[00:00:01]
CURRENTLY HAVE QUORUM.WE ARE WAITING ON OUR CHAIR, OUR A CO-CHAIR, BUT I DID NOT SEND OUT THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 30TH MEETING, SO I FIGURED WHILE WE'RE WAITING ON THAT, WE CAN KIND OF REVIEW THAT REAL QUICK.
SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN GO AHEAD AND VOTE AND APPROVE THAT.
SO WE WANT OFFICIALLY START THE MEETING.
LEGAL SAYS WE CAN KIND OF REVIEW NOW.
DON'T MAKE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO IT.
IF THERE'S ANY ADJUSTMENTS Y'ALL WANNA MAKE, WE'LL MAKE THAT MOTION ONCE WE KINDA GET STARTED.
BUT I'LL JUST BRING IT UP AND KIND OF REVIEW IT REAL QUICK.
SO DEFINITELY LET ME KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING.
THIS WAS JUST A ROLL CALL FOR PRESENCE.
WHAT WAS THAT? WELL, I, I'M ALWAYS LOOKING AT THIS SCREEN, WHICH IS A LOT BIGGER.
I FORGET THAT THOSE ARE A LOT SMALLER.
UH, WE NOTED THAT PEACE UTTERLY SHOWED UP AFTER THE APPROVAL OF, UM, OF MINUTES.
SO HE WASN'T THERE FOR THE FIRST ONE.
THIS ONCE AGAIN WAS ALL THE MINUTES FROM MOST OF THE END OF THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
TWO OF THEM FROM THE BUILDING CODE, ROBERT HENLEY, WAS THE MOTION AROUND COMMITTEE TO SECOND.
SO STAFF FIRST WENT OVER THEIR PRESENTATION, NO ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THAT, THAT WAS JUST D S D STAFF GOING OVER ALL THE ADOPTION CODES AND SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT WAS PRESENTED BY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CRYSTAL GONZALEZ.
OUR AGENDA WAS KIND OF STRUCTURED AS IT IS TODAY.
WE DON'T HAVE TO OFFICIALLY FOLLOW THAT.
IT'S MORE OF JUST, YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT SPECIFIC ITEMS TO VOTE AGAINST.
IT IS BROKEN DOWN BY THE ARTICLES UNDER CHAPTER 10, UH, WHICH ALSO REFERENCES ARTICLE THREE, CHAPTER 11.
WE DIDN'T OFFICIALLY TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THOSE OFFICIAL AGENDA ITEMS, BUT AFTER OUR PRESENTATION, WE DID HAVE, UM, LET'S SEE, I WANNA SAY IT WAS SAWS THAT CAME IN AND TALKED ABOUT A FEW ITEMS, AND WE TOOK ONE MOTION ON THAT.
I THINK I'M GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF AS I'M TALKING ABOUT IT.
SO, TESTING FOR LEAD, UH, ON, ON WITHIN PIPES THAT WAS TABLED FOR THIS MEETING, BUT WE DID, UH, APPROVE, UH, MOTION BY BRIAN SMITH AND SECONDED BY MICHAEL RUST TO ADD ADDITIONAL, UH, LANGUAGE FOR WEATHERPROOF TAGS ON SELECTED BACKFLOW PREVENTERS, UH, WHEN THEY'RE INSULATED.
AND THAT WAS ADDED TO CHAPTER 10.
THE ONLY REALLY OTHER MOTION THAT WE TOOK WAS DISCUSSION OF I R C.
SO AS WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE FULL COMMITTEE MEETINGS, WE DISCUSSED WHETHER WE WANTED TO ADOPT THE FULL CHAPTER, UH, FULL I R C OR JUST THE SELECTED CHAPTERS THAT WE TYPICALLY VOTE, UH, TO APPROVE, WHICH ARE THE BUILDING SECTIONS AND THE MECHANICAL REVIEWED AND KINDA STAYED ON THE FENCE.
THEY DIDN'T OFFICIALLY SAY THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GONNA ADOPT, BUT IF WE DO, HERE'S THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
SO THAT WAS KIND OF STILL ON THE TABLE.
THE N E C UH, COMMITTEE, THE ELECTRICAL COMMITTEE VOTED TO NOT DO THAT, SO THEY KIND OF TOOK THEIR SECTION OUT OF IT.
SO WE MOTIONED, UH, BOTH MICHAEL RUST AND BRIAN SMITH.
THERE'S KIND OF TIED UP IN THE SAME MOTION, UH, FUEL GAS CODE TO USE ALL OF THOSE AND NOT THE I R C SECTIONS, AS WELL AS THE ENERGY CODE WE'LL WORK ON.
SO THAT WAS A VOTE, UH, TO NOT ADOPT THOSE.
AND THAT ALL PASSED, UH, BOTH ALL OF THOSE FALL UNDER MOTION BY MICHAEL RUST AND SECONDED BY BRIAN SMITH.
SO ALL THAT WAS REALLY ONE MOTION.
THE LAST ONE WAS THE VESTIBULES.
WE BROUGHT UP THE, UH, PROPOSED CHANGE FOR ADDING VESTIBULE REQUIREMENTS WITHIN, UH, SCHOOLS.
THE MOTION WAS TO REJECT THAT OPTION.
UH, MOTION BY BRIAN SMITH, SECONDED BY RYAN CMES AND IMPROVED WRONG ES.
SO THOSE WERE ALL THE ACTIONS TAKING AT LAST MEETING.
DOES Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ANY EDITS Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO MAKE? ONCE WE GET THE MEETING STARTED, WE CAN KIND OF, UH, GO OVER THAT.
AND BEFORE THE MOTION OR BEFORE THE VOTE, Y'ALL CAN MAKE THAT MOTION.
SO WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE CHAIR OR CO-CHAIR COMES BEFORE, UM, MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE MEETING MINUTES.
[00:05:05]
AND GIMME ONE SECOND.OUR, UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR AMIN TEMAS IS ON WEBEX.
I WANNA MAKE SURE HE'S CAN HEAR AND TALK TO US AS NEEDED.
AMIN, CAN YOU TALK, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE CAN HEAR YOU.
AND THAT, JUST A REMINDER, MAKE SURE WE'RE USING THE MICROPHONES.
ALL OF THEM ARE PUSHED TO TALK, SO YOU GOTTA MAKE SURE YOU HOLD ONTO 'EM.
UH, BUT YEAH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE, ESPECIALLY FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO HEAR AND ANYBODY, WE ARE RECORDING THESE AND PLAYING THEM LIVE, UH, FOR CITIZENS TO LISTEN TO.
SO PLEASE USE THE MIC AS MUCH AS GIVE US AGAIN AND, OKAY.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH THE MEETING.
I THINK WE REALLY JUST NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CHAIR UNTIL ONE OF 'EM SHOWS UP.
SO WE JUST NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY TAKE ON THAT RESPONSIBILITY.
JEREMY, I THINK YOU ARE MUTED.
J JEREMY AND NOMINATE MARK ROSS TO CHAIR THE MEETING UNTIL THE CHAIRMAN OR THE CO-CHAIR CAM.
I JUST NEED IT UNDERNEATH FROM HERE.
SO THE TIME IS 1:07 PM WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
WE, UH, WE'LL START OFF WITH OUR SPANISH INTERPRETERS AVAILABILITY ANNOUNCEMENT.
I'M ONE OF THE SPANISH INTERPRETERS.
NEXT WILL BE A ROLL CALL FOR QUORUM.
WE HAVE 10 POSITIONS HERE, BOTH IN THE PRIMARY AND ALTERNATES COMBINED TO GIVE US A QUORUM FOR THIS MEETING.
SO, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE IS, UH, FOR THE BOARD TO REVIEW AND VOTE ON THE MEETING MINUTES FROM JUNE 30TH, 2022.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? ROBERT? DANLEY.
ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER TWO.
UH, SO I DON'T THINK THE CHAIR'S NOT HERE.
UM, IF HE WANTS TO MAKE A STATEMENT WHEN HE DOES ARRIVE, WE CAN, UH, MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT AVAILABILITY FOR HIM.
BUT WE'LL MOVE INTO, SO WHAT WE HAVE AGENDA ITEMS, UH, I THINK TWO THROUGH 14 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IS BROKEN DOWN BY THE ARTICLES UNDER CHAPTER
[00:10:01]
10.UH, ONE OF THOSE ARTICLES REFERENCES CHAPTER 11, THE ADOPTION OF THE ARTICLE THREE, WHICH IS THE ADOPTION OF THE I F C AND ITS PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
SO WE'VE KIND OF PRESENTED THAT ALL TO THE COMMITTEE OR TO THE BOARD.
UH, WE'VE GIVEN YOU ALL OUR DRAFTS THAT WE, WE CURRENTLY ARE AT ANY CHANGES.
THERE ARE SOME CHU CHANGES THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY IN OUR DOCUMENT AND WHAT WAS SENT OUT TO Y'ALL.
THOSE ARE MOSTLY CLERICAL IN NATURE.
UH, I SAY IN NATURE BECAUSE WHAT IT IS, IS WE'RE GOING BACK AND WE'RE REVIEWING THE MEETINGS, SOME OF THE DIALOGUE THAT WAS GOING THROUGH, AND WE WOULD JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY THE COMMITTEES OR THE VOTES THAT WERE MADE IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE PAPER.
SO IT MAY NOT BE A COMMENT HERE, UH, OR MISSPELLED WORD.
IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OF SUBSTANCE.
THE INTENT IS WE'RE MIRRORING EXACTLY WHAT WAS VOTED AND APPROVED BY THOSE COMMITTEES.
SO IN THAT SENSE, IT'S STILL CLERICAL AND NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES.
NOW, THERE ARE SIX ITEMS THAT WE STILL KIND OF HAVE TABLED THAT WE WANT TO PRESENT AND STILL GET A FULL APPROVAL FROM THIS BOARD THAT WERE EITHER NOT BROUGHT UP TO THE COMMITTEE, WE'RE APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEES.
AND THERE'S STILL SOME DISCUSSION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AT THE FULL BOARD LEVEL, WHETHER IT BE STAFF INTERNALLY OR SOME EXTERNAL, UM, CITIZENS OR ORGANIZATIONS THAT WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GONNA START OFF WITH.
ONCE WE KINDA GO THROUGH THOSE AND Y'ALL LET US KNOW HOW YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE, THEN WE CAN KINDA STEP THROUGH EACH ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS AND, YOU KNOW, EITHER HAVE ONE VOTE AT THE END TO ACCEPT ALL.
IF WE NEED TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER MEETING, THEN WE CAN DO THAT.
OR IF WE WANT TO GO THROUGH AND JUST ACCEPT SPECIFIC ONES WE CAN KIND OF MOVE FORWARD WITH.
WE'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD TO THE NEXT ONE.
SO I'LL KINDA LEAVE THAT UP TO THE, THE BOARD ON HOW I WANNA PROGRESS AFTER WE FINISH UP THESE SIX.
UM, ACTUALLY I PROBABLY SHOOTING MYSELF IN THE FOOT HERE, BUT THE FIRST ONE IS THE RESIDENTIAL CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION.
UH, MICHAEL RUST IS USUALLY, UH, HE'S HAD A LOT OF, UH, DISCUSSION WITH THIS ONE.
I DON'T WANNA MOVE FORWARD ON THIS ONE UNTIL HE ARRIVES.
HE'S, I BELIEVE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE.
MARK, IS THAT STILL THE CASE? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO I DON'T WANT TALK ABOUT THIS ONE 'CAUSE I KNOW HE DOES HAVE, UH, SOME ITEMS THAT HE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS ON IT.
SO I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL MOVE TO THE RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN DEFINITION UNDER, UH, CHAPTER 10 DASH ONE 13.
SO THERE'S A DEFINITION CHANGE AND AN UPDATE TO THE REGISTRATION OF CONTRACTORS FOR RE ELECTRICAL.
AND I'LL PULL THOSE UP REAL QUICK.
AND CAN YOU MAKE THE VIEW A LITTLE BIGGER? SO THE FIRST WE'LL LOOK AT IS JUST THE, UH, DEFINITION OF RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN.
IS THAT CORRECT, VALERIE? YES.
SO FOR THE RECORD, UH, AFTER THE VOTE FOR THE MEETING MINUTES, UH, UH, WHEREVER YOU WOULD LIKE, HERE'S YOUR PUSH TALK.
THIS IS YOUR, THAT'LL STAY ON.
HUH? I FELL IN FOR YOU WHILE YOU'RE, I JUST KNOCKED AN HOUR OFF THE MEETING, GUYS.
SO LET ME GO BACK TO THE MARKUP SO Y'ALL CAN SEE.
SO, RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN ORIGINAL VERSION WAS A PERSON LICENSED BY THE STATE WHO MAY ONLY PERFORM ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS IN SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS, NOT EXCEEDING THREE STORIES.
SO WE'VE ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN, DEFINING IT AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AS A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN AND NEW SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY.
SO, UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE, THE UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'RE NOT SOMEBODY THAT CAN GO INTO AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AND REWIRE.
THEY'D HAVE TO BE AT THAT POINT, A JOURNEYMAN OR A LICENSED ELECTRICIAN OR UNDER THEM.
UM, AND THEN ALSO, UH, WHO WORKS UNDER THE GENERAL SUPERVISION OF A MASTER ELECTRICIAN ON BEHALF OF, OF AN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR OR EMPLOYING GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY WHO PERFORMS ELECTRICAL WORK AS DEFINED IN THIS CHAPTER.
SO THAT'S THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE DEFINITION OF A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN.
AND THAT KIND OF CORRELATES TO THE CHANGE THAT WE WANNA MAKE UNDER SECTION 10 DASH ONE 13 THAT I CAN BRING UP AFTER THIS.
UH, ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEFINITION CHANGE? IS THAT DEFINITION SOMEWHERE IN THE STATE STATUTE ON? SO THAT WAS THE QUESTION I WAS GONNA ASK AS WELL, IS HOW DOES THIS DEFINITION FOR RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN COMPARE TO THE DEFINITION PROVIDED IN T D L R? I THINK WE'RE CLAR, I'M SORRY.
THIS IS VALERIE GLEASON, CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR.
[00:15:01]
I THINK WE'RE CLARIFYING MORE THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT, UH, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO WORK ON, IN OTHER WORDS, NEW, UH, RATHER THAN ALL RESIDENTIAL WORK, UH, WE KIND OF FEEL LIKE WITH THEIR LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE, NOT SLAMMING ANYBODY, BUT THAT IT'S A MINIMUM OF TWO YEARS TO BE ABLE TO TEXT FOR THE LICENSE, THAT THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL CAN BE MORE INVOLVED AND REALLY REQUIRES A LEVEL OF A JOURNEYMAN ELECTRICIAN TO GET INTO.SO IF THEY'RE DOING A UNIT GETS BURNED TO THE GROUND OR SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGE WHERE ALL THE ELECTRICAL HAS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF A BUILDING AND RE-PUT IN, WOULD THAT BE NEW? WE'VE HAD SEVERAL BURN JOBS ON APARTMENT BUILDINGS WHERE THEY'VE HAD TO BUILD FROM THE GROUND UP.
I WOULD, I WOULD INTERPRET THAT AS ALLOWABLE AS NEW.
AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION THAT DIDN'T GET ANSWERED IS, IS THIS DEFINITION CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE STATE SAYS? BECAUSE THE STATE HAS A PROHIBITION THAT IF THEY GRANT THIS KIND OF LICENSE, CITIES ARE PROHIBITED FROM DOING ANYTHING THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THAT STATUTE.
SO IS THIS THE SAME DEFINITION AS THE STATE OR IS THERE NO SUCH THING AS A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN IN THE STATE STATUTE? I WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO RESEARCH THAT QUICKLY.
UM, I BELIEVE IT IS STRICTER THAN STATE STATUTE.
WHAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH IS THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CHARGE FOR THEIR REGISTRATION HERE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO, BUT USUALLY IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO STUFF UNDER THE STATE STATUTE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO IT IN EVERY CITY AND WHEREVER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
SO WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE THE DEFINITIONS ARE, YOU KNOW, DO NOT CONFLICT.
YES, I CAN CHECK THAT REAL QUICK.
UM, WE'LL TRY TO GET THE UPDATE UPDATED HERE.
SO ONCE AGAIN, THE OTHER ITEM IN REGARDS TO THE RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN, THIS IS ARTICLE 13 I BELIEVE NOW, OR ADJUSTING, BUT THIS IS THE REGISTRATION OF CONTRACTORS.
THIS IS THE SECTION FOR ELECTRICIANS BEING REGISTERED WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
AND WE'RE ADDING SOME DEFINITION, OR NOT REALLY DEFINITION, SOME REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN UNDER THIS SECTION.
UH, NOTHING'S REALLY BEING REMOVED FROM THIS SECTION, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY TALKING ABOUT JOURNEYMAN ELECTRICIANS AND JOURNEYMAN SIGN ELECTRICIAN.
WERE ADDING IN THERE THE RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN.
WE'VE HAD A RATIO OF JOURNEYMAN ELECTRICIAN TO APPRENTICES, UH, FOR SEVERAL YEARS IN THE CHAPTER 10.
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS ALIGN THE RESIDENTIAL WIREMEN WITH A RATIO OF APPRENTICES, AGAIN, BECAUSE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO TEST FOR THIS TYPE OF LICENSE IN HALF THE TIME, EXPERIENCE 4,000 HOURS VERSUS 8,000 HOURS.
AND THEN I FOUND THE RESIDENTIAL WIRE DEFINITION, ACTUALLY, UH, MR. BURNELL FOUND IT FOR ME AS A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN MEANS A PERSON LICENSED UNDER THIS CHAPTER WHO MAY ONLY PERFORM ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS IN SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS NOT EXCEEDING FOUR STORIES.
SO I MEAN, I, AND SOMEBODY WITH THE ELECTRICAL BACKGROUND, BUT THE STATE DEFINITIONS ARE GONNA PREVAIL.
WELL, THAT, THAT'S THE QUESTION WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH SINCE THE ONSET OF THE SUB SUBCOMMITTEES IS MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A VIOLATION OF THE RECENTLY PASSED, UH, STATUTE.
BUT, UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS A CORRELATION OR CONCERN WITH THE CITY OR NOT.
UH, JUST SO I CAN UNDERSTAND, RON, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE, OR THE STATE STATUTE THAT GOT ADDRESSED IS, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M NOT THINKING OF THE SAME ONE WHERE IT'S THE MATERIAL.
IS THERE ANOTHER ONE THAT I MIGHT JUST BE SLIPPING MY MIND RIGHT NOW OF WELL, THAT, THAT, THAT, YEAH.
THE MATERIALS ONE IS, IS THE ONE THAT I KNOW WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH.
I DON'T THINK THIS ONE APPLIES, BUT BEFORE WE GO MOVE
[00:20:01]
FORWARD.YOU'RE JUST SAYING THE SAME VEIN OF, YOU KNOW, STATE SAYS THIS.
YEAH, WE CAN HAVE, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL GET WITH LEGAL AND SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH AN ANSWER TO THAT.
UH, IDEALLY WE CAN GET THAT RESOLVED TODAY AND MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
UH, BUT YEAH, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AND WE CAN TABLE THIS FOR THE, FOR THE TIME BEING AND MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM.
COME BACK AROUND TO THAT IF TIME, TIME, I'M WILLING.
THE, THE OTHER THING TO BE CAUTIOUS OF IS THAT, IS THE DEFINITION THAT VALERIE THAT YOU PROVIDED IS CHAPTER 1305.
BUT THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL DEFINITION UNDER CHAPTER 73 OF THE T D L R AS WELL, THAT THAT ONE READS AN INDIVIDUAL LICENSE AS A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN WHO WORKS UNDER THE GENERAL SUPERVISION OF A MASTER ELECTRICIAN ON BEHALF OF ELECTRICAL CONTRACT OR EMPLOYING GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY WHILE PERFORMING ELECTRIC WORK THAT IS LIMITED TO ELECTRICAL INSTALLATIONS AND SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, NOT EXCEEDING FOUR STORIES.
SO THERE'S SOME, A LOT OF SIMILARITIES, BUT A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND WHAT THE LANGUAGE IS THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT FOR THIS CHAPTER 10.
SO, UH, THAT IS THE DEFINITION.
UH, ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE ON KIND OF WHAT I WOULD SAY, THIS ISN'T THE DEFINITION OF WHAT RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT IS, BUT WHAT THE STIPULATIONS OF A RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN AND WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO AS REGISTERED WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
AND, AND RIGHT NOW IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT IF, YOU KNOW, SO IF THE CITY WANTED TO ESTABLISH AN ADDITIONAL DEFINITION WITH, WITH STRICTER REQUIREMENTS, I BELIEVE WE'RE OKAY, BUT JUST, WE JUST NEED CONFIRMATION.
YEAH, NO, WE'LL DEFINITELY CHECK THAT ON THE DEFINITION.
BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO SOMETHING AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, CITIES CAN MAKE YOU REGISTER.
THEY CAN MAKE YOU PULL A PERMIT, THEY CAN MAKE YOU DO A WHOLE LOT OF STUFF, BUT YOU CAN'T BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE STATUTE, WHICH IS THE SAME LOGIC THAT IF YOU HAVE AN ELECTRICAL LICENSE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS, WHY YOU DON'T NEED ONE TO DO WORK ANYWHERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
THIS WOULD AT LEAST FROM MY READING APPLY.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE JUST ADOPT THE STATE'S DEFINITION SO THAT EVERYBODY'S IN COMPLIANCE.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT, IF I HAVE A WIRE MAN'S LICENSE, THE STATE SAYS I CAN DO X, Y, Z.
SO VALERIE, ANY COMMENT TO THAT? ANY THOUGHTS? WELL, THE STATE, UH, DEFINITION DOES SAY, UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE WORD NEW AND IT DOES ALLOW THEM TO GO UP TO FOUR STORIES.
I THINK THE REASONING BEHIND THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE USE OF, UH, NON-METALLIC SHEATH CABLE OR AS WE KNOW IT ROMEX, UM, WHICH WE ALSO KNOW BY THE STATE STATUTE IS PRETTY MUCH GONNA BE ALLOWED ANYWHERE.
UM, SO THAT'S THE MAIN DIFFERENCE TO ME IS THAT THE FACT THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IT TO BE NEW ONLY, AND WE HAVE THREE STORIES RATHER THAN FOUR THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN THERE, THE THREE STORIES.
YEAH, WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AND, UH, SEE WE CAN UPDATE THAT AND SEE WHAT LEGAL HAS TO SAY AS WELL.
AND WE'LL TRY TO, I DON'T, I MEAN, YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL GO WITH THAT AND LOOK INTO IT.
UH, SO BACK TO THIS SECTION HERE.
ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, APPROACH TO THIS ONE HERE? OKAY.
UM, I GUESS THE BOARD, WE'LL PROBABLY HOLD OFF ON LOOKING AT MAYBE MAKING AN ACTION ON THIS ONE UNTIL WE DEFINE, MAKE THAT DEFINITION A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
BUT LIKE I SAID, WE'LL TRY TO WRECK THAT UP, UH, TODAY AND TRY TO GET THAT RESOLVED.
SO GOING BACK TO THE LIST OF ITEMS AND CHAIR.
SO WHAT THIS IS, IS THIS WAS THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WE WANTED TO SPECIFICALLY GO OVER TODAY BEFORE KIND OF JUST GOING THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT ARTICLES.
UH, I TABLED THE FIRST ONE BECAUSE MICHAEL RUST ISN'T HERE.
I KNOW HE'S BEEN WANTING TO DISCUSS THAT WITH US, UM, AT HIS, I THINK HE IS STILL SUPPOSED TO BE HERE TODAY.
SO HOPEFULLY WE DO GET A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
UM, IF, IF NOT, THEN YOU KNOW, I, WE'LL PROBABLY GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT IT IF HE'S NOT HERE.
BUT IF HE ISSUES SHOWING UP A LITTLE BIT LATE, WE'D LIKE TO, UH, WAIT TILL THEN.
SO THE NEXT ONE IS THE MAINTENANCE PERMITS FOR ONE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLING RENTALS.
LET'S SEE, CRYSTAL, SHOULD I PULL UP WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE UNDER ARTICLE E? I KNOW WE RECEIVED SOME INFORMATION FROM BOARD MEMBER ROSS, WHAT WOULD Y'ALL LIKE ME TO PULL UP AT THIS TIME? MAYBE ROSS, IF YOU WANNA DIRECT ME ON THAT.
MARK, DO YOU WANNA LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU PROPOSED FOR THE, UM, MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING MAINTENANCE PERMITS? YEAH, WITH THAT, I THINK IT'S, UH, IT'S ALONG THE LINES OF THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE.
YEAH, I MEAN, I DIDN'T CHANGE WHAT THE PERMIT IS.
I JUST CHANGED THAT IT'S AVAILABLE TO BOTH ONE AND TWO FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS LIKE HOTELS AND OTHER OFFICE BUILDINGS WHERE YOU HAVE PEOPLE DOING ELECTRICAL WORK, MINOR ELECTRICAL WORK, MINOR PLUMBING WORK THAT
[00:25:01]
WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT, BUT THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED UNDER STATE LAW NOT TO HAVE A PERMIT FOR.SO I JUST GAVE THEM THE OPTION THAT THEY COULD DO IT IF THEY WANT.
THE ONLY REQUIRED PERSON TO GET IT WOULD BE APARTMENTS.
CRYSTAL, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO RESEND THAT TO ME? UM, LOG THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO IT RIGHT HERE, BUT YOU SEND IT OVER TO ME, I CAN OPEN THAT UP.
SO WHAT I'LL DO WHILE I'M WAITING ON THAT IS WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PULL UP WHAT WE HAVE ON THE DRAFT THAT WE SUBMITTED OUT TO THE BOARD.
IF SOMEBODY COULD REMIND ME WHAT SECTION THAT WAS? 10 0 6.
I'M GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION.
NO, YOU'RE GOING THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
SO THIS IS THE SECTION IN QUESTION.
AND THIS IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO STAFF, WHICH WAS THEN LATER PRESENTED TO, UM, THE FULL BOARD FROM BOARD MEMBER ROSS IN REGARDS TO THIS.
WHO'S, DO YOU HAVE MY LANGUAGE SOMEWHERE? IT SHOULD BE ON NEXT PAGE, JEREMY.
