San Angelo City Council 11-5-13

[0:00:00] It's 900 9:06 about time to start a meeting if we could get everybody to find a chair and come to order. It's good to see everyone here today. Man, quite a crowd we have. It's time to start with our invocation. So, let me come to the front and we'll get this started. Tommy Richardson, Emanuel Baptist, will be our one that leads our invocation this morning. Good morning. Grab that mic. All right. Would you pray with me, please? Lord, we come to you today realizing just how good you are to us. Lord, you've blessed us in so many different ways. Our city's growing. Lord, I know that creates more stress and more strain on the infrastructure. I know it creates more stress and strain on our leadership. I pray that today that you would bless them. That father that they in their decisions and their discussions would bless you and that father that this would be a place where we know that we honor you in everything that we do and everything that we say. Father, we lift up this day to you as these as is as is these blessed ones, ones that you call ministers. Lord, I pray that that they would do things that are good for people, but most of all good for you, Lord. We pray all this in Jesus name. Amen. Amen. Thank you, sir. And thank you, Lord, for the reigns that you send and for the reigns that you will send. And to help me with the pledge this morning, Maria Franco, please come forward. Good morning. Pledge 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. I aliance to

[0:02:05] thee. One state under God one and indivisible. Thank you. Pardon? We do have three proclamations this morning. Uh the first one will be International Education Week. Uh Sharon Tomlin, are you here? Ma'am, the front row where it's where we wanted you. Yes, that's right. That's right. This is a long one, so bear with me a minute while we read this and then she can make a speech and then we'll take pictures. It says, "Whereas International Education Week is a joint initiative, the US Department of Education and the US Department of State, it celebrates the importance and benefits of international education in the United States and around the world. And as President Obama has stated, all of us share this world but for a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart or whether we commit ourselves to an effort a sustained effort to find common ground to focus on the future we seek for our children and to respect the dignity of all human beings. And we are reminded that the challenges we face today are increasingly borderless. Climate change, the environment, the economy or some of the issues that affect our daily lives and demand our attention on a global scale. And finding sustainable solutions is imperative and will require an unprecedented level of international cooperation. And a complete education in the 21st century must teach our children about their interdependent world. And it must prepare them to be good leaders and good global citizens. And international awareness and knowledge can help our children build the skills needed to communicate and cooperate with those from other nations and other cultures. And as they participate in international education and international exchange, our students can gain the knowledge and experiences to help them contribute to a sustainable future in all. Now therefore, I Dwayne Morrison, the mayor of the city of St. Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim the week of November 18, 213 as

[0:04:08] international education week 2013. Striving for international education, learning matters around the world as a chance to embrace the uniqueness of nations around the world as well as our similarities to better understand how to work together and strongly urge everyone to join the Angelo State University international studies program and in celebrating international education and international exchange. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. That was rather long. I realize I do want to thank the city of St. Angelo for their continuing support of international education at Angelo State University. Uh it is a very important thing for us to be able to promote diversity on our campus. It brings a great education that is far beyond words uh for our students. Um, you may or may not know, but uh, in the last reporting period, which included the semester through uh, fall of 2012, it was reported that our 95 international students contributed approximately $2.1 million to our local economy here in St. Angelo. And with that number more than doubled for this coming year, we expect that the impact will as well double uh, for the city of St. Angelo. So, our students do bring a lot to not just ASU, but to St. Angelo, the community and to the state. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you so much. We now have the children's grief awareness day. This will be accepted by the hospice Angelo Melissa Vines. Good morning. Glad you're here. And this also is any but a longer one. So I've got a cheat sheet here. She's up the font just a little bit. It says, "Whereas many children 15 years of age or younger will suffer the loss of one or both parents, an immediate family member or a close friend and loved one. And the majority of children and teens

[0:06:11] grieving a loved one feel alone, misunderstood, fearful, causing an inability to manage or even face their grief. And many adults and other children erroneously believe that grieving children and teens are resolent enough to get over their grief. Which is why children and teens are often called forgotten mourners. And the unresolved grief of children and teens who experience the death of a parent and immediate family member close friend may lead to depression, hopelessness and other mental health issues including anxiety disorders and substance abuse later in life. And grief centers such as Hospice of St. Angelo Building Bridges program provide peer support to children and teens who have experienced the death of a parent, primary caregiver, sibling, family member, neighbor, friend, and offer comfort and guidance to young people and their families in their time of grief and educate the community including schools and businesses on the profound effects that the type of personal loss has on children and teens. And National Children's Grief Awareness Day is observed every year on the 3rd Thursday in November to recognize and support grieving children and teens throughout the country during a part of the year when those mourning the loss of a loved one often feel alone apart from their peers. And whereas the permanent establishment of Children's Grief Awareness Day on the Thursday before the Thanksgiving holiday will raise public awareness about childhood bereavement and give the citizens of our fair community the opportunity to express their support for the thousands of children and teens living in St. Angelo who have suffered the loss of a loved one by participating in recognized support efforts in wearing blue and recognize the efforts of local grief centers such as Hospice of St. Angelo's building bridges program for the work on behalf of grieving children and teams. Now therefore, I, Dwayne Morrison, mayor of the city of St. Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim and permanently designate the third Thursday in November of each year as Children's Grief Awareness Day in St. Angelo. In order to raise public awareness about childhood bereavement and give the citizens of our community the opportunity to express their support for the children and teens living in St. Angelo have suffered the loss of a loved

[0:08:13] one by participating in recognized support events and wearing blue and recognize the efforts of local grief centers such as hospice of San Angelos's building bridges program for their work on behalf of grieving children and teens. You may have the mic. I would just like to thank the city council and mayor Morrison for recognizing uh children's grief awareness day and the importance that it holds for grieving children throughout our community and also the importance um that it has to programs like building bridges that offer support and encouragement to those children and their families. Thank you so much. [Applause] And we have one more proclamation. David McBride, if you would please come forward, please. Good morning. Good morning. Let me read this one. And again, this one's a little long, so bear with me. It says whereas every year more than 1.58 million Americans living with lifelimited illnesses and their families receive care from the nation's hospice programs in communities throughout the United States. And whereas hospice and palative care offers the highest quality of cares to patients and families and bring comfort, love and respect to all they serve, hospice allows people to spend their final months surrounded by family and loved ones at home wherever home may be. And whereas hospice and palative care professionals including physicians, nurses, social workers, therapists, counselors, health aids, and clergy providing comprehensive and compassionate care that make the wishes of each patient and family a priority. There are more than 468,000 trained volunteers that contribute 21 million hours of service

[0:10:16] to hospice programs annually. Whereas through pain management and symptom control, caregiver training and assistance and emotional and spiritual support, patients are able to live as fully as possible through the journeys through the journey at life's end. And the commitment of more than 1,600 hospice providers of which hospice of St. Angelo is one. The national hospice and palative care organizations and the department of veteran affairs have allowed the initiative program. We honor veterans to thrive and to ensure that veterans find the compassion, care and dignity that they deserve at the end of life. And whereas the provision of quality hospice and pallet of care reaffirms our belief in the essential dignity of every person regardless of age, health or social status, and that every stage of human life deserves to be treated with utmost respect and care. Now therefore, I, Dwayne Morrison, mayor of the city of St. Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim and permanently designate the month of November of each year as hospice and palative care month and encourage all people to learn more about options of care and to share their wishes with family, loved ones, and their health care professionals. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I accept this proclamation on behalf of the board of directors and the staff and the hundreds of volunteers of Hospice of St. Angelo, but more importantly on behalf of the patients that we serve. Back in 1985, we took our first patient, admitted our first patient, and we gave we made him three promises. We told him, "We will control your pain. We will walk with you on your journey, and we will put you in control of your treatment." We've made that same promise almost 10,000 times. We could not have done that without the generosity and the prayers and the love of the city of St. Angelo and the Concho Valley. And for that, we're very grateful. Thank you. [Applause] and my family has been the recipient of

[0:12:31] hospice care as probably many others of you have and it's a it's a wonderful organization to have. We have one more here and this is a recognition. Jamie Rainey and Michael Boyd y'all come forward please. And I didn't know this was on here until I read the agenda, but look like I'm going to get something. Had to slip the mayor $20, but we got the agenda going. Let me regress a little bit. A little over six years ago, hired colleges came up with a $25 million master plan. As you know, they've been here many, many years. We uh educate about 3,200 students. And uh about 3 months ago, we finally broke ground on the first $12 million two educational buildings. So if you if you're out on 277, I ask you to go by and look, excuse me, you'll see our two buildings being constructed. The curbon gutters are being poured, but with the mayor's leadership with Tex DOT's help, uh we finally seeing this come to fruition. So the first phase will be finished about a year from now. And on behalf of that, we want to thank the the mayor for being on our board for nine years. So if you would let me read this resolution dated June 19th, excuse me, 2013. Whereas Dwayne Morrison served as an exofficial member of the Hired College Sanlo Foundation from March 2004 until March 2013, dedicating his time, knowledge, and energy to the betterment of the Hired College San Angelo campus. And whereas Dwayne Morrison carefully considered each foundation decision, shared thoughtful insight, and demonstrated outstanding leadership. based on moral and ethical principles. And whereas Dwayne Morrison served the foundation through his sincere interest, wisdom, and deliberate actions in regard to the welfare of the students, the college, and the community. Be it therefore resolve that the Hired College Sanlo Foundation wishes to express our sincere appreciation to Dwayne Morrison for nine years of outstanding service. Thank you, sir.

[0:14:44] Thanks for those. You're very kind and I appreciate it very very much. I've enjoyed my board membership on Howard College and I really think that that's probably one of the greatest assets that we have in St. Angelo, Texas, because these people that are going to school out there are not children. They are they're they're grown people and they have families and they've realized that they need something else and Howard College has always been very good to schedule their hours so that they can be there for the students before class before they go to work and after they go to work. So it is a it is a tremendous asset to St. Angelo, Texas and I am very very proud that I've been a part of it. Thank you. [Applause] All right. This is the time that we go to public comment. So, anything that anyone has to say or wants to talk about or anything you want to do with the council, this will be your time. Let me read the legalities and then we'll open the floor up. Public comment. The council takes public comment on all items on the regular agenda. Public input on a regular agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion. Public input not on an item. Public input on an item not on the agenda or consent agenda may be identified and requested for consideration of the council at 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 decision and prior to any action on the item. Each member of the public shall make the remarks from the podium and 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

[0:16:46] will be allowed to speak more than once on any one subject until every citizen wishing to comment has done so. All right, public, line up and tell us what you think. Harry, state your name. Three to five minutes. Yeah, this is Harry Thomas. I'm a community volunteer and I want to say congratulations to Anthony Wilson and Brian Groves and their team on the six awards that they recently won. I also personally thank them and the rest of the city staffers uh for what they do for the city of St. Angelo and and the citizens of this great community. I also want to say thank congratulations to Brian for his selection in the 20 under 40 for this year's class. With this year's class and last year's class, we have the foundation of future leaders in St. Angelo and I feel comfortable in knowing that they're going to take on the issues that we've got coming. appreciate that. Thank you, Harry. Thank you. And to that I will say amen and amen. We have a we have a wonderful staff and I'm very very proud of them. State your name in three to five. Uh my name is Lee Bell. Uh I'm farmer rancher ranch farmed on high plains of Texas the Perian Basin and here recently in the Koncho Valley. Uh I am a member of the Lake Natworthy homeowner association. and I live at the lake and also on the board of uh directors and on the architect control committee. I have been working here and moved here uh 25 years ago and I love St. Angelo moved here on purpose. Uh anyway uh working in the farming industry and Rash and I have maintained a lot of ponds and waterways and u have had a chemical license for the past 50 years and on our education our study on those what one of our biggest problems we face in this area is our invasive uh vegetation namely mosquite salt cedar

[0:18:54] regular juniper and the item that I'm going to speak on after saying that is uh is G uh number 10 uh the Lake Nazworthy master plan immediate strategy. Uh I just thought I would tell y'all a little bit about that, how that came to be cuz uh I know you were here uh Mr. Mayor, but some of you didn't realize just how that came to be. Uh Paul Alexander was our representative. Probably going to have to ask you to wait until we get to that. Oh, to that. Okay, we need to wait on because on our public comment, these are things that are not already on today. Oh, that's what they Okay. Well, thank you. I'll get I'll be sure you get an opportunity to speak when it comes time, sir. Who else wants to speak? This is your opportunity. If there be no further public comment, then I'll open it up to the council. I will ask for council comment and then we will ask for anything that needs to be moved. So, do we have any comment from the council? Just something I'd like to move request to be moved when you're ready. Okay. This is the time, sir. Yeah. Item number 11, a zoning ordinance matter. uh that uh that matter uh is in Charlotte Farmers District and she couldn't be here today and she requested that it be removed from the uh agenda and so I'm just requesting that uh on her behalf. she'll be here at the next meeting and she would like for it to be moved to to the next meeting so she can be involved in in that zone change in her district and she had requested that in writing. I believe before we move that I know we probably got 30 or 40 people here that raise your hand those that are here on this we got a mess of you here. Do y'all want to put this off till next meeting or do you want to handle it today? Let's Let's press forward. I got one. Press forward. Anybody else want to

[0:20:58] speak to this? We would like for it to be postponed. Okay. Let's do this the Democratic way. If you want if you are here for the zone change, which is out in Southland. This is on the on the on the hotel. Shouldn't we be voting on this to decide whether we're going to remove this or not? Let's not let them Dwayne. Let's let's take a vote between us. Don't you think? Wouldn't you like to know how many what they think though? I understand what they think. I I I think I do, but let's make a consensus on what they think and then we will divide. We will Yeah, you're mayor. I was going to say, yeah, let's not let them vote, but at least a show of hands of who is here. Yeah. Well, that's that's what I meant. Yeah. Just How many of you want to run this through today? Show me a hand. Buddy, you out of luck. I've lost before. How about the council? What do we think by consensus of council? It doesn't make me any difference either way, Rodney. No, I I would u if Charlotte wants it move to the next one, I'll let Charlotte decide that. Marty, I'm good with that, Johnny. Yeah, we can wait. And Winky, well, there's six of us that says let's move it. So, so sorry. All righty. We We will move number 11 to the next meeting. Then you would to table it. Please. Please vote to table. I would like to move. Okay. If someone make a motion, I'll make I'll make a a motion or I'll move that we table it till the next meeting. I'll I'll second that. Okay, we've got a motion. We've got a second to table this next meeting. All in favor say I. Any comment? Any comment? I think we already had public comment. All right. Any anyone not opposed say nay. It will be moved. Sorry, folks. We'll see you next time. Any other items on the consent agenda that needs to be moved at this time? Okay. In that case, I will ask for a I will ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented with the exception of number 11. That's not on consent. That's not consent.

[0:23:03] That's a regular agenda. We just Okay. We've moved we've changed our agenda around this time, haven't Yes, we did. Okay. So, we'll get to that later. Okay. There we will not approve the consent agenda because there has been an item placed in front of it. Uh this is a change in the way the agendas usually work and I am a slow learner so we're going to have to back up just a little bit and we will take a regular item discussion and then we will get into consent. The regular agenda public hearing and comment is discussion pertaining to city council compliance with city charter qualification requirements. This is count this is requested by council member self. You have the floor Marty. Thank you. Um, I' I' I'd like to make a statement. Uh, after the U October 1st um, city council agenda where I recuse myself from from a vote, it's been uh questioned whether or not I'm qualified to uh, hold my city council seat. Uh, first of all, I'd like to say that um I was not legally required to to file the affidavit or even recuse myself um from the vote. Um I I did so to try and and avoid uh any appearance of propriety. And secondly, uh I I have no ownership uh in Texana or it uh or its successor ASG Security. Um thirdly um uh my company uh automatic fire protection has no subcontract um with Texana or ASG uh for this work and uh nor do they uh uh have to nor does Texana or or ASG security have to uh have to hire automatic fire protection to to perform those inspections. Um, I'd also like to say

[0:25:06] that contrary to uh the online article, u I do not have a contract with the city uh for the um uh airport terminal project. Uh I have uh I do not have any contracts uh with the city and neither does uh my company automatic fire protection. Templeton Construction has the um the contract with the city for the airport terminal project. Uh I am a uh I I do have a subcontract with uh Templeton Construction uh for the fire sprinkler renovation. Uh uh AFP or or or my company, Automatic Fire Protection, um has no continuing service agreements with the city. uh uh regarding any city facilities or or uh projects. Um after consulting with the with the city legal department and and with my private council, uh I've been advised that I do not constitute uh uh that that this doesn't constitute a a disqualification uh from my office under the city charter. Um and uh therefore I I intend to continue to serve and fulfill uh um the duties of my office uh that I was elected to uh elected to by the people of my district. So I just wanted to clear the air. Thank you, Martin. Mhm. Anyone care to speak to this? Yes, I do have a response. a brief response. Uh Mr. Self is uh more than uh uh uh entitled to have his own opinion. Uh but as a lawyer, I have a totally different

[0:27:09] opinion and uh uh I think he is disqualified from being on the city council. Uh the city charter prohibits a candidate or city council person from doing business with the city. Uh there's no there's no language in there that talks about the difference between a contractor or a subcontractor. Uh in 2000 in the 2000 recent city uh charter election, the citizens overwhelmingly reconfirmed that they do not want a candidate or council person to do business with the city. Uh the language reads uh no member shall have any interest in the profits or amaluments of any contract, job, work or service for the city. In amalument terms means uh compensation, gain or benefit and uh that this is certainly the case here. It also says no member shall have an interest in the sale to the city of any supplies, equipment or materials. uh the distinction has has been attempted to be made that just because you don't have a written contract with the city uh that you're you're not disqualified. I don't think uh I don't think that's a a fair construction of the language. Uh uh and now man Mr. Self did file an affidavit as he admits saying that his company automatic fire protection is doing business with the city and and now he's saying uh that he shouldn't have filed that. Well, I I disagree totally. Uh, and that's not a proper construction of the law as I read it, as I briefed it. Uh, what people have got to understand is that as a Texas home rule city, we are governed by our city charter. And a city, our city charter is just like a constitution for the US Constitution or the Constitution of the State of Texas. And we can't change that just by our interpretation uh up here at the council is what what we think. We have to follow the letter of the law. The people have have uh re reaffirmed that they want

[0:29:15] this to be the the way this is handled. Uh there are serious problems with a person doing business with the city of St. Angelo and being on the council in my opinion. uh and and that's why of course the citizens uh rejected the attempt to remove that provision uh from the city charter back in 2007. So uh you know my uh the reason we have courts and the reason that we we have the attorney general's office is for people to uh uh litigate their differences. And uh I think the proper thing to do here in all fairness is to have Mr. self fully disclose what all entities he owns an interest in uh that might be doing business with the city and the nature and extent of the contracts and I think we should uh request an attorney general's opinion from the state of Texas uh and uh uh let the chips fall where they may. Uh I want to read you uh an attorney general's opinion just briefly here uh which totally contradicts what we just heard. Uh this is an attorney general's opinion in 2010. Uh number GA0796 states that an affidavit of recusal is required when the decision or v or vote of the city council will have a special economic effect on the business entity. Well, voting on a contract that automatic fire protection uh is going to profit from uh is going to have a special effect on that business. And I think that attorney general opinion is totally contrary to what we just heard. And so, uh, I think the way to handle this is on the next regular city council meeting, I will put this on the agenda, uh, to request that this council, uh, ask for an attorney general's opinion from the state of Texas. And if the council won't do it, I I'll be happy to do that myself as a citizen.

[0:31:22] Mayor, may I? Yes, sir. Mayor, under a code of ordinances, article 2.400, as far as city attorney, it's section 2.4. 404 under advice. Our city attorney shall be the legal advisor of the city and shall render advice on all legal questions affecting the city. Mr. Warlock, I respect the fact that you're an attorney, but we do have an attorney, a city attorney that serves as a legal adviser for the city. Also, I would like to hear from our city attorney at this point. I know that everything that we do is we research everything very objectively to make sure that any advice that is given by our legal by our legal team is something that we know um was given without any subjectivity whatsoever and I want to make sure that we do hear from Miss Bowling at this point. Good morning council. Absolutely. And um to move forward from here, we we do of course consider the charter and the authority granted to the city council under the charter. And we will find that there is no procedure articulated in the charter for the city council to make uh a determination of whether um a council member has forfeited his office. The the charter is silent. And for that reason um I would suggest uh and support two methods of making a legal and factual determination of whether that interest indeed is a disqualification. Um there there's a recall petition uh available in our charter for the voters to make that determination or indeed the state of Texas um in a quo warrantto suit um and and the courts have said that is the exclusive remedy to determine whether factually and legally a council person has forfeited their office. meaning whether when they came into office they did not meet the qualifications or whether during the term of office no longer meets the qualifications. But our charter is silent. The city council

[0:33:25] doesn't have the authority to um to make a decision about this. It is a difficult question. It's a mixed question of law and fact. Indeed, as um council member Wllo has explained uh to you that yes, it's it's it is a term interests and who can best make that determination would be a court of law. Um, I would say that uh perhaps the attorney general opinion that was cited was really about um when a contract comes before council that is a direct contract uh in which a council member has a substantial interest which isn't the case here at all because uh there was no contract with the city council member in question before council and there is a procedure it's articulated and um it it articulates a substantial interest that has a an economic effect different than the public at large. That would be the test um under that statute. However, um I don't think it's applicable here because when the city contracted with Templeton, there wasn't an issue. Uh that just wasn't an issue. It couldn't become an issue. So in any event, I do um assert that we need to because without express authority, we must either uh go to the voters A or B um have the state of Texas through the attorney general, the district attorney or the county attorney uh file a lawsuit in Quo Warrento to determine qualifications in this case. Thank you, ma'am. Do you feel that there has been in your in your opinion as a city attorney, do you feel that there is any problem with councilman self? And um I looked at in my analysis I do not. Okay.

[0:35:31] And uh you agree you compare with what he said then? Yes. I I don't believe he has a disqualifying interest. That's what I want to hear. Go ahead, sir. In layman's terms, what we're saying here, if I'm understanding this correctly, is this vote was all done before Marty was ever a city council person. And even the thing that we we talked about, I think they were doing an increase on um the contract, he recused himself and that's how this all came to light when he did recuse himself from the vote on that after the fact. Is that is that right? Am I understanding it right? Yes. So, he's never voted on anything that could give him any capital gain or any any game whatsoever. Correct? Yes. Okay. That's what I wanted to know. Well, Rodney, that's not in any Does anyone else care to speak to this in the first round? Johnny, Don, Johnny. Well, and then I'll come back to you in a second. You if the bottom line is what if Mr. Winky Winky Warlaw wants to get the attorney general involved, so be it. Go, go, go with it. I think I've got more important things to to worry about, then do do your thing. If you if you feel he's in the wrong, okay, uh, that's your opinion. I want to concentrate on water. I want to concentrate on these ordinances that are here before us. And, uh, I don't think we need to beat this horse to death. Just winky, do your thing, and move on. And whatever comes out of it comes out of it. You know, I have no problem. Uh again, when we uh uh contracted with uh Temple Construction, it was way before this man was even at this table. So, I don't know. I don't know all the details, but again, I think we need to concentrate. We got thousands of people watching us and watch us like a soap popper every day. And this has a ripple effect on not not just the city, but you know, the communities around us. So, we've got to move forward and stay positive on on what's coming our way. And I I want to go there. you know, I don't want to worry about this, you know, muddy in the waters type of stuff. You know, with all due respect to Mr.

