San Angelo City Council 8-3-23

[0:00:00] start with our chaplain prayer and pledges and we are honored today to have police chaplain Ralph Dawkins come forward and lead us in both good morning everyone let us pray father we thank you for the opportunity to invoke prayer at your word into the Gathering of city leaders officials and concerned citizens Lord your word declares that we should acknowledge you in all of our ways and you would direct God paths and you said that if we Delight ourselves in you you would give us the desires of our heart there have many agenda items today and I pray that you would address them each and every one of them with integrity and courage and the community best interest in mind your word declares in Jeremiah 29 that you already know the plans that you have for us plans to prosper us and not for evil and plans that will give us a future and a hope so we ask your blessing on the people who have been called upon to lead this community make decisions in which we work and play so I lift up the mayor her staff and assistance the city council members the city manager and every person and Department that is instrumental in leading and guiding and directing our city I pray for the police chief and the entire police force the sheriff's department that they will continue to protect and serve the residents of our city I pray for the fire chief and the Department fire department and all the First Responders who serve our city and lastly I pray that you would bless our city and Community with economic Prosperity may you draw in and attract our city industry businesses and corporations that will produce jobs and revenue and help us to grow and prosper in Jesus name amen and amen let us pledge allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

[0:02:01] the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all honor the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to thee Texas one State under God one and indivisible thank you did you go to the Buffalo Soldier thing I did foreign to the public comment portion of the agenda individuals if you choose to make a public comment please state your name your address or SMD area each citizen can speak just once per item unless asked to comment by Council public comment is three minutes unless extended by Council or translation services and a proponent or opponent five minutes unless extended by Council or translation services Council has no obligation to respond to comments or questions from the public any response from a member of the city council to non-agenda comments is limited to a statement of specific factual information recitation of existing policy and directing staff to place a subject on a future agenda are there individuals in the audience today who would like to come forward and make public comment if so please do before he gives his name and address can I pass out a visual to you guys give one to the City attorney as well we can share but one for the City attorney and then we'll pass the other two Jason Davis got really 201 South Bishop

[0:04:14] Street single member district five mayor and city council I am here this morning to bring to your attention the closing of the San Angelo Nature Center Hidden Gem is a myriad of things to our community it encourages educational opportunities hands-on experience for volunteers as well as visitors and it provides a home to many forms of wildlife unique to West Texas from the time I first visited the Nature Center at five years old I have been counting down the days until I would be old enough to become a volunteer intern at the Nature Center that time came just this year and now has abruptly been taken away not only from myself but also from the other volunteers and future volunteers of our community we are being robbed of a great educational experience I'm not alone in my love for the Nature Center our community as a whole desires to see this facility fulfill its potential as a top attraction for San Angelo rather than to become another abandoned grave site in the city what I ask today is that you give us the opportunity to look at private Partnerships or fundraising opportunities to reopen or even reimagine and expand a new Nature Center for kids like me thank you for your time and consideration thank you very much anybody else who'd like to come forward and offer public comment Madame mayor and city council member district 5. hello my name is Lucille Goodman I am 13 years old I am an active member of American Heritage Girls troop 44. I had my fifth birthday party at the Nature Center my American Heritage Girls troop had a field trip there in 2019 to help us fulfill our nature and Wildlife badge throughout my childhood I have attended many community events with the Nature Center had an animal demonstration I just turned 13 in July and holded a anticipated holding an internship position at the Nature Center this fall the Nature Center is an

[0:06:17] important part of creating healthy interests hobbies and downtime for all members of our community I know our Mata mayor and the city council can find a solution to keep our Nature Center open thank you coming forward further public comment count to three and then we'll move on from public comment one two three the public comment section is now closed on the agenda we will move on to the consent agenda are there any items that Council would like to have pulled on the consent agenda I will start with Larry no ma'am QC no ma'am Harry no ma'am Tom no ma'am Tommy no ma'am with that I would ask for a motion for approval of the consent agenda to approve as presented a motion by Karen Hesse Smith and seconded by Harry any public comment on any of the items on consent agenda a non-hairy nun we'll take a vote those in favor say aye aye here I know of hearing all eyes motion passes 6-0 consent agenda I mean sorry 7-0 consent agenda is approved we will move into the regular agenda comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above applicants proponents and a balance are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit their remarks to less than five minutes item a is considered a warning fs-10-23 fleet vehicles to multiple vendors in the amount of two million 942 000 for the purchase of pickups police vehicles and cars for the fiscal year 2022-23 budget for corresponding expenses and authorizing the city