SO MY PROPOSAL ALLOW A PERMIT AT THE, UH, OPTION OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS OR COMMU COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH WOULD BE HOTELS OFFICE BUILDINGS TO ALSO PULL THESE PERMITS.
AND THEN ALSO FOR MULTI-FAMILY OR SINGLE FAMILY UNDER, UH, FOUR DWELLING UNITS OR LESS, IT WOULD BE AT THEIR OPTION.
SO THEY COULD EITHER PULL THIS PERMIT OR HAVE A LICENSED PERSON DO IT.
BUT NO, YOU KNOW, MIDDLE GROUND, BECAUSE THE STATE LAW BASICALLY SAYS THAT THE MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING WORK CAN BE DONE BY THE OWNER'S EMPLOYEES.
AND SO THIS WOULD JUST ALLOW THEM TO PICK WHICH AVENUE THEY WANT TO GO.
AND, AND THERE'S NO REAL CHANGES OTHER THAN ADDING THOSE.
I MOVED SOME STUFF AROUND TO MAKE IT WHAT I THOUGHT WAS MORE CLEAR, BUT I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE, UH, AMENDED LANGUAGE.
SO RIGHT NOW, THIS MECHANICAL, THIS MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING MAINTENANCE PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
SO THAT ALLOWS OUR INSPECTORS TO GO OUT, CHECK THE LOGS, SEE WHAT WORK HAS BEEN DONE, MAKE AN INSPECTION IF THEY FEEL NECESSARY, OR, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE ANNUAL, THEY DO IT AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR, SOMETIMES MORE, UM, VERIFY AGAIN, THE LOG IS UP TO DATE AND THAT INSPECTIONS ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE.
THE CONCERN FROM THE INSPECTION TEAM ON THIS ITEM IS IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, RIGHT? SO IF MARK HAS 50 RENTAL PROPERTIES UNDER HIS MANAGEMENT COMPANY GOING TO THOSE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, WHERE IS THE LOG HELD? IS THERE ACCESS? UM, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE GOING TO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, UH, TO THE LEASING OFFICE AND SOMEBODY'S ABLE TO LET THEM INTO THE, TO THE, UH, TENANT SPACE.
A CONCERN WOULD BE, UM, HOW TO DO THAT FOR MULTIPLE LOCATIONS.
UH, THE ACCESS AND WHERE'S THAT LOG HELD, THOSE ITEMS? WELL, CRYSTAL, THE LOG WOULD BE HELD JUST LIKE IT IS NOW, WHERE WE HAVE BUILDINGS THAT ARE MORE THAN FIVE UNITS THAT DON'T HAVE AN OFFICE AT THE PROPERTY.
ALL THOSE LOGS ARE IN THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT OFFICE.
THEY COME IN, THEY INSPECT THE LOG, AND THEN IF THEY WANT TO GO OUT THERE, WE GO OUT THERE WITH THEM.
I MEAN, IT'S JUST THE WAY FOR YOU TO KNOW WHAT WORK IS BEING DONE, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW NONE OF THAT WORK IS RECORDED AND I GUARANTEE YOU ZERO OF IT IS GETTING PERMITTED.
[00:30:01]
THE ABILITY, IF YOU WISH TO GO LOOK AT THE WORK, YOU KNOW, THE FEE STRUCTURE WOULD BE DIFFERENT.AND WE DO UNDERSTAND THAT, AND IT'S AT THE OWNER'S OPTION OF WHETHER THEY WANT TO DO THAT OR GET AN INDIVIDUAL PERMIT.
MOST OF THIS WORK IS NOT COVERED BY ANY PERMIT IF IT'S DONE BY A LICENSED INDIVIDUAL.
IT'S OTHER PLACES IN, IN THE CHAPTER 10.
BUT IF IT'S DONE LEGALLY BY SOMEONE, BY STATE LAW IS ALLOWED TO DO IT.
AND I JUST THINK IT'S PRUDENT TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE AS YOU ALL START UP ON THE, UH, ARE YOU LICENSED OR NOT? AND THE TEAMS START GOING BACK OUT TO CATCH PEOPLE DOING WORK.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS ALSO CUTS OUT SOME OF THAT WHERE WE CAN SAY WE HAVE A ANNUAL PERMIT, THEY CAN LOOK IT UP ON THEIR COMPUTER, KNOW THAT THEY HAVE IT, AND KNOW THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE AREN'T LICENSED DOING THE WORK IS LEGAL.
SO YOU'RE ACTUALLY, UH, SUGGESTING THAT, UH, ONE PERMIT WOULD COVER MULTIPLE HOMES.
DO YOU WANT TO LIMIT ON THAT PERMIT AS MANY HOW MANY HOMES? NO, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A MANAGEMENT COMPANY WHO MANAGES, LET'S SAY 200 HOMES WOULD JUST REGISTER ALL 200.
THOSE ADDRESSES WOULD BE PUT IN THE THING IN THE SYSTEM.
SO THE INSPECTOR GOING OUT THAT SEES SOMEBODY OUT THERE DOING WORK AND THINKS THEY'RE UNLICENSED, COULD LOOK UP AND SEE, OH NO, THERE IS A PERMIT ON THIS ADDRESS.
VERSUS THE BOOTLEG CONTRACTOR WHO THERE IS NO PERMIT.
AND BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT LICENSED, YOU KNOW, THEY NEED A PERMIT.
AND I JUST THINK IT IT FOR THE SAFETY OF EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
IT DOESN'T, YOU KNOW, TAKE ANY BUSINESS AWAY FROM LICENSED PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT DOING THAT WORK NOW ANYWAY.
BUT IT PREVENT, IT WOULD HELP THE CITY PREVENT PEOPLE THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, BOOTLEG CONTRACTORS AND NOT EMPLOYEES OF THE OWNER, YOU KNOW, ASSIST IN THAT.
SO I BELIEVE THEN THE CITY'S, UH, CHALLENGE WAS HOW TO MONITOR THAT MANY DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
WHY WOULD IT BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN, SAY, AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT HAD 400 DIFFERENT UNITS? WELL, ALL THOSE UNITS ARE AT ONE ADDRESS.
THIS IS 200 UNITS ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY, FOR INSTANCE, RIGHT? IF THERE WERE MULTIPLE, YEAH, 200 SEPARATE ADDRESSES AND LOCATIONS.
MARK, DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS? IF THERE'S NO, NO OFFICE, LIKE SAY YOU GOT 10 DUPLEXES, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE AT THE PROPERTY MANAGER'S OFFICE, THE, THAT WOULD BE THE REGISTERED PERMIT HOLDER.
THAT'S WHERE THE INSPECTOR WOULD SHOW UP TO LOOK AT THE BOOK.
THEY OPEN IT, THEY FLIP THROUGH IT, AND THEN IF THEY WANT TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT IT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN EITHER SET AN APPOINTMENT TO GO LOOK AT IT.
NORMALLY THEY, THEY GIVE US A, GIVE US A HEADS UP THAT THEY'RE COMING.
SO ALL THE PAPERWORK'S THERE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GOING OUT TO LOOK AT MAYBE ONE OUT OF ALL THE THINGS.
A LOT OF TIMES THEY JUST DRIVE AROUND AND LOOK AT IT BEFORE THEY COME IN.
AND IF ALL THE CASES ARE CLOSED AND EVERYTHING'S FINE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT MUCH INSPECTION.
IF THEY FIND A BUNCH OF STUFF IN THEIR DRIVE THROUGH THAT'S WRONG, THEY'LL COME IN AND WANT TO GO LOOK AT A BUNCH OF STUFF.
YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU CAN BUILD THE SYSTEM WHERE YOU CAN JUST UPLOAD THOSE SO YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO DO A WHOLE BUNCH OF DEBT DEBT ENTRY OR DELIVER IT IN A CVS C S V FILE OR A, YOU KNOW, EXCEL SPREADSHEET WHERE YOU CAN DO IT.
IT JUST, THE CITY IS NOT GETTING ANY REVENUE FROM THIS THERE.
THIS, YOU KNOW, COULD HELP FUND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE TEAMS THAT ARE OUT LOOKING FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING WORK WITHOUT THE PERMITS.
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS, IS THE STATE LAW SAYS THESE PEOPLE CAN DO THE WORK, WHICH THE CITY CANNOT STOP THEM FROM DOING.
BUT THE CITY WILL NOT ISSUE IF MY, MY GUY WENT IN TO PULL A PERMIT TO REPLACE A PLUG BECAUSE HE'S NOT LICENSED, THE CITY WOULDN'T ISSUE THE PLUG, THE, THE PERMIT.
SO THIS IS A WAY TO MAKE SURE WE ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.
AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN A CA YOU KNOW, IN OUR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, LIKE OUR MINI STORAGES WHERE WE DO, YOU KNOW, ELECTRICAL REPLACE FIXTURES ALL THE
[00:35:01]
TIME, WHICH, YOU KNOW, IF I WAS LICENSED I WOULDN'T NEED A PERMIT, BUT BECAUSE I'M NOT LICENSED, I NEED A PERMIT, BUT I CAN'T GET A PERMIT.AND SO WE WOULD JUST TAKE OUT A, A MAINTENANCE PERMIT.
YOU COULD DO IT BY SQUARE FOOT ON THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS OFFICE BUILDINGS HAVE PEOPLE DOING ALL THIS, YOU KNOW, WORK, NOBODY'S LICENSED, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALL MAINTENANCE ENGINEERS.
AND SO I JUST THINK THIS WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
AND IF YOU WANTED TO PUT, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF DELAY TO GIVE YOU ALL TIME TO, YOU KNOW, GET THE SYSTEM UP AND GOING, BECAUSE JANUARY MIGHT BE A CRUNCH.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM, BUT I JUST THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
SO THEN THE GROUP THAT WOULD MAKE THOSE, UM, SPONTANEOUS CHECKS, IS THAT CODE COMPLIANCE OR IS THAT THE STRIKE TEAM? IT'S OUR INSPECTION TEAM IN GENERAL.
CRYSTAL, UM, WOULD THIS, UM, HAS YOUR STAFF LOOKED TO SEE WHETHER THIS WILL CAUSE A INCREASE IN YOUR WORKLOAD AND THAT YOU NEED ADDITIONAL STAFFING NOW TO GO TO ALL THESE HOUSES ACROSS TOWN AND, UM, BUSINESSES AND HOTELS AND THINGS THAT ARE NOW IN ADDITION TO JUST THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES? WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THAT IMPACT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
COULD THIS WORK SIMILAR TO THE SPECIAL INSPECTION LOG? THERE SHOULD BE, THERE'S AN EXISTING LOG.
IT, IT'S, IT IS SIMILAR TO THE SPECIAL INSPECTION ON, ON WHAT WORK WAS PERFORMED ON WHAT DAY AND BY WHO.
UM, SO IT WOULD DOCUMENT THOSE ITEMS. DOESN'T THERE HAVE TO BE A FINAL LETTER THAT IT'S COMPLETED? NO, THERE'S, THERE'S NO FINAL LETTER.
IT'S A, IT'S BASICALLY AN ONGOING PERMIT THAT'S RENEWED ANNUALLY.
I JUST TRY TO GET SOME
BUT WE'RE IN A CATCH 22 WHERE IF YOU HAVE A FIRE OR SOMETHING AND IT SAYS, OKAY, WHO REPLACED THIS PLUG? AND WE SAY, WE DID, AND THEY GO LOOK AT THE CODE AND THE CODE SAYS YOU CAN'T DO IT AND WE DON'T HAVE A PERMIT AND WE'RE NOT AUTHORIZED OR BETTER YET A TOILET OR A PIECE OF A SEWER LINE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, EITHER EXEMPT US IN THE SECTION FROM HAVING TO GET A PERMIT OR CHANGE IT TO ALLOW THE PERMIT TO BE GOTTEN.
JOE, MILTON, YOU HAVE ANY, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? YES, MA'AM.
UH, MILTON MORALES PLUMBING INSPECTOR, THE ISSUE I HAVE, OR I THINK WE WOULD HAVE ON THE INSPECTION SIDE WOULD BE RECORD KEEPING.
IF WE WERE TO ISSUE PERMITS, I THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE PER PAR, UH, PROPERTY.
IF YOU HAVE 200 PROPERTIES LISTED UNDER ONE PERMIT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE AS FAR AS KEEPING TRACK OF IT OR DETAILING, UH, VISIT AT THIS PROPERTY AT SO-AND-SO.
AND THEN VISITING A PROPERTY ACROSS TOWN, MUCH LESS HOW ARE THE RECORDS GONNA BE KEPT? I HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEING UPLOADED TO THE SYSTEM, WHICH I THINK WOULD BE OKAY, BUT IF Y'ALL ARE THINKING THAT WE'RE GONNA MAKE AN INSPECTION, EXCUSE ME, OVER AT MARBACH AND THEN DRIVE INTO TOWN SOMEWHERE, WHEREVER YOUR OFFICE IS AT, AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT A TRIP, YOU KNOW, ON ONE SIDE OF TOWN DRIVING OVER TO THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN, UH, TO VIEW THESE DOCUMENTS.
SO AGAIN, IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS WERE TO BE DONE, I THINK IT SHOULD BE DONE MAYBE FIVE TO 10 PROPERTIES ON SEPARATE PERMITS, UM, OR INDIVIDUALLY PERMIT FOR PROPER RECORD KEEPING.
BUT YOU ARE, IF YOU, IF YOU GO TO PAGE 10, YOU ALREADY ARE ALLOWING MULTIPLE LOCATIONS.
SO I CAN SIGN UP A THOUSAND UNITS NOW OF FIVE UNITS PER PROPERTY AT UNDER ONE PERMIT AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
CURRENTLY, IF YOU GO TO THE LAST MONEY CATEGORY, AND WE DO THIS I BELIEVE, SO IT SAYS ANNUAL MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE PERMIT FEE FOR MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, A HUNDRED DOLLARS PLUS $4 PER RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT UNIT.
SO YOU'RE ALREADY ALLOWING THIS, IT'S JUST ALLOWING MORE TO BE ADDED TO IT.
[00:40:03]
EXCUSE ME, THIS IS, UH, CHIEF INSPECTOR FRIS, I'M OVER HERE MECHANICAL, UM,THAT'S WHY WE KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ISSUE.
WE SHOW UP TO A A PROPERTY AND THEY'RE LIKE, OH, WELL WE'LL REPLACE THE UNIT AND IT'S ACROSS TOWN.
I'M LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S TIME MONEY THAT THE INSPECTORS AS, AS IT IS.
WE'RE ALREADY IN A TIME CRUNCH AND THAT'S WHERE THE ISSUE IS COMING IN, UH, BECAUSE WE ARE GOING BY WHAT THE PERMIT SAYS AND IT SHOWS THIS ADDRESS.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE GOING.
SO WHAT, WHAT, UH, MR. MORALES IS SAYING IS THAT IF WE WERE TO HAVE INDIVIDUAL PERMITS, WE'LL BE ACTUALLY GOING TO THE PROPERTY AND CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT IF ANY WORK WAS DONE, WE CAN INSPECT IT AT THE TIME.
ALSO TO, TO WHAT YOU HAD SAID EARLIER, IF WE SEE SOMEBODY DOING WORK, UH, WE'RE GONNA STOP.
AND WHETHER THEY HAVE A PERMIT OR NOT, THAT IS FINE, BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA VERIFY THAT THE PERSON WHO'S ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK IS LICENSED TO BE DOING THAT TYPE OF WORK, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE.
THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU.
THE STATE LAW PROHIBITS YOU FROM REQUIRING THE PEOPLE THAT WORK ON MY EMPLOYEE, MY EMPLOYEES FROM HAVING ANY KIND OF LICENSE.
BUT DO THEY HAVE TO BE REGISTERED WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS? NOPE.
IT, THERE'S A, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE I PUT IN THE AIR CONDITIONING, THERE'S JUST A PROHIBIT, THERE'S A PROHIBIT.
THE STATE PROHIBITS YOU FROM REQUIRING THEM TO HAVE LICENSES AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO REGISTER AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING.
THEY'RE JUST GRANTED THE AUTHORITY LIKE A HOMEOWNER TO DO THE WORK.
SO I BELIEVE THE WAY, UH, THE WAY IT'S EXPRESSED IS AS LONG AS THAT PARTICULAR PERSON DOESN'T TURN AROUND AND CHARGE PUBLIC FOR THE SAME TYPE OF WORK, I BELIEVE THEY, THEY HAVE TO BE AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COMPANY TO BE AUTHORIZED TO DO THE WORK.
GENERALLY, WE EITHER TAKE OUT THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE PERMITS OR ALLOW THE PERMITS TO HAPPEN.
AND I DON'T HAVE A PREFERENCE EITHER WAY, BUT TAKE US OUT OF THE CATCH 22.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LICENSE.
YOU WON'T ISSUE A PERMIT TO SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A LICENSE.
AND ON OUR, ON OUR ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PERMIT WITH MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, THE ADDRESS FOR THE PERMIT HOLDER IS OUR OFFICE.
AND THEN YOU COME IN AND YOU KNOW, THE BOOK'S THERE, EVERYTHING, IF YOU WANT TO GO LOOK AT IT HAVE ADDED MOST OF THE TIME THEN INSPECTORS ARE JUST MAKING A DRIVE THROUGH AND IF THEY DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG, THEY JUST COME IN, ASK TO SEE THE PERMIT BOOK.
THE PERMIT BOOK IS THERE WITH ALL THE WORK ORDERS WE'VE DONE.
AND THAT'S THE END OF THE DISCUSSION.
SO AGAIN, CRYSTAL, YOU SAID IT WAS A IN, UH, INSPECTION TEAM, IS THAT A TEAM FROM THE STRIKE TEAM? NO, JUST OUR REGULAR INSPECTION TEAM.
SO IT WOULD SHOW UP ON THEIR, THEY ARE ALREADY PERFORMING THESE INSPECTIONS FOR THE ACCO APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
THESE MAINTENANCE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR THOSE OCCUPANCIES.
UM, SO THEY, THEY DO HAVE THESE DURING THEIR REGULAR SCHEDULES.
IT MAY INCREASE, UH, AS WILLIAM SAID, THAT COULD BE AN IMPACT THAT WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT YET.
UH, AND COULD, COULD INCREASE, UM, THOSE TYPES OF INSPECTIONS FOR OUR INSPECTION TEAM.
BUT THE FEES WOULD ALSO BE INCREASING AND HOPEFULLY YOU WOULD SET THE RATE COMMENSURATE TO COVER WHATEVER THAT WAS.
DO Y'ALL HAVE A PREFERENCE FOR EITHER ADDING IT OR REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR THAT WORK TO BE PERMANENT, MILTON? YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK SPEAKING ON THE INSPECTION SIDE, WE'D WANT TO KEEP THIS UNDER FORM SOME FORM OF PERMIT.
'CAUSE CURRENTLY IT WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT OF STANDALONE PERMIT, WHICH KINDA GOING BACK TO THE QUESTION OF WORKLOAD, THAT THAT WORK SHOULD FALL UNDER A STANDALONE PERMIT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE US TO GO OUT AND DO THAT INSPECTION TO CLOSE THE PERMIT.
SO WE, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVING SEEN HOW THIS IS ALL GONNA WORK OUT.
I MEAN, POTENTIALLY IT MIGHT REDUCE A LITTLE BIT OF THE SCOPE, SCOPE OF WORK BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND INSPECT EVERY SINGLE ONE.
IT'S KIND OF A, YOU KNOW, SPOT CHECK TYPE APPROACH THAT WE GO THROUGH THE MAINTENANCE.
SO WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, IT COULD BE INCREASE, IT COULD BE A DECREASE.
WE REALLY DON'T KNOW AT THIS TIME.
IT'S JUST TOO BIG OF AN UNKNOWN TO, TO BE ABLE TO
[00:45:01]
QUANTIFY.BUT AS FAR AS THE QUESTION OF REMOVING IT AS A PERMANENT REQUIREMENT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS OF IT BE FOR HOMEOWNERS.
HOW DO WE SAY THAT A RESIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW, A A RENTAL RESIDENTIAL DOESN'T REQUIRE THIS PERMIT, BUT A SOMEBODY THAT LIVES THERE DOES REQUIRE THE PERMIT FOR THE EXACT SAME WORK.
SO NOW WE'RE KIND OF GETTING INTO THIS DOESN'T REQUIRE IT.
SO THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD, WOULD PROBABLY MOVE AWAY FROM.
WE WOULD RATHER, YOU KNOW, ADD IT TO THE ABILITY TO ADD SINGLE FAMILY TO IN TWO DWELLING FAMILY UNITS TO THIS MAINTENANCE PERMIT PROGRAM THAN TO REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PERMIT AS A WHOLE.
WELL THE ANOTHER THING IS, IS IN TWO YEARS WE'RE GONNA BE REVISITING THIS.
SO IF IT'S NOT WORKING, WE CAN CHANGE IT.
BUT I, BUT WE'RE IN THE CATCH 22 NOW.
SO AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE REPLACE THE LANGUAGE THAT I HAVE SUBMITTED WITH WHAT IS IN THE CURRENT DRAFT.
UH, BEFORE THAT GETS SUBMITTED, MAYBE, UH, WE DO WORK FOR SEVERAL LARGE COMPANIES OR ENTITIES ANYWAY THAT OBVIOUSLY BUY AND FLIP THESE HOUSES.
SO ABOUT THE ONLY THING THEY BRING IN LICENSE PEOPLE FOR IS JUST DO CAMERA WORK, SEE HOW THINGS REALLY ARE, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY HAVE THESE PROPERTIES AND THEY'VE GOT THEIR PEOPLE IN THERE DOING THINGS.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE STRIKE TEAM ENDED UP BEING DEVELOPED BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT WORK WASN'T BEING PERMITTED.
SO DOES THAT CREATE A BIGGER CHALLENGE THEN AS FAR AS THAT SIDE? IF YOU HAVE A COMPANY THAT HAS 400 PIECES OF PROPERTY THAT THEY PURCHASED AND THEY, THEY'RE IN THE ACTIVE MOVEMENT OF TRYING TO SELL 'EM IN GROUPS AND, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THAT WOULD BE A, A SPECIFIC CHALLENGE FOR THE CITY.
BUT, BUT THE, THE DEAL IS, IS THAT IF THEY OWN 400 HOUSES, EVEN IF THEY'RE FLIPPING THEM, OKAY, AND IT'S A BONAFIDE EMPLOYEE, THE STATE LAW ALLOWS THEM THEIR EMPLOYEE, THEM OR THEIR EMPLOYEE TO DO CERTAIN WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO HAVE A LICENSE.
THE CITY WON'T ISSUE A LICENSE, I MEAN A, A PERMIT AND SO, SO AT LEAST THERE'S A TRACK OF IT ANYWAY.
I MEAN, AT LEAST THE, THE HOUSES
THE MOST OF THESE PERMITS ARE GONNA BE PULLED BY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANIES THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR RENTALS, YOU'RE NOT GONNA DO PULL, PULL A PERMIT FOR A HOMEOWNER'S NOT GONNA GET THIS.
I MEAN, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, GONNA BE THE LARGER MANAGEMENT COMPANIES THAT MANAGE THOUSANDS OF HOUSES AND YOU KNOW, ONCE THE INSPECTOR, YOU KNOW, THE INSPECTOR COULD GO DRIVE AND PICK TWO HOUSES WHILE THEY'RE OUT DOING THEIR OTHER INSPECTIONS.
AND IF EVERYTHING'S OKAY, THEY CAN, AS YOU KNOW, THEY BASICALLY ASSUME THE PEOPLE DOING THE WORK ARE DOING IT.
AND, YOU KNOW, AT LEAST ALL THOSE HOUSES THEY HAD A TRACK OF OF WHO.
CAN I JUMP IN? I'M NOT THE CHAIR, BUT I THINK JACK WOULD SAY.
I I WAS LOOKING FOR YOU, BUT I I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU WERE, BUT GO AHEAD.
YEAH, NO, NO, I'M, I'M BASICALLY ASKING YOU, MARK, BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS, UH, SOMETHING YOU BROUGHT UP.
SO BASICALLY AS YOU SAID, THE STATE ALLOWS OWNERS TO HIRE THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES TO DO SOME WORK.
OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT REPLACING A WHOLE AIR HANDLING UNIT OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, SO THAT PERSON NEEDS TO BE AN EMPLOYEE OF THE OWNER.
NOW, I THINK I HEARD THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IF ONE OWNER HAS, LET'S SAY I'M JUST THROWING THIS OUT, 200 HOUSES, THEY HIRE THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES TO DO THE WORK.
I, I THINK THAT MEETS THE CODE.
BUT WHAT ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE 10 OWNERS, EACH ONE HAS 10 HOUSES, THEY HIRE A MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO MANAGE ALL THESE HOUSES.
WHO'S HIRING THAT EMPLOYEE NOW? IT WOULD BE THE, THE STATE LAW SAYS IT'S EITHER THE OWNER OR THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEE.
SO IT, IT WOULD BE EITHER ONE.
SO NORMALLY IN MOST CASES IT'S GONNA BE THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT'S EMPLOYEES AND THEY'RE EXEMPT BY STATE STATUTE.
NOW MY OTHER CONCERN IS LATELY IN THE LAST FEW YEARS WE HAVE OUT-OF-STATE INVESTORS WHO ARE COMING AND
[00:50:01]
BUYING EITHER SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS OR DUPLEXES OR WHATEVER, AND THEY DO NOT HAVE A PHYSICAL ADDRESS HERE.THEY DON'T HAVE A LOCAL OFFICE.
THEY ARE MANAGING THEIR PROPERTIES THEMSELVES, I GUESS FROM LET'S SAY CALIFORNIA OR EVEN WE HAVE ONE FROM DALLAS OR WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE.
SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHEN WE ISSUE THE PERMIT, IF THIS GOES THROUGH WHICH ADDRESS WE'RE GONNA PUT PUT AND WHERE IS THAT LOG THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT? OR IS THIS ONLY FOR MANAGEMENT COMPANIES IN TOWN? THE, THE WAY THE ORDINANCE OR THE SECTION READS SOMEWHERE IN THERE, AND I DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE THING IN FRONT OF ME.
IT SAYS IT HAS TO BE A SAN ANTONIO TO BE ABLE TO GET THE PERMIT.
THE BOOK HAS TO BE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO.
SO IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN OFFICE IN THE CITY LIMITS OF SAN ANTONIO, YOU CAN'T PULL THIS PERMIT, ANY OF THESE PERMITS.
