San Angelo City Council 8-6-13 Part 2

[0:00:00] all right it is 20:05 and we are back in session okay and we've got several big items on the agenda that most of y'all I think are waiting on so if the council will allow us to I would like to jump to item 21 which is a Howard College on the street pick up 22 which is Howard College I would then like to go to item 25 which is the RV park at Butler Farm and then I would like to go to item 32 which is a presentation of the vality water and let everybody hear that and then we can go back and pick up our house keeping items and if anyone else sees anything in here that maybe we should take first let me know where's Republic I don't have a problem because Republic's here Republic here as well okay that's the that's the uh one two 3 four five items I've got is it will anybody will anybody approve us doing that will will you allow me to do that you did say item number 30 also yes item let's let's jump and get 21 22 25 30 and 32 and then after we get the major things and get everybody most of our crowd taken care of then we'll go back and pick up at 16 at our housekeeping units I second motion that'll work do I have doned winky you don't care okay let's step up Marty you okay with it fling you okay with it let's go then to item number 21 this is consideration of approving a recommendation by the city of s Angelo Development Corporation authorizing an increase in the estimated construction cost to 52900 from 350,000 as originally approved by council at their regular meeting June 2712 resulting from an increase based on the

[0:02:03] estimate for the actual design drawings in a wider proposed Street crosssection on the pauland boulevard portion of the project brother snan you have the floor sir thank you sir good afternoon um for the benefit of the uh newer members to council um this item has been before Council several times uh starting with a an original proposal to extend Smith Boulevard through the middle of of the uh Howard College campus that was a decided to to not be a good idea uh and we've we've gone back and looked at it several times the last time we had it in front of council um to get the approval of the 355,000 the proposed Street section was going to be a half width on pauland Boulevard and a half width on Smith Boulevard um so half width here and a half width here the uh once the engineers got into the actual design of the street um with drainage considerations and everything it just wasn't working to have the half width on pauland Boulevard I'm going to skip through slides here but um a full width section would be basically um everything uh uh the street being improved a full width and then a bar ditch along the north side to carry the the storm water runoff half width uh we would do the same thing but then we would have an unpaved area and then to the bar ditch to allow for expansion uh or widening of the street eventually this is the uh proposed uh full width Street if we did a half width Street and this is where it's it it starts to maybe make a little more sense um if we if we improve the full width at the intersection with Highway 67 we have to have a transition area to take it down to a half width Street and

[0:04:07] then we would need another transition area to get it back to a full width where we do the intersection with pauland Boulevard I'm sorry with the intersection with Smith Boulevard that left this area in between not being uh paved and it just didn't seem to make a lot of sense so we we looked at then what the cost would be for those two options option one uh for the full width of of Paul and Boulevard is 52,6 half width uh or partial half width was only $443,000 so it's about a $70,000 difference there so when we presented at the Costa DC board they said you know we might as well go ahead and do the whole street width now this was all predicated originally on the 355,000 by the way was without any design drawings or anything so there were no quantities it was just everybody's best estimate of what that cost was going to be now we have quantities we know how much we know what the storm drainage is now so we feel fairly good uh fairly confident in these estimates and the Costa DC board did uh recommend that we go ahead and improve paulan to the full width Don I believe this is in your area isn't it C yes sir would you uh comment please sir and make a motion well one of the the things I you know I I love what they're doing I think it's great but by the same token one of the things I have heartburn over is the fact that you know we had people from the Christian village come up and talked to us last week about us having water running across their property and it's been there for years and years and we haven't addressed that but we're addressing this um you know I I I I think we we need to do this but by the same token I think we need to put it as a higher priority on on helping those folks out too I I don't want to rob from

[0:06:11] Peter to pay Paul but um I think this is is good and and uh uh I'll make a motion to accept as presented to accept as presented do I have a second second do I have Council discussion Charlotte it was approved previously at the 355 yes Ma I don't understand why we can't ever have anything come back even close to what was estimated our own engineers and stuff that that was out there these wide variances are very disturbing to me apparently nobody else but they're very disturbing to me how did we get from 355 to five whatever actually close Charlotte H what is close and I'm not saying 350 to 512 but that was their that was what they said it was going to cost okay and that's what we were willing to do at that time out of uh this comes out of the general fund doesn't it no ma'am it comes out of cadc funds how does it match kosad DC I mean what makes it available for kosad DC funds Economic Development yes ma'am the fact that we're uh the property to the particularly to the north and to the west of Smith Boulevard is industrial or heavy commercial property available for Industrial Development which qualifies as a an eligible project under uh coad DC's guidelines and the state guidelines we've been dealing with this for two years trying to get a road out there to Howard College to give these to give these students some protection somebody's going to get hurt bad on 67 if we don't get another way in and out that's very dangerous it's extremely dangerous and we've been pushing this off and pushing this off do I have any more counsel do I have anyone from the public Howard do you want to talk about it I don't think her name is Howard identify yourself Miss bird and

[0:08:14] go and take off I thank thank you and and I uh thank you for the opportunity to to address this um this is as uh as the mayor has stated something that Howard College has been worried about and concerned about uh since we've been out there with our growth uh We've grown from uh right under uh a th000 students to over right under 3,000 students so we've quadrupled in size uh our students are having to go right here in the only entrance into Howard colleges right here um I've got pictures coming so I wasn't prepared to to show you but it is extremely dangerous we're we're living on borrowed time I want to remind the the city council that we came last year with a plan that would give us uh the right of way coming through through the campus and it was at City council's request that this that this Smith Boulevard was closed and we had to redesign uh so we redesigned Howard College property ends right here so that's why you know we're it is it is really desperately needed that we have this additional entrance to get our student um population off of of 67 as quickly as possible thank you thank you ly any other public comment if there is no more it's time to take a vote the motion and the second is that we approve this expenditure and I will ask for a vote now all of those in favor say I I I any oppos nay nay okay we have six for and Charlotte farmer is against which takes us to item 22 which is consideration of approving a recommendation by the city of s Angelo Development Corporation authorizing the advertisement for a request of bids RFB for the extension of Smith Boulevard from the North Boundary of Howard College to the intersection of Smith Boulevard and the extension of Paul an at a width of 26 ft and the

[0:10:17] extension of PA land from its intersection with Smith to its intersection with 67 at a width of 64 ft the cost is estimated by the city's engineering department being 512 870 to be funded using half cent sales tax proceeds and any other action in connection there to Mr schneeman um this is just a follow up to the previous item which is we'd like to take this project as it stands now uh construction documents are complete we'd like to take it to bid Mr bordon uh so move second any other councel anybody from the public wish to comment Mr Mayor yes sir mayor yes sir do you have uh does council have special instruction for bidding procedures they want used on this project we talked earlier about uh process that involves sealed proposals versus a a bid process for construction projects and we also talked about future bidding process um remember the discussion about with CA DC uh did you want to start our new bidding process here competitive competitive the reason why mayor excuse me if I might um the corporation isn't subject to the um chapter 252 of the local government code so so therefore um they Council can if Council desires make suggestions for to be adhered to in the bidding process what do you think we want to bid it just to have to we have been bidding or you want to put the special provisions on it that Roger Banks talked about a while ago anybody have Mr what would you like what what's your best I mean the competitive sealed bid process worked well on the the business resource center it gave us a little flexibility to deal with the uh with the contractors um I don't anticipate this one being particularly involved process it's pretty straightforward but I mean

[0:12:19] it's council's pleasure on it okay you say go ahead and use the new bid process go ahead and use the new the new process what you say Marty you carry it away I I think I think it would be be great to to see how it works and if it works and what it'll do and what it won't do I agree it's a good time to start let's do it do it our previous advice from Council about setting precedence on Costa DC's bid that it is you're talking about it being identical to the way the city does it no we're talking about using a different process than the way as Roger Banks was talking about this morning so this would be using a different process that is now available to us kind of give us an idea of how it works I'd like to kind of see how it works a pretty representative project Mr bman yes please do do what it would be a pretty representative project I think yes yeah I do I think so yes I'll include that in my motion okay will you include your second yep yes let me just ask as far as the timeline on this project I mean we're okay it'll start we are uh Howard College is about to start construction on their project um so we would like to finish this about the time they do but they've probably got a longer timeline that we do okay I don't see that it would slow us up any it's just a different procedure takes a little longer in reviewing the bids but it's an alternate bid method which um let's let's go ahead try through which you can obtain the best value but the criteria is just more or less mirrors the same criteria under think it's a good time to start so would there be a motion that we could articulate that just made it okay Don made it Marty second it he made the addition too all right and if there's no further counsel he didn't say it as well as Miss B said no it's kind of rough around the Ed if there's no further comment from Council and there is no further comment from the public then I'm going to call for the vote all of those in favor say I I I and

[0:14:22] those opposed no we have a 61 vote Miss farmer being the Nay vote thank you thank you sir let's move on now to item 25 this is discussion regarding a recommendation to the city's planning Division and the city planning's commission regarding future action on pending and future requests for zone changes or special use permits pertaining to number one Campground Recreation Vehicle Parks and number two manufactured housing parks and any action in connection there to and this was requested by council member Fleming and you now have the floor sir if you'd like to preface here I'm asking that that we go ahead as a s as a council and vote to place a moratorium on any um RV or trailer parks inside the city limits uh and I would ask that we not put a time limit on it therefore we could reverse it if we need to in the in the coming years now I do know Daniel that we've got a committee that's been working on these Provisions I know they've worked hard I know they're not completely through How would how do you feel with this Rodney as as far as the I met with the committee the last meeting that they had and I I like a lot of their recommendations but I that's not what I'm trying to achieve here I'm trying to stop any RV parks or trailer parks new ones coming into our city at this time I I just don't feel that it's needed and we can actually take Direction on that also to make sure that we start working on those ordinances you know that would um you know make sure that we highlight the directive of the council and moving forward on that uh we have done a lot of leg work and the subcommittees have done a lot of leg work as far as addressing criteria there so we could incorporate whatever it is that uh the will of the council is at this point and you did say that you're not putting a deadline on this so if the committee comes together with with a recommendation that we could stand then we could pull the moratorium or go the council could vote again to Mor that's the way I would like it to be any other Council comments Don I I'm not in opposition of what Rodney's wanting to do but I would like to hear a

[0:16:25] presentation from from them I know they did a lot of hard work and and I've had uh uh I've had pointed out to me by a good friend that was in Florida for a while that you know it works well there they they can uh make it to where it's a something that the city can live with so i' I'd like to hear from them somewhere along the line would there would there be an issue with I know Rodney what your will is on this also of course that we do have this committee at this point uh that can come together and incorporate you know what your concern is uh what the council's concern is and then uh have that of course it'll go to the Planning and Zoning for the recommendation but to include a moratorium in there also in the form of an ordinance would there be an issue doing it that way I mean it's still it still it still gets done what you like to get done you know there's basically effectively what we're doing at this point is everything's been tabled and that allows us to go back and make sure that we address it through the committee through recommendation of the planning zoning uh we can have our planning zoning staff take a look at that and make the commendations and bring it back to the city council but I don't see any change to that really to be honest are may I ask and and excuse me are you um directing the city to look at um the a moratorium pursuant to state law or a moratorium either moratorium in order to be effective would have to be by an ordinance but are you directing us to explore the mechanism available to us under state law to have not to explore but to go ahead and place the moratorium well would I'm asking for I'm asking for a vote from this city council to put a moratorium on any RV parks or trailer parks inside the city limits I'm asking for that it's a resolution is it a resolution yes a resolution won't have the same effect because what we are doing is we are affecting what is in an ordinance um the right of individuals under an ordinance so it would have to be action by an ordinance a resolution

[0:18:27] would merely be a policy statement so an action to um preserve the status quo of what's available under an ordinance would have to be by an ordinance so my suggestion is that we couldn't accomplish what we could we we must accomplish it with an ordinance either pursuant to state law or um which is chapter 212 which allows for municipal moratoriums on property development or we just have a standalone ordinance but my suggestion is that it's we we can't accomplish a moratorium by resolution merely at this time that's that's your opinion or what I'm asking is is if we do if we ask for the resolution and it passes it can't go into effect or we we post it now and then we vote on it maybe the next meeting uh it would be an ordinance that that would be the vehicle that we would need it would be an ordinance it's not a resolution so are you saying that you'd like action by Council so we could effectuate your council's action but it would be in an instrument that would be an ordinance not a resolution I do want action so I do want I I guess if you're telling me that it has to be an ordinance that's what you're saying to me yes it cannot be a resolution correct yes okay I would like an ordinance then to be placed make it make an informed motion there's a moratorium right now by prior Council yeah yes there is there's moratorium right now that we didn't well how long can this moratorium go on as long as we want it to that's why we were elected now the item was tabled for consideration basically and that's what the committee has been doing at this point to come up with a criteria and basically what I'm hearing from you is that you want to add to that of course as far as directive and making sure that we're more specific and saying this is a

[0:20:29] moratorium uh we want to address it uh not just with the criteria they currently develop but actually develop more add to that to make sure that we restrict where those yes very much so very much so I want the language to be put out there basically what I've been told that and this was by the previous Council that was in place that these things were tabled and so they just pushed them to the side there's three it's my understanding there's three requests for this types uh such properties right now and I want to make sure that we're not going to allow any more to come in for whatever time period that we deem needs to happen if it I could see in the future that it might change we may change what how we how the feeling is or another city council may come in but I would like it to be worded so that that the the uh resolution or the the tabling is uh stronger and that we're not going to allow them into the city limits at this time as far then in effect we'll come back to council for approval of this uh moratorium that we will um which will be embodied uh in the instrument which will be the ordinance and we'll set out the appropriate features and as we've had a discussion that um we need to substantiate preserving the status quo based on our police Powers which would be um we would have to have findings and evidence that we are um taking this action to um to safeguard our infrastructure our water resources and all the things that are laid out which make it permissible for a city to have a moratorium it's to preserve um the public health safety and Welfare and we would reflect that in the ordinance that we would present to you motion okay that would be fine but we're not doing that now though we're not we're getting direction from motion we can get it going okay I'd like to make a motion that we start the process in the morning yes we start the process and then move

[0:22:31] forward okay great and I'll second that motion let's wait till he gets back yes sir winky gone too looking that went okay the motion has been made that you know what you made you know what you want you know what he wants don't you okay the motion's been made it's been second anybody Council want to speak to it we don't need specifics you know no we don't we specific not going to do RV parks right that's what it means anybody in public want to talk to this then let's vote all those in favor of Rodney's motion say I I any oppos nay 70 what that was a did you votos n did I hear a n you said no I said no you said n you said any opposed n any opposed I yeah okay I said it wrong okay he abstains everybody else said I so call it a 60 vote I did not n it but my mistake forgive me 60 let's move on now to item number 30 this is the discussion and possible action regarding the renewal of the agreement for waste collection and Disposal and land Landfield lease and operation between the city of St Angelo and Republic was services of Texas this is requested by Charlotte farmer you have the floor ma'am I'm eating ice this is uh just a renewal of the existing contract with the Republic out there if they would like to come forward and state the reason for their uh renewal um my understanding is as they just need to know from the city a commitment in renewing their contract so that they can make some subst ual Capital Improvement um expenditures honorable mayor council uh

