Feb 02, 2026 City Council

[JOINT SESSION - 6:30 PM]

[00:00:05]

GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. THIS IS MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2ND OF 2026 AT 6:32 P.M..

WE'RE CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER. WE HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

MR. TOMMY LAMONT, WE HAVE A QUORUM OF THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION.

A MEETING TO ORDER, IF YOU WOULD BROTHER GARY SIMS, WOULD YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? PLEASE STAND FOR THE INVOCATION. FATHER, WE GIVE YOU PRAISE.

WE GIVE YOU GLORY, AND WE GIVE YOU HONOR. WE THANK YOU FOR THIS DAY.

IT'S A DAY THAT YOU HAVE MADE. AND BECAUSE YOU MADE IT, WE'RE GOING TO REJOICE IN THIS DAY.

WE LIFT THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE UP TO YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

WE ASK THAT YOU BLESS THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCILMAN IN JESUS NAME.

FATHER, WE PRAY THAT YOU BLESS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FATHER EVERYTHING THAT THIS CITY PROCEEDS TO DO.

I THANK YOU THAT IT WILL PROSPER AND IT WILL FLOURISH IN JESUS NAME.

I THANK YOU FOR EVERY IDEA, EVERY VISION, FATHER, THAT IT WILL COME TO FULL FRUITION.

IN THE NAME OF JESUS WE PRAY. AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY WHO'S MADE IT OUT TONIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR DAY TO BE HERE.

I DON'T MISS THE TEEN NIGHT ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY THE 23RD AT THE LIBRARY.

AND ALSO THERE'S A CHESS CLUB THAT MEETS ON THE SECOND AND THE FOURTH THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH.

IF YOU LIKE TO PLAY CHESS, A GOOD PLACE TO GO AND GET THAT DONE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OTHER THAN THAT ON THE AGENDA.

CORRECT. OKAY. MOVING TO AGENDA. DOES ANYBODY OUT THERE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA THAT YOU CAME HERE THAT YOU WANT TO SPEAK, BUT IT'S BUT IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. IF IT'S ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL CALL FOR YOU LATER.

ALRIGHT. SEEING THAT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

THE FIRST OPENING OF PUBLIC HEARING. WE'RE GOING TO AT 6:35 P.M., MR. MEDINA.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND MY FAMILY AT HOME WATCHING.

SO THIS IS OUR FIRST OF MANY ITEMS THAT WE HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT.

THIS ONE HERE, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE, IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF AN OR THE CREATION OF AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR CARGO CONTAINERS ON A TEMPORARY BASIS AT 100, FOR 120 CONSECUTIVE DAYS AT A TIME FOR ANY GIVEN CALENDAR YEAR.

THE REASON WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS, WHICH IS YOU'LL SEE THAT AS A COMMON THEME THROUGHOUT OUR ORDINANCES TONIGHT, IS QUITE A BIT OF OUR CODE JUST HASN'T BEEN REVIEWED AND ASSESSED IN QUITE SOME TIME.

AND SO WE WANTED TO MODERNIZE IT AND ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE KIND OF SEEING OUT THERE IN OUR COMMUNITY. ONE OF THOSE BEING IS WE DO HAVE SOME BUSINESSES THAT PARTICULARLY DURING HOLIDAY TRAFFIC AND HOLIDAY SALES AND RETAIL OPERATIONS, THEY JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE TO STORE SOME OF THEIR GOODS AND MATERIAL TO SELL DURING CHRISTMAS AND THE HOLIDAYS. SO WE FIGURED THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO ALLOW SOME OF THESE LARGER BIG BOXES TO COME IN AND GET THAT TEMPORARY STORAGE CONTAINER FOR FOR AS LONG AS THEY NEED TO GET THROUGH THE HOLIDAY SEASON. SO WE'RE STAFF.

WE'RE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

AND I'M PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

COUNCIL. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NOTHING. MAYOR PRCHAL Y'ALL.

DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM? WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:36 P.M.. MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.

BILL MEDINA WILL DO THAT TO AT 6:36 P.M.. GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

THIS ONE IS VERY SIMPLE. WE HAD SOME OUTDATED LANGUAGE IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE THAT REFERENCED SERVANTS QUARTERS.

[00:05:01]

COUNCIL. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MR. LAMONT? DOES THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS? IF NOT, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:37 P.M..

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:37 P.M..

MR. MEDINA. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. THIS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS THE CREATION OF A DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT.

HERE ARE THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT.

TRY TO KEEP IT VERY NARROW AND JUST ONLY FOCUS ON OUR DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.

THIS EXHIBIT, EXHIBIT A, IS A MAP THAT'S BEEN OUTLINED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, MR. KIRK MCDANIEL, WHO'S NOT HERE TONIGHT. BUT THIS FOLLOWS THE EDC'S PLAN FOR DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION AND REDEVELOPMENT.

SO KIND OF WORKING BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS TO IDENTIFY A SCOPE OF AREA.

AND WE FIGURED WE WOULD WANT TO FIRST START BY LOOKING AT WHAT LAND USES ARE ALLOWABLE DOWNTOWN.

OKAY. SO WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IN THIS ORDINANCE HERE WOULD LIMIT LIGHT MANUFACTURING, LAND USES AS WELL AS OUTSIDE STORAGE AND OR MOST IF NOT ALL STORAGE, AS WELL AS AUTO REPAIR AND AUTO USES.

WHILE THESE USES ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED TODAY BY RIGHT, DEPENDING ON THE UNDERLYING BASE ZONING, THIS WOULD REQUIRE THAT THOSE USES IN THE FUTURE OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND ONE.

ONE OTHER THING TO POINT OUT ON THIS IS WHEN WE SEND OUT THESE LETTERS THAT NOTIFY OUR OUR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS OF ZONING CHANGES.

THERE ARE CERTAIN LANGUAGE THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE IN THOSE LETTERS.

IF THE BUSINESS IS EXISTING TODAY LAWFULLY AND THEY'RE OPERATING LAWFULLY, THEY HAVE A CEO AND THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESSES THAT ANY BUSINESS IN THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW. THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE IF THIS IS APPROVED, SO LONG AS THEY DON'T CEASE OPERATING FOR SIX MONTHS.

IF LET'S JUST SAY, USE AUTO REPAIR AS AN EXAMPLE, IF AN AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS WHERE TO SELL OR TRANSFER THAT PROPERTY TO SOMEBODY ELSE, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO OPERATE, THAT NEW PROPERTY OWNER CAN GET A NEW CEO AND GET REINSPECTED.

THE THE LAPSE IN THAT GRANDFATHERED CLAUSE OR LEGAL NONCONFORMING WOULD ONLY OCCUR IF IT'S VACANT FOR SIX MONTHS AND A DAY.

IS THAT RIGHT, VICTORIA? YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. AND ALSO, THERE HAVE BEEN CASES WHERE SAY THERE'S BEEN A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A REFURBISHMENT.

AND IT TAKES A LITTLE LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS.

AND THE CITY CAN GIVE EXTENSIONS IN THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE'S AN INTENT TO CONTINUE THE USE.

THE OTHER THING IS FOR A, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS GRANDFATHERING.

SO EVERYBODY THAT'S USING IT NOW, YOUR USE IS GRANDFATHERED WITH GRANDFATHERED OR A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE, YOU ALSO CAN'T EXPAND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUSINESS.

THAT'S PROBABLY NOT REALLY AN ISSUE FOR MOST BECAUSE THEY'RE PROBABLY LOCKED IN ANYWAY.

BUT JUST MENTION THAT THAT'S THE OTHER STRICTURE.

THANK YOU. SO CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.

AND WE'RE PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. COUNCIL.

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR THOSE BUSINESSES THAT DO OUTDOOR DISPLAY NEW AND USED MATERIALS.

SO HERE IT SAYS NOW THEY WOULD NEED AN SCP, BUT IF THEY CURRENTLY DO THAT TODAY THEY HAVE AN SCP.

THAT IS CORRECT. COUNCIL MEMBER ANY OTHER. BROTHER.

MR. LAMONT PLANS ON HAVING A QUESTION. WE HAVE A MISS LIZ RAMSEY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE? YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. I WON'T NEED THAT. I. GOT.

I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE LETTER BECAUSE THE LETTER JUST CAME TO ME AND SAID, JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. LIZ RAMSEY, 307 NORTH WATSON. AND SO WHEN I GOT THE LETTER, IT TOLD ME THAT I MAY LOSE THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE USING MY LAND FOR ITS CURRENT USE AND THAT AND AND THAT WAS IT. AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS ALL ABOUT.

SO THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAVE NOW IS HOW DOES THAT DIFFER FROM THE PREVIOUS OVERLAY THAT, I MEAN, IS IT IS IT I MEAN, BECAUSE I, I'VE HEARD THAT TERM BEFORE AND IT'S BEEN SEVERAL YEARS.

[00:10:05]

THE OTHER OVERLAY EXCLUDED. YEAH. WE CAN'T. WELL.

OKAY. SO YOU CAN'T ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. GET ANSWERED WHEN IT COMES BACK TO COUNCIL.

OKAY. AND AND BACK TO US, I GUESS. I GUESS THAT'S ALL.

I MEAN, I JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW I ACTUALLY OWN SIX PIECES OF PROPERTY IN THAT, IN THAT OVERLAY.

