San Angelo City Council 6-3-14

[0:00:01] it is 9:01 and it's time to get this party started so I'm calling the meeting to order to start with we need to start with prayer uh we had one scheduled and I don't see her Helen Maxwell are you here John begnal come forward please turn and say the invocation for us buddy stand as you're able please let let's pray dear Lord thank you for this opportunity to gather in Freedom and we thank you for all the blessings that you have bestowed upon this fine City and this whole area of West Texas and please Grant the wisdom to these people up here that they can make the right choices and direct this this town and this area to go in the right direction again we thank you for the wonderful blessed rain that we received we prayed for it you granted us this rign and now we have to the great responsibility of making the choices of what to do with it we ask that you be with these people as they go through that task today we ask this in Jesus Christ's name and for his sake amen amen thank you John and now it is time to do the Pledge of Allegiance and assisting this morning will be Mr Damian Herrera who is four years old at Buie Elementary and the son of Ashley Herrera an employ of the city of St Angelo so help Damon and I with the pledge ready bu to of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy andice for all Texas to be Texas one State under God one and indivisible great job thank you we do have a couple of proclamations

[0:02:12] today uh one of the proclamations was supposed to have been read last week and Donna Fowler didn't know it so she didn't show up so we just held it back so I would like to read this Proclamation today this to the S Angelo Community EV come forward Donna and and the others y'all come up his way we have Dr constant Kelly which is a director at ASU and Jack P who is a percussionist and a drummer I suppose in the community band and of course Donna Fowler has played the trumpet in the community band and Lake View High School and let's read this Proclamation the city of the S Angelo Community deand was established in 1988 with the inaugural Memorial Day concert performed in 1989 and with the continued sponsorship support of the city of s Angelo through Winston mckinness farmer Recreation Advantage uh department manager concerts were performed at the bill Alor Memorial River Stage followed by concert at the ELO de santiang Pavilion and presently at Sierra Methodist Church Activity Center at 4522 College Hills where all 2014 concerts will be presented with the exception of the July 3rd Symphony pops which will be at the river stage the S Angelo Community band was established by Harris Harris Brenson the former Angelo State director of bands and now amerit and other former musicians of which six still remain membered since his Inception in 1989 Mr Brenson will return as the guest director for one of the favorite pieces in the silver Grand Anniversary Concert performance August 4th and the band's logo designed by Mr Brenson and S for the treble cleff followed by the letter notes acna a ACB thus Sab for S Angelo Community band three other directors have followed since Mr Bron's retirement presently the board of directors approved by Dr constant Kelly assistant professor of Music Angelo State University to direct the community band and the band's mission statement reveals a thoughtful commitment to Foster and promote the con concept of the adult community concert band to musically engender pride in our nation and affirm the community is a

[0:04:15] major source of America's strength to broaden the community band's position in American music and to assist musical learning of members and audience now therefore I Dwayne Morrison mayor of the city of s Angelo on behalf of the city council to hereby proclaim the 3rd of June 24 as silver anniversary concert session and urge all citizens to support the combined effort of this nonprofit organization and welcomes any and all contributions to its efforts to accomplish its Mission ma'am thank you thank you um thank you for this mayor and by the way uh he he speaks so well I think he could come back and play his trumpet with us don't you think yes thank you I play in the key of 12 is that all right sometimes we do as well I I just wanted to thank uh the mayor and the city council for its support since 198 uh8 uh we started our constitution in bylaws with Winston mcginness done at the recreation department uh building which used to be a fire station I think um without this support you know we wouldn't uh probably as as successful as we are uh another big uh source of our support has been from Angelo State University um and Mr Brinson of course was the director of bands there at the time he um established the community band so they have supported us uh all through these years 20 25 silver anniversary years I was just teasing that the director this year is going to be passing out diamonds at the end you know silver anniversary um they might be fake I don't know um the other thing is I had a couple of show and tales because I know that all of us that play in the band are citizens of our community and we play for the citizens of San Angelo

[0:06:21] so I know that there are former band people sitting right here looking at me right some of you and we would encourage you to come play uh in the back of our program uh someone said just dust off your instrument and come on back and sit in a chair and it all comes back to you like Dr Kelly just said a few minutes ago here sitting that um it's just like riding a bicycle you get back on it oh yeah I remember how to do this um and uh our band is very um we wrap our arms around you and uh Dr Kelly has brought a new energy to our band and we're so thrilled to have our silver anniversary with her under her Direction um I would like to also invite you to come to our next concert uh we had a big concert Memorial Day I'm sorry you missed it but we can do it again next year okay June June the 16th and that will be at SI Vista Methodist Church um we're going to uh have some special events of performers during our concerts um and this time we're going to kind of feature a vocalist accompanied by the band uh on a couple of Aon Copeland pieces if you like an American composer we can do it for you um what one thing I wanted to mention to you too that and some of you might know it some of you might not if you just sit in the audience you don't realize what goes on in the band but you do don't you do um there's a lot of activity around you we had uh when we're at the river stage we had um a rain shower come up and the audience was you know getting drenched we invited them to come up on the stage with us and they sat Among Us and they they said holy cow we don't we didn't realize there was this much going on up here so come join us sit near us sit far back whatever and and listen to us and uh we appreciate your support as an

[0:08:23] audience the city's support Angelo State's support and uh we thank you for the opportunity thank you Donna thank you come here let's take a picture thank you very much we appreciate Jenny Wilson are you here good morning ma'am Nathan how are you I'm very well good to see same here this is another Proclamation and this is for the just one day it's a national no kill day so please allow me to read this Proclamation and I'll present it to Jenny the proclamation is that dogs cats and other Animal Companions are considered cherished members of our families and the no kill movement in the United States has successfully implemented new and Innovative programs that provide alternatives to mass killings and life-saving change will come about only if no kill programs are embraced and further developed and June 11 is a national day of no kill across the country where hundreds and hopefully thousands of shelters and rescue groups will join together to create the safest day for shelter animals in the US history now therefore I Dwayne Morrison mayor of the city of St Angelo on behalf of the city council do here I declare the 11th day of June 214 as no kill in s Angelo Texas and urge all citizens to to support this committed effort it is incumbent upon all shelters and animal groups in our community to embrace the national day of no kill and work to create a no kill San Angelo Texas even if it is for just one day because if we can do it on June 11 we can also do it on June 12th for just another day Jenny thank you so thank you I just want to uh thank everyone um city council uh Mr riris Mayor Morrison um for recognizing

[0:10:28] this day with us um this is the first time that St Angelo has uh recognized this in in such a way it is a national day um a day to recognize that we kill far too many companion animals um uh millions are killed Nationwide St Angelo kills over 9,000 every year it's too many and there are better Alternatives and so I'm so excited that um the city has partnered with Pauls for the state to put the needle down and to see what we can do with adoption incentives uh we will be showcasing faing some pets uh shelter pets at our adoption center at Sunset Mall I've talked to Julie r with the city of s Angelo animal shelter uh and she too is going to of course Put the Needle down for the day and uh have some adoption incos and see how many we can actually adopt out instead of kill and like Dwayne Morrison just said if we can do it on June 11th we can do it on June 12th and the 13th and hopefully Sunday every day here in San Angelo so thank you so much Toody I just want to take a quick moment to uh thank the council for making this first step um on behalf of all the many animals that we have in our County um they thank you as well because this is one step forward and in Saving as many lives as we possibly can we thank you for this Proclamation and we thank you for your time today as well take picture all right thank thank you good to see you girl all right we do have a recognition Morgan yeah you're com okay the city of s San Angelo finance budget division for receiving the government Finance Officers Association gfoa distinguished budget presentation award to be accepted by budget manager Morgan CHT and budget senior budget analyst Jeremy Miller and I know I butchered your name and I apologize once again Morgan for doing for doing more doing it better and exceeding our

[0:12:33] expectations your high standards Inspire us all thank you thank you mayam appreciate I absolutely want to thank uh the mayor and the council for for their support and their recognition of this award I certainly want to thank Jeremy Miller with through his diligence of of putting this item together uh and and I want you all to know that this means that the budget document that we have presented for 2014 uh is something that our citizens can be proud of this is something that our our peers and colleagues have reviewed and said that it meets or exceeds the criteria set forth by uh best practices standards so uh we're we're more than pleased to to continue to receive this award and and very proud that we can deliver this kind of budget document to our citizens thank you thank you you have anything say buddy let's take big Nathan thank you all very much and I have one one more recognition that I would like to make and I'm going to piggy back on John begnal in his invocation this rain we got on Memorial Day was not a normal rain we've been begging God for the last couple of years to send us rain and Memorial Day He sent it and he sent it three nights in a row and he sent rain that not only covered us but covered our entire watershed area this was not a normal rain this was a Divine rain and in the Morrison household we're saying in the name of Jesus thank you Lord and I would encourage everyone in this city to say thank you Lord for what he has given us because this was a Divine Reign and we need to recognize him thank you thank you Lord all right we have now moved in our

[0:14:38] agenda to the public comment Arena let me read the logistics the legalities of this and then we will take public comment the council takes public comment on all items in the regular agenda public input on the regular agenda item will be taken at its appropriate discussion public input on an item not on the agenda or consent agenda may be identified and requested for consideration by 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 discussion 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 3 to 5 minutes unless waved by a council member for all speaking on matter no individual will be allowed to speak more than once on any subject until every citizen wishing to comment has done so so we're going to start with the public this is the public comment area this is where you line up and you Pro or con if you want to compliment us or blast us or whatever this is your opportunity if there's something on the consent agenda you want move if there is an item that you want to be considered at a later date this is is your opportunity form a line we're ready come ahead sir I'll ask you to state your name for the record then you've got three to five minutes uh my name is John Cross I'm president and CEO of lonar beef uh we're a major employer here in s Angelo we employ over 500 people out on North Bell Street a lot of people don't know where we're at Dwayne does I know where you are and I know where my reason today to come is s Angelo is really short of people workers our plan alone is short 30 35 people to fill our needs to keep

[0:16:42] expanding uh several years ago we employed about 300 people so we have constantly grown so my suggestion and I talked to Dwayne is there some possibility of taking the economic board who whose chore years ago was set up to bring business to St Angelo and grow the city all right now the city has has jobs we have between their efforts and the oil companies that have come into this city I can assure you if we brought 2500 semiskilled and skilled people into this city they could all get a job in a heartbeat if you look there's healthc care jobs there's oil field jobs there's trucking jobs there's welding jobs there's maintenance jobs and we have packing house jobs of which have some accounting some maintenance and working in the plant so my idea is can we take some of the funds from the economic board instead of looking for companies to come here and most of those companies have always been offered $2500 to $3500 per job if you come into the City and and have some criteria to it but could some of that money now go out to fill the jobs in this city that we have I know there's three or four or five new hotels going up there's 250 jobs are going to be absorbed here again the oil companies aren't in the city most of them have moved out on the highway but within those those people are living in s Angelo and spending their tax tax dollars here so between it and maybe the chamber uh our company be willing to work in it and I'm sure there's plenty of others uh could there be some type of promotion put together maybe get with Drew Derby you know the state of Texas

[0:18:44] the the governor has been out growing the state but we need people here we need people for health care jobs and and all these oil field jobs so again I'm just trying to throw out an idea could somebody Take It Forward can we do some kind of a promotion for St Angelo Texas that highlights what we have here we're almost 100,000 people um and then within it could they go to a website and within that website which still could be Go San Angelo here's all the jobs that are available here in San Angelo here's all the rental property or real estate companies so again if you're reaching out 1,000 miles 800 miles but then also okay we come up with a voucher system if somebody moves here takes a job stays 30 days they get a $500 voucher or a thou I'm just throwing out a number but it's the reverse of bringing in companies to ask them to hire people of getting 2500 to 3500 a job so anyway that's my uh presentation this morning and I'll be willing to help uh any of our employment people will be glad to help but anyway that's uh that's what I'd like to present today thank you John thank you that's a that's a new idea and that's that's where good ideas come from is from the people and you've got the city manager here that heard you Phil neighbors is back there he heard you and there's a lot of other people that heard you thank you John that was we appreciate you sir thank you anyone else care to approach the council at this time this is your opportunity going once going twice all right Council it is now your turn is there any is there anyone on the council that has anything that they want to comment or anything you want to pull I do have one item here that I must pull let me do this first uh item number 12 on the consent agenda it's up for a second reading we voted this down last meeting so this should number 12 should

[0:20:47] not be on our consent agenda this has already been dealt with so I am pulling number 12 from the agenda is there anyone else from the council that would like to make a comment or would like to pull anything or move it Johnny I see you Rodney I see you I see all let you start with you Elizabeth uh item number three trench repair okay number three you want to pull for the regular yes here okay item four item four pulled to regular J it item eight and I have a comment that I'd like to make during comment time okay John I don't want to pull anything but I do have a comment okay Marty do you have anything you want to pull no sir Mr FY I have a comment I would turn well let's start with comments and we are now pulling and just just to keep things going I'm going to pull number nine and I'm going to pull number five so I guess we won't have a we're not going to have much of a consent agenda this time so we are pulling number three number four number five number eight and number nine from the consent and then we have taken taking one of them that was number 12 out oh I also want to pull number 13 I don't have much on it I've just done this and for spite but I want to pull 13 as well okay you had a comment you want me to pull for spite too no I'm the only one that get pull for spite okay I have two comments that I'd like to make first comment is to the council I I'm going to beg that you listen and and take heed here I had to listen to our last council meeting uh for some information that I missed during the council meeting so I had to listen to it and and guys we we really kind of talked over one another and jumped in and interrupted and weren't recognized and it really was difficult watching it to see who was on first so I'm asking myself and the rest of us to be a little more cautious and careful there and a little more proper procedure would be necessary I think the other comment that I have is u in past

[0:22:52] years and as well as this year I have made some uh comments that I want to correct because my comments were wrong uh I uh have been doing a tremendous amount of reading on water and all the various reports that have been done out there over the years and I'm not talking about just the last 10 years I've gone back to the 1900s and I've read a lot of material in City Council meetings over the last uh 90 years it seems like and I made the statement that I'm tired of nobody ever doing anything we never do anything all we do is talk and that's not true it's a disservice to the rest of our council members in years past and committees who have worked very hard and very diligently on water and made a lot of reports it's up to us in the future from us but now this future uh to read those reports and to educate ourselves on the work that has been done so that we do not repeat the same old work over and over we need to learn from those reports so I want to apologize to committees and council members before there has been a lot done especially since the ' 50s in the 60s in the 70s uh it has taken from the 70s for the Hickory to come onto play which will be this year that is doing something so I do apologize and I stand corrected that uh we just need to educate ourselves on work that has been done out there thank you Johnny mayor I received a call late last night and I apologized to Rodney because I didn't get to share it with him it's a gentleman that lives out in Bentwood uh they opened up that new Road North Bentwood is it called and the concern that that uh he expressed was the there is no speed limit sign so cars are traveling 50 and 60 M hour to get to the loop so I just wanted to throw that out there that maybe we need to uh put something up their Shane and uh and uh you know prevent some an accident or something somebody getting run over from happening so just went throw that out Rodney uh couple things one this one's

[0:24:55] for Shane also the the wash out down on the river between the board and chadburn bridges on the trails we're working on that that's in line right yes the hike and bike trails they washed out real bad there and we had I've had a couple of residents that have called me and and ask me to make sure and check on that the second thing is is a procedural item and it's coming for how we post things to this agenda I want this to be real clear and understand how we post things last Thursday I asked for an item to be posted on the agenda in open meeting and I was told it was going to be on open meeting it was placed on open meeting on Thursday on Friday I didn't get the re they redid the agenda on Friday and I got it at 15 or 20 till 5 and my item was not an open meeting and it's an executive meeting I won't I want to be clear on how can I be overridden on this if I play something on the agenda and ask it to be an open meeting and I'm not called no one told me no one said anything to me when I called up here to ask I'm not going to point fingers right now but when I called up here to ask where the person was that overrode this they were gone they called me back after 5:30 I was busy but it was too late at that point can somebody explain that to me I had called to explain to you and I prefer I would have prefer that you would talk to me one1 and I could have addressed this a little bit better for you this item was discussed in executive session with Coosa DC as far as an item coming to the city council from kosa DC kosa CD DC should go straight to city council uh as far as the agenda as far as executive session it was an item again that for some reason came out of executive session went straight to you I would have preferred that it would have been an executive session here as well and there's another reason as well but I'll discuss that with you later we're going

[0:26:56] to talk about that out an executive session but this is what the public sees the public sees that we're talking about all these things in executive session when we don't need to be talking about them in executive session we need to talk to them in public about this after we talk about the item that we were talking about in executive today when we come back I'm going to for warning I'm going to tell everybody what's going on with this I'm going to tell them the whole story of what happened and it ain't going to be pretty well that's your prerogative that is my prerogative but this is this is the question or the this the problem I have Daniel is that you didn't call me and tell me you took it off and you put it an executive and you were the one that did that it was me I'm not going to deny it and what I what I have a problem here is as a flowchart on how this Council works for the city our bosses my boss I only have one boss and it's the public then you have seven bosses I'm one of your seven bosses I don't understand how you can override me on on that and change that without talking to me about that and I I'm I'm trying to stay calm on this and I'm trying to get this because winky had the same problem and now I'm seeing it from Winky's point of view on this this is the same thing that happened it was the same thing yes well it's an item that did not have to be an executive session and what I want to make sure of from now on can you tell me that if I if I bring up another item or if another council member brings up an item are you do you have free reign to to override what we put on there rules procedures of states the council has the right to put any item on the agenda yes and it's on the agenda the issue the issue here though is um it's it's actually twofold and again uh I called you yesterday too left a message for you because I want to talk to you about this as well you didn't call me back U there is you had you didn't give me the respect of calling me to tell me you take it off of it I'm not going to give you the respect of answering your phone call let's let's let's let's end this right now that's we're going to talk about this in executive this is something we can deal with but I would like to add Rodney and this is a followup and administrative

[0:28:59] items item number 30 consideration of and possible action on matters ex discussed in executive close session if needed so on every agenda even if we discuss it in executive there is always a followup that we can discuss anything we discussed in executive in Open Session and all it has to do is for who someone on the council to ask that it be discussed so it's it's covered yeah but Dwayne the kind of the problem I have is that you know open it up to the public this was thing this was something that was just going to that should have been discussed before the public it was an easy thing we can still discuss it before the public but we'll do it at the end of the agenda instead of the first thank you but I think we need to talk about this in executive anyone else have a comment or anything then I have my one comment and Charlotte beat me to it because I too watched the meeting last week and I was not happy with it we were we were very unprofessional we blurted it out as a council we talked over each other as a council we talked over staff and that's not the way things are going to be done we are going to do things decently and we're going to do them in order and we're going to be professional and we're going to talk one at a time and I will take the blame for this because it is the mayor's responsibility to run these meetings and I was lacked my in my discipline so I'm responsible for last meeting but I'm not going to be responsible anymore so before anyone on this Council speaks you will get my attention and I will tell you when to speak I don't care if you throw something at me call me Dwayne call me mayor call me Fathead call me anything you want to but get my attention before you speak and let me line a qu uh q and I will let people speak and I promise each and every person on this Council will get to say everything they want to say no one will be shorted staff will get to say everything they want to say they will not be shorted the public will get to say everything they want to say they will not be shorted but it's going to be done decently it's going to be done professionally it's going to be done in order and we are not going to have this we're not going to have the

[0:31:02] chaos we had last time that's embarrassing to me so any problems on the right wing with this any problems on the left wing any problems from staff no problems La any problems from the public and we're going to follow procedures on this because it is my responsibility and I don't want to be embarrassed again let's move on now to the consent agenda not much of the consent agenda to approve but we do have items number one number two number six number seven number 10 number 11 and number 12 and I will entertain a motion to approve these may we don't have number we did yeah and I pulled that on the other agenda and forgot to pull it on this one just subtract number 12 from that list I just made would somebody give me a motion we approve the consent agenda with all the U items you listed second I do have a a motion by John I will take Don second on this any further Council consideration anything from the public need to be said on the consent agenda if not all in favor of approval say I I any oppose Nay put a 70 on it let's drop back now to number two number three and uh you pull this one Elizabeth yes I'll be I'll be very let me read it and then you can speak to consideration of rewarding w114 trench repair to CM construction company of s angel for a period of 16 months in the amount of 1,365 3185 for the repair of city streets and alleys due to operation and maintenance of water distribution and Wastewater collection systems authorizing city manager to execute said contract documents your floor Miss Brian step Uh Kevin I've probably heard more complaints about trench repair in the past from both the public in the time it took to repair um problems in the streets by the contract ctor as well as staff being frustrated by the condition of the streets after after a repair was done and so because this is on this

[0:33:06] agenda I just want to make sure that Mr Dixon Mr Kelton and you are um completely satisfied that any problems that existed in the past have been addressed in this contract and that you and the public will be satisfied with it as we move forward yes we've uh we've actually made some changes in the um in the time it's allowed for uh repairs to be made so yes we're we're very confident in this package and can you tell us what that is believe it's we're requiring the uh at least temporary asphalt within 24 hours or 48 hours I'm not I can't remember exactly but somewhere in that time frame that's excellent thank you Miss farmer um yes Miss farmer uh yes in on item number three it says trench repair where's the money coming from what category to to pay for this that comes from our water and wastewater operating budget money but it doesn't come out of storm water no it's just water and waste water okay any other comments from Council John Mayor Kevin I think the only comment I have in in in Reading uh the uh the item for the repair of city streets I mean I'm looking in the background there is no list of what city streets you're talking about or alleys so if I'm the public and is there a list out there or these are these are small repairs that occur with we have uh water leaks or service lines or you know newly installed service lines are put on uh the mains so you know these occur all over the city there's really no way to uh to list where the the repairs will be made it's on an as-needed basis all right thank you anyone else you want to no it's just this this has such an impact because this is why the streets are patchworked and so if if if there's a long time before the patch is made then you have other problems associated with it so this really generates a lot of calls I think to the city so I I'm glad that you've had a chance to revise this if