[0:24:40] first of all thank you for the opportunity to speak on this today um you know I just want to take the opportunity to speak on behalf of the uh 90 employees that uh introduce yourself okay I'm sorry I'm Kenny ramzinski general manager of Republic Services here in San Angelo and uh just wanted to take a few moments to speak on behalf of the 90 employees that currently work um for Republic Services out of St Angelo uh and on behalf of their families that are that are dependent on this contract and U I know we have a lot of items on the agenda today and it's it's it's going to be a long meeting but I'd be remiss if I didn't get up here and speak on their behalf um you know these these uh 90 employees live in this in this community uh they raised their families here and and they're definitely part U of this community so um right now I just what we're asking for is just to extend uh or to uh uh to extend the contract uh to renew it uh for the five-year term and what I'd like to do is you know I I I really believe that we're in the day day and age of uh where action speaks louder than words and the actions of the 90 employees that work here they're strongly committed to this community they're strongly committed to the quality of service that they provide each and every day and we also understand that it's it's not a right to have this contract it's a privilege and we work hard each and every day to earn that privilege to have this contract and and U and we want to continue that um so on behalf of the Republic family we just want to thank you first and foremost for for the uh the business and we also would like to thank you in advance for your consideration to extend the contract uh going forward so we look forward and being a partner with that and and to Charlotte's Point um you know we we we definitely have to make some Capital Improvements uh we need to invest in some trucks and other equipment in order to do that we have to have uh a term that that we can spread those Capital cost over and uh and

[0:26:43] that's why we're asking for this extension to the contract so we can make those types of improvements and and get on down the road so any questions or boss talk to us about the city viewpoint on this please I do have a few comments first of all uh you've done a great job as far as uh the city is concerned the work that you've done in your waste collection we really appreciate the work that Republic has done we've been quite impressed to be honest with you we thank you for I know youve you start off the mechanical program too as far as those trucks and I think that pilot program went very well also uh we like what you're doing in that area the only area really that we' like to address uh moving forward is the landfill portion and we feel I mean this is this is my thought on this um the the other part of but you're doing really well the only other part that Chen and I have discussed also is we want to make sure that we have an opportunity to sit down with you and discuss the Landfield portion of that absolutely and and and just for for the benefit of council you know Republic Services owns and operates over 196 landfills so we have we we have the the resources available the engineering department to basically uh provide any types of changes or or uh operational efficiencies you'd like to see there part of this renewal was to also incorporate a uh convenience center for the correct for the U for the citizens to to separate them from the working phase so that that is part of this uh consideration if if we get the renewal that's part of that capital investment we want to make uh to make it better for the citizens uh in that respect but we obviously can entertain any any other Chang that was the only portion really that I would love to be able to sit down with you and just make sure that we get the the iron out the details really on the Landfield portion of it sure and um if we can get get that done I really don't have an issue whatsoever like I said we've been quite pleased with the service you provided for us well thank you motion to approve a Republic's renewal of their existing contract with City Waste Services is that what I'll second that okay is that with the negotiating the landfill portion of it uh because it's

[0:28:46] yes okay that's okay shouldn't we wait until we've negotiated before we make a motion to approve from a legal perspective you'll get your chance the city has the ability to and an option to renew whatever its Council desires to negotiate as part of the re renewal um is something that uh can be achieved so council do you want to renew the relationship but then um negotiate within the renewal amendments to the contract is that what you're asking that's what we're looking for actually yes so then um you could authorize City staff to negotiate the terms of um whatever it is that that you want them to look at however what you you are exercising is your option to renew the contract subject to amendments you could state it that way tell me what you desire to me it would be subject to as far as amendments uh based on negotiations with u uh with Republic pertaining to Landfield fees and other actually yeah Shane if you can come up here and actually talk a little bit more to that yeah and there's other issues I know we talked about you know with the pilot program and going to an automated service and things like that with the collection systems that that we haven't discussed and talked about as well that are not under the current contract if we just extended the current contract we're going to but the current contract says that they will uh manually twice we collect garbage and trash and so if we do want to go to an automated system things like that there's a lot of different negotiations uh the last council did talk heavily about uh recycling services and things like that as well that are not included anywhere in our contractor basically just open to the open to we weren't here today nor were they

[0:30:47] prepared today to talk about these items because Mr Valenzuela did want to visit with them on uh uh recy recycle and yes and so this was just a renewal a commitment from us that we're going to renew their contract as he is with negotiation so that they can do what they need to do and get on down the road with business and so can we like I said it was just those are other points talking points that we talked about prior to so and though our contract is currently written if you just if we just extended it the way it is currently then it doesn't allow us to negotiate those points in the future so uh Mr Mayor yes sir uh they they understand uh there other items to be negotiated there's something they want to negotiate too so it's a quid pro quo uh I don't have any problem with this as an attorney at all and and I'll second Charlotte's motion it's already second did somebody did already had a secondy Rodney well I think the negotiations ought to be ought to be done and we ought to have something to deal with but before we start voting on it but that's just my opinion public comment anyone care to speak to this come ahead Mr Gregory identify yourself and you have the floor sir good afternoon I'm Bobby Gregory with uh Texas Disposal Systems as well as Acme Iron and Metal here in here in St Angelo thank you for the opportunity to address you I'm here to ask you not to ex uh vote to renew this contract because I submit to you that the timing is not right there have been presentations to the Past Council uh in in in 12 and earlier this year concerning options that are available to you as a city for recycling for uh different types of collection for cart service um my suggestion is what has

[0:32:53] already been voiced here that a NE a decision today to extend the contract would take away and you would lose the negotiation posture that you now have to negotiate with uh Republic and if they don't negotiate in good faith you've lost your ability to go out for bids to do an RFP or to not extend the contract as you may know this contract automatically extends if either party does not give notice within at least 90 days before the it's uh due date and the due date for the first 10year terms uh first 10-year term of this contract is the end of July of next year you have almost a year to deal with this issue before 90 days prior to that you have to either give notice not to renew or it automatically renews it is my understanding that this contract has never been bid going back 30 years I don't think there's never been a single time that the city competitively bid its contract I suggest to you that perhaps it's time to get a competitive bid on it 10 years ago when this contract was negotiated it was a very different set of circumstances the value of this landfill given the flow going into it and given the activity in the area was dramatically different than it is now certainly dramatically different than is projected to be over the next five years of what your renewal would would be so I suggest to you as the city manager has stated there is a very good reason to negotiate the portion involving the landfill I think there has been some fear placed in some people's heart that a negot that if you don't automatically re extend this landfill you could lose your low rate for residential collection of $9 and something cents per month well

[0:34:56] I can assure you you can have a lower rate than $9 and some odd cents per month depending on what your other negotiations are you have absolutely nothing to lose by not by passing on this item today not extending the contract taking public comment in an agenda item that allowed you to consider the types of things you would like to include in negotiations perhaps even voting to do an R FP a request for proposal to allow Texas Disposal Systems and other companies to come in and give proposals on what they could do for the city you're absolutely not bound by any of that at all all you have to do is within at least 30 90 days prior to the U next the end of next July is not give notice that you're not going to allow it to automatically renew so I really really strongly encourage you not to throw away your right and the negotiation posture that you now have by being able to negotiate with the possible possibility of not approving it once you've approved it you've given up all negotiation posture so that is my that is my strong recommendation to you that you take a series of actions on city council agendas to allow people to give comments you consider those comments and decide whether you want an RFP or a bid or even allow unsolicited proposals an action today as proposed would cut that off completely and you would preclude yourself for 5 years from taking any action and if Republic does not choose to negotiate in good faith they could tell you I'll see you in five years because you've given away your right for that uh so uh those are my comments I'll be glad to answer any any questions at all if you have any thank you I I

[0:37:00] would counter that but I I do appreciate your position that the contract does provide Provisions for Amendment and we're not going to assume that there won't be the ability to amend uh in good faith um and the the agreement can be terminated mutually so I just think the discussion of an extension versus amending the contract as it is um Extended in the future to what the parties later negotiate is doable because all contracts can be amended and we're not assuming that it would wouldn't be amended in good faith but I do understand um from the Department that there are some um things that the department may desire to present to council to be implemented um in the future and um you know that could be presented at a later time as well but I I understand what you're saying but my position is that we don't forfeit amending a contract once Ann newed because there is a provision to do so but anyway it would be the staff that would have to present to council what different types of um uh methods they they wish uh to have Republic provide the service To Us by so I I just don't think when the um extension uh excludes later negotiation bowling as far as contingent on negotiations of course if things do not work out in good faith uh the city is under no obligation really to um renew the contract really then we have another year to determine whether we want to go out for our fece and so forth so the good faith has to be there anyway in the negotiations is that correct yes yes it's simply it's simply my understanding that if you renew it vote to renew it now you've lost your opportunity for 5 years to to not not that's cont that's way I see that's all I was saying I I agree mayor that I mean it's not up to

[0:39:04] it's not the ex the termination date it's not up for Renewal yet so we're ahead of it and I understood from Miss farmer there was just the uh concept she wanted to offer the concept that we would look to renewing it but it is not timely it's it's hasn't expired yet and so if I could just interject my motion and the reason to come now now was so that they could go ahead and make a capital Improvement to the business they don't want to wait a year from now to order half million dollar trucks and several of those at a time and and that was the conversation and that was the motion so I'd like to call for the vote your motion is to renew the contract for five more years right now and then let Neti yes that's my motion and I call for the vote well I think Republic in an excellent spot and I think they've done an excellent job but to renew this for five more years when it's not up for a year and then hope for negotiations to me doesn't make a lot of sense so I'd rather negotiate and get everything on the table then bring it back and then we'll know what we're voting for but that's that's just my opinion Ry question mayor yes if while we're negotiating Daniel if something doesn't go our way can we back out of it if we do it before the end of this year yes we that's that's what my understanding is we can back out of it uh so we still back out of it but if we make the motion was that we approve the extension right now so that they can start buying equipment which means that we have committed to five more years and then we negotiate to get what we to to to to get what we need to to do things that we want but if we're making the motion right now to extend this thing from 5 years from July 14 until July 19 then we've taken away all of our negotiating rights and that's what I'm saying let's negotiate it let's come up with the very best deal that we can get for Republic and for us then bring it back to negotiation we can then make a decision if we want to extend the negotiated

[0:41:06] items or if we want to go out for an RFP I just don't want to extend this until July 19 and then go out and negotiate I'd rather negotiate first and if we extend this for five more years we are tied into it Miss farmer would you consider uh rewarding your motion to allow them to at least negotiate say within the next month or two to I'm not going to put a time limit on it but I did allow to negotiate and um that is for us as well as them um you know if any of you read you know the right structure and how long it's been since there's been an increase and stuff you will want to negotiate so I call again for the vote well let me just add my comments this is probably one of the hardest decisions I've had to make you know I I I know both parties I know some parties involved and if at the end of the day uh the vote doesn't go even the way I I'm going to vote then so be it you know because and I have due respect for everybody out there all parties involved whether it's Republic or TDS or Allied or Waste Management whoever we open up to you know at the end of the day we we're going to work with whomever uh having said that I am going to vote for the motion to go with the motion but I I agree with you Mr Mayor I I would rather have if you're saying a negotiate terms that's one thing but if you're saying a motion to renew uh just so just so as long as we're clear that hey if you're voting to uh to renew a contract or extend the contract I want those terms in there to say hey let us tweak it to the way we want it before we move forward see what I'm saying and because it is Ral and RFP is not required and this gives uh Mr Valenzuela the opportunity to sit down with the folks from Republic and iron out some serious things that are going

[0:43:08] to take some time but in the meantime a company needs to make a capital Improvement and it seems within reason to me to renew as long as we have the power to negotiate any other for public comment well go ahead go ahead bud or Marty as I understand it we we can negotiate uh after we we approve but it doesn't allow them doesn't give them the opportunity to buy any Capital Improvements because if if we don't get the numbers we want we're not we're not moving forward that's right that's all right we don't have that's right Daniel that's correct aware of that okay so so to say we're we're renewing it just to allow them to for Capital Improvements that's not right they can't buy any Capital Improvements until the deals worked out any it's done so whatever so what's the purpose of this then I I don't see the purpose of the renewal I guess negotiations is to sit down I mean at this point what is your motion Miss farmer it's to renew the contract to renew the contract with the uh ability to negotiate on terms such as the landfill and the um um recyclable items that Mr Valena wants to work out some details with them all right and if there is no agreement and and also I just want to Let's Just Dial back for a little bit if we might and this might help everyone um the effective date of the contract was 2004 it had an initial term which takes us until the future July 31st of 2014 it is permissible for Renewal by agreement after the initial term the agreement may be re renewed upon mutual agreement of the party for as me parties

[0:45:11] for as many as two fiveyear terms either party that does not wish to renew this agreement upon expiration of the initial or first renewal term shall notify the other 90 days prior and so then there's contractor renewal option so I want to be very clear um to be able to um make sure I understand the desires of council it appears that Miss farmer um made the motion to renew the contract and it's prior to the expiration date okay um and it would appear that the sort of the ceiling of the deal would be dependent on the cities still having the ability to um negotiate certain things that would be going forward in this renewed agreement and so um I'm trying to make sure that we have a mechanism that if we do renew it today uh and our dealings fall through we're not able to negotiate the terms that we wish for the city's interest that I would like to know what action um we could take then because we wouldn't want to have a contract that we don't agree to the terms well renewal would as far as the renewal itself will be pending uh as far as the the negotiations themselves so basically far that's how I understood it as far as the uh negotiation itself you know if we don't have an agreement then we don't have aent upon so the renewal would be contingent upon the parties coming to agreement as to new terms under this proposed uh extension of the agreement correct wait a minute may I speak yes sir I I don't want I want to make sure you're not putting words in Miss Farmer's mouth if you renew a contract is she is is expressing it I think she

[0:47:18] intends for it to be a renewal and not a contingency she what she's merely saying in good faith is she knows that they're thing things that Republic wants to renegotiate because they haven't had an increase uh in in a number of years other than for their uh uh fuel uh fuel sech charge and uh she's just saying that is a practical matter but a renewal that is contingent upon other things is not a renewal and I don't think that's what she intends well that takes away the negotiating power to be honest with you then uh that's where I do have a concern then I do I don't have an issue with with and I I'll restate what I said a while I really felt that the renewal was contingent on the actual negotiations and if we go and renew right now then they lose a year of their contract and we would it would defeat our future negotiating possibility to negotiate new terms if we renew without the contingency leaving the door open well we've got a cloudy situation here legally so miss farmer you want to try one more time I'm ask8 what you're saying I'm asking for a one year they're going to lose a one year if they renew today they lose the five years that cuts them to the four does that take away a year anyway it doesn't matter uh I'm just asking that we renew their contract they've done business with us for 30 years um and as Mr Gregory said there's different things out there now uh we don't have to put it up for an RFP which he obviously his company would like to bid on on it uh I think loyalty and service that they have given us and we have given them that for a simple request to renew their contract now is not out of line and it's not unquestionable uh to reward someone for service their loyalty to the city and we're wanting to say no we're not going to let you request early renewal it