[0:37:34] Warlaw, but just do your thing and let's just move on. That that's just my opinion. Amen. Done. Well, when I ran I ran on trying to make the streets better, trying to uh do things for our citizens, not fighting amongst each other up here. I I uh I think every person up here is an honorable person or they wouldn't be elected. I mean, we don't do it for the uh for the money. We do it for the service to our community. And I, for one, have lived here my whole life. I have absolutely no problem with anyone up here. I uh like I said, I ran to help St. Angelo. And I don't think that uh what we're doing right now is helping St. Angelo. Wiki. Yeah, that that's not a legal defense. Uh uh what's helping St. Angelo or not, we have a duty. Uh each one of us have a duty to uphold the city charter, including the city manager has a duty to do that. Uh the fact that the contract might have been in existence uh before Mr. Self was was elected and sworn in makes no difference legally whatsoever. Uh in fact he and all of us had to sign two affidavits uh stating we're not doing any business with the city. The first sworn affidavit was at the time you filed to get on the ballot, you have to swear that you're not doing any business with the city. And secondly, when once you win the election and you're fixing to be sworn in, you have to file another affidavit saying you're doing business with the city, not doing business with the city at that time. Uh, and we all signed those affidavit under oath and the penalties of perjury. And, uh, as an attorney, I just I'm just not going to I think I have a duty and I think we're all sworn to uphold the constitution and laws of the state of Texas and the ordinance uh, all our ordinances and the city charter. And I'm just not willing to overlook that. It's nothing personal, but I I do see

[0:39:37] uh, I do see I uh, I help Mr. myself and his campaign. Uh I raised him money and I met with him and met with Frank White many times, his campaign manager who passed away last weekend. So you can laugh if you want to, but I believe in the rule of law and uh uh I know some people don't uh some people don't believe in the Constitution of the United States and they're fully willing to throw it in the trash, but I'm not one of those people. Daniel Mayor, uh I do want to state that our city attorney staff has spent countless hours researching this thing. Um it comes down to at this point uh Mr. Warlo, you've um decided that this is how you've interpreted the uh the charter. And you're right, I have a responsibility to make sure that the laws of the city, the charter and so forth are fulfilled also. But as I mentioned earlier, also have a legal adviser. We have a staff on on with the city at this point that do a lot of uh great work that do a lot of research and they did a lot of it this week sir uh to come to a conclusion to render a legal opinion that quite frankly I'm comfortable with at this point moving forward. Now as Mr. Silvas just mentioned a little while ago if you wish to pursue that moving forward then by all means do so. At this point, I know that we've uh our legal team has rendered a an opinion and I respect that. With that said, that's all I have and I agree with Mr. Silvas. I think you said it very well, Johnny. I'm tired of all this infighting. Makes us look like a bunch of school children up here. And I'm I'm tired of it. I am tired of it. I'm ready to move on and deal with the with the issues of this city that are important to all of us. And we are we're doing nothing positive by fighting amongst ourselves. The city attorney has investigated this. He has hired an attorney that has investigated this. They have found no wrongdoing. In my opinion, if we're going to be after someone, we need Templeton Construction in here because Templeton is the one that got the contract and Marty simply

[0:41:39] subcontracted for Templeton. And I I see no problem at all. I'm going to open this up to public comment from the floor. Yes. My name is Jim Turner. Uh, and I was one of the uh people running against Mr. Self, but I'm not here to uh try to get him removed at all or anything. What I'm here is I was also on the last charter review committee. And one of the reasons that this whole section of city charter was put before the voters and we probably didn't do a very good job of rewarding it or selling it is because this part of the city charter is overly broad. If you go by the most strict possible interpretation of this law, somebody who's working at Walmart and somebody from the city comes in and buys anything that would disqualify that person from holding an office that an elected office within the city. Uh if you take a look over the history of the last several years since I've been here, there have been a number of people that if you did this strict a reading uh that portion of the city charter, we would have probably had about half the council missing off of several of these because of one connection or another as either part of a retail establishment where they're getting uh the city is doing business with whether it's Walmart, one of the construction companies, a supplier, an electric company, you name it. Uh and that confusion, that overly broad nature of it needs to be addressed. The state has done a lot of things to narrow it down to financial interest, control of the operation and decisions of the company, etc. And that

[0:43:42] is what we need to look at doing in our city charter. If we are going to go beyond the state rules, we do need to have something that is reasonable, protects the city, prevents conflict of interest, but doesn't prevent somebody from that is working at a local restaurant from running from city council because the city happened to pay for some function there. Thank you. Before I ask for any more public comment, Alicia, would you look that farm up? I want that form read in its entirety so that we know exactly what we're dealing with. Anyway, Is there any other public comment on this item? Come forward, please. Ma'am, state your name and you've got three to five. Thank you. My name is Billy Dwit and I really did try to hold my peace and sit in my seat. But um I appreciated the comments that Mr. Silvas made. I certainly appreciate where Mr. Wardlaw feels that he has to bring this forward. I think it has been brought out. I appreciate Mr. self um letting us know what was going on up front, but um you know, it just seems like there's such a divided faction on the city council and I'm not sure what that is all about, but um as was stated, the city does need to move forward and to me this should be a non-issue. St. Angelo is so remotely we are isolated from any major operation. As the gentleman before me said, it's going to be awfully hard to do business in St. Angelo if you're a business person that someone couldn't dig and find some minute point to try to get you to not to, you know, to be invalidated. Um, and I just I just don't think that's

[0:45:44] right, you know, and and maybe one of the disqualifications should be from having an attorney on the city council because every time I come to a city council meeting, I hear, "Well, I'm a lawyer. I'm a lawyer." We need people who care about the city and would like to move the city forward. And you know when we spend however many minutes we have spent on this I appreciate the fact that you know Mr. Wlaw can as a citizen he stated as a citizen he would you know he'll just do it on his own. Well I that's what I would suggest happen here and and and let's let's move on to important issues that adversely impact this community. I do not see Mr. self as subcontracting with somebody adversely impacting his role and his ability to be objective. And that's what we need, objectivity in making decisions about the city of St. Angelo. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Mr. Bullet, my name is Mike Boyd. Uh, I concur. I just want to encourage you all to move forward. Uh, as we know, Abene is a major competitor of ours on the business side. And as you know, the people in Abene watch what happens in these city council meetings. Yes, they do. And time and time again, I've had people come to me and say, "Let's move forward. Let's work on economic development. Let's fix our water. Let's get pro business in here," which all of y'all support. And I encourage you to do that. If we have issues that need to be worked out that are not so important to me as a businessman and an individual, then I ask you to do it in close session, I ask you to come out in agreement and I ask you to come out with a smile on your face, but it's time for us to move forward. We've had six months of this. Not only I think is the public unhappy with what's going on. I know y'all are unhappy with what's going on. We'll support you. We'll do whatever we can to make San Angelo the best place to

[0:47:46] live, but I ask you please, let's get on with it. You said it well, Mike. And I tell you, I get comments from Ebene and Midland and these that are watching our meetings, too, and I'm getting the same exact feedback, and I'm tired of it. Yes, sir. Follow, please. Go ahead, Turner. Yes. I I think it's uh this in a way supports one of the things that uh Mayor Morrison brought up earlier at an earlier council meeting. It's time to have another charter review to do some clean up on some of these areas that do need some clarification. This isn't the only place that we know in charter where there is some confusion. It's out of sync with state law and it's time to be looked at again. The second thing I want to make clear also is we when we looked at modifying this because it was overly broad. There were three very competent attorneys, two ex mayors and a lot of experience on that charter review committee that came to the conclusion this part of the city charter needs some work. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. It'll be hard though to ever do away with that. I I think I mean in a technical sense, you could actually say I'm a I'm a real estate broker. If I ever sold a house to an employee that worked for the city, technically I'm getting a gain from that. I'm not saying that I have sold well actually I probably have sold to several city members in the past. So you could come back and say to me, this would almost be the same as him. Yes. That I did gain for that in the past. So I mean you can property that was used by by subcontractor to the city under the limits we're talking about right now being exactly the same. That's why I I think that the way it's written you have to have some flexibility in there

[0:49:48] in interpretation. But I'm all for Winky on this deal as far as if he wants to take this to the attorney general and the attorney general says that that there is something here well then we'll go forward then then we'll have something that will trump our attorneys. But our attorneys are saying that it's good. Let's just let's drop it right now. You go to the attorney general or you go to the the county attorney here and see if they want to do something against it and then let's move on. Let's be done with it. Let's stop right now. Mayor. Yes, sir. Let me add also and and I totally appreciate Miss Dwit and uh her coming forward, but you know, if you want to get down to the nitty-gritty, you know, the tax abatement that we awarded to Ethicon. Well, my wife has worked out there 30 plus years. So, do should I have recused myself? Uh I attended ASU. We're going to talk about golf carts soon. Do I need to recuse myself? How much of into detail do we go? I mean, our hands would be tied if if that was the case. So, again, I I don't know. I I'm just Yes, ma'am. Yes. Um and in sync with looking at how to potentially revise uh that part of the charter, there are studies on home rule chart charter provisions. Some of them eliminate the requirement completely and defer uh as Mr. Turner says to state law that has stepped up from the um common law approach which is just that interest being so broad. Um, additionally some charters have uh language in an ordinance that is very very specific in defining what the interest is. So, um I would be available and very happy to look at uh all the home rule city charters and um some of them have modernized and uh moved into uh the a different approach to uh protecting the public either deferring to state law defining the interest or eliminating um that qualification criteria completely. Do we have further comment from the

[0:51:50] public? Yes, ma'am. I'm Vera Kirkpatre and I just say I think it's pretty sad whenever a comment was made about having an attorney on the board on the council. I think it's important that we have attorneys on our board because that lets them look into things that may be pushed under the table. We have a lot of that going on in Washington. We don't want it to happen here in St. Angelo, I believe that you all need to get together. I've only attended three meetings and I see a big division in the council and I don't like it. I'd like to see you all join together and if things like this are brought up, let's not fight about it and say that we're mad because someone brought it up. So, I think that we need to give Mr. Wllo a hand because he was willing to bring this up. I don't know Mr. Self. I don't know anything about the business, but I do see a division in our council and I don't like to see that. Thank you, ma'am. A hand for three to five minutes. State your name, please. Okay. Bill Richardson. Uh like most the audience, I'd like to see the council like move forward on the city issues and uh uh I think one thing that have has to be said is that you know justice not only has to be done, it has to be seen to be done and I I think it's a little bit u on Mr. Self's shoulders to clarify that with the public. I think he has done it here to to an extent, but I think it has to be clarified further. Thank you for your time. Do we have further comment? It was just a discussion item. So, yes,

[0:53:53] it's just a discussion item. I was reading there was one thing here I wanted to I want to read it's section C here it said any contract in which a member is or becomes interested may be declared void by the council. So the only the only authority that the coun that the charter gives us as a council is that we declare the contract void. And I am not willing to bring Timon construction in here and declare the airport board contract because a sub won a contract and to work for Templeton and that is the by the by the charter. That is the only authority that we have. So I think I'm ready to put this thing to rest unless Mr. Wardlaw would like to take it further as a citizen. It is 100% his authority and I say do whatever you want to do. But as far as a council, I'm ready for this to be over. I see no for no foul, no harm. I see nothing that Marty has done wrong. Let's get a consensus here. Mr. Fleming, I want to move on. Yeah, he can he can do it on his own. Johnny, move on. I'm saying the same thing. Move on. Do it on your own. Don, move on. There's a consensus of four. Let's move on to the next item. All right, we're back to the consent agenda now. We had one item that we tabled and moved till the next meeting. Item number 11. That wasn't on the consent. It was on regular item. That's on the regular. I think it's time for a break. I I think we're getting there. Okay, let's ask now. Is there any item on the consent agenda that anyone wants to move to the regular agenda from the council? Are there any requests from the public to move an item from consent to regular? If not, then I'll entertain a motion to approve the consent. I'll move that we approve the consent agenda as is. I'll second that. We've got a motion. We

[0:55:56] have a second. I'll call for the vote. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. It's 10:02 and I need a break. Let's take a few It is 10:21 and our 10-minute break didn't take but 20 minutes that time. So, it's ready to get started again. And we are ready for item number nine. I finally got the able to differentiate between the consent and the regular. Okay. Okay. We'll ask you understand what they're up to. I have had a request to move number 17. This is about the golf carts. We've got people who want to speak to that. And I also know the chief's in here. Uh after we deal with item number nine, would it be all right to with the council if we brought 17 next? Do I have any problems down here? Any problems here? Okay. Well, let's take number nine and then we will go to item 17 so the chief can back to his own duty. Number nine is consideration and possible action on a petition for variance under the code of ordinances water conservation drought contingency plan section 11203e to to the allowable watering frequencies and time of day for new to planted landscape submitted by the St. Angelo Independent School District. Mr. Dixon, you are on sir. Thank you council and mayor. Um good morning. This morning we have a petition from the St. Angelo Independent School District. The variance for the drought level two watering restrictions. As you know, currently in um drought level two, November the 1st through March 31st, uh it's only once every 14 days for outside watering and there is no

[0:57:59] allowance for new landscapes. The SASD is requesting uh or wanting to overseed their UIL baseball and softball fields with winter ride for the sole purpose of saving and extending the life of their existing Bermuda turf. They're estimating that the process that they are proposing will require 960,000 gallons of water to oversee two baseball fields and two softball fields. And these fields are located at Lake View High School Athletic Complex and also at um St. Angelo Stadium complex. What the school is requesting is to be allowed to water the four fields identified up to twice a day for 10 or 15 minute periods for a duration of five consecutive days. And then after that, for the next 21 days, they're requesting to be allowed to water twice per week for 10 or 15 minutes to allow the establishment of the ride turf. And if you also grant this variance, they are willing to offer an alternative that they will cease all irrigation watering at schools and alternate department sites, which they have in their documentation that in November of last year resulted in almost 5 million gallons of water. So there could possibly be a 5 million gallon savings from them, not water in the other sides. and they're wanting to use 960,000 gallons to establish this ride turf. Believe Mr. Turner is here from the school district. If you have any questions for him, council Ricky, quick question. You said the 5 million gallons is applied where? What other sites? They have in their documentation that the alternate department sites and I can't clarify that, but Mr. Turner probably could. Good. Okay.

[1:00:03] AJ, is this a one time thing for this fall for this period of time? We're not Yes, sir. This is just for this period. Alternate sites being Carver Pays, uh, Sam Houston Project Center. Those alternate sites right there, that's the ones that we're doing. Uh, as you're all aware, we've got the playground fields that exist at all of our elementary sites. We weren't going to water those. Uh, the one thing is we need to make sure that we maintain the consistency of our baseball fields and make sure that they remain safe and remain up to UI standards as required. Uh, in in following the restrictions through the the drought contingencies, we wouldn't be able to do that to get the winter rye in. And that's what we're asking for. We will shut down all the other watering. We would like to be able to maintain our landscaped areas, the gardens, the memorial trees, uh the stuff like that that the schools have established and we do have a few of them. So, we would like to maintain those. AJ, so the 5 million, tell me again, it's every every school, every playground, every that was the total November bill uh from last year for all of our watering. That was just the gallons that we used was close million gallons. It's close to 5 million gallons. Yes, sir. We're just asking for 960,000. Now, we're probably going to get close to uh 100,000 if we do our landscape areas and our trees and stuff, but we'll still be far below what we what we used last year. Wow. Ricky, what do you think about this? Give me the city's perspective. I believe with them willing to sacrifice some of their other watering that it's a plus for us even if they are allowed to do this watering. Let me ask you another question. If they watered once in 14 days and put an inch of water which is what we allow, how many gallons would that take as opposed to this uh 15minute twice a day? What what would be the difference? How many do you have any ideas? I I do not I don't know what size fields these are and and all of that information, but if they're going to

[1:02:05] seed this with ry grass once every 14 days wouldn't make it. You know, if the rains continue, they may not have to use that much water anyway. So, there is some some hope there that they won't have to use that, but they won't be able to establish their ry grass if it's only once every 14 days. Well, if we allow this, we know it'll cost us 960,000 gallons. If we don it out and they do the one in 14 days, they're going to use half that much plus the other 5 million gallons that they would have put on their other irrigation council discussion. Okay, this is the problem I have with this. We are not taking our water issues serious. This city is got blinders on and we are not looking at what we need to be doing. When you're saying I will save this, I'll save you $5 million over there. You need to do that anyways. Whether we put the water on those baseball fields or not, you need to turn that water off and we not need not be using that water. So, that should be out of play completely. I I I'm one that loves baseball more than anybody. But I also realize that 12 months from now, 13 months from now, we don't have any water. There ain't going to be baseball. There ain't going to be football, no playgrounds, no nothing. I'm totally against this. I don't want to open this up. I when I got elected and I ran for this position, my number one thing was water for this city. And water for this city is drinking water and usable water. We're going to have to cut these things down. And we need to take we need to tighten our belts and suck it up and get tough on this situation. And we need to be telling the general public, this is a hard times. We live in West Texas in the desert and we have no water. So things are going to have to die. I have a my yard. You drive by my yard right now. It's beautiful. It looks good. A year from now, I probably won't have a yard. I know that and I realize that I would rather have drinking water and water for my kids than water for this baseball field. I am not going to be for this. I understood what you said. Any other comments from council?

[1:04:09] AJ, I wanted to you got to understand where what we're dealing with. you know, we all do, you know, and I appreciate you and and Jim and what you're doing out there, but you know, newly solded or newly grass areas, man, I don't know if that was thought of ahead of time, but it's, you know, 960,000 gallons, children out there, people out there, they're going to need it. It it it's tough. It's it's a tough choice. So, Jim, go ahead. Yeah, my name is Jim Ellison. I'm a maintenance director for school system and I can assure you that we do take our watering serious. Um if we stop the watering we are going to save water. If we don't by the practice we have right now and the laws right now we can go ahead and keep watering. So our fields cost a lot of money. We got our money from taxpayers. There's a good chance we'll lose these fields if that's what's decided if we can't get the winter rye to be watered. And we understand about water. We do everything we can. But you're kind of blackmailing us on this saying you're not going to water at these other schools and we'll do five mill. That's what you said. I don't know anybody. We're going to go by the law. That's why we're here to ask for permission. No, you said that you wouldn't do that over there in return. Will you tell me right now that you won't do that? Even if this is voted down. No, because I'm not going to lose everything. I'm going to fall. Water is everything. I I understand that. I don't think you do. I'm just saying by the law right now, we can keep watering the other field, the other areas, but we shouldn't be doing that. We shouldn't like on my yard. I don't have any sprinklers on there or anything. I'm not doing once in 14 days. I'm trying to stretch it out as far as I can, as far as possibly can. Understand that it's not just go ahead and do it. No, we do it to we're going to do it to

[1:06:15] keep what's alive there, our trees. But maybe we don't are right now. This is my opinion. We I think we need to I understand that and that's why we're here because Exactly. Right. We are asking to follow the law and we're asking for an adjustment and in return we're willing to give something up because the baseball fields or the athletic fields in general are a lot harder to bring back if we lose them in flowers or trees and the other areas. I agree with that. But who's next? Is ASU going to be up here in the next meeting asking for the same thing? Well, right now uh Okay, come back. Some people don't have to follow them. The water rules. Who's that? I'm just saying that Winky, you and Don, you and Y'all have anything to add to this? Uh, tell me what you're going to oversee again. A couple of baseball fields, the two high school baseball fields, the two high school baseball fields and softball and softball there. How many How many of those are there? Two softball fields or just one? There's two and two. Two baseball there. There's four fields complete. and and we we overseed every year. We've been doing it for years, right? And um we can't do it if we don't have the water. There's no sense in in buying the seed. It won't it won't take I think you're making a reasonable request. Uh I I we're all scared about running out of water, but uh I think we want to use our water that we have as long as we have it to to maintain as much as we can. And then if we have to haul in water to drink, we we just haul it in. But uh you know it we we know in Lano that they they they shut off all their water and then all their trees and landscaping died and then it it rained about 30 days thereafter and then you had the devastation. So I'm I'm sort of I'm sort of willing to bet on the come and and try to keep what we've got going and not have any kind of undue uh

[1:08:18] economic disaster in this town. We just hate to lose the fields because the fields are very expensive to put back and I understand we have to sacrifice and so we try to come up with a reasonable u sacrifice to keep the fields and some of it comes down to the safety of the children. Well, let's get down to a sacrifice. Cut half those fields. Give me something to give you something. You say how many fields is there total right now? Oh, we have to use our fields. All of them. Cool. Yes, sir. And not only do we do that, but there's a sacrifice. You just said you sacrifice fields, too. You're not sacrificing. We We all We all need We're giving up We're giving up the other areas in a possibility we may lose them other areas. We need to get to this mentality where we are going to sacrifice. People say they're going to sacrifice, but they're not really sacrificing. We need to sacrifice. We need to start. I understand that. and and we're willing to give up other areas. We may lose them, but you should give up the other areas anyways. Don, did you have anything to add to this? Yes, Mr. Dixon. Marty, can can you kind of check my figures here and see if my memory is anywhere close? If we get the the hickory coming, we'll have 9.3 million gallons coming through. We have a possibility. We have 9 million. Everything working perfect if everything's good to go. Okay. Right now we're using 11 about nine or 10 right now. And normally this time of year we use about 11. Yeah. Okay. You know, we've had some rain so it's down. Okay. So basically, we're at a 2 million gallon deficit if we don't have lake water and theoretically all we have is is our hickory water. Theoretically, yes, sir.

