City Council LIVE stream 6-16-26

[0:00:00] prayer and then we're going to have a little assistance on some pledges this morning with Mr. Jenkins. So, let's go. I'll rise for the prayer and pledges, please. Good morning everybody. God bless you to we give honor to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, to the mayor, the honorable Tom Thompson, and the members of the city council and all of the staff that are here. Will you [clears throat] please join with me in a word of prayer? Precious father in heaven, in Jesus's name, we bow before you to say thank you for this day. We thank you for your grace and your mercy, your divine protection, and how you provide for us each and every day. We pray the father that you will bless our city council with the wisdom and the tenacity to conduct the business of the city in a way that will glorify you and be edifying to all the inhabitants thereof. Lord, as our nation is celebrating or about to celebrate our 250th anniversary of independence, we ask you, Lord, to remember that it is written, "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, and we are the people of your inheritance whom you have chosen." We pray, Father, for our nation. We pray for all of our first responders, our firefighters, our police officers. We pray, Father, for this nation to once again glorify you. And we thank you for this day in Jesus's name. Amen. Amen. I pledge allegiance 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

[0:02:06] justice for all. >> Honor the Texas flag. I pledge algiance to the flag under God and indivisible. With no proclamations or recognitions this morning, we'll move straight into 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. again by stating your name and address or single member district number and limit your remarks to 3 minutes or less. >> Heather, let's start public comment. >> Hi, Gil Biennes. >> Good morning. >> Morning, city council. Um, just want to talk to you about, as you all know, you you voted in this data center. Uh, pretty much it feels like you all made up your minds. That's what you're going to do. Um, still requesting a moratorum. Back in the 1990s in this area, uh, back in the 1990s in this area, there was a drought and, um, it was pretty bad, you know, it got pretty bad and, uh, irrigation was the only thing that, uh, that caused the drought. We have a an aquafer here, a lipen aquafer. And uh with the pumping they did with

[0:04:09] the irrigations back in the 90s, they uh and then with all the residences, they had a really hard time trying to get that water. It doesn't like build back up immediately like people think it does. We don't live near an ocean. We just have this aquafer and we depend on that for our water. Now we're going to have a data center added to the in addition to the households and with the population increase and with the irrigation and now the data centers um it's going to really strain that aquifer and it doesn't just regenerate water immediately. It's going to take time for that water to come back if it comes back at all. Um, if the developers are good neighbors, what I would re what I would recommend that the developers do or maybe you can talk to them, let them know to do a hydrogeeological study just so that we know for sure the aquifer can handle the irrigation can handle the residences can handle what they're going to consume and what are they going to consume. Um I was doing a little research and uh data centers use a small one uses about 25 million gallons a year. So that's about 50 to 250 homes a year. I'm sure you all know this. Midsize of course uses uh 50 to 300 million gallons a year. And a big one is over 200 millions to a billion gallons a year. So we're going to have three of them. Um I really really emphasize if you can talk to the developers if they really mean at the meeting they came to in April they said they wanted to be a good neighbor. Well to be a good neighbor that means to be willing to do a hydro geological study so that we know what the aquifer can produce and then make that known to

[0:06:14] bring that out to the public. Be open about it. Don't don't uh hold it as a secret. Let everybody know. I mean, that's part of being a good neighbor, a good community is working together. And right now, that's not happening. Um, so thank you for listening to me. >> Good work, >> David Duncan. My name is David Duncan. I live in single member district number one at 6010 Devonire Lane. I'm here to urge you to one require that all short-term rentals obtain conditional use approval under current code provisions and two no longer allow short-term rentals by right. With thousands of construction workers will come an increase in ruling and criminal behavior and more calls for police assistance. The possibility of revocation or suspension of short-term rental permits will encourage owners to shoulder a greater share in maintaining order, which they can do by hiring of offduty police, private security firms, using evictions, security cameras, criminal backgrounds checks, and other such means. Please consider one, terminating short-term rentals by right and two, requiring all short-term rentals to be subject to conditional use permitting rules already in place. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Mr. Duncan. >> Third, >> Betty Damron. I'm sorry I can't stand up there. Uh, I would did not come this morning prepared to speak, but I have very strong feelings about what you're doing

[0:08:16] to our community with the data center. I've yet to understand what benefit we as an individual is going to get out of it. Now, I'm sure you're go say [clears throat] you got the tax baitments and all that stuff money that you've already received. That's that's not right. That's wrong. The city is going to be destroyed with that monster of a data data center out there. You're going to destroy our water. It's not good for the land. You've take over the land and these rentals you're talking about. What are you going to do with these rentals whenever's gone, construction's over, they're going to be pieces of junk that stand there because they're not being they're not being built correctly. They're being thrown up to house these workers. Think about what you're doing to our community. I know you say you can't stop it. I bet you could stop it if you really wanted it. But please consider what you're doing to the wonderful community of St. Angelo. Thank you. >> Thank you, baby. [applause] Heather Wy. >> Good morning. My name is Heather Wy and I'm a resident of District 3. I am against hypers scale data centers coming into San Angelo. Knowing my position on this issue, I want to acknowledge that San Angelo already has data centers. St. Angelo has enterprise and colllocation data centers and these look like the server rooms at Shannon or ASU which are very small and predictable. This also means that their impact is very low or even the plans for the frontier building which could potentially have a higher impact. St. Angelo does not currently have any hypers scale facilities which will require tremendous infrastructure buildout, tremendous power demand, high

[0:10:19] water usage and backup generation. Hypers scale data centers will result in larger environmental and community impacts. We are currently seeing this in headlines across the country. I urge you to amend the ordinance regulating data centers into three separate ordinances looking more closely at the specific needs of each type of facility instead of assuming that one ordinance for all will suffice. It is critical that ordinances distinguish between enterprise colllocation and hyperscale data center infrastructure regarding regulations. Light manufacturing zoning exists in and around St. Angelo. The frontier building cloudnam says that it is scalable in its brochure for future expansion. We do not want hypers scale expansion in the middle of a neighborhood. The city of St. Angelo doesn't need to be vulnerable because of a one-sizefits-all zoning approach. To allow more time, please pass a moratorum for the city of St. Angelo to better regulate and understand hypers scale data centers before you bring them into the area. Thank you. >> Thank you, Heather. >> Spencer Matthews. >> Spencer. >> Hello. Spencer Matthews. I live in Karen's district and I'm opening up a business downtown. First, I want to apologize to everybody. Uh, the last meeting I came in very aggressive and none of you all really deserve that as unpaid officials. So, I first want to just apologize for my scattered thoughts. Uh, but for some of you still, it's kind of a warning still that there's a big coalition and it's both sides, Republicans and Democrats coming against this thing. And so still would like you to pay attention to that. Uh to be clear, originally I was pro- data center. Obviously we have problems in our city. We have revenue issues. We have problems that we need to solve. We need business partners to come in and help us solve those problems. However, as the national dialogue has expanded and a lot of the real realities of these

[0:12:22] things have expanded, my opinion of them have shifted and I have changed my my opinion of them. Uh over the last several weeks, I've poured myself over all the FOYA documents, text messages, emails, pretty much everything that's out there. Any kind of presentation I could find, I've I've absorbed and I've uh reviewed. I've had several officials in my my store coming in to talk to me, reviewing this. I've also had people in the grocery stores coming up and thanking me for speaking up. And I've also talked to a lot of my colleagues back in Dallas and some in Houston that are REIT developers, private equity companies, people that I used to work with hands-on every day. Uh from what I've developed and I'm working on is a comprehensive draft of everything that we've talked about and it goes through every issue and I want to catch everybody up and make sure that we're all on the same page as we go into the 380 agreements. Uh before I put this on public record, I have a few more officials that I want to talk to and review it with. So I'm not interjecting any kind of more confusion into the dialogue. Um, some of those people I would like to talk to are from the Air Force base, intelligence officers that might be concerned about this much compute being this close to an intelligence base of national security. It's a concern. Uh, also on the financials, the financials are very, very concerning to me. Um, so if you're out there and you'd like to review with me, you can send my send an email to me at spencercangelodedge.com. Spencer spangelo d o g.com and I'd be glad to meet with you. Uh the only piece that I would like to call out that is troubling, most of the state p most of the power does rest with the state authorities. And right now we have a state representative, Drew Darby, who has financially benefited from this deal. Drew Darby has received $54,000 to title insurance this deal from Skybox. That seems like a conflict of

[0:14:25] interest. He also sits on the legal boards of many uh authorities in the state of Texas, law firms, and he's also uh generated a lot of donations for these from the power companies. >> Spencer, thank you, sir. All right, Jamal Shimpert, Jamal Shamber, SMD3. Um, last time y'all was up here, y'all talked about TCEQ and what they do. Uh, I just wanted to share some of my experience with them. Uh for about 2 or 3 years I had been trying to get them to give you guys a violation for not taking care of your storm area. Uh where I live it's called the two now bridge or the nile bridge is exactly where it flooded last year. They never gave you guys a violation and every time they just told me that it's under you you guys jurisdiction. I call your storm water manager. She wouldn't fix it. Um, fast forward, someone put a picture of all of this wood and all of the stuff that was still there, even though we spent the million dollars to clean it up. This this is an issue. I think it's a rig in the system. I don't know who it is or what it is, but TCQ will not hold you guys accountable. And it's it's been starting since 2021. That's why when you guys got to talking about um the issues TCQ or regulated, I think it's a problem even with TCQ regulating it. I think they're even afraid to regulate you guys stuff. I don't know who you guys have that's powerful, but they don't they they don't give you violations anymore. Back in 2021, you had violations for not doing your correct inspections on your new

[0:16:26] homes. Uh after that the violations started to disappear. Uh and I mean I [clears throat] tried for about two and a half three years took multiple pictures and eventually the flood happened and we lost a life that I think possibly could have been prevented. Uh that is why I have distrust issues with TCQ regulating some of the things on the wastewater. Uh I have a suggestion for the wastewater with the uh data center coming up when you talk about it but right now I can't mention it. Thank you. >> Thank you JAMAL >> Antonio Martinez. >> Good morning Mayor and council. Uh my name is Antonio Martinez, SMD4. Uh I want to request that the city of St. Angelo uh take a necessary and legally responsible step before considering any further ordinances, permitting or development actions related to a proposed data centers or best facilities. Texas Government Code Chapter 2274 or the Lonear Infrastructure Protection Act applies to every political subdivision in the state, including municipalities. The act proh prohibits cities from entering into agreements with companies that are owned, controlled, or influenced by foreign governments identified in the statute. It also restricts the use of certain foreign manufactured technologies within or connected to critical infrastructure. Data centers by their nature involve systems that may fall under the def that definition. As the document states, they typically require high-capacity electrical interconnection, water or cooling infrastructure, telecommunications and fiber optic systems, and potential integration with critical digital or operational networks. These are exactly the types of systems the act is designed to protect. Because of this, the city has a legal obligation to verify compliance before moving forward with any approvals, not after and not as an optional step. >> [clears throat] >> I'm respectfully requesting that the council direct staff and the city

[0:18:28] attorney to require the following from any data center or best applicant. One, a sworn affidavit affidavit affirming full compliance with the Lonear Infrastructure Protection Act, including disclosure of all parent companies, subsidiaries, investors, and controlling interests. Two, a third party legal review confirming that no ownership, contractual relationship, or equipment sourcing violates the act. Three, a critical infrastructure risk assessment to determine whether the proposed facility would connect to or interact with systems covered under LSIPA. Four, the complete vendor and equipment disclosure, including any foreign manufactured hardware or software that may fall under LSIPA restrictions. Five, a requirement that LSIPA compliance be written directly into any CUP zoning approval or development agreement. These steps are basic due diligence. They protect our electrical grid, our water systems, our telecommunications networks, and the residents who depend on them. They also protect the city from entering into an unlawful agreement. The request is made in good faith in the interest of transparency, public safety, and legal compliance. I respectfully ask that this matter be placed on a future agenda for discussion and action. Um, I would also like to add that because we know, we've been saying this for months now, that this is going to bring higher costs, including rents, and some of you being realtors or landlords, I see that you could possibly benefit from this without having to be signing NDAs or any other things because it's just inherently a corrupt system, and you're a part of it. That's just it. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Antonio. Liz Landers. >> Good morning. I'm Liz Landers. I live at 1111 Kinwood Drive. I just have to mention that in case anybody wants to drive by there and look across the street. Um,

[0:20:35] I am very disappointed. We have all been very nice about this and we've been very polite, very considerate of everyone who has had an opinion other than ours. I will tell you that almost everybody on the county has called me at some point because they know that I have been researching and I have been looking at what is going on all around the country around Texas and locally because that's where it starts and that's where it starts for me. I am very concerned that you guys have not done what your constituents want. It's very obvious to all of us that 70% of the people in this city do not want this at all. And it has not been handled transparently. And because I've had to now make this part of my agenda, my personal agenda is to come see what's going on or to watch on YouTube. I have now seen so many places where you guys have contradicted yourselves. I would personally if I did it I would probably be accused of lying. Um there are things that I saw from the very beginning when I began coming to these meetings. I started with the budget meeting last year and you guys had I heard you personally say that we were not doing cloud seating and then the budget meeting you reapproved that in the budget. So right there, you had my attention. And so I've been watching. I've been listening. There are a lot of things we could lose Goodfellow over this. The one thing that has kept, which I've had on good authority, the one thing that has kept Goodfellow in our community is the cost of living because their soldiers, our soldiers can afford to live here and live well and be part of our community. And if they can no longer afford the rents and the costs