[0:35:09] you're satisfied would you I'm quite satisfied I'd like to make a motion to approve second do have a motion to approve I do have a second any comment public comment on this all in favor please say I I any oppos nay 70 uh number four I think this was yours Don yeah sir number four is consideration adopting a resolution authorizing city manager to execute an airport lease and license agreement and related documents with matys field Cafe Incorporated Le of certain floor place in the terminal Building located at 8618 Terminal Road C terminal Circle Road San Angelo Regional Airport matville for purposes of selling and serving food and nonalcoholic Beverages and related use Don I was morning L I was just curious about uh why why such increase it seemed like a pretty hefty increase on there and I I know that uh you know it's really important out there to have a good restaurant and we have one uh we're following our schedule of rates and charges we're staying consistent throughout uh matfield Cafe had a different rate from an old lease now we're just staying consistent with the schedule of rates and charges so it's just an update of of something that they already knew was coming yes okay move for approval second do have a motion to approve I do have a second any further discussion John le I was out there I had lunch out there last week and I know that Rose told me that she had some water damage out there part of the renovation happening to the airport Does it include maybe helping her I think they had water leaks or something I didn't know how far we're working the water leaks through our insurance companies those happen due to the heavy rains and the hail damage that we received last month also okay so there is help for her yes okay thanks any further comment public a comment on this all in favor please say I I any oppos nay drop a 70 on that one number five stay where you are please Mr Lou considering this is mine I pulled it consideration adopting a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute an airport lease

[0:37:11] and license agreement and related documents with Skyline Flight Services Incorporated as Le of a certain hanger facility located at 8534 hanger Road s Angelo Regional Airport Mattis field for use and le le aeronautic AER Al to co business for parking and storage of aircraft uh I just have a few questions yes my my appointee to the airport board is is very he's he's very good and he discusses things with me in fact he called a special meeting with me last week with some questions that he has over some of these hangers out here I just have a few questions for you that are concerns of his and because they are concerns of his they are very much concerns of mine okay we depend upon our board members greatly he's concerned about the leases that have expired and have not been renegotiated he says there's several of them that have expired and have not been renegotiated number one number two he's very concerned about the delay to the lease to the GTE hanger to Skyline flight that this has been long overdue in his opinion we are losing many many thousands of dollars of Revenue would you please address that sir sure number one we're working on all of them I think we're almost cut up we have one staff person working on them how long have they been how many are there any of them that are several months due yeah matys field was one of them the one that you just voted on so we're working on them constantly uh number two uh the skyline lease is before you this is the month-to-month lease you will have an we will have an RFP out uh to address the whole hanger and the whole facility but this is the month-to-month lease for Skyline okay he ALS he also felt that maybe with the fire marshal that maybe we could do something with these other hangers out there I know we can't work in them but maybe for store uh understand at the hail storm I had a huge hanger there people trying to get the airplanes in to protect them had a couple airplanes right in the front door that couldn't move so uh is there anything is there any way we can coordinate just to be good citizens we allowed the movement of aircraft into this particular hanger and we didn't

[0:39:13] have aircraft there that were moving them while the hail was falling dull so some aircraft did get damage and this is the lease again for Skyland Aviation for the month-to month only okay well I'll pass this on to my to my board member but uh he may have other questions for us in the future Lou so sure but I'm listening to this man he's he's really working for me I will make a motion to approve this second second do I have a motion I do have a second further councel consideration do I have a comment from the public all in favor of this please say I I any opposed nay let's put a 70 on that thank you Lou number eight has been pulled who pulled this one I did Charlotte pulled consideration of approving the public art commission's recommendation to relocate The Rebirth of an old friend Buffalo wallow from its current location to another closer to Oak Street and the Ralph Chase State office complex you have the floor ma'am yes I read your uh memo to us very lengthy very detailed as you always are and I appreciate that but the few little bugs that were in the memo as to who is actually going to move it and what the cost would be have we finalized that down do you know yet um well it depends on what goes back in which we recommend that the pavers should go back in I think that cost is about $14,000 we add a couple of thousand to that if if irrigation and lighting is added at the new location uh but in terms of the cost that would all be covered by the the groups that have um supported the the move so the city wouldn't have to pay the city is being asked to provide in kind labor and Equipment use um to do the move so the cost is probably between 14,000 $16,000 not counting the in kind support and it'll be city employees that actually moves the art yes and take that responsibility I wanted to know that and I have one quick comment as well as volunteers okay and I move to approve uh now that you've answered my questions but I have one quick comment about the Arts um there seemed to be some

[0:41:15] confusion out there uh my vote last meeting that I did not support the Arts and that could not be further from the truth I highly support the Arts group and all that it does and what it brings to S Angelo my vote was not against the Arts my vote was I did not want to leave the percentage that they received in hot money at the 5% because I felt like it was short-term funds and we needed to make up some deficits at the Fort and other places but I do support the Arts and I want to make that very clear I had a couple of phone calls that uh very ey rate with me because I was not supporting the Arts so move to approve this item second the motion do have a motion do we have a second further Rodney is the $14,000 that's what comes out of the city no sir it would the volunteer the volunteer groups the Southside Lions Club and the Republic of Texas Independence organization so what would you estimate the cost being to the city the Inon support which um on helica do you remember about $2,000 okay that's it further comment public comment I do have a motion I do have a second to approve this all in favor please say I I any oppose Nay put a 70 on that one number nine I pull this one as well second hearing consideration of adopting an ordinance regarding nuisance lied on Residential Properties this is a second reading and I am uh I got a letter from Lee fluger who is the one that runs the conso Christmas light celebration and I know that we had a 14 14 day before a holiday and a 45 day before a holiday and 14 after but we did not specifically exempt the Christmas cono lights and under our ordinance if we don't specifically exempt them our cono lights is in violation of the ordinance they could sorry go ahead they could be of course it's it's based on complaints

[0:43:18] it wouldn't take but one person to make a complaint and there's people all over this country trying to take away the Commandments they're trying to take away nativity scene are trying to take away anything that has to deal with anything Christianity and Christmas so I don't think a complaint would be hard to come by but we could also uh come to council and uh exempt that particular event specifically um at later date I'd like to be exempt before we vote on this thing and I also have another problem and Gary cortiz brought this up last time and he's building houses and putting these lights on the houses they're not shielding and according to this ordinance they're illegal and that is not not fair to make an ordinance for people that's bought houses that have been built by the builders and then all of a sudden be in violation of the ordinance and I know that it only takes one that it work on a complaint basis but one complaint and we've got an entire subdivision that's in problem I'm not ready to vote on this thing yet because I don't think the bugs have been worked out I think though if you read the agenda item from before it was a there was a a calculation or a level and it was my friend next to me that mentioned just seeing this the light bulb and being simplistic if we go back to what staff recommended in the measurement of light it's different than seeing the bulb and then and then the lights that have been placed on all these homes are fine we we over complicated it ourselves my dear friend here not meaning to meaning to simplify that's correct but I don't want to I don't want to create and I Know It Takes Two readings to to make an ordinance it takes two readings to amend an ordinance it takes two readings to kill an ordinance so I know all of this we can change it we can tweak it but why would we want to put an ordinance out there for the people to be burdened with that's not right to start with why don't we get this thing right and then let's approve it and I'm not ready to approve it Rodney can we Liz said it perfectly can we just not right now say that and go and do another reading after that go back to the way you said the way you

[0:45:21] recommended to begin with is the measurement of the light not a visual side of the light correct that's correct that's an option we can certainly go back to that if you'd like with with the light meter yes and that's what you had recommended correct well originally we we it was the original thought was the light meter but the recommendation was make it simple which is you stand at the property line that's being affected and you look up if it's not being shielded it's affecting you you make them shielded it's it's a trespass at that point they don't have the right to you know to trespass on your property and that's that's why we made it simple yeah and still I mean those lights you're talking about mayor can be shielded or they could be lowered down to so they don't you know uh bother the the neighbors across the street I mean it's that simple no one has the right to trespass and somebody else's property I agree but in the ordinance Section 8 1205 it says the luminer of on and onto another property or the public rideway under circumstances where the light source in parentheses light bulb is visible and I don't like that statement yeah because that could that could that could affect hundreds of citizens if the light bulb is visible by ordinance they could be in violation so you know I'd like to say keep the light on your own property I have no problem with that I can understand Shield the bulb if it's off of your property I don't have a problem with that but when we say that if you can see the light source the light bulb we're in violation that's not right and I'm not going I'm not going to vote for it well if it's shielded correctly you won't see the light bulb that's the bottom line well that's that's what other cities do done the the ordinance the way it was before for the same thing that you're talking about would still be in violation because light meter no light meter if the light shining that's where you're talking about it would be in violation if it was bright enough to be obstructive obtrusive however you want to phrase that but the the bottom

[0:47:26] line is I understand what you're saying but I I still think we need to keep it simple for enforcement reasons and for our public being able to understand what the ordinance actually is going for you know we could also take out the uh the verbiage that says in the right of way uh and and specifically mention the the affected properties only I don't this you can protect you can protect the street and I think that's their intent and I don't have a problem with that but I do have a problem with it says that the light source light bulb is visible because that means if you've got a light bulb visible driving down the street they are in violation of this ordinance that's what the ordinance says and I don't like that is that what it says Daniel that's what it says it does it says if a light bulb is visible they are in violation of the ordinance and that is not good that's not good law I don't want that in there and I do want an that would be very bright light if it's a light bulb that's so bright into somebody's property that's not what it says though Robert it says that the light source light bulb of the Luminaire is visible from such other property or the public rideway it is a violation of the outdoor lighting standard okay so if you see a light bulb if I can drive down the road and see a light bulb shining that house is in violation of this ordinance according to section 81205 if it's bright up not that's not that's not what it says my friend it says if it is visible from other propert or the public rideway read section 8205 that's what it says understand that sir uh and I agree with you I'm just trying to we need to change it can we strike it can we I'm in favor of striking I'm in favor of striking 8205 or coming back with some more language that makes it sensible okay and if you want to come back with more language and make it sensible I don't have a problem with that but I want to vote against this because that is bad law John may I oh mayor Johnny no I just wanted to add that yeah I agree with keeping it simple and I agree with

[0:49:28] with what you're saying because other we're over complicating this thing otherwise we're going to have to go back to Lowe's or Home Depot that's the way they sell them you know that's the way they're they're they're made so keeping it simple and I I totally agree with you is is what it we're trying to do here Bob so well that's what I was trying to do with the light bulb too if it's shielded you're not going to see the light bulb therefore you're good I mean that's what our just we trying to do we're trying to force shielding the biggest that's all right the biggest thing I I just don't want us to drop this you know I kind of pushed this along to get it to this point I just don't want to drop it I want to make sure if we need to change the language a little bit let's change the language a little bit and bring it back the next time and get it done but we got to we got to do it we could do that I I just want to make sure that we that we don't drop the ball on this and we move forward on on this thing okay I agree Miss Bing thank you mayor um Council good morning uh we'll be very happy to look at the suggested changes and work with Mr Solace and Mr Flores I was going to suggest with regard to the exemption perhaps we could come up with um an objective City Event type of exemption that would um you know address that there are lights at that City uh event so that it may not be necessarily Christmas uh related as the but it would make we could put that exemption in the ordinance so we wouldn't have to come to council for a variance thank you and okay I I I would vote for it if we had language as she suggested and strike the exposed bulb because I think in the end we can all think of a lot of uh residential lighting um that Gary mentioned the other day that's encased in glass you can see a bulb and that's not what this is intended to do but as much time is has already been spent on this I would just as soon strike the the the language that I think is unnecessary and move forward Charlie well I I agree with you mayor and I

[0:51:32] agree with what Eliz withth just said also because what you just read is it wasn't intended to see the light bulb but he's right that is what it says and like my porch light right you can see my light bulb because it's a glass cover that's crackled and you can see the light bulb but I can just hear one of our inspectors saying the ordinance says so if you want to take out strike if the light bulb is visible or can be seen I'll I'll go with it today if not bring it back absolutely we could do that Johnny remind me and I've slept since then but I I remember when this thing first started it was more the the complaint from say for example the the businesses out there in O cristoval road so it went from commercial and then all of a sudden the residentials got swept in the same conversation so I don't I don't remember how that all happened but but let just keep it simple please that's that's what I'm asking but I just don't remember that Rodney well it did invol it did involve residential also and you know that half of it was residential mostly resal I think the most complaints we were getting were from residential now only a couple complaints came from the commercial and we're trying to head off the commercial stuff is what we're really trying to do um I I'm with Liz and I think we should just move forward strike that one part of the the ordinance and move forward and I think that it would work I think it would work fine for us and I don't have a problem with doing that if we want to strike the light source of the luminary is visible strike that entire sentence out of that or strike St let's strike section 81205 and add a section in there that says City sponsored uh Christmas lights are Exempted if we can do those two things I'll vote for this thing yeah can can we just say City sponsored special events yeah don't say Christmas that would be fine with me just something to give us and give us an out so if someone would like to make to I move to approve uh with the exemption of the light source luminaries and with

[0:53:36] adding that a city sponsored event has is Exempted okay would you want to just strike all of this yes 18 strike section yes sir sorry one second uh unfortunately it's going to affect our enforcement of this so we're going to have to add um some kind of enforcement mechanism which probably is going to be a light meter at this point so we're going to take if we going to eliminate the the visual enforcement we're going to have to go with a light meter so i' like to add uh the the process of uh of of enforcing this as well would would that's fine would you would you be willing to let just bring this back next meeting with right with correct language and let's deal with it then probably better would that be all right with councel I will remove my motion with the exceptions and ask to bring back proper wording at the next meeting everybody comfortable with that one meeting okay somebody give me a motion that we postpone this until next meeting did did you do that somebody second that second do I have a motion I do have a second we postpone this to the next meeting let's get rid of 88205 let's give some type of an enforcement statement and let's get let's give an exception for the uh Christmas lights or city sponsored lights City sponsored lights and bring it back to us next meeting we do all in favor please say I I and he opposed bring it back to us please sir okay let's move on now number 13 this is the last one and I pull this one for spot too or I pull this one for spot we uh second hearing consideration for adopting an ordinance amending chapter 12 exibit a zoning ordinance the con of ordinance city of St Angelo this is the one that we approved last time for commercial business out on Highway 87 for uh Side Road 42 30 4424 4436 North Briant Boulevard Boulevard frontage road 130 ft Northwest of the intersection of North briyan Frontage Road and Lake Drive I do not think this is a good idea uh the the citizens this area do not want this

[0:55:40] commercial activity the school board has sent a letter asking that we not allow this because the property AB buts their students livestock Barn where students are out there all hours of the day and night to to deal with their livestock stock and this is a commercial operation that would come right up to them I do not think this is good that we change this and I am definitely going to vote against it and I pulled it so that I could make that vote known so I listen to a motion could you remind me what the vote was was that a the vote was a 43 vote question 43 I'll make a motion to approve okay do you have a motion to approve I second do you have a motion uh second uh any further comment any public comment come ahead sir state your name you have three to five sir morning uh my name is Brooks Baka uh 15 tattenham Midland Texas I'm engineer working on the project uh here representing the client um I did early on in Planning and Zoning uh spoke with two of the property owners U Miss martini and Julie the adjacent property owner with the uh um uh animal um yes crematorium and uh we discussed that and that the area um where the her horses drink and all that and that area there has drainage that runs into it um there used to be a p Lake there um and we intend to bring that Pia Lake back for drainage um teex doot has uh water or water from teex do RightWay uh comes onto that property it has for years and and it always will um so the any increase from anything um wouldn't cause any any Downstream damage because we're trapping all of that water there so I see no real problem with Downstream drinking water for surface water for animals at this time um the facility that's going in there uh they they self-contain all of their uh chemicals

[0:57:43] uh it's a warn cap facility um and the we're not talking a standard industrial with kichi and and metal buildings that's not the type of facility that we're putting in this is much higher in than that and we intend to take care of the water so thank you I appreciate that the problem is is that a zone change does not go to the business the zone change goes to the property and if you sell that property tomorrow and there's somebody else wants to put something else they can do anything they want to with this zone change and the school has specifically written a letter and asked us to disapprove any further comment from Council comment more from the public the motion has been made that we approve it has been second seconded all in favor please say I I I oppose nay let's put a it pass 4 three we are ready now for number G which is public hearing and comment uh presentation regarding the city of s Angelo's conservation plan possible ordinance changes it is 10:00 does council want to take a 10 or 15 minute and come back no looks like quick break well I'm yes quick break quick bre quick break let's take a quick break we'll be back about 10 15 let's call let's meeting back to order it is 109 19 uh we are now to item number 14 on the agenda presentation regarding the city s Angelo's conservation plan possible ordinance changes presentation by water efficiency Action Group can we can we move on item 24 up to right behind uh 15 put all those water things together I think that'd be a wonderful idea and probably any any any disension from Council to move 24 up and get it with the rest of the water items just right behind 14 and 15 any problems from Council to put 24 up with the rest of them no problems with me okay we'll move 24 and we'll deal with it after 145 or other water ordinances okay chrisy who's uh who's going to run this good morning good morning uh my

[0:59:49] name is Dell Britton this is Stan matters we are part of the water efficiency Action Group group uh we got started getting together about somewhere 18 to 20 months ago um excuse me is that better that's better um the idea was a group of Citizens homeowners business owners landscapers and developers that had an interest in water and particularly had some expertise in the area of water usage uh to uh get together to serve as a positive presence for uh the people of the city of St Angelo and the Concho Valley uh we'd like to see that some uh assist with conservation goals that might be uh be moving forward in the city um I think we have a a group of people here uh that are listed there are others that are not on that list that helped uh get this uh this movement going uh particular I'd like to mention Clinton Bailey who was a former city manager attended meetings on his lunch hour on his own time and also encourage staff to come alongside and offer offer wisdom uh Mr Joe Morgan's not on the list and he's here I might just ask for a second if it's okay that the people who have come in to to support us here just stand up and make please please do stand and be recognized you lost thank you well I I appreciate their uh support because I'm just not used to standing up here and talking to a group like this but I do appreciate that you guys took the time and as Mrs Farmers said um the city of St Angelo has dealt with water issues and very very serious uh water issues for a long time um we'd like to make some suggestions at this point as sort of a demonstration of what our group has to offer but also will be offering services in the future um the primary thing we'd like to talk about today is the term drought levels and conservation level and changing some of these uh drought level rules to be uh I don't know if that microphone's on it is it's got a green light it's on so

[1:01:54] maybe just had to speak into I've just got to get loud it's no it's the volume in the back they need to turn it up okay and they'll they'll do it okay so they'll take care of that all right well uh we'd like to suggest for instance that we just change the name from drought level to conservation level the reason is that a lot of this is the mindset of the people and that we uh believe that we should go from one from three levels to four uh to give and we'd like to give more flexibility to you guys guys uh we had a spectacle occur in September of 2012 where we went to Drought level three and then immediately with with an unusual rainfall went back to Drought level two half the population was quite ready to go with this and we're quite frustrated when we simply came back out of it and it makes sense to us that if you have the flexibility for instance in May that we get an unusual level of of water and we're about to drop back maybe you hold that off for a month or two so people can can uh can U make their own adjustments so also it makes more sense if the wind's blowing 20 M an hour on a regular basis we've got 8% humidity and we have you know two weeks of water supply above a drought level then maybe you guys shouldn't have your hands tied saying that you can't keep us in the conservation level that we're at if that makes sense the way I'm explaining it uh we think it's a little too rigid in the way you have to move back and forth between these um the other that we'd like to do is participate in educating the public in the idea that conservation isn't an on and off Pursuit but has to be a way of life in the Concho Valley and that water conservation has to become something in the very DNA of the people who live here uh I'd like to see it as as maybe an anecdote that you know if a rattlesnake crosses your grandmother's porch that thing's head is cut off in a second we'd like to see it if somebody sees a water hose drop on the Dr driveway the same thing happens they just do not waste water it's just

[1:03:57] not something we do that has to be the way we think here because we have lurched from water uh from the verge of catastrophe several times in our history and we have to be much more efficient at um at conserving our water um I think I have just from personal experience it's a landscape irrigator um as a designer and as 15 years in the business have a perspective I'd like to give to you in a short story and it goes something like this um three years ago two summers three summers ago people would come up to me and I had three statements over and over every week excuse me it went like this first they said we're under water conservation rules this is how I'm going to cheat I heard that every week the second was we're under water conservation rules we want you to tell us how to cheat and I heard that every week for two summers in a row now this year then the third one was people would look at it and say okay we're underwater conservation rules I want to know how to change my landscape how to adjust my sprinkler controllers so that I can abide by the rules and keep a pleasant landscape in my yard um I think that was a better reaction and this year we're seeing almost completely that they're coming to us and they're saying how do we conserve water how do I abide by these rules how do I transform my landscape into something that looks good but still conserves water or uses little or no additional water and so the mindset of the people of St Angelo has changed greatly and now it's really up to a group such as ours or you to provide the leadership because they're looking for ways to get this done they're not looking for ways to cheat on it they're looking for ways to accomplish the purpose and so I think we have a time in our in our history we have a really good opportunity uh to change the the the paradigm Diamond the way we look at water so uh with that uh I'd like to go over some of these conservation rules

[1:06:01] that we would suggest to you and see what you think about it uh I won't go over all of them but uh going to a a four-level system conservation level one would be the Baseline that's what the the rules that we live under continuously it's not something that comes on and off and so such as watering one time per week in the summertime a landscape can be easily maintained pain with that it also prevents waste U there were in the past people who watered every day need it or not and uh so that type of a rule uh makes it a guideline that people use and that that's something else I'd like to comment on is that many people look at these drought rules or conservation rules as the as a guideline as how to operate their landscape now just because it says you can water one time every 14 days maybe your landscape only needs it every 21 days but people set their controllers to 14 days and so these rules go beyond just restrictions they also are taking as advice um we'd like to see a change in uh landscape watering rules in the wintertime for instance right now in drought level two you can water only once every 14 days it's absolutely unnecessary you can water once every 21 days and have a perfectly good lawn it's not a conservation rule at all and in fact we could be conserving water that stays in the lakes and doesn't evaporate during the the months November December January so it it's it's just a common sense kind of change um we'd uh think that oh excuse me appreciate that um we we mentioned drip irrigation and new plants and there's a little Aster in there that says with consideration for Turf approved Turf and overall landscape plan it's real common to us to get a call from a construction company from out of town and they want to bid on a landscape proposal and they ask us what are the city codes in Stan Angelo and we tell

