Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:04]

GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS MAYOR FORD.

THE TIME IS NOW FIVE 30 AND THE STATE.

AND I SAY THAT THE NOTICE OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING WITH DULY POSTED BEFORE I DO A ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL AND STAFF, I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT TO HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE.

WE LOST A FELLOW OFFICER THIS PAST WEEK DUE TO FRIENDLY FIRE, AS WELL AS, UH, THE, TO SEND OUT DIVIS DEEPEST CONDOLENCES TO THE GEORGE FLOYD FAMILY AND TO ALL THE FAMILIES THAT HAVE LOST LOVED ONES DUE TO RACISM OR POLICE BRUTALITY.

SO IF I CAN GET EVERYONE TO MUTE YOUR PHONES AND WE'LL TAKE A FEW SECONDS ASSIGNMENTS.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

WE WILL START WITH THE ROLL CALL.

IF I CAN GET CITY COUNCIL TO SAY TO STATE HERE ARE PRESENT.

WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME.

MAYOR PRO TEM PRESTON PRESENT.

OKAY.

CASTLE MEMBER AT WORKS, COUNCIL MEMBER EDWARDS, COUNCIL MEMBER STERLING PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBER BONEY, PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBER RUELAS PRESENT COUNCIL MEMBER EMORY PRESENT.

THERE WILL NOW BE A ROLL CALL OF CITY STAFF AND MEETING PRESENTERS.

AS I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE HERE OR PRESENT.

OKAY.

INTERIM CITY MANAGER, BILL ATKINSON.

YEAH, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER LANDMARK TAIL.

OKAY.

DID HE SECRETARY MARIA JACKSON PRESENT CITY ATTORNEY PRESENT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS, STACY WALKER AS AN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.

JAMES SAID ANGELA JAMES ST.

ANGELO DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, ELENA PORTIS, PRESENT PURCHASING AND RISK MANAGERS, INQUISITIVE PRESENT SHANNON PLEASANT PRESENT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT I DID NOT CALL THEIR NAME? THANK YOU, MAYOR.

AND WHO IS THAT? CEDRIC.

OKAY.

CEDRIC, WE HAVE YOU.

THANK YOU.

[2. DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION]

WE WILL START WITH AGENDA ITEM TO DISCUSS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ROADWAYS IN THE CITY, INCLUDING ROADWAYS AND MIDDLE CREEK.

THAT SHOULD FOR, WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.

SO WE WILL ALLOW OUR STAFF TO GIVE A PRESENTATION AND THEN WE WILL GO TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

IS JAMES ON THE LINE.

AND CAN I GET EVERYONE TO MUTE YOUR PHONES UNTIL IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK? DOUG? CAN YOU ASSIST US WITH THAT? YES.

THANK YOU.

ARE YOU GOING TO DO THE PRESENTATION? I DON'T THINK, I DON'T KNOW IF JAMES IS ON THE LINE.

HE'S THERE, HE'S THERE, BUT HE'S ON MUTE.

HELLO? WE CAN HEAR YOU.

GO AHEAD.

OKAY.

YEP.

OKAY, GO AHEAD, JAMES.

AM I COMING THROUGH? YOU ARE NOW.

OKAY.

I'M SORRY.

UM, YEAH, APPARENTLY THE PHONE SOMETHING'S GOING ON WITH THE PHONE.

I HAVE TO USE MY COMPUTER MICROPHONE, BUT AS LONG AS EVERYBODY COULD HEAR ME, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UM, ALRIGHT, SO, UH,

[00:05:01]

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO SAY GOOD EVENING.

UM, I'M GOING TO BE PRESENTING FOR THE NEXT FEW MINUTES ON PRIVATE STREETS, UM, PRIVATE AND PUBLIC STREETS IN THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY.

UM, IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

THIS, UH, PRESENTATION IS, UH, GEARED TOWARD THE STRATEGIC GOAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE QUALITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH BUILD-OUT AND IT HAS THREE OBJECTIVES.

IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

THIS IS THE THING I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS, UM, BASICALLY HOW TO DETERMINE WHETHER A STREET IN THE CITY IS PUBLIC OR IF IT'S PRIVATE.

AND, UH, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT A NUMBER OF FACTORS, UM, AND SEE WHERE THE EVIDENCE POINTS TO.

UM, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIME THESE STREETS WERE EITHER DEDICATED OR CONSTRUCTED SOME TIME AGO.

AND I'LL JUST GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES ON WHAT TO LOOK FOR.

THE SECOND OBJECTIVE IS TO DISCUSS CITY SERVICES AND WHICH CAN BE PERFORMED ON PRIVATE STREETS, UM, AND WHICH WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT ON PRIVATE STREETS.

AND THEN FINALLY THE THIRD OBJECTIVE IS, UH, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION.

I WANT TO, UH, ADDRESS THAT CASE SPECIFICALLY AND APPLY, UH, PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE STREET ANALYSIS TO THAT, UM, SPECIFIC CASE.

SO IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

SO THIS IS, UH, THE FIRST PART OF THE PRESENTATION, UM, HOW TO DETERMINE WHETHER A STREET IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

UM, SO THIS IS A MAP, UM, OF PRIVATE STREETS IN THE CITY.

I KNOW IT'S A PRETTY SMALL, SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO READ EXACTLY WHAT THOSE STREETS ARE, BUT I WANTED TO GIVE, UH, THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL SOME IDEA OF HOW MANY STREETS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE AND, UM, WHICH ONES ARE GATED VERSUS WHICH ARE NOT GATED.

UH, THE GREEN ONES ON THE MAP ARE GATED THE ORANGE ONES OR NOT.

UM, BUT HERE'S KIND OF AN IDEA OF WHERE THE PRIVATE STREETS ARE IN THE CITY AND, UM, BASICALLY HOW MANY THERE ARE.

SO IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

SO THE FIRST THING, UM, THAT ONE COULD LOOK AT IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT A STREET IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, IS THE PLAT ITSELF.

NOW, UH, THE SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR ANY GIVEN SUBDIVISION IS, UM, GOES THROUGH A VERY SPECIFIC PROCESS, SET FORTH IN STATE LAW.

UM, IT, IT IS, UH, IT GOES THROUGH A PROCESS THAT ARE, UM, OUR PUBLIC WORKS TEAM, AS WELL AS OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TEAM, UH, PLANNING DIVISION REVIEWS, AND IT'S APPROVED BY OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, AS WELL AS THE CITY COUNCIL.

UM, NOW SOMETIMES YOU'LL HAVE A PRIVATE STREET DESIGNATIONS ON THE PLAT ITSELF.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE PRESENTATION, I'VE ACTUALLY PROVIDED SUCH AN EXAMPLE.

UH, THIS I BELIEVE IS, UH, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE PLATTE FOR QUAIL VALLEY TOWNHOMES.

UM, AND THE PLATTE ACTUALLY, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS JUST A SMALL BIT OF IT, BUT IT DESIGNATED PRIVATE DRIVES, UH, RIGHT THERE ON THE PLAT.

UM, AND IT ACTUALLY SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE RIGHT OF WAY, I'VE CIRCLED WHERE IT SAYS PRIVATE DRIVE, BUT SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE NOTES AS WELL.

SO I PROVIDED SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT.

YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

AND I'VE PROVIDED, UM, TWO EXAMPLES.

ONE IS ONE THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN THE PLATTE NOTES FOR A PRIVATE STREET.

UM, THIS ONE I BELIEVE WAS TAKEN FROM PEBBLE BEACH, THE FIRST ONE, AND IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT THE STREETS ARE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND, UM, BASICALLY MANY OF THE PROPERTY RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ARE NOT DEDICATED FOR USE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

SO THAT'S CLEARLY, UM, A DESIGNATION THAT SUGGESTS THAT THOSE STREETS ARE MEANT TO BE PRIVATE.

I PROVIDED ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF, UM, WHAT YOU MIGHT SEE ON A PLAT OR IN THE PLAT NOTES FOR A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE LANGUAGE MIGHT DIFFER A LITTLE BIT, BUT IN A LOT OF CASES IT MIGHT SAY THAT IT'S DEDICATED TO THE USE OF THE PUBLIC OR DESIGNATED FOR, UM, COMMON PROPERTY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT STREETS, UM, AND, AND DESIGNATES THE,

[00:10:01]

UH, PUBLIC PLACES.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IF IT DOESN'T SAY WHETHER STREET IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ON THE PLAT ITSELF, UH, ONE WAY TO DO IT IS TO LOOK AT THE NOTES.

