San Angelo City Council 7-18-17

[0:00:00] eight thirty five this morning and we are going to start off with the prayer who's going to be it is going to be led by Christian Rabbein. Would you please come forward and leave us in prayer today? I am now going to ask Colton and Aiden from our Boy Scouts to come forward and lead us in Our pledge to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[0:02:05] I pledge allegiance to the United States, under God, one indivisible. Today, we're going to have a recognition of the San Angel Fire Department for receiving the 2017 EMS Recognition Award. The San Angel Fire Department has received the American Heart Association's Mission Lifeline EMS Silver Award for implementing quality improvement measures for the treatment of patients who experienced severe heart attacks. Emergency medical system providers are vital to the success of Mission Lifeline. Our EMS agency performs 12 lead ECGs, which measure the electrical activity of the heart and can help determine if a heart attack has occurred. The San Angel Fire Department follows protocols derived from American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology Guidelines. These tools, training, and practices allow our EMS providers to rapidly identify suspected heart attack patients, promptly notify the medical center, transmit the cardiac findings, and trigger an early response from the awaiting hospital personnel. Agencies that receive the mission, Lifeline Civil War have demonstrated at least 75% compliance for each required achievement measure for one year. The San Angel Fire Department is committed to providing the highest level of care to the citizens of San Angelo. Today I have Lieutenant Santos Elizondo, our EMS coordinator, here to accept the award.

[0:04:22] First of all, you know, we have a lot of people to thank. First of all, and foremost, the men and women of the San Diego Fire Department, without them, we can't do this. We have two major partners, both hospitals, Shannon Medical Center and Community Medical Center, both partnering up to make this possible. I do have two special accolades, Ms. Sandril Villarreal, who without her and her wanting to, for us to take this on, would not have been possible. And Dr. Steven Seifer, without those who implementing this, once again, we wouldn't be where we're at. We would hope next year not to receive any awards. That means no one had a cardiac event. But we do know that that's the reality is won't be that way. So we will keep on doing what we're doing. The San Diego Fire Department is always here to serve you. Census, San Diego, and the person of people of Tom Green County. Thank you very much. I didn't mention it before, but if you have a cell phone, please make sure that your cell phone is turned off at this moment. And we will now go into public comment. Issues that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium, begin by stating their name and limit remarks to less than three minutes. Council members may request that a discussed item be placed on a future agenda. The council takes comment on all regular agenda items

[0:06:26] during the discussion of those items. Do we have anybody coming forward for any public comment at this point? Good morning, council. Bob Salas, I'm the president of the Alliance of Charity here in San Angelo. We represent all eight clubs here. I want to thank council and staff for supporting our balloon fest we held last month. Even though the weather didn't cooperate, it was still a great success. We had over 5,000 people show up for the events. It included a car show. We had kids' kingdom, we had pancakes, of course. So anyway, next year, we hope to bring in the giant kites from Houston, kind of hedging our bets. So if the wind blows, we'll have the kites and it doesn't blow, we'll have balloons. So anyway, again, thank you and we hope to get your support next year. Thank you. Any other public comment? All right. We will move into the consent agenda. Do I have any issues with the council in terms of pulling anything from the consent agenda? Yes, Harry. Item Q, I think there are some constituents in the audience that would like for it. suggestion mayor, if we're going to pull item Q, maybe we, is it possible Theresa to to do that after we finish the special agenda so that we don't detain the slow down that process. Yes, we can move it to the regular agenda. Let's move it to the regular agenda because it might take a little longer.

[0:08:26] I'm full item I, okay? Item I, Lane, Charlotte. Oh, no ma'am. Okay. Tommy. Nothing to pull. And Tom, no, okay. All right, so at this point, we are going to pull item I and Q from the consent agenda. Do I have a motion to accept the rest of the consent agenda? Move to approve. Motion by Lane, second by Harry. All in favor, aye. Aye. Consent agenda approved with the exception of I and Q. Lucy, you want to talk about item I? Yes, I wanted Bob to come up here and explain this to us so the public, I know what it's about, but I would like the public to know and the people that are watching know what is available to them in their special program. Yes, ma'am. The admin's contract is they provide us funds for us to assist citizens who have an account with admin and we're able to do some weatherization for their house, we can replace water heaters and a variety of things. So that's basically it. We, I say we help about 20 to 30 people a year with this program. And how do they get a hold of, I mean, do they call? They do, they call us. They call us 6550-824. It will be happy to work and through the process. And they have an application that they have to fill out? There is. There's an application. They have to meet income requirements. And they have to be, of course, a U.S. citizens. That's to be as an actual citizens, and they have to be an account with admins. I want you to approve this present. I have a second.

[0:10:26] All in favor? Aye. Motion is approved. And then, of course, Q has been moved to the regular agenda. We will now move into the special agenda. I'll read into the record, the resolution. A resolution in order canvassing the returns and declaring the results of municipal officers runoff election for city council member, single member district six of the city of San Angelo, Texas, held on July 8, 2017. Whereas there came to be considered the returns of a runoff election held on the 8th day of July 2017. For the purposes of electing city council member, single member district six, and it appearing from said returns duly and legally made that were cast at said election valid and legal votes as set out in the report attached here to as exhibit a that each of the candidates in the said election received the following votes city council member single member district six Billy F. DeWitt 578 votes Steve Hampton 549 votes now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the city of San Angelo Texas that said election was duly called notice of said election was given in accordance with the law only qualified resident voters within single member district six were allowed to vote at said election the canvas of vote votes cast and returns thereof attached here to as exhibit a were made in accordance with the law and bill you have to it was duly elected by majority vote of the votes cast for single city council member single member district six said named Canada is hereby declared duly elected to the city council member single member district six. It is further ordered that the mayor caused to be prepared a certificate of election pursuant to the canvas of election returns to be

[0:12:26] promptly delivered to Billy after it and this resolution will be effective immediately upon its adoption. I'll just sit right back down and make this thing legal. Do I have a motion to accept to accept is presented. All in favor. Pass seven zero. Charlotte would you please come forward please. Presenting this to Charlotte farmer for city council member single member district six and grateful recognition of dedicated service to the city of San Angelo. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm going to hide behind the podium if you don't mind. I get to hide behind the desk up there, but no more. I've what a ride. It's been a wonderful ride, and I have enjoyed it. It's been 12 years of listening to the public out there,

[0:14:27] and I've prepared a little bit of something that I'd like to read if you'll bear with me to give back to the public. I wrote this a couple of weeks ago, so I need to refresh. Time really flies. It really flies. I've had 25 years in banking, 16 years in property management, and 12 years in city government. I think my next adventure will be that of a domestic goddess. It's time to retire, Charlotte, plain and simple. But time really does fly when you're having fun, whether you're learning the city system and how it works, working on projects or overseeing budgets, meeting with constituents and dealing with lack of water and lack of money, well, time really does fly. You see, I feel, Brenda, that I should change my name to Timex. I'm Timex, you ask why, so I'm gonna tell you why. Anyone who can take a licking by landslide vote, such as I did this past May 6th. And keep on ticking. I need to change my name to Timex. After I change my name to Timex, I'm going to say, well, what else could be the reason that I'm not mayor? And the reason is this lady here ran a great campaign for mayor. I chose not to run for District 6 again, because I really and truly felt it was time to step down. 12 years is long enough. But I have learned during this time that everything you do from buying equipment or supplies to long-term water

[0:16:28] sources takes time. We're getting back to that word, time X, as well as teamwork. It's never easy as it sounds. And I've also learned it takes a whole lot of red tape to cut the red tape. Truly does. We started cutting the red tape a few years ago when we had a council workshop at Fort Chadburn. As a result of that workshop, the message that was delivered to the staff find a way to say yes. And I would be remiss without congratulating John James and his staff for the enormous turnaround and headache that he has done since he has been here. And it's not been an easy task. He's a special person of character and I hope you're with the city for time to come, the long time to come. As I drive around our beautiful city, I see projects that I've been involved in and helped to protrition over these past 12 years. The passing of the San Angel have sent sales tax, passing of the Sunset have sent sales tax, Our beautiful square arena, Colosseum edition and ramp, new barns for the St. Angelo Stock Show, new wider streets at the Colosseum, and completing 50th Street to Armstrong, the Texas Bank Sports Complex, the Tennis Sports Facility, the Producers Park Complex, Middle Creek Park Complex, update and lights at the MLK Park Complex, new water line and gas line going in at MLK, Street lights, stop signs, and crosswalks. Sidewalks on 19th Street.

[0:18:28] Sidewalks for the new MLK street. Street sidewalks at Lincoln Junior High, which didn't weather the heat too well, but we'll look at that. Or they will look at that. The Red Arroya hike and bike trails, new public restrooms at Trinidad Park, excuse me, Unidad Park, new public restrooms downtown on the river. The City of San Angelo Development Corporation, City of San Angelo Business Center, Public and Private Partnership with Goodfellow Base Housing Project, Goodfellow Base Health Workout Facility, Remodel and Refurbish of City Hall and this facility, Remodel and Fervish of the City Auditorium, which I just missed, it's gonna open real soon, isn't it, Rick? Way, way taken time, but it's a beauty. It truly is. St. Angela Performing Arts Center, the Concho River dredging, and clean up. Phase one, Lake Nazworthy dredging. Moving a dangerous bend in the water at Lake Nazworthy, which most of you probably don't know about. New boat ramps at Lake Nazworthy, remodeling refurbish of the city swimming pool and the grounds to the art museum. What a beautiful facility and a shining star for our city. We finally got air conditioning and heating in some of the Fort Concho facilities. Most of you probably didn't know some of those buildings weren't heated and cooled. Two separate phases of brewery model and refurbished of the San Angelo Airport, hiking trails and lighting of the Riverwalk. The Bosque at the Riverwalk, footbridge over the river, the miniature golf course at the the Boskey, Kirby State Park, Kirby Park, Vivian, Contravalli of Governments New Bus Facility, ASU and Contravalli of Governments Bus Service, Good Fellow and Contravalli of Governments Bus Service.

[0:20:30] Installation of a minimum wage increased for city employees to tie to a percentage of the national average each year. We have purchased in full intent a facility for the Police Department that is still in the works, but know that this Council will inherit everything that we have looked at in the past. Employee retirement fund, employee participation in healthcare, reduction of city property tax, or maintain the same every year since 2005. That's important, very important. We've installed line item budgeting, the Hickory Water Pop Line in Wellfields, the new Hickory Water Filtration for Senna facility, Twin Mountain Drive Project, the financial five-year replacement and water improvement plan and long-term city street replacement plan, the purchase of the famed E-Rolly Ford Ranch to secure all long-term water rights, which will protect our non-producing wells and all of the lines that connect to our city. I'm proud, very proud, that the majority of all of this has been done without spending general fund dollars nor raising your property tax. That's work, ladies and gentlemen. I'm proud to have served on all of the committees that I've served on within the city, too many, and for all of these reasons it's time to step down. But all this didn't happen by me because of me or my doing. It has taken a team, a team of good people, good council people, and mayors who shared a vision of things that could happen if we worked as a team with a plan and stayed on course of that plan. Players and council members such as JW Long, Alvin Nood, Dwayne Morrison, Emilio

[0:22:35] Perez, John David Fields, John Mark Hogue, Elizabeth Grindstaff, Devon Bates, Jamie Rainey, HR Ward law and Paul Alexander and Kendall Hirschfield, all worked hard on these projects that I have mentioned to see that they came to fruition. Whether they were here for two years or four years, they worked diligently as all of your council members do. I have learned that if each of us give 100% to the job, you can make some really new friends along the way and you discover and gain respect for city staff and employees. I have yet to run in to a city employee with a bad attitude and is only here to collect a paycheck. If that has happened, I know our city manager or department heads corrected immediately. St. Angelo City employees are the very best out there and we are very blessed for them to be on our payroll. Employees such as Daniel Valenzuela, Rick Michael Lane, Elizabeth Grindstaff, Carl White, Shane Kelton, Becky Dunn, oh Lord, Becky don't you ever go anywhere. She is the Glue folks, she is the Glue. Lisa Marley, Morgan Chadwicken, Brian Kendrick, Luis Alassaba, Kena Derski, John James, the entire Engineering Division, Water Division, Planning Division, Street Bridge, and IT, boy they're probably jumping up and down and saying hallelujah she's out of here. here. Because there's nobody that has more electronical problems. I'm not technically in kind. You put the key in, turn it, it works. You push the button, it works. And if it doesn't work, I can't fix it. Can I, guys? I don't even know where to begin and I'm

[0:24:36] not going to pretend that I do. Yes, we promote from within giving the employees the opportunity to move up for higher pay, we promote the idea of letting their jobs grow as the city is grown. I know I gave 100% of me to this job and you couldn't help but do that by working with the staff that you have to work with, their exemplary. I had the opportunity to serve on the interview and selection committee for our vacancy when the former City Manager, Hal Dominguez, left for Colorado. I was also there when Harold took office. He was promoted from an assistant city manager. What St. Angelo does is take care of their own. It was a tough job finding the right fit for our community in a city manager. And for the first time ever, we decided to invite the citizens to come down here this facility and meet the possible candidates. Of the six finalists which were chosen from a field of 140, Daniel Valatowo was selected unanimously by the citizens and by the seven council members. Well, I asked you to give him room, let him do what he is trained to do. And that is run this city. Don't envy your job at all. He is a man of his word with deep convictions and of high integrity, he will keep our city in good financial shape, which 12 years ago it wasn't in good financial shape. And we can thank the wisdom of Michael Dane and his assistance for the hard work to keep and bring our city out of the bottoms

[0:26:36] to bring it up to a AA standard rating today that it is and to have preserves. Daniel, I hope that you call on me anytime that you need or want a board member, committee member because I will be proud to work for you. Lane Carter, we became fast friends and colleagues and displayed a lot of respect for each other. I encourage you, young man, to continue being the statesman that you are because the definition of a politician just does not fit Lane. I am still good friends with Elizabeth Grindstaff, and think that the two of you on council would be just awesome. Such a high IQ, such common sense for such high IQs, and the wisdom to stand their ground, speak up, and keep you on course. By the way, Blaine, I'm leaving my desk fan that's under there in your care. For you to use, since you're accustomed working in a super cool room. However, your hands are like ice. I'm not sure you didn't come to the mortuary this morning. I feel certain that your son, when he reaches 27, he will be proud of what you have worked for and have led your life by example. The reason I mentioned that lane, I know I'm picking on you, but straight here, folks, but I want to share something with you that I received last night. Hey, Nana, I'm so sorry, but I can't make it to your thing tomorrow because I have a workshop for school all day. The city has been blessed to have you all these years.

[0:28:38] You have done so many great things for the city and you should feel very proud of yourself. And I am beyond proud of you. love you and can't wait to make more memories at PK. That's from a 27-year-old granddaughter, who is a teacher, they have workshop today. So both my granddaughters couldn't be here with my little great grandchildren, but I'm gonna take the great grandchildren and use them as bait at PK, but that's another story. But Lucy Gonzalez continued to ask those questions, even if you know the answer, get staff, hold staff, get them to explain why, who, how much, for the normal folks out there who do not understand the lingo of the municipality staff. You are now the senior councilman. Doesn't that thrill you? Gary Thomas, keep those sharp eyes on the financials and investments. Please, sir, try not to trample over the rest of them on your way to the top. You will earn those mayor wings in time. be patient. Tom Thompson. I'm so sorry I got only two months to serve with you. Tom brings a fresh voice and I ask you to keep your sense of humor and remind everyone to enjoy and have a little fun now and then bring that sharp business mind to run the city with. By the way I brought my lampshade hat just for you today. I wrote that but I forgot it. I left it at the house. He called my hat a lampshade at the pop's concert. You can't understand that. Tommy Heibert, you didn't think I was going to leave you out, did you? Charlotte, I knew you wouldn't. Tommy, been there, done that, did it work or did it fail? Please be a reminder to all of them how easy and quick

[0:30:42] we can lose faith with the public if we don't keep transparency and that door open. Communication with people has always been the better out. Mayor Gunner, we were friends before the race, we were friends during the race, and we are still friends. I admire you, I respect you, and I know that you will lead with strong conviction. stay on the go and don't lose sight of the overall city and if you ever need to just talk, I'm there. To my family, certainly not last. I know we all love our families, we have to, they're our families, but my family is especially wonderful and I am so grateful for 12 years of adjusting to my city schedule all of our family projects or outings or birthday parties you have been wonderful to adjust your lives to accommodate my schedule. I couldn't do without you. I don't want to do without you. To my daughter Becky Dyches, she's a rock. She is a rock to all of us and when she disagrees with me she disagrees with me and lets me know that never ever has she given a bad piece of advice and it's always logical and right-on spot. My sister, Loretta Hicks, every campaign she has worked for 12 years, whether it's knocking on doors, handing out flyers, helping me type up flowers, reading my punctuation and grammar and changing and And then tell me, I don't know what you're talking about.

[0:32:42] Explain it to me so I can understand. She's always been there. And I just know when I call on her, she'll be there. I've got a son-in-law in J.D.A.X that just is immeasurable to how good he is, how loyal he is, how loving he is to his family. I don't agree with you, Charlotte, but that's what you want to do. We'll do it. I mean, they tell you what they think. And of course, my grandson, Kobe Docks, who's here today, along with his fiancee. Well, I get to call you that, because I'm on the inside track. You've all been wonderful to me, you've been supportive to me, and I could not have done this without you. With that, I'm going fishing just as soon as I can get out of the house, get out of these duds, and get my shorts on, the car's packed, and possum kingdom, here we come. We are staying, by the way, in an STR. Just thought I'd throw that out there. Where there is no smoking, no roosters. If you don't remember that one, that you asked somebody, they'll tell you, who crowed it for in the morning. And trash cans are not an issue. And I'm going to take the time to watch the world go by. I know I probably should have mentioned more employees. I probably should have mentioned the ones that I did, because I left somebody out, I'm sure. But there are good people who love the city. And Billy, to you, good luck. many blessings, endurance and patience, and it will get done.

[0:34:49] Thank you so much for having the courage to run. Thank you so much for staying in the strength. And I know that God has led you to this, and you will do great. And with that, I'll shut up. And thank you, everyone. Thank you so much. We are going to administer the Oath of Office and the presentation of Certificate of Election by Minister Gloria Pope. I, Billy DeWitt. I, Billy DeWitt, do solemnly affirm, do solemnly affirm that I will faithfully execute, that I will faithfully execute,

[0:36:50] the duties, the duties of the office, of the office, of San Angelo City Council, of San Angelo City Council, single member district, single member district, Number six of the state of Texas. Number six of the state of Texas. And will. And will. To the best of my ability. To the best of my ability. Preserve, protect, and defend. Preserve, protect, and defend. The Constitution and laws. The Constitution and laws. Of the United States. Of the United States. And of this state. And of this state. So help me God. So help me God. Amen, Amen. Good morning.

