San Angelo City Council 8-15-17

[0:00:09] the time but it's a wrap up of six items good Lane are you comfortable go to proof can i clarify the motion I'm sorry agenda items Zef G H and I and I've a clue to proof second and another values zero to the regular agenda Alliance and we have the ports two planes Alliance president Michael Reaves here today to speak to us mayor council members appreciate the opportunity to come before you today and give you an update on where we stand with the port's two planes a lion relationship with the city of San Angelo and a great support here I know mr. zebra councilman Hebert was our board of directors we've worked with mayor Morrison in the past former council person Charlotte farmer Chris Cornell continues served John Barrow has been a partner and it goes back to when Ron Lewis was with the city of Lubbock and was working on this project with us so we had the long history with the council even go to Wayne was up with us in Washington and so we appreciate that and we want to give you an update on where we are with the project and where we are moving forward so I had a presentation ready to kind of show some maps but our organization started back in the mid 90s we started back in the mid 90s with and it was a great City Council project with this with the it came out of the city of Lubbock City Council planning retreat looking freakonomics we had I 27 that ran from Lubbock Amarillo and we looked at you know they said we how can we capitalize on that how can we expand that and capitalize on the trade they saw what was happening on line 35 with

[0:02:12] the implementation of NAFTA we said hey here's here's a piece of infrastructure if we can work to improve that it gives us the connectivity and the economic stimulus that would come with that so we worked and our initial corridor designation was from Denver to the can border emphasizing on i-27 in the feasibility studies that came along with that and looking identified around primarily following us 87 and we start in Denver and runs we have two routes actually getting into interstate 25 one runs through New Mexico directly on on highway 87 and then the other runs through 287 through eastern Colorado kind of different routes titute and some truck traffic were more of a commuter craft or passenger traffic people go to the mountains going skiing that sort of thing 287 is interesting it's at least 2/3 truck traffic a lot of the truck drivers like to get off of i-25 I like to avoid the Raton Pass and go to the mountain turn so that's an interesting route and there's also a split once you get to La Mesa to Sterling City one route would swing to the west and connect into Midland Odessa and then follows Highway 158 over where it reconnects into highway 87 with other out being continuing a t-72 to San Angelo then once we get to San Angelo we go down to Del Rio on 277 follow that over to Carrizo springs where we hook into highway 83 and then down to Laredo interesting thing about that it gives us access to three ports of entry on the Mexican border and we've had a lot of success in doing that you know when we first started this I did two big spring so that completion over to Van de San Angelo was of course the plane tanisha to project or supported project New Mexico it's their stretch of the corridor four-lane divided in their territory and so it runs really you can get four-lane divided from interstate 25 down to San Angelo and then tech spot is invested quite a bit with the prop 12 funding with new funds now with the passing lanes that have been added between San Angelo and Sonora and

[0:04:14] they're working now between Eagle Pass and Bill Rio so it gives us a grade of greater ground probably about half a little over half of the highway now is four-lane divided reliever routes are going in that are planned I know the lightest one is under construction now is in Big Spring and so we're seeing tremendous progress I think overall we've had over a billion dollars invested in the corridor in Texas and when we take all our partners into account over two billion dollars have been invested in federal state funds into the Corps course we do partner we don't dead end in Del Rio and we don't dead end in Laredo we don't dead end in Denver we work with some other partner organizations and we have memberships now that run from Alberta Canada down to the west coast of Mexico with our partners there and it's interesting because our interests with these other other communities even though we were the wide geographic areas primarily economy to the rural and depend on agriculture and energy production so it gives us a tremendous we're creating connectivity with our trade partners with the communities that are similar interest to us and have similar functions and goals so we're very excited about that that energy and the common interest that we develop go from four states to nine states so we go from eight senators to 18 finishers so we have a lot more influence that way we have over 275 members right now primarily their cities counties chambers of commerce economic development organizations we have some businesses and some of the universities that pay and you can look at this map that's taken from our website and every one of those dots on the map is one of our members and you can actually go there and click on it and pull up information about the cities some connections and some some links to their website seeking out to belt on the websites and so people can get an idea of where we are and we have a volunteer board from throughout the corridor that represents our interests and is active with state and federal legislative issues as they arise when we were down I remember going before a Transportation Commission meeting when I was with the Lubbock

[0:06:15] chamber commerce and what one of the commissioners cuz why do you need money for highways in Lubbock you can rollerskate on freeways in love the quiet you look at it at 35 here and so I like to pull up this map because it shows them if you like to eat you need our corridor if you look where the farm production isn't in this country it runs right down the middle of the country that's and so that gives us a strong case even though we may not have the high population counts we have to get our farm products to market news was interesting by the a couple weeks ago with form a committee hearing here there's tremendous economic impact in this region but there's not enough of us to buy all the blue jeans t-shirts that are cotton producers we've got to get it out and so that's what we try to do is get our goods to market lower the transportation costs for getting that out and that keeps more money in the local economy and so we look at who buys farm products and it's really the China and it's number one but they flip-flop back and forth pretty regularly with Canada they're about twenty billion dollars a year each give and take it so it's pretty close between China and in Canada and then Mexico's our third leading buyer farm products and so down here in taxes is probably more Mexico as a trade partner and then it is a pretty significant drop-off we get to the European Union so we're our markets in Canada to our access to our markets in Mexico but also with the connectivities to the ports on the west coast of Mexico Mazatlan it gives another shipping round and it's another lower-cost alternative to get our goods to Asia into our big trade partner in China as well and that's what's interesting is agriculture is so important because it's we're talking about trade deficits and trade balance it's actually an area where we have exports and it's a strong export market for us an active course is critical for agriculture 20 billion in Canada 17 18 billion really in Mexico and they're growing you can look at the charts there and it's a growing demand for that for our farm products so it's critical for us to have that trade potential we're also the top energy corridor really when you look at it we have five of the top

[0:08:16] six gas producing states six of the top 10 oil-producing States including the top two in the United States and Texas and North Dakota is actually the number two oil producing state in the country and we also have a lot of wind energy going on with nine of the top 12 in wind energy potential States heavily infrastructure dependent upon that you look at one with opponents of the tower itself I'm not talking about all the trucks bringing concrete to build the pads and the rebar and all that just for the tower itself you're looking at eight to ten oversized loads that are coming through which require pilot cars and another five regular truckloads so you're looking at 13 to 15 trucks per tower so you can take that out of some of the wind farms that are planned in the region that are looking at over 2,500 towers and you're looking at 40,000 trucks on the highways and so it's really important for us have access to these to these sites and good infrastructure and we can see a tremendous impact that's having in the Panhandle where they built the new transmission lines and it's opened up a lot of development wind farms BNSF has put in a wind transport facility translating facility in Plainview just north of Lubbock so every time you're on I 27 now between Lubbock and Amarillo every rest stop is full of the Sal they're filling it up having a big impact and also what it can do as well you know these are big big equipment it costs $15 a mile to move one of these blades down the highlight so what it does is it gives an incentive for for our regional accountant manufacturers because they want to be as close as they can to the wind farms so that's a benefit for us as well as the infrastructure same thing with oil and gas 1,700 trucks to bring a crude oil well into development and we've seen that here in the region as well I know probably heavier in the Permian Basin in the Midland Odessa area were there overrun with with the freight from just trucks moving in the region going to the well sites so it's the same sort of thing you have to have that infrastructure in place to connect to drive our economy it's kind of big thing

[0:10:20] that we're working on to make the improvements with our corridor is is we're working very closely with the State Department's of Transportation work very closely with text on and the big thing they had their freight mobility plan which came out a couple years ago in 2015 and in that plan they specifically a couple things that jumped out at us one was it by 2040 over 70% of the state's population and over 80% of the employments going to be within five miles of an interstate no-no that's particularly of interest here in San Angelo where you look at near the largest state or largest city that's not on an interstate highway so it shows the tremendous impact of not only transportation but some reason the the cash aided interstate has there they've also particularly pointed out that the state has to look at improving existing facilities but also developing future freight corridors we can't basically we can't just keep putting money on i-35 and expect to you just can't can't build your way out of that with the congestion there and so among those other routes they looked at we're designating interstates on I 27 extending and then also u.s. 190 which was designated as interstate 14 so those are two fine Angela right at the crossroads of two potential new interstates and they also designate the course of planes is a primary non interstate freight network and so what's also interesting for us is they're updating that plan right after the tech stop put out this Freight plan the federal government has two new five-year transportation authorization bill so textile has to go back and update that plan what you're doing right now in the they're going to unveil the draft at a meeting later this month in play go to the Commission in September and so some of the things we're working on there is to increase the push to get I 27 extended in that as well as designating the quarter overall and so some of the draft plans I know they had designated a new federal program for critical rule freight corridors in the stretch from 87 between San Angelo and Big Spring was identified as being designated for the critical role Freight program so we're having an impact there with text dot we have strong support there with the Department I think that's one of the key things for us and I think what's really important is to have our

[0:12:21] members working together to continue to push this idea because I think the timings right with tech start to move forward with that in that bring this kind of where we are with interstate 27 you know our project initially started out as an extension of interstate 27 how do we get a 27 extended to take advantage of this and when we started in the mid-90s the the traffic counts weren't there and it really wasn't feasible but to give you an idea of how long it takes to move these projects forward just that highway itself they started paving at 1929 and weren't finished until the 40s they completed the four-lane divided construction in the 60s and then in 1968 the congressman from Lubbock George Mahan was chairman of camera appropriations or ways and means go to big budget committees and he needed his city on an interstate so he cobbled enough deals together with other members that had some left over interstate models and got their 125 mile stretch of interstate between Lubbock and Amarillo which is its designated 1968 but even then the construction on that didn't start until 75 and wasn't finished until the 90s and so cost was under half of billion dollars 450 million which is really when you look at the highway funding that's quite a bargain to get get that done but it shows how long these projects tank that brings us to today you know mayor then mayor Glen Robertson in Lubbock went to Texas not at a meeting a few years ago and he said why don't we look at i-27 extending that again and text not was responsive I said you know we haven't looked at that in a while and we need like saw with the freight planners and we need to start looking at this and they did a kind of a really high-level look at what it would take to extend i-27 the projected cost just within Texas from the pan top of the panting I would be converting it is about seven billion dollars for full controlled access interstate where we've been working primarily focusing right now is it going to get extended to the south working from where it ends in Lubbock now down to Laredo which is about 500 miles and if we can do that that would cost about five billion dollars is what

[0:14:22] the projection is the reason we started looking at a southern extension before we sort of working north is by doing it going to the South number one we have access to Lorado which is where about two-thirds of the us/mexico truck traffic comes through right now and it can give us an opportunity to divert some traffic off of i-35 some of that Freight doesn't have to go up through Austin and congestion and Dallas in San Antonio we have the capacity to take some of that so it gives us a good reason to extend all the way down to the south also by staying within Texas alone it makes it a much simpler process we have one Department of Transportation to work with as opposed to for federally it's a lot easier for the designation so that's where we're working on now you compare that it is a lot more expensive to do that if we were going strictly to go to completely upgrades to four-lane divided it would be about two billion dollars and these are getting rough numbers that you know it could be a little higher than that now with inflation and by the time you get everything completed but it gives you an impact of how much more expensive it is to build interstate but then again interstate versus four-lane divided you have ax frontage roads so you're basically doubling the lane miles you're putting in you have to have overpasses controlled access so it's quite a bit of a project there but 35 and we talked about how text I can just keep putting money into i-35 there was one project pulled this off of the i-35 text dot website in Dallas they were rebuilding a section of 28 miles and it was almost five billion dollars right there so cost-effectively we can build interstate a lot cheaper out the rural areas in West Texas so for 28 miles I can get to 500 even some some of the rural stretches of bigan and a half for a stretch in McLean Bell County down through Waco if they're working on there's one in Fort Worth over you know longs to billion dollars for 80 miles so we can be a cost-effective way and also address some of those congestion concerns that they would have in the Metroplex and then I think it's the timings right because of the us-mexico trade is supporting that extension we talked about how important is for tre but overall US Mexico Trey's continuing

[0:16:26] to grow it's almost doubled since 2005 it's over you know half a five hundred billion dollars and continue to grow in the thing about that is most of it moves by truck you have to have the truck traffic to move that there's no major north-south interstate west of i-35 in Texas and really if you look at a u.s. map description north-south interstates west of i-35 anyway you have by 15 by 25 but there's very little north-south connectivity so that's why we we feel we there's a strong there's a hole if you look at a map of Texas to serve this part of the state and then also the congestion that we can help alleviate it we touched upon that Austin on i-35 is a Newark top ranked congested spot in the state for truck traffic so it is Freight looks to move and just-in-time economies it's there's a good strong case we may for that and we can't forget about our Canadian partners as well it's a number one market for most US states for trade and it's over going across the u.s. Canadian border there are a number one foreign market they buy more export products from us than anyone and they're also a number one foreign oil supplier and that's probably most important for this area there were some numbers coming out that you know before the impact the Canadian oil production has in our area it's not just the refinery the benefit but there's probably for every two jobs in Canada that are created from the oil sands production there's a third in the United States because we have the expertise in oilfield equipment drilling pipe production and those sorts of materials that are exported to Canada to support that industry so it's a good bilateral and feeds both trades that way so that's it's important for us to have a good relationship with Canada into connectivity as well the timings right textile has more money now than they did before with the passage of prop 7 prop 1 prop 1 was the oil royalty severance tax funds rainy day money going to highway funds when all was you know $100 a barrel they put about a billion billion seven into the highway fund which was significant the last estimates for this

[0:18:28] passengers would be about five hundred million so it's dropped off but it's still significantly more than what we had before prop seven is shifting portion of the sales tax going into the Highway Trust Fund and then in 2020 they're going to shift some of the vehicle sales tax will be going into the gas tax fund and so that's projected to bring in two and a half to three billion dollars in new transportation funding that doesn't solve all the problems for transportation in the state but it does indicate that there's more opportunity to protect that to build highways and look at it adding on we're working that you know the Trump administration is proposed a trillion dollar infrastructure package when Hannah hurt we haven't heard a whole lot about it we just must be great and we don't know exactly what it's going to be some of the early things that were floated out with that or there's going to be focused primarily on bringing in private funds and that would mean essentially what that was maintenance we want big toll road projects and as well as you know pipelines or water infrastructure and there's a lot more going into this infrastructure in strictly highways you know for upgrades but but part of that with the highways a lot of the focus initially was on big urban toll road projects whole projects that could pay for themselves with the private investment in those public-private partnerships there was a lot of pushback from the rural states the rural senators saying you know if you're going to do a federal infrastructure investment plan we have roads in rural areas that are not Co liable we have to look at the whole drawl picture and so there's been some we're working with a lot of our congressional delegation and we're circulating a proposal for you know why the ports Des Plaines corridor could be an ideal target project to be focused on in a federal infrastructure package and it's one of those things where if you look at these projects individually you know pulling upgrading the highway between Sonora and Del Rio doesn't have the traffic counts to be competitive individually against a interchange in the Austin area that's going to have millions of cars today going past it but when you look at it on a big picture with with the oil and gas and the energy movement when you look at the wind power movement when you look at the

[0:20:31] agricultural production taken as a whole this corridor is significant so we're working a lot with that we're also working with text dot and text dodge focus on freight movement the latest federal highway bill on freight movement and as well I think what gives us some momentum is the interstate 14 because part of the designation they're looking on the west part of I 14 actually overlaps with the designated ports to Plains corridor with I 14 coming up through highway 87 from San Angelo over to 158 into midland-odessa so what we've kind of worked closely with the I 14 organization and they're working to see if there could be a code designation of I 27 and 914 both so you get two interstates for the price of one and it puts it really puts an angel in a strong position being at the overlap for two interstates come together north-south and east-west which would be a great opportunity for for Freight and whether you're locating distribution warehousing opportunities in watt nine the key for that really for us and there's the I 14 map I'm sure you guys have seen that as well what has been give you an idea of what we have coming up our annual conference is coming up in Lombok next month we have over we expect about a hundred fifty to two hundred attendees and we had our conference of course last year in San Angelo we appreciate the tremendous support from the community so we hope lava cos has a lot of pressure to put on a show as you guys do here in San Angelo we appreciate that support we'd invite you to come up for this conference as well we're focusing a lot on on trade and an infrastructure improvement with text dot with freight movement and opportunities we how can we work together to bring that aboard and I think the best way to help what can people say how can we get involved and that's really the key for our organization if we're having our member communities than what gives us strength is everyone working together to let our elected officials know that extending i-27 is a top priority for this area letting them know that the improvements in this corridor top priority for this area where this is the local state federal level when TxDOT was meet with the district engineers let them know that it's a priority because text ID has really become very