[0:22:39] that are going to go up, then we lose them. And that's $2 million a year right out of our budget. And how can we be sure? Because I look at what's happening in Abalene and they are being sued because they brought their data center in which collapsed the value of the property around it. And now they're suing to have their property value decreased so they don't have to pay as much in taxes. That's not okay. We can't afford to destroy what we already have and that we all love or we wouldn't be here. I wouldn't. I could have moved any place in the anywhere if I'd wanted to when I retired. Thank you. >> Thank you, Liz. China Young China. >> Hello, China Young SMD4. Um, at last week's development corporation meeting, Steve Elenius, the CEO of Chamber of Commerce, expressed that he was concerned about how people in St. Angelo and across the nation view economic development. He was referring to the data center development. I may be interpreting what he said incorrectly, but he seemed to be under the impression that the citizens of St. Angelo are standing in the way of economic development because so many have vocally opposed this [clears throat] hypers scale data center development. He then said to the development commissioners, I want to encourage you as policymakers to hold fast. essentially encouraging our city leaders to continue ignoring the citizens and cons uh the concerns of the people regarding this particular kind of development. Also last week, Good Movement uh downtown business shared a video about the impact of the Chadburn Street closure on their business and the businesses around them. The road and sidewalks in front of their businesses

[0:24:42] have been closed since January 3rd. They were given an initial project completion date of May. However, as of last week, they've been given a new completion date of August. The video shows the lack of front door access for a lot of businesses and mentions that, you know, once the roads were fixed in front of their businesses, it moves down the street to do another phase of the same work impacting other businesses. And just yesterday, a follow-up video from Good Movement was shared in which they said that they have been in contact with the city, but no solutions have been presented and in fact, St. Angelo does not have a plan in place to support local businesses during construction disruptions. As I mentioned, I live in SMD4, which means that I use the Bell Street North Loop intersections a lot. Um, and after last year's devastating floods, that area of the loop was projected to be closed 4 months for um to to get fixed. And I don't um recall the exact timeline, but it ended up reopening way ahead of schedule. Um, and I was very shocked and impressed at how quickly that project was completed. And I made a note that that meant that the city was capable of completing projects quickly. I assume that this was completed quickly because the road is used by big business and maybe there was extra support from the state because it was Highway 67. But regardless, it was accomplished in record time, which means it can be done. So when we're talking about economic development, it may be true that citizens are standing in the way of massive technological corporations from moving in and exploiting our resources. But it also seems that the city stands in the way of local businesses from succeeding. I don't know for sure whether they are offered the same tax incentives that the data center is uh potentially being offered for the draft 380 that we've seen circulating as well as a letter of preparation of abatement agreements, development incentives and related negotiation services that Skybox uh related to Skybox sent to the city on August 4th uh 2025 from Jeff Snowden with Cape Resource Group. All of these documents have been released as part of a Texas Public Information Act request. I don't know if small businesses get red carpet treatment that these data centers

[0:26:44] get, but it doesn't seem that way. And um I just want you to be more >> uh and two staff announcements. First, Aaron Venoy. [clears throat] >> Good morning, uh Mayor, City Council. Thank you um for letting us come and speak, but I have two promotions that I want to present to the council. Uh first, um both these guys are on my right, but uh Austin Reed is our planning and development services administrator. He's been with us for three years as a planner, and now he oversees our development services division and our planning division. So, he oversees our pre-development uh applications uh as well as anything that goes on in planning. And then to his right is Austin Ayers who's been with the city for 15 years or so. He seems like a long time. >> Yeah, he feels like 30. Um >> like 30 underwater. >> Yeah, either way. But he is now our uh city's building official. And so these two gentlemen are uh at the same level within our department. He's over our permits and inspections team. And so we're very excited that we're able to do some promotions uh internal. And I present these gentlemen to you guys as well as the public so that you can put a name and a face to them. And they are working very hard to do solution-minded u stuff for our community and allow development to continue in our community. And so I'm very excited to present these guys to you. If y'all have any questions for them or any encouragement, both Austin would just like thank you for stepping up. Thank you for looking uh forward for what we have to do. Responsible responsible and produce uh to say prudent analysis of what moves forward is very important for all of us and we lay our faith in what Aaron has said and spoke of y'all. And with that, welcome aboard. Thanks guys. >> Congratulations. >> Thanks guys. [applause] and Samuel Helm.

[0:29:00] >> Good morning, city council. I'm Samuel Helm. I'm with the St. Angelo Economic Development Corporation, and I wanted to announce to you guys that our St. Angelo Business Plan Competition is in full swing. Uh this is a a competition where we partner with the small business development center to um create a competition for small businesses or operating businesses to make a business plan to create an idea for the next project for the next step and uh present that to uh successful business owners in St. Angelo for a chance at over $100,000 in cash prizes. Uh so first place is $50,000 for cash cash grants, second place 30,000, third place $20,000. And this is just a great opportunity for the development corporation and SBDC to really pour into and strengthen our local economy. Um so I just want to announce that if there's any businesses in town who are looking for their next step ready to make a really polished business plan and uh and hopefully win um a piece of $100,000, uh the deadline is August 5th 5:00 PM online angelo.edu BPC business plan competition. So thank you guys. >> Samuel, welcome aboard, bud. Thank you so much. >> That concludes public comment. >> Mary, did you want to make a public comment? >> Thank [clears throat] you, Tom. >> Kind of a statement. And also that in the air of in the uh light of transparency that everybody has been so keen on wanting and needing and deserving. So, I've spent probably as much time as uh maybe anyone has been on this this uh data center thing, especially of late, and taking into consideration everybody's viewpoint, not just those that are based in fact, those that are also based in subjectivity with a lot of supposition. And when anytime that there's something that deals with our environment, it gets it can get heated. It can get passionate

[0:31:03] quickly as it should as it should because we've all got a vested right here. Not just the citizens of St. Angelo but us too. We live here too. We have children and grandchildren. So this is personal to us as well. I'll start first basically because my background for 45 years has either been in public accounting controller for different companies uh either is a CPA firm also uh bought built and sold businesses. So that's where I'm rooted. I I I math I do the math. I don't get into a lot of the emotional part of it and that's uh actually a pretty good comfort zone because the math doesn't lie. A lot of things have happened especially recently. I don't know if many of you are even aware of what happened on June 10th with our governor and how he really took it upon himself. It'll go in it'll come up to vote or at least be part of the legislature in January of 27. But on June 10th, he directed the public utilities commission that they that the developer has to be bear 100% of the cost of the infrastructure, not the citizens, not tax abatements, nothing. It has to come straight from the developer. So that is a that if you want to look at that as a win loss uh for the people, that's a win. So you may think you're not being heard, but you are. Not just on the local level, but also on the state level. Initially, I was a big I was a very big proponent of the data center and if this thing meets out, I would still be that. But as things the tide's starting to change, I'm just giving you the facts as they are right now. It's not on the agenda. Every one of you have my phone number, address, and email. And a lot of you have taken really good advantage of that to get in touch with me and let me uh at least give you what we know

[0:33:08] or what I know. Tax code, Texas tax code 1513595 that deals with uh sales tax. The comproller of the state of Texas has the power to not only abate state sales tax, it has the authority to abate local sales tax as it pertains to data centers. I don't know if many of you were aware of that. That is a big deal. So based on what we know right now or what I know right now, if I had to vote today, I couldn't vote for it. But like glaciers and government, it all moves at a glacial pace. So nothing is going to be ground. you know, we're not going to start digging holes and drilling wells and putting up co copper wiring and all of that stuff that the infrastructure and everybody is panicked over and I get it. I do. That's not about to happen. Uh is not even going to give out their reading or their allotments until I think at the very earliest July 15th, probably August 7th. So everybody, I'm not trying to tell you how to think or what to say or how to feel, but I want us to all kind of get a grip on just how fast or slow this thing may progress. In January 10th, >> Mary, you've got one minute. >> Okay. January 10th, we go to legislature goes back in and that's where all these abatements that we're talking about can be repealed. But I have to take a snapshot in time and say right now the math doesn't math. But give us until January and let's see.

[0:35:11] But nothing is going to be torn up, dug up, or bludgeoned in any way. This is taking time. And it's actually taking more time than we initially thought for good reason. And that's because we hear what you're saying and we hear your concerns and our job as officials, we have to meet out every bit of that. We've got to chase every rabbit down every hole. But just know that we are listening. And if we had to do it right now, I wouldn't do it, >> Mary. >> But it's going to take a while. Mayor, thank you for your time. And let me just make this closing statement. I appreciate every one of you in this room and everybody that's here in St. Angelo, whether you vote or you know or you don't. But this matters. You matter. Our land matters. And this is we're doing the right thing with the knowledge we have right now. That's why it's taking so long. I thank you for your time. Thank you for listening to me for a change. I appreciate it. >> Thank you, Mary. Done. At 9:07, we're going to move into the consent agenda. I'll start down here with Mr. Heert. Do you have anything to pull? >> Joe? >> No, sir. >> Mr. Thomas? >> No, sir. >> I do not have anything to pull. Patrick, >> no sir. >> Karen, >> Mary, Okay. So, with no items to pull off the consent agenda, I need a motion. >> I have a first from Harry and a second from Joe Self. Is there any public comment? [clears throat] >> Yes. >> On consent agenda? >> Yes. Um,

[0:37:18] >> Ally testing one, two, three. Okay. [snorts] Alli deo, county resident, uh, St. Angelo business owner. regarding the the the item that was tabled last meeting. Um I just want to talk to you a little bit more about water to try to put into perspective where we're at here. Uh water is becoming a scarce resource in Texas as Texas continues to grow and it's prompting concerns among state officials and ind industry leaders over what happens when the next drought occurs. The regional economy is expanding, but growth trends are beginning to collide with stark realities about natural resources that are already strained. In the state's existing water supplies are being depleted from overuse, persistent dry weather, rising temperatures, aging infrastructure, and water reliant technology like data centers. We have been warned that residential water supplies may stop flowing within the next few decades. Stream flows in nearly 75% of Texas rivers are declining and streams are indicators of the state of our groundwater. The Rio Grand is drying up from both ends. It doesn't reach the Gulf. We have damned every major river system in Texas and have drastically altered their natural cycles. We've diverted water from them and the estuaries they feed to support the economic development of the state. Enough is enough. It all comes at a price. The situation with the Rio Grand illustrates that we are sitting on a razor's edge everywhere in Texas. Our streams and rivers have toxic algae blooms, high bacteria levels, elevated concentrations of dissolved minerals, and low dissolved oxygen levels. We

[0:39:22] cannot continue to take these valuable resources for granted, and we cannot sustain further abuse of them. The city of St. Angelo is already reaching out 70 miles to bring water here from the Hickory Aquafer. We have other failed water projects that were supposed to bring us more water and they didn't. The population of Texas is expected to increase by 20 million people in the next 50 years. We do not have water for data centers. We need water for people, water for ecosystems and agriculture and for essential industry. And this AI scam is not essential. It's a big financial hoax. and we are not the beneficiaries of it. And if you pass this water use ordinance, that opens the gate to any other data center operations to come in and each use 11 million gallons of water a year as well. And there's only about five data centers in the entire state that are operating at this size. We could send these hyperscale husters running away right now if you just let go of the FOMO and stand with the people of this community. table this item again and bring it back so restrictive that no hypers scale waterguzzling data centers will want to build here. >> Thank you. >> Thanks >> Rebecca Ridge. >> Say it again. Rebecca >> Rebecca Ridge. >> Good morning, Mr. Mayor. IL. I'm Rebecca Ridge, single member, District 5. I'll try not to repeat things that we all keep saying, everyone knows, but it bears saying again. Um, what about Sorry, let me start at the beginning. I believe y'all are trying to do what's best, what you think is best for our

[0:41:27] city. [snorts] Our governor put y'all in a precarious position, all of us, with the abatements and all that. um the incentives for the billion trillion dollar companies that could care less about us. Even Governor Abbott has changed his tune. Thank you, election year. We need to be able to change our course as well. What do we do? I understand that water is life. It's beyond understanding to me that St. Angela would risk any of our water. We can't know what will change. We know change happens quickly. I mean, data centers quickly. Economic growth seems to mean more than quality of life to people making decisions. Not to me. We need to stop while we can. What? We need a kill switch for this thing. What happens when the worst case scenario happens? Trillion dollar companies do not care what they leave behind. What happens when the technology changes quickly? So quick, so much more quickly now with AI. What happens when there's something, a technology we haven't even thought of yet that would allow these trillion dollar companies to make more money? They're going for that and they're going to walk away from a data center that's on leased land. Imagine the cost to if St. Angelo is left with that job to clean up the cost to to

[0:43:32] deal with e-waste. You think you're getting a lot of money for this, a lot of tax money for the data center. The money you would spend on abatement, I mean, it'd be like a St. Angelo super fund site. We've got to to be prepared for a worst case scenario. Is our water Thanks. >> Thank you, Mr. RACH Cynthia Rutledge. Hello, I'm Cynthia Rutled. I live at 1621 McKenzie and I am impressed by all the comments this morning. I don't need to reiterate the reasons to be concerned. Um water is the primary one. When that's when that's drained, we're dead. We can't live without water. um the effect of data centers on the nearby livestock, the noise, the higher utility bills, the short-term pain of bringing in thousands of workers to construct this building, which we're not prepared for. Yes, that would ramp up the sales tax revenue from the money they spend while they're here, but they're not going to be here forever. They're not part of the long-term community. I understand that the city council wants to begin a um committee. the community impact review [clears throat] to evaluate the results of or or the possible results of the data center. Seems to me that should have been done months ago, but better late than never. Um I would urge that committee to look at the independent data, not just the glossy brochures that

