San Angelo City Council 8-19-25

[0:00:00] Chaplain Prayer and Pledges. And we're going to have the legendary great Gary Jenkins up this morning. >> Good morning, Mayor. >> Morning. >> Good morning, everybody. God bless you. Will you join with me in a word of prayer? Precious father in heaven, we bow before you to say thank you for this day. We thank you for your grace, your mercy, your longsuffering, and your patience. And we pray, God, that you will hear our prayer as we seek your face for wisdom for the city council and the mayor. We pray that you endow them with knowledge and understanding and the anointing to conduct the business of the city in a way that will glorify you. We pray God that you protect our children as they start this new school year, that they will be able to go to classes and return back safely. We ask you to bless our first responders, both fire and police, as well as medics. We ask you to bless our mayor, the honorable Tom Thompson, and all the members of the city council. And then we ask you to bless the city of St. Angelo and all of its residents and businesses that we may continue to be a city that will prosper and will flourish under your guidance. These things we ask in Jesus's name and for your name's sake. Let everybody say amen. >> Amen. Algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Honor the Texas flag. I aliance to thee, Texas. One state under God, one and indivisible. Thank you.

[0:02:06] >> There are no proclamations or recognitions this morning. We'll move straight into item four, which is public comment. Members of the public may raise issues or concerns not listed on the regular agenda. During this time to participate, please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in order they are signed in. When speaking, citizens must speak from the podium. Address all comments to the dis. Begin by stating your name and address or single member district number and limit your remarks to three minutes or less. Heather, do we have anybody for public comment? >> Um, Amanda B. >> And I don't see that Amanda B showed up. >> Okay. And then one staff comment from John Kaufman. >> John Mayor Thompson, City Council. I'm John Kaufman, director of water utilities. I'd like to introduce our new director, assistant director of water utilities, Danielle Ricks, who comes to us from the Dallas Fort Worth area. >> Good morning, Mayor Council. >> How are you? >> Good. How are you? >> Welcome to the club. >> Well, thank you so much. I'm really happy to be here. >> Like it or not, here you are. >> Yeah. I just wanted to say hello and thank you and I'm really excited to be here and learn and help serve the city of St. Angelo. >> So, you come to us from Dallas Fort Worth area. >> I do. Yes. >> Where did you work before here? Can I do a little bit of interrogation while we're up here just to hear a little bit of history of how you came here? >> Yeah. So, I worked for um the city of Farmers Branch for the past eight years. Oh, wow. That's just a north suburb of Dallas. Um before that I was in the private industry but um originally from California, been in Texas for 13 years now and we love it here. So >> Awesome. So um where'd you go to college? >> I went to uh Calpali State University in San Biso. >> Yes. >> Awesome. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Were you on the livestock judging team? >> I'm sorry. >> Were you on the livestock judging team? >> I was not.

[0:04:07] >> They have a reputation nationwide. I'm sorry. But anyway, they had a good a program for sure. >> Absolutely they do. Well, hey, welcome home and thank you for being here. >> Thank you so much. I'm really excited. Thank you. I would like to make a brief public comment also. We are nearing uh 60 we're between a 60 and 90day marks and we're finishing up our recovery um from the flood of July 4th. I think it's important that everybody understand we're finishing out identifying the people that have needs. Um, we have people out there to help service them. We have people waiting. Uh, if you haven't got help or you need assistance, you need to go field out a needs assessment on our website. Um, we're we're at the point where we have assets that can come help people. I think we have some unused assets or assets that are waiting. And at this point, the co-ad has been very active in helping identify all the people we can. Some of those were unidentified, but uh or or we don't we didn't track them as best we could because if they didn't identify, they were already getting assistance through somebody. But I want to say we're coming to the end of being able to allocate and define where these resources need to go. So, I'll reiterate once again, if you need help, please go online, please work out with somebody to get a copy of our needs assessment, fill that out, and we'll see if we can't work that with the co-ed to get you help. With that, there's no further comment. We'll close public comment. We'll move to the consent agenda. All right, Mary, I'll start with you. Do you have anything to pull? >> No, sir. >> Karen, >> no. Thank you. >> Patrick, >> no, sir. >> Harry, >> Joe, >> no. >> Tommy Heert, >> no sir. >> All right. I have nothing to pull with that. There are no items to pull. I'd like a motion. >> Second. >> I've got a first and a second. on public comment is I mean on the consent agenda

