San Angelo City Council 3-4-14

[0:00:01] all right on the left wing right wing ready it is 9:03 and it's time to call this meeting to order so we're going to start with our prayer Terry hux will be directing us an invocation this morning you're own sir sir shall we pray dear father God we just thank you for this day this glorious day that you have made for us father we just thank you for your many blessings father we just pray during this time in our country that you'll be with our leaders father I just pray that you put a hedge of protection around our men and women of our armed services father and just watch over them Father we just pray that you'll be watching over this meeting today Father we pray that our local leaders and our leaders throughout this country father in their decisions that they allow you to influence their decisions and their thoughts father because in all things you do father it is perfect father we just thank you for the blessings again we pray for rain father we just pray that you'll be with each and every person in this meeting this morning and bless their families we pray that we give in all things we do we give you the glory in your precious name we pray amen amen thank you you're wel and to help us in our Pledge of Allegiance this morning we have the Trinity some children from the Trinity Luther church and Connor Shin a third grader will be the one that leads us in our pledge and after the pledge we're going to let these kids introduce themselves so that we can honor each and every one of them Connor you ready sir there's your microphone there's the American and there's the Tex I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for

[0:02:05] all honor the Texas flag I plge aliance to the Texas one State under God one and indivisible thank you Conor excellent job each one of y'all come by and introduce yourself and tell what grade you're answer people will know do you are we've already had this is Conor Shen he's a third grader just follow around please you who's next step up I'm Anthony and I and I am in second grade I am Oakley and I'm in fifth grade I'm VI I'm Victor and I in third grade I'm Alex H gazabo and I'm in fifth grade I'm es white I'm in seventh grade I'm Isabella elazab and I'm in third grade I'm Paige Harris and I'm in sixth grade I'm Shane wied and I'm in fifth grade I'm Savannah rosani and I'm in sixth grade I'm kin and I'm in third grade hi I'm Jo K and I am in second grade we thank these kids let's get a picture let me get behind you ran get a picture of please sir come all right one two three thank you very much we appreciate youall very much and these are the inter Scholastic League correct private school inter Scholastic team private school inter Scholastic team it's like U private

[0:04:11] thank you for bringing them absolutely Rodney come down here with me pleaser we have a very very special honor this morning and that we have the 28 State basketball girls Champs and we want to bring you up and honor you for the wonderful things that you have done and and introduce you and to help me Rodney fening come on up girls are you going to read off Proclamation you take care of I don't have a I don't have Proclamation that's all we've got and this is probably the most important item of business that we will tend to this morning first of all we just want to say how proud We Are of these girls I've never been so more more proud of a set of girls in my life um I love love watching them and it was awesome awesome game uh I know some of them are probably just now healing up with all the bruises especially Maddie and and S who was it oh yeah it was Satie were y'all guarding that number 44 well Bobby or Bobby you were gu guarding number 44 the whole time she was rough she she was very rough we're going to introduce the coaches first we have Tate Lumbard he's the head coach he T and then we're going to introduce the assistant coaches we have Chris slicky we have Michael hexon H huon Michael hon and his pager Miss Lombard Miss Lombard is the other coach for the team the girls if you'll just raise your hand as I introduce you uh we have Alexis Garcia we have stie breast Bobby chitty Ali durki Stella do Shelby roach Kelsey Walling Hannah Carr Maddie chitty Whitney Barnett I don't think Whitney's here Whitney's one of the managers Sloan brater she is here um Macy

[0:06:15] Gully Rachel key Maya El Maser elre El MRE I'm sorry I knew I was going to get it wrong I asked also I tried to get it right uh Sean yoast SE Sean Sean yos Carly Pettit and Emma Phillips we just want to recognize them today for the great accomplishment this is a huge deal for our girls and for this area to have a state championship it very rarely do we see a team U an organized team go all the way to the state and we we as the city of St Angelo want to thank you for doing such a great job and the one thing I want to say also that very impressive was there wasn't a a senior on the starting lineup so I expect these girls to be there next year also thank you [Applause] two it is an honor isn't it have a State basketball team right here in the Concho Valley very proud of these girls we now have a couple of proclamations one of them is for the national Lutheran School month and if y'all would come up again and I will read this then you you each one I'm going to make a speech okay for over 150 years Lutheran Schools provided

[0:08:20] Community states in the country with Christian leaders and business politics military Ministry education and other fields and National Lutheran Schools month is also an occasion for schools to interest cities citizens in volunteering their time and talents to local Lutheran schools and this year's theme is securing each child's future for a life of service and Lutheran schools have provided a quality Christian education program that has inspired students to serve others through Civic engagement and provided students with opportunities to serve while equipping them with the tools they need to fulfill their future roles as good citizens productive employees and compassionate leaders and in keeping with this year's theme locally we are joining with Trinity Lutheran School as they celebrate almost 60 years of service to our community and I proudly Dwayne Morrison the mayor of the city of Stan Angelo on behalf of the city council do do hereby Proclaim March 2014 as National Lutheran Schools month and encourage everyone to pay tribute to the dedication and service of Trinity Lutheran schools for their many years of commitment to the community of St Angelo if you'll make if you'll say a few words I'll sign this while you're talking very good thank you mayor and city council and we want to thank all of St Angelo for it's actually 63 years of uh service to the community and and educating and and teaching young children um this actually I was going to say a little bit more this actually is our private school inter Scholastic Association team uh made up of second through seventh graders uh we participate in uh this competition every year uh all of half of these students won ribbons Connor we picked him to be the uh the speaker the The Pledge leader because he won first place and second place in his competitions and he gets to go on uh and compete on a state level now at the uh the state psia meet along with Savannah rosani uh she also came in second place and so they get to go on and compete on a higher level and our goal at Trinity is always to take kids take children from where they are and take them where God wants them to be or needs them to be spiritually academically socially

[0:10:23] emotionally physically uh to provide as much as we can for them so we want to thank you guys for honoring Us in this way and the support you have had for Trinity Lutheran School over the past 63 years thank you thank you sir Brian needs a picture hold a that can you get us squeeze in thank you very much appreciate you our next Proclamation will be to a as in regards to severe weather week to be accepted by Steve Miles Steve are you here well I'll read it and then we'll see that Steve gets us later it's a and it says a proclamation whereas as anyone caught in a Texas downpour or cold front can tell you the weather and the Lone Star State can change in an instant these changes can be unpredictable and intense and severe weather can strike anywhere at any time and with little to no warning over the years storms have posed a significant threat to Texans lives and properties and as a result we must ever be ever Vigilant in the face of severe weather and while dangerous storms may strike at any time of the year the months of March April and May bring a greater potential for violent weather events including damaging thunderstorms hail storms straight line winds tornadoes and flooding and it is vital that all Texans be aware of the dangers they present and planning and preparation can greatly reduce loss of life and property with disastrous strike Texans should be familiar with the differences between severe weather watches and warning designate a safe place for family members to meet in case of evacuation develop a plan to communicate with relatives and friends and other areas and put together a preparedness kit of important supplies and most importantly Texans should heed warnings information and instructions provided by local officials and Emergency Management Personnel I Dwayne Morrison mayor of the city of St Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council to hereby proclaim the week

[0:12:25] of March 2 through 8 2014 as weather Awareness Week in St Angelo Texas and at this time I encourage all citizens to remain mindful of the dangers presented by severe storms stay informed of current conditions and take precautions to prevent loss of life and property together we can work toward a brighter future for our city and we're proud of Steve mild because he is our emergency manager now and he's doing a tremendous job sending out emails and alerts and warnings working with the county and working with the city and with the state to keep us aware of the problems that we do have I know this last I storm I got about a half a dozen emails from him and he started at 3: and 4:00 in the morning so he's doing a good job we appreciate him and we do need to be aware that this is a rough time of the year for our area and be aware for the storm of the bad weather and take all warnings and preparations thank you Steve next Proclamation is to the American Red Cross it's to be accepted by Joshua McDonald the interim director exe executive director and the volunteer service specialist and I see some people here from from Red Cross come on up and let's let me read this Proclamation and get it to you it says whereas March is American Red Cross month a special time to recognize and thank Our Heroes those who volunteer take life-saving courses or provide Financial donations to support an organization whose mission is to help those in need and we would like to remember those who help help us all here in s Angelo who give help to people in need any time of disaster or when someone needs life-saving blood or the comfort of a helping hand providing Round the Clock of report to members of the military veterans and their families and teach life- saving classes in CPR aquatic safety and first aid and across the country and around the world the American Red Cross responded to hurricanes tornadoes floods and Wildfire the tragedy at the Boston Marathon and typhoon hayen in the Philippines and when an injured service member ended up in a hospital far from home it was the American Red Cross that offered Comfort when a hospital patient needed blood it was the American Red Cross Blood donors

[0:14:28] that helped them when a lifeguard jumped in to save a drowning child or someone stepped up to help a heart attack victim the American Red Cross was there and we dedicate the month of March to all of those who support the American Red Cross mission to prevent and alleviate human suffering in the face of emergencies our community depends upon the American Red Cross and which relies on donations of time money and blood to fulfill its humanitarian Mission I therefore Dwayne Morrison mayor of the city s Angelo on behalf of the city council do hereby proclaim the month of March 24 as American Red Cross month and encourage all Americans to support this organization and its Noble humanitarian Bion who's going to speak have at it h I just want to thank everybody um on behalf of our 127 volunteers over in 11 County area and for all of our donors for recognizing the Red Cross during March getting week very much introduce yourselves up here everybody knows who you are I'm Doyle Carter I work at Angelo State I'm Terry hux from the general sales manager for K king and the con Val homepage I'm Joanna Alexander and I have the Alexander Resource Group we're all members of the board and these are all members of the American Red Cross board get a picture Brian oh that's not the one thank you very much thank you sir [Applause] good 29 29 okay where we having a few computer problems and so we're going to

[0:16:32] go ahead and take public comment and then after we take public comment I think we need to take a few minutes of break so that they can we can continue tell me when it's time to stop we will stop when the boss says stop but we're going to continue until uh you say number 29 has been pulled chief 29 29 we will be pulling item number 29 from the agenda at this time we will take public comment public comment is the time when the council takes uh public comment on any or all items on the regular agenda public input on the regular agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion public input on an item not on the agenda or on the consent agenda may be identified and requested for consideration by the council at this time the council May request an item to be placed on a future agenda or for a consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for public comment on public hearing items public input will received on each item immediately following the council discussion in prior to any action on the item each member of the public shall make the remarks from the podium and begin by stating their name remarks by each citizen will be limited to three5 minutes unless waved by a council member for all speaking on that matter no individual will be allowed ow to speak more than once on any subject until every citizen wishing to comment has done so so I will now open the floor up to anyone in the audience that wishes to speak to address the council either Pro or con good or bad this is your opportunity to come forward and say what you want if it is on a regular agenda we will wait until that item if you have a consent agenda item you won't moved then this is the time to come forward form a line you're first Turner good morning my name is Jim Turner and uh this week this is the first city

[0:18:36] council meeting we have one scheduled for Thursday and I think that's a wonderful thing we had great participation last time unfortunately I've been looking at the agenda for the special session that you're going to have on Thursday and it is listed as a workshop meeting with no public input uh during the work session agenda I think that's entirely against what the purpose of that meeting is for you're supposed to be connecting with the citizens and giving and getting input feedback and information and I think it's up to the council because this is a council rule this is not a state law state law does not recognize a workshop as any different than any other public meeting it is strictly city of San Angelo city council decision on how you conduct your meetings and whether or not you take public input and it's your choice but I think going by what the agenda States defeats the purpose to a very large degree of having an evening meeting thank you thank you Turner and Jim did bring this to my attention yesterday and we had have uh we can solve this problem now the agenda's already gone has gone out and it has to be out 72 hours before the meeting so it's two late to redo the agenda and take the workshop word out but the uh rules procedures gives us the opportunity it says Council May wave any rule in a particular circumstance where deemed appropriate by the majority of the council these rules procedure and public input will be effective immediately upon acceptance by the city council so we can't take the word Workshop out of our meeting on Thursday because it's a done deal and we're already pass the time but we can by consensus of the council allow public input and I wouldn't even

[0:20:39] personally I wouldn't even think about having a meeting without having public input because y'all are the reason we are here public input is very important so Thursday at our meeting the first thing I'm going to do is call for a consensus of this Council and if four people up here will say we're going to have public comment then we will have public comment and we have the illegal authority to do so so we're going to take care of it Jim there will I suspect there will be public input at that meeting do I have any other comments from the floor anybody else Want To Praise or criticize your city council this is your opportunity don't put ideas in there mayor oh yes sir I would like to invite Patrick Howard to come to the front please I'd like to introduce our new community development director Patrick already comes to us from San Antonio with wonderful experience in the in the area of planning and Community Development we're very fortunate to have him he also serves our country as a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve so welcome Patrick thank you [Applause] welcome this is your time for a speech oh okay well uh mayor members of city council and uh obviously uh uh citizens of uh San Antonio San Angelo I'm sorry I came from San Antonio so he is still practicing but but I am definitely all here um heart mind and soul and looking forward to serving the community with you all hand in hand thank you Patrick it's good to have you Patrick here it's yall okay no you all it's yall okay and we're looking we're we're looking for great things out the permit and planning too Char it and thank you for pitching back the curveball I pitched at you yesterday okay don't we Indo we indoctrinate them quickly when they come to S Angelo Daniel got the first meeting and now we've got him so we're glad to have you sir any other comments from Council charte yes um want

[0:22:44] to make an announcement first there will be a uh single member district 6 town hall meeting at the TL search Tuesday the 11th I had told you Wednesday it's Tuesday the 11th at 6:00 p.m. for folks in my resident uh Council District that have questions about uh various projects and growth that's going on out in my district so I wanted to make that announcement and thanks to the folks at TLC Pro for providing the meeting room and the other one is a statement I went to vote this morning I didn't get the vote this morning and uh it was quite upsetting so for those citizens out there who've had trouble voting uh I understand it isn't exclusive just to you um I had the same kind of trouble last year when I voted in the city elections because I was one of those that their Precinct and their voting location had changed so I went back to the same change to location and was advised that I had to go back to my old location which had already been to and they sent me to the new but they still didn't let me vote so I'm angry about that and hope to get to the bottom of it and have talked to Alicia and she is talking to the county clerk so uh just to those of you out there I appreciate your frustrations anything further from the council everything all right on the left wing anybody else on the right wing one one thing and this is announcement that I made last last meeting and I'm going to make it again this meeting and probably will continue we like to be out of here by 1:30 2:00 at the latest you agree with me Mr WLW uh how about 12:00 but we are shooting for 1:30 to 2:00 we've got a very long agenda this morning so what I am politely asking is that if you have something to address the counsil with if you say it in a

[0:24:47] paragraph don't write us a chapter so let's let's be let's let's be concise and precise and the things that we have to say because everyone most of us up here are old and we get sleepy about 13 2:00 so work with us on this please so we can hopefully be out here by 1:30 2:00 anything else need to be said then let's move on to our consent agenda does anyone care to pull anything from the consent Charlotte items 6 10 11 and 12 for discussion okay I've got four items out of consent number six 10 11 and 12 we will pull to the regular agenda for discussion anyone else care to pull anything from consent to regular for discussion if I then could have a motion to accept the consent agenda which will be items 1 through 18 with the exception of 6 10 11 and 12 I will accept a motion so move second do have a motion do have a second do I have any Council consideration discussion on this do I have any public comment on this motion to accept consent with the four exceptions not I will call for the vote all in favor please say I I any oppose Nay put 70 on that one please ma'am let's go on then to number six which is consideration of adopting a resolution approving the recertification of Galilee Community Development Corporation as a community housing development organization El receive affordable housing funds a building Housing Home fund short yes Mr Solace could you ex explain this one to us please please or give us some background sure um every year we need to certify what we call a community housing development organization those are nonprofit organizations that are basically their mission is to provide affordable housing in St Angelo there's only one that's a galile CDC habitat used to be one but they for some reason we we no longer participate with them um if we don't

[0:26:51] certify and we don't have a chto 15% of our home funds go back to HUD and we we like to keep the money here so that's what we want to certify oh I see I guess I had forgotten that motion to approve as presented second do I have a motion to approve further councel discussion do I have discussion from the floor if not I call for the vote all in favor please say I I any oppose Nay put a 70 on that one number 10 consideration of adopting a resolution authorizing the adoption of the lake nasworthy investment policy and investment strategy Charlotte I on 9 11 and 12 I know excuse me 9 and 11 10 and 11 yes ma'am I know about them I know what they are but I would like some public input and explanation for the viewing audience please ma'am okay so these are the investment policies that govern the city of St Angelo's Investments uh there's one for Lake nasworthy Trust Fund and there's one for the city's regular Investments um they are these policies are governed by the public funds investment act so most a lot of the information that is in the policies is governed by that act um and then some of it is just uh you know who's on it that kind of thing and there are two council members who serve on that committee and they've read these prior to today's meeting yes ma'am that would be yourself and Mr Rodney Fleming thank you any other questions um oh sorry I was just going to say this did go to the investment oversight committee last week and was approved you unanimously motion to approve as presented one question I had that just for the viewing public is that uh I get to ask this all the time especially about Lake residents is there any way that we can get a higher interest rate or higher return on on our money in the fund the lake nasworthy fund and this was explained very well to me and I if you could explain that it would be great I'll do my best to do um so the the funds are governed by the the pfia the public funds investment act so it's very

[0:28:52] difficult to get high rates of return um with our Lake nsw worthy trust we do get a little bit a better rat because we can invest it for longer periods of time um so with with that governing us we we have to look at safety liquidity and yield and so safety is our number one priority yeah it's not like an individual investing their 401k or something like that is totally different and the the longevity was one of the main things it has to go out long periods of time we have to lock in that's why the rate is lower that's the way it was explained to me right we we do have the opportunity to layer or latter those Investments or that amount of money the longer period of time but due to the low interest rates at this time a laded effect might provide a little bit more interest but the fee we have to pay a fee for each time we reinvest and that fee would eat up any difference in that laded effect so that's why they're not laded for those who have been asking questions thank you I know I know I've got a motion do I have a second second we do have a motion to Second any further Council discussion do I have any discussion from the audience not I will call for the vote all in favor of accepting this as it is presented please say I I any oppose nay and that was for 10 the motion was 10 and 11 I didn't read 11 so we just did 10 so we just do 11 now and it it should be quick okay put seven on that one please ma'am number 11 is consideration of adopting a resolution authorizing the adoption of city of St Angelo Texas in investment policy and investment strategy 2113 you want to make a motion to motion to approve as submitted second do you have a motion do have a second all in favor say I I any opposed put seven on that one number 12 consideration thank you Tina consideration of adopting a resolution authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an easement and rideway on behalf of the city as grandar with Bentwood Country Club LLC granting a 60-ft construction easement and a

[0:30:55] Perpetual 20ft non-exclusive easement in right of away for water distribution lines on land owned by the city of St Angelo and said easan of rideway being approximately 950 and I believe that's 90 is that correct 9 950 ft 950 ft in length and being located within abandoned railroad right away in Southwest St Angelo Charlotte Mr Dixon I'm going to ask that you remind me about this this was discussed a few years ago and we had to stop all proceedings until we got some um things straightened out as to exactly how much water that they would be moving right and and you're correct with that and I don't have that information with me but I can get it but this to me kind of solves that issue this is Bentwood is requesting this easement for this distribution line for some private water rights that they have acquired that they will be using that water instead of Lake nasworthy water and that's what this easement is is about that will take care of what they've been using out of the lake yes ma'am okay and I'm not going to go into any further detail unless the rest of the council wants me to that right okay I commend them for this action I really do I think we need to do and they're paying for the line bent is paying for the line yes ma'am motion to approve is presented second yes I I have a question Mr Dixon can can you tell us where that water is uh em emanating from on these water RS is that out of the river somewhere uh Mr Collins is here with representing Bentwood LLC and I'll let him address that if he would my name is Kevin Collins I'm from Bentwood Country Club uh what we did is we secured a NE negotiated a contract with the holshire family uh and we're going to be buying groundwater from

