Aug 04, 2025 City Council

[00:00:02]

THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR. AND I WAS TALKING TO THESE GENTLEMEN, IT WAS LIKE, OKAY, DONNIE, WELL,

[(a) Recognitions: Sponsors of the Missouri City FourthFEST.]

[(a) City Manager Report - Provide an overview of Consent Agenda items and ...]

[00:05:07]

[7. CONSENT AGENDA]

SO SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. ON THE MOTION CARRIES 6 TO 0

[(g) Consideration and Possible Action - Second and Final Reading - An ordi...]

PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PROVIDING FOR REPEAL, PROVIDING A PENALTY, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. CAN WE HAVE A PRESENTATION? IDENTICAL. COMMISSIONER. ALL RIGHT. WELL, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I WILL MAKE IT VERY QUICK. THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE. I'M READING IT OVER HERE, BUT GO AHEAD. THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE.

THERE ARE THREE KEY CHANGES THAT WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO CONSIDER. THE FIRST CHANGE IS THE AS IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, THE SEATING CAPACITY. AS AT 180, THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED IT TO BE REVISED TO 210. I THINK THE DELTA USED FOR THE SERVING STAFF AND OTHER ANCILLARY STAFF, BUT STILL THE SEATING CAPACITY WOULD BE 180. THE SECOND ONE IS IT SAYS THAT THE SECURITY SECURITY BE PROVIDED FOR ALL EVENTS. THEY'RE ASKING FOR A CLARIFICATION THAT THE HIRED SECURITY BE PROVIDED ONLY FOR EVENTS WHERE ALCOHOL IS SERVED. THAT'S THE SECOND CHANGE THAT THEY'RE ASKING. THE THIRD ONE IS KIND OF AN OMISSION. IF GIVES THE HOUR OF OPERATIONS, BUT IT'S SILENT ON SUNDAYS. SO IT SAYS THURSDAY TO SATURDAY UP TO 12 A.M, BUT IS SILENT ON SUNDAYS.

SO WE WANT TO CLARIFY AND SAY FROM THURSDAY TO SUNDAY, NO LATER BY NO LATER THAN 12 A.M.

THESE ARE THE THREE MINOR REVISIONS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED. WITH THAT, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. IF STAFF IS RECOMMENDING OR RECOMMENDING THESE CHANGES TO THE HARDWARE. OKAY. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZE THE COUNSELOR. THANK YOU. COULD YOU REPEAT THE THREE REQUESTS ONE MORE TIME? THE FIRST ONE IS THE SEATING CAPACITY. THEY'RE ASKING FOR A REVISION FROM THE CURRENT. WHAT YOU HAVE IN THE ORDINANCE FROM 180 TO 210. THAT'S THE FIRST ONE. THE SECOND ONE IS THE EVENT SECURITY. CURRENTLY IT SAYS SECURITY BE PROVIDED FOR ALL EVENTS. BUT THEY'RE ASKING FOR A CLARIFICATION THAT HIRED SECURITY WOULD BE PROVIDED ONLY FOR EVENTS WHERE ALCOHOL IS SERVED. THAT'S THE SECOND ONE. THE THIRD ONE, ONE THIRD ONE IS THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE ORDINANCE FOR SUNDAY. SO WE'RE JUST CLARIFYING THAT IT'S THE SAME AS THE OTHER DAYS, THURSDAY TO SUNDAY, UP TO 12 A.M. THOSE ARE THE THREE CHANGES OR CLARIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE. SO RELATIVE TO NUMBER TWO, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING DONE FOR THE OTHER VENUES THAT WE VOTED ON OR EVENT CENTERS? BECAUSE I DEFINITELY WANT US TO BE CONSISTENT. SO IF WE REQUIRED THEM TO HAVE SECURITY FOR ALL EVENTS, THEN EITHER WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK TO MODIFY THEIRS OR I JUST NEED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND YOU KNOW, WHAT'S DONE THERE. BUT THE CITY HAS REQUIRED SECURITY FOR ALL OF THEM. SUCH EVENTS, IT IS NOT BASED AT ALL. THANK YOU. YOU RECOGNIZE AND COUNCILMEMBER TOWNSEND? YES. SO THE INCREASE

[00:10:07]

YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IN REGARDS TO THE CAPACITY HAVING SEATING INCREASED ANOTHER 30. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE STAFF MEMBERS, DID THEY NOT INCLUDE THOSE THE STAFF MEMBERS WITH THEIR ORIGINAL NUMBERS BECAUSE ORIGINALLY THEIR NUMBERS WERE 200 AND THEN THEY DECREASED IT? WELL, I THINK THEY'VE CHANGED THOSE NUMBERS A COUPLE OF TIMES.

ORIGINALLY THEY CAME FOR 280. AND THEN I THINK IN THE APPLICATION THEY PUT IN AS 210.

BUT THEN THE APPLICANT CLARIFIED THAT THE SEATING CAPACITY IS STILL 180, BUT THEY WANT THE ADDITIONAL RESERVE CAPACITY FOR. THE EVENT CENTER STAFF. SO BUT WHAT AGAIN, AS I SAID, WE HAVE VERIFIED THAT 210 IS ADEQUATE. WE HAVE TALKED TO THE RATIO IS CORRECT. SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION

[00:15:01]

I KNOW THAT THE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE PUT IN EVERYTHING YOU POSSIBLY CAN FOR SOUND BUFFERING AND BARRIERS AND THAT TYPE OF THING. BUT THE SUNDAY HOURS, EVEN THOUGH WE MATCH OTHER EVENT CENTERS, THEY'RE NOT BACKING UP TO A RESIDENCE THAT THAT'S AN ISSUE. SO I'M GOOD ON THE PARKING SITUATION AND THE CAPACITY. I WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SECURITY MEASURE THAT I, I DO TAKE ISSUE WITH THE SUNDAY EXPANSION JUST BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORING THE NEIGHBORHOOD IMMEDIATELY BEHIND IT. IN THAT AREA. THAT WOULD BE THE IMPACT OF WITH YOU AND THEN OTHER THAN THAT. OH, ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S WHY I SAY I'D TAKE ISSUE WITH THEM WANTING TO HAVE MIDNIGHT HOURS.

I TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT, BECAUSE THERE WILL BE A HOUSE RIGHT BEHIND THIS ESTABLISHMENT AFFECTED. SO I DO TAKE ISSUE WITH THEM WANTING TO EXPAND THE HOURS. I THINK THEY SHOULD NOT DO THAT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SHASHI I GUESS THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A VERY QUICK CONSENT AGENDA. THAT IS CORRECT THAT THAT WAS BECAUSE WE HAD A DEPTH OF DISCUSSION IN THE LAST TIME. SO CORRECT. WHO IS PROPOSING THESE THREE ITEMS? I THINK THE APPLICANT IS THE ONE WHO CAME UP WITH THESE REVISIONS OR CHANGES. REQUEST FOR CHANGES. SO THE FIRST ITEM WAS THE CAPACITY WENT FROM 180 TO 210 210. RIGHT. OKAY. SECOND WAS PRESENCE OF SECURITY FOR ALL EVENTS. THAT'S WHAT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE READS. BUT THE APPLICANT WANTS THE EXEMPTION THAT IT'S ONLY HEIGHT. SECURITY'S ONLY FOR EVENTS WHERE ALCOHOL IS SERVED. THAT'S THE EXEMPTION. AND OUR RULE IS WE PROVIDE SERVICES FOR EVERYBODY WITH ALCOHOL OR WITHOUT ALCOHOL.

THAT'S WHAT THE CITY HAS PROVIDED. ANOTHER EVENT CENTER ORDINANCE SPACE. YES. SO EVEN IF SOMEBODY IS A NON ALCOHOLIC, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A SECURITY. YES SIR. BASED ON FOR HOW MANY EVENTS. I MEAN WAS IT 50 PEOPLE 100. IT'S NOT IN OTHER ORDINANCES. IT'S NOT BASED ON PEOPLE. IT'S JUST BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS BEING USED AS AN EVENT CENTER. OKAY.

SO THIS IS BEING BECAUSE IT'S CATEGORIZED AS EVENT CENTER, RIGHT? OKAY. AND THEN THE THIRD, THE THIRD ONE IS ACTUALLY THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS. BUT I THINK IT'S MORE THAT WE THOUGHT BECAUSE IT'S SUNDAY HOURS OF OPERATION LIMIT WAS NOT MENTIONED. SO TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OTHERS, WE HAD IT ONLY FROM THURSDAY TO SATURDAY. WE'RE EXTENDING THE SAME TIMELINE TO SUNDAY, NO LATER THAN 12 A.M. THAT'S NOT MORE FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WHAT WE NOTICED. SO WE WANTED TO GET THAT ADDRESSED OR CORRECTED. OKAY. SO TODAY AND IN THE EVENT CENTER OPERATING SOMEWHERE IN THE CITY. SUNDAY, WHAT ARE THE HOURS MIDNIGHT THEY

[00:20:04]

LET'S GO TO VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES 5 TO 1. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER. SIX. IT'S A

[(1) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against the Community Deve...]

[(2) Consideration and Possible Action - Approve the Community Development ...]

AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, THE CITY IS CONSIDERED AN ENTITLEMENT COMMUNITY AND BASED ON CONGRESS'S BUDGET. EVERY YEAR, HUD GETS AN ALLOCATION. IT'S NOT GUARANTEED EVERY YEAR, BUT AGAIN, BASED ON THAT BUDGET AND THEN OF THAT BUDGET, HUD ALLOCATES IT TO ENTITLEMENT CITIES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT THE CITY CAN FUND USING THOSE ALLOCATIONS. PUBLIC SERVICES SIMILAR TO LIKE MEALS ON WHEELS SERVICES THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND OTHER SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES CAN UTILIZE UP TO 15% OF THE FUNDS THAT THE CITY USES. 20% CAN BE USED FOR TO COVER ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. ALL PROJECTS THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE CDBG FUND MUST MEET ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AS GOVERNED BY HUD. THERE'S A MAP OF CDBG TARGET AREAS THAT IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE. THIS IS THE MAP ON THE SCREEN. THERE ARE CERTAIN ACTIVITIES THAT CAN ONLY BE FUNDED WITHIN THOSE TARGET AREAS, AND THE CITY HAS IDENTIFIED THOSE TARGET AREAS BASED ON CENSUS NUMBERS FOR LOW TO MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN A CENSUS TRACT THAT THOSE AREAS ARE LOCATED WITHIN FOR PROGRAM YEAR 2025, WHICH IS THE CURRENT PROGRAM YEAR, THE CITY IS EXPECTED TO RECEIVE UP TO $300,000 TO PROVIDE THROUGH THIS PROGRAM. THIS IS A REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM, SO ALL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE FUNDED ARE REIMBURSED BASED ON WORK OR SERVICES THAT HAVE BEEN PERFORMED. SO IT'S NOT GUARANTEED FUNDING THAT ORGANIZATIONS OR THAT THE CITY WILL RECEIVE. IT'S ALL PERFORMANCE BASED, BASED ON ACTUALLY PERFORMING THOSE SERVICES. SO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECENTLY MET AND HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, RECEIVED APPLICATIONS FROM FIVE, I BELIEVE, SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES, IN ADDITION TO CITY PROGRAM FOR SCHOLARSHIP OR POST-SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL

[00:25:06]

THERE'S A CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY THAT IS FUNDED THROUGH THESE FUNDS. AND THEN, AS MENTIONED PRIOR, THE 20% CAP ON PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION. SO THE CDC DOES FORWARD THIS AS A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION. STAFF SUPPORTS THIS AS WELL. AND THAT'S THE END OF THIS PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RECOGNIZE AND COUNCILMEMBER CLAUSEN. YES. THANK YOU JENNIFER. AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE OUR CDBG COMMITTEE WHO VOLUNTEERS THEIR TIME TO LEAD THIS. MY I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ONE HAVE FEDERAL FUNDING CUTS AFFECTED THE. SO NOT YET NOT YET BUT WE'RE WE'RE ACTIVELY MONITORING THAT SITUATION. SO WE DO KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN LOSSES AT OUR LOCAL HUD OFFICES IN TERMS OF STAFF. BUT AS IT STANDS NOW, THESE MONIES ARE STILL AVAILABLE. OKAY. AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS. HOW ARE THE PRIORITIES DETERMINED. SO I SEE THAT THERE'S A FOUR YEAR PRIORITY NEEDS FORECAST. HOW DO YOU DETERMINE THESE NEEDS. VERY GOOD QUESTION. AND SO LAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST YEAR OF A FIVE YEAR PLAN. SO THE CITY WENT THROUGH A PROCESS OF DOING SURVEYS AND INTERVIEWS WITH LOCAL SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES. THERE ARE SEVERAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE AS WELL, TALKING ABOUT KIND OF WHAT THE NEED IS THROUGHOUT THE AREA. AND SO BASED ON THOSE ACTIONS, THE CDAC CONSIDERED PRIORITY FUNDING BASED ON ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. AND SO THAT PRIORITY FUNDING GUIDES THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IN TERMS OF PROJECTS, HOW THEY'RE CONSIDERED WHEN THEY COME FORWARD FOR FUNDING. OKAY, GREAT. AND THEN THE SPECIAL POPULATIONS, DOES OUR VETERAN, OUR LOCAL VFW, VERY, VERY CLOSE TO RIGHT IN OUR BACKYARD, WOULD THEY FIT UNDERNEATH THE SPECIAL POPULATIONS? I KNOW THEY'RE THEY'RE CONSTANTLY HAVING ISSUES WITH THEIR BUILDING, THEIR HVAC.

AND I KNOW IT'S NOT IN THE PRIORITY NEEDS NOW, BUT IS THERE A WAY TO INCORPORATE THEM? WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT. I KNOW THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED THAT BEFORE. OKAY. THEY DIDN'T SUBMIT AN APPLICATION THIS YEAR, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY SEE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE PERFORMING AND IF THEY FALL UNDER ANY OF THOSE OBJECTIVES. OKAY. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION IS I SAW AN ODD AMOUNT FOR THE RAINBOWS OF LOVE. IS THAT FOR A SPECIFIC EVENT OR SPECIFIC PURPOSE. YES. SO THEY'RE THEY'RE ACTUALLY A NEW SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY THAT APPLIED THIS YEAR.

THE COMMITTEE HAD ROBUST DISCUSSION, WANTING TO ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT THEM, BUT THEY'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING A NEW PROGRAM. SO I THINK THEY HAVE SOME ORIGINS IN LIKE ADOPTION SERVICES. BUT THE PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE SEEKING FUNDING FOR IS FOR TEENAGERS OR YOUTH THAT ARE HAVING HOUSING CHALLENGES. SO THEY WOULD PROVIDE SUPPORT SERVICES TO HELP GET THEM SITUATED WITH HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE CITY. OKAY. AND THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE MY LAST, LAST QUESTION. IS THERE A MATRIX THAT Y'ALL HAVE WHEN Y'ALL HAVE THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT COME THROUGH AND APPLY? IS THERE A LIKE A MATRIX OR SOMETHING THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, MORE SUBJECTIVE SO THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, LIKE, LIKE WE'RE DOING FOR THE WHAT IS IT THE EDC FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, JUST SOME SORT OF MATRIX SO THAT IT'S THE MONEY IS DISTRIBUTED AND, YOU KNOW, FAIR AND EQUITABLE. YEAH. AND I THINK WE CAN PUT WE CAN WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE TO PUT TOGETHER A DOCUMENT. BUT USUALLY THE GUIDING POSTS ARE WHAT THOSE PRIORITIES ARE THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND HOW CLOSELY THOSE ORGANIZATIONS MEET THOSE PRIORITIES. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, OTHER METRICS INCLUDE ARE THEY SERVING RESIDENTS, YOU KNOW, OR PEOPLE IN MISSOURI CITY, BECAUSE A LOT OF PROGRAMS WILL COME AND THEY MAY NOT HAVE A DIRECT BENEFIT TO RESIDENTS WITHIN MISSOURI CITY. RIGHT. SO WE CAN DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE TO PUT TOGETHER A DOCUMENT OF THAT NATURE. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS JUST SOME SORT OF STANDARD DOCUMENT

[00:30:05]

