My name is Julian Ramirez.

I am chair of the Quality of Life Committee and also uh councilmember in the at large one position.

I'll be conducting this meeting.

Thank you all for being here.

We'll call the meeting to order at 10.03.

We are live.

We're also online.

We have a few people online watching in with us.

So welcome everyone.

We have a couple of items on the agenda today.

And first let me recognize actually the folks who are here.

We have with us uh Councilmember Vice Mayor Pro Tem Amy Peck present in the chambers.

We have staff from Councilmember Abby Kamen's office, Councilmember Tiffany Thomas's office, Councilmember Joaquin Martinez office, Councilmember Sally Alcorn's office, as well as online.

We have staff from Councilmember Flickinger, Jackson Castex Tater, and Tatum.

I'm sorry, and Plummer.

So at the outset, I want to mention that late last week there was an item on the agenda that was pulled by the administration, and that had to deal with the Herman Park Conservancy.

Unfortunately, we will not be able to hear a presentation from the Herman Park Conservancy this morning.

However, I do want you to know that there will be an open house at the golf course clubhouse this Wednesday evening.

And I encourage anybody who's interested in the changes there at the golf course to try to attend that.

We may in this committee take up uh changes at the at Herman Park uh at a later time, but we won't be able to do that this morning, unfortunately.

I know that uh there are a few people in the audience who had come to listen to that presentation and plan on giving public comment.

So, in deference to that, I'm gonna allow uh those members of the public who would like to offer comment on the changes uh proposed for Herman Park to do that at the beginning of the meeting rather than having to wait till the end of the meeting.

So uh we have a list of a few people who have signed up to offer public comment.

Um Burt Graham.

Uh Bert, I know you have uh expressed an interest in offering comment about the uh changes at Herman Park, so why don't you come forward?

And I'll let you do that at this time.

And and uh let's raise the podium for Bert since he'll be standing.

And that microphone to your right is live.

It's got the the red light on.

So we're gonna raise the podium for you.

There we go.

That's good.

Okay, that's okay.

That's fine.

Thank you.

Um I have some concerns about the planned update.

It's called an update.

Um I played my first round of golf ever in my life there at Herman Park, 1958.

Never played before, and a friend of mine said, let's go out there and play golf.

So I got my dad's quiver basically, with a few clubs, and went out there.

One of the clubs was a driver, which is the main reason I'm talking today.

Because one of those holes I hit the driver, which for those that don't play golf, it's a big ball of uh wood or metal at the end of the club.

Contrary or different than an iron, that's just a sliver of metal.

And I hit that driver solid one time, and it changed my golf life for sure.

It sent a charge up my arms into my shoulders into my into my chest and into my soul, basically.

Uh that's hard to describe.

And if you don't play golf, you might think it's a silly description.

But if you play golf, you know what I mean.

It's rare to hit one that solid, at least for me.

Uh, but it brought me back time after time through my life to try to do that again.

And every now and then I succeed.

Uh you can't get that feeling with an iron, which is another club that's used in golf.

It's a small plate of of metal that doesn't give that same twalk feeling or sound or whatever it is when you hit it that sends the endorphins off into your body.

It just doesn't do the same thing.

And my concern is that this upgrade is really going to be a downgrade.

Because, as I understand it, the plan is to do away with nine holes of the golf course and replace it with nine three-par holes, which means no drivers in use on any of those new nine three-parts.

So you only get to hit seven drives the entire round if you play 18.

I imagine most people won't bother to play 18 anymore.

It's hard to score out of people be making par 60s and things.

And I know the ladies that are here are concerned that their club may not be able to play there anymore, or wouldn't want to play that kind of a course in a tournament.

So I realize there's needs, other needs, I guess, for uh for the for the course, but I just hate to see the main attraction, which is being able to drive the ball, which brings most people out to play golf.

Most of the scores are done with the small clubs, the putter and the irons.

Well, but in order to have the most fun, you get that feeling when you hit a uh driver solid.

I don't think people are going to come out and play there like they have been.

I was out there Sunday just walking, and um the course was full of people.

It was 100 degrees, and they were every hole had people on it.

Uh I would hope there's some way they can figure to, I mean, they could double the size of the uh um of the driving range by adding a second story, since that's part of their plan.

I don't see why they'd have to spread it out so much.

Seemed like they could add a second story where it is now.

And if they had to add parking garages where the parking is now, it seems like they could do that.

