All right, good evening. We'll call the order of the regular city council meeting August 13th at 630 p.m. It is in session. If you all would please rise for the invitation and the budget regions. All right, let's pray. Heavenly Father, thank you for the opportunity for us to come and gather tonight and talk about the business of our city. Thank you for who you are and what you've done. Thank you for sending your son to die for our sins so that through our belief in you, we may spend eternity with you, Lord. We are so blessed as a people. We are so blessed to live in this community. We're blessed that we woke up this morning to sunshine and air to breathe, Lord. We just thank you for the way the opportunities you give us in our lives. We pray that as we deliberate the things on the agenda tonight that we will elevate the needs of our community, that it will always be about our community, Lord. In our nation, in our city, we just pray that righteousness will always come to the top, and we will always do the hard thing and do what is required for our community and to shine your light well Lord. You thank you and praise you in Jesus name. Congratulations to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation of the Republic, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Council member, both. We'll move into our agenda item number two. This is our public comment section. Mr. Lachard, do we have any on the side of that? Yes, Mayor, we have three speakers. First of all, when is Karen Myers? 2800 Myers Road. Hi Karen Myers to 80 years, Ro. One reason that has not been mentioned yet is term limits actually protect council member from being forced to over serve. Sometimes council members are asked by their by their side to stay so they can stay in power when they really when they're really ready to leave. They win, but don't provide the same effort and energy that need or position deserves. It also encourages those in power to bring up and promote encouraged new members. Thank you. Our second speaker is Mitch Ombi, 255 Country Club Drive. Mayor, council, Mitch Ombi, 255 Country Club Drive is heath. I just wanted to speak today in favor of the amendment or term limits. It's a conservative thing to do and we're in a very conservative community. Thank you. So, and our third speaker is Erica Hatfield 107 Limley Drive. And I didn't put it in here. Sorry. First, I want to say thank you for, us speak today. All right, good evening members of the city council and thank you for the opportunity to dress you tonight. I'd like to quote Thomas Jefferson. I'm not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but I do believe that every generation should be allowed to make its own arrangements for its own government and that no one should hold office beyond a certain term. Government should be a temporary service and not a lifelong career. I stand before you to present a petition that has been significant and collaborative effort from our community. A petition to initiate term limits for our elected officials here in Heave. This initiative has garnered well over 500 signatures from concerned and engaged residents, a testament to the overwhelming support for this measure. The purpose of implementing term limits is multifaceted, but fundamentally rooted in enhancing accountability and effectiveness in our local government by introducing term limits, we aim to encourage accountability. That means ensuring that our elected officials remain responsive to the pressing issues and key problems facing our city. Create a sense of urgency. That means encouraging our leaders to deliver tangible results in a timely manner. Focus on solutions, promoting a results oriented approach rather than long-term tenure. And then, reinforce the temporary nature of the role, recognizing that these positions are meant to serve our community for a defined period and not indefinitely. This petition reflects a thoughtful and well-researched approach to term limits. We have studied various models and parameters to craft a proposal that balances continuity with fresh perspectives. While practices vary across Texas, many municipalities have successfully implemented term limits for allowing two to four terms for city council positions and two to three terms for mayor. Ultimately, it is the people of Heath who should determine the scope and duration of their elected officials terms. This petition is a call for the residents of Heath to have a voice in deciding this important matter through the next election. Thank you for your service to our community and considering this petition. I appreciate your attention and I look forward to opportunity for the residents of Heath to express their views on this proposal. Thank you, Ms. Appled. Mr. Lashar? Those are all speakers. Thank you, Mr. Lashar. All right. At that time, we'll move into agenda item number three. This is our consent agenda three dot a actual regarding the minutes of the July 23rd, 2024 regular meeting and July 30 birth special meeting. We'd like to note I know that everybody's had time to review the meeting minutes. However, in the absence of councilman cold. It's a few line items that she would like consideration in the meeting minutes. Once you've reviewed that then we'll discuss. At this time my perspective is unfortunately it's out of sequence, so it actually doesn't specifically match what was actually said. Do you guys have any other thoughts on that line on them? The whole thing, or one of the lines in particular, in fact it's this section here that's not really in sequence. I mean, I wasn't, I was on the on the zoom. I mean, it's basically what I heard on the zoom, but I wasn't in the room. So I guess. Well, I was. I was in the middle of the mountains and Idaho. So I didn't hear any of it. Okay. Um, I guess if the issue is sequence or content. So ultimately we have city secretary that believes that she's condensed in the meeting minutes. What to place on the meeting minutes for July 23. So. Part of the problem with is your comments on the end because they're not applicable to the minutes and they're essentially lies. This was not a process like any other process we ever had. So I would not. So if you're stated by Mr. Lash or if you guys would like to further this discussion. That's fine. We can. But I mean, ultimately it's a consent agenda item. It's meeting minutes as stated by the secretary. You'd like to. The majority of people want to print lives and let them. You're stating that the city secretary has a bias and no, I'm just saying she's reporting when she's told a report. I didn't tell her to report anything. Your statements at the end of the meeting. I just saw your statements that after those. As you walked out, I made a comment in regard to what my concerns were because it was a meeting that was interrupted because you guys were breaking the door for very good cause. Okay. Councilor Dodson, do you have any thoughts? I have no. I have no comments. Okay. People are waiting and moving on. Okay. So at this time, I mean, I'll entertain a motion. So you were looking for a motion whether we're going to. Yeah, what do you expect? I mean, what I mean, less there's pretty discussed. I mean, we can entertain a motion or we can discuss it further, but at this time I'd like to overcome it for if we would want to make a motion to approve as is the normal consent agenda as the city secretary has been doing this for years and has written a meeting minutes or do we want to make a motion to consider councilman Colwell's suggestions for what she believes in. I guess just for my own clarification, you commented that it was out of sequence. Yeah, so since we're going to go ahead and discuss, we'll discuss so for the audience and for the council. So ultimately on the 23rd, we were in the council and city manager section of discussion. This is where you make comments, you know, thanks gratitude, other line items. And essentially it's brought to the floor to make a motion to table a line item that was inside of the executive session. So typically the way that this works inside of the agenda, as you guys will know, is that you would address that inside of executive session. You would address the line item there and all that was suggested was, okay, let's move forward. The council said, well, do we have a second? So then someone said, yes, we have a second. Mr. Kraus and Ms. Caldwell, we're trying to make a motion to table the board selection. And so ultimately, that's what the meeting minutes is describing. However, the point of reference that she has in her corrective notes of our city secretary is, Mayor McClure stated he was there, so we don't need him. That is a reference to Councilman Weaver. It's actually not what was stated. I said something of the vein of he was in the interviews and I could represent him, right? I can represent him because I had also spoken with him the same day and double checked all of his selections so I would be prepared for the meeting. So there was nothing you know, furious or hidden in that remark. Then she goes on to say, Mayor McClure spoke over a council woman called well, who stated that she was or who stated she has a first amendment right and she will stand on it and he will not shut her up. She stated that without offense to the three new members of council who are neophytes, it is important that the experienced council members be present for these decisions. Unfortunately, the sequencing is not accurate. She was being disruptive in the meeting and essentially what happened was we allowed it to go to vote and then and she was being disruptive and calling everybody. Neophytes and the pre-existing council or the experience that need to all be here. At that time, I believe in the sequencing was then we put it to a vote. And that's when we voted even outside of the agenda that would be normal, as well as my right as the chairman to run the meeting accordingly and keep the corp and do it inside of the agenda as stated. However, I said it's a fair and balanced bench. We'll put it to a vote. The two council members lost the vote. That's when the issue was that they're going to walk out. So it's just the sequencing. And councilman Kraus, if you have another element of correction, happy to have whatever meeting minutes you guys want. I just, if we're going to talk about the truth, the tell things happen. We have a season veteran that has been on our city secretary for a number of years. She's doing her job. She's put it in the meeting minutes and I just don't believe that this is a good description. So, but at this time, again, we'll open this up for a motion. Again, it's meeting minutes for a motion or discussion. We'd like to discuss it more. We can do that. I would love to see a motion so we can just move forward again. Okay. Well, as you walk through, I mean, there are some things that I absolutely did here, but there's some emotion in here too. And I don't think we need to try to capture emotion in our minutes. Very good. So I'm happy to go through this and recount back what I heard if we want to craft this to. So I'm going to go. Hold on. Because you're saying a lot of the way you're as you're recounting through there there clearly is a lot more information that we could add to those minutes to better describe the situation. No I'm not actually what I'm saying is that we have a city secretary that not only takes notes copious notes during our meeting, but actually also sits in our office and relicens to the entire meeting and writes her meeting minutes. So she's not going off of motions or anything. She's going off of what actually happened. Mr. Lashin? Also, we have advice from the city of Ferdinand. Yes. So for the item that was posted and in the app, you could either do a motion have someone motion and second to remove from consent to make any changes or you could postpone that item to the next meeting if it requires changes. Okay so we need a motion of moving from consent before we can even have a third option. Can we can we just delay it so we can proceed with the rest of the meeting and have this discussion later today? Can we remove it from consent and put it towards the end of our meeting so that we don't burden these folks with this discussion? Well, first, yes. You need a motion in a second and about to remove it from the consent agenda and you can reorder it. Or we can just make a motion to approve the meeting minutes. Correct. I have a silence. So we can move on with the meeting. I'll make it for that. I'll make a motion to move on in accordance to the existing meeting minutes that we already got. So we have a motion on the floor to approve the meeting minutes of July 23rd, 2024 regular meeting and July 31st special meeting. Do we have a second? I second. We have a second. So the motion moves. All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed. Aye. I abstain since I wasn't present and have not heard the recording. Okay So we are mr. Rufo mr. Krauss Against passes Okay moving into agenda item number four. These are items for individual consideration. 4.8 is a bond annual part board update. So we are, we get, we get the pleasure of having the chairman, Mr. Er, so please a live audience. It's a popcorn out here. It's pretty good spot. Thank you. OK. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for having me. I'm Katie Dyer, Chair of the Park Board. And I'm just here to give you all an update on kind of what's been going on with this. Tonight I will provide a quick budget overview. I'll highlight some of our recent accomplishments. And I'll give you an overview of the exciting Town Center for Archminivation that's coming up, and I'm gonna provide an introduction to the New York Path Parks and Trails of Heath. We'll get to it, Steering Committee. So, this is our board. We have a great board full of people, all different variety of insights. We have parents, young children, parents, teenagers, grandparents, and every single one of them is dedicated to improving the outdoor recreation amenities we have in our town. We have cyclist runners, boaters, fishermen, we're all there and we just want to improve the city of Heath. So we're going to go over our budget. We have three different funds, our direct park fund. This one, it has about 42,000 in it. This is just mostly from developer fee and lieu of funds. If the developer is, we have a requirement for certain developers to do, provide a park in their development. And in some cases, they just provide us money to do that. Instead, it's, but this, I mean, this fund has been very, in their development. And in some cases they just provide us money to do that instead. It's but this I mean this fund has been very we don't really get much in this. This has just been kind of very holding steady there. Our path fund so this path stands for parks and trails of heat. This is about 35,000 right now and this is from donations from citizens. We take individual larger donations and also on the city, water and sewer bills. There's the little check box where you can just automatically have it deducted every month, which is great. And I encourage all Keith's citizens to do this. And we're gonna talk more about half later. And then our third fund is the Park CIP fund. Right now it's sitting at just over a million. And these funds come to us from a very generous contribution from the EDC and NBC board. They're giving us 25% of sales tax revenue in the city per year. And a lot of this right here is going to be used to pay the design fee for the park that's coming up. So now I'm going to go over some accomplishments from these three different funds, things that we've done recently. We've in 2018 we did a citywide survey and created a needs parks trails and recreation master plan. We've done a comprehensive review and revision of the city park land dedication ordinance that's what I was discussing with when developers come in. We needed to get some of those laws on the books changed to benefit getting more parks in our city. We've revised the park fees and policies. If you want to rent or you know use the fields and facilities and we have a resident and non-resident fee structure there. We launched an Adopt-A-Park trail and litter control program. You've probably seen the signs around town, different charities and such individuals and businesses will adopt a part of a trail and keep it clean and that's been great. And we've launched the parks and trails of heat, the Path Fundraising Program. So the money from that bigger fund, the CIP fund, these are some of the things we've done with that money in the past, is we've put a new picnic pavilion at Antigua Bay Park, new lights for the practice fields out here at Council Center Park, created a new trail connecting sort of that tom-thum area back to Chris Cuny, where the reserve is, and then landscaped and irrigated the median kind of across from the high school, which was looking really rough for a lot of years and it looks a lot better now. With our path funding, so that's the donations. We've put 25 mature shade trees and park benches out here at Town Center Park and a dog and people found me. I don't know if you'll open up to Terry Park but the sunset swings are out there and that's super popular and beautiful go out there and swing at sunset. We took out the old equipment there and then we repaired and unified the heat's tree monument kind of across from Chandler's landing and repaired and upgrade the Terry Park folks docs and then this next well this month now where you are going to start sewing some units around town. Okay, so our big thing that we're really focused on right able to get to the park renovation. There's going to be a well here to irrigate the park that's going to be drilled down into the park. And we're going to use drought resistant plants and low water landscaping. So none of the irrigation for this park will come out of. You know, or very precious city existing city water. What we have now. So the well is going to be funded separately under a different city utilities fund and it will add potable water to our city system is the current plan. So that's great news. Here is sort of an overview of we have Kimlee Horn design our park here. This is Amy Parks over here. This is the existing pavilion that's out there now in the bathrooms just to kind of let you'll see. There's going to be a new playground area here. There's going to be a pavilion concert stage fountain. Like sort of I believe this is going to be like a the harbor where it where it can be programmed intermittently to come on and off the little kind of splash feature in the middle to half basketball courts, six covered pickle ball courts, a festival street with food truck parking and a kind of additional parking lot here. And it's not on here, but I'll show you in a minute. And then, but meals were adding some new fields here. The existing fields will still be here. Here's a bird's eye view. So to orient you, we're here. So one of the big things this park is gonna do is fix the drainage problem. I don't know if you all ever driven. This is Lawrence 740. Whenever it rains, this is just a mess right here. So there's going to be a pond that's going to always be their decorative, beautiful plantings around it and viewing area kind of. And this is going to really fix the drainage. It's also going to hold the well water that we're going to come out and then you're getting parked with. So here's the fields. This is where the stage is. This is the kind of food truck festival street area. There's a lot of. We can do a lot with that. You know, I'm just thinking of the Christmas. Thing events in the farmers markets and this will be new parking areas here, which we desperately will need for all the people that will be playing. No wait this is the best tool street. I'm sorry. All the people will be playing pick-a-ball on here and that's a ball and there's going to be a little splash area over here for the kids in the new playground area. We're going to completely redo the baseball field. We're going to help Amy Parks with their drainage problems here and install more decorative fence than the chain link that's there now and then more fields. This is a dry creek bed also help with drainage natural dry creek area to kind of catch that. So these are just the more renderings. There's going to be a cool heath sign down there by that this is, sorry, my point is not working. The top picture is the pond that's going to be at the corner and then that heath sign's going to be here there. There's the concert pavilion, which I'm super excited about. And there's going to, what there were, there's an existing playground where this is now, this is behind the existing pavilion. There we go. This is the existing pavilion, this is the current. There's a little playground thing here that's going to be turf with the climbing deal. And there's the new playground. We're going to keep the same, the butterfly playground that's there, the existing one will still be there. This will be in addition to that. And this is the festival street. And here's a sun study, a shade study of the cover on the pickle bookboards during summer, where the sun will be. So we were, we worked really hard to get these pickable cores covered has it not surveyed in 2018 what people wanted was shade and connectivity of the sidewalks so we're at least doing shade here from this project so here's a little bit about the timeline we are currently here and we are going to hopefully get this all done by December of 2025. That's the goal. We have Helen Wilkinson, represented here by Max Scott here in front of me. They are our construction manager at Res. He's a key resident and they are dedicated to making sure this comes in under budget, on budget, on time. And we are, so tonight we're kind of going over, we're sort of here. We need a little bit more finalization on the final guaranteed maximum pricing is coming up really quickly. And then they're going to bid it. They may have started bidding. You have questions we can ask Max here. And then it'll start going and their well development is on kind of a separate timeline. So the well will be coming along here and then hopefully it'll come together by Christmas of 2025. So our other big initiative besides the park renovation which is huge or excited about it. I think our town needs some upscale, nice amenities to get us, you know, we're outside, but we need it to be a little, we're just, we've been kind of going along race and many when we can. We want to get more paths and sidewalks and connectivity. That's one of the main goals of it because as I said in that 2018 survey of the city, that is what our citizens want. We want to be able to get from our house to something like I'd love for every citizen in heats to be able to get from our house to something like I'd love for every citizen and heath to be able to get to this park on a bike. That's and my ultimate dream is to get us from this park to Terry Park on a bike safely. So that's that's my personal big vision. So at the mayor's request we have formed a new committee, the path steering committee, and this is who's on that. And we are gonna just really try to dial up this path program with public, private sponsorships and intersection with that. And we are just getting started, we form the group, and we've got some meetings on the books, and we're just gonna kind of get up and rolling with that. And we're hoping to really increase our trail connectivity. Up here, this is what the park board has identified as some major connectors that would really help get a number of people out of their island neighborhoods and connect neighborhoods together. City staff worked up some basic pricing. you know, as a starting point, just to kind of help us know what it would cost to do this. So we are going to get going on that. Here are some other potential projects we could do through this path program. We're hoping to get some big donors and get some people involved and really kind of get this moving so that we can all bike to this beautiful new park. We're looking forward to making progress on these goals and seeing some exciting things happen. So with that, does any of you all have any questions? Very good. Thank you for starting. Thank you. You should. Well thank you. Well, thank you. Thanks for having me. I really appreciate all the support we've gotten from council over the years. I'd like to keep it good. Nice partnership and try to improve our outdoor amenities. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving into agenda item 4 dot B case number at the two zero two zero two four zero four conduct a public hearing and act on a resolution granting variance to the heat code of ordinances one five seven dot zero two C that limits fences in the front yard to maximum height four foot to permit a five foot ornamental rot iron fence on the property of Kim 1140 also known as rural drive south of Twin View Road adjacent to Marine Way and further described as a lot of one zone addition to city of the Rockwell County Rockwell Ked number 12822 Missedale. Thank you. So we have before you tonight for your consideration request to extract a five foot rod iron or an eminal rod iron fence for this property, a shown on the aerial. It is located on the west side of Smurl, just south of Twin View and a adjacent and north on the north side of Moraineway. The property contains about two and a half acres and the request is to be able to increase the height of the fence from the maximum allowed in our ordinance, which is four feet to five feet and then they also would have requested the to have a solid gate across the driveway. We did send notice and public hearing, describing all of this to neighbors, and we received one response, which came in after the packets were distributed, and I provided you with a copy of that tonight. We began talking about this fence in May. The applicant was out of town and asked for the case to be tabled to June 11th. We did table it and had a more beefy conversation. You may remember in June 11th. And again, tabled the item to July 9th to allow the applicant some time to provide more detailed information. That information did not come in in time for the July 9th meeting, so it was not on the agenda. And because of that, we did send new notice to picture on the right is provided by the applicant as examples of the fence panels and the type of column they plan to build. The fence is planned to be located at the property line. The front property line is 25 feet from the edge of the pavement of Smurled. And this is allowed by our fence ordinance. The fence alignment at the property line is consistent with the alignment of the fence. A couple doors down at 8.11 to get Smurled, which is the closest fence on the same side of the road. The gate was discussed in