[0:22:33] responsive to community opportunities when they have you know meetings where public hearings and there's maybe 20 people there well those 20 people are very influential because you're the ones given the feedback and I think what's really more important is well especially for a project like AI 27 it's a generational project is a huge project so they want to make sure everyone in the region is on board with that and I know we worked with that with uniting our organizations and we turned in you know hundreds of petitions and signatures and and resolutions of support and I know we had great support here from from San Angelo and Tom Green County supporting i-27 extension but it's also working with all the mayors and everyone in the area and I know mayor Gunther has been working with Mayor Pro pand Lubbock and the other West Texas regional mayors to show that sort of unity and support and build that sort of consensus and how do we overcome to individual priorities for our communities for example the oil and gas field traffic which is over running Midland and Odessa or Amarillo is looking at extending 335 and completing that those are priority projects we don't want overshadow that but how can we look together as a region as a whole and look at a bigger project like the force appliance corridor the extension of I 27 to have that impact so that sort of you know native you Nana you unity is the word I've been looking for that sort of unity and working together in cooperation has been critical for us so we appreciate that and I'll be glad to answer any questions you have there's our contact information as well any questions Michael I got a question in a statement kind of going off of what we were able to do up in Washington DC and later of April when we were up there we usually heard from everyone that waiting on tax reform to get off the table the health care bill obviously we're still waiting on that to happen but for federal designation of how important that is can you kind of you already kind of touched on the bat picture especially in example of Boise City taking away from Oklahoma City Tulsa and putting money in that little segment and why that's so important in the at location

[0:24:37] at Boise City Oklahoma is a great example it's the westernmost our quarter goes to the westernmost County and Homa Panhandle about 1,200 people so it's not a priority at all for state of Oklahoma's is it compared to I 35 in Oklahoma City or you look at Tulsa the big metropolitan areas and so it's difficult to get focused on that it is local at a state level and so that's why we look at the role of the federal government the federal designation and why that helps us in rural areas because is in and of itself you know Boise City is not a priority in state of Oklahoma but for the federal to connect these longer agents that's what makes it a big priority and that's what we're looking at in our federal designation is such projects like that one more thing we were also talking about Midland how they were more focused on the farmer Market roads has what's their attitude at this point why I think anything well we've talked to initially is there with some well okay we're okay I think they're looking at it we don't want it we're so the pressing problem they have and it's a serious issue not only for connecting you for economic movement of mobility to the area but also safety and you know you look at is the oilfield traffic that they're seeing overrun with there's been some indication that they're ok with looking at the extension down to by 20 and I think once we get to eye 20 there's that designation with I 14 so it would be a minimal connection and I know that's one of the projects that mayor Gunther is working on with the mayors of West Texas mayor's meeting is kind of building those relationships and kind of building that support I think that's really probably going to be the key for us moving forward is when we get that that buy-in from the whole region that I think it's ready to burst and move I think just things we pretty quickly once said that happens thank you Michael thank you thanks Michael we're now going to have the presentation of the biannual report from downtown San Angelo Dale you're on thank you thank you good morning capsule okay i'ma start off with a little bit of

[0:26:56] an economic report and again this is covering a period of October well actually 2016 to current here's a list of businesses that have started working in the downtown district there are exactly twenty three new businesses that started last year through current currently I wanted to highlight a couple of revitalization efforts the first one is the mercantil most of you probably will remember it as the Harry's food store and originally was the first Sears & Roebuck building in San Angelo back in the 30s the second one has been the new construction of the first financial bank I know we've talked about that obviously related that this new construction has been has become part of our downtown district at the Shannon clinic building another major project in the downtown district and then the revitalization efforts that are taking place now at the formulae the Roosevelt Hotel now to be called the Roosevelt lofts in the private sector initiative or funding excuse me investments which provides which includes new construction permits of renovation and property sells the total cumulative for 2007 to June 30 of this year is 141 million $469,000 in the public private sector along with public projects there's another 47 48 million dollars rounding it up for a reinvestment grand total of a hundred and I'm going to round it up to 190 million dollars so quite a significant amount of dollars being put into the

[0:29:00] downtown district I want to talk a little bit about our promotions we will be our new edition of historic downtown San Angelo magazine will be coming out in October this year our downtown stroll continues you will see there the little banner or the banner of the picture that's an additions that we just added this year of $168,000 and in the Main Street corridor we saw 26.4% increase which is about $250,000 in that in those separate districts that liquor and sales tax combined we just liquor just liquor okay thank you any other questions for Dale Thank You Dale we will now have a presentation on the household hazardous waste event hosted by safe recycling on June 3rd and we will have Lloyd Pascal here or not hi hi I'm Lloyd good nice to meet you mayor I know a few of you on the board or council members I'm Lloyd Pascal and the directorate's safe recycling center this was our second household hazardous waste collection that the city has helped us host the first one was most recently was November 2015 we did have a few less cars this year but it was also in June which was much hotter so I think that there were less people that came out but we spent 14 hundred dollars less than the 50,000 the city gave us to put it so I sent a check back to the city Reavers for the 1,400 that we didn't spend compared to what we had spent last year we did have

[0:31:04] a lot of people recycled paint latex paint is something that's actually not toxic because it's a water-based paint and there is a less expensive way of recycling it that's something talk to Jane Kelton and see about maybe having where we have paint collection on latex on a year-round thing because we were charged just on paint alone was 11 thousand out of the total 48 thousand for the household hazardous waste collection and it's actually about would have been about twenty five hundred dollars as opposed to eleven thousand if we would collect it year round at the center but that's something that I could talk to Shane Kelton and you know so that would be a get the cost down but we had a great turnout still we had over 250 cars that came out people bringing their pesticides and chemicals and stuff like that and I know a lot of people really enjoy the fact that the city does support us and use that and I've had people call and say when's your next one - at the price that it is it will be for about another year probably maybe October of next year we're thinking like a year and a half in between or something okay do I have questions or from City Council Loyd thank you so much for your presentation I have a question yes so can you tell us exactly what the full map was you know you said it was $49 from the full amount of the bill was forty eight thousand five hundred and ninety seven dollars and forty cents back in November we had more people that came through and it was 49 thousand nine hundred and ninety one dollars and 32

[0:33:07] cents but we also had collected more waste in November 2015 than we did this time welcome any further questions all right thank you we are now going to have a presentation on the actuarial report by Towers Watson on the status of the workers compensation liability and property insurance program and we have presentation by our risk manager Charles Hagen and Towers Watson senior consultant Jason Martin golf morning I'm Charlotte taking your risk manager and every year we do an annual report from the actuarial what they find as far as what we need to have in funding for our self insurance what he's going to do is going to give you a run through some of the important highlights of that has been found and it should coincide with the actuarial report that you received earlier Jason Watson from Willis Towers good morning I'm Jason Martin with wills Towers Watson and thank you for the opportunity to go over the actual rail report with you this morning this report was completed in 2016 we perform an actual report every year this one was completed in September 30th of 2016 so we're coming up close to the annual cycle in terms of performing the next actual report terms of the findings of this report we'll go through you know the key overviews or the summary level look at what the findings of the report were in terms of the limitations that we have here is just basically saying that if the city wants to make any decisions to please do so based on the main report as opposed to the summary document in terms of the table of contents we'll go through the current self insurance program a little bit background on the city's program look through the

[0:35:09] objectives as well as the findings of the report so it's a little bit of background in terms of why we're performing this report every year the city does self insure several coverages these coverages are the workers compensation general and auto liabilities those law enforcement public officials and property coverage and so when we referred to self insurance if you think about maybe a homeowner's policy or your own personal automobile policy you may have a deductible on that so maybe your homeowners policy might have a thousand dollar deductible so if you have a wind or a health claim on your roof that cost $20,000 to repair you'll pay the first thousand dollars out of your own pocket and then the insurance company will pay the remaining 19 thousand as part of your insurance coverage well the city self insurance program is really from the same scenario except in this case the city is retaining a much larger deductible than what you might see for your homeowners policy so in the second column we showed the different retentions or the city's deductibles for each of these coverages workers compensation is a six hundred fifty thousand dollar deductible or retention so if you think if the city has a 1 million dollar workers compensation claim the city retains that first six hundred fifty thousand dollars then the insurance company would pay the remaining three hundred and fifty thousand dollars surly is that per incident or in total for the year that's per claim so per incident yes for general liability and auto liability that's really an unlimited there's no excess purchased on those in that case the city retains the full amount of the claim for law enforcement and public officials that's capped at five hundred thousand dollars that's your retention and then for property it's essentially a ten thousand dollar deductible for some of the vehicle and other equipment they're associated with maybe a catastrophe or a specific named event then it's a $25,000 back to par so one of what we're really tasked with the objectives of our review is to go

[0:37:12] through and estimate what is that liability that you're retaining so within that retained deductible and retention layer how much should the city's set aside so that you have enough funds to pay those claims when they come due and so we provide two different key I guess liability estimates for you one is the unpaid estimate of the loss and allocated loss adjustment expenses which essentially just expenses that go along with settling and handling those claims itself we provide that estimate as of September 30th of 2016 for claims that have occurred through September 30th of 2016 the next objective and the next piece of information we're providing is the forecast at lost and alae in this case these are going to be for claims happen during the period from October 1 2016 through September 30th of 2017 so these are really two mutually exclusive time periods one is covering all your historical claims up through September 30th the next is an estimate for any claims that happened during what's really a forecast period at the time that we did the analysis these are estimates I guess these estimates are not calendar your numbers so when we provide the liability estimates these are amounts that we expect to be paid over the next twelve months two years possibly up to 30 years so it's not a calendar your estimate it's not what we expect to be paid over the next twelve month period when we go through the findings you'll see that we're providing these unpaid and forecast Testaments on both an undiscounted and at discounted basis part of the reason why we do that is because as we mentioned that these amounts are not necessarily gonna be paid into the next 12 months in some cases it could be 20 years before you pay out these liabilities so you've set aside assets to pay these liabilities and those assets are earning investment income over that time period so what we give give is a present value estimate

[0:39:15] which is the discounted estimate so it shows that you set aside these assets they're earning investment income so you really don't have to put aside a dollar today to pay a dollar in the future you may be set aside ninety five cents and so you'll see the discounted estimates reflect that present value and the interest income essentially that you're earning on those assets that you have invested why do you do this on a calendar basis versus the budget year that the city works off I think that right now the time period matches the insured policy year that's in place so when the excess insurance kicks in place is running from a 10 1 to a 9:30 I don't know if there's another reason why we provided historic a nice particular time frame if needed we can provide these estimates at any particular timeframe that you need actually though we just seem to make sense that it would fall in line with the same way that our budget calendar functions works since we budget accordingly so for the discard rate I'm sorry so for the discounted rate we're currently discounting at a zero point six to one percent rate event of a rate of return and its ability provided by the city based on the expected return on the assets that are set aside for these liabilities as we get into the findings themselves the unpaid estimates in this case it's as of September 30th of 2016 if we look at column one that shows the undiscounted amount so in total the liability is about three point about three point three eight million dollars for workers compensation that's the largest piece of 2.5 million dollars and then for the liability and property estimate so about eight hundred and fifty six thousand dollars with the general liability making up most of that at five hundred and fifteen thousand scribe this again so if we're looking at three three million three hundred

[0:41:16] seventy eight thousand that is what so you're saying unpaid estimates undiscounted I'm confused why are we talking about right yeah so what this is it's looking at all the historical claims that the city's had and it's say in order to pay all those claims and close them out in the future you need to sit we're expecting that to cost about three point three seven eight million dollars so in the future we're expecting you to pay out three point three seven eight million dollars to close out all those claims that have happened through September 30th of 2016 their claim but not paid out is their reason to believe that claim the that that amount will reduce when it's closed out well yeah yeah so as you pay out those claims that amount will come down at the same time though you also have new claims coming on the book for the current period so in this case we provide a forecast estimate in the next slide we will look at how much do you think the claims are going to cost for October one of 2016 through September 30th of 2017 so during that 12-month period you'll have new claims coming on you'll be accruing additional liabilities at the same time at the same time that you're paying out these older claims there's a rel lower there is some yes so on a discounted basis these unpaid estimates come in about three point two six million dollars so you have some some savings from the you know investment income that you're earning for the forecasted estimates in this case these are those happening during October 1 2016 to September 30th 2017 and told what we're expecting those liabilities to be about one point five nine five million dollars with workers compensation making up most of that at about a million dollars and then the liability of property lines coming in a little less than six hundred thousand dollars a discounted basis until it's about one point five six three million question why would you forecast so much

[0:43:20] less than actuals were the previous year if we look at the previous slide where it was 3.0 right three seven eight right yeah that's a good question and one thing to clarify is that so that three point three seven eight is actually for all call historical years through September 30th of 2016 and some of these claims it can take many years before they're going to be settled so for workers compensation there are still claims that are open from ten maybe twelve years ago as it's possible for some claims to stay open thirty years before they're actually closed out so you have a cumulative effect of many years coming together and that's the reason why you're seeing this at a much higher amount than what you would for just the forecast here being just a 12-month period and just claims a 12-month period now one thing to keep in mind with this poor cast period though is that again it's not a calendar your estimate it's we're saying that you would put be with set aside the one point five six million dollars or one point five nine five million dollars today so that you can pay all your claims in the future some of it might get paid during is twelve period with some of might not get paid for another ten years from now that's a good question thanks for that the next slide looks at the surplus ratios in this case what we're looking at are the city's assets that are currently set aside in the fund to cover these liabilities so in column one for workers compensation the cities fund assets are about one point seven to five million dollars to cover those workers compensation liabilities the current estimate however for those liabilities is about 2.4 million dollars on a discounted basis so there's a deficit in this case for this fund of six hundred eighty six thousand dollars in column two we look at the liability and property and there's a separate fund set for those coverages in this case those assets are to 1.8 million dollars our current estimate for those liabilities

[0:45:25] at September 30th of 16 is about eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars so there is a surplus in this case so the nine hundred and sixty two thousand dollars of that fund the ratios at the bottom are showing some benchmarks in terms of how much surplus is make a reasonable amount or an expected amount maybe within the industry for the workers compensation because of the surplus position being negative those really aren't meaningful ratios if you look at the liability and property for the unpaid estimate and the loss forecast ratios the first two ratios those are both less than the benchmark of three so those are in a favorable position saying that that surplus is and is in a favorable position and then for the road trip the retention the surplus to retention ratio that's outside of that boundary but because those first two ratios are at a reasonable range that's really more of an indication of just the size of the program it is not a whole lot of claims running through and just the retention is a fairly healthy retention for the size of the program it's not to say that you should change your retention it's just saying that this ratio might not be a good fit for the size of the program when you use the word retention describe what retention is retention is really the deductible the amount that you're retaining there any questions on this slide itself so this goes through calendar year 2016 what we've just seen so based off of that what do you project for the budget year 2017 18 in terms of where the ratios will be or just the amount of funding that was well for the ratios I guess it'll depend if there's any additional it as long as the amounts are accrued based on the recommended levels so unless there are any significant changes in the claimed experience that would cause us to change what we expect those cost to be for 1718 the ratio should be similar to what you see here for the

[0:47:28] liability and property for the workers compensation unless there's some additional funding put in to help true up that surplus level then you might see these at about the same ratio as well it could improve a little bit depending on the claim experience that comes through but I wouldn't expect to see significant changes based on what we're expecting you know would you please come forward and talk about the workers comp loan budget and a question for Charles and this is a very significant portion of our budget dis liability what kind of programs do we have in place to kind of lessen this this risk we do a weekly tailgate training so we got some training in process we're reviewing accidents and looking at those at this point in time on a monthly basis in an effort to try to identify what we can do to reduce accidents and injuries we have a require is this required our workers required to attend these meetings for exam if I want to go yes we ask the super super visors do a weekly training on a tailgate and we started at about two years ago to to encourage a safety training as a part of their mission so they're supposed to do it weekly some of them I know a couple of the superintendent's has done daily briefings things like that so some of them are reaching out and exceeding what the what we've started so we're hoping to try and bring this down a little bit notation whenever Jason whenever we get through with Tina Tina come on but I did still have another question for you on the estimated surplus deficit good morning and I was back there trying to pull up the budget for next year when Michael called me forward so I don't have exact numbers for you but I can tell you for the current year we did budget revenue over expenditures for the

[0:49:30] workers comp fund of $351,000 and for next year we budgeted revenue over expenditures of $200,000 so we were actively working to build up those assets due to you know as a response to the negative claims experience that we've had actually she started was it two years ago are we in the first year or that we're in this week our way through the second year about two years ago when we began experiences the negative claims we did change the multiplier so each individual employee classification has the number assigned to it that code is multiplied by our multiplier which then produces the revenue from each of the funds and so we increase that multiplier a little bit bumped up what we were retrieving from the other funds to cover the cost of this funding and so that's how we began to build up that fund balance in the last two years they chose to do the chose to try to recover that workers comp negative fund balance over several years rather than all at once so that we didn't create a crisis in those other funny other funds right so let me just ask again so as it relates to reducing the risk and the number of incidents how do we formalize and ensure that every supervisor in every area has conducted training and ensure that there is a strategy to change the dynamics but it they're supposed to maintain records of their training so it would be in a state that doesn't sound very formal supposed to you don't like that word supposed to they're keeping the training records at which we can inspect on and how often do we inspect them I have not done an inspection we're completing an auto safety checklist audit as we speak in fact we're working on the report so one element of what Charles refers to as a comprehensive effort at reducing these claims is inspecting the vehicle before you take it out on a