[1:08:05] them there are none you can do anything you want to which is not really what I say because I don't want them to act like that but the truth is that there really isn't a code for landscape that that they have to be concerned with um we think that people who are cons spending the money going through the effort to convert their Landscapes into something that uses less water and uh prevents runoff Etc they go to that expense but there's no real incentive from the city and it would be a simple way to provide an incentive that doesn't cost the city any extra money by saying for instance if you put in a new landscape then you have 21 days to get that thing established whereas someone else may be under the rules that they can only water once for instance in drought level two uh they may be able to water every 14 days or every every 21 days depending on the time of year you allow these people who are coming in changing their landscape so that uses less water and you just incentivize it by allowing them to do it it doesn't cost the city and it makes entirely good sense for them to do it um let's see I feel like I'm kind of rambling on without any questions getting a lot of stairs I don't know if they're interested or bored but uh um I think I'd like to turn this over to Stan and talk a little bit about the things we'd like to do going forward for you as Dale mention you know we've we've spent we've met on on a regular basis for the better part of a year I would say um and put a lot of thought and discussion into these ideas the ones that we just showed in that little table some recommendations suggestions um that you might can chew on and and think about um we you know that we're not NE necessarily asking that action be taken on those items today right now but but believe me there has been thought we are very also very cognizant of the fact that um there are issues with the water budget and so you're you know in these

[1:10:08] times of decreased sales um that puts a strain on incentivizing things and so we think we we're thinking about the concerns that you have as Council and setting any guidelines um moving forward in terms of both both enforcement we talked midle ago about the lighting and and so how do you enforce this stuff and how that can become a burden so we want to keep all of these things in mind not over complicate things think about the budgets and and whatnot that are also involved in implementing any of these steps so I just wanted to make that statement and let y'all know that we are considering those types of issues um as as uh some next steps uh these are kind of things that are on our radar that as we meet as a group and kind of check through a few things here and there um you know uh councilman Fleming uh brought forth the uh the uh rate changes for con drought level three you know we think there's room to maybe change that across the board yes um so again we we would be happy to offer ourselves as as a group to do some leg work to do some thinking maybe run some numbers do some of the background information that might facilitate y'all's consideration of something like that uh and and I I kind of already said on the incentives you know education it it occurred to me not too long ago um you know one is and Dell was talking about kind of this mindset and changing that mindset within the community and I think we are seeing that evolving and happening and it's encouraging the the downside of that is and we all know this it that is a never- ending process and it's something that is slow goinging and so the idea of educating and and working with different groups um and different types of entities to finish my thought the what what came to mind the other day is you know we've got all these hotels being built in San Angela we've got all these new apartment complexes being built I know I travel a lot and I know when I'm out of town um and I'm in another city I

[1:12:11] don't really consider or think about or worry about whether that City's got 12 months water supply or 24 months or 15 years worth I don't think about it it's not my problem and so you know there's some opportunities perhaps through the hotel association to do educating and try to really hit home the message that when people come into this fine City from from Seattle or Vancouver which I have colleagues that come in about on a monthly basis from there uh that they're they're made aware of our issues and and don't take the 25 minute shower take the five minute shower I mean that I'm getting a little specific but but those types of things I think are are important um for us and we see uh there are many opportunities we feel like within the community for a uh continued and even expanded educational opportunities on an ongoing basis um the um the there are some resources that we have of of gone to uh some of these have been uh put forth to the council previously um but these are the types of ISS uh the types of sources that we're looking at and thinking about and I know you are as well but again we want to make ourselves available to um be the gatherers of that or or summarize some of these things and make that available to where it's uh maybe a type of information that's more digestible to you and uh in some of our research and and looking around on different websites uh this this particular uh quote or thought came up and and uh from the San Antonio water system and we think that's a very striking and fitting uh way of mindset and for us to be thinking as a community as a city and as a region so with that I think we'll conclude our remarks and um would be happy to entertain some questions if there are any and we would look forward to being able to uh have an opportunity to come back at in future meetings and and um maybe present some more ideas I appreciate very much your presentation and uh I don't know y'all

[1:14:13] said some of the same things that that I've been thinking uh you put it down I've just kind of thought about it but I think that also Rodney and probably the rest have also thought about some of these things as well and we're going to be discussing some of these things later on we're have we have a retreat planned what is it next week and we're going to be talking about some of those things there uh let's just start with the council they probably have a few questions for you uh Charlotte you want to you want to start off I will start off uh first of all uh I received um a month or so maybe two months ago that your email that had the items and your suggestions on them so I had them maybe a little bit longer have you taken those and compared those to our drought contingency plan uh that was published in March of this year item per item item per item no we haven't oh oh item pride no we haven't compared have you have you read this Stan has read it I think I've read probably we discussed it as group as as a group we have not sat down and gone through it Page by page as a group I know there are different members that that have and review it and understand well I'm I'm going to come right up front and just and our city manager can validate that I've scolded U ourselves uh for not making this public sooner I think Johnny has read I know Johnny has read it all the way through and I know I have read it all the way through but a lot of the things that you suggest are in here it's in our contingency plan there was a committee there was a group that worked in 2012 on various things and ideas I think it was started Ed by Mr herfield and then carried on from there uh conservation items and it's put into this book but maybe we haven't made it as public as we need to so that is where the city has fell down is not making it available uh to the public to know the conservation plans that are in there and written and the number of gallons per day or per month that is used by the

[1:16:16] average citizen which is considerably different in this report than we talked about two weeks ago but uh uh I appreciate what you've done and how it mirrors exactly and I think we have some homework to do here out in recognizing where there's some mirror ideas and a few discrepancies and things that can be worked out and I appreciate the group's efforts um but I do want to give staff the credit for the work that they have been doing in putting the contingency drought plan together because it is a piece of good work yeah and I'll say and that point well taken and you know where we where we have tried to focus our time and energy is looking at kind of lower hanging fruit and you know when I came into the group that this this suggestion about landscape watering in the wintertime and it was set at 14 days and the discussion went to that's really not necessary and so that's when we started asking ourselves the questions where where does some of this where's what's the basis where does this come from why is it set like this and if we have broad enough set of of expert opinions that says it could be something different then you know let's look at that so I think we have as opposed to really targeting that entire document really kind of focused on things that we felt like could have an impact and are areas where we would begin uh a process to I think you're right mirror look where there's overlapping interests or ideas and and see if we can run with those so thank you Elizabeth I was really excited to hear this and I wish we had been hearing more about it maybe at every meeting for the last year around here like Charlotte said these good works certainly don't need to be kept secrets um I think you're right I think the community is primed for a stronger conservation ethic we don't want to ever go to whatever you want to call it where there's absolutely no outdoor watering that's a scary place to be both as a resident and if you're looking at trying to bring new industry into the community

[1:18:18] so we don't want to we don't want to Teeter on that edge but the question that those that are not so conservation minded are going to ask is we still have water and when we have water we need to sell it so our problem is that we have a budget that is tied to the sale of water I know you had a lot of big thinkers on your committee and I'll I'll call Mr hfield one of them former councilman so did you did you discuss that because I think in the end we have to sort of re-evaluate how we fund uh water improvements if we're not if we're not selling to the same levels it's it's a really difficult situation we have discussed it and and we think that's that's probably one of the problems is you do have water uh the funding of the water department is based on the idea that we sell a lot of water cheaply that encourages waste and it underfunds the water department because we are going to be right back where we were frequently this area does go through prolonged periods of drought we all know it and so we have a plan to fail in place we need to change that and it needs to start with the water rates uh I discussed you know mentioning the questions that people frequently ask me two things had a huge impact on that aside from the last 12 months of seeing ourselves in such dire circumstances people saw the first time Lake nasworthy was draining down a couple of feet suddenly people understood drought in a real personal way they didn't understand it when you said twin butes is going dry OC Fisher is dry there's only a few months of applying oh that didn't impress them seeing Lake nasworthy low did and that made a big change in the kind of phone calls I was getting the find of kind of discussions we were getting um but the rate structure had the other one people said you know I don't want to pay that much I'll go ahead and fix it because before that very frequently we'd say you know St Augustine grass is of water hog it's not a good idea and guess what they said I want two pallets I want four

[1:20:20] pallets and so that great structure you know like it or not uh has a huge impact on how people use water but education is the next one people do now at this time as they haven't in the past want to know how to go forward and how to save water and create a means to do it on a long-term sustainable method but in the in the idea and you all know this the idea is that we absolutely and it's in the paper all week over the weekend and it's been discussed in this meeting already is that when we have these events like we had weekend before last that we don't just get complacent and let slip back into saying oh we bought ourselves some more time and then next thing you know we're staring down the barrel of a gun again and so I think that goes back to that that continued educational process and Outreach right but I think in the end we'll all be successful when we can figure out a way to handle the financial side of it well yes and I we have talked about i' rather stay on the conservation side but but to have everybody in the room involved I think we have to determine how to deal with Financial there's no doubt and I you know I've wrestled with this thought for a long time when I was on Council in ELD r that used to drive me mad that that we were absolutely dependent on sales of water when we were trying to conserve and how do you not bust the budget doing that and I I think there's you know I mean I think this is bigger than S Angelo or or or witch ofall Falls or any any I mean this is kind of a fundamental shift and our group is not you know spent a whole lot of time on trying to think about how do you fundamentally shift City budgets and water departments um based on current state and city laws that's not an easy task but it's something I think that I don't think it's I think there there's got to be other ways that we we look at that and think about it but I don't know Don did you have anything sir well I think that we took Maybe Baby Steps this last time toward that whenever we penalize the people for

[1:22:24] excessive use uh you know to me that's a win-win situation because we we gain the revenues but by the same token we're we're not penalizing people for normal use we're penalizing people for excessive use and I I think we need to continue that uh you know in every stage not not have absolutely agree higher on that's that's I think that's right and I like I said I think that's a win-win situation monetarily economically and as well as educationally because I know if you hit people in their pocketbooks they're going to pay attention John Mayor before I make my comments I'd like to hear from Christie uh I believe you had something on your mind Christie you wanted to share well I'm just no no pressure yeah they have their backs to me as I'm sitting there saying um I would like to just be clear that um from the beginning the group did look at the drought contingency plan I think that because people that aren't involved in city council or aren't on staff sometimes we don't know we just know those are the rules for watering they're the ordinances they're the water restrictions but that's what we based when this group first got together saying what is it that's not working here um so there are changes there are differences it doesn't mirror what's there why would we be here if that's the case um some of them seem small as Dell pointed out when do you water how often do you water your lawn in the summer that's huge whether you water it twice a week or once every 14 days that sounds small that's huge people look at that and they base what they do on that um the other thing uh that's that's really different is our conservation levels that we've suggested um is that instead of moving to a drought level um and the the levels are a little bit different um so that you when we're above 24 months that's conservation level one the other

[1:24:27] thing I think we need to point out that I don't want it this to seem this way at all this is something where we we have involved City staff all of you we've tried to continuously communicate because the staff is doing an incredible job and you know that we work with them all of the time this is a something joint this is a positive thing we're not up here saying this is not right this isn't done well this is a community effort and I I just I want to be clear that that is what this group is here is here to do these changes Do Not Mirror what's already there there are differences um and that's why we pulled in experts on Landscaping so that they could look at that and say you know we don't need to be watering three times a a week in the summertime so these are common sense things they're not crazy but they make sense um so I just wanted to make those two things clear that we really are working with staff we want to make this we want to work more with staff and we just want to be of of assistance and help and then I just wanted to add that you know in looking over this this presentation it shows that you guys really try to dissect just every little nook and cranny that's out there and I I am ready to uh approve anything that involves John begno you know because I think he is the expert out there but my you know talking about water uh conservation the one question I got about five phone calls last Sunday and this is more of a Ricky Dixon question to educate the public is why in the world would we release water from like nasworthy when you know we've been in this drought for you know 20 years so I think we need to educate the folks of why that happened and it's it wasn't a bad thing you know it you know it it's captured at the other end at at Ivy but I just wanted for the viewing public to understand the reasoning behind it you know I know it was it's a 100% capacity now and as Ricky comes up if you would

[1:26:30] just share your wisdom with us Mr Dixon and you know people just don't understand why they they thought we were nuts doing that so um the inflow that we was get from B conrete was more than we could contain in Lake nasworthy if we hadn't open the gates uh emergency Spillway which is a very small portion of nasworthy dam it would run over at that point it just wouldn't have run over fast enough to prevent property damage we were real close as it was and we just had such an inflow from I would have never thought it either you know I went from 4 foot down to I've got to open two gates 5 foot that's a that's a tremendous amount of water Downstream but we were truly blessed but that's the only reason you know we're trying to keep uh people's home from being damaged and their property and it's going to run over anyway we was just trying to make some room so I understand the inflow is still happening n it's just about quit now so we've got everything closed and we're just it's not a negative thing that we Rel what what happens we release it and it goes Downstream and tell us the it winds up in Ivy which comes back to us for a cost oh one third of it yeah yeah for a cost I've got pay to get it back but right I got to do something with it and that's the piece a lot of the taxpayers said did not understand and uh I just wanted talking about conservation well that's that's a part of it so Marty well um I I guess my question to the group would be uh was there any consideration given to the time frames that we go into I think the time frames are probably as important as the uh as the levels uh you know I don't think you'd want to possibly you you'd want to consider whether or not you go from level two to level three if you're a month from coming into the you know in August right you know that point uh what five on the screen that we have up now

[1:28:34] is I think what you're talking about so you're moving from one level to the other is that we would be taking a broader look at um criteria that would determine those those decisions not just on lake level alone but time of year long-term forecast recent history you know rainfall a number maybe a broader set of factors that could be considered that would give the council more flexibility or guidance on how they might maneuver between those um different levels yeah exactly I I don't think you can draw a line in the sand to say exactly when you go from one level to the next well in our last two big rain events have fallen right in in concert with with recent movement or or imminent movement right and as Dell pointed out before and I think you mentioned to me just on the side this morning that a number of people you know people have got that mindset that this is where we need to be we need to be conserving this and and they're really actually more disturbed by the fact that we would go back to a lesser stage more flexibility than staying put so I think there's some work that could be done there I know that's before you now rodne yeah that's what I was saying this morning I've talked to over 50 people just in the last seven days and I I didn't have a single person tell me that they thought that we should go back and level they what the Dell you said this perfectly everybody's getting more used to this and why why would we possibly change this now let's get them moving forward on changing the landscape the frame of mind let's go from the grass to you know whatever's can grow here and use less water uh pen Don you said this also really well and I want to bring this forward on the next meeting if possible hitting those high-end users on every level if we have a if we have a three level or we have a for level if you're a high-end user and we'll we'll determine what that is as a group but if you have a high-end user I think they

[1:30:37] should be hit extremely heavily I mean go after everything that they've got on there Liz said it also really well we've got to figure out where the money's coming from you know we've I think that we have very very low rates overall and I think that uh we're going to get some push back on this I know I'll get some push back on this but we've got to start realizing that you know when I go into to a grocery store and I buy some bottled water I never even think about you know that being a dollar or a dollar 25 or whatever it is now when you pay what is it how much we pay right now per thousand on the first level 232 I think it's two something for a thousand gallons uh that that blows my mind I mean that's it's nothing and we need to we need to raise those prices and get it up there and helps help supplement the water department on that part and get it into people's mind changing that mind mind frame also that you're going to pay more we don't have the water again I you know I know the next item that we're going to talk about is going to be changing of the levels I don't think we should and I I love your plan I think y'all came up with a really good plan I think you thought it through I think there's a couple little things that need to be tweaked on there but overall I think it's a great great plan and I love the four levels I think we should go and and uh Dwayne had talked to me earlier last week about going to a four-level system which I think we should go to a four-level system and kind of point out how we're going to be moving forward on those things and I too appreciate it uh I'd like to go to four levels and I like you're 24 months for level two or maybe even five levels because I think we do need and I've spoken to three groups in the last two weeks and I've made the statement we ask you to conserve you cut your water in half now our water water budget is $2 million in the red now we need to raise your rates to take care and it it's not going over well but uh I really think that we need to and and Don

[1:32:40] said it well we need to to charge put tears in in every conservation level and we need to charge these people that using the water those that's using less than 8 10,000 gallons a month that is really minimum but if you're using over 10 to 20 there needs to be an additional from 20 to 30 needs to be an additional and those who use over 30,000 they need to paying you know I don't I don't mind that dollar a bottle when we get to them but they need to be paying for it and we're going to have to do something for our budget so I appreciate what you've done we will look at this very closely and I think a lot of these things can be implemented John did you have something I had one last thought and I got a phone call just the other day uh you did you guys think uh now nowadays I think a lot of folks is I'll back I'll back up since this rain came I think a lot of folks have kind of given more hope to their lawns but before the the rains a lot of folks have just given up on their lawns but the one big concern that I'm hearing is uh the one the watering once every 14 days uh you know they're struggling with it but they're struggling you even more if them trying to save their trees so what are your thoughts on on cutting that uh the the number of days just to at least save the trees or shrubs you know trees are the main thing and this guy was very concerned I have to water once every 14 days one I'm going to be in you know he's going to be in trouble so the levels um two and three which are starting to become restrictive uh where for instance in the winter time it allows you to water once every 21 days that is very adequate for trees in the winter time uh it's also adequate for an average berm grass lawn even a St Augustine lawn if you and I don't want to get into details but John has an excellent tape on your on the city's website on how you train your grass or toughen it up to survive these times and it can be done quite effectively um and I'm not going to believe it until I joh did you want to talk about that John Bale's doing a good job we do want to hear from John that's

[1:34:42] a compliment I'll take that uh let's see there is the hose in hand yeah the hose in the idea of hose in hand yes uh for shrubs and trees and not Turf we allow that all the way into drought level three uh is a good idea and then the rate structuring again comes into the regulation on that because there are people who get a glass of tea and the husband and wife both go out in the lawn every day and that's what they do for an hour and a half and there's a number of places around town that that's that's the way they put out a lot of thousands of gallons uh so the rate structure and the rules have to work handin hand to to keep people thinking in a conservative mindset good John did you have a state do you want to talk minut sir yeah please thank you mayor council and uh I appreciate all the work that the committee has done Roger havlock and I were uh present for the initial meeting and haven't been able to attend very many but they have done a very good job of putting this together and Rodney and Marty I I welcome your comments and those are are well said I I think this is still got some tweaking to do between you and them uh to give you a good example it still doesn't address how much water is used basically you say one inch a week or you say once one a week but how many people in this room know what one inch of water does well in our clay LOM soil it only goes about eight or nine inches deep and if you're talking about your trees who have Roots 2 feet deep uh then you haven't address those roots for survival even so so there's that tweaking to do and then on the once per week uh as the the standard for when you're in contingency level or conservation level one if someone has a slope and there's no way they can water it at only one day a week without it getting in the street give them the flexibility to water twice a week to get the percolation in the soil there's got to be some flexibility built in there and Marty that was you're right on Target on that flexibility just as they

[1:36:44] have addressed in this if they get to 24 months and it's August and your second wetest month is September and you can stretch it for one more month and yall just make that call so I I believe it's not a Line in the Sand just like you said so we're educating and and these these younger people that are doing all the work now now that I've stepped out are doing a great job of encouraging people to learn that what are your largest users of water in the landscape it's turf grass as a general rule but you don't have to go make this place look like the moon okay you can allow yourself those things if you want to grow a vegetable garden and it says you can only water once a week Liz Can can you grow a vegetable garden in St Angelo Texas watering once a week no way I can't I can't no one can so do you give people the flexibility just like you can fill a pool to grow your vegetable garden use water responsibly and I think that's the the the part of the Educators to get that across but let's make this place a viable place to live let's not kill everything let's just make a better place and I think this this group has done an outstanding job thank John might mention John was on our committee in 2012 to help us right couldn't have done it without him we appreciate you we appreciate you very much uh we will be using your figures as I say we're going to be talking the next three items we're going to be talking about water and then next Tuesday that's what we'll be talking about so we'll be using your and we have this is not current cuz Walter kronite not but what he put in there if you'll watch it's actually very entertaining but it's also an excellent overview of the whole state of Texas and where water what happens right here affects the Gulf of Mexico thank you very much so I hope you'll watch that we appreciate it let's move on now to number 15 discussion consideration regarding matters related to the city water conservation drought contingency plan we'll take number a first consideration from adopting a

[1:38:47] resolution implementing a standard conservation level of the city's water conservation and drought contingency plan let's take a first if you would Mr Dixon and then we'll through with that and we'll take B mayor mayor and Council that's um they're really just a an option for y'all it's not really an AB type deal so B to then yeah go ahead and read it too is consideration of adopting a resolution implementing drought level one of the city water conservation drought contingency plan Mr Dixon mayor council it's U I feel a lot better standing here today than what I had planned on standing here and talking about um before the Memorial Day weekend and the the rains we were blessed with I was coming to you today with drought level three and I'm coming to you today with considerably better news than that on the screen um I run these numbers yesterday and apologize for not getting everything to everybody but I want to try to be as current as I could so what you see in front of you is kind of s Angelo's water supply yesterday all of this is in acre feet um if you just go down the list you know we have the Hickory that's fixed to come online we got nasworthy uh it's 9609 and acre feet twin be south pool 6570 North North Pool 16560 OHV or allotment of 15,000 acre feet a year OC Fisher at 2530 acre feet gives us a total of a little over 50,000 acre feet in our local Water Supplies not counting Hickory you take evaporation off of that we got available a little over 38,000 acre feet in a demand of 15,000 acre feet a year we got about 2.55 years or about 30 .57

