[4:29] >>Call the meeting to order on Tuesday,
[4:31] July 21, 2020 in Council Chambers at
[4:33] 222 N. Tennessee Street. It is 6:12 PM.
[4:41] We will begin with an invocation and
[4:45] Pledge of Allegiance. Invocation given
[4:46] by Pastor Mark Turman of Crosspoint
[4:50] church. Are you there?
[4:51] >> I am
[4:52] >> Lord, we thank you for this good day as
[5:00] We transition from [Indiscernible] and set
[5:01] our hearts and minds on this meeting. We
[5:02] welcome you into this time and we ask
[5:03] that you watch over us and Lord, you
[5:13] bring us increased compassion for each
[5:17] other in our city, that you give us
[5:18] clarity for the business and issues we
[5:19] need to discuss and deliberate tonight.
[5:25] And we give you praise for the goodness
[5:26] and generosity you showed to us
[5:32] individually and collectively.
[5:33] [Indiscernible] for the Mayor and
[5:34] Council persons and thank you for our
[5:35] city manager and city staff. We thank
[5:37] you that we get to call this place home
[5:41] as citizens. Lord give us direction
[5:47] understanding, give us clarity and help
[5:49] us as we deliberate to do so with pull
[5:51] civility toward one another, with
[5:53] consideration and patience, give us
[5:55] insight that can only come from you.
[6:00] Lord, help us to seek the good of the
[6:01] city in which we live for all of us. In
[6:04] Jesus name we pray, Amen.
[6:44] >>[Pledge of Allegiance]
[6:45] >> We have public comments on agenda
[6:53] items. The first one is Mimi Noris, does
[6:55] not wish to speak but once to have her
[7:03] opposition to 20040z2 noted
[7:07] >> We have a few people that would like
[7:15] to speak. Three minutes. On item
[7:20] 200616, Rwanda [Indiscernible]
[7:30] >> Hello Councilman I wanted to say the
[7:31] other day I had a wonderful time
[7:38] watching La'shadion and the Mayor
[7:39] Fuller and Paul Grimes come out to the
[7:40] cemetery and help clean up a cemetery
[7:42] where black people could only be buried.
[7:49] As we look through our history, we
[7:50] look through whether it is in McKinney
[7:51] or other states we realize there is
[7:54] history that is taking place that has
[7:56] been belittling to human beings of
[7:59] color. This statue is one of those. The
[8:02] statues across the states are those.
[8:06] Five months from now it will still be
[8:09] offensive it is offensive today it's
[8:13] going to be offensive when you create a
[8:14] task force for it it's going to be
[8:22] offensive when they debate whether it
[8:23] should be removed or not and I ask you
[8:24] to have that level of civility and
[8:25] understanding and working together to
[8:26] know if it is offensive to people in
[8:27] your community then it should not be
[8:30] put in the grounds of a court building.
[8:35] It does not belong there. The court
[8:36] building symbolizes justice for all. We
[8:40] just pledged allegiance to the flag,
[8:45] justice for all. When we have slave
[8:48] traders and history of abusing human
[8:49] beings and that is put in front of a
[8:51] court building it does not signify
[8:54] justice for all. I come to you and I
[8:55] ask you to think about that. It can be
[9:01] somewhere else but it should never be
[9:02] in a court building that has to
[9:05] administer or has a history of
[9:07] administering justice when it is
[9:08] supposed to be justice for all. Thank
[9:11] you
[9:12] >> [Applause]
[9:13] >> [Indiscernible] Johnson
[9:14] >> Hello everyone. Throckmorton was in
[9:26] opposer of the 14th amendment which
[9:31] gave citizenship to everyone born in
[9:34] the United States including former
[9:39] slaves and their families. It was one
[9:43] of three amendments passed during the
[9:44] Reconstruction era to establish rights
[9:47] for black Americans. The 14th amendment
[9:51] was key in landmark Supreme Court
[9:52] decision such as brown versus education
[9:54] which ruled segregating schools was
[9:58] unjust. According to Texas after the
[10:00] Civil War, the struggle of
[10:07] reconstruction by Carl Monahan a
[10:08] professor of history at the University
[10:09] of Arkansas in his inaugural address
[10:18] Throckmorton on one hand urged Texas
[10:19] legislators not to take action that
[10:20] would cause the north to doubt their
[10:23] loyalty. But on the other encourage
[10:24] them not to ratify the 14th amendment.
[10:27] Legislators did as he urged. Calling
[10:31] the amendment nothing more than an
[10:34] effort to raise black above white. They
[10:41] voted 70-5 rejected the 14th
[10:45] amendment. To raise Blacks above whites
[10:48] is not the sentiment behind the 14th
[10:51] amendment or the current movement.
[10:56] Think about it. Do you really think the
[11:01] African-American community is trying to
[11:02] set itself above any other group of
[11:03] people? Do you really think that? Does
[11:10] anyone really think that? Who thinks
[11:12] this way? What intelligent person sits
[11:13] down and tosses back and forth the
[11:16] notion that we are better than they?
[11:23] Who does that? I hate to say it but it
[11:24] seems that those who do support the
[11:27] Confederate movement do just that. The
[11:32] point is for equality in humanity,
[11:37] people are people, human beings are
[11:41] human beings, whether Asian, Black,
[11:47] Hispanic, white or whatever. We are not
[11:48] asking that the statue be destroyed. We
[11:54] are requesting the statue be moved to a
[11:56] more appropriate place. Perhaps a
[12:00] museum or the Pecan Grove cemetery, the
[12:07] gravesite of James Throckmorton. Not
[12:08] just the middle of the public square
[12:10] which should be a reflection of all.
[12:15] >> [Applause]
[12:21] >> Eric Scholz.
[12:22] >> Good evening. Eric Scholz 1505
[12:43] timberline Drive in McKinney. I spoke a
[12:46] couple weeks ago and I think it's
[12:49] necessary to speak again. A little
[12:51] background. From where I'm coming from.
[12:56] I am a 15 year Army veteran combat
[13:01] disabled. A unit in Grand Prairie born
[13:04] and raised in Hillsboro Texas. I am
[13:11] certified through Fort Leavenworth
[13:15] civil for military history to teach
[13:16] military history at the University
[13:17] level and I did that and I want
[13:24] McKinney to be on the right side of
[13:25] history with this and right now we are
[13:32] not. For the concerns that we are
[13:38] taking away from history, as a military
[13:39] history instructor for the United
[13:40] States Army and the University of South
[13:41] Florida, there is no conflict more
[13:44] documented especially on the
[13:45] Confederacy side than the US Civil War.