[1:10:21] Okay. Thank you. We're setting what about 15 months right now, Mr. Dixon? It's probably closer to 16 now. We we picked up a little bit in OC Fisher that we're going to start using. So, I'd like to leave it there. Well, I know, but you'll be drinking it next week. Johnny, I was just going to ask Jim, I know that you're willing to sacrifice the the the 5 million gallons you you could do away with if we allowed you this 960,000 gallons. That's what's calculated by last year. 5 million gallons. We calculate our utilities every month. Um, some of you have been previous board members. You've heard my reports monthly what we use. So, that's what we're basing it on is past history. So, if we don't uh give you this variance allowing you the 960,000, you're going to use 5 million. Is that the bottom line? I will continue what I've been practicing. But is that close to the right amount? 5 million. Wow, that's a lot of water. Oh, that's Man, you sure opened up a Pandora's box on this deal. That makes me sad. Well, I mean, really, it makes me sad to think that uh that we're going to lose our fields. And I know, but it's this is the only other option, so it's out of my control. The Yes or no? It is in your control. You can turn You can turn the water off. You should be turning that water off. I have turned the water off. It It's Let's vote. Let's vote on I'm just getting madder and madder. Well, take a chill pill. What's say, Marty? It's It's It's 5 million gallons over what time frame? 30 days. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. If someone wants to make a motion, if someone wants to move acceptance or denial of this, I'll ask for a second and then we'll take it to the public. I

[1:12:23] move that we deny this. I'm waiting for a second. Still waiting for a second. Go ahead. I'll second. All right, we've got a motion in a second. Let's open this up to the public now. Come weigh in on this one. You You gentlemen better stick around pretty close. State your name. You got five minutes. This wasn't what I was going to talk about, but this is something that I do on my ranch in Cono County. I do use winter wheat, winter r and food plots. I plant it. I have no irrigation down there at all. I try to get it in on 1 September and I've done really good on a wet fall. This is one of the wetest falls I ever saw. I tell you what, if it me, I think you ought to try to dry land it in there, Great Plains drills and stuff and fix that up. And uh I think this would be a good good time to take a chance on that because we are having a wet fall and uh and uh like I said I've got beautiful crops down there in Conole County. Faith of a mustard seed. Who else Bill Richardson I think that this should be approved for the school. Remember the the this is serving our children. The children of our community use those fields and use the recreation areas and uh get involved in the sports uh with the school system which is my son was involved in it and it was great. It keeps the children occupied and I think this this would be shown support to to the school system and to the children in the school system. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Anyone else in Can I answer that? Yes, sir. I support the kids 100%, but when those kids are thirsty and we don't have any water, who's going to be supporting them? That's why I'm standing up for this. I'm not gonna give in on this water situation. That's what I was voted to be in this position for. It's my number one thing. State your name. You've got three to five minutes. The name is Richard Bardo. And I mean,

[1:14:28] there's just no doubt in my mind that Mr. Fleming is is is right to a certain point, but Jim Ellison is right, too. Like the last person here talked about, he believing in helping the schools out. I just don't I just don't know which way to go on this because if you turn them down and you lose all that vegetation, you might end up with a second dust bowl in this country and it'll be right here in Texas again. Thank you. My name is Nathan Simpson and I think you should vote for them to do that. They're making a reasonable offer. They're willing to save 5 million gallons and only use about a million in times waters are tight. They are making a cut. But can I can I answer you? They should they should say the 5 million no matter what. That's I mean that's just common sense. The 5 million is off the table. Really? We're talking about 1 million until you change the law and the requirements. They have a right to that unfortunately. But they shouldn't. It's not right. They should. A lot of things should be done. But I see the city putting in irrigation pipes out there by the by the highway there on the loop. That's not the city. That's a state. Is that state? Who's going to be watering that? Where's that water coming from? Is it coming from us? I don't know. If I had to say it wouldn't be any, right? But they're making a reasonable offer. They're taking their assets and they're putting a priority on it like everybody should. Yes. And they should continue that throughout the year. Putting a priority. If they want to put a priority on them fields, that's their priority. That's great. They're saving us a lot of water in the long run. They're not smart. That's blackmail. No, that's the smart thing to do. They're being reasonable being blackmailed. I I can tell you right now,

[1:16:30] I I see how the votes probably going to go and you're going to get what you want. I'm voicing my opinion up here and and I respect your opinion also on this. And I I think I hate that we may lose those fields, but uh Lee Bell when he just said that about why why didn't they first of all, why didn't they put in this ry two weeks ago? There's a lot of things that should be done. Yeah. I mean, it should have been done two weeks ago. We get the laws in there to take care of it. Y'all got to change the plan. Let's move on. Okay. Let's move on. Anyone else? Any other opinions out there? Tell us what you think. Come on, Turner. Yes, my name is Jim Turner again still for current time and I am somewhat favorable towards having the school be able to take care of the fields. But I do not like this approach where they have coming up here and it does feel very much like blackmail. Just because a citizen can go out and water a certain amount doesn't mean that that's good for either the citizen or the community to take and go to the max all the time and abuse it. and threatening somebody, well, if you don't let me have my way, I'm going to take and do what I know I shouldn't be doing anyway, comes off as rather counterproductive, and I expected much better of our representatives from the school district. Thank you. Thank you, Turner. Come ahead, sir. You've already spoke once. Hang on just a minute, Bill. Let's see if anyone else wants to speak before you come forward. Anyone else care to speak? It's your turn if you want to speak. Okay, Bill thrice thrice minutes. Uh, Bill Richardson, I don't think this is blackmail. I think this is uh they're offering an alternative, you know, to what they generally do. They're going to change their plan. That's all they're asking for. Okay. They can legally water

[1:18:36] the rest of the area under under the present use and use five million gallons. What they offer was a tradeoff. It's not blackmail. It's consensus. It's it's uh you know compromise. Yeah. Thank you. I'm about to call for the vote unless somebody you want to make a parting shot. Yes, sir. Jim, while you're walking up, let me ask you real quick. Uh newly seated. It's It's a done deal. It's already been seated. It's have been No, it has not. Uh I have started prepping the fields and we're ready to go. But I don't want to invest especially taxpayers money uh on seed that u we know won't work. I can't predict the rain. But what I came back up here for is that obviously this is my first time talking at a council so I am a little nervous. So, I will say this. We as a school district and we as me, and I'll speak as Jim Ellson, we have no intention of coming here to blackmail anybody. We just thought you would like to know the numbers and what we could offer. We're basically trying to compromise. We're saying we if we lose our flower beds, if we lose some shrubs, you know, if we lose that type of area, it is not as hard to put back as it is to start to rebuild a fields if we wear out the grass that is there. And our fields are used almost every day. But we or Jim Ellson had no intention of coming here and trying to blackmail anybody. Thank you very much. This is this is for one month. The month of November. This is for once a year we do this. Okay. Question, Johnny. Jim, so the 5 million that you're willing to compromise on uh is it going to be you're not going to use them at all. You're telling us right now that you

[1:20:38] were willing to sacrifice. We are turning we are we will turn that area off. Hopefully, we don't know. We're taking a chance. Everybody is right. It may rain and we may not lose either one of them, right? But if I have to choose between losing the the playing fields and the other areas, I can recover the other areas quicker and cheaper than I can them fields. Do you know or does Ricky Dixon know how much you would pay for the n the 960,000 gallons he's going to use? I I do not know off hand, Michael. Any off top of your head? No, I'm sorry. I do not know because I kind of like what the condition of the grass you have at St. Angel Stadium how it's doing. So what I'm saying is maybe you need to look into the artificial uh type field. We are there are plans right now to put some artificial turf in right now being discussed at our our practice fields. Yes. And our uh practice band marching fields. So, we are trying to be proactive and uh we are only watering when we need to. Um, not only is it good for this city, but it's also good for the taxpayers that pays the utility bills. We monitor them monthly. And so, you're telling me you were you're going to turn off the faucet on the 5 million gallons that you would have used? Yes, sir. I don't want to lose both, right? So, I'm sorry it comes across that way, but I'm not really blackmailing you. I'm just using what's available to me and putting a priority on the fields. So, let's take a vote. Thank you. Motion has been made that we deny the request that the school district has made. It has been seconded. It's time to vote. All of those in favor of denial say I. I. I. All of those for allowing it say or nay. I guess who's who got one? Nay. Nay.

[1:22:45] Well, we got a three three on this one. So, I guess we'll deal with it next meeting. We had three nazs and three eyes. Mr. All of those in favor of denial, hold up your hand. to deny water. Deny the school district. All of those in favor of allowing the school district to water. That's a tie. That's a tie. So, we can't do anything with this one. Have to count Johnny twice. I don't know anything to do but just put this one on the next agenda when we have a seventh member and we'll deal with it again. We'll deal with it in two weeks. It won't work. It's too late to plant. We need to know that. Anybody want to change your vote? The hardest thing I had is just just it just sticks in my crow that you're saying that you'll stop watering over there if we vote this through. Well, you need to stop watering over there anyways. And you're shaking your head. No, let's I think it's time I think it's time that we realize the reality of the situation. We are in dire dire straits and if we don't get rain, we're going to lose a whole lot more in ball field. So, I'm not going to change my vote. Put it on the next agenda. Let's move on. Number 17. Number 17 is the first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 10 traffic control regarding the operation of golf carts. Ordinance of the city of St. Angelo, Texas. Amending chapter 10 traffic control of the St. Angelo Code of Ordinances by adding article 10700 operation of a golf cart on public streets. Regulating the operation of golf courts on public streets, providing for a penalty for the violation of this ordinance, providing for repealing savings and severely severability clauses, providing for an effective date of this ordinance. Chief Tim Bosquez, you are on, sir. Thank you. Okay. Uh, a while back you asked us to

[1:24:49] look at proposing an ordinance to uh address the golf cart issue. I believe the ordinance has been placed in front of you or you've had it. uh you can see some of the things that we had and really what I'd like for us to discuss right now is is basically we have some questions that we believe need to be clarified as far as what council is desiring before we proceed forward. Uh obviously there's some issues in regards to the amount on the permit would be something that uh that would need to be uh discussed amongst yourselves. Uh secondly, we would uh uh we're we feel that we need to inspect all of them whether you decide to charge them or not. So it's going to take up time from our department uh to inspect the golf carts. Uh there is also um I think we had a discussion on on allowing a government agency to to not have to pay those permits, but we would still have to do the inspections. Uh the other issue and I'm going to let Sergeant Kennedy come up in just a moment and answer some of the questions or discuss discuss some of the issues with you was uh uh a speed limit. You know, lowering the speed limit to to 30 mph would have to be the roadway that they can operate a uh a golf cart on instead of 35 instead of 35 moving that down to 30. Uh obviously for uh safety issues. Uh some of the other things that I think need to be discussed was the uh the age requirement as far as being inside the the golf cart and having a uh driver's license, valid driver's license in order to operate the golf cart. Now, we do understand uh that this is specific to uh the entities that you asked us to address, which was ASU, uh UPS, uh and the apartment complex, those type of things. Uh you also have the availability to adjust this ordinance to allow uh an area such as Bentwood to have a little more uh rain in regards to how they operate their golf carts in a particular area. And uh Corby, is there anything else that I need to touch on? Yeah, I don't know why you

[1:26:53] Okay. Yeah, he's back up. He's he's been handling he's done a good job with this and so it's legal. So, um questions, comments, I'm we're here. questions. Council Chief, on the the streets that are doing 35 now, what which streets are those if you would remind me? Well, most residential streets are going to be 30 mph or less. Uh I believe Avenue in is a is a uh 35 m per hour roadway. Uh Jackson is 40. And so, uh if if we if we allow ASU to operate that that vehicle, obviously we don't want them driving down Avenue in. Right. Okay. We don't want any golf carts on Avenue in, but they also have to cross Avenue in to get to the president's house. And so we're okay with them crossing a roadway at 35 mph zone, but not necessarily uh traversing on one. Yes. Okay, that's fair. We can write that in the ordinance. Yes. And and this is listed as as a first reading. Uh but I mean, if you like it as is, y'all can move forward. But I'm I'm I'm just we're here now really for me is to to discuss if there's any issues with this ordinance that need to be amended before we we actually start moving forward. Do we need to adjust this permit fee? That may be something we need to do. That's what I was going to ask. 20 sounds low to me. Yeah. And would y'all go out there or do they need to bring the carts to you? What's it would be easier and safer for us to send uh someone to the facility? Now, um again, I'm I'm not I'm not picking on ASU, but they are they are a government agency. So, you need to decide if they're going to be exempt from uh paying those uh those permit fees. But, uh I can't remember how many do they have. They have 62 golf carts that we would have to inspect every year. Well, Joe Munoz is out there. Can you answer that, sir? Well, I would like to expand that it doesn't just apply to Angelo State. It applies to Goodfell Air Force Base in the city of St. Angelo. If we're going to talk about the three governmental

[1:28:56] entities, the federal, the state, and the local municipalities. So, it doesn't just include ASU. So, when we're talking about inspecting golf carts, we're talking about raising the fee. We're talking about raising the fee for everybody. I like the way it starts out, and I appreciate the work the city attorney's office has done, the police department's done, section 10702, where talks about applicability. And a it says golf cars, utility vehicles owned and and/or operated for official government purposes by governmental employees are exempt from regulation of this code. And I just wondered, are we exempt or are we not exempt? And when we're talking about is the state exempt, the ASU exempt, is the city exempt, is Goodfilly exempt, or are we going to peacemeal it and try to uh include certain entities? I mean, it's either all or none is the way I see it. And that's why as reading through the through the ordinance, you see certain sections in there where it does again bring up the entities again. So it makes you wonder, are you exempt or you not exempt? I mean, it's that to me it's that simple. And if we're exempt, then we're going to comply with what the laws are the state of Texas and what we have to do there. But as far as the city ordinance goes, I mean, do we have to comply? And if we have to comply, then I'm sure the city and the Goodfield Air Force Base has to have to comply also. Would you be opposed to a $20 inspection fee? Would I be opposed as as Angelo State as a representative Angelo State? Look, as long as the city gets charged and Goodfellow gets charged, we're treated the same equally. I mean, I'm not opposed to anything. That's fair. Absolutely. Sure. And there's a services being Yeah. There's a services being provided. I mean, I'm I'm agreeable with whatever, you know, it applies to everybody. I was and just as a a comment, I was at the Riverfest. I saw a lot of city-owned golf carts that surely weren't inspected or weren't meeting code, but I'm not going to say anything about that. Let's not let's not go there. I'm glad you wi I'm glad you whispered that. Yeah. Glad you didn't. I will say our police department golf carts uh emergency alternate vehicles do meet those codes. Um and and really the exemption is is I don't think that we should issue an exemption for uh golf carts to not meet these requirements as we prescribed in the ordinance. But if it's your choice whether you want to

[1:30:58] exempt them from the permit fee, that's what I was trying to imply to you. I don't have a problem with the permit fee. I mean, there's a service rendered there and it's going to take time. Council, Don, Winky, anybody else want to talk to this? Yeah, I I have no problem with the fee. I think uh I think that's reasonable because of service rendered. Um I I think that's fine. I I think the the uh ordinance needs to to read, but I also think that our city ones need to comply with this just like everything else. I don't think there needs to be any exemptions. You have followed that, Daniel? I have no problem whatsoever. Johnny Chief, aren't most of these carts on camp or Joe Moss on campus anyway? I mean, sure, they travel to the president's house and uh on van event. I mean, sounds like they're mainly on campus anyway, or do they have to travel streets or very rare? I mean, they're only used for for uh maintenance and also our food service department uses them to travel in between uh cafeterias. They're used by our admissions office to give tours. Uh so part of the ordinance where it says no one under 16, things like that. I'm kind of are we exempt from that or we not exempt from that? I mean, so there's a lot of in between that I'm not sure exactly what applies to a state entity, what applies to a city entity or what applies to a federal. I mean, we have certain things that we have to have exemptions for or we won't be able to do tours or even our parking services who issue our tickets. I mean, they use golf carts. I can assure you right now that every golf cart that we have meets uh are you telling us that you have 16 year olds driving carts there on not driving carts but riding in carts or riding, you know, because we do give families tours and things like that. So, didn't I just talk about driving? Operating is what it says. operating has to have a valid driver's license. I I don't see the problem. We

[1:33:00] also have something in there about a passenger uh being over the age of 16 in those carts. Oh, see that's Oh, I see where the problem comes in. I thought it was just the operator had to be over 16. Okay, let me say something. I uh you know, this was a this was a deal that really needed to be addressed. Obviously, you know, we we have cited a few golf cart operators. Uh ASU, UPS, Southland AR, you know, if they were out there violating the law, we were writing the citations. Um you know, our focus is to try to provide you something that that you can work with as a council and and our priority is obviously public safety and there's always going to be risk involved when we allow this vehicle on a public roadway. And so that's why we have gone with some of these other things. Now, we did rely on another city that passed an ordinance that that we relied heavily on their ordinance and we were uh we liked a lot of their wording. Uh the 16-year-old thing is, you know, if they're doing business and they really need have, you know, are they going to have somebody under the age of 16 in there anyways? You know, probably not. But, u as far as ASU, I don't know what all they use their golf carts for. But, for us, ultimately, it's about public safety, and that's what we need to be focused on. Not all those golf carts are going to be used on public as far as roads and so forth. I mean, you you had 62 golf carts. You have a certain number actually that probably will be on on streets, right? I mean, every single one of them. The only time that uh they probably would use them on the road is especially during the semester. We have over 6,000 students and it gets really crowded uh driving down the main through a fair of the campus. And so, occasionally they might have to go down Vanavventor or something like that to avoid. Very rarely uh do they even go to the president's home in a golf cart. They have in the past traveled down campus avenue to get down to to the president's home, but very rarely do they do that. We use these pickups for doing something like that. Like I said, uh since in the mid 90s we've been doing this and and this is a good time to bring it up. We need clarification on

[1:35:01] this. So, I'm glad we're doing this. But, uh as far as ASU, I don't I can't speak for anybody else, but ours are just like the city. We use them for maintenance, you know, and try to maintain the campus. I can't see that that 16 16 year old would hurt you out there, Joe. I I I can't see that by keeping the provision that you have to be that no person younger than 16 years of age may be transport transporting a I don't see that that would hurt you at ASU. Well, we have we have families who Yeah. when they have tours, they have 10y old they have these limousine golf carts that have that can hold eight students or eight people and they bring their families and so as a result we give the entire family a tour of the university and so they're included in the tour also. That's about the only time you'll have young folks or young people on a golf cart. Well, I don't see that that being safe going across the street with kids in it. I I don't know. That's just me. I don't see I'd like to leave that in there, but I'm just one vote. Johnny, no, I was just going to say and I appreciate what uh Corby and the chief are, you know, the bottom line is safety, but uh I only feel that even when you're giving the tours, it's even before the the classes start anyway, the semester starts, so you've got very little traffic out there anyway. I I guess there's a lot of students, but what I'm saying is I don't want to tie your hands down. If I've got a 12-year-old brother that I'd like to bring along along along with my mom and dad, you know, that's where I think we're getting maybe too I don't know, we're just trying to slice and dice this thing just too thin. And but again, the bottom line is safety. I don't have a problem with 15 12 year old on the card. That's just me. Yeah, I don't either. We give tours every day at one Friday and even on the weekends if necessary. So there are tours ongoing all every day and again there are students there are families who have uh members of their family that are under you know that are 16 and under

[1:37:03] and so they jump on the cards too and we just we give everybody they want to keep everybody. Okay Rodney now this area is not going to include Bentwood anymore is it? Does this ordinance pertain to that? No. No. This ordinance pertains to to u pretty much to businesses. That's what that's what we're dealing with. You know, as far as or uh Bentwood, we still have the state law that that we can use two miles of a golf course, isn't it? Yeah. Is it two or one? Two miles within a golf course back and forth to the golf course having to play golf. No. Uh currently no age restriction, no Okay. Anything else like that? and and you can actually go in there and and say, you know, in the Bentwood area, we're going to let anybody and everybody drive a golf cart. Whether they're going to the golf course or not, that's totally up to y'all. We're just here to offer options. You know, one of the recommendations we made was to drop that speed limit from 35 to 30 mph on the roadway. Would that be the entire length of Avenue in Jump in? Well, uh, yeah. I mean, Avenue in I mean, uh, what, Avenue in? That's Johnson. In other words, in other words, we don't want the vehicles operated on Avenue in, right? Okay. They can cross Avenue. They can cross it. They can cross it to get to campus and and go to the president's house, but we don't want the golf carts up and down Avenue. And we can say that in our ordinance. Well, we say that when we drop the speed limit down at You have a problem with that, Joe? Okay. No, they're they're never on&M. I mean on on Avenue and they usually stay on either on campus or Vanavven to cross Jackson to get to their their shop wherever that may be and and uh and and Johnson Street I think it's 25 miles an hour anyways. Is it Maxwell Brandom and I actually drafted this ordinance. I worked with the city attorney's office and I just wanted to ask your clarification. and you discussed it earlier, but uh could you clarify as to whether you wanted to just inspect all golf carts, government or not, or whether it was just to not apply the permit fee to government entities, but still inspect them? I would I would say inspect all golf

[1:39:08] carts and charge everyone equally. Now, that would be my that would be my thoughts on it. If I've got if I've got a consensus, it'll follow me. All right. Thank you very much. And and along with that though, if council if there's if ASU has 62 golf carts and they only use 12 of them on the streets, the other ones on campus only, they can designate those and and yeah, that's what I was trying to get to. Also, yeah, you don't have to inspect every one of them, just the ones you're using off campus. I think that the committee wants to inspect all of when this came up order until they were all street legal. And so they've all become street legal. I think they with mirrors and reflectors and everything else necessary. So, they're ready to go except for inspections. But if he so chose next year not to do so, then he wouldn't have to inspect all 62 of I'm sure he's going to want everyone to expect. And council, I'd like to introduce you to the newest member of our staff who is Maxwell Brandom who's joined us as the municipal court prosecutor. So, we're very proud that he was able to um work on this ordinance with me. Thank you. Thank you very much. All right, council. We need some direction. Somebody take off. I want to hear what Corby had to say. Thank you. Um, one of the things that I want you to remember when we drafted this ordinance is as it's written, um, you know, when we started this process, we wanted it to be centralized around ASU. So, I don't want you to to just think about just ASU. The way it's written, if ASU is eligible to operate them, they can operate anywhere in the city. So that's why I wanted to change that that speed limit sign because I don't want them to be able to just because it's on Johnson around the school that's a 25 mile zone doesn't mean they can go all the way to Johnson's to the stadium because that's a 35. Uh I think that's where we don't want to be limited in scope. Yes, we want to allow this and under your direction we're going to but there are certain parts of the city that we don't want them operating because it's not safe. Um when we started our meetings and starting drafting the ordinance um

[1:41:12] one of the things that I was asked is there any streets that we don't want them to operate on? Well, of course there is, but to list them uh by name would take us forever. Um so limiting that to just the 30 mph zones I think will encompass all the intent that we want to do is to keep them off the major thorough affairs of Avenue N uh Nickerbacher Johnson's all those the ones that they may be 35 mileer zone but we still don't want them operating on those roadways. So don't be limited in scope to thinking that we're just thinking about just south and arms or just where UPS and the neighborhoods or just ASU. That's that's one of the things I want you to remember. I have one more question. Joe, have y'all ever had an accident where anyone was injured since you've been using these in the 90s that you know? They've had one accident that happened in June of last year. I don't think it wasn't a transporter, but he didn't get transported to the hospital, but I mean he Well, Joe took me on a tour at one time. I almost fell out, but uh I caught myself, so I think uh that was a near one. Uh, also what I' I'd like you to remember is on the inspection, of course, I'd have no doubt that that's all going to fall on my shoulder, so that's not a big deal. Um, but one of the things I want you to remember is, you know, whether you exempt or somebody, every golf cart that's going to be operating has to have a sticker. That way, my guys or anybody that's going to be enforcing this ordinance can differentiate the ones that are legally out there and the ones that are not. Right. Well, Joe, can't you get anywhere you need to to go without driving on You can drive on residential streets that's 30 and get anywhere you need to go, can't you? Yes, sir. Okay. So, that it's not a problem driving on Johnson. Okay. Just cross. Just cross. Just cross. Yeah. Okay. Well, that's that was my question. You don't have to drive on Johnson. You can get where you're going without it. I don't. So, you can live with the 30 mph speed limit. St. I I move that we accept the ordinance with the lowered 30 mph

[1:43:16] speed and but leave everything else as written. What about the age? We're going to have to take the exemption out. That the age Well, how about Yeah. See, that's a hard one. And along with that, the way it is now, as I read it, the the entities, the governmental entities are exempt from the fee. I think that we need to have everybody pay the fee. Yeah. We want to Yes. I Okay, let's let me change start over again. I I move that we accept the ordinance, change the take away the age limit, take it away, lower the speed limit down to 30, and everybody, no matter whether it's a government entity or just just a small business, pays the $20 inspection fee yearly. So, you you want to keep the 18 year old operator. Everything else is the same. So, you have to have a driver's license in there to to to operate it. But the any passengers could be of any age. I think that fits with what ASU wants. We've got a motion. We've got a second. Do we have any further council discussion on this? Marty, I get I I guess I do have a question. I'm I'm after thinking I'm I I support Rodney in the age um when we get below a certain age, they have to be buckled in uh on a on a and I and I hate to muddy the water at this point, but should I just shut up? You just did. Should we mirror state law? Okay. All right. Should we mirror state law in this as far as the height and the size of a child? Are there seat belts on these cars? That's my point. There is no provision in the state law that requires them to have seat belts. Period. Okay. Okay. Guess that question answered itself. Do we have comment from the public on this? This is your opportunity to weigh in. We have a motion that we accept the ordinance as written, but removing the exemption for government entities so that everyone

[1:45:20] pays. Removing the has to be 16 years old to ride. And what else did you do? The 30 mph zone has to be driven on 30 mph zones. Okay, that's been the motion. It's been second and I'm calling for the vote. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 60 on that, please. Who second that? Uh, Don. Oh, Don. Let's move back now to item number 10. Consideration of adopting documents as part of the 2009 comprehensive plan to include Lake Nazworthy subd district concept Lake Nur Nazworthy master plan implementation strategy. AJ Fber gateway planning principal Scott Pikov. Good morning council. I'll bring Mr. Polic up in a moment to give you a brief presentation just to kind of remind you of where we've been and where we're going. Um we are coming to you with a final document. You might remember that we started this planning process back around May of last year. And throughout that process, you all have been very involved and we thank you for your attendance at our public meetings and coming to speak with us on the on the matter. Uh we did go through a request for qualifications process for this back in 2012. uh had a selection committee that was uh made up of several different parties including some representatives from the city, the city council at the time, uh CODC, uh our parks consultant, Texas outdoor wildlife consulting was part of that effort and the late Nazworthy homeowners association. Uh this particular configuration of consultants was selected at that time and we were under contract and kicked off the project in December of 2012. Uh since then we've done a wide variety of public input which Mr. Policyov will summarize for you. You all again have attended some of those. We've had some one-on-one meetings with particular stakeholder groups. We've had some group meetings. We've had some community meetings that we've had some excellent attendance at as far as community meetings go. So it's been a very

