City Council 9-19-2023

[0:00:00] 18th of September 2023 it is 8 33 a.m in the morning [Music] as usual we will start the meeting with our chaplain prayer and pledges and we have chaplain Gary and Marcella Jenkins here to lead us in both if you will please stand good morning everyone God bless you dear God we ask you your blessings on the people who have been called to lead the community in which we live and work help our leaders who do not ask first how do we fix this but what do we need to do to learn how might we need to change and to whom do we need to listen remind us as a community because we are forgetful from time to time especially in the noisiness of what passes for political debate today that they are not only leaders but also servants and that is their responsibility and ours to serve the common good for all grant us to wisdom and courage to know and do what is right and good and true maybe speak out when it's time to speak out and listen patiently and receptively when it's time to listen may we always be guided by the spirit of love this we pray in Jesus name amen repeat after me the pledge please of America and the Republic for which it stands one nation under God individual with liberty

[0:02:05] and justice for all honor the Texas flag I pledge allegiance to the Texas one State under God one and indivisible thank you Lucy if you will join me up front this morning we have a proclamation for the Hispanic Heritage Month and so those in the audience who are here to receive this please come forward Hispanic Heritage Month observed annually from September 15th to October the 15th is a time to celebrate and honor the rich cultural heritage traditions and contributions of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the United States during this month we recognize the significant impact Latinos have made and continue to make in shaping our nation's history economy culture and Society Latinos are driving Prosperity power and progress and their contributions are integral to the fabric of our nation Hispanic progress is American progress as Latinos are the majority minority in the U.S and a significant proportion of the country's youth economy and Workforce the Hispanic community is driven by the American dream with a strong belief in upward mobility and life Improvement Hispanics are the newest injection of energy to our country representing a significant portion of population and Workforce growth Hispanics are young hard-working and optimistic with a strong belief in the value of hard work and higher

[0:04:08] aspirations for Career Success Hispanics are critical to Corporate America and the economy with a substantial GDP and a significant role in entrepreneurship Hispanic contributions are evident across multiple Industries including Sports culture retailing media entertainment Agriculture and more Hispanic culture is shaping Global culture with Latin music becoming one of the top five most consumed music genres in the U.S when faced with challenges Hispanics consistently rise to the occasion demonstrating remarkable progress in education and income growth Hispanics represent sustained secular growth contributing to our nation's progress through age economic influence population growth and education attainment the theme for Hispanic Heritage Month 2023 is Latinos driving Prosperity power and progress in America as designated by hispanicstar.org now therefore I Brenda Gunter mayor of the city of San Angelo Texas on behalf of the city council do hereby Proclaim September 15th through October 15 2023 as National Hispanic Heritage Month in San Angelo Texas and celebrate the rich Heritage contributions and achievements of our Hispanic community thank you mayor um just think everything was that was read in the proclamation tells the story about why we're celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month we became an organization back in 2019 and when I say we it's the San Angelo Hispanic Heritage Museum and Cultural Center we we started an initiative to create a museum that will pay tribute to our contribution here in San Angelo and in the surrounding 15 counties so we ask if you can to join us on Thursday September the 21st at six o'clock at the McNeese Convention Center

[0:06:13] for our first ever Hispanic Heritage Month banquet it will be a celebration kick kickoff for the total celebration of the month and we're going to be honoring some of our members that have participated in shaping our community so we thank you very much for for this [Applause] yeah we will now open up the public comment portion of the agenda issues or concerns not on the regular agenda may be raised by the public at this time citizens should speak from the podium address all comments to the Deus Again by stating their name and address or single member district number and limit their remarks to less than three minutes do we have individuals in the audience today who would like to offer public comment good morning my name is Derek Darby

[0:08:21] single member district five I'm Madam mayor members of the council I was had some comments regarding a item on consent agenda item number five f um just a bit of History I'm an attorney I represent Contra Valley Construction I'm going to you know what Derek I'm gonna pull that item from consent agenda so if you will just wait a minute and then we will pull it and you can finish with your remarks anybody who would like to come forward for public comment good morning city council and my name is Valenzuela and I'm single member district one I am the President of the Railway Museum and I believe we have an item on Executive session today so I just kind of wanted to briefly say um thank you very much for all that you all do for our community I know that service is hard um and I want to Express gratitude for the previous Boards of the Railway Museum who have set this Museum up we celebrated our 25th anniversary last year and so I think with what they built and with our ability to Market and do events we've really taken the museum to where it needs to be and the contract that we have was signed in 2019 and that was set with the previous board then the board members we have right now and we have accomplished everything that was asked in that contract and we were asked to do expanded business hours to put in a new HVAC system to put in a safety fencing all of that has been accomplished and so um I I loved the Railway Museum because I just think it's such a wonderful part of San Angelo's story and many people have visited in the last three years and we have had other accomplishments as well and we received an award from the Texas historic commission for programming that we did online programming that we did during covid and we have some wonderful

[0:10:24] goals and we are a non-profit we have fundraised we have been able to pay our bills successfully and we do have a lot of historic preservation things that we need assistance with that we have put a lot of funding towards so we that is what we are asking is for the contract to please be amended and to receive hot tax funds in historic preservation and thank you so much for the opportunity it's been a wonderful opportunity to serve the community to see the children's smiling faces at Santa Fe Christmas over a thousand people come to that event where Santa arrives by train and I think that people really love the train market and I think we have such a wonderful opportunity to keep this Museum going for future Generations so we hope that you will support us thank you or their public comment Edwin Guthrie District One I want to hopefully bring the attention that that we could revisit the recycling fee on dealing with uh on the trash pickup contract uh as everybody knows that it's a 50 Cent residential fee that goes directly to the butts recycling center and it's been multiple years and it's become quite obvious that we're never going to reach the amount of recyclable material to do away with the 50 Cent fee first most that he the recycling center does not recycle the heaviest material no newspapers no magazines no glass so basically when you're just taking the lightest material at that tonnage we're never going to reach that goal and I I don't understand why we don't revisit doing away with the 50 Cent fee for the customers due to the

[0:12:28] fact that all we're doing is subsidizing butts recycling business loan payment that's all I have to say thank you thank you very much for their public comment saying no further public comment we will move into the consent agenda I'm going to start by asking that we pull item e and item F Larry do you have any items that you want to pull even a of course I have to recuse myself okay all right Aaron no ma'am Lucy no ma'am Harry you've already pulled mine thank you okay Tom same nothing to pull normally check one two all right with that may I have a motion for approval of the consent agenda with the exception of items E and F second second any public comment saying none will check vote those in favor of approving items E and F of approving the consent agenda with the exception of enf please say aye all right with that I think Larry well he didn't but the consent agenda the two items we pull anyway just make sure foreign yeah did you want to vote to approve the consent agenda with the exception of items E and F yes okay so you're not voting so then the consent agenda with exception of enf passes 6-0 we'll move into item e consider an amendment to the tiers incentive policy regarding submission requirements eligibility and private priority of accessibility improvements John

[0:14:32] yeah this this is uh two different amendments to the tiers policy um the first one it was recommended by councilman Miller um it's a change to allow eligibility for Ada improvements uh it does two things one it lists Ada improvements specifically in the list of eligible items including both interior and exterior improvements you may recall that most tiers projects most of the eligible items are exterior only there are a few exceptions fire sprinkler systems asbestos abatement egress doors that kind of thing this would add improvements to make a facility more Ada accessible to that list of eligible improvements it also adds it in our criteria rankings it lists it as a high priority item and so that's the Ada component the other piece is over recent Cycles the board has sent a few projects back for the applicant to prepare a more detailed site plan so they can see what they're proposing so we've proposed adding a site plan requirement which we actually they changed at the meeting to site plan or drawing we don't want to say that they have to do a full-blown site plan like the development review process requires but some sort of drawing showing what they're doing on the site it would only apply if they're doing side improvements if they're doing fire sprinklers inside the building obviously they wouldn't need a site plan but if they're doing parking lots Landscaping um fencing those kinds of things they would have to show a site drawing showing what they're doing on the site so fairly minor improvements but those are the two improvements that are the changes to the to the policy since we are looking at changing some policies to the tiers incentive policy I want to add if possible the following that Grant requests for funding those who have not applied or received funding she'll take priority for funding

[0:16:37] multiple applications for the same address shall not take a priority or an equal standing okay there there is a provision in there already that's similar to that we could probably tweak that language it does say that priority will be given to projects or people that have not received funding right now it's worded in the past year so once the years passed you're on equal footing with everybody else we could change that to a longer period or just get rid of the period and say we always value somebody who's never gotten money over somebody who has but there is a provision in there already problem is if if let's say you have a hundred thousand dollars right so then they say if there's six let's say five applicants then the his history has been that we give all five applicants the same amount of money not always some some majorities they've prioritized them and in fact the board has considered and not funded projects that had received funding before when there were sufficient number of projects to give funding um but yeah so there's really two choices one is to leave that to the discretion of the board and Council or two to more specifically write that into the policy but that's I defer to just I just need to make sure I know what's currently in it if you say there's language in there I want to understand that language sure I can pull that up and I guess while I'm doing that if maybe we could get Teresa to answer the question to what can they make any change to the incentive policy without it coming from the board at this point or does it have to okay I would not want to go home with you tonight so the wording is um sites and or owners

[0:19:38] that have not received funding within the past year will be prioritized over those that have received funding that's the current wording so but it says but does that refer to the same address or just repeat that again because so it says sites or or so if it's the same owner of a different site that would count if it's the same site that would also count so the same address is included in that someone had multiple facilities or buildings right so the if it's the same owner for multiple properties they would be de-prioritized if they've received funding in the past year okay that covers the issue other comments from Council Larry yes it's wonderful that we've incentivized doing the Ada but my question is are teeth in there that requires people to make changes if they're receiving tiers money there's not anything above and beyond what the normal building codes would require so if you're doing a certain amount of work or you know so for example if you're remodeling your facility but you're not touching the bathrooms you don't necessarily have to bring them up to compliance but if you're remodeling the bathroom then you do have to bring it into compliance and so um we at least as it is right now we would only require Ada improvements if the building code requires it through that process which in many cases it would trigger it but the tiers policy does not place any additional burden above and beyond just the building code so if it's exterior to the building and it's in violation of ADA then there's a compelling reason for the people to correct that is that the way you're reading it well I think yeah the way we would look at it we would let applicants know and encourage them to include that because it's an eligible expense that's similar to

[0:21:43] um some projects that didn't ask for a particular like we had a project you know you can get up to 75 000 in the north um a project only asked for like 45 000 and they didn't include any landscaping and we said hey you can get more money if you also include Landscaping so they did and got the money so I think this would be similar we would encourage them hey we noticed you didn't include any Ada improvements you can get extra money if you'll do that as well code would require ADA compliance depending on what they're doing again if they're not touching that piece so for exterior improvements let's say they're replacing windows that wouldn't trigger making the doorway accessible if they're not doing anything to the doorway but if they were doing anything interior it would it might I mean off the top of my head I don't know all the thresholds but if if you're doing certain things there are triggers that that require it but again we right now we just default to whatever the building code triggers are that push you over the limit to having to bring it into compliance thank you any other questions or comments from Council okay so may I have a motion for approval of item e so moved by Larry second by Karen any public comment saying none will take a vote all those in favor say aye motion passes seven zero item f consider a resolution authorizing the correction of a scrivener's era and ordinance 2023-052 regarding the resign of plan development PD 23-04 on Riviera Lane in the Bentwood subdivision I'll just give you a brief overview of this this was a plan development in Bentwood uh went to the Planning Commission and Council um there were a there was a description in the staff report of what three changes

[0:23:47] were proposed uh in the plan development it was basically single-family residential zoning but with a change to the front setback the floor area ratio which is basically the coverage on the lot there was no mention in the staff report of any change to the rear setback we presented it to the Planning Commission in fact there was a question at the Planning Commission does this change the rear setbacks and the answer was no then it came to council again similar presentation to you all listed the three items that were changing did not mention anything about the rear setbacks however in the ordinance in your packet a staff member inadvertently included a change to the rear setback and part of the issue I won't go into all the details but the applicant originally requested RS3 zoning which had the reduced setback foreign in the Planning Commission there was some neighborhood opposition to the RS3 so they changed it to a plan development instead going back to the rs1 standards and so it should have been changed to the normal 20-foot rear setback instead of the 10 that piece of the ordinance didn't get updated correctly so that's technically what was in your packet our belief and I'll defer to before I get in trouble uh defer to Legal if it gets into the legal issues but basically the short answer is we believe there was no intention of playing commissioner Council to adopt that change in the rear setback and that was simply a topographical error or what what the lawyers call it scrivener's error and so this is a resolution acknowledging that error and basically saying here's what the ordinance was supposed to be adopted as it was to and signed documents do they not have validity I mean supposed to is kind of a whatever it's not a very good word to use supposed to I think Derek's gonna get up here and

