Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:05]

AND NOW FROM MCALLEN CITY HALL, A MEETING OF THE MCALLEN CITY COMMISSION.

[MUSIC] AND GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY, WELCOME TO TONIGHT'S COMMISSION MEETING, AND WE'LL

[CALL TO ORDER]

CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER, WE'LL HAVE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, FOLLOWED BY INVOCATION BY COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE] HEAVENLY FATHER, WE COME TO YOU TODAY ASKING FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, WISDOM AND SUPPORT AS WE BEGIN THIS MEETING. HELP US TO ENGAGE IN MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION.

ALLOW US TO GROW CLOSER AS A GROUP AND NATURE THE BONDS OF COMMUNITY.

FILL US WITH YOUR GRACE LORD GOD, AS WE MAKE DECISIONS THAT MAY AFFECT THE CITY OF MCALLEN AND CONTINUE TO REMIND US ALL THAT WE DO HERE TODAY, ALL THAT WE ACCOMPLISH IS FOR THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH, FOR THE GREATER GLORY OF YOU AND FOR THE SERVICE OF HUMANITY.

WE ASK THESE THINGS IN YOUR NAME.

AMEN. AMEN. AND WE HAVE ONE PROCLAMATION, IT'S A GREAT PROCLAMATION, ACTUALLY, WE HAVE

[PROCLAMATION]

TODAY. LARRY DELGADO BY COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE] MAYOR PRO TEM ZAMORA.

[Larry Delgado Day]

GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. DELGADO, COULD YOU COME FORWARD WITH YOUR FAMILY, PLEASE? DELGADO. AND I THINK I KNOW WHY IT WAS PICKED TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR PROCLAMATIONS BECAUSE I LIKE TO EAT.

SO I WAS JUST LIKE, HOW ARE YOU? THAT IS VERY TRUE. SO WITHOUT ANY FURTHER OR DO, CITY MCALLEN PROCLAMATION STATE OF TEXAS, COUNTY OF DEL LAGO, CITY MCALLEN.

JOIN ME RIGHT HERE, SIR. THANK YOU.

WHEREAS LARRY DELGADO WAS BORN TO [INAUDIBLE] AND NOELIA DELGADO ON JULY 30TH 1975.

AND WHEREAS CHEF LARRY DELGADO'S LOVE OF COOKING AND HIS PASSION FOR FOOD STARTED WHEN HE WAS ONLY SIX YEARS OLD.

ONE COULD ALWAYS FIND HIM IN THE KITCHEN, LEARNING TO PREPARE FAMILY MEALS UNDER THE WATCHFUL EYE OF HIS MOTHER, NOELIA.

THE DAY SPENT IN THE KITCHEN COOKING WITH HIS MOTHER MARKED HIS LIFE FOREVER.

AND WHEREAS ON OCTOBER OF 2008, CHEF LARRY AND HIS WIFE, JESSICA OPENED THEIR FIRST RESTAURANT, HOUSE, WINE AND BISTRO RIGHT HERE IN MCALLEN.

OTHER RESTAURANT VENTURES OPERATED BY LARRY DELGADO AND HIS FAMILY INCLUDE SALT, NEW AMERICAN TABLE AND SALOMÉ ON MAINE, WHICH OFFERS A MEXICAN MENU THAT'S UNLIKE ANY OTHER IN THE REGION. AND WHEREAS CHEF LARRY HAS WON MANY AWARDS SUCH AS SMALL BUSINESS PERSON OF THE YEAR 2013, TOP FIVE SMALL BUSINESS OF THE YEAR 2013, LATINO LEADERS 2014, CHEF OF THE YEAR 2014, OUTSTANDING RESTAURATEUR AWARD AND WHEREAS ON OCTOBER 2021, CHEF LARRY TOOK HIS TALENTS TO THE NATIONAL STAGE ON THE HIT SHOW BEAT BOBBY FLAY AND WE ALL KNOW WHO BOBBY FLAY IS RIGHT.

THE COMPETITION SHOW PITS TWO CHEFS AGAINST EACH OTHER BEFORE THE WINNER MOVES ON TO BATTLE FLAY HIMSELF.

CHEF LARRY MOVED FORWARD TO CHALLENGE THE CELEBRITY CHEF TO GUIDE US OUT OF BATTLE, WHERE HE VOWED, OR I'M SORRY, WHERE HE WOWED THE JUDGES WITH A FLAVORFUL, PERFECTLY COOKED CARNE ASADA [INAUDIBLE].

IN A QUICK, WOW THAT WAS HARD.

IN A QUICK [INAUDIBLE] VERTICALLY TO THE WINNING DISH THAT ULTIMATELY BEAT BOBBY FLAY.

NOW, THEREFORE, THAT'S RIGHT. WHEW! YOU KNOW [APPLAUSE] NOW THEREFORE, I JOAQUIN ZAMORA MAYOR PRO TEM OF THE CITY, MCALLEN BY VIRTUE OF THE AUTHORITY VESTED IN ME AND ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE CITY OF MCALLEN, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM NOVEMBER 22,2021 AS LARRY DELGADO DAY.

LARRY, YOU MAKE MCALLEN PROUD.

[APPLAUSE] HE'LL LIKE TO SAY SOME WORDS, PLEASE.

WOW. THANK YOU.

OH, GOSH, I DIDN'T THINK I'D BE AT A LOSS FOR WORDS.

WELL, YOU CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE A LOSS FOR WORDS WITH COOKING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THIS RECOGNITION.

THE COMMISSION, THE CITY MCALLEN.

YOU KNOW, WE MOVED HERE IN 2008 AND VERY FEW PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY MOVED HERE FROM AUSTIN TO GET OUT OF THE RESTAURANT BUSINESS.

AND A YEAR INTO IT, WE REALIZED THAT THAT WE HAD A PASSION FOR FOOD, A PASSION FOR PEOPLE. AND AND WE'VE COME TO REALLY CULTIVATE A PASSION FOR THE CITY OF MCALLEN.

AND WE WOULDN'T DREAM OF HAVING OUR BUSINESSES ANYWHERE ELSE.

IF YOU DON'T KNOW, ALL OF OUR BUSINESSES ARE WITHIN ONE MILE OF DOWNTOWN OF ONE ANOTHER IN DOWNTOWN MCALLEN.

AND IT'S BEEN AN HONOR AND A PLEASURE TO TO REPRESENT THIS CITY AND TO DO BUSINESS IN THE

[00:05:04]

CITY. AND WE CONTINUE TO DO OR WE HOPE TO CONTINUE TO DO SO FOR MANY YEARS TO COME.

THANK YOU. ON BEHALF OF MY FAMILY.

OUR STAFF AND EVERYBODY THAT MAKES OUR RESTAURANTS WORK DAY IN AND DAY OUT.

WE HUMBLY THANK YOU AND APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT.

CONGRATULATIONS. ONE OF OUR VERY OWN MCALLEN OWN.

[INAUDIBLE] FAMILY. THANK YOU.

ITEM NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

[1. PUBLIC HEARING]

[A) ROUTINE ITEMS]

COMMISSIONERS, GOOD EVENING TONIGHT WE HAVE SEVEN ITEMS LISTED UNDER ROUTINE, IT'S ONE REZONING AND SIX CUPS.

AS ALWAYS, THEY COME WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FROM PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND HAD NO OPPOSITION WHEN PRESENTED.

THEY CAN BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION OR DISCUSSED SEPARATELY AS DESIRED, AND THEY ARE A REZONING FROM C4 TO R-1 AT SEVENTY THIRTY ONE MILE SEVEN ROAD.

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR FOR A BAR AT 400 NOLANA AVENUE SUITES ONE AND TWO.

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR FOR A BAR SERVICE AT 813 NORTH MAIN STREET SUITE 213. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LIFE OF THE USE FOR GUEST HOUSE AT 1712 IRIS, A REQUEST CONDITIONED NEWS DEPARTMENT FOR LIFE WITH THE USE FOR GRADE SCHOOL PLAYGROUND AT 2400 DAFFODIL. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LIFE OF THE USE FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BEING A STORAGE AT 2401 RUSSELL ROAD AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR FOR A DRIVE IN THEATER AT 3116 ASH AVENUE.

ANYBODY HERE FOR AGAINST? MOVE TO APPROVE.AYE. AGAINST? THE MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM B REZONING.

[B) REZONINGS]

YES SIR, THIS IS A REZONING FROM R-1 TO R-2 AT 1500 NORTH BENSON.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH BENSON, APPROXIMATELY 210 FEET NORTH

[1. Rezone from R-1 (single-family residential) District to R-2 (duplex-fourplex residential) District: 0.544 acres out of Lot 1, Resubdivision of Lots 15 and 16, Block 2, Hammond’s Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 1500 North Bentsen Road.]

OF PECAN. IT IS AN IRREGULAR SHAPE AND MEASURES HALF AN ACRE.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING R2 FOR A DUPLEX AND A FOUR PLEX FEASIBILITY PLAN HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WITH TWO LOTS ON THE PROPERTY.

ADJACENT ZONING IS A0 TO THE NORTH AND EAST ARE ONE TO THE WEST AND SOUTH.

ADJACENT USES INCLUDE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THE DFW, ROWE HIGH SCHOOL, VACANT LAND TRANSFER THIS AREA, A RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL STAFF, DID RECEIVE OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, CITING TRAFFIC NOISE AND CHANGING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER.

THE ITEM WAS HEARD AT THE NOVEMBER 2ND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, WHERE THERE WAS A COUPLE OF MEMBERS THERE CITING THE SAME THINGS.

AND AFTER SOME DISCUSSION, [INAUDIBLE] UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST, SO IT DOES REQUIRE A SUPERMAJORITY FOR IT TO BE APPROVED.

ON THIS ITEM, WE LOOKED AT IT BACK IN AUGUST, RIGHT, AND WAS THERE IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF UNITS BETWEEN THE LAST TIME AND THIS TIME? I THINK I KNOW THAT THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE NUMBER OF, I MEAN, THE PARKING, CORRECT.

BUT AS FAR AS THE UNITS, IT'S THE SAME.

IT WAS ALWAYS SIX UNITS, CORRECT SIR.

SO I DON'T REALLY SEE A DIFFERENCE IN OUR OPINION, BUT IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'D I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THE ITEM.

[INAUDIBLE] ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST, AYE.

A MOTION CARRIES TO DISAPPROVE.

I WAS IN AGAINST. OKAY, TIME OUT.

OKAY, BOARD TO DISAPPROVE IF YOU ALL COULD RAISE YOUR HANDS.

TO DISAPPROVE. OH, NO TO APPROVE.

SORRY. OH APPROVE.

WAIT A MINUTE. OKAY, HOLD ON. [LAUGHTER] TO APPROVE THE MOTION, WHICH WAS TO DISAPPROVE.

OK. JUST A SECOND HERE.

ONE, TWO, THREE. OK.

ALL AGAINST, ONE, TWO, THREE.

OH [INAUDIBLE] WELL, THEY NEED A SUPERMAJORITY.

CORRECT. CORRECT. SO IT'S A NO.

RIGHT. ITS A NO.

MAN, I THOUGHT I WAS GONNA VOTE.

SORRY, MAN. OK.

NEXT ITEM. YES, SIR.

THE NEXT ITEM IS AN INITIAL ZONING TO R-1 AT 7100 MILE SIX ROAD.

