San Angelo City Council 7-16-13

[0:00:00] we're ready to go let's get this show on the road I do not see Michael Fifer who was supposed to lead our invocation this morning so I guess in the absence of the preacher I'll do it again myself so please indulge me and let's go to our Heavenly Father in a word of prayer Our dear God and our father we thank you so very much for this another day and we thank you for the opportunities you have presented unto us we are especially thankful this morning Father for the and for the Reigns that you have sent and in our we ask that you would please continue these Reigns to the point that it would restore our lakes and our streams our Rivers our weals and that prosperity and the balance of nature might once again be returned to this area be with us this morning Father as council members help us to listen to be patient help us to have the wisdom that we need to make the decisions that that involve your your people help us to do what is right be with us love us forgive us this is our prayer in the name of Jesus Christ amen amen and at this time may I have Megan Thompson come forward because she's going to help me with the pledge are you ready loud and strong to the of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all to the Texas H the Texas under the Texas flag I pledge aliance to the Texas one State under God one and indivisible thank you so much we have one Proclamation this morning and this will be for the Americans with Disabilities acts it's the Awareness Day July 25th 213 and if I mind have Mary poos and Rosalinda Rivera come to the front we will read this and

[0:02:06] present it I think we're going to start I think we're going to start asking for rain like this to proceede every city council meeting if that's all right with y'all and maybe the Lord will provide all right let me read this whereas on July the 26 1990 President George H bush signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Acts to ensure the civil rights of people with disabilities establishing a clear and comprehensive National mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals disabilities and whereas the Ada has expanded opportunities for Americans with Disabilities by reducing barriers and changing perceptions increasing full participation in community life however the full promise of the Ada will only be reached if public entities remain committed in their efforts to fully implement the Ada and whereas on the 23rd anniversary of the American Americans with Disabilities acts we the city of San Angelo celebrate and recognize the progress that has been made by reaffirming the principles of equality and inclusion and recommitting our efforts to reach full ADA compliance now therefore I Dwayne Morrison the mayor of the city of Stan Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council do hereby reaffirm our commitment to work toward full ADA compliance in the city of s Angelo and proclaimed July 25 20113 as Ada Awareness Day thank you thank you now you can make a speech now limited to 20 30 minutes of piece but y'all care to say anything want to say thank you on July the 25th we are going to have a celebration at at El pasel it's from 10: to 2 it is a come and go there's going to be food and entertainment and we've actually entitled it Independence Liberty and access for all thank you do you care to speak I just want to say thank thank you okay well let's take a picture then at this time in our council meeting we

[0:04:37] will ask for and allow for public comment the council takes public comment on all items of the regular agenda public input on the regular agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion public input on an item not on the agenda or consent agenda may be identified and requested consideration by the council at this time the council May request an item to be placed on the future agenda or for a consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for public comment and I didn't have my microphone anybody hear that they usually turn my microphone off and turn everyone else's up so at this time I will ask for public comment from anyone in the audience uh good morning my name is Jim Turner and and this is kind of an interesting situation because you have an item for agenda on the executive session but I think that we really need to look very closely at the executive session that you're planning on having for item number three there the open meetings Act is actually very clear that if you're discussing a Personnel action on an individual that is entirely appropriate Mr Turner may I ask you sir yes to come back when I read this for the executive since it is on the agenda if you could hold your comments until that time and then you will be allowed to speak during the public comment we cannot answer we cannot we can't say anything so if you would please just hold your comments I would like to just take and put one further clarification on this there though any violation of this act is subject to criminal action even if the participants in it City Council Members government officials don't realize they're violating the act and one of the few affirmative defenses is to actually have a written opinion by an by a court the attorney general or

[0:06:42] the attorney of the government body that's involved thank you we'll get back to you when after I have read this for executive I'll ask you to come forward and make your comments and that way we can we can talk back to you yes ma'am please state your name and proceed mayor Morrison members of city council and City staff I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you regarding St Angelo's feral cat problem I am Kristen Stanley and I was raised in St Angelo Texas I have 10 years of experience stabilizing and reducing feral cat colonies and have researched the topic of feral cat management at length as a board member of the main society of Tom Green County now doing business as koncho Valley paw I took over a feral cat colony of 28 cats in 2003 behind a legendary local restaurant feral cat colonists use utilize trap spay neuter vaccinate return and maintain to control feral cat populations this is commonly referred to as TNR through TNR adoption of cats that could be socialized attrition and having 27 additional cats dumped at the colony The Colony now has four cats after years of ineffective cycles of trap and kill resulting in costly Road infestations to buildings and vehicles on St Ang on Angeles State University's campus president Brian May supported doing things differently under Brian May's leadership and with the support and resources of koncho Valley paw I organized the Angelo State cat Coalition since February 2012 Coalition efforts stabilized a healthy cap population on campus and reduce the cap population by over 50% um preventing over 35 new litters and exponential population growth through subsequent litters this has been done by a group of dedicated volunteers spending zero tax dollars the concept of trap neuter return is not new and cities

[0:08:45] across the United States are embracing TNR to effectively reduce feral cap populations while saving taxpayer dollars the Arlington Texas City Council just approved a comprehensive TNR program estimating taxpayers Savings of $30,000 monthly in 2003 the Humane Society of Tom Green County received a summer Le grant that covered Spain neuter and vaccination expenses and the city shelter partnered with Humane Society in this effort as a result 2,000 fewer cats entered our shelter in 2007 saving taxpayer dollars approximately $120,000 the city stopped collaborating with animal rescue organizations and that's why I'm here today I speak on behalf of the San Angelo feral cat Coalition we are a community group of area animal groups committed volunteers and Grant funders we are deeply concerned over the over the city animal shelter's recent actions in regard to one particular feral cat colony in mid June City Animal Control Officers entered private property to threaten a community volunteer with arrest for feeding feral cats behind another Landmark Restaurant this volunteer with the help of Critter manard cha and a grant funer had reduced the number of feral cats at this particular site from over 70 cats to 55 cats she had permission from the private property owner and adjacent Property Owners to manage this population of feral cats City animals shelter workers stated they had complaints and the cats were a nuisance they ordered her to stop feeding or she would be arrested Animal Control Officers do not have the right to arrest and their order of removal of food is considered animal cruelty under city ordinances officers gave the volunteer a poorly warded letter from the animal shelter director saying she was in violation for not maintaining her pets to city ordinances members of our group met with City staff and we believe

[0:10:47] an enforcement approach does not address the underlying problem here given the policies of the City animal shelter trap and remove is in effect trap and kill trap and kill is ineffective it's costly to taxpayers and it's inhumane the stt Angelo Federal cat Coalition would like to partner with the city of St Angelo to more effectively deal with our feral cap program I am here to ask you to Cease the city's heavy-handed action regarding this one feral cat colony a different strategy and my appeal is needed and my appeal to the city council request not only that you lead but act as true Partners in addressing St Angelo's feral cat population I thank you for your time thank you very much very well presented Chief did you get all that yes I did okay yes ma'am state your name please hi my name is Sharon Hoffman and I'm going to speak on the same topic that Kristen spoke on um thank you for the opportunity to visit with y'all this morning I'm a volunteer with Critter Shack a local animal rescue group we worked with Mrs huling for three years can you little closer to micophone we've worked with Mrs Hing for three years uh with the cat coling behind meor Kata to spay neuter and vaccinate her cats during the last three years we have successfully spay vaccinated about 45 of her cats um our grant providers and the private donors who fund our free clinics um have helped us in the last year actually to vaccinate and sterilize and spay spay neuter 498 feral cats so we've we've been know what we're doing we we we've done a good job um we have support from 10 veterinarians in the area um we have spayed and neutered animals from approximately 30 feral cat colonies um we do this free of charge two of the veterinarians who help us are Dr Russell and Dr White who are on the animal advisory Services Board Our concern is for the feral cats in these colonies and for their the managers of the colonies our time energy and money have gone into

[0:12:49] our clinics spaying and neutering these cats and the city's current practice of tra and kill makes our efforts feudal uh we're asking for protection for the cats in these managed colonies and protection for their caretakers uh in five years 20 female cats and all of their offspring can produce over 250,000 cats even if there's a 50% mortality rate that's a lot of cats um we know that the best solution to this issue is to partner with the city to decrease the feral cap population through sterilization and vaccination and the TNR method that Christen explained is the Humane way to do that it's less expensive it's more Humane and it is what we believe is the only option that would successfully reduce the numbers of the feral caps thank you very much thank you ma'am did you get that Chief we got that we'll schedule that meeting with him anyone else care to speak from the public good morning Jim Ryan yes good morning I am Jim Ryan uh I may have some comments uh related to m Turners later but for right now uh we've been reading and hearing lately that our hotel occupancy tax is breaking records and and that's very good thing uh one thing I'm not sure that the city is aware of is uh there's an obscure State Statute that once a person has occupied a hotel room for 30 days that occupancy tax goes away nobody seems to be real sure where this came from there was a bill in the house this year to do away with it it got to committee and then died so as as we are looking at it now

[0:14:54] that's the way it still stands uh there was a UT study stud on the eagle Shale the Southeast Texas region that uh related that as many as 70 to 75% of the hotel rooms there had qualified for this exemption in other words the tax was no longer being paid this is something we may not be looking at in in the future if uh we have a lot of people coming in and staying for a lengthy period of time and I think uh we need to start planning on that it U may it may have a significant effect on our budget and I just wanted to make sure Council was aware of that thank you Jim thank you anyone else any more public comment want to speak to anything that's not on the agenda if not I will ask for anyone on the council does anyone on the council have anything that they want to speak about that is not on the agenda or do you have do you want to pull anything off of the consent for the regular agenda if not let's move into the consent agenda if any if if no one if no one has a problem with the consent agenda I will entertain a motion I will make a motion to approve the consent agenda agenda as is we have a motion to approve it as presented and a second from Mrs former any further comment if not I will call for the vote all of those in favor of the approval of the consent say I I any opposed we now move to the regular agenda and the first thing on this is the executive but we're going to hold this because we usually do our executive meetings at lunch so that we don't hold

[0:16:57] things up so much so Jim and Jim we'll talk about this when we'll get ready to break for lunch hold your comments until then and we will read these and then visi of item so now we go to the public hearing and the comment this is item number four it's consideration of approving an amendment to the vision plan component of the S Angelo comprehensive Plan update adopted in 209 specifically properties located between 43rd Street to the north colim drive to the East 40th Street to the South and Grape Creek Road in chadburn street to the West and Northwest s Angelo and we will have the presentation by interim senior planner Jeff Hines you got the floor good morning mayor and Council um good morning mayor and Council uh as You' stated this is a vision plan Amendment to the comprehensive plans um Vision plan portion a notification is not required for this particular request this is of what excert of what the vision plan is calling for now in this particular area the white pink color you see on here is a neighborhood center intended for higher residential development higher density residential Development question Mr Mayor M ask question uh before we go any further uh since there are four new people and I'm going to be five uh because I'm not remembering could you just describe the purpose of the vision plan for us right quick sure thank you yeah the vision plan works with the comprehensive plan in terms of um planning staff and planning commission's recommendations to this Council for zone changes um state law mandates the vision plan be followed whenever folks do is zone change um so if someone was requesting say Industrials and a color you see in this particular area would be gray if someone requests a zone change too industrial this plan really guides the council and Planning Commission as well as staff when recommending land use decisions to folks that come in okay um that being said um the yellow on the map here uh indicates neighborhood for residential development uh the lighter green you see is rural type development for a lower intensity lower density residential devel

[0:18:59] and the red color you'll see is commercial for the higher intensity uh development there would be a little bit more intense than a neighborhood center um this is a current zoning map of the area you can see there's um the darker shaded purple is cgc zoning or C2 zoning from previous zoning Maps it's a hold over um this area here is the Coliseum it's zoned as a plan development and then the other lighter yellow color on here is single family residential and the lighter green again is our Ranch and estate zoning District uh the light pink is a neighborhood Hood commercial in terms of the vision plan Amendment um the city council May approve this as presented remand back to the Planning Commission for further discussion deny the proposed Vision uh map amendment in on a property by property basis or um you know you may modify what the Planning Commission came up with as well and make that the final decision and another option not listed here is to table this for further discussion um the process that staff does whenever we do one of these amendments is a field survey of the area um planning staff did drive through the area to observe lot by lot what was actually going on on the properties there uh we discussed and consulted with engineering storm water water utilities Mo and tex that um data entry and discussion and observations and findings were discussed at the Planning Commission level uh we presented them with research regarding historical land use patterns aerial photos of the area past zoning history and an examination of the vision plan for strengths weaknesses and perhaps other opportunities uh the proposed amendment was based upon data and findings from that um staff isn't recommending any changes at this time however the Planning Commission at the April meeting did recommend adding a neighborhood center expanding that uh East by a vote of 5 to one this is just a land use p uh map of the area um we've went through and categorized and it does cut off on the bottom I apologize for that uh we went through and categorized all of these the yellow is the lower density U medium density residential and the darker green is the low density residential the orange color you'll see on here is vacant residential that's of a lower density the way it's zoned and then the lighter um blue on here is

[0:21:02] vacant commercial property at this time for those of you that like charts and numbers here is a representation of those of that map um regarding the parcels as well as the percentage of land area that was included in the background packet as well um you see there's a lot of uh lower density residential this area really changes drastically once you move west from chadborne Street um there's several uh vacant residential opportunities as well as commercial opportunities at this time this is an aerial photo of the area from late from Summer of 2011 and um you can see there are several vacant areas along chadburn that are currently zoned for commercial type development um this is this area here is um the area that is was discussed at the last meeting um just across the street from the Coliseum this is a thoroughfare plan excerpt from the comprehensive plan document as well the dashed red indicates a future projection the street does not exist at this time the red designation is an arterial Street the lighter blue you'll see on here is uh defined as a collector Street uh this is what the Planning Commission recommended um to the city council to do is to expand the neighborhood center uh from neighborhood it's currently envisioned to be neighborhood just east of here uh this area here to a neighborhood center um the basis for staff's recommendation on this is the neighborhood center was already located at a future key node if you remember back to the thoroughfare plan the street Network at this time isn't fully improved at this time it's not set up to handle the traffic that a collector Street would call for uh in some cases a whole driving Lan is missing from those collector streets near the Coliseum it's very narrow so staff would be hesitant to introduce the opportunity for future commercial development in that area at this time when we know there's issues with the traffic in addition this is a gateway to a major entertainment venue and into the community as well so you know the land use in that area is very important we wouldn't want a you know scrapyard or open open storage that type of thing on a main gateway into the Comm for a major entertainment venue um the present and anticipated development patterns of the area um are

[0:23:05] certainly something that staff took a look at we don't anticipate this area changing drastically it's very rural there's a lot of room for commercial and residential development at this time um the census data that was pulled for the area indicates our study area had about 170 people living at it at the time of the 2010 census there's a lot of room for infi development and there's you know multiple Acres of commercial development that are going underutilized at this time with that you know if there's any questions that this Council has for me I'll be happy to address those and the best I can so the the staff recommendation is no action at this time to leave it like it is leave it as it is the planning recommendation is to add a some commercial a commercial area yeah this neighborhood center for lower intensity commercial or higher density residential be it zero lot line homes that type of thing but staff says that's not necessary we think it's set up perfectly right now Marty this is your area I would like for you to make a motion either way and give your feelings on it sir well uh I'm very concerned about if allowing big trucks to drop to to come on to a 43rd in front of the Coliseum and I also think as people come to the Coliseum you know we only have a our first impression is is what people remember so I I move that we take no action do I have a second second at this time I will open it up to I'm sorry I'm sorry can I make a comment you may thank you uh I'm just curious about something and I I want to be clear on your data that you sent to the council under the history and background it says that on January 28th the Planning Commission directed planning staff to examine a series of properties isn't that the planning staff asked the commission because the the Planning Commission wasn't asking you to do this y'all

[0:25:09] brought it to them and asked them to approve you doing it originally correct we'd had a request from uh Mr Murray Mr Bill Murray had come in and requested staff um he was looking to do a zone change we'd let him know that you know the zoning he was looking for may not work with neighborhood he was looking for a commercial designation there well I just find it a bit misleading when you're reading the material that the Planning Commission which is the board instigated this and started this when in fact it was the planning department Mr Murray would come to us and I apologize for the confusion we didn't look to you know change it but Mr Murray would come to us with that request and we brought it to Planning Commission I apologize for that thank you any other comments from Council open it up to the floor do we have any public comment on this item well I agree with Marty I don't think we need to change anything and I don't want those big trucks out there either so I guess it's time to call for a Charlotte well uh we do have trucks out there using the Coliseum parking lot and we need to be reminded that we Grant things like that from time to time and that justifies the trucks being out on that street or that road yeah there's a lot of trucks out there there's a lot of trucks all over roads out there that was that were not designed for trucks and it's become a very very serious and a dangerous situation and I I personally am not for making it any worse I do have a motion on the floor that we take no action on this I have a second if there is no further comment from the council if there is no further comment from the public I will call for the vote all of those in favor say I I any opposed okay we will take no action on that item the next thing is number five this is the first public hearing and consideration of an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance of Conan ordinances city of San Angelo z1320 David Jensen do I need to read all of this Miss bowling or is that enough I

[0:27:12] think um I think you should read all of it okay an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinances city of St Angelo which said exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations use districts and a zoning map in accordance with comprehen plan by changing the Z and classification of the following property to Wi 1650 Iowa Avenue 1649 and 1650 Nebraska Avenue loaded located at the east corner LS at the intersection of Nevada Drive and Iowa Avenue and Nevada Drive and Nebraska Avenue this property specifically occupies the Capital Heights Edition section five block six lot 42 and block 11 lot one and lot 26 in Southwest s Angelo changing the zoning classification from zero lot La lot line twin home and townhouse residential RS3 to single family residential rs1 district providing for severe ability and providing a penalty and again Jeff Hines good morning again um we sent 10 notifications for this particular request none of those are returned to staff um this is a map kind of to orient you with the property um as you head down Cox Lane there's the field that's currently out of the city limits on nicer Bacher road further in the distance and there's an established neighborhood in this area and this uh area where the subject properties are currently developing at this time um here's a close-up view of the properties in an aerial photo from 2009 as you'll see from the site photos the area definitely does not look like this um the vision plan for this area is calling for neighborhood type development and this request is consistent with that um as promised there are houses on the ground as contrary to the aerial photo that I'd shown you this is looking South on Nevada Drive East along Iowa Avenue uh you can see some of the houses are just being currently constructed at this time and then looking Northeast at the subject property right here in the foreground and then looking North along Nevada Avenue again this is just an example of some of the zero lot line homes in the area this is what the property is currently zoned for um this is an example of some of the single

[0:29:14] family residences in the area uh planning staff does recommend approving the requested zone change and the Planning Commission recommended approval by a 6 to0 vote at the June 17th meeting the criteria of the application that the council must consider when considering a zone change is is the zone change compatible with the plans and policies of the city is it consistent with the intent and purposes of the zoning ordinance compatible with the surrounding area uh would any change conditions require amending the vision plan the effect on the natural environment a community need and development patterns of the area um staff did find that rs1 zoning allowed for conventional single family detached housing the RS3 would not it requires to a house be built on one of the property lines um rs1 uh would require that house to be centered the applicant um is the property owner in this case and did come to staff looking to build different type of housing on these Lots uh we did find this to be consistent with aspects of the vision plan incompatible uh with the existing development patterns of the area it met uh the Lots currently meet all aspects of the zoning ordinance they're ready to be built on today uh it's less intensive zoning than RS3 it allows for more open space um there's a couple of Alternatives this is what the proposal would do in terms of the zoning it would you kind of bridge the single family residential that already EX this west of Nevada Drive uh east of Nevada drive and be a transition into the RS3 zoning and with that if there's any questions I'll elaborate further so the question is is do we go from rs1 from RS3 that is currently zoned to rs1 eliminate the zero lot line let them build in the middle and that is a request correct okay I does it's mine I think this is in your area isn't it Rodney would you make a motion one way or the other and defend please sir I will make a motion that we approve this do I have a second second any council could you back up to the map please sure tell me when to stop the not that one cuz I'm upside down on that one okay just I'll ask the question

[0:31:21] instead of looking at the map this request is at the back of the subdivision it's not up at the front of the subdivision correct yeah back and how far in yards or miles is that to Jackson Street I mean how far does it go does the Builder own the land that goes all the way back there the reason I'm asking is up at the front you've got the zero lot line and the duplexes and stuff it's a buffer zone to the single family and I was just curious about the buffer zone on the it's on the back end instead of the front end so I was curious as to how far the there you go that's what I was looking for Jackson Street will run um it's even off of this exert Jackson Street is a ways uh off this way Cox Lane comes um through here is probably the closest street but it is uh somewhat far off then the single family residences exist in this area and the RS3 is here so it provides even more of a transition than I just had in my mind as to being to the front of the addition and it's not it's to the back so yes ma'am I don't any problems are you satisfied I'm satisfied any other Council I just statments Johnny I have a question explain to me the zero lot line I'm not I'm not understanding what you mean by that sure as um try to get closer here in like in a single family residential district you can build your house somewhat in the middle of the lot and preserve 5 feet on each sides with a zero lot line you put your house on the lot line and preserve 10 feet on one side so you still maintain the same separation U the RS3 does allow for a reduced front yard so the houses could be a little bit closer to the front in an RS3 Zone The rs1 Zone mandates a 25t setback or an RS3 you're just required a 15t setback from the front property line okay are you satisfied I am any other comments from Council winky just a quick comment or two um I want to compliment you when I think you've done something right and I think you have here uh it's been my opinion and observations in the past that the city planning department has been all too uh eager to down Zone which is to a more intensive use uh as opposed to

[0:33:25] upzoning as we call it in the real estate business which is is a less intensive use and so uh here you're Zoning for a less intensive use and I like that but I also need to to tell you what my attitude is about buffers uh and I was involved in the comprehensive land use plan when it was done about 10 years ago or a little more you weren't here at the time but anyway buffers are real important and I think this Council believes that and uh I've gotten into it with your department in the past because you you your department takes position that an 8ft opaque fence is a buffer well to me that is not a buffer uh that is contemplated by the comprehensive land use plan as it was constituted when I was involved in that and as a member of the city council so I just want to uh remind you that uh uh let's just don't do any more of these 8ot opaque fences and say that that takes care of all the problems because it does not no I tend to agree with you there you're you're on the right track and I certain certainly you know I've read through the comprehensive plan in that section and found where you're you're getting at and would agree that offense wouldn't certainly qualify roadways you know less intensive uses are much better buffers than a fence very good anything else anything from the public anyone want to comment on this from the public if not we have a motion on the floor that we approve this as it is presented we have a second and if there's no further comment I will ask for the vote at this time all of those in favor say I I any opposed put a 70 on that one please ma'am football game looks like we're going to number six now this is a first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinance city of St Angelo z1321 Clark Wilson an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinances city of St Angelo Texas which said exhibit a

[0:35:27] of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations used districts and a zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the F following property to it 3704 3712 3720 North chadburn Lo located directly southeast of the intersection of North chadburn West 37th Coliseum Drive and 175 ft Northeast of the intersection of North chadburn and East 37th more specifically occupying approximately 2 Acres out out of the ma Edition number two portions of block 11 and 12 including the north 7945 ft of South 29 of South 229.5 Ft of the West parts of block 11 and 12 the North 70.8 Ft and South 3.25 ft of the West part of blocks 12 11 and 12 and the South 170 ft of North 303 ft of West 38.8 3 ft of blocks 11 and 12 in Northwest St Angelo changing the zoning classification from a General commercial heavy commercial cgc and single family residential rs1 to a General commercial CG District providing for severability and providing a penalty AJ fer take it away I'm glad you get to read that caption and I don't have to by saying that if you would repeat that I I just barely did get Peter Peter peiper pick the pick I just did get through it the first time you made it that's what counts on this particular request we sent 23 notifications as required by state law we did receive two in favor of the request and we did not receive any in opposition to the request I'll show you in just a moment the properties who returned those in favor um first to orient you this is in Far Northern St Angelo these properties are just north of the intersection of East 37th Street with chadburn and just south of the intersections of of both Coliseum Drive and 39th Street with North chadburn

