[00:00:07]
EVERYBODY READY? GOOD MORNING.
UM, THIS IS, OR YEAH, AFTERNOON.
SORRY, IT'S STILL MORNING FOR ME.
UM, THE BUILDING STANDARD BOARD.
SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE SUBCOMMITTEE.
IT'S 1:07 PM UM, CAN WE DO A, UH, ROLL CALL? FRED ANDES.
ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING FROM THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FELIX RAMIREZ.
AND FROM DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AMIN TAMAZ.
INTERIM DIRECTOR MELISSA RAMIREZ.
INTERIM DEPUTY DIRECTOR DANNY LEGGE, CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER DALE RUSSELL.
CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR EMILY REYES PLANNER.
VALERIE RODRIGUEZ, SENIOR PLANNER.
CAN WE HAVE INTERPRETATION PLEASE? JUST A REMINDER ON, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
UH, WHAT WE WILL DO IS HAVE THE, UH, STAFF PRESENTATION FIRST AND THEN ALLOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THEN FOR QUESTIONS, UH, FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, UH, FOLLOWED BY, UM, A MOTION.
ARE YOU GUYS READY TO START? MADAM CHAIR? ONE MORE THING TO ADD.
JUDY ASKED ME TO REMIND EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD, MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE SAYING YOUR NAME WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING.
'CAUSE I KNOW OUR, OUR NEW INDIVIDUALS.
AND SO WHEN SHE'S TRYING TO DO THE INTERPRETATION AND MAKE EVERYTHING, SHE WAS HAVING A HARD TIME WITH IT.
FORGET WHO I'M, ARE WE READY? YES, MA'AM.
[ Briefing and Possible Action on the following items ]
OKAY.WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
DANNY LEE IS CODE ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATOR.
UH, WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S POINT OF ORDER.
WE DIDN'T APPROVE WHAT MINUTES? IT SAYS RIGHT HERE.
APPROVED MINUTES FROM IT'S NUMBER ONE.
WE DIDN'T APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE LAST MEETING.
MINUTES WERE EMAILED OUT ON MONDAY, I BELIEVE.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS FRED ANDES.
I, UH, WOULD LIKE TO MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, AS IS FOR, UH, OCTOBER 30TH, 2024.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE GET STARTED.
SO THERE IS A, UH, A NEW SPREADSHEET, A REVISED SPREADSHEET, IF YOU WILL.
IT SHOULD BE DATED 11, UH, EIGHT.
THAT'S GONNA BE THE LATEST VERSION.
WE DID GO BACK AFTER OUR LAST MEETING AND KIND OF REFORMAT IT SLIGHTLY, MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING ALIGNS WITH THE WORKING DOC, RIGHT? SO THERE WERE SOME, UH, ONE OR TWO ITEMS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN OUTTA PLACE AND MAYBE SOME, UH, FORMATTING AND, AND SOME REVISIONS.
BUT NEVERTHELESS, THIS IS WHAT'S GONNA BE THE FINAL PRODUCT.
YOU'LL SEE, UH, THE COLUMNS ARE ALL THE CHA SAME.
UH, ONLY THING WE'VE ADDED AT THIS POINT NOW IS GONNA BE, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO YOU'LL SEE, UM, IN THE SAME COLUMN THAT IT FILLED OUT.
AND AS WE MOVE FORWARD, UM, AFTER EACH MEETING, THEN YOU'LL SEE THE REVISED ONE WITH THE, UH, BOARDS OR SUBCOMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS ONLINE AS WELL.
SO, UH, EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A, THE LATEST COPY, UM, DATED 11 EIGHT.
A AND, AND MR. TOMAS REMINDED ME THAT EVERYONE GOT A COPY OF THE 2021, UH, CENTRAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
SO YOU SHOULD HAVE A, A HARD COPY AS WELL.
[00:05:02]
OKAY, SO WE'RE READY.SO WHERE WE LEFT OFF LAST TIME, WE LEFT OFF ON ITEM NUMBER, UH, 20.
UM, THIS IS GONNA BE A, UM, A, A UNIQUE ONE BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE ACTUALLY RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH SOME SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS.
AND THE ONLY THING WE'RE GONNA BE RECOMMENDING IN THIS CASE HERE IS GONNA BE A TITLE CHANGE, RIGHT? SO, UH, THE IPMC DID PROPOSE SOME LANGUAGE, AS YOU'LL SEE THAT'S IN THE, UH, WORKING DOC.
UH, THEY STRUCK OUT WHAT WAS IN RED AND THEY PROPOSED WHAT'S IN BLUE.
HOWEVER, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND ONLY ADOPT THE, UH, OFFICIAL TITLE CHANGE.
SO IT WOULD CHANGE, UH, FROM DEPARTMENT TO OFFICIAL RECORDS.
DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO.
ANY QUESTIONS? OPEN FOR A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C, UH, WORDING, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HEADING, WHICH WOULD GO FROM DEPARTMENT RECORDS TO OFFICIAL RECORDS.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? MS. THOMAS DRINKS A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR A.
THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 21.
UH, STAFF WILL BE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THIS NEW SECTION, UH, APPROVALS.
UH, AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, SOME OF THE IPMC JUST SIMPLY REFORMATTED AND MOVED ITEMS IN THEIR, UM, IN THEIR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
THIS IS ALREADY SPELLED OUT IN OUR S-A-P-M-C, THEREFORE, WE WE'RE, UH, RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS NEW SECTION.
I AM SORRY, THAT WAS ON MY, UH, NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, THIS IS, UH, JOEL SLA, JUST SINCE THIS IS ALL TOGETHER, 21 THROUGH 24, I JUST WANNA MAKE MENTION THAT 24, THE CHANGE THAT YOU'RE SHOWING FOR THE 2024 IPMC IS WRONG.
IT SHOULD BE 1 0 5 0.6 0.4 THE TEST.
SO I JUST NEED TO SWAP OUT THAT LANGUAGE.
UM, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE IPMC SECTION Y? YEAH.
SO 24 AND 22 ARE IDENTICAL RIGHT NOW, AND THAT SHOULDN'T BE THE CASE.
LET'S SEE, I THINK, UH, IT SAYS IT SHOULD BE 1 0 5 0.6 0.4 P FOUR IS AN EXTERNAL FOUR, WHICH IS AN EXTERNAL, HE WAS PIGGY BACKING OUT.
I, I'M SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY.
SO, YEAH, SO, SO, UM, I THINK THAT WAS BROUGHT UP DURING THE LAST CONVERSATION AS WELL.
SO THE, THE SECTION THAT YOU SEE THAT'S IN THAT COLUMN, THOSE ARE THE SECTIONS THAT ARE, ARE, THAT ARE, I GUESS IN IPMC, THAT, THAT ARE NOT GONNA MATCH OR COINCIDE WITH WHAT'S IN THE S-A-P-M-C.
THAT SECTION FOR INSPECTIONS IN THE IPMC IS SECTION 1 0 5 0.62 INSPECTIONS.
WHERE, WHERE'S THAT AT NOW? IS THAT SOMEWHERE LATER ON? 1 0 5 0.64? THAT'S CORRECT.
1 0 5 0.64 TEST REPORTS IS GONNA BE COVERED LATER ON DOWN TO THE SPREADSHEET ON 38.
SO THIS IS, UH, JOEL, DANNY, WHY WOULD WE TAKE THAT OUT OF THERE? I MEAN, THIS, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY ALL SHOULD BE TOGETHER HERE.
YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO WHAT THE STAFF IS PROPOSING.
IT JUST, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS JUST, WAS A MISSED, THEY JUST COPIED IN THE WRONG LANGUAGE INTO THE, THE SPREADSHEET.
WHAT SHE MEANT TO HAVE COPIED IN WAS WHAT? 1 0 6 0.5 0.4 THE TEST, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE 1, 2, 3, 4 SUB-BULLET ITEMS UNDER 1 0 5 0.6 0.1.
I GUESS I'M STILL NOT FOLLOWING YOU, MR. SO, SO, SO THE WAY WE LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IS WE, WE PLUGGED THE 2024 IPMC AMENDMENTS WHERE THEY EXIST TODAY IN
[00:10:01]
THE S-A-P-M-C.RIGHT? SO THE SECTION FOR TEST REPORTS, UH, DOES NOT LIVE UNDER THIS SECTION, UH, CURRENTLY UNDER DEPARTMENT RECORDS.
SO I BELIEVE IT'S, WE'LL SEE IT FURTHER DOWN THE LINE.
I THINK IT'S ON ROW NUMBER 20 OR RATHER 38 AND 36 I BELIEVE IT IS.
MR. SI ALSO WANNA POINT OUT LINE ITEM NUMBER 24 IS AN EXTERNAL RECOMMENDATION.
SO THERE IS SOME REPETITIVENESS TO IT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, SO WE'RE TRACKING THEM BOTH WAYS.
SO IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE BIT REPETITIVE, BUT IT'S BECAUSE THERE'S AN INTERNAL RECOMMENDATION AND AN EXTERNAL RECOMMENDATION.
SO IT'S KIND OF FOLLOWING IN LINE IS WHERE WE BEST TRY TO TO TRACK IT AS WELL.
EVERYONE ELSE IS OKAY WITH IT.
IT'S JUST NOT LIKE WE COULD JUST DEAL WITH IT RIGHT HERE.
IF IT WASN'T GONNA CHANGE THE LANGUAGE.
SO I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT FAR AHEAD TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT YOU WERE MAKING A PROPOSAL TO ACCEPT THAT LANGUAGE.
S SO FOR ITEM NUMBER 21, UM, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THAT ITEM, UH, WE'RE LOOKING ONLY AT THE SECTION OF APPROVALS, UH, WHICH IS A-I-P-M-C PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
D DANNY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT LAST PART.
YOU'RE SAYING YOU WANT IT OR DON'T WANT IT? NO, SIR.
WE, WE WANNA KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN.
NOW THAT'S FOR ALL FOUR, RIGHT? WELL, I, IT'S, WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE ITEM RIGHT NOW.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T OPEN UP FOR THE, I MEAN, I CAN DISCUSS ALL FOUR.
IT DEPENDS HOW YOU GUYS WANNA LOOK AT 'EM.
OR WE CAN LOOK AT EACH ITEM INDIVIDUALLY.
SO RIGHT NOW I ONLY SPOKE TO ITEM NUMBER 21.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND DO ALL FOUR SINCE IT'S ALL INTERCONNECTED.
ALRIGHT, SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM 22, ITEM 22, UM, AND 24, UH, ITEM 22 IS A PROPOSED, OR EXCUSE ME, RATHER, IT'S A-I-P-M-C UH, UPDATE.
UH, IT IS A NEW SECTION THAT'S BEING ADDED TO THE IPMC, UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS SECTION.
THERE WAS AN EXTERNAL, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT CAME IN, OR EXCUSE ME, NOT A PROPOSED MEMBER, RATHER A, A COMMENT THAT CAME IN, UM, IN REGARDS TO THIS SECTION, SIMPLY ASKING FOR EXAMPLES OF INSPECTIONS AND APPROVED INDIVIDUALS OR AGENCIES, UH, THAT WOULD BE CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS.
UM, AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF, IF WE WANNA HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS POINT OR JUST, I'M LOOKING, YOU'RE GETTING READY.
CAN YOU SAY IT ON THE MIC PLEASE? NO COMMENT.
SO AGAIN, ITEMS NUMBER 22 AND 24 WERE RECOMMENDED.
UH, ITEM NUMBER 23 IS A NEW SECTION AS WELL FROM THE IPMC UPDATES.
UH, AND WE ARE RECOMMEND DENIAL AS WELL FOR THAT SECTION.
SO, UM, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEMS 21, 22, 23, 24, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, DENIAL FOR ALL FOUR SECTIONS.
OKAY, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE'RE OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MADAM CHAIR THOMAS FRANKS, I WANT A MOTION TO AGREE WITH STAFF TO DENY THE CHANGES TO THE S-A-S-A-P-M-C ON ITEMS 21 THROUGH 24.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? DWAYNE NELSON, SECOND QUESTION.
YOUR, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU WANNA DENY SAMP, ISN'T IT IPMC THAT YOU WANNA DENY? IS THAT CORRECT? DENNY? WELL, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
DENY IT CAN BE ANSWERED BOTH WAYS.
YOU'RE EITHER DENYING ONE AND APPROVING ONE OR DENYING ONE APPROVAL ONE.
IT'S JUST HOWEVER YOU WANNA WORD IT.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO NOT PUT IN THE NEW TEXT INTO, OH, OKAY.
THE S-A-P-M-C FOR 21 THROUGH 24.
CAN WE MAKE SURE WE ONLY HAVE ONE MIC? 'CAUSE THAT, THAT THE FEEDBACK IS HORRIBLE.
NO, THAT, THAT ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NOW THIS IS JOEL.
IF, IF WE ARE GONNA DENY 21 THROUGH 24, THEN WE SHOULD ALSO MENTION, AT LEAST IN THE, THE MINUTES THAT COMMENT 24 WAS, WAS WITHDRAWN, OR IF IT'S NOT WITHDRAWN, WE WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA RESPOND TO THE COMMENT 'CAUSE THE COMMENTER WITHDREW THEIR COMMENT.
JUST SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE COVER OUR BASES, THAT THE COMMENTS WERE ADDRESSED, NOT LEAVE IT VOID THERE.
SO WE WILL MAKE A NOTE THAT THERE JUST NO COMMENTS.
UH, THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SUBMITTED THE
[00:15:01]
COMMENT, WHICH WERE THE COMMENT, MADAME CHAIR, UM, THEY DID NOT WITHDRAW THE COMMENT.THEY, THEY JUST SAID NO COMMENTS, BUT THEY DID NOT, DID NOT WITHDRAW IT.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT PUTTING ANYTHING AS INACCURATE.
TECHNICALLY THEY DID, 'CAUSE THEY STARTED SPEAKING AND SAYING, WELL IF YOU ARE GOING TO NOT APPROVE THIS, THEN WE WILL WITHDRAW.
THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE THEY MADE IT FROM THAT.
THEN AFTERWARDS IT WAS A NO COMMENT.
SO WE DO NEED TO ANNOTATE IT THAT THEY SPOKE AND THEN A NO COMMENT.
UM, YES, THEY, THEY SAID IT, BUT OFF MIC WE COULD HEAR THEM HEAR IT.
UM, YES, THEY DID WITHDRAW THE COMMENT AND THEY ARE HERE IN THE ROOM.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, THIS IS CLAY.
I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND, 'CAUSE THIS IS A, A PRETTY BIG SECTION WE'RE CUTTING, UH, AND MAINTAINING JUST A COUPLE OF SENTENCES.
AND SO IF Y'ALL COULD JUST EXPLAIN TO ME, UM, HOW THE CURRENT LANGUAGE MEETS THE, THE NEW LANGUAGE REAL, REAL GENERALLY.
SO THESE, THESE SECTIONS, THESE SPECIFIC SECTIONS, UH, ALREADY LIVE IN THE S-A-P-M-C UNDER THESE TITLES, INSPECTIONS AND CODE ALTERNATIVES.
UH, WHAT, WHAT THE IPMC SIMPLY DID WAS JUST TOOK THESE SECTIONS AND, AND PUT 'EM SOMEWHERE ELSE, RIGHT? SO THIS IS NEW IN A SENSE THAT THIS IS ALREADY LANGUAGE THAT'S ALREADY IN OUR S-A-P-M-C CODE.
SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE ON NUMBER 4.6 0.1 APPROVALS, DO TWO INSPECTIONS AND DO THREE CODE.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA END UP STAYING? NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA ACCEPT THAT ONE.
SO IT'S JUST THE 1 0 4 0.1, RIGHT? IS THAT RED LINE IS WHAT THEY WANT TO CUT? UH, MADAM CHAIR, POINT OF ORDER.
WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A MOTION.
WE NEED TO HOLD THIS UNTIL AFTER THE MOTION FOR DISCUSSION.
I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT WE WERE IN DISCUSSION.
WE'RE DISCUSSION, DISCUSSION, MOTION.
THERE'S LIKE 15 THINGS GOING ON AT ONCE.
OKAY, CAN, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT? YEAH, THESE ARE JUST A, A LOT OF LARGE SECTIONS HERE THAT, UH, WAS GONNA BE PUT IN THE 1 0 4 0.6 SECTION AND I'M JUST NOT SEEING THE, UH, PAST, I MEAN, MAYBE THIS IS JUST ME, ME BEING, UH, NOT BEING ABLE TO READ, WRITE, BUT, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE ALL THESE SECTIONS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO POSSIBLY NOT APPROVE OR DENY FROM THE IPMC ARE EFFECTIVELY COVERED IN JUST TWO SENTENCES IN THE CURRENT CODE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
YOU WANT C TWO? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
AND IT'S ALSO COVERED IN SECTION OH FOUR OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, SO THERE'S OTHER AREAS TOO, BUT I MEAN, IT'S LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE JUST NOTS RELIEF.
AND JUST FOR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, SO FOR EXAMPLE, INSPECTIONS ARE COVERED IN EXISTING CODE UNDER SECTION 1 0 4 0.2, SO IT IS COVERED SOMEWHERE ELSE.
I JUST WANNA ADD THAT WE ALREADY VOTED ON THAT AT THE LAST MEETING.
SO, UM, THIS IS JUST THE DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBERING BETWEEN, UH, INTERNATIONAL AND SAN ANTONIO.
WELL, AND THEN ALSO THE MOVEMENT OF SOME OF THAT STUFF.
MM-HMM,
THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS, UH, KIND OF COMMUNICATED.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
UM, IT IS A NEW SECTION UNDER 2024 IPMC UPDATES.
UH, IN REGARDS TO FEES, UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL, UH, FEES IN OUR S-A-P-M-C IS COVERED UNDER SECTION ONE 11, EXCUSE ME, ONE 13.
AND IT ALREADY OUTLINES THE, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CODE OFFICIALS TO ESTABLISH, UM, THEIR OWN FEE POLICY.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY QUESTIONS? WE'RE OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS FERNANDEZ.
I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE KEEP AS IS IN THE 2021 S-M-S-A-P-M-C.
[00:20:06]
ANY SECOND IS JOE AU SECOND DISCUSSION.THIS IS ERLINDA, UM, IN THE IPMC.
IT, IT, AND MAYBE I'M JUST READING IT WRONG.
CAN YOU MOVE YOUR MIC CLOSER? IT INDICATES A TIMEFRAME.
IT SAYS LIKE, BUT IN YOURS IT DOESN'T.
DOES IT MATTER? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT SECTION YOU'RE REFERRING TO? TO THE FEES ON 1 0 5 6? THE RECOMMENDED, UM, VERBIAGE FOR FEES.
IT SAYS THE RECORD OF FEES COLLECTED, UM, AND REFUNDED IN ACCORDANCE.
BUT, UM, IN YOURS, IT DOESN'T HAVE REFUNDED, UH, THAT'S COVERED IN ONE 13.1 13.
I'M, SO IT DOESN'T SAY THE WORD REFUNDED OR SO, YEAH.
SO UNDER SECTION ONE, 13.2 REFUNDS, IT READS, THE CODE OFFICIALS AUTHORIZED TO ESTABLISH A REFUND POLICY.
IT SHOULD
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR A AYE NO.
WANNA POST? UH, THOMAS FRANKS HOST? JUDY, DID YOU CAPTURE THAT? I DID.
SO WE'LL LOOK AT, UH, 26 AND 27 TOGETHER OF 26 IS A, UH, IPMC PROPOSED UPDATE.
UH, IN REGARDS TO THE SECTION OF MODIFICATIONS.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE WORKING DOCK, THEY STRUCK OUT WHAT'S IN RED AND REPLACED IT WHAT'S IN BLUE.
UM, IN, IN 27, THAT WAS A EXTERNAL AMENDMENT THAT CAME THROUGH THAT IF WE ACCEPTED THIS SECTION, THERE WERE SOME PREFERRED LANGUAGE, UH, AS YOU'LL SEE IN, IN THE MODIFICATION HERE.
SO THE PREFERRED LANGUAGE WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD STRIKE OUT ACCESSIBILITY AND REMOVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING SAFETY.
IF THIS SECTION WERE TO BE ADOPTED, THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE DENY, UH, THIS NEW SECTION AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN.
YOU NEED LIKE TO, TO FIGURE OUT WHY YOU WOULD, UH, NOT ACCEPT THE ACCESSIBILITY OR, UH, STRUCTURAL, YOU KNOW, ACCESSIBILITY IS IN, UH, IPMC.
UM, THREE 10.1 0.1 AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, IF A BUILDING IS REQUIRED TO BE ACCESSIBLE, THEN IT MUST BE MAINTAINED ACCESSIBLE DURING OCCUPANCY.
IT MUST BE MAINTAINING GOOD REPAIR.
WHY WOULD WE NOT WANT TO INCLUDE THAT HERE? I, I'M SORRY.
IT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION THAT WE KEEP AS IS S-A-P-M-C.
IT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION TO KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN, BUT I THINK TO MR. JOEL'S POINT, YOU'RE ASKING WHY WOULDN'T WE ACCEPT THIS PROPOSED LANGUAGE, RIGHT.
TO INCLUDE ACCESSIBILITY AND OR STRUCTURAL, RIGHT.
SO THE, THE, THE REASON, SORRY, THIS IS, I MEAN, THOMAS, SO THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE EXISTING LANGUAGE TALKS ABOUT HEALTH, LIFE AND SAFETY AND FIRE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.
STRUCTURE IS COMPONENT OF THAT.
NOW ACCESSIBILITY IS COVERED BY THE STATE, NOT BY THE JURISDICTION.
SO THAT'S WHY WE, WE REMOVED THAT.
SO IF, IF YOU WALK TO A BUILDING AND IT HAS A, A, A WHEELCHAIR RAMP, UH, MADE OUT OF WOOD
[00:25:01]
AND IT'S ROTTING, YOU WOULD IGNORE THAT WHEELCHAIR RAMP AND EVALUATE JUST THE BUILDING NOW, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD COVER THAT.SO THE ACCESSIBILITY IS COVERED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS, NOT BY THE CITY.
NOW IF WE SEE ANYTHING UNSAFE WITH THAT STRUCTURE, OF COURSE WE WILL ADDRESS IT, BUT IF IT LOOKS APPROPRIATE, WE, WE DON'T ENFORCE ANYTHING ON IT.
SO IPMC IS ONLY SAYING THAT IF IT, IF THE BUILDING WAS REQUIRED TO BE ACCESSIBLE, THAT IT IT BE MAINTAINED ACCESSIBLE.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT HERE? THAT'S WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
YOU'RE NOT MA MAKING THE DETERMINATION WHEN THEY BILL THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE ACCESSIBILITY.
YOU'RE JUST DEALING AFTER THE FACT NOW THAT IT HAS ACCESSIBILITY.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU HAVE THAT, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY COVERED? THAT WAS OUR PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
AND THE REASON WE TOOK IT OUT IS BECAUSE IT, THE LANGUAGE SAYS DOES NOT LESSEN.
AND ACCESSIBILITY IN COMMERCIAL AND MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS IS COVERED UNDER A DA AND UNDER THE FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS.
AND SO YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE X, Y, AND Z AND AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THEM, YOU MEET THE CODE.
AND IF I PUT IN, FOR EXAMPLE, TWO HANDICAP ENTRANCES TO A BUILDING AND THEN WE WISH TO TAKE ONE OUT, AS LONG AS THE BUILDING HAS THAT ONE, YOU'RE OKAY.
BUT THIS WOULD SAY YOU CANNOT LESSEN IT.
SO YOU'RE, THE CITY CAN ENFORCE THAT YOU HAVE WHAT'S REQUIRED, BUT THEY CAN'T TELL YOU, YOU CAN'T LESSEN YOUR ACCESSIBILITY WHEN YOU MEET THE CODE.
AND THE WAY THIS LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN, IT SAYS THAT.
AND SO WE TOOK IT OUT BECAUSE IT'S COVERED UNDER OTHER, UM, IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING IN R TWO OCCUPANCIES, IT'S COVERED UNDER THE FIRE CODE AND OTHER CODES, THE ICC CODES FOR BUILDINGS.
AND THAT'S WHY WE TOOK SUGGESTED TAKING ACCESSIBILITY OUT BECAUSE THE WORD BEFORE IT, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE, I THINK IT'S ON THE SCREEN, IT SAYS, DOES NOT LESSEN.
AND SO YOU LEGALLY YOU CAN LESSEN IT AS LONG AS YOU MAINTAIN WHAT'S REQUIRED.
SO ALL WE'RE SAYING HERE IS WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY DETERMINATION ABOUT REQUIREMENT.
WE'RE JUST SAYING IF IT'S THERE, IT'S GOTTA BE MAINTAINED.
SO WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT YOU AS THE BUILDER CAN TAKE ONE OUT IF YOU WANT TO.
WE'RE JUST SAYING IF YOU GOT IT, INSPECTOR COMES IN, IT BETTER BE MAINTAINED.
BUT THAT, BUT IT'S IN THE MODIFICATION SECTION VERSUS UPKEEP.
AND SO THE WAY THIS READS IS UNDER THE MODIFICATION THAT I CAN'T MAKE A MODIFICATION TO THE BUILDING THAT LESSENS THE ACCESSIBILITY AND I CAN LEGALLY MAKE THAT DONE AS LONG AS I MAINTAIN WHAT IS REQUIRED BY LAW.
SO IF I HAVE FIVE HANDICAP ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING AND I WANT TO REDUCE IT TO FOUR, THAT'S LEGAL.
BUT THE WAY THIS READS UNDER MODIFICATION THAT WE COULD GET CITED BY THE CODE OFFICIAL FOR TAKING ONE OF THEM OUT, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE TWICE AS MANY AS REQUIRED BY LAW CAN, YEAH, I MEAN THIS SECTION'S MODIFICATION OF CODE.
THIS IS ALLOWING CODE MODIFICATION, RIGHT? WHERE WE'RE SAYING YEAH, THE CODE INSPECTOR CAN ALLOW THEM TO MODIFY IT, BUT WE CAN'T MODIFY IT BELOW, UH, THE, THE STRICT LETTER, UH, OF THE CODE ANYWAY.