[0:08:19] manager to negotiate and execute all related documents Ryan you're on good morning mayor good morning Council Mr Valenzuela uh it's a pleasure to be with you it's been a while so glad to be here the item before you today has two main topics which is the reason for discussion this morning one is the award of the bid and the other is the financial aspect of moving funds in order to complete the purchases needed so I'll give a quick overview and please feel welcome to interrupt or ask questions as you as you might need to we will ask our city council members to ask for permission to please that offer comments or questions thank you this bit is a little different than what we've seen that we've requested councils approved for in the past we've lumped a lot of the vehicles together that we're interested in purchasing for the remainder of this year and next year so we won't be bringing to you a bid for each vehicle type for example half ton pickup and a three-quarter ton pickup Etc instead the this bid lumped these vehicles together because of some specific situations that I'll elaborate on as we progress this bid type did allow vendors to bid on our vehicle purchases without having specific pricing again I'll elaborate on that more in a moment but it resembles greatly what we see in a lot of our purchasing Cooperative bids the format of this bid allowed for better and easier responses and I think that's shown by the responses we did receive which while only three is more than we typically see on our bid so I'm pleased to see that we are also asking for this year to award this bid to multiple vendors again I'll elaborate on some challenges we're experiencing but this will assist us in the process of purchasing the items needed for the year where we've had some challenges there as well those challenges do include several of

[0:10:25] these aspects one is if if you've been in the car purchasing game for the last few years there are some great difficulties that consumers have and we have similar difficulties as well vehicle availability is is much more difficult than it was five years ago we in some cases take what we find in the sense of making sure that they they fit the needs with some leniency and what I mean by that is we look for different things that still fit so we may be a different brand or a different shape and size that still accomplishes the goal we need because availability is so difficult so we we do struggle with that and this bid helps accommodate that for us we've also been given in this last year we've been given an allocation by manufacturer and so what that means is that we were told how many vehicles we would be allowed to purchase from that manufacturer so that really puts damper on it when we award to one specific vendor and we're only allowed a certain number of vehicles from that vendor that doesn't give us much flexibility to continue to purchase as the year progresses so again this format of bid will let us buy from multiple vendors multiple manufacturers and helps alleviate that issue we do see some order bank and pricing issues and as I elaborate on that I'll point out that the manufacturer controls the buying process as far as the dealer or the vendor is concerned so while our bid is awarded to a specific dealer the manufacturer really dictates how that dealer is able to interact with the the not only the consumer but the dealer themselves and so the manufacturer is opening an order bank at a certain date and then they close it when they're ready to and what that means is we can order within the window or we may not get to order at all the dealer Also may not have pricing until the last minute when that order bank opens they may get Crossing that very day maybe just a week

[0:12:29] before that also does not lend us in our process our legal process of purchasing to be able to accomplish what we need to do with such a small window and so we have missed out in the past being able to fall within that window we do experience steel some order cancellations I expect and and you'll see some of these numbers shortly um I expect that we will have approximately a dozen Vehicles canceled this year that we ordered last September so again having some flexibility in our bid award uh will hopefully alleviate some of these challenges here are the numbers and the quantities that was expressed in your background information just so we could put it up on the screen these are the vehicle types that were bid there were no other vehicle types so you won't see a van in here that's because it was not bid so if we intend to purchase a van in the future for some reason that will be in addition to this bid so we will either bid that out separately depending on the value or get quotes Etc and you'll either see that because of the value or we'll purchase moving forward through the regular path I will note as you see the numbers the quantities on half ton pickups note that that includes the Dozen that I don't believe we're going to get from fiscal year 23 that were ordered so while it looks large it is large that's because we're virtually doubling that number we could still get those units they have not officially been canceled but um I think the writing on the wall is that they'll be canceled so my request is if you'll approve those numbers we will be able to reorder as soon as we're able to cancel the old po of course and reorder when the time comes the same thing applies to the line that says three quarter ton pickups and one ton chassis cabs those were the units that were restricted to us last year and the quantities that we could buy I was able to buy five of those units last year and we needed approximately a dozen