CAUSE USUALLY THERE IS SOME SORT OF NOTE ABOUT, UM, STREETS AND OTHER RIGHTS OF WAY AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES THAT MIGHT EXIST IN, UH, A SUBDIVISION PLAT.

OKAY.

SO ON THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, I WANTED TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT, UH, EVEN THOUGH A SUBDIVISION PLAT MIGHT STATE OR DEDICATE CERTAIN PROPERTY TO THE PUBLIC, A STATE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS THAT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THOSE PROPERTY RIGHTS, UH, REVERT BACK TO THE CITY OR ARE GRANTED TO THE CITY.

UH, THIS IS THE TEXT OF, UM, CHAPTER TWO OR I'M SORRY, SECTION TWO, 12 OH 11 AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, WHICH IS A CHAPTER GOVERNING THE PLANNING PROCESS.

AND WHAT THAT BASICALLY SAYS IS THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE MIGHT BE A DEDICATION TO THE PUBLIC IN A PLANT OR ON A PLAT, AND, UM, IT'S APPROVED BY THE CITY, JUST THAT FUNCTION, THAT ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION OF THE CITY OF ACCEPTING A PLAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THE CITY HAS ACCEPTED ANY PROPOSED DEDICATION.

UM, AND THEREFORE DOESN'T IMPOSE ANY MAINTENANCE OR IMPROVEMENT, UH, RESPONSIBILITY ON THE CITY.

SO BASICALLY IT'S A KIND OF A TWO PART PROCESS.

NOT ONLY DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE TO DEDICATE, UH, THE USE OF SOME PROPERTY ON A PLAT TO THE PUBLIC, BUT THE CITY HAS TO TAKE SOME ACTION, UM, IN ORDER TO ACTUALLY ACCEPT THAT.

AND THEY CAN DO THAT EITHER BY FORMAL, EITHER BY, UH, A COUNCIL DECISION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR, UM, THEY CAN ALSO TAKE SOME IMPLICIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR A PUBLIC DEDICATION BY ENTRY YOU USE OR IMPROVEMENT.

AND I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT IN A LITTLE WHILE, BUT, UH, YOU, NO, THIS IS JUST TO SERVE, UM, AS AN EXAMPLE, THAT JUST BECAUSE, UH, A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC, THAT'S NOT THE WHOLE STORY.

THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT EITHER BY ACTION OR BY, UM, THE LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL.

SO IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UM, IF THE PLAT ISN'T CLEAR AND SOMETIMES, UM, LIKE I SAID, THE LANGUAGE DIFFERS, OR SOMETIMES IT'S SILENT WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER STREETS ARE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.

YOU COULD ALSO LOOK AT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.

UM, AND BASICALLY I PROVIDED A LITTLE BIT OF THE, WHAT THE STATUTES SAY ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, AT THE TOP THERE, UH, THAT SAYS THEY'RE LIBERALLY CONSTRUED TO GIVE EFFECT TO ITS PURPOSE AND INTENT.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THAT JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT, UM, THAT IS BASICALLY THE, THE INTENT OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS CAN COVER AND HOW YOU WOULD TREAT A SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY.

AND THESE TWO, UM, THESE TWO EXAMPLES I'VE PROVIDED THEY'RE ACTUALLY FROM THE SAME DEED RESTRICTIONS, THEY'RE FROM MEADOW CREEK SECTION FOUR.

AND, UM, THE FIRST ONE SAYS THAT, UH, COMMON PROPERTY THAT IS DESIGNATED AS, UM, A PRIVATE STREET IS IMPROVED, MAINTAINED AND USED AS A PRIVATE STREET FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THAT SUBDIVISION, THE BUILDING LOT OWNERS AND THEIR GUESTS, AND THAT THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS FULL CONTROL AND DISCRETION WITH RESPECT TO THE DETAILS OF IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE.

UM, BASICALLY IN THAT SPECIFIC CASE.

AND I DID TELL YOU, I WOULD TALK ABOUT METAL CREEK CAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME CONCERN OVER THOSE STREETS.

UM, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS HAS DEFINED A COMMON PROPERTY AS IT'S USED HERE AS, UM, BASICALLY ANYTHING THAT'S NOT A BUILDING LOT OR A RESIDENTIAL LOT.

SO ANYTHING THAT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, ACTUAL HOME LOT WITH A STRUCTURE ON IT, UM, WOULD BE CONSIDERED COMMON PROPERTY.

AND THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS CLEARLY SAY THAT THE ASSOCIATION HAS A DISCRETION AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE.

AND THEN LATER ON IN THE DEED RESTRICTION, I THINK THIS IS ON THE SAME PAGE, BUT IT SERVES AS ANOTHER EXAMPLE.

UM, IT SAYS THAT THE ASSOCIATION PERFORMS FUNCTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF KEEPING REPAIR OF COMMON PROPERTY.

NO, I MEAN, IT GOES INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL THERE, BUT, UM, I THINK IF YOU LIBERALLY CONSTRUE THOSE PROVISIONS AS THE LAW DICTATES THAT, UM, YOU WERE TO DO

[00:15:01]

THAT BASICALLY IS A GOOD INDICATOR, THAT THE ASSOCIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, UH, THE MAINTENANCE OF THOSE STREETS, WHICH WOULD SUGGEST THAT THOSE STREETS ARE PRIVATE.

SO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

UM, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE A NOTE ABOUT GATED COMMUNITIES.

THAT IS A GOOD WAY OBVIOUSLY TO TELL THAT IF A STREET IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, UM, IF IT'S BEHIND A GATE, IT'S PROBABLY A PRIVATE STREET, UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE AUTHORITY OF A, UH, A COUNTY, THE, THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS ACTUALLY WEIGHED IN ON, UH, HOW YOU'RE TO TREAT A GATED COMMUNITY.

UM, AND IT SAYS THAT THE COUNTY CAN'T ACCEPT IT, BUT, UM, IT HAS TO MAINTAIN A STREET AFTER IT ACCEPTS IT, BUT, UM, ACCESS TO A PUBLIC ROAD, CAN'T BE RESTRICTED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT, UH, BUT THAT NOW PRO NOW PUBLIC ROAD, UM, BY USE OF A GATE AND SAYS BY MEANS OF A LOCKED GATE.

SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY SAYING IF YOU'VE GOT A GATED SUBDIVISION, EVEN IF A CITY ACCEPTS OWNERSHIP AND RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STREETS IN THAT SUBDIVISION, IT CAN'T BE BLOCKED WITH A GATE AND STILL BE CONSIDERED A PUBLIC ROAD.

SO THAT'S USUALLY A PRETTY GOOD CLUE.

YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

UM, AND FINALLY, UM, ANOTHER CLUE THAT'S OFTEN USED TO, UH, POINT TOWARDS WHETHER OR NOT A STREET IN THE CITY IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE IS, UH, WHAT CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS IS A STREET BUILT UNDER.

AND I HAVE PROVIDED ONE EXAMPLE ON THIS SLIDE.

UH, THE CITY HAS A LOT OF, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS.

A LOT OF THEM ARE CONTAINED IN OUR, OUR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN MANUAL, AND CHAPTER 11 GOVERNS THE, UH, THE ROADWAYS AND THE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS THAT, UH, DEVELOPERS ARE HELD TO.

UM, IF YOU WANT TO, UH, MAINTAIN A PUBLIC STREET, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SAYS AS I PROVIDED HERE IS THAT, UH, IT HAS TO BE A CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION, WHICH I REMOVED BACK IN THE PRESENTATION.

IF YOU COULD ADVANCE ONE.

YEAH, THANK YOU.

UM, START, UH, SERVED BY UNDERGROUND STORM SEWERS.

THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE.

ANOTHER EASY ONE IS, UM, THE, THE SAME CHAPTER ACTUALLY PROHIBITS THE USE OF, OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SPEED HUMPS AS A, UH, A SPEED CONTROL MEASURE DEVICE.

UM, SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING A STREET AND YOU WANT TO EXAMINE ITS CONSTRUCTION TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET, A LOT OF TIMES YOU'LL SEE SEA SPEED BUMPS AND THAT WILL, UM, INDICATE THAT OR SUGGEST THAT THE STREET MIGHT BE PRIVATE.

SO IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OKAY.

SO NOW I'VE, UM, PROVIDED SOME PICTURES OF KIND OF WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE, BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE MUCH USE TO JUST KIND OF LIST SOME OF THOSE PROVISIONS IN THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN MANUAL.

