San Angelo City Council 1-20-15

[0:00:01] Good morning and it is wonderful to have all y'all here today. We've got a wonderful, wonderful crowd. Let's start this off with prayer. Jimmy Hill, he is the assistant director at the House of Faith. If you would come up, please stand as you are able and he will start us off in prayer. Good morning. Morning. If you please join me. Father, we thank you for this morning. God, I thank you for uh just all that are in attendance here. God, the community that is represented. God, thank you for what you have done in this community, what you are doing in this community. Father of St. Angelo, we pray for like-mindedness this morning as we go along, Father, that you would uh be with those who are being rewarded and honored and recognized. So, Father, we do commit this time to you and we turn our eyes and our ears towards you. Give us ears to hear, eyes to see, and a heart to trust in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Amen. Thank you, sir. And now, Erai Mesa, would you please come forward? Good morning. She will help us with our pledge this morning. Are you ready? Here's our flag. You get us started, please. Pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And our Texas flag the flag. I aliance to thee, Texas. One state under God, indivisible and indivisible. Thank you so very [Applause] much. Andy, if you would bring your choir up, please. I went out to Glenn Junior High on Veterans Day. They had a real nice little celebration. And the eighth grade girls choir sang the national anthem while I was there. And it takes quite a

[0:02:04] lot to make a grizzled old mayor's eyes tear up, but these girls did it. Uh I I was just I was impressed with them. So I've asked them to come in this morning and to sing our national anthem for us. And then they have one other one other song that they will sing for us. So girls, we're glad to have you. You're on. Ma'am, I don't sit for the national anthem. Can we stand? Oh, say can you see by the dawn early so proud we at the twilight lasting stripes and bright stars through The [Music] paraly does that star spangle for the land of the free. I'm the home of the brave. Thank you very much. Um, you may all sit. We thought it would be very interesting uh to do something that we do when we go to UIL. And when we go to UIL, we do sing songs, but the other half of it is that we site read. And we

[0:04:09] are going we are put into a site reading room after we're done with our concert part. And when we go into that site reading room, we are handed a piece of music that we have never seen before and we are expected to site read it. And so it's very interesting the whole process. We thought we would show you just a glimpse of what we do when we go into that side room. So, if you guys pass these out, get into part one and part two. Each note of the scale is given a syllable. And what we do is we do and also a lot just like the song from the sound of music. And our first note in the key is do. And we use hand sign. We use the curve hand sign. So it's do everybody else do this with me. Do me and etc. And that's what we do. And this song that we have in front of us right now happens to be ladies in what key? the key of F. And how many beats per measure do we have? Four beats per measure. Okay. So, let's do let's talk about or let's take it a little little higher than [Music] that. And we're just going to pretend that this is something we've never seen before. And we're going to site readad it first time through. And I might stop. We're not going to go all the way through this, but I just give you an example of the pressure as you go in there. As singers, we do get two times to sing through the piece. And I do have to say I can brag on because we've got one we've gotten superior grades the last three years going to UIL and site. So I used to be scared going into the site room, but not anymore. We are

[0:06:11] always very excited about going into room. So anyway, let's do this ladies again. There's our I'm going to count it off and we're going to start this. One, two, ready, and go. [Music] So, [Music] Sing, soy. [Music] Okay, let's go ahead and finish it. Here we go, ladies. And [Music] So, [Music] so yeah. So [Applause] that gives you an idea what goes on in that side reading room when we go to and

[0:08:14] this year we're going to get ones again. So thank you for having us and mayor. We would love for you to have an official blind choir shirt. It's it's an XL. Thank you all very much. Anthony, what do you want? Teacher obviously loves it. That's a That's a big I guess my little eyes holding my breath on those high notes. I'm always blown away when a teacher cares like that and you can see it. You know why? One of the great things. Thanks now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of what we do with our children in the St. Angelo Independent School District. And I'm very proud of each and every one of them. Thank you. And following along with that with their SA S AISD school district, I have a proclamation that I would like to read. Uh, school board, come forward and let me read this. Dr. Bonds, if you haven't already retired, I want you, too. We're going to miss you. Dr. Bonds announced retirement last

[0:10:18] night. I think it happens in August of 15. We're going to miss you. Let me read this proclamation, then I'll give it to Lanny, and then you've got the floor to make whatever speech you want to make. It says, "The mission of public schools is to meet the diverse educational needs of all children and to empower them to become competent, productive contributors to a democratic society and to an ever changing world. Local school board members are committed to children and believe all children can can be successful, lifelong learners and that the best education is tailored to the individual needs of each child. Local school board members work closely with parents, educational professionals, and other community members to create the educational vision we want for our students. Local school board members are responsible for ensuring the structure that provides a solid foundation for our school system. Local school board members are strong advocates for public education and are responsible for communicating the needs of the school district to the public and the public's expectations to the district. Therefore, I Dwayne Morrison, mayor of the city of St. Angelo on behalf of the city council declare our appreciation to the members of the St. Angelo Independent School Board and proclaim the month of January 215 as school board recognition month in St. Angelo, Texas, and urge all citizens to join us in recognizing the dedication and hard work of local school board members and in working with them to mold an education system that meets the needs of both today's and tomorrow's children. Mr. L. Thank you, sir. Here's your proclamation and there's your microphone. Yeah, I don't have a speech prepared, but I do want to recognize the rest of our board team. Um, Amy Miselle Flint, U. Y'all turn around so everybody can see you. Amy Miselle Flint, Art Hernandez, Max Parker, and Bill Dindle, and then of course, um, Gerard Gagos, and Tim Archer are the other members of our board team, and they're not here. Also want to recognize, and I hope I got everybody written down, a a number of members of our administrative team who are here. Of course, Dr. Bonds has already been recognized. Uh we have our assistant superintendent, Dr. Jeff Bright. Stand up, Jeff. Um we also have Shelley

[0:12:22] Hullahan. Shelley, uh Dr. Carl Detloff. Um we have some of our uh executive directors here as well. Uh Steve Gil, uh Matt Kimble, uh we have one of our principles here. Thanks for being here, Karen Clark is here. Stand up, Karen. Um, and then we also had uh Miss Highmith who's our u director of um public information. Uh, so I appreciate that. Obviously, um, as y'all got a great example of how proud we are of our students. Uh, thanks Miss Dir for being here and bringing your Glenn students uh, to sing for our group here. Uh, I don't know very many boards I've said this, this is my 13th year, I think, to serve on the Stanel Independent School District's uh, board of trustees. Uh I don't know of very many boards that are elected boards uh that um have more passion and more uh unanimity as far as how we approach uh the school district and how we approach the lives and education of children. Uh we thank uh Daniel and his team uh certainly the city council for the opportunities that we have to work with them uh throughout the year. And uh it just gives us great pleasure uh for us to be able to work as a team to make uh the you know to accomplish the most possible with with every student. So we thank y'all for this recognition, Mayor. And uh we appreciate y'all's uh y'all's recognizing us this morning. Thank you. Anthony, [Applause] thank you very much. And now for another highlight of our

[0:14:26] meeting today. Angelo State Rams football team. Would y'all start filing to the front, please? I have a recognition to read this morning for a group of men that have really well, they've done everything they could to make our community as proud of them as and I'm very proud of them. It's what y'all have accomplished this year is is phenomenal. And I'm I'm so glad to have y'all here this morning so that we can recognize you and the city can recognize you and to tell the people what y'all have done for our community. Let me read this and then I'll present it and then I want a picture with these guys. The Angelo State Ram football team posted a 9 and3 record in 214, advancing to the NCAA Division 2 national playoffs for the first time since 2005. The Rams won their first round game for the first time since 1997. The team advanced to the NCAA Division 2 playoffs by winning the Lonear Conference Football Playoff. ASU finished 25th in the nation in total offense and 16th in the nation in scoring. Therefore, I Dwayne Morrison, the mayor of the city of St. Angelo, on behalf of the city council, do hereby recognize and applaud the Angelo State Ram football team, not only for their outstanding and impressive victories, but also for their commitment to both athletic and academic excellence. Who's gonna who accepts this? Somebody come forward. We all do. Everyone. Who gets to make speech? Sean Johnson. Sean. Who makes? Where's John? Sean. Sean. You guys are so shy. I know better than that. Um, I'm Hey, you got to get out of the way, Kyle. I'm Sean Johnson. I'm director of athletics here at ASU. I just want to thank the city council uh and everybody for recognizing our football program. You I'm certainly proud of what our guys have done off the field, but I'm equally proud of what they do in the community through community service and what they do in the classroom. Got a couple of our

[0:16:29] young men today, actually several that are already college graduates, uh graduated in December. We've got a couple that have graduated. They're going to grad school, are going to be back playing in the fall. So that's our number one goal is graduation. So we're really proud of our guys. I want to recognize our coaching staff as well. They're standing over here. Our head coach Will Wagner and the rest of his staff. You know, they've done a tremendous job here. And the thing that I'm most proud of is they've built this program the right way. You know, they've brought in quality student athletes, quality young men that do great things and do a great job of representing ASU both on and off the field. So, uh, thank you to the city council for this honor. We greatly appreciate it. And, uh, thanks to all the ASU alums and fans in the community. Go Rams. [Applause] I don't want to be on the back. Oh, he can go in front. It's a tall fell. Thank you gentlemen. [Applause] out to. It is now time for the section of our agenda for public comment. Let me read the legalities of this and then we will allow the public to come forward to the front to address the council and anything you want to talk about. The

[0:18:32] council takes public comment on all items in the on the regular agenda. Public input on a regular agenda item will be taken at it appropriate discussion. Public input on an item not on the agenda. I usually cut my microphone off, but I cut it off myself this time. The council may request an item to be placed on a future agenda or for a consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for public comment. On public hearing items, public input will be received on each item immediately following the council discussion prior to any action on the item. Each member of the public should make their remarks from the podium. Begin by stating their name. Remarks by each citizen will be limited to three to five minutes unless waved by a council member for all speaking on that matter. No individual will be allowed to speak more than once on anyone subject until every citizen wishing to comment has done so. I'm now opening up the floor for anyone that is in the audience that wishes to address the council pro or con on any item that is not on our regular agenda. If you have a consent item that you would like to pull forward for regular agenda discussion, this is your opportunity. Form a line. Good morning. Identify yourself and you had three to five, sir. Yes, sir. I'm Rick Abbott and I'm with the Lake Nazworthy Homeowners Association. The reason I've come today is we've noticed a a a pretty good deterioration in the buoys at the lake and we have formed a safety committee in our association and have gone out and taken some pictures and done some research on buoys and where their placement is and what they say. And what we would like is some some leadership from the council to where do we need to go next? Where do we need to come up with the funding? Where do we need to which departments do we need to go to? We have a fellow that can make a presentation to the council with some pictures that we've taken at the future date if y'all would like to consider this. And it would be probably a picture would be worth a thousand words cuz

[0:20:33] there's there's buoys that are up in the reads, there's buoys that you cannot read the writing on and and just as buoys on a lake is just like stop signs do not enter signs in the city. It's a direction for people who don't know anything about it where to go and I think it's something we really need to address. So, what we're looking for at this time is some direction from the council of what do we need to do. Thank you. Thank you, Rick. Mayor, and we can I mean, make sure Mayor, we can take this up with Rick Dixon and Bill Riley and we'll schedule a meeting and Shane as well. So, we'll schedule a meeting to discuss that and see how as far as we how we can move forward with that. And let me know, Rick, I'll be glad to put you on the agenda so that you can make your presentation so that everybody knows what we need to do. And I thank you for coming forward, sir. Thank you very much. And I too just toured the area Saturday all over and I have trouble reading various even trash can uh areas whether it's a fire can or trash. So it's it's needed. You agree? I agree. If I don't put it on the agenda, you will. Okay. Or you will, Fleming. Yes. Okay. We'll get you on the agenda, Rick. We'll get something done. Appreciate you, man. Any other public comment? This is your opportunity. We take compliments as well. If there be no further public comment, then I will and open it up to the council. Uh council, is there are there any things on the consent agenda that you would like to bring forward to the regular agenda? Do you have any comments that you would like to make? Is there anything you would like to to address the city? This is your opportunity. Start with you, Liz. Uh the only thing I have, mayor, is we're going to have our uh first neighborhood chat of the new year on February 2nd, Groundhog Day. uh location yet to be determined, but there'll be a press release put out and Sandra Vayal is going to be uh helping us understand what the opportunities are for the use of graywater in the community. So, we'll have our usual chat forum, but also she's our featured speaker. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Don, did you have anything, sir? No, sir. Charlotte. Yes. I'd like to pull

[0:22:34] items seven and nine from the consent agenda. just have some questions and then I have a comment with uh reference uh to the school kids and the school board if I may. Had the opportunity to attend a pastors and politics breakfast yesterday. Outstanding event and organization. But the one thing that Senator um our new senator Perry uh told us at that meeting and I want to share with you is the absolute most important election that you can attend or to vote in is your school board, your local school board because they set the criteria and the curriculum for our schools. And that is so crucial and important and it's even more important because once it is set by Texas all other 49 states follow what Texas does in setting that and I found that very interesting and wanted to share it with the public. Thank you ma'am. Items seven and items nine. Johnny do you have anything sir? Mayor I do not. Marty do you have anything sir? No. Mr. Fleming, do you have anything? No sir. All right. I will now entertain a motion to to move acceptance on the consent agendum. This will be items 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 eight. So if someone would move to accept these, we will I move to accept the agenda items as you just called. Johnny cells. I accept your motion. Who's going to second it? Who second it? Second. Elizabeth has second. Do I have further comments from the council on the consent agenda items? Do I have comments from the public on any items on the consent agenda under consideration? If not, I will call for the vote. All in favor, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Put a 70 on that one. Ryan number seven is consideration of authorizing the mayor, city manager or as a designate to enter to into a new commercial lease with Hawke incorporated for the lease of 0604 acres out of the EML Hearn survey number 174 commonly known as 4202 South Bryant

[0:24:37] Boulevard being located on the corner of Ben Franklin and South Bryant Boulevard, St. Angelo, Tom Green County and authorizing the mayor city manager as designignate to execute documents as may be necessary or convenient to the stated purpose. Mr. Dixon Charlotte, what are your questions? My question is, is this property the uh former Red Cross facility there at the brunt? Okay, for the last Daniel's Mr. Valins's very first month here, I hit him up about it and I doubt that he recalls, but supposedly we had that building under contract for sale at that time. And then I asked about it about a year later. Why what happened? Well, we've got another contract for sale. My question is is why are we leasing it? Why do we not sell this property and get out of the commercial business leasing uh competition? That that's my question to you. Um I can't answer that um too well, Charlotte. I don't think we've we've tried selling it. We have a couple of offers that have fell through. I think uh a lot of it because of the disrepair of the building. So, we're just trying to get somebody in there to uh we get it up to shape and they'll maintain it and we'll have somebody in there until something else comes available. Well, we're putting money in it to get it up to shape to make it habitable for a lease to be in there. Why don't we get it up to shape, put it on the market for sale? That if that's y'all's desire, we can certainly try that. Rodney, I I agree with Charlotte wholeheartedly on this and I don't think we have to get it up to shape to get it to sell. I I think we can just put it on the market and let some investor come along. That's a very good piece of property right there. It's in a hightra intersection and I think this would again I I've said this in the past. I don't think we need to be in the leasing business. We need to get rid of these things and get them get some tax money coming in. And I don't have a problem with leasing the building as is as long as it's habitable now. But with the understanding it's going on the market and it will be advertised for sale by the

[0:26:38] city. Uh I just feel strongly that we've had that piece of property for as long as I've been on the council and there's no reason for us to be holding a commercial piece of property in that area and it's been empty probably for as long as it's been empty the entire time. Yeah. You make a good point. You make a good argument. We'll try it. So that's my motion for approval is to approve the lease but with the condition in the lease that we will act the building is for sale. Okay. And it will be posted as for sale. We'll get back with the tenant see if they're agreeable with that and we'll move that direction. So if we did sell it then the tenant knows that he's needs to go somewhere else. We will let him know that. Got a motion on the floor. Do I have a second? I second that. Do I have further council comments on this item, Johnny? I was approached a number of years ago by one of the animal groups here in town who is interested in that building. So I hope if they're hearing or they hear this conversation, maybe they can step up and and let somebody know and let Ricky Dixon or Daniel know that they may be interested in purchasing it. So very well. It's a good motion. Charlotte, any public comment on this? How one last question. How much is the lease? 1200. Yeah. I couldn't remember seeing it. It's $1,000 a month. Yeah. 1,000. Sell it. Do I have any further public do I have any public comment on this item before we call for the vote? If not, I will call for the vote. All in favor, please say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Put a 70 on that one. Brian. Number nine is consideration of adopting a resolution to the city of St. Angelo authorizing the mayor to execute a tax resale quick claim deed conveying all right, title, and interest of the city of St. Angelon and all other taxing units interested in the tax foreclosure judgment on tax warrant. Uh lot one block two Broadmore edition suit number C10215 tax $1,500 Galilee community development cooperation. Lot two block two Broadmore Edition suit number D1

[0:28:41] 120235 tax 1500 Galilee community development cooperation. C. North half of lot 6 and north half of west half of lot 5 block 74 miles edition suit number C 110183 tax $1,500 Galilee community development cooperation D S 1/2 south 1/2 of lot 6 and south 1/2 of lot 1/2 west 1/2 of lot 5 block 74 miles edition suit number B9015t $1,500 tax Galilee community development cooperation E. South half of the north half of block 7, east south Kirby subdivision. Uh that's ES Kirby subdivision. Suit number C100051. Tax $233. Hapa and F north half of the south 100t of the north 150t of the south 783.7 foot of block 8. ES Kirby subdivision suit number B12 0201 tax $1958. Hatchapa I do have Cindy Priest standing by. Charlotte, you have the floor. I realize that this is one of our new normal routine items on tax foreclosure. So, but my main questions are on A, B, C, and D. Is this not the property that we gave to the Galilee Corporation a few years ago to improve the area uh uh for the community block through the community block run fans funds to improve that and now we're back here paying taking it back for unpaid taxes. Uh I'm I'm concerned about that. So can you explain to me? No ma'am this is not part of that um conveyance that was several years ago. These are properties that the city has held um some of them for a number of years. So they were struck off to the city as trustee, but the city has held several of these for a number of years. The remainder were picked up at the last tax sale. Um and they were have not been recent um conveyances from Galilee. So

[0:30:48] they were vacant lots, but there's been no movement or intention to build on them since they were picked up at a previous tax sale. No, ma'am. These were not part of that prior conveyance to Galloway Galilee several years ago. I can get you a listing of those properties if you wish. No, I just would like to have them in the future when this comes up. So, it it does concern me when we give something and we have to turn around and take them because of non-payment when we give something. So, um you clarified that for me. So, I'll make the motion to approve. Do I have a second? I'll second. I'll take Don second on this. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Do I have further council consideration on this item? Do I have public comment on this item before we vote? I will call for the vote. All in favor, please say I. Opposed? Nay. Which moves us to the public and hearing and comment section of our agenda. Uh we will postpone number 11. The proponent for number 11 has asked that we pull this one and to postpone it to a later meeting. So mark your agendas. We will be pulling number 11 and postponing it. Uh I'm confused. Number 11. Yes. On number 11. Um and the reason that we voted like we did last time was to keep their notification date and things in schedule if we post that now that we did for not the last time. So um I'm not understanding. Charlotte, it's just a request from the proponent to go ahead and pull that as far as they had certain issues that they need to look into prior to having this presented that they wanted to be comfortable with. So, they asked that we pull that item. And and you're correct, Charlotte, is if they were to withdraw it totally, then we'd have to go through the whole process again. If if we simply postpone it, we will have to renotify as far as the hearing date. So, it'll just require the one renotification for that new date. Correct. tell you my the reason for my concern is, you know, we push do business in St. Angelo and I I just don't want to make this more delaying

[0:32:51] and an absolute hair pulling situation for businesses who want to St. Angelo. That is my concern and my fear. So, um, anything that we can do to assist the proponents in getting this straightened out, I'd like to see the city manager's office work on that. Charlotte, this is actually nothing that the city did. It's just clarification, but we definitely are working with them to make sure that we get these through as quickly as we can. Okay. Okay. Well, we'll take number 10. Rodney, you did say you had one item that you wish to move forward. I think it we may move fast enough to get through it. So, okay. If if not, we I may ask for number 18 to move move up before I have to leave at three. Well, we'll go ahead and take the agenda then as it is. If you do see that there is a problem, then ask and we can move your item forward. Number 10 is discussion and consideration of adopting a resolution of city council acknowledging the considerable public opposition to future developments of frack sand mining, processing, storing, transloading, and transporting operations within the cooperate limits of the city and expressing concern for the potential negative impacts of such developments on health and safety, traffic, property values, and the quality of life for the residents of the community. This has been requested by council member Don Vman. I would like to set some ground rules for this before we get into this. This is a very we we are walking a legal line here. The city council never did have a chance to work on this because our city permit and our city planning department authorized and gave permits for this under existing law. When he took it to TCEQ, he was given a permit under existing TCEQ laws. It never came to city council. We never had a chance to look at it. We never had a chance to consider it. The only now the the opponents of this have challenged with the zoning board of adjustments to challenge the decision that our permit and our planning manager made according to light manufacturing as opposed to heavy manufacturing. This is in the hands of the zoning board of

[0:34:54] adjustments and they are the only ones in this city that have any authority to do anything about this. If the zoning board of adjustments, if their decision is not accepted by either party, then it goes to county court for a decision, the city council can do nothing. We never had the opportunity. We will never have the opportunity. However, Don realizing from a consensus that was taken of the of the city council several months ago when most of us issued a statement saying we were opposed to this sandfrack operation going into the part of the city where it is going. Don wanted to make a resolution. Wherever the resolution goes, whatever the decision is made on the resolution, it will simply be a resolution of the St. Angelo City Council. It is completely toothless. It has that we have no ability to punish. We have no authority to challenge. It is simply a resolution that seven members of the city council will or will not make according to the location of the sand plant location. It is totally and completely in the hands of the zoning board of of of adjustments and we are walking a very fine legal line even with the resolution. I will allow public comment after before we take our vote. Public comment will be specifically germanine to the wording of the agenda item. I will allow you to say I am for the resolution. I will allow you to say I am against the resolution. I will not allow any videos. I will not allow any any editorializing. I will not allow any comments because we will do absolutely nothing that would jeopardize the decision that the zoning board of adjustments will have to make on this. And uh I'm going to I'm going to hold I'm going to hold very I'm going to hold tight on this. Before we get into it, do you have a comment, Charlotte? Yes, Mr. Mayor. I have a question.

