Good afternoon.

And welcome to the 230 PM Public Works Committee meeting.

I'll call this meeting to order.

Agenda item number two.

Susan McKee.

Are you here?

Hi, come on out.

Yes.

Right.

That'd be great.

Reappointment to the Tulsa Preservation Commission.

Term expires October 1st, 2028.

Attended seven of ten meetings.

Representing council district four.

Hello, how are you?

I'm fine.

How are you?

Let's uh if you want to tell us a little bit about yourself and why you would like to continue to serve on the preservation commission.

Well, I really enjoyed the historic traffic of Tulsa.

And uh I'm really interested in keeping the historic integrity of our old neighborhoods.

So I just was yeah.

So I didn't want to continue this that I've been starting.

Yeah, doing for a while.

So for your willingness to serve.

Huh?

I said thank you for your willingness to definitely.

Are there any other questions or comments for the council?

Thank you.

No, thank you.

Oh, okay.

And then there's a C D for that.

We have a lot of historic neighborhoods that need to be preserved.

That's true.

Yes, definitely.

Based on our planning.

Okay, so we will vote at uh the five o'clock city council meeting on July 22nd.

Uh you don't have to attend, but you're free to attend if you would like to have words, but it's not required.

Well, thank you.

Good job on matching your tag to your sweater.

Oh I didn't realize that until I'm perfect.

Thank you.

Have a good afternoon.

Resolution author agenda item number three.

Resolution authorizing payment of 223,561 dollars and fifty cents for attorney fees to Tracy Lewis.

Plaintiff and David Mitchell Garrett Law Office, PLLC, and Christopher L.

Camp attorney at law from the sinking fund is payment of a judgment in case number CJ 2022-2783, Tracy Lewis versus City of Tulsa.

And attorney's getting paid.

Afternoon.

Chad Becker from Treasury here to uh provide assurance again that there is sufficient cash in the seeking fund to pay this judgment ahead of the levying placement on the property tax rules.

And the judgment has been approved by the court in the mayor and the council's approval.

And for the necessary paperwork to the county delay repayments.

Actually, fund over a three-year period on this one.

Now this is uh mayor name and familiar case, but Michelle Modrew from legal is here to provide details.

Okay, so thank you.

Uh this was on last month where you guys approved the payment for attorney's fees, but the resolution just included the litigation cost and the jud the interest on the judgment, not the attorney's fees.

So now we have redone it for the 223.569.50 cents for the attorney's fees awarded by the court, plus the statutory interest of $3,162 and 40 cents for a total of 226,723 and 90 cents.

But she hasn't her attorneys have not been paid her attorney's fees yet, um, even though we approved it last time.

And what what was it for again?

The pre when it was on the agenda previous feet.

It was for attorney's fees, but the resolution because at the last minute was changed to we were trying to get the attorney's fees because the judge just came out with the order on June 2nd, the attorney's fees award, and we already had the litigation costs and interest on the judgment amount on city council.

So we we came forward to get the attorney's fees award included, but the resolution just had the uh interest and the uh attorney's fees litigation cost on it, not this the 223,000 dollar attorney fee award.

So it's not double payment, it's just we're here twice for the same amount.

You said judge awarded.

Okay, so it is the same amount.

It's the same amount plus the in the statutory interest now three thousand of three thousand one hundred and sixty-two dollars and forty cents.

Okay, any other questions or comments?

All right, thank you.

Oh, single dollar.

No, it's way off last time.

It was 92 million last time, so I'm gonna say 91.75.

97.1.

I almost ran out of the case.

I know because yeah, I just dyslexic or something.

All right, thank you.

Item number four.

We're the resolution adopted the February 2024, Pearl Creek, Swan Creek, Travis Park Master Drainage Plan, and changes to the City of Tulsa regulatory floodplain map atlas as the official city of Tulsa floodplain maps for those parts of Tulsa County lying within the City of Tulsa's city limits, which maps supersede the previous Tulsa County and incorporated areas flip plain maps for the City of Tulsa floodplain map atlas.

Providing the copies of sand maps we filed and kept in the office of the city clerk in making said maps available to the public at a reasonable charge.

This carries the emergency clause.

I'm working on it.

Good afternoon.

I'm Joan Gottwick.

I'm the manager for stormwater planning.

And the resolution that we're um presenting to you today is to adopt the Crow Creek, Swan Creek, and Travis Park Master Drainage Plan.

The plan was completed in February 2024 and has been reviewed internally and but had not been formally adopted as the revised floodplain map for the city of Tulsa.

So that's what the resolution is.

In the information that I provided you, I have there are five maps that show the changes to the floodplain.

The most significant change is in the Travis Park area, which is page 105.

The previous City of Tulsa regulatory floodplain in that area was mapped based on the 1986 flood.

The 1986 flood was more than a hundred-year flood.

So the floodplain, the Tulsa regulatory floodplain in that area is remapped to the hundred-year fully urbanized floodplain.

So those changes will be incorporated that will re remove.

As you go through the remaining pages two through five, you will see the orange is again some areas that when we have remodeled the regulatory floodplain, there are some additions and reductions along the channels.