Small perimeter, but you know, stack it as high as you need to.

I just hate to see a historic course ruined by making it a novelty, an amusement park, whatever it is, it's not golf.

So that's my concern.

Okay.

Thank you, Bert.

Appreciate uh your being here.

Thank you.

All right.

And uh, ma'am, if you want to come forward and tell us your name and uh my name is Grace Simpson, and I actually play with a women's league there on Wednesdays.

I actually just joined them about a year and a half ago.

And um, as far as I know, that's really the only place right now that the women play league here in Houston itself.

We can't play at memorial because not everybody's really if you don't live in Houston, you pay 120 dollars to play at memorial.

So only the people who live right in Houston can play and pay $30 as opposed to $120.

That's a big difference.

And if you take away, you know, I can see making changes to the golf course, but why take away the 18-hole golf course?

Par threes, we have par threes.

We have East River Nine that has the par threes right now.

And you know, um it's a little bit more expensive to play par threes also.

And so you're gonna have nine holes of regular golf and nine holes of executive par three, which doesn't help us because that cannot that's not part of golf when we put our scores into the gin where we get our handicaps, that doesn't count.

So if you're gonna make changes, it's kind of like a joke for me because it's really hard to play for me at um Herman Park because of all the water.

So if you want to make changes to it, take a little bit out of take some of the lakes out.

But you know, it's it's it is historical, it's also a place where a lot of people play.

And so, you know, we didn't know anything about these changes until I was actually in the Philippines vacationing, and I got an email saying that they're closing Herman Park.

Nobody knew anything about it.

The people who work at Herman Park got the pink slip saying that um they didn't even know when their last day was gonna be.

So there was no open talk about it.

Nobody knew anything about it.

So to us, this was a very, very big surprise.

So if we can do something about it and not change it to what they're planning on doing, we're just begging you guys that this is the only place that we can play.

Grace, thank you for your comment.

I have a couple uh questions for clarification.

Uh you mentioned that the only other option for tournament play is memorial.

Um how easy or difficult is it for folks to get a tea time at Memorial?

It's very hard.

Right now, I it's I mean, it takes forever for us to you go online, you make reservations, and um it's it's difficult.

I guess we could play at Gus Wortham too, but Gus Wortham doesn't have the big uh room for if we have the leagues all the ladies' leagues that play, um then we need a big room so we have our luncheon or you know, and all those things.

And um, and actually we play on Wednesdays, and Gus Wortham does not open until 11 o'clock in the morning on Wednesdays.

The the leagues that you play in, how many how many uh people are we talking who play in those leagues?

Well, there's a lot.

There's a lot of leagues from all over Texas, and we play against each other, okay.

So our league is in Houston.

Our our group itself is in Houston, and then there's other places like um all over Texas, and then we play against each other, and there's one month out of the year or two months out of the year that we play at somebody's golf course, and all of us come together there and play against each other.

How many local players would you say play in the tournament?

In ours, um locally for where we are right now at uh at Herman Park.

I think we have about I want to say about 50 50 ladies that play there.

Fifty ladies or leagues?

Ladies that play for our the women's league.

I don't really know about the other, the men's league.

I don't know that much about them, but you know, um for the women's league, there's 50 ladies, I think that pretty much play at her at Herman Park.

All right, and let me ask you as well.

Um so the proposed changes are nine holes that are par three and nine regular holes.

Is it possible for uh your league's tournament play to do the nine regular holes twice?

That maybe I'm not sure.

So that could be something that we could look into, but um I'm not sure how that works with handicap and all that.

So I think it needed to be an 18th hole, but that's actually a good question.

Okay.

Um as I mentioned to uh Bert Graham, there will be an open house, I believe it's Wednesday evening where plans will be laid out, and uh there should be people there who are who will be able able to answer questions and certainly receive feedback.

So I would encourage you if you are able to go to that open house and share your perspective.

Yes, and there's gonna be a lot of us.

Great, all right.

Appreciate you coming down this morning.

Thank you for giving us the time.

Okay, you bet.

Thank you.

Yes, I can hear you.

Thank you, committee chair.

Is there anyone else who would like to offer public comment on the Herman Park golf item?

Dominic, uh, come forward.

I'll sit down.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

Well, I'm gonna diverge first, and my name is not McNey, I'm in the council chambers, and I came on Metro on 96 on the Red Line Walk, so I did my thing to produce them all today.