[13:50] There are tens of thousands of books
[13:56] hundreds of movies, museums, we are not
[13:57] losing history by moving the statue.
[14:02] I've also charted every Confederate
[14:05] monument in the Dallas-Fort Worth
[14:06] metropolitan area and surrounding
[14:10] areas. This is the last one standing in
[14:16] the metropolitan area. You are not
[14:18] going to be first but right now you are
[14:23] last at DFW and we need BB on the right
[14:24] side of history with this. The reason
[14:30] they took them down obviously they been
[14:31] debating the statues for years and
[14:34] decades but it's also a public safety
[14:37] issue. If we don't take this down
[14:40] immediately, then there is a great risk
[14:41] that it could be taken down without
[14:47] official support and that could be that
[14:52] could hurt the people taking it down or
[14:53] people responding to that trying to
[14:55] defend the statue and we don't want to
[14:56] see anyone hurt in the city. I ask that
[14:59] the city Council moved today to bring
[15:04] down the statue. No commission, no
[15:09] study, bring it down today move it
[15:11] somewhere and then have a commission
[15:12] what you want to do after that but if
[15:13] you don't take it down immediately you
[15:17] are risking harm to the people in
[15:22] McKinney.
[15:23] >> Debbie [Indiscernible]
[15:24] >> After all those people I can't tell
[15:38] you how frivolous I want to talk about
[15:41] will sound to you but it's not
[15:42] frivolous to the unincorporated
[15:45] citizens. I'd like to thank you for
[15:46] your service and everything you've done.
[15:52] I don't know anybody who would want to
[15:53] be Mayor or Councilman or leader it's a
[15:54] hard time and you are you're doing your
[15:56] best. I am a single mom of four young
[15:59] adults the youngest one in the last
[16:02] year at UT. All four went to McKinney
[16:04] schools and at one time I had a child in
[16:08] all schools at the same time I talked
[16:12] for McKinney ISD. My mom moved here
[16:20] from Stonebridge was on a piece of
[16:21] paper and she took me to her meeting
[16:22] and I said if you think they will put a
[16:23] beach in the middle of the field you
[16:24] have lost your mind but they did. My
[16:26] grandson will be [Indiscernible] and we
[16:27] will have five generations of my family
[16:28] that have moved to McKinney. I could
[16:31] not send for kids to college on a
[16:43] school teacher salary. [Indiscernible]
[16:47] I opened a wedding venue and I know you
[16:48] had people here are a couple of months
[16:49] ago and I was not here because my I had
[16:54] my first granddaughter. The clearest
[16:55] picture I can give you what's happening
[16:56] in the wedding industry is you have a
[17:01] [Indiscernible] and you come back to
[17:04] the wedding industry and say give me
[17:05] another car and now we have people
[17:06] coming back and saying give me another
[17:09] car. I have an angry mom coming
[17:11] tomorrow that thinks I should lose
[17:12] $15,000 changing her day twice. I lost
[17:20] over $160,000. I do this on my own and
[17:21] don't have financing our banks. You can
[17:24] imagine how excited I was when I heard
[17:27] about the [Indiscernible] obviously my
[17:31] financial issues. Are none of your
[17:33] problems and you don't have anything to
[17:34] do about it but when I found out after
[17:43] paying McKinney taxes by generation of
[17:44] taxes all my kids grew up in McKinney I
[17:45] had two houses and my third one is two
[17:48] miles outside the city and being two
[17:49] miles outside of the city I was not
[17:50] allowed to apply for any of the money.
[17:54] We have 600 guests per week and. I'm
[17:57] the only venue in the City of McKinney
[18:02] in the McKinney area that is in the not
[18:06] Hall of Fame. You may not have heard of
[18:07] me, that's fine I had not heard of you
[18:08] until I looked you up. Scott Elliott
[18:12] you do not have a synopsis on the
[18:16] commission page. Because you have been
[18:18] here a long time I think you understand
[18:19] I'm a citizen of McKinney. So I'm
[18:24] asking you to ask the county if they
[18:25] can open it up to the unincorporated
[18:29] area and I'd like to say on that form
[18:30] it asks if you are renting a business
[18:35] or leasing, it should knockout people
[18:39] that own their own business it also
[18:40] asks for the inventory some of us have
[18:41] inventory that can't be a dollar amount
[18:42] it's a day or another. Thank you for
[18:45] listening to me, I brought the horse is
[18:49] a dead horse and I may be beating a
[18:50] dead horse but thank you
[18:51] >> Are there any other speakers?
[18:52] >> We also have an agenda item
[19:22] [Indiscernible] Rodney Clark has
[19:27] submitted a notice of support for
[19:34] agenda item 200026.
[19:36] >> Let that be part of the record
[19:37] >> I do not have any other comments for
[19:38] items, we will move on to the consent
[19:45] agenda, items consisting of
[19:49] non-controversial, the public comments
[19:55] [Indiscernible]
[19:56] >> Consent agenda consists of
[20:03] non-controversial housekeeping required
[20:04] by law and may be considered
[20:05] individually by any Council member
[20:06] making such request prior to a motion
[20:07] to vote on the consent items
[20:08] >> Is there any item on the consent a
[20:09] Council member would like to pull down?
[20:16] If not, I will accept a motion to
[20:18] approve
[20:19] >> Move to approve, second
[20:20] >> All in favor? Motion passes
[20:37] >> Plaque consideration. Items under
[20:45] this subcategory require separate
[20:46] consideration pursuant to Texas local
[20:47] government code the staff
[20:48] recommendation described the necessary
[20:49] form of action required on each plat a
[20:50] motion to approve in accordance with
[20:51] staff recommendation will result in
[20:56] approval.
[20:57] >> There's one item, 200083pf act on a
[21:04] preliminary final plat for the JVC real
[21:08] estate addition located in the ETJ of
[21:10] McKinney 1600 feet north of County Road
[21:11] 408 and E side of farm to market roads
[21:20] >> Staff is recommending approval with
[21:21] conditions and variances to the plat.
[21:22] I'm happy to answer any questions
[21:23] >> Are there questions for Jennifer?