I WANTED TO GIVE SOME VISUAL AIDS THAT I'VE, UH, TAKEN OFF GOOGLE MAPS HERE, BUT, UH, THIS IS A CREEK WAY CIRCLE IN A MEADOW CREEK SECTION FOUR.

AND, UM, OKAY.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU'LL LOOK, I DON'T THINK YOU SEE ANY HERE, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT BE SPEED BUMPS ON THAT STREET THAT INDICATES THAT THEY'RE PRIVATE ROADWAYS, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S NO, UM, CURVES CONSTRUCTED IT, BASICALLY A BUS RIGHT TO THE DRIVEWAY AND THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY LINES.

UM, SO THAT'S A GOOD INDICATOR THAT THOSE ARE, THAT'S A PRIVATE STREET.

YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE.

OKAY.

THIS IS ASHMONT DRIVE.

THIS IS ACTUALLY IN THE MEADOWCREEK SECTION ONE, I BELIEVE.

AND IT LOOKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CONCRETE STREET, YOU CAN SEE CURVES.

UM, SO THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT THERE ARE NO SPEED BUMPS.

THERE ARE NO KIND OF, UM, ADDITIONAL PARKING AREAS OR ANYTHING.

UM, SO THAT WOULD INDICATE THAT THE STREETS ARE BETTER.

THIS IS A PUBLIC STREET, FOR EXAMPLE.

AND IF YOU'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, I'VE GOT TWO MORE EXAMPLES.

THIS IS A PRIVATE STREETS MMM.

IN, IN, UH, ANOTHER PART OF THE CITY, UM, THAT'S NOT ON, ON CARTWRIGHT, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, UH, AN EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THOSE STREETS THAT ARE, THAT'S BLOCKED BY A LOCKED GATE.

AND AS THE ATTORNEY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS SAID, AND I MENTIONED EARLIER, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE GOT A STREET

[00:20:01]

THAT'S BLOCKED OFF WITH A LOCKED GATE, THAT'S USUALLY A PRETTY GOOD INDICATOR THAT THAT'S A PRIVATE STREET.

AND THEN FINALLY THE NEXT EXAMPLE, MMM.

THIS IS ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL STREET IN THE CITY.

THIS IS RIDGEMONT DRIVE, I BELIEVE.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE THE CURB AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION AND, UM, SOME OTHER INDICATORS THAT'LL SUGGEST THAT THIS IS THE PUBLIC STREET.

SO IF YOU'LL, UM, ADVANCED YEAH.

TH TH THIS, YEAH, BASICALLY I'VE TALKED ABOUT KIND OF THE, UH, THE CITY STANDARDS AND THE, THE FILES RECORDED REAL PROPERTY INSTRUMENTS.

YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, JUST TO RECAP REAL QUICK, YOU LOOK AT THE PLAT, YOU LOOK AT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, YOU LOOK AT THE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS.

YOU CAN ALSO SOMETIMES LOOK BACK AT THE, UH, THE CITY'S RECORDS TO SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS TO SAY ABOUT, UM, THEIR INTENSE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY INTEND FOR THE STREETS TO BE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

UM, WHAT THE, THE CITY SAID IN THE PAST REGARDING, UH, PUBLIC VERSUS PRIVATE STREETS.

SO THIS IS, UH, ACTUALLY THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FOR A, UH, A CITY COUNCIL MEETING BACK IN 1982.

AND THIS ACTUALLY SHOWS THAT, UH, AT LEAST FROM THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE'RE PRESENTING TO COUNCIL, THEY BASICALLY, AND THIS IS REGARDING MEADOW CREEK AS WELL.

UH, THE SPECIFICALLY SECTION FOUR, THEY ACTUALLY CAME TO THE CITY AND SAID, YOU KNOW, WE WANT THE CITY TO, UM, TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE STREETS.

UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS JUST AN EXCERPT FROM THE DOCUMENT, BUT THEY BASICALLY SAID WE'VE HAD THESE PRIVATE STREETS, UM, THAT WE WANT THE CITY TO, UH, INITIATE MAINTENANCE OF.

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, JUST FROM THIS EXCERPT, UH, THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE STREETS WEREN'T BUILT TO THE, UH, THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, STANDARDS, AND THEY ACTUALLY VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE STREETS.

THEY ACTUALLY, UH, THEY ACTUALLY VOTED TO KEEP THEM PRIVATELY MAINTAINED AS THERE WERE INTENDED TO BE PRIVATE STREETS INITIALLY.

SO, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO DO SOME DIGGING IN THE CITY'S RECORDS, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT POINT TO, UH, TO THE INTENTION OF THE, THE INITIAL SUBDIVISION CONSTRUCTION.

ALRIGHT.

SO I THINK WE'RE MOVING ON TO OUR SECOND OBJECTIVE HERE AND THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT CITY SERVICES CAN BE CONDUCTED ON PRIVATE STREETS AND HOW, YOU KNOW, UM, SO IF YOU'LL LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UM, I SAID BEFORE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE KIND OF TWO PART TEST ON, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT A STREET'S BEEN GRANTED TO THE PUBLIC IS, YOU KNOW, IF IT SAYS SO IN THE DEED OR IN ANY OTHER RECORDED INSTRUMENT, AND IF THE CITY GOES AHEAD AND ACCEPTS THAT, AND I DID MENTION THAT IF THE CITY MAINTAINS, IMPROVES OR USES A STREET, THEN YOU KNOW, THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED TO HAVE TAKEN OWNERSHIP OF IT.

BUT, UM, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT CONSTITUTES USE FOR THAT.

UM, FOR THAT PURPOSE, UM, YOU HAVE TO ASK IS THE CITY, IF THE CITY PERFORMS ITS NORMAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS ON THAT STREET, IS THAT CONSIDERED USE WELL IN A LOT OF A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ANSWER IS NO.

UM, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE RECORDED INSTRUMENTS IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS, UM, IN CERTAIN PRIVATE, UH, IN CERTAIN SUBDIVISIONS WITH PRIVATE STREETS, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL ACTUALLY DESIGNATE OR, OR GRANT A LIMITED PURPOSE, UM, ENTRY OR USED BY THE CITY TO CONDUCT ITS NORMAL GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS LANGUAGE I'VE TAKEN RIGHT OUT OF A, A SET OF DEED RESTRICTIONS WHERE AT GRANTS EXPLICITLY GRANTS, CITY ENTRY ONTO A PRIVATE STREET FOR POLICE, FIRE PROTECTION, AMBULANCE, AND ALL SIMILAR PERSONS.

UM, SO IT KIND OF GOES BEYOND JUST POLICE, FIRE, AMBULANCE.

I'VE SEEN SOME THAT ACTUALLY PROVIDES FOR SOLID WASTE AS WELL AS THAT'S A CITY SERVICE.

UM, AND AGAIN, THERE'S,

[00:25:01]

THERE'S ACTUALLY SOME ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDANCE AS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS WEIGHED IN ON THE SERVICE ISSUE AS WELL.

UM, AND AGAIN, THIS IS WITH RESPECT TO A COUNTY, BUT, UH, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE HAS ACTUALLY SAID THAT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AREN'T EVEN AUTHORIZED TO MAINTAIN PRIVATE ROADS.

UM, AND THIS WAS WITH RESPECT TO, UM, THE FACT THAT SCHOOL BUSES WERE, UM, RUNNING ROUTES, UH, ON PRIVATE STREETS.

AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH YOU'VE GOT YOUR BUSES COMING THROUGH HERE, SINCE IT'S A PR THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN IT.

WELL, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UM, I WANTED TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT, AS I KNOW THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT'S COME UP, UM, EVERY NOW AND AGAIN, UM, USUALLY HE'LL HAVE, UM, IN THE TRANSPORTATION CODE OR, UH, ANY OTHER STATE CODE OR STATUTE, UM, WHERE YOU MIGHT HAVE A TRAFFIC INFRACTION, UM, OR A TRAFFIC LAW REGARDING TO THE RULES OF THE ROAD.

UM, IT'LL TELL YOU WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THAT INFRACTION CAN BE ENFORCED ON A PRIVATE STREET.

UH, USUALLY I KNOW WITH RESPECT TO A LOT OF THE MORE COMMON INFRACTIONS LIKE SPEEDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THE STATUTE WILL SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT, UH, PART OF THE, ONE OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE, UH, THE TRAFFIC INFRACTION IS THAT IT HAS TO BE ON A PUBLIC STREET OR HIGHWAY.

SO THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HIS OFFICE HAS SAID HERE.

