[00:00:01]
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE TIME IS NOW ONE 10 ON THE 8TH OF JULY, 2022.
THE COMMITTEE DOING THE SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE WAS, WILL RECON, WILL CONVENE, UH, LET'S DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MS. BROWN FREDERICK ANDES.
ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
SAVITA RYE AND FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
AMIN TOMAS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR DANNY LEGIS, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR JENNY RAMIREZ.
AND MYSELF ES ORTIZ, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SPECIALIST.
UH, IF WE WOULD, LET'S READ THE, UH, THE SPANISH TRANSLATION SERVICE, PLEASE.
THE MINUTES FROM OUR PRIOR MEETING HAVE BEEN CIRCULATED.
UH, THE MEETING BEING 24 JUNE, IS THERE ANY COMMENT OR A MOTION ON THOSE MINUTES? MR. CHAIR? I MOVE THAT WE, UH, ACCEPT THE MINUTES, AS IS MS. JANICE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT MINUTES.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MOTION CARRIES IN FRONT OF YOU.
HOPEFULLY YOU HAVE A LISTING OF CODES.
IT IS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT LISTING THAN WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY DOES INDEED BACK US UP IN SOME CASES TO CODES THAT WE HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT.
SO IF YOU LOOK ON THE VERY FIRST PAGE, YOU WILL FIND, UH, 1 0 7 0.1 AND THE FAR RIGHT HAND SIDE ON THE VERY FIRST ITEM, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ITEM NUMBER 10 THAT WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY.
UH, WE APPROVED THE, THE INFORMATION THAT'S CONTAINED IN THE FAR, UH, RIGHT HAND SIDE.
SO WE WILL, UH, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES THAT WE CAN GO AT.
WE CAN GO TO THE THREE TABLED ITEMS THAT WE HAD FROM LAST MEETING, OR WE CAN START WITH 1 0 7 0.1.
THE CHAIR WOULD PREFER TO START WITH 1 0 7 0.1 AND THEN GO FROM THAT PAGE GOING FORWARD.
BUT I WOULD LOOK FOR ANY INPUT OR ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT APPROACH.
IF WE GO WITH 1 0 7 0.1 FIRST, WE'LL STILL HAVE TO PICK UP THE TABLE ITEMS. IS THAT CORRECT? OH, ABSOLUTELY.
UH, AND IN FACT, THE QUESTION IS VERY APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT 1 0 7 0.1, THE SECOND ITEM, WHICH IS, UH, ITEM NUMBER 27 AS ORIGINALLY LISTED, AND THE ITEM NUMBER IS ON THE FAR LEFT HAND SIDE, THAT IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS TABLED.
28 AND 30 ARE THE TABLED ONES.
AND THIS IS ITEM 27 THAT WE HAD TABLED, AND 28 COMES UP ON THE NEXT PAGE.
UH, AND THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
SO WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME SHEET OF MUSIC.
THE, UH, PROPOSAL, UH, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, 1 0 7 0.1.
AGAIN, THE, THE APPROVED LANGUAGE IS IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND COLUMN.
UH, AND THEN 27 IS THE ONE THAT WE HAD STARTED TO DISCUSS AT THE LAST MEETING.
UH, AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, AND I, I APOLOGIZE, I'M GONNA BE BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE I'VE GOT NOTES ON THE PRIOR RENDITION, UH, THE MBO TYPE, UH, INCLUDING ORDERS
[00:05:01]
TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4.UH, THE, THE ADDITION OF, UH, 1 0 8 0.4, IF YOU GO TO THAT, IS BASICALLY IT.
IT JUST TALKS ABOUT, UH, THE REQUIREMENT TO VACATE.
UH, SO DOES THAT ADD ANY VALUE TO THE CODE PER SE, TO INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE? WE'LL GO REAL SLOW
UH, 1 0 7 0.1 IS THE SUBJECT MATTER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND IF YOU LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THERE'S AMENDMENT THAT, UH, SUGGEST ADDING, INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4, SECTION 1 0 8 0.4 DEALS SPECIFICALLY WITH VACATE AND THE INFORMATION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN, BASICALLY, IT JUST DEALS WITH THE ISSUE OF, OF CODE VIOLATIONS AND CODE VIOLATIONS, 1 0 7 0.2 AND 1 0 7 0.3 AS THE MANNER IN WHICH INSTRUCTIONS WOULD BE GIVEN.
SO CURRENTLY IT SAYS IT INCLUDES 1 0 7 0.2 AND 1 0 7 0.3.
WELL, 1 0 7 0.2 AND 1 0 7 0.3 IS THE ACTUAL FORMAT IN WHICH THE NOTICE IS BEING PROVIDED.
SO WHY NOT INCLUDE 1 0 8 0.4? UH, ARE YOU, DOES IT REALLY NEED TO BE THERE? IS THE QUESTION I'VE GOT YOU WANT GO BACK UP AND READ THAT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE APPROVED AND IT'S DEALING WITH THE FORMAT AND THE NOTICE, CORRECT.
AND ALL IT, ALL IT'S DOING IS TALKING ABOUT THE REQUIREMENT FOR VACATE CHAIR.
ARE WE DISCUSSING THE ITEM NOW? UM, IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4? THE, THE CHAIR'S QUESTION IS, DOES THAT, UH, IS IT NECESSARY TO BE IN THAT POINT? I MEAN, IN THIS PARTICULAR CODE, BECAUSE IT'S, IT IS, IT'S ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT VACATE VERSUS TALKING ABOUT THE FORMAT OF DELIVERY 1 0 7 0.2 AND 1 0 7 0.3 IS JUST ANY NOTICE.
IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY NOTICE TO VACATE.
AND 1 0 8 0.4 IS SPECIFICALLY NOTICE TO, TO VACATE WITH VACATE.
SO I WOULD SAY YES, WE NEED TO INCLUDE IT.
SO I WOULD SAY YES, WE SHOULD INCLUDE IT.
IS THAT IN FORM OF A MOTION? YES.
I MOTION THAT WE INCLUDE, UH, INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTIONS 1 0 8 0.4.
THE MOTION IS TO INCLUDE THE LANGUAGE AS PROPOSED, UH, TO, UH, THAT READS, INCLUDE ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4.
I AMEND THE MOTION TO ALSO INCLUDE, UH, PART OF MY DAYS, WHICH IS, UH, IM 71.
UH, WHY DON'T YOU, WOULD YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE UP AND USE THE MICROPHONE SO EVERYONE CAN HEAR? AND ALSO, UH, WE'RE BEING BROADCAST.
I CAN, I ALSO AMEND A MOTION TO INCLUDE ITEM 71, WHICH IS, WHICH ADDS THE 45 DAYS FROM THE DATA POINT.
THAT IS, THAT IS A VERY GOOD ISSUE THAT LET'S DEAL WITH.
IN FACT, I SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT, I GUESS FROM THE START.
LET'S LOOK AT ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE THERE.
THANK YOU FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION.
[00:10:01]
THAT ARE THERE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT BOTH OF THOSE.UH, I ACCEPT THE OTHER AND HIS, HIS.
I ACCEPT THE OTHER MS. VERY GOOD.
THE, UH, ADDITION TO INCLUDE THE INFORMATION IN ITEM 71 IS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION.
DOES THE CHAIR HAVE A SECOND? ALL SET.
SO I'M TRYING TO GET YOU THROUGH IT.
WHY ARE WE ADDING IN THE 45 DAYS? JUST GIVES A SPECIFIC, SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME.
WELL SEE THAT GOES BACK AND TO ITEM 30 ON THIS OTHER SIDE WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE, BECAUSE IT'S ONLY REQUIRED 10 DAYS AND ITEM 30 THAT WAS TABLED ALSO HAS A MISCOMMUNICATION IN THERE OF 20, 60 AND 90 DAYS WHEN WE ALREADY OFFER 10 DAYS.
SO WHY ARE WE OFFERING 45 DAYS NOW? UM, IF YOU READ IT, IT SAYS, UM, THE CODE OFFICIAL MAY INFORM THE OWNER OF A ANOTHER VIOLATION OF THE SAME SUBSECTION, MR. CHAIR.
THIS IS, UH, SAVITA RYE WITH LEGAL.
UH, IT CANNOT BE CHANGED TO 45.
IT CONFLICTS WITH STATE STATUTE.
STATE STATUTE UNDER THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES, UH, ON AN ANNUAL ANNIVERSARY.
UH, THE CITY CANNOT SHORTEN THAT TIMEFRAME.
THEN WE NEED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO, UH, EXCLUDE THAT CHANGE.
AND IN ESSENCE, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD INCLUDE THE WORDING, INCLUDE ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 1 0 8 0.4 ONLY.
YOU OKAY WITH THAT? WELL, SHE HAS TO BE, WELL, THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE WHAT.
BUT SHE, SHE CAN'T INCLUDE THAT PARTICULAR SECTION.
SO WHAT DOES THE LANGUAGE SAY RIGHT NOW? IT SAYS, UH, SECOND OR FIRST? RIGHT NEXT.
SO WHICH ONE IS IT? IS IT THE FIRST OR SECOND ANNIVERSARY? UH, FOR THE P M C, IT'S, UH, UH, IT ALLOWS FOR TWO YEARS.
SO THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO, UH, UNDER THE I P M C, IT'S TWO YEARS UNDER THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE, UH, FOR, UH, CHAPTER 14.
UH, IN THOSE SECTIONS, IT'S ONE YEAR.
SO I WOULD AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE, UM, INCLUDING ORDERS TO VACATE AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTIONS 1 0 8 0.4 AND NOT INCLUDING THE 45 DAYS CHAIR.
THIS IS AMIN THOMAS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
IF YOU DON'T MIND, UM, IF WE DO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AMENDMENT, UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT.
BUT IF WE DO THAT, WE ARE SAYING WE NEED TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 1 0 7 0.2 AND 1 0 7 0.310 7.2.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR TALKS ABOUT WE NEED TO INCLUDE A CORRECTION ORDER, ALLOWING FOR REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME TO MAKE REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.
WHEN WE DO NOTICE TO VACATE, WE ALREADY WENT THROUGH ALL THAT.
SO NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME TO GIVE A NOTICE TO VACATE AND GIVE THEM TIME TO FIX IT ON TOP OF ALL THE TIMES THAT WE ALREADY GAVE THEM THROUGHOUT THE NOTICES.
SO IF WE GONNA ACCEPT THIS CHANGE, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO MODIFY SECTION 1 0 7 0.2.
OTHERWISE, I CANNOT COMPLY WITH THIS AND THE NOTICE TO VACATE.
UM, ISN'T THERE A PERIOD OF APPEAL FOR NOTICE TO VACATE? YES.
UH, NORMALLY THE NOTICE TO VACATE WILL GIVE THEM 72 HOURS, BUT THEY HAVE 10 DAYS TO APPEAL.
SO THE, THE, THAT MEANS THAT THEY COULD HAVE 10 DAYS TO MAKE THOSE REPAIRS, WHICH IS THE 10 DAYS THAT THEY WOULD'VE HAD ANYWAYS.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT THE STATUTES ARE CONFLICTING BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO WAIT, WAIT OUT THEIR APPEAL TIME WITH THE, UH, OH, SORRY.
FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, UH, THE CONCERN
[00:15:01]
AND INCLUDING THE NOTICE TO VACATE ORDERS TO COMPLY WITH WHAT ARE ESSENTIALLY WARNING NOTICES UNDER THE NOTICE PROVISIONS IS REMOVING, UH, THE ABILITY TO, UH, ORDER A VACATE MUCH SOONER THAN, UH, 10 DAYS IN SITUATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN DEEMED TO BE HAZARDOUS.SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE AMENDMENT, UH, PASSES, THEN, UH, PROPERTY THAT IS, UH, ORDERED TO BE VACATED IN 24 HOURS BECAUSE, UH, THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT THE BOILER, UH, WAS GOING TO BLOW.
SO, UH, THE NOTICE TO VACATE WAS ISSUED.
UH, THE, UH, OWNERS ARGUED IT, UH, THE VERY NEXT DAY, THE BOILER BLEW THE BOARDING HOME CAUGHT ON FIRE.
SO IF YOU PUT THE NOTICE TO VACATE AND PROVIDE FOR 10 DAYS, THEN UM, THAT SITUATION HAPPENS THAT WE COULD HAVE ADDRESSED SOONER.
UH, YOU WOULD ALLOW FOR, UH, ADDITIONAL, UH, UH, THE THREAT OF HEALTH AND SAFETY TO CONTINUE FOR THAT MUCH LONGER.
AND A NOTICE TO VACATE IS NOT IN ORDER TO VACATE.
SO A NOTICE TO VACATE IS NOT ENFORCEABLE.
SO REGARDLESS IF THE NOTICE IS ISSUED, IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE UNLESS IT'S ORDERED THROUGH THE B S B BOARD.
SO IT WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT.
UH, NOTICE TO, UH, VACATE IS ENFORCEABLE, JUST LIKE, UH, UH, UH, FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR NOTICES TO VACATE, UH, THERE ARE, UH, PENALTY PROVISIONS FOR NOT COMPLYING.
NOW, DO WE, UH, FILE CRIMINAL CHARGES ON THOSE? NO.
BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR, UH, FOR ENFORCEMENT SHOULD THE SITUATION WARRANTED.
SO THERE, UH, IT DOES ALLOW FOR CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT, IT, AND, UH, IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE RIGHT TO APPEAL.
BUT THAT APPEAL, LET'S SAY IT'S 24 HOURS, THEN, UH, THE CITY WOULD NEED TO BE NOTIFIED, THEY'RE APPEALING.
AND THEN DEPENDING ON THE DANGEROUSNESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, I WOULD HAVE TO GO TO DISTRICT COURT AND OBTAIN A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER THAT THEY VACATE UNTIL THE HEARING IS HELD.
SO, UM, MY RECOMMENDATION FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE IS THAT NOTICES TO VACATE ARE NOT THE TYPICAL NOTICE THAT IS ISSUED FOR, UH, LACK OF WEATHERPROOFING PLUMBING ISSUES, UH, WHAT HAVE YOU.
THAT 1 0 7 AT ALL, UM, ADDRESS.
LEGAL? SO, UH, LEGAL, OH, OKAY.
UH, SO WHAT, YOUR SUGGESTION IS NOT TO PUT A, A TIME DATE ON THERE.
WHAT WOULD BE THE SUGGESTION? WELL, JUST FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, IS TO, UH, NOT INCLUDE THE WORDS, UH, UH, THAT IT APPLIED TO NOTICE, TO VACATE, UH, LET THE PROVISIONS OF 1 0 8 0.4 UH, GOVERN THAT.
JESSE, YOU UNDERSTOOD THE, THE, THE RECOMMEND, THE RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE IT REAL SIMPLE IS TO NOT ACCEPT EITHER OF THE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TO THE CODE AND KEEP IT ACCORDING TO THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THIS PARTICULAR CODE.
BUT WE, WE HAVE A MOTION BEFORE.
UH, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS THAT, KAYLA, YOU WANT ME TO CALL THE MOTION OR NO, I WITHDRAW IT.
YOU WANNA WITHDRAW IT? I WITHDRAW.
CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A DIFFERENT MOTION.
[00:20:02]
MR. CHAIR, I, UH, MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT 27 AS IT'S WRITTEN IN THE 2018 SS A P M C.IS THAT SAYING THE SAME THING AS DO NOT ACCEPT THE CHANGE RECOMMENDED IN 27 AND 71 AND KEEP WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED? OR 1 0 7 0.1 WE'RE DISCUSSING 71 TOO.
OKAY, THEN I, I LANGUAGE, I LANGUAGE, BY THE WAY, WE'VE ALREADY KILLED THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THAT.
I'LL AMEND THE, THE MOTION TO ACCEPT 27 AND 71 AS WRITTEN UNDER THE P M C, I MEAN SS A P M C OF 2018.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION BECAUSE, UH, I THINK THE LEGAL RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT WE KEEP THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF 1 0 7 0.1 AND NOT ACCEPT THE TWO CHANGES RECOMMENDED.
OBJECTION, THE 2021, THE, I'M SORRY, IT IS THE 2021, BUT IT IS NOTHING.
NO, WE'RE, WE'RE DISCUSSING THESE TWO RIGHT HERE.
I KNOW WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT, BUT THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH, THAT'S FOR NUMBER 10.
IN A PRIOR MEETING, WE APPROVED THE RIGHT 2021 SS A M P, WHICH IS THE FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THE FORM, SAY, AND KEEP IT WITHOUT SAY, KEEP THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN THE WAY IT IS.
THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM, FROM THE LEGAL STAFF.
ALRIGHT, LET'S GET A CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ANYTHING OF THE SAME WORDS AS WHAT IT SAYS OVER HERE IN THESE TWO.
SO, OH, WELL, I THINK WHAT, UH, WOULD MAKE IT EASIER IS, UH, IF THERE'S A, JUST A, UM, A MOTION IF THIS IS YOUR INTENT, UH, TO DENY, UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN 27 71 AND JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT SINCE WE'VE ALREADY, UH, DISCUSSED.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE EASIER ROUTE TO GO.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR THE 2021 SS A P M C AS IT'S WRITTEN IN THE LAST COLUMN OF THE SHEET, UH, AND TO REJECT THE PROPOSAL AMENDMENTS.
WELL SEE THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M CONFUSED ON BECAUSE THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH 27 OR 71.
LET, LET ME BACK YOU UP IN TIME.
WE HAVE DISCUSSED A CHANGE TO THE CODE 1 0 7 0.1 IN A PRIOR MEETING.
AND IN THAT PRIOR MEETING, THE COMMITTEE APPROVED THE LANGUAGE IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE FIRST COLUMN, WHICH WAS ITEM NUMBER 10 IN A PRIOR MEETING.
AND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM LEGAL, IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY, IS TO NOT ACCEPT THE TWO PROPOSED CHANGES IN ITEM NUMBER 27 AND ITEM NUMBER 71 AND KEEP WHAT WAS APPROVED AS ITEM 10 IN A PRIOR MEETING.
WELL, LET ME ASK THIS, BECAUSE AGAIN, THE WORDING IS NOT THE SAME IN 27 AND 71, AND THOSE ARE NOT ANY CHANGES IN THERE.
THESE ARE THE EXACT CODE AS WRITTEN TODAY.
CORRECT? I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR CONFUSION IS, BUT LET ME GET, MAKE IT REAL SIMPLE.
IGNORE WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN ITEM NUMBER 27 AND ITEM NUMBER 71 AS THE 2018 S A P M C, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S CONFUSING YOU.
SO LET ME, LET ME STEP IN A LITTLE.
WE THOUGHT WE ARE MAKING IT EASIER, BUT SEEMS IT'S COMPLICATING THINGS.
SO WE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE SEVERAL PROPOSALS FOR THE SAME EXACT SECTION.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT SHEET ONE HERE, THE ONE WE ARE LOOKING AT IT, THE THREE ITEMS ARE ALL RELATED TO THE SAME SECTION, SECTION 1 0 7 0.1.