[21:25] >> Thank you Jennifer
[21:26] >> Move to approve the items
[21:32] >> Second
[21:35] >> Please vote
[21:36] >> Motion passes
[22:03] >> 20004z2. A public hearing to act on
[22:07] a request to rezone subject property
[22:11] from Planned Development District to
[22:15] Planned Development District generally
[22:16] to modify the use and development
[22:17] standards to allow for an indoor and
[22:19] outdoor wedding event venue or banquet
[22:23] facility
[22:24] >> At the time of publishing the agenda
[22:27] the applicant requested the table but
[22:30] yesterday they request for it to be
[22:34] withdrawn for consideration
[22:38] >> As it was still on the agenda if
[22:39] there are people that would like to
[22:40] speak please understand it has been
[22:42] withdrawn, which means it has been
[22:44] pulled and will not be under
[22:47] consideration. I will call these names.
[22:53] If anyone did come to speak, make
[22:57] yourself [Indiscernible] I don't see any
[23:02] . Do we need to do anything for the
[23:03] item to be withdrawn?
[23:07] >> Nope
[23:08] >> We'll move on to the next item
[23:09] >> We don't need to open the public
[23:30] hearing
[23:31] >> If anyone did come I want to give
[23:32] them the opportunity to speak but I
[23:39] don't see anyone. 200040z2 request the
[23:48] subject property from single-family
[23:49] residence to duplex residential
[23:50] district located beside rock Wall
[23:51] Street and 615 feet north of Gerrish
[23:52] Street
[23:53] >> I would like to note for the record
[23:59] that following publishing of the agenda
[24:00] staff validated additional signature on
[24:01] a protest petition that has been passed
[24:04] out to Council. With the protest
[24:05] petition qualifying signatures
[24:06] representing 20 percent or more of the
[24:08] area within the protest area is needed
[24:17] to require ace majority vote of the
[24:18] Council with the additional signatures
[24:19] received it does meet the threshold at
[24:22] 66 percent. I will get into the item
[24:27] more but I wanted to confirm based on
[24:31] the Planning and Zoning Commission
[24:32] action as well as the protest petition
[24:33] a super majority vote is a required.
[24:34] >> This request is to rezone .7 acres
[24:54] from single-family residence to duplex
[24:59] residential district. The applicant has
[25:00] worked with city staff and we have
[25:02] reviewed the request in relationship to
[25:06] the area around it and a comprehensive
[25:14] [Indiscernible] higher density
[25:15] developments. In the area just south of
[25:16] the subject property there is a
[25:17] drainage culvert and on the north side
[25:21] there is a church. As you see on the
[25:22] map, there are a few residences in the
[25:25] neighborhood that sees duplex
[25:29] structures. With all of those things
[25:34] considered staff recommends approval.
[25:35] During the Planning and Zoning
[25:36] Commission meeting we heard from
[25:38] residents citing concerns regarding
[25:40] duplexes in this location. After
[25:42] discussion the commission voted 7-2
[25:51] To recommend denial. Staff recommended
[25:56] Approval. P&Z recommends denial and you
[25:57] will hear from folks with their
[25:58] concerns on the proposed rezoning.
[26:04] >> Are there questions for Jennifer?
[26:06] >> The duplex zoning that is out there,
[26:12] is that all zoning?
[26:13] >> Yes
[26:18] >> So the majority, the duplex zoning
[26:19] [Indiscernible]
[26:21] >> There is not.
[26:22] >> Most of the surrounding is RS 60
[26:28] >> Predominantly to the south and as we
[26:30] progress north some of the fabric of
[26:33] the single-family has dissolved a bit
[26:35] with the drainage culvert in the
[26:39] church. Those are some of the factors
[26:40] we looked at
[26:43] >> Any other questions for staff?
[26:47] >> I believe the applicant is here
[26:52] >> Would the applicant like to come up
[26:54] and address Council?
[26:55] >> The applicant for this item?
[26:56] >> I stand corrected, he must not be
[27:14] here
[27:15] >> A gentleman just came in the door
[27:16] >> That is not him
[27:18] >> This is a public hearing. We have
[27:21] people that would wish to speak.
[27:25] >> I will call the name and tell you so
[27:31] you can be prepared. Jeanette Palmer.
[27:37] After this, Kimberly Palmer
[27:38] >> Registers opposition to the item
[27:39] >> Kimberly Palmer? Registered as
[28:01] opposition to the item
[28:09] >> Jonas Palmer Christopher Palmer
[28:10] >> Good afternoon. My name is Kimberly
[28:25] Palmer and I live at 904
[28:29] [Indiscernible] I am here to represent
[28:34] the community and the citizens
[28:38] surrounding the subject property. This
[28:43] community was developed as a single
[28:44] family dwelling community in the 1840s
[28:45] the subject property is in the heart of
[28:46] the community. If duplexes are placed
[28:48] there it will disturb the atmosphere.
[28:52] There are 19 homes within the 200 feet
[28:58] of the subject property. 10 of the
[29:00] residents are elderly. That would
[29:04] negatively impact their lives. There
[29:08] are several of them I completed the
[29:11] zoning protests for the community and
[29:12] there are 26 names on this and my
[29:19] husband and I walked the community for
[29:20] those adjacent homes surrounding the
[29:23] subject property. 10 of the 19 homes or
[29:26] elderly members who are over the age of
[29:30] 70+. They will be negatively impacted
[29:33] because of the added traffic, not
[29:39] knowing who is coming to and from those
[29:44] locations at the duplexes. We all know
[29:45] and I've seen it for myself because
[29:46] I've been around areas in duplexes
[29:50] before when you have duplexes, people
[29:53] are there temporarily, not focused on
[29:54] the community aspect of the community.
[30:02] They are not trying to get to know
[30:03] people in the community, they are there
[30:04] to rest their head temporarily until
[30:05] they find something permanent. This
[30:08] would be a detriment to our
[30:09] single-family dwelling community for
[30:13] that reason. I respect you very much if
[30:16] you would consider not rezoning that
[30:22] development
[30:24] >> Jonas Palmer and then Christopher
[30:30] Palmer
[30:43] >> How are you doing today? My name is
[30:49] Jonas Palmer I'm 21 years old and that
[30:50] was my mother that just spoke. She was
[30:54] talking about statistics and I'm here
[30:55] to talking about the community. The
[31:00] community keeps we are a single-family
[31:04] dwelling community about how our
[31:05] community has potentially dissolved
[31:06] going onto the back streets. I want to
[31:07] say that is not the case.. After being
[31:13] there for 21 years we are a close-knit
[31:14] community that cares about each other
[31:17] when new people move and we incorporate
[31:19] them into our things that have been
[31:21] into the community. With these duplexes
[31:23] being put in that may not be the case.