COUNCIL MEMBER FOLEY. OKAY. I WAS JUST WAITING FOR HIM TO SIT DOWN. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, MAYOR PRO TEM. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUBLICLY THANK THE COMMITTEE THAT CONSISTS, OF COURSE, OF MY TWO COUNCIL PEOPLE AND MAYOR PRO TEM SONYA BROWN. MARSHALL AND COUNCILWOMAN RILEY ARE PART OF THAT COMMITTEE. AND WE HAVE SEVERAL RESIDENTS WHO SERVE FAITHFULLY. THIS WAS A VERY IT'S ALWAYS TOUGH WHEN YOU'RE LIMITED ON MONEY. AND THIS YEAR WE RECEIVED ABOUT 25,000 AND SOME CHANGE LESS THAN THE PREVIOUS FUNDING YEAR. AND HOPEFULLY THAT DOESN'T CONTINUE TO DECREASE. BUT NONETHELESS, SOME GREAT AND WORTHY AGENCIES THAT APPLIED, YOU KNOW, WE HAD TO CUT SOME, SOME PEOPLE'S REQUESTS. WE REALLY DIDN'T WANT TO. HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT MANY OF THESE ENTITIES ARE PROVIDING REAL SIGNIFICANT SERVICES TO THESE RESIDENTS. SO IT WAS HARD TO SAY NO. IT WAS HARD TO MAKE REDUCTIONS. BUT WHEN YOU'RE LIMITED ON HOW MUCH MONEY YOU CAN SPEND ON PUBLIC SERVICE, WHICH IS 15% OF THE, THERE'S A 15% CAP, WE HAVE TO MAKE THE BEST OF IT. AND SO I'M EXCITED THAT WE'RE PRESENTING AS A COMMITTEE THE RECOMMENDED FUNDING FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR, THIS PROGRAM YEAR. BUT WE'RE LIMITED AND WE CAN ONLY WE CAN ONLY SPEND SO MUCH ON SO MANY THINGS. AND SO HOUSING REHAB IS ONE OF THE TOP PROGRAMS. WE HAVE A WAITING LIST OF HOW MANY. WE HAVE ABOUT 26 PEOPLE, I BELIEVE. SO. SO IT'S REALLY A NEED. SO PROVIDING FUNDING FOR THAT PROGRAM IS DEFINITELY NECESSARY. AND I WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE AGAIN FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK AND HELPING US GET TO THIS NUMBER AND THE AGENTS, I'M SORRY. AND THE AGENCIES THAT CAME AND PRESENTED, BECAUSE ALL THE AGENCIES CAME AND PRESENTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE, I THINK IT WAS FORT BEND HABITAT. RIGHT. RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, THANK YOU. MAYOR, I WANT TO ECHO MY COUNCIL MEMBER AND THE CHAIR OF OUR COMMITTEE ON HIS SENTIMENTS. YOU KNOW, JENNIFER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE IS VERY CRITICAL BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH SOME OF OUR MOST VULNERABLE POPULATION OF FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES IN MISSOURI CITY. AND THE COMMITTEE DOES AN OUTSTANDING JOB OF REALLY TRYING TO SEE WHERE WE CAN MEET THE MOST NEED WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF MONEY, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, WAS A ROBUST CONVERSATION. AND UNLESS YOU'RE SITTING IN THESE MEETINGS, IT'S REALLY HARD TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT TEARS AT OUR HEARTS. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE GETTING THIS, THIS FEDERAL FUNDING AND WE'RE HAVING TO SAY WHICH IS A PRIORITY AND WHICH IS NOT. AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE NOT CITY DOLLARS. AND WHEN WE GET THESE, THESE, THESE FUNDS, IT'S HARD TO PUT IT IN A MATRIX. IT'S HARD TO SAY THIS IS A PRIORITY AND YOUR PRIORITY. BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE WE'RE DEALING WITH LIVES WHO ARE IN CRITICAL SITUATIONS. AND SO I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR TEAM, YOUR STAFF. I KNOW YOU LOST A MEMBER, BUT THE COMMITTEE AND THE RESIDENTS WHO WE GO BACK AND FORTH ON, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M VERY HARD NOSED ABOUT MAKING SURE, TRYING TO SEE IF EVERYBODY CAN GET A LITTLE BIT PIECE OF THE PIE. AND SO ALL OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT SUBMITTED THEIR NEEDS, THEY'RE GREAT ORGANIZATIONS OUT THERE. RAINBOW OF LOVE, ABIGAIL'S PLACE I'VE WORKED WITH BOTH OF THOSE.

EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT HABITAT TO HUMANITY, THE LITERACY COUNCIL. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE AMOUNTS THAT THEY REQUESTED AND WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO ALLOCATE. SEEING YOUR NAME. WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO RECOMMEND FUNDING IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS. SO I DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE TO URGE OUR RESIDENTS TO CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE WITH YOUR LEGISLATORS AND OTHERS TO LOOK AT THIS FUNDING TO HELP US INCREASE IT IN THE FUTURE, SO THAT WE CAN HELP MORE ORGANIZATIONS AND HELP MORE FAMILIES. BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR, FOR WHAT YOU DO WITH THIS COMMITTEE, WITH US AND MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHALL, FOR YOUR SERVICE AS WELL ON THIS COMMITTEE THAT JUST I JUST REALLY HAD COMMENTS THAT I WANTED TO MAKE AND HIGHLIGHT YOUR DEPARTMENT AND THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SEEING NO ONE ELSE ON THE QUEUE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. ITEM

[(3) Public Hearing - To receive comments for or against a resolution reaut...]