[0:45:34] >> the committee is a regular agenda item, so we just need to make sure we talk about that during that item. >> Okay. um 89 communities in the US so far have rejected the data centers. I would I would urge you to look at how they have done that and the impact on data centers in the cities that have allowed them and the fear that oh we can't do anything the big corporation will sue us so all the citizens must have to live under the corporation's rules that seems bizarre to me. It seems like a dystopian sci-fi movie where we subsume our own self-interest as a healthy community to a corporation. Even the governor, as has been mentioned, and our commissioner of agriculture have said, "Whoa, slow down. This is moving too fast. Let's look at everything." A moratorum is a good idea, I think. and a program of this size and possible permanent devastation of our community and our environment does need to move at a glacial pace. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Jamal Schubert. >> [clears throat] >> Jamal Shambert, SMD3. Um, number B on the consent agenda. I I've never seen that. Usually y'all talk about it afterwards, but I was wondering if that was going to be I know I can't ask a question. Just made me wonder if that's going to be regular now. How y'all put those on there? Uh, that's the approval. And for number D, did we close down that area or or is that area

[0:47:36] accessible at the airport that may have in it? I don't know if it does or if it doesn't, but from the report, seems like we were repairing it. It's a very much needed repair. Not against the repair at all. Just wanted to make sure we didn't put anybody in harm's way. Um, and for the affordable housing, he said he sent into y'all a letter saying that he dropped the lot $1,000. Um, right now at our affordable housing program, I think our lots go up to $15,000. We'll pay for them. He didn't tell us exactly how much each lot would be. I know he wants to finish out the subdivision and ask for the support. It's all legal for him to ask for the support, but I just wanted to know how much each lot would be. Just see how much affordable housing is going in there. And for I think I the the water um I [clears throat] kind of looked up properly glycol and like the dude said, like the utilities director said, it kind of expands things. Uh did we look at this to make sure that there if it leaks or breaks in any area it it won't get into our water. I like actual water the propylene glycol because it may expand those algae blooms. What I mean by that is we got a reclamation uh program that's about to start. You all guys know u and we have bad storm water. if they have a a leak at the wrong time it rains, it it's gonna probably run down into that that draw area and that would be a a serious issue that could probably possibly affect a lot of different other communities. I don't know how much propylene glycol is needed to activate those algae blooms and make them expand. Uh we probably should do studies on that and and part of something that's a little probably too late but maybe not because this is like you said it's going to be a while

[0:49:38] before we get those done. Probably should build wells and you say they don't use a lot of water. Uh put that water in there in the wells and run it through a whole another water treatment system. build them a smaller water treatment system so that they don't tear ours up and we don't have to mix the propylene glycol and make sure that you run their water through their systems until the propylene glycol is over with. Uh maybe that's that's something y'all should look at in the 380 agreement. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jamal. >> All right, we've had a first and a second. And we've heard the public comment on all the consent agenda. Now we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> With no opposed. All the consent agenda items pass 70. We'll 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. To participate, please sign in with city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in the order they are signed in. Comments are limited to less than three minutes. Applicants, proponents, and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit the remarks to less than five minutes. Item A, we're going to take it 9:22. Discussion and possible action regarding the potential establishment of a community impact review committee committee to address issues related to data center development. Presentation made by assistant city manager Shane Kelton. >> Good morning, council. We this item was brought to us uh or asked for by Councilman Keley and so we are bringing this forward now so uh we can kind of present this to council. I only have about three slides here for y'all to look at just kind of uh some prompts just to kind of start thinking about things and then we'll turn it over to the DAS to let y'all kind of uh give us give staff your feedback and kind of how y'all think y'all would like for us to move forward uh creating creating a committee and and moving this forward

[0:51:40] and what y'all would like to see. So, some of the potential issues that we that have been seen or heard of and even spoke spoke about in previous meetings here, these are some of the ones that kind of deal with housing. short-term rental spikes, uh conversions of long-term rentals to STRs, uh displacement of lowincome and fixed income residents, hotel shortages, unregulated temporary housing sites, um which is even that kind of even goes into uh the uh mobile home or RV parks, those type things that just pop up everywhere. Uh we've heard um we've heard stories of people talking about trying to move campers into their backyards to you know rent them out for people to stay in things like that. So we've heard of some of those type things that have happened and and go on in different places. And so this is one of the one set of the potential issues that um that are other than the things that we have already um started to regulate uh the zoning the wastewater and water stuff. We've started to regulate th those things already. So these are other things that that uh other places have had issues with around the country. Other potential issues related to infrastructure and services uh road damage from heavy construction traffic. Um while um a lot of this stuff would be um textbased uh looking at potential location sites that we know about. Uh most of those will be text roadways but again additional traffic you know during construction even on uh local residential or local roads here in town uh could also be affected. [snorts] Electric grid reliability has been a concern um across for a whole lot of people across the nation as well. Fire and EMS training gaps for data centers um not something that our our fire and EMS have ever had to deal with. So um those those could be issues that we need to take a look at as well. Uh added pressures on police services and availability of local workforce and

[0:53:42] trades. Uh not only as we are looking at um any potential industrial development but also as as we move forward uh if there are housing issues or increased housing demands how do we how do we continue to ensure that we have plenty of workforce and trades folks trades people available as well. So, those are some those are some of the main issues that you look up. Y'all may have more. Y'all may have heard more. And so, again, we want to make sure that um as we're looking forward that that we are trying to take a comprehensive look at at possible issues that could could come up in the community, not only whether whether one is even built in the city of Stangelo, if we have them, if they're out in Tom Green County or they're even in adjacent counties, this could become an issue as we are a regional hub. uh and people will will uh actually be using St. Angelo for a base of operations even if we're in Koncho County or Sterling County, Ronald County, wherever it we would be that regional hub. And so these are things that uh we we should start looking at and take take account for. uh some of the stakeholder groups. Uh this by uh by no means is all of the potential stakeholder groups, but just as we kind of looked at some of those some of those um issues, potential issues that can come up, these are these are some of the folks that um uh could definitely um step up. Some of these groups definitely have some people to step up and and help work through some of these issues and help us think through how how we would how we would either proactively or reactively try to work through these issues. So, don't want to read all of these to you. So, we'll let you look at those. And uh as as we start, I turn it over to to the dice and let y'all start. And I don't know, Council McKilley, since this was your >> your um your request, if you want to lead lead off with your thoughts and suggestions and >> Well, I'll I'll start and then I'm going to punt it to Patrick. But I want to commend Patrick for bringing it up. I mean, we need to govern this by plan is what we're looking at here. Shane, certainly get out in front of it. I

[0:55:43] think you bring up a very important point. We may we don't know if we're going to be second or third in the data center construction even if that comes through regarding you know we're just to the point now where we're looking at is there if there's an economic development benefit to us to way to move forward but um we're going to regulate some by ordinance some not but that'll be a huge uh huge thing here and we need to move forward with this anyway just to prepare regardless um what I do want to say is if you development a a group to oversee I want to make sure much like how we govern some of our other commissions and boards. I don't think that 20% of the board should be from any one SMD2. I don't think it should be from any single industry. I think that as this thing develops and grows, there's a very hard look upon and establish that this is an advisory group only. All right. And with that, we give fair representation across the entire city um as we develop this. And with that, Patrick, this is your baby. I'll let you run with it. >> There's there's a lot to unpack with this. Um, and in general, even if the first data center is not in the city, like you talked about, we are going to be the hub of any data center within 30 40 miles if one came. Um, so I think it's just a good idea and prudent to prepare for it to help the other a lot of your stakeholder groups to help them prepare for what may change. Um, and then if we can help out some of those stakeholder groups and to further uh their training programs to uh further police and fire, get them kind of prepared and ready. um whatever we can do. Um I think it needs to be a good mix of uh of city employees to especially planning and development maybe one of the new Austin's um you know in their um council to kind of have an idea um finance to see where um we could find funds, where we could get funds, what's legal. um developers and and the association realtors to um make sure they're

[0:57:46] prepared uh for what may happen so they can uh make sure they're educated to make sure they can show their landlords education um to help them prepare for it to look at uh we've already talked about or has been talked about STRs to make sure our enforcements are in place. Um, so that's code enforcement. That'll be on us to make sure that's ready to go. Um, to see, you know, to get look at their staffing and see if we think they're prepared, if they're not. If they're not, how can we get them to that? Because obviously we run lean, very lean as it is. Um, so to me it should be a mix of uh council should be on there, city employees, um, a a good mix of our stakeholders to um, try to make sure that they at least have somebody that can go back and talk to the rest of them. So in general, a group of them um, you know, like the realtors and HBA and apartment association, it doesn't have to be necessarily one from each of them, but at least one of them that is willing to go back and talk to all of them. um that that way that it's mainly about education and then to see where we need to start preparing our ordinances, our enforcement, whatever. Um and then get some citizen advocate groups for the same reason so they can come in, be a part of it, and then go back and and talk to everybody and kind of be a liazison. Uh so I'm open to suggestions. Um I I think it should be advisory committee. I mean, that's what was kind of my hope. Um, is that they can take the time to research things, to look into things, get all the heads together, and then come back to us and say, "Hey, here's what we think um we should do to make sure we're prepared." And that way then we can make decisions. >> Awesome. We'll start down here. Heert, you got any comments? >> Well, yeah. I'm not sure where to start without rambling. Um I would I would have concern about size of of the group. Thought also occurs to me maybe we have smaller groups that feed into one larger group with thoughts and ideas. Um it's one of those things there there

[0:59:55] there's an old saying that when it's everybody's responsibility, it's nobody's responsibility. So I have concern about how we re re not necessarily receive input we need to receive the input but how that is all collated and then communicated um and whose responsibility that would be um I'm going to stop there um Mel, >> I I think it's a good idea for educational purposes for the community, but I has reservations on understanding what we're trying to achieve here. And the reason that being said, we didn't do this before we passed the bond for the coliseum construction. I know there's some churches being built. There's a lot of construction. The the SASD has a lot of construction. So, we have a lot of out of town construction already, but we didn't do this before then. So, um and also I I this will may answer some questions to some people, but do we have solutions that we can help fix these problems? I mean, we can't control rent. We can't control the housing cost. That's all up to the builders or the renters. All we can do is regulate the ordinances that they go by like the the And so while I I understand and I think it would be good educationally for the community to understand it, but I I'm I'm I'm also kind of is there a I mean even like the fire department and training them. I mean that's Chief Brody's job. He's supposed to look into that and have his guys trained. >> We don't need a committee to tell them that. But uh and I'm kind of like Tommy, I'm kind of rambling. I think it's a great idea for educational purposes for

[1:01:57] the community on what a data center might impact in or outside of our city if even if it's in the county. But we didn't do this back in 2012 when the oil field hit. I mean, and it was from here to Midland and it's still in Midland Odessa. It's still a challenge, but there's we're restricted on what we can actually do to solve these problems. is is my look at. But again, I'm in favor for educational purposes, but I'm not sure we're going to solve problems. >> Councilman Thomas, >> but I'm not sure that I can do any better job than my previous two people said. Uh, but I do have to to agree with Joe. I think from an educational standpoint, we may be able to learn something. But I also caution, we don't want 25 or 30 people on on a committee, otherwise we're not going to get anything accomplished and do things. I also think we need to make sure that we're we've got people that are neutral here, not pro data center, not against data center, just to see realistically what's good for the citizens of St. Angelo. What can we do if we need to to get out in front of this? Uh, as Joe said, we're certainly not going to be able to direct the fire department or the police department. Uh, city already has a pretty good idea what we we think we will have to have for infrastructure needs. Uh, so I'm not sure how much information that particular group would be able to share there. Uh, I'm sure SISD, uh, Shannon, uh, ASU, all those folks have contingency plans, but it would be interesting for us to hear those things so the citizens understand what's before them. Again, I guess I'm probably rambling as much as my

[1:04:01] predecessors have, uh, but just some thoughts. Awesome, Karen. I'm sorry. >> Like it or not? [laughter] >> Um well, [clears throat] after all those remarks, I'm going to suggest that a couple of stakeholders be added to the list. So, I know that's kind of counter to where you guys launched your your point of view. I think we need a representative from the water masters or use the UC something like that so that the the water issues are addressed by professionals and those in these conversations that go forward. I think that's important. And since I'm hearing from my colleagues a lot of concern about management and administration and outcome of something like this, then I'm just going to point at the animal services task force that was appointed that ended up being very successful in my opinion and uh operated with a great deal of efficiency. So I would suggest that we use a model similar to that. Um when we reach the point of asking people to join this and making final decisions about who who is non-contributing and perhaps a witness like a member of council or a staff member. Um I I would be curious how all of you feel about this public and citizen advocacy groups. How do we choose? How do we do that? and and the mayor also mentioned uniform representation across all districts. So, um it is logistically sort of a puzzle right now, but that's why we're having this conversation. >> Mr. Mayor, >> I think everybody up here has had some really good insight. Um I agree with everyone what they've stated. Uh I don't think we want to just go with opinions. This is a very

[1:06:03] passionate project on both sides, you know, no matter where you're looking at it. So, uh, identify what what is our objective. Uh, is this this is not or I mean this would be something to discuss. Is this going to be made policy? Uh, is it going to lend itself to, you know, new ordinances or something like that? But just have having those clear objectives. And I know it sounds like we're just beating it to death as far as how do you have a meeting, but it's that needs to be thoughtful and also be uh respectful of everyone's time, you know. So, we don't want to waste anybody's time and we want to know exactly what we're doing. I do want to stress this though. While it may not seem the case uh with the ordinances and the different things that we have passed already, the our regulations on this as a municipality uh having a data center that I've read in several different places that we're the mo the most stringent uh heavily regulated policy maker uh for this in the country which I thought you know that's a yet again St. and Angelo made the made the list [laughter] depending on how you want to look at it. But u we we are I believe on the right track and and thankfully it's not something that we're going to break ground on tomorrow. We get to figure this out and we get to do it right, >> you know, and together. Exactly. Uh one thing another thing that we did and this was based on conversations that we had with Galilee when putting these this thing together. We emergent or whoever it is can only build two buildings per year and we start it you start with one build it to completion and then you start the second one you know if nothing else we learn what happened in Abalene you know they whatever Abene did don't do that you know is kind of the the mentality um but by doing that putting