[0:36:56] Um first of all, I disagree with not allowing uh comments on this. U it it's a community item and definitely needs to be heard. But what I'm reading as the agenda item on here, it doesn't specify any specific location or business that is now pending before the ZBA. What it states is, and I don't like the wording on this, by the way. I don't agree with the wording on this at all, but and I'll get into that later, but what it states is uh the considerable public opposition to future development of frack sand mining processing, storing, transloading, and transportation operation within the corporate limits of the city. Uh that's what we're talking about in this particular item. We are not talking about a current facility proposal such as the one that is before the ZBA. And I I I feel like we're free to talk about our feelings and free to view uh any video or hear public comment on the location of any type business. And that's what I understood this to be, not the council making direction or decision on the one before the ZBA is is that's my understanding of this item. Yes, I need legal opinion. I Yes, I think uh you and the mayor uh are addressing the same point which is very obvious. Um the particular development that's scheduled on appeal before the zoning board of adjustment uh is strictly as the mayor has said it's within the purview of the zoning board of adjustment. They're not advisory to the council under state law uh and under our ordinance which tracks state law. they have the sole authority to make the decision that uh regarding the opinion that's been appealed. Um

[0:39:02] under C rules applicable to the council the council is not and under state code the council is not to address that particular development. This is not the hearing for that. Therefore, your resolution is merely an acknowledgment that you've heard from your members that there is very substantial concern about that type of industry across the board and it does not respect any particular development. It's extremely important that this council not take any evidence, any statements, any public remarks about a particular development because again that is scheduled for public hearing. A process has been established to make sure that all the evidence that anyone might want to present that they have plenty of time to present it. that the board has plenty of time to look at it and that process will be followed to the letter to allow Mr. I understand that. I understand that totally and agree, but that's not what we're talking about here. Uh you and the mayor is rightfully so making sure that we do not talk about the specific item that is before the ZBA. Correct. But we can talk about the type of business as it's pointed out in this. That's what we're wanting to talk about. What concerns me that's in this is in the city limits. Uh I don't see us banning future businesses because we have areas in the city limits that are zoned heavy manufacturing and so forth and we need clarification. I I don't like the way it's worded because I don't want to ban everything this type of business from anywhere being around the city because in the city we have industrial areas which this would be suitable and appropriate. I don't want to mix the two subjects together here. Well, the resolution is not about banning

[0:41:05] anything. It's only about saying that we understand that with this particular interest concerns have arisen in the community. That's all that states. I I'm confused, mayor. I mean, if we're if we're talking about something specific, this is was meant to address I I think just an expression of the council's concern over the number of calls that we've all received on a a site. We all respect the fact that this is now before the ZBA and should be heard by the ZBA, but even you when you started your comments were talking about something he proposed and he was into. So somehow or another, I I'm not sure how we go forward. I understand the intent of Mr. Vetoman, but we all seem to be going back to a specific development proposal that we know we're not supposed to be talking about. So like Miss Farmer saying, I think we ought to be able to talk about um transloading facilities, but not any specific one. Well, we can hide our head in the sand if we so choose and play like we don't know what this is about. I mean, if that's what y'all want to, we can hide our head, but we know exactly what we're talking about. We know the location. We know the proponents. We know the opponents. We know what we're talking about here. And you know, we can play these silly games all day long, but that doesn't change the fact we're talking about the San Frack over on Hill Street. Uhoh. You are. Let me read the resolution. Let me read the resolution. We've had legal counsel on this. He has said, "Do not take comment." And I'm going to stick with that. But if it comes to a co to a to a vote of the council, we'll take it and we'll do whatever the council will. Let me read the resolution. It's a resolution of the city of St. Angelo City Council acknowledging the considerable public opposition to future developments of frack sand, mining, processing, storing, transloading, and transporting operations within the cooperate limits of the city and expressing concern for the potential negative impacts of such developments on health and safety, traffic, property values, and the quality of life for residents of the

[0:43:08] community. At a regular meeting held pursuant to public notice on October 21st, 2014, the city council heard a presentation by staff, took public comment, and discussed the city's zoning ordinances as it relates to a proposed frack sand transloading facility to be developed within the cooperate limits of the city. And whereas at that public meeting, council members and citizens expressed concerns and opposition to the proposed development relating to health and safety, traffic, property values, and quality of life. And whereas since the council meeting held on October 21st, 2014, city residents have contacted individual council members expressing concerns for negative impacts that such developments pose related to health and safety, traffic, property values, and quality of life. And whereas public concern for the potential negative impacts of such developments within the city continue to be expressed among residents in social media and local news media. And whereas the city council desires to acknowledge the considerable public opposition to future developments of frack sand mining, processing, storing, transloading, and transporting operations within the cooperate cities of the limits city limits of the city. And whereas the city council is in the process of reviewing ordinances applicable for the regulation of such developments as may be necessary for public health and safety. Now therefore, be it resolved by the city council of the city of St. Angelo that the council for the city of St. Angelo acknowledges the considerable public opposition to future developments of frack sand mining, processing, storing, transloading, and transporting operations within the cooperative limits of the city and determines that it is necessary and in the best interest of the public, including the protection of the public health and safety of the residents of the city of St. Angelo that the council express its concern for the potential negative impacts of such developments on the health and safety of the community, including impacts directly related to airborne pollution. And at our meeting on October 21st, 2014, we specifically by address spoke about this sand area. So, it has already been defined and it is defined in a

[0:45:12] resolution. You say no. I'm going to call C. I'm going to call the vote to the council. I'd like to make this easy. Let's just I I move that we accept the resolution as presented and move on. I'll second that. That sound like a good way to do it. I do have a motion to accept the resolution as it has been read and we will take comments specifically germanine to the resolution as it has been read. It has been defined at the October 21st meeting. The location was defined at the October 21st meeting. The zoning board is considering a specific location. This is the one that I will take and the agenda calls for the resolution. And you may comment for, you may comment against. The motion has been made and seconded that we move forward on the resolution as presented. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Then our item is not specific to the address or what it is for the resolution. The resolution, someone tell me the purpose of it the way it's written. Give me the purpose of if we pass this, what what good does it do? What is it? I mean, it's for the entire city. Good. Councilman Bart, what what I originally intended on this thing was to to have us show that um we're we're not against business. Uh I I personally am not against uh and I can't speak for the rest of y'all. I'm not against having frack sand uh a frack sand business inside the city limits like Charlotte said. I just think that it needs to be in the right district. uh the right zoning district that that uh uh the one that's in my district now I have no problem with. It's in a it's in a a good place. Um so I don't want this to to uh be construed as as this council or myself being against this this type of business because that's not what the intent was at all. What the intent of my

[0:47:16] resolution was uh is to come in and answer our citizens that that think basically we are doing absolutely nothing and to point out to them that that we're doing what we can do which is basically nothing at this point. Uh you know we uh we would love to be able to to step out I think and talk about this thing. We can't per our legal staff per what has been said here. So to me, this was the only way to publicly let our constituents and the citizens of St. Angelo know that we were looking at this. We are trying to do the best thing for our citizens and the best thing for St. Angelo. Thank you. And I'm very much against this location. Very much against it. and I've said so in the past and I'm going to vote for the resolution, but I don't want to get this thing out of hand and I do not want to get our zoning board or our city in a legal mess. And that's exactly what our city attorney has said we will do if we stray from the from the from the narrow path on this. But you're the one that keeps mentioning the location. The the location was mentioned in the October 21st, 2020. I know, but it's not today. I mean, on the if we have a resolution, as I said, I I'm I'm just saying it's confusing. I read the resolution. If I'm confused, I'm sure I'm not the only one in the room that's confused as to what we're doing here. May May we just move forward with public comment? Comment. Public comment at this time. Winky. For the record, my name is HR WLaw and also uh I'm one of the parties appealing uh the case and decision of Mr. Patrick Howard uh at the ZBA which will be heard on February the 2nd. I'm also one of the attorneys representing the uh group. Um and uh I can see the handwriting on the wall here. So I'm going to be brief, but uh I have to put on record that I I'm totally dis in disagreement with the law of your city

[0:49:19] attorneys. Uh and let me just point this out. uh is is this ruling I I know you can't override the ZBA and the ZBA is going to make the decision themselves and the ultimate issue is whether or not uh this location fits within the zoning of uh light manufacturing whether it does or doesn't and they're going to make that decision and you can't override it. Uh but you can express your opinion and you kind of have in the past but I was hoping you would do it in a better way. Uh but but but let me just point this out for the record. Uh we've all been on the council. You're still on the council. You people all the time go to these board meetings. You go to the planning commission. You go to the CBA and you express your opinion and you you influence those people. You've done that. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, and I've been with you when you did it. Uh you uh we just had a run uh we just had a similar situation in 2013 and 2014 when the city council overrode uh the planning department on man camps. We took it away from the city planning department and we took it away from the planning uh commission and and we uh rewrote the ordinance and we stopped uh the placement of man camps on every vacant lot in the city of St. Angelo. So, uh, is is the city attorney making the legal, uh, giving the legal opinion that you people individually can't go to the CBA? I I take it you're in a you're in agreement with the resolution? No, sir, I'm not. Okay. You're opposed to it? Well, I just don't I just don't think it helps us any Dan. Will these arguments be allowed to be made at the zoning board of adjustments meeting? Will they be able to to to bring their thoughts and their forward? Will they be able to address the ZBA? Yes, they they will be able to. And I think that the ZBA board has already made it very clear to all the interested parties that they're going to accept

[0:51:22] everything that that comes in. Mr. Wlaw, it's doing no good for you to sit here and editorialize with us because we cannot make the decision. We can make this resolution. It it has it's toothless. We have no power to enforce it. You can editorialize and you can comment but you cannot influence us because we have no say so on this. You will be given your opportunity and as I stated you can state I am for the resolution or you can state I am against the resolution. That's all and I I respectfully ask you to I I I respectfully ask that you obey what has been said. Another question, mayor. At whatever meeting in October, we had a 20inut presentation by a proponent of a project that we knew we couldn't hear. Why was that appropriate and his speaking isn't? I don't understand. Will be addressed at the zoning board of adjustments before a group of people that can hear your arguments on both sides and will then be able to make a decision. We cannot make that decision. We cannot make it. I I would like to just uh I'll get out of your hair in just about one second, but I would like to address uh Mr. S's question. Uh I'm neither for it or against it, Marty. I just think that I could propose, which the council's not going to accept here today. I could propose a resolution that would be a lot more effective uh and and and and solve more problems than what this is doing because the mayor said this is toothless. It's just a a declaration, you know, that that you can't do anything. It's almost like a legal protect a political protection uh resolution. But but Marty, what y'all could do is y'all could pass a resolution uh interpreting the the city zoning ordinance having to do uh with light manufacturing, which is section 305 and 316. And you could interpret that uh not to include uh silica frack sand operations. that obviously would not affect the current ZBA case, but it would affect any other uh ZBA case. I

[0:53:27] mean any other frack cases that come up in the future and we are concerned about that. You're out of line. You're out of line. I've asked you to res I respectfully ask you to obey. You will not do it. You're continuing to move further than our agenda item allows. I've told you we can't do anything about this today. I would respectfully ask you once again to sit down. All right. Respectfully, Winky, I think we are we are working on that for future cases. Not for any case that that we may be looking at now, but I think that that was kind of the it's already in the mail. Winky, I I just wanted you to understand that's where we were going. No, that's and we and we I can't speak for anybody else. I want that for for that group and for the city also. I I I believe that we are going to be moving forward on any other case. The problem was we didn't do it in time to get to any case that's before the ZBA now, but I believe before another one comes up or I'm hoping before anything else comes up that we address that issue and we fix fix the the issue and I agree with that completely. I want to fix it. That's what I'm saying. I agree with that. No, we're we're on we're on or I'm on the same page as you. I I can't speak for And there is a there's a portion of the resolution that addresses that as well. last portion uh where the city council is in the process of reviewing ordinances applicable for the regulation of such developments as may be necessary for public health and safety and that is an item that uh will be coming before the city council mayor to to clarify on that item for the public as well. I think attached not to your item but um Brian said in your background information was the draft that is going to the uh planning commission this month. So it does just that. So that is already in the works. It'll be reviewed by the planning commission. come up. I've got Charlotte first. Okay. I still I I must be losing my mind, but my question is still not been answered. The resolution as presented before us is specific to the item before the ZBA board. Okay, it's very specific to that

[0:55:33] and it states in our agenda right here. It states and expressing concern for potent potential negative impacts of such developments and that's plural on health and safety traffic property values for life residents of the community. To me the agenda item is generic for any future business but yet our resolution is specific to the item before the ZBA. I do not believe that legally these two things go together. The resolution doesn't match the agenda item. That's my complaint. I agree. But in any future item that we anytime one of these comes up again, I think I I disagree because I think Don was right on this. This will fit in with any of the ones coming in. We we do want to make sure that we have the right rules in place uh for lack of a better word and and get it going there. So I think this does fit in with the future. It's not saying Charlotte that we're going to stop them, which we don't want to stop them cuz I agree. The one that's up on the one that's in Don's district now, there's another one that's possibly going to be a second one in Don's district, which I think, you know, it's going to work out pretty good up there. Also, if they're in the right place, they're going to that, but that's not what the wording on the agenda item says. I personally am concerned like Miss Farmer in completely eliminating the chance for any particular industry which is a legal industry to be banned from our city limits. Um you know it's it's a risk that someone in this industry takes in building a multi-million dollar facility. There's really very little risk for the city. Uh the gain is huge in the sense of what this can do for our tax base. Uh we see what's happening in our region. Even though crude prices are low right now, they're probably going to come back and I have no crystal ball and don't understand the industry at all. But I I think we'll be fracking for a while and I would hope that we are not so shortsighted as to completely eliminate any opportunity for any such developments in the future. Um, and that

[0:57:38] wasn't my intended and I know that wasn't your intent and you know if you watch the meeting we all know that was not your intent. So, I agree again with Charlotte. The the item itself, the resolution is specific to a date that ties to a case that we've all agreed we're not talking to or talking about. And yet, when you read the agenda item, it specifically prohibits any uh any such uh fracking uh type transloading facilities in the city limits. So again, I think this is terribly confusing. Um, and I won't support I would support a resolution that did not specifically prohibit any such development within the corporate city limits. I don't I'd like I do I'd like to point out though that um as far as the wording itself, if you read it closely, uh it's it's it's just an acknowledgement of the considerable public opposition. It's not stating that the city council in the future will not permit for anything like this within the corporate city limits. Uh it is stating basically that uh as far as a process of reviewing those ordinances, we will address that at that point. But it is acknowledging that the city council understands that there is considerable public opposition and that's how I'm reading that as well. When I met with Dan and we kind of reviewed this, it was just an opportunity for the council to to acknowledge and say, "Yes, we do know that there is a lot of concern from the public as far as the public health and safety and that we want to address and let the public know that we definitely are looking after your wellbeing, especially as it retains moving forward with future ordinances and other proposed facilities within the city limits." But Mr. Valencor, that's not what our agenda item says. Our agenda item is generic for any future. Any future. Let's carry on with public comment. Is there any other public comment on this? Mayor, can I add something before? Excuse me, Jesse. One minute, Jesse. I I wanted to add that, you know, I totally agree with uh what Winky said about adding those sections that that the the I forgot the numbers of those sections that apply to, you know, 316. Yes. Throughout 316. What's

[0:59:42] happening out there already? I'm not even going to name the facility, but I think the uh there there's been a misunderstanding because I think a lot of the the citizens uh almost seem like uh they seem to think that we we as a council have our heads in the sands when we don't. We've been diligently working behind the scenes trying to resolve this. But I think keep in mind that they have been the greatest advocates. those folks out there that have that have made the phone calls to to whomever that on the opposition or whatever is there. So, I I I'm okay with the resolution. Uh I I heard it loud and clear that uh operations like this don't belong in the city of limits. And that's just my opinion, my sole opinion. I don't care whether it's where it's proposed or where it's in at around the southwest part of town or wherever inside the city limits. it I I don't feel there there is a a place for such facilities and uh so we're we're trying we're trying our best and we're working behind the scenes trying to get this resolved and I just wanted to throw that in there Mr. Martinez thank you Mr. Mayor Council, I'll just start. Well, I really don't know what my comment should be or not be. Your your comment, Jesse, is I'm for the resolution or I'm against it. Well, I don't even understand the resolution to have an opinion on whether I'm for it or against it. But you know even after the ZBA board meeting meets uh next month, this issue has created more questions and more concerns and I've heard comments about let's move forward and I'm all for that. I do want to move forward and upward, but the best way to do that, Mr. Mayor, council, the best way to move forward and upward is

[1:01:48] first to look inward. I think there needs to be some kind of study of the organizational structure of what we've got. You know, when I first uh got involved with this four months ago, maybe in my simpleness and maybe my naive ways, I was loyal, I was trusting, I was confident in city government. But those fundamental values have been replaced by disillusionment, disappointment, and quite frankly, suspicion. So let's look inward and maybe redefine some of the city ordinances, develop new city ordinances, clarify the old ones so that we won't come to this same place again and perhaps review performance standards as they exist. So Mr. Mayor, I thank you and I will end my non- comments with a comment that I do appreciate this council. I do appreciate your hard work. I know you're in a position that's very difficult and very hard at this moment on this particular issue, but the perception does exist and you're right, Mr. Councilman Silvas, there is a perception that this council is moving forward and allowing this issue uh without regard to the waves and waves of citizen opposition. So, thank you Jesse. There is a motion on the floor more. There is a motion on the floor that we either support or deny this resolution against the sand fracking. The motion was for the motion has already been made and seconded. Right. So, we're going to have to deal with the motion as has already been made and seconded. I'm allowing public comment to see if people are for the resolution or against. If we vote it down, then we'll create another resolution or we'll let

[1:03:51] the zoning board of adjustments handle it. But that's where we are. A motion has been made. We accept the resolution as it has been stated. Yes, ma'am. Mary Casper. Uh good morning. I agree with the two ladies on the uh board. We seem to be the only ones that actually have read the thing and it's future developments. Ma'am, I'm going to have to stop you on this. I'm going to have to We have We have got an agenda item that we must very very closely legally follow. Our legal not mentioning this this the site that shall not be named. We are dealing with an agenda item about this matter. It is not written that way. The perception in the public from what you have on here is that future developments within the corporate uh city limits which seems to be in um against item number 11 that is going to be put off. And I feel that any council member that votes for this is also implying that they could very well vote against the annexation of the other piece of property. And that's my concern. Nobody is against the frack sand. We want the industry that is that there are concerns but we are not against the business. Do you see where I am coming from on this? I do. I do. What you said, what you did not put the entire resolution in here and it is public perception and that is where you are in deep trouble. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Mayor, is it not possible to put the attachment the resolution on the screen? They have handouts out there. They can read it. Not that doesn't have the resolution, just an agenda. Don, would you like to put a specific address in your resolution? No. No. That

[1:05:53] would solve this problem. Can we finish the public hearing? I move I move that we accept the resolution as presented. Okay, that's the motion. It has been seconded. Dan would like to make a comment. Uh, legal, one moment, please. Let's legal wants to make a comment before we move on. Well, I think given the comments of council and and the public that the what the resolution is stating really does merit being addressed and the comments made so far leave off the preface the leave off part of the wordy. The resolution says that the council acknowledges the considerable public opposition to future developments of frackand of the frack sand industry within the corporate limits of the city. It does not that that is what it says on the action part of it. The now therefore what the city council is actually doing. It reads the council for the city of St. Angelo acknowledges the considerable public opposition to future developments of frack sand, mining, processing, storing, transloading and transporting operations, etc. So, um I just want to make it clear for the council, you know, uh to please read the entire thing. The intent is not to express a decision about eliminating any kind of industry in the in the city, but it is an acknowledgment as the mayor has indicated that there have been public comments. The city council is not deaf to those comments and is looking at the health and safety issues presented by the industry as a general proposition. And that's what the that's the intent of the resolution. But I believe that's what it says. And I just want to since there is public comment and it's still open just to um you know address that before public comment is Mr. Sh the resolution couldn't or just say the location of fracken businesses

[1:07:58] because I certainly wouldn't want one smack dab uh across the street from a a hospital or a school or something like that. Could it not say in the resolution that council acknowledges the locations of frack sand facilities? That is the function of zoning. We're back to that. The content of the resolution is up to council, but I just wanted to make clear what's what is before you right now. Uh so that so that everybody in the public like you say it's not up there on the screen. Tim is before us right now. So that you know what's on there anyway. Okay. Thank you. Yes, sir. I'm Tim Davenport Herps, pastor of St. Paul Presbyterian Church, and this morning speaking on behalf of WTOS with 17 member churches and organizations representing over 10,000 Christians and other people of faith in this community. At this point, I'm not clear on the resolution either. However, our biggest concern is the vulnerable communities in our city. We want to make sure that there is safety. We want to make sure that traffic and air quality is preserved for them. That is our concern. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Further comment. Okay. Just Harry Thomas, community volunteer. While I agree with what the intent was here, I have to agree with both Charlotte and Liz. That's not what it says in here. And I understand what your city attorney says. But I can tell you that the way it's written today, this council leaves itself open for some legal action. And I would have to say I have to vote against this. Thank you, Harry. Further comment? My name is Jimmy Hill and I'd like to

[1:10:02] note first off your decision making, your authority, uh your leadership is greatly appreciated from a community standpoint. I tell you, thank you very much for standing where you stand where nobody else tends to want to stand and make decisions that you make. I am opposed to the resolution. I can't see approving a resolution that means absolutely nothing. I'm say I'm asking as a community member, as someone who works with a large vast majority of community members, that if you were going to stand one way or the other, in my case, stand against what we're t not talking about, that you that you take an aggressive stance against that and not a neutral one. And by a propos and but proposing or this proposed resolution that means nothing from me and my standpoint from as much as I can understand it is more of a neutral stance. And so I'm asking you and I'm pleading with you that if you were opposed then take an aggressive stance against that please. I'm asking you I'm asking you to be wise. I'm asking you to be considerate and I'm asking you to just stop take a step back and then I'm also asking for boldness. Thank you. Thank you sir. Public comment. Good morning. My name is David Spalding. Uh I still think that this resolution is kind of convoluted. I don't know whether if I say I'm in favor of it. Could you speak into the mic? Does that mean that I'm in favor of the location or or am I in favor of the discussion of the council? Can you tell me what that means? We do not have a specific location in the resolution and I would be tickled to death. It would tickle me to death to

[1:12:05] put a specific location that way. We are making a bold statement. We are opposed to a sand plant at X address and I would gladly vote for that because I am very much opposed to the sand plant where it's going. That address is not in here. The motion will not I have asked Rodney to add that. He said he would not add it. No, you didn't ask me to add that. You said that the motion stood as you made it. Yeah, but I'll I'll add the address. I don't have I don't have a problem with that. That would tickle that would tickle me where we put a specific address. I'm I'll still vote for it. But I want you to understand that we have no authority on this and it means nothing. But if you if if if Rodney would amend his motion to to put the specific address and if we will get a second, I'll still vote for it. So I am opposed to this operation at this address and really I think that would solve the problem today. Mayor, with that said, I do want to point out that this is against a legal uh recommendation, right? you know, so that's I understand that and I didn't want to get very deep into that. I do have a question. I don't know the rules for the zoning uh board meetings and whether there is public discussion and is it uh can the council go there in person and express their opinions in in whole or only as an individual? Indiv. As an individual and can you identify yourselves as a member of the city council? I have identified myself as an individual. Yes. Then I would I would like to have a resolution that the city council there attend those meetings and identify themselves and express their opposition. That's that's it's not quite that easy though because if we're all if we're all in the same place, if there's a quorum of us and we're all dealing with city business, technically that needs to be a posted meeting. So it's for us to be there can be four of us there at a time. There can be three. Yeah. Okay. Then can't there be a resolution that four of you will be there every time? Three three that it's already I mean that's open meetings act.