[0:37:31] Street and then here's a closer look of the property with the current zoning uh one of the first things that your notice will be drawn to is that this is a variety of lots that have a split zoning uh designation the frontage on these Lots is currently zon cgc as Mr hint mentioned in his presentation that is a hold over from an previous zoning ordinance we also have a section of these lots that are zoned seed or General commercial um and we also have a strip of rs1 zoning the property owner in this case is seeking to replat these properties to create One Singular lot and thus it's in their best interest to create One Singular zoning and so the zoning request as the mayor just mentioned is for General commercial for the entire property here's an aerial photograph of these Lots as you can see the northernmost uh section is currently vacant the indication To Us by the property owner is that he seeks to do an expansion of this existing self- storage Warehouse facility which is located on the southernmost portions of these Lots again all of these lots have direct Frontage onto North chadburn Street this is an excerpt from the vision plan the red designates that it is intended to develop as commercial property the CG uh request in this case does match with that being a commercial designation although it is much less intensive than the current cgc port portions of the Lots uh it's timely that we just had a discussion about buffers because this is especially applicable in this case too I'll go back for a second and what you may notice is to the north there is an existing neighborhood that has been in place for some time and so transitioning into this neighborhood the CG district has much less intensive activities than the cgc the two lots in green here designate property owners who returned notifications in favor of the subject request one of those of course is the property owner we do have a neighbor to the north that also indicated their

[0:39:34] support of this request just a few photographs this is looking North down North chadburn Street the subject property is here to the right in the foreground you can see some of the existing storage warehouses and just behind that it's difficult to see but that is the vacant lot that is also part of the request this is looking South down North chadburn and as you look down the stretch of Street you can see some of the mix that has emerged along this street you have some Contracting type activities um of a more industrial nature mixed with residences and to illustrate that here is the subject property this is looking East from that segment of street but then as you look Due West you see some of the residen as I referred to earlier planning staff does recommend approval of the change uh the Planning Commission also recommended approval unanimously at their meeting on June 17th Mr hence has already reviewed the criteria so I won't go through those again but just know that we looked at the same criteria for this request and also in looking at our comprehensive plan it does call for again commercial at this area which is consistent um resoning this to sort of a lesser commercial designation will not only correct the issue of split Zoning for the property owner at their request but it also accomplishes a specific goal of the comprehensive plan which is to rezone any cgc which is immediately adjacent to a neighborhood so this does get us to that point as I mentioned earlier the proposed zoning is also less intensive than what is existing keeping in mind that nearby neighborhood but it does meet the needs of the um requestor or the applicant at this time U with that if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer those for you now so the property is now cgc and the property owner has approved he he is in agreement with reducing this from cgc to CG It's a combination actually of cgc CG and rs1 so he is requested to unite all of those properties under the CG zoning Mr sth this is in your area make a motion and

[0:41:37] defend pleas sir well when when you have multiple zones uh what what happens on the R1 property if if if he were to try to build something like it is right now if it met the dimensional standards for an rs1 District you could do so but in this case and I'll go back to the map it's a very small sliver um it's actually I believe about 30 feet by about 130 ft so it's actually not even large enough to build upon but but he could build on the front CG but he he could not encroach into the RS one area or in this particular request he's actually asking to change all of these properties to CG including that sliver which would make it buildable yeah yes ma'am but if if we did nothing and then he decided to build on the front part he he could not encroach into the AR I'm just asking yes you're correct okay all right well um I move that we accept the zone change second I've got a motion to accept it as presented and the second now I would like to see if there's any councel M sorry I just have a question or a statement Mr Valenzuela this is about the fifth time that I have requested when we send out uh sheets for information or comments from the public that they be included in the packet I didn't find it in my packet it's not here I I don't care one way or the other whether people are for it or against it but it is a way to know how our citizens feel about what we're doing and again it's not in our packet okay I apologize it was submitted with the report and I have the originals if you'd like to review those we'll make absolutely sure that those are under there in the future okay any other comment from Council Mr service mayor that was actually my uh comment also the question of where this area notification of the S them out and yay or nay so that that was my question also we do typically provide

[0:43:40] those so I apologize anyone from the public wish to speak to this if not we have a motion to approve as presented we have a second with no further com comment from the council I will call for the vote all those in favor say I I any opposed Mark that one 70 as well please ma'am keep telling you it's a bad football game let's go to number seven this is the first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance annexing approximately 24.4 eight4 Acres situated immediately west southwest of St Angelo and encompassing a vacant 24.4 A4 acre track extending Northwest from Mills Pass Drive and located directly west of an 8 995 acre track annexed to the city limits on March 52013 that comprises the proposed Prestonwood Edition section two miss fber this is a third and a series of hearings that this Council has had regarding the annexation request on this property uh if you approve the ordinance upon its first reading today we will be bringing you a second ordinance I'm sorry a second hearing rather of the same ordinance on August the 6th the subject property is in Far Southwest San Angelo you may recall in recent months we have done another annexation in the same area on a property which is immediately adjacent and uh just east of this subject property both the area that was annexed previously by the council and the area which is the subject of today's discussion are intended to become part of the Prestonwood Edition a remnant of which you can see to the southeast on this map uh it is intended to be neighborhood type development and we have received um applications to continue with this development if the annexation is approved here is a survey of the subject property showing it to be again just under 25 acres in size as you can see it does have Frontage along Mills Pass

[0:45:42] Drive and is just west of Southland we had two public hearings as required by public law um we had those on June 4th and June 18th we did not receive any comments from the public at those hearings the property that is just east of this property uh was annexed to the city limits on March 5th so this is a a timely request again indicates the desire to build and construct homes in this specific area one thing I will mention is that when we are looking at an annexation ordinance a required component of that ordinance is what we call the service plan which specifically itemizes the types of services which the city will extend to the property owner when and if annexed we did include that in your back background report I'll give you the highlights uh we did provide notification to a variety of parties to get their input to make sure that the service plan was compatible with the area and that no Capital Improvement um contributions were required at this time externally that included parties such as different public utility groups for example atmas Sudden Link wtu Etc Tom Green County the area fire volunteer fire departments and saisd internally we visited with a variety of departments including all of the development related groups the police and fire water utilities and other infrastructure related groups none of which had any comments to add the service plan components very briefly speak to public safety protection that includes police and fire as well as EMS Service uh waste collection Water and Wastewater maintenance Street Maintenance and maintenance of public facilities and Parks again you'll notice in this particular service plan we're emphasizing maintenance only because we don't find at this time that there are capital expenditures which are deemed necessary the developer When developing this section will include uh the extension of the water and sewer remains as well as the streets here is an aerial photograph of that property um again just to to remind you we're just uh North I'm sorry just

[0:47:47] southeast of Sherwood Way you'll remember that there is a fire department a building which is in close proximity so that is not an issue that we need to be concerned about at this time time that particular tract is called out on this map we also included a map for you showing the water and wastewater infrastructure in this area and as you can see there are Mains available to be extended to this particular development the comprehensive plan does provide some guidance to us on annexation and there are three particular points that are relevant to this uh instance one of those talks about annexing plans um where there are extensive development that is either occurring or about to occur the reason for that is you would like to be able to guide that development as it occurs and this is a perfect scenario for that as I mentioned we do have an intent by the property owner very clearly to construct a residential subdivision the comprehensive plan also goes on to talk about the best areas for annexation being those with realistic potential again very relevant since the goal here is immediate development of the property and then lastly the plan also speaks to identifying specific areas where annexation is useful and where utilities exist and as we've showed you in some of the maps there are Utilities in existence this developer will contribute to the City by continuing those improvements forward with that uh again we're simply asking you to approve or consider approval of the ordinance upon first reading today and if approved will bring that back to you in the August meeting for final approval at which time we will move forward with the actual annexation steps through the state of Texas and if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer those this is just a public hearing we have to we have no we take no action today correct today you're actually taking action on the ordinance itself to approve it and again as it doesn't say that it says P first public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance I mean if we if it requires

[0:49:51] action we will take it yes you're introducing the ordinance today upon first reading and then we'll ask you to finalize it upon second reading at the next hearing so it's very similar to the case we did for zoning Charlotte this is in your area um make a motion and defend well thank you sir uh don't have a problem with it I make a motion that we uh approve the first public hearing notice of this ordinance item number seven but I do have one little comment that I'm sorry I missed my notes I'd covered them up I wanted to speak about on item number five and the same thing I wanted to speak on this I noticed on this one you did mention storm water covering and talk to Etc and so forth but I didn't see that on number five okay and in that particular area storm water becomes a problem toward the back end of that subdivision correct uh I really want that addressed in any building permits or whatever so motion to approve on item seven second anywhere I'll second that okay Johnny Silva seconds any further comment from Council on this one do we have any comment from the public on this if not then I will call for the motion and this is in favor of annexation this is the first reading we have a motion we have a second do I have a say I if you're for it that was kind of a left-handed way to get that but anyone oppose say nay another 70 let's move on to this next one this is number eight this is consideration of adopting a resolution recommending to the Texas Department of Transportation that conso Valley Transit District be chosen as a direct recipient for federal funds in accordance with title 49 subtitle 3 chapter 53 section 5307 of the United States code for the S Angelo urbanized area authorizing the city manager to execute any documents required to evidence the city support of cvtd cono Valley Transit District as the direct recipient for federal section

[0:51:54] 5307 funding and providing for an effective date and this will be presented by our new Finance director Tina benell mayor May first of all yes sir I wasn't here at the last meeting I don't know if she was if Tina was formally introduced as our new Finance director we do want to welcome her aboard she comes to us with great experience U especially in the auditing field and uh we're very confident in her abilties to do a great job and again welcome AB board man appreciate thank you sir welcome to the city of San Angelo and good morning mayor council members have the floor did the mayor did he pronounce your your last name correctly he did Sir and how is it again banel benell I actually got it right yes sir well things are working out go ahead please ma'am start okay well this resolution just seeks to establish and writing a relationship and a procedure that actually is already in existence um but first I'd like to give you a brief background and a little bit of history about the funding of the Kono Valley Transit District it was created in 2006 to establish um an urban rural Transit District and the uh interlocal agreement was between the city of St Angelo and the Concho Valley Council of governments this agreement was made not only to generate better efficiencies in the transit um District here but it also allowed the district to receive state and federal Public Funding this funding comes from the Federal Transit Administration through the state of Texas and under Federal Transportation statute the state of Texas is the designated recipient for the funds received from the uh Federal Transit administration's fund fing program the term designated recipient is defined by the trans by the FTA um as an entity designated to receive an abortion the amounts that are attributable to transportation management areas the governor of Texas has delegated this Authority as the designated recipient to the Texas Department of Transportation so according to the FTA the designated recipient May authorize another public agency to be the direct recipient of those funds the designated

[0:53:57] recipient would then receive the funds and pass them along to the direct recipient who's responsible for Grant Management oversight and services provided in the past the urban Transit designated recipient was the city of St Angelo and the direct recipient was the K Valley Transit District however in October 2012 the FTA issued new guidance that designated Tech doot as the designated recipient and then in March of 2013 the teex do issued guidance requesting a local recommendation for the selection of direct recipient specifically they're requesting a resolution from city council and a written opinion of council stating that the direct recipient has the legal capability to act as direct recipient for the fund so the purpose of this resolution is to put in writing a policy that's already in practice uh the cbtd has been acting as direct recipient since it was created and this would just allow for a seamless flow of operation and allow them to continue to receive the federal funds we recommend that the resolution uh be passed so that they can continue to receive the federal funds as they won't be able to draw down a fiscal year 13 funds until it's passed anyone anyone with Council care to make a motion and defend it well I would like to ask a question the resolution I can't open it in either fashion if I go in the back door it I says cannot open and if I just go back to so the resolution I don't have you want to read mine do you have it I do well you read it I did okay cool I'm fine motion to approve anyone want to Second it I'll second that Mr silus we have any comment from the Council on this any comment from the public Mr [Music] Turner yes my name is Jim Turner and uh this is something that probably the council needs to get more involved with as far as the public transportation here here when the city merged the old bus company

[0:56:03] with the county and contal Council of government's uh rural Transit Authority there were certain promises made and a certain amount of oversight was expected and there were supposed to be Improvement for the citizens on the public transportation being able to use the bus to get to work for example a lot of that hasn't happened I know you can't take and deal with that as part of this item but I think it would be great for the city council to actually review the performance of this agreement because it really hasn't met the expectations that were put on it when this merger happened back in 2006 and it's about time that some of these actions started moving forward thank you thank you Mr Turner I know that just what three or four May ago we appointed some new members to this Transit board I guess have they all resigned now I don't know who our members are you I'm one of them but my problem is I get the notices after the fact of the meeting uh they're mailing them out they mail one to my house and then the one that goes to the city I always get it the week after the meeting's already occurred that's a way to have a real seamless meeting okay I believe that there are two vacant spots on that board right now and uh the next me meeting will be August 14th from what I've been told okay so we will get someone else on I believe they're working on filling those slots okay very well we'll take care of that Turner we'll get some board members on there so that we have some input you want to talk again make it quick yes I think what we need is to actually have a representative of the transit district come before the city and city council and explain what they're doing and it's not enough to just have a member on their board they need to just address the council as a whole on the progress and plans that they're trying to make we uh I've been to the meetings I'm one of like two or three people that's ever

[0:58:04] been to one of those meetings from the general public nothing goes on there of any substance unless somebody's making noise and a lot of the concerns I have and Council expressed at the time this was done have just been ignored because of lack of funding and lack of uh emphasis and the only way to get that is to get them expl explain themselves with for the council as a whole and the public thank you Chief did you get that yes we did and we can definitely have them come and do a presentation here that's not a problem okay we have a motion to accept the resolution I think Mr Silva second it any other comment from Council any other comment from the public if not I will call for the vote on this all in favor say I I any opposed another 70 what say let's deal with number nine and get Mr Solace and then let's take a break is that all right with everybody okay yes sir okay let's deal with number nine public hearing and consideration approving the 2013 annual action plan for use of Community Development block grant cdbg and home investment Partnerships funds and authorizing city manager to execute the applications required certifications related documents and annual funding agreements for $739,000 584 of cdbg funds and $245,300 Grant funds Mr Solus mayor council the uh annual action plan is our petition uh for federal funds for for both cdbg and home Grant funds uh this is the last opportunity for citizens to make comments on the allocations um um for this grant year the it is an annual HUD requirement and it's due August the 15th uh the plan certifies that we're adhering to all federal requirements uh such as fair housing

[1:00:06] anti-discrimination uh and maintaining a free drug environment IT addresses key interest items such as housing for the homeless um special needs uh barriers to affordable housing uh lead based paint abatement and those kind of things uh but most importantly the uh plan documents the city's projects allocations and expenditures uh that the council approved during the deliberation uh meeting we held last month we did advertise in the standard times and uh we have made copies available throughout the city and we're asking Council to approve the plan as we read it as written do I have a motion to accept or deny I'll make a motion that we accept have a motion to accept we have a second any further comment from Council do we have comment from the public if not I will Mr SE step forward please sir tell us who you are pleas sir yes sir my name is Jerry C and I'm one of the leaders of WT good morning uh mayor councel and uh staff uh we WTS uh we were there at all of the the public meetings that uh that uh was was presented uh Mr silus presented his program and he explained to us about uh not having as much money as he had last year to work with and he explained how he distributed the money and uh everybody was very satisfied and we think he did a great job and he he he he spread the money out uh and he showed us exactly how he did it and we're very pleased that uh he got as much money as he could to everybody that he could and uh we'd like to commend him and uh he's doing a great job for the city and the people and uh we thank him very much and we thank you people very much thank you thank you for your time thank you very

[1:02:07] much and I'll say Amen to that as well I like your presentations they're clear they're concise they're quick and they're quick that's really like that as long as you spend the money well is all right we have a motion no further if no further comment I will ask for a an approval all of those in favor say I I any opposed oh we hitting these sevenos today aren't we let's take about 10 or 15 let's call this meeting back to order and we will take up with number 10 on the regular agenda this is the consideration of approving a request for permit and it is 10:26 City Secretary a request for permit for the transport and disposal of garbage trash and debris within the city San Angelo City liit and any service that is allowed by state law or city ordinance that does not conflict with the city's contract with Republic Waste Services of Texas and the exclusive rights granted by the cont by that contract to Republic Waste Services of Texas for the following companies and authorizing the city manager to execute any necessary related documents Texas Disposal Systems Inc Texas Alloys Inc DBA ecme Iron and Metal Company Mr Kelton you are on Sir all right thank you mayor and Council uh we we did have two two requests for a permit and and it's basically just like stated in the caption they they have requested the um um the for a permit so they can actually use utilize our streets and utilize our landfill to uh transport and dispose waste they primarily are looking to um use Comm or commercial waste outside the city limits within Tom Green County and then of course the the counties uh they stated within economically reble uh driving distance uh to the to the city landfill so uh that's basically it in a nutshell uh do yall have any questions for me if not I know Bobby Gregory uh with uh Texas Disposal Systems is is

[1:04:10] here with us today to answer any questions y'all might have from them and uh he also has some others of his team that are here as well today too I guess do we start with the council or do we start with the public let's start with the council winky you start off please sir yeah yeah Shane um in connection with these two request for permits uh uh what is Republic Waste Services position on the on these do you know I I can't speak to uh their positions themselves um I I know that we do they are they do have our franchise agreement for everything for commercial and residential waste inside the city limits and I do know that they do service and do have contracts outside of the city limits with other counties uh that are contiguous to to Tom Green and do service residents outside the u city limits of sang low but I have not spoken to them specifically about their interest outside of of what we actually have contracted you know if we let the public comment first on this we may not have near as many questions on the council level if they kind of tell us because we've got all of them represented here why don't we go ahead and have public comments so that we know so that we have pros and cons on both sides and then when we have all the information we'll talk about it amongst ourselves is that okay that's fine me that's fine me let's have public comment first because I know this is going to become somewhat ponderous at this point I'm sure so let's open it up to since uh Republic is our existing uh contractor I would like to hear from them uh if they have an interest in this as well or how they feel about it since this wasn't a request for bids this was just someone phoning and wanted to make application so I would like an application for permit is is allowable by city ordinance 11.43 so it is allowable by city ordinance for another huler to to make permit to do this and like I said their

[1:06:12] their request is not to infringe upon anything that is within the city limits that we do have contracted with Republic Services it's only for those things that are outside of our existing contract but uh did you want to hear let's open it up to okay with the Pres I didn't see him good morning my name is Robert suros with the Republic Services I'm here with uh Brittney ragau our controller here and uh we can answer any questions as far as our position goes we're we're happy that uh that it's that we're protected on the inside city limit uh hauling of of of Waste Service and uh I understand TDs is interest in this area because of the uh uh growth that's going to that we foresee in this that we're forecasting in this area in and around this with the oil oil boom um the only thing that uh I can uh let you guys know is that we can handle the increased volume um it's it's one where um the concern that I have is is when you start having more than one permitted huler um come in um then your precious landfill gets filled up faster and right now we've got about uh 17 years of life left in the current area where we're where the landfill is and um it's it's a we'll have to start permitting um for the property across the street to to further the landfill 17 years is going to turn into 14 years or 13 years I don't know it's it's hard to say but uh the city is exposed to uh you know having waste transferred in if you grant the permit it's it's up to you guys um we can handle competition no problem uh outside the city we do it with TDS and other areas um but uh my only concern and and what I would just want to share with you is is is the life of the landfill so if you have any questions for me or Britney I'll be happy to answer them

[1:08:15] could I ask the question of Republic do y'all handle the Dove Creek area is that part of your service with the city or is that outside the city that's outside the city okay thank you any other questions Johnny Robert I I I've heard time and time again this word contiguous so what is Republic own or operate around the city of s Angela what contig contiguous area do you guys service well like Shane mentioned we we have about a dozen contracts that uh we've had for a very long time um in in counties outside we have municipalities that are in counties contiguous to Tom Green uh Ballinger um we have Eden um and several others we go as far as Junction um so it's one where there's if it's within 100 miles then we're happy to take care of uh that service for those for those folks I'm sorry now I was clearing my throat but I do want to make a comment as far as the U we do have an ordinance that specifies as far as Which counties U you know the garbage trash can be brought in from so we do we are protected in that fashion as far as making sure that we're not bringing in trash let's say from Austin or somewhere where really would fill up the landfill but what we have at this point are really the the smaller the rural communities the uh counties also and again that is there's a limitation on ordinance as far as we can come into our landfill sorry could I understand you to say there's a limitation of the tonnage that say BR Robert Lee Ballinger not not per say the tonnage just the um Which counties um we can actually bring in but there's not a limitation to the tonnage that we accept no not from those areas no but again that's the I believe that's the reason why the ordinance was created that way so there would be a limitation any other questions winky uh yes do you Robert do you uh have you seen any numbers on how much it would cost the city of Stan Angelo to uh to uh initiate a new landfill after this one

[1:10:20] fills up well um let me answer that by saying I'm not a landfill engineer and uh that's probably uh be better answered by someone else but but these things are I know Shane may want to Pine on this but these things are expensive and they are hard to get permitted are they not well it's it's a process and uh right now we're you know we we're uh 17 years is a good while and like I say I'm not sure what that'll turn into with with uh setting the precedent of having more licensed hollers come in it may not stop at TDS it could be you know ongoing and and that's where that's the only concern I have as far as the cost goes I mean there's revenue on on there's added Revenue that comes in as well but uh it's that life of the landfill mayor M yes sir I I do want to add and I'm show Shane standing back there at this point but we have started the process of course for the U as far as permitting into the Landfield and actually if you can want to speak to that a little bit that'll give the council a little bit of information what as to what we're doing at this point we do on uh 32 Acres just north of 50th Street uh of the existing landfill right there that was that was purchased some years back for the expansion of our landfill it talking with um our Consultants our landfill consultants and uh and looking at different options uh what's available to us uh with the oil field industry coming this way we've started looking at possibility of of looking at a uh of changing our classification or permitting the new land to maybe accept and take some uh Industrial Waste from the oil field as well if that's a possibility out there as well but the permitting process normally takes about two years to perit a new uh a new piece of land and the cost can range anywhere from $1 to $2 million in that range depending on whether it's you know whether it's it's challenged or if

[1:12:23] there's any issues out of Austin with it and by the time you do all the sampling and and the groundwater you know studies and all the things that you have to do there to to get a new landfill pered that's kind of roughly I mean I know that's a large uh estimation in there between 1 and 2 million but that's normally about what it takes to have one permitted yeah but that's not the the the whole cost or the entire cost of getting one equipped and ready to go is it no sir it it's not um and what and a lot of the and I I don't have the experience because this landfill's been here um since about the time I was born so I I don't have the experience with this landfill but other landfills as as you look for them to be developed or actually most of the time the city if the city acquires a permit or if the even a private entity wants to get a permit to build a landfill they uh The Entity themselves who we would if we were to contract with Republic Services uh for all of our issues we would we would contract with them to actually uh prepare prepare the site and to uh get it ready to accept waste that would be a part of their contract and that's that's standard across the industry well I'm just a little surprised there hadn't been a discussion as to what the ultimate cost would be of this landfill this city is is fairly poor really and uh uh we we got um 27 million borrowed already if not more uh not that doesn't even include our uh unfunded liabilities that we've got for health care and other stuff um you know I I just I'm concerned as where where this money would come from and how much it might be we have uh We've started and actually last year in the budget process and actually it goes back as far as two years ago we started in the budget process working with council at that time to establish a rate structure that would over the ne over the the remaining lifespan of the

[1:14:27] landfill actually collect enough uh from fees charged at the landfill to actually pay to not only one uh get the new land permitted but also expand the gas uh gas collection system as it's needed to be in in the future and also to take care of um the landfill the maintenance issues at the landfill uh for the next for the 30 years after it closed its final closure post closure cost we have actually uh started within our fee structure to account for all this stuff so by the time that we do have to close the existing landfill we actually have the money to uh pay for uh the new landfill and and it's or the permit the new landfill and to start accepting waste at that new landfill site Shane if I could if I could add that there was a two-part fee increase associated with that we've implemented the first phase right and so the second phase still remains yes October one of this year it will in addition to that the amounts that we're projecting to set aside were estimates based on what those costs were last year if if there are regulatory changes which significantly affect the cost of new permitting or operating uh then those costs could change so I'm I'm still not clear what you're saying do you have an established trust fund that has money actually in it right now not establish a trust fund we built the rate so that uh excess money would be collected so that it could be set aside for those future needs well is money set aside at this point and how much is it we just started collecting that and and in nove in November of this year we started collecting the new fees to start accommodating and working towards uh the goal of actually having a fund balance sufficient enough uh within the solid waste fund to um make sure that all this happens at the at the end of the life of our current landfill and you feel like it that that the that

[1:16:30] those monies are properly set aside and designated solely for that purpose it it is they they are designated to go into the to the landfill fund U or the solid waste fund and it's an accounting function maybe Mike can speak better that to that than I can it it's an important distinction that uh these excess monies go into that fund balance for that purpose but they are subject to um use by a future Council for other issues and so uh your question about are they locked down for those future purposes no sir they're not at this point that was the uh spirit behind that portion of the uh rate increase but uh a future Council uh like this council could change uh decisions which have been made in the past a few your council could could change those decisions also Mr May uh Michael about four maybe five years ago I can't remember which but I could go back and look we had an excess in our budget it wasn't much it was less than a half a million dollar and it was recommended and we talked about at council member uh a council meeting to set aside $450,000 to go into the future landfill um that's what we had and we talked about and I really would like to research that information to see what it was and yes it was subject to council direction or whatever but it was supposed to be designated and flagged for the future Landfield and I know you're looking blank at me so you don't remember it and uh but if we could look at that I would appreciate it to answer the question but then my question to uh Shane is how much um contaminated product do we dispose of or how do we deal with Shannon Hospital the community hospital their waste does it just go in