[0:32:58] their Wells their private Wells that they hold there will be no water coming out of the rivers it'll all be coming from their Wells and that well that well water will be transported across to our production lines and we'll be able to irrigate our entire Golf Course without using any City water or or water from the lake nesworthy can you tell us where these Wells are located yeah they're exactly well I I don't have the exact I think we do have the locations I think Ricky has the exact longitude and latitude but they are right across Callison Road um uh I don't I can tell you exactly where they are but the uh the holshire land sits right across cison Road we're going to come across cison road across the river and up the railroad easement okay do I have further comment from Council this is I I believe this is a great deal for the city so looking for second options and I wish more companies could you know try to find this so especially for the lake residents as the Lakes dropping every single week now we're trying to do everything we can to keep this river water where in the river so yes sir we're we're planning to start construction as soon as we get these in place do I have comment from the public on this if not I do have a motion I do have a second I'll call for the vote all in favor please say I I any oppos nay drop a 70 on that one please ma'am we're now to our regular agenda number f is the executive close session we'll get to that in a little while so let's go to uh section g public hearing and comment number 19 is a presentation and an update on the Rya feasibility study by the oper Upper Colorado River Authority presentation will be by operations director Chuck Brown Jacobs Engineering engineer Bert Weathersby and water utilities director Ricky Dixon you have the floor sir good morning we'll try to keep this brief but there's a lot of information to cover here on this update we do have the ucra Jacobs Engineering here to give you an up day kind of their their findings also have Jason Hill here

[0:35:02] with Lloyd golin kind of discuss very briefly the water right strategies that we are looking at and also have U Bob Brandis from Brandis Consulting here uh a little more information on some modeling efforts that he did for us so with that I'll turn it over to uh the ucra and for their presentation how do I get to it Alicia just H start the first one let me find it for you you going to be driving this train truck yes sir yeah all right that was easy morning Council mayor Mr Val wha uh I might first uh recognize some of our UC board members in the audience we have Jeffy Roberts back here our board chairman from Koch County and we have Eva Horton and Bill Holland here uh board members from Tom Green County so thank you board for being here uh as you know UCA started the storm water monitoring and modeling for the city of s Angelo back in 2010 and very early on we realized that the red Royo was a significant water producer um through charlton's modeling efforts in our uh on the ground uh monitoring stations we realized that pretty much every time we had an inch rain in St Angelo the r oy produced about 500 acre feet of water so theoretically in our average rainfall year which would be 20 in of rain the Rya could produce upwards of 10,000 acre feet of water which is annually 2/3 of the city of St Angelo's municipal water usage um with that we we hired uh we sent out a request for proposal and we hired Jacobs Engineering to do a feasibility study on a storm water Pond that would not only treat the storm water to be able to be released Downstream but also as a municipal water supply and so with that I'm going to turn it over to our engineer Bert

[0:37:04] Weatherby and let him fill you in on on the findings that Jacobs had thanks Chuck uh I'm Bert Weathersby I'm a senior senior project manager with Jacobs Engineering uh it's an honor to make this presentation to the mayor and Council uh if you can see on the screen there this is uh the location of the proposed R Royo Pond and it's uh located uh east of FM 1223 South south of Avenue L uh it's right in the Confluence of where the r a rodeo comes into the South Concho River and that kind of white area that you see on the screen is the location of the pond and the UC recommends the construction of this Pond to uh provide for water quality additional Municipal Water Supply and also to uh for Downstream releases uh requirements in St Angelo uh and so this presentation is going to summarize some of our findings and kind of give you the high points on that one of the first things we did uh to uh try to find out how much water is coming off the Watershed and this rodal Watershed is about 15 square miles we were able to look at some studies uh that Chuck mentioned earlier that had been commissioned by the ucra performed by the Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research that looked at some computer modeling to try to predict how much uh volume of water would come off the watersheds for several storms that they looked at and those storms are listed on the screen they ranged from about 3.74 in of rainfall down 2.74 4 inches of rainfall and so we kind of honed in on this study as a way to kind of look at uh how to size this Pond and see if it was feasible some of the uh information that we looked at the EPA and other agencies recommend that you build a pond that will uh capture the 95th percentile of rainfall that comes down the Watershed that ensures that your pond is not too big that it that it doesn't stay full and also is big enough to capture most of the rainfall that comes down the the the Watershed so we we uh went and and found a gauge at matfield to look at a 40-year period of record and we're able to determine that that 95th percentile rainfall was 1.67 in and that's up on

[0:39:09] the screen and so with the computer models that the T had developed and some of the other things that we looked at we were able to determine that that 1.67 inch uh rainfall that 95th percentile yields about 1,000 acre feet of runoff from The Watershed and uh uh an foot is an acre of water 1 ft deep so this this storm would build would yield about 1,000 acre feet uh this is a shot of the red Royal Watershed the area in black is uh excuse me my finger is a little bit heavy here the um the a as I said the watershed's about 15 square miles at the point where we would have the pond it's just a little bit before it goes into the South Concho River so that's about 14 square miles um we also did some averaging as Chuck alluded to and we believe that in an average year looking at the production from the storms that I mentioned earlier from the T study and the uh production of that uh that 1.67 inch rainfall and in an average year it looks like that 11,600 acre feet would be able to be produced from The Watershed and that's that's over uh in an average year uh Stan Angelo gets about 19.4 uh inches of rainfall so once we decided that we uh could build a pond to capture the water coming down the watered we needed a way to get this water over to the water treatment plant the Lone Wolf Water Treatment Plant so that you could treat it and get it into the San Angelo system there's several ways to do that we looked at three of them whether we could just gravity flow it over to the treatment plant gravity flow and pump it or just uh do a straight pumping we found out that pumping was the most optimal way to get it there so we U proposed a pumping system that would pump about 20 million gallons a day and drain the pond when it was full and get it over to the water treatment plant and so uh of course I think everybody really wants to know how much this will cost so that uh that pumping system that we talked about we looked at

[0:41:11] the cost of that the cost of Excavating the pond and the pond that we settled on is about 1,800 acre feet in size and it's the area on your screen that's kind of in Black to the left of that that large black line that's the the pond area that we would look at it's got a water that runs through it right now so we need to relocate that water line excavate the pond provide a liner all that kind of information is in the cost estimate that we came up with and our number is about $20 million which includes all those items uh for the first uh construction cost of the pond um one of the things that uh makes this feasible is that we can use that we hope to use that land to the right of where the pond would be built to stockpile and spread the material from the excavation of the pond if you can do that that this makes this $20 million cost estimate real if you have to take that dirt and haul it off you know 5 miles 7 miles wherever that uh that dirt cost hauling could go from $3 a cubic yard which is in our current cost estimate up to as high as $10 a cubic yard and drive the cost of the whole Pond up so this all uh is predicated on being able to to haul that stuff close by and stockpile it on that adjacent land and I'm might I'm might ad bir um that land that you see to the to the east of the proposed Pond area is owned by the city of St Angelo we also uh determin some additional issues to consider and I think these will be talked about water rights issues for trading out uh the water that uh you're currently taking out of the uh South Concho and this water those those issues are being worked out there are also some uh minor uh Wetlands issues in the in the in the Royo that we might impact uh we'll keep those to a minimum but those if if at a at a certain threshold those might have to be get a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers and then there's some some small property acquisition kind of on the edge of the pond that might need

[0:43:12] to be taken care of so what we found out is that the concept of this storage Basin to supply water for the city to the treatment plan is feasible uh as I said earlier the excavation costs drive this uh this total cost estimate and this these scenarios are predicated on being able to take that dirt to a nearby location so that's a pretty much our presentation uh Chuck were you gonna no that that sums it up any questions from Council Chuck the I I went over this plan again with uh Ricky and them on Thursday Ricky and Daniel and the main objections I think that they have is that um this this project could significantly go up from 20 million to 40 million or more because of the groundwater they're really worried about if we dig down 10 I think it was between 10 and 14t that we'd have to dig down there um I know I talked to you before about it just depends on the liner that we had put in or the base that you put in to keep the water from coming back up into the system we have there what is your feeling on that how how can you explain that sure uh in the cost estimate that we showed you all ago we have a cost for a liner in there yeah I think it's a 4ft thick liner uh there's several ways to prevent the water from coming in from the river the groundwater forces into the pond uh we looked at uh some of those forces uh that would press up on that liner and possibly cause it to fail it's a it's a shallow unconfined aquifer and we think those forces that would be on the liner would be small enough to be held back by the 4-foot liner if we get into the to the uh more uh detailed engineering design of this and find out it needs to be a little bit more I think we've got enough in there to cover that if we have to do a cutof wall which uh some people have suggested I think the the liner cost that we have in there now would cover that so there's still some more detailed engineering to be done but I think that uh what we've got in there covers what your concern was I think Ricky's concern and and

[0:45:15] rightly so is that this project you know that it could really blo up and we really won't know until we've done and I hate to say this because I know the public hates this but more studies on on that groundwater table over there and seeing how exactly how deep it is all in there and exactly you know how much water could possibly come up cuz they were saying it could go from a you know a 4ft liner to a a six or eight foot liner or even more which I I would think would really drastically you know up the price because you just got to you have to go down that much further on it and then we go into the table even that much more well and there's some additional options to consider as well um you could actually excavate down even further and and let that static groundwater pressure be leveled with the river I mean there there's other options and there's other engineering things that can be done we just don't think that this is going to be that big a deal I mean there yes you will probably have to do some dewatering if you construct this this project but that's not typical for this area but it's very typical all over the United States and and Engineering can can accommodate this right and I you know I've been on board of this project all the way around but I want to also make sure that Johnny you know I don't want a project going from 20 to 22 million to 50 to 100 million we can't do it absolutely and there needs to be some more studies this was just a very rough um I don't want to say cheap and dirty but this was a a feasibility study that didn't have a significant amount of engineering budget in it um If This Were to press forward obviously there would need to be some more significant geot technical investigations in a in a full-blown engineering study done and do you guys feel real confident with the amount of water that's coming through that Basin there that I mean I was brought they they let me know that they thought the city feels like it may be a lot less than what you guys are thinking all I can say is I've measured it and I'm gonna stand right by my numbers okay that's what I wanted to hear I think Ricky goad Charlotte I have three questions and I realize this is storm water runoff and whereever and whatever

[0:47:20] it runs across that's what's going to be in there so what is your estimate of the quality of water and the cost to treat it to make it for human consumption well you would have to allow this is going to be a a basin so you're going to have to allow the pollutants to settle out whether you catch it in s Angelo or whether it goes down the Concho River and settles out at Ivy it's all relative um the treatment cost is going to be a little bit more probably because of the turbidity because the reroy is red it has some fine Clays um so there's going to be a cost to treat it that may be a little more I'm not a water treatment person but that's that's an obvious that that that could be a cost um the settling effect will remove a lot of pollutants um we use water from the river right now and after storm events you know we're we're we're drinking if if it's on the ground it's in the water whether it's like I said whether it's in this Pond or whether it's all the way down at Ivy so I'm not concerned generally speaking the water quality as far as total dissolved solids is is very good um there are some nutrients of course that run off fertilizers and stuff like that from from yards and just our everyday use that that are elevated but not to an extent that's a concern and by no means anywhere above any type of EPA levels that would that would warrant concern okay my second question was after this process and the amount of water that you feel that is there what does that break down to as to how many gallons we would gain so I could try to put a price tag on per gallon um I've done that and let's let's say we come in at 20 million say this project comes in at $20 million M um this project has been identified in the region F water plan so it is available for low low interest water development board loan somewhere around 2 to 3% um if that's the case on a 20-year note at $20

[0:49:23] million um and I also added $100,000 a year year and operation and maintenance of it that would end up at $286 an acre foot if you advertise out on a 30-year schedule at $20 million that's $222 an acre foot let's say we run into a was nest and it cost 30 million that's 50% over budget um with with the same 3% money uh 100,000 a year for operation and maintenance that comes out to $419 an acre foot and that's on the very high end and I will say that the previous studies done um on Water Reclamation and water reuse from the wastewater treatment plant are anywhere from almost $900 down to a medium of around $700 with the study that was performed in 2006 thank you Mr Brown for having that those numbers already calculated for my question the last question is time frame If This Were approved today best case scenario when would there be water available when the hole's dug and it rains uh I would say permitting construction and all that on a fast track I I I don't foresee it being done within a year but certainly within two years thank you yes ma'am Mr SAS Chuck or Bert and what I had a phone caller to for some folks that heard about this idea and I guess uh a lot of people don't understand that City operates in different buckets of fun of money okay so when they see a $20 million price tag right away they you know eyebrows go up you know because all they think about is you know uh and these folks T called and talk to me about for example the Bell Street you know why would this take presidents over Bell Street I said it wouldn't and we're not there yet but when it whenever they they uh call and I'm telling you they they don't

[0:51:25] understand uh the the big picture but my question is uh and it was brought up the water basin the storage Basin what quality dirt or what type dirt is there now uh right now there's a typical just your Sandy LOM on top that's top soil um as you go down a little bit there's very very thickness of a of a clay um a pretty tight clay which theoretically could be removed and stockpiled and then reintroduced into the pond as a liner and then once you get below that Clays you have a strata of gravel down to a water table which is anywhere from 14 to 20 ft basically is what the boring said so it's top soil clay and then a gravel and then in that same conversation the topic came up is hey if they dig out that dirt and and you answered my question if you're going to stockpile it aesthetically speaking it wouldn't look good I don't know how you you propose to do that but could we not turn around and maybe give that Dirt away and and make it look somewhat you know better than than just having a big mound of dirt well and it's not going to be really as big of a mound where we where we propos to do it on the city property to the east of the the pipelines and the and the power line rideway um the engineers think that that that amount of dirt would only it wouldn't be a huge Dam it's not going to be an obscene looking Dam with a big slope it would be a gentle Mound that would would raise the elevation of that area about 3 ft across that entire area so it's not a big obtrusive structure and I think the bottom line mayor is the the concern is uh if the $20 million figure or idea is not set in stone then there there is a concern there of like Mr Rodney said that the price probably going up maybe going up so rest assured that those folks are listening and and watching to see every move we make so uh again that $2 million price tag is what was of great concern to a lot of folks that feel that other projects that we could

[0:53:28] uh focus on rather than jump into this one right here you can't find any cheaper water than average of $300 an AC foot I promise you you can't do it I appreciate that Marty I I don't have any Don yes sir um have we calculated where a break even point would be if we if we do this as far as as getting $300 water uh and selling it uh out there can we pay the loan off faster than that if if we're able to to use the calculations that they have for us now we haven't calculated a break even point but we can uh uh determine and execute a a loan term uh in accordance with council's priority if you want to pay it off quicker that has a more upward pressure on the rates if you stretch it out longer that that doesn't put as much immediate upward pressure on the rates U we would we have looked and uh every time we look at large expenditures like this we try to minimize the impact on the on the rate payers and so with this project also we've looked at existing debt structures how could we fit additional debt around current uh uh maturities which are coming up in the next few years we are looking at ways to minimize that impact but well and I guess my real question is to kind of break to the chase would we have to to increase the the cost of our water when it will give us more water to sell you know what what I'd like to see is us be able to to maintain our our current as much as possible our current uh uh amount that we're selling water for due to the increase in amount of water that we possibly can sell

[0:55:31] well the the cost of the water is dependent upon the total totality of expenditures in a given year and this will increase those expenditures and so the the overall cost of water will go up okay uh the question is does it go up more than the availability goes up and we haven't run that scenario Mr wlaw no questions this time till we get further along okay Rodney let's go back to you one of the things and Johnny brought this up about U other other things that need our infrastructure that needs to be redone and everything I just want to put it out there that and I've been saying this over and over without water it doesn't matter whether we have bumpy streets or we have bad water lines all throughout the city water is our number one thing I'm not saying that this is the the project that we have to do but this is one of the projects that we ser iously need to investigate and we need to find out whether it can be done or cannot be done what the exact costs are and also our other projects that we're working on right now water is number one all the other stuff is number two without water we have we have no City and the the public needs to start thinking they need to get that in their frame of mind when Don was asking about the price going up price is going to go up we know that and we know that uh our future price is going water is going to be like gold especially out here in West Texas where we have no water we need to all be getting that into our mind we are going to pay more for water I don't like it I don't like raising the stuff but we are going to have to go into that frame of mind we need to we need to do what's best for the city Charlotte could you pull back up your map uh that showed the pump locations uh thank you that one um and somebody might need to point out for me where the water plant is because my question is going be can this water be blended with our Hickory water certainly if we need to blend you're shaking your head yes so the

[0:57:34] availability to pipe it to the plant is there it's in the cost that you have and this water can be used to blend correct the the proposed facility is less than a half a mile from the from the treatment plant you can see the three little round uh the circles up at the very top of the screen there that is actually the some of the finishing ponds at the water treatment plant so it's it's in its backyard basically thank you Johnny yeah Chuck looking at the probable cost Slide the $10 million for excavation and Hol If you eliminate the Hol what does that price drop down to or does it or or that that is the bottom that is the the bottom dollar is $3 and that would just be hauling it from the pit right there to the adjacent land and then back so that's half of the price right right there $10 million sure uh the the the discharge piping uh there are there's piped there already so I guess it that's not usable I mean whatever is there now or there is a pipeline um and Ricky might have to help me with this I believe that is it that red line there's there's a the purple line I'm assuming is the Hickory line yes that's the 30 in Hickory line and then the yellow line is the big Southwest feeder m is that correct right the Southwest feeder m is is already finished water potable water that goes out to the distribution system the purple line uh it doesn't show up real well is the Hickory line now we can't pump this water directly in to the Hickory line because there's um special treatments options on the Hickory water I mean we've got to remove the radium and the iron and we can't blend this raw water with that it'll mess up that process so could we not take advantage of the yellow line or no no no that's a cross connection you don't want to the Royal Water be running out of your TAP oh J did you have a comment yeah very

[0:59:40] briefly um mayor council members uh first of all I want to commend ucra for the study that they've done uh we definitely understand I was pretty excited initially when I saw the project as well uh we want to do everything we possibly can as you mentioned a while ago we want to make sure we have the correct engine engineering numbers uh we started our own engineering numbers to determine uh what the actual cost could be to the city and again we know that this is an urgent matter for us we want to make sure we do everything we possibly can to secure more water and we have other options that we're looking at of course and what we want to do is make sure that we find the most costeffective option for the city as well andse securing that water but first and foremost we need to make absolutely sure that we have those those numbers the engineering numbers and we're all in agreement uh before we can even recommend going forward with this but this is something that we definitely don't want ucra or this community to think that we're dragging our feet on we just want to make absolutely sure that we know what we're dealing with as we should as we all should Marty yeah I I just had one one question after all U chuck if I understand this right you know we'll once we catch the water we want it to settle as as Miss farmer said and then pump it out back as fast as we can right sure so and we can do that over two weeks does that include the settling time or we probably have to see I would think no more than a week it would it would settle out significantly um and and yes you would it would you would have to actively manage this this Pond you would have to as you as you received inflows you'd have to let it settle and treat it and use it and wait for the next event um I might also add too that that you're going to have a certain if this does come to fruition you're going to have a certain amount of water that you're going to be able to use for municipal Supply there may be additional water available that can be used for Downstream releases which would further save twin buts in Lake nasworthy so you could not only use this but if you got up to your allotment of of what the water rights say you can use per per

[1:01:43] year there could be additional water that could be metered could be settled out released down the Concho River for Downstream water R users and thus save some of your lake levels in nasworthy and twin butes we keep the lake level at nasworthy higher possibly it could it certainly could okay you knew I was about to ask that question yes sir cuz I'm very concerned about that River East of town I don't want to kill that River yes sir so we would still be allowing all of the inflow that we have to go downst stream as it's supposed to but we would be releasing from the pond instead of releasing from nasworthy which should remove stop a lot of the evaporation so really we ought to get more water from the pond than we would get from nasworthy and maintain the same river levels that we have now you could certainly do that yes sir now that's my primary concern is uh we we've got to take care of that River because we're not we're not the only people that live on the river so and I might say another thing too some of the some of the concerns from the downstream land owners too were were you're going to stop some scouring flows which is needed to clean the river out periodically this Basin is only going to catch 1800 acre feet of water Max and and the two large events that we've had over the last couple years there was one in August of 2011 and another one of October of 12 um which were significant events which we calculated somewhere around 4 5,000 acre feet of water flowed past the this um it it was so high that it actually ran around behind our gauging station so we didn't we didn't account for all that water because there was a significant amount that went around in the old the old Creek Channel and dumped into the backside of Lone Wolf um so therefore the big flows there's going to be an emergency Spillway on this Pond and those big flows would continue to go Downstream you're not going to what you're going to do is you're going to stop the smaller ones and you're and then you can meter those out um it's good water management it's a balancing act Don do you and winky have anything else to say before we start a third round with Charlotte Charlotte that it just