[0:06:10] is there any public comment on anything in the consent agenda with no public comment we'll take a vote all in favor say I >> any opposed consent agenda pass consent agenda passes 70 with that we'll move to the regular agenda comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above to participate please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in order. They are signed in. Comments are limited to less than 3 minutes. Applicants, proponents, and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit their remarks to no less than 5 minutes. We will move into item A. Consider approving HGAC contract EO723 for the purchase of 911 recording, excuse me, 911 recording equipment through the Koncho Valley Council of Governments, Equator Recording Solutions proposal in the amount of $93,870.60 sourced from the general capital projects fund balance and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Presentation made by SAPD communications director, Sergeant John Bellini. John, you're on. >> Morning. >> Um, so something that I I didn't know. I just hit my three-year mark over at dispatch. I didn't know that every 5 years these recorders are needing to be replaced. We know that now. So going forward, we're going to work with the uh finance and purchasing to make sure that we budget for this so this isn't this kind of situation where we can kind of put some money away aside every year. Um but every 5 years the recording equipment has to be replaced. In the past the recorders were separate. Cog has to pay for the 911 recording. Um and then we were paid for own recorders for the radio channels, the regular phones, all that stuff. A couple years ago or I guess the last time was it just the last time? >> I think it's been the last time before that. >> Okay. So, for the last two cycles of this project, um, they combined it into

[0:08:13] one, which makes more sense. There's no reason to have two different recorders, two different sets of servers, all that stuff. Um, and so that's that's where we are. We're just at that point of it's time to replace it. The COG pays their portion, and I brought Jeff Lopez from the COG here to speak. If y'all have any questions on any of this, >> Jeff, tell us about the COG's obligation. Are this part of the is this a grant or is this part of a >> This is part of the normal funding. We uh we uh replace the recorders every 5 years at uh 14 counties now. We now have Edwards County as part of our region >> and uh most are smaller PAP two position paps. Uh they those uh recorders are all all the recorders in the region are replaced every 5 years and um usually go through our normal pro uh procurement processes. This one happens to be a by board and HGAC uh contract that we're uh purchasing these under. Uh but we do have a relationship and prior uh history with Equiter the vendor in uh that we are uh continuing with here and uh long-standing relationship. They have ongoing maintenance and a relationship with Sergeant Bolini as well. >> All right. So this comes as no surprise. We just let this one slip and we're going to have it earmarked the next time it needs to come up. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. I'll any questions from the D? >> Hi. Quick question. >> Um you talked about it's a region. Are we are the recorders for all of them being replaced or is it just our specific? >> Uh not only uh St. Angelo Public Safety Communications, but St. Angelo Emergency Operations Center, Tom Bring County Sheriff's Office, and all of the other 16 PAPs that we have in our region and 14 counties. >> And then our portion that we're we're proposing today, that is just 116th of Do you do you see what I'm saying? >> No, it's not. there's a there's a cap on what we can spend uh per site and everything above that is what the St. Angelo public safety needs for their business needs. >> So we we pay for more bells and whistles um so to speak. So recording the radio channels is not something they would normally cover. U but the fire

[0:10:15] department when they have a structure fire and they want to go back and they want to review um the operations that occurred, they ask for us to pull all the radio traffic and send them the recordings. Same thing if we have a SWAT call out or some, you know, a major incident on patrol. Anything that's on any of the recorded channels is there, but without us paying for our portion to for these bells and whistles, we wouldn't have that. >> Gotcha. >> So, >> so let me see if I understand Patrick's right. This is for St. Angelo's part. >> Yes. This is >> just for stuff being used for our area. >> Yes, sir. This money only goes for us and it's for the full five years. It's not every year for the next five years. It's it's a onetime payment for the full five years. and and the cog is covering all of the maintenance on all of it. >> What do we do with the old ones? >> The old recorders, do they just chunked or could they be salvaged maybe for a smaller county elsewhere or something like that? >> Honestly, ma'am, I'm not sure. Um that again, I was not here for the last project uh when I was not in 911 at that time. So, I'm not sure what happens with it. I would assume they're taken and recycled. Most most IT equipment that comes through the police department is usually have it usually has to be destroyed though. >> We can't there there's a lot of stuff you can't do it for security reasons that we can't let other people have access to any of that. So, a lot of equipment that comes through um the police department or something like that that has recordings on it. It it ends up being destroyed once the the time frame is up that we have to keep it. >> That makes sense. Thank you. >> With that, I've got a first from Harry. I'll second. I've got a second from Tommy Heert. Any public comment, Heather? >> With all that, we'll take a vote. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Item A passes 70. Thank you. >> Moving item B. Consider approving an amendment to the central square agreement for a human resources information system through UKG utilizing the general fund balance in the amount of $44,000. Presentation made by HR director Veronica Sanchez. Veronica, you're on. >> Good morning. Veronica Sanchez, HR director for the record. Um this item we've discussed several times through