[2. Initial zoning to R-1 (single-family residential) District: the west 10 acres of Lot 452, John H. Shary Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 7100 Mile 6 Road.]

SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILE SIX, APPROXIMATELY 1300 FEET EAST

[00:10:02]

OF STUART. IT IS A IT DOES TOTAL TEN ACRES.

RATHER, THE TRACT IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, BUT IS UNDERGOING VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION AS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS.

IT IS FOR A 35 LOT SUBDIVISION UNDER THE NAME OF NEMONT ESTATES, TOO.

IT IS SURROUNDED BY T.J.

PROPERTIES, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT TREND FOR THIS AREA IS RESIDENTIAL.

THE INITIAL REZONING WAS HEARD THAT THE NOVEMBER 2ND PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

[INAUDIBLE] IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. COUNCILOR, ON THE PREVIOUS MOTION, DO WE NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? THE MOTION WAS TO DISAPPROVE.

WELL, THE MOTION WAS TO DISAPPROVE, BUT YOU HAD MORE THAN TWO VOTES TO DISAPPROVE.

SO THE SUPERMAJORITY FAILED BY VIRTUE OF THE PREVIOUS MOTION.

BUT THE WELL, I GUESS.

BECAUSE IT WAS DISAPPROVED, I GUESS THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE ANOTHER MOTION TO APPROVE AND IT WOULD FAIL BECAUSE OF EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

EXACTLY. OK. NEXT ITEM.

YES, SIR, THIS IS AN INITIAL ZONING TO R-3T AT 8804 NORTH WARE ROAD.

[3. Initial zoning to R-3T (multifamily residential townhouse) District: the north 5 acres of Lot 209, Pride O’ Texas Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 8804 North Ware Road.]

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH WARE, APPROXIMATELY 120 FEET NORTH OF HARVARD. THE PROPERTY DOES TOTAL FIVE ACRES.

TRACT IS CURRENTLY OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, BUT IS UNDERGOING VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION AGAIN AS PART OF A SUBDIVISION.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING R3 T FOR TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT.

ADJACENT ZONING IS R-1 TO THE SOUTH AND EAST, A-O TO THE EAST AND THEN ETJ AREAS TO THE NORTH. USES SURROUNDING USES RATHER INCLUDE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, APARTMENTS, VACANT LAND AND THE BASEBALL COMPLEX.

THE INITIAL REZONING WAS HEARD AT THE NOVEMBER 2ND PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION MEETING NO OPPOSITION AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

I AM ABSTAINING FROM DISCUSSION.

I HAVE MOTION.

SO MOVED TO APPROVE, SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST. MOTION CARRIES.

THE NEXT ITEM THE DEVELOPER HAS REQUESTED TO MAINTAIN TABLED.

[4. Rezoning from R-1 (single-family residential) District to C-3 (general business) District: 0.97 acres out of Lot 11, Section 12, Hidalgo Canal Company’s Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 1009 Jay Avenue.(TABLED)]

THANK YOU. YES, SIR.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

YES SIR. THE FIRST ONE IS REQUEST OF CAPTAIN ADOLPH AGUIRRE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR

[C) CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS]

[1. Request of Captain Adolph Aguirre for a Conditional Use Permit, for life of the use, for a multi-purpose warehouse, at Lot “H”, Stroud-Hunter Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 2220 Pecan Boulevard.]

LIFE OF THE USE FOR A MULTIPURPOSE WAREHOUSE AT LOT H 2220 PECAN BOULEVARD.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PECAN.

EAST OF 23RD, IT IS ZONED C-3.

ADJACENT ZONING IS R-3A TO THE NORTH AND EAST, C-3 TO THE WEST AND C-2 TO THE SOUTH.

THE ADJACENT USES INCLUDE SALVATION ARMY.

THEN THERE'S A MULTI-FAMILY HOMES.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADD A 9,968 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR STORAGE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE BUILDING WILL STORE HOLIDAY AND PARADE ITEMS OWNED BY THE SALVATION ARMY, AS WELL AS CLOTHING, DONATIONS AND DISASTER RELIEF SUPPLIES.

THE ITEMS HEARD AT THE NOVEMBER 3RD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING THERE WAS ONE PERSON IN OPPOSITION CITING ESTHETICS OF THE COMMERCIAL AREA, BUT AFTER SOME DISCUSSION PNZ UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AS WELL.

ANYBODY FOR AGAINST? [INAUDIBLE] MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

AND THEN THE NEXT ITEM NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OFF THE TABLE.

[2. Request of Ricardo Vega for a Conditional Use Permit, for one year, for a Picture Venue and Event Area at Lot 78, La Lomita Irrigation and Construction Company’s Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas, 6712 North Bentsen Road.(TABLED)]

VOTE TO REMOVE FROM TABLE.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

IT'S OFF THE TABLE, SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH BENSON.

IT IS ZONED R-1 ADJACENT ZONING IS R-1 TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST AND TO THE EAST IN SOME AREAS. ADJACENT USES OUR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AG LAND AND VACANT LAND.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO OPERATE A PICTURE AND EVENT AREA OTHERWISE KNOWN AS MATTIE'S PUMPKIN PATCH, FROM NINE A.M.

TO EIGHT P.M. DAILY.

THE MEMO YOU HAVE PLACES THE PARKING REQUIREMENT AT 1525, BUT AFTER SOME RECALCULATIONS, WE HAVE REDUCED THAT NUMBER TO 350 NOW.

NO CURRENT PARKING ON THE PROPERTY IS UP TO CITY STANDARDS.

THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A THREE AND A HALF ACRE TRACK THAT HE'S PROPOSING FOR PARKING, BUT HE DOESN'T WANT TO PAVE.

STAFF DID RECEIVE UP A PETITION IN OPPOSITION, SO A SUPERMAJORITY WILL BE REQUIRED HERE AS WELL. THEY WERE CITING TRAFFIC, NOISE, DUST FROM THE UNPAVED PARKING, AS WELL AS LIVESTOCK ESCAPING FROM THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY.

AFTER SOME DISCUSSION P AND Z UNANIMOUSLY DISAPPROVED, WITH A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO PAVED PARKING, FENCING OF THE PROPERTY AND THE HOURS BEING RESTRICTED FROM NINE A.M. TO NINE P.M.

AND WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE.

OK FOR OR AGAINST ANYBODY? GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS JAIME MORALES, I'M AN ATTORNEY THAT WAS HIRED BY MR. RICK VEGA, THE ONLY OWNER OF MADDIE'S PUMPKIN PATCH.

WE'RE HERE, AND BOTH HIM AND HIS WIFE ARE PRESENT HERE AS WELL TO RESPOND TO ANY

[00:15:01]

QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE.

HE'S BEEN IN OPERATIONS SINCE 2016 UNDER A SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT.

HE'S BEEN MAKING IMPROVEMENTS AS TIME HAS PASSED.

BASED ON ISSUES THAT HE SAW, NOTHING HAD REALLY BEEN RAISED TO HIM BY THE CITY BEFORE.

BUT HE'S ADDRESSED ANY KIND OF OVERFLOW ONTO THE STREET BY LEASING ADDITIONAL LAND FOR PARKING THAT HE CLEARED OUT.

SO HE HAS AN ADDITIONAL THREE AND A HALF ACRES.

IT'S KIND OF A NATURAL SETTING.

HE HAS SOME ANIMALS THAT ARE THERE FOR THE KIDS, SOME TRACTOR RIDES, THE TRAIN THAT HE KIND OF PULLS AROUND FOR THE KIDS.

AN ORCHARD MAZE.

SO HE KIND OF SEES IT NOT JUST AS A PICTURE VENUE, BUT SOMETHING WHERE DAYCARES, YOU KNOW, SCHOOLS HAVE COME BY IN ORDER TO ENJOY THE NATURAL SURROUNDINGS AND SOME OF THE ANIMALS. SO WE FEEL THAT BASED ON THIS TYPE OF SITUATION, THAT A PAID PARKING IS NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING HERE ALREADY KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT AND ARE LOOKING FOR THIS NATURAL SURROUNDING, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE OF THE NORM.

THAT'S, YOU KNOW, FROM NORMAL CITY LIFE.

IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS THEM.

ANY QUESTIONS? OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR FROM MY POSITION FIRST? I CAN HEAR FROM OPPOSITION.

ANYBODY AGAINST THE THE ISSUE ? HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON.

CITY OF MCALLEN, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, I'M HERE TODAY IN OPPOSITION OF THE CUP APPLICATION AND ONE OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORING PARTIES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THIS BUSINESS.

YA'LL ARE WELL AWARE OF THOSE WHO OPPOSE, AS I'VE SUBMITTED THEIR SIGNATURES.

I'M HERE SPEAKING ON THEIR BEHALF AS WELL, SINCE MOST ARE ELDERLY.

I WANT TO MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR.

WE UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT A VAPE SHOP OR A BAR AND THAT IT'S AN OUTDOOR, FAMILY ORIENTED BUSINESS. BUT WE ARE NOT HERE TODAY TO DISCUSS WHETHER THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS IS NEEDED.

WE ARE HERE BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE BEING THEIR LOCATION.

IT'S WITHIN TWO HUNDRED FEET OF SEVERAL RESIDENCES AND IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE, WHICH IS AGAINST CITY ORDINANCE.

THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS BELONGS OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS OR IN A COMMERCIALLY ZONED AREA WHERE THEY DON'T DISRUPT THE DAILY LIVES OR POSE A THREAT TO THEIR NEIGHBORS HEALTH OR PEACE. I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY AS MY NEIGHBORS HAVE AND DEVELOPING OUR PROPERTIES, ONLY TO BE DESTRUCTED BY THE CONSTANT TRAFFIC, NOISE AND DUST BEING CAUSED BY THIS BUSINESS. EVERYONE WHO AGREES WITH HAVING THEM STAY OPEN DOESN'T RESIDE NEXT TO THEM. THE PROPERTY OWNERS DON'T EVEN RESIDE THERE.

ONLY THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO LIVE NEXT TO THIS BUSINESS.

THEY ALL GET TO GO HOME AND ENJOY THE PEACEFULNESS OF THEIR OWN BACKYARD.

MY GIRLS DON'T HAVE THAT PRIVILEGE.

THE MAIN ISSUES ARE PROPER PARKING, NOISE, DUST, TRASH FLASHING LIGHTS AT NIGHT AND THE LACK OF PRIVACY.

I HAVE AT TIMES COUNTED THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES PARKED IN ANOTHER NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY AN ORCHARD.

TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THE BUSINESS OWNER HAS LEASED THESE ADDITIONAL ACRES AND THROUGH [INAUDIBLE] WHICH HE WATERS DOWN TO NOT CAUSE THE DUST.

I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW WHEN YOU HAVE UPWARDS OF THREE HUNDRED VEHICLES AND PEOPLE GOING IN AND OUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE WATERING DOESN'T HELP.

THE OTHER ISSUE IS THE NOISE.

I JUST MENTIONED AT LEAST THREE HUNDRED CARS THAT I'VE COUNTED AT ONE TIME.

THAT'S EASILY AT LEAST ONE THOUSAND PEOPLE AT ONE TIME WALKING WITHIN ONE FOOT OF MY PROPERTY. THE GENERATORS, TRACTORS, MUSIC CAN CLEARLY BE HEARD AND WE'VE ALL HAD THAT NEIGHBOR. YOU KNOW THAT FROM TIME TO TIME HAS A LOUD BARBECUE PARTY AND IT'S OK.