SO WHAT HAPPENED IS THE FIRST LINE, WE DID GO THROUGH THAT AND GET IT APPROVED WITH THE MODIFICATIONS AND PROPOSED CHANGES BASED ON THE 2021.
NOW WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL CHANGES OR PROPOSED CHANGES THAT CAME IN AFTER THE FACT FOR THE SAME SECTION.
SO WE DECIDED INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THE ITEMS AS THEY CAME TO US, TO COMBINE THEM AND MAKE SURE WE LOOK AT THAT ONE SECTION ONE TIME VERSUS GOING BACK AND FORTH.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHY WE DID IT THIS WAY.
YEAH, BUT I THINK I FOLLOW LEGAL.
MAYBE THE EASIEST WAY IS WHEN YOU VOTE, VOTE ON EACH LINE ITEM BY ITSELF SEPARATE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UH, LINE ITEM 27, IF YOU DON'T
[00:25:01]
WANT THIS CHANGE, JUST SAY, I DON'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT CHANGE.THAT ENDS THAT ITEM RIGHT THERE.
IF EVERYBODY VOTES, OBVIOUSLY AND AGREE ON IT, OR IF YOU WANNA ADOPT THAT, JUST SAY YOU WANNA ADOPT THAT CHANGE.
WE WILL ADD THAT LANGUAGE INTO WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED AT A LATER DATE, BUT THAT WAY GO, GO THROUGH IT LINE BY LINE AND MAKE YOUR DECISIONS BASED ON THAT.
WELL, THE ONLY THING I SEE CHANGED, ACTUALLY, NOW THAT I READ THIS FIRST PART, IS THE FACT THAT IT SAYS NOTICE OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY 27 AND 17, RIGHT? THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S REALLY CHANGED.
MR. HAN, THIS IS DANNY WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT.
SO THAT'S JUST THE SECTION TITLE AND, AND SO I FORGOT TO ADMIT THAT, BUT AGAIN, THE CODE ITSELF IS THE EXACT SAME WORD FOR WORD.
THE PROPOSAL BACK IN MAY WAS TO KEEP THE SS A P M C AS WRITTEN, AND THAT WAS ADOPTED DURING THE MAY UM, DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE I WAS READING THE FIRST PART WHERE IT SAYS NOTICE OF RESPONSIBILITY, IT DOESN'T SAY IT ON.
SO I, I, I, UM, UH, WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT 27 AND 71 AS WRITTEN UNDER THE NEW P M C 2021 S M A P M C.
YOU DO NOT WANT TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
AND THE REASON WHY YOU DO NOT WANT TO MAKE THAT MOTION IS BECAUSE THE, THE PRIOR, YOU JUST SAY AT THE TOP RIGHT CORNER, THE TAR PRIOR APPROVED MEETING FOR ITEM NUMBER 10 IS IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER.
AND WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS IGNORE EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEE EXCEPT FOR THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES, WHICH IS ITEM HERE AND HERE.
AND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM LEGAL IS YOU DON'T WANT TO DO EITHER ONE OF THOSE.
SO YOU REALLY WANT TO SAY YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE OR ACCEPT ANY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES, AND YOU WANT TO KEEP WHAT WAS APPROVED IN A PRIOR MEETING FOR ITEM NUMBER 10.
I SECOND YOUR MOTION THEN IF YOU MAKE YOUR MOTION
ANY DISCUSSION NOW FROM THAT? IT IS NOT INCLUDED.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY YOU DID NOT ACCEPT IT.
STILL ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AND A SECOND, AYE, THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAYYY MOTION TO KEEP ITEM NUMBER 10 AS APPROVED IN A PRIOR MEETING IS APPROVED AGAIN.
NOW THEN I APOLOGIZE FOR CREATING THE CONFUSION ON DOING WHAT WE TRIED TO DO TO, AND ACTUALLY IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO KEEP MY MIND STRAIGHT, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, AND IT DIDN'T WORK REAL WELL AT ALL.
SO IF YOU GO TO A SECOND PAGE, YOU WILL SEE ITEM NUMBER 11.
ITEM NUMBER 11 WAS DISCUSSED IN A PRIOR MEETING.
AS A RESULT OF THAT PRIOR MEETING, THE COMMITTEE SAID THAT WE WANT TO KEEP THE 2021 S A M P C LANGUAGE.
THEREFORE, THE CURRENT CODE AS APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE IS WHAT YOU SEE AGAIN IN THE UPPER LEFT HAND CORNER OF 1 0 7 0.2.
FROM THAT, LOOK AT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ONLY IN COMPARISON TO THE UPPER RIGHT HAND DOCUMENT FOR 1 0 7 0.2.
I THINK MAYBE THAT MAKES IT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND.
AND ITEM NUMBER 28 IS A TABLED ITEM, BUT I'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO READ THROUGH ALL THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
[00:30:15]
MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR.WE'RE, WE'RE NOT INCLUDING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WHERE IT SAYS, UH, NUMBER ONE BEING TYPEFACE LEGIBLE WRITING IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
WE ARE CONSIDERING THAT, BUT AS AN ISSUE DUE, BUT THIS DO, YEAH.
WE WE'RE APPROVING THAT BECAUSE WE ARE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW, WE ARE CONSIDERING THE CHANGES AS PROPOSED BECAUSE THERE'S A STATE LAW, RIGHT? THAT ALL THAT ALL POLICIES SHOULD BE IN, IN ENGLISH.
BUT THAT'S WHY I WAS QUESTIONING THIS NUMBER ONE.
AND THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BEFORE ITEM NUMBER ONE IN ITEM 11 WHEN WE HAD THE DISCUSSION.
THIS IS, THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE BY, BY LAW ITEM NUMBER ONE IS IT HAS TO BE AN ENGLISH, THEREFORE THE SPANISH RECOMMENDATION IS PROPOSED, NOT BE ACCEPTED.
THAT'S CHAIR'S POSITION BECAUSE OF THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
AND CHAIR'S POSITION ON THE SECOND ITEM.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WITH INFORMATION ABOUT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
RIGHT NOW, D S D ALREADY PROVIDES ASSISTANCE INFORMATION AS BEST DESCRIBED AND BEST INFORMED ON WHAT WE HAVE.
BUT BECAUSE THOSE PROGRAMS CAN CHANGE, IT PROBABLY SHOULD NOT BE PART OF CODE.
AND AGAIN, THIS CHAIR'S POSITION.
WHICH ONE ARE, UH, THE, THE PROPOSAL IS, UH, IN ITEM NUMBER FOUR TO INCLUDE WITH INFORMATION ABOUT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
AND AGAIN, THE CHAIR'S POSITION IS WE DO THAT ALREADY IN D S D AND IN FACT, THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD ASK THAT QUESTION ALMOST EVERY MEETING WE HAVE, BUT TO INCLUDE IT IN THE CODE WOULD NOT BE A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THOSE PROGRAMS CHANGE FREQUENTLY AND SOMETIMES THEY GET, UH, PROGRAMS ADDED TOO.
SO BECAUSE OF THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT THE CODE IS IN EXISTENCE, IT WOULD NOT BE A GOOD RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CHAIR'S POINT OF VIEW.
HAS THERE BEEN AN EMOTION MADE? NO, MA'AM.
I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE DISCUSSING ALREADY AND THERE'S NO MOTION MADE.
AND PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THE FACT THAT I CHANGED THE FORMAT ON YOU AND IT CREATED MORE CONFUSION.
UH, SO I, I WILL LET EVERYBODY TAKE A LOOK AT, AGAIN, ALL THE ITEMS THERE AND IF YOU'VE READ THROUGH THEM, YOU CAN FORM A MOTION.
I'VE GIVEN YOU CHAIR'S VIEWPOINT ON TWO OF THE CHANGES.
AND IN FACT, I MIGHT AS WELL GO AHEAD AND GIVE YOU CHAIR'S INPUT ON THE LAST CHANGE.
GOING BACK TO WHAT AL SAID, THERE NEEDS TO BE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR BEFORE DISCUSSION CAN BE, UNLESS THE CHAIR IS JUST PROVIDING, UH, A SUMMARY AS TO PROCEDURE OR UNLESS MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS OF, OF STAFF.
DAVID, SAY AGAIN? I'LL MAKE A STAFF FOR CLARIFICATION.
YEAH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP, UH, ITEM 11, THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN AS IS AND NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES.
MOTION IS TO THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR THE 2021 SS A P M C AND NOT CONSIDER, UH, ITEM 28, ITEM 31 AND ITEM 50.
THE MOTION IS TO KEEP THE CHANGES MADE IN A PRIOR MEETING UNDER ITEM NUMBER 11 AND NOT ADOPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ITEM 28, 31 AND 50 I SECOND.
NOW, THEN WE CAN FULLY DISCUSS IT.
UL LET, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE'S TWO MORE ITEMS UNDER THE SAME, UH, ITEM NUMBER 63 AND 72 AS WELL.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE NOT HAVE ALL THE INPUT THAT WE CAN GET.
UH, SO IN THE MOTION, DID YOU ACTUALLY TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, ITEM NUMBER 63 AND ITEM NUMBER 72? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T SEE THAT.
BUT THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED AS WELL IN THE MOTION, NOT TO CONSIDER
[00:35:01]
NOT ADOPTED.NOW THEN, WELL YOU WAS DRAW YOUR MOTION.
WHAT, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING YOU, UH, NOT, NOT AS A MOTION, BUT FOR MORE INFORMATION AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THERE AND, UH, UNDER, BECAUSE THEY, THERE AIN'T NO SENSE TO MAKE A MOTION AND WE'RE NOT CLEAR.
HERE, HERE AGAIN, WE JUST SEE RIGHT HERE THAT WE NEEDED TO INCLUDE TOO.
AND THEN WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION AT THAT TIME, GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION WITH A P PREVIOUS OF OUR, THERE WAS CHAIR THERE.
THAT CHAIR DID NOT INCLUDE ITEM NUMBER 63 AND ITEM NUMBER 72 AND PAGE.
AND WE NEEDED DISCUSS IT BEFORE WE ENTERED.
YOU CAN'T DISCUSS IT BEFORE YOU MAKE A MOTION.
THE PROCESS WE AGREED TO IS TAKES THE MOTION IN A SECOND.
ROBERT, DID YOU MAKE A MOTION OR A SECOND AND THEN YOU DISCUSS TRUNK, COME MY CAR AND GET THE ROBIN RULES.
SO COUNSEL, QUESTION IN ROBERT'S RULES, DOES IT NOT SAY MOTION SECOND AND DISCUSS, YES, THAT'S THE PROCEDURE.
BUT IF THE, UH, COMMITTEE AGREES, UH, THE MAJORITY IN A MAJORITY VOTE TO ALLOW FOR DISCUSSION OF QUESTIONS OR THE PROCESS, THEN UH, Y'ALL CAN DO SO BEFORE A MOTION IS PUT ON THE TABLE AND THEN DISCUSSION IS ON THE MOTION THAT'S PUT ON THE TABLE.
BUT THAT WILL HAVE TO BE, UH, BY MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE TO ALLOW FOR DISCUSSION FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES PRIOR TO A MOTION, UH, EX.
UH, I JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT SINCE I KNOW THAT YOU WENT THROUGH ALL OF THIS ALREADY AND I WASN'T HERE.
BUT HERE WE SEE HERE WE SEE, BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED RIGHT NOW, THE MOTION WAS MADE, BUT, AND IT WAS SECOND, BUT IT WAS NOT INCLUDED TWO, BUT WOULD BE PRAYER PHASE AND THE ONION O OF THIS PROPERTY.
THE MOTION WAS, AND WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS AT THE MOTION WAS AMENDED.
UH, AND I DON'T KNOW, MR. SANDIS, DID YOU APPROVE THE, THE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE, NOT TO INCLUDE NOT YET.
BECAUSE I WAS LETTING JESSE POINT, POINT OF INFORMATION HOLD ON TO, TO, TO HOLD ON POINT OF INFORMATION.
WAIT, WAIT, RAY, HOLD ON JUST A MINUTE.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET THIS THROUGH.
THE REASON WAS IS BECAUSE I DIDN'T SECOND IT YET BECAUSE I WAS LETTING JESSE ASK THE QUESTION, BUT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT FIRST BEFORE WE DISCUSS IT.
WAIT, IS THAT, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION? SO WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO GO ON, WE'RE GONNA HOLD BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON THE DISCUSSION FIRST IS WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.
SO WE NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT.
WE'RE GONNA MAINTAIN THE PROCEDURES THAT WE'VE HAD, SO WE CAN THAT IS A MOTION, A SECOND.
WE ALREADY HAVE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, THE MOTION SECOND BOARD, AND IT'S BEEN AMENDED SECOND.
NOW YOU CAN, YOU CAN, YOU CAN QUESTION.
SO DID YOU SECOND IT? I JUST SECONDED NOW, THEN DISCUSSION.
UM, LEGAL JUST ADVISED THAT BEFORE WE HAVE A DISCUSSION THAT THERE SHOULD BE A VOTE OR A MOTION MADE AND A VOTE TAKEN TO HAVE A DISCUSSION PRIOR TO THE MOTION AND, UH, AND THE VOTE AND, AND THAT THAT VOTE SHOULD BE A MAJORITY VOTE, UH, OR TWO THIRDS.
UM, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO MOTION ON HAVING A DISCUSSION PRIOR TO MAKING THE MOTION.
THE THE LEGAL OPINION WAS THAT YOU CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION WITHOUT A MOTION OR YOU CAN HAVE A MOTION AND THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION.
BUT YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO VOTE WITH A MAJORITY TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AND TO BE SAID, I THINK WHAT, UM, HE WAS SAYING HERE IS THAT THE PROBLEM WITH THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE IS THAT, UM, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE 63 AND 72.
AND SO THAT IF WE'RE MAKING A MOTION AND IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE, UH, AMENDMENTS THAT WERE WRITTEN ON THE BACK, THEN WE ALSO HAVE TO DISCUSS THOSE AMENDMENTS OUTSIDE OF THIS MOTION UNLESS SOMEONE IS MAKING ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THOSE.
BUT I WILL SAY IF WE ARE INCLUDING 63 AND 72, THAT WE READ THEM CAREFULLY FIRST BEFORE WE DECIDE TO INCLUDE THOSE IN THIS MOTION.
UM, THAT WAY WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY CONSIDERING THESE AND READING THEM THROUGH, UH, I
[00:40:01]
DID AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE 63 AND 72 AND THREAD, SECONDED THE MOTION.SO THE MOTION NOW INCLUDES 63 AND 72? YES.
BUT MY ISSUE WITH THAT IS THE FACT THAT, UM, WE HAVEN'T READ 63 OR 72.
'CAUSE YOU, YOU SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A BACK.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ THEM FIRST BEFORE WE, BEFORE WE CONTINUE.
AND I INTERPRETED THEM AND DISCUSSION.
AND UNLESS THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DISAPPROVAL, THEN THE CHAIR IS NOT GOING TO FORM OR CHANGE THE FORMAT THAT WE HAVE USED BECAUSE I'VE CHANGED THE FORMAT ON THE WRITTEN DOCUMENT AND IT'S CREATING ENOUGH CONFUSION BY ITSELF.
SO WE'RE CON CON WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THE FORMAT THAT WE USED PREVIOUSLY, AND THAT IS REVIEW THE DOCUMENT, ACCEPT THE MOTION TO TAKE THE SECOND AND HAVE DISCUSSION.
RAY, IT'S YOUR CHANCE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS MATTER BEFORE, UH, TO INCLUDE SPANISH, UH, UH, UH, STATEMENT IN SPANISH ON THIS NOTICE.
UH, THE, UH, STATE LAW DOES NOT PRECLUDE, UH, US USING A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE ON THE FORMS. IT, IT ALLOWS FOR ENGLISH OR IT, IT MANDATES ENGLISH, BUT IT DOESN'T, UH, DENY US FROM USING OTHER LANGUAGES.
SO THAT IS WHY, UH, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR ADDING THE STATEMENT IN SPANISH.
AND JUST TO THAT POINT IN 72, IT SAYS, BE IN WRITING AN LEGIBLE FONT AND SIZE WITH A WRITTEN STATEMENT IN SPANISH OFFERING TRANSLATION SERVICES BY THE CITY.
THAT IS NOT ASKING THAT WE COMPLETELY TRANSLATE THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT.
IT'S JUST SAYING THAT WE SHOULD INCLUDE SOMETHING THAT IS WRITTEN IN SPANISH THAT SAYS, UM, TRANSLATION SERVICES ARE OFFERED BY THE CITY.
CALL THIS NUMBER IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS BEING GIVEN TO YOU.
I FEEL LIKE THAT'S, UM, PRETTY FAIR AS FAR AS THE ITEM FOUR WITH, UM, INFORMATION ABOUT ASSISTANT PROGRAMS. UM, EVEN THOUGH ASSISTANT PROGRAMS DO CHANGE, UM, LUCKILY WE LIVE IN A CITY THAT DOES OFFER ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. UM, AND EVEN THOUGH D S D DOES OFFER IT ALREADY, UM, I SEE NO PROBLEM AS TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE INFORMATION.
UM, IT'S ONE OF THE EASIEST THINGS THAT WE CAN DO, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT RESIDENTS ARE, UM, AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. AND THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT D S D IS NOT OFFERING THOSE ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS OR GIVING THOSE PAMPHLETS OUT ALREADY, WHATEVER IT IS.
UM, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO INCLUDE THAT AGAIN FOR FUTURE ADMINISTRATION THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE THE SAME VALUES AS YOU ALL.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY HERE, INCLUDING A STATEMENT OFFERING BOTH IN PERSON AND REMOTE MEANS OF ATTENDANCE.
UM, I THINK THE PANDEMIC WAS VERY UNIQUE, UM, AND MAKING A SHIFT TO A LOT OF ONLINE PRESENCE.
UM, BUT I THINK, UM, IN CONSIDERATION TO PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, ELDERLY PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO, UH, TRANSPORTATION, I THINK IT WOULD BE ALL RIGHT IF WE INCLUDED NUMBER SIX AS WELL IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ELDERLY AND OUR DISABLED OR ABLE TO ATTEND THESE MEETINGS, UM, IN A PROPER MANNER.
UM, WE DID DISCUSS IT, UH, I BELIEVE LAST MEETING.
UH, THE, UH, VIRTUAL IS IMPOSSIBLE.
UM, I DO AGREE WITH THE, UH, NUMBER 72, UH, JUST HAVING THAT STATEMENT ON THE FORM INCLUDED, THAT TRANSLATION SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK, UH, THE FIRST TWO POINTS, UH, THE YOUNG LADY MADE ABOUT WRITTEN STATEMENT IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
AND THEN THE OTHER STATEMENT ABOUT ASSISTANCE IS AVAILABLE ARE GENERIC STATEMENTS AND APPLY BASICALLY TO EVERY CODE THAT'S IN THIS BOOK OR TO EVERY CODE THAT THE CITY EVER PUTS OUT.
NOT ONLY JUST AS ASS M P C, BUT ALL OTHER CODES.