[0:12:18] the budget process. Um this is for an HIS system. Um UKG is the name of the vendor. It is uh a recommended system through Central Square. So that's why it's an amendment to them. Um if you remember during the budget process, both myself and Kimberly talked about the benefit that this would provide for the organization, the HR department. um efficiencies throughout. It takes the uh applicant through its life cycle per se with uh employment with the city from application through um resignation or retirement. They are able to do everything in one system. Um this would eliminate our need to uh use paper forms and things like that and it allows the employee to go into one system and also see everything from um promotions to salary information, benefit information. So I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> I will say I think this is a piece of equipment we've been waiting for quite a while. I know other people in your department has voiced their recommendation that we needed this just to help streamline the process. With that, we'll open up the dice. Any questions? >> I'd move approval, mayor. >> I have a first from Tommy Heaver and a second from Harry Thomas. Now, I'm going to step back over. Were there any questions over here on this side of the dice? With that, I've g a first and a second. I will see. Is there any public comment? With no public comment on item C, we'll ask for a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Items, excuse me, item B passes 70. >> Thank you, council. >> You're welcome. Now, we'll move to item C. Discuss, consider, and take appropriate action to adopt an ordinance authorizing the issuance and sale of city of St. Angelo, Texas tax note series 2025 in the approximate amount of 1 or 1,110,000 leving an annual ad valorum tax and providing for the payment of said note, providing an effective date, and

[0:14:19] enacting other provisions relating to the subject. Presentation made by Tina Deerski. >> Thank you, Mayor. Tina Deerski, director of finance. Um, you approved this tax note in concept at the July 15th meeting. This is um funding to uh help with the South Taxi Lane at the airport. >> Um, in addition to that, there will be some funding from the FAA as well as from the airport funds fund balance in the amount of $300,000. Um Justin's here if you have any questions about the project, but as far as the tax note, it's uh going to be in the amount of approximately $1.1 million. Um it'll mature on August 15th of next year, and we will be using uh money that's already available in the debt service fund, so it will not increase or impact the tax rate, but we already have existing capacity to cover it. Um we got bids in uh last week, and they came the winning bid came in at 3.5%, which was a really good good interest rate. So, we're happy with that. So, that's all I have. >> It's it's an airport question. So, we always had what 20 extra minutes for me to ask questions on this. >> Thank that comments there. But, as of right now, this is a south taxi lane. Um, it's something we've looked at. This help funds it. It's uh it's something in dire need and we'll bring some great improvements to the airport. With that, I'll open it up to the DAS. As the DAS has any questions, look for a motion. Joe first by Joe Self, a second by Tommy Heert. With that, is there any public comment? With no public comment, we'll take a vote on item C. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? Item C passes 70. We'll move into item D, discussion and consideration of matters related to the fiscal 20252026 operating budget, including one, first reading and public hearing of an ordinance approving and adopting the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2025 and ending September 30th, 2026. This budget will raise more total property taxes than last year's budget by 5,716,170, which is an increase of 9.7%. And of

[0:16:26] that amount, $861,795 is tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax role. And go ahead and item two, conducting a separate vote to ratify the property tax revenue increase reflected in the budget and place the adoption of this tax rate on the agenda for September 2nd, 2025, which was a regular meeting of city council and as an action item. Presentation made by Tina >> Tina Derki, director of finance. you again you've already uh kind of approved the budget um at the workshop but this is the formal action required. This is the first reading and we will conduct a separate record vote to ratify the property tax revenue increase. Um just going over quickly operating revenues um as far as from the different funds 40% being the general fund. Um and then expense by type personnel of course makes up 40% of our expenses on&m at 38% capital at 12% transfers out at 10%. And then just looking at the general fund in particular where revenue from property tax generates 50% of our revenue there um and expenditures for public safety exceed that at 59%. what's been included in the budget that you're seeing today. Um for public safety, uh professional development and training for the police department, uh software packages for the police department, fire department overtime, um fire apparatus for the fire department, an additional animal services officer, uh animal services rescue services, software upgrades for HR planning and the website, retirey insurance, and 5% raises. Again, this is the first public hearing and introduction of an ordinance adopting the 2026 budget. And I would like for um when someone is able to make the motion, if you could read the specific language and then we'll conduct a record vote. >> Okay. So, are there any questions from

