Now I'd like to call the Arlington City Council to order and I'm honored to be able to ask Ms. Katherine Walman, our council member, from West Arlington to give the invocation and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Ms. Walman. The office has been now. Oh Father, we come to you tonight praising you for who you are. Your name is majestic in all the earth and all the earth is yours. Lord we thank you for the privilege of being able to just live in this beautiful city in this wonderful state and in the United States of America. Lord I thank you for the people that are gathered here tonight. I thank you for this mayor and council. And Lord, I just pray tonight that You will give Your wisdom, Your strength, and Your compassion and ability to listen, and to hear and to speak, and to represent all of the people in this city. We are so blessed, Lord, I ask that you protect all of our emergency people. That you would watch over them, the farm and the police from the ambulance drivers, those people that are out all night long, Lord, taking care of us. We just lift them up to you and ask for your hand to cover each one of them and protect them tonight and give them all that they need to serve. We thank you for all the employees of this city who serve us so well and who do so much to make this the place that we want to live and grow and be a service to you. Now in the name of my Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, I pray, amen. Amen. Would you join me? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which is hence one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Texas flag, honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to be Texas one state under God and in New Jersey. I'd like to call up, Jensy Topel, the interim director of planning and also Jennifer Pruitt or planning manager if y'all would come up. Have a special presentation tonight. We have a certificate that recognizes the professional planning standards demonstrated by the planning staff of the City of Arlington, along with the support exhibited by the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission. The City of Arlington Planning staff has met the chapter's goals for one, increasing awareness of professional planning, recognizing planning departments which meet certain professional requirements, enhancing neighborhood and citizen recognition of planning efforts, encouraging the funding of professional training for commissioners and staff, and aiding in economic development and community image. We're very proud of this department. They handle a tremendous amount of cases and tons of permits, but most importantly of all, we count on them for strategic planning here and the community. I would like to thank the community for the work that we have done. We have done a lot of things that we have done. We have done a lot of things that we have done. We have done a lot of things that we have done. We have done a lot of things that we have done. We have done a lot of things for the support that council and planning and zoning commission has given us to be the professional planners that we want to be. Kevin, if you get a chance, can you come up here? I think whatever plan we could just have a vote together. Thank you. Thank you. Next view to appointments to boards and commissions and we'll turn to our city secretary, Miss Marys Spino. Thank you, Mayor. Tonight we have five appointments to boards and commissions to the Arlington Higher Education Finance Corporation, Kenneth Woods, President to the North Texas Higher Education Authority, Governor Jackson, President to the Housing Authority, Patrick Locke, Chair to the North Texas Higher Education Authority, Governor Jackson, President, to the Housing Authority, Patrick Locke, Chair, to the Park and Recreation Board, Donna Derevitz, Chair, and to the Special Transportation Advisory Board, Shannon Myers, Chair. Do we have a motion? Yeah. We have a motion for approval from Council Member Glass. Be a second. Council Member for our Myers, please cast your votes. Motion passes. Next, Mr. Pinot, could you go over speaker guidelines in general to Coral? Thank you, Mayor. We ask that citizens and other visitors in attendance assist in preserving the order and decorum of this meeting. Any person making personal profane slanders or threatening remarks, or who becomes disruptive or address the mayor and council, or while attending the city council meeting. Maybe remove from the council chambers. For speakers tonight, when your name is called, please come to the microphone at the podium and state your name and address for the record. During public hearings, the applicant will be asked to speak first and will be given five minutes to make their presentation in three minutes for any rebuttal. Speakers in support of an opposition of an item will be given five, excuse me, three minutes to make their statements. To the extent possible, please refrain from repeating testimony, which has already been given. A bell will signal the end of each speaker's time and consideration of other speakers. Please wrap up your comments promptly when you hear the bell. And we ask that you address your comments to the mayor and council. Okay, next we'll move to approval of items from executive session, Ms. Pino. Thank you, Mayor. Tonight