AND IT'S PUBLICIZED, VERY WELL PUBLICIZED THAT THE CITY DOES THAT, UH, EVERYWHERE.
SO THAT DOES NOT, AND SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED TO A SPECIFIC CODE.
SO I THINK WE NEED, DOES NOT NEED TO APPLY IT, UH, IN A PARTICULAR CODE.
OKAY? UH, THAT'S MY GENERAL FEELING.
CAN, CAN WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM LEGAL WHETHER THERE'S A LEGAL PROBLEM ANSWERED AS TO WHICH PROVISION REQUIREMENT WHETHER PROVIDING A STATEMENT IN SPANISH
[00:45:01]
IS AN ISSUE, A LEGAL ISSUE? YES, IT'S A LEGAL ISSUE IN THE PREVIOUS ITEMS BEING DISCUSSED, BUT AS ELL NOTED, UH, 72 DIFFERS FROM THE EARLIER ONES.THE EARLIER ONES REQUIRE THE NOTICE TO BE IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH.
HOWEVER, THIS ONE, UH, ITEM NUMBER 72, UH, SIMPLY STATES THAT A, A STATEMENT WILL BE PROVIDED IN SPANISH AS TO TRANSLATION SERVICES IN SPANISH.
AND UH, UH, I WILL DEFER TO DEPUTY DIRECTOR TOMAZ.
'CAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IS ALREADY IN THE WORKS.
UH, THAT, UH, THE PROPOSAL OF, UH, ADDING A STATEMENT ON THE FORM AS TO TRANSLATION SERVICES, UM, YEAH, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IT.
THAT'S WHY I MISSED SOME OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED SAVITA.
BUT, UM, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE FORM AND AS IS, I KNOW YOU GUYS WERE SAYING WE NEED TO MAKE THE FONT BIGGER AND YOU KNOW, DO ALL THAT.
UM, SO I WAS TALKING TO THE TEAM AND WE ARE NOT AGAINST PUTTING SOMETHING IN SPANISH, SO LET ME START THERE, BUT THERE IS NO REALLY NO MORE ROOM HERE TO PUT THAT.
SO WHAT WE ARE THINKING ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT, WE CAN PUT BASICALLY IN SPANISH, WE SAY FOR SPANISH SCAN THIS QR CODE, AND WE PUT A CODE, WHEN THEY SCAN THE CODE, WE CAN LINK IT TO ANYTHING WE WANT, LINK IT TO A PHONE NUMBER, LINK IT TO A PERSON, WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE.
THAT WAY THEY SCAN IT, THEY CALL US, WE WALK THEM THROUGH IT, WE EXPLAIN EVERYTHING.
WE CAN GO MEET THEM AT THEIR HOUSE IF NEEDED.
THAT WAY WE ARE PROVIDING THE SPANISH TRANSLATION BASICALLY, BUT IN A, AGAIN, QR CODE AND IN SPANISH SAYING, CANDICE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU NEED ASSISTANCE.
SO I THINK WE, WE MEET THE KIND OF THE GOAL, BUT I DON'T HAVE ROOM TO EVEN ADD A STATEMENT ANYWHERE.
AND YOU KNOW, MOST PEOPLE, YOUNGER PEOPLE MIGHT KNOW HOW TO USE A QR CODE, BUT MOST PEOPLE OVER, YOU KNOW, A CERTAIN AGE OR PEOPLE WHO JUST ARE NOT TECH SAVVY, THEY DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH IT.
THEY, THEY'RE NOT GONNA KNOW WHAT A QR CODE IS.
I AM EXTREMELY WELL VERSED IN TECHNOLOGY AND I HATE QR CODES.
I CAN'T STAND IT, IT, MY PHONE DOES NOT GO TO THAT.
I HAVE TO GO TO GOOGLE LENS AND GET IT TO OPEN IT AND THEN MESS WITH IT.
AND IT'S JUST, IT, IT FRUSTRATES ME.
SO THAT IS, I MEAN, YOU COULD PUT A QR CODE THERE, BUT THERE STILL NEEDS TO BE A STATEMENT AND A PHONE NUMBER.
UM, AND, AND I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH PUTTING THE STATEMENT.
WE WILL RE MR. CHAIRMAN REDESIGN IT AND ADD THE STATEMENT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I, I SUPPORT THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF, OF TRANS OFFERING, TRANSLATING TRANSLATION SERVICES, AND I BELIEVE WE ALREADY DO THAT.
UM, WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS SPANISH ONLY.
WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS AGO AN INDIVIDUAL COME BEFORE US SPEAKING MANDARIN.
SHE DIDN'T SPEAK SPANISH, SHE SPOKE A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE OTHER THAN SPANISH.
SO WE'RE SAYING HERE THAT EVERYONE THAT COMES BEFORE US EITHER SPEAKS ENGLISH OR SPANISH, AND THAT'S NOT TRUE.
WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER LANGUAGES OTHER THAN ENGLISH OR SPANISH? ARE WE GOING TO INCLUDE US A SENTENCE AND THOSE LANGUAGES AS WELL? THAT I'LL ACCEPT THAT AS A COMMENT.
THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT, EDWIN.
I THINK MY COMMENT, SORRY KAYLA, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T EVEN HAVE SMART PHONES, MIKE.
THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITHOUT SMARTPHONE THAT WILL BE IN THIS PARTICULAR POPULATION.
I SORT OF KNOW THAT FROM THE FOOD BANK.
UM, COULDN'T YOU JUST DO PUT A PHONE NUMBER, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, A PHONE NUMBER FOR, TO CALL IF YOU NEED, UM, SOMEONE TO SPEAK IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE, WHETHER IT BE SPANISH OR WHATEVER.
SO WE ARE, WE ARE DRIFTING INTO AN ISSUE THAT I'VE CALLED ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUE RATHER THAN CODE ISSUES.
I WANT US TO FOCUS ON CODE, NOT ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES.
SO IT'S A GOOD RECOMMENDATION AND A GOOD COMMENT WHAT YOU HAVE.
BUT IT ALSO BRINGS UP THIS WHOLE THING HERE, WHICH YEAH, WELL, IT'S WHAT WE TALKED
[00:50:01]
ABOUT BEFORE.SHOULDN'T YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SPECIFICALLY TARGETING TWO LANGUAGES.
THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF ALL THE OTHERS WHO SPEAK OTHER LANGUAGES.
THAT'S WHY THE GO-TO LANGUAGE IS ENGLISH.
BUT IF THE CONCERN PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, MANDARIN, CHINESE, RIGHT, OR GERMAN OR WHATEVER IT IS, THEY, THEN THE CONCERN IS THAT IF THEY'RE JUST READING IT IN ENGLISH, THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S THE SAME, IT RAISES THE SAME CONCERN THAT IT'S A VIOLATION OF, OF CIVIL RIGHTS OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT.
YOU CAN'T SAY THAT SOMEONE HAS RECEIVED A NOTICE IF THEY HAVEN'T UNDERSTOOD WHAT'S BEING HANDED TO THEM.
SO I HONESTLY DON'T SEE THE ISSUE WITH INCLUDING THIS STATEMENT HERE IN
SO IT'S THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE SPEAK SPANISH.
UM, AND TO INCLUDE THAT STATEMENT OR LIKE THE DOCUMENT IN ENGLISH IS NOT TAKING AWAY FROM THE FACT THAT THE DOCUMENT IS INDEED IN ENGLISH.
AND THE ONLY STATEMENT THAT'S IN SPANISH IS IF, UM, LIKE CALL HERE IF YOU NEED TRANSLATION, THAT'S IT.
I THINK THAT THAT IS VERY SIMPLE AND IT CAN BE INCLUDED IN THE SMALL LITTLE SPACE ON THE RIGHT BOTTOM CORNER.
ISN'T IS THE RISK OF GOING BACK TO ADMINISTRATIVE DISCUSSION? I'D LIKE ASK ONCE MORE.
'CAUSE I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE GIVEN US THE EXPLANATION, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. ESTI WHO SHARED WITH THE GROUP WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY COME ACROSS A MONOLINGUAL SPEAKER, REGARDLESS OF WHAT LANGUAGE IT IS.
AND I'D LIKE STAFF TO WALK US THROUGH THAT.
AGAIN, I KNOW MR. ZUNIGA WAS NOT HERE WHEN THAT EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN, BUT I THINK IT'LL BE A GOOD REMINDER FOR ALL OF US ANYWAY.
AGAIN, THIS IS MICHAEL, YOU'RE ARRESTING.
NORMALLY WHEN WE COME ACROSS A LOCATION WHERE THEY SPEAK ANOTHER LANGUAGE, WE LOOK TO OUR, UH, CURRENT CODE OFFICERS AND STAFF THAT WE HAD TO SEE IF THEY SPEAK SPANISH OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE SO WE CAN GET SOME INTERPRETATION SERVICES TO THEM.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE JUST SAY, HERE'S ENGLISH.
WE DON'T NOT, WE DO NOT DO THAT.
WE OFFER SERVICES THROUGH OUR OFFICERS AND THROUGH OUR STAFF.
AND MR. ESTI, IS THAT PART OF JUST ADMINISTRATION OR IS THAT AN S O P SOMEWHERE IN YOUR DOCUMENTS THAT ALL THE CODE OFFICERS KNOW THAT WHEN THEY COME ACROSS THIS SITUATION, THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO.
THAT'S PART OF OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE AND SOME OF THE POLICIES THAT WE HAVE.
SO, SO THEREFORE, I, I, I DON'T SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.
WE ALREADY SPEND SO MUCH MONEY ON IN THESE TRANSLATION SERVICES AND WE JUST DO IT IN SPANISH.
WE, WE ARE PRESENTLY IN A DISCUSSION OF DEBATE AND WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO HAVE DISCUSSION.
KAYLA, YOU GET ONE MORE COMMENT? YEAH, JUST MY QUESTION.
UM, OF ALL OF THE TIMES THAT THEY GO OUT AND LEAVE NOTICES, UM, IT, IT'S PRETTY COMMON THAT NO ONE IS HOME WHEN THEY GET OUT THERE, CORRECT? YES.
SO HOW DO YOU KNOW IF THEY SPEAK ENGLISH? NORMALLY WHEN THEY CALL THE PHONE NUMBER, SOMEBODY CALLS AND LEAVES A MESSAGE, THEY SPEAK SPANISH OR THEY GET A SPANISH PER PERSON TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT, THAT CALL OR SOMEONE WHO SPEAKS THAT LANGUAGE.
SO AGAIN, HOW DO THEY KNOW THAT THAT'S THE PHONE NUMBER THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO CALL? IF THEY DON'T SPEAK ENGLISH? A LOT OF TIMES THEY HAVE SOMEBODY WHO SPEAKS, UH, IN THEIR HOUSE ENGLISH TO LET THEM KNOW.
SO SOMEBODY WILL CALL ON THEIR BEHALF OR THEY'LL CALL US AND LEAVE US A MESSAGE IN THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE ASKING US TO CALL 'EM BACK.
THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO KEEP ITEM NUMBER 11 AS APPROVED IN A PRIOR MEETING AND NOT ADOPT ITEMS. NUMBER 18 31, 50, 63 AND 72 AND SECOND MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? HOLD ON, HOLD ON.
UH, CORRECTION, YOU SAID 18, IT'S 28.
THE MOTION IS TO KEEP ITEM NUMBER 11 APPROVED PRIOR AND NOT ADOPT 28, 31, 50, 63 AND 72.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
[00:55:04]
WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO CODE B 1 0 1 0.2.AND THERE ARE TWO ITEMS IN THIS ITEM.
NUMBER 30 WAS DISCUSSED IN OUR LAST MEETING.
THE REASON FOR THE TABLE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT 20 DAYS VERSUS 10 DAYS, 60 AND 90.
AND THEN WE HAVE A PROPOSAL TO MAKE APPEAL PROCESSES FOR 60 DAYS AND 90 DAYS, UH, AND ENSURING THAT THE ACTUAL PROCESS TO APPEAL, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC STEPS REQUIRED FOR BOTH THE HOMEOWNER AND INDIVIDUAL PARTIES IS INCLUDED AS A PHYSICAL FORM ALONG WITH THE NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS.
AND THE WORDING, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, FOR ITEM NUMBER 49 IS IDENTICAL.
AND THE CHAIR'S POSITION, CHAIR'S POSITION ONLY.
IS THE APPEAL PROCESS 60 TO 90 DAYS.
UH, WE'VE ALREADY ALLOWED A PROPERTY TO GO FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, UH, AND IT HAS GONE INTO SOME KIND OF THE, UH, UH, VIOLATION, NOT VIOLATION.
IT'S GONE INTO SOME KIND OF, UH, DISREPAIR IS A BETTER WAY TO DESCRIBE IT.
UH, AND OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, UH, IT EVENTUALLY WAS IDENTIFIED BY SOMEONE, UH, EITHER A CODE OFFICER OR A NEIGHBOR OR SOME OTHER, UH, PERSON IDENTIFYING IT, AND TO CARRY AN ADDITIONAL 60 TO 90 DAYS.
IT, AN APPEAL PROCESS TO ME JUST DOES NOT MAKE A LOT OF SENSE BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GET THAT WAY OVERNIGHT.
IT'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPING OVER A PERIOD OF TIME THAT'S CHAIR'S OPINION ONLY.
WELL, THE REASON I BROUGHT THIS UP IS BECAUSE THE LAW SAYS 10 DAYS AND WE'VE ALWAYS USED 10 DAYS.
AND THE 20:21 PM C S IS TALKING ABOUT A 20 DAY, WHICH AUTOMATICALLY GOES 10 DAYS OVER THE LAW, THE STATE LAW.
SO THAT'S WHY I ASKED COUNSEL TO WEIGH IN ON THIS, AND THAT'S WHEN WE DECIDED TO TABLE.
AND THE, THE, WELL, ACTUALLY, I'LL LET COUNSEL WILL ANSWER THE QUESTION, BUT I THINK COUNSEL SAID IT'S 10 DAYS AND WE'RE GONNA STAY AT 10 DAYS OR SHOULD STAY AT 10 DAYS THROUGHOUT FOR CONSISTENCY, I THINK, I THINK, UH, SHE'S LOOKING SOMETHING UP REAL QUICK.
BUT, UM, JUST MY FEEDBACK HERE IS, AGAIN, THESE, THESE TWO ITEMS ARE ACTUALLY FROM APPENDIX B, APPENDIX B, AND NORMALLY WE DON'T ADOPT THAT BECAUSE, UM, ALL THE APPEALS ARE LISTED IN CHAPTER SIX ALREADY.
SO IF WE GONNA MAKE CHANGES TO THE APPEAL PROCESS, IT NEEDS TO BE IN CHAPTER SIX, NOT IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, BUT I'LL LET, UH, LEGAL ACTUALLY WEIGH IN.
I MAKE THE MOTION TO, SO, UH, MY INTERPRETATION, MY INTERPRETATION THEN IS THAT, UH, THIS RIGHT HERE IS REDUNDANT SINCE WE HAVE ANOTHER CHAPTER THAT WOULD COVER IT.
SO WHY DO WE HAVE IT HERE, MR. CHAIRMAN? LET'S, LET'S HOLD FOR JUST A SECOND.
YEAH, HE GOES, YOU, YOU WOULD DEBATE HIM RIGHT NOW WITHOUT A, A DEBATE
OKAY, MR. CHAIR, UH, THIS IS, UH, LEGAL.
UM, WHAT I HAD BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING, UM, I, WE HAD REQUESTED A TABLE AFFORD TO BE TABLED SO I COULD LOOK FOR CHAPTER SIX.
I WAS HAVING A HARD TIME THEN DANNY, UH, FOUND.
AND UM, MY COMMENT AT THE LAST TIME WAS ALSO, UH, JUST WHAT DIRECTOR TOMA SAID IS THAT THE APPEAL PROCEDURES ARE IN CHAPTER SIX, AND, UH, IT PROVIDES FOR 10 BUSINESS DAYS TO APPEAL, UH, SAMHSA NOTICES.
AND THAT WAS A DECISION, UH, THAT WAS, UH, MADE AT THE TIME OF THE CREATION OF THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD IN 20 11, 20 10, 20 11.
[01:00:03]
AND THAT WAS THE DECISION OF COUNSEL THAT APPEALS WOULD GO TO B S B, THEREFORE THEY WOULD COMPLY WITH THE APPEAL PROCESS IN CHAPTER SIX.SO THE DECISION WAS MADE NOT TO INCLUDE, UH, THE INDEX IN THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE BECAUSE THE CITY ALREADY COVERS IT AND IT'S ALREADY CODIFIED.
AND AGAIN, I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU THAT THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, IT'S, UH, MEANT TO, UH, TO TRY TO APPLY TO ALL THE STATES AND CANADA, BUT, UH, EVERY STATE IS UNIQUE.
AND SO WHEN THE SAMHSA WAS CREATED, UH, THERE ARE SOME PROVISIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY THAT ARE SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED IN THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, SPECIFICALLY, UH, LIENS AGAINST, UM, A HOMESTEAD.
AND, UH, THERE'S, UH, OTHER PROPERTY EXEMPTIONS.
SO JUST JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND THAT THE I P M C IS GENERAL TO APPLY FOR EVERYBODY, BUT EACH STATE HAS ITS OWN SPECIFICS.
SO LONG-WINDED WAY OF SAYING, UH, THE APPEAL PROCESS IS ALREADY IN PLACE FOR CHAPTER SIX IN CHAPTER SIX, AND HAS BEEN SINCE, UH, 2012, I BELIEVE.
SO AT THE PRESENT TIME, UH, FOR, UH, B 1 0 1 0.2, THE INFORMATION THAT IS IN I P M C 2021, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO ADOPT THAT.
AND ALSO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO ADAPT, UH, OR ADOPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
UH, CORRECT, THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION.
AGAIN, IF WE COME UP WITH ANY RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE ADOPT THOSE AND THEY'RE IN CONFLICT WITH CHAPTER SIX, THEN ONE OF TWO THINGS NEED TO HAPPEN.
EITHER WE GO WITH THE MOST STRINGENT ONE.
WHEN YOU HAVE CONFLICT IN CODE, YOU GO WITH THE MOST STRINGENT.
SO WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE 10 DAYS.
OR OPTION TWO IS WE GO BACK TO CHAPTER SIX BY COUNCIL.
C C R NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO GO BACK AND OPEN CHAPTER OR SIX AND GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE AND HAVE TASK FORCE TO REVIEW IT, AND HOPEFULLY THEY END UP WITH THE SAME RESULT.
SO IF CHANGES TO THE APPEAL IS NEEDED OR PROPOSED, MY ADVICE IS TO GO AND DO THAT IN CHAPTER SIX, BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE THE APPEAL PROCESS IS OUTLINED ALREADY AND IS IN PLACE.
UH, THE, THE REASON WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, THE WAY I ASKED THE QUESTION IS BECAUSE, UH, WE AS A COMMITTEE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED ANYTHING OUT OF 2021 FOR THIS PARTICULAR SECTION.
AND IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS THE, UH, THE 2021 I P M C IS A RECOMMENDED CHANGE.