[0:18:29] the DAS? This is standard we run to this time of the year as we adopt the budget and move forward into the 2026 part of the year. Are there any questions? this all all year. I think we're ready for this. >> Any questions over here with that? What do you want to be the next step, Heather? Do we need to do this individually or we need to get a motion and then read the motion specific language >> for D1? Just a motion, second, and group vote. Okay. >> And then for two, a second motion, >> second, second, and then down the line, individual vote. All >> right. I'll make a motion to approve item D1. Second >> and a second by Tommy >> Heert. >> Excuse me. Harry Thomas. >> Is there any public comment on item one? >> None. >> With none, I'll look for a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? No nays. Item D1 passes 70. >> Now we'll go to item two. How do you want that handled? If someone will make a motion um reading the prompt here that Tina's provided and then a second and then an individual action vote. >> All right, >> I'll do it. >> Karen is going to make the first motion for item two. >> Like to make a motion to ratify the property tax revenue increase reflected in the budget and place the adoption of this tax on the agenda for the 2nd of September 2025 regular meeting of the city council as an action item. I need a second. >> I'll second that. >> Second by Tommy Heert. >> Any public comment? >> None. >> No public comment. We'll take a vote. Do you need an individual reading by person? >> Yes. Heert. >> Just yay or nay? >> Yeah. >> All right. So, we'll go down this one at a time with just a yay or nay. Tommy >> I. >> Joseph. >> Hi. >> Harry. >> Patrick. >> Yay. Always got to be a rebel. Karen said >> yay.

[0:20:33] >> Mary, >> yay. >> All those in favor? >> You're going to vote, mayor. >> Are there any nays? I didn't hear any. Oh, a yay from Tom. >> And at this point, public comment. >> No public comment. We've heard of a item passes 70. Okay. Okay, now we move to item E, first reading and public hearing of an ordinance fixing and leving advalorum taxes for the current tax year for the use and support of the municipal government of the city of St. Angelo, Texas for the 202526 budget year, providing for the assessment and collection thereof, providing when the tax shall become due, providing when the taxes shall become delinquent, providing for exemptions, providing for severability, providing for publication on the city operated website, and providing for an effective date. Tina, you're on. >> Tina Deerski, director of finance. Like you just read, mayor, um this is the first public hearing and introduction of the actual property tax rate that is generated to fund the general partially fund the general fund. Um the proposed rate is at 0.7947 per $100 valuation. The total increase is 0403 cents on the tax rate. Mostly most of that of course being due to the coliseum bond issue and again here we'll have specific language that we'll need to read out. >> All right. >> Right. So as we look at this we're looking at keeping the same tax rate we've carried for the past 10 11 12 years. The additional is just the addition of the renovation of the bond. Correct. >> For the most part it's that 3.0343 is due to the bond issue. Um and when we uh when we went to the voters with the bond issue, we expected um a possibility of a 4.7 cent increase. So that is still less than what we had expected and planned. So that's that's what the main part of the increase is from. >> We have kept everything as flat and consistent as manageably possible.

[0:22:36] Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. With that, does anybody have any questions from the DAS? >> With that, I'll look for a motion. I move that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of a tax rate of 0.7947 per hundred dollar of valuation which is effectively a 9.67% increase in the tax rate. >> I need a second >> a second by Harry Thomas. Any public comment? >> No public comment. With that we will take a vote. Do you need this individually? All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? With none opposed, item passes 70. >> Thank you. >> Is that your phone? >> Oh my god. Is that your ringtone? Is that a car or is that a pitbull or a French bulldog? >> Growling motorcycle. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry. some of the organizations I would that's >> yeah that's that's a that's a buck that's a buck Mary >> we're gonna have to hold your phone till the end of class Mary >> okay we're good let's go to item F and let's regroup consider approving tax increment reinvestment zone instead of funding for the north tiers project located at 216 west 5th totaling 75,000 to add paving and safety features on a site for a gymnasium presentation made by Aaron Venoy >> thank you mayor city council Aaron Venoy director of planning and development services. Um this is a private incentive here at 216 West 5th. Uh many of y'all are aware of the project where they've got a uh gymnasium here that's um uh geared towards uh cheerleading activities and things. A group out of the um Midland Odessa area has bought it. What we're doing here today is actually trying to improve these outdoor areas uh for some safety through the TEI program through a private incentive. The

