 So, again, good evening, everyone. My name is Amy Tomas. I work with development services and the deputy director for development services. I know most of you or probably all of us by now. So, again, welcome to tonight's meeting and thank you for joining. So, I guess the first thing is just to go through and do roll call. To see if we have enough task force members in attendance. So, I'll just go through the names I have Gemma Kennedy, Steve, are you are you filling in for Steve? He has not asked me to for today. He was supposed to join. Okay. Thank you, Bianca Patricia Duarte. I think I already saw you, Marta, you are here, Blaine Tucker, or Chad, I don't see the one on there, Don or Cindy, Jody, I think David, you are filling in for Jody, right? That's correct, Jared Peniel or Sergio, I saw Sergio earlier. Sam, Sam Aguirre, John Dotsky, here, John Brennan, here, John, all right, Captain Hightower, I saw you. Sir, yes, myself, Savita from city attorney's office. She will not make it today, but Felix is here instead. Mike, I saw you, Danny, I saw you as well. Jeremy McDonald's, not here. Jenny Ramirez. Yes, sir. Denise Hastings, I saw your name earlier. Art Ardando. Art, you are attending, right? I saw your name. Here? There. Sam Aguirre. Ashley, Daisy, David Dotson, Anissa Schell, I saw Anissa earlier. Hello, Steve Peterson, Barbara Ackman, Mike Shannon will be attending shortly. Bianca, I already know you are here. And Mena, Topa Wiggins, I know you are here. Stacy Jones, here. Parker Dixon, a Parker, Margaret Leeds, Bo Anderson, David Ulera, we got you. Eddie Rodriguez, Christine Hill. I think I saw Christine. Hey, Christine. Renee Zamora, Gina Eisenberg, Alma Jimenez, Cynthia Spillman, Don Pavelin. I'm here. Jim, I can't pronounce your last name, so I saw you already. I'll just add you. Lisa Petricks. Yes, I'm here. Thanks, Amin. Hi, Lisa. I guess that's it. So I got everybody. And I see Mike Shannon just joined as well. And I think I saw a couple. Yeah, Sam, Sam Aguirre just joined. Yes, sir, Sam. Thank you. Sorry about that. No, no worries. Perfect timing. Okay. Did I miss anybody? Anybody who's joining, I didn't call your name. I see Steve has joined. Steve or Stig. All right. Welcome, Steve. And I see a summer great house. Thank you for joining us today. Thank you. Did I miss anybody? Oh, I mean, I just got a text from Steve. He's having trouble getting in. So he might join us shortly. He can't access the WebEx for some reason. Oh, okay. I thought he just joined. Maybe he's, he's trying. Yeah, he should be able to. So sometimes just for whatever reason, you try to connect and doesn't allow you, but he should be able to do that. Thank you, Gemma. All right. So with that said, again, let me just jump into the agenda. So basically we, we just did the roll call. And just jumping into last meeting, the meeting minutes from last time. Anybody has any questions about them, concerns, comments, or are we good to go? Any of the task force members can, you know, chip in and let us know. I guess. Yes. With one of a district one reps like Anisha or Stacy, you want to comment on the, we had the meeting with the council and Bravo called like a week and a half ago. I just appreciate it. Maybe one of them might just chime in with, briefly what transpired at that meeting. John, and I mean, I'll jump in on that before we get started on that. So hey everybody, it's Mike Shannon. Good to see everybody. John, we're going to get to that. There was a couple of meetings over the last week and a half. That's kind of going to help us move forward a little bit. So let's go through a couple items, maybe the meeting minutes first and then we'll jump into that. I want to talk a little bit about the data and the pilot program, but I think item number four, we'll really jump into that because I think it'll lead us a little bit on some of our next steps moving forward. Is that all right to everybody? Yes, sir. Here's some head nods, some thumbs up and okay. All right, we'll just pin that for a few minutes, John. Thanks. All right. So I guess basically everybody's good with the meeting minutes. Sounds like it. All right. The next item is basically going through the pilot program. Let me pull that and we can go through the numbers to show you what we did last weekend. Let me zoom in a little. Can everyone see it? All right. Thank you. Okay. So immediately jumping into those numbers. So last weekend ended basically January 30th on Sunday. We did 300, we, PD received 338 calls on those three days basically. Code managed to investigate and go to 116 of those. Which is typical about, you know, 30% so far. And then we actually found 11 locations that they do have violations. We refer those to PD. PD issued three citations and then there was nine locations that we couldn't. Basically get our readings due to, again, safety reasons and things like that. So overall, on the right hand side, you can see the total so far. So in 15 weekends, PD received on those three days or three nights, 5,541 calls. We investigated 2017 of those. 204 of them they had violations and they were referred to PD. 126 citations were issued 110 locations. We were not able to get our readings. So again, it seems the numbers every weekend are roughly within the same percentage. All these numbers are kind of lining up so far. So again, we did about 37% of the calls we received from PD. And about 65% of those that they are in violation are residential. 31% are business and 4% Riverwalk, which mainly Riverwalk is business, but we always separated those just to make sure we know the location. And stop me at any time if you have any questions. So again, we broke those 200 set 240 citations or violations that we found. And we have them by district residential or business or Riverwalk. So again, that's just the breakdown of what I just went through the 65% residential 31 business and 4% Riverwalk. This is kind of the breakdown per district. And this is again the number of citations issued per district as well. The 126 citations that I just mentioned earlier. This is broken down by specifically each district and what type of business or residential is that. So again, just a breakdown of the information that provided about. We added this time this table here. Again, without identifying exactly the names of the businesses or the address of the residential property. But we just picked basically the district that they had the highest repeat offenders. So for example, in district 1, we have 12 repeat offenders. We have 12 addresses that they are popping up more often than others. Those 12 locations, they got 32 citations basically issued to them. Code enforcement as we talked about every time code enforcement referred 40 of those to PD, but 32 of them they received physically received citations. And again, we are not breaking it down to exactly who those locations are or businesses or addresses for houses. Again, we are just trying to give you some idea of what's going on. District 2, there is 3 repeat offenders. 6 refer to PD 2 citations and so forth. Again, you can see some districts are not listed because we did not get repeat offenders in those districts. So district 3, 8, 9 and 10, we did not get the same address multiple times. So we did not list those, but you can tell from just these repeat offenders. Those are a lot of citations already about 37 citations basically within those repeat offenders. So again, this is just small summary to provide that to you guys and to show you where the majority of the citations and where the majority of the repeat offenders. Are which district? I mean, can you go to the chart right above that? Yeah, that one. Yes, ma'am. So again, this one is the citations that have been issued to again residential or business or river work locations. Within the 15 weekends that we managed to basically infest the gate. So what we're saying is district 1, the 68 citations 32 work to repeat offenders 32 of them or repeat offenders. Yes. Yes, Gemma. That is accurate. So basically half of the citations in district 1 are given to 12 repeat offenders basically 12 locations received 32 citations out of the 68. That had been issued so far. And in district 5, they had 25 citations. That's been one of the highest, but they didn't have a lot of repeat offenders. Yes, just one, one, one location came multiple times basically. But the other ones were just one time. I guess a fender if you will. So, no, that's definitely a good Gemma. That's the reason why we put this is to start analyzing the data a little bit and trying to figure out where, again, the repeat offenders are out of those 126 citations where are the majority of those citations going to. And can you tell us roughly the percentage of those repeat offenders that are residential versus business? I think if I'm not mistaken, Jenny, you can jump in if you have that information, but just based on the comment here, it says 65% of citations issued to businesses were to repeat offenders. I don't have in front of me the breakdown of basically all these repeat offenders, how much of those are businesses compared to residential. Jenny, do you know that or do you have that handy? Yes, sir. So this table is actually representing just businesses. It was pulling just businesses. Our repeat offenders, I think we only had two residential properties that were falling into a repeat offender. So they didn't even really fall into the list. The majority of these were two or more locations. So it was just the businesses at this point. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. Great question, Colleen. Thank you. All right. Any other questions about this data? This is John Daske. I'd actually like to thank you guys. This is, I think, additional helpful information, you know, as we continue to work through it. There have been requests for analysis. And so I think this is really helpful. So I wanted to say thank you to everybody. A follow on question would be if this is 37% of the calls, that means 63% of the calls were not investigated. And so I guess a follow on question just in terms of, again, answering how big a deal this is to people. If that 63% has similar repeat calls for one noise complaint, or if it's a smattering, and in terms of for future use, trying to triage responses. If there are three or four calls to a given noise complaint versus if you're just going first through the gate investigating and letting, letting the similar timed ones lapse without investigation would, would be helpful. Just trying to steer the police and or whomever is going to be enforcing to be potentially more effective. Absolutely. Great comment, John. I really appreciate that. And just to let you know, the next item basically is to give you and show you a little bit more detailed information. So hopefully again, that additional information we're going to provide hopefully will answer some of your questions. Not completely everything you just talked about, but it will give you a little bit, not just you the whole team here, give you a little bit more idea of, you know, what's happening and where we stand. So there's no, I'm sorry. I was just going to ask, can we also pour over these statistics somewhere at a website? Is it open to the public? Or is it just here that during our meeting that we're having access to this excellent statistics? Thank you again also. Thank you, Martha. Yes, this information, this exact report is basically on our website. So, whatever we show you in the meetings actually is posted online at the same location on DSD website. So it's open to the public. As I said, the more detailed information we haven't yet posted online. I know some members talked about they want all the information online. And some of the task force members said no. That would be again the next item we're going to talk about go through some details, show you what we have. And then I guess the decision would be made on what do we want to do with that data? Do we want to put it online or not? But right now this summary reports are basically posted online on a weekly basis. Thank you. Thank you, Martha. All right. I mean, there's a couple of questions in the chat. Just sorry. I think Don's got a couple of questions. We might we might get into that here in a little bit. But Don, just I see your comments. Why were the public? Why I'm sorry, why we the public are not entitled to know who the repeater offenders are? We're going to have a conversation about that. So thanks, Ty. We'll get to that. I think Parker has a question. Why the gap in violations and citations? Parker, we've had a conversation about that a little bit over the past several months. We can certainly go over that again. The process right now, certainly just to remind everyone, is these three nights that the data that we're sharing with you are the three night shifts, right? They're just a snapshot of the week. The last 15 weeks, I mean, is that where we're at? Yes. Since October 7th. Code officers are assigned to do this 100% to be the first responders, if you will, to get to as many as they can. That's why we're getting to about 30% of them, maybe a little over 30% of them now. Not quite 50%, but we get to about 30% of those calls, 40% of those calls as shown on the report. If there's a violation, meaning a noise level higher than what's prescribed in today's current code, we then request SAPD to come back shortly thereafter and issue the citation. So that has some benefits and some challenges that this group has talked about, some efficiencies, some inefficiencies. But, you know, Parker, we've had that, I think we've talked about a little bit, so I don't want to go too much more into it. But if you had a specific question about that, maybe we can tackle that or we can talk more about that in a little bit on another agenda item. What do you think? I just, it's more so just specifically, he's not able to get out there to issue the citation. I'm not talking about triaging the calls, all to get over all, I'm just talking about specifically a violation and why they're not able to get there to issue the citation. Sure. Okay. Well, let's, Parker, let's leave that a little bit towards, I think it's going to be part of us moving forward that conversation about how we move forward and how we address that, right? How do we address, you know, calls that we receive as a city, no matter who it is and how we respond if there's a deathable reading or one other potential violation of the ordinance. Can we just put a hold on that for a little bit as we get a little bit further into these, the data that we're going to share? Okay. Okay. So, I mean, I think I'm going to just, I'm going to dive, I'm going to take over a little bit. I'm going to share my screen a little bit because before we get into the details, I want to let everybody know the noise, you know, we're doing this. You know, we're doing two things all at once, right? They're kind of the same, but we're doing the current pilot program, which is the alternate enforcement of the current ordinance. We also have this charge as the task force is to see what we need to do, if anything, with the current ordinance to modify policies, procedures, et cetera. So even though they're overlapping, we all know why they're a little bit separate. So let's just continue to look at this for a few minutes. Overall, this summary, we're still seeing about the same information, right? Code enforcement is getting to about, again, 30 to 40% of the calls that are coming in those times, which is Thursday, Friday, Saturday nights. Only a little over 10% of those calls, we find the violation, meaning a noise level reading that's higher than what's prescribed in the code. So we can take that, I mean, we're going to ask this task force to try to understand and make some determination as to what that means. Does that mean 90% of the time the calls are just not violations and only 10% or is it just maybe it's 30 minutes or so that it's taking to get out to that call? The noise goes down. There's a lot of information that we can glean from that. Certainly I talked about already that the handoff policy that we have right now with code and SAPD, there's some reasons why only about 50% of the violations that we find as a code enforcement officer are then able to be issued a citation. Some are choosing not to, some are just can't, just challenging. So those are some of the stats we can glean from that. I think this group has talked about it before. Of the violations that we're finding, two thirds are residential, a third are businesses. That hasn't changed much since the first month or so. I mean, and Jenny, is that right? I mean, I know we can go back to the data, but that's held pretty close to what we have seen. Is that about right? Yes, sir, that's correct. Any extreme up or down? Yeah, this kind of two thirds, one third. And again, I don't know if 2,000 data points is enough to, I mean, we're going to have probably another thousand or so in the next couple months. But just something for that to watch, you know, a few percentage on Riverwalks. And then of course we can, you can, we can talk about the cases and the districts, et cetera. So these are the summary items. And it's something we're going to continue along. Some of you have asked me recently about the pilot program. We are intending to go right up until April, right? With this enforcement three nights a week with these additional code officers. So we'll keep posting this. And, but what I also want to talk about and get into next is some of you are asking about data. Like where is the data behind those numbers? And I'm going to, I'm sharing it. Can everybody still see my screen? Hopefully. Okay. So here's the data. And it's as simple as this. I think we just showed you there's 5,500 calls that we've tracked during those three evenings times 15 weekends. And so here's a spreadsheet of essentially 5,500 calls. And this is actually taking a little bit from SAPD's data set, which is you get an incident number. And I'm just going to walk through this very quickly. And then I want to, I want to answer some questions and ask you all some questions from the task force. We have case numbers. Case number just means it was a case issued on that call. Yeah. It's still on the Word document. I'm sorry. That's okay. Let me see if that, that, that one, is that better or not? No. I'm going to stop sharing and I'm going to share. Let me see if that worked. Did that work? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for jumping in before I get to the end of my 15 minute spiel on this. Please interact with me anytime. So anyway, so you should see a list here. It's 5,540, I think it's 5541 records. That should match up what we have. These are just the calls we've received in that time frame that we just showed you the summary. We have whether or not a case number was issued or not. If you filter, you know, just an Excel spreadsheet you can filter. There have been some questions in some of the meetings about which substation these are being routed from or to, right? So there's a column there. We have time pickups, days of the week, hours. These are all disturbance, kind of loud music calls, if you will. That's how they're entered when they're called into SAPD. That doesn't mean that when we get out there it's actually loud music or disturbance. But there's location names if we have a location. We have addresses for each call. And then if there's an apartment, an apartment number. So what I'm saying is here's a spreadsheet that we can sift. This is just sorted. We started on 10, 7, and let me do this. I'm just going to zoom in a little bit. Does that help everybody? I don't know if that does. And again, as you can keep scrolling down and there's, like I said, 5,500 lines of data. There's another spreadsheet which is a subset of that which is the 2000 calls that actually went to, of those 5,500 calls, 2,000 of them went to code. So we have a spreadsheet here and we just added some things like week one to 15 dates, the call source and stuff. Addresses, zip codes, counts of district. We add things like residential or business, right? Actually, it's residential, business, industrial or river walk. The category is there. The location, if it's a business, right? Same thing we looked at on the other side. Was the location in violation? Again, 90% of them are going to be no. 10% of them are yes. And then there's some that we referred back to SAPD for the safety reasons that I mean talked about. So that's just how we categorize it. Unsafe to take reading, gathering in front yard, we send back to SAPD. Again, we've had that conversation. And then let me see here. We do actually record if there is a violation, whether there's a DB measurement taken or not. There's one that actually wasn't in violation. But we have a lot of those. We have some other notes from the officer and we have some data like time arriving and time leaving, et cetera. So we're sharing this today because many of you asked about this