[1:03:45] triggered another question I'm sorry my three questions have turned into five um I would like your professional opinion on cloud seity and if if we did cloud seating and got rain in these tributaries to run off to what do you how do you feel about that I I need an opinion from somebody who's in water I am not a meteorologist and I do not understand the sign I mean I understand the principle of it but I'm on the fence about it okay Ricky is Ricky Rick's a meteorologist yeah let's go with that no and I can't explain how it works either Charlotte but but you you said if we do cloud seeding we've been in this cloud seeding program since the mid 90s we are currently in it if there's clouds to seed we pay our fair share for it I thought that contract ran out about three or four years ago no ma'am it didn't we're still at it okay hard to see it in a blue sky isn't it yeah do I have any other Council coun I have one last yes Johnny could you uh stock this pond with fish and allow our citizens to fish out of it or if you don't want to use it yeah the you would have to actively manage it and drain it which would not be good for for biology it just it wouldn't it wouldn't in in theory that's what we first thought we were like man this would be great but to actively to manage it as you should um it just it wouldn't it wouldn't hold fish cuz you're going to drain it there's going to be times you're going to drain it wouldn't be any big fish would there any other Council comment before we go to public let's move the public comment on this anyone care to speak to this thank you thank you thank you Chu thank you Bert yes my name is Jim Turner one of the things that probably needs to be clarified on the whole funding for this is this will probably not be paid for out of things like property taxes this will be paid for off the water bill how

[1:05:48] much water we sell just like we're doing to a large degree with the Hickory line that's not a property tax or a sales tax per se project although the half sales tax does contribute to it and in theory could probably contribute a little bit of money to this bottom line the cost of water is showing up when you pay your water bill and all your development cost cuz that's the only amount of money that's big enough to handle this uh and that's the fairest way to do it you use the water you pay for the production the finding of it and so on and I'm glad to see that we've got the downstream water users involved in this because a lot of this water is not being lost per se it's going Downstream it's ending up in Ivy it's ending up in the water table and downstream users are using this I'd like to see some numbers on what the actual impact will be on the downstream users because as the mayor said we have to take care of the rest of the people that in our neighborhood just as much as San Angelo we can't take and benefit ourselves if we're hurting the people that come in here work here but don't live in the city thank you any other comment from the public come ahead brother Brown state your name we give you three to five how about short five Brown water with the up Riv Authority and former city management the uh there are some issues that need to be resolved but they're engineering issues and they're resolvable and they they should be done immediately and they should be done by the two people our engineering firm that we hired and the firm that y'all hired to reconcile those differences come up

[1:07:50] with an immediate answer to y'all on what the cost is going to be with some options there are some options to this liner which are coste effective and will probably come within in my opinion come within what we've already recommended to you now this is a renewable source taking 5,000 acre feet of water that you already have permitted in an existing structure that's a 1916 or 1913 permit which is the senior permit that you're moving to this location so you're mitigating a lot of Downstream issues right there already that you're not hurting Downstream users there are some also some other issues that were used in the injuring report that child the city iron and use some information regarding South Concho and twin butes which are really in my opinion superflous to this report and have no bearing or correlation to actual runoff figures that have been measured over the last three years in on the on the uh with the uh St water monitor monor in stations you got a renewable source 5,000 acre feet of water guaranteed almost every year thank you thank you thank Stephen anybody else come up state your name you've got three to five five Mr BR is that asking too much three to five okay my name is Richard Bardo former city councilman candidate for city council smd3 if you would let Mr Dixon come up here and the guys that were up here first could they touch on the basis of riparian Rights okay you take Lake nasworthy I used I I used to be told

[1:09:53] that those people had R parents rights no they don't I sure it's the law it's not a natural lake it's a man-made lake the water and all the right you go with belong to citizens of San Angelo now if you go ahead with this P which I don't object to it if we've got the right legally staying within the law I wouldn't object to it but I'd like to hear about evaporation okay cuz it's going to have to to sit there and settle right so certain time of the year while it's there you're going to lose some and then going back to riparian rights is going to be built by the city if it does but it's going to be owned by the citizens now like it was said earlier a lot of people out there don't understand you you need to bring them up to par and just because it's there and we own the water and all the rights with it you can't just throw a line in there and start pumping it out it don't work that way so if Mr Dixon and those two gentlemen can come up here touch on that I'd appreciate it thank you Ricky if if y'all would allow I'd like uh Mr Jason he to come up and let's let's talk about water rights and our strategy and and what we find out and and I think he can address a lot of those stuff and Mr Brandis has some other information that I think is pertinent to this conversation that needs to be considered so if y'all would allow us we'd like to proceed Jason I have a handout that Bob's going to go over some stuff that I'd like to get in y'all's hand so I'll do that now Enlighten us please sir thank you mayor members of the council I'm not sure if I

[1:11:55] can do that but I can uh at least let you know the K is he saying with the k no I'm saying I'm enlightened Le challenged sometimes but what we have been doing is you working on a way to figure out how to get this project permitted um because each of you know and most of the folks in the room know that just because you see water running down the river doesn't mean you have the ability to pull it out and in fact for the city to do that you got to have authorization from the state and so we've got to figure out a way to get water right to do that our Council has been very you know openly that you know getting new water appropriated in the Colorado River Basin is going to be a tall order so the strategy would be to figure out whether or not we had some room to breathe in the city's existing portfolio of surface water rights the Ben fckin water right gives the city the ability to divert 5,000 acre feet a year from the reservoir but you don't have the capacity to pull that water out at Lone Wolf so that right literally is just sitting there so we have the opportunity I think to leverage that right and take advantage of that for the red a Royo this would be considered not a storage water right like twin butes or nasworthy would be it would be considered a run-of River Project which means we're literally pulling water out of the river throwing it over into our off Channel Reservoir as fast as it can come down so we got to have a run a river direct diversion authorization to do that Ben Ben fckin gives us the opportunity to capture that water but only to the tune of 5,000 NE feet a year it's important for the council to recognize that without additional permitting Authority right now what we can what we know we could probably free up under the city's existing water rights portfolio it's about 5,000 acre feet of diversion authorization that means when you run through 5,000 feet in a year if you get through that in

[1:13:59] July everything that comes down that red Royal after that Point's got to go on P pass you you don't have the right to divert anymore so that's going to be a logistical challenge but from a legal standpoint I think the city's in pretty good shape as far as trying to get this thing permitted now whether or not it can be done in a two-year cycle um even at the best of times it's getting water rights per even amendments through tcq can be a challenge so that's going to be a little bit out of the city's control but we certainly have some experience in working those issues aggressively with the commission um with respect to I I'm not sure what other questions the council may have I'll fill obviously any questions that you have um and throw the rest of them to Dr Brandis but um I I think from a water right standpoint we've got a we've got a pretty decent strategy put together here question question Council sir do all do all Property Owners go through the same problems as far as permitting if they build a tank on their property no not all there there are some exceptions in the water code that allow folks under certain conditions to build empowerments on channel empowerments um there's all and that with under very limited circumstances and for and for particular uses domestic uses livestock watering uh propagation of wildlife there's also still going back to the the issue of reparan Rights there are residual reparan rights it's still exist today but they're only recognized for domestic and livestock purposes and true reparan rights aren't impoundment rights they're run a river direct diversion rights so for folks to build an empowerment on their place there's a way to do it but it's a considered something akin to a statutory right that's provided for in the water code it's not it's not necessarily an inherent repair right but so the answer is no not everybody has to go through the rigar

[1:16:01] roll that the city or any other municipality will have to go through as far as permitting is concerned because there are certain exceptions to permitting in the water code that allow folks the the uh opportunity to avoid that Pleasant process thank you Rodney because the the Royal is not classified as a river right because it has no banks uh the red Royo is considered a water course okay and which means that the water that's in it is state water regulated by the state of Texas regulated by the tcq is it a little bit lower regulation than is it easier to go through than than taking water from the river not any different the same it's the the the standard is uh it's a very loose standard of what uh constitutes a water course and there's just not any in fact we've I've Gotten Good indication from tcq staff that the r Royo is Falls squarely within the definition of a water course as far as they're concerned so whatever water collects in the red a Royo is held in trust by the state for the people of state but you got to have a permit to be able to pull any of it out when we have the ucra that's on board with this project and they they really like this project and endorse this project don't you think that would make it a little bit easier for us to get through this the permanent process and the the challenges at the tcq aren't political challenges it's a it's a factor of having a finite number of technical staff that are skilled enough to process water rights applications and they do it for every River Basin in the state of Texas and so it's literally just a Manpower issue okay they're stretch thin so uh we we've got I feel like um myself Dr branis my Law Firm has as good a relationship with the tcq technical staff as I think anyone could could expect and it's there's only so much work that an individual can get done in a given time and there's just a lot of it there and not a lot of hands

[1:18:03] around the table to do it so it's really a function of Manpower more than anything else and the last thing you you said the 5,000 acre feet you know if we could if we could get to use transfer our rights from Lone Wolf over there to this Basin for the 5,000 well 5,000 is almost the 13d of what we use anyways I think we use 16,000 on average per year onethird of the amount of water that we need to survive is is a lot of water so I I want to make sure and let everybody know that that is a big number and it still is a great thing for us to be have the capability of capturing if we if this was a project that becomes feasible yeah 5,000 acre feet is is certainly nothing to shy away from and we may be able to I've talked to them talked to a few people that we there might be in a future circumstances where we can move some other water rights around possibly in the future is that correct I there the city's got has obviously you know the city has several surface water rights in its portfolio um some of which are you know we we exhaust as much as we can and others just from a logistical and infrastructure standpoint you can't take as well advantage of and so there probably are some opportunities perhaps in theory at least um to uh you know coales some of those rights what we would propose to do with Ben fckin is not necessarily transfer it just add a new diversion point to the permit so the diversion point would be our our scalping facility there at on the red Royo okay um so it's a little bit of a little bit of a a Nuance there but it's an important one from a permitting standpoint thank you any other questions Council thank you Jason appreciate it mayor anyone else care to speak to this are we going to hear from Ricky so we can hear the city's point of view on this i' like Dr Brandis to um kind of give you what he found out we were wanted to just try to give you all

[1:20:09] the information that we could come up with on this reliable amount of water that this could possibly provide I'm not arguing the fact with anything the UC of Jacobs has done I just want to make yall aware that there is some other uh school of thought on this and I'd like for him to present this at this time and then I have a few closing remarks Dr bradis good morning mayor councilman um what I've been asked to do is to look at this project in the long term and make an assessment of how much water you might expect to get from this project if you consider how rainfall varies and runoff varies with a whole range of rainfall all events that you experience here in St Angelo uh what ucra has done has gone out in measured runoff from specific rainfall events and that's important data that gives us a a an understanding of how this Watershed responds to specific rainfall events what I've done is gone back and looked at some 60 years of rainfall on a daily basis uh as measured at this math matys Field Station and done an analysis uh where I converted that rainfall on a daily basis to runoff that you could expect from the red Royo Watershed so now we have a period of 60 some odd years of data uh that we can analyze and see how this red Royal project would really resp respond over a wide range of rainfall events um to accomplish this I had to apply a rainfall runoff method uh that's pretty universally accepted really throughout the United

[1:22:12] States developed by the soil conservation service years ago and this rainfall runoff method takes into account the type of land use that you have in a given watershed and it takes into account the kind of soils that you have in a given Watershed it puts those two things together and arrives at what we might call runoff coefficients and it's simply numbers that relate for a given amount of rainfall in a day or or in an event how much runoff can you expect to get and it does a fairly decent job of that so what we did we took the land use conditions the acreages of about 20 different landuse types and that information was provided to us by ucra we took those landuse types we took the soils conditions which we are available from the soil conservation service you download soils information from the web it's all there we put those two things together and we came up with a runoff coefficient that we believe is representative of the redoy Watershed so with that runoff coefficient and 60 some OD years of daily rainfall we simulated with a model how much runoff you could expect to get from this Watershed over that 60 some OD years of record on a daily basis we incorporated into our model the red Royal Basin that's being proposed this Basin too we took the information from the Jacobs report as to its size and storage capacity and where it's located uh we took information from Jacob report on how much water you could expect to capture in that Basin for a given rainfall

[1:24:15] event uh 80% 90% up to 99% for some smaller rainfall events and we use their information to to determine if you had x amount of runoff from The Watershed you apply this factor and you could get y amount into that Basin so that's what we did once we had the water in the Basin we we put evaporation on that amount of water that's stored in our model we put a diversion or a withdrawal on that stored water of 20 million gallons per day that's the number that Jacobs proposed as the pumping capacity to take water out of the Basin over to the Lone Wolf treatment plant so we use that 20 million gallons per day and by the way if the Basin was full after a rainfall event at 20 million gallons per day it would take 27 days to fully evacuate it and that's important because the way this Basin is going to operate it needs to be empty all the time so it's there available to capture runoff from the next storm event so you don't want to leave water sitting in this Basin like for fish you want to evacuate it as quick as you can so if you do get another rainfall event there's a place for that runoff to be stored and that's what we did we put in this 20 million gallon per day rate and we pumped out of the Basin so we made this simulation over this 60 some odd years and actually calculated what we thought we could capture with every rain all event and then we summarize those numbers into monthly quantities and annual quantities and I would would refer you to the handout this uh maybe go to page U page 12 there was a handout I think you each of you has it um what's shown there on page 12 that's

[1:26:19] these the results from this model simulated quantities and there expressed in acre feet per month or per year as you see over on the right hand side and these are the quantities in acre feet that you could expect to be diverted over to the Lone Wolf treatment plant as an additional supply of water based on this 60 some OD years of rainfall and you just look at the numbers and you see they vary pretty much you know from almost zero not quite up to something over 4,000 acre feet per year and by the way this model that we used we put a cap of 5,000 acre feet per year in accordance with the Ben fckin water right on how much could actually be diverted from R Royo into the Basin and by the time that's stored in there and it's subject to some evaporation you don't get 5,000 acre feet back you get in the upper 4,000 that's why you you don't see 5,000 acre feet in here because there's been some evaporation in the pond while it happened yes sir I have a question I was looking at table uh page 11 but since you're on on on 12 explain to me the the average amounts versus the minimum amounts at the very bottom of the page those are the minimum a minimum and maximum values over this entire period of record from 1940 to 2013 you just averaged amount and the average is the average of that period yes same thing on page 12 12 yes but that's based off a model that's not actuals we don't have actuals that's correct it's model we don't have records of Stream flow for red a Royo that go back 50 or 60 years right we have records for the last three or four years right so we've extrapolated back using rainfall as a a driver to determine how

[1:28:23] much runoff you could expect obviously rainfall is what generates the runoff and we we've used a modeling approach to arrive at how much we think could come off of there in in that modeling do you take in account that 50 or 60 years ago there wasn't hardly any ground cover anywhere in the city we do I mean the model the way we structured it it reflects current land use okay and all we're doing is taking current land use and soil conditions and imposing a 60-year record of rain fall on that condition right and things could change in the future uh right now the the according to ucc's numbers The Watershed is about 50% developed other words 50% of that Watershed is undeveloped it's either in farm land Ranch Land parked land but not in structures and pavement so maybe it gets more development in the future and our runoff coefficient would have to go up right but we reflected was what's there essentially today based on uc's land use conditions so what I want to point out maybe just turn over to page 13 uh because that's a the same summary of the numbers the graph at the top is is just a bar chart but it shows you the annual amounts from the previous page just presented graphically that we were able to simulate as you might be able to get from this project and if you look down at the lower part part of the page there on an average you get about 2600 acre feet and that ranges from around 50 up to 4900 on average so you can kind of get a feel for what you could expect for this in terms of water supply uh I want to point out one thing in terms of what's called firm annual yield and you'll see there's a couple of numbers there toward the bottom of page 13

[1:30:24] um one of them's 800 one of them is 50 The Firm annual yield the way it's defined is the amount of water you can expect to reliab reliably divert from a water supply project over the course of a period of time and often you look at what's called the drought of record and for this case we looked at Twin but's Reservoir and looked at its drought of record as simulated under a firm yield condition and then looked at our results for red a royal and came up with this 800 acre feet that's the minimum amount you get in any given Year from the red a royal project on a firm yield basis and if you were to go to the water development board to get funding this is the number that they're going to look at because that in their planning criteria for a run a River Project like the red a Royo they use the minimum amount in any given year that you can get as a basis for their uh cost uh unit cost of water so it's it's an important number that you at least should keep in mind um if there are questions about the water supply aspects I just want to say a couple of things about groundwater Char yes sir Dr brendis if I missed it I sincerely apologize to you uh but for me and for our viewing public on television could you please state your name again your profession and your credentials to report to us on water because I I missed that all right my name is Robert Brandis I'm a Consulting engineer specializing in Water Resources uh been doing this for over 40 years and I've worked in Texas all my life throughout the whole state doing pretty much this kind of work reservoir uh operations water rights uh work and my next question was for Ricky if we this water correct me if I'm wrong this

[1:32:26] water that you're talking about it eventually flows down to Lone Wolf D area and if Ricky if we took the same 20 $21 million and found it somewhere and gave it to you for improvements of at Long Wolf would it do the same or more no the reason is Lone Wolf is doesn't have the capacity that this red a Royo Basin does is I think it's like 800 feet acre feet of storage capacity we're talking about 1,600 1,800 acre feet here uh but Long Wolf pretty much needs to be maintained at a constant level because that's where we withdraw our water for the for the water treatment plant and if we were allowed it to go dry so it would be available to capture water the next time it rained we've got problems with how we deliver water to the city so you really couldn't do the same thing at Lone Wolf other question let me just mention uh groundwater because I know it's uh it's reared its head here lately um Jacobs actually had hired a a geotechnical firm to do borings and I know you're aware of that they did 20 some odd borings in this area this Basin and and what those borings show and you might refer to page uh 15 they show that a substantial amount of groundwater occurred in the those bore holes and to the extent that if you built the Basin at the level they're talking about building it you would have anywhere from 10 to 14 ft of groundwater above the bottom of the Basin and you've you've heard this discussed this morning somehow that water has to be kept out of the Basin if you allow the groundw to go in the Basin it's going to occupy the storage capacity that you w you want to use to store the runoff from the r Royal wed so you can't allow gr water to go into the Basin you have to keep it dry

[1:34:29] that's where this issue of installing a liner as a potential mitigative measure comes in there's other ways to do it dewatering systems put in a well system put in a cut off wall uh the liner is what was discussed in the Jacobs report and as a result of this I'm not a geotechnical engineer so I asked another firm h Dr engineering to take a look at this groundwater situation and the possibility of building a liner and what they come back with is they agree uh due to the type of material granular material Sands and gravels that underly this Basin there's going to be a substantial uplift pressure on the bottom of the of the Basin due to groundwater and it's be it's because you have groundwater up here and you got the bottom of the Basin here where the groundwater pushes down and up on the bottom of the Basin so you've got to put enough liner enough weight if you will in the bottom of that Basin to keep the groundwater from just pushing up into the Basin what they came up with is if you're going to leave the Basin at the elevation that they're proposing which is about 25 ft below the ground then you're going to have to excavate another 10 ft down to 35 ft to put in a 10-ft liner and a 10-ft liner would be substant enough to offset the groundwater pressures the uplet pressure pressures and that's a significant cost that I'm not sure has been included in in the cost estimates we have it's something that uh and I think Jacobs agrees it's something we need to look at in more detail that concludes my remarks I'll be happy to answer any other questions I have one quick one and maybe it's a Ricky Dixon or a Chuck question I don't know but how do you propose to divert the water into that Basin what's what it's going to require is to to construct within the Royo Channel some kind of low Dam or wear across the channel that's going to serve