[0:24:39] property is 0.574 acres. The request is 75,000 with a 13,925 match which is an 18.5% match. This is in district 3, Mr. Harry Thomas, the downtown neighborhood and the request is for paving striping ADA items um for the site safety and parking. You can see here this is their site plan. They are utilizing some of the parking over here which is offsite. uh they are paving that area so that they can uh have folks park there safely cross uh the alleyway and come around to the front of the building which is here. Uh they are also adding some uh parking there with a drive that comes in and comes in off of their driveway there. You can see the ADA space at the front. You can just barely tell it, but right here one of the conditions was to put some striping so that parents wouldn't park by the railroad. Uh they are planning on doing that striping and then they're also doing some safety railing around this elevated platform. Uh through here you can see the site uh mostly Khichi right now but they are going to pave that with an asphalt paving. uh they will be striping the ADA space over here in front of the main door um to you make this a very usable building from going from a warehouse to something uh that's going to be a lot more uh use or higher use for that uh part of the block there. With that, uh staff does recommend approval of the private incentive award of 75,000 to the property owners at 216 West 5th for paving and site safety improvements. This did go to the TEI board and they did recommend approval 50-0 at their July 22nd meeting. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> Erin, could you go back to some of those beginning photos? Take the overhead that one. Um, when you look at the map, go to the other picture that has the red outline. Okay. So, are we talking about just the property or the red outline or are they going to pave that whole parking lot? >> They require just this property right

[0:26:41] here that they have an agreement with the property owner to use that one. >> Correct. uh they do not they don't need all of the property to for their parking. So these areas will not be paved at this time. >> Okay. >> So the only trigger that's causing this one to be paved is to have additional parking for the facility there. >> So they're additional So it's kind of a is it just pretty much a drop off? Most of these are just drop off. >> Yes, sir. And that's why they're they're proposing that drive lane through here so that parents are able to navigate through there, drop their kids off, pick them up. Um, this is sometimes after school and evening and of course as we get into the winter times it's darker in that area. They are putting some outdoor lighting, but this is a much more safe uh orientation than trying to drop off out in this area and have vehicles potentially back up on the railroad or back here to Martin Luther King where there is additional traffic. >> Okay. So, we're partially paving that part of the lot. Did we ask them to do this or did they volunteer to do that? >> We did ask them to do that. That is part of the requirements out of the zoning ordinance. Um this this application here is the tiers that can help fund that. >> Okay. But they were told to continue business in this. They're going to have to pave that part of the parking lot. >> Yes, sir. They based on their size of their building and the occupancy. Um we look at how many parking spaces they do need. We did do a a reduced parking agreement so they don't have to hit the highest number. Um but as as we all know, this also stays with the building. So over time this may change and have a different use. They may add different programs. This gives them an opportunity to have some paved parking in the area. >> Okay. But going back to my original question, as part of the approvals or moving forward to staying in business, they have to pave. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. So that was imposed upon by us. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. With that, we'll open up for any questions. Harry has a question. >> In my district, but I have one question. Go back to the first slide, Erin, if you would. Right there. Do they own both pieces of this property, the one where the building is and this parking lot back here? >> They do not. They have a parking

[0:28:44] agreement with the property owner back here that it's a long-term agreement that they can improve the park the parking area as well as utilize the parking area. So, they have an agreement to to use. >> Take me through the tears things. when the applicant, I'm I'm presuming it's the one with the building, asked to do something on another piece of property that they don't own. >> We do have an affidavit from that property owner allowing them to request that in uh the funding for that piece of property for that paving, which allows that TI's application to come forward to the TEI committee or to the TEI um board for recommendation. And so while the the parking there is tied to this building at this time through the parking agreement, we also have the permission of that property owner for this group to ask for the funding for that piece of property. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any further questions? >> What is their match on that? >> Their match is um 18 and a half% so almost 14,000. The required match is only 10%. uh in the north tiers. >> That's right. Thank you. >> So it is is more than their normal requirement. >> Mary Karen, any questions? No, sir. >> How long is this been in how long have they been in business? Just curious. >> Well, I know they've started this process close to a year ago, right after uh January last year. Uh to go through the zoning aspect. They had construction. They're working through the construction items right now. This is just to get their parking um into compliance. I know that they're working with our building official as far as a temporary certificate of occupancy so they can start utilizing it. I think they have utilized it some here and there. They have another another site in town, but they really want to be here because this is more centralized to where their their families can come and drop their kids off. And so we think this is a win for the city. I mean, you can see there's just lots of vacant