[1:08:08] these two buildings in a year that mitigates that influx of workers ers and a lot of them probably would come from Abalene or from other areas because there is just based on the activity. Uh but then we're talking about a 100 maybe 200 workers instead of 5,000 that are descending upon that. So we're off to a a really good start I believe on having these parameters. Um and I think that that's going to work in our favor and all. Uh again, like what Karen was just saying on the task force, you know, I was brand new, so was Patrick and Joe, uh on how that task force went and what you adopt, what you don't and stuff, but that seemed to be a really good framework and I've heard it from a lot of different people both opposed to and for that. So what that would be a good a good way to do it. But I agree too with Karen that having you do need some stakeholders. You do need not just citizen groups or just you know run the just any any citizen that wants to dedicate their time but having some that have that knowledge because a lot of the questions that we're gonna that people would have can't really be answered by me or somebody. it would need somebody from UCR or, you know, TCQ because there's just there's a lot of language and there's a lot of >> legal issues that you you need to have an expert there that can help keep that on track. So, I said I wasn't going to talk anymore. [laughter] >> Shane, we we've got a >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Eric. Shane, we've got a lot of mileage to cover this morning with this. I just want to say thanks for bringing all this forward. This is a non- action item. Correct, Brandon. >> Correct. We're we're really just looking for direction [clears throat] this morning from you. Yes, we have. We have. We've heard a lot. And I think there I think there are things that we can look

[1:10:10] at within this where um you're looking at set trigger numbers that that would create a certain action whether that's working with you know CBCAA or other organizations uh that actually do help and work with these people directly on a regular basis. I think I think there can be some monitoring some some of those type things that we can look at that that can really bring meaningful information to the city and help direct either policy andor uh if ordinance changes or ordinance corrections or additions are needed. We can we can look at all of those and bring those to you. >> I would say it's it's a good idea. Look at those things that have been successful. Those things that have not, let's leave those off the table, but bring that back as soon as you can. Thanks, Shane. >> Yeah. Thank you. And one public comment from Jamal Schumpert. Um Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. Um just listening to y'all's conversation, it seems like half y'all think it's going to be a negative idea, half y'all think it's going to be positive. Uh there will be negative and positive from both. Uh the the the biggest thing I want you guys to look at is the is probably how to how can we win? That's how it should be set up. That that's what the theme of that committee should be. How how can our community win and at what cost so that we can measure both of those. Uh one of the the biggest benefits to this technology era is that nobody's figured it out because they're not trying. and they're just trying to get to the next phase to pull the money from it. Like data centers, it's just the beginning phase of quantum computing. Uh so why don't we get ahead of these guys and own the intelligence behind it? Because that's the way you make money in technology. It's not real estate like what you guys are used to. It's it's technology. Um, believe it or not, they're gonna be selling your real

[1:12:13] estate, virtual real estate to you 10, 20 years from now when people on virtual reality worlds and meta and all these different universes. I mean meta, I mean uh technology, >> keep on the topic of the committee here. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, it's it's it's quite a different transition of how we will live versus how y'all lived. Uh, I'm I'm from the millennial generation. It's just a lot of changes we saw happening like the internet. So that that community impact should also focus on how can we set up our educational infrastructure to benefit from the technology because not only is it chip designers and makers, it's it's people finding all types of rare minerals and critical minerals. And we will be having a what is that? a uh I forget what it's called, a recycling a solar panel recycling facility coming in. They might have some of those critical minerals we might actually need. So, let's kind of get all of it together. I see a lot of different pieces here and they they kind of don't fit with each other, but certain things could put bring your glue to gladder so your economic clusters match better and give you more of a benefit. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jamal. That's all. >> All right. No more public comment on that one. >> No. >> All right. We'll move on to item B at 9:45. Consider accepting a grant awarded by the Natural Resource Conservation Service under the Emergency Wershed Protection Program in the amount of $755,56.25 25 with a $228,219 local match sourced from the storm water storm water fund balance and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Patrick Frederick, you're on. >> All right. Good morning, mayor and council. Um, happy to be before you this morning to let you guys know that we have finally wrapped up um the other side of the NRCS's

[1:14:17] grant program due to the July 4th flooding. If you'll remember um right after the flood, NRCS stepped up and and I presented to you guys that we had two options through that through that entity. One, the buyout where we were buying out personal private property um to alleviate that risk of additional damage from flooding and the other side is what we call the EWP armoring side. So that protects our public infrastructure um through funds and a program through the NRCS. So um this item is for the EWP armoring. Uh there was some additional leg work that needed to be done. NRCS went and we toured all several different sites around town. They validated that they would be eligible for this program. Then they got their team together, put together the actual project, the cost, the design and everything to provide that armoring and they provided us a budget for that. So that's why I'm coming to you today to get you to a accept the $755,000 grant that they want to offer us to protect eight locations around St. Angelo as well as to get you guys to authorize us to use a little over $228,000 of our storm water fund balance to provide the 25% matching that we're required to as part of the program. Uh like I said, it's going to be eight areas around town. Basically, what it's going to be doing is it's going to be taking areas that are prone to high erosion or have high erosion and they're going to be remediating those and armoring them so we don't have the issues in the past. I don't know how many of you drive down along 19th Street, but the bridge underneath 19th Street at the river, that's the one of the projects that I'm super excited about. It's been on our concern for a little while. We just never knew how we were going to tackle this. So, this is one of those instances where procrastination worked for us. um you know, it worked in our favor and now we have a solution for that. So, that's going to be a little over a $600,000 repair on that on that particular area and it's going to protect that bridge structure from further erosion and further damage. We've patched it over time, but this

[1:16:19] one's going to actually protect it and fix it. So, those are the type of projects that this is going to be happening or going to be covering. So, if you would be gracious enough to allow me to accept that $755,000 and use $228,000 of my fund balance, we'll get started on this project. Patrick, I just want to say we have been pushing for this to be expedited and it's kind of new territory for the federal portion of that. We were actually the maiden voyage, which is what took it so long, and it's it's a shame that it took over a year to get here, but we understand everybody's going to have headwinds with that. I I know people that are affected by this and will get payouts from this and I appreciate it finally getting here to the front. And with that, I'll open it up to the dice if anybody has any questions. >> Tommy, >> you you mentioned eight areas, Patrick. >> Yes. >> Are you comfortable with and I'll say confident in their analysis that there are no more areas that we should be concerned about? There are other areas um that again we we presented the whole picture, you know, several different areas. We toured every site and they took the ones that were most eligible within what the confines that they could work within. And so we narrowed it down. We worked with them closely to generate that list of our that made sure that our top priorities were being met as well as meeting their criteria that they needed for us. So the answer to your question is yes. I'm very comfortable in eight areas and getting those taken. >> Okay. You you said something key there just when when when when you said that uh they made that evaluation and you had prioritization in place so that you could see 1 2 3 4. So >> right several of these have been on our list for several years. The outfall right here across um that's you know imminent to fall in. That's going to be another one that we're going to be taking care of. So y'all are aware of all of these Brentwood Park outfall um several of those that again needed to be done. We just needed to figure out a way. This is the way to get it done. >> Pay for it. Yeah. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Hey, [clears throat] Patrick. Um, so these are just for these uh this is not

[1:18:22] for the people's personal properties that we're >> This is not for the buyout. No, sir. This is only for the armoring side of it. >> Gotcha. Thank you. >> With that, I'll look for a motion. >> I'll move approval. >> I've got a first from Tommy Heert, a second from Harry Thomas. Any public comment on this m item? With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Item B passes 70. We'll move to item C. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Patrick. Nice job. >> Presentation from specialized public finance incorporated regarding the proposed plan of finance for the city of St. Angelo, Texas notes tax notes series 2026 and direct specialized public finance incorporated to proceed with such plan of finance. Presentation made by finance director Jonathan Flores and Specialized Public Finance Incorporated managing director Paul Jazzen. >> Good morning, Mayor, Council, Mr. Venuela. We are bringing before you something we talked about at the budget planning workshop as well as something I think we've worked the last couple years at uh finance director Jonathan Flores and then also we have Paul Jansen with uh SPFI with us as well if you have any questions. Um, so just to go over the program itself, um, we are requesting to issue a tax note for $4 million. What that will do is it'll free up about $2 million a year in our general fund revenue for equipment replacement. Um, this will free us up to use that $2 million towards uh other needs uh that we have during the budget cycle. I do want to make a note that this the plan that we are proposing will not increase the tax rate. We wanted to make sure we worked within our current approved tax rate. Uh so we don't see an increase there. Um so the plan the tenative plan is uh July 25th we will get assessed values. Once we get those assessed property values we'll come up with the debt rate and what our actual capacity will be. From there, um, the B placement will be made and then we will be bringing the actual award, the bid results to you at the August 18th council meeting for your

[1:20:25] approval. Um, like I said, this was a program we brought up to you guys during budget planning workshop and so we just need direction today to move forward with that plan. And so I'll take any questions or comments y'all may have on the debt issuance. Jonathan, I think this frees you up, gives you a little bit more outside [clears throat] lead to play and help gets things financed when things are going to get very tight. I know we have some agenda items coming in the next two or three uh months that are going to be very difficult, very straining, and I think this opens the handcuffs a little bit. So, you can I say have some options how to deal with that. With that, I'll look for any questions from the DAS. No questions. I'll look for a motion. Got a first from Harry Thomas. >> Second. >> Second for Tommy Heert. Any public comment on this item, Heather? >> Jamal Schobert. >> All right, Jamal, you're out. >> Really? All right. >> Thank you, Jamal. With that, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Item C passes 70. There there is a note of a role reversal. Uh Paul has the hair. Jonathan does not. Uh so I just want to want to make note of that. >> Make note the mayor did not say that. The mayor did [clears throat] not say that. >> Uhhuh. >> All right. Jonathan. Thank you, sir. >> Yes, sir. >> Item passes 70. >> Item D, consider a resolution approving the 2027 through 2031 capital improvement plan for the city of St. Angelo. Presentation again made by finance director Jonathan Flores. So, this is the final step in our capital improvement plan for this fiscal year. Um, we brought this before you uh last council meeting as just a public hearing. Uh, in between that time, we've received citizen comment as well. Uh, that should have been emailed out to you guys on Friday. Um, we got a lot of comment this time, a lot of good input. Um, nothing is changing with the plan currently right now. We believe uh what

[1:22:27] we've currently have planned is is a satisfactory plan for the next year. Of course, this this is an annual process, so we will uh be evaluating these projects um over the coming next year as well. Uh and then if we have anything that we need to add to the plan or any adjustments that need to be made, of course, we can always bring that back to you guys for amendment. If there's any questions on the plan itself or any other projects. >> Jonathan, have you got a total of the capital of the CIP? Uh yes sir. So let me see. I actually had slides for this. The total projects that we have in the CIP is 129 projects totaling $1.1 billion. Uh of that number, we currently have 236 active, 105 planned for a total of $341,000 of projects that are active or we currently plan on or we have funding set aside for them or funding planned for them as well. >> Million dollars. A million dollars. >> A million dollars. >> So, say it one. >> We We have >> Say it one more time. >> We have 129 total projects for a total of $1.1 billion. Um and then active projects of $236 million, planned projects of 105 million. And so those two categories there um are categories of projects that we have either started or funding set aside for them or an idea of funding. The rest of those proposed projects are projects that we would have to go out and find grant funds for or issue debt or come up with some financing mechanism for those projects. >> Well, and there's a lot of really cool projects that are in the proposed projects that would really make San Angelo um some key features to have, but I think Okay, Jonathan, pop test. What's our annual property tax revenue? >> That's a good question. >> Just historically, Tina, you might be able to help on this one. >> I left my blue book in the back. We're not going to hold you to that, but >> 50 million >> 50 million. >> Yeah. >> It's about 50 million, >> right? So any what we look at is if you

[1:24:29] just took just an active product, you know, we're almost 1/5if of what we need there, which is annual property tax revenue. >> All right, with that with there if there's any further questions, Karen, >> I would just like to ask Jonathan to quickly explain why we keep this list and how it impacts our ability to go out and request grant funding. Yeah, absolutely. So, this list serves three purposes. It serves a purpose for staff, city staff. They see this as as authorization for them to go out and uh uh complete these projects, figure out funding for these projects, um design for these projects. It also helps us with actually planning out funding in future years. That's the second um uh piece of the plan. And the third piece of the plan, I believe it's a good communication tool with the public, being able to show them, hey, look, this is what we're working towards. this is what we're working on. Um, and so this is super important just from a fiscal sustainability having making sure we have a good roadmap on our infrastructure and the projects we want to do and then being really communicative with the public. >> Any further questions? >> One quick comment and I think it's already been alluded to. We will never get to $1.1 billion in St. Angelo to cover all these capital improvement ideas. We've got to pick and choose as we go through that. So, anytime we have the opportunity to have increased property tax or sales tax that helps us do some of these things that the citizens have asked us to do and put on this particular plan. Is that correct, Jonathan? >> Yes, sir. Yeah. One of one of the other things on top of that is having projects in this plan also allows us to apply for grant funding. Um it shows that it's it's in our plan. It's a part of something we were already going to do. So we need grant funds for some of these projects. So a lot of those proposed projects really can be aided by grant funding as well. Just to add on to what you mentioned. >> Thank you. >> Uh Jonathan, real quick and and I've learned a lot by sitting on council um