[0:25:48] he's going to argue that it does have validity but and I would do that if I had his client but there is a Supreme Court case that essentially could say States very clearly that these kind of Errors don't override the will of a governing body nor would we want them to otherwise we could just be like oops put it wrong and just pass whatever we wanted to so um there's definitely a question there but the precedent that we reviewed and looking at the board meetings and the council meetings and the way John presented it and what was in the staff report there was never an intention um by any body of the city of San Angelo to change that rear setback nor did um John present it as such in fact he presented exactly the opposite these are the things specific things that are going to change regarding setbacks and did not present that one so scrivener's errors most cities have either in their Charter in their code of ordinances a rule that says staff can correct those things if you identify a error in a written document because we review hundreds of documents for accounts Meeting those things happen that we can just review it in-house if we had had that rule or policy we would have just corrected it to what was presented at Council and it never would have come but because we don't have one of those rules and because that development is going to be built out we thought it was prudent to bring it to you to make sure you're directing us to correct the record so it's clear but it's a signed document correct there is a signed document but that does not reflect the action that was taken by this body it reflects the signatures reflect what was obviously when you sign it you are signing a document that says x y and z correct yes but there's often errors in documents that everybody signs and that was one error in this ordinance so yes it was an error in the ordinance that's why we're here today asking to correct it so Brenda go ahead Tom so we approved what was presented correct and we voted on what was presented right

[0:27:49] but and I will go I've talked to parties on both sides of this and each seems to have valid points moving forward it's it's very unfortunate of the state people are in but the whole point is I think it falls back to it is a planned development but we voted on what was presented we don't see it as it goes forward up here as a council and so I get both parts of that but I just want to make sure my questions that I have been given lots of information which was provided to me not my own but even when I went back and looked it was an approval on what we were presented then the scribner's error happened after that and it's very very unfortunate that that happened but I just I want to make sure we got that comment in and John was clear with me said you're held accountable for what you voted on versus what was presented not what was documented and so at that point I'll kick it back I just think it's a super unfortunate situation here so any other questions or comments for John before Derek comes forward makes comments okay thanks John thank you madam mayor once again my name is Derek Darby single member district five and I I agree with 99 of what Miss James said the code for the San Angelo city of ordinance does not include the scrivener's error language that maybe some other cities have but what it does have is chapter 12 exhibit a Article 2 Section 210g there is a procedure to amend a plan development district and it says any amendments to the terms and conditions of an approved plant development District ordinance shall be subject to review and reconsideration in accordance with the procedure set forth in subsections a through F which are the procedures for the initial approval of a

[0:29:52] plan development District my position and not to be repetitive of what I said at the Planning Commission is there's a procedure to amend a planned development District the ordinance that was included in y'all's packages in the April 18th meeting and the May 4th meeting has the ordinance it's still online I saw it when I was getting ready for the Planning Commission meeting that ordinance is there and if the intent of the developer or Planning Commission or the planning department or the Planning Commission was to only change three items then why didn't exhibit B only include those three items that they wanted to change and leave everything else subject to rs1 zoning classification that's been my whole point all along there is a mechanism to amend a plan development District I don't understand why something's trying to be recreated instead of just amending it so that's the position I was going to take this morning could you clarify that Teresa's yeah 0.9 of what he said there is a process to amend an ordinance in this context but the difference that we have that point one percent that we have is a difference is that we do not believe it was ever approved as he believes it was approved so there's no Amendment that's necessary I would argue that if we wanted to make it State what Derek and his client wants it to State and what the actual document States at that point we would need to go back through the process because we actually are amending the direction that was given to us by Council and the approval that was given to this development by Council so that process would be relevant if you're interested in changing that rear setback because we're only changing um what was essentially a drafting error that's not necessary that's a different

[0:31:56] kind of thing that's happening well I I just for the record want to say my client doesn't take the position of what it should be my client was issued six building permits by the city based on this ordinance and then when a builder got the permit and then the Builder went to go build and he spent a bunch of money and now if the ordinance had said 20 won the bill six building permits would not have been issued and two the plans would have been drawn differently and we're really talking about five of the six building permits because one of the properties is well within the 20 feet but city of San Angelo issued stop work orders on the other remaining five on permits that they already approved based on something that's not a record whatever the intention of anybody was that's way before my time I'm looking at is the building permits were issued the Builder started work and now the Builder can't work on five of the six because of a scrivener's error well even if it is a scrivener's error there's no vehicle that I can find in the code to correct a scrivener's error on a plan development District ordinance that's the point I'm trying to make I don't want to get bogged I know there's a lot of noise around this issue but I want to narrowly focus it on my client was issued six building permits he started building and now no building if it's going to be fixed fix it the right way so after it was approved or discussed in Council and approved it then went to our planning department or permits department and they issued permits based off of the signed documents correct

[0:33:59] those signed documents indicated that he could do what he's doing now the question mark is what was a time frame and who finally caught it where where did all of a sudden the red flag come from because he got the permits we issued them the city issued them he went and started working when did the red flag come up I can't answer that question I'd like to clarify one thing Derek said that there was an intention here there wasn't just an intent to do something you guys actually took a vote to change that make those rules in a certain way never presented the way they want us to interpret it today so it wasn't just y'all thought well this would be nice and this is how we're going to do it you voted and directed us to do something did we fail in that direction by putting the wrong number for a rear setback in a document absolutely there's nobody here arguing that we didn't and that there was um when we hand it to our staff we don't expect them to go back and watch a meeting and make sure all that stuff is accurate things certainly slip through the cracks but it wasn't just an intention you guys actually took action here the second thing is that there's other ways for this to be resolved that have not been pursued I know that they've been offered to do a variance on this PD which is still an option for them I mean right now variances seem to be granted based on errors of Staff pretty frequently so I don't know how that would go definitely it's definitely a board decision but I don't think it's unfavorable to them they certainly have some valid arguments to be made there that is also an appropriate way to correct this error but to state that it was just an intention is really misrepresenting what actually occurred in this room regarding that PDD so what council could direct today is for this to go back to the planning I mean the Planning Commission and ask for a variance to allow the project to continue as it is is that correct

[0:36:03] well we we had a meeting with City Staff last week and we did submit variance requests last week the only I had some heartburn with the variance request because of something that said in the code and that is section 207 under the Zoning Board of adjustments there is a subsection e that says the zba shall not Grant a variance that would create some of the following effects number eight the variants will modify any condition imposed by the Planning Commission or city council as part of a conditional use special use or plan development District so obviously says we can't do that I was leery because if if if it if it's the will of the city council to change the ordinance as it exists today that ordinance in my opinion is valid today so therefore us applying for a variance that something the Zoning Board of adjustments shall not do it's kind of a a snake eating the snake Infinity type situation that's what my concern was but we have submitted the variance application okay good um I'll let John talk about portions of that and I'll talk about the snake eating the snake because that goes both ways snake eating the snake there's two snakes eating the other snake here so if you start from the premise that is our premise that you never adopted an ordinance that changed the rear set back that means that the rear setback is the standard setback that applies in rs1 zoning because the PD didn't change it therefore it's not a condition of the PD and so the the the provision that he referenced that said you the zoning board can't amend or can't vary a specific condition

[0:38:07] in the PD that rear setback is not a specific condition in that PD um if it had been then yes he's correct but we don't believe that that rear setback was changed by your vote and therefore it's just the general provision that is variable by the Zoning Board of adjustment and again um I just got a message from Brandon who said that the three conditions that can't be varied are those that the Planning Commission imposed and so we can't go back and change the ones that they've already changed but the other one would be a valid one so John got it though so what we're saying is that in essence what was approved was approved regardless what was signed absolutely not only do we say that but the Texas Supreme Court has said that in some opinions that they've issued saying that staff because of an error either deliberate or you know not deliberate cannot change the will of counsel and the will of counsel here was to not address that back setback that rear setback which is kind of the snake eating the snake part from our perspective if we had to go back and restart the process every time that there's a mistake in the writing of a document that is not good precedent either here or anywhere in the state of Texas a good president as a city either no right because it's not good to have signed documents or documents presented that are not reflective of the vote oh absolutely it's not but that's the whole purpose of scrivener's ordinances or scrivener's provisions and Charters and I find it interesting I mean just because I'm kind of nerdy about stuff like this but the case the Supreme Court case actually was cited a San Angelo case from like the 20s 30s or 40s where the mistake was made back then so these kind of mistakes although they're unfortunate we try not to make them they are not uncommon in government period or in business for that matter so they're just not it's not as uncommon as we

[0:40:11] would hope that it would be the 10-foot setback is in line with what Bentwood Country Club likes or doesn't like and what the adjacent properties like or don't like to partly to answer that but to go back to your previous question why it came up was the the neighbors to the rear of these homes they saw the Builder out there and it looked they were like hey wait a minute isn't he building too close to the property line so that's what started the ball rolling on on all of this um I'll maybe defer um to them to answer some of those questions there is an issue between them and Bentwood and deed restrictions but that's not the city's role to be involved in so there may be issues with that but again that's that's outside of our our realm but um I think according to when we met with them they believe that the neighbors are all on the same page now I I've not heard that personally but but that's my understanding we have questions from Council so what we're saying today is that if we approve this item F that we're asking the developer to tear out the work that's been done on five Lots assuming he does not get the variance he's requested yes but he is in the process to ask for a variance from the Zoning Board of adjustment which decided that he can ask for a variance based off of what Teresa said so why are we even discussing it today if he's going to apply for a variance I don't understand it even being on the agenda or us discussing it for a vote today if it's going to go back to the um zoning board why is it here issue is to correct the ordinance because as you mentioned there is a signed document and if somebody five years from now looks back at this

[0:42:13] property says oh there's a 10 foot rear setback that's what will be the official signed document so this item is to correct that for the record so that the official signed document reflects what you all actually approve that's great going forward so we're going to say we're not adding this to the ordinance basically that says we can do this but he still has the option to go back to the zoning board and ask for a variance on these specific properties and then he'll come back to the city council for another vote or not no no this this item simply corrects the ordinance that you adopted that's all it does it doesn't say anything about whether he was right or wrong or where right or wrong it just corrects the error yes it corrects one number oh he still has the right to go to the zoning board and ask for a variance and if they give it to him then does it come back to us for another Vote or they just give him the variance and he can move on correct one way or the other if they Grant the variance it's all done resolved he can build as he's already started building so just to be clear Council all we're voting on is changing the ordinance to include this language we're not voting on whether he was right or wrong or we're right or wrong we're just correcting the verbiage in the ordinance correcting the record which is really important for him going forward if somebody in this position 20 years from now comes and looks at this variance and it's based on an ordinance that seems to reflect what he got varied it doesn't make sense so and that happens So to avoid that for the future it is important that all the documents are in line with what was actually approved Larry you wanted to make a comment well I agree that the ordinance has to be changed and there's this promise that he can go for variance well that could go yes or no and there he is stuck if it's a no that concerns me because he's obviously made an investment on this and he has he doesn't have a promise for us from us that variants will pass I think

[0:44:18] that's problematic well but it's the process and we don't get a vote on the process it is the process so he can make a decision whether he wants to stop construction and his Workforce will have to work on something else as it moves through that process but that's the process and it's bad enough that we have in fact made a clerical error which has created red flags so we need to allow the process to go forward and that board can decide yes or no whether the scriveners now in effect would be in effect overrides or impacts that zoning issue and there are other Lots in this development that this would also affect as they're developing out so it makes it the whole it's not just this particular issue we want to correct it so going forward he doesn't have this concern correcting an ordinance he has the right to building the verbiage in an ordinance yes great we're correcting the verbiage in the ordinance but he has the right to go back through the process the process allows that so we're not voting on whether we like the process or not it is the process unless we change an ordinance that doesn't allow that process it is the process clear is there an imperative that we have to change this ordinance right now is there something that's going to happen in in the relatively near future that we should be aware of and and vote in favor of this well again I'd like to point out that whether you change tell us to change the error on that drafted ordinance or not your direction Remains the Same before if you want to go and say oh no we're just gonna because we feel bad for this guy we're gonna go and we're going to change that rear setback that's when

[0:46:20] you need to go back through the whole process you go back to the Planning Commission and get them to change that and then come here and then you guys approve changing it we are not changing any of that we are merely correcting an error in the writing so if you direct them to bring back that for further Vote or conversation you can do that but right now all we're doing is changing the verbiage so if this happens in the future we don't the developer doesn't get stuck with an issue the will of the council is valid even if paperwork is incorrect which sounds not good I mean that does not sound good but that's what we're being asked to do today I'm not mistake also I mean I don't I think it was kind of lightly stated here but there are two processes they need to take care of the first is with us but I think they still have an issue with Bentwood unless that has been resolved so the fact that he has already poured on that um project he didn't get approval from the second party in this Bentwood before doing that either so yes this affects him but my understanding is he was supposed to get that approval and made sure they were okay with that setback as well so that's another hurdle they're gonna have to jump but it's not our hurdle it's not our hurt because that's bentwood's hurdle so we we don't have authority to change bentwood's Authority basically so again we're voting on including in our ordinance this language that allows the correction of a scrivener's error period it sounds not good to me that we are saying it's okay if somebody makes a mistake in the paperwork because don't we always