[0:39:00] Oh, give thanks unto the Lord, for He is good. And I just had so many thoughts, and I thought about writing them all down, but I didn't want to read them because it's what's in my heart that matters. And I just want to thank all of you here that supported me. I hesitate to call names like Charlotte did, because I'm sure I would leave someone out. But I do want to call my husband to learn to do it because he has been there for me from the beginning. In about 2006, he and I started attending City Council meetings. There was some issue on the agenda that I had an interest in. And of course, I had some things I wanted to say about it. And after I did, he said, well, you ought to be on the City Council. He said, you're smart. I said, oh no, I don't want to do that. But he has been mentioning that for a long time. And when Charlotte announced that she was running for mayor, and the position came open, I was minding my own business one morning. And my husband and I were walking into the Stevens Library. And I heard my name, Billy Dewitt, Billy Dewitt. And I thought, I looked around, and there was this gentleman running toward me. And he said, you know, Charlotte's not running for that position. You need to run for city council. And I thought, mm-mm, I'm not going to do that. And I said, no, I don't think so. So he whipped out his business card and he said, call me sometimes, and let's have a cup of coffee and let's talk about it. And so we went in the library and I told my husband, I said, I'm not calling him, I don't want to do this. But over the months with some arm twisting and encouragement and lots of prayers. I decided to put my hat in the ring.

[0:41:01] And this has been an amazing journey. I have met so many new, interesting, well-informed people. I have developed some relationships that I didn't have before. So I just want to thank all of my volunteer supporters. You know who you are. You're the ones that walked with me knocking on doors in 108-degree temperatures. You're the ones that gave up your Friday evenings and your Saturdays to do phone banks for me. You're the ones that would call me and pray with me. You're the ones that sat with me Saturday evening on July the 8th. When the first results came in and I was down by, I think, eight votes. You were right there for me. And you're the one that when the final vote came in and it was on the telephone and you came over and you put your arm around me and you held your phone up in front of my face and said, look, and I couldn't focus. I don't know what it had. I just couldn't see it and I said, well, Spencer, what does it say? He says, it says you won. My knees buckled. I thought I would cry if I lost, but I cried when I won. So I just, like I said, it's been an amazing journey, and I'm so looking forward to working with this group of people here. These are some of the finest people in San Angelo, and as many of you heard, over and over and over the message of my campaign was embrace the vision. You heard Ms. Charlotte Farmer, whose shoes I'm not going to even try to feel, but you heard her say that it was the vision that the council and the mayor kept working toward. My message was embrace that vision and we are going to certainly do that because the only promise I made during my whole campaigning was that I promised to work hard and I promised to do my very best in this job and that's a promise I stand here and make today.

[0:43:06] I know I have a lot to learn when I met with Daniel last Friday for him to go over every everything with me. It was like my sponge was soaked and it started dripping out and I didn't retain everything. I'm already getting calls from constituents that have an interest in what's going on in this city. And I just thank God for this opportunity to serve. And as I've said before, I have a true servants heart. And that's what I want to do. I want to serve the citizens of this great community because as our former mayor said, and I quote him all the time. But San Angelo is a sweet spot. It's a very sweet spot. I love it. I want to see it continue to grow and to be the very, very best that it can be. So to all of my supporters, my friends, I just, and the voters, don't let me leave out the voters, the voters that got me standing here in this spot. I say thank you. God bless the city of San Angelo the state of Texas in the United States of America. Bless God. Thank you. We are going to take a break, if you will, and have a reception to honor Charlotte Farmer's Service and to welcome Billy DeWitt into the City Council. So I believe we have cake and some water. Please enjoy and shake their hands and congratulate them for all they've done and all they're going to do. order at 947. We will start with our regular agenda. The first item on the regular agenda is consider appointment of Mayor Pro Tem. I would like to nominate Lane Carter. Is there an issue? Can you hear? We still have item Q from the consent agenda to take care of, but we can go ahead and do A now that we've got a motion on the floor and then we'll move to. Okay, all right. Go ahead, Lucy. I think you had a motion. Yes, ma'am. I want to nominate

[0:45:09] Lane Carter for Pro Tem. Do I have a second? I will second that motion. All in favor of Lane Carter being the Mayor Pro Tem say aye. Aye. Aye. Oh sorry. I wouldn't for sure the procedure here. I want to nominate Harry for Pro Tem. We need to deal with a motion that's on the floor initially and then we could take an additional motion if that one fails. We will take a vote on the Mayor Pro Tem Lane Carter nomination. All of those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. So we have four in favor three against Lane Carter will be the Mayor Pro Tem. Now we will go to consider item Q which was removed from the consent agenda. It was on the consented agenda as a second reading and adoption of an ordinance amending chapter 11.02.043 raw water permit and appendix A, article A8.000 untreated water rates and a raw water permit fee. Bill Riley, if you'll come forward. Thank you, Mayor. Members of council, you remember this item was on our last meeting to change the raw water rate at the lake to the same as the landscape rate for the rest of the city and and also was to remove from the ordinance some language that was no longer in place that pertain to permits for the use of that water that was went went away once we begin to have to meter the water and account for the water to

[0:47:11] the TCEQ. I'm actually the one that has to be had this pulled because I think there's some people in the audience that are interested in speaking about this particular item. I'm really comfortable in this. Matter of fact, Bill, you and I have been working on this about six months or so because of some concerns of citizens about the raw water rates and so from my perspective you did what I needed to do but I'd like to have the public comment on whatever it is that they want to talk about. Just as another just reminder this when we first did the rate study the rate that we established for the raw water rate was in fact more than with the landscape rate or irrigation rate in the city was. So we went back and took a look at that and it seemed to make sense that since it is for irrigation and it does have the exact same impact on our water supply as the other irrigated water that it should be priced accordingly. It really is a policy issue in looking at the value of water. Would you remind everyone of the water rates that you're proposing for the raw water use on Lake Nazworthy evidence? Yes, ma'am. From zero to 89,000 gallons a month, you said it's $5. I think it's $5.35 And then at over 89,000 gallons, it goes to right at $10 a thousand, and there is a little bit of difference there between the summer and the winter rate, and I do not have those exact rates in front of me, but we'll get those here shortly. So the $10 is over 89,000 gallons usage, $535 under, and remind everybody, is it only like NAS worthy people that have the availability of being able to use raw water? is that is they have access just because of their property being on the lake. Again,

[0:49:17] from from my perspective, it's really is just a policy issue and how we value that water. It is part of our water supply and even though it might not go through the treatment process or distribution process, it still has the same impact on our available water supply as any irrigated water and it is being used strictly as irrigation, so therefore it's a decision on how you want to value that water. Bill, does the Hickory come into this equation at all or no? It doesn't. Thank you for bringing that up. That is an important issue here that we have to remember is because of the contracts that we have for the use of water off of the Hickory line, it ties that rate back to the lake, to the roll water rate for the city. So it is a bigger issue than just the lake from a pricing standpoint, because it also impacts the use of the water along the Hickory pipeline. People could tie onto the Hickory line along that line? Is that what I hear you saying? When the easements were granted for that pipeline, part of the consideration for that was to allow them to have connections along the pipeline, and so some people have exercised that. And those contracts tied the cost of that water back to our raw water rate. So the people on the HIC reographer have been tied in to using the raw water and we sell it to them at this point? Some, yes, ma'am. What kind of usage are you talking about? Well, it varies. Some of them use quite a bit. It's for livestock watering for the most part is what they use it for along the pipeline. So there have been some that used, you know, two, three hundred thousand gallons a month. How many raw water, is that a curious, how many raw untreated water users are there at

[0:51:17] Lake Nazworthy? Oh, there's around a hundred. What could be, if everyone out there used it, what would the number be? We know that how many lots on the lake have access if they wanted to access that. I don't know that number, I'm sure we have that, but I do not know the number of the actual lots along the lake. Bill, on the meter that you have, do they have to buy or purchase the meter themselves, or does the city provide that meter that? We actually provide the meter and connect it into their system, and then we read those. You didn't have an average, do you have a max user who's using the most of what that number is, greater than 89,000? I'm sorry, Mr. Carr, I didn't hear you. You have a number forming of greater than 89,000. If someone is using more than that at that rate of even $10 per thousand, is there a user using more than 89? Oh, there is. Yes. There is. I think. Sorry, let me specify that. Out of NAS worthy, not the hickory. Yeah. I think in the last presentation we've shown you that there were four users, I believe there There were two residences and then there was a church and then a golf course actually that used more than 89,000. So when we made the purchase of the Ford Ranch, it did not eliminate the selling of the raw water to individuals tied into the degree walker aquifer. I mean, I'm totally separate issue. Do I have a motion on the floor? Do I have further questions? It's out of here from if there's any interested citizens to speak. Good morning, Mayor, Council, City Manager.

[0:53:30] I'm Tad Logan, I'm a resident at the lake. I've been on a meter since 2010 when we were told that we needed to do this. This is not a new issue. he sent out a letter in 1990 saying that we were going to start the TCEQ was going to require that all water be metered. It wasn't, well that wasn't at that time, excuse me. He was going to charge a base rate of 35 dollars a month and we paid that for years, 10 to 12 years and then in 2010 this other letter came out saying that the TCEQ required that all water pumped out of the lake had to be permitted okay so we had to buy our own meter the city didn't supply $450 and then we started to base rate at a $1.71 and at that point it was stated it would never go over two well you can see where we are now. My last month's bill was $5.62 per thousand. To water my yard takes between five and ten thousand and that's one inch of water put on my backyard so it's real easy for me to have a $200 water bill for pumping out of the lake and my treated water last month was 365 and then jumped to four right at four. So I'm paying 30% to 40% more for untreated water than I am treated, which I understand this is a water resource, but that seems very absurd, but the biggest problem I've got is the lack of enforcement around the lake. It's easy to tell who has a meter. It's on satellite. Okay, you know these folks are

[0:55:33] or pumping legally. We've allowed water wells to be drilled out there for the last 15 to 20 years. The city retained the water rights. These folks pump 24-7 if they want to. They're sitting there 30-40 feet off the lake with nothing being charged. I had Mr. Riley and Mr. Dixon send out a letter in 2014 about water wells. Basically, it was an apology saying, you know, we'd appreciate it if you wouldn't pump because we're in a dire needs right now. We don't need to be beautifying yards when we need the water for drinking. Nothing's been done on that letter. since 2014 I've asked them a couple of times why why are we demanding that they at least meter these wells or cap them I said the city owns the water rights why was this allowed and since it was allowed less regulated but it's not been done so what irritates me as much as anything is that here I am trying to be an honest citizen I got my meter put in I pay my monthly bills and yet we've probably got 50 illegal users plus water wells around the lake they pay nothing and you know either less enforce these issues or let us all have the water you know let's don't charge for untreated water or let's let's get this under control because you know here we are again wanting to go up on the rates and we're not enforcing what we've got sitting out there. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

[0:57:37] Thank you, Mayor and City Council members for allowing me to come speak. My name is Dean Brooks. I live on the lake in 2002 Cattell Lane with my beautiful wife Cindy and two dogs Sophie and Cooper. We've been there since 2008 and like Ted. We started pumping out of the lake as soon as we got there because it was already a pumping place. We were charged $30 a month for about two years, and then we got this letter from Mr. Wilde saying that we'd be charged $21.08, usage charge plus $1.71 per thousand gallons. I happen to live on a two-acre lot. I have over an acre and a half of grass and trees. That's not the city's fault, but it's my fault. I feel like I'm being penalized for having that much grass. My average bill now has been closer to $6 per thousand for seven years. $500 per month incrementally, I figured it up, this raw water usage thing that we had to start in 2010 has cost us $40,000 in seven years. I've had bills as high as $1,300 a month. But now I'm paying $6.15 per 1,000 gallons. The problem is we are conserving every chance we get, yet we still have this high bill simply because we have a large lot. If you had to pay as much as we did, you'd turn that sprinkler system off every time

[0:59:40] rain. Every time you thought that it was going to be cooler weather for a few days in the wintertime when you could and if you go through and look at my bills you'll see that we do that. Now here's the kicker and this is the thing that's always bothered me the most. When we pump water out of the lake we pump it right back into the lake. Now that may not make sense to some of y'all but if you You dig down in my yard to the lake level, which is about two and a half feet, you're going to hit water. And if we dug another few feet, we could put our pump in there and pump from there. The water's all tied together. We live right on the lake. So the majority of that water that we're pumping is going right back into the lake. So I'm paying at some points, some months, $1,300 to recycle 80% of the water that I'm pumping out of the lake right back into the lake, it doesn't seem fair. Thank you for your time. Have a great day. God bless you. Good morning. My name is Randall Scottie and when I have just handed out to you consist of two items.

[1:01:44] One is the June 2010 letter from Will Wieldy outlining the rates, outlining the $450 that we would have to pay for the meter. In addition to that, what I have included was a proposal that I worked up to try to reform the raw water rates. These raw water rates that I have worked up are new and for Lake Naz were the only, so it takes the Hickory completely out of the picture. I need to touch base on a couple of things that Bill said. And Bill, correct me if I'm wrong, but the summer rates that you proposed on June 20, for $89,000 or less was $5.32. And for greater than $89,000 was $11.90. Right now, our treated water for $39,000 or less is $5.48. So basically, we're paying the same. And in some cases, this proposal, we pay more for treated water, or more for the water in the lake than we do for treated water. This new proposal for high cap users, like Mr. Brooks, is actually going to raise his bill. It's not a cut. And what I'm looking for is for the council to give consideration to reforming the rates, and bringing the raw water rates back down to where they historically have been. Now I understand that water in the lake, even though it's raw water, has value. I understand that goes against the allotment, just like treated water. So whether you take it out of the tap or take it out of the lake, it all is going to go against the allotment.

[1:03:45] Back in 2015, the raw water was still on a tiered schedule, starting at $1.81 and capping out with six tiers at $8.02 for anything over $100,000. On 2016, we were at $4.95, no tiers. this year we were at five dollars and sixty five cents no tears again looking at our water rates that are in place for treated water right now five dollars and forty eight cents is the last step in the tier for treated water until you make that jump to ten dollars and in three cents. Keep in mind, $10.03 is the top treated water tier. What Mr. Riley is proposing is a top tier of $11.90 for raw water. I think that we've gone far skew where we need to be. I know that the raw water in Lake Nazworthy has value. Nobody's disputing that. What we're looking for is to get those rights back where they should be, instead of this way. Thank you very much. Brenda. Do I have any other for any more public comment concerning the Lake Nazzworthy real water rates? Teresa, Brian, I need some clarification because this was originally on the consent agenda as a second reading of an ordinance. And so our action today, do we need to make a new motion? Do we approve this as a second ordinance or not approve it? So we still consider it the second reading of the ordinance.

[1:05:45] You can make amendments to it if you choose to do so. So if there's something in the structure you wanted to change, you do have the ability to do that. That would just need to be included in the motion to approve on second reading. Okay. Do I have a motion from a council member concerning this issue? I have some questions after the folks spoke. Yeah, Bill, I'm for you. And I guess for the council, I guess this may come for us. This may come to the point, do we want to sell raw water from the lake, period? That may be the biggest question. So one question for you, Bill, Is there a way to have a revenue neutral, whether it be no charges for untreated water so that there is just one charge regardless of where it comes from? I'm not naive enough to think if we didn't have meters on the lake that there wouldn't be some people that would withdraw anyway, I'm not that naive. but I'm looking for straightforward I guess and as much as possible equity for everybody because you know the speakers have all alluded to this is a resource for we have 30,000 rate payers is that 35,000 rate payers so we've got a lot of folks that that have vested interest in this. So I'm wondering, is there a way for equity in this, in your right structure? Well, let me answer that question. When we looked at the rates a couple years ago, there was a separate rate for the raw water out of the lake. We developed, and it had multi-tears

[1:07:47] that it just did not make any sense, because it was not enough usage, that it was not enough jump between the tiers to do that. So we tried to simplify that and make a flat rate, and so it was a revenue neutral rate. We just basically applied the cost, or not the cost, the rate, the flat rate to all of the usage to get the same revenue that we had been generating from that. So that's where that rate that was actually higher than the rest of the city landscape irrigation rate was. The landscape irrigation rate was based on developed and based on the cost of providing this service. It also had multiple tiers that really didn't make a lot of sense to have and those are not easy to administer. When you get those into to bill and all those tiers takes time cost money. So we tried to simplify that rate and developed two tiers a tier of up to 89,000 gallons, and then over 89,000 gallons, and those rates that were applied were based on the cost of providing that service. And there is a cost to being able to deliver that type of water. So we've got two separate rates there. So to answer your question, combine those, basically the cost of landscape, or landscape rate would be the rate that we would apply across the board. If we wanted to, and let me clarify something that was said earlier, we cannot just have a late NAS worthy rate and not consider the hickory. Those contracts tie the two together, so we have to consider that. So if we were to go back and try to develop a cost-to-service rate, if you will, for raw water. It would include, both NAS worthy and the Hickory. When we look at what the cost that we would apply to that, we're not going

[1:09:50] to see a lot of decrease in that rate because of the amount of usage that we have versus the amount of cost that we have to have both of those in place, it's going to be a substantial cost. So I would kind of as a side note I would say to you is if you want us to do that we shouldn't just pick an arbitrary rate of $1.81 or whatever it is. We need to go back and see what this really means to us. Okay and I'm gonna back up just a minute and talk about again the what I said earlier. Not just in San Angelo but across the country when we look at the value of water we also look at how that water's being used. And historically, within the last probably 10 to 20 years, water utilities have begun to take a strong look at how do we incentivize conservation. When we're pouring water out on the ground, what is the cost of doing that? And that cost goes beyond just what it is the cost to deliver that water. But what's the long-term cost of doing that? And we've priced water accordingly. And that's why you see, in a lot of cases, irrigation rates are higher, because if you're gonna choose to use water that way, you're gonna have to choose to pay for it. So back to this is strictly a philosophical discussion and a policy issue on how you want to value this water. And if we want to, again, take a different look at it, then I would suggest you send us back to actually combine the NASworthy and the Hickory and try to set out a separate rate for those. But it's, my initial feelings on that is it's not gonna see a substantial decrease in that cost. Yeah, I have a question and you may have said this earlier and I don't remember it, but why is the cost of raw water

[1:11:53] more expensive than the cost of treated water? Well, what we did, as I explained a minute ago, that rate was set out separately. And so when we took all of the tiered rates and made a flat rate that generated the same amount of revenue that was being generated from that usage, it established a rate that was higher than the raw water. Hindsight on that, we should have just implemented the landscape, the rate that we're proposing now in the first place. But again, there was, there's a mindset or a discussion to be had on how we want to value that water that's being used for irrigation. And it does, we are required by the T.C.Q. to account for that water. We have to notify them monthly on what we think the amount of that water is going to be. And the amount of that, the use that is metered goes directly against our allocation, our water right allocation. Mr. Logan or Mr. Scotty, which everyone said it, that so does the use of our treated water. That's absolutely correct. But then that, to me, begs the argument, then we treat them the same and we value it the same. I just make a personal comment about my yard. 2011, I didn't have a yard simply because I don't water my yard. When the good Lord lets it rain, then I've got green. When he doesn't, it's brown. And I guarantee you that I'm not going to pay money to put water on the ground coming from wherever it was. I'm not fortunate enough to live at the lake, so I can't pump directly out of there. So I use treated water for everything that I do. but we live in West Texas, on the edge of a desert,

