[1. CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION TO ACCEPT THE RESIGNATION OF WISE COUNTY WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT CHAIRMAN ROY EATON (SERVED 31 YEARS AND 11 MONTHS) AND APPOINT BRENNAN WILLIAMS TO FILL THE VACANT POSITION WITH A TERM TO EXPIRE APRIL 30, 2025.]

WISE COUNTY WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT CHAIR ROY EATON.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, GOOD EVENING.

AS YOU MAY BE AWARE, MR. EATON SERVED 31 YEARS AND 11 MONTHS ON THE WISE COUNTY WATER SUPPLY BOARD AND HE HAS RECENTLY DECIDED TO STEP AWAY FROM THAT ROLE.

THE BOARD HAS ANNOUNCED THAT BRENDAN WILLIAMS IF THE COUNCIL SO CHOOSES, WILL FILL THAT VACANT POSITION, AND THEN THE BOARD WILL RE-ORGANIZE THEIR OFFICERS.

THAT WOULD BE THE OPTION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

>> VERY GOOD. WE WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> YES, SIR.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED PLEASE.

>> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. THAT PASSES. THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR IF I MAY TAKE JUST A MOMENT TO EXPRESS OUR THANK YOU TO MR. EATON.

I KNOW YOU'RE PLANNING A PROCLAMATION IN HIS HONOR, BUT HE COULDN'T BE WITH US TONIGHT, SO WE'LL DO THAT AT A FUTURE DATE.

>> YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU FROM STAFF.

>> ABSOLUTELY. I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING MR. EATON COME VISIT WITH US.

HE'S SERVED OUR COMMUNITY SO WELL IN MANY WAYS AND IS SUCH AN ADVOCATE OF WATER AND WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE ROY AT OUR NEXT MEETING, HOPEFULLY.

ITEM 2, CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING

[2. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SCHEDULE OF FEES IN ORDINANCE 2024-01-01, BY UPDATING FEES IMPOSED BY THE CITY FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL GARBAGE RATES; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF APRIL 1, 2024. ORDINANCE 2024-03-07]

THE SCHEDULE OF FEES IN ORDINANCE 2024-0101.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL. ONE CHANGE FROM THE LAST TIME YOU SAW THIS ITEM AT ITS FIRST READING, WE'RE STRIKING THE LINE UNDER AIRPORT ACTIVITIES FUEL FLOWAGE FEE AT FIVE CENTS PER GALLON AND THAT WILL COMPLEMENT ITEM THREE WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT IN A MOMENT.

BUT IT IS NOT A PUBLIC-FACING FEE, IT'S A FEE THAT'S ADMINISTRATIVELY DUPLICATED AND YOU'LL SEE IN A MOMENT, AS WE PRESENT THE FBO CONTRACT, IT'S CAPTURED THERE AND OUR ABILITY TO LEVERAGE THAT FEE IS INSIDE THE CONTRACT, NOT THIS FEE SCHEDULE.

>> SO YOU'RE TELLING ME IT'S A FEE FEE?

>> IT'S ADMINISTRATIVELY DUPLICATED, SIR.

THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE, NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE FEE SCHEDULE.

>> THIS IS FOR ACTION, SO WE'LL LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2024-0307.

>> I'M GOING TO SECOND THAT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSED? SAME SIGN. THAT PASSES. THANK YOU.

ITEM 3, CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING

[3. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION REGARDING A FIXED BASED OPERATOR AGREEMENT FOR THE DECATUR MUNICIPAL AIRPORT]

A FIXED-BASED OPERATOR AGREEMENT FOR THE DECATUR MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.

>> SIR MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IT'S TIME TO RENEW OUR FIXED-BASED OPERATOR CONTRACT AND IF YOU KNOW A LONG-TIME OPERATOR FABIO HAVE BEEN A GRANT PARTNER TO THE CITY.

HE HAS HAD A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS AND I THINK AN ADDITIONAL 10-YEAR CONTRACT PRIOR TO THAT.

IN THE SPIRIT OF UPDATING HOW WE MANAGE THE CONTRACTS, I WOULD STRONGLY ADVOCATE IN THIS NEW CONTRACT FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM.

NOT BECAUSE FABIO DOESN'T DO A FANTASTIC JOB, BUT THE LONGER THE TERMS ON THESE CONTRACTS, THE MORE LIKELY WE ARE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GAIN EFFICIENCIES THROUGH REGULAR CHECK-INS WITH THE CONTRACTOR AND JUST AN ABILITY TO HAVE ENHANCED BUSINESS PRACTICES IN THOSE TWO-YEAR TIME FRAMES.