[1:40:51] months of water as a snapshot look without counting Hickory if you had the 6721 acre feet into Hickory we're at about 36 months so basically what this A&B part is is I was just wanted to give you an option I don't know what y'all's plans are if you're going to do anything if if you want to go out of the drought levels which is the standard conservation level that's above 24 months and you also have the option um or I provided a resolution for Drought level one if that's where you want to stop or I guess stay where you're at so I just try to give you options and so we could do whatever y'all's desire was today and that's about where in looking at the the water supply you you you you factored in evaporation rate yes sir would nothing be factored in for for normal rainfall that's part of the evaporation that's a net evaporation okay so it has I took the the standard or the average evaporation for this area and the rainfall and did the math so that's counting the rainfall too okay thank you Rodney so so we're going to decide with what what stage we're going to stay in my my personal opinion is I think we do we have to automatically go out of this isn't it written in the ordinances like that that we have to go out of this stage well part of the drought water conservation drought contingency plan and legal may not completely agree with this but under Section 11.24 exception and variance the city council may allow exceptions to any of these provisions of this article and the council May place conditions on any exception to me that says you can do

[1:42:54] whatever you want to yeah I I I I mean under under our if you go by the conservation above 24 months is the standard conservation levels we really and truly do have four levels we have standards in one two and three you can call them whatever you want to but we have four levels so to me that's y'all's decision what what do y'all want to do be mindful now before I before I shut up we have to come up with some way to make everything work I have to have funds to maintain the system and to turn the water treatment plant on and the Wastewater Plant and all the things that we have to do and maintain 750 Mi of of mains and all those things and I and I think we can get get there and I think we made a big step last week that we can continue on with so keep that in mind before you cut me off Rodney well I'm going to move that we stay in the the stage that we're in right now and the next meeting I want us to come forward with a plan of talking about raising the rates for sure talking about raising the rates on the highend users and coming up trying to adopt the plan that was presented to us trying to put it with our plan and all of us coming together at the next meeting I I'm I'm putting it on the for up for a vote that we stay with the stage that we're in right now and we we talk about at the next meeting of what we're going to do as far as the money goes I'll second that Mar well I I you know we we can come up with a plan I I I disagree I I uh uh and I'm going to vote against it strictly from the standpoint of of I I think our I think the citizens of San Angelo have been good stewards of water I think they they've taken into

[1:44:56] consideration what they uh what we needed to do at at at times I I don't think they will go out and just because uh we tell them we've got 3.57 months of of water left that they're going to open the faucets and and and go crazy but I think if they want to is is is John said if they want to start a a uh Garden in their backyard uh they'll be a they can do it and and they can get started at it now and and uh then we can still implement the plan have anything from down here I'm thinking Don um I have a question to begin with on our 30.5 uh months remaining is is that at the the level that we're in in now or is that in the previous levels and an average of both how did you come up with that that's just a total available water with the demand uh it doesn't got anything to do with with levels well I mean as far as the demand goes our demand has dropped off sharply with the implementation of the only thing the only thing that I changed on demand and um I don't maybe it's a safety factor maybe that's the way my little mind works but last year was at 14,200 acre feet the year before that we was a little over that year before that we was way over 15,000 so thinking that if something is relaxed and we're going to use a little more water I just put 15,000 acre feet it could have very easily been 14,200 if I went with last year so okay it's just a little safety net for me you just have a little buffer in there yes sir cool all right uh the the thing that I'm looking at is you know we've been totally Blessed Like Dwayne was saying we have 30 months I

[1:46:59] don't want to to do anything to take us out of the mindset that we can go on like we have in previous years and and you know use water without regard for for how it's used and the conservation of it so that's why I seconded Rodney's motion Johnny oh you forgot who's next Charlotte no Ricky my question is go ahead Johnny my question is uh I miss you I know a while back we were you started blending Hickory with our water now so where are we on are we still blend I lost track are we blending are we not or we using we've got some we've got some um skater control the electronic controls issue on the wellfield that we've got people down looking at that's why we was trying to blend some water to check that system and we're not blending any right now we will go back to that when they think they've got the bugs worked out so in the event that uh we need that or get ready to use it that we have all of those bugs worked out but currently we're not blending anymore so we're not using hickory we're not tapping into no I'm just I want to know your recommendation I mean you're the one that has to deal with all these numbers and and levels and all but what give us your train of thought where what what do you recommend okay and you know you got you've got a a money problems also at the same time so I do uh we're going to get into it a little bit on on the on the next agenda item and and we'll keep that in mind as I go forward here I of course would like to sell some money and get caught up we're um normally this time of year we're at about 57% of our budget has has come in we're only at 53% um two years ago I had right at $5 million of fund balance uh we projected in April that it will be less than a million dollar this year at this rate so

[1:49:03] there is financial problems at this at the same time I want people to continue conserve water and and do their part and I'm not a proponent of use it or lose it I it's a lose lose deal to me you can use it you're still going to lose it so it's a I don't think you can win that battle I would not recommend um leaving drought level one I certainly would not uh recommend going to the standard drought level just because we need to do that but at the same time we need to look at the rates as we did in drought level three and we're going to touch you a little bit about that on the next item uh the breakdown that we did for Drought level three those ranges were not halfhazard by any means and they'll make a lot more sense when we look at them again in a minute I don't think we ought to change anything in that high-end user that over 29,000 gallons a month whether you're in drought level three or standard conservation or anything else if you're going to use that much water you are to pay for it and you are to pay dearly for it and I think we can do the same thing on those other breakdowns just the same we may or may not that's y'all's choice of backing off a little bit on some of the fees that's y'all's call I wouldn't recommend backing off much but I think we we're we're at a at a place and and it's not going to be popular but those levels represent 98 to 99% of the residential users from that 29,000 gallons to zero that's where all the usage is yeah we're going to penalize those that use over 29,000 gallons but it's less than 1% or or percent and a half depends on which numbers you look at not going to help the budget any but we hope it makes them

[1:51:07] think about it so but it's it's not going to be a big benefit so that would be my recommendation if you push me for one today I would not recommend um going higher than drought level one with some considerations for funding Charlotte well I agree with Mr self that I'm I'm not interested in taking us back to stage one I think that we need to stay where we are Hold Steady the course and stay on path uh I'm totally opposed to raising any kind of rates without proper documentation as to what the actual useage and the percentages of our customers that fall into categories and I won't make that decision without staff preparing and bring us some proper numbers I won't vote just to do it just because we know that there's two or 3% of the people out there that's abusing it um I don't want to penalize everybody so I agree we stay in stage two steady the course we go to our Retreat we work on and we look at some facts and look at uh the proper numbers before we make any kind of rate changes or suggestions Elizabeth um Ricky no no no no i' I've got a question you you answered um Mr silvus on the Hickory and I didn't understand the acronym you were using or exactly what the situation is there because I'm very interested in the blending project we um we began blending uh can't remember the date at a rate of we got approval to for a 5:1 ratio one part Hickory water five parts surface water um we chose to blend that at a considerably less ratio than that we were just bringing in 1 million gallons of Hickory a day at the time we were blending we were treating anywhere from 11 to 12 million gallons a day that process was to test all of the control

[1:53:10] systems on all the wells um in the well field the booster Pump Station the tank levels um the automatic valves at the water treatment plan to make sure that as we brought and we wanted a certain volume of water that we were capable of just bringing that volume of water in and that's the discussion about the blending we're not doing that right now because we still have some issues with the control system that runs all the Wells on automatic we can run anything we want to in hand but it's a long way up there and I don't want anybody to live up her okay I I'm I'm I'm I don't know if I'm confused or overwhelmed with kind of the complexity of this because I think that in the end you pay for what you want to use and if you're using really what is sort of considered too much for our community then you pay for it I think those who want to use a lot God forbid I say this are also having water hauled in and that's a whole other issue let's not go there right but there are a lot of there are a lot of things right here to consider and so um I I would I would prefer to have a more comprehensive conversation based on the presentation that we just saw that we really liked and how to move forward so in my mind temporarily we stay where we are until we can come forward with a more comprehensive answer to me I don't mind raising rates again on those that that are overusers but I also want to see people have an opportunity to have an incentive to change out Landscapes and do something that's more responsible and more sustainable for the future and that's what I need to see before I really consider raising rates and and doing some other things so I think we're you know I think we're 50% of the way there but I don't think we're 100% of the way there miss farmer just mentioned a

[1:55:12] little while ago that we do have the retreat that's coming up and this is actually going to be a huge topic of conversation when we're there uh some of those numbers you're asking for we can have those numbers prepared and and ready to go and that way we can sit and look at what was presented by this group that came I think there's some wonderful ideas in there as well but uh again this will be a big part of what we'll be discussing the retreat and uh if you would like to move to stay in the the level that we're in at this point we can discuss those items in the retreat and come back at a later date to come um to determine exactly what we want to do moving forward but right now again it'll be a big topic next uh next Tuesday yes ma'am I just want to recognize that from all the material that I have read 5 years ago where St Angelo citizens used 19 million gallons a day and we're down to the 10 million area they have conserved they have done their part and we as a council need to do our part and act responsibly and conservatively in looking at rates and numbers I don't I don't have a problem with what Rodney has the motion he's made if there's a if there's a time limit on it and one of the things that I have said and asked for asked for advice on for the groups that I've spoken to I want this drought or conservation level whatever it is to be done by ordinance I do not want it to be something that is arbitrarily left up to seven members I don't I want it to be by ordinance where people know exactly what month it goes into exactly what's going to happen in that month if we decide to take drought level two to 24 months from 18 months I don't have a problem with that but I want it done by ordinance I don't want the I don't want the flexibility that they spoke of the giving the council the flexibility to change these things because I don't want the council to have that I don't want them to have that power I want it to be done by uh by ordinance and I think it needs to be but if Rodney wants to make this motion to keep us in drought too for 60 days until we can come up with a with a more concrete plan I don't have a problem

[1:57:14] with that yeah I'll change my motion to go to 60 days until we can figure this out and Marty was the that said it perfectly earlier when he said we have to have flexibility on coming out of these situations and uh dell said this earlier also when we have like if we're coming in certain times of year where we know that historically we do get rain we shouldn't change the thing immediately just because it's a trigger on a piece of paper it should be more of a common sense type thing where give us some time to go back right now you know we were going to go to stage three and now we're going to talking about going all the way out of everything and the the general public just right now you know I'm I'm hearing replies all over and everybody's freaking out that we're about to change this possibly and there all the the sentiment among all of them is just leave it where it's at well the people that have contacted me have also said stay in drought too yeah and and I agree I think we ought to and I think we need to change some months so that the ordinance reflects it but is I want it to be done by ordinance yeah Marty did you have something well I if we make it 60 days we we're pretty much saying that we're not going to we're not going to we're basically saying what what the the group of people right before us uh is saying that you know we grass is gone uh because we're we're staying at 1 to 14 uh and and I don't have a problem with that really you know but we're we're taking us through the summer and we're saying we're not going to water U but once every 14 days and and I just I just don't think that's uh that's fair to the citizens of St Angelo who have been good stewards of of of our water you make sense you make sense Johnny Ricky I want want you to touch on I know there's the folks out there like Miss farmer said that have really uh worked hard to conserve but I don't think there's a lot of folks out there

[1:59:15] that understand that uh okay I'm conserving now you're telling me that you've got lack of funds to run the department what does your department do for me anyway you know so I think there's a lot of folks that are out in the dark not knowing what you provide me water but what else do you do for me they don't understand all the other details of what you use your funding your uh fund money to uh to service us with you know what I'm saying okay you provide me water what what else do you give me from your from your department from your fund balance if you look to me if you look at the core Services of the water utility department is provide safe potable water in the collection of waste water and the treatment thereof and the disposal of waste water everything else is a function of that when you say you provide me water so what else do you do for me isn't that enough okay we repair the Leakes we work on the pumps we work on all the equipment we clean lines we we do all of those things that are necessary to provide you water that's what the cost is we provide you water and we take that water when you're through with it that ought to be enough it just takes a lot of parts to keep that running appreciate that I got Rodney waiting down here I have anybody waiting down here okay Don's been waiting longest I uh I agree with Rodney you know you know I don't want us to come out out of this thing right now I have no problem at all with putting a limit on it to where we can look at it decide where we want to go and those sort of things but you know my bottom line is when it when it comes to me taking a shower and getting a glass of water versus water in the lawn I I know which way I'm going to go and so that's that's definitely why I voted with um Rodney but by the same token I

[2:01:19] still think that we need to address the the money situation also which hopefully if the retreat we can do Rodney that's about what I that's what I was going to say about the retreat what we need to have is have City staff find out what the rates are for our sister cities and see if we're lower higher where we stand I know we're much lower than the the main three big cities in the state of Texas I know their rates are I I think their rates are a lot higher than our rates are so we can see what we compare to and how we can solve this problem of moving forward May microphone would sure wouldn't that depend on the source of those cities water I mean if they all if the sources have underground water wells ground surface I mean it's not going to compare to a source of just surface water only gather that information as well Mike mayor um I happen to be carrying the March 31 one monthly Financial with me uh that's a time when we were in drought stage two and probably is uh not the absolute accurate representation what it would look like going forward but probably give us an idea we lost $370,000 in the water operating fund that month if uh we're talking about moving through June and July 60 days uh uh continuing in that stage if we if we continue that way the financial impact would be $700 to $800,000 negative uh I think you need to be aware of that in addition to that that that's just additional loss those are months where our system our rates are built to recoup losses that we have in those winter months in the winter we don't sell enough water to cover our costs we make that up by selling more water in the summer if we're going to continue through the summer or 60 more days at wintertime usage levels than what

[2:03:22] we're planning for or two more months of financial losses it's not just the financial loss but it's not having the profit those are months where we should be generating a profit to make up for months where we did where we did have the losses so the true Financial impact is not just the loss it's the absence of a profit so uh the if we were to break even we would still have those losses yet to be made up uh so I think you need to know that that a 60-day time period continuing what we've done in the past will create a financial impact of greater than that 7 to 800,000 loss we we we can expect to have continued losses in that neighborhood uh and those are months where we need to have profits to make up for and we are fortunate that we started a a couple of years ago with a with some fun balance and and really that's what those fund balances are for but anyway so the way it stands right now we have 30 months of water and at 18th that would be in drought stage one if we waited and did according to the ordinance right now at 18 months we would go to two so there would be then uh 12 months 12 months of stage one am I am I am I figuring correctly well you you you've lost me if if we go by this we would be in standard conservation level yes and then at 18 months we would go into drought stage two correct and then in 12 months we would go into three yes that's correct so if we took it back to Drought stage one we could only be there and we might want to change the months instead of going at 18 months to two we may want to go at 22 months or 24 months at two change the change the change the drought level stages so if we went back to Drought one at 30 months and changed it to 24 months we could be in it 6 months and that would give us 6 months of water and 6 months of income and if it didn't rain then we could go back into two and I don't know it's you you make you make a good point Marty

[2:05:26] makes a good point we our fund is in trouble well we think you should make an informed decision and and there you know what is the what is that Financial impact that's just an estimate but absolutely this group has done a good job in uh keeping those financial consequences in mind uh as well as uh the Water use in mind and I think it's appropriate that we continue to the discussion both at the retreat and depending on the result of the retreat some follow up there well if we take the recommendation to go to drve stage two at 24 months that's not but 6 months of water not but 6 months at at the unrestricted level so what if we say let's stay in drought stage two for 30 days and give us time to work this thing out and really vetted and considerate and then in 30 days we'll make a decision as to where we whether we change it or not is that something you could go with I'm fine with changing my motion to 30 days but I again I wanted it to not be a a just a knee-jerk reaction to change these things quickly I understand the money situation I you know very very well and I I see that we're going to have to raise rates I I truly believe that I know that's not a popular thing and I'm not here to to win a popularity cont contest believe me but we're going to have to raise rates and we're going to have to figure out where we're going to get this from I think at this Retreat hopefully we will come up with some answers so yes I want to leave my motion the same I'll change it to 30 days at stage at the second we stay at stage two where we are right now drought two for an additional 30 days until we get some concrete figures and really decide what we want to do at that time we might take it to one or we might change the ordinance so that we can stay in two I don't have a problem with that two comments two comments we have 36 months with the Hickory on we we you didn't say the Hickory or you didn't say the Hickory right I wasn't counting the Hickory because it's I want to count the Hickory we've spent a lot of money to get the Hickory here I want to count the Hickory um I think the problem though is

[2:07:32] and it's it's uh it's it's our history is what Michael said we always go back to the money I mean we've got to figure out how to if we're going to have a conservation ethic that can't be the reason that we keep moving back and forth I know it's our reality now but I hope within you know if it's realistic within 30 days we need to have a different answer to the issue and so that's what I would hope that we that we focus on in the next 30 days and maybe not all of these other things that we keep getting distracted with light bulbs and the sge yes sir mayor she's absolutely right in the group did touch on dis a disconnect creating a disconnect between usage and financial consequence there is a way to do that we can talk about that at the retreat who seconded that who's would you would you go with 30 days on that Don absolutely mayor instead of going 30 days uh why don't we make until the first meeting in July that's about almost 30 days we can't do anything until the first meeting anyway July anyway okay can you restate the motion please Rodney Rodney that we stay in drought level two sta or stage two uh for the next thir 30 days until we decide what we're going to do with that at this meeting and that's it are you comfortable with the second on that Don yes sir do I have any further comment from Council on this well I I just want to say I'm I'm sticking to my guns uh 30 or 60 days I think we're you know we've asked we've asked our citizens they they've complied and if if they want to get even they're going to get even and um it it has no monetary mine has nothing to do monetarily we we've asked them to to do what they needed to do and now we have a supply I'm not asking I I don't think I think they've been set and train not to

[2:09:35] waste water but at the same time I think they deserve to be able to the the The Yards got a good jump start if they want to water their yards they water their yards if they want to put a guard in their backyard they can put a garden in their backyard they can't do any of that uh if we wait 30 days it it's it's going to be too late so Point well taken and I yes I just want I think Michael is exactly right I never looked at it that way but if we lost 300,000 Plus in March and we're not gaining Revenue that's a double that's a double hit right there so if we continue even another 60 or 30 or 60 days we we'll be hurting or the department will Charlotte it was uh recently that we changed our number of days to go to just once every 14 days instead of once a week I mean to reward the folks can we not go back to the once a week stay in stage two which allowed us previously Marty I'm I'm asking you oh yeah we could would that would that would be normal under stage too that would be the normal thing to do and it rewards uh our folks folks uh for their conservation efforts which they have done we have a little bit give us 30 days and it it allows them to go back to our regular what it used to be before we yeah it's a good idea do you agree Rod Rodney in stage two it was watering it was once a once a week and we changed it to go back changed it to 14 days I mean I didn't want to but that's what you know that was a change that was done under drought level one not drought level two drought level now that was once ever seven days but yeah it's always been once over 14 days it's 14 days I thought it was winter time and summertime win summer we had summertime should be once winter time was once for 14 and it's summer and we changed it to go back to

[2:11:37] Winter that's right so that would if we went back to just a normal drought stage too that would be watering once a week seven days okay and give yeah I'll change I'll change my motion to to read that that we'll stay in stay in drought level two but we'll go back to the original drought well it's actually as the ordinance is written we we changed it ourselves the last meeting yes meeting before last go back to the original ordinance for the next 30 days though and then we're going to figure this we got to figure this out on the money the money thing I think is the biggest thing right now we got to figure out on it so Don will you will you alter your second for that well I absolutely it kind of goes back to what we were talking about while ago though I I don't want to run backwards so much that that we're shooting oursel in the foot and and letting everybody be complacent with the water that we have as long as we're we're going forward then I don't have a problem with it okay Rick one thing that Council will need to address we've gotten some phone calls about people asking about new Landscapes because there have been a lot of houses who have not put in any Landscapes waiting so that is one item that y'all will need to give staff Direction on yes ma'am it's not going to change the way I've been doing things I've got this great big pink bowl that I put in my shower and capture the runoff water and my funnel that I pour it into containers and carry them out there and water things in my yard uh it's not going to change the way I do things and I really believe that the citizens here in St Angelo have been very very responsible I drove every District this last week and I think my district looks the brownest and and with the most dirt because they don't have any grass anymore I it differ but I I don't think people will change drastically but like you said they've had a head start and they want to uh try to keep it to take them into some fall months and I think that citizens deserve

[2:13:38] it we do have a motion on the floor is that we stay in drought 2 right now as we are instead of going to drought one we stay in it for 30 days until we can make some concrete decisions with some concrete answers that we go back to the original ordinance as it was written in drought 2 that allows watering once every seven days and I think that this will cover all the bases and give us time and then the July 1 July meeting we'll make some we'll make some some good strong hard decisions with with facts and wisdom is that right Rodney yeah that's right but I was looking at the numbers the 30 days does run after that July 1st can so can I change it one more time until the July 1 meeting that'll work that'll work yeah Don I'm gonna ask you again on your second if you'll accept that sure why not Don is getting real confused down here it doesn't take a whole lot I feel I feel like I'm taking advantage of my leg be boy down here he's well he's he's he he does his best work when he's confused we've got him under pressure now do I have anything from the public on this any any further comments on this I'm limiting this to 3 minutes Turner because we've been dealing with this for almost an hour and a half two three minutes yes my name is Jim Turner and I'll try to make this very short and to the point first thing is I think it is following up on something Mr DNE started on you need to tie other revenue streams to the water besides just selling water right now we're just selling umbrellas we need to when the sun's out we need to be selling suntan lotion something like that uh and that can be done we could have the water department actually providing conservation oriented friendly and make money off the conservation effort type Services materials whatever the second thing is I think you need to go beyond just straight Lake and water levels in determining your