[1:47:22] beneficial uh process for all of us involved as well to get that public input. And the plan document that you uh had in your background packet and which is also available on our website. We've had some people peruse that and call us with some questions and comments. Uh is really a formulation of all of that public input. The document that you see today is very different from where we started. And I think it's a good indicator of the willingness of people in St. Angelo to step up and give us some feedback on different things that they felt strongly about. And we did get a lot of that type of input. Uh running through the spring, we did, as I mentioned, have community breakfast. We had an evening meeting. We had some of those one-on-one meetings. We tried to identify every group that we could think of in the community that might have some stake in this effort. And we've had a lot of people that suggested other groups. And so, uh, Mr. Polikov can talk to you about the number of people that we've met with, but it's been pretty extensive. Uh, what we're looking for today, uh, you might notice that we have a two-part caption. We are looking at two different products that were the result of the contract that we, uh, were under with Gateway. One of those products that we required them to provide us with is what we're calling a subdist chapter. If you look through our 2009 comprehensive planning document, there are several subd districts that are identified as being unique pieces of the community that need special attention. Uh the council when putting this contract together felt that this was a specific part of the community that needed special attention and had not been recognized until this point. So we do have that product ready for you. We also have under B a second product and that is the uh master implementation strategy and planning document that is the uh significantly thicker of the two documents and we will not cover all of that for you today but we have made that available to you and staff members we are available if you have questions even after the meeting about specific parts of that document. We're happy to go through that with you. As far as an approval process, we have uh been before the planning commission at their most recent meeting, reviewed this presentation with them, reviewed the

[1:49:24] process. They've also been involved since the beginning and they unanimously recommended approval to the city council. So, I do have that recommendation for you today. We also met with the parks commission. We weren't able to get a quorum together, but we had three members that came and spent about two hours of time going through this with us, and they had some great comments and also indicated they were very supportive of the document as well. And so with that, I will uh bring up Mr. Polikov, our principal with Gateway Planning. He's going to go through again a brief overview of the two documents that we're bringing to you today. The caption is written in such a way that it allows you to take action, which would amend the current comprehensive plan by adding these two pieces. And so with that, I'll have him come forward. Mr. Polikov, mayor, members of the council, I'm going to give you five minutes. Oh, you said 10 out there. And if you're not through in 5 minutes, then I will ask the council if they will allow you another five minutes. So you could probably get 10 minutes, but you can talk on this for an hour because I've been in two meetings where you have. So we're going to start with five, then you're going to ask the council for an extension of five and then you're going to be through. Yes, sir. Fair enough, sir. No, that's great. Okay. But I but I do want to say this is a good news uh story and uh and and I want to declare victory with you. Uh, I think this deserves at least five minutes. This may be the most important issue before you today, and you've got a lot of issues before you, but the long-term preservation and opportunity with Lake Nazworthy is your gem and your jewel. And you've got a lot of important neighborhoods out there and business interest. And in that regard, we focused on the issue of linking both tourism and the neighborhoods. And I think we've met that balance. There were some concerns about redeveloping everywhere around the lake and I'll show you a map in a sec that contains that. So that this is just a very focused set of opportunities and that's all this is is this is a recommendation and a pathway for opportunities. You're not committing to anything today. You're actually just putting the framework in place. uh

[1:51:27] you're telling the neighborhoods and the markets and the staff what their options are so that you can have rational discussions down the line when opportunities present themselves. Uh in terms of the deliverables, the uh modification of the comprehensive plan and the thick planning documents you have before you has now been completed. What we would like is if you adopt the plan today is we'll then work with your staff on potential zoning reforms, which I think is something you all desperately want so that these cases when they come before you, there's a a better alignment in the regulatory environment with the desires of the neighborhoods and the developers proposing projects and also a discussion about potential catalytic projects to bring in some opportunities that are referenced in the plan. Uh, in terms of public participation, we've met with virtually everybody that has an interest in the property and in the lake and in the neighborhoods. Uh, we think this plan reflects what the uh, KOA folks like, what the business folks like, what Angela State wants, what the Air Force wants, what the property owners want. Uh, this reflects a lot of collaboration amongst your different staff members and your different departments. And I want to underscore how important this is. This gives your city staff the opportunity to to collaborate across departments to prioritize asset preservation at the lake. That's something you didn't have before this piece of work was done. You had a lot of people working on a lot of different pieces of the lake. This gives the staff the ability to work together more efficiently and more effectively uh in order for government to deliver what it does more efficiently, which I know is important to this council. Uh bottom line is that as you can see from this map we had scores and scores of people give us feedback and I'm going to jump ahead. This will presentation will be available for the web mayor. Uh but you know one of the key quotes we had was we see a carefully planned public private partnership that results in a functional blend of improved lake access and supporting infrastructure for residents, open space, green belts and selectively

[1:53:29] approved economic development activities that do not negatively impact existing recreational activities. Uh and I think that we have met that standard terms of the final outreach. We met with the public. We had the planning commission meeting as AJ said, the parks board meeting and I I believe and and uh uh I I think you'll see council member Fleming I think can attest to this. I think there's very strong broad support for this analysis and this project. Now uh bottom line is there are some strong resource management issues out there in terms of erosion control and water issues. We see this as a parallel track. We don't think that those are all going to be resolved, but if you adopt this plan and encourage the proper investment in the lake and you keep supporting the activity out there, much of which is nationally recognized now. You have tourists come to this region and spend money because of the lake. I think that'll even create a stronger constituency for getting at the tough issues of erosion control and lake management. And I think those are complimentary opportunities. People have said don't do anything else until we solve those problems. We think this plan supports a stronger coni constituency so those problems can be solved. I'm not going to go through all the market analysis. This is all available to you. I'm going to jump forward to a specific map. This map I think clarifies some concerns. As you can see, the existing city parks are in the dark green. The existing residential neighborhoods are in the yellow. They're substantial. The only proposed mixeduse commercial development are in the two red locations and they're actually already areas that have been developed. They just are in disrepair, the power plant area and the marine area. We are not proposing substantial development around the lake when instead what we're proposing around the lake are things like birding centers uh and for example enhanced trail

[1:55:31] systems and for example low impact trail heads and more bathrooms and parking. 90% of the improvements were suggesting around the lake or just enhancing what's already there. And I wanted to reinforce that. And I think after we had the public meeting and mayor, I know you were there and others. I think now that we were able to get that word out, I think the concerns by the neighborhoods that we're going to overwhelm them with commercial development has now been dealt with. And in fact, the locations where there is demand. I paid $300 for a hotel room last night. Uh, and there's extensive analysis in this document that reinforces that. uh having a great resort hotel and destination and restaurants at the marina is just taking advantage of what's already there and not asking to put any neighborhoods at risk because of development around the rest of the lake. I want to also focus on next steps. We do think that there are some opportunities that need to be uh facilitated and we don't want to try and do everything that's in this plan. So, one of the things we want to work with you and staff on going forward in the city attorney's office. Council, may you have five more minutes? I I want him to keep Yes. Five. Five. Five more. All right. Down here. Go ahead, sir. I'm I'll give you some time back. One of the things that we want to talk about or what are those areas that you feel are important to move forward. Would you like to receive proposals for a resort hotel and and enhanced marina? Should we enhance the east side of the lake for a birding center? uh you know, we need to work with you on some priorities. And so, uh once you adopt this plan, hopefully today, we can work with the staff on those questions. And the other thing is is that we want to move aggressively into the modification of the of the zoning standards so that we don't have these conflicts anymore when a proposed development comes forward. We want to make sure that you have the plan and you have the tools on the books that are aligned so that you can say to the marketplace and the development community and to the neighborhoods, we know what we want. You have the tools to

[1:57:33] deliver the development that we want and if what you're proposing doesn't align with the plan and doesn't align with the tools and the zoning ordinance, then we're not going to move forward with that project. And I think that gives you certainty of outcome. That gives the market certainty of outcome, which is important for financing projects. And most importantly, it gives the neighborhood a sense that they're not going to have to come down to council and fight every proposal because you already have on the books the tools necessary to elevate the game of the developer and the applicant to make sure that they're bringing forward only the projects that already make sense that are reflected in this plan. I'm happy to to uh give back the time and answer any questions. I know you have a very busy agenda. Uh AJ and Jeff are going to post this presentation on uh the website. Uh it's already uh in PDF format. Uh the plan is on the website. We've met with you individually and walk you through the details. This is a business plan for neighborhood preservation and long-term investment for particular locations that make sense. But most of all, I think it's the best balance of a regional destination and neighborhoods, and that's tough to do, but I think we accomplished that. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, sir. Rodney. Rodney, this is in your area, so I'm going to turn it over to you, sir. Well, I've been for this, and I've gone to all the meetings. I've met with the the lake residents out there, and I think the majority of them are for this. Um, this is just a game plan. All of this is is um a very expensive game plan, but it is a game plan. It doesn't mean that we're going to put a hotel out there and it doesn't mean that these things are going to happen. What we're doing is we're saying where the spots are, he just said, where the spots that we they could do this at and if we do get some developers and this could help us possibly find developers because we are receptive to putting things there. So, I'm I'm totally in favor of this. I think we need I if we did if we didn't accept this, that's the problem I'm going to have because we've just paid $350,000 for a game plan that we are not going to accept. Well, we had all of our former

[1:59:37] council members that were on the board that accepted this company to put together our game plan. So, they basically hired our coach. This is our coach. He's saying what to do. Let's do it. Do we need a motion on this? We don't have any public input. Oh, yes. You get the opportunity. I move that we accept the gateway plan as presented. I'll second that. Would be both both the the uh A and B. A and B. A and B. Yes. Okay. There is a motion. There is a second. Is there any further council discussion on this? Now, I'll open it up to the public. Well, uh state your name and you got three to five. say before I'm Lee Bell Farm branching uh the high plains of Texas firming bas here I have worked with all kind of things uh the thing I disagree with them uh mostly on is uh the public input how this debacle got started was Mr. Paul Alexander, he wants to bring it forth. Well, we had three big meetings with Paul and the Lake Nazary homeowners residence about spending 350 or $60,000 and we said not only no, but hell no. My gosh, that kind of money. I mean, now the study get I like their maps and stuff. Of course, I think we got them nearly all down at at city hall. We can get our maps. Maybe that's where he got them. I don't know. But anyway, I'm don't have a big problem with the study. I think it's a pretty good study for about $35,000. Now, once you pay 10 times too much for it, well, yeah, I guess uh need to improve it. That maybe make us not look too stupid, but sometimes I wonder am I the only one that sees the elephant in the room here? We have got this B. Now, Paul, when he got ready to bring this down here to the city council, we have had three meetings and we've been dead set against it. And he comes down and talks to the city council, which I

[2:01:40] don't think hardly any of y'all were on there. And, uh, he says, um, uh, yeah, I've talked to the Lake Nworthy homeowners. He didn't tell you. I mean, he act like this debuggle he was, uh, that we were all in favor of it. And I'll disagree with Rody some that I don't believe that everybody's saying this is wonderful and nice and I'm sure it's probably going to get approved anyway, but there's a whole lot more people against this than than you think. And one of our biggest things is our infrastructure and I agree with them about, you know, working on existing things that are out there. I think that's one of the best things. But I think as far as getting your cart in front of your horse, uh, you sure need to do that with infrastructure before you start planning these other things or spending $350,000 on a study. Uh, one thing is I would say this whole outfit depends on water. And uh, we don't have any water. I mean, uh, have y'all thought about putting a dirt track out there? I mean, that's maybe what we need, a dirt track instead of something to do with the water. We don't have any water. Our evasive weeds, I've had a chemical license since I was for the last 50 years. Uh going to these continuing uh education seminars that we have to go to to maintain our chemical license. We have the invasive weeds which are cedar um um salt cedars uh mosques uh prickly pair and uh we haven't had them like this 50 years ago. We hadn't had them like this 25 years ago. They have covered up our waterways. If the good Lord continues to bless us with rain, uh we need some of that stuff uh looked into. We need a study on that. Not a $350,000 study. sound like Mr. Gateway representative want to have his hand still in our pocket to help us go along with this when we may need to turn into like I said a dirt track or what out of

[2:03:43] there but I'll leave y'all with this is uh like I said just a whole bunch of this I disagree with about 90% of what he said I think he's got a pretty good study and a pretty good plan but I leave you this where and how are we going to get the water we need to work on our waterways, clearing them out. We need to see about a hole in uh in South Pool. Uh we are way far off from being anything like this. I would take this thing, I would table it, put it in a drawer, put a piece of tape on there and say, "Take that back out and look at it when Twin B is half full." Appreciate your comments. And that was that was a 61 vote when it was passed because I voted against it. Said the same thing you did. Yeah. And if you'll know that uh uh Mr. Paul Alexander's no longer here and you vote against it and you're our mayor, but you know it's it's still it's still rule of law here and it's four votes. Four votes is what happened. So I believe that if we had had the opportunity, see Paul moved it up one deal. We were all ready to come down here and voice our opposition to this, but he moved it up when we and so he got it in there. It kind of stinks kind of dead skunk. We're not going to solve any problems in 213 if we still keep dealing with those in 211. Who else? State your name. You got three to five. Nathan Simpson. I'd like to thank uh Rodney for coming out and listening to the homeowners. And uh I think we need to approve the plan, but also we need to put it on hold till we use some of the storm water runoff fees to improve the area out there and take care of that runoff and make those improvements that he also said need to coincide with. Right. They need to go first. But hold on one second. Uh, we need to prove the plan though, just kind of to lay down the foundation, you know, and right to Lee's comments, I would I would have been with Dwayne on that $350,000 study. That was, you know, no offense. I'm sorry. I It's a beautiful study, but I just I couldn't have made

[2:05:46] myself vote for something like that at all and have a good conscience on that. But that being said, it's done. It's paid. It's paid for. It's in place. It is a good plan. We do we have as a council and as a city, we do we have to move forward. Lee did say one good thing in his comments there. The infrastructure is very very important about what we got to get done and what you're saying also. So, we have to, you know, as our as our city planners come into effect, they need to be telling the new developers, this is what you got to do and everything. And I I have no fear that they're going to be doing those things. They're going to look at, like I said, the storm water runoff fee. I asked about that cuz we have a problem with it coming through our yard. We got a anywhere from a 6 in river to a foot deep going between us and the neighbor out through our boat slip. Yeah. Water runoff and he says, "Well, we can't do it for flood control." And I'm saying it's runoff control, right? Thank you, buddy. Thank you. Yes, sir. My name's Ray Van Stockham. I've been a practicing attorney for a number of years. I was a judge, state court judge for 27 years. I retired here to San Angelo by choice. I went out to the lake when I first came here in 1994 and just fell in love with it and leased a lot at that time and the first time he'd let us buy them, I bought it and I built a home out there in 2005 and we love living out of the lake. I want to preserve that. This study does that. I urge you to approve the study. Uh it gives us it gives you the tools you need to say no to a developer that wants to put the strip club out there someplace or the big bar uh in a certain area. We've got home a lot of people have invested a lot of money out there. They're retired out there and they'd like to keep their homes nice and the neighborhoods nice and this will do that and I really urge your approval on it. Thank you, sir. Thank you. And it is just a plan. Nothing is set in concrete. This is a plan. It's a guideline. We need to remember that. Any other comment from the fuller? Come up, Tad. State your name. You've got three to five, sir. All

[2:07:49] right. I'm Tad Logan, uh, president of the Lake Nazworthy Homeowners Association. And, uh, I am I'm also, of course, uh, at the planning meeting, I was sitting here going, well, I I want this approved, but not implemented. And I've kind of cons I've changed my mind. Basically, we've got to implement this thing before we can start working on capitalization of the plan as it is. Uh we as homeowners out there are greatly concerned about the storm water runoff. Uh the problems we've got with existing shorelines, the water quality, and if we're going to even have a lake. And uh of course these need to be the primary issues looked at, but they're not going to be looked at until we implement a plan uh so that we've got areas where certain things can happen, certain things can't happen. We understand that. We do want y'all to go ahead and get this plan in the in the works so that we can set up 20 and 30 year plans for continued maintenance or whatever we need at this lake. But it is a gym. We've all got vested interest out there now. Uh there's a lot of us and uh we want to see the water quality maintained. We also want to see water there. That's the main thing. At some point when we figure out what Hickory is going to do, we'd like to see that uh hopefully, you know, there's some implementation to keep this lake full or to some level. Uh because twin but might not exist again. Uh so what are we going to do if that alternative has to be faced? I think that's something we've got to really look at in the next 12 months. But anyway, thank y'all and uh we do like would prefer implementation. Well said, Ted. Anyone else from the public care to speak to this? Come up, Bill. State your name. You've got three to five, sir. Okay, Bill Richardson. I believe this should be approved. And I think the cost maybe a lot of people

[2:09:53] don't realize the amount that it will cost to do the research that went into this plan. and the compilation together all the information and put it together in a in a plan and uh write it all up and and put up the maps and the different uh charts and displays that the Gateway Planning Group has put together. I think they've done a really good job and I think this would be really good for the city and for the area. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Anyone else, Mr. Mayor? Yes, sir. I just wanted to add uh I too uh agree with this plan. I voted for this plan years ago, you know, however many years it's been. Uh, and the bottom line was for them to bring us something, an idea of what to do with the Lake Nazworthy area. Thinking about those folks out there, thinking about the city as a whole to bring more tourism out there. You know, that was the bottom line. $350,000 later, was it too much? Yeah, some some would argue it is. Uh, some would argue that $9 million we spent on the convent river was too much or the $15 million on the city hall was too much, but it needed to be done, you know, and I think it's just a, you know, it's just a feather in our hat that we're ret trying to revitalize the city. I am pro lake Nazworthy. I've always wanted more people from out of town to come and spend their money and go boating and buy gasoline and go to restaurants, which benefits us. So, uh, was it too much? I it could have been, you know, uh it was it's a fantastic plan. It's an idea. It's a like they're saying, it's bringing us something to the table for us to to run with. So, I appreciate Gateway and uh Rodney, thank you for uh supporting it and uh and move on from there and see we can just uh better uh equip ourselves for for that area. And that was that was the bottom line. Thank you, sir. Thanks. Any other comment from the public? Any further comment from the council? Then we have got a we've got a motion on the floor that says we approve both A and B as presented. We have a second. We'll call for the vote. All of those in favor say I. I. Any oppose?

[2:11:57] Nay. Put a 60 on that one. Thank you very much. Let's move on now to item number 11, which is the first public hearing. And can No, that's the one we pulled. That one's gone. Never mind. I'm going to put it back on the consent agenda where I was trying to put it before. That one has been pulled. Number 11 has been tabled. So, we'll move to number 12. First public hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12, exhibit A, zoning ordinance of the code of ordinance, city of St. Angelo Z1336, SAS Texas Properties LLC. An ordinance amending chapter 2, exhibit A of the code of ordinances, city of St. Angelo, Texas, which said, "Exhibit A of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations, use districts, and the zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning classification of the following property to wit. An unadressed track located approximately 800 ft south from the intersection of Umble Road and North Bryant Boulevard. Property specifically occupies a Lakeside Gardens edition, block one, lots 28 through 31 in northwestern St. Angelo. changing the classified zoning classification from heavy commercial CH to general commercial CG district providing for severability and providing a penalty. Mr. Hines, you have the floor, sir. Mayor, before Jeff starts, I wanted to just we recently received a notice and he'll be leaving us in a couple of weeks. Uh, I want to thank Jeff. I think he's done a great job for the city and we appreciate all the the work he's put into it. you've seen his presentations and I I think what we we've been very blessed to have him on board with us and we wish him the best uh in his future endeavors and uh thank you Jeff for all you've done for us. You have you guys didn't do anything wrong. You're cool. Um just I I took an opportunity to move back by family um in the Midwest. So you guys are fine. I like it. I'll come back and visit. Well, I thought you were joining the Dallas Cowboys. No. Yeah. No, unfortunately they cut me. But um you have maturity and you've done a you've done very well, Jeff. I I compliment you, sir. Good job. Thank you. Uh we sent 19 notifications for this particular request. I know time

[2:14:01] is of somewhat of the essence here, so I'll try to get through all these before lunch here for you. Um this is the subject property here. Here's a map of the notices that we did receive. The one in favor and one in opposition. Uh the property is uh somewhere near Lake Drive, Umble Road. 29th Street is much further south on the property. The aerial photo is a much better depiction. Uh the circle at the end of Aaron Street is probably the most um the closest residential existing at this time. Uh currently the property is vacant. A billboard sits just north of the self-service warehouses on this particular on the property to the south. Uh it is zoned heavy commercial and I'll get into why you know it would be a good to. Uh this is the vision plan map for the area. The majority of the parcel is indeed calling for commercial development with a small remainder in the back calling for neighborhood. Um it's unaccessible at this time. So, we would urge the council and planning commission took this action as well to zone the property. You know, one one zoning designation to avoid confusion into the future. Uh just some aerial photos looking west from the property of the golf course looking north on Highway 87 from the right of way heading out of town and then south from Highway 87 on that rightway looking back in town towards the Walmart. Um you may approve this, remand it back to the planning commission or uh deny the zone change. staff did recommend approving this and the planning commission recommended unanimous approval at the October meeting as well and I can get into it further if there's any questions. What what was the the objection that the opponent had? Uh they wrote in about just development of the property in general somewhat. There was just you know anything happening there. But if you left it the way that it is kind of from the staff perspective, heavy commercial allows for open storage, junkyards and things of that nature that general commercial would not allow for. So we're actually lessening. Yeah, you're lessening the zoning. It'll be much better on the neighborhood. Marty, this is in your area. You take it, sir. The he he he was opposed to it because of looking back into that area. Do do we u do we require the uh the owner of the property to do anything for and I I know in the past there's been fences built and stuff to if if that area becomes unsightly, do do code would work any

[2:16:06] unsightly kind of junk violations. A privacy fence is required. It's, you know, not much. There's a 10-ft separation required for any of the buildings that would abut the residential zoning there. Um, but generally speaking, the general commercial allows for much lesser intensity uses and, you know, better things like retail that would be much more beneficial to the neighborhood than the heavy commercial zoning would allow for. Okay. And and I guess my other question was u u they at one time there was a request for for an RV park or or correct. This is a different group. The RV park was tabled uh by the planning commission and never reached council. This is a the property is transacted as a result of that falling through. Um they indicated on their application to us they're looking to do retail sales and service on this property. Okay. All right. I I I think it would be a benefit to the area. I move approval. Second. Okay. We do have a motion to approve as as presented with a second. Do I have further council consideration on this? Open it up to the public. This is your opportunity if you want to speak either for it or against it. Well, Johnny's not here. Let's take a vote. If it's a tie, we'll wait till he gets back and do it again. We have a motion on the floor to accept it. All of those in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 50 on it. All right, Jeff. We've got the next one will be item number 13, which is Did you say I? I said I put 60 on the pin. First public hearing number 13 in consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit A zoning ordinance city of ordinances city of St. Angelo Z1334 the river St. Angelo Church Inc. An ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit A of the code of ordinances city of St. Angelo with set exhibit A of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations. Use districts in the zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classific classification of the following property to width. 50/50 Lake Drive located approximately 800 ft southwest of the intersection of North

[2:18:07] Chadburn and Lake Drive. More specifically occupying the Julier Bailey subdivision being 4.384 acres out of the south part of block 8 lot 2 and northwest St. Angelo. Changing the zonic classifications from ranch and estate R& general commercial heavy commercial CJCH to general commercial CG district providing for severe ability providing a penalty. Mr. Hines, we'd sent 11 notices for this particular request. One was returned in favor, none were opposed. Uh this is in the similar area of town again. So that's kind of the theme for today. Um whoever's district that is, I guess I'm picking on you. Sorry. Um but generally speaking, this is the property here. Uh, North Chadurn Street runs just north of the property. Lake Drive is to the west of the property. Um, the property is highlighted here. This line across the map indicates the portions that are currently zoned commercial. That was done in the 50s and 60s when a 300T strip on either side of Chadburn was designated the CGCH zone. Um, and the rest of it has remained ranching estate since the city first adopted zoning regulations in 1954. Um, and Ariel, the photo, it's currently um, has a church on the property. There is a uh the vision plan is calling for a neighborhood center and commercial development on this particular property. Here's a notice uh where the notice and favor had come from was right across the street of the property. There's some aerial photos looking north uh looking south on Lake Drive and then looking east at the subject property. At one time there was a church there and it may still be you know going on at this time. Essentially the applicant had come to staff and requested the zone change to go ahead and you know potentially sell the property to someone else. um without the zone change essentially um it has to revert back to the ranch and estate zoning. So the building would have to be used as a house without this zone change. So they're looking for some flexibility. They'd come in and requested heavy commercial at first, but after meeting with staff decided general commercial would be a much better fit for the area and we'd concurred. Um I can go into this further if you'd like if you have any questions. Marty, this is yours. U so so the church is going away and we're just cuz it the original permit was tied to it being a church.