AND THAT'S WHY IT DIDN'T IT DIDN'T ADDRESS WHICH PROPERTY IT WAS FOR OR, YOU KNOW, IT WAS JUST VERY VAGUE.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. MR. RICKY KIRBY.

RICKY KIRBY SAID, I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ABOUT EIGHT PEOPLE ESPECIALLY ON THIS.

YOU SAID THAT YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IF THEY GO FURTHER.

SAY, SAY THIS MECHANIC SHOPS RENTING OUT PEOPLE MOVES OUT.

WELL, 90% OF THE TIME IN COMMERCIAL, IT TAKES MORE THAN SIX MONTHS TO GET EVERYTHING BACK AND GET AT LEAST BACK OUT, NOT ONLY LEGALLY, BUT TO DO IT RIGHT. YOU SAID YOU'D HAVE TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SO WHY DID WHY DID THEY SIT SIX MONTHS? THAT'S THE QUESTION. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE TYING THEIR HANDS DOWN.

THAT THING HAS BEEN. SOME OF THESE BUILDINGS DOWN THERE HAS BEEN THAT WAY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME.

NOW I KNOW WHAT THE PURPOSE IS EVERYBODY'S TRYING TO DO. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUSH THESE PEOPLE OUT NOW, THAT'S BEEN HERE FOREVER.

THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BECAUSE THEY MAY NOT MEET THAT OVERLAY. AND THEN IF THEY COME WITH THE OVERLAY, WHAT IF Y'ALL DON'T ISSUE THAT SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO THEM BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE ONE THING ABOUT IT.

IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN SOME PROBLEMS THAT'S ALREADY ANNOUNCED THAT SOME OF US ALREADY WENT THROUGH.

IT'LL GO BEFORE THE COUNCIL IF YOU'LL BE PATIENT.

WE'LL GET THOSE ANSWERED. PARDON? WE'LL GET THAT ANSWERED.

OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. CAN WE ANSWER THAT NOW OR. OR. WHEN YOU CLOSE THE PUBLIC.

OKAY. NUMBER SEVEN, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT SEVEN 6:45 P.M., MR. HERNANDEZ. YEAH. SO THE PREVIOUS OVERLAY WAS MUCH BROADER.

I MEAN, IT WENT ALL THE WAY DOWN OFF OF THE STREET.

YEAH. AND BUT IT WAS. WE'RE TRYING TO JUST FOCUS ON THE CORE DOWNTOWN AREA.

RIGHT? AS FAR AS THE QUESTIONS THIS MONTH, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S SET BY ORDINANCE, AND IT'S NOT THIS ORDINANCE.

IT'S AN ORDINANCE THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS THAT GOVERNS NONCONFORMING USES OR GRANDFATHERED USES.

AND IT'S SIX MONTHS. WHAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO IS IF YOU HAVE A HAVE A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP SO THAT YOU KNOW THERE'S POTENTIALLY GOING TO BE A CHANGE IN USE OR WHATEVER THAT YOU THINK WILL TAKE LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS, THAT YOU BE IN COMMUNICATION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH MR. MEDINA, WITH THE CITY STAFF, AND LET THEM KNOW THAT, BECAUSE ONCE WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS AN INTENT TO CONTINUE THE USE, THEN EVEN IF IT TAKES LONGER THAN SIX MONTHS, THE CITY'S WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT USE GETS TO CONTINUE.

THANK YOU. MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 6:46 P.M..

MR. MEDINA. THANK YOU AGAIN, MAYOR. SO THIS ITEM HERE, NUMBER EIGHT, THIS IS A AMENDMENT TO OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH CREATES AND AMENDS NEW DEFINITIONS OR MEN'S EXISTING DEFINITIONS, IN ADDITION TO CREATING NEW ONES. SO YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE REGARDING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.

WE'VE CLEANED THAT UP. WE CREATED A NEW DEFINITION FOR GROCERY STORE WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET AND ON SCREEN NOW.

WE'VE ALSO CLARIFIED A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN ACTUAL PARKING SPACE.

WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THE SIZE OF THE PARKING SPACE IN ANY WAY.

IT'S SIMPLY JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A CLEAR DEFINITION OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT IT IS,

[00:15:03]

AN APPROVED SURFACE DRIVEWAY BEFORE IT HAD A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE ON THERE.

SO WE WERE JUST MAKING SURE THAT APPROVED LANGUAGE OR APPROVED SURFACE IS CONSISTENT LANGUAGE WITH WHAT WE SEE ELSEWHERE IN OUR ORDINANCE.

KIND OF CLEAN UP SOME CONFUSION. YOU SEE THAT DEFINITION ABOUT GUEST QUARTERS, AND WE ALSO CREATE A DEFINITION FOR A STANDARD STORY.

THIS WAS VERY VAGUE IN OUR ORDINANCE BEFORE, AND WE HAD TO KIND OF JUST RELY ON BEST PRACTICES IN THE INDUSTRY WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING BUILDING PLANS AND INSPECTING. AND SO THIS CREATES A PRETTY GENEROUS STANDARD THAT MOST COMMUNITIES USE FOR A STANDARD STORY.

PRESIDENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. COUNCIL. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MR. LAMONT? DOES ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA? ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:48 P.M..

MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE, PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:48 P.M., MR. MEDINA. THANK YOU SIR. AGENDA ITEM NINE. SO THIS IS ANOTHER ZONING ORDINANCE WHICH DOES ADOPT NEW DEFINITIONS, AS WELL AS SLOTTING THOSE DEFINITIONS IN AN APPROPRIATE PLACE WITHIN OUR ZONING CODE AND WHERE THOSE USES WOULD BE ALLOWED IN OUR ZONING DISTRICTS.

THIS FIRST ONE IS A HEALTH AND FITNESS STUDIO IS BASICALLY JUST DESCRIBES GYMNASIUMS, WEIGHT ROOM, SWIMMING POOLS, JUST YOUR WHAT YOU SEE AS A NORMAL GYM IN THE CITY.

AGAIN, WHEN WE'RE WORKING THROUGH OUR CODES, WE REALIZE THAT IT WASN'T VERY CLEAR AS TO WHERE THESE COULD GO OR HOW THEY WERE DEFINED.

SO VICTORIA HELPED US DRAFT AN ORDINANCE THAT PROTECTED THE EXISTING BUSINESSES THAT WE HAVE THAT WOULD THAT WOULD FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY.

THEY'D BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN OUR LOCAL RETAIL ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS WHERE THEY ARE CURRENTLY LOCATED. THE OTHER ONE IS A HEALTH AND SPORTING FACILITY, WHICH MEANS AN AN INDOOR AND OR OUTDOOR PRIVATE FACILITY OPERATED TO PROMOTE COMPETITIVE SPORTING ACTIVITIES WHICH MAY INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED TO, EXERCISE TRAINING, UTILIZATION AND GAME COURTS. GAME FIELDS, RUNNING, JOGGING TRACKS. WE HAVE A MEMBER OF OUR COMMUNITY WHO WANTS TO CREATE ONE OF THESE SPORTING FACILITIES, BUT IT WASN'T CLEAR IN OUR ORDINANCE HOW THEY WOULD BE DEFINED OR WHERE THEY COULD GO.

SO I WORKED WITH THIS INDIVIDUAL TO COME UP WITH A DEFINITION THAT WORKS FOR HIM AS, AS WELL AS THE CITIES THAT WE CAN KIND OF PUT PEN TO PAPER AND CREATE AN ORDINANCE AND DEFINITION THAT WORKS. WE ALSO WANTED TO CREATE A NEW DEFINITION FOR VARIETY STORE AND CLARIFY VENDING AND KIOSKS, ATMS AND WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE AND WORK.

THOSE CAN GO AS WELL. SO IN YOUR ORDINANCE HERE, THIS NEXT SLIDE WILL BE HELPFUL.

SO YOUR YOUR HEALTH AND FITNESS STUDIO THOSE WILL BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITHIN THE LOCAL RETAIL DISTRICT.

HOWEVER HEALTH AND SPORTING FACILITIES WILL BE ALLOWED IN THE.

I'M SORRY. OR IS IT MR. THAT HEALTH AND SPORTING FACILITIES, THESE LARGER SCALE GAME COURTS AND SPORTING FACILITIES, THOSE WILL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.

SAME WITH VARIETY STORES AND YOUR VENDING KIOSKS AND ATMS AS YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN NOW.

SO I'M PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST. COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? MR. LAMONT? DOES ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:51 P.M.. NUMBER TEN.

THE TIME IS 6:51 P.M.. THE CITY COUNCIL RECESSED FROM OPEN MEETING AND TURN IN.

TURN IT OVER TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON ANY OF THE FIVE ITEMS? ANY OF THE FIVE ORDINANCES DISCUSSED FROM US FOR PLANNING? ZONING. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I'M ASKING. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

THIS IS ON PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN Y'ALL. IT'S.

IT'S ORDINANCE FIVE. I GUESS I'VE GOT A LITTLE QUESTIONS ON.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM RIGHT NOW.

YEAH. CONTAINERS. YOU KNOW, YOU SAID SIX MONTHS.

[00:20:03]

THAT'S RIGHT. I'M NOT HERE. OKAY. I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR A ITEM NUMBER FIVE, ORDINANCE FIVE. I RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE.

I GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE. NEED A SECOND? I SECOND ALL IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? OKAY, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SIX.

I MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SIX. GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SIX.

I NEED A SECOND. GOT A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED? NONE. LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. I NEED A SECOND.

SECOND. WE GOT A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? ALL OPPOSED? NO. SORRY. OH, SORRY. SORRY. YOU'RE IN FAVOR? YES. OKAY. SORRY. WHICH ONE WAS THAT? SEVEN. THAT WAS SEVEN.

OKAY. LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. I NEED A SECOND.

I SECOND. GOT A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? NO. OPPOSED? NEED A MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER NINE. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

ITEM NINE. GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NINE.

I NEED A SECOND. SECOND. GOT A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? I JUST ADJOURN. SORRY. THANK YOU. AT THIS POINT, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ALSO GIVES PERMISSION FOR THE FOR BILL MEDINA TO PROVIDE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL.

YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY.

OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 12. WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13. RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL AT 6:55 P.M..

INTO THE OPEN MEETING ACT. AGENDA NUMBER 14. MR. BILL MEDINA WILL PRESENT ITEMS 33 THROUGH 37.

NO PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED RIGHT NOW.

VICTORIA, WOULD YOU LIKE FOR ME TO GIVE THE REPORT? DO I NEED TO GIVE AN ADDITIONAL REPORT ON THE ACTIONS OF THE PNC COMMISSION? OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR. SO JUST TO GIVE AN OFFICIAL REPORT BY THE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF ITEMS NUMBER FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE.

SORRY, MR. MEDINA, TO CONFIRM, THAT WAS THE FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU. DO WE NEED A MOTION ON THIS? OKAY, WE MOVE ON. ITEM 33 THROUGH 37 IS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT FOR CONSIDERATION.

[Consent Agenda]

[00:25:05]

I NEED A MOTION MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. LESS. ITEM NUMBER 35. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 35 THAT HAS BEEN PULLED.

ALL IN FAVOR? NONE OPPOSED. RICHARD HOWARD.

MAYOR, I ASK THAT 35 PULL BECAUSE IT REQUIRES A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE TO PASS.

[35. Consider an Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, as amended, at Title II: “Buildings; Development; Zoning”, Chapter 25 “Zoning”, Article 25.02, “Zoning Ordinance” by adding a new Division 17 “Overlay Districts” and a new section 25.02.391 “Downtown Overlay District” and by amending section 25.02.631 “Uses by Ordinance”; and providing for penalty of fine not to exceed the sum of two thousand ($2,000.00).]

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 35. NEEDS A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE.

SO WE'LL GO AROUND THE ROOM. THERE WAS A QUESTION BY A GENTLEMAN ABOUT.

NEVER MIND. I VOTE. YES.

OH, YES. NUMBER ITEM NUMBER 38. THE TIME IS 658. AND WE'LL CONVENE INTO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

4142.

TEST. ALRIGHT. TIME IS 7:22 P.M.. THERE'S NO ACTION TAKEN AS A RESULT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I'M GOING TO ASK MAYOR PRO TEM MR. MCGILL TO TAKE OVER FOR AGENDA ITEM 39.

[Public Hearing]

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM APPROXIMATELY 2.895 ACRES.

TRACT OF REAL PROPERTY SITUATED OUT OF THE JOHN D MERCHANT SURVEY.

ABSTRACT NUMBER 850, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, BEING MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 600 WATER STREET FROM MANUFACTURING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH LOCAL RETAIL BASED ZONING ALLOWING FOR LIMITED DID USE TO INCLUDE EVENT CENTERS.

PD LR EVENT CENTER PD 012060. APPROXIMATELY APPROVING A SITE CONCEPT PLAN AND PROVIDING A PENALTY. A FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF $2,000.

WE HAVE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO.

TIME IS 7:23 P.M.. WE OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.

GOOD EVENING. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 39. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR AN EVENT CENTER AT 600 WATER STREET.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE. IT'S AT THE INTERSECTION.

THIS IS THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WATER STREET AND US 175.

AND HERE IS THE ZONING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

THIS IS KIND OF A LITTLE BIT ZOOMED OUT, BUT IT'S A LIGHT MANUFACTURING.

THAT'S THAT PURPLE SQUARE THERE. TO THE EAST YOU HAVE R5 OR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SAME TO THE SOUTH AS WELL AS TO THE SOUTHWEST.

HERE IS AN ELEVATION. THIS IS JUST A CONCEPT PLAN OF THE PROPOSED EVENT CENTER, AND I'LL GET INTO SOME MORE OF THE SPECS HERE IN A SECOND.

SO THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 2.8 ACRES IN SIZE.

THE PROPOSED EVENT CENTER WILL BE 14,200FT², PLUS OR MINUS, LOCATED ALONG WATER STREET AND 175.

IN THE PAST, I KNOW PARKING HAS BEEN AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE A CONCERN TO MAKE SURE THAT ANY KIND OF EVENT SPACES RETAIL SPACES WILL HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING SPACES. AND HERE WE HAVE A PROPOSED 175 SPACES ARE BEING PROVIDED.

[00:30:07]

THOSE ARE ALL IN YOUR PACKET, AND BASED ON THE NUMBER OF LETTERS WRITTEN OPPOSITION THAT WE DID RECEIVE, THAT DOES TRIGGER A SUPERMAJORITY TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU. BILL. YES, SIR. IS THIS A STANDALONE BUILDING? SO THIS BUILDING HERE. GOOD QUESTION. SORRY I MISSED A SLIDE.

COUNCIL MEMBER. SO THIS ITEM HERE, YOU CAN SEE THIS.

IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE, BUT IF YOU LOOK ON YOUR SCREEN ON THE TOP RIGHT, THAT BIG RECTANGLE, THAT'S THE PROPOSED EVENT CENTER. AND YOU'LL HAVE PARKING IN THE FRONT AND BACKING UP TO WATER STREET IS A MULTI-TENANT BUILDING WITH ABOUT SIX UNITS, APPROXIMATELY SIX UNITS PLUS OR MINUS DEPENDING ON THE FINISH OUT.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING SOME RETAIL ON AT THAT LOCATION AS WELL.

BUT I'M ASKING YOU, IS THE EVENTS IN OR BY ITSELF SEPARATED FROM THE THE OTHER BUILDING OR IS IT TOGETHER? THEY'RE SEPARATED. THEY'RE ON THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT THEY ARE SEPARATE STRUCTURES. BECAUSE I KNOW WE REQUIRE THE EVENT CENTER TO BE SEPARATE BY ITSELF, CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

AND IN THIS CASE IT IS SEPARATED. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, PNC DENIED THIS CHANGE.

CORRECT? YES, SIR. THE FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS ITEM.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE HAVE ANY INPUT? SEEING NONE WE CLOSE THAT? IT'S 727.

CALL FOR A VOTE. I'M SORRY. ANY DISCUSSION BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS? NO DISCUSSION. OKAY, I.

NEED A MOTION.

AND I'LL JUST REMIND YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE FOR YOUR OWN MOTION, BUT A MOTION NEEDS TO BE STATED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.

WHAT WE NEED AT LEAST A MOTION TO. I, FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

I MOVE WE APPROVE ITEM.

SEEING. NO SECOND THIS MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND.

THIS MEANS THAT THIS MOTION FAILED. THIS TIME THE MAYOR CAN COME BACK IN.

40. NO. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. GILL. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 41ST OPEN PUBLIC HEARING, MR. MEDINA. 629 729. I'M SORRY. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THAT WE HAD TWO RECUSALS COUNCIL MEMBER GRIMES AND COUNCIL MEMBER EPPS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR. WELCOME BACK. ITEM NUMBER 40 HERE. THIS IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD, IN ITS ENTIRETY, REPEAL TWO EXISTING ORDINANCES, THAT IS 11, 20, 22 AND 33 2023. IT WOULD REPEAL A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT 1803 1815 SINGLE ROAD, 620 NO NAME AND 1908 KANE STREET AS A FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCES THAT WOULD REPEAL ORDINANCES 11,

[00:35:04]

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. MY NAME IS EDWARD RASMUSSEN.

I LIVE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD IN SEAGOVILLE.

I'M A GOOD EVENING. FIRST OF ALL, TO MAYOR, CITY MANAGER, CITY COUNCIL, COMMISSIONERS AND OUR GREAT TURNOUT THAT WE'VE GOT TONIGHT.

I WISH TO START BY PUBLICLY CORRECTING A STATEMENT MADE BY MY WIFE AND I IN A PREVIOUS CITY HALL.

IN A LETTER TO COMMUNITY, WE HAD STATED THAT SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS DOES NOT ALLOW FOR APARTMENTS.

WE BASE THAT STATEMENT ON AN EMAIL THAT PATRICIA RECEIVED FROM AN EMPLOYEE WITH THE CITY OF SOUTH LAKE.

WE HAVE SINCE CONFIRMED THAT SOUTH LAKE DOES HAVE APARTMENTS, SO WE APOLOGIZE FOR THAT ERROR.

THE POINT REMAINS THAT CITIES SHOULD LISTEN TO RESIDENTS AND PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY INTERESTS, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE COUNCIL TO DO.