[1:14:08] That's already state law. We cannot Well, I'm not saying that you can't go. I'm just saying you know three of you show up say I'm from the city council. This is what my constituents say and you know thanks for you know your time. I would just like you to be there in person and not just a resolution of the city council be published somewhere. That's that's my opinion and uh I'm still not sure how this works, but I'm uh either for or against this the way that it's uh the way that it's written. I am I'm am um not in favor of the location that the ZBA has uh proposed. Right. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I would like to withdraw my motion and at redo it accept it as written adding in the address that's there. This I I think this is the biggest waste of time that we've done so far this morning. You talked about this and I just want to move forward. I want to get to this meeting on February the second and then we figure out what we're going to do at that time. I know that's against I know it's against attorneys. I I don't care. No, I I would say I would imagine the attorney would have preferred that this resolution not have been on the agenda. Well, I'm sure they said that, right? But we also know what Mr. Vean was trying to do was to acknowledge the hundreds of calls that each of us have received. Yes. Contacts on this issue and and I think if nothing else, we can say acknowledged. Uh I appreciate the work that my constituents have done and one of my constituents is sitting uh next to them and he's involved as well. So, it's it's been kind of interesting to be a a representative of District 5 in all of this. Um, but that said, I'm I'm happy withdrawing and and passing and taking no action on this. I think the public now understands our concern. They understand the legal quandry that we're in here, but I certainly don't want to take any action that leaves the public

[1:16:09] with the idea that we are not businessfriendly in St. Angelo. Absolutely. Did you remove your motion? I did, but I just I presented it again with the address. See, I Is there Is there a second to that motion? Because if not, I think Liz is I think Elizabeth's come I think she's hit on a I think she's hit on a very good solution to this. The general public again is going to see out there that we didn't do anything on this. And I mean, we're not doing anything either way we go. No, you'll pass a resolution if it passes. Well, there's no use passing a resolution that means nothing because it does mean something. It's a part of our history. And here here again, my resolution uh had the address. It wasn't legally acceptable to to do it in that way. And so it was removed. Yeah. Well, we can tell him that we don't understand. You can ask for it to be in there. That's his that's his opinion. Okay. You have moved to adopt the resolution with the address. Does anyone want to second that? see the young man that came up here and said that he wanted us to act bold on this thing that that's not we're not acting bold on this that that's not bold. So I I'm just saying that I'm all I'm against this. I'm against it at this location and I'm putting it out there. I'm going against what they're saying and I'm the only one that's willing to do that. Well, I think the problem is if you read this, you have to rewrite the resolution because it continues to mention within the corporate city limits. That would be my reservation. But not if you put that address. If you put that address, that changes the whole thing. I'm fine. If no one's going to second it, let's move on. Do I have Yes. Hold up. Hold on. If we if we can't go there, but if we if you want to be specific and and and it's it's in my district, and I'm totally opposed to it. You know, I've been in post when I first heard it from a second or third party and so I've I've been

[1:18:12] there with, you know, you're preaching to the choir. You know, I've, you know, I've I've been against it. So, I'm going to second your motion. Uh whether it means something or not, at least let the folks know, hey, that hey, your representative is listening to your phone calls and listening to your concerns. And uh I don't want it anywhere close to where it's proposed. So, I'm going to go with that second and see where where it falls. It has been moved that we accept the reol resolution with the specific address of the proposed sand fracking operation and uh whatever that exact address is can be added and I don't have a problem voting for that. Would the uh would the council member sponsoring the motion want to state where he would like to see that added? Yeah. See now in there if that would for clarification. Okay. I know I don't like writing it up here. Public op uh opposition to it's not don't take out future to the development located at the address. Can you take that down too? Can we just put uh at Hill Street? I don't know if there's a street. Is there a street address there? Planning, Lee. Is there a street address? I understand there is no there is no street address. It would have to be legal description. Property legal description. Or you could you could elect to say Hill Street. You could just to give the generality. Can we just add both Hill Street and then do the legal? Yes, we can do that. Lot block. Yes. Okay. I do have another public comment. Come ahead, sir. My name's Ken Casper. Uh, if this

[1:20:24] resolution has no value, don't have any resolutions. Period. If it does have value, say what you mean and mean what you say. Stop playing word games and just be honest. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir. For the record, HR WLAW again, and I thank uh Mr. Fleming's uh uh proposed changes are beneficial and I think and I would urge the council and on behalf of the appellants to pass this resolution. Thank you. Further comments from the public? If not, we got a vote on this. Well, I I'd just like to go on record saying I'm I'm very much opposed to the to the loca to the sand fracking bands location set. I'm going to vote against this, however, because I I don't I don't think it has anything to do with being bold. I I think the way you you correct items is is through the process. and if we need a and I've asked staff to to bring us uh additional zoning uh ordinances and they're supposed to be working on those and I think that's the correct way to to uh to stop things and and or to correct things and still be pro business and that's what I want to do through all this. So further comment before we vote on this? It's yours Don. Do you have anything further to say about it? uh calf rope I think. Yeah, it's it's blown completely up from what you wanted. Yeah, I was trying to do something positive and show that that uh what our stance was and evidently uh I missed the mark on that one. So, we're against it or I'm against it, but I don't want to jeopardize our ZBA. And if we vote on

[1:22:26] this with the location, will it jeopardize our ZBA? Um yes. uh under the ethics rules and under the state statute uh it's the prerogative of the ZBA and it's very important and we've been very careful that uh all parties have equal access to establish a record in front of the ZBA. We don't necessarily even have all of the parties here for input on public comment. So, but I've already given you know an opinion based on you know what my understanding of the law is after reviewing everything. But you are the legislative body and you can adopt resol and if we pass this we're actually shooting our own self in the foot with ZBA and with proceedings and legal matters. I I don't agree with that because you know ZBA does their own thing anyway. They don't answer to us anyway. I think this is just a uh this is just a it's a waste of time is what it is. It's a waste of time. But folks know that we if this fails if this fails Liz, you had made a statement that we do that we move forward and forget the resolution. Is that is that correct? Right. And I again I don't mean to be disrespectful to Don, but I I think the public can see this meeting and understand the concern that we have. Uh we also know that TCEQ is actually the agency that that monitors and sets rules and distance requirements and all of that. So I you know I would say let it let it lie and we we go forward and let the ZBA do what they're going to do. And as Marty mentioned, it's already within the planning process to uh better define uh these types of industries which were not contemplated during the last rewrite of the zoning ordinance and let the planning commission do their work and then we see it at the end of that process. I think that's the best public policy moving forward, right? But I mean

[1:24:29] you can you can look at Barnhart right now in TCQ that that deals right in the middle of up there and it's it's caused they're not an incor it's all it's all different though. It's it's all different requirements. It's caused huge problems and the general perception by the public is that us being a government body are not taking care of them and we're not helping them at all. That this thing was interpreted from the very beginning in my opinion was interpreted not right. it was completely wrong. And I I I I believe that all we're showing them is we're not taking care of something that should have been taken care of at the very beginning, which we do have a say in. And I and I hope we are going to, you know, like we told Winky, we are going to try to work on how some of that stuff is defined in the and in in the future, but this is the case that we're dealing with right now. And, you know, I can see how the public just doesn't trust anything that's going to happen. Charlotte, I'm going to make my final statement on the matter. I I agree with Mr. Fleming that this was interpreted wrong in the beginning because nuisance definitely has a bearing in light and heavy manufacturing. That's been my position from the beginning. I I'm not changed off of that. I will not and I cannot support the motion uh for the same reasons that Mr. yourself has just stated and I want to add but what's on the agenda, the way it's worded on our agenda and the resolution do not match and I I can't support it for those reasons. We do have a motion on the floor that we accept it adding the address that as a council we are opposed to this being placed at that area. It has been seconded. I've had comment from the council. I've had public comment. We're beat on this either way we go, but I'm calling for the vote. All in favor of the resolution, please say I. I. Raise your hands. All oppose, please say nay. Nay. Put a three four and a four against. And the resolution fails. Did you want to make another resolution, Elizabeth? Or

[1:26:31] do you want to leave? I would make a motion that there be no resolution and we let the processes go forward as they are with the citizens understanding completely the number of concern comments that we've received. In that case, it is 10:27 and I'm gonna call a break for about 15 minutes. You gonna let me make a motion and not ask for I thought you said you just wanted to let it die and it was over. Whatever, however you want to do it. However, if if we just we took a vote and it failed, so it's dead. I'll withdraw my motion. Thank you. It is 10:28. I call a 15-minute break. It is 10:49. I'm calling this meeting back to order. Uh item number 11 was pulled by the proponents. We will not be dealing with that. We will go into item number 12, which is a presentation and public hearing to discuss and receive public comment on a proposed proposed entertainment destination development project for the development of Lake Nazworthy that would include the lease of parkland possible action thereon. Number eight, consideration of proposed resort and entertainment destination development project at Lake Nazworthy consistent with the Lake Nazworthy master plan adopted November 5 to13 and recommendations of Gateway Planning Group, the city's professional use planners and consultants for the development of Lake Nazworthy, which proposed project is to be under a ground lease with the city of St. Angelo for all or portion of approximately 19.5 acres at or about 7409 Nicerbaka Road generally known as Mary E. Lee Park to be pursued conditioned on city's compliance with chapter 26 of Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. And item number B, consideration of making following findings required by chapter 26 of Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. One, there is no feasible or prudent alternative to the use or taking of such land. And number two, the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land as a park, recreation area, scientific area, wildlife refuge, or historic site historic site resulting from the use or taking. And C, consideration adopting a resolution approving a proposed

[1:28:34] entertainment destination development project for the development of Lake Nazworthy consistent with the Lake Nazworthy master plan under a ground lease with the city of St. Angelo that requires the use or taking of all or a portion of approximately 19.5 acres of public land designated and known as Mary Elely Park located on about 7409 Nickerbacher Road making determinations pursuant to chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code directing the preparation of publication of a solicitation proposals providing an effective date and deed providing direction to staff Scott Pico with Gateway Planning Group. Are you the start or are you starting us? AJ, I'm tired of reading. We need to build somebody in. Well, you did an excellent job, mayor. So, just to um kind of preview, Scott Pollicov with Gateway Planning will be doing the majority of the presentation. You'll notice that the caption does have four uh subcaptions. We will be asking at the conclusion of the presentation to get direction and action from you all on each of those four items separately. So, that's the ultimate goal for the presentation. Um to begin I'll bring up Scott Picov. He's going to go through a very brief overview of kind of where we've been with the project, talk about the requirements for this type of development, and then talk about next steps moving forward. Then if you have any questions after that, uh Scott and I together will try to answer all of those for you. Thank you, AJ. Welcome, Scott. Thank you, Mayor, uh Mr. City Manager, members of the council, and uh the staff. We've been working on this for some time and actually I think this is an exciting opportunity. It a lot of planning work has been done. We've engaged the community and so uh over the period of time we've been doing this work and now it's time to actually maybe do a project that could be catalytic in nature. So we're going to talk about the history, desired steps, the legal requirements. Uh I'm going to go through those quickly. I'm going to uh spend a little more time on the findings because it's really critical that you all feel good about those. We feel good about them, but the recommended findings for

[1:30:36] y'all. Uh then next steps and then any questions. Um we've been, as you know, working uh focusing on uh this gem that you have that's not just a local uh uh asset. It's a community place and it's also a place for West Texas. And that's why I think this opportunity makes sense. Um what we what we want to do going forward is is hopefully if you agree with the findings and approve the authorization to do a solicitation then there will be uh a process where there will be a best value analysis of the proposals and I'll go through that in a sec. Uh and then ultimately uh this uh site which we want to reinforce will stay open as a public access park and beach and hopefully will reactivate the marina and will be a public access boat launch. No matter what we talk about today, nothing will change in that regard. This will remain a park. It will remain public access. The beach will be accessible. The neighborhood next door will have access. All we're talking about is the potential ground lease of a portion of that for a uh potential hotel, restaurant, hospitality development which we think would enhance that public access. So the the approach is to look at all of the different factors that are aligned but are not connected. Uh we have the marina, we have Nickerbacha road, we have access to the airport, we have regional and and and and and West Texas markets, local demand. uh and a unique location. The master plan that you adopted after extensive public participation supports this specific project opportunity. We also worked very carefully with the parks plan that was adopted simultaneously and this is consistent with the parks plan. You can see in the red location what we call the harbor village. That's just a placeholder name. Uh that's right there as Nickerbacher crosses the lake and lands. Uh that's the opportunity. Uh there we've identified land on both sides of the property as kind of the

[1:32:39] impact area. Some of that's privately owned and we hope that uh this project can influence the highest and best use of the property obviously across the street. Uh we went through a market analysis. Uh I'm not going to go into the details uh in in any great uh uh uh way unless you want me to back up and talk about those. But uh the market analysis was updated last fall in terms of hotels but conditions have continued to change. Obviously the impact of the energy sector on hotels locally is something that is significant. However, nobody is in the process of or has recently developed this type of hotel because frankly there's no other location for an upper scale resort type hotel in San Angelo with these kinds of attributes. And so I think you have to view this in a regional context, not in a local context, and also in terms of the market and the activity at the at the lake. The bottom line though is maybe it's not opportune in terms of timing. But my guess is is that um uh uh council member Grindstaff, she she said earlier, I was watching the earlier presentation. Uh all of us who have been in Texas for most of our lives know that we go through cycles. My guess is is that we're going to cycle down a little bit, but an investment like this is going to be a longerterm investment. And I think any investor is going to look at a longerterm energy cycle. And there are a lot of folks that are local and regionally that are going to always want to be at the lake no matter what. Uh and so the conclusion of our market analysis is there is demand for an upper scale resort hotel in this location. Uh we did a little bit of uh design analysis on how this could uh be deployed next to the marina, next to the neighborhood, incorporating the beach. There is a current business out there, the excursion business, and there's a new proposed business may be coming online, the paddle boat uh or the uh the steam the steamboat. We have assured both of those business owners that this would be complimentary to their existing business and there would be uh uh that this would not impact their ability to

[1:34:41] continue their business. In fact, I think it would enhance their business. Uh we went through some design detail. Uh obviously we'll have to work if this moves forward very carefully with Texot, the parks department uh and continue to work very closely with the community and the neighborhoods. And I want to reassure once again that the beach access uh is is going to remain open no matter what. That will be in the RFP and I think again it will actually make it a cooler place. So in terms of the the steps we'll evaluate uh any proposal based on uh as I said in terms of maintaining the public access coordination potentially with the the marina opportunity uh coordination with adjacent owners uh creative uses of design uh and most importantly the key is going to be what is leveraged uh are you going to be able to justify and bring restaurants. Are you looking at a 20 at a 7-day a week, 12 month a year strategy so that this is a true destination for the local community? Um uh and in fact uh who wants to stay at a hotel if they're out in the middle of nowhere at night and there's no place to eat and you got to get in your car. So this is a real synergistic opportunity. Uh the legal requirements specifically uh are that the parks and wildlife code permits a city to approve a project and uh the designated land as a park if they make certain determinations and that would be uh this legislative body. There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use or taking of such land and the program or project includes all reasonable planning to minimize harm to the land as a park from the use or taking. We are very very comfortable saying that those two findings absolutely make sense from all the planning we've done, our knowledge of the market, our professional experience and so um we believe there is no other meaningful location in terms of this type of mixeduse resort hotel uh restaurant hospitality opportunity and it's actually the perfect location because of the juxtaposition on

[1:36:43] Nickerbacher uh and uh the existing marina uh and we believe because of that there's no other uh city-owned property property that exists at this time uh that would uh facilitate this uh public opportunity. In addition, as you know, we have coordinated through the process with the nature center and we think this is also an opportunity and we will ask in the RFP for proposals on ideas about the nature center. This is a catalytic opportunity to encourage the residing of that so it actually has uh a more meaningful location in terms of its isolation there uh simply on the beach in a building. Uh we also believe that this is in terms of findings uh in terms of the St. Angelo citizens uh this is the type of amenity that would be a benefit. Our market analysis supports this. Uh the proposal will be uh required to enhance the area to maintain the open access uh to be a positive fiscal impact in terms of tax base. And frankly, the home run is to see if we can generate more money so that there will be additional funds available for additional enhancements to the lake itself, docks, bathrooms, and those sorts of things. And I think the proposals that come forward and actually propose mechanisms to help uh uh channel some of the long-term opportunity from a revenue standpoint into reinvestments into the lake itself not only benefits the investment, it also benefits the community. Um uh we've had continuous community support through this process. You heard from them in a very favorable way during the adoption of both the parks plan and the Nazworthy master plan. Uh there is no harm that we're aware of this uh use if executed correctly uh would uh result in terms of the site. In fact, it would be an enhancement to the site. uh and there will be continuous built-in reviews during the process to make sure all of these attributes uh are realized uh going forward and ultimately you and the community have the say as to whether or not a proposal would be accepted and executed. Uh so this is this is the beginning of the process not the end of

[1:38:44] the process. Um uh I think I've already covered uh the extensive community process uh the uh access to appropriate size thoroughare and the services and and attractions of this site are appropriate and complimentary to a park use uh and the cash flow. So our recommendations are are are uh that we move ahead with the affirmative determination of findings. Uh we also recommend uh proceeding with the publication of an RFP. Uh we're asking you to authorize that today. Uh and uh the parks and recreation board voted 6 to1 to support these findings and recommendations uh as a recommendation that form the basis of the meeting today. So I did that in less than five minutes. Mayor, you did well. Questions from council. I think it's very exciting. It's very exciting to see what what our asset as you say can be both for the community as well as the region. Charlotte, I agree that it it is very exciting. I do have one question. When you talk about development there at Mary Lee Park specifically, and I have for years have wanted more lighting along the road and that road improved out there, what portion of a developer could be charged to the road lighting and increasing the the width of the road there to have more turning lanes. Is that been addressed with any or will it be addressed with developers? We'll include that in the RFP that improvements to the road needs to be a part of the proposed strategy. How it's paid for I think is a detail to be worked out. Um but obviously Nickerbacher there needs to be designed and improved in partnership with Texot and uh I think it's uh an opportunity for all of us because I know there are some other concerns and issues about that roadway and if we can align uh event day concerns access to some of the neighborhoods and uh redevelopment all in one strategy uh and our preliminary conversations by the way with text have

[1:40:47] been pretty positive. I think as long as they believe that health and safety goals uh are met, uh I think they would be open to some tweaks to the to the design. Lighting obviously would be an absolute requirement. I just think we'd be very remiss if we didn't take the opportunity going in to insist that the development of the roadway and lighting be included or be required. The uh council council member, the only limitation is we would need to of course qualify that with approvals by textile. We couldn't we couldn't force the developer on an offsite stateowned facility to do certain things without the consent of textile. Rodney, this is your area. Do you have any feeling on this? Yeah, I'm all for this. And you know, when they do the roads in interior, all those roads are going to be all brand new. It's not that the roads that exist now will probably just all be taken away. U maybe some down there by the beach would stay, but on the other end, it'll all be new and they're going to have to redesign all that anyways. And it'll be up to code. I think Charlotte to get to what you're talking about. So, I think we'll be fine there. I I I kind of see this as another one of those no-brainers where we can, you know, we just should get this done and move forward. We don't lose anything as a city by putting this out there to allow someone to come in and possibly bid to build this for us. He's addressed the issue. And, you know, one of my main issues, and I had a couple people ask me about this, was the park. Is the park still going to be there? Is it still going to be free access for for our residents to go to? It absolutely is. He's pointed that out numerous times and and we we will not change that part of it. And so that was my only objection to the to the whole thing out there. So I I see this as a good thing. Um are we going to take these items one at a time? That was my question. AJ, do you want to do A, B, C, and D one at a time or do you want to do them all in one fail swoop? That's what we've been advised to do. Yes. One at a time. One at a time. You want to start us off on this writing? I move that we accept a as written. Second. Okay. Do have a motion and a second. Uh public comment. Any public comment on this item? Come on up, sir. I'm Rick Labbbit with the Lake

[1:42:55] Nesworthy Homeowners. Uh two or three things I see here on this thing that I'm concerned about. Uh the first is if you look to the east of the dam, that's private property. If you look to the west of the dam, that's property property. Uh, I also see that the city has gone out for bids on a new police boat house. It apparently is not going to happen if you follow what if I see this map correct. That's not because you're going to be putting it right in where we're showing a development. This is just a schematic though. So, well, but are we talking at this point about taking land away from people who have land for sale at the lake? No. because well uh you've got a motel with five or six eight units whatever it is. Is that correct? Is that the that's the west? First of all, this is not even the hotel will probably not end up looking anything like what this drawing is. It'll be up to the person coming in business coming in to to submit to us any of their conceptual drawings. And that company will have to kind of address what Liz was I think about to say was that company's going to have to buy like uh where the cottages are over on east side of that that is owned by an individual. But if they were going to put something over there, they're going to have to go straight to that individual and buy that. Even the marina building is owned. The marina building is owned by an individual. Not right out on the water side. It's not. The city owns that, but the marina building and they're going to have to purchase that from them. So they'll have There's three about three private properties. Yeah. They'll have to work out all that. That business will have to work that out. Not us as a city. They'll have to work that out. Yes, Councilman's absolutely right. This is just an illustrative design to show if there was a a hotel on the on on the Mary Lee site next to the marina, how it could be redesigned and reactivated with maybe some uh day casitas and then some redevelopment that could occur across the street that could be catalyzed. I hope the person across the street makes a lot of money off of this. That would be our goal. There's no requirement for any city acquisition of