[2:20:10] Correct. Correct. That's how it got to be that's how it got to be a non-residential use. Um the churches require conditional uses in residential zoning districts. So that's how it got to be there at this time. And then uh they'd indicated to us they're looking to do something different or sell the property potentially. So they wanted to get it zoned commercially for a little more flexibility. Okay. Um I move approval. Second. And you had no opposition to this from there was no opposition. No, none that was received in writing. There were some folks that came to speak at the planning commission and the minute record was in the background report, but they had uh worked out all that general commercial seemed to be amenable to everyone. There was this concern about kind of oil field and those types of businesses being on this tract and the general commercial wouldn't allow for that type of use. Okay. Any further council consideration? There were uh within the 200 yard radius, there were folks there, correct? I mean, I'm one map that doesn't show anything, but yeah, there's there's a couple houses in this area then. um a residence here and then a more of a retail establishment in this area. Do we have comment from the public? This is your opportunity. If not, we have a motion to approve as presented with a second. And I will ask all in favor to say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 70 on that one. Number 14. 60. Yeah. No. Seven. 60. First public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance authorizing abandonment of the complete unimproved 60-oot wide public rideway for Nelson Avenue extending north for a distance of 485 ft from ERA east of block three lots 8 through 13 of the Goodfellow Court Annex and immediately west to property outside the city limits and an abandonment of a complete 13t wide rideway for an alley extending west of Nelson Avenue and directly north of the Goodfellow Cord annex block three and adjacent to the entire northern length of lock 8 of the same subdivision east and s in east San Angelo. An ordinance providing for the abandonment closing of the following unimproved street segment. an unimproved alley segment to wit. A complete unimproved 60 foot wide public rideway

[2:22:13] for Nelson Avenue extending north for a distance of 485 from Mera Street east of block three lots 8 through13 of Goodfellow Court Annex and immediately west to property outside of the city limit and an abandonment of the complete 13t wide ride ofway for an alley extending west of Nelson Avenue and directly north of the Goodfellow Court Annex block three and adjacent to the entire northern length of block 8 of same subdivision St. Angelo authorizing the conveyance therefore thereof to the abuing property owners providing for the terms and conditions of abandonment and conveyance and providing for the mayor to execute and deliver a quick deed to the abuing property owners. Mr. Hines we sent 13 notices for this um one was received in favor and we did receive uh one in opposition recently after the packet went out. So I'll share that with you now. Um so the slide is slightly wrong. Uh the one in opposition, there may be a little confusion with the request and it was sent out and I'll elaborate on that a little bit further, but this is at the fur uh the far eastern segment of the city. Um here's the good fellow court annex block 3. It's an alleyway to the north of lot 8. Uh but and then the the right of way for Nelson Avenue just uh west of the city limit line at this time. Um essentially it's an unimproved right of way. Um, as a as a result of this request, the applicant has indicated they'd like to, you know, close this rightway and put some type of house out there. It's zoned residentially at this time. Um, they think that the property would be better used as part of their private property. Um, given the current status and the lack of improvement of Nelson Avenue, staff had tend to agree with that. Um, the vision plan is calling for a neighborhood in this area. And here's a notice of the one that had received in opposition or in favor. Then you have the opposition one. So, if you look at the number for that, I forget what it was, but you'll be able to figure where that figure out where that was on the map here. Um, but essentially, here's where that right ofway is. Um, it's unless you have a truck, it's probably not advisable to drive down it. Um, you can see looking south from what it is, a neighborhood at this time. And then the property in the county at this time

[2:24:15] outside of the city limits. Um, also received notice they do own some property within the city limits and did not object to this. Um, they still do have access to the property even as a result of if you were to recommend approving this. The planning commission recommended approval of this and I can go into it further if you'd like. Johnny, is this yours or is this yours, Rodney? It's not mine. It's mine. It's yours, Don. Okay. And I'll move for approval. Okay, I'll second that. Do we have any further council? I just have a We would ask that you adopt these uh conditions so that we don't create lots that don't have access to an approved rightway. They replat all the property into one lot so it accesses off of Aerys Street and then uh storm water has indicated an easement for water conveyance through there would be required as well. We'd ask you to adopt those conditions with it as well. Yes. Would you add that? Some move. Will you that again? Any further council consideration? Johnny, I just wonder what that red line meant that kept on popping up in in every slide. There's that red line. City limits. This one right here. I didn't think it was. Is that city limits? Yeah, the city limit line is right there. Wow. I thought it we can go back a little further, but yeah, it is the city limit line. There's a little kind of hole in the city here where it is not incorporated at this time and this is on the edge of that. Okay. Further comment from council. Have any comment from the public on this? Anyone wish to speak either for or against it? This is your opportunity. If not, I have a motion on the floor that we accept this as it has been presented. It has been seconded. All in favor say I. I. Opposed. Nay. Put a 60 on that one. Number 15. Consideration and possible approval of a recommendation by the city of St. Angelo Development Corporation COSDC to amend COSDC FY214 budget by reducing account number 410580 travel and lodging from 18,000 to 10,000 and increasing account 415310 city services by $10,000 to address the cost of public information office staff

[2:26:18] services provided to Kosa DC is approved by council in August of 212. Brother Steamman, you have the floor. Thank you. Good morning. Um, take me just a second here to get the slide up. We can do this uh either item by item or we can hit the items that were uh changed. I'll leave it up to council. Uh, however you'all would like to do it. Just like talk about the items that been changed. Okay. Uh first of all uh account number 410580 admin and travel admin travel and lodging which is basically uh uh an expense uh in support of training or off off site training. We had a budget originally of 18,000 uh that's been the budget for that item for a number of years. We looked at what we spent uh last year and I think we spent about 7,800 8,000 something like that on it. Uh so the board decided we would reduce that one from the 18,000 down to 10,000. Um and council may recall there were a number of items that uh that you asked us to take a look at. That one they they uh agreed to reduce by $8,000 under the city services contract. This was the increase um a little over a year ago. In August of 2012, council uh and this was the previous council approved uh adding $10,000 to the staff services contract to cover the cost of the public information office staff having to cover DC meetings uh providing us with uh uh CDs so that we could prepare our minutes and what have you. And so uh I hadn't added that to the budget at the time that I brought this to you before. The budget office pointed out to me that we needed to add this in and so we've added that $10,000 to it and the board approved it. And this is just to this is a reimbursement to the general fund for the cost of public information office

[2:28:22] has nothing to do with the public information office budget itself. Uh and that was everything else. Uh the board looked at and felt comfortable with the budget as we had it. So those are the two items we're proposed. Mr. would you like to take this one, sir? Yes, sir. Bob, the mayor directed you to uh take this budget back and scrub it and cut some stuff out of it. And uh here it comes back more bloated than ever. I'm I'm distressed about that. Your microphone, sir. instructions were your instructions were to cut this budget, not bring it back with more expenditures than were there. And I can see lots of things that could be cut out of there. And again, as I said, I I took all of those items to the Coast DC board. Yeah. We discussed them one on one, I'm sorry, individually, one at a time. And this is what these are the changes that they came back with. Well, this is disappointing at the very least. And I've got several that I'd be willing to take a shot at cutting out. I don't know if anybody else around here other than than me and the mayor like to cut, but uh there's some items that could come out of there for sure out of a several million dollar budget. Would you like to remand this back to Kosad and let him take another shot at it? Yes, I would. And I'll give them some suggestions of my own again. I think that may I may I add something? I know that KOSA DC and the KOSA board themselves are very I mean I think they're very in tune with with what's going on within this budget and they have a pretty good understanding of what those needs are within that department. Uh it may be something at this point that um I know if it goes back to them uh as far as a discussion that they had and and looking at these numbers they felt very strongly that these these were actually numbers that were absolutely needed in the budget. That's correct

[2:30:24] sir. Okay. So remaining and sending that back at this point basically we're saying well we don't agree with what you guys have sent back to us. Uh we want you to trim it at this point. Is there anything specifically that you are aware of that you would like to give instruction on to trim off the this budget term? Is there something inside something that you know that perhaps I don't know? Okay. You want to hear them right now? That'd be nice. That way they'd have some uh some good direction. Either that or we can we can vote as to whether we want to remand it and if we get the votes then we can remand it back with suggestions or we can if we don't get the votes somebody can make the motion to accept it as is. So you want to make a mo if you want to make a motion I'll second it to remand and let's take a vote and see what people say. Yes. I'll make a motion to remand this for f future work and and to follow the instructions of this council which were to cut the budgets some more. I'll second it. Any I guess now we can take a vote. If we get a vote to remand it, then it will be remanded. At which time Mr. Wlaw can tell them what his suggestions are and if we can't get the vote, then I'll accept another motion to accept it as presented. So, let's take a vote on it. Johnny, can I ask Mr. Warlock, did you not share with them the changes you wanted to make the first time? I mean, they brought it to us once. I don't remember. I've slept since then. So, do you remember? Did you? I did to my appointee, Johnny. Okay. All right. That's what I want to know. So, they knew. They knew. Yes, sir. Well, if he if he if he shared it with them, if he transmitted that information, and I think he probably did, but I don't know that for a fact. Okay. He my my representative was not aware that they voted the last time to increase the budget $10,000 for the public information officer. He said they might have, but he didn't. He looked at his notes and the information furnished and and he didn't recall that it was even up for for a vote.

[2:32:29] Let's take a vote on this. All those in favor of remanding it, please say I. I. See I raise hands. One two three four five. That's a 51 vote to remand it. Winky, would you get with Mr. Snee and tell him what you want him to look at specifically and let him discuss it again and bring it back. Yes, sir. I think we can deal with it like that. All right, Bob. Thank you, sir. Okay. Thank you. It is 11:58 and we are We don't want to deal with this next one right now because we never would get out of here for lunch. So, I think it's time that we go to executive. We have three items that we need to deal with in executive and then we will come back and we will start with number 16 with the discussion of the solid waste. Let me read this executive session. Does that all right with everyone? Yes. Yes sir. Executive session under the revision of government code title five open government ethics subtitle A open government chapter 551 open meetings sub chapter D exceptions to requirements that meetings be open under the following sections. Section 551072 to deliberate the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property regarding Redoya edition special recreational leases Lake Nazwsworthy. Section 551 074A1 to deliberate the appointment and employment of the emergency operations coordinate position. Section 551074A1 to deliberate the appointment and employment of the economic development director's position. How long you think this going to take, Chief? We have those three items. Um I don't give it any more than maybe an hour maybe an hour and a half the most. Can we do you think that we can say that we will be back at 1:30? Definitely. Is that all right with everyone? Okay, let's just say that this executive will take an hour and a half and we will be back at 1:30 to take up the next item which is 16. And it is 11:59 and we have just gone to

[2:34:33] executive and we said we'd be back at 1:30. So if everyone's ready, let's resume our meeting. But before we start, I want to introduce some very special guest in the audience today. I want all you third graders from Fort Concho to stand up and do like that. They're studying city government and so they came down to watch how we do things. So you you boys believe yourself, Mr. Mayor. But we're welcome to have you here and just glad you're here, Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir. Can I tell them that I too graduated from Fort Kcho Elementary? I'm a pioneer. You got an alumni. And they've got the best principal in the district, Lori Barton, right there. Thank you, Lori, for all you're doing. And I only spent three years in the third grade, so it was that was a fun grade. Let's move on now. We are to number 17. This is the first public hearing. And no, let's not. Let's go to 16. We've already done Man, I have had real trouble with this agenda. 16. 16. 16 on the regular agenda. Number 16, discussion and possible action related to solid waste collection and landfill management. Mr. Kelton, you have the floor, sir. Thank you, councel. Um, got a couple of different parts here. We want to kind of visit with y'all a little bit on the uh collections as we're looking at uh uh coming up with either renegotiated contract or an RFP process uh to look at the uh collections and landfill management um contract that we have. Um, as we move forward, just we just I'm going to give you a brief update of kind of where we are and what we what we've been doing, then get y'all's guidance on what y'all would like to see and uh we'll move through it

[2:36:36] from there. And yes or no is fine. If that's all y'all want to do, that's good. All right. Currently um for the u collections and disposals currently Republic Way services is contracted to provide services for both the collections disposal and for the landfill operations. Our current contract with them the first initial 10-year term is up July 31st of 2014. current services that uh they provide right now for collections is uh manual collections um in the alleys or in the streets depending on where it is. Uh house to house and picking up individual trash cans and dumping them into the into the rear loaders except for where y'all have seen the pilot program that Republic Services has initiated with the cart programs. Uh on the commercial side, we do have a once a week minimum pickup on the um two yard to six yard containers the uh uh for the commercial side and then they offer rolloff services and currently we do not have a recycling service that we provide through a contractor. Uh, as far as the landfill operations, um, Republic Services is contracted to run our landfill. They take care of all the daily operations out there and, uh, maintain it in compliance with our permit through the TCQ. All right. Next, what we're looking for directions on as we move forward to kind of get y'all's ideas of what y'all would like to see from a collection service standpoint, what y'all would where y'all uh, see the city as we move forward. uh types of collections that we want to look at as far as garbage collection uh as far as residential is manual versus automated system. And when I talk automated, I mean the cart system like

[2:38:38] that Republic has done in the pilot studies that they've they've conducted around town. Uh want to want to get y'all's opinion on that. And it probably be best uh for us if we just kind of take these one at a time and y'all give me your opinion on on what y'all like to see. So uh with that we can kind of automated versus manual. What are y'all's feelings? And or cart let me not automate. Let's put cart system. Let's say cart system. So I don't have any problem with cart system. And really I think that is what the future's going to hold. I don't know how much longer we're going to be able to hire men to drive on ride on the back of a truck, but again, that's something that can be negotiated. How's the rest of council feel about this? I love the I love the card system. I mean, I think if it's up to me, and and I've said this before that, you know, I I uh I could do with a and we hadn't gone there yet. I can do with a once a week pickup, but that's just two people in my house. I imagine there's other family with more uh individuals in the family like Gwen Morrison and all his 20 grandkids, whatever, but you know, they would do twice a week. But again, cards are fine. I I really do like it. Rodney, how you feel about cards? That's the future and that's pretty much where it's going nationwide and I think we might as well go ahead and start turning that that direction for sure. Marty, I'm not a proponent of the carts, but I know it's going that way, so I'm I'm I'm good with it. Don, um carts, I think I know she's got uh bulk trash uh collection down there. Um I think those two definitely need to be coupled together as far as as getting some couches and those sort of things. We can talk to that. We can get down there. Mr. board law. Uh we have a pilot program over there in Santaita and I've not heard anybody that uh was dissatisfied with it. So I believe the carts will be fine.

[2:40:41] Carts. Okay. Very good. And I think Don brought brought up a good point there on on the bulk collection. Yes, we've got a we've got a situation right now that probably is not duplicatable because it it's the best of both worlds, but I just don't see it continuing. But if we could have an add maybe a run every month or something to pick up the big stuff with the carts, I believe the people would buy into it. So that's kind of kind of where I am on it. We and we'll I'll definitely when we get down and we start and we discuss bulk trash collection, I'll definitely have a recommendation that I would like to throw out for y'all and and then let y'all give me some feedback on. So um so with that being said, um talk about recycling just a minute. Uh there's been a lot of talk around town. I know uh council's visited with me, others uh other individuals around town have visited with me about it and looking at more of a a recycling program utilizing the cart system at at the homes uh in more of a single stream type recycling versus uh area uh recycling stations uh other I know other communities have those where they set up stations around the community where people go and drop off the recycling versus the single stream at the residence recycling. uh the feedback that I've received from most citizens that I've talked to and visited with or have talked to me would would prefer the single stream recycling, but currently we do not have a recycling program. So, I guess first off, is is a recycling program something that y'all would like to see implemented as we move forward in this? Rodney, you want to start us off? Yes, definitely. Um I know that all of us have gotten a lot of letters in the last two weeks and I'm definitely for the recycling. I know that we'll probably have to phase that in. And I've talked to both the companies that are that are present here today and I know that it's going to be a big investment for them to put in the what is it called? The morph. Murf. Murf. Put in the Murf. It's going to be a million dollars plus. And uh so it's going to take some time. So I'd like to tell all of the residents here out there that this is not something that's going to happen January 1st. This could be a

[2:42:45] thing that might be take one, two, or even three years. But I think my opinion is that we should start moving towards that. Okay, Mr. S. Well, my wife said don't come home without recycling. I know who runs my household, so I I would say I would vote in favor of recycling. Mr. Sus, I think, you know, like uh Who said it? Marty. Marty said it or Rodney said it that a lot of communities are are going or or if not they're already already recycling. So I think if it's if it helps add to the life of our landfill. I mean that's that's a no-brainer. You know I think like he said that it may take a couple of years to get there but I think we will head in that direction. You know we we've got to Yes. Mr. Barton. I I think recycling is good. Now I I don't know about due to the amount of money it would take initially to go single stream, you know, maybe we can take baby steps uh get some of the area uh designated uh places to to drop off your recycling uh see how how successful it is, how well it works, and then then eventually move into single stream. But, uh, you know, I know a lot of people are for recycling, but I'm not sure how excited they're going to be with how much it's going to cost. So, Mr. Ward, I agree with Don Vman completely. I'm I'm concerned about the cost and I think the citizens rejected it a couple of years ago based on the cost. So, I'm not willing to jump in with both feet right now if it's up to me. And I I'm sorry. No, mayor, I wanted to say, of course, that when we look at u the card system, you know, and Johnny just mentioned a while ago as far as doing the once a week or twice a week, we can make adjustments based on if we do have the single stream recycling, you know, if we can go to once a week on the cart and actually uh kind of reduce costs that way. So, there's some options available

[2:44:47] also. But, uh uh I do I'm glad that Mr. Warlock mentioned that a while ago because there's going to be a cost associated with that. Yeah. And I'm glad to see us talking about this because I also have had some interest in the recycling. But as Don said, I don't know that the people are going to be as interested when they see what the cost the price tag is going to be. So I would like to see a I would like to see a price for just trash pickup and I would like to see a price for trash pickup and recycling. And when we start getting some bids together, then we we'll be able as a council and as a community to make a decision. But I'd love to have you and there and there's lots and there's lots of ways to negotiate through these things to to to ensure that we keep the prices at a reasonable rate. And I think that's the biggest concern right here is to get service the service that the community wants at a price that they can afford to pay. Okay. Uh and then sounds like we're we're kind of all in in consensus there. So we'll move on to the commercial side. And right now, and I guess the biggest thing on commercial side is I've had, you know, lots of complaints and it's been through even the council from uh over times is that uh on the commercial side of things, we just have a minimum once a week pickup right now. And uh we do get a lot of complaints about overflowing dumpsters and all over town and people not calling for their extra pickup. I guess right now, do we want to leave it at a minimum once a week pickup or would we like to see that a minimum go to twice a week? How would y'all like to or do y'all have any other ideas that y'all would like to see maybe to give us some direction on how y'all want to handle the commercial side of things as far as trying to help alleviate some of these overflowing dumpsters around town and the trash flying everywhere? You know that y'all brought those concerns to us several times over the years. Mr. Wlaw, you want to start us off on this one? Yes. I I have the fortune or misfortune to have a bunch of commercial dumpsters and they do occasionally overflow, but I do not want to double my cost and in in having twice a week pickup. Okay, Mr. Bman, I I agree with

[2:46:54] that also. Um, I would like for uh for whoever gets this deal is to factor in an additional pickup if somebody's remodeling or or getting in extra uh merchandise for holidays or whatever. So, it would wouldn't just kill them uh to to have two or three extra pickups a year, a week, a month, something like that. Currently, we do have in our structure that we do have a pricing structure for a second pickup or third pickup or fourth pickup. It's just I I think that we've we've run into it every year. Well, every time it's been brought up that people are just, you know, they just if they can get by with it, they will and they won't call for the extra pickup. So, because it does cost extra money so there's no way around it. So, Mr. service Shane I'm just curious at the frequency of the calls that either Robert Surles or Kenya or if you want to answer it but you know if the and we don't know I don't know the commercial people out there are they having to call in on one at least once a month for an extra pickup do you have any idea where where we are on that you're saying you got Well I mean I I get calls of blowing trash and things like that we go out or code enforcement will go out and they will take a look at the the dumpsters and they'll be overflowing and I and I'm not sure that people are, you know, they're not calling in when they should be for the extra dump. So, uh, once they filled them up and they start overflowing, I I think that's the biggest issue is people just aren't calling in for that extra service to come out. But, how many calls do y'all get, guys? Handful a week. Yeah, just a handful a week of of extra pickups on and I go I guess part of that is the the part of the growing pains that we're going through as a community, you know, just all over town, you know, you know, more business coming to town. So, yeah, I'm good with once once a week. Mr. Fleming, I don't want to really increase that or force that on especially the

[2:48:56] small business owner. And that's who it's going to affect more than anybody. It's going to be the small businesses that if we say you're going to go from one to two and we're I don't know if it's going to be a double of their fee, but it's going to be a big increase of their fee. So, I I think just one is good. I I say one. Yeah. I say we leave it like it is. Okay, Daniel. I'm good with that. Absolutely. All right. If we're not having more than a handful of calls for a second pickup a week, I don't see it's a big problem. So, okay. Very good. Very good. All right. Uh let's talk about bulk trash collection. you know, if if we're going to go to the cart system, people are going to have chairs and some couches and some uh branches and tree things that won't fit in the cart. Um I we we've seen other communities and visit with other communities heard horror stories from Republic and and everybody else about people on bulk trash collection doing it once a month or trying to do it too often. Uh and and the problem with doing it too often is as soon as the trash trucks come by, uh the people are throwing it right back out on the curb again to get ready for the next load. uh everything that other cities that we've talked to and visited with uh and and visiting with Republic Services uh from what they've seen and their experiences that they've had is either doing it uh at a maximum of once a quarter and probably preferable twice a year on a bulk uh collection uh system. That way the people will, you know, they know it's coming in 6 months or it's coming in 3 months and and they don't just go throw it out on their curb and and uh trash up the trash up the curbside. So uh that would you know our recommendation would be either two times a year or four times a year once a quarter uh at the at the maximum would be our recommendation on that. Want to get y'all's feedback on on that as well. But, you know, and and one thing too, uh, and I'll we'll talk about it here in just a second is the, uh, citizens free dumping program. Uh, that kind of could tie into that a little bit as well, too. So, Mr. Ward,

[2:51:01] twice a year. Okay. Um, I'd rather have too much than not enough. I'd rather see four, but, you know, once again, it depends on on the cost. uh uh if it's affordable, twice would be fine. I I know as far as the the free dumping, uh all that's well and good, but we have a lot of senior citizens that uh aren't able to to go to those and and don't have a pickup or trailer or whatever it takes also, even if if they were able to pick it up. So, I think we definitely need to to do something dovetailing in with that perhaps. Okay, Mr. Silvis. I I'm kind of leaning towards maybe once a quarter, but like you're saying, maybe give the citizens a heads up. Hey, we're going to do it on this day or this week so as not to have, you know, the trash piled. I've seen I've seen that happen in Austin where Yeah, it sat there for a week or so and it does look bad, but you knew it was coming because I think every house that was on the road that I saw, they had that bulk built up, you know. So, I think if you're giving them a heads up of what day, I'm okay with once a quarter. That's that's just me. Okay. How does Mrs. Sell feel about this, Marty? Well, she didn't she didn't instruct me on this one, but uh I I I'm more in support of once a quarter. Okay. I think Okay, Mr. Fleming. Definitely once a quarter. Definitely once a quarter. Okay. I don't want to see them on 50th. I don't want to see these old couches and chairs and mattresses on 50th Street. And if we don't pick up enough, that's where they're going to end up. So, I would like to see at least four times a year, maybe maybe six times a year, every of the month. But that's something that can be negotiated. Okay, Daniel, the only comment I have is just to reiterate what um Shane just said a while ago. I know previous city that I was at and Eagle Pass, we're actually doing on a monthly basis and it just seemed like there was always junk out there no matter what. We want to clean up those neighborhoods. So, uh I'd even

[2:53:03] be absolutely open to just twice a year. I think people citizens get accustomed to to the u idea that during spring or during fall we'll announce it. You know when we go be out there to pick up the the bulk trash people get used to that too. So I don't have an issue really with twice a year either. So anyway that's my input. Johnny Shane remind me are we still doing the free uh what' you call it? The citizens redundant program. Yes we we we do have that budgeted in every year and of course it it's free to the citizens. Of course, that's something that uh we pay for, the city pays for it, but uh with a copy of my water bill, that's the one you're talking about. I can go up to the landfield. Do you take your take your current water bill out? So, how often is that a once a month type? Once a month, you you can do it once a month. Yes, sir. Okay. Mayor, what? Yes, sir. Shane, are you going to come back to free dumping and where we leave things at the landfill? Is that a topic farther down your list? Okay. What's the bulk trash pickup now situation? Currently, if you put put it out beside your existing trash right now, they'll just pick it up and put it in the as long as it meets a certain size requirement, they just pick it up, put it in the truck right now. Okay. If it's sitting in the most cases the alley uh next to their trash cans. Okay. Okay. and see frequency of collection. Now, this is when we get into going back to our cart system. Um, I guess right now we're doing twice uh twice a week service. Is this something that we want to keep with the cart system or would y'all want to look at moving it back to maybe once a week with the cart system? I know Councilman Silvis, you said once a week will work for you, but Yes. Yes, sir. It may not work for for everybody, but what you think, Marty? I I think twice if if we we possibly don't have to do u recycling twice. I mean, we possibly can do that once, but pick up trash twice. Mr.