AND, UH, THE STAFF HAS NOT RECOMMENDED A CHANGE TO ADOPT THE 2021, UH, IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY.
AND ALSO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO ACCEPT OR NOT TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
SO IT WOULD STAY, UH, ITEM, GET MY PAGE TURNED CORRECTLY.
NO, THE RECOMMENDATION, THE MOTION, UH, WOULD EITHER TO ADD THIS PROVISION TO THE SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE OR TO, UM, NOT ACCEPT, UH, ADDING THIS PROVISION INTO THE SAMHSA CODE.
OKAY, TWO, TWO THINGS ARE AT ISSUE.
UH, ONE, THE SAMHSA DOES NOT HAVE THE LANGUAGE FROM THE I P M C APPENDIX B BECAUSE
[01:05:01]
WE HAVE A B S B BOARD.COUNSEL HAS ALREADY DECIDED SAMHSA CASES WILL BE APPEALED TO THE B S B.
SO THAT'S WHY, UH, THIS WAS NEVER PUT INTO THE SAMHSA CODE.
AND THEN, UM, THE SECOND ISSUE IS EXTENDING THE APPEAL PROCESS, BUT, UH, IF THE VOTE IS TO NOT ADD THE LANGUAGE FROM THE I P M C, APPENDIX B, THEN, UH, THE SECOND IS, UH, IS TAKING CARE OF AS FAR AS EXTENDING TO 60 TO 90 DAYS.
AND THAT CAN BE TAKEN UP AS DEPUTY TOMA SAID, UH, AS A C C R FROM COUNSEL TO, UH, REVISIT CHAPTER SIX AND LOOK AT THE APPELLATE DEADLINES IN CHAPTER SIX.
UH, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND TAKE A MOTION.
UM, I MOTION THAT WE, UH, REJECT, UH, NUMBER 30 AND NUMBER 49, AND DO NOT ADD THIS LANGUAGE INTO THE S A P M C.
SAY IT AGAIN, PLEASE? I MISSED PART OF IT.
I MOTION THAT WE REJECT ITEMS 30 AND 49 AND DO NOT ADD, UH, THIS LANGUAGE INTO THE SSS A P M C.
DO NOT ADD THE LANGUAGE IN 2021 I M P C AND REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
SO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO, UH, TO REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND TO MAIN, ACTUALLY, AND NOT ACCEPT THE 2021 I M P C, UH, BENDIX B TO THE CODE.
I SECOND, I SECOND I HAVE A SECOND DISCUSSION.
WE, AND THAT WAS A QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK THE ATTORNEY IS THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW, IT'S GONNA BE LEFT THAT WAY.
10 DAYS IN THE, THAT IS THE MOTION, OKAY.
THAT'S THE SHORT VERSION OF GOOD.
AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT, WITH THE MOTION AS MADE? YES.
THAT Y'ALL ARE NOT ADDING IN THE 2021.
UH, THE, JUST, JUST EXACTLY WHAT KAYLA STATED TO REJECT 30 AND I CAN'T READ, UH, 49, RIGHT, THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL FURTHER
WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO THE MEANS OF APPEAL.
ITEM NUMBER 16 WAS APPROVED IN A PRIOR MEETING AND IT READS MEANS OF APPEAL.
THE APPELLATE PROCESS SHALL FOLLOW.
CHAPTER SIX, ARTICLE EIGHT, BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD FOR THE CITY CODE OF SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.
ITEM NUMBER 17 WAS NOT ADOPTED.
ITEM NUMBER 18 WAS NOT ADOPTED.
AND WHEN I SAY NOT ADOPTED, IT'S THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT WE ADOPTED IN 16, THEREFORE 16 IS THE PROPER LANGUAGE.
32 IS A NEW PROPOSAL AND IT GOES INTO 51 AND 81.
IT CARRIES OVER TO THE SECOND PAGE TO ITEM NUMBER 51 AND 81 AS PROPOSED CHANGES.
[01:10:01]
AND 19, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE SS A P M C S WRITTEN.UH, WE HAVE ALREADY VOTED ON THOSE AND WE DID KEEP THOSE AS WRITTEN.
SO, SO NOW THEN WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING ONLY AT THE POSSIBILITY OF CHANGES.
MR. THAT WOULD BE ITEM NUMBER 32.
I HAVE A MOTION, RIGHT? 51 AND 81.
AND I HAVE A MOTION, UH, JU JUST A SECOND.
I'VE GOT A MOTION THAT I'VE GOT.
OKAY, I MOTION ON TO REJECT ITEM 32, UH, 51 AND 81.
SO THE MOTION IS TO REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGES, UH, OF ITEM NUMBER 32 51 AND 81.
AND I HAVE A SECOND DISCUSSION ON THOSE ISSUES.
I JUST WANNA SAY THE REASON I'M ASKING TO REDACT IT IS BECAUSE WE, WE ALREADY HAD THIS DISCUSSION, UM, THE LAST TIME, AND, UM, SINCE ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE UNDER CHAPTER SIX, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND CHANGE IT.
SO IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT, UH, S A M P C SECTION 1 0 8 0.1.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 13, IT WAS APPROVED IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER THAT READS UNSAFE CONDITIONS WHEN EQUIPMENT IS FOUND BY THE CODE OFFICER TO BE UNSAFE.
WHEN A STRUCTURE IS FOUND UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY OR IS FOUND TO BE AN UNLAWFUL STRUCTURE, THE STRUCTURE AND OR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE PROPOSED CHANGES.
ITEM NUMBER 32 READS AMEND TO MAKE CLEAR THE RESIDENTS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HEARING AND BEFORE THE ORDER TO VACATE THE ISSUE.
AND ITEM NUMBER 52, SIMILAR LANGUAGE.
BASICALLY IT'S DEALING WITH DUE PROCESS.
AND I WILL SAY THIS FROM A CHAIR'S POINT OF VIEW.
THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS A CORNERSTONE, UH, IN ITS EXISTENCE OF DUE PROCESS.
UH, AND AS A RESULT, UH, THE PROPOSALS, UH, ARE BASICALLY MOOT BECAUSE THEY FIT WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
AGAIN, IT'S ITEM NUMBER 33, EXCUSE ME, ITEM 33 AND 52 CHANGES.
UH, AND IT'S NOT MY GLASSES AND IT'S NOT THE TYPE, IT'S JUST THE CHAIRMAN NOT BEING ABLE TO READ TODAY.
DO I LET YOU READ THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION? AGAIN, THE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR SECTION 1 0 8 0.1.
MR. CHAIR, THIS IS FRED ANDIS.
I, UM, MOVE THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE AMENDMENTS.
MOTION IS NOT ACCEPT AMENDMENTS 33 AND 52.
IS THAT A CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
NOT ACCEPT AMENDMENTS FOR 32 AND 50, I MEAN 33 AND 52.
THE MOTION IS TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR 33 AND 52.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO NOT ACCEPT PROPOSED CHANGES? 33 AND 52 SAY AYE.
MOVING TO S A M P C CODE OR SECTION 1 0 8 3 STRUCTURE UNFI FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
[01:15:01]
THESE ARE NEW ISSUES THAT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED IN THE PAST.AND, UH, DANNY, I'LL, I'LL GO TO YOU, UH, TO, UH, GIVE US ANY INPUT YOU MAY HAVE FROM STAFF.
UH, DANNY LEE IS CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
SO WE DO HAVE ITEMS NUMBER 34 53 56 AND ITEM 74 ALL IN REGARDS TO SECTION S A P M C, SECTION 1 0 8 0.1 0.3, STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
UH, WE RECEIVE FOUR SUBMITTALS, UM, 34 AND 53 ARE IDENTICAL.
AND 74 AND 56 ARE VERY SIMILAR IN NATURE.
SO ITEM 34 AND 53 PROPOSAL IS TO AMEND THE 2018 SS A P M C TO MAKE CLEAR THE RESIDENTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING BEFORE IN ORDER TO VACATE HIS ISSUED.
WE HAVE THIS MICROPHONE PLEASE QUESTION.
UM, I GET, MAYBE I WANNA MAKE A STATEMENT, IS THAT OKAY? UH, THE ORDER TO VACATE IS ALWAYS THE LAST, THE LAST STRAW.
SO ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE BEING DONE JUST PRIOR TO THE ORDER TO VACATE THIS IS SORT OF LIKE SAYING, WELL, WE WANTED TO ASK YOU TO VACATE, BUT REALLY WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS PRETEND THAT WE DID IT AND GIVE YOU, IT'S LIKE THE KID THAT THEY KEEP GIVING HIM A LITTLE MORE TIME AND A LITTLE MORE TIME AND A LITTLE MORE TIME.
VACATE IS THE LAST STEP TO THE B S B PROBLEM.
AM I RIGHT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AS MENTIONED EARLIER BY DEPUTY, UH, TOMAS, THAT THE NOTICE TO VACATE FOLLOWS, UH, THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
SO THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN SOME TIME TO COMPLY WITH WHATEVER THE CODE ISSUE MAY BE, WHETHER IT'S NO WATER IN SANITARY, UM, ANYTHING THAT WOULD, I GUESS, RISE TO THE LEVEL OF AK ORDER.
CAN WE DO THAT? THAT'S CORRECT.
THIS IS SORT, LET ME ASK A QUESTION.
WHY DIDN'T THAT FALL UNDER 10? IT DEALS WITH VACATED UNDER 10 AS WELL.
THE SAME THING WE DISCUSSED FOR 27 AND 71.
IT'S A PARTICULAR SECTION 1 0 8 0.1 0.3.
SO THERE'RE TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TIME THE SECTION 10 IS 1 0 7 0.1, BUT RATHER ITEM 10, IT HAS TO DO WITH 1 0 7 0.1 MORE WITH THE NOTICE OF PERSON RESPONSIBLE.
AGAIN, CHAIR, JUST TO CLARIFY, AS YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED IN THE LAST MEETINGS, THE NOTICE TO VACATE CURRENTLY INCLUDES LANGUAGE ON HOW TO APPEAL THE NOTICE TO VACATE.
SO I THINK WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS ALREADY, UM, BEING DONE IN PRACTICE IN A SENSE.
WE'RE SAYING THAT EVEN IF THE STRUCTURE THAT'S UNLIVABLE, SANITARY, ET CETERA, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THE WHAT.
UH, AND MAYBE THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION ALSO THAT YOU CANNOT ORDER OR VACATE AND THEN HAVE A HEARING.
YOU GOT TO HAVE A HEARING IF THE PERSON IS THERE AND, AND BEFORE YOU KNOW, YOU CAN VACATE THE PROPERTY, SAY A PERSON CAN'T TAKE CARE OF THEMSELF, ET CETERA OR HERSELF.
AND, UH, NOBODY WANTS SOMEBODY.
AND I'M NOT REFERRING TO ANY CASE.
UH, IF IT IS, IT'S A BY ACCIDENT AND YOU WANT TO GET THAT PERSON, EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, IS HELPING, OR THE OUTSIDE AGENCY WANT, THEY'RE OUT OF THAT INFESTED, DANGEROUS, UNBELIEVABLE MODE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT.
[01:20:01]
TELL 'EM, LOOK, YOU GOTTA VACATE.AND THEN I SAID, THIS GOES INTO LEGAL, I GUESS, AND THEN HAVE A HEARING.
YOU GOTTA HAVE AN ANSWER BEFORE YOU.
WHY? WELL, I'M, I'M ASKING, YOU KNOW, UH, IS THERE A, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING BEFORE YOU CAN VACATE THERE.
EVEN IF A SOCIAL OR MENTAL HEALTH, UH, VETERAN THERE, UH, THAT YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU WANT TO GET 'EM OUT AND PUT 'EM WHEREVER THE VA LIKES, YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE A HEARING.
ARE YOU ASKING IN TERMS OF, OF STATE AGENCIES? SO IF A C P S OR A P SS OR A MENTAL HEALTH UNIT, UH, WHEN THEY DEEM THERE'S A, A THREAT TO THE PERSON, UH, THEY DO NOT HAVE A HEARING.
THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMOVE THE PERSON IMMEDIATELY.
UH, SIMILAR TO, UM, IF THE POLICE RESPOND TO A SITUATION AND, UM, THERE IS AN IMMEDIATE THREAT TO THAT PERSON, EITHER A THREAT TO THEMSELVES OR A THREAT FROM, UH, WHEN THE POLICE DO IT, THEY, UH, NO, THERE IS NO HEARING REQUIRED TO, UH, TAKE THEM TO, UH, I CAN'T THINK OF THE YEAH.
SO, UH, NO, UH, WHEN THE, UH, POLICE DO IT, THERE IS, UH, NO HEARING REQUIRED.
AND, UH, WHEN THE STATE AGENCIES, UH, DEEMED THERE IS A THREAT, THERE IS NO HEARING REQUIRED.
YOU KNOW, AFTER THIS, IT'LL GO TO ANOTHER REVIEW BY WHATEVER THE PLANNING OR THE LIKES AND THE CITY COUNCIL.
AND THIS IS WHY I'M ASKING, DO WE HAVE TO WAIT IF A PERSON IS IN DANGER AND, UH, THE COURT OFFICER, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS THEIR JOB, VOLUNTEERS THAT, UH, DO WE HAVE TO WAIT? DO THEY HAVE TO WAIT? THE FAMILY HAVE TO WAIT THAT LONG TO HAVE A HEARING AND THE HEARING AIN'T, IF THEY REPORT TODAY, THE HEARING AIN'T GOING TO BE TOMORROW OR NEXT WEEK OR NEXT, MAYBE NEXT MONTH OR WHATEVER.
THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING TO HAVE SOME LANGUAGE INCLUDED IF POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, LET'S NOT STOP.
LET'S SAY, LIKE I SAID, IT STILL HAS ANOTHER REVIEW TO GO TO.
THE PROPOSALS THAT'S PRESENTED FOR 1 0 8 0.1 0.3, UH, BASICALLY ARE CHANGES TO THE 2018 S A M P C CODE CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
KAYLA, I MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT, UH, ITEM 74 AS A CHANGE 74.
THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ITEM NUMBER 74.
AND AGAIN, THE PROPOSED OR THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ITEM 74.
AND YOU WANT SAY THAT IN THE MICROPHONE PLEASE?
I, I JUST WANT TO SAY TO, TO THE REST OF THE MEMBERS, UM, WE HAD THIS HUGE DISCUSSION ON WHAT ACTUALLY IS INS SANITARY, WHAT'S NOT INS SANITARY? WHAT'S ONE PERSON'S PERSPECTIVE? WHAT'S ANOTHER'S? THIS LANGUAGE MAKES IT REALLY CLEAR AND IT, IT, IT TAKES AWAY THE, THE POSSIBILITY OF, YOU KNOW, ONE SINGLE PERSON SAYING, OH, YOU HAVE A DIRTY DIAPER ON THE SIDE OF YOUR TRASH CAN, SO YOUR WHOLE HOUSE IS CONTAMINATED.
LIKE, THAT'S JUST TAKES AWAY THAT ARGUMENT.
WELL, THIS MAKES IT VERY, VERY, VERY CLEAR.
[01:25:01]
I TOTALLY CONCUR WITH THAT.IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT LEAVES THE AMBIGUITY OUT OF IT.
AND BUT BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ARE, ARE RATS, ARE RATS ARE ACCEPTABLE NOW? NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SAYING.
I WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT, BUT YOU DELETED IT, THEREFORE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT, I MEAN, BUT IT'S SAYING THAT IT'S PRESENTING A, AN ELECTROCUTION IGN, UM, IGNITION OR ASPHYXIATION OR A STRUCTURE THAT IS REASONABLY LIKELY TO COLLAPSE, WHICH IS, I THINK IS WHAT'S UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE AMONG RATS.
BUT, UM, SAY FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEONE LIKE, WHAT I'M THINKING OF, THERE IS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IN DISTRICT 10 RIGHT NEXT TO MORGAN'S WONDERLAND.
AND WHEN MORGAN'S WONDERLAND WAS CREATED, THEY, UH, YOU KNOW, DEPLETED A LOT OF THE FOREST AND THE TREES AND EVERYTHING.
AND RATS STARTED INFILTRATING THE HOMES AROUND THAT.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE FAULT OF THE HOMEOWNER FOR HAVING A DIRTY HOME, A RAT INFESTED HOME.
IT WAS BECAUSE OF THE, YOU KNOW, THEIR HABITAT BEING LOST.
SO WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, RAT INFESTED IS, YOU KNOW, FIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
I'M NOT SURE THAT ANYONE WOULD SAY THAT.
BUT CONSIDERING VERMIN OR RAT INFESTED, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN EXACTLY? IF YOU FIND ONE ROACH, DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOUR HOUSE IS COMPLETELY UNSANITARY? IF YOU FIND ONE RAT, DOES THAT MEAN YOUR HOUSE IS COMPLETELY UNSANITARY? IF YOU, AND AGAIN, WHAT IS SANITARY, WHAT ISN'T SANITARY? UM, I THINK THAT THIS NEW, UH, AMO AMENDMENT THAT, UM, KAYLA PROPOSED IS, IS VERY CLEAR AND IT REALLY STATES WHAT IS UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
AND WHAT'S UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY IS IF A STRUCTURE IS REASONABLY LIKELY TO COLLAPSE OR IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO GET ELECTROCUTED, OR IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO GET, YOU KNOW, ASPHYXIATED.
UM, I THINK THIS MAKES IT VERY CLEAR.
WHAT HAPPENED? 34, 53 AND 56? UH, BASICALLY, WELL, I'LL, I'LL LET THE MOTION FIRST ADDRESS THAT
I, I, I'LL ACCEPT A, A FRIENDLY, UH, I'LL, I'LL ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, UM, TO, UM, REJECT 34, 53, 56 AND ACCEPT ITEM 74.
UH, DID YOU SAY REJECT, REJECT THREE, REJECT ITEM 34, ITEM 53, 56 AND 56.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON RAT, WHY WE ISN'T 56 AND 74 THE SAME THING? UH, THE LANGUAGE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THERE.
THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE, BUT, UH, BASICALLY SHE SAID REJECT 56 BECAUSE IT ALMOST IS IDENTICAL FOR 74.
70, 74 IS THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE.
AND, UM, AS COUNCIL JUST INFORMED US, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY GO OUT TO PROPERTIES THAT HAVE TO BE VACATED IMMEDIATELY, THAT USUALLY STATE AGENCIES, POLICE, ET CETERA, WILL BE IN CON CONSULTATION WITH THE CODE OFFICER, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS LANGUAGE SAYS.
SO THIS IS AMIN THOMAS'S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO WITH THE NEW LANGUAGE, BASICALLY, IF I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, YOU KNOW, ONE RAT OR WHATEVER, I GET IT.
BUT WE'VE SEEN LOCATIONS WHERE THERE'S HUNDREDS.
I'M NOT SAYING ONE OR TWO OR 10 HUNDREDS.
SO NOW WITH THE LU WITH THE NEW PROPOSED LANGUAGE, BASICALLY WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY THIS IS UNSAFE.
IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE? I MEAN, WHAT YOU WANT, I GUESS.
I MEAN, AN EXAMPLE, JUST BECAUSE I SAY I LIKE PANCAKES DOESN'T MEAN I'M SAYING I HATE WAFFLES.
I THINK I I THAT BY THAT LOGIC, YOU COULD STILL CONSIDER SOMETHING TO BE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S INFESTED WITH HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF RATS, THEN YES, UM, YOUR CODE OFFICIALS WILL AGREE WITH YOU THAT UNFIT HUMAN OCCUPANCY 'CAUSE THAT'S UNSANITARY.
BUT, UM, LIKE I SAID, JUST BECAUSE WE ARE OMITTING THAT LANGUAGE DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S STILL CAN'T BE, UM, YOU KNOW, A
UH, I WOULD THINK THAT IT WOULD FALL UNDER, UM, A HAZARD TO THE OCCUPANT IF THERE'S HUNDREDS OF RATS OR HUNDREDS OF ROACHES.
I MEAN, I HAVE ASTHMA, SO IF THERE'S ROACHES, I'M GONNA, I CAN'T BREATHE IN THE HOUSE, BUT CHAIR AND ENFORCEMENT, YOU, THAT
[01:30:01]
IS OUR, THAT'S OUR TAKING.IF IT'S NOT INCLUDED, I'LL CHAIR.
THIS IS DANNY WITH CODE FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE.
IF YOU DON'T, YOU KNOW, AND BRAD, FOR A WHILE, PULL THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOU, ANN, 'CAUSE I'M NOT HEARING EVERYTHING YOU SAY.
I SAID ONE RAT IS GONNA BECOME MANY RATS IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
SO, AND DANNY CHAIR, I, I JUST, JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON A FEW THINGS.
SO WE HAVE TO READ THE CODE, THE CODE AS A WHOLE, RIGHT? YES.
AND NOT JUST TAKE PIECES OF IT TO INTERPRET OR TO APPLY IT IN A CERTAIN WAY.
SO IF, IF, IF WE REMOVE OR STRIKE OUT THE LANGUAGE THAT'S PROPOSED IN SANITARY VERMIN, RAT INFESTED CONTAINS FIELDING CONTAMINATION OR LACKS VENTILATION, ELIMINATION, SANITARY HEATING FACILITIES OR OTHER CENTRAL EQUIPMENT, THAT MEANS THAT IF SOMEONE'S OCCUPYING A HOUSE, AGAIN OVER THE COURSE OF MY YEAR, AS I'VE SEEN, UH, ANIMAL HOARDING RIGHT DEAD CARCASSES, UM, IN THE BEDROOM, THAT THIS CODE WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE.
WE COULD NOT REMOVE THEM, RIGHT? UM, SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T HAVE HOT WATER, UH, OR, OR DOESN'T HAVE, LET'S SAY THE PROPER BOILING SYSTEM, UM, WE LIMIT OURSELVES BY SOLELY SAYING SOMETHING THAT PRESENTS ELECTROCUTION IGNITION OR ASPHYXIATION.
UM, WHEN YOU THINK DANGEROUS STRUCTURES, DON'T JUST THINK STRUCTURAL.
THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT MAKE A STRUCTURE DANGEROUS BESIDES STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS.
IT'S SOMETIMES THE LIVING CONDITIONS THAT WE NEED TO, I GUESS, ADDRESS.
SO THAT'S JUST MY 2 CENTS FOR AND ONE ADDED ITEM, THIS IS JENNY RAMIREZ.
TO ALSO ADD ONTO THAT IT'S NOT EVEN JUST THE INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURES AND NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT ALSO APARTMENT UNITS THAT ARE RIGHT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.
SO TYPICALLY WHAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE ON AN INFESTATION IS NOT ONLY THAT UNIT, THEY'RE GONNA SPREAD, THEY'LL DEFINITELY SPREAD ABOVE, BELOW AND BESIDE EACH OTHER.
AND THAT'S WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE GET THE CONCERNS THAT, WELL, IF THEY WANNA LIVE LIKE THAT, THAT MAY BE OKAY.
BUT IT'S NOT BECAUSE IT IS DIRECTLY IMPACTFUL TO THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS ABOVE, BELOW, AND ALONGSIDE OF EACH OTHER.
AND ALSO, EVEN THE ELIMINATION IS AN ISSUE AS WELL.
UM, LACK OF ELIMINATION MEANS LACK OF PROPER ELECTRICITY.
THE LACK OF IT MEANS WHAT ARE THEY USING INSTEAD? ARE THEY STARTING FIRES? ARE THEY STARTING, ARE THEY HAVING A GENERATOR? THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE EXEMPTING THOSE, THEN THAT DOES NOT GIVE US THE AUTHORITY THEN TO ENFORCE.
SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, I GUESS WE COULD SAY IS WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED FOR, OR JUST TO MAKE KNOWN.
UM, JUST A COUPLE MONTHS AGO, WE WERE ON A PROPERTY, THE INFESTATION WAS BAD ENOUGH THAT IT CAUSED FIRES, LITERALLY ROACHES WERE GETTING INTO THE WIRES AND CREATING ELECTRICAL HAZARDS BECAUSE OF THE INFESTATION.
SO WE JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR AND, AND MAKE SURE WE'RE GIVING YOU THOSE EXAMPLES SO THAT WE'RE NOT OVERLOOKING SOMETHING THAT CREATES A BIGGER PROBLEM FOR US.
MR. CHAIRMAN, A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
SO THEN WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT TO GIVE STAFF THE LEVERAGE TO ENFORCE YOU PREFER THAT WE KEEP THE 20:18 PM 2018, AS IS THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO KEEP WHAT WE HAVE.
OTHERWISE, YOU ARE TYING OUR HANDS TO VERY SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT WE CAN OKAY, I GUESS MONITOR.
AND THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
AND WILL THAT CLARIFICATION KEY? I'LL BE VOTED AGAINST YOUR MOTION, MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIR.
UH, JUST TO ADDRESS, UH, ADDRESS THE EXAMPLE OF, UH, ONE RAT OR WHATEVER, OR ONE ROACH.
UM, UH, I DO TAKE EXCEPTION TO THAT.
UH, MY CLIENT'S, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT, DO NOT ISSUE NOTICES OF VACATE BASED ON ONE RAT OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
AND, UM, THE KEY, THE KEY FOR THAT IS, UH, WHY WE INCLUDED THE WORD INFESTATION.
AND THE LEGAL DEFINITION FOR INFESTATION IS THE PRESENCE OF AN UNUSUALLY LARGE NUMBER OF INSECTS OR ANIMALS IN A PLACE SO AS TO CAUSE DAMAGE OR DISEASE.
SO, UH, IT, IT, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SITUATIONS WITH ONE RAT, UH, OR ONE ROACH.
[01:35:01]
ALSO I DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT ADDING IN THE LANGUAGE IF THE STRUCTURE IS REASONABLY LIKELY TO COLLAPSE.UH, THAT IS ADDRESSED UNDER CHAPTER SIX.
UH, THAT IS, UH, AS I MENTIONED, UH, LAST TIME, UH, DANGEROUS STRUCTURES DEMOLITIONS, UH, THO NONE OF THOSE ARE, UH, WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE SAMHSA CODE.
AND THEN JUST AS A FINAL, JUST TO, UH, GIVE Y'ALL EXAMPLES, REMOVING THIS LANGUAGE WOULD'VE PREVENTED CODE ENFORCEMENT FROM ISSUING A NOTICE TO VACATE A PARTICULAR HOUSE WHERE AN ELDERLY WOMAN WAS ABANDONED BY HER HUSBAND AND HER CHILDREN, NO UTILITIES.
UH, THERE WERE DEAD DOGS INSIDE, LIVE DOGS INSIDE, UH, THERE WAS NO WATER, NO FOOD IN THE FRIDGE.
UH, SHE WAS COVERED IN, UH, FLEAS.
SHE HAD OPEN SOURCE AND, UH, THERE WAS DOG FECES.
UH, ALMOST, UH, ABOUT SIX FEET, IF I RECALL.
AND JUST CONSIDER THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS THAT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE THEN WOULD BE, UH, IS THE CITY GOING TO ALLOW HER TO REMAIN THERE? UH, ANOTHER EXAMPLE, BOARDING HOMES, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
UM, BED BEDBUGS ARE A BIG ISSUE AS, UH, CODE MANAGER RAMIREZ STATED, UH, BEDBUGS TRAVEL, UH, VERY, VERY SWIFTLY.
WE HAD A RETIREMENT FACILITY FOR THE ELDERLY AND DISABLED.
THE BEDBUGS WERE SO BAD THAT, UH, THERE WERE ELDERLY PERSONS TIED TO A WHEELCHAIR, UH, NOT BEING TENDED TO WITH, UH, BEDBUGS SO SEVERE THAT YOU COULDN'T SEE ANY MORE SKIN ON THEM.
UH, WHAT YOU WANT TO TAKE AWAY A, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S AUTHORITY TO VACATE THE PREMISES AND ALLOW THE CITY TO GO IN AND ABATE THE PROBLEM AND MAKE IT SAFER.
JESSE, FIRST OF ALL, LET, LET ME, UH, INVITE MS. BROWN IN HERE WITH US TODAY.
UH, THE ONLY THING I LIKE ON THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS THAT THE OFFICIALS WILL DO CONS CONSULTATION WITH THE, UH, AFFIRMATION OFFICERS, WHICH IS POLICE SAY, ET CETERA.
I, I'M NOT GONNA GIVE YOU THE, THE GLOOM AND DOOM STORY, OR WE'LL HAVE TO ORDER DINNER, BUT I MEAN, THE, SO THE THING IS THIS, I I SIT ON THOSE BOARD, ALL FOUR OF THOSE PEOPLE SIT ON AND THEY DON'T, I DON'T SPEAK THAT MUCH, OKAY? I JUST, I, I'M AFRAID TO SPEAK.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING SITTING ON THE BOARD.
ALL OF US HERE HAVE SEEN WHAT THIS PARAGRAPH SAYS.
WE'VE SEEN HOUSES THAT ARE UNFIT, HOUSES THAT ARE BURNED, HOUSES THAT, YOU KNOW, ON THE RAIN COMING IN.
IT'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF SITUATIONS, OKAY? UH, THAT OCCURRED TO A HOUSE.
AND IF, YOU KNOW, YOU, ALL THE CITIZENS CAN COME IN OR THE RESIDENTS CAN COME SEE SOME OF THOSE DEMOLITIONS.
WHEN IT'S DEMOLITION, IT'S DEMOLITION, AND THE COURT OFFICERS SIGN IT AND GO THROUGH THE STEPS, YOU KNOW, FROM THE DIRECTOR HERE.
SO IT, IT, IT'S, IT'S NOT ONE THING, IT'S NOT ONE ROW, LIKE I SAY.
AND I'M NOT GOING TO, LIKE I SAY, BE HERE THE GLOOM AND DOOM.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU READ IN THE PAPERS OR THE U T SS A WHATEVER, IT'S VERY DIFFERENT.
IT'S THE REAL WORLD WHEN THE PERSON COMES HERE AND WHEN THE COOK OFFICERS EXPLAIN TO US WHAT, WHY THEY WANT THIS HOME REHAB, REPAIR OR DEMO, UH, AND WHY THE PEOPLE ARE VACATED.
YOU GOTTA BE IN ACTION TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
IF YOU'RE NOT INTO ACTION THERE, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT, I WILL SAY THAT I HAVE WORKED WITH PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE,
[01:40:01]
UM, RECEIVED, UM, NOTICES, UM, TO VACATE DUE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURES, UM, BEING IN VIOLATION OF SS A P M C.UM, SOME OF THEM HAVE HAD MEASURES WHERE IT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST NOT REASONABLE, AT LEAST NOT TO THE STANDARDS OF THIS UN UH, STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
UM, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT IF YOU MAKE SOMEONE LEAVE THEIR HOME BECAUSE SAY IT'S INFESTED WITH FLEAS OR SOMETHING, THAT MOVING THEM OUT SOMEWHERE THAT'S NOT IN THE HOME, UM, WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO SLEEP, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT THAT'S A SAFE, SAFER OPTION FOR THEM.
ALSO, UM, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE AMOUNT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT I WORK WITH, UM, AND HEARING THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE RATS AND MOLD AND, YOU KNOW, UM, ALL THESE DIFFERENT VERMIN CRAWLING UP AND MAKING TROUBLES FOR ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS. FOR EXAMPLE, SEVEN OAKS APARTMENTS, CALLAHAN APARTMENTS, UNION PARK APARTMENTS, UM, JUST PLENTY OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES THAT HAVE THESE ISSUES WITH VERMIN.
AND YET, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CODE OFFICIALS HAVEN'T CORRECTED THOSE.
UM, IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, KEEP IT AS IS I TO INTERRUPT YOU AT THE PRESENT TIME, BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE VENTURING OFF INTO ISSUES AS OPPOSED TO CODE AND I WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON CODE.
IT IS, IT IS AN ISSUE OF CHALLENGING THE CODE, ET CETERA, GIVING PERSONAL OPINIONS, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, LIKE YOU HAVEN'T, I'M GOING TO REPEAT THE MOTION.
THE MOTION WAS TO NOT ACCEPT ITEMS 34 53 AND 56, UH, BUT TO ACCEPT ITEM 74, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO NOT ACCEPT ITEM 74.
I'LL CALL FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTES RATHER THAN A SINGLE VOICE VOTE.
I'M SORRY, SAY IT AGAIN, PLEASE.
CALL, CALL FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTES.
YOU WANT A ROLL CALL? VOTE ON THIS ONE.
UH, THERE WILL BE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON ACCEPTING, UH, THE MOTION, WHICH WAS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE AS PROPOSED IN ITEM 74.
LADIES, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE ROLL.
JESSE ZUNIGA, NO MOTION FAILS WITH THE VOTE OF TWO TO FIGHT.
THE CHAIR WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION.
UH, ESTHER, UH, EVELYN BROWN IS PRESIDENT.
EVELYN, SHE, I WASN'T HERE FOR THE, FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE DISCUSSION, SO I'M, SHE CAN ABS I'M ABSTAINING.
AND, AND WELL, AT LEAST NOW YOU HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF THIS, AND I RESPECTFUL WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT NOW BY BEING HERE, YOU CAN SPEAK TO THE TWO HEAD MAN HERE.
SHANNON, I'M ACTUALLY GONNA INTERRUPT YOU.
I, I, AND ACTUALLY WE'RE GONNA BOTH GO TO, UH, AT LEAST ANOTHER MOTION.
UH, I'LL LET YOU DO THAT AS A SIDE PIECE.
UH, CHAIR WILL ACCEPT A MOTION ON BUILDING CODE 1 0 8, 0.1 0.3.
MR. CHAIRMAN, BEFORE YOU GO FORWARD, I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO ACCEPT, UH, ITEM 34 AND ITEM 53, SEPARATE THEM OUT FROM 56 AND, UH, WHAT WAS IT? 74.
SO I WANT TO ACCEPT 34 AND 53 AS PROPOSED IN THE AMENDMENT.
UH, WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER TWO CHANGES? UH, CHANGES ON 56 AND THOSE TWO OUT, BECAUSE WE HAVE REJECTED THOSE.
WELL, WE, WE ACTUALLY, UH, VOTED ON IT ALL VOTED NO, WE VOTED ON A SINGLE, SINGLE ISSUE.
WHEN THEY COMBINED ALL FOUR OF THEM, WE REJECTED IT.
SO I WANT TO SEPARATE OUT 34 AND 53 AND PUT THAT AS A MOTION TO ACCEPT 34 AND 53.
SO YOUR MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGES, UH, IN, UH, ITEM 34 AND ITEM 53.
AND BASICALLY THE CHANGE IS AMEND TO MAKE CLEAR AND THE REQUESTED CHANGE DOES NOT GIVE US LANGUAGE THAT MAKES IT CLEAR.
[01:45:01]
AS A RESULT OF THAT, UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ACCEPT THOSE CHANGES.WELL, THIS, THE MOTION WAS EARLIER 34 50.
'CAUSE SHE BROUGHT IT IN AS A SECOND.
IT WAS 34, 53, 56 AND 57 IN ONE SHOT THAT WE WERE GOING TO ACCEPT 57, BUT NOT THE OTHER THREE.
SO THAT WAS ALREADY VOTED ON, RIGHT? WHAT I'M SAYING IS NOT, NOT, NOT FOR THIS SECTION 34, EXCEPT ONLY ITEM 34 AND 53 AND NOT DEAL WITH 56 AND 74.
CHAIR, CHAIR, THERE WAS A MOTION FOR FOUR ITEMS. THAT'S RIGHT.
AND THEN WHEN YOU DID THE ROLL CALL, TECHNICALLY THAT MOTION FAILED.
WHAT I'M SAYING, SO NOW YOU NEED TO HAVE A NEW MOTION.
EITHER YOU DO ALL FOUR TOGETHER OR YOU DO ONE INDIVIDUALLY OR YOU COMBINE TWO, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO.
BUT WE NEED NEW MOTION TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHAT TO DO.
AND I BELIEVE WHAT'S MR THE MOTION THAT I'M MAKING GUPTA IS SAYING IS, UH, THE 34 AND 50 53 ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE, UH, OTHERS.
SO THAT'S WHY HE WANTS TO ADDRESS THOSE SEPARATELY.
AND, UH, JUST TO MAKE CLEAR WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS, IS TO ADD A REQUIREMENT THAT A HEARING IS TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN ISSUE A NOTICE TO VACATE.
SOMETHING'S WRONG IN MY BRAIN.
OR, UH, SO JUST THE PROPOSAL, MR. WELL, MR. GUPTA IS WANTING TO TAKE THE TAP 2 34 AND 53 AND ADDRESS THOSE SEPARATELY BECAUSE THOSE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS DIFFER FROM THE OTHER ONES.
SO WHAT HE IS, UH, PROPOSING EMO UH, HIS MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT, UH, WHICH WOULD ADD A REQUIREMENT THAT WHEN A, UH, NOTICE, UH, A HEARING MUST BE HELD BEFORE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN ISSUE A NOTICE TO VACATE.
I'M SAYING YOU CAN'T DO THIS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOTTA HAVE AN ACTION BEFORE YOU HAVE A REACTION.
SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE TICKET BEFORE YOU GO TO COURT.
LET ME REPEAT THE MOTION TO MAKE SURE THAT I'VE GOT THE MOTION AND THEN WE CAN DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF A SECOND.
THE MOTION IS, LET, LET ME JUST READ THE WORDING.
FIRST OF ALL, AMEND TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING BEFORE AN ORDER TO VACATE IS ISSUED.
AND THE MOTION WAS BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE IS IDENTICAL TO ACCEPT THAT LANGUAGE AND NOT ACCEPT 56 AND 74.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW YOU'RE TRYING TO KEEP THAT AS SEPARATE ISSUE.
I'M NOT DEALING WITH 56 AND 74.