[0:51:33] daily basis and we're completing an audit on that now and internal audit we expect that it will result in some some small changes related to that function but the questions yes for Jason come talk to us Tina may have addressed this and if I was following what what y'all were talking about the very end there we show a negative in our estimated surplus on our workers comp is that Tina is that way specifically what you were answering okay okay thank you so we have a plan in place to address that okay thanks just as a brief on that that's a separate fund and funds who employ funds which employee have employees make a contribution in essence a payroll burden item to the workers comp fund where the claims are paid so if you have three employees you'll make a smaller contribution than if you have 30 employees so it is a payroll it's not a payroll deduct it's a payroll burden item that those funds pay to the workers comp fund and what Tina meant was we just increase those contributions a small amount so that a larger overall amount would come in to the workers comp fund and they actually did it with a design that there would be a $300,000 net income at the end of this year to decrease that negative position and this is actually to either the second or third year that they did that and so they're making progress on the workers comp fund they could do it all at once but it would create eight a budgetary a minor budgetary crisis in those other funds and so we think this is the right way to continue the right road to continue down as well as playing good defense working toward reducing claims strategically obviously

[0:53:41] reducing claims as the number one strategy how we shift dollars from one fund to the next to cover the negative number is not high because it still impacts the overall budget regardless of how you shift it and compensate from one fund to the next the big issues how we shut down and limit and control the number of incidents and that to me strategically is a number-one issue because we can always shift the dollars from column a to column B and cover ourselves from column a to column B but how do we reduce the number of incidents and that's got to be a key strategy any further questions or need for more information or comments from anybody on the council thank you very much Thank You Marilyn Brian passed out the actuary report that this presentation was based on so thank you all right we're going to item e consider adoption of an ordinance authorizing the issuance of city of city of San Angelo Texas general obligation refunding bonds series 201 7 B appointing a pricing officer and delegating to the pricing officer the authority to approve on behalf of the city to sell of the bonds the terms of the bonds and the offering documents for the bonds establishing certain parameters for the approval of such matters by the pricing officer leveling and annual ad valorem tax and providing for the security for and payment of said bonds providing an effective date and enacting other provisions relating to the subject and Tina you're presenting yes ma'am morning again mayor council mr. Allen whele I have an opportunity here for the city to refund some general uh pardon me some bonds that were issued in 2011 they

[0:55:48] originally issued for interest rates between four and five percent we're looking at wreaths well refunding is similar to a refinancing of a mortgage or something like that so we're refunding the bonds an expected rate of three point two seven percent with an expected savings over the life of the issue of about nine hundred and forty three thousand dollars what is the life issued in 2011 I believe those go out to 2036 and so when all right so we've got the new number the three point two seven percent so on a statistical basis then that savings would be forecasted in the upcoming budgets based versus what would have been in the budget from 2016-17 you know the screen is flashing really bad and so some if we could just turn it off because it's kind of blinding so your question was whether when we start with IRA Flavian and over the budget year yeah yes well because I assumed that the number that was in the 2016-17 budget is a different number than what would have would be in the 2017-18 budget for the same items based off of those savings over that time frame we would have budgeted the amount for principal and interest for the upcoming fiscal year and yes that amount should decrease based on the refunding I think it was between fifty and sixty thousand dollars per year correct me if I'm wrong Ben okay and what were those bonds that was a 2011 issue or the sales tax of type B sales tax bond issue was for the airport concho River Park I think some for the auditorium I have it here you some Fort Concho improvements some Fairgrounds

[0:57:53] improvements and I think that covered everything that was on this list so those will not be paid off until the year 2036 correct that was the that was the original original date for pay off so it did not extend the life of the bonds do we have questions so Tina you may have said this without saying it is this this going to impact our i ns rent it well between fifty and sixty thousand dollars per year in savings over the life of the issue and so in terms of cents dollars in cents well this is a type B sales tax bond issue so it's funded by the Development Corporation so they are servicing the debt that's great okay all right just appreciate the fact that did you and your team continue to look at these bonds and look for savings since I've been on council 15 months I think this is the third or fourth time that you've come to the council with with significant savings because we had reduced right thank you we have a good support when it comes to that but we're certainly always open to saving some money any other questions or comments Thank You Tina going to item reality Oh perishing on that one right we need to make you crazy Yes Man so ordinance all its favor oh I should go back before you vote and ask if there's any public comment sorry consider that not a vote thank you I'm sorry it did interfere but I was curious this is a very good thing it seems to me but are there any fine refi finance to charges no mention was made of any

[0:59:56] charges to do this paperwork you know will you come forward we're going to ask Vince the Alpha and specialize public finance to answer that question for it Eric council members good morning my name is Vince vo a specialized public finance for the city's financial advisor when it comes to issues of this matter the cost of issuance that we anticipate to incur on the three financing is approximately one hundred and eighty seven thousand five hundred dollars now all the costs that are related to any financing that a city does our contingent costs upon the transaction being accomplished and meeting these goals or exceeding these goals so the city has no exposure as far as cost of issuance should this transaction not be accomplished at these levels or better so all the costs are included in these savings numbers any savings numbers that we present to the city are net savings to the city after all costs have been incurred I hope that answers the question so the 187,000 refinancing charge or if I miss quoted that number is in addition to would have been on top of the nine hundred and seven thousand dollar savings so there would have been an initial million dollar-plus minus the refinancing charge and net effect the nine hundred and some thousand dollars awesomely good yes ma'am that's a good analogy any other questions comments any more further public comment then I will ask for a motion again we the first motion we'll do with it you'll do great then do we need to revote and we'll revote so all in favor say aye opposed passes 7-0 item F consider approving two memos to the tears north and tears south incentive policies and John James you're on thank you John James director Planning and

[1:02:00] Development Services you may recall a couple of meetings ago where you all looked at the new tiers incentive policies as recommended by the board you asked us to come back to address this issue of nonprofit organizations and so as you know that was left out of the previous draft but again you asked us to bring this back so we brought back this simple proposed amendment based on the direction that you all gave at the last meeting and the text of it is right here but this would just be added to that existing incentive policy basically saying that nonprofit organizations may be eligible basically on a case-by-case basis if the board and the City Council both find that there's a significant economic impact to that nonprofit improvement it is worded just as a note that providing the funding for the nonprofit would require a supermajority vote of both the board as well as the City Council I just wanted to make sure you're aware of that and so in the example of the board as opposed to it but council likes the idea this would still not allow funding of it unless both both entities passed it by a supermajority vote obviously that's up for your consideration but that's how we've drafted the proposal all right I'm going to say that I'm totally against this I believe number one that it should be may not apply for tier Sunday and I say that for the following reason the tears program was created for twofold reason one to come up with a fund of money based off of increased appraised values of properties to help facilitate development of new buildings and improve the overall visual appearance of downtown today we have over 70 buildings that are still vacant that need work done on them number two the other second strategy for the tiers program was always in fact to

[1:04:02] look at it and look at dollars being set aside to improve the overall infrastructure presence look of historic downtown the reason it's not appropriate to include nonprofit organizations is that for businesses that are for-profit organizations there is no other place to apply for funds that help them improve the visual or other issues required by permits and and planning redoing a building in the downtown area is a much more expensive project than it is in other areas of town we in the historic business district of downtown a very large percent of real estate is owned by nonprofits it's one of the largest real estate owned by nonprofits in all Main Street cities in the state of Texas and the largest number of nonprofits downtown in this city are in the downtown area we have two wonderful organizations that do an incredible job of providing funds for nonprofits almost a hundred percent of their money goes towards nonprofits and that is the Health Foundation and the area foundation for-profit businesses those are not areas where they can apply for funds it's geared towards nonprofits we must develop down if you remember the numbers that Dell just quoted in terms of performance of downtown it actually exceeded the performance of the entire city in terms of increases in sales / liquor tax dollars there's a reason to continue to invest in the downtown businesses and allow them to improve their overall appearance and make it possible for some

[1:06:06] to actually redo a building and open up a new building as I said before we still have 70 buildings downtown that still need work the expense of redoing those buildings is quite expensive compared to other areas of town and because in fact the funding was never the creation of the tear zone here in San Angelo or in any other city across the country does not provide for funding for nonprofits they tears funds are created by the falling mechanism improved values put money back into the bank nonprofits already contribute to a lot of the real estate downtown and there are no sales tax dollars going impac into the fund from them and we have a lot of needs for downtown when you use the word may we as the City Council open the doors to create too much confusion and too much work and effort trying to make a decision about which nonprofit we will or will not fund it becomes emotional it becomes personal it becomes difficult in terms of making the decision and so I recommend that instead of saying nonprofit organizations may be eligible for tiers incentives I make a motion that says nonprofit organizations may not be eligible for tiers incentives and your motion would include the rest of it as written other than that change you would you would not need the second paragraph because if you say may not it covers the issue it would not be brought forward so you would not need a 3/4 of all the members of the tears board or City Council's so my motion is nonprofit

[1:08:09] organizations may not be eligible for tears incentives do I have a second I will second that for the following reason I am not against any particular nonprofit I like what they do you have churches you have the area Foundation Health Foundation but I don't feel comfortable allowing a a tax based entity that relies on the economic sector of the city to bring in funds so put into the tears board to approve improve their overall well-being downtown to go to others that are not contributing so I will second that motion do I have public comments Steve Hampton I feel that well there are there are things that one of the things that you're trying to do is erase a phrasal value and so if you can use this money to increase the value of the property and that's going to help the city and now you maybe you need a percentage on how much of this money needs to be applied to you know the different types instead of an but I think it's all for the purpose of moving the downtown forward I thank you that's all I have for the public comment Jenni I didn't plan on coming up here I'm on the next item please button say your name Tony hunter and one of the owners of PB Dubois downtown as well as tamango flats good morning I was here for the next

[1:10:12] item but I can't help but get involved in this one because for 10 years we have been a part of downtown and we actually came in right when revitalization was just kicking off there wasn't a lot downtown and for us we've we've had Sears money on one time for fee fees and one time for some Engel flats and it's made an amazing difference in our property we're small businesses we have no other way to get money for what we need and trust me in a short downtown every time you turn around every month there's something that breaks down there as old it's a hundred years old and it takes money and our businesses most of everything we really don't work for a lot of profit everything we profit actually goes back into making that business better and making that property attract more people downtown so I'm very passionate about the issue and I think that that money should go you know been other city's downtown grapevine you walk through there and it's open from 8:00 in the morning until two o'clock in the money there's constant steady flow of businesses that is putting money back into that community and I think that's where cheers is a wonderful program and I'd like to see it stay as it is it means a lot to a lot of us small guys and I can't even tell you I feel very strongly that thank you good morning money to introduce myself to several of you - Jim Cummings I'm your newly appointed chairman of the tears board I want to thank you for affording me the opportunity of serving in this capacity and I pledge to you my concerted efforts to merit the confidence and trust that you've placed in me I promise you that I will be passionate and I'll be proactive in trying to fulfill my responsibilities I need to go on record with you that first and foremost I support nonprofits

[1:12:19] in this city and I serve as a trustee of an organization that we make large contributions to nonprofits in our city and that brings great joy to me but in the role as chairman of the tears board serving in that capacity I need to inform you that fundamentally I am opposed to nonprofits being potential beneficiaries of grants from the tears board and the reason I take the stance is that to include nonprofits in my view as has been stated creates confusion and it creates conflict with our mission which is kind of productive in what we're trying to do on the tears board and the tears responsibilities we are first to we will strive to promote economic prosperity within the taras owns secondly but just is important we want to grow the tax base within the tiers owns and then third we want to encourage the overall revitalization and redevelopment of downtown San Angelo having said that I want to thank each of you you for serving in your capacity serving our citizens in our city I appreciate you very much thank you thank you morning ma'am when counsel my name is Terry gyro and I work for a non-profit but I also agree with most of the speakers that have addressed this problem that we have got to keep putting reinvestment into taxpaying entities as I say I work for a non-profit myself so I should have maybe a little bit different view of it but I don't we have wonderful nonprofit organizations for

[1:14:23] instance that have taken over many of many buildings that would be derelict and really are instrumental in revitalizing and reutilizing if you will some of these vacant buildings so it's a wonderful thing they do but it also takes them off the tax rolls and as you can see by the budgets that we have for this city we need an increase in the receipts for our taxes our tax rolls and the way to do that is not to encourage if you will reutilization of this utilization investment by by nonprofits thank you very much further comment and I'm also speaking on behalf of not allowing nonprofits to benefit from the tears funds there are 29 501 C status exemptions that any nonprofit can apply for through the IRS federal government and there's an additional routine other type statuses that you can apply for again as a nonprofit for tax exemptions through the IRS so there are many other ways for nonprofits to be able to take advantage of creating funds for their ability we downtown San Angelo is a 501 C 3 we also had two opportunities when we took donations of two buildings in downtown significant buildings in the Roosevelt Hotel and the I mentioned earlier the the little Harry's food store building we chose not to apply for tiers funds just for that particular reason as a

[1:16:28] non-profit we wanted and wanted to make sure that funds were going to be created to replenish those funds and so obviously those properties have been sold and purchasing now they will be contributing back to the tiers funds so I just wanted to again reiterate there's a lot of opportunities for 501 C 3 s to be able to gain funds from without having to go through tears thank you you know while you're up here with I'm a land bank or something and I want to take and develop something downtown I mean let's take anything local at it but if I'm looking as an investor or I'm a lane Bank and I'm a nonprofit and I come here and I look at something downtown I want to improve and I need you know the ability to do some funds would as this is stated would that impact me to apply or not apply when my future goal is to actually have something that we can sell and make taxable so that's kind of my question on this thing is I know I see everybody's for America and I get it but I want to say in a bigger picture does this prohibit somebody from looking at us down the line and saying I would develop that property but I don't think I can get the assistance from the city to develop that property or they're not going to support me and that was my whole thing when we brought this up a couple of weeks ago was does it keep other people from coming to us if they eventually want to develop some property and they are a non-profit at that time but the property the property is eventually going to be taxable and provide an economic incentive well still just said there are many options if it's a non-profit to begin with they have a whole laundry list of areas to go for funding including locally the Health Foundation and the area foundation businesses for profit have no place to go except to a bank and most banks say you know what it's going to cost an awful lot of money what we what we have never had a problem with is that scenario what we've had a

[1:18:33] problem with is people looking at buying a building and development because of the cost and historic districts are that most creative energy entrepreneurial spirit that exists in downtown and we have to make sure our historic downtown is successful and it requires tears' support to do that there are so many avenues and I repeat again the area Foundation and the Health Foundation give a hundred percent the Health Foundation gives 100 percent of their funds to nonprofits they're a source if I want to open up a coffee shop the Health Foundation is not a source for me they have multiple levels on multiple levels of places to go to make that concept happen a business for profit does not and also in that scenario that you just spoke about and if they're buying a building whether it's just historic or non historic depending on the age of the building and most of our buildings in downtown would qualify for either federal or state historic tax credits that's another avenue for a the scenario you just described in order to be able to tap into those kinds of resources okay you've answered my question there and I guess I get it down to the point that I'd figure under super majority going through two different committees or councils to review you know basically 12 out of 14 people would figure that one out and shut it off for it gets everything you've answered my question yeah idea the other part of it that I think we haven't emphasized enough is and the conflict issue you know you put a board and put City Council on on China on an emotional level when you've got someone coming up to say well we're doing this for the children we're we're doing this for whatever the cause is and you know who wants to turn that down well nobody does

[1:20:39] so that eliminates and this is again of the tears not not a not it's not a fighting agent called tax increment refinance rebound that's a reason it's called tears so you eliminate having to face that as a tears board member and it's a City Council and that's that's another element that I think we need to emphasize as I think that's a good element that you just mentioned however I think it does get emotional because we're really focused on downtown's and Angela and what happens there that if I remember correctly there's the south tears and the north tears right so in the north tears there are different needs than there are in the south tears and when we have a policy you know one of the things that I grew up with was never say never because you don't really know what's going to happen of what's going to go forward and to Tom's point I agree with him 100% with it going through a couple of boards before a decision is made I think that's a check and balance on it plus it gives us opportunity to consider it doesn't say that nonprofits will you know have a chance for funds it said they may and that gives us an opportunity to look at things because we don't know what changes are going to occur and you stated that there are 29 avenues that nonprofits can go to how do we know those 29 will always be there and maybe there's a situation going on in the north tears that you know could use some funding some tears so I just think that we need to step back and not just look at it so black and white and I understand what you're saying and may I

[1:22:41] understand what you're saying that we want we need much as we want but we need properties to go on the tax rolls so that it can be reinvested into our city but I think we ought to leave an opportunity if there is something that comes along that we need to consider for tiers funding and this gives us that opportunity and I also understand the point you made that you know if I come and the tears board and the City Council allow me to have funding and then another nonprofit comes along and we deny funding that could create conflict within the city and we certainly want to avoid that at all cost and so I guess what I'm saying is and saying all that is I understand both sides but I just hate to say never say never to this policy amendment and I just think that gives us an opportunity to make decisions and I think we as a board that's what we were elected to do to make tough decisions it's not always easy you're exactly exactly right about that Councilwoman do it I did one is just there's this is a RS status exemptions there are 29 in an additional 14 so there's 42 total exemptions that a non-profit can take advantage of in terms of being able to create funding resources or tax credits or whatever that are available to 501c3 or any nonprofit organization whatever their issues or whatever their statuses and this is a relatively in the big picture the funds especially for the south tears are much smaller than the northern tier funds is the northern tier right now I think sits at 1.5 million am I correct somewhere in that area and