[00:35:04]

NO FURTHER COMMENTS. WE'LL NOW GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. 8A3. AND WOULD IT BE

[(4) Consideration and Possible Action - A resolution of the City Council o...]

RECOGNIZING COUNCILMEMBER RYAN. THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER MANGUM I HAD ONE QUESTION. I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE INFORMATION. I DIDN'T SEE WHERE WE HAD A TIME LIMIT. I THINK IN THE PAST, SOME OF THE TAX ABATEMENTS HAVE HAD 15, 20, MAYBE EVEN 30 YEARS. SO ARE WE GOING TO BE LOOKING TO ADD THAT INTO. SO AS I MENTIONED, EVERY EVERY AGREEMENT WOULD BE DEPENDENT ON WHAT THE COUNCIL DECIDES FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL AGREEMENT. HOWEVER, AS I THINK IT'S NUMBER ONE UP THERE, SAYS THE TYPICAL TERM WOULD BE FIVE YEARS BASED ON THAT. SO THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE A FIVE YEAR TAX ABATEMENT TERM FOR THE MAJORITY OF. AND OBVIOUSLY IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF PROJECT, THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT AND THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT IT MAY GENERATE. AND THAT GIVES THE COUNCIL SOME FLEXIBILITY IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER THAT FIVE YEARS IS APPROPRIATE OR NOT. SO WHAT MY REQUEST WOULD BE, I MEAN, YOU GUYS HAVE TO REALLY KIND OF IRON THAT OUT IS LOOKING, PUTTING SOME PARAMETERS AROUND TIME LIMITS WITH WHATEVER REVENUE IS GOING TO COME IN, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO BE HERE. AND SO WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING SOLID IN PLACE SO THAT THE FUTURE LEADERS AND STAFF MEMBERS HAVE SOMETHING TO WORK WITH, AND THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT. SO IF WE'RE SAYING TYPICALLY FIVE YEARS, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? FIVE YEARS AND $1 MILLION, $10 MILLION LIKE, I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE STRUCTURED. AND I KNOW THIS IS THE BEGINNING PART, THE PRELIMINARY ASPECT OF IT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY GOOD IF WE CAN PUT SOME TEETH IN. OR IS IT MEAT? WHICHEVER ONE IT IS, THE SAYING IS PUT SOMETHING INTO IT SO THAT WE REALLY HAVE SOMETHING SOLID AND DEVELOPERS THAT ARE COMING ARE NOT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THEY'LL MEET THE CRITERIA OR IF THEY WANT THAT TYPE OF INCENTIVE, OR IF

[00:40:04]

AND THEN THE TIME OF FIVE YEARS. YEAH. AND THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I THINK IF WE PUT IT KIND OF LIKE A SIDE BY SIDE TYPE CHART, THAT WILL MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER. SO THANK YOU.

RECOGNIZE THE MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MARSHALL THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU SO MUCH JASON FOR THIS REPORT. MY QUESTIONS PRIMARILY STEM AROUND THE FACTORS THAT WE'LL BE CONSIDERING IN TERMS OF I'M HAPPY HERE TO SEE, NUMBER ONE, DOES IT OUTLINE WITH RESPECT TO OUR COMP PLAN AND OUR STRATEGIC PLAN. SO THAT'S REALLY GOOD. BUT ARE WE GOING TO FURTHER FLESH THIS OUT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF JOBS. ARE WE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF JOBS THAT THE BUSINESS HAS TO GENERATE, AND WILL THAT ALSO BE OUTLINED WITHIN THE POLICY, ALONG WITH THE LOCAL PAYROLL? ARE WE LOOKING FOR A SPECIFIC DOLLAR AND LOCAL SALES TAXES? ARE WE LOOKING FOR SPECIFIC DOLLARS TO RESPOND TO THAT? PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS WAIT UNTIL WE GET THROUGH THE COMP PLAN TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT LAND WE'RE LOOKING AT AND HOW WE ARE CLASSIFYING THAT LAND, BECAUSE WE HAVE LIMITED LAND AVAILABLE, AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT IT FROM TWO DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES. ONE IS ON NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THE OTHER IS ON REDEVELOPMENT. AND I THINK THERE WILL BE DIFFERENT STRATEGIES FOR BOTH DEPENDING ON WHAT THE OVERALL GOALS ARE. AND SO THAT THAT'S WHEN HE INDICATED THAT THIS IS JUST THE PLACEHOLDER, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE EVERY TWO YEARS. AND WE'RE WE'RE UP ON THAT TWO YEARS NOW. BUT RECOGNIZING THAT IT WILL COME BACK WITH SOME RECOMMENDED CHANGES AFTER WE'VE HAD A CHANCE TO REALLY FLESH IT THROUGH. OKAY. AND I JUST HAVE TWO FINAL QUESTIONS. HOW LONG DO YOU THINK IT WILL TAKE US TO WORK ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM? SO COME BACK WITH THE AMENDMENTS. SO THAT WOULD BE BASED ON THE COMP PLAN. AFTER THE COMP PLAN IS APPROVED, THEN WE WOULD COME BACK AND SEE IF THIS ALIGNS WITH THE WITH THE COMP PLAN. ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S TARGETED INDUSTRIES REALLY THIS THIS THIS VERSION OF THE POLICY REALLY FOCUSES ON BRINGING DAYTIME POPULATION TO MISSOURI CITY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE WAREHOUSING, DISTRIBUTION, MEDICAL, BIOTECH, ENGINEERING, SOFTWARE, ELECTRONICS, PROFESSIONAL BUSINESSES, THAT'S REALLY WHAT TWO YEARS AGO, THE COUNCIL SAID WAS IMPORTANT AS THESE, YOU KNOW, BRINGING THESE INDUSTRIES THAT THAT WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF. AND SO AS WE FINISH THE COMP PLAN, THEN WE CAN AGAIN, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CURRENT POLICY. HOW DOES IT ALIGN WITH THE COMP PLAN. AND THEN WHERE ARE THE GAPS. WE FILL IN THE GAPS AND BRING IT BACK FOR AMENDMENTS. AND THEN MY FINAL QUESTION I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ONCE MORE ON TONIGHT IN REGARDS TO VAPE SHOPS AND THOSE THINGS. I DID NOT SEE THAT THOSE WERE TAKEN OUT OF THIS PARTICULAR POLICY. DO WE NEED TO ADD THEM INTO THIS PARTICULAR POLICY OR DO WE THINK THAT OR DID I OVERLOOK IT? YEAH I DON'T SEE IT. SINCE THIS POLICY IS JUST A GUIDE, WE HAVE TIME TO MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS AND WE WOULD BE MAKING WHATEVER ADJUSTMENTS YOU MAKE IN REGARDS TO MORATORIUMS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE WOULD BE INCORPORATING THIS INTO THE FINAL. AND KEEP IN MIND AS, AS ACM POINTED OUT, ANY AGREEMENT WOULD HAVE TO COME TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. AND SO WE WOULD NOT BE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR ANYTHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED AS A MORATORIUM ON IT. BUT THE BUT THE MORATORIUMS ONLY LAST FOR 90 DAYS. BUT WE THEY MAY LAST FOR 90 DAYS, BUT THAT'S GUIDANCE TO STAFF IN TERMS OF HOW WE CONVEY THESE INCENTIVES AND WHAT'S OUT THERE FOR TAX ABATEMENTS. AND I AND AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHENED EVEN MORE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE WANT TO MAXIMIZE THE RETURN THAT WE GET ON WHATEVER ABATEMENT WE OFFER UP. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MAXIMIZE IT AND HAVE SOME CONDITIONS. SO WE'RE WE'RE BASICALLY DOING THE PLACEHOLDER NOW BECAUSE THAT'S STATE REQUIREMENT OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A