I'M ONLY DEALING WITH 34 AND 53.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE IN ITEM 34 AND ITEM 53 IN 2018? OR WITH THE, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, THE AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENTS CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT A SECOND.
CHAIR ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR ANY OR ALL OR INDIVIDUALLY ISSUES.
WE'VE ALREADY SAID NO TO ITEM 74.
SO 74 IS NOT IN CONSIDERATION.
ITEM 34, 53 AND 56 ARE STILL AVAILABLE FOR CONSIDERATION.
MR. CHAIR, THIS IS FRED ANDIS.
I MOTION THAT WE NOT ACCEPT ANY AMENDMENTS ON 34 53 OR 56 UNDER S AND P SECTION 1 0 8 0.1 0.3, THE MOTION IS TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR 1 0 8 0.1 0.3.
DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND, AND A SECOND DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
[01:50:02]
MR. CHAIR? YES, MA'AM.UH, UH, I JUST WANNA, UH, UH, REQUEST THAT, UH, ONE, UM, LET'S NOT TURN THIS INTO, UM, UH, YELLING MATCH, BUT, UH, TWO, THAT, UH, THERE BE TIME AT THE CONCLUSION OF BUSINESS, BUT PRIOR TO FOUR O'CLOCK, UH, FOR ANY PERSONS TO SPEAK AND EXPRESS, UH, WHAT THEY WISH TO BE HEARD, UH, SO THAT IT IT'D BE, UH, BASICALLY, UH, CITIZENS TO BE HEARD, UH, SO THAT OPINIONS CAN BE EXPRESSED.
UH, THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE IS THAT, UH, NOT ON EMOTION, BUT, UM, THAT EVERY CITIZEN BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, UH, TO SPEAK AS TO, UH, ISSUES OF CONCERN.
SO, UH, IF THE CHAIR, UH, IS AMENABLE TO THAT, I WOULD RECOMMEND THE LAST 15 MINUTES WHERE IT WOULD ALLOW FOR, UH, ANY CITIZENS, UH, TO SPEAK AND OR IF WE RECEIVED ANY EMAILS, UH, ESTHER, I'M NOT SURE IF, UH, BUT IF WE DID FOR THAT TO BE, UH, READ INTO THE RECORD.
UH, STEPH, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE AT 3 45, STOP ME WHEREVER WE ARE.
AND IN FACT, UH, LET'S DO IT AT, UH, THREE 40 AND THAT WAY WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CONCLUDE SOMETHING.
UH, SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE SECTION 1 0 8 0.4.
IN ITEM NUMBER 14, IN A PRIOR MEETING, WE APPROVED THE LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER THAT READS ANY OCCUPIED STRUCTURE DETERMINED BY THE CODE OFFICER TO BE A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH.
SAFETY AND WELFARE SHALL BE VACATED, UH, AS NOTIFIED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL.
UH, FAILURE TO VACATE AS DIRECTED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL IS IN VIOLATION OF THIS CODE.
THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ITEM NUMBER 35 54 AND 77.
ITEM NUMBER 35 AND 54 DEAL WITH THE ISSUE THAT SAYS, AMEND TO CLEAR THAT THE RESIDENT HAS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING BEFORE AN ORDER TO VACATE IS ISSUED, AND THOSE TWO ISSUES.
AND THEN ITEM 77, THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE.
UH, SO IF YOU WOULD TAKE TIME TO READ THAT, THAT CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE.
THIS IS EMIN THOMAS'S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
JUST SO WE DON'T GO THROUGH WHAT WE WENT THROUGH EARLIER, MY RECOMMENDATION IS WE ADDRESS 35 AND 54 FIRST, BECAUSE THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN 77.
THAT WAY WE, WE GO THROUGH TWO DIFFERENT MOTIONS, TWO DIFFERENT DISCUSSIONS.
UH, LET'S LOOK AT ITEM 35 AND ITEM 54 AND CHAIR WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THOSE TWO ITEMS. SPECIFICALLY, MR. CHAIR, THIS IS FRED ANDES.
I RECOMMEND THAT WE NOT ACCEPT AMENDMENTS FOR 34 OR 54.
THE MOTION IS TO NOT ACCEPT ITEM 35 AND ITEM 54.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, MR. GARZA SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION OF NOT ACCEPTING ITEM 35 AND 54? SAY, AYE.
MOTION CARRIES THEN NOW, THEN IT'S EASY AS A MEANS RECOMMENDED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN ITEM 77.
[01:55:19]
UM, DIS LANGUAGE JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE SAYS, YOU KNOW, ANY OCCUPIED STRUCTURE DID DETERMINED BY CODE OFFICIAL TO BE A THREAT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE.BUT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS, UH, TO GIVE 12 DAYS NOTICE UNLESS IT'S A THREAT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND WELFARE.
I MEAN THAT JUST, CAN YOU PUT THAT IN THE FORM OF A MOTION? UH, I MOTION WE REJECT ITEM 77 AND KEEP THE LANGUAGE AS, UH, AS, UH, THE PROPOSED CHANGE FOR 2021.
THIS ONE RIGHT HERE, RIGHT CORNER.
YOUR, YOUR MOTION IS TO MAINTAIN OBJECT, WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OBJECT.
SO YOUR MOTION IS NOT TO ACCEPT? YES.
SECOND, THE MOTION NOT TO ACCEPT.
THE MOTION IS TO MAINTAIN THE CHANGES PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AS ITEM 14 AND NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN ITEM 77.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO MAINTAIN, UH, THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE IN ITEM 14 AT A PREVIOUS MEETING AND REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN ITEM 77.
WE'LL MOVE TO, UH, SECTION 1 0 9 0.1.
IMMINENT DANGERS, DANGER, SINGULAR.
THERE ARE THREE ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION.
TWO OF THE ITEMS ARE IDENTICAL.
IT SAYS TO ADOPT THE 2021 I M P C SECTION ONE 12.1 IMMINENT DANGER AS WRITTEN AND THE OTHER ONE IS IDENTICAL.
IN TERMS OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE, UH, I'D LIKE TO HAVE STAFF INPUT ON THIS IF I COULD GET STAFF INPUT ON IT.
I AM SORRY, CHAIR, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? IS IT 1 0 9 0.1? PARDON? OKAY.
IN REGARDS TO ITEMS NUMBER 36 AND 55, UM, THE PROPOSAL THAT CAME THROUGH WAS TO ADOPT THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE SECTION ONE, 12.1, IMMINENT DANGEROUS WRITTEN.
AND ITEM NUMBER 78 WAS TO AMEND THE 2018 S A P M C.
STRIKE OUT THE LANGUAGE WHICH READS, OR WHEN THERE IS ACTUAL POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE BUILDING OCCUPANTS AND REPLACED WITH A FAILURE OR COLLAPSE OF STRUCTURE, BUILDING STRUCTURE THAT ENDANGERS HUMAN LIFE OR WHEN ANY STRUCTURE OR PART OF A STRUCTURE HAS FALLEN OR, AND LIFE IS ENDANGERED BY THE OCCUPATION, OCCUPATION OF THE STRUCTURE, OR WHEN THERE IS ACTUAL POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE BUILDING OCCUPANTS OR THERE IS THOSE IN PROXIMITY OF ANY STRUCTURE.
AND QUESTION FOR STAFF ON THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, JUST LIKE YOU SHARED WITH US IN THE PREVIOUS ITEM WHERE IT WOULD MAKE DIFF MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO HAVE ANY ENFORCEMENT.
ARE THERE ANY ISSUES HERE THAT CAUSE YOU SOME PAUSE THAT WE SHOULD BE AWARE OF
[02:00:10]
IN A, A PREVIOUS CONVERSATION OR A PREVIOUS, UH, DISCUSSION? UH, THE INFORMATION THAT'S CONTAINED IN ONE 12.1, UH, ACTUALLY DOES CREATE SOME PROBLEMS, UH, OVERALL AND BASED ON WHAT I THINK I UNDERSTOOD THAT THE, THE PROPOSAL AT THAT TIME WAS IN PRIOR DISCUSSION OR OTHER DISCUSSION WAS THAT WOULD MAINTAIN, UH, 1 0 9 0.10 9.1 AS WRITTEN IN 2018.I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
UM, WE JUST HAD THE DISCUSSION LIKE 20 MINUTES AGO ABOUT, UH, BUILDING COLLAPSE AND IT'S IN ALL THREE SUGGESTIONS.
SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
UH, KAYLA, COULD YOU, THIS IS EVELYN BROWN.
COULD YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? 'CAUSE I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT.
UM, EARLIER WE HAD A, A DISCUSSION AND CLARIFICATION FROM LEGAL THAT, UH, WE COULD NOT PUT A BUILDING STRUCTURE, UH, OR COLLAPSE OR THAT TYPE OF WORDING IN THERE BECAUSE IT, THAT'S PART OF DANGEROUS STRUCTURES AND IT'S NOT PART OF THE S A P M C.
SO ALL THREE OF THESE SUGGESTIONS HERE INCLUDE THAT.
SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TAKE THESE SUGGESTIONS AS WRITTEN BECAUSE IT INCLUDES LANGUAGE YOU CAN'T PUT, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WHAT, BUT BASICALLY WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS, UH, THOSE, THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE, UH, WOULD WIND UP HAVING TO CAUSE US TO CHANGE CHAPTER OR SECTION SIX OR CHAPTER SIX, UH,
CHAPTER SIX OF THE BUILDING CODE.
UH, SO, UH, THEY WOULD NOT BE VIABLE RECOMMENDATIONS IS WHAT SHE'S REALLY SAYING.
SO, WHICH ARE YOU SAYING? YES.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE BUILDING SHOULD START COLLAPSING FIRST BEFORE IT'S CONSIDERED DANGEROUS OR WHAT? NO MA'AM.
I'M SAYING THAT WE CAN'T CHANGE THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE CHAPTER SIX.
WE HAVE TO CHANGE, KEEP THIS BECAUSE THIS SAYS YOU WAIT FOR IT TO COLLAPSE BEFORE WE HAVE TO CHANGE CHAPTER SIX OF CITY CODE SAYING KEEP, UH, 20 18 20 18.
I HAVEN'T, AND, AND BASICALLY THE, AGAIN, FROM PRIOR CONVERSATION, IT CREATES SOME PROBLEMS. SO THE RECOMMENDATION BASICALLY IS, UH, THAT WE NOT ADOPT ANY OF THE CHANGES FOR SECTION 1 0 9 0.1, BUT I DO NOT HAVE A MOTION TO THAT.
MAKE IT, UM, I MOTION THAT WE REJECT, UM, I'M SORRY, 36 55 AND 78 AND KEEP THE LANGUAGE OF THE 2018 SS A P M C.
UH, THE MOTION IS TO REJECT THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN ITEM 36 55 AND 78 AND KEEP THE LANGUAGE IN THE 20, UH, 2018 S A M P C CODE.
YOU REQUESTED A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF AND I'M NOT SURE, UH, I HEARD ONE.
SO, SO IN CONCERN, I THINK, UM, MS. MIRANDA KIND OF ALLUDED TO IT.
SO STRUCTURE RELATED ISSUES OR WHEN TALKS OF DEFINITION OF COLLAPSING IN COVER CHAPTER SIX.
SO AMENDING IT IN THE SS A P M C WOULD ALSO HAVE TO INCLUDE AMENDING IT IN CHAPTER SIX AS WELL.
SO WE'D BE PROPOSING THAT THE CHANGE NOT HAPPEN IN THE S A P M C 2018, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT'S UNDER REVIEW AT THIS TIME IN 2018 S A P M C? YES.
TO FURTHER CLARIFY, TO KEEP THE, UH, LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN, 2018 S A P M C FOR THE 2021 SS A P M C DISCUSSION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THE, THE QUESTION WAS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? THE ANSWER WAS YES.
WITH THE MOTION WAS TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN 50, EXCUSE
[02:05:01]
ME, 36, 55 AND 78 AND TO KEEP THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN IN 2018 S A M P C CODE AND IT WAS SECONDED.ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE.
WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT 1 0 3 0.3 AND THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. WELL, ACTUALLY ONE ITEM IN A PREVIOUS, UH, MEETING WE ACCEPTED ITEM NUMBER SIX, THE LANGUAGE, UH, IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER.
THES AND NEEDS OF THE CODE OFFICIALS SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DELEGATE POWERS, UH, UNDER THIS CODE.
SUCH DELEGATE SHALL HAVE THE POWER AS DELEGATED BY THE CODE OFFICIALS.
AND THERE IS A PROPOSED CHANGE IN ITEM NUMBER 37 THAT READS, REQUIRE QUALIFICATION OF THE DESIGNEE EQUAL TO THOSE OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, TOXIC CHEMICAL SPECIALIST ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS, AND INDICATE PROFESSIONALS THAT CAN MAKE HEALTH AND SAFETY DETERMINATIONS.
AND WE'VE SORT OF DISCUSSED THAT KIND OF AN ISSUE IN SOMETHING ELSE.
AND WE IDENTIFIED OF COURSE, THAT THE STAFF IS ENGINEERS.
UH, THERE ARE ENGINEERS ON THE STAFF.
UH, AND AS A RESULT, UH, I DO NOT KNOW IF THERE'S ANY VALUE IN THE PROPOSAL.
AGAIN, THAT'S CHAIR'S OPINION CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION NOT TO ACCEPT.
UH, ITEM 37 MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE AS PRESENTED IN ITEM NUMBER 37.
THE MOTION CARRIES C M P C SECTION, UH, 2 0 2, GENERAL DEFINITIONS.
ITEM NUMBER 38 HAS A PROPOSED CHANGE AND THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS TO DELETE THE WORD ACCEPTED TO TO APPROVED BY THE CODE.
AND WE WILL TAKE THOSE TWO SINCE THEY ARE IDENTICAL.
DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THE THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES? MR. CHAIR? MR. FRED ANIS.
I MOTION THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR ITEM 38 OR 58.
SECOND MOTION MADE AND SECONDED TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE PROMOTION TO NOT ACCEPT THE POST CHANGES? 38 AND 58.
WE'LL LOOK AT THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN ITEM NUMBER 39 AND ITEM 59.
AND AGAIN, CHAIR'S POSITION IS, IT DOESN'T PROVIDE ANY ENHANCEMENT TO THE CODE.
AND THE STAFF, OF COURSE, IS A PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CHAIR OF ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEMS 39, MR. CHAIR.
I MOTION THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE MOTION.
I MEAN THE AMENDMENTS FOR 39 AND 59.
SECOND MOTION'S MADE, AND SECOND TO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
ANY DISCUSSION? UM, MS. WINTER IS THERE, THERE IS A, A CODE FOR SOMEONE THAT IS GONNA APPLY FOR THAT POSITION, CORRECT? IT'S ALREADY DEFINED.
THERE, THERE IS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT POSITION.
UH, NOT NECESSARILY TO BE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
[02:10:01]
WE JUST WENT THROUGH A COUPLE OF ITEMS PRIOR TO THIS WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE CODE OFFICIAL HAS THE RIGHT TO COMMUNICATE AND CONSULT WITH ANYBODY, BASICALLY.SO, LIKE THE EXAMPLE, UH, SAVITA GAVE EARLIER IN REGARDS TO A SENIOR FACILITY WITH SOME INFESTATION, WE CONSULTED WITH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
'CAUSE EVEN IF YOU HAVE AN ENGINEER ON STAFF AS THE CO OFFICIAL, YOU STILL NEED SOMEBODY ELSE TO HELP WITH THOSE KIND OF HEALTH ISSUES.
WHEN WE HAVE, UH, CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES, WE CONSULT WITH PD.
WHEN THERE IS FIRE, WE CONSULT WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
SO OBVIOUSLY WE UTILIZE THE RESOURCES THAT, THAT THE CITY HAS IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS, AND THEY'RE SPECIALIZED AND QUALIFIED FOR THOSE UH, ITEMS. BASICALLY.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE MOTION IS TO NOT ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN ITEM 39 AND 59.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? SAY AYE.
I WILL DIRECT YOU IF YOU WILL ALLOW ME TO, TO LOOK AT PROPOSAL.
UH, BASICALLY IS AN ISSUE ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF ACCUMULATION.
IF, UH, MATTHEW, I BELIEVE WE SKIPPED 44 AND 83.
UH, COST OF, I INTENTIONALLY SKIPPED THEM BECAUSE I WANTED TO GO DOWN TO THE, THE LANGUAGES WERE NOT IDENTICAL IN THOSE TWO.
UH, CHAIR WILL, WILL BACK TRACE.
THEY'RE DIFFERENT IN THE, I GUESS MY GLASSES ARE NOT WORKING RIGHT OR THEY'RE DIFFERENT IN THE PROPOSAL.
PARDON ME? THEY'RE DIFFERENT IN THE PROPOSAL.
THE PROPOSALS ARE DIFFERENT THEN.
MR. CHAIRMAN, GO AHEAD AND ASK THE QUESTION UNDER PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT'S ADDED IN BOLD, OR IF THE STRUCTURE WAS DECONSTRUCTED AND ITS MATERIALS STOWED FOR SALVAGE BY LAW, CAN WE DO THAT? NOPE, YOU CAN'T.
SO, UH, AS FAR AS, UM, WELL ONE, I DON'T KNOW WHY I THIS DEFINITION IS IN, UH, SAMHSA SINCE THIS IS ADDRESSING DEMOLITION OR REPAIR OF A STRUCTURE.
SO IT, UH, IT'S ALREADY ADDRESSED IN CHAPTER SIX THAT, UH, COSTS ASSESSED, UH, WILL BE THE ACTUAL COSTS OF DEMOLITION OR REPAIR.
UH, THERE IS ON THE TABLE, UH, UH, A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AS TO DECONSTRUCTION.
THE THE LAW IS, UH, UNDER TEXAS LAW, WE ARE REQUIRED TO FILE A LIEN FOR THE ACTUAL COSTS EXPENDED.
AND SO, UH, THAT'S THE LAW RIGHT NOW.
BUT, UH, DEPENDING ON, UM, THE OUTCOME OF THE DECONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE, THERE MAY BE, UH, CHANGES TO THE CITY CODE TO ADDRESS, UH, REDUCTION OR CREDIT TO THE LIEN ABOUT, BUT, UH, UNDER TEXAS LAW RIGHT NOW, THE LIEN HAS TO BE FILED FOR THE ACTUAL CAUSE.
I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS DEFINITION IN HERE BEFORE.
SO, SO, UH, THE DECONSTRUCTION, I MEAN, THAT'S THE, I I THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT FOR REVENUE OBTAINED IF SALVAGE WAS CONDUCTED.
SO THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE BASICALLY IS REPEATING THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN PLACE ALREADY.
THIS IS, THIS IS AMIN THOMAS'S DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SO, JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK WHAT SAVITA IS TALKING ABOUT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE 2018
[02:15:01]
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE TODAY, IT DOES TALK ABOUT YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THE COST LESS REVENUE OBTAINED IF SALVAGE WAS, UH, CONDUCTED PRIOR TO DEMOLITION OR REPAIR.SO IT'S ALREADY IN HERE THAT IF YOU SALVAGE ANYTHING FROM A PROPERTY, WE CANNOT GO AND PUT LIEN ON THE PROPERTY FOR THE FULL AMOUNT THAT WE, THE COST THAT WE HAD, WE HAVE TO SUBTRACT ANY MONEY THAT WE RECEIVED IN EXCHANGE OF SALVAGE.