[1:24:45] the the southern tiers typically stays within four hundred five hundred thousand dollars that would be available and so the northern tiers if you're concerned about the northern tiers has considerable on my money available to it and the other issue is there's a low amount of applications that are coming in for funding from the from the north tears from those businesses that would be eligible and that's one of the reasons why so I understand what you're saying but I still don't I still think very clearly that that we continue to utilize tiers funds for nonprofit status and those funds are not going to be replenished because they don't have to be replenished because of their status we lose at the end of the day I would like to mirror what Councilwoman DeWitt said I'm very much for the fact that you don't know how things are going to be in the future and for us to make this definite decision of no we're not going to ever approve a non-profit I'd like to sit in especially because of the north side that they do not have a lot of applications maybe this would help the nonprofit and the north side come across and say hey we're going to apply we're going to do this but I do not like the fact that we have to go up there they know we're not going to do it completely well what happened they have been eligible to apply I'm sure and but but even they know now then they will definitely be out of ball game and that's that's where I I think that like mr. Witt said we were elected to protect the people in our in our district and and it's not just about downtown it's about other places in town and I'm not saying this just about downtown I'm saying that the northern tears has an abundant now many many thing right okay and so relatively speaking they can and have been ill available to those funds

[1:26:47] and they haven't taken advantage of it but but the point again I'm making in downtown San Angelo is making is that when you take those funds out they're not going to come back and we need those funds available for Salinas thank you it's it Johnny you want to come on comment again John at some point them I have a question for you one thing about the northern tears because we've been able to do a couple of things that think there's also an informational educational aspect to the tears board that needs to go out to the businesses on the north side I've been approached by several saying how do you do it how do we do this how can we do this and I said sit down write that the things you want to do to improve your business things that you need write it down and let's look at it I'll be more than happy to show you where to go we'll set it to set you down from the right people and get it done there are a lot of people I think up there that would love to make their business a better place some needs a lot of work so there's money available so I'm encouraging those folks do what we didn't get in there just but there is information that needs to be shared and education on the matter and I think that would change a lot of just a bunch of money hit I think there's a lot of folks out there that would love to have it the other issue for nonprofits or I should say for nonprofit organizations is someone can redo a building and we and apply for tiers funding they then can lease to a nonprofit organization most nonprofits don't spend the money on a historic old building because it's so expensive and they're not going to send those kinds of funds on a downtown building and the costs associated with it more often than not someone else owns the and leases it to a non-profit so there are many different aspects of that yes Raylan Marin City Council my name is

[1:28:51] Roland pena director of economic development I just felt compelled to make some comments I really don't and this is not my not my issue not under my purview but I felt like I needed to provide some some input some insight with regard to a broader perspective economic development perspective tears provides assistance for public purpose and just to give you an example of a non-profit the city of San Angelo Development Corporation is a non-profit and we work very closely with neighborhood and Family Services who provides services for us to rehabilitate neighborhoods and we do that by providing affordable housing way of which the majority of cost is provided by the Development Corporation that in turn provides an individual the ability to afford a home and it helps to revitalize a neighborhood I think the only concern that I have is that the nonprofit terminology may exclude city government other nonprofits that are able to help for a public purpose I see a day when this community may have more than one or two tiers that we can have one and different portions of the city's so that we can revitalize other neighborhoods the city can take advantage of tiers to help build other public purpose buildings for example I mean tiers can be used for fire departments medical facilities or for state facilities paramedic facilities parks and I think that what we're talking about is revitalization and creating vitality and when you the term is if we be get that then that

[1:30:56] in itself begets itself and continues to write or revitalize I think that's what we're talking about I would just hate to exclude those entities like city government or the city of San Angelo Development Corporation that can help revitalize other parts of the city and that's that's my only comment you have separate funding through for that purpose that is correct but not but when we collaborate when we can collaborate just like we're talking about the Chadbourne project it's a multi million dollar project and it will beget revitalization and I think the city benefits remain C of course is a nonprofit but it's a 501 C 8 right you want to describe what a non-profit 501 C 8 is versus a 501 3 C Teresa would use it but most government says that a 501 C 8 let me is is theirs is fraternal beneficiary Society and associations so the government I looked into that city government is not a 501 anything it's it is tax-exempt but under the IRS but it does not qualify as a 501 status profit right it's not a non-problem taxing organization but it is not it's not a non-profit so that's that's a misunderstanding right there city is not a not renowned profit it's a tax-exempt organization I think there's a distinguish those two because we are a non-profit because we are not-for-profit we do not have a tax designation under 501 C right John and I were just talking about if we're going to let the governments of the city especially receive these funds we probably want to change the nonprofit organization

[1:32:59] language to be more the tax designation versus just the general statement of organizations so are you saying we should say nonprofit organizations who do not have a taxing element I don't think it will be that easy either because you can be an organized nonprofit under Texas statutes without being a 501c3 under the IRS code so we would have to make sure that how I would write this if we want to make sure that governmental entities are included in getting fierce funding is that we would explicitly state that it does not apply to governmental entities John I have a question for you there's I'll say obviously passion on both both sides of this sometimes I think we need to step back just a couple of steps I don't know what I don't know you don't know what you don't know but help me here are we are there some unintended consequences either their way of this this issue that we do need to consider before we ultimately take a vote well probably I think it's a short answer there may be some unintended consequences and I think some of those have been raised Tom raised one that in other cities Abilene for example there's an there's a non-profit whose sole purpose is to purchase properties rehabilitate them combined you know combined parcels and then basically flip it to encourage redevelopment in that case an organization like that that's a non-profit wouldn't be able to get funds I don't know that that's a huge problem because they could find a different mechanism or they could they could consolidate the property and resell it and then have the new owner apply for funds I do want to make two points so you talked about North versus South as you may recall when we adopted the new policies we split what used to be one

[1:35:02] policy into two so there's now North policy and a South so one option could be to include different language in the north versus the south so that's one thing to consider the other thing is this policy is specifically for the incentive grant program something like the Chadbourne street improvement project does not fall under this program so when we're thinking about funding city projects or other things there are other ways that the tiers funds can be expended other than through this incentive program this is specifically for a grant program where people apply under this particular policy so I don't want anyone to go away thinking that what's written on this policy applies to the entirety of tiers funding opportunities John let me see if I got you correct you're saying that the north side could say that the nonprofit's were eligible and the south side could say no they're not eligible correct okay I like that idea we do for you run away John I think I'm probably the only one up here that hasn't spoke and this all started a couple council meetings go right in the middle of my district so what I want to say is is that it's very difficult in the south because we because there's not as much funding there I think we have to find a way to get more businesses downtown to grow that particular fund if we had a million and a half dollars in the South fund I don't know that we'd be having this long discussion about nonprofits up here because I think we would have dollars enough to do what we needed to do on a regular basis so splitting this maybe maybe an opportunity the other thing is is as we look at this and Tom Thompson just said it if you do a supermajority in two separate boards that means 12 out of 14 people have to agree that that it's a project that that meets public need and is good for the

[1:37:08] community so there's a possibility that we could stay that particular wave if we decided that's what we wanted to do we just have to figure out a way in in the South Zone majority of the downtown area how we're going to increase that tax base not only for the tiers funding but also for the sales tax and we have got to figure how we're going to get people in those 70 plus buildings and ever since I've been coming to these council meetings about five or six years ago we've been talking about that particular item and we've been some successful in in in a few instances but we've got to find a way and I don't know whether it means somehow or another we strategically sit down and look at that from an entire community and not just Downtown Association but we've got to figure that out because if we don't the South Zone is always going to have no money regardless of whether or not it goes to a non-profit or not so however we decide here this morning on on this particular issue I think the larger issue simply is this we've got to get people in those buildings and we've got to revitalize the downtown to increase that tax base let me ask you this business this may be the firestorm question at least in my mind let me go up but let me go ahead and ask you as a conversation ever taken place since we've had North Zone South Zone tears as conversation ever taken place why don't we just have a Tears and not a north and a south yeah I think I understand why there is two but I'm wondering if we had one would that if I only had one tears the the boundaries of those respective not being any different than they are but it was just all one

[1:39:10] pot would that help any in this discussion I think that's for another day in another time oh absolutely like that conversation has been we can it will set off a firestorm we absolutely will because as Tony when she was speaking said that people are not coming forward from the north tears to apply for the fund that's why the Trish the funds are building up so much and education and encouragement and getting people on the north side to start applying for some of those funds is in and I think that as it's been said here because the South Fund doesn't have as much money as the north Sun if we make it one fund then the North is not going to get anything so I just as the mayor said maybe that's a conversation for another day and I'd really like to prepare for that so I'm just saying I guess there's a motion in a second on the floor for this yes ma'am yes you may I do want to make a comment that as far as tiers of monies we didn't know there's a finite amount of money there's not a huge pocket available to us so we start looking at reinvestment in that area this is just my opinion when you look at reinvestment in the area and we talked a little bit about the aisle being this at the pocket Park last time that if you invest in in that nonprofit that it would it possibly promote investment in that area but because there is a finite amount of money the question becomes a question of opportunity cost if you invest in a project as considered indirect which would be like a nonprofit the pocket park are you foregoing the opportunity investing in a direct a reinvestment type project where you're actually building the tax base and not only led when you're investing in a direct impact type of investment you're already you already encouraging investment in the

[1:41:14] area because you're encouraging that directly into that business at the for profit that actually is building a tax base so again it for me that's become a question of indirect and direct and also opportunity cost as you invest money if you put it toward a nonprofit that takes away from the possibility of investing in a for-profit it's actually building a tax base in that area and also contributing again back into that incremental amount that can be a reinvestment reinvested later so for me when I look at that I do understand that for a if you look at a project a project by project and say okay are we going to consider investing in that one you're going to ask yourself what is the the loss that we may incur upon that do we lose that money in the future to invest in a poor profit and again a poor profit that would have an impact both ways building the tax base and also encouraging investment in that in that area so again we don't have in much we all wish we had a lot of money and I wish that we could go and look at each particular project and say hey can we look at that a non-profit as an indirect contribution to that area or should we wait for a direct contribution within a poor profit and that's just my time thank you all right we have a motion on the floor and a second let's listen let's hear the motion because there's a lot of discussion we've talked about laddies things up and I want to make sure I know what I'm voting for do I need to restate it as I stated it or dark can i reword it you can reword it we'd have to have an additional second if you want to include the information related to government entities that sort of stuff I'm going okay I'm going to make a motion that nonprofit organizations with exception of government entities may not be eligible for tiers incentives in the southern tiers zone do I have a second that's that's an amendment amendment is

[1:43:19] there an amendment of indigent was the original just southern or support north and it was just it was both I'm just doing the southern right now second all in favor of the motion say aye all right opposed nay the motion passes 7 to 0 and now we can take additional motions on this subject I would like to make a motion I would like to make a motion that nonprofit organizations may be eligible for tiers incentives in this North Zone if the tiers board and City Council make a finding that a significant economic impact will be created as a result of the project that was a 3/4 of all the members of the here's board and city council voting for providing funding for providing funding for a nonprofit organization under this policy shall require a favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the tears board and City Council's so as written for the north tears exactly yes Riya does she need to be specific about not of not allowing for it in the South District because that just find a way that she stated well I think as long as she's specific for than the north tears as written for the rating workers yes okay good I could second that all in favor aye opposed nay passes 6-1 I think everyone says we need a break moving to G could I move J forward which would be the first reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending chapter 5 article 5.0 to alcohol and beverage regulations of the city code of ordinances to add a minimum 300-foot separation for the sale of any

[1:45:22] alcoholic beverage liquor beer wine or Venus liquor from a church John you're on thank you again John James Director of Planning development services this is an item that you may recall at a previous City Council meeting maybe six months even a year ago the issue came up about separation of bars from churches that is something as you see on the screen here the Texas Alcoholic Beverage code basically the state allows cities to say alcohol sales have to be separated from churches however we don't currently have that separation restriction in our ordinance we do separate from schools and hospitals but our current ordinance does not require separation from churches we looked at other cities the ten cities you see on the list here all ten of them have the separation requirement for alcohol sales from churches but as I said we do not currently have that this is a district app that shows the areas of town where alcohol sales are allowed and so that would affect that particular item in that area and so here's the proposed language basically adding to where we say alcohol sales cannot happen within 300 feet of an elementary or secondary public school or it would add Church to that list as well so fairly minor amendment to the ordinance but it would potentially have an impact out in the community I will note that the we have proposed exempting the CBD the downtown since there's a lot of different things happening in close proximity there's already bars and churches literally across the street or next door we didn't want to impact that type of activity in the downtown where you expect things to be in closer proximity so this would apply outside of the downtown again that's the that exception for the central business district so this does come to you from the Planning Commission

[1:47:27] with a recommendation for denial that was a 4-2 vote by the Planning Commission per the zoning ordinance when the Planning Commission recommends denial of a text amendment to the ordinance like this it does trigger the supermajority requirement for City Council so to approve this amendment to the zoning ordinance would require 3/4 majority vote by the council could you go back to the a couple of slides back where you had the red drawn and say again what you said my understanding is that isn't is the area within which alcohol sales are allowed generally that those areas are eligible for liquor permits without the restrictions that apply in other parts of the city so anything that does exist within those zones would be become a legal non-conforming use is that an accurate statement that's correct as with any of our most of our zoning requirements if you're in existence now you're allowed to continue and so if there is a current currently a liquorish or more within 300 feet of a church they would be allowed to continue as a non component if they ever stopped that use and would stay stay that ways at 12 months right then they would be subject to the 300 foot that's correct so if I sell my business or if I want to sell my business and somebody wants to own my liquor business I cannot sell my business no the business can be transferred as long as it's in operation and doesn't cease operation for more than 12 months you can sell it you know you can close it down and open it up correct okay but if you miss the one year window then it's gone correct and downtown is excluded from this conversation that's correct has there been public comment public

[1:49:32] input did we ask any of the public their perspective on this and then repeat to me again is this a current Texas law ordinance you said something about the state of Texas early on the state law allows cities to adopt this regulation but does not require it and so we have not taken advantage of that opportunity but just want a few things that they allow you to have an opinion on because we want to have the opinion this can be one of very few we ever in opinion on I want everybody to speak up today so we need to be careful we have an opinion yes John John you said the Planning Commission denied the amendment to the ordinance to include churches where schools and hospitals are why was that I mean whether and partly to answer the mayor's question there was quite a bit of discussion we've reached out to folks who have spoken on this before or have expressed an interest and so and there was some interest at the Planning Commission so we've tried to get the word out on this so that anyone interested can come forward there was quite a bit of discussion the Planning Commission I think their feeling was that it was just too restrictive too we have lots of churches and if we were to say that liquor sales were not allowed within 300 feet of a church that would significantly diminish the opportunities for that type of business and that on on the whole I'm trying to speak for the Commission here but on the whole that there have not been significant problems with that with maybe a handful of exceptions all only the one that we're really aware of that was brought up at a previous City Council meeting so I think trying to summarize what the Planning Commission's feeling was was that it just wasn't a problem that needed to be fixed

[1:51:34] again it was a four to vote so two of the commissioners felt that it was something they would would approve now I know the mayor asked for confirmation on this I'm asking it would exclude the downtown area correct this change would so it would apply to businesses that are in the residential areas of town yeah everything outside of downtown this this would apply to well when we talked we let's be clear Billy because one of the things we need to make sure is when we talk about downtown we want to talk about the downtown district so meaning define downtown based off of this ordinance because you know we have many different ways we talk northern tiers southern tiers we have a Main Street district we have a central business district we have many different languages and terminology so what we need is clarification John on specifically when we say it excludes downtown tell me the territory express well it's the central business doning district and so I unfortunately I don't have a map of that on the presentation but it's basically what you think of is downtown basically the freeway down to the river roughly I don't know if it ends at Coney calm or Abe but roughly there over to the main street wherever on the west yeah so when you hear downtown present Billy they talk about the 16 block territory downtown that is the territory inclusive of all those bars that would already be in existence in that district and this basically came about a year or so ago because of one one particular bar that was in proximity to a church and this particular bars patrons were evidently not very respectful to that property on that church and that's why we started having this conversation is that correct that is correct this is one instance one

[1:53:40] particular bar I have I wonder how many times the police officers have responded to that that particular site I know chief Howard was here earlier would have been able to answer that question but unfortunately is not right now so and I think if we've got one particular area that that's a problem it's going to be difficult for me to blanket the whole community with with an ordinance so at least that's my comment right now how many businesses I don't know if I asked this before how many businesses does this impact outside the downtown district business district we have not tried to do an analysis of where all of the churches and all of the liquor sales permits are within the city that that's a pretty big undertaking so we have not tried to to look at that so Harriet to your point of from from where it originated did that arise again this year that particular situation arise again this year that now prompted it at this point in time no the short answer is when that came up at the time the City Council said hey this is something we should look at we put it on our to-do list so that we it's just now we've gotten to it okay basically so basically we have one church one bar that has created an issue that now is brought before us because of one bar one church in the entire city of San Angelo that is problematic and so we're trying to create an ordinance based off of one bar one church I believe Reverend Davis was the one who had come up here before and mentioned that bar there was a limo okay that's right across the street from that church that's right and so I believe there may be public here to speak at least on that