BUT YEAH, I MEAN THIS IS MODIFICATION OF ALREADY EXISTING CODE.
SO WE'RE, WHAT IF WE DENY THIS MODIFICATION TO THE OR? I'M NOT GONNA USE THE WORD MODIFICATION 'CAUSE THAT'S ALREADY USED.
UM, IF WE DENY THIS, UH, IPMC CHANGE, WE'RE JUST STILL ALLOWING FOR MODIFICATION BY THE CODE OFFICIAL AND WE'RE STILL MAINTAINING IT AT, YOU KNOW, HEALTH AND SAFETY AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS.
THIS ISN'T GETTING INTO INVOLVED WITH WHAT IS DEFINED AS ACCESSIBILITY, LIFE AND FIRE SAFETY OR STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS.
'CAUSE THAT'S UNDERNEATH THE DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE CODE.
LIKE FIRE CODE OR, UH, A DA COMPLIANCE.
THIS IS JUST MODIFICATION LANGUAGE.
NO, I, I MEAN I AGREE WITH YOU PARTIALLY, I DON'T WANNA SAY A HUNDRED PERCENT BECAUSE AGAIN, AS WE MENTIONED, AND, AND MARK MENTIONED THE SAME THING, THE STATE HAS THE A DA REQUIREMENTS AND THEY ENFORCE THAT.
NOW THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE IS ONE OF THE CODES THAT ICC PUBLISH.
AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO ADOPTS ALL THE ICC CODES, BUILDING AND FIRE
[00:30:01]
AND EXISTING BUILDING CODE AS WELL.NORMALLY WHEN YOU HAVE EXISTING BUILDING, THE CODE REQUIRES YOU TO COMPLY WITH THE CODE AT THE TIME IT WAS BUILT.
SO YOU DON'T IMPOSE NEW CODES ON THAT BUILDING UNLESS YOU'RE GONNA DO MAJOR REMODELING OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT AS A BUILDING, SO AGAIN, BECAUSE WE DON'T ENFORCE A DA RULES, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THAT.
NOW REMEMBER THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE THAT WE ARE REVIEWING, THE 2024 IS BUILT FOR EVERY JURISDICTION NATIONWIDE OR EVEN INTERNATIONAL IF THEY USE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SO SOME CITIES ARE VERY SMALL AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY A DA OR ANY ACCESSIBILITY OFFICE OR ANYBODY.
WE DO HAVE AN OFFICE THAT WORKS ON THAT AS WELL IN CONGESTION WITH THE STATE.
SO, BUT IT'S NOT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR CODE ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE, WE, WE AGREE WITH KEEPING WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY.
I, I THINK THE BIG TAKEAWAY, AT LEAST FOR ME WAS THAT IT'S MODIFICATION THAT ALLOWS THE CODE ENFORCE OR THE CODED OFFICIAL TO MODIFY.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOUGH CLEARS MUD.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION QUESTION? WELL, THIS IS JOEL.
I THINK CLAY WAS HITTING ON THE RIGHT RIGHT ASPECT THERE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE IN MODIFICATION.
THIS IS REALLY IN CARRYING OUT THE PROVISIONS OF THE CODE, GIVEN THE CODE AUTHORITY, THE ABILITY TO, TO DO MODIFICATIONS TO ACCEPT A DIFFERENT, UH, TESTING AND DIFFERENT TEST METHODS SO THAT IT REALLY DOES SEEM THAT IT WOULD, IT SHOULD BE SUITED IN HERE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ACCESSIBILITY AND STRUCTURAL.
AGAIN, I JUST WANNA REMIND THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT'S, THAT'S STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ULTIMATELY YOU GUYS CAN DECIDE WHICH WAY YOU WANNA SEE, UH, WHETHER THIS LANGUAGE SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE S-A-P-M-C.
UM, SO I'LL LEAVE IT WITH THAT COMMENT.
YOU GET INTO THE SITUATION IN TERMS OF ACCESSIBILITY IN, IN TERMS OF LESS ACCESSIBILITY WITH A COMMENT THAT HE MADE ABOUT IN THE EVENT YOU WANT TO TAKE OUT A STAIRWELL AND IT'S NOT REQUIRED TO DO ANYTHING, THEN YOU ARE INDEED LIMITING ACCESSIBILITY, UH, IN THAT CASE.
BUT IF YOU LEAVE THE WORDING IN THERE LIKE IT IS, THEN IT MEANS THEY CAN'T EVEN DO THAT ANYMORE.
AND I SEE A REASON OF WHY THEY MAY AT SOME TIME WANT TO CHANGE THAT ACCESSIBILITY.
SO IT'S AN ISSUE OF, OF COLLECTING THE WORDS TOGETHER, UH, OF LESSENING ACCESSIBILITY.
UH, AS LONG AS YOU STAY WITHIN THE CODES OF THE STATE, UH, THEN I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M COMFORTABLE WITH, IT'S BECAUSE THE STATE THEN TAKES CARE OF THE ISSUE THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN OUT A STAIRWELL.
BUT IT WAS OKAY BECAUSE IT DID NOT INDEED IN THE BIG TERM, LESS THAN THE ACCESSIBILITY, EXCEPT IT DID BECAUSE OF WHAT WAS THERE.
SO THAT MODIFICATION CREATES A PROBLEM.
SO I, I CAN GO EITHER WAY ON IT, BUT INDEED I DO UNDERSTAND WHY THEY ACCESS WORD ACCESSIBILITY MAY OR MAY NOT BE THERE.
HEY, UM, THIS IS FRED AND MAYBE LEGAL OR OR STAFF CAN ANSWER THIS ONE.
THE WAY THAT'S WRITTEN, ESPECIALLY WHERE IT GIVES THE CODE OFFICER HAS THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT I'M THE WAY WE USE CODE OFFICER, THEY DON'T GRANT THAT WOULD NORMALLY COME FROM THE BUILDING PERMITS.
BUT IN THIS ONE HERE, IT'S SAYING THE CODE OFFICER.
SO IT KIND OF IMPLIES THAT THE CODE OFFICER ON SITE GRANTS, UNLESS I'M READING THAT WRONG, IT SAYS GRANTS MODIFICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL CASES.
I THOUGHT WE HAD IDENTIFIED CODE OFFICER AS A MEAN FOR ALL INTENT PURPOSES.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE DIRECTOR OF OFFICER, WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING BECAUSE THIS ISN'T DIRECTOR OFFICER, THIS WOULD BE A BUILDING PERMITTING PIECE.
SO CAN SOMEBODY CLARIFY THAT? THAT'S WHY I SAID LEGAL OR STAFF, BECAUSE THAT KIND OF CONFUSES ME.
AND IF AN AVERAGE PERSON'S READING THAT, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GONNA ASSUME IS A CODE OFFICER IN THE FIELD GRANTS IT.
IT DOESN'T SAY OFFICER, IT SAYS OFFICIAL.
SO, SO IT SAYS, IT SAYS CODE EFFICIENT, RIGHT? UM, AND I GUESS THE, MAYBE THE GOOD THING HERE IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INCLUDES CODE ENFORCEMENT.
SO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS THE CODE OFFICIAL TWO IN ONE, I GUESS.
[00:35:01]
THAT MEANS IS YES, IT'S MY, MY DECISION OR AGAIN, I CAN DESIGNATE THAT, I CAN ASK THE CODE OFFICER TO MAKE THAT DECISION FOR ME.BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE ULTIMATE DECISION COMES TO THE CODE OFFICIAL, WHICH IS ME AT THIS POINT UNTIL JANUARY WHEN MIKE COMES BACK.
BUT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON WHEN THEY READ THAT CODE WOULD ASSUME THAT THE CODE OFFICIAL, WHICH NORMALLY WOULD BE THE CODE COMPLIANCE PERSON WOULD GRANT.
AND, AND SO, BUT AS I LOOK AT IT AS A BUILDER, THAT ALL COMES FROM THE PERMITTING AREA THAT'S ALREADY DONE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WHAT I'M SAYING THE CODE OFFICIAL IS THE BUILDING OFFICIAL IN SAN ANTONIO, RIGHT? LIKE EITHER WAY.
UM, 'CAUSE IF, IF YOU'RE DOING A MODIFICATION, YOU HAVE TO PULL THE PERMIT, CORRECT? CORRECT.
WELL, I, IN READING THIS AS A WHOLE AND NOT JUST PICKING ON CERTAIN LANGUAGE, WHAT I AM GETTING OUT OF THIS SECTION IS THAT IT IS UP TO THE CODE OFFICIAL TO MAKE MODIFICATIONS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WHEN THE STRICT LETTER OF THIS CODE IS IMPRACTICAL, MEANING IT'S THE, THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN IS NOT PRACTICAL FOR THAT PARTICULAR CASE.
SO IT'S NOT EVEN AS AN OVERALL, IT'S LIKE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WHERE THERE'S EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
SO AGAIN, CODE OFFICERS WILL FOLLOW THE CODE, BUT IF THEY RUN INTO AN OPTION, UH, AN ISSUE THAT DOESN'T FIT CODE, NORMALLY THEY BRING IT UP ALL THE WAY TO MY LEVEL AND THAT'S WHEN I MAKE A DECISION ON IT.
SO FOR THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS GIVEN WHERE THERE'S MULTIPLE ACCESSIBLE UNITS, OUR OUR ENTRANCES OR AREAS AND THEY WANT TO KNOCK IT DOWN TO ONE, THAT'S NOT AN EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE A CODE OFFICIAL WOULD HAVE TO MODIFY THE CODE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
YEAH, WE, WE, IT'S NOT LIKE WE MODIFY THE CODE, BUT LET'S ASSUME THEY HAVE TWO OR THREE WAYS OUT AND CODE REQUIRES ONLY TWO AND THEY DECIDE TO REMOVE ONE OF THEM.
WE WILL APPROVE IT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT WAIVING CODE, WE DON'T WAIVE CODE.
WE NEED TO MEET CODE, THE, THE LETTER OF CODE OR MINIMUM THE INTENT OF CODE.
AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH THAT, IF THEY HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO REMOVE, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE.
MOTION WOULD BE TO KEEP THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C WORDING AND DENY THE 2024 IPMC WORDING THAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED FOR NUMBER 26 AND 27 AND 27.
I WILL SECOND THE ADDITION OF 27 AND INCLUDE 26 IN MY SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? UH, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
OH, THE, ARE YOU OPPOSED OR I'M OPPOSED.
KEEPING THIS ON OUR SIDE, WE'LL GIVE YOU A RIGHT.
UH, THIS IS GONNA BE AN ANOTHER IPMC PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
UH, IT IS REVISION TO SECTION, UM, TO ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE WORKING DOCK, THERE ARE SOME LANGUAGE THAT HAS BEEN STRICKEN OUT BY THE IPMC AND REPLACED WITH SOME LANGUAGE IN BLUE.
UH, IT IS STATUS RECOMMENDATION TO, UH, DENY, UH, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN.
ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? ANY QUESTIONS OPEN FOR A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR DWAYNE NELSON.
I MOVE THAT ON ITEM NUMBER 28.
WE DENY THE CHANGE AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C FROM 2021.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
[00:40:05]
OKAY, THE NEXT ITEMS, UM, IF THE CHAIR'S OKAY, THEN FEW OF THEM KIND OF GO ALL TOGETHER AND WE'RE RECOMMENDED NOW FOR, SO IF WE COULD LOOK AT 'EM AS WE DID THE OTHER ONES ALL TOGETHER AT ONCE AND THEN MAKE A MOTION.SO, UH, WHAT ARE THE ITEM NUMBERS? ITEM NUMBER 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, AND 35.
SO THAT IS, UH, 29 THROUGH 35? THAT'S CORRECT.
UH, THIS, THIS NEW LANGUAGE IS BEING PROPOSED BY THE IPMC, UH, NEW SECTION IN REGARDS TO ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS, METHODS, CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT.
IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND DENY THE, UM, PROPOSED LANGUAGE UNDER THE IPMC.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO.
ANY QUESTIONS? I WAS JUST GONNA HAVE, I WAS JUST GONNA HAVE ONE QUESTION.
UM, AND I, I HEARD, I BELIEVE I ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I JUST WANNA GET IT ON THE RECORD.
THE, UH, SO BECAUSE WE HAVE KEPT THE SECTION AS, AS WAS, UM, ALL THESE NEW SUBSECTIONS ARE NOT BEING BROKEN OUT.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT'S MEETING, IT'S STILL MEETING ALL THESE REQUIREMENTS.
IT'S JUST KEEPING IT IN THE 1 1 0 5 0.2 ALTERNATIVE METHOD OR ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS PARAGRAPH, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION.
SORRY, I WAS READING SOMETHING REAL QUICK.
SO I'M PROBABLY JUST READING THIS INCORRECTLY.
BY REMOVING THIS, WE ARE NOT DENYING THE PUBLIC FROM USING NEW TECHNOLOGY OR NEW MATERIALS, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS RIGHT.
MADAM CHAIR DWAYNE NELSON, I MOVE THAT ON ITEMS NUMBER 29 THROUGH 35, THAT WE KEEP THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C AND DENY THE CHANGE AS PROPOSED BY THE IP PI PMC FROM 2024.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
OKAY, NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER 36.
UH, IT'S REVISION TO SECTION, UH, UNDER REQUIRED TESTING.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY STRUCK OUT THE ENTIRE SECTION.
UM, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT, UH, WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND DO NOT ACCEPT THE 2024 IPMC UPDATE.
ANY QUESTIONS? OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MRS. THOMAS FRANKS WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO KEEP THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C LANGUAGE FROM STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND TO NOT ADOPT THE 2024 I-P-M-C-A SECOND.
THIS IS FRED IN JUST A SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? AND THIS IS ITEM 36 IN HONOR.
IF THE, UH, SUBCOMMITTEE IS OKAY, I'M GONNA, I'LL DO 27, OR EXCUSE ME, 37, 38, UH, TOGETHER.
UM, TEST METHODS AND TEST REPORTS.
UM, THESE ARE AGAIN REVISIONS TO THE 2024 IPMC.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE WORKING, THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE STRUCK OUT BY THE IPMC AND REPLACE WHAT'S IN BLUE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C
[00:45:01]
AS WRITTEN.ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY QUESTIONS? MRS. CLAY? I JUST HAD ONE.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TEST STANDARDS AND METHODS IN THE TESTING METHODS? UH, SECTION, UM, THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE BY 2024 IPMC IS IN THE ABSENCE OF RECOGNIZED AND ACCEPTED TEST STANDARDS.
UM, AND THEN OUR LANGUAGE IS, UH, CURRENTLY TEST METHODS.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STANDARDS AND METHODS? SO, NORMALLY IN, IN CODE, WHEN YOU SAY STANDARD, IT'S REALLY, IT'S A STANDARD.
UH, SO FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE IF YOU'RE
THE, THE, THE, THE CODE IS ALL THE ICC CODES THAT WE ADOPT.
BUT THE STANDARD IS, GIVES YOU THE METHOD ON HOW TO DO SOMETHING.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE FIRE CODE SAYS INSTALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM BASED ON THE NFPA 72 STANDARD.
SO THE N-F-P-N-F-P-A 72 IS THE WAY YOU INSTALL IT, BUT THE FIRE CODE TELLS YOU WHEN YOU NEED IT AND IF YOU NEED IT.
SAME THING HERE IS WHEN YOU HAVE TESTING, YOU CAN TEST IT BASED ON THOSE STANDARDS.
'CAUSE THEY GIVE YOU A PRESCRIP METHOD OF TESTING OR YOU CAN USE A TESTING METHOD.
SO SOME PEOPLE GO TO SOUTHWEST, UH, RESEARCH OR THEY GO TO A TESTING FACILITY AND THEY DO TEST THAT AND THEY GET REPORTS.
THERE IS TWO WAYS TO TEST THINGS EITHER BASED ON STANDARD OR BASED ON A METHOD.
AND I'M JUST MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE STANDARD BEING, LIKE YOU SAID, THE THE CODE STANDARD.
AND, AND THE METHOD JUST SEEMS LIKE, UH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE IN THIS SITUATION, IF WE DON'T ACCEPT THEIR CHANGE, THEN Y'ALL CAN GO DO A DIFFERENT TEST METHOD THAT MEETS THAT REQUIREMENT AT, AT SOUTHWEST RESEARCH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT MAYBE DOESN'T MEET THE TEST STANDARD THAT IPMC RECOMMENDS.
IS THAT, IS THAT KIND OF WHAT I'M HEARING? OR IT JUST STANDARDS AND METHODS ALWAYS POP OUT TO ME.
'CAUSE STANDARD IS LIKE THE STANDARD AND THEN THE METHOD YOU GET TO SAID STANDARD IS, IS A METHOD AND YOU CAN DO VARIOUS METHODS TO MEET A STANDARD.
SO I MEAN, IF, IF THERE IS NO STANDARD SOMETIMES OR THEY MEET, THEY DON'T MEET IT A HUNDRED PERCENT, THEY MEET THE INTENT OF THAT.
IF THE METHOD THEY UTILIZED, UM, IS BACKED UP WITH INFORMATION OR WITH THE ORGANIZATION THAT IS APPROVED, THEN WE UTILIZE THAT.
SOMETIMES IT'S JUST TO KEEP THE OPTIONS A LITTLE OPEN.
BUT IN GENERAL, I MEAN, MOST OF THE TIME THEY FOLLOW THE STANDARDS.
IT'S RARE WHERE THE STANDARD DOESN'T COVER SOMETHING.
UH, A METHOD WOULD BE HOW ARE YOU GOING TO CONDUCT A TEST? AND A STANDARD WOULD BE WHAT IS YOUR RESULT OF YOUR EXPECTATIONS AND OR REQUIREMENTS FOR IT.
IF I WERE TESTING A BEAM, THE METHOD OF TESTING WOULD BE LOAD.
IF I WERE TESTING TO A STANDARD, IT'D BE A LOAD TO 100 POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH.
SO THE STANDARD IS 100 POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH.
I I JUST COME FROM THE ELECTRICAL WORLD.
SO IT'S A DIFFERENT TAKE FOR, FOR ME, I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT TEST METHOD WAS A STM, YOU KNOW, YOU WANT US, UH, YOU HAVE GALVANIZED STEEL AND YOU WANNA VERIFY THAT THEY HAVE ENOUGH ZINC COATING ON THAT STEEL.
I MEAN, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR, PAYING FOR THE STEEL AND THE ZINC.
SO A STM YOU WOULD LOOK FOR FOR THE TEST METHOD, BUT FOR THE STANDARD YOU WOULD ACTUALLY LOOK FOR A NANCY ACCREDITED STANDARD DEVELOPER TO, TO PROVIDE THE STANDARD TO SAY FOR THIS CLASS, THIS CATEGORY OF, OF STEEL ZINC PLATED HAS TO MEET THIS LEVEL OF ZINC PLATING.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE STANDARD.
THAT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE TO ME.
ANY OTHER NEXT QUESTION? JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GO OFF TRACK AND, AND, AND SAY THAT THERE ISN'T A STANDARD, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, FOR US IN THE ELECTRICAL SIDE, UH, IF THERE, THERE WASN'T A STANDARD, UM, DIDN'T ACTUALLY, UH, UH, MEET THE, THAT, THAT THE PRODUCT ITSELF, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE TEST LAB WOULD NOT USE OTHER STANDARDS TO APPLY.
YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE WAS WITH, UH, KIMBERLY CLARK.
THEY'RE, THEY HAVE A, UH, A DIAPER MACHINE THAT MAKES THE DIAPER AND IT HAS A HOT GLUE AT THE END THAT GLUES IT ALL UP.
SO IT COMES OUT, IT'S COMPLETED PRODUCT.
[00:50:01]
THERE'S NOT A STANDARD FOR THE, THE, THE MACHINE PER SE.UH, BUT THE, THE LAB WOULD, WOULD ACTUALLY PICK OUT THE APPROPRIATE STANDARDS TO APPLY TO THE MACHINE FOR DOING A FIELD EVALUATION AS WELL AS TO THE HOT GLUE SIDE.
IN THIS CASE, THE HOT GLUE HAD TO STAY ON 24 7.
IF THEY TURNED OFF THE HEAT TO THE HOT GLUE, THAT WOULD SEIZE UP THE MACHINE AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO DOWN FOR QUITE A LONG TIME TO CLEAN IT OUT AND REDO IT.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY HAD TO DO THE FIELD EVALUATION.
BUT JUST A LITTLE CLARITY THERE.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? UM, ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION.
OH, DID YOU DO A MOTION? NO, WE DIDN'T DO MOTION WORE YOU DEAD A MOTION.
NO, WE WERE STILL IN QUESTION.
SO FRED AND I ARE DECIDING WHO'S GONNA DO THE MOTION.
FRED'S GONNA DO A MOTION IS NOT A MOTION.
I JUST WANNA MAKE A NOTE THAT SABINA'S HERE SHE IS READING OUR BRAINS.
YEAH, WE WERE STILL IN YOUR QUESTION PHASE AND OH YEAH.
SO WE HAVEN'T GOT TO THAT YET.
I COULD HAVE SWORE THAT YOU GUYS LIKE MADE A MOTION.
SO WHO'S DOING THE MOTION? FRED'S DOING THE MOTION.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS, UH, FRED ANDERSON.
I WOULD LIKE TO AT THE SAME TIME, ITEM 37 38, EXCEPT OUR OR REJECT THE 2024 IPMC AND KEEP THE LANGUAGE OF 2020 ONES S-A-P-M-C.
AND I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ALRIGHT, UM, SO LOOKING AT, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 39.
WE'LL LOOK AT 39 AND 40 TOGETHER.
UH, 39 IS A PROPOSED, UM, REVISION FROM THE IPMC.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S REGARDS TO USE MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT AS YOU SEE IN THE WORKING DOCK.
THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE HAS BEEN, UM, STRUCK OUT IN THE IPMC AND REPLACE WHAT'S IN BLUE.
UH, WE DID RECEIVE ONE EXTERNAL EXTERNAL AMENDMENT, UH, THAT IF WE ACCEPT THIS OR RATHER, YOU KNOW, MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS LANGUAGE, THERE'S SOME PREFERRED LANGUAGE IN THERE, UH, IN REGARDS TO REPLACING, UM, APPROVE WITH PROPER WORKING CONDITIONS.
SO HOWEVER, IT'S STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND TO KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN.
ANY COMMENTS? YES, WE AGREE ON THE STAFF POSITION BECAUSE IF THEY, IF YOU DO WHAT THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, THE, OUR SUGGESTION MARK, CAN YOU MOVE YOUR MICROPHONE? YEAH, I'M SO SORRY.
WE, WE AGREE WITH THE STAFF'S POSITION THAT YOU SHOULD KEEP THE SAME LANGUAGE.
ANY QUESTIONS? I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE DENY THE CHANGES TO ITEM NUMBER 39 AND 40 AND KEEP THE 21.
ANY DISCUSSION? YOU GUYS? OKAY.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, IF WE MAY, CAN WE LOOK AT ITEMS 41, 42, 43, 44 AND 45? UM, AGAIN, TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME THEY'RE UH, IN RELATIONS TO ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AND METHODS, CONSTRUCTION AND RESEARCH REPORTS.
SO ITEM 41 IS A, UM, REVISION TO THE EXISTING, UH, IPMC.
UM, IN RE REGARDS TO RESEARCH REPORTS, UH, THE IPMC STRUCK OUT THE LANGUAGE IN RED AND REPLACED IT.
WHAT'S IN BLUE? UH, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE ITEMS. 42, 43, 44 AND 45 ARE NEW SECTIONS THAT WERE ADDED IN THE IPMC.
UM, AGAIN, IT IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT ADOPT THESE NEW SECTIONS AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENT QUESTIONS? THIS IS
[00:55:01]
THOMAS FRANKS.SO ON 46, WHY WERE WE NOT TAKING THAT OUT? IS IT SOMEWHERE ELSE? 46 IS NOT ON AT PRESENT TIME.
AND IF I MAY, JUST TO CLARIFY, SECTION 45, UM, IF 43 IS ACCEPTED, THERE IS A PREFERRED LANGUAGE THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED IT READS THEIR PERSONS LICENSE OR THE STATE OF OR PERSONS OR GROUPS.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S ONLY IF THE COMMITTEE DECIDES TO ACCEPT, UM, 43.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, I GOT A QUESTION.
UH, BEFORE WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT, MADAM CHAIR, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS FIRST, WE, WE SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO JUST, UH, NOT ADOPT THOSE PARAGRAPHS, WHICH INCLUDES OUR RECOMMENDED CHANGE BECOMES MOOT.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND YOU'RE WILLING TO WITHDRAW IF WE DO NOT ACCEPT.
UH, YEAH, THE QUESTION WAS IF YOU'RE RECOMMENDED TO NOT ADOPT THE IMPC, THEN WE ARE TAKING THIS AS A WHOLE.
SO WE REALLY CAN'T DIVIDE 43 AND SAY WE ADOPT IT BECAUSE THEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE OTHERS INDIVIDUALLY.
AND EACH, EACH SECTION TALKS ABOUT SOMETHING.
SO ONE OF THEM IS THE EVALUATION OF THE REPORT.
THE OTHER ONE, OTHER REPORTS PEER REVIEW.
SO EACH ONE IS TALKING ABOUT ONE ITEM.
I MEAN, IF YOU CHOOSE TO TALK ABOUT ONE OF THEM SPECIFICALLY, YOU CAN, BUT WE ARE LOOKING AT IT AS, AS A WHOLE, AS A, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THAT.
'CAUSE IF WE DO THAT, THEN WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND INDIVIDUALLY DISCUSS THE OTHERS OTHER THAN 43 AND 45.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION.
MADAM JUDGE THIS FRED ANDES, UH, ITEMS 41 THROUGH 45, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, PROPOSE THAT WE REJECT THE IMPC LANGUAGE OF 2024 AND KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C LANGUAGE OF 2021.