[0:14:33] and so we are backlogged a little bit so those numbers are higher because of that fact we did receive the five that we ordered but we needed several more than that several is not a number yes ma'am the the numbers we needed last year we we were cutting because we simply couldn't buy them because we weren't able to from the manufacturer's perspective but we were trying to buy 11 or 12 of those units is what was on our list for the year so our request is to award this bid FS 1023 to the multiple vendors as you see noted there below these were the three vendors that responded uh to the bid and the amount that you see there 2.942 million dollars that does include the funding from the remaining vehicles that I believe will be canceled this year it includes next year's funding and it includes the funding that we are asking we pull forward from next year into this year so that we can take action when the order banks open what percentage of this is estimated to be in the fiscal year 23-24 versus fiscal year 22-23 I'm sorry I don't have the percentage but I have the dollar amount and that amount is 1.338 million that we are pulling from next year's budget into this year so a million six is coming from existing budget which will be used in fy24 yes ma'am so we're Harry has a question Ryan if we approve this today when would they get ordered and when would we

[0:16:34] receive them biggest question is when would we receive them yes sir I can't answer that for you I would like to say that we traditionally see a three to four month turnaround on a vehicle build from the time of order but that is unfortunately not the case anymore we have half ton pickups ordered and police cars ordered from August and September of last year that we have not received so I would love to say three to four months is the typical industry average it unfortunately is not any longer so I don't really have an answer for you so a good number of these vehicles will actually end up being received in fiscal year 24. is that correct that's correct of the current Vehicles ordered in fiscal year 23 we will see many many of those ordered or received in know October to December is not in the balance of 23. and we're not talking about these units that were were requesting to order for fiscal year 24 we are talking about the ones that are previously or yes sir so we're actually going to end up paying for them after we receive them typically that's net 30 days which means we're really going to be paying for them in fiscal year 24 anyway is that correct we are yes sir but the PO that was issued does secure those funds and if necessary we'll carry them over and you'll see that carryover request to do so it's one of the citizens to understand that even though we're pushing some of them bringing some of the money forward from 24 fiscal year 24 into this fiscal year we're actually not going to be paying for a majority of these vehicles until after October 1st okay Tom yeah thank you Brandon um Ron my question here in this whole cancel and dies we're a HomeTown crowd but what we look at here is you know Richardson

[0:18:36] Texas and Bernie Texas we'll get that so if I understand it right the manufacturer controls this they probably most most likely control the margin that the dealership gets to provide too so they're working off an allocation to each different dealership would that be correct I probably could not speak to that I think each manufacturer has their own model and I couldn't speak necessarily to how Chevrolet or Ford does that right well just my point is we love to see these dollars spent more in Angelo than out of town and if you get a chance to maximize that we'd appreciate it that's really a result if I'm not mistaken by the fact that when you put the purchase order out there or the request to provide they were not able to provide those vehicles so they didn't make a bid and present it Forward allocation just to be sure we say that correct yes ma'am yeah the the vendors are doing everything they want to sell they absolutely do that is not the case that they don't want to sell us Vehicles they they just are in some cases restricted well where I'm going with that also when we have to do warranty work and take them back I mean does Jim bass Ford I would not be as quick to put it at the front of the line on something that came from me versus something that came from Bernie but I realize it's us but anyway that was just my point of bringing it keeping it home yes Tommy uh Ryan zooming out just a little bit I assume which I don't want to do that's the reason for my question that this different purchasing model this year could save us money overall long term not necessarily in one year but if this is the way the market is and the way it continues to be this may save us money to do it as you were doing it this year as opposed to the way you've done it in previous years yes sir good question and let me elaborate on that since we are requesting the award to three vendors

[0:20:38] the intention is to check with those vendors each time a vehicle is specified and needed that way those three vendors can provide us quotes at that specific moment or they can say we don't have that and so yes absolutely it does continue the competition past the bid to make sure that our vendors are responding as aggressively as they can any questions on this other side of the council Tommy got mine okay got it all right so with that then I would need a motion to approve item a awarding the 2.942 for the purchase of these vehicles may I have that motion I'll move by Tommy second of by Larry any public comment in regards to this item we will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye not opposed motion passes seven zero we'll move on to the last item on the consent agenda and it is Item B which is consider approving tax increment reinvestment Zone tiers incentive funding for three private projects and amending the fiscal year 2022-23 budget for the corresponding expenses in the north tiers area the property located at 1718 North Bryant item two in the South tears area for the property located at one West Concho totaling 72 294 and the third one is in the South tears area for the property located at 213 North Chadbourne totaling 72 294. you're on John thank you John James director of planning and development services as you mentioned this first project is we only had one project move forward from the north 1718 North Bryant requesting 68 800 you can see down here we have just under 1.5 million dollars available we have been successful