SO EITHER THE PROPERTY THAT HAS THE OFFICE NEEDS TO BE IN THE SAN ANTONIO OR THE, UH, OFFICE THAT MANAGES THE PROPERTY HAS TO BE IN SAN ANTONIO.
AND I THINK THAT'S SOMEWHERE DOWN IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF SECTIONS WHERE IT SAYS RECORD KEEPING.
I DON'T THINK YOU'RE LOOKING AT APPLES TO APPLES, UH, IN THAT ANALOGY BECAUSE IF I'M AN ABSENTEE OWNER WITH A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE OR TWO OR THREE HOUSES, AND I'M ONLY HERE ONCE EVERY 90 DAYS TO LOOK AT IT, I'M NOT GONNA HIRE SOMEONE TO COME IN AND DO ANY WORK IN MY PROPERTIES UNLESS THEY'RE CERTIFIED OR LICENSED.
SO, UH, YOU'RE GONNA SEE A, UM, ELECTRICAL COMPANY THAT'LL COME IN AND DO THAT WORK.
SO THEREFORE THE PERMIT'S LEGALLY PULLED AND THE, UH, PAPERWORK IS WHAT THE ELECTRICAL COMPANY, NOT THE OWNER.
AND, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
UH, I MEAN, THESE ARE SOMEBODY WHO'S GONNA PULL THIS PERMIT AS A PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT MANAGES, YOU KNOW, FOUR OR 500 HOUSES THAT HAS A FULL-TIME STAFF, YOU KNOW, TO DO MAINTENANCE.
IF THE, IF THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COMPANY DOESN'T HAVE AN EMPLOYEE, THEY CAN'T GET THE PERMIT, IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD.
YOU KNOW, I I I MANAGE OFFICE BUILDINGS AND, AND, UH, OF COURSE MY EMPLOYEES COULD DO THIS WORK, BUT I PREFERRED NOT TO HAVE THEM DO THIS WORK BECAUSE OF LIABILITY.
IF THEY'RE NOT CERTIFIED, I GET AN OUTSIDE CONTRACTOR TO COME IN AND, UH, NOT TO DAMPEN THIS DISCUSSION, BUT, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE REAL ISSUE LIES, IS HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU GET COVERED IF THERE'S A LIABILITY ISSUE THAT OCCURS AT THE PROPERTY? UM, IF, IF JOHNNY IS HIRED BY YOUR COMPANY AND HE CHANGES AN ELECTRICAL OUTLET AND IT FLAMES UP AND BURNS THE, UH, COMPLEX DOWN, DID YOU QUALIFY JOHNNY THAT HE'S, UH, HE'S QUALIFIED TO DO THAT ELECTRICAL WORK? UH, I, I'M, I'M JUST ASKING AS A GENERAL ELECTRICAL'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE ELECTRICAL, THE CITY WILL ISSUE A PERMIT BASICALLY TO ANYBODY, AN ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE PERMIT TO EVERYBODY.
SO ALL WE'RE ASKING IS THE SAME THING THAT APPLIES TO THE ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE PERMIT APPLIES TO THE PLUMBING AND H V A C STUFF.
SO CURRENTLY UNDER, FOR 10 YEARS, YOU KNOW, SINCE IT DID, WE INSTITUTED ME LICENSING MAINTENANCE, TECHNICIAN LICENSING, YOU GET A PERMIT, YOU KNOW, ANYBODY CAN GET, ANY KIND OF USE CAN GET A PERMIT AND THIS WOULD BE SIMILAR, BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS, IS THE STATE HAS PROHIBITIONS AND ALLOWS EMPLOYEES TO DO PLUMBING AND H V A C WHERE THERE IS NOT THAT SAME KIND OF LANGUAGE FOR ELECTRICAL WORK.
SO THEN TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION, MARK, REALLY YOU'RE ASKING FOR THIS, UH, MOTION TO MORE OR LESS RUN ALONGSIDE WHAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY STATED ABOUT THE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS? IS THAT IT, JEREMY, PULL DOWN ON THE NUMBER, PAGE 10, IT ALREADY ALLOWS MULTIPLE LOCATIONS.
SO IF I HAVE 25 OR 50 OR 105 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEXES, I CAN REGISTER THEM UNDER ONE MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND ALL THE DIFFERENT ADDRESSES.
AND IT'S WORKED SO FAR AND IT HASN'T BEEN A HASSLE.
AND YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE GOTTEN NO NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FROM OUR INDUSTRY WHATSOEVER ABOUT THE INSPECTORS
[00:55:01]
COMING OUT AND WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE AND BEING INTRUSIVE AND BOTHERING THE RESIDENTS.AND SO WE JUST WANT TO EXPAND IT TO THE OTHER RENTAL PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, IN SAN ANTONIO SO THAT WE CAN BE IN COMPLIANCE WHERE ONE HAND SAYS, I DON'T NEED A, I NEED TO GET A PERMIT BECAUSE OUR STAFF ISN'T LICENSED.
THE STATE SAYS I DON'T NEED TO HAVE A LICENSE AND THE CITY CAN'T MAKE YOU GET ONE.
AND SO EITHER ADD THE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS WE DON'T NEED TO GET A PERMIT IF WE'RE EXEMPTED BY STATE LAW UNLESS IT'S OTHERWISE REQUIRED IN THE CODE OR ADD TO WHERE WE CAN GET THE PERMIT.
MARK, I, I GUESS I'M CONFUSED AS AS TO THE CATCH 22 BECAUSE, UH, THE OUT IS WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN PER CITY RULES.
IF YOU NEED SOMETHING THAT NEEDS A PERMIT AND THE PERMIT NEEDS TO BE PULLED BY A LICENSED CONTRACTOR, THEN IT'S YOUR OBLIGATION AS THE OWNER TO GO HIRE A LICENSED CONTRACTOR JUST AS THIS GENTLEMAN DOES FOR HIS APARTMENT CONTRACT.
NO, BUT THAT'S NOT CORRECT BECAUSE THE STATE PREEMPTS THE CITY FROM HAVING ANYTHING IN CONFLICT WITH THE STATE STATUTE.
SO, SO THE CITY CANNOT REQUIRE MY EMPLOYEES TO BE LICENSED TO DO AIR CONDITIONING WORK FOR ANYTHING OTHER UNLESS IT'S THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM.
SO, SO IT, THERE'S A LIMITATION ON WHAT MIKE MORALES, I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU WERE DONE GEORGE.
UM, YEAH, UNDER STATE LAW MAINTENANCE GUYS, FULL-TIME MAINTENANCE GUYS THAT DON'T HAVE COMPANIES CAN DO REPAIRS, UH, BE IT ON DRAIN LINES, WATER LINES, UM, THEY CAN MAKE THEIR REPAIRS ANYTHING OTHER THAN GAS, UH, GAS WATER HEATERS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PERMITTED THROUGH A LICENSED, UH, PLUMBING CONTRACTOR.
BUT FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, IT SOUNDS LIKE AGAIN, YOUR MAINTENANCE GUYS CAN GO IN, MAKE WHATEVER REPAIRS WITHOUT ALTERING A BUILDING AND DOING ANYTHING THAT SAY A MAJOR PLUMBING PERMIT, UH, WOULD REQUIRE.
SO DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU KNOW IS THE REAL QUESTION.
BUT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR MAINTENANCE GUYS, AS LONG AS THEY ARE LISTED ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE CAN VERIFY, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH OUR INSPECTORS EITHER DOING A CHECK ON THEM, WHAT ARE YOU DOING, WHO ARE YOU EMPLOYED BY? UM, BUT MAKING THOSE REPAIRS AS A, UH, MAINTENANCE GUIDE THROUGH YOUR COMPANY SHOULD BE OKAY.
UH, AS FAR AS NO GAS WORK, GAS, WATER, HEAT, IT IS OKAY, BUT ACCORDING TO THE CODE, THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED IN A PREVIOUS SECTION, THAT KIND OF WORK IS ONLY NON PERMITTED WHEN THERE IS A LICENSED PERSON DOING.
IF YOU WANT TO ADD TO THE DEFINITION, EITHER A LICENSED PERSON OR SOMEONE ALLOWED TO DO THE WORK UNDER THE STATE, UNDER STATE STATUTE, I'M GOOD.
AND YOU CAN LEAVE THE LANGUAGE JUST LIKE IT IS, BUT YOU GOTTA DO ONE OR THE OTHER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SAY IN ONE SECTION OF THE CODE, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO GET A PERMIT.
WE COME DOWN, IF I WANTED TO GET A PERMIT, YOU WON'T ISSUE IT.
AND SO I'M HAPPY IF YOU WANT TO JUST GO TO THAT OTHER SECTION WHERE IT'S THE LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT DON'T REQUIRE PERMITS AND ADD, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME SENTENCE THAT SAYS UNLESS ALLOWED TO PERFORM THE WORK BY STATE STATUTE.
I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A FEW HOURS PREVIOUSLY IN SUBCOMMITTEE AND THAT'S WHERE THIS LANGUAGE CAME FROM.
WE'RE INTO THIS FOR ALMOST AN HOUR.
I MEAN, CAN CAN WE ADD THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT LIKE HE'S SUGGESTING INSTEAD OF HAVING TO CREATE A WHOLE NOTHER SET OF OF LANGUAGE OF, OF TYING IT TO THE STATE AND, AND THAT COULD PRETTY MUCH BE A CATCHALL, WELL IT'S WRITTEN HERE UNDER, UH, B PLUMBING REPAIR, MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING POTABLE WATER LINES EXISTING.
NO, BUT THAT'S UNDER BUT THAT'S UNDER THIS PERMIT.
IT, IT'S IN THE OTHER SECTION.
CAN YOU PULL THAT UP FOR ME? AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE, WHERE, I THINK IT'S BEFORE THIS, WHERE IT'S THE LAUNDRY LIST OF THINGS THAT REQUIRE A PERMIT AND DON'T REQUIRE A PERMIT.
I THINK THAT'S IT RIGHT THERE.
[01:00:01]
NO JEREMY, I THINK YOU MISSED IT.NO, I THINK THAT WAS THE SECTION FOR ELECTRICAL ONLY IN REGARDS TO MAINTEN PERMITS.
IT'S THE ONE THAT, YOU KNOW, PAINTING AND ALL THAT STUFF.
DO I KNOW WHAT THAT IS? IT'S A WORK EXEMPT FROM A PERMIT.
AN E STARTS IN E AND THEN PLUMBING.
SO IT'S THE SECTION AFTER THIS IS THE LAST ONE.
SO THIS LAUNDRY LIST HERE, NUMBER FIVE, IF YOU KEEP GOING.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR A SPECIFIC SECTION.
SO THERE'S MECHANICAL PLUMBING.
SO I'M OKAY WITH YOUR SUGGESTION JUST TO ADD THE WORD.
WE CAN BRING IT BACK AND SAY LET THEM INSERT IT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT PLACE.
IT'S THE SECTION THAT HAS PAINTING, INSTALLING CABINETS, REPAIR WORK BY LICENSED INDIVIDUALS.
AND IF YOU JUST ADD THE WORD OR PERSONS ALLOWED EXEMPTED FROM STATE FROM LICENSURE.
DO YOU THINK YOU CAN FIND THAT CRYSTAL SOMEWHERE? THIS THIS IS IT.
IT'S BROKEN OUT BY IT'S WORK EXEMPT FROM A PERMIT BROKEN OUT BY DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES.
SO BUILDING WHAT THAT WOULD BE THE CABINETS, THE PAINTING, THE FLOORING, ELECTRICAL HAS SPECIFIC ITEMS. IF THEY WOULD ADD THAT TO EACH OF THESE, THE THE PLUMBING AND THE H V A C ONE.
ARE Y'ALL OKAY WITH THAT? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH THAT.
WHAT I SAID IS IF YOU GO INTO THE MECHANICAL AND THE PLUMBING AND PUT SOME KIND OF SENTENCE THAT SAYS UNLESS REQUIRED SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THIS SECTION, WORK PERFORMED BY PERSONS EXEMPT FROM STATE STATUTE DO NOT REQUIRE A PER, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER YOU CAN COME UP WITH A MAGIC LANGUAGE.
IT WOULD BE NEED TO BE INSERTED IN BOTH MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING.
SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING WITH CHIEF MORALES ABOUT.
SO THIS WOULD BE WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT THE REQUEST IS IS BY FOLLOWING THE STATE AND MOVING ALL EXEMPTING ALL OF THAT OUTSIDE OF CHAPTER 10, THEN WHATEVER THE STATE ALLOWS FOR NON-LICENSED INDIVIDUALS TO DO WITHOUT PERMITS WOULD THEN BE APPROVED WITHIN THE CITY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE REPLACEMENT OF GAS WATER HEATERS.
NO, THAT'S WHAT I'M BEING TOLD.
GAS WATER HEATERS ARE SPECIFICALLY ANY GAS APPLIANCE OTHER THAN LIKE A STOVE IS EXI.
YOU NEED TO, TO HAVE A PLUMBING LICENSE TO PUT THAT IN THAT THE STATE STATUTE SAYS THAT OR WE CAN CARRY IT OVER, UM, AND ADD IT HERE TO BE CONSISTENT AND CLEAR THAT THAT'S STILL NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL AS PER STATE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IT'S ALREADY SHOWING IT THERE.
SO WE'RE JUST KIND OF TYING IT LIKE WE'RE DOING A LOT OF THESE THINGS, IT'S MARRYING THE THINGS TOGETHER INSTEAD OF TRYING TO HAVE CONFLICT.
SO DO Y'ALL WANT TO COME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE? CAN YOU GO TO THE, OF THE SECTION SORRY.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THE SECTION? SO THIS IS THE SECTION OF UH, WORK EXEMPT FROM PERMITS, RIGHT? OKAY.
THE LANGUAGE YOU WANT TO ADD, MARK, YOU COULD PUT IT RIGHT HERE.
YOU, YOU COULD EITHER PUT IT IN THIS SECTION AS A GENERAL THING OR YOU COULD PUT IT UNDER ATIONS MECHANICAL.
COULD, COULD YOU JUST ADD AFTER THE OF THE CITY OR STATE ON THAT SENTENCE? I CAN'T READ THE SENTENCE.
DO YOU WANT SOME GLASSES? JUST ME.
CAN YOU
[01:05:01]
AS LONG AS THE CITY'S GONNA INTERPRET THAT, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO ADD IN SO THAT IT'S CLEAR FIVE YEARS AGO FROM NOW WHEN NO ONE'S HERE, YOU KNOW THAT IT'S EXEMPT.SO I WOULD, I'M OKAY WITH THAT BUT IT, THE BETTER PLACE TO PUT IT IS IN BOTH MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING.
SO THAT IT'S JUST CRYSTAL CLEAR, NO PUN INTENDED.
I THINK THIS IS THE BEST PLACE TO PUT IT.
YOU LOOK HERE FIRST WORK EXEMPT FROM PERMIT PERIOD.
IF YOU'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE REQUIREMENTS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK ANY FURTHER FOR MECHANICAL OR PLUMBING SPECIFIC ITEMS. 'CAUSE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL SUBCATEGORIES, THAT WOULD BE FINE BUT THAT IT MESA ALSO EXEMPT YOUR PLUMBING AND MAINTENANCE PERMITS.
THE MAINTENANCE PERMITS IS A SECTION BEFORE, THIS IS A SEPARATE SECTION.
THIS IS RIGHT AFTER THE MAINTENANCE PERMITS.
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ADD OR STATE AFTER THAT AND WE COULD HAVE SAVED AN HOUR.
DO DO WE NEED TO DO THAT AS A MOTION JEREMY? YES.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON TABLE TO ADD THAT, THAT LANGUAGE OF ANN STATE DATE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ANY BOARD MEMBERS SECONDING? I'LL SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? NEED ANOTHER HOUR? WE GOOD? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UH, MIKE RUS STILL ISN'T HERE, BUT I, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE OTHER ITEMS, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN PUTTING OFF MANY TIMES AS THE CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION.
SO I'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THAT AND PUT THIS OUT THERE AND GET A FINAL VOTE ON IT SO WE DON'T MISS IT AGAIN.
'CAUSE WE ALWAYS KIND OF PUSH IT TO THE END OF THE MEETING AND THEN WE RUN OUTTA TIME.
SO I'M GONNA PULL THAT UP RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS THE CERTIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS FOR RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO BEFORE WE GET INTO THE CERTIFICATION THING, ONE THING THAT GOT BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING WAS TALKING ABOUT HOLDING THE LICENSE, THE REGISTRATION CARD.
YOU KNOW, WE, SO WE'RE ADDING A LITTLE BIT OF LANGUAGE HERE JUST TO KIND OF SAY, YOU SHALL BE WORKING UNDER A CONTRACTOR REGISTERED PER CHAPTERS 10 DASH 15 AND 10 DASH 16 WITH A VALID AND AUTHENTICATED HOME BUILDER REGISTRATION CARD ISSUED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IN THEIR POSITION.
SO THAT'S KIND OF GETTING Y'ALL, Y'ALL PROBABLY Y'ALL CAUGHT THAT LITTLE CATCHALL THAT IT MAKES IT SOUND LIKE EVERYBODY THAT'S DOING WORK WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT REGISTRATION INSTEAD OF JUST ONE MEMBER OF THE COMPANY BEING REGISTERED.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THAT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY LANGUAGE CHANGED HERE IF THERE'S ANY CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE, BUT WE'RE STILL SAYING THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A REGISTRATION CARD, CORRECT? SOMEBODY NEEDS EACH PERSON.
NO, JUST THE, EVERYBODY NEEDS TO BE WORKING UNDER SOMEBODY WITH THAT REGISTRATION CARD.
BEFORE IT HAD TO BE EACH PERSON OUT THERE HAD IT.
IT WAS NEVER THE INTENT POSSESS CARRY ONE MORE CARD IN YOUR EXACTLY.
YEAH, IT WAS IT WAS NEVER THE INTENT, BUT, OKAY.
THE, THE GOAL IS TO CLARIFY THAT THE ONLY PERSON THAT REQUIRES IT IS THE ONE THAT'S REGISTERED WITH THE CITY.
THAT DOES, DOES, DO WE NEED TO GET A MOTION FOR THIS OR YOU JUST GONNA INSERT THE LENGTH? I MEAN, WE COULD PROBABLY GET A MOTION ON HOW Y'ALL WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH 1 1 5 AS A WHOLE.
SO LET'S LOOK AT THE NEXT SECTION OF 1 1 5.
WHICH IS A CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
SO THIS IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MEETING.
UH, WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO, TO, TO DISCUSS IT, BUT WE BROUGHT IT UP, PRESENTED IT, AND WE SENT IT OUT TO EVERYBODY TO REVIEW.
AND I TRY TO HIGHLIGHT IT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
SO THE, THE WORD OR THE, THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IS EVERYTHING IN BLACK RIGHT HERE.
THE VOTING OF OFFICIAL SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO INVESTIGATE AND EXAMINE THE QUALIFICATIONS AND FITNESS OF AN APPLICANT UPON RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION.
THE VOTING OF OFFICIAL SHALL CONDUCT A CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK.
AND WE'LL GO INTO A LITTLE BIT OF DETAILS ABOUT WHAT THAT IS, BUT THAT'S WHAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS AND REALLY THE QUALIFICATIONS AND FITNESS OF AN APPLICANT.
WE'RE STOPPING THAT AT A BACKGROUND CHECK.
[01:10:01]
SECTION B IS LOOKING AT IT AND, AND REQUIRING A CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR NEW CONTRACTORS COMING IN.SO FOR, AND THIS IS FOR HOME BUILDERS ONLY.
SO SECTION 1 1 15 IS BOTH HOME BUILDERS AND HOME IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTORS, WHICH WE KIND OF WENT OVER PREVIOUSLY WHAT THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE AND MADE A LITTLE BIT ADJUSTMENTS TO THOSE AT OTHER MEETINGS.
BUT REALLY THIS IS FOCUSING ON HOME BUILDERS.
SO THAT WOULD BE NEW HOMES, NEW ADDITIONS, UH, NOT JUST REMODELS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO REALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS LIKE STRUCTURAL.
ONCE YOU KINDA MOVE INTO A STRUCTURAL, UH, SCOPE OF WORK, THAT'S USUALLY WHERE THE HOME BUILDER, UH, REGISTRATION COMES IN.
ONE AGENT AFFILIATED WITH THAT CONTRACTOR, SO NOT WHOEVER'S REGISTERED.
SO ANYBODY THAT YOU KNOW, YOU COULD BE REGISTERED, YOU KNOW, SOME ISSUES ARE SOMETIMES THEY WILL, THAT ARE REGISTERED WITH THE CITY OR MORE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 'CAUSE THEY'RE HANDLING THE PERMITS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO WE UNDERSTOOD THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THE TECHNICAL INDIVIDUAL FOR THAT COMPANY DOING THE WORK OUT IN THE FIELD MAY NOT BE REGISTERED, BUT AS LONG AS THEY'RE, THEY HAVE A HIRED INDIVIDUAL THAT'S RE UH, HAS CERTIFICATION AND THAT'S GOOD FOR FIVE YEARS.
SO THE INTENT HERE IS IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN CERTIFIED OR REGISTERED WITH THE CITY FOR FIVE YEARS, THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT CERTIFICATION.
ONCE YOU'VE HIT THAT FIVE YEARS, YOU NO LONGER HAVE TO CONTINUE THAT CERTIFICATION.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE YOUR CEUS.
UM, AND THAT FIVE YEARS IS GOOD FOR BOTH THE REGISTERED INDIVIDUAL AND THE, AND THE INDIVIDUAL THAT IS CERTIFIED.
SO THEY CAN KIND OF, IF THEY EVER NEEDED TO BRANCH OFF THAT, YOU KNOW, IF SAY A LARGE COMPANY THAT HAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF THAT'S DOING THE REGISTERED, UH, BEING REGISTERED BUT NOT THE CERTIFICATION, IF THAT PERSON WERE TO LEAVE AND THEY BROUGHT SOMEBODY ELSE BACK IN, THAT FIVE YEARS IS GOOD TO THE COMPANY.
SO AS LONG AS THE COMPANY AS A WHOLE HAS BEEN WITH THE CITY REGISTERED WITH NO ISSUES, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, VIOLATIONS THAT LEAD TO SUSPENSIONS OR REVOCATIONS, THEN THEY'RE, I DON'T WANNA USE THE WORD GRANDFATHER 'CAUSE ULTIMATELY EVERYBODY GETS TO THAT FIVE YEAR POINT.
SO IT'S NOT REALLY AGRA GRANDFATHERED, IT'S JUST A DURATION OF FIVE YEARS THAT THIS IS REQUIRED.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE TO KIND OF CAPTURE THOSE THAT ARE DON'T FALL WITHIN THAT FIVE YEAR THAT ARE REGISTERED.
YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY THAT'S BEEN REGISTERED WITH US FOR A YEAR, IF THIS WERE TO GET PASSED, YOU KNOW, WE GIVE THEM A YEAR TO GET THAT CERTIFICATION.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA PUT 'EM UNDER PROBATION SO THEY CAN COME IN AND GET RE-REGISTERED AND WE'LL JUST SAY, HEY, YOU HAVE UNTIL JANUARY 1ST, 2024.
UH, AND THIS WILL PROBABLY GET ADJUSTED.
IF FOR SOME REASON WE DON'T GET THIS VOTED AND OFFICIALLY APPROVED AS OFFICIAL DATE OF JANUARY 1ST, WE'LL UPDATE THAT.
THAT'S MORE OF A ONE YEAR FROM, FROM ORDINANCE ADOPTION.
SO THOSE ARE THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, IT'S A CERTIFICATION.
UH, WE SPECIFY I R C SO OF COURSE WE ADOPT THE I R C.
ALL OUR BUILDING, UH, BUILDING INSPECTORS ARE CERTIFIED THROUGH THE I R C PROGRAM, BUT WE ALSO HAVE AS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIALS.
SO WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL HAVE ON OUR APPLICATION SOME PRE-APPROVED ONES, UH, WE'LL HAVE A LIST OF FIVE TO SIX.
WE'RE STILL RESEARCHING AND TRYING TO GET THOSE ON THERE.
BUT ONCE WE ADOPT THIS, WE'LL HAVE PRE-APPROVED ONES READY TO GO ON THE APPLICATION.
SO THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO SAY, WELL I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S OUT THERE.
BUT EVEN THEN, JUST 'CAUSE THEY'RE PRE-APPROVED, IF IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE NEVER HEARD OF AND SOMEBODY WANTS TO PRESENT THAT TO US, THEY CAN PRESENT IT TO US.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'LL MAKE A EXPEDITE THE REVIEW OF THAT AND TRY TO GET AN ANSWER TO 'EM AND NOT HOLD UP THEIR REGISTRATION BY SAYING, WELL WE GOTTA LOOK AT THIS FOR A MONTH.
IT WOULD BE, LET US SEE WHAT IT IS, GIVE US THE INFORMATION ON IT AND WE'LL, YOU KNOW, ALSO TRY TO HAVE SOME GUIDELINES OF WHAT THAT IS.
MOSTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS, YOU KNOW, THE NEEDS TO HAVE THE CONTINUED EDUCATION AND A FORM OF CERTIFICATION THAT IS RENEWED SO YOU CAN MAINTAIN THAT.
SO IT'S NOT, I JUST PASSED A TEST AND THAT'S IT.
IT IS AN ACTUAL CERTIFICATION THAT IS RENEWED THROUGH CONTINUED EDUCATION AND SOME TYPE OF REGISTRY SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND DO A LOT OF RESEARCH.
WE LIKE, HEY, HERE'S WHERE I'M REGISTERED AT.
YOU CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY JUST LIKE THE I R C, HEY THIS PERSON IS REGISTERED UNTIL THIS DATE AND ARE RE IF THEY NEED TO RENEW, THEY'LL RENEW.
BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AS A, YOU KNOW, THEN WE'LL LOOK AT SUBSTANCE AS WELL.
I MEAN DEFINITELY THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF IT, BUT THOSE ARE THE KEY, TWO KEY KEY FACTORS IS CONTINUED EDUCATIONS AND RENEWAL PROCESS OR REGISTRATION PROCESS OR REGISTRY.