[0:49:20] seems unreasonable to me I don't have a problem with an early renewal but it would be in the C interest to negotiate excuse me it would be in the city's interest to negotiate the terms that we desire in the future we need to leave that door open I I I agree with I I mean I I guess I I agree with you Charlotte and and winky if I understand what you're saying if we if we renew the contract today we're renewing it as is yeah that's right so okay so I thought there was possibility of wanting a uh a rate increase so that's not their request today no and uh they uh for Daniel to have the opportunity on the things that are coming down the pike as far as landfill and things to be done um they just want to be able to lock in their contract so they can move forward and we want the ability to say we would like to visit with you at a later date we don't have to put make it a requirement or make that a part of the motion but let them know that at a later date we would like to visit with them about the landfill let but let me ask this goad Johnny if Miss farmer if you stick with your motion Miss bowling let me ask you can we then come back and make amendments to the contract uh as I previously stated the current contract which would be renewed has a provision for contracts your microphone indeed um it it can be a all contracts those are standard Provisions but it's I'm just listening and hearing the desires of the of Staff or perhaps other Council that just want to make this renewal contingent you know perhaps going forward have negotiations towards renewal of the contract that would be my recommendation but to answer your question yes there is a a provision for termination for amending a contract which is very standard but I think that

[0:51:25] it it wouldn't be a guarantee that the amendment would be uh in the city's interest or it would it would be successful so I think while we have an opportunity instead of um defeating any future negotiations that we would have towards uh in this renewal we should seize upon that and make the renewal contingent upon successful negotiations of the new terms that the city desires and that's that's my recomend Commendation Rodney Charlotte I agree with you on this wholeheartedly except that I I agree with Alicia on this that we I think we do need to negotiate first yes sir and so I I want to pull back I said gentlemen I understand let me finish please Charlotte let me finish um I think that we should negotiate it well first I'm not saying I think we're going to get it negotiated I've talked with these guys I've talked with the other guys and I think we will get it negotiated I think we will we'll get it worked out I think we're just putting the cart in front of the horse on this deal let's get this thing negotiated out and we all we're all going to get what we we probably want in the end anyways as parliamentary procedure could we just call for the vote if you guys vote it down then that's it okay for that's why call for the vote instead of we're still we're still taking public comment and we're still talking with among amongst oursel on the council and when we've got all the public comment and all the council comment I will call for the vote is there any public any further public comment to this yes my name is Harry Thomas I'm a community volunteer and I'm listening to all the councilmen talk about this particular item I will tell you that I was in business for 40 years with with goodye Proving Grounds and I negotiated a number of contracts uh for a lot of different things but I never signed a contract never went into a contract before I didn't have all the terms in front of me and I will tell you there are a number of folks right out here that will tell you very something very

[0:53:28] very similar to this so I will tell you even though I think Charlotte's going in the right direction I agree with what Rodney said we've got the cart before the horse and and I will tell you public will not stand for something like this so you call for the vote and it goes this way we will have a lot of different people want to have conversations about why we didn't look at negotiating before we made the decision thank you Harry anyone else come ahead good afternoon yes ma'am state your name and you have the floor my name is Billy dwit I live here in St Angelo and um I agree 100% with what that gentleman just said you do not sign a contract before you have the details of the contract worked out I worked for 34 years I've been in the business of negotiating contract and I can hear you know let's approve it contingent up on uh us getting what we want but I tell you if they order a half million dollars in equipment it is going to be very difficult for people to say well we're going to back out of this contract because they're going to make us feel guilty that we need to move forward with it so I would like to see the council vote I mean why would you want to go for with the contract them make a commitment to something that then we later may not like their their agreement with it so I absolutely think and it doesn't have to take until July of next year to get it going or whatever the 90 days is that could start to happen right now working out those details and as I understood what Daniel said they're going to start working on that now so I don't understand the rush to do this to vote to extend it to sign a contract for 5 years they go on ordering their equipment and making their Capital

[0:55:32] Improvements and then the deal doesn't work out if we sign that contract and even though there may be a provision to terminate it you're going to have to go through the legal system you're going to have to spend extra money so I don't understand I guess the rush to do this right now if they're not going to be able to order the equipment now anyway until we get all the negotiation it absolutely makes no sense thank you for the opportunity thank you m than you anyone else come forward please ma'am my name is Alberta Spence and I was a commercial real estate broker in California for 40 years negotiate a lot of real estate contracts and leases and we never signed a contract until we had all the terms ironed out that's impossible to get them ironed out afterwards and they have to be both agreement right okay one person says no the other person says yes where you going to go you have to sign the contract after you negotiate the contract thank you thank you ma'am I did anyone else Mr well I agree I don't want I don't want to sign a contract and then negotiate terms I think that's yes right I seconded that to begin with and then it was kind of explained to me a little bit better and and I want to withdraw my second on that I'm not going to all right so are we having Council authorized negotiation of the contract is that what I'm withdrawing my second I'm not that motion hadn't been made all right so I'm just trying to understand what advice that I could give to clarify now that all this has been stated um it I'm asking whether we would want Council to authorize negotiation to consider renewal before 2014 July we've got a year to negotiate this and if Republic wants to get with Daniel and negotiate

[0:57:34] and see if they can come to some terms and get something figured out I think that's wonderful uh if the negotiations are not what we want then we can go out for an RFP but we don't have to do this today and I certainly will not vote to sign a contract until two night July 219 without even the going what we're negotiating about that I will not for that so Mr Mayor yes sir Miss bowling do we just then give Mr Valenzuela uh direction to go and visit with Republic and iron out hash out tweak the whatever potential potential um amendments to the contract do we we don't have second yet do you need a i let's first look at what's posted for Action as um Mr Fleming has stated do we have a second Charlotte did you want to Second winky so the it's posted for discussion and possible action regarding the renewal so if we don't wish to renew it this time then that could be a mo the it just dies yes Charlotte has made the motion if there is a second we'll take a vote on it if there's not a second then I'm going to let this thing die unless you get another motion unless I get another motion right now I have a motion in no second goad 30 32 uh I'm sorry 30 30 Welles I don't have any I'm second motion and I'm just say why as I've talked to these I've talked to these people and they got a bunch of stuff they want uh and that they need and so uh there's not going to be any problems with negotiations uh and uh so I'm going to second the motion and I'm not the least bit worried about it okay we have a motion that we go

[0:59:38] ahead and renew the contract until 219 and negotiate with the city manager that may or may not be what we want but the contract is already done until 29 we're signing the contract and hoping on a negotiation and that's kind of the way it sets so uh we' we got a motion and a second everyone in favor of that say I I I Nays nay n looks to me like it's five nay and two eyes Mr Mayor yes sir but I would like to uh make another motion hold on regarding renewal it's dealing strictly with renewal at this point so it's far as the motion let the thing die okay we'll let it die I believe that one just died let's go on to now number 32 this is a presentation by the valver groundwater group and any action in connection there to and this will be a presentation does anybody want to take a break before we do this you want to go on with this what does council think anybody want five minutes I could use a water break go ahead let's take a water break let's take a five minute water break get started uh this will be a presentation by the valty groundwater group and any action in connection there too Mr Little John identify yourself and you have the floor sir sure I'm John Little John um I'm with uh the principal of valver water company uh we're here today to talk about uh bringing water from valy County to St Angelo and then beyond uh my experience on this started now 40 years ago this was part of the area of my dissertation when I was at Harvard so it's like going back to Old home turf uh uh my reintroduction to this area started four and a half years ago when the city of San Antonio first contacted me about putting together a proposal for water we we've been working on that and we're one of the uh uh two finalists at this point in that and we'll be back into that with them the area that San Antonio is looking at is about 15 miles further to the east uh for a wellfield this area is between 18 and 20 mil north

[1:01:41] of the town of Del Rio across the uh Amistad um Lake Area throughout this time U of work on that to give you a little background uh and the and what you are the beneficiary of it's we have put together the effort that's gone towards this Northern project over the last s months but before that was four years of effort that involved things like I have led every steel plant that can manufacture this size of Steel uh piping in North America there's three in the United States and two in Canada uh because of the special nature of of the metals in here because we're going to treat this water before we send it this way uh that means there's chlorine in the water so that means you have to have special Metallurgy and even the valves and the only place that you can get valves that are made like this are by Cameron iron in Italy so hunting that material down searching the world over making sure your Metallurgy was right and so on are all part of this uh you are the beneficiary of that but on top of that we're not asking for any money we will not receive the first dime until we have water at your City Gate and you're buying it at that point unlike all the rest of the projects that all the rest the cities in West Texas have entered between Midland uh the crmwd even uh St Angelo here where it's cost you on the front end and the numbers continue to escalate and we'll look at that in here uh let's look first at exactly the situation that you're in and that is this is from the crmwd uh presentation in Snider uh as of about three weeks ago the interesting thing about this they have extended the curves what beyond what had existed before so now we can see the last two years years before they stopped at 2010 the importance of this curve is it shows and particularly for the blue line which is the use by the city of Odessa it says they are now being so restricted on water they're getting the same amount of water today that they were 37 years ago when their population was less than half

[1:03:43] of what it is now and and so and that is true across all of the area what this points to is an Insidious cost to you and Insidious means the people that might want to settle in West Texas drive past it because the quality of life is such that they set up somewhere else I can give you an explicit example of that when we visited with uh one company in uh Odessa it has over 300 employees the five Executives of that all live in Houston and they fly in for three to five days of work here and their families and homes are in Houston because the quality of life has become so perverse that they have chosen not to live in West Texas how much that is happening is impossible to quantify but this curve tells you that it's real and it's there um the next thing we're going to look at is the water quality itself this is just a simple table it shows what the quality of our water is versus chloride sulfates and total dissolved solids when you look at what other cities are offering or what is happening with water delivered out of the crmwd you can see that we have as good or better water than exists anywhere in the State and if you look at that same number set of numbers and you move it to a graphic form this tells the same story so the first curve on the far left is the VV water and it shows it for chloride sulfates and total dissolved solids then you can see San Anton or Austin then San Antonio Brian lck and then here comes the crmwd um water that exists in the various lakes that they have here as noted and then finally on the far right is the Texas commission on Environmental Quality which sets the standards by which you will deliver water it's a and that is there's uh 300 limits on chlorides and sulfates and thousand limits on TDS you can exceed those but only for a limited time and and usually only until a complaint comes in and then they step you

[1:05:45] back um this is the area that we're going to come out of you can see Amad Lake on the south end of the photograph that's a Google photograph our well field will be in the middle this where you see the the taxs that start where it says storage and treatment there's planned to have 24 wells in the well field out here that will be able to deliver more than 150,000 acre feet a year uh the line will cross the Devils River and go over to Highway 377 and 277 which are the same ones and head north and that line follows on the uh Westward side of 277 all the way up to an area just immediately south of the town of Christoval and then comes across country to the Northwest side of St Angelo when we come across that Countryside there we pass by two areas uh within less than 1,700 ft of proximity to the city of San Angelo water system both of them water tires and water lines that we can drop that into uh any water project depends upon three specific items and these are the items that that control your life you have to when you go through an evaluation you have to do it in this sequence if you break out of the sequence or you don't answer these questions all you're doing is opening yourself up to tremendous costs let's talk first about deliverability that means have I done my hydrology studies do I know that the water is there or am I under any kind of constraints and can I move this water out of the area in the volumes that we're talking about uh for West Texas here the next part would be the feasibility in there and we've talked brief ly about that just a moment ago in which do I know what the costs and what I'll have to have in order to do all the valving the pump stations the the tanks and the well field itself at that point and know specifically uh without any equivocation what every one of those units are going to cost in here and then finally you come through affordability and and that is uh you know what the rates are that you're

[1:07:49] going to have to have on this what the volumes that you're going to have to have and you know what your interest rates are on the cost of your money at that point the one thing that we see more than anything else that is affecting us is that our interest rates have climbed from about 4% to now at 42% when we have quoted a price here it is at 42% money that is the cheapest money that we have seen in many many decades and it is questionable how much longer this is going to last same thing happens to you if you decide that you want a specific home and they tell you that it's $100,000 and the interest rate is at 5% then you pay one price uh if they tell you that interest rate's at 5 and a half or six that's a very different price and the cost is going to go up on you we are in a time zone in which it's prudent to act now and if not then you can expect the costs are going to go up considerably on you at that point the next thing is is this is page 28 out of report by the Texas uh water development board there is a there is a mirror image report by the United States Geological Survey um the first one of those done by the USGS was in 1972 this one's been updated in the late 80s and they both show the same thing and that is there's in excess of 500,000 acre feet that of water that flows out of the rocks in our immediate area and into the river streams and and um and the lake itself to put in context what that means 500,000 000 acre feet equals 450 million gallons of day flowing from the rocks and most of that's captured in the lake and then there's two local Springs that do that um the lake itself is an immense Lake it's twice the size as the next nearest lake it holds over 5.4 million acre feet of water that would be a hundred-year water supply for

[1:09:53] West Texas um uh the magnitude of of the water that is available here is staggering uh the water that we're talking about bringing to this part of West Texas represents something between 10 and 12% of the water that's flowing out of that rock continuously at that point the the Basin that this is in uh has the funnel end at this area immediately above Lake Amistad the the Basin reaches all the way up past Ozona and snora almost all the way around to Fort Stockton and encompasses uh some 6 million Acres um or excuse me 4 million acres and about 6,000 square miles in area at the upper end uh the elevation is above 2500 ft and it gradually percolates all the way down to where we are at 12200 ft it takes over 80 years to get from the upper end of the Basin to the lower end so whether you're in drought or whether in Good Times the water just continues to flow because it's an immense immense aquifer that just continues to flow in there this is also one of the purest ERS because it takes that long slow trip of cleansing that water through the entire system to give you an idea these are bar graphs that show uh the nature of what we're dealing with the bar on the far left shows the average annual discharge from that aquifer into the streams and rivers in there and again and that's over 500,000 acre feet per year the next bar is the amount of water that the CRM cmwd is providing to its U purchasers throughout its distribution area here that is slightly over 50,000 acre feet a year but if you take out the part some 5,000 uh acre feet that goes to abene that's picked up on the far side of Ivy and is not part of the crmw system

[1:11:55] system crmwd system they are actually providing something in the neighborhood of 48 or 49,000 acre feet a year uh in year 2000 that number uh Rose as high as 75,000 acre feet so you're already at 2third of what you were using uh just a mirror 12 years ago the amount of water that we're talking about bringing and supplying to the cities of West Texas at this point is shown in the next graph and that's our bar that would be at about 60,000 to 62,000 acre feet a year and the next bar shows what we can deliver to you so as your needs increase we have carrying capacity that will probably allow you between 40 and more likely 50 years of growth before we'll e reach the capacity on this pipeline that's out there so the needs that you have today can be fully met and as as uh West Texas grows this line will be able to continuously supply all the needs that are out there this is the chemical analysis of our water uh uh that is the hudo Well versus the water that's coming out of the crmwd system and this is at the uh station or terminal uh for their um uh propos or their uh water tests that they have in here the critical number to note in here that is uh speaks more to anything else uh is the total dissolved solids at the fourth line from the the bottom our water is at 292 the water in coming out of Ivy at this point originally listed at 900 at this date at the beginning of January is now up into uh the 940 960 area you can see for other parts that we've tested for so all the standard uh irons metals and radioactive elements they're so low that we can't detect anything in parts per trillion this is some of the purest water that you will find in the state of