July, oh, excuse me, in June, when the item came before you the first time for a discussion. And at that time, it wasn't clear where the gate would be, the assumption was that the plan was for it to be at the property line as well. But the applicant has indicated that the gate will be set back 15 feet from the front property line. and the goal of that is to allow the 25 feet of distance from the pavement to the property line plus 15 feet which would equal 40 feet to be ample space for a truck and a trailer to be able to pull in and stage their lot of gate operates. And that way that vehicle and trailer would be off the off of Someral entirely. So the aerial here shows the fence alignment of 811, the cache property, which is right here. This is some open space right here between their property and marine ways, entry, and then the subject property is right here. And so the aim of this aerial is to show the proposed alignment of the application tonight in green compared to the existing alignment of defense at 8-11. The gate at 8-11 in pink is approximately 13 feet from the property line, so the applicant before you tonight is proposing to push the gate a little bit farther into the property than what you would see if you drove by and looked at 8-11. Here's a closer view on the left. The aerial shows the alignment of the fence and the gate that I'm outlining with the pointer right here that exists at 8-11. And this is the photograph on the lower right is a street view that exists in fence and gate. This is a fence that's located across the street from the subject property on a piece of property that's over six acres, so it's considered in a state lot by our fence ordinance. Fence heights that are allowed by the fence ordinance for a state lot is up to eight feet with 10 foot gate feature. That's the same that is allowed for subdivision fences, the perimeter fences that you see around some of our subdivisions, and ag fences are allowed to be five feet. What you're going to see in this air, I'm missing some slides. My apologies. Yeah. Okay. I would like to point out. I'll use a different area. I'll just show you. Here we go. In the area of this of the property that we're discussing tonight. On this side of the street. This is wind a mirror. And there is an existing perimeter fence that has a max height of 8 feet right here. The properties from the Windamere moving south down Smurl are all in agriculture. These properties over here are all in agricultural zoning and in excess of five acres, so they all qualify as a state lots with eight-foot fences allowed by right. And the same is true for the southern edge of twin view down here, which is approximately 5 feet and has been there quite a long time. Next door to it is a argues that would be allowed in 8 foot fence as well. That is those are the facts of the case and you're here tonight to consider this because it doesn't the request does not comply with the fence ordinance high to for your consideration tonight. Thank you, Mr. Del. At this time, Council, do you have any questions for staff? Councilman Krauss. Nope. Councilman Dodson, no questions. Councilman Weber. Well, my only question is related to a swirl itself. And of course, everybody knows it's a text.rode. Are we aware of any pending or forthcoming plans for text not to expand that to widen it? There's nothing offended at this time. We have been acquiring as these properties to have developed over the last several years. We were acquiring an additional 10th bit of ride away. So we were able to accommodate teacher widening. We're not able to do that any longer. This legislature changed the law that if it's not an active, it's not a currently funded project, you can no longer acquire right of way in anticipation of a future of funded project. So at this time, there is not an improvement project. Okay. improvement project. Okay and this hypothetical right away that you describe that would have occurred at a planning stage not at a fencing stage. That's true and we did already acquire it. Okay they plotted about three years ago. Yes that's right we should hear it. Okay so it's already baked into this. Yes. Perfect that's it for me. Thank you Cal's where we figured. Okay, so so it's already baked into this. Yes, perfect. That's it for me. Thank you, Councilman. We were Councilman. You make questions for staff. No, sir. Okay. Yeah, one quick question. Across the street that the metal fence across the street with the pillars. What was the height of that again? It is between five and six feet. So it's five foot with six foot pillars, maybe something like that? Yes, the pillars are allowed to be six inches taller than the fence panels. Okay. And I didn't want to get too close because it's private property. So that's me. Okay, I'm five. That's a lie. I'm almost five feet tall. I'm not sure. five feet tall. And then look to be about my honey. And so on the so on in the request here, they're going to do a five foot fence within a five foot six inch columns basically. So yes, they didn't request a variance for the column height. Okay, thank you. And we will review the column materials they must match the house. And we talked about this last time. There's no house on the property. So the columns will set the precedent for the masonry on the home. Your show. There you go. Usually. And so I guess any trail projects, we actually be across the street. They are the trail plan and the portions that have been built are on the opposite side of the street. They are the trail plan and the portions that have been built are on the opposite side of the street. Okay, Councilman, any further questions for staff? Thank you, Mr. Dal. Welcome, you'll need to have a public hearing on this. At this time, would the app and app like to approach the podium and speak? Thank you. Thanks. Thanks. I'm the purpose of the fence. Would stage your name in your press. Donny, why seven points out of one. Thank you. Sorry. Purpose of the fence is add more security. For not only our family, but our biology app. We're going to actually be putting the fence from a standard rod iron to one by one decade, whether it be by two rail and four by four post for the busy road that's there in any lead potential accidents that can happen up front. So thank you very good. Thank you Mr. Blancs. Council at this time, do you guys have any questions for the applicant councilman Woodenfo? Any questions? Councilman Warren? No sir. Councilman Weaver. Yeah I'm curious the motivation for the solid gate the non-transparent gate. I like the appearance. The president's already said me sitting in my. Okay. Councilman Dodson. No other questions. Councilman Kraus. Thank you. Okay. There's no further questions. Thank you to the applicant. Richard. All right. Council, do you have any discussion on the four of the public here? None. All right. At seven or seven. We will not public hearing. At this time. Are there any residents that would like to speak for this line up? At 7.11 close to here. Council to you guys have any discussion items amongst yourselves? Well, yeah, Brent mentioned the the saligate and I think that is true. We have approved those before like and other people have got variances when they do that. Some of the indisistent past we have. I get back to your nervous specific property. So you're. I'm going to hold that. I've seen your list. It's a local rufre that has one recently. Oh, that's four-light five. Yeah. If you have five 49 minutes down the road, we'll go. Thank you. Okay. That's my way right. Yeah, I think regarding the fence, you know, our, I mean, I think regarding the fence, you know, our, actually, I think we discussed this a little bit at the last meeting, but regarding the fence, you know, our principal has always been, you know, to try to prevent extra tall, overbearing fences, directly adjacent the public right away. And again, this goes back to the intent of the fence ordinance, which we didn't write. It's been in place for a long time longer than I've been on count. So I helped write it. But yeah. So the intent of limiting the height in the front yard is to prevent, again, an overbearing fence, directly adjacent to the public right away. So we get these requests occasionally, and we grant some, we deny some. Typically it's always on a case-by-case basis. In this particular case, I look at the distance from the street, smurled in this case, to where the property line is. I also look at the topology where the property falls off as you go from smurled towards where this fence is gonna be. And so in my mind, those two things help alleviate the concerns I would have with having a tall fence at the front property line. Again, that front property line is a fair distance from the public domain from the street. There's no immediate action or intention to widen that street. And there's no sidewalk along that side of the street. So the trail, if it ever does get exists, when it does get built, will be on the opposite side. So again, we're getting height and posing on public right away. It really doesn't create an issue here, also given that the falloff of the land. I'm still a bit undecided about the solid gate. Again, we've the gate that you referenced on 549, I'm not sure that that ever came to Council and was approved and I think it may have just been built. And so, you know, again, I'm undecided about the solid gate, but I certainly support the tall fence. I understand the need for security, given the dogs and given the family, given the distance to the street. I can support the fence variants. And thank you, Councilman. Councilman Dodson. No, other points. Councilman Long. I would like to say that I'll live in Windomare and I've measured all the fences along the street and there's none of them that are for foot. I'm not understanding the for foot rule of offense and this has come up before in the February 28th of 2023, emotional was made by a relator and second by Rufo on the chariants to approve a five foot fence. And so there are no four foot fences. And two weaver's statement is that it's been approved before his only stickler was the closed fence. And I just think we're wasting a much of time on something that's very petty and I would strongly encourage to make a motion to approve. OK. Well, at this time, we have a motion. I got some comments. Yeah, so to echo some of what Councilman Weber said, you know, the setting of the property certainly does the five foot fence fence fits nicely there. It is a busy road. And so I have no issues with the fence height. I think it's going to be a great looking fence. I do know on the gate that we've, you know, this one is more on a more rural road, a bit more spaced out. When we've had requests come in, sometimes the neighbors don't like the solid fences. So that is on the gate, rather. So that is something that we have had objections to. So we're very cautious on those when they get approved. And so I would like to understand precedentwise, what solid gates have we approved over time, or if any? So that question is to staff to staff. We do have a motion on the course, do we have a second for that motion? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to do that. I didn't know that was an action motion. I wanted you to speak, though. No, I understand. I shouldn't have said that. We have a second. Yeah. To that motion for approval. We did not have a second. So therefore the motion dies at this time. The question stands for missive. In the time I've been here approximately four years, we have not approved. We haven't had an application for a solid gate. So there has not been an occasion to deliver that that I'm aware of in the last four years. So if there is an approval on the books, it predates my time here. And it's at least four years ago. All right, very well. And I did not research the specifics of that. So I'm not preparing to answer more thoroughly than that. Sure. You have a follow-up question coming. Yeah, well, yeah, I mean, so that's a that's a sticky point for me because because it is one of those things that we've had stood strong on is transparency and fences. And so I really don't want to set a precedent of just approving some and not others. So I do want to make sure I'm consistent. There are other people have asked for them and we've said no to those folks. So it's not fair to say no to some and yes to others. I do need to correct my statement. You did recently review an application for the beam and property that included a solid gate and that was denied. What was a lot larger than what's being requested. Absolutely. I'm telling it about much larger. Right. Right. It's all and all the things. Yeah. I'm telling it about much larger. Right. Right. All and all the things. But I did. I felt like I need to correct that. I appreciate that. Very good. Councilman Krauss, you stated that you helped author this ordinance. So maybe you can speak to the ordinance as it currently since. Do you recall when this ordinance was written? It took about 18 months to do it. And I think it's been about five years ago. And we've had to count the more than seven years before it is time. Yeah. So that would be seven years. Okay. And we did discuss at one point allowing the fight for the rather continuing to have variances, but for every reason, whatever reason, is a sign that we would continue, because we didn't get that many variances that we'd like to review them. Although it