SO THAT'S ALREADY IN THE CODE, LIKE TODAY.
ITEM 44, MOTION IS TO REJECT ITEM 44.
YOU MEAN THE AMENDMENT? YES, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
YEAH, BECAUSE WHEN HE SAID OBJECT WHEN HE SAID 44, THAT MEANS NO, NO.
HOW COME YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT?
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND MOTION'S MADE.
AND SECOND TO NOT ACCEPT ITEM 44.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
LOOKING AT ITEM 83, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL.
UM, ON ITEM, UH, 83, UH, THERE'S A SUGGESTION TO CHANGE, DE DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT.
WOULD THAT MAKE MORE SENSE IN THE SS A P M C SINCE DEMOLITION IS COVERED BY CHAPTER SIX? IT, IT WOULD, IT, IT DEFINITELY WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE.
UM, AND I AM DISAVOWING, UH, PUTTING THIS LANGUAGE AND, UH, I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE INITIAL DRAFTING OF THE SAMHSA.
UH, BUT YES, UH, PUTTING ABATEMENT, BUT THEN, UH, READING ALONG IT, IT, IT STILL STATES, UH, DEMOLITION OR, UM, SO THAT WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED, UH, TOO.
YOUR MOTION IS, UM, I MOTION THAT ON ITEM 83, WE ACCEPT THE CHANGE FROM DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT, BUT REJECTS THE, UH, OTHER CHANGES OF THE LANGUAGE.
THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO ACCEPT THE CHANGE FROM DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT, BUT TO NOT ACCEPT THE, IF THE STRUCTURE WAS DECONSTRUCTED IN MATERIALS SOLD FOR SALVAGE, DO SECOND, UH, SECOND MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? YEAH, DISCUSSION.
UM, IF YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO DOWN AND ALSO TAKE OUT THE WORDS PRIOR TO DEMOLITION OR REPAIR.
SO YOU HAVE TO PRETTY MUCH CHANGE A LOT OF THE WORDING IN THIS.
UH, MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UH, YES, UH, REMOVE, UH, DEMOLITION OR REPAIR AND REPLACE THAT WITH, UH, ABATEMENT LESS REVENUE, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
AND THEN, UH, YEAH, AND THAT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT.
'CAUSE THE LAST LINE TO ENFORCE AN ORDER OF DEMOLITION.
UH, I WOULD, UH, PROPOSE THE, WELL ACTUALLY, UM, I APOLOGIZE.
UH, THE MOTION, THERE IS A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
SO THAT NEEDS TO BE VOTED ON FIRST BEFORE, UH, I PROPOSE ANY CHANGES.
AND AGAIN, I DO NOT HAVE, UH, THE AUTHORITY TO PROPOSE, UH, CHANGE.
UH, I CAN ONLY RECOMMEND, WELL, I, I'M WILLING TO, THE REASON I BROUGHT THAT UP IS 'CAUSE YOU ALSO HAVE TO CHANGE OR EMERGENCY REPAIR AT THE TOP TWO BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AN EMERGENCY REPAIR.
AGAIN, MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MEASURE MOTION
[02:20:02]
TO SAY THAT, THAT BACKGROUND YEAH.WE, THE ABATEMENT US ABOUT THREE TIMES.
THE PROPOSED, THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS TO CHANGE THE WORD DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THAT PARAGRAPH.
DO YOU ACCEPT THE PROPOSED FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? YES, BUT YES.
BUT, BUT, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT TO JUST CHANGE, LIKE, OKAY, SO 1, 2, 3, THERE'S THREE TIMES IT SAYS DEMOLITION OR REPAIR.
SO I WOULD SAY REMOVING RE UH, EMERGENCY REPAIR, DEMOLITION, OR REPAIR THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PARAGRAPH.
AND THEN THE FOURTH WOULD BE AT THE BOTTOM ORDER OF DEMOLITION.
SO I PROPOSE THAT WE CHANGE ALL OF THE DEMOLITION OR REPAIRS TO SIMPLY ABATEMENT JUST ONE WORD.
BUT ABATEMENT AND EMERGENCY REPAIRS ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES.
DO YOU WANT TO DELETE EMERGENCY? OKAY.
NOT E REPAIRS, EMERGENCY REPAIRS, ABATEMENT.
SO, UH, REPLACE ABATEMENT FOR DEMOLITION THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PARAGRAPH.
SO THE MOTION IS, MAKE SURE I GIVE IT CORRECT THAT WE CHANGE OR DELETE THE WORD DEMOLITION IN FAVOR OF THE WORD ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PARAGRAPH.
BUT KEEP THIS WHOLE, THE WORDS EMERGENCY REPAIR.
WELL, UH, MOTION, REMOVE THE LANGUAGE ON IF THE STRUCTURE WAS, AND, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
AND WE DID REMOVE THE LANGUAGE, OR IF THE STRUCTURE WAS DECONSTRUCTED AND MATERIALS SOLD FOR SALVAGE, THAT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? WELL, THEY'VE ALREADY AMENDED IT AND HE ALREADY SECONDED IT.
LET ME ASK, I DID NOT HEAR AN AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT WAS HE WAS AMENDING THE AMENDMENT.
UM, HE MADE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SHE ACCEPTED FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
DID I HEAR A SECOND ON THE ACCEPTED? A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
OKAY, NOW I DIDN'T HEAR A SECOND.
LET ME ASK THIS ON ABATEMENT OR DOES THE CITY MAKE EMERGENCY REPAIRS? I'VE NEVER KNOWN THEM TO GO OUT AND MAKE EMERGENCY REPAIRS.
UM, THIS IS JENNY CODE MANAGER.
UM, YOU WOULD NOT SEE THEM COME BEFORE THE BIGGEST SPEED BOARD BECAUSE WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF THE ISSUE.
BUT THERE ARE INSTANCES IS, UH, AN EXAMPLE THAT I CAN THINK OF WOULD BE IF, UM, AN INFESTATION, A BE INFESTATION.
THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S THAT SITUATION.
OR IN INSTANCES OF A SEWER REPAIR THAT WOULD TAKE AN IMMEDIATE, THERE'S SOME NEED FOR A SEWER REPAIR.
WE'VE BEEN KNOWN TO MAKE THOSE REPAIRS AS WELL.
SO THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE UNDER THE AMENDMENT TO LEAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE.
IT WAS NOT PART OF THE, OF THE MOTION.
THE MOTION IS SIMPLE, IS TO KEEP EMERGENCY REPAIR, WHICH A PART OF THE PART THE MOTION IS TO CHANGE THE WORD DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PARAGRAPH.
ACCEPT THE LAST, THE LAST SENTENCE.
THE MOTION WAS TO CHANGE THE WORD DEMOLITION TO ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PARAGRAPH.
IS THAT RIGHT? I THOUGHT YOU HAD TO SAY IT TO LEAVE IT.
OH, WELL THAT WAS PRIOR TO, TO LEAVE IT.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
WHAT WAS THAT MOTION? FINAL MOTION.
YEAH, BECAUSE THERE'S THE, THE MOTION MADE WAS TO TAKE THE WORD DEMOLITION AND INSERT OUT AND, AND INSERT THE WORD ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PARAGRAPH.
AND ALSO THE OTHER SENTENCE OR NOT, I'M SORRY, THE SENTENCE SALVAGE.
[02:25:01]
REPLACE THE WORD DEMOLITION WITH ABATEMENT THROUGHOUT THE PARAGRAPH AND TO NOT ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT, OR IF THE STRUCTURE WAS DECONSTRUCTED AND IT'S MATERIAL SOLD FOR SALVAGE.IS THAT A CORRECT READ OF THE MOTION? YES.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, SAY AYE.
UH, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SECTION, UH, 2 0 2 THROUGH ITEM NUMBER 83, AND WE WILL STOP AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
AND LET'S FIRST ADDRESS AN ISSUE ABOUT A NEXT MEETING.
DO WE HAVE DENNY, DO WE HAVE A POST TIME? I'M SORRY.
DO NEED A ANOTHER MEETING? YEAH.
NO, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A MOTION.
DO WE? TOMORROW 8:00 AM I HAVE MOTION LAST TIME FOR TWO MEETINGS.
UH, I'M SORRY I MISSED, UH, UM, IF THERE IS, DOES ANYONE WANNA TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK? IS I WOULD RECOMMEND IF, IF THERE IS NOT, THEN CONTINUE ON.
BUT, UM, YEAH, LET'S CHECK FIRST, UH, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AND ASK HER IF, UH, DID Y'ALL RECEIVE ANY COMMENTS BY EMAIL TO BE SHARED? OKAY.
BASICALLY THE, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR ANY, UH, COMMENTS AT ALL.
UH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ALL, LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT NOW, IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY HERE, YOU KNOW, TO COME TO THE BOARD MEETINGS AND SEE THIS.
AND HERE, LIKE YOU, UH, INTERACT WITH THE COMMUNITY A LOT AND ISSUES LIKE THIS.
YOU GOT BOTH THE DIRECTOR HERE, MICHAEL SHANNON, AND THE DEPUTY JOHN, AND MS. DANNY AND JEANIE.
AND IF, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN CONTACT 'EM AFTER THIS AND YOU KNOW, I MEAN, AT LEAST YOU'LL HAVE THEIR PHONE NUMBER AND THEIR CARDS AND YOU CAN CALL 'EM.
AND THIS WAY IT'LL GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION AND HELP YOU DO YOUR JOB AND HELP US DO THE JOB OF EVERYWHERE.
ANY OF US GO AND SAID, WELL, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION.
I DON'T HAVE A COMPUTER, THIS AND THAT, BUT THIS WAY YOU CAN SPREAD THE WORD AND I HOPE IT, IT, IT WAS A GOOD CHALLENGE FOR YOU ALL.
AND ESPECIALLY SENATOR ISLAND THAT CAME TO FIRST DAY EVEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WEREN'T ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS THAT HE CAME AND HE FOUND SO THAT, THAT, THAT THAT'S, AT THAT TIME WE WEREN'T, BUT I THINK WE ACCEPTED THAT.
SO, YOU KNOW, SO I WASN'T HERE, BUT THANK YOU.
UM, I, I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.
UM, CAN YOU HOLD ON? MR. MORALES IS ABOUT TO SPEAK AND I, I I'LL GO AHEAD ANN.
HE YIELDS PLEASE, PLEASE CONTINUE.
HE YIELDS TO YOU THEN, MS. WINTER, I WAS WITH THE APARTMENTS.
I MEAN, IT IS THE LANDLORDS OR THE WHATEVER, IT'S THEIR JOB TO TAKE CARE OF IT.
AND IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T CALL 3 1 1 OR THE CITY TO TELL THEM WHAT'S GOING ON IN THERE, THEY WON'T KNOW.
SO IS SOMEBODY CALLING AND SAYING THAT THEY HAVE AN AUNT OR A WHAT? I'M SORRY.
I HAVE THE WHOLE LOT, YOU KNOW, I LIVED DOWN IN THE CENTER, BUT, UM, IF YOU, IF YOU DON'T CALL THE CITY, THEY'RE NOT GONNA MAKE THE LANDLORD DO ANYTHING.
I WORK WITH RENDERS EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I'M A, I LIVE IN PUBLIC HOUSING, UH, AND IF ANY OF YOU GUYS GOOGLE MY NAME AND SAHA PUT IT IN GOOGLE, YOU WILL FIND PROBABLY 200 NEWS ARTICLES, PROTESTS, EVERYTHING THAT WE FOUGHT BECAUSE OF THE LIVING CONDITIONS IN THOSE APARTMENTS.
I CAN TELL YOU, WE WORK WITH PLENTY OF TENANTS, WHETHER THEY ARE LOW INCOME, REGULAR INCOME, SOME EVEN MAKE REALLY GREAT MONEY, BUT THEY'RE A RENTER AND IT'S IGNORED.
BUT THESE APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND THESE DEVELOPERS, THEY'RE NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND PEOPLE ARE STILL LIVING IN THOSE CONDITIONS.
SO THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE FIGHT FOR A LOT OF THE THINGS
[02:30:01]
THAT WE FIGHT FOR, UM, WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE AND WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO DO THINGS BECAUSE WE COME ACROSS PEOPLE THAT ARE COMPLETELY IGNORED.AND THEN WE COME ACROSS PEOPLE WHO ARE ABUSED.
I MEAN, I, I HAD SHARED PICTURES WITH THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.
ONE OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE CAME WHERE PEOPLE, SOMEONE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD GOT A CODE COMPLIANCE VIOLATION FOR A CANDY BAR WRAPPER IN THEIR FRONT YARD.
THERE WAS NO OTHER TRASH ANYWHERE ELSE THAT WAS THE VIOLATION FOR ONE CANDY BAR WRAPPER THAT PROBABLY BLEW INTO THE YARD.
SO IT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE THOSE THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION BECAUSE WHILE YOU MAY HAVE GREAT INTENTIONS, I HAVE GREAT INTENTIONS.
THE PEOPLE SITTING HERE HAVE GREAT INTENTIONS.
THE PEOPLE OUT THERE MAY NOT, YOU ALWAYS COME, COME ACROSS THAT ONE PERSON THAT IS JUST HAVING A BAD DAY OR WHATEVER'S GOING ON, AND THEY'RE JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT? WHATEVER.
AND THE ONE ESPECIALLY, SHE MAKES COMPLAINTS.
I'M LIKE, GLORIA, CALL THE CITY.
TELL THEM THAT YOUR LANDLORD IS NOT DOING THIS.
I I DON'T GO IN, I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVING IN THAT PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT THAT I CAN DO ABOUT IT.
UM, I, I DON'T MEAN TO BE HARSH, UM, BUT I'M, I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED IN, IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
AND, AND THE PROCESS WAS VERY CONFUSING FROM, FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
AND I EXPECTED, UH, POSSIBLY, UH, PEOPLE THAT PARTICIPATED IN THIS PROCESS FOR YEARS WOULD UNDERSTAND, UH, UH, HOW TO, YOU KNOW, PARTICIPATE, UM, AND TO BE CIVIL ABOUT IT.
UH, BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE ULTIMATELY DOING IS REPRESENTING OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, AND I DON'T SEE THAT REALLY HAPPENING.
UM, THE FURTHERMORE, UH, I'M, I'M MORE DISAPPOINTED IN THAT THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS NOT REALLY BEING FOLLOWED.
AND I ASKED SEVERAL OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT OF INTENT OF THE CODE IS? AND THEY COULD NOT NAME WHAT THE INTENT OF THE CODE WAS.
UM, I MADE THAT MENTION WHEN I, UH, APPLIED, UH, TO THIS COMMITTEE.
AND, AND I DO, I DO FOLLOW THAT INTENT, UM, WHICH IS ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE, JUST TO REMIND THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, THE ONES THAT I ASKED THAT WERE NOT AWARE OF THAT.
AND, UH, I TAKE THAT VERY SERIOUSLY.
AND MY DISAPPOINTMENT IS, IS THAT, UH, WE'RE PUTTING PEOPLE OUT INTO THE STREETS.
I'M NOT, I DON'T, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT APARTMENT DWELLERS OR LANDLORDS THAT DO NOT MAINTAIN THE PROPERTIES.
I'M TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE THAT, THAT OWN THEIR OWN HOMES, THAT PAY THEIR TAXES, UH, BUT THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO MAINTAIN THEIR HOMES.
WE'RE PUTTING THEM OUT INTO THE STREETS, UH, WHATEVER YOU CALL IT.
UH, YOU DON'T CALL IT EVICTION.
UH, THAT'S NOT, THE CITY DOES NOT DO THAT.
UH, BUT YOU'RE PUTTING PEOPLE OUT, OUT INTO THE STREETS INTO UNSAFE, UNHEALTHY AND DANGEROUS CONDITIONS.
AND, AND I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY SAY, YES, UH, THIS IS THE LAST RECOURSE.
THIS IS THE, THE, THE LAST THING THAT WE'RE, WE'RE, UH, WE'RE DOING IT AND WE'RE, AND WE'RE TRYING TO HELP THE COMMUNITY.
AND JUST TO RESPOND TO, UM, JESSE AND UM, ANNE OVER HERE, UM, I WILL SAY THAT LIKE, AS SOMEONE WHO WORKS WITH COMMUNITY, IT IS MY JOB TO, UM, CONNECT COMMUNITY MEMBERS, RESIDENTS WITH OFFICIALS OR WHOEVER IT IS THAT THEY NEED TO, UM, TO GET IN CONTACT TO TALK ABOUT THE SITUATIONS, UM, TO, TO KIND OF PRESUME THAT THAT ISN'T ALREADY HAPPENING.
UM, IT, WELL, IT'S INCORRECT, RIGHT? UM, I, I KNOW HOW TO DO MY JOB AND, UM, WE CONNECT PEOPLE WITH THEIR COUNCIL MEMBERS WITH, UM, UH, WHOEVER ELSE, UH, D S D N H S D, UM, UM, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
WE CONNECT PEOPLE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT WE, UM, ASSUME ARE GOING TO HELP THEM.
AND, UM, WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO DO EVERY SINGLE THING, RIGHT? AS MUCH AS IT'S, UM, SO MUCH PAPERWORK, SO MUCH CONFUSION, SO MUCH WAITING, SO MUCH PRESSURE, SO MUCH, JUST SO MUCH STRESS
[02:35:01]
THAT THEY'RE ALREADY UNDER THE FACT THAT THEIR HOMES ARE PROBABLY, LIKE RAY SAID, THEY CAN'T, UM, PAY TO MAINTAIN THEM, BUT THEY PAY THEIR TAXES BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY CAN AFFORD TO DO.THEY PAY THEIR UTILITIES 'CAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY CAN AFFORD TO DO.
UM, AND THEY CAN'T REPAIR THEIR HOMES OR THEY'RE TOO OLD, OR THEY'RE DISABLED OR THEY, YOU KNOW, HAVE, UM, SPOUSES OR CHILDREN THAT LEFT THEM.
AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE 'CAUSE THESE ARE THE STORIES THAT I DEAL WITH EVERY SINGLE DAY.
AND I CONNECT THEM AND DO EVERYTHING IN MY POWER TO HELP THEM AND, UM, CONNECT THEM TO THE RESOURCES THAT THEY NEED TO.
AND THEY DO EVERYTHING ABSOLUTELY RIGHT DOWN TO A T THEY ARE DRIVING TO PLACES THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN AFFORD TO.
THEY'RE CATCHING A BUS THAT TAKES THEM TWO, THREE HOURS TO GET BACK, UM, TO THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN.
UM, AND THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT THEY NEED TO BE DOING, AND YET THE SYSTEMS IN PLACE ARE STILL FAILING TO PROVIDE THEM WITH THE RESOURCES THAT THEY NEED OR WITH THE, UM, ASSISTANCE THAT THEY NEED.