OKAY? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
WHAT WHAT, WHAT'S GOING ON BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU? IT'LL, IT WILL ELIMINATE YOUR ORIGINAL CONCERN ABOUT 43 AND 44, UH, PER SE.
UH, AND, AND WE WERE GOING TO DENY THAT, OR AT LEAST MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE DENY IT ANYWAY.
SO WE YOU TOOK CARE OF IT WITH THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE SITTING HERE LOOKING AT EACH OTHER.
LIKE, WHY'D YOU EVEN ASK THAT QUESTION
IT NEEDED TO GO ON THE RECORD.
BECAUSE IF SOMEBODY SAYS SO IF THEY'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT ONE, WHAT ARE THE OTHER? SO IT'S ON THE PUBLIC RECORD, IS THAT IT WOUND UP BEING A VERY GOOD QUESTION AND YOUR MOTION TOOK CARE OF THE ISSUE ALTOGETHER AND THE VOTE CERTAINLY TOOK CARE OF THE ISSUE.
AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU DID MOVE THAT DIRECTION.
WE HAVE ALL KINDS OF SNACKS BACK HERE.
SO IS THAT A RECOMMENDATION? JACOB BREAK SO YOU CAN GET IT.
YEAH, YOU'VE LOST CONTROL CHAIR.
GET IT? WHERE'S THE GO AHEAD, MADAM CHAIR.
I I THINK EVERYBODY NEEDS A LITTLE, UM, SNACK RIGHT NOW.
UH, LET'S DO A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
IT IS, UM,
THAT'S AN EXTRA, YOU GUYS ARE A LOT MORE SWEAT IN THE AFTERNOON, I'M TELLING YOU.
NOT UNTIL WE'VE RESTART, WHICH WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE COMING BACK TO THE, UH, SAN ANTONIO PROPERTY CODE SUBCOMMITTEE.
UH, LET'S GET STARTED ON OUR NEXT ITEM.
SO THE NEXT ITEM WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ITEM NUMBER
[01:00:01]
46.THIS IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT CAME IN.
UH, IT IS A NEW SECTION THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR THE S-A-P-M-C.
UH, IT IS A SECTION OF LIABILITY OF OWNER, AND I'LL READ THE SECTION.
UM, AN OWNER MANAGEMENT COMPANY OR AGENT OF REAL PROPERTY SHOULD NOW BE LIABLE FOR VIOLATIONS CAUSED BY A TENANT IF THE OWNER, IF NOT LATER IN THE 10TH BUSINESS DAY AFTER THE DATE OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION IS ISSUED IF THE INDIVIDUAL PROVIDES A TENANT'S NAME AND A TELEPHONE NUMBER TO THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR THE OFFICIAL SUPERIOR.
DANNY, CAN WE USE THE OTHER LANGUAGE WE SENT YOU? THE REVISED LANGUAGE? THAT'S THE ONE THAT YOU JUST EMAILED OVER THERE, BECAUSE THAT'S THE LANGUAGE AFTER WE MET.
WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE THE, UM, AND IF YOU COULD SHARE IT ON THE I AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS, THIS WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE FINAL, SO THAT'S WHY HE'S BRINGING UP IN PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION.
SO WHENEVER Y'ALL ARE READY TO TALK ABOUT THAT PUBLIC COMMENT, THEN THEY CAN ADDRESS THEIR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
YEAH, COULD YOU, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT REALLY PICKING IT UP A LITTLE.
SO THIS IS THE REVISED LANGUAGE FROM WHAT WE SENT THAT ADDRESSED A COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT WE HAD AFTER MEETING WITH THE CITY.
SO THE WHOLE SUGGESTION OF OUR, UH, SUBMITTAL IS THAT, AND IT'S BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS.
SO YOU HAVE A HOUSE THAT YOU'VE RENTED TO SOMEONE AND THE SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE YARD.
THE, THE TENANT MOWS THE YARD LIKE MOST RENT HOUSES DO.
AND THAT, AND THE OWNER ENDS UP GETTING CITED.
AND THE OWNER'S ONLY ACTION THAT THEY CAN TAKE IS, YOU KNOW, WE EVICT THE TENANT BECAUSE THEY VIOLATED THE RULES.
OR WE HAVE A COMMERCIAL APPLICATION WHERE IN THE LEASE CONTRACT THE MAINTENANCE OF ALL THE SYSTEMS AND REPAIR OTHER THAN THE ROOF AND THE FOUR WALLS OR THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TENANT OF THE BUILDING.
LIKE WE RENT A BUILDING TO GROUND LEASE A BUILDING OR RENT THE BUILDING OUT TO, UM, SEARS, YOU KNOW, NOT A GOOD EXAMPLE, BUT YOU KNOW, SEARS OR KMART OR WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT AT THAT POINT THEY MAINTAIN THE BUILDING OR WE LEASE IT TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE BUILDING.
AND CONTRACTUALLY THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN THINGS THAT I CAN DO TO STEP IN.
AND MOST OF THE TIME THAT ACTION IS EVICTION BECAUSE THEY'RE VIOLATING THE RULES.
AND SO WHAT OUR THOUGHT PROCESS WAS, IS IF WE SUBMIT A EITHER NOTARIZED STATEMENT THAT THE TENANT DID ALL THE DAMAGES, SO THAT'S CODE OFFICIAL COMES IN AND THERE'S HOLES IN THE WALL AND IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE TENANT HAS KICKED THE HOLES IN THE WALLS AND WE SEND A NOTARIZED LETTER THAT SAYS THE TENANT DID THIS DAMAGE, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAIR, OR IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE TENANT IS CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATED TO DO WHEN WE PROVIDE YOU THE NAME, THE ADDRESS, HOW TO CONTACT THEM AND EVERYTHING THAT, THAT POTENTIAL LIABILITY FOR THE CITATION IS ISSUED TO THE TENANT RATHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE BUILDING.
AND THAT'S F YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO DO ALL THIS STUFF FOR THAT LIABILITY TO TRANSFER.
IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING SIMILAR TO A STATE STATUTE THAT WAS PASSED AGAINST, YOU KNOW, HOLDING THE EMPLOYEE OF THE OWNER LIABLE.
IF WE DO THAT, AND THAT'S HOW WE FASHION THE LANGUAGE AFTER, UH, MY NAME'S, UH, MIKE RUST, I HAVE A, A SLIGHTLY SIMILAR BUT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TAKE.
SO THE WAY IT HAPPENS NOW, SO I HAVE A LARGE PORTFOLIO OF, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, THAT WE RENT OUT.
UM, 99% OF CODE VIOLATIONS THAT I WOULD GET ON.
THOSE ARE THE LAWN'S NOT MOWED.
UH, THERE'S JUNK IN THE YARD, THERE'S A CAR, YOU KNOW, PARKED IN THE GRASS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I, I GET THE, I GET THE CODE VIOLATION.
I'LL TEND TO GO TO THE MUNICIPAL COURT IF IT GOES TO CITATION.
YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY INITIALLY WE NOTIFY THE TENANT, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENT LIKE, HEY, THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON WITH YOUR PROPERTY, YOU GOTTA CLEAN IT UP.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE HESITANT TO GO ONTO SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY AND THROW AWAY WHAT THE CITY CALLS JUNK OR YOU KNOW, JUST TAKE THEIR PROPERTY OR JUST GO BEHIND THE FENCE OR DO WHAT, WHATEVER WHATEVER'S REQUIRED TO DO, UH, TO, TO COMPLY WITH THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
OBVIOUSLY I CAN'T JUST TOW A CAR.
UM, I CAN JUST GO MOW THE GRASS FORM AND CHARGE AND THAT'S FINE.
[01:05:01]
I'LL GO TO MUNICIPAL COURT IF IT GOES TO CITATION BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THE TENANT TO GET A $300 FINE, RIGHT? SO WE'LL GO, IF WE GET IT RESOLVED, I'LL GO.'CAUSE I'M THE ONE THAT'S CITED, I'M THE ONE THAT HAS TO ANSWER THE, THE, THE CITATION.
YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE ARE HAPPY TO JUST TAKE A THREE, A $300 FINE AND PASS IT ON TO THE RESIDENT.
UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, AND THEY'RE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN NOTICED THAT THERE WAS A VIOLATION, YOU KNOW, SO THEY COULD, THEY COULD END UP WITH A $300 FINE PASSED ON TO THEM FOR SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, THEY CAUSED AND DIDN'T REALLY KNOW ABOUT.
UH, THE OTHER THING IS THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, I I GUESS ON THE DAMAGES SIDE, I SLIGHTLY DISAGREE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S SOMETHING PHYSICALLY WITH THE BUILDING YEAH, THAT'S ON ME.
UM, BUT IT'S THE, IT'S THE YARD ISSUES THAT I THINK, UM, RUN IN, YOU KNOW, I RUN INTO A LITTLE PROBLEM AND THERE'S A PERSONNEL PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ASPECT TO THIS THAT I THINK IS, IS WORTH CONSIDERING.
UM, SO YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO AT THIS FORMAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'D BE HAPPY TO CLARIFY, UH, OUR COMMENTS.
IF YOU, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, IF YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE, UH, YOU OWN A, A PIECE OF REAL ESTATE, UH, UH, ON, ON A BUILDING AND YOU SIGN A CONTRACT WITH THE PERSON THAT'S GOING IN THAT BUILDING, UH, AND YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING IN YOUR CONTRACT THAT THE RENTER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING IN TERMS OF REPAIR, UH, AND YET THE NEXT OWNER NEXT DOOR HAS A CONTRACT THAT A DIFFERENT CONTRACT, UH, AND THE CITY DOES NOT KNOW OR IS NOT INVOLVED IN EITHER CONTRACT, HOW CAN THE CITY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONTRACTS ARE AND HOW CAN THE CITY DETERMINE ISSUES WITH, WITH THE CONTRACTS? IN OTHER WORDS, THE CITY IS NOT, IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE CONTRACTS.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW, UH, THE CITY SHOULD BE EVEN LOOKING AT ANYTHING OTHER THAN TO THE OWNER FOR IT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY AS A CITY TO GET INVOLVED IN THE CONTRACT, RIGHT? YOU'RE NO, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
AND THE INITIAL NOTICE WOULD CERTAINLY COME TO THE OWNER.
AND WHAT THIS DOES IS, IS PROVISIONS A PROACTIVE RESPONSE FROM THE OWNER TO THE CITY THAT SAYS, YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE CONTRACT THAT SAYS THIS IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TENANT.
UM, THIS IS THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION AND REQUEST, REQUEST THAT YOU SEND IT ON TO THEM.
AND ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE STATEMENT WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN IN THAT LETTER TO THE CITY SAYING THAT THE TENANT'S RESPONSIBLE, MOST OWNERS WOULD POINT OUT IN THE CONTRACT WHERE IT IS.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, WE, WE LEASE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE ALSO, AND IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE CONTRACTS, THE TENANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE AIR CONDITIONING, MAINTAINING THE PLUMBING, MAINTAINING THE FLOOR.
WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOUR WALLS AND THE ROOF.
AND AS TO MIKE'S EXAMPLE OF JUNK IN THE DEAL IN THE YARD, WE'RE NOT GONNA GO INTO THE YARD AND THROW ANYTHING AWAY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR A LAWSUIT AGAINST US THAT WE THREW THE TENANT'S PROPERTY AWAY AND UNDER THE PROPERTY CODE, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GO DISPOSE OF TENANT PROPERTY THAT'S STORED OUTSIDE.
ALL WE CAN DO IS SEND THE, TO THE RESIDENT A LETTER SAYING, WE GOT CITED BY THE CITY.
AND IF THEY DON'T, OUR ONLY RECOURSE AT THAT POINT IS TO EVICT THE TENANT.
SO I, I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS HERE.
UM, FIRST, THAT'S NOT YOUR ONLY RECOURSE.
UM, I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN ADD THIS IN WITHOUT OVERSTEPPING OUR BOUNDARIES BECAUSE THIS IS CIVIL LITIGATION.
YOUR CONTRACT, YOUR LEASE, UH, WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS WHAT IS ALL DECIDED AT THE JP COURT NOT HERE.
UM, THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE IS, IS STRAIGHT TO THE OWNER BECAUSE IT IS YOUR PROPERTY.
ULTIMATELY, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT REGARDLESS OF WHO YOUR RENTERS ARE.
AND I DO ALSO WANT TO ADD IN THERE THAT THIS OPENS UP SO MUCH ABUSE.
I HAVE SEEN SO MANY RENTERS WHOSE LANDLORDS ARE TRYING TO GET THEM TO SIGN SOMETHING LIKE THIS INTO THE LEASE AND THE PROPERTY IS WELL BEYOND WHAT IT SHOULD BE ON REPAIRS.
AND THEY WANT THE RENTERS TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT.
I HAVE ALSO SEEN CASES WHERE THE, IT IS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND IT'S 20-YEAR-OLD AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM THAT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED, AND THEY WANT THE RENTER TO REPLACE IT, THAT'S NOT THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.
SO THIS, I, I REALLY DO NOT SEE HOW WE CAN PUT THIS IN LEGALLY OR EVEN MORALLY SPEAKING.
SO LOOKING AT THIS FROM A RESIDENTIAL ASPECT AND THEN A COMMERCIAL ASPECT, OKAY? SO I'M GONNA PICK ON THE LARGEST CONVENIENCE STORE, UH, IN THE WORLD, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
[01:10:01]
SO YOU WOULD BE MAKING A, SAY, CONVENIENCE STORE, RIGHT? A, A TENTATIVE OF THEIRS RESPONSE, BEING ABLE TO BE PUSHED TO PAY FOR SOMETHING, RIGHT? WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTRACTS.
YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING, RIGHT? SO IN MY OPINION, IF I READ THIS, IF FRED IS MY TENANT, AND THE CITY DOESN'T KNOW THAT, WE ALSO HAVE A MEP CONTRACT.
SO HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE TAKING CARE OF, SAY, HVAC, RIGHT? AND IT'S A SUBSIDIARY OR SIDE HOW I CAN TRICK THE CITY INTO MAKING HIM PAY FOR MY BILL.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I'VE SEEN IT MULTIPLE TIMES.
AND I THINK THE BEST SCENARIO IS SIMON PROPERTY GROUP VERSUS JC PENNEY'S.
UH, SIMON PROPERTY GROUP HAD SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR TO THIS IN THEIR CONTRACT AND TRIED TO TAKE JC PENNEY'S HERE, ACTUALLY IN SAN ANTONIO OVER A CHILLER SYSTEM.
UM, I THINK WE WOULD OPEN UP A LOT OF WORMS WITH THIS.
LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION, OR LET ME MAKE THIS STATEMENT FIRST.
IF I'M A SLUMLORD, AND WE SEE SOME PEOPLE COME IN HERE THAT HAVE SLUMLORDS OUTSIDE THE STATE, SO THAT OPENS UP A VERY BIG PANDORA'S BOX FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT TAKING CARE OF THE PROPERTY ALREADY, BUT NOW DUMPS IT ON THE RENTER.
THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE ASKING US TO PUT NO, AND LEGALLY WE CAN'T ENFORCE A CONTRACT.
WHAT THE RULING IS UP HERE IS QUAD JUDICIAL, AND WE HAVE TO DO THE LAY OF THE LAND.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO OWNS IT, AS LONG AS IT COMES WITHIN AND THEY FIX TO CODE.
NOW THE CITY GOES OUT TO PROPERTIES.
THEY DON'T ASK WHEN, WHEN WE DO AN ABATEMENT, THEY PICK THE STUFF UP AND PUT IT IN THE DUMPSTER AND MOVE ON BECAUSE THEY HAD AN ORDER OF 10 DAYS TO CLEAR IT.
IF THEY DIDN'T, THEY GET ANOTHER VISIT AND THEY GET ANOTHER.
AND THEN IF THEY END UP IN A COURT OR THE CITY ORDERS AN ABATEMENT, THEY TELL US, WELL, WE ORDERED AN ABATEMENT.
THE CITY DOESN'T PICK THROUGH.
WHAT DO YOU WANT? WHAT DO YOU DON'T WANT? IF YOU OWN PROPERTY AND YOU WANNA RENT IT, YOU TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF ANY DAMAGES, YOU CAN TAKE IT OUT OF THE RENT OR ACTUALLY OUT OF THE, WHAT'S THE ONE THEY HOLD OFF THE YEAH, I'M, UH, THE, WHEN THEY TAKE THE MONEY AND THEY SET IT ASIDE.
OKAY, WELL, SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
YOU'RE GOING INTO, YOU'RE DUMPING THAT ON THE ACTUAL RENTER THAT IN SOME CASES CAN BARELY AFFORD TO PAY RENT ALREADY.
BUT YOU'RE GOING IN THE WEEDS A LITTLE BIT THERE ON, ON, ON THE CIVIL SIDE OF LITIGATION.
LIKE WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO.
THE JP JUDGE IS ABLE TO DO MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE THINGS.
THEY CAN, UH, ORDER YOU TO, UH, ORDER THE TENANT TO COMPLY.
THEY CAN ORDER THE TENANT TO DO THE WORK THEY CAN, BUT YOU HAVE, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF, ESPECIALLY SELF-HELP FORMS ONLINE WHERE YOU JUST GO LOOK IT UP AND YOU FILL IT IN FOR YOUR TENANT, AND YOU TAKE IT OVER TO THE JP AND THE JUDGE WILL SIGN OFF ON IT, AND THERE YOU GO.
BUT THAT'S ALL OUTSIDE OF THIS AREA, RIGHT? AND WE CAN'T EXPECT OUR CODE OFFICERS TO, UH, PRACTICE LAW.
THEY CAN'T READ CONTRACTS AND JUST MAKE A DECISION.
RIGHT? I JUST, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT, WHAT IT IS WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE.
RIGHT? UM, NO ONE'S SAYING THAT THE FULL MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY GOES ONTO THE TENANT.
THE BURDEN OF THE PROOF, BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE LANDLORD TO PROVE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING, AND AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU MOVED IN, THERE WAS NO JUNK IN THE YARD, AND NOW THERE'S JUNK IN THE YARD.
THAT'S CLEARLY NOT A, NOT A SLUM.
LORD, SLOUGHING OFF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF, OF CITIZENS IN THE CITY, RIGHT? UM, AND SO IF THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON ME TO PROVE THAT IT WAS IN GOOD CONDITION, AND THE TENANT IS THE ONE THAT PUT IT IN BAD CONDITION, AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT WEAR AND TEAR OF AN AC SYSTEM, IF THE AC SYSTEM GOES OUT, THAT'S CLEARLY AN OWNERSHIP RESPONSIBILITY.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY MORE NARROWLY TE NARROWLY TAILORED, UM, THAN THE CONVERSATION HAS KIND OF LED TO.
UH, BUT AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, IT'S YOUR BOARD AT YOUR PURVIEW.
I'M HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, EXPLAIN OUR REASONING.
AND THERE IS PRECEDENCE TO GO INTO THE CITY.
YOU KNOW, THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE THAT WE'LL HEAR ABOUT SOON, YOU KNOW, HAS BUILT IN A METHOD OF COMMUNICATING FROM THE RECIPIENT OF A VIOLATION TO THE CITY, UH, TO DISCUSS AND PRESENT EVIDENCE OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO THIS ISN'T COMPLETELY OUTTA BOUNDS.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ASKING THE CITY TO, TO THE CITY INSPECTORS TO MITIGATE ANYTHING.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON ME, UM, FOR VERY SPECIFIC CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND NOT A BLANKET.
UM, IF IT'S RENTAL PROPERTY, I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF DEFENDING SLUMLORDS.
UM, THIS IS, THIS IS A VERY NARROWLY
[01:15:01]
TAILORED, UM, THING.SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AND, AND THAT IS CORRECT, BUT IT, IT, IT'S REALLY UP TO CODE.
UM, THE STUFF DOESN'T COME BEFORE US BEFORE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS, AND THAT BURDEN OF PROOF CAN BE SHOWN RIGHT AFTER THE VIOLATION.
BUT I, WE HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS.
I KNOW PROBABLY EVERYBODY WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.
UM, BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND.
I'VE SEEN, AND I'M SURE MY TEAM SEEN BAD TENANTS, AND WE'VE SEEN BAD LANDLORDS.
SO IT'S, IT'S, I'M NOT AGAINST ONE OR I'M NOT AGAINST THE OTHER.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, AND I'M, I'M SURE SAVITA WILL TALK ABOUT THIS, BY LAW IN TEXAS, THE OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR PROPERTY AND THEIR PREMISE.
IF THERE IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE LANDLORD AND THE TENANT, AGAIN, THAT'S A CONTRACTUAL THING.
AND IF YOU WANNA HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO SHOW THAT THE TENANT DID SOMETHING WRONG OR DIDN'T DO SOMETHING THEY SHOULD DO, THAT'S BETWEEN YOU AND THE TENANT, BETWEEN YOU AND THE COURT, NOT REALLY CODE ENFORCEMENT OR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO.
SO BASICALLY THAT, THAT'S WHY WE ARE SAYING WE RECOMMEND NOT TO APPROVE THIS.
UM, BUT I KNOW JENNY WANNA SAY SOMETHING AND PROBABLY SAVITA AFTER.
YEAH, I ALSO, YEAH, THIS IS JENNY.
UM, THE TWO THINGS I JUST WANTED TO DEFINITELY POINT OUT IS, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T TECHNICALLY SUPPORT THIS SECTION BECAUSE IT WOULD SEEM TO BE A BLANKET SECTION FOR THE ENTIRE SECTION OF S-A-P-M-C, AND THEN WE DON'T BELIEVE IT'S ALSO NECESSARY BECAUSE THE CHAPTERS INDIVIDUALLY DO SPEAK TO RESPONSIBILITY.
EACH CHAPTER, CHAPTER THREE, CHAPTER FOUR, WHEN YOU GET INTO THE LIGHT, WHEN YOU GET INTO MECHANICAL CHAPTER FIVE, CHAPTER SEVEN FOR FIRE REQUIREMENTS, IT DOES BREAK OUT.
CHAPTER THREE SPECIFICALLY DOES ALREADY INCLUDE OCCUPANT CAN BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EXTERIOR OR THE PART OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH O OCCUPY, WHICH THE OCCUPANT IS IN CARE AND CONTROL OF FOR KEEPING IT SANITARY AND CLEAN.
SO THOSE THINGS WE BELIEVE ARE, ARE, ARE PRETTY, UM, CLEARLY ALREADY, UH, NOTATED OF WHO CAN BE HELD RESPONSIBLE BASED ON WHAT THEY HAVE CARE AND CONTROL OVER.
AND WE BELIEVE WE, WE, WE HAVE THAT AUTHORITY ALREADY, VERSUS TRYING TO PUT IT AT THE VERY FRONT AND MAKING A BLANKET STATEMENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
WE DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY PRACTICAL OR ENFORCEABLE FOR WHAT WE WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING.
CAN I JUST ASK A FOLLOW UP FROM YOU? YES.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE TENANT IS IN CARRYING CONTROL OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AND RESPONSIBLE FOR MOWING THE YARD, BASED UPON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, JENNY, IS, CAN YOU MOVE THE MIC UP? YEAH.
WHAT, WHAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS THAT IF THE TENANT IS IN CON CARE AND CONTROL OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, THEY RENT IT, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE YARD MAINTENANCE AND ALL THAT STUFF, THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO BEGIN, BASED UPON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, TO CITE THE TENANT FOR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN THE YARD OR LEAVING JUNK OUT IN THE YARD RATHER THAN US.
AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BEGIN.
THEY'VE ALWAYS BEEN DOING THAT.
SO UNDER CHAPTER THREE, THE TENANT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE, SIDEWALKS, WEEDS, ROAD AND HARBOR BRIDGE, ET CETERA.
AND SO THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN, UH, THE WAY CODE HAS CITED.
NOW, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, IF IT'S A VACANT HOME AND THERE'S NO TENANT IN THERE, THEN OF COURSE IT'S GONNA BE THE OWNER WHO'S GOING TO BE CITED AT THAT POINT.
YEAH, IT'S NOT, THAT'S FUNCTIONALLY, I MEAN, THAT'S FUNCTION'S HAPPENING.
WELL, IT, IT'S IN THE, UH, S-A-P-M-C ALREADY.
UH, LEGALLY IT WOULD BE PROVIDING A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LATTER PORTIONS OF THE S-A-P-M-C.
I WAS JUST GONNA ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOTHING WRITTEN IN THIS, IN THE CODE THAT, UH, WOULD PERMIT THE CODE OFFICIAL TO ASSESS WHO'S AT FAULT OR AT GUILT FOR ANY DAMAGE WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
WE HEARD EARLIER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TENANT, UH, OBVIOUSLY KICKED HOLES IN THE WALL.
THERE'S NO WAY A CODE OFFICIAL WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT AND THAT DETERMINATION.
SO RIGHT, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, UM, OWNERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THE BSB TO PROVE THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE THAT, AND THAT WOULD BE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
UM, SO JUST TO ANSWER THAT, THE, THE STATEMENT, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE FINDING, FINDING THAT YOU WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THIS, THEN, UH, IT'S IMPORTANT TO, UH, REQUEST THAT HEARING WITH THE BSB SO THAT YOU CAN COME IN.
[01:20:01]
AS FAR AS THIS ITEM HERE, I'M READY FOR A MOTION.I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ITEM 46 TO, UH, FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF NOT MAKING THIS MODIFICATION.
AND THE 2021 S-A-P-M-C DWAY NELSON.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS RED HAND.
I SECOND, I'M GETTING OVER ANY DISCUSSION? FRED DID SECOND IT? YES, FRED WAS A SECOND.
THANK YOU FOR DISCUSSING THAT.
HONOR, WE STILL NEED TO ADDRESS THE SUBMITTED PUBLIC COMMENT.
I MEAN, IT'S THE SAME, OH, YEAH.
DOWN ITEM NUMBER 46, BUT NOT THAT YOU SUBMIT IT, MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD, UH, LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT REAL QUICK.