Anyway, uh first of all, speak I'm gonna diverge to the second topic and say we have a problem, especially on the red line of unauthorized people selling food.

They're even selling uh they'll get they have the goal even to go on platforms and bus platforms to sell food.

I think that they know I mean T knows about it, but I think that I think I need to tell you too because those are city ordinances.

Getting back to Herman Park, just listening to uh thought came into my mind is that leave Herman Park alone.

I mean, improve it fine.

But I think as for I'm a Navy Houston, the thing, three things about Herman Park I knew about was the zoo, the train, and golf course.

Those are signature things that have Herman Park.

My thing is though, what is the uh who jurisdiction covers I mean uh Melrose Park off Canina Road?

Is that a city park or is that a county park?

Because they have a par three course there.

So maybe the thing is leave Herman Park alone and upgrade Melrose's course and advertise it, and I think that might be the best of both worlds.

And lastly, I think it's just here, and I think I'll mention it.

Being on taking the north end of the north, uh the red line, going and coming, I packed Moody Park.

And my thing is I think it's an injustice that we know with the courage and everything else.

Get improvements, but because how the churches that the city doesn't have money to improve Moody Park, which is basically a Hispanic and lower lower income area.

And I'm surprised the city has not been sued on that.

And I think that's something that needs to be looked at.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dominic.

Is there anyone else who would like to offer comments specifically on the Herman Park issue?

All right.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

We'll go ahead and then continue with uh the regular agenda.

And the first item on the regular agenda is going to be the municipal setting designation, application presentation.

So if you're involved in that, please come forward.

And while we're getting set up, I want to note that we have online Councilmember Joaquin Martinez, Councilmember Mary Nan Huffman, and staff from Councilmember Twyla Carter, Councilmember Edward Pollard, and uh Councilmember Evan Shabazz.

And we also have in the chamber, Councilmember uh Mario Castillo.

So we have with us on the municipal setting designation, Cassandra Walker, administration manager with Houston Public Works.

So uh Cassandra, whenever you're ready, you can uh go ahead and get started.

All right.

Okay, thanks.

Hi, I'm Cassandra Walker, and I am presenting a municipal settings designation application for the Department of Public Works.

Next slide.

Cassandra, I'm sorry.

Is there a way you could move a little bit closer to the microphone?

I would prefer to stand.

Is that okay?

Sure.

We'll raise the podium for you.

Thank you.

Testing, testing.

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Thanks.

Um, can you raise it a little bit more?

Okay, thank you.

Can you hear me better now, sir?

Okay.

Yeah, a little better, I think.

Okay.

Um the agenda for today's um application.

We will be discussing with us what a municipal set setting designation is, who the MSD impacts, and the steps in the MSD process.

Um, the applicant um who will be also providing technical answers to any questions that you might have for the specific site at 12280 through 1228 West Hymer Road.

And we have the senior scientist who is Erun New Pain.

He will answer any questions that you all may have once the presentation is concluded.

Next slide.

For information on environmental protection in Texas, the state of Texas has jurisdiction for environmental protection, and that is overseen by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ.

If you have environmental complaints or concerns, the contact number for TCEQ is 1888-777-3186.

And you can also reach them online at TCEQ Texas.gov.

The City of Houston also has contacts for environmental concerns.

You can contact the city of Houston by phone at 311 or online at WW.houst.gov slash 311.

Next slide.

What is an MSD?

A municipal setting designation is an official designation that certifies the property's groundwater, is contaminated and should not be used as potable water now or in the future.

Potable water is safe for human consumption and is used for drinking, showering, bathing, cooking purposes, or for crop irrigation.

This D-restriction is voluntary and can be used as a tool for property owners to address environmental impairments to groundwater and allow reinvestment and redevelopment of the property.

This is also a public health protection.

The designation is administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and requires a local public hearing, and that is what we are in attendance for right now.

Next slide.

This is a transitional slide, and it shows the impact of groundwater contamination on a visual basis.

Next transition.

Next transition.

Not next slide, next transition.

Okay.

Houston has shallow contaminated groundwater across the city.

This source eventually seeps through the soil into the shallow groundwater zone and creates a contaminant plume.

Once the source is no longer actively contributing to the plume, either from the source being removed from the operation ceasing from the property, it begins to retract.

To define the area of the plume, the owner installs a number of sampling wells throughout the property.

The MSD program addresses water that is typically 20 to 60 feet below the surface.