information. And all this shows is the calls that we've received, kind of dates, times, locations, et cetera. The calls that code enforcement of those 5,500 calls, which ones the code officers were able to respond to, and at least that outcome. And before I stop, the last thing that I'll share is that we are starting to put some of this into the heat map form. So can you all see a heat map now or do I have to undo it again and redo it? Yeah, you need to undo it. All right. Thank you. I'm going to learn. I'm sorry. That was like the chorus. I know. Thank you. See, how's that? Okay. So what we're showing here is now this is just one heat map of one subset of data. So we're just showing this because some of you have asked for heat maps. Others didn't really know what the heat map was. We got a couple of questions about that. So let me just set this one up. This is just the 231. And now this is 14 weeks worth of data. This didn't include this last weekend. So the numbers are a little bit off. But these are the 231 violations that code found that we would refer back to SAPD and ask them to, you know, do the next step and possibly issue a citation. Okay. So again, we can do this for the, we're actually in the process of doing this for the 5,500 calls. For the 2,000 calls that code was able to get to. And then heat mapping, you know, which ones were in violations, which ones weren't. And then showing where we have found a decibel level higher than the prescribed of today's code. So again, this is the information that we're starting to produce. This is a couple pieces. This is like one map that we have. We just wanted to show, because I wanted to make sure that, and we wanted to make sure that this is what the task force was looking for in order to help move this process along to try to find solutions, you know, to some of the challenges we've been facing. And talking about now for six months. Okay. So with that, I'm going to stop sharing for a second. And I'm going to ask the group, meaning the task force, to make any comments or ask me any questions. And as you do, I will pull up a spreadsheet and or a heat map if needed. But the question that we're going to ask you all. As a task force is we're already posting the summary. Would we be posting these calls for service and the results that I just showed? I mean, it's all open data anyway. Anybody can ask for it. I think to this group a number of times, if any of you called and asked for this information today, tomorrow, this week, we're giving it to you. We give it to you. We give it to you. So that's kind of the question I'll ask for you, but I also want to open it up, you know, for any questions you have. I gave it to you very quickly and I can put it back up on the screen. I will. So it's a lot of information to digest, but I think, you know, I think I'll take that and open it up and I'll use. We can use the chat. Someone can just chime in. Use your digital hand raising. Or if I see your face. I see. All right. I see when Martha has already waved her real virtual hand. So, Mark, we'll go to you first. Okay. I actually think using the data that you have nicely summarized into reports that is valuable is the type of information that should be posted online. And if somebody wants more, that freedom of information act should be utilized so we know who asked for it. And the only reason why I really feel like that's important. You know, yes, it's all data, but there is a risk of profiling people who report because it actually has been reported to me. I've had individuals tell me, you know, so-and-so was profiled by a business owner and he didn't even report or make a complaint of the noise. It was another person. So we're in that world already. And I think that we need to just try to mitigate that kind of behavior by not making all of the information available to everybody and not really knowing then where it was, you know, farmed from. You know, whoever wants it can get it. You also, whenever someone asked for it, you would have a record of who asked for it. So, you know, I think it's, I think it just be responsible for us to minimize the risk factor of having people unfavorably profiled by a business that's upset for having gotten a citation. We really need to take that report of, you know, that happening very, very seriously. I mean, I don't want us to be liable for something as a task force or even as a city. You know, we don't want any lawsuits of any kind for anything. So, you know, I think it's post-pandemic. There's a lot of businesses that are, I think, feeling the pinch and they feel like this noise citation and complaint might be impacting their business. There's just a lot of things going on and there's also people trying to get rest and they're stressed out with this pandemic. So, we're dealing with, you know, different warring sites to issue. And I think it's just not responsible to post everything. It's public information requested if you need more. Okay. Thank you, Martha. I think that's an important point that I'd like the task force to help us with. One clarification, though, Martha. I want to make sure what I didn't show in that, in any of those lists, are who called? Like, who called the call for service? And I would say most of those, we can go back and look, but most of those are anonymous. That's how most of those come in. Most calls for service for things like this or code enforcement a lot. Generally, people do it anonymous for a lot of the safety reasons and just, again, that's how it was envisioned. That's exactly what we did when we did the EDE, emergency declaration enforcement about a year ago when the math mandates and the businesses. You know, we got thousands of calls anonymously and we did some proactive, of course. But again, that's something I want the group to talk about and see if we can build some sort of consensus and make a decision on this. But thank you. I see a couple on the chat, a couple posted online. Don LaDios is trying to get on and someone needs to let her in to the meeting. She's been trying for the last 15 minutes. Who's that? Don? Yeah. Okay. Well, there's no, okay. Let's see. Jenny or Mike or is Jimena on the call? Yes, she is. Okay. Jimena, can one of you send her the direct link? There is no, it's just a web link that you, I mean, it's a WebEx link. There's no letting you in if you have the link, but we can do that. Jimena, can you reach out to Don LaDios, one of our members? I think we have her email on the meeting invite. Okay. I'll send her the link. Yeah. Okay. Anybody want to jump in and thank you for that. If there's anybody else having trouble getting in, let us know, we'll try to get them connected, but this is an open WebEx. This isn't one of those, you know, the host will let you in out of the waiting, I think waiting rooms or something like that, right? Okay. I see a digital hand with Steve. Hey, Steve. Hello. So, I mean, I understand the concerns. Obviously, I mean, we experienced those kind of concerns just right here in the blocks around me when things are going on. But, you know, I mean, there's a website where you can go and look at every active 311 call for the city. I mean, this stuff is typically available. And the purpose of the Freedom for Information Act is not to know who asked it. It's because it's designed around equity so that if it isn't available to everybody, you can't be selective of who you give it to. So the reason people requested it is not so the city knows you requested it. It's for equity, but so I don't see why all the details with, you know, personal information redacted, that's common. I've done open record requests and they say, well, you don't need people's personal information. And I say no, I don't. I mean, that's common. The UDC amendments have my address redacted when they're posted online. I mean, that's really, so I don't see why and I want to see this all available without doing a opens records request every week. Thank you. Thank you, Sam. There's a quick question on the on the chat. Can the data on the spreadsheet be sorted by county district? Yes, it's one of the columns. We can show you that it's the data that I showed you and certainly my experience. I mean, and Jenny and the team, when we did this with the emergency declaration enforcement team to the early and mid stages of the pandemic, it was posted as a spreadsheet that that's sortable. And all you need to know is how to use a spreadsheet. Now, if you don't know how to use a spreadsheet, the city staff can walk anybody through that, but it's really a simple with sorting and filtering. But, but not only on data by a council district, but any one of those other columns that I that I share and I can bring that back up if we want to talk more about that, but wanted to open it up to any other questions or comments. I know there's got to be more. I don't see a lot of digital hands, but I see Gemma's hand is on. Yeah. So one, yes, I think it should be published. Number one, and number two, it really will answer some of the questions we had last time. And I think Bianca brought it up about a lot of the calls that are coming in. Don't get violations. Is it because of the density? Is it in an apartment complex where you really can't find where the noise is coming from. And it seems it appears that the data has, if they were able to monitor it where they were called in, they didn't get a decimal read it was it because of the density, was it because it was lost in the, you know, multi family apartment complex, but people can hear it. And trying to figure out, you know, you're getting so many calls. What does that mean? You know, why are people calling you they're hearing noise from somewhere. And so maybe the state it can sort of show us or maybe Jenny can from the experience that they're having. Why aren't they getting the decimal reading, but yet you're getting a lot of complaints. So I don't know if we can bring that out from that data sheet. So Gemma, let me let me jump in and answer some of your comments or questions. So the first thing is we are not doing any apartment complex calls. So if we get an address and we don't know it's an apartment complex and we show up there. We immediately defer that back to PD. Again, for a lot of reasons, because number one, it's hard for us to get the reading because it could be two apartments next to each other calling, you know, on each other basically. So there is really no exactly property line where we're going to get the reading between those apartments. That's