[0:30:46] properties. This building has been vacant for a while. Um, this gets another property back onto the tax roles and continues to allow them to move forward, which is part of the T tiers program is how do we get these properties moving forward? And if the TEI funding can assist in some way to get a part of that moving, we think that's a a win-win for the city as well as the property owners. >> Yes. >> With that, I'll look forward for a motion. >> So, move second. >> I've got a first from Harry Thomas. I have a second from Joseph. Is there any public comment? >> With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? With no opposed. Item F passes 70. We'll move to item G, a resolution to consider a set aside fund for commercial and RM1 and RM2 properties affected by the July 4th flood event in the north tier zone in the amount of $1 million with associated conditions. Presentation made by Aaron Venoy. >> Thank you, mayor, city council. Again, Aaron Venoy, director of planning development services. So, the TIE board has an interest in uh assisting um the flood victims particularly in the north tiers because that's where we've identified water has inundated some of those properties. You can see here in this map on the left from our initial um group of folks that went out for damage assessment, they identified this is Chadburn Street right here. These properties along Chadburn Street. And of course, this area right here is also in the tears, and that's up there uh by Grape Creek and Lake Drive. Um all of these properties appeared to have some level of damage from water that inundated them. The TEI board said, "Is there a way that we can do something uh that may assist them in a different way than our normal North Tiers program?" All of them are eligible for our normal North Tiers program. Just want to say that. Um, but this is a slightly modified program where they could apply, they would still come to TIE, they would still come to city council and y'all would make the final decision of funding, but this also modifies some of

[0:32:49] the conditions of that funding. Over here on the right side, you can see currently right now we have 2.5 million in the north tiers. And so the set aside is asking to set aside 1 million of that 2.5 that would be eligible for these properties uh that are highlighted in the orange. So what are those conditions? Obviously the total funding would be the 1 million. They did vote and say that the individual properties affected can request up to 55,000 which as you note is lower than our normal um project. In this case for this program they voted to that the applicant would not have to have matching funds. they could get up to 10% upfront, which is basically up to 5,500 upfront. Particularly if some of those businesses have already remediated some of those issues, they can come forward and provide the re the receipts and staff would look at those to say, "All right, this is this within the right time frame for the flood. Is it flood related?" The city council uh if pass if they pass this resolution would be opening the application window for 90 days so that those businesses and those properties would have 90 days to come to the city request this set aside amount um to move it forward and then we could get resolution very quickly. And the last item is if dollars are not encumbered or insign assigned after the 90 days, all of these monies just roll back right into the north tiers fund to be allocated out uh as uh tiers board recommends and as city council sees fit. We did take this uh to the board. Um staff does recommend approval. The TE's board did have a special meeting um that should actually uh say August the 8th I believe there. um that they did have a recommendation out of approval of 50-0 at their August 8th meeting for this special um tier set aside for the north. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> Erin, I think this is a great thing. Some of these people were affected and that was, you know, pretty much the river Chadurn Street is what it was for

[0:34:52] a while. Um my question is I want to be very clear on the 90 days date. When does that date start and who is that specifically and only for? So it would start at the adoption of the resolution. So if it's adopted today, today would be day one. >> And it is there are we identified 72 properties, individual properties. There may some folks may own multiple properties, but individual properties in that that are highlighted in orange that through the damage assessments had water damage. And that's who this program would be for. All of the properties in the north are still eligible for the north the regular north tiers funding, but this would just be a special set aside that has some different conditions for this group there in orange. I apologize for this group here in orange. Now, if they happen to be an RS1 zoned property, say a single family residential, they're not eligible, but we will work through those things and we will find them the resources that they may need if they have if they haven't been uh satisfied with some resources already. >> Right. Have we seen I mean as I look through this and I'm going to look to Brandon on this one. There's a lot of rules and regulations to tiers and funding. So we're we've gone down the legal path and you have given this your oversight and blessing. >> Yes sir. The these projects they would have to meet all the same requirements as tiers. This is just adding additional requirements which I believe is allowed uh and specific towards the flood recovery. So they would still have our regular agreements where they have to show all expenditures subject to recapturing the funds. If they default on the agreement, all that will still be the same. >> So there's no chance of somebody coming back and there's no conflict of us not being consistent with our tiers program. >> No, I don't think so. >> Awesome. With that, I'll open up the for open up to the dies for questions. >> Quick question. >> All right. So Karen waved her hand first. So, >> Jarren, >> just curious how this initiative will be advertised or promoted or published to the community since you have a relatively short window. >> Well, we've already pulled all the addresses and we have a letter ready to send out today to those property owners, but we also have our um partners with

