT IS NOT MISINTERPRETED? AND MAYBE REFER TO 1.7, 0.12 AND THREE, UH, TO JUST LEAVE IT CLEAR AND CONSISTENT INSTEAD OF LEAVING IT THAT TO A DELIBERATION OR EITHER LEGAL OR ANY OTHER PERSON THAT IS GONNA BE CREATING OTHER FURTHER PROBLEMS? WELL, FROM, FROM A LEGAL POINT OF VIEW, IF IT WILL STAND UP IN COURT, AND I REALIZE THAT ONLY A JUDGE CAN MAKE THAT DECISION, UH, BUT IF IT WILL STAND UP IN COURT, I HAVE TO GO BY THE INTERPRETATION THAT IS GIVEN TO ME BY COUNSEL.
UH, BECAUSE IF I, IF I IGNORE COUNSELS, THEN IT WINDS UP BEING A PERSONAL OPINION.
AND I DO HAVE A PERSONAL OPINION THAT THE WORD GIVEN IN MANY PROPERTY CODE ISSUES, UH, IS, MEANS MULTIPLE MEANS OF DELIVERY.
UH, WHEN, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT EVEN LIEN ISSUES ON PROPERTY CODE, UH, GIVEN DOES NOT MEAN HANDED TO GIVEN MEANS DELIVERED.
AND IN FACT, IN LIEN CASES, BY MOST OFTEN CERTIFIED MAIL, UH, SO JUST THE, THE CHAIR HAPPENS TO BE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH, WITH THE WORD GIVEN, BUT OBVIOUSLY THE COMMITTEE HAS TO, TO VOTE ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
UH, BUT THE MOTION BEFORE US RIGHT NOW IS TO ACTUALLY CHANGE ONE WORD IN THE MOTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ONE WORD OR BOTH? I THINK TWO WORDS.
THE AND FROM AIDAN TO THE, AND FROM DOING, TO PERFORM TO PERFORMING.
UH, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
SO, CHAIR, UM, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, UM, WHEN DANNY PRESENTED THIS, UH, SECTION, HE SAID, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADOPT THE 2021, WHICH IS THE TWO WORDS.
BUT KAYLA PUT A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO TAKE THE 2018 AND CHANGE DOING TO PERFORMANCE PERFORMING.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOUR MOTION IS APPROPRIATE.
THAT THAT'S NOT THE MOTION THAT I HEARD.
THE MOTION THAT I HEARD SPECIFICALLY WAS TO ACCEPT THE, I MEAN, TO KEEP THE 2018.
NO, I, I BELIEVE I DID SAY 2018, BUT IT I MEANT 2021.
THEN LET'S TAKE THAT VOTE AND DISCOUNT IT.
SHE'S GOTTA RE AND GO BACK IN.
SAY WHAT? SHE HAS TO RESCIND HER MOTION.
SO I'LL, I'LL RESCIND THE MOTION.
RESTATE THE MOTION IF YOU WOULD.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE GONNA WITHDRAW THE RESULTS OF THAT VOTE, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION ON IT.
AND WE'RE GONNA GO BACK INTO DISCUSSION AGAIN.
SHE VOTE RE BUT SHE ACTUALLY, NO, SHE, WE HAVE TO VOTE ON IT BECAUSE IT WAS APPROVED.
UH, THE MOTION IS TO RESCIND THE LAST, UH, MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE RESCINDING.
BEFORE I STATE THE MOTION, CAN YOU REPEAT TO ME WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS? WELL, DEFINITELY.
SO IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P M C AS WRITTEN, UH, WITH THE TWO CHANGES FROM A TO THE, AND FROM ELIMINATING DOING TO PERFORMING.
UH, I AM SPEAKING IT
SO THE, THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT WHAT WE WE'RE LOOKING AT IN WRITING.
IS THAT CORRECT? FOR THE 2021 I
[00:30:01]
P C, UH, IPCS.AND THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE IN SECOND.
AND IF YOU'VE GOT ANY NEW DISCUSSION,
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE REVISED MOTION, SAY AYE.
WE ARE ACCEPTING THE 2021 I P M C NEXT CODE ITEM NUMBER 22, UH, SECTION 2 0 1 0.3.
TERMS DEFINED AS OTHER CODES, UH, TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO KEEP THE 2018 SS A P M C AS WRITTEN.
UH, TERMS DEFINED IN OTHER CODES WHERE TERMS ARE NOT DEFINED IN THE CODE OR DEFINED IN THE CODE IN CHAPTER EIGHT OF THE S A P M C.
SUCH TERMS HAVE, SHALL HAVE THE MEANING ASCRIBED TO THEM AS STATED IN THESE CODES OR IN THOSE CODES.
MR. CHAIR, I MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE 2018 S A P M C AS IS ON, UH, 2022.
I'M SORRY, ON, UH, ITEM 22, UH, SECTION 2 0 1 0.3 CHAIR.
DURING YOUR MOTION, THE MOTION, THE MOTION WAS TO, UH, KEEP THE 2018 S A M P C CODE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? AND, UH, SECOND.
NOW THE COMMENT CAN ASK, CAN I ASK THE PEOPLE THAT MADE THE MOTION AND SECOND IT, UH, WHERE IN CHAPTER EIGHT, THOSE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE BEING REFERRED TO WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED? YOU'VE GOTTA GO BACK TO THE OLD, YEAH, IT'S IN THE OLD, OH, YOU'VE GOT THE OLD, OKAY.
2018, I'M SORRY, 2018 CODE STATES THAT, UH, CHAPTER, UH, DEFINITIONS ARE IN CHAPTER EIGHT, AND THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE MOTIONING TO KEEP.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHERE IN CHAPTER EIGHT, UH, THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE INCLUDED.
SO CHAPTER EIGHT IS A REFERENCE STANDARD.
IT LISTS ALL THE DIFFERENT I C C CODES.
AND THEN THE WAY IT READS HERE, IT'S AT LAST SENTENCE.
SUCH TERMS SHALL BE MEANING SUBSCRIBED TO THEM AS STATED IN THOSE RESPECTIVE CODES.
SO YOU HAVE TO REFER TO, LET'S, LET'S USE EXAMPLE.
THE I R C, RIGHT? OR THE I B C.
THERE, THERE IS A WHOLE PAGE OF CODES IN THERE.
SO I, I'M, I'M SUPPOSED TO, OR ANYBODY ELSE IS SUPPOSED TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE CODES FOR A DEFINITION OR SIMPLE DEFINITION.
I'M NOT SURE THAT'S A RHETORICAL QUESTION.
THAT'S, I JUST, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S BEEN OUR STANDARD.
UH, I IT'S A REFERENCE STANDARD, RIGHT? SO, UH, IT, IT, IT'D BE, UM, A REALLY LONG P M C IF WE PUT EVERY DEFINITION FROM EVERY CODE.
BUT I MEAN, IT'S OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, WE USE, UH, UH, THE 2021 I P M C REFERS TO UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS CONDITIONS.
AND I THINK THOSE ARE VERY PERTINENT, UH, TO THIS CODE.
HOWEVER, THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE NOT, UH, ANYWHERE THAT I COULD SEE IT ON THE S A P M C, ON THE, ON THE 2018 SS A P M C.
AND, AND I'M JUST WONDERING, YOU KNOW, UH, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UH, CODES THAT ARE CLEAR THAT WHERE EVERY WORD, UH, PHRASE PUNCTUATION MATTER, I THINK THIS REALLY MATTERS TO THE CODE.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR AND THAT WE HAVE, UH, I GUESS STANDARDS OR, OR, OR, UH, CLEAR CONSENSUS ON THE LANGUAGE AND, AND UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS, LIKE AT THE VERY BEGINNING OR THE SECOND, UH, ITEM HERE ON THESE, ON THESE CODES WHERE I ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT WHAT DOES REASONABLE STAND FOR, YOU KNOW, REASONABLE, UH, LEVEL.
AND, AND THAT WAS NOT CLEAR, UH, IN MY OPINION.
YEAH, I'M NOT A, AN ATTORNEY AND MAYBE WE CAN, UH, ASK, UH, MS. MS. RYE HERE.
UH, WHAT ARE THE, THOSE DEFINITIONS FOR UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS? AND I LOOKED THROUGH THE CODES AND I SPENT MAYBE TWO AND A HALF DAYS ON IT.
SO RAY, WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION? MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO, UH, ACTUALLY DEFINE THOSE, UH, TERMS, UNSAFE DANGERS IN SANITARY, UH, BECAUSE LATER ON, UH, ON, ON SOME OF THESE
[00:35:01]
PROPOSALS, UH, YOU WILL SEE THAT, THAT THAT IS VERY CRITICAL TO THIS CODE.SO, AS YOU KNOW, UH, ALL I C C CODES ARE WRITTEN TOGETHER AND THEY GET ADOPTED TOGETHER, AND THEY'RE ALL CONNECTED.
UH, THE ONLY WAY TO DEFINE EVERY SINGLE TERM IS TO CREATE A 500 PAGE DOCUMENT TO DEFINE EVERYTHING IN THE I C C.
I'M ONLY ASKING ABOUT THESE TWO TERMS, UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THE, YOU, IT'S STATED HERE ON, ON THE, ON THE LEDGER, UH, 2021, I P M C.
UH, WHEN USED WITHIN THIS CODE, THE TERMS UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS SHOULD HAVE ONLY THE MEETINGS ASCRIBED TO THEM.
UH, THE 2018, UH, DOESN'T HAVE, UH, THE 2018 SS A P M C DOESN'T HAVE THESE DEFINITIONS, HOWEVER, THEY'RE REFERRED TO IN GENERAL TO CHAPTER EIGHT.
BUT CHAPTER EIGHT, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THE OTHER CODES TO DETERMINE WHAT THESE TERMS MEAN.
CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS AND, AND PULL IT? THIS ISN'T ABOUT BUILDINGS, BUT IT IS ABOUT OUR BUREAUCRACY.
AND IN MEDICINE NOW, IN ORDER TO GET PAID, YOU NOT ONLY HAVE TO PUT IN YOUR SURGERY, YOU HAVE TO NITTLE IT DOWN TO YOUR VERY SMALLEST NUMBER FOR YOUR DIAGNOSIS CODE.
AND IF YOU SAW A DIAGNOSIS CODE BOOK, THEY'RE HUGE.
AND WE WOULD HAVE TO, THIS IS WHY PEOPLE GET PAID A LOT OF MONEY TO DO THE CODING, BECAUSE IT'S NOT EASY.
AND IT'S THE SAME THING WITH THIS.
AND I, WHAT WHAT WE COULD DO ABOUT THAT.
UNLESS THEY HAVE SOME SPECIAL SOMETHING FOR THE CITY, NOT FOR THE CITY, BUT FOR PEOPLE TO LEARN HOW TO DO THAT CODING TO ASSIST.
BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, THIS IS GOVERNMENT.
THIS IS NOT SAN ANTONIO AS MUCH, REALLY? YEAH.
AND, UH, I MEAN, AGAIN, UH, WE CAN DEFINE THOSE TWO TERMS, BUT BASED ON THIS, UH, DESCRIPTION HERE, UNSAFE, FOR EXAMPLE, I'LL JUST USE THAT.
UNSAFE IN THE ELECTRICAL CODE HAS DIFFERENT DEFINITION THAN UNSAFE IN THE MECHANICAL CODE, DIFFERENT THAN UNSAFE IN THE BUILDING CODE, DIFFERENT THAN UNSAFE IN THE PLUMBING CODE.
SO AGAIN, TO DEFINE EVEN THOSE TWO WORDS, I GONNA HAVE PAGES.
SO AGAIN, ALL THESE CODES ARE CONNECTED, AND THAT'S WHY THEY REFERENCE YOU BACK TO THAT CODE.
IS, IS CHAPTER EIGHT LOCATED, UH, ONLINE? CAN I GET TO IT ONLINE, OR IS CHAPTER EIGHT? UH, ALL, ALL, ALL I C C CODES ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FREE TO REVIEW THEM AND SEE ANY, ANY OF THEM.
SO THEN BY I C C, THAT'S NOT REQUEST CITY WOULD REQUEST TO OPERATE IF I WANTED TO GET ALL THE DEFINITIONS.
UH, UH, I MEAN, AGAIN, YES, ALL I C C CODES ARE ONLINE.
THIS IS, UH, I C C CODES AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE AVAILABLE, BUT THEY ARE DEFINED, ALL WORDS ARE DEFINED.
THE WORDS THAT ARE PERTINENT TO CODES ARE ALL DEFINED, CORRECT.
AND THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE REFERENCE THOSE CODES.
SO IT TELLS YOU GO BACK TO, LET'S SAY I R C.
OKAY? INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, YOU GO TO THE I R C, THERE'S DEFINITIONS THERE.
SO INDEED THE INFORMATION IS CORRECT IF THE TERM IS, UH, UH, IF TERMS DEFINED IN OTHER CODES WHERE THE TERMS ARE NOT DEFINED IN THE CODE AND ARE DEFINED IN, UH, UH, CHAPTER EIGHT OF THE PROPER MAINTENANCE CODE SHALL TERMS, SUCH TERMS SHALL HAVE MEANING ASCRIBED TO THEM AS STATED IN THESE CODES.
SO THOSE CODES ARE ALL CORRECT.
SO YOU CAN FIND A DEFINITION WITH, WITH SOME RESEARCH.
THERE IS NO DEFINITIONS ON, ON UNSAFE AND DANGERS.
HOWEVER, I SEE THESE TERMS THROUGHOUT THE 2018 S A P M C, AND, UH, THAT, THAT GIVES ME PAUSE BECAUSE THESE TERMS CAN BE INTERPRETED IN DIFFERENT MANNERS.
CAN I ASK LEGAL, UM, WOULD IT BE SO HARD TO MAKE A DEFINITION SPECIFIC TO THIS CODE? UM, I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE, UH, NOT ONLY ATTORNEY FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT AND FOR B S B, UM, I AM THE ONE DEFENDING THESE IN COURT.
AND, UH, THERE'S, UH, AS DEPUTY TEMA MENTIONED, THE I C C, THE ELECTRICAL, ALL THAT HAVE IT
[00:40:01]
DEFINED SPECIFICALLY AS TO, LET'S SAY, WIRING, WHATEVER.WHEN IT COMES TO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE, UM, CODE ISSUES, IF A PROPERTY IS IN VIOLATION OF ANY OF THESE CODES, IT'S CONSIDERED UNSAFE.
AND, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, AS B S B, WHEN Y'ALL ARE DEALING WITH A, A DANGEROUS STRUCTURE, THE, UH, AS I'VE ALWAYS ADVISED, Y'ALL, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO FINDINGS.
UH, ONE, IT'S A PUBLIC NUISANCE WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE, IS THAT IT'S, UH, IT POSES OR LIKELY TO POSE A THREAT TO HEALTH LIFE SAFETY.
UH, SECOND, THAT IT REQUIRES ABATEMENT.
SO IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, THE CODE PROVISIONS ALL IN HERE.
IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF A PROVISION IN THE SAMHSA, IT IS CONSIDERED UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS AS TO DEFINING UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS.
AGAIN, AS THE ATTORNEY WHO DEFENSES IN COURT, UH, UH, IT WOULD MAKE IT EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY DIFFICULT IF WE ARE TIED TO ONE SPECIFIC DEFINITION THAT WE DEFINE AS OPPOSED TO HOW IT'S DEFINED IN VARIOUS, UH, CASE LAW.
AND SO, UH, UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS, IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, IT'S UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS.
SO I WOULD, UH, I WOULD, UH, HIGHLY RECOMMEND THE COMMITTEE TO NOT DEFINE UNSAFE AND DANGEROUS.
MR. MR. CHAIRMAN GOT THE QUESTION, MY COMMENT COMING FROM THE CORNER FIRST, YES, I'D, I'D LIKE TO BRING THE COMMITTEE'S ATTENTION TO SECTION ONE 11 OF THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, WHICH I THINK DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB OF DEFINING THE TERMS THAT THE COMMITTEE IS NOW DISCUSSING OVER THE COURSE OF A PAGE AND A HALF OR TWO PAGES.