[0:48:23] follow the paperwork or the money one or the other which means the same errors of course this was voted on by the city council and what was understood and was voted on is not what was put on paper which was the error itself and quite frankly I see her listening to this and I do feel like we are a sincere apology for for what happened with this error um this is not something we take lightly we strive to make sure that we do everything we can correctly without error there's humans involved and sometimes that does happen so this is why we're coming back on with this part of it because we do know we do understand what the council had voted on it was just an error on staff and again for that we're sincerely we sincerely apologize for that but we still feel that that needs to be corrected mayor so all we're doing today I repeat is adding to the ordinance the shrivener's error we can deal with other issues that pertain to things like this we're not adding anything changes you're just passing a resolution directing us to correct the ordinance that was already a particular this particular one so I'll make that motion mayor there's a motion and there's a second is there public comment foreign just to correct a few things on the record me coming to city council today is to discuss issues with City Council and nothing more and nothing less the actual text of this ordinance was included in all of your packages in April and in May it's still there online I just want to make make it clear that it was not something that you passed then the document was drafted the actual physical copy of the ordinance was included in all of your packages in April and in May it wasn't it wasn't noticed then thank you oh the but the 10th foot setback wasn't in our paperwork

[0:50:27] initially presented it was only in signing off on the document or is that incorrect background information in your pocket but it was not presented as an issue to be changed during the meeting so as John I mean we have ordinances in the packet every time there's an ordinance but John presents what the actual changes are and that's what you're voting on thank you Everybody Take It 15 minutes so sorry so we are now ready for a vote

[0:52:46] is that right all those in favor of this resolution say I those opposed the resolution passes seven zero with that we'll move on to our regular agenda comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above applicants proponents and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit their remarks to less than five minutes we will start today with a presentation of the downtown San Angelo inks by annual report and I believe Monica Ramos is presenting with the backup support of Dale Velasquez may not need Dell's backup today we'll see good morning Council just nice to know he's in the audience backing you up oh yes absolutely always by my side um so let's see let's get started here I do need him okay perfect the presentation pending yes the presentation is loading right where you

[0:54:48] needed Dale all right this word I know I spoke too soon yeah they'll connect out the Powerpoints how about that charades for yourself foreign y so I'll start with our reporting this is our reinvestment numbers that come from our reinvestment dollars from new constructions from public private properties as of June 30th we're at 3 million two hundred and twelve thousand one hundred and forty one dollars these numbers are collected from data from our city departments as well as the Tom Green County Appraisal District for any new property sales our overall total is shown here of the 284 million seven hundred six thousand seven hundred and thirty three dollars this is really great for downtown that we have the new constructions that continue our mixed beverage and sales report this shows a combination of the two and the mixed beverage report being any entity that sells prepares or serves alcoholic beverages and on the sales end this only shows the city's portion of the one percent the other portions for the state county and Ed are not shown on this chart here but they are a combination and so what we can look at is a difference between the prior Year's first quarter to now and we see an increase across the board with 12 percent increase for San Angelo overall six percent for the central business district and six percent for Main Street if we look at a comparison of the second quarter

[0:56:50] the central business district and Main Street slightly decreased a bit however overall San Angelo has an increase so those numbers look good there and so the trend shows positive for us on our tears projects for the year the South total is 335 963 dollars we have two projects that were recently approved the first being the valley vending location uh Valley vending specializes in the sale and um repair of vending machines jukeboxes pool tables and their request was for facade improvements as we see here that was very much needed and so they'll be putting in some new doors and windows and updating the plaster there the second property is angry Cactus restaurant they're also a request for facade improvements they'll be expanding their dining area improving the kitchen and adding new windows to this property here as well I will make a note Public Announcement for those in the South that are looking to apply for Tears funding the new cycle does open on October 1st and all completed applications must be submitted by November 30th and so the funds will be replenished at this point I added this Boutique Hotel to the presentation as a note of progress Dell and I visited recently with the property owner Kyle Christian Christensen and you can really see the before and after of the progress that's taking place here there will be 40 rooms with two Suites Ada accessible rooms a gym a check-in area conveniently located next to the bar and the pool area so that was very clever we're really looking forward to the completion of this project because it is on a very high traffic

[0:58:52] thoroughfare area and I believe that this will be fabulous once it's all said and done as for new business in downtown we have a total of six since the last time I was here in April we have where well a retail store uh and Screen Printing Texas filament Supply Jacob Martin firm the golden hour Lux 76 and good movement gravity Pilates so this adds to what I had previously presented for a total of 15 new businesses thus far so that's really looking great with all of these new businesses it's not to say that there's not any closures we do have two businesses that are closing their or have closed their doors and that's the grind coffee shop and Bricks Winery and then we do have pure Boutique that was located on Concho they're still open however they've relocated out of our Central business district to North chadburn didn't brick sell to someone who's opening up a new business yes so luckily that location thankfully that location even though one business is doors closed another will be opening and that will be a yoga studio or Spa is what we're expecting to see there so there's another business coming in to replace the the missing business as far as our marketing and promotions the Sheep spectacular continues to just Skyrocket through the roof for us which is really great for San Angelo as far as helping out the artists be able to display their artwork people get to really experience what San Angelo's history stands behind and we're really glad to see that there is now 151 total sheep sponsored and this does include those that may not have made their debut just yet we added those to the list so that's quite a bit there we do have sheep unveilings that we host with the sponsors and tomorrow at October 20 on

[1:00:56] October 20th at 11 30 A.M October September September 20th I was jumping to the next unveiling September 20th at 11 30 a.m Sam's Club is unveiling their sheep so the public is invited to come out and attend the ceremony and then on October 24th at 2 o'clock P.M Central Texas Farm Credit will be unveiling their sheep our downtown stroll is coming up on October 26th this is on a Thursday between the hours of 5 and 8 PM this is one of the largest Halloween events in San Angelo the streets are filled with families trick-or-treating and visiting businesses I know that the YMCA and some of the local churches participate on this day with trunk Retreats so if you're out in downtown on that day please be cautious of pedestrians and join in on the celebrations because there will also be Fall Festival style games on this evening our historic downtown magazine is set to be distributed at the end of October and the highlight of the magazine is going to be the beautiful Concho River so we can't wait to see that media Advantage has done a really great job of working with the magazine and the last distribution of the lady in blue was really great in partnership with old Central Firehouse downtown San Angelo hosted a Mother's Day Mosey event I really think that this was something that was well appreciated by all the mothers we had 12 locations that participated And We Made It Fun by adding a bingo card for the guests and as you can see here at froyo's it Suites downtown watering mine Brewery and Bricks Winery the event was very very well attended and our Star-Spangled Banner concert and fireworks as you all know the fireworks were a very wonderful display we'd again like to thank our sponsor AEP in the city of San Angelo and as well as any of

[1:03:00] our Partnerships and volunteers that we've had with ASU San Angelo live and U-turn for Christ for helping us make this event possible a little more of marketing and promotions continue this is important to us because our goal is to try to help bring people to downtown and really impact their experience in downtown so as far as ASU goes we do get an intern from the School of Business and from the arts department and we also work with the class as well so we helped coordinate to bring students to downtown to take photography of different scenery in downtown they really enjoyed coming out and exploring we continue to be a part of leadership San Angelo's tours we hosted ASU rambunctious week not too long ago and the students were able to come out and explore the dining shopping entertainment and art of downtown this Friday Dell and I will be hosting a historic properties tour for the state board of review and um also coming up is the end Plein Air Visual Arts tour that we will be assisting with as well when is the impliner that one will be on October 27th outdoor painting right I know I was just curious when last week the last it starts on the last week of October the artists arrive on Sunday and start painting on Monday yes we always enjoy that so yeah thank you yes and then this Tour on the 27th and so we'll continue as an organization to do what we can to help boost revitalization in downtown vice president Michael Looney of the Chamber of Commerce stated that Rosenberger gmhb did state that the reason that they decided to move to San Angelo was because of the vibrancy of downtown and I'll also quote Michael here where he

[1:05:02] says Downtown played a role in helping recruit them as downtown is the heart and soul of the community which they value and that's very true it is did you include in your statistics the cell of the the middle sister building um no ma'am that one was not included on there we'll have that for our next quarter that was in January right yes questions Vermont for Monica yes Tom okay of all those businesses that we see come in and start how many of those are say do they buy the property are they renters are they property do they purchase the buildings or are they mainly renters I think it's more of a renters that we have um sometimes it's just a toss-up it depends on the climate but more so Runners that come in for the businesses well and the reason I asked that as renters it's easier for them to move in and try and to do these things when you go to purchase and brick and mortar it gets a little complicated I'm very pleased the fact of how y'all work with people that are I want to try something I want to get out and get outside the envelope a little bit with their personal lives and they've done that I just I appreciate y'all doing that with this group I really do and we do our best to work with anybody that comes into our office that's looking for space we kind of guide them and direct them to what's available we're kind of the liaison that says here's the realtor that you can get in contact with here's the property owner that you can speak to so we we do it we can to really help anyone that has any questions for us we'll do what we can questions either further comments for Monica right thank you Monica thank you I am thinking that what we should do is items B C D and E H hold off on those a minute and do some of these other items and then come back to the actual

[1:07:06] Financial items because there's people in the audience for some of these other items so we're going to hold off on you Tina we're going to move forward on the agenda and I'll call all right so we will do the the item F consider approving Source well contract number 091422-wcp for the purchase of a concrete placement boom from White Cap in the amount of 119 980 utilizing stormwater fund balance and Authority authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents Ryan you're on morning mayor and Council as was just read and as you permit I'll be somewhat brief this is request to purchase this item a concrete placement Boom for the use in the storm water department to be utilized in conjunction with other equipment that's already in place and we're asking for that purchase from Source well Cooperative contract the funding for this purchase will be out of stormwater's fund balance that's the reason on the regular agenda questions in terms of the first question people want to know what a concrete boom is so describe a concrete boom and then we'll take a vote very good you might have seen on some larger concrete projects where there's a large truck with a big boom that's helping those workers put concrete in specific places this is not to that magnitude but it's the same effect so this unit is designed to travel over more sensitive spaces so through Parks or irrigation to get down to projects so that might be along the river or other similar areas that way we're keeping the concrete trucks off of our turf or our sensitive areas and it allows us to put that concrete exactly where we need it to go so for example the difference is coming out of the back of a concrete truck that concrete goes where the concrete goes placement boom allows us to put the concrete within a retaining wall for example or in very small type places allows the flexibility of of that concrete being moved with a machine instead of

[1:09:10] physically so I know our workers are going to be more effective in that measure as well for the questions for Ryan on this item may I have a motion for approval Emotion by Harry is second by Lucy any public comment on these items seeing none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye no Nays so the motion passes seven zero item G is first reading a public hearing of an ordinance deleting the juvenile curfew from chapter 8 article 8.07 division two of the code of ordinances and Teresa you're on yes ma'am this is basically a cleanup ordinance House Bill 1819 was approved by the Texas legislature which basically said we can no longer have a juvenile curfew so since we have one on the books to avoid confusion and make sure our ordinances remain as current as possible this deletes that provision questions for Teresa make a comment yes yes go ahead Harry I'm not enthused about this change in state law I think that curfew curbed a lot of juvenile crime and and young people getting in trouble I would encourage citizens if you feel the same way to contact Mr Darby and anybody else that you know in in the state senate or legislature I think this change is not appropriate and I really believe this will be detrimental to this particular community thank you Harry do we have numbers that talk about prior to this going into effect what juvenile issues existed versus now do we see do we have any statistics on that I don't have any statistics on that but I did want to see what effect this would have on our code of our ordinances and our citations that we write and we we average right around 50 citations a year for juvenile violations like this I