[1:18:33] the regular landfill there's no separation they they no they have to contract with another entity to dispose of medical waste our uh our permit our landfill permit doesn't allow disposals of O oils or medical waste or anything like that so those have to be contracted separately and those are actually those are exceptions that are are um are granted to the carrier that they don't have our carrier rep Public Services doesn't have to pick up and dispose of those uh and they are contracted separately uh with a company that's specializes in the handling of hazardous material and disposed of in a landfill that will accept them our ours will not well I'll if Mr may I um I'll tell you just how I feel about the subject you know we had trash away and uh Republic came in took them over bought them out and I believe we owe a certain amount of respect uh to our existing carrier uh for their exclusivity I don't want to muddy up the waters with an outside contractor coming in and having two three four different people doing trash and confuse the area confuse the people confuse me and uh filling up our landfill a whole lot faster than we have budgeted or planned or anticipate uh if we were to offer I mean if Republic wanted the contract to do so I'm more inclined to give it to Republic simply because they're established they have done a lot of things to for the city in the way of their trial on the automatic trash receptacles um I I just feel some loyalty and respect to that company and since they have the exclusive contract with us yes ma'am and and what we're talking about is not letting these people that have requested a permit they're just requesting to drive on our streets and to use and to use our our landfill that's what I don't want is any more of the large heavy dump trucks

[1:20:38] on our streets in conjunctions to what we already have and that's that's just the way I feel about it yeah change my mind if you can I I'm open but that's I was just and you know and I think in the majority of it and we wouldn't even you know and well of course I guess it it would depend on um you know whether they started a recycling service or something that is allowable within within ordinance and within state law but prior to our annexation of the remainder of Bell Street and in thato or I'm sorry old Ballinger Highway out there um they wouldn't even had to have asked for permit to transport at that point it would have just been to dispose of within our landfill because at that point time we didn't old Ballinger Highway was not annexed into our city you know uh so they could have actually traveled down old Ballinger highway to get to our uh landfill at that point and I think that's really I don't think they're going to be D I don't think they're going to be using our residential streets I don't think that's their intent uh I mean because they're not going to be picking up residential trash that that is that is that is exclusively Republic's uh contct I understand that and what you're saying but I can tell you from from my district alone and being out on the west side of the city and when they can't get through the intersection of Southland and Sherwood Way or Southwest and Sherwood Way because of the amount of trucks and I I've watched the truckers get just as aggravated and they'll cut down Southwest they'll cut down Southland and they end up because of the amount of trucks that are at these intersections already I can speak highly to that particular intersection because I'm there I live in that area but College Hills and Southwest both you know at the Loop the truck traffic I don't want additional big uh trash trucks in the year area okay and and currently they have only requested for just to use two trucks at this point so uh and those are rolloff trucks and that's that's all the request is at this point uh to utilize I don't know if that you know may not help you any at all but that's um that's their

[1:22:42] request at this point is just just two trucks um to utilize for the rolloff containers right yes Mr silus Shane I just have a a couple of question comments with TDS applying does who does that open the door to anybody in the state of Texas can apply now or or what well by ordinance anybody any any carrier that wants to could request uh from Council a permit to utilize our streets and our landfill it it could be any carrier in the United States uh that actually you know that meets the criteria that's outlined in our uh ordinance and in conversations that had with you last week and I think you and I were on on the same page when we have both heard and really this is a question for Robert surles is I've I've heard both sides that Republic cannot handle the rolloffs request from in the outside area so I wanted to set the record straight can you guys handle it or not you know that's you know I'm hearing both sides so educate me well Republic's a company that operates in 39 States and our largest um Municipal contract is Las Vegas and we do 5,000 rolloff Halls a week picking up compactors at the casinos sometimes four times a day so we have the resources to to do that or we can we have the resources to to meet any need here so we just if we have to add two trucks or four trucks or a thousand trucks uh Republic can can do that so it's a Fortune 500 company that can handle any need we're the second largest uh our parent company's the second largest in the in the country have you had to turn anybody away I mean I guess you can handle anybody everybody that no I mean sometimes weather uh makes you late on a delivery or uh some uh but for the most part it's we gear up for for

[1:24:47] more volume that's going to be consistent then we can meet that need so it's one where we're doing it already in other states other cities and there's no reason we couldn't do it here okay Mr Fleming Shane the question that I have is that U when we talk about the trash and the the more traffic volume going through that the trash is coming we're not going to stop the trash it's going going to come so it's either going to be Republic's trash trucks that are going to be rolloff trucks that are going to be taking it to the landfill or it's going to be someone else's right yes sir I I would I would I mean that kind of makes sense that makes yes sir it makes sense that people are going to be calling it doesn't matter whether it's Republic or TDS or Acme or whoever they're going to be calling for service and and I would you know um Robert and them are not going to I wouldn't think they would turn away business so no I wouldn't think Robert would turn away any business what what I'm for is that uh free enterprise I like having another someone competing with them I I'm totally with Republic on the city contract I have no problems with them I haven't heard anything negative about them but out in the county which is what we're talking about out in the county I'd like myself having a little bit of competition in order to keep some prices down and things like that so I my argument is that the the trash is coming it's going to be one of the two of them right now and it could be three or four in the future and to me that's even better because if I was if I had an oil fill company out there I'd be wanting to get the least expensive price to dispose of my waste am I that's kind of your thing also right your recommendation is we allow this right it to me I I don't see a there's not a whole lot of negative or or positive uh to the city I'm I'm somewhat neutral in this thing I I don't see any reason not to okay but I'm it it's kind of a neutral issue for for staff okay thank you Mr Gregory do you want to speak to this sir can I address thank you

[1:26:52] Charlotte uh I understand and I do believe in competition but Republic already has the communities out in the county such as uh Robert Lee U BR other areas they already have that and my my point being is those trucks that are out there and come back into s Angelo if there is someone out in the county who calls for a pickup and whatnot I just see that Republic should be able to do that and add to the trash that they've already picked up in these communities and to me they have that right I think they're talking about rolloffs though and it's not really going to be a matter of that those rolloffs are going to probably be at my understanding is probably going to be at the job sites and um you're not going to add to it I mean it'll be primarily the job site of where the location that they're at correct that's my understanding as well is that we're talking about rolloffs that will be at a construction site or other sites um in the in and around the surrounding counties whether it's at a uh a housing development in Christoval or or or wherever in these in these surrounding counties that would be the type of trash that they're they're primarily targeting at this time I'm I'm I'm all for Republic I I like Republic's contract that we have here in the city the only thing I'm saying is out in the county I think that a little bit of competition is not going to hurt anybody I don't believe or feel like that they should have the same rates let's listen to Mr Gregory okay may we Mr Gregory I was looking for Mr Gregory up here thank you very much you've set this up very well for me let's see how I do uh if I may take a moment just to introduce myself I've introduced myself to some of you today prior to today I don't know that I'd met any of you although my name is Bob Gregory my brother and I Jimmy and I own Texas Disposal Systems I own Acme Iron and Metal I started texaloy that now owns Zarin and metal in 1972 here in s an Ang I was born and raised

[1:28:56] in St Angelo right over here on Glenmore Drive I grew up so I lived here until I went off to UT and liked Austin so much I stayed there but likeed St Angelo so much I bought my dad's business that he started in 1951 the year I was born I bought it in 1984 so for over 40 years I've been a business owner here in s Angelo since 1984 almost 30 years I guess I'll have to count now but anyway since 1984 I've owned my dad's business that he started in 1951 Acme and metal we're an upstanding company in the in the market and have been a good uh service provider in the market in the scrap metal business from 1977 my brother and I started in the trash business that grew into recycling composting landfilling in Austin and now have 600 employees there servicing a lot of Municipal contracts one all the way out in in Alpine so we are very interested in coming to this area I love West Texas I love St Angelo it's my home I'm here all the time I've owned a business here since 71 I don't feel like an intruder coming in uh obviously Republic does not want competition in the area uh we compete with Republic in Central Texas uh we took we we have a contract that Republic had before in in Alpine so I'm not hiding behind any of that there is competition in the industry Mr kelon laid out our request and what we're interested in doing very well we have a business here we've hauled re our own waste from uh Acme Iron and Metal to the landfill since 1951 a long long time and uh we intend to continue doing that there are other business there are exempt services that are not part of Republic's contract that one being the uh Angelo

[1:31:02] State they've put out a bid an RFP the bid is due in 13 days uh we would we believe there's no question Angelo State is protected by state law they can put out and and bid that contract just like the federal government uh allows a Goodfellow to put out y'all may recall used to for a long long time more services service good fellow Air Force Base and haul the waste to the city landfill before uh Republic had that contract so there are two major contracts within the city limits of St Angelo that are not part of this contract one of them comes up for bid in less than two weeks we would like to bid on that we hope to have a contra a permit to be able to drive on city streets if we are successful in getting the Angelo State contract to remove all question of whether we can legally drive on city streets otherwise you can talk to Mr Kelton and and your staff on whether we could be able to service that we believe we can so there are also other exemptions from the contract including liquid waste and scrap tires and things like that some of which we do we have no intention of doing what we can't do under your contract we would like to haul outside waste from outside the city limits though into the landfill and not have to deal with the question of whether we're interloping by coming down a city street whether it's old Ballinger highway or or any of the other city streets or the federal not there's no federal but the state highways or County highways in the city so that's we're we're just trying to enter the market in a non-disruptive manner to bring bring competition to out to the county and I think it's fair to say that we won't bring any more waste here us and Republic combined wouldn't bring any

[1:33:06] more waste here to the landfill than Republic would any way there's things called waste sheds as you all know you probably do know there's a landfill or two in abene Midland Odessa Big Springs eloro when haulers are closer to those markets depending on the price at those landfills they haul to those landfills I would imagine Republic has a tendency to haul more back here because they operate this I own a very large landfill in Austin I haul waste further because I own the landfill I give myself a better rate than I give the public that stands for reason TDS does a lot of recycling we're we're a state leader in recycling on percentages so really and truly with TDS in the market for the out of City Limits waste I actually believe there would be less material coming in to the city of St Angelo landfill because of recycling and because when we're further out closer to eloro Big Springs Midland Odessa abene the waste would go to those closer landfills you have the disposal cost and of course you have the cost of Transportation which me is the the truck the fuel the labor Etc uh so it's an economic issue where the waste shed flows I believe more waste will come into this landfill with Republic alone than it would be with TDS I don't think what you I don't believe that you can uh uh successfully keep out all of that waste from Simply private individuals or companies in Big Lake or or areas around here Barnhart that are going to bring waste to the landfill it's something that you you you know you ought to you ought to consider I think we do bring competition we do BRING Recycling we do bring more diverse

[1:35:10] ideas for recycling and composting so I think this is a good thing for the city I wouldn't stand before you and and and try to talk you into something that I didn't think was better and I wouldn't tell you that it would be probably less waste coming into the landfill servicing the area with TDS competing with with uh with with Republic than it would if it was just Republic we will not go out there and dig up a customer that's not already hauling or having someone haul their way somewhere the waste as you've stated correctly is going to go somewhere whether it's one huler two haulers or five haulers people don't haul more just because there are more haulers so uh I would I would hope you would uh be able to allow us to clarify whether we could haul on city streets if we do bid successfully bid for the University uh contract here in a couple weeks I don't even know when the goodfella Air Force Base bid comes up I I I don't I don't have that here uh but uh the cost of landfill permitting is a major issue I know I permitted one we have a large landfill in St Angel and in Austin and it's an issue that is is a valid concern and we're happy to work with the city on that in any way we can but all I can say is the waste is coming here anyway the more that's recycled the more will be diverted away the longer the landfill will will uh will last uh I think that's I think I've addressed it as best I could remember the questions please ask me any question that any of you would like I have a question go ahead Johnny Mr Gregory you mentioned you mentioned recycling a couple of times how do you intend to recycle by just being able to come into our streets and go to the landfill where does the recycling part come in it comes in by offering uh companies multiple containers if a company has one container and all the

[1:37:15] waste with recyclables go into one container it goes to the landfill generally you have a very good recycler in the area but recycling they do a good job I do not know how much they service with containers out in the outlying areas around uh s Angelo as far as offering containers recycling is much is is enhanced when containers are available and it's convenient for people so by us offering service out there with different containers where they can not only put their waste but they can also put recyclables those recyclables would go to be being recycled rather than all going to the landfill because they all ended up in the same container does that answer your question no because I thought butts only did paper do they not just do paper what about the Plastics same difference same Plastics if it's a resident a residential account in these other areas TDS has a republic does in other markets too they have a single we have a single stream recycling facility where we separate out the steel cans the the plastic the glass uh the the different types of paper and uh that's a long way to Austin 200 M I took a t or your you've been there okay you've seen it all right if we're able to service municipalities in the area and do more recycling because we offer split Services both Recycling and solid waste collection in those municipalities or for those businesses out there outside St Angelo City Limits then that would give a separation at the point and that material doesn't go to the landfill unless there's a murf at the landfill like that exists in Austin so that reduces the volume going into the landfill we've shown even though we o own the largest landfill in in Central Texas uh we've worked very very hard to divert as much away from landfill because we make more money uh by

[1:39:19] Recycling and composting so it's both recyclables of those type materials you mentioned paper plastic aluminum steel but also yard waste not as much yard waste thank God for the rain maybe we'll have a little more out here in West Texas but that yard waste too can be diverted away into composting so then those items you mentioned that are recyclable are you going to transport those all the way to Austin or what would you do it depends on the economics we may sell them to butts right here if it's economically feasible then we may just do that do just that to haul them to Austin it's like the landfill question it's all based on the economics but more would be diverted from the landfill in any event and my final question really is to Shane or whoever wants say the the the notation where the possible increase in in rates or because of the tonnage I I want to I want to tap on that see what is that is that a question for me that's for sure I'm sorry Mr mcre I'm happy to address it um the increase in Revenue based on uh currently if we use our existing established pricing that we have in the ordinance right now uh for non-residential um services and and the tonnage fees collected at the landfill if you increase tonnage uh coming in it just increases the amount of Revenue that we receive and can we even talk about rates with this item or probably not I would say no but that's for the City attorney decide I can I can tell you what those I can tell you what the existing rates are is your would your recommendation be to keep it this the those rates the same if we brought them in or what what are you looking at we could it's at council's discretion it's it's whatever yall want to do uh we we could keep the rates the same because we do have established non-resident rates uh which is anybody outside the city of sow is charged a different rate from our own citizens uh when trash is deposited

[1:41:23] within the landfill and then um or we could look at coming back and amending the ordinance as it you know as it states right now to have a separate rate for third party haulers liced third party who does the county use now or does the county the County residents who the county the residents out in the county are responsible for their own Services the county doesn't offer a service like that so if you live out in the county um right now Republic is is it so you pick up the phone you call uh Republic Services downtown and say can uh I have uh trash service if you live out in the county and I I guess I'm still Mr Mayor still a little confused because if you're telling me the Republic Services Services the the city as a whole I understand that now you're saying that if the County residents want want to use Republic they call Republic I don't understand where TDS comes in or they fit in I I don't is it a I guess the county it's open to anybody it's it's not a no man's land it's the count the county doesn't have a contract with any service provider for trash whether it be residential trash or construction trash or anything they um it's it's free game I mean it's uh any anybody any service provider out there that wants to collect that or wants to provide that service and collect that uh collect their trash can and one last last one and I'll get off my soap box but I'm hearing more and more you know of the the Klein shell and the oil industry so how does that affect us what is is what could possibly TDS bring in from the oil services out that's happening what what kind of material or there is nothing they can bring into our landfill that is not Municipal Solid Waste we we cannot we cannot accept uh Industrial Waste uh any oil field waste like that at all so we can't uh um some production company can't call up TDS and

[1:43:26] say hey can you come bring us a roll off we want to load it up with drilling mud or something leftover drilling mud we we cannot accept that waste in our landfill okay that's all I have thank you Mr Fleming one of the questions I have is the area that you're servicing out in West Texas is uh Alpine correct Alpine and the small towns surrounding Alpine and so y'all haul from Alpine to Austin now right no we operate the city of Alpine owned landfill a contractor there like Republic operates your landfill okay that's the question I had any other comment from the floor if not I'm going to open it up for discussion to the council I think we pretty well this horse is almost on life support but y'all have anything else to say we need to talk about it no one El says any comments I'm entertaining I will entertain a motion motion to deny got a motion to deny do I hear a second I'll second we've got a motion to deny the application and we have a second I guess it's time to take a vote all of those in favor of denying the motion please say I I I to those against say Nay n nay we have a motion five for five against and two for the motion fails do I have another motion Mr Mayor I really need to request and and I may nullify that vote but I need a five minute break to speak with you and our City attorney and you asked me that and I told you that I would allow it and then I completely skipped over need to take about five minutes it's a attorney relationship with Charlotte and myself over some type of uh possible conflict of interest so if you will just give us 5 minutes let you step back here in the back and we have an attorney be right

[1:45:30] back it's on her mother's side it's a it's a distant Charlotte has absolutely no Financial bearing or Presence at all in any of the businesses of the gregories but she is a distant relative and for the sake of propriety so that there would be absolutely no conflict of interest Charlotte has chosen to accuse herself before we make another vote now the last vote a motion was made it was denied it did not pass so that motion's dead anyway but Charlotte has recused herself from the other vote because of a distant relationship in family so I am now ready to entertain a second motion move for approval as presented I second I have a motion to approve this I have a second any other comments I'll call for the vote all those in favor say I I I opposed n two next okay all those in favor of raise your hand we have Mr Fleming Mr self myself and Mr bman for nayes raise your hand we have Mr Ward law and Mr silvus as opposed it passes four to two Miss farmer you may return let's move on now to number 11 which is a presentation on the North conso River and trails Improvement project Mr White and we running a little short on time if we going to be through by two Carl and I didn't say anything but we are running a little behind on time Carl yes sir we do have quite a bit of ground to cover but I'll go as quick as we can I want to give some brief bre background on the overall project and and the funding first of all just to look at the funding right quick and I'm talking

[1:47:31] about all the money that was allocated towards the river improvements we've got about $16 million for about 14 million of that is half cent sales tax 2 million in Grants two grants from uh Texas Parks and Wildlife one for recreation elements that are part of the ongoing project another grant for refurbishment of trails and the addition of of a few uh Trail sections a large Grant from the St Angel Health foundation $570,000 for some elements primary landscaping and uh Rock landscaping and Bank stabilization Around The Visitor Center uh that's a substantial Grant another Grant from the Texas commission on Environmental Quality $323,000 for Bank stabilization then a um a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts for some artwork much of which has already been installed uh want to give a update on the the main project that's going on but towards the end of this presentation we'll talk about three specific topics dead the existing dead trees the removal of those dead trees the put putut golf course area and potential to do some drip irrigation for the existing River trees those items are funding related so we'll we'll talk about that towards the end we're not asking for decision today we can't ask for decision decision but we are asking for some Direct in regards to the remaining funding there is a fair amount of funding left over from the project uh if that direction involves uh a purchase or change order of 50,000 or more we'll have to bring that back to you for for consideration now the scope of the project we are doing some work basically from Bell Street to 14th Street but the core of the project area is from Concho Avenue to about First Street below the the high school primarily the project includes a lot of Bank stabilization in that area some of the sections had already been stabilized it includes Trail improvements new lighting exra outdoor exercise stations public art uh shaded

[1:49:33] sitting areas the games Court area uh refurbished water features and other special elements it also includes a new Trail section along uh the South Bank of the river on health Foundation property the overall project has included uh different elements uh we've done dredging of the river basically where self- withdrawal comes into the river up River to about 14th Street um some of those sections couldn't be dredged because of they were too narrow and too shallow we did it with a barge we we pumped the silt from the barge through the pipe to a settlement station uh pits um north of 19th Street the the project has involved lots of different studies uh assessments and design and we purchased some property one property that we purchased is between Irving and chav Street the old Edgewater Insight this about this location and some property north of 19th Street uh the property north of 19th Street um between 19th Street and 29th Street or Eden Boulevard will allow us to make a final connection if we if we so choose to do either with a trail or with a road uh from 19th Street to Edmund Boulevard okay just a quick look at the money of the current project that's going on this isn't the overall project but just the the current construction project the current budget is a little over $10 million to date we've got about $820,000 with the change orders uh with all the Billings and pay applications and retainage we're technically at about 87% completion we do have a pending uh pay application for about $314,000 once that's paid we'll be at 92% completion with the project just a quick look at the major change orders of the project the biggest one is Bank stabilization that was done between sulfur draw and First Street we added that uh after we had begun the

[1:51:35] project that was almost $700,000 the second biggest change order is repair the pedestrian bridge as we presented a few meetings ago uh Council approved that change order to repair that existing Bridge we added some additional LED lights uh part spe specifically for four each under Oaks and Chad Bridges we've uh ordered the removal of some dead trees as part of the project right now um those trees virtually have been removed we'll talk about others towards the end of this presentation we've added some additional lights at some areas to uh uh brighten them up a little bit primarily underneath uh Cunningham where the exercise station equipment is and underneath Oak Street where the interpretive area is and then we had to make an adjustment to one of the the stone columns as you recall it was in the the the traffic line of sight and so we uh kind of made that a ghost image of a column that's been done and then we added an additional drinking fountain looking at the project this is looking from Bell Street going working back up River uh looking at some of the trail refurbishments outside of the core area the city is responsible for doing the trail refurbishments and that refurbishment includes uh replacement of the chat for uh the chat material which is that crushed Limestone material and in some sections we've added concrete because in this like this specific location water um sheets off thankfully on days like today runs over to the curb and then washes out the that section so there's in some sections where there's a lot of erosion we've added come back in and done concrete so inh house we're doing the trail refurbishments um outside of the core area uh this is a chat area that is in the process of getting refurbished coming back into the core area of the project this is underneath Oak Street bridge this is the interpretive area U you can also see some art that's been added the celebration Bridge the connection to

[1:53:37] Celebration bridge is right next to it but this area has some interpretive panels uh and some lighting the interpretive panels talk about the history of the area the connection to the fort in the past and uh plants and animals this is what it looks like at night with the lighting this is a look at the new LED lights underneath Oak Street we've got LED lights underneath Oaks uh chadburn Abe and C Cunningham Bridges this light uh we can program to do different colors program it for to come on at different times and uh kind of choreograph it not to music but just to do different kind of uh different things this is a fuzzy picture but it shows the the filter and the pump stations for for all the water features the existing water features we in the past had separate water pump stations that that fed water to the the water features once we refurbished all those we Consolidated the pumps into one location the pump is at this location this is actually a filter um a roof is going on and I believe that's been done since this picture was taken and that the outside fence has been removed but it basically filters the water as it comes in before it goes to the pump so because we've done that we've refurbished some of the um existing water features this is is the water feature at Celebration Bridge it had been dormant for about 5 or 6 years it's been reactivated this is the water feature next to Oak Street Bridge uh if you recall I should have had some before and after pictures but if you recall there was some very large Boulders that surrounded the edges and uh wasn't really very inviting but now you with the flat stone you can actually walk up to the feature and it actually pumps more water out and you get to see more play of the water some of the art new benches for the core area this is a these are shade structures that aren't quite complete yet that are beside the the main water fountain below NFS this is a new landscaped area below

[1:55:40] nefs and above the new uh refurbished main Fountain this is the new main Fountain refurbished this is a look at some the the new stonework and steps and railing that's been done this is next to the main Fountain this is what it looks like at night with it new lights we we got smart this time and put in LED lights so there'll be less cost in terms of electricity and also less cost in terms of Maintenance moving forward this is um some of the artwork that's underneath chab bridge and I want to just step ahead right quick uh a little more detail work in this area between chadburn and Irving streets this is what we call the games Court area and this is the old put putut golf course we'll talk about this top area towards the end of the the presentation it's separated for a couple of reasons one was because of funding but the other is because there's a large sewer line that's going in the back side of the property that uh will have to be replaced it's going to be replaced next next summer and by doing that it's going to tear up this backside of this property but it does give us the opportunity to do something different once that's done so in the games Court here basically from chabr to Irving underneath chadburn there's a little uh theater area where you could musicians can play we've added the Chimes underneath this section of the bridge and there's space to add more musical elements in the games Court area there's an Alay of ornamental trees these are mountain Laurels there's a botche ball court there are washer plane areas and this was a horse shoe uh plane area but we replaced it with a chess board and then we've got restrooms that were added to the project and and lots of different Rock work and here's a quick look at some of those features this is the bot ball court water