[1:44:58] property to do this. All we're talking about is findings and authority to move forward with a ground lease to reconfigure the park so that a resort hotel and potentially restaurants or other appropriate uses would be done. But you're asking for a lease and then you're asking the guy to turn around and buy two other pieces of property. No, sir. the the the is that's why we put on the front page these are for illustrative purposes only. It was our obligation to say if the city helps support development on Mary Lee Park as a resort destination, what's the potential economic development opportunities for the private property interests across the street. This is government working to help people in the private side be successful. This is government will have nothing to do with happens on the other side of the street. to get to give y'all a little bit of a background. I think it's important to reinforce that because it's not fair to suggest that what this picture represents is somehow government suggesting they're going to come in and take somebody's property. Just the opposite. If I were the owner of that property, I would be standing up right now watching this going, "Hallelujah. This is government helping add value to my property." That's right. In 1962, I helped my dad build Lake Lakeshore Amusement Park. And I don't know how many members. Do y'all remember that we had an amusement park at Mary Lee Park? Nobody remembers that. We'd love for you to develop one. We had we had a well we had the largest railroad track in West Texas because we bought the train out of Breen Ridge Park in San Antonio. We had ferris wheels. We had go-karts. We had kitty rides. Had a concession stand is where the boat club is right now. But the the property was actually leased by my dad in 1962. and we we were there three years, four years actually and then moved back to Odessa. But there has been an amusement park in that in Mary Lee Park and it probably would have been successful. Uh the things that happened at that time, the first year the city decided to kill the fish and we had a fish kill from Merten all the way down. The second year the city decided to close the bridge to rebuild it and the third year the city decided to drain the lake. So our first three years out there in the amusement

[1:47:00] business was not very good. But it it it can happen and I know Mirle Lee Park is a good location, but I am concerned if we're talking about the city taking land from some people or buying land, taking it off the property tax roles to make this development be a success. And this is a what I would call kind of a a catalyst development. And so what we're proposing or what there is being proposed is the use of city land as long as we meet the criteria according to Texas Parks and Wildlife to create a catalyst for more positive development in the area. So as Scott said, if you're a private land owner in the area, you can decide to participate, sell, or sit and do nothing, but there's going to be some interesting things happen around you that will add value to your land. Well, I can see where like Jean Scotty's old property is the key to this whole development. Yeah. And if you don't have that, it's not going to work. And I just see it appears to me if you got the city working one way and a guy that's holding that property. It's called planning. We're going to we're going to try. I mean, he might put in something that you don't like right next to what you have already put. So, I'm just concerned how you control all of the land to do a development like this. That's my only concern. Thank you. Thank you, Rick. Any any other further public comment on this before we move forward? Mayor, for the record, I was I don't remember the park. I was 2 years old living in Odessa, so I don't remember it either. And I was here, but I hope you redo it. I I like the railroad the the train. I'd like to have that down in downtown, but it was a nice one. Did you sell your train? You still have it? No, we sold it. Okay. had Santa Fe Railroad actually put in the tracks. There was a mile and a half a railroad track there. Wow. I'm good. Further comment from the public. We moved here. My name is Jim Moyer. I'm also on the board. This area right here where we

[1:49:03] have finally your council has approved the police boat dock. uh yet they've got something there. I want to make sure that the council reserves that because we desperately need the police boat dock on the water, not the boats parked on the airport. And by the way, how's that coming? We're we're in the final stages right now on that. We're working on that. So that this this whole plan is not That's good. It had been approved about four years ago and never happened. So as you know how is kind of curious as to what's going on. As you know how government works everything is add 10 to everything um that is in the final stages I've been told and that will not be part of any kind of development. We own that as a we own that as a city and it's not a park. We're talking about parklands now. That that lot is not a park and it's on the other side just east and it's not for sale. It's not further public comment. Call for the vote. The motion has been made that we approve number A, proposed resort and entertainment destination development project as it has been presented. All in favor, please say I. I oppose. Nay. Number B is a consideration uh no feasible approvement alternative to the taking of such land. Uh, this is to to be in and to be in compliance with chapter 26 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. Uh, do I have a motion on this? I move that we accept it as written. Second. Do have a second. Who's that? Marty. No, Johnny. Johnny. Okay. Uh, Rodney and Johnny as a second. Further comment from councel. Public comment on this item. Motion's been made. We accept as presented. All in favor, please say I. I. Oppos? A put 70 on him. Number C is consideration approving a proposed entertainment destination development project Mary E. Lee Park pursuit to chapter 26 of Texas Parks and Wildlife.

[1:51:08] Will someone move to accept this as presented? I move that we accept as presented. Second. Do have Rodney and Elizabeth as a second. Comment on this from the public council comment. Further all in favor please say I. I oppose. Nay. Put a 70 on that one. Directing providing direction to staff. I move that we accept. Well, that that's not really accept as written. I mean, we're we've already given direction to staff. What do you need on that, NJ? No, we just wanted to give you an opportunity if you had thought of additional items you wanted included in the package to say that. Now, if you don't, so we don't even need to vote on this. That's fine. Not the plan. Okay. We don't need to vote on that. You don't have to take action on this last item. Have any comments? Can I ask you a question? Yes, ma'am. I I don't want to over complicate this, but in in I don't remember all of the prior uh uh discussions with uh Scott's group, but has a tears district or any uh any financing mechanism been discussed to help with the public improvements that Charlotte was mentioning or any of those. It is something we've discussed internally. One of the deliverables in the remainder of the contract that we have with Gateway is to do an analysis of the area and look at land use control mechanisms and finance mechanisms that could help further the project. So that's sort of the next step. I think those need to be used very judiciously in a city that struggles with its general fund, but I could see this being one of those kinds of developments certainly in our city. And then also uh going back when I was on staff, the top of the hill, is that still city- owned land with no purpose even though it has an navigation issue because of uh it is still city-owned property. It is um not obviously in this portion of the overall Lake Nazworthy plan, but it was identified in the um overall scheme where we identified I believe five different um activity areas for the lake

[1:53:12] and it was considered um there we go was considered the area for special opportunity as an area that we needed to examine further determine if there were ways that we could maybe um using this development then kickstart some activity across the lake there as Because I think there there is another how how many acres is that roughly? If I told you I'd be lying. Yes. I don't remember. Quite a few. Quite a few. You're right. You are exactly right. It's quite a few. So, there is another opportunity for city- owned land that has virtually no purpose that could be sold or rolled up into the development. I think we talked about that at the early on when I first got on the on the council about possibly because I'm all in favor of selling as much of that land out there as we can. In fact, it's not just the top of the hill. It's backed off Red Bluff. We have a whole bunch back there in the middle that I I don't see us as a city needing to own. We need to get rid of that and try to get some tax money coming in on the on the right. So, I think as as your group works and as the as you work with the planning staff, just keep those areas in mind that there really is more city-owned land that could see private investment as this thing takes off. You did well, Scott. Thank you. Thank you, good to see you, AJ. You got everything. If it wasn't for her, I wouldn't be standing up here, though. Y'all got everything you need. Straight. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you, mayor. Thank Move on now to item number 13 is consideration of approving a professional services contract contract with Raffilis Financial Consultants, Inc. for the purpose of conducting a water and water reclamation rate study for a not to exceed fee of $90,000 and authorizing the mayor and our city manager to execute set agreement pending background. Uh, Bill Riley, you are on, sir. Thank you, mayor. This is your first presentation, isn't it? Yes, sir. Go easy on me. Y'all take it easy on Bill Council. Not that Bill. This is our new water bill. It was actually introduced.

[1:55:17] What was it last month? Yes. I must have stepped out. You must. You're on, sir. Thank you. Appreciate being here. Good to see you all. Um, most of you know more of the history of this than I do, but just to give a quick recap. uh last June you had expressed as a council some concerns or or desire to look at uh the rate structures uh the rates and also uh water conservation incentives. Uh following that, these uh staff sent out a request for qualifications. Uh received several back in uh in August. Uh after a staff review, a committee review, Rafelis Financial Consultants was chosen as as the best fit uh for the city and for doing this study. On November 4th, you authorized staff to uh negotiate a contract uh with Ras Refellis, which would include of course a final scope and a fee. Uh and that's what we're bringing back uh to you today. The study uh would develop uh not only look at the rate structure but also develop the costs of providing service to each of the customer classes uh residential, commercial, industrial, irrigation etc. uh and also look at our uh capital improvements plan and fold that into the process to see what that does to uh the rate structure uh the rates uh and then also ensuring efficient revenue or appropriate revenue for continuing to implement the drought strategies that are underway. Um in addition, we're also going to look at all of the other fees that the city charges, water, sewer taps, uh meter service fees, and those kind of things. um and make sure that that uh our our cost of providing those uh are uh we're receiving the the appropriate fee for what it's cost us to do that. Uh we're also going to look at which was one of your objectives is an additional uh conservation um activities things we could implement to uh uh to further uh conservation

[1:57:21] efforts but also look at the implementation costs of those things. Uh and so what we want to have them do is look at what's been done and what could other things that could be done additionally to uh conserve water, maybe provide incentives for that. And then uh we're going to excuse me built into this is is uh what I think is an important part of this is to have uh meetings with the individual council members uh so that as we go through this process we could get your philosophies, your feedback and your expectations from this and so that uh as we move forward uh that's built into the process. The uh will also be a uh public meeting, one public meeting, and we'd anticipate doing that once we have uh considerable amount of the information together so that we can provide uh information to the public on what what this is looking like and gets feedback from the public for the uh the process. We this the fee that we got back in the scope uh is not to exceed $90,000. Uh this conduct of this study does not obligate the council to anything. Uh but it does provide you with the tools that you would need to to look at the rates, look at the rate structure and make any decisions in the future. It's also a good management tool for us. It sees where our costs are. It shows us where our costs are and where we need to spend dollars and where we don't don't need to. So with that, we would certainly uh recommend approval of the study and would be happy to do my best to answer any questions that you might have. I got that's not but about three times what I expected this to come in as as cost. Rodney, you had a question. Well, one of the questions I have on the reclamation uh part of it, does this study include like does it kind of break down what the cost would be for us to to do the development for that in the future for for the any type of reuse project? Yes, that would certainly be uh included in in the capital part of it. So that any projected cost for that over the

[1:59:23] 5year period would be included in that. Yes, sir. Because we're that's the direction I think that we've talked about in the past and I think most cities in state of Texas are going towards uh recycling the water and going through that. And that's what I was referring to when I said drought strategies. To me that's another part of the whole drought strategy of water supply. We want to make sure even though it's a fiveyear study, I would want to make sure that uh that we look in that five years and beyond for any of those costs, but we certainly need that as part of understanding for the future for our rates and and rate structure. And just for clarification, Bill, I just want to make sure that we're clear on this. This is not the water uh reuse project study. This is actually what you're talking about is the CIP or the capital cost for that would be included as far as the study, this study. That's correct. This is not just the reuse study. This is looking at all of all of the uh the water utilities. That's right. My concern is that it's taken so long. I I think we were all hoping to have something in the summer when we were all feeling the pressure of lack of rain and uh you know, no no real positive uh environmental changes that were going to help us out. So, I mean, I I was for this in June and now I'm a little concerned that we could go without it for seven months. And um it's I mean here we are almost 8 months later. It's not telling me it was critical. I thought it was critical. It was supposed to. If I may, we have close to I'm going to give you two options. Don't say no one was here to do it. We're uh No, I won't say that. We have close to 200 miles of water lines that need to be replaced at a cost of close to $100 million. total capital projects really for for the water waste water wastewater we're looking at $138 million. We need to start planning now as far as what those fees are going to be the fee structure in order for us to be able to start replacing some of that infrastructure. It's not just the you know we have more water now. Uh we are okay. We're not and I know that's what you're saying but what I'm saying is we need to start planning for the future of replacing a lot of that infrastructure

[2:01:25] that's in the ground right now. And in order for us to do that we need to make sure that we do a good study. We know what those rates are going to be objectively. Objectively. Yeah. Very objectively. And that's what we want to get to. Charlotte, my opinion has stayed since June. I was against it then. I'm against it now. I think it's excessive cost. What you just said. We know what the rates are going to be. We know what the cost is going to be for the water lines. And why do I need to pay for study to tell me what we already know? Johnny Bill. I think my my concern too is when I saw the $90,000 figure, I mean, it just, you know, really opens your eyes. But how how comfortable are you with this Raf Telus Consulting Group? Have you worked with them before in the future or I mean in the past or I have? Yes, sir. Very aware of the firm. It's a very reputable firm. uh very capable of doing the study. And I think once you put a contract together and then when you when you structure it or uh and it reads not to exceed 90,000 I mean that's almost an a a blank check to them letting them know well I can go 89,000 and I'm not exceeding. So is there a possibility of it being far less than that? Do you have any idea? Uh far less probably not. I mean it is it is based on an hourly rate uh for the different phases of the study. There is a possibility that it comes in under that. Realistically it very seldom does but there is a possibility and and it gives us the flexibility if there's pieces of the of the study the way it's broken down that we don't need to do as we as we get in and start seeing the data then we can cut those things out and then we we would not pay for those. So there is some possibility it would be less. So what is it they do? I mean what is this study? You just mentioned data. What what h what do they do? It's an analytical process that that looks at all of our our data, all of our financial data, budgets, capital improvements plan, all of our costs, all our revenues, and determines what what our helps us to determine what our costs of providing the different service

[2:03:27] services to each of the the service levels, customer services. What is it costing us to provide uh service to our residential customers? What are the peaking factors that we have there? Are they putting the burden burden on to uh the system or is it commercial? It looks at the usage patterns of each one of those service levels and we begin to understand our specific costs with those. We fold into to the capital improvement plan, excuse me, over five years. We have uh x x number of dollars the first year, second, third, and we can track what our revenues are doing uh during that time with our costs. We can make adjustments with those if we need to from year to year uh based on priority or need with our projected revenues. uh part of what they will uh one thing they'll provide that I failed to me mention is an Excel-based econometric model. Basically they'll develop a model financial model basel based as they develop this this study they'll turn that over to us so that in as we go through each year not only can we monitor uh the success of any changes that are made but we can make do whatif scenarios if you will where we can say okay we're going to spend x amount of dollars this year um and we had planned you know x but we're going to spend y what does that actually do to our revenue recovery what does it do to our cost what does that do to the whole process And so we can make those uh each year we can look at those actually anytime we want to and see where we're track where we're going and what we need to do. Uh one of the major tools for me in this is we don't necessarily know what exactly what our costs are for each of the service levels. Not very seldom. I mean it's hard to know that unless you go through this this process and it's it's pretty it's a pretty complicated uh very timeintensive process to do this and that's where the costs come in. So I assume it's nothing we can do in-house, Mr. Manell. Can we do it in house? Well, actually that's a question that's a question for actually for you because that staff would be have to be dedicated to that. Do we have the expertise at

[2:05:29] this point to actually go in there and and specifically address each one of the areas that we need the funding for? We probably do not. I mean, we could actually do something. Um, and that's not I don't I don't think that's a reflection on staff. The biggest issue to me though is the time commitment to doing this. It it takes and and the value of having somebody look at it. First off, you have eyes from outside. You have a totally uh objective look at it and and they have the time to focus on it. And we're talking about a lot of numbers um in a in a huge spreadsheet. And if you don't have somebody that's focusing on that full-time, uh you lose the momentum. You lose the whole focus of where you're going. And um we could do something uh could we do a a you know be able to complete a study uh what what we're asking them to do? I don't think so. Have you ever done something like this previously? Um the my the firm I was previously at did a lot of these studies. Yes. I'm pretty intimately familiar with the process. That's great. So if we but if we move forward with this and with the the use of the consultant, is this something that you can maintain going over time or do we have to go back to the consultant for updates? Because you mentioned the word that I'm not going to try to say again, but the spreadsheets is that the Excel. No, you said econometrics. um for a period of time. I mean, generally what I what I've seen is every probably four to five years a city ought to have somebody come in and kind of re regroup everything. But for at least that long uh and and it's possible to do it longer, you just begin to lose some of the um um I guess some of the synergy in the whole thing. uh using that model, yes, we can uh certainly be able to track and make changes into in our rate model and in the rate structure if so desired, but most importantly be able to track what what it's doing for us.

[2:07:33] Realistically, we have a study going right now on the Red Aoya project. We have a study going right now on the wastewater project. We have a study going right now on a road study project. And everywhere I go and every group I talk to, people ask me, "How many dollars are you going to spend on studies before you finally do something?" And it's becoming a very, very difficult question to answer. And when I expected 20 $30,000 on this and I thought that'd be high. And when you hit us with 90 kind of took my breath away, but it's uh it's really becoming a very hard question for us to answer when we've got so many studies going on out there and nothing happens. So, I don't know. That's kind of my my take. Well, I I can see having that many studies going on, it's it would be impossible for the staff level that we have to do all of that. I I'm just interested in what expertise do we now have on staff that we didn't have before and what can we you know what we can eliminate so we're not just consultant out our ears. I think also in all fairness to for the comment that you just made mayor um that study specifically for example you mentioned the street study that study in itself I feel very confident that we're going to have some savings there based on the study that comes through so even the monies that are being spent at this point I know there's going to be a combination of things we can do to repair roads that at this point we're not just going there and doing a complete uh uh uh reconstruction project when perhaps all we need is a mill and overlay. there's certain things that once that project comes back, the study comes back, that'll show us, you know, where the savings can be had. And I feel pretty confident that we're going to have some pretty good savings off that study as well. Um, one of the issues, of course, with water is we want to make sure that we're charging a a fee that is is sufficient enough again to cover our costs moving forward. Um even though we did it in-house, I do like the idea of having outside eyes looking at it because it is a very objective study and as we move forward and we make decisions or the council have to make the tough decisions or making of making

[2:09:35] adjustments on the water rate, we know that it was a thorough study. We know that it took into account all the needs of the city really infrastructure- wise, everything else that's included in there, the service that we provide, what is the cost associated with that. We know that we can actually confidently move forward in making the adjustments that we need to the water rate. Uh if we do it in-house, again, we may or may not have the expertise to do it, the time associated with this. Uh Bill, as far as these type of studies, have you ever seen studies that go below 50,000, 40,000, 30,000? Um very seldom. Um and this this mayor, I I appreciate what your comments are, but I I can say from my experience, this is well within in the range of what you would expect to pay for this study for a city this size. Uh quite frankly, they actually uh their original fee was considerably more uh but through the discussions they they agreed to to the not to exceed 90. Mayor. Yes, sir. One last question. Bill, I I'm looking at the financial impact. It's blank. So, is this a budgeted item or It is budgeted. Yes, sir. Mayor. Yes, sir. My stand on this, I think we're kind of getting the cart before the horse because what I'd like to do is is uh take a look at the studies that we already have as far as water goes before we we start doing these sort of things. I realize that that even right now we need to be conserving everything that we possibly can. I just don't see where this is is going to help us get to where we need to to be $90,000 worth. Okay. the where this I think provides it's a little bit different than the other studies that we're looking at. This is a study to help us figure out how we're going to pay for everything. Uh the conservation piece of it and looking we don't know how much those fees are how much how much our fees are going to need to be to cover exactly what you said. No sir, but if we're making estimates over for the next 5 10 years on what uh we're going to need to spend for additional water supplies, whether it's a reuse

[2:11:38] project or whatever it is, we really need to know what the financial impact is going to be. Uh we still have, you know, the great thing about conservation is it conserves water. The bad thing about conservation is all of our costs don't go away. Uh and so we still we still have um everything to maintain that we had before, but we have a less revenue to do that with. Um to me, it's important to do something like this so we can really take a look at what happened uh when when you conserve and how we respond to that. And if we're talking about implementing additional conservation measures, you still have that same issue to deal with. So, but at the same time, we have some pretty large expenditures looking at this city in the future as part of our continued drought strategy. So, this provides a tool uh where you can say, you know, we looked at it. We looked at our cost. We know what it's costing us to provide these services and and this is what we're going to have to spend in the future and this is how we're going to pay for it. Further comments from council? No, I I would make a motion to go forward. And I think what's compelling is the portion of of that that you just said having to do with conservation because I think we're all very committed to a conservation strategy and it it is probably the single most important impact on that, you know, on the rate and the selling of water. So I I just don't want us to be dependent upon consultants. I don't think anybody up here does if we have the expertise. I think you you complement the the rest of the staff in a way that we didn't have before. I think we're all interested in transparency and so as objective as we can be going forward, let's do it. But this isn't as political as some of the other issues that we deal with. Streets, who gets the street money versus I mean what's we're we don't quite have the same infighting I don't think over over our uh sewer line and water line infrastructure. So, mayor, I'll for the sake of discussion, um I'll make a motion to approve this. Uh but I I would hope that we don't wait seven or eight months to to to move forward with something that we said was so critical

[2:13:41] back in June. Anybody want to second that motion? I'll second it if if you'll add that this is the last study we do this year. Yeah. that he proposes that anybody proposes. Ricky's still got his uh suit on, so I I'll take your second. I can justify the road study, but that's $180,000 of our citizens money, but I've been able to justify that. I can justify the wastewater study, and I can justify the Red Aoya study. I can't justify this one. But the it has been moved that we approve. It has been segated. We've had council comment. Do I have public comment on this item before we vote? Come ahead. Jude, state your name. You've got three to five, buddy. Thank you, sir. Jude Rashard, taxpayer. Um, what I heard is that there's some concern about the cost and there was an expectation that it would be lower. And what I heard from the gentleman during the presentation is that there are other are possibly other opportunities for cost uh cost savings with other entities. And I've also heard him say that he's worked with this before. But what I haven't heard is that this is something where market research has been done as to whether or not we can recoup or have some cost savings through a competitive effort. Thank you, sir. Question. Further comment from the public. It's time to vote. It has the It has been moved that we accept this as presented. Professional services contract not to exceed $90,000. Raffalis Financial Consultants for a water and reclamate water and water reclamation rate study. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Raise your hand. Opposed? Nays. It passes 4 to three. Moving on, number 14 is consideration