[1:11:14] would assume most of those are in the summer seems like that's when this is really utilized but one thing about this ordinance whenever it was put in place and I think it was actually a requirement of the statute itself is that it has to be reauthorized and so every couple of years and we just reauthorized it a couple years ago PD does go and look and see what kind of juvenile issues we're having to see if this is still an effective way to deal with it and it always has been reauthorized so I'm assuming that they still saw value in it well the curfew changes but misbehavior can still be cited so even though you can't specifically do it because it's a juven it's not a juvenile I mean it's a juvenile curfew but if they're graffiting it still can be ticketed so let's just say the fine it doesn't change the illegal activity and citations for that right let's go ahead Lucy why they went and changed it's about discrimination I don't know why they did a lot of things they did at the legislature this last year I know that there is it feels like in the last few sessions there's been a slow and not so slow willingness by our Texas legislature to remove different authorities from local government I mean the Death Star bill is an example of that which you know a court has put on hold but that could be coming back as well so I have no background when I was going through this with PD they were they were not sure why they had done it either the information that I read was very specific about they felt like it was discrimination of an age group right or wrong I think that's what I read so so Pop Quiz what are we calling a juvenile what age what do we separate this at 18. oh 17 and under yeah if you're less than 18 years old and it had I mean the the way it's written is there's exceptions for work and for after school activities and those sorts of things as well but it is 18 years old

[1:13:15] okay so it's 17 and under 18 years and 12 months and 30 days absolutely just to be specific about that age yes sir Tommy anecdotally I was on the council when we passed this ordinance back in the mid 90s only anecdotally but it did have a noticeable effect on juvenile more than misbehavior but it was a the the law enforcement folks were very appreciative of the help that it gave them at that point I too Harry am uh dismayed that we are unable to keep this and also to Teresa's point we have this had to be reauthorized every so often and it was always reauthorized it was just another tool for law enforcement to have to curb activity that shouldn't be happening so I I too am saddened by that I would mayor even having said that I wouldn't make a motion to approve item G is presented I think we already made a motion yes and we had a second so now it was open for public I'm sorry if I'm not mistaken a memory serves me correct so public comment s yeah Harry did without public comment seeing none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes seven zero item H consider ratifying a Cosa DC resolution authorizing a project under chapter 501 and 505 of the Texas local government code to utilize sales and use tax funds in an amount not to exceed two million dollars to partially fund construction of a Flight Training Facility by Angelo State University subject to city council approval and authorizing the board president to

[1:15:17] negotiate and execute all necessary documents Michael morning Marion Council Michael Dane interim economic development director bringing to you a proposal to enter a to participate in a project with ASU for Flight Training they would like to construct a facility a classroom facility at Mathis field to do this work go back to that slide and show us where on that slide this facility would be you was kind of sloppy down there so it was a little bit it's a lazy exactly it's a lazy you classroom all right that is immediately adjacent to the new Skyline location which they have started construction on wrong wrong direction um they propose a classroom facility which will be approximately 15 000 square feet Falls 22 fall 2023 enrollment 140 students they anticipate 250 000 Jeremy as steadfast 50. all right 250. all right Dr topless get nervous about the expectation you just had two members of the audience pass out I'm already thinking about the numbers um uh the financials um Jeremy has steadfastly said this is going to grow larger and faster than anybody anticipates he is he has told us that there's from day one that there's tremendous demand and he's been right

[1:17:19] and ASU has beat all of their estimates all the way through for growth a Bachelor's of commercial Aviation they do plan on placing a simulator or I know in the past they've talked about more than one simulator um Skyline Aviation is the partner who brings the expertise the actual flight training expertise to um to the program and this is critical as we go through and we measure or attempt to measure the projected economic impact a Skyline currently has 18 aircraft plus seven on order with these current estimates they we will need or they will need approximately 36 aircraft to handle the anticipated demand one aircraft per seven students again at the 250 student level 42 approximately 42 flight instructors these will be students which move through the program achieve completion of the program and will be eligible to move into flight trainer status we've and we've put those students in those instructors into the software at forty thousand dollars for the jobs that are created my only concern there is that that sounds low and over the span of 10 years I would expect that to grow if the next 10 years is like the previous 10 years that's likely to be half again as much but we've got a flat projection in the in the economic impact facility needs they've already leased the footprint from the airport 15 000 square foot new building the current estimate they're still in design current estimate is a is 7.4

[1:19:23] million in change when we initially started talking about this they were talking about something in the six million dollar range and so they split the proposal three ways 2 million from the Eda Grant 2 million from funding they had and 2 million from coast EC they're hunting or have been hunting the additional money they have not asked for additional money from kosa DC the ROI says 6 to 11 years if you consider only the city of San Angelo it's an 11-year projected Payback that comes remember that ASU is not a traditional tax paying entity so the the benefits associated with come from the creation of those instructor jobs and the spin-off from that the sales tax impact of having new jobs created and the student enrollment in other words when you have 200 plus students that come to town and place the man on our services real estate groceries whatever whatever a student spends their money on or spends their parents money on or the uh that has an economic impact so uh the other thing that I think is not listed here I didn't see it listed here is the benefit um that this school will offer will be additional businesses that will probably look at our airport for expansion or creation of new things for example mechanical School Aviation mechanical schools so this is a beginning step for what probably will be an enticement for other businesses to look at our airport for additional Economic Development opportunities mayor you're right there was there's no way to work that in there are other benefits that Jeremy could talk to us about that have to do with uh

[1:21:26] operations I'm sorry go ahead operations operations that's right increased operations increases our profile with the FAA and Jeremy's here he can talk about that kind of thing um again I started to talk about ROI ROI six to 11 years that's a pretty big range it's 11 years if you only consider the city's perspective but keep in mind that uh as Skyline pays taxes technically Skyline is going to pay taxes on that aircraft there when you say taxes also are you talking about the fuel because we also benefit from an increased sale of fuel is that not correct you're correct Flowage fees we we receive a little piece of each gallon that sold the airport does and that helps support airport operations like you were talking about earlier um if you consider the impact of those property taxes played on paid on all that aircraft it has an impact to the school and the county as well and that's where that's why when Bob ran the analysis if you look at all the tax the all three taxing entities locally the ROI could be as short as six years if you look at only the city it would be closer to 11 years the net benefits of the city 1.8 million over 10 years we're putting two in net benefit to us at 1.8 over those 10 years it's higher than that if you include the county the impact of the county and the school district also again because asu's partner Skyline is a for-profit operation they do pay property taxes questions for Michael Dain why are you thinking about questions we have people who know more than I do in the room we have representatives from ASU and we have Jeremy here to talk about airport impact ASU can talk about more about the program let's see where the questions go and see if we need additional support for the presentation so Tom let's all go with the fact we need

[1:23:29] Jeremy to go ahead and come up but I think the key to this is what I mean come on up I think the key to this is what it provides to us in our leverage with FAA all right I do have an issue with the fact of we're gonna oh try to stop a plane we will do anything to get your sympathy at what links you'll go vacations are always costly right well this is a this is a contribution to Something in which we get no direct repayment other than the economic benefit of additional students the cfis we at ASU will pretty much raise our own cfis and keep them in the program but Jeremy tell me convince me how this helps us leverage our airport with FAA you just wanted to see me hovel up here didn't you much I didn't know you were crippled but anyway about a known I'd ask sooner no uh Jeremy valgartz in the San Angelo airport director it's a good question so what this does directly for us is you know the pilot problem is a big problem I won't rehash that because I say it every time I'm in here so obviously we need Pilots is what you're saying we need Pilots there's a huge pilot shortage that's why we only have three flights a day instead of our six flights because there's aircraft to be flown but nobody to fly them um so they're they're helping fill that Gap they're going to provide a direct pipeline to to fill that Gap the other benefit to us is the increased operations because we're down on airline operations a lot of the small regionals are shifting their focus from Airline operations to more general aviation business Aviation and mayor you've been a proponent of that since I've been here um to promote the excuse me business Aviation so this will increase based on the last assessment over a two-year period it'll increase operations 38 000 operations over a year that puts us over the hundred thousand Mark which makes us a busy airport which will help us compete for more discretionary money when it comes to FAA discretionary it's strictly based off how many operations

[1:25:32] and not how many implements so these operations will really help help us compete for more of that discretionary money we're also talking with the FAA it's very early conversations but we're doing CIP meetings about adding an additional Runway which will help with two parallel runways it'll help with the flow of traffic that will also entice more business by having additional Runway and it may open up the other side of the Airfield for more development so that's a really big view of what this program could offer but just strictly the increase of operations really gets the faas mind turning and it puts us higher on the map so who manages this building does ASU management or to Skyline run it it will be ASU it's just a land lease with us we lease on the land and then ASU would be the owner of the facility and they would maintain the facility one of the asks that I would have for this and I support it is that it be made available to you or people who come into the airport who might need a larger facility for meetings Etc so I would hope that we could work together to ensure that your needs for our people who fly in and out that if they need access to a room for some reason that we would be able to accommodate that that would be a tremendous benefit and hopefully ASU can work with us on that so so here's my last one so Jeremy 30 years something changes we do something different we move to a different site facility what happens to this building who owns it when it goes away in 30 years where does that Revenue go from the sale or what happens um since we own the land since the city of San Angelo owns a land and it is a land lease there is reversionary cause in the lease or clause in a lease so after the term of the lease the building would be ownership of the city and then we could lease it to back to ASU or to

[1:27:35] another individual so if you if ASU wanted to turn the building over to us prior to the expiration of that lease it would be ownership of the city of San Angelo answers my questions thank you other questions I'm Lucy yes I just it curious is this bachelor of commercial Aviation is the degree the same as your normal four-year degrees does it take four years or I was just wondering how long we'll have the students do you mind repeating that question I'm Don topliff Provost vice president for academic Affairs yes sir I just wanted to know if it would take the at four years to obtain the the bachelor's degree in every uh Aviation yes it's a four-year program like uh called all bachelor's program it's 120 semester credit hours obviously a significant portion of those credit hours are based in Flight Training but there are additional credit hours they have to meet all of the the same core requirements that all of our students meet with respect to communication English government mathematics all of those things relates to scholarships can you talk through that because I know I've heard from several people this program's not inexpensive and of course it wouldn't be but these students do have access to car scholarships or other scholarships to help reduce the cost of this program it doesn't reduce the cost of the program but it helps pay for it and certainly flight training is not an inexpensive thing um and in the four-year program a student on top of their other tuition and fees it's going to cost them in the neighborhood of eighty thousand dollars in addition so uh obviously scholarships are an important part of that they are eligible and and I will make one other uh observation and one of the things that all of the airlines have have really made a pitch towards increasing the number of Pilots that are people of

[1:29:40] color and females and I'll point out to you that right now between people of color and females in our program we are approaching 40 percent of of that so um you know it's not only this has benefits Beyond just the economic part of what we're talking about and we think that's very important for ASU additional questions do I have a is that the end of your presentation Michael if you're about to vote approval for this I will stop talking stop while you're ahead sometimes right and so mayor I'd make a motion we approve somebody has a motion a second by Karen with that any further public comment no one's coming forward so we will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes seven zero and I just want to remind everybody what I said we need to make sure that should Jeremy need use of that facility for to accommodate any of his clients that we make it available I want that on record please all right we're going to take a break and so it is 1004 we'll be back at 10 18. at 10 23 if you'll please sit down and we will start with the next item on the agenda which is item and item I is considered approving tax increment reinvestment Zone incentive funding for a private non-profit projected at 1720 Martin Luther King ah thank you um John James director of planning and development services this may look familiar this is a a second request to

[1:31:45] uh for a slightly different project than than what came to you before but this is a funding request it is a non-profit organization a church requesting about 68 thousand dollars the total project is about 82 000 with their thirteen thousand dollar match the tiers board did recommend funding the full 68 771.89 that was requested you can see the available North funding is a little over 1.4 million available the summary of their work and and there'll be some additional slides with some photos but uh facade improvements to the building itself some lighting improvements Paving the parking lot and then some Landscaping as well these are just some pictures of the existing site these are some some drawings of some of the proposed changes this is their basically their site plan showing um kind of a rendering of what the building would look like after the improvements as well as the paving of the parking lot and then this is where the Landscaping would be so as you know how just to remind you non-profit organizations that this is the text from the incentive policy non-profit organizations may be eligible for tiers incentives the council and the board must make a finding that there's a significant economic impact that will be created as a result of the project um and so it does also require three-fourths majority of all the members of both the tiers board which their vote was unanimous so they met that threshold and then the city council also must be a three-fourths majority to approve the funding staff does recommend approving approval of the funding for this project and then as I mentioned the tiers board recommended 7-0 to approve as well and I know there are a lot of people here to speak so I just

[1:33:46] wanted to Briefly summarize that the economic Improvement that that the board saw and that the applicants are advocating is that even though improvements to this site won't generate any increased property values for the zone that Improvement of the site benefits the surrounding area dilapidated areas of town discourage businesses coming in it discourages people coming through and shopping at businesses and so even improving non-profit buildings and sites will help spread that to the surrounding area further encouraging Redevelopment and investment in the area again I think that's that's kind of the the overview be happy to answer any questions from Council I have a motion I moved to approve second their second public comment good morning mayor City Council my name is William McLendon single member district six and we're back again to get approval for Gethsemane Missionary Baptist Church we're seeking the approval for the funds to go for the funds to go help outer the outer appearance of our church and property we feel that improving our outer appearance of the church will help to improve the look of the community we understand that tears stands for the tax increment reinvestment Zone and that and that although we do not pay taxes on the property we are able to apply for the grant money because you the city council voted to allow non-profits in the north Zone to to apply because there was