[1:13:57] Texas uh this is a Google map it shows the pipeline as it comes across in Blue uh comes across the area of the Devils River immediately over to 277 and then uh moves northward up to and then at at a area immediately south of the town of Christoval moves out away from the highway and across the lake areas and ends up on the northwest side of um the of San Angelo the other line that you see is the proposed line that would go from an Eastern field back over to San Antonio they're actually in need of less water than all of West Texas would be at that point this is the same Google Map the difference is in the lower portion of that it shows you the elevational change that would occur across this area so the little notch on the far left is where we cross the Devil's River and then we climb continuously to an area north of Interstate 10 and and reach an elevation of about 2500 ft and then back down to St Angelo at about 1,850 ft it is this elevation that's the that's the greatest challenge to overcome through time because you're having to lift tremendous volumes of water uh up about 1300 ft and then lower it back down into the town of St Angelo this is a picture of the type of tank that we'll use from the well field itself and where Wells produce it goes to a treating house where we uh treat that with chlorine and we know from that point forward that our line systems are everything else remains pure there won't be any contaminants in there and it goes into this 10 million gallon tank that we have on the south end and the North End to collect water once it leaves this tank it's less than 24 hours between leaving this tank and arriving at at St Angelo at that point so this water if you elect to doesn't even need to be treated it already has at that point and we will have a state engineer with a license to watch over and make sure that it meets all portable standards at that point this is a picture of the 48 in

[1:16:02] pipe that we intend to use it shows that you uh that the internal coating which is U approved by the asme which stands for the American Society of mechanical engineers is a food grade coating that is on the inside so uh the Water never comes in contact with the pipe on by like kind on the outside is a a seal coating and then a protective coating that you see here in Black this pipeline when it's cathodically protected will last you know a 100 years uh this shows uh what the intent is even Beyond San Angelo here and that is to move water through the existing infrastructure to serve the remaining cities of West Texas it involves doing two things and that is segregating out the pure water that's going to come out of valver County from the water that's coming out of the lake systems the lake systems we call industrial water and we have labeled that in pink and it now would by this design flow counterclockwise coming to St Angelo we would build a a jump line that would go across to the Spence area and then use the Spence line to move it around in a continuing counterclockwise over to Big Springs then to Midland and then to Odessa allowing uh all the major CI to have industrial water for continuous development if they elect to have that as their major drinking water that would be available to them but we still call it industrial Water by the nature of it in addition at Lake Ivy itself uh right now they just pick it up and put it into the pipeline system and and It Coats the bottom of that pipeline as much as a foot to two foot of sludge in the bottom of the that line and that has to be cleaned out between once and twice a year we would create a set of settling ponds that would get all the sediment clay and sand out of the system which it's there's an immense amount of that

[1:18:05] uh run it through a very limited cleaner uh treat it there with chlorine and ship it through the line so this this line would finally stay clean and you would stop this process of of permanently having to re-enter the line system shut it down and then and then take a a system of brushes that are automatically driven through the line to clean it out this is our price that we have quoted uh that is FOB uh St Angelo as I've said earlier that is predicated upon the interest rate remaining at or close to where it is for the immediate time that is $3.80 to you at the gate in which you pay nothing other than for for the moment that we delivered all the costs everything else before that is borne by us to to give you an idea of that I think it would be appropriate to look at um the three other major projects that have under have been undertaken in the immediate time that will give you an idea of contemporaneous pricing and also what has happened to those projects the first of these is the one un undertaken by Midland which is called the tar Ranch you can see that depicted on the far left they're out north west of the little town of Kermit in Winkler County uh they've developed a wellfield in the pacis alium and they've moved that through a pipeline it almost equals the one that you built it's about 65 70 Mi this project cost them $28 million and out of that what they have is this they have now drilled through well number 60 these numbers come from the the Texas commission of Environmental Quality out of this out of all the wells that they drilled only well number 44 has drinkable water all the rest of them shown in red have either excessive amounts of arsenic or excessive amounts of radium or both the ones that are shown in level have excessive amounts of chlorine Florine sulfate or TDS and some

[1:20:10] of them have all of that so they have one well at this point that they can use they have bought another place further to the south of their te- bar Ranch and they're going to go down there and start drilling on that hoping that they have some water that is more than 18 miles away so they're going to have to drill another pipeline the next project that that has occurred in here is the one by the crmwd they have spent an additional $185 million developing what has been called the North wward Field it was a property originally owned by luminant and they've gone in there and drilled um what set out to be Wells 1 through 24 they actually omitted Wells 16 20 and 21 and out of that from the coloring in here they have five Wells that had water that was producible and usable the rest of them had either U excesses of TDS or other uh uh components that disallowed their usage at that point when they started producing on this just as a test to see what they had one of their five good Wells within just a a short amount of time started producing 11 times the aable for Benzene the reason for that although you can barely see it on the western or on the Eastern side of the of the Ward Field is a oil field that is on 10 acre spacings and then just beyond that underneath the word ward is a gas and oil field that has numerous Wells on 10 20 and 40 acre spacings depending on depth that they're in somehow the contamination has gotten out of those Wells and into the Eastern side of of the Ward Field area and it's unclear whether there is not a Benzene layer of several feet on top of the water floating there which would contaminate the field and make it unusable for the duration at that point they have spent $185 million and it's questionable what

[1:22:14] what kind and the volume of water that they have if you take out the one well that was bad and use the four remaining they have about um uh between four and and 5,000 um uh excuse me four and five million gallons a day that they can use out of this field at this point um uh the last of these that we'll look at is uh what's uh normally call the Hickory project it's the one that starts on the Ford Ranch and as you can see the pipeline is built to the southeast side of the town in here when we look at this on a compartive comparative analysis basis out here we know what the costs are at least to date so for the crmwd they have spent $185 million this is their interest rate and on a 30-year amiz they're going to have to have about 11 and A3 million dollar per year to amuze the debt and principal out as far as interest and the principal um that is a capitalized cost we don't know the volume of water that that would be put against so if the volume starts going down then obviously the cost per unit goes up distinctly but the other side of that is the operational costs that are out here when you start to produce it you have a lifting cost a gathering charge through the field and so on and putting in a production tank and those are estimated at 45 cents per thousand the processing now that they're going to have to go through in order to clean this up and run it through a uh a rem Reverse Osmosis System out here there's a number of bids that that have come in and other comparative units that have been run on bids of similar type Water by the city of Odessa their numbers have varied between as low as 320 as a wished for estimate and odessa's ran between 420 and 480 per th000 we've used the 320 number and then you have the cost of pumping it down the line handling the

[1:24:17] facilities and doing other things and that's put at a120 with those low numbers it still say is that on an operational basis never mind the capital cost side you're $485 if they have low numbers on the capital cost that number could easily double on the Midland T Bar uh again you have $28 million that has been expended on that that says that they're going to have to have around 12 and 3/4 million a year on interest and principle for the time and the interest rate shown in here but they're operational cost meaning those are capital on what they've spent so far but they're operational in here it's going to be easier for them to remove the Arsenic than it is to remove um other things that are called uh the dissolved or the total dissolved solid part arsic is a is a easier item to remove you do have a cost as to disposal and you can get to this low number of $2.50 if you make just one pass which gives you about 90% of the water that that comes through and then you dispose of the other 10% if you run it through one more time to get the next um 8% or so of what you want then it's far more expensive to do that and but you're only disposing of the last 2 or 3% of the water using that number they're still at about $4.45 to just operate this and remove that water uh from the or get the contaminants out of the water that's in there looking at the Hickory uh that the San Angelo project there's all kinds of numbers and they're very questionable about what's happening again just using a 40 or 45 Cent uh inside the field Gathering lifting you're going to have to put your pumps at between 600 and 700 ft because the water will conb down and it's at about 450 ft right now so that has a much higher lift factor to it because of the

[1:26:20] depth of what you're dealing with but because your field is very tight you're not having to ship it long distance in the field before you get it to a gathering system the 320 for the processing comes from uh one known contract and that is this a town in Missouri that is using the same contractor to remove that is charging them 94 cents per a th000 gallons to remove the radium out of their water their radium ranges between below 10 to slightly above that but they're taking out an average of 10 Picos of radium here your your radium hovers around 37 Picos and to get to the same point of having three or four Picos left you're going to have to take 3.4 times as much of the radium out and it's a simple linear relationship when the water enters the filtering system it will charge and and reach saturation 3.4 times as fast they are operating and have signed a contract and they're operating removing the ium today in those facilities in Missouri I've heard that there's a 59% proposal in but I don't know if that proposal is a hard contract or whether what we're seeing in Missouri is the reality of what we're going to deal with if you use the hard contract and you go 3.4 times the 94 cents you get to $3.20 your that makes your operating cost both INF field treating it and then delivering it down through the system at $4.80 doing that it says then when you look at our water at $3.80 delivered to you is cheaper than what you can operate that field for never mind all the rest of your capitalized costs you may be able to get that down and I hope that you can but it's all going to be dependent upon having a hard contract for something less than that $320 cents which is what they're operating in real life in Missouri

[1:28:22] today uh our our request before the city council today is not to vote on uh this contract or agree to buy our water we know that we need we have arranged for and used exactly the same contract that the city of St Angelo is buying water today from the crmwd from we have said following that form we merely want this to be taken and as a a motion to be uh sent over to the attorney so we can look at this uh get it Formed up and been brought back to city council for consideration and possible approval at a later time so the only commitment we're asking from today is not about buying this water it's merely to go and start the process of seeing if we can arrive at agreed purchase and sale agreement for water that would then come back to the council for consideration at a subsequent time I thank you if you have any questions I'd be glad to answer answer it thank you Mr Little John this we've had this same presentation in our executive and each council member had some questions we all have some concerns uh this uh the Colorado River Municipal Water District is jointly owned by us midlin Big Spring is I get them all and Snider but it's we're not members actually okay thank you for us to sign the resolution though that they're asking us to sign we have to sign a statement saying that we express a vote of no confidence in the management of the Colorado River Municipal District we also have to say that Colorado River Municipal has failed in its Mission we also have to say that they have taken deliberate action to combat the city of San Angelo and we also have to say that this this resolution would declare no

[1:30:27] confidence in the management of the Colorado River Municipal District this would in fact put the S the city of San Angelo at odds with this district and I am not ready to do that until I know exactly what this is going to cost now valber water company has no pumps they have no lines they have no rideways they have no easements they have no distribution there's not a line in where they have none of the permits so they're a long long way of bring long way away from bringing water to S Angelo uh it was kind of decided in our executive that we would meet with some members from Big Spring we would meet with some members from Odessa and we would meet with members from Snider and all of us together instead of San Angelo taking the lead and destroying a relationship that we've spent 15 to 20 years to build that we would in fact get with these sister cities see exactly how they feel exactly what they're doing so that we know we're not going into this by ourself this is a very big project it is a very expensive project and we're going to commit to this as a city uh it is my opinion and it is my desire that we put this thing off until we get more information until we know more about what's going on so that we can make an informed decision and I guess I'm asking for a consensus of the of the council we need more information before we sign on to anything and before we get to Colorado River Municipal District against us and start saying things that this res I'm not going to sign this resolution today if I've got my way about it but I need consensus of the council and I would like to get more information I'd like to meet with our sister cities I'd like to see what they're doing and go from there so I'm asking for I'm asking for Council tell me what you want to do Mr Mayor I am totally with you on that and Mr John we are very much interested in in looking further into this idea but

[1:32:31] like Mr Fleming came up with the idea of meet meeting with these so-called sister cities and getting more feedback from them rather than us just going into it blind we'd like to get more feedback from other players so to speak but uh I do to totally appreciate what uh what you brought to us and again I apologize for never being able to meet with you but uh I I'm I'm definitely on line in line with trying to meet with other folks and certainly this isn't out of the question no I just I want more information I would feel more comfortable Marty how do you feel about it sir I I think it's uh it it's the it has the possibility of being a great uh uh viable water supply for S Angelo uh I I would uh U if if I understood Mr Little John uh uh two of the three two of the three dist District cities are going to be voting this week and next week and if if they vote to move forward uh then then I I think uh we should definitely look at moving forward too you want more information sure how about you Mr Fleming definitely I want to I want to set up the meeting with the group I want to get us all together in the same place the same time and that way we know where everybody's coming from we're not hiding anything from any of these cities and when when we said those cities we also I want to the the Tri Cities agreement which or I say that every time the west Texas water partnership agreement uh which also includes abalene I would like for abalene to be in on that meeting with us uh so that we're not hiding anything from any of these cities we all have the same goal and we all know that the water they're talking about is the best water in West Texas I I don't think where any of us are even arguing that now it's really a matter of how do we get the water up here do we go with we go with the VV water company which I like the I

[1:34:35] like these guys and I think that it could be a possibility or do we do another route it's such a big project we can't make this I I agree with Dwayne there there's no way I would sign this resolution today without doing our due diligence Charlotte I uh like the presentation I like the group group and I like the water I've tasted it it's uh very spring-like close to an artisian well taste and I'd like to see us pursue it Mr bman um I also have met with them and I think that they're on to something and I think we'll be shooting oursel in the foot if we don't pursue this thing um I personally have no problem with making the CR mwd mad doesn't matter I'm here for the citizens of s Angelo and trying to get us the most water the best water the fastest way that we can Mr wof well I've sort done my due diligence over the last six months and 40 40 years and uh I agree with Mr wholeheartedly and I think it' be full hearted for us to let this deal get away you're talking about 8 or 900 million which they're willing to finance I City the BV water company has some people are split pair saying that they don't own the water know that they own option contracts on the water and as a lawyer to me that's just as good and you know how somebody else is going to come in there and shove them aside and uh uh take over this water Beyond Comprehension I have four votes to wait and meet with our sister cities I have three that says go ahead so I believe we're going to wait and meet with our

[1:36:36] sister cities we're going to see what Big Spring does we're going to do see what Snider let's let's go ahead and ask for the vote real so we make it real clear okay let's uh I will make the motion that we meet with our sister cities that we get more information that we know exactly what we're doing before we pull trigger on this I'll make the motion we wait I'll second okay anybody from the public want to talk to this Terry got one coming up first here Terry mop come on up Sir state your name and you have the floor sir thank you afternoon Council my name is Steve Salman I'm a former member of the St Angel Water advisory board I'm a 20-year veteran of the chairmanship of Texas sheep and goat risers natural resources committee I've worked in Austin on water issues since 1995 when Buster Brown created Senate bill one and started the water planning process in the state of Texas I'm president of Riverside land owners protection Coalition which is a private property Rights group and I have fought hard in Texas to preserve the right of land owners to keep the water or sell the water that's under their land as a citizen of city of St Angelo I spent 18 years as the Executive Vice President of wiland manufacturing I was a former bank director for Bank of the West so I have business experience as well as water and natural resources experience I'm very much in favor of this project I think it's a great project and one that we should not walk away from when I was on the water Advisory Board I came