JACK, CAN WE MAKE ONE MORE CHANGE AFTER THE WORD FEDERAL OF INVESTIGATION AND ADD THE SENTENCE, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY APPROVE OTHER MEANS OF VERIFYING CRIMINAL HISTORY SO THAT AS TECHNOLOGY IS AVAILABLE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, GET A FINGERPRINT AND SEND IT OFF TO THE F B I AND DELIVER IT HOWEVER OFTEN YOU HAVE TO DO IT.
UM, BOARD MEMBER ROSS, I APPRECIATE THAT AND I KNOW THAT IS SOMETHING I WANNA DISCUSS, BUT IF WE COULD, I, I KINDA WANNA FOCUS ON JUST THE CERTIFICATION RIGHT NOW AND THEN WE CAN BRING THAT INTO ANOTHER DIALOGUE AFTERWARDS.
BUT I REALLY WANT TO HASH THIS ONE OUT AND SEE IF WE CAN GET A, A VOTE FROM THE BOARD ON MOVING FORWARD OR, OR NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS.
THEN I'M HAPPY TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE AFTERWARDS AFTER DISCUSSION.
THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, UH, SAY A A, A BUILDER BUILT FOR FOUR YEARS AND THEN HE WENT TO SOUTH AMERICA FOR A YEAR OR TWO AND DIDN'T KEEP HIS REGISTRATION UP.
DOES HE HAVE TO START ALL OVER
[01:15:05]
BASED ON THIS? I MEAN IT'S, YOU KNOW, JUST 'CAUSE THEY MISSED A YEAR OR THEY, THEY, THEY WENT ON A ONE YEAR HIATUS TRYING GET AWAY FROM, SO THIS IS JOSEPH AL WITH THE STRIKE TEAM BUILDING CHIEF.SO WE HAVE INSPECTORS AT, WELL OF THEIR LICENSE HAD LAPSED 'CAUSE THEY WENT ON TO DO OTHER THINGS AND COME BACK AND THEY CONTACT I C C AND THEY JUST REQUIRE SOME KIND OF EDUCATION TO GET IT BACK RENEWED AND A FEE.
IT'S NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO TAKE A TEST AGAIN, IT'S JUST CONTACTING I C C, UH, TO VERIFY THAT THEY DID HAVE SOME KIND OF CONTINUING ED OR IF THEY'RE LACKING IT TO TAKE SOME KIND OF CONTINUING ED AND RENEW.
BUT, AND YEAH, SO THAT WOULD BE ON THE, IF THEY NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THAT CERTIFICATION, THAT WOULD BE ONE THING.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD LOOK AT THAT CASE.
I MEAN THESE ARE TWO YEAR REGISTRATIONS, SO YOU'RE GOOD FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE YOU'D HAVE TO COME BACK AND HAVE US LOOK TO SEE IF THE CERTIFICATION'S STILL VALID, YOU KNOW, AS, AS ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, ONE, IT WOULD BE A VOTING OFFICIAL DECISION TO NOT ALLOW THAT SO THEY COULD BRING IT TO THE BILL.
IF WE'RE DENYING REGISTRATION, THE BOARD CAN MAKE A DECISION.
BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK THE INTENT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN, WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN DOING, YOU KNOW, AS A BRIEF CONVERSATION, MAYBE PSEUDO INTERVIEW OF WHAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING AND YOU KNOW, REALLY IF THEY SHOW THAT THEY HAD INITIALLY, UM, OR YOU KNOW, IF THEY'VE HAD 40 YEARS EXPERIENCE.
SO SAY THEY'RE CURRENTLY AFTER FIVE YEARS AND THEN THEY STEP AWAY.
SO THEY NEVER GOT THAT CERTIFICATION, BUT THEY SHOW, HEY, WE WERE HERE FOR FIVE YEARS, NEVER HAD ANY ISSUES BEFORE.
YOU KNOW, IF IT'S BEEN 10 YEARS AND THEY COMPLETELY CHANGED THEIR STRUCTURE, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING WE MIGHT LOOK AT.
BUT I THINK THE INTENT IS REALLY MORE THOSE NEW CONTRACTORS COMING IN FRESH DON'T HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CAPTURE IS SHOW US SOME TECHNICAL ABILITY FOR HOOVER'S OUT THERE OVERSEEING THE CONSTRUCTION.
HAS SOME UNDERSTANDING OF THE TECHNICAL BUILDING OF THE BUILDING YOU YEAH, BUT THE WAY THIS IS DRAFTED, IF I HAVE FIVE YEARS OF CONTINUOUS REGISTRATION, NO MATTER WHEN THAT FIVE YEARS WAS, 10 YEARS AGO, 15 YEARS AGO, I'M ELIGIBLE RIGHT NOW TO GET IT AND MEET THIS REQUIREMENT BY THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED AND THAT IS KIND OF THE INTENT, YOU KNOW, AS IT WAS KIND OF BROUGHT UP, I, YOU KNOW, THE ANSWERS OF YOU WERE DOING IT FOR 20 YEARS AND YOU QUIT FOR TWO AND CAME BACK.
THEY'D HAVE TO ISSUE YOU AFTER YOU GET A CRIMINAL HISTORY THAT YOU'RE LICENSE, BUT AGREED.
AND THOSE CERTIFICATIONS ARE GOOD FOR THREE YEARS BEFORE THEY WOULD EXPIRE AND YOU CAN KEEP 'EM UP WITH, UM, CONTINUING EDUCATION CREDITS.
JUST DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S JUST MAKING THAT POINT? OKAY.
I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ADOPTED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? THIS IS LEWIS OLIS.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UH, SO MARK, I KNOW WE HAD THIS UP, I KNOW WE'VE RUN THROUGH THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE, CRYSTAL, I KINDA WANNA TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU.
I'M NOT SURE WE, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST BOARD MEMBER.
I'M NOT SURE LAST BOARD MEETING ON THE DEFINITION OF THE F B I AND ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OF WAS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
DO WE NEED TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE TO MEET WHAT MARK'S TRYING TO GO FOR HERE? OR DO WE NO, IT'S RIGHT HERE.
I MEAN, BASICALLY, BASICALLY THE WAY THIS SAYS IS THE APPLICANT EVERY TIME THEY GET A DEAL HAS TO GO SUBMIT THE SEALED FINGERPRINT.
AND I JUST WANT TO ADD A SENTENCE THAT SAYS OR OTHER MEET METHODS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
AND THAT GIVES THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THE RIGHT TO, IF THEY GET THIS F B I THING WHERE IT'S AUTOMATIC DONE OR IF THEY SAY, OKAY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A DATABASE NOW THAT'S 99.999% ACCURATE AND YOU CAN JUST PRESS A BUTTON AND GET THE INFORMATION IN TWO SECONDS, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE DO IN THE APARTMENT INDUSTRY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE OKAY.
UH, THIS IS ROBERT HENLEY, MARK, UH, WHAT IS THAT DATABASE? WHO'S THE SPONSORSHIP? WHO COLLECTS THAT INFORMATION AND WHAT ARE THE SOURCES OF THAT INFORMATION? THE THE ONE THAT I GAVE TO THE STAFF IS THE F B I, IT'S THE F B I SYSTEM.
BUT THERE WILL BE OTHER, AS WE GET BETTER WITH DATA D STUFF, I MEAN WE RUN A CRIMINAL HISTORY CHECK ON EVERY RESIDENT THAT'S NATIONWIDE AND SOMETIMES WE TURN UP BETTER INFORMATION THAN THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS.
'CAUSE IT HAS MORE STUFF ON IT.
AND SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE THE BUILDING, IT'S UP TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO SAY IT'S OKAY.
SO JUST ADD THEIR OR OTHER METHODS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THEN IT'S NOT LOCKED IN TO THIS IS THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET IT.
AND THAT DISCUSSION IS WHAT'S OKAY, WHAT'S NOT OKAY.
CAN BE DECIDED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
I JUST, UH, WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT A LOT OF, I KNOW THAT THE, UH, TEXAS
[01:20:01]
SOCIETY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND TEXAS BOARD OF ARCHITECT REQUIRES YOU TO BE FINGERPRINTED.I MEAN, ONCE YOU DO IT, ONCE YOU'RE DONE, YES.
BUT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO THAT INITIAL TIME.
CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNERS HAVE TO BE FINGERPRINT.
SO A LOT OF THIS IS FAIRLY STANDARD IN THE INDUSTRY.
SO I DON'T WANT TO SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, WELL LET'S MAKE AN EXCEPTION HERE.
NO, I'M NOT ASKING FOR AN EXCEPTION.
I'M ASKING THEM TO START OUT WITH THE SAME THING WE DO FOR OUR REAL ESTATE LICENSE OR ENGINEERING OR ARCHITECTURE LICENSE.
YOU GET FINGERPRINTED ONCE AND YOU'RE DONE.
I BELIEVE JACK EVERY THREE YEARS HAS TO GO GET HIS FINGERPRINTS TAKEN, SEND IT OFF TO THE F B I AND HAVE IT RETURNED.
UNLESS I DO SOMETHING ELSE WRONG, BUT I HAVEN'T.
SO YEAH, IT, AND THE OTHER THING IS, MARK IS ON THIS THAT SAYS, UPON RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION, HOW MANY TIMES IS AN INDIVIDUAL GONNA SUBMIT AN APPLICATION? EACH TIME YOU GET A LICENSE EACH, EVERY THREE YEARS YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT AN YEAH.
SO EVERY TWO YEARS, EVERY EVERY COUPLE YEARS, YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND DO IT AGAIN.
I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT LANGUAGE, UM, DOESN'T REALLY NEGATIVELY IMPACT.
UM, IT'S ALWAYS AS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL.
JUST SAYING, I MEAN, IF, IF WE FIND BETTER TECHNOLOGIES AND WAYS TO DO THINGS BEFORE WE UPDATE THE CHAPTER 10 NEXT TIME, UH, THEN WE'LL IMPLEMENT THOSE.
SO IT, IT DOESN'T REALLY IMPACT.
UM, SO I'M FINE WITH THE LANGUAGE.
SO THAT WAS A MOTION TO ADD THAT LANGUAGE TO THE END OF THE SENTENCE.
SO REAL QUICK, MARK, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND AMENDING YOUR MOTION, IF Y'ALL WANT TO GO AHEAD AND JUST SAY UPDATE UH, 10 DASH 15 AS PRESENTED, THAT WOULD ALSO COVER WHAT WE LOOKED UP HERE.
ADDING THE CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION.
A LITTLE BIT OF LANGUAGE THERE TO CLARIFY.
SO IN BOTH PLACES I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT, THAT LANGUAGE BE ADDED.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
SO WE HAVE NOW GOTTEN THROUGH THE TOP THREE ITEMS TO DISCUSS.
THE LAST ONE FROM STAFF IS THE ELECTRICAL PANELS AND CLOSETS PER N S C N E C 2040 DASH 24 D.
THIS WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT WAS MADE DURING A COMMITTEE.
UH, SINCE REVIEWING THAT, WE, WE JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT ONE MORE TIME.
GET SOME CLARIFICATION, MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S ON THE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT REQUIREMENTS THESE ARE.
UH, THIS IS REALLY LOOKING AT ELECTRICAL PANELS INSIDE CLOSETS AND WHAT WORK CAN BE DONE THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY REQUIRE THEM TO BE RELOCATED OUTTA THE CLOSET DUE TO COMBUSTIBILITY WITH OF MATERIALS IN THAT AND TRYING TO FIND WAYS OF, YOU KNOW, DOING A LITTLE BIT OF WORK TO THOSE, MAINTAINING AND MAINTAINING 'EM WHERE THEY'RE AT.
SO THIS IS WHEN YOU GO TO REMODEL, UM, AN OLDER HOME THAT HAS THE ELECTRICAL PANELS INSIDE THOSE CLOSETS.
WHAT SCOPE OF OF WORK COULD THEY DO BEFORE THEY HAVE TO MOVE THAT PANEL OUT? AND SO RIGHT NOW IT'S PRETTY MUCH ANY WORK THAT'S DONE WITHIN THE HOUSE.
THE REQUIREMENT IS FOR THAT PANEL TO GET RELOCATED SOMEWHERE ELSE.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO ELABORATE ON, YOU KNOW, ALLOW SOME WORK TO BE DONE FOR REMODELING WITHOUT ADDING THE COST OF, OF THE RELOCATION OF A PANEL.
SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UH, CHIEF GLEASON.
UM, ACTUALLY THERE WAS A, A LITTLE SENTENCE OR A LITTLE VERBIAGE ADDED TO THE VERY END OF IT THAT SAID, UH, UPGRADES PERMITTED AN EXISTING LOCATION.
IT WAS ADDED TO THE CHAPTER 10.
UM, I KIND OF HAVE A LITTLE HEARTACHE OVER THAT.
I THINK THAT'S A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE.
UM, I WENT BACK AND DID SOME RESEARCH ABOUT, UH, OVER CURRENT DEVICES SHALL NOT BE LOCATED IN AREAS OF COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS.
LATER CODES ADDED THE EXAMPLE OF SUCH AS CLOSED CLOSETS DIDN'T MEAN ONLY CLOSED CLOSETS.
NOW CERTAINLY IF WE HAVE A PANEL IN A CLOSED CLOSET IN AN APARTMENT OR A RESIDENCE AND WE NEED TO CHANGE OUT A BREAKER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, REPLACE A BREAKER, DO SOME REPAIR, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR IT TO BE MOVED OUT.
OKAY? WHEN WE START TO GET INTO SOME OF THESE REWIRES OR COMPLETE REPLACEMENTS, THEN WE BEGIN TO HAVE AN ISSUE THAT IS A FIRE HAZARD TO HAVE AN OVER CURRENT DEVICE IN A, IN A, IN A CLOSET.
UM, SO MY ONLY HEARTACHE IS REALLY THAT LAST LITTLE UPGRADES PERMITTED IN EXISTING LOCATIONS.
CHIEF, I MEAN, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE COMMITTEE IS BREAKERS ARE GETTING HARDER AND HARDER TO COME BY AS THEY, THE PROPERTIES GET OLDER AND OLDER.
AND WHAT IS BETTER? WHAT IS MORE SAFE? HAVING A BRAND NEW PANEL IN A CLOSET OR HAVING A 60 YEAR OLD PANEL IN THE CLOSET THAT IS 60 YEARS OLD.
AND AND THE COMMITTEE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT WAS BETTER
[01:25:01]
TO HAVE A BRAND NEW PANEL IN THE CLOSET THAN IT WAS TO HAVE THE OLD PANEL IN THE CLOSET.BUT IF YOU TRIGGERED SOME OTHER BUILDING, UH, A BUILDING, UH, PERMIT TO DO A REHAB OF, YOU KNOW, MINOR OR MAJOR REHAB, THAT WAS NOT, YOU KNOW, WHAT THIS WAS CONTEMPLATED FOR? IT WAS YOU COME ACROSS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN AN APARTMENT.
I HAVE ONE BREAKER, I CAN'T GET THE BREAKER.
AND SO NOW I AM FACED WITH, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO FIND AN OLDER BREAKER THAT WE MIGHT HAVE THAT WE TOOK OUT OF SOMETHING WE DID BEFORE AND PUT IT IN THERE.
OR JUST REPLACING THE PANEL WITH BRAND NEW, NEW BUS BOARDS, NEW THE WHOLE SHEBANG AND, AND HAVING A SAFER DEAL AT THE END OF THE DAY.
AND, AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IF YOU, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU'RE REMODELING THE WHOLE UNIT AND YOU WANT TO JUST UPGRADE THE PANEL, AT THAT POINT YOU WOULD HAVE TO MOVE IT.
BUT THE MOST OF THESE ARE IN OCCUPIED DEPARTMENTS WHERE TO MOVE THE PANEL, THEY'RE WITHOUT ELECTRICITY FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS.
NO AIR CONDITIONING ONCE WE START DOING THE WORK.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO PUT A BIG, YOU KNOW, JUNCTION BOX AND THEN FIND SOMEWHERE ELSE WHERE YOU CAN STICK THE BREAKER PANEL IN AND YOU MAY HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, MOVE BEARING, YOU KNOW, PUT IT INTO A BEARING WALL TO GET IT.
'CAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE SOMEWHERE CLOSE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO RUN THE WIRES FROM THE PANEL ALL THE WAY TO THE DEAL.
YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, AND IF IT'S ALUMINUM WIRING IN THERE, THAT'S EVEN MORE UNSAFE BY HAVING EXTRA JOINTS IN THE ALUMINUM.
YOU KNOW, THE COMMITTEE AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, UNANIMOUSLY SAID THAT THAT WAS OKAY.
SO THE ISSUE I HAVE IS THE WORD UPGRADE UNDER THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE.
A REPLACEMENT OF A PANEL IN A, IN A CLOSET MEETS WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
SO WE HAVE AN OLD, UM, FP PANEL.
THEY'RE OBSOLETE AND WE'RE GONNA CHANGE IT OUT TO PUT SOMETHING NEW IN THERE LIKE FOR LIKE SAME AMPACITY, NOTHING ELSE, THEN THAT'S FINE THAT UNDER THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENT OF MAINTENANCE.
IF THAT IS THE CASE, I'M OKAY IF WE CAN JUST PUT A STATEMENT IN WHAT YOU JUST SAID IN THERE BECAUSE NONE OF US COULD FIND THAT WHEN WE DID THAT AN UPGRADE WAS THE STAFF LANGUAGE TO ADD.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT LANGUAGE YOU WANT TO ADD THERE TO GET THE INTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO, IT'S WHAT SHE SAID REPLACEMENT RATHER THAN UPGRADE? YEAH, PER EXISTING BUILDING CODE.
YEAH, I'M, I MEAN THAT'S FINE.
I MEAN THAT'S HOW WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT MAKING A BIGGER PANEL WE'RE YOU HAVE A 60 AMP PANEL, YOU'RE GONNA PUT A 60 AMP PANEL BACK WITH BRAND NEW BREAKERS AND GOD KEYBOARD'S WORST.
SO THAT IS THE, THAT'S WHAT STAFF WANTED TO, OR, UH, TO DISCUSS.
UH, SO, OR THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE WAS VOTED AND APPROVED BY COMMITTEE.
SO IF, UH, THE BOARD WANTS TO APPROVE THAT LANGUAGE SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE NEW LANGUAGE AS PRESENTED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? RON KAMUS SECOND.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
SO NOW WE ARE GOING TO, UH, MOVE INTO SOME DISCUSSION FROM OUTSIDE OF D S D.
THESE ARE STAKEHOLDERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME AND DISCUSS A FEW ITEMS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS, UH, TO THE FULL BOARD.
WE'LL START OFF WITH SOME ENERGY CONSERVATION ITEMS FROM THE SIERRA CLUB.
HEY, SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO UNMUTE AND MY COMPUTER FROZE.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT AND I KNOW WHY WE ARE DOING IT, BUT IF ANYBODY READS THIS, A REPLACEMENT MEANS I'M REPLACING A DEVICE, RIGHT? SO I CAN'T REPLACE THE PANEL WITH ANOTHER ONE.
IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT REPLACING THE PANEL WITH THE STEM CAPACITY.
SO IF I TECHNICALLY REPLACE IT AND GET A NEW
[01:30:01]
PANEL THAT IS A LITTLE BIT UPGRADED DOESN'T PREVENT ME FROM DOING THAT HERE.SO MAYBE REPLACEMENT WITH THE SAME CAPACITY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO MAKE SURE WE JUST USE THE WORD SIMILAR OR SIMILAR, YEAH.
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET A 60 AMP PANEL.
THEY MAY NOT MAKE 'EM ANYMORE, SO IT MAY HAVE TO BE A 70.
AND THIS IS JOSEPH AL WITH THE STRIKE TEAM.
BOUGIE, WOULDN'T THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE CORRECT THAT THOUGH? WOULD THAT ALLOW OR WOULD IT NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN? BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING PER THE EXISTING BUILDING CODEBREAKER.
AND IF YOU HAVE ALL THIS, IF YOU HAVE AN ALL ELECTRIC HOUSE, WHAT DOES, WHAT DOES THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE SAY? NOW HAVE TO LET US TAKE A LOOK.
WELL IT REALLY, IT WOULD BE COVERED BY THE N E C.
I MEAN THAT'S THE CODE YOU WOULD HAVE TO MEET RIGHT? INTEREST? WELL THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE WOULD, WOULD PLAY A PART IN IT AS FAR AS REPLACEMENT.
IT WOULD FALL UNDER MAINTENANCE.
THE KIND, THE TYPE OF WORK THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
THIS IS OUT OF THE 2018 I E B C EXISTING BUILDING CODE.
UH, SECTION 4 0 6 0.1406 IS THE ELECTRICAL SECTION AND SAYS THAT EXISTING ELECTRICAL WIRING EQUIPMENT UNDERGOING REPAIR SHALL BE ALLOWED TO BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED WITH LIKE MATERIAL MAINTENANCE ONLY.
IT'S NOT A LEVEL ONE ALTERATION OR BEYOND.
OKAY, THEN I THINK YEAH, WE, WE ARE COVERED WHEN YOU ARE, WE ARE SAYING REPLACEMENT AS PER THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE, THEN WE SHOULD BE GOOD.
SORRY FOR THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
MR. CHAIRMAN? MR. CHAIRMAN? YES SIR.
UM, ON THAT LAST ITEM, I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE CORRECT TO HAVE THE TERM INTERNATIONAL IN FRONT OF EXISTING BILLING CODE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE DOCUMENT.
WILLIAM INTERNATIONAL AFTER EXISTING, I ASSUME THAT'S WHY YOU WERE HERE AFTER EXISTING WILLIAM? BEFORE, BEFORE IT IS, YEAH.
THE INTERNATIONAL EXISTING BUILDING CODE, YEAH.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT MARK OR UH, JOSEPH.
I MEAN ULTIMATELY WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON APPROVING THIS WHOLE SECTION, SO, OKAY.
SO IF WE ARE GOOD THERE, WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO, UH, SORRY I'M BLANKING ON THE NAME.
IF YOU GIVE YOUR NAME, UH, THEN I'LL PULL UP YOUR PER YOU, YOU CAN CALL ME WHATEVER YOU LIKE.
BUT, UH, FOR THE RECORD, CYRUS REED, UM, THAT'S LOUD.
UH, UH, I DON'T LIVE IN SAN ANTONIO.
I WORK FOR THE SIERRA CLUB, AN ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATION.
UH, I'M BASED IN AUSTIN, BUT, UH, DO TRAVEL AROUND THE STATE AND I'M OFTEN INVOLVED IN BUILDING CODE AND MANY OTHER ISSUES, UH, THAT I'M INVOLVED IN.
AND I HAVE BEEN A FREQUENT PARTICIPANT IN SAN ANTONIO AS YOU GUYS HAVE DEVELOPED BUILDING CODES THROUGH THE YEAR.
UH, WE HAD A SERIES OF MEETINGS, UH, UM, WITH, UM, AMIN AND OTHER OFFICIALS FROM D S D, UM, FROM C P S ENERGY, UH, FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ON, UH, SOLAR READY AND EV READY.
UM, SO I'M MAINLY GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT AND I'LL BE VERY BRIEF.
I KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG MEETING, UH, BUT WANTED TO START IN GENERAL JUST TO SAY, UH, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ADOPTION OF THE 21 SUITE OF CODES AND PARTICULARLY THE ENERGY CODE WE'VE SEEN FROM THE, UM, D O E ANALYSIS AND ALSO HERE IN TEXAS, THE ENERGY SYSTEMS LAB ANALYSIS THAT THESE WILL SAVE ENERGY AND BE OF BENEFIT TO CONSUMERS.
SO VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE DOCUMENT, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU, WHICH IS ADOPTING THE 21 CODES.
THINK THAT'S A GOOD, THAT'S A GOOD THING FOR, FOR CONSUMERS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT'S TOUGH ON THE BUILDERS SOMETIMES ALL THESE CONSTANT CODES CHANGING, BUT I THINK IN THE, IN THE END IT'S A GOOD THING.
IT'S GONNA HELP MAKE A, UH, A BETTER GRID AND BETTER HOMES AND AND BUSINESSES.
UM, THE TWO GENERAL COMMENTS WHERE WE HAVE A SLIGHT DISAGREEMENT ON, ON THE VERSION THAT I SAW, WHICH WAS VERSION E I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE STILL OPERATING ON, IS WE DO THINK THE ENERGY MODELING, UM, IS BETTER AT 25,000 SQUARE FEET THAN A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER REASONS FOR MAYBE WANTING TO GO TO A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FEET, BUT I'LL JUST MAKE THAT COMMENT.
YOU GUYS ARE THE DECISION MAKERS, BUT WE, WE SUPPORT THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.
UM, AND THEN IN TERMS OF, UM, UH, INSULATION IN THE ATTIC, WHAT'S IN THE 21
[01:35:01]
I E C C IS THE 49 R VALUE YOU GUYS ARE SUGGESTING MOVING TO 38.AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND WITH COSTS GOING UP ON VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING, I UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR IT, BUT AGAIN, I'LL JUST STATE THAT WE, WE WOULD SUPPORT THE 49 AND IF NOT THE 49, MAYBE THERE'S A HAPPY MEDIUM BETWEEN 38 AND 49.
SO I JUST PUT THAT THERE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE MAIN THING I WANTED TO ADDRESS WAS, UM, THE PROVISIONS THAT YOU'VE ADDED IN THIS CODE FOR EV READY AND SOLAR READY.
SO FIRST OF ALL, WE SUPPORT ADDING EV READY AND SOLAR READY PROVISIONS IN THE CODE AS YOU'VE DONE.
AND THEN I'M GONNA TELL YOU, THEY DON'T GO FAR ENOUGH, WHICH PROBABLY DOESN'T SURPRISE YOU, UH, 'CAUSE I, I WORK FOR SIERRA CLUB, BUT THE ID, THE IDEA REALLY IS FOR CONSUMERS, UM, WE WANNA MAKE BUILDINGS THAT ARE EASY FOR PEOPLE TO ADD EITHER EV CHARGING OR SOLAR TO.
IT DOESN'T MEAN WE WANT YOU, THE BUILDERS TO PUT EV CHARGING STATIONS OR SOLAR PANELS ON.
WE JUST WANT YOU TO DESIGN THE BUILDINGS, BE IT, UM, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL IN A WAY THAT'S MAKES IT EASIER TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT IS THE FUTURE.
THAT'S WHERE C P S ENERGY IS GOING.
IT'S WHERE THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE IS GOING.
IT'S WHERE EV MANUFACTURERS ARE GOING.