[1:55:45] side and perhaps the other side of the issue as well any more questions for John does anyone want to make a motion will we do public comment after we have a motion sorry do I have a motion I make a motion to approve as president and when you move to make a motion to approve it you are making a motion that says that we would protect churches from bars there 300 feet within that churches real estate is that correct and I will second that motion may we have public comments good morning or you had to wait so long thanks for hanging on oh I'm a very patient man I have no patience and I have money no seventh Dale my name is Charles Davis and I just happened to be the pastor the st. Paul Baptist Church um the church is not 300 feet away from the bar the bar is that a mirror back there that's not 300 feet what is 300 feet if I'm in this room football football field length of a football field okay and there's no way in the world the dead bar could be 300 feet from the church when you walk out the church you the boss right there and from what I understand from the history that I've received as the young lady got killed the dead are two years ago several people always parking our church parking lot I've even had people Park in my personal parking space in the church parking lot and I really don't think that that's good um

[1:57:51] and it's in a residential area and not only is it across the street from st. Paul Baptist Church but it's also right beside Alexander temple which is another Church that shouldn't be I'm a little upset because the guy who supposedly run the bar he bragged about how he got the bar even bragged to me that he paid $15,000 extra to have that bar put there I don't know how if that's true or not but I think it should be investigated that this man has a bar across the street from the church and that he thrives on that God allowed him to do no not the god I serve the god I serve with never allowed me to put a bar across the street from a church I respect the church very highly it's sad that our children have to see this bar there's a school right down the street from our church and again there's always somebody parking in front of the church and when I asked him to move and they tell me where the church has closed the church ain't never closed yes handicapped signs that are there you go to Walmart at 12 o'clock at night you can't park in a handicap parking space but yet you come to the church and you park in front of a handicap parking space you're not respecting the church are we asking is that you respect the church did I understand that there's bars and around churches downtown that's fine I don't have a problem with that most of the bars that you see downtown are restaurants this is not a restaurant this is a bar food tables right likes friendly pub pub

[2:00:00] is another word for bar I came last year by myself but I brought one of the members with me did they come on I would have brought some more but I just found out yesterday that this was coming up and we're very serious about our church I think if I'm not mistaken our church had been in that area for 67 years our church is 121 years old so we have some history here in the neighborhood and again it's not downtown if it was downtown with the rest of the churches I wouldn't need to be complaining but it's in a residential area and it's not respected you realize if even if that if that building in that business already exists whatever we vote for today won't change that because it will be grandfathered in I understand I'm gonna find that out loud to make sure we all understand that I understand the grandfather love but at the same time I understand God's law and that's against God's ordinance and so however long it take me to fight for that building to be moved I'm taking the stand I'm asking not only myself but I'm asking my congregation to do the same thing not only the congregation but the whole community because it's the only bar in our community and it should not be it shouldn't I don't think that there's a bar and at your church there is not thank you you know I get we'd like all like to change things in life the unfortunate part is whatever we decide today won't change that bar and that's the price I'm just speaking out loud - I know what you're saying and I'm

[2:02:03] passionate I really do I respect what you're saying and it was there and I understand the grandfather law but at the same time I understand that in 2018 it is and so I'm coming back and hopefully I'm not coming back by myself it would be more of us the next time we come you want something to say so tell she's ready to talk come on hello Council my name is Michelle Chen I am a member of st. Paul Baptist Church I've been there for 17 years now I have a child that attends st. Paul Baptist Church since we've been here and we have children young children that attend st. Paul Baptist Church we believe strongly about the separation between the church in and Bars just like everybody else and we believe in our children attending church and that they should be safe and protected against things such as bars and that kind of thing and you know it's hard to protect your kids as it is and then if you have a bar across the street you have to worry about the bar and when we come to church for a Bible study and you see adults outside they can drink outside you know we see them drinking and we can hear the music and it's just not Christian and we're Christians and we try to uphold that and we try to build that in our children and we try to build upstanding citizens for the community and that's all we want to do and we do understand that it takes time to have this ordinance come about we just want you to hear what we're saying to you we'd like you to consider that strongly and that we be considered in that just like you would any other Church in any other bar situation and like the

[2:04:07] pastor said other churches have that we would like to have that considered as well so long I'm sorry we just thank you for your consideration thank you God is a very historical church and just want to be recognized as being has served as a historical church in our community is one matter of fact st. Paul is the oldest church in the community it's 121 years old congratulations yeah as a matter of fact this October we would celebrate that hundred and twenty-one years so it's not just church that was just put down that's some history there and we want to keep that history going and like sister sent ten said you know when we go to Bible study and our youth doing a car wash or what have you you know we have to pick up beer bottles from my church to Graham and that shouldn't be and for me that's very painful that people don't respect the church these are not tears of weakness these are tears of sadness because people have lost respect for the church and I'm not going to allow that to happen and so it doesn't matter how many times I have to come here I'm coming and I'm going to keep coming in the name of Jesus I'm coming there's somebody make a change let me make a change let me ask you this River you said that particular location that church had been there for 60-some years it's my understanding if what you say I'm not mistaken yes yeah I think you as we take a look at this and mayor you said this very appropriately both of those entities

[2:06:10] have existed in the same spot for a number of years and so I'm not sure whatever decision we make today is going to impact that I also feel like that the parishioners of this particular Church have a valid issue with that particular establishment because the patrons of that of that bar over there are not respecting the people from this church and the church property so I think we we really need to see whether or not again I go back and say what I said earlier I don't know how many how many calls for service the police department has made to that particular establishment but maybe if we put more pressure on the people that own that that place maybe we could help clean up some of that stuff I so appreciated I think we're going to have to use the law and whatever code enforcement issues we can find to help protect your church property and the value of your Christianity and what happens in that church because I don't think we can pass a vote today that will impact you and that's the unfortunate thing but it won't but if we make it uncomfortable enough that the people attending that bar don't feel comfortable attending it any more than perhaps we can change the dynamics thank you thank you you too do I have further up you have to ask a question here in the if we needed more information on this one of the questions that was asked and I think you asked of John is how many of these places in San Angelo are within that 300 foot radius the church and the bar I'd rather postpone a vote on this thing personally until we got it information that allows us to say all right this is one instances or we've got thirty

[2:08:14] instances in this particular community I'll just note we can do that that's a fairly significant undertaking there's not a good we don't have a layer on our GIS for example of churches so we'll have to do some research the Yellow Pages are googling online to get a good list of the churches which we may not have same with bars it's definitely something we can do but I mean from my perspective if this is this is a problem throughout the community then I may be tending to vote one way if it's a single issue then I'd like to have the police department take care of it and I may vote a different way I ask again do we have any other issues with any other churches with this problem I'm aware this is the one complaint that we received right there we can look at police reports and pull what complaints have been received for certain bars certain pubs and see if in fact maybe there's church nearby and maybe do it that way so that John and staff isn't buried with a lot of research but really we want to find out how many issues or problems really are out there so the complaints have been had with certain bars we can take a look at that and see how close the churches are to that bar establishment I believe strongly public property right so I believe if someone's had a business in a location and it's a bar whatever that it's hard to change that dynamics and tell them one day you can't you know it's going to be an issue if I sell it on the other hand I'm very protective of and obviously at some point so was the law in an interesting way that it prohibited from schools and hospitals but not churches I find that amazing that something was passed that excluded churches to begin with that's odd I'm not sure the logic behind that

[2:10:19] because I would have thought that the church and the schools would have been the most protected elements not hospitals so that's an interesting thing for me but but I don't think we can pass something today that has an all over the city dynamic that would change the dynamics merrily I'm sorry as a mere allowance researcher we can actually bring it back for for consideration you know Harry mentioned that he'd like to have a more research on that we can definitely do that and bring that back but again if we're not prepared with information that we have I just do recommend that we just kind of bring it back next time around I would like to say that this is more for me it's more like something that's in the future say for instance if this bar was to close down or anymore that is budget it would prevent them in his bid late last year that they would not be able to reestablish in that location and that's where I see this benefiting everyone and that's what it says now right right you said that if we saw if I sold my bar to somebody if they didn't open it up before one year they could not open a bar there they have one year to buy it from me open it back up under their name their t BAC license period assuming yes assuming that you're outside the CBD yes and that's correct John what would present prevent somebody from going and opening up a church and then actually affecting somebody that has an establishment that sells alcohol whether that be a chain restaurant or something else that would also apply to them over a period of time correct it would again if the alcohol sales already existed they would be grandfathered but yeah that has happened in the past where you have a bar and maybe the church moves in next door and that would create a similar non-conforming situation okay

[2:12:22] thank you all right well I think we had a motion on the table so what we need to do is to ask if we can pull that motion can I do that if yes if it's decided that you want to spend some time and deliberate it and bring it back at a further meat of future meeting then we would need the second and the motion rescinded otherwise we need to deal with the motion on the floor so I'm going to let's I'm going to ask to see if the person who made the motion and the second would like to resend that motion in that second and move to a later date with more information this conversation yes I will resend my second we will tell you John go to work thank you for being patient with us today and hanging out we're sorry it took so long to get to you okay thank you all right so now we're going to go back up to Adam D and it is consider resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a temporary non-exclusive sidewalk use license agreement for 280 square feet of landscape planters seating areas and an existing porch in canopy and 320 square feet of seating areas awnings and an electric smoker to be located within the right-of-way of Oak Street for properties located 204 and 208 South Oak Street John thank you again John James Director of Planning development services this is a sidewalk use agreement on Oak Street currently PCs barbecue is the tenant in this building and as you mentioned that these are the things that they've they've asked to

[2:14:24] allow encroaching into the public right-of-way onto the sidewalk the staff is recommending approval of the proposal with the exception of the electric smoker and I'll get to that in just a second this is the survey of the area just defining what areas they will encroach I will note that as with any such encroachment where it involves a sidewalk particularly in the downtown we would always maintain a clear path for pedestrians and wheelchairs and so that won't be an issue in any case this is a picture of the site this is the smoker in question again the staff is recommending approval for the awnings the seating outdoors all the other things they're asking for but we have recommended not including the smoker for a number of reasons but largely aesthetics and just interference with the sidewalk in downtown we believe this isn't the kind of thing we want to see in the downtown this sort of mechanical equipment in the middle of the sidewalk in a downtown area this is just the next building over just showing the general vicinity again here's the summary of the request staff is recommending approval of everything with the exception of the smoker I'd be happy to answer any questions do I have any questions from anyone on City Council I guess that had to ask the question just for clarifications the peep sees is this basically barbecue and they use this particular smoker or one like it for for their meals is there a place on that particular property that they can place that smoker that won't allow them to continue operation doing what they what they're doing I guess I would defer that to the applicant I would say there's likely a place but I guess my answer to that from a staff perspective

[2:16:27] is even if there's not we would hope that folks find facilities that accommodate the business use that they need rather than having to ask a city to place something like that into the public right-of-way on the sidewalk I know Tony's here so I'd like to hear what she has to say may I also ask that obviously the owner of the property has a lease agreement with the restaurant and if it was denied having that electric smoker there you would have a negative impact because the lease would not work for that tenant so I would ask if there's the potential to say that the electric smoker would be allowed until determination or the and of the existing contract and I also know that there are some of those smokers that pull up on weekends over in some other areas of downtown and so the question mark is as we talk through this is this a singled out anonymous phone call complaint or is it in fact something that we are enforcing in all of the downtown area yes because less than two blocks away there's another one on that same street yeah and I can say that as with most of our code enforcement it is largely complaint based and we did receive a complaint on this one we have approached other others in the downtown so I wouldn't say this is a single event but there they're made as you mentioned be others that we haven't enforced against simply because we have not received those similar complaints I do know at least one that I can think of is actually back on the owners property rather than out in the sidewalk even though it is their visible you know from the street but yes we we

[2:18:32] do largely enforce based on complaints the wheel on the smoker and that tree there it doesn't look like very much space and if we are concerned with the safety issue because that is that even enough space for a wheelchair or a double-wide carriage you know when they have different events downtown people come with their children and strollers and things is that even enough room to get through without accidentally bumping up against the smoker and getting a burn or something well two answers to that one is they would be required to place it in such a way that there is sufficient room however I will say that the ad a requirement for that is only a three-foot clear so and that to me that looks more than three feet and so I think how its situated now would be compliant the other option is they could move it down one way or the other so that it's not immediately adjacent to that tree that you know giving a little more space but now between the two buildings there isn't that like a driveway or something between this building and the two-story red brick in that a driveway well it's a door opening into the BART into the outdoor patio air into that restaurant it's not a driveway a right way on the northern side of that two-story building but that is not a driveway where you see those white doors there on the far right that is not a driveway okay well what about the back is there no room in the back where that smoker could be put behind the building again I would defer to the applicant to answer that question well Connie can you come forward Tony hunter again I am the applicant as well

[2:20:41] as owner of the property the electric smoker we never intended to be that way but we do not have a backyard we do not have an easement we didn't have anything we originally approached it perhapses taking a parking spot pulling it in and leaving it as a parking spot kind of like the food trucks that park around town and maybe just designate a spot for that to set it is an electric smoker we've had Ross Coleman from the fire marshal out it's not a like you would think a cast-iron thing that's cooking meat it's an encased insulated smoker all it does was a low heat that they use overnight it's not hot to the touch he's been there he's rubbed up against it so it's not what we would consider a hazard to folks other than being more curious and some people are and maybe they shouldn't be playing with such things but we do lock it lock it down lock it up and all those kind of things we don't have a lot of options in this situation you have any option not really other than losing my lessee and the complaint came in and for me there's a complaint and obviously there's a lot of other things within that just in a four-block radius that could be complained about but we got the complaint we address it we've spent the money we paid them in order to apply to be able have this now as you know as an agreement are as maybe an exception when that lease expires then we can move it away and then just say I promise that we'll never do that again but we're already in the middle right in the middle of the lease it's got a few months left on it and I really don't want to lose the revenue right and we've done everything we can with the city and with the specifications and everything it needs to happen everything that we can possibly do to try to remedy this situation so any questions you have having you something maybe I haven't thought about what what's behind the

[2:22:44] building it's a zero lot line so it backs up against another property this it's owned by someone else there is no rear access period we have very few alleys downtown which is okay well I was just wondering what I know it's there I know you said you know until you sit but your property behind that is it open it's actually a zero lot line we put up next to it I guess house it's there that has you know the big two-story with the green wraparound and then they've got a little yard and then they've got to behind them they've got two properties that are like extended stays for whatever they didn't however I don't really don't know how she uses the property but I know that we have zero access zero there was this smoker before you brought it outside or decided to put it outside and it was actually down the street that on East chewing on another property that was purchased so we moved it when that property got purchased it looks like we could take the smoker off the trailer and have a good 32 inches actually got what do we measure was it 50 45 54 inches from the it was 50 45 to 50 inches I think from the wheel to that just where the planner starts the picture doesn't really reflect correctly right but we did with the city measured everything to see and and could we probably move it a little closer could we reconfigure it just a little bit but we're talking maybe six six seven inches of the most so you're willing as you I think you stay before but I'm going to repeat it that you really are asking and requesting that you be allowed to have that smoker there until the end of the lease that currently exists and upon that least terminating then you would not look for another tenant who would need the smoker that gives us the option to work with the tenant to resolve the situation by the end by the time the lease is up for renewal we clarify when that lease in by

[2:24:48] chance believe it's I believe it's April first I think it's April 30th - April 30th I have to there was a there was a little honor there was a 60-day flex in that least so I need to go back to you know the original lease and see exactly when is but it that's probably April 30 or something like that so if it wasn't approved you would lose the lessee lease or because they do barbecue they have that's what they do they do we would and it's not and it's it's a you would said there's a difference in I know there's a difference than barbecue and smoking this is done on a low heat it does it's electric it doesn't even use the wood that's in there is nothing but as the unit heats up the wood flavors that mean it's not wood that's on fire it's just it's a natural smoking process so it's a different than what you see when they pull up those containers and they're stoking that fire that is not happening this is an electric smoker it's actually run by electricity not by fire you go ahead when the lease is up there's no chance of them opting to continue the lease there is there is but that gives me the time to resolve the situation whether we have all the meat smoked at another location which wouldn't tell me rewording the lease and reworking at least to give them exception are you know an option that reduces their lease because they're smoking at their other property that's down the street so it just gives me a chance to rectify the situation that they came up because of one complaint tony is it monitored whenever it's smoking me yes somebody is there and monitoring it to somebody could my concern with asking that question is if we allow you to have the smoker and that an accident occurs I'm just wondering if the city wouldn't be liable no I'm actually a part of the