[1:13:56] you know that you don't have the water that you do in East Texas, and I try to conserve every place I can, which means I don't have a green yard. Do I have any further questions, comments? I might offer the council the following thing, if we vote not to accept the second reading, or vote in favor of the second reading this, it would require that we not bring it back up for six more months. In that time period, we would have an opportunity to look at the numbers, study the numbers a little bit more, and I feel like everyone would have the information that they feel like they might need to better address this issue and vote accordingly. So take that into consideration. It is open for someone to make a motion concerning this second reading, and then we'll go from there. So do I have any motions? I move to approve as presented. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. I'm the only I opposed I think did I hear in any other eyes then the motion passes the second reading of this motion passes next to one right we'll have a public hearing discussion and deliberation on requested projects to be considered for funding with grant year 2017 community development block grant and home investment partnerships grant funds from the

[1:16:00] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Bob Salas, you'll be making the presentation today. Good morning again. We're here this morning to present our 2017 CDBG and home grant proposals. We did hold a couple of public meetings to get citizen input before we came up with our recommendations. We also ensured that each recommendation met our five-year strategic plan. This year, we got a little bit of a bump in CDBG funds, about $10,000, but we took a hit in home grants, a little bit less than $5,000. Well, funding fluctuates pretty much every year. For the past decade, we've seen a steady reduction in funds, so we've had to adjust our programs to meet that consistent cuts. We also conduct annual reviews of our local housing trends, which helps us drive some of our programs. You can see by this slide that St. Angel still suffers from what we call the cost burden and that is people who pay more than 30% of their income towards housing. You can also see that renters suffer twice as much of the cost burden. This tells us that the gap between housing affordability and income is basically a still problem in St. Angel. We It also means that low-income families have a harder time paying their housing costs. Poverty is still relatively high at 16.1%, which is higher than the state average of 15.9. You can also see that about 6% suffer from what we call deep poverty. Those are people who pay less than $6,000 a year. So it's very difficult for them to make to meet. And like the rest of the nation, we're getting old. Our housing stock is getting older,

[1:18:02] so we'll start looking at that demographic at one point. Here's our proposed for CDBG. We're asking for 144,000 for admin, 125,000 for what we call program delivery, 146,000 for debt payment services for producers park, 38,000 for co-compliance so they can stay in our areas that we targeted for revitalization. We're asking for a new program called The Homeless Prevention, 90,000 for that. We're not asking for anything for blitz this year, and I'll talk about it in the next line. And we are asking for an increase in emergency repairs. We want to expand that program a little bit to include some ramps and some other things that we haven't done in the past. So kind of beef that program up a little bit. The New Homeless Prevention Program that we're proposing It's kind of geared towards assisting families that encounter a life crisis, and they kind of need help to kind of get over that crisis. It's not meant for those who are already homeless, it's not meant for those who don't, who are consistently being made homeless because they don't pay the rent and that kind of thing. To be eligible, you have to have a history of making payments, either mortgage or rent, to be eligible. We also want to continue our Blitz, but we want to partner with the Helping Hands program through Galilee, which means that the Blitz doesn't really go away. We just kind of change its hands. We'll support it with resources, volunteers, and those kind of things. And they will expand their program a little bit to accommodate some of our requirements. Here's our home grant proposal. Very similar to last year's. We're asking for $25,000 for home admin. 99 for a first-time home buyer's assistance, 46 for tenant-based rental assistance through MHMR, which is our special needs cases, and then 83,000 for Galilee CDC for new home construction.

[1:20:05] At this point, we take Council's direction, and once we get that, we will come back next month with an annual action plan that goes to HUD. We'll get to our approval, and it goes to HUD for their approval. I'll be glad to answer your questions and entertain suggestions. Did you explain a little more on that $90,000 for the homeless? Because it's obviously not been in a budget before and not been a conversation. This is basically a brand new program that we're recommending. We've been looking at this for a couple of years now. We've had a lot of during our public meetings as the issue has been brought up several times. We're constantly being asked to look at to provide of these kind of resources through churches that come to us, non-profits that come to us, telling us if there's anything we can do to help these folks. We've never had an opportunity to do that. This person has an opportunity to kind of cover that demographic. It would be dealing with folks, let me kind of go back to a little bit. It would be folks at 50% of AMI, which is really a low, lower income category. It's the same income, eligibility that public housing authority uses for their such an aid rental assistance. We want to mimic mirror the Plano program. It's been very successful there. I've talked with them. I've visited with them. And they have 100% success rate of after 60 days and over 90% over six months. So the idea is to keep people in their house. We want to make sure that they don't become homeless. Now, what we normally do when we have a new program, we monitor it, and for some reason after six months, it's not working out, we tweak it, we adjust it, or we kill it. I mean, if it's nothing happens in six months, we may come back to you to kind of reallocate those funds if it doesn't work out. I'm a little confused if who has helped this group of homeless before they get to be homeless

[1:22:14] is what you're saying. But my question mark is there's obviously been services available, help available for this group. I think you alluded to a couple of them just a minute ago. So how is there an overlap from other groups that provide the same assistance? And so, when you start to overlap programs, I have a great concern about overlapping programs for the same identical group of people. As far as I know, there's not a program like this in San Angelo. We have some at-hoc, we have several churches that will help individual people, individual families get by that, but it's not formalized, it's not, there's no study of funds to address issue. So as far as overlap, I'm not sure if that's, if there's a program out there that really does this. I know that we have a, we used to have a, in fact, I think the Contravioli Action Agency has a CAP program that provides funds for utility assistance, but I don't believe it covers rent or mortgage. So I think it's relatively unique. I haven't, maybe the audience, somebody in the office may, correct me, but I don't think we have a program like that. And you share the Plano program with us so we better understand what they're doing and what has worked and not worked for them? I will send it to you. You'll have a copy. I'll be before next month when it comes to you for the any action plan. Then you can make adjustments at that point. That's the formula. This is more of a deliberation exercise. Next month you will be approving the action plan that goes to HUD. So at that point we can adjust it tweak it or eliminate it and go back to the Blitz or whatever you recommend. The Blitz has been very favorable by many people. It's done some wonderful things. So to take that money out and not have it again would seem to be a little bit of an issue because I think many people very much have liked and supported the idea of the Blitz program.

[1:24:18] It has been a very good program. The idea was a finite five-year plan. We've done it for nine years now so you can see. And the idea was we're going to venture to run out of houses or areas to do and we're kind of getting there. Although we have neighborhoods to have individual blighted houses as a neighborhood, we've attacked a lot of those issues. So the idea was to run out of them and we're kind of getting to that point. So we kind of want to refocus that. But it doesn't go away. I mean, I think, I think a party with galleys is a good thing. They kind of, they do the same thing, very similar. They focus on elderly, but talking with a director, he's willing to adjust their program to cover non-elderly, just low income, and then we could provide them some resources that we do have available to equipment, that kind of thing, and volunteers to beef up their blitz, in fact, they call it the blitz as well. And it's all at the same time, so I think it's a good partnership. It's a good, I think it's a good time to look at transitioning out, that's my opinion, of course. Do I have other questions or comments from Council? Just clarification, this is repetition, Bob, I apologize. The new 90,000 is rental assistance, and we've never had that before. It's rental and mortgage assistance. We have rental assistance, per se, through section eight public housing, but not with the caveat that it will be someone that's going to be evicted and become homeless. That's the difference. We want to stay in their houses what we want to do, whether you're buying a house or whether you're renting a house. And there's some stipulations on it. It's not really free money for say. There are some things they have to go through. Let me fit it. Qualifications and applications. application. I'll send you the program design that we put together and to see

[1:26:19] what you all think. On your visual, you must be able to sustain after crisis recovery. So how do you take a look at that? What determines that they're able to sustain? They're going to have to provide us a budget. They're going to tell us, we're going to know how much money they make, what the crisis is, what their income looks like, and we'll look at a, in fact, we have non-profits that actually do provide budgeting services through our homeless coalition. We'll be using their resources as well. So we'll take a look and see where there are. And for some reason, it looks like they consistently are not making their payments, they're costing, they're going from house to house, you know, from mortgage to mortgage from whatever, at that point, we really won't be able to help them. So that someone who's really working has just, you know, their car broke down, and they're on the edge. And that car repair it throws them into a spiral, and it can't pay their rent. And before you know, they can't pay their insurance. I mean, it happens quite often, especially for low income families. So that's the intent of this program. And if I understood what you said, It was sort of to prevent homelessness rather than being reactive to it. This is not a homeless program per se. The homeless prevention is a little bit different than what the housing coalition, the homeless coalition is doing. We're doing different things with homeless individuals. Different programs, different efforts through the coalition. So it's a little bit different. Since we've been attacking the homeless issue, have we seen an increase of new individuals that have become homeless in situations that this would relate to? These folks are usually the quiet ones. The ones you don't see, the ones you don't hear about, other than through organizations

[1:28:20] that when they come to the organization, they ask for assistance. I'm sure there's an answer to that. I don't know what the numbers are to be honest with you. So let's say they get three months of assistance with their renter mortgage, and then they come off of this program. And can they re-qualify in 30 days, 60 days? No, it's a three month for ever or a three month for a year. Is it a three month for three years? What's the definition of timeline? Right now, it's, and again, we can tweak that, and it's just a draft version, but right now, I think we should, in fact, I've got it right here. I've got a copy of it. I think we should say, give me one second here, see if I can put it together, some of us don't remember what I write. I'm not reading it quick enough here, unfortunately. It's three months, and I believe it is a year after a year, you won't be able to do it for a year, But I'll let me confirm in that and I'll get back to you in that one but there's there's a there's a limitation Half and you can you know if you can't be taking advantage of this on a regular basis if that's the case You're not looking for this you this is not your program Need good strong guidelines we do and I think we've got them Right here, we'll send them to you and see what you all think, okay, so we'll be certainly be able to Pretty pretty strict manage them pretty strict policy of monitoring their budget and what bills they're spending on yes that we will ask for, we ask for one of the requirements is to ask for their budget to see where they're at. Yes, I mean, that's, we don't only throw money away, just throw money away. Okay, any further questions for Bob? I just have a quick one. Well, on the three months assistant,

[1:30:21] say for instance, like you said, it was something that just happened that month, then you would only help them for that one month and they would still have, or would you go ahead and continue to help them for the next two months? situational driven. It kind of depends on what happened to them, what the crisis is, how much it is, what the situation is and that that point we'll make a decision. We'll make a, hopefully we'll have some kind of decision matrix that we can use to help identify how much assistance we're going to give them. And of course, it's limited as well. I mean, how much you can help. No further questions then. Thank you, Bob. We do have some folks that want to speak at this. public comment please. I'm Craig Myers and as I was listening to Charlotte Farmer a couple of things one she said that Lucy Gonzalez was the senior council person now and so that means that the history of both the Blitz and what's coming up here is probably new to a lot of you. The second one was that it was like I reawakened another lifetime when I saw Tommy Hebert up here. But a couple of times... Is that a good lifetime or a bad lifetime? I've had a hard lifetime. But the fact of the matter is these two issues, the Blitz in relationship to the new program, congratulations to the council past and the city staff because about 12 years ago I've set a meeting with Marilynne and they had this designated as a city for blighted areas blighted areas slums if you will as of about three years ago statistically those four neighborhoods are developing neighborhoods they're

[1:32:23] not slums because the blitz was a part of something that was more than the blitz. The hardest sale in the state of Texas is the Texas Board of Housing that gives out tax credits. We've been done there twice because of the information we have with the collaboration of moving from 70% substandard housing to now under 20% substandard in these neighborhoods. They went against their own city staff, I mean, their own staff twice to provide tax credits worth $13 million of product on the ground here because we're doing something nobody else has done. And the key is collaboration and comprehensive stuff. One, collaboration, there are about 40 groups, including departments of the city, and not for profits, and churches and everybody else involved in this, because the city doesn't have the money to turn around slum areas. And in the process of these 10 or 12 years, $60 million of product on the ground has been put in a new housing, apartment complexes, infrastructure. She mentioned some of those things, but this is tremendous. You're to be congratulated, but the blitz was designed to take an area where there's a high concentration of low-income housing that is totally substandard and put in 30 to 50 new rehabs in a one-shot that stimulates the ripple effect for every house that goes into the blitz of the 300. There's a multiplier of about four. Some come now from private income, from private developers, and some comes from the citizens themselves now being encouraged to some from other not-for-profits, and some from a variety of areas. But now we don't have that concentration

[1:34:23] in any of these areas. There will still be needed to help with some of, excuse me, but some of the individual pockets, but the blitz is not a strategy. This new thing, and if you give me just one minute, you ask some questions about how do we know about what kind of people are using this. I've been a pastor in San Angelo in unretired and now I'm two churches, we have had a continual run of people who fit the categories here. These are working people. These are people who live at or slightly above the minimum wage, which is not a living wage in San Angelo. Rent utilities and some kind of transportation is what that will pay for, and it doesn't even include food, clothing, those sorts of things. And so it only takes a sick child where you have to stay at home because you don't have childcare for two weeks, and you're two weeks behind on your rent, and if you couldn't pay it last month, just barely pay it, you can't pay it next month, it compounds. You're required to have liability insurance, and $100 plus a month on that kind of budget, you cannot possibly pay that. It's a luxury, but it's a legal luxury. And if you get caught, it takes you $2,000 to get out of the situation where you pay the fine, you pay it to get your car out of impound, you pay for the towing fees, and you have to have a year's worth of insurance before you can get back to where you can go to work and take your kids where they have to go. That's impossible, but if you have rent and you have utilities taken care of for three months and you're still working, you can put aside that kind of money that requires one rent, months rent, a deposit, and your utilities. That's the kind of situation. People who have worked, people who will work, people who are working, but have had circumstances

[1:36:23] that are impossible to recover from. And if the council takes the same approach that they did to the collaboration and the comprehensive approach to the neighborhood revitalization, which the blitz was a part, you can handle this. It's not like addiction and other kinds of things that make it more complicated. I hope you'll see fit to approve it, but also to collaborate with Bob in Neighborhood Services as they collaborate with Galilee and community development and all these other things, because it's only a comprehensive error for it that's gonna make this work. Thank you so much. Thank you very much for the comment, please. morning council and audience. My name is Scott Heiser. I've been in San Angelo for 11 years now. That's a long time. But what I've seen happening is an increasing number of people that are experiencing poverty and sometimes deep poverty here in San Angelo. Right now we're sitting at 16% poverty in San Angelo. We have 5,000 families in San Angelo that are living in that deep poverty level as Mr. Salas presented there. That's a lot of people. Those are the people who, if they miss a housing payment, a rent payment or a mortgage payment, right, those are the people that that then begin a downward spiral to homelessness, all right? Now the impact of homeless prevention, and this is nothing new, it's new here in San Angelo, but not everywhere else.

[1:38:25] The American Enterprise Institute has found that a modest payment to help with one month's rent or three months rent along with the utilities keeps over 60, 76% of those people out of shelters because that's where they end up, right? And these are national numbers, right? So I really applaud Mr. Salos and his department for including this homeless prevention program. And it's gonna be especially helpful to qualifying families, and I say qualifying families because I know that the requirements to receive this money are going to be very stringent, right? It's going to help keep a lot of families we're looking at, numbers I run based on the homeless counts over the past years is annually we see about 50 to 75 families that actually end up homeless in shelters because of being evicted from their apartments or failing to pay a mortgage. Now in addition to that those families we're talking about 22% of our children here in San Angelo are living in poverty, so it's going to allow those children and those 55 to 75 families to remain stably housed, which is very critical here. So it's a very positive thing. It's new to San Angelo, but as Mr. Salas said, he's done his homework, and it's a very positive thing in this city, and that's a start. We need to start. Our homeless situation grows every year. All right, we typically see close to 500 people annually in San Angelo that become homeless. Majority of them are able to get out of the homeless situation, right? But this is a real critical part of it. Thank you very much. Do I have further public comment?

[1:40:36] Blackburn and I work for MHMR services for the Consular Valley in supportive housing. And I would like to say that I see where this new program every day would help prevent people from being homeless. A lot of people are just one paycheck, one sickness, one firing away from totally becoming homeless. So I think that it would be a very a good program to start here in San Antonio. Also, the coordinator for the MHMR TBRA home grant program, and that helps people with a chronic mental illness while they're waiting for the assistance of HUD, which is eight to 12 months. So I just want to let you know how I felt about it. I see it every day. Every day, I see people that I can't help because there's a waiting list, that HUD can't help right now because there's a waiting list. Everywhere you go, there's a waiting list. And you may be able to get some help now for a short period of time, like you may be able to go in the community and get your utility paid or this month's rent paid, but that really doesn't help. You need more than that. You need to have a bridging the gap where you can get another job, where you can, you know, pay your utilities and mortgage, and get on the other side where you can be steady again. Thank you. Any further public comment?

[1:42:37] name is Stephanie Hamby and I am the director of client services with galley community development and I just want to say that the city and galley have a wonderful collaboration program the blitz has been amazing for us we do helping hands in April their blitz also runs in April so like you said a lot of times we feel like we're overlapping a lot of things so by combining our programs I feel that we really are benefiting the city a little more because we can go outside of maybe some of their for you know for target neighborhoods with our programs. So we're really going to improve the program with that and as far as the homeless program we see so many people in our offices every day that are having housing crisis issues and everything else and they are they're trying and these people are the ones that we want to help the ones they're trying that are trying to do just a little bit more and we're starting a program where we're working on grants to do something that will kind of go hand in hand with what they're doing. But I think it's just amazing and I think we need to give it a try. Like Bob said, you know, if it's not working in six months, they'll go back and revisit it. And we think that that's a great opportunity for us to collaborate even more and bring in other organizations to collaborate along with them. Thank you. Any further public comment? At this point, I get you direction, no need to vote, but like I said, if you're comfortable with this proposal, we'll put it together into an annual action plan, come to you next month for approval. And I will send you the guidelines for the draft guidelines for this new program. Thank you, Bob. I don't know who's in control of the air conditioning, but my hands are blue. So if there's anyone who can warm this room up just a little bit, it would be grandly appreciated.