SO SINCE BUILDINGS ARE AROUND FOR 30 YEARS, IT MAKES SENSE TO DO SOMETHING AT THE FRONT END, UH, AS LONG AS WE CAN KEEP, YOU KNOW, THE COST IN LINE AND COST EFFECTIVE.
SO, UM, IN YOUR PROPOSAL IN TERMS OF SOLAR READY, WHAT'S IN YOUR DOCUMENT, UM, IS A REQUIREMENT THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UM, AND DUPLEXES, TOWNHOUSES, UM, RESERVE SOME SPACE ON THE PANEL AND, AND WE SUPPORT THAT.
UM, WHAT YOU HAVEN'T INCLUDED, WHICH SOME OTHER CITIES HAVE INCLUDED, LIKE AUSTIN, LIKE HOUSTON IS ALSO IN THE PLAN ITSELF RESERVING, UH, SOME SPACE ON THE ROOF THAT SAYS THIS IS THE SOLAR READY ZONE.
UM, AND IN THE, IN THE DOCUMENT THAT I BELIEVE YOU ALL HAVE THAT I SENT OUT, THERE IS A LINK AS AN EXAMPLE.
I'M NOT TELLING YOU TO DUCK WHAT AUSTIN DID.
I'M, I'M JUST GIVING IT AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THEY DID IN, IN TERMS OF THE CELL SOLAR READY ROOF SPACE.
IT'S REALLY JUST, UM, IN THE DESIGN DOCUMENTS SHOWING WHERE A FUTURE SOLAR PANEL CAN DO CAN GO.
AND THE REASON FOR DOING THAT IS JUST TO ASSURE THAT THERE'S SUFFICIENT SPACE ON THE ROOF, THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE VENTS AND PIPES THAT WOULD PREVENT A FUTURE, UH, SOLAR, SOLAR SYSTEM.
SOLAR, SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF.
UM, SIMILARLY, YOU GUYS ARE ONLY ADDRESSING, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL, UM, IN AUSTIN, UM, I THINK A LITTLE IN HOUSTON.
UM, THEY'VE ALSO EXTENDED THAT TO MULTIFAMILY AND SOME TYPES OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'RE GONNA DO THIS, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU ALSO LOOK AT OTHER TYPES OF BUILDINGS, UH, IN TERMS OF THE, OF THE SOLAR WRITING.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR WIRING, UH, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR SPACE ON THE PANEL AND SPACE ON THE ROOF THAT THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
I KNOW SOME, SOME OTHER, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR WHAT CALIFORNIA DID, WHICH IS ACTUALLY REQUIRE SOLAR.
UH, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR SYSTEMS TO BE DESIGNED A WAY THAT CAN EASILY ADD SOLAR.
AND IF PEOPLE WANT THAT OPTION, IT'S EASY TO DO.
IT'S NOT A BIG EXPENSE TO THEM.
SO THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY ON SOLAR.
UM, EV READY? UM, YOU'VE TAKEN A COUPLE STEPS HERE, WHICH, WHICH ARE BETTER THAN DOING NOTHING.
UM, BUT I'LL SAY THE REQUIREMENT FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, YOU'RE ASKING FOR 20, UH, A REQUIRED, UH, 20 AMPS SPACE, BASICALLY.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT MOST ELECTRIC VEHICLES TO GET TODAY TO REALLY CHARGE IN A WAY THAT'S FAST ENOUGH TO MAKE IT CONVENIENT, YOU REALLY NEED 40 AMPS.
UM, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE C P S ENERGY TYPES OF INCENTIVES THEY'RE GIVING, UH, IT'S REALLY FOR 40 AMPS.
SO I'M GONNA SAY I THINK IT WOULD BE A BETTER PROPOSAL TO HAVE A 40 AMP REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.
UM, AND, AND ALL THAT, THAT WOULD BE OUR REQUEST THAT YOU BUMP THAT UP FROM 20 AMPS TO 40 AMPS.
UM, IN YOUR COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENTS, UH, WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN THIS PROPOSED CODE IS SAYING, UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S CAPACITY IN THOSE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS SO THAT 3% OF THE PARKING SPACES COULD BE COVERED IN THE FUTURE BY EV.
SO IT'S, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU DO EV CHARGING, IT'S REALLY JUST MAKING SURE YOU'VE GOT THE CAPACITY TO DO THAT.
AND WHAT I SAID IN THE, IN THE DOCUMENT THAT HOPEFULLY YOU ALL GOT WAS THAT'S PRETTY, THAT THAT'S PRETTY LOW.
UM, SO IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE I C C IS DISCUSSING, UM, THEY HAVE A PROPOSED TABLE THAT IS MAKING WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT EV CAPABLE SPACES? THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE FIVE TO 75% LEVELS, NOT 3%.
UM, I DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR,
[01:40:01]
UH, RECOMMENDATION, BUT IF, IF YOU WERE TO ASK ME FOR RECOMMENDATION, I'D SAY AIM FOR SOMETHING MORE LIKE 10% RATHER THAN 3%.LET'S, LET'S MAKE THE BUILDINGS, UH, HAVE BE AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE EV UH, CHARGING, NOT ASKING YOU TO DO EV CHARGING.
ASK YOU TO HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO DO THAT IN THE FUTURE.
AND THE OTHER BIG, UM, WHOLE I'D SAY IS YOU'RE SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTING MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.
AND I KNOW THAT'S A CONCERN OF THE FOLKS WHO BUILD MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.
UM, BUT UM, I THINK ALSO HAVING SOME EV CAPABLE PANELS SPACING FOR FUTURE PARKING SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING BECAUSE IT'S, SAY IT AGAIN.
WE DID NOT DO SOLAR READY BECAUSE THERE'S JUST, UNLESS YOU HAVE A BIG BUILDING THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING THE AIR CONDITIONING, NOBODY'S GONNA PUT SOLAR ON A BUILDING.
NO TENANT CAN PUT IT ON THE BUILDING, SIGN A SIX MONTH LEASE AND COMMIT THE OWNER TO 20 YEARS OF PAYMENTS.
I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 1 39 OF THE VERSION E, SECTION E 4 0 9 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CAPABLE.
THIS SECTION APPLIES TO ALL BUILDINGS NOT INCLUDED IN SECTION R FOUR 10.
SO IT DOES APPLY TO MULTI-FAMILY.
I WAS THINKING YOU, I MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAD EV OKAY.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT THAT WAS SOMETHING.
OKAY, SO WELL THEN I'LL GO BACK TO MY PREVIOUS COMMENT AND SAY, I THINK 3% IS TOO LOW.
YOU, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER A HIGHER NUMBER AND I'LL LEAVE IT THERE.
BUT THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING.
THAT'S, THAT'S MY MISTAKE FOR MISREADING, UH, THESE CODES WRONG, WHICH I'VE DONE IN THE PAST AND WE'LL PROBABLY CONTINUE TO DO.
UM, SO THOSE, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.
UM, AND, AND UH, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE ANY RESPONSE OR WOULD LIKE ME TO STAY UP, I'M HAPPY TO STAY UP.
IF YOU WANT ME TO SIT DOWN, I'M HAPPY TO SIT DOWN.
AND, AND I KNOW THERE WAS A SEPARATE EMAIL FROM ONE OF OUR MEMBERS, RUSSELL SEALE, JUST POINTING OUT ABOUT THE, THE FACT THAT C P S ENERGY INCENTIVES ARE TARGETED TO 35 40 AMPS, NOT 20 AMPS.
SO WHY NOT MAKE IT THE REQUIREMENT OF FOR 40 AMPS? EXACTLY.
YEAH, NO, AND JUST 'CAUSE HE DID ASK THIS AGAIN ON THE RECORD, I DID EMAIL THIS OUT TO THE BOARD.
I MEAN, I GOT IT LATE SO Y'ALL KIND OF GET IT LATE, BUT THIS IS THE EMAIL THAT HE SENT OVER, UH, DISCUSSING THIS IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO READ IT.
UM, THERE WAS ONE OTHER SECTION OF THAT, BUT I DO WANNA PUT IT ON THE RECORD.
SO THIS IS ANYBODY THAT COMES BACK AND READ VIEW VIEWS THIS, THEY CAN READ THIS AS WELL.
UH, THIS IS SECTION ONE TALKING ABOUT THE 20 AMP AND 40 AMP AND THEN A CONTINUATION OF THAT WITH SOME LINKS TALKING ABOUT THE NEMA ENCLOSURES REQUIREMENT.
I MEAN, JACK, ONE THING I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I THINK THEY'RE ALL ONLINE, IS YOU GO BACK AND LISTEN TO THE MEETINGS WHERE WE WOULD'VE LOVED TO HAVE YOU THERE.
AND, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GOT THE COST ESTIMATE BACK FOR THE EV IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OF SOMEWHERE AT A MINIMUM OF AROUND 1500 BUCKS, BY THE TIME IT GOT TO THE CONSUMER, BECAUSE IT'S NOT ONLY THE INTERIOR PANEL THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE UPGRADED IF THE, IF THE EXTERIOR PANEL AND THEN SERVICE BACK TO THE LINE TO SUPPORT WHAT MAY BE A FUTURE LOAD, WE SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A BABY STEP.
SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN MOST OF THE HOUSES WHERE PEOPLE, UH, CAN AFFORD TO BUY THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE.
RIGHT NOW, A LOT OF 'EM ARE ALREADY PUTTING IT IN AS THERE, BUT TO MANDATE IT IS, AT LEAST IN THE COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, FOR AFFORDABILITY REASONS, JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.
OKAY, WELL MAYBE, I MEAN, MAYBE THERE'S A WAY TO WORK WITH C P SS ENERGY WITH BUILDERS TO GET THE 40 AMPS IN THERE AND PROVIDED INCENTIVE TO BUILDERS.
THAT COULD BE ANOTHER APPROACH.
I MEAN, IF C P S WROTE THE $1,500 CHECK, I'M SURE EVERYBODY WOULD PUT IT IN TOMORROW.
YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK NATIONAL SIERRA CLUB.
I WORK FOR THE STATE SIERRA CLUB.
I DON'T GET THOSE NATIONAL TYPE BUDGETS.
AND THE, AND THE TRUTH IS THOSE NUMBERS ARE EVEN LIGHT THAT, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE YOU KNOW, NUMBER ONE, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY.
THE MAJORITY OF OUR CITY, THE ONES THAT CAN DO IT, DO IT.
THE ONES THAT CAN'T TO BURDEN THEM WITH ANOTHER ONE MORE EXPENSE.
ONE MORE, JUST READ THE PAPER YESTERDAY, WHICH IS JUST, IT'S A ONE MORE HIT THIS LITTLE BIT.
I THINK WE SHOULD PUT A 50 AMP SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN HAVE A POOL IN THE FUTURE.
BUT NO, THAT MAKES NO SENSE EITHER.
AND THIS, UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S WHEN YOU HAVE A PANEL THAT IS AN ALL ELECTRIC HOME, WHICH
[01:45:01]
A LOT OF THESE HOMES ARE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE GOOD.YOU COULD PROBABLY PUT A 40 AMP OF SOMETHING IN THERE AND YOU'D BE RIGHT THERE.
BUT IF ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU SAY, WELL, I DO WANT, I'VE ALWAYS WANTED A HOT TUB OR A POOL AND I NEED THAT EXTRA 40 OR 50 AMPS, WELL THEN THAT PUTS YOU UP TO A THREE 20 AND NOW YOU'RE ADDING ABOUT $2,000 MORE.
IT JUST, IT, IT JUST SNOWBALLS.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE ONES THAT CAN'T AFFORD IT, WE'LL AFFORD IT.
AND UNTIL SOMEBODY COMES ALONG WITH ALL THESE GREAT IDEAS AND COMES UP WITH A WAY TO SUBSTANTIATE THE FUNDS FOR THE, FOR THE CONSUMER AND SAY, WELL LOOK WHAT OUR CITY HAS DONE FOR EVERYBODY'S READY.
SO WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD $130,000 TESLA, UH, WE'RE SET UP FOR YOU.
AND I, I THINK THAT'S THE SENTIMENT WE DID IN COMMITTEE.
AND, AND, UH, SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
AND, UM, TE TESLA'S NOT THE ONLY VEHICLE OUT THERE, I'LL SAY, BUT, UH, I, I GET YOUR POINT.
UM, WELL WITH THAT, I'LL, I'LL, I DO APPRECIATE YOU INCLUDING, UM, SOME EV READY AND SOLAR READY REQUIREMENTS AND, UH, YOU, YOU'VE GOT MY COMMENTS AND SO WITH THAT I'LL SIT DOWN.
AND, AND JACK FOR THE, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THEM AND TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, WENT AGAINST WHAT THE ASSOCIATIONS WOULD'VE PREFERRED BECAUSE THEY WOULD'VE PREFERRED NOTHING.
AND SO WE TRIED TO FIND A COMPROMISE AND MY SUGGESTION TO EVERYBODY IS RATHER THAT THAN SAY I DIDN'T GET EVERYTHING THAT I WANTED, MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE IS TO GO TO COUNCIL WHEN THIS GETS THERE OR HERE AT THE BOARD AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, PERIOD.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE TOOK A LOT OF HEAT FROM A LOT OF GROUPS TO GET TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
OKAY, SO THE LAST ONE IS A PRESENTATION BY SAS.
THIS WAS, UH, BROUGHT UP ORIGINALLY AT THE LAST MEETING AND ALSO UNDER THE, UH, PLUMBING CODE COMMITTEE ABOUT THE, UH, LEAD, UH, LEAD TESTING OF EXPOSED SUPPLY LINES.
AND THEY'RE FORWARDING ME THAT LANGUAGE.
I APOLOGIZE, I'M NOT PREPARED FOR THAT, BUT I'LL PULL IT UP HERE IN A SECOND.
AND, UH, SO THEY, BASED OFF OF THE MEETING FROM JUNE 30TH, UH, Y'ALL PROVIDED, Y'ALL REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE AND SOME CLARIFICATION OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, TESTING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO SAW HAS PROPOSED SOME NEW, UH, LANGUAGE, WHICH I FORWARDED OUT TO Y'ALL, UH, EARLIER THIS WEEK.
YOU WANT ME TO WAIT ON YOU? IF YOU WANNA START.
I'M THE MANAGER OF WATER QUALITY OVER AT SAWS WORK FOR MR. HALTE.
UM, AS JEREMY SAID AT THE UH, JUNE BOARD MEETING, THERE WAS A LANGUAGE THAT WAS PROPOSED THAT Y'ALL DISCUSSED AT LENGTH AND AT THE END OF THE DISCUSSION THERE WERE A COUPLE THINGS THAT WERE ASKED THAT WE GO BACK AND GO AHEAD AND SEE IF WE COULD IMPROVE UPON.
AND, UH, ONCE JEREMY GETS IT UP THERE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND HIGHLIGHT THOSE AT THAT TIME.
THEN, LET'S SEE, IS THAT THE, IS THAT THE NEW ONE? OKAY.
THE, UM, THE TWO MAIN ITEMS THAT WERE ASKED TO BE CLARIFIED WAS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT PIPE WAS GONNA BE REMOVED AT THE TIME THAT THE, UH, SWAB TEST WAS BEING ASKED FOR.
SO BASICALLY THAT HAS BEEN ADDED INTO THE, UH, LANGUAGE TO WHERE BASICALLY STATES THAT THE REMOVAL OF, UH, ANY SECTION OF PIPES NOT REQUIRED.
THE, UH, SECOND KEY THING WAS WHAT WAS, WAS ACTUALLY GONNA BE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED TO SAWS AS A RESULT OF THIS EFFORT.
AND THAT IS BASICALLY HANDLED IN THE, UM, AREA THERE WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF ANY AREA PIPE CONNECTOR, SOLDER
[01:50:02]
SHELBY TESTED AS WELL.AND COMPLETE, UH, SWAB TEST MUST BE TAKEN AND SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO SAWS ALONG WITH INFORMATION IDENTIFYING THE PROPERTY AND TESTING LOCATION.
YOU CAN READ THE REST OF THAT.
SO OTHER THAN THAT, THERE WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF GENERAL WORDSMITHING IT WAS DONE TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, EASILY READ.
AND, UM, IF YOU GOT ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT, THEN I'LL TRY TO ANSWER IT.
IF NOT, THEN I'VE GOT MY LEAD AND COPPER EXPERT HERE AS WELL.
CAN SHE ANSWER WHAT IS LIKELY TO TEST POSITIVE AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT DOES TEST POSITIVE? AND, UH, THE CAUSE OF THE CONTAMINATION WAS YOUR SAWS LINE CONTAMINATING MY GALVANIZED PIPE AND NOW WE KNOW THAT WHO'S PAYING FOR THAT? I CAN ATTEMPT TO, THIS IS KIRSTEN NOWER.
I, KIRSTEN LER WATER QUALITY SCIENTIST WITH SAWS.
UM, BASICALLY THE RULE IS DESIGNED, THE NEW RULE IS DESIGNED TO IDENTIFY LEAD PIPE IN THE GROUND.
THAT IS THE PRIMARY OBJECTIVE OF THE RULE.
IT'S A NA NATIONAL RULE AND TRUTHFULLY, IT WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR A CITY LIKE OURS IN THE NINETIES.
IT WAS STANDARD MARCHING ORDERS THAT WHENEVER ANYTHING LEAD WAS FOUND, IT WAS REPLACED.
SO AS A WHOLE, WE DO NOT HAVE A LEAD PROBLEM.
IS THERE POSSIBLY SOME LEAD OUT THERE THAT WE JUST AREN'T AWARE OF? YES, THAT IS PROBABLY OUT THERE, BUT WHAT IT IS IS GONNA BE VERY SMALL.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY THIS RULE AND WE HAVE TO CREATE THIS INVENTORY OF WHAT THE SERVICE LINE MATERIAL IS, BOTH ON THE PUBLIC SIDE AND THE PRIVATE SIDE.
AND E P A HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE FACT THAT THEY'RE GIVING MUNICIPALITIES LIKE OURSELVES RULES THAT MUST BE ABIDED BY ON THE PRIVATE SIDE.
AND THEY SAID THAT ALL AT THIS POINT, ALL WE'RE ASKING IS FOR YOU TO IDENTIFY THEM IF YOU FIND THEM, NOTIFY THE PERSON WHO OWNS THAT PRIVATE LINE AND OFFER TO REPLACE THAT LINE AT THEIR COST, WHICH IS HARD.
AND THAT'S A BIG THING THAT MUNICIPALITIES HAVE BEEN PUSHED BACK ON WITH THE E P A.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES OUT THERE.
SAWS WILL BE INVESTIGATING THOSE.
UH, WE AREN'T SURE AT THIS TIME WHAT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE TO OUR CUSTOMERS.
WE OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE'S LEAD OUT THERE AS SAWS, WE WANNA TRY TO GET IT OUTTA THE GROUND AS BEST AS WE CAN.
WE WANNA MAKE THIS PROGRAM, UM, AFFORDABLE FROM FOR SAWS, FOR OUR CUSTOMERS, FOR OUR RATE PAYERS, FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE REQUIRED TO ABIDE BY THESE.
AND SO WHAT THIS RULE HELPS US DO, UM, WHETHER YOU PASS IT OR NOT, DOESN'T CHANGE THE REQUIREMENTS PUT ON SAUCE.
WHAT THIS DOES IS THIS HELPS IT BE MORE AFFORDABLE FOR SAWS TO BE ABLE TO GO INTO THESE.
AND WE KNOW YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE GOING INTO EVERY HOUSE AND EVERY AREA, BUT IF A LINE IS UNEARTHED FOR WHATEVER WORK IS BEING DONE, IF WE CAN HAVE THAT IDENTIFIED, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT INTO OUR INVENTORY AND THAT MAKES IT EASIER AND FASTER AND MORE AFFORDABLE FOR ALL INVOLVED TO ACTUALLY COMPLETE THIS INVENTORY AND HAVE IT APPROVED BY BOTH T C E Q AND EVENTUALLY E P A.
NOW YOU MENTIONED THE SOURCE OF THE LEAD, THE SOURCE OF THE LEAD IS GOING TO BE LEAD PIPE.
THERE'S BASICALLY FOUR DISTINCTIONS THAT CAN BE MADE THROUGH THIS INVENTORY.
LEAD SELF-EXPLANATORY, NOT LEAD, ALSO SELF-EXPLANATORY, UNKNOWN WITH, WE JUST DON'T KNOW YET.
AND THAT REQUIRES US TO HAVE FURTHER INVESTIGATION TO IDENTIFY WHAT THAT PIPE MATERIAL IS AS WELL AS WHAT'S CALLED GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.
WHEN YOU HAVE A LEAD SERVICE LINE AND THEN YOU HAVE GALVANIZED, WHAT CAN HAPPEN IS BASED ON THE WATER CHEMISTRY THAT GALVANIZED CAN ACT AS A SOMEWHAT MAGNET OF SORTS FOR ANY LEAD THAT IS DISSOLVED IN THAT WATER.
SO IF YOU HAVE LEAD THAT'S ENTERING THE WATER OVER HERE AND AS IT'S TRAVELING THROUGH, IT CAN BE ATTACHED ONTO THE GALVANIZED WALL.
NOW, IN ORDER FOR GALVANIZED TO HAVE A PROBLEM, FIRST YOU HAVE TO HAVE LEAD PIPE AHEAD OF IT THAT IS CAUSING A PROBLEM.
SO IF WE HAVE IDENTIFIED GALVANIZED LINE, BUT WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS NEVER LEAD AHEAD OF IT, WE DON'T NEED TO REPLACE THAT.
THAT'S NOT GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.
GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT IS WHEN WE CAN KNOW THAT OKAY, AT SOME POINT THERE WAS A LEAD LINE AHEAD OF THAT GALVANIZED, THEREFORE WE NEED TO REPLACE THAT GALVANIZED.
SO IF WE JUST FIND GALVANIZED AND IT'S ALWAYS BEEN GALVANIZED AND EVERYTHING AHEAD OF IT'S BEEN GALVANIZED, THAT'S NOT REQUIRING REPLACEMENT, IT WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE.
SO WHEN YOU FIND LEAD IN THE GALVANIZED PIPE ON MY SIDE OF THE SERVICE LINE MM-HMM.
[01:55:01]
OR IS SAWS GOING TO PAY TO BE LIABLE AND PAY FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE PIPE THAT YOU POISON? UH, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I THINK THAT YOU'VE PROBABLY IDENTIFIED A FUTURE LAW, YOU KNOW, LEGAL ISSUE IS GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSED AND HANDLED THAT WAY AS FAR AS SAWS, I MEAN IT'LL, IT'LL REALLY DEPEND ON WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THAT KIND OF A MM-HMM.
BA BASICALLY THIS ROBERT HENLEY.
BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU'RE UNDER THE GUN, UH, BY RULES THAT ARE PASSED, UH, AT SOME DISTANT FUTURE TO AN ANSWER MARK'S QUESTION.
IF YOU HAVE LEAD CONTAMINATION, THAT'S DISPUTE RESOLUTION TO THE FUTURE.
BUT FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, YOU'RE HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE CURRENT, UH, RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO FOLLOW.
THE FACT IS EVEN IF IT WAS MARKED CONTAMINATION, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE WATER'S NOT GOING OUT, WATER'S COMING IN.
UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH IN THE FUTURE THAT YOU SUMMED IT UP QUITE WELL.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE WE'RE AT.
AND IT'S BASICALLY A FOR ALL INTENT PURPOSE, IT'S THERE, THERE IS FINANCING, BUT IT'S REALLY AN UNFUNDED MANDATE.
THIS LIST FOR OFFICE, UH, IN, UH, COMMENT TO THE, UH, THE STATEMENT MADE THAT THE GALVANIZED PIPING WOULD ATTRACT, UH, THE LEAD FROM A PREVIOUS LEAD PIPE BASED ON THE HISTORY OF, UH, SAWS IN THEIR, UH, MAPPING AND EVERYTHING.
A LOT OF TIMES IT'S INCONSISTENT IN INACCURATE.
SO IF YOU DON'T FIND ANYTHING, BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE BEFORE THAT LEAD IS STILL, UH, PRESENT IN THAT LINE.
THE WAY THE RULE STATES IT BASICALLY FOR IT TO BE DEEMED GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT, IT HAS TO BE GALVANIZED LINE THAT WE CANNOT PROVE LEAD WAS NEVER UPSTREAM OF IT.
SO IF WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION THAT IT'S GALVANIZED LINE, GALVANIZED LINE ON BOTH SIDES, THAT'S PROOF THAT SHOWS, OKAY, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN GALVANIZED LINE.
THERE'S CLEARLY NEVER BEEN A REPLACEMENT HERE.
ALL OF OUR RECORDS SAY IT WAS ALWAYS GALVANIZED LINE THAT WOULD DEEM BE DEEMED NON LEAD RATHER THAN GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.
ARE YOU COMPLETE WITH THE INVENTORY ON YOUR SIDE OF THE LINE? WE HAVE A VERY GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF OUR SIDE OF THE LINE.
IS IT A HUNDRED PERCENT PERFECT? NO, BUT THROUGH THIS PROCESS WE ARE INTENDING TO GET THERE.
RIGHT? UM, AS FAR AS WE ARE AWARE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY LEAD PIPE ON THE SAW ZONE PORTION.
AND WE ARE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THE EFFORTS THAT WE NEED TO AS MANDATED BY T C E Q AND E P A TO CONFIRM THAT, UH, THIS, HOW MUCH DID YOU HAVE THIS GEORGE SLIVA? UM, IF WE'RE, IF IT'S A GALVANIZED MANDATORY REPLACEMENT, WHY ARE WE SWABBING COPPER? UM, THE, THE RULE IS CALLED THE LEAD COPPER RULE REVISION.
WHEN THE RULE WAS ORIGINALLY PUT OUT AS THE LEAD COPPER RULE IN THE NINETIES, THE E P A WAS VERY INTERESTED IN BOTH LEAD COPPER.
THE INTEREST IN COPPER HAS KIND OF FALLEN OFF, UM, FOR REASONS WE PROBABLY DON'T EVEN WANNA GO INTO.
UH, BUT THE FACT THAT THE COPPER COMPONENT STILL EXISTS AS PART OF THE PROGRAM, THAT'S WHY.
SO IT'S NOT OF HIGH INTEREST AS IN THE LEAD, THE OFFICIAL, YOU KNOW, WORD FROM EPAS GET THE LEAD OUT, BUT COPPER IS STILL A COMPONENT OF THE PROGRAM.