[2:55:09] Fleming. Well, it's hard for me to decide on this because it really comes down to the cost. Then I think if we're going to get hammered on this on this price increase, then we we may be forced to go back to one instead. I would like I like twice. I like the way it is right now, but I could see that it it could be a possibility because I really think that we should be getting the recycling in. So if we're going to pick up that recycling, which is an increased cost to us, um you know, keep it to one. Yeah. We may have to go back to one in order to do that. In order to keep it fairly close in price. Yeah. And I think this might have to be a sacrifice. Again, this is, you know, this is my been my theme for today about sacrifice, but we may have to work things out a little better. Sounds like blackmail to me. Yeah. Can I add something to what he just said? I know that there's been times when, you know, and I'm okay with the once, but if I don't have enough trash, mine my my pickup is Monday and Thursday. I guarantee you if I don't have any trash, enough trash for the Thursday pickup, I won't even put my cart out and hoping I'm saving the company, you know, some gas uh expense for them not having to stop by my house, you know. So, if I guess I' I'd urge citizens that if you don't have enough or maybe you do or you if those those big carts hold a lot of trash, but if you got a couple of small bags in there, you're not worried about whether it smells bad or not. again. I I just feel kind of bad putting it out a second time. So, uh, does that make any mad or lazy? Well, my wife would argue with that, Daniel. Um, we had a once a week pickup in Eagle Pass and we I had a family of five at the time. We didn't have an issue. We didn't have the u we of course we didn't have the recycling, but we just learned how to crush up the u the uh milk plastic carton. you you crushed everything down and we always managed to do just fine with a family of five once a week pickup. Don, I I think we we're going to have to look at our recycling. Um I kind of

[2:57:15] agree that we're if we go single stream on recycling and we're only going to have one pickup as far as it goes on trash, I think, to be affordable, right? But if if we take our baby steps and have area recycling, you know, then I think two would be be reasonable. Mr. Ward Doll, a lot of people need twice a week pickup. Okay. And I think we should leave it like that. And you know, we if we get hammered on the cost, we can always look at it again. But two times a week is fine with me. Okay. And it may and it may be something as we move forward too that we start off with twice a week service and then as we move into a single stream like Councilman Vamman stated uh maybe you know one one time a week they come by and they pick up the recycling and the other time a week they come by and actually pick up uh the trash and um you kind of equal out there as to where uh hopefully it works out that way. So it's something to look forward to. I'm inclined to go with two. I like to two days a week, but uh as has been said, I think that that dollar amount is what's going to make our decision. Okay. Very good. Well, we'll we'll we'll start off with looking at two times a week and then we'll work from there. All right. The citizens free dumping program kind of going back into our bulk trash discussion. Uh just kind of want to let y'all uh let y'all know as as we're as we go forward with this the citizens free dumping program is of course I think we may need to come back and and visit. I know mayor you you've had a couple of calls here lately on it and we're getting uh more and more people that are wanting to use this program. Uh and and we can definitely tell that by by the cost associated with it. Two years ago, our cost was roughly 122,000, I believe, is what it cost us for the citizens free dumping program. This last year, it cost me 167,000. Uh, so people are using our program. Um, and uh, and apparently it's gaining more

[2:59:17] ground and becoming more popular. So, it's something that uh, we want to look at and I just want to bring that to y'all's attention. um that you know this program is costing us, people are using it, but uh I don't know if it's something that y'all want to revisit or if it's something y'all want to maintain and keep going and uh how we want to look at that as we uh move forward. Start with you, Don. Um my thoughts on that are it depends on on how we work. You know, if we go with the carts and then then have uh uh quarterly pickup at the house for for bulk items, we may not not even want to mess with this. But, you know, I think it all depends on on how it comes out in the wash with all this stuff. Okay. Mr. Ward law. Uh, I'm in favor of leaving the program like it is unless somebody can convince me otherwise, and they might, but I like the program. Okay, Mr. Fleming, I I actually have used that program multiple times. Um, I think though that I would be more in favor of doing I know that's all computerized. you can put the address in where you're coming from and going back to maybe if you're going to do a bulk pickup four times at someone's house, maybe you can only go out to the landfill twice a year or something like that because I know that there are people that are taking advantage of this. These are, you know, it's contractors or somebody like that that's working and they're using they're getting their free in by doing it once a month every single month of the year. Do you have numbers on that? I know you probably don't now. Yeah, it's it's one of those things that uh um we we realize there's some abuse out there and and the guys out at Republican out at the landfill, they do a really good job trying to police it as best they can, but based on the parameters of of the program, they just can't catch all of it. So, um but yes, I do know that there is some abuse of of the program, but could they take that back though to like say twice a year? If that's if that's council's pleasure,

[3:01:22] uh we can we can redesign the program however y'all would like to see it done. Well, that that's what I'd be more in favor of, especially if you're going to do four bulk pickups at your house and then maybe twice a year out there of taking a trailer out there. I think you can get by with twice a year. The average person could, Marty. Well, I I think definitely I I tend to agree with uh Rodney. Most definitely. We could cut those down by four because there's four others we're going to have. So, u I say we cut them down somehow. We don't give them one free every month. Okay. Well, we and if that's the consensus amongst everybody, we can uh and of course I know Mr. Wlaw, you said you want to you'd be in favor of keeping it the same, but we can definitely look at changing the parameters of the program. Is this both residential and commercial? It's it's it's residential only. It's residential only. Oh, I wouldn't mind cutting it back some. I don't have a problem with that. You know, four times a year, whatever. Okay. Do you want to talk you in the two? You said you could be talked into it. Quattro or I I think I could go with once every other month, especially if we're going to incorporate this bulk trash pickup. I think we could do away with, you know, cutting it in half. So maybe once every other month on that clear as mud. I like the every month. I've got two, four, and six. So we got in. Now you got a 12. I mean, the the purpose of this is to clean up our city and to keep it clean and to get rid of this unwanted junk. Uh I like this once a month pick allowing them to go out once a month and dump. And I think if we don't allow that, then I think we're going to see more trash along 50th Street. And that's kind of way I gauge things. I know you we go up on our prices, you start seeing more piles along the roads going to the dump. And we don't want this because it's

[3:03:24] going to cost us more money to go out and pick their junk up than it does to let them go ahead and dump it in the first place. I like once a month letting them dump free. That's and we know it's being used. You've told us about the month the the amount we're use. Our citizens are using it. So that means that they're throwing stuff away that they don't need. Uh if we start cutting back, they're going to stop dumping and uh we're going to have we're going to have clutter building up in the neighborhood. So I' I'd like to keep it once a month. Well, I I guess I I'm almost going to say I want to agree with the mayor, and that sounds strange. Uh but u we we're only charged now currently on what it's used. Yes. By so if we leave it at 12 once a month and it's not used because people are using the bulk um pickup then then we're not it doesn't cost us anything anyway, right? No, it it won't cost if if they don't drive over the scales, it won't cost us any extra. and see how see how wise I am now. Well, I wouldn't go there, but Well, your plaque. It does say wisdom on it. So, that's I wouldn't have Yeah. It doesn't cost 12. Okay. We're not charged. Mayor. Yes, sir. May I My issue is whether we pay or it's free is driving down into the cell. Is there a way to require some kind of a as we as we move forward and we negotiate? One one of the things and one of our major concerns um and we've talked about this before is a um a station setup that's not on the working face of the landfill to where citizens can go uh and deposit their trash into into bins uh at a convenience station uh set up at the landfill to keep people off of the working face. And that's something that uh I I believe is a must uh to to get people off the working

[3:05:26] face. So I agree with that. That's there now. That's in place. No, it's not in place now. But as as as we move forward uh that that's something I believe that we should require uh the the landfill operator to uh to provide is a convenience convenience station for That's an excellent suggestion. Is the industry the industry as a whole is moving that way? Yes. A lot of the landfills uh that you go to, especially in the larger metropolitan areas, uh they're all that way where the they keep citizens off the working face. It's just so much safer that way. That's pretty nice. And if they're throwing away something of value, then it wouldn't go in the landfield. It could go to scrap place. That's it. Somewhere else. So, we might actually make a little on it, do a little diversion. So uh talking about uh the the contract itself as far as on the collection side of it currently uh we have both the the res of course the residential and commercial side franchised uh under a franchise tax which grants exclusivity to those uh to those two functions to the to currently republic services right now and uh it it basically exclusive rights to anything any commercial or residential trash inside the city limits. Um, that's pretty much standard practice across uh the industry, especially out here in West Texas. Now, you start getting into some of the metropolitan areas, bigger areas. Uh, sometimes you see the commercial uh maybe put on the open market, but just wanted to touch base with y'all on that. Is that something y'all want to continue to see uh the franchised uh both residential and commercial? Rodney, you want to start this? I I'd be for that. I'd like to leave it the way it is. Okay. I agree. I have no problem with it. But I do have a question. Okay. Uh talking about the exclusive contract, how many surrounding communities use our landfill, come and dump in our landfill.

[3:07:29] How many of the merchants and the walls and the just off the top of your head, do you have any idea how many? I'd have to for a dozen. A dozen communities. I'm okay. Okay. I'm good. Yes. Okay. Yes. All right. And uh let's talk about recycling on this end as well too. Uh right now there is no exclusivity issue for any recycling. So anybody, I guess at this point could come in and start a recycling company in town and go doortodoor and charge people to collect. Is that something I guess you would want to also see wrapped up in the exclusivity agreement? on the recycling side of things. What's the argument for that rather than let letting competition? I would I would I would think looking at it from my standpoint, of course, I'm not a I'm not a contractor, but looking at it from my standpoint, if we do go to the cart system and we want to go to a single stream recycling system versus uh some kind of area distribution or area collection center for recycling, if they're going from door to door, um I think if if it's not an exclusive portion of that contract, I believe that your cost would increase dramatically on on the recycling side of things if that makes sense. I thought we already had people doing that and I I know we don't have a recycling Well, we do have a recycling center though where you can carry stuff, but but I'm saying there are already individuals out there doing that. Yes. You know, we have Go Green that collects I know he collects certain specific items. I'm not sure exactly what all he collects, but certain specific items. I'm not sure of how his structure is if he's charging for those services or not. But I'm I'm not sure how you set up on that. I think he is. Is he okay? From what I understand, this recycling is not a money maker anyway. It's a it's money loss. So I I wouldn't have a problem. I don't know that I would go exclusive. I don't know. I think I'd leave it open to

[3:09:32] the market. That's just me. What do you say? I think that's what I said. I think it is too. Don, I'm kind of scared. I'm agreeing with both of y'all. Now that's another marketable man, Johnny. I I'm on the fence because if it it's going to increase the price of, you know, us doing recycling with, you know, the folks out there, then I'm I'm against it, but I don't know that, you know, what is it going to happen? It it's and of course it could be a negotiation point, too, as we look to move forward. We could uh if you'd rather us look at uh the in the negotiation phases to negotiate the recycling side of it to see which may be more beneficial to whether to leave it, you know, to give it an an exclusiveness or to leave it on the open market. That could be a negotiation point when we get down to price factor. How does that affect go green or butts recycling is what I would want to know if it's going to be a detriment to their business. It definitely could be. Now, of course, you could just you could just do it. Well, we just have to look at it. Okay. Uh you could make it exclusive to residential only and and commercial recycling could be different. So, what you think, Marty? I'll go along with y'all. Okay, Mr. Fleming. I'm I'm good with leaving it open. Okay. All right. All right. Next. Uh talk about the landfill contract. One one of the things that I would like to see us do uh with y'all's approval is is currently we have landfill contract and our collections contract all wrapped up into one. I would actually like to see us split this contract into two different contracts. One that focuses one contract f focuses on collections and the other one focuses on landfill. Um I believe that uh just having them separated makes things a lot

[3:11:35] cleaner and a lot easier for us to follow and track as we go through uh and and trying to keep up with all the different things that are in the contract. It'll clean it up, make it easier. Um, but one of the things that uh we would like to do there is is get y'all's opinion. Would y'all like to see a term contract kind of what we have now or would y'all maybe be open to looking at more of a a long-term life of sight contract? these uh the of course the longer the contract that you're willing to provide uh the more upfront monies may be available to us uh in the negotiation process. Um, one thing we've looked at with, you know, maybe having of our existing permit, you know, estimates of of uh 15 years of life left. Uh, I think with recycling program, you start getting some diversion from that. We can probably extend it a little bit further based on our existing permit. Uh, so a life of sight contract, maybe a 20-year contract. It might open things up in the negotiation process for us to see a little more upfront monies versus setting it at a five or a 10-year contract. But, uh, like I said, that that's up to y'all. What What's y'all's preference? Would y'all rather see a five or a 10ear term contract on that or y'all rather see something a little longer? I want what's best for the citizens, and I I don't know what that is. Uh, I think you'd probably be better making that decision than me. I I'm willing to leave that in your hands, Johnny. You know, I've the more I've been involved in this uh situation that we're in, uh the more I think that uh not only is it would it benefit us to go a longer I'm, you know, 20 years would be fine with me because that gives someone like Republic an upfront, you know, some time to to renovate themselves, you know, of what we we will be asking for. So I mean five or 10 years is that's like 5 weeks or 10

[3:13:37] weeks. I mean it goes by fast. That's not enough time for them to restructure of what is coming to the table for them. So I would more lean to a 15 20 year type of uh s setup giving them time to breathe and giving us uh you know the benefit of having the best deal out there. So okay that's just me. Marty, I uh I would think the longer the contract, the better the price, the better the rate. Uh I' I'd definitely be in favor of doing what would be the best beneficial for the for the constituents of St. Angelo. Mr. Fleming, definitely I would go towards the longer. I don't know that if I'd go towards 20 just because u I think we're going to have issues with the landfill and us going over to the other what is it 360 acres that we have across the street. 320. Yes, sir. 320 acres over there. I think that um you know 10 or 15 years I think would be good. Maybe 10 years with another 5year uh option on it or something like that. But I wouldn't go I wouldn't go to less than 10 for sure. Okay. we uh looking at it and of course there there are different options out there either even for our existing site uh to where we could you know look at amending our existing permit uh to extend the life of our existing site or depending on what our costbenefit analysis comes out to be at our existing site versus construction at a new site. You know, there's a lot of different things that we need to look at there as we move forward. And even if we did, if if y'all want me to look at a life of sight type of contract, maybe for, you know, that would go out 15 or 20 years, I would only want to uh make that as the existing permit states right now. I wouldn't want to I I wouldn't want to go I wouldn't want to base a contract right now, negotiations on a contract right now on what might be. I'd rather do it on what I know. Right, Mr. Ban? Um, I I really lean towards, you know, 10 with a a five-year renewal just to because it's so hard to predict what's

[3:15:41] going to be happening, you know, how things are going to be working much past two years, much less 10. So, I' I'd kind of stick with that and then, like you say, have a fiveyear renewal or something else to extend it. Mr. Ward, what's feeling, sir? I have none at this point. Um um no um I sort of agree with Rodney and Don u more along the lines of a 10-year contract with 5-year option. However, I do notice in this contract here, it does have a life of a site uh in paragraph 1.53, uh it allows them to extend based on the the life expectancy of a current sale. And I don't know how all this meshes in what we're talking about, but the the and the life of the life of sight would be the life of the entire permitted area versus uh what you just stated there in the contract. Once we have built a spec a individual sale that they are developing that they're that they're working in right then and and they've built and they developed it they if we come up to the end of the term of the contract and um we decided you know we give them notice hey guys we're you know we don't want your you know services anymore or whatever we're getting out of the trash business whatever. uh they have the option to renew the contract until the life of that specific cell they're working in is is completed. That's what that that's what that uh grants them in the in the existing contract. Just the specific sale, right? Yeah, I understand that. Uh and is that in play here with this uh contract renewal? What what's what's the existing sale? Currently, right now, the existing cell that they're working in right now is projected to uh be finalized just almost in conjunction with the end of this uh initial 10-year term. I'm sorry, say that again. The current the current the life of the current sale

[3:17:44] that they're working in right now is expected to be completed. They're supposed they're expecting to fill that sale completely about the same time that this contract expires next year. July July 31st or 14. And it's, you know, I mean it give it, you know, you know, a month one way or the other, but that's kind of the general expected time frame. Okay. And you can put my vote anywhere in there. It's wherever you think. Whatever we think. Okay. Whatever. I do have a question. Yes, sir. Johnny Shane, explain to us what we have now with Republic versus your idea of splitting the contracts. I mean, what how much is it going to be difficult to do that? I mean, what? No, it's it's it's not we would basically just take the collection side of it and the landfill side of it and just pull them apart into two different documents. Uh, that way we can very very clear. It's kind of muddled as you read through our document. We we're talking about collections on this page. you flipped the page and then all of a sudden we're talking about landfill. Flip the page and we're back on collections again. Um, so I would really like to completely separate those two uh functions just in two separate documents, not but they would have the same length of term, right? Uh, I I would I would Yes, I would I would let them have the same length of term on on both sides. That that's really as far as maximizing um any of our ne negotiations, you would definitely want A to match B. All right. Um so we will look at that in our negotiation phase. Uh, and the big question is, uh, your feelings on, uh, re renegotiating the existing contract with Republic Services, or would y'all like to see us, uh, send send all this out for a request for proposals? I'll start this one. I don't

[3:19:48] have one problem with Republic. I think y'all have done excellent service. I'm very proud of what you've done. No problems. That's it. I'd like an RFP because I know that there's two maybe three companies that's interested and competition competition is good for the citizens. I would like an RFP and I would like to have negotiations and whatever's the best for the city is the one I'm going to be interested in. That's me. Johnny, you know, I thought I've I've thought about this one long and hard and I've visited with both and uh you know, it's I was kind of on the fence there for a while, but uh I would I am more leaning to the renegotiation because I don't care if it's Republic or if it was TDS or if it was waste management. The mayor just said it, the the service they've provided us for the these last 10 years has been excellent, you know. So, I don't care who is in place, you know, I I just I I guess I'm loyal to who whoever's there. So, I'm leaning towards renegotiation and uh and and giving them an option to hey or a chance to hey, this is what we're looking for if they can provide it because at the end of the day, if they don't if we don't like what they bring or bring to us, then there's other folks out there that would or can. So that that's my thought right now. And again, I said I don't care. Uh I guess I'm being loyal to them because whether their name was TDS or Waste Management or whoever is out there, I'm uh I have no problem with the services they they've provided. So if at the end of the day it goes to RFP and I get out voted, so be it. I can work with anybody that's out there. Marty. Well, I I I guess, mayor, I I kind of agree with you. I I I really uh I've sat down with uh with uh Republic and and they I'm very pleased with with uh uh

[3:21:54] with the service. Um I admire them for doing the pilot program. So we know uh where uh uh so we know how that worked. Uh but it was my understanding that that staff wanted RFP. Is that right? Yes, sir. I mean I believe that the I believe the only way that we will understand the true value of our asset is by an RFP. I I mean, I I kind of have an idea of what uh what our asset is worth, but I I I can't I can't promise you that I'm I'm right on the money or uh what it would actually be worth on the open market. So, to me, for the citizens, the best the best way to look at this would be with an RFP. Now, with that said, it doesn't mean that we go out for an RFP. Y'all may decide y'all don't like any of the proposals and y'all may want to renegotiate with with Republic at that point. Uh which is fine and dandy too. Y'all don't just because we go out for an RFP doesn't mean you have to like any of them. U so y'all can y'all can reject all proposals and and we can move forward with renegotiations at that point. However y'all would like to see it. I just uh and again I have absolutely no issues with Republic Services. They have done a great job. They've been very responsive. Anytime I call those guys, they're they're right there on the money and they get the job done, handle any complaints, you know, they've done a great job. But as we look forward and and and we need to know the value of our asset and which again, we haven't um to my knowledge, it hasn't been bid out on the open market since we acquired our permit in ' 84. I don't it's it's never been it's never been bid out. And again, you know, 30 years ago before the new regulations came down and there was a dump in every county and ours was basically a dump at the time. Uh it's a landfill now. Back then it was pretty much more of a dump. Um, you know, the landfill may not have

[3:23:58] been a big asset back then because everybody had one and and they didn't and they didn't need need a good centralized well-run landfill that could meet and uh maintain all the requirements set set forth in the new laws. But the um but now that's not the case. Uh the laws changed, new regulations came down and uh landfills are assets to cities. if you own one, it's an asset. Um, and and it can be worth considerable amounts of money to to the municipality. Uh, especially in a situation where we are a central hub, uh, if you will, to a lot of different areas. And again, I believe the only way to truly get a good value of what our asset is is with an RFP. Mr. Fleming, I'm really torn on this one. Um, I I think Republic has done a super good job on this on this thing. And I really when I was coming into this today, I was leaning one way. I think that we probably should, just for all purposes and clarity on this, we probably should do an RFP. I think it's probably the fairest thing. Shane has really turned me on this. He and I had a discussion before about learning the value, the true value of this asset, and it is an asset that we have as a city. I think that I would be doing uh the citizens of our city a disfavor of not allowing this to be a very clear and open uh bid process and we get the bid. What I was most nervous about on TDS and I've I've told them this to their face is that I'm most nervous about the second company doing the bids on this is their size. Shane actually explained to me on some size things that you know when they do this FRP they're going to have to come through and they're going to have to do a bunch show us the financials that they are capable doing and doing those things. So I think I'm in favor of doing the RFP and I think that uh that would be the way to go. Mr. Vivan RFP