does feel like we're the council for fences. Yes. Well, yes. And before we had public hearings, what in the ordinance fence has just appeared, like you're saying saying kind of like gates So and then they wanted to come back and say hey is it okay? You know, we had to have one guy you know whack his fence down Recently so yeah, that's the only guy I'm concerned too as far as the gate But I did what men's do I really like having the gates set back great forethought, you know, they're tracking challenge, but yeah, they're to sell a case. Do you recall what the intent was as you co-authored this ordinance on why the gate itself can't be sold? I think because it was the intent in general that we wanted 75% in totality even though it's written as an airport. I'm just trying to understand that intention. I don't remember coming up as being an issue requiring a solid gate no one really requested them. Not talking. Evidently even those that are there now. Okay. So so as I see it, we're seeing a fence and this would be a question to staff. What's the what's the total length? This is a 2.5-acre. It's not what we classifies in a state property. Right. However, it is a larger state style property. It is, it's over 200 feet. Do you recall Donnie here? What? You're in a big problem here. 255 feet. And so I have 25 feet. So I have 255 foot, not to make a councilman weaver start calculating. But what's the size of the actual gate that's going to be solid because the rest of it's going to be raw yarn other rest of it's going to be raw yarn other than corporate columns, correct? Sure, it'll be between 20 and 25 feet. They haven't laid out the post locations and whatnot yet. Made a 25 foot up 200 plus feet. Yes, and you can kind of see this going all over here. So that apron that's existing in probably about 20. So would you say that the intent, Councilman Krause is to not have just these blanket walls as we saw on this application that was just cited these very closed in-a-states. I think the intent is I would read the planal quarters that we used to call it right. And so it's kind of to keep that open space feel. Now, obviously, we've seen property owners that have, you know, also completely covered their, their fence line with seducations, right? So essentially, they're for blockade even more than the world's events, but I understand the intention of the ordinance. So as I see it, I guess my biggest question is we're talking about 20 to 25 of solid panel gate. You're going to see the property from the street. I'm just posing the question. I guess the only question with this VA problematic precedent to set down if we approve. Only if you don't like solid gates. Honestly, I mean, the only it's an aesthetic preference decision. So that's for us for you guys to determine, but as far as access to it by our DPS, it'll be equipped with the NOX system of NOX. So they'll be able to get access from that perspective, servicing the property had a lot of conversation about that last big robbery. It was going to be a lot of fence, just solid wall to this being a gate entrance. I understand the ordinance, but I also understand if it was no variance as well. Let me just discuss it. This is a wild and we're going to be sitting here and discussing. Yeah, no, I think it's, I think it's going to be a great looking fence. So, you know, no offense to the fence. I think it's the right spot. I think it's the right place that's set back up the gate is perfect. It's just that we've made a point of no solid, staying away from gates or fences that have no transparency. And so if we approve this one, so many of us come in from another spot, it's going to say, hey, you guys approved this one. Now precedent has been set. And that's my concern. It's a setting precedent. I would prefer if the gates had a degree of transparency in it to stay in an alignment with the other things in town that had been approved with variances. Very well. Thank you, Councilman Rufo, to the point of Councilman Kraus because of his empirical knowledge on this topic and co-writing this ordinance. I want to raise that. co-writing this ordinance. What a raise. The intention. Well, it's to a good point, right? The intentionality of the ordinance is to not create a corridor of prison like obliance with walls, correct? A lack of better description. So again, we're talking about a solid gate, the lack of better description. So again, we're talking about a solid gate, not a solid fence. So to that point, does that match the original intent of the ordinance or not? No. No. So the original intent of 75% we've never considered that way before. I don't know why I wouldn't have it. Well, it could have mapped different people up here just trying to dialogue some of our ordinances. Right. So. Okay. All right. At this time, I will let it down motion. Obviously we have two elements on the agenda. Yes, just make sure that we make note that we're referencing the height as well as the solid gate. Okay, I will make a motion to approve the five foot fence with the solid gate. All right, motion has stated. Do we have a second. All right motion motion bells again. I will entertain a motion again if there's another motion to be entertained. I move that we accept the five foot fence variance with a semi-transparent gate feature. Okay. semi-transparent as stated in the ordinance. Yes. Okay. There's a motion on the floor as stated. We have a second. We'll second that. Okay, we have a second from Councilman Weber. So the motion moves. Yeah, just discussion. I mean, so we're. There's a motion on the table to prove it with a transparent fence. But we haven't talked to the applicant to see if that's something that's amenable. So I don't want to just prove something without having that conversation. Technically, we have a motion is a second. The answer. So questions to Claire. Okay. You can now discussions. I just didn't know what you do with the applicant. Very well. Thank you, council. I kind of you take the podium stage and then you address. And we'll have council ask questions. Don't you want 75 level one. Thank you, sir. Councilmember response. Well, this is it. There's a motion on the table to approve it with a semi-transparent fence. And so. I just. Sorry. A semi-transparent gate. So I just don't want to see us. Have something that would not suit your needs if you, you know, I'm trying not to jam something towards you, but it lets you have a say. Here are four examples within the subdivision that counseling waiver and mayor could have looked further support the data that these are in. So the next question I would add will define semi-transparent. These are all permitted. I'm hearing T. They're not. We certainly were approved. I'm not going to use them. They're not. I think we had this session before. You know, the reason I ever came to us. We'll certainly never came to us. Make plenty more examples around city. So that's four different examples that you provided. Yes, sir. So we've heard of four examples in which been provided by the it ever came to council. So we've now cited five different people that build fences that currently are in existence. And we have an applicant standing for us today that's trying to get the right thing and follow your guidance and asking for a variant. So with that being said, that makes a unique point of discussion. Right. So if something doesn't come to council, that's a whole another thing though. They should have come to council. And so we do have, we do have fences that come back because someone didn't go get a, get a permit. So certainly you are doing the right thing by, by coming to council. And I really appreciate that. Is there, is there, is there a middle ground that we can find that would be acceptable to you again my question to you is define transparent. transparency. Is it single lines like you see lectures there is it normal run what's the I would ask, Steph, can you provide guidance on this? What defines transparency in our gates? Well, the ordinance only addresses transparency related to the fence. It doesn't call out gates being treated any differently than the rest of the fence and that is a 75% open area per linear but is the transparency requirement in the ordinance so for each foot you can only have a covering to 25% of the linear distance. Okay so that's the way it's written. Is perflit, they're gonna let me 25%. That's what's allowed in that. Okay, the order is. Thank you. So semi would be that or more. Very well, the answer I'm gonna ask you if any further questions for the applicant. Nope. That's when dogs and people, no, we do not. We don't have to make room. No. Councilor Moore. No, sir. Dr. Rufo. No. Okay, so thank you, I appreciate it. So at this time we do have a motion to. A motion to approve the height of the defense request. However, the motion also states that we would follow the transparency of the ordinance for the gated self. Correct. Okay. We have a motion. We have a second. So the motion moves. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All of those opposed? No. Those abstain? Okay. Do you? You are. Okay. Thank you, sir. So, Vassus. That's stated. Okay. Moving into agenda item 4c. Case FB20406. Induct the Public Hearing and Act on a request by Jason Watson for the approval of a variant. One five seven dot zero two C that limits fences in the front yard to a maximum height about 4 foot to permit a 5 foot fundamental radar offense on property addressed for peninsula court. And further describe as the peninsula law to miss a doubt. Thank you. You can see on the screen here the location of this property. It is within the peninsula subdivision and the request is for an additional one-foot-of-hive for an ornamental radiron fence. There's a small, this is the map that was sent to the neighbors and we get include and a rendering provided by the applicant showing Black Defense is anticipated to look like. The ordinance does require masonry and stone columns to match the main residence so that does not require a variance in this request so we are only considering height in this in this request. We mailed notices to the neighbors and we did get one response after your packet was distributed and I've given you a copy of that tonight. They provided a few renderings, some aerial view and some street level views. The alignment of the fence is shown on the survey on the right. And it would be placed at the front property line. There are two gate openings to the fence and both of those are planned to be the ornamental rod iron panels. This is the portion of the fence that is being considered and it is outside of the right of way for Peninsula Court. This is going to click through a few more renderings for you to consider. So the ordinance allows for the front gates to be no color than seven feet. And as depicted on here, there is no variance required without. And we've already discussed the column height and materials. Those will all be confirmed with the building permit or the fence permit review process. And according to the ordinance, you can review and approve fences based on these four conditions. And I should have highlighted these in the last case, but I'll go ahead and go into your attention in this case. As you go ahead and make your deliberation on this topic. So the four conditions are that it enforces the enforcing the provision is not would not be in the best interest of the public that enforcing the ordinance to be a waste or inefficient use of land or resources that it would create an undue hardship on the applicant or that the forcing the provision does not serve its intended purpose and is an effective or necessary. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Miss Adele. At this time, just council have any questions for staff. Councilman Rufo. No questions. Councilman Wormen. Councilman Weaver. Yeah, just to clarify a comment you just made, but the, um, you said the fence is behind the right away or extends beyond the right away. It's on the private property side. OK. Just to clarify. Yeah. That's it. OK. Thank you. Questions. Councilman Dawson. Any feedback on the surrounding fences to this particular request? No. In terms of height, I'm sorry. Oh, we haven't dealt with a fence variance on the street side of any of the properties. The property at the very end of the peninsula is the topic of a take line, a take area fence, conditional use permit application a couple years ago. Right. But that's a separate matter entirely from this one that one, you know, deals with the backside and the take area of visibility requirements. This is a different type of health there. I don't have a, I don't have a similar one on the street to compare to. Right. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Council. Thank you. Councilman. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Questions for staff. No. Thank you. Councilman. Thank you. Staff. At this time, we'll see applicant president. What they like to take the 30. Mr Watson. No, Mr. What? Yes, right. All right. So no applicant. All right. So at this time, we will open the public hearing is 7 know what was going to come up last time I would have got up previous to this because I had an incident. We built a new homes. We started building it in 22 and towards the end around October, I came to do a fence application. We were building a pool. And if that time I was informed that there was the new ordinance was in place of four feet and I'm not even familiar with the main entrance of the Marine. Our pool had been dug and I was informed that we would not be able to move into the house unless I had built fence around the pool. I was wanting a five, six-foot fence, which I think Maraine, all-mortar association allows either up to six or eight because there's fences over there. And when I said, well, how long would it take to get my parents? She said in October, I was told it would probably be February because of overload of, and of course COVID was in effect. And it would probably be four months, and I wouldn't be able to move in my house for over four months waiting to talk to the city if they would even consider it and she said it takes about two months to the past to come and as we talk to the I said, well, six months, I can't afford to not move into my new home. And so I just built a four foot fence around the pool area, which of course was a waste of money, but I had to be good so I could move in my home myself. I would pass the City Council to thank you for your speed. If you may want to reconsider the fence ordinance and anything not on the main thoroughfares, you may refer to HOA of provisions that are in the neighborhoods. I'm not going to say anybody went and built a fence in the city didn't prove it or they didn't ask permission. Of course it happens, but you have code enforcement people and if they did that force a code and good for the guy that built it, as far as I can say. But to come back and someone else just penalized, I mean, not the same way. It's transparent. Transparency on my fence is it's here. You know know who wants wood fences where you can't see through but on a gate and I know two people on the 549 fathers property and the son of property neighbors that have the solid gates and as far as I'm concerned there's some of the best looking gates in the city or in our city and it may be something I of course you're not looking forward but it may be something I of course you're not looking for work but maybe something for you to consider as I am a property rights kind of guided you know I should have been able to build my a pension around my whole property at a fence at my HOA approved I'd never in a even imagined that the city would say back where I lived, I can build a four foot fence, a four foot fence for security, you know, dogs jump over four foot fences. So somebody wants to get near property of four fence fences, no security whatsoever. Little dogs can crawl through the slots and big dogs jump over it so it doesn't help at all. Anyway, that's, I just wanted to mention that. So if you didn't have anything to do, if you would re-go through your fence or- Thank you, Mr. Plata. Thank you. Hi. Are there any other residents that would like to speak for, I guess, if you want to take the podium, I should have them. Bill Matthew, 107, Linda Drive. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. do anything to keep anybody out or the moses are supposed to be kept out. So in ruling, it's a pretty fence, it's a pretty property. No one goes through there. It's not a thoroughfare. It's not a main road. It's a private road. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Schabbill. Are there any other residents that would like to speak for against this happen? Very well. At 7.2, we will close the public hearing. Council, do you have any further discussion items? Or at this time, a little bit more. Or a little bit of motion. Yeah, I've got a comment and this goes back to maybe back to Aaron or anybody who's. Specifically familiar with that street and it goes back to your question. I was quite certain that there's already a fence on the applicant's side of the street. Very much aligned with this fence that it's a five foot fence. Am I wrong in recalling this? And I'm thinking. I don't have access to that property. Okay. I'm able to verify that. I'm doing this for memory of maybe, well, Lisa, price are, are contours my business? This offense fair, there was a defense fair, and it's done for Sean Mary's property, where his, his, his, Jim, yes, Jim, not the other property where his's falling yes, but the gym. It's, I believe, about what was stolen to columns. Okay. Very similar looking, but it was for the maybe, which is just one lot down. Right. Could you bring up the aerial? And I'm recalling. There's a lot between this one. Yeah, there's a lot between. So, so Lisa is speaking of the property for the south. Yes, I'm recalling I'm recalling a property to the north. Yes, same semi Ebrahams property. I don't know if same got a very That's just An act But same has probably a six foot list. And is that you recall Lisa, here we are having a conversation, but is that property directly adjacent to the subject property or is it separated by one also? It's to a vacant lot for the weather direction. So there's a vacant lot between the Watson's and Sam in a vacant lot between the Watson's and Sean Maron's June the matrix. Okay. There's any further questions from us. So what they heard about the other question. I don't I guess my comment is and I think the applicant kind of alluded to it. The result is, you know, similar fences along this portion of the street. We go back to Paul's comment about sitting precedent or not sitting precedent. We approved, I believe, several years ago. We approved, I believe, in Lafayette landing. I can't recall the street. maybe it's Lafayette. I can't tell if it's in Lafayette Landing, a similar situation where a five foot fence was going to be consistent with some of the surrounding properties. In that case, it was appropriate to provide that five foot fence because the neighboring properties may be not directly adjacent, but any properties that five foot fence because the neighboring properties, maybe not directly adjacent, but any properties that had a fence at the time were already a five foot fence. So to have this modulation was was was out of character. So, you know, I think in this particular case, given that we've got president on either side, removed by one, I could probably support it. Well, the hype request here. All right, very well. Thank you, Councilman Weber. Is there questions for staff? Councilman, this is in a gated community. It's in a private community. I agree with Mr. Klenzak, my old ordinance, and then dates us with meeting absolutely about offenses. So to me, I'm probably by. I make a motion we approve. Okay. Motion to approve by Councilman Grouse. Second. We have a second by Councilman Riepo. So the motion moves, all those infections are out. All right. Those opposed. The passes unanimously. Thank you. All right very well. We begin to agenda item 4. Dean, facilities improvement agreement, RAPO IST, with our name is Vermitt. Please for Penny Mills, William, Mr. Lachor. Thank you, Mayor and Council. We are asking this item be tabled. The Rappall Independent School District staff, they need more time to review the final draft of the interlocal agreement. And also staff, we need time to calculate what the discounted building permit fees would be under this agreement. So, this be tabled and brought back to the August 27th meeting. Thank you. Okay, I'll ask the meeting. You guys have any questions as it pertains to the recommendation by the city manager to table this item. If not, the chair will go floor to entertain a motion. Make a motion to table 4d to the next meeting. Yeah, second. Oh, has a motion on the floor to table this item. We have a second. So like Councilman Johnson said, the motion moves. All those in favor say, oh, I don't know those opposed. Fast as unanimously. Okay, we're going to be in the next agenda item. We're not the discussion and actually regarding a resolution of the city council of the city of the Texas authorized in the city manager to direct the city attorney to pursue a settlement agreement with North Texas Municipal Water District in the matter style, North Texas Municipal Water District versus the City of Heath, cause number 1, 2, 2, 0, 7, 0, 4, Mr. Alascher. Last Friday, we had a meeting, there was a budget work session meeting. And as a part of that meeting, we also presented some options for the future, a plan for acquiring future water resources, both on a long-term basis and also on a short-term basis. And Mr. Brian Creed gave a really good presentation and you may recall on some of those slides, he had those regulators. In order for us to. Remove some potential road blocks to our negotiations with. City of Rockwall and with the city and not the city, but the district of the North Texas, municipal water district. That staff would be recommending that we find a way to completely resolve this suit. And that's the terminology that I'm using for today's agenda item. Now what we're asking you to consider is for us to just simply instruct the city attorney to pursue a settlement agreement. But we're not saying let's set it now. We're just saying, per se. As a result of that pursuit, maybe we find some things that we haven't found out before. And we may have a totally different perspective. But we have been told in very direct ways. And what I'm about to say is some of you are not going to, it's going to hurt. I apologize for it. But we've been told pretty much directly by the city of Rockwall. That the litigation is a stumbling blood. With their council, we've also been told by the City of Rockwall that there are two members that are on the North Texas Municipal Water District Board that see this as a stumbling blood. We've also have talked with the North Texas Municipal Water District, in fact, we are in, as you know, negotiations to create a second supply point from the South of Ortown. And they have told us they haven't been as direct as Rockwell has been. But they have told us they like working with communities that are good community partners. And so you can, and I think what Ryan said, even my dog understands that on which self. So, but let me say this, the thing that, you know, that you've heard me use the word nobility, there is some nobility of what the city did. They cut down a lot of trees. And if we were to reach a settlement agreement, which would be, I guess, the next step, I would not see that agreement as being us waving the light flag here, because they took down $2.8 million worth of trees and a swath, and they used it to build a sewer, the capacity of which is, the demand of which is actually being generated by other cities over the teeth. And so I can see the frustration when our neighbors called and and or citizens who live directly a joining this parallel inter-simper line that the district bill their concerns. You've got the phone calls we got the phone calls. But I think right now we've got bigger you've heard bigger fish to pry right now. And so yeah it's with mixed emotions because we've got bigger you've heard bigger fish to pry right now and so Yeah, it's with mixed emotions because I've been with you for seven years But I think I I have to agree and somebody maybe heard for that or I apologize But I agree that we need to seriously resolve this litigation and I'd be glad to open it up to questions or debate As you see fit. Thank you, Mayor. Very well. Thank you, Mr. Lasher. At this time, Council will open up some discussion. So Councilman Rufo, do you have any questions or discussions? Items as if pertains to it. Sure. My first question is, my understanding is, at the point we're at in this litigation, the lion's share of all the work has been done. And we are just waiting for the judges decision, which is imminent. Is that is that correct? This matter is also listed in our post meetings. I for any legal issues regarding it, I'd like to reserve that for the executive session. Okay. Okay. Okay. And you do have the option. I think we got. You do have the option, Courtney, is a long of going in, having the executive session and coming back out of the executive sessions. Recalling this is in the item and then we have the item after this also is an executive session. We calling that item as out as well and rendering your final decision. If you'd like to have a discussion with legal counsel. I think given that this particular item is a legal, you know, there's litigation involved. I think it would be wise and prudent to go into executive session to have our executive discussions before we act on this particular item. Otherwise, I think it would be a bit premature. Yeah, thank you. We were thinking Councilman Rupo, any other council members with questions, Councilman Krauss? I concur. If we're going to make a decision on this, we have an executive session on it. We should go ahead and do that before we make a decision. Okay. As far as I understand everybody's concern, I think that the city citizens and residents like see will transparency so understanding legal but I also understand transparency and the request of everybody in the city. I understand this. So Councilor Dodson, do you have any questions on this discussion topic? No, no questions. I am very much in favor of trying to resolve prevent this from recurring and 10 to 15 years and another 90 foot section being taken. pre-negotiated that piece, but I am favor of trying to resolve this litigation for the greater good, the greater good being, I think at this point, finding an additional water supply for our city. Okay. Mayor Mack, clarify. So to the extent that any extra-ing is, you know, legal questions were discussed, that's why I've suggest it, but if this matter itself with the resolution has is public and action can be taken, it's just if there were any related legal issues. Good. That's what I would recommend. Very well. Thank you, Council. Councilmember Norma, any questions or comments on this item? I don't have any questions, but I do have a comment that we're looking at a public safety hazard. And it's very important that our public and citizens understand what we're dealing with. And it's about public safety. And it's imperative that we make the right decisions as a city that support our public safety. And so not to get into the legal issues, but I do want people to understand it's about public safety. And I need to walk for my yard. So that's all I'll say. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councilman Mormon. Are there any other questions from the council to say staff? Yeah, I think if we're going to go ahead and have the discussion now, let's have it. I'm just trying to be fair and balanced to all the people in the bench, but also to the citizens. This item has been here since the election. We've been in executive session. Can you talk about this item? You know, I think the citizens and for their tax dollars are $333,000. I think that they're really curious on what we're going to do. I'm not trying to say one way or another. I haven't proposed my opinion on anybody on this topic public, but I believe that we've all heard that city manager, Wayne Langs, say, hey, this is a roadline. And he is for our charter, the CEO of the city, where the bench which creates policies. So if the CEO of the city is saying, Hey, I've been in the unions that I'm trying to get a resolution and I'm making the recommendation to the body. We need a resolution so I can do my job effectively and we all do know that the unrestrictions have been this last two- of years. But the numbers do have to be actually been written. So obviously people are very concerned about their yards. I understand the point of council is, is that we normally use less than 2 million gallons a day. So we have 5 million gallons in storage and people want to water their yards. And that's what's creating the problem. At the end of the day, this is a discussion for public because I've talked to a lot of people and I understand people are highly frustrated with water circumstances. So instead of doing these things in executive session, the city manager is requested to do this in a public setting and have the dialogue. I am trying to be fair and balanced to everybody on this bench, but I'm also trying to be fair and balanced to the city manager so you can do his job properly. I'm trying to be fair and balanced because I too sat in those meetings and I too sat there and said, okay, these entities are telling you, this is a problem. So I recognize what God is here. I recognize that we're frustrated about trees. I recognize that we've been fighting this for the last two years. I recognize that we lost as the defendant. I recognize that we've gone to the appeal. I was there in a little argument. I was sitting in the court. I was the only person on this bench sitting and listening to a little argument so I'm just saying let's give the residents but I think the residents would like to know 333,000 multi-year litigation and gosh under restrictions. How did we get away so cheap on the South Ridge group on only 23,000? Did most of that happen before then? Anyway, is there any information in executive session that would change our position here? I guess I just don't want to go make a decision and then we go on executive session. I said, well gee, why didn't you tell me that earlier? I think that's a great question. Thank you, Council. Yeah, I'm pleased. So this was published and it's made public. And so there's nothing to contradict to this. So it would just be another update like the other update. Which I think. In a peel and we're way. Yeah, but I think you just got in there. Yeah, I don't want to break your rules. I was kind of, you know, view all the arguments are, it's public. There are people that are welcome to go to those oral arguments in the fifth circuit. No different than I was sitting there, you could have been there and any other reason could have been there. So you're not breaking privilege by us having that dialogue. And so in this item, I mean, all of us would have wanted to have not gone down this road. You know what I mean? And resolved it much earlier would have, obviously. If a resolution encouraging the settlement of this case helps, because I agree, we get beat up by a lot of things and all of us in life try to do the right thing Sometimes it doesn't go real well Our citizens need water They need water. So So I've agreed like we would Scott stand it was surely we want this Result I'm not sure how this helps to this give our senior manager and attorney some more rights, privileges and authority they didn't have before. Is that what this does? Well, I believe that the body voted to appeal. Correct. We were told that the lion share of the finances were spent, defending the case. We were sued by the lion. You know, that, that appealing is not near as expensive as fennium. Let's be really clear if I understand what you're trying to do there. And again, I'm just trying to answer your question. Right. So as stated, yes. That was a recommendation that we were sued. Again, so. Let's, if we're going to go to the case, the case, and in of itself, that created you, are us to be the defendant, is that as stated in the case, that we impeded, right? On their ability. So therefore the contractor. I think we're going too far of this, because I'm not sure that's the end of that. I don't want to read it. At the end of the day, this is what residents want to understand right? Yeah, but they need the facts of the case not your opinion what I'm not giving any opinion So the fact I'm telling you that that that that was one of the issues right one of the issues was that we impede if I can find sure We impede I'm not saying that we did by any stretch. I'm just simply staying because we did not one is actually written in the law So so if anybody wants to go read the lawsuit, you can actually see it So so whenever we sit up here and I've heard it for months how we act like well, where's the defendant? Okay, but that's not really the the case in and of itself and again I'm not sharing any of my opinions. So I know councils nervous here. In general, I'm not sharing any opinion. I am stating what is in the case. My legal brief is this big. Again, I sat during the appeal. Okay. So all I'm simply saying is let's give some transparency to the residents. Right? So if we were the defendant and we lost, okay, then the body says, okay, whether it's legal counsel that gave council or were an opinion, we gave direction to the city manager to the individual in which is accountable for running the daily city business, he said, and won a appeal. That's the truth behind all of it. So I don't know, but we're not breaking privilege. That's how we got here. But I would ask what you agree that the way the circles have turned in the water situation, all that, you have to look at it in the big picture, and I agree, and Scott made a good point. What do you do to prevent it from happening? You know, those are great things to consider. So I absolutely want to solve this case. I want to settle it. I want to get our citizens water. I want to go down the 80 and hope they don't cut us off in 10 years because they already developed too much after we spend money. I would love to have the contract with Rockwall renewed so that we have to, all this stuff sounds great to me. And if we have to take a little bit of a bloody nose on part of that, to be totally transparent as a councilman, I can do that. So I don't know what this resolution looks like, but I see no reason not to encourage this from being settled. Thank you, Casper Crosse. That's my way, right? Did you have something? Sure, I'll, yeah. I'm already on. Do you wanna go? No, okay. So, so let's, for the sake of the Residence, let's rewind to how this even started. So we, and I'm gonna get bored with this, but when you get elected councilman, one of the first things you do is take an oath to uphold your city's ordinances period. Whether you like them, you don't like them, you're obligated to uphold the city's ordinances. We have a tree preservation ordinance. Seven Division. tree preservation ordinance. Seventy vision. It's. Excuse me. Seventy vision ordinance. The tree preservation ordinance states that development will mitigate trees that are removed during development. There's a few exceptions in there. Utilities. Utilities of a franchise. Utility. So so again. So so let me try. I'm filling in blanks. I want to fill in the blanks. So if you're going to say that there's a tree worth fence that is car blotch blank, it's anybody that comes into the city, I'm just making sure that everybody understands the state's utilities. I understand it says franchise. I also understand that's what we lost. And that's what we're appealing. Okay, so again, we can get into the legalities. The point is, we have an ordinance, we informed them of the ordinance. They said, yes, we're aware of these ordinances. They acknowledged it. They went to the effort to do a tree survey, knowing that they were going to mitigate, and then at some point, and all along we never stopped them from their development. So we said, continue proceed with your development. At some point, they saw the price tag and basically recanted, and that's what led us to where we are today. Okay. Now, do I agree with our intent up here? Yes, our intent up here is to to help resolve this water shortage issue. Now, let's put that in perspective. And I'll speak to Councilman Mormons comments about, you know, we want water. This is a fire, not a fire, but this is a health and safety issue. Nor Texas municipal water district like any supplier, and I'll be frank here, they don't care about your lawn. They care about providing water to people. That's the health and safety issue. Okay. So when they describe, when they calculate how much water they want to provide to city x, city y, and city z, they do it on a per capita basis. They do it on a per capita basis. Okay, so in their models, they have provided us in their calculations if they were to provide us a direct contract, which everybody wants, everybody's been waiting for this opportunity to have a direct contract or become a direct customer with North Texas, minus a water district. Their calculations would provide us 4.8 million gallons a day. That's less water than we get now. So, I'm in favor of resolving this lawsuit. I'm in favor of obtaining more water sources. What I'm telling you though is, North Texas Municipal Water District, their calculations of what they would provide us are less than what we have now. It's a reduction. We currently have six million gallons a day that would drop us down to 4.8. So there's no net gain there in doing so. Now I'm very interested in resolving this and providing a net increase in our water supply. Will Rockwall provide the extra water that we desperately need? I don't know. Does this resolution ensure that? I don't know. That's my concern. Am I in favor of whatever approach we need to take to guarantee we get some more water? Absolutely. Does this do it? It seems weak to me. That's my concern. It then I'm going to speak to that. But I just would say that this resolution is nearly to direct the settlement any settlement agreement that has come the terms that are new. We'll come to this body for approval for road execution. This is nearly just the direction to personally the seven. Okay. Thank you for the direction before to settle this. Well, so thank you for that clarification. You know, thank you for the clarification because that wasn't I mean, you know, make sure you know that. Yeah, just to go that direction to shut express articles. Okay, Okay, Alright, thank you, Council member, appreciate it. That's it. Okay. That direction. All right. Thank you. Council member. Appreciate it. That's it. Mr. Lashers. Yeah. We have a Richard Gormar city engineer been buying three year old public works for everything. And based on our calculations that we have seen it into the North Texas Missile Water District, they're saying that total demand, adequate demand is at nine point seven. And so of which six six million would be for hawk all to the ballot be from another swore. So, if we were to maintain or 6 million for hawk all to be reestablished in our contract, and we would still have the option of receiving the balance of that either from the district or from another source. But ultimately 9.7 is our bench bar. At build out, not a current population. Based on our built out information and their coefficients that they use in all the city. So if you apply that to the day's population, it equates to 4.8 million gallons a day. That's my point. It does not equate to more water. It equates to less water per person than what we received today. Okay. Where I'm confused is that we're currently using 6.0 million gallons now. So how do we get down? How do we get from 6.0 to 8? because that 9.7 or 9.8, but they are projecting at our projected build out of max population. So if you scale that to today's population, it's a simple linear scale. You scale that to today's population, that