[1:36:31] as a structure to divert water through what's being proposed now are 48 in pipes that would be installed from the r Royal channel into the Basin and there would be a series of those pipes maybe four six who knows that would be used to make this diversion that's the way it's been out because now it naturally flows into the cono River that's correct so we would have to put a a small dam and I'm talking maybe 4 feet in height something like that four five ft uh that would serve to not allow the water to go down the red aroyo to the South Concho and force it through these 48 in pipes and then you know once the basin's filled there there will be a lowf flow Outlet in that Dam and it'll be an open hole maybe 18 in in diameter 12 in in diameter that's going to allow the water always to drain out of the structure you have to do that from a water right standpoint thank thank you very much sir we appreciate that thank you Ricky you want to conclude this sir yeah I'll try to wrap it up and and we really appreciate time I know we didn't do our three to five minutes and try to get you out here this but we need to talk about this and and as you can see um we've just looked at a couple of different options uh there's some there's some other a lot of other things I think that need to be considered before we make a a recommendation on this project uh there was a couple of key statements made today I think and I think uh they need to be brought out Charlotte asked when can we have it when can we use it how long will it take to build it Chuck said when we dig the hole in it rains I think that's a I think that's a key statement when it rains something we need to keep in mind that this is another for all intents and purpose is the way I look at it is a surface water supply hinging upon rain we know that uh we have not been blessed and everybody's legs are are

[1:38:36] suffering on this deal Steven Brown made a key comment he said there's 5,000 ft of water here available guaranteed that's a pretty broad statement I don't think that if it doesn't rain there is nothing guaranteed and that's that's the important part to keep in mind on this I think we need to do some more investigative work if y'all want us wish to us to proceed that way try to come up with the firm number how to deal with the groundwater issues there's lots of different options we just looked at one but more important to me is we also have a Wastewater reuse study that we're are going to come back to y'all probably at the next council meeting get you to award the the price of that to look at conservatively speaking we got 7 million gallons a day out there that we can use if we need to that's 7500 acre feet give or take that water is guaranteed as long as we got some water to put in the homes we're going to receive it at the wastewater treatment plant it's not a real nice sounding option but it's one option that we need to consider and I think we need to make sure that we're spending our money in the right right place so with that if you have any other questions for me or or any of the gentlemen here and and I commend the ucra uh for coming up with this idea I think it's a marvelous deal I don't want to be accused of of any way putting a wet blanket on this deal and I don't know what the cost of water is too high if you don't have any so with that I'm I'm pretty much finished and y'all can do whatever y'all need but if you have a question for me I'd be glad to entertain joh just for the public about what do we pay per acre right now for water I'm going to have to get

[1:40:40] back I don't have that with me right I don't I'll I'll get it to you we make you think it's close to the 300 to 400 I'm I'm not going to say I don't know if we can find that out anything J the um I know stepen recommended and I I fully agree with him also that we need to work together ucra and the city and the reports the numbers that we've uh We've calculated at this point let's get together and come up with something that we feel uh can work or may not even work we don't know yet but at this point we do need to make sure that we work closely with ECR and um again come back with a response to the council uh sooner than later so again I know we have some of our numbers let's get together with UC and and see what we come up with okay we'd be glad to do that this has been very interesting and I think it's something that we need to be considering and I appreciate I appreciate everyone here today when the and the presentations that you made and the expertise that you brought this has been very informative uh the Citizens need to know that we are we're not sticking our head in the sand here we are looking for water options for our city so that said this was a presentation and an update and I think we have I think we have had the presentation and the the update is complete I'd like to call for a few minutes of break thank you thank you Ricky 1044 we're going to take a few minutes let's call the meeting back to order it is 11:08 and as and as according to average our 10-minute breaks only lasted 30 minutes so I wish we capture let's call the mey back to order uh next thing we have is a presentation by the downtown s Angelo Incorporated third and fourth quarter reports Brenda Gunner D Vasquez y'all are own thank you council members uh I'm going to make mine real quick we have a newsletter that we're going to pass out I know that we emailed all of you uh this letter before but I thought I'd go ahead and bring a hard copy for you and that'll be my report for today uh but I do want to let you know that we're going to be hosting uh members of the governor's staff that will be coming

[1:42:45] in on May 1st and you'll be getting invitations for this event uh it's a town hall meeting and they're going to be discussing water Finance Texas Enterprise fund the skills Development Fund and the emerging Tech fund so uh please put that on your calendar that's Thursday May 1st be starting at 11:30 but again we'll send all the appropriate information and with that I'm going to turn it over to our president Mr Bender Gunner thank you you have in your packet today a combination of what would be our third and fourth quarter report which basically makes it an annual report so that we can summarize uh the Year 2013 if you take a look at the numbers for the city of St Angelo for the year 2013 there was a 10.28% increase when you combine the retail sales tax and the mixed beverage taxes together that compares to a 35.3 1% increase in the corly sales and mixed liquor tax numbers for our Central business district and it gives us a 34.99 or an almost 35% increase in our Main Street District if you look at it simply in terms of the fourth quarter you would see that in fact the trending of the large increases that we saw in in first second and third quarter started to slow down a bit for combinations of reasons but in central business district we went from um highs of 30 uh 40% to 36 and 31% down to 8.85% when we combine our sales tax and our liquor tax the same thing of course in our Main Street District where we had um a 30 uh a 13.62% which again was a much slower track than where we've been in the past certainly part of that is because when you have annualized increases you ultimately come up against those large increases and so the percentages start to decrease however we also look at what percent we are relative to the total and

[1:44:49] in the combined first through fourth quarters the central business District represented a 3.91% to the total City and our Main Street District represented 8.28% to the total City if you say if you take a look at simply at the mix beverage report you will see that for the first time we've seen some negative numbers in those uh collections It's a combination of one certainly tough weather two tough business climate and three tough competition for the first time we've had some really strong competition that has come into the city of St Angelo and they've enjoyed some tremendous business and because they're new and because they have certainly um found a market niche in s Angelo they have had an impact on our overall U sales uh liquor tax increases in addition we've had a closure but that closure really of um of a bar restaurant really was impacted in the sales tax because they don't serve hard liquor there so that was really a negative impact in our sales tax our liquor tax so for the first time we see those numbers having a negative Trend and not a positive trend although when you take a look at it on an annualized basis our Central business district had a 22% increase in overall mixed beverage tax dollars and in our Main Street District an overall increase of 14.2% we continue to represent a good percent to the total City with 22% 22.7% to the total City in our Central business district and 28.7% in our Main Street District if you take a look at the sales tax dollars the most important thing to look at is if you look at our Main Street District we went from in 2013 representing only 4.5% of the total sales tax dollars to U the year 2013 where we represent 5.2% so we're continuing to improve our our percentage to the total City sales tax dollars so

[1:46:53] we're excited about that particularly because we know that the city of St Angelo has had some tremendous increases um this past year and we're still able to show increase in sales tax dollars as well as a percent that we represent to the total City we always like to report some of the significant changes that have happened in the downtown area and the two that I'm going to speak to most importantly today because they're some of the largest dollars and we think some of the most important changes in our downtown area and one is the area foundation building which uh opened um the area foundation actually moved into their building late December and that is the new building located on the corner of koncho Avenue and South Irving Street it has not only a Concho Avenue Frontage but certainly a South Irving and that has had a nice dramatic change to um a Gateway into downtown if you will without having a Gateway into downtown it's a new phase to our downtown area and we're very excited about that that on the opposing corner at 39 West koncho Avenue is a building that before was a um Tire building actually and we have a new retail business that will be opening up shortly called Casa decor and they are a business that has a great history in riodosa they U sell um outdoor uh furniture and um accessories they have had great successes there to the point that there are a lot of s Angelo people who have homes there visit there that shop in that store so we think it's going to be a new addition to um the downtown area and once again serves as a great foundation for a wonderful Gateway into the downtown s Angelo area there's certainly other areas that have put some money into their businesses and improved uh their businesses and I'm not going to go through those but someone might say well what difference does A500 or $1,000 U change in the building make well it makes a difference because it means they're not allowing it to deteriorate that everything that they put into it is either bringing it up to code or

[1:48:55] improving the facility and it means that we're not de um not continuing to decline in the facilities so those um issues are very important in the third and fourth quarter we also saw the falling new businesses open up in downtown St Angelo Inc one was a dedicated Tattoo Company Wild Heart portraits fashion craze Starbucks venue on the Concho Discount Tire bouquet pure lingerie pink Tumbleweed and the S Angelo area foundation which we talked about earlier if you combine the third and fourth re uh quarters reinvestments into the downtown area you would see almost a million5 increase in total value in in reinvestment making a the total reinvestment in downtown St Angelo Inc since 2005 or in an 8-year period over $80 million that concludes our report do we have any questions or comments please Johnny Brenda what is that Katerina L what is it Katarina LLC that is really their corporation but it's the casa um Decor um is going to be a furniture store that's just the corporation that bought the property but it will be uh the the store from Rio Doo that will be opening up there and they're pretty close to opening up their doors now I don't know if you've seen the improvements they've made to that property but it's been significant and that property happened to be on the market for a very long time many people people were having problems trying to figure out what to do with it because of some environmental issues they overcame what those issues um were going to be and they also filled an important hole we believe in terms of the retail trade in downtown St Angelo because one of the things we don't really have right now is out Furniture whether it be indoor or outdoor and that has consistently been a void in the overall market and one of the things that Consultants have said to us is a big void in this city not only in the downtown area it also is important because it is not going to be competitive really with any other business in the downtown town area where many times when we open up a new bar or restaurant or another retail store you

[1:50:57] start to see market share deterioration this should not and create any market share deterioration and should be a positive and a plus to the overall retail business it's also one of those businesses that really today is not going to have the competition that the internet tends to give to many of the other retail businesses and if you ask what our biggest biggest challenges in the downtown area it's really the internet as it is with retail Nationwide um no matter where you live and and many retailers found that again this year that the overall biggest negative that they've had in retail trade is losing it to the internet instead of numbers of people walking into retail store and and store traffic is dramatically off Nationwide I'm not saying that's in downtown but I am saying Nationwide but it does impact obviously on a local level and because we're local it would impact our downtown Merchants as well Brenda what one other note I wanted to make is uh I don't know if you guys are have looked or looking into more trash cans because Sunday mornings when I drive through the downtown area you know it's it's sad you know there's some people that don't care and leave their trash all over the place this past Sunday I cringed a little bit but and and you know what I'm talking about those there are certain weekends where the traffic is much higher than others and if you want to identify um some specific areas we will talk to those Property Owners because we do have some trash cans that we could put out and help solve the problem the question mark is whether people use those trash cans because I know I have one in front of my building and it's amazing to me how much ends up in the flower beds and on the sidewalk when there's a trash can within a hands reach of what could be used sometimes those the trash is Left Behind is left from a mindset that doesn't believe in trash cans but just yes throwing so with that due respect we do have some trash cans and we would be glad to look at any areas that you feel like we need to be putting those out want you guys to it to look nicer out there you know we agree it's in a part of the overall image and that's certainly one of the big challenges that we have as a downtown area is to constantly improve the overall image of downtown we believe strongly that there's two important things that we need to focus on one is The Branding of downtown the marketing of downtown uh we know a lot of people use it for dining

[1:53:00] and eating but not necessarily for local shopping as much as tourism we also know that many people use the downtown area for Friday and Saturday night not Monday through Saturday and we also know that successful businesses have to be bigger than just a Friday night or a Saturday night business or a Saturday shopping experience because no one's volume can survive on a one-day traffic story singularly thanks any other comments from Council any comments from the public then Brenda thank you very much I was very diplomatic the way you said that about the trash can yes it was very very diplomatic thank you thank you very much brendale let's move on now if we could to number 21 which is discussion of 2014 2019 Capital Improvement plan preparation Miss Morgan good morning I have a a PowerPoint for yall it is it appears to be lengthy but I will be brief and just hit the high points we're at an exciting time in the the CIP um where we've had our public forums we've had our draft a project submitted by our uh project managers and um and we're going to talk about in more detail on March 6th at the night meeting and so that's why today I'm just going to go over very briefly um where we are so far in the process and the result of those public forums uh we had held two public forums we uh promoted them a variety of ways uh we were on klst uh we were on uh kixy radio we were on just just every local media station we could be on and had a lot of positive results uh from all of those the first public forum was uh February 20th here at the convention center we had about 12 citizens available to that and and certainly lots of relevant staff members available to speak to those items um and and you've had in your background the summary of the public comments um all info from these public meetings was forwarded on to um relevant staff if it was something that that was not yet included in the CIP and should be we went ahead and made those uh

[1:55:03] changes to the plan uh we very responsive to those uh requests from the citizens the some items that were talked about in the public were not um CIP items but still items that City staff should look into addressing or or answer those questions and so we certainly got those to to relevant staff to do that uh the second meeting was February 25th at Lincoln middle school we had about 20 citizens there and we actually had casan come and do a live uh video spot from there and so that also got a lot of of input there were several folks that couldn't make it to the um the CIP meetings and we certainly have a mechanism in place to still get their public comment heard and we're getting some input in that with the online submissions uh we can direct anybody to kosa tx. us/ CIP input and we've gotten about six well at at time of print for this we had about six responses we've gotten a couple more since then and that's still wide open and so we're just referring people that were not able to make the public forums that we still want to hear their input and we're getting lots of information on those and so um certainly the items you would expect to hear in these public forums like water supply uh streets uh as a whole uh some specific streets uh Trails um many items that we were aware of and had in the CIP and we're addressing all of those items um with that I have a list of all the CIP projects that have been submitted uh and identify them as what is funded and what is not funded but certainly in the uh interest of time I was going to save that for for March 6 I think we're going to get into more of that detail later this week and so that's all that's all I really had for you this morning appreciate you Morgan Hey and and I was here for a little while at this meeting here but I I stayed through the entire meeting at Lincoln and I I appreciate the way that worked that was our citizens were there they had their request it it was a way well-run meeting and I think it was very I think it's very profitable I appreciate you sir it's it's a very exciting time for us and we we really appreciate getting that those citizens that are interested and and want to share their opinions we're we're very pleased with with the turnout and the

[1:57:04] the back and forth and the way we're able to answer those questions and they did have opinions absolutely any Council comment on this I have a question Charlotte what where' Michael go maybe Tina can answer it if if Morgan can't uh what monies dedicated to the capital Improvement plan do have on schedule to be spent in the next 24 months two years the total amount and I'll tell you the reason I'm asking uh I'm a little worried uh our financial situation and and if we can postpone any expenditures to see what's going to happen with water uh if we have to buy water for our citizens that money's got to come from somewhere and yes I know it's been designated for Capital Improvement plans but I'm serious about wanting to maybe hold put a hold on any of those expenditures until we get through our spring rains and uh into our fall months I don't know how the rest of the council feels about that I just don't want to see us spending any monies that U we absolutely don't have to in Capital Improvements it's scheduled I'm not talking about the 19th Street sidewalks I know that that's been awaiting for a long time but asking staff if we could possibly look at some of these that can't go as scheduled simply because of the tight money situation that we're in for water I still don't see that it hurts to plan oh no I'm not talking I'm not talking about scratching the plan I not at current talking about current as far as what's been allocated for that right what's been allocated if we just hold up a little bit to see where we're going to end up with our spring rains because I'm not for raising water rates and having the people come in and spend and monies are there that are allocated and just hold off on the current just be cautious that that's one of the things

[1:59:07] that I I was hoping for us to discuss once again Thursday evening uh to where anytime you have budgeted items is strictly a priority and of course right now our priority is is water but by the same token um I I think that we need to to prioritize a capital Improvement also and one of the other things I wanted to say in in going to these meetings our staff does a fantastic job and sometimes I think we we kind of take that for granted but margan and and all the troops that were there uh just did did really really a fine job in representing the city I think further comment I'm just surprised that there was only six are you talking about six citizens had input via email or online correct we had six submissions that's kind of and we've had two more since then and so that's why I hope folks are listening at home it's it's it's still maybe you need put do you need to put it in bigger print or something you know sure I I hope to have lots more input get Anthony to stand on his head and juggle wear that hair yeah exactly well kand did us a lot of K the television did us and I appreciate you because she did us a very good she did very a very good presentation that night so we appreciate that as well we appreciate our media all right that is a pre that is the discussion and we'll talk more about this Thursday night at our 5:30 meeting thank you Morgan let's move on now to item number 22 which discussion and possible action regarding lighting issues related M matters brother Solus I'll be right with you morning Council um when it comes to uh um addressing light nuisance complaints uh unfortunately our code officers have no authority to enforce

[2:01:11] compliance since the city doesn't have an ordinance covering light intrusion uh we do receive several um complaints over the last past several years uh the only solution we can offer is to ask the offending party to voluntarily comply unfortunately we've had situations where the offenders refuse and the uh leaving the nuisance basically unresolved as Council knows uh we need an ordinance to seek mandatory compliance uh fortunately there are several cities in Texas that have these U ordinances in place some very complex but some pretty simple if Council wishes for us to uh research and pursue an ordinance here are some key issues we would need to address obviously we' have to have clear definitions of course of what constitutes a deance uh we need to decide if we want to limit our enforcement to residential areas uh we would certainly recommend that uh we have it as a complaint-based process um we'll have to look at adding exemptions to ensure we don't violate um say concerns uh we'll have to set standards and we'll have to have a have a way to measure the light uh mitigation and intrusion and lastly we'll have to outline some solutions such as uh light Shields and directionality and those kind of things and basically we're here to ask Council for some direction on how you want to pursue pursue and Rodney I'm going let you start on this you seem to have the most problems in the city yes I do um actually I do I I do want us to pursue the ordinance I I'm always leaning towards the easy way to do it instead of the complicated way to do it and um I I think that this would be a good thing to help solve some arguments in the future since we do have people that are not agreeing to help out their or do the Good Neighbor deed right and um I have three people in my district right now that are going through this and and two of them I've seen myself and they're it's bad I if I live next door

[2:03:15] to that person I would be very very upset so um I think in order to do that we I hate imp imp menting new rules but I think this would be a case where we do need to to do that okay and it would be nuisance of course we don't want to we want to we certainly don't want to go into the light pollution issue that's a whole different no it's nuisance and it be residential also that'll be residential okay I i' I'd like to make a motion that we uh move forward on this to do an ordinance a light ordinance we can do that because there is possible action is in our agenda I have a question yes Don do do we not have something in the building code I know we have minimum standards as far as candle power and light output for different occupancies do we not have have a maximum in there in the residential code or or building Cod I don't believe we do as far as as nuisance is concerned we do have um some standards on on the light itself but not until it not when becomes a nuisance we don't address that okay and my my thought process here is I would whole a whole lot rather have it at the front end than the back end and I agree with Rodney as far as this is probably needing being needed as far as a nuisance but by the same TR token I think some of these new businesses that are are coming in you know if we could have regulated them on the front end then we wouldn't have to have to be fighting this now quite as much so maybe we need to look at not only from this standpoint but also from a a building official standpoint and and what we can do whenever they're first coming in that's a good point very good point I second his motion any further any further discussion from Council shoot me an email on this I will because I've got a young lady from Fort cono that sent me a letter two months ago asking me about this and I didn't know what to tell her so I I've just kind of let the letter set there in the

[2:05:18] dead file I want to send her copies of this so if you would please the same letter I might have gotten that same letter did you answer her no I didn't either was it a complaint no no she just it was a student wanted to know more about it and I've already been real I've been to Fort cono once and talked to a group of the GT students about this same thing so send it to me so I can send it to her and do my due diligence and Bob in these in the in the possible new ordinance it will have some teeth in it where there'll be a fines that will be absolutely it will be a find yes we'll we'll provide uh solutions for them we'll give them some a period of time to comply and then we'll just take action as we because that's been the problem before I know that you personally have gone out to at least one of these locations and you've talked to the person and tried to you know work it out yourself and you did an awesome job on that part and it's just that we can't do anything we just have no teeth on this whatsoever on being able to keep them from doing it that would have been James Flores our Co Cod manager he does he does an incredible job uh doing the mitigating situations as best he can and he tried real hard he tried real hard what I've been told is they tried hard on that he's been out for about 18 months actually one case I know that's right and it's the case that the biggest case let's give you some tools to work with Charlotte the letter that I got from the young lady was actually requesting that we look at our light ordinance uh to anything new coming in or as people replace lights that they use the low glow density so that we can see the beautiful stars that are out at night and by the high reflective that keeps the star stars unvisible and that was her concern and wanted something so that's address in life pollution actually of course pollution that is life pollution that's a whole different ball game really I'm I'm ass sure do you want us to pursue that because that is that's that's additional steps that's uh that wasn't in the motion no it's not I'm just asking why why would did you answer her not yet I don't know what to tell her well I'm going to ride I'm going to