Did I miss you?

Oh, it's okay.

I'm so sorry.

You're good.

I'll assign those certificates.

The second thing that we do when we do a master drainage plan is we identify the problem areas, so areas where structures, roads, etc.

are within the hundred-year floodplain, and proposed projects that we add to the CIP inventory to address those areas.

So I did provide you an additional handout with today's materials that outline the problem area projects that will be added to the inventory.

And for the Crow Creek basin, there are let's see.

I know I can't tell you those are these are three different areas.

It's three different creeks.

Creeks that drain to the Arkansas River.

There's several tributaries to Crow Creek has several different tributaries that also that drain into Crow Creek.

They're unnamed tributaries of Crow Creek, and then Crow Creek will drain to the Arkansas River.

Um all of them are some of them are less noticeable because they actually have been undergrounded and they are the creek is in very large diameter pipe.

Um crow a good portion of the crow, like the project we're doing at Woodward Park right now, is really part of a creek that has been put into a um an underground conduit for storm sewer.

So a lot of times people don't necessarily notice that they're in the floodplain or notice that they're even in the floodway of a creek because the creek is underground and the storm sewer goes through their yard or adjacent to the property.

Okay, so each map has the same title on it.

Same project.

It's all one project, it's all so how do we how do you is there maybe which one is scroll, Travis or someone?

Well, that's when you go to this handle.

Well, what the bottom you didn't get that was the report has a key map that shows where these five maps lay over.

Um map one, page one is traffic.

I would have just taken this for fills don't think about it.

It kind of gives you an idea down here.

He's missing square.

A lot of you read the thing.

Well, a lot of Crow Creek is around 31st area.

It's traveling our area.

Okay, yeah.

Yeah, most of Travis Park is on page one.

So you're seeing Travis Park on page one.

You're seeing Swan Lake and Swan Creek on page four and five, and you're seeing most of Crow on two and three question one.

She's looking at it.

Yeah, when you guys go in and do those improvements to the creek, you are laying a bigger pipe, right?

Yeah, like if we have to like woodwork.

Um how do we determine how size the size of the pipe going in?

So the size of the pipe will be determined on calculating the volume of the flow.

Right.

So we are designing for a hundred year storm.

So we're looking at a hundred year rain event, and we go through the modeling process to determine how much flow is produced by that event.

Okay.

Um all of those tables and all that data is within a master drainage plan.

So our engineers, they did the master drainage plan modeling, determined the flows for all of those tributaries and areas, and those.

So then a storm sewer will be designed based on that flow that was determined by the hydraulic and by the modeling.

Okay, so they're all different sizes depending on they can be all different sizes depending on the area that's being drained, the types of soils, the type of how much development is in that area, the amount of impervious area.

Okay.

So all of that will factor into sizing a pipe in the engineering study that follows, you know, as we look at yeah, no, I get it.

I just believe it or not, my constituents-esque you know, yeah.

So I understand constituents want to know the size of the pipe going in all the time, so that's why it was for all the places that have this smaller ones they've done.

You know, and historically, you know, if a line has been in place for a long time, you know, development in the area may be very different now than when that line was installed.

Um, and criteria are different, you know.

So engineering criteria has changed.

Right.

So we do have undersized pipe in areas, and but we would size it based, so we would do the modeling, we would size it based on the flow that the calculated flows.

Yeah.

No, that helps, so I can go back and explain it to you.

Which is daily, it's been the whole summer of just drainage.

Uh rainfall.

So it's just been missing.

I know this is actually it's a rich district public now.

No.

Um I was just gonna check just to clarify for the people watching it over things like that, um, especially with this big change in that maple ridge area.

I've always heard complaints about for people over time about their ability to access flood insurance and things like that.

How does a change in a regulatory flood clean?

You may not know this, that's like but let me know.

I just wasn't sure how this interfaces with people's ability to insure property.

Well, if you are in the federal FEMA floodplain and you have a federal loan, you'll be required to get flood insurance.

Okay.

Um banks may even require flood insurance for City of Tulsa regulatory floodplain.

So if we add a property to the floodplain and they sell that, they may it may require flood insurance for that new mortgage.

If we remove the property from the federal flood insurance from the floodplain, it may change their premium on their flood insurance if they have it.

So if it if it is removed from the floodplain, it could be lower.

Okay, but they've changed the process.

It used to be a yes or no.

Are you in the floodplain?

Aren't you in the floodplain?

Now that they use a risk-based system for determining premiums, um, it it can be kind of distance-based, like how far are you from the hundred-year floodplain?

So your premium may or may not change because you're still kind of in the same spot.

Okay.

Um City of Tulsa being with a TRS program, everybody in Tulsa does get a 45% discount off their flood insurance.

Only thing is is they don't necessarily see that as like a coupon because it will the discount will already be factored into the rate that they're quoted.

So they won't be quoted $300 to get 45% off.

$300 will reflect the fact that City of Tulsa's participation in the CRS program.

So we do have some of the lowest flood insurance rates in the country for the same risk.