[2:15:46] and approval of an interlocal agreement between the city of St. Angelo and the North Central Texas Council of Governance, NCTC COG to utilize NCT COG's master contract for a service line warranty program calling out utility service partner private label incorporated USP to provide line repair coverage to homeowners residing in the city of St. Angelo. Brother Solace, you're on sir. Good morning. I think still morning. It is um during the uh December 16th meeting uh council approved entry into a partnership with the North Texas uh council of governments uh to use their master contract with USP to provide the service line warranty program. Uh we've provided the interlocal agreement for uh with the COG for your review uh which is really the vehicle to get the process started and we're asking council to approve it. Do I have comments from council on this? I have mine, but I'm going to wait till y'all are through. Why don't you lead us, Mayor? I voted against this last time. And just to give a little background, I ran a fence company here for 25 years, and I had a stellar reputation. Never got a hot check, never had anybody refused to pay me. Five years ago, my health got to where I couldn't run it anymore, and I shut the company down. But if someone with this exact same thing came to my office and said, "I'm from Peg's Knuckle, Iowa, and I'm selling a maintenance agreement that a 100 plus companies sell, but people are throwing away all of the information in the brochures I send. And I want your company name, your company logo, your company envelopes. I want you to write me a letter that says, "I'm the one to do this. And I want you to give you I want you to give me a copy of your client list over your 25 years of business. I guarantee and for this we will pay you 50 cents for each and every one of these we sell. I guarantee you that be out of my office quicker than

[2:17:48] they came in. Just to give you a kind of a relation, it would cost more to buy that Coca-Cola name than it would for everything that Coca-Cola owns. That's called blue sky. That's called buying a reputation. It's called buying a name. It's called buying a logo. And that's exactly what this company has come in and asked to do. They can sell to anybody in St. Angelo. And I welcome them selling anybody in St. Angelo, just like the hundred other plus companies that do the same thing. But I don't want to give them my city logo. And I don't want to give them my city envelopes. And I don't want to give them a city recommendation. I don't want to give them all of this because that's not the purpose of city. And I think that our blue sky and our stellar reputation and our credit reference as a city I think is worth far more than 50 cents for every one of these that these people can sell. And I think it is absurd that the city gets into this. And that's my humble opinion. You want mine? Yes. You're next. Uh I I think these services are important to our citizens and I think that it you know certainly we need to have uh faith in the companies that we uh select to work with and the only reason that this one was considered and I I know there are others was because they had I believe a stellar reputation. Um for us to do nothing as a community really causes no risk but I don't think that's what we're in the business of. Bob stands before us. He works in affordable housing. We actually build and sell houses to citizens. We help rehab their homes. There's all sorts of things we do that take on risk that someone else could say is unnecessary or not the role of government. But really to me, at the end of the day, we're here to provide and look for services that improve the lives of our citizens. And to my knowledge, there is no company locally that wants

[2:19:51] to come in and compete to provide this service for the same rate that the this company is offering. And so I'm very willing to to acknowledge again that I ask that this be put on the agenda because I'm more interested in having access to services that are otherwise u unaffordable to our citizens than to simply do nothing. here, right? I the last time this came up, I voted for this and I thought that the I thought this was going to be a good thing for to provide a lower rates. After that meeting, I had a couple of business owners come to me and actually they kind of gave me the same story that Dwayne just told me. And they said, "You need to look at it this way. Would you allow your logo, my my company, I have a small company, and someone came into me and said they wanted to use my company that I built up over all these years. would you allow them to do that? And I said, "No, I wouldn't." That these guys told me the same thing. Why would you ever let the city use let them have the city's logo to do this? I am going to change my mind on this on this time. And I I just looked at it in depth and I I I kind of feel like this is a free market. They can come in, they can do whatever they want. They can mail out to every They can find the same mailing list we have. That's possible. I buy mailing lists monthly. And so they can do all those things. And if they think that this market is that great of a market, then they will still keep their cost down. They should still be able to keep the cost down. In fact, they should save money because they're not going to pay out 50 cents per per client and in the beginning. So that's my feeling on this. I I think Dwayne hit the nail on the head on this where you know last time I know he did I and I didn't listen to him last time about you know this is a slippery slope we do it here and now you know next month it's AAA plumbing that's going to provide the plumbing on the inside you know and it's the fence company that's going to do this do do we back them and we let them use our logo for and actually we we gave this away

[2:21:54] for too low of a cost anyways when I did look at it I think Charlotte you brought this up that last um we there were some other cities that got more money than we got uh a good bit more. So that's my thoughts on this. We're not preventing anyone from doing business in the city of St. Angelo. We're not we're not closing any doors. They are welcome to do business in our city, but they don't need my help or the city's help to do it. Any other comments on this, Charlotte? Same question that I had last time, Bob, was the wording in the contract. I questioned where it said uh that from the resident side of the meter to the house. I questioned, you know, when there is leaks in the foundation in those pipes and the gentleman assured us, oh no, that was included, they would cover it. But I don't see a contract in today's presentation that shows they changed that wording. And I I can't support it without knowing that the people are protected with the leak because I know what it costs to have a cement slab jackhammered because of a leak in my waterline. I do have a representative from USP here that can answer some of those questions. I do want to clarify a couple of things. Uh first off, it's um they did in did they increased um the actually they they included a upfront licensing fee of $45,000 to the city which we didn't have before and then they're increasing it to 60 cents per participant versus 50 50 cents. So they are they're a very competitive company. Um and again we got to remember that the city provides these services water and sewer. So, that's a little that's why we uh consider to entertain uh this type of company in the first place. So, mayor, I wouldn't sell my company's name for $45,000 and it's been out of business 5 years. I I don't think that's, you know, my interest and I understand we have a philosophical difference that's been expressed here and I appreciate that. I have no interest in the city taking a fee upfront for anything. What we talked about before, I thought, was looking at

[2:23:58] a way to or or, you know, we could, if we did, to use that to help residents who are in need, like your emergency repair program, but but I would hate for this to in any way hinge on on some upfront payment. I'm not in favor of that for this, nor was I in favor of that on our trash contract. So, um, I want to be clear that I'm I'm not interested in getting paid anything. I want a service for our citizens. Okay, mayor. Yes, sir. And I might add that, you know, that's the beauty of sitting on this council is we can agree to disagree, and I disagree with these two, and that's fine. But my bottom line is I saw it as it's an option. The citizen can take it or leave it, bottom line. But then I I I think of the the the folks that have called me time and time again for help with issues such as this water line, sewer line, and I saw this as a a way to help them. And uh and and possibly, you know, just rectify their problem. And there's been quite a few. There's a lot of the elderly uh that that have approached me on on do I know of an organization that could help me or a church or something. So it always it always comes my way. So again, uh I agree to disagree the we with whoever is against it, but that's fine. At the end of the day, that citizen will check yes or no and and it's over. So correct. I just want to throw that in. Can I have my question answered on the contract? Uh, I think the question you asked and the last time our controversy was that it ended at the exterior of the foundation and that's what the contract said, but yet the man when I questioned him said, "No, if it's inside the the house, we'll we'll go in that concrete and we'll fix that." But the contract said exterior of the foundation. Um, thank you, Bonnie Kuritin with Utility Service Partners. And I believe the attorney has the contract and in the terms of the contract, it says when that pipe daylights into the home, which means it goes through the concrete and

[2:26:02] and has air, opens up to the light. So, yes, we will tear up the concrete and replace it. That is included in our service. And you changed your contract accordingly. And it's in the terms and conditions that you all have vetted. Yes. Okay. I'd like to see that. I'd like to see where you're actually going to go into the foundation to fix a leak because your contract says exterior of the foundation. That means the outside. That's what the old one did. I'd like to see I'd like to see where you're going to go into it. I believe the city clerk can bring that up. It should be in the background information. I I don't have a whole backup with me here. I can show you what we do have our background cuz I never saw it in our background. I can show you what it would you like to see it here. This is what you have. If you look on item four, we're both local and the contract. While you're reading that, can I make a statement? Sure. Yes, sir. Thank you, Marty. Um, my issue is not even the slab. My issue goes right back to giving away the the city logo and allowing it to be on the the letter head. There are uh Johnny said, you know, allows them to do this. There are companies already in town right now. I use them on a daily basis that provide this service. They provide this service exact service. $6 a month. I do a full package usually like when we when we sell a house, it's usually a full home warranty. So, it's a package deal and it's usually, you know, depending on the company you use, it can be as low as $350 a year all the way up to $550 a year. Yeah. I think that's the difference though, right? But my issue is we're giving away you're talking about people that have the opportunity to access something. And I I think that's that's sort of a philosophical difference. We're talking about people that don't have this necessarily the same access to the different programs. I

[2:28:04] remember the first time I took a a a a bus tour and it may have included Johnny, the mayor, Charlotte, we went through Blackshere and we literally saw people that were trying to replace a sewer line themselves because they had no funding and what that does to the interior of a home, not to mention to the neighborhood. So I again I I I respect a difference of opinion, but I don't think that a a product like this is available to our public for the cost that's being offered. And I'm willing to take the risk of using the logo. I would love for someone in our community to offer the same thing. And if they would, I think we would have been talking to them. But how fair is that for the next company that comes up and asks to use our logo? It's not I I think we look at them, you know, one at a time and and determine again what our risk is. And this isn't an exclusivity, right? Uh but what I'm hearing Elizabeth say, and thank you for reminding me about that tour, is you're simply advocating for the homes and the public, the people out there that cannot afford to research, don't have online, can't Google. They're looking for a city endorsement to know that it's safe to spend their money in something. and it not be wasted. And that's the cloud, the security that you're looking for for people and that you're talking to. Absolutely. Is and we have a number of those homes. Uh a number I've walked in on the dirt floors and the falling through the wood floors and the exposed sewer lines and they simply don't have the money, but they don't know who to trust. May I ask what you're looking for? May I ask a question on that? If those people that have the dirt floors and the crushed sewer lines and the water lines were to take out this insurance tomorrow, would this company come out and repair what they've already got? No pre-existing. Well, I believe they do. Uh they will come out pre-existing repairs. Well, again, yes, we dropped any pre-existing condition from the contract there. So, if they've

[2:30:06] got a if they've got a sewer line that is rotten from the house all the way to the street and it's been rotten for years and they they sign up for $6 worth of insurance, you will go out there and replace that water that sewer line. What I heard you say is if they have a sewer line that has been inoperable for years. No. No. What she said, we went out and they're leaking and they're raw sewage and they're broken and they've been like that for years. They're leaking and there's sewage leaking, which not only impacts the environment and your cost in managing your water and sewer, it also um impacts the homeowner in terms of increased rates. And the answer to that is as long as there's something flowing, it's leaking, we will cover it. If it's completely broken and hasn't been operational for years, no, we won't cover it. However, If it's oper if it's there's something flowing even though it's leaking. Yes, there is no pre-existing condition in our contract. Hang on, Mayor. I'm just going to let let her finish. You You were I have a house and my sewer line has been leaking from the exterior of the house for the last year. I can go in and take this $6 a month sewer line repair and turn it into you and you will come out and repair replace my sewer line even though it's leaking before I take the insurance. We will do what's most cost effective for you that prevents the um death destroying of your grounds. We will repair the leak. Now you said you will replace your sewer line. We do whatever is needed. We would repair the leak. Got you. I'm going to start buying insurance on life after I've died. If that's the situation, isn't there such a thing as great, mayor? That's good. It's good to know. I like that. You're going to die to spite yourself, aren't you? But let let me add that these are services the city provides anyway. I mean, you talk about

[2:32:07] water and sewer. Rodney, you asked about the next company coming up. Well, it better be a company that repairs streets or or does something to us, you know? So, these are two uh essential services that we as a city provide them halfway up to their property line anyway. But if you're willing to repair that for that elderly folk that can't afford that $4,000 bill, that's, you know, that's what I'm looking at. You know, and I appreciate you mentioning that because it's completely different than your fence company or someone else because what we do directly impacts your bottom line. There is a line item in your budget for conservation of water and sewer. And if the homeowner's line is leaking, it affects you. It affects your qualifications with the EPA. It's very few services that are offered to the city that have that position. And so that's why it's critical that we partner with you to help solve not only the residential issue, but you all have a greater issue on your hands. And so this is just really one small cog in the wheel of solving an environmental issue. Well spoken. I want to go on record as saying I don't believe that. I believe that they'll come out and they'll look at every one of these things on a case-by case deal. And that's what I deal with right now with all the home warranties. I I deal with home warranties weekly and they come out and it's deal with. It's deal with on a case-byase deal. And they'll end up saying, "Well, it's been leaking for 3 months or something like that." which most time when we're talking about these situations, it is a prolonged period of time before you ever even know that you have these problems. So, I'm on record of saying I don't believe that you guys will fix all these things when it comes time. And I think and I'm just saying from my experience with past home warranty companies, this is their track record. They're going to promise you the sky and they're going to give you nothing. Okay. May I address that? We went through an extensive vetting process with the COG and one of the

[2:34:10] areas that we rated highest in not only with the COG but with the Better Business Bureau is in business ethics and if I sit here today and tell you that we will we will repair it then we will repair it. We have one of the lowest denied claim rates in any industry doing this type of service. And the main reasons they were denied was because something like somebody signed up for water and they had the sewer problem. So, we would count that as a denied claim. However, somebody that has a there used to be a pre-existing condition in the contract. You're absolutely right. And we were able to take a look at it and we removed it. We removed it because it's very difficult to say, was it leaking yesterday or did it just start leaking today? It's very difficult to determine when that leak started. So, we just removed it. Totally. And if you go back, I will I will ask you to please vet our our um references. Now, I'm just saying this in out right here on record that if this does pass and you guys get this to pass. Yes, sir. That you had better cover every one of them. You want my home number? No, I'm just saying that you've you've totally opened yourself up to I would think a bunch of lawsuits and you will also have to go under the concrete floor because that's what it says. The service line you we were waiting on Marty. I'm waiting on Marty and then you and then I get through. Hang on, mayor. Hang on. You get the last word. I gave you the first word, too. Mayor Pro Tim, I I I I think it's I think it's important that that we realize that that as she is saying, they're going to fix the leak, not not replace the line. Okay. And those are definitely different deals. But I would really like to hear public comment before we go any further. I've got Elizabeth and then Charlotte and then we're going to go to public comment. Elizabeth, one of the issues at the last

[2:36:13] meeting or I get a question was uh that there were other companies who did this. I think um Mary found others online and I know there is a representative of another company here. While you're at the podium, can you tell us what you found with regard to um some of the claims that she made about uh how they pay claims, what their rating is with the Better Business Bureau, what the North Central Texas Cog uh found when they were vetting the different companies. Well, they did. They vetted uh four companies, USP, American Water, Dominion, and Home Services USA. Uh they checked for quality, handling, customer grievances, uh just to name a few. quality of homeowner contracts, a variety, a slew of uh criteria and a USP was the was the winner. Um, and I did a ker uh review and one of the things that came up for for example was I looked at the uh complaints um the last three years uh one of them home serves had 315 and USP had 21 the same period of time. So they're very um so that those are kind of things that COG looked at uh to so otherwise they wouldn't endorse it and um so they are very reputable and so short. Yes. Uh first of all remind me again Bob where what are we going to do with the $45,000 upfront and is that an annual fee? It would be an annual uh well the upfront is 45,000 and then 60 cents per participant. That that's going to vary. Uh we haven't come to council yet, but we're going to recommend that we put it into the uh um into the housing support uh things like emergency repairs to help offset the cost of where they don't cover everything. We can come in with uh with the grant funds to help cover those things. My second was a comment. Uh ma'am, I sorry I failed to get your name, but uh thank you for your presentation. I appreciate and applaud your tenacity and sticking by your guns. Mayor, if I if I could Yes, sir. That 45,000 isn't entirely upfront. It's spread out over 3 years. 225 and then another cord 25%.

[2:38:17] But it's above and beyond the initial Yeah, that's right. It's above and beyond the 66. Well, that's that is a revenue to the city. It can't become an expenditure until it uh is run through the budgeting process. So, it'll be some time before we come to council with that. Thank you. If it gets approved, public comment Good afternoon. I think it's afternoon still. Um, my name is Dana Batist. I'm with Home Serve USA. I'd just like to make a quick comment about the the the number that was just sped out about the 300 unsatisfied or home serves the largest in the in the industry. We've got 2.5 million contracts, 1.5 million customers. So, you know, everyone's with a I would say a 90% success rate. 98% um Better Business Bureau's double A plus. Uh Home Service is I'd like to credit Home Serve today for for basically through this competitive process um giving the citizens a better value. They've just um was just talked about how the uh the uh the upfront revenue is 45,000 when it was zero from the last council meeting. So um we have an opportunity here to present our company. Um I think the citizens would benefit greatly. Um, home serve is uh when and I'm going off of the last council meeting. The last council meeting um there was talks about pre-existing conditions. Home serve covers all pre-existing conditions, mayor. So, if the sewer line is is is crushed and it needs to be replaced, a citizen can sign up and in 30 days on the 31st day, we will come out and

[2:40:20] replace that line. Same with the waterline. Um there was a there was a conversation about um at the last council meeting about um the uh the concession payment to the city. 6 to $10,000 was the number mentioned. Um we we see in our industry, you know, that the city would generate anywhere from 50 to 60,000 over $60,000 a year and that could go to the Home Serve Cares program, which would help the people, the disadvantaged, the elderly, the ones that could not afford the uh the u the insurance, the warranty plan. Um, you know, Home Serve covers up to $12,000 annually for replacing water and sewer lines, not the $4,000. So, if we see an existing condition happening over and over and over again, Home Serve basically will replace the line because it will cost us more money to keep coming out to repair that line, to continue to repair, repair, repair. It's just easier for us to replace the line. So, it's a great program. I commend the city for doing it. It's a positive step. It helps the people that cannot afford that can't come up with the, you know, it could cost more than $4,000 if there's a tree. If you got to take a tree down and the trees are blocking the the sewer line. So, I commend the city for it. I would ask the city table and let home serve come in and give a presentation and show what our value to the citizens of St. Angelo is and then from that point the city can make a decision and I applaud the decision to move forward. I think it's a great program. It makes sense. Thank you. Thank you. further public

[2:42:25] comment on this. Um Mr. um Batista mentioned the $4,000. That's actually incorrect. Um we will cover any incident that occurs up to $4,000 as many times as it occurs during the year. So there's no cap. There's no $12,000 cap on what we will cover. And if indeed the line is leaking and we have to repair it, it makes economic sense to replace it, we will indeed replace it and we have no deductible um for our plan. Also, I just want to mention that um in terms of the logo during the last meeting, I someone mentioned that you all can go down for a realtor and pay and actually be able to get the logo. This is an issue where really it's a public it's a partnership for us to solve the overall problem and we have found that residents or citizens open and read the information in a more at a higher rate when it comes from the city. Now they have complete option as to whether they decide to do it or to not do it. you have complete discretion on what you do with the funds, whether you set them aside for um people who can't afford it. But it is an ongoing issue. It's been a national issue. There's over 28 cities in Texas that have joined the Nickco um agreement. We have paid out more than $2.67 million in claims in Texas alone. And we use local plumbers. We don't set a cap on what they can charge. We have a master plumber in house that works with them. So the monies that are spent stay in St. Angelo, which is critically important to the economy. So I feel that it's a win-win for everyone. And our goal is really to educate and to be costeffective. Not only did we come up with upfront money for San Angelo and increase the royalty, which it's a

[2:44:28] wonderful thought, the city of Atlanta has done miracles with their funding for low income. Um, but we also lowered the rate to the homeowner. we lowered it by 75 cents per product to make it more affordable for those for the for the citizens of of um St. Angelo. So with that, I would um hope and I would ask that you would approve this and um I appreciate the time. Thank you, ma'am. Any further comment from the public before we vote on this? Mr. Mayor, you know, I'm a verbiage guy. If it's not in writing, it doesn't exist. Um, last night we had our homeowners association meeting. Um, I'm sorry, Jud Rashard. Jude Rashard. Uh, we had our homeowners association meeting and I had a discussion about this very issue um with some of the some of the people that live in our neighborhood. Um, and our issue is that the city is selling the logo. Yes, this is not just an endorsement. This is the city selling its letter head and its envelopes and its logo. That's where the citizens are taking offense. Not in that we're we're not we're not negating any other competition or anybody else coming in and offering the service or even just a simple endorsement from the city. This is our city logo. This is the people that you're selling and you're giving it to one company. That's where the people in my neighborhood that I've had discussions with, that's where they have had have had the issue. Just like where uh Mr. Fleming has had opportunity to talk with with some of the business owners that that's their issue that you're selling our logo. Thank you, Jade. Excuse me. Is this exclusivity? What What homeowner organization are you with? It's not actually Country Club Lake Estates logo to that one as far as but we can give it to somebody else. Yeah, you can give it to

[2:46:30] another home warranty company. I mean equal opportunity. I don't think they're going to much. Is that correct? Hello Terry. Hello go ahead and then we'll settle our question. Are you Go ahead. I can wait. I'm Terry Jackson and I'm here for the St. Angelo Association of Realtors. Uh Rodney talked about several home warranties that we offer already that are available. My question is on this one, is this plan open to everyone or is it only open to those that that are needing help? Everyone. Everyone. To everyone. And $6 only covers certain programs, certain insurance, or is that $6 for everything per month? There's two services. There's two products. Okay. A water line and a sewer line. That's right. It may be I and I forget the the numbers but it's six for one maybe five for the other or something like that. Okay, that was and then there is no if you have something you call is there a charge at that time? No, she's saying no. No. Okay. I am not in favor the same as the other people about the city giving their logo, their name to endorse this. There's a lot of of companies out there. There's two here today that do this particular thing. We deal, Rodney and I, on a daily basis. There's four or five companies that are available. They're going to be a little bit more expensive, but they also cover everything within the house. So, I think at this time it would be better, in my opinion, for whatever that's worth to not endorse this. Does the board of realtors endorse any product or anyone? No, we do not. Anyone? No, we do not. It's a It's a selection that the homeowner makes on their own. She's getting at a political endorsement, which that's totally political. We're talking about utilities. I think I just want to know if they endorse. I just want to know because it's important. You make decisions when that logo passes and I understand that. Sure, we do. We have a political side, which you're aware of. I think everybody here is and we do that.