we have three items, but our first item is a condemnation resolution, so we'll do that one first. This is a resolution authorizing condemnation of 85,777. Square feet of waterline easement rights for the public use in, over, and through. Land situated in Tarrin County, Texas, being a track of land located in the Matthew Anderson survey, abstract number nine, tracks nine and ten, and the Grimsley S survey, abstract number five, seven, four, track three. Taren County, Texas, otherwise known as 7430, Hudson Cemetery Road, 7530 Hudson Cemetery Road, 7504 Hudson Cemetery Road, and 4930 Eden Road South. For the public use of constructing, reconstructing, maintaining and using a water main and all necessary occurrences for the Bethesda 24-inch water line extension, Mansfield Cardinal Road, Hudson Cemetery Road and Eden Road Project. Lots to call upon Council Member Parker. Thank you, Mayor. I move that the city council authorize a use in power of a minute domain by the City of Arlington to acquire the Property necessary for public use is ready by the as read by the city secretary and As more fully described in the resolution for this item Mr. Pino, are there any speakers on this item no speakers mayor? Okay, then I'll call for a second to that motion No speakers, Mayor. Okay, then I'll call for a second to that motion. Okay, we have a motion by Councilmember Parker and a second from Councilmember K. Part. Please cast your votes. Motion passes. And we have the two executive session consent agenda items, which is the Bethesda 24-inch waterline extension project, Mansfield Cardinal Road, Hudson Cemetery Road and Eden Road, Robert Martell Ruff and Mark Walker Wells, co-trust use of the Sarah Ann Ruff family testimentary trust and Rebecca Ann Wells, and also the Abrams Street Project, Cooper Street to Collins Street, Mark A. Guest or just and Belinda Guest. And those are the two items, Mayor. Mr. Peno, are there any speakers on this item? No speakers. Okay, then I'll call for a motion. I have a motion for approval from Councilmember K. Part and a second from Councilmember Parker, please cast your votes. Okay, Mr. Shepherd. Madam Secretary, please show me a substaining on item 6.3. Okay. We'll. Okay. Next with that, we'll move to approval of minutes. Mr. Pino. Thank you, Mayor. We have the special meeting minutes from November 6th of 2017 and the afternoon the special meeting minutes from November 6th of 2017, and the afternoon and evening meeting minutes from November 7th of 2017. Council members have any additions or corrections? Seeing none, Mr. Pino, are there any speakers on this item? No speakers. Okay, and then we have a motion for approval from Council Member Wolfe, and a second from Council Member Walmond. Please cast your votes. Motion passes. Next we move to approval of consent agenda, Mr. Sapino. Thank you, Mayor of the Consent agenda. This evening contains nine minute orders and five resolutions. The minute order seek to authorize one sitting at FY 2018 maintenance agreement. Two annual requirements contract for the supply of plastic meter boxes and iron cover lids. Three through five renewal of annual requirements contract for liquid aluminum sulfate, for hot mix, asphalt, concrete, and for irrigation relocation, three removal and grass replacement. Six engineering services contract for East Arlington Recreation Center and East Arlington Branch Library Drainage Analysis. Seven construction contract for WAL 12-inch sanitary sewer. Eight and nine purchase of playground equipment for the Nathan Low Park and for fire apparatus. And the resolution seek to authorize 10 construction manager at risk authorization for the Southeast Arlington Recreation Center. 11 and 12 cas votes for the Arlington Entertainment Area Management District Board and for the Terrent Appraisal District Board of Directors. 13 in the North Central Texas Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program and 14 the Housing Tax Credit Application Review Policy. Okay, I'd like to call upon Ms. Wolfe. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to remove from a consent consideration item number 8.14. Okay. And then, Mr. Pino, are there any speakers in support or opposition of the items that appear on the consent agenda? Just on the 8.14. Okay. I'm going to hold that one. Okay, so we'll now take a motion for approval of the consent agenda minus 814. So I have a motion for approval of the rest of the consent agenda from Council Member K. Partt and a second from Council Member Walman, please cast your votes. Motion passes. Mr. Shepherd. Mayor Madam Secretary, shall me as standing on item 8.7 please. Thank you. Sorry, Mayor. Okay. So now we are considering 8.14. Ms. Wolfe, do you have anything you want to say or about that? I just wanted to move for approval of the housing tax credit application review policy as revised by council this evening at the Saturday news session. Right before I call for a second we have a speaker. Mr. Charles prior. Price. I'm sorry. Mr. Price. I'm here in opposite. You could state your name and address please. Charlie Price, as I'm known, with the development corporation at 1509B South University in Fort Ward. We are a Terrent County Community Housing Development Organization, certified by the City of Arlington and by Terrent County. And in the process