[1:26:34] especially with a lot of this taxes. How much of our property tax that we we charge people do we actually get? What percentage do we get it all or does the state take part of it? >> So we no we we get um we levy a certain amount of the property tax. Now in any given year we collect about 98% of that property tax but all of that does come to us. >> It does all come to us. >> Yeah. Of the amount that we levy. >> Okay. I just know the state sometimes takes part of our tax revenue that that >> people see, oh well, our taxes are high, but yet we don't get all that money. The state takes part of that. >> Yeah. There there's a portion of sales tax, the 6.25 that the state does keep. >> Okay. >> Um >> which which kind of hinders us on what we can do even though we're >> have sales tax. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Thank you, >> Karen. I noticed you added a link on the city website encouraging citizen engagement and feedback. Do you have data for us on what kind of what level of response you received? >> Yeah. >> And how that looked? >> Yeah, we got we got a lot of response this year. Um a a lot of it was u repeat stuff that we see from year to year. U people want investment in parks, people want investment in water supply. Um we did get a lot of comments about data centers. Um there's not really anything in the CIP that addresses data centers. Um so th those comments really didn't have too much of an impact on the plan itself because there's just nothing in there. But really it's it goes back to uh parks, infrastructure, and public safety is kind of what we saw. And we believe our CP aligns with that as well. >> Mayor, it Karen, it seemed to me when when I looked through there that there was a lot of comment on streets and drainage. Those two things seem jumped out at me when I look through those >> perennial favorites. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We we see those from year year to year. Yeah. Any additional comments? If

[1:28:37] not, I'll look for a motion. >> So move. >> I have a first from Harry. >> Second >> and a second. I'll give this one to Karen. >> Any public comment on this item? >> Jamal Shimpert. Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. I just like to add my my wish list to it. I wanted y'all to add a orchard on there. Uh I'm I'm just really playing, Tom. I mean, uh mayor. Sorry about that. [laughter] But um actually, this this looked a lot better than last year or the year before. I like this capital improvement plan a lot better. Thank you guys. >> Thank you, Jamal. Is that it? All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? No opposed. Item D passes 70. We'll move to item E. Consider resolution amending the schedule of fees and charges for the addition, removal, and update of language for the following sections. Animal control services, building and construction, building related fees, parks and recreation plan. Planning related fees, fire and rescue service, fire safety inspection, health and sanitation, cemetery, facility use, airport presentation made by finance director Jonathan Flores. >> Morning again. I think this is this is for sure a record for me. Three items in a row. Um we so every single year we do our a free review. Normally we only do a section of our fees uh fee schedule. This year I during our budget planning work session we kind of got the direction that hey we really want to look at fees this year. We want to make sure we're covering the cost of service. And so this is the first step of that. Um we had departments look through their entire fee schedule, all their fees and kind of let us know what needed to change as far as what what they weren't charging, what they needed to uh start charging and also the cost of service. So, the the first two items we're going to be looking at today, these are fees that aren't being used or no longer being used and fees that we need to add

[1:30:40] to the fee schedule. We'll bring the cost of service piece of that during the budget cycle. We want to make sure to get these pieces um approved and and up and running so that we can uh make sure everything else is in place for the budget cycle. So, these are the list of the fees. We've listed these out separately um in the agenda caption as well, so we can vote on them individually. I'll go through these fees and then I'll let you guys decide how you guys want to vote on them afterwards. The first set of fees here is for animal control fees. Um we are removing items for heartworm uh fleas and ticks, uh spay and neuter and a trap deposit. Uh these are all fees that we uh don't provide. These are services we don't provide. And in the case of spay and neuter, it's built into the adoption fee. So there's not a need for a separate fee. And because we're not really charging these out, there is no financial impact uh in removing these fees off the list. Building and construction fees. Um we have a couple items that we're going to pull off and and really a lot of these changes on this building construction is helping us simplify the fee schedule. Uh we are uh asking the to remove the building permit fee section of change of occupancy for minor alterations and major alterations. We're asking to uh change some wording on the electrical uh section. There was a section that should have said uh this item is for no increase and this item is for an increase in service. And so we're correcting wording of verbage change there. And then on the other side, we are adding a couple fees or several fees for building and construction fees. The first one here is for non-digital submitt. Uh this is for when applicants come in and they don't use the digital process. There's a um a fee uh fee proposed to add to those submissions of 134,000. Um right now we've got proposed uh 700 of those fees in the next cycle. So that would add up to 62,000 of the

[1:32:43] financial impact of adding this fee. Um these next three fees are additional permit fees that we're requesting to be added. a gas permit, a safety inspection permit, and a third party permit, solar fee. Uh these fees, we don't have good volumes or good financial impact information. We know these are permits that we need to start charging for, but we don't have a good idea of how many permits we're going to be charging throughout the year. So, I don't have a good um financial impact on these fees. Uh just the non non-digital submittal of 62,000 uh added to the budget effectively. The next proposal that we have is >> Can we So, hold on a minute, John. Can we discuss these as we move forward when we get to each individual item? >> Absolutely. >> Can you go back a slide, please? >> Yes, sir. >> Uh, one more. I go back to the non-digital. If somebody comes in and wants to build something and let's just say English is a second language for them and they can't communicate. I look at this sometimes as a as a penalty. I mean sometimes people aren't going to be able to use a computer. I just want you to understand that and I think that's something there that's a concern to me. I just want to bring that up here as we move forward. Sometimes that concerns me because I have sitting there myself waiting to get a permit and have seen somebody come in that couldn't speak English and left there probably not knowing any more than what they did. I hate to charge them $134 for that, but I get it. So, if there's anything um there, that's just going to be my ramble for the day, but I I look at that one and I sometimes struggle with that. Anyway, please go ahead. The next fee that we had up to discuss was the removal of alarm permit fees, a revoked alarm users permit fee, and a false alarm. Um, these are really just cleaning up the language in the fee

[1:34:45] schedule. We charge these fees already for false alarms. Um, this this is just kind of pulling out that language to simplify it. uh already. The next is uh removal of existing fees for park facilities, fees for sports tournaments and leagues. Um we're removing flag football, youth league early registration uh and softball resale. Both these fees aren't utilized u very often, especially when it comes to the softballs. I think the request is that people bring kind of softballs themselves. That way we don't um people aren't buying softballs from us. So it'd be better if they brought their own softballs and we don't charge this fee out. Kind of get ourselves out of the business of that. Um additional park facility fees. Um these are rental fees for Santa Fe. Um this would get rid of um some of the individual rooms that we're not using. If if you want to rent out the Santa Fe, there's still an option to rent out Santa Fe building, but we're kind of cleaning up the the amount of fees that we we're charging as well as cleaning up the deposits on them as well. Again, there's no financial impact on these items that we're removing because we haven't charged them out. We haven't used these fees. We have the same setup for station 618. These are fees that we're not charging out currently. This next one is uh we are removing a miscellaneous events fee for summer camp weekly holding fee. I believe this is we have we have a list of individuals that we don't we don't want to have to make you pay just to add your name to a list of whether or not you're going to make it to the summer camp or whether we're going to have openings for the summer camp. Two fees that we are proposing to add is

[1:36:50] a gym tournament fee and a a practice fee for the 29th Sports Street Complex. So the gym tournament fee would be for tournaments mainly that we put on ourselves. This would be uh entry into uh those tournaments. It gives us the ability to charge for um one-off tournaments that we do on weekends as well as it gives us the ability to charge those for if somebody wants to put on a tournament as well over the weekend at one of our gyms. And then the 29th Street Sports Complex, of course, this um was just recently renovated, recently fixed up, and so we're adding a fee to the schedule in order to charge out for practices. >> Is that by the hour or just >> I think it's I think it's just the day. >> I'm pretty sure it's just the day. >> That's fine. Let's just go on. This next one is an addition um miscellaneous planning fees. Lot a lot unity agreement. I think planning had identified this is um a fee that they really need to be charging out. There's some work that specifically comes with these lot unity agreements that isn't currently captured inside our current fee schedule. And so they wanted to include this fee at $300. Um we don't have a good estimate of how many of these we're going to have. So, we don't have a current financial impact. This just gives us the ability to recoup the cost whenever these issues come up. Fire and ambulance and fire and rescue fees. Um, this is cleaning up some language. We currently charge um an additional amount for responding to outside of the city limits uh emergencies. Um, we had multiple fees built into our fee schedule that addressed this. Um, and so we're just taking out these fees and updating that current verbiage and fee at the very bottom, the non-resident charge $100. That captures all the fees that we need or all the additional costs

[1:38:54] to responding to something outside the city limits. And then we're removing fire and safety inspection fee for LP gas storage for $50. This is just the fee that we never charged out, never used, cleaning up the fee schedule. And then this is also for uh another fee that we never used, transfer to septic tank contents. Um we don't have a current process to charge this fee. The application fee was $50 um each additional vehicle. Um to my knowledge, we've never charged this fee out since I've been here. So, we're just kind of removing that from the fee schedule as well. And then the removal of ex of uh private sewage facility license fees, residential, commercial, and reinspection. We don't use these fees as well. Pull and spa permit section. Um we don't issue these fees these permits um individually to pools and spas. So, we're removing uh the whole entire uh pool and spa permit section from the fee schedule. Cemetery section um or for the cemetery fees, we are removing some fees for burial for the concrete vault fees. We don't use this fee. We have concrete boxes that we charge out. Uh and then marker fees, veterans marker setting fee. We are proposing to add some fees here for the cemetery. Um, we wanted to give uh, citizens the ability to um, have some flexibilities on the fees that we charge. Sometimes we only need to set out chairs for a certain ceremony, certain event. So, we're making that fee available to citizens at $250, an installation fee and flagging fee, uh, giving just additional functionality to citizens if they need to need these services. Um both all three of these fees together in addition add up to about $10,000 of

[1:40:58] additional revenue or projected additional revenue or the cemetery. And then we got a pretty good long list of uh fees that we're removing first off for Fort Koncho uh facility fees uh regional calvary uh competition registration baseball demonstration and demonstration with artillery demo. my understanding, we don't really use these uh too often for these demonstrations. And then as well as civic events for out at the El Paso, there were some individual fees if you wanted to rent the facility out for camper space, electrical hookup, um rental convention, rental ticketed events, which we don't really use. Um, so we're taking those individual items out of the um, PO rentals and basically saying, "Hey, you get all of these services whenever you rent the PO. We're not going to add on these charges for additional functionality out out at El Po." Um, same thing for farmers market. We're taking out some rental convention, rental ticketed events and just offering one rate for the farmers market. M Mc Mes Convention Center. Uh we're removing um different fees, different options at the convention center and we're offering kind of just one rate for the convention center and giving the ability for the civic events manager to kind of negotiate those rates as needed. Um simplifying our fee schedule as well. some additional MCNES Convention Center fees, fees for the River Stage, a rental convention rate that we don't use, other rental fees for nonprofits, multiple date users, uh nonprofits and multiple date users per ticket numbers, and some extras, removing removing the section as these items are set by the civic events board. um as well as the ability to

[1:43:00] negotiate some of these other rates uh through the civic man uh civic events manager. And then finally, the last fee that we're uh bringing to you guys today is an airport fee. This is overnight air carrier aircraft parking fee. This would be if um a carrier aircraft was parked overnight at the airport, we charge them $12 a night. So on that one, since somebody said airport, >> sorry, um there's certain ramp spots that are governed by skyline, certain ramp ramp parts that are governed by ranger and certain people, businesses have certain ramp positions. So does this happen everybody regardless? >> Yeah, >> here comes Fletcher. >> Yeah, Justin should be able to help us. helping you get your steps in. >> Uh this fee is levied only to the commercial air carrier, American Airlines. Uh so as that aircraft is parked at the gate overnight, it's it's taking up ramp space, it's also taking up uh that gate space. So it's common, this is a common fee that airports levy across the country. So for aircraft that are in remain overnight, >> can we charge them a thousand for those that don't make it or for the overnight? Right. Okay, thank you Justin. Thanks for the clarification on 12. >> Any questions or comments on any of the fees? >> Clear that one. >> Yeah, a lot a lot of a lot of um administrative changes. >> Okay. So, we're going to open up. So, what I see here, we're removing a lot. >> Removing a lot a lot of a lot that we didn't use. We're cleaning up a lot of language is really what it comes down to. >> Okay. So with inside and I'll go to the assistant city managers and Daniel too. Will this make things easier in dealing with us >> when general public comes to deal with the city? Does this clear up a lot of questions? AB: >> Absolutely. That's the primary goal of

[1:45:03] why we're bringing this is the make our fee schedule a little bit more readable, a little bit more intuitive, and then help out our um departments as well as charging out these fees, making sure they're charging out appropriate fees. >> Gotcha. And y'all agree with that? Should we find where we made an error of this, can something be brought back? >> Absolutely. Yeah. And and the plan again is to bring some of these fees back to you during the budget cycle to bring them up to cost of service. And I'm sure we'll probably even have some other adjustments as well that we probably could make. And these are always approved. These changes are always approved through resolution. >> All right. Awesome. With that up to the dice. Any questions this side? Patrick. Um, [clears throat] so I know we've talked about bringing up the cost of service. So is are we going backwards on some of these and are we going to have to turn around and at budget cycle say actually we need to charge this now to make up for this? >> No sir. We we verified that these fees aren't being charged, they won't be charged um and that by bringing ourselves up to cost of service and during the budget cycle, we won't need these fees um anyways. we'll be able to cover what we need to cover um as far as what it costs for us to actually provide these services. >> So, are most of them covered in another way that we're not seeing on here? Like the ones you remove, it's because we're already getting it somewhere else. >> Absolutely. Yes, sir. >> Okay. Um on the going back to the non-digital part um and oh fairness are still around the that was that's a significant change uh with what we'll be getting from that um is that easily done by firsttime permit applicants are they able to understand our system >> thank you Patrick for that question uh Erin Fenoy director of planning development services. So, that's a good question. Um, we feel like we're going to have a little grace. Uh, particularly if it's a homeowner that's coming to pull a permit and they're this is the only time they're probably going to pull