number one. Number two is the safety of the officer walking into an apartment complex and we might have 50 people partying in one apartment. And again, we defer those back to PD. 9 out of 10, we know it's apartment complex because our supervisor will take the address, plug it into Google Maps and normally it pops up with the name of the apartment. So we immediately defer those back to PD. Are they counted in our calls when we say we have 5,000 calls? Are those counted in the calls, even though we'd never go out to measure them? Because that's a large number, you know, which are apartments. So really the calls that we can do are a lot less. We don't break it out as such, you know. Yes. Yeah, so the apartments are part of the 5,000 calls, you are correct, but they're not part of the 2017 that we went to. So the ones that code enforcement responded to, they do not have apartment complex in there. Yeah, because that sort of skews the numbers, you know, if we knew that out of that 5,000, you know, 2,000 were apartment complexes because I'm looking at neighbor noise and that seems to be a big one. So really the number that we can work with is like 3,000 calls. You see what the top number is. So it's sort of skewing the data a little bit if we can't go there, you know. So if you could break it down. So Gemma, let me just let me jump in just a little bit and just so you and I think so the apartments are in that and I can you all see my screen again. Yes, yes. Okay, so I just took the list of 5,000 calls, right? And this is just a spreadsheet. So just very simply, and this is just on the fly. So don't, you know, don't sign it. Don't sign anything legal with this, right? So I just did a filter on location names and just put a search for anything called APT or apartment. And you can see there's certain apartments that came in and I have out of the 5,000, if you look down, there's a count of over 900, right? So again, not all the residential calls that are coming in are single family dwellings. There's a lot of apartments or if you will, apartment maybe with the unit number or something to that effect. So it's a good number. And yes, you can use this information to figure out how many are coming in. And I'll just unsword it now. I'll just say all again. But having this information is probably at least with the task force, you know, being able to sort through this a little bit and answer some of those questions. Either you give us the questions and we'll sort through it and bring back the information or we're going to ask, you know, the task force to help us answer some of those questions. But, you know, I think we've shared this with the group is we are seeing a lot of calls for not just single family. You know, we talked about two thirds being residential. A good number of those are coming out of apartments and not just single family, which is, I mean, that's very natural. We have we live in a big city with a lot of apartments and we have a lot of single family dwelling. So that's probably not not unheard of. So quick question. Can I have a question? So is that Marta Marta? OK, I'll let you jump in. I don't see another digital hand right yet. I'm going to look but OK. We have two third residential one third business, pretty much for the violations, right? So, I mean, I heard you say I recorded, you know, you're saying that. So the two thirds residential that we're speaking of automatically excludes all of these apartments. Is that correct? It excludes all of you know, we referred them back to SAPD so they're not a part of that two third residential statistic that we are talking about. Is that correct? I mean, and I mean, I mean, and Jenny, yes, that's correct. OK, so what that what that I mean, you can just do those that two thirds of those are reported and plenty more in the multi dwelling multifamily dwelling are a problem. The task force isn't just addressing residential single family homes, right? I mean, we're here for all of them, even though our pilot study doesn't track all of them. So I just wanted to, you know, put that out. Yeah. So, you're right. As we as we move forward, you're right. I mean, you know, apartments apartments right now are excluded from code response just because of our process and how we're able to deal with apartment complexes and really the lack of codes ability to do so. So, you know, I think based on the conversation, I see a couple other questions on apartments. Maybe we can internally look at some of that and try to gleam gleam some information. We can I mean, maybe we can look at with SAPD and see what we're finding in some of those apartments. But but again, I'll maybe we'll leave that as an action item between now and the next meeting. So I see a couple of chat questions. How many apartment calls total? I did a quick down and dirty, you know, and I just I did a search on APT apartment. So and I saw over 900 calls now do not quote me on that. So I that was just looking at a 5000 spreadsheet very quickly. But I think we can do we can based on this apartment discussion, we can maybe grab some of that look through it to get to get a real number. It's probably not too far off, but so we can take that as part of it. And then there's a question about how many residential properties are repeat citations? Again, we'll have to look through the data and find the answer to that question, I think. Mike, just in regards to that question, how many residential properties are repeat citations? If we are talking about single family dwelling units from the calls that we did, it's only two addresses that they are repeat. Great minimal. Okay. Okay. That's out of the two. That's out of the 240. Citations that we've got listed so far to repeat residential single family dwelling property. Okay. Thank you. All right. So more discussion, please on this topic. If I see your hand up, I'm going to see if there's anybody else before you jump in a second time, but I don't see anyone. Hey, Michael, this is Sergio. Hey, Sergio. I'm okay with just the summaries. I mean, me personally, I'm posting the raw data. I'll be honest. I don't think I'm going to go through it all and you guys are doing enough work already and taking the time to summarize it all. That's efficient for, I think should be for everyone because we trust you guys are doing the right thing doing your job and providing information. So I think if anybody has a specific question that they can certainly ask you guys, but I'm okay with just the summaries you guys have been providing. Thank you, Sergio. Steve, I'm going to jump back to you. I got your digital hand raised. Is that a new question or comments or is that leftover? No. No, well, it's not leftover. Yeah, I was just going to, I mean, I don't think this is a criticism that you're not doing well. And I don't think this means we don't expect you to summarize in the future. It's just, I think, just transparency. And I guess my question is, I mean, what if, you know, when this discussion's over, what's the next step to get it posted the data? Well, I mean, again, I wanted this discussion tonight to help help help guide that. I mean, I clearly, I don't know if everybody is going to agree all the time on everything, right? But, you know, I'm, you know, I'm trying to understand, you know, the pros and cons. We don't want to create more of a problem than solving more of a problem with anything we do. You know, certainly, you know, I work for the city of San Antonio and, you know, we have over the past several years, I've been here 20 years, I'll just say increased our overall data transparency through things like the OpenGov portal and all that. I mean, so it's kind of just like what we do now. So, but again, we want to do it thoughtfully. And that's kind of why we're having this discussion, Steve. So I don't know the exact answer to your question, but what's the exact next step? But, you know, that's kind of why it's an important discussion. So, Mike, I, you know, I love data. So I love looking. It gives you more ideas when you see things. When it's in the front of you, you can even ask more questions. You know, if you look and you see a lot of apartments or the residential, it really sort of stimulates asking more questions about the information. And I know that helps me. And I think lately there hasn't been a lot of transparency in some things that have been involved in. I'm for more transparency. Okay. All right. Is this I don't look. I don't want to summarize what I'm hearing. But I also, I don't want to miss the obvious. Am I getting more of our task force members that maybe represent the resident, the neighborhood side of the house as opposed to the business side of the house? Am I getting more of that, that we want this data posted regularly? Meaning, is it enough for you? You think that's enough? I'm looking for some other business members to kind of weigh in if they're still on. Again, I think we've had more comments on, I think, from the neighborhood side of it. Again, I'm trying to stay away from the sides. All here trying to. Mike, I think we lost you a little bit. I'm not sure if it's just me or everybody else. All right. Am I back now? Yeah. Yes. Okay. Yeah. It's just starting to lag a little bit. I thought it was my internet. All right. I'm going to have to go tell my daughters to get off Netflix. I need some bandwidth. And I'll tell them the task force told me it's not daddy's fault. All right. Any, anyone want to weigh in a little bit on that? Or we beat this to death and we just need to make a decision. I see Martha waving her hand. Martha. There, there might be some incentive built into having all that data available to make the businesses not want to be on the website for noise violations. I can actually see the value. Of making all of this public as a deterrent. That that is a possibility to, you know, announce. Make it public that you're going to do that. That that might, that might be something that. Would work. On the one hand, but on the other hand. You know, it just, like I said, I really have concerns ever since I, you know, even though you're confidential when you call, there's people who suspect and think that so and so reported them. That just happens because, you know, people have suspicions that they act upon that have no basis. So anyway, but that there might work to also make it very public. That might be if indeed it is going to go public. A good announcement and alert. Might be something that would help to. Work as an incentive to not make noise