[1:35:49] abundance of money you said in the past that non-profits does not put money back to the system and that we shouldn't be allowed to receive any funds businesses that will be hired to carry out these projects they pay taxes so the money does go back also the money for these Pro projects would solely come from the tiers would not so would not come from the tears because we have to do a 10 percent money match the council should look at the big picture and see that the revitalization is needed and with your help everyone comes out on top that's all I have if you have very much thank you Craig Myers 19 North Washington uh for last 23 or four years I've been involved in all four of the neighborhoods that were designated as blighted back in the early part of this century and uh two really incredible things have taken place one has been in terms of the residential revitalization which includes the Blackshear area in the northern tiers area and the second one has been the revitalization of downtown the revitalization of the neighborhoods has been exceptional uh the best in the state of Texas in that area and I've not seen a better downtown in any small city in Texas better than what you have here but when you talk about the tears part of this issue I do not believe that the north side will ever redevelop as a business unless people begin to understand the difference between them

[1:37:53] and the downtown there are two really radically different things happening one is when downtown started revitalization it had a very very solid area of not-for-profits and government and the hospital and all these kinds of things to generate traffic downtown and also had buildings everywhere A lot of them were vacant a lot of them are run down but there was a place for businesses to come in and redevelop and with the skill and the effort of the downtown organization in the city and and Coastal DC and the Chamber and all these things happened and you really did a great job on the North side there is not a large area of built up business area there's a lot of residential area there's a lot of dilapidated buildings and there's a lot of vacant areas up there as well but what you have is a place that doesn't have the infrastructure or the exceptional business skills of the people around there to do the kinds of things that happen down here and so if there is to be a Redevelopment up there it's not going to be just because you redevelop the businesses that are there you could redevelop every business up there and still not have a base for redeveloping the whole area business-wise and so what you wind up with is as you look at this not-for-profit situation when you take the MLK drive itself what you find is that from the freeway on up to where Walmart is on 29th Street two-thirds of that of all the public buildings that exist there most of them are churches so that if you're trying to redevelop the kinds of Craig that was I think part

[1:39:57] of the previous person's statistics so you can keep talking because I don't think thank you but uh from from that area that almost 20 block area that constitutes it almost all of the area that occupies space that's not residential is made up of churches and they are the ones that attract the traffic that does come up there and they're the ones that people see when they come through though they do not pay taxes but if you are to develop any businesses that do pay taxes you cannot have those spots those areas that are blatted areas and do not uh track people or at least do not repel people so it's an investment in the tax base to see that that much of the public business I mean non-business and non-residential area has something to offer they will be developing a tax base if they improve and with tears you find a way to market the area of the open area to meet the needs of the developing residential area so I think that you know it's it's not it's not apples and apples it's apples and oranges the situation downtown is quite different in terms of the non-profits and their importance to the community and so I hope that this time you see an opportunity to improve an area as the picture showed that will make the next block over have somebody would like to come in and start a new business because it'll be starting new businesses that make that develop not just putting facades on the ones that are there that's important but there aren't that many businesses at all so thank you for their public comment good morning

[1:42:05] my name is Minister you talk a little more into the microphone if you don't mind okay good morning I'm Minister Evelyn Smith against Cinema Missionary Baptist Church SMD 5 and first of all I want to take my hats off to you all for the job you guys have to do it is not always easy so I am here to try to get a little more understanding about the procedure of the tears program because from what I understand the only reason the guest sending me uh application was denied the last time because we do not pay taxes but we but we knew that when we put in the application and when I first heard about the tiers program I came up and asked were there any funds for churches and you said no and you explain why and I'm like okay but then in August you open up the doors from churches and non-profit and especially churches to put in the application so we did so you knew we didn't pay taxes so um but yet I know non-profit organization has been approved for Tears fund and from this city as I watched it on TV a non-profit organization is also actually on the budget for that 2023 uh budget and so just to say we are not a church we're not just a church we are a community action which is a significant impact in our community we feed over 250 to 300 people a day we deliver food boxes during the covet uh 200 to 500 people we do back to school block parties and events and we have high instead of Halloween we have Trunk or Treat which uses our parking lot is on our project that that need to be revitalized we do Vacation Bible School we help people find employment we inform businesses about the tiers program so they can put an application we work with the homeless shelter and our pastor and wife has been put taking money out of their own pocket to help people and we work with all other different churches

[1:44:10] uh three o'clock Services people use our parking lot the community come over use and and use our church and parking lot we help people to be better citizens for themselves and for the city we Empower people so if non-profit organizations and churches went out of business the city would probably have a lot more to do and that's another significant impact we are not just trying to fix our church we're trying to fix the community just because a business building uses tears funds to beautify their business that still doesn't mean people is going to come if you don't have a nice looking public area and you probably just heard that uh people not going to come people are not going to stop them we got Subway and Church's Chicken they're on brine Thruway but they don't do very well either because the area doesn't look very nice I've talked to them about that the area doesn't look nice and so that's another significant impact we we want to attract people to our community there have been no more hardly any businesses rebuilding over there restaurants and you know we just want more business over in our area they won't come and and build over there because of the way it looks the terrorist funds do not go to our church it goes to the businesses that do the work the tiers fund is reinvested back into the businesses that do the work and you can you wrap up your comments are we making sure this three this is working correctly because before it was set on a different number so if you could wrap that up I would appreciate it okay we have met other eligible requirements and we believe we believe a non-profit building would be an economic benefit and positive impact to the community and to the business the Improvement on the non-profit Bill building is economic and social investment into our designated area for the overall fiscal impact we do more for the city and Community than some of the other non-profits that have had funds from the tiers program so if you deny us I see that as a

[1:46:15] discrimination against a non-profit church so we receive let's wrap it up this is my last comment we respectfully ask that you consider about improving our application since the city council opened the door for non-profit to apply we respectfully ask that you approve that we'd be able to work together I thank you thank you very much morning mayor members of council my name is John Mark Hogue I live in single member district five I'm the chair of the cheers board and I just want to make a few brief comments uh from the board's perspective I'm not speaking for everyone on the board necessarily but uh when this project and the whole non-profit issue first came up I had a lot of the reservations that some of you may have uh it's a church and of course I had issues being a good Baptist I'm a separation of church and state kind of guy so I had concerns about that I had concerns about non-profits and how and do we open the door but as we began to go through the discussion both with staff with members of the public and other and not just not just those who are here advocating for it but people that were in the audience who had no interest in the project itself came forward and gave comments and insight about this and I think I want to Echo some of what Mr Myers was saying we began to see this as not just an issue about return on investment and about what the purpose of the tears was I was on the city council when the tears was created and at that time the the main idea of it was was revitalization particularly in this area of town you know the Walmart was coming in and we wanted to create the tiers Fund in part for downtown San Angelo to revitalize but also talking about this north side

[1:48:19] and the several areas of town the council had identified as a need of improvement that had been blighted or economically depressed however however you want to State it what we began to see what I began to see is that the it's it's all one big picture and what we're talking about is investment to try to make the north side of town more attractive to be a place where people will want to invest in Residential Properties invest in invest in businesses invest in the properties that are there so that we can improve that entire quarter and it's not just MLK we're talking about Chapman Street we're talking about uh Bryant that the entire the entire area of the city uh we think and and I think that is the main purpose what what tears was created for and what the council should be considering in what what it does with this request I I understand the concerns we also again had the issue of you know one and a half million dollars sitting in there and no one applying for it so that's also another issue that we were trying to do with the Northern Area was try to find ways to encourage individuals businesses uh to to request those and in in this case we think it's a good project I've been to the location I've seen it myself I think the entire area needs revitalization and I think that is only going to help raise property values that do pay taxes in the residential areas Etc so that's all I have thank you I will also go ahead how long have you been on the tears board about four years this is my second term about four years so Evelyn made some comments that we had given tears money to non-profits is that accurate or maybe we confusing that's hot tax money correct it's hot tax money I want to hear you say that well I don't recall and we may

[1:50:23] have just recently done another one but uh some have come before but no this is the first one all right so we'll recall all right so in your opinion is it fair to allow a to allow a church on North in the north tier Zone to apply and churches on the south Zone not to apply no and and when when that issue came up we at the direction of council we went back and looked at that a couple of meetings ago and I believe what the tiers board recommended was to lift that and to make it available in both the North and the South that I believe when it came to the council the council denied that request and just decided to keep it in the North correct I I want to make a point to um talk about many of the comments that have been made and that is that we brought it was presented to the tears board that we improve the chadburn corridor all the way up to 44th Street which I think is what the tiers board tiers territory is because we believe that if we improve the corridor that many people would benefit from that Improvement chadburn has not been improved in the north Corridor like MLK has And yet when presented to the tiers board for improvement of the chadburn Street area north of Houston heart or the whole North tiers area which I believe starts at 4th Street it was voted unit down and yet that investment would have improved a huge Corridor that would have improved many people's businesses non-profit and for-profit and perhaps new businesses would have been created but it was voted down because we do believe that the streetscape program in the South has helped businesses to the tune that we wanted to use these Monies to improve the quarter for all people who have businesses residents or

[1:52:29] non-profits on that quarter it was voted no Madam and I'm not really here to get into a debate about not either I'm just making a comment well but that's the comment that you just raised and so I will address that the to my knowledge and I haven't been there forever and I wasn't on the tears board at the time the original investments in streets in downtown when those funds were appropriated through the tiers and through the city council so I'm not aware of what vote you may be referring to one that was made just about a few months ago if you're talking about the ones for maintenance investment maintenance street I'm not and I'm not aware of which vote you're talking about mayor Shane Kelton presented yeah we're talking about John what we're talking about I don't I don't recall and I'm not debating I'm just telling you what happened so just it is on record so it can be seen well you're you're sitting here attacking me no I'm not no you're you're you're getting back and trying to get back at the tiers board when we're here to really discuss another issue which was this application which was all I addressed I think um I I wouldn't say it was it was denied there was a proposal to improve north chadburn north of of the loop um and I think if my recollection was it was tabled so that um Shane and others could bring back more information about that project and so I think there was some skepticism of using those funds I think it's no it's no secret that the board has been concerned that so much of the funds available were set aside for the chadburn street project and they were hesitant to spend more on that while they're still paying off you know some of the other Chapman project but I don't think they actually denied it well Shane's in the room we'll just we'll get clarification on that when John Marco is is through talking I'm not really sure that issue is even

[1:54:32] on the agenda but and I'm sorry I'm just going to say that we need to keep it on the 1720 Martin Luther King project if we have questions that are related to that then that's appropriate otherwise we can schedule I'll be happy to talk about any of those other issues at any time and I'm sorry I got up here now to distract from The Martin Luther King project um our and I've stated what our position was and what our view was that we're trying to work on in the Redevelopment of the entire community and I'll be happy to discuss any other issues if you'd like to invite me back to have any issues about the tears thank you thank you very much for the public comment if you want to speak if you if you're going to come up and speak go ahead and sit on that front row if you will so you'll be easier to just come on up go ahead Theodore Boone and I'm standing to speak on behalf of the Martin Luther King Court we've heard about the past we're dealing with the present but there's also a future for the area since we first came here activity on Martin Luther King Drive from the city has escalated work has been done on the on the streets on the walkways on the lighting and is making a difference events are taking place all up and down the street not just at churches this is not a church issue we're making it a church issue but the real issue is relationship

[1:56:37] in our community it's a mixture of all of the cultures in our city there was a young man who died for what he believed that made a speech that said he had a dream that dream is the street that we're talking about elevating it both relationally economically and for future there will be meaningful and a statement not only to San Angelo but just the mention of that name MLK corridor can stimulate economic issues and realities it can bring about a community that's connected that are working together to improve not just economics but quality of life so I'm standing here I'm saying this is not a church issue this is a people issue Community issue and just as we can spend money in parts or spend money in other neighborhoods I think we're being challenged for the moment what are we going to do about the future of an area that has potential but has not had resources to fulfill those needs maybe we should be talking about something different than tears but tears is an opportunity to show Good Will that

[1:58:38] we count and when I say we count I'm seeing everybody count and should have opportunities for resources that's for the community thank you very much I'm confused about this timer because it doesn't seem like to me it's working correctly so because I I'm just sure it's not first time it didn't I know it didn't so I just want to make sure the first gentleman that spoke got five minutes as the applicant everybody else making public comment is just getting three okay just to clarify that because that's checking and making sure that it is working just want to make sure everybody gets their Fair amount of time and it seemed like we were shortening some of them so I just want to make sure everybody has the fair amount of time to talk that's all I don't want them feel like they got shorted okay further public comment [Music] Council mayor single member district tree my name is Michael lieback I'm here in in to talk about I was here at the very first hearing for the tears and I'm I'm here to talk about the community uh there's a definite Community interest in this area there are five churches all those five churches contribute to the community in a greater capacity than other areas of the city and I just want to talk about the community and the importance of of the development that they're that they are trying to accomplish and my last comment is is that please take this in careful consideration thank you thank you Michael good morning councilman good morning a