SO I THINK IT IS POSSIBLE, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO ADOPT THOSE PROVISIONS THAT HAVE, ARE RECOGNIZED AS THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR THIS KIND OF CODE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS BY, UH, OUR NON-VOTING MEMBER AND THE PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S RECOMMENDATION.
AND SO, UNLESS THERE'S NEW DISCUSSION ON THIS TOPIC, I CALL FOR THE QUESTION.
THE MOTION IS TO MAINTAIN THE 2018 S A P M C CODE, UH, AND HAS BEEN SECONDED.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
THE NEXT SECTION, ITEM NUMBER 23.
UH, SECTION 2 0 2, GENERAL DEFINITIONS.
THIS IS A NEW SECTION THAT WAS ADDED, UM, ESCAPE, EMERGENCY, ESCAPE AND RESCUE, OPENING AN OPENABLE EXTERIOR WINDOW DOOR, OR OTHER SIMILAR DEVICE THAT PROVIDES THE MEANS OF ESCAPE AND ACCESS FOR RESCUE IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY.
IT IS, THAT'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P M C AS WRITTEN CHAIR.
I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE NEW CODE 2 0 2, EMERGENCY ESCAPE AND RESCUE OPENING.
THE MOTION IS TO, UH, ACCEPT THE 2021 I P M C WORDING.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
THE CHAIR JUST WANTS IT TO BE APPROVED, THEREFORE, NO OBJECTION TO IT, THEREFORE, IT IS ADOPTED.
NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 24, UH, SECTION 7 0 2 0.4, EMERGENCY ESCAPE OPENINGS.
UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P M C AS WRITTEN.
[00:45:16]
MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR.UH, I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER 24 WITH, UH, 2021 I P M C AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
THE MOTION IS TO ADOPT THE 2021 I P M C, UH, AS WRITTEN.
I SECOND AND SECOND DISCUSSION.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THIS, BUT WHY DO THEY HAVE THE ONE, WHY DID THEY ADD THIS NEW ONE UP ABOVE IT? BECAUSE THEY CHANGED THE DEFINITION.
IT USED TO BE CALLED AN EGRESS.
SO THEY CHANGED THE DEFINITION TO FIT THE INTERNATIONAL CODE WHEN WE USED TO CALL 'EM EGRESS OPENINGS, WHICH WERE THE SAME THING.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TOYE ACCEPT THE 2021 I P MC AYE.
UH, I HAVE ONE COMMENT BEFORE WE, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE LEAVE A COUPLE OF MORE SECONDS AFTER YOU MOVE INTO ACCEPTING OR VOTING? UH, I WAS ABOUT TO DISCUSS AND I COULDN'T BEFORE YOU VOTED.
'CAUSE I'M NOT HEARING YOU FOR SOME REASON.
CAN YOU PLEASE ALLOW A COUPLE MORE SECONDS AFTER YOU MOVE INTO THE VOTING PART AFTER, FOR THE DISCUSSION? I WAS ABOUT TO PRESS THE BUTTON FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, AND IF I MAY, UH, JUST BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT, UH, THESE, UM, THIS ITEM, UH, MAY INCREASE THE NUMBER OF PROPERTY VIOLATIONS BECAUSE OF CULTURALLY, OUR CITY HAS MANY HOUSES THAT, UH, HAVE INSTALLED, UH, THE BARS AND GRILLS, UH, IN THEIR WINDOWS.
UH, SO THERE HAS TO BE, AT SOME POINT, SOME DISCUSSION, MAYBE NOT HERE, BUT LATER, AT LEAST BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A, A, A TRIGGER FOR INCREASE OF PROPERTY VIOLATIONS IF THEY ARE, UH, UH, PURSUED AND, UH, AND CONDUCTED INTO, UH, SOME AREAS OF THE CITY.
UH, SO HOPEFULLY THIS RECORDING, IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, SEEN BY THOSE WITH, UH, RESOURCES TO HELP THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE THESE, UH, ITEMS IN THEIR WINDOWS TO, UH, EH, EH, TO HAVE THE PROPERTY, UH, OR THE, THE CORRECT MECHANISMS FOR THEM TO BE RELEASABLE FROM THE INSIDE, WHICH MOST, IN MOST CASES, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
UH, MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM, PLEASE.
WE CAN TAKE A QUICK FIVE MINUTE RECESS SO WE CAN TRANSITION FROM THE POWERPOINT TO THE SPREADSHEET.
OF COURSE, THE TIME IS NOW 1 59.
WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.
THE TIME IS NOW 2 0 6, AND WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE FROM RECESS.
AND, UH, A PROPOSED, ACTUALLY, NOT A PROPOSED, JUST A RECOMMENDATION.
UH, IF I AM MOVING TOO FAST FOR YOU, UH, PLEASE SPEAK UP AT THE TIME, JUST ASK ONE MOMENT, PLEASE, AND WE'LL STOP THE PROCEEDINGS AT THAT POINT.
THAT'LL KEEP ME FROM, FROM PUSHING YOU WAY TOO FAST.
UH, IF WE GET TO THAT CASE, IS THAT OKAY? THAT WORK FOR YOU? YEAH.
UH, IN ORDER FOR DANNY TO SEE THE, THE SCREEN A LITTLE BIT EASIER, HE'S GONNA WORK AS IF HE'S PAYING HIS BACK IS TO US, BUT HE'LL, HE'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY COMMUNICATE THAT WAY.
OKAY, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 25.
SO THE REMAINING ITEMS ARE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY THE PUBLIC.
UM, THE NEXT FEW ITEMS WERE SUBMITTED BY LETICIA SANCHEZ.
SHE'S THE CO-CHAIR FOR THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESIDENT ASSOCIATION.
UH, HER PROPOSAL IN THIS CASE HERE PERTAINS TO SECTIONS 1 0 2 0.4.
SHE'S PROPOSING THAT WE ADD THE LANGUAGE, UH, THAT'S GONNA BE UNDER COLUMN L.
YOU SEE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN BOLD, WHERE IT READS, HOWEVER, DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL SHALL BE REGARDED AS A REMEDY OF THE LAST RESORT.
[00:50:04]
AND PLEASE LET ME KNOW, I NEED TO MAKE THE SCREEN A LITTLE LARGER FOR REVIEW.SO IS THAT A STAFF ORGANIZATION? HOW IS THIS NO, THE AMENDMENT, THE, THE QUESTION IS, IS STAFF MAKING A PROPOSAL AT ALL, OR ARE YOU JUST PRESENTING THE, UH, THE CASE TO THE COMMITTEE? I GUESS DANNY IS JUST PRESENTING WHAT WE RECEIVED.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH, WITH THIS AMENDMENT.
UH, DO THE, UH, FOUR ADDITIONAL NON-VOTING MEMBERS, CAN WE MAKE MOTIONS, UH, TO, UH, ACCEPT OR, UH, UH, I UNFORTUNATELY PROVIDED THE, UH, INCORRECT ADVICE AT THE LAST SESSION.
UH, LOOKING BACK AT ROBERT'S RULES, UH, ONLY VOTING MEMBERS MAY, UH, MAKE VOTE THE MOTION, UH, TO BE VOTED ON.
SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCORRECT ADVICE.
UH, AT THE LAST MEETING, I HAVE A MOTION, I MOTION TO ACCEPT, UH, THE PER THE EDITS TO ADD, HOWEVER, DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL SHALL BE REGARDED AS A REMEDY OF LAST RESORT.
THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL, UH, AS WRITTEN HERE.
UH, WHICH MEANS THIS PROVISION, THIS CODE SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO ABOLISH OR IMPAIR EXISTING, UH, REMEDIES OF THE CITY AND ITS OFFICERS AND AGENCIES RELATING TO THE REMOVAL OF DEMO, UH, DEMOLITION OF ANY STRUCTURE WHICH IS DANGEROUS AND UNSAFE.
AND THEN, UH, AND SANITARY, UH, THE MOTION IS MADE.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND FOR MS. WINTER.
ANY DISCUSSION? YOU'RE SAYING NOT USE THE DEMOLITION? IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S, SORRY.
UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ADOPTING THE, HOWEVER, DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL SHALL BE REGARDED AS REMEDY OF THE LAST RESORT.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE MOTION THAT KAYLA JUST PUT FORWARD.
IT, IT IS THE MOTION, THE REASON WHY STAFF, WELL, LET ME NOT INTERPRET, BUT MY OPINION OF THE REASON STAFF IS NOT OPPOSED TO IT IS BECAUSE INDEED IT IS THE LAST RESORT THAT WE GET TO ANYWAY.
SO I DO NOT KNOW IF THIS IS BEING REDUNDANT PER SE, UH, BECAUSE IT IS, IT IS ALREADY THE LAST RESORT, UH, COMMENT FROM IT.
I HEAR IT FOUR OR FIVE TIMES EACH MEETING.
SO WHY SHOULDN'T IT BE IN THE CODE? OKAY.
I THINK, UH, FOR THE COMMITTEE, JUST TO BE AWARE, UM, UH, THE SAMHSA CODE DOES NOT GOVERN DANGEROUS STRUCTURES AND DEMOLITION, UH, CHAPTER SIX DOES.
AND, UM, THERE'S NO PROBLEM ADDING IT.
I JUST WANT EVERYONE TO BE AWARE THAT, UH, CHAPTER SIX GOVERNS AND CHAPTER SIX ALREADY HAS THIS LANGUAGE IN THERE.
IF BY THE WORD REMOVAL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOTICES AND, OR, UH, ORDERS TO VACATE, HOWEVER YOU WANNA PHRASE IT, UM, THAT I IS, IS GOVERNED ORDERS TO VACATE.
NOTICES TO VACATE IS GOVERNED BY THE SS A P M C.
AND THAT LANGUAGE THAT IT'S THE LAST RESORT IS NOWHERE ELSE, UH, WRITTEN WITHIN THE S A P M C.
SO, I, UH, AM IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
I, I THINK, I THINK IT SHOULD BE LEFT IN THERE BECAUSE IF THE OWNER AGREES TO DO THE NECESSARY REPAIRS AND BRING IT UP TO THE STANDARD, THEN THERE IS NO NEED FOR DEMOLITION.
SO I THINK BY LEAVING THIS IN THERE, IT SAYS THAT THERE IS, THIS IS THE LAST RESORT.
WELL, THE FACT THAT IT'S ACTUALLY ALREADY IN CODE SIX, UH, DEALS WITH THAT.
AND IN ESSENCE, THE PROPOSAL IS ACTUALLY BEING REDUNDANT WITH THE CODE AT THE PRESENT TIME.
UH, AND AGAIN, WELL, ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT THAT OFFENDED THAT THAT IS, I THINK IT REINFORCES IT.
[00:55:01]
WITH DO I THINK, JUST LIKE YOU ALL HAVE MENTIONED, UM, THAT IT JUST REINFORCES WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE SAID SEVERAL TIMES, AND YOU CAN JUST INCLUDE THAT IN THE LANGUAGE.UH, THIS IS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH, THIS IS LEGAL.
UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, THERE, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH ADDING IT JUST, UH, FOR THE COMMITTEE'S BENEFIT, UH, SAMHSA DOES NOT CONTROL, UH, DEMOLITIONS CHAPTER SIX DOES.
UH, SO THE, I MEAN, THERE'S NO PROBLEM ADDING THE LANGUAGE.
AND TO CLARIFY, REMOVAL IS REMOVAL OF THE STRUCTURE.
IT'S NOT VACATE, IT'S NOT, CHAPTER SIX DOES NOT DEAL WITH PROVISIONS.
UH, THE NOTICE TO VACATE REMOVAL HAS BEEN, UH, ACTUALLY IN, UH, UH, CHAPTER SIX, IT'S, UH, DEMOLITION SHALL BE REGARDED AS A REMEDY OF LAST RESORT THAT'S IN THE CODE, UM, REMOVAL OF THE STRUCTURE.
IT, IT'S REMOVAL OF A DANGEROUS STRUCTURE.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT REMOVAL OF PEOPLE.
W WOULD IT HELP, UM, I KNOW A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND, AND SECONDED, BUT WOULD IT HELP TO CHANGE, UH, AND THIS WOULD BE A FRIENDLY ATTACHMENT, I GUESS, OR FRIENDLY MOTION.
UH, WOULD IT HELP TO CHANGE THE DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT, UH, TO, TO, UH, FIT THE LANGUAGE AND REMOVAL TO, UH, VACATE? I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT SHE'S PROPOSING.
I, I THINK THE ISSUE OF REMOVAL IS, IS LITERALLY THE, UH, TEARING DOWN OF THE BUILDING.
THIS IS, I MEAN, TOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THIS SECTION IS VERY CLEAR, AND IT TALKS ABOUT REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION OF ANY STRUCTURE.
SO THIS ADDED SENTENCE IS, AGAIN, REMOVAL OR DEMOLITION OF A STRUCTURE.
AND WE ARE SAYING IT'S THE LAST RESORT.
AS SAVITA SAID, IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN EXACTLY LIKE THAT IN CHAPTER SIX.
AND THAT'S WHY WHEN YOU ASKED ME MY RECOMMENDATION, I SAID, I DON'T HAVE PROBLEM WITH IT BECAUSE IT IS IN CHAPTER SIX.
THE BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, THAT WE SAY IT EVERY MEETING, THIS IS THE LAST THING WE WANNA DO.
SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM ADDING THAT TO THE CODE.
UM, I WAS GONNA SUGGEST MAYBE SINCE IT'S BEEN SAID THAT, UM, THIS SECTION DOESN'T COVER DEMOLITION.
COULD YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD? MY NAME IS KELLY HOGUE.
UM, SINCE THIS SECTION, KELLY, ALSO, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU.
YOU ARE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
OH, I AM A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
SINCE THIS SECTION DOESN'T COVER DEMOLITION, UM, BUT IT DOES COVER NOTICES TO VACATE, MAYBE IT SHOULD SAY, NOTICES TO VACATE SHALL BE REGARDED AS A REMEDY OF LAST RESORT UNDER SAMHSA SINCE SAMHSA COVERS NOTICES TO VACATE.
AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE PUBLIC'S COMMENT, BUT HAVING HEARD FROM LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF, AND THEY'RE FINE WITH THIS LANGUAGE, I CALL FOR THE QUESTION, UH, NEED DISCUSSION.
DO I HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS? THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, AS PROVIDED.
NEXT ITEM CONSIDERED FOR CONSIDERATION.
ITEM NUMBER 26, SECTIONS 1 0 2 0.8 REQUIREMENTS NOT COVERED BY THE CODE.
AND THIS PROPOSAL WAS SUBMITTED, UM, AGAIN, NOT ONLY BY LETICIA SANCHEZ, CO-CHAIR FOR THE HISTORIC WEST SIDE, UH, RESIDENCE ASSOCI, BUT ALSO BY RICK ACOSTA, WHO'S THE PRESIDENT FOR MY CITY IS MY HOME.
THESE ARE TWO EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
UM, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY ADD THE LANGUAGE IN BODE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER AND OR DIRECTOR OF METRO HEALTH
[01:00:01]
OR THEIR DESIGNEE WHERE NEEDED CHAIR.IF I MAY, I HAVE A CIVIL SIMILAR AMENDMENT THAT HASN'T BEEN POSTED YET.
AND, AND I AGREE WITH THIS, UH, LANGUAGE HERE.
UM, IT, UM, I I, MS MORALE, UH, LET ME STOP YOU RIGHT THERE.
UH, THERE NEEDS TO BE A MOTION AND A SECOND BEFORE DISCUSSION, UM, CAN BE HAD, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ACTUALLY, I THINK PRESENTING OR ATTEMPTING TO PRESENT A DIFFERENT VIEW, NOT A VIEW, A DIFFERENT, AN ADDITIONAL COMMENT, I GUESS IS WHAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO SAY, OR WERE YOU ABOUT TO COMMENT ON THE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS, THAT'S HERE.