[1:38:38] to prior members of the city council and suggested that we needed a joint agreement between West Texas cities to develop water that we all shared in this project meets that goal the city of St Angelo has joined and done that and I was told like they couldn't talk to me about it even though it was my idea because it was secret that's the tree party agreement you've talked about I understand there's probably a reservoir project connected to that history shows that reservoirs have not worked for West Texas OC Fisher has been full once since 1958 twin butes was full in 1974 they don't work we need to look at underground water whether this is there I'm not a hydrologist I'm not going to say but I like the project what I don't like and here's where I differ and encourage you to do the due diligence or have staff do the due diligence I was approached and asked to evaluate this project two weeks ago so I've only heard about it for the last two weeks in doing that I said I really like the project I can support the project then my I wore my finance business hat and did some due diligence and looked at Secretary of State website and the Texas com trollers website and did a little other research on the internet because God knows you can find anything on the internet what I didn't find was a financial ability to pull this project off what I didn't find was the progression of being able to

[1:40:42] complete a project I hope they can I'll be the first to stand up and say yeah please let's do this but I ask for that information and didn't get it I I could have attended a meeting and been told stuff I wanted something I could verify uh and didn't get it I'm asking you to do that and maybe you have the authority maybe you got more information than I did but I hope you can get that information and we go forward with this project this morning you talked about drilling water wells in Hickory that's just to meet the water needs that the city needs in the foreseeable immediate future Hickory is going to be our sole source if we don't get rain quick and big rain and I think we finally have faced that fact when we wouldn't face it when I was on the water Advisory Board I knew then that there wasn't enough water there if it became our sole source um so hopefully we'll we'll move forward we need the water so that the city can grow so that Angelo State University can grow and Goodville Air Force Base can grow and I thank you for your time if you have questions I'll be happy to answer thank you Mr Salman thank you thank you thank you Terry let me see if I can find this in here where is it I got to find the uh com Alicia do you need to help him on that yeah where is it up it's this is really something the city ought to be doing Terry Terry this is really something that the city ought to be doing okay if he just brings it up Alicia you can you find what he needs should it be on it's on there I saw it at noon yes I understand what was that what what just tell us what you

[1:42:48] need to say Terry okay well basically I just wanted to say that this is an opportunity that we can solve our water problems uh with the VB water uh people and that that's all right he just going to tell us about it Brian oh there it is he found it uh Terry Terry Mr Campbell Mr Campbell there it is the city needs to handle that sir not you okay okay anyway uh the bottom line is the uh city of San Angelo and the VB water uh people need to get together and there's several things needs to be done on both sides that uh we pay for the water when it is delivered for $385 $3.80 uh per th gallons and with we have no upfront investment and no payments until the water's delivered but another thing that I didn't see in their stuff from their uh their little proposal there uh we need to commit to buying 15,000 acre feet a year U of water now here's the part that's a little strange which everybody's saying about we have to show a no confidence in the crmwd now the uh plus the VV water only comes if it is a regional uh solution to where all all the people have to agree not just one of us so I agree with your thing getting everybody together now this long-term commitment would be uh with the communities with each Community which would be like Big Spring Snider Odessa Midland St Angelo and somebody over here wanted to add abalene which abalene is not in your proposal now is it I don't think so no I want abalene to be in on the talks is what I'm saying okay not necessarily on the deal okay in other words my my

[1:44:51] opinion is you know we need to if if we don't commit to this uh someone else is going to take the water like you know San Antonio they'll sell it to San Antonio or Austin if we don't buy it and basically the way it looks this is probably the last chance uh for us to uh come up with an econ economical solution to our water needs and as far as uh as far as you know getting on the bad side of the CM crmwd I think we already are I've got minutes from one of their meetings where it says they're going to combat the Tri tric City solution and it it's in their own words so as far as alienating them uh I think we're already there thank you thank you Terry thank you anyone else need to speak come up jerc and introduce yourself and speak five minutes Jerry I don't plan to be here that long I hope not I'm hungry CU it's already 4:07 and I've already missed seven minutes judge you yes sir I just wasted another two minutes uh my name is Jerry C and uh I am a member of W2s but then uh we've talked about this situation and I'm not speaking uh on behalf of WT because we haven't come together as a group we are undecided like much of you are but I've been talking about water for I guess you might say years uh I came here in the late 80s and uh one of the first jobs that I got here was uh was with Stacy but the Stacy Dam job and then I came to St Angelo and it's with the water department with Ricky and uh he was operating to backo and so was I and the problem then was water and the Colorado River a dam was supposed to be the the the fix

[1:46:57] all for this area but it's not we need water now and I have been harping on this for the longest we have people coming here to Frack these Wells we need water they are going to get the oil if they come and get the water out of your refrigerator they going to get the oil believe me we need water this is an opportunity to assist with the water that coming here with the Hickory oil with the Hickory oil they yeah oil water but uh uh we need water we need water now and this is an opportunity that we have to possibly uh correct all of our problems with oil while oil and water mixed together see it it's a it's an answer to what we've been looking for for years you know it's uh it's plenty of water source and it's Underground water and it's uh it's going to be a positive thing for this area and we're going to need it for ranching Hunting Fishing and fracking Welles and all of these counties around here is running out of water somebody's going to buy this water and if we don't move on it now somebody else will and we're still we're going to need water before it's over and I thank you very much for your time thank you Jerry it's your opportunity my name's Tony olon um I just like one comment I think you're on the right track to visit with these sister cities but please please do it very quickly and let's get this thing going that's all thank you Tony yes sir like women farmer I can almost taste that good water uh but I think you should follow the same procedures you follow on

[1:49:00] an ordinance let this be the introduction let uh uh wink uh put out his due diligence so people can look at it so the public can see what you're voting on just like an ordinance we see it later on you vote on it I I think that would be the smart way of doing it not putting the C before the horse that has been said before uh you know let us see the agreement let us see what's going on thank you thank you come on UPS state your name for the record please ma'am Su M's WT member but speaking as an individual we've had the opportunity to meet with BV water and they have been most um thorough and comprehensive about providing um information that we have requested and there's much really to uh respect and like about this proposal I also uh share some of the same uh issues and concerns raised by um our relationships with our sister cities in uh the the water district and uh a different dimension I would like to add to it as well in terms of the sources of our water I would like not only for those sources to be legal but also to U be moral and ethical and in terms of the sources we're considering to make sure that the people in the sources of the water are not unduly deprived themselves of uh water in order to sustain their individual lives and their business activity good points so thank you anybody else want to speak to this yes my name is Jim Turner and

[1:51:11] there's been a lot of good points raised on this it's been said that water is the new oil and probably the next Wars are going to be fought of water and looking what we see around here that's probably true they may not necessarily be shooting Wars but there is going to be some very intense competition going on we do have to be careful in first off we do need to have a regional water solution here it doesn't do s Angelo any good if their water solution leaves a surrounding area or other communities worse off because of us it needs to be a regional solution and that can be done we also have to be very very careful in doing our due diligence if you look at other areas and other water projects some of them have been extremely successful but there's been a lot of snake oil projects out there there have been companies and I'm not questioning anybody that's before us today but we do have a history of failed water projects and communities cities and countries getting in trouble with because they haven't done the necessary detailed due diligence and seen the actual capabilities that can happen and I think it is wise to take and take the time go the extra mile because this is a solution that this city is going to have to live with for probably the next hundred years whatever we come up with is going to be a long-term solution whether it's out of Val County other counties what to here whatever projects end up being combined and last thing is we want to make sure that we don't get so emotionally tied up in one solution that other options are just taken off the table we need to have

[1:53:17] a backup in Cas there is a failure of some sort any water project of this size even though it might be small there is a risk of failure we need to make sure that we don't do anything that will leave us completely helpless if we go with this solution in case of a failure the risks are small but when you're talking a project this large there is no such thing as a small risk thank you thank you Turner I think we have time for one more someone else wants to comment step forward if not we're going to call for a vote no further comments we're going to call for the vote Yes sir go Marty what exactly is the motion the motion is is that we meet with our sister cities we we determine what their decisions are we determine how they're feeling about this so that we're not standing out by ourself and we make it as a region instead of four or five separate people making a decision I just want to know I want to know what they feel I want to know how they feel I want to know what they're how they take this instead of us stepping out and doing this by oursel I want I want to meet with our sister cities and we can't do it by ourselves and we can't do it by ourselves we're going to have to have them so why don't we meet with them so we know what they're thinking got a lady in the audience holding up her hand better I have come up ma'am come to the come to the microphone please you'll be the you'll be the last one all right my name is Lan mlen the and uh I just want to say I I appreciate your concerns and wanting to do D due diligence that's wonderful I have a bit of a concern when you say you want to talk to your sister cities first I think s Angelo is a could be a big part of this and I think that you will set the tone for this so I don't I'm concerned if you go in saying without any without expressing any support for it that you may set a negative tone I

[1:55:21] mean I think that St Angelo plays a pivotal part here and I would I would be concerned about how that was started off that conversation okay thank you thank you call for the vote all those in favor visit with our sister cities before we make a decision say I I I nay no no okay let's have a show of hands all the A's Hold Your Hand all right okay we've got three and all the those holding so we've got four that say we're going with PV water company no I'm not saying that I'm just saying that that I'm not necessarily wanting to wait until we meet with the sister cities are you are you in favor of signing this resolution no I'm not there's not I'm I'm I'm just saying at this point in time I'm in favor of not taking any action at all period well I don't agree with that we have we have to take action we need to meet with somebody and we need to get this done within the next month well we can still meet yeah but I if if certain things happen um prior to us meeting we may want to take action and we're setting up we're setting ourselves to say we cannot take action until we until we meet with our sister cities I'm not in favor of signing the resolution I'm not in favor of moving forward with VB right now I'm just saying that if if if if certain things happen and we we may want to we may want to move forward prior to I I don't know how long it'll take to to set up the meetings you know uh we could try to expedite that but of course everybody's going through budget process at this point so it it'll be a little bit tougher but uh we would shoot for the next couple of weeks actually and see what we could get set up I you know well then somebody needs to make a motion somebody gu since I've um I'll make the motion that at this

[1:57:26] time we take no action okay I I can go with that one Mr W made the second pardon me Mr W made the second I got the second okay the motion has been made that at this time we take no action whatsoever until we're able to do our due Dem that the and that includes a resolution well if we take no action that includes a resolution I don't want to sign a resolution with that does that include no sign on the resolution it it means exactly what it said no action I can go for that one the motion is a we and had been seconded Mr Ward law that we take no action on this at this time all those in favor say I I I any opposed that one worked out at 70 Mr Mayor yes sir can we are going to ask though that Daniel does set up this meeting as fast as we can we need to be done as quickly as possible okay everybody agreeable with that works for me okay all righty how many do we have here today that is interested in the where's hotel tax do we have anyone here that is interested in hotel tax oh okay we have several would it be all right with Council if we moved hotel tax up next yes sir anybody have a problem with it what number is it let's find it you'll be ready I'm going to throw you under the bus 28 28 all right if let's move let's move 28 to the to the Forefront this will be discussion and popal fall action regarding excess Hotel occupancy tax receipts Tina Burell or Michael DNE or Rick whoever's going to handle this uh thank you mayor in the interest of time uh we were going to cover legal options the Le legal boundaries associated with expending occupancy tax in the interest of time we've left it on so we can consider an issue or discuss briefly an issue that's come to our attention with regard to the

[1:59:28] Coliseum roof and uh with that in mind I I'm going to throw Rick under the bus and push the microphone in front of him and I think it's the council's pleasure as to what you want to hear but they can go into more detail the one specific item that uh I would like y'all to consider today is we have been discussing some the Coliseum roof we had some damage to that roof as you know that roof when the building is very old um we have had someone look at that they're advising that we really really need to take action on moving forward with that um so what I'm looking for is some Council direction that that particular project is one that you feel is a priority that uh should be addressed uh through the Hot Dollars and if it is then staff would like to move forward with at least pursuing um securing some um requests for proposals and qualifications that then we can put a committee together to review so that we can start the ball what I don't want to happen is that the roof deteriorates so bad that we have more major problems it's one of those that's been on the capital replacement plan as you know for several years um I I had a a concerned citizen who also happened to be a roofer that was looking at that thing and what he explain to me is the the roof that's now on there has not only lost a a large chunk but it also has small holes throughout and when you're in the Coliseum and you look up and the the rough looking sheets up there that's actually part of of the structure and that deteriorates with water so you know it's one of those you can pay me now you can pay me later you're going to pay me I I just think it's it would be be a whole lot smarter for us to uh to fix that thing now than it is to to pay a whole lot more money later

[2:01:31] on you want to make a motion then uh yes I I move and I think it what we had an estimate was going to ask 400 but you know Don I I that estimate when they initially looked at that back then I mean it was basically what we did years ago which was just sort of cod it you know would seal it so I don't have any idea at this point what it will cost we're going to have to have someone and that's why I want to go out for to look for someone to request proposals and qualifications where a group can look at it so then we can select who that is that's qualified to advise us what needs to be done because I have I just have no idea we at this point we're not spending any money right and so I wouldn't even include a dollar amount I just say we want to pursue with that and then we'll bring it back to you with the next step so no dollars will be spent until we come back my my motion would be then to to move it up as a top priority for those dollars so that that we can expedite that we have a motion and a second that we expedite the roof on the Coliseum any other council members want to speak to this is that the the total conversation on item 28 is that it is that Mr silvus we can continue with the full-blown discussion of what's legal and not or we can push the rest of that uh to another day would be whatever suits counsel it would suit me yes the mind can only absorb what the back end will endure and I'm running out of absorption anybody the public want to talk to this and J Judy is then let's take a vote the motion has been made that we expedite the Coliseum roof and get some prices together determine what we can do to fix this before it becomes a very serious problem it has been seconded all in favor say I I any n a 70 vote okay we are back Mr Mayor yes sir can I have can I ask that my item number 26 be pushed to the next meeting okay you want cuz I I can see we're

[2:03:35] we're nowhere close well yeah is right one of mine as well because we still have an executive session to go through item number 26 to the next meeting please okay we're back to item 16 can this be pushed 16 not um you want to do it it's a vision plan we have a timeline all the planning I checked with the planners and they said that all the planning items are are are fitting into a a prescribe timeline and if we don't hear those today we'll have to restart a calendar where we count days and provide notice that kind of thing do it depending on the priority for Council we can move ahead or uh or we can push those do let just do it okay 16 10 minutes per item or five or five 16's consideration approving an amendment division plan component s Angelo comprehensive Plan update adopted in 09 specifically property starting starting approximately 800 foot west from the intersection of 306 in bays in a Northerly direction to fm2105 easterly through the city Landfield encompassing properties annexed to the city limits of December 11 and City owned properties north of US Highway 67 North and east of the current industrial park in the far north Northeast portion of St Angelo Mr Hines good afternoon uh Council are you going to start the clock on him five minutes or I already got the clock running okay all right not a problem um this one I'll just give you a little bit of a history on um we had taken a look at this area back in May different council at that time of course um it was remanded back to the Planning Commission there were a couple areas that were uh discussed to maybe be changed at that time this is the current Vision plan app at this time um your options for this you may approve remand deny U make changes you deem necessary and then approve the request at that point um staff does recommend approving the final map I'll show you as the the Planning Commission recommended that as well on the 15th um this is just a