Groundwater is not used for drinking water.

Water wells designated for drinking water are much deeper, generally 600 feet or more.

Quarterly sampling events determine if the groundwater contamination is decreasing or stable.

Now that the owner knows where the contamination is, the owner can apply to have MSD restriction placed on the property.

The D restriction prohibits use of groundwater to ever be used for drinking water.

During the MSD process, the applicant is required to verify that there is state regulated drinking water available.

The owner can now comfortably pursue redeveloping the site while ensuring the public that contaminated water will never be used as drinking water.

Next slide.

The affected property is located beneath an immediately downgradient from the former ultrafine cleaners lease space, which is situated on the northwestern corner of the shopping center.

According to historical sources reviewed during a 2019 phase one environmental site assessment, the former ultrafine cleaners had operated at the site since the mid-1980s.

An historically used chlorinated dry cleaning solvent.

By 2004, operations switched to petroleum-based solvent DF 2000, which reportedly consisted of a closed loop system.

Ultrafine cleaners vacated the lease space in December of 2020.

Next slide.

So they took monitoring wells and placed them in separate sites across the property so that they could get a well-balanced environmental assessment of the site.

The six site monitoring wells indicate that the affected property assessment APA, which delineates the extent of affected groundwater, is complete, and groundwater monitoring documents that the groundwater plume is stable in concentration and extent.

This means that the groundwater contamination plume is stable or is decreasing.

The contamination is slowly but surely declining.

Additionally, soil samples collected from the soil borings completed by NOVA and Terracon have not been identified to contain VOCs above SDLs.

Subslab soil gas collected beneath the dry cleaner lease space by NOVA in 2019 did not contain CVOCs above US EPA VISL.

The applicant's current plan for the designated property, and all of these acronyms are spelled out in your presentation and they should be on the screen.

That's why I'm I'm shortening, I'm using the acronym to shorten the presentation.

The applicant's current plan for the designated property within the MSD boundary is to obtain regulatory closure through the TCEQ voluntary cleanup program.

The property has been assigned VCP number 3031.

Upon approval of the MSD ordinance by the city of Houston for this property, a TCEQ MSD application will be submitted for review and approval by TCEQ.

So once this hearing is concluded, and if the application is approved by the City of Houston to move forward, then the TCEQ will start their own process of assessing the site as well.

So it's a double double check to make sure the contamination is decreasing.

Next slide.

This is a visual representation of the groundwater impacts and how the contamination is decreasing.

If you look at the blue dotted line, the approximate contamination is in this uh elliptical circle dash elliptical circle, and that was uh approximately June of 2020, and as of December the 12th, 2024, which is four and a half years later.

If you see the um black elliptical circle, it shows the approximate um PCE plume has decreased significantly.

So that's just a visual of how the contamination has decreased at just one of those monitoring wells.

Next slide.

But I want to make sure that the transitions are going to show.

So whomever is um progressing my slides.

Can you check and see if it's gonna transition or if I just have to just read the slide as is?

Okay, go to the previous slide, so it's not transitional.

Okay.

So this is a pictorial representation of the chemical degradation.

Um this is just for perchlorethylene, and it shows how perchlorethylene breaks down into a chemical that is safe for human consumption.

Perchlorethylene degrades into trichlorethylene, and trichlorethylene degrades in either one of two contaminants, which is cis dichlorethylene or transdichlorethylene, and we're going from left to right.

Cisdichlorethylene or transdichlorethylene degrades to vinyl chloride.

Vinochloride degrades to ethylene and ethylene subsequently, biodegrades to carbon dioxide, which is safe for human consumption.

Next slide.

Exposure pathways.

This shows the different ways that humans can be exposed to chemicals and how cleanup programs are based on public exposure to contaminants and reduce public health risks.

What we want to do is in these environmental cleanup situations, we want to remove exposure pathways.

Um, and the different ways that the chemicals can be ingested are inhalation, contact, which is dermal by soil, groundwater, surface to water, or by ecological exposure.

Next slide.

The MSD is only one step in the cleanup process, and MSD does not excuse the applicant from reducing risk to the public, and responsible parties are always responsible.

Next slide.

The MSD does not affect you.

MSDs do not affect your property, MSDs do not affect your water well, and there are no requirements on you.

Drinking water supplied by the city is not affected as shown in the last uh transitional slide.

The first transitional slide, um, public water is 600 feet below ground surface level.