UH, BACK IN 1999, THEY EXPRESSLY CAME OUT WITH AN OPINION REGARDING, UM, UH, CITY POLICE DEPARTMENTS, TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT ON PRIVATE STREETS.

AND IT BASICALLY SAID THEY APPLY ONLY ON PUBLIC ROADWAYS AND NOT ON PRIVATE ROADS OR STREETS, UNLESS THE STATUTE EXPLICITLY SAYS THAT A TRAFFIC LAW CAN BE ENFORCED ON A PRIVATE STREET A MINUTE, EVEN FURTHER WENT ON TO SAY THAT A POLICE OFFICER ACTUALLY DOESN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A CITATION FOR TRAFFIC OFFENSE ON A PRIVATE STREET.

AND IF A CITATION IS ISSUED, IT CAN'T BE PROSECUTED AGAIN, UNLESS IT'S EXPRESSLY SPELLED OUT IN THE, UM, IN THE STATE TRAFFIC CODE.

AND THEN, UM, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE ALSO ISSUED SOME GUIDANCE ON, UM, THE COUNTY.

THIS IS ACTUALLY, THEY WERE ADDRESSING FORT BEND COUNTY HERE.

THEY SAID, UH, JUST BECAUSE A, A PLAT WAS FILED AND APPROVED, UM, THE COUNTY'S NOT ABLE TO ENFORCE SPEED LIMITS ON PRIVATE ROADS.

UM, IN ORDER TO HAVE THAT AUTHORITY, THE COUNTY HAS TO ACCEPT THE ROAD FOR MAINTENANCE AS PART OF THE COUNTY ROAD SYSTEM.

AND IT MIGHT DO THAT, YOU KNOW, AND KIND OF THE, THE WAY THAT I SUGGESTED EITHER BY FORMAL ACCEPTANCE OR IF IT MAINTAINS THE ROAD OR USES IT IN SOME WAY, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO, TO HAVE THAT BE CONSIDERED, UH, AN APPROPRIATION BASICALLY LIKE A I COULD USE, UH, IN THAT RESPECT.

SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UM, OKAY.

I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY TALK ABOUT MEADOW CREEK.

I HAD KIND OF BROUGHT UP THE SITUATION, UM, IN GOING THROUGH SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU MIGHT LOOK AT, UM, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT A CITY STREET IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

LET'S, WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

MMM.

I BASICALLY JUST SUMMED UP THE TYPES OF THINGS THAT THE CITY HAS LOOKED AT WITH REGARD TO THE STREETS THAT THE CITY, UM, MAINTAINS THEIR PRIVATE IN THE MEADOWCREEK SECTION FOUR.

UM, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY FORMAL ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY.

UM, AND EVEN THOUGH, AS I SAID BEFORE, UM, THERE WAS A PUBLIC DEDICATION OF THE STREETS IN THE PLAT.

UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY IS BASICALLY PROTECTED BY STATE LAW, UM, FOR ANY MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT, UNLESS IT ACCEPTS IT.

UM, AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ABLE TO SOME LIMITED RESPECT TO, UH, PERFORM GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES ON THOSE STREETS, YOU KNOW, IT HASN'T USED THE STREETS TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A ACCEPTING A GRANT, UH, ACCEPTING A PUBLIC GRANT OR DEDICATION.

UM, AND AGAIN, WE LOOKED AT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, UH, MY PROVIDED SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT THESE PARTICULAR DEED RESTRICTIONS SAYS.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT KIND OF SPELLS OUT THAT THE ASSOCIATE ASSOCIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRIVATE STREETS AND

[00:30:01]

COMMON PROPERTY.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR SECTION FOUR SPECIFICALLY, IT ALLOWS FOR A STREET ASSESSMENT AS WELL.

UM, AND AS I SAID BEFORE, IT PROVIDES AN EASEMENT OR DIRECTS AN EASEMENT, UH, FOR POLICE, FIRE, AMBULANCE, SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND OTHER SIMILAR SERVICES, OBVIOUSLY THAT EASEMENT WOULD NEED TO BE GRANTED IF THE STREETS WERE PUBLIC CAUSE THEN THE CITY WOULD OWN THEM.

UM, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY WHAT THAT'S SAYING AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS IS THAT WE'RE ALLOWING THE CITY TO PERFORM THESE SERVICES ON THE STREET.

UM, WHEREAS IF THEY WERE, YEAH, AS A PRIVATE, WE MIGHT NOT, THE CITY MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE BE ABLE TO CONDUCT THOSE SERVICES, ABSENT ANY SPECIFIC GRANT THAT WE'RE ALLOWED THAT THE CITY'S ALLOWED ON THERE TO, TO CONDUCT THOSE ACTIVITIES.

UM, AGAIN, WE PROVIDED THE, THERE IS EVIDENCE IN SOME OF OUR, UH, SOME OF THE CITY'S COUNCIL AND, UH, COMMISSION MINUTES THAT, UH, THE STREETS WEREN'T BUILT A STANDARD WHEN THE, TO THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARDS, WHEN THE LAND WAS DEVELOPED.

UM, AND THEN FINALLY, UM, THERE'S AN EXAMPLE IN THE CITY'S RECORDS ABOUT, UH, HOW THAT PARTICULAR ASSOCIATION ASKED THE CITY TO MAINTAIN THOSE STREETS BACK IN THE EIGHTIES AND, UH, COUNCIL IN FATIMA VOTED TO, UM, NOT ACCEPT THOSE STREETS FORMALLY AND CONSIDER THEM PRIVATE STREETS UNDER THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ASSOCIATION.

UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE FACTOR IS THAT THE CITY CITY STAFF LOOKED AT, UM, LIKE I SAID, IT'S NOT, UH, SOMETIMES THERE'S NOT A SINGLE DOCUMENT THAT POINTS TO A CLEAR ANSWER, BUT A LOT OF TIMES WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO IS JUST LOOK AT ALL THE EVIDENCE, YOU KNOW, GO BACK INTO THOSE MINUTES, GO BACK INTO THE, UM, THE PLATS AND IN SOME CASES, THE REPLANTS AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER, UH, RECORDED INSTRUMENTS, AND THAT SHOULD PROVIDE SOME GUIDANCE AS TO HOW THOSE STREETS ARE TREATED.

SO YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, AND THAT'S IT.

SO, UM, I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE, UM, BEFORE THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ARE ABLE TO DO SO.

AND THE SAME THING.

I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION WHEN WE'RE READY, JAMES, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

SO WAS SOME OF THIS STUFF ALREADY SHARED WITH THE MEADOWCREEK RESIDENTS AND INTERESTED PARTIES? YES.

UM, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, THE STAFF HAS MET WITH, UM, INDIVIDUALS FROM THE MEADOWCREEK ASSOCIATION, UM, TO, UH, IN AN EFFORT TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT THE CITY HAS BEEN LOOKING AT, UM, AND MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT, UH, CERTAIN STREETS IN SECTION FOUR ARE PRIVATE.

UM, AND WE'VE ALSO, UM, ADDRESSED OPEN RECORDS REQUESTS THAT, UH, PROVIDE BASICALLY WHAT THE CITY HAS REGARDING, UM, THE PLANNING PROCESS, AS WELL AS THE, ANYTHING SPEAKING TO THE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE NATURE OF THE STREETS AND THAT PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS, BUT I'LL WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC COMPANY.

OKAY.

WELL GO AHEAD AND START WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS.

I HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE SIGNED UP.

UM, MARIA, ARE YOU THERE? YOU SENT ME AN EMAIL THAT MR. FONDO WOULD BE, UH, SOMEWHAT, WELL, SEVERAL, THE INDIVIDUAL WOULD PASS OVER THEIR TIME TO MR. .

UH, DO YOU HAVE A LIST OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS? NO, THEY DIDN'T STATE WHO WAS GOING TO, UM, GIVE THEM THEIR TIME.

SO IF YOU JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH THE NAMES, I CAN KEEP TRACK OF, OF HIS TIME.

HE HAS THE, I HAVE HIM LISTED AS THE LAST PERSON, BUT I CAN KEEP TALLY UP TO TIME.

OKAY.

ALRIGHTY.

UH, WE'LL START WITH DILBERT.

SIMPERS MAYOR.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, MAYOR.

I'D LIKE TO HEAR MY TIME TO MR. FONTENEAU AT THIS TIME.

OKAY.

WILLIE JONES.

[00:35:04]

OH, HI.

UM, MY NAME IS LUCY JONES.