Any things that's helpful?

Do you have a questions or comments?

Okay, thank you.

Agenda item number five, ordinance amending ordinance two five six eight eight, closing a certain portion of a vertical air space located at 711 South Boulder Avenue, crossing the intersection of West 7th Street and South Boulder Avenue.

On behalf of Mayville, Mayfield Investments Inc.

for construction of a sky bridge.

The revised sky bridge doesn't design doesn't match the horizontal and vertical limits of the airspace previously closed by ordinance 25688.

Portions of the structure now fall outside of the legally authorized airspace envelope, requiring a new ordinance ordinance.

This isn't Johnson District 4.

Sound like something is missed up.

We did this pretty recently for the construction to start.

Um this is uh with the new ONG expansion and connection to the parking garage, it's a diagonal uh bridge.

They had it under concept, and then when they actually got into construction, they realized whenever we close things, there it is right there.

If you it's actually diagonally going across uh the street, and what we did just like what we do on crossways in the crossing for elevated crosswalks, we specified the elevation so far above the pavement to a certain height.

We closed that.

Um we don't want to issue um I'm gonna say license agreements because if we wanted it out, it's not feasible that you're gonna remove this.

So for insurance underwriting and all those things, those things that are permanent structures like this, we literally go ahead and close.

And what happened when they got into final design, they're a little bit lower in some areas and higher in the others.

So what we're doing is just going back and amending the previously approved uh license, not license agreement, the closure to reflect that we've encapsulated the full top and bottom now that they have a hundred percent drawing, so we just let's just make it accurate as opposed to us finding that we have a problem out in the future.

So it just slightly came outside, but we we want it to be right, so it doesn't create a problem for them in the future.

And we would just ask for your approval uh of this, and we nobody uh we have received no objections to this at all, so we would just ask for your all's approval.

Questions or comments?

Agenda item number six or disclosing a portion of a senator's sewer easement requested by Robert Vale of Vale Land Use LLC for property located at 2258 East 31st Street.

Open all addition.

The easement closure request is for the development of the properties in Council District 9.

Yes, ma'am, as part of the development.

They're building over the location of where there was an existing sanitary sewer and a sewer easement.

Um they asked for that to be closed, and the stipulation of that is we will close that easement once we have our new sanitary sewer in place in an accepted easement and functioning, and then we will go and close that easement.

So that's what we have now is the IDP has been finalized and approved.

We have a new sanitary sewer that's been rerouted.

Uh it's functioning, and now we would uh recommend approval uh to close this easement and to close out uh the old sanitary serial line that's there that's no longer in function.

So we would ask for your approval of that.

Questions of comments.

Agenda item number seven, resolution authorizing condemnation of property owned by Alfonso Rosas and Angelica Y Lopez, located at 1147 North College Avenue, home gardens edition and existing public necessities, require sanitary sewer improvements in the vicinity of North Harvard Avenue and East Marshall Street for Coal Creek Rehabilitation Relief.

This carries the emergency clause.

Yes, ma'am.

Um sometimes we get out there the sanitary sewers we find are not in easements, and they're not uh instead of just relying on prescriptive rights, we're trying to go back and get easements on things.

And this particular one $2,737.

We started in December 15th of 25.

We've sent packets, we've sent certified letters, um undeliverable returns back to us.

We've looked and researched as much as we can as possible addresses as late as with March 6th, was our latest try, and it came back unclaimed.

So we um the property is also fenced, and it has beware of dogs, so um, we're just unable to access the front door to knock on it and things like that.

So we're really just entering into a uh judicial process to help us track down who these people are and where we need to write the checks to.

It's not we're not in disagreement, we just haven't been able to get hold of them.

Okay, questions or comments agenda item number eight resolution authorizing condemnation.

Is that the same?

Yeah, there's two of them.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, um resolution authorizing condemnation of various properties owned by Oakhurst Strategies Inc.

located at 1240 North Harvard Avenue, 1162 North Harvard Avenue, 1197, North Gary Place, and 1204 North Gary Place.

Uh 1208 North Gary Place, 1212 North Gary Place, Tulsa Garden Acres Edition, an existing public necessity requires sanitary sewer improvements in the vicinity of North Harvard Avenue and East Marshall Street for Cold Creek Rehabilitation Relief carries the emergency clause also in Council District 3.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh this has started back December 15th of 2025.

We sent first offer letters uh to each one uh of these and the owner of the property.

We did receive the card signed back that the certified mail was in fact delivered.

Uh we then called, we've left messages February.

We did a second letter mailed.

We also received that card returned.

Uh it came back then undelivered at that point.

He didn't sign for it the next time.

Called left voicemail, there's no answer.

We've left another voicemail March 30th.

We mailed and sent certified final offer.

Uh we received no response, uh, but we did receive the card back that that uh certified letter was in fact received, um, but just no response.

So the reason for this condemnation is the city and owner.

We don't have any disagreement on price.

We haven't really even been able to get a response back on it, and it's just the owner refuses to respond, and this is just like on the prior one.