[2:00:46] single member district four and I came to thank you all again for all what you do for our city and also would like to encourage you to pass this particular uh project I have been on several committees especially working with Reverend Meyer when when the west Texas organizing strategy began uh it took care of all of the north it targeted four areas in town and the north was part of it and also the west Texas organizing strategy also included meetings with the cheers board and at the time that the tears was being organized it also included a chaperon Martin Luther King and um and the a Brian Thruway all North and I understand that what helped the north get the money is Walmart it has been building up since then with several businesses even since we spoke the last time from from uh for the cheers board some other businesses have been added and if this project is accepted when it's accepted then it's not gonna you're not gonna lose the tears is not gonna lose any money because we have i-27 coming through we have I 14 coming through in the north of town and that money is going to put back into our city it's not like it's going to be a loss it's going to be added even though personally this church is going to add to it but it's going to be added even more so it's uh more funds more money is going to be added into our community because of this I am so much for our community I even ran for office because I care and I know you all care so please

[2:02:52] care for that Community like we do too thank you very much further public comment with that oh greatest kind of questions I do too yeah I wondered if the tears uh cheers board chairman could come up I get a couple questions that he may be able to answer by the way I think uh the folks that showed up here did a great job of presenting it as a Community Action Network I did have one problem with the request and that dealt with signage I realize that we're in fact dealing with a church which is kind of awkward as you'll probably admit in terms of the city providing money there but it seems to me that providing signage for the church goes beyond an expectation that we should do well I think I think the signage is all part of the appearance of the chart I mean I haven't looked at that item in particular in any in depth I I oh okay because I think the policy says it won't yeah I yeah I think John the policy says it won't pay for for signage so it might have been in the picture but not in the numbers I think I think they're telling what they're telling me is that's they're funding that out of their match that's their 10 percent part of their 10 match but I did notice a request so it was there well it's it's it's part of the project but they'll be paying you'll be paying for the signage out of the out of the the 10 match that they have to make the Thirteen thousand dollars they're paying for that that's one of the things they're using was part of that is that correct John

[2:04:54] yeah and the tiers policy does say it won't pay for signage both North and South so but when they present a site presentation it would only make sense that the signage would be a part of that site present it's what we see when the two when it's presented to the tears board thank you anything else I've got a question um yeah for you how much does the north tiers bring in annually and I know this is a heart and you can guesstimate this John John I don't know off the top of my head I know that it's never been I know that it's the balance since the entire time I've been on the tears has been well above a million dollars the entire time and it's been close to two but I think it's important to where I'm going to go with this if we knew how much it brought in annually in have you got that number but just hold with me a minute how much the tears brings in annually the north Zone Revenue this year the tears is budgeted to bring in 776 000 in property tax revenue um year-to-date we brought in 7.95 with me and we're just trying to talk out loud here but I'll I think I'll complete this where we get there um I don't think it's fair what we can do in one zone and not the other I've had lots of people contact me about revitalizing Martin Luther King and I drive Martin Luther King two to three times a day so I'm with you on that I don't think it's fair and ethical to do award one church and not another unless you do something in there put some parameters in there so everybody can play so if I look at this and after we denied this the first time I talked with Kimberly Hawley and she pulled up some non-profits that are listed up and down Martin Luther King and listed up and down chadburn and I just driving with my limited knowledge on what the property ownership is I found there were 10 just

[2:06:57] on Martin Luther King that were non-profits so once we approved the door to one we don't discriminate and go across so now we open it up to you know 10 to 12 maybe who knows that can apply for this money then we take that and the revenue generated by them while it and going with the discussion made today that's going to take place over time that's not going to be something where those people start paying tax revenue back so what scares me is there's going to be commercial property and if you take away the funds that the commercial property people could have had and you're giving it to all the non-profits they've got an argument not to revitalize it I mean I'm going to go in there and I will say if I want my thing to move forward and I've got a sprinkler or I've got to do something with this and take an existent building which there aren't very many that are somebody would want to improve that so it's kind of a double-edged sword going through there but I I won't support the motion as it stands but I would say if the motion came back and we limited the availability to non-profits to 10 or 15 percent of the annual revenue the north Zone has then I I would have no problem with that because you give them a set period or set dollar amount that they can pursue and it's up to your board to decide how that splits if you gave them ten percent they're 70 grand if you gave them twenty percent 140 but I don't want to to discriminate against the commercial business that would generate immediate Revenue these people and people that have contacted me constituents have been I don't want you to decide where my taxpayer dollar goes to a non-profit if I want to give to my church I'll give to my church I don't want you to decide where it's going and I've got several of those phone calls it's a double-edged sword but what I'm saying is if you're going to do something with non-profits you can't discriminate against discriminate against those commercial revenues that are going to come and if you placed a specific dollar amount on what was available to them then they can decide because there are non-profits there that stand a chance of making it

[2:09:00] the next 20 30 40 years and there's buildings there that don't I would hate to give twenty Thirty forty thousand dollars to a building and in 15 years it's gone and I don't know if you would agree with that or not but well I I understand the concern I mean I think that's you know you know concerned that I had going into this um but I think as you begin to evaluate it non-profit does not mean no economic impact there are many of non-profits in this community that have significant economic impact in this community yeah so exactly one of the things that got brought up first was okay non-profits well what about churches well we can't discriminate against a church that's a non-profit versus you know Habitat for Humanity that's a non-profit so you would have to apply the same standards to each I I understand the concern I also but I disagree to the extent that what this whole project is is not about not necessarily about a business growing and and and being tax revenue in that is one of the one of the things that can happen with it but I believe it's more about revitalization of the area overall over a long term and I think what you're doing is raise what you're wanting to do is raise the property values of the entire area because by raising the property values of the entire area that's where the tax revenue issue comes in but I I the situation that we have in the north tiers and this is the problem we've had since the beginning is no applicants um and you know I I understand your concern if we had a flood of applicants and the money was all and tons of non-profits were applying this is the first non-profit that's really come to us uh and asked for that so we don't have a track record of that um so I don't think under the circumstances at this present time that that's something that we that we can consider

[2:11:02] what we have to consider as a tears board is what the criteria is that's been adopted by the city council we evaluated on that criteria we make our recommendation um if at some point in the I think there's a there's a point there that you make that at some point in the future if all of a sudden you get lots of non-profits coming in and applying and you may have to revisit what you're what you're doing and if all of a sudden we get lots of Business Development going on in the north tiers then I think that's a different that's a different story as well well I think this boils down to Martin Luther King Street and I when you open the doors on it if this one was to go through I think you would see at least seven to ten non-profits file the next they would be crazy if they didn't file the next turn all right to come in and ask for money and so that that scares me and I don't think it's fair I have a hard problem giving money to one side and not treating the other side equally I agree completely right I don't think it's limited to Martin Luther King I hear your concern your concern is that now all the non-profits on Martin Luther King are going to come in and ask for for Tears funding I think that's that's speculation at this point and we can't really make our we can't as a board as a tears board make our decision based on speculation it's the criteria that we've approved if the criteria need to change and if the city council wants to change the criteria that's always your discretion I don't want to give it to them and take it away I mean while it is speculation it's also I would call it you know a little bit of anticipation of what is likely to come and so I get the word choice of speculation but I would think it would be hard for some of them not to press forward with this and go okay that is so I I think it's very obvious that you're going to get if you approve one you're now going to get 10 and then while that is speculation at this point I think that it's a pretty high probability they're going to move forward well my my argument back to that is that may or may not be the case but as a tears board what we're presented with is determining whether there's a

[2:13:04] significant economic impact on the community by this project that's all we have to go on there's no further definition of that or what we do so we have to evaluate that based on what's presented and based on what's presented we think there is a like it's going to be a significant economic impact for Martin Luther King in general that's where I was going with my if you allotted a portion of the funds available that are each year you would provide yourself protection against anything that could go either way there's the number that's what we have for non-profits that can be split up anyway that your board deems relevant or a necessity I understand what you're saying and all I'm saying is that's a policy decision which is not which is not was not in the purview of tears and it's not in the purview I guess of this application right now what we just have to do is consider it on our samarits but you know one of the I Tina again we might ask that you come forward because we made a major effort to do Town Hall meetings and educate the public more about the tiers money and particularly the northern tiers money to that point I believe in the past nine months about eight hundred thousand dollars from for-profit businesses have applied for tiers money and received it can you give us that dollar amount well I would really probably have to defer to John for that I can see what's been kind of encumbered in our financial statements but he'd probably be more aware of what projects that sounds like a high number to me because I believe we started and I'm not going to tell you whether I know it's 23 or 22 over 2 million dollars and it's now down to 1.4 million and those dollars were all spent on for-profit businesses and that followed us doing Town Hall meetings and trying to educate the public on the use of these funds and then we had individuals

[2:15:06] I believe Shirley Spears happened to be one of them who went out and knocked on some doors I think and and Lucy did too to make sure people were aware of the opportunity attached to tears and the response based off of that whether it was for that or whatever reasons the amount of people submitting applications for Tears money really improved and and changed and I think John the last minute the meeting before I forget which one it was maybe been four meetings ago you talked about how much that total number had been reduced from what we started off with in the beginning I think at 23 but I could be wrong on that and yeah and I think I think we were I want to say we were around 2.1 million so uh we've had a significant response in terms of number of applicants obviously there's still a lot of money out there and even even at the max 75 000 per applicant you know we could still fund a lot of projects um and I think I think councilman Thompson's right you know we could look at bringing back a change to the incentive policy um but I think what the chairman was saying is we still have to act on this one today but if then your direction is for us to take that for consideration to the board we could definitely look at that incentive policy for a future change to limit the amount that could go to nonprofits for sure yes Lucy wanted to say one thing real quick instead of going down the way Thompson said to go down why why isn't it that you couldn't just say that the business that are being taxed are the ones that are priority over the non-profits could prioritize it yeah but the tears board would do that yeah I guess I'll just remind you that this came to you not too long ago I think it was referenced earlier uh one of the discussion points by the council was eliminating funding for nonprofits altogether and you all chose to leave it

[2:17:08] in to allow funding for nonprofits now again it's a high bar you and you obviously don't have to approve any of them or all of them for sure but you did leave in the option for these non-profits to apply and so that is in the current policy that's what I'm talking about today ended the last time that we brought this to to us is that as long as these non-profits are meeting that criteria I don't see how we can say deny it when they actually meet everything on there now if we don't want to approve non-profits then let's just make that policy to whether or not included that they cannot apply for this money but don't deny them just because they're non-profit if they're eligible for their comments before I sit down outside one more comment I just wanted to clarify your comment mayor um the the policy does allow for signage but it has to be part of an overall Improvement you can't come and ask for just signage but if it's part of an overall site Improvement project signage can be a piece of that but but you're right that they have not asked for funding for signage and I didn't mean to get off track on my conversation earlier but several people had made a point to talk about in the Improvement in the corridor and that Corridor conversation kept coming up so it was introduced by public comment the quarter being improved that's all Craig Myers 19 North Washington just in relationship to what was said uh for 20 years tears roughly has been in existence and for 20 years we've had the history of generating the money up there and not being able to spend it and to say for speculation what would happen if we actually started spending the money

[2:19:09] up there I think that's a little bit premature you can change anytime you want to and you've changed policy from time to time but up to this time the practice has been to generate money and not use money and if we find out that it's being used and it's you know then you can change anytime you want to but at this particular juncture after 20 years of sort of denial of generating the policies and the programs and the publicity and all these kinds of things that have made it a problem that you have too many applicants I think to say that let's not think about uh not for profits you've got it you've had a chance to vote on it again you voted on it they're there I'd wait a while before you change up something that you've got a 20-year history of not being a problem thank you all right we have a Tom well come back to for continuity's sake and the protection of this program commercial businesses that pay taxes generate the revenue a lot of the discussion today has been about non-profits and how it will make the neighborhood and Revitalize go there but when it boils down to what it was really made was those that put money in can get money out and those that are getting money out are going to put money back in um I certainly understand it I think if you're going to like I said I will not support the motion in the that's on the floor but if somebody wants to bring something back in the future I have no problem saying this is a an allocation of funds for non-profits that they can decide is available for non-profits and let the board decide that but I think for the protection that's not what's out there today right it's not what's out there today but for the protection the program I'm not going to support the motion that's on for there's a motion I agree on the public comment so at this