UH, I'M SEEKING TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION.
THEN IT IS CORRECT THAT WE MUST HAVE A MOTION BEFORE THAT I, WOULD I MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP THE 2018 SB SAPC? WELL, WE, WE'VE ACTUALLY GOT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, SANJAY.
UH, WE'VE GOT A, A RECOMMENDATION BY ONE PERSON, AND THEN A, A MIN ACTUALLY, UH, ADDITION TO THAT, UH, BY SOMEONE ELSE.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY COMING TO US FROM THE S A M P C OR COMING TO US FROM THE I P M A I P M C.
THESE ARE COMING FROM RESIDENTS OF THE, OF THE CITY.
UH, SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS.
ONE IS UNDER THE S A P M C, UH, AND THE OTHER ONE IS UNDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THAT.
UH, AND, AND I THINK YOU WERE ABOUT TO SAY, YOU WOULD TAKE THE COMMENT THAT'S UNDER THE 200, UH, 2018 SS A M P C LINE.
THEN THE MOTION IS TO KEEP, TO TAKE THAT 8C VERY GOOD AS IS OKAY.
THE MOTION IS TO MAINTAIN THE 20,018 SS A P M C.
AND DISCUSSION NOW TO THE, THE PERSON THAT, OH, SORRY.
UM, YES, UH, THE, UH, THIS, UH, AMENDMENT IS SIMILAR TO ONE, UH, UH, THAT I'M, I, I HAVE PROPOSED.
UH, AND, UH, MY QUESTION IS, OR MY COMMENT ON THIS IS THAT, UH, IF WE KEEP THE 2018 S A P M C AS IT STANDS, UH, IT, UH, THE CODE OFFICIAL IS THE, UH, I GUESS THE, UH, THE PERSON THAT MAKING THE DETERMINATION AND, AND WHAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, STATES IS THAT, UM, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER AND OR DIRECTOR OF METRO HEALTH OR THEIR DESIGNEE OR NEEDED.
AND, AND MY, MY ONLY, UH, POINT ON THAT IS THAT, UH, LICENSED HYGIENIST, UH, BECAUSE, UH, THE CODE STATES, UM, UH, UNSANITARY, UH, CONDITIONS, THAT, THAT TYPE OF THING, AND, AND THOSE TERMS ARE REALLY HARD TO DEFINE AS I'VE STATED BEFORE.
UM, UH, SO MY COMMENT IS THAT ALTHOUGH CODE OFFICIALS MAY BE TRAINED, QUALIFIED, AND EXPERIENCED AS, AS, UH, BEEN STATED BEFORE, THEY STILL ARE NOT BOUND BY LIFETIME STANDARDS, ETHICAL CODES AND REGULATIONS, UH, THAT ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, UH, HYGIENIST, UH, DOCTORS ARE BOUND BY, UH, THEY COULD LOSE, THESE LICENSED PROFESSIONALS COULD LOSE THEIR, THEIR LICENSE OR REGISTRATION DUE TO IMPROPER AND OR UNETHICAL PRACTICE.
AND, UH, SO THAT IS MY CONCERN WITH THIS SECTION.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I THINK THIS NEW LANGUAGE IS VERY LIMITED, BECAUSE THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE HELP THAT THE CORAL FISHER REALLY NEEDS, LIKE YOU SAID.
AND IF YOU START LISTING ALL THE PROFESSIONALS THAT THE COURT OFFICIALS SHOULD DEPEND ON, YOU'LL BE WRITING A BOOK.
AND THAT'S WHY YOU SHOULD LEAVE IT OPEN AND LET THE COURT OFFICIALS DETERMINE WHO HE NEEDS TO CONSULT WITH IN MAKING THE DECISION.
THIS IS, WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
ON THE, UM, CHART, THE CHART, YOU HAVE DUPLICATE AS THE NOTE.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT? UH, YES, SIR.
SO YOU'RE GONNA SEE DUPLICATE, UM, AND YOU'RE ALSO GONNA SEE A COMMENT, UM, ALONG THE WAY THAT READS, UH, REFER TO OTHER AMENDMENTS.
IT WAS AN INTERNAL NOTE FOR MYSELF, JUST TO REMIND MYSELF THAT THIS, UH, PROPOSAL AMENDMENT CAME UP MORE THAN ONCE.
UH, BY TWO DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS.
SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHILE WE'RE REVIEWING AND WE'RE REVIEWING 'EM
[01:05:01]
BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.SO I JUST WANNA, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT, UM, I'M SORRY, THIS IS SO LOUD.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT IF THIS IS JUST IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER OR THE DIRECTOR OF METRO HEALTH, UM, THOSE ARE CITY EMPLOYERS.
THOSE ARE SERVICES THAT ARE ALREADY PROVIDED BY THE CITY.
UM, SO I HONESTLY DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD HURT, UM, FOR SOME OF THEIR DECISIONS TO BE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER OR THE DIRECTOR OF METRO HEALTH.
AND THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE THE S A P M C SAYS THAT THIS IS SURROUNDING THE IDEA OF PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH OR GENERAL, WE WELFARE.
AND I AGREE WITH YOU, WE CAN'T CONTRACT EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE CITY BECAUSE THAT WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME.
UM, BUT IF WE DO CONTRACT THE CITY ENGINEER AS A SECOND OPINION, OR METRO HEALTH, WHO ARE DEFINITELY QUALIFIED IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT SANITATION, WHAT WELFARE, WHAT HEALTHY LIVING LOOKS LIKE, I DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD HURT JUST TO GET THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, CONSULTATION WITH THE CODE OFFICIALS AND MAKING SURE THAT THEIR, UM, DECISIONS ARE ON THE SAME, THEY'RE IN AGREEMENT.
UM, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? I, SO WHAT WOULD YOU PREFER A REALLY WIDE OPEN, UH, QUESTION THAT YOU COULD THEN NARROW DOWN OR SOMETHING THAT'S SO NARROW THAT YOU SORT OF HAVE TO TAKE IT FROM THERE AND MOVE ON WITH IT? ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME? I, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO ADD SO MUCH VERBIAGE INTO THIS BOOK THAT WE COULD TURN IT INTO A LIBRARY, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A REFERENCE BOOK.
YOU KNOW, IT'S A REFERRING YOU TO EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND I, I, I THINK THAT'S WHERE OUR PROBLEMS ARE LYING.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO HAVE LITTLE MINUTIAE POINTS ABOUT WHERE THE PERIOD IS, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SHOULD BE.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF, UH, POINTS HERE.
FIRST I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ON THE SUGGESTED LANGUAGE, IT IS STATING, UH, NOT SPECIFICALLY COVERED BY THIS CODE SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL.
SO THERE, THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF DEFINITIONS WITHIN THIS CODE AND A, A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY, UM, PRETTY MUCH SET.
SO THIS WOULD NOT BE A HUGE AREA THAT IS NOT ALREADY DEFINED.
SO IN THOSE SPECIFIC SPECIAL CASES, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH ASKING FOR OUTSIDE CONSULTATION BECAUSE WHAT COMES TO MIND FOR ME IS, FOR EXAMPLE, HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.
NOT EVERY CODE OFFICIAL, NOT EVERY CODE OFFICER IS AN EXPERT IN HISTORICAL BUILDINGS, AND THEY MAY NEED A CONSULT.
SO I THINK THAT THIS LANGUAGE IS GOOD.
UM, MY, MY SECOND THING, I, I, I REALLY LIKE TO ASK CHAIR, UM, MEMBERS OF THE, THE PUBLIC HAVE BEEN INTERRUPTED SEVERAL TIMES, AND I JUST WANT TO SEE IF WE CAN TRY TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.
I'M A RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, I, I DO SUPPORT, UH, THIS AMENDMENT ITEM NUMBER 26.
AND I WOULD ALSO JUST COMMENT THAT I, I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT A LOT OF THESE AMENDMENT AMENDMENTS FROM THE, THE PUBLIC ARE QUIBBLING WITH PERIODS.
AND I, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CONCERN ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, GETTING WAY TOO TECHNICAL OR THROWING IN TOO MUCH LANGUAGE AND MAKING IT OVER COMPLICATED, BUT I, I DO WANT TO STRESS THE FACT THAT OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THEIR HOMES THAT THEY OWN, UM, AS A RESULT OF THE S A P M C.
AND THAT THIS DOCUMENT GOVERNS OUR GOVERNMENTS.
IT, IT, IT PROVIDES THE RULES FOR OUR GOVERNMENT'S USE OF A VERY, UH, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A LARGE POWER.
IT'S A POWER TO TELL PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN NO LONGER LIVE IN A HOME THAT THEY OWN.
AND SO I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE TAKE EVERY WORD, UH, INTO CONSIDERATION, AND WE THINK ABOUT IT REALLY THOUGHTFULLY AND CAREFULLY.
BUT I, I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN ABOUT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I, I, I DON'T, I, I DON'T MEAN TO SUGGEST THAT EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE, YOU KNOW, EVERY COMMA NEEDS TO BE DEBATED OVER, BUT I DO THINK THAT THESE AMENDMENTS ARE IMPORTANT AND INCLUDING THIS ONE, NUMBER 26.
YEAH, I, I DIDN'T MEAN TO BE SNARKY ABOUT THE PERIODS, BUT I, I THINK, YEAH, MY POINT WAS JUST IF YOU ADD SO MUCH IN THERE, IT'S GONNA GET THE, THE ESSENCE OF IT IS GONNA GET LOST IN ALL THE VERBIAGE.
I WILL JUST SAY IN RESPONSE TO THAT, THAT I THINK, UM,
[01:10:01]
IF YOU ARE EXPERIENCING AN ISSUE, UM, WITH CODE OFFICIALS OR CODE COMPLIANCE, WHATEVER IT IS, UM, IF YOU ARE EXPERIENCING THAT AS A CITIZEN, I THINK IT'S HELPFUL FOR THE LANGUAGE TO BE CLEAR AND TO HAVE LIKE DIRECT, UM, PEOPLE THAT CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.BECAUSE, UM, THAT WAY THEY CAN TRACE BACK WHERE THEY CAN GO, WHERE THEY CAN SEEK HELP, WHERE THEY, UM, YOU KNOW, CAN TALK TO CODE OFFICIALS AND HAVE THOSE OPEN DISCUSSIONS.
SO MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, VERY SOLID IN THE DECISIONS OF THE CODE OFFICIAL.
I REALLY DON'T SEE HOW THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE, ESPECIALLY FOR RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, AND CONSIDERING THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TWICE, AND WE HAVE, UM, OUR PUBLIC COMMENT ALSO IN SUPPORT, I URGE YOU ALL TO RETHINK THAT.
UM, CITIZENS ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS TYPE OF, UM, AMENDMENT.
LET MINUTE THAT MR. SPEAK, SINCE HE'S BEEN HOLDING, I THINK WE'VE BEEN FORGETTING THE FACT THAT THE CODE OFFICER IS NOT THE ONE WHO MAKES THE DECISION.
HE'S THE ONE THAT MAKES A RECOMMENDATION.
THEN IT GOES FORTH TO THE STAFF.
IF THE STAFF LIKE A DEMOLITION DEEMS THAT THEY NEED TO GO AND LOOK AT THIS, THEN THEY'LL GO OUT.
IT'S NOT THE CODE OFFICER WHO MAKES A DECISION.
MENTAL HEALTH IS DONE BY THE CITY.
THAT'S WAY BEFORE IT EVEN GETS TO THE BOARD.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE STEPS THAT ARE TAKEN FROM THE TIME THE INCIDENT OCCURS TO THE TIME IT GETS TO THE BOARD.
AND 90%, I WOULD SAY, DON'T EVEN COME TO THE BOARD.
SO YOU GUYS KEEP BLAMING THE CODE OFFICER AS IF, AS SOON AS HE OR SHE GOES OUT THERE THAT THE DECISION IS MADE.
IT IS NOT, IT GOES TO A STAFF.
THE STAFF THEN HANDLES IT AS IT GOES.
AND THEN IF IT NEEDS TO COME TO THE BOARD, THE BOARD IS THE LAST RESORT.
YOU GUYS ARE ACTING LIKE ONE PERSON MAKES THE DECISION.
I THINK THAT WE ARE FAILING TO, I OBJECT, UH, PERSONALLY, I OBJECT TO THE ISSUE.
YOU GUYS PLEASE DON'T DO THAT.
UH, BECAUSE THE ISSUE IS WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AND SEEKING FOR INPUT AND COMMENT AND, AND SO, SO KEEP COMMENTS TO MY CORRECTION ON THAT.
AND, BUT AGAIN, THEY KEEP SINGLING OUT CODE OFFICERS AS IF THEY HAVE THE DETERMINATION TO MAKE THE DECISION RIGHT THEN AND THERE.
THEY DON'T, THEY HAVE A STAFF THAT DOES IT.
IT'S JUST, THIS IS JUST TO SAY, IT SAYS CODE OFFICIALS AND CODE OFFICIALS IS DEFINED IN THE S A P M C AS TO BE, UM, ANYONE WHO WAS DELEGATED POWER TO UPON, UM, THE D S D, UM, OR THE DIRECTOR OF THE D S D.
SO I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU OF THAT 'CAUSE I AM COMPLETELY AWARE THAT IT'S NOT A SINGLE PERSON MAKING THESE DECISIONS.
THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME THOUGH.
THIS IS EMIN THOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
NUMBER ONE, YES, CODE OFFICIAL IS BASICALLY THE DIRECTOR OF CODE AND I'M THE DEPUTY.
UM, JUST TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, WE ARE CERTIFIED BUILDING OFFICIALS, SO WE DO HAVE LICENSES.
MY BOSS, WHO IS THE CODE OFFICIAL, IS A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
SO WE ARE BOUND BY OUR LICENSES.
WE HAVE ETHICS, WE HAVE LICENSES TO WORRY ABOUT.
WE ARE NOT JUST GONNA MAKE DECISIONS AND NOT WORRY ABOUT OUR LICENSES.
SO JUST TO ANSWER RAY ON THAT, THE OTHER THING I WANNA MAKE SURE I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THIS, BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA LIMIT US TO ONLY THOSE TWO FOLKS.
BASICALLY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CITY ENGINEER AND METRO HEALTH.
JUST IN THE LAST, YOU KNOW, FEW MONTHS, WE HAD TO CALL A C S ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES BECAUSE WE HAD A LOCATION WHERE IT HAS ANIMALS.
WE HAVE LOCATION WHERE WE DID GET METROHEALTH BECAUSE THERE WAS INFESTATION, ANOTHER LOCATION, WE GOT PD, THERE IS CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES, ANOTHER LOCATION FIRE.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA WRITE ONLY THESE TWO THINGS HERE, YOU ARE LIMITING US TO CONSULT WITH ONLY THOSE TWO.
KAYLA, YOU TALKED ABOUT O H P, YOU TALKED ABOUT BASICALLY HISTORIC.
SO IF I ADOPT THIS AND I NEED TO GET THEIR CONSULTATION, YOU'RE TELLING ME NOT TO GO TO THEM.
WE, WE DO APPROACH ANYBODY WHO WORKS WITH THE CITY, WHO HAS THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE CAPACITY WHEN WE NEED THAT.
SO IF YOU WANNA LIST EVERYBODY, I'M, I'M ALL FOR IT.
OR, OR LEAVE IT OPEN AND WE WILL TAKE THE RIGHT APPROACH WHEN WE NEED THAT.
I, MY NOTES ACTUALLY REITERATE THE ISSUE OF THAT IS THE, THE ADDITION OF THE LANGUAGE IS TOO LIMITING BECAUSE WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TALK TO WHOMEVER WE NEED TO TALK
[01:15:01]
TO ABOUT IT.UH, NO, RIGHT NEXT TO YOU FIRST.