I REQUEST THAT THIS COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON ORDINANCES 27, 20, 23, 26, 2023, 11, 2022 AND 33 2023 UNTIL FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 211 IS DOCUMENTED AND CONFIRMED.

THIS IS BASED ON DOCUMENTED ALLEGED PROCEDURAL FAILURES, ADMITTED CONDUCT, AND LEGAL CONCERNS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS ZONING AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAWS. TO DATE.

I OPPOSE THE REPEAL OF THESE FOUR ORDERS BASED UPON INFORMATION DISCOVERED DURING AND AFTER THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2025. ALSO, I REQUEST THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PLACE AN ITEM ON ITS NEXT POSTED AGENDA AGENDA TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE TERMINATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT OF BILL MEDINA AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING THE TERMINATION OF ALL ENGAGEMENT CONTRACTS BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE AND THE LAW FIRM OF NICHOLLS, JACKSON, NICHOLLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGER AND SMITH LLP AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESSES OR ENTITIES.

ALSO VICTORIA W THOMAS, CHRISTOPHER METCALF AND DAVID BERMAN.

I ALLEGE THE CITY HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THE TEXAS ZONING LAW PROCEDURES TO DATE RELATING TO THESE FOUR ORDINANCES.

SOME OF THE ALLEGED FAILURES BY THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE THAT CAUSED THE FOUR ORDINANCES REPEAL ACTIONS TO BE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT ARE NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING.

ON NOVEMBER 1ST, 2023, A DOCUMENTED MEETING TOOK PLACE AT THE CITY'S OFFICE IN ATTENDANCE, WHERE MY WIFE PATRICIA AND I, AS WELL AS FORMER CITY MANAGER PAT STALLINGS, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER CINDY BROWN, CITY SECRETARY SARAH EGAN, BILL MEDINA AND HIS ASSISTANT CASEY CITY ATTORNEY VICTORIA THOMAS WITH THE NICHOLLS JACKSON LAW FIRM. DURING THAT MEETING, IT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IN 2023, A REQUIRED PROPOSED ZONING NOTICE SIGN PLACED ON SINGLE VILLE ROAD BY BILL MEDINA WAS NOT VISIBLE DUE TO OVERGROWN WEEDS AND GRASS, AND NO ZONING SIGN HAD BEEN PLACED ON KANE STREET.

MR. MEDINA ADMITTED THAT HE PERSONALLY PLACED THE SIGN ON SEAGOVILLE ROAD, AND THAT HE DID NOT PLACE A SIGN ON KANE STREET.

THESE FACTS ARE ADMISSION PRESERVED IN AN AUDIO RECORDING TRANSCRIPT, PHOTOS, OPPOSITION TO ZONING PETITION AND AFFIDAVIT, WHICH ARE PROVIDED TO BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.

BILL MEDINA AND VICTORIA THOMAS FAILED TO CORRECT KNOWN VIOLATIONS AFTER THESE ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED.

THE REQUIRED SIGN ON KANE STREET WAS NEVER PLACED.

THE OVERGROWN GRASS OBSTRUCTING THE SIGN ON SEAGOVILLE ROAD WAS NEVER CUT DURING THE APPROPRIATE TIME PERIOD.

DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE SIGN.

NOTICES WERE NOT GIVEN, AND THE SUPERMAJORITY VOTE THAT WAS REQUIRED DUE TO THE OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING WAS NOT BROUGHT UP AT ALL.

[00:40:08]

UNDER TEXAS ZONING LAW, NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ARE MANDATORY.

WHEN NOTICE IS DEFECTIVE, THE PROPER RESPONSE IS TO PAUSE OR RESET THE PROCESS, NOT PROCEED.

THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS PRESENT DURING THE NOVEMBER 1ST, 2023 MEETING AND WAS MADE A MAYOR OF MADE AWARE OF OBSTRUCTED SIGNAGE, MISSING SIGNAGE, PROCEDURAL DEFECTS, LACK OF NOTICE, AND OFFICIAL SUBMISSION OF THE ZONING OPPOSITION.

THE APPROPRIATE ACTIONS SHOULD HAVE BEEN TO ALTER DELAY THE ZONING PROCESS SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 6TH, 2023, UNTIL COMPLIANCE WAS ACHIEVED. THAT DID NOT OCCUR.

THE CITY ATTORNEY REPORTEDLY GAVE LEGAL ADVICE TO COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN JOHN EPPS COULD VOTE ON THE ZONING MATTER.

TEXAS ZONING LAWS ARE NOT LIMITED TO OWNERSHIP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

A ZONING CHANGE THAT INCREASES THE VALUE BY $2,500 ON AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNED BY A CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PERSON RAISES A SERIOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST CONCERNS.

JOHN EPPS IS MARRIED TO THE ADJOINING LANDOWNER'S DAUGHTER AND CAN INHERIT FROM THIS ARRANGEMENT.

FAILING TO PLACE THESE ITEMS ON THE NEXT AGENDA RISKS THE APPEARANCE THAT THE CONCERNS ARE BEING IGNORED RATHER THAN ADDRESSED.

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THESE CONCERNS IS TO SUBMIT IT TO YOU TONIGHT.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS COMMISSION TO PLACE THIS MATTER ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

TO REVIEW THE EVIDENCE AND VOTE ON WHETHER TO RECOMMEND TERMINATION AS REQUESTED.

TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND LAWFUL PROCESS.

PROTECT THIS COMMISSION CITY AND PROTECTS EVERY RESIDENT OF SEAGOVILLE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.

MISS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN.

I RESIDE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY.

I REQUEST THAT THIS COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON ORDINANCES.

27 DASH 20 2326, 2023, 11, 2022 AND 33 DASH 2023 UNTIL FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 211 IS DOCUMENTED AND CONFIRMED.

I AM PLACING NOTICE TO THE CITY COUNCIL RIGHT NOW.

I ALLEGE THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE IS IN NONCOMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS ZONING LAWS AND ITS MANDATORY PROCEDURES, AND MUST NOT GO FORWARD WITH ANY RELATED VOTING.

CONCERNING THE FOUR STATED ORDINANCES, REPEAL IS A ZONING CHANGE UNDER TEXAS LAW.

THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT RESOLVED THIS ISSUE IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN VERSUS ACUNA IN TEXAS IN 2021.

IF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, HEIGHT LIMITS, DENSITY STANDARDS, OR NONCONFORMING STATUS ARE AFFECTED.

CHAPTER 211 APPLIES IN FULL. THESE FOUR ORDINANCES CLEARLY AFFECT THOSE RIGHTS.

NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ARE MANDATORY. SECTION 211 .006 REQUIRES PUBLISHED NOTICE PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND MAILED WRITTEN NOTICE WHEN A ZONING ACTION MAY CREATE NONCONFORMING USES.

EXAMPLE. THE OWNER AND EACH TENANT LIVING IN THE THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT MALLOY BRIDGE ROAD, 108 SOUTH US 175 FRONTAGE ROAD, SEAGOVILLE, TEXAS, HAD TO RECEIVE NOTICE BY US MAIL.

THIS CLEARLY DID NOT HAPPEN IN CITY OF SAN ANTONIO VERSUS ARDEN AND YOU KNOW, PARTNERS, TEXAS SAN ANTONIO, 2003. THE COURT HELD THAT FAILURE TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITH STATUTORY ZONING NOTICE RENDERS THE ACTION VOID WHEN STATUTORY NOTICE IS DEFECTIVE, THE PROCESS MUST STOP AND RESTART UNDER SECTION TWO.

11.007 THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MUST REVIEW THE PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION AND SUBMIT ITS RECOMMENDATION BEFORE COUNCIL ACTS THAT DID NOT OCCUR ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2020.

FIVE. PNC DISCUSSED A PARTIAL REPEAL, NOT A FULL REPEAL, LEAVING THREE STORY PROVISIONS AND ONE ACRE PLANNED

[00:45:09]

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE. THAT IS NOT THE SAME MEASURE AND IN VIOLATION OF ZONING LAWS.

YOU CAN'T DO IT. ACTING ON LANGUAGE NOT REVIEWED BY PNC.

DECEMBER 30TH, 2025 CONSTITUTES PROCEDURAL DEFECT IN MAYHEW VERSUS TOWN OF SUNNYVALE, TEXAS, 1998. THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMED THAT WHEN A STATUTE PRESCRIBES A SPECIFIC PROCEDURE, THAT PROCEDURE IS EXCLUSIVE. SIGNIFICANT, SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INVALIDATES THE ACTION.

ALSO, THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE WILL TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF ANY MAILED NOTICES TO EFFECTIVE OWNERS.

THESE ORDINANCES IMPACT THREE STORY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEXES, AND OTHERS. IF REPEAL ALTERS THEIR LEGAL STATUS OR CREATES NON-CONFORMING USES, MAILED NOTICE IS TRIGGERED UNDER CHAPTER 211, WHICH THIS OCCURRED.

THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING PACKET, NOR THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKETS EVIDENCING CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS OR ANY RECEIPT, DOCUMENTING SERVICE OR NOTICE TAX ROW MAILINGS NOTICE TO OWNERS WITHIN 200FT.