YOU DEAL WITH IT. YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN EVERY DAY, BUT AT MY HOUSE, IT'S AN EVERYDAY ISSUE.

I UNDERSTAND WE ARE WANTING TO LIMIT THE BUSINESS HOURS SO THEY WON'T BE OPERATING AT NIGHT. BUT THEN WHEN DO I GET TO ENJOY MY PROPERTY? WHEN AM I'M SUPPOSED TO BE ASLEEP? THE VIEW FROM MY PROPERTY IS ALSO DISGUSTING.

THEY HAVE THROWN ALL THEIR BOXES TRASH, OLD TOYS, FURNITURE BEHIND SOME TREES THAT ARE IN DIRECT SIGHT AND PARALLEL TO MY FENCE LINE.

WHAT BREAKS MY HEART IS THAT MY GIRLS HAVE NO PRIVACY IN THEIR OWN BACKYARD.

ANY BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF MCALLEN IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PROPER PAVED PARKING AND FENCING. I HOPE THAT YOU ALL HAVE A SENSE OF UNDERSTANDING OR CAN PUT YOURSELF IN OUR SHOES AS TO WHAT WE MUST DEAL WITH.

PLEASE DON'T LET YOURSELVES BE INFLUENCED BY SOCIAL MEDIA.

MAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS BASED ON THE RULES AND REGULATIONS AT THE CITY OF MCALLEN HAS IMPOSED ON THE RESIDENTS.

THESE ORDINANCES WERE SET FOR A REASON IN THE PAST.

THIS WAS AN ISSUE, AND IT'S AN ISSUE TODAY.

DON'T LET SOMEONE BREAK THESE RULES, HAVE THEM ABIDE BY THEM.

A BUSINESS OF THIS SIZE OPERATING IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE IS SIMPLY NOT THE RIGHT FIT.

THIS BUSINESS IS NOT REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF GARBAGE VISIBLE FROM NEIGHBORS PROPERTIES AND

[00:20:05]

IS NOT REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DUST BEING SWEPT INTO THE AIR BY JUST WATERING IT DOWN.

THESE FACTS POINT TO THE REASON THERE IS CITY ORDINANCES AND RULES.

THIS IS A STEP YOU CAN TAKE AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY DON'T GET AWAY WITH VIOLATING THEM, WHICH THEN GIVES OTHERS THE RIGHT TO DO THE SAME AS WELL.

PLEASE VOTE NO ON THIS ISSUE.

NOT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE RIGHT BUSINESS TO HAVE, BUT BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO WHEN IT COMES TO THE LOCATION OF THIS BUSINESS.

I WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR MY CHILDREN'S PRIVACY, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT GOING TO STOP DOING. THANK YOU.

ANYBODY ELSE AGAINST? THANK YOU. OK.

MR. MORALES, I BELIEVE SOMEBODY JUST STOOD UP.

OH YES, PLEASE.

HELLO, MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE] AND I AM ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS WHICH HE WAS SPEAKING OF.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE MAP WAS UP HERE EARLIER THAT I DON'T KNOW, CAN YOU OPEN IT BACK UP? I'M BASICALLY HERE REPRESENTING MYSELF AND MY PARENTS AS WELL BECAUSE WE LIVE ON THE SAME TRACK OF LAND AND FOR THAT EVERYWHERE IT, SAYS [INAUDIBLE] SUBDIVISION. THAT'S WHERE MY HOUSE IS RIGHT AND THEN RIGHT BEHIND THERE.

MY PARENTS LIVE, WE LIVE ON ORIGINALLY WAS LIKE A FOUR AND A HALF ACRE TRACT.

WELL, THE THE PARKING LOT.

ARE YOU SPEAKING OF IS IN THE ORCHARD, NOT THE THE PLACE THAT CIRCLED THERE, BUT IN THE ORCHARD RIGHT NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO MY HOUSE.

AND IT'S RIGHT.

I MEAN, THE PARKING LOTS RIGHT THERE, MY FENCE LINE AND MY PARENTS' HOUSE IS RIGHT BEHIND THERE. AND THE PARKING LOT NOT ONLY HAS BEEN USED IN A PARKING LOT, BUT IT IS PART OF THE ATTRACTION. SO THAT CIRCLE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE BIGGER BECAUSE THE TRACTOR RIDES ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO THE PARKING LOT AS WELL.

THE MY PARENTS, WHEN THEY BUILT THEIR HOUSE, THEY BUILT UP ABOUT 600 FEET FROM BENTON ROAD FOR PRIVACY REASONS, AND MY HOUSE IS ABOUT 300 FEET FROM BENTON ROAD.

AGAIN, WE DON'T WANT TO BE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT ON TOP OF BENSON, RIGHT? SO THE REASON NOT MENTIONING THAT IS BECAUSE THEIR PRIVACY, ALSO THEIR ELDERLY AND, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE BASICALLY MADE THEIR LIFE OF THEY LOVE PLANNING STUFF.

THEY LOVE BEING OUTSIDE AND THEY'RE BASICALLY NOW PART OF THE ATTRACTION.

WE MAKE A JOKE OF IT BECAUSE THERE'S THE TRACTORS GOING THROUGH THE ORCHARD AND PEOPLE ARE SAYING, HI TO THEM AND BLASTED THEM ON FACEBOOK LIVE AND STUFF, AND THEY SAY THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE PART OF THE ZOO, PART OF THE ATTRACTION.

RIGHT. SO I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT THAT STUFF.

WHEN WE'VE BEEN THERE, I'VE BEEN THERE MY WHOLE LIFE, MY PARENTS, THEY BOUGHT THAT LAND IN 1985, SO WE LIVED THERE.

WE LIVED THERE AND WE.

I'M NOT TRYING LIKE THEY LIKE, THE YOUNG LADY SAID.

I'M NOT TRYING. I DON'T SEE.

I THINK IT'S A BAD BUSINESS, BUT JUST THE AREA THAT IT'S IN.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT.

WE LIVE THERE EVERY DAY, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE AGAINST? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS LEOPOLDO CHOW.

WELL, MY WIFE AND MY NEIGHBOR SPOKE ABOUT PERSONAL ISSUES THAT WE'VE HAD.

I'M JUST HERE A LITTLE BIT TO CLARIFY ABOUT, I GUESS THE REASON THE ZONING, EVERYTHING'S ALL ZONING. I SHARE THE SAME ISSUES THEY HAVE.

BUT AS WE SEE WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD BRAND NEW NEIGHBORHOOD, TWO NEIGHBORHOODS COMING UP ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BENSON AND THREE MILE.

WE'VE GOT ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD GOING UP ON THE NORTH SIDE CLOSE TO FIVE MILE.

ALL THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE HOUSES SOON.

IT'S JUST LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST NOT THE RIGHT FIT RIGHT NOW.

THEY IT WAS A GOOD THING.

I'VE GONE MYSELF.

IT WAS A GOOD PUMPKIN PATCH.

IT IS A GOOD PUMPKIN PATCH.

BUT ONE MR.VEGA ONCE SAID THEY CAME OUT ON TEXAS MONTHLY.

HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE TO COME OUT ON TEXAS MONTHLY? I THINK IT'S JUST SOMEWHERE WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE VENUE OR CHANGE THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

MR. MORALES. OK.

[00:25:06]

WELL, KIND OF FIRST TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO PARKING.

WE WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THE PARKING AT THIS OR THIS SEASON HAS ALL OCCURRED WITHIN EITHER HIS OWN PROPERTY OR THE PROPERTY THAT WAS LEASED.

MR. VEGA HAD NOTICED ISSUES BEFORE.

SO EVEN BEFORE THIS BECAME AN ISSUE, HE LEASED AN ADDITIONAL BELIEVE IT WAS 11/12 ACRES OF THE ORCHARD JOINING HIM IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO OVERFLOW OR ANY DISRUPTION TO THE PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF HIS OWN ONE.

SECOND, THERE'S BEEN OTHER NEIGHBORS WHO WERE WILLING TO LEASE PROPERTY TO HIM AS WELL FOR A PARKING LOT IF HE WAS WILLING TO PAY FOR IT.

HE CHOSE TO THIS ONE.

SO IT WASN'T AN ISSUE WITH AT THE TIME.

IF THEY WERE WILLING TO PAY FOR PARKING, MR. VEGA'S PROPERTY IS WE INVITED EVERYONE.

I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT THERE.

HE HAS DONE HIS BEST TO TRY TO LIMIT WITH AS FAR AS BRUSH LINE BETWEEN HIMSELF AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

THERE ARE FENCES AROUND SOME OF THE PROPERTY.

HE'S RE CONFIGURATED THE PARKING LOT TO TRY TO MINIMIZE ANY DISRUPTION TO THE NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH.

HE'S REROUTED AFTER SPEAKING TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS, SOME OF THE TRACTOR RIDES, TO TRY TO MINIMIZE ANY IMPACT ON THEM.

HE'S PUT UP FENCING BETWEEN HIMSELF AND THE OTHER NEIGHBORS IN ORDER TO BLOCK IT ANY OPENINGS THAT MIGHT BE THERE.

HE'S, YOU KNOW, DONE EVERYTHING HE CAN TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES AND CONCERNS THAT THEY HAVE.

THERE IS NOISE FROM THE GENERATORS.

IF THE CUP IS APPROVED, HE'S ALLOWED TO GET ELECTRICITY.

HE HAS REQUESTED A METER IN ORDER TO INSTALL ELECTRICITY TO CUT DOWN ON THE NOISE FROM THE GENERATORS. HOWEVER, THAT'S KIND OF PENDING THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION TODAY.

SO BASICALLY, HE'S OPEN.

I MEAN, HE'S TALKED TO THE NEIGHBORS AND HE'S DONE WHAT HE CAN, AND HE CONTINUES TO IMPROVE AND HE UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS USE IS NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE CONTINUED IN PERPETUITY.

OK. I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CHANGING BASED ON THE CHANGING AREA AS THINGS CONTINUE TO EVOLVE.

BUT RIGHT NOW, TO SAY THAT IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL IS NOT CORRECT.

I MEAN, THERE'S A HERD OF GOATS, THERE'S CHICKENS, THERE'S LIVESTOCK.

SO IT'S KIND OF AN AREA THAT STILL SEEMS TO BE IN AN AREA OF FLUX OR TRANSITION.

SO WE'RE ASKING FOR IS ONE YEAR CUP.

THAT WOULD EXTEND THE MAIN TIME THAT THE HIS BUSINESS IS ACTIVE IS FROM THE SECOND WEEK WEEKEND IN SEPTEMBER UNTIL JANUARY.

AFTER THAT, HE MAY HAVE AN OCCASIONAL SCHOOL COME IN DAYCARE THAT HE HAS ESTABLISHED RELATIONSHIPS TO KIND OF COME PLAY ON THE SWINGS.

YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THE THE GOATS, BUT IT'S NOTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE ANYWHERE NEAR THE TIME OF THE YEAR THAT WE'RE AT NOW.

SO WE WERE ASKING FOR THE APPROVAL OF CUP AT LEAST UNTIL MID-JANUARY OF 2023.