[2:21:13] point in time we will take a vote Tom E Tommy your vote aye Tom hey Harry hi Lucy aye Karen hi Larry hi mayor nay so how many did two it doesn't pass all right we'll move on to the next item on the agenda which is item J first reading and public hearing on an ordinance to rezone from single-family residential to two family residential property located at 2718 Forest Park Avenue John you're on yes as you said this is a rezoning request from rs1 to rs2 basically from single family to allow for two family or duplex you can see the property there in red I'll point out while it's on this slide while it is largely a single family neighborhood there's RS3 zoning just to the north neighborhood commercial just there to the west and so we believe that this does make sense for this particular neighborhood this is a proposed re-plat so they're basically going to take that one fairly larger lot and split it into two this is a picture of the site that existing mobile home that's currently on the lot will be removed to to be replaced by the duplex as I mentioned staff does recommend the rezoning the Planning Commission heard this at their August meeting and also recommended approval unanimously um I don't think we have the slide for the in favor in opposition but I don't believe there was any opposition to this one Tom you want to make comments this will improve what's there and I

[2:23:17] haven't heard any objections from any of my constituents so I will make a motion to approve this percentage second by Larry any public comment on this item see none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes seven zero move on to item K first reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending the future land use map in the comprehensive plan for commercial to Neighborhood Center and rezoning from light manufacturing to the zero lot line twin home and townhome residential residence district for property located at 3480 Edgewood thank you um as you mentioned this is and for some reason the boundaries not showing up but it's it's this property here those existing three lots you can see there's a city fire station right across the street and this property backs up to Goodfellow Air Force Base which is all of this area and there's a big uh fence there right or a chain link fence there yeah the fence for the base and of course this is kind of the beginning of the neighborhood and you'll see there's there's one or two in opposition uh that spoke and those are from that neighborhood with concerns about density of of developing uh at that location this is the proposed plat so you can see there are 15 Lots I want to clarify because we got some questions from folks um because they're they're thinking of this as duplexes but it they're actually what we call Twin Homes it's a duplex that straddles a lot line so each side of the duplex is on its own lot so this would actually only be 15 total units um I think some people were thinking that it was maybe a duplex on each making it 30 total units but in fact it's just the 15 units so basically you would have one duplex across each

[2:25:19] property line um and I think obviously there's an odd number so I think this larger lot here might be just a single family home on that one uh you can see the notification area there and this map shows the existing zoning is lot manufacturing and so that was some of the discussion at the Planning Commission is that if you don't rezone this um it would remain lot manufacturing and you can imagine some of the um everything from warehousing to actual Industrial Services type uses could go on those properties it is currently in our vision plan is commercial but part of this request would be to change that to allow for the residential we did send the 15 notices out to the surrounding Property Owners within 200 feet none in favor and one in opposition may I ask because it backs up to Goodfellow Air Force Base did we send notifications to goodfell Air Force Base that's a good question I actually don't know the answer if the backup to the fence line of goodfell Air Force Base and so I would have thought there would have been notification issues the the answer is if that shows up as a property per the appraisal district what we're required to send is notices to the listed property owner per the appraisal district I'm assuming that that means Goodfellow got one but for example if for city-owned property there would be a notice the city shows up as the owner of the fire station property across the street but actually that's a wrinkle that I have not come across before so I'm not 100 sure that Goodfellow got notice but I will say we did meet the statutory requirement because we used the appraisal District's official tax roll and so if they are on that official tax roll they did get a notice mayor yes Tommy um I don't know whether they got the official notice they were aware I talked

[2:27:21] to a gentleman yesterday who is a civilian on base and deals with real estate and um other things and he was aware of this zone change request so I don't again I don't know if that was Through official notice or through other means but they were aware I just noticed on the documents anyway doesn't matter move forward so as I mentioned staff does recommend approval of the change to the comprehensive plan from commercial to neighborhood as well as the rezoning from light manufacturing to RS3 just a reminder RS3 allows zero lot line homes town homes and Twin Homes again Twin Homes are basically just a duplex but that is split with a property line town homes are similar but you can have between three and eight units all attached and zero lot line are basically single family but on one side they're right up against the the property may I ask a question because of of um comments that people have made to me and that is the following that you're only there was assumption by many people that it was not only that property but the property on the other side of the street where there's tremendous flooding issues or drainage issues or something but this specific piece of land does not have those same drainage issues that the one across the street has is that correct I'm not fully aware of all the drainage issues but I will note that there is you can see this little piece here that is not actually a lot that is the drainage easement because drainage coming from the base comes across this property and so that gets it out to the street uh now as with any development when this develops they will have to address drainage uh they basically in short they can't create more drainage offsite than it was pre-development so they'll have

[2:29:23] to do detention or some other mechanism to ensure that they're not making the problem worse by the same token they don't have to make an existing problem better but they can't make it any worse that just needs to be said so that people understand drainage would be addressed right at their August meeting the Planning Commission did vote on this they voted a 5-2 to approve so it wasn't unanimous but it was a majority vote to approve it if you have any questions just Council have questions for John Larry do you have any idea why the two members were opposed largely concerns about traffic just density of development the you know with 15 homes versus if if you developed a single family it would be a few less and so just additional parking maybe cars parking in the street traffic where the kids going to play was one of the questions of you know because these are these are pretty tight those are not very deep Lots on entrance garages that'd be a question for the developers zoning doesn't Define how they do that I suspect there's not sufficient room to have sort of rear entry type garage Karen uh Larry thank you for asking your question that was part of my concern I I would say that the overarching idea is a good one but the density is too much for me to approve I I think that 15 units on that strip given all the things that have been mentioned parking safety drainage 15 is too many for me further comment

[2:31:25] mayor I have had more than several conversations with different folks I mentioned the the gentleman at the base yesterday um one of my questions was um need for something like this around town and then I have also visited with three different realtors um the gentleman at the base yesterday indicated this would be good housing for the ncos as a beginning house starter home or for starter home for others in the community I also have visited with a developer on this I'm not going to put words in the developer's mouth but my assumption was investing about this was that in order to make this work just by the sheer investment that he has already made but will continue to make with respect to I've also talked to the engineer on the project to your point mayor about the drainage the engineer is fully aware of the drainage issues and was going to do it sounded to me a little additional modeling from an engineering standpoint to address the drainage because the engineer was aware of that I think across the street as well um I've I found it a little interesting in talking to one of the Realtors this particular realtor partners with a builder in town that this is the they are doing something similar around town these I'm going to say smaller homes in in a more dense fashion than what we typically think of as single family homes and he said for them their experience and he wasn't speaking for anybody else but their experience was they didn't even have to Market these they became uh sold if you will as they

[2:33:31] were completing them just simply due to the demand the housing study also that we paid for indicated strong need for duplex townhome buildings to happen that we had a very low level low number of town home duplexes and that this was a big need for not just good fell Air Force Base but the city as a whole as as John mentioned um we we're just being asked to approve zoning here we're we're not talking about approving um an elevation plan or anything like that that's not part of what we're asked to do but I have looked at um some of the developers other properties around town that have been developed and it they appear to me to be single family homes that you can I'll say clearly see they are single-family homes they're just accommodated to fit a much uh I'll say thinner footprint than what we think of as a typical single family home because of infill because those lots are left over like that absolutely so again I think the developers here they can speak on their own behalf but um due to the investment that the developer has already made will continue to make the developers got to put in the water and sewer the developers got a make sure that the drainage through their engineer so with the investment and plus the purchase price of the property I see this as a an appropriate use of of the property yes Harry one of the concerns I've heard is the increased amount of traffic especially around the fire station I think Chief Brody's here would he come forward and talk about that good morning Council I actually drove

[2:35:37] out there yesterday because I wanted to put you know eyes on it and boots on the ground I actually parked across the street right here right there and measured from my edge of my truck all the way to the ramp of the fire station 30 feet I went inside talked to the guys at the station asked them to duplicate what what would happen in the inventive emergency and there was people parked on the street there's plenty of clearance drainage issue so we have an angle of departure as we're exiting the fire station the ramp the front bumper comes real close and the more you angle coming out of that station it could potentially so if there is a car parked and then a car in that lane of traffic we would not be able to make that corner because it causes too much of a turn in radius but if there's not if both lanes of traffic are clear and only one car parked on that side of the street then we had clearance so I am concerned a little bit about the compactness of how many uh how many houses are going to be in this era area zero lot line concerns me uh spread of fire from one unit to another unit to another unit um and 15 units in that small compact space does concern me traffic flow does not concern me as much as the compactness of the neighborhood any other questions thank you further public comment Edwin Guthrie district one as the chief stated he's not concerned too much as the the traffic on Edgewood coming out of the firehouse but for those that are not familiar with the area at eight o'clock in the morning if you're going down Edgewood to make a left to go to the south gate of the base that Center turn lane on South

[2:37:39] Chadbourne is completely backed up to the Firehouse so you're unable to come to this stop sign here and make a left to go the base because the high volume of traffic at eight o'clock in the morning I'm opposed to the development only for if it was a residential one single family units would be fine but the condensity of this and this fence line of the base there's no buffer zone in the entire perimeter of the base there's either a natural barrier an Alleyway or an easement of at least 12 feet between the public access and the base fins also on the Edgewood is a high point of this town so all the water that comes down Edgewood also ends into this lot beside the lot across the street you all were talking about earlier Highway on the here and makes a hard sharp back into Edgewood continually ruts out because it's a dirt alleyway and washes out the perimeter bottom of this security fence at the base where they continually bring in rocks and gravel and backfill after every after every rain the narrowness of this with the condensity of 15 units I just think it's too much I live in the neighborhood directly it won't directly affect me because I'm far enough down the road but I think the condensity of the amount of number of units in the drainage along with the morning traffic will become a nightmare and also earlier last year when the gate the south gate was being worked on and the north gate was the only one

[2:39:41] available all the all the the normal traffic realized they could cut through our neighborhood to bypass the light that Chad Bourne and Christoval and now I'm getting commercial traffic actually cutting through there also that's that's my concern thank you thank you good morning Zane Willard with contra Valley Construction a little history when when the property became available for sale we consulted with the city with the planning department ask them what their preference was if we were to purchase this if they would support a uh you know residential versus light manufacturing uh they they definitely said we did we're very cognizant of the fact that your housing study as you mentioned earlier Ms mayor that uh there's a need for more affordable housing uh the next thing that we did we consulted with the base because we realized the need for housing this was an appropriate area for it it fits into where they need one of the things that they've made clear to us multiple times is that one of the biggest constraints they have for people to come to San Angelo is especially if they have to to buy something is fitting the price point you know it's it's this allows us to do that then we go and look at the the ordinances that state what you can do and so what we did was follow the Sydney's ordinances and one of the things that I've heard at Planning Commission is city council is especially for the reason we've proposed twin RS3 or rm1 is it's a good transition area between commercial and residential and that's what's been stated many many times and so as we talk to the engineers and we talk to the city staff we said this is the perfect area instead of a which could cause more traffic and drainage issues instead of a big manufacturing facility being right at the edge of a residential neighborhood let's transition from regular single-family homes to Twin Homes which is probably what we're going to do that's what we've drawn up and that's what we're looking at in

[2:41:43] addition to that we provide a price point that fits what the constituency needs we'll deal with the drainage issues there's already a drainage study being done right now we are finding a way where we're going to put the water out we'll build this up and we'll make high quality affordable housing for the for the residents of San Angelo and that's the reason there was a lot of due diligence put into this before we brought it forth and took it to Planning Commission I understand many of the concerns but our job is to try to find a resolution to fix some problems instead of a I think it was about two acres you know it's been abandoned for a long time and somebody's out there mowing it we want to add value to the city add value to the constituency and do something that that makes a nice transition from from commercial into residential any questions for Zane yes yes go ahead so I I still like the overarching idea no concerns about that and everything you've said is very helpful so thank you for sharing your process with us it helps us see the big picture you have indicated that you think you're going to put in 15 units what would stop you from making 15 into 30 by making it two stories zoning will not allow it so there's no there's no possibility of zoning I take pride in in uh whenever we go there's two houses we built on Avenue T 413 and four I can't I don't remember the address and and they were on those smaller Lots so we made skinnier houses and we try to try to make the yard be the side yard personal opinion is is that in the city of San Angelo where we live in the Perpetual state of drought so the less yard we can have but the more usable the yard space is the the better it is for the people that live there because it disheartening when you drive through in July and everybody's yards browned out because they water restrictions and I can't afford the water bill so the way we've designed these is that they will set on the property line you'll have more of a side yard it gives us room to push them back so that we get plenty of off street