NOTICE TO MALLOY BRIDGE APARTMENT TENANTS AND OWNERS NOTICE TO OTHER POTENTIALLY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS TENANTS IF A MAIL NOTICE WAS REQUIRED AND NOT PROVIDED. THIS REPEAL ACTION ITSELF IS VULNERABLE.

COURT SCRUTINIZE ZONING STRICTLY A TOWN OF LAKEWOOD.

VILLAGE VERSUS BIZIOS. TEXAS 200, 2016. THE COURT EMPHASIZED STRICT SCRUTINY WHEN ZONING ACTIONS AFFECT EXISTING USES. WHEN CHAPTER 211 REQUIRES A STEP, THAT STEP MUST BE TAKEN.

THE LEGALLY PRUDENT ACTION TONIGHT IS STRAIGHTFORWARD PAUSE AND STOP.

START OVER AND PROVIDE FULL STATUTORY NOTICE.

PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THIS WITHIN THE AGENDA PACKET.

ENSURE IDENTICAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS REVIEWED BY PLANNING AND ZONING, AS IS THE CITY COUNCIL.

DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE, THEN PROCEED THAT PROTECTS PROTECTS THE CITY TAXPAYERS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND THIS COUNCIL FROM AVOIDABLE LITIGATION. FOLLOWING THE LAW IS MANDATORY WHEN UNLAWFUL ORDINANCES ARE PASSED AND THEN REPEALED UNDER LEGAL PRESSURE, SPECIFICALLY, A LAWSUIT THAT REFLECTS THE CITY COUNCIL'S FAILURE AND THAT OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ADVISED YOU TAXPAYERS BEAR THE COST OF THOSE FAILURES. THIS LIST OF ZONING LAW FAILURES, ALONG WITH OTHER FAILURES, ARE THE REASONS WHY I RESPECTFULLY, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL PLACE ON THE NEXT FUTURE AGENDA THE TERMINATION OF ALL CONTRACTS.

ENGAGING SERVICES WITH THE LAW FIRM OF NICHOLS JACKSON, ALL ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATED WITH NICOLE JACKSON NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, AND INITIATE AN INDEPENDENT LEGAL REVIEW OF THE PAST ZONING PROCEDURES A LEGAL REVIEW WITH HONEST REVIEWERS IS THE CITY'S DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY. WHEN A PATTERN OF DEFECTIVE PROCESS EXPOSES A CITY TO LITIGATION AND FINANCIAL RISK, CONTINUING THE SAME REPRESENTATION WITHOUT REVIEW IS NEGLIGENT.

THE RESIDENTS OF SEAGOVILLE DESERVE LAWFUL PROCESS, COMPETENT COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 211 AND LEGAL COUNSEL THAT PROTECTS THE CITY, NOT EXPOSES IT TO ALLEGED UNLAWFUL ACTIONS. I URGE YOU TO ACT ACCORDINGLY.

I'M PROVIDING YOU WITH EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARIZING THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES.

THANK YOU. AND I GAVE IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY.

PLEASE PASS THAT OUT TO EACH CITY COUNCIL. CITY MANAGER.

THANK YOU. ZONING PEOPLE. THANK YOU. MR. SEBASTIAN.

HELLO. I AM SHANNA SEBASTIAN EPPS, AND GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL, AND I'M A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF SICKLERVILLE.

I LIVE AT 606 MEYERS STREET, AND I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO START BY SAYING, AND I WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR AT THE ONSET THAT I'M NOT MAKING ACCUSATIONS, LEGAL CONCLUSIONS OR STATEMENTS OF WRONGDOING AGAINST ANY PERSON, PERSONS OR ENTITY. I'M HERE TO ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS NAMES THAT WERE RECENTLY IN A COURSE CORRESPONDENCE CIRCULATED

[00:50:02]

AND IT SPECIFICALLY NAMES MY HUSBAND, WHICH IS JOHN EPPS, AND MY DAD, WHICH IS STEPPER SEBASTIAN.

AND I JUST WANT TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD, THAT THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE DISPUTED AND ARE NOT ESTABLISHED FACTS, AND THAT THE DOCUMENTS ALLEGING WRONGDOING IS DEEPLY CONCERNING TO ME AND MY FAMILY.

AND I'M ONLY SAYING THIS BECAUSE WHEN INDIVIDUALS ARE PUBLICLY NAMED IN WIDELY DISTRIBUTED CORRESPONDENCES CONTAINED IN ALLEGATIONS, IT CAN HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES BEYOND THE MATTER OF ITSELF.

THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS MAY PLACE ADDED STRESS NOT ONLY TO THE PERSONS NAMES, BUT TO THE FAMILIES, WHICH WOULD BE ME AND MY FAMILY, KIDS, DAD, SISTERS, ALL OF THE ABOVE THAT WE ALL LIVE HERE IN SEAGOVILLE.

AND I FEEL IT'S A CONCERN FOR OUR PERSONAL SAFETY AND OUR WELL-BEING, SIMPLY DUE TO THE HEIGHTENED PUBLIC ATTENTION.

ATTENTION. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT HERE TO DEBATE ZONE CHANGES, BUT I WANT TO STATE FACTS.

AND SINCE THIS SEVEN PAGE LETTER THAT WAS RECENTLY DISTRIBUTED REGARDING A PENDING ZONING MATTER, SPECIFICALLY ALLEGED CONFLICTS OF INTEREST INVOLVING THE PROPERTY THAT MY DAD ONCE OWNED NEARLY FOUR YEARS AGO.

MIND YOU, IT'S BEEN SOLD SINCE 2022. I THINK THAT THIS IS ANOTHER REASON WHY I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO.

THAT COMMUNICATIONS OF THIS NATURE ACTUALLY REMAIN GROUNDED AND VERIFIED FACTS AND HANDLED THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL, ETHICAL CHANNELS. AND SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR AGAIN, THAT MY FAMILY HAS NOT RECEIVED, NOR STANDS TO RECEIVE ANY FINANCIAL BENEFIT, COMPENSATION OR PREFERRED TREATMENTS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, IF IT SO MAY BE ZONED AND FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH.

AND THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW FOR ZONE CHANGES.

BACK WHERE I'M THINKING. THERE'S NO ONGOING INTEREST, NO INDIRECT GAIN, AND NO PERSONAL ADVANTAGES CONNECTED TO THE MATTER AT HAND.

I DO, HOWEVER, PERSONALLY OWN LAND WITHIN. IT'S LESS THAN 600FT FROM THE LAND IN QUESTION AND MORE THAN 300FT. AND SO OF COURSE I DON'T HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT, BUT I'M ALSO IN THE SAME DISTANCE TO CEDAR POINT APARTMENTS, WHICH IS RIGHT AROUND THE SAME RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. SO YOU WOULD HAVE TWO APARTMENT COMPLEXES NEXT TO EACH OTHER. AGAIN, IT WOULDN'T AFFECT MY HOME. AND SO I'M JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY, THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR JUST TO KIND OF TO RELY ON VERIFIED FACTS, DOCUMENTED TIMELINES, AND ESTABLISHED ETHICAL STANDARDS RATHER THAN SPECULATION OR OUTDATED ASSUMPTIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS.

AND I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF PUT AND CLEAR THIS THE SITUATION AT HAND, SINCE IT SEEMS TO BE BROUGHT UP AND THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:48 P.M..

ANY REQUEST OR MOTION. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND SECOND TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 40.

ALL IN FAVOR? MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 41.

OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 748. MR. BILL MEDINA PAUSE FOR A MOMENT. I'M SORRY.

GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 41.

SO THIS IS AN ITEM TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 26 DASH 2023.

THE SUBJECT ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO A MAXIMUM OF THREE STORIES, OR 45FT IN HEIGHT.

SO THAT ORDINANCE 26 2023 WOULD BE REPEALED. THE OFFICIAL AND FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THAT ORDINANCE. PRESENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

PUBLIC HEARING.

MR.. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 41.

[00:55:07]

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I APOLOGIZE FOR THE REPETITION, BUT AS THIS IS SEPARATED INTO THREE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM, THAT'S GOING TO SOUND VERY MUCH THE SAME. OKAY, WE CAN SKIP OVER THE SOUTH LAKE THING THAT THAT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE, BUT I REQUEST THAT THE COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON THESE ORDINANCES UNTIL FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 211 IS DOCUMENTED AND CONFIRMED. THIS IS BASED ON DOCUMENTS ALLEGING PROCEDURAL FAILURES, ADMITTED CONDUCT AND LEGAL CONCERNS RELATED TO THE ALLEGED LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS ZONING AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAWS TO DATE.

I OPPOSE THE REPEAL OF THE FOUR ORDINANCES BASED UPON INFORMATION DISCOVERED DURING AND AFTER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING THAT TOOK PLACE IN DECEMBER 30TH, 2025. I REQUEST THE CITY COUNCIL PLACE AN ITEM ON ITS NEXT AGENDA TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT OF BILL MEDINA AND TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING THE TERMINATION OF ALL ENGAGEMENT CONTRACTS BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY AND THE SINGLE OF SEAGOVILLE AND THE LAW FIRM OF NICHOLS, JACKSON AND ANY ASSOCIATED BUSINESSES OR ENTITIES.

I ALLEGE THE CITY HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH TEXAS ZONING LAW PROCEDURES TO DATE RELATING TO THESE FOUR ORDINANCES.