AND THEN THAT WAY, THIS ISSUE WOULD BE REVISITED DEPENDING ON ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT HE HAS CONTINUED TO MAKE SINCE HE ESTABLISHED THIS BUSINESS AND THE RESPONSIVENESS THAT HE HAS WITH RESPECT TO THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS, WHICH HE HAS BEEN DOING HIS BEST TO ADDRESS.

WHAT IS A PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION? I BELIEVE IT WAS FROM NINE TO EIGHT P.M., BUT I BELIEVE THEY I BELIEVE THEY REPRESENTED NINE TO NINE, BUT.

THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION OF PNC.

BUT YOU GUYS ARE ASKING MORE OR LESS NINE TO NINE.

NINE TO EIGHT. NINE TO EIGHT.

SO WE HAVE THE ISSUES OF TRAFFIC, DUST, NOISE, LIVESTOCK AND FENCING.

WHAT WHAT CAN POSSIBLY BE DONE TO KIND OF AMELIORATE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THAT HOPEFULLY CAN ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERNS? BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF CALLS AND ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, AND I'M SURE I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE. SO WE ALWAYS WANT TO TRY TO HELP WHENEVER IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT WE ALSO WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE AND BE COMFORTABLE WHEREVER THEY LIVE AND THEIR HOMES.

I MEAN, THAT'S THEIR KINGDOM.

WHAT CAN WE POSSIBLY DO OR WHAT CAN Y'ALL DO TO MAKE IT BETTER? WITH RESPECT TO LIVESTOCK, AS FAR AS THERE'S BASICALLY THREE COWS OR, WELL, SORRY, A BULL AND TWO COWS? SORRY, BUT THOSE ARE FENCED IN.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN A SMALLER PORTION OF THE PASTURE.

I MEAN, I GUESS THE DIFFERENCE IS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THIS IS A BUSINESS OR NOT, THESE ANIMALS ARE THERE.

THIS KIND OF STARTED OFF AS HIS HOBBY FARM THAT EVOLVED AS SOMETHING YOU TRY TO GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AFTER HIS DAUGHTER RECOVERED FROM AN ILLNESS.

SO HE KIND OF GEARED IT TO BE SOMETHING FAMILY FRIENDLY.

BUT AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, ARE THE ANIMALS GOING TO BE TAKEN AWAY IF THE CUP IS DENIED? NO, I MEAN, THE ANIMALS ARE PART ARE THOSE ARE HIS ANIMALS.

HE HAS OTHER PROPERTY THAT HE ROTATES SOME COWS THROUGH IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE PASTURE TO GROW BACK. SO THE PARKING LOT THAT IS USED, THE PARKING LOT IS GOING TO BE AS PASTURE

[00:30:03]

LAND FOR THE ANIMALS.

SO HE'S NOT.

SO I GUESS THAT'S ONE ISSUE.

I MEAN, I THINK THERE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, THAT I'M AWARE OF AN ISSUE WITH, I MEAN, A DOG ESCAPED ONCE, BUT A DOG'S GOING TO ESCAPE FROM MOST PROPERTY.

MY DOG JUST RAN AWAY.

DON'T BRING THAT UP, PLEASE.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

REWARD TO WHOEVER CAN FIND HIM.

FIND HER BUT IT IS FENCED IN FOR FOR THE ANIMALS, FOR THE LARGER ANIMALS WITH RESPECT TO TRAFFIC. I MEAN, WE HAVE THERE WAS INCLUDED A LETTER WE HAD A SHERIFF'S DEPUTY OR A SHERIFF'S INVESTIGATOR WHO CAME IN WHO HELPED TO CONTROL TRAFFIC AT LEAST DURING BASICALLY TWO PEAK WEEKENDS ARE THE MAIN.

THE MAIN CONCERN WHERE MR. VEGA SEPARATE AND APART FROM THIS, HAD ALREADY HIRED SOMEBODY LAST YEAR BECAUSE HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WASN'T AN ISSUE.

HE CREATED AN OVERFLOW LOT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO BACKUP ONTO BENSON ROAD TO NOT DISRUPT ANYONE THERE.

SO I GUESS THE CONCERN IS YOU HAVE TO CONVINCE SIX OF THE SEVEN PEOPLE UP HERE.

AND AND IF YOU DO, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE ENOUGH RESTRICTIONS OR ENOUGH THINGS TO MAKE EVERYBODY, IN THESE SITUATIONS NOBODY'S 100% HAPPY.

IT KIND OF SEEMS LIKE A LEGAL MEDIATION TYPE OF DEAL A LOT OF THE TIMES.

SO COMMISSION, WHAT DO Y'ALL FEEL IF Y'ALL WANT TO ASSESS WHAT TYPE OF RESTRICTIONS REQUIREMENTS WOULD Y'ALL BE LOOKING AT? HOW WOULD THEY FEEL ABOUT LIKE THE FENCING? BECAUSE LIKE THE FENCING THAT I SEE AROUND THE PROPERTY, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A CHAIN FENCE AND THE WOODEN FENCE, MAYBE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE LIKE TO GIVE A LITTLE MORE PRIVACY TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCOMMODATE TO MAKE MAYBE A TALLER FENCE THAT'S NOT DISRUPTIVE TO LIKE THE NEIGHBORS, I BELIEVE, HE SAID, LIKE WITH THE PARENTS.

AND I THINK WITHIN REASON HE IS WILLING TO DO THAT.

AND HE'S ALREADY STARTED, I GUESS, TO THE NEIGHBOR, TO THE SOUTH WITHOUT USING ANY NAMES.

I MEAN, THEY'VE FENCED IN CONCRETE BLOCK FENCE OVER 50 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY, JUST NONE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S ABUTTING MY CLIENTS.

DON'T EVEN THINK IT HAS TO BE CONCRETE.

WELL, NO, HE HAS PUT UP THERE WAS ONE PORTION THAT WAS OPEN.

I BELIEVE WE INVITED MR. COMMISSIONER ZAMORA, AND HE STARTED PUTTING UP A I WANNA SAY IT WAS AT LEAST AN EIGHT-FOOT WOOD FENCE ON A BIG OPEN AREA AND THEN THERE IS A BRUSH COVERING IT.

WE KIND OF WALKED AROUND THE PERIMETER AND WE SAW KIND OF AN OPENING.

SO THE NEXT DAY HE PUT UP SOME MORE WOOD FENCING IN ORDER TO BLOCK ANY VIEWS AND KIND OF MOVE, YOU KNOW, SOME LITTLE PICTURE BACKGROUND AREAS, WERE SHIFTED IN ORDER TO MOVE PEOPLE AWAY FROM WANTING TO LINGER NEAR THE PROPERTY LINE.

SORRY, I'M JUST TO INTRODUCE, WE HAVE INVESTIGATOR FRANCISCO GARCIA WITH HIDALGO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. HE WAS WORKING THE PARKING LOT AND TRAFFIC DUTY JUST TO KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS RUNNING SMOOTHLY.

HE ATTACHED A LETTER FOR YOUR REVIEW.

AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, HE'S HERE AS WELL.

SO. SO I GUESS IN RESPONSE WITH RESPECT TO THE SOUTH, HE HAS EITHER ALLOWED AND THERE WAS OTHER THINGS THAT HE WANTED TO DO, BUT KIND OF THINGS GOT PUT ON HOLD PENDING THE RESOLUTION THIS EVENING.

THE ISSUE OF NOISE IS THAT TRAFFIC NOISE OR CAUSE THAT'S ONE THING TO ME.

I BELIEVE THE THING THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED WAS THE GENERATORS.

THE GENERATORS ARE THERE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T BEEN ALLOWED TO GET A METER THAT WOULD BE DONE AS SOON AS THE CUP IS APPROVED.

HE WOULD PUT IN THE REQUEST JUST BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE TO RUN GENERATORS RIGHT NOW THAN IT WOULD BE TO USE JUST AN ACTUAL.

METER, FENCING, TRAFFIC I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF TEMPORARY WHENEVER IT'S GOING ON AND OFF LIVESTOCK, FENCING, NOISE, DUST.

DUST, I GUESS WHEN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, WE DID HAVE SOMEONE COME IN TO DETERMINE WHETHER [INAUDIBLE] OR ANYTHING ELSE WOULD WORK.

TECHNICALLY, THE PASTURE KIND OF FEELS, SORRY, THE ONE NORTH OF THE ORCHARD TO THE NORTH OF THEM THAT IS NOW BEING USED FOR PARKING.

IT ACTUALLY GROWS INTO GRASS.

IT'S JUST KIND OF AS PEOPLE ARE DRIVING ON IT, IT KIND OF, I GUESS, TEMPERS DOWN.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE RIGHT WORD FOR THAT.

BUT HE CONSULTED WITH SOMEONE ABOUT BRINGING IN AT LEAST [INAUDIBLE].

BUT THEY RECOMMENDED THE WATER, THE SPRAYING.

SO AGAIN, LATER THAT DAY, HE HAD ALREADY PURCHASED A SPRAYER IN ORDER TO TO HANDLE THAT SITUATION. SO AGAIN, HE'S DOING IT.

I MEAN, HE'S NOT OPEN NECESSARILY TO DOING SOME ADDITIONAL REMEDIATION, BUT HE JUST NEEDS TO KNOW WHETHER HE'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS PLANS.

I'M SORRY. DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR INVESTIGATOR GARCIA? IF NOT, HE COULD BE RETURNED TO HIS SEAT.

I DON'T. MAYOR, I HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION THAT I WANT TO DIRECT TO MR. GARCIA.

OH, MR. VEGA? NO, MR.GARCIA [INAUDIBLE] OK.

OK.

SORRY THANK YOU. OK, THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE 2016.

YES SIR.

IS THAT WHAT I READ AND HEARD?

[00:35:01]

OK. AND THEY WERE IN THE CITY LIMITS.

CORRECT. THEY ARE IN THE CITY LIMITS AND THEY WERE IN THE CITY LIMITS IN 2016.

CORRECT. OK. HAVE THEY BEEN OPERATING WITH A LICENSE? THEY HAVE BEEN OPERATING WITH A TEMPORARY SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT.

SO THAT GOES TO THE CITY SECRETARY AND IT'S ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE FOR CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. OK.

AND HAS IT COME THROUGH TO THIS BOARD BEFORE FOR THAT? NO, SIR. THOSE GO THROUGH CITY MANAGEMENT AND THEY GO TO THE CITY SECRETARY.

BUT THIS ONE IS COMING TO OUR BOARD.

BECAUSE THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, NOT A SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT.

SO THE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY DURING THIS THANKSGIVING TIME OR WHAT. WELL, AND IT WAS STILL RELATIVELY SMALL AS THE VENUE GREW IN SIZE AND WE GOT THE TRAFFIC ISSUES, NOISE ISSUES.

AT THAT POINT, IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THEM TO GET SOMETHING MORE PERMANENT, WHICH IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. OK.

SO THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY'VE COME.

THAT IS CORRECT. FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMANENT FOR A YEAR.

CORRECT. MR. GARCIA, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT THE PROPERTY THERE ON NORTH BENSON ROAD AND DID SPEAK WITH MR. MORALES AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH AND SPEAK WITH MR. VEGA. AS WHAT WAS ALSO REITERATED TODAY AND I LEARNED SEVERAL WEEKS AGO IS THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE TRACK NORTH OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THAT SOLID BLACK LINE OR BOLD BLACK LINE IS USING ACTUALLY PART OF THE OPERATION FOR PARKING.