THAT'S AN ANNUAL ITEM.

THIS IS A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC TO THE FACILITY THAT WE OWN AND HE OPERATES FOR US.

IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE LONGER TERMS, LEGALLY, IT DOESN'T CREATE A LARGE ISSUE.

BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT BINDS FUTURE COUNCILS TO

[00:05:02]

A DECISION THAT YOU GUYS WOULD MAKE IN THIS TIME PERIOD, THIS PERIOD WAS NOW.

REALLY I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT AS WRITTEN TONIGHT, I'M REALLY ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY.

MAYBE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT YOUR WILL MAY BE IN THE TERM OF YEARS ON THE FBO CONTRACT.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> I WOULD FEEL THAT THAT'S PROBABLY PRUDENT TO HAVE THAT AT A MORE REGULAR SCHEDULE AS OPPOSED TO A LONG SCHEDULE.

>> WHAT DOES FABIO WANT? HOW MANY YEARS?

>> I THINK FABIO WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH A LITTLE BIT LONGER TERM.

IT IS AN ELEMENT OF BUSINESS FOR HIM, THE GUARANTEE FOR LONG-TERM OPERATION.

WE OFFERED TO NEGOTIATE TO A PERPETUAL TERM, AN EVERGREEN TYPE OF TERM, IF YOU WILL, WHERE HE COULD ENJOY TWO-YEAR TERMS THAT WOULD RENEW AT THE END OF EVERY TERM.

IT WOULD JUST REQUIRE COUNCIL ACTION.

>> YEAH, THAT'S REASONABLE.

>> HAVE YOU LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES WHAT THEY'RE DOING?

>> YES. [INAUDIBLE] AND I DID SOME RESEARCH ON THAT.

IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO SEE TERMS INSIDE THE FIVE-YEAR RANGE.

AGAIN, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.

IT'S JUST THAT THE ONLY ISSUE THAT I WOULD CAUTION US ALL ON IS FUTURE COUNCILS.

EVERY YEAR WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL SEATS TO CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE WILL OF YOU GUYS TO RUN AGAIN OR SOMEONE FROM THE COMMUNITY TO RUN.

I WOULD JUST CAUTION US TO EXTEND THOSE TERMS TOO FAR.

>> YEAH.

>> BUT THE ONLY REASON I BRING IT UP IS THERE COULD BE ISSUES AS FAR AS BUSINESS LOANS, A BANK ISN'T GOING TO LOAN YOU MONEY IF THE CITY CAN COME TO YOU IN TWO YEARS AND SAY YOU'RE DONE, NOW YOU DON'T HAVE A BUSINESS, NOW YOU CAN'T SUPPORT THAT LOAN.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

IF FABIO IS FINE WITH IT, I'M FINE WITH IT.

BUT I WOULD GET WHY HE WOULD WANT A LITTLE BIT LONGER OF A TERM BECAUSE THAT'S TOUGH AS A BUSINESS OWNER TO ONLY HAVE TWO YEARS TO OPERATE YOUR BUSINESS.

YOU GET A NEW COUNCIL THAT DOESN'T LIKE YOU AND THEY WANT TO TERMINATE YOUR CONTRACT.

THAT COULD BE TOUGH.

>> THAT'S FAIR.

>> OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CONTRACTS SIMILAR TO THIS OR IS THIS A UNIQUE CONTRACT?

>> IT'S UNIQUE FROM THE STANCE THAT IT'S A PROCESS THAT HE'S MANAGING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, THE OPERATION OF THE AIRPORT.

IT IS NOT UNIQUE IN THE SPIRIT OF A CONTRACT.

FOR EXAMPLE, TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CONTRACT, A THREE-YEAR TERM ON OUR TECHNOLOGY SERVICES CONTRACT.

I BELIEVE WASTE CONNECTIONS, THREE OR FOUR-YEAR TERM ON WASTE CONNECTIONS, WHICH IS OUR SOLID WASTE, TRASH, AND RECYCLING PROVIDER.

IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO HAVE TERMS THAT ARE SLIGHTLY LONGER, WHICH IS WHY WE WANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION JUST TO GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THE COUNCIL'S DESIRE IS.

I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, MISS HILTON.