The city's requirement of the applicant is enrollment in a state or federal cleanup program.

Thorough investigation confirming that the groundwater plume contamination is stable or decreasing and delineated.

The exact position of the contamination has been defined and identified.

The source of contamination has been removed, and a third-party engineer or geologist must certify the application.

Next slide.

Next slide.

This is the steps in the process, graphic representation.

The MSD process starts with a pre-application meeting.

The application is submitted to the city.

Next slide.

Prior to applications being presented to the committee, the public is notified and they are given 30 days' notice prior to their public meeting.

This is a graphic representation of the notice that was presented to the public as well as a map that shows the radius of the well owners, the property owners, and the neighborhood library where a higher copy of the application is for the public.

Next slide.

Why should we support this MSD or any MSD application?

It's because it protects the public by present prohibiting the consumption of contaminated groundwater.

They encourage the cleanup of contaminated sites and they promote redevelopment of underutilized properties.

Next slide.

Next slide.

Um not for uh taking out of the library, but you can view it and make copies if you would like.houston public works.

Next slide.

Next slide.

If you have any questions, my contact information is on your screen.

Again, I'm Cassandra Walker, and my office is located in the Houston Public Works uh building at 1002 Washington on the third floor.

Do we have any questions?

Cassandra, I don't see any questions in the queue, uh, but uh that was a very thorough presentation.

I appreciate all the work you put in my opinion.

The most important information was on slide 16 where you explain that an MSD uh while it can seem scary, um is a good thing because it protects the public by prohibiting the consumption of contaminated groundwater while encouraging cleanup of contaminated sites and promoting redevelopment of underdeveloped properties.

And so that's an important thing for the city of Houston and why we have these uh MSD presentations from from time to time.

So I don't see any uh questions in the queue.

So uh we'll give you a thank you and we'll see you next time.

Thank you.

Have a great day, everybody.

All right, we'll go ahead and move to item the second item on the agenda.

The proposed changes to chapter 20 of the Houston coordinate code of ordinances dealing with food and drugs, and we'll have a presentation from the Houston Health Department and representing our health department is Christopher Sparks, who is Bureau Chief Consumer Health Services.

Christopher, welcome.

Would you like that podium uh raised?

All right.

We'll do that.

It's out of control.

That's it.

Okay.

We'll get it right there.

That should be good.

Close enough.

All right.

All right.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

All right.

Next slide, please.

All right.

So I'll talk about the uh these um changes to Chapter 20 of the ordinance and and fees.

Umate Bill 1008 passed during the 89th legislative Texas legislature, requires local jurisdictions to align their food safety regulations with state and federal models and mandates significant changes to local public health permitting structures for food establishments.

In response, the city of Houston is initiating a comprehensive update of our food safety ordinance and must restructure its current permit fees and categories, moving from an employee-based model where we issued fees based on the number of employees in that establishment to now a risk-based structure where now we charge the fees based on how much risk that particular establishment poses to the public to reflect these new statutory changes.

Next slide, please.

So the purposes of these changes again is to align the city of Houston's food ordinance with state law, implement Senate Bill 1008.

We're going to modernize and streamline our local food regulations, update our permit fee structure, especially for our retail establishments to a risk-based model instead of employees and ensure legal compliance and regulatory clarity.

Next slide, please.

So Senate Bill 1008 amended the Texas Health and Safety Code 437 to restrict local health authorities from imposing requirements that differ from state law unless expressly or authorized.

This includes mandating uniform food safety standards across jurisdictions.

This requires adoption of the most recent version of the FDA model food code as referenced in the Texas food establishment rules.

And it prevents local governments from maintaining conflicting or more restrictive uh provisions not supported in statute, what we basically called home rule and the ability to be able to be more restrictive with food safety law here in Houston.

The primary goal of ordinance updates are again to align with the FDA model food code and Texas food establishment rules as the foundations for our local food safety.

We're going to ensure consistency with the state law by repealing any provisions of the Houston Food Ordinance that duplicate or conflict with state requirements, and we'll streamline the enforcement and regulatory clarity for businesses operating in the city of Houston.

So again, uh next slide, please.

Um, just to uh summarize, we're gonna um we need to do regulatory consistency statewide um to avoid any kind of injury to the city.

The provisions of 1008 um gave uh would give businesses the ability to to um sue the city if we enforced a provision that was higher than what state law um legal compliance with Senate Bill 1008, um improved clarity for operators and inspectors that lines up across all jurisdictions and it preserves our public health protections.