[2:26:51] part of this process is that we supplied all the necessary indentification insurance information to the city that we are liable for that and we also as businesses we carry a tremendous amount of liability insurance because we also beer and wine and so on and so on so we do we do cover our bases on that we would never think that the city would have anything when we go out of our way to make sure that it's safe and having Ross over to do that ahead of time for me was important because I knew about as much about electric smokers is you know probably half the people in here so it was an educational process for me as well when the lease is up next April when you see it what you would look at options or something I can't remember exactly how you said it but there's a chance that the people who are leasing it now would want to do another lease with you and keep the smoker there indefinitely right I think my option would be they don't renew just because of the way it is and and they move on or they do want to renew but they're going to ask me they're going to remove the smoker that's that's all I'm asking is to that that gives me an opportunity to to work with the tenant and if they move the smoker then they're going to ask me for rent for less money and you know it works it's if you lose things and you don't want to pay for things that you got originally analyse so it allows me the opportunity to fix the situation so that it works for everyone now I would not mind letting you keep the smoker till the end of the lease it's just the fact if not having there it all the time because I think it's kind of an eyesore well and some time on my son town I've ever talked about dad Chad you know that area I can't hear you I can walk with you for a few blocks and we could have all kinds of conversation on the street yeah well I just think it's an eyesore but if you would be willing to let them

[2:28:55] stay there just to release this app and then with the condition that that would not they would not mean and that's basically what I'm asking that gives me an opportunity in good faith to work with my tenant and allow them to continue business because like earlier with the one complaint and that complaint once against chairs and tables things that have been there when we bought the property they've been there they've been there for 10 years and so in compliance we're going to do what we have to do with the city to do the right thing but we'd also don't want to be singled out as the only person that's having to go through all these motions it's it's a lot of energy that goes in to just this meeting here today and I can be using that energy in a lot of other ways so that's just what we're asking okay thank you Tony any do I have a motion on the floor let me ask this question of John can we make the motion to grant this portion of it the barbecue bit only through the length of this lease which is April of 2018 and then leave the rest of it as a permanent type use agreement sure I believe so okay well I'll make the motion then that we allow this temporary use or this sidewalk use for this agreement but only the the barbecue bit only through the length of the lease which is April 2018 the rest of it is out as as regularly presented I second it any further public comment yes sir I'm going doing y'all come and have it this and I'm sure that Brenda might back me up in this this location has been a very viable part of downtown San Angelo and I know when when rod moved out it suffered a lot of issues we're trying to

[2:31:00] trying to fill the position try to get people to come back to that area I don't want to see that same kind of easy situation develop again where it Kurt tells that part of downtown when we had such good revitalization effort going into that that's the only thing I'm worried about with this I want to make sure that they keep a good viable source of entertainment and economy to downtown that's my only issue on this on this matter thank you very much well put all in favor of the motion that Harry made that we allow the electric smoker to be placed there through the term through the end of the existing contract say aye any opposed motion passes 7-0 hungry new so where's the barbecue or the smoke today report okay we are going to the item age which is the first reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending chapter 1 section 4 subsection C appeal to City Council of the city's land development and subdivision ordinance to allow the planning director or director Public Works to appeal variances granted or denied by the Planning Commission to City Council John again you're on the keiondre this is at a proposed amendment to the subdivision ordinance currently when an applicant a developer submits a subdivision plat they have the opportunity to request a variance from particular standards whether its lot with or making a road narrower than it is required under the city ordinances those variances are heard by the Planning Commission if the Planning Commission denies the variance the developer can appeal that to the City Council and get another hearing but currently under the ordinance staff does not have the ability if the Planning Commission denies the variance staff

[2:33:03] can't come to the council and say hey this is something we think you should consider overruling the Planning Commission so this would give staff the ability to appeal those decisions up to you all again it would only allow the appeal of the plats variances not the plats themselves we did look at 23 other cities ordinances and there's a variety but almost all of them the plat variance is either go directly to council every time or they can be appealed to the City Council only two cities currently of those Amarillo and San Angelo do not allow those appeals to the City Council something I'll just add here that these cities 35% of the cities have all plat variances go to the City Council that's something that we first brought this up we had recommended to the Planning Commission and so what we bring to you now is kind of a compromise where you guys don't have to see every single Platteville's but it does still give staff the ability to appeal those to you if we feel strongly that it's something you should be making the final decision on this is a very simple change to the ordinance basically where it is an appeal it adds the words that the planning director or the Director of Public Works also has the authority to appeal we did take this to our development task force meeting which is a meeting we have every other month with the development community there were no objections raised they don't take formal votes so it's not a formal recommendation but with those president that meeting no one raised any issues or concerns this did go to the Planning Commission they made no recommendation they believed that this was a decision for City Council because it's deciding what you should and shouldn't hear so rather than make a recommendation one or the other they said let's leave it up to the City Council to make that decision that I'd be happy to answer any questions so basically you're saying to us that instead of I mean where

[2:35:08] previously they were not allowed to approve any variances and plat variances and so now they can go to you first and if you don't resolve it and like it they can then send it to City Council no actually today of a developer can ask for a variance from the Planning Commission and then the Planning Commission makes that decision the developer if they don't like that decision by the Planning Commission can appeal it to the council but staff does not currently have that ability under the ordinance so this would allow staff to appeal a decision of the Planning Commission on to the City Council but in any case it will be heard initially by the Planning Commission I think Brenda what it what it may help the Planning Department and the council is really look a long ways down the road on things that may have some the proverbial unintended consequences that we need to be thinking 10 15 20 years yeah yeah I'll move approval okay okay all in favor okay this does require hearing let me back up the minute no one voted now we're going to have public comment I didn't read any hands up so no one does it okay since I seem to be one of the only people remaining in this meeting I woke up fourth but I think this is a good thing I think this might be one of the things that expedites the process of a code making and working with our business businesses in town on changes like that so I I think this is a good thing with and they and they still have the appeal second to go ahead and come to the City Council if there's a problem the only thing I in order you know in order to keep the decisions kind of going the same direction that we have said we might

[2:37:13] have some kind of a report made to the mayor or the council that that you might approve be aware of be approved something of that nature but that doesn't seem like a big thing if there's a problem people will complain thank you thank you any further public comment I will now take a vote all in favor say aye aye opposed nay passes 7-0 look it's John mr. John James please come forward okay so now it is the first reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending the City Code of Ordinances chapter 4 section 4.0 4.0 3/5 concrete and foundation construction which would introduce a procedure for ensuring the accurate placement my role on blue passed I okay sorry my apologies well you know what because I've already read it I'm going to we're going to move forward okay because I'm not going to waste my word so that would be which would introduce a procedure for ensuring the accurate placement of residential building foundations John I'm still hungry [Laughter] hi m'kay thank you again John James corrector planning involved services the zoning ordinance as you probably know requires buildings to be set back a certain distance from the property lines typically five feet on the sides 25 feet in the front etc over the past few years we've had more variance requests because home builders have built their homes too close to a property line whether it was

[2:39:16] the concrete guide didn't measure appropriately or they measured from the wrong place in the past we've maybe had one or two of these every couple of years but in the last three years we've had eleven and so in talking with the Zoning Board of Adjustment they they recommend that we look into the issue and say are there ways that we can resolve this and so this has gone back to them two or three times and so it comes to you today is the is the joint recommendation of the Zoning Board of Adjustment staff and as well as being signed off on by the home builders and the home builders Home Builders Association and so basically we've done is created a solution we what we first looked at was requiring a surveyor to go out and say yes before they pour the foundation they're putting it in the right place and as we discussed through that we thought well that's that's a little ownerís to require every builder to do that on every project and so what we came up with was this idea that for what we called rectilinear Lots basically square lots that have mostly straight lines then the Builder can just go out find the property pens that show where the property lines are and run a string between those pens and then our inspectors who go out to inspect the foundations anyway they can just take a tape measure measure from that string to the foundation and say yes it's it's sufficient that creates a problem on curved Lots however because you know if you've got a curved lot you've got a property pin here and a property pin here if you connect those with a string well you've got a problem here where you could have you know the building being built too close to that line and so we what we suggested is requiring either a surveyor to do the actual survey or they would have to sign form basically saying that it is in compliance and so that's that's kind of a compromise that everyone has agreed to I I took out what is in your packet is a big complicated chart these are just a few examples but just for an example on

[2:41:19] any cul-de-sac it would require the surveyor to sign off on it because of the significant curve but then as the curves get bigger if you have a long slow flat curve that's if the curve is sufficiently long then we really don't need the surveyor we can still just run the string and so our engineering department actually came up with the chart based on a calculation of at what point does the curve get so much that connecting the two strings would potentially create a problem so that's how we came up with that chart so again this does come as a recommendation from the Zoning Board of adjustment as well as staff in consultation with a number of groups and with that I'd be happy to answer any questions I think I think you said this earlier but you worked closely with the Home Builders Association to make sure that they were on the same wavelength as these recommendations are and I happened to be at one of the issues where a guy had pins were wrong the foundation was laid the house was built and and they figured it out so it does become a problem and it's a problem when you get too far down the road becomes a very expensive problem so I like very much that you have worked with the home builders that the home builders and the Planning Department have come together and created a solution to the problem and I am very supportive of the presentation and thought process and the recommendations on I see that there the approval was six to one did somebody see a downside with doing what the Zoning Board is recommending no I think that one vote he still believed that this was too onerous to make every home builder do basically to solve a problem that is with a very limited number of home builders that it's basically punishing everyone that's doing it right but again

[2:43:25] we see a growing problem with it right and we've had that many in that period of time because what happens with that when you know somebody puts the foundation out of spec and somebody's lived there for three or four or five years what do you do and that was the concern that the Zoning Board had in large part is that these were typically being found after the house was constructed and so I'll be honest what many cities require is that you deconstructed the front part of the building and move it back or completely reconstruct the house that's not what we thought was the best solution the Zoning Board thought that wasn't the best solution but at the same time they didn't like approving these over and over because builders weren't measuring properly and so again we think this is a solution that hasn't the most minimal impact possible but still lets us review the situation earlier in the process I moved to prove a sentence okay all in favor oh I did not oppose I would call them public comment leave she's hungry yes okay I was wondering is it going to be additional cost what are the charges on this situation the short answer is yes there may be a small cost surveyors of builders hire surveyors to come out and do a survey on the property anyway what this might mean is one additional trip out for the surveyor having to do this on every everyone the the engineers and servers we talked to suggested that this might mean two or three hundred dollars additional expense again that would be only on the ones that are on curved Lots that's that's one of the reasons we exempted the the other losses the additional cost if any would be you know 10 minutes for a guy running a string between two steaks basically so yeah on the ones that are on curved Lots it would it would see a little

[2:45:28] more expense for the surveyor to come out that additional trip and that's where most of the problems there are anyways on called a second curve lights the majority of them have been on those captive Lots that's right what's the odds of a survey being wrong if they're raising the property line and they come back I would say not not very likely although I mean we can't rule out that the surveyor makes the same mistake but they're trained and they have a license that is on a line if they don't do it correctly versus in some cases this was just the concrete truck guy comes out and measures and just measures from the wrong place and so we think the surveyors would likely not make that same mistake good let's go any further public comment we have a motion in a second all in favor say aye those opposed motion passes 7-0 do we want to take a lunch break it is 11:55 or we can approve one more we're going to do we're going to go back and do I okay first reading a public hearing of an ordinance amid need chapter 12 article twelve point zero three division two the City Code of Ordinances in Chapter 12 article three of exhibit a city zoning ordinance to allow for an approved process for manufactured homes to be placed on residentially zoned properties with additional development standards thank you again John James this you may recall back a few months ago we had a property owner who came to you asking to allow a mobile home on his property at that time you asked us to go back and look at this ordinance and make some changes I won't read through all of this you probably recall from before that prior to 2000 you could come to the council and ask for placement of a

[2:47:33] mobile home the council at that time changed the ordinance basically making it stricter and limiting where mobile homes would be allowed our manufactured homes will be allowed in the community this would soften that at least slightly to allow folks to seek that permission this is just a summary of what happened to back at your June meeting what you all recommended us to look at and so basically what we've proposed is in our residential districts ranch in a state RS 1 and RS 2 which are basically our single-family residential districts it creates as a special use manufactured homes and so in those districts someone could come to you asking to place a mobile home on those properties I won't spend a lot of time on this with the Planning Commission we discussed the option of a special use versus a conditional use really the main difference is a conditional use would be a final approval by the Commission but then the applicant could appeal it to you so you wouldn't hear everyone but you would hear those that were appealed a special use as we've proposed it every one of these would come to you for consideration and so that was our understanding of what you all recommended I just wanted to point out that that distinction the Planning Commission did make a recommended change to the proposed ordinance that we recommended or that we presented to them at least based on our understanding of what the council recommended what their recommendation was they were concerned that allowing manufactured homes anywhere in single-family zoning would open up the door too much it would allow anyone anywhere to ask for this and they didn't want to see that they thought that was going too far and so what they understood the concern really to be is replacing an existing mobile or manufactured home and so they limited this ordinance amendment only to the replacement of a manufactured home or mobile home so if I've got a vacant lot in the middle of the neighborhood I would not have the ability to come and ask you to put a manufactured home on it only if there had previously been a

[2:49:36] mobile home or manufactured home on that property we also added some standards for ensuring a permanent foundation as well as the median taxable value you may recall when we adopted an ordinance for modular homes we said that the value of that home had to be at least the median of this pounding home rounding area we inserted that same language into this for manufactured homes that addresses that issue I think a lot of the concern with the one you all heard was that that was actually an improvement to that neighborhood but what we wouldn't want to see is the one of these go into a neighborhood where it actually is devaluing the neighborhood fairly straightforward modification began now I wanted to make sure that you understood the change that the Planning Commission recommended that would only allow these four replacements with that I'd be happy to answer any questions live to a pursuit as presented approach a person do I have public comment John is there any kind of restraint or constraint of if there has been an existing mobile home on a lot but whatever reason it has remained vacant for some period of time much like what in this discussion we just had just immediately had the twelve month time frame earlier is there that sort of condition or restraint here as well well there is but as long as the home is on the property there they're good whether it's occupied or not is not the issue if there has been a mobile or manufactured home on the property within the previous twelve months then they would qualify all right there has been a motion in a second we've asked for public comment there has been none we'll take a vote all those in favor say aye those opposed motion passes seven to zero we are going to go into executive

[2:51:40] session and section five five 1.07 to deliberations about real property regarding lot nine a block to section nine a ready Roya hills addition will be the topic conversation and we anticipate this being about a 30-minute executive session so we will adjourn until approximately thirty minutes at 12:40 12:40 we moved to support a request by cosa DC to make an offer to buy the properties from the city for $25,000 under the recommendation that the cosa DC would pick up the cost for the environmental and cleanup studies as well as pay for the cleanup and if the properties sold that the cosa DC would get their $25,000 back and then whatever the properties sold for over and above twenty five thousand dollars the city and cosa DC would share in that dollar amount 5050 do I need to comment any further that's a motion but we just need the second all in favor aye aye passes 7-0 we'll move back to the regular agenda and we're going to move to item I BL consider proving a contract for RFQ w u o three-one-seven professional service water supply engineering feasibility study with Alan Plummer and Associates incorporated in an amount not to exceed five hundred seventy four thousand ninety nine dollars and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents and Bill Riley I

[2:53:43] believe you're presenting ma'am Thank You mayor council appreciate the opportunity to bring this item before you this afternoon most of what I'm going to have here is stuff that you've already seen through the the workshops that we did but I wanted to take just a minute to kind of go back through this and kind of lay out the reason that because we need to move forward with this study just a reminder one of the things that I think is it's important for us to remember is that our surface water supplies are vulnerable to drought conditions and in fact our main water supply lake IV has been less than 12 months applied twice in the last few years and so it kind of lays the foundation for what we need to do to augment our current supplies again as a reminder the contract with CRA mwd for water out of Lake IV is for fifteen thousand acre feet a year but the safe yield of ivy has been reduced to a little under five thousand acre feet a year while c-arm WD has not adopted that and changed their policy they still allow us to take the fifteen thousand in for water planning purposes this is what we have available because and it in fact could change to where this is what we are allowed to take each year in relation to that of course is our Hickory ground water project which currently has a capability of producing about nine thousand acre feet a year or eight million gallons a day and with a ultimate build-out of 12,000 acre feet and that's our maximum allotment from the the permits that we have for producing that the Hickory ground water the plants at eight million gallons and as we've discussed the next step in that would be to upgrade the Hickory to where it will produce the full 12,000 acre feet our ten point seven million gallons a day so our current water supplies again for planning purposes are around thirteen thousand just under fourteen

[2:55:45] thousand acre feet that's roughly what our average uses our annual use is currently so based on these numbers that we can meet that projected need and again just kind of a recap just looking at what our population projections would be moving out fifty years we can see that we're going to need additional water supplies in the future probably in the ten to fifteen thousand acre feet range but that is a that's a little bit different issue than what we're talking about today the reality is is that we have to plan the fact that that IV since it got to under twelve months of supply twice that the reality is it could potentially go away and I think as we've discussed I don't think it's realistic to think that it would go away forever it would just dry up and have water but there could potentially and very likely be a time period that we would need to bridge then I don't know what that number is how many how is it a months a year three years or what that timeframe would be but I think it's imprudent for us to look for ways to augment our supplies so that we can bridge that gap if we need to and in equally important is to be able to have water supply to support economic development and growth in the city so the objective is is to develop a comprehensive water supply plan the process would be to begin to look at all of our options that those the things that we have looked at that have been identified and those that are yet to be identified compare those on an apples-to-apples basis and and begin to understand the feasibility of those on both cost and non cost basis in other words not only the evaluation not only has to determine or be determined by what it costs us to implement it but what's the feasibility of being able to implement that over a long time and the viability of that supply so the bottom line is is that the objective would be to develop a road map