[00:45:01]

[(a) Consideration and Possible Action - Authorize the City Manager to exec...]

SO THIS IS TO WE ARE CLOSE TO GETTING THAT EXECUTE THAT PIPELINE AGREEMENT EASEMENT EXECUTED. THIS IS TO GIVE THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THAT AGREEMENT WITH EXXONMOBIL. WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER O'DEKIRK, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BONEY. SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT.

[(a) Consideration and Possible Action - First and Final Reading - An ordin...]

PROVIDING FOR ELECTION PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES. PROVIDING FOR REPEAL, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT. CRYSTAL MALL GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS ITEM WOULD ORDER THE SPECIAL ELECTION FOR NOVEMBER THE 4TH, 2025 TO FILL THE VACANT POSITION FOR COUNCIL MEMBER, DISTRICT B. OKAY. THANK YOU. THERE'S A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BONE, SEEING NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM TEN B AN

[(b) Consideration and Possible Action - First and Final Reading - An ordin...]

[(c) Consideration and Possible Action - First of Two Readings - An ordinan...]

THANK YOU. THIS IS THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING A MORATORIUM ON SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD ON JULY 28TH. THE PUBLIC HEARING WITH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WAS HELD ON JULY 31ST, AND NOTICE OF THOSE HEARINGS WAS PUBLISHED ON

[00:50:03]

THANK YOU FOR ADDING IN THOSE OTHER ITEMS THAT I REQUESTED ABOUT FOR THE DISPENSARY AND THE THC. YES, MA'AM. I GET IT RIGHT. YES, MA'AM. THAT. YES. NOT THE NOT THE FULL NAME FOR THC, BUT YES YES YES YES YES. BECAUSE IN YOUR LAST PRESENTATION YOU TALKED ABOUT THE CITY OF MISSOURI. CITY HAD 20 OF THESE VAPE SHOPS CURRENTLY PRIMARILY ON HIGHWAY SIX AND TEXAS PARKWAY. AND IN COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES LIKE SUGARLAND, WHO ALSO DID A SIMILAR ORDINANCE TO THIS, THEY HAVE ABOUT 11. SO WE HAVE THE MOST IN OUR CITY, AND OBVIOUSLY WE DON'T WANT TO BECOME A LOCATION KNOWN FOR THAT. WE WANT TO BE A DESTINATION. AND SO I APPRECIATE YOU ADDING THOSE ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT I HAD REQUESTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE THAT MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR WORK. THANK YOU.

COUNCILMEMBER O'DEKIRK. THANK YOU. SO YOU MENTIONED THE 30% RULE. SO IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION JUST TODAY THAT WE HAVE GAS STATIONS SELLING DRUG PARAPHERNALIA SUCH AS METH PIPES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IS THE 30% JUST FROM THE RETAIL STORE OR THE GAS SALES INCLUDED IN THAT? SO HOW ARE WE SO 30% THAT 30% ONLY EQUATES FOR THE SALE OF NICOTINE OR SMOKING PRODUCTS.