SOME OF THE ALLEGED FAILURES BY THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE THAT CAUSED THE FOUR ORDINANCE REPEAL ACTIONS TO BE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT, NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING. ON NOVEMBER 1ST, 2023, A DOCUMENTED MEETING TOOK PLACE AT THE CITY'S OFFICE, WHERE MY WIFE PATRICIA AND I, AS WELL AS FORMER CITY MANAGER PAT STALLINGS.

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, CITY. CINDY BROWN. OWN CITY SECRETARY SARAH EGAN.

BILL MEDINA AND HIS ASSISTANT CASEY. CITY ATTORNEY VICTORIA THOMAS WITH THE NICHOLLS JACKSON LAW FIRM.

DURING THAT MEETING, IT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT A REQUIRED PROPOSED ZONING SIGN PLACED ON SEAGOVILLE ROAD BY BILL MEDINA WAS NOT VISIBLE DUE TO OVERGROWN WEEDS AND GRASS, AND NO ZONING SIGN HAD BEEN PLACED ON KANE STREET.

MR. MEDINA ADMITS THAT HE PERSONALLY PLACED THE SIGN AT SEAGOVILLE ROAD AND NO SIGN ON KANE STREET.

THESE ARE. THESE FACTS ARE ADMISSIONS PRESERVED IN AUDIO RECORDING, TRANSCRIPT, PHOTOS AND SO ON.

BILL MEDINA AND VICTORIA THOMAS FAILED TO CORRECT KNOWN VIOLATIONS AFTER THESE ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED.

THE REQUIRED SIGN ON KANE STREET WAS NEVER PLACED.

THE OVERGROWN GRASS WAS NOT CUT UNTIL THE VOTING TIME HAD PASSED, SO IT WAS NO LONGER HELPFUL TO SEE A SIGN THAT DIDN'T APPLY.

NOTICES WERE NOT GIVEN IN THE SUPER MAJORITY VOTE THAT WAS REQUIRED DUE TO THE OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING WAS NOT BROUGHT UP AT ALL DURING THE COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 6TH, 2023. SO THE ZONING PROCESS CONTINUED WITHOUT CORRECTION.

UNDER TEXAS ZONING LAW, NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ARE MANDATORY.

WHEN NOTICE IS DEFECTIVE, THE PROPER RESPONSE IS TO PAUSE OR RESET THE PROCESS, NOT PROCEED.

THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS PRESENT DURING THE NOVEMBER 1ST, 2023 MEETING AND WAS MADE AWARE OF OBSTRUCTED SIGNAGE, MISSING SIGNAGE, PROCEDURAL DEFECTS, LACK OF NOTICE, AND AN OFFICIAL SUBMISSION OF ZONING OPPOSITION.

THE APPROPRIATE ACTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN TO HALT OR DELAY THE ZONING PROCESS UNTIL COMPLIANCE WAS ACHIEVED.

THAT DID NOT OCCUR. THE CITY ATTORNEY REPORTEDLY GAVE LEGAL ADVICE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN EPPS COULD VOTE ON THE ZONING MATTER.

AND AGAIN, DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE DIDN'T OWN THE LAND HIMSELF, HE WAS IN POSITION TO INHERIT THAT FROM THE LANDOWNERS AND THE NEIGHBORING THE NEIGHBORING SPOT THERE IN THAT LOCATION.

FAILURE TO ADDRESS THESE ITEMS IN THE NEXT APPEARANCE THAT THEY'RE BEING IGNORED RATHER THAN ADDRESSED.

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THESE CONCERNS IS BEING SUBMITTED TO YOU TONIGHT.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THIS COMMISSION TO PLACE THIS MATTER ON THE NEXT AGENDA TO REVIEW THE EVIDENCE AND VOTE ON WHETHER TO RECOMMEND TERMINATION IS REQUESTED.

REQUESTED. AGAIN, TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND LAWFUL LAWFUL PROCESS PROTECTS THIS COMMISSION THE CITY AND PROTECTS EVERY

[01:00:10]

THANK YOU. MISS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. MY NAME IS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN.

I RESIDE AT 1919 ROAD. I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. I REQUEST THAT THIS COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.

UNTIL FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 211 IS DOCUMENTED AND CONFIRMED.

I'M PLACING NOTICE TO THE CITY COUNCIL RIGHT NOW.

I ALLEGE THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE IS NONCOMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS ZONING LAWS AND ITS MANDATORY PROCEDURES, AND MUST NOT GO FORWARD WITH ANY RELATED VOTING.

CONCERNING THE FOUR STATED RESIDENT ORDINANCES, REPEAL IS A ZONING CHANGE UNDER TEXAS LAW.

THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT RESOLVED THIS ISSUE IN CITY OF AUSTIN VERSUS ACUNA.

TEXAS 2021. IF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, HEIGHT LIMITS, DENSITY STANDARDS, OR NONCONFORMING STATUS ARE AFFECTED.

CHAPTER 211 APPLIES IN FULL. THESE FOUR ORDINANCES CLEARLY AFFECT THOSE RIGHTS.

NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ARE MANDATORY. SECTION 211 .006 REQUIRES PUBLISHED NOTICE PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND MAILED WRITTEN NOTICE WHEN A ZONING ACTION MAY CREATE NONCONFORMING USES.

EXAMPLE. THE OWNER OF EACH TENANT LIVING IN THE THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT MALLOY BRIDGE ROAD, 108 SOUTH US 175 FRONTAGE ROAD, TEXAS, HAD TO RECEIVE NOTICE BY US MAIL.

THIS CLEARLY DID NOT HAPPEN IN CITY OF SAN ANTONIO VERSUS ARDEN ENCINO PARTNERS AND SAN ANTONIO 003. THE COURT HELD THAT FAILURE TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITH STATUTORY ZONING ORDINANCE RENDERS THE ACTION VOID WHEN STATUTORY NOTICE IS DEFECTIVE. THE PROCESS MUST STOP AND RESTART UNDER SECTION 211 .007, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MUST REVIEW THE PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION AND SUBMIT ITS RECOMMENDATION BEFORE COUNCIL ACTS.

THIS DID NOT OCCUR ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2025. PNC DISCUSSED A PARTIAL REPEAL, NOT FULL REPEAL, LEAVING THREE STORY PROVISIONS AND ONE ACRE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INTACT.

BUT CITY COUNCIL IS NOW CONSIDERED FULL REPEAL BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE.

THAT IS NOT THE SAME MEASURE AND IN VIOLATION OF ZONING ORDINANCES ACTING ON LANGUAGE NOT REVIEWED BY PNC.

DECEMBER 30TH, 2025 CONSTITUTES PROCEDURAL DEFECT IN MAYHEW VERSUS TOWN OF SUNNYVALE, TEXAS, 1998, THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMED THAT WHEN A STATUTE PRESCRIBES A SPECIFIC PROCEDURE.

THAT PROCEDURE IS EXCLUSIVE, SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INVALIDATES THE ACTION ALSO.

THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE FAILED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF ANY MAIL NOTICES TO EFFECTIVE OWNERS.

THESE ORDINANCES IMPACT THREE STORY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEXES, AND OTHERS. IF REPEAL ALTERS THEIR LEGAL STATUS OR CREATES NON-CONFORMING USES, MAILED NOTICE IS TRIGGERED UNDER CHAPTER 211.

THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING PACKET, NOR THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKETS EVIDENCING CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS OR ANY RECEIPT DOCUMENTING SERVICE OF NOTICE. TAX ROLL MAILINGS NOTICE TO OWNERS WITHIN 200FT.

NOTICE TO APARTMENT TENANTS AND OWNERS. NOTICE TO OTHER POTENTIALLY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS TENANTS IF A MAILED NOTICE WAS REQUIRED AND NOT PROVIDED. THIS REPEAL ACTION ITSELF IS VULNERABLE.

COURT SCRUTINIZE ZONING STRICTLY IN TOWN OF LAKEWOOD VILLAGE VERSUS TEXAS, 2016.

THE COURT EMPHASIZED STRICT SCRUTINY WHEN ZONING ACTIONS AFFECT EXISTING USES.

WHEN CHAPTER 211 REQUIRES A STEP THAT THAT STEP MUST BE TAKEN, THE LEGALLY PRUDENT ACTION TONIGHT IS STRAIGHTFORWARD PAUSE AND STOP.

START OVER AND PROVIDE FULL STATUTORY NOTICE.

PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THIS WITHIN THE AGENDA PACKET.

ENSURE IDENTICAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS REVIEWED BY PLANNING AND ZONING AS THE CITY COUNCIL DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE, THEN PROCEED. THAT PROTECTS THE CITY TAXPAYERS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND THIS COUNCIL FROM AVOIDABLE LITIGATION FOLLOWING THE LAW'S MANDATORY WHEN UNLAWFUL ORDINANCES ARE PASSED AND THEN REPEALED UNDER LEGAL PRESSURE.

SPECIFICALLY A A LAWSUIT THAT REFLECTS THE CITY COUNCIL FAILURE AND THAT OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ADVISED YOU TAXPAYERS BEAR THE COST OF THOSE

[01:05:08]

ALL ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATED WITH NICHOLS JACKSON NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, AND INITIATE AN INDEPENDENT LEGAL REVIEW OF PAST ZONING PROCEDURES.