[1:44:39] Item C consider a resolution approving an emergency contract in regards to installation and construction of the signalized intersection at Main Street and Pulliam Street. Third street pursuant to Texas local government code 252.022A2 an associated project cost and authorizing the city manager to execute related documents. Ryan, you're on. Morning Council, Mayor, Mr. Valenzuela. This one is basically just that, a resolution to allow the city manager to sign the contracts needed so we can move forward. I know all you folks are aware of the damage that we had back in June. In this particular intersection, Maine and Pulliam is one that was damaged beyond repair. Had some old Derek Laddis work poles, some of them, you know, piece of was on AEP. So in the storm, it all came down. So we've totally removed everything, put in place, what was allowed by METCD standards, which is the manual uniform traffic control devices that allows us in the event something like that happens where a signal gets destroyed. We went to an all-way stop condition. So this resolution is actually being expeditious and letting us move forward to try to get, you know, for the safety of the citizens, signalized intersection back up and running and so that's really what this is. Middle of my district and I'm safety is paramount. I move to approve, present it. Second. How long will it take to get this intersection up and running again? To give you a little bit of background, the estimate that I've worked up for the RFB so that we could put that piece out to bid is approximately about 170,000. And then the time frame on that will be, And that's what the resolution is to move some of those documents along. We're already working with purchasing, and they're working on getting those out to contractors to bid.

[1:46:39] The time hold up always, it's like Washington was when we had that poll damage, is getting the polls here. They don't always have stuff like that on stock when we order from different vendors. So to expedite that part of it, we're doing it just like we did Washington. And also to save budgetary numbers on the other way, kind of things are going this year. So the traffic department has ordered the poles, some of the components that go inside the cabinet to save costs, but also move that along. We've already got that in place, so we're kind of ahead of the curve on ordering the poles. This will allow us when we put the RFB out to basically get a contractor on board to all the underground work that we're not set up to do. The foundations, all the underground conduit, run the electrical to make the system totally operational. So this part will be bid out. And then those other components, we're buying ourselves to save cost and to save money. And so we're already ahead of that game. We've got that ordering in. So I would say three months, if we can get all the documents done, maybe sooner if we can get that done. And just like us, there's a lot of other cities, middle and no deaths that have had damage. So trying to get a contractor in here quickly is our goal. You're projecting $170,000 cost. Is that what I heard you say? Yes. That's what the estimate sets out for the RFB part that we're going to have to bid out to get a contractor on board that's pretty close, I think, to kind of what we're looking at. A typical intersection, if we don't buy those other poles and components, it's typically about $250,000 to redo and signalize the intersection. So hopefully the components were binds about $40,000, so hopefully we're saving, you know, $30,000 is the intent. I have a motion. I have a second. All in favor. Any opposed? Passes 7-0. Next item, D, discussion regarding late fee charges associated with the municipal statement, and

[1:48:45] I have Bill Riley making a presentation today. Thank you Mayor, Council. As you know, this is an issue that we have discuss quite a bit. So what I'd like to do is just take a few minutes and kind of go through the basically the same presentation that we did last time that just kind of lays out the issue and and then you can have that needed discussion. So this is the ordinance that requires a $25 late fee following 28 days after the billing date which would deem a bill delinquent and at that point to $25 is assessed. Just looking at historically what there's been about 5,000 delinquent accounts a month, and so that is historically equated to about $1.5 million in revenue. You can see the actual 2014 through 2016 and the last couple of years has exceeded that. part of our budgeting, we do include $1.5 million of revenue in our revenue projections. Just to take a look at how that would be impacted if the rate was changed, as you can see if we dropped it, if we used a percentage basis what the actual revenue would be on an annual basis and what it would be, the estimated late fee would be. For example, at 5%, it's a little over $4 for a, that's using an average 4,000 gallons a month of average residential bill, that's what that would be. Up to 20%, would only be $16.38. Another, looking at it as flat fees, obviously at the $25 fee, that's a projected annual revenue of $1.5 million, and as we drop down to $10,

[1:50:45] of course, that's only about $600,000. Again, that's based on the pretty much average 5,000 accounts a month that are delinquent. Just to give you some idea what others do, you can see what the Midland Big Spring Odessa, which Stull Falls all have percentage late fee. Abilene does not have one. However, the day that you are late, they shut you off. And then there's a reconnect fee associated with that. Whereas with us, we're over 60 days before we ever turn anybody off. Obviously, from my perspective, the issue here is a revenue shortfall. In the process of rate making, when you look at what your revenue needs are and what your revenue sources are, we look at every source of revenue. And there's revenue offsets or sources of revenues that is more than just the commodity charge. And one of these, in this case, is a very is this $1.5 million that we have seen historically for over 10 years is a very consistent revenue source. So obviously we have to account for all the revenue sources, so that is included and was included in the five year rate plan. So if that was to change, then I'm looking at how we make up that shortfall to meet our financial needs. So one way to do that would be to increase the water rates and the projected increases or increase to projected increases for that through the five years. We have looked at some other options. Currently, our deposits are $35, which does not cover the cost of the bill if somebody walks there. We have to send it to collections. If we change that deposit from the $35 to $100, based on the number of accounts that we send to collections each year, we would see about an additional $100,000 in revenue.

[1:52:45] Another area that we really need to take a look at is in our tap fees. In most of those fees, currently, the tap fee doesn't even cover the cost of the material that we have to buy to set that meter and make that tap. So if we change that to just cover our costs, we would see approximately $200,000 increase. So those two, we can come up with about $300,000, but there's really not anywhere else that we've seen that we can make up that shortfall. Looking at the projected five-year plan, for this 2018, the projected increase is 11%. So if our actual revenue from delinquent late charges was cut in half, that 11% would need to go to 13.7% to make that up. And as you can see across the board, if we only receive in about $250,000, that increase would have to go to 15.4% to make up that revenue shortfall. So that's basically the information that I have to provide you. I mean, that is where we're at. And so be happy to answer any questions or have some discussion on how we might approach this issue. My first question would be that we show we have a million five short fees collected for late payments, but what dollar amount of that million five or the million four that you reflect over the past five years are dollars that are carried over for longer than one year? In other words, is part of that number, a number from somebody who didn't pay two years ago or three years ago and is carried on the books for an ongoing time period, eternity.

[1:54:45] That's revenue, right, Bill? Every year, 1.5. That is correct. So it's actually money coming in to us. That is correct, okay. The dollars that you're talking about, Mayor, would be in our collections, and that is a separate amount. That is over and above the 1.5 million. That's actually what we collect annually from late fees. We'll have three questions. The first one's actually kind of like a statement just for you to clarify. If we increase the rates, is that going to be a catch 22 to where people can't afford the bill in the long run again and ending up in more late fees? The second is the deposits. How long after an initial services set up, does that deposit be applied to that bill? Well, it's not that, well, I think it's four years. Four years. I think for residential accounts, it's four years. I don't I'm wouldn't aware that we were applying anything currently. Well, it's basically a return in it But I guess it could be applied against that that So the customer gets after four years a refund of Yes, so after four years the customer gets a refund $100 35 And third how late are people paying late? Is it one week to week? What's the average all of the above all of the above? of what's the median of each? I don't have that mention people are. Majority paying in the first week, second, late. I honestly don't know when to figure that out. I'm sure we could. I mean, if I might take the next step, I'm sorry. But what I think you're alluding to there is a process of where that late fee grows over time,

[1:56:45] based on when they pay like a rolling schedule first week and I'm not going to speak for Tina on this but that becomes very expensive to employ because it's not just a matter of I mean we have to have the the billing system that will actually do that and I'm not sure that our current billing system will do that I think I think you're right Bill I suspect that it would not it'd be a custom modification and then an annual maintenance fee on the modification right My question was Bill when if you're raising this water bill, you're looking at everyone right all the customers not just your That would be the rate a rate increase across for everybody and seeing I think that that it's not a good idea for the Matter of fact that we're getting punished the people that pay their bills on time They're gonna get an increase because of the people that don't pay their bills on time So I don't much care for that percent rate myself Mayor Mayor if I could build touched on something and and I don't think we spent a lot of time on it But bill would you revisit the issue of the tap fees? Didn't we cover several months back the the possibility of a rate change on those tap fees that we weren't getting Anywhere near what it cost us to connect to the system and so that the rest of the water fund activity was subsidizing the rates associated with people who needed a TAP that is correct that that would give you some relief if you're feeling pressure to reduce this revenue if you increase that revenue to at least what it costs us to do that business that can give you a little slack to create some relief here was that cost I don't remember the numbers feel quite variable on the different size of tap or me to this being set. But to give you an example, our current, and I don't have the exact number of our current, TAP fee is around $250, I believe. The actual cost of the material is over $1,000.

[1:58:51] So it's significant what we're actually subsidizing for new taps. We did discuss those a few months ago, and the decision that time was made to leave them like they are. But it certainly is an area that we're not getting even our costs. Do we have what other cities do relative to tap fees? Absolutely. Can you share that? Okay. I thought you might bring you what others are doing. Well, I can tell you that most cities do their best to have a cost of service. They pass on that cost because it's an individual that's causing that, has that need and therefore the philosophy should be is that they pay the actual cost of that service being provided to them. Most do their best to do that. Not all like some more like it sometimes becomes the decision process is based on other things. So you're saying that other cities, if the cost of that tap service is over $1,000, they're asking the customer to pay for that? Oh, absolutely. That's actually probably today. That's a low tap fee. It would be more anywhere from $1,500 to $2,000. Which would really price people have been able to have a tap fee, wouldn't it? Probably. Mayor, again, that's a philosophical discussion, but I can tell you across the country, that's not, that's where those, that would be more in line with what those are. And people are building houses and putting in taps every day. So I would say it's a cost of if you need it, you pay for it. What about deposits? Give me some history from other communities in terms of what they require for deposits? You know, that's all over the place. Generally what I think that is, so we've looked at most communities try to get close to what the bill would be

[2:00:53] for the deposit, and we're not there, I mean, we're. How would that number be? Well, I think $100 is more in line with, and that's why we chose that number for this evaluation, because that's a whole lot more in line with what the normal bills would be that we would lose. You know, what percentage stay for years and get that deposit back? Do you have that number? I do not, I do not, council. So the tap fee is primarily for new construction. That's correct. That's just as much as a new house or subdivision, the new house subdivision, whatever. So right now we would charge a new home. What fee for a tap connection? Well, for a normal residential, again, I believe it's $250. Then if there's we have to cut the street, and there's additional charge they have to pay to have that street repaired. But that's based on what it costs to repair that street. But just the tap fee that includes tapping the line, the material, and setting the meter, and the labor associated with that is about $250. Based off of our current software that we have in place, what are the flexibilities in terms of being able to program our current software to accept different parameters? I'm sure that there is some, and I would just be lying to you if I was being in to try to explain that to you right now, but it certainly is something that we can look into. I would expect a flat fee or a percentage would be just basic requirements associated with that. So if you were going to consider either a flat fee or a percentage, we would expect those to be very doable. I think the difficulty, I like Lane's idea about the later you are, the more you pay, we just have to research whether or not that's a possibility. Here's an idea, what about ASU's IT department

[2:02:55] get an intern to use their project? This is not, this software is not intern software. This isn't, it'll be an app. This is major software, right. And we wouldn't want to deviate from our contract with the company to maintain that software. What would be breach of contract? Is that what? We want that company to maintain that software. This is specialized software. It's not just, I mean, it takes somebody that understands it and the people that build it and that maintain it to do those changes and reprogramming for it to operate and integrate with the other modules in the software. Get that number to ask them to see how much it would cost for them to build and maintain? depends on what we would be building. We have to do it. We need to determine what we want dictated to be done. The cost would vary over a whole array of ideas that you might want to build. Just to be clear, it's a $25 late fee, the day after one misses their payment. And it stays $25 as a late fee until when. It's after the 28th day. So on the 29th day, if you have not paid, then there's a late fee applied. $25. At what point does it become larger than $25 until you cut it off at the end of 60 days? It could. I mean, if you don't pay it, then there's going to be another, it'll be late again at the next 28 days. So there would be another, it does grow. It occurs to me. And there's not a utility that we have, a utility bill that we have that does not have some sort of late fee structure. Whether that be atmos energy, whether that be sudden link, whether that, you know, our credit card bills, if we don't pay our credit card bills on time, you know, they have a percentage.

[2:05:00] I realize fully that there are some folks that would struggle to pay their water bill. I understand that. but they also have other late fees that they would incur on their other utility bills as well. So, it's as cold-hearted as it may sound. I am okay with a $25 late fee. That, to me, is not just exorbitant. I think it's important to point out too that we work with folks every day. If somebody calls and is having problems and concerns, and they're trying to get their bill paid, we work with them. I mean, it's not just a matter of, no, sorry, you're gonna pay it, as we do our best to work with people and help them work it out where they can keep their water on and pay their bills. Bill, I do want to make sure that the citizens do understand that not everybody gets charged at $25 late fee. There's a certain number, you had to surpass a certain value before you're charged that late fee, right? So there's some accounts really that are below, what is it, $35? That's correct. So if it's about $35, we don't assess the $25 fee, because that would be excessive, really, can we start looking at it from percentage basis. I do, of course, want to point out that if any changes that we make that'll impact the five-year rate plan will throw us off as far as the plans that we had for replacing infrastructure, future projects, and what have you. So I know that we considered this prior to developing the five-year plan, and we had reduced the late fee. More than likely, the rates would have gone up where everybody else, just to make that adjustment. But again, on our part, we do work with our citizens. I know I'll make this comment, and I don't want to seem cold hard either. When I was struggling as a college student with a family, I made sure I never paid a late fee. I could not afford to pay a late fee, so I don't believe I ever did. That's one of the first things that I took care of was my utilities, my rent, what have you, the things that I need to

[2:07:02] live. But again, this is just a presentation in your part. Again, Bill can go back, take a look based on what the City Council would like to see happen. It would come back with some other suggestions. I agree. Bill and Allison and Tina have worked very well together to bring professional business practice-oriented proposals. And I'd be interested to know what they thought was a good industry standard approach for the light fees, the tap fees, and the deposits. I think we have to do a thorough analysis of all those areas and look at a big picture game plan for what we do. And I would encourage us to support that kind of action and time. I think if they brought something on deposits, something on tap fees, that could give you, you could implement some sort of relief on late fees. It would be modest, but it would be some relief. And it'd be revenue neutral. And move us more toward centralized position related to best practices. And they have a history of working those kind of proposals up, so I'm interested to, I think that'd be a good way to go. I'd also like to see us move, attempt to move that $35 threshold up some and see if we can get to maybe $100. And that way, people will not think $25 is such an exorbitant fee. I don't know what kind of impact that will be financially planning. But if we can look at that threshold, I think that that may be a bigger impact and then really looking at some of these other items. Great idea, Harry. May I also ask how many people have a $35 water bill? Because I didn't know anybody could even only use

[2:09:03] $35 worth of water so is the number like zero or five people or I mean did they not turn the water on or are you talking just the thousands of gallons usage calculated out that portion is that what you're speaking about it's a total total bill so it's it's not there's not very many and I do not well and it's based on your balance so if you can pay it down below that threshold. That gets you the relief. So if you had an $80 bill and paid 50 of it where you had an outstanding balance of 30, that got you the relief. Am I misstating that? I'm pretty sure that I asked you to do it. I think we need to look at that because I don't know about that $30 thing. But facts are facts, numbers are numbers, so we'll look at it and understand what kind of a big picture program we can put together and provide some relief at the same point in time, protect the fiscal responsibility that we owe the rest of the citizens. Bill, one quick comment on that. I'm going to echo Harry's comment. I think we could stair-step that thing up and get closer to the hundred over a period of time. That's great, whether that be six months, nine months, year, two years, whatever. But on the tap fees, realize there's builders that have houses on the marker right now that are priced. And so a quick action on a tap fee could actually affect their margin on the houses. I realize that. But when you look at new construction and how many houses somebody might have already on the market for sale. So let's keep that in mind as we look at the tap fees. But I certainly agree those tap fees are probably 90, 95 percent new construction, which could be passed on to purchasers. But we have to make sure that the builders have time to price that accordingly. Thank you. Do you have any further questions from Council Bill or do you feel like you have what you need to to march forward on? If that's a consensus decision we know where we're going. If we move if we're close to removing to that $100 per deposit can we look at decreasing

[2:11:10] the amount of time to where that is applied because there's going to be a lot of people that $100 upfront is going to be excessive to where they can't go into the office and to get it turned on, but if it's two years to where it's applied to their bill, I hardly have $100 water bill. Yeah, we absolutely can't. I mean, we can see if that works out as well. But the deposit obviously is to protect us. And the other issue I think that we've talked about is our collections is growing at about $1.5 million a year. And so we don't want to do something that jeopardizes that as well, because it currently stands over $3 million. So it is significant. Can you also at some point give us an update on that collection? Because I think we've hired an outside agency to help us with that. I'd like to understand their performance relative. I mean, if you're thinking of trying to save water, you can come shower at my house. Thank you, Bill. All right, we're going to move on to E, consider approving tiers incentive request for seven South Tier's private projects, totaling 102,962 cents, and one South Tier's public project that totals $37,000 that were approved by the Tier's Board on 523-17, and also consider approving tiers incentive request for two North Tier's private projects, totaling 124,150, And one South Tier's private project that totals 38,030 that were approved by the Tier's Board, 627, 17. And I have John James at the podium. Thank you. John James, Director of Planning and Development Services.