[2:07:20] ride her back this week can tell her something I'm I'm I'm embarrassed Don uh I noticed Al was back there he might can answer my question that Al knows it all yeah Al's my hero unfortunately my answer is no the building code does not address this okay uh is there any amendments or something that that can be adopted easily on this or we we can work with Mr Salas with whatever he comes up with and of course our our department would likely enforce some of this like you said at the beginning of the of the project and then co- compliance would take over with enforcement afterwards right absolutely thank you I think we're on the right track any further comment Council I wonder that M Mr Salas there's a gentleman that works right next door to me Stan and I went blank on his I apologize Stan out there I forgot his last name the man the the man St the man that's what I call him no but he had he's the one that brought it up to our attention because he's faced with those folks out there on o cristoval Road and he had a some type of a a little uh experiment he wanted to show us one day we didn't have time where he wanted to turn off all the lights and show us exactly sure how that is a new how intrusion is affecting his exactly so I'm going to put him in contact with you and uh just kind of and he's one of the people that I was talking about he's the second one that's we'll try to get it some to you pretty quick how does that affect it well though because he's residential but what he's talking about is commercial no if it's commercial to commercial we wouldn't address that we would address regardless of where the source is it doesn't matter if it's affecting a residential um unit it's it's it's it's a nuisance that's what I want to make doesn't matter where the where it's coming from public comment on this anybody else want to weigh in if not I've got a mo no wait come here share your wisdom with us oh

[2:09:25] please good morning my name is Billy dwit and um I hadn't been here in a while so it's good to be back and see that you know the hard tough work has continued to go on so as I've said before I appreciate each and every one of you and the attention that you pay to our city uh my question comment is not directly related to uh the lighting situation but it is a nuisance concern and um I don't know if there's an ordinance or if we're going to do an ordinance for lighting if we could include something else and it has to do with Residential Properties and people storing junk and old cars and old refrigerators and everything in their backyard that is fenced but it's with a see-through fence you know it's the Miss dit is that we can't we can't talk about this now we have to stay with our agenda man oh okay and I understand your concern and we can address it uh James Flores can address it with you yes there are definitely some nuisance ordinances against that and they can be addressed but I I apologize we're talking about lighting and that's way it says on the agenda okay unless we're going to talk about lighting we're not okay thank you I appr I thought you I thought you were going to say lighting that's in the backyard maybe covering this area but yeah okay thank you ma'am sorry to shut you down all right we do have a motion on the floor do we have any further comment from the public not let's take a vote on this the the motion was that we would allow staff to go ahead and look into this and bring us back some ideas as far as a nuisance ordinance to prevent this and it has been seconded all in favor please say I I any oppose Nay put a 70 on that please ma'am thank you all righty let's move on now to number 23 which is the first public hearing consider ation have been introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 ex exhibit a zoning ordinance of the cond of

[2:11:28] ordinances city of St Angelo z142 BMW Trailer Company it is an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinance of city of s Angelo Texas which St exhibit a of chapter 12 adops zoning regulations use districts and a zoning map in accordance with a comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the following properties to W 1616 and 1620 Upton Street located at the northwest corner of the intersection at Upson Street and North Marie more specifically located in the Bell Edition block one locks 8 through1 East St Angelo changing the zoning classification from single family residential R S1 to General commercial CG District providing for severe ability providing a penalty roxan Johnson you are own ma'am good morning roxand Johnson I'm a planner um as you see we have the subject property located on the east side of town here um right off of Bell Street and not very far um south of uh the Houston heart expressway so uh this is a better illustration um that I'll probably be coming to in a moment um subject property located on a corner um the applicant actually owns BMW trailer which is located right here they own this property here the only two lots they don't own are these two lots right here and then they own these on the other side so as you see the residential area at one time these as I talked about in my report um one or two of these Lots were res used for residential purposes um those have since vacated the trend is not necessarily going towards commercial in the area but it's not it's definitely not trending towards um um commercial or residential either one so the purpose that uh the applicant wants to use this um and rezone this land is for uh parking some of their um customers vehicles or whatever the point is here that the applicant originally came to us for

[2:13:31] heavy commercial zoning um Planning Commission um talked about this um staff wasn't approving of that at the time either and so it kind of got um discussed that maybe CG would be a better fit so that's what we're going for today is is General commercial in that area knowing that the vision plan also supports commercial in this area and that um it's something that could be a good fit here Don I believe this is in your area you would take the lead please sir yes I I drove by there and because of the distance from the the residences I really didn't see a whole lot the noise would be the only thing that I would kind of be concerned about but if they just use it for parking you know you're you're noise is going to be to a minimum I would think could we could we achieve the same goal if they want to use for parking by maybe making neighborhood commercial instead of CG no sir that wouldn't that was the least intense commercial zoning that would allow for parking and there was quite a dialogue during the Planning Commission between the uh owners of the house and also the applicant so I'm not quite sure how they resolve their um concerns with each other however we did ren notify everything everyone in the area to let them know that there had been a change in um proposition of The General commercial um those owners didn't return another letter in opposition so would it be possible to leave it where it is and give them special Authority just to make an exception if they're going they say they're going to use it for parking to make an exception to leave zoned as it is so that they can park I don't want I don't want any heavy I don't want any heavy manufacturing over here oh no no no this is this would be commercial which is not anything to doy still it's it's just a step right and and no it's not allowed in rs1 under we don't have a special addition or any any kind of a tool that we can use there those are all

[2:15:32] my questions J you had one yes uh how far away from this in in in blocks or feet is this from the any Baptist Memorial properties oh Baptist Memorial um I've been trying to figure it out on the map and I I haven't been able to get to so Houston heart is right here so Baptist Memorial is probably down over here because it's off M Street yeah this is Bell and then main is over yeah yes okay and so it's quite a way away I live in that neighborhood I uh have requested and this will probably be the fourth or the fifth time that I've had to bring it up that we don't get copies of the people who submit their opinions we can gain a lot from Reading those I'm going take full responsibility and I did put a little excerpt in there I had passed those out at the Planning Commission and I didn't get them back and and I fully apologize that's all on me but there were no yes there was no the second time we sent these out of course um MD already had the reports the 15 days uh we didn't get any against the second time around that we sent the new notifications out but originally there were two four and one there there were three four and and one against Don you want to move one way or the other on this I'll move for approval second do we have any further Council discussion on this yes John roxan go back a slide or two where it shows the area of notification one more that one where where do you come up with 13 notifications sent 13 I don't see 13 um let me see right there that's our actual notification have a variety of different owners where it touches their property line um okay like here's 12 and then here's 13 so the applicant owns several of the lots and then uh going back to the idea of making it a parking lot right are we talking about just a

[2:17:33] regular vehicles or are we talking about 18 wheelers or what what are we talk I believe they use them for 18 wheelers I'm not sure if the applicant is here to speak to this today I'm 18 wheelers well it's a they they they repair trailers there so I would say yes there will be 18 week right and in talking with the one uh home owner representative or whatever uh right here the concern wasn't the noise or the traffic or anything like that they didn't want fencing but fencing is something that will be required between um oh those properties read in here something about the the reason he's requesting the change the parking he can't enclose where he's at to the type of stuff that he works on so there's allow to be some pretty big stuff and I understand his situation as well I understand it well do we have anyone from the public that would like to speak at this either Pro or con this is your opportunity we do have a motion that we approve this as presented which would be going from rs1 to a CG I guess it's time to take the vote all in favor say I I any oppos nay nay put a put a 61 on this one please ma'am let's move on now to do you need a break again just need to hand her a paper okay next is number 24 first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the zoning ordinance of the code of ordinance city of s Angelo z1401 Lewis blanck Jr and ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinances city of s Angelo Texas which said exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations use districts and a zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the following property to Wi 1805 and 1806 Harbor Court located approximately 166 ft and 212 ft south of the intersection of Harbor Court in West

[2:19:36] Avenue in respectively this property specifically occupies the TJ AK Edition section two tracks f and g in South Central San Angelo changing the zoning classification from light manufacturing ml to General commercial CG District providing for SE severability and providing a penalty Miss Johnson very nice okay as you can see um North Bryant is to the east of the property and then Avenue in to the north um we all know that it's kind of a commercial node um although it is light manufacturing right now he's just seeking to kind of blend in with the other commercial properties that are there right now do you have any questions so he's really reduced see the classification from yes he is okay Johnny is this yours or it's Johnny's Johnny take this one please sir would you like some more Graphics there you go that's what the auto part store in the auto part store up there and there is an auto part store there's also I believe KFC and car wash oh okay I know where this is yeah I can give you some pictures it's all it's all commercially surrounded by commercial and the reason it was probably light Manufacturing was when you know the railroads well was there at one time I think in that area exactly it's it's not very close to residential we're actually reducing the classification we definitely are Johnny you want to make a motion one way I make a motion to approve this second we do have a motion we do a second any further Council comment on this do I have anyone from the from the public I know you're out there Lis do you want to talk to it or you s this side let it go okay we do have a motion we do have a second I will call for the vote all in favor please say I I any oppose nay drop 70 on that one please ma'am uh number 25 discussion possible action regarding a draft ordinance for manufactured home parks mobile homes recreational vehicles the moratorium and effect suspending

[2:21:38] commercial property development as it relates to manufactured home parks mobile homes RV parks and any matters related there two AJ good morning mayor council I know we're approaching the noon hour so we'll try to move you through through this item fairly quickly um our goals for today essentially in this discussion are to give you an update on the steps that have been taken and towards this effort uh to remind you of the timeline that we're Bound by moving forward and then lastly to get some direction from the group as to how you'd like us to utilize the remaining time we have before bringing you a final product for introduction so we'll try to move very quickly through those three items um first I do want to remind you that that there has been some length background um regarding this item uh dating all the way back to the beginning of the year in 2013 we've been talking about this through our Planning Commission who's been a very active member of the conversation um you might remember that there was a good deal of research that was done by City staff and brought back to that group we had a joint session between the city council and the Planning Commission in April of last year and then we moved through the practice of putting that moratorium that um is currently in effect into place uh you might recall that we had an initial 90-day period uh that 90-day period expired in February there was one 90-day extension I do you want to reiterate that's the only extension that we have available to us so naturally we're trying to guide you through the process of timing the ordinance amendments uh to coincide with the expiration of that second 90-day period um the most recent steps to date that you may or may not be aware of uh you might remember in February we did have a little discussion about the extension of the moratorium the housing committee uh met February 12th that was the last meeting that we had had at that meeting the committee felt uh relatively good about the products that we put together that were in your we sent out an initial draft of those to you at the end of January we do have an updated set of drafts um obviously it's a great deal of

[2:23:41] information to work through so we'll talk about that here in a moment uh we did make those edits recommended by the housing committee and those are included in your background packet um on the 17th we did have a discussion with the Planning Commission on this item it was a very good dialogue I think it was a very productive meeting we had several individuals that came forward and make public comment the um content of those public comments are included within the minute excert of your background packet um there were some good suggestions made there were four specific items that represented overall minor changes to the uh draft package that the Planning Commission did reach consensus on we've made those uh changes accordingly and the Planning Commission also uh expressed to staff and asked to pass along to councel their willingness to have additional meetings or special meetings if you will if deemed necessary to work through the draft ordinances so please know that that's something that they did indicate their willingness to do we also had several people from the public that indicated they would be willing to participate in such an effort uh I will remind you moving forward uh we are beginning the discussion on Amendment today the dates that we're working for um in April and may include the April 15th meeting which would be the latest date that we could introduce those ordinances in a first reading and May 6th being the latest date that we could introduce those for a second reading um having those in place by the expiration of the second moratorium period which is on May 16th so we're working with a titer timeline now we're sort of approaching the end of this effort we do have the month of March available and uh the beginning of the month of April so I would say we probably have five to six weeks with which to work um so knowing that knowing the background and how we need to move forward I don't want to take any more of your time except perhaps to have a quick dialogue with you about how we should utilize that time moving forward um I have had some edits uh suggested from different groups that have been presented to me today so

[2:25:44] we will go ahead and begin the review of those um doing some markups our committee members that are in attendance today have also expressed their willingness to get together with us for a special meeting and then lastly we did a mail out of all of the uh Redline drafts to every Park owner of record in the city limits um I have spoken with a couple of individuals from that group at length uh for several hours going through the drafts with them and making sure that there's an understanding of what the intent of the committee was with those drafts so with that I will open it up to any discussion and direction that you all have we'd like to make sure in April when we bring back to you for first reading we have essentially checked off all of the to-do items that you give us here today well I have tried on several occasions to read that draft but it has a tendency to put me to sleep imagine writing it I have not got I've not got too deeply into the detail uh Council uh winky uh yes I've gone through this uh these drafts uh carefully and uh I do have a few changes and uh uh I think those have been passed on to Candy pool and Terry Jackson on the housing committee uh and uh U she may want to uh elaborate on those up here in just a minute and I think she may have something tyed up I haven't seen it but uh you do you have that yet I do I have a copy of your edits I also have a copy of Miss P's edits okay well they should be about the same and and uh uh it's my it's my uh uh wish that those changes be made uh and need to be made and U uh if you will keep us posted on on whether or not you're making those changes that would be good yes sir what are the changes would you like me to run through those I can sure and uh if uh you know probably everybody's going to need a copy of the the written changes I haven't seen them either but is one of them the buffer zone one is regarding the buffer um looking at a 1,000 ft uh

[2:27:48] distance rather than the um buffer Zone that is pro proposed in the current draft which is 100 ft um there is a proposed amendment regarding the use categories in which group of living is allowed uh reducing the the number of uh districts in which that is allowed it looks like um some uh areas where some consistency and language needs to be cleaned up um sort of some clerical edits and um with the increase in buffer it looks like proposing some reductions to some of the setb back requirements to compensate for the increase in the buffer right those seem to be the main changes I see here very good i' that's that's something committee needs to look at and make that Johnny did you have something sir yeah AJ uh yes sir mayor one of the areas of concerned that have fallen my ears that I'm hearing is some of the existing Property Owners uh feel that they're being made to jump through hoops uh I know that we're looking forward for any new possible but some of the guys that are are people that have already in place now I mean are we making them uh revamp essentially come up to no um we initially had a good deal of dialogue at the Planning Commission meeting about the concept of legal non-conformities uh features and and placements of buildings things that occurred before the uh existing ordinance and that were lawfully done at the time that they were were done there are some legal protections that the city itself cannot usurp um to allow those items to continue the Planning Commission did have some good suggestions I think about further spelling out um abilities for those items to be documented with the initial permit um so that they are recognized by the council they are documented for the record of course documentation is is something we don't have a lot of for for a lot of the older parks and to allow that one-time recognition to carry with

[2:29:50] the park indefinitely to allow those features to continue so uh I worked with the assistant City attorney uh Dan salur he and I sat down and and tried to come up with some additional language the current draft that you have uh indicates three different opportunities for existing Park owners to declare those features and have them recognized they can do it with the initial application they have a second chance to do so um at the ex time of inspection they have a third time to do so during the public hearing process so by allowing more opportunities hopefully um running through those steps it allows us to find recognize and document all of those features um I think it is a shared um Desire by staff and the the members of the committee to try to reutilize as many of the existing Parks as possible to take on any accumulated um demand that comes into the city therefore reducing the need for so many new parks um that already are part of the community they're somewhat integrated many have spaces available why shouldn't we make those usable in order to help kushion the blow of any demand that we have and I think maybe there there may be some sort of miscommunication there uh with that so maybe reach out to the folks that are have existed or in existence and we have we we've sent out a mail out we've asked them to call and con and contact us uh We've offered to sit down I had one gentleman um that owns two of the existing parks in St Angelo he and I spent an hour and a half about two hours yesterday talking through the points sort of hearing his point of view on things and he made some good suggestions for edits as well so U we're we're ready and able to work through that with people um and we encourage them to contact us so that we can do so Don uh I'm going to piggyback with Johnny a little bit that was my concern also uh I guess my question still is let's say somewhere in the process something falls through the crack it's not noted on there uh an inspector comes

[2:31:54] back four years later and and says okay you need to spend $115,000 to correct this even though at the time of adoption of the ordinance and at the time of implementation of the park it was it was okay how are you going to handle that well I and I probably shouldn't speak um for the legal staff but I would imagine at that point um when that item is pointed out we would still have to do the research to determine when the feature was put into place this is a concept that's been tried um in many case cases at many different levels of government and so we have to be very careful about how we proceed the documentation is going to be crucial on those items so I would think it would be incumbent upon the city to uh be able to um try to pinpoint when those features uh came into be and what the ordinance was at that time that's essentially what they're Bound by not the new ordinance right but normally the way the language is is that whatever is existing and acceptable at the time of adoption of the ordinance that's acceptable why are we going through all these hoops on this one well again this is a recommendation of the committee if the council would like to um write language in recognizing that with the initial granting of the permit anything that existed on that date is hereby legitimized or something to that effect I'm not the word Smith but I would think that we would be able to write that into the ordinance and maybe that's another amendment that we should make I I think it's something that I would like to see us look into I think we need some grandfathers for these existence yeah that's easily done I think or Charlotte the uh uh problem I had with reviewing the draft and I went through every page and fell asleep a few times so but do we have the ability when we're doing a draft and the proposed changes to strike through exactly where it is and change to put in Red so we can compare what we were and what we're going to it make a whole lot more sense

[2:33:58] can save on time and and that was the second um document that went out to you all on Friday afternoon we we did do that I just wanted to emphasize that I've got numerous things of reading and it's very very difficult to follow if you don't have the from and where and I do want to add the problems that I ran into uh in finding things on our new website a lot of information's not archived yet and it made it very difficult and I want to thank Mr Howard and uh Alex back there for helping me and getting me some definitions on some things because sometimes staff forgets that we measley council members do not live in your world and talk your language and therefore we need some I need definitions of certain things to be included and we're happy to provide anything else that you find you might need Johnny a I was G I was just going to mention that the the mail outs that you send to these Property Owners if uh you're sharing all the options that they have to produce documents I mean I would think that and I agree with Don you know and the mayor that you know if if some of these need to be grandfathered I think they should be as long as they're they're kept up and you know they look decent but if if they're able to produce some of these documents that maybe you might be asking for I think it would be to their benefit anyway so you know to have a file for that you're correct the the ultimate goal in that um formulation of that process was to be able to emerge with something in writing that's recognized by the official body for the city which that property owner can file away and and and have available to them um where they know that moving forward those features are preserved and they have documentation that backs that up um there was some talk about that being able to also be um a benefit to those Property Owners as they're transacting property obtaining financing that kind of documentation might be very helpful for them to have and we agree it would be Obviously good

[2:36:00] for staff to have as well for enforcement purposes Marty does m self have anything she wanted you to throw into this no she was fine she just wanted to make sure that we that we protected uh in in grandfathered our our exis Rodney you have anything to answer no I think winky would winky drafted up the changes and I agree with what winky is asking for wholeheartedly I think that it will help protect the whole city as a whole and Don Don's right where we do need to you know all the existing ones we need to go ahead and do an amendment for them so that we don't put a burden on them Chief I just wanted to express my gratitude I know I see several members of the housing committee out there they put in countless hours you know just to work on these items and uh we're just so thankful for the effort that they' put forth I think the product that theyve produced is a pretty solid one so again thank you very much we appreciate that mayor yes sir I wanted AJ or Rodney to elaborate on the buffer zone what is the idea on the buffer zone the idea of the buffer zone is to maintain a distance between Residential Properties and the park itself um so they're not directly abing one another and therefore any effects of that Park would be immediately affecting the neighbor so in this case in the original proposal there was discussion of having a 100t buffer and the proposal now it sounds like from both ends of the podium and also from some of the committee members would be to change that to a 1,000 foot buffer that would um extend from the property line is what I'm imagining in my mind of the residential property to where those uh units are placed so that there is a clear uh separation to help deal with issues that might be nuisance related noise and that sort of thing traffic and streets count in that buffer zone too so you've got to look at that when the the thousand foot the main thing looking at on that is I'm I want to protect the values of the residents that are near what whatever part of town this is on the North side South Side East West I want to protect the values of the H the residents that are there in place now and I think a