SO THEN WHY IS OUR, OUR, UH, 2014 IF I REMEMBER THAT IN THE WHY IS THAT OUR BREAKPOINT, INSTEAD OF USING AN AREA OF SAN ANTONIO THAT WE KNOW IS PREDOMINANTLY GALVANIZED THE TWO, THE 2014 ACTUALLY IS A DATE THAT COMES DOWN FROM T C E Q.
[02:00:01]
BEEN TWO LEAD BANDS, ONE IN 1986 AND THEN THE OTHER ONE IN 2014.UM, THE BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO IS THE PERCENT OF SOLDER, UM, CONCENTRATION OF LEAD AND THE 2014 DATA.
ANYTHING PAST THAT IS A REALLY HARD SAFE ZONE THAT ANYTHING PAST THERE IS GONNA HAVE THE EXTREMELY LOW CONTENT LEAD SOLDER AND ABSOLUTELY NO LEAD PIPE.
AND SO THAT, THAT DATE REALLY COMES DOWN FROM ABOVE IS WHY WE PUT THAT IN THERE.
I REALLY DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT IT, THIS HAS TO GO ON THE PLUMBING INDUSTRY TO BE ABLE TO PROVE OR SOLVE OR SATISFY THE DATABASE FOR SOMEBODY LIKE E P, A SAD THING IS ORTHOPHOSPHATE INJECTION IS NOT REALLY WHAT WE WANT TO DO
UH, AND BESIDES BEING VERY EXPENSIVE FOR THE INJECTION, FOR AS MANY WELLS AS SAN ANTONIO HAS, UH, FROM WHAT I'VE GATHERED WITH PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH ORTHOPHOSPHATE, IT ALSO INCAPACITATES EXISTING WATER SOFTENERS.
HAVE Y'ALL SEEN THAT OR HAVE STUDIES PROVEN THAT? UH, I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY TO WATER SOFTENERS, BUT FOR THE CITY TO TAKE ON ORTHOPHOSPHATE WOULD BE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE.
UM, WE'VE MAYBE BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE REMOVED ON THE, ON THE BACK END OF IT.
WELL, AND IT'S SO NEW, THEY STILL HAVEN'T EVEN FIGURED OUT THE ACTUAL HOW MUCH TO INJECT INTO CERTAIN AMOUNT OF VOLUME OF WATER AND STORAGE AND THINGS.
SO, UH, I MEAN AS MUCH AS I HATE IT, I'D HAVE TO GO WITH THIS JUST TO SAVE THE CITY FOR THIS IMPACT OF ORTHOPHOSPHATE.
LOCALIZED TREATMENT IS, IS DECENT, BUT WHEN THEY'RE INJECTING IT STRAIGHT INTO THE SYSTEM, THERE'S JUST TOO MUCH AND IT'S TOO FAR OUT OF CONTROL.
SO A QUESTION I HAVE IS, IS THERE NO WAY TO DO THIS TESTING BY TESTING THE WATER THAT WOULD MEET YES AND NO.
UM, AS PART OF THE LETTING COPPER RULE AND THEN NOW THE LETTING COPPER RULE REVISIONS, THERE IS A WHOLE PORTION OF THE RULE THAT IS TAP SAMPLING THAT ZAS TAKES ON AND WE FIND REPRESENTATIVE HOUSES, WE DROP OFF A BOTTLE, THEY COLLECT IT, WE COME BACK AND WE THE WHOLE THING.
SO WE DO DO WATER QUALITY TESTING THROUGH THAT, UH, PROGRAM.
THIS AS FOR THE INVENTORY, NO.
AND I REALLY WISH THE ANSWER IS YES.
WE DID A WHOLE SUB-STUDY ON THIS, WROTE UP PAPERS AND EVERYTHING.
UM, AND BASICALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS IF YOU TAKE A WATER QUALITY TEST AND DO STAGNATION AND MULTI-VOLUME AND YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT EXACTLY HOW MUCH WATER IS IN THAT LINE AND TAKE ALL THE SAMPLES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, WE CAN DO THAT.
AND IF YOU GET A LEAD HIT THAT IS GOOD SOLID PROOF THAT THERE IS SOME SORT OF LEAD COMPONENT ON THAT LINE, IF YOU DO NOT GET A LEAD HIT THAT IS NOT SOLID PROOF THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE LEAD ON THAT LINE, IT'S SOLID PROOF THAT SOMETHING IS WORKING RIGHT.
YOUR TREATMENT IS WORKING RIGHT OR YOUR CORROSION INHIBITORS LIKE ORTHOPHOSPHATE, EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE THAT IS WORKING RIGHT.
SO IT'S REALLY GOOD AT PROVING THERE'S LEAD.
IT'S JUST NOT GOOD AT PROVING THERE'S NOT LEAD.
I'M A WATER QUALITY AND IF WE COULD GET PAST NOVEMBER, WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT.
BUT ANYWAY,
BUT ANYWAY, UH, AGAIN EVERYBODY, I MEAN I I, AS MUCH AS I HATE TO SEE THIS THROWN ONTO THE PLUMBING INDUSTRY, IT'S, IT'S WHAT'S GOTTA BE DONE.
MIKE MORALES, UH, I'M A LITTLE CURIOUS WHY THIS ISN'T A SAWS PR PROGRAM AND INSTEAD OF IT BEING WRITTEN ONTO OUR BOOKS, THERE IS A REQUIRED PR COMPONENT.
THERE IS AN ENTIRE OTHER COMPONENT THAT IS BEING CON DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW AND IT'LL BE PART OF THIS.
'CAUSE RIGHT NOW WE UM, NONE OF THIS COMES INTO COMPLIANCE UNTIL OCTOBER 16TH, 2024 WHEN WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT INVENTORY.
SO WE HAVE KIND OF AN INTERIM PERIOD WE HAVE DEVELOPED THAT INVENTORY AND THE PR CAMPAIGN REALLY WILL NOT, UM, REALLY HIT ANYTHING PROBABLY UNTIL 20 24, 20 25.
AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE SAS IS LOOKING AT HIRING A CONSULTANT TO HELP WITH ALL THIS.
AND THAT'S GOING TO THE BOARD IN UH, AUGUST I BELIEVE.
I AGREE WITH GEORGE AND HAVING THIS THROWN ONTO THE PLUMBING INDUSTRY WHERE AGAIN, YOU MAY HAVE SOME REALLY GOOD PEOPLE OUT THERE AND PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT MIGHT ABUSE THE PROGRAM, YOU KNOW MM-HMM.
WELL, AND THE MAIN THING WITH I THINK THIS COMPONENT MM-HMM.
WE JUST WANNA IDENTIFY IT SAYING IT'S THE, UH, THE LEAD SERVICE LINE INVENTORY MM-HMM.
[02:05:01]
UH, SOME OF IT'LL BE DIRECT INVESTIGATION AND THEN OTHERS OF IT WILL HOPEFULLY BE A PREDICTIVE MODEL FOR BEING ABLE TO HELP POTENTIALLY LOCATE AREAS THAT NEED TO HAVE POTHOLING AND WHATNOT TO HAVE PHYSICAL VERIFICATION OF THE LINE.
SO ONE, ONE THING I'D LIKE TO ADD TO THE LANGUAGE IS SOMEWHERE IN THERE IF IT'S NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY TESTED, 'CAUSE THERE'S NO POINT IN DOING THE TEST AFTER TEST AFTER, YOU'RE ONLY REQUIRED TO DO THE TEST ONCE, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.
SO IF WE CAN JUST SOMEWHERE, IF IT'S NOT TESTED, PREVIOUSLY TESTED AND UPON AND UPON EXPOSURE, LIKE UPON EXPOSURE OF A NOT PREVIOUSLY TESTED WATERLINE SERVICE LINE, FINE.
I MEAN, THAT'D PROBABLY BE THE BEST SPOT.
BUT CAN WE THEN, IF THEY'RE PUTTING THE BURDEN ON US AND THE HOMEOWNER SAYS, OH, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY DONE IT ONCE, HOW DO WE KNOW IT TO PUBLISH A, IT DOES HAVE TO BE THE TEST AND THAT DOES HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED TO US WITHIN THE WHAT IT 10 DAYS.
BUT THEY COULD COME UP WITH A DATABASE WHERE YOU COULD PUT AN ADDRESS IN IF YOU WANTED TO.
SO, UH, SHORTLY AFTER THE FIRST PRESENTATION THAT SCOTT HAD MADE WHEN Y'ALL CAME, UH, I NOTICED IN THE LETTER THAT CAME OUT IN THE SAWS BILL THAT Y'ALL WERE OFFERING $150 REBATE FOR PEOPLE THAT WENT IN TO REPLACE THEIR MAIN WATER CUTOFF INSTEAD OF USING THE SAWS CUTOFF AT THE METER.
TO PROVE THAT INSTALLATION, THEY ALSO HAD TO HAVE THE PLUMBERS TAKE PICTURES OF THE PIPING AND THAT CONNECTION TO PROVE THAT INSTALLATION.
SO DID THAT HELP CREATE THIS DATABASE? CAN Y'ALL USE THAT? NO, YOU DON'T HAVE THE SWAB, BUT IF IT'S P V C, YOU START ELIMINATING A LOT OF THESE ADDRESSES.
BECAUSE THE IDEA IS IF WE HAVE THE INTENT, IF WE SHOW THE INTENT, E P A SHOULD BACK OFF.
THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD GO BACK AND TAKE A LOOK AT.
FROM THE STANDPOINT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE, I GUESS THE, THE, THE PROGRAM THAT CAME BACK BECAUSE OF THE SNOWMAGEDDON,
SO, UH, WE, WE'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AND SEE WHAT KIND OF INFORMATION HAS BEEN COLLECTED ON THAT.
AND IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE TO AT LEAST UTILIZE SOME OF THAT IN THE, UH, LEAD SERVICE, YOU KNOW, LINE INVENTORY, ESPECIALLY SINCE THAT'S ON THE SIDE THAT WE KNOW VERY, VERY LITTLE ABOUT BEING ON THE CUSTOMER SIDE.
AND MAYBE THE NEXT REBATE IS IF YOU GO DO THE, DIG IT UP AND DO THE TEST, YOU GET A, BECAUSE YOU ONLY HAVE TO TEST IT ONE PLACE.
WE WILL BE INVESTIGATING IT AT THE METER FROM WHAT WE CAN SEE AT THE METER BECAUSE WE OWN THE METER.
UM, AS FAR AS WE UNDERSTAND IT, HAVING ANOTHER POINT IS WHAT IS GONNA BE REQUIRED.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, AT EVERY PROPERTY WE HAVE, YOU HAVE A METER MM-HMM.
THAT'S TYPICALLY WITHIN A BOX.
CAN WE JUST GO SWAB RIGHT NEXT TO THE OWNER METER, THE EXPOSED PIPE, AND WOULD THAT COMPLY? WE, WE BELIEVE SO, YES.
YEAH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THIS WE'RE GOING BY WHAT, YOU KNOW, OTHERS HAVE DONE ACROSS THE COUNTRY SO FAR THAT'S BEEN APPROVED.
BUT WE ALSO HAVE E P A AND T C E Q IN THEIR NEGOTIATIONS AND WHATNOT AS FAR AS WHAT THE ACTUAL PLAN IS GONNA BE FOR MM-HMM.
SO EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE APPROVED IN OTHER AREAS, DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT E P A MAY STILL APPROVE IT, BUT T C E Q MAY DECIDE THAT THEY WANT MORE MM-HMM.
SO THAT'S ALWAYS A, THAT'S ALWAYS A RISK.
UH, ONE OTHER QUESTION BEFORE I LET IT GO.
SO WE DIG UP A COPPER LINE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, WE'RE LOOKING AT GALVANIZES OUR PRIMARY.
YOU DON'T SWAB GALVANIZE, YOU SWAB COPPER.
SO NOW THEN WE TAKE THE PICTURE NEXT TO OUR COPPER PIPE AND THAT SWAB INDICATES LEAD.
[02:10:01]
WOULD BE INTERESTING.AND AS PART OF THE SUBMISSION IT WOULD SAY, ARE YOU, IS THIS SWAB FROM THE SOLDER? IS THIS SWAB FROM THE COPPER OR THE PIPE? AND, AND SO IN THE ACTUAL FORM THAT WE WOULD CREATE, IT WOULD HAVE THAT OF WHAT EXACTLY DID YOU SWAB AND ACCOMPANY WITH THE PICTURE.
SO NOW THEN WE'VE GOT A, A PROPERTY THAT THE SWAB MM-HMM.
ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE PIPE ANYWAY.
UM, IS IT, IS THAT GONNA BE A FORCED REPLACEMENT ON A CONSUMER? IT WILL NOT BE UNDER THE CURRENT.
WHY NOT? UNDER THE CURRENT RULE, IT WANTS YOU TO IDENTIFY CONNECTORS AND SOLDER, BUT THEY'RE NOT REQUIRING REPLACEMENT OF THEM.
AND WE JUST ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION AND WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE GONNA DO IN 10 OR 15 YEARS
'CAUSE 'CAUSE WHEN I GOTTA FIGURE THIS OUT BECAUSE ONCE THE PLUMBING INDUSTRY CATCHES WIND TO THIS, THEY'RE ALL OVER ME WANTING TO KNOW WHY I'LL LET IT GO.
UM, THE ONLY THING THAT WILL BE RE WILL BE OFFERED FOR REPLACEMENT AT THE COST OF THE OWNER WOULD BE LEAD PIPE OR GALVANIZED THAT HAS HAD LEAD SOURCING IT IN THE PAST.
THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO THAT WE WOULD THE HOMEOWNER WOULD BE, UM, APPROACHED FOR A REPLACEMENT.
AND THEN, SO BACK TO GEORGE'S QUESTION.
IF YOU'RE TAKING OUT A PIECE OF PIPE AND THERE'S COPPER, A JOINT COPPER, WHAT ARE YOU REQUIRED TESTS? SO I CAN JUST DO THE COPPER PIPE AND I'M DONE AND JUST REPORT THAT? OR DO YOU WANT 3 84? YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO TEST SALT? YEAH.
ESSENTIALLY ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE, I MEAN, IF YOU SEE THE PIPE, SWAB THE PIPE, IF YOU SEE A CONNECTOR, YOU'RE LIKE, OH, THAT LOOKS KIND OF LIKE, LIKE CONNECTOR, SWAB THE CONNECTOR AND, BUT YOU SEE WHAT I'M AFRAID OF? MM-HMM.
RIGHT NOW, T C E Q I HATE TO KEEP THROWING THEM AS THE WILD CARD.
THEY, THEY COULD DECIDE SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
'CAUSE LIKE KIRSTEN SAID, RIGHT NOW, COPPER, COPPER COMPONENT, IF IT TESTS POSITIVE OR WHATEVER, THEN IT'S NOT IN THE RULE TO BE REPLACED.
BUT AS YOU POINT OUT AND WITH T C E Q THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE AND YET NOBODY'S WORRIED ABOUT COPPER IONS IN OUR WATER BEING LEACHED OUT OF THE PIPE.
UM, OR LET'S SAY E P A AT THE CONCENTRATIONS THAT EXIST.
NO, THERE IS A PRIMARY LIMIT OF 1.3 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER THROUGH OUR CURRENT LEAD AND COPPER PROGRAM AND THROUGH ALL OF THE OTHER WATER QUALITY TESTING WE DO, WE'RE NOT EVEN A, I MEAN WE'RE A FRACTION OF THAT AT OUR HIGHEST VALUES.
AND SO IT'S JUST, UM, THROUGH THE TAP SAMPLING THAT WE CURRENTLY DO, WE, WE SAMPLE IN OUR HOMES AND WE HAVE A VERY EXTENSIVE WATER QUALITY MON MONITORING NETWORK THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY.
SO, UM, WE, OURSELVES AND OTHER CITIES, JUST TO GET A CON COPPER CONCENTRATION THAT'S ACTUALLY, POTENTIALLY POSSIBLY HARMFUL IS, IS JUST EXTREMELY HIGH.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE COLORED WATER PRIOR TO THAT CONCENTRATION.
SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT THE MOTION ON THE, UH, TABLE FOR, UM, ACCEPTANCE OR FOR A SECOND.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND AS SECOND FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THIS GEORGE SALIBA RULE.
IT'S THE LEAD TESTING TO EXPOSE SUPPLY LINES.
I'D LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO, WE CALL THIS GEORGE'S LAW
NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA GO THAT FAR.
WE'RE JUST LEAD TESTING, UH, BLOOD TESTING OF EXPOSED.
BUT WHERE'S THIS GONNA BE PUT? WHERE'S THIS ACTUALLY GONNA BE ADDED? YEAH, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE, INTO YOUR AMENDMENTS.
NO PLUMBER RES WOULD AMENDMENT.
THIS WOULD BE AN AMENDMENT TO THE I P C.
WE WERE LOOKING AT BETWEEN CHAPTER ONE OR, UH, ARTICLE ONE UNDER PERMITS AND IN TESTING.
BUT I THINK WE WANNA PUT IT UNDER THE I P C THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE FLUID AND WHEN WE UPDATE THE I P C AND THE NEXT TIME WE REEVALUATED IT DOESN'T KINDA GET LOST IN THE SHUFFLE.
SO, AND, AND JUST YOU HAVE A SECTION, MILTON.
[02:15:02]
UM, WE, WE, WE DON'T WANNA ADOPT THE PLUMBING SIDE OF THE I R C, SO THE I P C SUPERSEDES AND JUST, JUST AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION, SINCE WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND, WHEN IT'S JUST THE EXPOSED PIPE, WE'RE NOT HAVING TO EXPOSE ALL THE PIPE.ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? JUST NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION, BUT AN OBSERVATION WHEN, UH, SO WAS WITH US, US PREVIOUSLY, HOLD ON.
UH, THIS WAS A NEW THOUGHT PROCESS THAT WE WERE ALL TRYING TO, TRYING TO DIGEST.
AND SO ONE, I WANT TO GIVE YOU, UH, KUDOS TO Y'ALL FOR COMING BACK AND 'CAUSE WE CHALLENGED YOU WITH A PLAN B AND FOR COMING BACK AND TAKING THE TIME TO, TO REALLY PUT SOME THOUGHT BEHIND THIS AND HELP ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS.
SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
YOU SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT THE SCIENTISTS AT THE FIRST MEETING.
SHE WAS HERE, BUT SHE WAS BEING QUIET.
I TOLD HER SHE NEEDS TO GET UP HERE AND TALK.
THEY DIDN'T BRING HER ALL THE WAY FROM FLORIDA FOR NOTHING.
SO THAT IS EVERYTHING STAFF AND STAKEHOLDERS PRESENTED THAT THEY WANTED TO, UH, REACH BACK OUT TO THE BOARD AFTER REVIEWING ALL THE PROPOSED CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS FOR THE ADOPTION OF THESE CODES.
SO AT THIS TIME, IT'S NOW AT THE BOARD.
IF THE BOARD HAS ANY ITEMS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT, REVIEW, WE CAN PULL THOSE UP.
UM, OR IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO START, YOU KNOW, GOING THROUGH THAT AND WE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH EACH ARTICLE AS NEEDED, BUT I THINK WE'VE HIGHLIGHTED AND LET Y'ALL KNOW EVERY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WE HAVE MADE OUTSIDE OF THOSE COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE.
CAN YOU PULL UP JEREMY, PAGE 11, NUMBER SEVEN IF I'M ON THE RIGHT PAGE.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL UNDER UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
SO MARK, WHAT IS THE SECTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? I DON'T KNOW.
RESIDENTIAL, DON'T KNOW THE SECTION BECAUSE I, I JUST PRINTED THE PAGE, BUT IT'S PAGE 11.
NUMBER SEVEN, WORK NOT COVERED BY ANNUAL MECHANICAL PLUMBING.
I WANT TO, I WANT TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE IN NUMBER ONE TO MATCH THE STATE STATUTE, WHICH IDENTIFIES THAT AS TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM, WHICH IS THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE EXEMPTION IN STATE LAW.
BECAUSE NUMBER ONE IS NOT ENFORCEABLE.
SO THIS IS GOING BACK TO THE MAINTENANCE PERMIT THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER.
YEAH, THAT WAS PART OF MY STUFF IN THE MAINTENANCE PERMIT AND WE DIDN'T GET TO THAT.
WELL, I GUESS IF IT'S ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, DO WE NOT TRUMP THAT REQUIREMENT UP HERE? YEAH.
BUT OVERALL, BUT YOU'RE, THIS IS IN, THIS IS A PERMIT AND YOU'RE SAYING WHAT I CAN DO AND WHAT I CAN'T DO AND MY EMPLOYEES CAN DO ANYTHING SHORT OF REPLACEMENT OF THE TOTAL SYSTEM.
AND SO I WANT THIS BECAUSE IT, WE'RE PULLING A PERMIT THAT THERE'S, IT'S CLEAR WHAT IS COVERED.
WELL, UP UNTIL THE POINT WE REPLACED THE DUCTS, THE THERMOSTAT AT THE, EVERYTHING IN THE THING.
WE CAN DO REPAIR WORK AS LONG AS IT'S NOT THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
UM, WE'RE REACHING OUT TO CHIEF FER EZ WHO JUST STEPPED OUT.
BUT I GUESS, UH, WHAT, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMITTEE OR FROM THE BOARD FOR THIS? COULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT LINE ITEM AND NUMBER YOU'RE CHANGING OR ADDING? SEVEN A ONE TO CHANGE THAT TO READ JUST TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM.
AND IF YOU HAVE WHAT I SENT YOU, I EXPLAINED WHY AND I WOULD RATHER, SO RIGHT NOW THIS IS, THIS IS UNDER THE SUBSECTION OF WORK NOT COVERED BY THE ANNUAL MECHANICAL.
SO REALLY WHAT YOU WANT ME TO REMOVE IS THAT FIRST SECTION.
SO SIMULTANEOUS NUMBER ONE, PLACEMENT OF THE CONDENSING UNIT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S, IT WOULD, IT WOULD CHANGE TO, I SEE IT WOULD BE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
WELL, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE WORDING THIS CORRECTLY.
[02:20:01]
WE'RE JUST REMOVING THAT.SO NOW, BECAUSE THIS IS WORK THAT IS NOT COVERED BY THAT PERMIT, BY REMOVING THIS LANGUAGE, WE WOULD NOW BE COVERED UNDER THAT PERMIT IS THE WAY I THINK NOW IF YOU, NUMBER ONE NEEDS TO READ TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM, AND IF YOU GO BACK UP TO THE TOP, THE FOLLOWING WORK IS NOT COVERED BY THE PERMIT.
SO TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM WOULD NOT BE COVERED BY THE PERMIT BECAUSE AT THAT POINT YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO GET AN INDIVIDUAL PERMIT BECAUSE IT'S NOT MAINTENANCE WORK ANYMORE.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NEW INSTALLATION.
I MEAN, SOMEBODY ELSE READING THE DIFFERENT THAN I'M, SO I READ THIS, THE FOLLOWING WORK IS NOT COVERED BY THESE PERMITS UNLESS IT'S PERFORMED BY EITHER A LICENSED CONTRACTOR OR A STATE LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
SO IF WE ADD IN THERE THE COMPLETE REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM, THEN IT'S NOT COVERED BY THIS PERMIT.
AND IT IS REQUIRED TO BE DONE BY A LICENSE, A STATE LICENSE.
IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT? YES, THAT'S WHAT I WANT.
YOU WANT A STATE LICENSE REQUIREMENT FOR THIS? IF, IF YOU REPLACE THE TOTAL SYSTEM, IT NEEDS TO BE DONE BY A LICENSED CONTRACTOR PERIOD.
BECAUSE THAT IS NOT REPAIR AND THAT IS DANGEROUS AND THAT'S NOT GOOD.
AND WE DON'T WANT ANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES REPLACING THE TOTAL SYSTEM IF WE'RE JUST REPLACING LIKE, KIND FOR LIKE KIND THAT SOMEBODY ELSE DESIGNED AND DID.
SO TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE, OF A SYSTEM.
AND DOES THAT, DOES THAT MEAN JUST LIKE IF YOU WERE REPLACING A, A COMPRESSOR OUTSIDE, YOU'D HAVE, IF I WAS REPLACING A CONDENSING UNIT, A COIL AND A UH, AIR HANDLER, YOU WOULDN'T, YOU WOULDN'T NEED TO BE LICENSED AS LONG AS YOU ARE REPLACING LIKE, KIND WITH LIKE KIND AND IT'S MY, YOU KNOW, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE OWNER, ONCE YOU GET BIGGER UNITS, SMALLER UNITS, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT IT'S BASICALLY A DIFFERENT SYSTEM.
SO IT'S NO LONGER MAINTENANCE.
SO IF I, YOU KNOW, IT NEEDS SOMEBODY TO DESIGN IT, MAKE SURE THE AIRFLOW CALCULATIONS ARE RIGHT.
MAKE SURE YOU'RE PULLING ENOUGH CFMS IN AND PUSHING ENOUGH CFMS OUT.
BUT YOU KNOW, IF I HAVE A THREE TON CONDENSING UNIT WITH A THREE TON COIL AND A THREE TON, UH, AIR HANDLER INSIDE AND OUR EMPLOYEES ARE JUST GOING TO REPLACEMENT, THAT IS NOT A TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THE SYSTEM WOULD BE EVERYTHING.
BUT IF I'M GOING AND DOING A REMODEL IN ONE OF OUR UNITS AND I'M PULLING THE DUCKS OUT AND THE THERMOSTATS OUT AND REPLACING EVERYTHING THAT NEEDS A PERMIT AND THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BY A LICENSED INDIVIDUAL.
SORRY, OUR CHIEF'S LOOKING AT IT, JEREMY, INSTEAD OF THE WORD THE, IT JUST SHOULD SAY, UH, A BECAUSE IT, THAT WOULD MATCH THE STATE LANGUAGE.
I'M SORRY, THIS IS CHIEF, UH, INSPECTOR FRIS.
SO THE PROPOSE IS TO REMOVE SIM SIMULTANEOUS AND PUT A TOTAL REPLACEMENT.
BUT THE, THE WORD SIMULTANEOUSLY BASICALLY REFERS TO THE, THE WAY IT'S INTERPRETED OR THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IN THE LAW IS, YOU KNOW, YOU CANNOT DO A TOTAL CHANGE OUT OR A TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE EQUIPMENT.