AND I THINK, I GUESS A TRAIL RIDE OR A HAY RIDE.

THAT WAS NOT WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE TRAIL RIDES.

OUR UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT IT WAS ONLY FOR THE PARKING AND MAYBE LIKE A SHUTTLE TO GO BACK AND FORTH, BUT NOT AS ACTUAL PART OF THE TRAIN RIDE OR WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.

AND I GUESS I HAVE, I'M GOING TO STEP BACK A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IF THAT IS IN FACT PART OF THE OPERATION, IT'S NOT WITHIN THE AREA THAT'S CONTEMPLATED FOR THE CUP.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I HATE TO POSTPONE OR PROLONG THIS, BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT AT LEAST WHAT'S UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ONLY THAT AREA THAT'S BLOCKED OFF RIGHT NOW. AND THE WAY I LOOK AT IT LEGALISTICALLY IS THAT IT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO, I GUESS, THAT LOT.

THAT'S THE CONTEMPLATED AND IT WOULD EXCLUDE THE USE OR THE OPERATION FOR PARKING OR MAYBE THAT TRAIL RIDE ON THE NORTH SIDE.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S THE BEST ROUTE.

SO FOR FOR PARKING COMMISSIONER, IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR US TO HAVE PARKING AGREEMENTS AND SO MANY TIMES WHEN WE WOULD GET A CUP FOR A BAR, FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS JUST THAT SUITE.

AND THEN WHEREVER THE PARKING, WHEREVER THEY'RE LEASING PARKING SPACES FROM, THOSE ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR THE BOUNDARIES.

NOW, IF HE IS USING THAT NORTHERN PROPERTY AS PART OF THE TRAIL RIDE, I MEAN, THAT'S UP TO HIM IF HE WANTS TO STOP USING THAT PROPERTY OR WE CAN RE-ADVERTISE AND INCLUDE IT AS WELL. BUT YOU ARE CORRECT.

IF IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CUP, THEN HE CANNOT USE IT FOR THESE PURPOSES.

I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY AGAIN TO GO OUT THERE AND I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO MR. CHOW AND READ YOUR LETTERS AS WELL.

AND YOU KNOW, AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, I LIVED IN THAT PART OF TOWN PRETTY MUCH ALL MY WHOLE LIFE. IT IS IN TRANSITION.

I'M NOT GOING TO SAY IT'S RURAL, BUT I'M NOT ALSO GOING TO SAY IT'S URBAN.

IF ANYTHING, IT'S SEMI-RURAL OR SEMI-URBAN.

HOWEVER, YOU WANT TO SEE THE GLASS.

[INAUDIBLE] AND SPEAKING WITH MR. VEGA. I MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR ABOUT THAT, AND THAT'S OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT HE CANNOT IGNORE.

AND, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THREE OR FOUR YEARS, YOU KNOW, I SEE A COUPLE OF PLOTS IN THAT AREA BECOMING, YOU KNOW, 50 OR EVEN 90 LOT SUBDIVISIONS.

AND SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE URBAN DENSITY WHERE THE USE OR HIS INTENDED USE TO RUN THAT OPERATION IS GOING TO BE PRETTY MUCH PUSHED OUT FOR LACK OF A BETTER PHRASE BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S A RE-ZONE AS A RESIDENTIAL ONE.

OBVIOUSLY, A FAMILY, A PERSON'S HOME IS THEIR CASTLE AND THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE PRIVACY THAT'S ATTENUATED WITH THAT TYPE OF RESIDENCE.

CERTAINLY THE ENJOYMENT AND FULFILLMENT OF THEIR INVESTMENT AND THE ABILITY TO ENJOY THEIR BACKYARD OR WHATNOT.

SO HERE WE'RE JUST BALANCING INTERESTS, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE NEIGHBORS AND ALSO HIS OPPORTUNITY AS A PROPERTY OWNER WHO HAS RIGHTS TOO AS WELL TO USE IT, DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS HE SEES FIT WITHIN THE RULES PROVIDED.

YOU KNOW, I'M INCLINED TO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND LOOK AT IT FOR ONE YEAR, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IN GOOD FAITH.

HE'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, PUT UP A FENCE.

I SAW IT MYSELF, BUT THOSE THINGS ARE NEED TO BE UP TO CITY STANDARD AND WHATNOT.

AS FAR AS THE THE PARKING LOT, I THINK IF YOU REQUIRE AN ASPHALT PARKING LOT, IT DOES DETRACT FROM THE VENUE ITSELF FROM BEING KIND OF AGRICULTURAL, YOU KNOW, FARM TYPE OF EXPERIENCE. I THINK IT KIND OF CONFLICTS WITH THE ESTHETICS OF WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO THERE. NEVERTHELESS, I THINK THE OPERATIONS AND I'M NOT REFERRING TO THE TIME, BUT I

[00:40:01]

THINK THE CALENDAR YEAR, YOU KNOW, MAYBE.

THIS COMMISSION MIGHT CONSIDER LOOKING AT WHERE EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE A ONE YEAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE ACTUAL OPERATION WOULD TAKE PLACE FROM SEPTEMBER TO THE FOLLOWING JANUARY.

AND OF COURSE, WITH THE SAME RESTRICTIONS AND OF COURSE, DUE TO BAFFLE OR THE NOISE, MITIGATE THE NOISE, MITIGATE THE LIGHT.

ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS I DID SEE, I THINK THE NOISE MIGHT BE ADDRESSED IF WE'RE GOING TO BE GRANTED WITH THE POWER IN THE UNIT THERE.

BUT YOU HAVE THE LIGHT AND THAT'S WHERE YOU HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHERS OUT THERE.

EVEN NOW, IT'S ALREADY DARK AT SIX AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERN.

YOU KNOW, THE FLASHING LIGHTS AND THE POPPING POPPING.

AND IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF YOU CLOSE YOUR BLIND AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE STILL GOING TO GET SOMETHING THROUGH THE WINDOW.

SO I CAN SEE HOW THAT CAN KIND OF ALSO BE ANNOYING AND DETRACTING FROM THEM ENJOYING THEIR HOME LIFE. BUT THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I BROUGHT UP IN MY VISIT, AND I CERTAINLY ADDRESS IT, MR. VEGA.

THAT, UNFORTUNATELY, IS THE WAY I SEE IT, THE OPERATION.

I WISH HIM THE BEST.

BUT THE OPERATION HAS ITS TIME NUMBERED.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT WON'T BE AROUND WITHIN A FEW YEARS, SIMPLY BECAUSE INSTEAD OF HAVING JUST NINE NEIGHBORS, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 120 NEIGHBORS BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN OUR GROWTH IN THAT PART OF TOWN WILL CONTINUE AND HAVE MORE SUBDIVISIONS COME ON LINE.

WITH THAT, I AM INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE USE PERMIT FOR ONE YEAR THAT THE OPERATION BE IN OPERATION FROM SEPTEMBER TO THE FOLLOWING JANUARY WITH THE HOURS SET FORWARD, AS WELL AS ABIDING BY BUILDING THE OPAQUE FENCE OR OPAQUE FENCE REQUIREMENT, AND THAT THE FENCE MEETS CITY CODE THAT THE DEPARTMENT NOT EXTEND OBVIOUSLY TO THE USE OF A HAY OR TRAIL RIDE AND THAT OTHER PROPERTY.

AND THAT, AGAIN, CONTINUE USING ALL MITIGATION MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE AMOUNT OF DUST, THE NOISE AND THE LIGHT.

AND THERE WAS ALSO A COMPLAINT ABOUT SANITATION THAT THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR CITY DUMPSTER THAT'S THERE.

AND THEN IT'S BEING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ANY LITTER DEBRIS THAT IT REGULARLY BE MAINTAINED AND TO THE AND TO THE PERSONS OUT THERE.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS CAN BE WITHDRAWN AT ANY TIME IF THERE'S A COMPLAINT OR INVESTIGATION COMMENCED BY CODE COMPLIANCE AND IT CAN BE REVISITED AND REVOKED DURING THAT TIME. THAT'S MY MOTION.

COMMISSIONER, I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD THAT WITH A 12 MONTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, IT WOULD IT WOULD TAKE US RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR BUSIEST TIME.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO LOOK AT IT RIGHT BEFORE THEY GET INTO THEIR BUSY SEASON, WHICH WOULD BE A NINE MONTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE COMING IN AND ASSESSING THE SITUATION RIGHT MIDWAY INTO THEIR SEASON GETS TO BE A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED.

AND SO THAT'S JUST MY SUGGESTION.

I KNOW YOU'VE MADE THE MOTION, BUT I RECOMMEND A NINE-MONTH.

AND IF I ACTUALLY WANT TO AMEND THE HOURS INSTEAD OF EIGHT, MAYBE SEVEN, BECAUSE DURING THE TIME OF THE DAYLIGHT SAVINGS BY EIGHT IT'S ALREADY PRETTY DARK.

SO BUT THEY'RE ADDING THE LIGHTS, RIGHT? WELL, I DON'T THE HOURS.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE HOURS, CORRECT MR. VEGA? IF IT WAS SEVEN P.M., THAT WAS FINE.

OUR ONLY REQUEST WOULD BE RATHER THAN NINE MONTH IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER ALLOWING IT UNTIL JANUARY THAT WAY WE CAN HAVE ONE FULL SEASON TO ADDRESS ANY OTHER ISSUES.

AND THEN AFTER WHEN IT WAS TO BE CONSIDERED AGAIN BECAUSE RIGHT BEFORE, WELL, THEN WE'RE KIND OF IN THE SAME SITUATION.

I MEAN, IF WE'RE OUR SEASON'S GOING TO END AT THE END OF DECEMBER, WELL, THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT NECESSARILY BETWEEN NOW AND THEN? SO MY REQUEST WOULD BE IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER ALLOWING US UNTIL MAYBE JANUARY 15TH.

YOU KNOW, I THINK OUR SEASON OF YOU'RE ALLOWING US THE ONE YEAR CUP.

WAS IT GOING TO BE SEASONAL? I DIDN'T QUITE CATCH THAT.

A ONE YEAR TIMEFRAME FROM THE POINT THAT THE BOARD TAKES ACTION.

SO WE'RE RIGHT IN BETWEEN YOUR SEASON.

SO YOU WOULD BE ASKING FOR A 15 MONTH VERSUS A 12, I'M SUGGESTING NINE BECAUSE YOU'RE TELLING US YOU'RE GOING TO DO A NUMBER OF THINGS.

AND SO WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT IF WE DO THE NINE MONTH, WE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK TO SEE IF YOU'VE ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED THOSE THINGS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THE THE RESIDENTS AS WELL AND ASSESS THE SITUATION FOR YOUR NEXT SEASON. IF WE GO KNOW, I THINK YOU'RE ASKING FOR A SEASON AND A HALF AND I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE LONG. AND I THINK THE ISSUE WHAT I'LL PHRASE IT DIFFERENTLY, OBVIOUSLY. BUT COMMISSIONER QUINTANILLA BRINGS A GOOD POINT IS WHAT IS THE LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE THAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO ACTUALLY DO BEFORE THE NEXT SEASON? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO WANT TO SEE WHAT ACTIVITIES HE'S DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT HE'S COMPLIANT WITH REGARDS TO THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS.

[00:45:03]

AND WITH RESPECT TO THE RESTRICTIONS, AS FAR AS NOT HAVING THE TRAIL RIDE.