[2:38:03] th000 foot would definitely do that and I think the way it's worded in there is you know it's got to be kind of like a park type setting or it's got to be M down it's got be cleaned out and I think it would look nice I think it would help them out and uh you know we can't stop them from happening but we can make where it's going to be real nice and a good buffer winky are you satisfied with this sir U I'm satisfied if these changes are made that's right we can make we can make these changes no matter what right yeah Don you all right sir yes sir sh it I'm with him as long as changes are made okay everybody all right down here on the Planning Commission even if they say if they vote that down on the th000 foot we can come back and override that and if we want a th000 foot it would be who y'all put a th000 in there right right mayor yes could I ask for clarity AJ do we hear do we have Clarity that the drafts are going to be updated by these by this proposal and future consideration of the draft will include these alterations I'm is that the way Council understand that's correct yes okay and then to to further clarify I think you're right on the right track um it it sounds like we may be ready to bring these back for a first reading with these changes yes we would hope so even even next meeting yeah if if we have time to to study them and make sure they're in place okay so we'll we'll make the changes this week send them back out to you all so you can react to the the wording and then we will based on those comments do a final product for the next meeting sound like we're on track perfect okay anybody from the public want to comment on this come head sir thank you AJ thank you thank you AJ thanks good morning uh mayor uh city manager General lady Gentlemen of the of the council and staff my name is Jerry C and I'm a member of St Paul Baptist Church and one of the senior leaders of

[2:40:05] wos I'm glad to see that you're doing something about uh uh these I call them manufactory homes because the only difference in some of them is a uh a tin roof and a composite roof and they're anchored just like a lot of houses that's still here uh take the wheels off of them they're set on peer and beams and uh there is a place in our city for some of the uh for some of this because it affords some people an opportunity to own instead of renting and uh my experience I have seen some of these uh some of these homes uh much better than uh uh some of these permanent homes and uh it gives people opportunity to uh to own just like I said and these uh uh uh these rules that you're putting in place uh please make these or excuse me ordinances uh uh enforceable because what gives uh these residents in these areas of black eye is uh uh the same thing that that you were saying earlier you got all these cars and all this other mess out in front of their homes make the ordinances uh uh where it would be where it would be enforceable you know because it's a it it it it gives the the community a bad Lu and I thank you for working on this because I myself uh own one of these places and I did uh offer anyone at any time that they wanted to to come to my place because I'm not trailer trash Park I mean Park probably like whatever it is but uh it gives it gives a person an opportunity to have a better quality of life you

[2:42:08] know and some people according to their income and I'm glad that you're considering that thank you very much thank you Jerry anyone else come ahead sir Jerry can we come over for supper didn't hear me yes sir state your name and you have the floor sir good morning my name is Lee Brown owner of the Spring Creek Marina and RV park I would like to look have you look at something that RV park owners have been dealing with for many years and that is we've been trying even on the state and National levels to separate ourselves from being lumped into manufactured home parks if you've ever been out to Spring Creek or if you've ever been out to the KOA we do not operate like manufactured park homes and I'd like to address some things that uh I feel like separate us and by what is being proposed in these ordinances is going to really restrict us in the way we would like to operate our business whenever I bought Spring Creek back 16 years ago I wanted to operate an RV park that off that offered a camping experience to a family so we picked one and it spring quick was by the lake it offers us a chance to offer families to come out and Camp however the restrictions on here are not going to allow us to continue with our game plan for one thing I'll just kind go through here and I'm I'm not understanding why we're being lumped into manufactured housing and that we don't even cater to the same clientele uh y'all have already addressed the grandfathering part of it uh I don't feel like I need to jump through the Hoops to show that I have benefited the city greatly out there we're surrounded by a city park we take care of the money out there when we sell

[2:44:10] permits for the city park we do everything we can be a part of the big picture uh I I'm not understanding where some of the minimums like 10 acres are required uh why are we required if I to if I decide to expand my park within the boundaries of what I have why am I required only 10 spaces per acre that is luxurious for an RV site right now my my RV sites uh average 35 ft between sites and this more than doubles that and I have luxurious sites I didn't bring the pictures because I I'm not really familiar with the how the city council Works my sites that we're that we're building now have patios and fire Rings we cater to the camping experience one thing that I'm very concerned about I have 2500 uh linear feet that uh is designed by what I'm reading I have to have opaque screening because because we have public come by through there what's the purpose of being at the lake and trying to have a camping experience if I have to have 8 foot fence 2500 ft around my entire vpart maximum stays I understand some of the uh things that you're trying to re uh regulate as far as uh monthlies and and long-term stays and what have you however I have uh exception with it says uh only 10 % of your current sites can have Park models in them I totally disagree with that a park model by definition by the uh recreational vehicle industry Association is a trailer type RV that is designed to provide temporary accommodation for recreation camping or

[2:46:12] seasonal use PM RVs are built on a single chassis mounted on Wheels and have a gross trailer area not exceeding 400 square ft in the setup mode they are C certified by their manufacturers as complying with an a9.5 standard for recreational parks trailers PM RVs Park Model RVs are most often used in recreational vehicle campgrounds they may be owned by the campground and rented to guest these RVs are used for recreational purposes only they are not meant to be permanently a fixed to the property therefore they do not improve property value used in any way and they are neither designed nor intended by the manufacturers to be used as permanent residences pmvs are titled as vehicles in the state of Texas this is because pmvs are built on permanent chassis such that they can be uh and are moved within a campground my particular case is I have 15 of these little dwellings that are pmvs tied with the state of Texas as Vehicles the reason that the industry came up with these is so that uh as a registered uh as an RV park owner I'm not allowed manufactured homes in my Park so if I want to rent any kind of rooms to provide a camping experience I have to go with a a registered title vehicle that I can park in a registered titled site basically all I have to do is just back it in hook it up just like an RV it's no different than than buying a fifth wheel backing it up into the same site and renting it out as a little cabin that's all we're doing at this time I have 15 of them however if we go with 10% I'm more than double over the limit however because of the camper kns that I do rent out uh on weekends and by

[2:48:15] the day I could actually get 15 more and still over uh still outrun my capacity during the Summers and this is for vacation this is for exactly what an RV park is for another problem I have no tents allowed why am I now not allowed to have tents whenever I'm trying to offer a camping experience these are reasons I think that RV park should be considered in a separate ordinance compared to a manufactured home uh parks manufactured park homes are allowed 30% of our our V occupancy whereas uh anyways I've already covered that I would like for you to consider that these changes uh be made so that RV parks are considered different because we totally operate under a different clientele one thing that uh was mentioned that the true RV parks in the town those that cater to the camping experience parents have not been asked their opinions on any of this the first time that KOA owner or I received any information this was fridy in the mail I would strongly suggest that the Texas Association of Campground owners which is a very national uh recognized Association of Campground owners be pulled in for consideration of recommendations they deal with cities all the time as far as legal issues and what have you I highly suggest that they get involved uh Mr Marshall uh gray is going to would suggest that the KOA Association which is also a national be involved with it also they are very this is two organizations that are very concerned with the um opinions of how people look at RV parts and campgrounds I would if if you don't mind take my suggestion I would appreciate that thank you sir thank you AJ did you hear all of that I believe

[2:50:19] okay but he's exempt from all that yeah he's grandfather grandfathered that's what I was going to say you you you're grandfathered from all this expansion expansion okay explain it to me though if I want if I'm already over the limits on Park models and I want to increase that I'm not exempt if if I am used to dealing with the city Administration yeah anything he does extra he have to make that would be the case on any any anybody it has to be that's why I'm saying I would I would really appreciate y'all looking at that a little bit different because the with the whole idea of the park model being a temporary vacation opportunity that's the only way we're doing it and we feel like we're we're filling a niche that's not being uh handled by the motels hotels and as in Ence for just for your information uh last year we paid $222,000 of motel hotel tax yeah it's not like we're sliding under the radar we do everything up front everything is taken care of I want it because I would like to expand I'm not satisfied with where I am right now I would like to increase my business but with this ordinance I will not be able to do so because because that's a lease isn't that city land that you're on the dirt is yes is there some way that we could go about that because of actually his and Marshall's I believe in Marshall's city land also or does he own he may have purchased his as as far and that's that's just just a side note I'm not allowed to purchase mine so I'm I I get a double wh me on that isn't there something that we could do about that because it's our land and put in there in the amendment to allow him to do do some increases on that the thing that the thing that we're all sitting here up here having problems with is not you expanding out there because I I want you to expand out there it's the it's the new RV We won't to even talk about trailers but it's the new RV parks coming in cuz what's

[2:52:21] happening is all in West Texas they're not bringing in trailers they're bringing in RVs in these camps and people are living in those camps that's the and you understand where we're coming in what we're seeing on this it's not you're your little or your Park out there is not really seeing that but these Parks all north of town and all west of town that is those guys are living there permanently and they're in an RV it is a it's a vehicle that they're living in permanently so we don't that's why we're that's why we're saying it's not a camping thing I want you and I want Marshall I know his deal also and we know what y'all's deals are if we there's some way that we can make it where if you were to expand it would go into the old rules or something I don't know how we do that well makesense one of the one of the things he just solved his own own problem I think is if you separate out the RVs the strictly RVs from from the rest of it I yeah but still we still have the problem though Donna the RV like a new RV park coming in that's winky has kind of thought this out he's gone really in depth on this and when the new RV park comes in the it's not the camping experience that we're worried about that's the one we all love and I love rving it's the living there right and and the we've seen all the cities that are north and Northwest of us and those cities if you go out there the they're comp they're composed of miniature little cities of RV parks where guys are living there 12 months a year they live there it's not a camping deal isn't there isn't there a day isn't there a day that you can stay that would distinguish between the two well there's there's two things that you can do with the the draft ordinances one there is a u process written into the ordinance for variances where the the the the council EXC me the council could find that that based on the particulars of that Park they should have more allowance in certain areas um the other approach that I can think of would be to

[2:54:24] um to modify the percentages you know you have a percentage in there uh that is uh basically 75% is is subject to the sixth month you have a 15% allowance um for uh that that's exempt and then you have a 10% allowance for the um Camp part models you could also um change those or modify those accordingly so there's there's two approaches that you could for that but if you modified as much as he as he needs right now to be modified I mean we're we're messing up the whole thing about what we're and and Bob and them don't have time that's the other thing is we don't have anybody to go out and and check the books in these in these parks and say okay well he stayed here 28 days he needs to move or go out or whatever we don't have people that we don't have the manpower to go out and and police that but there's a provision in the draft that requires the property owner Ley to keep records for up to three years and can be inspected up at any time to say whether they stayed over that time so the city it gives the city the power to inspect it which we always we've always had the we've always been able to inspect it it's just a matter of having you know what I'm saying we just don't have the manpower to go out there yeah and that would be the difference between the two approaches is that that modifying the percentages would be a change that would apply to every single Park the the variance process is a change that applies to one specific Park so [Music] well each would make application on their own merits but yes you would be the decision maker and that might be the way to do this is to apply for a variance yes because if we don't do it that way then this whole thing is going to unravel and we don't have time time is of the essence we need to go ahead and pass this ordinance with the understanding that he will get a fair hearing if he applies for a variance uh because he's come in front of this Council and uh notified us as to his problems and his desire to expand what do we have to even do a variance if you know what you want now and do it before we pass the the new ordinance on this can we just do that do you know what you

[2:56:26] want to do I no sir the problem is it has taken me a year and a half and almost two years to get what I am doing now approved through the city Administration okay so even if I started planning now to try to think about two years ahead uh I'm still having to work with uh 6 months of manufacturing time you know you you plan ahead and basically if you can understand my busy season is is March through Labor Day you the busy hot hot times therefore if I was going to order a park model or try to do any expansion I'm going to try to do it in the winter time so that they're all in place by the time March hits and uh so no there's no way you can do that in the next uh six weeks could we get together and just come up with a like your dream pie in the sky deal well I have pie in the sky I mean I have plenty of ideas well maybe we need to do that is come together you you and Marshall and all of us come together and do the variant I think that if we do the variances well every ordinance that we ride has a clause in there that says anyone can take it to the council for very I guess my fear is that I start planning two years ahead and every year I have to apply for the I'd get the variants before I plan very far but that's what I'm saying and then the next year they say oh never mind it is we do that's why I think you asked for a lot and we try to anyways you can see past has not been that way so no sir appreciate you thank you Johnny talk to you Mr Brewer I do have a question for you right here uh brown brown I'm sorry uh let me get this straight you are wanting to expand is that I mean just yes or no you want you want to expand yes and then two where again does he it fall that he's he's un he's under uh he's got city land yeah his is different so this is a totally different case so right but according to the way I read

[2:58:30] the ordinance it's it's not so because we're lumped together well we need to change get with Rodney and the city Administration sometime this next month Taco is coming to San Angelo to meet with the two of us on other matters and we'll make sure that yeah that would be an a that would be a great opportunity for all of us to get together then right I let me know when that is and okay T what's T Texas Association of Texas Association Campground owners okay thank you we also we also used to represent New Mexico now was the nacho division awful close to lunchtime be talking about is do we have any further public comment come ahead sir state your name and you've got three to five good morning councel Council my name is Brian Brown and I am a local park owner also uh I have a very unique Park here in town that I have some concerns about and my Park is located on 29th Street 35 West 29th Street right down the street from hsvi still I bought this park about four years ago and it's a very established been there for 30 some some odd years or longer many of my concerns with this draft involve uh changes that would have to be made that would basically make it impossible for me to continue to do business uh I've heard your concerns voiced about grandfathering and that would be that would help me in a in a big way I also hear concerns about fairing uh filing for variances uh I I would like to see some type of clarity in the language that assure US Park owners that we have that we will be grandfathered or uh we will be granted these variances that's where there in Clarity in where my concerns come from I don't see that that would be a problem no agree we we have to put something in the ordinance related to grandfathering and that's what we were discussing earlier you know that was my

[3:00:32] point we need to to not be putting people out of business because when they went into that business everything was acceptable good faith okay well I would like that under consideration I appreciate your time your deal is a little bit different than theirs where they have I know I know your part pretty well and you really don't have land to expand whereas they do have land I don't have any intentions in expanding either one of the concerns were with the percentages of RVs in relation to mobile homes I'm technically and I haven't got clear of a wording as to how you would Define my Park my Park's been there for 30 plus years but I have 20 spaces in that Park and out of my 20 spaces currently 15 are occupied by RVs and uh if you start talking talking about the length of time people can stay there I've I've owned the park for four years and I've had people that have lived in an RV for 10 to 12 years they are their permanent residents they do not have another place to go um I would hate to have to approach these people and tell them that they have a certain time that they will have to leave my Park um so I would just like some clarity in the wording uh some consideration possibly for us existing Park owners uh the grandfather clause would be great it's very well said problem we'll fix that anyone else care to speak to this come on up Eustace should we allow him one to three no that's fine I won't take that much um I'm Steve eustus I'm a commercial real estate broker here and I would have bet a quarter Mr Mayor when I was watching the council meeting on my little screen that you would have taken a lunch break before you launched into this so and well this if they keep talking about tacos and nachos I'm not going to be here when when AJ started I jumped out of my chair and drove down here so I'm sorry that I I missed a little bit um I'm I'm not in the business don't intend to be uh but I've sold two parks one of which was to my nephew Brian Brown that

[3:02:34] just spoke and another was uh River B that Mr Cory Donaldson owns uh he lives in California and was not aware of this either until I got a hold of him um we don't ma'am Colby you said Corey Corey Donaldson okay Cory Donaldson uh and first of all I know we need an or we have no question about it and I also know uh Mr wlaw we definitely have a a Time fuse on our hands so we got to get this done uh so I really want to talk about existing just for a moment um you know when you go to get this variance and Brian brought it up are we grandfathered or we non-conforming or do we go get a variance I'm not sure that it's necessary for yall to involve eight departments you you to submit this site plan W you stop right there and put it in the file Instead The Proposal is eight different city departments have to go out and inspect all these to if they're grandfathered they're grandfathered I don't know why we would want to burden staff with that kind of thing that sounds bureaucratic doesn't it well you know I mean it's that's a lot of work and and um and time I think if if somebody if if y'all feel the need and and I can understand that to have s plan let's have S plan and and submit it and put it in the file and let's be done with it um another thing I want to talk about is an annual license fee um I don't I mean I don't think that's going to break anybody but do we require any other businesses in this town to annually pay a fee to be in business in this town I I don't not that I know of yeah we do um we may inspection they call it a fire inspection well we do that now yeah sure and it's yeah it's 20 I think it's 25 bucks but this is an annual 420 well first time is 425 and then I'm I'm just

[3:04:38] bringing the point up I mean if y'all decide that's what you need to do that's fine another thing that Brian brought of is existing RVs uh colag people for a long time and it is their home and they're is proud of that nice little you know 16t RV as as we are of all of our homes um so that's I just want to make sure existing Park owners um have a chance to weigh on in this and I want to thank AJ she's been very open I want to thank the committee and and the Planning Commission was just so open to listening to all the concerns so this is a complex problem I don't know what the answer is but let's protect our our um existing Park owners cuz they're the ones that have hung in there with this town in their businesses through all the lean and dry years and when all these man camps go away these guys are going to get hurt in the interim and then they're going then they're going to be the ones that have to suffer through it and they'll they'll stick through it when the end's coming now and just one thing on new parks that I'm a little confused about I'm not sure Rodney your point a while ago a th000 feet buffer okay I don't know what it needs to be but if y'all take a 10 acre square that's 660 ft by 660 ft that's 10 acres squared if you put even a 100 foot buffer on three sides it's not a buffer okay it's not a buffer anymore it's just a distance it changed from a it's it's it's it was it was a buffer originally it's not a buffer anymore so your your point there is is moot okay what is it then it's just a distance you can't be you can't locate your Park any closer than 1,000 ft uh from a residential area so okay so you you determine where all your residential zoning is and go a th000 ft out from that for perimeter to

[3:06:42] Perimeter okay yeah it's different than okay yeah I think if you I think if it were a buffer you would have very valid complaint well 10 acres with 100 foot would net you only 5 point something Acres of buildable space but and wik you evidently had some um proposals that you had written up how do we get copies they'll probably be part of this ordinance well can we look at it before then M AJ's got it okay thank you'all very much thank you Steve anyone else Pros or cons this is your this is your opportunity if not AJ do you have what you need girl yes sir okay well uh I think you said that there was nothing to discuss in executive I'm going to say then it is 12:34 I think we can be back here by shortly after 1:00 give us 30 minutes to Taco and nacho and then we'll be back I can cover some may I do want to cover just some of the since we're going to be doing a 30-minute lunch I do want to cover some of my discussions with chrisan Village and do you think we'll be back in 35 minutes easily easily let's shoot let's shoot let's shoot for about 105 110 and we'll be back then is that all right with you ma'am works for me just hry up and read it so we can get out of here uh there is nothing to read is there yeah he said you want to discuss you did want to say something let me read it let me read it right quick to make the we need quum though that wasn't me right hang on just a minute let me read this executive Clos session executive session under the revision of government code Title 5 open government ethics subtitle a open governance chapter 551 open meetings sub chapter D exceptions to requirement the meetings be open under the following section section 551 072 deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property regarding West Texas Christian Foundation property AKA Christian village 12:35 we gone it is 111 and we are now back in session we have uh next on our agenda is

[3:08:48] item number 26 which is consideration of approving the city of St Angelo to permit closure of city offices for employee participation in the neighborhood revitalization cleanup project in Real Vista neighborhood on Friday May the 16th 214 excluding offices of essential Personnel who directly Pro provide public health and safety Services Mr Silas uh Council once again we're hosting our annual neighborhood Blitz let me rephrase that the award-winning neighborhood Blitz uh and we're asking Council to allow us to uh close non-essential services for that Friday uh May the 16th and for us to carry out uh cleanup and paint projects anyone want to move to approve this I have a question yes ma'am um I've been in favor of this you know and I said something last time that uh the areas that have been selected are all in centralized in just one area location when is is a team of people people surveyed the entire city for other people who need assistance who are not physically able to clean up or fix up I mean there are other areas in the city than where the concentration has been yes ma'am uh there's there's lots of part you're right there's lots of parts of the city that do need to be addressed uh what we're trying to do is focus on these four neighborhoods that we identified several years back as part of our neighborhood rev revitalization plan plan and once we were comfortable with with those those areas we can start moving away but we're not quite there yet I don't believe uh maybe a couple years uh at that point we can start moving out outside those target areas um and for example there's there's a there's a place uh towards of Howard and uh Webster those areas that's another area that we're trying to look at we'll have to come back to council and ask for us to uh reshape areas so we can expand there there's some areas there that