[2:05:38] little bit about our process but I'll skip through that um in interest of time this area was annexed in December of 2011 staff will go ahead and take a look at um doing an analysis of the region um to be a little more proactive instead of reactive this is the map that was remanded back to the Planning Commission there was some discussion on the May meeting on the 14th about this property here across from the landfill as well as uh the property here along the frontage which is also subject to a zone change later on uh in this meeting uh that being said this is what the proposal would be um the only change being from the last council meeting when this was discussed was uh the industrial changing uh changing to Industrial from commercial for this particular area um in the interest of time if there's any questions you have of me be happy to address this I like motion to approve second I do we did go over this and it's been it's been probably five or six months ago and of course it was a previous Council but we pretty well tore this thing apart we dissected it and we talked about it I think you and this is what everyone at the council at that time agreed to so that doesn't mean that's what everybody at the council today will agree to but we do have a motion and we do have a second to accept it as presented Marty I thinkk I have one quick question the the people that are living out there now there's no changes to them whatsoever unless they sell their property or even if they sell it's just if the use would stop and in terms of the vision plan map it's just the um the guidance for zone changes so if folks don't actually come for a zone change or anything whatever they're doing now is allowed to continue as long as it doesn't vacate for more than a year right I had several questions on that and I just wanted to be sure are you satisfied you bet okay anybody else have any questions public have any questions or comments if not I'm going to ask for the vote on this and the motion is that we accept the plan as presented all in favor say I I any any opposed 70 number 17 first public hearing consideration of introducing an

[2:07:40] ordinance amending chapter 12 ex exhibit a zoning ordinance cone of ordinances city of St Angelo Earl and Michelle Weber ordinance amending chapter 12 except to a code nordon city exhibit a of chapter 12 adopt zoning regulations use District zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the following property to it 3862 tractor trail located at the northwest corner of the intersection of tractor Trail and Porter Henderson this property specifically occupies the Paul Gregory Edition section two 5.33 acres of track J and 0310 acres in Smith Boulevard and Northeast and Angelo chaining changing the zoning classification from Ranch into state to light manufacturing Mr Hans sure um per uh the zoning ordinance um this is just the caption you'd read off this is the location of the property in the similar area that we just took a look at for the vision plan map um this was already coded to be industrial under the past revision but is still industrial under the revision that was just passed by Council um that being said um per 303a of the zoning ordinance and state law this was brought in to the city limits when it was annexed as the lowest intensity Zone ranching estate um they're now looking to uh have this zoned more in accordance more in accordance with what's actually on the property they've got they've got a warehouse there and uh some storage of materials that they're looking to have zoned light manufacturing for the purposes of their business uh this is just an excerpt of where the responses in favor uh where the response in favor for this requested come from um and these are just some aerial photos of the of the surrounding areas it's certainly Industrial in nature it's part of the chef Center just behind it um this is looking at the property right now I believe it's vacant or for leased but they're looking to get some tenants in there uh that wouldn't be doing Ranch and estate type activities of course and it's been vacant so that's why they had come forward with this request um if you have any questions of me though I can elaborate further on this particular request but we do recommend approval of this as staff and the Planning

[2:09:42] Commission recommended approval six to zero did we have any in opposition to this no there was nothing received in opposition is there anything in favor oh there was the one that was in favor the one in favor zero opposition zero opposition yes sir Don this is yours think so oh I think it's great move for approval second okay we've got a motion to approve as presented and a second any other Council consideration on this consideration from the public if not I'll call for the vote all in favor to accept the motion as presented say I I any oppos n 70 number 18 first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance of the cone of code of ordinances San Angelo Texas Z 1322 M&H Mueller an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinances city of St Angelo with which set exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts with zoning regulations use district and zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the following property to Wi 3172 McGill Boulevard and 3733 North US Highway 67 collectively occupying both a 5131 acre track and a 55.1 1830 acre track located west of us67 north of pauland Boulevard East of Smith Boulevard more specifically occupying 5.13 Acres of the J Point devent survey 1113 abstract 4873 and 55.83 Acres of the J fer survey 001 abstract 4985 North SE Angelo changing the zoning classification from a General commercial CG to a lot manufacturing ml District Jeff I promise that's the last time you're going to have to read a legal description like that for today uh not forever though uh 10 notices were sent for this particular request we did receive one in favor um this is again similar the Northeast is kind of my

[2:11:44] theme for this afternoon this is subject that was uh previously envisioned to be commercial with the recent amendment is now industrial um this is just a few maps of the property um this one is now gray per the amendment from a few minutes ago um this is a notification of where the response that was in favor to this request had come from um again similar photos this is the John Deere implement that was out there um looking across at the vacant property and then looking south from this property towards Howard College um Mr Mueller did approach uh staff to go ahead and um reone this property to light manufacturing from General commercial and able to make it more marketable to sell uh General retailing wasn't be an option for him out there any longer um staff and the Planning Commission did recommend approval of this uh at the July meeting by unanimous vote as well and if there's any questions I'll be able to address those Jeff on the Jeff's picking on me today uh looks good like I said out there with with what's going on it's going to fit right in move for approval second got a motion to approve and a second as presented any further consideration from Council or the public if not I'm going to call for the vote motion to approve all in favor say I I any oppos nay 70 is the vote next we have number 19 consideration of authorizing a request for temporary placement of a mobile home not to exceed one year during construction of a permanent home in the same 2 Acre Site 4609 Armstrong located approximately 170 ft fet south of the intersection of Armstrong Street and East 47th Street more more specifically occupying the carrian Edition track two being 2 acres in Northern San Angelo AJ fer we'll try to keep us moving uh this is a procedure that's a little different from the other zoning procedures that you're hearing today this is a provision in our general city code not the actual zoning ordinance that allows for the city council to Grant a permit for one year's time uh the intent behind the

[2:13:47] ordinance is to allow someone to temporarily reside in an alternate structure while building a home on the property in the past we've we've had a lot of discussions about these and based on the direction that a moratorium takes we might need to also re-examine this ordinance uh we are required to do notifications in this instance we did send out nine notifications we received one in favor two in opposition uh this property is just near the North Boundary of the city that's the red line that you see here uh off to the West here uh you would see North Bryant Boulevard uh just off of the map here would be Lake View High School to give you a reference point here's a closer look at that lot again it's a pretty sizable lot it's around two acres in size and you can see from the aerial photograph it's in a fairly sparsely populated area although I will mention there is an established neighborhood just off of this map to the South that you might want to keep in mind I did mention that there were two uh opposition notifications that were sent in one actually came in yesterday so that one will not be in your background packet but I do have it on the slide here for for you to read uh basically the summary is the opposition was uh number one that they could request for an additional extension at some point in time which is a fact and also they were concerned that if someone saw this type of temporary structure in this area they would think it would be okay to do that on their own properties so again those letters of opposition uh are property owner number one immediately to the south of uh the subject property and just south of the U person that wrote in in favor and then the other person property owner number nine directly south of the subject property just a couple of photographs this is looking North along Armstrong Street uh so your property will be off to the right uh looking South and then looking directly at the subject property again you can see it's currently vacant and with this request you can approve it modify this uh by adding conditions to it or deny it altogether the uh temporary City I'm sorry the city code AS out for temporary mobile home

[2:15:52] installation doesn't really give you any criteria so it's simply a subjective uh decision for you as the council to make uh the existing zoning is rs1 so you wouldn't see more than one uh single family home per lot and again that is predominant to the north and south of this particular area uh the underlying zoning of course would not allow placement of either a mobile home or any sort of uh recreational vehicle which is the reason for this request and this city code dates back to 1959 um there is the opportunity as the person in opposition was concerned about to ask for an additional extension that request would have to come back to you as the council uh after that period expires again a one-year term with that I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have we we've dealt with these in the past and I think they've all worked out pretty well I know we've got one on West 48 right now and I think we gave that six or seven month he's almost got his house built uh it was a year it was a year in July okay well he just about got his house built so the mobile home may we tried to watch it pretty carefully because I know there were some concerns You' got ack her on that I know and you'll have a Ticker on this one won't you yes CU we need to be very very careful Marty this is in your area make a motion defend it please what what uh uh what what about sewer in this instance uh they would have to be able to show that they could connect to the facilities they've not indicated how they would do that as of yet they simply wanted to see if this would gain contaction before they made the formal modifications but they would have to uh connect to facilities in order to actually live their permanently or temporarily for that matter okay and I think the first concern was how how if if they decide H how what what is the criteria for removing it if they don't fulfill their obligation we uh as the mayor said we do have a a Tickler so to speak where we would monitor uh the period of time we usually try to go out before a year even just to survey what's going on on

[2:17:53] the site at the one-year Mark if that structure is still in place we would immediately send them a citation and work that through the municipal court process um in my time with the city I can think of two that we've worked that way and we were able to gain compliance before the final step of Municipal Court but that would be the the approach that we would take to it okay I I will move for approval uh I don't plan on moving for approval of any extension so I hope the homeowners realize they've got a year or less we'll be happy to put that in the letter and make it very clear okay I'll second that motion any Council like yes sir uh is it is this person applied for a building permit no sir they have not and they're asking for already asking for asking for a mobile home I mean how how do we even know they're even going to commence construction how long is this how long has this application been in uh let me look at the date here we received it on July the 8th well and as I as I read there their request they're wanting to live on the property until their home was complete is that right that is their intention although we've made them aware that the one year is what they get regardless of where they are with their Construction yeah but uh these are not made contingent upon them actually commencing construction are they you're correct yeah I got it that's all I need to know Don do do they have sewer out there there there is the ability for sewer um okay that there's a sewer line that that there is a line there's just no tap at this time which would be in the right of way here okay I don't know about that AJ how how big is that lot two acres two acres two acres um the

[2:19:57] problem I have with this is that you had two people that were adjoining that property that didn't that oppose this so I definitely am not going to be forward if that that's happening I I believe that we're we could start seeing a lot more of these people because I could see someone coming in here that wants a temporary housing there is no temporary housing they throw a trailer on that lot they live there for a year they're gone they probably they could they could end up even paying this is this person even here is this person here I don't believe so if it was pretty important to me I think I'd be here I would like to hear from this person I'd like to hear their plans and and see what they're that's just me I think we would also suggest revisiting this ordinance I think there can be some but I can see in the future that this could this could be a problem where people could ask for the this there's a lot of empty lots on the north side of town somebody can throw I mean it would be a lot cheaper for them to go buy a $5,000 trailer $10,000 trailer put it on there for one year put a loophole in the system yeah I mean it is a loophole in the system got a good point Rodney good point it's that's a bad president was what you're saying I don't I don't like starting these especially since two people that live right next to them don't want it I if I lived right next to it and I didn't want it I would hope that the city would stop it very good any other done can I make a suggestion when that person uh comes in has plans maybe submits the blueprint uh we give him another shot at it at that time and they can come and tell us what they want to do possibly I mean I'll look at anything but I just don't like putting the trailers there I mean any more building a house it sometimes it can take 9 10 12 months to even to get a set of blueprints easily and there's his year so if they come to you ready to build that's a whole different scenario if they've got their permit already pulled plumbers you know contractors lined up and the plans set of plans in this case they don't Marty you want to pull your motion and give them a chance to come back with all the

[2:21:59] information or do you want to take a vote on it no sure I'll I'll pull it you want to pull your second John I going to stick with my I'm just kidding I'm just kidding uh let's pull this thing and let him bring it back and I think but I do have a question are you sure about the sewer line on Armstrong are you talking about Armstrong or 47th 47th Street 47th okay okay cuz I know there's not one on Armstrong I'm sorry if I was misleading I didn't tend to be okay let's pull this tell him to bring everything and that's as Charlotte said bring back all his information and he can reapply since we didn't take a vote on this we'll do that they need to come in person and that would be a good idea number 20 is mine and in sake of time I'm going to pull it put number 20 on next on next agenda okay we've done 20 1 we've done 22 uh we've got text Dot Mr silvus you want to do 23 what time is it uh 444 you on Dutch you on a pullet buddy would I hurt your feelings if we put it off Mr Shan it's not going to hurt mine however John's John's already here you know what let's go ahead and do it yeah I didn't I didn't realize I didn't realize John was here come on come on up let's he just been here all day okay let's go ahead and do number 23 that's update discussion of text do maintenance activities along Texas Department of Transportation rideways within City Limits and options for supplementing their maintenance operations Mr silvus you requested this do you want to preface it yeah and I visited with Shane on I get numerous calls and I'm sure some of us most of us gotten a the you know I can remember the day that they cut the ribbon for that Houston heart and how beautiful it was and then now I don't know I know it it's state right away and I know they maintain it but man I tell you what it gets rough and it gets ugly and it just makes us look bad so that along with the exits I've always you know uh really griped about because of how they they look horrible they need

[2:24:04] Bean swept they need you know I've even offered uh some of the nonprofits out there to come on board and help us do that but then the safety issue came up you know where you know traffic out there at Bryant in six or Fifth Street and so all these little roadblocks but having said all that if we can somehow you know show the state or Drew Derby or somebody that we're interested in getting this thing cleaned up I believe our even our uh the mowing part of it has gone down it went from four to three to maybe now twice a year so that's concerning to to me and I'm sure to a lot of other folks so yes sir we we did we had a a good meeting with the Tex out officials uh week and a half ago or so now and uh I learned a little bit about their program and what they're doing of course you know we' we've known their ride of ways for a long time and what you know what what their uh what you know their responsibilities are as far as uh their R of ways but what they uh right now on their roadways and um you can just see right here on a a map this is U all of U textiles within the city limits and then of course this does go outside the city limits to some uh a little bit as well too but you can see what the uh which rights of ways within town uh that they're responsible for uh and and we go back up and we can um right now um they actually have contracts where they go out and they contract the the sweeping of of all their rights of ways uh in in the in the streets uh they contract the mowing they contract the uh litter control and then they do herbicide applications in town and then they do have uh with with their own staff they do the herbicide applications uh on as needed basis or as they can basis and also they also have their own Crews that do hand sweeping of certain um Bish the wrong term but U uh drainage ways and uh storm water structures that

[2:26:07] they actually go out and hand clean themselves with their own staff uh in your background we did kind of include some of uh some of the costs that they are incurring within within their um contracts their contracted Services uh mowing uh they do three uh they have a contract for three full Services per year of their rway mowing um and of course you know one thing that Tex do you know stated up front you know that their funds are set up so they can mow for safety issues not aesthetic issues um so you know that's their main function and main focus and that's what their funding is allowed for is or safety issues not aesthetic issues uh sweeping based on their ms4 permit with the with the tcq uh they they're they have it in their in their plans to produ uh street sweeping once a month so they do actually sweep their streets or their highways once a month within the city limits and then the litter control they have a contract uh I believe it's through the tibh is that yeah conso resources and um they use use them for their L litter control uh and they have it divided up and Donald and uh the texto guys can go into more detail about what they do and how they do it but they have it divided up into five different areas around town that they go along and they they will pick up in their rights away the trash um as they can as they um can get to it it's just you know there's a lot of rideway and and one crew that picks up trash so it takes a while to get around um Mr silus you did request some pictures and uh and you kind of specified me some areas that you were looking at here is uh chadburn and fifth uh looking uh north um you know a little bit of tall weeds and some trash that's collected there uh this is Oaks and sixth uh kind of facing back towards the West uh and some trash that that's collected