APPARENTLY, HE TOLD ME HE STOPPED THAT ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO.

THAT WAS MY MISTAKE.

SO THOSE CONDITIONS, THOSE TYPE OF CONDITIONS, WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

IT SEEMS THE BIG ISSUE SEEMS TO BE OFFENSE RIGHT OF SOME SORT WHERE AN OPAQUE FENCE AND SOME DUST MITIGATION AND MAKE SURE ANY LIVESTOCK IS TAKEN CARE OF.

YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSING SOME OF THE FENCING.

AND I USUALLY I USUALLY TELL COMMISSIONER ZAMORA THAT HE'S LONG WINDED, BUT HE HIT ALL THE POINTS. HE HAD ALL THE POINTS WE NEEDED TO DISCUSS.

SO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER PRO ZEM.

COMMISSIONER, ON THE ELECTRICITY.

YOU MENTIONED THAT? YES, IT'S THE GENERATIONS.

YEAH. AND I WILL RECOMMEND FOR THE DUST.

AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPERS HERE UNDERSTAND IS WHEN I WORKED FOR THE COUNTY AND WE USE THESE KIND OF CHEMICAL THAT WE PUT IN THE CALICHE ROADS.

SO IT HARDENS AND IT DOESN'T CREATE THAT DUST INSTEAD OF, OF COURSE, PAVING BECAUSE IT WILL DISRUPT THE NATURE OF THE FARMING AND OUTDOOR.

PUT THAT AND THAT'S GOING TO MEET TODAY, BECAUSE IF YOU WATER DOWN IS GOING TO EVAPORATE AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THE DUST THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT IF YOU PUT THAT CHEMICAL AND YOU HAVE A SPRAYER.

SO JUST PUT IT OVER THERE AND IT'S GOING TO HARDEN OR YOU CAN COMBINE IT WITH LIME IF YOU WANT TO.

IT MIGHT MAKE IT MORE HARDER. BUT THEIR SOLUTIONS FOR THAT AND I REALLY, IF YOU WANT TO AMEND THAT IN THAT POINT, COMMISSIONER, YOU JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WON'T.

I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO ONE THAT WOULD BE A NINE MONTH PERMIT ONCE THE BOARD TAKES ACTION TODAY THAT AMEND MY MOTION THAT THE OPTIONS OPERATION CONCLUDE AT SEVEN P.M.

IS AS RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ AND THAT IT ALSO IS RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONER CABEZA DE VACCA TO DO THE DUST MITIGATION AS PROPOSED SO THAT YOU TRY TO DAMPER OR BAFFLE THE AMOUNT OF DUST THAT'S BEING CREATED.

AND THAT'S THE NATURE AND CONTEXT OF MY MOTION.

I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

THERE'S BEEN A PERSON, A SECOND, MR. MORALES, AND I THINK HOPEFULLY YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR CLIENT REALIZES THAT THIS IS PROBABLY HE'S AT THE TAIL END OF UTILIZING THE PROPERTY FOR THIS PURPOSE.

BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. ALL AGAINST.

MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

MR. MORALES AND MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THEY CAN COME BACK AND PULL IT IF THERE BE ANYTHING NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

WE UNDERSTAND YOUR HONOR.

THANK YOU SIR.

OKAY, I NEED A MOTION TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

[D) Amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of McAllen.]

[INAUDIBLE] ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM D.

E. OR E.

YES. SO THIS IS ANNEXATION, WHOA.

AGAIN, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILE SIX.

THERE YOU GO. APPROXIMATELY 1300 FEET EAST OF STUART, IT DOES TOTAL TEN ACRES.

THE REQUESTING R1 435 LOT SUBDIVISION AGAIN UNDER NEWMONT ESTATES.

THEY DID REQUEST PARK FEE WAIVERS AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. DON'T MOVE.

ANYBODY FOR OR AGAINST.

IF NOT, DO I HEAR A MOTION.

SO MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. AYE.

AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE FOR THE ANNEXATION AT 8804 N WARE ROAD.

[E) Public Hearing and ordinance providing for the annexation of the west 10 acres of Lot 452, John H. Shary Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 7100 Mile 6 Road.]

AGAIN THIS WAS ALSO JUST RE-ZONED.

IT IS A PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH WARE APPROXIMATELY 120 FEET NORTH OF HARVARD, IT IS FIVE ACRES.

THE DEVELOPER IS REQUESTING R3-T FOR TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT.

THEY HAVE ALSO REQUESTED WAIVER OF PARK FEES.

THE ANNEXATION WAS HEARD ON NOVEMBER 2ND, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC AGAINST? IF NOT, DO I HEAR MOTION TO APPROVE? I'M ABSTAINING FROM THIS.

MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT ITEM THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 62 OF THE CITY OF MCALLEN

[F) Public Hearing and ordinance providing for the annexation of the north 5.0 acres of Lot 209, Pride O’ Texas Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 8804 North Ware Road.]

CODE OF ORDINANCES AT 1017 NORTH MAIN STREET.

SO THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NORTH MAIN, APPROXIMATELY 60 FEET SOUTH OF KENDLEWOOD. IT IS ZONE C3 ADJACENT ZONING TO C3 TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH, R1 TO THE WEST AND EAST.

TACOS AL PLABE IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE 300 FOOT DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FROM A CHURCH SINCE FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST SCIENTIST AND FREE METHODIST CHURCH ARE BOTH WITHIN 300 FEET

[00:50:03]

OF THE LOCALE.

THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY OPERATES A RESTAURANT DAILY FROM 11 30 A.M.

TO MIDNIGHT. OBVIOUSLY, ALCOHOL SALES WOULD ADHERE TO STATE LAWS.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE SINCE IT'S IN LINE WITH OTHER RESTAURANTS IN THE AREA. WE DID RECEIVE ABOUT THIRTY-EIGHT SIGNATURES IN SUPPORT.

[G) Public Hearing for a variance from Section 6-2 of the City of McAllen Code of Ordinances of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, request of Luis A. Peña on behalf of Tacos El Plebe, LLC., at the south 40 ft. of Lot 2 and the north 30 ft. of Lot 3, Block 16, Ewing’s Addition, Hidalgo County, Texas; 1017 North Main Street.]

WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANYTHING IN OPPOSITION.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC AGAINST? IF NOT, DO I HEAR MOTION TO APPROVE? MOVE TO APPROVE. IN SECOND.

OR THERE WAS.

ALL IN FAVOR. AYE.

AGAINST? THE MOTION CARRIES.

NAY. AGAINST.

ONE AGAINST.

AND THAT'S THE END OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS CONSENT AGENDA.

[END OF PUBLIC HEARING]

DO WE NEED TO PULL ANYTHING FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

TO BE. PARDON.

TO BE. TO BE, ANYTHING ELSE? IF NOT, I NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A THROUGH J MINUS B.

[2. CONSENT AGENDA]

MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST? THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM B.

[B) Consideration and Approval of Change Order No. 1 for New Parks Facility and Metro Transfer Station.]

YES, SIR. OK.

SO ON THIS ITEM, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE WAS SOME GEOTECHNICAL REPORT THAT WAS DONE PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION, PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION.

AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW AND I THINK COMMISSIONER, SOMEWHAT ALSO HAS A QUESTION ALONG THE SAME LINES. BUT WITH WITH THE ANALYSIS BEING DONE ON THIS PROPERTY, HOW DID THIS PARTICULAR AREA GET SKIPPED? DID WE JUST DO WE DO SOIL SAMPLING ON SOME OF THE PROPERTY, JUST NOT THIS SECTION? AND WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY WAS IT TO DO A FULL ANALYSIS OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY? WAS IT THE ARCHITECT OR THE CONTRACTOR WHO SHOULD HAVE KNOWN? ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS.

I'LL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER THEM.

SO AS WE DO WITH ANY PROPERTY BEFORE WE CONSTRUCT A BUILDING, THE CITY NORMALLY HIRES A GEOTECHNICAL FIRM TO DO A GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE SITE.

WE USUALLY COORDINATE WITH THE ARCHITECTS WHEN WE HAVE THEM ON BOARD AND AS WE DID WITH THIS ARCHITECT, AND THOSE BOARDS ARE NORMALLY IDENTIFIED AND SELECTED IN KEY LOCATIONS.

YOU CAN TAKE IT ANYWHERE ON THE SITE TO GET AN IDEA OF THE SAMPLING OF THE SOILS, BUT NORMALLY THEY'RE TAKEN WHERE THE BUILDING LIES, WHERE THE BUILDINGS POTENTIALLY GOING TO LIE AND WHERE THE PARKING AREAS ARE, AND THEY'RE DONE FOR SEVERAL REASONS.

ONE IS SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO GET A GOOD SOIL SAMPLE AND ABLE TO OBTAIN A REPORT FROM THAT SOIL SAMPLE THAT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CAN USE TO MAKE HIS RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FOUNDATION FOR THE BUILDINGS.

AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, SO THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT CAN MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PAVEMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

AND SO THAT WAS DONE FOR THIS PROJECT.

IT WAS DONE IN 2020.

AND SO WE RECEIVED THAT REPORT AND THAT REPORT WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE INFORMATION THAT WENT WITH THE CONTRACTORS WE WENT OUT TO BID.

SO WITH THOSE GEOTECHNICAL BOARDS, IT'S A BOARD THEY DRILL AT SPECIFIC LOCATIONS IN THE GROUND. THEY TAKE OUT A SAMPLE OF THAT SOIL, AND THEY ALSO RECORD AT WHAT DEPTH THEY FIND GROUNDWATER.

FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, GROUNDWATER WAS FOUND AT A DISTANCE BETWEEN 14 TO 17 FEET BELOW GROUND. WE DID ANTICIPATE THAT WAS GOING TO BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE WE WERE NOT EXCAVATING TO THOSE STEPS. HOWEVER, WHEN THE CONTRACTOR WAS OUT THERE EXCAVATING AND COMPACTING THE AREA IN PREPARATION FOR THE BUILDING PAD, THEY FOUND SOME SOFT SPOTS.

IT WAS A IT WAS NOT COMPACTING.

AND SO THEY SAID USUALLY THAT OCCURS WHEN YOU FIND WATER.

SO THEY DID SOME EXCAVATION IN AN AREA, THEY FOUND WATER.

THEY DID SOME OTHER EXCAVATIONS IN THE AREAS OF WHERE THE BUILDING LIES, AND THEY FOUND ADDITIONAL SOFT SPOTS.

SO NORMALLY WHEN THAT HAPPENS, FOR WHATEVER REASON, THERE'S WATER GETTING INTO THAT AREA.

THEY WEREN'T PICKED UP AS PART OF THE INVESTIGATION THAT WAS DONE.

THAT IS NORMAL IN STANDARD PRACTICE.

THERE SAY BEST GUESS FOR HOW THE WATER GOT THERE.

IS THERE USED TO BE ANOTHER BUILDING THERE, ANOTHER FOUNDATION? AND WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED IS DURING RAIN EVENTS THAT HAD RECENTLY OCCURRED OR HAVE OCCURRED IN THE PAST, JUST DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF SOIL THERE IS, YOU MIGHT GET WATER THAT'S TRAPPED IN THAT AREA, BUT THEY DON'T KNOW 100% CERTAINTY THAT THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

AND SO WE WENT BACK TO THE GEOTECHNICAL FIRM AND ASKED THEM TO GIVE US RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHAT TO DO TO MITIGATE THAT ISSUE.