>> IT DOES. IF WE'RE LOOKING TO SHORTEN HIS TERM, WOULD WE BE LOOKING AT CREATING A STANDARDIZED TERM FOR ALL VENDORS?

>> IT'S POSSIBLE THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS THAT WE DO LOOK AT STANDARDIZING ALL FUTURE CONTRACTS FOR THIS VERY REASON.

>> YEAH.

>> STANDARDIZATION IS ALWAYS GREAT.

I'M AN ADVOCATE OF THAT, BUT THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE ONE-OFF PROCESS, THIS IS TYPICAL FOR THIS BUSINESS.

IT COULD BE VERY BUSINESS-SPECIFIC IN SOME CASES.

>> THAT CAN ALSO PUT YOU IN A VERY UNCOMFORTABLE SITUATION WHEN YOU'VE SET A PRECEDENT.

>> WELL, SURE. I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE IF YOU HAVE THE CONSISTENCY OF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS CARTE BLANCHE, BUT IT DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA OF ANOTHER BUSINESS, THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD END UP, AND I'M GOING TO FOLLOW THIS PROCESS AS OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT WHAT THE OUTSIDE STANDARD IS FOR OTHER BUSINESSES.

AGAIN, EVERYBODY THERE CAN BE UNIQUENESS, YOU CAN HAVE STANDARDIZATION FOR THE BUSINESSES IN WHICH YOU'RE DOING BUSINESS WITH VERSUS A SET CRITERIA FOR ALL BUSINESSES.

OTHER COMMENTS? BASICALLY, THERE IS SOME LEVEL OF UNIQUENESS FOR INDIVIDUAL BUSINESSES.

WE HAVE NATE'S CONTRACT AS AN EXAMPLE, AS AN EXECUTIVE, WE HAVE A CITY COUNCIL ATTORNEY, AND EACH ONE OF THOSE ARE LOOKED AT HOW WE DO BUSINESS WITH OTHER ATTORNEYS OR MAYBE AS OTHER CITY MANAGERS.

AGAIN, I THINK THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES THAT YOU'RE DOING WORK WITH AS OPPOSED TO SAYING A CONSTANT TIME FRAME.

THAT WOULD JUST BE ONE. AGAIN, I LOVE THE IDEA OF THE CONSISTENCY, BUT I ALSO FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME LEVEL OF

[00:10:02]

CONSISTENCY WITH THE TYPE OF BUSINESS YOU'RE DEALING WITH.

>> WELL, IN 10 YEARS OF ANY TYPE OF CONTRACT SEEMS A LITTLE EXCESSIVE TO ME.

>> SURE.

>> THERE'S A LOT OF VOLATILITY, ESPECIALLY WITH FUEL AND COST OF GOODS SOLD.

YEAH, I WOULD SEE HOW EVERYBODY WOULD WANT TO LENGTHEN THAT TERM A LITTLE BIT.

>> SURE.

CIRCLING BACK, IS FABIO COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING?

>> YEAH. FABIO AND GREG AND I WE'VE ALL BEEN IN COMMUNICATIONS OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS TO GET THE CONTRACT TO WHERE IT IS TODAY.

HE'S LOOKING FOR A LONGER TERM, SO I'M TRYING TO GAUGE A COMFORT LEVEL WITH COUNCIL.

>> I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH A LITTLE BIT LONGER TERM.

I UNDERSTAND 10 YEARS, BUT MAYBE FIVE YEARS.

WE DON'T BUY THE FUEL, FABIO BUYS THE FUEL, HE JUST GETS A CUT.

YOU'RE TALKING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS THAT YOU GOT UP FRONT TO GET THE FUEL THERE AND THEN SELL.

THOSE ARE LOANS THAT YOU GOT TO HAVE SOME EQUITY.

HE DOESN'T OWN THE BUILDING OR ANYTHING, RIGHT?

>> RIGHT.

>> CITY OWNS THE BUILDING. TWO YEARS SEEMS A LITTLE BIT SHORT.

>> TWO YEARS IS VERY FAST, ESPECIALLY IN THE BUSINESS WORLD, IT COMES AND GOES BEFORE YOU KNOW IT.

I'D BE COMFORTABLE SOMETHING A LITTLE LONGER.

I'D BE HAPPY WITH THE FIVE-YEAR MARK.

>> WE'LL GET BACK TO WORK ON THE CONTRACT.