This is just what we do.

We go and have the judge help do it, and they tend to maybe answer better to a judge's letter than a city of Tulsa letter.

Questions or comments?

Yeah, okay.

Agenda item number nine, license agreement between the city of Falsa and Southwestern Vale Telephone Company, DBA ATT Oklahoma for property located on South Wales Ranch Road, approximately 950 feet north of East 530 Road, Rogers County Oklahoma, to install an aerial fiber optic line over a raw water flow line right of way.

Yes, ma'am.

These are uh there since we go cross country, they're building their lines along public roads out in these areas, and they were crossing in this particular one.

It is a cable going across the top.

Uh we have very clear specifications on how close the poles can be to our public right-of-way.

Also the minimum height.

The minimum that we have as far as a sag distance of a line over it is 32.7 feet.

Their low point and their cable is 34.5 feet.

They are doing a 148-foot wide span, which completely crosses uh our 100-foot uh right-of-way, and it does not look like it will adversely impact uh our operations, but as with all license agreements, if we ever have to get out there and construct, and we accidentally hit that, then so be it.

Uh they are aware of the risk and they're willing to sign the license agreement.

We would ask for your approval on that.

Questions, comments?

Classic district work after the sidewalk driveway stuff.

Oh, yeah.

Sorry, no basalmic or whatever.

No, I usually learn any material.

Um that's a salad dressing, isn't it?

Sorry.

It's on the Italian place.

Um Bowmanite.

I guess just as a quick clarifier, um, for like for instance the brick papers.

I know sometimes those create accessibility issues if they're too textured.

I'm assuming I think it's a good idea.

It is if they they cannot create tripping hazards and we apply the ADA difference in elevations.

Um we still don't do some of those things in our areas because of the complaints we've had from wheelchairs.

Yeah.

So if they're just like crossing their driveway, that that's okay, but we still watch for that tripping hazard requirement.

So we are in compliance with ADA, but not necessarily what we would do on our sidewalks.

Okay, thanks.

All right.

Agenda item number 10, license agreement between the city of Tulsa and Donna R.

Chapel and Aaron L.

Lenegan Chapel for property located at 305 East 19th Street, South Side Edition to install and maintain decorative lighted archways with support stakes and a decorative brick paper site wall within the street right-of-way in council district four.

Yeah, there's some pictures in here, but we did uh they have some lighted archways they have as they approach their home, and they would like a couple on the sidewalk that runs in the public right-of-way in front of their homes.

Um we also the brick work that the pavers that they want to put in those those have been checked, and they nobody offered any uh objections to it.

I these things are by no means a permanent installation if you look at the pictures that are in the their lit up hoops that they'll have up and over the road.

They're cool, yeah.

So it'll it probably looks best at night uh if you're seeing the lights.

It actually looks pretty cool.

A lot of things look better in the dark, don't they?

They do.

Thanks for the compliment.

That's meant that is not okay.

So we received no objections on this one, so we would ask for your approval of that.

Light it up.

All right.

You did it, Councillor Bellas.

Oh, yeah.

I guess I'll drive by there when they have their Christmas decorations up, but it'll be nice.

Yeah.

Okay.

Item number 11.

License agreement between the city of Tulsa and VTR Hill Press H S.

Tulsa LLC for property located at 8801 South 101st East Avenue, South Prest Medical Campus Edition to install and maintain a monument sign within a raised median on East 88th Street South, adjacent to the South Mingo Road, in and upon the street right-of-way in Council District 7.

Yes, ma'am.

Um, off of the Arturo Roadways uh Hillcrest, there are medians in the entrance.

It's a divided entrance on a public street, and there are pictures of the signs.

They've had them there in the past, and we were out there.

So this is a catch-up, and we're just licensing these signs to be placed there in the medions.

They are far enough back, they do not create a site distance issue.

Uh, but we actually had no record of those items in there, and they provided us all the drawings and everything to back up to the information that we needed.

So both this item and the next one will be a different location.

One is off of one road, one's off another, but both placements are just the same in a median and a divided entrance on a public street.

Questions or comments.

Agenda item number 12.

License agreement between the city of Tulsa and BTR Hill Crest HS Tulsa LLC for property located at 8801, South 100 First East Avenue, South Preston Medical Campus Edition to install and maintain a monument sign within a raised median on East 88 Street South, adjacent to South Domingo Road in and upon the street right of way.

That's not just the same.

Okay.

Um those got duplicated.

The first one item 11.

Numbers are a little different.

Well, they are, but 80 the number 11 was 88th Street as you read it.

Uh-huh.

Number 12, it's a raised median on east 101st East Avenue off of 91st Street.

So if we need to bring that one back, it's just a different location.

The first one read correctly, 11 is at 12 instead of saying a raised medium on the East 88th Street, it should be on South 101st East Avenue, adjacent to 91st East 91st Street.

So I think those just got duplicated, so I'm assuming bring back number 12.

All right.

Okay.

Yes, ma'am.