[1:57:44] fountain uh the sculpted panels that go on the columns there's I think there's a total of 22 or 24 that we're going to get very unique they're very attractive and they'll be really special touch to the overall project these panels and some of them have words others have plants and animals but they're very unique very special this is a look at the chest board area this is a look at the washer plane area with the uh light columns and the tiv lights this is a look at in this section we couldn't do the spray irrigation so we did drip irrigation this just shows you the the drip irrigation underneath an existing tree and this shows the artwork that's in that section the my my favorite piece is the DIA delos moros truck which has a picnic table on the back of it this picture was taken in the winter those trees Aren't Dead this was taken in the winter uh We've added restrooms to the games Court area it's it's a very uh popular area to go to especially because of the fishing that section of the river is stocked uh so folks need restrooms there will be a porch That's added to the front of this rest to make it look a little more attractive this is the main entrance from the parking lot off Irving Street into the games Court area it shows some of the columns and there's going to be an arch sign that goes over the top of that this is looking back down uh along Irving Street there was only a walkway I think on one side of the street but we've we've got the walkway now on both sides of the road and it's been widened and rails have been added and since this picture was taken the rails have been finished but these columns also have lights on them there'll be lights on the underside of the railing so it'll make it a safer and easier connection this is looking at the new Trail section that we're adding along the health foundation's property is some of you may recall that we have an agreement with the health Foundation to put this Trail on their property and it's basically the license

[1:59:47] agreement it connects from Irving Street on the south side of the bank to the our Trail which is by The Visitors Center that will be it's under construction now not today because of the rain but uh the next few weeks this is the uh the drive down to the little parking area that's by beside the Boy Scout building and uh Cunningham uh Bridge I'll talk a little bit more about this towards the end of the project because the it's um refurbishment is not part of the main project right now we did add a couple of boat ramps to the project to allow uh our folks to maintain the river better and also for folks to be able to access the river with canoes and kayaks one is located by the river stage the other one is located by the boy scap building um right about this location this is a look at some of the artwork that was added uh these were the pieces that were vandalized and there's some loose rocks that are around that and we'll talk about that towards the end of the presentation but there are lights that are by these pieces and the lights that are there uh are operational and have guards on them to prevent them from being damaged this is a look at some of the LED lights um underneath the bridge a lookout area that hasn't quite been finished yet um near The Visitor Center one of the new drinking fountains that was added nearby the exercise stations by Kids Kingdom Playground Bank stabilization below Kids Kingdom more artwork this underneath um South AB Street on the south side it's in my mind it's kind of the signature piece it's the largest piece uh more of the landscaped area that's not quite finished by the pedestrian bridge a little kind of Amphitheater spot that's by the pedestrian bridge where you can sit have a picnic or fish or um listen to some music

[2:01:52] the last big change order we had was to repair the pedest existing pedestrian bridge uh the the UND side supports were Hollow which allowed water to get into them which all uh caused rusting prematurely virtually all those were will be replaced as part of this change order and caps so they won't uh rust again in the future as quickly and we're getting all new metal flooring and railing for the the bridge as well as painting a look at the irrigation system that's going in um along the golf course section of of the project this isn't quite a before and after shot but it does give you an idea of what the banks to remind us what the banks did look like in the past and now that they've been stabilized how they'll be secure for decades to come more look at bank stabilization this is a good shot showing the the terraforming that had to occur to get to the right slope to prevent erosion in the future these were earlier shots a fair amount of turf has been reestablished on most of these slopes because of the rains we have gotten more Bank stabilization this is the section below the library at the high school there was some concern about uh revegetating the slope we did Hydro mulch it and some of the cane has come back it's a pretty steep slope but it has revegetated look at the in-house trail refurbishments that are up River this near 14th Street okay getting into the main topics uh to talk about one is the removal of dead trees as part of the project we did do a change order for the removal of 20 trees um this is prior to our assessment that we did back in May of the the rest of the trees most of those trees have been removed by the contractor there are an additional 40 trees we at most of the trees that we've lost were pecan trees those pean trees

[2:03:58] leaf out in the middle to the end of April so we had to wait till early May to make an assessment of the rest of the trees to see which conditions they were in so we we brought on John bno to take a look at the trees we did a treeby tree inspection and made an assessment of which trees needed to be removed and just a little background from my assessment we we did lose some trees and it's fortunate for all of us but it was really just a combination of several factors the first of all was the drought just the sheer fact that we didn't have the rainfall the second was we didn't have an irrigation system there that was operable to be able to water and besides the the project had been going on and we couldn't water with the irrigation system even if it did work uh we did drain the river in the primary sections so we could do the bank stabilization work so the trees that were accustomed to tapping into that River water couldn't do that we had elevated temperatures um because of the heat trees can't transpire they can't bring the water from the soil up through um to uh keep themselves cool and then we did the trees that we lost were more species specific we lost a lot of pecan trees and a few red oak trees some of the other trees um like the Live Oaks really didn't seem to be phased at all um so we've ordered the removal of 20 trees through the project with the project we've got prices to remove an additional 40 trees which we plan to remove as part of the landscape allowance which is in the project budget so it's not going to cost extra money it's money that's already in the project and then there's additional 20 trees that are on the golf course side which could be removed as well as part of this project so those will be happening um I believe if all goes well the the the additional trees that will be removed will start to be removed in early August so that we'll have all of them removed before uh Riverfest okay unless there's any

[2:06:03] questions about the tree tree removals I'll move on to the next topic which is the P put golf course area Carl can I ask you something real quick from the MR May uh the the railing there on Irving Street bridge is that pretty sturdy I mean looks kind of flimsy it is sty we've checked it out I mean it's not going to stop if a truck jump jumps over that high curb it's not going to stop that um but it's it's sturdy if you lean up against it or bump up against it you'll feel that it's pretty sturdy and the next question I have and I don't feel so bad because the city manager and I don't know what bot ball is I'm sorry I've heard of it well in my mind it's kind of a combination of bowling and washers where you roll a ball to a spot and you try to try to hit it with another ball maybe a larger version of marbles kikas call have a training class for us we call it Kik okay gotcha the old put putt area we've got to wait sometime till this sewer line gets removed but it does give us the opportunity to kind of think about this area as to what we could do in the future one of the ideas we've we've kind of thrown around is to establish a food court area now there is a concession building right now about this location it's the old concession building for the P golf course it has to be removed because it's on top of the sewer line and when the sewer new sewer line goes in uh we can't save the old building we have to build a new one so as part of the sewer line project we will be able to get back a basic concession structure so the thought is perhaps maybe to come in with a structure a concession building that uh we could have a private vendor operate that could check out botche balls check out chest pieces check out Golf Course Putters and and balls maybe rent paddle boats uh and serve concession food food and drinks

[2:08:07] also as part of that project perhaps include the infrastructure so that we could have some food carts and if you're interested what food carts are uh this is a location of some food trucks that are at a park the overpass park that's um at Uptown D downtown Dallas by the art art section Art District these this is right next to the road the trucks come in um every day pull in and serve concessions the park is right here it's a fairly large Park this is in Austin and this is kind of a little bit more like what our setting is like it's a little more intimate a little more rustic it has tily lights another shot I believe if you're familiar with Texas highways this is the cart that was on the front cover of that Texas highways that was a couple of issues ago so our thought is to perhaps create a food cart Court area and that way you can bring more people down uh they'll stay longer down in the river even spill over to downtown um with that is the possibility of refurbishing the old golf public golf course site either refurbishing what's already there and for at least 18 holes or coming in and and tearing the old courses out and and building new ones so these are some of the things we're thinking about I mean it's not funded yet we would need some direction if this is a a direction you would like to go and then the next piece I wanted to talk about is is to look at the funding that we do have left as far uh for the end of the project and I'm this is towards the end of the presentation so I'm almost almost done mayor after the project is done we've got about $900,000 with which to work in the past the council had hadn't voted on it but they had to give us some general direction to reserve about $500,000 so that's still set to the side

[2:10:10] which is part of the 900,000 we're currently talking about some purchase of some land north of 19th Street which is ongoing the cost of that property is as well as the phase one environmental assessment and the closing cost and the survey is going to cost about $48,000 we've put down here additional tree work if if if needed we're going to be able to remove the trees as part of the landscape allowance that's in the project now but if we have uh need for future money to do any additional pruning work or to plant new trees we'd like to set aside about 50,000 to be able to do that in case we need to so the total cost of that is about 600,000 leaving us about 300,000 now Council may want to direct us to free up this money this 500,000 for something else that's that that's your direction but some of the things that we know we would like to do outside of the project first of all is to secure the loose uh large river rock that's by right next to the artwork we anticipate doing that with uh um inmate labor and so to keep the cost down but basically taking that stone is carrying it in cement so it's not loose uh we've talked about doing additional signage and way finding signs in the project there's some very basic signage but it doesn't have all the directional signs when you're on on foot following the trail it we'd like to be able to do some signage which matches the same format as the overall way finding um study that was done a few years ago and to do that we're thinking it's going to cost about $150,000 it could be paid for out of the the the River Project or it could be paid for out of hot money the games and food court area that we talked about and its restoration we're thinking cost us about $175,000 maybe 200,000 depending on what we do and we could partner with artists uh and other groups and maybe get some additional grant funding to add to this the turnaround area parking by cim this is by the Boy Scout building where you

[2:12:13] saw the road that went down uh we need to fix that up a little bit better uh put in some new base pack it down and and make a uh add some bulage around it so it's a kind of a more defined area and probably re asphalt the uh the road that goes down and then let's see the maintenance drive from ELO to the pumps as part of this project the contractor is putting back in what it once looked like from the celebration bridge to the new pumping stations but depending on how often we have to go over there for maintenance we may want to put in an actual maintenance Drive which is what that is and then um as part of the project from cono Avenue to First Street we're putting an all new traditional irrigation system this doesn't count the golf course it's all on the Riverside and the ne area this doesn't include drip irrigation however the S the system that we're putting in as part of the project does have the infrastructure the lines the valves to be able to add drip irrigation to add drip irrigation to the existing trees about almost 300 existing trees that cost about $175,000 Carl that's the trees only on the rivers side of the road that's correct not on the golf doesn't count the golf course and then these items don't have funding but they're things that we've talked about doing a better connection perhaps a suspension bridge underneath Contra Avenue to connect to the existing River Trail um underneath Concho to where the trail picks up across from the old holiday in the holidome uh we would really like to do some better Trail connections two two downtown um one could be where celebration Bridge picks up along Oak Street to Concho Avenue a second location could be at Irving and then another possible one's at chadman but we've got some height problems to overcome there and then of course when conditions get better we would need some funding for landscaping this is for Turf and for

[2:14:16] additional trees and then eventually we we'll need to address some Bank stabilization down river below Johnson Dam to Bell Street and then finally uh this property that we purchased the old Edgewater Insight there's not a trail there now of course we'd like to sell this property and get it developed um through the private sector but we'd like to maintain a section land along the river on that South Bank to connect uh the trail on the South Side all the way to the river station page and that's what that item is so we do ask for your direction on some of these post contract items um like I said if it if that direction involves a change order we would come back with that change order if we did the drip irrigation uh we recommend that we would do that as part of the project as a change order I'm sorry if we did do the drip irrigation we would do it as part of a uh a change order as part of the existing project one thing we talked about is that area there by the golf course is the best way to do it because the existing Golf Course area is under the two pro contract and they pay the watering in that area if we're concerned about the trees in that area the best way to do that is to actually bore under the road connecting it to our system that's going in on the Riverside already we're under the road and put the drip around those trees as well and that's something that we could change order into the contractor who's working on it right now Johnny Carl the the put put area the games Court area the existing concession stand is there the old concession it doesn't show on this map but it's right you really have to tear that thing down could you not get a crane and move it or and keep it I mean it looks like it's in good condition I don't know but I'm just saying I don't think you could move it a slab it's a it it's brick sort of type structure you can't pick it up and so

[2:16:17] the the SE line goes right or concrete goes right underneath it so there's just no way and for them to be able to maneuver through there with that sewer line and dig the hole they're going have to dig plus the the sewer line uh at some points through all of that area is now above ground so like for instance on the back of that big tall building there the sewer line is actually above ground and so they'll be building a an encasement around it that doesn't go under and that building will be the same way the elevations on it changes that's right Charlotte well I have several things that I would like to address but I want to start off with uh for the rest of the council that's new here today is you're looking at Carl Rick and whoever else that I haven't seen in the audience they always seem to come in under budget uh for those who don't know the sports complex came in under budget and if you've not been down on the river to see what they've been doing and walk this I encourage you to grab Carl and take a tour it is fabulous the work that has been done and for three of us up here on the council when this was first brought to us and Craig Kenny made his presentation as his dream what it could be uh we all got on board and the council basically stayed out of the way and let you guys do your thing and I I think it's remarkable and I for one want to stay out of your way to finish it up and uh I don't have a problem with the additional drips systems for AR gating keeping our trees I quite frankly I don't have a problem with anything that you have proposed I I would like to see you to continue the good work and congratulations um to all of you who've worked on this project um I know and speaking with John begno he has really sang the Praises of Shane Kelton Carl white uh uh havlock Roger havlock in their Love and Desire and the work that they do and all we get are the

[2:18:19] complaints very few people will tell you how great a job you did but I for one say it's great and thank you thank you Johnny Carl my last question I saw that it was 87% complete so by October 18 19th it'll be done right now with the the last change where we have for the bridge repairs that extended to the middle of September so if we add another change order for the drip irrigation it would likely extend it another couple weeks but we'll be virtually done I mean it'll be done for the River Project I mean may may not be every last little thing completed like every table installed but it has to be it has to be well in the change order that we're talking about I think we we need to talk to them about it but that area is not in the bulk of the area where you're doing most of your activities right the D right over along the golf course so if they finish up their area and simply were boring under the road and working on the golf course side it probably wouldn't impact well they have a golf tournament planned so it might it might impact let us visit with them and what we may need to do is is depending on how that works we may have to do some timing components with them um our other option is to to bid that out separately but I think that because they're already doing the work there now our best bet as far as getting the work done quickly and pricewise is going to be to change order in let us visit with them about that and I think as far as the removal of the trees I mean I I think a lot of us are happy that's that's finally going to happen but not only that but there's a lot of branches from living trees that are in danger of falling on to kids for example at the Kids Kingdom so I worry about that and there's big branches and various trees that are still doing well so so to speak but they could easily be a liability to us from a car driving down the road along the river I I I spot I love trees so I spot that all the time so yes don't forget about that there's definitely some pruning we need to do

[2:20:23] yes and is that part of the um agreement we we're working out with the group that's going to remove some of the trees the existing one is to remove trees but we still have landscape allowance money to do some pruning okay so what I'm hearing so far is and I just want to clarify for priority Sake One Is to look at the drip irrigation and try to get that change ordered in looking at the coordination with Riverfest secondly looking at we've got tree removal going on but also look at those that if we're going to top them or whatever ever it is where a tree is going to remain but it's got a bunch of debt in it go ahead and try and get that done as well with some of these dollars is that kind of what I'm hearing mhm looks to me like you've got about $37,000 to work with so well you've got bring us back something yeah and remember you've got the the five as well in there so you've got more than that that is just set aside at Council I sure do like a contingency plan oh we do too I sure do like to have a little money in reserve but so what we'll do is go ahead and look at those two uh options for starting that work and using some of those dollars Johnny Carl on that U the miniature golf course are you guys have are you thinking about maybe doing a private uh type part A just just a private yeah we were talking about doing a public private partnership private and so we have some work going on right now to get some uh pricing and ideas for the the uh main concession area that would be there uh that's something once we get all that sort of worked out along with what Carl talked about we'll have to take that to the river Corridor commission and bring that plan up through the process but at the end of the day really wanted to have a public private partnership where we encourage someone to come in and actually operate uh those facilities um yes and they work with the city CU I don't think we should be doing that we agree if that's all we will let this one go you've got what you need Carl I think so yes sir the next item that we have is item number 12 and then item number 13 they

[2:22:26] will work together it is 10 minutes until 12 we also have some people that's coming in for our executive that has a presentation to make I suspect that 12 and 13 will probably take 45 minutes to an hour you agree yes sir probably Lively displate and discussion do I want to take it now do you want to take lunch and come back and do our executive and come back and pick it up after lunch my back is my back has had just about all it can stand without a break I'll second that motion people in the audience that are here for item 20 can we give them an approximate time that it's going to be discussed so we've tied them up all morning I would say I think it's probably going to take what an hour for our executive eror to and a half huh error to an ER and a half okay let's say if we break if we break by 12:00 to go to Executive it will take us at least an hour so let's let's allow an hour and 15 minutes so I will say we will be back on this floor meeting will be opened at 1:15 1:15 will be we will be back I see Jim and if we have not finished our executive Time by then then we will go back and finish it afterwards but we will be back on the floor by 1:15 to take care of our citizens so I am now going to take us into executive let me read this Turner you had some remarks to make so if we're back at 1:15 we're looking at about an hour on items 12 and we're looking at about an hour on 12 and 13 we're looking at probably 20 minutes on item 14 we're looking at 15 minutes on 15 we're looking at another 20 or on 16 we're going to be here a long time and then we also have a workshop schedule today that we may have to put

[2:24:30] off because it looks to me like we're going to be here till 4:00 as it is well um mayor propos something yes sir I was going to propose something anyway and one thing I wanted to do is schedule meetings individually council members anyway to go through the budget thoroughly okay so we we'll discuss that at that point I think we we will probably then we're going to be here till 3:30 or 4 anyway just dealing with the rest of this agenda so the work I think maybe the budget Workshop that we had scheduled we probably want to put off some other time cuz I'm not going to sit here at 6:00 so that kind of gives us an idea of where we are let me read this for executive I know you had some comments to make Turner and then we will go into executive we will meet executive session under the revision of government code Title Five open government ethics subtitle a open governments chapter 551 open meetings sub chapter D exceptions to requirements at meetings be open under the following sections number one section 551 0711 to consult with the attorney regarding red aoya and West Texas water partnership section 551 07t to deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property regarding red aoya section 551 0741 to to deliberate the appointment evaluation reassignment duties discipline or dismissal of the San Ango city manager assistant city managers all of the department directors and acting or interim Department directors I don't like that third one but we're going to talk about it anyway Turner yes Mr Mayor uh Jim Turner again and there's a number of issues I think especially with the third one right off the bat you have the issue that if you're talking about policy about a general class of employees and how you're going to deal with department heads directors Etc and not talking about an individual in that meeting then according to the attorney general's

[2:26:32] opinions that are out there and what's in the OPA meeting's handbook that has to be done in open section anything that affects policy of a class of people has to be done in an open meeting not in an executive session and there's a ruling from that that goes back to 19 75 under uh uh it was attorney general was Hill at that time John Hill it's uh H 495 is a reference number second issue that you have with this is our own City Charter goes into some detail on the rules and responsibilities of who can do hiring and firing and the role the city council has in hiring and firing of city state staff and other employees you have a city manager who is responsible for the appointment and the hiring and day-to-day operations of the entire city staff except for the municipal court judge there is a clause in there that says those people that are directly appointed by the city manager the city council does have what's called advice and consent which means they have to approve his hiring of basically senior staff the City attorney uh department heads Department directors those people that he directly appoints and that uh uh report directly to him he has to get the advice and consent of city council to do that which means they have to be brought before city council for pretty much an up or down boat just like when the Senate confirms a presidential appointment as far as the actual termination Personnel policies Etc the council has input on that but the implementation the actual firing disciplining Etc by City Charter and this was clarified during

[2:28:37] the last City Charter election is done by the city manager if he's not doing that up to council standard up to their correct and then you need to replace the city manager of course but at the same time the city council should not be going around the city manager and trying to discipline somebody else when the city manager is either already supposed to be doing that or if he's not doing it then get somebody who can so I one of the things I'm very concerned about is that a lot of what looks like just from the agenda item should be a part of a public policy discussion in Open session with public input and not behind closed doors if you're talking about an individual disciplining an individual Sal negotiation raises firing changing positions on an individual that is perfectly legitimate under executive session if you're talking about how are we going to deal with senior staff matters like that those policy decisions need to be completely discussed in Open Session except in the very rare case where there is another legal opinion needed where you've got an attorney client privilege situation that you'd have to consult with the attorney about how do we go about doing a specific legal issue but the policy needs to be discussed an open session and before the public with public input and if you don't do that I think you're in violation of the open meetings act and that is subject to criminal penalties even if you don't know that you're violating it if you have a violation there you can still be held liable there are some affirmative

[2:30:40] defenses the ATT the City attorney can take steps to protect the council written opinions that type of things but the open meeting act limits the number of things that can be done Behind Closed Doors by city council and you have to be very very careful that you're not doing that if you're talking policy it needs to be in public if you're talking individuals That's A Private Matter and even there in the open meetings act the individual that you're talking about has the option of saying this must be done in public session as well and it's his call it's not up to counsel if he wants that disciplinary action or other action done before the public thank you we realize that this is a very very sensitive discussion we realize some things can be done in executive we also realize that some things must be done in Open Session and that is the purpose of this Council to bring everything out in the open to have it honest and transparent so that everybody knows what's going on City City lawyer I'm City attorney I'm going to ask you to address this in a few sentences if you can and I'm going to ask you to pledge to us as Council that you will be on top of this that you will not allow us to get off topic and that you will not allow us to do anything in an executive that we should be doing an open and when I when we come back there is a there is a a spot on the agenda that we can discuss what we discussed in executive I will tell you what we discussed we're not hiding anything it will be brought forward you will be able to hear it but right now I need the City attorney to address what Mr Turner has said and I want some assurances that this Bunch up here is not going to spend some time in an orange suit cuz uh that's not something I w't do your ma'am it's pretty clear what we're

[2:32:42] talking about here um in addition to talking about my duty to make sure sure that the city complies with its statutory duty to comply with the open meetings act that is number one uh secondarily what we're talking about is providing and in City uh complying with the open meetings act we have to think about the notice that we provide to the sub to the public of the subject matter of the executive session and I might add the subject matter of any item that's posted whether it be in open or closed session okay so let's consider the subject matter here um it is posted according to what's uh listed under the exception for post Personnel matters however uh and also Mr Turner has articulated some of the things that are not permitted to be discussed under Personnel exception such as policy in general discussions about oversight and control but what I find more problematic about even going into executive session is the um potential Charter violation uh and uh it's very obvious uh and very clear that we are a council manager form of government the city manager has the authority to direct and supervise employees I find it highly unusual for the city council to go into an executive session to discuss and evaluate employees over which uh the city manager has Direct Control I find that problematic uh I think that we need to consider um that uh to do so would interfere with the charter and um I would suggest that

[2:34:47] we look very carefully and this doesn't require very highlevel discussion uh there are several Charter Provisions that lay out the um city council uh City man uh Council city manager city council form of government separation of powers I have a handout for you uh but it's very very clear the city manager has the authority to appoint with consent of council however it is the city manager that has the authority to remove not requiring the consent of council so any of the control and supervision uh and everything is reinforced throughout this layer of obvious uh very clearly stated Provisions that reinforce the separation of powers that give the city manager the exclusive authority over all of the other employees um I would just suggest that we cannot go into executive session to discuss employees that are under the direct supervision of the city manager certainly uh and we're we're looking at whether it's permissible yes to talk about the uh the city manager you you as Council have authority over him I would suggest that to do so would be to to first of all understand for Council to interfere with the city manager's Authority that would be impermissible so you would be using a sword and a shield you would go ahead and try to do something that you can't do and you'd be doing it behind closed doors so I'm concerned about the subject matter even being uh permissible to even be legally permissible to be into in executive

[2:36:49] session now if Council wishes to speak to other all of these administrative matters consider perhaps amending the charter because that's what it would take to take away the authority that he clearly is delegated under the charter to direct and manage the Departments that could be an open session item so um first of all talking about subject matter appropriate notice to the public uh um I just think we don't even get through the door to talk for Council to talk about matters that would violate um the charter so so what you are suggesting that we do not even deliberate this in executive correct uh beyond the city manager I agree with you I don't want to talk about this in executive because I think that the charter is very very plain on the perimeters that are established for city council and the duties of the manager and I don't want to talk about it either and if you're saying that we should not then I'm going to make the motion that we do not talk about section three in executive and I need a consensus of counsel if we get a consensus we will not mayor I would just clarify that it is appropriate because you do have uh the ability to talk about the city manager and that's permissible but about as you've just stated all of the folks that report to him it's just simply not a subject matter that uh should be discussed and I would suggest that um my recommendation would would not to to venture through those doors I agree with the city attorney but I'm going to have to have some Council guidance here I am in favor of completely doing away with number three I do not want to deliberate number three in executive mayor may I yes sir I um the way I look at at this point and I am in agreement with with uh what Miss bowling has just mentioned a

[2:38:51] while ago absolutely if you want to take me into executive session and give me a direction uh disciplinary action whatever what I'm not sure exactly what it's about uh but if uh at any point you'd like to take uh the city mat myself into executive session and discuss whatever it is it is that needs to be discussed as far as guidance so forth I'm all for that I don't have an issue with that whatsoever I do feel that my staff it's really important uh that I do have the authority uh given by Charter also uh by ordinance that uh I am able uh to evaluate determine uh whether a staff member needs disciplinary action uh all those things do fall under the purview of the city manager and I want to make sure that I do maintain that again uh if for some reason Council wants to uh evaluate me I have no issue whatsoever with that I I welcome that uh give me guidance I welcome that also uh but uh with that said uh I am in agreement with Miss Bing and the way it's worded right now we cannot just talk about the city manager because it has uh assistant city managers Department directors interim directors and this is too broad of this is too broad of scope it's it's too broad of brush I am not comfortable with dealing with Section 551 0741 in executive today I'm not going to deal with it when we get to this I will come back and sit right here and wait I'm not going to deal with this because this is this is very dangerous it's very sensitive and I'm not going to put myself in a position of violating open meetings so Council let's you know it takes four of us to make a decision here I'm saying no I'm not going to do it Rodney I I agree I don't I don't think we should be talking and I'm kind of in the dark on this I don't even understand who who brought this up who who put it on the agenda I I don't know who we're talking about on this so I'm totally in the dark on this I I I i' I'm for open meetings so I want everything to be out as in the open as much as possible so

[2:40:54] that's my opinion and I guess we could deal with this an open meeting after we it would have to be posted I I would suggest let the City attorney speak I would suggest that we formulate an agenda item at a future meeting that um is particular to what council wishes to address and gives the public notice of the subject matter so I I think it would just be to spontaneously come out and just begin a discussion I I think we need to think about the policy or the administrative manners or to be able to articulate a subject matter that we would discuss in Open session so I wouldn't pref I I wouldn't recommend coming out to discuss it in Open Session until it's posted let's do it this way I'm going to make a motion right now that we do not discuss section 551 0741 to deliberate the appointment evaluation reassignment duties disciplines or dismissal of the S Angelo city manager assistant city managers all of the department directors and acting or interim Department directors either in executive or open and that if it is to be brought back then it will be brought back in a way that is within the scope of the law in open meetings and that we are not in any danger of any way of violating open meetings that's my motion do I have a second M Mr Mayor I'll second that but let's let's hear from Mr now you may speak there is a motion on the floor and a second we're going to we're going to deal with this but you may speak this I've been a lawyer for 40 years uh that that makes no difference we're not we're not talking about lawyers we're talking about our Charter and we're talking about something that the City attorney has said is illegal that we should not do and we will not do it if I can get three people to vote with me well is irr some suggestions Mr War turn on your microphone if it's not on I I'm I'm more than willing to to have this heard in executive in Open Session I'm more than willing to have and but I want it done today if these

[2:42:58] people that they have the right under the statute to request it to be held in Open Session but you know executive decisions uh having to do with Personnel can be held in closed session okay and I chose to put it on that way and some others on the council felt like that was probably the right way to do it there's two different ways to skin the cat but I'm more than willing to to air this dirty laundry in Open Session but it needs to be today because it is on the the is on the agenda and we can vote to remove it from closed session and put it in Open Session but I've I've been I've been here in two meetings and now y'all are trying to prevent me from having my stuff on the agenda every single time I show up I'm trying to prevent this Council from being in violation of the open meetings act now there's a motion has been made it has been second and I'm going to call for the vote quot order disc more discussion discussion uh first of all I want the people out there to realize something that maybe nobody up here wants to say but when you have the staff or the bureaucracy trying to prevent the council from Guiding and directing that's wrong and if that is the case it does need to be discussed and then it the results need to be announced to the public some things could be misunderstanding some things could be deliberate but the council cannot act if their hands are tied and not are able to discuss issues with the city manager in executive session for all to hear you've got peac meals peace meals of everything so therefore I don't have a problem meeting with the city manager in executive session and talking about these things so that we can all talk openly what I do have a problem with is Staff the bureaucracy whatever you want to call it trying to prevent Council from finding out more of what's going on and how

[2:45:00] things are dealt with and I want to be open and above board and we should be able to discuss it and I will vote no to your motion simply because I think that each council member has the right to be heard any other discussion mayor yeah Johnny go ahead no I was just going to say I've been here a little bit over 5 years sitting on councel and I've always understood the city council city government style of way of doing things but I've always understood that we have one employee we have one employee and that's all I'm worried about I have no problem with taking this man into executive session if it if it was worded that way Mr WL I I I respect you what you're trying to do but this is the only gentleman that answers to all of us you know this board here has one employee so if you want to talk to him solely uh I have no problem with it I don't think we can do it today the way it's worded uh but that's just me I I have no problem speaking to this man behind closed doors and then whatever comes out of it comes out of it but again for me to say that uh I I want to go over his head and talk about assistant city managers and the department directors and all that's not my business that's that's why we hired him for you know and uh and that's all I'll say I just we want to talk to him let's talk to him that's this is this is the head this is the chief of this organization and this this is where it begins that's where we have authority over and the agenda needs to be worded in that exact way city manager only and I don't have a problem with talking to him in executive or in open but I don't like this broad stroke Morty well I get I I I guess my main concern is U why did we wait till now for this to come up and I guess my second concern is if if Mr Turner wouldn't have said anything where what would be happening so

[2:47:07] uh I'm I'm very concerned that that we go for two weeks U and and the uh uh it's just now 5 minutes before we were going to go into exective session is brought up that that we could be in violation of of of executive session well why wasn't something said or done before might I speak to that uh mayor um we were directed uh to put this item on the agenda and I was waiting for an opportunity to advise Council about the prior uh the the propriety of having an executive session on the matter um uh it was required to be on the agenda and so I'm responding now and I did so despite Mr Turner stepping up he's entitled to do that as Citizens are entitled to speak to any item um I was just waiting for the opportunity to do so okay thank you Charlotte you know Mr S I partially would like to address that uh why was hadn't we heard it before it's a simple matter since Mr wlaw was sworn in he has requested certain things beyond the agenda and the legal department has pulled his agenda items through either or approval of the city manager I don't know but as a council member he has a right to put those things on the agenda and to be heard and not played games with well I find it this you know Tech it just appears to me that staff is trying their best to keep it off of the agenda because they don't want to talk about it and I don't mind staying standing up and saying that's not right we're not going to play these games let's sit down and be grown-ups and talk about this mayor may I yes sir one thing that I want to do is that I definitely want to make sure that we establish trust between the city council and the staff that's really important in order for us to work together and progress the efforts of the city and i' never want this the city council members

[2:49:10] to feel like um you know they can't trust us you know we're trying to hide something I assure you we're not trying to hide anything um as far as this item on the agenda I've said it from the very beginning I don't have an issue with me going to Executive session explaining what I right to explain hear from you uh you let me know what the the issues are I don't have a problem with that whatsoever again uh I don't want I want nothing more than for us to work all of us work together as a team uh there's a lot that we can accomplish here in this community and I look forward to that I'm very excited about that uh it's unfortunate as far as the way this is warted uh there's no there I have no issue whatsoever uh in the very near future me going into exe executive session and listening to you uh getting your direction and allowing me also to communicate with you too aside from that I'd love to be able to communicate with you uh on an individual basis outside of the city council also you know that's something that's really important um again I am sorry that uh we do have council members that may feel this way as far as that the trust just isn't there and that's my responsibility to make sure that I that I build that you know so I'll work harder at that so I'm sorry if that hasn't happened yet uh again U I just wanted to make sure that I made that comment thank you and the City attorney also cannot speak to anything unless it is on the agenda this is the first time it's been on the agenda it's the first time she could speak to it and she has given her opinion and it is an opinion Jim turer has given an opinion but her opinion is that we do not discuss this and I I have I've got to I've got to listen to her and take her advice that's what we pay her for as her advice so well Mr Mr Mayor may I you may may I ask her to render another opinion Mr Valenzuela wasn't here at the last meeting but we took a vote about putting uh the the bid on the contract uh for the water treatment plant and it was removed from the agenda by the vote of four members of the council including your own vote and now that has been put back on the agenda uh by someone and I

[2:51:15] don't know who it was by me I put it back on I changed my vote and you lost your four I guess no but you didn't let the rest of them vote now that that's bogus that's bogus I asked that it' be put back on but I think because I think it's important there is a time element here we need to discuss it I want it to be discussed I let have a point of order on it let's have a point let's have her uh if we have a vote of four people on the council taking something off the agenda for today can one person uh put it back on over the vote of over the vote of the majority of the Council when it was taken off the agenda well first of all I would suggest that we can't even discuss this because we're only posted about going into an executive session so I can't respond I guess we'll discuss that when we get to the agenda item and if if they if y'all want to pull it if four of you do not want to discuss it then we'll take a vote on it and if it's killed again then it'll be dead but I wanted it back on there because I think it's time sensitive no I think we've had enough discussion I want to take a vote on this yes and if we don't if we can't come to a decision on the vote Council has the right to speak Council has the right to speak we have the right to speak to go around we have the right to go around again and we have gone around we have spoken I didn't go around again say a word I kept trying to get in there one real quick thing well excuse me is that I've lost I've lost a lot of confidence in the in our attorney because you're saying that she brought it up now I I really think and maybe this is just my ignorance I think I should have been Mr Turner I'm glad you brought this up to us because this probably should have been told to the council before this meeting that we cannot do this right I think that's what I'm being told is well understand I can't communicate with the Quorum and I've been in many many discussions many with the city manager about how to navigate this item and so we've been examining it for the the last two weeks to determine uh and weighing the desires

[2:53:21] of a council person to have an item it was Uncharted Territory uh I've looked at it very very closely so uh I I would like to um for for you not to lack confidence in me but just understand that I couldn't come to council as the mayor stated as a body to give an opinion into this time but I certainly have been closely examining and researching how is this item workable is this item workable because uh could it be permissible to talk about each and every uh employee uh not talking about a class of employee we my object was to make it work and it wasn't because of Mr Turner it's just to now is the time it just seem it just seems bad because he's bringing it up and that's the only time that it's been brought forward right but he's but I would have I absolutely was prepared please uh have faith and confidence that this is my job and I certainly uh had concerns about it but we also had the desire of a council person to have a particular item not removed and uh it it was going to remain on the agenda until Council as a whole as a body could consider uh whether we needed to go forward and at this time I'm giving my opinion seems to me though that council could have addressed Mr wardlaw and talked to him individually and said we we've got a few little problems with how you're wording this and I did they did they never contact you and see if I would feel the same way if I if you if I put something on there that's wrong or something that's against the law I would hope that you would come to me and say you know what you worded this wrong and we've got to change this because we are going to have problems with this and I would suggest and and thank you very much um I would suggest that that's something the city manager

[2:55:23] would navigate but we just had an experience with regard to an item on uh an an on a pending contract that we have and it was my advice I did such I did take such course of action and I suggested that the uh contract that's going to be an open session the Corolla contract be um navigated as it is appropriate and rip for an executive session attorney Cent type of uh discussion to be put placed into close session and that wasn't um Ben that that wasn't desirable uh in terms of the individual council member that asked the item to be put on so please do understand um in deference to his desire and to not do the same thing that I had recommended previously which was to take his item and move and and change it because it was my opinion previously that it wasn't permissible to talk about something in Open Session and I did such and so I stood down this time but it wasn't without two weeks of research and work and concern and waiting for uh my day that I I was suggesting that you change it I suggested that you talked with Mr War law or whoever brings those things to you and discuss the pitfalls of making some making a decision that could be against the law absolutely and that is what I share share with City management thank you may speak yes ma'am Mr Mayor I'm going to use your words uh at your acceptance speech even though I was out of town I did watch it on the video and uh was proud of the things that you stated and what we were going to do that you were one voice you had one vote no more power or say so over the rest of us those were your words but something that was voted Ed against by a majority four people of which you held your fingers up and said four

[2:57:24] votes instead of discussing it with the council member that had brought it forward to begin with you instructed the uh attorney to put it back on the agenda or the city clerk back on the agenda and advise them if Mr wlaw had a a problem with that tell him to call you instead of you respectfully calling your council member to say why you had put it back you one vote that that is issue that is agenda item number 17 and I've already made the statement then when we get to item number 17 we will discuss that I felt that it needed to be back on by recognition of the staff I had it put back on but if y'all do not want to discuss it when we get to item 17 when we are able to speak to this we'll make a decision and and if you tell me by votes of four that we're not going to discuss this we won't discuss it but we're not discussing that now we are now discussing an executive item so if you will wait until item 17 when we discuss this you will have every opportunity to speak okay just just for clarification in in the future should we decide to discuss Personnel in executive session uh it will be the city manager and he needs to be listed individually and he yes well if that's the employee about whom you wish to have a a session yes yes absolutely well you just told us that's the only one we could address yes and I'm confirming yes exective D yes Don one of the things our Charter also says along with consent of the council says and May and will remove any officers or employees appointed by the city manager what's your number there uh section 28 Page 6 of 16 so it's it's not only saying it's all right to hire individuals the way I read it says also remove any officers or employees what's your what's your

[2:59:28] question um Mr it's not a question it's a statement what's your statement would you read that Don uh section 28 Page 6 of 16 okay says the city manager shall see that the laws and ordinances of the city are enforced shall appoint all appointed officers or employees who report directly to the city manager of the city except the municipal judges with the advice and consent of the council and May at will remove any officers or employees of the city manager you know is that the council or is that the city maner man it's the subject matter of the sentence is the city manager and it's under the section for the authority of the city manager so just grammatically it would be the city manager if we were to read the sentence I just wanted to add that you know I remember hearing about this item come up and I think you did the right thing Mr warlock asked for it to be on you put it on you're advising us today cuz we're finally all sitting together in Open Session but I want to let the public know that the majority of us don't even know what it's about you know I really don't I don't I don't know what the issue is if the the only issue that I have is if we want to visit with this man right here I have no problem with it but I really don't know Mr warlock I don't honestly we you and I have never visited about the details of of the matter I'm sure there's mistakes be have been made out there you know but you know nobody's perfect uh my item for example on that was supposedly I called for it seven time it was not seven times it was maybe two or three times I have no problem with it finally made it uh it was uh the transparency was there on the item but honestly with all due respect to you Mr warlock I don't know what it's about and to this day to this minute that I'm talking I don't know what it's about so for you public out there that's that's where I'm coming from is I don't know who else knows the details but I this this council person certainly does

[3:01:33] not you have a motion a second any other comments how we to talk about it all of us together that I just have the question up do what how else are we to talk about uh what Mr wlaw wants to talk about or to inform all of us if we don't post what we want to talk about I mean how can we as a group of seven discuss or hear the problems or match it up to the same problems that maybe I'm having or you're having or that we don't know of unless we talk about it yes we could talk about it with the city manager we certainly can that's our right and as far as I'm concerned when you read the section 551 uh the excuse me uh the way it is worded it doesn't say oh we have to talk about everything in there or we can't talk at all now I disagree with that we could leave here saying that we can and we want to visit with the city manager period does it have to say that Miss bowling I would just be conservative and suggest uh as the mayor had and confirm what the mayor desires which is to rearticulate that section to give notice to the public instead of just severing the other employees I would just feel more comfortable take the vote she again I welcome a meeting with with all the city council members individually with the individual council members I just want toed we can talk about it take a vote I just finish one yes sir turn turn your mic on thank you sir this this may be one of the first times I've ever seen in my 40 years of practice in law that quoting the statute and using the statutory language which is all you're required to do in in having a meeting in in Clos session uh is somehow or another wrong and illegal that that's that's crazy uh we don't have to we just have to track the

[3:03:35] statute giving the public notice that we're going to talk to the the city manager or whoever else we designate about certain broad categories we don't have to say we're going to talk to the city manager about uh a b and c or you know why didn't he do this or why didn't he do that that those are the specifics we don't have to set those out in in the notice uh we've got a notice here on real estate uh for the matter coming up in executive session and uh uh that doesn't give uh that that doesn't give proper notice and and my deal these items that you put on this time that that were discluded uded the last meeting there was no change in the notice uh as what was going into closed session and so that was totally illegal to be claiming you were going to hear my items in executive session when they weren't even noticed at all uh on the agenda and I I know you don't I don't you you don't you don't agree with that mayor but you're dead wrong okay there is a motion on the floor that we do not that we do not discuss this in open SE or executive as it is written I have no problem with rewarding it and putting it on Daniel the city manager and talking about it in executive or open I do not like the wording of the way it is listed here and I have made a motion that we do not discuss this with the wording that is in the executive order that is the motion I have a second if I don't get four votes then we'll make another motion we'll do something else I do not like this language I think is dangerous I do not want to subject myself in the violation of an open meetings act and I made the motion to protect myself and to protect this Council but if I can't get four votes then we'll do it another way but the motion has been made it has been seconded and I'm going to call for the vote all that do not want to discuss

[3:05:38] this in executive are open as it is written I want you to say I I I everyone is opposed say nay n n okay the motion failed we will speak about it in executive and an open session after we get through but you're going to have to be very very careful that we do not get out of bounds this is a we are it is now 12:32 we are going into executive this is going to take an hour and 15 minutes 12:30 that's 1:30 1:45 we will be back here by 10 minutes until 10 minutes until 2 we will be back here to do business at 10 minutes until 2 we are now going to Executive let's move on if we could and it is now 2:41 so I'm only 40 minutes past what I told everyone but we did have three attorneys that we brought in uh we discussed two of the items we did not get to Mr W Law's item we will be going back into executive after we conclude the meeting so that we can so that we can complete his item but we did get two of them talked about and that was I guess that's an accomplishment anyway we are now going to oh I Johnny did you say that you would be willing to pull number 15 until a later date yes sir I I am willing to if it is if it pleases a councel we will pull item number 15 and we will deal with it another time also on item 20 this is uh there's some comments that need to be made but it also is with a workshop we have decided to take the comments so that we will be able to have an idea what the public wants but as far as the workshops Daniel wants to visit with each individual council member separately to get an idea of what each council member wants so we will take comments on on 20 but we will not do anything today because we still need some

[3:07:42] priorities and at this time we will reconvene into Open Session out of executive and the first thing that we are dealing with will be item number 12 this was requested by council member Ward law and it is the discussion and possible action concerning future further employment of cillo Engineers and again Mrs Miss bowling if things get I know that this is a very sensitive thing if we get out of line I want you to yell point of order because I don't want to get out of line on this one so with that I turn it over to you Mr wol thank you sir Mr Mayor I don't intend to get out of line um I put items number 12 and 13 on the agenda and they're sort of interconnected depending on the vote on the first item which is further employment of cillo Engineers um I have a carefully uh gone over the contract of the city with corello Engineers it's an original uh contract with about three amendments and uh in this contract it allows the city at its pleasure to terminate the contract at any time the contract uh as amended basically has three sections to it uh and excuse me I just wanted to reassert my opinion which I provided to the city manager with affirmation from tml and the Texas Texas Attorney General that it would be within the province of an attorney client executive session for consultation with the attorney to discuss a pending contract um not an open session that uh involves the rights and liabilities of the parties under the contract and I just wanted to reaffirm my recommendation to councel if we are to discuss a contract we would need to do and under the terms and I can uh read or share my

[3:09:47] legal opinion that I have provided and the confirmation from tml and the Attorney General this is a matter that I would recommend be discussed in closed session under the attorney client privilege I to repeat what she said please miss bowling yes there I forly issued a legal opinion to the city manager oh I'm sorry I'm sorry so I'm I'm just restating it and I also uh based on the city manager's request confirmed with tml and the Assistant Attorney General's office about whether it would be permissible or warranted to discuss a pending contract such as this one for which we have a long-term relationship in executive session and it was my recommend that the contract be discussed and the termination of the contract and matters relating to the rights and liabilities of this contract in executive session under the attorney client privilege for consultation with the attorney may I uh address that fine go ahead go ahead I have closely looked at the law and matters uh I don't believe this is a matter to be on the uh closed session but it's up to the council to place these on either Open session or closed session there there's nothing in the open uh meetings act that requires stuff to be held in closed session that's the that is discretionary of the C between the council members themselves and so this idea of saying whatever I put something on the Open session it needs to be in the Clos session I put something on the Clos session no it needs to be in the open session this is totally wrong a wrong opinion of

[3:11:50] the law and we can hear this anywhere we want to plus the fact this Council has made it clear many times uh that we want transparency and the mayor just acknowledged that before we went to lunch and now here we're saying uh that the City attorney re I don't know if she's ordering or whether she's recommending this be put in executive session but uh uh I put it on the Open Session and it's legal to do that here and and that's what what I want to do unless the council wants to overturn uh what I what I have requested again uh I just can't get anything on the agenda to be heard Mr the manner which Mr let's hear what you have to say that's fine and it was only a recommendation um it was just a recommendation uh for Council and I just wanted to reaffirm a prior opinion Council does understand that we are dealing with this against the recommendation and the adice of our Council City attorney City attorney Council recognizes this yes go ahead Mr wlof kind of hard to make a presentation under these circumstances but anyway I believe what I was saying is that uh the contract with cillo Engineers has uh basically three parts to it the first is having to do with the uh the well field itself and the work to be done out there uh the second item is the uh pip line from the wellfield to St Angelo both of those projects are close to being completed but not completed then the third segment of the contract has to do with the uh construction of the of the treatment plant to remove the the radio nucleid and collect the radium and and it has not been started of course and bids just came in in the last few days uh which is

[3:13:53] on the agenda which item is on the agenda later on but in any event what I'm recommending in my item 11 excuse me 12 is uh that uh cillo be allowed to finish its work uh on on the first two segments of the contract and the third item uh that we look at hiring somebody else uh that uh this Council has trust and confidence in uh I believe that we can do better than what we have now uh and let let me my two objections are this which I will expand on but number one is carillo's fees are excessive in my opinion they've already been paid $12 million on a 58 million contract or a little less expenditures and uh they're scheduled to make another $7 million on the Water Treatment Plant and uh some wellfield work so we spent $70 million already we got $50 more million do to spend uh my theory on this and and I think some others of the on the council would be uh that uh we would like to have somebody that we have trust and confidence in to do uh the Consulting work and try to get a a a fee that is less uh we we won this election uh uh what the people uh the public needs to know is that all of those people who who ran and won uh did a whole lot of homework and due diligence and we consulted and met with a number of water experts and they advised us to go slow on this and uh uh that there are a lot of problems and and considerations that we have to make uh with respect to the water treatment plan in the third segment of this project and

[3:15:56] I've got a list of 14 issues and and questions that I have and I know that other council members who who worked on this before the even while the election was going on we took time off from the election to to educate ourselves and and become up to speed uh on on the water treatment plan and the Hickory project project in general uh I was on the council 10 years ago and uh we we studied the Hickory uh well filled in great detail and had a many hundreds of thousands of dollars report made on it by freeze and nickels uh and studied it and we concluded at that time as have subsequent councils uh that this project had a lot of problems so it's it's important to understand that we're not shooting from the hip those who are concerned and uh we we know we know what the issues are we know what the problems are we know what the warts are of of the Hickory uh and it it's only a stop Gap uh uh water source that would be used in times of emergencies and we are getting close to an emergency if we don't keep getting some more rain but uh my my my contention is that this Council has the right to have uh a a consultant at many millions of dollars be somebody that they have trust and confidence in and uh we have a legal right to do that we have the moral right to have that type of person it's no uh it's nothing against Mr ham I've never met him but I've seen his presentations and I don't have trust and confidence in him uh and uh it's not just me a number of the other people do not have trust and confidence in him uh in fact uh I will tell you sitting in Mr Dixon's office down at City Hall he told two of us that yes there were problems

[3:17:59] with Mr H Salam uh and they were trying to keep him away from the council City Council Members because of the problems with him and the fact that the council the previous Council was not even comfortable with him so uh I'm not finished you have something to say I'll wait all right you you you you might be seated so uh no in no way is anybody trying to hold this thing up uh the the item is was the items that were of such contention uh in the first meeting that they took off for these items having to do with cillo and the employment of a new water consultant and that new water consultant would have to be approved by the council and it could be any number of people that we interviewed but I did have someone from one of the top firms here in the state of Texas willing to come here on today at this meeting if we if my items had not been pulled off the agenda and another thing it's important a couple of more things that is important for people to understand is uh the objections to what I want to do and what I believe this Council may want to do is not based on the merits it's based on the fact uh that they're worried about the delay well uh I I think uh I don't think there'll be much delay and Mr Dixon obviously will have a a rebuttal to that but uh uh you know to me uh they're just changing the the the term of the delay which indicates to me it's it's Scare Tactics and I just wish we'd debate the merits rather than than anything else and Let Me Tell You Folks too and and I'm addressing my constituents and people that have called

[3:20:01] me they have great concern about the location of the treatment plant whether it's here in the city limits of San Angelo or somewhere else that would give the citizens more protection against this dangerous radioactive material that's going be accumulated uh at a processing plan here in town and I have not um I have not seen the requisite amount of concern by the city staff for the liability that we have under the under the circle which is uh the federal law having to do with uh with radioactive or uh uh dangerous waste and uh also so another complaint I have against the city but in particular cillo is the city the Citizens need to understand that with respect to the the treatment plant only one bid was received and they took that one bid without without going back and getting other bids and it's not just a one bid which is suspicious but it's also they uh you know uh that's just not a good way to do business and uh I hold Carill in part responsible for that even though it's probably more more the city's Fault in in that connection and so um I I just I just hope this Council will get somebody that we have trust and confidence in to finish out this project and and and be spending the next the $50 million of the taxpayers money uh to um uh and make sure that we get this right once and for all and that's what the people uh that I've talked to and my constituents want me to do there are lots of other problems with the way this has been handled but I'm sure the mayor doesn't want me to talk too much longer but uh that's kind of the long and short of it uh and so I guess we'll just see uh whether uh what where where everybody else's trust and confidence is and U I'm

[3:22:06] I'll be ready to vote on it Mr Dixon no more counil comment I have one um problem in particular with his statement that he made about him uh sitting in my office and me saying that uh I agreed with him that um I didn't trust uh Mr Caro what was actually said in my office Mr Mr wlaw said excuse me I have something to say now I agree with you what Mr ww said is he didn't trust Hutch because he couldn't understand him I told him I understood that was an issue and I'm trying to do the presentations it had nothing to do with whether I thought Mr mullum was doing a good job or not it was all dealing with the statement that was made by Mr wlaw that he didn't trust him because he couldn't understand him and I want to get that straight I have no issues with Cora whatsoever on this project they have been instrumental in getting the progress to where it is today I've talked to the Texas water development board and they have no issues with our Engineers they understand that Engineers can be change during the project and they understand that they don't have an issue with that there will be um some delays I think unfortunately U with not getting the treatment plant finished uh it's blessed that we have rain and and I appreciate that and I thank God for it but I run the numbers yesterday we got about 15 months if we award the treatment plant today and we we can issue a notice proceed after the Texas water development board releases the funds by September 1st it's a 365-day project and everything goes perfect and we can finish by next September if we don't get substantial runoff the rest of the year we're going to run out of water in October that's a month's window that I don't feel real comfortable about and

[3:24:08] that's my concern with this project so I just want y'all to know that that those are my issues and I appreciate the time do you have a problem with cillo not at all have they have they fulfilled their duties as we have expected them to do in your opinion sir I believe they have fulfilled their contract duties and went above that with their um representation of our problem with the tcq and the Texas water development board and all the Endangered Species Act and environmental stuff that we had to go through that um this project has prog ressed greatly and even the Texas water development board I talked to Mr Nichols yesterday and he said he was uh very impressed with the progress of this this project you know if if Corolla Engineers are let go of the project any existing projects that's going on comes to a stop they have to have a Texas water development board approved inspectors for the job which the city does not have those resources to furnish that um and they all have to be approved I mean we can't let projects go on and they're going to stop there's going to be contractor delays and other issues so have they overcharged us over what we agreed to in the original contract or have they been paid according to the original contract they've been paid according to the original contract and even on the original services agreement and Amendment one which is closed uh I think there was a balance on that contract of $115,000 that they didn't use so they didn't charge us for it I mean this is not your typical design project this is uh we're going to draw you up a set of plans and hand them to you and say thank you very much and call us if we can help again that service was provided along

[3:26:11] with submittal reviews all the inspection all the meetings everything that goes along with the project project management the whole nine yards they brought in inspectors from out of town to put on this job permanent as required by the Texas water development board so I think they have performed admirably I have no issues with their work do you have anything further to add if not I'm going to open it up to councel I a question yes there is there is a couple other things I I don't know where this is is going and and just so everybody's clear all the funding that's provided for the Hickory project cannot be used for any other project this is Hickory project money alone they can't use it for anything else and also there has been an established fee yes sir for the engineering and approved by the Texas water development board loan and that fee cannot be exceeded and paid for by the loan if in the process of the city choosing another engineering firm should run over the amount that is approved by the Texas water development loan those funds will be paid by the city not from the loan Daniel do you have a statement I I do want to reiterate what uh Ricky just said and and trust me we I hate to use the term we don't have a dog in this game but the deal is is that objectively our job is to like take a look at a situation and figure out where we currently are my concern at this point is just what Mr Dixon just mentioned a while ago is from an emergency standpoint uh we put a stop to a project at this point that is on target to hopefully give us relief if a a worst case scenario comes comes into play I'm concerned that uh a year down the road uh we are will still be in a in very drought conditions and we won't be able to uh provide our citizens the water that's so necessary I know that um I do understand the concerns uh expressed uh at this point I think that before the

[3:28:15] council members even act on this what I'd love to be able to do is possibly sit down and discuss those 14 points concern that you have and see how we can address that and if at some for some reason we feel that there is no way uh that we can continue working with cor we can bring this back to the city council at the next meeting but at this point I think that uh it may be a little bit too rash to act and say we are going to uh stop working with with CR engineering I just really would like to have an opportunity to take a look at all those concerns that you have expressed Mr warl and see how we can either work uh work this out or if not come back it is at your will absolutely you know whether you want to you know hire somebody else but U definitely for the sake of delaying and and the possibility as far as the water uh Supply I would prefer that we'd have a sit down discuss that and bring it back at the next meeting I'm going to have to respectfully uh turn down your your request uh in in the interest of time I'm trying to be expeditious about this myself who was it who was it that made the decision to not start the Filtration plant until after the pipeline was done was that corillo yes come forward please that's a big thing for me I don't understand it no it's not cor would you introduce yourself my name is Hutch musum and I'm with Caro Engineers I have been the I'm the the project manager uh with Coro and I am actually vice president as well in the company I have been involved with city of San Angelo since 1999 my first involvement was when we did the design the uh wastewater treatment plant by biosolid sludge management and Order control improvements 5 years later we were I was retained as a project manager for a distribution system improvements and uh back in um 09 December uh December 08 uh we were retained uh to do uh to for the Hickory

[3:30:22] project and that project it started the first two phases there was study and pilot plan investigations that was before we we even went to the loan um at the time when we went when we finished the project at the first phase there was the feasibility and I I did work with the firm that you had uh I was one of the senior Associates project managers there The Firm that you mentioned with the report um at the time that report was done the technology had been different but regardless um we we I was just going to say things we were selected through a highly competitive process in involving several firms we were interviewed uh we won the work because the city selection committee was convinced we had the best qualifications in experience uh for the city's project all major decisions including whatever all the pting studies delays that you may may have alerted to uh were made jointly with a staff maybe the previous staff and brought to the city of St Angelo Council as well as the water Advisory Board um for approval and making the decision and and what it was when we started phase two which is the detailed design that's when the Texas water development board money was approved moved and allocated and we were instrumental in helping the city get that loan that was for the detailed design and the city staff at the time they felt that as regulations were changing on reverse osmosis they said well you know we have we know that this thing works this single U sign exchange or the filtration U we know that this thing works it we don't have a lot of competition there let's look at another technology olog and so we jointly discussed that with Will wiy at the time and other staff and we discussed with the Texas water development board and

[3:32:25] tcq and at the time we felt that going to reverse osmosis which was the second selection when you know from our first phase project you know it was the second best thing would be uh would be a good good thing to to to check and and for sure and it worked and in fact after several months of building the pilot plant the second pilot plant and testing it um the results showed that it worked but there was a caveat and that some of that radium from the ion exchange would go back to the city's wastewater treatment plant you know within the limits within within the concentrations but we came back to present it and we said you know this is going to cost you this this is going to cost you that over a 10 20 year period cost were very much identical and the city council elected to go with the older technology that was selected a year or so ago that is when and that was back in May of 20 May of 2012 and that is why we we had held on the design until everybody including City staff was signed off on the technology that was to be used in hindsight if we didn't not do the pilot plant yes that project would probably the treatment plant would probably be close to completion but that was not my decision that was something that came out there was and and you talk about fees There Was You know the fees for the design initially were based on 7% for final design city did some work uh some work on the plan and profile for the pipeline altto together we were honest with the city say you know now we are not going to overcharge when this is not a lamam job this is a Cost Plus not to exceed so we will charge for the time and material that's used and we came to the city we said you know there is money that is

[3:34:27] going to be left from the design of the pipeline 7 800,000 you know that will if you want us to do the pilot plant we can do that for that money for no additional money to the city we had to clear that turtle with the Texas water development board because they want to make sure that what's in basic service and special services stays but it was fine and we came to council August 7 August 2nd 200 11 presented that saying that this would be what is the what is the council's uh decision and we had unanimous vote I believe to go and do that second pilot plan so this is what excuse me this is why there was that delay it didn't cost the city any extra money it was within the original budget now it did expand that and I know Mr wler is concerned about the that budget but that budget was there was a lot of things this is a lot of complication on this job that were before and a lot of studies that were happening before and during the design a lot of the studies a lot of pilot plans and these pilot plant are not cheap I mean the chemical the chemical analysis that we spend between pilot plants this just you know I was just you know running our computer we have over $700,000 from that money that was spent in with Labs between the two pilot plants um you know our uh we have over 20% or between 20 and 25% uh that was paid to subs and labs and we have over 1.14 million uh from that money that was paid to local Subs s Angelo Subs so this was the story and this is why this thing had been delayed uh luckily when we when we went back and said you know let's revive this it was already a year late or a year and a half late one of the two approved vendors for the single use iron exchange um was starting to we didn't we didn't know whether they were going to be in business or not we didn't have a clear

[3:36:29] direction we knew that one was going to be in business and I believe I came to council that May or June and I have that video and I said you know if we go with single use on Exchange that's probably good somebody's going to take care of that res resin but you may be ending up with one vendor and this Council voted to go with it so when when Mr wlo says we ended up with one bid that was when we did the procurement document just for the iron exchange filters and he's right that was something that uh was discussed with Council and you can look at the minutes and I I basically said this could be this could be an issue um luckily it came and and the that the the wrt was uh a technology that worked and the wrt company has a lot of installations we went and visited some and we were very we worked very closely with them to develop that portion of the project now that portion of the project is only a small portion of the overall I mean you have to treat the water for there's iron and that's there's iron there's other things and that water that makes it more complicated it's not just the radium the radium is above maximum contaminant level and so as so as so is iron other than that it's perfect but with the technology with we've got a lot of people we we have uh you know Cora has a lot of bench strength uh and this is what we do treatment and water is what we do we've been in business since 1933 we're a national firm and I've been with a company for about 7 years now um so you know that's what it is we we spent we spent a lot of time looking at the existing facility and figuring out how we can tie this groundwater facility to the to the new facility and so we had to do some improvements to the existing facility as well that was also you know done within the budget um and then

[3:38:31] before that we had the question whether this is going to be at the plant or whether the treatment location is going to be at the plant or to the wellfield and I I I know I understand there this is concern that if if if it was feasible to do it at the wellfield then maybe that would be a good thing but we came and brought it to council and there was pros and cons the fact of the matter is the wellfield had a lot of Pros you keep it there right you keep it there you treat it but then you have the issue with the iron what do you do with the iron and the if you when you bring it to the city you've got local personnel and this this side you can send it back to the Wastewater Plant to mix with this slge so it's it's a treatment but it was also a disposal it was a disposal uh situation for the end for the situation with with the radium removal vessels uh the city part of the procurement documents that was submitted by wrt back in December uh there is a contract and that contract would say that the city would enter into a 10-year agreement with wrt that they will be responsible for handling the resin including replacing it and with disposing it because the city didn't want to get involved in messing with recra and landfills and I understand that and that's probably one of the reasons that's council at the time decided to go back with this technology um but I do understand this is new Council I would I would just hope and and I hope that I can talk in a way that members can understand me but I honest to God I would like to if there's any issues or problems uh whether it's billing or anything I would like to know what it is um I I I I was under the impression the city has been very happy with our work and uh you know our contact has been the utilities department and sometimes we see Daniel sometimes we see other staff and from all from all my from my perspective and

[3:40:34] our perspective as a company we have done uh we have done well our buildings are open um you know it's ours and we have a specific multiplier we have a specific ceiling that we have never exceeded we I'm hoping that we won't even get there because a lot of the time a lot of the budget that was spent was on the treatment I mean if you cancel this project now the money the actual money that was spent most of it has been on the treatment whether it's the two pilot PL investigations that were conducted were the final design because that designing the treatment is a lot more complicated than designing a linear Pipeline and it costs a lot more so we're done with that design um we believe we have some money left in the budget we can keep it and you know we're hoping that you know we went through some hoops to get it done in time we're hoping that uh this is something that is seen but we're okay with whatever the city council's decision is at this point um we we do not believe that it would be in the city's interest to change engineers at this time um in our in our opinion it can increase costs and uh we don't know why there no issues were brought over the last 4 years and 7 months everything has been brought to council everything has been brought to the water board I have been certainly available by by members of the of the of the uh media as well as others and uh yes we had a couple occasions that people were scared about radium but at all times we came in and and addressed it we brought the the the uh we brought the uh experts and you know there's not it's not a perfect water source the surface water is definitely better than this water and it's cheaper nobody is contending that and nobody's saying that this is the water that is going to be the the every water for you no this is only a portion and there are other there

[3:42:37] are other things like the red oroo there's a lot of things that you need to look at to augment your water resources but this is a good viable solution that will give you you know 6 to 10 MGD for a particular and you know for some time um you know so that that's all I have to say and um I want to thank you for this opportunity and and I do accept whatever decisions you all make thank you H thank you um I have some comments and I'll link them all together and then I've got a question to ask everyone before we go any further so you say four years and 7 months is how long you've been doing this project with four years and seven months I believe it is do you recall what the original estimate was that you gave us for total engineering cost four years and 7 months ago we did not give a total engineering cost we gave a total project cost I believe 120.5 million so you didn't break it down to us forine cost I have to go back and look but typically what we've said on these on the slides and reports we put 18% for engineering but I couldn't I mean I have to go back and look and looking back at some of the financials and and asking uh staff to provide me with total monies that we had spent today I became very alarmed at uh the amount of money spent to date and the percentage of it that was for engineering correct um uh what would you said a while ago you mentioned uh what was the cost plus not to exceed did you ever give us a percent that the engineering portion of the project would be because there is a lot of studies the percentages I have have been used by US and the Texas water development board as guidelines but it know when we when we when we put the fee together it's the what we think is effort for example when you have an inspector on the side if the project is $5 or $5 million that inspector's salary still have to be paid

[3:44:42] so sometimes it gets skewed now somebody saying that 6 to 7% for the final justed design I can see a little bit less on Pipeline a little bit more for treatment but there's a lot of things a lot of studies uh you know from the loop test to two pip to to two pilot plan investigations things of that nature that are typically not tied to the percentage and you can look at U pretty much most of the or all the ones that I know these are that's why you call you know these are not even considered a special ser basic Services also one of the things that kind of got me to looking at our total numbers that we'd spent and for what on this project other than it being taxpayers dollar that we're spending up here is I was looking at bids uh the bids for the water remediation technology which came recommended by you and you came recommended To Us by from Mr Wy um and the bids went out and when we got to the point to ex explore or to award that bid water uh remediation Technologies was the only company that bid on it correct and that's that's what I just mentioned 6 months before that I when we went to single use on Exchange that was that was a concern that because technology were changing and people were some of some of the people that we studied okay were not interested well I took the information straight from our minutes and I called one of the companies that we sent a packet out too mhm and uh told them who I was and that I was curious as to why they chose not to bid on our project which is within my right to do absolutely um what they told me was uh they never received a request for bid from the city of St Angelo oh uh which bothered me that you know if we only had one received so I wanted to know how our bid process worked how it was handled and

[3:46:45] much to my dismay we do not have a return receipt requested on those things that we send out and we should have and that's another issue but that got me to looking even further into the amount of monies that have been spent to date I do find the engineering fees excessive my brother's an engineer he's certainly not uh uh say an engineer of your caliber or your studies but U I discussed approximate range and I've several contractors and stuff the approximate range that we could expect to pay in just engineering fees and I do find them excessive uh you know today the council is considering the purchase of a water purification plant uh before we have drilled all the wells necessary to pump water to the plant and further the council is considering building a water purification plant based on the design specific to water remediation Technologies uh who was the only company to return a request for the proposal so far is that right that is that is a true water mediation Technologies uh claim to be the only company doing this type of radium removal yet they have not shown us their financials their scientific procedures that they do this by their approvals I've I've not seen anything come across to document the company's going to be here tomorrow uh and they've not shown us any installation that is presently refining any quantity approaching the size considered by St Angelo and um that has or is removing 35 Pico carries and I pardon I'm not a water specialist but of radium of even half that is under consideration as to what they're doing uh with this limited knowledge the council being asked to purchase this plant without knowing how much it's going to cost to dispose of

[3:48:51] the radium once it's removed uh by a company who has had no competition in their proposed uh field or in other cities it um it doesn't seem to be wise to uh commit the city to a route that obligates us to costs that we don't know what they are uh that's what you're asking asking for so I I'm I'm just just a moment because I lose my train of thought sorry if uh any of the rest of the council wishes to vote for radium removal plant before they have good figures on the radium disposal cost or know the price of what the disposal cost per 1,000 gallons um is going to be and not hesitate in doing this I would find surprising but four years and seven months you as the engineer have had the opportunity to bring to us and show us possibly within a range of what the disposal cost is going to be that to me is alarming and I it to me it's questionable as an engineer of the project why in four years and seven months have you not or somebody not talked to us about this price okay may I speak yes you may well I I think a lot of what you say a lot of resonates with us even and some of the concerns I understand and the fact of the matter uh radium removal Technologies they not there's not a whole lot I mean you can remove radium but it's it's the caveat isn't the waste disposal so Texas water de the tcq requires every technology to be piloted that's we build the building we have a small you know we we have uh we basically test it for three or four or 5 months with the actual water that's going to be treating the first pilot plant was for the single use on Exchange with which included da Media made by Dao

[3:50:55] chemical and wrt and a third vendor that was available but didn't the results were not very good so we basically said and you know that these two there's two type of media one is W onow can actually can do the job with send that the tcq uh reviewed and we met with them reviewed the pilot plan investigation and we basically we we established design parameters so when we put this thing on hold for about a year a year and a half or a year we went back to the technology number two because Council and the and the utilities department was like well isn't there something different I said well everything every technology that we talk about every technology before we talk about and make it you know before you can even go to design has to be piloted and that makes it expensive so the second one was to go to the single to the I to reverse osmosis which worked very well as well but but when we brought the two you know the old results and the new results and we had this discussion pros and cons I was to go with you know the council elected to go with single use on Exchange so we went back to the drawing board took the information that we gathered from Pilot plant investigation and the procurement documents and the the detailed design for the plant which was completed two or three months ago so in the process W you know there was um wrt manufacturers makes their own media and they manufacture their own vessels whereas the other vendor just sells the media the contractors that were that typically what we call original equipment manufacturers they had a dispute with a vendor it looks like with da and they said we do not want to bid on this job this is why we ended up with one bid instead of two but all along we knew the maximum we can get in a in a request for procurement was up to two well I I want

[3:52:59] to follow and as far as the waste disposal let me just finish here because that's a very important we made a lot of during the the study you know different data we come in with one time it's going to cost you this and the next time we change it depending on the data and and this is still a work in progress in the state as far as what sites are permitted what is not and and you know as we there's a lot of things that got developed during the process but luckily this wrt does the turnkey operation and the bids for the disposal for the operations came came in the procurement documents as well so we know the numbers and they were actually better than what we originally little bit better than SL you know what we origin anticipated so I still am having problems in the Engineering Process and I'll wrap this up with just two more deals that I have a hard time understanding why you as the engineer service has not been able to provide us with a cost of whether it's going to be $1 or $10 per gallon to haul off you know the waste I I have but you haven't you don't maybe you don't see it you but it's been provided it has yes I've never been provided that I recall the cost of the radium but uh any at any point I find it difficult to understand why we wouldn't have it if w u RT is providing facilities in California Illinois Wisconsin New Jersey New York Virginia I mean there there's got to be a price out there has it been to us and you mentioned in your statement that you came to council and the discussion was going on about putting the plant you know inside the city limits outside and the conversation going on but what you failed to mention is this Council never made a decision as to where to have that location it's never come back yes we did I don't excuse me I don't recall it and I would have I I voted against it twice I brought this up put this on

[3:55:02] the wh field look at the uh minutes to read that because I don't recall it and I do have a problem and especially since the actions out at West Texas the explosion I have a problem with locating that plant that facility inside the city limits because you you're not going to stand there and tell me that there's not an explosive uh part to it that it it it's possible it's possible uh I would say this is not a very likely to explode this is the concern would be R I don't want to live next door to it or have my business there I think it's safer than some of the other treatment technologies that there are but I do believe that this came to a vote because we had pros and cons I do remember that may mayor mayor Morrison was a council member he was sitting there and him and another person voted nay and everybody else voted there let's go take it to St Angelo and then we did it I mean the the details of the final design are so specific that you have to know where you're designing and what you're designing you have to know what you're designing to and where before you can do the final design and so once that was established we went and did the final design when was that established though uh Johnny I think you've been waiting it's your time oh well just one second I think it's what was the bid 59 cents may I address may I address this is Kevin Krueger I would like to address a question of the price of the disposal that that was determined when we open bids for the procurement documents with wrt and that price is 59 cents per thousand so I'm sorry was what 59 cents per thousand so that that was the point at which we we knew for sure you know up until that point it would be an estimate as to what we would be charged but once the bids were actually opened and that was what in September actually the bids were open in January January of 2013 so it was it was a procurement so and that that's a

[3:57:07] that's a price that's guaranteed for 10 years with this company so I just wanted to make sure that we understood that Johnny H Hut the only questions I had was you know like Miss farmer says there four years s months well I've slept many times since then me too and I do remember the $120 million projected price and that's what the loan we applied for the loan for for the total project okay aside from that I don't remember every single detail but uh I just wanted to kind of follow up on Mr W Law's uh the 14 issues of concern have have those been shared with you uh and so you don't even know this is this is last week was the first time uh I hear that there's a concern okay about me or this project and so I I mean I thought that everything was hunk ofor frankly but uh so you haven't you haven't had the the given given the opportunity to even address I have not concern I do not know what the concerns are but I will be more than happy and Ne neither do I so that's I was just curious to see what they were or be more than happy to address or sit down with anyone and and I understand you know this is a sensitive topic because I think if I have concerns with you I would follow with Daniel or I've got your number I would have called you and and addressed them and then hopefully if I don't get a remediation if I don't like what I'm hearing then I bring it up but again if you haven't been given the opportunity to to respond uh then that's I see a problem there and and I have to say that all the fees all the engineering fees were reviewed by um the utilities department a lot of the biggest contract volume biggest contract which is amendment number two that was 7 that was basically constitutes about 75% of the total fee was presented to council with actual dollars for the engine m not to exceed dollars for the details I believe the date was February 1st 2011 that that the same that contract

[3:59:11] was actually also reviewed by the water Advisory Board where you they went line by line and was understood that sometimes these are just general guesstimates that we will stay Within These guidelines but sometimes between different tasks we may have to shift dollars up or down uh just depending to see you know depending on what how things let me let me throw this in and I'll in here that we did beat that horse to death when on the water treatment and we both I remember voting against it and so did Mr Morrison we wanted it out there at the water fields at the water and if I'm not mistaken Charlotte made the motion to put it here I if I'm not mistaken you made the motion to put that water treatment here because I brought this up specifically to discuss it because I did not want that thing sitting down there on the cono River and I was voted down it was a 52 vote so when I heard that this estimate was coming in for this treatment plan at under two way under with a $2 million savings you know I I was happy with it so you know and in our last estimate for the water plant what we showed that Texas water development board to keep you know hold the money was 29750 and that's with the extra 2 MGD you know have a capacity of 8 MGD we everything was designed our contract was for 6 MGD but because the city is expanding the wells we said you know let's put an alternate bid item if if the bids come good you know the city should have additional treatment capacity for its citizens and that was not added you know we didn't ask for additional service for it it was just there um luckily um we it came about 2 million 2 million below our estimate and we had three bids three close bids and the lowest was 2 million and and when you have close bids that means that the set of plans and specs is very good and when you have approvals from the Texas water ability development board in tcq in a an astronomical quick time it means that the engineering was good as well

[4:01:13] now thank you that's uh Ricky you uh there was a contract and three amendments yes sir what were the Amendments now do you want to know the total of the Amendments well well I mean were they because he was uh because Killa wasn't doing a good job or I mean no that was just part of the process of the development of the Hickory project okay that was the original service agreement then there was Amendment one to do some work Amendment two to do some more work and Amendment Three to do some more work okay all of these were brought to council all of these numbers were aired out in the open all of these numbers were voted on so they were fees they're fees it's not a percentage contract it's a not to exceed amount okay EST pardon me I thought I heard you mention the original es I didn't hear when Marty Rodney is next so we've spent $12 million in engineering fees give or take okay and and what what is that what they were approved is that what was approved yes they have not exceeded any approved amount okay so right now they're working on Amendment two and three Amendment the original service agreement and Amendment one that those tasks are completed those books have been closed out for I think nearly a year okay what were those fees hang on Amendment one is a million5 I think okay and a Amendment two according to to Jimmy's figures in here are 14140 14, 140,000 Don are you thinking are you thinking I

[4:03:19] got them that that's what it shows okay original contract was for $835,000 Amendment one was for 1,520 th000 amendment 2 is 14, 140,000 and amendment 3 is 2, 885,000 okay and and did the council vote on those yes sir okay so so we as a council knew what the people could be I believe all the Amendments and original contracts were unanimous except Amendment one I think Mr Morrison voted against it okay so when we talk about fees we we we knew they could yeah you knew what those fees were not to exceed amount okay I believe that's correct Rodney I want to get back to my question is he said that the they got got everything kind of straight last May on this filtration building in your opinion were we not pushing them to say hey this PIP plan is going to be done next summer why aren't we getting going on this filtration house earlier than now why why am I seeing this I shouldn't even be voting on this it should have been built by now so I want I didn't get I I didn't understand or get I think the reason and I think what Hut was saying was because the additional test and the pilot testing that had to be done on the treatment facility is why the delays were what they were before they could decide tcq requires a pilot test but that was before May yes sir may 201 so what's happened last May until now the design work and stuff and the procurements for the actual treatment facility and the other miscellaneous improvements at the water treatment plant you know y'all are scared of the radium and stuff I'm more scared of the existing chlorine facility you have a rupture on a radium cylinder inside the building where it at

[4:05:23] it runs off in the floor you have a rupture on a one ton cylinder at the water treatment plant I don't know what kind of serious problems that citizens that live around the plan have that's my concern I'm not concerned about the radium but back to your question those things had to be done a lot of this was done before me I mean these decisions were made by this Council or not this Council by Council that okay we're we're good with the ion let's do the RO that's more delays and all the tests come back you have to do all this stuff then they have the engineering firm don't know what to design until the decision's made they can't start anything until Council says we're going to go with radium and then they start so it took over year to come up with a design that's that's the answer you're giving me yes come to the microphone hedge sorry I guess this this was still what we consider an expedited schedule there's a lot of details I mean lot of people a lot of details and involved involvement in these minute uh minute details on this design and what we when we first start with this project we have a schedule in original contract we said this is what we anticipate and it's still in the original contract and that shows the completion in about a year or two from now actually so we have beat we beat all the original uh what we what we what we uh would schedule for a for a normal project now this was unusual and we would have beat this too but there was a decision from the from the water staff from the council hey let's look at other Technologies because people wanted to see you know if if if really this is the best answer we can get is single year sign exchange the best answer and unfortunately with these Technologies these these new these new

[4:07:26] processes um you cannot have a final answer nor will the state approve it unless you have a full fullblown U pilot plant investigation and we did those in you know reverse osmosis iron exchange you know it t took a lot of buildings a lot of equipment and and you have to have 90 days of uninterrupted operation plus the reports that go before and after so it does take 8 nine months every time and we saw pictures and slides of that process Donnie Don um Jimmy Ricky I'm sorry uh I was trying to make uh uh heads or tails of the of the figures and not fussing I'm just trying to understand okay so our total contracts are $1 19,3 $80,000 that's correct now for the the new plant coming on is that the 2,890 for engineering fees or did I look at that wrong that's real no I'm I'm not I'm not real I'm not following your question here so try me again okay you're talking about what what was the engineering cost for the new treatment plan well on your on your slides I was that's what I was trying to figure out says Hickory fund summary engineering payments 19 milon 380,000 and it shows original contract Amendment one two and three on that slide okay and then what I was trying to figure out does that include the the well filled engineering costs yes and okay that's one of the Amendments then right okay okay uh now then on fee estimate breakdown cillo Engineers con continued you've got total 2, 885,000 that's on Amendment Three correct so do we do we have a an estimate on the engineering cost for the

[4:09:31] the new plant in here anywhere that would be I think the that engineering fee was lumped in with Amendment two okay so so it's already in here in the 19 million yes sir okay okay that's what I was trying to figure out sorry any other further further comment from councel have one Charlotte I would just like to ask if uh it is permissible for me just to ask if I can't hear something are you not going to let me ask for him to repeat what he said when I can't hear it because if you're not I'm going to file a complaint against you with the American Disabilities Act I simply was asking him to say what he said again because I didn't hear it thank you any other comment from Council any comment from the floor somebody want to make a motion have a oh come on left sir I'm sorry I didn't see you good afternoon my name is Richard De bres um I'm not too sure this really fits but it when we're talking about this I think it's important uh I saw a news article last week or this week talking about the possibility of blending the water from the water line the new water line with existing water 6 to1 and that was an official from the city talking about that and saying that would be acceptable under the law and that we would install a bypass pipe or I expect there would be a bypass on the new facility anyway um but he said that decision had not been made um my question is uh is it going to be made are we going to have a bypass and number two uh just hearing today that we spent

[4:11:35] all this money to design a plant and if we discontinue his services do we have in our in our possession possession a complete design for that plant thank you Ricky I have called and talked to the tcq about the op options of blending the water they want a engineered stamp report of our plans techniques drawings calculations everything I think the closer number is probably 1 to 7 figur in a safety Factor 1 to eight on the blending opportunity that all has to go to the tcq I've called them early to go ahead and try to get that answer in case we do have some water and and that blending is an option the bypass pipe is um reviewing the final plans of that that was not in the original 62 miles of plant that's 24 that goes around ties into the new treatment plant and then we've added a place that goes and ties into where our 39 in raw water line comes in from Ivy so we do have an opportunity to have a place to inject it into our local deal but um he's correct that decision has not been made because we do not have that official I guess opinion from tcq thank [Music] you yes sir Ricky do I'm sorry do uh do you have any feel for that because to to me the year that we're um that we're in the process of building this thing then we can gain basically a day a week right within well there's some technicalities uh you're you're don't you're not in violation unless you go I think three or four consecutive quarters or basically a year and you bust your

[4:13:39] five PES per limit at that point so the there are some options that you know we might feed some water that's a little hot and and back off and you know so I feel good that I think that they will let us do that I mean they understand the situation how how long would it take to go ahead and TI in the system that you're talking about that you just I think there's probably um another 45 days of work something like that and then we could actually be be using some water be sending some water um booster Pump Station there was um increase on their contract time for some restrictions for on U some of the ranches during the hunting season and they're expected to be through the end of next month so yeah I think 45 days we could expect if we can get the rest that line in that I I think that would be an option if we can get a reply back okay good I'd like to discuss that okay yes sir question you've got you got about 3 minutes okay then the question is does the city have the capability to measure such low qual low levels of that radiation and if indeed we are going to be forced to ingest that radiation are we going to be uh concerned or are we going to be consulted uh I haven't heard discussion from the city council about uh giving everybody uh certain amount of radiation we have discussed it answer his question the the limit is five P carries from the EPA on drinking water standards that's the only limit they have on this water uh we do not have the equipment necessary to measure this water uh we have to send those samples off it takes a month to run those samples so what water you think you're feeding today you won't know for

[4:15:41] a month so it takes a while to get them back I don't know of any process that's faster to do it it just takes time okay Rodney am I right Ricky where Brady I'm sorry to make you keep going back up there but Brady Brady doesn't do any kind of blending now do they they're taking it straight out I think there is some some surface water that I think they're trying to blend it with but it's Li yeah they're just drinking it I think I grew up in Mason I grew up drinking this water until I was 18 years old when I moved away so I'm not in fear to me I I think that might be a little bit of an overkill on on some of that stuff and I know Brady doesn't do it right now so um you know I don't have as big a problem with that as I do with some of the other stuff more the cost is the biggest problem I have right now okay I'll open for a motion yes I'll take a shot at it I'll make a motion that um as soon as cillo Engineers finishes their work on the uh wellfield and the pipeline and all of the accessories that go there to uh that their contract be terminated uh and that um of course at that and at that point in time we'll look for U or as soon as possible we look for new water consultant second I have a motion and a second that just as soon as gello is through with the scope of the project that they are now that's lit I guess it's the best way to say it that they would be terminated and I've had a second I have a question I yes sir I could you say that again when they complete which ones the projects that they're currently working on now which your microphone

[4:17:44] winky turn your mic on oh I'm sorry oh it is on I just wasn't close enough turnning uh that as soon as as Carillo Engineers finishes the projects they're currently working on which I believe to be the uh a little bit of work left on the wellfield in McCulla County and the pipeline and all of the uh all the instruments and and apperances that go there with uh then uh their contract would be terminated and we would could look for another consultant or uh uh even leave them in the mix uh to renegotiate if we so chose whatever whatever the council decides second still stand yall heard the motion question yes sir Mr wlaw would you reconsider uh your motion if you were to give them opportunity to answer your 14 concerns which we nobody seems to [Music] know I don't want to be horsey about this uh or arbitrary Johnny but uh I've thought about this a lot and I've I've talked to so many people and so many uh water experts that I've that I know and and respect and have confidence in I just don't think it it would do any good uh if if it would I I would agree to do that but I I have a Don a little bit of a question clarification Ricky have we've already paid them to do the engineering for the plant did did I understand that right or we we just have the contract with them to do the plant the plant has been uh plans inspectors are out and bid and we receive bids on the plan so I'm going to help clarify that well the design Works done yes I

[4:19:48] mean most a lot of I would say a good 40% or 30 to 40% of that $12 million that we did was associated with the treatment and the plan and that has been finished so what's remaining there's a few things remaining but what's remaining is construction phase Services operations and maintenance manuals startup assistance communication Texas water development board um as well as risk management plan if the city so chooses and as CT uh study which is a disinfection study at their Wastewater at their water treatment plan because we upgraded the entire disinfection facility because when we did the um evaluation of the surface water treatment plant which was part of the scope uh we found out that it was actually out of compliance and we were able to uh marry up that facility to be both uh disinfection facility for the surface water treatment plant and the groundwater facilities to save the city some money and give use for a long period of time so yeah so as far as our design what is remaining is um final design on the new well field expansion we have the uh plans we have the specifications and the contract documents for drilling the wells completed and as the bids are coming on Thursday to the city that has been advertised that has been approved by the tcq um and so bids are on the bids will be open here on Thursday and the city the city will decide whether it's five six or seven Wells depending on the bids we believe that with the available funding with available 120 million the city could expand the well field by another five by another at least another five Wells with all the we with um with all the booster Pump Station expansion Etc but the design for the booster Pump Station expansion and the actual

[4:21:52] equipping of the wells will be in a separate contract and we did that because usually the contractors for the Drillers are not the same as the contractors that equip um these Wells and so uh we're about 40% complete on the final design of the wellfield um uh expansion and that would be uh equipping the wells the interconnecting piping the electrical the buildings that go near these these Wells upgrading the booster Pump Station and the electrical gear to toh take it from an 6 MGD to 9 MGD or maybe more capacity that is an amendment number three so basically if your services were terminated at this time you're you're 90 plus% complete excluding the wellfield yes the only thing that's remaining and that's not a small you know that's not a small task is construction phase Services uh looking you know that's that's separated into two phases we've got the Engineering Services during construction whereby the design Engineers who were involved of the day-to-day operations will actually make sure that what is submitted things are of that nature are within the intent of the design we also have the inspection services uh by individuals that are approved by the Texas water development board as well and they will they will be there here in San Angelo um with the contractor day to-day uh putting reports to the Texas water development board making sure that everything paperwork and everything in the inspection is kosher as well so monetarily how much roughly well the it's it's really hard to say monetarily here on the stand I believe we still have a about $7 million give or take of unused money this money we if if all goes well I mean this was not a lumsum job and you know it was when I we spoke I I made sure that told

[4:23:57] Will at the time hey there's a lot of unknowns we want to put a ceiling that is fair but that's within the limits because if it wasn't it wouldn't be approved by the board and other play people anyway so we if we don't use that money and we hope we don't I mean we hope we like we could leave a million whatever if things AR efficient then we won't build the city and this is not the first time we'll leave money on the project like this but it's up to the that's up to council anyway okay thank you Johnny Mr Mayor I just wanted to and Hutch or even Ricky I'm going to ask that uh you know we we're at a point where I know it's very it's a it's critical uh I am going to vote against his motion and only because here here's my concern if we stop you now what happens when we have to go back to the Texas water development board and ask for for the remaining funds to build a treatment plant I mean is that going to drag us out another year another B you know even longer than what it's already projected I mean what do we have to go through I mean it sounds like a nightmare we have to start all over again I know Hutch and his Coro engineer had played a big part in helping us acquire the funding helping us they were they were required for us to get the funding I think the main the main thing that we're going to have is we'll have to go back out the RFQ process to select another engineering firm that engineering firm would be have to be approved by Texas water development board and then that engineering firm takes over where Coro has been you know they have to get up to speed on the design of the plan and if if they accept those designs are they going to redesign the plant are they going to want to use any of it is that going to cost us I don't know but the Texas water development board understands and this has happened before but that engineering firm has to be approved by them and I don't know

[4:26:01] what that takes and what delays that is I know it's not going to happen in a short order well the applications that they're right there going to do for us is is one of my big concerns but really if we have to reinvent the wheel for this if a new uh firm came on that that's just my concern and uh I would hate we'll just have to say I don't know what that actually entails okay well having said that yeah Rodney I want to agree with Johnny you know I I think this contractor was way out of whack I think they had a a cap on it and they're pushing it to the cap with the engineering fees that's my opinion on that uh but I don't want to start over on this and that's I'm voicing that because I I know how I'm going to vote I'm going to vote against it also um and I know that's going to be a a lot of people are not going to like that but I don't want to start over I'm really really worried about next November next November is the thing that's on the back of my mind and all I care about is the residents in this town I don't want to delay this three or four months if we run out of water so having said that you know I don't like what we're the fees we are I feel like the city the previous city of council our contracts may not have been written well enough for us to to back us up and we may not have had all the information it sounds like to me we didn't get all the information that we should have gotten and I'm I'm hearing that over and over again that's kind of a reoccurring thing right now so that's just the statement I wanted to make M and I think this end of the of the council's kind of in agreement I I I I do too I think the fees are are high I don't think the the plant should have been built at this end prior councils took us into that direction on both of them uh to to to let the the engineering firm go now I think it'd be uh basically closing the gate after the cows are out so uh you know I'm I'm going to have to

[4:28:03] go along with this end of the table calling for the vote the motion is to terminate corillo when he gets through with where he is we've had a second all of those in favor of terminating cillo say I I I all of those opposed say nay nay let's have a raise show of hands Nays the motion failed cillo has not been terminated it was done by a 52 vote and I need to take a break he we have now progressed to item 13 which is has been made moot by the decision on item 12 so there is no reason to move on to there you know this and Charlotte just made a point here we've got people out here that want to talk to item 20 and we're going to be here till 6:00 anyway but there's no reason for them to be would it be all right with Council if we move 20 up to right now you have a problem with that Mr self shouldn't everybody sharing a wh I have no problem they not getting to pay we are they're not making anything here three of the ladies that were wanted to speak just left two minutes ago well they should have waited let's go on if it's all right with Council let's go on and take up item number 20 let me read this it's a discussion and possible action regarding the fiscal year 213 and 214 budget preparation preparation by budget manager Morgan trainer that's not correct anymore is it no sir I answer to it though Craig Craig Chad chag wden Morgan Chad Wigan yes sir they get pretty close yeah can we just call you Morgan absolutely thank you now on this uh we decided earlier we are going to take comments because I know we've got some people out there have some special comments but we're not going to go any further than that we're not going to have our budget session

[4:30:06] because Daniel wants to talk to each council member individually and as he talks to us he will be able to priori ize his budget so we're not going into the budget but we do wish to take up the drainage issues so do you want to lead us through this Morgan I I'll walk us through that if you don't mind or at least get us started while our public comment folks get ready better work fine take it away Michael for a couple of years now uh Mr eustus Steve eustus has been talking to us about uh what has become a drainage issue or has been a drainage issue for a while and he seeking uh to open the conversation about possible solutions uh related to uh a property that is we know it as the Christian village property uh out on the South Loop uh behind uh where Dollar General was or is and uh Albertson's out there and uh we had uh Mr Bailey Clinton Bailey before he left had worked up a brief on the the a summary of the issues there and what potential Solutions might exist and uh Miss farmer has been keeping her eye on this issue and has asked that we uh consider uh a discussion about it and so uh all those all those roads have come together today where we have an opportunity to discuss budget uh we actually had that as a line item as other needs in the slide presentation that we're not going to go through I don't think and we have uh public who are interested or have an interest in that property uh here and available to express their opinion about uh the situation and I guess that would be Steve Eustace or come ahead sir Jim okay please identify yourself sir and thank you g up uh my name is James Carter and I'm here as a board member of

[4:32:10] West Texas Christian foundation and I appreciate your taking us out of order and I appreciate your comments what I'm going to do is make my comments very short but I want to be sure everybody understands the problem we've had this problem over 25 years we've had different mayors different councils look at it in an agreement but there's just been no action so we're asking this Council if at all possible to solve the drainage problem as soon as you can what happened as I was on the original board that the west Texas Christian Foundation bought land and that land was purchased in 1977 and this is the land that was described just uh uh east of loop 306 and uh Mark here is showing you our exhibit one which is a plat Topography of that acreage that was purchased and the reason I'm showing that to you is there is uh this was 3 months after purchase and there is no drainage across that track the next plat that Mark is going to show you is when they started building Highway 306 we asked permission if we could drain some water onto that track and with the sidel the uh contractor even asked permission to put dirt on that track we agreed to it we had difficulty getting the dirt off but we finally got the dart off but we have never got the water off the uh diagram number two chart number two shows just a trickle of water going across the track the Christian village which was built is to the right of the water draining toward uh behind Dollar General and the drug store there uh plant number three shows um much greater flow of water if you go down and observe behind

[4:34:19] I believe it's the drugstore Dollar General you'll find uh uh four to 5 foot drop offs where that water drops off it looks like a waterfall and it goes down and it eventually ends up on College Hills Boulevard uh when we had that much water we first went to the state of Texas they looked at it and they said not a state of Texas problem State Highway problem it's a city problem and we said why is it a city problem they said because of all the construction west of 306 the apartments the buildings it's caused much more drainage and it's not because of 306 so we come to the city and we've been to the city several times uh trying to seek help from you to correct that drainage problem uh West Texas Christian Foundation was Char was started by the Johnson Street Church of Christ after we built uh Christian village it was such a success the goal to build housing for elderly affordable housing we were going to build more but we could never get the drainage problem solved so it was going to be too costly for us to do it so we dropped those plans we're now wanting to sell that property and Mr eustus has helped us and there are prospects of people considering purchase but not until the drainage problem is solved and so we want to sell it and get the money to do other functions for West Texas Christian Foundation there are enough uh apartments for elderly that we don't feel like that we need to full fill that need other than what we have so we would appreciate uh your uh putting it on your agenda and finding a way one thing

[4:36:22] that's in your packet that uh we wanted to bring to your attention is a letter to Jim strer who was president of West Texas Christian Foundation dated April 24 1997 and uh at that time the uh city manager Mr Adams was in ating yes we want to help you our problem is is finding the funding and soon as we pass this half cent sales tax that'll give us the funding well the half cent sales tax didn't pass as you know the first few times it was put before a vote but it finally passed well we haven't been able to get prior councils to say we need to have some of that to fix this drainage problem and since then we have the drainage fee that we are charging and and that's what that fee I assume is for so we appreciate you're listening to us again if we can answer any question provide anything uh take you out there let you see it we be welcome to do it we just need your help so that we can get our value out of that property and use it in our other charitable function could we just have Daniel write you a letter dated 213 would that no that won't do it that won't work no Danny what can we do with storm water on this is there some way that the storm water can fix this or work on it at this point I know when Clint Bailey was here uh as far as engineering we did have he worked up three different options that uh would be available for us as far as the cost estimates and so forth so we'll have that available also when we do meet and discuss the capital Improvement as far as priorities and so forth and I'll share that information with all the council members do you think maybe we could get some answers and maybe put this on the agenda maybe September October just to give these guys some some knowledge of what we're doing sure absolutely the deal is of course is that when we go through the CIP and prioritize our CIP and so forth that's when we'll get indication from the council exactly where you know where this this project will fall it does need

[4:38:25] to be on the CIP and as we go through our budget we will work uh we'll be through with the CIP and the budget in October so possibly November December we can put this on the agenda and H have hopefully have something for you well good if you don't mind if we haven't heard from you by December if you don't mind I'll remind you is that okay that would be great thank you I've got emails on the city website my all my personal numbers and my home phone give me a call we'll get it on there sir thank you for listening to us any question have estimates from uh Clinton Bailey before he left St Angelo and several options that he gave for repair or whatever it needs to be done so at budget session we can share those with the rest of the council good good well we can supply anything we'll be happy to Daniel thank thank you yes I look forward to working with you too so thank you mayor uh again just to reiterate I'll be scheduling meetings individually the council members will go through the the budget and also the capital Improvement projects and we'll discuss with them we will work on this Mr Carter Mr hustace let's move on to the next one let's go back budget items is there else out there the budget items we were not going to deal with until we have had individual meetings with Daniel and we'll work on the CIP is that agreeable with everyone yes just was wondering if there was anybody else with public comment I thought I saw somebody earlier but she's up there now never mind anyone else have public comment on this item before we move to the next one let's move to the next one okay we are on the first public hearing and consideration this is item number 14 of an ordinance amending the water conservation and draft contingency plan an ordinance of the city of St Angelo Texas amending chapter 11 in article 11200 water conservation and drought contingency plan by amending subpart D entitled water supply stage drought level one of Section 11.21 3

[4:40:28] drought stages and Water Management measures to limit watering of Lawns Gardens landscape areas trees shrubs golf courses except greens or other plants being grown Outdoors to once over seven days providing for severe ability and providing for an effective date Mr Dixon thank you mayor that just about sums up what this is about uh the last council meeting uh there was interest to amend the current water conservation drought conserv contingency plan and the the instructions that we were given was to change drought level one outside watering from twice every seven days to once every seven days and that's exactly what this is it's the first public hearing introduction of ordinance so anybody have any questions I'll be glad to answer it the way I remember that's exactly what we told you to do do I have Council comments yeah I agree this is exactly what we but if we if we go two to one that's basically what we're doing does do do no we changed drought level one from twice ever seven days to once ever seven days now what exactly is in drought level two where how does drought level two change okay the only other thing that's different between drought level two and drought level one is the extra charges for water usage okay there is more dur in drought level two higher charges than in drought level one so that's only difference okay don't you go

[4:42:31] over how many, gallons 10,000 or I think syus is asking for a a breakdown on that ready and there drought level one a fee will be charged for water uses Amounts is set forth below this fee shall be in addition to the standard fee charged for water usage shall be in L of the excessive usage fee is defin in section 11.22 for a single family residential accounts an additional fee of $2 per per thousand gallons shall be charged for all usage from 25 through 34,000 gallons during a billing billing period an additional fee of 350 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 35,000 through 44,000 gallons during a billing period an additional fee of $6 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage over 44,000 gallons during a billing period usage on a single family residential account shall be the total usage at the address which is determined by adding together the usage on the meter supplying the residents and the usage on the meter supplying water to the landscape watering system for All Landscape meters except those at single family residential family residences schools colleges Parks cemeteries golf courses or athletic facilities an additional fee of $2 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 75 through 94,000 gallons during a billing period an additional fee of $350 cents per 1,000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 95 through 114,000 gallons excuse me from 95,000 through 114,000 gallons during a billing period and fee of $6 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage over 114,000 gallons during a billing period That's drought level one drought level two the a fee shall be charged for water usage and the amounts as set forth below this fee in addition to the standard fee charged for water usage and in lie of the water usage fee set out in

[4:44:34] section 11.23 D3 the excessive usage fee is defined in section 11.22 for a single family res single family residential accounts an additional fee of 350 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 10,000 through 19,000 gallons during a billing period an additional fee of $5 $5 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 20,000 through 29,000 gallons during a billing period an additional fee of $8 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage over 29,000 gallons during a bill period usage on a single family residential account shall be the total use usage at the address which is determined by adding together the usage on the meter supplying the residence and the usage on the meter or meters supplying water to the landscape watering system for All Landscape meter except those at single family residences an additional fee of 350 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage from 60,000 through 79,000 gallons during a billing period an additional fee of $5 per thousand gallon shall be charged for all usage from 80,000 through 999,000 gallons during a billing P billing period and an additional fee of $8 per th000 gallons shall be charged for all usage over 999,000 gallons during a billing period so that's the difference since you asked for that Johnny you need to repeat it back okay you me go over that again I was trying to hurt I missed the fourth line on the second one I'm kidding is there any more Council comments on this just one uh at one time when we were doing a uh ordinance change we had asked that the changes be highlighted in Red so that we would as we were reading along we would know what we changed and I don't see that okay noted we'll make sure thank you thank you

[4:46:38] ma'am Ricky you don't remember that would you like to read the parts that need to be highlight highlighted red I'm just kidding highlight and red we changed twice once it's getting too late in today for this is it Ricky okay any public comment on this if not I'm looking for a motion I'd like to make a motion that we pass the ordinance as written I'll second that we got a Mr fling Fleming has made the motion Silas has second it if no further comment all oh yes sir mayor I'd just like to remind uh the council and public that uh when we restrict the sale of water we place a like restriction on our ability to generate Revenue which pays for all the things we've been talking about today and so I know we're managing that Water Resource as we as it gets low and we get concerned about it we also have the financial side that that warrants attention and management understood thank you all in favor of the ad adoption of the ordinance as presented please say I I any opposed ordinance passes 70 okay we have decided that we would put Mr Silva said he would pull item number 15 for another for another council meeting so we'll go through that one that leaves us with number 16 have you still got questions on that we need to talk about it some more Mr Mayor I believe it's a mute point at this point did we could have discussed it before the others so it's pulled I I agre let's move on to item s this is consideration of awarding water utility bid w1013 groundwater treatment facility and misscellaneous Improvement projects for the Hickory aquafer water supply project to PCL Construction Inc Irving Texas in the amount of 27,1 32193 authorizing the city manager to execute said contract in substantially the attached form and related documents I requested this uh Ricky Dixon will present it and I will say that by a

[4:48:42] consensus on the last council member last council meeting by consensus four of us decided not to listen to it I do not think there was a vote I think it was a consensus by four and we decided to pull this H but I have since talked to City staff I have talked to Mr Dixon and I think that this is important enough as far as timeline in money that it needed to be brought back for consideration for a presentation so that Council would have an opportunity to vote on it however if someone wants to make a motion to pull this thing before we hear Mr Dixon's presentation in lie of last week I will entertain a motion I would just like to speak to that issue would you like to make a motion no sir i' just like to speak to the issue I don't think upon uh scrutiny uh that you should you were in your rights to do that you may dis disagree but we had four votes and you went right down the line and you said and I'm the fourth vote and we're taking this off the agenda we've just got to we've just got to have proper uh procedures here and not have someone uh that's over and above the the the vote of the council and I know I know your your motives are pure but uh I would just ask that we not do this anymore noted I accept that okay good constructive criticism I accept it in such very good thank you but I did ask that it be put back on the agenda and unless someone wants to make a motion to pull it and get three votes we're about to get a presentation is there any motion to pull this Mr Dixon thank you mayor and Council as you said we city has received three bids from three contractors for the construction of the groundwater treatment facility mulation Improvement projects for Hickory water supply the low bid for the project was submitted by

[4:50:46] PCL Construction Incorporated for 27,32 1093 um the project consist of the construction of the groundwater treatment facility with the capacity of 8 million gallons per day new disinfection facility for the groundwater treatment facility and existing surface water treatment facility it is REM recommended that the low bid from PCL be accepted and city manager be authorized to execute the contract documents I also have attached to that a recommendation from from carollo Engineers that also recommends the acceptance of this bid from PCL Construction for the total base bid price of 24396 493 base bid plus bid alate one of 27132 193 in the base bid plus bid alternates 1 and2 27131 193 so with that I will entertain any questions that someone that might have and we also have attached the bid tab to this I have a few questions but I'll defer does who is there any Council wishes to speak to this Don yes sir okay Ricky I'm just wanting to make sure that I understand there's no engineering fees in this those have already been done and what about construction overview is that included in the engineering phase that's included in the engineering fee that does not have anything to do with this bid okay thank you further comment from Council my only question is is can we use these plans and locate this at the walfield instead of bringing this radioactive water into St Angelo Texas and putting it on the banks of the cono River no sir it is very important that and the reason or or part of the reason that the existing location at the surface water treatment plant was selected was we need the access to the Sewer for the disposal of the iron filters basically for a better

[4:52:52] description I mean that's that's key and also this disinfection facility is going to bring our current disinfection facility up to standards with the tcq I mean the existing facility was not big enough to handle both projects so it's included on this to fix it right where it's safe and we don't have to worry about it and it will handle the surface water treatment plant as long as the groundwater treatment plant and I believe that's one of the main reasons that this s was chosen can we put it outside of the city limits does it have to be on the banks of the cono River same same same answer pretty much I mean I guess anything's possible I'm not going to say we cannot do that but I don't know what the delays and the cost would be Hut do you have any idea sir Ricky Rick is right that you know this design the location is specific to the water plant can we do it someplace else yes but we have to redesign uh a lot of the things and the disposal has been is is the big the big issue here nothing is going to go to the banks of the river um the even if we have a spill the uh concentrations of the water is like 35 pyur per liter at best if if we don't get any treatment and the uh what what what's allowed to discharge without even having any alarm is 60 picures per liter to a river based on my understanding and knowledge um and so at this point in the game it it it will require significant um you know time and and effort to relocate it to a different location plus we us using a lot of common facilities with existing surface treatment plan including the disinfection facility thank sir any other John Hutch or Ricky anybody I have a question uh in looking at this bid even the radium removal

[4:54:57] system how does that work the four 4.9 million is that over the the life of the facility or how how is that price play you want to the 4.9 million was the cost the equipment cost of the uh ion exchange vessels with the with the media and so that is included in the $27 million so it's in you know instead sometimes you go and pre-negotiate a piece of equipment with a with a vendor and because you absolutely want to have it you don't want you don't want them to you know jack up the prices at bid date so procurement is one of the ways that you can negotiating openly so once we once the city got this this Capital cost for the procurement then we assigned this purchase then you know to the general contractor who would build this filter if you want to call it the filter plus all the auxiliary equipment associated with it and the total cost of 27 Milli $131 is inclusive of that $4 million right yeah so okay that's there's and and then uh there will be another contract that the city will be negotiating with wrt on the annual um maintenance and and U disposal of that waste too all right thank you if there are no more questions may I have a motion one way or the other I'm going to make a motion uh for approval of this contract with PCL in the amount of 27,1 32,1 1930 as has presented second anyone do I get a second motion fails like the motion fails somebody want to make another one uh I I guess my question is if we

[4:57:01] take no action what happens Ricky if we take no action what happens far as I know the project stops if we can't award a bid we can't have a treatment plan I can't treat water I can't and I'll second his motion and see where it goes we've got a motion and a second that we approve this bid as presented do I have any comment from the floor come on up Mr Carnell and identify yourself hey Mr mayor council CH Cornell uh of single member district 5 and I would say failure to award this project uh would be a horribly irresponsible action on the part of the council we are at a critical phase in the development of the Hickory oer wellfield frankly uh the time frame is too close for my comfort I think Mr Dixon would agree and we need to get this underway as soon as possible thank you sir I might add one other statement that something I've been thinking about and if if we don't do this treatment plan and and we've spent $73 million on this project we've have a 8,350 th000 annual debt that the citizen rate payers are saddled with now because of this Hickory project and we don't build a plant we can't treat this water and on a on a good day uh if we have surface water and we can blend at a 7:1 ratio just to make it easy and we're using 21 million gallons of water a day okay I can blend 3 million gallons of that water basically we have saddled the rate payers with this this debt for water that they basically can't use and I have no way of generating Revenue to pay this debt so I just think that's important that the public are to know that that you know this is where we're at we've spent $73

[4:59:03] million to get this far to try to get a more stable source of water for the citizens of St Angelo so I thought that was important thank you thank you we do have a motion we do have a second to accept I'm now going to call for the vote all of those in Fair in in favor of accepting the bid of 27132 193 for the water treatment plant please say I I let's have a show hands on the eyes nay motion passes with a five 52 with a 5-2 vote let's move on now to item number 18 this is consideration of adopting a resolution of the city of s Angelo city council awarding RFB number e113 Engineering Services Avenue P Street and drainage Improvement project teres Albert Inc and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an agreement for construction of Avenue P Street and drainage remediation project between the city of St Angelo and REE Albert Inc in accordance with said bid in substantially the attached form said agreement being subject to recision on December 31st 20113 should the necessary rideway and unnecessary easements not be require acquired by City before December 31 20113 as provided under such agreement interim city engineer Mr Wolf good afternoon mayor council um we're here to award a bid hopefully for Avenue P Street and drainage Improvement project uh before we do I'd like to give you for the new council members and anybody watching at home a brief update or brief overview of what the project is um Avenue P Street and drainage Improvement project was designed to alleviate all the flooding issues that we see along Avenue PE neighborhood that whole area you could characterize it as a true neighborhood um all the residents have lived there for many generations they they're grandparents that live there and

[5:01:05] they've all experienced severe flooding over last several decades uh um it has increased somewhat over the years due to Upstream development at ASU and uh on the west side of Bryant Boulevard you can see here on the right side of the screen is a um old picture from the standard times in 1987 of dealing with the flooding issues then um Council was aware of it back then too but no funds were available to help these these local folk there um here's a picture from uh one of the flooding events and it it happens fairly often you can see how high the water can get in the street there and of course as it gets in the street that high it then gets up into the yards and up into the homes and there are a number of homes around there that have flooding and in this picture you can see a little over about a foot of what it was in you can see about a foot or so a little higher than that of of flooding there which of course goes in the house and and destroys all these people's properties um a little bit of other background is in 2000 we obtained a master drainage plan from free and nickels out of Fort Worth in that plan they analyzed 57 different drainage areas or drainage issues across the city um they ranked them on various issues but uh this Avenue PE drainage project came in ranked number two out of all 57 projects U what this project is is a underground storm sewer system basically a big box Culvert that will catch water that's flowing across Bryant Boulevard at Avenue PE it takes it Underground and carries it underground all the way east past South chadburn Street um across a private property and then out um discharges it out by the r Royo over there on the right side um that piece of property on the east side of South chadburn there is privately owned um so we do need easements across there and that can be discussed here in just a little bit too uh this project was out for bid in February we open bids in March uh there

[5:03:09] were two biders on this project reys Albert Inc and Oscar Renda one of them is local the uh I do need to note there this this price right here should be 2,856 661 I just noticed that a while ago and I apologize for that um ree Albert Inc we did select as the lowest responsible bidder and we're asking to award the bid to them today there is some contingency on that um the property as I said south east of South chadburn Street is private owned so we do need to acquire easements across there these easements have been in discussions for months now about a year um they were to be gifted however situations arose where um with lean holders on the property that um we're going to have to actually pursue uh financial means to to get these easements and potentially imminent domain if necessary um that is the the next item 19 on the agenda is to actually pursue these easements um here's just a diagram of these easements for you to be thinking about it's a 50ft drainage easement for the uh actual storm sewer itself and then a 40 foot temporary construction easement which will go away after the the project is complete um what we're asking here today is in an effort to protect the city against Rising construction and uh material construction production costs ree Albert has actually agreed to hold their bid prices steady and firm if we award it now contingent upon acquiring those easements we do not have the easements right now we're in the process of getting them but uh if we have to reject bids and weight then you know we have to rebid the whole project and start all over with the thought that potentially new bids would come in higher because construction costs are going up production costs of Steel and concrete are going up but we would like to award today with Reese Albert holding their bids contingent upon us getting the easement it's necessary we have until

[5:05:11] December 31st in the contract to do that um if we cannot get those easements in that time which we feel pretty certain we can if we cannot then uh this whole contract becomes null and void and there's no obligations on either part the city or the contractor to move further that's that's item 18 Johnny you want to talk to this I know this is your pet project you know and and I can appreciate James Carter and Steve uses for what they're trying to do because I feel for those folks as well as I feel for these uh I went up on a Sunday morning after a rain event back in August of a couple of years ago and I was standing right there and every room in that house in the in that neighborhood it was about I think the water hit at least 4 foot tall it was 4ot deep I'm saying but the inside of the house was just a mess and this idea has been uh has been an ongoing idea since uh 19 the picture you saw of uh Gary asavela that was a 1993 photo and they have been kicking it around and and you know just tossing it back and forth and and I it it's terrible you know you get a 2in rain and and you see conditions like that so again you know I hope that I have the support of folks to move forward with this and we've been talking about it almost two years now when even myself and uh uh Harold Dominguez and and had a town hall meeting with these folks and it came back up again so I certainly uh feel for them when it happens I thought about them this morning I said I wouldn't be surprised if there's flooding going on out there right now or you earlier today so again I just want to you know it's it's it's good for the neighborhood uh the safety issue is what I think it brought it to light because heaven forbid we have another drowning out there like we did at a park north of town but uh you know that's the last thing I I want on my conscience so I represent the area and uh I'm here in in

[5:07:16] support of this so I'm having said all that I'm I'm I'm going to make a motion for approval of this item and again we don't have anything to lose you know we have till December 31st to iron out the The Kinks that we've come across and unfortunately but uh yeah I'll make a motion to approve this item as as presented looking for a second I'll second that that's a motion in a second you're happy with this Chris absolutely okay any other comment yes Don where's the remainder of the money coming from your bids your bids at uh 2 milon 593 M and under Financial impact you'll got 2,800,000 and then 360,000 from starmore you're right 2 2,400 something, I don't remember where where we worked at I know when we dealt with this before we had the money sources fixed you remember well we will be scaling the project back if we cannot secure any more of that funding we will be scaling it back just a little bit it still maintain all of the objectives of this project but we will get under budget I believe there was some storm water funding well three showing 36 storm storm water and general funds I know I know we talked about it and we had it all worked out where there was enough money I just didn't remember yes sir it was it was discussed the budget issue on this was discussed um it's in this year's budget it's actually actually it was uh discussed actually a couple of months back when presented in component there was a component in there that should have covered the full cost I'm I'm so sorry I can't even recall I can't remember it but I know we did we had it we had it figured out yes and scale back was one of the yeah uh items necessary okay we can pay for it done okay any other comment from Council do I have any comment from the public if not I will call for the mo I will call for the vote on this the motion has been made that we accept this bid as presented it has been seconded

[5:09:19] all those in favor say I I any opposed 70 let's move on into the next one this is number 19 consideration of adopting a resolution authorizing the acquisition of a permanent drainage utility easement and temporary construction easement across certain real property east of South chadburn Street at Vue P required for the Avenue P Street and drainage Improvement project and authorizing the city manager to execute all contracts and other legal instruments necessary or convenient to acquire set easements finding a public use and benefit therefore and authorizing initiation of imminent domain PR proceedings pursuant to law if necessary to acquire the property for said easan Mr Wolf yes as I did mention in the previous item we are uh looking looking for these easements um I know the legal department is in conversations with the property owner's attorney the discussions are being had and I feel pretty certain that we're going to have a deal worked out pretty soon um if Things Fall Apart then we could pursue IM imminent domain if necessary but uh that that's what we're here to do is just get your authorization to pursue the acquisition of these easements and I do want I do want to mention I'm sorry that uh this of course um we'll bring back to bring back to the city council for your final approval as far as the proposed uh so again it will come back to you and you'll know with the amount and I guess to go along with councilman bman where are those funds coming from when we make the deal will yall those funds will come from the project those are project monies okay Mr sis you want to make another motion sure I'll make a motion to approve item number 19 as presented Mr Fleming you want to make another second I'll second that any other comment from Council comment from the public if not we have a motion to accept it uh all of those in favor please signify by saying I I any opposed nay another

[5:11:22] 70 okay we have already dealt with item number 20 we are just about to break to go back to Executive session to complete our our session y'all want to go ahead and get 22 out of the way and 23 let's get 22 out of the way if that's if that's and then we will break and go back to executive and then we will come back and conclude with item number 21 but item number 22 is consideration of approving various board nominations by Council and designated council members Civic events board Michaela Brownfield smd4 Ford koncho Harry Terrace Harry Thomas smd4 Planning Commission Sammy farmer smd4 to an expired term January 20115 do I have a motion move approval second I have a motion and I have a second do I have comment from councel do I have comment from public no comment I'm sorry no further comment I will call for the vote all in favor please say I I all opposed motion carries 70 consideration of nominating and approving two City Council Members to serve on the investment oversight commit and I believe that we did have mayor new and yes mayor new and Kendall hfield were on this committee they have they are no longer with us we need to appoint two members to serve on this committee I'm looking for volunteers Rodney Fleming said he'd volunteer there's one looking for another who else you volunteering Don I I volunteer of Charlotte either one well thus far Rodney's been volunteered and Charlotte's been volunteered I volunteer Charlotte that's a good thing Rodney will you serve sir yes charte will you serve graes they do provide graes okay we have in a roundabout way we do have two volunteers we have Rodney Fleming and charlot

[5:13:25] farmer do I have a motion to approve these move approval second I have a motion and a second any further comment from Council comment from the public all in favor of Charlotte and Rodney please say I I any opposed that has been taken care of and that was with a 70 V and I guess that's where we need to break for the uh executive and then when we come back we will deal with consideration and possible action on matters discussed in the executive closed session that's number 21 do I need to read this again miss bowling or will it suffice that I read it once already are you um speaking of reading the caption for item number three within please read it read it again okay now the one will be that we will deliberate on is the last one this is section 551 0741 to deliberate the appointment evaluation reassignment duties discipline or dismissal of the S Angelo city manager assistant city managers all of the department directors and acting or interim Department directors it is exactly 5:00 and we will now go to Executive session thank you 50 and we are coming back into regular session item 21 is consideration of and possible action on matters discussed in executive so closed session if needed and really there was nothing said in executive we were very very careful about anything that we talked about we did talk about the duties of the city manager we did talk about the charter and the duties of the city council with the city manager and basically other than those few remarks we had very little to say in executive and really I have nothing to report about our executive is there anyone on the council that would that like to add anything to that for public for a regular

[5:15:30] session I think we better disclose we talked about the TR cities we did talk about the TR cities that was on the that was on an executive item that we I think that was number two but we did talk about the Tri Cities and there will be more information that Daniel is going to bring us about the Tri Cities and the expenditures and we will be talking about that again that is that issue is very much alive but item number one that was item number one okay I know it was on the ex item number one it was it was one of the items that we spoke about at noon just barely can remember back I think it was a very good idea of of us scheduling the retre Retreat here Monday soon so I think that's a very very good idea we did talk about a possible retreat but that was not on the agenda anyhow that's that's about all that we talked about there was nothing no Earth shattering groundbreaking news Mo uh agenda items let's see uh we have the announcements and consideration of future agenda items I did have two that I asked for last week that I told Alicia to go ahead and put on off because they were not that important but I think it's time I want one of them on it anyway so which one I want the one about the December uh January 3 2012 meeting the the code of code of ethics of conflict of interest that we abolished I want to discuss that and put it back into our bylaws but my other one we can just let it ride because I know we're probably going to have another heavy I hope it's not as heavy as this one but who else has any agenda items Mr Fleming I have two items uh the first one would be discussion of possible action on placing a moratorium on any RV parks or man camps inside the city limits the second one is uh discussion and possible action on stopping the uh the shooting off of fireworks at Twin

[5:17:33] butes park that's it Mr s u you I believe right I believe you U told me you submitted something in writing on that and you you want it on the agenda like it appear like you yes not not not the way you actually I want to do it I want to do it this way winky uh I've discussed this with several different people and the moratorium will be a different I think it's going to be a different way of doing it the better way of doing it because we could reverse it if in a year or two if we had to okay you said how did you say that then I'd like to have possible discussion and action taken on placing a moratorium on allowing RV parks or man camps in the C City Limits there is no designation r with all du respect there is no designation for man camps so you um people camp manufactured homes or RV parks are the only two designations we have okay the then I would say to include RV or uh trailer parks no no manufactured manufactured homes andv Parks RV parks thank you the uh mayor uh the man camps uh we were instructed fall into group living and we're working on issues asso with that if it's all right uh in association with that agenda item we'll bring what information we have uh related to that item also U so thank you Michael okay and and then on on the agenda item that I requested did did uh you and Mr Floyd and uh possibly find some new information uh

[5:19:39] we did discuss um Mr self requested uh an agenda item that talked about the etj and what options we had and uh M uh Steve Floyd one of our County Commissioners attended our recent I think he's attended a couple of housing meetings now and attended the recent meeting uh the consensus of that group was to uh we have an agreement with the county I won't take too much time but we have an agreement with the county where we design who does what Duty in the etj the consensus was that we should work together with the county to strengthen what happens in the etj which means probably handing some things back to the county but uh also the group said beyond the etj that we would support the county and work with them for uh Solutions also that we didn't just need to create an artificial border yeah could in one of the near Council meetings could we have that as an agenda item that goes along with my deal you know it might be appropriate for that to come with okay because that housing group has been working on that and and we can bring what we've got on those issues and they're working on increasing the etj I think it needs needs to be two separate items though one we can do that one one follows the other or something yeah that'll work perfect thank you I did one my want my item brought back on the water consumption update uh thank God you know for sending this rain but I'm still curious Charlotte I have a a request for a report and the amount that it was going to cost to look at our Billing System to see if we could bill in 100 gallon increments instead of thousand gallon increments uh as most of the new council members probably don't know how that works and we've never gotten an answer to that subject to uh answer to the citizens and I've had a few calls

[5:21:40] wanting to know when we're going to come back and report that because they really want us to go to 100 gallon and not a thousand gallon report and okay we do have some prelim preliminary information we're waiting till after the the dust settled from the election and can can bring that back September October is fine I just want it on the agenda as a future agenda item okay because I know we've got a lot of stuff and then um this is not an agenda request but I last meeting I had requested U we maybe take a look at around town where we were minus some street signs that we needed more notification and um there is a sign that is up on SOL Ros at the aoya if you're going from the loop going inside that has just been recently put up uh with reference to the possibility of high water but the sign is after you're already out in the middle of the aoya to read it and you can't read it from say the SHP sign because of the tree uh in the view and we need to look at that and see if we can have better placement of that sign in my opinion Charlotte and Sh okay we'll check out we'll check out we'll check out that sign on S Ross as far as the overall situation my notes say uh Charlotte I don't know if we had that as a Charlotte item but we did have signs Shane Kelton is working on the signs issue and uh we'll we'll bring that remember we had a a me a citizen make public comment about signage and she referred to certain parts of town but we really in all parts of town we have lots of unmarked intersections and the question for us will be what level of commitment and I also the opportunity if I could Mr Mayor I wanted to apologize to Ricky Dixon I was not uh picking him out singling him out last meeting because I know it wasn't his work that I was questioning he just in inherited the work so I I'm sorry that he's gone but uh maybe he'll

[5:23:43] hear that I am sorry that it reflected I reflected it on him thank youl Charlotte excuse me mayor I can add to your items Charlotte uh I've always had very good uh very good luck with there's a gentleman that works for Shane Kelton on the signs signage Alonzo Carrasco I've got his cell I call him he could you know I always report all these signs that are vandalized or just need replacing and he's always been there for us well tell Alonzo thank you we're getting the four-way stop out on the Bluffs and those folks could not be happier and then also on your request for the water usage or the not water us the 100 gallon idea uh Michael if you would add also and I had requested it a while back but you triggered my memory uh it was brought to my attention that there's some folks out there that think that we are actually being build 13 months of water usage for 12 months of usage 13 months versus 12 so look at that and see it I guess it all depends on it is it's the number of days Johnny I've looked at it and it some people do feel it works out to be 13 months a year instead of the 12 so you you all can look into the all right Don um I had a couple of requests one can set but I'd like to go ahead and talk about um us having an evening meeting I I noticed that seems like even these meetings are are better attended but I'd like to discuss it with the council about an evening meeting and then I'd also uh like to look at a resolution for ASU to be able to uh Drive their little maintenance golf cart mule type vehicles on on the city streets winky yeah I have Mr Mayor I have one item uh that I'll flesh out in writing and get get it back to the city clerk having to do with Clos session on Personnel that's all

[5:25:48] probably I will entertain a motion a motion to adjourn second all in favor say I I let's go

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=gr3H2C-JKPY