[1:47:05] a permit for a carport. We need to make that process simple and assist them uh and help them through that digital process. This is for our contractors that have been routine contractors that have pulled permits and they just hand us this stack and say, "Okay, well you guys, y'all be the applicant now being the staff." And so we get the comments back and then we have to process those comments back to them. They're not participating in the process. That's our goal with this. And so I think we need to set a policy of how we would use that. We just needed to establish a fee that we actually have a fee that we can charge for the non-digital. Um, and I agree with the mayor's comments about English as a second language. We do have some interpreters within our department. Uh, but we want to make sure that we're helping people, not penalizing people to get through the permit process. >> Perfect. >> Sounds great. >> I'll just add one thing to that. on on our website. Um, thanks to Brian Groves's group, we have a software where any PDF on our website, it can actually immediately translate to other languages and it's a ton of languages. Um, and it happens in just a click. So, that is available. >> Perfect. No, and I think you alluded to it. Basically, the homeowners that just come for the one time, if we can when y'all word that, try to help them out. >> Be cognizant of them. I mean, it could be very foreign to them just not knowing the software side of it. And so, that's where we have staff to assist with those folks. But contractors that do this that have digital plans ready to turn in, we we want them to go through the digital process. It's more efficient. They get results faster and uh it gets them their permit quicker. >> Thank you, Aaron. on the park and recreck fee. Can you allude to what the 29th Street practice area is over there? Like is that the fields or is that just the green space behind it? >> I believe it's the fields themselves. Um you may hear from that department. There is most most [clears throat] of the fields

[1:49:11] out there are practice fields except for one field. It's all the practice areas and there'll be signs out there that designate which fields there are. So, it's just for the practice fields. >> Okay. And then you you may want to stay. I got a couple other questions on those. On the youth early registration, are we just charging them a normal fee instead of the early fee? Like do we are we taking away a cheaper fee? >> Yes, you will answer that. >> Okay. Yes, we we don't do the early registration um in particular because of that fee for individual registrations doesn't cover the cost of participating in in the league. So, it's not conducive to have that fee in there. >> So, we lose money by charging early registration fee, >> right? Do we need to look at flipping that on its head and have the early registration fee be the exact cost and that way we actually would recruit more um in effective penalize people for waiting till the last second? But we actually >> we could yeah we could do that of having basically what we charge now be the early bird and then you know uh having like our late our ontime fee be a little bit higher and then a late fee. That is something we could do but if we did do an early fee it would have to go up from the 65. >> Gotcha. Okay, that makes sense on that. Um, >> and I do want to make a note on that. We can't charge fees above our cost of service. >> Perfect. >> So, it'd be better just to have one fee that recovers that cost. >> That works. That makes sense. Uh, and as far as cleaning up fees, I mean, I'm all for that. Um, I just want to make sure we're getting the cost of service. Um, and then on I know you had someone on there that I don't see on on my background, the um, station 618, all that. Why are we not uh charging some of those rental rates? Are we not allowing the room to be rented? Are we Sorry, Jesse. Yes. So, clarity on this section. These are deposits. We do charge the deposits, but what we're going to do is include

[1:51:14] this in our fees going forward. So, instead of having a deposit fee that you get back, it's going to be a cleaning fee that's going to be part of your total fee that you pay up. Uh part of that is because we do end up just cleaning it anyways. Uh so we're just getting more of the cost back that we are spending on personnel and supplies being out there. Also with our civic rec system, it has a hard time with refunding uh things that are paid too far in advance, especially paid by card. And we want to eliminate options of having to make people a vendor and dealing out checks if we can avoid it. >> Think that's all I've got. That's so yeah. So, like I say, we only see one side of this and it's what we're moving. I wanted to make sure it was covered in other areas. So, that's perfect. And then the fact that I want to make sure they're rented out as much as we can if we've got that building there. So, thank you. That's all I've got. >> With no additional questions, I'll look for a motion. >> So, move. >> Have a first from Harry. >> Second. >> Have a second from Joseph. Is there any public comment on this item, Heather? >> With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All in favor of item E say I. I. Any opposed? >> Item E passes 70. Now let's move to item F. First reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2025 and ending September 30th, 2026 for health insurance claims presentation made by Finance Director Jonathan Flores. >> So I I think what we'd like to request is um for us to table this amendment. We've had some additional information come through that we'd like to factor in when we make this amendment and bring this back to you guys at at a single time. We'd also like our um health benefits consultant to also come and kind of give us an update on the fund and kind of where it's at and why this amendment is kind of necessary. >> And we alluded to that earlier that this is one that needs a lot more explanation >> and definition of why it is what it is. So I I agree with that. So, at this point, I'll make a motion the table. >> Second >> and have a second from Karen Hessie

[1:53:16] Smith. Any public comment, Heather. >> Sorry, >> Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. I just I just wanted to be sure and hope that uh our former employees that are retired are included because over the last two years they they've been coming to ask. Uh, I don't think that's appropriate for them to have to at all, but I would like to thank y'all if y'all cover this for them. I I really would appreciate it. Thank you. >> Oh, duly noted. Thanks, Jamal. >> All those in favor of passing or tableing this item, say I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Item F is tabled. 70. We'll go to item G. Consider accepting the following grants and assistance with the comprehensive plan. Number one, tax increment investment zone supported 50,000 equally split between the north and south zones. And number two, development corporation supported 50,000 for the economic development policies of the comprehensive plan and ratifying Kosa DC's approval of the same as a project pursuant to chapters 501 and 505 of the Texas Development Corporation Act. Presentation made by Finance Director Jonathan Flores and Planning [snorts] and Development Services Director Aaron Benoy. Good morning, mayor. I know I do not look like Jonathan Flores. He decided he had enough and uh took an exit to the right. Um this item is to uh ask the city council to accept those two funding sources to help fund our comprehensive plan. The first one is from the TEI recommendation from the TEI board to equally split 25,000 out of the north and the south. And the recommendation from Kosa DC board is to spend $50,000 as a project that will support specifically the economic development policy uh part of our comprehensive plan. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions from you guys. >> I think this one's pretty cut and dry. Aaron, do we have any questions from the DAS?

[1:55:18] >> With that, I'll look for a motion. >> So move. >> I have a first from Tommy Heert and a second from Harry Thomas. Is there any public comment, Heather? >> No. With no public comment, we'll look for a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Item passes 70. We'll move into item H. Consider awarding RFQPL-126 comprehensive plan to update Olsen, Inc. in an amount not to exceed 900,000 with 100,000 sourced from TEI and KOA DC funds and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Presentation made by planning and services director Aaron Venoy. Thank you again, mayor, city council. This item is to move forward with our comprehensive plan. This is to uh allow our city manager to execute the contract with Olsen Incorporated. Um and we're very excited about this. Even some of the discussion that we've had today about other things and and what's happening with our community. The comprehensive plan takes all of those plans together and tries to get the the entire city organization city organization and the community be pulling in the same direction on the same types of projects so that we're not just kind of doing a shotgun approach and doing other things uh that may be contr contrary to the vision that is set up through our comprehensive plan. So we talked about the CIP plan earlier in an earlier agenda item. This brings that together under that umbrella. It brings those infrastructure things together under that umbrella, the master thoroughare plan, the parks plans, all of those things together to get the community to unite, to get the council, this council and future councils to say, "This is our plan and we want to stick with it and move it forward." So, we're very excited about this. Um, it's been 23 years since we've had a comprehensive plan, and it's time for us to do that, to work with our community. Um, we've got a number of committees that are going to be set up to listen to our community, uh, from our stakeholders, from uh, what we also call as a community think tank that will be coming out and representing different areas of

[1:57:21] our community. We're going to have a youth uh, committee that's going to help us look at that because this plan is going to be put on them to keep us moving forward. They are the future of St. Angelo and so we want them to be a part of that and have some input of what's going on. So we're very excited about that. We know we have a technical committee that's going to be what are the nuts and bolts? What is the financing behind all of these things that we have to get done for the infrastructure side for police and safety? How do we address housing in our community when we have things? What are our economic de development policies and who we target for economic development? All of those things will be in this comprehensive plan. So I'm very excited about that. This is just the agenda item to allow our uh city manager to ex to uh negotiate and execute that contract. I do have uh Mr. Brennan Kaine uh here from Olsen. Uh if you have any follow-up questions for him or I mayor. >> Well, [snorts] number one, this is long overdue. I mean, we have looked at and this kind of sets the pace, the structure and the outline and the map that the city will follow. As you can tell, the last one kind of laid out a a rough guidance for 20some years. We think it needs to be dialed a lot tighter than this. I remember having this discussion over the past two years. And with that, I'm going to kick it over to Mr. Heert to give a little bit of a back history. And I know you and Karen both, but I think it's important you share your idea and your vision about what this may do for the city moving forward. >> Karen, I'm going to let you go first. >> Ladies first. Karen, >> it's not fair. I might just get up and dance with pompoms. I I I [laughter] just think >> it's it's long overdue. >> Uh it is it's time that we had a contemporary map that addresses where we are right now and where we're headed for the future. We're very excited to welcome Olsen to help guide us through the the process. I love your idea of the youth committee and the and even the titling of the community think tank. I think it's awesome. So, nothing is more important than having a map to where you're going. Uh so, for us, this is huge and I hope we get a great deal of

[1:59:25] community involvement. Is that it? >> Well said, Mr. Heber. >> It will sound trit. And many folks might not totally grasp this. This is one of those items in city government that has the potential to be transformational, long-term transformational. Um, Brennan, we look to you and your team to help us get into further into the 21st century. Um, I had the opportunity to visit at length last year at TML with some of U Brennan's folks and with Brennan one evening. Um, as well as other folks that were interested in this. Um, Olsen rose to the top through the process. Um, as Karen said, this is the road map. this is going to lead us into the future. Um it it it's one of those things that I hope we have as much if not a whole lot more public engagement on this than we do on most things because this is what does the community want for the next 5 years, 10 years. And I hope we update this much more frequently than we have in the past. Um the Karen and I have been working on this very quietly for the last two to two and a half years and here it is uh coming forward. It it makes me sad in just a small way. I'm not going to be here to see this come into being. Um I'm I'm term limited. Harry and I are um and I will not be able to vote on the ultimate and final plan which is just how things go. But I am truly excited about this and excited to be able to be on the front end of this. Um I I hope everybody else is excited as I am, but I'm sure they're

[2:01:27] probably not. Thanks, Mayor. Well, it's well said from experienced that have looked at what this does and it's hard you should do research and see how these shape what happens for the city. But with that, Daniel, I'm going to throw it to you make a comment because I know you have talked a lot about the need for this and I want to hear your words too. >> I you know to be honest with you, I think if anything um Tommy always does a great job uh as far as when he start talking about the comprehensive plan and he's right. My goodness, we've been hearing it for for the longest time. Karen, you as well. And I know that as far as moving forward as a city, as you transition with a new city manager, the focus will be on where is it we want to be and what is it we want to accomplish. There's a lot, especially from planning uh that'll be tackled and addressed uh in this comprehensive plan that'll make the city a whole lot better. And quite frankly, I'm very proud that this has finally moved forward. And I'm very happy that it'll come to to fruition. And again, I won't be here either, but uh I'll be I'll be keeping track. You might see me a few times up there on the on the tide, [laughter] but uh again, I'm pretty excited about this as well. But um again, it's going to take a lot of uh leg work to make this thing happen and put this thing together, but we have a wonderful staff. We have an outstanding staff that can make this happen and and a great council as well. So, thank you, mayor, for for that opportunity. >> Absolutely. I need them. Any further questions from the D or comments? Tom, I I this was presented to us at planning and and it is a very good thing that we need to do. Um it has overdone uh or long overdue and and honestly till I got on planning I didn't realize there was that roadmap to where we're going, where we've been, where we're and things like that. So I I'm excited about it too to be able to be a part of it and and see it. Um um there my grandma my great-grandmother came over in a covered wagon. My grandparents bought lots in Lake View before it was a

[2:03:30] part of the city. So the the city has changed over the years and it will continue to do that and that's why we have to have this for that change as we go forward. Harry. >> Well, I won't be quite as elicated as my previous two council people, but I will say this. We can go any place in this comm community, but if you don't have a plan, you don't know which direction you're going to go in. Uh they talk about a road map. Well, this certainly will be a road map, and I'll be interested to see uh what Olsen brings back to the city because I won't be here either. Uh Tommy and I have done this for a long period of time. Uh and it'll be time for our successors to come in and and do what they need to do. But anyway, thank you. You know, 23 years is a long time uh move this city forward without a comprehensive plan. So uh again, I hope the new councils will continue to look at this on a regular basis. Thank you. Any additional comments? Well, now I'll look for a motion. >> I have a first from Karen >> and I have a second appropriately from Tommy Heert. >> Any public comment, Heather? >> With that, we'll look for a vote on a spending a million dollars on this. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? >> Item passes 70. Item I, consider an appeal of a planning commission's action on April 20th, 2026 to deny application CU26-03, a short-term rental located at 404 South Monroe. Presentation made by Planning and Development Services Director Aaron Venoy. Aaron, you're on. >> Thank you, Mayor. This is an a appeal of a denial for short-term rental via conditional use. The planning commission did deny this conditional use um at their April meeting. This is in the Santaita neighborhood, District 5, Miss

[2:05:32] Karen Hessie Smith. The vision plan is neighborhood. And again, the property right here is 404 South Monroe Street. We did send out uh our original mailing of 19 notices before the planning commission. And this is the map that came back after the planning commission. You can see there were a number of folks that were opposed and one just slightly outside of the the notification area over here. So uh that was what influenced our uh planning commissioners to deny unanimously this request for conditional use. The applicants have come forward and appealed that decision and they have actually been able to visit with some or maybe all of this all of the neighbors in that area. And I believe you have some of the comments there in front of you that I laid a couple of those in there. You can see the first one is is still opposed. Um but then you have three other neighbors that are um within that 200 foot that have now said that they are in favor. There's three of those there that were in written form. We received another one this morning um at at our uh city um uh building from three 322 South Monroe. Uh so also in this area so there is some support for this um in the area now. not as many as opposed as once were, but I would still say it's closer to 50/50. Now, I know that they did have uh some discussion with some neighbors. So, again, this is in RS1 district. They have to have that conditional use process. The conditional use process is discretionary. Um this is got a neighborhood feel or their neighborhood vision plan for this property. This is the property here. Um, they have a main house here and then garage and parking. And then they actually here with not on this photograph. And I may go back to the overhead that's a little cleaner right here. You can see right here is a back apartment um uh structure, if you will. Um, and that that comes into play because you have

