Norman City Council Study Session - January 6, 2026
Norman City Council Study Session - January 6, 2026
The Norman City Council convened on January 6, 2026, to discuss four major agenda items: the release of a voter survey on homelessness and a potential shelter bond, architectural designs and cost estimates for a new permanent shelter, amendments to the guest room tax including the addition of recreational vehicles, and city charter amendments regarding council term start dates and compensation. The meeting focused on translating public opinion into actionable items for a potential April election, balancing fiscal constraints with community needs.
Consent Calendar
- No routine approvals or unanimous actions were taken; all items were discussed individually.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Amber Integrated (Jackson Lyle): Presented survey results from 339 registered voters, noting that 81% view homelessness as a serious issue and 86% support shelters. Speaker noted that 50% of voters support a 20-year bond for a permanent shelter, with the strongest opposition driven by cost and taxes rather than the concept of a shelter itself.
- Council Members: Expressed concerns regarding the lack of awareness about current shelter funding structures and the need for a robust public education campaign before any bond vote.
- Community Concerns (voiced by Council): Raised specific questions about capacity for battered women, the difference between no-barrier and low-barrier shelters, and the operational costs associated with portable buildings versus the proposed permanent structure.
Discussion Items
-
Homeless Shelter Survey Interpretation:
- 64% of voters support moving the current shelter at West Gray Street and James.
- The strongest objection to the proposed bond is cost/taxes (46% of opponents), followed by safety concerns and location.
- Council expressed that the lack of public understanding regarding funding requires significant educational efforts, potentially using analogies to previous water rate and bridge bond campaigns.
-
Shelter Design and Cost Estimates (FSB Architects):
- Proposed a single-phase, one-time construction approach using prefabricated metal buildings to reduce costs by $500,000 compared to a multi-phase plan.
- Total estimated cost of $8 million covers all construction, design, lighting, and landscaping, with a $400,000 owner contingency.
- The facility includes separate buildings for a men's/women's dormitory (76 men, 44 women) and a family/respite unit (10 respite rooms).
- Council noted the absence of ground-floor windows for security but emphasized the need for natural light and aesthetic sensitivity to the neighborhood.
-
Guest Room Tax Amendments:
- Proposal 1: Increase tax from 8% to 10% and apply it to recreational vehicle (RV) overnight spaces (excluding long-term mobile home residents).
- Proposal 2: Divert 0.25% of the total tax revenue (approx. $118,000) from the tourism/arts fund to the General Fund for other priorities (e.g., housing insecurity), with the remainder of the increase dedicated to parks capital projects.
- Council discussed the risk of voter fatigue and the potential for opponents to use the General Fund allocation as a reason to vote "no" on the rate increase.
-
City Charter Amendments:
- Start Date: Proposal to move the swearing-in and term start date to the first Tuesday following the runoff election to eliminate the current 5-month gap.
- Compensation: Discussed potential future amendments for a council stipend increase or a compensation commission, though consensus leaned toward delaying this specific vote to avoid overloading the April ballot.
Key Outcomes
- April Ballot Planning: Council directed staff to draft language for first reading at the next meeting (January 13) to target an April election.
- Proposed April Ballot Items:
- Renewal of the Street Maintenance Bond (non-tax increase).
- Homeless Shelter Bond (20-year bond for $8 million construction).
- Guest Room Tax Increase (8% to 10%) and applicability to RVs.
- City Charter Amendment: Changing the term start date to the Tuesday after the runoff election.
- City Charter Amendment: Clarifying City Auditor qualifications.
- Deferred Items:
- Council member pay/compensation amendment was deferred to a future election (June or later) to mitigate ballot fatigue and public backlash.
- The potential diversion of tax revenue to the General Fund (Proposal 2) was tentatively separated from the rate increase in voting strategy, pending further review to ensure the rate increase passes.
- Next Steps: Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading on January 13; Council to determine final ballot composition by January 27. Councilmember Peacock and others will engage with community groups to prepare for the educational phase of the campaign.
Meeting Transcript
Okay. But it is definitely here. All right, everybody. We'll go ahead and get the meeting started. Um, welcome to the city council study session for Tuesday, January 6th, 2026. Um, we do have four items on the agenda. And uh just want to welcome everybody back from the holidays, and I hope you all had a really good one and uh thought about what we're thankful for and thought about what we might be able to do better for Norman in the coming year. So um we'll get hit the ground running and start with the first item on the agenda, which is a presentation and discussion regarding the results of the homeless shelter survey. And we have uh Amber in a international integrated integrated. Thank you for having me. I appreciate you all having me uh today. Uh my name's Jackson Lyle. I'm with Amber Integrated. We uh performed a survey for you all last month, and uh excited to go over the results with you today. Um at any point, feel free to stop me if you have questions or comments or things like that. So I'll just kind of go through this with you. Uh, you also have the same presentation in your packet that I handed out, as well as uh the top line uh document, which kind of is the same data but just structured a little bit differently, so it might be more easy to comprehend, or the questions might be a little bit worded a little bit. Larger formats, so it might be easier to read. Um, so just you know you've got those things in your packet there. Uh so this survey was 339 voters, registered voters in the city of Norman. We conducted this December 1st to the third. Uh it's got a margin of error of just over 5%. Um, and I'm gonna kind of briefly go through these insights and analysis. I'm not gonna uh do everything word to work word for word because you've got this also in front of you, and you can reference it as well. Um generally in Norman homelessness's view is a serious issue. 81% of voters say it's uh very or somewhat serious. Um, and it's that that concern is uh cross party lines in the city of Norman. Um voters overwhelmingly believe that the shelter is important to the community. Um 86% agree that it is uh at least uh strongly or somewhat important. Um just 13% disagree that uh that a homeless shelter is important. Uh that support is uh broadly uh spans demographics, uh including age groups and your city council districts as well. The current awareness of the existing shelter and its costs is quite limited. Uh only 35% of voters were aware of the current city owned contractor operated shelter. Um 24% were not aware at all, and 40% were aware that it existed, but did not know how it was uh the how it was funded. Another thing that uh lacks awareness is uh most voters are unaware of the pressures of the current city's general revenue fund. Um just 44% were aware that uh that the fund relies on sales tax and franchise fees, and that that revenue growth has stagnated. Um 29% were not aware of the funding structure, and 27% were aware of how the city's funded, but we're not aware that the uh the revenue has stagnated. Uh we'll see a majority of voters support moving the current shelter. 64% say that the overnight shelter at West Gray Street and James should be moved. Um, and that is a kind of a range of intensity of agreement. 35% or 30% disagree, and six percent are unsure. Uh agreement is strongest among voters under 55, and in several of the council districts. Again, those crosstabs of the specific city council districts are in your presentations, and you can look at those individually if you like. So the uh we asked about the bond proposal, the 20-year bond proposal. Uh currently that sits at 50% support uh to build a permanent uh hunter bed shelter. 32 percent uh oppose, 18% are unsure. Um let's see, the support is strongest amongst Democrat voters, 82% support, independent voters, uh 47% support, and uh voters with at least some level of college education. Um supporters, so we asked them also like why they support this, and and these were free response questions. We didn't probe them to say, hey, here's the here's why you might support it. Uh and so we categorize those, and 46% of those voters said that who did support uh this bond and issue said that they cited a moral and ethical obligation to help, followed by uh need for increased resources and capacity.
openpublica.com