that disturbs your neighbors. Michael forgive me for coming in late, but I'm assuming that you all are talking about posting repeat offenders on the website, the city's website. And I just feel that that's a bad idea. You know, here we are supposed to be finding solutions. We're supposed to be working together residents with the business community. And I just feel this is not a solution by targeting people posting their businesses on the website that that that that just would not be appropriate. And let's say more people start targeting them because. It's easy to just look them up on the website, then let's post every resident. Every residential habitant that's been cited. Let's do that. Also the people that are calling in that those repeat callers. Let's post their names and their numbers. You know, I just I just don't see a solution by posting businesses names. I think it's very inappropriate. Did they have names on that sheet? Thank you. No, they're just to clarify. There's no there would be no name. No personal. I mean, I mean, there'd be business. Address. Addresses and business names of where the call for service was not not. I mean, I think I know Don you I know you had some trouble getting in. Apologize for that. So the the the call for service doesn't include who called it in most mostly because most of the time it's anonymous. I mean, it's a high majority of the time. These are anonymous calls that we receive. And then secondly, Don just to clarify. It's all the data not not only. I mean, it's going to have those locations that there were no violations found that we have documentation of of houses and businesses that are. Below the limits in compliance thumbs up just even more often than we have the we find violations. So, you know, that's again, I don't want to we're not we're not proposing the target only if someone, you know, got a violation. But to your point. Do we post it? Someone can glee that. So who who got violations and who didn't? Okay, so I'm sorry, Michael, so the address of the business is posted. No, it would. Well, it would be a business or residents that got a call to the the SAPD non-emergency hotline during the hours that the three nights are happening, right, that we that we're doing our pilot program. Those would be in a big spreadsheet. Yeah, we showed everybody that so I could I could pull it up. Yeah. Hey, my good Sergio again. I agree with Don. I mean, again, like I said, I'm okay with the summaries. And I think that posting the data can lead to targeting. And if we're looking for transparency, like, you know, callers are calling anonymous and and why not get their name? Hey, if you're calling a noise complaint on a business, hey, let's get your name. Let's post it. Just like you've mentioned with the emergency declaration data set. I mean, you saw the business that we're we're being really shamed on because they ended up on that list and were they really in violation? I mean, I'm not sure but someone called them and called on them and they ended up on the list. And so it could really ruin a business and damage a business if people really start targeting and using this as a way to target and try to shut a business down. So I think we just got to be careful with the business community just all across the city of how this can lead to targeting and really damage business. This is John. You know, I understand your concern, Sergio, Don, but you know, like I know one business that's run off three other businesses. Okay. Shut them down. Taken over their their areas. But once, you know, the code compliance comes out there and the business is getting multiple citations. That's not targeted. That's pretty much factual. That's not just somebody calling to harass, you know, nuisance calls or whatever. Code compliance officers come out there and multiple times and say, hey, this business is out of control. That should be, you know, that that's that's what we're going after. Not, you know, 98% of businesses are are in compliance. And, you know, it's like, I, you know, so, yeah, we're back to the, you know, the bad guys or the bad apples or whatever that, you know, the 12 and district one, the 12, the 12 repeat offenders that 32 citations to me, that's where we should be focusing on everybody else. Yeah, I think that the 12 and district one is more of a density issue. It's not really a noise issue. I can speak for a fact that that may be true in some part of the district, but I know one part of district one, one that's not that's not the case. All right. Well, look, I hope I see another digital hand. Colleen, is that Colleen? Yeah, I wasn't sure I heard that correctly about a density as opposed to a noise issue. But putting that aside, we do post all of our calls that come in for code compliance on on the city's website and anybody can look at any of that information on the on any residents, any business. I don't know why we should treat this any differently. And it tells whether they're cited or not what the status of it is. Okay, thank you, Colleen. Gemma, you had you had a comment. Yeah, you know, I don't think of it as one way or another. I'm just interested in we get a lot of calls and how this information is broken down. And are we spend, you know, spinning our wheels? Why do we have so many calls that they don't get connected? They're not really in violation of anything. Is there a way we can sort through this? Can we really look through this information? Actually, this was a quest by Don to really look at who are the repeat offenders. You know that it's sort of in the business section. But it goes across, we know district one has a lot of businesses, but you go to district five. They have a lot of neighbors and how can we find out how to do our noise ordinance if we're not looking at the information. And I guess I never thought of it as business versus residents and just the information we need to make this noise ordinance work. And if people are repeat offenders, they're repeat offenders of their neighborhoods, of their apartment building, their businesses. It's just data and it feels strongly about not taking up. So I feel like it should be transparent or you can just send it to all of us, you know, we're attending. But I like to see the data. Okay. All right. Well, here's, I think I want to, I want to make sure we have some time for two things. One, I want to talk about the next topic. You know, this is, this is, this is my take on it. You know, and I think that Colleen, you had a good point. We actually, if you go to the city's open data portal, we have service requests for animal calls, service requests for all property maintenance, service requests. I mean, it's all there. The city has moved, moved to that. And, you know, I see this data as showing that there's a lot of residences and businesses that are in compliance and following our code. And I think we need to do a better job educating all of us, including maybe some of the people that are calling it in. It may be, it may be a little annoying, but it's not against code, right? In terms of decibel levels or what have you. But then there are some residences and businesses that are getting shown to be in violation is what we've seen. This is just code office, I'm just speaking for the code officers and I know PD's on the line. They've had violations in the past and they'll have some in the future as well. I, I don't, well, I don't want to create a targeting environment. I don't want to create an unsafe environment for anyone. I, although, but I just don't see how we can move forward without posting this, this information. Again, this is just raw data. And I think it's going to be used, something useful for this task force to be, to, to, to, to look at and see what's not working, where things aren't working or where there are properties that aren't working well. How do we help them? Because that's what I keep hearing is how do we help them get back into compliance or into compliance with our current code or a modified code in the future that, that finds that right balance. I just, I don't know how I go against the city's open data transparency efforts over the last several years. So my recommendation, I think, you know, is going to be that we use this information appropriately. We don't use it to target. But at the same time, we use it to learn what's not and how do we find those solutions for, you know, what we've been charged to do. This is a challenging item. It's not easy. If it was easy, we would have fixed it in a month. But, you know, I think we've got a group of people here that are, that are really trying to work together. And I don't care what side of, I don't want to say what side of the aisle. It sounds so, you know, kind of federal partisan politics and that, but I just, I can't, I can't see how we wouldn't. So we're going to move that direction, I think, as the city and, and I think we need to figure out how to understand that data. If there's anything we're missing or we think is, you know, needed to be added or some context to it, that's fine. But I just can't see us moving forward another way. And we've done that in the past. It's some other things that I've worked on and it's done more good than not good. And I think that's how we're going to have to go. So look, some of you like that information and don't. And I wish I could make everybody happy on this, but I just feel like we have to do that to move forward. We've got two more months of this and we're going to need that data to help us, you know, make some, make some improvements moving forward with our policies, procedures and, and code or whatever. So I think that's what I'm going to go. I've, you know, I appreciate everybody's comments and I'll continue the conversation. After this, I got to move on to the next one, but I think that's how we're going to move forward. So I'm going to move forward with my team on sharing it with the, and what I'll probably do is I'll probably email it to all your task force members, but it's going to be posted online in a day or two in just that format and up there. And you'll see how it feeds into the summary. Okay. So that, that, that kind of gets us into the summary of the pilot program. And I want to move off the pilot for a little bit. I know there, we talked about them being two separate items, even though they overlap and are critical to each other. But John, we're finally getting to your question from an hour ago, man. Sorry, sorry, it took me so long, but I'm getting there. So as many of