SO, GENTLEMEN, SO ON, ON YOUR, UH, ACCUSATION OF YOU ALL GETTING FINES, IT WASN'T AN ACCUSATION.
YOU, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT GETTING FINES, PLEASE APPEAL THOSE TO THE BSB IF MM-HMM.
IF THAT HAPPENS, AND THANK YOU.
TYPICALLY, WE, WE GET IT SOLVED AT THE MUNICIPAL COURT LEVEL, AND, AND IF THE JUDGE PUTS A PENALTY ON, WE JUST, WE PASS IT ALONG.
UM, YOU KNOW, MY, MY THING WAS, IT, IT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SAY THE CITY HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.
AND SO THIS WAS AN OUTLET FOR THAT, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING THAT.
ARE WE READY FOR THE NEXT ITEM? YES, MADAM CHAIR.
THE NEXT ITEM NUMBER 47, UH, IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
UH, IT WOULD BE A REVISION TO THE EXISTING S-A-P-M-C.
UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE WORKING DOCK, THERE, UH, EXCLUDES OR THEY STRICKEN OUT THE, UM, UH, THE LANGUAGE IN RED, UM, WHICH READS, UH, WHEN A NOTICE IS PROVIDED UNDER THIS SECTION, THE CODE OFFICIAL MAY INFORM THE OWNER THAT IF THE OWNER COMMITS ANOTHER VIOLATION OF THE SAME SUBSECTION OF THIS SEC, OF THIS CODE ON, OR BEFORE THE SECOND ANNIVERSARY OF THE DATE OF NOTICE, THE CITY WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE MAY PROCEED WITH THE PERSECUTION OF SAID VIOLATION.
UM, AND IN REGARDS TO THAT, THERE IS A COMMENT THAT WAS, UM, AND I, I, I BELIEVE THE, UH, GENTLEMAN HERE WILL SPEAK TO IT AS, AS WELL.
BUT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADOPT SOMETHING SIMILAR, UH, IF THE CITY HAS ADOPTED IT TO ENFORCE THE PROACTIVE APARTMENT INSPECTION PROGRAM, UH, WHICH REQUIRES INDIVIDUAL NOTICE FOR EACH VIOLATION EACH TIME WE GO OUT AND INSPECT THE PROPERTY.
AND SO, YEAH, I CAN SPEAK TO THIS.
I WAS GONNA SAY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER WITH WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
SO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW IS, UM, IF YOU HAVE A VIOLATION AND THEN YOU CURE IT OR DON'T CURE, WHATEVER HAPPENS WITHIN TWO YEARS, IF THAT VIOLATION RECURS, THEY DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOU A VIOLATION NOTICE, THEY JUST GO STRAIGHT TO GIVING YOU A CITATION.
UM, IN THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE, THAT'S IS A, UH, ARTICLE OF CHAPTER SIX.
UH, MARK AND I AND OTHER PEOPLE WORKED ON A COUPLE, YOU KNOW, A FEW YEARS AGO, UM, IN THAT IS A SPECIFIC, UM, REFERENCE THAT SAYS THAT IS NOT APPLICABLE FOR ANYTHING THAT IS INVOLVED IN THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE.
BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE STAKES OF THAT PROGRAM, EVERY VIOLATION NEEDS TO, YOU NEED TO HAVE A CHANCE TO RECEIVE A VIOLATION NOTICE AND BE GIVEN A CHANCE TO ADDRESS IT BEFORE THE CITATION IS ISSUED.
UM, WE THINK THAT THAT'S A METHOD THAT SHOULD BE APPLICABLE TO THE ENTIRE CITY, NOT JUST TO APARTMENT OWNERS.
UM, THAT'S ONE, ONE PIECE OF IT.
SECOND PIECE OF IT IS JUST KIND OF A, A FAIRNESS THING.
UM, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT IN YOUR PERSONAL HOME, IF, UM, YOU, AND YOU KNOW HOW IT WORKS IN, IN TEXAS, IN THE, IN THE SPRING SUMMER, IT'S GONNA BE REALLY HOT.
IT'S GONNA RAIN FIVE INCHES OVERNIGHT, AND TWO DAYS LATER YOU'VE GOT WEEDS THAT ARE KNEE HIGH, UM, UNDER THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.
NOW, THE CITY CAN COME BY AND SEE THAT GIVE YOU A VIOLATION.
NOTICE YOU MOW THE GRASS WHEN YOU GET HOME AND SEE IT TWO YEARS LATER.
IF THAT SAME THING HAPPENS AGAIN, RATHER THAN GET A VIOLATION NOTICE AND HAVE A CHANCE TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, THEY CAN JUST IMMEDIATELY GIVE YOU A CITATION.
UM, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE IN MY WORLD WHERE THIS HAPPENS WITHIN OUR, OUR APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, YOU KNOW, APARTMENT COMMUNITY DUMPSTERS ARE PUBLIC DUMPSTERS ESSENTIALLY, RIGHT? UM, EVERY MONDAY WE COME INTO WORK AND, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY OVER THE WEEKEND HAS DUMPED ALL THEIR STUFF IN FRONT OF OUR DUMPSTER.
IF THE INSPECTOR DRIVES BY AND SEES THAT, YOU KNOW, I GET A VIOLATION, UH, WITHIN TWO YEARS, IF HE SEES IT AGAIN, I GET A CITATION.
AND THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ME MULTIPLE TIMES WHERE I JUST, I WAKE UP TO A CITATION FOR A DUMPSTER ISSUE THAT I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO CURE, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I DEAL WITH LITERALLY EVERY WEEK.
UM, SO YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE IS NOT SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR US, BUT I THINK IT'S FAIRNESS FOR THE, FOR THE ENTIRE CITY, THAT IF THERE'S A VIOLATION,
[01:25:01]
UM, YOU GET A CHANCE TO GET THE VIOLATION NOTICE AND, AND CORRECT IT.UM, SO THAT, THAT, THAT'S WHY WE ASKED FOR THIS ONE, THANK ANY ON THIS.
WHAT, WHERE'S IT WRITTEN TO GO WITH WHAT HE'S SAYING?
SO THAT IS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
SO THIS SECTION ALREADY EXISTS IN THE S-A-P-M-C.
THEIR AMENDMENT IS TO PROPOSE THAT THEY STRIKE OUT, OR WE STRIKE OUT RATHER WHAT'S IN RED, WHICH IS BASICALLY THE, UM, WHAT WE CALL THE ANNUAL NOTICE OR THE TWO YEAR NOTICE FOR, UH, PMC VIOLATIONS.
UH, JUST FOR THE TASK FORCE'S BENEFIT, I JUST WANNA REMIND Y'ALL THAT, UM, THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE, UH, 3 42, I BELIEVE, I DON'T HOLD ME TO THAT, I WILL VERIFY, BUT, UH, IT'S IN THE STATE STATUTE ABOUT THE ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY.
AND SO WE WOULD BE CONTRADICTING STATE STATUTE IF WE DECIDED TO GO A A DIFFERENT ROUTE.
CAN THERE BE A CLAUSE ADDED TO THIS TO ALLOW THE CODE OFFICIAL TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ON IT? I, I'M GONNA GO BACK TO LIKE THE GARBAGE.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE SEE THAT ALL THE TIME.
I MEAN, WHEN I WAS IN AN APARTMENT, WE WOULD SEE THAT, IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW, YOU KNOW, A PROVISION OR SOMETHING FOR THEM TO GET OUT OF HAVING TO GET FINED AGAIN? YEAH.
LIKE IF WE CAN ADD IN, UM, UM, A NOTICE AND THEN SAY THAT IF IT'S CURED WITHIN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT CAN BE CANCELED, WELL, BUT THAT'S WHAT THE CURRENT PROCESS IS.
YOU WOULD BE ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CURE IT, AND IF YOU CURED IT BEFORE THE 10 DAY PERIOD, YOU WOULDN'T GET THIS, WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW.
AND IT, AND IT'S NOT WHAT I CALL EQUALLY APPLIED BY EVERY CODE OFFICIAL OR IS THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME WILL JUST ISSUE THE CITATION BECAUSE THEY DID IT FOUR MONTHS AGO.
BUT IN THE DUMPSTER ISSUE THAT MIKE GAVE, THAT IT'S A DAILY PROBLEM.
IN OTHER WORDS, OUR DUMPSTERS BECOME THE CITY DUMPSTERS, AND IT'S NOT PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING IN THE APARTMENT, IT'S PEOPLE THAT JUST DRIVE UP.
I MEAN, ROOFING CONTRACTORS, PEOPLE THAT ARE CLEARING BRUSH, YOU KNOW, THEY END UP IN FRONT OF OUR DUMPSTERS AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S PART OF OUR PROCESS OF CLEANING IT UP EVERY DAY.
BUT IF THE CODE OFFICIAL COMES THERE AT NINE OR 10 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING BEFORE WE HAVE A CHANCE TO GET IT ALL CLEANED UP BECAUSE WE'RE HANDLING EMERGENCIES INSIDE APARTMENTS FOR THE WEEKEND, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST NOT FAIR.
HOW OFTEN DOES A CODE OFFICIAL COME OUT? LIKE, DO YOU HAVE ANY DATA BEHIND THAT OR ANY MONETARY AMOUNT OF HOW MUCH IT'S COST FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT? WELL, I, WE COULD PROBABLY GET DATA.
I MEAN, I DIDN'T COME HERE WITH DATA.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT I ALWAYS GO TO THE MUNICIPAL COURT AND GET IT WAIVED, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT'S, UH, THAT'S TIME THAT'S VALUABLE TO ME AND, UM, AND OTHER PEOPLE.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE DATA TO GIVE YOU.
UM, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A ONE OFF
SO BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID, DOES THAT MEAN THAT OUR APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE IS BY CONTRARY TO, TO STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO, THAT THAT REQUIRES A, A VIOLATION NOTICE FOR EVERY, FOR EVERYONE? I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE AS IT WAS SPECIFICALLY, UH, WRITTEN, BUT, UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WAS ALREADY, UH, REVIEWED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY WHO WAS SITTING WITH Y'ALL DURING THE PROCESS, AND THAT IT WAS DETERMINED TO BE FINE UNDER A HOME RULE AUTHORITY.
WHAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT IS WE CREATED THE, UH, THE PAP UNDER HOME RULE AUTHORITY, WHEREAS THE S-A-P-M-C IS PURSUANT TO STATE STATUTE AND ALSO TO THE INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
AND SO OUR LANGUAGE WITH SAMHSA NEEDS TO BE IN LINE WITH A STATE STATUTE, WHEREAS A PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE WAS CREATED UNDER HOME RULE AUTHORITY.
I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD THINK THAT WE NEED TO SEE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO MODIFY IT.
ONE SETS THE MAXIMUM TERM OF WHAT YOU CAN DO.
THE OTHER IS WE'RE NOT GONNA FIND YOU IF THIS HAPPENS.
I I JUST THINK IT'S INHERENTLY FAIR THAT BEFORE YOU GET ZAPPED WITH A 300 OR $500 FEE, OR HAVE TO GO TO THE COURT, YOU AT LEAST HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THAT YOU HAVE A PROBLEM.
I MEAN, AND, AND IT, IT APPLIES TO HOMEOWNERS, JUST LIKE IT DOES US AS SOMEBODY TOILET PAPER PAPER'S, YOUR YARD ONCE AND TWO YEARS LATER IT GETS TOILET PAPERED AGAIN AND THE CODE
[01:30:01]
OF FISH, SOME NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP COMPLAINS TO THE CITY, AND THE CITY COMES OUT AND THEY JUST ISSUE A CITATION.YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S INHERENTLY NOT FAIR.
AND SO YOU SHOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CURE.
WE'RE NOT, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO MAKE YOU THE POLICE FOR THE PERSON WHO DOESN'T MOW THE LAWN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT, THERE'S OTHER AVENUES TO TAKE.
THIS IS JUST, YOU KNOW, TWO YEARS IS AN AWFULLY LONG TIME, YOU KNOW, TO, TO BE ABLE TO BE ON THE HOOK WITHOUT GETTING NOTICE.
LET ME, LET ME, LET ME JUST CLARIFY REAL QUICK.
IT'S, UM, WHERE ARE WE GETTING THE TWO YEARS? UH, I KNOW IT'S, IT'S IN THERE, UM, BUT UNDER 3 42 IS ONE YEAR.
AND SO, UH, PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND.
WELL, THE WAY THIS READS SECOND ANNIVERSARY WOULD BE, TODAY'S THE FIRST DATE, FIRST ANNIVERSARY IS A YEAR FROM NOW.
SECOND ANNIVERSARY IS TWO YEARS FROM NOW.
IT SAYS THE SECOND ANNIVERSARY OF THE DATE OF THE NOTICE.
AND, AND ALSO JUST LIKE AN EXAMPLE IN D FIVE, WE HAD A, A LOT OF, UH, OLDER HOUSING STOCK TO BEGIN WITH.
AND THEN WE HAVE A LOT OF ELDERLY, UM, FOLKS THAT CAN'T GET OUT THERE AND MOW THE LAWN EVERY SINGLE TIME.
AND AGAIN, LIKE THE, THE EXPLANATION OF THE, WE GET THE HEAVY RAINS AND EVERYTHING POPS UP REALLY FAST.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE THE SAME ISSUE WITH A LOT OF OUR, OUR, OUR FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT CAN'T GET OUTSIDE TO CUT THE GRASS AND THEY'RE WAITING ON THE ONE TO COME DO IT.
AND THAT, THAT TIMEFRAME GETS THEM VIOLATION ADDITION.
AND, UH, IT, IT COULD BE A STAFF QUESTION OR LEGAL QUESTION OR, I, I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS APARTMENTS THAT YOU GUYS KEEP REFERRING TO.
ALRIGHT? THIS IS NOT JUST AN APARTMENT.
THIS IS FOR PEOPLE, THE PRIVATE CITIZEN NEXT TO YOU IN A PRIVATE HOME THAT YOU'RE ASKING TO APPLY THE SAME RULES AND THEY DON'T HAVE THEM IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES.
RIGHT? WELL, SO I, I HAVE SINGLE FAMILY POOL FILL AND, AND, AND APARTMENTS.
WELL, LET, LET ME, I USE APARTMENTS, BUT LET ME, LET ME GO THROUGH.
SO ACTUALLY FRED, I'M GONNA CUT YOU OFF FOR JUST A SECOND.
ALRIGHT? 'CAUSE THIS MIGHT RESOLVE, IT IS, I WOULD REQUEST THAT THE TASK FORCE TABLE THIS YES.
SO I CAN RESEARCH IT A LITTLE MORE, UH, BECAUSE THEY DO BRING UP A GOOD POINT.
AND ALSO I HAVE A CONCERN IF WE DID GO TO TWO YEARS WHEN THE STATE STATUTE, UH, SPECIFICALLY STATES ONE YEAR.
I AGREE WITH YOU, CHAIR BOY NELSON.
I MOVE WE TABLE ITEM NUMBER 47.
I THOUGHT WE SHOULD TABLE IT JUST BECAUSE THERE'S INCONSISTENCIES ACROSS, UM, THE DOCUMENTS EVEN INSIDE THE ITS OWN, UM, MM-HMM.
AND, AND, AND I JUST, I REMEMBER THE S-A-P-M-C LAST ROUNDS, WE HAD A LOT OF COMMENTS TRYING TO GET THIS LOWERED OR CHANGED.
AND HERE WE ARE AGAIN ASKING THE SAME THING.
LET'S, LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO SO THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT GETTING AN AUTOMATIC FINE.
THEY ARE LIKE, I, I KNOW PER PEOPLE PERSONALLY THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED TO.
THEY ARE GETTING THAT FINE WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF LIKE NOTICE.
WELL, THAT COULD BE BECAUSE THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES.
AYE, ANY OF ANY OF THOSE? OKAY.
THIS, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN TABLED.
THE NEXT ITEM WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ITEM NUMBER 48.
IT IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, WITH REVISION TO THE S-A-P-M-C.
FORMS SPECIFICALLY IS, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO SUBSECTION NUMBER TWO.
AND, AND I'LL READ THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE HERE, WHICH MEANS INCLUDING THE EFFECTIVE DWELLING UNIT AND OR BUILDING IF APPLICABLE.
BASICALLY, MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO, AGAIN, TO MIRROR, UH, WHAT WE DID FOR THE APARTMENT, UH, ORDINANCE WHERE WE WERE ALREADY MORE DESCRIPTIVE ON WHERE THE VIOLATION ACTUALLY WAS OCCURRING AND WHICH SPECIFICALLY WHICH BUILDING AND WHICH UNIT, UH, IN THIS CASE.
SO, UH, WE ARE OKAY WITH THAT PROPOSED LANGUAGE, AND WE WOULD BE OKAY WITH ACCEPTING AN AMENDING R-S-A-P-M-C TO READ SUCH AND TO INPUT LEGAL.
UM, THE COURTS ALSO ASK US TO PROVIDE THIS WHEN WE DO GO TO COURT.
SO, UH, THIS WOULD BE BENEFICIAL.
[01:35:03]
WE AGREE.UM, YOU KNOW, I I, I'VE GONE INTO SEVERAL DIFFERENT APARTMENT BUILDINGS AROUND, UH, MY AREA, AND I CAN TELL YOU IT IS A PAIN IN THE NECK TO FIGURE OUT WHICH BUILDING GOES TO WHAT APARTMENT NUMBER.
UH, SOME APARTMENTS, UH, ARE REALLY GOOD ABOUT HAVING A DIRECTORY OUT RIGHT OUT IN FRONT WHEN YOU COME IN.
MAKES IT EASY TO, TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
UH, BUT OTHERS, ESPECIALLY THE SMALLER ONES, UH, AREN'T READILY IDENTIFIABLE.
UH, WHICH APARTMENT DWELLING NUMBER IT IS, WHETHER IT'S NUMBERED OR USING ALPHA, AND YOU NEVER KNOW WHERE THEY'RE GOING, CLOCKWISE, COUNTERCLOCKWISE, IT'S NOT EASY TO TO, TO FIGURE IT OUT.
SO I, I'D JUST BE CAUTIOUS HERE ON THIS.
WAS THAT A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION? I, WELL, I CAN MAKE A MOTION.
CAN I ANSWER WHY IT'S IMPORTANT? I MEAN, THIS IS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT'S REQUIRED NOW IN THE CITY CODE AS FAR AS THE INSPECTION ORDINANCE WE GET, WE USED TO GET CITATIONS THAT SAID TOILET BACKED UP.
AND SO THIS IS JUST REQUIRING THAT WHERE IT'S EASILY IDENTIFIABLE INSIDE A UNIT.
THEY LIST THE UNIT NUMBER SO WE KNOW WHERE TO GO TO FIX IT.
OR IF IT'S A SEWER BACKUP, YOU KNOW, AND YOU HAVE A 20 ACRE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW WHERE THAT IS.
AND THE CITY IS DOING THIS PRETTY MUCH ALREADY.
AND SO WE JUST THINK THE S-A-P-M-C SHOULD MIRROR WHAT THEY'RE HAVING TO DO REGARDLESS FOR THE OTHER ORDINANCE.
AND IT'S THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY.
AND THEN THE OTHER POINT IS, YOU KNOW, THE CODE SECTION AND TELLING YOU WHAT'S WRONG VERSUS SOME QUICK THICK NOTE THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND THE CITY HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB OF DOING THIS FOR THE INSPECTION ORDINANCE WHEN THEY DO APARTMENT INSPECTIONS, AND THEY SHOULD PROBABLY DO THAT EVERYWHERE.
SO GENERAL CITIZENS KNOW WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO FIX WITHOUT HAVING TO GO, YOU KNOW, SEARCH THE CODE, WHICH, IF YOU'RE NOT EDUCATED IN IT CAN BE A PROCESS ALL THE OF ITSELF.
AND MADAM CHAIR, CAN I JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT? SO JOELLE, YOU, YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THIS IS GOOD BECAUSE TO APARTMENTS AND YOUR MIC'S NOT WORKING.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? OKAY, SO JUST TO YOUR COMMENT, THIS IS ONLY FOR OUR NOTICE WHEN WE ISSUE A NOTICE ABOUT A VIOLATION TO GIVE THEM THE BUILDING NUMBER, THE UNIT NUMBER, SO THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT MARK SAID.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T GIVE HIM, THERE'S A VIOLATION AND YOU HAVE 200 UNITS, WHICH ONE YOU GONNA CHECK.
SO YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT YOU WALK INTO AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHICH BUILDING YOU'RE IN, WHICH UNIT, BECAUSE THE NUMBERS ARE ALL OVER THE PLACE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, JUST RAISING THAT AS A CONCERN FOR THE, UM, MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE PROPOSAL.
I WAS GONNA, UH, GO AHEAD, MR. MEREDITH.
UH, LET ME ASK ONE QUESTION FIRST BEFORE I MAKE THE AMENDMENT OR THE PROPOSAL.
UM, WITH 48, CAN WE ALSO GO WITH 49? YES.
I WAS GONNA, WOULD THAT SUGGEST MAYBE DO AT THE SAME TIME, IF WE COULD BEFORE WE MAKE THE MOTION, I CAN READ INTO THE RECORD NUMBER 49 AS WELL, IF THAT'S OKAY, IF MADAM CHAIR'S OKAY WITH IT.
UH, YES, GO AHEAD AND READ THAT.
SO YEAH, SO ITEM 49, UH, DOES PERTAIN TO THE SAME SECTION 1 0 7 0.2.
IT IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT AS WELL IN REGARDS TO THE FORM.
UH, IT'S BE INCLUDING SOME LANGUAGE AS I'LL READ OUT LOUD HERE TO SUBSECTION NUMBER THREE, WHICH IT BASICALLY SAYS, INCLUDING THE APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS AND A DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE VIOLATION.
UH, WE WERE OKAY WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION AS WELL WHEN, UH, ADDING IT TO THE S-A-P-M-C.
UM, WAS THERE ANY COMMENT ON THIS PORTION OF THE SECTION? NO.
MR. S, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR MOTION.
UH, MADAM CHAIR, I MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT 40 LINE, 48 AND 49 BOTH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
UH, MADAM CHAIR, IF WE COULD, CAN WE LOOK AT ITEMS 50 AND 51, UH, TOGETHER? UH, BOTH ARE, UM, EXTERNAL AMENDMENTS.
UM, PROPOSED LANGUAGE TO SEC, SEC RATHER.
UH, IN THE WORKING DOC, YOU'LL SEE, UM, THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE IS TO STRIKE OUT, UM, ITEM NUMBER ONE, DELIVERED PERSONALLY OR AND REPLACED IN ITEM THREE
[01:40:01]
BY EITHER OR PERSONALLY DELIVERED.IT IS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND DO NOT ACCEPT THE PREFERRED OR RATHER THE REVISIONS TO THE, UM, THE CODE AT THIS TIME.
ALRIGHT, SO, UM, JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
SO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, THERE'S THREE OPTIONS FOR DELIVERY OF A NOTICE.
IT'S EITHER DELIVERED PERSONALLY AND NOTHING ELSE, OR SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
OR, UH, NUMBER THREE WITHOUT THE BLUE, UM, LANGUAGE, UH, WHICH IS BY MAIL AND POSTING AND A CONSPICUOUS PLACE ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO WHAT THAT FUNCTIONALLY MEANS FOR US, UH, AS APARTMENT OPERATORS IS THAT A NOTICE CAN BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED IF THEY HAND IT TO, YOU KNOW, OUR MAINTENANCE GUYS, HE'S WALKING BY NOW, I PREACH TO MY EMPLOYEES, TELL 'EM BLUE IN THE FACE.
IF YOU SEE CO COMPLIANCE THAT IS A, YOU KNOW, HIGH PRIORITY, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, HAPPENING.
AND SO FOLLOW THEM AROUND AND, UM, AND GET THE PAPER AND GIVE IT TO ME.
UM, THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS HAPPEN.
YOU KNOW, OUR MAINTENANCE GUYS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, FIVE, SIX WORK ORDERS A DAY AND PUTTING OUT WHATEVER FIRES, YOU KNOW, I CAN TELL 'EM TO DO SOMETHING AS THEY'RE WALKING BY AND IF, AND IT MIGHT BE GONE BY THE TIME THEY GET TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING.
UM, SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS THAT THE PERSONALLY DELIVERED PART, NOT BE STANDALONE, THAT IT BE ADDED TO THE THIRD ONE, UM, WHICH IS WHERE YOU CAN SEND IT BY JUST REGULAR OLD MAIL, FIRST CLASS MAIL AND POST IT LIKE ON THE MANAGEMENT OFFICE.
SO TYPICALLY WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS IF, IF THEY CAN'T FIND ANYBODY, THEY TAPE IT TO THE DOOR OF THE MANAGEMENT OFFICE AND THEN IT ALSO GETS SENT TO ME BY THE MAIL.
UM, THAT'S TYPICALLY THE WAY IT, IT, IT FUNCTIONALLY HAPPENS.
UM, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS TO KIND OF CODIFY THAT PROCEDURE SO THAT PERSONALLY DELIVERED IS NOT A STANDALONE OPTION, UM, FOR DELIVERING THESE NOTICES.
UH, JUST FOR THE TASK FORCE'S KNOWLEDGE, UH, CHAPTERS 54 AND TWO 14 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, UH, THIS IS, UH, TAKEN FROM THOSE STATUTES AND SO THEY DO DIVIDE OUT DELIVERED PERSONALLY.
AND IF I MAY, I JUST WANNA JUMP IN AND SAY SOMETHING.
UM, AND I KNOW WE SHOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT THE APARTMENT UH, PROGRAM, THE PROACTIVE APARTMENT PROGRAM HERE, BUT ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS WE HAD WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT IS THE APARTMENT OWNERS WANTED TO GET LIKE A FASTER NOTIFICATION.
SO WHAT'S FASTER THAN GIVING SOMEBODY A DOCUMENT IN HAND? UH, SO IF WE REMOVE THAT AND LET'S, LET'S JUST SAY IF WE DO THIS AND I GO WITH OPTION TWO, THEY'RE GONNA GET IT IN THE MAIL.