would be equivalent to 4.8. And the equivalent to 4.8 is going to be actual 4.8. So I'm here. We go into stage three, then we'll go to stay free. I don't know. You're still in the 4.8. We'll go to stay free tomorrow. Calm down. Calm down. Calm down. I'm like Scott was referring. I'm looking at future state. And I'm saying that they're potentially offering would be equivalent to 4.8 today. So it would be equivalent to less water than we currently receive. Very well. Thank you, Councilmember. We appreciate that. Councilman Krauss, you had a specific question that you'd like to ask, Mr. Lashert. I believe you interrupted an ask. Oh, yeah, yeah. I didn't want to invite the think that we never wanted to solve. You have an even staff. The move forward was a resolution of this agenda? I think we probably did your part. You did. No, I think you heard me out. And I think we actually had enthusiasm that we connected this case. This is what two years ago, and they had generated the web to point $8 million to mitigation fees. We had to do shade of that. That they would pay 100% of that when our ordinance only allowed 40% to be paid. So we thought we've had a chance for an opportunity to, I guess, to be a pioneer, I guess, in terms of litigation. And in fact, case long, and in the tradition that that would have for other cities. But then the draft came up and then we set a factor steaming in which you're generating anxiety. As I'm talking you guys see me. It's an idea. So there's just been so much change in the last two years that I think that we can at least need to Look at a complete resolution, but again don't wave the lifeline. That's not what you're saying Because this will happen again. I'm not saying this and it does where are we gonna be then and that's something we're going to Okay, thank you mr. Lashir Calculating for their comments or questions about this, a genie? Yes. OK. Councilor Rufo. So a couple of things to Councilman Krauss' comments about the goal of settlement in the past. We have been through arbitration, not arbitration, mediation, two times, three times. It's been a number of times we've been, we've tried to sit down and find a commie ground. To the point Mayor I appreciate about doing this in open session. I love doing this in open session. I request by the city manager just trying to honor the charter allowing the city manager to a show. So just where everyone knows it's we don't sit down and sit as a council and say, what are we going to put in executive session and what and what are we not? You know, things the agenda is created and we see the agenda as well and we see what's been advised to be in executive session, but there are many times that I wish things were an open session, but legal council says, no, this needs to be an executive session. So it's not it's not hidden in executive session it's just that's that's what we are told by legal counsel of where it needs to be discussed and so that's what we do it if you know anytime that comes up and we have concerns and we'll ask having not an executive session but it's it's but this was not hidden in executive session. I just want to stay up for the record. I don't think anybody tried to apply that, but thank you for pointing that out. Well, you were saying that it's been an executive session and people have a right to hear and I totally agree. And I'm glad we're talking about it. I hope in the west of the city manager. Right. I just want to get it out there that, you know, there was no intent to keep it. Sure. In dark corners of some meetings. All right. I'm not, I'm not a person who loves illegal stuff. I'm not a person who loves lawsuits. I do appreciate that our founding fathers set up our nation such that we such that we can use the court system to reach resolution when resolution needs to be reached. So in this situation, the goal here to Council and Weaver's point was to protect the ordinances of our city and to look out for what for our community. And so when that was violated, there's a, you know, we were actually, we were actually sued by the district and we thought, okay, well, we'll, you know, we'll work this out and we'll go through it. Now, when it comes to the appeal, yes, it did come to this council and we said, yes, let's appeal. And if a quasi-government agency or like the Texas, the municipal water district can come forward and they can override our ordinances, then who else can come and override our ordinances? It puts us in a very weak position as a city and we are here to protect our city. That is the biggest goal. Now as far as resolving this, I am 100% in favor of resolving this. I think it would be great to resolve it. Let's put this to bed and move on. There were allegations that we stopped work. We did not stop work. That was one of the contentions that we went back and forth with them about. The ability for a city to have their ordinances adhere to is very important, especially as we see more and more things come up with these months. The months someone could call the Muttac Quasi government agency and that would really cause a big problem for a city like ours. This for public health and safety, that is one of the biggest drivers on this is to make sure that we don't put We the community. I mean, I'm community member too. This is You know, there was talk earlier about Politicians and careers. I mean none of us get paid to be up here. We're just doing this because we love our community so So, um, but it's important that we do protect our community. And that's, that was the intent of this is to make sure we were looking out for, for we the people, you know, I'm a community member just, just like you. So, and to Council and Weaver's points, the 4.8 million that comes from Richard Dormier was talking about a Conversations that were happening with the water district where they said due because they're running low on water all over the place And so what they agreed in principle was 205 that's important number 205 Gallons her person per day. So if we take the 205, we multiply by 10, 6, 60, which is approximately our population. And then we multiply that by a 2.2 peaking factor. It gives you 4.8. And so to count some weabers point, that is 1.2 less than we currently have today. So what we know from that, not trying to say that they're going to back us down, we already have access to the 6 million. We don't believe they're going to back us down from that. However, it's, it, it brings a point, it brings a lot of attention to the fact that we really do need conservation methods to be put in place, we have a usage problem here in our city. And we all want to bring in more water, but we do have a usage problem. And that's something we need to work through. So I want to say, I do I am in favor of finding resolution here. I also want everyone to realize that this was not a light thing that the council wants to do. All right, very well. Whoops, just still just totally got staff. That's you. So, I'm just happy to have Richard Dormire. Richard Dormire is our city engineer. So, you can do something specifically. So, I'm very surprised what Brent was talking about. But I was confused when you first brought it in. But once they explained it and they were you're talking about. So, because the number was very close to what we're going to get from North Texas anyway, when if we go to the south and get that additional water. So your North Texas basically says they're going to allow us to have 205 gallons per person per day. And we can have a 2.2 multiplier on that for peaking. We're still talking for some of that peaking. Yes. And that's the number that is based on their conservation goals trying to conserve water in the entire North Texas area so that in 20 years, if they hit those goals, I believe it's equal to two times the volume of water like the bond. And so that's where they're headed with all of this, is totally conservation. Can you repeat that statement because nobody but us three seem to acknowledge that this is a north Texas problem. This isn't a heath problem. This is a North Texas problem. Now, are we on the ugly end of the stick? Yes, but this is a North Texas water shortage problem. When you say North Texas, I think you're not talking about North Texas and this for water district, you're talking about the region of North Texas. Correct. Correct. Correct. Correct. Yeah. So, um, Our discussions have been that in theory, we hope we're going to keep our water source in rock wall. Our original request was to be a North Texas customer in rock wall for the entire mental. And they said that would work because they're not going to have enough water there for us in the near future. So they suggested looking at keeping the amount of water we get in rock wall now and getting the rest of the water down highway 80 somewhere around 40 and bringing it back up. That if we did keep the six, then we're looking at about close to four down to 20, around 10. It's what they're saying based on their conservation numbers, is what they would expect us to use. I'd build out. I'd built out right now when we go down there and build that If we do go down there and build a take point I Would say more than likely we're gonna get 4MGD's first that So things would be nice for a while Then we'll grow into the point that we won't have any more if what their saying holds true. So I think our numbers Richard had us at 14 something, right? 14 or 15 is what we were asking for. Right. To maintain equivalency with our current. Yeah. Yes, it's like. So for the sake of the meeting and staying on course, this agenda item is discussed and and have action regarding a resolution to a current litigation. Now we're getting into water. I want the conversation. I agree with you. I appreciate you, Councilman Weaver, for giving some detail. Thank you, staff, for giving some additional detail. I know that we've been in multiple meetings talking about new solutions that were presented at the budget meeting of drilling wells for secondary supplemental water sources and more storage. So this water dialogue is vast, highly comprehensive, and we're going to be doing some tours of another city this week. But again, for the sake of the agenda item, I would like to keep us on point. I will say to your point, Councilman Rufo, and to yours, Councilman Rufo, I do understand that I don't believe that you're giving credit to the new Council members. We do recognize that there don't believe that you're giving credit to the new council members. We do recognize that there is concern in North Texas, but I can also say that there are other sources, other cities that are coming up with solutions. I've met with multiple mayors outside of our county that do not have the problems we have. that do not have the problems we had. So I didn't ask him how much each person watered or on though, but I did ask how often are you on restrictions? What is your plan? And they have complete comprehensive water plans. So to simply carte blanche, say that it's all North Texas and nobody knows what to do is just not 100% accurate, but I understand at your point. Okay. And understand your point. And to your point, Councillor Rupo, when you say that your duty is to protect the city, I'd like to point out, North Texas Municipal Water District is a provider of water to who we get our water from, which is Rockwell as a member city, to Forning as a member city, to RCH, to High Point, to Forning Lake 40 Lake water supply all as customers. So whenever we're protecting our city and we're in litigation with the primary water supplier, I'm not sure as a 100% accurate. So I do appreciate your comments. Councilman Norman, do you have any comments? No, no, Councilman, we do have any comments? No, no, no, Councilman. We do have plenty of time. Councilman Norman, I'll let you speak. Let's let Councilman Norman speak. He hasn't had an opportunity and he's gone to push his butt at least four times. Yeah, so just specifically authorizing the city manager to direct the city attorney to pursue a settlement agreement. Yes, I would agree to instruct the city manager to direct the city attorney to move forward with settlement agreement. And what I just heard. What I was trying to pick out all the bullet points there is that I heard we were saying he's in favor. I heard another favorite, crowds is in favor, roofless in favor. So I'm trying to stay focused on what you asked and everybody's in favor. So I would just say that for the record I'm in favor and I think we shouldn't do wrong. Okay very well. Councilman Rufo for your response. Yes. If we want to look at it biopically, you can do that. My point was that looking after our community to make sure precedent to set that an outside agency cannot come in and override our ordinances is very important. So if you want to try to call me out biopically for saying for North Texas fine, but it's part of a bigger picture of making sure that we're strategically doing the right thing. That's my point. Okay. Very now, Councilmember Rinto, I'm not trying to call you out. What I'm trying to do is share my opinion. I've opened this up to a lot of dialogue. We listened to every single person's opinion. We listened to European and multiple times. know they've lived it so my opinion is hold on my opinion is that we have to be very careful safety and security yes ordinances yes but we also have to pay attention to liabilities and risk and all I'm simply