of being certified by the City of Fort Ward. So we're one of the three that are certified in Terrent County, but there's only two of us who actually do basically community housing development organization type work. The other one is housing channels, also known as Terrent County Housing Partnership. And my comments are reflective of their comments they gave to me this afternoon. Unfortunately, they're not here to be able to talk about it. We are definitely against this policy. We think that you guys need to really take a harder look at this and look at the long-term effect that has and not having a nonprofit owner of these properties because you know these are Section 42 IRS tax credits. These are individual or these are tax credits are due from our federal government and they actually buy down the debt on these pieces of property. And we want the long term use of those. It was actually in the statute, the Section 42 statute, that it would be sold to a non-profit at the end of the compliance period. But, and we have had some state laws that have changed that now allow the developer to continue owning the property forever. So, local cities can actually say you have to sell it. You have to get out of the transaction. And I'm going to tell you why some local cities want to do that. Tarant county basically pushes this one very hard. And if you want a bond deal done in Tarant County, you've got to come to the housing channels or the community, or to the development corporation of Tarrant County. And they want that for a reason. The long term survivability of this property. After 15 years, if a developer has left this property go down, and they want to recent indicate it again, and they're a related entity, under state law, they're allowed to do it. So here you are. You're the state guys are trying to put you local guys wanna do. I will say to you, just like Tarrant County did, they made them sign a first-order refusal with the development corporation of Tarrant County that we would be the owners. Now, I will tell you that we're general partners on three different transactions here in Tarant County, one being the Samsung Park right now. We're building the 100 units of workforce housing and 212 units of senior housing. We're also doing the same type of project over in ball springs. So gives you an idea of what you can do, what it does is it gives you local control in the end. The City of Fort Worth requires you to either go through their housing finance corporation as a general partner or the housing authorities or local partner or through community housing development organization. They've been burned enough that they understand that in the end a local group will be a better owner than someone from out of state. And of course I went over today and talked to Tilly about a previous transaction we had here in Arlington from an out of town nonprofit. And this nonprofit decided after we had agreed that they would do social services. And after I left representing the nonprofit, they decided because Tilly was part of a church. They said, we don't want you providing social services for us. Now, that wouldn't happen with us. That wouldn't happen with health and channels. So it gives you an idea of right now, you can make a difference. The pre-application that's doing the 18th is a pre-application. And that's all I guess. It's not where they put a bunch of money up and a bunch of drawing time up. Some of these deals are just getting to the drawing stage. So this gives you an idea that this is a time that you guys can make a difference in your long term policy. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Price? Mr. Parker. Mr. Price, could you give us some examples of the difference that transpires between a tax credit property that is absentee owned and one that is locally owned? Well, I think there's one in New York and 303 if I remember right. If some old tax credit deal were two officials from HUD went to jail on and it did go down for many years and had to be recindicated get it back to normal. So I just give you one example right there. That was an older transaction. Okay. Now you have taken several properties in the city of Arlington, have you not and you have rehabbed them under, not redeveloped them, you've rehabbed them. And I just want to say to the council that it has changed the face of that particular neighborhood because of the projects that Mr. Price has completed. And I fully support his notion that in the event that these tax credit owners who are in it for the tax credits themselves, in the event that they want to roll these particular properties and we've seen this quite a bit. It's important to roll them to a local entity that can be reached at the city level and not go to LA or New York or wherever that particular financial house is. So I agree with him. I believe that the deadline is simply a deadline that can be we can make an amendment to this, but until we make an amendment to it, I really can't support it because I believe in local entities. Thank you. Mr. Shepherd. Mayor, if I could ask Mindy Cochrane to come forward for just a second. Thank you, Mr. Price. Thank you. I've been asking you a lot of questions today to help me figure out what's what. That's okay. So the resolution that we have before us today, which has the single page