[3:26:03] Mr. board law renegotiation of the existing contract and uh u I'm not I don't have the same concerns as is voiced here. Uh I I'm mainly concerned about getting service to the citizens and we we can figure out the price. Uh when you when you change horses in in the middle of the stream and we've got a great service going here at a very reasonable price, you're taking the risk of of getting some unknown person in there, some business uh that doesn't perform. And you think the citizens are going to are upset now about something. They're going to really be upset if their service goes to to pot. And uh just for what it's worth, I think Charlotte is for uh even though she's not here, she's for renegotiation of the contract too for whatever that's worth. And I don't know what the vote is now, but Well, let's take a consensus RFP. Actually, take an action. You can actually This is an You can You can Yes, sir. If you mayor, can I ask something? It is an action. Yes, Mr. Sillis. And I guess and I and I visited with with Jimmy yesterday and and I think and I expressed them my concern is and maybe they'll make it right, but my concern was there is no they have no infrastructure now. Uh their customer service is 3 hours away. So some of those things that you know I'm not totally convinced that we're there yet, you know. So that that is the reason I was leaning towards staying with who we are now we have now be I just want it to be a smooth transition and I just see there's there's nothing on the ground well and and and there's and there's nothing to say that even if we go out for an RFP process because they're I've been contacted by several other companies besides TDS TDS is just you know they're here and they have a very I guess the Gregories are from here. So, they have a maybe more of a vested

[3:28:06] interest in coming back to the community. You know, I'm not sure. But just because we put it out for an RFP doesn't mean that y'all are going to like their proposal and and want to go with them and there would be any transition. Uh Republic's proposal may be the best proposal and and y'all may and that may be the direction that y'all want to go and you choose to go. Uh the only thing that the proposal does is it just it opens it up uh so everybody can sharpen their pencils and they can tell us what our assets worth. I mean and that's and that's what all of the RFP process boils down to uh is is just having multiple people confirm that our asset is worth this to the city. And uh like I said, y'all may not like what RFP has to has has to say or what TDS has to say or uh Waste Management or any other company out there that may want to bid on this process. Y'all may not like what they have to say. You may not think that they can transition based on their proposal and based on their uh what they present to us uh through the process. Uh and and those are valid those are very valid uh questions that I would have for any for any bidder or any person that turns in a proposal. Uh how are you going to handle these issues? Well, one thing that I keep hearing time and time again and I want your opinion on it or Michael Danes or even Daniels that you know we're not getting the best bang for our buck on their landfill. Are we or are we not? I mean, let's just put it out on the table. Are we getting what we uh the city are we the city getting the best uh money out there or is there more? I mean is there are they taking advantage or they you know so I again without us ever bidding it out I can't answer that yes or no for sure. But I feel certain that there are a lot better deals out there for the city than what we're currently getting right now. And even through the negotiation process as we would move forward uh we would

[3:30:09] ensure that that would be the would be the case. Well and if you know you give me direction to go negotiate with Republic Services today. I mean I have there are specific issues that are I you know that we're going to negotiate out uh that would be in more favor for the city. If someone wants to move on this then we'll if we get a motion and a second then we'll open it up to public comment. Anybody want to make anybody want I got one last question first. Uh now we go out for RFPs. Uh we do not have to necessarily take the lowest bid. Right. No sir. The these will be proposals. There will it's not a hard bid. You have to like the entire package. uh if you if you don't like the if you don't like the entire package that's presented and you don't feel comfortable that you could negotiate a favorable contract with any of them, you can you can reject all proposals. Okay. All right. Thank you. I think it's just a win-win situation for us as the city. Again, you know, when I came into this today, I I was I wasn't going to do this, but I think that the RFP is the is the fairest, most clear way to do it and make it where we're doing the right thing for the citizens out there. And um and possibly we could get a much better deal by doing this also because we may have a little bit of leverage that way. It's all about leverage and negotiating. Put it in the form of a motion. I motion that we put it out for an RFP. second. Let's open it up for public comment. I know there's going to be some of that. We've already dealt with this for almost an hour, so let's let's keep it five minutes. Okay. Please, sir. I just have a couple of questions on the bulk pickup. Uh is there any restrictions on how long, you know, that could be sitting there? like if it's going to be only uh picked up every 3 months or something like I I don't want it sitting

[3:32:12] out there for 2 months and uh plus I would like to know what what is what would be uh uh picked up in the recycling you know just exactly what would be put put up put out and uh you I lived in a city where they had the regional uh uh drop offs and that seemed to work quite well even if you have uh you know individual pick up pickups at individual houses everybody's not going to participate and I agree with the open bid process I think it's open you know it's fair and it's part of open government and and uh that way we can see exactly you know what we have and what is out there and I think a 10-year contract is better than a 20-year contract because we can predict the future Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. State your name and we're trying to limit to about five minutes. I understand. Charles Young, gentlemen, how are y'all today? Couple of things. Uh Mr. Silvis, one of the things I noticed when you were making your comments, you were asking for specific answers to specific questions without having any of these other businesses have the opportunity to answer those questions. I think that's a mistake. Basically, the way you're treating these these other people that would would go out to bid is republic is innocent until proven guilty. Everybody else is guilty until proven innocent. I think that's a backwards way to look at it. Um I think we talk about competition and one of the things that Mr. WL mentioned was you don't want to change horses in midstream. Well, you know, 100 years ago, everybody rode a horse to work. Nobody does that anymore because there's a more efficient, better technologically way to do things. I think that's a good way to look at this. Just because they've done a great job in the past doesn't mean they're going to do a great job in the

[3:34:13] future. It also doesn't mean they're going to do a poor job in the future. Requesting these bids, as you mentioned, gives you the opportunity. You can pick one, you can pick any of the others. I think it would be a huge mistake to judge these people without hearing what they have to say. And putting it into a bid and listening to it and evaluating it and getting input from the people would be an excellent, excellent way to do it. And I think would be in the best long-term interest of St. Angelo, just like you did the water. We don't know what it's going to look like in 5 years. We don't know what it's going to look like in 10 years or 15 years or 20 years. That was the other issue with the duration of the contract is if you look at the duration of the contract, we don't know what the techn is going to be in 10 years. 20 years ago, we didn't know we were going to have hickory issues. We do now. It changes every single day. And by locking it in, I think you're making a mistake and you're you're losing those potential economies of scale with the technology that's available. And that technology literally changes during the course of this this meeting. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Who's next? Yes, ma'am. I'm Vera Kirkpatrick, and somebody said if you keep going up there, they'll want you to run for the council, but I'm not ready to run for the council. But anyway, um I just would like to suggest that that the council uh ask the staff to submit a request for a proposal for the solid waste and landfill contract. This is a 20 to30 $30 million contract. If uh it it is my understanding that this contract has never been put out for bid. Is that correct? That's right. Okay. Why wouldn't we want competition for the contract? Why would you consider renewing such a large contract without looking at all the options, especially the ones related to the landfill? We have a company uh here that

[3:36:17] wants to present a presentation that the owners are from here. They were born and raised in San Angelo and they're asking you to allow them just to bid on the contract. And as far as the customer service being 30 or 3 hours away, I'm sure that if they get the contract, they'll hire some local people to take care of the customer service. So, uh, I ask you to open this up for competition and free enterprise, you know, is good for the city and let's get all the options out there on the table before you make your decision. Um, so I ask you to issue a request for a proposal for the solid waste contract and the landfill contract today. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Who's next? State your name and you've got five, sir. I am Fred Preston, one of the owners of Butts Recycling. Um, San Angelo does have a recycling company here. Been working with the city, working with um, the safe center, if you're familiar with that. Been supportive of that for over 24 years. What came to my mind and what they were talking about was when they said exclusive commercial recycling. Sorry, I have a voice problem. Um, my only concern with that was what would that limit us to? We would love for y'all to come out. you can look at our facilities, see what we've been doing, and uh what we can do. Uh we're willing to work in the recycle end of this in any way we can, but uh basically we just want to state who we are and that uh we're here to help. Thank you, sir. Surely that's not all. Yes, my name is Jim Turner and I have to

[3:38:29] agree with the people so far that have been in favor of putting this out for a request for proposal, free enterprise and all that, but I think it's also a chance to see some uh possibly innovative solutions, ideas, something different than what we have right now. This does not mean anything against Republic and what they're doing, but having a chance to review how other people do business, how other people would run our landfill and our use our assets and everything gives a clearer picture of what we actually have here. Both the positive assets of it and the liabilities involved in this. This is a complex operation and having more ideas, more innovation, more proposals. Even if in the end we end up renegotiating with Republic for continuation, just getting that input is going to be a positive step in the right direction. And a minor point on the number of times somebody can go out to the landfill. Instead of doing it necessarily just on a every so often, you know, every month, every two months, every six months, maybe you might want to look at allowing them so many trips a year out there. if they have to use all of those in one time frame because they're doing some major renovation and they use up their say four trips a year in four months. That's it. But that may be another way to look at it as opposed to going strictly on time. Don't limit them on how often they can do it, but how many times they can do it. Thank you. Thank you, Turner. Come ahead, sir. You've got five minutes, Mr. Gregory. I

[3:40:36] will do my best, sir. Okay. Uh I knowing that I had so much to talk to you guys about and present with so little time and I totally respect your time. It's precious. I prepared a handout that I'm asking to be passed out. I think there's 10 or 11. So there should be plenty here. I'd like to turn and give one to staff. Time well spent. So I I will I will touch on the high points of this. This is my message to you today that I wanted to leave. I knew I couldn't cover it all. I wanted to make sure it stayed and remained. So, I did it in a in a handout. My my wife Kay and Jimmy, my brother, my business partner, are here. I'd like to go right immediately to pages two and three that give an overview. I know there's been some concerns about how big our company is, what our capacity is, and our ability to service this account. This is not unusual. We've heard this before from other times that we've gone uh in competition on on major accounts with uh with Republic. You can see from those first two pages that the Gregory family has been active in business here for 62 years. I bought out my father's business in 1984 and uh I've functioned in business from working for him and then buying his business and starting my own business in 1972 here and have been active myself since 72 and active as the Gregory business and recycling since 1951. And uh you can also see looking down, I won't take the time to go through it, but different awards and the dates thereof uh of 30-year contracts with the city of San Antonio, with the city of Austin, uh two 30-year contracts and one 20-year contracts when we purchased different companies. And on the the second page, which is page

[3:42:38] three, the award for Alpine, which we were able to take from uh Republic, uh as a matter of fact, they didn't even respond to the RFP proposal, they they were so convinced we could not handle it, they didn't respond to the city's RFP. Uh all the way to last night, the city of Merten voted to negotiate an exclusive contract with TDS for both residential and commercial waste collection and disposal. Those are highlights that deal with our company's performance that I we thought were pertinent to this St. Angelo contract. On page four is a TDS integrated company of 13 different uh business units. And this shows you what our units how they've worked together. 200 plus trucks, 600 employees, 100 plus municipalities and homeowners association and mud contracts. Some of the names are listed there of the cities. Georgetown is about half the size of San San Angelo. Uh we have absolutely no problem handling that. You can see again the the contracts that we've handled and the commitments we have. And believe me, San Antonio and Austin don't take lightly relying on us exclusively for these type services. If something happens, it gets bad very very quickly. like in minutes or hours. So, uh I'll talk a little bit more about that later. If you go to page five, I would like to particularly call your attention to the situ situation with the landfill. The the TCQ requires every landfill owner, which is the city in this case, to submit annual reports. Those annual reports are you can easily track. They're online. You can go get them yourselves. I have them in my briefcase back there. In 2003, you can see over in column one uh the year, column two, the total tons buried, the com the diversion tonnage, what was reported is not land taken in but not

[3:44:42] landfilled, the compaction rate, and the remaining years life. This is a regional landfill. Uh like Shane said, in 2003, the city reported 41 years life remaining. In 2011, it was down to 17.2. In 2012, a year later, it was 13 years. At the rate the landfill is filling up, the landfill could be full by the end of this next five-year term of the extension. It is filling up that quickly. The um the um the remaining life of the landfill is increasing rapidly due to a combination of poor compaction of waste in the landfill, minimum landfill diversion of things that can be recycled and composted, and much more waste coming in from outside of St. Angelo, which it's reported that approximately 50% of the waste going into the landfill comes from outside the city. the diversion is less than 1%. On page six, you can see some of the uh regional benefits of having a landfill. Currently, we understand that the solid waste from approximately 25 municipalities is being disposed in the St. Angelo landfill. This is one thing that Republic had reported to council uh previously. The city's budget shows that the landfill is not profitable for the city and is not generating adequate revenues to pay for the city's future financial landfill obligations. Excuse me, council. You want him to continue? Give him five more. Mayor, that'd be I have a consensus. Go ahead. Thank you very much. The continued expansion of extension of the trashway contract has resulted in the city's landfill becoming a major liability when it could be a major asset. as Shane commented and I will move quicker. This uh page eight uh in San in St. Angelo TDS would like the to present these nine things. I won't take the time

[3:46:45] to go over them, but there are nine things listed that we would like the opportunity to present in an RFP response. Page nine talks about what rec single stream recycling is, the type of products and it makes a statement at the top that TDS will work with local recycling facility but recycling on what they can handle and as necessary will transport the remaining recyclables that a TDS MURF in Austin until a MURF is justified in St. Angelo. And yes, we can transfer to um to Austin from here. Our contract, our 30-year contract with the city of San Antonio transfers from San Antonio to Austin approximately a third of the waste that the city collects from residences in the city. Page 12, uh, TDS requests that for the first time in approximately 40 years, the city council seek and accept competitive proposals for the city's solid waste services contract. uh TDS requests the council consider the eight things listed on that page and uh and to not be discouraged or frightened by Republic's representatives claim that we've been aware made aware of that TDS will not be able to adequately respond to a disaster will not have the resources to purchase and deliver the necessary equipment or help the city with permitting needs of the landfill or that TDS TS personnel do not know how to professionally manage a landfill of all things, build a handling uh hauling operation and service a major contract. TDS has proven its worth many times before and will again, if the council will just give us an opportunity. Our reputation speaks for itself and uh some of you have seen our site, you you have an idea of how we how we operate. the uh on page 13 you see a timeline a suggested timeline. I do not

[3:48:47] know what the what the staff's suggested would be but this is typical of an RFP process and it really promotes the that time is of the essence. there's really not time to negotiate for a couple of months and then do an RFP process and have equipment on the street on August 1 uh at the first day of this next uh contract. We feel this is a reasonable timeline depending upon how the city calculates this contract's annual gross revenue value and the contractor's financial benefit of using the city landfill. We believe the annual value of this contract is between 15 and $30 million. TDS sales rep representatives are now calling on customers and have found rates for residential solid waste collection services outside the incorporated limits of the city of St. Angelo to range from $25 to $130 per month with many in the $70 per month range. This shows a serious need for competition within the market and perhaps why Merson took the action that they did last night. There are very few options for recycling particularly as curbside. This is why TDS will remain a competitive uh player in this market regardless of what ends up out of this operation. To my knowledge again over the past 40 years, the city's solid waste contract has never been bid out or put out for an RFP. Please allow us the opportunity to present ourselves and that proposal. TD TDS urges the council to competitively bid through an RFP process. There will still be time, as staff has told you, for the council to renegotiate with the republic if the council chooses to not do an award consistent with the RFP process. We believe the council, the city has nothing to lose and much to gain. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Right on time. Good. Thank you. Questions,

[3:50:53] council. Thank Thank you, Mr. Gregory. Any other comment? Okay, we're going to close close the public comment section. Is there any comment from council before we vote on this? Motion has been made that we go out for an RFP. It has been seconded. All in favor of going out for an RFP, please say I. I. Opposed? Nay. Okay. So, we have two nays and we have four eyes. So, we'll be taking it out for an RFP. And mayor, let me just say that I can live without an RFP cuz just bring your best game, you know. Yes, sir. At the end of the day, whoever brings the best, whatever happens happens. Whatever happens. How about let's take 10-minute break. 2:47 M. It is 3:05. Let's uh get the meeting started again. And just so everybody knows, at 4:00, Mr. Wlaw has got is going to make the motion that we adjourn. So, we need to get through with this. Let's go to number 18. You ready to go, Mr. Banks? Number 18. Consideration providing city staff direction relating to changing from traditional bidding low responsible bidder process to the request for competitive seal proposal process that provides selection criteria relating to local businesses. Mr. Banks, you have the floor, sir. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mayor. uh a few weeks back you asked us to revisit how we were bidding construction projects and one and then one of the methods that is available to us is the request for competitive seal proposal process. I just wanted to briefly tell you some of the little differences between the bid process and the proposal process when it comes to construction contracts. uh things that that are pretty typical in this process and then ask for some

[3:52:55] direction also from you uh regarding some criteria waiting with this project. Uh this this request for uh proposal process does allow some um other things to be considered other than just price and most times it cannot be used with outside funding such as federal projects usually require a lowest responsible bidder uh still. So it will depend on the on the terms and conditions of the grant or the funding that we're getting as to whether this process can be used for that type of project. So I can't use it for everything. Uh if you like the process, you want want to try it out and go forward with it, uh we'll use it as as often as as we can to do that to provide some uh waiting towards local preference. Uh the selection criteria must be published in the proposal. So, we can't throw something out there and then when it all comes back, well, that's not what we meant. Whatever we decide to go with is what we're stuck with until you guys reject reject the bids. Uh, it's same advertising has to be advertised for two consecutive weeks. One of the neat things about the program is is that it allows for best and final offers from all the folks that submit stuff. So, we can go back to them before we even come to council and say, "Okay, give us your best and final offer offers on this product or services." we can kind of pre-negotiate a contract and see if we can come change the specs up a little bit and see if we can't get better deals. Uh contracts may be negotiated. I know if you've been up here several times already where we've had contracts that have came in over budget uh and then we'll easily request that uh you award the contract with the understanding that we're going to do a change order, reduce it to fit our budgets. Uh with this process, uh we can negotiate the contract down to the budget before we come to council. So that's that's in my opinion is a plus and I'm sure the city attorney would agree. We'd rather have it negotiated to that point uh before you came up to negotiations does not necessarily uh begin with the lowest price. Uh it most likely will will uh begin with the one that is highest rank based on all the

[3:54:59] selection criteria that's published. So that's some of the the highlights of the proposal process with there are things that we absolutely have to put in the uh proposals for everybody to consider to give the contractor a fair opportunity to bid on our our projects uh like the construction documents. The weighted SL uh selection criteria this must be in there as long as the point value uh must be stayed in there and that's what we'll use in the process to to work towards awarding the contract. the estimated budget. That's kind of a double sword to be quite honest. I don't always like to show the hand as to how much we've got to spend on the project. I prefer that they give us their best price. Uh but lots of times they call and we'll give it to them anyway because it's public information, but it's not something we always publish in there just because we like to keep those cards close to our chest. Uh the estimated completion date is one of the things that we uh would like to put that needs to be in there so they know when they need to start when they need the completion because it may uh be a difference in the way that they stage their construction projects and the personnel that would be to do that which could of course affect their price and any other information that we feel is necessary that we to put in there to get fair submitts back. I'm old school. I'm used to doing flip charts. Sorry. Um let me catch up here. Uh the Texas local uh government code tells us some of the things that we can put in there as far it's uh the price, safety records, proposed personnel, financial capability, and any other relevant factor. Now, that factor can include local preference to some degree. Um and from my research across uh uh the interweb uh it's you'll see a wide variety of proposals that have many many different things as far as selection criteria and the waiting that is usually based upon the um the type of the project it is but there is one common theme through all of them of everyone that I've seen uh regarding to

[3:57:01] construction contracts no matter what they are from buildings to to public works projects is that the highest ranked one is always priced because we don't have unlimited money. So the highest priest ranked selection criteria is always uh price those vary as I said from city to city and project to project. This one is is and I left this the uh names of the cities off to to protect the guilty and the and a few of the innocents. Uh but it range anything from past performance, project management, the types of subcontractors they're going to bring in, have they ever been in litigation, relevant experience to the project, their financial stability. They don't even always have to add up to 100. In this case, this one adds up to 120 points. So we So there's a wide range of things that we can do. Uh they can also be very very simple. This is one uh from one of the smaller cities in Texas. Their highest ranked one was was uh 70 70% for price, 15 uh points for local presence and experience, 15 points for local area experience. So that that one is so this one is very very simple. The other ones can be very very complicated especially when you're asking for the information that the committees must now evaluate. Uh as I said the first time we talked about that this is a lengthier process uh that will require times. We are required to rank all of the respondents within 45 days after the day of opening. Typically, we would probably be at council within 45 days uh uh in a regular lowest bid process. This process will take a few weeks longer to actually get to the award process. I did some bid analysis to see um how it would affect us uh if if we went with local biders. I know that was one of Mr. Verman's uh wishes is that we try to find a way to to award as many local biders as we could. I just want to point out there are some ramifications to doing that from a city standpoint. Uh each one of these projects that I looked

[3:59:03] at uh over I think these are over the last two years where we had a local bidder that was not awarded the contract uh it would have increased our cost over those contracts by an additional $1.6 million or increased our cost by 22% on these jobs. what I'm re recommending and I I've met with uh uh several of of our directors regarding uh their preferences and we sat in a room and played different scenarios. We uh work some different scenarios. If we the if the local percent local presence was 15% how why where would it add up to? How would we get there? we kind we kind of came to the conclusion that we let you make that decision. Uh what I would think makes sense uh personally is that that we try to take a balanced approach to this uh that would allow us to maximize as much as of our budgets as we have to to extend the services to the city of San Angelo uh citizens. Um and uh it still allows for uh awarding local contractors the bid to both the fair and open competition while maximizing our budgets. My recommendation would be to take a sliding scale uh that uh based upon the estimates for the construction projects uh which is similar to what the state of Texas does when they are awarding uh local contracts for goods uh or widgets or what products is that the the greater the size of the contract, the smaller the percentage is. uh for for goods for things under $100,000 they allow 5%. Uh less than $500,000 it's 5% and over 500 it it was 3%. So I sort of took the same approach. Uh and this is uh certainly not scientific. It just a to me is a way that the contract that we're going to put out for our proposals

[4:01:05] would be less than $500,000 that the that the waiting for local preference would be 5% 1.5 million. Uh less than that would be 4% and 1 point greater than 1.5 is that they would have to be within 3% of the lowest bid for them to get maximum points on that. That still would not necessarily guarantee that they were awarded the contract, but it certainly gives them a better opportunity to win than they have now because anything over $500,000 now they have it's basically based on lowest price. So it does give them some advantage and I feel personally that we are also being fair to the other biders. As big as St. Angelo is, it's still small enough we don't have all the contractors in St. Angelo to do all the work that we need done. Uh, that's my recommendation and I would welcome your opinion. I like it. I I have some questions. Yes, sir. Go ahead, Don. Um, you you start out with the rules. Number one, the process may not be used for state or federally funded projects. Is there a percentage in there for those? I mean, if those are based strictly on lowest responsible bidder and again, it depend on the type of funding. Some may allow it. Some most federal contracts uh like uh many of those at the airport, they're going to tell us how that since it's their money and we're using their money, they're going to tell us how we have to bid it. In most cases, that is low is going to be lowest responsible bidder. Okay? If they have 5%, the state's put 5% in, we're putting in 95%, we still have to go with the lowest and can't use this or is there a percentage in there? Their their grants will spell out how we could how we would have to do the bid process period. Okay. Okay. All right. Any other questions, council? I think this is good. I think I think this is good. All right. This is not an action. It's just uh I was seeking your opinion. Consideration of providing direction. All right. Thank you. Thank