[2:48:34] But as far as utilities, as far as home warranties, we do not. That's a decision. Does the association of realtors that when you're talking about the local organization, you provide a home warranty? There are four or five different companies that that are chosen and the way it works is usually in the transaction in a sale of a property that they can at that time do it and or enlist on one. They can also do at any time. But those are those are companies that your organization has vetted as well. They're companies that are that work within our area. Okay. not with our association. They have, you know, they have the same as they with all of their um people that they work with. They're from our area and they cover this area. They have to be licensed by the state of Texas and only what she's saying is and it fluctuates actually. It can go. I've seen a high of six or seven companies that actually will come to this area and now it's probably about four or five companies that are actually in this area. So, so they've already gone through and they have, you know, have agreements with all of the different people, the plumbers, the electricians, everybody else of what they charge and how they do their their business similar to what we're doing here or considering. No, no, not at all. They don't give the it doesn't we don't give out the logo that says St. Angelo Board of Realtors to anybody. No, but you're when you endorse it's a We're not endorsing. Okay. They're not endorse them. We don't endorse them. They are there are companies. Sorry, that's what I asked you in the beginning. I'm sorry. You asked me about political endorsement in the beginning. I asked you about the companies that we don't endorse them. Okay. No, there's five companies and it is up to individuals to choose which one they want. You know, we have all the paperwork information. Yeah. We just offer it. We have brochures. Look at this. Is this something you'd be interested in? Yes. No. Which one? Pretty much. And do any of them have pricing like what you're you're hearing? Um, the ones that, you know, these, like I said, include everything in the house, your electrical, your heating and air conditioning, all that. They're anywhere

[2:50:36] from about 28 or $29 a month up from there, just depending on what you want to how much you want to pay. Right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. There was one question that was asked that I need you to to that I'd like for you to ask answer, please, ma'am. And that is the logo. Would it be an exclusive logo to your company only or is this a logo? Can we give it to every company that comes in here that does this and ask for it? You know, that would be a question for legal. I honestly don't know. Um, what we're asking is that you partner with us in the solicitation. And in terms of the logo, it would be the use of your logo in conjunction with the National League of Cities and utility service line partners. So, it's not strictly your logo and the letter won't just come from you. It will come from the National League of Cities Service Line Warranty Program with in partnership with the city of San Angelo because this is not just a San Angelo problem. This is a national issue. And the other thing I wanted to clarify was that we only offer this service in partnership with cities because you get a zillion mailings out there and there is a bad taste in a lot of people's mouth because people don't live up to what those things say. And we are all about integrity and doing what we say. And we have not only the National League of Cities reputation on our backs, we have the city's reputation on our backs as well as our own integrity. So we will not solicit to the city of St. Angelo residents without a partnership with you. That is because of the market. That's just because of the way we choose to do the business. Question. Uh Charlotte first. Don't sit down because I've got a question for you. Uh first of all I want to clarify something that in my understanding of all of this was this is not exclusive. It's not an exclusivity. If another

[2:52:37] company wants to come in and the vetting process you know is done and the city wants to do the same there can be multiple companies out there. Now, and the reason I say that, I'm going to follow something that uh uh it is, let me just clarify that for this service, just strictly the repair and replacement of the laterals there, we ask that you not sign. I don't know the exact language. It's a legal issue, but Well, that brings me to a question that was just brought up yesterday by Senator U um Perry and in his statement with the judicial representatives that were there. If we as a government municipality and we take money you know from the government then we have to apply to everyone we cannot be exclusive and that's going to get into the next recommendations down and you'll find it in a minute Bob that you know we have to be equal to everyone and we have to offer that equal if I'm going to offer our logo you know to you because we're doing the vetting on your company for our citizens out there. I have to be equal to another company. I have to be equal. That's the way I understand it. I believe in this program for the people that uh are not um smart, savvy on how to Google and look up the background information and they're depending on the city to say we have vetted this company and we feel strongly that they will stand behind their contract to you. Mhm. That's what they're dependent on us saying. And that's what I'm looking here because I took out a home warranty uh contract when I changed homes a just a couple of years ago. And I fought them for two years now because, you know, I paid my premium in advance and it said in the brochure they did XXX. First service call first year was $45. Second year they jumped to $75 which was no mention in the first year contract. But they I

[2:54:41] had to fight them for every repair, numerous service calls, and I don't expect anyone to go through this. Yes, it was my choice. I was given five brochures at the uh home closing sale for me to choose whoever had the nicest brochure, you know, and I chose uh a popular one, but I had bad bad service with them. So for an individual out there, uh, fixed income people that are do not know how to do the research themselves, there is a comfort zone in the city doing that vetting and them trusting that the city has checked this for them. And that's the reason I grilled you so bad on the contract. What does it say in the contract? And I just wanted to make that clarification that this isn't exclusivity. If we do, for one, it is because their economics don't work. If it's if it's for every company, including the ones that Rodney's mentioned and Terry, it it doesn't work. Right. So, she they've never represented it any other way. I'm sure that's how Dana's company functions. It's an industry standard. Yeah. Yeah, it is. It's an industry standard for the exclusivity. It's an industry standard. Microphone. Uh Dana Batis would home serve again. It's an industry standard. It's an industry standard for the exclusivity. It's an industry standard. um for the uh no charge, no call outs. Um those are all industry standards. That's why taking this through an RFP process will clear up all those questions that that the council has. It'll all your concerns. So it's it's pretty much an industry standard. My main concern my main concern is the logo. I the logo is an industry standard. It I understand that. But that that's where the people my people in my district that are coming to me and the business owners are coming to me and saying do not let any any company and I don't have anything against either one of your companies. I don't I don't know you personally but don't let any company have the logo of the city of St. Angelo

[2:56:46] no matter what the business is. you you know um what what we've seen in the past and and through the the 50 years that Home Serve has been internationally um existing. What we've seen in the past is that the actual customer service aspect increases when you have this service to offer to your constituents at a high level. and Home Serve being the largest in the industry with with 1.5 million customers, you know, morphs everyone else. I mean, Birmingham, Alabama, um, Salt Lake City, you know, it it basically we've got we've penetrated 30% of the market in South Lake in the first year because the citizens realize it's a service that they need. The clock's running on you. Yes, I'm done. All right. And I would just can I clarify one thing is that there was an extensive in fact I wasn't here during that time but there was a grueling vetting process and RFP process that went through Nickcog and Homeserve was part of that as well as top four other contenders in the industry. And the bottom line is that out of all of those companies USP scored the highest in all of the areas and Home Serve scored the lowest. Okay. In the point evaluation, Johnny, I think we've uh beat this beat to death. Well, I I do have a question and I forget her name. I'm sorry. Bonnie. Bonnie. Bonnie. Bonnie. If this were to pass and if I were to receive an envelope and an offer, with all due respect on the issues on the lo where is there our city logo on the envelope that I receive? Um, I would have to clarify that. I believe so. I believe there is. And the reason I asked that is a just a couple of weeks ago, I had an offer in the mail and it was the same water, you know, issue uh type of uh offer. And I guarantee I I wish I would have gone back and read it.

[2:58:49] But you know what I did? I I tore it up. I didn't even look at it. Didn't even, you know, I I didn't even think twice about opening it up. But uh I think in this case, I would at least say, "Wait a minute. What What is this?" you know, so I I see where you're saying that you need the partnership with that logo. That's the only thing it does. And and with all due respect to everybody else that's against it, I totally see because I guarantee you David Batist would be doing the same thing. He he'd want the logo. He'd want everything else. So, but let's not get in the business of selling our logo. Absolutely. Let's go to public comment and then I'm going to ask somebody to somebody to make a motion on this and let's let's move on. Yes, my name is Jim Turner and I like the idea of a warranty, but I do not like the way that this is would be using the city's logo, name, reputation, and asset. If we want to make sure that people know about this program, they have water and sewer, it's very simple. We take and put a list of companies that we have vetted in the water bill. doesn't require our logo on their letter head, doesn't require our logo on their sales brochure, and they know exactly that yes, the city has vetted these companies or even if it's just a one company that we have vetted at that time. This company we know provides this service, here's the facts. And if they don't read their water bill, they're not going to probably read anything else from the city government anyway. They're going to read that because that is money out of their pocket. And if you we one of the reasons we went to the type of water bill we have right now is the ability to provide vital information to the public that the city council, the water department thinks is important for the citizens to know. We think it's important for them to know

[3:00:51] about these service line warranty programs. The appropriate way to do that is put those companies that we have vetted that are good companies have a solid reputation and are doing business in the area and have a list of those as part of the water bill but not give them our name reputation and possibly even entangle the city in a legal issue just because we happened to uh have an agree agreement with them so they to help them promote their business here. We do need to be very fair with every company that offers this service so we actually have competition for this type of thing and we do not need the city in the business of favoring one company over another company that provides the same service. There are 32 companies, last I checked, that are licensed by the state of Texas to provide some sort of warranty service statewide. We've only had presentations so far from two of them. They're probably good companies. I haven't done in-depth research on them, but I know that none of the companies out there have got a perfect track record. If you take and start looking for problems with these service line warranties, you're going to get pages and pages of it. And every company that does them has had issues. They're not perfect. But the city of San Angelo is not here to endorse one company over another. They're there to endorse service to the citizens, but don't give up the logo. Don't give up your name. Don't give up your reputation for that. There's better ways to do it. And if they don't want to take and just have an endorsement that's part of the water bill insert saying we've checked them out, they provide this service, then we probably don't need to be doing business with them. Thank you.

[3:02:54] Thanks, Jim. State your name. You've got three to five. Uh Mary Casper. And I'm really not too sure if this is the appropriate place for all the comments, you know, with this one and the next one. Um, I agree with Mr. Turner, uh, very much so. I don't think the city has any place in giving out their logo. The other thing is, and I look at it a little bit differently as far as the royalty, quote unquote, that is actually another tax on your taxpayers. taxpayers are getting hit enough. We've got other taxes coming up. We've got the city has got bonds that you want to go ahead and approve for roads, water, etc., etc. So, you're asking them to pay an extra fee over and above this warranty service. Yeah, it's only five cents, but sometimes five cents and five cents and five cents and 10 cents and another $4 on their tax bill and another increase in a hotel occupancy tax or a car rental tax or whatever is beginning to mount up. The oil well fields are going the price of oil is going down. You have to consider all of these things in addition. Yeah, it's only 5 cents. Well, when does it become a thousand? So, I want you to take that into consideration also, especially with the lowincome people. There are other products out there and I think it has to be open to everyone. If you want to say yes, this is a good company, put it in

[3:05:00] the water bill. Give them the number for the Better Business Bureau and educate the people. Don't just provide the service, educate them. because if you have skin in the game, that's when you're going to go ahead and do something about it instead of being babysat. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Casper. Mayor, yes, if I could. There was some discussion and question about whether or not this agreement was an exclusive license agreement. I think Miss Farmer uh uh suggested that it was non-exclusive. Um I there's been lots of discussion uh uh about the next agenda item which is specifically about the license agreement. That proposed agreement is attached there and section two of that uh reads city hereby grants to SLWA a non-exclusive license to use the city's name and logo etc. So she suggested it was non-exclusive. She's correct. It is non-exclusive as it is written in the agenda item attachments. Thank you, Michael. Thank you. Well, for clarification, I don't have that right in front of me. However, um computer, if I recall that the the city agreement um would provide that the city would not grant a similar license to a company offering water and sewer line warranties. They have to be They both said it has to be exclusive, right? They both said they have to be the only one. Right. Mayor Mayor, he he's correct. That language is farther down in that paragraph. Right. Uh city agrees non the non-exclusive there means that um in other lines of business or for other reasons the city might grant a license to utilize its logo. But for

[3:07:04] warranty service for water and sewer lines, we will not grant the same license. So it is exclusive. Yes. With regard to this business line. Yes. But for other issues. Yeah. Well, that's what both of them said that it was exclusive. Do I have any further comments on this before? Well, there hasn't even nobody's even moved to accept or deny. I'll make a motion to approve. Do you have a motion to approve from Elizabeth? I'm going to second that. Okay, it has been seconded, Rodney. No, I was going to make a motion, but she beat me. Okay, we've got a motion on the floor. We have to deal with it. Yes. Uh, public comment. We've opened it up. Has everyone had their say? You got one minute. I think we better beat this horse. We've already We've already done an Bonnie. I think we're I think we're done. I would like to hear from the city manager though staff's recommendation. This is the way we I look at it. Um we have multiple cities with a reputations as well. The National League of Cities with a with a great reputation. Uh this has been de debated with them I'm sure as well as far as do we use a city loco or not. These entities um looked at the um what USP would provide and did decide to go with them. I know this is a local preference on our part, but I will tell you that there is a need for the service that uh USB does provide. We know that although there are those warranties out there that cover the majority of other issues within a home, some of our citizens can't afford that and that's the the biggest concern that I have. Again, it has been vetted out by multiple cities, National League of Cities. they did put their reputations on the line in signing an agreement with these individuals and that's the way I look at at this point. There is a service that can be provided uh that our citizens some of our citizens just cannot afford and this is an opportunity to be able to do that. So again this is a local preference. It

[3:09:06] just depends on what the city of St. Angelo is comfortable doing as far as logo call for the vote. Motion has been made that we accept this interlocal agreement giving our logo, our name, our reputation, and everything else. Uh, call for the vote. All of those in favor, please say I. I. I. Hold your hand up. One, two, three, four. Naz be a four to three. It passed. Let's hit the number 15 and then let's break the lunch. You want ready to quit? I got quit. 15. Well, it pass. Just vote on it. It won't take but a minute. This is the second part. This is the second part of the uh of the It's consideration approval of licensing agreement between the city of St. Angelo and utility service partners private label to provide Ryan repair coverage to homeowners residing in city of St. Angelo. Move to approve. Second. Okay, we do have a motion to approve. We have a second. I think we've already had comment from the public and from the council. All in favor, please say I. I. Raise up your hand again. One, two, three, four. Naz. put a 4-3 on that and it passed. Now we're going to go to executive. What do you think on this boss? This is liable to take some time. I'd say maybe an hour and a half. So executive session under revision of government code title 5 open government ethics subtitle A open government chapter 551 open meeting sub chapter D exception requirement that meetings be open under the following sections. Section 5510712 to consult with attorney on a matter in which the duty of the attorney of the governmental body and the Texas disciplinary rules of professional conduct of the state bar of Texas clear to conflicts with the chapter regarding matters related to the development agreements between the city of St. Angelo city of St. Angelo development cooperation or mart for Hersere energy system. Number two section 551072 deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property regarding a a parcel of land out of an unopened portion of Avenue H and small tracks out of J Ebert survey and new hall development edition city of St. Angelo and B a parcel of land out of Jerbert Survey City of St. Angelo potential

[3:11:09] sites for police department administration building. I'm going to say we will not be back before 2, but I'll make an announcement at 2. It's probably going to be 2:30. We are 12:33. Brian, y'all ready? It is 1:59. Let's go ahead and get started with our meeting. It has been requested Rodney has to leave at at three. Also, there's some people in the audience that asked that we move item number 18 next and deal with this one. Uh, you have a problem with it, Marty? No, sir. Johnny, no, sir. Charlotte? No. Don? No, sir. Elizabeth, let's move 18 up and we'll take care of that. And I've almost talked long enough until we've got to 2:00 when I said we'd start. So, I guess if I talk just a little bit longer that we would be able to get from 159. Number 18 is discussion of proposing an ordinance regulating the use of handheld mobile communication devices while driving and providing direction to staff. Mr. Fleming, this one is yours, sir. And it's 2:00. This came about u probably a couple months ago. I was reading through some things on texting and driving and I I actually I have two kids that are about to get their driver's license. It really made me think start thinking more about this texting and driving thing. I started researching it and I found out that through research that there are over 40 cities throughout the state of Texas that already have texting and driving and talking and driving laws on the books. San Anton is the biggest city and it just they just passed January 1st their their strongest ordinance to date and what their ordinance says is they won't allow any texting while driving and no talking while driving except on a Bluetooth type device. you can talk on on your phone within the city limits. There's a fine if you're caught doing either one of these things. And I felt like

[3:13:11] um researching more and found out that more than 25% of all accidents are now now due to driver inattention. So they're just not paying attention to the road. I was myself was almost ran off the road last week by a lady that was talking on the phone. She wasn't texting, but she was talking. And in the last 5 years, this problem has just escalated so high because everybody does everything on their phone. They look on the internet on their phone. They check their Facebook, their emails, everything on their phone. And they're doing it all while they're driving their car. And I think this is this is an ordinance that we should pass just like 40 other other cities in the state of Texas have already passed. Uh the wording I I I've passed out a a copy of the wording of the ordinance for San Anton in there and it's um it does spell out about them having hands-free devices and whether they can use hands-free device while they're talking. It also the way their ordinance is written, it says that that when you're stopped at a stoplight or a stop sign, you cannot text and you cannot talk on the phone then at those times either because you've got to pay you need to be paying attention to what's going on anyways. So, I felt like this was something that was near and dear to my heart and I thought that this that this is something that the city of St. Angelo should move forward on. This is a discussion item. Who else who else wants to weigh in? Well, I agree with you. I I tried to get this council to do something about it three years ago and uh I see people including myself out there that your lack of concentration on driving and moving that uh several thousand pound vehicle down the road is severely diminished when you're handholding and talking on the phone and by seeing the increasing traffic accidents around town or I witnessed here a while back family member of mine was uh waved at with one hand, one finger because the person in front of them, they were stopped at a stoplight. Light

[3:15:14] turned green and they were there sitting talking on the phone and not realize and then the cars roaring up behind knew that it was a green light and of course the little chain reaction event. It's just it's not good practice in my opinion. I'd like to hear what the police chief has to say about it. Mhm. I'd like to hear about it. And you know, I also would make mention of the fact uh Governor Elect Abbott, I guess he's probably governor by now, but he made a statement last week and he wrote an article was in the Austin Statesman and he said, and the word he used was Californiaization. He said, "We have so many cities with so many ordinances and they're all different." and he said, "Wait and let the state legislature deal with this and make a Texas ordinance and then the cities can adopt the ordinance from the state so that everybody is equal." But you have them from El Paso to San Anton to Austin and every one of them are different with different fines and different ways of violating the law. And that would be my only thing. And I hate to I hate these ordinances because it takes away freedom. But you're right. This this it's this one's this one is time. people are not responsible. I I think that it's more if if that law if the Texas law does change because there is there are Texas laws about minors uh under 18 right now on the books about texting and things like that. But I think it's going to be a while before the Texas the state gets that law. Why would why wouldn't we like 40 other cities in the state, more than 40, why wouldn't we go ahead and do this now and then when the state comes up with a law on the books and we can modify our ordinance to fit that law word for word? I think the legislature will deal with it this time. I think it has become important enough I think that the legislature will deal with it. And you're right, we could make our own ordinance and then we could change our ordinance or we could wait and see what the state comes up with. That's just a couple of months down the road. If they don't do it, then we could do our ordinance or we could modify. We could we could ride ours like the state.

[3:17:18] That's just my thoughts on it. Want to weigh in? The my only other thing I'll say, sorry Liz, about my only other thing I want to say about that is I you know, since I've been up here in this office, I'm always told that, you know, just wait. It's coming up. It's right around the corner. Well, you know what? I've got projects that started from day one that haven't finished in two and a half years. and right around the corner can you know how many people can die you know how many kids could die in the in the state or in the city and that's all only thing I if this would save one person maybe not even from dying but save one kid from having an accident and losing a limb or being hurt very bad it it would be well worth it to me Liz when I saw this on the agenda I was thinking back when I was growing up you would see occasionally I mean very occasionally you would see someone driving with a paperback in their hand. And I can remember thinking how ridiculous that was that someone was reading and driving an automobile. And yet we're doing it every day now. So I'm I'm very interested in hearing more about this. I I know that there's going to be a push back because of personal liberties, but I'm with you, Rodney. you know, the age of my kids and um and and whether it's them or or anyone that that can easily be distracted um we all become a victim then by that distracted driver. Uh so I I would be very happy to hear more about it. I do want to hear kind of the chief's opinion on it and on from the network of people that he's um related to particularly with regard to enforcement. Um, I also think this would be something that we should consider having some night meetings and getting some public dialogue because I think this is kind of would be kind of a big deal for our community. But I don't I don't have any need to wait. I just think we need to have a public discussion that's not simply within the confines of a council meeting. And you know, going back to the personal liberties thing because I'm a big personal liberty still person. And

[3:19:21] in 19 I think it was 1984 when we passed the seat belt laws, first seat belt laws in the state of Texas. Man, everybody, that was that's just going to be terrible. More people are going to die. That's what everybody kept saying. More people are going to die because of seat belts. Can you imagine not getting in your car now and not putting on your seat belt? I can't even imagine doing that. My kids, it's an automatic deal. And it it's something that you you know, I take as common sense. And talking on the phone and texting on the phone, I take as a common sense. But unfortunately, there's a ton of people out there that have no common sense. But they become they become a weapon, so to speak. Yes. When they're uh doing that. That's right. John, I wanted to add that, you know, I've often been behind that driver that is weaving and either they're intoxicated or but during the day, I'm sure they're on the cell phone, but even e even Liz mentioned the uh the push back and it it reminded me when we had the item on the agenda on the smoking ban and how people were up here saying that we're going to our business is going to suffer or that we're going to have to shut the doors. Well, it it it had an a reverse effect on a lot of the businesses. They actually expanded, added patios for the folks to go out there and and smoke outside. So, this thing, if if we're not in such a hurry, we could even put it on on the on the ballot on the May ballot if that's the case and let the let the the the citizens decide. You know, that's the way we did it with the smoking and it took it off our hands. But I'm all with you. You know, I I totally agree that a lot of the kids are are very irresponsible when it comes to tech. And I've been next to that to the young folks driving next to me. They're and I said, "Look at they're texting." And you know, you can I don't think it's only young people, though. I just It's not Well, young, old, middle. It's equal opportunity. Yeah. So, I I'm uh I'm in agreement with with the discussion here from Chief. Chief. Yeah. Chief, I know there's several people that want

[3:21:22] to I know there's several people that want to comment on this. So, we'll Liz, I appreciate you asking me to come up and voice my opinion on it. Um, I really I'm going to speak solely from the enforcement aspect of it. If you want to enforcement with this law is very problem problematic. And uh I I'll start first with the cities that have issued texting bans. uh it's difficult for uh someone to determine if someone is texting. Now, we all know that when you're standing next to someone or when you drive next to somebody, you see them on their phone manipulating their phone. Uh we don't know if they're making a call. We don't know if they're putting in an address for a map. Now, if we stop someone and suspicion that they're texting, uh unless they um offer that that's what I was doing, how do we prove that they were texting? And you know, I was talking to someone about it uh yesterday and they said, "Well, you know, they have to show you their phone." No, they don't. That's their personal property. Uh we're talking creating an ordinance as a class C misdemeanor, which goes to municipal court. We can't get a search warrant on a class C misdemeanor. Now, when we do get search warrants on phones where accidents are involved, we are looking at some type of felonious crime that has occurred that allows us to get into that phone to see what was occurring at that time. So, if I pull someone over and I say, you know, uh, you were texting and they see your phone and they say, "I don't want to show you my phone." They don't have to show the phone. And so, then we're going to have to try to find a way to prove that in court. So, that's problematic. Now, by adding the uh hands-free talking and those type of things, that will be a lot easier to enforce because somebody will actually have the phone up to their uh their head if their ear if they're violating that law, right? How do you enforce talking through a school zone? I mean, because you see them talking up on the phone. So, and and and when we issue citations for that, that's what we're catching people doing is actually on the phone driving through the school zone. Not this, not