I, I'D JUST LIKE TO, TO COMMENT.
I, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THAT THE SS A P M C DOES GOVERN PRE B SS B PROCEDURE.
THE, THE BOARD, THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD IS BARELY MENTIONED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
IT'S BASICALLY ONLY MENTIONED WHEN, UH, THE DOCUMENT REFERS BACK TO THE CITY CODE.
AND SO THIS DOCUMENT DOES AUTHORIZE THE CODE OFFICIAL AND HIS DE DESIGNEES TO ISSUE NOTICES AND OR, AND OR ORDERS TO VACATE.
UH, AND THAT DOES TAKE PLACE PRIOR TO A B S B HEARING.
NOW, IT IS TRUE THAT SOMEONE CAN THEN HAVE A LATER B SS B HEARING, UH, AT WHICH POINT THE B S B MAY ORDER DEMOLITION.
BUT THE SS A P M C DOES GOVERN THE PROCEDURE THAT TAKES PLACE, INCLUDING ORDERS AND NOTICES TO VACATE THAT HAPPEN BEFORE A B S B HEARING.
AND THAT'S A CORRECT COMMENT RIGHT NEXT TO YOU.
I'D LIKE TO, UM, RAISE A FRIENDLY MOTION.
I THINK THAT'S THE NAME, UH, TO CHANGE, UH, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER AND DIRECTOR OF METRO HEALTH OR THE DESIGNEE WHERE NEEDED TO, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL, THE, THE MOTION IS TO ACTUALLY ACCEPT THE, THE 2018, UH, AS A RESULT OF A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO WE CAN'T ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY OR MEAN THEN INSTEAD OF A FRIENDLY MOTION, YOU MAKE A COMMENT, BUT YOU JUST CANNOT MAKE A FRIENDLY, OKAY, SO MY COMMENT WOULD BE, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE THEN TO, IN ORDER TO LEAVE THIS, UH, AS OPEN AS POSSIBLE, TO CHANGE OR ADD THE, THE, THE, THE TEXT IN CONSULTATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROFESSIONAL WHEN THE CODE OFFICIAL DOES NOT HAVE THE ENOUGH QUALIFICATIONS TO MAKE THE DECISION? UH, SINCE IT'S DONE ALREADY, I DO NOT KNOW IF THAT'S VI VIABLE OR NOT, BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
GIVE, GIVE YOU A NAME AND ALSO VERIFY THAT YOUR CITY, YES.
MY NAME IS IRMA HOFFMAN, AND I'M A RESIDENT.
AND MINE IS JUST A COMMENT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES WHY IS THIS HAPPENING,
AND THEN THIS IS, AGAIN, A CAUSE AND EFFECT.
ALL OF THIS IS HAPPENING AND, AND THERE'S A BALANCE THAT'S TRYING TO BE REACHED.
I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THAT BALANCE WILL BE, BUT I, I FEEL THAT THERE'S A PROTECTIVE, UH, HOW SHOULD I PUT IT, WAVE COMING THROUGH IN ORDER TO HELP PROTECT THE RESIDENTS.
JUST A REAL QUICK COMMENT TO THAT.
UH, THE, THE QUESTION, AND I DO NOT, THIS IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION.
DO NOT EXPECT AN ANSWER, UH, OF WHERE DO WE HAVE THE INFORMATION THAT SAYS WE DESTROY OR WE DEMOLISH MORE BUILDINGS THAN ANY OTHER CITY.
IF YOU'RE GOING BY THE MOST RECENTLY PUBLISHED ARTICLE, UH, THAT WAS DRAFTED BY SOMEBODY OUT OF AUSTIN THAT WE WON'T QUOTE PER SE, THAT INFORMATION IS PROBABLY INVALID.
IN FACT, I KNOW FOR SURE PART OF IT IS INVALID BECAUSE THERE WERE COMPARISONS MADE BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, UH, THE CITY OF HOUSTON, CITY OF DALLAS, AND THE COMPARISON WAS NOT AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON.
JUST JUST A REAL QUICK COMMENT THAT, UH, THAT INFORMATION MAY OR MAY NOT BE CORRECT DEPENDING ON WHERE YOUR SOURCE IS COMING FROM, BECAUSE FOR, FOR AT LEAST ONE PERSON ON THE BOARD, WE LOOK HARD AT EVERY BUILDING, UH, FROM MULTIPLE POINTS OF VIEW TO GO BEYOND THE ISSUE OF EVEN A DANGEROUS STRUCTURE.
IS IT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ACTUALLY SALVAGED FOR TAXPAYER ROLE PURPOSES, AS AN EXAMPLE? JUST ONE POINT OF PERSONAL, UH, CONSIDERATION ON IT.
UH, BUT APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT ON IT REAL WELL.
UH, I'M GOING TO CALL THE MOTION.
THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE 2018, UH, SS A P M C CODE.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
NEXT ITEM, DENNY, LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT MS. BROWN HAS JOINED US, UH, MR. CHAIR.
UH, I'D ALSO, UH, WANT THE RECORD TO REC, UH, REFLECT THAT, UH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FELIX RAMIREZ, UH, HAS JOINED AS WELL.
HOW DID YOU STICK IN THAT, THAT BREAK? NO, HE GAVE ME JUST A LITTLE WELDING
[01:20:01]
BOY, YOU GUYS NEED TO KEEP ME STRAIGHT OVER HERE,NEXT ITEM ON THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION IS ITEM NUMBER 27.
UH, IT'S AN EXTERNAL PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY LETICIA SANCHEZ, CO-CHAIR FOR THE WEST SIDE, UM, EXCUSE ME, HISTORIC WEST SIDE RESERV RESIDENT ASSOCIATION.
THIS IS AN ITEM THAT THE COMMITTEE TOOK ACTION ON BACK IN MAY 13TH, 2020.
IN REGARDS SECTION 7 0 1 0.1, NOTICE TO PERSONAL RESPONSIBLE, MS. SANCHEZ IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE ADD THE LANGUAGE IN BOLD, UH, THAT READS, INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTIONS 1 0 8 0.4.
AGAIN, HOPE EVERYBODY CAN SEE THE SCREEN.
AGAIN, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED.
THE CONS COMMITTEE CONSIDERED THE, UH, RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF AND VOTED ON APPROVING THE, UM, SO AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S, UM, UP FOR CONSIDERATION AGAIN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
UH, WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND THAT BOLDING, INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE A PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4, WHAT IS, UH, LEGAL COUNSEL STAFF'S POSITION ON THIS AMENDMENT? PROPOSED AMENDMENT I IS MS. SANCHEZ HERE TODAY? NO.
UH, I, I, I'M CONFUSED AS TO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT SURE WHAT SHE'S ASKING FOR.
OR, OR WHO IS IT? MS. SANCHEZ.
SHE'S THE ONE THAT PROPOSED THE AMENDMENT.
AND I, I DO HAVE HER EMAIL, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER EXPLANATION FOR THE, UH, THE CHANGE.
NOW, SECTION 1 0 8 0.4 IN THE SS A P M C REFERS TO PROHIBIT OCCUPANCY.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO TABLE THIS ITEM AND BRING IT BACK LATER WHEN WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON THE INTENT? OH, YES, CERTAINLY.
UH, THE COMMITTEE, UH, CAN DECIDE TO TABLE, UM, MOTION TO TABLE, YEAH, TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT IS.
ALL AGREEABLE TO, UH, TABLE THE ISSUE, SAY AYE.
THAT DOCUMENT OR ITEM IS TABLED AT THIS TIME.
THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 28.
AGAIN, IT'S AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY SEVERAL PEOPLE.
UM, AND WE'LL GO THROUGH EACH ONE.
UM, SOME OF THEM ARE DUPLICATES, UM, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE GET TO CAPTURE EVERY ONE.
UH, SECTION 1 0 7 0.2 FORM, UH, THIS IS A SECTION THAT WAS, UM, MAINTAINED, UH, OR RATHER APPROVED, AND IT WAS RECOMMENDED TO MAINTAIN THE 2021 I P M C LANGUAGE, EXCLUDING ITEM NUMBER SIX BACK IN JUNE 10TH, THE LAST MEETING.
UH, SO AGAIN, JUST AS WE GO THROUGH EACH PROPOSAL, UH, MS. SANCHEZ PROPOSING THAT WE, UH, ADD INTERFACE OR RATHER TYPEFACE OR LEGIBLE, UM, WHENEVER WE HAVE WRITTEN A NOTICE IN BOTH ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
AND TO INCLUDE, UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UH, WITH INFORMATION ABOUT ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. FURTHERMORE, SHE'S ADDING ADDITIONAL ITEM ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH READS TO INFORM THE PROPERTY OWNER OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT OF THE RIGHT TO APPEAL AND THE PROCEDURES FOR AN APPEAL, INCLUDING A DESCRIPTION OF ANY DOCUMENTS THAT MUST BE SUBMITTED, NOTICE OF THE RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED, OR TO BE PRESENT WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE, A STATEMENT OF BOTH AND IN-PERSON AND REMOTE MEANS OF ATTENDANCE AND THE DATE AND TIME OF
[01:25:01]
ANY DEADLINES.AND THEN SHE, THAT WE CAN BETTER COMMUNICATE WHAT A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME IS TO THE PUBLIC.
DAN, COULD YOU MAKE A COMMENT TO YOUR NOTE? UH, I'M SORRY, SIR, REPEAT THAT.
REFER, REFER TO OTHER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, SAME SECTION UNDER THE, THE COLUMN FOR NOTES, JUST TO HELP ME UNDERSTAND IF THAT WAS YOUR NOTE OR FOR US.
AGAIN, THAT'S A NOTE FOR MYSELF JUST TO REFER TO OTHER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, LIKE I SAID.
AGAIN, THERE WAS TWO OTHER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UM, ACTUALLY THREE RATHER.
UM, AND SO THERE'S ONE SUBMITTED BY TEXAS HAUSER STAFF AND RICK ACOSTA.
ACTUALLY RICK ACOSTA SUBMITTED IT TWICE, UM, WITH TWO DIFFERENT, I GUESS, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, IF YOU SEE HERE.
THIS IS, UH, EVELYN BROWN SPEAKING.
I THOUGHT WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS AT, AT A COUPLE OF THE MEETINGS PRIOR TO ABOUT WHAT WAS GONNA BE IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH AND WHAT WAS NOT GOING TO BE IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ABOUT GIVING THE HOMEOWNER NOTICE, AND I THOUGHT WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS.
IT SEEMS LIKE I'M GOING BACKWARDS HERE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
AND BEFORE WE HAVE MORE DISCUSSION, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT ITEM NUMBER 28, UH, WITH THE 2018 S UH, A P M C S IS I, SECOND, I MOTION, MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE, I MEAN, TO MAINTAIN THE 2018 S A P M C AND THE SECOND, UH, TO MAINTAIN AGAIN, 2018 DISCUSSION.
I, I BROUGHT UP THAT THIS ISSUE IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, UH, WHERE THE FORM IS, IS, UM, OR THE NOTICE, UH, IS NOT QUITE, UH, LEGIBLE.
LET, LET ME ASK YOU, ARE YOU SUPPORTING ALL OF IT AS WRITTEN, OR ARE YOU SUPPORTING ANY, ANY INDIVIDUAL ELEMENT? I'LL MAKE IT EASY.
I'LL SUPPORT THE WHOLE THING, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
UH, AND, AND, UH, BECAUSE I, I'VE MADE SIM SIMILAR COMMENTS AND, AND RAISED CONCERNS ON THE NOTICES.
AND, UH, AND I'VE LOOKED AT THE NOTICE AND, UH, DANNY PRESENTED, UH, THE, THE NOTICES, AND THEY'RE NOT QUITE LEGIBLE.
I KNOW I JUST TURNED 65, BUT, UH, I STILL, YOU KNOW, UH, LIKE TO READ WHATEVER I'M GIVEN.
UH, AND, UM, SO, SO, UH, I REQUESTED THAT, THAT A LARGER TYPE PHASE, UH, AND, AND MAYBE, UH, UH, SPANISH STATEMENT, UH, OFFERING TRANSLATION SERVICES BY THE CITY.
AND, UH, UH, AS I RECALL, UH, LEGAL COUNSEL, UH, SOMEWHAT AGREED WITH IT.
UH, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WERE, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEING A ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, ISSUE, BUT SINCE THIS IS PART OF THE CODE HERE, UH, I THINK WE OUGHT TO, YOU KNOW, UH, CONSIDER THIS, THIS, UH, THIS AMENDMENT.
UH, I, I LIKE TO SAY THAT, UH, THE PROCESS, AS I UNDERSTAND OF THIS, UH, UH, UPDATING THE, THE, THE CODE IS, UH, FIRST PROPOSED BY, BY STAFF, THE FIRST PART, AND THE SECOND PART IS PROPOSED BY THE CITIZENS, CITIZENS OF THE CITY.
AND, UH, TO SAY THAT CONSIDERING THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE COMMENTS THAT THE CITY HAS SUBMITTED, UH, UH, UH, UH, THAT WE ARE GOING BACK OR GOING BACKWARDS, I DON'T THINK THAT'S, THAT SHOULD BE, UH, UH, UH, AN OPINION THAT IT SHOULD BE REFLECTED AS A PROCESS OF THIS.
THE PROCESS OF THIS FIRST WAS TO GO THROUGH THE, THE, THE CODES, UH, SUGGESTIONS THAT THE STAFF HAS PROPOSING.
AND NOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE CODE THAT THE CITIZENS ARE PROPOSING AS, AND THAT'S THE VALID, UH, CONCERN.
AND WE SHOULD JUST GO THROUGH THOSE WITHOUT EMITTING ANY OPINIONS THAT WE'RE GOING BACK BACKWARDS OR, UH, IN ANY OTHER SITUATION.
UH, UH, TO THAT RELATE, IT DOES APPEAR THAT WE'RE GOING BACKWARD, HOWEVER, WE INVITED THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE INPUT TO US.
AND SOMETIMES THAT CAUSES US TO GO BACKWARD.
IN FACT, I WOULD SAY THAT IN ALMOST ALL CASES, UH, REPHRASE THAT IN MOST CASES, NOT ALMOST ALL, IN MOST CASES, WE'RE GOING BACKWARD BECAUSE OF, OF INPUT COMING FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'VE INVITED TO COME TO IT.
SO IT DOES, IN FACT, IT'S VERY UNCOMFORTABLE GOING BACKWARD.
IT, IT, IT, UH, ASHLEY, I FIND THAT BACKWARDS COMMENT, VERY DISRESPECTFUL.
UH, FOR ONE, WE HAVE JUST BEEN DETERMINED THAT WE CANNOT MAKE MOTIONS BACK BACKWARD IN TIME, NOT BACKWARD IN TERMS OF THE, OF THE CONTENT BACKWARD IMPACT.
[01:30:01]
AND, AND, UH, SO VERY DISRESPECTFUL FOR US THAT ARE, UH, VOLUNTEERING OUR TIME.AND, UH, SO WE CAN'T MAKE MOTIONS.
SO WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? I, I JUST HEARD FROM A FELLOW, UH, APPOINTMENT, UH, THAT, WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? UH, ON, ON OUR SIDE OF THE, OF THE TABLE, I SUPPOSE.
UH, WE'RE PROVIDING COMMENTS, WE'RE BEING DI DISREGARDED, WE'RE BEING DISRESPECTED.
NO, I'M REALLY SORRY THAT YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE DISRESPECT.
UH, MS. BROWN, I'VE GOT A COMMENT FROM SOMEONE ELSE.
THIS IS MATTHEW GARCIA, RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, SO YEAH, I'D JUST LIKE TO, TO NOTE THAT A CONVERSATION HAS BEEN HAD BY THE COMMITTEE ABOUT SOME OF THESE I IDEAS, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THE COMMITTEE HAS ACTUALLY VOTED OR BEEN SUBMITTED AN ACTUAL, UM, MOTION ON THESE.