[2:13:12] As you know, the tax increment reinvestment zone. Tier's has funds, and there are one or two cycles every year where we solicit applications from the public for eligible grant projects. And so this is the recommendation from that tiers board of the projects that they are recommending funding out of those tiers funds. So first I wanted to set the stage for how much funding is available. For example, in this year's South grant cycle, we got well over, we got more projects requesting funding than we had funding available. So that comes into play in a little bit. But these you can see the available funds for private projects is just under 170,000. The tiers board recently established a policy of setting aside 25% of their annual funding, specifically for public projects, whether that be public facilities, public parks, street projects. We discussed recently the Chadburn Street Project. So that 25% set aside is set aside specifically for public projects. That was a minimum of 25%. Exactly, a minimum of 25% of those funds, that's about $70,000. So for our purposes today, we, for the South area of the tiers, you have about $170,000 available to distribute to grant funds. Now you don't have to distribute all of that, but that's what's available. The Tears Board has recommended a total of about 150,000 of that in projects and I'll briefly outline those projects in just a minute. The recommended Tears South private projects, here's a list, in your packet is a detailed information about what they're doing, whether it's facade improvements, windows, fire sprinkler systems, and that sort of thing, but this just lists the projects themselves and the

[2:15:16] amount that was recommended. I'll note here this says these asterisk ones those were ones not recommended by staff. I just want to clarify that that does not mean that we believed that those projects were not worthy of funding. The way staff approached this we simply took all of the projects, ranked them one through how many of our projects there were 12 or 15 and then we picked the top projects based on the amount of available funding. So again, all of these projects we felt were worthy. There was just not enough funding to go around. But then as the Tears Board took up these items, some of the ones we recommended funding, they didn't fund and vice versa. So what's before you today is the Tears Board recommendation. On just as a quick clarification, do you have criteria the staff says we recommend these for funding based on A, B, C, D, E, F, G? Yes, the policies of the incentive policy that the tears board and the council has adopted has some general criteria. Those aren't, you know, it's not a rigorous scoring where, you know, numbers are assessed, but it's more of a kind of comparing this project versus this project, which one's better. And then we just iteratively did that until we had a list. And that's similar to what the Tears Board did as they reviewed all of these projects as well. This is just a continuation of that previous list, again with the projects recommended. Then finally, this is the, all of those other projects were recommended out of the private funding. This Heritage Park project, the Tears Board recommended funding 37,000 out of that public set aside. That is a, will be a park. The proposal is for a park at the corner of Oaks and Tewig,

[2:17:16] and it is currently owned by the area foundation, and they are the applicants in this case. So that made this project eligible for the public funding, and that's how the board chose to distribute that funding, or recommend for this particular project. That was the south area. The north is a little bit simpler, partly because we didn't have near as many applicants. Although we are, if anybody out there is listening, we're strongly encouraging folks from the north area to apply. As you can see, one of the reasons is that we currently have just under $1 million available in the north tiers, and the similar set aside of about 100,000 minimum for public projects. And before I pass this, the board recommended funding 124,000 in private funds. These are the projects that they did recommend in the north. Again, that's just a repeat of that slide showing the amount available. There were just a few projects that were not recommended for funding. Again, in the south, the board felt the same way staff did, that all of the projects were worthy. They just didn't have enough funds available to put funds towards all of those projects. In the north, there was only, I think, one project that was not recommended for funding. And that was simply because it was repaving a parking lot. And as the board has discussed, what the goal of the tiers is in terms of making improvements in these areas, simply reworking an existing parking lot that needs to be repaved, they felt and staff agrees that that doesn't rise to the level of what the tiers is trying to do in terms of raising the quality of development in the area. Again, that's a very brief overview of these projects. You have more detail in your background information,

[2:19:17] but I'd be happy to answer any questions. Do I have questions from Council? My first question is that 25% that set aside, that you said that was a policy change that the tears board made? Yes. I guess probably I'm a little confused. I thought to all the policy for these particular commissions and boards really should come by for the council. Well, it does, and that's actually in the policy that's the next item on the agenda. So you're correct in that currently that set aside is not official. When the board, it's not official until you approve the policy that's recommended before you on today's agenda. So you could spend some of those what are labeled here public funds you could spend them any way you want because that policy is not yet in place. As the board looked at how they want to fund projects they had already recommended that 25% set aside so in their recommendation to you on these particular projects they went ahead and separated that out. But you're correct that policy has not yet been approved but it's before you later today. I like getting cart before the horse though. Again that's the board's recommendation they chose to reflect their policy change in their decision making, obviously you can differ from that if you choose to. I think it would be great to set a policy before we change rules and regulations, criteria on the tiers board that you make sure you get counsel's approval before you take action. I think again it's kind of backwards in terms of what we're doing. So with that said, I also want to remind everybody that the creation of tiers was really created for two particular big reasons. One is to create economic development in the downtown area by improving buildings. And second, to have money available for the big public projects that, in fact, can have a benefit to a big area,

[2:21:18] like the downtown area of which there would never be enough public funds through the general fund to take care of the total expense. Sorry, I need some water. And what we have found is that as a priority, we certainly have in the past wanted to make sure that dollars invested came back to increase the property tax funds to develop more funds down the road to put back into tears to help further projects going forward. Do I have comments, questions from the council? Rick, I've got one question for you. The money allotted for the Chatteran Street project for out of the public funds, we set aside 50%. Yes, but that did not. This budget was done prior to that. So when we brought the calculations to you, it excluded the current year. Is that correct, Dan? Yes, that's correct. So we calculated that. So yes, it would come out of those funds 50%, but it didn't calculate this year into that. For future years, yes. Okay. What is the amount that we're looking at? Do we have a number yet? Last we spoke. We felt how much the Chabron Street project to are we at 19? When we brought it to you all, the presentation was 19 million. We're in discussions with the state now about that grant and how that project in trying to get those grant dollars may actually change the scope of the project, which we'll be bringing back to you. But yes, the initial full scope of the project was 19 million. But the council could direct them to go ahead and use public funds from this year's budget as well since the shortfall is going to be greater than we thought based off of some new recommendations or new criteria that Tech's dot has put out there in terms of the grant fund. So we've got a bigger hold than we thought we had based on the current budget. What was the amount that tears would be besides just 50% do you having what was the

[2:23:20] remember that 50% have all that with me today a prop non-profits are there that could even qualify you know that's hard to say I mean they're a handful of churches you know they would qualify as a not-for-profit organization charitable organizations, there are the foundations, you know, I couldn't begin to guess how many, but there's probably quite a few. I mean, I know when the Main Street people from the Texas Historic Commission came to San Angelo and did a study on our downtown area prior to selecting downtown, or San Angelo's a Main Street city, they said that we had more nonprofits and more square footage in our main street district than any other city in the state of Texas. Well, I'm going to agree with Harry that we're going to put into the cart before the horse, but with this Chabron Street project coming on, and we don't have a true number of how much that's going to cost. On the side note, I'm not against any of these public projects because in the long run it's going to be helpful, but with a 19 to 20 million, maybe even 21, hopefully it doesn't reach that amount of a project that's going to do a full Chatham Street. We need to be very conservative on how we're spending the tears funds north and south right now. Is that are you making a motion? Let me think about it. Is the I'm struggling here is do we have a bigger question here of you know I'm sensing to we have the cart before the horse here

[2:25:22] on the non-profit deal. Does the policy need to be decided whether or not non-profits are going to have any, you know, churches? You know, if we've got, you know, I trust the study was accurate that there's more non- I'm just wondering, again, do we have the cart before the horse here since we have a non-profit in this mix? I think the reason the staff put these in the order we did is that the funding cycle that we're currently in falls under the incentive policy that was in place when those applicants applied and so they fall under the what you might call the old or the current funding policy which does not exclude nonprofits and so we put the incentive policy changes after because the decision you make there will apply from that point forward. Obviously, how you think about that could impact what decision you make on this. But we want it to be clear that if you make a change to the policy, that still won't affect this particular cycle. But that policy changed in the come to us to begin with, would that mean this is out of compliance? No, the current policy that we're under was approved by the Council in July of 2015. so that the current policy that were under was approved by the City Council upon recommendation of the Board. That time non-profits were not excluded is what understanding correct there was a policy prior to that did exclude non-profits in 2015 that that exception to not allow funding for non-profits was removed from the policy so the current policy were under would allow non-profits to be eligible. Do I have further comment? Do I have a motion? I think we need

[2:27:35] to be very cognizant about how we're spending money that's going to be allotted for Chappern. Because that's going to be coming out short. I wish we had some numbers for that. Was it 50% south, 25% north? Yes, at the time what the council chose to do was four things that that you're taking 50% of the funds from the South to go toward that and allocating only 25 from the North. And 25 on the North only applied to a block and a half that were actually within the North zone. The budget this year for the North tiers is $430,000. So 25% of that we did include a 3% increase every year for the next what 10 years I believe was the period of time. And then the budget this year for the south tiers is $278,000. So half of that would be about $140,000. Again, with a 3% increase each year for the next 10 years. That help. OK, thank you. You're welcome. So the issue right now is not so much the private funds. It's basically what I'm hearing is that you can learn about the public funds at this point and make sure we leverage those for a future project, which is the Chabron project, basically. You can make it. And we're matching with tiers and we're using a variety of funding sources to try and come up with that. We have players from CoCIDC to MPO to tiers to street reconstruction dollars so we pulled a lot of resources together plus trying to obtain some grant dollars through TechStop. We can entertain a motion that one specifically deals with the public funding and one that specifically deals with the private funding.

[2:29:36] We can also make motions that specifically are south versus north, or we can make a motion to include all north and south funding from private and a separate motion concerning public. Do I have a motion? We have no action. I want to see what 37 and 38 will do in the long run with matching funds for Chatham. How that can affect. I'm not sure what your question is. of the 37,000 for the south tiers and was it 38 for the north? Well, you can't come up with finite numbers lane because, in fact, you don't know what the tier's fund is going to have and as you've increased the baseline of the tier's fund on an ongoing basis, those numbers will change. So they can't give you a defined specific number today because those are fluctuating numbers and that's part of the issue as it relates to how you come up with the money. the Tears Fund grows over the next eight years, the dollars that you use as a base, which they're using a base number off of tears from today. Not what it will be next year, the next year, or the next year. So they can't give you a dollar number finite. I'm going to make a motion that we first approve the funding for the private funds for both the north and the south I'm going to make a motion that we do not approve the funding from the public section

[2:31:36] of public funds from the tiers program due to the unknown factors as it relates to the larger, bigger, most important project to funding the Chadburn Street project. Let's have some discussion on that, some further discussion. I don't have a problem with this particular project. I don't actually have a real problem with public funds going to a specific public project. I really have a greater problem with the fact is that we're dealing with a nonprofit. non-profit. And I really think that we open ourselves up to a great number of other non-profits in this community coming to us and asking for dollars. I think the project is a good project and I think it will definitely enhance that particular corner and do a lot of things for the citizens. I just really that I'm philosophically not comfortable with giving tax dollars to a non-profit right now. Any other comments? Do I have public comment? We'll take a vote. All in favor say aye. Oh sorry Matt. Mayor, council members. My name is Matt Lewis. I'm the president of the San Angelaria Foundation, the applicant for this $30,000 public project. Councilman Thomas, I understand where you're coming from and I admire the responsibility all of you

[2:33:37] have in trying to make sure we make those dollars that are available for projects get the maximum use. This is a neat project I'm sure you've studied it that is being primarily done by fundraising grants private donations and we We would not have applied for this $37,000 had it had we felt that it was not in compliance with what was then the current policy understanding you'll look at that again for going forward. But I mean that was our application was these were available funds. And those funds are needed to help finish that project not funded fundraising will continue to try to make this project come to fruition. I think there's many examples where public dollars have been put toward non-profits, if you will. The city itself is a non-profit. Shannon Hospital is a non-profit. ASU is considered a non-profit. The public school system, as you mentioned, churches, Boys and Girls Club, there's lots of great organizations that contribute. The non-profit sector contributes greatly to our community. And the reason we asked was thinking it was available, and that it was going to be a small investment into over $800,000 investment into a pocket park, not being funded by taxpayers, and not being maintained by taxpayers as a neat, public, private partnership with the donor. And so I just wanted to be able to offer my two cents worth before you took your vote, I understand. but I want to be able to answer any questions you might have. And I really appreciate your perspective that kind of balances where I am. Those other nonprofits do have revenue streams, right?

[2:35:37] Nonprofits have revenue streams called begging. I think sales tax dollars and property tax dollars are help fund a city if I'm not mistaken. That's right. The city is responsible for managing the tax dollars and trusted to your stewardship. And the city is also able to go seek as was alluded to other grant funding that's available to them. And we're just, we're also attempting to help do our part to help improve the quality of life of downtown and the whole community, the consular that we serve. Thank you. I have a question, but it's for John. I don't know if anybody else has questions for you. I'm happy to sit down. John, question. Prior to 2015, nonprofits were excluded. In 2015, the council voted to allow non-profits to get public funds for projects that fall within the tier zone. Is that correct? Do you remember or would you have any knowledge of what changed that caused the council to vote in 2015 to include non-profits again? You know I don't recall that was about the time I came on and so some of those discussions had occurred prior to my joining the city and so I can't speak to that and I should also add that a new policy was adopted in 2014 that had that language. language I didn't go back that doesn't necessarily mean that language was in place from the beginning of the tears that policy might have changed over the years prior to that issue was that it didn't exclude him it didn't include him but didn't exclude him right so if they're not excluded they would you know we could consider it as a council right okay all right so as I understand it

[2:37:41] because I've had a chance to look at some of the detail for this project. What the San Angelo area foundation and the supporters of this are actually asking, requesting public funds to do a project that's on city land, is that part of what they wanna do? It's a portion that belongs to the city. No, it's actually, the property, as you can see here, is privately owned by the Area Foundation. Now, I should add that some of the costs in their project, roughly equivalent to what they've asked from tears money, is for this stuff that you see that is within the public right of way. So improving the sidewalk, street trees, those sorts of things. So that's one of the discussion points that the Tears Board discussed when they talked about funding in this project was that you could consider those funds as all applying to the public right of way. Okay. Now, would this be similar to what has been done on Chadburn with tears money? It could be, again, to the extent that you limit it, the city tears funding to the public right of way, then yes, it would be similar to sidewalk work and landscaping, streetscape improvements similar to what's been done on Chadburn. you might know and just from past reference and John James might not know this either but there was previous money from tears given to this project already so when in fact that streetscape program was done on Chadburn some monies were taken from tears then to do this current brickwork already on this project so there's already been tears money put into this project at a previous time. Okay. So, and Brenda, you may be able to answer this question.

[2:39:43] What happened at that time? It looks like the project stalled or something happened. What do you know? The land was donated by J. Willis Johnson. It was part of his family's heritage and he had a vision that what he wanted was a pocket park, which would be a landscaped area that would feature a horse and a man on the property. And that was his premise for this project was a simple landscape project with his statute that he agreed to pay for. And over time made a decision to put the property into the area of foundation, but it was not originally in the area foundation when, in fact, the project was first conceived. So it looks like from the renderings, the drawings that we're looking at, that it has gone much beyond a statue and a horse, right? So who can speak to the specifics of what this pocket park, I'm not familiar with pocket parks. So I'd like to understand a little bit more about what this park would bring to our city and our downtown area. Is that somebody help me with that? Yeah, I would defer to the applicant or someone representing the park that probably could do a better job of that than I could. Thank you, Council. I'm Lee Fluger. I'm the vice chair of the tears board. I represent the county on that board. These funds are supplied 40% by the county and 60% by the city taxes. I think your question a while ago is,

[2:41:45] and when the mayor got into it, she thought you were asking about the property itself, which was not your question. Your question was of this area here, It was completed. Basically it was about half done when the city did their original grant, which was a federal grant, a 90-10 federal grant called Freedom Grant. The city put, or the city, this grant did some brick work and concrete work. It didn't complete the brickwork in this area didn't complete the brickwork in this area nor did it plant the trees Nor did it put irrigation Nor did it put the electrical that was subsequently done on Chadburn Street When they when the city finished the project on Chadburn Street, I don't where those funds came from and they didn't address completing this part of the sidewalk at at Teweg and South Oaks. I think that was your question. If I can kind of put just a kind of an overview on this deal, I think Craig Myers said it all, but Tommy here is new in some of the information about what doing public projects like this do. And that came in 1992 when we started the route at and our downtown was absolutely vacant except for junk stores and and very little activity and we did the route out and their first project was celebration bridge which is a public private partnership exactly like this the city council at that time donated

[2:43:47] funds to help build it along with 1500 people in San Angelo put that together I I see this is pretty much the same sort of thing that will keep Revitalization, I'm flying about 30,000 feet here, not on this particular project, but 30,000 feet on what we're trying to do and that's to keep activity going downtown to raise the level of appreciation of our city and what it can do and And by doing that, we get more investment. We get more energy. We get more excitement about what's going on downtown. Basically, what we're asking for here is, it's like to say the $30,000, we're just about finish the street, the sidewalk. City right of way. City right of way, but we're trying to make it a public-private partnership where we kind of all join together. We do something good for Oak Street. I know we can do a lot on Chad when we're just south zone is going to allocate over a million dollars for Chadman Street. This will be the only 37,000 we are going to spend on Oaks. And the funds that they're talking about are for this project, for the Chadman project, we were told we're all going to be allocated after this year. That was the process that we were told. If there are any questions about the park, I don't think there's much. I think we've got Caroline Bond is here on the educational part of it. It is more than a park. It's actually a multifaceted educational concept for our community and about 6,000 kids a year or use it. But I'd let that Carol Ann tell you about the opportunity that our community is going to have from the

[2:45:53] educational aspects of the park. Thank you. Carol? Thanks. I'm here speaking for myself and Carl Detloff, the current superintendent. The thing that grabbed my heart here is some years ago, not very long ago, six or so years, We had to become so lean that we could not send our young people to our sister cities for the Abilene Zoo, just to speak of one example. We do send on a limited basis out of the city, but what I was so pleased about the design of this is the interactive video that is museum quality that's there so that when children do go down, or definitely adults too, without a docent, they can learn about the things that are important to us and certainly water being a huge thing. This is, we have, I think, the best city parks of any city I've ever lived in. I'm so grateful in our schools, we just use those all the time. What this takes to a higher level is a deep educational value, and I know in your packet Some of our curriculum folks are writing things to help when teachers want to go and take their third graders, fourth graders, fifth graders, particularly put the eighth grade and the tenth grade. But those young kids will be able to have either separately or in their classrooms an educational experience that is not duplicated in our city.

[2:47:57] questions and if I could say one more thing if we are in an era unlike in my previous years the last two to three years of some rich public-private partnerships and we those of you who are able to come to the briefing at good fellow, those are some of my first experiences with partnerships on projects that the public couldn't do by themselves and the private couldn't do by themselves. And so this is just another example of that. But I will tell you, Lane, I have to use my mother's daily used word agonized. I've agonized on prioritizing. So I appreciate your watch watching, watchfulness. Thank you, Caroline. Thank you. Any further public comment? Yes, my name is Jim Turner. One of the things I haven't heard a lot in this discussion for is you need to remember why you actually have a tears. This is to take some of the tax money, property tax money that comes from the improvements that are happening in this area and plow that back in to accelerate those improvements to get this area up to where it should be as a viable taxable part of the community. Any project that will do that which will help increase the value of this both taxable and and community values is probably worthy of consideration no matter who is partnering to do it. And I think that's kind of the original intent

[2:49:58] from when they started doing this. This is to help accelerate the improvement in the value of property that's been historically for a long time undervalued for numerous reasons, both north and south of the river. But this is to improve the value using this increment that we're pulling out of the property tax and help accelerate it to get it where it should be a healthy value both tax-wise and community-wise to the city. Thank you. Thank you. Further comment? I have one question on the Freedom Grid. Someone's coming forward. Oh, sorry, Del. I know the Las Vegas downtown, San Angelo. One of the concerns that y'all have already started to address is the nonprofit issue. And Mr. Turner just explained, one of the things that the whole process of tears was to re-incentivize the development of businesses and properties downtown and, of course, in the northern tier as well. But non-profits, as a whole, and just to throw this in, as well, in addressing what Matt was saying, it's not apples to apples, not every nonprofit has a profit stream or a profit stream. So the tiers is reliant on the tax properties that are being funded in order to incentivize. So I just wanna say that from a nonprofit perspective and I'm a nonprofit, I don't see us needing to spend funds

[2:52:00] to provide additional support to nonprofits from a tax base. We've got over 70 vacant buildings in downtown San Angelo and they are either paying very little in property taxes and I know, well maybe not all of you, but some of you have heard me talk about one specific property that has been paying less than a thousand dollars And it's a major property in downtown San Angelo, because there's nothing else to be able to appraise it by, because it's so unique. It's such a unique property, but it's a major property in downtown San Angelo. And so we're seeing a reversal in a sense of how we're able to find tears. And so I ask you to take into consideration before you make any decisions how we continue to fund tiers and especially on the public end since we're working on this Chabron Street project which we totally support as a downtown organization. Do you have any questions? No. Thank you. All right. We have a motion and a second. There was a question why in 2015 that we took non-profits or the prohibition against non-profits out. The discussion at that time, we thought we might be able to build a private or 501c3 development corporation using private dollars contributed by individuals, coupled and then maybe use some of the tears money to apply to that and what those corporations would do, and I think they were nabbling, I think weren't they mayor, that they go in as a non-profit, they buy these

[2:54:05] buildings, rehab them, maybe not all the way, but get them up to a point where they are commercially bible and then sell them and just turn, excuse me, turn those over, and that was a reason we put that option in to be able to use some of these tears money to help that particular structure to rehab some of the buildings in downtown. That's why we took it out in 15. That concept has not emerged yet here in San Angelo though. No. No. Go ahead. I just have a couple of comments about this particular funding. You know what really captured my attention, when I first heard about Heritage Park, I didn't have any idea what all it involved, but what I heard Dr. Bon say that has caught my attention And then she repeated it is that this would be used as a learning center in addition to a place, you know, a park, utilization as a park. And I think about back in the day when I was, it's been a long time ago, folks, when I was in elementary school in junior high, and we had extracurricular activities, we had art, and we had music. And our public schools have lost a lot of those things. And what I hear is that this could be an opportunity for our school kids to do a field trip here in San Angelo, learn about the history of San Angelo, and really appreciate what we have here in San Angelo. And it just looks like it would be an outstanding educational opportunity. The other thing that caught my attention is that if I'm understanding correctly, not a lot of public funds have been spent outside of Chabron.