you know, and some of you may not know, we actually had some internal meetings. The councilman Bravo had asked, you know, kind of a check in from city staff and some of the task force members as to, you know, what's working well, what's not working. We see, what do we, what do we see? How do we, how do we keep this thing moving? But maybe, maybe this task force and our community, you know, moving forward a little bit. And I know that the question was posed a little bit to district one staff, but I'm going to take a stab at it. Those, there was a, there was a representative group from the task force of those of you that are, that are representing more of a neighborhood component. And I'm oversimplifying it because some of you that represent neighborhood components have small businesses or large businesses or et cetera. So it's not one hat only. And then there was another meeting where we had some businesses, business members, representatives kind of asked the same thing, what's working well, what can we do moving forward. And again, all you business owners, you are, you live in neighborhoods or, you know, you, you wear multiple hats. So again, not to oversimplify it. But one of the themes was we really wanted to figure out a way to formally bring on, you know, some, some sound expert expertise. I know we've asked Don Pitch and RB Blackstone, they've attended a couple of meetings, just kind of to see what's going on. They've had some experience. But what we heard, and I think the councilman and including Councilman Perry and their staff had heard is, you know, we really think it might be good for this group to bring in some, you know, some, you know, formally bring in some, you know, professional guidance around sound and some of the solutions that are out there. No matter what side of the discussion you're on. And so we're going to move forward. So, you know, I know there's something for sound expert questions on the agenda. I think I just want to talk a little bit about, you know, the city staff along with likely the city council members that are engaged. We're going to work to try to bring, you know, to formally bring on, you know, like a sound expert, you know, someone like that. It might be, you know, certainly, you know, it could be Don, it could be someone like that or RB or something like that. But, you know, I don't have the details. But I think we clearly heard that, you know, this group would benefit from that expertise. Not just about sound, how to measure sound and just add the other, but really what have been some solutions that have worked in other areas that can help businesses and residents if you're having a house party or something, I guess. But a lot of the discussion was on, you know, how do you get businesses that are trying so hard and some of them are just not privy to some of the expertise that's out there. So how do we bring that to them? And how do we bring that to the educational component to some of the adjacent neighbors and stuff? So I don't have a lot of details yet about what the process is. The city has procurement processes, right? So we can't, I can't just go tomorrow and write a kind of contract myself or the councilman can't by themselves sign a contract with anybody. There's procurement processes. We've started, you know, a little bit on what that could look like, what our options are. But we want to do it, of course, in line with the city regulations on that. So that's going to be our really next step. So as we're thinking about anything, whether it is a process improvement or change, you know, for improvement, code, potential changes, you know, assistance, you know, how do we get expertise into some areas that maybe are challenged to meet a certain decimal level or whatever. But that's what we're going to do. So I'm just kind of declaring that as I think what we heard is one of the major themes that most of you all shared with us in those settings. Now, I'm going to do this. I mean, within those meetings, some of the councilmember staff, am I missing any of those? Is that the major theme we heard? I think I just want to make sure that we heard that. For those of you that were in those meetings, that's what's members. Does that sound about what you heard in some of those meetings, right? What's that? Yeah, I just wanted to say that I think it's really important to have a professional who makes everyone comfortable with one their track record of having promoted industries as well as professionally promoted a safe sound level, reduced complaints. That's a tremendous track record. And Don Pitts is the one who I know of, having done that in several markets. I know his website will promote him very well because he will only advertise his success stories. But I feel like San Antonio needs a voice that can help everybody feel like there aren't sides to this. I feel like we're at that point right now. You can sense, you know, the tension within our meetings. And I think it's out there in the street. I've gotten word from some of the neighborhood people that, you know, it's just, there's quote unquote, bad blood. And we need a professional to just turn that around. And I feel like we're not just getting him for expert opinion, but actually to have, to help us create the shift that we need as a community. So we're not just having him for his professional advertisement or professional services, but for his professional opinion to help steer a sentiment that's out there right now. Yeah. Thank you, Martha. And I do believe that was shared by many of those that attended those meetings and provided that feedback. So many of you all had an opportunity to share that. And certainly, I mean, we don't want to be, you know, bashing our heads together for the next month, years, having forbidden, right? And... Cutting out again. Yeah. And, you know, we want to find ways to continue to work together and maybe improve some of that. Because I think there are solutions that we all can work on. And I think that's what we're going to be looking for, not just someone that knows sound or knows sound ordinances, but someone that can help bring a facilitation, you know, that we all can, you know, just jump on a little bit more and just hopefully get us moving in the right direction. So, like, I'm the eternal optimist. I think this group will get there. I just... I want us to do it as, you know, I don't want it to be as painful as, you know, any more than it used to be. So, okay. Mike, I agree with Martha. You know, Dom Hitch does have a great reputation of working with not only businesses and neighborhoods and crossing that. And how do you work together? It's not an either or. It's just how do we make the best noise ordinance we can? The city is growing. It's getting denser. High density everywhere. And so, yeah, I think someone of his skill would be really a great addition. Thank you, Jenna. Education over citation. I think someone like, you know, with that expertise will certainly help with that. Yeah, that's important. Michael, and as I said from the beginning, you know, I feel that these repeat offenders, they truly need to be educated. Even the residents, those repeat offenders, they just need to be educated. Giving citations is not going to solve anything. And that's what I've repeated. We have every single meeting. It's not about residents again, but against businesses. It's about us working together to find solutions to educate. You know, when someone, when a person, when an individual is having an issue with their own personal self, they go to rehab. They get help. They seek help. So let's help these repeat offenders. Let's find solutions by working together. Let's stop issuing citations. I think people are going through this pandemic has been so difficult on everyone, not just businesses, but the community as well. And I feel that people don't need to be cited over and over again. They need to be educated. You know, what that constitutes, we'll have to see. But Michael, thank you to you and your team again for putting all this data together, for bringing us together. You know, at the end of the day, we all have to work together to find solutions. I firmly believe that. Yeah. Thank you, Don. And I think this could be an opportunity if we, you know, again, I look, we have to go through the process to get someone, you know, on board. But, you know, if there's, you know, if there is someone, you know, there's some, some that we identify that, you know, maybe we, maybe we do a field visit with this, this professional out to a locate, and maybe even find some solutions that, and if they work, that could be part of what we, what we do moving forward, right? And so I think there's some of that out there is some of the internal conversations that we're having. I think you're all having the same one. So I think that's going to be our next step. Any other questions or comments about that? I'll talk a little bit about timeline here in a sec what that, what that could look like. Martha? Yeah. What timeline would it take, you know, for us to formally hire someone? Is this, I know you said. Yeah, I mean, yeah. A year? No, no, no, no, no. I think, I think best case scenario. So it's going to be a few weeks worth case, maybe a little over a month. I have to, you know, I've already started a quick conversation with my finance department about which procurement method this could take form. You know, we're not, the city's not going to spend a gazillion dollars for this professional service assistance, but I have to make sure that we go through the proper channels that are allowed. You know, there are things that you can do under professional service contracts. There are things you have to do to RFTs and stuff like, you know, like formerly bid. So, you know, let me, let me look at that. I've done those as director of a done those, but I always work with my finance team to figure out which one is the best one to get, you know, someone in fairly quickly, but the best qualified person that we think can help. So, but if I was guessing, I was working in February trying to get that locked up and we can certainly, you know, keep this group updated, but that's kind of my goal. Let's see, I mean, anybody else, am I missing a second? Trying to wave their digital hand. Either that or I'm paused again. You're good. I don't see anybody. All right, so here's what we'll do, everyone. In the meantime, what I'll probably do, and I'll, before we get, we want to get to the community input, I know we have a couple other things on the agenda, but I think, you know, for the purposes of moving forward on some of those other items, like what code changes we should be, you know, debating about a little bit more and considering, I think it might be more prudent to do that when we formally get, you know, that assistance, you know, professionals is kind of formalized. So I don't want to go up to the task force members a little bit and then I'm going to open it up to the community members in the last, you know, 20 minutes or so of the meeting if anybody wants to weigh in. So task force members, I'm going to give you a chance to kind of open and freely add anything for the next couple of minutes that we may, that may be on your mind that we should consider moving forward that we didn't hit tonight and or just want us not to forget moving forward. Martha. Okay. At the very beginning I thought about bringing this up and I thought, oh, we have more important stuff to talk about. Since we have some spare time, I see 110 were unsafe way back to your data. I took notes, so I was looking at your graphs and then we had 126 citations, so we had unsafe for recording. Isn't that right? 