AND BASICALLY IT'S WITHIN 24 HOURS TYPE DEAL.
SO IF WE PUT A THAT, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE LAW STATE LAW SAYS STATE LAWS.
I AM PULLING THE LANGUAGE EXACTLY FROM STATE LAW.
IT'S IN, UH, TE SECTION 1302 DASH OH OH TWO DEFINITIONS UNDER THE CHAPTER AND, AND BASICALLY SAYS AIR CONDITIONING, REFRIGERATION MAINTENANCE WORKS MEANS ALL THAT.
THE TERM DOES NOT MEAN TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
SO ANYTHING SHORT OF A TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM IS CONSIDERED MAINTENANCE WORK, WHICH WE'RE EXEMPT FROM DOING.
SO I CAN REPLACE THE CONDENSED, THE
[02:25:01]
CONDENSING UNIT, THE EVAPORATOR COIL, THE AIR HANDLER INSIDE THE FURNACE, WHATEVER, ALL AT THE SAME TIME, FIVE MINUTES APART FROM EACH OTHER.AND THAT IS NOT THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM WOULD INCLUDE THE DUCT WORK AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S INCORPORATED THE COPPER LINES THAT GO TO THE SYSTEM.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY THE LAW READS.
WE DON'T HAVE THE DEFINITION OF CONTROL.
WELL, THE STATE LAW SAYS WHEN THERE'S NO DEFINITION, YOU GO TO WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY AND LOOK IT UP.
AND TOTAL MEANS EVERYTHING AND SYSTEM MEANS ALL THE COMPONENTS.
SO IF I SAID I HAVE A NEW HOUSE AND I WANT YOU TO PUT AN AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM IN THE HOUSE, THAT WOULD BE EVERYTHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN TO MAKE A SYSTEM.
SO EVERY COMPONENT THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN, THAT'S THE TOTAL SYSTEM.
ANYTHING SHORT OF THAT, AS LONG AS YOU'RE REPLACING LIKE, KIND FOR LIKE KIND IS MAINTENANCE WORK.
WHAT ELSE? SO I GUESS IF Y'ALL WANNA MAKE AN ACTION ON THIS, THIS WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, ONCE AGAIN WE'RE KIND OF, OR JOE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANNA ADD TO THIS? NO, BUT I'M, I'M, I'M, THERE WAS A SECTION ON THE, ON THE TEXAS LAW THAT I WAS LOOKING AT UP EARLIER THAT IT ACTUALLY STATES, UH, UH, COMPLETE, UH, CHANGE OUT.
BUT I'M, I'M, I'M STILL LOOKING FOR IT.
UH, SO WE CAN TABLE THAT FOR A SECOND.
ONCE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, AT THIS TIME IT IS FULLY UP TO THE BOARD, UH, STAFF AND STAKEHOLDERS NO LONGER HAVE ANY OTHER ITEMS TO ADDRESS.
UH, WE CAN BE LOOKING AT EACH ARTICLE AND APPROVING THOSE, YOU KNOW, AT Y'S LEISURE.
REVISIT, REVISIT ANOTHER SECTION.
CAN YOU LOOK AT PAGE 1, 4 1? OKAY.
DO YOU HAVE A SECTION AREA THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT? DO YOU HAVE THE, UH, CODES OR THE CODE BOOK THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT AND SECTION SECTION R 4 0 3.
SO THAT'D BE THE RESIDENTIAL CODE OR I'M SORRY, THE ENERGY CODE FOR RESIDENTIAL? YES.
THERE USED TO BE AN EXCEPTION NUMBER ONE IF THE DUCKS OR PORTION OF EVER LOCATED COMPLETELY INSIDE THE BUILDING THERMAL ENVELOPE, WHY DID WE ELIMINATE THAT? SO THIS, THIS ONE ON THE BOTTOM.
LEMME SEE IF I CAN PULL UP THE SPREADSHEET REAL FAST.
[02:30:01]
THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT 'CAUSE YOU CAN'T ENCAPSULATE EVERYTHING IN THE HALLWAY IN THE MIDDLE OF A HOUSE.SO LIKE SAY YOU HAVE YOUR DUCK LINES, EVEN YOUR UNIT, YOU HAVE A NINE 10 FOOT CEILING AND YOU DROP A HALLWAY IN THE MIDDLE OF A HOUSE TO EIGHT FEET, YOU CAN PUT EVERYTHING IN THERE AND CALCULATE IT IN THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.
AND THAT'S WHY LIKE, I DIDN'T THINK WE WOULD REMOVE THAT, BUT EVIDENTLY WE DID.
SO THAT SECTION, SO THAT WAS MODIFIED IN THE MEETING PER THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IS THE NOTES I HAVE AND ENERGY, CORRECT? YEAH, THIS IS THE ENERGY.
I MEAN I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT THAT BUT I CAN'T, I MEAN I CAN LOOK TO SEE IF I CAN PULL UP THE VIDEO, BUT I'M TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT THAT ITEM WAS.
WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT THE SECOND ONE.
WE WERE ALREADY THE LANGUAGE AND THAT'S FINE.
BUT WHY WOULD WE ELIMINATE THE NUMBER ONE THAT USED TO BE THERE? LET ME, BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T CHIME IN AT THE MEETING.
HUH? BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T CHIME IN AT THE MEETING.
WASN'T THERE
UM, DEPENDING ON YOUR ATTIC, IF IT'S, IF IT'S A FOAM FOAM ATTIC, YOU'RE IN SEMICON CONDITION OR CONDITIONED SPACE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE IN THE ATTIC.
SO THIS IS THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY, YOU CAN SEE THIS I THINK JOE, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
EXCEPTION DUCTS OR PORTIONS THEREOF LOCATED COMPLETELY INSIDE THE BUILDING.
MAYBE IT SHOULD BE A DUCTS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE INSULATION BARRIER.
JOE, ARE YOU WORKING? JOE, ARE YOU RECOMMENDING PUTTING ONE BACK IN? YES.
HEY JEREMY, CAN YOU MAKE THAT JUST A HAIR BIGGER? SO I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE PUT IT BACK IN.
UM, I'M LOOKING RIGHT NOW AT THE 2021.
UM, AND THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS SECTION.
SO THAT MAY HAVE BEEN AN EXCEPTION IN THE 2018.
SO WE DIDN'T NECESSARILY REMOVE IT.
WE WERE UPDATING IT TO THE 2021 LANGUAGE THAT THAT EXCEPTION DOESN'T EXIST IN THE 2021.
UM, THAT INCLUDES THAT UNDERLINED LANGUAGE.
YOU'RE SAYING NUMBER ONE WAS INCLUDED ON 2018 BEFORE, CORRECT? YES.
SO THE REASON IT SHOWS STRUCK OUT HERE IS BECAUSE
[02:35:01]
WE'RE UPDATING TO THE 2021 LANGUAGE.SO IF YOU WANT, DO YOU WANT, DO YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE ADDED BACK IN AS AN EXCEPTION? LIKE WE DID SOME OTHER STUFF.
I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP IT, UNLESS YOU KNOW SOMETHING ELSE ON OTHER READINGS.
I MEAN THE REASON WHY I DON'T GET THAT.
SO THE SECTION TITLE CHANGED FROM INSULATION TO DUCKS LOCATED OUTSIDE CONDITION SPACES.
SO IT, IT DOESN'T REFER TO DUCKS INSIDE THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.
DOES THAT REQUIRE
THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER SECTION FOR UM, DUCKS IN, OH, I HAVE MY BOOK RIGHT HERE.
DUCKS IN CONDITION, SPACIOUS IF IT'S IN THE OTHER SECTION.
SO THE NEXT SECTION AFTER THIS IS 4 0 3 3 2 FOR DUCKS LOCATED IN CONDITION SPACE.
IT DIDN'T GET MOVED, THEY MOVED IT, THE CITY DIDN'T MOVE IT, IT WAS JUST MOVED IN THE 20 I C C MOVED IT.
WHAT'S ALLOWED THAT NUMBER ONE IS ALLOWED THEN WHAT I'M ASKING, SO THIS SECTION IS SAYING THAT THERE'S A TRADE OFF FOR UM, RIGHT.
SO YOU WANT THAT TRADE OFF IN CONDITIONED SPACES AS WELL, NOT JUST IN ATTIC SPACES.
SO ARE WE SAYING THAT CONDITIONED SPACE IS INSIDE THE BUILDING THERMAL ENVELOPE? IS THAT THE SAME? YES.
THE EXAMPLE I'M USING IS YOU GOT A HALLWAY AND IT'S A 10 FOOT NINE FOOT PLATE.
YOU DROP THE CEILING AND YOU PUT IT INSIDE THAT CAVITY.
THE THERMAL STILL GOES AROUND IT WITH THE INSULATION FROM THE ATTIC.
AND IF THERE'S A SECOND STORY AND IT YOU'RE WAY SAFE BECAUSE IT'S REALLY WITHIN AIR, ALMOST AIR CONDITION.
IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE, I CAN TRY TO PULL UP THAT SECTION.
I THINK I MIGHT HAVE THAT VIDEO FROM WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT AND SPOKE TO THE BOARD THOUGH.
AND IF IT'LL WORK, I CAN'T GUARANTEE IT'LL WORK.
CAN WE JUST PULL UP THE LANGUAGE FOR THE 2021 SECTION FOR DUCKS IN CONDITIONED SPACES? SO IT REALLY ONLY SAYS THAT THAT'S A CEILING INSULATION R VALUE INSTALLED AGAINST AND ABOVE THE INSULATED DUCT IS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO THE PROPOSED CEILING INSULATION.
R VALUE LESS THE R VALUE OF THE INSULATION OF THE DUCT.
MAY, MAYBE WE CAN LOOK AT IT TOGETHER.
SINCE WE KNOW WE'RE HAVING ANOTHER MEETING REGARDLESS, CAN WE JUST TABLE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING SO THEY CAN WORK THE ISSUE OUT? I GUESS.
ARE WE SURE THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER MEETING? I WAS GONNA LEAVE THAT UP TO THE BOARD, BUT I THINK WE'RE READY TO CLARIFY THE OTHER ITEM WE HAD IN REGARDS TO THE RESIDENTIAL WIREMAN.
BESIDES THAT THEN THERE'S MY AIR CONDITIONING ISSUE.
UNLESS WE ALL AGREED TO CHANGE IT TO TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
YEAH, WE'RE TRYING TO, I MEAN I, ONCE AGAIN IT'S UP TO THE BOARD.
I KNOW WE ARE GETTING CLOSE TO THAT FOUR O'CLOCK, SO I DON'T WANNA PUSH ONTO SOMETHING
[02:40:01]
ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WE ORIGINALLY WERE TRYING TO GET TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY COM, UM, PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COM COUN COMMITTEE FOR THE COUNCIL.BUT THAT'S GONNA GET PUSHED NOT INTO AUGUST.
IT'LL BE AT THE EARLIEST I THINK IS SEPTEMBER.
BUT YOU KNOW, I WANNA APPRECIATE Y'ALL'S TIME.
IF Y'ALL WANNA STAY A LITTLE BIT LATER, TRY TO GET THIS RESOLVED TODAY.
STAFF IS HERE, READY TO DO THAT.
BUT IF Y'ALL WANT TO, UH, YOU KNOW, HAVE ANOTHER MEETING.
I KNOW WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO THE FOUR O'CLOCK.
I WANNA LEAVE IT UP TO THE BOARD.
'CAUSE WE HAVE UH, 15 MINUTES, 20 MINUTES.
I MEAN, TECHNICALLY WE'RE ALLOWED TO STAY AS LONG AS THE BOARD IS GOT NINE QUORUM, WE'RE GONNA BE HERE.
WE HAVEN'T EVEN TOUCHED ON FIRE AND THEY'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 10 MINUTES TO ONE.
THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PRESENT.
THEY'RE HERE IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ADOPTION.
THEY, WHAT ARE WE BRING UP? THE UH, I'M SORRY, WHAT IS THAT? ARE WE, WE'RE STILL LOOKING FOR THE VIDEO? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE WAITING ON? OH NO, I GUESS I'M, LET'S DO 1, 3, 2, 3, 2.
UH, JUST TO GET CLARIFICATION.
YOU YOU, YOU JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IF THE DUCT IS GONNA BE INCLUDED ON THE INSIDE OF THE ENVELOPE, RIGHT? IS THAT KIND OF THE MAIN CONCERN YOU HAVE IN AN ENCLOSED SPACE? RIGHT? IT'S GONNA BE AN ENCLOSED ENVELOPE SPACE.
RIGHT? BUT THE BUT THE ENCLOSURE IS WITHIN THE ENVELOPE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S NO R VALUE REQUIRED ACCORDING TO WHAT CRYSTAL JUST SAID.
I MEAN, ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS WE HAVE SOME MINI STORAGES THAT WE BOUGHT THAT HAS A, A PIPE THAT GOES THROUGH A HALLWAY THAT IS AIR CONDITIONED AND AS THE AIR GOES THROUGH THE THING AND THE, ON A HUMID DAY IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT INSULATED, IT DRIPS.
AND, AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS IN A PLACE WHERE, UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S GONNA STAIN THE SHEET ROCK AND CAUSE MOLD AND MILDEW AND JOE, THAT STUFF YOU PUT IN THERE HAS SOME KIND OF INSULATION AROUND IT.
RIGHT? AND IT'S IN CONDITION SPACE.
SO YOU HAVE YOUR, YOUR CEILINGS THERE TO GOT YEAH.
IT'S WITHIN THAT, IT'S WITHIN THE HALLWAY OF THE HOUSE.
BUT MOST OF THAT'S FLEXIBLE DUCK AND IT'S GONNA HAVE SOME KIND OF INSULATION AROUND THE LITTLE PIPE.
CORRECT? I WAS READING IT IN MY TURN OR MY ORIGINAL TURN.
BUT ACCORDING TO WHAT WE'RE READING HERE, THERE'S NO R RATING REQUIRED AT ALL.
IT MAY EVEN BE ALLOWED TO GO BACK TO R FOUR, SEE THE R VALUE RIGHT NOW.
BUT IT JUST, I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR THE EXCEPTION.
NOW YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO PUT ANY INSULATION AROUND IT, WHICH, WHICH IS GONNA CAUSE THE PROBLEM IN AND OF ITSELF.
YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU DO IF IT'S A COMPLETELY FOAM HOUSE? WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THEN? AGAIN, THAT'S WITHIN THE THERMAL ENVELOPE, RIGHT? CONDITION SPACE, RIGHT.
THE SAME THING WITH YOUR, YOUR
[02:45:01]
THE DUCT THAT'S IN A FUR DOWN THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A CAVITY THAT'S WITHIN THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.'CAUSE EVEN ON THAT, YOUR R 30 EIGHT'S ABOVE IT, WHETHER IT HAS A WALL AROUND IT OR NOT, THE WHOLE HOUSE IS THE THERMAL ENVELOPE, RIGHT? I MEAN IT GOES FROM THE WALLS TO THE CEILING AT THE R 38 AND DOWN.
EVERYTHING IN BETWEEN THERE CLOSED ON, RIGHT? BECAUSE DOESN'T NEED INSULATION IN THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOF.
SO WHAT JACK IS SAYING, YES, YOU'RE WITHIN A THERMAL ENVELOPE, BUT SHOULDN'T, I MEAN ASKING AN ENGINEER OR A AIR CONDITIONED PERSON SHOULDN'T THAT HAVE SOME KIND OF INSULATION AROUND IT TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T SWEAT AND CAUSE MOISTURE AND MOLD AND MILDEW AND CREATE A WHOLE LOT OF THE FUTONS.
SHOULD WE JUST SAY THAT'S WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE? SO IF WE LOOK BACK AT THE PREVIOUS LANGUAGE, WHAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, IT SAYS INSULATION, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF INSULATION.
THE EXCEPTION WAS DUCKS LOCATED COMPLETELY INSIDE THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.
SO IT WAS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT WE HAD, IT WAS THE SAME CONCEPT THAT WAS ADOPTED IN THE 2018.
THAT SECTION THAT WHERE YOU WANTED THE EXCEPTION.
UM, THAT SAID YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THIS DUCT INSULATION IF YOU'RE LOCATED IN THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.
SO IT'S THE SAME, THEY JUST MOVED IT AROUND.
BUT IT'S, I MEAN THIS ONE IS SAYING THE SAME THING, ISN'T IT? I MEAN TO ME IT IS THAT FIRST ONE, UM, THE DUCT SYSTEM SHALL BE LOCATED COMPLETELY WITHIN THE CONTINUOUS AIR BARRIER AND WITHIN THE THERMAL ENVELOPE.
WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION HE'S TALKING ABOUT A CAVITY IS WITHIN THE ENVELOPE.
IT SAYS IT SHALL COMPLY WITH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING.
YOU GOOD JOE, THEN WE'RE GOOD AS IS.
SO WE DON'T NEED THAT MOTION MARK, DO WE? NOPE.
BOARD MEMBERS, UH, ANY OTHER ITEMS ON ANY OF THE CODE SECTIONS THAT I'D LIKE TO BRING UP FOR MORE DISCUSSION? JOE, DO WE HAVE THE ITEM ABOUT TOTAL REPLACEMENT UNDER THE MAINTENANCE PERMIT? YEAH, SO, OKAY, UM, SO THE, THIS I'M LOOKING AT THE I C C, UH, DEFINITIONS OR I M C DEFINITIONS OF WHAT A AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM IS.
AND BASICALLY WHAT IT SAYS IS A SYSTEM THAT CONSISTS OF HEAT, EXCHANGERS, BLOWERS, FILTERS, SUPPLY EXHAUST AND RETURN DOCKS AND SHALL INCLUDE ANY APPARATUS INSTALLING CONNECTION THEREWITH.
SO BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE SYSTEM, RIGHT? SO I'M LOOKING AT THE DEFINITIONS FOR AIR CONDITIONING, REFRIGERATION MAINTENANCE WORK UNDER THE TEXAS LAW.
AND IT SAYS MEANS ALL WORK INCLUDING REPAIR WORK REQUIRED FOR THE CONTINUED NORMAL PERFORMANCE OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM, A COOLING OR HEATING SYSTEM, A COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION, THE TERM DOES NOT INCLUDE THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM.
SO, SO NOW IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW YOU INTERPRET THAT, RIGHT? WELL, DIDN'T THE I C C DEFINE THE SYSTEM TO INCLUDE THE DUCKS? YES, IT DOES.
THEN THAT THING THAT THEY LISTED IS THE TOTAL SYSTEM.
ANYTHING SHORT OF THAT IS NOT, IT'S IT, I MEAN THAT, SO, SO SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS WHEN IT SAYS, UH, INCLUDING REPAIR WORK, SO UH, THAT'S JUST A REPAIR IF YOU'RE GONNA CHANGE OUT A COIL, RIGHT? IT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AN APPLIANCE BY DEFINITION.
IT'S AN APPLIANCE THAT YOU'RE CHANGING OUT ON THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, WHICH I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT, SO IF YOU CHANGE OUT THE COIL RIGHT NOW AND THEN YOU CHANGE OUT THE FURNACE 10 MINUTES FROM NOW AND THEN YOU CHANGE OUT THE CONDENSER, YOU KNOW, AN HOUR FROM NOW AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AT WHAT POINT IS IT CONSIDERED A TOTAL REPLACEMENT WHEN YOU REPLACE EVERYTHING THAT THE I C C LISTED AS THE TOTAL SYSTEM? INCLUDING THE DUCKS? INCLUDING THE DUCKS, WHICH IS WHAT THE STATE LAW SAYS THAT ANYTHING SHORT OF REPLACEMENT OF THE TOTAL, A TOTAL SYSTEM IS CONSIDERED MAINTENANCE WORK.
SO THE I C C, WHICH EVEN STRENGTHENS MY CASE, LISTS OUT WHAT THE TOTAL SYSTEM IS AND IT INCLUDES DUCKS IN, IN WHAT A SYSTEM, ALL THE COMPONENTS OF THE SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT I PUT IN MY MEMO AND I'M SO, SO MY POINT IS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WHAT
[02:50:01]
I'M SAYING IS THAT, SO AT WHAT POINT WOULD IT BE CONSIDERED A TOTAL REPLACEMENT? IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU REPLACE THE FURNACE, COLON CONDENSER AND THEN, UH, TOMORROW YOU REPLACE THE DUCT WORK, WHATEVER'S LEFT IS THAT TOTAL REPLACEMENT.IF YOU REPLACE THE ALL THREE OF THOSE COMPONENTS, THE DUCTS AND THE THERMOSTAT IN, IN RELATIVELY THE SAME PERIOD, THAT WOULD BE A TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO GET A LICENSED CONTRACTOR TO DO ALL OF THAT AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO PULL A PERMIT.
AND MY EMPLOYEES COULDN'T DO THAT.
ANYTHING SHORT OF REPLACING EVERYTHING.
SO I WASN'T HERE FOR THE FIRST RUN WHEN THIS WAS ADOPTED, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY THEY PUT SIMULTANEOUSLY BECAUSE I MEAN YOU CAN RE YOU CAN DO PARTS, YOU KNOW, WITHIN A WEEK AND THEN RE AND END UP REPLACING THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.
IF YOU REPLACE EVERY SINGLE THING IN SOME SIMULTANEOUS PERIOD, INCLUDING DUCKS AND THERMOSTATS AND ALL THAT STUFF.
YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET ANY ARGUMENT FROM US THAT THAT IS TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF THE SYSTEM.
BUT IT, BUT THE WAY THIS READS IS ORIGINALLY READ IS CONDENSING UNITS, FURNACES AND EVAPORATOR COILS.
THAT IS NOT THE TOTAL SYSTEM BECAUSE IT'S MI MINUS THE COPPER LINES, THE DUCTS, ALL THAT STUFF.
I, I DON'T, I, I'M, I'M AS A HUNDRED PERCENT CERTAIN AS I CAN BE BECAUSE I HELPED, YOU KNOW, 30, 40 YEARS AGO HELPED DRAFT THIS IN STATE STATUTE.
AND, AND THAT'S TOTAL SYSTEM MEANS EVERYTHING, ANYTHING SHORT OF EVERYTHING IS MAINTENANCE WORK.
AND THAT'S WHAT THE STATE LAW SAYS IN, YOU KNOW, BLACK AND WHITE.
AS JOSEPH AL WITH THE STRIKE TEAM, IS THERE A TIMEFRAME ON WHEN YOU CAN REPLACE THESE THINGS OR HOW LONG YOU CAN WAIT TO REPLACE THEM? SAY IF I REPLACE THE CONDENSER NOW I WAIT A WEEK AND THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED A WHOLE SYSTEM, ARE WE HERE? NO, I CAN REPLACE ALL AT ONCE AND AS LONG AS I DON'T DO THE DUCTS OR THE THERMOSTAT, IT'S NOT THE TOTAL SYSTEM.
IF I REPLACE ALL OF THAT, YOU KNOW, BUT NOBODY'S GONNA GO WITHOUT AIR CONDITION FOR WE, YOU KNOW, TWO WEEKS.
UH, I MEAN IN, IN OUR APPLICATION WE'RE NOT MESSING EVER WITH THE DUCTS.
WE'RE NOT MESSING WITH THE THERMOSTAT WIRE UNLESS THERE'S A SHORT IN IT.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS WHEN A NEW SYSTEM GETS INSTALLED, THERE'S CALCULATIONS THAT ARE NEED TO BE MADE ON CFMS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
THAT'S WAY ABOVE OUR SKILL LEVEL.
BUT REPLACING THE CONDENSING UNIT FURNACE AND EVAPORATOR COIL ALL AT THE SAME TIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE HAVING TO GO TO THE NEW FREON, YOU KNOW, IT'S MAINTENANCE WORK.
SO, SO MY POINT ON THIS SIDE IS THAT I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S PEOPLE THAT DO THAT, BUT ON MY SIDE, I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BAD SIDE, RIGHT? WITH THE STRIKE TEAM, YOU'RE GIVING THEM AN OUT TO REPLACE EVERYTHING AND THEN A YEAR I COULD WAIT, I COULD REPLACE EVERYTHING I WANT AND NOT HAVE TO DO IT, AND THEN WAIT TWO YEARS LATER, REPLACE A TEMP GAUGE OR COIL LINE OR SOMETHING IT I DON'T PERMIT.
YEAH, THEN THEN IT'S MAINTENANCE.
THEN IT'S MAINTENANCE BECAUSE IT'S, IT, IT TALKS IN THE THING ABOUT IT, IT'S SIMULTANEOUSLY REPLACING THE TOTAL SYSTEM.
IF I WANT TO DO ONE THING ONE YEAR, ONE THING THE NEXT YEAR, ONE THING THE NEXT YEAR.
BUT, SO IF I REPLACE EVERYTHING I, IT'S A BADLY WRITTEN STATE LAW 'CAUSE THEY DIDN'T DEFINE IT, BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS.
IF I REPLACE ALL THREE, RIGHT? IF I REPLACE ALL THREE AND I JUST DON'T REPLACE MY LINES 'CAUSE I'M JUST GONNA WAIT 'CAUSE I DON'T WANNA HAVE TO PULL THAT PERMIT.
SO I'M GIVING IT OUT TO EVERYBODY THAT THEY COULD JUST REPLACE THE WHOLE SYSTEM EXCEPT THE LINES AND NOT BE A WHOLE SYSTEM.
AND THEN MAYBE IN A YEAR OR TWO THEN I'LL REPLACE THAT LINES.
I CAN'T GO BACK AND GET 'EM TWO YEARS LATER.
YOU CAN'T GO BACK AND GET 'EM BECAUSE YOU'RE PROHIBITED BY STATE LAW FROM DOING THAT.
SO IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM, GO CHANGE THE STATE LAW.
THE STATE LAW SAYS WHAT IT SAYS YOU'RE, AND IT ALSO HAS LANGUAGE THAT SAYS IN THERE THAT MUNICIPALITIES CAN'T ENACT ANYTHING THAT'S IN, NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS LAW.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S, I THINK WE CAN GET A LITTLE STRICTER THAN THE STATE LAW.
YEAH, BUT YOU CAN'T BE ANY STRICTER THAN THE STATE LAW.
'CAUSE THE STATE LAW PROHIBITS IT.
SO YOUR WHOLE ORDINANCE AT THAT POINT, DEALING WITH THIS SECTION IS INVALID.
I I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THE WAY THE LAW WAS WRITTEN IS POORLY AT THE SAME TIME IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A TIMEFRAME.