AND THEY GAVE TWO OPTIONS.

ONE OF THE OPTIONS WAS A GEO TEXTILE TYPE OF MATERIAL TO BE PLACED OVER THE LIMITS OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING, AND THAT IS THE OPTION THAT THE ARCHITECT ARCHITECTURAL ARCHITECT IS RECOMMENDING, AND THAT IS THE OPTION THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO YOU FOR

[00:55:03]

APPROVAL. THERE WAS NOT NECESSARILY THE CASE THAT THE WATER TABLE IS AT THAT LEVEL.

IT'S JUST IT'S MORE LIKELY THAT SOME WATER MAY HAVE BEEN TRAPPED IN THOSE LOCATIONS.

THERE COULD BE SEVERAL ISSUES.

I DON'T I CAN'T GIVE YOU A GUARANTEE, WHETHER IT IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE IS AN AREA WHERE WATER IS COMING UP FROM THE WATER TABLE.

THEY THINK MOST LIKELY THAT IT IS FROM SOME WATER THAT WAS TRAPPED FROM A RAIN EVENT.

HOPEFULLY IT'S CONTAINED TO THESE AREAS AND DOESN'T AFFECT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OR EVEN FURTHER. SO THE BENEFIT OF HAVING THIS GEO TEXTILE MATERIAL PLACE DOWN IS IT ACTS MORE OR LESS AS A BRIDGE.

AND SO IF THAT WATER STAYS THERE, IT CAN STAY THERE AND IT GIVES US A FORM, A FIRM SURFACE THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO COME IN AND DO THE FOUNDATION OF THE BUILDING AND PROCEED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION.

ON THE GEOTECH STYLE, I KNOW THAT YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT IT WOULD BE PLACED, I GUESS, TO COVER THE ENTIRE FOOTPRINT OF THE [INAUDIBLE].

THAT IS WHAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING, YES.

DID IT ALSO INCLUDE THE WALL? BECAUSE I IMAGINE YOU'RE GOING HAVE TO EXCAVATE DOWN THREE OR FOUR FEET, MAYBE FIVE FEET, I DON'T KNOW. SO IT INCLUDES THAT THE LIMIT OF WHERE THE FOUNDATION IS GOING TO BE PLACED . AND INCLUDING THE WALLS TOO? IT DOES NOT NEED TO COME UP INTO THE WALL.

IT'S JUST SO THAT WE CAN SET THAT FOUNDATION.

WOULD THERE BE A CONCERN THAT WATER WOULD ACTUALLY CLIMB UP TO THE WALL OR SIDE AND THEN SEEP IN? NO, NO, NO, SIR.

OK. WELL, MY I GUESS MY LAST POINT HERE AND AND A CONCERN IS THAT WE WERE REALLY OVERBUDGET ON THIS PROJECT.

I KNOW THIS IS, UH, WE'RE VERY EARLY IN THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND WE'RE ALREADY GETTING A CHANGE ORDER AND WE'RE WAY OVER BUDGET.

SO IT'S JUST A CONCERN THAT I'M ADDRESSING THAT WE JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH CHANGE ORDERS, ESPECIALLY ON THE PROJECT THAT IS WAY OVER BUDGET.

YES, SIR. I DON'T KNOW.

I KNOW IT'S STILL A CHANGE ORDER AND IT IS STILL COSTS.

BUT IT'S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT FTA WAS GOING TO COVER THE COST OF THIS BECAUSE IT FALLS ON THE METRO SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

OK, OK, EVERYBODY'S OK.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM B AND ALSO K, WHICH WE HAVE MISSED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.

AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

AND NOBODY HAS ANY OBJECTION AND WE CAN GO TO ITEM 6B.

[K) CONSENT COOP PURCHASES]

COUNCILOR.

MAYOR RESPECT ITEM 6B.

I RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION TAKE NO ACTION THIS EVENING, BUT TO ALLOW MY OFFICE AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE INVESTIGATION AND GET BACK WITH YOU WITH SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

THANK YOU, COUNCILOR AND LADIES AND GENTS.

THAT WAS THE ITEM REGARDING, I THINK, THE ISSUE YOU WERE HERE FOR.

AND INSTEAD OF HAVING Y'ALL WAITING, WAITING.

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OTHER DIFFERENT ISSUES.

AND I GUESS COUNCILOR AND MAYBE THE CITY MANAGER WILL GET BACK TO BACK TO YOU.

OK, THANK YOU.

THANK Y'ALL FOR BEING HERE.IT'S SIX ON THE AGENDA I'M LOOKING AT.

6B. NO ACTION, MR. CITY MANAGER.

I HAVE IT AT 6B.

ITS 6B. 6B CORRECT? YEAH, 6B.

THANK YOU. AND I APOLOGIZE, I SHOULD HAVE CALLED IT EARLIER.

THANK YOU. ITEM THREE.

3A IS OF WATER CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CURRENT MODEL, ALL-TERRAIN FORKLIFT.

[3. BIDS/CONTRACTS]

[A) Award of contract for the Purchase of One (1) Current Year Model All-Terrain Fork Lift.]

HERE'S THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU.

PUBLIC WORKS IS SEEKING YOUR AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD A PURCHASE CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE CURRENT YEAR MODEL FORKLIFT TO NUECES POWER EQUIPMENT OF CORPUS CHRISTI, TEXAS, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $79,930.05 .

THIS IS A COOPERATIVE PURCHASE THROUGH HGAC COOPERATIVE USING THE LOWEST UNIT COST.

MEETING ALL SPECIFICATIONS.

THIS FORKLIFT IS USED BY COMMERCIAL BOX WELDING SHOP STAFF.

THIS IS A PURCHASE FUNDED THROUGH SANITATION DEPRECIATION, AND IT IS SUBJECT TO A BUDGET RE-CLASS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THEY'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST MOTION CARRIES.

AND IF Y'ALL ARE READY, IF Y'ALL HAVE READ IT.

YOU ALL CAN MAKE A MOTION ON THE ITEMS UNLESS YOU ALL NEED PRESENTATION BY STAFF.

ITEM B.[INAUDIBLE] TO APPROVE.

[B) Award of Contract for the Purchase of Two (2) new current year model Backhoes.]

ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE THAT. WE HAVE ITEM FOUR.

[4. VARIANCE]

4A IS CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE FOR THE ESCROW REQUIREMENTS AT 4229 NEW HOUSE DRIVE.

[A) Consideration of a variance request to the escrow requirements for paving and drainage improvements at the proposed Neuhaus Estates Subdivision, Hidalgo County, Texas; 4229 Neuhaus Drive.]

YES SIR. SO NEW HOUSE ESTATE IS A FOUR LOT SUBDIVISION MEASURING 4.69 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NEW HOUSE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 250-FEET EAST OF BENSON.

THE PROPERTY IS ZONED A0 AND SURROUNDING ZONINGS ARE R1 TO THE NORTH WEST AND A0 TO THE

[01:00:01]

EAST AND SOUTH.

THE PROJECT ENGINEERS ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO THE ESCROW REQUIREMENTS FOR PAVING DRAINAGE AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS.

I MUST NOTE THAT IN JULY OF LAST YEAR, LOS VECINOS THE SUBDIVISION JUST TO THE NORTH RECEIVED THE SAME VARIANCE REQUESTED.

THE BASIS FOR THE REQUEST FOR NEW HOUSE IS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO OBTAIN THE SAME VARIANCE. THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS BEFORE YOU STAFF RECOMMENDS OPTION ONE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE AS REQUESTED.

SO THEY'RE NOT EVEN CLAIMING FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, THEY'RE JUST CLAIMING, WELL, THEY GOT IT, WE WANTED TO. YEAH, I GET A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT TYPE OF STUFF, AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT EVERY SINGLE ONE AND SEE WHAT WHAT THE ISSUES ARE.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT.

THAT'S NOT WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING.

CORRECT. OKAY, WHY ARE Y'ALL RECOMMENDING IT? ENGINEERING, WELL TAKE THIS ONE.

THEY ARE. SO PART OF WELL, THE REASON THAT I RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THIS VARIANCE IS, SAY, NOT COMPLETELY BECAUSE OF THE OTHER SUBDIVISION, BUT THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THAT WE REQUIRED OF THE OTHER SUBDIVISION DID SOME WIDENING SO THAT WE COULD COORDINATE WITH, BENSON ROAD. THEY END WEST OF THIS SUBDIVISION AND TO WIDEN THIS SECTION JUST THROUGH THE LIMITS OF THE SUBDIVISION.

WE REALLY DON'T GAIN ADDITIONAL ROADWAY THAT'S REALLY FOR ANY BENEFICIAL USE.

WE'RE OKAY WITH IT THEN. WE'RE OKAY WITH IT, YES SIR. I MOTION TO APPROVE.

IS THERE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST? NAY.

MOTION CARRIES.

MANAGER'S REPORT.

[5. MANAGER’S REPORT]

5A APPOINTMENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS.

[A) Appointment to the Zoning Board of Adjustments and Appeals.]

MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION, WE CURRENTLY HAVE A VACANCY TO THE ZBOA BOARD.

NORMALLY WHAT WE DO IS WHEN WE HAVE A VACANCY, WE TAKE THE LONGEST SERVING MEMBER AND WE MOVE THEM UP. SO THAT WOULD BE ANN TAFEL THAT WOULD LEAVE THREE ALTERNATES.

SO THAT CREATES A VACANCY IN THE ALTERNATE CATEGORY.

SO I AM REQUESTING A NOMINATION.

IF NOBODY HAS THE NOMINATION AND WE CAN HAVE A MOTION TO THE EFFECT AS STATED BY OUR CITY SECRETARY WHO WOULD AND WHO'S THE PERSON? ANN TAFEL IS THE ONE THAT WE WOULD BE MOVING UP.

SO THAT WOULD LEAVE THREE INDIVIDUALS THAT WOULD LEAVE REBECCA MILAN, HUGO AVILA AND ROBERT RODRIGUEZ.

WE HAVE TWO INTERESTED CITIZENS.

WE HAVE MARK TALBOT AND WE'VE GOT ROGELIO RODRIGUEZ THAT ARE INTERESTED IN SERVING AS ALTERNATES. AND ANN TAFEL HAS BEEN THERE AS AN ALTERNATE ALREADY.

YEAH, SHE'S BEEN THE LONGEST SERVING MEMBER.

PERLA, JUST JUST TO CLARIFY YOUR REQUEST, YOU'RE REQUESTING THAT MS. TAFEL BE MADE PERMANENT, BUT THAT YOU'RE ALSO REQUESTING A SUGGESTION TO FILL THE VACANCY SHE'LL LEAVE IN YOUR ALTERNATE CATEGORY.

CORRECT. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A MOTION.

HOLD ON, BUT WHO DO WE HAVE FOR THE ALTERNATE? FOR THE ALTERNATE I'VE GOT THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER.

MARK TALBOT AND ROGELIO RODRIGUEZ.

MARK TALBOT. YEAH, MARK M.

TALBERT. YES, HE'S IN DISTRICT SIX.

OKAY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE ANN TAFEL PERMANENT AND MARK TALBOT.

SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

[B) Subdivision Monthly Report.]

SUBDIVISION REPORTS DO Y'ALL NEED TO HEAR THE REPORTS OR ARE Y'ALL OK? WE'RE GOOD, OK.