[2:57:48] if you will that lays out how we can augment our water supplies today how we and develop a timeline and a plan for implementation of those supplies and also the improvements that we've all talked about that are needed in our treatment infrastructure in both our wastewater and our water treatment plants and and that plan would be coupled with the long term plan that the West Texas water partnership is working on to give the city a 50-plus year I call a master water supply plan they can be implemented over time so we understand when we need to implement sections of that and what it will cost us and how we move forward to protect and grow our water supplies unfortunately that's not cheap the basic services in the in the study is about three hundred seventy two thousand dollars we've broken this up this way and basic and special services there are some ground water supply options that could hold some potential options for the city however I think in the initial review of those would determine whether we need to whether it's even feasible to even continue in evaluation so the basic services would take a cursory look at those options if it proved that there was some some real potential there then these special services would kick in bring in the water the ground water experts and develop that option is a potential supply with a total not to exceed amount of contract to five hundred seventy four thousand and ninety nine dollars so just as kind of a timeline of how the advisory board has looked at this last year the Advisory Board took some of the options that we have and did a SWOT analysis we spent a couple of meetings doing that you know we just looked at those as as a group and determine which ones that we thought had some potential and which ones that we knew had issues that were not going to be feasible projects at the end of

[2:59:52] that the next step was okay what now we need to really take an in-depth look at this and bring a consultant in to pull all this together and help us to develop the roadmap in August of last year the advisory board voted unanimously to recommend moving forward with that option develop a scope of services develop an RFP and move for with hiring consultant went back to the advisory board in November and gave them an update and as we did again in May and told them that we're going to be moving forward bringing that to Council we went back to the adviser advisory board last Wednesday laid out this project for them and they made a unanimous recommendation to you to move forward with awarding this contract single developing this long-range plan we have any questions how are you going to pay for it it is it is budgeted in our current budget in the current budget is Monken and where does that but when you pay for this what don't you pay for because you're paying for this this is this nothing this is in our capital funds or available the study but it impacts capital fund impacts the ability to do something with capital I'm not in support of this I will tell you that I'm pretty much not supportive consultant fees to start with and as you went through many of the items here in terms of what just what we need to do seems like to me we've done a lot of it through our own staff and I'm not sure I understand spending five hundred seventy-five thousand dollars to hire a consultant to look for water if you will when number one if the West Texas water partnership hasn't found it how can Bay number 2 this is the third consultant scope of services describe to me what we did the first and second times we hired them to do some consultant work for us and how that difference from this one assume you're talking about this far monsoon you're talking about the first study

[3:01:54] they did was an initial review parries for the wastewater effluent following that the city hired them to do the conduct a pilot study for the direct potable reuse project totally separate than these all right so then the other part I noticed in one of the line items as I went through the study that they were going to do is to project out our population and project out our water usage and you just show me a chart that does that so why would we pay them over seven thousand dollars to do the same thing I just looked at well these are just specific recommendations that I'm sorry the projections that we came up with that were part of the region F plan if we're really going to understand our needs we're going to have to make sure that we have all of that done appropriately and projected not only in our population but what our demands are going to be so we need that what you just showed me what I showed you was yes and I think we need to confirm that we can't confirm it who can confirm it for us well this is our city our water our consumption our projections how could our numbers be different than paying somebody to come up with different numbers I mean I'm confused if we can put this together why we need to pay somebody else to put it together for us well mayor there's a lot of work that goes into projecting the population and the usage patterns and we want to make sure that we have those right well I guess for me what what do what expertise did they have that we don't we currently don't have on on staffed this is a huge project and it's going to take the

[3:03:59] expertise of a lot of different disciplines and that's the value of bringing in the consultants you're not hiring a person you're hiring a national firm that can bring in the expertise for the different disciplines the different facets to this project to devote to this project we do not have the expertise of expertise on staff to not to just focus on this but to develop this that's what these folks do and we need to in my opinion over the next not too many years the city is going to spend somewhere between 100 and 200 million dollars in developing water supply just to meet our current needs and infrastructure replacement we should have a good plan for that if we miss that we could spend more than a half a million dollars real quick we could waste millions of dollars so I think it's important to have a good a good roadmap a good plan for that so we need a consultant to tell us what our infrastructure problems are we do we do need a consultant to look at what our specific needs are in our wastewater treatment plan we're talking about getting a discharge permit so that we would be able to put that in the river and be able to utilize that that effluent we need to understand all that what are our options what how do we need to design that plan depending don't decide to do a fluent then why do we need means because you have to first all agree to want to do a fluent before you need that study and we haven't agreed to do that yet well we need to develop all the data so you can make that decision and watch data is different from the first and second study since the first and second studies dealt with a flood usage they looked at the the biggest part of the studies was direct potable reuse and that's what that's what they looked at they looked at how we would utilize that how would we would treat that this is actually taken that a different direction how can we utilize our effluent in a non direct way in an indirect way putting it into

[3:06:02] the river taking it out downstream through some sort of riverbank filtration putting it into the ground through an offer storage recovery project there's a multitude of potential options that we can utilize to be able to use that water that is ours for about seven million gallons a day on average what sorry go ahead the carry so if if we decided that for some reason or other that we we didn't want to do this what would be our options since we have to depend on the good Lord to let it rain on the watersheds and put more water in the lakes and rivers streams whatever I'm not I'm not I know me and the Lord probably see eye to eye a lot of things but I'm not sure that he's going to allow me to make the prediction that we're going to have water in that lake sufficient enough so that my granddaughters grandchildren will have water so I'm looking at whatever we can do for 50 years down the line I know I don't worry about next week or next year what can we do 50 years down the line to ensure that the population that is here 50 years from now in 2060 7 2070 really have the water to allow this this continue to this community to continue to grow and support the population of 150,000 people so if we don't do this what are our options to try to get to that particular spot well mr. Thomas I think the the we would we would need to move forward with our plants and we would figure out how we upgrade our plants without any knowledge or understanding of what our source waters might be for that hopefully we would get it right as far as water supply if you don't do this today then I'm going to go out and start trying to negotiate some sort of emergency backup supply 50 years down the road I think we

[3:08:07] continue to work with the with the West Texas water partnership for that that doesn't solve today it doesn't solve for the next 20 years and we need to make sure to me have ourselves in a position where we won't run out of water where if we do lose IV for a period we have something in place to to make that up the hick'ry won't do that it won't meet our daily needs it comes close but if we're relying strictly on the chicory we're relying on a on a well-filled that's 70 miles from here with a lot of moving parts I don't think that's a good plan it's a great source of water for us it was a great decision a very smart decision that the city did and but it doesn't answer the question and so we just got to get back to where we we need to be now and continue to plan for the 50 years so they can go ahead now go ahead but you could they can't find the water force if West Texas partnership hasn't come up with the water and we're paying whatever we're paying annually for us to work with them to find the water how is this consultant piece of paper were worth 540 about seventy thousand dollars going to find water for us well there's two different things mayor one is is that West Texas water partnership is looking for a large supply of water that does take us out for a long time we're looking at how to augment our supplies and make up a gap bridge a gap to debt in 20 years from now and provide some make sure that our supplies are viable enough that you can bring business in here we can have economic development today that's that's the objective with this is to have a plan that finds something that helps us and that that might end up beats being just an emergency supply with somebody a

[3:10:10] contract with Abilene or somebody that might be the answer but it might not be there might be other options that we have using our own water if I'm a mare I'm sorry as far as the West Texas water partnership as bill just pointed out it is a long term search it could be 20 30 years down the road one thing that the city member cities have always understood is that we're responsible for the short-term and intermediate water needs of our community and that's what each one of the community is doing right now in Abilene in Midland and us as well actually even as we know right now adays has been working on that for quite a while but that's one of the things that we all agreed on is that we would be responsible for locating and addressing the short term in intermediate terms for our communities and this is actually what we're trying to do at this point the long term part of it West Texas water partnership is looking at it because it's going to be a very very costly endeavor probably close to about billion dollars when it's all said and done so again on our part we do understand the concern as far as the cost for the study but I'm really worried at this point cuz even at this the study is going to take about 18 months a scare to death as far as what could happen whether our water supply then as far as the what we have in surface water with ivy so again our big concern is to make sure that we show up what we fill the gap my concern is number one is is that we need to find the money to complete the drilling of five wells number two we need to find the money to improve the water treatment facilities those two things alone help shore up short-term needs and when you start talking about capital money money is money five hundred thousand dollars buys you a part of what I just said and I look at it and in reference to many of the consultant groups surveys and things that we have we have racks and racks of studies done they're sitting on shelves that we've never had the money to execute whatever was in those studies and by the time if we can

[3:12:14] get to those studies the information is antiquated and not current so I think at some point we have to say what is our priority a priority is getting five more wells drilled Hickory aquifers that was to be a key component of our water source and if you talk about 18 months the chances of finding something else in the 18 months out from now that's going to shore up our water supply is slim and none if there's something out there right now that we can find that we can get piped in here or pulled in here in 18 months why haven't we been talking about it and it obviously would have been more obvious by now so I'm worried that we're spending money it takes money out of the capital fund that we need to complete five wells and upgrades the water treatment facilities and I do not question the need to look for water down the road I don't but I go through this thing and look at the various line items in terms of where this study's going and I've got question marks in terms of whether it's the best use of the money in the big picture on that laid out proposal there yes sir Marion Council [Music] Roland Kenyon director of economic development I'm bringing you the perspective as a member of the water advisory board I appreciate your comments and concerns and I just want to provide insight as to how me is an individual member the water advisory board looked at the proposal so we saw this as a water supply resource plan that looks into the future that is looking at all these options including what you just talked about those additional wells and expansion at the Hickory but it would give us a road mag roadmap to determine when those options need to be in place and how how in advance we

[3:14:18] need to be working toward bringing those options online so we saw that is a much more as a study that solidifies all those options into one plan and gives us a schedule with cost and a timeline of when they need to come online don't we know that don't we know we need to drill five more Wells don't we know we need to upgrade the water treatment facilities don't we know that now we do know that I think we've stated all along that we know that the the upgrade of the Hickory is needs to happen it just is not going to look at that and the word study gets a it's a bad rap but it's really a preliminary engineering plan that allows us to then go apply for a TBD s permit so that we can drop our effluent in the river it helps us again understand does the preliminary engineering for understanding what we need to do in our wastewater treatment plant it also allow us to apply for any state or federal funding that we have to have this done to be able to do that didn't we agreed last year did the City Council agree to go ahead and apply with that water fund the state water fund for 1.5 million and we filled it out and applied for it then well we actually it was a swift funding and we put in application for 150 million yes so we applied for that no but I know diffic to that project okay but I noticed that those terminologies Swift also included in this document so is that not part of what we want they all they said in that document was that if we wanted them to they would assist with any Swift funding application or state or federal application we apply already first law so the council approved that we just didn't do it the council also voted to retract that application but again those applications are project specific what we did back

[3:16:24] then won't apply to something other that project you still have to have the preliminary engineering done they'll back up just a minute for me you you referenced I think quickly just then this this particular analysis would look at what some of the needed requirements are at the waste water treatment facility does that also include any needed our potential needed things at the water treatment facility it will come from here the thing that we want to make sure we do is understand before we just go out and start upgrading these facilities is we understand what our potential water sources are going to be beyond what we have today we want to make sure that anything that we do today takes us and works for us into the future for potential different water sources so yes it will if we don't know what the water source is no one else can give us a study that says what we need to do to that facility because if you don't have it identified you don't know about the water treatment what we need you got to identify the water source first which we haven't been able to do beyond the Hickey aquifer right now and that's what we're trying to do is identify another source that will augment our current supplies and bridge the gap and once we as part of this is we understand that then the improvements that are made to the water treatment and wastewater treatment plant take that into consideration now do we know what we're going to have 30 50 years from now no we don't but we know what we can have now and we need to begin to design those improvements knowing what that source is we know now that is we have the hick'ry aquifer and that really only gives us 2020 according to your map the charge that you've got right here basically because after at 2020 we need approximately 18,000 gallons now I understand you sold us

[3:18:29] before that this number is probably a little larger than that what we would probably need but it's certainly between 14 and 18 so at that point in time even if we had the five additional wells done or what our total capacity was twelve thousand gallons that correct is correct okay - its twelve thousand acre-feet twelve twelve million yes okay and you're you're receiving whatever we we can get out of the IV today what you indicated was forty six eighty one or whatever that number is that only gets us to sixteen but also remember we lose our bank water rights in the year 2026 okay so you lose your bank water rights twenty twenty six so you have to be using it up so if you take a look at right now we're in year 2017 and we're only using how much of the bank water per year that we have available to us not using any of the bank water right so if you take from 2012 - let's just say 2018 how much is that banked water how much Bank water do we have to supplement that number with before you get to 2020 you can only put twelve twelve million gallons through the pipe is that correct and that's correct really the bank water is an insurance policy it's not an additional water set aside somewhere that we lose okay so I don't think the mindset should be that we if we lose if we need to go use that up if we need it it's there because right now we add it right now we can't there's nothing to lose it's an insurance policy right now we can't pump a twenty the twelve thousand acre-feet our allocation is only twenty five hundred and it's going to be that way for awhile it goes up to five thousand and then it goes up to ten thousand okay well before it gets there if we have to rely on that then we're going to eat

[3:20:30] into that banked water if it's not there we don't pump we have further questions so let me summarize for my for my mind bill the what you're recommending it is a plan to to get us I'm going to say at a minimum 20 years down the road if not further even though that plan will have to be adjusted over time that this this moves us 20 25 30 years down the road with adjustments as they would become necessary as M is that a correct summation are no good summation yes sir okay if we find additional water is that what you're saying because this state does I mean or does it basically say we're looking at because there isn't just another pot of water out there and a near really close like reach out and touch it kind of thing because that's what the closest thing we've had the hick'ry aquifer right I don't think we're going to be able to find all the water somewhere we can go tap into correct we're going to have to do some things to make that water available correct well I'm looking at this study and the scope of practice that they're looking at and I'm looking at each task in each subtask and I'm going to go back on what the mayor said I'm looking at the descriptions of each and what we can be doing in house such as projecting a plan planning our own workshops finding the criteria for screening that the alternatives from the workshop a lot of things that week as a council are going to be deciding on how we want to go before we get down to task 6 which was water supply engineering feasible study feasibility study all of that can be done like if we're going to be deciding

[3:22:35] if we want to do those five wells that's decided from us on a council and we can move forward if we need they studies in at a way cheaper rate than five hundred forty seven thousand dollars and those wells the Hickory is not part of that but what we did we built in a lot of workshops with the consultant with the the advisory board and the council so and the community sounded loading the hickory on that I'm just saying from this report I see a lot of things that we can probably handle on our own especially impact of existing and upcoming federal flash state regulations and permitting requirements that's just a little bit of research on TCEQ to follow a little bit more than that councilman Carter these folks are experts and work with you with the red Ettore agencies all the time and they can evaluate those regulations they have insight to those regulations and I want to capitalize on that I think that's a very important part of this under I understand that it's important but we can find the regulations from federal and state on our own to try to maximize how much money we have for our own capital let's let's put it in perspective I know an anesthesiologist that can recite all the TCEQ based on all the flooding off a foster Road clinging to consultant we can probably consult him it's a good but he's done his own research and I believe there's some things that we can do on our own to try to save this city some money and go the route of what's best for the next 50 years because I know Harry's granddaughter needs water and I know my son Jackson need some water and that's what we're trying to do right a lot of these others are sited on this thing that we did we

[3:24:39] try to save a few thousand dollars and come with an incomplete plan that we cannot utilize if the experts say that it's going to take this amount of money for this particular plan we can nitpick this thing and say hey we don't need that part we don't need this part but if it comes back with a plan that we can't utilize what good is that for the citizens then we've wasted four hundred and fifty thousand dollars and up not so from my perspective I want to support this it's a lot of money I understand that but I guarantee you if you don't get an expert to try to help you find the water and process it the way it needs to be done then we are just throwing money in the end of the wind if you're going to go get legal council for some reason rather you're going to pay for that particular attorney if you're going to go get advice from a doctor you're going to pay for that so if we are going to get water and water sources and secure the water for the for the next how many ever years with this study is going to do I still say 50 the bottom line is is you've got to go to the experts and if you go to the experts you're going to have to pay for it so from my perspective I can support this you know I'm and counsel I don't mean to beat a dead horse but the question was asked earlier about two studies we've had prior to this did they do something different bill than this study will do or say that again I'm sorry I just yes ma'am absolutely the first study was just a it was a true study they just looked at how the city might utilize its effluent in some manner okay and they just developed a report that had some options and some ideas and more than