Next slide, please.

Um as far as our permitting structure is concerned, um there are significant changes that we had to take.

Again, we talked about how the current employee tiered fee structure was five different tiers that were based on the number of employees that that stabs them had, and it ranged from 291 dollars for the least number of employees up to um if there were a hundred or more, um the fee was a thousand fifty-nine.

And um this will be a completely eliminated.

Moving forward, um Senate Bill 1008 gives us the ability to be able to set fees in two ways, either by gross annual sales or by risk-based inspection, which lines up with FDA model food code, which is what we're doing.

We're gonna line up with FDA model food code and do risk-based um fee structures.

Our um, so moving forward, our permit fees will be assigned based on risk classification in the fees um with low risk being 258.

Again, the state mandated that we could not charge a fee higher than what they charged.

And these fees um for low medium and high risk facilities line up exactly with the state's um version of fees, which are done by gross annual sales, and we're doing it simply by risk because the bill gives us the opportunity to do so.

All of our nonprofit permits will be removed as required by the new law, which includes we'll no longer permit um schools.

Uh we will still inspect, but it will have to be done in the same way that DSHS does.

So part of what the bill did was it says that you cannot require a permit if DSHS does not require permit.

And DSHS permitting structure as it pertains to schools, says there's no permit.

You can go in inspect, and you can only charge and you can charge an inspection fee for the inspection.

And all schools require two inspections a year to be able to maintain funding through the Department of Agriculture.

So we'll still perform those inspections, but it will not uh permit that establishment.

But all nonprofit permits will be removed as required by the new law.

Um there was a public health provision permit that we use for frozen dessert permits, um, including some of our nonprofit variations, all of that will be eliminated.

We use the the frozen dessert permit fee to um charge a fee to test for those machines to ensure that they were we were protecting public health, and we'll no longer be able to charge that fee also.

Next slide.

Um as far as our mobile foods and our temporary permits, um, the medallion fee will be reduced to what DSHS charges.

Our medallion fee was $708, it will be reduced to a flat fee of $258, same amount that is charged by DSHS.

We also were the first jurisdiction in the United States to uh place GPS on our mobile food units to give us a lot to do surveillance and inspections um at a higher rate.

Um another bill's House Bill 2844 eliminated our ability to do that, and 1008 eliminated our ability to charge the electronic monitoring fee to uh to do so, so that will also be removed in addition to administrative fees um that are written in ordinance for us that allowed us to charge.

Our temporary permits will be reduced.

Um, typically we charge uh 79 a day dollars a day that would be reduced to 52.

Our 10-day permits, which you typically saw more of at the rodeo, were $700 would be reduced to 104 dollars.

And um our manager certification fees or course that we taught um in the city to be able to help operators to be able to get the necessary knowledge that they needed, um, the bill prohibits us from charging that or teaching that course going forward.

Next slide.

That completes uh my uh presentation.

Are there any questions?

We do have uh council member Vice Mayor Pro Tem Amy Peck in the queue.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you so much for the presentation.

Um for the nonprofit permits, so if we're not doing the permits anymore, let's say um you go in and do an inspection and there's an issue.

Is there no longer the threat of taking away a permit as for compliance?

So what what would we do?

Could we issue citations or what do we have to do on that in that situation?

How would we uh well we lose the ability to permit, so we actually lose the ability to actually have you know perform the inspection.

Um the we can't require that it that we have it um the facility if we did get a complaint on a complaint basis, we still would inspect, and if there were violations that existed, we still have the ability to require that they correct those violations um to protect the public.

But we would probably do inspections on complaint basis only.

Okay, and if they don't get in compliance, what would we be able to do at that point?

Because before it would be gonna take the permit away.

Right.

So which another part of the of the of 1008, which makes it more restrictive, it took away our ability to revoke even for those permits that we will issue, we won't be able to do revocation.

Revocation is not part of state law.

So we could suspend the license, and um one of the things we're discussing with legal is how we could move forward if it was necessary to be able to revoke a lot, uh take the permit away, but we're still working with legal to try to find out what can we do?

Can we still issue citations to it to a um uh but if the I believe that that if the violation exists, we need to be able to take some action, and I believe we would be able to still issue a citation.

And for any of the fee changes or the structure changes, when is that going to take place?

Is that upon applying for their next permit or is that going to be immediately?