[2:28:10] there and then this is the offramp uh coming into US U 87 from 67 so and this those are some of the areas that you specifically mentioned uh as far as wanting you know pictures to show that what accumulates between cycle times that teot has and like I said it's it's part of their uh like I said they're it's it's cyclical it's like we do they they of course being contracted they try to get their contractors in as timely as they can based on uh rainfall and and wheat growth and weat wheat height but again it's not always it's not always perfect in their timing and it's kind of like us we you know everything will look pretty good because it's dry and it hasn't rained and we're drought out and all the weeds are low and then all of a sudden we get 3 Ines of rain and I can't keep up so uh I'm sure they fight the same battles like we do so uh with that if you have questions if anybody has questions I'm here uh Tex out officials are here to answer any questions we did uh I believe they did look into um and and they can uh expand on this but I believe they did look into an Adopt A Highway type program uh for maybe the loop and what the restrictions would be so uh with that I'll turn it over and let them kind of go through some the option they come up I just wanted to say hey it's certainly not me even though I am an advocate of you know making this town an All-American City like it was once supposed to be but but really uh you know when I get comments from taxpayers that say Hey I thought the state had a surplus of funds out there so I don't know that you know that's why these guys are here and maybe they've got a different idea but again the Aesthetics the look The you know just the ugliness of it all is is what people see right away you know so I'm just the messenger Mr Tex do people out there so you know I'm just bringing it to you so no I'm done as I say Mr syus and uh mayor and members of the council

[2:30:16] that's a good place to start the conversation you mentioned the budget pressures um first of all I'm John DT I'm with Tex out here in Stan Angelo Stan Angelo district and we have 15 counties out here Stan Angelo being the urban center uh with me I never go anywhere alone is Tom Johnson our maintenance engineer for the district and Donald Peterson who I think most of you know who's our are engineer manages our maintenance and uh construction activities in Tom Green County and four other counties on the Northern Tier of our district but uh Shane mentioned I believe our budget numbers or flashed them up there for you in total we spend about 390 000 a year at least we did this fiscal year on contracted litter pickup Mowing and sweeping within the urban area and just to give you a feel for what that represents in our budget that's 4% of our overall contracted maintenance budget for our 15 counties for this year and that's you know there's more and more pressure as our budget declines and our traffic increases to spend a higher and higher percentage of what we do have on roadway maintenance and repair Road bed maintenance and repair not roadside you're correct our our moon cycles have gone down historically over past few years over a number of years you know depends on where you want to start counting uh we were discussing in the back we recall not in the not too distant past roughly 10 years ago or so we had three to four moing Cycles a year in the urban area now we budget for two and we have a contingency for a third and we start our third in the urban area tomorrow um so some of this will look better as a result of that um also as I Shane related to you our focus and uh efforts are placed on in terms of mowing um are placed on um maintaining the safety um of the transportation system not necessarily

[2:32:20] thetics we just don't have the funding level to you know have a putting green type appearance like honestly maybe we used to of course it used to rain more than it did also um but it is a balancing act for us um I think um L pickup sweeping was touched on um and I'd be happy to answer any more detailed questions you might have one of the things I do want to um pick up on that Shane said yes we did as a result of our conversation with the city manager and other City staff a couple weeks ago go home and research the opportunity to um allow and Adopt A Highway type approach to litter pickup on Loop 306 and the Houston har facility our controlled access facilities in town and found that U and it was news to us that yes it is allowed uh we would um work with groups to to uh perform litter pickup from the edge of the frontage roads on out to the outside of the rideway not in the medians for safety considerations for their safety um there are some discussions at our commission level and we have no detail on this yet but um it's not just happening in St Angelo the the same sort of issues are happening everywhere so we're looking for Partnerships and one of the U things that's under consideration discussion or corporate sponsorship for I'm not sure how extensive it is may just be litter may include mowing I'm not sure we don't have much guidance if it we have no guidance on this yet just conversation there's that sort of discussion going on at Statewide level also that might be something we could tap into as time goes on also like I said i' like to open it up and let you I just wanted to add that and I know I brought it up before I think Miss farmer has brought it up before uh and others but you know I I'm a an advocate of getting we the people involved you know government city

[2:34:24] government state government doesn't have to do it all you know James flor's back there doesn't have to mow all the ones out there I think we need to reach out to folks and it's good to know that the state is may be doing that uh but you know I think we need to get up off our you know what and go and and do our part you know and and not just rely on on Tex dot or the city to do everything I think there's you know some of us can can contribute so you know Partnerships are great I like that idea but you know what it's been going on and I brought it up numerous times to finally get you folks up here to the podium to even be talking about it having this conversation as a start I I believe and we can go forward from there you know well we appreciate the opportunity and I'd like to suggest that we stay in contact with City staff and continue the conversation and at your discretion have us back for formal report on this but I think maybe there's some things they're taking shape and the corporate sponsorship aspect of it may be one that may be a real boom to us or it's a new tool that we haven't had before at least okay so when's our next mowing going to happen starts tomorrow right Don good starts tomorrow timing's everything so that's that's by the way that is our third cycle this year so we did pull the trigger on that optional cycle because it did rain a few weeks ago and that's what we're experiencing but reach out and I and I and I uh applaud Shane for doing this and helping me but reach out to to the churches in s Angelo somebody has to you know you know light the fuse for that to even we need to Market that program yes you do you really do and it's good advertisement and good public exposure for these groups and I think um we see it more in the rural areas although it's I think we've had some problems in the rural areas also keeping the momentum going with it but I think you make a good point I think it's we have to go out and advertise get with Mr Jerry C back there cuz he had interest in it and and he's sitting right there so just you know start the conversation you know thank you so much thank you all thank

[2:36:25] you next on our list is number 24 do we need to do this Shane please we do to consideration of adopting a resolution authorizing pursuit to March 9 gasb issued statement number 54 the commitment of funds in the amount of 375 21862 from fiscal year 2213 general fund balance for the purchase of 14 14 Fleet Patrol vehicles in August 20113 said commitment of funds in the amount of 375 21862 to be reimbursed to the general fund balance owner about October 1 213 from the FY 213 214 equipment replacement funds and approving the purchase of said 14 Fleet Patrol vehicles under VM 0813 and authorizing the city manag to execute all documents necessary and related to the purchase this obviously is Tim's Taho this is Tim Tim's tahos yes sir um every year the vehicle maintenance department schedules uh equipment replacement uh throughout for different divisions within our organizations um one of the one of the divisions is the police department as well as Municipal Court department and we purchase these vehicles every year on a recurring basis in order to keep that Fleet up to speed and keep that Fleet up to date um we are requesting uh your approval this year for to do this a little differently because of some situations that arose with the manufacturers of the tahos um General Motors has giving us given us an August 22nd cutof off date uh for the production of the 2014 Taho uh Tahoe police P Patrol vehicles um what that means is after August 22nd they're going to take no more orders they're going to shut down their factories and retool to start production of the 2015 year models which is going to have a new technology new drivetrain as well as a new body style um so in order to be a little proactive and and benefit us and uh in

[2:38:29] order to keep the cycle going we're asking that yall allow us to use some of the general fund balance uh through the gasby number statement number 54 that allows us to commit those funds to use that balance to go to issue a purchase order to Reliable Chevrolet for the purchase of these 14 tahos and go ahead and get our name in the Hat and get those in production um and avoid that 2015 year model and that delay the 2015 year model will not start production until March the 31st of 2014 so you have the delay there you have the production date and then the upfitting manufacturers will get a Tahoe and then they have to start their manufacturing processes and their R&D and then man remman and so it's a it's going to be a huge delay and it's going to put us back in our replacement schedule that we fought really hard over the last 3 years to get PD up to speed and get them into into vehicles that are going to be reliable for them thank you any questions Tim you want to come up and tell us what you think about it you don't no I know you have an opinion on this just say I think y'all should just vote yes thank you you're welome why why are we switching we currently don't use Taho do we we went to tahos uh last year we purchased them uh well it was approved in January we don't have any out on the streets right now uh they're being uh set up and with the cages and the lights and everything else so we have a fleet of them right now we have think 13 13 we have 13 of them sitting at the shop getting ready to be put on the street right now um we've had a few for a while but they've been K9 units specifically canine why why why those instead of a sedan uh well we we I wish I had all my stuff but we went through all this in the last Council there was quite a bit of information reliability was one of the main things resale value was another main thing uh the initial cost upfront was a few thousand dollars more but we felt in the

[2:40:32] long run with maintenance uh fuel economy as well as uh being our area the way it is we'd be able to to use them better than the sedans and the council the council did approve the Taho when we spoke about it reason was reliability and the equipment that the guys carry now and if they leave them in the back seat you know the car or whatnot or in the trunk the kind of equipment that they're using and the different uh Firepower and stuff they need the Tahoe for the space and the K9 that was as much as I remember about why he was changing in the right I have no problem with canine I have problem with Patrol and and you can that's that's okay um we didn't just pull it off you know our hip there was some there was some study there was a lot of study done in it uh there's a lot of organizations and agencies around the state that have been utilizing them for quite some time uh we uh we relied on a lot of their information a lot of their statistics uh and that's why we decided to move that direction we lose a lot of undercarriage on the Chargers right now on the lowprofile vehicles um I'm probably not the one best to discuss that probably uh Patrick is knowing all the issues that we've had at the shop with the lower ride vehicles but uh uh they tested well and they actually tested better on the speed track than the other cars did why the problem with the undercarriage driving through b the on the on the Dodge Charger was cuz they were too low they're they're low yes okay and that had to do with I with rough roads or uh speed bumps rough roads yeah a bunch of different things okay our streets I I can right there yeah the same thing the public going through enough said Street the tahos don't roll uh actually uh again uh they haven't rolled on us they're built for for Pursuit driving uh we we did have the opportunity to get them on the track uh they they performed better than any

[2:42:34] of the cars that we had uh they handled very very well the tires did not hold up so we're going to have to use different tires and I think we ordered them we ordered them with specific tires to withhold the driving that we put on them how many miles per gallon uh you're asking me a question that I had in January an answer that I had in January that I don't have right now uh the um Patrick do you remember offand charer they were one mile per gallon better than the charger worse than the charger worse than the charger uh what we looked at too was was maintenance cost and and uh the Chevrolet tahos historically uh with other agencies have had very low maintenance cost in comparison to other vehicles and then the resale when you're looking at the resell you know we sell a charger or a Crown Vic and we get about 1,500 uh the other cities were getting uh 15,000 for their tahos when they put them back out on Market obviously in our Market we'll probably be closer to $ 95 to $10,000 $9,500 $110,000 resale that's what we're anticipating Johnny then Fleming Chief uh so we're buying 14 new ones are are we replacing 14 old ones or what are we doing with those or Patrick can probably answer better to our repacement uh program did I see some go on sale or we're selling some or yes sir Johnny um typically what happens is we do a one forone replacement on our vehicles so as we get one new vehicle we're taking one that is either meet met the age or the mileage criteria we take that out of the fleet we decommission it and then we sell it through the auction process so yes we don't we call it Fleet creep in our world but we don't allow Fleet creep we don't try to expand our our Fleet um not yet unconsciously yeah Chief has more on that um but yes uh a one patrol car will come out as one daho comes in so Rodney who are we buying these from Reliable Chevrolet where who is that they are out of Richardson um Texas they

[2:44:38] are actually we haven't used this this vendor before last year we bought them from calwell Chevrolet and we price compared calwell Chevrolet to this vendor this year and Cal Chevrolet was actually about $800 a vehicle more than what we're getting them at this point so the local the local guys didn't want the local vendors have not whenever we have solicited they Dodge Chargers Chevy will not hasn't hasn't submitted a bid or a quote okay Jim bass they don't carry it I just uh bass group did submit a bid but they don't carry the Taho they wanted you to go with um Exploder yeah explod Exploder yes said that we turn over I'm sorry let me rephrase that Explorer do do we turn them over a certain year we try to replace them at about 95,000 miles um we expect the tahos uh depending and we're going to watch it but we expect the Taho we can run maybe a little longer um when we've talked to our Auctioneer and we kind of use his guy because he's very knowledgeable in this area he said if you can turn the tahos over at stay at that 100 to the 110 Mark you're going to see a very high return on your on your based on his experience so we're probably going to stay within that standpoint about the 95 to 110,000 mile Mark anybody else I apologize to John bass for saying that I didn't mean to it was a slip John any any other comment from Council we have any comment from the public on this I'm looking for a motion I'm make a motion to approve item number 24 that's it adopt the resolution pursuant to all as present as presented yes is anybody want to second that I'll second okay just had you made a mo let's call for the

[2:46:40] vote all in favor of buing Taho accepting the resolution as presented say I I I any opposed no no okay let's have a show of hands all four that's one two that's Rodney silvus myself and Charlotte far let's see the Nays we got Ward law bman and self no so it's 43 passed all righty I guess we need to do 27 or you want to move it we got 27 we especially need to discuss the uh mayor we especially need to make sure that we get the item B uh taken care of today okay let's do 27 discussion and possible action on matters related to fiscal year 213 214 budget preparation included but not limited to priorities goals and All City funds B consideration of a record vote to propose a property tax rate for fiscal year 213 214 can we get clarity Daniel I'm sorry go ahead I have a question and it's just supposed to be my day to be very argumentative but I just see it as a waste of time when Council has not had a single Workshop to look at the budget and go over how can I recommend whether we go down on the tax stay where we are go up without going and uh in the workshops you know one meeting with staff just me and no other Council input I just not ready to talk about it we do have items that were discussed with the council members individually that we can share with you at this point we did discussed with you individually also on this budget that U as far as what we presented to you was based on a flat budget as far as the uh the tax rate itself um so that is something that um that we did present to you individually we did have that work it is minus the group the rest of the council where we feed off of each other's ideas and come up with and uh I'm sorry staff's not elected council is and I think we are to look at it in a workshop before we we're approving if I could suggest on the on

[2:48:45] the B item uh the B item is a a state prescribed timing mhm and U we've been in this situation before where we're not we don't have all our dust settled and so our option the option we've selected before uh on the B item is to move ahead with the vote as the state requires uh we can subsequent to that to this action reduce or approve a property tax rate below what was approved but we can't go above what the This Record vote today does I I think U it'd be fair it's not spilling many beans to suggest that the comments we heard from Council nobody suggested that raising the property tax rate was a good idea and so if we took a record vote today for a for a tax which was equivalent to what we have currently in this year we can subsequently the options exist to go ahead and approve an ordinance for the property tax rate which is flat the same as the year or reduced so you still have on that b item you can vote for a the tax rate to be the same as it is this year and you can still reduce it in a future council meeting if you choose and I do recommend in this case then that we don't have a uh as far as a workshop schedule with a lot of other items on the agenda and just say we'll do a workshop period that's it and uh address it that way also which um we could do a workshop next Tuesday where we do nothing but that I I don't have information I I need to to vote on the uh I don't have the information supplied to me that I need to vote on a tax rate uh including the the increase in property tax uh property valuations that are on the RADS and all that stuff so I don't I don't understand your timeline uh but I'm I'm personally not ready to vote on that and and I understand you say you can set a a a ceiling I guess and then go down but I'm I'm not I'm not