License agreement between the City of Tulsa and BKL buildings LLC for property located at 4901 North Domingo Road, crane carrier light one, amended addition to install and maintain a raised sidewalk with a drainage structure and handrails within the street right of way in Council District 3.

Yes, ma'am.

As part of this development, uh they were running sidewalk along the road.

There was one place where they have a larger swale and a box, a drainage box is underneath it, and the distance, the fall distance off the side of the sidewalk.

They're adding the handrail.

So we're doing a license agreement for that.

That will be their prop their issues to maintain.

And then another one, it's just a raised sidewalk, and they have a low culvert underneath it.

And it's going to be nice because the stormwater now doesn't overrun the sidewalk and get it mossy and selected like that.

The drainage is going under.

We like those, but as just a matter of course, because they have a swale leading to it, it's all under their responsibility to keep it functioning.

We don't want it to fill in over time.

So that's what these license agreements are for them to maintain those crossings that they're had to install because they decided to install the sidewalk in the manner in which they did.

So we would just ask for your approval of the license agreement as well.

Council Dudden.

Yeah, I'm looking at the incidents and the fact that location.

Where would the handrails go?

The handrails is they don't we did not show a picture of the one at the handrails.

There is a drawing if you look at that.

I'm sorry.

The numbers are so small.

Yes, they are.

Um, the one these that you're seeing, they have the shallow.

If they get to anywhere like around a three-foot drop off, um, they have a handrail, and the detail is here, and that may not be installed yet, but they actually have a drainage box underneath that, and that's where that fall protection fence will go.

Okay, I see.

Okay, but that the pictures that you have right there don't require that fall protection, but you kind of see an idea.

It's like we we don't need our guys going up on their property cleaning out their drainage dis all the way back to try and do that.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, agenda item 14 license agreement between the city of Tulsa and Dominion Communications LLC for property located on South 4200 Road, approximately 1,600 feet north of East 530 Road, east side of road unplatted to install a one and a quarter inch polyduct and fiber optic line underneath raw water flow lines.

This is in Rogers County.

Yes, ma'am.

This one is a buried installation, and we have a requirement that it's at least six foot below the outside of our conduits, and you can see an aerials of where they are.

It's crossing down a uh arterial roadway system and crossing their bores and everything and their depths.

Uh they are well within our standard uh detail that we want, and they come up outside our pipe.

So we see no interference with our operation and maintenance of our system by having this pipe there.

But as always, if we ever replace it and we nick it, chip it, do whatever, it's not a fault of the cities.

By adding a new chapter six waiver policy and fees to promote housing affordability, an ordinance providing for the waiver news is the abatement costs, and please under specified conditions to promote affordable housing, providing for the flawback of waiver fees and costs.

If required documentation is not timely submitted, providing for several abilities.

Hi, good afternoon, council.

You'll remember that this and the next one came before you a few weeks ago, and I know you all didn't ask for it to come back, but we wanted to clarify a couple of things, and um, so this should be quick.

Um thing that had not been in the prior draft that is in the draft in the back of now is the requirement that the property to qualify has to be uninhabited for at least six months, and I think that's something Travis had mentioned, but it hadn't been in the prior track, so it is there now.

Another thing Travis had mentioned last time was a requirement that there not be other private liens.

Um that there not be other private liens on the property.

Um that is not in the draft, and kind of in discussing it, um Gene and Travis, I think they agree just not to not to have that as a condition.

Um so you can see the conditions, you know, it's important things like that our nuisance liens were incurred prior to that current owner taking um possession of the property, the uninhabited requirement, the covenant requirement, all that's in there.

But we just wanted to clarify those two things, and then um another one of the discussion, and Councillor Paul Harper, you had brought this up last time.

You were correct.

So when we when uh property goes to a tax sale, uh the city policy is to release our liens.

So in looking, having done some legal research on that, uh the policy now is you know, if if you buy something at tax sale and you call finance that will release those, that um I think and I had done some research on that.

That uh my position is those have to be released.

That you know, if if our liens were part of the impetus for the sale and they're part of the notice that we need to release those.

Um different case that would not apply to a share sale, so like in a foreclosure, um, those don't get released.

In fact, we enter appearances all the time on those and demand that we're paid first.

That are our priority.

But I did want to go back and kind of fix the record on that because you specifically brought it up.

So we're not losing money in that regard.

The cost of whatever it's the the bid starts with both of those, right?

The cost that the county has incurred as well as the city, and that's where it starts.

I don't believe so.

I think sometimes we are losing that.

Why?

Um need to get out money.

Yeah.

I think that has to do with I I apologize, I can't remember what the minimum bid is, but yeah, sometimes we are not able to be paid in full on those.

Why?

I think do the liens exceed the minimum bid requirement.

I think so.

Who sends the minimum?

I think they well on the state.

I think state statute.

But on the new H B 2147, sorry, Gene Bull Mastervisor to Mayor on Housing, the new H B health bill 2147, which is incorporated into our vacant improvement program, which all approved a couple weeks ago.

If we do implement pro um, that would be a foreclosure sale, which as Caroline mentioned, our fee having to not be waived uh in that process.