[0:22:42] recently on getting more projects from the north our last cycle you may recall had a larger number of projects we do have a couple of projects pending that were tabled at the at the tears board and so there are a couple of more tears North projects that should be coming forward soon as well as I mentioned this project is requesting 68 800 with a total project cost of about a hundred and seven thousand staff did recommend the full incentive amount as did the tiers board and the work is Demolition and Disposal for an ongoing project their plan was to build a new building uh improve the parking lot and they did not want to wait on the tiers process to begin doing that and as you know you can't spend tiers money on things that have already happened you can't proceed with the project until it's been approved and so they chose to go ahead and move forward with building that new building and then the old building that they were replacing they left on the site and now they're asking for this money as part of the project to demo that old building you can see just a few pictures of of the area um that is the old building and then I think this is the new building that you can see here as I said that has already been constructed and then their request is just for demolition before I move on if you have any questions about that particular project or I'll move on to the next questions for John on this particular item no one has questions move on okay and we did have three funding requests for the South tiers um as you can see there's only about a hundred and forty four thousand dollars available the board discussed in the past they have taken a couple of different uh tactics uh in some cases they tried to split the available money between all

[0:24:45] eligible projects and in other years they have recommended more fully funding fewer projects but the the highest rated projects and that's what they did in this case all three projects requested seventy five thousand dollars we only had about a hundred and forty four thousand available so they selected the two highest priority projects to fund almost all of what they're asking the 144 doesn't get us quite to 75 each but it is about 72 000. I'll note before I get off of this slide that this item does include a budget amendment to get to that hundred and forty four thousand it includes adding in the accrued interest to date which you have to approve a budget amendment to move that accrued interest into the available funding for projects question it says five West Concho Avenue our paperwork says one West Concho Avenue yeah they provided different information it's it's sort of both um the project is actually at five West Concho but it's part of uh an expansion of one West Concho uh and so it's sort of both both properties my question and comment would be the fine and historically when there's limited money we don't go back to the budget and use accrued interest in fact most people who've asked for 75 000 have very often gotten thirty thousand or fifty thousand Etc so my question and concern is this new approach to it when in the past we've basically said and then the other uh basically said based off of the request there's x amount you get a percentage of it and so by the timing of these requests has opened the door for them to get a larger percentage than the past few recipients have been able to get and then the

[0:26:47] question is with your comment that they determine the higher priority what was the 325 West First Street project that was uh it's over near the Walgreens and it's a vacant lot adjacent to that and it's it would be for a drive through T retail Tea Store and so the I think the thinking was that the the two projects recommended uh were both in the downtown in uh dilapidated buildings that that really needed Improvement uh versus the 325 West First Street was a vacant site where they would be building a brand new building in sort of the the Suburban Auto oriented part of of downtown in that area where there's fast food and other things and so they felt that using that money to rehabilitate existing dilapidated buildings that needed work uh were were higher priority and as you can see in the tiers incentive policy those that historic preservation and those buildings is a higher priority versus new Builds on you know vacant property other questions further questions from Council Larry I noticed in one of the requests that the individual indicated that they would be resolving any Ada problems associated with the property uh I just wondered if the other two had had also taken a look at uh how how Ada would impact what they're choosing to do we have we have let them all the projects uh know that that is something we'll be looking at in fact at the last tiers board meeting they had a discussion uh and recommended moving forward with a change to the tiers incentive policy to specifically include uh Ada improvements as a high priority item that would be a factor in their decisions moving forward I think at our

[0:28:50] next meeting with them we'll actually be bringing that change uh to them to the incentive policy which then you all will see in a couple of months fantastic because there is such a limited amount of money always in the tier Zone I don't really support going back and getting the interest and adding to this so just FYI go ahead and do the 213 North chadburn go ahead sure yeah and this is Valley vending at 213 North chadburne as I mentioned they requested 75 000 it's a total project cost of 284 000 and the summary of the work is they're doing facade improvements which is the bulk of it a little bit of landscaping in front it does meet the category of historic preservation and then they are had in the rear they do have some outdoors screening of a storage area so this is what it looks like today you can see it's boarded up I should mention that this both of these projects in the South have gotten design and historic review commission approval so the designs have been approved through that process this is a rendering of what that would look like once they're completed with the project that one before I move on and then the five West Concho project uh the total project cost I think is what that I think those are reversed it's 75 000 requested 101 000 of a total project the recommended incentive is 72 000 which is half of that available funding if we include the interest and their work is primarily facade but also a little bit of landscaping as well as the fire sprinkler system this is the building as it looks today again it's similar to the first one that it's boarded up it definitely needs some exterior work and improvements to rehabilitate that that Frontage this is the rendering that they provided to the design and historic review commission which was approved