[3:10:52] uh Junius and on down and around that uh absolutely that absolutely are in some need there's some areas up on Webster um that that you swing around and the the years go by and the people get older and yes they could use assistance but it doesn't seem like they're getting any attention so I'm ringing that Bell yes ma'am um I would ask that we hold off for a little while give us a little bit more chance to focus on these NE the ones we've already identified we're getting close uh Black Shear for example we've done a lot there we're almost time it's almost to to a point where we don't need to go back there anymore um Real Vista get to point where we're getting we're getting pretty close to uh we covered a lot of uh projects in that area as well um we still need to look at Reagan area that that's hasn't been addressed very much either uh once we get there uh then we could perhaps expand um of course it's up to council we could do it next year if you want uh it's really up to council at that point thank you I'll move to approve this item anybody want a second I'll second it we do have a motion we do have a second do I have any further Council discussion public discussion motion has been made and seconded that we authorize the cleanup neighborhood revitalization all in favor please say I I oppose Nay Nay put a two put a 52 on that one I'm sorry Charlotte and winky first public hearing number 27 a consideration of introducing an ordinance amending appendant a pertaining to Lake nasworthy lot lease fees of the code in ordinance of the city of San Angelo and ordinance amending appendix a article 6 section 6.10 Z entitled Lake nasworthy lot lease fees of the code of ordinances of City s Angelo Texas by appealing and restating said article in its entirety to provide for Lake nasworthy and South cono River leas fees providing for severability

[3:12:54] providing for an effective date Cindy priest you are own ma'am thank you good afternoon mayor and Council I'm Cindy PRI and I'm with the real estate division of the city attorney's office the purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the lake nasworthy and South Concho River recreational grazing and agricultural lease fees into the section of the fee schedule additionally is to reduce the multiplication factor for those residential lease fees based on market value effective January 1st 2017 the first change to the section is the title this new section title will be Lake nasworthy South Concho River annual lease fees the second change is going to provide for a $50 transfer fee for recreational grazing and agricultural leases this is a current fee all we're doing is including it in the fee schedule the Third change is going to be um the granting uh a granting fee of $75 for recreational grazing and agricultural leases again this is the current fee all we're doing is including it into the fee schedule the fourth change provides um for the annual lease fee for recreational grazing and agricultural leases city council approved the current lease fees on June 29th 1982 and since that time these fees have remained the same our proposal is that the increase be minimal we're going to increase it to $14 per acre for land $250 recreational charge regardless of the Acres 50 cents per linear foot on water Frontage and the $75 per family unit involved in adjacent subdivision remains unchanged our fifth change has to addresses the annual rent residential lots beginning January 1st

[3:15:01] 2017 our change um indicates that our change will be to reduce the impact of the residential rent escalation based on the appraised market value effective January 1st 2017 the the amended ordinance provides that the annual rent be calculated based on the appraised market value of the land multiplied by a factor of 0.015 this change um is from the current multiplication factor of 08 the following examples will illustrate the financial impact of the current ordinance on residential lease holders we currently have our example one we have a residential lease holder who pays $619 a year the appraised market value of their property is 78,000 based on the current ordinance um and a multiplication factor of 0.08 effective January 1st 2017 this lease Holder will pay $634 in annual rent the proposed change is a multiplication factor of 0.015 and this would reduce the annual rate to 1,1 $82 you'll note that this is an increase in the annual rent um it will go from $619 to $1,182 example two is similar an annual rent of $661 the appraised market value of the property is 88,000 based on the current ordinance um the multiplication factor of 08 effective January 1st 2017 this lease Holder will pay $ 7,40 in annual rent proposed change would reduce their annual rent um from $740 to 1,320 again this is a an increase in their annual rent um just not as drastic and the sixth and final change

[3:17:07] provides that at no time shall any annual residential re rent based on the appraised market value be less than $700 uh we recomend men this as um to offset the cost of managing the residential lots including the billing the transfer of leases new leases and the cost of appraisals and I'll be happy to answer any questions Rodney this is your area you want to start sir yeah first of all this we looked at this over a long period of time and we were trying to come up with what was best for the residents and also what was best for the city these rates have not been raised since 1980 192 1982 they have have not again I want to say that to be really clear these rates have not been raised since 1982 so they had to be had to be raised at this point um there were a lot of numbers that were tossed around that anywhere between the 1.5 to 45% I feel that the 1.5% raise is a is fair to all the residents that are involved I know it is going to be a hardship on some of the residents that are out there but it it is way way better than what the 8% deal was going to be in 2017 18 8% was going to basically kill people force them to to move well and it's the recreational Agricultural and grazing lease fees that have not been increased since 82 um but the residential fees have had a gradual increas gradual but they still weren't near where they should be no sir and that and pretty much all the I don't want to speak for everybody but but most of us felt like that was that was the case that that we had to raise it it was just how much we going to raise it and I feel that uh you know we kept it as low as we possibly could but yet we made it where it is going to for lack of better words that help pay their fair share out there on the on the lots that are there do you like to move one way or another on this I move that we accept the wait Mr Mayor yes well we can still we can still take

[3:19:10] discussion I move that we accept the rates as presented I'll second that motion okay now we have other discussion Charlie uh as presented uh covers everything in future and I thought we were trying to protect those that have been there with the changing the eight to the one but does that mean that anybody who buys from this day forward gets the advantage of that one or should it be a different rate no they get the advantage of the one I think they in order to be fair out there for everybody they should all pay the same rate and that's the residential annual residential lease fees are based if effective January 1 2017 the ones that are scheduled to go to market value will be based on the appraisal times 08 so if the appraisals go up then it automatically goes up it goes up exactly just need I think it's I think it's fair Charlotte that the way we've got it that we've planned well just a minute Rodney let let me bring up a point and make sure I understand or make sure everybody else understands I'm concerned about uh tracks that are not Unleashed right now like uh Unleashed Riverfront or Unleashed uh farmland or something uh I don't know how that's treated in this I can't remember over this long period of time but it seems like everything that's Unleashed uh uh on on the tracks I'm talking about ought to go to fair market value right immediately and I don't know if it's accomplished in there um the farm leases are um bid out so so they go to the highest bidder the only leases that this pertains to are those that go that are along Lake nasworthy are the South Concho River it does not affect and it does not affect twin but's leases those leases are through the Bureau of Reclamation so again these only affect the city-owned property along Lake nasworthy and the South Concho River right uh that's fine uh but uh the

[3:21:12] principle would be the same and I'm focusing in on uh that 900t track in particular uh that's never been leased along the uh Concho River why would we lease that for less than fair market value or any other tracks that are Unleashed on the river it's just is it just the one though well I don't know there may be others well I think we have two now because we denied a a a renewal of a lease for a residential which I want to come back to but so what would be wrong with removing those right now to fair market value well well I I I have an issue with the one that we denied earlier this year or last year of the residents I I think that we weren't fair on that deal that because we've never ever denied anybody that's had a residential lease or to to be able to lease the land that's down below them so I think we need to come back and address that I don't think we can really talk about it here because it's not one of the items that's not part of what the discussion was supposed to be normally these properties um they have limited access and so the only ones that would have access to the river Frontage or the budding Property Owners so that's why um the rates have been established since 1982 um is again to they're also the caretakers of the land so that they P um keep the city from having to go out and clean the property yeah but but wait a minute wa wait a minute I've got a degree in real estate and I've taken all the real estate appraisal courses that that are offered you you if if if a track has never been leased and you're going to lease it to somebody based on the the rates uh 30 years ago plus a slight increase which you're trying to take care of those people I understand that but if you're not leasing Unleashed tracks for the fair market value you're just making a gift to that particular person of city property or City money you understand what I'm saying I do

[3:23:17] I think he's got a point he does I did too but got a good point and I I think you do also but how many pieces of property are we talking about well well Rodney you just you know he may be your friend now but uh if if we're going to lease that property to him uh he needs to pay fair market value he's not even been a resident of St Angelo why should he get why should he get the he or anybody else it's not personal why should anybody get the benefit of our negligence for the last 30 years that's not well it is personal but anyways that that it's not personal to me that property over there it is to me and I I felt like we did him an injustice on that because we didn't allow him to have the same lease that we allowed every other homeowner in there I'm talking about I'm talking about the rates I understand but he should have the same rates as every other homeowner that's in there no he shouldn't he's not a s Angelo taxpayer yes he is he lives here he lives in St Angelo the only EXC the only excuse for keeping the rates lower than fair market value is a person's held that property for a long period of time and you you're not wanting to pile the increase on him all in one year that that situation is not relevant where you're leasing the track that somebody doesn't own it yeah but we took it away from him no no he didn't he never owned it yeah he had the lease on it and every other lease it's ever been done out at the lake every lease has been renewed and not a single one has ever been denied ever when did we take he when did we denied him the re you didn't take it away from him you never I had it maybe we ought to put that on a future agenda that's he had the lease he had the right to that lease on that property he did I don't remember enough about it to even deal with it but maybe that's something we should put on a few agenda I think we should and I do want it on there because we did take CU we're a little bit we're a little bit we're we're walking on the line here are well okay let's just pass it and get make make some gifts to people in the we have enough information we've already moved and

[3:25:19] we've got a second let's vote on it and I suppose if it fails then if someone wants to move that we add that all property that's not undere existing be charged at fair market value and I think win's got a very good point there and as far as this one particular instance you're talking about we can bring that back just that one portion and we can not if you not if they re we we can make a variance we can we can make a variance because it's already been a yes right now there is a motion on the floor that we accept this as it has been proposed and if we get four votes it will be passed as that if it does not then we'll make another motion we'll start over again any public comment Don oh thank you mayor uh my name is Don buts and I uh represent a a lady that has a lease slot there at at the lake and I have uh I just first I want to say thank you all for addressing this and going back and revisiting the ordinance as it was written to bring it up to date sort of to meet our uh standards so to speak is there anything in the new ordinance that addresses how often those thing those lots be repaced was there in Reading I did not pick it up there praised no less than every 10 years so it would be a 10year marker and then they would be reappraised and the new lease rate would be set at 10 years it's 10 years too long should we go to five oh I didn't I just I did not even pick it up whether or not that it was uh in there at all where it could be appraised as the council sees fit every year every six months or whatever and so uh when y'all uh is it in is it in there it's in chapter nine of well I mean what they what they voted on first reading is it

[3:27:21] it's in there mhm yes okay if y'all Y all satisfied it's in there it's fine uh let me ask you this when we when we first started this process of selling lots uh there was a uh some kind of an index formula whereby that appraisal was made and then uh I uh I don't know exactly what that formula was or what the index was but there was a factor in there that the appraisal value was not the Lots were not sold at what they were praised for but they were there was a factor factored in there of how long that lease had to be gone uh and so forth and so and it was uh then the price was set did y'all discuss anything if okay if people start to there's what 221 or 220 lease Lots out there now uh if they if they want come to you and said uh look uh we want to buy ours is it at the appraised V is and yall's appraisers is it can be bought for what that appraisal is or is there is there uh some Factor as it was before it's market value Cindy I believe it isue Char you do you remember that I thought it was at market value of what and it listed an MR uh it stated an MRI upraisal which that's for commercial purposes it didn't necessarily State a residential that's what I remember but there was a factor though that were giving credit for however long your lease had to go don't remember yes there was yes but right there there was and it and in effect it decreased the fair market value of the property giving them the benefit of the bad lease that the city made but you're absolutely right so my

[3:29:25] question was Mr pror is did y'all discuss that uh when you coming up with this uh I didn't I didn't I've never heard anything about it would this change Cindy I'm sorry would this would what Don's talking about would that change under this under our vote no sir what right now my understanding is that effective January 1st 2017 the appraisals are going to Value the property at the fee simple value that there will not be a deduction based on the leas hold interest that's my understanding I've not confirmed that with the appraiser that is the standard that that's in the the background minutes so that actually would take the uh the the discount away for those people that had had the leg lots for a long time that was part of the benefit of buying the lot early is that what we want Council so you may want to whatever I'm not you know say look make a decision today but but that is that is something that's going to come up it's why some some people had advantage of that and some people didn't mayor it sounds like maybe we haven't thought this thing completely through and I may not hurt to hold off to the next meeting Motion in second well we can forward unless they pull their you want to pull it to next meeting Rodney yes I'm fine with withdrawing Mone motion you're going to withdraw second keep no I'm going to keep going to keep his second Johnny's keeping his second but the motion's been withdrawn let's let's visit this at second at the next meeting he's pulling a second well now he's pulled his second we'll get to you Richard if that's all right let's just put this let's let's wait on this a couple of weeks and revisit it again Cindy is that all right with you yes sir Council anybody want to make a motion we postpone this I'll make the motion that we postpone we have further information regarding the questions of the value and U also address the question that Mr wlaw brought up about uh never leased property or new lease values that we

[3:31:28] should have those questions before we bring it back could we do this by the 18th Cindy yes sir okay anyone will second that good questions Don thank you thank you Council thank you anybody want to Second her motion I'll second it okay Richard did you have a comment sir yes sir name's Richard Bardo again uh when I was on the council these Lots came up there was people out there that wanted them on a discount I was one of four votes on that Council that clearly voted for selling them to whoever wanted them at fair market value and Mr w law was there now I I think that the mistake by a very far back previous Council was made but we don't we're not being we you guys can't be held to that but they made a big mistake in my opinion by going into the real estate bu when that leg was manmade cuz it's not laid there by the hand of God and they planted all that Land by God they should have just sold it to whoever comes first now former mayor Don buts brings up some darn good questions and I I'm I'm hoping that you all postpone it I think you already did that but when the simple vote of the council decided to sell them again fair market value no discount okay they chose to lease it and you're right Mr fman correctly uh nobody

[3:33:32] has been denied but only in the area of exercising their option to continue to lease it or drop it you're correct but it's based on that now and you can go back into the records it's all in black and white at that time the council major U uh simple vote clearly set three appraisers out there you want to do your homework go back check me out by the time that was over Mr Fleming and the rest of you that weren't here but Mr warw was we ended up with five appraisers and the city manager couldn't explain why we voted on three only and and former mayor but when he asks about you know the the fair market value back then well I it's not supposed to stand because the market goes up and down we all know that so you better be careful when these people that he represents for example may but former may but man you better give them time behind this microphone I'm serious there a heart attack but for the council to say three appraisers and then two come in it raises a red flag why were they brought in who are they catering to you got people out there and that's your District Mr fman you know that you got people out there that want to buy

[3:35:34] them but they're not reachable no more huh Rick Abit for example one of your constituents was telling me gee Richard some of people out there got it for for 22 and 25 I said I know man I know now he's talking about they want between 70 and 90 grand you do some of these people are doing like you know I mean God put the moon where it's at and it's going to stay there well well these property at fair market value they going to go up now these guys that are out there that want to buy that land it's it's not reachable it's like the moon it's not reachable but mayor I I thank you for setting this back somewhere now don't put it on the back burner because a lot of times when you put something on the back burner it just burns up thank you any other further comment from the public one thing that I want to want to really stress on this and I know you guys are wavering the other way on this is you can get a city council up here and vote to take away a person's right to do their lease which we did we took took away the right for him to renew his lease and I and I fully admit I was wrong in that because I voted to take that away after I've I've thought about it I've met with him I've talked with him and it's the only one that's ever been done that way I feel that we should give him that right to have that lease back he doesn't have to take it just like no none of the other houses do but they all do no one has ever turned down the lease it hasn't happened yet so I think you're taking away property rights that person should have when he bought that property that how that property was tied to it and we basically with the stroke of a pen we took away his property rights we took it away from him and now I feel like we should give it back to him and I like what you said Richard we need to have people up here because the general public needs to know if you have property on that River and you and somebody on this Council gets

[3:37:37] upset with you if they can get three people to take away your property rights you will lose your property rights and that's what happened to him I want to make sure that we don't do that again I messed up on it the first time I won't mess up on it again we all make mistakes yeah we all do I you know I pray to God every day on the mistakes I make but I also I can live up to it and know that if I know I made a mistake I'll try to make it right I think we can put that specific example back on the agenda for I want that on there I mean it's two it's two separate things though yes I agree with you it's talking about his lease which he has already come back to me and said that he wants that lease and I think it is fair that he gets that lease no matter whether he was going to do whatever the trailer park or the RV park or anything that he was going to do that lease is should be his lease I agree with you all right we've got a motion we don't have any more public comment we don't have any more Council comment uh the motion has be made that we postpone this until March the 18th at which time these things can be clarified and we'll vote again all in favor of postponing say I I any oppos osed put a 70 on that one all right number 28 discussion consideration of nominating City Council Members to solve on the serve on the solid waste request for proposal selection committee uh councilman self has asked for this why don't you take it Marty and explain your position sure after talking to Shane last U after the last council meeting uh and I think the majority of the council at that time may have all wanted to serve on the committee and and uh he explained that basically the time crunch were under and the uh the uh um the way it's going to take it's going to be too hard for all of us to serve on it so I I think uh we we need to get those we we need to get to three or under so that we uh uh we don't have to have several meetings and it takes a lot

[3:39:41] of time and at the same time there was some questions brought up about whether or not it' had to be done in Open Session and and couldn't be kept uh behind closed doors so um I think we need to get that number under three and so I was asked for it to be put back on on the agenda um I don't I don't want that number three to include me nor me I need a point of order yes ma'am this was voted on last meeting and we did away with the committee and now the request is that we have the committee after we just voted on it and I'm I'm trying to find it in the uh minutes I had ask Alicia um I thought when Mr Jimenez was on the council that he brought up and we had a lengthy discussion about if something had just been presented and say a council member didn't like the way the vote turned out that before he could bring it back he had to have a signed request by two council members and it had to pass by super majority I would just like to point and find the minutes of that meeting to clarify what we put in place at that time before we move forward what we did back when hmin was here is it was for ordinances and it was the count the dog amount of dog ordinances amount of dogs that one could have and it was an ordinance and what the ordinance said was that if you wanted to bring it back before 6 months that it had to be put on the agenda it had to be discussed and four members of the council had to say bring it back at which time it could be brought back but it could be brought back the next week if four members of the council would do it this has been put back on the agenda uh if four members of this Council say we want to look at it again then we have that right to do it and this is not even an ordinance this was just a decision I don't have a problem one with four

[3:41:43] members of this Council making the majority vote it it gives the appearance I guess my problem is this it gives the appearance that we unanimously made a decision up here last week and say four people got together and said well we didn't like that we need to go back and change it and that's discussing a meeting four people together that's you shouldn't be doing that it it to me it jeopardizes the Integrity of our votes if we're going to do this well that never happened to begin with I've never told talked with Marty about this and I've never even talked about it here why don't you just be one of the members that are on the committee and then that that voids it out but I don't agree that we need a committee a few people are you going to attend every meeting yes I always you didn't no I was the only person that came from this Council that was here for the RFP every one of you said that you wanted to it every one of you said you wanted to be on it and I was here I have to have notice of when there's going to be meetings well I was the only Council member that went for it I think it's a matter of logistics I mean we can we can only be in so many places at one time they didn't know about a meeting no now that's unusual if three of us down here didn't know about a meeting look I just want I just want to uh uh reiterate the words of the mayor at the last meeting after we voted unanimously 70 to have this done by the entire Council and that was this is too important important an item and that he wanted to be on there and he thought anybody else that wanted to be on the committee and hear the presentation should be there and and I agree with that 100% and that's the reason I voted for it and that's the reason why I'm against any change and and I don't know what the law is but uh I think anybody that wants to attend that meeting should be able to attend uh if you're you're an elected representative of the city we're entrusted caretakers of uh of of all of this stuff and we do not need to be

[3:43:47] excluded by some majority of other people and I don't know if you can prevent me from being there but I I'm I'm planning on attending any presentation whether I'm on the committee or not and I don't think there should be a committee and and I don't uh I I don't think this change from one meeting to another passes a smell test to tell you the truth and I don't think a lot of other citizens in this community do either well I don't know if we could all set on the committee or or said in it anyway I mean um well clarify yourself when you said something about it couldn't be an executive session that didn't make any sense to me well can I assist may I assist um the issue initially with the a quorum of council sitting in executive session which appeared to be the original uh strategy it was determined that that's not permissible because um the open meetings doesn't provide an ex there's no provision for the quorum to review an RFP in executive so then we would look at a quorum of Council in Open Session it's not legally impermissible but I think there were questions about deviation from the normal procedure that we do follow uh to have an RFP reviewed an open session and it was just We examined what um what that might how that might deviate from PR prior instances or practice of evaluating with a less than a quorum not an open session so I could go into some details perhaps the city manager might wish to um however there's no legal issue with regard to a quorum in Open Session but there may be some other uh issues as far as readdressing the item that was voted on because perhaps it was thought that it would be permissible for the item to be reviewed in executive and it was determined that there was not an