A LEGAL REVIEW WITH HONEST REVIEWERS IS THE CITY'S DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY.

WHEN A PATTERN OF DEFECTIVE PROCESS EXPOSES CITY TO LITIGATION AND FINANCIAL RISK, CONTINUING THE SAME REPRESENTATION WITHOUT REVIEW IS NEGLIGENT. THE RESIDENTS OF SEAGOVILLE DESERVE LAWFUL PROCESS, COMPETENT COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 211 AND LEGAL COUNSEL THAT PROTECTS THE TEXAS CITY, NOT EXPOSES IT TO ALLEGED UNLAWFUL ACTIONS.

I URGE YOU TO ACT ACCORDINGLY. I'M PROVIDING YOU WITH THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARIZING THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITIES.

THANK YOU. AND MISS EGAN HAS THAT INFORMATION.

CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:01 P.M.. DO I HEAR A MOTION? I MOVE, WE APPROVE. AGENDA ITEM 41 SECOND, A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA, AND A SECOND TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 41.

ALL IN FAVOR? NONE OPPOSED. MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 42.

THE TIME IS 801. AND MR. BILL MEDINA, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR AGAIN.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 41 OR 40 222 42.

SO ITEM NUMBER 42 AS THE FINAL REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCES THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. THIS ITEM IS TO REPEAL ORDINANCE NUMBER 27, 2023.

THE SUBJECT ORDINANCE REDUCED THE MINIMUM SIZE FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICTS DOWN TO ONE ACRE IN SIZE.

PRESIDENT FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTION? THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. MR. RASMUSSEN.

YOU'LL STILL HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. OKAY. MY NAME IS STILL ED RASMUSSEN.

I STILL LIVE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD. I DON'T WANT TO REREAD ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT APPLIED BOTH TO 40 AND 41.

SO I'LL JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS AND MOVE ON.

WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON ANY OF THESE THINGS BASED ON THE DOCUMENTED ALLEGED ALLEGED PROCEDURAL FAILURES, ADMITTED CONDUCT AND LEGAL CONCERNS, LACK OF COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING, AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST LAWS.

I OPPOSE THE REPEAL OF THESE ORDINANCES. JUST POINTING OUT THAT ONE THAT WAS MENTIONED, THE CHANGING THE ACREAGE REQUIREMENT ON THAT THING.

WELL, IT WAS ORIGINALLY SUPPOSED TO BE TEN ACRE REQUIREMENT AND OF COURSE, THE PROPERTY AND THAT WAS BEING SOLD AND MOVED AROUND WAS ONLY NINE AND A HALF. SO WHAT A SURPRISE. THE ORDINANCE HAD TO BE CHANGED SO THAT THAT SALE COULD BE MADE.

AN EXTRA MILLION DOLLARS COULD GO INTO SOMEBODY'S POCKET.

WHOSE NAME I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO MENTION. ALSO OUR AGAIN, WE'D LIKE TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THING THAT THE CITY MANAGERS AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER TERMINATING EMPLOYMENT OF BILL MEDINA, AND IT SHOULD BE TERMINATING THE ALL ENGAGEMENT CONTRACTS BETWEEN CITY DEPARTMENTS AND THE LAW FIRM OF NICHOLS, JACKSON, DILLARD, HAGAN, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REASON TO REPEAT A LOT OF THIS STUFF AS FAR AS THE SIGNAGE GOES.

YOU KNOW, THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THE RULES AND PUT OUT THE SIGNS THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE OUT WHEN THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE OUT AND WHERE INVISIBLE AREAS.

SO THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE. GOOD NIGHT. THANK YOU.

MISS PATRICIA RASMUSSEN. GOOD EVENING,

[01:10:03]

I RESIDE AT 1919 SEAGOVILLE ROAD. I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY.

I REQUEST THAT THIS COUNCIL CEASE AND DESIST FROM TAKING ANY ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, AND UNTIL FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 211 IS DOCUMENTED AND CONFIRMED.

I'M PLACING NOTICE TO THE CITY COUNCIL RIGHT NOW.

I CITY OF SEAGOVILLE, IS IN NONCOMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS ZONING LAWS AND ITS MANDATORY PROCEDURES AND MUST NOT GO FORWARD WITH ANY RELATED VOTING.

CONCERNING THE FOUR STATED ORDINANCES, REPEAL IS A ZONING CHANGE UNDER TEXAS LAW.

THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT RESOLVED THIS ISSUE IN CITY OF AUSTIN VERSUS ACUNA, TEXAS, 2021 IF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, HEIGHT LIMITS, DENSITY STANDARDS, OR NONCONFORMING STATUS ARE AFFECTED.

CHAPTER 211 APPLIES IN FULL. THESE FOUR ORDINANCES CLEARLY AFFECT THOSE RIGHTS.

NOTICE REQUIREMENTS ARE MANDATORY. SECTION 211 .006 REQUIRES PUBLIC NOTICE PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND MAILED WRITTEN NOTICE WHEN A ZONING ACTION MAY CREATE NONCONFORMING USES.

EXAMPLE. THE OWNER AND EACH TENANT LIVING IN THE THREE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX LOCATED AT MALLOY BRIDGE APARTMENTS, 108 SOUTH US ONE, 75 FRONTAGE ROAD, SEAGOVILLE, TEXAS, HAD TO RECEIVE NOTICE BY US MAIL.

THIS CLEARLY DID NOT HAPPEN IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO VERSUS ARDEN ENCINO PARTNERS, SAN ANTONIO, 2003. THE COURT HELD THAT FAILURE TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITH STATUTORY ZONING ORDINANCE NOTICE RENDERS THE ACTION VOID WHEN STATUTORY NOTICE IS DEFECTIVE. THE PROCESS MUST STOP AND RESTORE UNDER SECTION 211 .007.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MUST REVIEW THE PROPOSED PROPOSED ZONING REGULATION AND SUBMIT ITS RECOMMENDATION BEFORE COUNCIL ACTS THAT DID NOT OCCUR ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2025. PNC DISCUSSED A PARTIAL REPEAL, NOT A FULL REPEAL, LEAVING THREE STORY PROVISIONS IN ONE ACRE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INTACT. THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOW CONSIDERING FULL REPEAL.

BACK TO THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE. THAT IS NOT THE SAME MEASURE AND IN VIOLATION OF ZONING LAWS.

ACTING ON LANGUAGE NOT REVIEWED BY PNC DECEMBER 30TH, 2025 CONSTITUTES PROCEDURAL DEFECT IN MAYHEW VERSUS TOWN OF SUNNYVALE, TEXAS 1998 THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMED THAT WHEN A STATUTE PRESCRIBED SPECIFIC PROCEDURE, THAT PROCEDURE IS EXCLUSIVE. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INVALIDATES THE ACTION ALSO.

THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE FAILED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF ANY MAILED NOTICES TO AFFECTED OWNERS.

THESE ORDINANCES IMPACT THREE STORY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEXES, AND OTHERS. IF REPEAL ALTERS THEIR LEGAL STATUS OR CREATES NON-CONFORMING USES, MAILED NOTICE IS TRIGGERED UNDER CHAPTER 211.

THERE IS NO DOCUMENTATION IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING PACKET OR THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PACKETS EVIDENCING CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS OF ANY RECEIPT, DOCUMENTING SERVICE OR NOTICE TAX ROLL MAILINGS NOTICE TO OWNERS WITHIN 200FT.

NOTICE TO THE MALOY BRIDGE APARTMENT TENANT AND OWNERS NOTICE TO OTHER POTENTIALLY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS AND TENANTS IF A MAIL NOTICE WAS REQUIRED AND NOT PROVIDED THIS REPEAL ACTION ITSELF IS VULNERABLE.

COURT SCRUTINIZE ZONING STRICTLY AND TOWN OF LAKEWOOD VILLAGE VERSUS BUZIOS, TEXAS, 2016.

THE COURT EMPHASIZED STRICT SCRUTINY WHEN ZONING ACTIONS AFFECT EXISTING USES.

WHEN CHAPTER 211 REQUIRES A STEP, THAT STEP MUST BE TAKEN.

THE LEGALLY PRUDENT ACTION TONIGHT IS STRAIGHTFORWARD PAUSE AND STOP.

START OVER AND PROVIDE FULL STATUTORY NOTICE.

PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THIS WRITTEN WITHIN THE AGENDA PACKET.

ENSURE IDENTICAL ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS REVIEWED BY PLANNING AND ZONING AS A STATE COUNCIL DOCUMENT.

COMPLIANCE THEN PROCEED THAT PROTECTS THE CITY TAXPAYERS, PROPERTY OWNERS AND THIS COUNCIL FROM AVOIDABLE LITIGATION FOLLOWING THE LAW AS MANDATORY WHEN UNLAWFUL ORDINANCE ARE PASSED AND THEN REPEALED UNDER LEGAL PRESSURE.

SPECIFICALLY, A LAWSUIT THAT REFLECTS THE CITY COUNCIL'S FAILURE AND THAT OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ADVISED YOU TAXPAYERS BEAR THE COST OF THOSE FAILURES. THIS LIST OF ZONING LAW FAILURES, ALONG WITH OTHER FAILURES, ARE THE REASON WHY I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL PLACE ON THE NEXT FUTURE AGENDA THE TERMINATION OF ALL CONTRACTS IN ENGAGING SERVICES WITH THE LAW FIRM OF NICHOLS JACKSON.