THEY MIGHT GET IT 10 DAYS LATER AND THEY WILL SAY, OH, I JUST GOT IT WHILE YOU ARE SENDING IT TO ME BY MAIL.
OR EVEN IF I GO OPTION THREE, IT SAYS EITHER POST IT AT THE LOCATION.
SO IF THEY DON'T TRUST THE PERSON WHO WORKED FOR THEM THAT WE GAVE THIS DOCUMENT DIRECTLY TO THEM AND THEY DIDN'T GET IT, THEN IF I POST IT ON THE DOOR, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? SO AGAIN, I'M, I'M JUST POINTING THIS OUT BECAUSE MIGHT CAUSE SOME ISSUES DOWN THE ROAD.
I, YEAH, I I MEAN IF I, IF I, IF I CAN RESPOND TO THAT, RIGHT? UM, THE, THE P LIKE THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE IS ABSOLUTELY PART OF THIS CONVERSATION, RIGHT? I MEAN, WE TALKED ABOUT WHEN WE CREATED IT, THAT BASICALLY WHAT THAT DID IS TAKE THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE PROCESS AND INCREASE THE STAKES BY, YOU KNOW, AN EXPONENTIAL AMOUNT, RIGHT? FOR, FOR APARTMENT OPERATORS, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE EMPLOYEES.
SO, AND I WON'T ASK YOU TO COMMENT ON THIS.
YOU ACTUALLY, YOU'LL PROBABLY WANT TO PUBLICLY DISAGREE WITH ME, BUT NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU TRUST THEM, PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES, RIGHT? AND IT'S A VERY HIGH STAKES THING.
YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE DELIVERY BEING 10 DAYS LATER, AND THAT'S A BIG, I MEAN, THIS WAS A BIG, THIS WAS A VERY BIG ISSUE FOR US THROUGHOUT THAT ENTIRE PROCESS.
UH, BECAUSE YOU HAVE 10 DAYS TO CURE A VIOLATION, AND IF I GET THE MAIL, I GET THE NOTICE IN THE MAIL EIGHT DAYS LATER, I'VE GOT TWO DAYS TO FIGURE IT OUT.
NOW THERE'S A, A, A QUEUE INSIDE THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS ME TO EMAIL THE CITY AND TRY TO GET EXTRA TIME FOR X, Y, Z REASONS.
UM, BUT THE REASON WE WANT DELIVERED PERSONALLY OUT IS NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK IT'S FAST, BE BECAUSE IT'S IN INHERENTLY UNRELIABLE, AND THE POSTED ON THE DOOR REQUIRES TO BE ALSO SENT BY FIRST CLASS MAIL.
AND SO WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR THIS TO BE TREATED THE SAME WAY AS, AS NOT NECESSARILY A DIRECT NOTIFICATION.
UM, AND AGAIN, THE NOTIFICATION THING IS A, IS A REALLY, REALLY BIG ISSUE IN THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE, AND IT'S, IT'S BORN FROM THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, SINCE THE LAST TIME THE PMC WAS EVALUATED, THAT INSPECTION ORDINANCE CAME OUT.
AND THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO TRY AND I THINK TACKLE SOME, SOME NOTIFICATION ISSUES, UM, THAT WOULD MAKE IT A BETTER PROGRAM.
AND IT'S GONNA BE BETTER FOR NOT JUST US, BUT FOR THE, YOU KNOW, UM, CITIZENS THROUGHOUT THE CITY IS CHAIRMAN.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION REAL QUICK? SHOULD WE, WE WE'RE DOING 50 51, CORRECT? YES.
SHOULDN'T WE ALSO BE DOING 52? BECAUSE THE CURE TIME ALSO GOES WITH THIS.
[01:45:01]
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME TOO.NO, NO, THAT ONE IS DIFFERENT SECTION.
SO LET'S, LET'S KEEP THESE TWO TOGETHER ON THIS HERE.
THAT WAS, I WANT TO ASK LEGAL ON 50 51, WHAT WAS YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THAT? UH, BASED ON CHAPTERS 54 AND TWO 14, PRIMARILY TWO 14 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE PER, UH, DELIVERED PERSONALLY NEEDS TO BE IN THERE.
BUT EITHER ME NOR DANNY OR THE TWO TOGETHER, UM, SUGGESTED ADDING THE REPLACING OR IN NUMBER ONE WITH, AND YES, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK THAT.
SO, SO TO ADD THAT, SO THE STATE REQUIRES WHAT'S WRITTEN THERE AND IF WE LEAVE IT, BUT THEN CHANGE THE WORD OR AFTER DELIVERED PERSONALLY ON NUMBER ONE, WE ARE GOING A LITTLE MORE THAN WHAT THE STATE REQUIRES.
SO THEN WE ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF STATE, AND I THINK THAT COVERS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT.
SO WE DO, UH, DELIVER IT IN PERSON AND EITHER OPTION TWO OR OPTION THREE TO DO CERTIFIED MAIL OR FIRST CLASS MALE.
CAN I, BECAUSE I, I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING IS, IS, I'M SORRY.
BY DOING IT THE WAY YOU ARE SUGGESTING, IF YOU CAN'T DELIVER IT PERSONALLY, IT'S MOOT AND IT'S NOT A VALID CITATION.
OUR LANGUAGE ALLOWS YOU TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND GIVE YOU THE OP.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE SENDING IT EITHER NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS CERTIFIED MAIL, ALWAYS SENDING IT.
IF YOU DON'T SEND IT CERTIFIED MAIL, YOU'RE SENDING IT FIRST CLASS MAIL AND THEN EITHER DELIVERING IT PERSONALLY OR POSTING IT ON THE DOOR.
BUT IF YOU PUT THE WORD AND AFTER DELIVERY PERSONALLY, AND YOU DON'T DELIVER PERSONALLY, YOUR CITATION IS MOOT.
AND I JUST DON'T WANNA SEE THAT.
THANK YOU FOR COVERING MY BEHIND.
SO, UM, I WAS GOING TO SAY, I, I WITHDRAW MY RECOMMENDATION.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH, AND, UM, AND, AND, AND I DO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT, UM, I WOULD SAY NOT THE OWNER IS NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS HOME.
AND I HAVE SEEN CASES WHERE THE TEENAGE KIDS ARE HOME AND THAT'S WHO GETS THE NOTICE, OR, UH, A FRIEND OR FAMILY MEMBER OR WHOEVER, OR A RENTER GETS IT AND NOT THE OWNER.
UM, AND WE, WE DISCUSSED THIS LAST TIME AS WELL, AND THERE WAS A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS AROUND IT.
BUT PERSONALLY HANDING IT, IT DELIVERED PERSONALLY TO OWNER OR, OR OWNER AGENT WOULD TAKE OUT THE MAINTENANCE MEN BECAUSE THE MAINTENANCE MEN ARE NOT THE OWNER AGENT.
IT, THE, THE OFFICE STAFF WOULD BE THE OWNER AGENT, UM, DELIVERED PERSONALLY TO OWNER OR OWNER'S AGENTS AND THEN PUT, AND, OR LIKE IF THEY, IF IF THEY CANNOT GET A HOLD OF THAT PERSON WOULDN'T LEAVE THE, OR IN, I WOULD JUST, I WOULD ADD WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING OWNER AGENT, SO THAT OPENS UP POINT OF CONTACT, BUT KEEP THE WORD.
AND SO THAT WAY IT'S, IT DOES IT SIMULTANEOUSLY.
THEY DELIVERED IT PERSONALLY AND THEY SENT IT BY CERTIFIED MAIL.
I THINK USING, YOU KNOW, OWNER AGENT OPENS UP LEGAL, YOU CAN CORRECT ME ON THIS, BUT THEN WE HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT AN OWNER AGENT IS, RIGHT? IS THAT A PROPERTY MANAGER? IS THAT AN ASSISTANT PROPERTY MANAGER? IS THAT THE TENANT OR IS THAT THE OWNER? RIGHT.
SO I I THINK WE SHOULD GO WITH DELIVERED PERSONALLY AND SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH, WE SEE IT ALL THE BOARD ALL THE TIME, EVERY, YOU KNOW, MONTH WHERE WE TAPE IT AND PEOPLE GET IT.
AND WE ALSO SEND OUT THE CERTIFIED MAIL.
CAN I OFFER ONE MINOR SUGGESTION IS IT SHOULD BE, AND EITHER TWO OR THREE C DON'T REQUIRE TWO AND THREE.
SO, AND I WAS JUST GONNA ASK A, A KIND OF A QUESTION OR A A A PROPOSAL HERE.
SO LET'S SAY THAT, UH, YOU'RE A NURSE THAT WORKS THE NIGHT SHIFT, RIGHT? AND SO YOU'RE ASLEEP DURING THE DAY, YOU'RE NEVER GONNA ANSWER THE DOOR AND YOU'RE AWAY AT WORK AT NIGHT.
THEY'LL NEVER DELIVER IT PERSONALLY, RIGHT? IF THEY GO TO THEIR HOUSE.
AND SO IF THEY DON'T WITH THAT AND LANGUAGE THERE, IF THEY DON'T DELIVER IT PERSONALLY, THEN EVERYTHING AFTER THAT IS, IS GONE.
AND AND OUR SUGGESTION WAS IS YEAH, DELIVER.
IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER THREE WITH OUR LANGUAGE, IT GIVES THEM THE, THEY'RE ALWAYS SENDING IT BY FIRST CLASS MAIL, AND THEY HAVE THE OPTION OF
[01:50:01]
EITHER DELIVERING IT PERSONALLY TO WHOEVER OR POSTING IT ON THE DOOR, WHICH ALL WE WANT IS THE FIRST CLASS MALE EVERY TIME THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT DOING NUMBER TWO AT ALL.SO, BUT THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU HAVE THERE IS YOU WILL NEVER HAVE A EFFECTIVE CITATION BECAUSE ALL I GOTTA DO IS CLOSE THE DOOR, NOT ANSWER IT, AND YOU'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO PROSECUTE A CASE EVER.
BECAUSE IF I HIDE FROM YOU, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
WHEREAS IF YOU GET RID OF DELIVERED PERSONALLY IN NUMBER ONE AND ACCEPT OUR LANGUAGE DELIVERY PERSONALLY IS ONE METHOD, BUT YOU'RE ALWAYS MAILING A FIRST CLASS SO THAT THE OWNER OF RECORD GETS NOTICE THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM.
JUST TO CLARIFY, WE CAN HOLD, WE CAN COME AFTER.
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T ANSWER THE DOOR OR YOU, YOU RUN, IT COMES UP TO THE BOARD AND THEN THE BOARD MAKES A DECISION.
SO JUST, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY THAT REAL QUICK, CLARIFY.
UM, BUT I DO AGREE IT SHOULD BE DELIVERED PERSONALLY AND THREE, NO, HE WASN'T WANT.
AND IF YOU MAKE IT AND, AND, AND THAT MEANS YOU'VE GOTTA GO THROUGH ALL, I THOUGHT I WAS PRESSING ON THE MIC.
YOU'VE GOTTA GO THROUGH EVERY ONE OF THOSE STEPS.
YOU DO NOT WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE MULTIPLE STEPS.
WHAT YOU WANNA DO, WHAT YOU WANNA ACCOMPLISH IS YOU WANT TO PROVIDE NOTICE AND HOW DO YOU PROVIDE, BUT WE ALREADY PUT IT NOTICE ON THE BOARD.
SO WE WE DO A DEMO, THEY POST IT AND THEN THEY SEND CERTIFIED MAIL.
WHY AREN'T WE REPLICATING THAT? WE'RE NOT, WELL IF YOU, FOR THIS, WHY CAN WE REPLICATE THAT IF YOU SAY PERSONAL NOTICE AND MAIL AND STICK IT TO THE DOOR? NO, I'M SAYING IT'S GONNA BE AN EITHER OR SITUATION, STICK IT AND MAIL IT.
BUT THAT, THAT TWO AND THREE SAYS THAT, THAT THAT IS WHAT TWO.
AND IF YOU GET RID OF ONE AND YOU ADOPT OUR CHANGE, I, I DON'T WANT TO GET RID OF ONE.
I WANT IT TO BE A STANDALONE, UM, LIKE LEGAL WAS TALKING ABOUT, ALL RIGHT.
IT, IT NEEDS TO BE A STANDALONE AND THEN IT CAN BE A TWO OR A THREE, RIGHT? OR, AND I KNOW WE'RE GETTING INTO THE AND AND ORDER FIGHT, BUT LET ME, LET ME, LET ME JUMP IN BECAUSE REMEMBER MY RECOMMENDATION WAS TO CHANGE THE ORDER TO END AND I ALREADY WITHDRAW MY, AND, AND THE REASON FOR IT IS EXACTLY WHAT MARK SAID BECAUSE IF WE SAY PERSONALLY DELIVER IT AND DO WHATEVER ELSE, RIGHT? IF I CAN'T DELIVER IT, THAT MEAN MY NOTICE IS INVALID RIGHT THERE.
UH, SO DEFINITELY WE DON'T WANT TO DO, AND NO, MIKE, YOU KEEP GOING FURTHER.
VITA AND I WERE STILL DISCUSSING BECAUSE WE MAY NOT BE DEAD IN THE WATER WITH THE, AND BECAUSE AT THE END OF NUMBER TWO YOU STILL HAVE THE OR.
SO WHAT IT ESSENTIALLY WOULD DO, IF WE WENT BACK TO THAT AND AT THE TOP OF NUMBER ONE, YOU WOULD BE COMBINING ONE AND TWO TOGETHER, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THREE ESSENTIALLY BECOME YOUR NUMBER TWO IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CONSIDER.
YOU WOULD HAVE THOSE TWO COMBINED TOGETHER, THE TOP TWO, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE LAST ITEM STILL AS THE STANDALONE ITEM BECAUSE OF THE, OR AT THE END OF NUMBER TWO.
SO, UH, CAN I KIND OF GO WITH THIS A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEN? WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO SEE IS WE WANT MAIL EVERY TIME EITHER CERTIFIED OR FIRST CLASS, AND THEN AN OPTION FOR DELIVERY IN ADDITION TO MAIL EVERY TIME.
NO, WE WERE WANTING PERSONAL DELIVERY AND TWO OR THREE, JUST LIKE WE DO WHEN WE DEMO A, A BUILDING, WHEN THEY GET A VACATE ORDER, WE POST IT AND THEN THE INFORMATION IS ALSO MELD.
YEAH, I MEAN THAT, BUT THAT WOULD MEAN PERSONAL DELIVERY IS NEVER OKAY BY ITSELF, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANT.
AND, AND THAT SHOULD BE CORRECT THOUGH, BECAUSE SOMETIMES PERSONAL DELIVERY IS YOUR TENANT AND NOT YOU OR PERSONAL DELIVERY IS, YOU KNOW, YOUR CHILD OR YOUR, YOUR PARENTS AND, AND YOU NEVER GET THAT NOTICE AND THEN YOU'RE BLINDSIDED.
SO WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT EVERYONE GETS PROPER NOTICE.
UM, MADAM CHAIR, CAN I, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS SO THAT STAFF CAN LOOK BACK OVER AND DO SOME RESEARCH? YES.
AND THEN WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHETHER IT'S AN OR AND OR, AND.
UH, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? HANG, I'LL SECOND.
CAN YOU SECOND? CLAY? CLAY? OKAY.
UM, UH, ALL IN PAPER I FOR THE CLARIFICATION, THAT'S FOR 51 AND 50, YES, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
JUST TO, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT WORKS.
[01:55:02]
SO WE ARE TABLING, UH, ITEM NUMBER 50 AND 51, CORRECT? AND CAN WE JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THE STAFF THAT LIKE, I, I THINK AT LEAST THE MALE OPTION IS WE WANT THAT EVERY TIME OR NO? YES.EITHER THE CERTIFIED OR THE FIRST CLASS.
IT'S KIND OF THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.
I I, I KNOW WE TABLED IT, BUT JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, SO
NOW, THE REASON WHY IT DOESN'T SAY AND BECAUSE THE STATE DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO DO BOTH THE MINUTE YOU SAY, AND WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO BOTH.
SO THE MAILING IS ALMOST, I WANT TO CALL IT COURTESY.
IF WE CHANGE IT TO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, WE GONNA HAVE TO DO THAT.
AND THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE DO TODAY AND WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS INTERNALLY, AND WE'LL COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS NEXT, NEXT TIME.
AND SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT AMIN SAID IS SINCE HE SAID THE POLICY IS TO PERSONALLY DELIVER AND MAIL IT, IT'S A POLICY THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S SET IN THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RATHER THAN CODIFYING AND GOING AGAINST THE STATUTE.
I'VE ALWAYS HAD A PROBLEM WITH, UH, POLICIES VERSUS, UH, PRACTICE AND I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE IT IN WRITING.
I THINK THE CITY SHOULD POST AND MAIL ALWAYS, BUT, BUT THERE IS, THERE IS.
BUT NO, AGAIN, LET, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S TABLE IT.
AS WE SAID, WE, WE'LL TALK ABOUT, I'M JUST SAYING I IOP IT AND I'M RET TABLING.
I, I, I HEAR THE BUDGET THING A LOT.
I MEAN, IF WE PASS THIS AS PART OF THE CODE, THEN OBVIOUSLY THE CITY'S GONNA HAVE TO COVER IT.
UH, CAN WE GO ON AND GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, PLEASE? OKAY.
SO, UH, THE NEXT ITEMS, UH, 52, UH, MADAM CHAIR, 52, 53, 54.
IF WE CAN LOOK AT THOSE ALTOGETHER.
UH, IT IS PROPOSED LANGUAGE, NEW LANGUAGE, UM, FOR THE S-A-P-M-C, IT IS AN EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ADD A NEW SECTION, UM, THAT WOULD SPEAK TO REASONABLE TIME TO CURE.
UM, HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AFTER, UH, THE SUBMISSION WAS CLOSED.
SO, UH, IF WE COULD HAVE THE THERE YOU GO.
SO THERE ARE SOME HANDOUTS AND IF WE CAN, LET'S HEAR THE, UM, THE REPORT ON IT FIRST BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE, UM, WOULD BE A NEW SECTION, UH, REASONABLE TIME TO CURE.
THERE WOULD BE A SUBSECTION RIGHT BELOW IT FOR REQUESTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO CURE.
UM, AND LEMME SEE IF I MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT SECTION HERE IN FRONT OF ME.
WELL, DANNY, IS IT REASONABLE TO TIME TO CURE OR JUST REASONABLE TIME TO CURE? SO THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN AND SUBMITTED, I JUST, IT IT'S SUBMITTED AS REASONABLE TIME TO CURE.
UH, THERE IS NO OTHER ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE PROVIDED UNDERNEATH THAT.
UH, THERE IS A SUBSECTION, UH, WHICH WE'RE POSING IS REQUESTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO CURE, UM, WHICH WOULD READ, UM, AND I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT FROM HERE.
THE 1 0 7 0.1 IS THE SAME AS WE ORIGINALLY THERE WAS A TYPO IN THE, IT SHOULD BE JUST REASONABLE TIME TO CURE.
SO THE 1 0 7 0.1 REQUESTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO CURE IT BASICALLY READS ANY REQUEST FOR MORE TIME FROM THE OWNER MUST BE IN WRITING TO THE CODE OFFICIAL.
THE REQUEST FOR MORE TIME MUST INCLUDE A, A PLAN TO REPAIR THE VIOLATION.
B, ANY PLAN TO MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF THE VIOLATION, AND C, AN ESTIMATE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED TO CURE THE VIOLATION.
SUBSECTION 1 0 7, 0.7 0.2, UM, WOULD READ THE CODE OF OFFICIAL SHALL HAVE THE DISCRETION TO EXTEND THE TIME TO CURE THE VIOLATION FOR SO LONG AS THE CODE OFFICIAL SHALL DEEM NECESSARY AND REASONABLE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.
A, THE NOTE, THE DATE ON WHICH THE OWNER RECEIVED A NOTICE.
B, THE SEVERITY, SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE CONDITION.
C, THE REASONABLE AVAILABILITY OF MATERIALS AND LABOR AND OF UTILITIES FROM A UTILITY COMPANY.
AND THE TWO ADDITIONAL SECTIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED AFTER OUR
[02:00:01]
DE, WHICH READ NOTICE REQUIREMENTS IN LOCAL ORDINANCE OR, AND STATE OR FEDERAL LAW OR E REFUSAL OF TENANT TO ALLOW ACCESS TO PREMISES TO PERFORM WORK.IT IS A STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE AND KEEP THE PMC AS WRITTEN.
UM, PUBLIC COMMENT ON THESE ITEMS. YEAH, THIS IS, MOST OF THIS LANGUAGE IS RIGHT OUT OF THE, UH, LANGUAGE THAT WAS CRAFTED IN THE INSPECTION ORDINANCE THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY APPROVED AND ADOPTED.
UH, THE FIRST PART OF IT IS IN WRITING, SO THAT IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR MORE TIME, UH, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE YOU SEND IT IN.
A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS DONE VERBALLY NOW, UH, WITH THE INSPECTOR AND WHEN IT GETS TO THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, WE JUST THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER THAT THE PROCESS IS WRITTEN.
IT'S BASICALLY DONE BY SENDING AN EMAIL IN.
THEY HAVE AN ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN SET UP AN ADDRESS, AN EMAIL ADDRESS WHERE THIS STUFF GOES, GIVING, YOU KNOW, HOW YOU'RE GONNA REPAIR IT WHEN YOU'RE GONNA BE THERE, YOU KNOW, INFORMATION ABOUT COULD INCLUDE WHO'S DOING THE WORK AND HOW LONG THEY SAY IT'S GONNA TAKE.
AND THEN YOU GET A RESPONSE BACK THAT SAYS, IT'S OKAY, YOU HAVE, WE ARE EXTENDING THE TIME, 10 DAYS, 15 DAYS, 20 DAYS, BUT THERE IS SOME SORT OF WRITTEN RECORD.
AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF IT IS ALSO PART OF THAT ORDINANCE AS WELL AS THE HABITABILITY CODE ON THE STATE STATUTE THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES 10 DAYS IS NOT A LONG, AND IT'S NOT SAYING THEY HAVE TO EXTEND IT, BUT IT'S GIVING THEM THE, YOU KNOW, PARAMETERS OF WHICH TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES AND ONE WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER IN MORE DETAIL WITH A DIFFERENT PROPOSAL WE HAVE.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, I HAVE A CAR IN A PARKING LOT THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED BECAUSE IT'S A JUNK VEHICLE UNDER STATE STATUTE, YOU HAVE TO GIVE THE TENANT X NUMBER OF DAYS, AND IT'S USUALLY 15 DAYS BY CERTIFIED MAIL, BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER FIVE OR 10 DAYS BEFORE THAT TO GET THE INFORMATION BACK FROM THE STATE WHERE YOU HAVE THE OFFICIAL OWNER AND LIEN HOLDER AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT YOU HAVE TO NOTICE.
AND, AND SO THAT WOULD BE THAT D REQUIREMENT WHERE THE STATE GIVES YOU SOME PROCESS AND THEY SHOULD GIVE YOU EQUAL AMOUNT OF TIME TO DO THAT.
AND THEN THE OTHER IS WE HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE COME OUT TO DO THE WORK WE'VE BEEN CITED AND THE TENANT WON'T LET US IN THE UNIT OR TO MAKE THE REPAIRS.
AND SO ALL THAT SHOULD BE THERE AS WELL AS THE OTHER FIRST THREE.
AND THOSE ARE ALL WHAT THEY'RE DOING PRETTY MUCH RIGHT NOW.
AND IT JUST CODIFIES THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE CODE WHERE YOU KNOW EXACTLY, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE AUTHORITY IS TO MAKE THAT EXTENSION.
WHY DO Y'ALL NOT WANT THIS WRITTEN IN CODE AGAIN, IT JUST, IF OFFICER CORRECTLY, SO THE TIME A WAS SUBMITTED, UM, AND TO, UH, MR. ROSS'S POINT IS, UM, TRY TO MIRROR THE APARTMENT ORDINANCE, RIGHT? THE APARTMENT DOES, ORDINANCE DOES HAVE A, UM, A PROVISION IN THE ORDINANCE WHERE, UH, IF THERE IS REQUEST FOR MORE TIME, IT'S SUBMITTED IN WRITING.
UM, AND IT'S SPECIFIC TO APARTMENTS.
WE'RE TALKING THE VOLUME OF, OF, OF REQUESTS THAT WE MAY COME IN AS WE DO DAILY FOR, I MEAN THIS ENTIRE UNIVERSE, THE PMC APPLIES TO EVERY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, NOT SPECIFICALLY APARTMENTS.
SO ONE WOULD BE THE VOLUME, RIGHT? THIS WOULD SAY TODAY THAT IF A HOMEOWNER WANTS MORE TIME, THEY'D HAVE TO SUBMIT.
AND, AND BSB MEMBERS, YOU GUYS FAMILIAR WITH SCOPE OF WORK? BASICALLY A, A PLAN OR A SCOPE OF WORK, UH, FOR THE ITEMS THAT THEY WANNA REPAIR.
WE CAN DO THAT TODAY JUST BY A VERBAL CONFIRMATION.
THE OFFICERS IN THE FIELD AND THE OWNER SAYS, HEY, LOOK, I'M GONNA FIX THE ROOF.
OKAY, WELL LET'S FIX THE ROOF, RIGHT? TODAY, IF WE AMEND IT TO SPEED SUCH, IT'D BE THIS OWNER HAS PUT IT IN WRITING, I'M GONNA FIX THE ROOF BY SUCH AND SUCH DATE.
THAT'S JUST A LOT OF RECORD KEEPING, IF YOU WILL.
UH, WHEN IT'S ALREADY IN OUR SYSTEM TODAY, THE OFFICER DOES MAKE NOTES IN OUR COMMENTS THAT IT'S ALREADY A REQUEST THAT'S BEEN ASKED FOR MORE TIME.