SO, UM, I AM IN SUPPORT, UM, OF THE AMENDMENTS LISTED HERE IN ITEM 28.
AND I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THESE SEEM LIKE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD, SIMPLE, BASIC, UH, CHANGES TO, TO THE NOTICE.
UM, AND THEY PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION TO, UH, OUR RESIDENTS.
AND I THINK THAT'S AN, AN EASY THING FOR, FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COMMITTEE TO RECOMMEND THIS, UM, THESE, UH, CHANGES.
I'M VERY SORRY THAT YOU ALL FEEL DISRESPECTED.
MY INTENT IS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS.
WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE HOURS WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE NOTICES AND WHAT IT'S GONNA SAY AND HOW MUCH TIME THAT WE ARE, WE ARE ALLOWING THE, THE RESIDENT TO DO WHATEVER TO FIX THE HOUSE OR, OR EVICT THEM OR WHAT, WHATEVER IT IS.
SO IN MY OPINION, IT'S NOT LIKE GOING FORWARD BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED IT, BUT IN, IN THAT SENSE, IN IF WE ARE RECEIVING COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, SHOULDN'T THAT MEAN THAT WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED IT ENOUGH, OR WE SHOULD BE DISCUSSING EVEN FURTHER? BECAUSE AT SOME POINT, THIS PROCESS BEING A TWO TIER PROCESS, FIRST WITH THE STAFF AND SECOND WITH THE CITIZENS, IT'S MEANING THAT WE ARE OPEN TO RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM THE CITIZENS.
AND DISCUSSING THOSE PROBLEMS SHOULDN'T BE TAKEN OR INTERPRETED AS GOING BACKWARDS IN THOSE CONTENTS SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AS WE SHOULD BE FURTHER DISCUSSING THESE THINGS.
BECAUSE SEEMS LIKE WITH THE DISCUSSION THAT WE ALREADY HAVE, IT'S NOT BEING REFLECTED IN THESE COMMENTS THAT THEY'RE SU SUBMITTING TO US.
YOU KNOW, THE FIRST PART OF OF EVERYTHING WAS, WAS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND IF WE'RE GONNA SIT HERE AND TELL THE PUBLIC, PLEASE MAKE YOUR COMMENT, PLEASE, UH, PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS, WE WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.
AND THEN TO CONTINUOUSLY PUSH PAST IT, RUSH PAST IT, UM, AND TRY TO DISREGARD EVERY SINGLE THING THAT'S BROUGHT IN IS VERY, VERY DISRESPECTFUL.
UM, I DO HAVE A COMMENT ON THE ACTUAL ITEM ITSELF.
UM, FIRST, UH, CLARIFICATION FROM LEGAL.
UH, I REMEMBER WHEN WE WERE, WHEN I DID MY ORIENTATION, YOU, UH, SOMEONE MENTIONED, UM, THAT VIRTUAL WAS NOT POSSIBLE.
VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE, WHAT WAS NOT POSSIBLE VIRTUAL, UH, CORRECT.
UH, AFTER, UH, THE, UH, THE AG HAD SUSPENDED PARTS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, WHICH, UH, DOES REQUIRE IN PERSON AND PROVIDED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, PRESENT YOURSELF, UH, VIA REMOTE.
HOWEVER, UM, IN SEPTEMBER, I BELIEVE SEPTEMBER 1ST, UH, THE AG REVOKED THAT AND, UH, APPEARING REMOTELY IS NO LONGER AN OPTION AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE BECAUSE, UH, OP UH, OPEN MEETING, UH, REQUIRES IN PERSON PRESENCE.
BUT, UH, I BELIEVE WHAT IS STILL, UH, CONTINUING IS IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, UH, THEY CAN STILL EMAIL, UM, COMMENTS TO, UM, JUDY OR ESTHER, I BELIEVE.
AND, UH, THOSE ARE READ INTO THE RECORD FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION.
SO VERY LONG-WINDED WAY OF SAYING, UH, YES, REMOTE IS NOT ALLOWED.
I'M A CITIZEN OF SAN ANTONIO, UM, A RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, I JUST ALSO WANTED TO ENCOURAGE
[01:35:01]
THE COMMITTEE TO, UH, NOT APPROVE OF THIS MOTION, AND INSTEAD TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS LANGUAGE, I GUESS, WITH THE REVISION OF, UH, TAKING OUT THAT PEOPLE CAN ATTEND REMOTELY.UM, THE REASON BEING, I KNOW THAT THE COMMITTEE KEEPS TALKING ABOUT DEMOLITION AS A LAST RESORT, AND I REALLY THINK THAT IF THESE, AND THE COMMITTEE HAS FREQUENTLY TALKED ABOUT HOW 90% OF WHAT CODE DOES IS STUFF THAT'S GOVERNED BY SAMHSA, THE SS A P M C.
AND SO I THINK MAKING THESE NOTICES A VIOLATION.
I MEAN, I WATCH THE B S B MEETINGS.
I HOW MANY PEOPLE COME UP AND SAY, I HAD NO IDEA THIS WAS A PROBLEM.
YOU KNOW, SO MAKING THE NOTICES AS CLEAR TO RESIDENTS AS POSSIBLE, ESPECIALLY JUST MAKING THEM IN SPANISH WHEN WE KNOW SO MANY RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO, UM, ARE MONOLINGUAL SPANISH SPEAKERS, I THINK IS THE SMALLEST THING THAT THE COMMITTEE COULD DO TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR HOMES AND WE DON'T GET TO DEMOLITION.
SO I THINK BETTER NOTICES TO APPRISE PEOPLE OF WHAT THE ISSUE IS, IS A GREAT IDEA TO MAKE SURE CITIZENS KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COMMITTEE TO NOT APPROVE OF THE MOTION, UH, THAT'S OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY ONE OR TWO THINGS.
ONE IS THAT WE ARE JUST PEOPLE AS WELL.
WE COME HERE BECAUSE WE WANT TO DO IT JUST LIKE YOU.
SO I GUESS THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WE DO GET TO VOTE, AND WE DO IT EVERY ONCE A MONTH.
AND THAT'S SORT OF THE WAY IT WORKS OUT.
UM, I THOUGHT THAT WE SAW A COPY OF THE, UH, VACATE NOTICE OR STOP, WHATEVER, SOME OF THE NOTICES.
I THOUGHT THEY WERE ALL BILINGUAL, UM, ON ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER.
YOU KNOW, THE ONES LIKE YOU WOULD PUT ON THE, ON THE HOUSE, THERE'S NO BILINGUAL ON THERE, OR CAN YOU REFERENCE ON, PEOPLE CAN GO.
SO THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE THERE IS, IS REDOING THAT PARTICULAR FORM, RIGHT.
RATHER THAN PUTTING IT ALL IN THIS BOOK.
WE, WE, WE DID SAY THAT WE WOULD TAKE THE ADMINISTRATIVE TYPES OF THINGS AT A LATER DATE.
UH, WE'RE GONNA DEAL WITH JUST THE CODE ITSELF, UH, RIGHT NOW.
SO WE WILL KEEP THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE IN MIND FOR LATER REVIEW.
KAYLA, IT'S, YEAH, JUST ONE SINGLE COMMENT.
WAIT, WAIT, KAYLA, UH, I, I DO REMEMBER A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS AROUND THIS.
UM, AND WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT EMAIL AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS.
AND, UM, JUST THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD, UH, I'M SORRY, DID YOU SAY THERE WAS, UH, TWO OR THREE, UH, INDIVIDUALS THAT PUT THIS IN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL? HOW MANY WERE THERE? I BELIEVE THERE WAS THREE.
SO IT WAS TWO OTHER INDIVIDUALS, UM, SUBMITTED VERY SIMILAR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE RIGHT TO AN APPEAL AND TYPE FACING LEGIBLE WRITING IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
SO WE HAVE THREE INDIVIDUALS SUBMIT SUBMITTING THE SAME COMMENTS, THEN I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO REVISIT.
IF, IF I COULD, UH, WAIT JUST A MINUTE.
YEAH, I WAS JUST A RESPONSE TO THE COMMENT THAT, UH, THERE WAS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
UH, BECAUSE, UH, THE, IF IT'S NOT IN THE CODE, IT IS NOT NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE NOTICE BEING WRITTEN OR ANY POINTER THAT THERE'S A SPANISH SERVICES PROVISION.
SO THE, THE IDEA OF PUTTING IN THE CODE IS TO ASSURE OR MAKE SURE THAT THE POPULATION WILL HAVE ACCESS TO, UH, A, A NOTICE, UH, OF A, A CODE VIOLATION THAT IS LEGI LEGIBLE FOR ON, ON THEIR LANGUAGE.
UH, UH, SO IT'S, IT'S VERY RELATED.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A, IT IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
MR. CHAIR? OH, UM, NO, I, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS ONE OR SOMETHING? ACROSS THE BOARD? UH, ACROSS THE BOARD? UM, OKAY, GO AHEAD.
TO CLARIFY, UH, THIS COMMITTEE HAD APPROVED, INCLUDING NU A NUMBER SIX, STATING, UM, THAT THE NOTICES WOULD PROVIDE INFORMATION ON RIGHT TO APPEAL.
[01:40:01]
MY COLLEAGUE ALSO ADVISES COMMITTEE AT THE SAME TIME AFTER THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, UM, THE LEGAL ISSUES, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, THE VARIOUS LANGUAGES.UH, HE DID ADVISE THAT TEXAS, THE, THE, UH, IT HAS TO BE IN ENGLISH, UH, OFFICIAL NOTICES, UH, JUST, BUT I DO BELIEVE, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME NOTICES CAN BE PROVIDED IN SPANISH.
SO I THOUGHT, UH, AND, UH, SO I, I'M CONFUSED, DANNY.
SO AS LISTED IN THE 2018 COLUMN, THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS CHANGED BY THIS COMMITTEE AND PAST, UH, THIS COMMITTEE ADDED NUMBER SIX, RIGHT TO APPEAL.
UH, THE COMMITTEE ADDED THAT, UM, TRANS, UH, THAT NOTICES WILL INCLUDE, UH, TRANSLATION SERVICES AND OR, UM, FURTHER INFORMATION FOR ASSISTANCE CONTACT.
AND THIS COMMITTEE ALSO ADDED ON THE NOTICES THAT, UH, THE CODE OFFICERS WOULD PROVIDE EMAILS.
SO THAT, UH, I THINK THERE'S SOME CONFUSION IN THAT, UH, THE 2018 THAT'S LISTED IS, IS NOT WHAT WAS APPROVED AMENDED THAT, UH, ADDRESSED THESE MATTERS.
AND I, IF I CAN HELP CLARIFY, IF YOU LOOK AT COLUMN O, UM, THIS IS THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS PROPOSED ON THE JUNE 10TH MEETING.
UM, IT WAS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION, THEN IT WAS PROPOSED THAT WE MAINTAIN THE 2021 I P M C EXCLUDING, UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX.
SO ITEM NUMBER SIX IS ALREADY APPROVED AS EXCLUDED ON THE OTHER, IT WAS EXCLUDED, UM, WHEN, UH, DANNY MENTIONED ITEM NUMBER SIX UNDER 2021 AMENDMENT.
UM, THE, THE NUMBERS WERE OFF.
SO, UH, WHAT THEY INCLUDED IN THERE WAS PROVIDED, UH, INFORMATION STATING RIGHT TO APPEAL.
ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE PROPOSED 2021 WAS ALSO PROVIDE, UH, A NOTICE THAT A LIEN WOULD BE FILED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.
UH, AGAIN, THIS IS AN INTERNATIONAL CODE.
IT CONFLICTS WITH, UH, TEXAS LAW.
UH, TEXAS, UH, DOES NOT ALLOW FOR LIENS OR LIMITS THE AMOUNT, UM, TO BE FILED AGAINST HOMESTEADS.
AND SO THAT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION ITEM NUMBER SIX IN THE PROPOSED 2021, NOT BE ADDED BECAUSE IN TEXAS WE CANNOT FILE LIENS AGAINST CERTAIN PROPERTIES.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE 2018, UH, THAT'S WRITTEN HERE, THERE'S NUMBER FIVE, THEN NUMBER SIX WAS ADDED TO STATE RIGHT TO APPEAL.
DID I GET THAT RIGHT, DANNY? IF YOU LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 11, UM, THAT'S WHERE WE MADE OUR CHANGES.
AND IT, IT SAYS ITEM NUMBER, IT GOES UP TO FIVE.
SO I THINK WE TOOK SOMETHING OUT, DIDN'T WE? WE TOOK SIX OUT.
BUT YOU ALSO STILL HAVE A NOTE OUR COMMENT THAT THERE IS RIGHT TO APPEAL.
UH, I'M GONNA TAKE ONE MORE COMMENT REAL QUICK, AND THEN I'LL HAVE A, JUST A GENERAL, A DIFFERENT TYPE OF DISCUSSION WITH STAFF.
WELL, I ACTUALLY WANTED TO CLARIFY.
SO IT'S, YOU WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED.
WHO ARE, YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
I'M A RESIDENT OF SAN ANTONIO.
UM, I DON'T UNDER, SO YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BE IN BOTH LANGUAGES TO BE AN OFFICIAL NOTICE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS, IS THAT WHAT WAS JUST SAID? SAY THAT AGAIN, PLEASE.
I THOUGHT, AND IF THE FIRST COMMENT WAS IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO HAVE THEM IN BOTH, IN BOTH LANGUAGES, IS THAT RIGHT? THE, THE WOULD CONFLICT WITH TEXAS LAW? THE COMMENT WAS THAT THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT IT IS IN ENGLISH ONLY.
[01:45:01]
THE, THE WOULD, UH, ATTORNEY ADAMS HAD STATED, UH, IT WAS DURING THE DISCUSSION OF THE, UH, THE NOTICES BEING PROVIDED IN A VARIETY OF LANGUAGES IN TEXAS, THE DEFAULT FOR LEGAL DOCUMENTS HAS TO BE IN ENGLISH.BUT, UH, SINCE A LARGE, UH, PORTION OF THE POPULATION, I BELIEVE STILL THE LARGE PERCENTAGE IS HISPANIC CODE HAS TAKEN THE ADDITIONAL STEP OF PROVIDING, UM, UH, AT LEAST FOR, UH, CHAPTER SIX IN THE MEETING, YOU CAN ALSO CLARIFY, BUT THEY HAVE PROVIDED IN SPANISH, WHEN SAM SAID IN TEXAS, THE DEFAULT IS ENGLISH.
UH, THAT WAS IN RESPONSE TO, UH, UH, SOMEONE'S RECOMMENDATION OF PUTTING IT IN A VARIETY OF LANGUAGES.
SO IT, IT WAS MY RECOMMENDATION, AND I HAD SAID IN A LANGUAGE, THEY UNDERSTOOD, UH, SO, AND THAT, OH, THAT WAS RESPONDED BY, WELL, THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE EVERY, ALL THE LANGUAGES.
SO, UH, THESE ARE, UM, SO THIS WAS ITEM 11 WHEN, UM, GOING THROUGH, WE ADDED NUMBER SIX TO THE CURRENT 2018 RIGHT TO APPEAL.
UH, WE, UH, ADDED ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE, UH, A STATEMENT, UH, THAT, UH, UH, STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT TRANSLATION SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE, PLEASE CONTACT, UM, THE NOTICE ADDED, UH, EMAIL CONTACT, UH, BECAUSE I BELIEVE SOMEONE HAD BROUGHT UP, UH, ON THE NOTICE TO APPEAL, UH, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, ON THE NOTICES AT THE BOTTOM, IT STATES IF, UH, YOU WANT TO APPEAL THIS NOTICE, SEND THIS IN.
AND SO SOMEONE BROUGHT UP, UM, CAN THEY BE ALLOWED TO DO IT BY EMAIL? SO, UH, THAT'S ALL ADMINISTRATIVE, AND THAT'S ALL WAS AGREED TO BY, UM, THE STAFF.