So another reason for us to try to use that new process, A, it's faster, and B, we have more likelihood of getting paid on those.

You said the fees would not be waived in the foreclosure process.

Correct.

As Caroline indicated a share sale, uh, which is the new process as opposed to the county tax sale.

County tax sales what Calvin was mentioning before, our liens do get extinguished at the county tax sale, as opposed to our new process.

If we go the other route, they're more likely to be paid at a sheriff sale as opposed to the county tax sale.

So the county county list on that.

Well, sorry, what the county wins on that.

Well, they're not getting the money.

Well, so for example, if there are um I guess the oftentimes you'll see that we're owed money and that and we're at velorum, right?

And so that those they get there at valorum.

Right.

We should be paid at coequally.

So ours are co-equal with that valorum.

So you know, it should be that if it falls short, if the sale price falls short, then likely the the county's losing out some too.

Just it's not it's not selling for enough to pay pay all of us that are at that top priority level that's priority.

I think the state law requires the minimum bid to be like two-thirds of the amount owed or something.

And so if if people bid up and the the winning bid is enough to cover the the taxes and the liens, everyone gets paid.

If not, I think we all get paid proportionally.

We are in the country.

So it's based on the two you said two-thirds of the amount that's owed.

I think that's the quote, but I think it's in some some state statute that determines the minimum bid, and so I think you know our our liens are co-equal with the the county real estate taxes.

And so only if it gets into a bidding war, do we get the full amount?

Yeah, counselor like oh no, I was just signaling to women.

So all the people who were here previously.

It's okay.

Just soccer.

I thought you were doing it, Jolly.

Can we FIFA?

Okay.

And then just to clarify again, the this over these these two ordinances were already approved first reading, so they should go to second meeting tonight.

Again, we just wanted to clarify so.

And this allows a way for us to question release those liens in exchange for certain uh an agreement to do certain things and provide affordable housing.

And this is the county.

So are any of the programs that we've been talking about?

Because we've talked about the sheriff sale.

No, the sheriffs are the ones that's foreclosure based versus okay.

All right, I'm just trying to get all this straight in my head.

Any other questions about a real question?

This is if this is a soccer question, this is just a real question.

Okay.

Um, so we have county foreclosure, sheriff sales.

Do we have another process?

County tax sale, sheriff foreclosure.

Sheriff is the foreclosure.

County tax sale, sheriff foreclosure.

Sheriff foreclosure.

County tax sales every year or two.

Waiving costs.

The county tax sale.

Sorry, I just confused everything by bringing up the sheriff foreclosure.

Because we don't get anything.

If we're just clarifying that if a property gets sold at that foreclosure, any city liens get extinguished.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

And under like a certain amount, 10,000 bucks or something like that.

Is it there a number in there?

There's a number in the ordinance that says if a property changes hands outside of the county tax sale.

So if I have a property with liens on and Caroline buys my property from me, Caroline come to the city and we would waive the liens separate and apart from the tax sale.

Yeah.

We said you were clarifying the second of those two points.

What was that?

Was there is no condition right now that you that you don't have other private liens on the property?

Oh, yeah.

And a private lien would be some bank or um, if you have a private lien, you can't go through this program.

Sorry.

No, we're not gonna, I guess ultimately we're not gonna look at that.

We talked about having that as a requirement, and we decided that'd be really hard to manage and come and monitor.

So we decided that we're not getting we're not gonna require that.

So even if there are private liens, we'll still waive our lien if you meet our requirements.

And then it's up to the property owner to clear those liens themselves.

Okay.

We're not getting in the middle of that.

And what was the first point that you made?

Um I this draft does that have the it must have been uninhabited for six months?

Oh, yeah.

So that's something that Travis had brought up.

I was catching it draft up to the case.

I understood that one.

Okay, I got confused on the private lien and just want to make sure I understood the foreclosure sheriff sale thing.

Okay.

Thank you.

Are you watching soccer?

Maybe, maybe not.

That's called food ball.

You can't just close it this time.

That's why that's why I was raising one one team scored.

Oh, that's why I think so.

This indicates the team that's scored.

So the case that's a good thing.

Uh counselor didn't.

Yeah, so I'm just wondering.

Okay, he's not a shape.

What does it look like with the liens that are being dismissed?

I mean, what is that cost in the end look like with these various sources and sales?

Yeah, I'm just wondering how much the city's actually losing.

I I don't have that data at this point.

But again, we're on the sheriff's sale.

Right, we're not on the county tax sale, that happens routinely by state law.

Nothing we can do about that.

And then the sheriff's sale at in these private liens.

The ordinance we're talking about today is if a property is sold outside of the county tax sale.

Right.

There was just some conversation at the last meeting about donor liens get waived at a county tax sale and we weren't sure.

The answer is yes.

What we're talking about today is uh private sale.

So if somebody just buys a lien, this ordinance is intended to waive those liens so that we can encourage more people to take these properties that have liens and rehabilitate them and create housing.

So that's the condition that it has to be a vacant, so we don't want somebody buying property that's already inhabited that's already happening.

We don't need to incentivize that.