[2:56:06] And they have been focused on Chabron. And I know the tiers committee recommended that this be funded, but I think the city staff says no, but I'm not real clear on why city staff, John, doesn't, support us doing some work on the city's right of way. I'm just not clear on that, I apologize. Yeah. Well, let me step back real quickly and say, when these projects came in, we were reviewing this against all of the private projects as just another private project. And so we ranked it with all of the other projects you looked at, and it just in that ranking wasn't one of the top projects. Again, we didn't think any of the projects were bad. It was just low enough down our list. It didn't warrant the funding. It was pretty late in the process where the tears board said, hey, you know what, this is public, this is non-profit-owned. It would qualify for the public funds. And so the board themselves said, let's take it out of the private pot to be considered with those projects and let's consider it differently as a public project. So the staff never reviewed it in that context. when we made our recommendation, it was among that list of all the other South Projects as just one other South Project. Back to the Freedom Grant that Mr. Flugger spoke of, why did the city not completed at that time and where did those monies go? I could not answer that. Ran out of money. I guess I'd have one more question and maybe Matt Lowes can answer this, or Leif-Lugger. And my question would be this, we talked about public-private partnerships, which I'm very much in favor of.

[2:58:06] I used it at Fort Consul when I was on that board. I have encouraged David Wood over at the railroad museum to do it. If for some reason or other this particular group decided that the $37,000 they didn't want to invest it right now, would that keep this park from happening? And the reason I ask that question is, you've already heard me say that I'm very much in favor of it. But Dr. Carol Ann Bond said about education is very, very key to how we approach this thing, and I think it's a very, very good project. But you've also heard me say that philosophically I'm a little bit using tax dollars to a nonprofit is probably not where I want to be. So my question basically is this. If this group up here decides that the $37,000 is not what we want to do, would this list project? Question. I would hope it would not kill the project. I'm an optimist and I've seen a lot of money raised in this community in my 15 years and that whenever people get excited behind a project, we've seen lots of money spend on lots of great investments in our community, both that benefit the tax base and that just benefit the quality of life. And I've seen the city and your predecessors put money into public projects. So I think it'll happen. It'll obviously be $37,000 under that we've still got to go raise. It would probably delay and the challenge with delay, as you know, as Kenneth McNeese used to love to say, is every time we kick something down the road, we just increase the cost because inflation and the cost goes up. You know, I think it would happen, just maybe a delay, but I do think that this is an investment

[3:00:06] in city right-of-way along the sidewalk portion, you could allocate it and certainly make that case there that it is improving the city's right-of-way. but I do think it could add a delay, but I still think it would happen late. Would you all for any change on that? Or could you let us know the total amount that will be invested in this part? So the, as you can imagine hearing about traffic standards earlier, it's approximately 100, you know, on the traffic standards, it's approximately an $870,000 project. I think that's what's in your packet information. on that right. To date, approximately $600,000 has been raised and committed. There's a lot of requests to individual donors and other foundations seeking funds, of which this 37 is one of those requests. And so we're building our way towards that. A piece of that budget is a permanent endowment that would help maintain this so that it's not a burden on the goal was not for it to be a burden on the city to have this park that it would be maintained by private dollars. I have a motion on the floor that. I'm sorry, Mayor. May I just make one other comment? Thank you. I hear what Harry is saying about being philosophically against this. And I guess there was a point when I was that I don't know, I guess I have a hard time not wanting to invest $37,000 in our kids' continuing education in a very productive, educational, nice environment.

[3:02:07] And I just wish that, you know, I know it's a motion on the floor and all, but I just wish we could, you know, step back and think how beneficial this will be, not just to downtown revitalization, but also to our young people who will have an opportunity to take advantage of this at some point. So I don't think $37,000 is unreasonable to invest in our kids. Thank you. Any other comment? All right, the motion on the floor is to not fund the $37,000 for the pocket park. There has been a second. All in favor of the motion, not to fund the $37,000 say aye. I oppose. It passes six to one. We are going to continue on with the agenda. We are now going to consider proving amendments to the tears north and the tears south incentive policies. And John James you're on again. Thank you again. This is the tears policy updates that the board has recommended. They made quite a few changes in terms of just re-wording things to make them more clear. I'm not going to discuss any of those. I think none of those were controversial or they weren't substantial policy changes. So what I'm going to go through here is just the substantive changes made to the policies. One is the one we already mentioned. 25% of the funds would be allocated for private projects. The other 75% would be available for any project, public or private. It does add in the south zone, south area only, the 25% match for even for projects under 10,000. Currently, if it's a project, $10,000 or less, it does not require a match.

[3:04:10] But given that we've gotten so many project requests with the limited amount of money in the south, the board felt it was important to go ahead and apply that match to all projects of whatever size. Again, that's just in the south. that provision will not apply as recommended in the North. John, I want to remind you that the vote was a minimum of 25% of the funds would be allocated for public funds. That's correct. You want to make sure you use that word coming out of it, if you would, please. Right, minimum of 25%, other 75% can go to public or private. It also, one of the concerns the board had as they reviewed the information submitted by projects, They would have a project that would ask for $75,000 of tears money, which is a significant amount of money, with maybe a half-page description of what they wanted to do. And so they wanted to beef up the application requirements to include a more rigorous impact statement, saying how will this benefit the zone, also current photos of the site, as well as graphic renderings of what is being proposed. And then another piece was, if it's in an area that requires approval by the design and historic review commission. They wanted to see an approval letter from the DHRC first. So in other words, they wanted a project to have to go to the DHRC and get approval as meeting historic standards, meeting river corridor standards or whatever the case may be, otherwise they would not allow a project to move forward without already having that approval. And then also indicating, has that project or that individual applying received previous tears funding, the board believed that that would help them make better decisions in terms of weighing one project versus another. The North policy updates, this is exactly the same as the South with the exception of that.

[3:06:14] Projects $10,000 or less would not require a matching funds as proposed in the South. That's again a brief overview of the substantive changes in the incentive policies. I didn't mention this. We'd already talked about that quite a bit, but it does recommend allowing nonprofits to continue to receive incentives and apply. I'll tell you the board was mixed on that. The discussion went back and forth across a couple of meetings. There was even a draft of the policies that re-instituted the restriction on not funding non-profits, but at the end of the day, the board's recommendation was to not include that provision. I think their direction was we're hesitant about funding non-profits, but we want to still be able to do that on a case-by-case basis, so they did not want to see an outright prohibition written into the policy. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. So what are you asking for us from us today? Are you asking us to update, to approve these updates as presented or to give, to use some recommendations from council to go back and work on before we approve these? What we're bringing to you is the recommendation of the tears board. So what's before you and what you could vote on and approve today is the updates to the policy as recommended by the board. You could instead make changes to this and adopt it today or if there are significant changes, you could give us direction to go back and rework something and bring it back to you. I think what I've been hearing is most of the council and I'll let them speak for themselves are not in support of nonprofit organizations being eligible for incentives. Now, you can do that on a North versus South basis, but I think it would generally be best to approve it as an overall policy

[3:08:15] for both North and South. And again, that's something you could definitely do today, adopt the board's recommendation with that change. John, going back to what something Lee brought up, Paul, what are the odds, and I think Abilene said, he talked about it, of a nonprofit coming in, doing some development, and then that turning into something that's actually available for commercial that we can put an economic impact in a tax base on. I mean, have we ever seen that here to begin with? Not that I'm familiar with, that is common in other cities, like the example we used in Abilene. A lot of cities have land banks or other non-similar non-profits, that that's their whole purpose, is to acquire land, improve it in some ways, and then basically turn around and sell it to the private sector to help encourage development. But again, I'm not aware of anything like that happening. In your opinion, why has that not happened here? That's a, that's a tough question to answer, but. Well, in some examples, you might say in a minimal kind of way it might have happened. If you look at the San Angel Performing Arts Center as, as an example, that is, is not the same, but could be the same. And you also can say that at some point in time, as someone wanted to put together one of these organizations where, first of all, someone might want to throw, first of all, you have to have someone who wants to buy the property or throw their property into the land bank. takes a lot of people agreeing on the original concept, the program for which they're going to develop that concept, and it's very hard to get consensus from enough people to do that what we have found in San Angelo, at least on a private basis, is that most of our development in the downtown area has been done by single people who own property and have specific issues in terms of end use for those properties.

[3:10:16] John, as a part of the zone impact statement is we don't specifically see here, and I realize this would be hard to talk about in specifics, but nonetheless I'll ask the question. We need to have some at least addressing the economic aspect that of maybe the economic impact that any project could potentially have. Again, there's nothing here specifically, but is that going to be something that's going to be asked about during talking about the zone impact statement? Yeah, and specifically, if you look at the draft of what the board recommended, where it describes that economic or that impact statement, it says that it should include an economic benefit and positive impact of property taxes that will be generated as a result. So they're asking the applicant to, I mean, it's sort of open-ended, but it's asking the applicant tell us how this will impact and provide an economic benefit in order to help judge, you know, one project versus another. think that's I think that's important I think that's tough because how do you define it my let's say one business has a hotel another business is a bar and they're both applying for funds out of the same pot is the tears board ready to define the economic impact of one of those projects versus the other if they're about requesting $75,000 funding. I think the short answer is yes, I mean that's what they're already doing, and so what they're asking for is a little more information from the applicant on what their perspective is

[3:12:16] on what that impact would be. Again, at the end of the day, in some ways it's a guess, I'll give you one example of projects that as the board weighed different projects, one of the questions they asked some of the applicants was do you have a tenant lined up? And so, for example, if somebody wanted to improve the exterior appearance of their building, and they had a tenant already lined up to move in, they weighed that more heavily than another applicant that wanted to improve the exterior of their building, but it was more speculative, and they didn't have a business ready to move in. And so that's an example of the one clearly had a more economic impact, because they had a tenant. Now, having said that, could that tenant stay in there three months and leave? sure and then it would be vacant again but that's that's the kind of things the board has to weigh on any project and they thought by having this impact statement it would help give them more information to make a better decision. Having a tenant is not the same as having a certificate of occupancy so those are two separate issues. That's correct. On the southern tiers I think, would you go to that policy, talk about an approval letter from the DHRC One of the big challenges and issues that has existed out there is making sure that the DHRC understands the policy book that was approved by Council, a previous council, in terms of what river corridor, what historic properties, what a historic district, if you will, or historic overlay district, those issues are. And what we have found that very often decisions are made, approvals are given, that do not reflect a standard policy that was approved by the City Council in terms of the things that these properties must do or should do or fall in line with in a historic overlay or historic district. So the question mark is making sure the DHRC from the beginning follows direction given

[3:14:21] by the book that they have that dictates what should or should not be approved. And just a brief response to that, since it's not directly related to this, but the, at the request of counsel, the DHRC itself is going through a process of revisiting their policies and procedures and even the ordinance. And so hopefully fairly soon they will be bringing you a recommendation on changes to their process hopefully to help address that concern. What I hear from many people who go before some of these boards, that one specifically is that there's too much personal opinion about whether they like or don't like and which color they like or don't like versus what is specific and detailed into the policy book on approval from the quote River Quarter DHRC and so we would hope to have a document that is more defining than it is personalized. Do I have other questions? Tom brought up something that is if you if you have a non-profit 501c3 that came in and started to develop buildings downtown a little bit different than regular non-profit organizations, I ask them for incentive tiers dollars, so we need to make sure that however we move here that we don't lock somebody out that helps move some of those 70 plus buildings that we have downtown. I agree with Harry and I'm good with the policy changes we have here except the non-profit and We have to be consistent with how we behaved and how we act and going forward.

[3:16:23] On a non-profit, I would almost put the amendment to it on a non-profit request for funding. It would take a super-majority to approve, and I mean, we'd all have to agree. So we could sit there, but I mean, somebody's going to have to come up and talk to everyone of us and go all the way through it. It's just throwing it out there or something to think about, but the non-profit would be eligible only if they had a super-majority approved. that way it would be case by case. It would be case by case. So we wouldn't, so somebody comes to town and goes up to downtown and says, I want this building, but I'm coming in as a nonprofit, we can all say absolutely at 70 apartments, we're good to go. Then do you have to start? I mean, from the beginning, you almost have to go through story conversation about what is a nonprofit organization. Is the church, is it a new church coming to town? Is it a developer coming to town to build a non-profit? You know, it's almost, if you don't, what I often find is if you allow too much gray matter, it really complicates the situation. And I think what we need to have is a policy that's pretty black and white, and then we can have exceptions presented with a super majority vote to override it on a specific case basis. I think I agree with what Tom said though. I'd rather leave this particular statement in there, even though you know I'm philosophically against non-profits getting public tax dollars. I'd rather leave this particular statement in there, but with a caveat that says it's gotta be approved by a super majority of the council. So going back to what Brenda just brought up, do we structure it to her summit? I don't know how we classify 501c3s. I think you're gonna get very complicated and very emotional and pretty difficult to start voting on which non-profit

[3:18:23] and which non-profit gets the yes, which non-profit gets a no. I think you're moving into territory that's gonna be very difficult to manage. You don't think we can dictate language that is specific enough that we don't have those issues? I do not. And I think you're better off if there's something that's presented that one thinks, I think you're better to do it on an exception basis than to open up the door and allow for it on an open door basis. I think you need to get more defined. When you look at that, then you see non-profit organizations eligible for incentives or to be non-profit organizations are not eligible for incentive, except by, so you're already basically pointing out that really non-profits are not necessarily available or eligible for incentives, however there is a review process. Basically, you're already saying right off the bat that non-profits you'd have to really surpass a certain criteria. Rather than saying it are eligible, you may say differently and make sure that you put a caveat on there that it would be by a supermanjoring or by a case-by-case. And that way, right off the bat, we know that nonprofit organizations really are not so much eligible, but there is an opportunity really if you come back and you actually pass a certain criteria. Well, define, I think one of the issues, if you have an idea of what someone might want, I mean, let's say you're an organization that's a nonprofit and you're bringing your nonprofit to town for the first time. but already you've got 900 non-profits in the city of San Angel, which is what we have. Which you've got one new one coming to town, and all of a sudden they're eligible for this. Because it's an issue, whether it's a non-profit running

[3:20:23] a non-profit organization versus a non-profit who chooses to develop a building for ultimate profit. We're just saying economic impact. I mean, if you're coming in here, it's a non-profit. I would be willing to look at provide economic impact and how would they do that if the building is a nonprofit then that has no ability to increase your property tax rates so how would that happen I think in their proposal they'd have to spell that out but I'm with you mayor I understand where you're trying to go we can get it over complicated and we're kind of beating this horse to death here but right I hate to exclude something to where we block somebody out if they look at it from abroad and just pull it up and look at this zone say well we don't qualify and go on I don't want to miss that And we haven't, is there an opportunity without it being too complicated to say that nonprofit organizations would not be eligible for incentives unless the planning department or the development office made a decision that based off of their, I mean, I just think it, I just think we're asking for a really complicated situation to exist. It's just you're going to it's it's just too complicated. I think you I think you have to have a nonprofit organizations are not eligible for incentives and make it black and white and then if something seems to be abnormally outside those parameters I don't know I just don't know I can't imagine what it would be how about this I mean we don't necessarily have to pass this today I mean as far as the amendments we can definitely go back and look at the wording on the nonprofit portion of it, and maybe perhaps come up with something that, and I kind of get a feel for what you're trying to say as well, but we can go back and take a look at that and see how we can award that a little bit succinctly that allows for certain projects that can come forward. But again, it doesn't necessarily have to be approved today. We can bring it back to the next City Council meeting with some some viable options. That's definitely an option. I will point out that the next cycle of funding

[3:22:29] has just now opened so if this is not approved within the next month or so at your one of your meetings next month then that next round of projects will also fall under the old policy rather than snoopers. I think we're asking for a problem then. I can throw it another option as you could you could approve this policy as written and we could bring back just the nonprofit discussion so that that everything else the board has recommended is already in place for that new cycle as well. Just excluding the non-profit at this point and then come back with wording for that, is that what you're saying right now? Right, because right now the policy doesn't mention non-profits, it's not that it says they're eligible, it just doesn't say they're ineligible. What we could do is if we did receive any non-profit applications during that process, we could forewarn them that this is still under discussion by the council, So it could change during that time, whatever y'all decide on. So we could kind of at least give them a heads up. Do we have a motion on the floor, Brenda? We have no motion on the floor, we've just had discussion. So at this point, we don't have to have a motion to do anything if we're this is just conversation only. We can have a motion to accept all of it, accept the nonprofit. We can have a motion to change it, that nonprofits are not eligible. There are several actions here that could be taken. I would move to approve, as presented, except striking the non-profit until we get clarification from, and that would be that non-profits are not eligible for incentives. So it changed that particular line until staff came back to us with further updates. So approve both policies, both off in North with the exception of non-profit not being eligible

[3:24:33] for incentives at this particular time. Do I have a second? Second. Do I have public comment? Thank you, Mayor. Steve Hampton. I feel that the bottom line should be whether they're gonna make us money or not. The taxes, so I don't have a problem with non-profits. if they can show that they're going to benefit the city and the city's income. So that's something to consider. Thank you. Thank you. Any other further comment? Luke, again, I think you know where I am. I would like to share one thing with you on this. If you have the way it is right now, you might get somebody making an application on the one that we've just done that y'all declined. It wasn't as simple that all didn't happen one day here. I've been working these applications require like a year of going to meetings and getting updates and providing information and you're not going to be able to put on your on our application. We have trouble getting applicants. It's not our problem. We just got to weed them out except in the south. So if you're going to get applicants to come in, your policy has to look like they've got a chance and a reasonable chance to spend a year to work with this and to delay their project until the council has time to get to it. So if you start making our policy, I'm seeing this from the fact of the tears board itself. If you make the policy look very complicated, it's complicated enough already. It's going be a turn off for any nonprofit to come in here and then get shot down when they get here.