[3:23:24] this. It's driving with on the phone. Now, you'll see that a lot of these cities that do implement these uh these laws, there's 40 of them, obviously. Uh I think Amarillo was one that published most recently. uh large city uh most recently in probably the last two years implemented it. Uh the citation numbers aren't uh what they uh what they thought they would be because it is very difficult to enforce. I will say that when you look at you can get on the internet and you can see so many statistics that say um these these are amount of accidents have increased because of texting and and I'd be interested to know how they were able to prove that. uh it's you can prove driver in attention possibly and I think that's what you said a moment ago that the 25% 25% uh is driver in attention which could be putting makeup on eating a hamburger uh playing with the radio doing whatever other than just texting. So we look at driver in attention as the big issue. Obviously talking on the phone and texting is is a part of that driver in attention. Uh so uh we would do what you know what uh we're required to do and try to enforce the law but it would be difficult. So I would you know I I want everybody to know upfront that it's not going to be a thousand citations in one month that you know once we implement this uh I want to say one of the larger cities in their first year wrote less than a hundred and their population is close to a million. So uh it's it's difficult to enforce. It's my understanding that Austin's law went into effect January 1 as well. Austin was before. San Anton went in January 1. January one. That's what that article on the second page is about. Okay. Austin's not on your list though. It's on there. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Austin is. Oh, there it is. I found you had last year. A U S T I N. Yeah. I can't see C E S E. and the in the the way of finding those textures. It's, you know, there are some things

[3:25:27] coming down the pipeline. I'm sure you've seen that some there's some electronical advances that are coming down that probably within the next year or two. They have them now and they're testing them, but within the next year or two will be available for police departments to to be able to tell if someone is texting when they go buy them. That that's correct. It it the the technology is coming. I just don't know how expensive it's going to be, but it would uh basically it would allow the officer to know that there is a transmission leaving that vehicle. That's right, Charlotte. with the fear of a $1,000 fine or whatever the maximum is that we can charge, you know, by the state the state laws. But with the fear of that and knowing that um you could lose your driver's license uh or have that fine for texting or talking, you know, with the handheld device, don't you think that that would restrict a lot of usage is is in that area? I do think the law would be a deterrent, especially for those that do abide by the law. Uh That's a lot. How do we I'd stop for a fine at I would stop. I'd pull over signs. How do we tell the people coming into St. Angelo that we have that? You know, a lot of the large cities have signs. Uh you know, you go into San Antonio, you drive in and when you're on it 10 coming in, it's, you know, all over their electronic signs. But every every city to answer that question also has different ordinances. And there there's not a sign up for every ordinance. It's your responsibility to know what the ordinances are. But I've seen a lot of signs when you enter the city limits right under the city limit sign. It's deal there is no self uh must handree usage cell phone only you know and uh there there'll be a lot of things to take into consideration. Uh exemptions who gets exempted from the ordinance you know uh ambulances, fire trucks, police cars all have MTC's computers in them that that they work. um using the radio, you know, those type of things are those things will be uh things that'll need to be addressed in

[3:27:29] ordinance if you create an ordinance. And the last ordinance that was written was by San Anton. I have a copy of that ordinance here. And so it kind of spells out it it does spell out all those things that you just said and allows them to still be able to to do that. And when it says hands-free, it has to be either a Bluetooth device or something that's fastened inside the car. Even CB radio, would CB radio be included in this? I I don't think a trans It doesn't say CB. It says radio of some sort. I would think that any kind of usage of any kind of communication, communication equipment would be fall under that category. Unless you're part of a police, fire, EMS, public safety, something. Okay. Does include that. It talks about it. So that would not be allowed. Anything else you need to add? Nothing else I need to add. Mayor, that does include you're full of ideas. That does include flip phones. Okay. Flip smartphones and flip phones. You got me now. Okay. Anything else? That's any other public comment on this item? Come on, D. Yes, my name is Jim Turner. Uh I agree with the chief that enforcement of this is going to be a problem even with some of the technology that's actually already out there. It's not a matter of the technological fix. The ma it's a matter of using this in such a way that it still complies with the spirit and letter of the laws in the constitution. And they've been having problems with that and law enforcement, NSA, and all these other groups. They can basically tell exactly what's going on on a telephone any place in the world. Second reason I'm up here is to address a comment, a suggestion Mr. Silvas made. You can't put this in front of the public because the city council cannot put a referendum on a ballot for the

[3:29:34] public. Right now, according to our charter, the only way to put a referendum on the ballot initiative is by a citizens group petition. We are going to be looking at the city charter here and that's going to be uh something we can address and it's something I had actually planned on looking at. But realistically, we're not going to get the charter ready until at least the November election. It's an awful lot of work to take and go through all the sections of the charter that need to and you can only put the charter before the people every two years. So, we need and it hasn't been looked at for seven years in any detail. There have been a couple other things that were on the charter and put before the public, but you haven't had a real charter review in seven years. So there's a lot of work that needs to be done and the election section initiative, referendum, recall, all of that area really needs some major work needs to be looked at. But it's not going to be ready until November. So if you want to have a referendum, you're either going to have to have a bunch of people put together a petition to do it or you're going to have to wait until we get the charter fixed to where city council can do it. Thank you. Thank you, Ter Jude. Did you want to speak on this Jude Rashard, Cono Valley Transit District? Um, you know, I I drive all all around the state and I see signs that say slower traffic, keep right, and that doesn't work. So, passing another ordinance to me goes, how how are we going to enforce that? Federal law right now requires that all public transit agencies have communication devices. So what do we have in our buses? Um we have radios. They're not hands-free. Those radios do not come handsree. You know,

[3:31:38] we have people that we're picking up Medicare patients, Medicaid patients. We're we're supporting ADA. We're supporting seniors in this town. And there's a lot of changes that happen in the course of a day that affect a driver that the only opportunity for us to communicate is via cell phone. So we contact that driver, a dispatcher contacts the driver to make the changes because a doctor appointment has changed or maybe a person needs to be picked up from dialysis or the their appointment was early so they're done. They need to go home. without that opportunity um to be able to communicate, we're going to affect every individual in this city, not to mention everybody that comes out of the counties because they bring everybody here to go to the doctor. So, these exceptions that we're talking about where we're saying, well, we're just going to leave the first responders and allow them to use their radios and allow them to use their cell phones, it affects more than just first responders. It's going to affect every citizen that uses public transportation in this city or to this city. That's even more of a concern to me is you're telling me that a a bus driver, a heavier, larger vehicle distracted using their cell phone and shouldn't it be recommended that they pull over regardless of the schedule to use that cell phone instead of moving in traffic since they are such a larger vehicle? It is. We do we do recommend it, but there's times that our dispatcher um they may be between um the person's doctor's office and the person's home that they need to contact. There's some people that need attendance. They need help to get in and out of their homes. So, it affects. So my concern is we're going to if we create an ordinance here and then the state comes and they create they create a law that affects the state because I'm sure they're going to look at the federal laws and how the FTA and the DOT affects public transportation. I would assume that that our lawyers at that point are going to take a look at these federal laws and

[3:33:41] make sure that every everyone is adhered to. If we require people in this area, everyone to use hands-free devices, Contro Valley Transit District is a notfor-profit organization. We don't have the budget to go and and purchase um ear devices for every one of our drivers. Do y'all have a federal federal communications commission? Like do y'all use a certain band on the radio? You do. you're exempt on this on on this deal, the ordinance that was written and the one that I'm putting forward that exempts them if you have so there's an exemption in there that says that or who is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission while operating a radio frequency device other than a handheld mobile communications device. Okay. So like stormchasers I think even go on certain frequencies also and they could be exempt. So, I I think this was this is San Antonio's ordinance and they had a lot of attorneys looking at this and I think they went over they took a good while to do it. They also when they voted on this as a city council for the for San Anton, it was unanimous and hardly ever do they vote on anything in that city that's unanimous. Would it be possible um before this goes to a vote for the transit district to have an opportunity to I'm not going to ask for a vote today. What I'm doing is I'm bringing this forward and I would like for us to talk about it which we are doing. There's some good talk communication. I think that there'll be more comm more more talking about it once we hear what the general public but everybody that comes to me and talks to me likes the idea of this and it's not so much of the enforcing. I realize that they're not going to be able to enforce this, but what it is is you can tell your kids or I can tell my kids this is against the law and you know 90% of the time they will follow that 10% they won't. But now there's no law. There's no nothing. They can talk on the phone

[3:35:44] as much as they want as soon as they drive down the street. So it's just catching a few of them at least. And if it again if it saves one person or it helps one person from being injured, it's worth it. I I I can I can understand it because it's annoying for me because I'm I'm one of those individuals, Chief. Not that I go around speeding in town or anything. Um but I'm one of those individuals that when I'm going down the road, you know, and and somebody automatically picks up the phone and it they drop down 10 miles below the what they were doing, that drives me nuts. Yes. You know, and and and those are the individuals that are out there possibly causing accidents. Um I don't know the statistics on it and I haven't done a study. So but in what we do I am just concerned that it doesn't affect us and the support that we give to our community. I think on your radios it would if if we were talking about the same writing our ordinance similar to the way their ordinance is written which I would think that we would try to model after it because they've put so much time and effort into it if it were to go that far. I think that we would definitely cover those radio devices that have their own radio frequency. Okay. Um, so it's not just emergency personnel. It's it it incorporates a few other options, right? And and I can appreciate it. But what do I do in those areas where the radios don't work? I have to refer to cell phones. Well, first of all, you're in the city, so it should work in the city. Uh, we have we have a fleet of over 69 vehicles, 12 counties that we have people coming into town and not everywhere. we have to pay rent on repeaters um you know to to try and reach some of those counties and and the radios don't reach everybody all the time. We're not going to solve this today. This was just to begin a discussion and I understand that and that's that's why I'm trying to be a part of this. It's just a safety issue. Charlotte said it best especially to you. You know I I hope they are pulling over and they are talking and they're not I hope they're not even talking on the radio while they're driving. That's very bad. Right. But the you know the operations manager and the supervisors are not on the bus. you know, when those phone calls come through. Thanks. Thank

[3:37:47] you, Jude. Anybody else care to weigh in on this? It's been a good discussion and I think probably sadly the time has come for this. Uh what do you want to do? Direct staff to put something together and bring it back. I would like what's your plan? I would like to have staff put something together that's similar to the ordinance that was just passed in in January in San Anton. I I've given I've given them a copy of that and uh I would like to do something that would be similar to that. What's a consensus council? You agree, Don? Where you stand on this? Um I think it's going to keep honest people honest and s you know exactly like just like Tim said. Yeah. Yeah. You're right. I I'm not not that excited about it one way or another, tell you the truth. Like I said, we had plenty of ordinances. I think Yeah, you can't do anything without breaking the law anymore. We're just adding to it. Is $200 the maximum that can be charged. That's what San Anton did because No, I think you can. I think it can be much higher than that. Five. Five. Okay. That's That's But San Antonio started it out at 200 is what they agreed to. Good. Elizabeth, you in favor of head moving forward on this? I think we need to have public discussion. Okay. How about you, Johnny? I think we're headed in that direction. I mean, I think if all these 40 cities are going there, doesn't mean we have to do it just because they're doing it. But I think for the safety of all people, I think we at least need to move forward and at least talk about it. Marty, I'm not uh exactly real keen on it, but I'm I'm okay with moving forward. I think we got four people up here. It's a consensus. It says move forward on it. So So we're going to talk about it. Are we going to have a a meeting on just this? We can actually bring this back as a draft ordinance for discussion. Okay, let's do it that way.

[3:39:49] I I would I would suggest that we have a public meeting first because uh learning from what a draft ordinance can set in motion when it is just a draft can be pretty ugly and pretty hard to pull back. Some of you may remember one that Mr. Solace was involved with that. Um, so can we just talk about it at at another setting where we kind of gauge what the interest is before we try to put it in an ordinance because I think that scares people. As long as Mr. Bman doesn't make it a resolution, no more no more resolution, please. No resolution. Lesson learned. Lesson learned. Are you talking about Elizabeth? Are you talking about like an evening type meeting or town hall meeting hall meeting on the subject not everybody could look look how many people we lost between the beginning and the end of a meeting. People can't do this. And when I came on we we had a two or three evening meetings and they were very well attended. I I think it's time for us to have another one anyway. Sound like a winner. Let's set it up as an evening meeting and have a public hearing. Let people You want this specifically just for the cell phone um discussion though? Uh just a special meeting. We can we can put a couple items on it. I don't want to I want us to be efficient on this thing. Yeah. We we don't need to stay till midnight. But by the same token, I don't An hour ought to be enough. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I may resolve then that we don't do that. Throw throw Bell Street in there and maybe a dog park and you have direction, Daniel? I got it. Okay, let's move on now. Let's go back up. We've already done uh 14 and 15. Let's go to 16. Consideration to approve waving permit and application fees associated with construction for a lowincome housing tax credit. That's an LIHTC project by the LDG development to construct affordable housing apartments. Mr. Simon, Mayor, Council, LDG Development is a low-income housing tax credit developer interested in applying for tax credits to build an 80unit affordable housing apartment complex here in St. Angelo. uh they are

[3:41:52] requesting that the city wave permit fees as part of the uh city support for the project. Uh fee wavers uh and other financial support really provide a lot of support and points for the project when they compete over the state uh TTHCA uh when they're rating and ranking these these projects. Uh I have uh Mr. Justin Harts to give you a quick overview of the project. Welcome, sir, mayor and council. Uh my name is Justin Hartz. I'm with LDG Development. Um I'm here to present Outlook at Valley View. It's a 80 unit um affordable apartment complex. Um give me one second. Oh, great. Um this picture right here is a project we built um in Austin, Texas. It just kind of gives you a um example of the facade that we'll be providing to the St. Angelo project. Um it's cementous uh cement stone siding um with Texas stone facade around the breezeways. They come all the way from the back. Um the site location is 13 acres. It's off of uh Valley View Drive. Um kind of walk through the Texas stone facades on the threetory uh residential buildings we'll be building. Uh quick little summary here. Uh 80 unit apartment units. Uh be located on 13 acres. Um that would actually provide you with um six units per acre. Um we would have eight onebedrooms, 42 bedrooms and 32 threebs. Um our square footage would range from 850 ft to $1,185 on the threebs. Um our rent range

[3:43:57] would range from $440 a month to $740 a month. Uh the total investment um if we would be appraised at would be $9.9 million per our calculations. Uh building specs be 100% stone and cementous exterior composition 35 year dimensional roofing shingles 15 shear air conditioned units. Um all the units are um built to fire standards with fire sprinklers. Um all the appliances are any starter rated uh cover patios and balconies on all units. Um and every single unit is also provided with a laundry and dryer hookup. Um but they can the tenants can actually rent the appliances from u the property management company. Um building standards it's lease certified. Um and also to the community will be gated with a perimeter fence. Um here's just an example of a one-bedroom unit. Um we we provide Wilson art laminate floors in the common area and then we do provide carpet in the bedrooms um for more of a comfortable feel. Um very similar two-bedroom 3D layout going on to the threebedroom. Uh three bedrooms do have uh two baths which is also two on the two bedrooms. Um here's just a little picture of a example facade in our clubhouse. Um all the club houses we build we do uh provide uh a computer lab for all the uh kids to use when the kids come home from school. We provide supportive services. Um, DA rooms are also provided in our communities. Um, additionally with a um, a porch off the back that would actually look onto a pool. Um, kind of gone through these already, some of them. Um, site location is very uh, close to retail, transportation,

[3:46:00] schools um, off of Valley View Drive. um amenities in the clubhouse, theater room, exercise room, health and wellness classes, uh computer lab, balcony, balconies, uh sitting area and gazeos. Um we also provide tot lot and children playgrounds. Um gone through that. And also too, we do provide um if for say um the community wants to use the clubhouse for a location for voting, we do also open that up for the community to use the uh community clubhouse for town hall meetings. Exactly. Um we do provide our um complexes with g gated community. Um, every single building does have a security camera on every single corner, so if we do have any kind of uh crime involvement activity, uh, we can capture it on uh, video tape. Um, ample lighting um, in our parking lots and of course close to the local schools. Um, financing for the project, um, we will be um, applying for 9% tax credits from TDHCA, which is the Texas Department of Housing Community Affairs. Um we'll be um requesting 9% tax credits and then we will actually sell those to a private investor um which would be a market value about $7.2 million and then we will partner up with the um investment with a conventional loan at $2.5 million and the project will pay um city and county tax roation. Um I know this is a prelim uh presentation to you all. What we're uh requesting is a resolution support and also to um exempting the project from any type of u building fees, permit fees, impact fees. Um due to since this project will be submitted to TDHA, we

[3:48:05] have to compete with Midland, Odessa, other projects in the community and region uh 10. So, if we can get a resolution report that actually adds us 18 points for scoring and if we can get any type of other exemption that can actually give us up to um 10 points. So, more points you can score um the better the project will do overall and only one deal gets awarded in this region. So, we have to compete with larger towns such as Midland and Odessa. So, thank you Charlotte. This is in your area. It's in Rodney's. Okay. Well, let's lead off resolutions handled by Don. I met with this group about a month ago or so and uh looked at the project. We were looking at two different sites over there. I'm all in favor for this thing. First of all, my district needs lowincome housing of some sort. There's none over there now. And it I think it would be a very positive, especially looking at the plans and what they've done. How many How many states are y'all in now? Three or four? We're currently in 13 states. We have 3,000 units in operation state of Texas. Uh everywhere from Sherman, Texas up on the Oklahoma border all the way down to Alvin, Texas, which is south of Houston. My my question is you were asking for the fees to be waved, which the fees, it looks like a rough estimate was around $14,500 for the fees to be waved. That's correct. I got that from the uh permits and inspection. If we put this on the tax row in the first year, wouldn't the taxes be more than 14,500? a good bit more. Yes. I I mean, yes. Just kind of a common sense thing. I I think it would be a good bit more than what it would be the very first year out out. So, I think this is a I think this is a project that's very doable. What to get those extra 10 points? What What can you do? What can the city do to get any extra points on that? um some additional points for the local funding is the largest part of

[3:50:07] scoring that's kind of subjective uh from us requesting u funding. One way we could get some additional points is if you all had like a local housing finance corporation or a local political subdivision corporation, um we can provide um like a pass through loan which also qualifies um for the project to get more points. Um pass through loans get very um involved. um we can kind of talk to our legal attorneys and they can actually provide that to your old city be interested in that. I know um I know the I know there used to be a Tom Green Housing Finance Corporation which I think Steve Floyd which is the county judge is also involved with and um I talked to him and he kind of wants to talk to me further. So that's a thing that um we could look into. Okay, Charlotte, I was the instrumental party that spear spearheaded the Tom Green C County Housing Finance Corporation back in the 80s. So, I'm very familiar with the program there. Uh, but I do have four areas that I want us to consider. Uh, one of them, uh, is market saturation in our community. Uh I think that when this come something like this comes to us that we do need to have the statistics on market saturation for the exact number of affordable housing that is in the unit. We also need a market survey as to what the uh availability is out there right now in our community and the need for before we can make such an endorsement. And then the other thing is the skin in the game. you you know you're asking for fees to be waved and you're already you know asking for TDCH money and lots of benefits and stuff there and I see the city is continuing to give away their services and I'm I'm just really reigning in on that and but the big thing is all other endorsements. I do know of two more properties that

[3:52:09] are applying for this goound. One is for a 200 unit complex uh in the north part out on North Bryant and the other one is another 160 units out on the u west side of Nickerbacher that I have gotten u certified letters of in the mail that is coming to St. Angelo. So that tells me that if I'm here to give this endorsement and it is viable and provable and a need for in our community, are we to not endorse or give approval for the others? I think that we should because it's taking, you know, government monies, taxpayers money and everybody deserves the same endorsement and it doesn't dilute the project and then each person should be judged on their merits minus those city endorsements at the state level and takes it out of our responsibility. That's where I'm standing on this and would like to see clarification of this information beforehand. Bob, are you familiar with other competing projects locally? They have not come to me. Uh this is the first project that has so I'm not familiar with them. Um but like we did last year we supported two projects. Uh they competed and uh we neither got funded but um we can certainly do that. We can we can just as they come in uh we come to council for their support and we just letter endorsement for all of them and have them compete uh equally. But Bob, did we hurt one of those projects last year by not picking one over the other? Did when they went for their points, did they lose points on that? They didn't lose points. Um to to the best of my knowledge, they did not lose points because we supported both. My understanding that there would be uh potentially uh negative um um response to to balancing I mean supporting both of those, but I didn't get anything from that. So Okay. I don't think they did. Okay. And we didn't offer them any type of an incentive. Those other two, they didn't ask for an incentive, did they? They did. Uh we actually had um which you don't we don't have those funds anymore, but we

[3:54:10] uh I think we had some uh coast of DC affordable housing money that we're going to use to support that. What are the number of properties in the city now that take assisted uh uh HAP housing assistance program monies to assist people? How many programs in the city now? Um we have two. the city supports uh uh through our programs. Uh one is through home home grants and one is through the coast of DC funds but through private assistance through PHA and others. There are several Oh yeah, absolutely. Okay. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. I thought I thought I was talking about the city. Yeah, there's several. Yes. Again though in that area where where they're talking about over there the rents were you had that on the screen. Was it 500 to 700 or 400? 470 you think to about uh 740. 740 for a three-bedroom. I mean, that's huge for a family. Has there been a community meeting in that area uh like there was before? No, because we didn't know it was coming forward until just now. I met with them, but they didn't act when the time I met with them, they were looking at more than one property. Correct. And due to the other we were looking at um we just couldn't put our uh land contract and control it. Um the the price was estimical and it was just price per square foot when you put in financial model you can make it work and um since we're going after 9% tax credits we're not you we're not requesting any type of um other subsidy it's not subsidized we take the 9% tax credit and then sell it off privately so we're not really not subsidizing any way except um just lowering the rents on our apartment complex and again within the first year just by having this on our tax row we would more than make up the money of it. Since this is a low rent, uh are the tax rates adjusted or they pay the same as everybody else? The same. How does that

[3:56:12] work? Um we we we get praised out usually by the net operating income and a cap rate by like a normal uh county assessor would. Um, so that's how they calculate our So your your your taxes would be the same as the Yeah. one right next. If you had a market apartment complex that was built by Greyar or something like that, we get priced the exact same way. Okay. And if you all have any kind of market questions, um, I'll get with my market analyst, you know, send you all a market summary and, um, we can map out all the, um, affordable projects. At the same time, we can also, um, map in the government assisted projects also. I'd like to have you here. Yes. But the last couple of years we have business has boomed in St. Angela and we have not had to incentivize people to build here. And now that things are slowing down, I don't know that we need to incentivize anybody else to build here. It's kind of my problem. But wouldn't you want wouldn't you think that we really need more lower income housing now? Probably in the next two years. We might need it now than we've ever needed needed it before. It's true. And then we may have a whole lot of hotels we could put low income in, too. Well, at last count, and I can't give you an upto-date method at the last survey or count that I did, which was four, five years ago on rental assistant housing in the city of St. Angelo, there were over 26 pro properties that participated in lowincome family housing. Uh, I I just would like an up-to-date figure on the number of properties. I just think it's important. And what is your deadline? So, um, the deadline, we submitted a pre-application on this, which means you submit it to the state. They just log all the pre-applications going to go forth in the 2015 round. um February 27th, I have to submit a full application which I have to um submit a resolution support and also to um a resolution that would state that I would

[3:58:16] be getting X amount of um you know permit exemptions that would you know equal 14,000 or if I you know if I could get some type of pass through loan um which is it's not a grant um basically would use a conventional loan. We we personally would uh lend it through the um local HFC. They turn around and lend it back to us. Um I know it sounds crazy. It's kind of crazy. Uh it's just for point scoring. Um but all that submitted February 27th. So and then by the time we we we would actually go through scoring July 31st, we get awarded tax credits and then takes us about 4 months to actually sell those tax credits off and start construction. So we're talking by the time we complete the project it' be 18 months to 24 months you would see anything actually in operation out there. Can I ask another question? Yes ma'am. So when when you are uh being scored by the TDHCA they're also looking at our market rental rates too. It's not simply your word that says that this is a needed project. I mean that's isn't that part of the the competition is to where the the projects are needed most in what communities they do they vet it they uh score it separately they have they have a whole staff that does that for each application verify and this site score scores well too because it's not in a um poverty restricting area or anything. It's actually in a higher income area where they're trying to push affordable. So really um the affordable tenants are actually your you know service working um citizens that be working at you know like um we have a project in Austin a lot of them are temporary teachers um policemen first year firefighters really your service industries people who we provide so it's more workforce housing um in y'all's community I move that we accept the resolution as presented At this point, we don't have a

[4:00:20] resolution, sir. We have just what we're doing is getting getting buyin from the council. I'll come back with a resolution with all the details um to come for their approval. And that's my, you know, I would like more information because you're using housing tax credit, you know, information. And should this go through and be approved and you build your project, you've used housing tax credit monies, 100% financing, you get all of your fees waved, should uh we be market saturated for this thing, and you don't rent out, you go belly up. I mean, what is your investment into the deal? Well, our investment into the deal is one, we it's it's fully recourse to us to the company. So, if it does value flop up, we have to repay uh $9.9 million to our investors. Um, our investors are not uh small companies. Um, we just closed a deal last week with JP Morgan Chase. Um, some other investors are Sherman Williams. Uh, they invested in one of our projects down in New Orleans that was um close to $80 million. Um, so we do have a lot of skin in the game. Um, additionally we do uh bring in a third-party property management company and then um we do have one asset management uh director that all she does is manage the third party property management company. Um we do actually own our own GC company drone contractor. So they build it um based our team in the last um 10 years we've built around 6,700 units in uh 13 states. So have you had any go belly up? No. Okay. Thank you. If they did go belly up, we would not be here. Right. Question. Yes, sir. Bob, tell me again, what is the potential uh property tax revenue on something like this? The tax revenue or are you talking about the wave? Oh, the the waiver amount or say it was all built. It's all in place. What is the potential tax revenue uh off of 9.9 million? So, we're talking about uh the percentage of that. I'm not sure.

[4:02:22] I don't have to calculate 25,000 approximately. Yeah. How much? Approximately 25,000. Right. And we're talking about waving fees over 14,500. That's correct. So 25,000 a year a year. It adds up fairly quickly. I'm sorry. It he could be that. I believe it's more like 75,000. I think you're right. That's right. That's even better. So having found that out then I'll second Rod's motion. Well, like you said, we I don't think we can do it. I think we're asking right now is to uh is is to allow to direct direct staff to come back with a resolution. Well, then that's what we want to do at this point. Yeah. I do want staff to come back with the resolution. Okay. I would like for them to come back with a resolution. It doesn't take a vote then. It just they have to have a consensus. Consensus, I believe. What is a consensus? Well, the consideration is to prove waving the permit and application fees. Do you need that done today? Thank you. That's what it says. Do you need that done today? That's an action item. Yeah, it is action. I would like that. Yes. And I can come back with a resolution that uh that supports that. Um Rodney I move that we Rodney has moved to approve it. Johnny is seconded. Okay. So yeah, we will take and I'm wording that Brian I move to approve that we wave the the fees. The fees. Yes. To get by so we can come back with resolution for it. Any further comment from council? Public comment on this item before we vote. We are authorizing them to bring a resolution back to us that will say all of this. All in favor say I. I. Oppose. Nay. Nay. Nay. Mayor, when this comes back or Daniel, can we can we see the extension of uh Valley View just to or to see what the thoroughare plan again looks like in this area? Woody. Cuz I could see this. What was the vote on that? Was it 52? 52. 52. Five in favor. two against. Okay. Charlene and I I just remember the last one we tried to put out there by Sams and I remember

[4:04:25] what we went through as a city and a council. I'd like some public meetings. Oh my goodness, that was mean. And we didn't incentivize them, but I remembered. And this is a $15,000 incentivize. I don't want to deal with those people again. They were mean, weren't they? Yes, sir. Dwayne, let's move on. Dwayne, send them to me. Oh, you don't. Let's move on now to number 17 which is discussion and direction to staff regarding the implementation and the use of a venue tax and its potential application to city of St. Angelo venue products. Rick and Sandra Varel mayor mayor I'm going to leave right after this. I I am too. We will try to make I gotta leave at three. Fast Rick in that somebody somebody moved to a journ. We will try and speed through this. Sandra has put most of this together. But in summary, I spoke with each of you about the potential of a venue tax. This is something we've discussed in the community there. Each of you expressed a desire or an interest for us to at least explore it. So today we're not looking for any action but we are looking for your clear direction. Um in short um prior to this meeting we visited with representatives from the hotel year groups from the uh CVB the chamber the civic events board uh from the stock show and rodeo association and while all of them felt this is something that we certainly could look at uh they did not necessarily feel this is something we need to press forward with for this coming May it's something we should explore over the next year uh put our facts together and then come with a solution maybe that even looks at exploring the use of some hot dollars uh for actually doing schematics of facilities if there are potential projects that we do want to pursue. So with that, we're going to give you all just sort of a summary of the facts of the project in a PowerPoint just what a venue tax involves. And Sandra, why don't you just chime in wherever I miss something? But the first part is just

[4:06:27] sort of the legislative background, but that just basically states what the law is and that it allows you uh to proceed with venue uh projects. The permissible venue projects, it talks about um what type of projects are available from coliseums to convention centers, all of those kind of things. The only thing that is typically not permissible are things that are associated under a venue tax, specifically with construction of a park facility. Um, permissible related infrastructure projects. This just states that that all of those things that would complement the venue uh those infrastructure components that go along with it are typically also expenses that that qualify. In our case, we had talked about some identified uh projects. Um the things that have been mentioned are a variety of things. Those that have come to the surface most commonly are are the convention center in regard to this facility not having an exhibit hall um and not enough breakout rooms to accommodate conventions. Uh the coliseum of course uh from the need for additional seating. And then there's also been some discussion about if that is the facility we're going to stay in, then potentially just an entire new face look on that. As you know, we just put a new roof on the building. Just finished that recently. Uh the other one that's been talked about, of course, is uh restroom facilities at the sports complex. We have them on quads one and three. There's been talk of trying to put them on two and four, which would allow us to have additional um events going on there and and more use. Uh other things that have been mentioned not on this list are the river stage, things of that nature. Um I think that's about it on that one. It does go into the types. You can do a venue tax and then there's also that's on it's added on to your hot in addition to your hot tax. It's added on uh for your hotels. The other one is a short-term rental vehicle or a rental car tax you can put on as well. So going

[4:08:31] to the next slide, you'll see that in regard to the venue tax, uh you could add an additional 2%. Um your overall hot your overall tax on a hotel cannot exceed 17%. So St. Angelo could add an additional 2% potentially. In order to do that, um you have to have an election. So that would have to go onto the ballot for the citizens to vote. Um, I think that covers it on that slide. I will say in regard to that vote, um, those things are specific and we may cover it later, but the the ballot would actually have to say what the project was, where the revenue is going to come from. So, not exact dollar amounts, but if you're going to take some from HOT, some from venue, some from general fund, it would have to list all of those. And you can't clump three projects together. They would have to vote on individual projects. Um, going on to the next slide, we wanted to give y'all just a quick example of what we currently uh could generate uh at a 2% um average hotel receipts over the past 5 years. So, what Tina and her staff did for us was look at the past 5 years and came up with an average. So, you see the average for the past 5 years would have been $649,945. So in this case, if you were to issue debt for 20 years, it shows what your yield would be. Uh and then if you were to do 25 or 30, I will say in this case, in a venue tax uh situation, you cannot issue debt for more than 30 years. So that's your max. Um the next slide shows uh they did a little more exploration on that and shows uh typically if you took that 649 945 as your starting base and you assumed an average growth rate of 4.48% it shows you then what you could potentially generate. So they're just trying to give you some realistic figures of what what you might be able to to utilize. Uh the other one we

[4:10:35] looked at was the short-term motor vehicle which is the car rental. um you can implement a five up to a 5% uh rental fee on that. Um and the next slide shows specifically what that could generate. Uh with the same five-year average that could would currently generate $78,770 a year. And then if you read farther down in the slide, uh they do the same projection uh with an average growth rate to give you an idea of of what it could do. Last slide uh just pertains to what I talked about a while ago, but in summary, you know, the you would have to council would have to issue a resolution that they wanted to proceed with a venue tax. Uh that would then have to uh go to the controllers's office for them to review. They have 30 days to review that and then send it back to us. Um at that point, if it was approved, uh we could put it on the ballot for the citizens to vote on. you'd have to have the specific language. And once again, once the venue is paid off, then that venue tax goes away. It doesn't just stay on forever. So, that's kind of it in a nutshell. Um, we're not looking for any action, but we did want to report back on that and see if that is indeed something you would like us to explore more, then we'll do that and we'll put the various groups together. I think it's going to be a more in-depth decision of exactly which projects and then uh proceeding from there exploring those projects in a little more detail conceptually and exactly what kind of cost we're looking at to see what sort of capacity you have to fund. You know, you may not have enough capacity to fund a coliseum and a convention center. Although after we do a little study, maybe you do in the com combining of venue and hot. We're here questions. I suspect we've got public comment. Do we have public comment on this? Did y'all have something you wanted to I see you back there, Michaela

[4:12:39] and Pamela and Susanna and Susanna. Okay. Michaela Brownfield and Jenny at this point as just an individual hotel year sit on the civic events board. um not really taking a stand on it, but I think trying to get it on the May election would be very quick and be it'd be wouldn't appear really well. I think a lot more study needs to be done on it before we really try to move forward on what what we really want to do with it. Okay. Thank you. Pamela Miller, St. Angelo Convention and Visitors Bureau. I just wanted to throw out there that one of the reasons that we're not ready to just jump on this immediately is because we've gone through about 2 years of getting screamed at for our hotel rates. And now we have a lot of hotel rooms coming. Our prices are going to come down. We feel like we're going to be able to be competitive again. Um, most of our closest competitors out there have a venue tax. So, for us to start off with our prices coming down being 2% less, that's going to be a plus for us to help us get out there and be competitive again. We're the first ones to say we'd love to have a bigger, better convention center. We just don't feel that this immediately is the time to do it. How did I know that's exactly what you were going to say? Thank you, Pamela. Any other public comment on this? And things have changed in the last year. Things have changed in the last couple of months. And it's it's not the same city that it was when oil was 100 plus a barrel. So council, what you think about this? Well, Rick, I I've got a question. Uh I like it from the standpoint of a use tax. There was some comments earlier about that hurting and the city

[4:14:42] and I don't think it hurts the city. I think any kind of use tax is good because it it you pay to play that away and you're not hurting the the local people. I I guess my question about the 5% gross uh or or the or the over the last five years those have been our best years. So to actually it took and Tina can answer that. She did the calculations, but it as I understand it in took some of in some of our worst and some of our best. It does. So it actually combined both. Okay. All right. Is that a correct statement, Mike? Yeah. I think they were trying to be pretty conservative as they looked at it. Good. Well, I want to use one of Don's famous taglines. I don't want to get the card before the horse, but I think it's a good discussion. And I think that we're headed in that direction and it may not be the right time to do this. And I totally agree with what Pamela said on where we are as far as finishing out these hotels rodeo coming and I think it's not the right time but you know in the near future we are going to be uh certainly talking about it a little bit a bit harder. So and that's my question for y'all and I think I speak for them. and they can correct me if not, but when I said it the first that this was something that staff wasn't recommending that we try to do for this May, but that we look at it over the next year. Yeah. So, I would rather if if it is something that and I think they agreed with that concept. If that is our concept that we agree with, then if if y'all are okay with that, that's what we'll do. I don't want to come up, you know, screeching at the end trying to to do something. So, if y'all are at least interested, then we'll start the research and then we'll bring that back to you at some time over the next year. uh for a discussion. Why why can't we if we want to go forward if there's interest, why can't we consider it for November and that when you have your you're thinking the charter election? Yeah, that's a good idea. No, what was that deer in the headlights

[4:16:44] look? I don't know. To me, it's either a good idea or or not. A lot of times we and and we can bring it whenever. A lot of times we we couple these more community-minded um elections with the May time frame. That's when you're doing council members, that kind of stuff. So, you seem to get a better turnout on the local component, but you can put it on any tends to have a bigger draw because it's not simply a local election, right? I don't know. I I don't I don't know strategy, but I can't imagine us making a decision now to say what we want to do in a year. And I think a lot of it depends on what uh if if they select certain venues and if we actually want to uh hire someone to assist us with schematics and and those kind of things, then that can take a little more time. But, you know, it it's y'all's call whether you want November or if you want to shoot for the May. But we can start working on it regardless and move it in that direction. Well, I'm in favor of moving forward. Right. Pros and cons of the different projects. I think that's a good start. Yeah. How you feel, Charlotte? I wanted it in 2009. I'm still in favor of it today. It is a just like Marty said, you know, you pay to use and uh the city has suffered the usage and maintain it and stuff like that in 2009. We didn't go forward and here it is 2015. We're in the same spot where we were. It doesn't hurt a thing to go forward and get all of our information and get to where we need to be, whether it be May or November, but we need to move forward. And I I want to explain when I stepped into the back for the viewing audience, heard everything that went on. Our speakers work there and I never left the back. So, how you feel about it, Don? I think it's uh fine to discuss it. I'm not sure. uh like they were sell saying, you know, now's the time to do it. But uh let's just kind of wait and see. And by the time we get all of our ducks in a row, we'll be six months down the line anyway. You agree with that, Elizabeth? Yes, sir. Move on, my friend. Thank you.

[4:18:48] All right. Where are we? We've already done You gone, Johnny? Yes, sir. Well, there's five of us. Anybody else leaves, we're through. I have to be somewhere. We better get These next two items go really quickly, though. uh discussion possible action regarding a special meeting of city council for strategic planning session February 215. Mr. Valenuela. Hi. This that time of the year again. Um the strategic planning workshop. I wanted to go ahead and get that set up. We're looking at the last week in February which will be the 23rd through the 27th. You don't have to give me an answer today, but I do I would like it to have at the very least a full day from the city council members. And that's starting at 8 o'clock in the morning and ending at five o'clock. So again, that's the last week of February from the 23rd to the 27th. I'll get with you and kind of get a a date that would work for everyone. And I'd love to have everybody there. This only works if we have everybody there. Sure. Not available on the 25th. On the 25th. Okay. And we'll coordinate that. So, but anyway, just wanted to make sure that uh everyone knew that this is coming up and that'll be the last week in February. Everybody comfortable? Maybe not the 27th. Yeah. Not the 27th. 25th 27th out of the way. Okay. How about you, Marty? What's your schedule? I'm think what you need, boss. That's it. Discussion and poss possible action to provide direction to the charter review committee. Mayor, council members, we do have uh the meeting of the charter charter review committee to be meeting on the 23rd at 3:00. What I wanted to make sure that um Mr. Turner talked about this a little while ago. I'm not sure if exactly uh specifically you like to look at every section of that charter or there specific sections that you would like to consider at this point, but uh I just wanted to make sure that we had good direction as we go into that first meeting next Friday. Uh as far as what would you like what would you you would like for the charter review committee to review. I'll let I'll let Mr. Turner I'll as Turner is my appointee. I'll let Turner

[4:20:52] Well, as he mentioned, I mean, it's been it's been quite a few years since probably look at all of it. Correct. Yeah. So, yeah, we had requested when we set it up that it all be looked at, but especially that the committee be provided with the items that were on last charter review that went to the ballot that went to the people, what it was on, what it won or lost by, and the percentages that they need that information to start up and to move forward. and then we'll be provided that information at the before before the meeting on next Friday. Can you remind me something? Sure. Are the only members on the charter review those that are council appointed? It's just it's just I believe so. Yeah. Just seven members. Mhm. When we were uh doing that, was there any interest in maybe having a slightly larger group, whether that be at large or two? Was there was there any I can't remember discussion about what was the kind of optimum number a good number? I think seven's a good working number. We didn't discuss it. I can't I can't remember. We didn't. Yeah. The bigger it becomes, the more cumbersome and it'll be a little more difficult to meet, you know. So, I think seven's a good number. Really, personally, I think all we need is Turner, but I think he agrees with you, Dwayne. In those meetings, uh, they're posted. How often are they meeting right now? They'll um they'll actually on the 23rd uh that discussion will be had as far as how often uh they'll be meeting. Um this will be the first this will be their initial meeting. So at that point they'll discuss that. I keep getting questions about the charter review. So thank you. I get it now. Do you need to say something Turner? And I guess if the if when they meet if they decide they needed extra members or other expertise they could they could ask for it and we could come back and I was on the last charter review committee and we met monthly. We actually one of the very first things we did was set up when we were going to be meeting monthly. All of them are open meetings. We want to have maximum public input because we're reviewing the city's

[4:22:54] it's not our charter we're working on. It's the city's charter, so we want citizen input. And that was our approach last time. And that's going to carry on again this time as as much as we can. I've already talked to a few of the other members. We will probably have some special sessions. We did last time reviewing specific things. We had a special session last time on uh the chief of police, for example, where we had a number of representatives there from the police department and the public to decide what we were going to put on the ballot and if we were going to put anything there. We're very we're going to be very open to having meetings as needed. We're going to try to have at least once a month. We're going to be setting up the schedule at this first meeting and we'd like to get some information on the city's website, have a city email address, etc. that we can get public input from that type of thing. But a lot of that we're getting ready to do right now. We had a lot of information from the last including city charters from other cities that we looked at. Uh there's a couple model city charters we looked at last time. and we still have that information. So, this it's never an easy process, but it shouldn't be a uh process that's also unmanageable because we do have some people that have had experience doing this. Some of the people that worked with us last time are still on city staff. Mr. Dame was very instrumental in helping last time, for example, uh especially like on the capital budget portion of it. So, we're going to be looking at the entire charter. We already know some of the areas that need to be looked at. We know that the election section, we kind of got there and really just didn't have enough time to go into it and not enough space really on the ballot on a lot of this. We had a very full slate last time. We're going to have a very full

[4:24:57] slate this time and we're looking at a goal of having it on the November ballot and realistically we can probably do that. But if it's not ready by November, we'll get it on there when it is ready. But we're going to make sure that we have the charter looked at, updated, cleaned up, and in the shape that it needs to be. And we definitely need input from everybody. city council and so on. Several members is a nice manageable size. It worked last time and we're that's kind of why we're doing it again this time because it was uh we know that it worked. So, any questions on what we plan on doing? I'm here and I think uh a couple other people that are on the committee are actually here today. Uh if you have any questions for me, I'd be glad to answer them. Thank you, Turner. That all the direction you need both. That's it. Let's go to number 21 which is consideration of and possible action on matters discussed in executive close session if needed. I don't nothing we need to discuss. There was no no decisions made. It was just a discussion. Uh number 22 is consideration of approving various board nominations by council and designated council members. Zoning Board of Adjustment SMD2 would be Hayden John to a second term January 2017. Zoning Board of Adjustments SMD3, David Nen to a third term January 216. Zoning Board of Adjustment SMD4, Ricardo Carthole to a first term, January 217. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Uh, can we be told or it added on here? Someone tell me now which of these are alternate or member positions, please. Mine and Marty's are alternates. Yours and are alternate for the last. Yeah. One day

[4:26:59] I'd like to know how that h how we figure out who's the alternate and and I think sent that out. kind of a they would if you could prepare a memo or s that explains to the council members how those came about who was there's some confusion about when one comes on why are they an alternate or not so how does that process work well that I understand this last memo but I I cannot I don't carry a recording calculator as to which zone district here is member or alternate and I just would have liked to have seen it on there just I move approval we we can't include that in the future any comments from Council move approval with a second. Comments from the public. All in favor, please say I. I. I. Oppo. Uh. Nay. Put a 5 on that one. Announcements. Consideration of future agenda items. Start with you, Elizabeth. None. Don. None. Charlie. Trash. Uh, I know that Shane's been working on a committee to discuss to do a little better job in controlling trash. And I mentioned to Shane during our lunch break that uh the trash from HB going west in the vacant lot by the church is there. It looks worse than it does at the dump on a windy day. Um we we've got to do something about Can I comment on that? Uh I noticed one day when it was extremely windy trash blowing out of a commercial dumpster. And so, you know, I think I know that's really hard to police, but it's amazing how much comes out when those are not properly managed in the commercial areas and then they it ends up on the vacant lot across the street, you know. So, I I know you know that, but I think we need to make sure that our our commercial businesses also have receptacles that are adequate for their their waist stream. But I would like to request that we move forward much faster on our committee to come up with some resolutions on that. Whether it's locks on dumpsters or finding the businesses, you know, whose trash it is. I I you

[4:29:02] know, March is right around the corner and I would like to ask for a quicker uh setup on that, please. Shane, did you hear that, Shane? And and I I assume I my chair lost all his stuff. I feel real low. I I I I assume we're getting close to uh recycling. I talked to Robert Sorl. He says May. We will be starting March and April. You start getting your new cans and in May they plan on starting this the system. We were told it would be April. I've told all my constituents April. Well, Robert Sals told me May last week. I want to read. We'll see when it happens. You want him to address it? No, just I'm I'm with her. Just make sure it happens in April. And other than that, I'll move for adjournment. I thought it was Did you hear that, Shane? I got a second. I got a second to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I. This meeting is over.

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=pvkVrUE85HU