attachment, I couldn't find anything in the single page attachment, which is our new policy that talks about what we just heard from Mr. Pride. The policy is silent to that element. It just defaults back to TDHCA's rule that says at the end of the compliance period, there's a 60-day window where the property is available to a Cho-toe community housing development organization like DCTC, like housing channel. Then the next 60 days it goes to a nonprofit. Chotas are nonprofit, but they're special type of nonprofits. So kind of goes to a generic nonprofit for the second 60 days, and then it's available to be sold. So the two entities would have the opportunity to purchase a property at the end of the compliance period. For 120 days, we wouldn't just, it would stop required to sell it to a local nonprofit. There could be other nonprofits competing for the project. So during that 120 day period, it just says the TDHCA rules just for to a nonprofit, not a local nonprofit. Correct. That's the difference. And I know we had some conversation today about lures and all kinds of other stuff. And that's not found here. Correct. We just default to TDHCA's rules, which is Texas statutes. And if we wanted to include Mr. Prides comments, as Mr. Parker has suggested, would there need to be anything done to what's before us today? Or is that something that can be done? We could do it as subsequent action. We could do it as subsequent council meeting, we sure could. So if we were to pass this tonight, that wouldn't, that would allow the process to move forward. And we could still, the next meeting or the meeting after that add to what we're talking. Absolutely. Okay, all right, thank you very much. Okay, any other discussion? Dr. Myers. Thank you, Mayor. I'm not sure which question this is for as many or for Mr. Price. I heard Mr. Price say that this, if I didn't mistake in what you said, if you don't mind coming back up here for just a moment if I may ask you. I heard you say that what we just heard about the TDHC policy, is that you said something about a state law overriding that could you clarify that point for me? decided to change what they considered material change in ownership to include related entities could continue owning the property after the 15th year and it does not go through the first right of refusal process And that's where the lure kicks in the lure with that at that point be negated and if let's say My son Duncan wanted to take over my property, he could. And it not go through a local nonprofit. And I'm just using that as a generic way of saying it. So yes, the the lower process got changed in one stroke of the pen. Not this last session, but the session before. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Price. And then I have just one question for you. As a follow up to that particular piece to piggyback on what Mr. Shepard just asked you, given the light of what was just articulated to us, I hear that we can do this in subsequent action. However, I'm a firm believer and if we're going to put this out to for those developers who are interested in doing this, to set our expectations up front. And so I'm a little concerned that we're not setting this expectation of, I understand controlling what happens 15 years down the line under, I understand some of the arguments. Help me work through though the question that I have in my mind, which is if we come back, say we do this today, we come back and amend it some future time, that is setting a mixed message to the developers that are out there. So I'm a little concerned in that. Can you help me get more comfortable with that? In my opinion, it's just my opinion. I don't know that the developer would have a strong opinion one way or the other, whether the project was still to a nonprofit or a local nonprofit. Oftentimes the developers aren't local, they don't have that tie to the community like we all do. So I don't know that they would have a strong preference either way. Am I answering your question? Sort of. If you have a developer who is partnering with a local nonprofit, which is the structure that we're looking for to happen, you're telling me that someone under developer just would not have this as a concern in the upfront when they are proposing these particular. Automation, I think we might be talking about two different things. I think so. I'm talking about the developer requiring the developer to partner with a nonprofit up front. Or are we talking about the 15 year end of the 15 year compliance period where the project is sold? 15 years. At the end of the 15 years. Okay. We're talking about the 15 year. But what I'm saying is, do you not in your estimation is my concern is that we set that expectation that there would be that at the end of the 15 years that we and if TDHC's policy has already been overridden and the Laura is a problem. So I'm asking you is there anything we can do to the policy is current or do we need to go forward tonight or can we do something to this policy to address that issue? I'm back to Mr. Shepard's question. It would be my recommendation that we move forward with the policy as it exists and we can certainly come back at any point in time and revisit it. I don't think that would deter an applicant from applying, but I think there's a legal issue that would need to be vetted to determine which law would be overriding. And I say that based on TDHCA's comments to me this morning when we discuss this. Okay Ms. Kport. Thank you Mayor. So if we were to pass this tonight and this according to the schedule we saw today was supposed to be kind of out there December 1st, which is Friday, right? Correct. But we're meeting next Tuesday. So we can amend it, we get clarification on all these things, and we can amend it as early as next Tuesday. So you're only talking two business dates, really. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Roughly, yeah. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Roughly. Thank you. Okay. Ms. Wolfe. Thank you. My question was, does it have to be done before any? I know you said you're already working with nine developers. Do our actions, if we want to enforce what Mr. Price has brought forward to us? Is there a drop dead date there or does we just need to have that adopted as they move through the process and get a recommendation prior if that's February? We know they have to be down in Austin by March 1. Correct. So we could, when we look at those projects, just because this gets changed, there still may be opportunities to say no, no, no. But we will look at each of those projects through committee as well as this full council will and be able to truly vet that, according this policy and move forward and they can either stay in the game or choose to not move forward. Is that? Absolutely because the policy is designed to I don't think next Tuesday is a big deal to my mind. Let's get it right. Yeah so that we can share have staff share with those developers are intentions. I think it's more important to get the policy as it's written right now out to the developers so that we can start accepting applications because the review process is so long and during that timeframe between now and March 1st, if Council so choose they could go this other route and put that requirement on those projects. Right now what we're trying to do is upfront, what do we want the project to look like and what's gonna happen in 15 years is almost related, obviously, but it's a separate question. Do we want to decide now who the next best owner will be in 15 years? Thank you, that answered my question. Welcome. Ms. Walman. Okay, I mean, this is Walman. Okay. I'm trying to get this graphic around my head. But what my question would be, maybe I'm a ghostly, why would we go ahead and what this paper suggested? And wrap the whole thing up right now. Instead of taking it one, what scenario would cause us not to adopt this for one? That's what I wanted to know. What kind of scenario is there that we wouldn't want to do that? That we wouldn't want to go ahead and do what Mr. Price said for any of them. Can you tell me that? You're asking me? I don't know. I thought you were asking me to help there. It really comes down to, do you want to make the decision today about restricting who could be the owner of that property in 15 years, not knowing who the nonprofit developers in the community might be at that time. They might be fantastic. They might be DCTC and housing channel and that would be ideal. But we don't know who they'll be in 15 years. That would be the only reason I could think that you may not want to. And then the legal aspect of which Laura would prevail. We would need to iron that out. But we have 15 years. Oh, okay. So we would have to, then every time when comes in and we're looking at it, we would have to go through committee and be bedded and then counsel and then decided. You know, okay, thank you. Any other questions? Are there any other speakers? No other speakers, Mayor. Any other discussion? Dr. Myers. Mr. Mayor. I'm a little troubled by our discussion about this particular issue and I'm leaning toward wanting to have the opportunity. It's as Miss K. Part pointed out, it's three business days. I'd rather see us wrap this up and deal with this. We are meeting next Tuesday. If staff feels confident that they could work through this and add this language so that we can just wrap it up and complete it next Tuesday. I think I'd feel better for us to take a step back at this point and postpone it until next week. But the. Mission. Well, what I heard here though is the December 1 deadline is getting out the information, but. What I heard here though is the December 1 deadline is getting out the information, but the application, but essentially instead of releasing it on Friday, they were to release it next Wednesday. So it's not the lot of time in terms of that. It allows us another few days to get this worked out so it's in one policy statement. It's all encompassed and it's all up front. But I defer to the will of council. Mr. Farker, make a motion to continue to the 5th of December. All right, so we have a motion by Mr. Parker to continue until the December 5th council meeting. We have a second from council member for our mayors. We'll let it catch up, okay? Please cast your votes. Motion passes to continue. Yes, Mr. Shepherd. If I could, I supported my colleagues in the continuance. I guess what I'm struggling with and I want to make this on the record. So Mr. Pride can hear it and Mr. Coran, and my colleagues can hear it as well. I think we're trying to solve a problem we can't solve. If