But we're just talking about creating a new program that would hopefully further incentivize people to take buy these properties with liens, um, and the city would waive the liens so that we can get new housing.

Right, okay.

So we have a we have limitations.

We can't we will not waive more than ten thousand dollars per property, right?

So we have a lien, and we will track how many of these waivers we request.

Yeah, and if it becomes excessive, you all have the always have the ability to revoke your ordinance or amend an ordinance.

We can lower the waiver, we can limit the number of waivers that we like issue a year.

So there aren't that many.

Um I think there are like 200 um properties with city liens on it currently, is actually 1,200.

So it's not a huge number.

Um, and I think the vast majority of those liens are under a thousand dollars.

Well, that's okay.

So okay, so that goes back to the question then for the private liens that are waived, and then the money that we're losing with the county tax sales.

I wonder if I'm just wondering what that would look like in the waiver private line.

Yeah, so we're we're we have no ability to waive private liens, right?

If I loan you money and you put a mortgage on my house, that's between you and me.

This is nothing to do with that.

We're we're not touching that.

What we're talking about, and today's conversation, the ordinance has nothing to do with the county tax sale.

All we're talking about today is if there's a private sale of property that has a city lien, the city will waive up to ten thousand dollars per property if the new buyer agrees to build, so it had a good vacance, we're creating new housing, they agree to build within a short period of time and keep it affordable for a longer period of time.

You think I was going to be able to do that?

And if they don't, then we could look at the colour.

Then we can reclaim back the lien, correct?

Money, yeah.

So we're just waiting, we're only offering lien waiver if they're producing affordable housing.

Right.

And so again, if there are 1,200 properties that have liens, most of them are about a thousand dollars.

We're talking about twelve thousand dollars.

Right.

Who's gonna be tracking that?

Yeah.

The housing office, uh the there's a new position, the housing program coordinator in the current budget, so this will be one of the things that they will be administering.

Okay, okay.

I I'd still like to know what the end of what it looks like.

We can provide some sort of yearly report or something as to how this program is going or that'd be great.

Thank you.

Sure, so once we pass this, there's no requirement that you engage with the counselors for the that they that those are being.

Right.

So we're this essentially you guys delegating the authority to the staff to waive liens up to ten thousand dollars.

So if somebody comes in with a very large lien, they would still have to go to you.

Um this is liens of ten thousand dollars and below you're delegating that authority to staff so that it hopefully be a more efficient uh streamlined process.

We can certainly report to you on a periodic basis as to how the program is working.

Yeah, effectively write that in.

Right.

That's what I was gonna ask how we can get those reports to see how that process is working out, how much money um we're not receiving because those liens are being waived.

Right.

And how many houses are put into production?

Yeah, right.

I would ask you to look at it not like liens were technically not gonna pay because realistically the property just sits there or get or gets sold at the tax sale.

We're probably not collecting them anyways, but it's a potential revenue loss.

Yeah, but I mean, you just said yourself that it's something that we can do to amend the ordinance if we see that we're you know, if we're losing a certain amount of funds, yeah.

So we need to know how can we track that um funding source.

So we could add a requirement for uh reporting.

Like six months, like six months.

Oh, I'm thinking quarterly, yeah.

Because the sales only happen on a annual.

It's yeah, quarterly.

You're gonna say what how often does the actual sales sales happen?

So again, keep in mind this ordinance would only be for private sales.

Private sales that have any time.

Never mind.

We'll just keep circling back to whatever the sheriff is.

But again, they're only 1200 properties that have city lien.

So it's not like you know, we're gonna get 12 home.

Right, oh, right, correct.

I would love that to be the case, but I highly down there.

So just a few things.

Reporting requirements in the nuisance code are kind of odd.

But we could we could just schedule Gene.

Like we could just sit into my calendar invite, and if he doesn't come, then we can stick.

I come when I would buy it.

Then we have a game both reporting ordinance.

Just from a historical context, the city's just done things like this before.

But what this is doing is more formalizing it, so everybody's um kind of given the same considerations, and there is an um some affordability requirements on the backside so that you can meet those public purpose requirements.

Um and it does let people not have to go through as administratively burdensome of an issue.

I when these have come before, I don't think it was that frequently.

I don't think you would get new ones every monthly, you know, if you if you put that forward.

So if that if that helps at all.

All right, we uh no, I'm sorry, it was so we'll be tracking that in council of ourselves in the council office of every we'll just send them an invite every six months owner.

We can also tie it to like threshold amounts, right?

So we we will be tracking how many requests we get, we'll be tracking how many how much each waiver is.

So like again, 10,000 seems like a pretty small number in the city's budget, but we can report to you at every 10,000 dollars, like every time we get 10,000 of waiver, we can yeah, I get it.

But again, I'm just thinking the world, there are only 1200 properties.

Right.

So even if 1200 properties had 10,000, that's 120,000 of actual liens that are out there.

So um, yeah, we we can certainly do I'm happy to come whenever y'all invite me.

Another police officer.

Or we could uh or we could put it to a sum threshold number.