saying is that our city manager has brought something to the table to say hey you would like to further discuss and have a resolution and have an opportunity in which that resolution is coming back to the body for our approval nonetheless. We have the city CEO that's saying hey I really need some of the boundaries taken off so I can have some more thorough dialogues. There? You're saying you want to say your opinion, and that's fine, but it's not neutral. It's pointed towards me on some of these things. And- Well, we have to have order. I understand. I understand it's a very heated topic for everybody. Well, you have to have order unfortunately. I understand it's a very heated topic for everybody. You have to have water unfortunately. We have to let the body discuss. And I do appreciate and understand the heatedness. As you can see this panel, I want unity within this panel. I want the body to be in unity. This is obviously an item in which the citizens as a whole are very divided. Okay, so with that being said at this time the chair will open the floor for motion. I move that we provide our city manager the ability to direct. direct city attorneys to seek resolution on the litigation that's currently in place for North Texas and the city of Rockwell. Very well so there's a motion by Councilman Dodson to allow the city manager to seek resolution as it pertains to North Texas minus water district and the matter style North Texas minus water district versus the city of Heath. Do we have a second? I'll say that we have a second by Councilman Mormon. So therefore the motion moves all those in favor say aye I Those opposed You know that unanimous very well. Thank you council get her done. Thank you council Council for the collaboration and allowing a very public dialogue on something that's very very different opinions moving on to agenda item 4.f. This is a discussion regarding receipt of a petition for charter amendment. Ms Duncan. Oh, here we go. So my office received two, the city secretary's office, my office, received two sets of petition documents that were hand-delivered from a citizen, circulated the posing, a charter amendment during two separate visits by the citizen on August 8. In other words, she came by twice I'm going to take a look at the documents that are being taken to the document. I'm going to take a look at the document. I'm going to take a look at the document. I'm going to take a look at the document. I'm going to take a look at the document. I'm going to take a look at the document. received contained 67 pages with 537 signatures. As of July 24th, 2024, per the Rockwalk County elections office, the city of Heath has 8,648 registered voters. 5% of those registered voters are needed to support the petition, which means it's 433 signatures. My office verified the signatures from the 67 pages and using the Rockwell County Elections voter portal. 446 signatures were validated as City of Heath registered voters. There are still 91 remaining signatures on these 67-page submittal that will not check because the 446 met the goal of 433. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, Norma. At this time, council, do you have discussion items on this topic? We'll start with council me. Krause. Yeah, is there any statue that allows it to be retroactive? That would be a question for council. We do have this item listed on executive session given that the materials were just received last week and move the we would fully discuss that. I tried. Council, why would that be a point for executive session? a number of issues around the particular, the particulars of this, but as far as that particular question, I know that it's being researched as to the weather. I'm gonna say that, this isn't litigation, and there's 534 people that have signed a petition. So I'm just not sure why the discussion will go to executive session. In as much as there is a potential for litigation, it's done out of a little, and a little bit so caution. There are a number of other requirements that need to be met prior to taking the next steps on this. And we just wanted to be aware, and we all want to be aware what we receive. We have not had time to digest all of the elements of the documents or receive to make sure that it's compliance with the various requirements, but we're not trying to hide anything. We're just trying to provide you. What we know. Okay. On this short period of time. Thank you, council. Councilman Kraus, any further questions? Well, they just ain't going. Councilman Dawson. No other questions. Councilman Dawson? No other questions. Councilman Lear? Yeah, I'll make a few comments. You know, term limits, yeah, I'm in favor of them, especially at FedRoll and in state levels. You know, one interesting thing about Heath is Heath, Heath gets out in votes. We've got a very active, very involved, very engaged group of citizens that get out and vote. So when it comes to term limits or deciding whether it's time for a counseling to go or our counsel person to go or not, they invoke those limits every year when they go to the polls and they take care of it. And so in some respects, this is a clearly not even lightly veiled attempt to remove from any potential future running, Kelseman that have been elected numerous times and I'll refer specifically to Kelseman Krauss. Kelseman Krauss has been opposed numerous times. In fact, there are people in this room that signed a petition that lost elections to Kelseman Krauss. So the reason Kelseman Krauss as an example has been reelected numerous times is because the people like him, the people want him, they understand that he is there representing them and he always has and always would be. And that's why he's remained on council longer than any of us. This action effectively removes him from being an option for all are effectively in some respects rigging an election to eliminate a potential turn. I understand. I understand the point. So, of course, correct. That's our point. Well, you can have your opinion. You can have your opinion. And I'll have my opinion. I will continue. So we are removing as a resident who has voted in this city for almost three decades. I like to be able to vote for the person I want to vote for. And this removes that ability. And so I'm not in favor of course not. So that's it. Thank you. Very well. Councilman Warman. There are benefits to charm limits and a lot of major bigger cities have them. So there is a benefit to it and I don't want to be here forever. I think you should make way for creating opportunities for a lot of people to serve their community. And I think that's important. I don't want to just highlight to talk about how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to how to return how we get and I'm thankful that we have such an involved community that that comes out and speaks at the elections. So I want to say thanks very well. My point on this is is always, every way to work. When I first heard about it, I thought, man, this has to do with me. I didn't think it was about Mr. Krauss. Maybe people only wanted to see me in for two times. So we can make this about ourselves, we can make this about the individuals at which sign the petition. I echo, as we were said, I do appreciate Mr. Krauss and his years of service. And so I have two different opinions. One, thank you all for serving the times of which you've all served because this is a very thankless job and it is unfit. And I understand the concern that you would be limited in your service role by a term on a second though I would say that I'm very strong conservative that believes that time limits are very important at federal level at the state level and also at the local just from the fact that you know to Mr. Warman's point it allowed time for new people to come in. I believe all of this body has heard be talk about importance of getting more community members involved, getting more community members involved in awards, exterior goodies, and even tried to and we'll bring it up at a later date, considering new rules. So I do understand the concerns, and I also understand the positives to this topic at this time. We have 534, the sign of position. We do not have a vote here, but obviously we will discuss it in an executive session due to concerns as it pertains to legal. So there are no other further discussion items on this topic. We will move to the next agenda. That's one thing that I would point out that we do decide to change our charter. We're going to be, quote, progressing. We should also consider the at-large and start having precincts. So we don't have particular subdivision that has a majority of the votes. So we've only had, I've been here 30 years, I think we've had three contested mayor braces. The last two seats were walkoffs. In your 30 years, I think we've had three contested mayor, braces. The last two seats were walkoffs. Some of the people walked on without opponents. Jim Chester, Sharon Caldwell, Kevin Lambert, John Main, Lauren Ligty, John Rackliffe, Stephen Kimmy, Barry Brooks, Joe Chamberlain, Brian Barry, Karen Lewis, Julie Zurich, Bob Hilly All, no opponents. We don't have a list of people that are just dying to come here and do this and not that I blame them. I have to say through my campaigns, there's something wrong with me. You know, there is the fact that I enjoy this. But I do. And I'll also caution you that developers love newbies. So yeah, they want you to give them all the newbies you can. They're enough. They you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. the city of Heath really doesn't like to run contested racists and while it was my final decision not to run for that particular seat, I was certainly discouraged from doing so So that didn't happen twice, but I'm sure I wasn't the first person to be discouraged from running And for the record I called you and asked you through the You did and for the record I called you and asked you through the run. You did. Okay. All right. Very well. Councilman Dawson and a further comments. No, sir. Into your point, Councilman Krause, I agree. I think we all agree that we want to preserve open space to follow the ordinances. of the community. And we have a lot of the community. And we have a lot of the community. And we have a lot of the community. And we have a lot of the community. And we have a lot of the community. And we have a lot of to do me that area. So at this time, this agenda item is closed. We will go on to agenda item number five. This is our executive session and of course, the Texas Government vote chapter five five one sub-chapter on you. City Council to the recess and executive session. This is a close review to discuss the file. So five dot eight session or five five1 or 9, summer of 7. Consultation with attorney. Yeah, there you go. The governing body. The professional conduct of the state floor. Excess newly complex with this chapter regarding zoning and plotting standard government code. Shock lock and religion on the class. Trilogy development standard trilogy development in the Clinton, Chess and City of Limit, an extra territorial jurisdiction and receipt of a petition for the chapter for the charter amendment five dot B section five five one dot zero seven one consultation with the attorneys regarding pending or contemplated litigation or settlement offer regarding MC Trilogy LLC versus City of Heat Cards number 32 to see V0215 or D City of Heat versus Clinical Chiffin. Cards number 1221204 and more fixes, we need for water district versus City of Heat Cards number 1220704 5.C Section 551.0 7 4 deliberation regarding the appointment evaluation reassignment duties discipline and dismissal of a public officer or employee regarding city manager. We're now in executive session at 841. Okay. Agenda item number six, we will reconvene into open session and accordance with Texas government code chapter 551. The city council will reconvene into regular session to consider action. If any on back in the open session. First off, let me thank the council for a very spirited meeting today. Thank you all. I know that there were many topics that had a whole lot of discussion inside of it. We are at this time going to open the floor for a motion. I'd like to make a motion to set a special meeting on August 19th, 2024, including to call a election. Okay. There's a motion on the floor to have a special session and to set the election as it pertains to the petition or a charter amendment. Do we have a second? Oh, second. Okay. We have a second by Councilman Weaver. So the motion moves all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed. It passes unanimously. Another action item to note is that our great city manager, the city CEO, Kevin Lashar after many years of service has tenored his resignation this evening due to moving into retirement. And Mr. Lashir on the record, let me just say, how appreciative I am of your kindness, your hard work, your diligence, and your collaboration. And I know that the council feels the same level of appreciation. So thank you. And we look forward to working with you as we never can probably fill your shoes, but we will do our due diligence to so and staff's favorite to keep the city moving forward in the same and right direction. at this time if there are no other comments by council. All right, this meeting is adjourned at 10-21. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi.