San Angelo City Council 8-2-22

[0:00:00] call this meeting to order we will start today with our chaplain prayer and pledges and we have today police chaplain lorenzo hatch here to to lead us in both good morning good morning bow your heads with me gracious father we thank you so much for this day that we can gather in your name and to to deliberate as a council lord we ask that you stretch your mighty hand upon our nation upon all of our leaders especially our local leaders lord be with their agenda today and inspire them to respond to the needs of our community and lord we ask that you bless and protect all our brave men and women who serve in our police and our fire department and lastly lord we ask we continue to ask you to remember us and please and send us rain for our community these and all things we ask in your mighty name amen i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states texas flag i pledge allegiance to the texas one thank you excuse me there are no proclamations today so we will start with a public comment public comment you must state your name

[0:02:02] and address or smd each citizen can speak just once per item unless asked to comment by counsel public comment three minutes unless extended by counsel or translation services the proponent or opponent five minutes unless extended by counsel or translation services council has no obligation to respond to comments or questions from the public any response from a member of the city council to non-agenda comments is limited to a statement of specific factual information recitation of existing policy and directing staff to place a subject on a future agenda are there individuals in the audience today who would like to come forward and offer public comment scene none we will now move into the consent agenda larry do you have anything you want to pull from the consent agenda karen d and f lucy um i believe it's g near g gary item p item p tom i've already got it so we're good okay and tommy okay without me i have a motion for approval of the consent agenda with the exception of items d f g and p let's move still moved by harry seconded by tommy any public uh comment on the consent agenda scene none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes seven um yes seven zero we will now go to item d consider amending the june 21st 2022 purchase via tips agreement number

[0:04:05] 200201 from kings consulting to construction consultants 3 for an amount not to exceed one million five hundred thousand dollars to update the north amcon hangar to the shell rent requirements using 196 204 from the airport fund balance and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents jeremy you're on morning mayor morning and staff um representing your airport today um this item as you see it came before you in june and this was to do all the shale rent requirements for the m-com hangar this was just an oversight on my part when we started the negotiation process everything he sent in was on king's paperwork he has the two companies they're sister companies so when i made the actual agenda item it was on kings when we got when i asked for the tips number he gave me the tips number the tips number is registered for construction consultants the vendor actually in the city system is kings because he does the asbestos removal so because of such a broad scope of what he does he put it underneath his construction consulting services so it wasn't until after council had already approved the agreement and purchasing caught it as we submitted the requisition for payment so nothing's been paid no work has been done yet we just need to change the name from the sister company to the parent company because kings is not actually on the tips agreement its construction we've already approved the 1.5 million dollars previously so it's just a name change on this one do we have karen do you have a further question thank you jeremy you addressed my exact question so that's perfect and i'm assuming that legally you can do that you can transfer that from one entity to another without a re-bid those were my concerns yes okay thank you perfect thank you all right item f consider motion memorandum can we get a motion to approve that item we can do it one at a time or you we can go through all of them and then ask if there we can present the four we can do it either way yeah we'll do them as four okay item f consider accepting a

[0:06:09] memorandum of understanding between texas pacifico transportation ltd and the city of san angelo for railway improvements as a part of the southwest boulevard rehabilitation project and authorizing the city manager to execute all related documents patrick euron good morning mayor council this is a memorandum of understanding with texas pacifico as part of that southwest project we've completed most of the roadway and now we're up to the railway portion pacifico recently went in a couple weeks ago and raised that railway to meet our roadway elevation what this part of it is is we're adding a sidewalk along that west side that doesn't exist right now we'll incorporate it into that sidewalk and those pedestrian elements is a a pedestrian gate so that the kiddos don't try to cross the road whenever a train's coming obviously so since this is in texas pacifico right away they need to do the work they need to do the design so it meets their standards and their construction standards as well we have questions for patrick thank you patrick you addressed my questions all right item g consider a resolution approving the 2022 annual action plan for use of cdbg and home grant funds as approved by city council on july 7 2022 and authorizing the city manager to execute the applications required certifications related documents and annual funding agreement for the allocation of hundred 661 three of c d b g and three hundred thirty seven thousand and fifty dollars for the home grant funds and seventeen thousand eight hundred in program income and one hundred thousand in prior years funds hello how are you today good morning morgan checkwood assistant director of neighborhood and family services what's before you today is the culmination of the grant preparation process for hud so the cdbg grant the hud grant and all

[0:08:12] program income and prior year funds are encapsulated in the items discussed at the july 7th meeting which are housing rehab at 130 thousand dollars emergency repairs at eleven thousand dollars a code compliance support at forty five thousand dollars debt service obligations of one hundred thirty three thousand dollars and change and then home we have the home buyers assistance program at sixty seven thousand and change the choto set aside at 285 000 in our mhmr support for rental assistance at 60 thousand dollars lucy do you have a question or comment yes ma'am good morning um i wanted to ask you on this um community community development block grant and the home investment partnership that y'all say is the annual action plan in the summary on here can you explain to me a little bit about um your plan as far as reva re rehabilitation and their uh programs for the neighborhood can you explain those to me as far as that the constituents can know what their their they would apply for what they're eligible sure the specific programming is largely unchanged from prior years so the services that citizens are used to receiving from our department are largely unchanged so there is the home buyers assistance program as far as down payment assistance the housing rehab program where you can make application for support for those kind of services the emergency repairs for example if somebody has water line repairs or you know unforeseen items come up that are on the customer side that they can't afford they can make applications for that the um income requirements to

[0:10:14] qualify for these programs are also listed on our website it's a sliding not a sliding scale but it's determined by house size household size so for example a household of four would not exceed this dollar amount would qualify for this programming so that housing rehab and emergency repairs are direct support to citizens making application for those those programs the code compliance and the debt service are the debt service is a legally obligated ongoing loan that we have had for many years and then the code compliance support helps those officers be back out in the field in those target neighborhoods to ensure they stay they meet the standards of the neighborhood morgan in the hundred thousand dollars prior to this year is that money left over from last year or where's the hundred thousand dollars coming from a hundred thousand dollars is an accumulation of multiple years of unspent funds um so not simply last year's spend funds so like what why was that money not used i believe that hundred thousand dollars is specifically from our choto set aside so our contract are contracted um chodo is with galilee and so as they have eligible um clients who can request drawdown of funds they continue to do that we want to fully fund our choto and make sure that they have ample funds set aside for clients but it is um unfortunately common that there is money left on the table we just want to reinvest that make sure we can still match it with with eligible citizens you don't lose the money that's correct do you know by any chance how many people or citizens we might have helped last year in total i don't have the total for all programs but i can get you that information by detail by each specific program i'd be happy to do that that would be great thank you on the blitz program where is it in neighborhood services it is under neighborhood and family services but it's not funded through these program dollars and so what you're considering today in the annual action plan is simply hud dollars and program income

[0:12:17] off of hud dollars the blitz is funded with local dollars and would come in a separate council action but in the past the blitz program has always been presented in fact it was taken away two years ago and bob told us that there was such a need and said so many people wanted that blitz program put back in so he put it back in last year i want to make sure that the blitz program continues forward because it has been a very important program and just because siding has gone up in terms of expense does not change the need for the blitz program so i just want to go on record on that yes i i acknowledge that i think that that's really valuable for sure the plan as it's presented today would need to be considered just to meet the statutory requirements of the grant but there is ample time to research local funding and amending the grant at a future date so i need to make sure that happens sure yes ma'am noted lucy do you have further questions no ma'am i do not i don't need to no we're not working yet okay we're sitting still for a minute item p is the last item on consent agenda for consideration in conversation and it is second reading of an ordinance for z22-15 to re-zone properties from two-family residential zoning district to office commercial zoning district being .23 acres located at 103 and 107 west 14th who pulled this one harry go ahead the only question on this johnny is i thought previously that when we had a split vote on the first reading that we brought it back under the regular agenda and not under the consent that's that's my only question and the vote was what five two five 5-2 yeah i think we have done that in the

[0:14:20] past i don't know that is it required always done it no no so y'all can vote on it now again or if you need any more information you need more information anybody no okay so i think that was asked and answered with that then i would entertain a motion for items d f g and p may i have that motion motion has been made by tommy seconded by lucy we will take a vote all those in favor could we get public comment on that we sure could is there some is there any seeing none and hearing none we will take a vote all in favor say aye aye none opposed consent agenda is passed seven two zero we will now move into our regular agenda comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above applicants proponents and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit their remarks to less than five minutes item a consider matters related to requests for proposal hr-02-22 one discussion proposal submitted for benefits regarding medical pharmacy clinic dental and life slash a d and d and two consider selecting benefit providers authorizing staff to negotiate contracts and authorizing the city manager to execute all related documents and we have today director brian kendrick here yes and we'll also have julie rickman from holmes murphy she'll be presenting most of the details i just kind of wanted to give an overview so good morning mayor city council

[0:16:23] as you will probably remember from last year's budget cycle i warned of the upcoming increase to health insurance that you know is around the corner because we've we've held it back creatively and kind of re-established baselines over the last several years and i didn't think we'd be able to do that for another year but as it turns out one of the relationships that we started a couple of years ago come to fruition this coming fiscal year and so i believe we've able to we've been able to keep that tide from coming in quite yet so with that being said i'll introduce julie rickman she'll go through the presentation and i'll be available for any questions as well good morning council someone help her with getting her slides up all right um and to start off with my name is julie rickman with holmes murphy um jason newman was going to be here to present today but you can see that i'm not jason newman i've had the pleasure though of working with the city of san angelo for many years so i can answer any questions that you might have regarding the rfp process we're going to go a little bit about budget and then the rfp itself when it comes to the benefits that we talked about for today so first of all i wanted to start back and go and show you a little look back on your medical and your pharmacy claims and how your trend has been running over the last several years and you can see right now you're running about 8.7 meaning that the cost of services have gone up for the city of san angelo 8.7 the bumpy line is where your actual month over month pieces are the red line is actually a trended outline that regresses it and shows it as kind of just as a slope a standard slope um i will tell you go on that slope where it goes up above the red line is that primarily impacted by covin part of it was impacted by covid part of it could just be a large claim for those

[0:18:25] specific months so sometimes you'll have a really large claim on a specific month and then it will drop down the next few months you can see some coveted pieces that happened kind of in that 2020 area where you dropped down a little bit in april 2020 or so you've been progressing under your trend line over the last several months in fact which is a positive for you as well code does definitely have some effect though overall on your trend um just it does for everyone at this point so when we're saying that you're looking forward and we're going at 8.7 you're pretty pretty good in line with what the market is showing right now as well what's the market showing it depends on where you're going we have a sql survey that we do and then different carriers that you go through so i've seen it anywhere from about eight percent to about nine and a half percent on medical so you're doing well when we look at your pharmacy trend we've had conversations in the past about pharmacy and you have rebates that happen with your pharmacy as people spend dollars so without rebates your trend is at 13.6 percent but with pharmacy rebates you're looking at 7.2 percent which is really under trend so trend on that is a little bit more like that's where you come those come from the medical from the drugs that your employees actually use so there's rebates that happen back from the carriers that give you dollars back from the medications that your folks are using and that happens several times a couple times a year for you all and you get dollars that come back through to the city as people use pharmacy so i will say for both your medical and your pharmacy when we're looking at your at the very end where you see that 185 dollars and 84 cents that's per um per participant per year those are under what i normally see i work specifically with municipalities and public entities and your medical and your pharmacy is well under what i see for most of my employers so you're running really well that has a lot to do with the contract negotiations that we have when you're medical and you know just looking at this it's a very positive outlook considering what

[0:20:28] i've seen in the marketplace especially recently i wanted to talk a little bit about pharmacy um in a little bit more detail as well holmes murphy and the city we partner with a company called honest rx and honest rx is an organization that works specifically on pharmacy so while you're we're your consultants and we work on pharmacy they get into the nitty-gritty and all the details of your pharmacy what they do is they do a semi-annual review of your formulary changes so every year your your medical carrier and your pharmacy carrier goes through and says we're changing these medications up and down tiers depending on if something is no longer a generic or something new comes to the market and they take a look at that and determine you know what we should be doing for the citizens for the members of your your plan they also do a full annual audit of your pharmacy claims to ensure that your plan is paying the way that it needs to pay for your pharmacy claims and making sure that that's running the way appropriately they have ongoing claims assistance so if someone has maybe a medication that they're having trouble getting a hold of or maybe you know not finding the right thing that they can use for their for the plan we go back and we help them with that as well they help that with that as well they do evaluation of your rebates making sure that we're getting the best bang for our buck and making sure that the carrier is giving us the fullest amount of rebate that we can that does again you saw how much it keeps your trend lower when we're receiving the the best rebates we can they also help us with analysis of your pharmacy rfp to ensure that all of your rfp pieces are done in an appropriate manner and that we're getting what we can for the for the city of san angelo at the best price so again medical industry trend um 7.3 pharmacy industry trend is 8.4 that goes up and down depending on what carrier you're looking at and what what you're doing when we're looking at this for this particular plan you're going forward we're looking at no plan design changes so your members on the plan will not experience any changes to either pharmacy or medical the only exception to that is on pharmacy your formulary changes a little bit every year about

[0:22:32] three to four percent of your folks will be affected by that but in general no changes for folks we were showing your claims experience through may of 2022 and your current enrollment numbers when we're looking at how we're budgeting for you all talk about those um current enrollment numbers i have those a couple slides forward so i'll go back through those real quick so we have a couple options when we talk about funding for this upcoming plan year really what we're looking at is a couple of different pieces so one is if we're looking at optimistic rebates so the pharmacy rebates go up and down to your what you've said before it depends on actually what your folks are using for their medications they we look back at what you've done in the past and that's how we can kind of come up with those average numbers of what we would expect but when we're looking at this overall if we have a funding option and we're optimistic in your rebates at a 2.5 increase for both the city and for employees we can level out your budget and get you at a surplus or deficit of zero and kind of net you out at a 2.5 percent increase the other option to this is if we are looking to put the entire dollar amount onto the city we're looking at 3.2 percent increase and no increase to in to your members i'll show you what those numbers look like as far as their premiums go the reason why obviously the difference between the 2.5 and 3.2 percent is the employees pay less dollars fewer dollars than the city does and so when we try and put it all into the city it comes out to that 3.2 percent if you look at the revenue increase if we're looking at two and a half percent for a city increase you're looking at 175 000 of increase annually and if you're looking at the 3.2 percent and taking that full amount on that is 221 000 of increase um on your spend any questions i'll go back to that previous slide and the claims for may 2022 compared to um the previous year would be what

[0:24:39] from may well i can show you kind of on this chart i don't have the exact number but if you're looking at previous year when we're looking at how your may of 2022 we don't necessarily look at may 2021 to compare to may of 2022 we take your trend and we average it out over a longer period of time correct yes the other option that we are bringing to the table as far as funding goes is oh and let me let me go ahead and show you for option one so one of the questions that we'll always have is what has that affect members and how much would that be per pay period so if you look at the the current monthly rates at the top and then you have the proposed monthly rates the bottom is per month increase for each individual per tier so the e stands for employee s is employee plus spouse the c is employee plus child or children and then the f is employee plus their family so you can see that on the low plan which is the difference between family and child and child you don't include your spouse so when we're looking at the child plan it's just an employee plus their children and when you're looking at family plan it's employee plus children plus spouse so if you're looking at the lowest tier and i'll show you the enrollment numbers as well but the lowest tier on your low plan employee only it's 51 extra cents a month so that's that two and a half percent increase for folks the most increase that you would see is on your high plan family coverage um you're looking at 26.86 per month on that one when you say high medium and low what's high what's medium and what's low what are you talking about you have three different plan designs that the employees of the city of san angelo can select from so the low plan is the one that is what most of your folks are in and that's just the plan design a little bit higher co-pays maybe a little bit more out of pocket the high plan is fewer dollars out of pocket but the premiums are a little higher okay um this of course is a city only

[0:26:41] increase if you're looking at only increasing for the city obviously then at that 3.2 percent then you have no increases to your employees um for any of those monthly pieces the other option that we're looking at for funding is if we decided that we're going to be a little bit more moderate with our rebates and determine that we're not going to receive as large rebates back why would we do that it depends on how aggressive or moderate you want to be in your projections so when we're looking at what have we been in the past what's the trend line i would say most of the time we've been pretty optimistic um and within when i say optimistic and and uh moderate might not be what other people mean uh this is not pie in the sky numbers we we feel that either one of these are probably within the realm of achievability and i think i think the two and a half percent is achievable the reason we're the only reason we're putting the five percent in there at all is not that we don't think we can do that but we're we don't have a healthy fund balance compared to what we would want there and i know that exists in multiple funds and so i understand the reality of of municipal budgeting i just wanted to put this before you you're doubling as a body well i mean if you go from 2.5 to 5 you're doubling it there's got to be something in between between 2.5 and 5. and you could choose anything those are the two that that we selected from because essentially this is this would add approximately 200 000 to the fund balance it's not it's not a huge amount um and we're just that impact in the past year on fund balance has happened um we've been almost zero um so we're doing well like i said we've we've been optim what i would say is optimistic and we've hit those numbers uh and just to kind of track back to earlier in the presentation when you were seeing those uh seven point you know 7.7 percent on the medical and the and uh 7.6 or 7.3 on the

[0:28:47] yeah 8.7 on the on the medical and 7.2 on the pharmacy those those are again if you go back to june of 18 that's what we should really be at but some of the creative things that we've done have kept that from from existing so if we were to go with the two and a half percent increase this year we will average a two percent increase over the last four years since uh since i've been in hr um and if you take that back five more years so that you can see that that trend line is not something we're making up or saying oh look we're doing well we were trending at 9.2 percent for the previous five years if we would have kept on that trajectory this number that's 562.55 here on the on the yes um that would be we would be we'd be asking for 767. so we've we really have held that tied back um through you know one of the things we did was we bid pharmacy separate than medical that was 2018 or 2019 um 2020 we started the relationship with honest rx we're starting to see this this will be the full fruition of that that's what i was mentioning we're going to get more rebates than we have in the past because we haven't had somebody being able to go to that level and make sure we're receiving those things so all these things that we've done over this time have really reset that baseline and you know i i just want to want to mention that because you know so many people think that if you in municipal government that you might not be um fiscally responsible but we we don't think that we are fiscally responsible and i want to point that out that we have we have worked hard to keep this number um opposed to the overall industry uh percentages and so we have we have done that two and a half percent um is a as you all know we're experiencing 9.1

[0:30:50] percent inflation uh typically uh i think medical typically will outpace inflation um it's held back by about a year from what i understand but from talking to chief so it takes a little while because contracts are in place it takes a little while for that inflation to really hit medical so it's a good time for us to get a three-year contract and what we are talking about is a three-year contract yes yes ma'am and i believe we have two one-year options in this so we could keep this for five years which is huge for us to to make sure that we're stable in this fund overall and so i just didn't want to miss the opportunity to point that out that when we're saying two and a half percent it really is against a trend line of of around seven and a half to nine um depending on you know depending on whoever's playing is being managed so uh and i wanna you know i would like to thank my staff for for working hard to to make sure we're watching everything and holmes murphy has been a great partner in that and so it just can't be overstated the difference that this really makes to the overall budget i think i'm going to stop right now and just see if there's questions at the presentation at this point then we'll move forward tom so i want to go to the rx question and it's simpler so we go through and we audit and i give a rebate so do our employees get the rebate do we does the city as a policy holder get the rebate how does that split it's an offset back to your medical spend and your pharmacy spend so basically we receive the dollars back that goes back against your basically just goes back into your account and then you use that to be able to offset the cost of your claims okay so those are kind of predetermined then right yes and no it's it's predetermined because we can get an assumption based on how your spend has been in the past but rebates are really dependent on what your employees use in the drug mix that they use so we can do because of you know our experience and how much we we do this we get an idea that's why we kind of could be a little bit more aggressive or a little bit more moderate so

[0:32:50] we can we can get do an actuarial value and best guess based off how you currently use medical spend on pharmacy spend and how you've done in the past okay so you've answered this i'm going to throw it out to brian brian have we had any objections or have you had any complaints about using honest rx oh no absolutely not the end user doesn't even see that and wouldn't um and you know i missed a point i do want to uh kind of say thank you to shannon they were very fair in this uh in this bid process which which without them being a partner in the community we we wouldn't be where we are so uh i don't want that that can't be overstated as well but yep i'm good thanks mayor okay any other questions at this point in the presentation lucy you're going to ask it right oh well yeah go ahead we were wondering what is the ee funding what does that stand for employee funding those are your employee dollars so we take that based off of what your employees currently what tiers they're currently in and your actual enrollment currently and then that comes up with the number of what your employees are actually spending towards your medical plan we actually figured out that part of it was employee we didn't know what the other east states were yeah go ahead and describe what p-e-p-m is per employee per month yeah we you know it's insurance we like to do a lot of acronyms but also i think for the purpose of this just to keep it smaller on the that okay as long as you know what we're talking about absolutely okay any further questions at this point in the presentation okay go continue so moving forward i'm going to go back over to the option two we talk about the five percent increase if we're looking at a five percent increase to employee and five percent and increased i think we're going for that one okay i can i can move forward unless anyone wants me to spend a little bit more time on this one okay and this is what the spend would be the increase per month if we were looking at a five percent increase so i will move forward from there

[0:34:54] this is where your current plan enrollment is uh mariota actually asked about this a few moments ago so to what i said before most of your employees are sitting in that employee only tier on the low plan so you see 688 folks are sitting on that and you can kind of see the spread across the other tiers are relatively nominal when we talk about the total amount of employees that you have in the plan so when we're looking at those increases the two and a half percent um you know again that employee only um at 688 i'll go back so you can just take a look at it because i know that's important go back no go back to that screen we were just on okay would somebody add that six eight eight five eight one two nine and nine two up please the total number i'm sorry though okay so just for reference how many employees do we have totally 9.99 or approximately 880 on the plan it can vary yeah and how many employees do we have um if we were fully staffed it'd be over 900 but we have some vacancies i thought it was closer to a thousand so basically a majority of our employees take advantage of the plan yes and the vast majority of those obviously take care take advantage of the employee only which is the lowest amount because some have people who work in other companies and their medical is covered there so also some folks that might have tricare or something along those lines not to be in the plan medicare yeah medicare yeah we have our medicare offering that we have for your employees too but yeah once they reach over the age of 65 they could be on a medicare plan um but yeah the majority of our folks are on the plan that's good i have a question yes lucy can you explain to me oh we you have the employee and then the spouse the children the family is that that six that number 688 and out of that 688 58 is is paying for spouses

[0:36:58] that is 688 people have employee only coverage on the low plan there's 58 folks that have employee plus spouse coverage on that plan so each each little bucket is where the people are sitting at so it's not it's not cumulative it's it's individual buckets for how many people are sitting in the majority is in the low so when we look at everything moving to the next slides we should concentrate on the low because that's where the majority focus is yes yes and and michael brought up a good point on the side there that uh i need to make sure you are aware that this does include retirees as well and so that's the reason these numbers add up to more if you add all these numbers together it's going to be quite a bit over 65 so yeah your pre-65 retirees are included in here too that's how we come up with some of our numbers as well so when we're looking at that yes your low plan is what you really should focus on employee only coverage is what you should focus on since we're not doing much plan and then we're not doing really anything in the way of plan design changes really the focus is going to be if you're looking at two and a half percent increase for those folks what that affects them per month and that's what i was going to go back to there on this as well so these are the increases that we're talking about and you can see that the low plan the dollar increase for employee only coverage is 51 cents a month so we're not talking about a lot of money and so this is uh employee contribution as an increase but not the city picking up the total not the total correct so just to be clear both the city and in this particular scenario it's both the city and employees take two and a half percent increase got it so you can see again when i talked about that high tier and the family plan on the high tier it's 26.86 a month and then we're looking at the total number of folks that are in that plan you'll see that you only have one person in the family high tier that would be affected so really it's when we're looking at that low plan is where folks are really migrating towards okay all right

[0:39:02] keep on going perfect so really i'm gonna go moving from from medical on to dental so any other questions on medical before i move on to dental no we're good so for the marketing efforts for dental we actually had um six vendors respond to your dental rfp i will tell you that our list is pretty expensive so six is actually a decent number um four of them matched our requirements we had three of them that we chose for our best and final offers through that but really the the overall cost and the network we were recommending to move forward with um dental to lincoln it and the other piece that we're talking about on your dental plan is you have two dental plans you have a low plan and a high plan your high plan has been the same for quite some time and dental expenses i'm sure if all of you know you go to the dentist 1500 does not go very far when you have a crown or root canal or something that you have to get done so our recommendation was increasing the maximum on your dental plan that folks were able to use from 1500 to 2500 i will say that's much more in line with what the market is showing for higher plans again that way people don't necessarily have to choose which tooth they're having worked on for this year they can get a couple different pieces done at the same time so when we're looking at the rates for individuals you can see that your current plan under the top part is your thousand dollar plan which we consider your low plan um that's a thousand dollars worth of benefit that they can use annually you can see right now that your employees and the accounts um for where tiers people are sitting on is that first column where you see employees only on the low plan there's 401 of your folks that are on the low plan currently they're paying 21.33 the change would be to link in at 21.54 across the board your employees use your dental plan which is the reason why you see an increase at all your folks do use it and trend has been increasing on that usually we see that closer to three to five percent on the dental and then on the dental plan for your high plan right

[0:41:05] now we're talking twenty seven dollars and fifty three cents for your high plan at a fifteen hundred dollar benefit it goes up a little slightly to that twenty five hundred dollar benefit at thirty one dollars and seventy cents so increase for your employees overall but i think it gives them a much better option when it comes to the high plan and a richer benefit in general this is in addition to the previous insurance matters it's included in the medical no it was included in the total amount okay so this is just breaking it out and separating the specifics like dental and i but those numbers are in the total medical yes just because we want to make sure we're not talking about that number plus this number then plus another number this is included in that two and a half percent yes uh and so will the life which she's about to speak to yeah so in your budgeting process we try and take into account all the considerations including your administrative fees and all those things as well stop loss and knows so um dental we this is the scoring criteria that we had for your dental plans once we had the best and final offers back and you can see that lincoln had a 99 out of 100 the other ones depending on what services they were offering how closely it matched your current plan designs and again if we have renewals and guarantees so if we have longer guarantees for your rates then that has additional considerations as well all of them had great references and all of them adhered to the terms of our rfp but really when we're looking at this is overall plan design rates and then network is a big piece too we want to ensure that your folks will still have access to as many of the same dentists as they did before and have plenty of access to dentists in the city of san angelo so when we have the three that are up there we're not picking one where people dentists might have choose to use aetna versus delta what are we doing here so explain that our recommendation is to move forward with lincoln because of the network and the pricing on that um your your correct

[0:43:08] dentist can choose to be in or out of networks for different carriers that does happen but when we're looking at when we do our rfp process for the city we take into account who your employees currently utilize and that has a bearing on the scoring criteria as well so if we have most of your folks are using these dentists and they're also in network with lincoln which we we found that to be true then that get a higher scoring criteria than someone that might have some of your highly utilized dentists that were no longer in their network any questions on any additional questions on the dental before i move to life insurance move on okay so on the life insurance our initial response was six vendors responded five of them that matt start what we were looking for for our requirements we had three that we chose for best and final offers and again when we're looking at best and final offers we're looking at overall pricing and plan designs and that way we can narrow down that field a little bit when you have five respond we kind of try and narrow that down a bit to determine what would be the best for the city based on the overall cost the references and administrative flexibility the recommendation was to move forward with the life and a dnd with symmetra to speak to administrative flexibility right now your life insurance is a list bill meaning that it lists every single person that's on the plan a lot of group a lot of carriers will require they do self-accounting which means that you just give them numbers and the preference for the city is to have the list bill to indicate who is actually on the plan so that's a big piece for that um currently you have dearborn national as sorry did you have a question no okay thank you um dearborn national is your current life insurance carrier you can see that symmetra came in with their proposed rate um you can see that it's actually overall going to be a decrease to your total spend for your life insurance of around 7 700 annually so a very small um decrease every dollar counts though every dollar does that river dollar does count um and overall it's just a i mean

[0:45:11] life insurance is one of those benefits that when you need it you you know it's it's a pretty simple benefit to administer but when you need it you need to ensure that they pay your claims properly promptly on time and we have good relationships with symmetra and we are very confident they'll be able to treat the city of san angelo properly and so on where it says dependent life is that the number of of employees who have signed up what is that dependent so when we're looking at the units yes dependent life units is how many folks have dependent life under your basic life insurance plan correct so not a lot not not that many on that no important but not a lot correct and you also have the ability for um buy up on voluntary life insurance as well so people can purchase additional insurance if they need it okay this is our scoring criteria when it came to your life insurance benefits and you can see that overall um blue cross did not provide references in this rfp that's the reason why they scored low we know who they work with but they didn't provide them in the rfp process but overall you can see the same thing we look at the administrative services and plan design to make sure they can match your current as much as they can fees renewals and rate guarantees that gives us additional scoring and symmetra scored very high in those references and then just an adherence to the rfp process so really that's what it boils down to any other questions also do you have questions tom so brian i just want to make sure with the vendors that we've been talking to do the majority of them get accepted at shannon is is the majority of everything we're going to do in network there's notice there's no disruption at all in what we're presenting in fact i mean of course as we moved over to shannon uh that gave access that that for years with the community relationship uh folks didn't have access to some of those doctors so um overall this is probably the best as far as there's no conflict right yeah in terms

[0:47:15] of that yeah and i just want to touch one more time on the reason that we put a two and a half percent and a five percent option um you know one of the things that you know they always say in investments is past uh past experience doesn't guarantee future results we don't know what tomorrow brings and we don't okay we don't and you can't project it right and so we're just putting that as an option to build a fund balance against that i know it's not likely uh but we wanted to give you all that option because i think it's it's fiscally responsible for me for the would be three so it would be 3.5 so it would be four so at 4.5 absolutely absolutely we're just throwing out there that you know anything above two and a half percent would add to the the fund balance we think um again it doesn't guarantee future results we might have to ask you to get we might have a bad year but uh i just want to make sure that we're all on the same page there and it seems like we are thank you further questions all right thank you for the presentation all right we will now move into item b yes sorry what action do you need because generally what we do is we don't make a decision on this until we get into the general fund and further discuss issues so we generally do not do this at this point we usually wait and vote on this issue until later i believe i was informed we can't vote during a workshop and so this we're trying to do this so that y'all have that um set for the for the um for the workshop next week we haven't done it that way before i don't believe they're needing direction on which of the providers to pick and to actually award the rfp so we would need to do that in advance typically in the budget workshops we just are given general direction and

[0:49:19] then budget feeds that into the budget that is then presented and voted on in september so so if i'm understanding right sorry i think you're saying do we have to settle on the two and a half percent or five percent we do not have to settle on that we just have to award the rfp so that we can move forward we can discuss how we fund that at the general fund workshop we wanted you all to have that information as quickly as possible ahead of that so that that could be in your in your mindset as we prepare for the general fund workshop but no we don't have to do that all we're doing is going to execute an rfp part atina has some comment or a question [Music] i'm just i was just going to mention that we usually do have this information for the general fund workshop just so that when we show you the calculator and what we have left for marginal revenue we kind of know what that is and so council has a good idea of what we have available for other projects or ideas exactly so this will be more like the the process that we had back in 2019 no but because we're because we're awarding a bid and we only do that every three years so normally it is slightly different um but again we wanted you all to have that information going you know going forward into that workshop but this um six agenda item 6a2 we do need a motion on that so that we can select those providers and get going so the motion is only about the rfp putting one out there for selection not about any of the details within the presentation yeah it's actually about selecting the providers they discuss today we're going to award them okay so then is there a recommendation for awarding it yes the recommendation is lincoln for dental is symmetra for life and add and is aetna shannon for health pharmacy and clinic do i have a motion for those vendors as

[0:51:22] he just presented by tommy okay we've got a motion and a second any public comment scene none we will take a vote on that all in favor say aye motion passes seven zero next we will have a discussion and direction regarding the charter review committee's presentation and i think we have many folks in the audience for this today but judge gilbert you're the spokesperson you're on thank you thank you very much um our committee that you put together a selection of of council members to work on and to look at the elected voice versus the appointed chief charter revision is here with us today and i want to introduce each one of those to you so that you know who each one of those are i want to tell you that all my years of public service working with the city i've been a lot of committees never been on one that worked as hard as this committee so let me happily introduce to you our our committee members we have candy candy pool of course billy i believe everybody knows billy dewitt jeff curry mark lack and j.j graham thank you for the work these committee members have worked extremely extremely hard along with your staff and i want to mention your staff teresa and julia and heather were with us in every meeting they worked very very hard with us they never tried to persuade us in any direction but they gave us all the information that we needed and worked very hard so and we had a lot of homework to do

[0:53:25] this committee had a lot of homework doing as you can tell by looking at them they hadn't done homework in a long time so it wasn't real easy for us to get all that done and we've developed this kind of relationship that i can say those kind of things i believe so uh but our our purpose on on our uh let me get this thing working here all right there we go okay our charter purpose that we had our committee purpose that we had that was given to us by you as the city council was to evaluate the elected and the appointed chief and to provide a recommendation back to you each member of this committee some of us came in with preconceived notions of what we thought should happen and so we had long talks about that and everyone committed to look at this with an open mind a complete open mind because we want to look at one thing and that is what's best in the best interest of the city of san angelo and that's where we went to you gave us a very simple chore elected versus appointed you know if you talk to people in san angelo there's two things that you can get somebody from san angelo really fired up about that's football and the elected chief and this committee has found that going out into the public and talking to people about this sometimes they needed bodyguards because people tell you and that's okay that's what we want to hear is we want to hear what people have to say and so we we took a very long look at a lot of things let me tell you what we did in our our process that we had we spent five weeks we were told we want to try to be ready in case there's a november election to make a decision on this so we had five weeks to do this so this committee met

[0:55:29] twice a week at least two hours every meeting and then they did their homework and we went through a lot of things we talked to individual people we spent over 16 hours just in meetings we spent over 20 30 hours and talking to individuals we looked at section 60 and 64 of the city charter we reviewed the state and local statutes the texas local government code 143 of civil service that controls the police department and the chief the texas government code 142 meet and confer we looked at all that we looked at los angeles civil service regulations we interviewed elected and appointed officials and we did informal conversations with people throughout the community so to tell you what we did so that you know that we didn't just sit in there and talk about this is what we've heard we went and found the facts we looked into the facts and we did talk a little bit about what we heard but let's look at the uh los angeles city charter the city charter was created to effective to have the elected police of chief for the city of san angelo 61 says that the chief shall have been a resident of the city of angelo for a period of at least two years immediately prior to his election and shall possess the qualifications of electors in said city so are you telling me that the only two qualifications to run for chief of police is they have to have lived in this city for two years an elector yes ma'am you must have been looking at my paper i've got that written down right here making sure that's correct and that the term of the chief is going to be for four years those are the requirements that's it is there an age requirement uh you have to be an elector so you got to be 18. just to say that you have to be 18 years of age you have to be a resident of the city of san angelo for a period of at least two years prior to

[0:57:31] your election that are the only requirements that there are to run for chief of police there's no experience required no ma'am so when we looked at those and we started we kept going through the city charter and looking at what are the other requirements that we have or anything that we have in the city charter we have section 63 which is the duty and the powers judge gilbert may i just stop one moment because i think what we did i don't know if you said as part of your committee members david howard because i think he's in the back of the room that's right we haven't i want to make sure everyone understands that we had a representation on this charter committee as well from the police department yes david howard he's the assistant chief of police and he was with and sent with the committee each and every meeting and he added a lot of information gave us a lot of things and we very openly and it was we would think it's kind of hard because there's a policeman sitting right there that's assistant chief but he was very good about taking everything that came at him and he came back at us so it made for a real good situation in our committee it really worked out really well okay 63 says that let me get to 63 here it shall be the duty of the chief of police to preserve law and order within the city of angel especially to enforce the ordinances of said city that's the duty and the powers the authority under 64 says that the chief shall have the exclusive control of the police department of the city of san angelo and shall the right to select employ discharge that will and prescribe the salaries within the monetary limits fixed by the city budget the employees and such department so we have 63 and 64 of the duties and the authority and through our research we find that under authority that this statement is not correct that it is not correct and i will

[0:59:34] explain to you why here in in just a moment then we looked at the texas local government code 143 civil service statute and under that it provides for appointed chiefs under that statute it does not provide for elected chiefs that provides for appointed chiefs and it sets them up that's totally in contradiction yes ma'am the civil service provision not really contradiction it's just there's not a provision here for elected chief there's a provisions for appointed chief and one of the reasons why that is is that we are the only city in the state of texas that has an elected chief now there may be another small one out there somewhere we didn't find but as far as we know we are the only city in the state of texas has an elected chief and so that's why there is no state law that authorizes chief of police we have state laws that authorizes the sheriff's department and the election thereof but chief of police because they can be done through charter you can have a charter that provides for elected chief just like we have you can have ordinances that give this authority and so it's not mandatory or required that you have to have a state statute in order to have an elected chief of police now through the years as as most y'all know i was with the city for almost 50 years and i watched a lot of appointed i'm sorry elected cities slowly turn into appointed and so that's happened through the years until the point that in about within the last 12 years there were three left now according to the information we have there's one left and that's us so that's why you don't see provisions in state law provisions some in the civil service because there are no other departments other than us

[1:01:36] how does that work then with civil service teresa i mean how does that legally work basically civil service as the judge will go through talks about how um the benefits and rights of the officers there is a reference very brief in civil service about elected but it talks about if you're going to have an appointed chief this is how they have to be appointed and that's appointed by city manager and confirmed by council so um and then it's like unless elected is the only part that it says in civil service rules so what the judge is saying is that it talks about how the chief is selected in an appointed system but does not have any reference at all to qualifications or anything related to an elected system all right let's move on to that was the local government code of civil service so let's move to 142 which is the provision for uh meet and confer and you all are very familiar with me and first some of you are and and we have that in our police department but we are a city at this time i believe they call it meat confer without a contract so we're operating now under civil service in the city of san angelo because civil service was adopted back in the 1960s by the city of san angelo so we we operate under civil service and then provisions come and meet and confer then you'll operate under provisions of meat confer and civil service so you can be confusing yes ma'am believe me you can ask these people we went and i'm liable to get some of this wrong so i apologize if i do but we found there's a lot of complications in a lot of things but that's going to be whether we have an elected police of chief or an appointed police chief because these are just the provisions that affect and how our police department has operated all right so let's let's move on and tell you a little bit about the people that we interviewed because we spent a considerable amount of time talking with them as you'll see on here we have frank carter who is our current elected

[1:03:40] chief of police we have brian dunn who was appointed fire chief for the city of san angelo for many years and then we have the appointed police chief from brownwood ed cading and so i'll tell you a little bit about each one of these individuals and i haven't even looked i'm sure frank's in the room i don't see frank back there but i've known frank since he was this big and watched him grow up through the ranks well some of y'all have done that with too so i don't i got to be careful i guess but watching come up through the ranks and how he did and frank's done a great job he has done a terrific job as the chief of police for the city of san angelo so we got his feeling and what he felt about the elected versus the appointed and being in his position he gave us surprisingly gave us some information that he thought was important on both sides of the road we brought in brian elect the appointed police chief because we wanted to know we've heard things that say well we don't want an appointed person because they're appointed by the city manager and we don't want them to be just totally under the control of the city mandarin i'm just gonna i'm gonna lay the facts out to you y'all may not like some of what i'm i'm gonna say but this is what we are dealing with and people say they don't want that uh well we brought brian in brian has he says in all this time he's never had problems with city managers trying to control his department you know and we know i know you know that can happen but that can happen with any given thing so we were able to get information from both sides from the elected versus the appointed the reason we asked mr cayden to come in for brownwood because he is an appointed chief of police in brownwood they were just a few years back went from elected to appointed but ed was also a lieutenant in los angeles police department who ran for chief of police here and didn't get elected here but went to brownwood as chief so we brought him in to give us

[1:05:41] perspective of what he's seen since he's gotten there and what is it like and the information that he told us and and he said that uh having worked in both systems uh even though as an appointed chief ed says that you know you can have problems with people not liking you they're still trying to go to the city council go to the city manager but that's going to be in any job that can be in teresa's job that was in my job as the judge and assistant city managers those things can happen regardless that's not going to be just the chief of police that that situation happens in but ed was very happy with dealing working with an appointed system and he did tell us the good things about the elected that he thought the few things that he thought was there so we we heard both sides of everything that everybody had to say and questioned them at length of what their feelings were and the facts not only just their feelings now we went out and talked to people in the community and here's one of the first things we got from their responses as you will see is that they said not again when we talked about elected versus appointed does it need to go to an election not again it's been up for elections several times and i think the last time and i may get this wrong but i believe it was 73 percent to stay elected than city of san angelo so one thing that we as the committee talked about and talked about and talked about is we may have feelings about how we would like to see it in the city of san angelo maybe we want it to be elected maybe we want it to be appointed but what it boils down to is what the public what they want what the community what the citizens of san angelo want because they told us that they didn't trust the city government that was one of the biggest things we heard the city runs on a buddy system

[1:07:44] with self-interest to city management and taking priority over city needs the city just wants to appoint someone that will do their bidding an elected police chief is free to do whatever he wants when he wants and the only answers to the voters and that the city wants to control this the police budget we already control the police budget but these are i'm telling you these are the main things that we heard from people when they say that they the police chief only answers to the voters what does it take what percentage of the voters would it take to recall a police chief the recall provision that i'm familiar with speaks directly to the mayor and the city council members for a city council member it would be um well city council and mayor i'm sorry i'm 30 percent of the registered voters but it doesn't specif it's not specific about a police chief so and i asked because if someone was trying to get signatures or whatever happens i think it would be the same but i'm not sure but there's as we go through it there's a number of areas where the police chief just isn't anticipated to be the same so we would follow the same process for recall but of course without any precedent or any direct language in our charter to address that that would be something that could be open to challenge we're and we're going to address that just a little bit here in a second but we wanted you to hear the comments that we heard from some of the people and so and we brought these questions forward in the committee also and uh uh you know not again yes we've had an elected system for 70 odd years now in the city of san angelo uh and so there's a lot of we just grew up with this system there's a lot of that it's just that's the way it has been that's

[1:09:46] the way it should be i'm not the distrust in government i'm not so sure i can tell you that i've heard that in my whole career my whole life when i was on the city council in 1974 all the way through you hear that but you really don't there's not factual stuff there but that's that's something that we do here the city runs on the buddy system hey there's been some good ol boy stuff through the years i will guarantee you that is i've i've seen that they want to appoint somebody to do their bidding i i don't really see that factor um the the chief of police is free to do what he wants with the department that's absolutely not true there are controls in civil service and city ordinances and things that give control to that and so but here's what we found was the other side of this that when we talked with people most of it was shock and sometimes disbelief at the lack of qualifications required for a person to run for chief of police indicating that several people some of the people that talked to other people said well you could run or i could run or this and yes if you politically your student you can do that you have enough money you can do that we've been fortunate the majority of the police chiefs that we've had i think i went through either 11 or 12 chief of police in my career and most of those were extremely good chief of police we've been very fortunate with the majority of our police chiefs that have come through and they did a great job and most of them have been people that were qualified and had the things that were necessary in order to be the chief of police the lack of knowledge about how the chief's duties are regulated by federal and state law was another thing that people said they had no idea they thought the chief of police could i can hire them i can fire them i can do

[1:11:49] whatever i want they can do this and that and and our findings we found under the elected under the elected chief of police the requirements did not include prior police experience the chief due to civil service statutes and meet and confer does not have exclusive control over the department and its employees the elected chief divides the department during the elected period election period which begins once an officer announces their candidacy an elected chief who is also legal as a city employee is exempt from discipline when it comes to violations of rules and policies explain that well meaning that because they are elected they don't fall under the same classification or category that julia does or teresa does or or rick does they're elected so therefore if they do something wrong the only way that it can something to be happened is through your recall petition to get them out of office there is no provision correct me if i'm around no provision for suspension removal administrative leave any of these type of things because of the elected chief that's correct so you you have ma'am that's pretty um yes so so as you can see those are the things there that provided because they're not appointed that it opens the door to a lot of a lot of areas and so and i'm not trying to tell you right now elected or appointed i want you all to know this i'm giving you the facts as we found them from the committee if you had an appointed chief of police which of these things would change if you had an appointed chief of police there would be requirements [Music]

[1:13:51] the duties of the chief and the authority of the chief are going to stay the same whether they're appointed or whether they're elected because civil service mean confer and the laws provide for what those are that's not just an open door that's going to be the same regardless elected chiefs divide the department we wouldn't see that because of the election there wouldn't be that election but there is something else i'll get to in a minute on that but as an appointed then you would also have the provision of suspension removal things of this nature that you don't have under the elected system so we found under the under the appointed chief of police civil service statute defines minimum requirements for an appointed chief so you have minimum requirements before you can be appointed what would they be um if we can hold one second i believe it's about two down okay the chief of police under civil service and meet and confer is going to be the same with appointed the police department would not be divided in ranks during the election but may be united and is disdain for the selection of the appointed chief i mean they could still be upset because they didn't like who the city manager and the city council appointed so there could still be that but you wouldn't have nine months eight months six months of political election time going on during that did you hear comments about how divided the police department becomes during election time period because someone i mean people choose sides so how disruptive is that we did hear that yes ma'am we did hear that uh that is pretty much the norm i will tell you this that in the last with our last chief well frank that's come in probably the least amount of that i've ever seen i have honestly seen it being right i know as the judge i was probably the

[1:15:54] closest city employee to the police with being outside of that there has been a lot of that in the past where if you support the wrong candidate you might get moved to nights or you might get moved to the basement to do evidence or things of this nature that has happened uh that has happened at certain times so yes that's there okay here's kind of a comparison here for the research findings uh elected chief is two years residency 18 years of old not a felon not mentally incapacitated you have to be an elector versus appointed which the minimums there are five years as a licensed police officer a teco intermediate certification that's the minimum requirement under civil service and what's that t cole texas commission on law enforcement okay and these requirements are set up in civil service but they're not required of an elected chief they're not required as elected chief yes ma'am you don't have to be a licensed police officer to run for police chief now one thing we found out you don't even have to have a texas driver's license so tom did you have a comment on that i heard something i have a son who's fixing graduating as we say i'm fixing to throw his hat in the ring here tom could be police chief no okay so as you can see i'm giving you both i'm giving you both sides of this for you to look at here and i guess what it all boils down to is the reason you wanted us to come here today was to give you a recommendation well as i stated we've had five weeks we've had a lot of work we've talked to a lot of people this committee they've done such a terrific job

[1:17:56] of discussing everything we just talked about discussing every bit of it and believe me they took both sides and i can tell you that two of them that i'm not going to say which two because i haven't even told them this but in my mind i feel like they were totally on one side and then as of the last couple of weeks they were right in the middle just like me because the first thing i told this community when they asked me to be chairman was okay but you gotta understand i'm not crazy i'm gonna argue both sides and i look up now and every member of this committee argues both sides they argue both sides and i think that's something that's great because we're we're not just looking at one side but the recommendation that we have for you today we're not going to recommend that we have an elected or an appointed right now we're going to recommend that give us some more time you know you have an election coming up in november but we also have an election coming up in in may from what we've been told from the community from what we've heard and we've talked to a we're not talking about we talked to 10 people we've talked to a lot of people and what we find is well first off i'm going to ask y'all how many of y'all knew civil service overruled most things that the chief of police could do anybody know that okay did anybody know about meet and confer overrules a whole lot of things that the chief could do and the chief's not even involved in that he didn't know what those were okay all right okay so i'm talking to you as the city council and the mayor do you know how many people in the public knows that information you know we haven't found anybody that really does that hasn't been involved i don't think you probably found many people who understood how the qualifications were so nothing

[1:19:58] that's right that was that was a major factor i i can tell you candy everybody talk that candy talked to just about that was their major major deal right there because every meeting she would go up talk to three more guess what they said and so but here's what we're recommending and i'm i've got it written down here but i'm just going to tell you from the heart we need to talk to the public we need to inform i'm not going to say educate we need to inform the public of just some of the more than what i've informed you today because believe me we can go on for another 30 or 40 minutes we need to inform the public and whichever way the public wants to vote on this that's their job but i believe they need to vote after they are informed now this committee and we have totally agreed to this we are not going to recommend one side or the other to the public until we have received all of our information back from the public of what they want after they've had a chance of being informed so what we want to do is we want to ask you to let us have until january to come back with a recommendation that would go on the may election and in this time period of time we want to develop a public outreach and public education plan to inform the citizens angelo of this extremely important project we want to elicit feedback from the public so that we can develop that we can develop our recommendations and here's our here's our potential program that we want to do we want to work with the local media to distribute all this information social media is how you get it done in today's world we want to host a town hall meeting maybe one maybe two whatever it takes we want to work with the communications department with the city i think teresa

[1:22:00] and them and julie have already talked to about to brian about helping us with doing this we want to do a social media outreach we want to use channel 17 we want to provide bilingual we want to provide as much information that is information not a political campaign for or against we want to provide information to the public that allows them to receive this and then they can vote informed one thing that i might have missed and you might have covered it but because we elect what we also find is that most of the candidates are within our current police department yes ma'am so you don't have people from other cities who might have terrific experience or good experience coming into our city to run because it does become more of a popularity contest with credentials than um and so you you your candidates candidates all come from a pool of existing police officers primarily is that correct did you talk about that earlier yes no i didn't but we did discuss that in the uh we did discuss that and and one thing for your information if we use the minimum let's say let's just for example we went to an appointed and let's say that we use the minimum standards that that civil service uh has here my and i may be wrong on this number but my understanding was that uh dave gave us the information and maybe the chief did that we have roughly 70 officers that would qualify to be appointed to the chief of police coming from this unit okay and we even looked at well what if the qualifications were this this and this and it was even we had 60 officers in our department that would be eligible for appointment as the chief of police

[1:24:03] if you made those requirements because we got requirements qualifications from cities all over the state and looked at those not just we didn't just look at civil service teresa and them got us this information we looked at it and we felt like if we were going to do this it had to be raised so we have already looked at both sides of this picture what we would do if it if we came back and recommended elected what we would do if we had to come back and do appointed we have some thought processes here that we want to lay that we would lay out i think also i think most of us sitting up here would also say that this isn't about the current police chief there's as you said before chief carter's done a terrific job as police chief so this conversation has not come up because of his performance i think everyone here would say he has strong support from the public and from council so this isn't about our current police chief and we just need to be very loud and very vocal about that yes it is and and the committee itself we made that i believe we made that clear the first day the very first day we made that clear that this has nothing to do with the current administration police chief assistant chiefs it has nothing to do with them this is a matter of as a community for us to look at what direction do you want to head in okay i'm just going to ask each council member if there's questions for judge gilbert or any comments so everyone has a chance to voice something i'm going to start with tommy thank you mayor allen did y'all talk about if if we felt that it was important to address the lack of qualifications for police chief be it elected or appointed um if we wanted to do something about that now how would we go about inserting into what the framework we have right now how would we go about inserting that into the the process we knew that was going to be a

[1:26:09] question tommy and i appreciate you bringing up yes sir if let's just say for if right now and we give a lot of yes let's say we were to be going to faller head and going into november for the election okay if you wanted to put on the ballot and say we're going to keep an elected chief but we're going to require that they have these qualifications let's say a master's under tco uh 10 years experience i've been a supervisor have been a commander and i'm just throwing out some stuff here to you but you could stipple you could put all those in there requirements uh texas driver's license you could put all those requirements in there and then it could be voted as an amendment to the charter and then your next elected police chief would have to meet these standards in order to be elected yes that was that was my main question thank you tommy tom you know alan the the thing we look at here in in being an advocate of looking at this process and i we can't thank the charter group enough for going through what they're going through but i've had lots of phone calls on this and i put the scenarios in front of them and i say the purpose of this charter one thing is to take and they've heard me say this before it's kind of to take the politics out of public safety and with that i don't know how that agenda moves forward but i thank y'all for for doing what you're doing but i want to say my question to the group is the majority of the objections you have to this is it from people not knowing the entire situation and how this goes because i would say the 10 15 people i've talked to after i explained to him kind of the purpose of looking and going down this path is the more they learn about it the more open they are to the other side is that what you found out mark come on up come on up come on up get a turn at the mic you need to be

[1:28:11] on the microphone this is this is mark black hi i i in my personal conversations i'm not going to say exactly who but everybody in this room knows who i have spoken to uh even they when i gave them the the qualifications they got shock so it wasn't just a typical person in the grocery store that we may say you know did you know that your 18 year old child can now run for chief of police uh and i actually i would tell people that my daughter's who's about to turn 18 will be eligible to run and i said she she even laughed at that and thought that was hilarious i said no that that according to our city charter that is correct if you talk to people who have been involved in our city government they are shocked at those lack of qualifications so it's not just a one or two people that we've talked to it's people who we would expect to be well informed are completely uninformed as to the process to elect our chief of police thank you for those comments tom you're good harry tom go ahead i'm sorry i'm a judge mayor i'm sorry what you're saying is exactly what we're saying from the committee we're saying that the public hasn't been informed of all these years that has come up for election never has there been a situation that allowed for information to be given out to the public it's always put on the ballot as appointment yes or no or election yes or no and there's never been as far as i know a committee like this that is willing to go out and do these type of meetings to inform the public inform the citizens of what we've just informed you of and you're absolutely correct i didn't there's some things in here i didn't know and there's some things in here y'all didn't know so we know they don't know and they may know it and still decide they want to go one way or the

[1:30:12] other but the you know my requirements of everything in my life has always been before you make a decision become informed and that's what we want our public to be as informed and if they're informed however they decided then that's the right way but they have the right to be informed thank you harry yes i'll reiterate a little bit about what tom said i certainly appreciate people that are sitting on this charter review committee i app they had the opportunity to serve on the last one seven years ago and one of the things that we were not able to accomplish because we didn't do a very good job of getting the public educated was to talk about uh an appointed chief that didn't pass the last time so i want to say thank you i appreciate it and i and i agree with what you've d you've recommended here and that is let us educate the public let us get out there and do that so we don't have to rush into this thing in november and personally i would rather rather make sure that every citizen had the opportunity to learn what's going on and and to be educated before before they went out and voted so i want to say thank you i also want to say go back and say this again one of your first slides that showed the qualifications all you got to do is live in san diego for two years you do not have to be a police officer if you've got the time and want to run then if you win the only thing that you've got to do is become a certified police certified peace officer within 12 months i mean that's that's state laws that's that part of our charter i said no okay but i think what they have to do is they have to become a chief administrator of uh and tracy and david might be able to help with this but the chief administrator there's this course for

[1:32:14] that and they need to complete that course but i do not believe that requires being a peace officer a certified peace officer not a police officer a peace officer police officer right i do not believe it requires that you just have to become a chief administrator and there are situations where police chiefs are purely administrative and run the department and they don't do the law enforcement work but okay so with that i just hope that we can get to the spot where people understand uh what we can do i offer one other suggestion that i've offered to the city manager for years and that is if the citizens still do not trust city hall to appoint a police chief that would run this particular city maybe they should look at it appointing a police commission not a police commission i want to say safety commission that looks at the fire chief the police chief and the emergency manager i mean there's another another ways to do this and i just offer those a little suggestions but anyway we can look at those things thank you lucy excuse me mayor may i address that with harry right quick under the civil service provisions because we talked about this exactly what you said civil service provisions if you go to appointed is going to be city management appointment with consent of counsel because that's requirements under the civil service there are some cities within the state of texas that have police or safety commissions one of them they can but i i have to let theresa address this more but that's the requirements that are set up under the city of civil service it's down the road someplace else lucy oh i just want to thank you for every one of y'all for your past present and future time that you're putting into this it is much appreciated and we thank you for the information that y'all are bringing to us karen i won't waste any more time the good questions have come from the colleagues

[1:34:16] on the other side of the table so thank you for your wisdom and prudence and the recommendations that you're making going forward i appreciate that larry i can first of all say ditto to everything has been said but now the question is who's going to create the prerequisites we want to create watchers who's going to create these prerequisites if we do it for elected i mean what would it would still be this committee would also come back and recommend to us what they would the language for qualifications that would still have to be voted on by the public because it's part of the city charters so this same committee if they chose to not uh change it to appointed but elected would also have to come up with those because it would have to be part of that language for the vote okay yeah and last of all some folks may have a fear that if you stack the prerequisites too severely you're eliminating part of the potential field for folks to run for office for this office you'd certainly use other cities and they're you're not just gonna throw darts at things and come up with them we would have to use other cities requirements and knowledge and information about all of this we're not going to we're not going to try to make it an impossible feat we need a strong police chief we need someone elected or appointed to follow in frank carter's steps because he has done a great job and he could be a great source of information to anybody elected or appointed just as his assistant police chiefs could be as well and as i said earlier we have looked at all these requirements and if we were to go to the top level of requirements uh we would still have roughly 60 police officers in angel that would be eligible so that would not says a lot that's great yes that says a lot for our police department that says a whole lot for our police department thank you okay all right so with that um does anyone on

[1:36:20] the committee the charter committee want to come forward and offer any other comments or say anything before we go to a vote and look like anyone's coming forward yes okay so then with that i would like i think what i need is a motion to for to delay or put may in as a time period for a potential election on this issue what do we need julia we have this posted as discussion and direction so if the council i think we have a consensus that you'd like the committee to come back in january with a final recommendation i think that'll be good right is there anyone opposed to that or any for the comment all right so i think you all have direction from us and as a final thank you for what you've done the work you've put in and the work you're going to be putting in because it's not over yet so thank you very much all right with that it's 1007 we are going to take a break we'll be back at around 10 15. if you could stay just a few more minutes if you don't mind okay tommy needs ice and not ice is in law enforcement right just the cold kind all right we are now open for public

[1:38:26] comment on the conversation presented by the charter committee on elected versus anna appointed smd one um just a few things i wrote down and to me the biggest concern that seems to been expressed as qualifications um the election process generally flushes that out i as part of the tea party i remember years ago when uh frank or chief carter ran uh that was probably our biggest meeting ever it was packed and we had all of the candidates for the police chief and there were a lot of questions so as far as qualifications i'm not that concerned yes you could write that in the charter and that would take care of that and and not worry about the elected versus appointed i don't know how many times this has been before the public the citizenry of san angelo and every single time appointed versus elected has been defeated it's been several times it's been on our ballots i think 11 would be the number 11 would be that number uh so uh with i don't know 73 percent in the last election voted the point is is that um it was well stated by judge gilbert that even though it was put on a ballot in the past no one did anything to educate or meet one-on-one with citizens and opened up that conversation okay and my next concerns are what are the qualifications of the appointers the city manager what's the qualification there so you're worried about the police chief and yes they do need to

[1:40:29] have qualifications and i really feel like the election process flushes all of that out but you can put that in the charter and satisfy everybody uh anyway those are my comments um and when you take the power away from the citizenry which should be every in everybody's mind and every decision you make does this interfere with the power of the people i would always have to vote no thank you i think i have a question larry go ahead yes ma'am um i mean here we talked about 18 years old and you know the other minimal uh prerequisites you're not in favor of of uh eliminating eliminating other possible prerequisites for an elected or selected uh chief of police is that correct correct correct if you put it in the charter then whoever is appointed or elected needs to meet those qualifications thank you i'm derek kirkpatrick and i live on coral way and i want to thank the committee i know i've been on committees and it's a lot of hard work so i do appreciate that to me the education is very important to educate the public but also i think that we need to change the requirements everything every job that any that i've ever had you had to have a list of requirements to qualify for the position but then

[1:42:30] we don't need to be like other cities i keep hearing this so and such and such city has this and that we're san angelo so let's stay san angelo and we don't have to be like everybody else but let's not take away the power from the people because today the marxist agenda is to control everybody and we do not want to be controlled so let the people vote that's what i say thank you city council for always listening further public comment we'll give it a 1 a 2 a 3 conversation is concluded all right thank you all charter members again and thanks for hanging around for a few more minutes we will now move into item uh c which is consider approving amendments to the tax increment reinvestment zone incentives policy john euron thank you john james director planning and development services this is an item that's coming before you at the recommendation of the tiers board some changes to the tiers policies and i'll start off by saying this has nothing to do with funding north south any of that these are policy changes that they've been working on for quite some time they originally made their initial recommendations back in february however they asked us to bring those back they made a couple of additional tweaks just last month and so i'll go through kind of an overview of those changes first of all there used to be a north and a south or there currently is a north and a south policy but the you know 95 percent of the words are the same in each and so we just combined

[1:44:33] them into one and then made notes where certain provisions only apply to north or south we also eliminated the 10 or proposed to eliminate the 10 percent upfront payment right now if you get funding for tiers we give you 10 percent of the cost of your project up front and then once you complete it you get 90 and that created basically an extra burden for staff but also really didn't help the applicant oftentimes on a most of the smaller projects it was only a few thousand dollars and so the applicants found that that was more hassle for them doing all the paperwork to get the 10 percent and so now the proposal is just once you complete the project you get the 100 percent back it also clarifies that matching funds have to be for eligible tiers costs so oftentimes we would have applicants submit a big major project included internal remodeling and all kinds of other things that aren't eligible for tiers and they would ask to count that as match for the last few years the tiers board has recommended only counting tiers eligible expenses as part of that match and so this just writes that into the policy but again they've been doing that for the last few years there's no change there no but it writes it into the policy so it requires that to be the case rather than just a discretionary decision you can't use interior fund interior improvements to qualify correct they actually have to be putting matching funds towards the items aesthetic improvements or whatever that they're getting the funding for they also looked at changing adding the criteria for how projects are decided and that's largely applies to the south i mean technically it applies to both but in the south we usually have more projects that apply than the funding we have available and so the board and you all are tasked with deciding amongst various projects so for

[1:46:36] example in the last funding cycle i believe we had 16 projects in the south submit we were only able to provide funding for eight of those and so these are the criteria that the board and you all would use to compare different projects compared with each other and so what the board came up with was the highest priority should be given to preservation of historic buildings improvements of facades to make the buildings look nicer housing creating housing and then fire sprinklers and that's that's noted because that's one of the changes they made in the past month their original recommendation put the fire sprinklers in the medium category hugely important they decided to move that up to the high priority medium priority would be things like landscaping other aesthetic improvements other than the facade and other health and safety improvements other than fire sprinklers and then lower priority would be other building type improvements as well as signage and then the lowest priority would be parking lots and paving and as we'll note in a minute the paving in the south can't be a stand-alone project it would have to be part of a larger project that's already the case in the policy and i'd be happy if you have questions about these to stop at any time but well go back to that front screen because the other thing i hear a lot of people ask about is if the dollars if the inves if the improvements are made is there any expectation in terms of employment because we can make a facade nice but it doesn't change it doesn't create a business and or hiring of of employees so even though it improves the overall district that's one thing it doesn't do that's one of the recommendations i think it's on a couple slides down where they made a recommendations uh somewhat really nice i didn't know where it was going to be put into here yeah and we'll get to that piece

[1:48:40] yes go ahead um on john this might be a far-fetched question um but let's say uh someone that was going to apply for tears had already done much of the work with their own own funds and really the only thing they had remaining was a parking lot does that still then push them to the lowest priority category if all they have to work on is their parking lot what if they're in the south again it's on an upcoming slide but one of the recommendations of the board was to allow parking lot improvements in the north without it having to be part of a larger you know project with buildings and landscaping and other things but yeah in the south given that there's a relative lack of funds and so many projects requesting it the board's belief was we want to be improving buildings we want to be getting buildings occupiable somebody resurfacing a parking lot is not the highest priority in their opinion lucy you just answered my question it was about the parking lots and it was about the north side that has been in need of a lot of parking lots redone so they would be eligible regardless i mean because of the priority it being the lowest they would be up there to be able to be it would and again though these are for you and the board to judge projects against each other you know there's nothing that requires you to you know if there's a facade improvement you have to fund that one over a landscaping project if you all believe a landscaping project on a particular business is really more important than an aesthetic improvement to a building that's really a discretionary decision this just gives some guidelines and it also gives one of the things we heard from applicants is we feel like the board and council's decisions are kind of willy-nilly even though there were some criteria uh this

[1:50:42] fleshed out that criteria a little more so applicants know uh a little better of what the priorities are and you need to know going into it right yeah thank you and this is it lists some other considerations that the board felt were important to consider uh for example on aesthetic improvements if there's a building that's already nice and they're just making some additional improvements that would be weighted lower than a building that really looks bad and is being really improved so a building that's falling down for example that would get higher weight to improve it a higher priority for visible improvements we had a project a year or two ago they were putting windows in the alley side of a building and the board went back and forth on that they ended up recommending funding of it but they wanted to include this that if we have two projects one is improving the front facade in the downtown and one is approving windows in the back that can't be seen from the street then the the front facade should be more important higher priority for existing or planned occupancy versus speculative that gets to the mayor's point if if there's a tenant already in the building or there's an identified tenant going into the building as part of the remodeling project then that would get higher weight than somebody who just wants to improve it but doesn't have anybody lined up to go in speaking of that are there there and i believe there should be criteria as it relates to things like if i want to do what you just said improve my facade just so i can get my building sold so is there limitation in terms of if you get tiers funding the time frame that you have to hold on to that building before you can sell it because that's the other issue is are you doing it to be a part of the economic redevelopment of downtown which maybe you would say if you sold it it would be because somebody else might do more for it but

[1:52:44] what is the criteria used for that issue getting money but immediately turn it around because i think you had a couple cases year to couple years ago that that's exactly what happened there currently is no requirement for that in fact we do we have had some projects where the person already had the buyer identified but the tears improvements were part of basically the sale of that property i'll improve it and then sell it to you and you'll open a business in it and it's sort of partnership between the buyer and the seller so i'm not sure we would want to preclude that kind of activity but at the current time there's no obligation to hold on to the building for any period of time and the other question would be if today you are a taxable entity you are not a non-profit but you apply for tears today you get the money you make the improvements and then a year or less or a year you then make your facility a non-profit that is not currently addressed in the policy needs to be that's something that you all could add a requirement uh for that we'd have to think through how that would be you know how to be written into it but i guess it would be a similar provision that per the agreement they would remain taxable on the tax rolls now they could release it to anybody and that doesn't change it but the other issue is if you have a tenant in a taxable property who is non-profit and you and there's a million dollars spent to improve the facility that is going to be leased to a non-profit does that million dollars become a part of a increase in the taxable value of that property or does that million dollars

[1:54:45] to improve a non-profit who's the leasee stay with that not with the property itself it would affect the property value and therefore the taxes the fact that it's a non-profit if they're leasing my understanding is the the the ownership of the building still pays property taxes on the building they also identified a priority for projects that expand the tax tax base that's a little bit subjective because sometimes you don't you don't know the idea is if you're comparing two projects and you know one is going to create jobs and expand the tax values of the property and the other one you're not sure then that could be a factor does that mean it should say higher priority for projects that expand tax base and employees it could expand tax-based energy one way you could incorporate it and these are just an overview of what the the board did at their meeting just this past month as i mentioned already they moved fire sprinklers to the high priority in the north area only they added the provision that parking lot improvements could be a standalone project they also eliminated or recommended eliminating the annual application cycles right now we open the applications like in november and all the people who want to apply have to apply within the month of november with the deadline in december and then they're all reviewed at once and that's largely because in the south there were too many projects and not enough money so we wanted to compare them all at the same time in the north because of the funding that's available and the relatively fewer number of projects the board didn't see any reason to make them wait until november or may and so the change would allow north applicants to apply at any time that's good yes just a tom

[1:56:47] john on the on the parking lot would we not want part of the parking lot to be part of a building too i mean part of an establishment that's there i mean it almost had to be on the same plat because you wouldn't want somebody buying property right beside it and just wanting i i kind of have a little bit of pro problem of just resurfacing a parking lot whether i buy it or not now if it's a parking lot of my business i'm good with that i think that's a good point and i think it must be specific that it says the parking lot attached to a business i don't know if i'm making sense there but i would hate for somebody say oh hey i'm just going to buy that one because i know the city can resurface that i mean it's got to be part of the specific plot it's smart you can add that now i wouldn't i wouldn't tie it to the property because we got a lot of properties up there where uh the legally platted lots there may be four small lots but it's owned by one person as one business so technically in some cases the parking lot for the business might be on a separate lot but it's associated with a business yes use that language that would say parking lot associated with that business and utilize for that business while we're on it brent i mean we'll just take a break and go back to it um yeah i think if somebody gets those funds they need to if they sell that business or go i mean we're not against private ownership of trade there but i kind of have an issue of if the tiers funding goes through i'll buy it well that needs to be maybe on the buyer instead of the seller all right and so i have no problem getting in there and saying there has to be a time that you have to own the period of the business or you refund it or i don't know that gets awful sticky in there but i hate to take the business's money north or south and give it to somebody for them to turn around and make a profit in less than well also because i could have made the improvement to that building based off of you might have said okay i'm going to give you that money because of what you the facade improvements you're going to make but also because of the business you're projecting to be inside it then

[1:58:49] you sell it two months later and the facade is made but the business isn't going to happen doesn't happen or it's a completely different kind of business a follow-on to that yes larry maybe this is for miss james uh can you write a contract that uh requires that that individual uh retain that piece of property for any length of time we can write that into a contract how you do that and make it enforceable without spending more money trying to recover the money than the money you're actually giving them is really the trick but we can make it a requirement at least at the expectation that the property be retained by a certain owner or as you know taxable property for a certain period of time i do think that's a good point though we've had some issues where people have gotten approval and then not done the work and even getting the 10 percent back was a fairly big hassle and so it would be even worse if we've given them 100 of the money and depending on how long we require that they own it if they sell it within two years or whatever that does add an extra burden to try to collect that money back at that point so just to keep in mind lag on that the other issue is and i haven't i didn't see it when i was reading this last night is the time frame in which one must accomplish the improvements because we have had properties in the past where the money was given to someone to do something and five years later we still don't have that money because that money's been allocated so we can't use the allocated money and yet that project was never done so we need a time limit to which the project must be done there is i believe it's three years it's not in this policy it's in the agreements our standard agreement it ought to be in the policy i think it's a long time i think two

[2:00:57] years at best threes is too long and i'd have to double check that that's just from memory i didn't see it in this stuff i had on but doesn't mean i didn't miss it just have a quick question hey yes what happens if that person dies i'm serious i'm coming to thinking you know they you give them this they fix it up and everything and that person dies and they have to sell it whoever is the executor of their will or whatever sells it to somebody else and they don't use it for what it's supposed to are you going to hold them responsible well i mean you know we can make this as complicated and difficult as possible and there's a lot of what-ifs out there that can happen we can't make this reflective of all what-ifs in life and i could come up with seven more real quick well and that we have i think that's original owner yeah you know and so trust the executive states you just have to manage what the original owner had but there's no i don't think anybody up here down there would penalize somebody for croaking but again the the kind of the point of the tears i don't know the point of the tiers funding to begin with is to make improvements to property in the in the area uh and so i'm actually not sure if allowing change of ownership is not a bad thing uh we're still getting the property improved it's still being used for a productive purpose especially if we include then you know you can't change it to a non-profit we're still getting the benefits in terms of tax base and all the purposes for the tiers even if ownership changes i think we ought to have 18 months of with no ownership change no i mean 18 months to complete the instead of the three years yeah three years is i mean because the other thing that happened was on that particular project that never got done again you ties the money up and then you

[2:03:00] have these people applying and you have no money and then that project doesn't happen or it's delayed and they can always which has also been the policy they always have the opportunity to come back and say my contractor that whatever i need an extension but i think there needs to be a tighter window for completion and if yeah if that's your at the end when we get to the end we'll go through the budget cleaner i mean you have to carry on it sits there because we've had a lot of people go well that's there and like no that's those are dedicated projects but i was thinking 24 months but 18 months you keep it out of rolling forward two to three years so 18 to 20 months is fine we can add an exception if they want to request an extension of some sort and that's already the case in fact at last month's meeting we had someone that had some covert related supply chain issues and asked for an extension and i think it ought to be 18 not 18 months not three years and with the opportunity to ask for extension based off of circumstances and while we're talking about that one of the things that was mentioned was ensuring that it remains in a taxable status for a period of time do you all have a recommendation of what that time did you say 10 years i did that's a long time it is but you gave money away i go 10 years well let's let's look at both sides of that i mean 10 years i could buy something and then turn around and want to get rid of it in that period of time but i get that but i mean you want them to have it to be there so if if it moves to a non-profit you at that point maybe you get a certain part back but the life of businesses on north chadburn are quite often less than 10 years i mean well yeah but the 10 years is profit to nonprofit we're not talking life of business we're talking from a

[2:05:03] taxable status to a non-taxable status we're not that's not applicable to what that business is we're not saying if you put in you got seventy five thousand dollars first for a first you were not saying you have to hold on to that 10 years that's not the conversation well but so i'm thinking if there's like the one we have on 19th that we're going to talk about here shortly if somebody sells their building to somebody who wants to be a church they've got some funding i agree with you i don't think it should leave our tax rolls but i'm not for sure 10 years we'll name i mean five years five years is good five years is up minimum minimum of five years i just don't want us to get caught in something that would if somebody was going to sell some property and it was valued right to sell it i know those people buy that it's about taxable versus non-taxable because this is tax money these the money in this fund is created by increase in property values as far as enforcing that that's going to be one thing we're not going to like go and check constantly so it's it's one of those things that typically you either hear about it and then you check into it i don't make a small town exactly so that's the way we would go about it just so everybody's clear call your neighbor you reinforce that way so yes i think this is the last item one of the other as the board was talking about how do we encourage people in the north to use these funds for projects one of the things we heard from the town hall meetings was that some of these mom and pops of small businesses uh even a 10 percent or 25 match on a small project was difficult for them to come up with and so we did recommended two things here one is right now you don't have to have a match if your project is ten thousand dollars or less uh we would increase that to twenty-five thousand so in the north you

[2:07:05] could do a twenty-five thousand dollar project with no match it also do you um but when you do that what we were talking about earlier is instead of ten percent of the money we went to a hundred percent of the money so would that still be the same policy here or did that line item apply to north and south yes that applied both north and south so in this case okay we could we would give them twenty five thousand dollars up front with no match no no i'm sorry just making sure the 100 is after the project's done so uh under this policy as proposed they wouldn't get any money until they've done everything they promised to do they have to provide receipts and invoices and all that and once we verify it all then they get the amount of money we don't give under this we wouldn't give anything up front it would all be a reimbursement at the end and so then let me ask you another question because i think this is the correct thing to do for many people who own properties on chadburn for example or mlk but if you owned property on bryant boulevard and you leased it to a chain but you're the property owner for example if i built a building and leased it to tgi fridays but tgi fridays needs me to improve that lot that building for their purposes because i want to protect the small guys is my point i want to protect the small guys and this doesn't differentiate between anybody or anything and maybe you can't do it but i just want to be clear because a lot of the funds

[2:09:07] that have been spent out of the northern tiers has been for projects on north bryant boulevard 87 north i guess the way i would answer that is the these are the the criteria and the minimums for projects you all still have discretion for example on the last round in the south projects the board recommended because there wasn't enough money they funded the ones they funded at 75 percent of what they requested um if they had funded them at 50 they might have gotten one or two more people funded that's correct and that's they chose to do 75 and eliminate six people but by the same token you all could decide well if this is going for a chain on bryant well we'll give them less or we won't give them any money versus a mom and pop on mlk you'll give them the full amount that that's all all that's still at your discretion to pick and choose projects i just want to make sure we protect the mlk types of projects and then north chadburn types of projects and allow for flexibility for them and the second piece of this is where there is a match required on those projects over 25 000 it would be reduced from a 25 match to a 10 match well when i was reading through this document last night there are a lot of things that have they're in red ink that are crossed out and then there are things that are just red ink that are not crossed out yes what that is intended to be that the the the text in black is what is in the current policy and so the red if it's stricken out it's in the current policy that we're proposing to remove if it's red then it's something added that is not in the current policy so it's a it's an attempt to show you what changes were made so you know the differences of what what's already in the policy versus what's been added and so everything that i read that's in the red in this

[2:11:10] document is incorporated on everything that i've read that's not crossed out and is in red is incorporated in this overview correct well there are items in red that are minor cleanups because as i mentioned at the beginning we combined the two documents into one so there were some cleanup so this bullet summary doesn't address everything but it it's i would say it addresses the substantive issues not the text cleanup and grammar concepts including signage correct other questions or comments good so far okay so with that then all right we've given you changes so the question mark is do we make a motion to prove this with changes or do you need to bring it back to us with the changes for a vote it's up to you all i can read through the changes as i have them but we want to see it come back okay that'll work no action taken we can just bring it back when it's ready bring it back with changes okay thank you very much item d first reading and introduction oh wait a minute no public comment on this tears review if you want to come forward come forward now you could wait and when we do the final on it it'll be clearer for you than trying to comment now which is kind of all over the place in order to comment so just it'll probably be within the next month okay all right then we go on to yes please come forward

[2:13:17] would you um talk a little louder pull that microphone down because we can't quite hear you okay how's that that's great evelyn smith smd5 the last meeting i was hearing july 19th i asked a question about were there any tears funds for non-profit organization i see this is on the list for non-profit organization to be funded with some of the tiers provided with the criteria it has the north not the south yes ma'am the north yes the north um so um was that already on the program i understand that some things were already put into works in back in february so i guess my question is so this is it's already been approved by the tears committee it's just on the books to be approved by the city council on the next time it comes up yeah if there was additional approvals by the tiers board and it hasn't come before city council then it would be on the next city council meeting i guess is that what you're asking alan yes okay so i just really want to understand that um that there is now like it says maybe funding for a non-profit organization which is actually on the books now and my question was also has this always been in the north it was voted on in 2017 that the north which is typically against tiers policies but the north could use money for non-profits and the reason it was discussed and considered was because the whole idea behind tax increment refinance zone is improvement of properties to add to the tax rolls so a non-profit if there was limitations of money in the north would fall down in to a category of not as important as

[2:15:20] somebody who had a property that was taxable just by the nature of we're trying to build a tax increment refinance zone fund balance but yes last question is so um it's been approved to combine the north and south no it hasn't been approved to combine the north and south funds we have not approved that okay i'm saying it's approved by the tears but hasn't been presented to the council to be approved no so where is it right now it's it has not been approved by this council it was voted no okay at last meeting thank you very much all right we will any any further public comment okay then we move on to item d first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning october 1 2021 and ending september 30th 2022 for grants capital items and projects thank you mayor i have i think four budget amendments for you this morning the first one oh tina dierski director of finance pardon me um the first one is for the railway museum of san angelo that is a project where they are purchasing fencing materials the city will fund it and then be reimbursed by the railway museum for that one the second one is a general fund transfer out this is for police body cameras um this is year two of a five year contract that allowed 45 additional body cameras for a total of 190 body cameras for the police department and this is to pay for that second year this one is to budget for the most recent street debt issue for the 16 million dollars plus issue cost that was issued earlier this year for street reconstruction and improvements and finally wicker sees some additional funding for overtime and so they are just bringing a budget amendment to

[2:17:21] budget for both the revenue and the expense associated with that questions for tina from anyone yes so regarding the item governing body cameras and i'm looking at yours ma'am so just can you help me understand please i'm looking at this page in the most recent blue book that was issued to us and it shows the amount seventy thousand [Music] sixty seven dollars is already encumbered you have 336 thousand dollars in the account for body cameras and if you read below you have a restricted amount of 500 over 500 000 for body cameras so i'm just trying to wrap my head around all these different numbers that appear to be for body cameras i'm wondering why are we going through this process why are you asking for money if you already have encumbered dollars um is there a po what what's happening macklin city council originally um approved the purchase of body cameras for the five-year period of time uh we did allocate over a million dollars in funding it was a fairly expensive purchase and that is again over a five-year period so the amount that's restricted within the fund balance there is to make sure that we keep that restricted so that in those years three four and five we have that funding available as we told council that we would um the first year of this additional amount of the seventy thousand dollars the first year was twenty four thousand dollars police did pay for that amount out of restricted funds um on out of police restricted funds and said that they would go out for grant funding if they couldn't find grants and city council did approve to pay for the additional seventy thousand per year for years two through five so what's in the original budget and fund 501 is for this current year's amount that was already authorized by city council a year or two ago and this is going out for that additional funding where we weren't able to find any grants that would fund body cameras

[2:19:24] thank you for explaining you're welcome with that a motion for approval of the budget budget amendments some move by harry seconded by lucy public comment see none then we'll take a vote all in favor say aye motion passes we will now move into our closed session the executive session of the provision of government code title v open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meeting sub chapter d exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under the fine sections a section 551.072 deliberations about real property regarding an easement for aep and c burberry survey we are at this point adjourned for closed session hey john can i see it for a minute [Music] at 11 44 a.m there's no announcements to be made concerning the executive session so we will now move into the follow-up and administrative issues in addition to the nothing from executive session we will do consideration of approving various board nominations keep san angelo beautiful michelle barnett smd 2 and sean stein smd 4 both to an unexpired term ending september 2023. may i have a motion for those approvals lucy move to approve second and by larry all in favor say aye with none opposed those nominations are approved are there any announcements in consideration of future agenda items seeing none then may i have a motion for adjournment some move by tommy seconded by lucy all in favor say aye

[2:21:30] meeting is adjourned at 11 45 a.m on august the 2nd you

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=_Yzn_8SJ_Fw