The Sundown City Council continued their discussion regarding the City’s water meter project and the junk vehicleordinance enforcement during their monthly meeting.
The Council talked to Matt Sullivan, a representative from the Government Capitol about the concerns being raised about the cost and potential tax increases with one comment stating how much more can we tax the residents? The City wants to clarify this project is not expected to cause additional expenses to residents. The increased revenue generated by the new meters will cover the project’s cost. Sullivan went over some ways for this project to be the most cost efficient.
One of the options was a lease purchase, which would have a shorter term with a fixed tax rate. The other option was a public financing act, which would depend on the amount spent on the project, like the interest rate and better security for lenders. It would also be a longer term from 20 to a 25-year term to pay back.
Moving forward, the Council discussed the junk vehiclesordinance enforcement. Danny Barrett and Sam Hyatt from the Texas Communities’ Group where they addressed the multiple complaints from different parts of town. Their main goal is to still hold property owners accountable for their vehicles on their premises. The Texas Communities Group focuses on structural work, weed work, debris clean up and junk vehicle clean up. Junk vehicles have been a hot topic for years and they have been receiving calls from the city regarding them.
“I think we came up with a program that we think works well,” stated Barrett. “There is a lot of information about what a junk vehicle is, so we’re doing a buyback program.”
If a resident possesses a junk vehicle, they can have the group take the vehicle from the resident and receive some money in return.
They are looking for three things for this program, does the car look operable, is the registration current or is it parked in an awkward manner, for example is it sitting across the lawn or on the side of the house. If they see those three things, those are the ones they want to tackle.
“I think one of the things we provide is we don’t live here, we don’t have history here as far as knowing people, we’re just looking for vehicles. We’re civil and we’re great with working with people,” Barrett said.
The first time the City tried this program it didn’t go as planned because they didn’t have the law enforcement support. They’re in the middle of tagging numbers so as of now they have a 28% compliance rate and over a 50% rate with people who have consented with the program.
Once the cars are tagged, the tow company will come pick the cars up, take the car to a garage and they have a car crusher to do the rest. They must keep the car for a minimum of 10 days in case the resident decides they want the car back. If the resident decides to take the car back, the resident must prove the vehicle’s operability, get a registered market legally again because the vehicle is going to be defined as a junk vehicle. If the resident complies, they are good to go if not the program technically must hold the vehicle for thirty days until they can get a demolisher tag from the state before it can be crushed.
With the buyback program, the program will make an offer to the resident and with given consent, the resident will sign the paperwork and receive $100.
Going into the action items, the Council considered and took necessary action relative to Maria Martinez for relief forgiveness.
The Martinez family was contacted by Barton Purdue Law Firm regarding delinquent taxes. Martinez contacted the landholders about the $32,280 total for the mulling and administrative fees for the mowing of the property. Martinez owns four 25-foot lots. The City has mowed the property a couple of times, charging $300 per twentyfive lot. The property was then mowed by a couple of contractors and then a third party, considering it would be cheaper. Martinez was asking for $2,400 of forgiveness. The motion was denied, given that Martinez does not live in the house. Additionally, when the City sent them letters regarding maintenance on the lawn the City received no answer. The Council also took into consideration if they relieved the Martinez family of this issue it would only be fair to do it for everyone.
Next on the agenda the Council took into consideration and took necessary action for ordinance No. 607, amending chapter 13 relating to utilities and amending section a 7.300 City zoning related fees, and ordinance No. 608 amending chapter 14 zoning and amending sections 14.106 and 14.108.
The Council previously approved the ordinance changes back in March but now the City requires a formal adoption through ordinance numbers to be legally binding. They passed it with no issue.