[3:26:41] that obviously it had some engineering in it the second study was we hired them specifically to do the pilot for the direct potable reuse so they they the focus was on using a treating our effluent to drinkable water quality standards and so that it focused specifically on that those two were totally different than what as that we're looking at now yes all right thank but there's not lost I mean that and that data is there that studies there so it's part of the portfolio if you will of understanding of our options we maybe we may get to the point of that direct potable reuse at some point have a shelf life well that's an interesting question if we don't act on it yes but I would say I'd have to say no because the plan we really need to do something with our treatment facilities okay so I cannot see us not implementing that the if we find some feasible water supply I can't see us not doing that if the ultimate idea is okay or the option is to go negotiate a contract with somebody if that's even a possibility for emergency supply or even long-term supply then we would go do that so so I think the the real answer would be is no it's it's intended this is not intended you know I heard what the mayor said and I understand that I've seen that too many times where we go to a study and in a lot of cases it has nothing to do with really what you wanted to do so it sits on a shelf that's not the intent for this we need to do something so the intent is to finally pull all this together and go do something well and where I'm going with that even when we

[3:28:44] were all campaigning to be here we had feedback from our constituents and they've elected us be up here and say you know proper use of money and so many times we heard something some interface well did we really need somebody to tell us you know we needed to redo Bell Street or Chad Bernie and and I get where they're coming from but I think what you're getting up here is trying to tell us there's some parts of expertise here that we don't have and you're going to need that information from those people there will actually have enough guts to sign their name on a sheet of paper and say in my professional opinion I guarantee this where there could potentially be issues and legal issues further down the line yes sir that's correct I mean the proper credentials to make that statement I just want to make sure that elements you're going for here bill are something and I agree with the mayor if there's something here we can do our own can we line-item veto it out and do some things on our own here to save some money or do you have to Everson in its entirety there's absolute things that we can do we laid out the scope I develop the scope it was based on what we what we needed to put in his project if there's any of this that we can do then then we do it but the fact the matter is you're absolutely right these folks did this this is a highly technical study and these folks are experts in this and we just need to capitalize on that that the expertise that they have and I said the value of hiring a consulting firm like this is they can bring experts from all over the country if they're needed for specific line items no we don't have this expertise in-house and you wouldn't want to have this kind of expertise in-house because you couldn't afford that for one thing the other thing is they wouldn't have this kind of stuff for them to do and a good value of hiring a consultant is when you're done they go home and you're not still paying that thank you Bill well when I read it says scope of services and I'm going to read a couple of the line items here one it says evaluate sign Angela's current water supplies and develop a plan for future use of those current supplies you've

[3:30:49] made several presentations to us and as far as I'm concerned those presentations did that very first line item of evaluating fine Angelo's current water supplies current water supplies and develop a plan for future use of those current supplies mayor when when you have multiple water supply sources you have to make sure that those sources can be utilized together it's the same thing with our Hickory ground water and our surface water supplies the characteristics of that water is not the same so you have to go through us as to make sure that they actually when you put them together that it doesn't create chemical reactions and issues that that either destroy the pipes and infrastructure or you have taste and odor issues so any source that we currently have we have to understand that so that when we look at different sources we make sure that we can put those together but didn't we know and don't we know that when we built the 120 million dollar hickory aquifer pipeline that in fact we would be using what facilities we would be using and what water we would be mixing with it at that point in time so we know that we did but it might change if we have a different source we're not we're not proposing to go pay them to do something that it's not a value to this process and then I gotta have them just go look at our supplies and say well you have this and we know we have that this is what they're doing is in relationship to the project to the other water sources and how we develop a water sources for Santangelo the second items is identify potential new new water sources so and I lay that out again if we've been looking for water around here for quite a while so I can't imagine that by hiring this consultant group that they're going to

[3:32:51] find us new water sources they might find as you've said ways to use the existing water sources in a different way perhaps but new water so that would be a new water supply source regardless of what it is if it's a new supply - if it's a even if it's our own effluent it now becomes part of our supply it's a new supply that we have to make part of the portfolio and it has to work together chemically I'm going to repeat I'm very in favor of the five new Wells at Hickory aquifer and bringing on up to current necessary levels our water treatment plant those are huge priorities for me so with that said are there other further comments I'll make a motion that we approve as presented by mr. Riley to go forward with this particular consulting firm and develop a full water plan that takes care the citizens needs for a number of years going forward I think of that much do I have public comment you'll state your name please my name is Debra Bayliss and I'm in total agreement with you we paid $800,000 last year for this same company to do it was my understanding at the time to first look for a new water source then to look at the affluent water and then we paid them to come up with the plan to use that affluent water I think this is almost insanity this is the definition of insanity we're doing the same thing again and expecting a different result thank you thank you additional public comment yes I love

[3:35:02] Steve Hamptons eye makes me want to go out and open up a willow branch water finding business when I hear these kind of comments we have we could do other things that carry on and and you better make better use of our current water I am agreed with the mayor we bill has a responsibility to warn and he's done that and I think he's done it many times we haven't done anything like taking our lakes that are dry now and and lined them with maybe bentonite or something like this so we can prepare when the rain comes we have we've talked about the affluent of reuse and I think that I think that's probably what we're going to have to do but the production costs are real high maybe in the future some new machinery will be coming out that will help us to collect it at a reasonable cost we have we could eradicate the mesquite trees you know that's an old an old one but when it comes down to it we have to faith it bill Tom fairy skimming has brought up the invoke that you know the Lukic Lord is got this program started and I think he's going to help us see it through but we have to do a part and in keeping faith in Him and and we can't be morally bankrupt and then give it or

[3:37:05] give it lip service and then depend on the arm of man as as we think we ought to we have to reform ourselves and stay a faith-based community thank you very much afternoon my name is Terry Jarreau I also feel that what we would be doing by approving this would be to put throw in good money after bad $800,000 was a lot of money to put out there and I don't know that we really got the bang for the buck that we should have gotten it was decided that toilet to tap was a good idea and we've even allocated I guess the water water department even decided to raise our rights by 5% a year for the next few years based on that toilet to tap which we're not even going to go forward with so where we as homeowners business owners are strapped now and to go looking for a needle in a haystack when we've we've turned over every Rock in West Texas it seems like to get the water resources that we have we probably ought to be looking at technological and scientific improvements regarding the the waters that we do have some way shape or form reducing dissipation of our lake water river water things of that nature but I think doing another quote feasibility study is just not the way to go in these really tough times thank you any further

[3:39:12] public comment all right we'll take about the motion on the table is to accept the request to spend five hundred and seventy thousand dollars for this study by Allen Plummer associates all in favor say aye aye opposed aye passes five to two we are going to pull item M we are going to move to item in and that is consider resolution authorizing sorry we pull item R up a see Commission bacon here we can go ahead and we can go ahead and get him okay item R we're going to skip and move to item R consider authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an interlocal agreement with Tom Green County for joint participation in a Texas Department of Agriculture 2017 Texas Community Development Block Grant Program Texas capital fund project if grant funds are awarded to construct sewer improvements to benefit the alcohol and drug abuse council consul valleys journey Recovery Center development project Rick you're on yes ma'am thank you council mayor apologized for that long agenda item we had the same agenda item this morning so I have the original document here for y'all and hopefully mine won't take as long as not much discussion on it we are in the process of applying for a Texas infrastructure grant for through the Texas bar by agriculture part of that we currently have an agreement I understand with the sewer line that city's helping with that as far as the design however we found an opportunity through that part of Agriculture when the ADAC

[3:41:15] journey facility was going to be built out there that they would be eligible to apply for this grant we're going to be eligible for approximately $400,000 to apply towards the cost of the sewer line county is on the hook for that sewer line we're paying for that y'all designed it we'll build it and so this is an opportunity for us to recover some of that state money that goes to Austin all the time and anytime we have an opportunity that I think the state can help us out I think we should try that in all we're asking this for y'all to approve the mou this is a terminology @td everywhere and that's the reason that we had to do this I'll be happy to answer any questions you have we have questions correct I'll move to please move approval several people want to approve it okay again need communication is good there's a second I do I have public comment we will take a vote all in favor say aye those opposed none passes 7-0 thank you very much I appreciate you recognized routine patient with us we will go back up to item n which is considered resolution authorizing the acquisition of permanent easements and rights away across various parcels of real property required for the Belle Street improvement project and authorizing the city manager to execute all related documents finding a public use and benefit therefore and authorizing initial initiation of eminent domain proceedings pursuant to law if necessary to acquire the property for said easements and rights away in shame Joran mayor that was such a good presentation I think you kind of did it for me there so it is basically exactly what what it says in the caption so we're just this is basically just so we can give notification to adjacent landowners it's a very important public project we're moving forward with it we want to move forward with it very quickly and this is just a first step to give notification

[3:43:18] to those adjacent property owners that if we can't come to a reasonable agreement that eminent domain is a possibility out there so first step we don't plan to do any eminent domain but it's just a first step just in case so and that's kind of it in a nutshell it's not a all right Shane let's see if we have any questions from anybody I have a question shade so are you running into a lot of problems or is it just one or two properties that are it's just one or two properties thus far most most everybody has been very accommodating they want to see the Belle Street project done and they want to see it done very quickly you know how how bad a shape is in and how long people have been talking about this for a long time so it's just one or two proper that that we're having some negotiation difficulties with and so again it's it's not everybody it's just one or two change from me if I'm wrong are these couple properties that's been subject is actually a result of bad surveying to where our mapping shows that their property actually extends further out than it actually should we did well there there were quite a few properties like that that of course I guess Belle Street being one of the oldest streets in town and laid out so long ago that some of the surveying and property lines did overlap in different places however there's one or two of these that were actually trying to we are actually needing to actually get onto property that they've already built it's not just taking our street back but because we're actually in one or two places we're going to is signal eyes intersections we're going to add turning lanes in there we're going to add sidewalks we're putting the water lines out from underneath the street outside the curb line so in case we ever do have any problems with the water line we don't have to dig up the street to fix the water line things like that so we are actually purchasing easements and rights-of-way

[3:45:19] that are actually outside of the traditional street that we see now but we are a lot of this is cleaning up some of those old surveys that we're in correct Daniel you had comment I just want to make sure that people normally do in domain I just want to make sure everybody understands we're not talking about taking whole properties we're talking about just a portion that we need to force right aways to make sure that we can complete the project correct yeah small like you know it may be 200 foot long and five foot wide or something it's very very narrow sections that we're actually talking that were they were negotiating with and this this would only again this would only be if negotiations completely broke down and we weren't able to to work out a deal with the property owners and we want to make sure that we keep the project moving and that one property owner to property owners don't completely stop the project we want to be able to keep the project moving and keep it on schedule because we don't want to you know I'd hate for you know because we can't oh she ate with one property owner that were that we postponed Bell Street for another year we don't want to do that so again this is just a first step in that process this is kind of an easement easier for the sidewalk or the water line or the or the protection you know intersection turn lane yes sir any further questions for Shane and I have a motion to approve I move to previous presumably a second any public comment all in favor say aye aye any opposed passes 7-0 next item is first public hearing an introduction of an ordinance amending the 2016 and 17 budget for incomplete projects equipment replacement in grants antenna turski is presenting so again I have here for your consideration our final budget amendment

[3:47:26] of the year the first amendment is for traffic operations and that is related to storm a storm damage claim for a traffic signal at the corner of maintenance podium will be increasing revenue and expense the revenue is from risk management and of course the expenditure to fix the traffic signal the next amendment is for environmental health they have increased permit revenue that they would like to capture so that they can do some things within their operating budget next would be airport taxiway reconfiguration grant and the aircraft rescue and firetruck grants @lu explain those to you earlier this morning in detail next up is the Ford Ranch lease income as you're aware there is a lease on the Ford ranch and there will be revenue associated with that and we will do budgeting for both revenue and some expenses that they plan to make improvements out there on the ranch related to the chicory project and then fleet services materials revenue $200,000 that would be revenue generated from the funds that we are needing the additional materials and then the expenditures - those materials property casualty insurance claims that is money budgeted and the risk management fund for some I guess that would be subrogation out on the right word but that they would be receiving that revenue from tml to fund some of the storm damage that we had in June religious city facilities next up would be closing a well actually - bond funds that we're closing out the projects are completed and so we close those out and to fund balance and use them for debt service and the related funds and the creation of the hotel occupancy tax fund we talked about this a little bit in our budget workshop that we're creating that new fund so that we can be more transparent with our hotel occupancy tax revenues and then finally we have the budget amendment for the Development Corporation the AC T were quite a community reimbursement of $4,200 that would complete the presentation on the most amendments if

[3:49:30] you have any questions we'll be happy to answer to a comment yes Santa Anna and I certainly appreciate this as I started looking at budgets from 1415 months ago with the city or however long has been one of the things I noticed was some we had some older funds i quarterly meeting with you and Morgan I asked about those and a couple of those you've retired now some of them some of them we took the money and put against our bond issues some of them we took and put him against projects that the city needed so I appreciate you answering those questions and taking a look at what we could do also the difference in where those hot funds go that creation of that particular separate fund to me makes all the sense in the world so that you can separate the pot funds from the civic event stuff so thank you very much for that you're welcome thank you for those comments any other questions of Tina [Music] and I'm going to take any other is action on the budget areas actually so I need a motion to approve second any public comment on favor say aye 0 passes 7 0 next item P discussion consideration of matters regarding the fiscal year 2017 and 18 budget preparation including but not limited to 1 council direction regarding general fund expenditures and 2 other items needing council direction your on this item is just to provide an opportunity for discussion if there is any and also to remind you of our budget workshop on August 22nd or we'll go into very much more detail on general fund revenues and expenditures the potential priorities

[3:51:34] we've discussed so far include salaries insurance additional ambulance crew and additional police officers this would be an opportunity for you to let us know if there's something different you're wanting to see something more that you're wanting to see or any research that we can do in preparation for that budget workshop are really any other discussion related to general fund revenue expenditures that you may want to have at this time I know I for one want to make sure that we don't make I mean until we go through the work session on August 22nd at 8:30 in the morning here at McNeese center I want to make sure that we have a thorough discussion on those issues as well as all the other issues that are encompassing in terms of a general fund and so today I don't believe we should be making any decisions or given any direction to any of these items because we haven't reviewed the big picture and I don't think we can agree or disagree or direct without the big picture okay and I'm thank you for the plug by the way here at 8:30 next Tuesday that's right okay so do we have any other further discussion on that or move on move on okay now you're going to update us on the sales tax revenue perform good news is we're up again three months in a row I'm still cautiously optimistic it wasn't up as much as we wanted so right I was hoping we're gonna did you're happy but disappointed yes okay so we were up five percent August compared with the same month last year but we were still short of our original budget by five hundred and fifty four thousand dollars again we remain cautiously optimistic and hope for four even better numbers next month but for now that's where we are Daniel now we're talking about this yesterday which month will be will we be seeing the increases assuming an increase from June when we

[3:53:39] had the storms roll through and would probably that would have been this month does it so is that into a few months well know imagine wanna make sure we point out that attacks from that storm occurred at the later part of June almost July July so really a lot of the expenditures related to that then meaning will be will be seen them actually next month so next month numbers will be kind of skewed upward you know so again yes I think this one is still a fair indication of where we are compared to last year I do want to point out that Odessa Midland some of the oil and gas cities and counties are doing extremely well there so tax revenues consumer confidence is really high in those areas so we're hoping that that really continues to trickle in our direction as well but again we would have merrier right we're hoping to seeing a better number than 5% but we'll take it right now this is a because I know a lot of people watch the City Council meetings and I want to remind everybody that the City Council on sales tax revenue in order to pay our bills it's a very important part of what happens in this city so I encourage people support locally buy locally spend locally because it's your local dollars that pay for the quality of life we have here in this city of San Angelo and every time we go out of this city or we use Amazon or any other e-commerce sites to buy things our city of San Angelo suffers and so we want to be a lot more aggressive encouraging everybody by local support local spend local we need more than 5% increases in order to continue to fulfill the needs of citizens have the quality of life mayor I'll also like to point out and that's a very good point I also like to point out that as ourselves tax numbers go up it actually helps with the property taxes as well you know so it helps us to stabilize those or reduce those again when you have the second highest revenue source that we have when that number goes up it helps us to assist the number one source revenue sources we has is property taxes these

[3:55:41] numbers go up it helps us to stabilize the property taxes as well may also for all of you who are listening and participating in the conversation about the tax increases the county is looking at is that you know households don't have supplemental money just bags the money sitting around so when we increase property tax dollars those dollars come from somewhere and they're usually self tax dollars because when you take it out of this pot to pay that property tax it reduces the amount of money that goes into the sales tax pot eating out less buying fewer clothes buying fewer appliances updating the house at a later date etc so we need to make sure that we encourage spend local shop local support local and with that I am going to ask if there's any announcements yes mayor I have one Councilwoman do it and I both received letters last week from a constituent that was concerned about the new routes that the city buses were taking that individual did not leave a name or contact information so if they happen to be listening today if they will count up contact either Billy do it or myself or call a transit district we may be able to assist them but just let us know what your name is and where we can contact you with that I ask for a motion for adjournment no one wants us to adjourn okay we'll just keep on going salut sorry you got second it or goat on it Stefan zero done

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=0FBB0RE08PA