[0:30:53] and so again that's just a summary be happy to answer any questions further questions from Council Tommy John can you speak to just maybe the conversation or the thought process that went into reaching in and grabbing that that interest amount there's got to be a little more to the story that might be informational at least to me educational and informational as to why why you did it this time why it hadn't happened before Etc yeah basically it was a request from the tears board when they saw that we had about 138 000 available and they wanted to fund those two projects as much as possible one of the board members asked the question well do we how much interest are we earning on the money we have and is there accrued interest that is available that we could move into that fund to be able to fund them a little bit closer to the 75 000 they were asking so as you can see it's not a huge amount of money but it does add you know a little less than three thousand for each project um you know that that money ultimately ends up in the tiers account I mean it's interest being accrued uh to the account um but they just wanted to basically pull it in uh earlier than than would normally happen I again I asked the question because if you take a look at the last ones that we approved in the southern tiers we didn't reach back to get and most of those projects were funded at about 50 percent of their request and so the request was significantly less and so um it's just seems a little odd now to be doing that when we've not been able to fund at this level in the past and we haven't looked forward to this amount of money and then I would also ask what is the projected dollar amount for the next funding cycle

[0:32:58] we haven't looked at that number I don't know if if Tina or someone has has access to that we typically look at that as we get a little bit closer to October 1st in the new budget year but off the top of my head I don't I don't know what that expected revenue for the coming year would be Gina can you offer anything yes Tom well she's coming up John as far as going into this part of the 50 Cent have we so I think part of the thing we have to worry about is being fair and consistent you know over time and historically have we ever allowed anybody to go in and pull that money I mean interest income forward or backwards not that I'm aware of again there's been some discussions at the tiers board about interest and how we how we do that we've made some changes recently regarding how interest is is calculated on tiers money and for whatever reason there are some tiers board members that are interested in changing how we do that and so I I think their intent is to do this more often every cycle we have pull in that interest so we have more money to give out so yes we haven't done this before in the past but I think it's their goal to to move forward doing this to to be consistent doing this as a new way you know we haven't even shown a face card that they could do this in the past no and because I love it it has now come forward okay right you tell me what I needed to know Tommy well I think he you just answered it sounds as if this I'm going to say would be setting a precedent and then they would then begin doing that on a go forward basis or change something that in fact they could do that so that I think you answered the question for me that yeah this this could be a likely strategy on a move moving forward basis but it hasn't been in the past that's right but once you change the policy I can understand doing

[0:35:00] it but the policy hasn't been approved yet Director of Finance you're correct that we haven't pulled from interest income in the past in this fund typically we don't do that in any of our funds this interest at the end of the fiscal year would go into their fund balance and then it would be available for a future fiscal years how we typically handle interest income which is what's happened in the past so they have spent interest in the past it's just they've spent it after it's gone to fund balance we haven't done it as part of the funding cycle exactly and what's the concern we're doing it this way as far as pooling immediately rather than allowing it to build up I think what you know the mayor and I think Tommy said setting a precedent um and you know beginning to rely on the interest income in the current year um which typically we would use in a future fiscal year once we know for sure what's there you know after the audit and everything so it's not to discredit the quality of these projects that's not the comment it's just setting a precedent that hasn't been there before and also at a time period when we're funding at a higher level of the request than we have in the past so past recipients have received a much smaller percent of the seventy five thousand dollars and and then we've eliminated one request which again is you know the tiers board's option to do it but it seems like we're changing up a lot right here on this request I think it would be a fair question from past recipients to say why didn't you do this for me that's my concern so in the past what we've done is every request has received a percentage of their request and we've never eliminated a project that requested if they met design and historic review

[0:37:02] approval and if in fact there was money available so it seems to me we are stepping out there in a couple of ways that have not been done before and I'm very concerned about that and if I again was as Tommy said a recipient before we didn't rank the priority of those projects necessarily and decided to eliminate one we've always funded something and again 213 North Chabert and five Western it's not about the quality of the project it's just a tremendous difference in precedent than what we've done in the past and I'm concerned about that mayor I think originally your question to me was property tax evaluations and the tiers for the next fiscal year we have not yet received those from the appraisal district did you get those we expect to receive them any day I know they're working on the worksheets and and they'll be hopefully this week yes Tom just how accurate is that never going to be there okay yeah I just had to throw that one in no comment I'm sorry stop it it's a moving Target so yeah so I'm With You Bruno I think if we pull interest income from a current year to we we set precedence for all other budgets and discussions for yeah I don't think we should do if they want to bring a change to us to do that yeah that we can have that then we have a different conversation but correct yeah so I think the motion should be we would approve um with the not allowing the 5766 to be included in the approved amount that needs to be pulled out and with that I think the support is there for the two projects but again I've never known the tiers board to pick and choose projects and so I'm some somewhat concerned about picking projects and again it has nothing to do with these two projects it's precedent that's going on that hasn't been before