I'M HEARING COUNCIL'S COMFORT LEVEL NOT TO EXCEED AROUND FIVE YEARS, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

THERE'S STILL WORK TO BE DONE ON THE CONTRACT, SO WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU AT YOUR NEXT SESSION.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL?

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> HEARING NONE. SOUNDS GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ALSO YOU STATED THAT YOU DID NOT EXPECT AN ACTION FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, SO WE WILL JUST WAIT FOR THIS TO APPEAR ON A SUBSEQUENT AGENDA AT SOME POINT.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR.

>> WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4,

[4. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPOINT SHAUN DAVIE TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION BOARD TO SERVICE A TWO YEAR TERM.]

CONSIDERING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPOINT SEAN DAVY TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION BOARD TO SERVE FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM.

>> SEAN'S APPLICATION IS FOUND ON PAGE 22 OF YOUR PACKET, AND WAYNE IS HERE WHO HELPS OVERSEE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO WAYNE.

>> WELL, I'LL DEFER TO COUNCIL IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, AND IF NOT, WE'LL JUST LOOK FOR A MOTION.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? THIS IS ANOTHER CONTRACTOR THAT WE'RE BRINGING ON TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION.

WE'RE GOING FOR HAVING DIFFERENT TRADES REPRESENTED ON THAT COMMISSION BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF WORK THAT THEY DO, AND WE'RE ABLE TO PULL FROM THAT EXPERTISE AND THEY KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE TRADES IN THERE.

SEAN'S ONE. WE'VE GOT ANOTHER APPLICATION THAT SHOULD BE COMING IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS FROM ANOTHER CONTRACTOR.

>> I THINK THIS IS A AWESOME COMMITTEE, AND IT'S GOING TO REALLY HELP THE CITY A LOT.

>> IT'S ALREADY SHOWING IMPROVEMENTS AND MAKING BIG DIVIDENDS WITH WHAT WE'VE DONE.

YOU CAN SEE THE ADVANTAGE BUILDING AND WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT.

WE'VE GOT A FEW MORE THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE LINE WITH THAT.

>> AWESOME.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION, IF YOU WOULD ACCEPT ONE.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I WOULD MOVE TO APPOINT SEAN DAVY TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION BOARD TO SERVE A TWO-YEAR TERM.

>> SECOND.

>> WOW.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. I'LL RECOGNIZE THAT.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE, SAME SIGN. THAT PASSES.

CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE

[5. CONSIDER AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE JANUARY 9, 1973 RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET.]

RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE JANUARY 9TH, 1973 RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET, R 2024/03/04.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THOSE INTERESTING ITEMS THAT WE DON'T HAVE VERY OFTEN, SO I WANTED TO BE THE ONE TO PRESENT IT TO YOU TONIGHT.

STAFF DOES A FANTASTIC JOB OF HANDLING ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT FLOW THROUGH THE VARIOUS BOARDS COMMISSIONS, AND THIS IS JUST ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE ARE UNABLE TO REPRODUCE THE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS FROM 1973.

BETWEEN PLANNING AND CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE LEGAL, AND A FEW DIVES INTO THE ARCHIVES, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO COBBLE TOGETHER WHAT IS PROOF THAT THE INTENT WAS HERE FOR THIS RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET.

I JUST WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRAG ON STAFF BECAUSE WE REALLY DO NOT DO THIS VERY OFTEN.

BUT A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THIS ITEM IS THE WAY WE FIX IT.

BACK ON JANUARY 9TH OF 1973, WE WERE ABLE TO FIND THE MINUTES FROM A COUNCIL MEETING WHERE, I BELIEVE IT'S ITEM 3, IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT THE INTENT OF THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME WAS TO RELOCATE CLIFF STREET.

[00:15:03]

I'LL SHOW YOU THE PICTURES THAT COMPLEMENT THAT.

THE ORANGE LINES REPRESENT WHERE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELOCATED FROM OVER TO THE ALLEYWAY TO THE LEFT, AND I REALIZE THAT THAT'S HARD TO READ, YOU SHOULD SEE IT IN PERSON, IT'S A LITTLE HARDER.

THE INTENT REALLY WAS FOR THAT ALLEYWAY THERE ON THE LEFT OF THOSE ORANGE LINES, WHICH WOULD BE ONE BLOCK OVER, TO BECOME CLIFF STREET.

TODAY, IF WE DREW THE ORANGE LINES OVER THAT PLAT FROM 1973, IT WOULD LAND HERE, AND THE GREEN BOX REPRESENTS WHERE CLIFF STREET SHOULD BE IN A CURRENT DAY MAP.