[31:36] I listen to what my parents are saying
[31:37] and talking about with the petition and
[31:38] the reactions they got from people and
[31:39] the general consensus is they do not
[31:40] want duplexes because I don't feel safe
[31:41] for their kids or the elderly don't
[31:42] feel safe in their homes and they don't
[31:46] feel safe taking walks and getting
[31:47] exercise because of the potential they
[31:49] duplex. Just the placing of it is
[31:53] inconvenient, there is no parking for
[31:58] the church. It's going to ruin the
[32:02] overall community feel. Not because
[32:03] they are temporary movers or they just
[32:05] come in to rent but because the
[32:06] community has been built and set and
[32:08] it's one it's been a minority community
[32:17] and incorporating people who don't know
[32:18] about it who may or may not care about
[32:23] it and may bring in things that are a
[32:29] detriment to the community I don't feel
[32:30] and the community does not feel that's
[32:31] okay and I wanted to speak on that
[32:32] thank you for your time
[32:33] >> [Applause]
[32:37] >> Christopher Palmer and then Maia
[32:42] Burns
[32:43] >> Christopher?
[33:03] >> He does not wish to speak but he is
[33:08] in opposition
[33:10] >> Maia Burns and then Jasmine Burns
[33:11] >> We can register in opposition
[33:25] >> Maia Burns is in opposition. Jasmine
[33:31] Burns in opposition.
[33:32] >> After Jasmine will be Gerard
[33:49] [Indiscernible]
[33:50] >> I have come here today to speak on
[33:51] behalf of of the people who can't speak
[33:55] for themselves. That is the elderly
[33:56] members of the community who live on
[34:00] Rockwall Street. Every Sunday I make my
[34:04] rounds and speak to the ones who are
[34:05] sick or shut in or can't get around. As
[34:09] I speak to them I get to hear a lot of
[34:10] concerns and how they feel about the
[34:13] neighborhood. Quite a few of them feel
[34:16] threatened by the presence of duplexes.
[34:21] I feel like this is not misplaced
[34:22] because duplexes do pose a present
[34:25] danger. Perhaps not in the tenants
[34:27] themselves but what the duplexes can
[34:31] bring. The higher traffic that comes
[34:32] from the increased population density
[34:35] will make efforts to come in and out of
[34:38] the community more difficult. This
[34:39] isn't just a minor inconvenience for
[34:43] those of us able-bodied but this can be
[34:45] an open danger to the elderly members
[34:46] because they may not get the help they
[34:49] need. My grandfather who lives on
[34:50] Rockwall Street close to the church is
[34:53] elderly and disabled and cannot get
[34:57] around. I am worried a lot of the time
[35:02] that he may not be able to get the help
[35:03] he needs because there is something
[35:07] obstructing first responders
[35:08] obstructing us from getting to him.
[35:12] Another elderly member who lives on
[35:14] that street very sweet woman who is 94
[35:16] years old can get around really well,
[35:22] very sweet lady, but I'm also worried
[35:25] about her safety because she is so much
[35:28] older I know it's going to be difficult
[35:29] for people to get to her and to think
[35:34] that could be stopped by something as
[35:38] simple as withholding the zoning from
[35:42] being rezoned, it seems like a
[35:46] no-brainer fix to me. Over all, that's
[35:47] what I'm worried about as a citizen.
[35:50] Thank you
[35:52] >> [Applause]
[35:58] >> I apologize but it looks like Gerard
[36:05] [Indiscernible]
[36:06] >> Afterwards is Angela Henderson
[36:13] >> Good evening. I've lived here for
[36:19] two years. My wife and I decided to
[36:22] live on the side of McKinney for the
[36:23] sense of community we felt while
[36:25] researching the area. There's a high a
[36:31] lot of minorities in the area and deep
[36:32] roots in my neighborhood especially on
[36:35] my corner. The three sets of neighbors
[36:36] have been there for more than 50 years
[36:38] and bringing in a set of duplexes will
[36:43] separate, it won't feel like the
[36:44] community that is there now. I'm in
[36:49] opposition of the duplex because I feel
[36:50] there is not a lot of care for the area
[36:55] and I think the duplex will make
[37:01] district 1 more of a temporary home
[37:02] instead of the community that's been
[37:04] there for 50 years.
[37:07] >> Thank you
[37:08] >> Angela Henderson and then
[37:11] [Indiscernible] Palmer
[37:17] >> Angela is in opposition to the
[37:24] rezoning
[37:25] >> [Indiscernible] Palmer
[37:30] >> Good evening. I simply want to say I
[37:32] grew up in that neighborhood, have gone
[37:35] to the church in that neighborhood for
[37:41] 50 years. That has been a single-family
[37:49] home residence. My feeling is bringing
[37:54] in duplexes is going to allow for
[37:55] something else, apartments and it will
[37:56] take away the home feeling in the
[37:59] neighborhood. As everyone has said,
[38:00] there are a lot of elderly people that
[38:02] I've known all my life. There are other
[38:10] neighborhoods in the city that want to
[38:13] keep that hometown feeling as McKinney
[38:15] says, you have that hometown feeling.
[38:18] In that neighborhood we want to keep
[38:23] that.
[38:24] >> Sheila Simmons
[38:29] >> She is in opposition
[38:30] >> Marco Nobles is...
[38:31] >> Is there anyone else that would like
[38:59] to speak?
[39:07] >> Seeing none. Move to close the
[39:08] public hearing
[39:09] >> Second
[39:13] >> All in favor?
[39:14] >> Please vote
[39:31] >> The public hearing is closed.
[39:38] Discussion?
[39:39] >> Kudos to the folks in the
[39:47] neighborhood. I don't think I've ever
[39:48] seen as organized a group of folks and
[39:52] never seen over 60 percent opposition.
[39:57] They have a neighborhood that's been
[40:00] that way for decades. A long time.
[40:07] [Indiscernible] in opposition to this
[40:13] >> I guess that goes the super
[40:16] majority. As a representative of that
[40:19] district, I want to say hats off to the
[40:24] community. I remember coming to my
[40:27] first city Council meeting and one of
[40:28] the most important things I wanted to
[40:30] do was make sure my community was
[40:33] engaged and understood the importance
[40:36] of local government and city Council
[40:37] meetings and if you look around and
[40:40] look out, I could not be more proud. To
[40:47] see this petition Council member
[40:48] Elliott and myself they do not have the
[40:49] super majority and there it goes so
[40:53] thank you
[40:54] >> Maybe that's why he did not show up
[40:57] >> Count me as three against it. I love
[41:02] the passion. I like to see that in the
[41:06] community. Thank you all for coming out
[41:07] and speaking on the item. To me, it
[41:11] does not look like it fits in your
[41:12] neighborhood so I'm against it
[41:20] >> Same thing. It's wonderful to see
[41:22] everybody come out. By the way, such a
[41:30] very thoughtful and respectful
[41:35] presentation of opposition. Which is
[41:46] always refreshing and accomplishes much
[41:47] more than disrespectful so thank you to
[41:48] all of you it was fantastic the way you
[41:49] came in and gave the facts and spoke
[41:50] passionately but respectfully and thank
[41:51] you. I know where I am on this.