[3:26:36] Thank you. Any other further comment? All right. The motion on the floor is to accept the tiers policies both for the south and the north with the exception of changing it that nonprofits are not eligible for incentives. All those in favor of that motion say aye. Aye. Opposed? as a 7-0 and we will be taking a break for lunch. Clear file on that one will work on warding based on what you told us and bring back options for you to look at. Correct. We are taking a lunch break. Excuse me. I need to second that change. Well. No, we already have. Can I have a question? Are we going into executive session? We are going to an executive session, sorry, it's lunch break, but it is executive session, and the executive session will last at least an hour. Would you want me to read it into the record? Excuse me. Okay, I'm going to do this the way it's supposed to be done as soon as I find it. Executive session, executive session under the- Hold on, hold on, hold on, everybody. Please sit down, could Council please sit down? We were, but we hadn't read it, so we had to put you back down your seat. We are now going to a closed session, executive session on the provision of government code Title V, Open Government, Ethics, Subtitle A, Open Government, Chapter 551, Open Meeting, Sub Chapter D, exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under the following sections. I need to read these. Okay, section A, 551.07, 1A, consult with attorney when the governmental body seeks the advice of its attorney about pending or contemplated litigation regarding.

[3:28:36] One, the 2013 seal coding program contract to the Templeton construction. Three, all say, incorporated versus City of San Angelo. Four, City of San Angelo versus Spillman. B. Section 551.0712 consultation with attorney regarding the expansion of the Hickory Wellfield. C. Section 551.072 deliberations about real property regarding 1.703 South Chabron and 2 Lake Nazworthy residential lot leases. Have I covered what I need to cover? I've covered us we are now in closed session it is now lunchtime and we will be gone for an hour I think that's it council back to order and we will follow up on the administrative issues which are a consider items discussed in executive session so you want me to present are you gonna present Theresa you go ahead I'll I'll authorize the motion. What we're requesting you to do is somebody to make a motion to authorize the city manager to negotiate and execute a settlement agreement in the amount of $1,250,000 with Spillman Technologies. Do I have that motion? Motion. A second. Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. Motion approved. I want to make a recommendation. We pull item M forward. Item M is first reading and public hearing for an ordinance amending the plan development PD-12-03 zoning district to modify section 6a to allow for building facade consistency amongst similar building types and eliminate section 7g thereby align metal buildings anywhere within the site on property located at 3501

[3:30:37] north US highway 67 encompassing the area known as the Howard College on approximately 34.707 acres, and John James, you're on. Thank you. Yes. As you mentioned, this is a plant development district amendment. There's plant development zoning already on the Howard College campus. This is an amendment to the text regarding where metal buildings can be located on the property. Currently, it is campus institutional or future land use in the plant development. Currently there is only a limited area part of the campus where metal buildings are allowed. The remainder of the buildings on areas on campus would have to be brick, stucco, something like that. This would amend that to be in line with their current plans to allow an additional metal building in a location previously it wouldn't be allowed and so this will open up metal buildings for the entire site. I'd be happy to answer any questions. I may have to approve this presenting. Second. Second. Any public comment? I, for one, just want to say how excited I am about this change. I think the opportunity to create a trade school at Howard College is one of the most exciting things that we can do for the youth here in San Angelo. And I am thrilled that we've been able to accomplish the goal of changing this. And Jamie, why don't you take over? Hi, thank you counsel for considering our request. I'm Jamie Rainey. I am the Workforce and Community Development Officer for Howard College, St. Angelo. And today I have with me Dr. Cheryl Sparks, our president from Big Spring. First let me say, this is so important to us and it's important to our community. So I wanna share just a little bit. I know you've got tons of information, you had lots of great pictures with this presentation and staff helped me so much on this.

[3:32:40] Rebecca and Jeff were both just great to help me know what wording to put into the request and what the process was and to get through that. So I want to say thank you to them. But I also want to share with you just a little bit of the background to why this is important and why there's so much support for it. Construction trades including carpenters, electricians, plumbers, welders, and Masons are all occupations that are in demand. It not only now, but for the foreseeable future. Some time ago, Mike Biggersaf, our former San Angelo Humboldters Association President, agreed to chair a Howard College Committee to investigate starting a construction trades program for adult learners at our campus. But the ultimate goal is to create and expand the program to really become a center of excellence all trades training. The very first thing it was determined that we were out of space for any kind of lab space that would be appropriate for this type of program. So we were looking at needing another classroom and lab space in a metal building, much like building number two is on our campus today. So to add for the building, we had to have funding because the way we're funding is after the fact. And so Mike Biggerstaff and Kevin Bond of Sunbelt construction have taken their own personal time and their commitment to this project to have raised over $320,000 toward the project, which is almost 90% of where we need to be to finalize it. So while the funds were being raised, we were also working with staff to say, okay, we need a metal building, but we need it on the site, and what do we need to do to change our master plan? When we built our master plans, it was several years ago, and it's a great growth for the campus, and it will allow growth for a long time.

[3:34:43] But we didn't need, at that point, we didn't see the need for an additional trades-type building, and that has totally changed, and today that's what we need. And truthfully, we don't need to have the added expense to that building of putting a facade on it like our other buildings. really should be able to be like the metal buildings that we currently have on our property. And we do like the consistency of those. So we're asking for that change and we hope that you will consider it and I'll be glad to answer any questions that you might have about the effort that's going on right now to make this a great program and with lots of blessings we will have a program up and running in the spring. Thank you very much. Sandy? Questions? No questions, but I know that St. Angel's lacking on the trades and this is going to be putting us a step forward for those individuals that don't really want to pursue the college route and go towards the building trades. This is going to be a great benefit for St. Angelou. Thank you all. As far as we thank you two for your leadership and helping guide everyone through the process and letting us know what we needed to do to make this happen. On the mayor and city council members and city manager, thank you so much for considering this change to our master plan as Jamie has already shared. And last in a very short number of years, we have needed to change our vision of what we were gonna do in St. Angelo. And we're trying to listen to what business and industry needs and as Jamie has already pointed out, We've had some fantastic support from business and industry to look at this. I assure you, we want our master plan to still be a place that our students are proud of, and that the community of St. Angelo is proud of, so thank you so much for your consideration.

[3:36:43] More public comment, please. Ladies and gentlemen of the council, thanks for the opportunity to come before you and speak in support of this effort by the HBA and Howard College. My name is Stephen McLaughlin, owner of McLaughlin Advertising, and today I'm not speaking as a representative of any group that I may be a part of, this is simply a topic that I've been passionate about for over 20 years. As you make your decision on allowing Howard College to modify their own master plan, I wanted to provide you with some additional information that better defines the community need for this project. 40 years ago, our country began to focus on increasing the number of kids going to college, and that process created a vacuum that's growing in negative impact. Now as a nation, we've failed to modernize, or in some cases we've abandoned vocational training. Now for many people, college is the best course and I'm not here to demean that in any way. However, there are always young people for whom academics are not their interests nor their aptitude. But that doesn't mean that their talents or intellect are any less important or valuable to our economy. Many of them have the native talent and skill to become technicians or craftsmen, tradesmen or women. But in focusing so much attention on four-year degrees What we've done is we've slipped in identifying and shepherding those kids to their career path that is right for them. The Home Builders Association and Howard College are laboring to make a correction to that right here and now. And if you ask any builder, or plumber, or electrician, or mechanic, they'll tell you that the number of young people coming up in the trades decline drastically years back. So they're simply not enough tradesmen to serve today's needs. That's why you have a hard time getting someone to your home. And that's why new construction jobs may have to wait for weeks for a subcontractor to work their way to them. We came to believe that failing to attend a four-year college will mean that we or our kids will not achieve financial success, but the stats misled us. While it is true that a person with a college degree will earn more than a person with a

[3:38:44] high school diploma, that blunt statistic groups skilled trades in with minimum wage and part-time jobs. The average electrician today in the United States makes $5,000 a year more than the average college graduate, and that number will increase. As of 2015, there were already 600,000 job openings in the U.S. for electricians alone, and that's just one of the trades. As more baby boomers retire, those jobs will explode, as will their value. The Bureau of Labor Statistics says that for every three skilled workers who retire today, Only one person is trained to come forward to replace them. They also predict that with Texas' growth rate, our state will have a critical need for a 25% increase in skilled workers by 2022. That's only five years from now. Right now, the average age on a construction site in San Angelo is 57 years old. Our kids here in San Angelo and in the communities all around us need to be told there's another means to economic success. And if we in San Angelo offer this trade school, we can keep our youth on track, and we can draw young people from all over West Texas. And that approves San Angelo's economy today and everybody's economy tomorrow. With your swift action, they could be serving students as early as January of 2018. Now a lot of us work a lot, and we're very active in pursuing economic development for San Angelo. But how often do we get the opportunity to support an initiative that's already funded that can get started immediately and has so much potential. Now, I appreciate your time. I came here before you today with every confidence that you will help the school move forward. And I thank you for hearing me out. Thank you. Caroline. Here to support, obviously, I'm on the Howard College Foundation Board. And technical education is very important to me. And the only thing I would add is that there

[3:40:47] There are some technical courses, vocational courses, that these types of buildings just lend themselves for, that it's a pure waste to put in a brick and mortar. So I know you all so much support these young people as they are giving more options to grain skills. Thank you all. Thank you. Do I have further public comment? If not, I have a motion and a second to accept the recommendations from the planning department to approve the addition of metal buildings to Howard College. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Nay. Motion. I'd like to move item number K up. We've had a constituent here since 830 this morning. Sure. Okay. Great. Okay. Thank you. Item K, first reading in public hearing for case Z17-06, an ordinance approving a rezoning from the neighborhood commercial CN zoning district to the single family resident residential RS1, generally located at the northeast corner of South Irving Street and West Avenue are on 0.172 acres. And John, I believe you're on again. Thank you. Again, John James, Director of Planning and Development Services. This is a rezoning case from Property Zone Neighborhood Commercial to Single Family. You can see the location Avenue R and Irving. It is, future land use designates it as neighborhood. For whatever reason in the past, this entire intersection was zoned commercial. Now they want to take a piece of that commercial, rezone it back to residential for residential structure. is surrounded by housing this makes a lot of sense to rezone it for the purpose of an additional home.

[3:42:51] We did send out our notifications did not receive any in favor or in opposition. So staff as well as the Planning Commission does recommend approval. Second. All in favor. I need any public comment before we approve. We're good. Very happy. I'm here to straighten this things up a little. Reference to residential to commercial. With the new queue and with the new or. 21, 24, you and 21, 28, you, which is the one that I'm sorry, Irving, which is the one that's one that's being requested to change. Nick, we've already approved it. We will prove this. I've got all the baby we're here from the city hall. It's all just Dr. Unal to say yes or no. Sorry. We already said yes, sir. You can go home and celebrate. We already approved it. We just approved it with a 7-0 vote. Yeah, he's he's approved, right? It is approved. Okay, because I've got all the data here that is needed for that. Well, we're glad you came well prepared. We appreciate your time and effort and energy in getting well prepared. But the council gave you a 7-0 go. Take the rest of the day off, OK? Yeah. Go get out of here. Where? I'll like him. OK, so I'm a little, let me see where we're going to go back to G. Let me get my page correct here.

[3:45:01] OK, this will be the first reading and public hearing of ordinances approving one. An amendment to the comprehensive plan changing certain lands from the neighborhood center to the neighborhood future land use category located at 6101-6118 Katie Lane 3401-3437 school house drive and 340 twin mountain drive in approximately 7.68 acres and an amendment to the comprehensive plan changing certain lands from the neighborhood to the neighborhood Center, future land use category, generally located at the intersection of Twin Mountain Drive and Alameda Drive on approximately 2.96 acres. And actually you could go ahead and read the number two, there will be one presentation for all of it. You will have to take two votes at the end. Okay. So to a rezoning from the neighborhood commercial CN zoning district to the single family residential RS1 zoning district on properties located at 3440 Twin Mountain Drive on approximately 3.24 acres. John. Thank you. This is both a comprehensive plan amendment and a rezoning and you'll see on the maps for the area that they're both a little bit different areas. This corner where Southwest and Twin Mountain come together that has long been designated as a commercial center for future commercial development to serve the neighborhood. However, this currently vacant tract, the owners have decided to go ahead and develop more homes instead of commercial, and so that's the reason for this rezoning from commercial to residential. However, knowing that this area will likely need more commercial in the future, we've gone ahead and designated an additional area for commercial to kind of balance out so that there's still about the same amount of commercial designated property in that area. This area that I noted is outside the city limits currently so it's not zoned but once it does come in we would likely recommend zoning

[3:47:04] it to commercial. It is consistent with the surrounding area. It's mostly homes now. It would just be building additional homes. We did send out our notifications, did not receive any responses. So again before you is two separate votes one would be first to change the conference a plan designation and then followed by a vote to change the zoning from neighborhood commercial to single family residential. Staff does recommend approval as did the planning commission. Do I have a um do I have any questions for John James at this point? Do I have a motion to approve one plan amendments from neighborhood center to neighborhood and neighborhood to neighborhood center? And before you vote we do need to have you open the public hearing before the vote's taken. Yes. Move approval of item number one. One second. Second. Second. Do I have any public comment, please? My name is Jeff Hamier. I'm a realtor with address as a real estate. I'm the representative of the current property owner and I have a client that is purchasing that land from him that will develop for a residential use. I don't have any comments, but I also just want to be here in case you have any questions or concerns for me. Any questions for Jeff? Good. Thanks. any other public comment that I move to a vote all in favor of the recommended plan amendments from neighborhood center to neighborhood center say aye aye opposed motion passes 7-0 I now need a motion to approve the rezoning from neighborhood commercial to single-family residential move to approve as second. Do I have any public comment? No public comment. I'll take a vote all in favor of the rezoning request say aye. Any opposed passes 7-0. Items H first

[3:49:10] reading the public hearing of ordinances approving 1 an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan changing certain lands from the neighborhood center to the commercial future land use category generally located northwest of the intersection of Glenestreet and Mercedes street on approximately 5.87 acres do you want me to read to it at the same time okay to a rezoning from the neighborhood commercial CN the office warehouse O W the general commercial heavy commercial CG CH and the general commercial CG zoning districts to the heavy commercial CH zoning district on properties generally located at northwest to the intersection of Glenna Street and Mercedes Street on approximately 5.87 acres. John? Thank you. Again, this is like the last one is both a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning. So it will take two separate votes. As you can see, it is on Glenna. And just looking at the current designation is for Neighborhood Center, which is intended for neighborhood-friendly commercial. But over time, this whole stretch has developed more with heavier commercial uses like automotive repair shops and those sorts of uses. We had one property owner come in, you can see here asking to have it rezoned to heavy commercial to, in order to, for the expansion of his business. As we were looking at the entire area, we realized that every business within this entire rectangle there are all heavy commercial type businesses. So rather than just rezoning the one individual property, we've recommended rezoning that entire strip, basically making all of those existing non-conforming businesses now legal if you approve this. Again, it is consistent with those existing uses on the properties, so it's not creating any non-conforming situations, it's actually correcting existing non-conforming situations.

[3:51:10] I'm not asking a question at this point, John. Yes. Now, is this right across from the townhomes, the row of townhomes that's there on Glenna. So how is that, is that a part of this zoning? No, and so these are the townhomes or apartments across the street. This is not part of that. Now some of those folks did get notice and so because they're within 200 feet of the subject property, but it will, it does not affect their properties. Really the only impact to their properties is now the property across the street would be zoned for heavier tops of commercial, but as I mentioned, that's the kind of commercial that's already in place there already. And you didn't get any responses from? Correct. We sent out 65 notices. You can see the map here of who all we sent those to. We did not receive any in favor or in opposition. That was actually the end of the presentation. So again, it does take two motions. Staff recommends approval as did the planning commission unanimously. do I have a motion? I'll make the motion. Second. Second. Do I have public comment? All in favor the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Passes 7-0. I need a motion for rezoning from neighborhood commercial, office warehouse and general commercial, heavy commercial to heavy commercial. Any public comment. I'll take a vote all in favor. Any opposed? Motion passes. I first reading the public hearing of ordinances approving an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan changing certain lands from the neighborhood to the commercial future land use category

[3:53:12] generally located approximately 1200 feet northeast of the intersection of South Bryant Boulevard in Cox Lane on 3.311 acres, 2 a rezoning from the general commercial, CG and low-rise multi-family residential RM1 zoning districts to a planned development PD zoning district to allow for plant nursery with retail sales, lawn and landscaping care and maintenance and accessory uses, generally located approximately 400 feet northeast of the intersection of South Bryant Boulevard and Cox Lane on 6.774 acres. John. Thank you. Once again, this is both a comprehensive plan amendment and a rezoning. You can see the location here on South Bryant. This is a business location of a former landscaping business nursery. Farmer's daughter is another existing landscaping business that will be moving onto this site. in order to accommodate some of the unique development aspects of their layout, we've recommended a plan development district that will allow for all the things on the property that they want to do. One of the issues here is that along Bryant there's an area designated for commercial back some distance. Behind that was designated for residential so for that reason this piece needs to be changed in the plan to allow for the commercial development within that area and you can see that same rear of the property was zoned currently for multi-family apartment development basically but now they want to expand this landscaping business all the way to the back thus the need for the rezoning to commercial or the plan development which includes the commercial aspects. This is the site plan that they submitted to us showing the layout of their property that is adopted as part of the plan development district. Just a couple of renderings of some of the site improvements that they hope to make on the site, adding some additional buildings to expand their operation, able to advance.