[01:15:05]

A LEGAL REVIEW WITH HONEST REVIEWERS IS A CITY'S DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY.

WHEN A PATTERN OF DEFECTIVE PROCESS EXPOSES A CITY, KNOW LITIGATION TO LITIGATION AND FINANCIAL RISK.

CONTINUING THE SAME REPRESENTATION WITHOUT REVIEW IS NEGLIGENT.

THE RESIDENTS OF SEAGOVILLE DESERVE LAWFUL PROCESS, COMPETENT COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 211 AND LEGAL COUNSEL THAT PROTECTS THE CITY, NOT EXPOSES IT TO ALLEGE UNLAWFUL ACTIONS, I URGE YOU TO ACT ACCORDINGLY.

I'M PROVIDING YOU WITH EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARIZING THE CONTROLLING OR ORDINANCE AUTHORITIES IN WHICH MRS. EGAN HAS. AT THE TIME IS 811. I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NEED A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA. ITEM 42. SECOND.

MOTION. AND A SECOND FOR AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER 42.

ALL IN FAVOR? NONE OPPOSED. MOVING TO REGULAR AGENDA.

[Regular Agenda]

I'M GOING TO LEARN TO SAY THAT ONE DAY. GOTTA PRONOUNCE THAT AGAIN.

GOOD EVENING. MAYOR, COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGER.

THE CITY TRASH COLLECTION SERVICE PROVIDER IS FRONTIER WASTE, AND WE HAVE BEEN IN CONTRACT WITH THEM SINCE FEBRUARY 1ST, 2023. THE PROVIDER NOTIFIED THAT THE SERVICE HAS UPCOMING PRICE INCREASE, WHICH WILL BE EFFECTIVE FROM FEBRUARY 1ST, 2026. THE PRICE WERE ADJUSTED BASED ON CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.

THE INCREASED COST WILL BE PASSED ON TO RESIDENTS STARTING FROM FEBRUARY 1ST, 2026 AS WELL.

THE CURRENT PRICE IS 1621 FOR THE SINGLE CART AND THE NEW RATE WILL BE 17.09, WHICH IS $0.88 INCREASE.

IT IS 5.40 PERCENTILE IN INCREASE BASED ON CPI ADJUSTMENT.

AND I HAVE HERE FRONTIER REPRESENTATIVE, IF YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS I WANT TO HEAR FROM.

DO WE GET ANY DISCOUNTS DUE TO INFLATION? DO YOU ALL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR HIM? DO YOU WANT TO COME HERE AND COMMENT OR. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IS NOT A GOOD TIME TO USE CPI. JUST SAYING. MAYOR, COUNCIL, ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF.

PLEASURE TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF YOU. THAT'S THE STANDARD IN THE INDUSTRY.

IS THE CPI BASED OFF THE AGREEMENT THAT WE PUT TOGETHER? AND THAT WAS AT 5.4%. AND THAT AGAIN, THAT'S THE GOVERNMENTAL NUMBERS.

THAT'S NOT FRONTIER'S NUMBERS. LET ME ASK THIS.

I DON'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF. SO IF IT'S LOWER NEXT TIME, DO WE DO WE COME DOWN ON THE, ON THE ON THE RATE.

RIGHT. I ALWAYS JUST GO UP. HAVE YOU EVER KNOWN THE CPI TO REDUCE? YEAH. IF THE CPI GOES DOWN. WELL YEAH. THE RATE OF INCREASE IS BASED STRICTLY ON THE CPI.

SO WHEN IS THERE A RATE OF DECREASE. WHEN IS THERE A DECREASED RATE IS WHAT I'M ASKING. WELL WHEN THE CPI GOES BACKWARDS IT GOES BACK.

I BELIEVE IF I HAVE TO CHECK YOUR PARTICULAR CONTRACT.

BUT MOST OF THEM ARE WRITTEN. I DIDN'T WRITE THIS ONE AND I DIDN'T SIGN IT.

BUT A LOT, MOST OF THEM SAY THAT IF IT GOES UP, IT GOES UP.

AND IF IT GOES DOWN, IT GOES DOWN. I WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT LOOK AT THAT PARTICULAR CLAUSE IN YOURS.

BUT MOST OF THEM THAT I'VE SEEN GO UP AND DOWN.

SO IT'S NOT OUR NUMBER THAT WE'RE PICKING. IT'S IT'S THE NUMBER OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS BASED ON, ON THE AGREEMENT WE GOT. I MEAN, I'M IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND I'VE GOT CUSTOMERS ASKING FOR REDUCED COST BECAUSE OF TARIFFS AND SO SIMILAR WITH US. YOU KNOW WE GOT TO PAY THE TARIFFS I KNOW Y'ALL GOT TO PAY YOU KNOW AS WELL, SIR. I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH WE CAN WE CAN PUT ONTO THE CUSTOMER, INCLUDING MYSELF.

AND THERE'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, GOTTA WE GOTTA FIGURE SOMETHING OUT.

5% MAY SOUND LITTLE, BUT YOU THREE TIMES THAT, THAT'S 15%, YOU KNOW.

AND SO WE NEED TO START BURNING OUR OWN TRASH.

I DON'T KNOW, BUT YOU KNOW SOMETHING? SOMETHING'S GOTTA GIVE.

SO IF YOU COULD CHECK THAT CONTRACT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BOTH WAYS, I APPRECIATE IT.

[01:20:04]

ANYBODY ELSE BESIDES HIM MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 44.

MISS SARAH EGAN, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. GOOD EVENING.

MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. SO TONIGHT, I AM PRESENTING TO YOU A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD MAY 2ND, 2026, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ELECTING PERSONS TO THE OFFICES OF CITY COUNCIL PLACE ONE, THREE AND FIVE.

THIS ALSO AUTHORIZES US TO JOIN THE JOINT ELECTION WITH DALLAS COUNTY AND KAUFMAN COUNTY, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ELECTION SERVICES CONTRACTS. CURRENTLY LIKE I MENTIONED, IT'S PLACE ONE, THREE, AND FIVE.

WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OTHER APPLICATIONS OTHER THAN THE INCUMBENTS, SO THEY ARE UNOPPOSED.

IF THEY REMAIN UNOPPOSED AFTER THE FILING DEADLINE, THE CITY MAY CANCEL THE ELECTION.

SINCE WE ARE AN AT LARGE CITY, THE FILING PERIOD BEGAN JANUARY 14TH AND ENDS NEXT FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13TH AT 5 P.M..

SO IF THERE IS NO ELECTION THAT WILL SAVE THE CITY, WHAT ABOUT $12,000? IS THAT CORRECT? ROUGHLY. IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT.

LAST YEAR, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AND I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME, BUT WE PAID APPROXIMATELY 16,000.

MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT. BUT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY OF THE NOTICES OR THE PUBLICATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO DO.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY MOTION. MOVE.

WE APPROVE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 44. SECOND. MOTION.

AND SECOND. APPROVE. AGENDA ITEM 44. ALL IN FAVOR? NONE OPPOSED. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 45. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST? WE'LL START WITH YOU, MR. HERNANDEZ. NO, SIR.

NO, SIR. NOTHING. MR.. MR. EPPS, I'M GLAD WE THROW IT OUT.

FINALLY. YEAH. NO MORE ICE, NO MORE SNOW. AND IT'S GOOD TO HAVE OUR CITIZENS SHOW UP.

FINALLY. IT'S BEEN A WHILE. IT'S GOOD TO SEE Y'ALL. THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING. FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.

WE'LL GO THE OTHER WAY. THERE'S NOTHING. MAYOR.

MAYOR. COMMISSIONER. YEAH. I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON RULES OVER PUBLIC COMMENT RULES.

THANK YOU. DISCUSSION ON OUR PUBLIC COMMENT RULES.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? WE'LL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 47.

WITH THAT SAID AS. ITEM 46, I'VE ALREADY ASKED.

YOU CAN'T. YOU CAN'T SPEAK, MAN. THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC DISCUSSION RIGHT HERE.

MOVING TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 47 AS MAYOR AND I REPRESENT THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALL THE CITIZENS OF SEAGOVILLE, I HOPE. I APPRECIATE THE CITY. THE CITIZEN, I MEAN, THE EMPLOYEES THAT WORKED SO HARD DURING THE FREEZE.

THEY HAD TO TAKE A COUPLE OF DAYS OFF. THAT DIDN'T BECAUSE IT GOT BELOW 40 DEGREES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

IT WAS ICE ON THE GROUND AND IT WAS TERRIBLE ON TRAVELING.

THEY DID GET BACK. THE SANITATION PICKUP WORKED DILIGENTLY TRYING TO CATCH UP.

THERE WAS THREE DAYS THERE THAT COULDN'T DO WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO.

BUT WITH ALL THAT SAID, MY HAT'S OFF TO EVERY EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OF SEAGOVILLE.

AND I HAVE A THANK YOU. AND I SAY AGAIN, THANK YOU.

I THANK THE COUNCIL AGREES WITH EVERYTHING I JUST SAID.

YES, SIR. EVERYBODY HAPPY? WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 8:19 P.M..

MY FRIEND.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.