state law has preempted already, any action that we might take that would be something different than what state law has said. And I think I heard Mr. Pride say it one way, and I think I heard Ms. Cochran say it a different way. But that's not going to change between now and next Tuesday. We're still going to have the same dilemma, which is do we adopt an action of Laura or whatever the name is, that we know, perhaps based on what Mr. Pryde has said, is preempted by state law. So we've postponed it to vote on something that's not gonna be any different today than it is next Tuesday. And I'm fine with that. I'm just bringing that up to encourage staff to try to see if there is a way to fix this. Otherwise, we're in the same predicament next Tuesday as we are today. We're going to adopt a policy which may be because I agree with Mr. Parker and I agree with Mr. Pride. I would love to keep it local. But as Mr. Pride's pointed out, the state's already said we can't. And so I don't know how we saw that problem, but I just want to be on record for that. So hopefully we have a solution to that problem next Tuesday. We're not talking in circles again, like we have today on this. Well taken. Councilmember K. Part. Thank you, and I agree with you, Mr. Shefford. And I was supportive of the motion. report. Thank you and I agree with you Mr. Sheppard and I was supportive of the motion. You know I think our dilemma is is that you're trying to predict 15 years out and that's very difficult to do. It's really virtually impossible to do. But staff may now that they've heard our concerns and our desire, although they may not be realistic because they're overridden by the state, give them more time to maybe come back with some other language that at least mediates the problem a little bit. And they may not be able to. But that's why I was fine with going ahead and voting on it today and then amending it next Tuesday. Assuming there was something to amend, but we can just vote on it next Tuesday. Great points, Ms. Wolfe. And perhaps if we can't resolve this because it's at that state level, but perhaps if we as a council gave staff the authority to share with that potential developer. Our intent is, you know, if you choose not to operate this entity for the next 30, 40 years, that our intent is and our expectation is to have a local nonprofit, local Chodo come in when you're ready to walk away from, if it's 15 years, 20 years, but somehow create language of what this counsel's intent, because we're not gonna be here in 10, 15 years, so it can be somebody else in the state can change it to it three more times. But somehow, I just wanna throw that in be somebody else in the state can change it to it three more times. But somehow I just want to throw that in to what our intent is if that could help y'all ward something in this application to send the message of the City of Arlington's intent as we move forward with any tax credit developments. That's just my opinion. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Wolfe. Okay, with that, we've given staff lots of information there and a big challenge ahead and thank you for that. Well, next move to public hearings, ordinances, first and final readings. The zoning case PD 16-24 platinum storage 2696 Bernie Road. We will continue this case until December 5th still gathering information there and working out some things on that. So if everybody's all right we'll continue that case next week. And then the next one that we have is 121 ordnance emitting parks and recreation chapter relative to park closings and I'll call upon Mr. Scott Farman assistant director of parks and recreation department. Good evening, Mayor and Council. For your consideration tonight, the ordinance is to amend the article 8.01, references park closing of our parks and recreation chapter So the neighbors at SJ Stovall on Richard Simpson Park have been increasingly reporting nuisances past 10 and later hours of the evening And we've had several requests to close the parks at 10 p.m. and ranging back to 2015. There's been considerable discussion by City Council, the Committee on Municipal Policy and Parks and Recreation Board about this issue in both the Committee and the Parks and Recreation Board made recommendations to close both these facilities at 10 p.m. So with the adoption of this ordinance, SJ Stovall Park, closing hours would go from mid-night to 10 p.m. and Richard Simpson Park would go from 11 p.m. to 10 p.m. We have be taking questions. Any questions for Mr. Farman, Ms. Walman? And Richard Simpson Park, does this when you say close the park will this allow fishermen to go into the lake because they they go and odd hours crew after in between those hours at their club is that still going to have access only for fishermen or how will that work correct The ordinance is still has language in it that allows fishing and boating activities beyond 10 p.m. All right. 