So for those establishments prior to so all this bill actually takes effect September 1.

So we had three months to um do work on the uh repeal and replace of the entire Houston Food Ordinance.

Takes effect September 1 for those establishments that had a permit prior to September 1, we'll we continue to move forward, but after September 1, then we'll simply issue at the fees at what is required by this the uh uh the Senate bill.

So an establishment that already has one of these permits, they would see the fee change upon the during their next thing.

Thank you.

I've got a couple of questions for you.

So um the permit structure changes go to a risk-based fee.

Yes.

Low risk is 258 dollars going up to high risk 773 dollars.

Can you explain to us how you determine risk?

Absolutely.

FDA model food code lands lays out um specifically how you determine risk.

So for instance, a low-risk facility, pre-packaged food items, you walk into a convenience store, almost everything in there is pre-packaged, yet they have what you call TCS food or something that requires refrigeration such as milk.

We would still license those, but they're low risk because those items are already pre-packaged and made in a manufacturing facility.

Your medium risk heat and serve McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, anything where they cook it and serve it immediately is more of your medium risk.

High risk are your full service food establishments, um uh cheesecake factory or um any other full service restaurant, um, those would be determined to be high risk in accordance with FDA's model for determining risk classification.

So to use your example, something like a cheesecake factory uh under the new uh permit structure would be would have to pay a fee of 773 dollars.

Correct.

What what did they have to pay before?

Um if depending on the number of employees, so let's say that a cheesecake factory had um 101 employees or more, they paid 1,059.

Um now the fee will come down to 773.

So if they have a thousand employees, what if they have say a hundred?

100 employees.

101 or more was uh um 1,059.

If they had uh between 51 uh up to 100, it would have been $864, I believe.

So can you can you generalize and say that under the new permit structure?

A lot of restaurants will pay less than they were before, or you fe not feel comfortable doing that?

Um I don't necessarily feel comfortable doing it.

We're still we're doing projections uh right now.

Um, but the medium uh more of your medium uh since we're not using employee-based, you probably will see a lot of the one through nines end up if they're doing heat and serve uh their fee change.

And uh you mentioned gross annual sales, how does that figure in?

So gross annual sales is a choice.

DSHS uses gross annual sales.

I see.

Gross annual sales uh using uh zero to uh fifty thousand, fifty one fifty thousand one up to a hundred and forty-nine nine, and then one hundred and fifty thousand and above.

The problem that we uh we did not want to create was um being able to um get tax records from all 15,000 establishments that we have in the city of Houston.

So 1008 gives us the opportunity to be able to use risk-based inspection model where we know FDA's risk-based inspection model is um best methods, best practice, best scientific evidence, and we wanted since we're switching over to that, we're lining up specifically with that to charge our fees.

All right.

And uh last uh topic would be in coming up with the proposed ordinance, which we do not have before us, but in that process, did you all consult stakeholders like the restaurant association?

We have spoken to the restaurant association and let them know that changes would be coming.

Um we were set left with such a short timeline.

We're gonna really start um doing this and we're gonna be get doing a campaign to uh get out, do webinars and get as much information out as possible on these changes.

But uh you typically with a rule change such as this, it would take anywhere between six months to a year, and they gave us realistically three months to do something as um extensive as this.

When do you envision coming before council with uh an ordinance?

Um that's being prepared now.

We hope to get on the agenda um before September 1 to be able to uh do it.

We've done a lot of the work and we've worked with legal to try to get this done, and uh, we hope to do it prior to the bill which takes effect September 1, 2025.

Well, that would leave uh since the this week's agenda has already been prepared.

I don't believe it's on this week's agenda.

But uh that would only leave August uh 27th.

Okay.

Um they may be looking to put it on the August 27th agenda.

I'm not sure yet.

Okay.

We did try to push to make sure that the city, because um uh we don't want to put the city at risk by enforcing any of the provisions, and we basically was pushed to a point where we needed to make sure that the city was protected by change making sure the rules were changed to state law.

Okay.

Uh thank you for the presentation.

I don't see any other questions in the queue.

So thank you.

Thank you.

I do want to mention we've had uh present with us staff from Councilmember Tarsha Jackson's office.

So we're back to public comment.

Is there anyone here who would like to offer public comment that hasn't yet?

All right.

Seeing no one uh we'll go ahead and adjourn this meeting.

The time is 10 55, and uh we'll see you next month.

Thank you.