IS THIS A MAYOR? A BOARD? YES.

YES IT IS.

OH YES.

I WANTED TO AS WELL.

OKAY.

DOROTHY JONES? YES.

IT'S DOROTHY JOHN'S THERE? YES.

THIS IS MS. JONES.

YES.

HOW ARE YOU YIELDING YOUR TIME OR ARE YOU SPEAKING? OKAY.

VONDA, VONDA, WASHINGTON.

YES.

I'M YIELDING MY TIME TO MR. FONTENEAU AS WELL.

OKAY.

HENRY, IS IT DAD? DAD DRE? YES.

MAYOR.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.

I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY TIME TO MR. JIM PATINO.

OKAY.

AND THE GALLERY? YEAH.

UH, MAYOR FLORIDA.

I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY TIME TO JIM FONTENEAU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

SO LET'S SEE PRICED.

YES.

IT'S SHUTS THE PRICE.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY TIME TO TIM, BUT NO, PLEASE.

THANK YOU.

JEANNETTE.

CRU CRU DIAL.

IS THAT CORRECT? I, YES, IT WELCOME THERE.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY TIME TO, TO JIM THOUGH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, LAUREN LEE.

YEAH.

I'D LIKE, I'D LIKE TO GIVE MY TIME TO MR. FONTENOT AS WELL.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, DENISE MARTINEZ.

HI.

YES.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MY TIME TO MR. BUTTON AS WELL.

OKAY.

ALICIA LYNCH? YES.

I YIELD MY SPEAKING TIME TO JIM FONTENEAU.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, BETH WATSON.

I YIELD MY TIME TO MR. .

THANK YOU, LATANYA KELLY.

GOOD EVENING.

I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD MY TIME TO MR. AS WELL.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, DON BAILEY.

I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, SPEAK, BUT AFTER, UH, MR. FONTENEAU, SO I CAN MAKE SURE THAT I I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR MYSELF.

OKAY.

UH, SHARON MCFARLAND, UM, MISS MS. TRINA POWERS TRAIN HER POWERS.

YES.

YES.

I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

OKAY.

OKAY.

YOU CAN GO AHEAD.

I WILL.

I WILL.

I'M NOT GOING TO USE UP MY TIME.

I WANT TO SHARE SOME OF MY CONCERNS.

GO AHEAD.

YOU CAN GO AHEAD.

OH, AM I MISSING ON THE LIST? OH, OKAY.

OH, WOW.

OKAY.

UM, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO VOICE MARKINGS, MS. POWERS.

ARE YOU THERE? AND CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, WE LOST YOU FOR A SECOND.

ARE YOU THERE? OH, YES.

MA'AM YEAH, GO AHEAD.

THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH THIS CONCERN FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS AND IT STILL DOESN'T SEEM TO BE RESOLVED AND I STILL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, UH, PERTAINING TO WHETHER THE STREETS ARE, I BELIEVE THEY'RE ACTUALLY PUBLIC.

UM, UH, THE, THE FIRST THING I WANTED TO KNOW IS THE, A DEDICATION DOCUMENT THAT, UM, WE PRESENTED, UH, TO MR. BONY LAST FALL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY.

AND IT DOES SAY THAT THE STREETS ARE DEDICATED.

UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE DEDICATED BACK IN, THIS WAS A RECORDED DOCUMENT BY THE COUNTY.

UM, SO THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION.

AND THEN, UH, NUMBER TWO, IN OUR ACTUAL COVENANT,

[00:40:02]

IT SAYS WHEN I LOOKED AT THE COVENANT, UH, DATED IN JUNE, IT SAYS THAT, UM, IF I COULD PARAPHRASE THAT A PORTION OF THE COMMON PROPERTY DESIGNATED ON SAID RECORDED PLAT IS PRIVATE STREET.

BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE, THE, THE PLAQUE THAT'S RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY, UH, IN MAY OF 1973, IT DOESN'T SAY THAT CREEKWAY CIRCLE IS PRIVATE.

AND, UM, SO FAR AS THE ATTORNEY WAS, UH, IN HIS LETTER THAT HE ADDRESSED TO US AND SOME OF THE THINGS HE SAID TODAY IS THE, THE CITY RECORDS INDICATE THAT THEY HAVE NEVER DONE ANY APPROPRIATIONS ON THE STREET, BUT HOWEVER MUDD HAS DONE, UH, SOME STREET SERVICES AND THEY'VE DONE SOME WORK IN THE GREEN BELT.

SO, UM, OVERALL I JUST WANT TO SPEAK, UM, I, I LIVE ON CREEK WAY CIRCLE.

I'VE OWNED MY HOME FOR 20 YEARS AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BASICALLY BLUE COLLAR WORKERS.

YOU KNOW, WE PAY CITY AND PROPERTY TAXES.

AND THE ONLY SERVICES WE GET FROM THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS IS MISS SKILLS, MOSQUITO SPRING FROM TIME TO TIME.

UM, AND THE ARE NOT MAINTAINED AT THE END OF THE DAY.

YOU KNOW, I RIDE, RIDE MY BIKE ALMOST EVERY DAY AND THEY NEED REPAIR.

AND, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST APPEALED INTO AS A, AS A RESIDENT OF THE CITY TAX PAYER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTS WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE HAVING SOME ASSISTANCE WITH THIS.

YOU KNOW, UM, THE ATTORNEY TALKED ABOUT, UH, GATED COMMUNITIES.

WELL, WE'VE NEVER BEEN GATED THAT OUR STREETS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

SO, UM, EXCUSE ME, FOR JUST A MINUTE, I WAS LOOKING AT SOME OF HIS, I WAS WRITING SOME OF HIS NOTES DOWN THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS.

UM, OKAY.

WELL, I GUESS THAT SHOULD COVER EVERYTHING THAT I WANTED, WANTED TO SAY.

I, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU HEARING ME OUT.

THANK YOU, MS. POWERS, MR. FONTENEAU, ARE YOU THERE? YES, MA'AM.

I AM.

OKAY.

MR. FONDO I HAVE 14 PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP AND PASSED OVER THEIR TIME TO YOU, MARIA, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY.

SO, UM, MR. FONDO, YOU'LL HAVE 42 MINUTES.

GO AHEAD AND I'LL TRY NOT TO USE ALL THAT TIME.

LET ME GO.

IT WOULD BE LEGAL ANALYSIS THAT I BELIEVE JAMES GAVE US AND I'LL PIGGYBACK ON WHAT MS. POWERS MENTIONED RELATIVE TO A PARAGRAPH, NUMBER THREE IN THE PATIO HOME DEED RESTRICTIONS.

AND SHE WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

IT DOES SAY THAT A PORTION OF THE COMMON PROPERTY DESIGNATED ON THE SET RECORDED PLAT IS PRIVATE SCREEN.

SHE'LL BE IMPROVED.

UH, I WOULD, I WOULD, I DON'T KNOW IF MARIA GAVE YOU GUYS THE SLIDES.

SHE MAY HAVE SENT THEM VIA EMAIL, BUT I WOULD TAKE YOU TO A MORE LEGIBLE COPY OF THE SECTION ONE AND FOUR DEDICATION.

DOUG, ARE YOU ABLE TO GET THOSE UP FOR US IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT? I'LL I'LL I BLEW UP PART OF IT SO THAT YOU COULD SEE IT BETTER.

AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT SECTION ONE AND SUCH IN FOUR BORDERS EACH OTHER.

NO, IF YOU GO TO THE ACTUAL DEDICATION DOCUMENT, IT CLEARLY STATES AND I KIND OF GO THROUGH IT.

THAT'S SECTION ONE AND FOUR.

WE'RE DEDICATED TO THE CITY.

THIS HAS BEEN THE QUESTION THAT WE HAVE RAISED FROM, WITH THE CITY SINCE DAY ONE.

NOW I CAN'T GO BACK TO 1982 WHEN MR. JERRY WHITE MADE HIS HEARSAY COMMENTS, NOR CAN I GO BACK TO 1973.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL DEDICATED DOCUMENT THAT IS SIGNED BY THE, THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR OR THE DEVELOPER, AS WELL AS THE BANK WHO WAS FINANCING OR WHO HAD LEAN AUDIT AS WELL AS A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, AS WELL AS THE PLANNING COMMISSIONER AT THAT TIME.

AND IT WAS NOTARIZED, IT WAS NOTARIZED.

SO WHEN

[00:45:01]

PEOPLE TALK ABOUT JAMES, TALK ABOUT INTENT, I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOU GO WITH INTENT VERSUS A LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT CLEARLY STATES, AND I SHALL READ IT.