[41:53] >> Kimberly I know you are out there.
[41:56] That's how you do a presentation. And
[41:58] this is how you put it together. We get
[42:03] to see these not as organized we've
[42:07] talked about before where we are
[42:08] watching a lot of things being built in
[42:11] our city placing them in spots they
[42:12] should not be placed and this is one of
[42:16] them. I've watch with these have done
[42:21] to communities and it destroys them so
[42:22] thank you for taking the time effort
[42:23] and passion to the Council because we
[42:24] will kill it
[42:25] >> I'd like to point out
[42:34] [Indiscernible] second go around
[42:35] because most all of them were here at
[42:36] the Planning and Zoning [Indiscernible]
[42:39] so thank you for your resilience and
[42:40] coming back
[42:44] >> I find it fascinating. I will not
[42:49] support this but we had something in my
[42:51] district that a lot of people came out.
[42:58] But this Council went ahead and shoved
[42:59] it down our throats and passed it. It's
[43:06] really interesting, I appreciate these
[43:10] people coming out and doing that but
[43:11] this Council plays both sides. The
[43:15] reasons they gave for not having and
[43:20] it's not even multifamily just a couple
[43:24] of duplexes are the same reasons people
[43:26] don't like multifamily in their areas
[43:32] or backyards. So many times, this
[43:34] Council ignores the pleas of those
[43:36] people so I find it fascinating we are
[43:39] all going to vote no on this one
[43:42] because of these good people. I want
[43:46] you to remember that the next time
[43:51] people come against other. Projects in
[43:52] their neighborhoods they might not be
[43:56] as organized but they still are sincere
[43:57] about wanting to keep their
[43:58] neighborhood what it's like when they
[44:04] bought it. That's my comment
[44:05] >> The staff found it just as
[44:10] fascinating when you voted down the car
[44:11] lots and then doubled back and
[44:13] [Indiscernible] so the same dynamic
[44:14] played when you go from one way to from
[44:19] one thing and turn around and vote
[44:20] another way for another thing so you
[44:21] can't have it both ways
[44:24] >> [Indiscernible]
[44:25] >> Same dynamic
[44:29] >> [Indiscernible] was a great one to
[44:30] vote down and whether you didn't
[44:32] [Indiscernible]
[44:37] >> Same dynamic. We do everything the
[44:40] councilman wants us to do and now we
[44:43] are doing it [Indiscernible] it's the
[44:46] same dynamic it's what you do every day
[44:48] >> I have a motion. I move to deny this
[44:56] >> Second
[45:00] >> Please cast your votes
[45:01] >> Motion passes
[45:02] >> 200048z2, act on a request to rezone
[45:26] subject property from plan center
[45:28] district to residential estates district
[45:32] 600 feet west of US Highway 75 and 200
[45:36] feet north of White Avenue
[45:37] >> This is a request to rezone the
[45:43] subject property from plan center to
[45:47] Red-1 residential estate
[45:52] District, it's a 3.8 acre tract staff
[45:53] has reviewed the request with the
[45:56] applicant while the property is
[45:57] currently zoned for commercial uses its
[46:03] location on the west side of a
[46:06] significant floodplain and has little
[46:07] to no access for commercial development.
[46:13] There is an existing home on the site
[46:14] and the rezoning will allow the
[46:15] property owner to rebuild and expand
[46:19] their existing home. We have reviewed
[46:20] the request and are in support of the
[46:24] request. The Planning and Zoning
[46:27] Commission heard the item and
[46:28] recommends approval and I'm happy to
[46:29] answer any questions
[46:30] >> Any questions for Jennifer?
[46:37] >> My understanding is the applicant is
[46:41] here
[46:42] >> Good evening. Cross engineering here
[46:50] representing the owner. Due to the
[46:54] limited access commercial use would be
[46:56] hard on the property so we request to
[46:57] keep it as a single-family use. He'd
[47:01] like to construct his home on the
[47:02] property and I'm here to answer any
[47:04] questions
[47:05] >> There has been a home there for a
[47:06] long time
[47:08] >> Are there any questions?
[47:13] >> This is a public hearing, would
[47:15] anyone like to speak?
[47:16] >> Would anyone like to speak?
[47:17] >> Move to close the public hearing and
[47:32] approve the item as presented
[47:33] >> Second
[47:35] >> Please cast your votes
[47:36] >> Motion passes
[47:37] >> 20002 SUP three, specific use permit
[48:03] request to allow for an indoor gun
[48:04] range located northeast corner of
[48:05] Industrial Boulevard and Millwood Road
[48:06] >> The applicant is requesting a
[48:11] specific use permit to allow for an
[48:12] indoor gun range on the subject
[48:15] property. It is on the north side of
[48:18] industrial, there are two relatively
[48:21] new spec industrial buildings on the
[48:24] site currently. The applicant would
[48:27] like to propose to include an indoor
[48:34] gun range.. Staff was unable to support
[48:35] the request it was a tough one for us
[48:36] because the area is industrial in
[48:39] nature. But on the north side of the
[48:42] subject property there is a residential
[48:43] neighborhood that sits 65 feet away
[48:49] from the proposed range. At the time of
[48:50] the Planning and Zoning Commission the
[48:51] applicant requested the indoor gun
[48:56] range. At the meeting they did request
[48:57] the applicant tied sound mitigation as
[49:05] part of the Internet [Indiscernible] we
[49:06] are appreciative of the proposed
[49:07] standards they are including in the SUP
[49:12] which include double cinderblock wall
[49:13] with a minimum of four inches spray
[49:17] foam between the cinderblocks. A four
[49:18] inch concrete roof provided over the
[49:20] top and rubber burns at the end of each
[49:24] range. We are appreciative of the sound
[49:28] mitigations. Staff cannot confirm these
[49:33] mitigations will alleviate potential
[49:34] noise outside of the building which is
[49:36] our concern with being so close to
[49:40] residential properties. We do have
[49:41] performance standards to help mitigate
[49:43] potential noise above a certain decibel.