Yeah.

Council.

Council Archie, you need counsel biggest?

Yes.

Um and maybe I missed thinking of it.

It's always good to have here um.

Uh maybe I missed it.

Can you compare and contrast this what we're talking about with the VIP program?

Because I feel like the VIP, when the person buys it, they will pay uh whatever lien is in there.

Is that right?

And just maybe just clarify that in my mind.

Yeah, so the the vacancy improvement program, which council previously approved, is kind of the problematic properties that A are not occupied, B have at least $1,500 in liens, um, C, there's a six-month cooling off period, and if that program we're trying to get those properties to change hands um for somebody else to acquire and build and develop.

That process triggers the sheriff's foreclosure sale.

Okay as opposed to the county tax sale.

December 16th.

Which Kelly indicated as those typically the city gets paid for the liens.

In theory, somebody could stack these ordinances, and so if the city were to trigger the vacancy improvement program on a piece of property, somebody could request a waiver of the liens, but I think they yeah, so they they they could be stacked together, um, but they're separate processes, they don't have to go together.

Okay.

Um this one, the I think you just said that is almost like to try to get a transfer.

This one, the transfer of ownership's already happened.

So you have a new owner who said there are these liens on this property, I didn't cause them.

I didn't, it wasn't I wasn't causing the nuisance that led to these.

I they're keeping me from kind of developing.

Similar to the request, I think you all get directly sometimes on.

And we're and this doesn't take that away either.

You all people would still be able to come directly to council, but this has requirement, you know, in in exchange for this, you have to do X, Y, and Z.

This intend is streamline that process, and as Sarah indicated, I think there have been various attempts over the years.

Sometimes city staff did this, sometimes they didn't, and sometimes they went to you, and so we're just trying to streamline and make sure that everybody's treated the same.

Good.

Yeah, council Bingle?

Yeah, my questions are just reminder questions.

So obviously you said the property has to be uninhabited for at least 180 days.

And what is the time?

Was it two years?

At least within two years, I had to have a is it an application and process?

Two years from the purchase, um, I think to have a lease or a sale.

Okay.

We want them within two years to get their permit through the construction and have somebody living in the property.

Okay.

So at what point, what triggers clawback?

So if they don't have occupancy within the two-year period, we could trigger clawback.

Or if at any point they occupy the property and then it's vacant again.

So depending on the amount of wave liens that we're waiving, it's a three, five, or seven year affordability period.

So and there's an annual certification from the owner.

So if we don't get the annual certification, we can follow up and say, hey, you didn't give us your certification, what's going on?

And if they haven't done what they said they're going to do within that three, five, seven year period, we can claw it back.

Either initially, or let's say they lease it, somebody moves in, three months later they move out, and it's vacant for nine months.

If we don't get you either we don't get that annual certification, if the annual certification doesn't confirm that they're doing what they're supposed to do, we could claw it back for however long that three five seven year period of affordability is, depending on how much we waive.

Okay, is are there any provisions in there for extensions of those timelines?

I think we've talked about that.

I don't remember what the final language is.

So I think I'm sure you want to be deliberate about when not be just hard-nosed about those if there are extenuating circumstances, obviously.

So I'm just curious whether there were provisions specifically about what potentially might qualify for extensions of those timelines.

That two-year requirement where you have to make a qualified sale or qualified lease.

Um it does allow for an extension of up to one year for good cause.

Okay.

And who determines good calls?

You know, B bars and maybe housing coordinator coordinator on we'll set up internal policies as to what that looks like and how many extensions can be granted and all that stuff.

Okay.

Good cause has some legal standards behind it for public purpose.

Sorry, so good cause has legal standards behind it, and it typically has like a public purpose requirement.

Yeah, you know.

So I'm like, okay.

Yeah.

As long as we we know what that there is actually the potential for an extension beyond that period.

Any other questions or comments?

I'm gonna ask Council Rick?

One more.

Um the clawback provision.

An LLC buys the house, let's say um you try to claw it back.

They're like, I don't have any money, all I have is the house.

Um, because the LLC, the house is the only thing in the LLC.

Um, so we just put another lien on it.

Okay.

I would think so.

Perfect.

But yes, I would think so.

So it just goes back to what it was.

But hopefully it's not the case.

Any other questions or comments?

All right, last agenda item 16, ordinance admitting to also advised ordinance title 49, administrative permit and license fees, chapter three, building permit fees by adding section 328, building permit fee adjustment for affordable housing, providing for a waiver of fees imposed under section 301, building permit application fee, and 302 building permit fee to promote affordable housing in the city of Tulsa, outlining conditions to qualify for the adjustment, providing for a clawback of conditions, if conditions are not met, providing for several ability, the list, Dictorite, Lincoln, and Bush.

Three H test was recommendation.

This was literally just fixing a typo, actually.

So these two are kind of partner ordinances, they reference each other, and so in this one, when it referenced the other, it said the wrong chapter number.

So I just fixed that toward it.

And that's a typo.

Questions or comments?

No, thanks for that.

All right, we're out of here.

I think we want to five five.