SO I, I THINK WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT JUST THE VOLUME OF REQUESTS THAT WE MAY GET.
IT MAY AT THE SAME TIME DETER PEOPLE FROM, UM, FOR WHATEVER OTHER REASON TO MAYBE JUST FOR, UH, EITHER LEGITIMACY OR THEY JUST CAN'T WRITE OR THEY JUST, OR LANGUAGE BARRIER, OR THEY JUST MAY NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE PUTTING IT IN WRITING.
UH, I'D RATHER KEEP THAT OPEN TO WHERE IT'S STILL THAT YOU CAN HAVE THAT COMMUNICATION WITH SOMEBODY AND THEY CAN REQUEST TIME VERBALLY AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING IT WRITING.
I KINDA LIKE THE IDEA OF IT BEING PUT IN WRITING.
[02:05:01]
YESTERDAY PANEL A, WE JUST HAD A CASE THAT WAS IN FRONT OF US TO WHERE INFORMATION WASN'T FULLY ENTERED INTO THE NOTES THAT WE WERE GIVEN, RIGHT? IT, UH, WAS MISSING THREE MONTHS WORTH OF INFORMATION, UH, IN THE PACKET.SO I, YOU KNOW, I'M COPIED THINKING OF OTHER CITIES THAT I'VE BEEN IN WITH, AND I FEEL LIKE DALLAS, FORT WORTH, HOUSTON, AUSTIN, CORPUS CHRISTI, BENTONVILLE, ARKANSAS, MIAMI, FLORIDA, THEY ALL HAVE A EMAIL ADDRESS WHERE AS A CITIZEN, IF I GOT A CODE VIOLATION, I CAN EMAIL IN SAYING, HEY, I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO MAKE THIS TIMELINE BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, XI NEED A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA TIME.
DANNY, MAY I COMMENT ON THIS? UM, THIS IS FRED ANDIS.
LAST TIME WE DID THIS, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP BEFORE AS WELL, AND WE COVERED THIS BECAUSE THE SIMPLE FACT IS WHEN YOU GET A NOTICE CODE, OFFICER COMES OUT, GIVES ME A NOTICE, THE FIRST NOTICE IS 10 DAYS.
SO THERE'S YOUR NOTICE THERE AND TIMELINE.
NOW, LET'S SAY HE TELLS ME I GOTTA CUT MY GRASS, I GO OUT TO CUT MY GRASS, IT'S RAINING, HE DRIVES BY, HE KNOWS IT'S BEEN RAINING, SO I CAN'T CUT MY GRASS.
SO HE'S GONNA, AND I'M GONNA ASK HIM, HEY LOOK, I CAN'T CUT MY GRASS UNTIL THE WEATHER CLEARS.
WELL, HE'S GONNA GIMME THE ADDITIONAL TIME, THE WHOLE PURPOSE.
AND THIS HERE GETS BACK INTO THE RENTAL ISSUE OF TENANT.
THIS BOARD ONLY HEARS THE CASES THAT NEED TO COME HERE, AND WE ARE NOT GETTING INTO CONTRACT DISPUTES.
ALL OF THE OTHER STUFFS CAN BE DONE AT THE LOWER LEVEL AND AT THE MANAGEMENT LEVEL.
OKAY? AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE ASKING A LOT ABOUT APARTMENT ISSUES, BUT WE DEAL WITH RESIDENTIAL ISSUES MORE THAN APARTMENT ISSUES, AND THIS IS GONNA AFFECT THEM IN THE WORST WAY POSSIBLE.
SO LET ME, LET ME, LET ME JUMP IN IF YOU DON'T MIND.
SO NUMBER ONE, THOMAS, REGARDING YOUR COMMENT ABOUT, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE NOTES IN THE PACKAGE, THAT IS ACCURATE, BUT THE NOTES WERE IN THE SYSTEM, WE JUST DIDN'T PRINT THEM.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE WE DON'T HAVE THE NOTES.
THE OTHER THING IS WE DO 350,000 INSPECTIONS A YEAR.
SO NOW YOU GONNA EXPECT ME TO NUMBER ONE, EITHER HAVE A CALL CENTER OR HAVE SOMEBODY TO JUST REVIEW THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
OUT OF THAT 350,000 MORE THAN 55% IS JUST TALL GRASS.
SO WHAT HAPPENS TODAY IS CODE OFFICERS DO HAVE THAT DISCRETION.
SO WE GIVE 10 DAYS NOTICE TO CUT THE GRASS.
IF THEY STARTED AND THEY'RE MORE BROKE, THEY TELL THE CODE OFFICER, LOOK, I STARTED MY MORE BROKE.
GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME.
I DON'T NEED THEM TO SUBMIT A PLAN.
AND DO THEY HAVE THE MONEY? OR THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY AND GIVE ME ALL THAT.
WHAT'S THE MITIGATION FACTORS AND ALL THAT? IT, I DON'T NEED THAT.
SO THAT GONNA SLOW OUT THE, THE PROCESS.
WE'RE GONNA NEED MORE RESOURCES TO DO THAT.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DP CASES, THAT'S DIFFERENT STORY.
THAT'S, THAT'S MORE DOCUMENTATION, BIGGER CASE.
BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, AGAIN, GRASS FOR 50 OR 55% OF THE CASES WE HAVE.
IF THEY CANNOT CUT IT IN 10 DAYS, AS LONG AS THEY COMMIT TO DOING IT, WE GIVE THEM THE TIME.
IT'S A DISCRETION FROM THE CODE OFFICER.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CODE OFFICER HANDLING IT AND SOMEONE ELSE HANDLING IT? BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR THE CODE OFFICER'S ALREADY, YOU KNOW, BEING PAID TO HANDLE IT.
SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THE CODE OFFICER'S TIME THAT'S DEALING WITH A HUNDRED GRASSES, RIGHT? CAN'T BE UTILIZED FOR A HUNDRED OTHER ITEMS WHILE SOMEONE ELSE IS TAKING THOSE SMALL ISSUES.
SO NO, THE CO I'M SORRY, THE CO THE CODE OFFICER IS DOING THE REINSPECTION ALREADY, RIGHT? THEY'RE DOING IT.
THEY MAKE THE DECISION ON THE SPOT AND THEY CONTINUE.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO TELL THE OWNER AN ELDERLY PERSON, OH, HERE IS AN EMAIL ADDRESS.
YOU NEED TO SEND A PLAN AND FINANCIAL MEANS AND TELL ME WHEN YOU'RE GONNA DO IT.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING? AND YOUR BUDGET IT, YOU NEED TO SUBMIT IT IN WRITING SO WE CAN RESPOND BACK TO YOU IN WRITING.
AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DO THAT.
IT'S, I'M TRYING TO SAY A COMMENT NOW.
THAT'S REQUIRING A LOT OF INFORMATION FOR EVERYONE THAT IS NOT IN AN APARTMENT COMPLEX.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T WANT TO ASK, ESPECIALLY IN D FIVE, A LOT OF PEOPLE TO GET A SCOPE OF WORK TO PRESENT A FINANCIAL PLAN.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAPPEN ONCE, ONCE YOU HAVE GONE SO FAR TO END UP AT THE BSB.
PRIOR TO THAT, PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY, HEY, I'M GONNA DO THIS IN A COUPLE WEEKS.
[02:10:01]
OF THAT, I ALSO DON'T WANT THIS TO BE OPENED FOR THE LANDLORDS THAT JUST REFUSE TO DO THE REPAIRS ON THEIR, THEIR PROPERTIES.IT SHOULDN'T TAKE A LANDLORD, UH, AN EXTRA 15 DAYS TO GET SOMEONE TO GO CUT THE GRASS AT HIS OWN PROPERTY.
LIKE IT'S, I CAN UNDERSTAND AN ELDERLY, AN ELDERLY HOMEOWNER NOT BEING ABLE TO GET OUT AND CUT THE GRASS, BUT I CANNOT UNDERSTAND SOMEONE LIVING IN CALIFORNIA THAT CAN'T FIND SOMEONE TO COME CUT THE GRASS IN THAT HOME THAT THEY OWN IN, IN SAN ANTONIO.
WE PROBABLY AGREE WITH AMIN ON THE ONE PART, TAKING THE FIRST PART OUT.
THE SECOND ONE JUST GIVES SOME GUIDANCE TO THE CODE OFFICIAL AS TO WHAT'S OKAY TO EXTEND IT.
AND IT'S NOT GETTING INVOLVED IN CONTRACT.
IT'S BASICALLY SAYING THAT WE CAN EXTEND, THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO EXTEND IT IF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES OCCUR.
AND NONE OF THESE ARE, ARE CONTRACTUAL DEALS, BUT THEY'RE JUST PRACTICAL DEALS.
IF YOU HAVE A FREEZE, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THERE ARE NO CONTRACTORS OR PARTS OR ANYTHING LIKE WE HAD DURING FREEZE EDDEN, IT MAY TAKE MORE THAN 10 DAYS TO MAKE REPAIRS.
OR IF THERE'S AN INSURANCE CLAIM THAT YOU'RE WAITING, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S A BIG AMOUNT FOR THEM TO ADJUST THE CLAIM OR, YOU KNOW, YOU DIDN'T GET THE NOTICE UNTIL 10 DAYS AFTER, YOU KNOW, YOU RECEIVED YOUR FIRST NOTIFICATION ON THE 11TH DAY AFTER THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO CALL UP AND WE AGREE WITH THAT TO THE CODE OFFICIAL AND SAY, HERE'S THE THING, AND A, B, C, D AND E JUST GIVES THEM THE PARAMETERS OF WHICH TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
I MEAN, IT DOES SAY REASONABLE AND ANY REASONABLE PERSON KNOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A FREAK SNOWSTORM AND IF YOU'RE ON THE 10TH DAY, THAT'S NOT REASONABLE TO EXPECT YOU TO DO IT.
AND IT'S REALLY JUST THE CODE OFFICER.
BUT BY PUTTING THIS LANGUAGE IN, IT'S, IT, IT, IT REQUIRES A LOT MORE, UM, ON BOTH SIDES.
NO, WE ARE, WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT WE AGREE WITH THE CITY AFTER HEARING THEM ON THE FIRST PART.
MS. VALERIE, CAN YOU PULL UP OUR, OUR, THE ORIGINAL ONE THAT WAS, UH, REVIEWED? THAT ONE? YES, MA'AM.
GO AHEAD AND EXPAND IT TO THE WHOLE SCREEN.
SO MARK, WHICH ONE YOU, YOU WERE SAYING? YEAH, I MEAN THE FIR AFTER HEARING WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT MOST OF IT BEING GRASS, THE 1 0 7 0.7 0.1, IT WOULD BE AFTER HEARING YOU AND HEARING EVERYBODY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT ONE SUGGEST THAT YOU NOT ADOPT THAT ONE AND THE CODE OFFICIALS STILL CA YOU CAN DO THAT IF YOU WISH, OR YOU CAN DO IT BY PHONE WITH THE CODE OFFICIAL.
BUT THAT 1 0 7 0.7 0.2, WHICH IS GIVING THE FRAMEWORK IN ADDITION WITH THE DNE ADDED, THAT THE CODE OFFICIAL CAN, UH, YOU KNOW, MAKE THAT GIVES, GIVES THEM THE PARAMETERS OR THE, YOU KNOW, TO SAY, OKAY, IT'S OKAY TO EXTEND IT IF THESE THINGS ARE GOING ON.
AND IT DOESN'T SAY THEY HAVE TO, IT SAYS THEY MAY.
YEAH, BUT THEY ALREADY DO THAT, RIGHT? THEY ALREADY HAVE THAT ABILITY TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
AND THIS GIVES A LITTLE GUIDANCE WITHIN THE ORDINANCE OR THE THING AS TO WHAT THEY SHOULD CONSIDER IN MAKING THAT DETERMINATION.
AND, AND UP TO THIS POINT, IF A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT THE CODE OF ENFORCER HAS THIS, UH, DISCRETION, I MEAN, HOW WOULD THEY, HOW WOULD THEY KNOW ANY OTHER WAY IF THAT THE CODE OF ENFORCER HAS THE DISCRETION TO TO WHATEVER OR NOT? THEY DON'T, I MEAN, YOU JUST GOTTA HAVE TO NOTE, RIGHT? LIKE, YOU KNOW, A GUIDING CODE, THEY CAN CALL THE OFFICE.
SO IS THERE SOMEWHERE THAT IS COVERED BESIDES RIGHT HERE? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE 7 1 0 7 0.7, THE APPEAL PROCESS? UH, WELL, WELL WE ADDED, UH, DURING THE LAST GO ROUND THAT WE HAD TO PUT
[02:15:01]
IN LANGUAGE ON THE NOTICES THAT THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL BY CONTACTING THE BSB LIAISON AND PROVIDING, UH, SAY IT'S JUDY JUDY'S, UH, CONTACT INFORMATION.SO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY ALREADY TO HAVE, THEY HAVE A NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS, A PERSON WHO'S THE LIAISON FOR BSB TO CALL.
AND IF IT IS ASKING FOR MORE TIME, JUDY HAS THAT AUTHORITY TO, UH, TRANSFER THE CALL TO THE CODE OFFICER.
UH, ONE THING FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, I THINK WHEN YOU START PUTTING CRITERIA ON DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY, YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATING DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY.
THIS WOULD BE AN INTERNAL PROCESS, RIGHT? IT'S HOW THEY'RE BEING TRAINED AND WORKSHOPS, UM, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS, IT WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY TO DO PROF, YOU KNOW, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
AND, AND THAT'S, THAT'S UNDERSTOOD.
I I MEAN, THIS LANGUAGE EXISTS IN THE APARTMENT INSPECTION ORDINANCE, RIGHT? SO, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU'RE, AND YOU'RE RIGHT, WE ARE, WE REPRESENT THE APARTMENT ASSOCIATION.
AND OUR MEMBERS HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND, BUT THAT'S WHY EVERYTHING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT, BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE, RIGHT? I MEAN, THIS, WE ARE, WE ARE INTERESTED PARTIES 'CAUSE THIS AFFECTS OUR EVERY DAY.
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THAT IS WHY, UM, I JUST, YOU KNOW, OUR SUGGESTION WAS THAT IT'S GOOD THAT THE PROTECTIONS THAT WE HAVE WOULD BE GOOD FOR, UH, THE CITIZENS OF DISTRICT FIVE OR WHEREVER ELSE, BECAUSE TO YOUR POINT, CLAY, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THE CODE PROCESS.
BUT IF I'M JOE PUBLIC AND I JUST GET A, A NOTICE, I MIGHT NOT KNOW THAT I CAN CALL AND ASK FOR MORE TIME.
AND MAY I, MAY I INTERRUPT FOR A SECOND? YES, SIR.
STAFF, DID WE NOT, UH, DANNY, AND, AND I MEAN, AND I THINK, UH, LAST TIME WE DID THIS, DID WE NOT GET A COPY OF THE ACTUAL CODE STUFF AND IT WAS ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT SHEET THEY GIVE OUT? CORRECT.
IS IT POSSIBLE NEXT MEETING THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT COPY SO THEY SEE WHAT IS ALREADY ON THAT DOCUMENT? WE'VE SEEN THE DOCUMENT AND IT SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO APPEAL, YOU CAN DO THIS.
IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT TELLING THE CITIZEN.
THEY CAN CALL THE CODE OFFICIAL AND SAY, I NEED MORE TIME.
IT JUST SAYS YOU'RE, YOU CAN APPEAL.
THEY PIN ON THE DOOR THE PHONE NUMBER FOR THE OFFICER.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND UH, DALE IS GOING TO GO GRAB SOME COPIES RIGHT NOW.
JUST, I'M NOW FULLY UNDERSTANDING YOU WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS.
YOU'RE ASSUMING THAT PEOPLE AREN'T INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO GOOGLE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND PICK THE PHONE AND, AND MAKE A PHONE CALL OR CALL THAT.
NOW I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS.
I DON'T REALLY SEE WHY IT WOULD NEED TO BE CODIFIED THAT SOMEONE CAN CALL SOMEONE AND GET AN EXTENDED AMOUNT OF TIME.
I, I AGREE WITH STAFF TO, TO BE FAIR, WE'RE NOT ASSUMING ANYBODY'S INTELLIGENCE.
BUT I MEAN, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
LIKE YOU, LIKE YOU SAID, IF YOU, IF YOU PUT IT IN WRITING, IT'S CODIFIED AND IT, IT, IT TAKES DISCRETION OUTTA DISCRETIONARY PROCESS.
I MEAN, FOR, FOR THE, FOR THE HIGH DOLLAR, THE HIGH RISK PART OF THE CODE, IT'S IN THERE.
UM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, WELL, I I THINK THIS WOULD BE MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM RATHER THAN A EDIT TO THE CODE.
SO I JUST WANNA ANSWER MR. ANDERSON'S QUESTION.
SO TO TO YOUR POINT, THE NOTICE DOES HAVE A SECTION IN THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE NOTICE THAT READS THAT CAN BE CUT OFF, EXCUSE ME, THAT CAN BE TORN OFF OR CUT OFF AND SENT, SENT BACK.
AND BASICALLY THERE'S LIKE SEVERAL OPTIONS, RIGHT? YOU CAN EITHER SAY, I DON'T OWN THE PROPERTY ANYMORE, I SEWED IT.
UH, AND YOU, YOU PROVIDE THE INFORMATION WHO YOU SOLD IT TO, RIGHT? UH, YOU NEED MORE TIME TO COMPLY AND I'LL COMPLY BY THIS DATE.
UH, I WILL COMPLY WITH ALL NECESSARY WORK ON THIS DATE.
OR YOU, YOU EITHER HAVE A SECTION WHERE IT SAYS OTHER SITUATIONS AND YOU CAN DESCRIBE ON THE BACK OF THE FORM AS WELL, SEND THAT BACK INTO US.
SO THERE IS SOME, SOME LANGUAGE IN THE NOTICE THAT GOES OUT TO, IF SOMEBODY'S WANTING MORE INFORMATION OR MORE TIME, THEY CAN SUBMIT THAT BACK AND LET US KNOW.
I MEAN, AT THE SAME TIME, YOU GET THE NOTICE, YOU CAN SIMPLY CALL THE OFFICER AND SAY, HEY, I NEED MORE TIME.
AND WE ALSO BROUGHT UP LAST TIME THE FACT THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE COMPUTERS, THAT'S WHY THIS WAS PUT ON THERE, IS BECAUSE THOSE WHO DON'T HAVE COMPUTERS HAVE AN OPTION.
AND IF YOU, ON THE BOARD, WHEN WE, WHEN THEY PRESENT THE CASE, ONE OF THE PARTS THEY PRESENT IS THE PHOTOGRAPH OF WHEN THEY PUT THE VIOLATION ON THE DOOR OR THE FENCE OR WHEREVER IT'S PHOTOGRAPHED.
SO WHEN IT COMES UP HERE, IT MIGHT GOT BLOWN OFF IN THE RAIN OR WHATEVER, BUT IT ALSO HAS APPEAL THE OFFICER'S, UH, NAME, I THINK BADGE NUMBER AND THE PHONE NUMBER TO CALL.
AND THEN HE COMES BACK IN 10 DAYS.
IF YOU NEED MORE TIME, IT'S THERE.
BUT THEY'RE DOCUMENTS THAT WE WENT THROUGH LAST TIME THAT HAVE ALL OF THAT ON IT.
NOW YOU MAY NOT SEE THOSE BECAUSE WE DEAL MAINLY WITH HOUSES.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THAT ONE RIGHT THERE WHERE IT SAYS PLAN OF REPAIR, ALL THAT IS
[02:20:01]
ALL FOR DEMOLITION.THEY HAVE TO COME UP WITH A SCOPE OF WORK AND ALL THAT.
WHEN I SEE THAT, THAT KIND OF TELLS ME THAT YOU'RE ASKING A LOT OF STUFF FOR THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS OFF THE TABLE.
YEAH, NO, I'M JUST SAYING BECAUSE THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT STEP FOR US.
BUT FOR THE PAPERWORK, THIS WAS DISCUSSED TWO YEARS AGO, FRED, I SWEAR YOU'RE ALWAYS YELLING
SOMETIMES THEY, I'M BACK IN, I CAN'T, BUT WHEN I GET UP HERE, IT'S TOO MUCH.
BUT I'M, I'M SORRY IF IT, IF IT'S, IF IT'S BETTER THIS WAY.
SO THE, THE, THE SAME FORM THAT GOES TO HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENCE AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IS THE SAME THAT GOES TO THE APARTMENTS OR IS THAT CORRECT? IT, IT'S, IT'S, WELL IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT REQUEST SPECIFICALLY FOR APARTMENTS, UH, THAT WE INCLUDED IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL TIME HERE, THE PROCESS, YOU GOTTA FOLLOW, LIKE I SAID, FOR APARTMENTS IT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
BUT THERE IS EVEN AN EMAIL OPTION, IF YOU WILL, UH, TO BE NOTIFIED OF THE VIOLATION.
AGAIN, BE TALKING ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE VOLUME OF APARTMENTS VERSUS EVERY RESIDENTIAL HOME.
BUT, UH, APARTMENTS COULD BE POSSIBLY LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS OF UNITS.
SO THEY NEED THAT, THAT DIFFERENCE.
OKAY, SO THE NORMAL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING DOESN'T HAVE THAT EMAIL, JUST APARTMENTS DO CORRECT.
THE, THE EMAIL THAT DANNY'S TALKING ABOUT? YES.
JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT HE MEANT BY EMAIL.
AS A HOMEOWNER, IF YOU CHOOSE TO EMAIL US TO ASK FOR EXTENSION OR WHATEVER, YOU'RE WELCOME TO WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT IS IN THE PROGRAM THEY ASKED FOR COURTESY.
AGAIN, IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, A COURTESY EMAIL THAT WE SENT TO THEM STATING THAT, HEY, WE GAVE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION BECAUSE THEIR MAINTENANCE PER PERSON GOT THE NOTICE AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW THEY WANTED TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE OWNER AN EMAIL TELLING THEM, HEY, WE ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA COLLECT EMAILS FROM 1.7 MILLION PEOPLE IN SAN ANTONIO.
AND SO WE'RE GONNA EMAIL YOU EVERY TIME WE ISSUE THE NOTICE.
JUST ASK MADAM CHAIR, DWAYNE NELSON.
I MOVE THAT WE ON FOR ITEMS 52, 53 AND 54.
WE NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, THOMAS FIRST, SECOND.
THERE WAS A WHOLE LOT OF SECONDS WE HAD, UM, JOEL LEE SECONDS.
UM, YEAH, I THINK ANY, YEAH, IN MAJORITY OF BOARD.
OKAY, SO EVERYONE SECONDS YOU IN THE SECOND.
THE, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH NUMBER IT WAS LAST MEETING, UH, IT HAD TO GO BACK TO LEGAL.
DID THAT EVER GET LOOKED AT? WE HAVE NOT COME BACK TO IT YET.
AND I WAS ASKING STAFF, WE WAS THAT THE ISSUE ABOUT, UH, THAT THE CITY SHALL DEFEND CODE OFFICERS? YES.
UH, THE ANSWER TO THAT, I'M SORRY.
I, UH, FELIX WAS TOLD TO SAY THAT IT'S FINE, IT'S BEEN APPROVED AND THERE'S NO HARM IN ADDING THAT LANGUAGE THAT THE, UH, THE CITY DOES IT BY LAW ANYWAY.
AND SO TO UM, ADD IT TO THE SAMHSA IS FINE.
WHICH IS, UM, SO TO TO, TO MAKE IT, UH, APPROPRIATE AND HAVE IT ON THE RECORD.
DANNY WILL GO THROUGH IT REAL QUICK AND THEN SAVITA CAN MAKE HER COMMENTS.
WHAT'S THAT? ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CORRECT.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE WERE TABLED FOR A LEGAL REVIEW.
SO LET'S, LET'S GO BACK TO THOSE BEFORE WE GO ON WITH COUNSEL'S.
CONCURRENCE, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE ITEMS FOUR AND FIVE.
ANY DISCUSSION? YEAH, I THINK IT WAS ITEM JUST FIVE, BUT I THINK FOUR WE APPROVED LAST, UH, MEETING.
I APOLOGIZE FOR AMENDMENT MOTION TO SAY THAT I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE LANGUAGE FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE AS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
LET'S GO BACK TO WHERE WE WERE.
[02:25:01]
55.UM, IT IS A, UH, PROPOSED EXTERNAL AMENDMENT, UH, FOR REVISION TO SECTION 1 0 8 0.3, UH, WHICH IS A SECTION FOR STRUCTURE UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
UM, THERE WAS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SUBMIT, UH, OR RATHER TO ADD THE LANGUAGE IN BLUE, UH, OR TO FIRST RESPONDERS AT THE END OF THAT SENTENCE OR THE PARAGRAPH AND TO STRIKE OUT OR JUST FROM FORMATTING, IF YOU WILL, BUT REALLY JUST, UM, ADDING THE LANGUAGE OR TO FIRST RESPONDERS AND IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS REVISION TO THE S-A-P-M-C AND CHAIR DWAYNE NELSON.
I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOR ITEM NUMBER 55.
ANY OPPOSED? BUT IF YOU LIKE, UNFORTUNATELY AS MUCH CARRIES.
UM, ALL RIGHT, UM, ITEM NUMBER 56.
UH, THIS IS A, UH, I GUESS REVISION, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE, UH, IPMC.
UH, IT'S A, A MATTER OF FORMATTING IF YOU, AND, AND OR CHANGING THE LANGUAGE OF WORD, WHETHER STRIKING OUT WHERE IT READS IN A DANGEROUS OR, AND REPLACING WITH AN UNSAFE MANNER.
SO, UH, STAFF DOES SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CHANGE AND, UH, DOES RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL, UM, ADOPTING THE LANGUAGE IN THE, UM, S-A-P-M-C.
ANY QUESTIONS? A CHAIR MOTION.
MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ITEM NUMBER 56.