[2:15:41] conservation or drought level there's other measurements out there as agriculture is getting better they're looking at Precision farming where they're looking at soil moisture content and so on and that probably needs to be part of the decision on when you go from one conservation stage to another not just straight how Deep's the water in the lake you're selling yourself short and you're not really educating the consumer either if the consumer knows the water user knows the citizen knows that the water rate and conservation level depended not only on the water in the lake but the water in the soil and other things like that they're going to do a better job of conserving also we don't need to have something that's tied to just one number we need to have something that's actually tied to a a real accurate picture of the water situation which is not just lake levels in the area thank you anybody else want to talk for 3 minutes give me your name sir and you've got the floor Jim Moyer and during this uh thing where you're going to be talking about water I would like for you to consider deepening Lake nasworthy if you're talking about evaporation the deeper nasworthy is you're doing better on the evaporation from Twin butes a floating dadge would do a whole lot of good to deepen Lake nasworthy thank very good point thank you thank you sir anybody else want their three minutes I had a gentleman coming mayor to me about the same idea but he he'd like to use the word capacity increasing the capacity of lake nasworthy so and that's an excellent idea that's a very good idea Rodney did you have something else no anybody else want to comment on this before we vote I'm calling for the vote all in favor please say I I any oppos Nay put a 70 on it we'll make a

[2:17:44] decision in July first meeting September the 6 Ricky September okay that's when it's going to rain again yeah that's the next big one the next big one September 6 prepare we are now number 16 first public hearing consideration reducing an ordinance amending the water conservation draft contingency plan in ordinance of City St Angelo amending chapter 11 utilities and solid waste article 11200 water conservation drought contingency plan section 11 20 three entitled drought stages Water Management measures subpart F entitled water supply stage drought level three sub paragraph 3A providing for additional fees for water usage and single family residential accounts based on volume and applicable underwater Supply stage drought level three providing for severe ability providing for an effective date Ricky Dixon got you councelor you remember of the last meeting this is what we are y'all sort of agreed to and wanted to bring back as a ordinance change and that's that's what I have for you today uh this is um changing the fee schedule under drought level three got um as you can as you recall we broke it out as basically because the average water Residential Water user is 6,000 gallons we didn't we gave 0 to 7 and then we started at 8 to 14,000 gallons um adjust ing that fee um up and then the next break was 15 to 20 and then 21 through 29 then everything over 29 is is where it was hit with that that big number over 29,000 gallons that's what I touched on a little bit earlier if you look at this information I have here on the screen this is U we went back to 2013

[2:19:47] residential water consumption and this is something that y'all had seen in the past um but we broke it out as the ranges in which uh we proposed them last time this 0 to 7 at 77% of the residential water consumption is in that rate um what you're looking at here is a a summary total this is domestic landscape and untreated for the term that we have some of those accounts at nasor that have meters that pull water from the lake so this is kind of an all-encompassing number uh then from 8 to 14 U is 15% 15 to 20 3.88 21 to 29 is 2.05% this what I was talking about a while ago you know when you when you get past this level even at this 21 to 29 you know that um some people think is an um a lot of water that's just 2% of the users those first four 21 through 29 up that's 90 9% of the residential water users are in those four categories that we broke out the rest that is less than in 1% on on this particular deal another way to kind of get a little maybe better visual picture this and and I apologize these numbers are small but their pie pieces got really small and we had to Crow a lot of information in here but the big blue portion is that 77% which is that first user of 0o to 7 and then 15% 38 and two that's the big pieces the rest of that off the bottom that less than 1% is those other little bitty shapes of the pie or slices as as you would see it that's 2013 2014 and and keep in mind that this is through April

[2:21:51] that's all the complete data we had so these numbers are going to be skewed a little bit because we don't have any summertime usage on here but it's it's basically the the same numbers you know 0 to 7even it's it's up to 84% because most toets in winter time but still the first four groups are 98% something like that 98 and a half or or maybe this one's 99 the other one's 98 and a half but I don't remember but that's where most of the usage is you know that's that's where we or yall wanted to do the the rate change and this is kind of that high representation of that big blue portion is 84% and then the 12.3 1.6 72 so this is kind of where we're at and this is the first reading of the proposed rate changes under drought level three Charlotte Mr Dixon I am not picking on you I I truly am not but I don't mind go ahead okay good thank you no I I'm I'm really not but I as last time I was not willing to make the change without some good facts and figures and numbers in front of us that I could compare to and this is just like those Engineers reports you got one report that says this and another report that says that and which one do you believe you're telling me that the average uses that you said last meeting was 6,000 gallons and according to our own report that we put out in March of this year the average usage per residential meter is 9,36 gallons that's 3,36 gallons difference so do I believe this report that is put out of March of this year or do I believe the 6,000 I don't want to change any rates or schedules or anything until we can come together and answer these questions at our Workshop okay Daniel actually

[2:23:57] I I concur with Miss farmer I want to make absolutely sure that um instead of acting on this today give us all an opportunity to actually take a look at all the different levels and see what we be what we will be considering based on the data that we do present on how we adjust those rates not just for that one level this Dr level three but the other levels as well so we could wait my recommendation as we do I don't have problem you want to go ahead and make a motion that we postpone this I'll make a motion that we postpone uh the discussion and decision on this until after we have our workshop and can discuss all the values anybody W second that I'll second we do have a motion we do have a second that we postpone this any Council discussion have anything from the public all in favor of a postponement please say I I any oppose nay yes sir okay Council uh I need your need your input on something we do have a a number 19 is a public hearing consideration of an ordinance the man that is here that is a proponent of this has to leave quickly he would like to to go ahead and have this brought forward at this time so that he could have his say before he has to leave but I need four of y'all to say bring it forwarding that's good okay we bring it forward and by vote of the council we have the authority to move things up so we are going because of a time limit on the gentleman we are going to move 19 up before we deal with this other number 19's first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance of the con ordes city of St Angelo z408 Todd nef ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinances city of St Angelo Texas which said exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts with zoning regulations use districts zoning map in accordance with a comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the pro following property to with

[2:26:00] 4349 North US Highway 277 located approximately 440t north of the intersection of North US Highway 277 and North US Highway 67 this property specifically occupies 8.0 4 Acres with the Paul Gregory Edition track one and 0.384 acres in Smith Boulevard in Northeast St Angelo chaining the zoning classification from Ranch in state r& to heavy manufacturing MH District providing for severe ability providing a penalty Mr Howard you have the floor sir thank you uh mayor members of city council um the applicant wishes to change the existing zoning from Ranch and Estates which is essentially the the def def fault zoning uh classification when we Annex properties into the city to heavy manufacturing um the recommendation or the proposed request is consistent with the vision plan map however staff is recommending a less intensive use of light manufacturing which is uh uh an alternative to the proposed heavy manufacturing requested by the applicant Planning Commission however did uh recommend approval of the applicant's request as you can see from the slide this is a subject property there is a heavy manufacturing um with adjacent to the southwest of the property the balance of the other properties are Ranch in Estates again this area was re uh annexed into the City and when City areas are annexed in the city the default zoning is Ranch in States so there is um some heavy manufacturing however uh given the location of the property G being a Gateway into the City and with the range of uses that are allowed within heavy manufacturing we as staff uh would implore you to consider

[2:28:03] light manufacturing as an alternative um this is the aerial just showing the same area uh this um shows the uses within the area um and then the last floor slides show the air the subject property uh and the adjacent uses this is the looking Southwest from the subject Southeast from the subject property looking East um from the subject property and then South property and then lastly west of their subject property and look so essentially as I I talked about before um the this is a this is the key Gateway into the city um the vision plan map does recommend uh industrial as in use and we believe that a light manufacturing classification would be more appropriate given the location um however again Planning Commission did uh support the applicant's recommendation for heavy manufacturing Don I believe this is in your area yes sir take take it sir I uh I have a little bit of a problem with it with a 100 units of livestock on 8 acres and I didn't understand by our background and I'm glad the gentleman's here uh whether that 100 units is a pass through all at once what what what he actually plans on doing as far as his his production and usage is I'm Todd Neff and to answer your question is it's a pass through is I'm uh I'm looking to build a barn and some uh livestock paddocks it's more of a uh

[2:30:08] would be a breeding facility and the barn will be used more as a nursery uh lamming facility things of that nature uh my biggest concern is is smell this is as the crow flies less than a mile from my house and it's actually probably a little closer to sunle Estates and some of the the other residential areas out there um university so you know that's that's my biggest concern uh for it is is this this ammonia smell and and some of those things that you're not looking like you're you're probably thinking more like a feed lot situation that's not what this will be uh it's going to be more of a holding time for a period of two to three months and then everything's gone it's a it's it's just a pattern uh what's the maximum amount of livestock that you'd have at one time uh the 100 the 100 yes sir but most of those would be in a barn situation okay so in the winter time okay uh summertime you know would be considerably less than that okay and the reason you know was Heavy manufacturing because that's the only zoning that was own the planning uh from what the uh city planning committee told me that would allow me to do what I'm doing so what is the difference Patrick in the in the lot in the heavy as far as his operation goes gentlemen is he is correct that the for what he intends on doing uh it does require heavy industrial use I would have to say that as a staff we probably need to consider potentially new uh zoning classifications in the future

[2:32:12] potentially um the the issue that relates to livestock is that typically associated with livestock there are uses that are fairly noxious potentially that go along with livestock breeding and so the reason why you have it in heavy manufacturing is for that for that reason I'd also like to note that again as you mentioned um mayor um that when you talk about resoning a property you allow for a range of uses that may not necessarily be consistent with what you want to see in the area so even um given the the fact that we're talking about livestock it does open up the opportunity or possibility for more intensive uses that may not be appropriate um given again the location but um they are light manufacturing um the the the range of uses in in heavy manufacturing um there's really no limit as it relates to what potentially could could occur in with that zoning classification short holding are for livestock in the city limits um it it is the smells that um I would be opposed to it if I lived at Paul land or if I lived um U anywhere in that area I live in the southwest part of town and sometimes we can get the smells from livestock feeding places uh and and to be right there where the Howard College is expanding their campus and lots of improvements are going on and uh the growth subdivision and family housing that's starting to grow out in that area I I I can't support it well I I I can tell you this that I don't know if everybody anybody's everever been by Producers Livestock Auction what you would see from this operation is a third of what you would you would get there I I don't think you're going to

[2:34:15] have a problem with the lieth lieth waiting Elizabeth I think my concern is that it's um we we said this was a Gateway when it was uh I think I remember when it was annexed and the comp plan calls for it to be sort of a Gateway into the community so I have a problem with what can happen in heavy manufacturing for our Gateway it's not necessarily the use if you're familiar with zoning it's not your use it's what can happen in the future and that becomes very problematic particular particularly when you have the development of residential housing or or I think an activity center like Howard College which we've been very supportive of so I think they're inconsistent and incompatible myself well and and I I agree with you for the simple reason is I didn't request heavy manufacturing I understand and I certainly don't want you to go out of town to do what you want to do because I think there are more appropriate places in the city I don't want to run any business outside of the city limits and lose the tax opportunity but I I think that um you know a planed development District if you want to look at that I don't know that we've ever done one with livestock that's that's really a stretch but there has to be some sort of control that protects the residential development going on as well so you're you're kind of stuck um but heavy manufacturing is very concerning well I am I have one piece of property as you did or I don't but there is a pre property that joins my property that is H heavy manufacturing and you can see on south of me there is a a concrete plant there right now where prevailing Southwest South Winds Southwest winds you know the nuisance is dust blowing from there right and that of course was created before we were before it was in the city limits and and north of me is livestock horses cattle that have joined me too

[2:36:16] so it's a tough one Marty you know I if if there were if there was going to be a 100 animals there 365 days a year I think it would be a problem uh you know being there 2 to 3 months lamming and then leaving I I I I I don't see the problem anyone else Charlotte the landing and the leaving that it that kind of bothers me with our traffic situation and the college students that are out there we don't have an overpass at the something Trail Turkey Trail or whatever it is out there yet and I'm that concerns me as well because to get livestock landing and leaving it's going to take livestock trailers yeah but we we saw that as so important that that we didn't we that the prior Council didn't do the necessary things to cut that traffic down either uh if I remember correctly because I served on the board have hired college and we we requested that the street be cut through and and Council didn't allow it so they they the traffic so that I don't know if that dog actually hunts Don this and jurs buddy you're going to have to make a decision one way or another and we'll vote it one way or the other well I hate to do this I think he kind of Falls in between a crack here and a hard place but uh I I move for denial second do have a motion to deny and we do have a second any further councel comment on this John Mayor I think in looking at the presentation the Area notification there was no one I think there was five that went out and no one responded I don't have a problem with it I really don't uh but that's just me uh we already get the smell from some of the packing plants out there even I live over here close to the police station and uh I I can understand that your operation will be way different than this one I have no problem with it but again

[2:38:17] that's just just one vote you know and I am probably you know uh you talk about hired College I'm probably a mile mile and a half north of there so ESS exiting and leaving uh I'm not even close to that as far as that's concerned Elizabeth if we vote to deny turn your mic on I got caught if we vote to deny then he cannot come back with the same request within a year correct but he could come back with a different request and perhaps there you work with a different classification that would have some limitation from the heavy commercial I mean the heavy manufacturing that's correct see and and here again I I think his his operation is pretty viable but I just don't want that heavy heavy classification to go with his property you know it's it's not as much against him as the classification that it carries and if we could do some tweaking to where we could work something I have no problem with that well I don't have proot industrial like they were talking about but it does not within the zoning guidelines does not allow me to do what I'm wanting to do with this piece of property I understand and uh so you know I went before for planning the city planning the staff recommendation was I go with heavy manufacturing and it's like them like I told them uh I don't care if it's zoned as an amusement park right I mean you just want to get your stuff able to do with what I'm trying to do mayor yes sir I I'm confused I know that Patrick let me ask you this the planning approved heavy manufacturing but yet you're recommending light is light would light fit his or would it not so why would you recommend light

[2:40:21] manufacturing if it because we believe that that's the we're not we don't staff's not basing a recommendation on what the gentleman is looking to do we're basing it on what we think is the most appropriate use for the property got so that's why we offered the recommendation yeah the gentleman can continue to do the work that he's doing now he he wants to build a he wants to construct a a a building and so that's not allowed if in fact he were to continue as he is he could he could do that um but it's because of what he wants to construct that is requiring uh him to uh need this heavy industrial use and so when staff uh offered him when he proposed to staff what he intended on doing they made him aware of the fact that he had to go for a heavy industrial zoning classification and I'll show my ignorance because I believe I guess the smell comes from a packing plant that kills the animals versus something like this gentleman's trying to do that just no no it I grew up I grew up next to a d out on Armstrong I know exactly what it does and I know how it smells okay now this isn't a dairy but you're still dealing with a bunch of animals and I know what animals do Rodney how much livestock do you have there now uh I have nothing there right now just moved them off well how much did you have I had 30 head of use so had many complaints on the 30 we're talking about going up to 100 um how many employees do you have working for you three three yes sir what are you going to do if this fails Plan B I guess I don't know what that is yet I'm my investment in this is I'm looking to invest improve that property and putting over $100,000 into that property M so it's not something I'm

[2:42:23] taking lightly and it's something that definitely not going to be an eyesore uh so uh that's pretty much where I'm coming from any more discussion from Council do I have any discussion from the uh from the public come ahead Jim you got three minutes buddy I'm still Jim Turner and looking at some issues similar to this in the past not exactly this type business but wouldn't there be some way of working out a plan to where he could have light manufacturing with a variance specifically to allow what he needs to do there to where if he did sell the property the variant probably wouldn't even go with that and to revert to a light manufacturing only we've done that with car lots and other businesses around town why don't we take and have this postponed until we can come up with some sort of variance that lets him do what he needs to do without creating a zoning issue that's uh for the future thank you we do have a motion on the floor so we're going to have to take a vote I guess if it's denied I I guess we'll look at plan go to plan B like you said yes Rodney you don't want to change your motion I mean you it kind of sounded to me like you were kind of leaning that way if you wanted well I changed my motion like five times earlier yeah but he changed his second I had my hand up before you looked at him but okay forget everything I just said okay go to you Elizabeth okay do you want planning 101 I know you don't as zone change has to be consistent with a comprehensive plan if we're willing to make a zone change then we need to be willing to change our comprehensive plan the comprehensive plan calls for a Gateway at this area

[2:44:26] the problem with that is we are inheriting uses that are not consistent with that so we have to make hard choices we'll have to do this every time we Annex property that has some use already on it but the point is what do you want to be when you grow up do you want this it's your doorstep and maybe you do and maybe you don't but in the end the reason that this use within the existing ordinance is only allowed in heavy manufacturing is because it has nuisance type activities smells sounds Etc and I'm not I don't know that much about lamming facilities but until the ordinance is changed we have what we have our job is also to follow the ordinance um I would like to see if there's something that we can work out with him but in the end he can't promise US that the animals will not defecate and we are in a in a in close to a residential area so for that reason I will continue to vote no and I'm not saying that there's not a solution to this but right now in the way it's presented I don't believe that there is you st with your motion Don and that's exactly where I was coming from yes I I don't I don't want to to keep him from from doing what he needs to do but by the same time token I feel like our hands are tied on it I I I don't have any problem at all with us looking or Patrick looking at the zoning and seeing if there's something when this sort of thing occurs that we can can work with a little easier but right now it's deny heavy manufacturing yes that's the second I second you second it is that the same second same second motion's been made it's been s anybody else care to speak not going to call for the boote the motion has been made and I think we're going to have show hands on this one because it's going to be the Bice all of those in favor of denying heavy manufacturing raise your hand all in favor of allowing it that is a four vote to deny with three to accept

[2:46:30] motion fails it is 127 what do y'all want to do you want a break for lunch you going to pull up item 24 well we were going to pull item 24 and we also need to do uh 18 yeah we were through with 17 with item 24 y'all want to take 24 and then break that'll get us at kind of at a Breaking Point okay consider item number 24 consideration of possible action on matters relating to water budget and irrigation requirements for City maintained parks and sports Fields Santa Fe golf course Fairmont Cemetery Roger havick and I got the timer on you buddy make sure I can find so let's BR let's breze through this some reason it's not on I'm not ready to call a break I'm getting votes up here to say let's call a break I got to have aak well before we take a break I just would like to make sure that last item is not put on cons cuz I want to pull it for spy for next it won't be on consent how many want to break and how many want to take off on this got two that's already broke anybody else going to break I'll keep it short you got it it's going to be short short go ahead we still have a quorum I would say good morning but we're now in afternoon so good afternoon mayor and City Council Members I am Roger havlock I'm the park superintendent with the city of St Angelo we've actually looked at this uh back back in September and October of last year from y'all's Direction y'all wanted us to bring this back to council during the budget sessions we are at that point and so here we are we want to talk about uh water budgets and uh water needs uh the purpose of this presentation is to discuss water

[2:48:33] requirements possible options for water budget rates for city maintainance parks and sports Fields Santa Fe golf course Fairmount Cemetery uh for the upcoming fiscal year of course we all know the reasons for supplemental irrigation I'll be brief with this basically to sustain healthy Landscapes and safe play and surfaces for the enjoyment of the general public to minimize soil erosion and excessive weed populations and to avoid the replacement cost from plant injury death due to stress we have seen the death and injury to many of our Parks uh and Fairmount cemetery and other places uh along the river yall have noticed it the public has noticed it you can see in the numbers we have had several trees that have died because of lack of water much of that reason is because of lack of funding to be able to place the water out that and of course the drought levels that we were in and to be conservative what we would like to discuss though is that we do have inadequate funding for consistent irrigation to minimize the impacts on the turf the trees and other landscape plants uh we also need to be or want to make yall aware the fact that even if we're not irrigating we do have other water needs for restrooms uh fountain fountains uh drinking fountains things of that nature the other point that I'd like to make are that the storm water fees uh began back in 2010 although we were assess those fees we were never given any additional dollars in our budgets to offset that cost and then of course the option at one time was to look at either waving the fees uh for the those that I've mentioned or lessening those water fees for City maintained spaces just a very very brief update of where we're at parks department maintains roughly 555 Acres there's 356 acres in parks close to 200 acres in sports fields and roughly 300 acres of those parks and sports Fields have viable irrigation of that 194 acres are in Parks 43 acres in sports fields which I

[2:50:38] do need to point out those that 43 acres is paid for by those associations that includes sassa off GLA Northern Little League western Little League those types and of course another point I'd like to make is that in terms of drip irrigation for trees we only have them in places or locations that were uh renovated or new locations for example producers Park uh City Park those types of things uh they're not for all the mature trees it'll only be for those that are newly planted or those that are very young we also have 55 Acres of irrigated turf at the Texas Bank Sports Complex Fairmont Cemetery has 57 acres and the golf course uh has 36 this is just a kind of a snapshot of all the different locations that we maintain within the parks department and you can see there's different colors uh and basically those colors uh mean that those in blue are those that have irrigation systems that just need minor repairs at this point which our budget can withstand uh it does not mean that those are the ones that we were actually utilizing just means those have the the systems in place the red are those that have that need major repairs but do have systems in place the black is no irrigation system at all the Orange is the Texas Bank sports complex which we have allocated funds to repair the valves and fittings that we spoke about about a year ago uh and then the green of course is the golf course and to bring that irrigation system back into play where it would do well throughout the entire site it would probably take about $60 to $75,000 okay cost prior to 2011 our department or division paid about $281 per th000 gallons that's in total that's storm water fees base fee any other fee that's assessed on that bill that I receive we were at approximately $281 there was an increase in rates to