[49:51] As part of the research, staff and I
[49:52] visited Dick few indoor gun ranges and
[49:53] they did range quite a bit on which
[49:54] ones we could hear from on the outside
[49:56] and which ones we could not. That was
[50:00] the foundation for the recommendation
[50:04] of denial. The area itself is
[50:09] industrial so we understand the logic
[50:10] but with that proximity to residential
[50:11] we were uncomfortable recommending
[50:12] approval. Planning and Zoning did hear
[50:14] this and they recommended approval. And
[50:17] I'm happy to answer any questions I
[50:20] believe the applicant is here to speak
[50:21] >> Jennifer, were there any
[50:26] [Indiscernible] associated with
[50:29] [Indiscernible]
[50:30] >> I don't know what an STC rating is
[50:35] >> The sound coefficient
[50:41] [Indiscernible] tells you what decibel
[50:47] sound you can hear
[50:49] >> The applicant did do a great job of
[50:50] providing a variety of sound studies.
[50:53] None tied to the specific mitigation
[50:54] they are going to include. They did
[51:01] show us videos of sound studies done
[51:02] inside of a facility and on the roof of
[51:04] another facility that were within a
[51:08] comparable range but they were not tied
[51:09] to the mitigation they were proposing.
[51:12] I'm assuming the applicant is here. You
[51:16] will hear from him and he will talk
[51:18] about the mitigation they are
[51:20] proposing, where it is seen. I don't
[51:25] believe it is here in North Texas but
[51:26] you can talk more to that
[51:28] >> Are there any other questions for
[51:34] staff?
[51:35] >> Jennifer, what's on the north side
[51:41] of the building? What's outside of the
[51:45] actual building itself?
[51:46] >> The only thing is the required
[51:49] screening wall. Just the rear entry
[51:50] fire lane and the screening wall
[51:53] >> The floor plan shows there are five
[51:57] or six doors on the north side
[52:03] [Indiscernible]
[52:06] >> You will hear from the applicant the
[52:12] range themselves are going East and
[52:13] West so the berms they are proposing
[52:14] will be on those ends to collect the
[52:18] bullets and get them out of the
[52:23] facility. Any doors you see on the rear
[52:24] is just for entry access to the
[52:27] building.
[52:28] >> If the applicant could come up.
[52:29] >> Mr. Mayor and members of Council,
[52:42] thank you for allowing me time to
[52:46] speak. I'd also like to thank city
[52:47] staff for their time and effort they
[52:52] dedicated my application. Many years
[52:53] ago I was asked which lasts longer the
[52:56] first car the first girlfriend or your
[53:03] first 22? I laugh because I knew the
[53:07] answer but for me it was not a 22 but a
[53:08] 3030 my parents got me for my 18th
[53:11] birthday. Looking back I believe I
[53:14] sound like Ralphie in a Christmas story
[53:15] when asked what I wanted and I said mom
[53:18] I want a model 336 3030 lever action
[53:21] rifle. My father introduced me to
[53:22] shooting when I was eight. We would go
[53:25] to our family property in Little Elm
[53:29] and I would shoot his 22 rifle for as
[53:30] long as he would let me. He not only
[53:32] taught me how to shoot how to shoot
[53:37] responsibly. As a surgeon he had seen
[53:39] the damage the improper use of firearms
[53:42] cost. He taught me the consequences of
[53:46] not being responsible. Those lessons
[53:47] have stuck with me and I have passed
[53:48] them on to my children and anyone I
[53:53] teach. What my father did not know is
[53:56] he open the door to a sport I love and
[53:59] enjoy to this day. By the time my
[54:00] father sold the property I had spent
[54:02] many hours with friends shooting. I
[54:06] have lost count of how many people I
[54:10] talked to shoot and I'm proud to say
[54:11] one person became a firearms instructor
[54:14] for the Air Force. This doesn't sound
[54:17] unusual to you learn the friend was a
[54:18] five foot five inch 19-year-old female
[54:20] a rare accomplishment in the mid-80s. I
[54:26] told you my history because it mirrors
[54:27] how many Texans for so many years learn
[54:31] to shoot. Unfortunately, this way is
[54:32] slowly becoming a thing of the past
[54:34] because the open land we use to shoot
[54:36] is now home to the businesses. Our
[54:46] primary goal of opening the range of
[54:47] McKinney is to build a place for people
[54:48] to experience what I and so many others
[54:49] have loved for so long. Instead of
[54:51] being out in a field in 101 degree heat
[54:54] they will be in a modern
[54:58] air-conditioned facility. The range of
[54:59] McKinney consists of 18 indoor lanes a
[55:04] virtual training system two classrooms
[55:07] retail space a warehouse a catering
[55:12] kitchen and business offices. Our live
[55:16] fire range uses equipment designed for
[55:17] and used by military and law
[55:18] enforcement agencies around the world.
[55:26] The environment in the range area will
[55:27] be clean and comfortable with a system
[55:28] designed to purify the air of smoke and
[55:29] lead in seconds not minutes. In
[55:30] addition to live fire training, the
[55:32] range of McKinney will be the first
[55:38] private range in Texas to house the 300
[55:42] virtual immersive training system which
[55:44] is currently used by handful of
[55:45] military and law enforcement agencies
[55:48] around the world. This training system
[55:53] provides realistic fully immersive
[55:54] training which allows users to feel as
[55:55] if they are in the middle of the action.
[55:59] It prepares them for what may happen
[56:00] and also teaches how to de-escalate the
[56:03] situation. The system is like nothing
[56:07] you have experienced. I have seen
[56:11] seasoned professionals come out of the
[56:12] sessions sweating in disbelief of how
[56:15] realistic the experience was. Demand
[56:19] for the system will come from law
[56:20] enforcement agencies businesses school
[56:21] districts and individuals and bring
[56:22] people from all over Texas and the
[56:26] surrounding states to McKinney and
[56:27] these people will stay in local hotels
[56:35] are classrooms we use for courses
[56:36] taught by instructors and they will be
[56:37] available for private and group
[56:38] lessons. Since the start of the pandemic
[56:42] millions of people have taken
[56:43] advantage of their Second Amendment
[56:46] right to bear arms. The new gun owners
[56:47] will want to have a nice place to train
[56:49] and learn and in turn become better
[56:53] gun owners. Why should the gun owners be
[56:57] forced to go and spend money at ranges
[56:58] in other cities when they can stay here
[57:01] in McKinney. The retail and waiting
[57:03] areas are designed to be open and
[57:04] comfortable so clients can shop and
[57:07] relax. Our retail area will stock new
[57:09] and used firearms accessories and
[57:12] ammunition. My mother had a great head
[57:13] for business and taught me product
[57:16] selection brings in clients that
[57:17] customer service keeps them coming back
[57:20] so we will provide the best in customer
[57:26] service. [Indiscernible]
[57:27] >> You may already have what you need
[57:45] to be successful
[57:49] >> If you are saying asking me to stop,
[57:53] I'm happy to
[57:58] >> To be clear, we limit the public
[58:02] comments however the becomes a time
[58:11] [Indiscernible] I don't want to be
[58:12] disrespectful of your presentation
[58:13] >> I just wanted to make sure and
[58:14] introduce you to the product so you
[58:15] understand exactly what we want to do.