ANY SECONDS? THOMAS FRANKS A SECOND.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
UH, WITH THAT IS, WE COVER CHAPTER ONE.
DO YOU WANT TO TAKE FIVE MINUTE BREAK? AND THEN WE JUMP INTO CHAPTER TWO? YES.
WE'RE GONNA TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
IT IS THREE 50 AND WE'RE RETURNING, UM, WE'RE GONNA START BACK WITH ITEM NUMBER 57.
UH, I KNOW WE'RE SCHEDULED TO GO TILL FIVE O'CLOCK.
IS THERE ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY OBJECTION TO CONTINUING UNTIL FIVE? I BELIEVE
BESIDES AVITA, DOES ANYBODY HAVE
WELL, ACCORDING TO FRED'S REQUIREMENTS, YOU HAVE TO ORDER DINNER ANYWAY, SINCE YOU'VE KEPT THIS PAST THREE.
FRED HASN'T SAID ANYTHING ABOUT DINNER.
HIS MICROPHONE WENT OUT, HAS REPEATEDLY REQUESTED THE COB SALAD WITH THE AVOCADO THAT WE USED.
GET, UH, JUST SO THAT THAT'S NOTED AND THAT CODE REGISTER, PLEASE.
COUNSEL, WHAT TIME SHE WANTS TO LEAVE, UH, OR NEEDS SAVITA? WHAT? IS THERE A TIME THAT YOU NEED TO LEAVE? NO, I WAS JUST SAY, WELL, I HAVE TO BE OUT HERE BY SIX BECAUSE I'M GOT HAPPY HOUR
LET'S MAKE SURE WE REMOVE THAT FROM THE RECORD.
WHAT WE DO ON OUR, OUR OWN PERSONAL TIME IS NONE OF ANY WINDOWS IS BUSINESS.
UH, SO WE'RE IN THE GENERAL DEFINITION SECTION OF THE S-A-P-M-C NOW.
SO, UH, WE'RE GONNA LOOK OVER A FEW DEFINITIONS, UM, THAT WE'LL WE'LL BE REVIEWING HERE.
SO THE FIRST ONE WE'RE LOOKING AT IS A NEW SECTION, A NEW DEFINITION FOR APPROVED AGENCY.
IT IS A, UH, A NEW SECTION THAT WAS ADDED IN THE IPMC.
[02:30:02]
UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UH, THE APPROVAL OF THIS NEW DEFINITION AND ACCEPTING LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN.ANY PUBLIC COMMENT QUESTIONS? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT DOES THIS MAKE? AND, SORRY, I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT Y'ALL ARE ALREADY THE CODE OFFICIAL.
YOU CAN ALREADY DO ALL THESE THINGS.
WHAT'S A, WHAT'S AN APPROVED AGENCY ADDITION ADDING TO CODE ENFORCEMENT ABILITY? IT'S FUNNY YOU SHOULD ASK.
I THINK THAT WAS, UM, IN ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS DISCUSSION.
I THINK YOU MAY HAVE ASKED THAT QUESTION, UH, EXACTLY WHAT A PROOF AGENCY WAS, AND IT WAS REFERENCED IN CHAPTER ONE.
I THINK AMIN GAVE A, A FAIRLY, UM, GOOD RESPONSE IN WHAT A PROOF AGENCY IS, BUT NOW WE HAVE A DEFINITION FOR CLARIFYING EXACTLY WHAT WE CONSIDER AN APPROVED DEFINITION OR WHAT WOULD IT BE, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERED, I GUESS, IF YOU WILL.
DANNY, WHERE'D YOU GET THE LANGUAGE FROM? THE LANGUAGE IS FROM THE, UH, INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE.
IT'S A PROPOSED LANGUAGE NEW SECTION THAT WAS ADDED TO THE IPMC.
MR. THOMAS FRANKS LIKE TO MAKE MOTION.
MM-HMM,
CAN YOU START OVER PLEASE? OKAY, MADAM CHAIR, DWAY NELSON.
I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE 2024 IPMC FOR ITEM NUMBER 57.
I WAS GONNA ASK A QUESTION BEFORE YOU MADE THE MOTION.
WE ARE IN SECTION 200, RIGHT? FOR DEFINITIONS.
IS THAT GONNA GO IN 200? SO WOULD THAT SECTION CHANGE ON 1 0 4 0.2 ON THE, UH, NOTES? WHAT, ON THE NOTES IT SAYS IS IT GONNA GO UNDER THAT OR IS IT GONNA GO AS A NO NO.
2 0 2 POINT SECTION 1 0 4 0.2 DID REFERENCE RIGHT.
AND THE QUESTION WAS, LAST TIME, WHAT IS APPROVED AGENCY? THE GOOD THING IS, I GUESS THE WAY WE ARE THINKING, THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE CAUGHT UP TO US AND THEY HAD THIS DEFINITION IN IT.
SO WE ARE SAYING WE WOULD RECOMMEND ADOPTING THAT.
SO IT'S, IT'LL GO INTO SECTION 2 0 2? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OTHER OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.
UM, THIS IS A PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT CAME, UM, FOR A NEW SECTION, RATHER TO ADD A NEW DEFINITION TO FURTHER CLARIFY, UM, WHAT A FOUNDATION WALL, UM, IS.
AND SO THERE IS PROPOSED LANGUAGE, UM, ADDING, AS YOU CAN SEE IN, IN THE WORKING DOCK, WHAT, UH, DEFINES FOUNDATION WALL.
AND FOUNDATION WALL IS REFERENCED IN, UH, 3 0 4, UH, IN EXTERIOR STRUCTURE.
SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE APPROVE THIS LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN, UH, AND INCLUDING THE 2024 S-A-P-M-C.
DANNY, ONE QUESTION, UM, WHEN THIS CAME UP, I AGREE WITH IT, BUT WHAT IS, UH, WAS A PARAFFIN WALL EVER THOUGHT ABOUT BEING ADDED TO GO ALONG WITH THIS ONE? YOU SAY PARAPET WALL? YEAH.
IT DIDN'T COME UP IN CONVERSATION.
DWAYNE, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT? 'CAUSE WE HAD THAT ONE CASE WHERE IT WAS REALLY BIG ABOUT THE PARAFFIN WALL.
ACTUALLY, I, I, I NOT PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE CHANGES OF BILL OF MATERIALS PER SE AS A RESULT.
I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION FOR SURE.
MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS THOMAS RIGGS MOTION ON NUMBER 58 TO ACCEPT STAFF, UM, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
MADAM JUDGE, THIS READ AND I SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
[02:35:04]
OKAY, THE NEXT SECTION IS ITEM 59.UH, THIS IS AN EXTERNAL, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENT FOR A NEW DEFINITION, UH, TO INCLUDE THE DEFINITION IN SANITARY.
UH, WE ARE, UH, NOT OPPOSED TO ADDING THIS NEW DEFINITION.
WE APPROVE THE DEFINITION AS WRITTEN AND WOULD APPROVE TO ADD IT TO THE 2024 S-A-P-M-C.
THIS COMMENT? THIS? YEAH, THIS WAS OURS.
IT IS JUST BECAUSE THE WORD INSANITARY APPEARS THROUGHOUT THE, THE DOCUMENT AND YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GET TO THE ENFORCEABLE PARAGRAPHS AND THERE'S NO DEF THERE WAS NO DEFINITION OF IT.
AND WHAT DID YOU FIND IT IN EITHER CHAT, PT OR GOOGLE? MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW.
SO I WANNA, I WANNA JUST GUYS, COME ON.
I JUST WANT TO, UH, REMIND ANYONE THAT, UH, PARTICIPATED IN S-A-P-M-C THE PREVIOUS TIME.
THERE WAS A VERY LARGE DISCUSSION AROUND THIS, AROUND THE WORD AND SANITARY AND HOW PERCEPTION ONE PERSON'S PERCEPTION OF INSANITARY CAN BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER PERSON'S PERCEPTION OF INSANITARY.
UM, BUT I WILL OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I WOULD THINK THE WORD INSANITARY IS MORE OF AN ADJECTIVE.
IT'S DESCRIBING A PLACE, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A PLACE.
A PLACE CAN BE INSANITARY THAT CAN CAUSE, UM, UNHEALTHY OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME.
BUT A PLACE IS NOT INSANITARY.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? YEAH, YEAH.
SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S MORE OF A CONDITION OR DESCRIPTOR, BUT A NOT, NOT NECESSARILY.
CAN YOU GET CLOSER TO YOUR MIC? OH YEAH, SORRY.
YOU'RE SAYING IT'S, IT'S MORE OF A CONDITION OR A DESCRIPTOR AND NOT NECESSARILY A PLACE YEAH.
IT'S AN ADJECTIVE NOD, UH, NOUN.
AND, UH, JUST PERSONAL PREFERENCE.
CAN WE GO BACK TO SAYING UNSANITARY? YES.
INSTEAD OF INSANITARY, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO CHANGE IT EVERY SINGLE.
THAT I, YEAH, I MEAN, WE'D HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT.
'CAUSE WHEN IT CAME OUT THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT, IT'S LIKE WE ALL HAD TO GO LOOK AT A DEFINITION.
'CAUSE NOBODY KNEW WHAT THAT MEANT.
THE BRITISH USE IN SANITARY WHILE, UH, NORTH AMERICA USES UNSANITARY AND WE JUST HAD, IT WAS A, A FORMER CODE OFFICIAL WHO, WHO PREFERRED INSANITARY.
BUT TO ME IT SOUNDS TOO CLOSE TO INSANE THERE.
THEREFORE, THE DEFINITION WOULD BE FOR INSANITARY IS, OR INSANITARY IS AN UNSANITARY CONDITION, IS DIRTY AND HEALTHY.
IN OTHER WORDS, WHICH IS USE UNSANITARY IN THE DEFINITION.
SINCE YOU'RE NOT USING THE SAME WORD IN THE DEFINITION, IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE TO DO THAT.
WAS THAT A LEGAL RECOMMENDATION OR IS THAT JUST A COMMENT? UH, THAT WAS JUST COMMON.
I THINK YOU NEED TO ADD THE, WHICH IS, CAN YOU RAISE YOUR MIC A LITTLE BIT? THANK YOU.
I THINK BEFORE THE WORD IS YOU NEED WHATEVER YOU'RE GONNA, BUT BEFORE THAT, WHICH IS DIRTY.
AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE WORDS AND GET RID OF THE PLACE, FIGURE OUT A CONDITION WHICH IS A CONDITION WHICH IS DIRTY, COMMA, UNHEALTHY.
AND IT'S ALL, IT'S BASICALLY ALL THREE.
SO, SO EMILY, IT WOULD BE DIRTY, REMOVE AND UNHEALTHY.
AND THEN THE, THE REMAINING SENTENCE.
AND DID WE WANT TO LEAVE IT INSANITARY OR CHANGE IT TO UNSANITARY? NO, WE, WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT BECAUSE UNSANITARY IS A SPECIFIC, IT'S TELLING YOU WHAT EVERYBODY'S ALREADY USED TO.
THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER SEEN IT INS SANITARY.
I MEAN, SO IF, IF YOU APPROVE THIS, I NEED YOU TO APPROVE AS WELL.
US GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENT AND CHANGING THAT WORD THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT, WHICH JUST FOR THE RECORD, IT'S ONLY REFERENCED ONE TIME AND WE HAVE TO CHANGE IT FROM INSANITARY TO INSANITARY.
I, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
ALSO, IF THE CITY HAS THAT ISSUE THROUGHOUT THE CITY, THAT'S NOT OUR BOARD ISSUE.
[02:40:01]
BUT FOR US, WE'RE JUST ABOUT THIS CODE.AND FOR US THAT IS MORE TO POINT THAN THE OTHER ONE WAS.
UH, I JUST FEEL OBLIGATED TO DEFEND MY USE OF THE LANGUAGE.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS IN, IN HERE.
IT'S, IT'S UNPLEASANT TO READ IT THAT WAY, BUT THAT'S WHY WE
I I, I STILL HAVE, I'M STILL TAKING ISSUE WITH THE WORDS DIRTY, UN AND UNHEALTHY.
UNHEALTHY BECAUSE AGAIN, AND, AND I'M THINKING OF IT FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, LIKE I HAVE, I'VE SEEN FAMILIES THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR WHATEVER REASON CPS CAME OUT AND THAT CPS WORKER IS CALLING SOMETHING DIRTY AND UNHEALTHY, BUT THEN THEIR SUPERIOR COMES IN AND LOOKS AT THE SAME EXACT CONDITION AND SAYS, NO, NOT NECESSARILY.
IT'S A LITTLE CLUTTERED, BUT IT'S NOT DIRTY.
AND IT, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THE PERCEPTION OF ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER.
AND USING THIS LANGUAGE IN HERE, YOU KNOW, FOR SOMEONE WHO IS A NEAT FREAK, THEY CAN WALK INTO ANY CLUTTERED ROOM AND THEY'RE GONNA CALL IT DIRTY.
THEY'RE GONNA CALL IT UNHEALTHY.
THEY'RE GONNA SAY, OH MY GOD, ALL THE DUST AND MY ASTHMA'S GONNA MIX UP.
LIKE, IT, IT, THERE'S A, THERE'S A WAY TO GO, TO GO WAY TOO FAR WITH THIS.
AND THERE'S NO DEFINITION OF THIS WITHOUT, I, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE HOW THIS CAN NOT BE OPEN TO INTERPRETATION.
I RECOMMEND THAT WE TABLE THIS UNTIL STAFF AND LEGAL CAN WORK OUT TERMINOLOGY.
WELL, I WAS JUST GONNA LET Y'ALL KNOW THE, THE DICTIONARY DEFINITION IS SO DIRTY OR RIDDEN WITH GERMS AS TO BE A DANGER.
AND SO PERHAPS A CONDITION THAT IS DIRTY AND HEALTHY SO AS TO CAUSE DISEASE OR HARM TO OTHERS.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO JUMP IN HERE 'CAUSE I HAVE A, A CAN YOU HEAR ME? NO, I CAN.
SO, UH, I THINK THAT THIS IS KIND OF A HARD ONE FOR A CODE OFFICIAL TO ENFORCE, RIGHT? BECAUSE EVERYTHING I READ THERE IS LIKE PUBLIC HEALTH YEAH.
WHICH REQUIRES A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A CODE OFFICIAL TRAINING.
SO WHERE, HOW ARE WE GONNA DEFINE THIS? WHO IS WHO IN PUBLIC HEALTH OR WHATEVER DEPARTMENT OUTSIDE OF THE, OF THE, UH, DSD IS GOING ENFORCE THIS? YEAH, I THINK FOR THE BILLY SANDS BOARD, WHEN WE RAN INTO PROBLEMS LIKE THIS, IT, IT WAS WITH, UH, ANIMALS BEING INSIDE THE HOME.
AND IT WAS THE, THE TRIGGER WAS THE AMMONIA CONCENTRATION.
WHETHER THEY HAD THE, IN ORDER TO ENTER THE HOUSE, THEY HAD IT PUT ON BASICALLY A HAZMAT SUIT.
SO WHAT I'M READING HERE DOES NOT GET ME TO HAZMAT, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M, I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH.
THAT'S WHY IT'S CAUSED DISEASE OR HARM TO, YOU KNOW, HARM PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
WE'RE TALKING, THAT'S WHERE IT'S CALLING IT OUT RIGHT THERE, YOU KNOW, BUT UNSANITARY ISN'T A, A WOKE WORD, RIGHT? IT IS DESCRIBING WHAT WE SEE EVERY SINGLE DAY.
WE HAVE HOARDERS, WE HAVE MOLD IN ISSUES, WE HAVE DIRTY ICE MACHINES, RIGHT? IT'S UNSANITARY ICE MACHINE.
RIGHT? THAT'S NOT CALLING SOMEONE BAD.
IT'S NOT SAYING YOU OR UNC TO INDIVIDUAL.
IT'S NOT OUR, IT'S NOT OUR ISSUE THAT SOMEONE DOESN'T LIKE THAT WORD.
IT IS DESCRIBING A, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING ON, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
AND I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THAT DESCRIPTION IN THERE.
AND ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS WE'VE RUN INTO CASES WHERE THEY BRING IT IN ON PMCS PROPERTY ISSUES WHERE RATS, INFESTATION OF BUGS ROACHES STUFF.
SO THEY DO DO IT AND THEY DO HAVE HEALTH OFFICERS WITH 'EM WHEN THEY DO A DART INSPECTION, ALL THE CITY CODES ARE THERE.
SO THERE ARE AREAS WHERE WE DO DEAL WITH THIS TYPE OF ISSUES.
I, I GUESS SO MY MY PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND IS, IS TOTALLY LIKE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY STUFF, RIGHT? LIKE WILDLIFE AND, UH, AND, AND FORESTRY.
AND SO WHEN I READ THIS, I KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS FOR CERTAIN RODENTS OR I KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS FOR, I DON'T KNOW, UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE A KISSING BUG OR SOMETHING.
RIGHT? BUT THAT'S BECAUSE I'M TRAINED ON IT.
UH, AND, AND A PUBLIC HEALTH PERSON WOULD BE TOO, WHERE I, WHERE I HAVE A PROBLEM IS HOW DOES A CODE OFFICIAL HAVE THE PROPER TRAINING TO SAY WHAT'S GONNA HARM PEOPLE'S HEALTH? BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY, THAT IS A VERY SPECIFIC THING.
AND, AND THEY, AND THEY DON'T, I MEAN, NOT GONNA MOLD THOUGH BECAUSE YEAH.
BUT, BUT THE PROBLEM IS, IS THERE'S A RABBIT HOLE ON THIS ONE MOMENT.
[02:45:01]
MOLD IS NOT ACTUALLY CONSIDERED IN THE, IN, IN THE, FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS MOLD IS, IS NOT A CONSIDERATION.EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW AS LOGICAL HUMAN BEINGS THAT MOLD IS BAD FOR YOU.
BUT THAT, THAT'S GETTING BACK TO ACTUALLY IS, BUT IT'S UNDER TCEQ.
RIGHT? SO MOLD IS, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S UNDER A DIFFERENT AGENCY BECAUSE MOLD CAN KILL YOU, ESPECIALLY BLACK MOLD.
HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM IS, IS THE WORD, WHETHER YOU USE UNSANITARY OR INSANITARY, IS REFERENCED IN THE CODE.
SO OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS NOT TO TAKE THE WORD OUT, BUT IT'S TO FIGURE OUT SOME KIND OF DEFINITION THAT EITHER MAKES IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST, WE AGREE WITH YOU UNS INSANITARY DOESN'T MEAN JUST DIRTY, YOU KNOW, IT'S SOME CONDITION THAT'S SO BAD THAT IT'S GONNA CAUSE DANGER TO PEOPLE.
AND THE CODE OFFICIALS ARE ENFORCING THAT EVERY DAY RIGHT NOW.
AND SO, BUT THIS DEFINES THAT SAVITA AVITAS DEFINITION IS FINE WITH US.
WE WENT TO EITHER GOOGLE OR CHAT GPT WHEN WE WERE RUSHING TO GET THE DEFINITION, LOOKED IT UP AND JUST PUT IT IN.
BUT I, IF THERE'S A LEGAL DEFINITION OF INSANITARY OR UNSANITARY, THAT WOULD EVEN BE BETTER BECAUSE THAT THEN YOU'RE RELYING ON SOMEBODY ELSE OTHER THAN US.
IT'S ALSO, IT APPEARS ONE TIME IN 1 0 8 0.1 0.3.
I MEAN, IF, IF YOU, I MEAN A STRUCTURE FOR IS UNFAIR FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY.
WHEN THE CODE OFFICIAL FINDS THAT SUCH STRUCTURE IS UNLAWFUL INS, SANITARY VERMIN OR RAT INFESTED CONTAINS FILT AND CONTAMINATION.
RELAX, VENTILATION, ILLUMINATION, SANITARY HEATING FACILITIES ARE OTHER ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT REQUIRED BY THIS CODE.
WE'RE NOT LIKE MARRIED TO THIS DEFINITION.
WE JUST THOUGHT THAT IF IT'S GONNA BE IN THERE, IT SHOULD BE DEFINED.
SO, SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS, I'M SORRY, CAN LEAD TO A NEGATIVE HEALTH OUTCOME.
SO CAN WE JUST SHORTEN IT AND SAY A CONDITION THAT CAN LEAD TO A NEGATIVE HEALTH OUTCOME? YEAH, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT MUCH MORE.
I'M GONNA DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE IF YOU'RE, NOW YOU'RE UP TO SOMEONE'S INTERPRETATION, RIGHT? THEY MIGHT THINK IT IS HOWEVER, WE'RE SETTING CONDITIONS DIRTY, UNHEALTHY, AND LIKELY TO CAUSE, RIGHT? SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE A CHECKLIST.
IS IT DIRTY? IS IT UNHEALTHY? AND IS IT LIKELY TO CAUSE DISEASE? RIGHT? YEAH.
WHAT I HAD RECOMMENDED, WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF IT? UM, THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF UNSANITARY IS A CONDITION THAT IS DIRTY, UNHEALTHY, SO AS TO CAUSE DISEASE OR HARM PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
DOES THAT COME FROM BLACK LEGAL LIBRARY? ALL THAT NEEDS, IF THAT COMES FROM BLACK'S LEGAL LIBRARY, THAT'S AN ACCEPTABLE DEFINITION BECAUSE IT'S USED EVERYWHERE.
SO, SO WE CAN SEE THIS ON THE, I KNOW PEOPLE THAT WOULD CONSIDER THIS RIGHT HERE TO BE DIRTY.
NO, I, I MEAN, BUT IT'S NOT, BUT IT IS
OH, JUST FOR THAT WAS NOT A HINT TO THROW AWAY YOUR TRASH DOING.
HEY, JUST FOR DISCUSS, UH, SO FOR EMILY, A CONDITION THAT IS DIRTY AND, AND UNHEALTH A DIRTY AND UNHEALTHY SO AS TO CAUSE AND TAKE OUT AND LIKELY TO CAUSE OR TAKE OUT AND LIKELY UNSANITARY IS NOT REFERENCED.
SO WE'RE, SO LET LET ME JUST JUMP IN RIGHT QUICK.
SO AS, UH, MIKE SAID THIS IS ONLY REFERENCED ONE TIME.
ONE IS WHY WE DON'T CHANGE IT FROM WHAT SAYS IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW, INSANITARY TO SAY NOT SANITARY.
SO I DON'T NEED THIS DEFINITION ANYMORE 'CAUSE I DON'T HAVE INSANITARY DEFINITION OR WORD IN THE CODE, BUT I HAVE SANITARY 26 TIMES IN THE CODE AND THERE IS NO DEFINITION.
SO SHOULDN'T WE DEFINE SANITARY, WHICH IS HYGIENE OR CLEAN OR WHATEVER.
AND THAT WOULD, THAT SHOULD BE IT.
AND THAT WAY I DON'T HAVE INSANITARY OR UNSANITARY IN THE CODE BECAUSE IT'S ONLY REFERENCED ONCE AND I SWITCH IT AND HAVE DEFINITION FOR SANITARY.
'CAUSE TODAY WE DON'T HAVE THAT DEFINITION.
AND SANITARY IS REFERENCED 26 TIMES IN THE CODE.
THAT'S A GOOD, I THINK, I THINK THE OTHER SIDE OF DOING THAT, WHICH I I AGREE WITH THAT IDEA, IS I DON'T LIKE HAVING THE DEFINITION IN THERE BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN POP THE DEFINITION IN WHENEVER YOU NEED IT.
AND SO IF YOU ARE TAKING THIS OUT AND THE ONE TIME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE CONDITION, YOU CALL IT NOT SANITARY, THEN THAT ONCE AGAIN IT'S JUST, IT, IT MEETS THE INTENT THERE, BUT DOESN'T CREATE A DEFINITION THAT 'CAUSE THAT DEFINITIONS ARE THE, THE BEST SECTION TO, TO START FROM, RIGHT? 'CAUSE THEN I CAN JUST GRAB THAT DEFINITION AND PUT IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE AND REFERENCE A DOZEN THINGS IN A, IN A NEW CODE.
AND SO YEAH, I I I PREFER AT LEAST THAT WAY AND MAYBE DEFINE
[02:50:01]
SANITARY.I STILL THINK THAT IT'S, Y'ALL ARE REALLY LIKE GETTING INTO MURKY WATERS WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DISEASE OR PEOPLE'S HEALTH, UH, FROM A, UH, A CODE ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE.
'CAUSE I MEAN LIKE WHAT, HOW MANY OF Y'ALL WOULD WANT TO A, A BUNCH OF SQUIRRELS UP IN YOUR ATTIC, RIGHT? BUT YOU MIGHT NOT THINK OF THAT AS UNHEALTHY OR UNSANITARY, BUT THE RATS IS THE SAME.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING EARLIER.
IS THAT, SORRY, I I JUST OPENED UP A CAN OF WORMS. I APOLOGIZE THAT NO, BECAUSE THAT IS COVERED IN PMCS, BUT WE DO HAVE RODENTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
UH, WASTE WATER AND THE OTHER AGENCIES, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOES GO OUT ON INSPECTION.
SO IT IS COVERED WITH OTHER AGENCIES TO COME OUT WITH CODE COMPLIANCE.
THAT'S REALLY MY, SORRY, JUST TO ANSWER.
I THINK YOU MENTIONED THIS EARLIER OR YOU ASKED THE QUESTION.
SO CODE OFFICERS ARE NOT EXPERTS BASICALLY IN EVERYTHING, RIGHT? BUT IN CHAPTER ONE, IT DOES ALLOW US TO ASK FOR ANY ASSISTANCE WE NEED.
SO IF WE NEED METRO HEALTH, WE DO ASK THEM TO COME WITH US.
IF WE NEED ANIMAL CARE SERVICES, THE EXAMPLE ABOUT THAT LOCATION, WE, WE DO ASK FOR THEM TO SHOW UP.
SO WE HAVE OTHER RESOURCES AND EXPERTISE THAT, THAT WE DO DEPEND ON WHEN WE NEED TO.
IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS, WHEN WE GET DOWN TO GOING TO COURT, WHICH IS THE FINAL RESOLUTION, THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF UNSANITARY SHOULD BE THE DEFINITION THAT WE USE BECAUSE IT'S UNDERSTOOD IN LEGAL COMMUNITIES.
EVEN WAIT A MINUTE, IS THERE A JUDGE, EVEN A JUDGE WOULD UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL DEFINITION BECAUSE IT'S IN BLACK'S LEGAL LIBRARY AND THAT'S WHAT THEY ALL GO BY.
IF I TALK LIKE THE JUDGE IS A THIRD GRADER, THEN THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND
I, I'M GLAD I DIDN'T SAY THAT.
AND I'LL PUT THAT IN A MOTION TO ADOPT THE LEGAL LI DEFINITION OF UNSANITARY AND OR INSANITARY MEANING EQUAL THE SAME.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, JUDGE CILLA USED TO BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT PROSECUTOR, SO SHE KNOWS
I'M GONNA SECOND THE MOTION FOR, SO THE, THE, THE, THE FIRST QUESTION OVER HERE, FRED, I'M SORRY, WAS DO WE NOT ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL? THE ANSWER IS NO, WE DON'T ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL, BUT WE DO RECOMMEND AN ALTERNATE DEFINITION.
AND THE ALTERNATE DEFINITION IS FROM BLACK'S LEGAL LIBRARY.
THE QUESTION I ASKED BEFORE WE GO TO THE MOTION IS WHAT THEY HAVE ON THE PAPER HERE IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S UP THERE RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT? YOU'RE MAKING LIVE CHANGES POTENTIALLY TO THE LANGUAGE.
AND SO IF YOU CHOOSE TO TAKE THE AMENDED LANGUAGE, THEN YOU NEED TO STATE THAT AND, AND, AND YOU CAN'T APPROVE WITH AMENDMENTS BASICALLY, RIGHT? WITH, AND WE'RE FINE WITH THE AMENDMENT.
WHAT IS, UH, WITH WHAT IS UP THERE NOT IS WHAT IS ON, THIS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
RIGHT? YOU'RE MAKING LIVE CHANGES.
SO BASED OFF OF THE CONVERSATION THAT OCCURRED, WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING CONSIDERED.
WHAT WAS PROVIDED IN THE MEETING DOCUMENT WAS THE START OF THE CONVERSATION.
BUT THIS IS WHAT IS THE AMENDED LANGUAGE.
SO IN THE DOCUMENT HERE, WILL THIS EVER BE CORRECTED FOR RECORD OR NO? YES, IT'S THERE.
IT'LL BE CORRECTED IN THE MINUTES AND THEN THE FINAL DOCUMENT WILL BE POSTED ONLINE.
SO MR. ANDIS, IF THERE WERE TO BE A PROPOSAL, WE WOULD BE TRACKING IT AS AN APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS.
SO THAT'S HOW WE'RE, WE WERE TRACKING IT IN OUR NOTES AND HOW IT'S GONNA GO ON THE RECORD, YOU SAID YOU WERE FRIENDLY AND IT WOULD BE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED APPROVED AMENDED LANGUAGE.
SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE, BECAUSE YOU MADE THE MOTION, SO WE'RE ACCEPTING THAT.
SO IT HAS TO BE RECORD AS THAT I AM USING MY LOUSY MEMORY.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT SAVITA SAID, THAT THAT IS THE DEFINITION IN BLACK'S LEGAL LIBRARY.
AND IF THAT IS THE DEFINITION IN BLACK'S LEGAL LIBRARY, THEN YES, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS THE LANGUAGE.
AND I SECOND THAT MOTION, UH, THOMAS FRANK, 32ND IT I AM RE SECONDING IT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, THIS IS JOEL.
I I STILL LIKE A MEANS, UH, PROPOSAL JUST USING SANITARY AND GOING BACK AND CHANGING INSANITARY TO NOT SANITARY IN THE CODE, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT DEFINITION.
BUT AGAIN, UNSANITARY IS ONLY USED ONE TIME.
[02:55:02]
VERSUS INSANITARY VERSUS UNSANITARY.IF WE GET RID OF THE ONE INSTANCE WHERE WE'RE USING IN INSANITARY, THAT THAT TAKES CARE OF THIS.
UH, JUST THE ONE CONCERN I HAVE WITH, IF WE GO WITH JUST, UH, DEFINING SANITARY, THEN THAT MAY BRING UP, UH, OPEN UP A CAN OF WORMS BECAUSE THE DEFINITION OF SANITARY HYGIENIC, PROPHYLACTIC PURIFIED SALUBRIOUS SANITY.
AND, AND, AND THIS IS THE SAME DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD THE LAST S-A-P-M-T ROUND, WHICH IS WHY I REMINDED PEOPLE THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD THIS DISCUSSION AND IT WAS LIKE A THREE WEEK, THREE MEETING DISCUSSION GOING BACK AND FORTH.
WE DO NOT WANT TO REPEAT THAT.
FRED, CAN WE PUT, CAN WE GO AHEAD.
I THINK THE WAY Y'ALL DID IT, UH, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT 1 0 8 0.1 0.3, YOU LOOK AT A CODE SECTION IN ITS ENTIRETY.
AND THE WAY THIS TASK FORCE DID, DID IT IN 2022, IS WE FINALLY CAME TO THE DECISION THAT YOU LOOK AT IT WITHIN THE ENTIRE CONTEXT OF THE STATUTE THERE JUST NOW WORD BY ITSELF.
AND SO GOING BACK TO THE LEGAL DEFINITION, I MEAN THAT THAT IS EXPLAINING UNSANITARY, BUT THEN YOU TAKE IT IN CONJUNCTION WITH UNFIT FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY, UNLAWFUL FERMENT OR RAT INFESTED CONTAINS FILTER CONTAMINATION.
AND SO I DO COMMEND THE LAST TASK FORCE FOR LIKE YOU SAID, AFTER THREE WEEKS.
SO JUST THE OTHER QUESTION, SINCE WE ARE CHANGING INSANITARY TO UNSANITARY IN YOUR MOTION, DID YOU ALSO RECOMMEND THAT CHANGE? I DID NOT.
THAT'S A GOOD FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
I ALSO ADD TO THAT, THAT THE WORD INSANITARY BE DELETED AND WE USE THE WORD UNSANITARY AND THE DEFINITION AS YOU SEE THERE, I ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I GOT, UH, SO IT TOOK ME A LITTLE WHILE TO FIND WHAT, UH, BLACKS CALLS, UH, THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF UNSANITARY.
AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT SHORTER.
SO DO WE WANT TO MAKE IT THAT SHORTER OR IS THIS RIGHT OUT OF THE I THIS IS RIGHT OUT OF THE LEGAL DEFINITION UNSANITARY.
AND I THINK IT PROVIDES MORE GUIDANCE TO A CODE OFFICER AS OPPOSED TO IF WE GO WITH SANITARY AND WE HAVE TO ADD IN EVERY DEFINITION KNOWN TO MAN OR WOMAN.
SO I THINK THAT WE WOULD NEED, UM, A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO, TO SAY THE RECOMMENDED, UH, DEFINITION VERSUS THE BLACKS DEFINITION BECAUSE IT'S NOT EXACTLY THE SAME.
YOU'RE SAYING THE ORIG WELL, OKAY.
YOU WANT ME TO TAKE BLACK'S LIBRARY OUT MY MOTION? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
UH, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE USE, UH, FIRST OF ALL, THE MOTION IS TO CHANGE THE WORD INSANITARY TO UNSANITARY AND TO USE A DEFINITION THAT SAYS A CONDITION THAT IS DIRTY AND UNHEALTHY, SO AS TO CAUSE DISEASE OR HARM PEOPLE'S HEALTH.
I ACCEPT THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
AND MADAM, CAN WE DO AN ACTUAL ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS ONE, PLEASE.
CAN WE DO A ROLL CALL? VOTE, VOTE PLEASE.
WE'RE JUST GETTING THAT TAKEN CARE OF.
'CAUSE UM, WE, SHE HAD TO LEAVE OUR ADMIN TEAM.
IF WE COULD GET A ROLL CALL FOR THE DEFINIT, ACCEPTING THE DEFINITION AS WRITTEN AS MODIFIED, UM, FOR UNSANITARY.
ALL THOSE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? SHE WANTS TO DO A ROLL CALL VOTE.
AND THE ROLL CALL YOUR MOTION PLEASE.
[03:00:01]
CORRECTION.WE'LL TAKE THAT AS, UM, ON OUR NOTES.
UH, NEXT ITEM NUMBER SIX, IF WE CAN ALSO, BEFORE WE GET TOO FURTHER, CAN WE GO UP TO SECTION 1 0 8, 0.1 0.3 AND MAKE THAT CHANGE AS WELL FOR TRACKING.
IT WAS PART OF THE, THAT WAS PART OF THE MOTION RIGHT NOW, CORRECT.
BUT FOR EMILY TO MAKE THE CORRECTION AS WELL.
JUST SO WE'RE DOING THE LIVE TRACKS.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT SECTION AGAIN? 1 0 8 0.1 0.33.
IT'LL BE THE SECOND LINE, UH, INSANITARY RED LINING THAT AND REPLACING IT WITH UNSANITARY.
MAKE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE JUST AT FOUR 30, WE JUST SEND IT.
WE'RE DONE FOR THE DAY HERE SINCE SOME OF STAFF HAD TO LEAVE.
IS EVERYONE GOOD WITH THAT? I THINK WE CAN BE GOOD WITH THAT.
YEAH, WE, WE ARE OKAY TO CONTINUE FROM CITY.
YEAH, WE'RE STILL TRACKING THE RECORDS FOR THE MINUTES AND WE'RE STILL TRACKING THE NOTATION.
SO WE DO HAVE COVERAGE IF WE NEED TO KEEP GOING, BUT TOTALLY UP TO, I THINK ALMOND JUST LIKES OPENING THE WORMS, CANS OF WORMS CONSTANTLY.
I THINK FOUR 30 IS A GOOD TIME.
IF WE STAY LONGER THOUGH, THE TRAFFIC WILL BE GONE.
YOU GONNA SIT TILL SEVEN? YES.
I, I NEED TO GO GET MY NOTES DONE.
I'LL ACCEPT, I'LL ACCEPT YOUR GUIDANCE BOUNCE HERE.
DANNY, WE NEED TO FINISH ALL THE IONS QUICKLY.
I BETWEEN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YEAH.
ALRIGHT, MADAM CHAIR, WE'RE READY TO
OKAY, SO, UH, THE NEXT ITEM IS GONNA BE, UM, ITEM NUMBER 60.
THAT IS A, UH, PROPOSED, UH, AMENDMENT RATHER FROM THE IPMC.
IT'S A NEW SECTION, THE DEFINITIONS FOR PEER REVIEW.
UH, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THIS DEFINITION.
IT'S NOT REFERENCED ANYWHERE IN THE S-A-P-M-C, UH, THEREFORE WE KEEP THE S-A-P-M-C AS WRITTEN AND DENIED THIS REQUEST OR THIS RATHER THIS AMENDMENT COMMENT.
YOU'RE, UH, I MISSED THE RECORD.
YOU RECOMMEND WE DO OR DON'T, DON'T WE DON'T.
BECAUSE I WAS GONNA ARGUE THE FACT THAT A PEER REVIEW DOESN'T INQUIRE THIRD PARTY.
WE, WE JUST, UH, WENT THROUGH A SECTION THAT WAS ADDED IN THE 24 AND WE, UH, YOU GUYS VOTED ON NOT ADOPTING THAT SECTION.
THEREFORE WE DON'T NEED THE DEFINITION FOR IT.
MOTION TO GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF NOT, UM, ADOPTING THIS SECTION IN THE, UH, S-P-M-A-C.
I, UH, THIS FRED INS I, UH, SECOND IT.
OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION? I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.
WHEN WOULD A PEER REVIEW BE WARRANTED? SO, AGAIN, REMEMBER THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL IS REALLY FOR EVERY JURISDICTION.
THERE IS A LOT OF SMALL JURISDICTIONS THAT DO ASK FOR PEER REVIEW SO THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFF AND THEY DO HIRE A THIRD PARTY CODE OFFICERS TO GO DO THEIR WORK EVERY NOW AND THEN.
THIS WAS ADDED ON THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL THROUGHOUT THE HEARINGS THAT THEY HAD.
WE DON'T USE PEER REVIEWS AND THAT'S WHY WE REMOVED THE
[03:05:01]
SECTION ORIGINALLY OR ASKED TO REMOVE THE SECTION AND NOW WE ARE REMOVING THE DEFINITION AND MOST OFTEN IT'S USED IN LEGAL WHEN YOU GET INTO LEGAL ISSUES.ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
OKAY, THE NEXT SECTION WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM NUMBER 61.
IT IS A, UM, NEW DEFINITION THAT WAS ADDED IN THE 2024 IPMC.
UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS, UH, TO POWER SAFETY COVER.
UH, WE'RE RECOMMENDING WE REMOVE THE SHADED AREA ADDITIONAL CONTENT.
UM, THE IPMC UNFORTUNATELY DID NOT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CONTENT.
HOWEVER THE LANGUAGE WAS ON, WE'RE RATHER IN THE DEFINITION WE'RE WE WANNA STRIKE THAT OUT AND NOT ACCEPT THAT.
JUST THE DEFINITION ITSELF, NOT THE ADDITIONAL CONTENT SECTION.
ANY QUESTIONS? I'M READY FOR A MOTION.
NO, I HAVE, BUT I GOTTA, BECAUSE I'M NOT BUYING POWER, SAFETY POWER, A POOL COVER PLACED OVER A POWER SAFETY COVER RIGHT OVER WATER.
IT'S A POOL COVER THAT YOU PRESS A SWITCH AND IT GOES AND BACK.
IT SHOULD REFER AS A POWER SAFETY COVER.
IF YOU'RE AN ELECTRICAL, A POWER SAFETY WOULD GO OVER A PANEL BOX.
SO TO ME THAT KIND OF GIVES A, UH, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING POWER AND A SAFETY COVER, THE COVER IS OPERATED BY POWER.
IT'S NOT TALKING ABOUT POWER IN THE POOL.
YOU'VE, YOU'VE ACTUALLY GOT A COVER THAT GOES OVER THE POOL AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A REAL OUTSIDE OF THE POOL AREA THAT DRAWS THAT COVER BACK AWAY OFF THE TOP OF THE POOL.
AND SO WHY DO WE NEED THE DEFINITION? BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PULL AND THEN A NO HOMEOWNER HAS THAT MOTOR HAS MECHANISM ACTIVATED BY CONTROL SWITCH.
BUT WHY DO WE NEED THIS IN THE DEFINITION SAFETY? SO LET, LET ME, LET ME PUT THIS RECOMMENDATION OUT THERE IF WE CAN.
TABLE 61 AND 62 BECAUSE IT'S POWER, SAFETY COVER AND SAFETY COVER.
THOSE TWO ITEMS ARE DEFINITIONS FOR POOL COVERS.
ONE IS MOTORIZED AND ONE IS JUST COVER.
WE HAVE A SECTION IN THE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE LATER ON TALKS ABOUT THAT.
SO TECHNICALLY IF WE DO ADOPT THAT SECTION, WE NEED THE DEFINITION.
IF WE DON'T ADOPT IT, WE DON'T NEED THE DEFINITION.
OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADOPT THE DEFINITION AND THE SECTION.
BUT INSTEAD OF DOING THAT NOW WE CAN WAIT TILL WE GET THERE AND DISCUSS ALL THAT TOGETHER.
UM, CHAIR, I RECOMMEND OUR MOVE THAT WE TABLE ITEM 61 AND 62 UNTIL WE GET TO THE ACTUAL SECTION DEALING WITH POOLS.
UH, THIS FRED AND I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
HOW MANY MORE DO WE HAVE? THREE.
ALRIGHT, SO THE NEXT SECTION, NUMBER 63, IT'S AN IPMC AMENDMENT.
UH, IT'S A NEW DEFINITION STORM SHELTER.
UH, WE ARE NOT ADOPTING THE SECTION FOR STORM SHELTERS IN THE S-A-P-M-C, THEREFORE WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE DO NOT ACCEPT THE DEFINITION FOR STORM SHELTERS.
AND ANY COMMENT ALREADY REJECT THE STORM SHELTER SECTION.
'CAUSE IT MIGHT BE SAME THING YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT.
WHY ARE WE NOT ADOPTING THE STORM SHELTER SECTION? I THOUGHT I, I ACTUALLY LIKED IT.
YEAH, I DON'T THINK WE GOT TO IT.
I THINK WE'RE RECOMMENDING MAYBE TABLING IT UNTIL WE GET TO THE STORM SECTION.
'CAUSE I HAD SOME NOTES ALL ON THAT SECTION.
THEN WE'LL MAKE A NOTE TO TABLE THAT ITEM.
UH, MADAM CHAIRMAN THOMAS FRICKS.
I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE ITEM 63.
UH, UH, WE HERE ITEM 64 IS ANOTHER EXTERNAL PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
IT IS A NEW SECTION THAT WE'RE WRITING TO A GENERAL DEFINITION.
IT IS A DEFINITION FOR STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.
UM, UH, I THINK YOU PASSED IT UP, EMILY.
STRUCTURE MEMBERS IS REFERENCING OUR, UH, PMC
[03:10:01]
UNDER 3 0 4 EXTERIOR STRUCTURE.SO, UH, WE'RE RECOMMENDING ADDING A DEFINITION TO FURTHER DEFINE OR CLARIFY, UH, WHAT A STRUCTURE MEMBER IS.
ANY COMMENT? ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A NOTES TO.
DO WE WANT TO TO HAVE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OR DOES THE EXAMPLES CREATE MORE PROBLEM FOR US? EXAMPLES MEANING FOUNDATION, WALLS, UH, OR SUPPORT WALLS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOW BARRIERS.
OR DOES THAT JUST CREATE TOO MUCH PROBLEM? I THINK, I THINK THAT WOULD KEEP THE LANGUAGE CONSISTENT BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT READS IN THE OTHER SECTION.
I'M SORRY, WHERE WAS THAT NOTE, UM, TAKEN FROM? NO, IT IS, IT'S MY NOTES.
NOTES SAY, UH, SUCH AS FOUNDATIONS, WALLS, ROOFS, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL LOAD BEARING ITEMS. ALRIGHT, I SEE.
SO YOU'RE SUGGESTING MAYBE ADDING SOME, UH, APPROVING IT IN SOME WITH MODIFICATIONS.
CAN YOU REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME SO WE CAN TRACK THOSE CHANGES ON THE SCREEN SUCH AS FOUNDATIONS IT SHOULD SAY INSTEAD OF SUCH? I'M SORRY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO.
YEAH, THAT'S, WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY, YEAH, I WAS GONNA SAY THAT.
UM, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO.
CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY WHERE YOU'RE WANTING THIS LANGUAGE? WITHIN THE SENTENCE? IT'S ON THE SCREEN AT THE END OF STRUCTURE.
SUCH AS? SUCH AS, SUCH AS FOUNDATIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO.
THE RECOMMENDATION TO INCLUDED BUT NOT LIMITED TO FOUNDATIONS, WALL WALLS, ROOF, VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL.
IS THIS THAT, IS THIS DEFINED IN THE IBC OR IRC? IT, IT VERY POSSIBLY COULD BE, MIGHT BE A WAY TO GET, TO GET TO, BECAUSE IF, CAN WE JUST, SOCIAL MEMBERS ARE REFERENCED IN THIS CODE.
IT'S GONNA BE REFERENCING BACK TO RIGHT.
THAT, BUT CAN WE JUST FINISH DOING THE TEXT AND THEN WE CAN CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION JUST SO WE CAN HAVE IT ON, ON THE WRITING.
WHAT WAS THE LAST PART OF THAT ONE? I'M SORRY, JUST A MINUTE.
I'M READING IT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN CHANGING MY MIND.
I WITHDRAW MY AMENDMENT TO IT.
EMILY, YOU CAN DELETE ALL THE WAY BACK TO STRUCTURE.
YEAH, SOMETIMES WHEN YOU'RE WORKING TOO LATE AT NIGHT ON MULTIPLE SUBJECTS, YOU GET TOO INVOLVED.
SO ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I, I AM OPEN TO A MOTION THEN.
WHAT'S GOING ON SECOND? DWAYNE, LOOK LIKE YOU WAS ABOUT TO MAKE THE MOTION, SO I WAS WAITING FOR HIM.
MS. THOMAS FRANKS, I, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON, UH, STRUCTURAL, UH, MEMBERS DEFINITION.
OKAY, THE LAST ONE'S FAIRLY SIMPLE.
IT'S, UH, AGAIN, A PROPOSED AMENDMENT, MORE OF A COMMENT IF ANYTHING ELSE, BUT IT'S, IT'S REALLY REFERENCING THE DEFINITIONS IN THIS CHAPTER TWO.
UH, AND IT'S PROPOSING THAT WE ITALICIZE THE DEFINITIONS, UH, IN THE, UM, THROUGHOUT THE BOOK, WHEREVER IT'S REFERENCED.
UH, AND THERE'S A DEFINITION SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT, THAT WORD IN THE PMC, UH, WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT APPROVAL OR THAT RECOMMENDATION.
I'D SAY IT'S PRETTY MUCH STANDARD PRACTICE NOW TO HAVE IT.
[03:15:01]
I'LL TAKE A MOTION.I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT THE, UH, THE ITALICS WITHIN THE BOOK.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
THAT'S THE LAST ITEM, UH, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT TODAY.
UH, IS THERE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE BEFORE WE GO? I, I THINK THE ONLY ITEM TO DISCUSS IS OUR NEXT MEETING IS WEDNESDAY, UH, THE 13TH THAT STARTS AT 9 9 2 11.
THE MEETING AFTER THAT IS GONNA BE NOVEMBER THE 20TH.
THE QUESTION IS, DO WE WANNA EXTEND THE TIME FOR THAT MEETING? DO WE WANNA KEEP IT TO TWO HOURS OR EXTEND TO FOUR HOURS LIKE WE DID THIS EVENING? THE 20TH, BUT WE HAVE 13.
I THINK WE SHOULD, UH, HOLD OFF UNTIL NEXT MEETING TO SEE THAT.
JUST TO SEE IF THERE'S, IF IT'S WARRANTED, KICK DONE.
MADAM CHAIRMAN, CAN I, CAN I MAKE A REQUEST? SURE.
UM, THE, THE TWO ITEMS THAT WERE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM US THAT WERE TABLED TO BE RECONSIDERED, UM, CAN WE ASK THAT THOSE NOT BE DONE AT THE NOVEMBER 13TH MEETING? 'CAUSE NEITHER OF US ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO ATTEND THAT DAY.
UM, WHAT WERE THE ITEM NUMBERS? REMEMBER IT WAS THE, IT WAS ITEMS, THERE WAS SEVERAL 50 AND 51.
IT WAS IN REFERENCE TO THE METHOD OF SERVICE 1 0 7 0.3, AS WELL AS ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WE RECOMMENDED THAT YOU WANT US TO SPEAK UP.
WE'RE GOING TO A NATIONAL MEETING THAT WE HAVE TO GO TO.
IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE ON, ON THE BOARD.
AND SO AS A, IF POSSIBLE JUST TO DELAY ANY OF OUR RECOMMENDED STUFF UNTIL THE 67 73 MADAM CHAIR, ONE STIPULATION TO THAT IS THAT WE KIND OF HAVE A TENTATIVE DATE TO APPROVE THIS ALREADY.
AND SO AS LONG AS THIS DOESN'T SLOW DOWN THE DATE TO FULLY APPROVE THAT, I DON'T SEE WHY WE COULDN'T DO THAT.
WE DO HAVE THE, THE 13TH, WHICH IS THE TWO HOUR MEETING, AND THEN WE HAVE THE 20TH ALREADY SCHEDULED.
SO YOU'LL BE HERE THE 20TH? NO, IF YOU'RE DONE ON THE 13TH.
I MEAN, I, I WOULDN'T EXPECT YOU TO WAIT FOR US.
I'M JUST ASKING IF, IF YOU CAN, WELL, AND Y'ALL WILL HAVE A CHANCE AT THE BSB BOARD WHERE IT'S GOING IN FRONT.
SO Y'ALL WILL ALSO HAVE A CHANCE FOR THE ENTIRE BOARD MEETING TO WHERE WE CAN MAKE CHANGES UP THERE AS WELL.
AND WE WILL BE HERE ON THE 20TH FOR SURE.
AND THEN, UM, ALSO, WELL THAT EXTENDS TO THE ENTIRE PUBLIC.
IF ANYONE THAT HAS BEEN WATCHING WANTS TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS, THEY'RE ABLE TO COME IN AS WELL.
SO MADAM CHAIR, ONE QUESTION TO, UH, STAFF.
IF WE APPROVE EVERYTHING HERE AND IT'S DONE AND WE PRESENT IT, IT'S PRESENTED TO THE FULL BOARD, ARE YOU SAYING IT CAN STILL BE CHANGED? THE FULL BOARD? YEAH.
THE FULL BOARD CAN CHANGE, YEAH.
AND THEN FROM THERE, WE TAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL.
UH, WE TAKE IT TO PCDC FIRST AND THEY HAVE THE, I GUESS, THE RIGHT TO CHANGE OR MODIFY ANYTHING, AND THEN WE GO TO FULL COUNCIL AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHANGE OR MODIFY ANYTHING.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LONG PROCESS AND WE HAVE A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS OR PUBLIC SPEAKERS IF THEY CHOOSE TO THROW OUT THE WHOLE PROCESS.
I WILL NOT BE HERE ON THE 20TH OF NOVEMBER.
UH, SO JUST MAKE THAT COMMENT FOR ASSURANCE THAT YOU HAVE A QUARUM.
AND I, I WILL NOT BE HERE ON THE 13TH, SO NEXT WEEK I WON'T BE HERE.
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, UH, THEN WE'RE ADJOURNED.
AND THERE'S STILL COFFEE AND SNACKS HERE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TAKE ANY TO GO.