SO IF, IF IT TAKES YOU TWO YEARS TO REPLACE THE ENTIRE SYSTEM, THEN A PERMIT SHOULD BE REQUIRED.
YOU CAN'T, MAY, IN OTHER WORDS, EACH TIME I GO REPAIR IT, IT'S MAINTENANCE THAT'S
[02:55:01]
NOT ON THE, IT'S NOT BROKEN DOWN IN THE STATE LAW.I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH CLEARER YOU, YOU READ THE STATUTE FROM THE I C C THAT SAYS WHAT A TOTAL SYSTEM IS, AS LONG AS AT ONE TIME YOU DON'T REPLACE ALL THOSE THINGS AT ONCE.
MR. CHAIRMAN, UM, MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT, BUT MY ASSUMPTION WAS THAT THE STATE LAW IS SET AND JURISDICTIONS COULD MAKE IT MORE STRICT, BUT THEY COULDN'T MAKE IT LESS STRICT.
AND IF THE CITY WANTS TO MAKE IT MORE STRICT AS THEY HAVE IN THE PAST, WOULD JUST IDENTIFYING THE SIMULTANEOUS UH, COMPONENTS, THEN I THINK THAT WAS LEGAL.
THIS IS THE SAME KIND OF LAW AS THE ONE WE DEALT WITH AT EVERY MEETING WE WENT TO WHERE THE STATE SAID ANYTHING IN THE I C C IS VALID AND THE CITIES CAN'T DO ANYTHING.
THERE IS THE SAME KIND OF LANGUAGE AT THE END OF THIS THAT SAYS ALL MUNICIPAL CODES MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS LAW, WHICH EXEMPTS WHO HAS TO DO WORK AND WHAT WORK IS DEFINED.
TO ME IT'S JUST A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION BECAUSE IT SAYS COMPLETE SYSTEM, BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A TIMEFRAME.
IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A TIMEFRAME, IT DOESN'T DO ANY OF THAT.
SO SOMEHOW, SOMEWHERE WHEN THIS WAS A STARTED, SOMEBODY PUT SIMULTANEOUSLY GOT VOTED ON FOR A SPECIFIC REASON.
AND TO ME IT'S JUST A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION BECAUSE I CAN REPLACE THE SYSTEM ONE DAY AND DID THE DUCT WORK THE NEXT DAY.
TO ME, THAT'S A COMPLETE SYSTEM CHANGE OUT.
YEAH, BUT IN IN PRAC, I, I DON'T HAVE, IF IF YOU WANT TO ADD A, SOMETHING IN HERE THAT SAYS THAT WITHIN A SIX MONTH OR EIGHT MONTH PERIOD, 12 MONTHS, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S REALLY, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER.
'CAUSE IT NEVER HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, IN THIS MAINTENANCE PERMIT THAT IS, IS DONE BY APARTMENTS, THEY ARE NOT REPLACING THE DUCT WORK, THE THERMOSTAT AND THE LINE, YOU KNOW, ALL AT THE SAME TIME WITH THE OTHER THREE COMPONENTS.
SO BOARD, I THINK, YOU KNOW, BASED OFF THIS CONVERSATION, STAFF HAS CONCERNS WITH AMENDING THIS TO BE, YOU KNOW, A TOTAL REPLACEMENT INSTEAD OF THE SIMULTANEOUS REPLACEMENT OF THE CONDENSING UNIT FURNACE AND EVAPORATED COIL AS EXISTING.
NOW OF COURSE THEY'VE BROUGHT UP SOME LEGAL CONCERNS AND WE CAN REACH OUT WITH OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND REVIEW THAT.
AND YES, IF THE ADOPTED CODE HAS ANY LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT, I THINK WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE THAT CHANGE BEFORE WE GO TO COUNSEL WITH THAT.
SO I WOULD SAY WHAT'S ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW IS WHAT IS THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION? WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE LEGAL SIDE, WE CAN GET THAT HASHED OUT LATER OF WHETHER KEEPING THE LANGUAGE AS IS OR MOVING TO A TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM.
AGAIN, THIS MATCHES WHAT IS IN STATE CORRECT WORD FOR WORD.
SO I THINK YOU, YOU JUST DEDUCTED THE LEGAL SIDE OF IT, SAID YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT THAT AGAIN AND THEN I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GONNA BRING THAT BACK, BUT IT'S TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT LIKE WE'VE DONE WITH UMPTEEN OTHER THINGS THAT WE'VE WORKED ON, LET'S KEEP IT CONSISTENT AND WHETHER THEY LIKE WROTE IT WRONG, IF THEY WROTE IT WRONG, THEY WROTE IT WRONG.
AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED, THEN LEGAL NEEDS TO SAY IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED OR THEY CAN FIX IT.
AND IF THEY CAN'T FIX IT, IT STAYS AS IT IS.
THAT'S, SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT THE WORDING CHANGED TO TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM.
WE DO, I HAVE A SECOND MAX ALSO FOR, I SECOND A MOTION TO SECOND.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NEXT, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS JOSEPH HARNEY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
WE, WE'LL, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK IF, AND IF WE DO NEED TO EITHER REFINE THE, THE DEFINITION OR BASICALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, MODIFY, UH, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY EVERYTHING'S IN COMPLIANCE, THEN, THEN WE WILL, IF WE NEED TO COME BACK, WE WILL.
BUT, UM, OTHERWISE WE'LL, WE'LL JUST VERIFY.
SO I THINK THAT, UH, THE ONLY OTHER ITEM WE HAD THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING WAS GOING BACK TO THE LINEMAN AND STAFF IS PREPARED TO CHANGE THE LINEMAN DEFINITION.
I'M SORRY, THAT GOES BACK TO THE OTHER, UH, I'M SORRY, NOT LINEMAN, WIREMAN ELECTRICAL WIREMAN DEFINITION, UH, TO NOT TO REMOVE THE WORD NEW AND TO CHANGE IT FROM THREE TO FOUR.
SO IT REALLY, IT IS NOW CONSISTENT I BELIEVE WITH, UH, WHAT WAS FOUND UNDER THE STATE CODE.
[03:00:01]
SO I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE CHANGE IT TO THE LANGUAGE IN THE STATE CODE CONSISTENT WITH THE LANGUAGE IN THE STATE CODE.YEAH, SO THAT WOULD BE REMOVE NEW AND CHANGE THREE TO FOUR STORIES.
THAT'S THE MOTION YOU'RE MAKING.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? RON KAM? A SECOND.
WE MOTION TO SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
OKAY, SO THAT'S ALL INDIVIDUAL ITEMS, UNLESS THE BOARD HAS ANY OTHER ONES, BUT REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ADOPTING CHAPTER 10 ARTICLES ONE THROUGH 13.
UH, WHICH ARTICLE 12 IS THE ADOPT, UH, INCLUDES THE REFERENCE TO CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE THREE OF THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE.
THAT WOULD BE THE ADOPTION OF THE FULL FAMILY OF THE I CODES 2020, I'M SORRY, 2021 EXCEPT FOR THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, WHICH IS BEING HANDLED BY THE BUILDING STANDARDS BOARD AND THE N E C 2020.
SO I LEAVE IT UP TO Y'ALL IF Y'ALL WANNA MAKE INDIVIDUAL MOTIONS.
I THINK IF Y'ALL WANTED TO VOTE ON THIS TODAY TO APPROVE THE VOTE, THE, THE ADOPTION OF THOSE AS, UH, PRESENTED TO THE BOARD AND COMMITTEES, DO WE NEED TO DO A INDIVIDUAL ONE FOR EACH GENERAL ITEM OR IF THEY WERE TO DO, THEY CAN DO A, A COLLECTIVE THAT WE DO BOTH THE, ALL THE CODES THAT WE DID PLUS THE FIRE CODE AND APPROVE THEM AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY THAT THEY ADOPT WITH AMENDMENTS, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO THAT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH CHAPTER 10, ARTICLES ONE THROUGH 13 AND CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE THREE DOES THAT? YEAH, COVERS EVERYTHING YOU NEED.
CHIEF, UH, THIS IS ROBERT HAMLEY.
JEREMY ON THE AGENDA YOU HAVE, UH, 14 ITEMS AND YOU'RE SAYING, UH, THROUGH 13, WHAT DO WE DO WITH ITEM 14 ON? OH, THAT WAS, UH, MEETING MINUTES.
IT SAYS WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT.
IT'S ONE, THERE'S 13 ITEMS. OKAY.
SO TECHNICALLY ITEM NUMBER 13 IS BOTH CHAPTER 10, ARTICLE 12, WHICH IS REALLY JUST A REFERENCE TO CHAPTER 11, ARTICLE THREE AND CHIEF FROSTO.
I WANNA MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T MISS ANYTHING ON THE FIRE SIDE.
HI, UH, VALERIE FROSTO CENT ANTONIONI FIRE.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING ANOTHER ITEM, UH, TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION.
UM, IT IS RELATED TO A, UH, DISCREPANCY BETWEEN U D C AND I F C AND RELATES DIRECTLY TO, UH, APPENDIX D, WHICH IS FIRE ACCESS ROADS ON, UM, ONE THAT PERTAINED TO ONE OR TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
AND UM, SPECIFICALLY IT IS SECTION D 1 0 7 0.1 TITLED ONE OR TWO FAMILY DWELLING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
AND THIS IS ACTUALLY A, UM, WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO CODIFY AN EXISTING C M R THAT WE HAVE, UM, HAD AN INCREASED NUMBER OF BECAUSE OF QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR, UH, ITEM AND THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF AS TO, UH, ADOPT THE CODE, UM, AS WRITTEN IN 2021 I F C.
AND, UH, ADD SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWS OR SPECIFIES OTHER SITUATIONS THAT WILL BE ACCEPTABLE, UM, AND THAT WE FEEL MEET THE INTENT OF THE CODE IN THESE SITUATIONS.
THIS IS ROBERT HANLEY, UM, CHIEF RASTRO.
DOES THIS MEAN THAT WE, BECAUSE, UH, WE WERE TRACKING PARALLEL THE BUILDING, THE BUILDING CODES AND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND NEITHER ONE OF THEM HAS GONE TO COUNCIL YET.
SO IS THERE ANY CHANGES REQUIRED OF THE U D C? NO, SIR.
WE ARE JUST REQUESTING THE U D C ACTUALLY AS 1 25 IS, IS THE, UH, THRESHOLD AND I F C IS 30 DWELLING UNITS.
SO OUR, UM, ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS JUST HAVE SOME ALLOWANCES THAT IF THERE ARE MORE THAN 30 DWELLING UNITS AND ANY LESS THAN 126, I BELIEVE, YES, 1 26 DWELLING UNITS THAT, UH, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MET THAT WE WILL FIND, UM, AS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE.
AND, UM, THE EXCEPTION NUMBER FOUR IS, UH, ANOTHER, UH, SITUATION THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT AND THAT'S RELATED TO, UH, REMOTENESS REQUIREMENTS AND IT'S JUST
[03:05:01]
A, AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT SITUATION, BUT STILL WITH THE SAME PARAMETERS OF ANYTHING LESS THAN MORE THAN 30 AND LESS THAN 126 DWELLING UNITS.SO IS THAT LOTS OR IS, BECAUSE YOU SAID THIS APPLIES TO SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEXES, SO IS IS IT UNITS OR LOTS THAT THIS WOULD, BECAUSE WE DON'T DEAL WITH LOTS IN THE RIGHT NOW, THESE ARE, UH, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT WILL CONTAIN NOTHING BUT ONE OR TWO FAMILY DWELLING RESIDENTIAL, UH, STRUCTURES.
IS IS THAT, UH, NUMBER FOUR IS, ARE YOU SAYING THAT HAS NOT BEEN IN THERE BEFORE? NO, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN THE CODE AND IT IS ACTUALLY, UH, WRITTEN IN I F C OR I F C 2018 AND I F C 2021.
THE ONLY, UH, RECOMMENDATION WE'VE HAD WE HAVE IS TO ADD ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF OR, UH, MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF CMRS THAT WE ARE SEEING RELATED TO THESE TYPE OF PROJECTS.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ IT IN ITS ENTIRETY OR ONLY EXCEPTIONS? THREE AND FOUR THAT WILL BE ADDED.
OKAY, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SAYING THOSE TWO, THREE, AND FOUR, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.
SO WOULD THIS, THIS IS REALLY A MULTI F DEAL BECAUSE YOU CAN ONLY BUILD ONE UNIT ON ONE LOT.
THESE ARE ONE AND TWO FAMILY DWELLING RESIDENTIAL.
BUT, BUT, BUT THIS WOULDN'T APPLY IN THE BUILDING OR FIRE CODE.
WHEN YOU GO TO PLA IT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO THINGS.
IT REALLY DOESN'T APPLY TO THE BUILDING CODE.
IT'S, IT'S ALLOWING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO, THAT YOU HAVE A, INSTEAD OF HAVING TO CREATE A WHOLE NOTHER ROAD FOR A SECONDARY ENTRANCE IS ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS YOU'RE GONNA BE, YOU'RE ABLE TO HAVE AN ALL WEATHER ROAD WITH A GATE THAT CAN BE BLOCKED OFF AND IT CAN BE JUST AN ACCESS FOR FIRE.
NO, NO, I KNOW, BUT, BUT I, I, MY QUESTION IS, IS IN THE FIRE CODE ITSELF, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE IN CHARGE OF AND ADOPTING, IS THERE A SECTION IN THERE ON SUBDIVISION DESIGN AND PLATING AND THINGS LIKE THAT? OR IS THAT IN THE U D C? SO THERE, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE ACCESS ROADS.
SO THIS IS CURRENTLY IN THE I F C, IT'S CURRENTLY ENFORCED AND THE LIMITATION IS 30 DWELLING UNITS.
SO THERE'S THAT HUGE DISCREPANCY.
AND AS CHIEF ROSSO MENTIONED, WE GET A LOT OF CODE MODIFICATIONS BECAUSE HEY, WE PLATTED, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED LOTS AND WE DIDN'T ACCOUNT FOR SECONDARY ACCESS.
UM, NOW THEY'RE IN THE BUILDING STAGE AND WE DENY THEM BECAUSE THEY DON'T COMPLY WITH THE BUILDING CODE OR THE FIRE CODE IN THIS INSTANCE.
SO IS THIS THE LANGUAGE THAT THE U D C COMMITTEE OR THE TECH APPROVED? SO THERE ARE NO PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE U D C IN THIS SECTION REGARDING THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS, UH, THAT CAN BE EXCEEDED, UM, BEFORE REQUIRING TWO SEPARATE AND SECONDARY TWO SEPARATE ACCESS POINTS.
THIS ROBERT HANLEY CRYSTAL, THERE WERE 196 AMENDMENTS TO THE U D C.
THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, ROBERT.
SO, SO EFFECTIVELY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE KNITTING THESE TWO, TWO DOCUMENTS TOGETHER TO CREATE CONTINUITY.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE FOR APPROVAL FOR, I, THERE'S ALREADY A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, SO I'D LIKE TO MY AMEND MY MOTION TO APPROVE BOTH AND ADD THIS AS AN ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT IF WE CAN GET A FRIENDLY, THE SECOND TO SAY, OKAY, WILLIAM BURRIS.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS? WE'RE APPROVING EVERYTHING WITH THIS ADDITIONAL AMENDED LANGUAGE ADDED TO WHATEVER WE JUST APPROVED, WHAT WE'RE APPROVING.
SO THIS IS ALL TWO THROUGH 13, TWO THROUGH 14 WITH THIS ADDED AS AMENDED LANGUAGE TO THE FIRE CODE.
EVERYBODY GOOD WITH THAT? EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND? ANY MORE DISCUSSION? THIS IS, UH, VALERIE WITH SAN ANTONIO FIRE.
UH, THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS THAT
[03:10:01]
I FEEL THE NEED TO MENTION.UM, ONLY BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT, UH, REFLECTED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED.
WE, UM, WERE INFORMED THAT THERE, UH, WAS GONNA BE A COUPLE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE D S D UH, AMENDMENTS AND FIRE AMENDMENTS.
SO TO UM, MAKE SURE THAT THOSE TWO DOCUMENTS MIRROR EACH OTHER.
UH, WE DID ADJUST MAKE A COUPLE ADJUSTMENTS TO ONE OF THEM BEING 9 0 3 0.2 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. UM, THIS WAS AN EXISTING AMENDMENT THAT WE DID NOT HAVE LANGUAGE IN, UH, THAT WAS IN OUR LOCAL AMENDMENTS ON THE FIRE SIDE.
SO WE ARE, UM, ADDING THAT LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE SAME AS WAS APPROVED FOR D S D.
SO REALLY THOSE WERE JUST CLERICAL, UM, ITEMS. RIGHT.
SO THERE THERE BEEN NO CHANGES FROM 2018 TO 2021 AND THOSE WHEN SPRINKLERS AND HOW THEY, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING? CORRECT.
JUST IN REVIEW OF THE TWO DOCUMENTS, THE CHAPTER 10 AND CHAPTER 11, UM, THERE WERE SOME DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE TWO.
DOES THE BUILDING CODE AND THE FIRE CODE HAVE NUMEROUS SECTIONS THAT ARE DUPLICATED? SO THE AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE DUPLICATED? THANK YOU.
THE, THE OTHER ONE BEING THE LUMINOUS EGRESS PATH MARKINGS.
I JUST DIDN'T WANT YOU TO HAVE ANY SURPRISES.
IF YOU NOTICE THAT ON THE UPDATED DRAFT, IS THAT THE ONE IN THE HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS? THAT OKAY, THANK YOU.
THAT WAS, YEAH, THAT, YES SIR.
THE BUILDING CODE COMMITTEE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
WE JUST MIRRORED IT IN THE FIRE CODE.
WE DON'T NEED TO CHANGE YOUR, YOUR MOTION OR SECOND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I'D LIKE TO JUST COMMEND THE CHAIR AND ALL THE COMMITTEES FOR ALL THAT HARD WORK WE DID BEFORE WE END UP, BECAUSE IT WAS A LOT.
WELL, IT WAS, AND I, AND I AGREE WITH YOU A HUNDRED PERCENT.
I I THINK SO MANY PEOPLE DID SO MUCH, UH, A LOT OF TIME AND HAD A LOT OF THOUGHT AND A LOT OF CARE AND TO STAFF FOR BEING SO PREPARED AT ALL THE MEETINGS THAT MADE IT EASY.
THIS IS CHIEF INSPECTOR FRIS AGAIN.
I'M, I'M JUST GONNA QUICKLY TOUCH BACK ON ON THAT OTHER ISSUE THAT WE HAVE WITH THE, A ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PERMIT.
I ACTUALLY FOUND THE DEFINITION, THE DEFINITION FOR TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM UNDER THE TEXAS.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND FINISH OUR MOTION THAT WE HAD ON THE TABLE.
LET'S DO THAT AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO THAT.
SO I DID FIND THE, THE DEFINITION OF TOTAL REPLACEMENT OF A SYSTEM UNDER THE TEXAS LAW.
AND BASICALLY WHAT IT ACTUALLY, THE DEFINITION IS, IS SIMUL SIMULTANEOUSLY REPLACEMENT OF THE CONDENSING UNIT, THE COIL, THE EVAPORATED COIL, THE FURNACE, AND IF APPLICABLE, THE AIR HANDLING UNIT OR REPLACEMENT OF A PACKAGE SYSTEM.
IT DOES NOT INCLUDE DUCT WORK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO BY THE DEFINITION, THAT'S WHY IT WAS WORDED LIKE THAT.
I GUESS BACK IN THE DAYS WHEN THIS WAS, UH, UH, ACCEPTED.
CAN YOU PUT THAT UP ON THE SCREEN? UH, DIFFERENT DOCUMENT.
DO WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT STATE DOCUMENTS? AND THAT'S A STATE STATUTE.
THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF THE STATE LAW.
NO, NO, IT WHAT WHAT STATUTE NUMBER? UH, I, I, I'LL 1733.
IT'S A DEFINITION, BUT, UH, GO ALL THE WAY TO THE TITLE 16, CHAPTER 75 RULE.
THAT A RULE? OR IS THAT THE STATE STATUTE? TEXAS OF ADMINISTRATIVE CODE THERE WE PROPERTY.
HE DOESN'T HAVE HIS SOMETHING'S GOTTA TAKE PRECEDENT.
YOU, THEY QUOTED ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
WHAT'S THE CODE YOU FROM? WHAT AM I LOOKING UP? HMM? WHAT'D YOU SAY? WHAT AM I LOOKING UP? OH, NO, I KNOW.
IS IT UNDER T D L R MARK? IS IT UNDER T D L R? IT IT IS.
IT'S WHATEVER, WHEREVER THIS, IT'S THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
[03:15:03]
WHAT IS IT, 75 CHECK FORM.YEAH, IT'S, UH, TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, UH, CHAPTER 75 RULE.
WELL MEAN YOU JUST GO THERE AND GO DOWN DEFINITIONS.
UH, 75 POINT 10 AND THEN GO DOWN ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT THERE.
CAN YOU GO UP TO THE TOP OF THIS SECTION? TOTAL REPLACEMENT BASEMENT, AIR CONDITIONING AND REFRIGERATION.
NOT, THAT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S A, A DEFINITION OF WHAT THE STATUES ARE.
SO WHICH ONE, RON, COULD YOU, COULD YOU SAY THAT RON? 'CAUSE I I THINK YOU'RE BRINGING UP SOME GOOD INFORMATION IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND SAYING THAT OUT THERE.
YEAH, THE THE THING YOU GOTTA KIND OF BE CAREFUL WITH TDLR IS THEY'LL BREAK EACH ONE OF THESE THINGS UP INTO, INTO TWO DISTINCT SECTIONS.
SO LIKE ON UNDER THE ELECTRICAL SIDE, 73 IS A RULE, 1305 IS THE LAW.
THERE'S A LOT OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE TWO, BUT SOMETIMES THERE'S DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE TWO AND IF THERE'S A DISCREPANCY, THE LAW PREVAILS OVER THE RULE.
THE, THE, THE LEGISLATURE DEFINED IT BY WHAT IT IS.
AND SO I WOULD JUST SUGGEST WE GO ON THE WAY, LET JOSEPH LOOK AT IT, READ THE LAW, READ WHAT IT SAYS, AND BECAUSE THE I C C DEFINED IT, AND THAT'S THE INDUSTRY STANDARD OF WHAT IT IS.
AND THEN IF WE NEED TO, WE CAN CALL A QUICKIE MEETING BEFORE WE, I MEAN, WE HAVE MONTHS BEFORE THAT IS, SO I THINK SOME LAWYER NEEDS TO LOOK AT IT, BUT AGAIN, IT'S STILL, THIS IS, THIS IS RULE IN WHAT YOU'RE QUOTING IS LAW, AND SO WE'RE GONNA NEED AN INTERPRET CASE MADE.
THE, THE RULE DOESN'T OVERT TRUMP THE LAW.
SO, BUT WE NEED A FINAL DETERMINATION AS WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, THAT YOU'RE GONNA DO AFTERWARDS.
SO I THINK THAT CONCLUDES EVERYTHING ON THE CODE ADOPTION.
IF THIS DOES, YOU KNOW, WE, WE LOOK AT THIS AND IF THIS COMES UP AGAIN, WE'LL WE'LL PRINT IT OUT TO THE BOARD AND SEE WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT AS IS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE IT AS THE TOTAL REPLACEMENT DEFINED AS APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
UH, SO THE LAST THING IS DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, THE ONLY THING I HAVE IS Y'ALL SHOULD BE RECEIVING EMAILS FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
THERE'S SOME TRAINING THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE ALL BOARD MEMBERS GO THROUGH IN REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, JUST CITY POLICIES, UM, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'M GOING THROUGH THE SAME TRAINING, SO IF Y'ALL NEED SOME CLIFF NOTES, FEEL FREE TO, TO REACH OUT.
IS THIS GONNA BE IN PERSON OR CAN YOU DO IT ONLINE? THIS IS ALL ONLINE.
THEY'RE KIND OF MOVING AWAY FROM THAT.
UM, AND YOU DO A QUICK LITTLE QUIZ AFTERWARDS.
SO, UH, BUT QUIZ THING, CORRECT? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
SO Y'ALL SHOULD BE SEEING THOSE.
HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO TAKE? WE GOT THE NOTICE, BUT HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO TAKE? SO THEY HAVE MULTIPLES.
I THINK YOU HAVE A MONTH FROM EACH ONE.
SO IT'LL BE KIND OF ONCE A MONTH TO GET A NEW 10 MINUTE VIDEO.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU MISS ONE? CAN YOU TAKE 'EM ALL AT ONCE? LIKE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, AND DONE? I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
IT'LL PROBABLY BE, IF YOU MISS THIS FIRST ONE, THEY'LL PROBABLY COME AFTER ME.
BUT SORT OF LIKE THE F D R I MEAN, ULTIMATELY THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE BY ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS OR YOU NO LONGER CAN BE ON THE BOARD.
SO YEAH, IF IT, IF IT HELPS, I DID THE FIRST ONE.
LET'S WATCH, WATCH THE VIDEO, ANSWER THREE QUESTIONS AND MOVE ON THIS.
BUT YEAH, THEY'LL, THOSE WILL ALL BE COMING FROM THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, BUT I THINK I WILL BE THE ONE HOUNDING Y'ALL IF YOU DON'T GET 'EM DONE,
SO THAT IS EVERYTHING STAFF HAS, UH, ONCE AGAIN, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A VERY LONG PROCESS.
WE HAD WELL OVER 20, 20 TO 25 MEETINGS TO GET THROUGH THIS.
DEFINITELY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME AND COMMITMENT AND ACTUALLY, UH, STICKING AROUND FOR ANOTHER 30 MINUTES ON A DAY LIKE THIS TO, TO GET THIS WRAPPED UP.
THAT'S A BIG LIFT BY THIS BOARD AND ALL THE COMMITTEES AND WE, WE DO APPRECIATE ALL Y'ALL'S TIME AND EFFORTS.
YEAH, IT GOES FOR THE GUYS THAT AREN'T HERE.
APPRECIATE YOUR, UH, INPUT AND TIME LOOKING INTO ALL OF THESE CODES.
KNOW IT'S THE BEST VOLUNTEER JOB YOU'VE EVER HAD.
WELL, THANK YOU CRYSTAL, FOR MAKING EVERYTHING CRYSTAL CLEAR.