[58:19] What I did not get to and what I would
[58:22] like to say is the wall configuration
[58:25] in our building was used in Illinois.
[58:30] The sound requirements at this facility
[58:32] in Illinois were that they could not be
[58:36] heard because this facility is in a
[58:38] strip center. The adjacent businesses
[58:41] next to them in the strip center could
[58:48] not hear the gunfire. You could be
[58:50] outside the building and the only thing
[58:51] you hear is noise from the streets
[58:52] >> I don't know the exact value, the
[58:59] decibel level is around 68 to 72.
[59:05] >> Say that again
[59:06] >> [Indiscernible] is how much sound
[59:12] volume can be heard on the other side.
[59:23] >> I am not sure the sound engineers
[59:25] have not given that me that
[59:29] information. I know the videos I
[59:31] provided to staff were taken outside of
[59:38] the range in Chicago. You could not
[59:39] hear any gunfire
[59:40] >> And you have committed to that
[59:45] >> We are spending in excess of
[59:46] $500,000 to make sure it does not happen
[59:51] >> In the future, if I were you and I
[59:56] was presenting this again, the sound
[59:57] engineer could identify the STC
[59:58] assembly and you could say and that we
[1:00:03] would clear it up and we would not have
[1:00:07] this dialogue. Jennifer, you heard the
[1:00:11] video? And you agree you could not hear
[1:00:14] anything?
[1:00:15] >> [Speaker off mic]
[1:00:16] >> Mr. Houser, is there a way possible
[1:00:20] since this is an SUP to tie that CO to
[1:00:31] that sound barrier somehow to protect
[1:00:32] those residents?
[1:00:33] >> Come out and shoot a gun and stand
[1:00:36] outside to make sure the residents
[1:00:39] >> I think it would be better to tie it
[1:00:44] to the standards so you can technically
[1:00:48] measure it. No noise
[1:00:49] >> [Indiscernible] maybe Mr. Mayor
[1:00:59] could put it in the motion
[1:01:00] >> Are there any other questions for
[1:01:10] the applicant?
[1:01:11] >> This is a public hearing
[1:01:13] >> There are some comments. John Feltus
[1:01:28] >> Good evening. I've lived here almost
[1:01:34] 20 years. When I moved here there was a
[1:01:37] gun range on 380. I'm a lifetime
[1:01:39] shooter but more than that I spent a
[1:01:43] year in Academy selling firearms
[1:01:47] full-time. I sold a lot of guns and one
[1:01:48] of the things I saw commonly is people
[1:01:51] that bought them did not know how to
[1:01:54] use them. They had nowhere to go. They
[1:01:58] were reluctant to step outside their
[1:02:02] comfort zone so they take them home and
[1:02:03] put them in the night stand and feel
[1:02:04] safe and don't have a clue what they
[1:02:06] are doing. They need a place here where
[1:02:08] they can learn these things, where they
[1:02:11] can do it properly and safely and not
[1:02:16] shoot your kids because they are
[1:02:17] playing in the street because they are
[1:02:19] scared. I would ask you to please and
[1:02:24] I'm not trying to overrule Jennifer by
[1:02:26] any means she's done her job well but
[1:02:27] we need a place here. Allen has one,
[1:02:33] Plano has several. We are the only town
[1:02:35] around that does not and you are losing
[1:02:36] money and revenue off of it and we are
[1:02:41] losing a good opportunity. Please vote
[1:02:42] in favor
[1:02:45] >> I'm not showing any other cards. Is
[1:02:51] there anybody here that would like to
[1:02:59] speak?
[1:03:00] >> I gave you a card but I'm not sure
[1:03:01] what happened
[1:03:02] >> My name is [Indiscernible]. I live
[1:03:11] at 3300 Brentwood. I am a lifelong gun
[1:03:16] enthusiast. I highly recommend
[1:03:17] everybody support their Second
[1:03:19] Amendment right to carry but more
[1:03:21] importantly if you are going to carry
[1:03:26] you need to practice. You need to take
[1:03:27] courses and learn what you are doing
[1:03:28] because the firearm is not a toy. We
[1:03:33] need places to go out and practice that
[1:03:38] skill because that's what it is a skill
[1:03:39] and you need to practice. If you don't
[1:03:42] practice you have no reason carrying a
[1:03:46] firearm. I say that as somebody who
[1:03:48] thinks everybody should. I have trained
[1:03:51] a number of my friends to use firearms.
[1:03:54] One of the biggest things I get to when
[1:03:57] I talk to people about how often do you
[1:04:01] go out and practice or hit the range. I
[1:04:05] don't because there's not one anywhere
[1:04:06] around I have to go too far. There is
[1:04:11] always excuses but number one is the
[1:04:15] proximity.. The closer you have a place
[1:04:17] the more likely you are going to be to
[1:04:25] go. If it's going to offer the training
[1:04:26] they claim they are going to offer, I
[1:04:30] would highly recommend you approve this
[1:04:35] because that is something I am myself
[1:04:36] as a McKinney resident will use. I will
[1:04:41] take my friends there. I will get other
[1:04:42] people to go there because that's what
[1:04:44] I do. Right now I get them to go to
[1:04:46] other places. Let's keep that here in
[1:04:52] McKinney. If we are going to have
[1:04:56] people here in McKinney carrying
[1:04:57] firearms we need to have places in
[1:04:58] McKinney for them to practice that
[1:05:01] skill. I respect the staff has done
[1:05:02] their work and decided against it but I
[1:05:07] believe it's incorrect and I believe we
[1:05:08] should have a place to hone our skills.