[2:43:45] parking there'll be a two-car garage they'll have four parking spots so to help the fire station everybody will have four spots off Street to get their vehicles off of the uh the street they have a nice side yard there is an alley in the back back there but the the possibility of making them 30 residences the zoning will not allow that so they'll only they'll be single family homes just on a slightly more narrow lot following the city ordinance that's what you know what what the planning department has passed in years past and that's what we designed it to to to fit the need of what that would allow uh Mr Hebert mentioned earlier we had talked about the cost to develop this we're adding the water line the extension for the water line the extension for the sewer line we're doing the drainage study so it's more than just the cost of the land there's a lot of other improvements that we have to add to make this property buildable garages and driveways are in the front is that correct I don't think the alley is wide enough for them to go down and turn in so yes it would be but I think the the standard Zoning for uh for what we've got here is a 15-foot setback the way we've drawn them has 25 foot which is standard for most rs1 houses so we're going to push them back 25 feet to make sure that you have enough parking off Street to get two cars off plus just in case I know most people don't do this but fill the garage up with a bunch of stuff you know that still gives them it does that I was going to use another word but that wasn't the right word we have that too other questions Karen all right may I have a motion for approval I'm mayor I'd make a motion to approve his presented second by Lucy oh there's a motion a second now open for more public comment it's all right you're right we still have time my name's Steve Lawson I live happen to live in that area I've heard a lot of talk about the

[2:45:49] economic viability of this project but I haven't heard much about the people that lived I haven't heard much about the people where their kids are they going to play in the street with a fire station right across the street what's the economic impact to the people's homes there value is going to go up with this type of building project have you spoken to anybody in that area not just the base I'm a veteran I've served 27 years I understand what's going on base they have plenty of room there to to do this and consider this type of construction in a single family residential area and it's just kind of disheartening sir I don't think it's safe I don't think it's good for the firehouse as the gentleman said and as you can tell I'm kind of emotional about it I've been in my house for 30 years there I'm a veteran that's where I chose to live and there's a lot of other veterans with families and people that are currently assigned to the base there traffic your the gentleman talk about that it's just not in the morning it's in the evenings with people coming to and from the base I would hate to see even one child it's playing out in front of their home like they should be struck by it's not a viable option for that 1.8 Acres thank you all appreciate it further public comment there has been a motion in a second but it is open for further public comment okay with no more public comment we'll take a vote those in favor of approving the zoning change please say aye aye those opposed nay motion passes six one we will now move back now we could take a break for lunch we're going to take a break for lunch we will come back in 30 minutes so we'll be

[2:47:55] back here at 12 15. can you hear me now okay and I'm going to read the executive session items so uh executive session on the provision of government code title V open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meetings subchapter D exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under the following sections a section 551.072 discussion regarding response to rfpre-01-23 Sarah R Robertson survey 178 Item B section 551.072 deliberations about real property regarding commercial lease and possible sell of lots two and three block one group middle Concho Lake nasworthy Edition and item c section 551.072 deliberations about real property regarding Santa Fe train depot at this time we are adjourned for an hour or or adjourned we'll be back when we're through with business we're at 129 pm on Tuesday September the 19th we have completed our executive session and Karen has an announcement to make I would like to make a motion that we amend the lease to Historic Orient Santa Fe Depot Incorporated to allow them to request hot fund funding I second that motion public comment um can you when do we make when do we add to that but we have to see performance paper uh people talk about that during the budget portion that we're fixing address if you could add to that motion authorizing Daniel to negotiate and execute that Amendment so it doesn't come out or Michael Dane I'm sorry Michael okay uh whoever and authorizing assistant city manager

[2:50:00] Michael Dane to negotiate terms of and execute terms of the lease and then during budget session we will discuss the requirement for providing p l and board positions people board positions on the people up on the board okay with that there's a motion in a second any public comment see none will take a vote all those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion passes 7-0 we will now move back up in the agenda to item C B discussion related to a rolling debt program to provide funds for Public Safety and other equipment replacement Tina you are finally on girl thank you mayor Tina dearski Director of Finance you'll recall during our general fund budget Workshop we discussed a program that the city has utilized in the past it's called I guess it's called a rolling debt program and it's used to pay for equipment replacement Public Safety Equipment things like that that the city needs on an ongoing basis we do have Vince vial from specialized Public Finance he has come to the meeting today to kind of walk you all through how that program would work and what kind of impact it would have on our debt capacity so I'll have him come up and kind of go through that with you mayor council members good afternoon my name is Vince viel with specialized Public Finance for the city's financial advisor I'd like to visit with the council today about a rolling debt or rolling net note program answer any questions y'all may have about how it works and make sure you all understand the concept so if we want to implement this program in the future we're comfortable moving forward with it so a rolling note or a rolling debt program enables us to issue notes on a periodic

[2:52:03] basis the model that we've looked at in this case is issuing notes every other year starting in 2024 so we would have note issuances in 2024 26 28 Etc this program is totally driven by the council you've got the ability to pull it back or accelerate it at any time that you wish the no proceeds are basically used to purchase short life type assets that you would not want to Finance on a long-term basis such as city fleet needs maintenance operation equipment things of that nature that have a short life span because these notes have a very short life span we issue these notes typically with a two sometimes maybe a three-year maturity and they pay off at the end of that time that's what enables us to keep this Pro program rolling as soon as we pay off one of the note issues we come behind it with another one and issue another note so we're always raising capital for these type of expense items again that have a short life span as do the term of the notes now currently we've dedicated 11.4 cents on our tax rate for the interest and sinking fund what we've looked at in our model is allocating two cents out of that 11.4 cents and trying to determine what size of a rolling note program that would generate for the city so if we start our first note issue in 2024 what we're looking at again about every other year is give or take about a three million dollar note issue for this program now that's going to be dictated by the size of the tax-based growth within the city as the tax base gets larger that two cents is going to generate more Revenue we could expand the note program if we wished again Council has total discretion on when you issue the notes for what purposes how much things of that nature but again this is just a method by which we can Finance

[2:54:06] short yearly life type improvements for the city that would match a short amortization for the debt that's issued to finance that I'm happy to try to answer any questions the council may have you describe that again we're doing short-term financing for short-term projects easy said yes question any questions yes and she have talked talked to us in the past about our capacity sir how does this impact our capacity for a larger debt issuance for the for the large Capital project that we we do have from time to time how does this impact that or does it it does with that Tommy like what's the difference between big and small I mean doing this short-term rate short term is there a Dollar limit to this and if I'm assuming we'd have to work with you if we anticipate a large capital expenditure that we know we're going to have we would have to work with you closely on a on on the rolling debt program so that we didn't impact adversely our ability to finance a larger a larger Capital project yes sir and I think I understand your question let me take a stab at it and make sure I answer it sufficiently so again what we're doing is we're allocating two cents of the interest and sinking fund tax rate of our 11.4 cents that we currently utilize for Debt Service payments that two cents would be utilized for this rolling node program if we were to look at doing a larger Capital expense item couple of factors come into play one will The Debt Service on that larger Capital item be paid for out of the 11.4 Cent Inez tax rate or two will it be a water and sewer system Improvement that will be paid out of

[2:56:09] water and sewer system revenues we have to make that decision on how we're going to pay for that larger Capital expense item the rolling note program will certainly have an implication Upon Our capacity in the future again we're looking at give or take about three million dollars in a note program every other year for our Capital expense items right now based upon our current tax base if we implement this program uh starting in 2024 and we have got set aside right now a 16 million dollar Street program issue in 2024 what that allows us based upon current information that we have gives us additional capacity beyond the note program beyond the 16 million of give or take 35 million dollars that we could use within that 11.4 cents does that answer your absolutely you you your your two steps ahead of me because I was going to go down the path of what additional capacity could we have above and beyond so thank you yes sir thanks yes Tom so we had so let's say you compare us to other cities other cities within our size have the same problems are they doing the same thing that you work with right most of my clients are especially cities and school districts one of the things you have to keep in mind is the interest and sinking fund portion of your tax rate is not subject to rollback it's not subject to revenue compression so whatever o m items that we can flip onto the ins side and finance those that would free up those o m dollars for other City uses this is clearly a cash flow management tool to our benefit to to do something like this to have more dollars available in our uh general fund Revenue stream to do something like this rather than having to I say having to we have over the past several years paid cash for things which is not a bad thing correct but this gives us some more flexibility that we don't now have to pay for some of these things and and manage those

[2:58:11] cash flows yes sir okay all right so go ahead and add comments well I just want to say that uh fortunately I understand this and I am definitely in favor okay thank you other questions from Council so with that do I need a motion for approval of this actually this is just an information item only okay for Council information uh we will bring this program back to the council for future consideration and authorization to pursue at a later date once we determine how much you're going to want on that first program uh Council will then decide and give us authorization to move forward okay I want to thank you all for y'all's time everybody understand thank you for yours yeah thanks for waiting pleasure to be here I learned a lot about us didn't you more than you wanted to know before that drive all right so we go on to item d c d and e do I read them all at once or do I have to do them individual this first one is just that short-term note that we talked about the last meeting that we would use as a one-time funding source for a grant match or other needs as Council deems necessary so this one is just we did receive the bids back on the interest rates came in at 5.24 and so this is just that final step of approving that short-term debt issue is what he just discussed that was the one for next year that he just discussed so this is the same Pro along the same lines yeah so we don't need we need a motion on this we need a motion do you need to vote on this one yeah motion is by Harry in a second by Tommy public comment saying none hearing none we'll take a vote all those in favor say aye aye motion passes item d

[3:00:20] second reading and public hearing of an ordinance adopting the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1 2023 and ending September 30th 2024. this budget will raise more total property taxes than last year's budget by one million 871 755 or 3.8 percent increase and of that amount 812 634 is tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll and my first question of course is going to be we're confident in these numbers right yes ma'am we're not going to wake up and have a shock with a number I sure hope not no I feel like we're pretty confident we've reviewed every specific thing we need to with a tax appraisal unit we've sent it back multiple multiple times um and we're at a point where we feel like we're we're in a good place so okay so with that do I have a motion I need this one has to be a record vote individually so what do we read the caption someone can still make a motion someone can second but then voting go down the line or H1 individually so do I have a motion so much a second second any public comment good morning or afternoon Susanna Valenzuela president of the Royal Museum and I wanted to make a request for 25 000 in hot texts for the rower Museum now that our contract has been amended and I want to say thank you for doing that and I'm really happy for San Angelo we need to still see profit and loss statements from last year in the first six months so not just yours I'll have it today got to be a request and we need to see all your board members yes current that

[3:02:23] as well you want me to turn it into the city clerk yes that would be fine okay we can do that so those things have to be done yes today thank you do we have to vote on that we will but there's so if Council directs us to include that twenty five thousand dollars in the hot budget for fy24 um I think we'll go and talking with Theresa we'll adopt the budget as is and then bring that back as a budget amendment once the contract has been amended that's what I was asking for before okay well yeah and what you'll bring back is the agreement regarding that hot tax that spells out all the requirements like we do before okay all right with that there's a motion in a second and public comment now we're going to individually say yay or nay to item e no I'm seeing item D so you're going to say yay or nay Tommy hi Tom ah Harry hi Lucy hi Karen aye Larry aye mayor I so motion passes seven to zero and to be clear we are directed to bring back that 25 000 at the next meeting you are the next meeting thank you so directed item e second reading and public hearing of an ordinance fixing and leveling ad valorem taxes for the current tax year for use and support of the municipal government of the city of San Angelo Texas for the 2023-2024 budget year providing for the assessment collection thereof providing when the tax shall become due providing when the tax shall become delinquent providing for exemptions providing for severability providing for publication on the city operated website and providing for an effective date thank you mayor again like you said second public hearing of the ordinance Levering loving the property tax for

[3:04:25] 2023 tax year the proposed rate is 0.7042 cents per 100 valuation that is again a 3.38 decrease from last year's property tax rate I need this caption read into the motion please by each person or just by one by one person and then a second and then I moved that the property tax rate be increased by the adoption of the tax rate of 0.7042 per 100 valuation which is effectively a 7.24 percent increase in the tax rate but period but the actual decrease in the tax rate is 0.338 is that right 0.03383 that's what the public will see yes yes 3.38 decrease on your property tax rate from the city all right with that may I have um a second and a second okay and public comment seeing none will take a vote individually this one doesn't have to be all those in favor of approving please say aye non opposed motion passes seven zero we will move to follow-up and administrative issues um the last one is Item B so consider proving various board nominations Ada advisory committees Jordan Dill dieborn die bone to a first term ending April 2025. then a design and historic review commission David major the mayor to a third term Kenna Archer smd2 and Donna crisp smd5 to a first full-term all ending September 2025 and then the public Arts commission Mark Stevenson

[3:06:30] which is smd1 to first term ending April 2025. May I have a motion for those to be approved by Lucy seconded by Larry thank you for that any public comment on those nominations seeing none will take a vote all those in favor say aye passes 7-0 we will now move for an announcement of consideration of future agenda items and an adjournment if possible motion for adjournment please if we adjourn second all in favor say aye city council meeting officially retires at 147 p.m on this September the 19th

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=kMFh95g2_H4