110 of them were deemed unsafe. This is the total numbers. 110, unsafe. I had a question about that one. So we're, oh, I'm sorry. I thought that was your question, but let me ask your question and then we'll find the right staff to answer. Out of the 110 who were unsafe for the measurements to be taken, there was a possibility that there were several more citations if it was indeed safe. Is that right? There's a possibility of that. There's a possibility that there was a violation and not a violation, but just remember, as we've discussed, I mean, safety is paramount for everybody, whether you're a PD officer or whether you're a code officer, right? And whether you're a business owner or a resident, you know, having a get-together or living next to a get-together, et cetera. But there are just some times where it's, you know, code officers aren't peace officers. If we respond to an address, vocation, and it just seems, you know, that's not a good, not even for us to get out of the car and take a reading. Or, you know, that's not a good deal. So what we do is we really just back off and we're tracking that because in this pilot program, we're going to ask ourselves and the community's going to ask what's the best way, no matter what we do on enforcement, no matter what the code ends up being, right? There's going to be some sort of response and or enforcement that the city would likely provide. So we have to see how many of these are maybe not, you know, say scenarios for a... not a peace officer, you know? Right. What I wanted to just say is if it was unsafe to formally measure it the way we would like to measure it, can they still get a reading from wherever it was safe to take for the record? Just because I feel like if it's very unsafe that could also be part of the effort to not have anybody come and, you know, measure them. I'm just saying, can they just get whatever from wherever is safe for the record? Just have a reading instead of nothing. Yeah. Well, I don't know, Jenny, I mean, if you guys want to jump on that, I'll just share with you this. I mean, if you look at the data, 95% of the time we're able to get a reading, right? It's 100 out of 2000 that we're just... and I've instructed to and will continue and I think this task force, if you were in my shoes, you'd do the same. When in doubt, back off, right? When in doubt at 2 a.m., 1 a.m., whatever, back off. And it's not safe, you know, just move on and I know it's a noise issue, but it's not, again, but again, most of the time, high most of the time we can take a reading, but I mean, or Jenny, do you want to share anything else that, you know, certainly if we can take a paper, I mean, but I don't know if you want to add anything to that. Yeah, let me just jump in really quick and then Jenny definitely can add or subtract, but I went with the team actually this last weekend and I wanted to see it firsthand. Luckily, I did not have any of these cases that they're unsafe, but my understanding from the code officer that I was with, I asked some of these questions and his response was most of the time, those cases are single family dwelling unit and you have a bunch of people in the front yard drinking, screaming, yelling, whatever. So when they pull towards that house and they see that many people, they just keep going. So to get a reading, you have to stop. So if they don't stop in front of the house and they go 5, 6 houses down, potentially the reading and might be lower than what's there and now we cannot say there in compliance because the reading is way too far from where the source of the noise is coming from. So technically, they just keep driving and then they call in PD dispatch and say this is unsafe for us, send PD out here. So PD is responding to those locations but we are not getting the reading. So and we can try to attempt to get the reading but I don't see the benefit of it if we are too far off from that location. But again, Jenny, please jump in as well. No, I think you covered the majority of it. I do have one location that stands out in my mind where it was a big house party. The Code Officer did show up. The Code Officer did attempt to take a reading and the reading was below levels but there were so many people at that property. Police actually showed up shortly after the officer because continual calls kept coming out. At that time, the police actually issued a disturbance ticket. It wasn't even a noise violation ticket they issued. They issued a disturbance ticket and we're carrying it within our reports but it's kind of a good example of something that's tipping potentially between an actual disturbance and just a simple noise violation. So it's a real thin line and we're giving our officers that discretion and continuing to show that discretion, especially to the residential properties. I have not seen it become as big an issue for the businesses typically they're all kind of managing their own customers or whatever may be going on with either security or whatever else but it's the houses we have some that are dead-end street or some in a cul-de-sac. It doesn't make it safe to really stop anywhere close by where they will get a definitive reading to be able to address the call correctly. So that's definitely something that we've continually discussed with our staff. Thank you. Alright, I'm going to go to Steve. Steve, you're going to be the last task force member before we open it up to the community members that have joined us tonight. So Steve, what do you got for us? I was just going to say that I think we should remember it's important that we finish this out in a way that's not just a few lines of code. I think this has to be a solution that works in the future. I mean, there's a situation in our neighborhood where someone's asking to rezone something that's already seen to specific use of a bar tavern. And there's a lot of vacant office space over there and everyone would like to see that filled but it's things like this that make you resistant to what does that person want to do? Are they going to have live bands outside or actually I think they want it to be a brewery or a gastropub. Anyway, I think it's important to solve these for us moving forward for this to be something that people know that won't be a situation that can be glad that a business is coming in because there will be a way for this to be straightened out where it isn't a bother to the neighborhood. All right, thank you Steve. I'm not going to dive too much into zoning. We have a zoning commissioner here. I don't want to get too deep into that. But I understand your point. I mean if we're going to have uses it's important for this group to think not only short-term but long-term for whatever we come up with. That's how I'm taking from that Steve. I paraphrase a little bit. Here's what I'm going to do. Task Force members, sit back get your pens out, notebooks whatever you do. We're taking notes as well, but we certainly want to hear from those of you that are joined us from the community. This is about 20 minutes that we set aside and we'll go a little longer if we need to. I mean, I got here a little late so I missed kind of the roll call and I know some people are sitting in as the alternate for the Task Force so you might need to help me out a little bit as to who's the community member. I see the participant list and I'm going to start there. Let's go down the list there. I'm going to call your name out a little bit I see Bianca. Bianca, are you on the chair tonight or your community member? I'm a community member tonight, thank you. There we go. A woman of many hats. Do you have anything you want to share or add for the group? I just want to thank everybody for their time and rolling up their sleeves and doing some of this hard work. I know I've posted some comments in the chat box. I just want to reiterate I'm thankful that you're going to post this data. I think that that shows transparency but it's also a feedback mechanism. I think all too often we see people that have called and reached out to SAPD for concern and never found out what the resolution was in that situation and I think the feedback mechanism that the data will present to the community will be beneficial to moving hopefully the needle forward and then I also posted a comment about education just like code compliance educates people to mow their yard and to not park on the front grass the noise component and the noise ordinance and what our violations is a critical element to educate everyone in the city of San Antonio and I know that there's a lot of concern about repeat offenders and sitting down and having a dialogue with those individuals I think is critical and then also the apartments that you mentioned we have very active apartment association who has not been engaged in this process and maybe it's an opportunity to bring them to the table to obviously talk about these situations that are ongoing because ultimately it is a cost to our city's resources and SAPD resources and code resources when people are consistently going to multiple locations whether it be a density situation or residential situation or business situation and lastly I will say that I think hiring a sound expert will obviously bring examples of what has worked well and what has not worked well in other urban settings across either Texas