[1:05:12] >> Is there anybody else to speak to
[1:05:16] the item? I will entertain a motion to
[1:05:18] close the public hearing
[1:05:22] >> So moved, second
[1:05:23] >> Cast your votes
[1:05:24] >> Motion passes
[1:05:33] >> Discussion
[1:05:37] >> I think staff recommended denial for
[1:05:43] the right reason. They are concerned
[1:05:46] about the residential so they wanted to
[1:05:48] make sure that's what they were looking
[1:05:51] out for as this will be an SUP
[1:05:53] requirement that would potentially
[1:05:57] disrupt. I think we can require that
[1:06:02] they produce on the front side a
[1:06:05] construction the ratings of the walls
[1:06:08] they will build. That can easily be
[1:06:11] contrasted with the noise generated on
[1:06:17] the inside and it sounds like you are
[1:06:18] willing to do that already. So I know
[1:06:27] for me the only thing you did not say
[1:06:30] you said being outside of 101 degree
[1:06:33] whether it's also legal so I prefer a
[1:06:37] legal and safe place for anyone
[1:06:41] carrying a gun being able to practice
[1:06:43] here as long as we mitigate that
[1:06:46] concern staff has very rightfully
[1:06:50] expressed. Does anyone else have a
[1:06:54] comment?
[1:06:55] >> I'd like to say thank you for doing
[1:06:58] business in McKinney. We've needed this
[1:07:02] for a very long time and I appreciate
[1:07:03] you investing your time and money in
[1:07:04] McKinney and I hope you are very
[1:07:07] successful. I saw you present at
[1:07:08] Planning and Zoning and I'm pleased to
[1:07:12] see you here and I know you care about
[1:07:14] what you are doing and you are bringing
[1:07:15] a good quality product so thank you
[1:07:16] very much
[1:07:21] >> I look forward as long as it is tied
[1:07:22] to making sure those residents are
[1:07:25] represented aren't interrupted by the
[1:07:27] noise and making sure it's maintained
[1:07:31] throughout. I know we have good legal
[1:07:37] team that can tie that to the SUP. It
[1:07:43] has to be maintained so how those walls
[1:07:46] deteriorate with the sound somehow gets
[1:07:49] too loud, the SUP will be revoked.
[1:07:53] Maintain that sound quality
[1:07:55] >> I'm in favor
[1:07:56] >> I'd like to know when you will open
[1:08:03] >> I will be one of the first ones there
[1:08:09] >> [Indiscernible]
[1:08:13] >> I will ask for a motion. And to
[1:08:22] contain the language
[1:08:23] >> Move to approve with the stipulation
[1:08:24] on the sound
[1:08:25] >> Second
[1:08:31] >> Mark, you have enough to go on what
[1:08:34] we are looking for.
[1:08:35] >> Please vote
[1:08:40] >> Motion passes
[1:08:41] >> Congratulations
[1:08:42] >> 200006z2 rezone property from Local
[1:09:00] Commercial District to Planned
[1:09:01] Development District to modify the
[1:09:02] development standards to allow for
[1:09:03] multifamily uses
[1:09:04] >> Just here to introduce the item, the
[1:09:10] applicant requests the public hearing
[1:09:11] be continued until August 18
[1:09:12] >> I believe the purpose was for them
[1:09:19] to co-back to the residence and see if
[1:09:22] they can't get agreement from the
[1:09:26] residence to be in support
[1:09:27] >> That is correct
[1:09:28] >> That's their best chance
[1:09:37] >> I'm okay with it being tabled.
[1:09:44] Everybody else?
[1:09:45] >> Move to table the item
[1:09:47] >> We need a public hearing
[1:09:48] >> And continue the public hearing
[1:09:49] >> Second
[1:09:50] >> Motion passes
[1:10:21] >> 200626, act on a resolution
[1:10:22] authorizing the creation of an ad hoc
[1:10:23] Throckmorton statue advisory board to
[1:10:24] oversee staff and expert research
[1:10:25] related to the Throckmorton statue
[1:10:26] located on city-owned property
[1:10:27] >> Thank you, Assistant City Manager.
[1:10:31] This resolution formalizes the
[1:10:32] Throckmorton advisory board as
[1:10:33] presented at the Work Session. Happy to
[1:10:38] stand for any questions. And Mark Doty
[1:10:41] is available
[1:10:42] >> Are there questions for Kim?
[1:10:47] >> Is there a motion
[1:10:51] >> Some discussion
[1:10:55] >> We had discussion in Work Session.
[1:10:58] It's highly disappointing and
[1:11:01] discouraging to look at my Council
[1:11:09] peers who dismissed and as you can see,
[1:11:15] there's a better part of your community
[1:11:16] out here that feels dismissed
[1:11:20] disappointed and discouraged. We are
[1:11:24] asking you to not sit on your hands and
[1:11:25] not have an ad hoc committee, we are
[1:11:28] not going to sit by and be dismissed.
[1:11:36] You might look at me and see one person
[1:11:37] on the Council you don't agree with and
[1:11:38] you don't like and you could care less
[1:11:40] to have the conversation but you need
[1:11:41] to look out the window. Looked past me
[1:11:46] because I'm not me I'm representing the
[1:11:53] constituents in your community. I'm not
[1:11:55] talking about you I'm talking about me
[1:11:56] right now and those constituents out
[1:12:01] there. As quickly as you dismissed me
[1:12:04] earlier at Work Session, we are not
[1:12:06] going to be dismissed and be
[1:12:14] disrespected. So again, you can hear
[1:12:15] us, you can see as and these numbers
[1:12:20] will grow. The division is not being
[1:12:26] caused by the person calling out the
[1:12:30] problem. Bringing awareness to the
[1:12:33] problem.
[1:12:45] >> This is inappropriate and I need to
[1:12:46] ask you to step away from the dais
[1:12:51] >> The comments that were made that the
[1:12:58] group your constituents which are my
[1:13:00] constituents and everyone's
[1:13:03] constituents here, I don't subscribe to
[1:13:05] the thought that engaging the whole
[1:13:10] community is disrespecting anybody.
[1:13:13] Ignoring anybody. It's what we are
[1:13:14] required to do
[1:13:15] >>[ I'm speaking right now
[1:13:19] >> Multiple speakers]
[1:13:22] >> I was not done and speaking
[1:13:23] >> La'shadion
[1:13:24] >> No No No you don't get to cut me off
[1:13:28] in the middle of my comments
[1:13:35] >> Council member Shemwell
[1:13:36] >> You do not get to cut me off
[1:13:37] >> We will be back in five minutes
[1:13:47] >> Call a recess all you want but we
[1:13:48] will not be dismissed
[1:13:55] >>We are back and we will have this
[1:14:02] discussion respectfully and with that I
[1:14:03] make a motion to adjourn
[1:14:08] >> So moved, we are adjourned
[1:14:11] >> [The meeting has ended]