[0:39:04] and I don't know if there's some political issues behind it but I think it's it's concerning so I have them oh go ahead oh I'm sorry I just want to ask can they actually award them less money than seventy five thousand dollars and then those people come back later on and request more money I mean like not if it's the same project if it's the a different request for that same facility but on a different item yes they can and I would add that um the the policy that was adopted recently there was a change that um it doesn't prohibit somebody from getting money for the same project but a project that has received money in the past is given a lower priority so if there are two equal projects board's preference and ural's preference in the policy is to give the money to one that has not received it in the past having said that we have had multiple projects that have done multiple Cycles uh as well usually one might be a fire fire prevention one might be Ada one might be something else so it's not it hasn't been the same project needing more money it's been the same building with multiple projects okay that's right so I'd like that motion to be I'll make the motion to approve the projects all projects as presented uh less the 57.66 for the two in the southern tiers is there a second I'll second and Tom seconds that there is a second by Tom and with that we'll take public opinion or public comments see none will take a vote all those in favor say aye yes just for clarification purposes the 5766 then would be split in half as far as the funding the process 28.83 we want to get in the middle of that girls want to be specifics yes one project doesn't get it all in no it

[0:41:06] shouldn't be very good yes all right with that we'll take a vote those in favor of the motion on the floor please say aye motion passes seven zero we'll move on to closed session of which there is none so we will go to follow up and administrative issues consider approving various board nominations construction Board of adjustments and appeals Jordan sheffic smd5 to the first term ending February 2025 and tax increment reinvestment Zone board Trey Holmes smd3 to the first term ending July 2025 may I have a motion for those two nominations a motion by Karen is second by Harry any public comment on those items seeing none hearing none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes seven zero announcements in consideration of future agenda items you want to take that one on Daniel I do mayor so we do need to move forward uh to make sure that we schedule our budget workshops we've had some changes recently uh we looked at some dates that would be available based on the city council members availability and the dates we looked at actually one of the dates that we had was the 11th of August turns out that saisd actually has already booked the uh the center and they're using all of the rooms for the breakouts so the dates that we had initially talked about changing to was August 11th and the 29th we not propose either the 14th or the 17th of August to discuss the Enterprise fund and then the 29th for the for the general fund discussions I'd like to move the 11th to the 17th but then again I don't have that sheet that showed availability I have the availability it looks like on the 17th council member hessie Smith and Gonzalez will be out that doesn't that correct okay sorry ladies all right so it's the 14th

[0:43:12] I hate doing my Mondays but as long as Tom's here exactly exactly I could do it teams okay so the 14th is the new budget meeting which is a Monday okay Monday this is for the Enterprise budget now Tom would that be best for you at 8 30 in the morning or 3 30 in the afternoon you know I prefer early morning so there you go the sprinkles it just so happens that that's my scheduled tax protest date I'm gonna move that one 11th at what time dear are we good with the 14th are you are you okay fine because she has a nice little District protests all about her taxes we need to bring a sack lunch and a change of clothes okay I do want to emphasize while she's looking at the importance of having all the council members present at the at the workshop so we need everyone absolutely so when somebody can't make it then we end up having to reschedule so this needs to be said in stone really to make sure that we we have these states down 1 31 PM 131 well we should oh 8 30. the Enterprise fund we should be done we should be fine so it's going to be planned for 8 30 on August the 14th here in this room and then the next one will be on the 29th of August is there any conflict with that I think we're aware of at this point we've already looked at the dates and we're good on the 29th oh we'll put that at 8 30 a.m as well okay with that may I have a motion for adjournment I'm going to jail address

[0:45:16] the Labor Day we did that earlier he counts are good with that one to the seventh yeah I mean we vote we moved we did that one some time ago to Move It from the fifth to the seventh officially okay well it is now perfect okay so it's September 7th yeah move we adjourn a second please there's a second may I have a vote of approval for dismissal all right Jerry what would you like to do I motion carries we are adjourned at 9 16 A.M

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=5V4zCg6iIoY