[2:07:34] two really living areas, if you will. These were built way before our zoning ordinance. It said you couldn't have that in RS1. So, they're they're legal non-conforming. Um but that that comes down to some of the conditions that we are proposing for this time and you may have seen even um in some of those comments that they it should apply to the apartment and not the main house. And so I want to make sure you can visualize where that is. So from this street view picture that is actually right here just out of view. With that, the staff does recommend approval as they do meet all the criteria for distances from schools or from another short-term rental. Uh we have updated uh well, this was the conditions for um the planning commission. Again, they denied that with those conditions um 6 in April. We have moved forward with the recommendation to approve but the following conditions uh that we've added was again section 406 and our zoning ordinance that they would follow section 804 they would follow they would we would restrict through the conditional use that the STR is for the apartment dwelling unit only. We would then review for compliance within 6 months instead of a full year. Normally we give them one year before city staff goes and starts looking at issues unless we have some kind of complaint. We would look for that. Um, and if they are successful in not having any any compliance issues, they would still go forward to the regular June 1st renewal date. Um, if not, we would bring that status back to planning commission for potential revocation of the conditional use. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. And I'm not sure if we had anybody sign up today for public comment, but there may be some. >> So, let's tee this one up first. Uh Heather, just out of curiosity, is there any public comment signed up on this? All right. So, we have hit one of those hot topics that originally with all the opposition, but

[2:09:36] you've come back and have some that are not in opposition. I think you've done enough research on it from what I've seen as you're going to identify what structurally can be an STR and what cannot. Um certainly realize that this uh area of town is sensitive to STRs and what can be done and what can be abused on it. Karen, I'm going to let you float on this one first if you would like and um ask some questions, then look for us to come back and help you out. >> Uh thank you, mayor. I am actually very pleased to report that the neighborhood I believe has resolved this concern, the original concern in an exemplary fashion. And let me describe. So, the applicants who are here with us today with the world's best baby who has not made a sound for hours um h took part in multiple neighborhood meetings that included most of the red star opponents, if not all. and they they tolerated they were patient with some pretty intense questioning and demands for restrictions and uh expectations shall we say. So they may be intending to speak today but I am satisfied I am also their neighbor. I am just outside the zone. Uh, and I think the six-month review is appropriate and we would like we this group would like to give them the chance to keep their word to us which we have accepted. >> Additional comments from the DIS. >> Are are they okay? Is that their original intent is just the apartment in the back? >> Yes, >> I think that is their original intent and this just specifies that more completely. So that's in the conditional use as a condition. Okay. >> So if we if we did have to do some

[2:11:39] enforcement action, we'd have that ability in writing that, hey, they said they were doing this and not this. >> Yeah. I I just wanted to make sure that I STRs are one of those touchy subjects everybody gets all in up in arms. I saw a lot on planning. >> Sure. >> Um yet it has more safeguards against it than just a regular long-term rental. >> And I I commend the the neighborhood and the applicants on working together. That's really how they that's really how it should work. They shouldn't have to engage the local government to resolve those types of issues. They did that. They went through the right process. So, I'm very proud of our citizens and proud of Karen Hessie Smith for helping give some guidance to those folks to say, "Here, let's work this out. Let's find the right way." So, I'm very proud of our community. >> We saw a lot of the opposite of that [clears throat] and planning. So, very, very good. Very good. Yes, >> I'd like to speak to Joe directly and tell you that um in fact I think the issue that arose at planning evolved from a misunderstanding of our ordinance by the applicants >> and so it clarifies for us that we maybe need to take a look at that in the future. >> All right. So throw an audible out here to legal on first readings. I have no saw you roll your eyes there, Heather. But anyway, [laughter] on first readings, I have no problem with public comment being before we take motions. All right. So, do you mind if we listen to public comment before we take a motion here? >> All right. So, do we have any public comment on this, Heather? >> Uh, yes. The applicant, Joseph Stall, >> is he bound by the three minutes? You'll have five minutes. >> You got five, Joseph. Doesn't mean you have to use them, but you have five. >> All right. No, I'll make it quick. Um, good morning, mayor, may members of city council. Uh, my name is Joseph Stall, and I am a active military member, a husband, and a father to an awesome six-month-old. Uh, my family recently bought our very first home right here in

[2:13:41] San Angelo in the historic uh, Sanorita neighborhood. Uh, I am here to appeal the the initial denial of my short-term rental permit for the secondary remodel two-bedroom dwelling on our lot. Um, like Karen was saying, when my when our initial request was denied, um, I chose to listen uh rather than go on the defense. Um, just coming from a neighborhood background, you know, we're neighborhood oriented people and so [clears throat] I chose to go to my neighbors and, you know, just gather their concerns because they are val valid. Um, they love their neighborhood. They love Sanorita and they want and all they want to do is protect it. I do, too. Uh, we are living in the main house and my son is uh going to grow up in this neighborhood for the foreseeable future. Um, so over the last few weeks, I've gone door todoor and been able to sit down uh with neighbors to hear the concerns face to face and find a way to integrate this property safely into into our community. And through those conversations, we identified four core areas of concern. And I have explicitly updated our future property management plan and house rules to solve them. all include uh safety and security, neighborhood character and tenant vetting, uh noise control, and parking and trash were the main ones. And I have the uh management plan as well as the future house rules in case anyone wanted to see it, I can present those. Um, there was also a large understandable fear regarding property values and deferred maintenance to remain viable and competitive um for high-end professional traveling tenants which we intend to seek out primarily from Shannon and Goodfellow. Uh, a short-term rental must be kept in immaculate basically immaculate condition. Um, because I am on site every single day, the second dwelling will receive the cleaning and

[2:15:43] maintenance it needs multiple times a week. Uh, it will never suffer from the deferred maintenance or neglect that can sometimes happen with absent out of town landlords. Um, and this overall will enhance the curb appeal and property values for the entire block. Uh, members of council and fellow neighbors, I'm not a faceless LLC or an out ofstate corporate investor trying to commercialize a residential zone. I am simply just your neighbor. I'm not asking to reszone this property. I'm asking for a permit to work within the existing framework under strict owner occupied supervision. I've given my personal information to my neighbors. My message to them and to you today is that my door is always open. If a future concern arises, I am right next door to fix it in five minutes. My goal is not to change the dynamic of this beautiful family oriented community, but to prove that through hard work, active management, open communication, we can make this request support the uh this request to support the flourishing future of Sanorita. Uh I respectfully ask the council to grant this appeal and allow us to move forward with this neighborhood stewardship plan. Thank you all for your time. Thank you to the planning commissioning commission for putting up with me over the last couple months and I am open to any questions anyone may have. >> Number one, thanks for coming forward and giving that statement. Um I think what we ask in the protection of neighborhoods, we people just do the right thing. Common sense decisions do the right thing. Resolve any conflicts that you have and move forward. And with that and from what I've heard, if anybody else has here, number one, thank you for your service. And then number two, if anybody has any questions up here, please feel free to ask Mr. Stall. Any further questions? >> Motion to approve. >> With that, we have a first from Karen. >> And I have a second from Tommy Heert. Is there any additional public comment? Heather? >> No. >> With that, all those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? Passes 70. Nice job. You bet. Okay, let's roll over to item J. First

[2:17:52] reading of public hearing ordinance for RO26-03, a request to abandon a total of 328 acres along several portions of street rightway around Central High School beginning at 655 KO. Aaron, you're on. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um this is a project that's coming forward from uh SAISD as they work towards their bond projects there on the central campus. They are looking at some areas around the campus that they are uh of course looking to put perimeter fencing as well as some building setbacks and they're asking to abandon some of the right of way uh along some of those street frontages. Um so this is in the central neighborhood. It is in district 5, Miss Karen Hessie Smith. It is a vision plan of neighborhood and campus. And you'll see the the total and I'll get a different map in here that kind of shows you. So it's just a about a third of an acre that we're totally abandoning throughout different ride ofways. Um so here's a little bit better indication uh along Mosquite over here that kind of separates their campus as well as coming down Hickory, San Antonio, and Cottonwood. I'll take that red line off for just a moment. Those are areas on either side of the road. You can see the red line. That's where they're going to abandon approximately 5 foot of right of way uh on some of it on either side there on the hickory. Uh but some of it on just one side. In years past, the city has actually abandoned that entire road there that that is actually under the um ownership, if you will, of U. SISD. This is kind of step one for their project. they may come back and request some additional abandonment if it makes sense for those properties. Uh I think the city has been looking at that to see if that makes sense for them as well as their third-party utility providers in those areas and emergency access. Uh so we did send out our required notifications. We did not receive any in support or any opposed. Again, this is a little bit more detailed map. You can

[2:19:54] see the the red lines on there uh where that abandonment uh of that rideway will be. This did go through our standard review process with our internal departments um engineering services taking the lead on that to look at any city-owned utilities in there and it did go to our external partners uh those third party utility providers and as to date nobody has made any issues with any utilities in that area and is open to abandonment. Again, a couple of little closer uh shots right in there showing that right ofway where it will move a little bit closer to the curb um along that hickory area. So, the analysis again, it's unused. Uh it will help the school and campus. Um we're not really planning to widen those streets in those areas. Uh it's not going to negatively affect the traffic patterns because they're going to keep some of the traffic ways open. even if we abandon roads in the future, they may still keep those as internal drives. So, with that, staff recommendation is uh to approve the proposed uh abandonment. Um they go through this the [snorts] three-step process to get that and then they come back and they replat it into their property so they actually have full ownership of those abandoned pieces. This did go to planning commission and did they did recommend approval with a 6-0 vote. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. >> I'll open it up to DAS. Any questions, Tommy? >> Public safety comment on any of this. >> They did look at this through the standard review process. They still have access to where they need to be. Uh even looking at the some of the proposed buildings, how that access is going to set up and so they were they were satisfied uh that they have access. >> Thank you. Any other questions? No further questions. We'll look for a motion. >> So moved. >> I have a first from Joe Cell. I have a second from Karen Hessie Smith. Any public comment on this item? >> With none, we'll look for a vote. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Item J passes 70. Item K, first reading and public hearing of an

[2:21:59] ordinance for RO26-04, a request to abandon to abandon 7449 square feet of street and alley rightway around the 200 block of West Fifth. Aaron, you're on. >> Thank you again, mayor. This is really a cleanup item for this property owner. They're going through and cleaning up a lot of the property that they own where there's a bunch of old rightway that was established through plats through the early um 1900s and the late 1800s in the northern part of our downtown. Uh this is in the downtown area. District 3, Mr. Harry Thomas. The vision plan is downtown and you can see it's just uh.171 acres and it's a request to abandon uh there's a portion of an old alleyway right here and this is a portion where a building has been built over in the ride ofway and they're trying to get clean title on that to do some some development work in that area. And so that's what's coming forward with this one. We did mail out 19 notices. We had two in support, none in opposition. There's here's the image of the old plat. You can see that the alleyway is right there. And you can see this piece right here um uh is where that structure is over the top of not not being used as rightway at this time. Uh there are not utilities there. Now you kind of see this arc that comes through here. That's the railroad that comes through there. And that's really kind of what railroads you have to get special permission to put your utilities under and through and around. So there's really not anything there that's um that we need to worry about. It did go through our standard uh process for our internal folks as well as our external utility providers and they've all said this is acceptable to abandon this these pieces of the right away. So with that uh this did go to planning commission um in May. They did recommend 60 for approval. City staff does also recommend approval with the standard three conditions. With that I'll be happy to answer any questions. So, I have a question. I'm going to throw Brandon up here on this one. Why do we have to see this? I mean, when something is so much common sense and it's going back to the 1800s, why does this even

[2:24:01] have to come to us? Why can't it just roll through council and be done? >> And I don't say that because I don't want to see it. I'm just saying things like this are very common sense. And then we're delaying people anywhere from weeks to a month to getting this taken care of. >> Well, it it's still abandoning city rightways. So, I mean, anytime we have any real estate transactions, I mean, city council has to >> hear that. >> I was just hoping for a way to shorten it, but anyway, with that, I have any questions? >> All those in uh is there any public comment, Heather? >> With no public comment, all those in favor say I. >> Item. All those in favor say I. >> We don't have a motion, do we? >> Oh, skip the motion. All right. I need a motion. [laughter] I was really moving in front. New person. >> I got a first from Patrick. Second >> and I have a second from Joe. Thank y'all. [laughter] No public comment. >> All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any of those opposed say nay. Item passes 70. >> All right. First reading of public hearing of an ordinance for Z26-05. a request for a zone change from the two family residential zoning district to the low-rise multif family zoning district for 095 acres of property located at 411 West Avenue H. Aaron. >> Thank you, mayor. This is a reasonzoning request for a piece of property that's between Coenheim and Abe on Avenue H. It is 41. That's looks like a four, right? 411 West Avenue H. Uh it is a property that's.19 acres. Uh it is currently zoned RS2 and they would like to go to the low-rise multif family RM1. Their plan is to actually put back a duplex structure, but they would like to have it available for the short-term rental process uh or to be short-term rental by right. This is district 5 Miss Karen Hy Smith and it is just barely in the Santaita neighborhood which stops right there on Coenheim. So here is the future land use which is neighborhood center which is that mix uh that we have that we have some