24 hours. Just K part. Thank you Mayor. One question. When would this go into effect at the council passes it? It'll be 30 days from the adoption of the ordinance. So it's around January 11th, 12th. So that's going to give us enough time to do some public outreach. Let everyone know that the park's closing at different hours and also change some signage and things like that that we need to do operationally. Okay, thank you. And Mayor, if I can add a comment, both of these items were citizen driven. The neighborhood I know personally around Estrella Park is Being concerned about this for about four years. We've had I've had town hall meetings about it We've had the police involved we stepped up the trolls out there the problem continued But you know lots of times and those of us They're elected here. Well, I can't make a difference. Well, you absolutely can because this was citizen driven and it Miss Wyme would had a similar experience at Simpson And so it all emanated from they live closest to the park they see the problem much more often than I see the problem and They came forward to City Hall and the parks department they went through the process. They did the whole thing right and If the council agrees this evening, they absolutely affected change. And so kudos to them. All right. Any other questions from Mr. Farman? Okay, Mr. Pino, are there any speakers on this item? Yes, Mary, we have three speakers tonight on support. Doors Mullins? Miss Mullins, if you could come forward and state your name and address for the record. I'm going to go to the office to see if you can come forward and state your name and address for the record. I get evening everybody. My name is Doris Mullins and my address is the Poladras 31 20. there in the area by Stowewell Park. And hello, just wanted to confirm my support for adopting this ordinance. As Ms. Kate Parton had mentioned too, there's been several years that we've been in communications with the councils and parks and recreation. The neighbors have been getting together, pulling together for this cause and concern. So just wanted to say that yes, we're very much in favor and we appreciate your time. And the recommendations that have come to this level. And you know, for our kids to really enjoy the community, our neighbors. We have definitely been having a lot of instances that have been increasing and would love to see it being closed at 10 o'clock for safety of our residents of Arlington. So let me see if I have any other questions or thoughts. Just definitely think it'd be smart to close the park. 10. Thank you. Thank you. Stephen Berry. Hello, I'm Stephen Berry. I live at 3110 Olin Court. And I live right across the street from Miss Mullins. And we just wanted to thank you for your attention and thank you for your support. And yeah, this has been a long process. So it's been four years. I've lived there actually for four years exactly. And yeah, in the beginning, it was just a bit of an annoyance and now it's escalated to safety and you know whenever you have kids whether you have them or not it kind of cranks cranked it up a little bit more so I just want to continue to support closing the park at 10 and for a long time we were told that this is a regional park and so it has to close at midnight and you know What is a regional park and after we went through the whole rig and roll of figuring that out? There are other parks that are regional parks, but they have exceptions to close at 10 So I don't see any reason why we can't also do that I can't imagine that they've had to go through the hoops that we have, but I appreciate your attention and I support closing the parking tin. So thank you. Thank you Mr. Berry. And Stephanie Griffin. Good evening City Council and Mayor. My name is Stephanie Griffin. I live at 3107 Olin Court. Council and Mayor, my name is Stephanie Griffin. I live at 3107, Owen Court. I came to you back in August and asked for you all to look into the hours of operation for civil park. And I learned at that meeting that earlier in the day, you all had instructed city staff to look into that further. And so in September, I participated in the parks board meeting where that was discussed and Mr. Scott provided the summary of the history of all that had been going on at both of those parks. I'm more concerned and still all because I live right next to it. But anyway he provided a very good summary, allowed us to provide our comments and our input and we appreciate that opportunity. We, I've reviewed the proposed amendment to the Parks and Recreation Chapter of the Code of the City of Arlington that includes an exemption for Stovo Park to close at 10 PM. This exemption is similar to the languages provided for other parks listed in the section of the code. My family and I fully support the proposed amendment for the operating hours at Stova Park to be 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. The Parks and Reg Board fully supports this amendment, and we are hopeful that the City Council will also be fully supportive of this amendment. At this point, it falls to you all, and so we are hopeful that you will support that. I appreciate your consideration. Thank you, Ms. Griffin. Thank you. support that. I appreciate your consideration. Thank you, Ms. Griffin. Thank you. Those are all the speakers, Mayor. Okay. Any discussion or any motion? Okay, we have a motion for approval from Councilmember Walman and a second from Councilmember Thalman. Please caster votes. Motion passes. Thank you so much for coming down tonight. Really appreciate that. Next we move to zoning case PD 17-8, Greater Texas Federal Credit Union 1417 and 1425 North Sinner Street. This applicant is also