[2:52:44] where during the non drought level and the water conservation level so to speak okay greater than 24 months of water we then moved to $420 per th000 gallons at that point we were never provided any additional funds to offset those costs so at $4.20 per th000 gallons it cost me out of my budget roughly $114 per acre for one in of water and of of course from our standpoint our our cap at what we think our requirements are at this point based on evaporation transpiration from the plants rainfall in which we look at it from effective rainfall and what I mean by that is just to give you a quick example in some of our areas we received anywhere from 7 to 10 in in the city we went out last Thursday with a back ho to do some test and in some areas it only penetrated 10 to 12 in in others it was down 40 in and still wet so there are differences in locations uh as you look across that but the reason why I bring that up is in terms of inches of water we feel that we would need a minimum or at least a maximum of 38 in a minimum of 28 in in a given normal year with normal rainfall okay at 30 in of rainfall I I'm sorry 30 in of water per year per acre the cost would be $433 per acre if you look at all the the Park acreage the 194 Acres that we have I would need a budget of $840,000 for that at $4.20 per th000 gallons the sports complex would need 238,000 a year Fairmont Cemetery would need 247,000 per year and Santa Fe golf course uh would need about $156,000 per year I went back and looked at usage

[2:54:49] over the last six years and we looked at gallons used I couldn't looked at dollars used because we've changed not only did we change from $281 to 420 but as we're in these drought levels the SE charges and things like that so I went back and looked at gallons and those numbers just reflect those that gallonage based on $4.20 and you can see that in Parks uh we were about at 172 in 2010 203,000 uh and so forth and you can see where it went dramatically down for the last two years of course with the drought levels and so forth Texas Bank Sports Complex is similar Fairmount cemetery is similar the reason why I bring this up is you have to understand those numbers are based on very few areas being watered that's not the 194 Acres that's probably more like in the Parks end of it less than 100 acres uh Sports Complex probably about anywhere from 25 to 45 depending on INF forw water and outside the fences and Fairmont Cemetery uh it's 57 uh Acres uh again that's about what they would have used in dollars if you look at our budgets though I have $27,000 which is about a fourth maybe of that 100 thou 840,000 that I just spoke of Texas B Sports Complex budget at 42,000 Fairmont Cemetery at 16,000 and I just put a footnote there only allows for two to three irrigations of one inch of water per year okay so it's very limited uh there's an obvious deficit that's your current budget that's current budget for 2013 and 14 and on that note that's the real reason we're having this discussion is that during the budget cycle the the direction y'all gave me was that when we were at the point of those accounts running out of money we were to come back for Clear direction from you so that's that's why we're here is because

[2:56:52] we don't need that today but you need to know we're at that point okay so if we look that look at this in a chart form you can see the number of acres for each site what our current budget is and again as I mentioned before if we look at the 38 in of water uh at $420 I would need about $840,000 at $4.20 per thousand for 28 in of water which is that more of a minimum that means you're putting limitations basically uh on us being able to make decisions that we need to make uh to keep things healthy and viable uh we're at 620 and you can see the numbers as they go down what we would suggest is the 38 in and in fact I was given direction to leave the parks value or fund value the same that's why you're seeing in $27,995 uh I'm sorry 27,9 48 all the way across if you'll look though I can pinpoint right here at 38 in of water if you put my rate and that's a total rate storm water fees everything included it would need to be at A14 per th000 gallons to maintain the park value at 207 that's the direction I was given to be okay if we look at the 28 in you can see you would have to put it at $141 per thousand gallons and I could leave my budget alone and still have enough water for 28 in or the 38 again at A1 four the Texas Bank Sports Complex would need 59,000 in its budget Fairmont cemetery 61,000 and I think two Pro Management would appreciate appreciate uh 39,000 as a budget for theirs as well at A1 four again we mentioned the non-irrigation use I just wanted to uh

[2:58:56] place that in the the presentation it's not a slide that y'all seen before uh for buildings uh other features you're looking at a total including the storm water fees of about 35,000 for Parks the sports complex roughly 9500 and Fairmont Cemetery about 1,290 so when you add those two together this is what our recommendation is is to bring our fees to A1 four per thousand and then provide us with a budget that takes care of the landscape portion and the non irrigation portion of 242,656 a532 when you add those two components together Fair Fairmount Cemetery be 62,200 and Santa Fe golf course uh again we're under contract with those so I couldn't really speak on behalf of them for that portion but what we would ask is to have an amount we we put $10,000 to be able to go in and at least have some uh monies for the trees along the river uh if they choose not to irrigate and we come in and want to irrigate it does give us uh some freedoms to do that uh to be able to handle that Mr SS Roger on the Santa Fe golf so what what about the greens what they take they take care of their own greens and they pay their own bills for that and again I've included them in this discussion because and you know others would would benefit from it too it be S Angelo ISD Angelo State University we're the ones that have the acreage uh the normal use that y'all are talking about residential you're talking about a 5,000 square ft landscape you know my the parks that we manage are in the in some cases up to 50 acres and and parks of 12 Acres 14 acres stuff like that and so we're talking a lot different types but our the main component uh is to consider looking at lessening our fee in total to A1 four

[3:01:01] per thousand and then providing the budgeted amounts again I hope to never use okay but on a on a good rainy year I may use half of that and still have money left over in the bank uh but again if you give me you know let's say 150,000 uh and give me the dollar for then you're putting limitations again we're going back to picking and choosing what areas we're going to have to focus that money in on uh and you're going to have areas like Brown Park Bell Park uh Harmon Park along the along the river uh that we are going to lose Landscapes and trees and things like that I have to take care of things that are what what are considered priority and the expectations are high let me ask you a question Roger you're saying your water right now is costing you $4.20 when we're not in any type of drought level okay and uh yes so yes and you want and you want us to reduce this to a doll four per th000 so you're asking for the taxpayers to subsidize the city 75% of their watering budg we need to clarify that Roger what we're doing is when when and Shane can speak to this this is really their item but when we came during the budget session we told Council that the money allocated that you had currently allocated in the budget was not going to cover it and and they I asked for decisions at that point there were various opinions on whether that some people thought that public space the water should be given that you know we should use that and the department shouldn't be charged others thought differently so Council chose not to make a decision at that point what staff told you is I can guarantee you there is not enough funding that has been placed in these budgets to cover it the sports complex complex is a prime example of that and that when those dollars got there I was going to insist that this item come back to council for

[3:03:03] discussion as to what you wanted us to do do you want us to stop watering the sports complex or do you want to come up with a way to fund that so that's why it's coming back because and not he's suggesting this is an option one option there was there was some consensus that those dollars should be lowered for public open spaces things that everyone could use those those dollars would be lowered that's just one option um we can quit watering we can put extra money in we can lower the rate there's all kinds of options and we don't need a decision today but I I wanted to make sure y'all were well informed that this issue still exists as we said it would exist when we went through the budget cycle last year well if the cost of raw water cost everybody in St Angelo $44.20 because we all have to pay the storm water and the way I see it you're asking for a 75% subsidy that's the way am I right or wrong you may be correct but that's a decision for yall to make I again I I don't I can't see that I can't see when everybody in the city's paying $4.20 and then they subsidized the city to I can't see he gave that as an example that is one option he could put up other options you can increase the budget by x hundred thousands of dollars that's an option so those are budget issue is what I well it is a budget issue absolutely do you have something Marty well I I I think the main thing we we we uh make sure we don't allow that happen is what we allowed a couple years ago and that's for all those trees to start dying at Fairmont and everywhere else I I don't particularly care to to give them a Subs uh to to to subsidize I mean to to to set their water rate cheaper but I say we find the money for them to water appropriately the way they need to water and and uh if we need if if if he needs 38 great 28 slim then uh I I say they bring it back to us as a budget

[3:05:09] item at 33 in the Roger and his staff are great at knowing when when to water and not overwater and we we let them do it as they need to and and then we just figure out the way to fund it and and and um however we need if we need to do that in a motion or whatever uh you know let me know Don I I have more questions than anything um number one and this may be a Michael question can we not uh take take money from our sales tax that that list parks in there is that just for new construction versus maintenance um are you talking about kosa DC half cent money yes well not kosa uh under the the actual uh the other 72% doesn't it list parks in there on the voted own portion there there is yes out of that that's kosad DC money and that that uh there is a an amount that comes over that I think is in the neighborhood of a quar million dollars well there's two there there are two batches yes there two bges of money there there's one that's a ballot item and there's a supplemental item in addition to that that supplemental item has been working down each year uh at the direction of that board in this coun or former councils okay so why are we are we talking about taking this out of the general fund instead of out of that because that's been the direction of former councils okay so what what we're doing then is we're taking that money that's the sales tax money and we're building new parks with it and letting maintenance of our existing ones go can I address no that this the the additional money that's not part of the that was not identified specifically in the ballot the additional money was uh to help uh smooth the transition into an increased maintenance effort on the on

[3:07:14] the on the city Side in other words when those Parks were first built it there's a especially Sports Complex there was a significant increase in the maintenance and operational expense that went with those that because those didn't exist before or didn't exist at that level before that maintenance effort was not necessary so on a temporary basis Costa DC board approved an additional amount each year and uh at the direction of really at the direction of city council and at the request of kosad DC that amount has stepped down um the quarter of a million Remains the the other quarter of a million which was what the other one was has been stepped down and and I think is nearly to zero now well it it appears to me that that's a mistake I mean we're talking about taking it out of the general fund when we can can possibly take it out of the sales tax fund so that people coming into our city and and buy things can help fund exactly what we're talking about um so I think we need to look into that for sure the the second part of my question is um I know that along the river the $10,000 was for drip irrigation is is there any way that we can can shift some more of that that money for the cemetery and along the river to to do more irrigation uh which is the best utilization of of monies for water because it's best utilization of water um or is that cost prohibited quite possibly it's cost prohibitive uh for that uh I mean the $110,000 is just for the water itself there's no there's no infrastructure for drip irrigation along that River we do have a system in place and it needs about 70 to $80,000 worth the repairs uh since we uh went on contract with t Pro Management several years ago and that's our estimations but that

[3:09:18] 10,000 is really just for water only that's not we don't when we don't have the funds and you actually brought up a really good point Mr vman uh that I probably should have addressed uh in this presentation and that is for years now we have been building and renovating Parks I'll give you a good example City Park uh or producers Park City Park was already a park that got renovated but at the conclusion and when it opened there was never any additional dollars put into our accounts whether it's for water or operational Meadow Creek Park was the same city park producers Park which is 13 acres uh was put on us no additional dollars both for operational and water so there's a history here and what tends to happen and what I think you need to understand as you're going through these sessions is that you if you keep adding these renovated and new what I'm having to do is keep the same budget keep the exact same budget that 207 948 I've had for probably seven years now I feel your pain up in in front of that same Podium but but the issue here is all of these parks that you see on that board from the right hand side especially those just keep added to that areas that get very little attention we try to keep the safety issues out of the way but there's no more water no more infrastructure because all of a sudden I have all of these new parks uh cono River Project we just spent N9 or 10 million I have absolutely zero maintenance dollars and we've already started taking care of that site see I I think that during our budget session what we need to look at is is more revenues I I mean you know you're you're putting good money after bad as far as I'm concerned for us to continue to to grow more part parks and and not grow a maintenance budget to where we can even afford water much less the the rest of the maintenance as far

[3:11:19] as Mowing and those sort of things you can only stretch that dollar so much you're you're right councilman Rick and I had our first discussion about the additional maintenance burden associated with the redeveloped park when he was doing the planning for Kirby Park that that was well over 10 years ago we had our first discussion about how are we going to get the additional maintenance burden that goes with this new part worked into the budget well and I also want to include with that the cemetery I mean it's to me a travesty the amount of trees that we've lost at our Cemetery which is is on one of the largest travel streets in s Angelo Avenue in along there um you know so I want to include it with this stuff it's a Gateway Rodney no he he got it Charlotte Roger you made a statement that I'm going to have to get Rick or you to clarify for me you said these were part were brought online with absolutely no increase to your budget now with each budget of each item there was a contingency or a maintenance to start up what happened to those monies was it not there was as I recall in Roger correct in most cases we brought on the The Parks a lot of them now some of them are reduced which actually assist in some ways the the way it helps is that you have a new viable irrigation system the way it hurts is that he may have not had a irrigation system that functioned there at all before so you bring it on and you now have an efficient system that works properly it's just that he might have not been paying anything on it before because it just didn't work so now you actually have an irrigation system that works but as far as additional funds being added to their budget typically for a new renovated or a renovated Park usually they did not receive those in their in their budget the the amounts for maintenance dollars were given to council each time that they were approved to begin construction and at the end the problem is is it was never mandatory for those dollars to be put in place okay you answered my question and really our discussion today

[3:13:21] is is and I don't want us to get too deep into the they got operational things that we need to address but I did not want at the we were in a different scenario today than what I thought we'd be in because last year we were in the scenario of trees are dying what are y'all doing to save these trees well I wanted Council to give clear Direction because his budget has maxed out and he hasn't been excessively watering anything and so he has no more money so what do we do do you want us to stop watering do you want us to continue last year you made exceptions saying watering the trees and I don't need you to give me that direction today but at the retreat might be a good time for youall to give us that direction you've got a pretty clear understanding I think of what the issue is and and that would be beneficial for us because we don't want to ignore the things that need to be done Elizabeth I think that the the projects you've put up there you know we'll see um if what opportunities for the sports complex but the other things you know they don't they may not have another funding source other than general fund but these are these are uh well-known facilities well-utilized facilities that are truly owned by everyone I mean I don't think this is an Us and Them these are Community owned facilities that need to be properly funded and and as you say once you lose the trees they it's so hard to reestablish I will have lost six mature pecans when this is all over and it's devastating to my lot so I can only imagine what that would be to Fair Mount or you know to other facilities yes Johnny you know Roger I think the the sad thing is even before T Pro came along you know I had always heard concerns about Santa Fe golf course and the trees when Mike Das rasas and them were handling they were always struggling with water so I wish we would have looked at it back then the way we are today and I think we would been better off but you know what's the difference I mean they

[3:15:23] struggled and they struggled we we had to water back then to keep it alive and viable and we identified that back then I came I came here in 2006 if I'm not mistaken the water budget was $222,000 for 36 Acres at the golf course unbelievably low there was no way that was one of the first things I told our staff there's no way that I can keep this a viable golf course we can maybe handle the greens and maybe the tea boxes there's no way we can do anything with the fairways luckily in 2007 we got a tremendous amount of rain we were able to do some weed control everything came back we fertilized everything did very well but we've had other years that went down even when we handled it and so when you're dealing it it's the same thing all over again Mr Silvis when you give me a budget that limits my abilities it's not that I want to use all the money that you give me but when you limit what I can do as a manager I have to pick and choose and when I do that you're going to hear gripes from everybody somebody's going to be ging somewhere at Bell Park if I'm not watering or doing something over there you're going to hear it but I have to focus my time and money at Kids Kingdom which is a 10-year-old park now that cost a lot of money to maintain and I have limited budgets let me ask you this at Bell Street uh what type of grass we have on those fields at Bel at oh at Bel U at the sports complex it's Tiff white 419 Bermuda grass it's a hybrid Bermuda now could we have gotten with something lower than I mean I I I always heard that that was a higher end grass that we never should have gone with no not necessarily more water I do I was with extension as a Turf specialist for a while before I came here and I do a lot of Consulting work too and it's it's really comes down to and you can throw St Augustine in the same thing if you're wanting a certain level of quality and you have a certain amount of use on a specific field or lawn or whatever the case may be it takes a certain amount of

[3:17:27] water and other management which includes fertility and other things to go along with it uh I can keep St Augustine just as green as uh Bermuda or anything else uh and vice versa but it it takes a certain amount once it gets past or you're limited then you start losing some ground yes the tiway 419 is a little bit what I call finicky in other words it shows signs of stress a little bit earlier on it doesn't mean it's a non-healthy grass you can see we went through a long period of drought where we we watered minimally over the last 6 months and you go out there today and it's a pretty good stand common Bermuda grass has a wider non not as dense of a canopy when you get that you get weeds that come in even when it's in a quasi dorcy stage during dormy or or during a drought I'm sorry okay so the use is very appropriate it's used all over the country that it is a very good grass to 419 uh but again you have to manage it correctly to get what you need and that's what we try to do we don't try to go overboard but we do try to manage it correctly and I have to manage a common Bermuda different than I do the the 419 Marty oh I I'm in support of discussing this at at the budget uh meeting do do do do we have everything covered until we find him the money we'll be fine I mean we know that I think I got clear direction from y'all we don't want to quit watering trees and those kind of things so we will make that work until we discuss it with y'all any further okay yeah because if we need a motion I'll make that motion but if if if if they're good with keeping on going then keep going I I want stuff watered until we figured out I don't think we heard turn off the faucet today any obviously they're not overwatering to begin with they're being very conservative so we'll continue in that same format okay thank you I get it okay it

[3:19:31] is 12:40 let me read the executive public comment on this do we any public comment on this is there a public comment on this yes ma'am thank you Roger good afternoon I'm Eva Horton I'm chairman of the board of Fairmount cemetery and I just wanted to come to the mic to just say how important this is to us um I underline everything that's being said uh at Fairmount the board is doing the best that we can do with the limited funds that we have uh we've done everything from lock up faucets spets around the cemetery because uh you know folks come out and they want to plant mother's favorite rose bush whatever we can't allow that and that's what's happening um we do when we sell lots and spaces we promise Perpetual care and we're between a rock and a hard place right now when it comes to that so this is very important to us whether you do it whether it's uh the rate fee or whether it's a budget please please consider all of the above and to hear hear that the budget has not been changed for that many years is that's interesting so thank you thank you ma'am anything else any other comments let's take us into executive there's uh three items we're going to discuss what do you think bosson hour well it is 12:41 if we say we're going to be back by 145 do you think we can do it executive session under the revision of government code Title 5 open government ethics subtitle a open government chapter 551 open meetings sub chapter D exception requirement that meetings be open under the following sections section 55171 to consult with attorney on contemplated litigation section 5572 to deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property section

[3:21:34] 55187 to discuss an offer a financial other incentive to accompany or companies with whom the city of s Angelo is conducting economic develop negotiations in which the city of St Angelo seeks to have locate stay or expand in St Angelo it is 12:42 we will do our best to be back by uh 145 and if I'm not back by 145 I'll come tell you when we are now dismissed let's call this meeting to order it is 2 o' so we're almost on time we've got item number 17 first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance M chapter 12 article 12 tank 600 sign regulations of the code and ordance city of s Angelo and ordinance amending chapter 12 article 12600 sign regulations of the code of audit the city s Angelo by repealing subsection 12 60611 entitled portable signs in its entirety and enacting a new subsection 12 60611 entitled portable signs providing for portable signs to be limited to 180 days and enacting a new subsection 12 6061 J providing for the requirement of identifying labels visible from the street indicating the expiration date of the portable sign at the location providing for severe ability providing for an effective date and you are not Patrick Howard I am not Patrick Howard no sir take it away Al I'm Al Torres billing official and uh I'm actually going to be presenting items 17 and 18 we submitted them together uh they're both changes to the S ordinance uh they're relatively simple straightforward changes so hopefully I won't take too much of your time uh first one 17 deals with the portable sign ordinance currently the portable sign ordinance states that uh people have a total of 90 days per aggregate calendar year that they can uh basically take out a permit for portable signs uh this item was brought to us by councilman Fleming uh We've looked at it running through the um process and basically the request was that we look at changing that to 180 days um so that

[3:23:39] would be the only change to that portion of the ordinance uh however the other thing we we discussed when we talked about this uh when we first brought it to you was that this is going to increase uh load on our inspectors as far as enforcement codes so what we would like to do is we added a a section where we would want to add uh this is a policy that we had at one time we basically just want to bring it back uh where we added decal to the portable signs that makes it easy for our inspectors to see from their vehicles as they're driving by whether a sign is uh is expired or not that's that's going to really uh help with our enforcement of these signs so anyway uh like I said it's pretty straightforward it's changing the date uh that portable signs are allowed from 90 to 180 days and adding the statement about the decals if you have any questions I'd be glad to answer go Rodney I move that we accept your ordinance as you've presented it anybody want to second that well then I'll second it and if you want to call that 365 days instead of 180 I'll second that one as well this sign ordinance needs to go to the way of the goony bird this is not a good ordinance it's never been good law but what's the downside H what is the downside how do you really feel maror I have comments I'll just hold my hand up down here quietly go ahead comment um I'd like like to think that portable signs are used for temporary purposes sales uh special events um maybe someone just moved into a new location that's not retail but again temporary and so 90 days um seems generous throughout a calendar year and the idea of 180 days if I do my math right is almost half a calendar year so to me the use of a portable sign for this purpose is kind of contradictory to the the its intention also the portable

[3:25:43] signs even though they're I think a higher quality than they used to be are also regularly put into the public rideway and become very problematic for inspectors and and for the the driving public so I think they're very good at what they do but they should not be used uh any more than what the ordinance currently now specifies one one of the basic principles or ideas behind the side ordinance is to reduce visual clutter so that was originally the intent in limiting these is to try to cut down on the number number of them that you see around town uh on the other hand U it's it's a very economical way for small businesses to advertise so basically say that again it's an economical way for small businesses to adver economical way for a small business to advertise what they sell and to exist yes sir so it's a matter of striking a balance between the two between the two ideas say it again Rodney this this is a great deal for small businesses I'm one of those small businesses I I don't use this well actually I have used one of these signs in the past it's been years ago but I had this I had this small business owner Kristen Oliver came to me and asked me if we could do something to she didn't want it all year round she also tries to tell her clients this does not work effectively if you do six months in one spot or or if you don't change your sign actually even monthly change the wording on the sign and so that's why she said the 180 days she felt was real good cuz she has clients all a lot of clients that could do like a 30-day on 30-day off and that's where we kind of came up with the 180 days a there's a lot of small businesses out there that can't afford newspaper advertising which is outrageous it's very very high and TV of course is out of the question you can't afford that so the this is a like a last resort for a lot of very small businesses there's a lot of hair stylists and mutian Barbers people like that that need these type of