SO IF YOU DON'T SEE IT CLEARLY STATES, OR ARE YOU STILL THERE? WE ARE STILL HERE.

YES, WE'RE STILL HERE.

IT CLEARLY STATES THAT WE, THE, UH, JAMESBURG AND, UH, UH, WK BERT PRESIDENT AND ASSISTANT SECRETARY, RESPECTFULLY OF CHARLESTON INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF HOUSTON, TEXAS ON OF THE PROPERTY SUB SUBDIVIDED AND ABOVE FOUR, GOING UP THE METAL CREEK SUBDIVISION SECTION ONE AND FOUR, WHICH ARE CLEARLY ON THE DEDICATION DOCUMENT, DO HERE BY MAKE SUBDIVISION OF SET PROPERTY FOR, AND ON BEHALF OF THE, OF THE INVESTMENT CORPORATION, ACCORDING TO THE LINES STREETS, LOTS ALLEYS MARKS, BUILDING LINES AND EASEMENTS, WHICH MR. JAMES TALKED ABOUT, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN SIX DEED RESTRICTIONS WITHIN MEADOWCREEK SUBDIVISION, BY THE WAY, DESIGNATE SAID SUBDIVISION, UH, UH, PROPERTIES.

ONE IS FOR SHOWN AND DESIGNATED THIS.

AS I MENTIONED IN THE BRIGHT METAL LEAGUE, ALL FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS, AND DEDICATE TO PUBLIC USE AS SUCH THE STREETS, ALLEYS PARKS.

AND I MIGHT ADD EASEMENTS SHOWN THERE ON FOR WHATEVER.

AND IT'S APPROVED BY ALL OF THE INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER.

NOW, IF WE GO BACK TO WITNESS TO JAMES TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, AND I THINK ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ASKED THE QUESTION, WHAT DID YOU INVOLVE THE FOLKS FROM MEDICARE? YES, WE DID.

WE MET WITH, UH, MR. SNIPES.

WE MET WITH MR. BONI TWICE.

WE GOT NO RESPONSE CONTRARY TO WHAT MS. POWELL WAS SAID.

WE NEVER GOT A DIRECT RESPONSE FROM EITHER ONE OF THOSE, WHAT WE RECEIVED WAS A CONFIDENTIAL INTERNAL MEMORANDUM FROM THE CITY.

IT WAS MARKED BOLDLY CONFIDENTIAL.

SOMEHOW IT ENDED UP IN OUR, THE MEDITERRANEAN ASSOCIATION MAILBOX.

NO, UNFORTUNATELY WHEN WE RECEIVED THAT, WE REVIEWED IT AND IT WAS MUDDLED WITH ALL SORTS OF MISREPRESENTATIONS.

MOST OF WHICH JANE JUST WENT THROUGH, IT WAS A LOT OF LIKELY PROBABLE PROBABLY, MAYBE ALL THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT.

IT MADE NO MENTION WHATSOEVER OF THE MEETING BETWEEN METAL CREEK MEMBERS WITH MR. SNIPES.

IT MADE NO MENTION WHATSOEVER REGARDING OUR MEETING TWO MEETINGS WITH, UH, COUNCILMAN BONEY.

NOW, KNOWING THE PAST ADMINISTRATIONS RESISTANCE WE BROUGHT, WE WENT THROUGH THE PAINSTAKING EFFORT OF FINDING THAT LEGAL DOCUMENT, WHICH FOR 40 YEARS HAD NEVER BEEN REVEALED TO ANYONE.

IN FACT, IF YOU GO BACK TO MR. WYATT'S COMMENTS IN THE PARENT COUNCIL MEETING BACK IN 1982, THAT DOCUMENT WAS NEVER PRESENT.

IF IT WAS, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO, UH, THE CITY, UH, UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.

WE NEVER RECEIVED THAT LETTER BY THE WAY.

SO MY POINT IS, IS THAT, AND, AND THE SO-CALLED DOCUMENT THAT I JUST MENTIONED THAT WAS CONFIDENTIAL, A CONFIDENTIAL INTERNAL MEMORANDUM THAT SOMEHOW FOUND ITS WAY TO OUR EMAIL.

NEVER MENTIONED ANYTHING, NEVER PROVIDED ANY FORM OF ATTACHMENT WHATSOEVER, RELATIVE TO, UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS MR. JAMES MADE.

NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT DOCUMENT AGAIN, I WOULD ASK THE QUESTION AND I LEAVE THIS QUESTION WITH CITY COUNCIL.

ALRIGHT, WHAT IS IT IN THAT DOCUMENT THAT MADE SECTION ONE DIFFERENT FROM SECTION FOUR, WHEN THE CON, WHEN THE DEVELOPER DEBTED IT DEDICATED IT TO THE CITY.

I THINK JAMES MENTIONED THEY COULDN'T FIND ANY TYPE OF REPLAT.

THEY COULDN'T FIND AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEDICATION.

THEY COULDN'T FIND THE REDEDICATION OF THE PROPERTY.

I ASKED WHAT, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? HOW COULD YOU ADVISE IF SECTION ONE AND SECTION FOUR ARE MENTIONED ON THE SAME DEDICATION DOCUMENT, WHAT WAS THE CITY'S POSITION IN TERMS OF ONLY CATERING TO SECTION ONE AND NOT SECTION FOUR, HE CERTAINLY GAVE YOU SOME WEAK INFORMATION IN TERMS OF HOW HE EXTRAPOLATE OR INTERPRETED INFORMATION REGARDING THE PRIVATE USE OF CERTAIN AREAS.

[00:50:01]

FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE PARKING, MAYBE THAT IS PARKED, MAYBE THAT IS PRIVATE.

MAYBE IT WAS DEDICATED TO THE MEMBERS, BUT IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE STREET.

SO IF YOU GO BACK AND YOU READ THE SECOND PART OF IT, IT SAYS THE ITEM B OF THAT SAME DEED RESTRICTION TO THE RED SAID THAT PORTION OF THE COMMON PROPERTY NOT DESIGNATED ON THE RECORDED PART, THIS PRIVATE SPREE SHALL BE IMPROVED, MAINTAIN AND SOLELY FOR THE BUILDING LOT OWNERS.

AND IT SAYS FOR THEIR GUESTS AND BUYING THESE LICENSES, IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT STREETS.

IT SAYS LANDSCAPE.

IT SAYS TREES.

IT SAYS, FROGS, WE DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS.

IT SAYS PLANNING.

IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT STREETS.

IT TALKS ABOUT EVEN SWIMMING POOLS.

WE DON'T HAVE A SWIMMING POOL, BUT IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT STREETS AND THE PLAQUE IS NOT MARKED PRIVATE.

AND THE PLAQUE INDICATE THAT THE, THE INDICATES THAT THE DEVELOPER ACTUALLY DEDICATED THE STREETS, ALLEYS AND PARKS TO THE CITY.

SO WHAT CAME OUT OF OUR MEETING WHEN ANTHONY SNIPES TK, MR. SCOTT, ELMER, WHO I ASSUME WAS ACTING AS AN ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, THE RESPONSIBILITY TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH DOCUMENTS, LEADING UP TO THE DEDICATION, OR THAT MIGHT HAVE LEGALLY CHANGED THE TRANSACTION.

AND WE AGREED TO FOLLOW BACK UP WITH EACH OTHER, BUT THAT NEVER HAPPENED INSTEAD.

THAT'S WHEN THE CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENT HIT OUR, OUR EMAIL ADDRESS SOMEWHERE, WE FOUND NOTHING.

NOW THERE'S ONE THING THAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT THIS AS WELL IN WHAT MR. JAMES DIDN'T MENTION THAT IN THAT MEMORANDUM, HE SAID THE CITY WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE YET A SINGLE LEGAL DOCUMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

I'LL REFUTE SECTIONS ONE AND FOUR, IN TERMS OF WHAT THE, WHAT, THE WAY WE WOULD DO WHAT THE MEMORANDUM RANDOM DOES REFLECT AS AN INFORMATION DOCUMENT.

THAT'S MISLEADING.

IT'S UNRELIABLE.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY ATTORNEY CONFUSED, BY THE WAY THAT DOCUMENT WAS SENT FROM THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, IT NEVER WAS ADDRESSED TO US.

SO WE NEVER RECEIVED A RESPONSE FROM EITHER SNIPES OR AGAIN, FROM COUNCILMAN BONIN.