SO THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I'M HERE.
AND LIKE RAY SAID, UM, IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST A LITTLE DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE WE ARE JUST REVERTING BACK TO THE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE SYSTEM'S ALREADY IN PLACE.
AND, UM, EXPERIENCING WHAT I HAVE WITH RENTERS AND HOMEOWNERS AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE ISSUES WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, CODE ENFORCEMENT OR WHATEVER IT IS.
UM, IT'S JUST A LITTLE DISAPPOINTING BECAUSE THEY'VE EXPRESSED CONCERNS TO US THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.
THIS IS, THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WE WANNA SEE CHANGE.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD APPRECIATE IF IT WAS IN THERE.
UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THESE SYSTEMS ARE IN PLACE.
SO EVEN IF THE ADMINISTRATION HAS GOOD INTENTIONS, LIKE KAYLA SAID, UM, DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE PEOPLE PRACTICING IT OUT ON THE FIELD HAVE THE BEST INTENTIONS.
MAYBE THEY HAVE A BAD DAY, MAYBE SOMETHING HAPPENED, MAYBE THEY LOST A LOVED ONE, WHATEVER IT IS.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, IT'S THE CODE THAT GUIDES THESE, UM, NOTICES OR VIOLATIONS OR WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL THEM.
AND, UM, WE NEED TO MAKE THAT PROCESS AS CONSISTENT AS POSSIBLE.
AND, UM, JUST EQUITABLE FAIR AND PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO IT.
UM, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHY YOU, MAYBE YOU THINK THAT WE'RE BEING A STICKLER ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS, BUT THAT'S WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS EXPRESSED TO US.
THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE HEARD FROM OUR RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE OUT THERE, WORKING WITH THEM, WORKING WITH THEM IN THE APARTMENTS, WORKING WITH THEM IN THEIR HOMES, WORKING THEM WITH THEM ON THE SIDES OF THE STREETS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE ALREADY RAN OUT OF A HOME.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
AND IT'S JUST EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING TO KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ALL REVERTED BACK TO THE SYSTEMS THAT HAVE CLEARLY NOT BEEN WORKING FOR THOSE RESIDENTS.
AND HERE WE ARE, AND ASKING US TO SET ASIDE TIME TO SPEAK.
IT'S A, A LITTLE DISRESPECTFUL TO ME BECAUSE HOW, WHY WOULD YOU SET ASIDE TIME FOR US TO SPEAK AT THE END WHEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN LISTENING TO US THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS? SO THAT'S ALL I WANNA SAY.
UH, BUT I HADN'T BEEN HERE, BUT I WOULD BEEN, AND, UH, I, I, I FORGOT TO SAY ONE THING.
UH, YOU KNOW, MR. GARZA, MYSELF AND OTHERS HAD BEEN IN THE STREET.
HE WAS DOING, HE WAS WORKING WITH THE CITY.
HE WAS OUT THERE GIVING INFORMATION TO THE PEOPLE.
AND A LOT OF 'EM, EVEN IN
WE ALL HAVE TO GO WALK THE WALK.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU, YOU PASS THROUGH A STREET, YOU WANT TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, HEY, YOU KNOW, IS IT TATED HOMES, THIS AND THAT? BUT WHEN YOU EXPECT, YOU SAID, HEY, MY FOOTPRINTS ARE ON THAT ROAD, THAT'S WHEN YOU REALLY KNOW IT, YOU KNOW, AND WE WON'T EVEN GET PAID FOR IT.
GOT, UM, UH, I APPRECIATE, UH, THAT YOU INVITED US TO, UH, UH, VISIT THE B S B.
AND I'VE HAD SEVERAL, SEVERAL INVITATIONS, AND SEVERAL INVITATIONS TO JOIN THE BOARD.
BUT I, I HAVE WATCHED THE VIDEOS PAST B SSS B BOARD MEETINGS, AND IN MY OPINION, UH, THE RESIDENTS OF SAN ANTONIO HAVE BEEN BELITTLED AND BEEN DISRESPECTED.
THE MOST NEEDIEST OF US HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD, UH, WHEN THEY CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE BEING NOTIFIED ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, WHETHER IT'S IN ENGLISH OR IN SPANISH.
THERE'S A LOT OF TERMINOLOGY IN HERE THAT NOT EVEN YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND, AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
[02:40:01]
THE VERY FIRST AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED, UH, MENTIONED REASONABLE AND LEGAL AGREED WITH MY POINT THAT IT WAS VAGUE SUBJECT TO LITIGATION.AND THERE'S A LOT OF TERMS IN HERE, BUT WE HAVE NOT BEEN LISTENED TO.
INITIALLY, WE WERE TOLD WE COULD MAKE MOTIONS AND WE CAN'T MAKE MOTIONS.
I UNDERSTAND WE CAN'T VOTE, BUT WHEN WE'RE NOT EVEN BEING LISTENED TO, THAT IS REALLY DISAPPOINTING.
UH, JESSE KNOW JESSE, MR. SUN, I DON'T KNOW.
UM, TH THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS OPINIONS, UH, BUT LIST NOT GET INTO, UH, BACK AND FORTH.
UH, NO, UH, MR. MR. ZALE, LET ME FINISH.
UM, AS, UH, FAR, AS FAR AS IF YOU HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT, UH, CODE OFFICER IN THE FIELD, LIKE WITH THE SINGLE CANDY WRAPPER, WE DEFINITELY BRING IT TO, UH, THE ATTENTION OF, UH, ANY OF THE CODE MANAGERS, THE DEPUTIES.
'CAUSE I AGREE, IF THEY WERE CITED FOR A SINGLE WRAPPER, UH, I MEAN, WE WOULDN'T PROSECUTE THAT CASE.
UH, AS FAR AS, UH, FEELING DISRESPECTED OR NOT HEARD, UH, EVERYONE ABSOLUTELY HAS BEEN HEARD, UH, WHEN ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS COME IN AND THE AMENDMENTS, EVERY SINGLE ONE IS GONE THROUGH REVIEWED.
AND THEN THIS IS Y'ALL'S CHANCE TO DISCUSS THEM.
I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE SOME TIME FOR ANY CITIZENS TO SPEAK, UH, ANY BOARD MEMBERS, UH, OH, WHILE YOU WERE CUT OFF EARLIER.
SO I WANTED TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO FINISH SPEAKING.
UH, BUT PLEASE NOW, UH, LET US NOT GET INTO, UH, WE VERSUS THEY OR, UM, IF, UH, A AS TO, UH, THE SYSTEM.
UH, THE CODES ARE NOT A SYSTEM.
SO THE CODES ARE THE LAWS THAT, UH, WE ALL HAVE TO ABIDE BY.
WE ALL HAVE TO ENFORCE THE SYSTEM.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IS, UH, THE ENFORCEMENT OF SUCH POLICIES, OR IF THE SYSTEM IS, UH, PROVIDING, UM, MORE PROGRAMS OR MORE INFORMATION.
I MEAN, CERTAINLY I THINK, UH, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HEAR SUGGESTIONS ABOUT, UH, PUTTING THOSE IN PLACE.
BUT, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS, UH, THAT IS NOT A SYSTEM.
IT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED BLACK AND WHITE.
AND IT'S IN PLACE NOT TO PUNISH PEOPLE.
IT'S TO, UH, AS MR. ZUNIGA SAID, THE INTENT IS TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE, AND TO NOT ALLOW THE EGREGIOUS SITUATIONS.
SO, UH, IF, IF ANYBODY HAS SUGGESTIONS AS TO HOW, UH, SOMETHING THAT THE CITY AS A WHOLE, NOT JUST, UH, CODE ENFORCEMENT, BUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, SOLID WASTE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, THAT I'M, I'M SURE, UH, THEY WOULD ALL BE WILLING TO LISTEN.
AND, UH, MR. GARZA, UH, USED TO BE THE DIRECTOR FOR HOUSING UNDER GOVERNOR RICHARDS FOR, UH, QUITE A WHILE.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, HE CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION AND HE HAS, UH, ACTUALLY, UH, BROUGHT, UH, RESOURCES TO THE CITY.
AND IF, UH, Y'ALL AWARE OF ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, I ABSOLUTELY KNOW CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO LISTEN.
SO AT THIS POINT, LET'S NOT GET INTO A BACK AND FORTH, UH, THE APARTMENTS YOU MENTIONED.
UH, IF, UH, THERE ARE SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN CALLED IN, UH, YOU'RE WELCOME TO CONTACT MIKE ESY OR, UH, ALICE GUDO.
UH, I'LL THROW JENNY AND DANNY INTO THE MIX SO THAT
[02:45:01]
THEY'RE MADE AWARE IN CASE THE TENANTS DO NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE CALLING IN.UH, 'CAUSE, UH, THOSE APARTMENT SEVEN OAKS, UH, THAT'S IN MY DISTRICT, UH, FIRST TIME I HEARD ABOUT IT IS, UH, THE NEWS NEWSPAPER ARTICLE.
SO, UM, DEFINITELY, AND I APPLAUD EVERYBODY 'CAUSE EVERYBODY IS GIVING THEIR TIME AND UNFORTUNATELY, ALL THE COST OF GAS FOR HAVING TO ATTEND.
AND NO ONE ON THE BOARD, UH, NEITHER OF YOU, NO ONE IS GETTING PAID TO BE HERE.
SO, UH, I WILL SAY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, UH, WE DO APPRECIATE ALL YOUR SERVERS, REGARDLESS IF YOU'RE ON THE BOARD OR, UH, NOT ON THE BOARD.
UH, EVERYTHING, CODE ENFORCEMENT, EVERY, EVERYTHING, ALL 41 DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY DO.
SO, UH, JUST LET'S, LET'S STICK TO THAT.
AND, UH, IF THERE'S ISSUES WITH THE SYSTEM, THEN UH, LET, LET US KNOW AND, OR CODE ENFORCEMENT, AND THEY WILL GET WITH WHICHEVER DEPARTMENT CAN ASSIST AS WELL.
I SPOKE EARLIER ABOUT, UH, THE PROCESS, CONFUSION WITH THE PROCESS, EXCUSE ME.
UH, NOW, NOW I KNOW WHAT HE WAS SPEAK ABOUT SEEING THROUGH TV, YOU KNOW, THE RE DISRESPECT OR WHATEVER.
UH, THE ATTORNEY HERE WAS SPEAKING HER PEACE ON IT.
AND, UH, BUT WE'RE NOT, LIKE I SAY, I'M NOT DISRESPECTFUL TO ANYBODY OR ANYTHING, BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET.
UH, MY COMMENT IS, UM, UH, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND, AND THE CONFUSION IN THE PROCESS.
UH, I KNOW THAT SOME AMENDMENTS, UH, UH, HAD BEEN SUBMITTED, UH, TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO OUR LAST MEETING.
AND, UH, THEY DID NOT GO UP IN, INTO THE WEBSITE UNTIL THE, THE NIGHT BEFORE.
UH, SO I FIND THAT THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS, IS PRETTY IMPOSSIBLE, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCESS, UH, BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON UNTIL WE HAVE ALREADY VOTED ON IT.
UH, JUNE 24TH WAS OUR, THE DATE OF OUR LAST MEETING.
AND, AND THE AMENDMENTS WERE NOT POSTED UNTIL JUNE 23RD THAT EVENING.
UH, AND, AND I HAD MADE SOME, UH, AMENDMENTS PRIOR TO THAT, TO JUNE 24TH.
AND THEY WERE NOT POSTED, NOT UNTIL NOW, BUT NOW THE, THE PROCESS CHANGED COMPLETELY WHERE MOST EVERYBODY HERE WAS CONFUSED AS TO WHAT WAS HAPPENING.
AND SO, I, I FIND IT VERY DISAPPOINTING THAT WE CAN'T MAKE, UH, INFORMED DECISIONS, INFORMED VOTES, OR THAT YOU CAN'T, UH, AND, AND THAT, THAT IS MY COMMENT ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
SO IT, IT IS NOT, UH, A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS HERE.
I NOW TURN TO KAYLA FOR A MOTION.
UH, I MOTION THAT WE EXTEND THIS COMMITTEE AN ADDITIONAL TWO MEETINGS JUST IN CASE, SO THAT WE CAN FINISH GETTING THROUGH THESE, UM, PROPOSALS.
THE MOTION IS TO EXTEND THE COMMITTEE FOR TWO ADDITIONAL MEETINGS.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.
DANNY, DO WE HAVE ANY TIME THAT WE CAN SELECT NOW OR DO WE NEED TO NOTIFY TOMORROW MORNING? TOMORROW MORNING?
MR. ESS WOULD LIKE TOMORROW MORNING,
SO WE DID HAVE TENTATIVELY THE JULY 22ND SET UP, UM, JUST IN CASE WE HAD TO GO OVER TODAY, RIGHT? SO WE DO HAVE JULY 2ND, JUNE, EXCUSE ME, JULY 22ND, SET UP.
SAME PLACE, SAME TIME, 1 0 4 AT THE BOARDROOM.
UH, WE CAN SET IT UP FOR AUGUST 5TH OR EXTEND IT OUT A WEEK AFTER THAT.
YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU GUYS WANNA DO.
LET SEE IF YOU CAN GET AUGUST 5TH, PLEASE.
SO I, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE PUBLIC WAS AWARE.
UM, A LOT OF US ARE ON THE B S V AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKE HOMEOWNER, THE HOMEOWNER REPAIR, UH, PROGRAM IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT IS IMPORTANT.
UM, LAST YEAR, UH, I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO REPRESENT DISTRICT FIVE ON THE 2022 HOUSING BOND, WHICH WAS THE FIRST HOUSING BOND IN SAN ANTONIO.
[02:50:01]
AND I AM EXTREMELY PROUD OF THE WORK THAT WE DID THERE.AND, UM, PART OF THAT WORK WAS ALLOTTING $45 MILLION TO THE, THE, UH, HOMEOWNER, HOMEOWNER, UH, REHAB.
AND THOSE APPLICATIONS WILL BE OPENING UP ON AUGUST 8TH.
SO ANYONE WHO NEEDS REPAIRS, UM, ANYONE WHO HAS, UH, CODE VIOLATIONS, UM, UH, CAN DO THAT APPLICATION THROUGH, UH, N H N H S D, WHICH IS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES.
UM, THEY ARE HOLDING PUBLIC MEETINGS WHERE THEY'RE GONNA DO PRESENTATIONS ON THE BONDS.
UM, ONE IS THE TOMORROW, SATURDAY, JULY 9TH, AND IT IS AT JULIA SIMS PUBLIC LIBRARY.
THE ADDRESS FOR THAT IS 1 5 0 6 0 JUDSON ROAD.
UM, THAT IS FROM 10:30 AM TO 11:30 AM AND THEN IT'S FOLLOWED BY AN EVICTION PREVENTION, UH, PRESENTATION AS WELL.
AND THEN IF YOU CAN'T GET TO THAT SIDE OF TOWN, UM, THEY WILL ALSO BE HOLDING A SECOND MEETING ON TUESDAY, JULY 12TH AT ST.
PHILIP'S, UH, COLLEGE VETERANS OUTREACH CENTER, LOCATED AT 2 0 2 CONNOLLY STREET, ROOM 2 0 8, AND THAT IS FROM FIVE 30 TO 6:30 PM AND IT IS ALSO FOLLOWED BY AN EVICTION, UH, PRE, UH, EVICTION PREVENTION.
SO THE 45 MILLION, IS IT SOLELY FOR THE OWNER OCCUPIED REHAB PROGRAM OR FOR UNDER ONE ROOF, UH, OPERATION REBUILD? WELL, IT'S GONNA GO BETWEEN THOSE.
SO THE 45 MILLION THAT IS ALLOTTED FROM THE HOUSING BOND, UM, IS GOING TO, UH, UM, IT'S HOMEOWNER REHAB AND, UH, MINOR REPAIR.
SO, UH, THE DIFFERENT PARTNERS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA BE HANDLING, BUT THEY, IT ALL ALL GOES THROUGH N H S D, BUT THE BOND ITSELF IS 150 MILLION.
SO THERE'S 45 MILLION TO, UH, HOMEOWNER REHAB AND REPAIR.
AND THEN THERE WAS, UH, 40 MILLION TO RENTAL REPAIRS.
SO IF YOU HAVE RENTAL PROPERTIES, YOU CAN APPLY FOR THOSE FUNDS TO FIX UP THE RENTAL PROPERTIES.
AND THEN THERE'S 30 MILLION FOR RENTAL ACQUISITION AND, UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND 25 MILLION FOR, UH, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
AND THEN 5 MILLION FOR NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION.
UM, THE MAJORITY SOMETHING LIKE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OR OTHER PROGRAMS LIKE THAT.
BUT, BUT THAT IS ACTUALLY OWNER OCCUPIED, THOUGH? IT'S NOT JUST OWNER.
YEAH, THE 45 IS THE HOMEOWNER.
DOES THE APPLICATION THROUGH ANYTHING HOMEOWNER OCCUPIED? YES.
IS THIS LIST, UH, AT THESE MEETINGS, YEAH.
'CAUSE I, I'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, SUBMITTED TO ME ABOUT IT.
AT MOST OF THOSE MEETINGS, THEY'RE DOING THE PRESENTATIONS, AND THEY ALSO HAVE AN ONLINE ONE.
UM, IT'S AVAILABLE ON THE N H S D WEBSITE.
SO IF YOU WANT TO GO WATCH THE PRESENTATION, IT HAS ALL THE SLIDES AND IT EXPLAINS THE, THE DIFFERENT PARAMETERS.
THA THANKS FOR YOUR WORK ON THERE.
KAYLA, ARE THESE GRANTS LOANS OR ACCOMMODATION? IT'S, IT'S BOND MONEY.
NOW, UM, I, I KNOW THAT THERE'S OTHER FUNDING FROM OTHER OPTIONS AND IT, IT DEPENDS ON THE PROGRAM IT GOES TO, BUT THE BOND FUNDS IS, THAT'S THE CITY BOND.
BUT THE CITY BOND IS ALL, UH, GRANT, I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME THAT WAS NOT GRANT.
THE, THE BOND, THE
LIKE, IT'S JUST LIKE ANY OTHER BOND.
NO, I, I KNOW THAT, BUT I, I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE PROGRAM THOUGH IS, IS ALL GRANT PROGRAM, UM, IT DEPENDS ON THE PROGRAM THAT IT'S GOING THROUGH.
SO, UH, I, I'VE HEARD, I'M NOT 100% SURE THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WANNA ASK N H S D, BUT I'VE HEARD THAT LIKE SOME OF THE HOMEOWNER REHAB PROGRAMS THAT IT'S A LOAN, IT'S, THEY HAVE TO PAY IT BACK.
UM, BUT I KNOW AS FAR AS THE BOND FUND MONEY THAT IS BOND FUND THAT IS GOING INTO THAT, IT, IT'S, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PAID.
I'LL, I'LL GO LISTEN TO THE, TO THE PRESENTATION AND GET THE SPECIFICS.
THE TIME IS NOW 4 0 5 WITHOUT OBJECTION.
WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL 22, JULY.