[3:27:45] at uh routes to to advertise I think this isn't hurting anyone when I'm I'm not asking for it to just be lifted where it's year round your sticker on the on the deal I agree with I think it needs to be as easy as you can possibly make it for you guys and so we can make sure of that so I think this is a great deal I hope that it moves forward and there already are restrictions in this ordinance that says where you can put them you can't put these things in the right of way they have to be placed on so that's already done that's a you know that's a redundant statement that's correct and that's just a matter of enforcement and that's that's just a that's easy enfor it's in the right way you have them move it it never happen they're never in the right way no it does happen Charlotte well about the Clutter I'm thinking of Sherwood Way after you leave Avenue in and before you get to Southwest Boulevard if every business down there has got a portable sign out there the Clutter for just seeing traffic because of the same height as a vehicle is bothersome to me I mean how do we address that I guess it depends on which side of it if you're trying to make a living and sell a product you know beauty is in the high Eye of the Beholder and when you've got a sign that will sit out there and work for you for $30 a month or 40 whatever they are as opposed to $250 to $300 a day for a little 2 by two newspaper ad you know it's it's economics it's it's trying to keep people alive in their small businesses well IDE ideally M Miss farmer councilman farmer is uh that the portable signs should not be in the public RightWay which means they shouldn't be obstructing the view of traffic but like councilwoman gr say sometimes it does happen yes ma'am well I I think that again no one's here trying to hurt small business and it's an opportunity just like uh banners and other things that the council has approved but what we're allowing right now under the current ordinance essentially is the use of this sign one out of every 4 days and what you're proposing is one out of every two days

[3:29:50] and I think that these aren't meant to be permanent signage and that's what essentially what they're becoming the Clutter down Sherwood Way I think is unbelievable and there are places where they they are maybe out of the public ride of way but they are still a hindrance to sight where where the ride of way itself is very very shallow and there are a lot of places we could say across from HB some of the areas not directly but in that vicinity and and there I think to be used this much is not the intention of the sign Rodney under that same argument today you could have all those same people have all those signs for a 90-day period and they would be there so I mean so I don't want to double it it's it's staggered effect also everybody doesn't have the signs up at the same time I I thought think the benefits far outweigh the negatives on this and especially when you're truly to it just comes down to whether you can afford it or not and small businesses this is the route that they have to go I can't believe that we're even talking about this like this just different points of view with all due respect there will always be an opposing view yeah well I guess being a small I was in the small business and I know what that portable sign did for me and I know what it did to me when the city took it away yes sir well as I said I remember it well there's arguments in both sides so it's just a matter of what the council decides I guess it just depends on if you want to eat you need to sell something and these signs help you eat mayor yes ma'am I will sit over here and I will behave but that's not really fair because everyone up here wants businesses to do well then let's give them tools what you want your community to look I can pull a buster all day long on this one and I may get voted down and I'm happy with that but what you want your community look like in the end is very much dictated by these types of activities and we struggle with signage we want people to

[3:31:52] have what they need to be a successful business but in the end everybody then has to deal with sort of the visual clutter and what you have are a bunch of signs that become very uneffective because there are so many they're so uh prolific that you you lose the impact and that that becomes our norm and I think that's that's really bad Urban Design and a and a and poor Community design any further Council comment on this no do I have anything from the audience on this did you have something Patrick yeah I was just going to say I I um I think you know staff was obviously uh directed to bring back this ordinance and this is what we've done and we essentially are allowing you to weigh in on what you believe is appropriate given the the context of what we're talking about I think fil clutter is a problem I think that this uh doesn't necessarily address that um per se I think that whole sale we need to look at signage in general and think about what would be appropriate and so I think if you were to elect to direct staff to look at signage more specifically and more comprehensively we certainly be willing to do that I think that uh it is a problem and it does not it it can be a detractor but as it relates to what's being presented here staff was asked to bring back an ordinance with the specific direction of extending the time period however um I mean there are obviously pros and cons and we aren't weighing in on that per se but you could let's call for the vote Yes ma'am just one question uh since this was brought back without uh a lot of notification to businesses would there it be appropriate if we ask for to hear from our business people out there I mean I mean I hear from all of those up and down Sherwood Way I truly hear and I've got about a 5050 50% that wants it and 50% that doesn't because of the Clutter the height of them it blocks the view of cars exiting and uh going into to various businesses

[3:33:58] so I'm just asking if that's a possibility if we should vet it a little more with our business Community out there I might also add Sherwood Way is a very important part of our city but it is not all of our city there are businesses in other parts of our town other than Sherwood Way and we need we need to work for all of our all of our businesses they all need help well go ahead sir well I I guess my concern is I I was on the council just right when the when all the sign ordinance it it literally divided s Angelo and it took a long time time uh to to u to get over it for for you know it it was basically like the Civil War I mean brothers were fighting brothers and and uh I'm just I I know this is a minor change I I'm just leery of of of what if if we do one does that open the door to start the whole process over again and that's I would say no because we've we've tweaked this thing a two dozen times since I've been on Council I know I've brought a half a dozen of them up and I will continue now I've got some help thank you Rodney because this whole sign ordinance needs to go away but we've done it before we've changed the the laws on banners on signs we've extended times this is just one thing that we're dealing with so someone big deal so someone let you get your foot in the door and you won't stop huh ain't no big deal I think I think that's a good characterization let's call for the boat and I'm going to ask for a show of hands on this one because it's going to be divided public comment I've already asked for public comment all of those in favor of going from 90 days to 180 hold up your hand we've got a three all of those not in favor it's a three- three vote we're going to have to put it off put it put

[3:36:01] it put it to next put it back on the next council meeting we'll have Sil us and we'll decide it can you do that yes you can yes yes yes you can we can put it back on the next since it was a tie votee there's no decision made so put it on the next one please let's move on number 18 first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance city of ordinance city of St Angelo an ordinance of the city of St Angelo Texas amending chapter 12 entitled Planning and Development article 12600 we on the same thing again we we had originally submitted this as two separate sign Nord changes more particularly by amending section 12604 entitled own sight regulations in order to allow freestanding signs to be placed at an angle on Lots at the intersection of two streets amending subsection 12 606 entitled portable signs in order to extend the period of portable sign may be placed from 90 days to 180 days and to require an identifying label indicating the expiration date of a portable sign providing for a penalty for the violation of this ordinance providing for sever severability providing an effective date your own yes sir uh again to explain that we we originally submitted this as two separate requests we combined them into one but somehow in the captioning they got listed as as two again so the second move it to the next meeting yeah can we move to the next meeting because it's the vote the same thing it's well no no this this is uh basically this is two parts one of it is a portable sign part the second part has to do with Corner Lots signs at corner Lots but we're still dealing with the 90 to 180 days yeah well this this will be different somebody make me a motion and let's deal with I move move I move we move it to next week or to the next count meeting second we'll work with City staff and get that corrected okay okay all in favor say I I we'll move it to next week next meeting number 19 first public

[3:38:04] hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance number 19 is done number 20 first public hearing consideration introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance city of code of ordinance the city s Angelo an ordinance of the city of s Angelo amending chapter 12 exhibit a entitled zoning ordinance more particularly by amending article 8 entitled definitions section 803 entitle measurements subsection 83 803c entitled floor area in order to remove attic space from the determination of floor area providing for severability providing for an effective date of this uh this ordinance Patrick you are own sir thank you um additionally per year request uh staff was asked to to or directed to go back and look at the floor area ratio what we found is that in the current ordinance uh the floor area ratio for adex was included and obviously limited the amount of floor area that one could use for living space and so this ordinance in effect uh does not include that calculation for floor ratio as it relates to addicts um it went to Planning Commission and was approved and staff also recommends approval somebody want to make a motion on this and get it started motion to approve second got a motion to approve this as it is written to remove attic space from the termination of floor area I do have a second further comment from Council public comment all of those in favor please say I I opposing Nay put a 60 on that one please number 21 first public hearing consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance the code of ordinance city of s Angelo conso Valley turning point in cooperated Z 1409 and amend an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinance city of s Angelo which said exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations use district and zoning map in accordance with a comprehensive plan by changing the zoning and classification of the

[3:40:06] following property to wit 528 East Highland Boulevard located approxim 100 ft west of the intersection of East Highland Boulevard in pal Street this property specifically occupies approximately 0.35 Acres Fort cono Edition the South 156 72 ft of Lot 12 and the South 156 ft of lot 13 in central St Angelo changing the zoning classification from two family resident District rs2 to lowrise multif Family Residence District rm1 district providing for severability providing a penalty Bel Howard you are own sir okay as been stated the applicant would like to rezone the property um to RS from rs2 to rm1 um this is consistent with the vision plan map uh it did receive approval um from the Planning Commission and staff has also recommended approval what I'm providing here is a a vicinity map that shows the subject property outlin in red the J uh the adjacent property is also already um Zone R in one with the balance of the use is in the general vicinity rs2 with obviously the area to the South across Highland being uh light manufacturing this is just an areial that shows the same subject property outlined in red and then this is the vision plan map that shows the recommended Lane use for for the area and then lastly looking at the subject prop property from all directions North East West and lastly South and we are trying they they've asked to change this from lowrise from Family Residence District rs2 to lowrise multif Family Residence District rm1 somebody help me out here motion to approve somebody second me second do I have a motion to approve with a second do I have further Council

[3:42:09] discussion do I have comments from the public all of those in favor please say I I any oppose nay let's put a 60 on that first public hearing number 22 into consideration of introducing an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a oning ordinance code of ordinance the city of s Angelo z404 ter Sher Galilee CDC an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinance city of s Angelo which said exhibit a of chapter 12 adopts zoning regulations use districts and a zoning map in accordance with a comprehensive plan but changing the zoning and classification of the following property to Wi an unaddressed track of land located Northeast of the intersection of Roosevelt Street and South Buchanan and Northeast of the intersection of Roosevelt Street and South Florence Street this property specifically includes approximately 3.3 acres of land out of the Robert Gearhart survey 23 325 abstract 237 and 208 and 214 South panan and 207 211 and 215 South Florence Street more specifically being 2.13 Acres out of the Robert Gearhart survey 325 abstract 237 in Central San Angelo changing the zoning classification from single family residential rs1 to lowrise multifam residential rm1 district providing for severe ability providing a penalty Go sir okay uh the applicant is requesting uh a change in zoning to rm1 from rs1 uh it did reprove receive approval from Planning Commission it is consistent with the vision for the area and staff also recommends approval of such here's a vicinity map with the subject property outlined in red as you can see there a single family uses primarily in the area although south of uh Roosevelt you'll see some multif family uh as well here's an aerial of the subject property the vision plan

[3:44:13] map and then lastly uh views from each all directions North View looking South another South View actually uh West and then looking East the ordinance is proposed that we go from single family residential rs1 lowrise multif family res residential rm1 somebody help me out Johnny's not here this is his district or is this yours Don uh it's mine move for approval it's right on the border I think anybody want to Second do have a motion I do have a second do I have further councel discussion public discussion all in favor please say I I put a 60 on that one please first public hearing number 23 consideration of introducing an ordinance am chapter 12 exhibit a zoning ordinance code of ordinance the city of St Angelo Z1 14- 10 Plateau Development LLC an ordinance amending chapter 12 exhibit a of the code of ordinance city of St Angelo Texas which said exhibit of chapter 12 adops zoning regulations use districts on the zoning map in accordance with the comprehensive plan but changing the zoning and classification of the following property to wet an undressed 1acre track located at the Northwest section of the intersection of West bigard in Merit Circle more specifically occupy the Claremore Heights Edition block one Lots 4 through six Southwest St Angelo changing the zoning classification from zero lot line twin home and townhouse residence RS3 to lowrise multifam Residence rm1 District providing for severe ability providing a penalty okay the applicant was is requesting rm1 um from RS3 which would allow for greater density which staff uh believes is appropriate Planning Commission did as well as they recommend approve of the request um and the vision PL plan map uh is consistent with the the

[3:46:19] request here's the subject properties outlined in red as you can see there is a myriad of different uses in the general area um there's a rs1 to the South and some neighborhood commercial um across Sherwood Way uh there's some um General commercial heavy commercial and then to the far uh Northeast you can see some General commercial as well and here's just an area of the property Vision plan map recommendation and then views from the subject property North and South looking East lastly West The Proposal is to go from his only class classification zero lot line twin home townhouse residence RS3 to lowrise multif Family Residence rm1 this is yours Charlotte get us started please I've talked to the developer as well as the contractor on this and they do plan to put in uh town homes and this land has been vacant ever since I've been in St Angelo and I'm tickled to death to say motion to approve second do have a motion to approve I have a second further Council Rodney word where is the mail outs on this to the residents across the street the the the appropriate uh applicants were notified we didn't include that in the in the presentation um Asos none I I'd hate to approve this and have that house because I know I've actually showed the house across the street the big house and have that person be upset that we were doing this because this could go to a two-story if we change this zoning it can go to a small apartment complex but you said you did there is there's no notification there wasn't I I didn't bring that with me there but from what I recall there wasn't opposition

[3:48:21] and I mean typically um folks don't always respond and so we we get very limited I mean that's we may look at other methods obviously to try to get uh the community um gauge the community's interest but uh there wasn't a lot of response for for this could I clarify you did send the legally required notice according to the statute yes right absolutely thank you and I know for a fact that it's not an apartment community it's kind of I know but it's kind of like we were talking about earlier with industrial once you do that once you change that classification they can come in there and they can put apartment complex in there if they want to two story you can pull it on the second rating like I did this morning on my spot when do have a motion to approve do I have public comment on this all in favor please say I I oppose nay nay we'll put a 51 on that one please number 24 we have done number 25 discussion possible action fiscal year 214 215 budget preparation budget manager Miss Morgan you are on ma'am good afternoon we're coming to y'all a little earlier in the the Year this year to start the budget preparation process I apologize my presentation's not queued up it should be in your background but I'll get it up here just a second that today we wanted the opportunity to go over with you the um budget calendar and budget process where we are year to uh so far in our next fiscal year 2015 budget process and so we we in in March in February March uh budget staff prepared the budget calendar and it was approved in March to proceed in allowance with our own internal policies and Council uh directives and um state law in April we've been busy uh working with divisions um holding trainings holding budget kickoff um preparing Revenue estimates and um and drafting the first

[3:50:26] draft of the budget which is very very early ordinarily we'd like to bring this to youall we'll bring figures to youall at the next meeting and so we're preparing for that information um also then we're in to May which we of of course just finished having um expenditure uh packets out to all the division managers and Department directors uh everybody got their expense budgets in all of their uh criteria in and uh we went and did our our site visits with each of those folks to to receive their budget from them and then my staff we've been working quickly to get information back out to the budget committee uh one change of course on this calendar is uh we're going to forgo that June 10th day for the council's uh Retreat and instead convene the budget committee again on the 16th so we'll meet with the budget committee June 9th 11th 12th and 13th and the 16th and so that'll be a quick turnaround to get you information on the 17th for the next council meeting but we're working diligently so that we can have some overview some some figures to to present to you'all for the major funds then on into July we have um tentatively scheduled July 15th as a the budget work session we're certainly flexible for whatever is the council's pleasure we just wanted to get one down because we assume we'll have some kind of work session um as it's the council's pleasure and then we get into August which um gets into our truth and Taxation code which we are um attending webinars and and free trainings that are available to make sure that we're compliant with the new legislation that's come out um that will require additional notices and and additional items so we just want to make sure that we're super clear on how all that needs to be done and that'll start in the August 5th and 19th meetings and continue on into the September meetings when we're ultimately um adopt the budget ordinance and the tax levy ordinance and that gets us through the budget process so there's a lot going on behind the scenes we're working diligently to bring yall a um a product

[3:52:29] that we can work with and continue to make um changes with and assign to um to council's priorities and so um none of that to report at this time but we're working towards that I do go ahead sir I do want to mention that as far as priorities will be discussed as well during our Retreat um Tuesday of next week to ensure that we have a really thorough understanding as far as what those priorities are and we're also going to have areas in particular that we'll be working on uh as it pertains to water as it pertain to streets that we'll delve into quite extensively so we'll be covering a lot of that also at The Retreat uh which will lead into also the uh the budget process so what do would need today just prove your plan sure yes sir there there's no action necessary we necessary uh we just wanted to brief the council and and let you know uh where we are in our process do we have questions Council a pleasure thank you Morgan mayor yes sir I'd like to emphasize that the budget is full of dilemmas like we talked about this morning that that was a good budget discussion or a good discussion of a dilemma which exists within multiple times within the budget how how do we fund either adequately fund something we think we need to be doing or how do we pull back on something we're doing because we don't feel like we want to adequately fund it and and so the only way to work through those issues is to spend time this group to spend time working on those issues so this is a plea for making time either in regular Council meetings or in special meetings or aside from those on one on if you have one-on-one issues we are available that's our that's our offer and our plea that we spend time on those issues so that uh we reach as as good an understanding as we can get to to make those budgetary decisions it's all just money isn't it that's all just money well sometimes there's not money and

[3:54:32] that requires discussion also so well we've got a tree that we can grow it on so thank you m Mar better be a big one let's move on number 26 consideration of authorizing staff to negotiate an agreement and substantially the attached form with freeze and nickels Incorporated Professional Services per request for qualifications RFQ s214 Professional Services storm watering Engineering Services in an amount not to exceed 100,000 per year authorizing the city maner to execute an agreement between the city of St Angelo and Freez and Nichols and I believe we dealt with this before hadn't with Carl good afternoon mayor councel yes I was here two weeks ago um excuse me I don't have trouble getting presentation up here yeah I was here two weeks ago and uh just want to clarify a few things there maybe some some information I really didn't cover and U kind of apologize in advance for for doing this twice and and taking up your time but uh just want to make sure we were you had all information that that was there uh engineering division isn't in need of uh some Engineering Services for a storm water engineer uh right now I think last week I'm the only engineer in the Engineering Services Division there's other engineers in water sewer division but uh for me to to do both of those jobs it's it's really going to take down the productivity of both both of the jobs unless we can can move forward on this but um I just want to kind of give you some information um we went up for RFQ on this s214 we sent out 10 uh proposals had two returned and uh we uh to do this we have to comply with state law and on our purchasing procedures and of course that goes through our purchasing Division and through legal and and we follow all that to the letter to make sure we're we're following the law and the law that we're we're looking at is uh it's under the Texas government code if if you care

[3:56:34] look at that someday but it's uh chapter 24 2254 basically says we have to judge those based on qualifications we can't select a architect engineer or surveyor based on low bid type scenario and after we reviewed the pro proposals fre and Nichols of Fort Worth was the clearly the most qualified provider over a local firm here uh BL Associates U they've done several projects for us in the past um just want to kind of show you what they've done there um and this is with us here at the city of s Angelo over last 10 years they've dealt with the assistance with numerous storm storm water related issues they've assisted in preparing the latest version of kosa storm water ordinance uh they only work with the public sector in St Angelo so they're not working with developers and uh uh us and that that could that could uh create a a conflict of interest sometimes and uh that was a plus there they have offices in Midland and Lok they don't have an office actually here in St Angelo but they are in West Texas they're based out of Fort Worth here in Texas but they do have strong presence in Midland and L um we're asking today on action if if you so please is a permission to allow city manager to U enter enter into a contract well first we need to negotiate with the uh with Freez and nickels if we can't come to a s successful negotiation on fees with them then we would go down to the second U engineering firm um if we do have successful negotiations then we would come to the city manager with a contract that I think of in your packet it's a sample we would be very closely aligned with that and ask him to be able to sign that I know we dealt with this two weeks ago and the and the question was and the controversy was that we've got a young hungry company right here in San Angelo just a few blocks from City Hall that wants his contract and yet we go to Fort Worth for the contract so and and the

[3:58:39] question was why should we go to Fort Worth when we've got a contractor an engineer right here in town that wants this job and needs this job and I understand the qualifications but you know it's kind of like credit they say I can't give you a loan because you have no credit but you you can't get credit until you get a loan I mean it's kind of a it's kind of a catch 21 here Catch 22 it may be but it's that's the way this the law is written it's based on spiritual qualifications then explain to me why Freez and Nichols is so much more qualified that we should go to Fort Worth and hire them instead of hiring one of our own local contractors but we had the qualifications and the the criteria that we selected them in the RFP that went out to all the Consultants so they knew what was going to be um judg how they were going to be judged um I didn't bring that information with me today I should have you have the list here um Carl that uh first of all you mentioned as far as Sor uh as far as the specs that freezing nickels came out ahe but you also had it on the firm's local and area expertise related to storm water the firm's technical expertise regarding engineering storm water and storm water permits the adequateness of personnel and Professional Resources to provide the services required by the city and the firm firm's performance on past storm water projects for the municipalities so those that's the criteria that you're looking for when you start looking at the qualifications and when you looked at both parties what you're saying at this point is one was easily above the other is that correct yeah yes there was clear it was clearly free and equals okay Rodney you're first so can we go back to them and when we're negotiating this price just hit them with the super low price the the thing that I have people coming to me all the time on and they're tired of us paying for these you know these studies and all this stuff and we get all these people from out of town and the problem is is when we when we need to talk to them here like in an executive session costs thousands and thousands of dollars that they charge us to come and talk to us

[4:00:41] about something and that I I just think that our local guy will be able to beat them on the overall project on this so can we can we Hammer them on the pro you just said that you would if they if we don't get it negotiated with them we could go to number two correct that's that's true so I don't want I don't want to proove $100,000 then I mean that's a blank that's just a blank check we've just given them a check that covers everything they want well well I on $100,000 what that is that's a maximum and it's not like a um retainer like in law lawyer would have it's a if we have specific project that we're going to do and one Avenue P comes up for instance probably familiar with that that there's some engineering we need to tweak on that that uh I need somebody that's really familiar with drainage and storm water to to do that they would we would we're negoti ahead of time on an hourly weight rate and then there'll be a a number of hours that'll take them to do that and shouldn't be anywhere near $100,000 for that particular one but $100,000 would be the maximum per year I know but when I hear when I hear a maximum rate that's kind of like if I was going to sell a house and somebody said well you know I'll pay 100,000 well that's what the price is going to be it's going to be as close to that 100,000 as you can possibly get to it I I think that if we if we go back to them with the the lowest rates that we can get I think maybe maybe this local guy can compete with that and overall he's going to save us money here this local company is going to save us money if I I could interject I mean I think that our desire is to have in in-house expertise and that's that's our goal we've been working feverishly on on secure on hiring a storm water engineer because Carl works for me and I know that he's inundated with work and when we're focusing on customer service and he's having to do two jobs it's becomes very problematic and it's counter to what we all know we want in terms of being expeditious and very thorough in our assessments and our review in our reviews as well so we don't anticipate