AND AS MENTIONED, I DON'T REMEMBER IF I MENTIONED IT HERE OR AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, BUT THE 30% CAME FROM A REPORT BY A GAS STATION ASSOCIATION THAT FOUND THAT MOST GAS STATIONS OR CONVENIENCE STORES. CONVENIENCE CENTERS SELL ABOUT 25 TO 27% IN NICOTINE AND SMOKING PRODUCTS. SO THE GOAL HERE IS NOT TO REALLY PREVENT THOSE TYPES OF CONVENIENCE STORES. THE GOAL HERE IS TO PAUSE DEVELOPMENT ON SMOKE SHOPS THAT ARE SPECIFIC. SPECIFIC SMOKE. CORRECT SMOKE I MY QUESTION WAS REALLY IS THAT 30% OF THE RETAIL SALES, WHICH IS JUST THE CONVENIENCE STORE OR THE GAS SALES OUTWEIGH THE 30. I MEAN FOR GAS STATIONS, AGAIN, THOSE SALES ARE ONLY AT ABOUT 25 TO 27% FOR SALE RETAIL SALE FOR. YEAH. I WAS WONDERING IF THE GAS IS EXCLUDED IN THAT 100% OR IF IT'S. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU? I'M ASKING IF THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF THEIR SALES IS 30%, INCLUDING GAS, OR 30% OF THE ONLY THE RETAIL STORE SIDE THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT DOES MAKE SENSE, AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WOULD BE THE TOTAL. IF THEY'RE BEING TOLD 20, THEY JUST FALL UNDER THAT THRESHOLD. OKAY, BUT I DO I DO SEE A PROBLEM. I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THE CHIEF TO ADDRESS, BUT DRUG PARAPHERNALIA IN THESE STORES I BELIEVE IS AGAINST TEXAS LAW. SO YEAH, IT IS. OKAY, SO IF YOU GUYS WALKED INTO A STORE AND NOTICED THAT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD ADDRESS? SO IT'S TRYING TO EXPLAIN THIS. IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE THEY'RE USING THE OBJECT. SO SAY A GLASS PIPE THEY COULD BE USING TO SMOKE REGULAR TOBACCO. BUT THEY COULD ALSO BE USING THE SAME TYPE OF SMOKE MARIJUANA WHEN THEY USE IT TO SMOKE MARIJUANA. THAT'S WHEN IT'S DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. OKAY. SO IS IT KIND OF HOW THEY'RE PITCHING IT? IT DEPENDS ON HOW THEY'RE UTILIZING PIPES IN THE IN THE CASE YOU CAN'T LEGALLY

[00:55:04]

HOW DID WE DERIVE IT? 30%. SO THE 30% CAME FROM A REPORT FROM THE CONVENIENCE STORE ASSOCIATION THAT FOUND THAT ABOUT 25 TO 27% OF CONVENIENCE STORES AND GAS STATIONS PROVIDE OR HAVE GROSS SALES THAT CONSIST OF SMOKE, SMOKING ITEMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THAT'S WHERE THE 30% CAME FROM. BUT YOU ALL CAN CERTAINLY IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE THAT NUMBER, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THAT NUMBER AS WELL. I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THE QUESTION, BECAUSE IF THERE IS SOME TYPE OF CONCERN THAT OTHER RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS ARE ARE SELLING THESE ITEMS. THEN MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK TO ADDRESS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE REACH AND MAKE SURE THAT WE COVER THOSE AS WELL. BECAUSE WHAT I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE HAPPEN IS A SHIFT IN THAT IF THEY AREN'T DOING THE 30%, WELL, NOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO 30%, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD BE A NEW INCOME GENERATOR FOR THOSE BUSINESSES. NOT NOT THAT I WANT TO TAKE AWAY BUSINESS. I JUST WANT GOOD SOUND BUSINESS FOR OUR CITY. SO MAYBE 35%, I'M SORRY. 25, 25 I MEANT TO SAY 25%. IF WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT. MY LAST COMMENT IS I WANTED TO JUST GO BACK AND MAKE SURE THAT DURING THIS 90 DAY PERIOD, THAT SHOULD A VAPE SHOP LEAVE OUT OF THAT SPOT, THAT THIS, THAT THIS THING WILL HOLD THAT IN PLACE AND THAT ANOTHER ONE CANNOT COME IN RIGHT BEHIND IT. CORRECT. SO THE 90 DAY MORATORIUM PREVENTS THE STAFF FROM ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS FOR ANY VAPE OR SMOKE SMOKE SHOP IN THE CITY. AND AGAIN, TO REITERATE, I THINK WHAT WAS MENTIONED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, THIS DOES NOT IMPACT OPERATING EXISTING VAPE AND SMOKE SHOPS. THIS ONLY APPLIES TO SMOKE SHOPS THAT ARE TRYING TO COME IN AND LOCATE IN THE CITY. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM. BUT FOR CLARIFICATION, WAS THAT YOUR MOTION TO CHANGE THE PERCENTAGE TO 25% INSTEAD OF 30%? AND IF SO, COUNCIL MEMBER, IS THAT YOUR SECOND AS WELL? WELL, I HAVEN'T GOT THERE YET. OH I APOLOGIZE, WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE. OH I APOLOGIZE, LET ME RECOGNIZE COUNCILMEMBER CLAUSER. YES. THANK YOU. HAVE THERE BEEN ANY MORE APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH SINCE OUR PRESENTATION AT THE LAST SPECIAL MEETING? I KNOW THERE WAS ONE IN THE THAT THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS ALREADY GOING THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS. AND WILL THAT SMOKE SHOP BE CONSIDERED AS GRANDFATHERED IN. YES. OKAY.