[0:36:57] downtown St. Angelo. They're ready to go as well as we have an individual flyer that we're going to go and drive and go and knock on those properties doors in the next few days. so that they know that this is available so they can come and start working with us to see if there's any options that they have to move forward. >> Patrick, >> could you tell me real quick what RM1 and RM2 type properties are? >> Yes, RM1 is a low-rise multifamily. We have some of those zonings in that area. Under the tiers, RS properties are not allowed to receive tiers funding because they're strictly single family residential or two family residential. Now, there are some zones that that could be like a duplex or triplex or a multifamily type thing. RM2 is just a high-rise, which we really don't have any in that tiers district that were affected with this, but those are the zoning districts that are allowed to receive funding through the TIE program. That's why we listed them separately. And then on this with this special program, if somebody wanted to fix their damage, but then they wanted to go ahead and say, you know what, can I get some more TIE funding for the parking lot or whatever the other options that TEI has, could they combine both, or is it limited only to one or the other or an amount? >> I think they would they would look at the total amount. I think that would be up to the TEI board and city council to determine if they can come forward with that. Obviously, each project can be unique. they may be having to repair some damage and then maybe they look at this as an opportunity to expand their their business. And so they would look at that. We would look at our policies to see if there's anything that's in violation. But >> multiple properties can receive >> multiple tiers funding over time. Sometimes there's a a timeline in between, but we also know that we have a very large fund here that we need to to utilize to keep our our properties moving forward, our commercial properties moving forward. And so that would be consideration through the tears board and ultimately city council. >> Gotcha. Thank you. Mary, do you have any questions? >> Well, Patrick, you already got mine my question answered. So, >> Tommy Hever, >> I want to go down the path Karen Karen went down just a minute. I I I hope our

[0:39:00] outreach is I I'll use the word vigorous and robust for these folks. just so 72 is not a whole lot, but I would hate for somebody to somehow inadvertently not get the notification. So, uh I I appreciate, as Karen mentioned, the fact that you're going to go knock on their door, but uh let's just be sure we don't miss any of the 72 so that they don't come back 120 days from now and say, "Oh, I don't I didn't know about that anyway." Yes, sir. >> Thanks. >> Assistency manager DNE, if you got a comment, >> Tommy, was that a request for the uh Kosa DC rep from the chamber to assist in that contact or SBDC or both? >> Well, I would just say if Aaron needs help, maybe he could reach out to whomever he needs help from. Yes, >> we'll count on you to let us know what what we can do to help. >> Yes, sir. Like both assistant city managers would like knocking door to door up and down that street. Little exercise. >> I thought I really thought Michael was a volunteer is what I thought, but I was >> all wrong. >> Don't ask my doctor. He'd tell me get out there every day. I get that. >> All right. With with no more questions, can I get a motion? >> So move. >> One by Harry Thomas. >> Second. >> Second by Tommy Heert. Is there any public comment, Heather? >> With none, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? With no opposition, item G passes 70. With that, we'll close session. We'll go into executive session under the proision provision of government code title five, open government ethics, subtitle A, open government chapter 551, open meetings, chapter D, exceptions to requirements that meetings be open under the following exceptions. A section 551.087 business prospect negotiations regarding one, project hyperspace. Two, project rally point. Item B, section 55.072, deliberations about real property

[0:41:04] regarding 7409 Nickerbucker Road. Item C, 551.072, deliberations about real property regarding plus or minus 528.8930 acres out of the TJ Smith survey, abstract 5145 survey 0004, and plus or minus 152.107 107 acres out of the JW Johnson survey. Abstract 8134, survey 0010. We're going to executive session. I expect this to last a little less than one hour. Daisy. All right, it's 10:42. We will come back from executive session with no follow-up issues to discuss from that. We'll go into number eight, followup and administrative issues. A, consider items discussed in executive session. As we said, nothing needed there. Item B, consider approving various board nominations. Parks and Wreck Advisory Board, William Kit, designation of the mayor to an unexpired term ending December 2025. Planning Commission, Jennifer Warz, SMD2, to an unexpired term ending January 2026. And C or let's let's go. There's any issues with the appointments there? >> All right. So, let's go ahead and vote on item B. >> I need a motion. So move. >> I have a first from Joseph. >> Second. >> Second from Tommy Heert. Any public comment on those appointments? >> With none. All in favor of the appointment of William Kit and Jennifer Warz, say I. >> I. >> Any opposed. B passes 70. We'll move on to item C, announcement and consideration of future agenda items. I have one. Um, Brandon, we had was it two maybe three planning meetings that we didn't have a quorum and I was wondering if there was a way that we could amend if we and and those were