SO IT, IT'S A SIMPLE REQUEST, UH, THIS IS PART OF THE CODE, AND IF IT'S NOT ON THE CODE, UH, THEN, YOU KNOW, TO HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, I, I, UH, NUMBER ONE, UH, ADD THE STATEMENT THAT A WRITTEN STATEMENT IN SPANISH OFFERING TRANSLATION SERVICES BY THE CITY, THAT WAS A SIMPLE REQUEST, UH, TO ADD TO THE CODE.
UH, AND IF WE DON'T PUT IT IN THE CODE LATER ON, THAT CAN BE CHANGED.
THAT CAN BE INTERPRETED IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
SO I, I DON'T SEE WHAT'S SO DIFFICULT ABOUT ADDING THAT STATEMENT, THAT TRANSLATION SERVICES, UH, CAN BE PROVIDED.
WE ALREADY SPEND, UH, QUITE A BIT OF FUNDING ON TRANSLATION HERE.
WOULD THAT BE A PREFE TO THE CODE AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING THAT WE TRY TO INCORPORATE INTO EACH INDIVIDUAL CODE? UH, YEAH.
WELL, WHAT I HAD JUST SAID IS IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, MATTER THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE TO BE PUT IN THE CODE, BUT THAT, UH, PER THE COMMITTEE'S VOTE, THAT STATEMENT WOULD BE ADDED.
UH, TRANSLATION SERVICES ARE PROVIDED.
AND THEN, UH, AT THE TIME, UM, CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER, MICHAEL ESI, EXPLAINED THE PROCESS WHEN THE CODE OFFICER, UH, IS AT A PROPERTY AND, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER DOES NOT, UH, SPEAK ENGLISH, UH, THE CODE OFFICER WILL, UH, TRY TO FIND SOMEONE IN THE HOUSE WHO DOES.
IF, UH, THERE IS NOT, THEN THE CODE OFFICER WILL, UH, MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO FIND SOMEONE WHO SPEAKS THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I'M SAYING STUFF IN SPANISH, OKAY.
AND I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GIVE SOMEONE A NOTICE ACCORDING TO SECTION 1 0 7 0.1, WITHOUT HAVING THEM UNDERSTAND
[01:50:01]
WHAT'S BEING WRITTEN ON THE DOCUMENT.IF THEY, ESPECIALLY IF THE CITY, WE HAVE OUR CENSUS, WE HAVE OUR DATA THAT, UM, IDENTIFIES CI, UM, HOMES, HOMES THAT PRIMARILY SPEAK SPANISH OR ONLY SPEAK SPANISH.
SO I THINK THAT IF THAT'S THE CASE, UM, THERE REALLY IS NO ISSUE IN CREATING A SMALL TYPE, UM, THAT SAYS IF YOU NEED TRANSLATION SERVICES, AND IF IT SAYS THIS IN SPANISH, CALL THIS NUMBER.
UM, AND I WILL SAY THAT FOR THOSE SAYING THAT THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, EVERYTHING IN SECTION 1 0 7 POINT, UM, ONE OR 1 0 7 0.2, IT SEEMS ADMINISTRATIVE, UM, IT IS, UM, KIND OF DIRECTING WHAT IS BEING WRITTEN ON THE NOTICE, HOW IT'S BEING WRITTEN.
SO I DON'T SEE THE ISSUE AS TO INCLUDE THESE MEASURES AS WELL.
MR. CHAIRMAN, LEMME GET ONE COMMENT.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, I DO THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE WRITTEN ORDER BE IN THE LANGUAGE THAT SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS BECAUSE THEY SHOW IT TO, YOU KNOW, THEIR COMMUNITY.
YOU KNOW, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN JUST SAYING TO SOMEONE IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR HELP AND YOU JUST EXPLAIN TO SOMEONE WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU, IT CAN BE HARD TO COMMUNICATE VERSUS SAYING, I RECEIVED THIS TO A COMMUNITY MEMBER AND SAYING, WHAT DO I DO WITH THIS? YOU KNOW, YOU JUST NEED TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT IN WRITING.
SO HAVING IT IN A LANGUAGE THAT THE PERSON UNDERSTANDS, IT'S JUST SO IMPORTANT.
AND D SS D HAS ALREADY SAID, WHICH I THINK IS AWESOME, THAT THEY'RE DOING THIS ALREADY, WHICH IS GREAT.
SO THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH ALSO PUTTING IT INTO THE SS A P M C, DAVID, MR. CHAIRMAN BEING A, UH, STRONG PROPONENT OF BILINGUAL, UH, SPEAKING AND, UH, I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT AGAIN, AS THE CHAIRMAN SAID, THIS IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUE AND LEMME JUST SHARE IT WITH Y'ALL.
I SERVED AS THE DIRECTOR OF CODE COMPLIANCE FOR FIVE YEARS.
I NEVER HAD, WE NEVER HAD ISSUES.
ALL OF OUR CODE OFFICERS, AS LEGAL EXPLAINED, IF THEY WERE MONOLINGUAL SPEAKERS, THEY WOULD FIND SOMEONE THAT WAS BILINGUAL.
I, MYSELF SPENT TIME WITH THE RESIDENTS SPEAKING IN SPANISH.
I OFFERED TO GO TO THEIR HOMES, AND I WOULD GO TO THEIR HOMES AND SPEAK TO THEM IN SPANISH AND EXPLAIN WHAT WAS GOING ON.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THE CODE.
IT'S SOMETHING ALREADY THAT STAFF DOES NOW.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT I USED TO DO IN THE PAST, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO HELP RESIDENTS WITH, REGARDLESS OF THEIR ABILITY TO SPEAK ENGLISH OR NOT.
SO I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, AND I BELIEVE THE COMMENTS HAVE BECOME CIRCULAR.
AND IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, UNLESS THERE IS NEW, UH, INFORMATION BEING OFFERED, I CALL FOR THE QUESTION, UH, ONE, ONE SMALL COMMENT.
NO, I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S GREAT THAT YOU'RE, YOU, YOU, YOU'RE DOING THAT AND YOU HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE.
AND I, AND THE BOARD IS DOING THAT, AND THE DEPARTMENT IS DOING THAT.
HOWEVER, WE CANNOT RELY ON PEOPLE'S WILLINGNESS AND THE GREAT, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES TO, FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.
I'LL, WE NEED, WE HAVE A NEED.
LET'S JUST TRY TO MAKE IT OFFICIAL SO IT DOESN'T RELY ON PEOPLE'S WILLINGNESS OR SOME CUSTOM THAT IT CAN BE GO, CAN BE REMOVED AND TAKEN AWAY.
MR. CHAIRMAN IS NOT A MATTER OF WILLINGNESS.
NO, WAIT, DAVID, YOU, YOU'VE CALLED THE MOTION, BUT LET ME ASK STAFF A QUESTION FIRST.
IS THAT OKAY? UH, WHEN WE HAVE A CODE THAT WE HAVE QUOTE APPROVED AT ONE TIME AND NOW THEN WE TAKE A LOOK BACK AT INPUT FROM THE CITY, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO LOOK AT WHAT WE APPROVED RATHER THAN WHAT WAS AND THEN WHAT THE CHANGES WOULD BE? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
FROM AN INPUT? THAT'S CORRECT, SIR.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT COLUMN O, THIS IS THE LANGUAGE AGAIN, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY WHAT WAS APPROVED AT THE LAST MEETING, THIS IS THE LANGUAGE THAT WE WOULD BE CONSIDERING AT THIS POINT, UH, TO AMEND.
AND WHAT IS COLUMN O ON MY SHEET? DANNY, WE DON'T HAVE A COLUMN.
THE HEADER REACH PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR THE 2021 SS A P M C, WE, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT CODE.
THEREFORE, IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING.
THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT ABOUT THIS NOTICE AS WELL.
IF THEY CAN'T READ IT, UH, THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.
HOW IS THIS GONNA BE GIVEN? I'M NOT WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT COMMENT.
I'VE ALREADY HEARD THAT COMMENT ENOUGH AND I ACCEPT THE COMMENT.
UH, BUT DAVID, IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME TO, I'D LIKE TO TABLE THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
[01:55:01]
AND THE REASON I REASON IS FOR THAT IS BECAUSE WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT WHAT WAS APPROVED AND IT'S GOING BACK, THEN I WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND UM, AND I PROPOSE THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM MOTION TO WITHDRAWN.CAN I DO THAT THAT WAY OR DO I HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND ON THE MOTION TO WITHDRAW? NO, BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER VOTED ON.
IT WAS NOT SO IT WAS ONLY, IT WAS ONLY, UM, SECOND AND THEN DISCUSSION.
SO THEREFORE HE CAN WITHDRAW HIS MOTION.
WHO SECONDED IT? I SECOND IT DOWN.
YOU I SECONDED IT SO IT COULD GET TO DISCUSSION.
NOW THAT WE HAD DISCUSSION, HE CAN WITHDRAW BECAUSE IT WASN'T VOTED, SIR.
THE TIME IS NOW THREE 13 AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
YOU GOT A MOTION ON THE THING ABOUT TABLING TABLE? OH, EXCUSE ME.
ALL IN FAVOR OF, OF PULLING OR OF TABLING THIS DOCUMENT, SAY AYE.
NOW THEN THE TIME IS STILL THREE 14 AND WE'RE GONNA TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
AND YOU GET SUNDAY NON-BINARY.
WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO REASSEMBLE.
SO IF YOU FINISH UP YOUR REAL QUICK COMMENTS TOGETHER, UH, I ASKED DANNY JUST A REAL QUICK COMMENT ON, ON THE LAST ISSUE.
I GOT SO CONFUSED ON WHAT WAS BEING REQUESTED TO TRY TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME WHAT WAS NOT CLEAR.
AND THEREFORE THAT'S THE REASON WHY I ASKED TO TABLE IT.
BECAUSE, UH, AS YOU HAD SAID, WE VISITED THIS THING ONCE BEFORE AND WE'VE MADE CHANGES TO IT, AND WHY ARE WE GOING BACK? AND, AND THE ANSWER AGAIN IS WE DID ASK FOR INPUT, BUT BECAUSE I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT WE HAD ACTUALLY APPROVED, UH, PREVIOUSLY AND COMPARING IT TO WHAT WAS BEING PROPOSED, UH, IT GOT TOO CONFUSING FOR ME AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MY WEAK MIND.
UH, BUT AS A RESULT OF THAT, WHAT WE'VE SAID WE WILL DO IS WE WILL NOT DISCUSS, UH, A PROPOSED, UH, CHANGE FROM COMMENTS MAILED IN TO US UNLESS WE SEE, UH, ON THOSE ITEMS THAT WE'VE ALREADY DEVELOPED A NEW CODE FOR, UNLESS WE SEE THE NEW CODE AND THEN WHAT IS BEING DEVELOPED FROM THE NEW CODE TO PROPOSAL FROM SOMEONE ELSE.
SO IT SHOULD MAKE OUR CONVERSATIONS A LITTLE BIT EASIER.
'CAUSE WE'RE NOW LOOKING AT SOMETHING'S BEEN APPROVED, SOMETHING'S BEEN COMMENTED ON IN THE FUTURE.
AND I GUESS DANNY, WITH THAT, UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT RECONVENED OFFICIALLY THE THE MEETING DID I, UH, EXCEPT I DID.
THE TIME IS 3 25 AND WE ARE OUT OF RECESS.
AND DANNY, IF YOU WOULD, IF YOU CAN FIGURE OUT FROM OUR LAST CONVERSATION, WHICH ITEM DO WE WANT TO PITCH IN AND TALK ABOUT NEXT? NO, NOT, IT'S NOT NUMERICALLY.
IT'S, IT'S WHATEVER WOULD BE THE NEXT ONE THAT DOES NOT HAVE AGREED TO 2022 CHANGE.
MAYBE NOT BECAUSE I IS IS OLD, IS 29.
SO, SO CHERRY, IT'S DANNY WITH THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, UH, ADMINISTRATOR.
SO ITEM NUMBER 29, UH, AGAIN, WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED BACK IN, YOU KNOW, JUNE THE 10TH.
HOWEVER, THIS IS ONE THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT WE KEEP THE SS A P M C AS WRITTEN, SO THERE WAS NO CHANGES PROPOSED.
UM, AND SO THIS IS ONE THAT WE CAN CONSIDER.
THIS IS THE PROPOSAL THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
AGAIN, UH, IF YOU'D LIKE TO CONTINUE, THIS IS ONE IS REALLY JUST ADDING MAILING, UH, IN FRONT OF ADDRESS FOR ITEMS ONE AND TWO OF THIS SECTION.
AGAIN, WE CAN SKIP THIS ONE IF YOU'D LIKE.
UH, SINCE WE ARE LOOKING AT WHAT WE APPROVED PREVIOUSLY, UH, THEN THE, THE COMMENTS COMING INTO US, UH, YOU WILL SEE IN THE, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UH, IN BOLD PRINT THE WORD MAILING.
SO THOSE ARE THE, THE COMMENTS COMING IN.
IS THAT CORRECT, DAN? THAT'S CORRECT, SIR.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE PURPOSE OF THAT, UH, SOMETIMES, IS THAT CORRECT? SOMETIMES PURPOSE WOULD BE IMPORTANT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, UH, BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT READS, WE CAN PROBABLY DEAL WITH IT WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THE PURPOSE ON IT.
[02:00:01]
WE ACCEPT LINE 29 OF THE 2018 S A P M C AS IS I SECOND IT.NOW THEN COMMENTS? WE HAVE A MOTION TO KEEP WHAT WE HAD PROPOSED IN THE LAST MEETING, AND IT HAPPENED TO BE THE 2018 S A P M C COMMENTS.
I, I HAVE A FRIENDLY, I'VE GOT A COMMENT FIRST HERE.
OH, I, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY JUST MADE MAIL AND MAILING BIG.
I, I, I RAISED A SIMILAR ISSUE EARLIER, UH, AT A EARLIER MEETING.
AND, UH, MY INTENT WAS TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT, UH, MAILING WOULD, WOULD BE GOING TO A PHYSICAL ADDRESS AND SOMETIMES THE POST OFFICE BOX, UH, AS DANNY REMINDED ME, 'CAUSE I'D FORGOTTEN ALL ABOUT IT.
UH, THE POST OFFICE BOX, UH, IS A PHYSICAL MAILING ADDRESS AND THEY DO SEND MAIL TO A POST OFFICE BOX.
IS THAT CORRECT, DANNY? SO I YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.
YOU KNOW, I, I I I SUPPORT THE, THE, UH, ORIGINAL 2018 SS A P M C.
AND YOU HAD A COMMENT, I THINK, I THINK THERE WAS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
I, I HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AND REALLY I, I CAN'T TAKE ALL THE CREDIT FOR IT.
UH, FRED KIND OF POINTED IT OUT.
UM, BUT IN THE LANGUAGE, UH, IT SAYS KEY.
WHERE IS THIS AT? I JUST LOST MY PLACE.
YEAH, IT, IT SAYS, UH, SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL POSTAGE PAGE, UH, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED TO THE OWNER, A RECORD AT HIS ADDRESS, AND THEN IT ALSO SAYS HIS ADDRESS, UH, UNDER NUMBER THREE.
AND I PROPOSE THAT WE CHANGE THE PRONOUN FROM HIS TO THERE.
UM, THERE ARE RECORD OF ADDRESS, UH, I'LL TALK YOU EITHER
IT SHOULD BE OF, OR WHAT WAS YOURS? UM, WELL, I I WOULD ACCEPT THEIR, THEIR THEY, THEIR G I R? YES.
OR AT THEIR ADDRESS? YES, YES, EITHER OR.
IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME OF OR THERE.
INSTEAD OF HE, I ACCEPT THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WE'LL PUT THERE THAT WAY IT'S NOT BINDING TO ANY OBJECTION.