WHAT BACK TO THE EXAMPLE, THE CITY ATTORNEY CONFUSINGLY STATES THAT SECTION ONE, ONE AND FOUR, WHICH ARE ON THE PLAT ARE LIKELY ON THE LAND LIKELY TO, BECAUSE HE USED THAT WORD QUITE A BIT, CONSIDERED PRIVATE STREETS.

AND HE GOES ON TO SAY, FURTHERMORE, THERE IS EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT METAL CREEK IS RESPONSIBLE MAINTENANCE.

AND HE JUST TOLD YOU THAT THOUGH, THE MULTIPLE USE OF THE WORD, LIKELY AS IT DID GIVE AWAY, IN MY OPINION, THE ASSERTION IS SELF-DEFEATING ON ITS FACE AND GROSSLY MISLEADING.

THE CITY MANAGER WOULD HAVE ONLY NEEDED TO CHALLENGE THE CITY ATTORNEY AS TO WHY THE CITY APPROVED AND COMPLETED A MAJOR STREET CONSTRUCTIONAL SECTION ONE, IF THE ASSOCIATION WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT.

SO THESE GUYS ARE MISCONCEPTIONS HAVE BEEN THE SOURCE OF DISCONNECT AND CONFUSION.

AS TRINA POWER SAID FOR MANY YEARS, NOBODY KNOWS WHAT TO DO.

THE CITY COUNCIL.

ALSO CITY ATTORNEY GOES ON TO SAY THAT THE DEED WITH SECTION ONE ARE SILENT ON THE ISSUE OF STREET MAINTENANCE.

HE DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT, BUT NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH FOLKS, SECTION 16 OF SECTION ONE DEED RESTRICTION.

AND I'M GOING TO BE STRAIGHT UP WITH YOU.

IT SAYS UNDER THE MAINTENANCE FUND AND HE HAD THE DEED RESTRICTION, IT MAKES IT CLEAR THE MAINTENANCE FUND WILL BE APPLIED AND SO FORTH AS IT MAY BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE PAYMENT FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION OF ST.

PATRICK PARK.

NOW THAT'S IN SECTION ONE, THAT'S SECTION ONE WHERE YOU JUST COMPLETED.

I'M GOING TO GUESS, BUT OVER A HALF, A MILLION DOLLARS OF STREET, NEW STREET CONSTRUCTION, BUT YET THE CITY COUNCIL IS CONFUSING YOU OR MISLEADING YOU BY SAYING THAT THE ASSOCIATION SHOULD HAVE TAKEN CARE OF.

SECTION ONE IS WELL, READ THE DOCUMENT IT'S IN THERE.

THE FIRST THREE PAGES HE SAID IN THAT MEMORANDUM, IT'S SEVEN 70 PAGES, THREE PAGES, OR A BUNCH OF MISLEADING STATEMENTS.

AND THE REMAINING 67 DEALS WOULD BE RESPECT.

IT'S JUST THE RESTRICTION ON ATTACHMENTS, BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN USEFUL FOR THE CITY MANAGER, MR. SNIPES, OR EVEN MR. BONY FOR THAT MATTER TO KNOW THAT THE SAME OR SIMILAR LANGUAGE CAN BE FOUND IN MEADOWCREEK SECTION TWO, WHICH WAS DEDICATED IN THE SAME MANNER IS ONE AND FOUR.

SO THE CITY SECTION THREE, WHERE I LIVE WAS DEDICATED TO THE CITY IN THE SAME MANNER AS SECTION ONE AND FOUR, SECTION FIVE WAS DEDICATED

[00:55:01]

TO THE CITY AND THE SAME MANNER AS SECTION ONE AND FOUR.

AND IT CONTAINS THE SAME LANGUAGE.

IT STARTS OFF BY SAYING THAT THE ASSOCIATION IN SECTION ONE AND SECTION TWO AND SECTION THREE, AND SECTION FIVE WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR STREET MAINTENANCE, REPLACING AND MAINTENANCE.

BUT YET YOU ARE DOING SIR PROVIDING PUBLIC SERVICE TO ALL OF THOSE SECTIONS.

AND AGAIN, SECTION ONE AND SECTION FOUR ON THE SAME DEDICATION DOCUMENT REGARDING THE CITY, ATTORNEY'S REFERENCED TO, UH, AGAIN, SECTION FOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS AND THAT SECTION, WHAT HE CALLS MAINTENANCE OF COMMON PROPERTY AND HIS VAGUE INTERPRETATION OF THE WORD PRIVATE.

THIS DOES NOTHING TO REFUTE THAT DEDICATION DOCUMENT.

OH, WE'VE HEARD THAT FOUR IS HEARSAY AND ANYBODY THAT HAS ANY REASONABLE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW JUDGES WORK IN COURT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LISTEN TO HEARSAY.

YOU'RE GOING TO GO GET, PROVIDE A COURT HEARSAY EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE BASED ON WHAT SOMEONE SAID AND EIGHT IN A COUNCIL MEETING.

AND IT'S NOT EVEN CLEAR IF HE WAS JUST A PARTICIPANT.

THE OTHER THING I WOULD, I WOULD MENTION IS THAT ON THE WEAK AND MISLEADING INTERPRETATION, THAT THE STREETS ARE PRIVATE, BUT MERELY DEDICATED FOR COMMON USE BY THE RESIDENTS OR THE PUBLIC THAT ONLY BOLSTERS OUR ARGUMENT, READ HIS DOCUMENT.

IT'S IN THERE, IT BOLSTERS IT.

HE SAID HE MAKES THE CITY ATTORNEY STATE THAT THE STREETS ARE PRIVATE, BUT NEARLY DEDICATED FOR COMMON USE BY THE RESIDENCE ARE THE PUBLIC.

NOW, ODDLY, THE CITY'S MEMORANDUM STATES THAT THEY'RE STRONG, IT'S EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THEIR POSITION, THAT THE STREETS ARE PRIVATE.

HE REFERENCES LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION TWO 12.011.

BOY, IF I HEAR THAT ONE AGAIN, I'M JUST GOING TO ROLL OVER.

THAT IS THE WEAKEST ARGUMENT IN THE WORLD.

THE MEMORANDUM FOR FURTHER STAYS THAT THE ATTORNEY, WHOEVER DID A DILIGENCE SEARCH OF THE CITY'S RECORD, AND THEY CAN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE WAY OF APPROPRIATION, BUT THAT'S GROSSLY INCORRECT.

THE TRUTH BE TOLD NO RECORD WAS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE APPROPRIATION STARTED AND END IT WITH THE FORMAL DEDICATION EXECUTED BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY OFFICIALS.

WE HAVE AN OFFER AND WE HAVE AN ACCEPTANCE AND ARGUABLY THE CITY COULD PROBABLY PRESENT A SMITH SENSIBLE CASE REGARDING THE USE OF PARKS, BUT WE HAVE NO PARKS.

WE HAVE NO PARKS AT ALL.

BUT WHAT YOU CAN'T ORDER IS THAT THE CITY HAS NOT ENTERED AND THE CITY HAS NOT USED CREEK.

WHEN CIRCLED IS AN EXAMPLE, IT'S ONE OF THE BUSIEST STREETS AND MEDICALLY, I WOULD PUT THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH QUICK RACE CREEKWAY CIRCLE AGAINST WATERFALL OR QUAIL VALLEY, WHERE FOLKS COME OFF OF CARTWRIGHT ROAD, TAKE WELL VALLEY EAST IN THE WATERFALL JUST TO GET THE OLD PORT ROAD OR TO GET THE TEXAS PARKWAY FOR THAT MATTER.

BUT THE SAME THING HAPPENS IN, IN, IN CREEK WASTE CIRCLE.

YOU CAN'T TELL WHERE CREEK CIRCLE BEGINS ON THE SOFTWARE SITE, OR WE'RE LUCKY THE ANS YOU CAN'T TELL WHERE METAL WEIGHT ON THE, ON THE, NOT ON THE, UH, NORTH, ON, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION.

YOU CAN'T TELL WHAT METAL WAY BEGINS AND WHERE A CREEK WAY CIRCLE IN.

IT'S A CIRCLE ALL THROUGHOUT THAT SECTION ONE COMMUNITY.

AND IT MAKES SENSE THAT WHEN THE DEVELOPER DEVELOPED THESE PROPERTIES, ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY, IT MADE SENSE FOR THE DEDICATION TO BE ON ONE PIECE OF PAPER.

AND HE DEDICATED SECTION ONE IN FOUR, AND THE LANGUAGE APPLIES TO BOTH OF THEM.