[3:45:49] exception to allow that that caused us to be here at the plate again okay when was there a written notice sent out to each council member advising that there would be a meeting that I supposedly missed that I didn't see Shane you want to go and address that real quick the meeting the meeting schedules were uh actually listed on the last agenda item at the at the last meeting all all meeting dates were uh meeting schedules were listed on the agenda item so the meeting for last Tuesday was actually on the agenda for an RFP review yes for the pre for the pre-proposal conference it was actually listed in the actual background memo yeah well I think we're kind of getting off point here uh why what you do you tell me again why you don't why you think it's too unwieldy to have a full counsel or substantially full amount of counsel to listen to the presentation he doesn't care I it it doesn't matter to me about listening to the presentations I there are some issues that that I I feel there are in doing it in Open Session uh in a regular council meeting uh to where you know we allow public comment regular uh in regular meetings in which deviates greatly from a standard RFP procedure uh which would allow all citizens to comment on the actual RFP procedure itself and then not only that it would allow actually each one of the proponents or respondents to be able to get up in uh public comment period and actually give a presentation at that point and or rebut or uh refute anything that's said or proposed or you know reviewed by other the other respondents so we kind of deviate from from standard procedure and I'm not sure you know you know there's some concerns there from my standpoint uh and then the amount of material that we that we've asked for in

[3:47:51] this RFP is going to be quite staggering um I'm expecting multiple different variations of responses a lot of calculations that we're going to have to go through to actually review to to determine which proposal is actually the best value brings the best value to the city uh and we fully intend to involve the council but we we just weren't planning on the whole Council but we weren't planning on doing it as as the review portion of this proposal cuz there there will be and I'm not sure exactly how significant these these proposals are but I would I would suspect four or 500 pages uh uh in some in some responses that we're going to have to sift through in a very very quickly to get the turnaround times that we need we're going to be a lot of number crunching to determine you know best value from multiple different proposals because there are a lot of proposals on the table we we've asked for a whole lot of uh things to for people to propose and bring back to the table bring back to us what's the duration of time do you think Shane that'll take to really give this a thorough review and make sure that we are addressing the concerns that we have of course there's also points that we like to negotiate based on what we received back on those rfps how long time how much time will that take and I'm sorry I wasn't here at the last meeting I left for a on City business also but I was kind of concerned when I heard that the home city council wanted to serve on this uh on this committee but and the reason behind that is because as Shen is saying there this this is going to be very thorough uh if we're going to be posting City Council meetings multi it's going to be multiple meetings uh just to get this thing ironed out and it's not going to be something that I feel that's going to happen in one setting it's going to be multiple settings just to get this ironed out uh and that's just a concern that that I do have I think that if we have three council members that serve on on this committee along with staff reviewing you know we can set a uh aside the time necessary to give this a thorough review without having to scheduled multiple Council meetings just to get this thing done and of course we

[3:49:52] do have a time crunch here also uh to get this resolved as soon as possible yeah and you only have two weeks is it when I'm I'm really trying to do it in I'm trying to have most of it turned around or have the major review done within two weeks and have it have a have it back to negotiate with one of them to yeah to really bring back a proposal Within within two to 3 weeks and within that we could schedule a you know a special meeting in there if we needed to but I would think if the whole Council wants to review everything and we want to Crunch through all the numbers we're talking four five six hour meetings just on this one topic Mr Valenzuela I just looked back at the previous meeting and his letter uh last Tuesday was February 25th and it says in the letter pre-proposal conference and before it gets down to initial committee meeting is March 17th that's what you've got in the in your memo here I would not have didn't notice that this meant committee meeting to be there February 11th or February 255th because it doesn't say anything until March 17th is the initial committee meeting that's misleading and blindsiding well no I mean the committee did not have to be there at the pre-proposal conference this was the preo it wasn't Mand to the meeting I go to all the meetings it wasn't a mandatory pre it was mandatory for the for the people it wasn't mandatory for the committee or the deal I had to be there because I was leading the meeting but that was I didn't say you had to be there what I said was this is a the biggest contract that this city is going to exctly and I would not miss the meeting and it wasn't implied that it was an initial meeting at that date I don't think he I don't go to meetings for the need of going to meetings but those are necessary absolutely and the insinuation and The Blindside is not appreciated on something this large and this important it was a meeting to clarify as

[3:51:55] far as answers any questions that may have as far as anybody submitted for the RFP any questions or any clarification that's what that meeting was for um again the way you read it charlot it sounds like basically uh if you wanted to show up uh and answer any questions then you were welcome to do so I'm not sure you misunder did that as far as you had to be invited or oh no I didn't I I go because the meeting before that we said all of us were going to be on there so I'm naturally thinking we're all going to the meeting well I'm the only one that shows up to the meeting aside from what happened in the past logistically logistically I just feel that uh this is my opinion but as far as the way that we should move forward I really do feel that there's three council members my understanding is probably going to be three council members that want to start this committee it's going to take a lot of time it's going to be very timec consuming but again it affords us the opportunity to review what comes in uh and also affords us the opportunity if there's some negotiating points that we'd like to pursue we're not doing it here in an open session we do it in by committee I'd also like to talk about um a quorum of C Council appearing at a committee at an art you can't do that so it is problematic a quorum of council would be an open session and we were looking at that um as a deviation from the past practice and um there are some concerns that I would like to mention um as far as disclosing bidding information which um under the open records act uh the city is entitled not to release bidding information to provide the city a competitive advantage that is going to be um you know all of that's going to be out there to the to the detriment to the city's bargaining position and there may be initial difficulties in redacting um proprietary information of the respondents so um you know and I think Shane mentioned the multiple co uh public comments and the fact that the uh respondents might have

[3:53:59] several bites at the Apple in because it's posted on the agenda um so it's just different than our priv prior practice and again a quorum can only meet you know if it's posted and noticed and so um it just is a little problematic not illegal but problematic because it differs from uh what we've done in the past and of course the selection group The Selection evaluation committee was sort of established thinking that there would be a specialized knowledge that would be crystallized and sort of compacted into the evaluation committee based on I see I see two choices here I see either staff takes care of it the RFP and does it only with staff or staff can do it with three council members but staff cannot do it with seven council members because if we have more than three in a committee it has to be posted and it has to be an open meeting so we're either going to have to do everything we do in an open meeting or we're going to have to do it with three council members in a committee or it's going to have to be done by staff I mean that's that's the only choices we have and I didn't realize that last time which is the reason because of the Quorum I realized we we can't do it as a council well let me let me comment on that you're saying you're saying a quorum now are you talking about four or five people because a qu in here under the ordinance is five that's a legal question technically yes but I don't like any more than four people being I'm not talking about technically I I want to know quum for purposes of of meeting is five right yes okay so why can't for uh I'm I'm I'm thinking of an option which is that if there are three people that don't want to sit in on the meetings we can have four and be okay that which is different than what the mayor's saying I'm just counting I'm counting chickens may I may I address that when you have four council members that are serving even

[3:56:02] though you don't have a quorum it takes four council members to to vote uh in an open session so you could bring into question well you have four you don't have a quorum but you do have four council members there uh a decision already be made by those four council members so even though you don't have a quorum an open session all of a sudden now you have four individuals that are part of the that committee that now have a decision that's made even though that's it wasn't a quorum of five you have four that that can move forward on a a decision or can vote on an item I I don't see that concern at all U uh if if we have four then are you saying that we could it would be okay to meet in close session four is is opposed to a quorum do you know the answer to that off top of your head for purposes of the open meetings act um the Quorum for deliberation uh would be five however um you know let me just think for a moment and I don't have an issue to be honest with if it's four council members I just I just don't like the perception that you have four council members serving the committee a decision decision decision could have already been made before you actually doing an open session that's the only concern that I have other than that I don't have a problem with with four council members being on that committee whatsoever well we just we just everybody just takeing oath that they won't have any preconceived ideas that uh that they're going to tell everybody else that they're going to vote on that way perceptions I'm just talking about perception I'm willing to trust I'm willing to trust the and up to this point up to this point I know the mayor myself have stepped down from I I don't want to serve you know I and I don't care it doesn't bother me if three of you guys are interested in serving get get one more to step down then maybe we can solve our problem that's uh that was the whole reason I asked for it to be put on the agenda before point of order was called I I would be willing to step down I I mean I trust whichever three are on there I have no problem because we're

[3:58:04] going to bet this fully and completely in open Council before we make any decision all the all the committee is for is just to go through the to go through the fine prints and bring some something to us for president so the whole council's going to make the decision correct I don't see the problem here well it sounds like we can solve this real quick and let's get moving on winky you do it Charlotte do it and I'll do it that's it that's three that's it so we're done Don you want to be honored no no okay the perception I think he's right on the perception thing of the four people could could push through whatever they want if three of us are on there the two of you want to be on there I want to be on there let's just do it let's move I am bothered by the perception that you vote on something and every week or every two weeks we're going to change it with another vote that just totally in my opinion slaps the Integrity of this Council that hey we didn't get our way last time let's try it this way that's what I worry about Charlotte we couldn't do it it's we cannot discuss this out in open Forum it has to be in the executive we have to discuss this behind closed doors because you're going to be looking at two or three probably companies and you're going to put in the numbers together and we may have to go back because I was I do have a little bit of advantage over you guys I was at this meeting we may have to go back several times with two companies to before we decide and we're going to have to look at the numbers if those companies and go back and forth you'll you'll be brought up to speed on that but we have to do that in executive session you can't let it out in the open were you making a motion I I move that the three of us you winky Charlotte and myself are the committee on this second we're part of the committee I know that part of it's going to be the part of We're the city council members that will be on the committee okay I seconded there has been a motion there has been a second I think as far as Council we beat this thing to death anybody from the public want to comment vote has been made that winky charlot and Fleming be the council members on the committee to vet the the proposals for waste and that they then

[4:00:08] after the after they have made their decisions they will bring it all to the council it will all be fully vetted in an open coun and we will look at all the options and then we will make the final decision but y'all are the ones that will V it through that most the whole committee though it's not just the council members it's also that's right staff staff it's all staff all in favor please say I I any opposed I have one comment Mr Valenzuela and your office is very good about whenever a council member has to be at a meeting they send a memo puts it on their calendar on their phone accept Decline and Etc and so forth I am going to demand since it questioned my loyalty to this city and the integrity was brought up today I firmly believe that and feel that that I would want these any meeting to be sent to us in this manner so we can confirm that we will be there yes ma'am Charlotte I was never that's it I never ever questioned your integrity integrity was questioned did you vote for this or against it Charlotte vote for it okay okay so after all this is said and done it's a 70 vote that these three be on let's move on now to the next one which is item number 30 discussion and seeking Direction and approval of city council related to the proposed sale of Housing Authority of city of St Angelo of the following affordable housing rental properties for appro appraised values providing that such housing remain affordable housing while under the ownership of the Housing Authority are during the affordability period for the home ownership housing 2703 junor s Angelo 1823 forx imately 88,000 277 Junius 1823 for approximately 87,000 2725 Junius 1823 fora for approximately 82,000 I suppose that square footage that is the appraise value for 2009 okay 2735 Junius 1823 for approximately 78,000 2741 1823 for approximately 82,000 2034 Shelton uh approximately

[4:02:12] $100,000 204 to Shelton approximately $100,000 Mr Solis um we um the city owns and manages the five duplexes over en Forest Park and two single family rental units over there on Shelton Street however due to cuts to Grants and to reduction in division staff we are no longer man to manage those properties uh we're requesting the permission to sell these HUD funded properties to the public housing authority at a praise value uh PHA is in the position to manage uh the properties in accordance with HUD rules and regulations uh and they will maintain the affordability of these of these units um we will carry a 20-year note um and the payments will be reallocated to City programs identifying our annual action plan it's a win-win for everyone I believe and we're asking permission to proceed with the sale Charlotte you said 2009 appraisal yes ma'am that was the absolute worst year of all in the economy for appraisals and property values and it's uh several years old um I I'm not fond of giving away expensed property items and the condition the current condition of these properties though there wasn't appraisal attached to our packet that I saw um the current condition and the remaining economic life sure is very important before I could even begin to consider a 20-year loan sure we would need an updated appraisal uh we didn't want to proceed with the appraisal unless we get permission to proceed with with the process uh that's what we're asking right now um we still have to go through legal and do all the all the documentation that's required in the sale which includes in appraisal an updated appraisal that's why you said approximately approximately because that was a 2009 that's the latest we got um yes uh I have several problems in in concerns U obviously a 2009 appraisal is

[4:04:17] no longer valid uh but my concern and objection goes further than that uh my preference would be uh that the city of San Angelo and and the taxpayers uh cash in uh if you want to get rid of these properties uh I don't believe in the city owning real estate anyway I think this is a mistake to begin with I do know from being around and in the housing and legal business for a long time that there have been problems with housing authority and I I object to selling these on a slow 20-year note uh with 30-y old properties uh I think the taxpayers are put at risk and uh I I would vote for this if you'd go find you a Federal Loan of housing authority to get their own loan and pay off the city but I'm not for a slow note so that's just my opinion the benefits selling to the highest bidder the problem with the highest bidder is that there's an affordability attached to these properties which means that it requires them to to maintain a certain level of rent for 20 years um it's for the shelter homes uh we still have another 16 years of affordability the duplexes have a little bit to have like four years left um but so so that's the reason we didn't go with a public bid process pH is HUD funded and that's they they that's what they do for a living they manage properties like these what I'm talking about Charlotte though is going getting a Hud loan of public housing authority and let them pay cash to uh uh the city well aren't you putting them on the tax rooll if you turn around selling them in anyway well we would and the good thing about the extending it to a certain like 20 years is that the the the annual allocation of funds can be managed if you get a one-time shot uh that you have now you have a big chunk

[4:06:22] of funds that you have to expend by a certain period of time and it kind of puts my staff a little bit into a a little bit of little uh problem but it does it requires us to um expend those funds relatively quick uh with the extended 20 years allows us time to uh spend those funds appropriately so that's we're looking at the US carrying the note and of course PHA uh they're they're they're they're they're HUD funded so they don't have a lot of money either so we trying to trying to make it easier to manage these properties profit will make that off the interest there'll be uh well we we were thinking of a no interest no um again they they know PHA only has so much funds available as you know it's just like just like we do um uh it's more of a management issue to be honest with you um I don't have a management staff to do it anymore uh I need someone going to take it over uh they're position to do that they're staffed to do that um that was my idea so longterm res these um well they they're rental they're they're rental so we have we've had turnover um probably not as much as others because the rent's relatively what it's affordable so we have a lot of folks stick around for a long time social fixed income some handicap that's it's they don't move around a lot that's correct they they they usually die yeah they usually um well in the duplexes we rarely have um a turnover unless you know the inevitable happens so so if one of them defaults on payment what what happens oh you talk rent yes well we ask them to pay and then if we TR we let them catch up if not eventually we evict them like any other landlord we're basically the landlord is what we're doing and we've been doing that for the last six years six seven years since I've come on we inherited these properties by the way um just so happened we took them on and we continue getting the rent uh to help pay for some

[4:08:25] you know some um some cost associated with it I'm going to um move to uh approve this and let you go do what you have to do and you just for the sake of discussion just uh I'm ready to move on with it it's 211 anybody want to second that it's my understanding you're going to go if if if if we approve this you'll go get appraisals and then if the appraisals come back in this approximate range I suppose you'll sell them if they don't then what happens well if they're the person come in too high uh pH won't be able to manage these so they probably won't uh the deal will probably be off to be honest with you uh you have to make it affordable to them I mean they're they're a nonprofit organization just like just like we are um so they're limited on how much funds they have available um so then we'll we're back to square one how do we manage these um it's we're kind of uh we're pretty limited to be honest with you because of the affordability otherwise we'd sell them on the on on the open market and get a lot more money for them what is the staff cuts from cut back in your budget or not finding people to fill the positions uh it's the we had to actually cut a position we're down to three staff we we've gone from 10 to three over the time I've been a director but I just ask why is that has Council cut your budget has the government cut your budget government federal federal funds federal funds yes ma'am the federal funds have been cut drastically the way I see this we need to just we need the appraisal no matter what absolutely so but I'm I'm definitely not Bob in favor of doing a a zero interest loan to anybody I don't care whether it's federal government or you know whoever it is low income U I think if we get the appraisals back then we can we can decide as a council what we're going to do uh whe you can see if is it PHA yes that you can see if PHA

[4:10:30] would be doing willing to do some kind of interest if they're not then maybe we go to another organization that would be sounds like we got to sell them no matter what you can't take care of them we need to sell them that's the bottom line that's what it sounds like that's the bottom line then it should go to like how I bter myself yeah and I I I'm all for that I really don't think you know this almost goes back to the late stuff we're not in Property Management we're not and we're not good property managers um so we shouldn't be taking care of these things and we should you know I see your problem where when you get all that money and what I would be afraid of if I were you is you're going to get all that money but you ain't going to get it it's going to go in the general fund and then you'll probably never see any of it or very little of it and what really concerns me the most really is that affordability period we man we have to we have to uh uh review it we have to ensure that they're meeting that requirement or HUD could come back and ask us to repay them because we violated their uh their contract have we got a have we got a second no but I'll make another motion I think it's time because we didn't get a second I move that we get a current apprais fair market value appraisal on all these properties uh and then we'll take action accordingly thereafter I'll second that F the comment from Council public comment the motion has been made that we get a new appraisal to update the 209 appraisal and that you can bring it back to us then with the appraisal and we'll make a decision at that time we'll do thank motion's been made in Sega all in favor say I any oppos Nay put a 70 on that one Bob maybe we can just figure out where maybe we can try to get you that that money tied back to you right follow up and administrative issues number 31 consider ation of and possible action on matters discussed in executive close session if needed nothing needs to be brought forward uh no decisions were made in executive consideration of approving approving 32 various board nominations of the council and designated council members for consal Museum board Gary Capers smd4 to a first full term January

[4:12:34] 217 zoning Board of adjustments Harry Carr smd1 full first term January 16 does anybody want to make a decision either way on this May Mo for approval second Don is approved Don has made the motion Marty has seconded any further comments on this from Council mayor Mr um Capers has withdrawn his application so it'll just be the one for okay back out Fort cono mum board Gary Capers smd4 to a first full term January 17 we will only be considering B which be zoning Board of adjustment har car smd1 for a full first term January 26 does your motion still stand on yes sir does you second still stand Mr Marty yes public comment all in favor say I I any oppose Nay put a 70 on this one announcements and consideration of future agenda items start with you winky I'll I'll abstain till I get M and writing Don I I'm Good Charlotte uh yes I'm going to ask for an update on the accounting of I believe it was a $2.2 million grant that was to build producers Park and renovate Real Vista Park I would like to see where we are and have an accounting of how those monies were spent and any balances that are left I'm sorry I didn't hear you the Real Vista and producers Park the grant there was a $2.2 million grant that was gotten uh to do those two items with and since it was done I've not seen any accounting as to what each one cost and where we stand I know real Visto is not completed is it it it's very close and prod but I just need to see an accounting of the grant do you want the just the grant dollar some of those like producers for instance had large sums of contributions the all it okay anything else Johnny no I Marty none at this time I know you have one do you want to put

[4:14:38] that uh light lock L lot on there yeah I think that we already talked about you I do want that but I wanted that it's two different things that we're going to be talking about the lease raising of the leases and then graning the lease Jo I take yes sir well I wasn't and and I mentioned it to Rick earlier uh there are some folks out there that they're wondering if we're moving on I know we've used up a lot of the funds for the the River Bank stabilization all those projects so wondering if we're going to move to a second phase I I believe the funding is gone and do we accumulate more funding through half and sales tax or what's the idea there maybe and just just an update I mean just uh whatever whatever our options are and we can but basically yes it's haveon sales tax and Grant dollars and those have been expended except for this U area we're looking at for the in the putt putt area and all that where we have those dollars that we reported on exactly what we had left during our last presentation approv the remaining de dedicated dollars that at up all the budget and the only ones other than that out there is if the property the Edgewater property is ever sold then that water that funding was taken from the River Project would be returned to that project so after that it would require additional you know you'd have to vote something if you wanted to use half sales tax dollars that would have to be a ballot or something winky it's time for you move to Jour second all in favor say I it's over we almost did it

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=O4ioS9AGrII