[0:43:07] surprises to us of the day. We didn't know those were going to happen until that day, but planning commission is very important. There's a lot of people that have had to wait 30 days, 60 days to get things come back. if maybe we could amend our rules or bylaws to pull in a a person that had previously served on planning commission to sit in by proxy to come in. Is that even something you could discuss, but if a council person could sit in? I don't know if you could do that or somebody that had previously been on I hate to see where I'm going with this is I hate to see somebody's business held up for 30 60 days by lack of a quorum on our part. >> Yeah. especially we have statutory timelines that we have to like on plat. So, um I I don't think a council member is a possibility, but I will look into maybe like alternates like we do on some of the other boards. >> I I see Heather shaking her head. Yes. No. If y'all would research that, I think it'd be really cool. And I don't know if that would just apply to planning. If there's any others, I know we have it for what else have we got? >> We got ZBA >> ZBA. They have alternates >> that have been empty. >> Yeah, they have been >> and maybe for construction board, but let's look at having potential alternates that are available to go on city and just so we don't hold up business when we shouldn't. >> Yes, sir. >> Um, anybody else have any agenda items? >> Um, I I want to ask is this a possibility? Um, you know, usually, now I say usually, sometimes we only have one meeting in December, but sometimes we wait too late to make that decision because of what Brandon pointed out, statutory requirements that we have specifically on planning commission and notification. Um, could we agree today by consensus if we wanted to on a meeting date in December to just have one meeting in December or do we need to have an agenda item to do that? >> Yeah. >> So, it's typically not like a a consent or regular agenda item. It's usually something that I list under um

[0:45:09] considerations for future agendas and I can certainly do that on the next agenda for us to discuss a meeting date for December. And I would also encourage discuss January as well because a lot of times that New Year's holiday interferes with what is normally our first meeting in January. But I can bring that back. >> It would be my preference as one council member. The staff gets very little break. People that have to come to council meeting, the staff that has to come to council meeting. >> They're they're they're working virtually year round. >> So, let's let's just throw this ball out here. It's as it falls. December 2nd would be the first council meeting and then January 6th would be this uh the meeting the first meeting in January. So, let's say tenatively we're planning on one council meeting in December and one in January. Can you push that meeting in December >> to the 9th? >> You can because I will be in I'll be gone that week. >> Well, >> but we could. We didn't have that. So, let's look at that. You know what? Let's look. >> It doesn't have to be the 1st or 3rd. We can propose any week. >> Let's look at a potential December 9th. Let's look at a potential December 9th and then we'll roll over to uh January 13th as a potential which lies between those. That would give staff a nice break in there in my opinion. >> Yes, that would keep me from having to publish on um New Year's Eve. >> Perfect. >> Well, you've got to start publishing earlier now than you even were doing already, don't you? >> Yes. State law has changed. >> Yeah. >> Rick Heather. So you'll bring that I guess at the next meeting and that'll greatly help on the planning because we can warn yes those people coming planning commission or whatever. It gives us plenty of time. So thank you. >> All right. Thanks. Any other suggestion, Miss Mary? >> Well, I have a question back on those uh board nominations committee members. You know, like we have the mayor prom. Could

[0:47:12] we not have a council member be like the committee pro tim if there's you can't >> no the hard thing is especially with like planning commission zva I mean they make decisions that y'all might hear and so you don't want to be on a board making a decision that's also going to be heard as a council member. >> Good point. Is there someone though that we could assign so maybe it's a current employee or something that way like day of if it's short there's >> uh in most cases probably not an employee um you kind of have to look at the board there's some statuto requirements about that >> mayor we would hope that unlike what's happened the past two planning meetings before that was we'd have a little bit of a a head start an idea of who was or we're not going to be there and if they allow us to appoint and designate alternates. I think that solves your your question right there. >> Yeah, >> that just hate to see stuff not move. >> Thank you. >> All right. Do I have any other items for discussion? Karen, you've been awful quiet over there. >> I move we adjourn. >> I have a first and a second. A first by Tommy Heert, a second by Harry Thomas. All of those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? With that, we'll draw this meeting to a close at 10:49.

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=E9ENmKRh6iU