IT'S JUST REALLY NEAT TO SEE THAT HISTORY PLAY OUT AND THINK WHAT THE LEADERS THAT CAME BEFORE US WERE DEALING WITH, WITHOUT THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY AND ALL OF THE STAFF THAT WE HAVE TODAY TO HELP US FIND THESE THINGS.

THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM FOR YOU, IF YOU SO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING JANUARY 9TH, 1973 RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO SUPPORT, I BELIEVE, THE TITLING PROCESS IN A SALE OF A PROPERTY THAT ADJOINS WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CLIFF STREET BACK IN THE '70S.

I'M HAPPY TO FLIP BACK THROUGH ANY OF THOSE PICTURES IF YOU JUST WANT TO SEE THEM AGAIN.

>> WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE 1973, ITEM NUMBER 3.

>> THAT'S ALSO WHY I PUT THIS SLIDE UP HERE.

IF YOU SO APPROVE, IT WOULD BE THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE JANUARY 9TH, 1973, RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET.

YOU'RE APPROVING A RESOLUTION IN TONIGHT'S TIME AND DATE.

>> THEY HAVE THE RESOLUTION IN THEIR PACKET?

>> YES. THE RESOLUTION FOR RECORD IS IN YOUR PACKET?

>> NOW, I WAS CURIOUS, THE SIGNATURES THAT WERE ON THAT DOCUMENT, I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THEM OUT, I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS AN EFFORT TO SEE WHO THOSE PEOPLE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. VERY APPROPRIATE TO SAY THAT, MAYOR.

THIS IS EXHIBIT A, AND IT'S SIGNED BY SECRETARY SAM RENSHAW, AND MAYOR COKE GAGE.

>> AWESOME.

>> I THINK I SAW BOBBY WILSON ON THERE TOO.

>> YEAH. MEMBERS PRESENT, MAYOR COKE GAGE, FLOYD DOYLE, BOBBY WILSON, CHARLES LONG, JOE FOREMAN, DR. BEN MERRITT, AND CHARLES BURTON.

>> WOW. AWESOME.

>> THOSE NAMES PROBABLY SOUND FAMILIAR.

>> VERY FAMILIAR. YES.

>> VERY MUCH WOVEN INTO THE FABRIC OF THE LIFE WE ENJOY TODAY.

>> AWESOME. WELL, THANK YOU FOR GOING BACK TO LOOK AT THAT.

NEAT TO BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THAT AT THIS POINT.

COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS? LOOK FOR A MOTION?

>> MR. MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING A JANUARY 9TH, 1973 RELOCATION OF CLIFF STREET.

>> YOU GET A SECOND RIGHT HERE.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OPPOSE SAME SIGN.

THAT PASSES. THANK YOU.

ITEM 6. HERE'S STAFF REPORT TO CONSIDER TAKE ACTION ON A VARIANCE ON A SIGN ORDINANCE.

[6. V2024-01 HEAR STAFF REPORT, CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON A VARIANCE FROM THE CITY OF DECATUR SIGN ORDINANCE, SECTION 15-50 HISTORICAL OVERLAY WALL SIGNS. SPECIFICALLY, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CUMULATIVE WALL SIGN AREA THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AREA. BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, THE REGULATIONS ALLOW A MAXIMUM SIGN AREA OF 300.8 SQ. FT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 110 N. TRINITY STREET, TEXAS. (VARIANCE APPLICATION 2024-01—TREVOR HIGHFILL, ON BEHALF OF VOLTAGE COFFEE PROJECT)]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

WE DO HAVE A VARIANCE APPLICATION FROM MR. TREVOR HIFEL.

IT'S HIS REQUEST ON BEHALF OF VOLTAGE COFFEE PROJECT FOR HISTORICAL OVERLAY WALL SIGN VARIANCE.

THE CASE IS V2024-01.

IT'S A 466.67 SQUARE FOOT SIGN.

IT WAS DENIED.

IT'S IN EXCESS OF OUR AREA ALLOWED, AND WHAT I CAN APPROVE ADMINISTRATIVELY.

THE AREA THAT WE CALCULATED IS 300.8 SQUARE FEET.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 110 NORTH TRINITY STREET.

WELL, THERE WE GO.

WE JUST HAVE THE TWO SLIDES.

THIS IS SHOWING YOU THE EXISTING SIGN, AND THEN WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.