requesting continuance to the December 12 17 meeting. About any objections, we'll keep that continuance going. Seeing none, we'll move forward on that. And then next, we'll move to citizen participation and Mr. Peno would you go over the speaker guidelines? Yes, thank you Mayor. Citizen participation gives a public an opportunity to make comments or address concerns which are not posted on the evenings agenda. However, please understand that the Mayor and Council are not permitted by law to respond or address your concerns at this time as these items are not included on the post of council agenda for this evening the mayor and council may only ask Clarifying questions and or direct staff to take appropriate action speakers will be given three minutes to make their comments Okay, we have Tracy Anders here Good mr. Anders if you come forward and state your name and address for the record. Thank you Tracy Anders only that 2426 Creek Crossing Court in South East Arlington. I'm here as a byproduct of negligence by the city. We've had some situations in my particular neighborhood. That's a byproduct of the expanded commercial development in that southeastern corridor of I-20 and 360. And the negligence, ironically, is a byproduct of the strategic planning group, or appears to be by those strategic planning efforts. What we've ran into is a tremendous amount of traffic by 18 wheelers in the neighborhoods. I've got photos of three different situations that actually affects my property directly, dating back to December of 16 to where I live in actually in a cul-de-sac. And an 18-wheeler got misdirected, apparently by the GPS system he was utilizing. Got in my neighborhood could not turn around, so he used my front yard. As the parkway, that caused a tremendous amount of damage to my property, house valuation, not counting my time. Starting in December last year, I reached out to Mr. Williams to address this issue. I've asked and spoke with, I believe four or five different folks on the committee this afternoon. And invite them out to the property. They'd actually see it firsthand, see what's going on and come up with a solution. But more importantly is to figure out why it's taking place. The commercial development clearly either did not have good strategic planning or the if they did have the planning and process, it wasn't applied. And so we continuously, week after week after week after week, get 18 wheelers down into this area and they cannot turn around. So December of last year, they ran through my drive, literally using it as a parkway. March of this year, same thing, after I spent several thousand dollars getting my yard completed, resorted and the irrigation replaced and repaired. They did it again in March of this year, not straight through my yard, but a portion of it made a huge run. That's caused issues. Again, I reached out to Mr. Yelverton, I spoke to Mrs. Silesh. Invite them to come out and take a look at it along with the people that would be responsible for the issues I hand as far as the planning and zoning is concerned. Unfortunately, no one within the city has elected to come out there. Outside of Mr. Yolverton, but he declined the additional staff to come out there, outside of Mr. Yellowton, but he declined the additional staff to come with him. This, just a few weeks back, it continued. Where an 18-wheeler got in my cul-de-sac again, wasn't able to turn around again, the same case, same scenario, week after week. And this time they took out the local community mailbox. So I'm here to not notice we have a root cause issue of the transportation planning issue, but also the staff that's employed by the city not meeting expectations. And expectations is the key word not meeting my expectations, not meeting my neighbors expectations and not meeting the citizens expectations. Be happy to provide you photos of all the occurrences. If you'd like to see it, Mr. Reultions seen a few of them, but it really comes down to a safety issue and more importantly now for our own, and it's a liability issue because they've been made aware of it, and now they're on the hook for it. If something happens again, they're liable. So I've asked, like I said, on several different occasions to have staff come out, take a look at it. The city manager and the appropriate staff that would have been involved with the planning and has been declined. Quite honestly, it's just unacceptable. That's what they're getting paid to do. So that's my issue that we have to get resolved. And these will be resolved a little bit faster than the folks that were before me as far as waiting for years. Thank you, Mr. Anders. We'll now move to announcements. Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to remind our residents at Arlington City Council evening meetings or re-broadcast on Sundays at 6 p.m. and on Wednesday and Saturday mornings at 6.30 a.m. The council's afternoon work sessions are re-broadcast on Sundays at 1 p.m., Wednesdays at 1.30 p.m. and on Wednesday and Saturday mornings at 6.30 a.m. The Council's afternoon work sessions are rebroadcast on Sundays at 1 p.m. Wednesdays at 1.30 p.m. And on Saturdays at 6 p.m. You can also watch meetings online anytime at www.arlingtontx.gov. Any other announcements? Seeing none, our business is concluded and will adjourn. Thank you.