EVEN THOUGH OKAY. AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION IS IF THIS IS THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO READINGS OKAY. SO WHEN WILL THE SECOND READING BE? I HAVE REQUESTED FROM THE CITY MANAGER THAT WE

[01:00:02]

AND SO THEN THE ORDINANCE WILL GO INTO EFFECT FOUR DAYS AFTER THAT. IS THAT WHAT AM I. SO THE ORDINANCE, THE TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ACTUALLY GOES INTO EFFECT FIVE DAYS AFTER THE NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED. SO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN JULY 31ST. SO THE CITY CURRENTLY WOULD CANNOT ACCEPT THE OR ANY APPLICATIONS FOR SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS. OKAY. AND THEN ONCE LET'S SAY THAT IT IS APPROVED, WHAT ARE THE NEXT STEPS BEYOND THAT. SO ONCE THIS MORATORIUM IS APPROVED, THE MORATORIUM WILL LAST AT LEAST FOR 90 DAYS, WHICH MEANS IT WILL TERMINATE ON OR ABOUT NOVEMBER 9TH, 2025 DURING THAT TIMEFRAME. I KNOW STAFF IS WORKING ON AN ORDINANCE THAT WILL ADDRESS SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS, SO THE PLAN AND THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THAT ORDINANCE ADOPTED BEFORE THE 90 DAY PERIOD. THAT WAY, THE CITIZENS, THE RESIDENTS AND COUNCIL'S CONCERNS AS THEY RELATE TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC ARE BEING ADDRESSED THROUGH A REVISED ORDINANCE. OKAY. AND HAVE YOU HAD ANY INQUIRIES INTO YOUR OFFICE OR CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE FROM THE VAPE SHOP COMMUNITY IN MISSOURI CITY ASKING ABOUT THIS POTENTIAL ORDINANCE OR MORATORIUM? THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE HAS NOT. OKAY. AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. AND COUNCILMEMBER THANK YOU, MAYOR, RELATIVE TO THAT, THAT ORDINANCE THAT YOU SAY THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS GOING TO WORK ON, WHAT IS IT GOING TO ENTAIL? SO RIGHT NOW, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL PROHIBITS SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS FROM COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS IN MISSOURI CITY. SO MUCH LIKE THE SUGARLAND ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS A NEW SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS THAT THAT THAT IS WHAT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL INCLUDES. SO THE PLAN, PER THE ORDINANCE THAT WILL COME BEFORE US, IS TO COMPLETELY ERADICATE THOSE BUSINESSES FROM BEING BROUGHT TO MISSOURI CITY. CORRECT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

SO, MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN, WHAT IS YOUR MOTION? MAYOR? MY MOTION TONIGHT WOULD BE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT IMPOSES A MORATORIUM FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS ON ON SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS AND ALSO ON 25% RETAIL SALES AT OTHER LOCATIONS. OKAY. SO IS THAT YOUR SECOND COUNCILMEMBER? REIMER. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER. BONNIE. YES. ONE FINAL QUESTION. IF IN FACT, YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE ORDINANCE DRAFTED OR WE ARE UNABLE TO VOTE ON THAT ORDINANCE BEFORE THE MORATORIUM LIFTS, WHAT HAPPENS THEN? STATE LAW ALLOWS THE CITY TO EXTEND THE MORATORIUM. THAT MORATORIUM CANNOT BE EXTENDED LONGER THAN A TOTAL OF 180 DAYS. BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AGAIN IN ORDER TO EXTEND IT, AS WELL AS THE NOTICE PROCESS AGAIN TO EXTEND IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES. COUNCILMEMBER RILEY, SORRY. ONE MORE QUESTION. ARE THERE ANY REGULATIONS OR LAWS THAT REQUIRE US TO NOTIFY ANY OF THE VAPE SHOPS THAT WE NO LONGER ALLOW THOSE? SO THIS IS THE JUST THE ORDINANCE FOR THE MORATORIUM. ONCE WE GET TO THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE THAT IMPACTS OR COULD MAKE THOSE VAPE SHOPS AND SMOKE SHOPS NONCONFORMING USES. AT THAT POINT, YES, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO NOTIFY THOSE ESTABLISHMENTS THAT THEIR USES MAY BECOME NONCONFORMING. SO THAT OCCURS THROUGH THE ORDINANCE DRAFTING PROCESS FOR THE ACTUAL REGULATION. AND AGAIN, THIS IS JUST THE MORATORIUM PROVIDING FOR A TEMPORARY PAUSE ON DEVELOPMENT. YES. AND THE ONLY REASON I ASK THAT, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES BUSINESSES, THEY'LL SIGN LEASES WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS NOT AWARE OF. YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT'S A SCARY THOUGHT, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN. SO WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ALSO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE THAT CUSHION TO THOSE BUSINESSES SO THEY'RE NOT LOCKED INTO A PARTICULAR TENANT SITUATION AND THEY CAN'T ACTUALLY OPERATE HERE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MAYOR, MAYOR BROWNE-MARSHALL, CAN WE JUST STATE THAT MOTION ONE MORE TIME? SO WE'RE CLEAR. YES. SO MY MOTION TONIGHT IS TO IMPOSE A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE, AUTHORIZATION AND APPROVAL. WAIT A MINUTE. AM I READING THE RIGHT THING ON SMOKE SHOPS AND VAPE SHOPS WITH A 25%? HOLD IT, WITH 25% ON RETAIL SALES AT OTHER LOCATIONS AS IT RELATES TO SMOKE AND VAPE SHOPS. OKAY, COUNCILMEMBER RILEY,

[01:05:03]

[(a) Consideration and Possible Action - A resolution adopting the Investme...]