[4:03:07] you, sir. Let's move on to number 19. consideration and possible action on adopting a resolution authorizing the mayor to negotiate and execute a letter of intent among the cities of Abalene, Midland, and San Angelo, Texas for water supply development and delivery. Mr. Valenzuela, mayor, council members, of course, and for the sake of the public, uh just a quick reminder, uh we do have a West Texas water partnership with a um member cities which are Abene and Midland and the city of St. Angelo. Uh basically what it's established for is to make sure that we can seek out water sources um for the long term. Uh what it affords us as far as a partnership with these other two entities is that we can seek out uh more cost-effective approaches to securing those water, the water that the city will need in the future. And also uh gives us a bigger voice of course with the state. Uh when we have 300,000 voices being heard, uh it's a lot easier to get our point across to our state representatives. uh the resources of course uh the city of St. Angelo by itself uh would be extremely difficult to go out there and try to secure a long-term water source because the money money's required will be too prohibitive for the city. So it's a wonderful opportunity to team up with these two other cities. What this is is um u we're looking at a letter of intent uh which is intended only as an expression of interest and it's not intended to be binding. Uh there's one portion of it that is kind of binding. It's just that the city is stating that we intend to share in existing and to be developed water supplies at some point in the future and also that we all agree collaboratively to participate in the regional water planning and state water planning process. Uh so as to ensure that such intentions are reflected in our water plan, the region F water plan. Uh that is not asking too much. We already participate in that process. But again, this is kind of to memorialize between the three cities the support that we have for each other and that in the future we will be looking at uh sharing those water

[4:05:12] sources. It is our recommendation to approve the resolution. We have met with Midland and with Abalene, the city manager and the mayors. This is an this is an extremely expensive deal that we're working on here. It's very expensive. But we also know that we must have water for our citizens and it's we've got to find it and we've got to develop it. And we can either go all on our own and we can spend these excessively expensive amounts by ourself or we can go out and divide these amounts by three. Uh it it to me is is something that even though it is expensive, it is something that we need to do for our citizens. And to answer one question that I have heard brought forth, St. Angelo has not spent and will not spend $1 on the Cedar Ridge pro program that Abalene is developing up in uh Northwest Texas. We have not spent one dollar, nor will we. So, this is something that we need to understand this. We are working on developing a water supply for St. Angelo and St. Angelo citizens. And I'll guarantee you what, we are a very strong part of this partnership and we will control what is spent so that our citizens will profit from this. So it's very expensive, but water is very expensive and it's going to get even more expensive. And if we don't if we don't form some coalitions with some voices, we're going to be doing it ourselves. So that's I agree with Daniel. This is a resolution that I think that is in our best interest to to pass. Any other council comment? Johnny, I have a question. Looking at the resolution, do you know, mayor, if the other two cities uh if their council has signed off on it? Because I noticed that it's your name and Daniels and uh Alicia Alisia is attesting and then Miss Bowling, but I didn't know if the other councils I think that they have already signed

[4:07:13] off on. I know Abene has. I'm not sure about Midland. It's all on their agendas. I mean, it's all working. I believe Midland was having a meeting on the 14th. That's what they're going to point out. Let me rephrase my question. Are we each council member going to sign off on this or is it just the names that are here? I think it says me, just the mayor. Okay. And the other count the other councils for the other two cities? Their mayor. Same. Their mayor. The same thing. Okay. Because if it was the other way where everybody signed, then I we'd want to do it the same. But if it's that's not the case, I'm fine with it. No, y'all give y'all make the decision, you give instruction, and it gets to be my name on the line. I have a couple questions, Mr. Mayor. Yes, sir. I think you've just answered one of my questions, but it says give you the right to uh it's all trying to look at the same negotiate and execute. Uh the the negotiate part is not really right in the agenda, is it? In other words, you you're asking we're asking permission. Have you signed this document that's presented? We have not signed it. I have not signed it. No, I'm saying but that is that is the question at hand. It says negotiate and execute. That's the letter of intent actually that was provided to you and as far as the verbiage there's not going to be any changes to that whatsoever. It is what it is what's in right now. So that was my question because it says negotiate. See what I'm saying? There will be no changes to that. I understand I'm not against you I'm not against you saying it. I just don't want you to go renegotiate. No say the same. No nothing personal. We're not going to renegotiate anything. It's It's already negotiated. It's just ready to sign. I see what you're saying, sir. Yeah. Okay. And I have one other question and comment. Um u I think we're all agree that we're not going to spend any more money on the Cedar Ridge reservoir. Uh we haven't we have not spent money on Cedar Ridge. We have not spent nor will we spend one St.

[4:09:17] Angelo dollar on Cedar Ridge. Well, I'm not going to get an argue with you on that right now. Uh but uh we we all the council agreed that that they that they would be that they would understand we were not going to spend any money on Cedar Ridge and and did you and Daniel make that clear to them? We had made it very clear to them. Okay. Yeah. Now there is one qualification there. Okay. Now if Abene develops their cedar ridge and they're a long way away. They're just in the process. But Abene has a has a portion of ivy water and we have a portion of ivy water and Midland has a portion of ivy water. And if Abene were to finally get it developed or Cedar Ridge and begin to pull their water from Cedar Ridge, then we would be able to negotiate with Abene possibly to buy their allotted amount out of Ivy. So we're not spending St. Angelo money, but if there were extra water in Ivy that could have been allotted to St. Angelo and we needed it, we would be able to buy it. But we are not spending money on Cedar Ridge. Yeah. Well, as a lawyer, I just I wish they'd worded this differently here on the binding understandings where they talk about Brazis G regional water plan. Uh because we're we're not involved in that. And that would be an interbasin transfer which is illegal under Texas law without without a permit. And uh so if you if you represent and tell us that we're not going to be spending any money on Cedar Ridge, uh then I'm fine with it. Thank you. Okay. Any other further comment from council? Do we have comment from the public on this? Come on, Turner. Yes. My name is Jim Turner and actually I've been in favor of regional agreements, partnerships and so on since before this even became a twinkling in city council's eye. I've been pushing for it for that long. I think it's a

[4:11:21] good idea if we go forward with them on new projects. Some of the projects they already have in the mill we probably don't want any part of. At the same time, I think this is just a step that we need to keep going and bring more people in partnership with us, especially some of our major trading partners, our local businesses outside of the city that if they dry up, St. Angelo is going to dry up and blow away. So this is just a very small step for a total water partnership for the area and it needs to be expanded into more partnerships with more people and more diversity not just the urban areas. Thank you. And that has been discussed there. Yeah. Yeah. And the more parties we can have involved in this, the better it's going to be. And uh Michael and Daniel and I went to a meeting last week and we we we pretty well laid down some we pretty well laid down the position that St. Angelo has and we are we are a third partner in this and uh our our our interest will be looked after. Any other further public comment? If not, I'm going to call No, I need somebody to make a motion that we accept. I'll move somebody move. I'll move that we uh accept this item number 19. I'm brain dead right now, so the resolution. Adopt the resolution uh to have you, the mayor and city manager. Yeah, sign it. Will somebody second that? Second. God, did that make any sense? I think that was kind of a convoluted motion, but anyhow, it has been made. It has been made and seconded that we accept this resolution and that St. Angelo join the the partnership St. Angelo Midland and and uh Ebene to find and develop water. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed say nay.

[4:13:26] Put a 6 on that one. M brain dead. All righty. Let's go on to the next one. And this is number 20. Consideration of authorizing funding and payment for the city's proportionate share of cost incurred for services pursuant to the inter interlocal agreement between the cities of Abalene, Midland, and St. Angelo effective April 9, 211, West Texas Water Partnership for the quarterly invoice dated September 17, 213 and October 29, 213. Miss Burrell, you're on. Thanks. Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Um, speaking of the West Texas Water Partnership, uh, we received two invoices, one for August and one for September since we last discussed this on September 17th. Um, at that time, uh, council ratified about $262,000 worth of expenditures to the West Texas Water Partnership, uh, namely the city of Abalene. Um, since then we've received two invoices, one for August in the amount of about $6,000 and one in September for about $23,000 for a total of about $29,000 that would be due at this time in addition to what has already been ratified. So, we're seeking authorization to pay those invoices. Are there going to be any more of these, Michael? Yeah. Yes, sir. on a regular basis. They're we're going to be build for our share uh one-third of the expenses of the partnership and uh your finance director is before you today seeking authority based on the direction given by council a few meetings back and we'll continue to do it this way until council directs otherwise. So this is not in addition to what we authorized two meetings ago, but this is a new bill. Yeah, there are two new I'm sorry. Go ahead. There are two two new invoices. the one for August and the one for September. So, we initially ratified $262,000. Right now, we're at a total of $292,000 for an additional $29,000. Is this still in phase one? This is a little of both. Mayor, when we talked before, we had we knew the June

[4:15:28] and July numbers. And so if you take the 247 at the top of her screen, add the 8,900, the 5700, I think you get up to the 200 62 62 that we had discussed before, but we had not cut checks for the 8,900 or the 5700, but you did give approval to pay up to that 262 amount. What she says is we've got two more invoices, the 6,000 and the 23,000. And so we're while we've got approval for those first two lines, we need approval for those next two lines. We're going to cut them a check for 44,000 and change. Uh we just need approval on for the 6,000 and the 23,000 in order to do that. And this is still under that contract that that the previous mayor signed as onethird of the coalition, Abene, Midland, and St. Angelo where we said under contract that we would pay our third. This is this is one/3. Yes, sir. And this is the end of it. No M. Yes, sir. that that interlocal agreement continues as long as we continue to meet and have those meetings. For example, uh we've got a quarterly meeting coming up here in a in a couple of months. Uh there will be there'll be expenses associated with that and uh we'll continue to pay onethird. Uh and so uh as legal fees acrew associated with that partnership, we'll we'll pay a third of those and as um as the engineers do work and and provide billings for those, we'll we'll have to pay onethird of those. Also, council, one thing I have a question on is the invoice that we have for the $23,392.13. It says West Texas Water Partnership September. That's it. That's all it says. Right. Well, we we can't go ahead. The detail is still based on the opinion of the city attorney subject to

[4:17:31] executive session. We need to have those in executive session. Can we do that? Yes. because I' I'd like to I'd like to know for the residents in the city to to know that at least someone's looking after I know Winky would want that also. Somebody's looking after the amount of money that we're spending. When somebody just hands me a bill and it says it's $24,000 and it's and and there's no breakdown whatsoever. We need to be looking at something. You are absolutely right. Agree. Glad to do that. It's it's our practice to try to redact uh any work product attorney client privilege information on an invoice. So, uh we could do so and then present in open session if you wish, but the concern would just be uh I will speak with Mr. Rochelle and determine what might need to be redacted. Okay. Right. I'm fine with that. I think we're we'd all be fine with that as long as seven of us are looking at the bills that are coming in and we're you know this is this is very very secure. This is very sensitive information that we're dealing with and we we don't want everybody in the world to know what we're doing and I understand what you're saying and I agree it should be done in executive but I move we table this. I think we should I I I'll second that. Yeah. So, at least we know what's going on. But we're going to have to keep this. But you're saying you're saying we're going to get to see it. Yes. I think Okay. As long as I just want to see it. We'll bring it to the next meeting. But it needs to stay in exact. It doesn't need to be in the standard times. Well, maybe somebody else needs to tail that to We've had a motion. We've had a second. And let's table this until next meeting and we'll have a have an accounting. I have any further comment on that? Are they going to cut our account off? We going credit though? I don't believe so. We're behind by 29,000. We've already approved. We're going to get our dump trucks repossessed. We're behind by by 44,000. Oh, 44. Sorry. Public comment. Cancel our membership. I

[4:19:35] have a comment. Start hiding vehicles. We're all in agreement on all this, but please do not send do not ask us to approve bills when we don't even know what they are. Okay? That's contrary to what the council intends. And Mr. Mr. Fleming said that clearly and we had this agreement a while back and so but then but then on the other hand when we look at these as a council and executive these figures and this secure information must stay in executive and not be sent out on a memorandum to the entire world. So I think just as long as we understand that I understand us getting the information but it needs to stay with us and that has not been the case in past. If it has to be released and you said this before we'll release it as a as a body and not as it's going to have to be because if this if a memorandum comes out again that we as a council has said we don't want this to come out and we have one member that sends it out instead then that is not going it's going to destroy things. So there has to be an understanding if we're going to do this as an executive, we're going to have to keep this in executive. And I'm preaching to the choir here because we did keep it in executive. But well, for our governors, we're going to pay the bill up there. I'm sure this I'm sure everything is on the up and up. From now on, when we see one bill that just says that, you know, it's No, I understand. Okay. And Tina Tina won't tell the whole wide world what the breakdown of that $23,000 is. I'm not telling anyone. Good. We've had a motion. We've had a second that we table this until we get more information. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 60 on that one. Mayor, we appreciate the direction. Yes, sir. Thank you. Let's see. Number 21's consideration with adopting a resolution in preparation for staff to provide for budget goals and policies that include the following options for terminating the wastewater payment in l of taxes transfer. Miss Morgan. Good afternoon. What I have here before you is a

[4:21:37] resolution uh speaking to an item that was discussed uh late during the budget preparation process that we do away with the uh $500,000 wastewater pilot that is transferred from the wastewater utility fund to the uh general operating fund. So um just a brief explanation here that the the pilot the payment in lie of taxes is um when general fund receives uh a transfer from a nonprofit We had this presentation, Megan, before. Can we just get to the uh the proposals? Sure thing. Absolutely. One up. We got to leave it for Dwayne's got to leave four. Judge Duty comes on at four. There are a couple of options open to you in that resolution. Uh the first one before you is an example that we could reduce the wastewater fund transfer by $100,000 every year for 5 years. This is um as discussed before to mitigate the imp impact to the general fund so that we can absorb that over time and not take one um hit in a very short amount of time. And so that plan is there before you uh to be done in fiscal year 19 at $0 being transferred uh for this purpose. Another option before you in that resolution is to reduce the wastewater transfer by half uh so to so to stay in the current fiscal year at $500,000 to reduce it by $250,000 next fiscal year and then to uh propose the budget for fiscal year 16 at $0. So those are the um the options that staff has put together for you as as requested. What would Daniel what would the city is your recommendation? My recommendation to be honest with you, I guess um we're going to be doing everything we can to possibly reduce expenditures as much as possible this coming fiscal year. This would work, but I mean me, I would prefer to go with 100,000 on a on a year-by-year basis. Um this one right here. Uh again, we'll shoot uh for as much as we possibly can and we'll be doing a lot of reductions this coming year, but uh just to be on uh being very conservative, this is the one that I like. Council, we had the

[4:23:41] discussion. Uh yeah, I I I I like the second proposal, but in compromise in the spirit of compromise and getting out of here, I I wouldn't have any problem with doing $100,000 this year and getting rid of the other $400,000 next year. Uh I'm assuming with all the construction going on, we'll have additional revenue next year. And that would be a good place to to get knock it in the head once and for all. I don't think we ought to stair step this over four or five years. How about 100, 200, 200? Three years. I could accept that. That's compromise. Would that work, Winky? 100, 200, 200. Do it over three years. Oh, I guess. All right. How about 250, 250? My My deal is let's do it 100 this year, then let's look at the budget next year. And if we can knock it 250, let's do it. Oh, that's a good idea. How uh how long have we been doing this? Forever, I guess. More than 10 years. Yeah, longer than that. It started back in the 90s. That's crazy. Okay. I I make a motion uh that we cut at $100,000 this year and look at the budget the next go round. I like that. I'll second it. And I'm sorry. I I'm There is no I'll need clarification. When you say this year, do you mean fiscal year 14, the year we're in right now? Because there will need to be corresponding expense reductions immediately in the general fund, which is not what's before you from staff, right? 14 in 14. Yes. So, are we adopting a resolution? Is that the way it's Are we even voting on this? Yeah, we're adopting the resolution. He just made the I just resolved just moved and I just You just resolved it. I just resetted it. My goodness, I'm impressed. Any other council comments? Do we have anyone from the public wishes to comment on this? Come on, Turner. Sunrise trying just like trying to slip a sunrise by a rooster, isn't it? Yeah, but I'm still Jim Turner and uh we don't have time to go into some of

[4:25:46] the history errors that were presented earlier on this, but we do have to be careful when we're presenting stuff like this to the council. We do get the history right. But part of the history when we eliminated the water pilot fund which was a true pilot that was based on property tax calculations etc. Even though it was not a good transfer at least they got the name right and the procedure right that was done over three years and it took almost three years to negotiate it away. So that was a very contentious process. you finally have got a council that has the same philosophy, same direction, and it's going to go much smoother. I think as part of the resolution, you do need to put a term limit on it of three years that you will have it done with so that next year you still have that timeline in front of you. In three years, we're going to be done with this pilot. However you divide it up based on the budget considerations, that's mechanics. The goal needs to be it's eliminated in 3 years. Thank you. Any other public comment? You got the olders, boss. Got them. Been a motion that we do 100,000 in FY14 and then next year it comes back to us the remainder of 400 400,000 to determine how we're going to get rid of it. And I like Daniel's 100 200 200, but that's a goal. We'll deal with it next year. Okay. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 60 on that one, please. Ma'am, first number 22, first budget hearing and consideration of introducing an ordinance amending the 213 214 budget for a contract change order. An ordinance of the city of St. Angelo amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 213 and ending September 3214 for a contract change order. Miss Morgan, it's necessary at this time to amend the budget ordinance uh for a uh new project

[4:27:49] uh a change in the scope of the airport terminal project. Uh it's necessary to increase revenue for that project of $14,643 from the passenger facility charges which are an eligible use of this um fee for um the construction contract on airport terminal project specifically for um electrical work needed to install equipment for the transport transportation security administration. So, it'll be a $14,000, $643 expense out of the passenger facility charge fund. And then that expense uh for to Templeton for the expense of installing uh electrical equipment for this to be installed. This is going to be a per ticket price. This will be added to the price of a ticket. It's already been collected and is in the fund balance for passenger facility charge. uh the current per ticket price that is paid already. Council, any consideration? Voting against it. Anybody want to Anybody want to move that we approve this? I'll move for approval of this item. Anybody want to second? Second. Any public comment? It has been moved that we accept this as presented. It has been seconded. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. I abstain. You abstain. That would be a 50 vote for approval. That must be a large large master control panel. Yeah. That we're relocating. Yeah. Lou tells me there's some super duper piece of equipment TSA is getting and this electrical work is necessary to put it in use. Super duper. Super duper. That's a that's a technical term. Super duper. As was said at the last meeting, this is an awful lot of money you're spending. Anyhow, it's been approved. First public hearing number 23 in consideration of introducing an ordinance increasing the number of

[4:29:51] members on the public housing authority from 5 to 7 and other related provisions. An ordinance amending chapter 2 entitled administration article 22700 entitled housing authority section 2.271 271 entitled created members terms of the code of ordinance of the city of St. Angelo by increasing the number of members on the housing authority from five to seven providing that two members be tenants of public housing and providing for severability and effective date. Mr. Mr. May, as um you read in the caption, the uh public housing authority uh voted to increase their numbers from 5 to 7 and this merely just um updates the ordinance to um show the membership has been increased. I've attended several of these meetings and they uh this this is a very wellorganized uh Tony Vrial is the chairman of this. It's uh I I like I like the way they do business. So I don't have a problem. They want seven. Anybody want to? My problem is we've got too many committees, too many boards, too many, too much, and now we're making one bigger. Why? Why? Yeah. This vote was taken back in April. I'm not sure why they changed their membership composition. If if they want to change their composition, I have no problem with that. I have a problem with them adding to with a what? with an add are they adding the two tenants or the two tenants already on there or No, before it was only one tenant. When you increase the number from five to seven, you have to have two tenants. So, you're adding a tenant and another member. Yes, sir. Keep it even odd. Oddly, tie breakers. What you want to do, brother Bman? I don't want to do it. You want to remand it back to them and tell them I will I will move to approve this addition of two members to this PHA board for the sake of discussion. If I get a second, we'll vote. If I don't get a second, then we'll look for another motion to remand it back to them to redo it.

[4:31:53] Got a second. Was this done in order to get a forum or they having problem getting That may be the problem, Rodney. That may be the problem. I sure would like to hear from them before I vote on this because I could see Don's point of view on this. Um I wish that that that board was here in front of us and tell us why they asked for two more spots. There may be some good reason that I the only thing I mean I have their minutes and it just shows the vote. It doesn't give the reason why. No, I'd like to have them here telling us what Okay. And Tony and I trust Tony on those things. He he usually knows best, but I think he could make it a lot easier for us if he explained it to us. Okay. Do I pull my move or do I pull my motion? You pull your motion. Motion. I'll pull my motion plus the move. Second. Okay. Then let's remand this back to Cuddly Cousing and tell him we want to know why before we do it. Okay, we'll do. We want Tony here to tell us why he want. Not that we're against it. Friend. Yeah. I just like for him to tell us why. That would be a steno, wouldn't it? All righty. Let's move on. Number 24. consideration and possible action on matters discussed in executive close session if needed. There's really no I mean I consent there's nothing we did talk about uh we talked about some land uh we talked about a couple of hires from emergency operations we talked about a hire from for the CODC director uh now we need to carry it further to the next step to see if they want to be hired but uh we did consent to the applicants and now we need to send it to them to see if they want to consent to us that say it that's it So there is really no action need to be taken. It is matter a bookkeeping now to be sure that it'll happen. Okay, let's go to number 25. Consideration approving various board nominations by council and designated council members a tax increment reinvestment zone Dominic Santos SMD3 to a full turn October 215. Does anyone want to move that we accept

[4:33:56] Dominic Santos? That' be in your area, Johnny? Yes, sir. I move we accept. I'll second that. We do have a motion and a second. Do I have any further count council consideration? Do I have any public comment on this? Then the motion has been made that Dominic Santos be the be included tax increment reinvestment zone. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Put a 6. Consideration number 26 and nomination for council member Marty self single member district 2 to serve as an exeicial member on the Howard County St. Angelo Foundation board. College. What' I say? County County Howard County. The Howard College St. Angelo Foundation Board. Boy, you did such a good job on that. Remove the county from that. It is laid in. I will bust a move to just about. Does anyone want to make a motion on this one? I'll make a move. Okay. To move. We have a move and a second. Is there any further consideration from council? Do I have any consideration from the public? If not, all in favor of appointing Marty say I. I. Any oppose? Nay. Announcements. Number 27 in consideration of future agenda items. What do we have? Mr. Wlaw. Uh, I'll wait till later on in the week, first part of next week on mine so I can get you out of here. Um, I would and have been asking and I'm not sure this is I'll leave this call up to Michael. Uh, I've been wanting to look at our our storm water fees, what we're spending those on, uh, a breakdown and discussion with the council on those, and also a look at our halfsent sales tax and and, uh, how much is going where and and if the the council would like to take a look at those and maybe redirect some of those monies. I know that'll have to go to to the vote, but I' I'd like for us to discuss it anyway. And if you want to split those out, whatever the

[4:35:58] agenda will stand, I think we'll talk about whether or not to try to do something in a regular council setting or have some kind of special meeting or break it up and have uh smaller group sessions where we orient uh about what the ballot is and what the financials look like and what they mean. So, we'll try to work up a strategy for for getting that into everybody's hands and we may need your help on developing that strategy. That's fine. Can you repeat what that that first item was that you mentioned? Uh storm water fees. Storm water fees. We've got that planned as what what happens with storm water? Where does the money go? That kind of thing. Mr. Sus. Yes, sir. Mr. S? I have nothing. Mr. Fleming, I'll wait till later in the week. Okay. I have asked for one item to be placed on the next meeting and I I emailed uh Alicia Alicia two weeks ago. I would like for the city of St. Angelo to hoist host a joint meeting with the school board and the superintendent, okay, and the county with the judge or the new judge or whatever. But I would like for the city council to host a meeting with the county and with the school board here and just, you know, we might take 30 minutes of public comment and then maybe another hour and a half just to sit and visit uh to see if there are anything that we could do as a city or a county or school to to combine some of the expenses that we have and some of the some of the things. Uh cooperation, share resources, cooperation, share resources. uh just so that we know these county guys and the school guys and they know us so that there's a little more comfort level there. So if that if the council does not oppose me on this, I would like for city staff, we'll talk about this next meeting and city staff then can set this up. So I put that for the next agenda. Do we have anything else? That's good. I'm waiting. We second. All in favor of adjourning say I. I oppose. Nay. Put a 60 on that one.

[4:38:02] And it is 3:52. This meeting is over.

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