ITEM C PROJECT STATUS REPORTS.

[C) Project Status Report through October 31, 2021.]

WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK IT'S GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO LAST TIME? CAN I JUST LOOK AT IT REAL QUICK? SURE. WE CAN LOOK AT EVERYTHING.

OH, WHEN ARE WE OPENING BICENTENNIAL? EIGHTH. [LAUGHING] DECEMBER, WE HAVE IT SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER THE 8TH, THE GRAND OPENING.

OK, DECEMBER 8TH.

IT IS. THAT'S ALL I HAD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

Y'ALL WANT TO HEAR FROM PARKS?

[D) Parks & Recreation Status on Projects.]

Y'ALL OK? GOOD.

GOOD. OK.

IMMIGRATION RESPITE CENTER REPORT.

[E) Immigration and Respite Center Report.]

GIVE US SOME GOOD NEWS.

AND I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF, HONORABLE MAYOR COMMISSIONER IS ABOUT 138 IMMIGRANTS PER DAY IS THE AVERAGE FOR THE LAST TWO WEEKS IS SLIGHTLY DOWN FROM THE 148 FROM THE TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THAT. WE HAVE HAD NOW THREE WEEKS IN A ROW THAT WE'VE HAD UNDER A THOUSAND THAT HAVE BEEN DROPPED OFF FOR THE WEEK.

THE LAST TWO WEEKS WERE 981 AND 948, RESPECTIVELY.

OUR COVID NUMBERS ARE DOWN A LITTLE BIT.

WE WERE AT 19% TWO WEEKS AGO, 16.2% LAST WEEK.

AND OVER THESE LAST TWO WEEKS WE'VE HAD ABOUT 24 INDIVIDUALS POSITIVE TESTED PER DAY.

ALSO, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF DAYS THIS LAST WEEK WHERE HE HAD UNDER FIVE POSITIVES FOR THE DAY. SO OUR CAPACITY AT [INAUDIBLE] AS PARK REMAINS ABOUT FIFTEEN HUNDRED.

[01:05:02]

WE'RE AVERAGING RIGHT AROUND 165 INDIVIDUALS PER NIGHT AT [INAUDIBLE], SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 250 AND 350 INDIVIDUALS IN QUARANTINE THROUGHOUT THE AREA AS PER CATHOLIC CHARITIES.

OF COURSE, WITH THE REMINDER THAT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY ALL COVID POSITIVE, WE CONSIDER TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR CHATTER ABOUT CARAVAN SOUTH OF US, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

ANYBODY? THANK YOU. OUR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.

[F) Future Agenda Items.]

MR. MAYOR, MR. CITY MANAGER, I LIKE TO AT SOME POINT.

REVISIT BUI RESERVOIR.

OK, ACTUALLY, I HAVE TO I WAS GOING TO BRING IT UP TOO, SO LET'S DISCUSS THAT.

AND ALSO I'D LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP CRITERIA.

I THINK COUNCIL IS PROBABLY WORKING ON IT ALREADY.

AND ANYTHING ELSE? YES. MAYOR COMMISSIONER AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT FOR A LONG, LONG TIME NOW. AND ACTUALLY, WE'RE TRYING TO IMPLEMENT IT IN THE COUNTY, BUT CONSIDERATION TO MAKE OUR PARKS WIFI.

I THOUGHT ABOUT ALL THE [INAUDIBLE], BUT THE PARKS, AND THAT'S THAT'S HOW [INAUDIBLE] FOR THAT. OF COURSE, THE ACCESS OF FAMILIES AND TO THE WIFI SINCE EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW RUNS THROUGH THE NET. AND SECOND, IT'LL BE A GOOD THING FOR FOR FAMILIES TO ENJOY THE PARK.

I'VE SEEN SOME TIMES THAT THAT FAMILIES CANNOT GO TO THE PARK YET BECAUSE OF THE KIDS CANNOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE INTERNET.

YOU KNOW, THE PARENTS CANNOT EXERCISE OR VICE VERSA, SO THE PARENTS CAN BE WORKING WHILE THE KIDS ENJOY OR THE KIDS CAN BE DOING HOMEWORK WELL WHILE THE ADULTS EXERCISE.

I THINK I CHECKED WITH DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT ARE EXPERTS IN IT, AND THE COST, I DON'T THINK WILL BE VERY STEEP, SO I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER IT AND MAKE A.

LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT IT. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT, OH, GO AHEAD.

OH NO GO AHEAD. I WAS GOING TO SAY, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT, DIDN'T WE ALLOCATE SOME MONEY TO PARKS IN GENERAL DURING THIS LAST BUDGET? I THINK IT WAS A STIMULUS MONEY, AND SO IT MIGHT BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY ALSO TO SEE WHAT ADVANCEMENTS WE'RE MAKING ON TRYING TO COORDINATE THE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.

I THINK TO IT PROBABLY TIES INTO A COMMENT WHERE OMAR IS STATING WHICH IS THE STATUS ON THAT SPECIFIC ITEM. THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING MORE FOR JANUARY.

BUT WHERE WE ARE SINCE WE PUT SO MUCH ON THE BUDGET AND THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS RIGHT FROM TENNIS FACILITY TO A SLEW OF OTHER ITEMS IN JANUARY, SOME TIME IS THERE. CAN WE GET AT LEAST SOME KIND OF DETAILED UPDATE OR DATE ON WHAT'S BEEN DONE ON SOME OF THOSE? JUST SORT OF WHERE WE'RE AT ON TRYING TO INITIATE A FEW OF THOSE PROJECTS? OR IF NOT, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO START SOME OF THEM? SO THAT PROBABLY AFTER THE FIRST QUARTER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, I GUESS REALLY SO MORE JANUARY, FEBRUARY, BUT JUST TO KNOW SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT MOVEMENT WE'VE MADE ON THEM [INAUDIBLE] WOULD INCLUDED UPDATE ON THAT.

LET'S MAKE THEM ACCESS TO ANOTHER ANOTHER ITEM, WHICH IS PROBABLY NOT.

IT'S NOT A WORKSHOP. IT'S NOT A FEATURE AGENDA ITEM, REALLY.

BUT ON THE CURRENT PACKETS, WHENEVER THERE'S AN ENGINEER AS THE APPLICANT, IS IT POSSIBLE TO PUT LIKE MELVIN IN HUNT ON BEHALF OF IT'S SOMETIMES HARD FOR US TO DECIPHER WHO THE APPLICANT MIGHT TRULY BE IN CASE OF A CONFLICT.

SOMETIMES WE KIND OF YOU CAN DIG THROUGH THE PACKAGE OR IT'S THERE, AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT THERE. SO ANYTHING ELSE? THE OTHER THING IS I HAVE BEEN REQUESTING FOR THE RENAMING OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER AND I THINK THE LAST PAST MEETINGS, I'VE ASKED FOR IT AS A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AND HAS NOT SHOWN UP HERE. JUST SAYING.

ALSO THE OTHER THING IS I WANTED TO LOOK AT TO SEE IF WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE THE THEME PARK THAT'S ADJACENT TO ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY.

THE TRACK IS VERY DETERIORATED, SO WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT AS WELL, MAYBE FOR A WORKSHOP FOR THAT ONE. AND I THINK FOR NOW, THAT'S IT.

COMMISSIONER, I THINK THE COMMUNITY CENTER ISSUE IS DEAD, ITS CHAMPIONS LAKE COMMUNITY CENTER. SO.

I'M JUST KIDDING. [LAUGHTER] NO, IT'S NOT LIKE WHEN UNLESS Y'ALL DID THAT WITHOUT LIKE A COURT HEARING.

NO, THAT'S FOR THE GOLF COURSE.

SO NOW WE HAVE THE ISSUE OF THE THE PALM BEACH COMMUNITY.

YES, CORRECT. SO THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN BRINGING UP.

AND THEN ALSO THE PARK AT ROOSEVELT, JUST BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF HOLES IN THAT TRACK.

CERTAINLY ANYTHING ELSE. YES, SINCE WE'RE ADDING ALL THE STUFF, I'LL LIKE TO HAVE MILKSHAKES INSTEAD OF [INAUDIBLE] CUPS NOW, PLEASE.

NO, ALL RIGHTY. WELL, BEFORE WE RECESS, OUR COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR FOR ALWAYS BEING PREPARED.

I LIKE IT AND I THINK STAFF APPRECIATES THAT WE COME.

[01:10:03]

WE TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS AND WE ALLOW THEM TO GO HOME EARLY.

WE'LL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[6. EXECUTIVE SESSION, CHAPTER 551, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.071 (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY), SECTION 551.072 (DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY), SECTION 551.074 (PERSONNEL MATTERS) AND SECTION 551.087 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT).]

[01:51:11]

YES. YEAH, I KNOW. NOW WE'RE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION TO TIME IS 6:52.

[01:51:18]

COUNCILMAN WHAT DO WE HAVE?

[01:51:20]

MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6A.

[01:51:21]

I RECOMMEND THE CITY COMMISSION ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE AND RATIFY THE CITY

[A) Consultation with City Attorney regarding pending litigation: City of McAllen v. Plateros Produce and Spices, LLC; Cause No. C-4560-21-B. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

[01:51:26]

ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND FILING CAUSE NUMBER C456021B TO RECOUP MONIES ON BEHALF OF THE

[01:51:35]

CITY'S WORKERS COMPENSATION PLAN.

[01:51:37]

WE HAVE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

[01:51:39]

SO MOVE TO RATIFY.

ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

[B) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal aspects of naming city buildings. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

MAYOR, WE ALREADY TOOK CARE OF ITEM 6B.

SO WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6C AND D, I RECOMMEND WELL WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6C, I RECOMMEND

[C) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal aspects of contractual relationship with MedCare EMS. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

YOU ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, TO WORK WITH MEDICARE IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST? THE MOTION CARRIES.

MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6D, I RECOMMEND NO ACTION WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6E.

[D) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal issues related to Risk Management claims report. (Section 551.071, T.G.C.)]

BOTH NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO.

[E) Discussion and possible lease, sale or purchase of real property; Tract 1 & Tract 2. (Section 551.072, T.G.C.)]

I AUTHORIZE YOU TO TAKE.

I RECOMMEND THAT YOU AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY AND IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO TAKE THOSE ACTIONS THAT ARE APPROPRIATE, NECESSARY TO SELL THE TWO REFERENCED PROPERTIES.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES. MAYOR, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6FF1, I RECOMMEND YOU AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED AS DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I HAVE MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6F2.

I RECOMMEND THAT YOU AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO OFFER THE INCENTIVES DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

DO I HAVE MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

AND WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6F3, I ALSO RECOMMEND THAT YOU AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER AND

[F) Consideration of Economic Development Matters. (Section 551.087, T.G.C.)]

CITY ATTORNEY TO OFFER THE INCENTIVES DESCRIBED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

DON'T MOVE.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AGAINST? MOTION CARRIES.

WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 6G MAYOR, I RECOMMEND THE COMMISSION TAKE NO ACTION.

[G) Consultation with City Attorney regarding legal issues of contractual obligations with Chamber of Commerce. (Section 551.71, T.G.C.)]

AND IS THAT ALL WE HAVE? THAT IS ALL WE HAVE. THERE BE NO FURTHER BUSINESS.

THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

[ADJOURNMENT]

THANK Y'ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.