GENDER, OR WHO'S SECONDARY? WELL, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO USE A PRONOUN.
YES, YOU COULD VERY EASILY USE THE SINGLE WORD THE, THE OWNER OF RECORD AT THE ADDRESS AS IT APPEARS ON THE BEXAR COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORD.
SO TAKE THE PRONOUN OUT ALTOGETHER AND JUST USE THE WORD THE, UH, AND I GUESS THAT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
AND THEN THE ISSUE IS, IS ADDRESS UNDERSTOOD AS A MAILING ADDRESS.
UH, YOU CAN GET IN SOMATICS ON THAT ISSUE.
UH, SO WE HAD A MOTION TO MAINTAIN FOR MR. ANDES, MAINTAIN THE, UH, 2018 CHANGE THAT WE MADE FOR 2022.
UH, AND THEN THERE WAS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE WORD, HIS ADDRESS TO THE ADDRESS.
UH, DID THAT TAKE CARE OF BOTH OF THOSE POSITIONS AND YOU ACCEPTED THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? YEAH.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT POINT? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER 30.
UH, THIS IS AGAIN, EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
UM, IT WAS SUBMITTED VERY SIMILAR ACTUALLY, THE LANGUAGE IS VERY THE SAME TWICE BY, UH,
[02:05:01]
ONE BY TEXAS HAUSER STAFF AND ANOTHER BY RICK ACOSTA, WHO'S PRESIDENT OF MY CITY, IS MY HOME.UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT DEALS WITH APPENDIX B, UH, SECTION B 1 0 1 0.2, UH, APPLICATION FOR APPEAL.
THIS SECTION CURRENTLY IS NOT ADAPTED BY THE OR INCLUDED IN THE 2018 SS A P M C.
AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT MAY WOULD BE TO MAKE THE APPEAL PROCESS 60 TO 90 DAYS AND ENSURING THAT THE ACTUAL PROCESS TO APPEAL, INCLUDING SPECIFIC STEPS REQUIRED OF BOTH THE HOMEOWNER AND ANY INVOLVED PARTIES IS INCLUDED AS A PHYSICAL FORM ALONG WITH A NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
AND AGAIN, JUST FOR REFERENCE, THE NOTE DUPLICATE MEANS THAT IT'S BEEN SUBMITTED MORE THAN ONCE.
I WANNA MAKE SURE WE CAPTURE BOTH OF THEM AT THE SAME TIME.
COUNSEL, THIS IS, UM, THIS IS FRED ANDIS.
UM, UNDER THE CURRENT APPEALS PROCESS, WE HAVE A 10 DAY, CORRECT? NO, 30 DAYS, 30 FROM THE TIME, UH, UM, IT'S A 30 DAY APPEAL FROM THE TIME IT GETS TO THE PERSON.
UH, THAT DOESN'T, THE NOTICE IS, IS SIGNED, IS THAT CORRECT? WHEN IT COMES, LIKE IN THE B S B, IT'S A 30 DAY AFTER THAT, ONCE IT'S DISPOSITIONED, THAT IS, UH, YOU'RE SPEAKING OF THE APPEAL PERIOD, THE STATUTORY APPEAL PERIOD FOR B S B ORDERS.
I BELIEVE THIS IS RELATED TO THE INITIAL NOTICE THAT, UH, PROVIDES.
UM, IT'S NOT A CITATION, IT IS, UM, JU THIS IS JUST THE NOTICE PUTTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, TENANT LANDLORD, WHOEVER ON NOTICE THERE'S A VIOLATION AND, UM, PLEASE TAKE CARE OF IT WITHIN THE NEXT 10 DAYS.
THEN THE CODE OFFICER WILL DO A RE-INSPECTION, UH, AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT TIME.
AND, UH, IF WARRANTED, EITHER PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TIME OR IF THE OWNER REFUSES AT THAT POINT IS WHEN, UH, CITATION COULD BE ISSUED EITHER CRIMINALLY ADMINISTRATIVE OR BROUGHT TO B SS B.
UH, SO, UH, IN THE, SO THIS IS, UH, WHEN APPEALS COME BEFORE THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD, IT'S AN APPEAL OF THE NOTICE NO, UM, UH, ADJUDICATION HAS BEEN MADE.
SO THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN THEY, UH, COME BEFORE YOU AND THEY DON'T AGREE THAT THERE'S A VIOLATION, THEY'RE PROVIDED, UH, THE TIME TO SUBMIT THEIR APPEAL.
AND THAT IS WHEN B S B HEARS THE, UH, FROM, UH, ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.
AND, UH, THE OWNER OR REPRESENTATIVE CAN PROVIDE EVIDENCE AS TO WHY IT'S NOT A VIOLATION.
AND THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE SUMMARY ABATEMENT APPEALS.
Y'ALL HEAR, UH, THE ONLY DETERMINATION YOU MAKE IS UPHOLD THE, UH, DETERMINATION.
YES, THERE'S A VIOLATION OR WE, UH, AGREE NO VIOLATION.
SO IT, FROM, FROM WHAT I'M READING, UM, THEY'RE WANTING THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER TO HAVE 60 TO 90 DAYS TO APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF JUST THE NOTICE.
AND, UH, I, UH, UH, THE CONCERN ABOUT THE 60 TO 90 DAYS, 'CAUSE THIS WOULD APPLY FOR NOTICES FOR EVERYTHING.
SO, UH, UH, PROPERTY, UH, HAS, UM, UH, LET'S SAY, UH, WEEDS IN EXCESS OF 12 INCHES, A NOTICE IS ISSUED, UH, PLEASE COMPLY WITHIN 10 DAYS.
THE REASON THERE'S A CODE, UH, UNDER THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE ABOUT HIGH GRASS, UH, IT TRACKS RODENTS.
[02:10:01]
TALLER, THEN THERE'S THE CONCERN, UM, ABOUT SAFETY OF CHILDREN, UH, WALKING PAST.SO WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS, OKAY, THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, IS IN EXCESS OF 12 INCHES.
THE GRASS CODE CANNOT TAKE ANY ACTION ONCE AN APPEAL IS FILED, AND THEN AFTER THE B SS B HAS RENDERED THE DECISION.
YOU KNOW, SO I JUST WANT Y'ALL TO THINK ABOUT, UM, IF YOU LIVE NEXT TO THAT PROPERTY, 90 DAYS TO APPEAL, THEN UM, THE GRASS CAN KEEP GROWING AND GROWING AND GROWING.
UH, IT ATTRACTS VERMIN, UH, RODENTS PARTICULARLY, THE CONCERN IS RATS, THEN RATS, UH, START MOVING ONTO OTHER PROPERTIES.
SITUATION LIKE THAT, OR A BROKEN WINDOW OR UNSECURED DOOR.
DO YOU WANT TO ALLOW THAT TO REMAIN FOR 90 DAYS? SO, UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE Y'ALL TO, UH, THINK OF IT THAT WAY.
WELL, I ASK THAT BECAUSE ALSO IN THE 2021 I P M C, IT SAYS WITHIN 20 DAYS, IF YOU GET A NOTICE TO HAVE IT DONE WITHIN 10 DAYS, YOU FILE THE APPEAL AFTER YOU RECEIVED A NOTICE FOR 20 DAYS.
CAN I GET CLARIFICATION ON THIS? THIS IS THE NOTICE ISN'T THAT 10 DAYS, UH, HERE, DON'T, DON'T THEY HAVE 10 DAYS TO APPEAL A NOTICE.
NO, THEY HAVE 10 DAYS TO COMPLY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THAT YOU HAVE 10 DAYS TO COMPLY UNDER THE FIRST NOTICE.
THEN IT SAYS IN THIS HERE, YOU FILED AN APPEAL WITHIN 20 DAYS.
AND WE DON'T, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, YOU HAVE 10 DAYS TO COMPLY, THEN IT'S REASSESSED TO SEE IF YOU COMPLIED OR NON COMPLIED.
UM, I, I DO HAVE A CONCERN HERE.
UM, AND REALLY I WOULD NEED CLARIFICATION FROM HAUSER ON WHAT THEIR AT, UH, INTENT IS.
BUT YOU KNOW, MY CONCERN REALLY IS, YOU KNOW, A PERSON RENTING A PROPERTY, UH, A HOMEOWNER USING THAT, A LANDLORD USING THAT TO PRO
UM, SO I WOULD NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
UH, AND I AGREE BECAUSE ALL OF THIS SAYS YOU HAVE, IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S PUSHING TIME OFF TO CORRECT THE VIOLATION, BUT YET THE VIOLATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE CORRECTED WITHIN 10 DAYS.
SO I THINK IN THIS ONE HERE, BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE NOBODY THAT SUBMITTED ALL THIS, I, I DON'T SEE WE CAN PUT ANY OF THESE FORTH 'CAUSE YOU'RE PUSHING EVERYTHING FURTHER OUT INSTEAD OF TRYING TO GET THE, UH, SITUATION CORRECTED ON THE 10 DAY NOTICE.
SO I'M GONNA AGREE WITH YOU, I THINK THIS ONE HERE NEEDS TO, TO REALLY BE LOOKED AT IN A, IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
I THINK THIS ONE SHOULD BE TABLED UNTIL SOME OTHER CLARIFICATION BE MADE ON THIS BECAUSE YOU GOT A 20 DAY AND THEN IT GOES UP TO 60 AND 90 DAY, DEPENDING ON WHICH ONE YOU LOOK AT.
CAN I MOTION THE TABLE THIS ITEM? SURE, YOU CAN DO IT.
ALRIGHT, I MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM.
WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO OR SECOND? I SECOND IT.
BUT IF, UH, I WANTED TO WAIT TILL NOW DISCUSSION.
YEAH, NOT DISCUSSION UNTIL YOU, I MEAN, OKAY, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE.
UM, THIS SECTION IN 2021 IS AN APPENDIX B, AND NORMALLY WE DON'T ADOPT THAT APPENDIX.
THE REASON FOR IT IS ALL THE APPEALS IS IN CHAPTER SIX.
SO IN CHAPTER SIX TODAY, THE APPEAL TIMEFRAME IS 20 DAYS.
SO IT DOES KIND OF MATCH THIS 2021, BUT IT'S ALREADY IN CHAPTER SIX.
SO NUMBER ONE, I MEAN, IF WE GONNA MODIFY IT, I WOULD SAY WE NEED TO MODIFY THIS IN CHAPTER SIX.
NOT HERE, NOT IN THIS CODE, BECAUSE AGAIN, ALL THE APPEALS IS LISTED IN CHAPTER SIX AT THIS POINT.
UM, UH, MR. CHAIR, UH, THIS IS LEGAL, SORRY.
[02:15:01]
I, I APOLOGIZE.UH, UM, AS, UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR TOMA SAID, UH, THE SAMHSA CODE IS UNDER CHAPTER SIX AND IT REFERS TO, UH, THE APPEAL IN CHAPTER SIX AND THE APPEAL, UH, UH, I'M SORRY I WAS WRONG.
SO WITHIN THE 10 DAYS THAT YOU'RE PROVIDED TO COMPLY DURING THAT TIMEFRAME, IF YOU DISAGREE, UH, YOU MUST FILE AN APPEAL WITH THE BOARD WITHIN 10 DAYS.
ONCE THAT APPEAL IS, UH, RECEIVED, UH, CODE CANNOT TAKE ANY ACTION, UH, SUCH AS, UH, ABATING IT ITSELF, WHAT HAVE YOU, UNTIL THE BOARD DETERMINES EITHER WAY, YES, WE AGREE THERE'S A VIOLATION OR, UM, NO, UM, WE DON'T SEE A VIOLATION.
AND, AND THAT'S ALL THE BOARD DOES.
THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION.
'CAUSE IF THERE'S A 10 DAY RULE, THESE ARE BOTH THE 2021 AND THE PROPOSALS BOTH HAVE A 20 DAY ON THE 2021 AND THEN A 60 TO 90 DAY, WHICH IS ALREADY OVER YOUR 10 DAY.
SO BOTH OF THESE ARE THE ONES YOU'RE PROPOSING OR HAVE BEEN PUT UP FOR US.
THEY DON'T MATCH WHAT'S ALREADY OUT THERE ON THIS, ON CHAPTER SIX.
SO THE PROPOSAL WAS TO TABLE IT UNTIL WE GET TO CHAPTER SIX, OR IS THIS GONNA BE A MUTE ISSUE OR UNTIL LANGUAGE IS REDONE IN IT? YEAH, WITH THE, THE TABLING IT WAS, UH, TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT, UH, CHAPTER SIX, BUT DANNY, UH, LOOKED IT UP ON HIS PHONE.
AND, UH, SO, UH, IT IS THE 10 DAYS TO APPEAL.
AND SO, UM, THE 2021 VERSION, YOU'RE CORRECT, IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE CURRENT APPELLATE DEADLINE AND, AND THEN THERE'S THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2021 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 60 TO 90 DAYS.
AND SO, UM, AND UH, THAT'S THE REASON I WANTED IT TABLED, WAS THAT'S FINE TO BE ABLE TO CLARIFY THAT.
UH, KELLY, KELLY, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE NOPE.
IF, IF POSSIBLE, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE THE, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM, FROM LEGAL, UH, ON, WE HAVE DISCUSSED IT, THE, IN, IN IN THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS THAT THERE HAS TO BE CLARIFICATION IF THESE 10 DAYS ARE BUSINESS DAYS OR CALENDAR DAYS, THE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS AS BUSINESS DAYS.
BUT I THINK IN SOME OTHER PARTS YOU HAVE MENTIONED THAT IT WERE CALENDAR, CALENDAR DAYS.
SO, AND OUR DISCUSSION WAS THAT WE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF KEEPING THEM THOSE 10 DAYS AS BUSINESS DAYS INSTEAD OF CALENDAR DAYS.
SO FOR NEXT MEETING, MAYBE WHEN WE, WE, WE TAKE THIS, I WILL LET, LOVE TO HEAR THAT CLARIFICATION.
WERE YOU SAYING YOU, YOU RECOMMENDED BUSINESS DAYS AS OPPOSED TO JUST DAYS? UH, I, I HAVE, THIS IS JUST ME.
I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, WITH THE TERMINOLOGY BUSINESS DAYS, UH, BECAUSE CALENDAR DAYS ARE, ARE SPECIFIC BUSINESS DAYS GET FLUSHED ALL OVER THE PLACE BASED ON HOLIDAYS.
BUT THAT'S JUST, AGAIN, THAT'S JUST A PERSONAL ISSUE.
HOW DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? IT'S JUST THAT THE, IT IS JUST THAT THE, THE NOTICE A VIOLATION, THE CURRENT ONE THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO SAYS 10 BUSINESS DAYS.
AND THAT'S THE, THE, THE, THE WHAT THEY IS, IT HAS BEEN CIRCULATING INTO THE PUBLIC.
AND YOU KNOW, I GUESS FOR CONSISTENCY ISSUES, WE SHOULD TRY TO KEEP THAT.
YEAH, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOUR, I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING AND THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND IT, UH, AMAN, SO THAT, THAT IS CORRECT.
THE 10 DAYS IS, UH, THE TIME TO APPEAL.
SO OBVIOUSLY, I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO APPEAL A DECISION, WE NEED TO BE IN OPERATION THOSE DAYS.
I MEAN, WE CAN'T SAY JUST 10 DAYS.
THAT'S WHY THE APPEAL IS 10 BUSINESS DAYS.
SO LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION ON THE, TO COUNSEL ON THE 2021 I P M C, WOULD IT BE FEASIBLE JUST TO CHANGE WITHIN THE 10 BUSINESS DAYS
[02:20:02]
WHILE SHE'S THINKING ABOUT IT? I'LL JUMP INUH, IT'S, IT'S UP TO THE BOARD HERE TO DECIDE WHAT YOU WANNA DO.
UH, WE NORMALLY, WE DO NOT ADOPT APPENDIX B AS I SAID, BECAUSE ALL THE APPEALS ARE LISTED AND, UH, SHOWN BASICALLY IN CHAPTER SIX.
SO NORMALLY WE DO NOT ADOPT, UH, APPENDIX B.
THIS CAME AS A PROPOSED CHANGE TO THAT SECTION IN APPENDIX B.
SO WE ARE JUST PRESENTING WHAT WE RECEIVED.
THAT'S WHY WE SHOW THE 2021 SECTION AND THEN WE SAY WHAT THEY WANT IT TO BE CHANGED TO.
BUT NORMALLY WE DO NOT HAVE APPENDIX B OR APPEAL TIME IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE BOOK ITSELF SINCE, SINCE THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECOND TO TABLE IT, EVEN THOUGH I WOULD NOT HAVE TABLED IT PERSONALLY, WE WILL TAKE A VOTE ON TABLING THIS ALL IN FAVOR OF TABLING THIS, SAY AYE.
OPPOSED SAY NAYYY TWO NAYS NELSON NAY, BUT IT IS TABLED.
SO DANNY, IF WE COULD MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
UH, IF WE COULD EMAIL, UM, RETURN THE EMAIL TO TEXAS HOUSERS, UH, THE, THE HOUSER EMAIL THAT SENT US, UM, IF WE CAN ASK THEM TO TRY TO BE HERE NEXT TIME SO THEY CAN EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT, UH, WHAT THEIR MEANING IS.
UM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT STAFF.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO EMAIL THE, TO THE RECOMMENDER TO TRY TO BE HERE.
IS THAT A DOABLE ISSUE? THAT, THAT CERTAINLY IS.
UM, HOWEVER, I DO HAVE A, A LETTER THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT, I GUESS, WHICH, IF YOU ALLOW ME TO READ IT TO THE RECORD.
UM, I GUESS THE REASONING FOR THE CHANGE, PLEASE DO.
THIS IS A LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE S A P M C COMMITTEE FROM TEXAS HOUSERS REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, UH, APPENDIX B 1 0 1 0.2, WHICH STATES THAT ANY PERSON HAS A RIGHT TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE CODE OFFICIAL TO THE BOARD.
IT ALSO STATES THE APPLICATION IS APPEAL SHALL BE FILED WITHIN 20 DAYS AFTER THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
THE LIVED EXPERIENCES OF THE COMMUNITY AND HOMEOWNERS, MANY OF WHOM ARE PEOPLE OF COLOR AND ARE LOW INCOME, INDICATE THAT 20 DAYS IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO FILE AN APPEAL.
THE COMMUNITY HAS ECHOED THE DESIRE FOR MAKING THE APPEALS PROCESS 60 TO 90 DAYS SINCE THEY'RE OFTEN OVERWHELMED BY THE PAPERWORK AND THE THREAT OF LOSING THEIR HOMES.
ALSO, ENSURING THAT THE ACTUAL PROCESS TO APPEAL, INCLUDING SPECIFIC STEPS REQUIRED OF BOTH THE HOMEOWNER AND ANY INVOLVED PARTIES IS INCLUDED AS A PHYSICAL FORM ALONG WITH THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION IS CRUCIAL AS RESIDENTS HAVE REPEATEDLY EXPRESSED THAT EVEN IF THEY KNEW THE APPEAL PROCESS WAS AVAILABLE, THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF AS TO HOW TO FILE AN APPEAL.
SO NOTED, I GUESS BECAUSE MULTIPLE ISSUES, AND AGAIN, THEIR PERSONAL ISSUES, UH, AN ISSUE OF VIOLATION DID NOT OCCUR OVERNIGHT.
AS MS. BROWN FREQUENTLY REMINDS US, IT HAPPENED OVER TIME.
AND AS A RESULT, IF YOU GIVE ME ANOTHER 60 DAYS, THEN I'M GONNA DELAY ANOTHER 60 DAYS.
AND WHEN I GET DOWN TO THE LAST 10 MINUTES, IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING BECAUSE WE TABLED THE ISSUE ANYWAY.
DO WE HAVE TIME? UH, AT PRESENTLY IT'S 3 52.
DO WE HAVE TIME FOR ANOTHER ONE OR DO WE WANT TO ADJOURN? NO, WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT LIKE 60 MORE TO GO.
UM, I'D LIKE TO KNOW FROM MY PERSONAL, UH, INFORMATION, WHO IS TEXAS HOUSER'S? WHAT IS THAT? WHO IS THAT? I, OKAY.
WHAT FROM WHAT I RECEIVED HERE IS TEXAS HOUSER'S IS A TEXAS LOW INCOME HOUSING AND INFORMATION SERVICES.
UM, THEY'RE A 5 0 1 C THREE NONPROFIT, FOUNDED IN 1988 TO SUPPORT LOW INCOME TEXANS EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE THE AMERICAN DREAM OF, OF A DECENT, AFFORDABLE HOME AND A QUALITY NEIGHBORHOOD OF THEIR CHOOSING.
I HAVE A FURTHER QUESTION ALSO, IF I MAY YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YOU, YOU CAN ALWAYS ASK THE QUESTION.
THESE, THESE, UH, AMENDMENTS, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WERE POSTED ONTO THE WEBSITE, UH, LAST NIGHT.
'CAUSE I, I LOOKED EARLIER, UH, YESTERDAY AND THEY WERE, THE, THE NEW ONES WERE, HAD NOT BEEN POSTED.
UM, EARLIER, UH, IN THIS SESSION, A COMMENT WAS MADE THAT, UM, UH, THE, THE, THE COMMUNITY HAD HAD ACCESS TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS.
I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S POSSIBLE UNLESS THEY DID IT THIS MORNING.
[02:25:01]
UH, I'M JUST WONDERING HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS, WHERE THE COMMUNITY CAN MAKE COMMENTS ON SOME OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.'CAUSE AS DANNY HAS INDICATED, THERE'S BEEN MULTIPLE, UH, SUBMISSIONS OF THESE AMENDMENTS AND, UH, BUT THE COMMUNITY HASN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.
BUT MY QUESTION TO BE CLEAR IS HOW IS THIS PROCESS, UH, BEING, UH, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, FAVORABLE TO THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ADOPTED, UH, BACK IN, UH, THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO? THE, THE, UH, THE, THE BIGGER QUESTION IS, AS YOU ASKED IT THE FIRST TIME, DOES THE COMMUNITY HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT? AND DANNY, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
AGAIN, SO THIS INFORMATION CORRECTLY, IT WAS POSTED YESTERDAY EVENING.
UM, IT WAS DUE TO THE RESPONSE THAT WE RECEIVED MULTIPLE PROPOSALS AT REALLY THE 11TH HOUR, IF YOU WILL.
UM, AS I MENTIONED TO MR. MORALES, EVEN HIS PROPOSALS WERE NOT ADDED TO TODAY'S SPREADSHEET 'CAUSE THEY WAS JUST, UM, SUBMITTED AFTER.
BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE ARE TRYING TO GET THIS OUT, UM, SOONER THAN LATER, UH, TO POST ONLINE FOR THE PUBLIC TO REVIEW, OR EVEN FOR THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW.
UM, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, DUE TO THE LARGE VOLUME PROPOSAL WE RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST MEETING, IT WAS A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO DO.
DO SO, CAN I MAKE JUST A COMMENT? YES, MA'AM.
ALL THESE COMMENTS AND EMAILS THAT ARE COMING IN, BUT WE'RE ALREADY, WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE FOUR MEETINGS ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS, AND THEN WE WENT TO FIVE AND SIX MEETINGS.
ARE WE GONNA END UP JUST DOING THIS FOREVER? BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL BE CONSTANTLY GOING THROUGH THIS STUFF AND ADDING, AND THEY HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHERE IT'S GONNA END.
'CAUSE YOU GOTTA HAVE AN END POINT.
UH, WE'LL ESTABLISH AN ENDPOINT PROBABLY AT A LATER DATE.
CAN I REMEMBER THAT THE ORIGINAL MEETING NUMBERS WAS AN ARBITRARY NUMBER.
AND I MEAN, YES, YOU CAN COMMENT.
UM, ACTUALLY THAT WAS ONE ITEM WE WANTED TO TALK TO YOU ALL ABOUT AND DECIDE, UM, OUR RECOMMENDATION, AGAIN, JUST A RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UM, RECEIVE THE FINAL, I GUESS, COMMENTS, IF YOU WILL, OR NOTES FROM THE CITIZENS OR FROM ANYBODY, UH, BY THE END OF THIS MONTH, JUNE 30TH AT MIDNIGHT.
IF WE KEEP IT OPEN, WE CAN GET TO THE LAST MINUTE AND THEN WE GET ONE MORE, AND THEN WE GET ONE MORE AND WE GET ONE MORE.
SO, UM, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO STOP AT MIDNIGHT ON THE 30TH.
THAT WAY WE WRAP UP EVERYTHING, WE GET EVERYTHING ON THIS LIST, AND HOPEFULLY COUPLE OF MEETINGS AFTER THAT WE SHOULD BE DONE.
SO THE LAST LAST OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO, TO COMMENT IS GONNA BE ON THE 30TH OF JUNE.
UH, AND THAT INFORMATION IS ALSO PUTTING OUT, OR WILL BE PUT OUT, I'M ASSUMING, WITH THE UPDATES THAT WE GET BY EMAIL IF YOU'RE ON THAT EMAIL LIST.
UH, BUT CERTAINLY WE'RE COMMUNICATING THAT TO THE PUBLIC ALL AT LARGE.
UM, CAN I ALSO JUST SUGGEST THAT, UH, SINCE WE ARE GONNA PUT A CUTOFF DATE, THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT OUR NEXT MEETING IS GIVING AMPLE TIME FOR COMMUNITY TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THOSE, UH, SUBMISSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS.
THAT WAY NOBODY IS, UH, BLINDSIDED OR TRYING TO GET IN LAST MINUTE'S, UH, COMMENTS.
SO YOU'RE ACT YOU'RE ACTUALLY SAYING THAT ACCORDING TO OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH IS, UH, SEVENTH, THE SEVENTH OF 7TH OF JULY, SEVENTH JULY, UH, THEN JULY 8TH, ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THAT EIGHTH, EIGHTH, JULY, 8TH OF JULY.
THERE'S NO ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THAT THEN, UH, WHICH WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY THE, THE END OF JUNE ALSO.
SO BASICALLY THE 30TH OF JUNE IS THE LAST CHANCE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE ANY, THE PUBLIC HAS A CHANCE TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENT TO ANYTHING THAT WE DISCUSSED THUS FAR.
AND THEN THE MEETING ON THE EIGHTH, THOSE COMMENTS THEN SHOULD BE POSTED BEFORE, UH, THE MEETING ON THE EIGHTH.
UH, SO CAN WE GET 'EM POSTED FROM TO THE INTERNET ON THE, THE 30TH OF JUNE, OR DO WE NEED A COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THAT? I BELIEVE WE'RE GIVING TILL JUNE, UM, 30TH END OF THE DAY.
SO IT'LL BE MIDNIGHT, RIGHT? SO, UM, THE EARLIEST WE CAN POST WOULD PROBABLY BE THE FOLLOWING DAY, EITHER JULY 1ST OR JULY 5TH.
SO, SO IF I COULD CLEAR THAT, UH, QUESTION, UH, 30TH OF JUNE IS, IS THE LAST DAY TO SUBMIT AMENDMENTS, IS THAT CORRECT? NOT COMMENTS? THAT'D BE CORRECT.
IT'D BE THE LAST DAY TO SUBMIT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
OF COURSE, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE OPEN TO THE DAY OF THE, UM, THE, THE MEETINGS.
[02:30:01]
IT'S AMENDMENTS, NOT COMMENTS? YES, SIR.WELL, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT COMMENT.
UH, EH, DOES THE TYPE OF PEOPLE OR INSTITUTION THAT SUBMITS, UH, AN AMENDMENT MATTERS TO THE BOARD FOR ITS VALIDITY? SO IT DOESN'T MATTER IF A PERSON OR AN INSTITUTION OR ANYBODY, UH, SUBMITS THE, THE AMENDMENT OR IS THERE IT'S MY, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND DANNY, YOU MIGHT EVEN WANT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
UH, WHO'S ALLOWED TO, ACTUALLY, I THINK THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
WHO'S ALLOWED TO MAKE THE CON OPPOSED AMENDMENTS? I, I, IF I COULD PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE THAT, UH, IF A PERSON, UH, OR OR INSTITUTION, UH, SUBMITS A, A, A COMMENT, AS LONG AS THEY HAVE A REAL INTEREST AND THEY'RE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, UH, I THINK WE SHOULD NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT COLUMN B UH, INTO, FOR US TO BE BASING OUR DECISIONS OR, OR THOUGHTS ON THE VALIDITY OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT ARE MADE THAT THAT SHOULD NOT BE, IN MY OPINION, UH, UH, INFORMATION THAT WE SHOULD BE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT TO, TO MAKE PREJUDGMENTS OF THE VALIDITY OF THE, OF THE SUBMISSIONS.
UM, MR. CHAIR, I UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S SAYING.
SAYING HE'S, HE'S SAYING, BECAUSE YOU QUESTION WHO TEXAS HOUSERS IS, AND I MEAN, I, I WORK, I'VE WORK ALONGSIDE WITH HOUSERS A LOT, SO I KNOW THAT THEY ARE PROFESSIONAL, UH, GATHERING DATA AND THEIR DATA IS ACTUALLY USED BY THE CITY, BY THE STATE.
UM, SO ASKING WHO THEY ARE AS IN IS, IS IT VALID WHAT THEIR STATEMENTS ARE, IS WHAT HE'S QUESTIONING.
SOMETIMES IT'S A CURIOSITY ISSUE.
ONLY I, 'CAUSE I ASK THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS OFTENTIMES, MR. CHAIRMAN, CURIOSITY, AND IT'S A MOOD ISSUE.
I'M NOT EVEN GONNA LET YOU ADDRESS IT IF YOU DON'T MIND.
AND, UH, BECAUSE AN ISSUE, THE TIME IS PRESENTLY FOUR O'CLOCK AND WITHOUT, UH, WHO LEGAL AS A COMMENT, DO YOU GET THE LAST COMMENT FOR THE DAY? OKAY.
UH, FOUR TRANSPARENCY REASONS WE ARE REQUIRED TO PUT WHO SUBMITTED THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND OR COMMENTS BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
IT'S NOT FOR, OH, IT'S THIS GROUP OR THAT GROUP.
UM, I ALSO ASKED WHAT TEXAS HOUSES WERE.
'CAUSE I BELIEVE OEL IS A, A MEMBER ALONG WITH MIA EF.
UM, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, AND ALSO, UH, DAVID, UH, USED TO BE IN CHARGE OF, UH, THE CITY'S HOUSING PROGRAMS. AND SO HE, HE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION THAT I HAD ASKED, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE, UM, UM, MS. SANCHEZ, I, I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT, UH, W WHATEVER, WHATEVER STOOD FOR OF THE WEST SIDE SIDE HISTORIC LINES, UH, BUT UH, BOTTOM LINE, UH, CODE IS REQUIRED SINCE THIS IS SUBJECT TO THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND IS SUBJECT TO THE OPEN RECORDS ACT, THAT, UH, WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY WHERE THE COMMENTS ARE COMING FROM AND, UH, AND ALSO TO SHOW WHOEVER SUBMITTED THE COMMENTS, WE RECEIVED YOUR COMMENT AND HERE'S EVIDENCE OF THAT.
SO, UH, IT HAS TO BE, UH, ON THE, UM, THE PAPERWORK THAT'S BEFORE YOU.
AND WITH THAT, WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE ARE ADJOURNED BY UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
DO I HEAR YOUR OBJECTION, COUNSEL? DIDN'T HAVE THE LAST WORD.
I WITHDRAW MY FINAL COMMENT, BUT WE'RE STILL ADJOURNED.
I DON'T CARE HOW YOU LOOK AT IT.