[4:02:45] having to maximize the contract obviously funds were set aside for a person's salary which we're saying we're going to be using some portion of it because of the lack of a position right and so um we envision being able to move quickly we believe we have a solution in order to secure a seasoned storm water engineering but in the inter room we really do need this void filled um the qualifications were outlined um obviously the staff will work to to negotiate a price that's in the best interest of the city but our desire our our desire is to have in-house expertise in order to to carry out this function so it's not that's not our intent to to spend the funds because we needed to to to pay an individual so but you know you understand what I'm saying Patrick it's a perception thing to the public when we when we sit here and we if we were to vote and say you have 100,000 that 100,000 is gone no no in fact again the the the same funds we're using to pay a storm War engineer consultant would be the same funds we're being would be using theoretically to to pay for an in-house staff Personnel will be that become an asset of the city and so again our desire is to have an internal person but we do need and we do need to secure someone in the inter room so it was just simplest to put put aside a a certain amount of money that was essentially the salary and benefits for a storm Warner engineer but it's not our intent to to expend all those funds because our hope is that very shortly we'll have someone in housee well could couldn't we just change that and just say like 20,000 10,000 and if we if for whatever reason you understand what I'm saying I understand um we believe that it's it's safer just to have a not to exceed amount and we know that we won't exceed it if the council whatever Council feels more comfortable with I don't I don't believe 20,000 is probably we may have

[4:04:48] to come back to council ENT you know go through this discussion again so I don't perform right you you pay out only for work performance correct absolutely Elizabeth basically like billing hours against whatever you need them to do well that's correct I think that we we heard Carl say that Avenue P needs tweaking that's an interesting term in engineering but I I think that um in the experience that I've had with freeze and Nicholls it's been very positive they've done a lot of work with us on storm water in particular and I'd be happy to make the motion to approve but I also think that there's a lot of Truth in what you're saying about growing local but I think that that is probably better served um from a qualifications perspective on another project and I would like to see us do that because I think everybody I mean we're happy to have professionals start business businesses here and we want them to be successful but for this project in particular I think we're looking for some expertise to help us in kind of a jam that's true so I'd be happy to make the motion to approve and I'll second SE uh as a rule I probably squeal almost as loud as uh Mr Morrison on paying out fees and stuff but I did ask the question at the last meeting of which U uh it was answered that this is the salary that's already in our budget that we would be paying this person if we had them on staff yes ma'am in the last few months I like I have said repeatedly I have read more material on water and have quickly come to realize that the expertise that we need is definitely in a storm water water type engineer gosh I didn't know there was so many different kinds of Engineers and my brother's an engineer but uh uh it is best that we have the expertise that we can call on to do the work and if I may without revealing too much information we've had to pass up on 7 $800,000 of grant money because we're short staffed in engineering and this

[4:06:52] would only help free you up for what we need to be and I have will be the first one to admit freeze Nichols information that I've read from early 90s on is the easiest for me to read thank you and understand I that says something bad for you or not but I believe in hiring locally but this is something that I don't want to have a new fresh set of eyes someone who's not familiar with our area and our drainage areas and where various tributaries dump into and from what I've been reading freeze Nichols is very familiar with our area and I think we would be best served by doing this so that's why I second her motion Michael thank you mayor I I think uh council member farmer touched on it and and if if it's not clear we had an a storm water engineer who quit and moved on to uh what we assume he felt was a better opportunity uh we're thinking this we're hoping this is a temporary situation the key is that uh that the market is very competitive right now for engineers just a question of clarification this storm waterer engineer that we had in house did he go to work for freeze Nichols no no no he didn't did he go to work for a local company we work for another city hm we work for another city no he didn't who did he go to work for her bille Associates who Associates who uh the local firm the local firm so the in-house man that we had working for the city of San Angelo that we entrusted all of this to that was so familiar with it quit the city of San Angelo and went to work for the local firm which you say is not as qualified as the firm out of Fort word Marty did you have something to say Sir were we trying to hire a new employ yeah okay we can't afford it though no we we can't afford it just person take a job sry I agree I the way that we had set up

[4:08:59] the criteria the Freez and nickels were were clearly more qualifi even though the our our own man that worked for the city of San Angelo that was intimately associated with storm water quit and went to work for the local firm we still had rather go to can do I have any other comments from the Council on this Mr Mayor I also want way I mean when you look at a company's uh capacity you got to look at all the individuals and so not not withstanding the experience of one individual who I seemingly would be qualified we're talking about the company and their profile um their experience um their uh exposure to different projects of that type and so not based on an individual is based on the company as a whole but if this man were still in the employee of the city of s Angelo he would be the one responsible for this and we would not even going out be going out for proposals from freeze nichel and I would certainly hope that the the the good old boy Theory wouldn't come into play since he went to work for a local company and we took The Local Company just because he went to work for them to me that would be construed as the good old boy Theory and that would be very wrong well I'm I'm going to call for a vote here go ahead Daniel mayor I just want to express that staff uh definitely we follow the Texas government code when it comes to our selection RFQ criteria and uh that's what we have to go by and that's what the staff did I commend the staff for having done that and um we stand stand here before you asking for a a vote on this issue but again I commend the staff for following the the RFQ procedure and the and the the U Texas government code can Rodney can we say anything about them traveling down here in their travel time that's the problem that I have is no travel time you you bid it out on the items that you're doing the firm The Firm that's here in town has said that they'll they'll do do that they don't have travel time I really anticipate very little travel time with this project with with

[4:11:04] the electronics that we're using now with phones and okay easy just say we're we won't pay any fees for them that's until we get to the project pafic it's it's kind of hard to say that because I really don't know exactly what it is Mr Banks I knew you wouldn't let me stay in the audience forever uh the request for qualifications is just for that it's just for the qualifications you're actually prohibited by law to ask for the pricing at that point that's part of your contract negotiations which would include your travel time your buildable hours and those things that you've already addressed excuse me so first you get the qualification then you negotiate the prices if those negotiations fail as Carl's already said then you could cease negotiations and go with the next guy so that's by law we are actually prohibited by for asking for any kind of pricing in the RFQ process we're mandated to pick the most qualified firms for the city of Stan Angelo and then you move from there and that's what staff has done any further comment Elizabeth Roger could we cap a percentage of whatever is eventually negotiated on uh travel or reimburse like that you could your contract you can that' be okay I'd be happy to amend the motion to to put a a cap on on on travel yeah it's better but I'm not what is that cap 5% sure I mean I'll amend my second to to your uh motion but to me it's a mute point you can put build services and whether it says travel or not on there it's just up to the person billing the only time they're coming is when they're asked by this staff to come when they're needed here by this staff El Allan's got more to do than to run up and down the road do I have any further comment from Council if not have opened up to the Public Public comment state your name you've got three to five my friend good afternoon my name is Darren fent I'm the regional office

[4:13:08] manager for blin associates appreciate you letting me speak uh this afternoon um I understand we're not a very well-known engineering firm uh we're a small and mediumsized firm based out of conro um we compete all the time with Freez and nickels Jones and Carters the uh coros um were just not as well known as they are nor as large um but we are very familiar with storm water um uh being raised if you will in engineering bus business in the his Houston Metro area we deal with storm water uh on a daily basis um I was born or not born but I was raised here in St Angelo um I've seen the streets flood um flooded out many cars as a teenager um so I'm very familiar with uh the the storm system in St Angelo matter of fact I've been checking on the Lakes almost daily myself I love to fish so I saw twin butes rise goodness a lot over the last few weeks so or last couple of weeks um we did hire Tim Wolf who was the uh previous City storm water engineer um he's been a great asset to us um and that's uh that's that's no secret uh to anyone um uh but as a company we do uh our our main business are municipalities we service Municipal utility districts in and around conro uh we are the city engineer for the city of Willis we're the city engineer for the city of pamaran Village uh we are the district Engineers for mud four mud Dy um and and a couple others around Lake conro so we're very familiar with u how municipalities work uh very familiar with grants and I'm very sorry it was I hate to hear that the city lost that much money uh in storm water grant um those are things we can help I didn't say storm water grants oh I apologize I I misunderstood I thought because we

[4:15:12] didn't have a storm water engineer we'd lost some grants okay I apologize um but we're very familiar with how the process works uh we're very familiar with storm water uh we design water plants sewer plants as well as all the infrastructure um we also do deal with developers uh residential and Commercial developers uh but we feel like we do a very good job at keeping keep being uh uh the the city codes in mind and adhering to what the city wants as well as incorporating what our developers would like to see on their developments uh so uh we are here we're here to stay this is my hometown my company actually wanted me to go to leik and I fought Toth Andel to come to St Angelo um so I look forward to hopefully doing business with you all in the future and uh again I appreciate you letting me speak today and where did you say you were headquartered we're headquartered in Conroe thank you thank you come ahead sir my name is Allan Greer I'm vice president with freeza Nichols and I would just like to come up and say Frieza Nichols has been very blessed to work with Stan Angelo since 1910 and we've done a lot of work we like to work with municipalities we like to provide value added services to help you meet your Municipal challenges on this job uh I will be personally involved I am a vice president and over our storm water practice I wrote all the documents that you use right now for storm water as well as your master plan as well as a lot of the hydrology Hydraulics that have been done uh my staff either in Midland or lck will work with me and I have Specialized Service in Fort Worth this this contract can require all types of services whether it's computer modeling design specs ordinances I can just pull the people that are needed to just do that assignment I don't have to have specialized expertise I've got that in all of my locations so we would just like to be considered for the contract I know we work in lots of cities uh we're

[4:17:14] in 13 cities across the state and we've got 550 people in Texas uh so we're very we feel like I'm out here on a regular basis I'm leaving here to go to a council meeting in Big Springs so I'm here on a regular basis uh I am in West Texas so uh with that uh we appreciate your consideration for this contract thank you Alan any further comment from the public I'm going to call for the vote I believe the motion was that they we would accept the qualific the the RFQ the request for qualifications as written not to exceed $100,000 with a 5% cap for mileage was that am I correct travel for travel travel is that is that your second name yes sir sorry call for the vote all in favor please say I I I hold up your hand all opposed put it on the next council meeting and we'll have Johnny help aside this 3 three tie number 27 consideration for selecting mid texes of Midland for the fire training center fd14 construction manager at risk Services authorizing staff to negotiate authorizing the city manager to execute said contract brother nap you are own sir good afternoon I'm a little stopped up so forgive me um this was an RFP so we got proposals we weren't looking at qualif necessarily the qualifications as our uh main uh measuring stick here but um so this is a construction manager at risk for the fire training center it allows us to bring the contractor online in the design process of the project and they can help us focus on the budget and keep the building within budget as we move forward and at uh so this first phase is their reconstruction phase we're only asking for approval really of $5,000 worth of their expenses that was in their proposal and um you know at the

[4:19:18] end of that they'll come back to us and give us a guaranteed maximum price that uh you know we feel we won't do that until we know it's within our our budget and we're all comfortable with it um so you know we we put this out for bid or proposals we had five proposers um one local and the four out of town around the state um you know all very qualified and a lot of experience in cm and fire training centers and fire stations um upon evaluation looking at uh what their fees were for preconstruction fees for uh CM fee what their markup would be um and their experience we as a committee we had a four person committee and we evaluated it and it came out um midex was the highest scoring highest ranking at uh 378 points uh stared construction was second at 374 uh Lee Lewis was next at 361 Templeton at 340 and then WB Kibler at 258 David would you also cover the the fees associated proposed because that was a large component of the decision um the one so the CM Fe is basically their General markup on what the cost of work will be so um for example um midtech their markup was 1.88% um Lee Lewis was 42% uh tempton was 4% um I believe Kibler was at 3% and uh Stoddard was at 1.75% but when you take that that number which is you know we're look that's the big number that'll impact our final construction

[4:21:20] cost with their General conditions um which is their expenses during the the construction of the project your job trailer their Staffing your superintendent um everything they need uh to operate that project um you know balance all that out midex became kind of the clear uh most cost effective for us to uh go with on this project um obviously they're out of Midland but uh they do have the superintendent are local you know they live here in town uh they've done a lot of work with the school district and got nothing but glowing reviews from uh those people and and uh I feel like you know they have the experience with the CM that I think we can benefit from so what do you need for us from us today D um approval to be able to negotiate the final contract with midex and get this thing going now have you got dollar figures from all of these companies so that you know what they're trying yes yeah we and how does how does midches come in line with all of that they were the one of the lowest in their percentage fee um they were give him the total combine if you combine all that stuff together midex was the the best I didn't bring that I didn't I was just going to read the scoring number midex was the cheapest the other thing we also considered was construction time um one of our some of the firms were a longer construction period of time uh midex was was one of the shortest ones right um I think they had TI with the shortage right right eight months construction time whereas one vendor was 12 months well the general conditions over 8 months versus 12 months you know you're paying a lot more just in the general condition so you know with the time of

[4:23:22] construction their fee and um length the job matters quite a bit yeah yeah you had we had one s Angelo contractor correct what was the difference between midtech and the local was it was it uh price-wise it was pretty significant um the scoring came out you know they were about 30 points behind I guess 38 points but pricing was significant it was not uh close enough I mean it was sign pricing was the the more the defining point or between all of them and and they were far enough ahead above I think it might have been 100,000 it was a lot and also the time the length of length job was okay yes uh any questions from Council I need a motion to I'm sorry go ahead move to approve is submitted I'll second it I'm I'm not supportive going outside St Angelo but uh we we've got to do what best for the taxpayers right well that's why I asked the questions I mean if it's a significant amount and the length of time that it takes to do the job then these are things we have to consider do have a motion to accept as presented uh any further comment from Council do I have anything from the public all in favor please say I put a 60 on that one please ma'am thank you thank you brother nap first public hearing this is number 28 consideration of introducing an ordinance amending established boundaries of single member district 6 ordinance of the city council of San Angelo Texas amending and establishing the boundaries of single member district number six for the purpose of incorporating a newly annexed area in the said District authorizing and directing any other necessary action providing for severe ability providing for an effective date M Ramirez M murly who's going to handle this one um I'm sorry I didn't mean to put M mccurley's name on it this is mainly to update the um uh City's map because due to the annexation that was done back in March

[4:25:24] we're just updating the boundaries for single member district 6 that's that's yours you want to I'm I'm five six charting Arrangements confuse me my district and I think I have 10 more Cactus and probably about 20 more mosquite trees than you now okay you're going to you're going to you're going to move to approve move to approve anybody want a second second okay motion from Charlotte I've got Marty as a second any further councel comment public all in favor please say I I I put a 60 on that one number 29 this is where we get V McCurley consideration of adopting a resolution in support of the application of the County commissioners of Tom County made to the Texas Secretary of State for participation in a pilot program to eliminate County election Precinct polling places and to establish countywide polling places that would include the general election to be held jointly with the county on the uniform election date in November 214 Mrs Ramirez and Miss McCurley um thank you for considering this I know you've had a long day and I appreciate being one of the ending things um we've had a busy day if you have not heard about vote centers um this is is a concept that we're going to uh consider tonight in a public hearing the hearing will be conducted in the commissioner's courtroom at 6:30 we do invite anyone and everyone to come and give their feedback about vote centers vote centers will um change that Dynamics on Election Day if we're able to implement them it's a step-by-step process we'll have the public hearing tonight depending on what the Commissioners here they'll decide whether they want to uh apply to be able to implement vote centers or not if they do decide to apply then we have to prepare a packet and part of that packet includes letters of support from businesses and entities that we contract with and so forth so I appreciate Alicia getting this together for us to see if we can take it Forward once we uh make that decision and if we do apply then it goes to Secretary of State there's only

[4:27:26] six spots open Statewide for our population and we do know of at least four other counties that are considering implementing them in November so uh support letters from entities that contract with us would probably help us move a lot further in in what we do vote centers allow voters to go to any one of the proposed 18 locations we could only we could go down to 17 but the committee that I formed chose to go to 18 we currently have 26 polling places and those 26 are located in the neighborhoods where the voters are registered so currently they have to go where they're registered in the vote Center environment any of the 18 sites that are open a voter can go vote on Election Day and so we're hoping that convenience and consistency will be a plus side the downside is that we can no longer offer paper ballots on Election Day if we implement this knowing that Tong Green County prefers to have paper ballots and in a lot of cases we're going to offer those in early voting you have 12 days of early voting where you can use paper or you have election day where you can use totally electronic equipment but go to any location that you'd like to go so that's a down and dirty lesson on vote centers and I'll don't take any questions you have would they still be able to go to the county election office on Election Day in newspaper they cannot go to anywhere on Election Pap no paper on Election Day on Election Day paper early only early voting only that's correct okay questions Council I think it is as well somebody I'm I'm I move we adopt the resolution in support second got a motion I've got a second and I plan on being at the meeting tonight very I want to hear what the county commissioner say good uh further comment from Council do I have public comment on this item yes sir what do we anticipate Financial impact to be to the participating uh agencies uh you know it's kind of I met with Alicia and with the cities and at

[4:29:27] this time I currently have a a contract with you guys to continue which is six polling PL uh sorry eight polling places in the city and two in very best on wall or one in very best on one in wall um it's unclear as to whether you guys will be able to join into this and if you are it'll probably be a case by case while I'm striving to have consistency for our voters and our meeting Mr hollik made a very good point which I appreciate he said you know I get all set to hold with the city I get all set to hold with very best and then everybody cancels their election and I'm the only one does it make sense to have 18 locations open when I only have a few voters that are Ed so it's going to be kind of a lesson as we go um to see how everything goes but at this time I don't anticipate your cost changing any because as it stands right now we'll continue with what we're doing this is only for the November this is only for the November election and if they choose to put something in for May then we'll come back and as for this on the May election actually I haven't had a chance to update you but if we're deemed successful in November we can continue using them for all elections from there forward okay so I mean it'd be something we'd have to renegotiate when we get ready for May but she's correct it is only for the November election at this time and then it'll go to secretary state and they'll have to deem whether we've implemented it successfully or not to be able to continue using them as it stands right now you're not going to see any cost changes because we will have to renegotiate what we're doing with you any further comment from the public call for the motion all in favor please say I I any oppose Nay put a 60 on that one thank you very much thank you VOR followup and administrative issues number 30 consideration of imposs action on matters discussed in executive closed session if needed and I'm know of nothing that we discussed in executive that needs any further discussion am I right on this one Council everybody happy okay so there is

[4:31:31] nothing from executive that we discuss that we need to bring forward at this time uh number 31 announcements consideration of future agenda items I'll start with you rod do you have anything sir uh not at this time Marty not at this time Charlotte yes okay um I need to know if we are a regional district for the Texas Water Board uh the rainy day fund okay and where we are on our application that is due um I think in 1 of September with the state I mean just what our our water conservation plan is I mean we've got to have an application in by that day in order to apply for State funds from the rainy day fund and I need to check and see where we are on that status because we're running out of time okay okay anything else ma'am no Don um I'd like to uh look at our park situation after uh what we talked about this morning see if there's any parks that are used very little or or practically not at all uh see about uh getting rid of those and maybe that' free up some monies for uh helping the ones that we have presently thank you sir Miss grinda uh just a couple of things um probably I received the most calls or the most contact on issues relating to um Inspection Services Daniel I'd like to meet with you on that and any staff that you feel appropriate uh those are my overwhelming contacts also I think that um and I'm not sure if we've done this recently a a joint meeting of the council and the Development Corporation has that occurred recently it's been some time it's been it's been a while so could I get some information on the the uh minutes from that um again I have concerns over the I'm not the word's not consistency but but moving toward the same end

[4:33:35] between these boards and I don't want anybody to be wasting their time just seems like there's again a bit of a disconnect that I would like to see addressed but I would I would see minutes first before I would ask for anything to be done on that other than that everything I have I'm sure will come out at the retreat which I'm looking forward to good very good and we're go to item number 32 hold on hold on Dwayne I'm sorry rney I'm sorry I just saw an email from um the police department and they were asking need to check on what the status is on moving forward on the boat on the boat house yes we we will on that we working on it as you can tell by the email and we are engaged in um we're making progress we are yes yes we are the email says it's stalled I just want to make sure that we move forward there were questions and I think Roger Banks um had just been asked pertaining to Jeff Vance's email um for uh and he gave six different things and he gave he delegated six different things for folks to answer so I'm I would call that can I be included on that on the answers to those six different questions absolutely thank you you're welcome and just for the public to know we are spraying mosquitoes okay I've had several calls about that we are spraying mosquitoes consideration of setting and conducting a retreat work session meeting on Tuesday June 214 do we need a motion on that no not necessarily all just um again I just want to thank the council for your patience uh we've worked with several dates couldn't get everybody all at the same time but we finally managed to get June 10th and want to thank all of you we're looking forward to it the meeting will be from The Retreat will be from 9:00 in the morning to 4:00 in the afternoon that'll be held at Fort chadburn okay thank you all again verify the rules procedures require motion for that and we will um advise of course that uh the meeting will be posted in

[4:35:38] compliance with the open meeting as open meeting okay I need a motion then move anybody want a second second I do have a motion I do have a second cons any comments public comments we will then have a retreat work session meeting on Tuesday June 10th 214 this will be conducted at Fort chadburn air conditioning there is air conditioning and it's uh they're at the Fort just uh it's about 52 miles from here and gets about 12 miles on the other side of Brun on Highway 277 all in favor please say I I any oppose nay I'm waiting now for someone on item number 33 move weour second all in favor this meeting is over it is 3:14

Captured 2026-07-26 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=t3z1Q1f3TYo