[2:26:04] businesses you can see the apartment complex right there uh on the frontage of uh particularly on Abe um on both sides there are some businesses over there and of course on the opposite side of Coenheim there's some uh established building uh businesses on that side there are still some single family houses in the area uh so it is a mix currently it is zoned RS2 too. So, they could have a duplex by right now. Uh, this structure is no longer there. It actually uh had a fire and has been burned down and so a developer is purchased the lot and ready to build another duplex back on there. Uh, but would like to have the option with the RM1 to have the short-term rental ability. We did send out 17 notices. Uh, we did not receive any in support and any of in opposition. Again, that image, you can kind of see how we have that mix that we have some single family homes in there. We have apartment complex, we have businesses and things like that. This is the lot there in question. Again, you can see the apartment complex at the back. Uh it is a larger lot than a normal single familyiz lot. Uh it is long. It's 50 ft wide, but it's um um 180t long, I believe it is. Um and so it does meet the standards for a duplex uh for that property. With that, staff did recommend approval uh to reszone uh from the RS22 family residential to the low-rise multif family residential at the 411 West Avenue H. This did go before planning commission and they did recommend approval with a 60-0 vote also in May. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Again, whose district is this? Is this in? Karen Karen Hessie Smith. It's mine. And I'm just going to make a comment primarily for our Olsen person in the back that I think this is a funky use for this particular the characteristics of this particular piece of property. Uh, no one's objected. Planning

[2:28:07] commission is in favor. Uh, I wouldn't want to stay there or live there, but I guess it's not up to me. I think putting some a residential use or a rental use in between two probably the two busiest streets in the city is odd. >> It does have a lot of connectivity. Um it's close >> the positive side. >> It's close to downtown and is close to the cultural district. Um I you know particularly if it works for maybe folks that work at Shannon or one of our financial institutions, maybe an ASU professor. um that might work for them. But I think this is an area that through our comprehensive plan, we may look at and say, is there a a uh corridor plan that should come into this area and address some of those strange uses that are mixed together? >> And and clearly whatever whatever use ultimately lands in that space will be exiting, entering and exiting on Avenue H, not from Bryant. >> Correct. >> Correct. That is correct. Okay. >> Any additional questions on the dice? >> I do. >> Okay, Patrick. >> Um, if it was a duplex, could they both go through the CU process to be STRS or could only one of them be? >> That's a great question. Now, a conditional use is for the property. And so, if you have a duplex, that implies that both sides would be available for the short-term rental. Um, because it the conditional use is usually for the property. So just like the appeal we talked about, they actually had two living spaces. So that was the concern of that neighborhood is that you could have both. Now you could put a condition at some point if they go through a conditional use process. You could only use one side or the other. But when they're on the same property, the separation distance is really from property to property, not from structure to structure, if that makes sense. And then as an um multif family, how many units could be on it

[2:30:10] going that direction? That's a that's a good question. Um since they applied under the the old rules, the RM1 uh L, if you will, um they would be able to do probably two duplexes, so four structures total based on the lot size. Um that's not their intent uh at this time. Can you go back to your um kind of overlay of all the different um that one right there? Uh that is such such quite a mix there. Um if it was not would office commercial allow like a uh I mean basically a hotel what what could a hotel go in where they could have STR as well if it was a commercial radio? Well, if they were in a a true commercial zone, this office commercial would not allow a hotel. >> Um, that's more of like your business offices like a tax office. Um, like I know Daybreak is over there that that's really an office for their operations. Um, some of these uh we do have other STRs through this corridor uh that are in the middle of here, but office commercial really is a a small office space um few customers at a time. It's not really like a hotel space. That would be more of your general commercial, your central business district. Um that you'd be looking for the hotel size. Um even this low-rise multif family, I don't exactly know how many units are there. Um they could have an short-term rentals if they chose to. They they currently don't that we're aware of. uh they do all long-term rentals there and they really want this as being long-term rental, but they also know that there are times that they may need it for short-term rentals, too. >> Do you have an opinion? >> I I think this is a a very mixeduse area and to provide mixeduse housing is good. We need more housing closer to our downtown and cultural district to allow

[2:32:14] people to access those areas more frequently. Um, this is a high transit area. Um, and I think that gives good connectivity throughout our town. And so I think this is a a good zoning for here. Uh, I think this is an area that's been in transition for 25 years or more and slowly transitioning as our community does into more heavier uses. >> Thank you. >> Any additional questions? With that, we'll look for a motion. >> I'll make the motion to approve as presented. First Karen, a second from >> Harry. Any public comment? >> No public comment. We'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Item passes 70. Item M, first reading and public hearing an ordinance Z26-06, a request for a zone change from the two family residential general commercial and general commercial heavy commercial zoning districts to the low-rise multif family zoning district for 78 acres of property located at 309 through 333 West 8th. Aaron, >> thank you, mayor. Uh, this again is a reasonzoning uh coming to you from the planning commission. You can see these properties uh lined up right there on 8th Street. They back up to Seventh Street, which is an an access frontage road for Houston Hart. So, this is just north of downtown. This is Bryant Boulevard just to the left. You've seen these vacant properties for years. Uh you've also seen uh that there's a structure there that uh probably has been uh at times on a dangerous building or aborted building list. Uh but they have purchased all of these lots uh together and so they're going to be proposing a demolition of that uh to move it forward. This is in the Black Shear neighborhood and it is district number four. for Mr. Patrick Keley. And you can see the multitude of zonings. When we get to the map, you'll see those and you're like, "How did we get those zonings?" And I'd like to say, "I have no idea." So, um, you can see over here the vision plan is neighborhood center. Um, something that, uh, will allow folks to come into the neighborhood. Again, with the Carver School, uh, being across

[2:34:17] the street, uh, what is it that's going to work, uh, for these these properties? So, here on the right side is our zoning. You can see the RS2 zoning in there. You see one lot is covered with that. You got four lots that are with uh general commercial and then you've got one lot back here that's got the general commercial heavy commercial. And so getting this unification through this block right here will make a big important um change in this in this landscape [snorts] of this this street. I'm going to go back to this image. One thing I did didn't mention, but uh 8th Street is a dead end. It does not connect to Bryant. We do not want it to connect to Bryant through this process. There's nothing that will make it connect to Bryant. So, their access is back to Martin Luther King. Whether they come back to the loop that way or they go up Martin Luther King uh somewhere else. Again, we mailed out our 12 notices. We did get zero in support, zero in opposition. This is just an image of the site. Again, they've been scraped off uh very vacant land uh ready for redevelopment. This did go to planning commission in May. Uh we did not have anybody come forward to to talk about this uh specifically u against it. Uh I think this is an area that people are looking for more housing in this area. It does fall within the north tiers district or tur district. Um and so they may come forward for a request for funding. One of the reasons why they are are requesting the RM zoning in this area. their intent is duplexes but to uh have them as uh long-term renters uh in those as opposed to short-term renters but in our policies we do not give funding to RS districts and so they're coming forward with the RM request um so they are requesting that zoning staff is recommending approval and again planning commission did recommend approval um in May uh with a 6-0 vote with that I'll be happy to answer any

[2:36:20] questions I think that'll be a pretty noisy spot, but anyway, um, long story short, it would it would be great to have something there. Patrick, it's in your district. Take the lead. >> Um, while the tears would go for those, it would also go for commercial buildings, right? If somebody wanted to put commercials. >> Yes. And we've had folks that have come through with commercial project ideas and it just doesn't work. Uh, the lots are small. they're smaller than a normal size lot. Um he might be reconfiguring some of the lots and and limiting how many uh duplexes he has, but for a commercial venture, there's while it's right by a highway, you think you've got great access, it is hard to get back there if you're a commways along that access road. You'll only get driveways off of 8th Street. And so for commercial, it is very difficult for that to to work. It's just a very challenging thing. When when Houston Hart came through and said, "Okay, this is where we're going to put it." It it made those lots smaller and that block smaller. >> And 8th Street will never connect to Bryant. >> That would not be in in the the best interest of uh traffic safety. Uh basically, everybody that's looked at that intersection has said that's there's a reason why they didn't connect it back then when they made all this expansion. We also have a a number of drainage items that go that way. It drains down this way and under trying to get back to the Concho River and having that that street connection really does not benefit anybody in the long run. >> Well, speak of that drainage, will that hurt these homes? Will they have to build it up quite a bit to >> They will evaluate that when they come in with the foundations. It is not in a flood plane at all right now. Um they have looked at this one uh since they're going to be demoing it. They may come in and bring some fill and compact it and do some compaction test. Uh but it just depends on how he does his layout. >> And then on the 12 notices were not half of them just to their own property,

[2:38:23] their own self. >> Well, as you can see it, this is just one of those interesting anomalies that a lot of this is all just public rightway. Doesn't really hit properties. Then you have the school district and then you have a few of those and these. And so yeah, it it doesn't hit a lot and it hits a lot of their own properties. You are correct. >> I mean it it was a school in two properties it looks like to me. Right. Well, three I guess one >> vacant. About four total and those may be under one ownership. I'm not sure. I'd have to look back at the list. >> Uh I mean my personal opinion is I hate it for homes. That seems um if we want commercial development to grow, you're taking that away. But with 8 Street not connecting uh and the small lots, I don't know that the commercial would ever develop there. Um, now I've also not seen them readily for sale for commercial development. Now, most of those go in and try to find properties for themselves. Um, we've had that issue with some other ones. How do you know how long those lights are off hand, north, south? >> I want to say they're 85 ft deep. >> They're not very deep. I know they're 50 feet wide, but I think they're 85 feet deep. I'd have to look again just to be sure, but and then of course you have this kind of odd shaped one down here that's even even smaller. >> Generally, I would say no, but for that specific area, that may be the best thing to actually get it developed and be used. Um, so I'll leave it to some other people to ask some questions. That's my thoughts. >> Any additional questions? I It puts us on It puts us on a tax roll. All right. And gets us a little bit more and go with that. Patrick, I'll look for a motion from you. >> I have a question. Okay, question Karen. >> Can we ask for landscaping along Houston Heart? >> When we get to the site plan, we'll be able to do that because this was in a zoning district that would potentially allow that. Depends on how they bring forward with the structures. We don't have a landscaping ordinance that requires it for certain things, but if it's multif family and depending on how they structure the lots, if that comes forward with a a TEI funding request,

[2:40:25] that is something the TI's funding can help uh support. And so we would uh encourage that. We know that all these those the these images are a little old. Text dot has put a sidewalk through there. Uh and so sidewalk does connect those folks um through some different areas and even back to the north um uh going back to a more commercial commercial corridor. So we we would look at that very heavily on the on a tiers request for sure. >> We will trust you to encourage that on the t the tourist pathway. Uh it would help residents with noise remediation >> because anytime you can get some kind of buffering uh through foliage through there that's going to be very helpful. >> Thank you. >> You good. >> Any additional questions? With that, I'll look for a motion. >> I will to approve. >> Second. >> I have a first from Patrick, a second from Joseph. Is there any public comment? Heather? >> With no public comment, all those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? Item N passes 70. Now we'll at 11:12 a.m. we'll move into close session. Executive session under the provision of government code title 5 open government ethics subtitle A open government chapter 551 open meetings sub chapter D. Exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under under the following sections. section A or A section 551071 consultation with attorney regarding Texas local government code chapter 380 and Texas tax code tax code chapter 312 and B section 551074 personal matters to deliberate the appointment employment and duties of the city manager with that 1113 we'll move into close session Let me find something to read here.

[4:41:32] All right, we'll come back from executive session close session at 1:12 PM. We're going to talk um follow up and administrative issues. Consider items discussed in executive session if needed. I do have one motion to talk about. Um I want to make a motion authorizing termination of the employment agreement with the city of with the city manager Daniel Valenuela without cause to be effective July 15, 2026. I'll need a second on that. >> Second. >> A second from Patrick. All those in favor say I. Any opposed? All right. With that, I also like to make a comment that Daniel's um final council meeting will be with us on July 7th. >> July 7th. Yes. >> July 7th. And then that we were also going to have a um retirement party for you July 10th in the East Mezzanine. >> Correct. >> So at least we have all those dates down. If anybody's watching, they can uh gather that off there. Hey, uh, mayor. Also, just so there's not a misunderstanding about what this means. >> Yes, sir. >> It just really means that, um, I've already announced my retirement and, uh, by charter, you can't have two city managers. And so, uh, I'm just very grateful to this council, to, uh, everyone that I've had an opportunity to work with for near 14 years now here in San Angelo. And, um, I just feel very blessed. And, uh, thank you'all all. Uh I'll I'll be more expressive uh probably at the next city council meeting, but I'm I'm very appreciative to all of y'all and God bless y'all. >> Well, we'll without rambling here going into the all of us uh getting real emotional. It has been an honor to have to be one of the few cities that I'm even aware of that's ever had a city manager for 14 years. >> Okay. That speaks a lot about working being able to mend bridges, work with communities all the way through. So, number one, we really appreciate that, Daniel, very much. >> Thank you, ma'am. Um, announcements and considerations of future agenda items. The July 21st meeting will be at 6 PM in the evening as proposed.

[4:43:38] Does everybody have that one down? July 21st at 6 p.m. With that, there were no action items taken in uh Are you all good? >> July 21st night meeting. >> Night meeting 6 p.m. >> July. >> Yeah. July. July 21st. It's the second one. >> I'm gonna get to I'm gonna miss that. >> Yeah, [laughter] >> I know. It's a It's It's a heartbreaker there. >> I know. >> You You You know what? You can watch it on TV if you feel like that's going to be a big issue. >> Well, that there were no other action items taking executive session. Uh any other announcements for future agenda items? Can I get an update on Kirby Park or where we stand? Will y'all make an Give us an update on Kirby Park? um >> in council or >> uh you know I'd like to see that one on council. So I just give a quick quick update on that one. Um I'm trying to think of anything else that we would have lay down. Anybody on this side of the dice over here with all that I'll look for a motion to close the meeting. >> Second. >> I have a first from Tommy Heert and a second from Harry Thomas. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Let's close ex let's close 116.

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=LFs8Dvvdkws