[2:50:48] ready to vote personally and I I have requested that information too Mr Mayor yes sir can we not uh you know Daniel's talking about maybe next Tuesday can we not just have a workshop that discusses both budget and then the tax rate only and nothing else absolutely and we we should is that going to put you in a bind as far as just waiting another week Morgan uh what it may require some other special meetings later uh the truth and Taxation deadline is where we're approaching now the property tax rate must be adopted by a certain date the budget must be adopted by a certain date and so if we today is really just to take a vote that we do intend to Levy a property tax for fiscal year 14 um the the rate itself is not what's so important what is important is to say we we will probably Levy a property tax we need it to function and offer our services and so if delay this meeting today it could cause potentially more special meetings uh throughout September if if we decide I'm sorry go ahead I didn't this deadline we know about it all year long and every council person up here has asked for the last few months for a workshop and you're asking us to you know send the wrong message out there to the you know uh public that well we're just leaving it flat you know whatever when we don't know what we're voting on the dollars I just let's let's give okay Marty C can we Morgan can can we have the meeting next week and and do it published that we're going to do the tax rate at that meeting will that still fit in the guidelines it will probably require some special meetings in September but we'll sharpen our pencil and get on the phone to the comproller to see what 7 days is going to delay us is that okay Mike for that sure what our

[2:52:53] objective is to uh uh satisfy these State uh mandated time frames within the uh normal council meeting structure and if council's not interested in that then we don't need that objective we can if council's interested in special meetings uh we can work around that certainly our goal was not to uh press you into special meetings unnecessarily well I I personally don't have a problem with a special meeting for Budget since regular meetings are going from 9: to 6 so and I do and I do want to point out also that we did have a workshop uh scheduled for the last meeting that we had we ran tight on time and we decided to do it on an individual basis to make sure that we address the draft budget and so forth so it wasn't that the staff is trying to avoid uh these uh workshops we definitely want to have the workshops but we are tied on time as here's another example of it uh again we can schedule that for next week nothing on the agenda but just a workshop and we'll get down to the nitty grey and take what we need to um the only thing I'd say is Workshop is a no action kind of event so we'll have a what what would be set up as a regular council meeting its sole item will be the budget obviously but we'll need to take action and so that can't be a workshop it's it's it is a regular it's a up that way if we're going to be on Tuesday it's going to have to be after 1:30 or 2:00 Daniel L at the uh chamber lunch in that day probably most of the rest of you Wednesday or we can meet break for lunch and then come back we could do that before you know really though I don't have a problem on making the motion that our tax rate not exceed what it is right now that's what I'm saying I don't have a problem with that I mean if if it was if we were lowering it or raising it'd be a it would be a different thing but we're not going to raise taxes we have no intention of and if we decide to go down all we have to do is make a motion and go down I'm going to make a motion

[2:54:55] that we go ahead and set the tax rate what was it 78.1 correct yes sir I'm going to make a motion that we go ahead and set the tax rate to not go above 781 it's not really setting the tax rate just a record vote to propose a property tax rate at this point so a record vote to propose a property tax rate that does not exceed 78.1 which means we can go down but we cannot go up I'll make that motion and that's the same as it is right now that's the same as it is I'll second that motion okay because we need to get this in regardless of whether we have a budget we need to get this into the state and this doesn't hurt anything or change anything discussion any other Council discussion and as far as the workshop I don't have a problem with the workshop we can do it early in the morning we can do it in the afternoon you know I'd rather not be here in more than another couple hours but or we can do it when we can do it whenever we want to I don't have a problem with a with a budget Workshop but I think we need to get this in today yeah any public comment on this then I'm going to call yes Jerry I just have a question when you talk about when you say priorities are you talking about projects right now we're just talking about the tax rate oh that's all I you at the wrong time when you get to all right I'm going to call for the motion on this and the motion is that we set the property tax rate for purposes to not exceed 78.1 record vote record vote all of those in favor say i i i n okay we've got a 70 vote on that so that is taken care of we can schedule the workshop for Tuesday of next week then what do you want to start at 9:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 8:00 I'm just about 2 o' whatever time the the 9:00 2 o' 2 o' 2 o' 9:00 9:00 who said N9 Morgan said nine oh Morgan said nine yeah we got to listen to her it's up to

[2:57:00] the council I'm okay with nine okay I'm saying 2 o'cl who's who's who's with me on 2 o' I'm good two okay that's four V 2 o'clock next Tuesday we're going to have a budget meeting mayor we we we don't need to I I I'm going to submit to my fellow staff memb override I don't think we need to cover item a except I think we have a member in the room a member of the public in the room who'd like to make a comment about what he say sees as a priority okay where are we priorities go that would be Mr C I expect okay we want to go ahead and we want to go ahead and do a sure okay let's do a go ahead well just I'm proposing just to give Mr C an opportunity to tell us what he thinks is a priority not because I think Morgan needs to run through a presentation why don't you come up and tell us what you want Jerry and we'll break take it up in our Workshop budget next week because we're not in a hurry on this one are we no but I wanted Mr C's been waiting to make comment I just wanted to know uh what what priorities are you meaning uh uh different the jobs or different things that you're going to do Mr C we had a meeting with council members of course back in uh I'm brought here oh uh back in February uh as far as to establish strategic priorities and priorities as far as the capital uh we also had meetings individually with the council members this past week to determine their parties too so we're um again just taking a look at um what we have seen from Council previous and this current Council as far as those priorities um we also have met with staff which is what we'll also share with the city council at our Workshop but uh at this point if you'd like to share something you feel should be a priority we' love to hear from you yes sir I was thinking about uh the 19th Street project uh at one time uh that was on the board and uh I know that 19th Street there's no easement the city had no easement so uh we put a lot of work into that we walked and uh talked to the

[2:59:02] people that own property along 19th Street and uh they donated uh their land for the sidewalks for 19th Street and uh like I've been out of loop for a couple of years now and uh I wanted to know it fell off the board or was taken off the board or whatever and uh I'd like to I'd like to see that come back because there was a lot of lot of citizens involved they gave up their land for this and I like to see that this uh this be considered again and i' like to see it taken all the way and see what we can do with that it it is a priority and it's uh one of the most dangerous streets on that side of town you know and in fact there's been several different accidents there and uh I consider it a priority and and and if and if you don't mind I would like to before you make make a decision on priorities would you give us a week or so to we uh go and revisit that uh Street and look at it again please I would like to do that with you this week actually as we discussed you know um I'd definitely like to be able to go out there with you and uh also with Shane and that way you can kind of show us some of those concerns and make sure that we're on the same page thank you that's exactly what I was talking about I appreciate that thank you very much for your time this uh Mr C brought this to our attention a couple of months ago before the council changed over and we got Direction then to let's see where we're at on this and uh Clinton Bailey had spent some time working on this and and the right away the easements are kind of kind of a tough tough nut to crack at this point uh Mr Wolf our interim city engineer has picked this up has taken some photos and working on a a brief memo to uh kind of give us the lay of the land and I think it'd be great for him to go along with you Daniel and and give examples of where the project would move smoothly and where where there would be hurdles to to to overcome we'll get that meeting scheduled thank you okay Jerry yes sir appreciate it thank you very okay we'll discuss that

[3:01:05] then in our budget next week okay we've got number 29 that's first public can we move that one good deal 29 is dead we've already done 30 okay we're at 33 this is consideration of approving various board nominations by Council and designated council members and I do think we ought to do this yes okay excuse me um Mr Morrison I did confirm that residency requirement and we're good to go on Mr I'm sure on the construction board for Mr Julian I did confirm that residency requirement and we're good to go okay thank you all right we got consideration of various board animal shelter smd4 Sarah Bennett First full term January 15 construction Board of adjustment appeals smd1 L tras one first full term February 25 Roger Julian smd2 first fullterm January 15 Christopher goo did I even get close it sounds good Christopher goo smd4 to a first full term January 215 you want to do these one at a time you want me to leave read them all and do it in one fail swoop I I'll make a motion to do them all at one fail swoop okay number c design and historic review commission Eric Eric Eric egire smd1 unexpired term September 23 development cooperation Daniel Anderson of the mayor unexpired term February 215 Fort conso board Harry Thomas smd4 to a second full term public art commission Alejandro castanon smd3 to a second full term April 215 and Susan Williams SNB 5 to a first full term April 2115 Zoning Board of adjustments Lloyd Woodfin Jr smd4 to a first full term January 25 May I have a motion motion to approve all the names you just read out as pres second got a mo got a got a motion from silus and a second from bman do we have

[3:03:08] any F few do we have any more comments from Council we got to get out of here anything from the public motion to approve all in favor say I I any Nays that is a 60 vote 6 70 70 70 it I about had it number 34 consideration of nominating and approving various atlarge members to serve on the following board's commission by City Council Members construction Board of adjustments appeals Downtown Development commission what do we need to do here Lisa on the um construction board appeals I had one application um in your background you'll see it's Jerry cillo he is uh listed as an electrician on his application however he's not uh registered or licensed electrician his uh but who was an electrician in the Navy he's eligible and would be suited for this position anybody want to make a motion to approve him what was his name again Jerry corillo I read the background he was an electrician in the Navy he's just not an electrician I'll make a motion to approve Mr Jerry second Cario any any further Council discussion motion to approve i i i any Nays 70 we have Downtown Development commission I have um four members they're um interested willing and interested to continue serving on the Downtown Development commission so if you'd like to reappoint those individuals as well Jim Cummings Lisa you get closer to the microphone please thank you the members are Jim Lisa Lisa Edy Tim Edwards and John FES these would all be reappointments move approve second got a motion and got a second public all in favor say I I any Nays that's a 70 consideration of nominating approving City Council Members to serve on the following boards and committees cono river water Master

[3:05:11] advisory committee what does three mean we need three three council members because the POS former appointees were Alvin new Paul Alexander and kall hershfield do they have to be City Council Members yes okay this is for the water Master I'll I'll serve as mayor if if anybody else want if but two of you going to have to also I will not serve you will not no sir Marty you want to serve I'll serve bleming you want to serve am I already on the budget it doesn't make any difference this is on a different day Mr B would like to Mr bman you want to serve I second that motion thank you Mr vman sure okay myself Marty self and Don bman just been volunteered is there a second volunt second okay any any comment motion to approve I I any Nays 70 c Valley Council of governments executive committee we need one member yes that was held by mayor former mayor new I think I no I'm not on this one I'm on the transit it's uh Johnny Silva Farmer on the general assembly I will not serve on this one will you serve Charlotte she's already on the general assembly she's already on so we need someone other than Charlotte yes sir I'll do it you'll do it Don yeah put Don on motion to approve Don give me a second please second second all in favor say I I any Nays 70 cono Valley Transit the district we need one that's Charlotte that is hold on one bless me right now it's Johnny and Charlotte that are serving so I need another one you need one more this on the trans side Winky Winky you want it no I don't Don you want it no I want do you already on it Fleming you want it I want to do the last one you how about Marty you want it I was going to take the next one I think you'd be good on that cono Valley Transit District that is right up your alley that would I want the next one okay put me on it then motion to approve me to

[3:07:14] cono Valley trans second yeah all in favor say I any Nays 70 records management committee we need one I'll do Marty's got that motion to approve Marty Marty or Bling No I'm going to do the last one okay motion to approve I want to do that one too which one you just need one the records you can have Valley Transit you do no Hotel I'm waiting on a second on Marty yeah okay motion to approve I I any Nays 70 Hotel community housing committee you want that in Fleming motion to approve Fleming second all in favor say I I nay that's a 70 discussion and possible action of conducting an evening city council meeting once per quarter I think you asked for this Don yes sir um I just while I was running I heard this quite a bit I know it's been tried in the past what I'd like to do is just try it one time if we have good at attendance uh and I don't know how we can get much better attendance than what we've been having but if we have good attendance in the evening then maybe do it once a quarter something like that just a trial run is what I'd like to see make it a motion uh move to have it once a quarter to uh makeing a motion to have it once once one oh once yeah yeah as a trial anybody want to second that second this weekend you have any idea when you want to do this uh on a short of agenda n yeah yeah not one with 40 well we need to remember we've got to pay staff prob they exempt from overtime not everybody is and security you know if we can if we can start at 6 we'll be out of here by 3 at a in the morning that's that's what worries yeah a problem I got a second and I've got a that may motivate us got a motion I've got a second all in favor say I I any Nays that's said moo hold on did you decide when you wanted to start this

[3:09:18] when we have a short agenda we can discuss it after budget after budget we're down to 35 yeah no I'm just kidding you one that's about 20 let's set it up okay announcements and consideration of future agenda items the one I've got is that we have got to find a way to get these meetings down where we're through by 3 or 4:00 these six o' meetings are killing me and we're not even through today you two earlier in the year well two would be better but I'm trying to be realistic we got several items out the last two so but we've got to we have got to get so I need I need council's help on this we're either going to have to do less items we're going to have to spend less time we're going to have to put timers on everybody but something has got to be done because these 9-hour meetings are killing me so that's one thing I want to talk about as a future item we need some we need some we need a plan cuz this ain't working so there's mine who else I I have one yes and I don't care if it's an agenda item but the the the overlay program I I know we're we're evidently we're working on it Shane or something but I would really like to see that program where it's seven or eight years and it's every street uh you know and not being subjective and if we could work on like I said I don't care if that's an agenda item as long as we're working on anyone else I've already got stuff on there okay consider itation of September 3 213 city council what does that mean yes sir basically that meeting is uh before the holiday and we just wanted to confirm with Council that we were going to have that meeting because it is before um Labor Day I think or Memorial Day it's after after I don't have a problem need to confirm that we are going to have that meeting because we have some Publications I want to make sure that we have that scheduled meeting I don't have a problem do any have a problem with meeting September 3 anybody down here Don no sir let's meet September 3 okay

[3:11:23] thank you okay and I guess now we need to go back into executive let me read this again right quick did yeah we're not through with executive I am I just about am let's read the last one this is section 55174 A1 to deliberate the appointment employment evaluation reassignment duties discipline or dismissal of the city manager we property items huh there are two mayor there are two property items I missed them where are they no it's just read that about property leases regarding property the bullet right before didn't we deal with that earlier no sir no we had two two other items that would fell under that category okay I see we had another item under this we dealt with one of them correct corre okay section 551 71 to consult with attorney on pending or contemplated litigation or a settlement offer regarding property damage claim go1 12154 and it is wait wait a minut no no that's still the what' you say the second bullet it's the second bullet right second and third bullet okay there's two more items exception you read the first one section 551 072 deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property regarding groundwater Supply options for the city including VV groundwater business and Industrial Park property in Lake nasworthy property or we're through correct it's 53 534 we're going to Executive we have two items that came out of executive that we need to make a motion on and approve I think we need to point out to Mr bman left the meeting Mr vman did leave the first one is to settle an offer to a settlement offer to settle damages to Verizon this is settlement offer

[3:13:24] e01 12154 and we will authorize up to 4 no no no no no we're not saying blank saying that we're no money Mount authorized to settle would be correct I move we authorize to settle with Verizon we authorized to settle with Verizon e121 154 you have a motion I have a motion second I'll second that all in favor say I I any Nays I did okay the next one is for Community Development this is cased hole Solutions and they have offered $20,000 per acre for 20 acres in our Industrial Park for a total of $400,000 do I have a motion to approve Marty do I have a second second I have a second all of those in favor say I I and I am a nay on this one I'm opposed to it okay who I'm sorry who second I seconded then I have a third motion I move we adjourn let's do it quick somebody second it second favor I I over J

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=YAH2n9gI1D4