or in the US and also brings a component of technicality behind it to make it give you the tools as obviously Mike is the director of development services to ensure that we bring compliance whether through a tiered system of first, second warning or violation one or two and the whole goal is not just the stick but the carrot too of course we want everyone to come into compliance because it's a quality of life issue so I'll just leave with those comments and thank you. Thank you Bianca. Let's see Colin you know is it Don Pavlin? All right Don. I don't have anything right now. All right you've been very active in the chat thank you very much. We've got those comments and some of those questions I think we might have answered a couple of them. All right someone who's FR-17423 is that one of us? Who's FR-17423? That's um Parker are you one of the seats tonight or are you a community member? I'll be a member tonight. All right Parker I know you joined us in chat a little bit but do you have anything you want to share with us? Yes the talks about posting names of residents making the calls I think we can just shut that down that's a that's an egregious and malicious violation of a victim's right to privacy you don't expose a victim to the accused and risk their safety so I think any talk of that just we can just shut that down that should not even be addressed as like a actual option and then as far as the targeting because we're worried about residents targeting certain businesses now if you're in violation you're in violation you know I mean I don't I don't know how we're supposed to answer uh answer that one whenever uh let's say you're speeding and the same cop pulls you over three times and gives you a ticket three times are you being targeted or are you just breaking the law? you're breaking the law and that's the way it is um I understand that there are some neighbors that might call excessively but if you're not in violation you're out in violation and if you are you are so I'm not understanding the the need to try and shut down or expose like we're all calling in high numbers if businesses all need in violation I'm not sure thank you Parker Patricia, Rec do you like to join us or any comments tonight? Patricia I don't know if you're unmuting yourself or you're just deciding you know you're not required to say anything or add anything but okay I'm gonna move to RB RB Blackstone RB how are you tonight you hung with us he's actually managing an event he has he stayed here just if we need to text him he will respond oh that's alright okay well he's just he's kind of paying attention I think we've all been victim of that once or twice when we've done a double WebEx meeting or something that is that is painful um Mr. Shannon it's Patricia Rec sorry about that no no no not a problem thank you I was trying to unmute but I'm more familiar with Zoom I want to thank the noise task force for all their work and also city employees I am a city employee myself and I appreciate I know how hard we work but I am also a resident who is experiencing just you know the noise disturbance and I do believe that a solution needs to be made as a team as a group um but it definitely I agree with Bianca it is a quality of life issue um for me and my husband and everyone on our street so I appreciate everyone's hard work and respective tone with each other and um I just feel that um if you're violating the noise ordinance that you stop um you know just like I'm a citizen who obeys the law but I also get up at 5 30 in the morning to teach school so it would be great if I could get a good night's sleep even on the weekends so um thank you all for your hard work and trying to come up with solutions I appreciate it alright thank you Patricia is it Sarah Grace Villarreal Sarah do you have anything you'd like to comment on a question today I'm not showing you as muted I don't hear you if you're anybody else here Sarah no alright Trouble we'll come back to you if or you're just uh you're content then either way is fine we'll go to Scott Hullson I'm Michael this is Scott Hullson hey Scott how are you you know Scott I I heard you a little bit now I'm having trouble hearing you are you you'd like to share some comments no I'm just you're in and out a little bit Scott on me well I'm I'm just here to listen alright I heard you at the end there I appreciate it Scott thank you um alright Sarah it was now cast thank you Sarah and uh but uh she's good but she didn't know why her sound wasn't working okay alright and Summer Summer had the hardest day of all it was fun yes how are you Summer um great thanks so much for me so for those of you who don't know me I'm the District One Zoning Commissioner and I asked Mike to include me on this mostly because I would like to understand what's going on obviously noise is an issue that gets brought up at zoning and I'm also a D1 resident and I live close enough to the St. Mary Strip that uh that I can even hear the music and I'm about three quarters of a mile away um so we just want to kind of understand what is going on and um the issues as well as the work that's going toward finding a workable solution for all of the stakeholders in the community both on the and I know we're trying to say not say that they're sides but both in the um you know business aspect as well as the folks who coexist and live around those businesses um and also just wanted to say thank you so much to everybody who's serving on this task course and all the hard work and long hours that you guys are putting into this as well as city staff so thank you for letting me join right thank you summer all right I think I went through the list of participants those of you that have hung in with us did I miss any uh community members that uh wanted to share anything um probably comments or ask any questions all right well um I don't hear any and I don't see any more comments in the chat so um well I think like I said the uh we have moving forward um you know we are going to look uh to get the professional services more formula of helping out the task for us we're going to continue the noise ordinance pilot program uh with the goal of you know trying to try to see you know what's what's out there what's working what the data can can tell us um if there's no I mean I think there's going to be some good information still coming along there uh we'll work to get that that data uploaded uh this week and you know I just I just you know continue to encourage everybody I know this is still a difficult situation uh to find there's no magic there's no silver bullet one way to solve this problem or make the improvements that we can all um you know bring something back to city council that that we know will be better but uh we'll keep working through it I do want to thank everybody uh for all your time tonight and and you know stay safe out there it's going to be cold next couple of months from now I think so uh so stay stay warm stay safe and um I think the next meeting I mean we would typically do three weeks out right and um I'm going to kind of propose this it is what February 1 can we look at maybe March 1 give us kind of the full four weeks that I I just have a feeling we're going to need a good four weeks to get that um uh to get that professional services formally done um so that my proposal will be maybe we huddle up an extra week out uh but I'm going to ask the task force it's up to you if you think that we want to stick with a three week and just maybe look at the data again uh and anything else you want to talk about or uh something else I I'm I'm open for um for that any any comments any suggestions I just wanted to say I think four weeks out is good mark is getting raised and I don't know if everybody agrees but this is a great time sorry I was just talking and mark is that four weeks four weeks yeah that was and I'm driving that's why I turned the video off four weeks is good and this time is the best time for me okay um six o'clock to seven eight I can't attend the two to four but my alternate might be able to online but this this is great like after work work since I'm volunteering and can we do it again I'm asking okay um I was just asking I think I you know this is to the group we had talked about it that mark's question can we do six o'clock again is that better for everyone I don't know if it's everyone but we get I think we're getting we can look at the attendance sheets are we getting more you know better attendance from the task force in the evening meetings than we are the two to fours yes yes I think I think that's the case and you know I think these meetings run really well of course when we have uh not only more participation of the task force members um but even additional community involvement um in these you know is there anybody that that's a really challenge for them is if we went to another six o'clock meeting it was for me only because I had a church rehearsal but you know a little bit of warning I'm good okay all right thank you RV man of many talents two things at once um all right let's let's let's try to plant this uh flag in the in the ground uh we'll do March 1 6 p.m. I think March 1 of the Tuesday is it a Tuesday yes it is okay March 1 uh a Tuesday same bad time same bad channel um if there's any millennials in the room you won't know who that is but I don't I mean you're not a millennial you you understand so you just look like a millennial I don't want to be a millennial um all right well let's let's shoot for March 1 uh now we some information there was there was real um there was some questions I think that we still oh so we'll get those out to the group uh in in our meeting minutes and maybe just let people know if there's any you know some of the specific ones but we'll work on those as well so um uh I guess I'll ask it virtual I mean if the COVID situation is the same is virtual still good for everybody um you know I I certainly like an in-person meeting and I know interaction is a little bit easier to manage but um we're getting to be pretty good at this virtual stuff so all right March 1 virtual 6pm unless otherwise changed but let's let's just shoot for that is that something about right yep all right in the meantime if you guys need anything from city staff um or each other just keep working on it but we're here to help uh help answer anything you got okay thanks everybody we just got in under the wire so on time and under budget okay thanks everybody have a good evening take care be safe