THERE WERE SO MANY DISCREPANCIES IN AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT AND JAMES IS A MEMORANDUM, THE INTERNAL MEMORY, CAUSE WE NEVER GOT RESPONDENTS.

AGAIN.

FOR EXAMPLE, HE TALKS ABOUT THE TERM OF BEAT RESTRICTIONS IN 10 YEARS, SUCCESSIVE CALLS IN SECTION ONE IS THE RESTRICTION THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEDICATION DOCUMENT.

THE IDENTICAL CLAUSES THAT ARE IN SECTION TWO, THREE, AND FIVE.

WE SEE THAT THERE IS NO RELEVANCE TO THAT.

NOW HE GOES ON, HE SAY THE CITY AS THE CITY'S REFERENCE TO SECTION TWO OH 2.03 OF THE TEXAS PROPERTY CODE.

AGAIN, DON'T BE MISLEADED FOLKS.

ANYONE FAMILIAR WITH TEXAS PROPERTY CODE WOULD NOTE THAT SUBSECTION B OF THAT CODE REFERS SPECIFICALLY TO THE USE OF A PROPERTY AS A FAMILY, HOME, IT EVEN PUT RESTRICTIONS, THE ONLY ASSOCIATION TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T CHANGE THAT RESTRICTION THAT

[01:00:01]

WE CAN'T CHANGE IT.

THAT LOT WAS BUILT FOR THAT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT FOR HOME.

SO THAT'S MISLEADING.

IT'S WELL, I DON'T LIKE TO BRING UP THINGS WHEN PEOPLE ARE SO INEPT IN TERMS OF WHAT'S GOING ON, WHAT I DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT THE CITY ATTORNEY INCORRECTLY REFERS TO ARTICLE NINE, WHICH STATES EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE, SADLY, THIS SECTION PERTAINS TO METACRITIC TOWNHOMES OR WHAT WE CALL WHAT'S.

ALL OF THE PLATTE IS SECTION SIX AND IT'S NO WAY WHATSOEVER RELEVANT TO THE PATIO HOMES.

DEDICATION.

I WOULD REMIND HE TALKED ABOUT EASEMENT BECAUSE I LOOK AT MY NOTES, GRANTING APPEASEMENT TO POLICE AND SAID FIRE PROTECTION AND AMBULANCE SERVICE.

THEY ENDED UP ON THE STREETS AND COMMON AREAS.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT IS IN SIX, THE RESTRICTIONS IN METAL CREEK, THE SAME LANGUAGE.

SO THAT DOG DON'T HUNT IT'S IN THERE.

WE HAVE TO GRANT THAT EASEMENT THAT'S THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER THE, THE, THE, UH, THE DEVELOPER INTENDED FOR THE STREETS TO BE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

BUT THE DEDICATION ITSELF STANDS NOW IN ABOUT JULY 31ST, WE MET WITH MR. BARNEY.

IT HAPPENED THAT YOU WERE IN FROM THE CITY MANAGER AND I QUESTIONED, WHY IS IT, WHY DID WE NOT HEAR FROM MR. SNIPES? A SMALL DELEGATE MET WITH MR. BONI, OUR DISTRICT LEAD COUNSEL, TO BRIEF HIM ON A DEDICATION DOCUMENT.

THAT'S WHEN WE HEARD A LOT OF THE MUDDLE KIND OF MUMBLE JUMBLED AT JAMES ESCAPE, THE CITY COUNTY, I CAN SEE WHY THIS HAS BEEN LINKED RENT FOR 40 PLUS YEARS, 45 YEARS.

AND TODAY YOU'RE ASKING THE PATIO HOME MEMBERS WITH A MEDIUM INCOME OF PROBABLY LESS THAN $50,000 TO START TAKING ON STREET MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT STREET MATRIX, BRINGING THEM UP TO CODE, WHICH IS WHAT JAMES KIND OF ALLUDED TO.

THAT'S NOT RIGHT, OR YOU'RE READY TO TURN YOUR BACK ON, ON A SECTION OF OUR CITY THAT WILL CREATE A HUGE FINANCIAL BURDEN.

LIKE YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT CAN NOT BE MAINTAINED.

NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT ENTRY AND USE.

THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND, THAT'S THE CITY OF MISSOURI CITY HAS SOME AFFILIATION WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT.

THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND, WE CAN ARGUE ABOUT IT ALL DAY, BUT THERE'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT THERE IS AN AFFILIATION WASTE MANAGEMENT DRIVE UP AND DOWN THOSE STREETS.

LIKE YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE WELL, YOU PROBABLY WOULD BECAUSE IT'S PART OF YOUR BUSINESS AND THE KIND OF DAMAGES THAT THEY INFLICT ON THE CALL, LESS THAN UP TO CODE STREETS THAT JAMES TALKED ABOUT.

IT'S SAD.

YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE TRUCKS THAT THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IS NOT USING THE STREETS.

THEY CERTAINLY DIDN'T GET OUR PERMISSION.

YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THEY'RE NOT ENTERING ON THE STREETS.

THEY CERTAINLY DIDN'T GET OUR PERMISSION.

AND IT WAS POWER AS MENTIONED.

WE CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE A GATE UP THERE TO STOP THEM.

THE CITY RECEIVED THE FRANCHISE FEE FROM WASTE MANAGEMENT, NOT DIMENSION, PERHAPS REVENUE COMMISSION.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GET.

I HAVEN'T LOOKED INTO IT.

SHOULDN'T IT.

WOULDN'T IT BE FAIR.

IF PART OF THAT MONEY CAME BACK TO THE STREETS.

THE SO-CALLED SUBSTANDARD STREETS THAT YOU GUYS SAID ON UP THE PARK AND THAT PART OF THE FUNDS BE USED FOR THAT.

THAT'S ALL WE ASK.

WELL, WE'RE ALSO ASKING YOU TO HONOR THE DEDICATION DOCUMENT, UNLESS YOU CAN COME UP WITH ANOTHER DOCUMENT LEGALLY THAT REFUTES IT, NOT A BUNCH OF HEARSAY STUFF, OR MR. JAMES, THIS INTERPRETATION, POOR INTERPRETATION WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.

AND I DON'T EXPECT THEM TO BE AN EXPERT ON DEED RESTRICTIONS.

WE READ THOSE THINGS ALL DAY LONG, BUT THAT'S A FLIMSY EXCUSE TO NEGATE OR ATTEMPT TO REPUDIATE A DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE COUNTY AND SIGNED OUT BY THE CITY.

THE CITY SAID, WE APPROVE THIS PLAT.

THEY COULD HAVE TAKEN A STAMP AND STAMPED IT PRIVATE.

THEY COULD HAVE GONE BACK TO THE COUNTY AND SAID, WE MADE A MISTAKE AND WE'VE GOTTEN THE DEVELOPER SIGNATURE AND THEY COULD HAVE REPLANTED.

IT COULD HAVE AMENDED IT.

EVEN IN 1973, THAT PROCESS EXISTED.

WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

THAT'S AMENDED ALL THE TIME, BUT YOU CAN'T AMEND A LEGAL DOCUMENT ON THE BASIS OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE, NOT EVEN CIRCUMSTANTIAL.

SO I APPRECIATE MR. JAMES TO DEFENSE SOMEONE IN THERE.

I KNOW HE DEFENDED MR. MR. SNIPES, BECAUSE MR. SNIPES

[01:05:01]

NAME WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THAT DOCUMENT WHATSOEVER.

THE MEETING HE HAD, WHAT ALMOST 12 DELEGATES FROM THE PATIO HOMES WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THAT DOCUMENT.

LIKEWISE, THE NAME MR. BONY NEVER CAME UP.

THE MEETING WE HAD WITH MR. BONY NEVER CAME UP.

WHAT KIND OF GAME IS THIS? THANK GOD I WASN'T IN THE 1982 MEETINGS, NO RELEVANT TO TRACKING.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.

BACK IN LATE 2016, WE REQUESTED THE CITY TO COME AND SERVICE A LIGHT POLE.

INSTEAD OF GETTING SOME KIND OF A DOCUMENT LOCAL DOCUMENT FROM THE CITY THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE CITY DOESN'T PROVIDE THE SERVICES.

AGAIN.

AS MR. JAMES ALLUDED, WE GOT AN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION, ATTORNEY, A GENERAL GENERAL OPINION.

AM I LOSING SOMETHING? HERE IS OUR CITY BEING RUN BASED ON OPINIONS.

THE OPINION