[3:55:30] It's cold. It's cold. It's cold. It's cold. We're good. Just keep rolling. Just keep rolling. Okay. We're good. Okay. this is consistent with the surrounding development in the area and so it makes sense the rezoning I don't know if Brian did that advancing but if you can do that again this one we did send out notices we did receive one in favor none in opposition what did the one in favor say or just in favor I don't believe if oftentimes there's a checkbox they can say I'm in favor or not we can find out if they made any specific comments so if we could go forward one more time for the economy was their comments this is a summary of the conditions plan developments allows to place conditions on the property some of those expand what they can do for example the unlimited outdoor storage some of it is just reiterating existing ordinance requirements like parking So if we go to the next one, it does limit the hours of operation given that there are some homes nearby behind it and no loudspeakers or audible systems and then lighting turned off after 10 p.m. And so our recommendation again is approval of both. Staff does recommend approval as did the Planning Commission unanimously. Thank you. Do it. Does anyone have questions for John? Do I have a motion? It's a approval number one. Wait a second. Do I have public comment? We will go for a vote. All in favor of approving? Say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Do I have a motion for two? Second. Any public comment?

[3:57:32] All in favor vote aye. Say yes. Yeah. Good. Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Next is cases Z17-08A and Z17-08B Brewer, City of San Angelo, first reading in public hearing of an ordinance for a rezoning from the light manufacturing ML zoning district to the single family residential R.S. 1 zoning district, generally located at the northwest corner Baker Street and Rust Street on approximately five acres. John? They're telling me if I point backwards it will go on, but that doesn't seem to be working either. And actually there's a number of slides here that we can skip on to the next case. So this is a rezoning from lot manufacturing to single family. This is Rust Street, Baker And then the railroad tracks, actually not too far from us here. There was a property owner that needed to rezone their property to do some things on the property. You can't typically build housing or do anything with a house on manufacturing property. This whole triangle is zoned for lot manufacturing. But again, similar to the Glenna case, we thought that it was in the best interest of all of these homeowners to rezone their properties from manufacturing to single family. If we could go forward, it is zoned for, or it's the long-range plan for the areas for neighborhood, but for some reason in the past, probably its relationship to the railroad, it was zoned for manufacturing with the idea that maybe it would transition to railroad-oriented manufacturing, one more slide. We do recommend approval.

[3:59:34] Actually, if we could go maybe one more, We did send out our notices. We got zero in favor. There is one in opposition. Oh, I'm sorry if you go back. This corner property, they currently have a business and however that business, it's a home occupation, would be allowed in the single family zoning. So the rezoning does not cause a problem for the business itself. However, they also have a sign in front of the home business that would not be allowed under the new zoning. However, as an existing sign it would be allowed to continue, but if it was damaged or destroyed they couldn't replace it without going through a separate process. Now the flip side to this is the Planning Commission considered perhaps leaving them out of this rezoning, just leaving them as manufacturing zoning, however in that case if their home was destroyed they could not rebuild it without having to go through this whole process again. So honestly we think it's in their best interest to be rezoned single family and maybe in the future have to deal with getting a new sign versus having this same hassle of getting a rebuilding their house. So with that if we could go forward one more that's our recommendation to rezone that whole triangular property from lot manufacturing to single family. Planning Commission also agreed unanimously. Okay. I'll just for clarification since I was in the planning commission meeting when they vetted this issue. The homeowner that has the sign that has the business understands that should the sign be destroyed or they have to replace it. They cannot do that with the RS-1. And so they are comfortable with that or they at least understand that, is that correct? Yes, I believe they understand the distinction out at the meeting, they weren't sure which way to go, but yes. This is my district, I move to approve as presented. Do I have any public comment?

[4:01:37] Take a vote, all in favor of? Second. I mean, all nay, none. Moves, passes, seven, zero. Hey, item L, first reading in public hearing for case SU-17-03, an ordinance approving a special use to allow for an auto and vote dealer as defined in section 3315 point B of the zoning ordinance in the neighborhood commercial C and zoning district generally located east to South Bryant Boulevard between West Avenue Y and West Avenue Z on point 757 acres. John. Thank you. This property because of its and you'll see on the map in a minute it's close to a lot of homes back behind it. So even though it's on Bryant it is zoned for neighborhood commercial again which is intended to be more compatible with adjacent homes, but for that reason, car sales is not an allowed use by right. They have to seek this special use approval from you all to allow for car sales in the neighborhood commercial district. This is the land use designation is neighborhood center and the zoning is neighborhood commercial. We are recommending approval of this with a few stipulations. One is that they put some shade trees and privacy fence, particularly screening from the neighbors to the rear and this use. It is located on South Bryant and so in coordinating with text.we recommended prohibiting access directly onto South Bryant so that the business would be accessed off of one of the side streets to help reduce the potential for accidents on Bryant itself. We did send out our notices to the surrounding property owners, did not receive any responses on this case as well. This is just a list of the conditions not allowing sales of heavy trucks, only normal cars and trucks.

[4:03:38] Vehicle repair and maintenance would be allowed, but only inside an enclosed building, limiting the hours of operation, no loudspeakers, as I said, no vehicle access from South Bryant. Vehicles must be operable. can't store junk vehicles on the property. They must pave the parking areas. Shielded lighting, again, to help protect the neighbors. Fencing of the property. Constructing a sidewalk. There's already a sidewalk on Bryant. This would connect back to the neighborhood to the rear. And although they own a larger property, this approval is only for the northern half of the property north of the alley. With that, staff does recommend approval with those conditions and this planning commission also unanimously recommended the same. We have questions. Okay. Second. Do we have any public comment? We will take a vote. All in favor of John James presentation and recommendations say aye. Aye. Those opposed. Nay passes seven zero. Okay, we are now going to end. I believe. consider awarding RFCSPEAS-08-17 2017 annual silcope project to Ronald R. Wagner Company LP and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an agreement, therefore, in a sum not to exceed $2,440,000. Russell? Yes, thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. first I just wanted to go over kind of the general location of where we'll be working this year. This first item or location here is Bell Street is more or less dissecting this area. This area encompasses both Lucy and Mr. Thomas's

[4:05:40] Districts and for that sure this next area is basically our Santa Rita area it's in Lane's district and here is Sherwood Way up here to the north and Angelos State University is right here this is the College Hills area we have College Hills running through here this also Lane's district as well we got Avenue in up here to the north. This small area right here is, if you'll recall, it's an area that was addressed, or an issue that Ms. Farmer brought up previously. Basically, Twin Mountain Drive had a safety issue with the way this area developed out. We have one half width section here, this area here in blue. It's just to mitigate that safety issue to, you know, basically the half with. And what we're doing there is we're working with our street and bridge department to bring in the base material to basically bring in the foundation, and then we'll be putting a two course pavement there, and it's a very typical pavement that's found out in the county. Our county roads are typically a two course pavement, and this is a temporary solution until this area, this specific area right here, is a undeveloped, it's a new subdivision that will come in at an undetermined time at this point. But the developer for this property will be responsible for removing this temporary pavement and going back with a permanent solution or a permanent pavement that meets our city standards and specifications. This is primarily to address a safety issue that we have out there.

[4:07:40] this is our ad alternate that we put out for bid we are going to be doing this area as well this is basically the west portion of College Hills it's also in Lane's district we have Sherwood way here on the north side College Hills is running along here this is this final section here is our ad alternate number two that we're going to also do. It's basically the southern part of college hills. I believe this is also in Lane's area as well, so Lane, you want to be able to speak? Okay. No, there's a problem. I don't know about that. I don't know about it. Just to give you an idea of where this is at, here's the Loop 306. That's Billy's District. Yes. This is Billy's District. Okay, my mistake. Good news. I think you're paying the number. I don't know if that's what I said. My mistake. The loot 306 is here to the south and red royal is up here to the north. Just FYI, we are doing approximately 1.1 million square yards of seal coat this year. This is just part of our eight year program. city street in the city of San Angelo. It's we're actually a little bit behind our target, our target for each area for each eight year cycles about 1.6 million square yards. The main reason we're behind this year is because of some budget issues or just not having enough revenue and having to make up for some other operational issues. But basically the last two years we were able to do more. So it's really, we're really right in line with, you know, as far as the overall bigger picture, you know, numbers of square yards that we're looking to do.

[4:09:45] So, you know, as long as we continue to generate more revenue and things of that nature, we should be on track for our eight-year cycle. The other benefit to this year as well is with oil prices being down, we're able to do more square yardage with less money. So we're averaging this year about $2.2 per square yard, whereas in previous year, or $2.20 per square yard, whereas in previous years, it's been around $2.40, 50 cents, something in that neighborhood. So that helped out a lot, too. This is part of the eight-year plan. This isn't a sideline to it. This is part of the original eight-year plan, correct? So that $2.440 million is part of that original plan. correct. One correction that is part of my district also. I couldn't see college chills running right down the middle. Do we have any questions for Russell? Do I have a motion? Any public comment? We will take a vote all in favor of approving the 2.44 million annual seal coat projects. Aye. Any opposed? Passes 7-0. Oh, consider authorizing city staff to negotiate a public right-of-way agreement with the telecommunications company, mobile, lighty, litty, mobility, sorry, it's, I would pronounce it that way too if I was you, but that's how they pronounce it, sure, something like that. Oh, what is this? This is basically a wireless telecommunication is basically cell phone.

[4:11:45] This is an agreement that we were approached by mobility with, and let me back up a little bit. All this really is added cell phone infrastructure. And this came up because of a couple of things, mobility. One, they approached us and then two, state legislature recently passed some new laws regarding what's considered as far as cell towers, what's considered a public utility, and state legislature passes. This is a public utility and that they do have the right to use any city right of way within the city, state, what have you. So what we're doing, that legislature doesn't actually go into effect until September 1. Mobility wants to be the first in town to have this type of infrastructure in place. And what this will ultimately bring to San Angelo is 5G capabilities. What this does is it's just added infrastructure and it's just adding more coverage, more better data transfer, and that's the main thing. and please don't hesitate that, you know, interrupt me and ask questions. Is this a Towers Russell? It, they're actually, and I've got some examples here in a second, and we can go over those now, that's fine. This is an example of what this looks like, or just one example. This up here, this basically looks just like a standard street light, correct? So I mean, it's just this little antenna that they're adding throughout town within the right of way is what they're proposing to add, as well as, let me show you another example, this pole here in the center is also what they're proposing. It's basically just a little taller telephone pole,

[4:13:49] kinda depending on the area, those are some things that we stipulated in this agreement is the type of pole, And I'll get back on my presentation here in a second. So part of what this agreement does is what we're doing is establishing standards for, you know, appearance and placement. You know, like I said, the appearance is, you know, basically going to be either a wooden or metal pole. What we've agreed upon with them is, you know, if it's primarily in that area, if we have wooden poles, they're going to put a wooden pole there. If we have metal poles in that area, they're going to put a metal pole and if there's a mixed use in that area We're going to defer to a metal pole as being the standard The other thing the two that we've stipulated in this agreement is the number of nodes or antennas that can be on that pole You know the placement where it can be within the right of way You know basically we want it to be in line with any existing telephone poles or things of that nature just so that it doesn't, it's not obvious or sticking out, you know, we wanted to generally conform to the area. You know, we got with our parks department as well as some other cities that have been, you know, working with these agreements, you know, the standard has been not to have these in the parks because we don't want to add another pole or something that's ugly for a park, you know, we want to try keep this in the right of way where we have this typical construction. Historic areas you know those will require special uses as well and you know those are the types of things that we stipulated in this agreement and here's my examples you know in agreement we also stipulated you know maintenance who's responsible for this poll you know if it gets knocked over you know basically

[4:15:50] it falls back on mobility. And, too, I kind of got ahead of myself a little bit. There's, you know, the state legislature stipulated that these can be in the right of way. So, after September 1, we will be, you know, this will be a state law. So, part of their stipulations were that cities and municipalities that own and operate these right of ways they can develop design manuals We'll be coming back next month with a design manual and some new ordnance to accommodate for this new type of infrastructure in our right of way. We're just trying to get ahead of the game here because of this specific agreement with mobility and in that ordnance we'll be stipulating the actual fees and the permitting fees and right-of-way use but more specifically to this agreement you know we're more or less going to be following that same state you know new state law that went into effect as per chapter 284 it'll be for the permitting fees will have you know a five hundred dollar fee for up to five nodes and an additional two hundred fifty dollars per additional node, a $1,000 permitting fee for a per poll, and then $1,500 rental fee for the right of way per poll for this first year with the agreement, so state legislature placed a cap on the rental fee for the right of way, and their cap is $250 per year. since we're coming forward now with this agreement beforehand and mobility was you know they're the ones that are really driving this agreement you know they were agreeable to $1,500 per pole for this first year and then after the first year they'll they you know we're going to have to divert back to the $250 per pole. How many poles are we looking at? So right now with this

[4:17:52] first this initial agreement we're looking at eight poles initially and you know we did kind of a preliminary investigation of this, you know, we didn't have these design standards actually in place. We've been doing some very extensive research on this, you know, what other cities are doing, City of Arlington, City of Lubbock. They're already moving forward with some of these things, and the standards that are in this agreement, as well as the standards that are going to be in the design manual, are going to be very, very similar to those, but more specific to to San Angelo and what our needs are. So, you know, what we found was these, with these first eight was that they actually were in Textile right-of-way, or at least four out of eight were, and Textile's not actually allowing these in their right-of-way, go figure. But, you know, we're interested in moving to, you know, moving forward with the cell phone technology. You know, everybody has a smartphone, So the one store, the one store, the one store, are being relocated or. Yes. So they're actually relocating those and they'll be into a city ride away. We're also off of this first eight poles. First year, we're going to get $12,000 a second year. We're going to get 2,000 because of state law. Right. So we should tell our state legislators that city business are going to be taken care of by the city council and city staff. I want you to handle that one. Could you go back to the previous slide that talked about other fees, this $500 for up to five nodes, 250 per additional node? Right. So this is basically the permitting fee. So we'll have an upfront permitting fee for the review of each of these applications. We're going to be looking at location as well as type of poll. We're going to have to go out to the site. these are the fees just to one it's you know we felt like you know the state

[4:19:57] legislature covered covered the you know the actual our costs and so we're just going to move forward with with that this is actually the cap that state let's just I mean this mimics state legislature what they put it this part won't go down after September correct correct the permitting fees will stay the same Russell real quick does this give an exclusive to mobile on that poll. Can other people be on the poll? Future expansion, do we have a question was right away if I'm mobile I to and I want to sit on the same corner? Yeah, so that's a good really good question. I mean this agreement is specifically just with mobility. So at this point in time, yes, it would only be mobility and I'd have to defer to to reach a little bit on that specific question as far as you know having co-locations on I don't see a problem with it you know the thing that we have asked or put in our standard is if you know if there's any kind of interference not only with the cities you know infrastructure you know our emergency communications but as well as their own You know, they should be looking at that as well. You know if there's if there's going to be interference You know, we're putting that responsibility on The you know the wireless communication facility to determine if that's going to be an issue whether it's the city You know wireless communications or or their own. So I do see a potential for that. Yes Ocean on this Yes, I do recommend approval on this item. Any public comment? You, Hampton.

[4:21:58] Question, can these be put in alleys? They'd have to be, the one he showed was on a sidewalk, it looked like. And rather not have it there, but could be on alley. Also, he showed the one on the light post, understood that to be one node. Is that correct? How does that look? It does get messy. So, you know, we have, we've done a couple of different things in this agreement as far as the location. One, in residential areas, these types of nodes can only be placed in an alleyway. And so that at least addresses his first comment. And then as far as the second comment, you know, one thing that we did stipulate is We don't want to hold a bunch of polls just right next to each other, so we did stipulate that they need to have a 300-foot clearance between from poll to poll, but we did in accordance with state legislatures, too, we're not just minimizing the number of antennas per poll. We can be more stringent on this than what state legislature stipulates. we can reduce the number of nodes that are allowed on a pole. You have a picture of one with five nodes? I don't. I sure don't. I don't know what that looks like, because this is new. I mean, this is a pretty new technology. It looks like a ceiling fan, I bet. Yeah, it could look like a ceiling fan, or, well, I mean, too, you've got poles with multiple lights on them. I mean, I don't know if they could potentially have an antenna on each of those lights. You know, I mean, it's, you know, the intent with this agreement is to camouflage.

[4:23:59] You know, we did stipulate in there as well, you know, if it's a wood pole we want the antenna to be, you know, a similar color to that pole or metal, you know, and that's another thing, too, moving forward once we get an actual design manual approved that we can put or those types of restrictions on there as far as camouflaging in the number of nodes and things to that magnitude. So today we're really asking for us to approve, as we've said, right away agreement. And then you're going to come back to us with some design standards and design manual for this project. Right, correct. So this is just an initial agreement. any design manual or new ordinance would proceed this is it so in other words ordinance could say that we only will allow you to have three or two or so this is simply a motion to approve right away negotiations with this company that's correct right and this is this is only a draft agreement at this point so after today, you know, you'll give us approval to, you know, negotiate and execute this agreement and we can, you know, address any of the concerns that y'all have or want to teach you. So today we're going to authorize you, if passed, to create the language and then you'll bring it back and then we approve that language. Is that what you're saying? That's not what we're intending on this time. No. Yeah, this time because we have only until September 1st to enter this agreement to get with the $1,500, we're asking that you allow us to negotiate and execute this agreement. As far as the design of these going forward, that will be coming to you probably at the next meeting. Yeah, either the next meeting or the meeting after that in August. And you'll have input onto the broader city. You should also know that Texas cities are not

[4:26:00] happy about this legislation. And there's already cities who have banded together sue to get this overturned because it essentially forces us to give away our right-of-way for less than market rate. This company, it's the only, yeah this is the only, we've been approached by two companies actually. Mobility is the only company now that currently has a contract with a cell phone provider, I don't know if I'm allowed to disclose who it is, but anyway. So they have a contract and I guess that whoever they're working with is pushing them pretty hard to get this into place with multiple cities. I know that they've been in contact with the city of Lubbock, Abilene, Midland, Odessa. You know they've been pushing pretty hard to get this in place. I think supposedly they already have an agreement with Houston for the you know when they had the Super Bowl there you know to have that increased cell phone coverage there. You know this is Basically the help, you know When you have a lot of people in one concentrated area using a lot of data to ban with Typically gets bogged down and you don't have a lot of internet speed So this will help increase with that increase that You didn't ban with Russell you didn't choose a company, right? This company is ready to go Yeah, this company comes and is ready to go then we would be talking to them about a contract also, right? That's correct This is not an exclusive contract. We didn't choose from a company or another. Actually, no other company that's busy. This is an exclusive contract. That's what we need to clarify. We talked to both companies who had approached us previously and the other companies willing to wait until September. So, do I have a motion to... That's what I thought. So do you want to repeat that? So we'll clear on that, Harry. Harry, you want to repeat that motion since there's been a lot of conversation?

[4:28:00] Sure, the motion to move to approve is presented to take this mobile light contract for these nodes. And the second. Second. Can we add to that motion allowing execution because that's not part of the caption? I understand. It is added to the motion that we allow for execution of the motion. It's seconded. And do I have any public comment further public comment I think Steve made public comment before so I think since we changed the motion we have to allow a little more public comment. Well Steve Hampton I that brings up who's going to approve it then I just don't understand who is it going to go only through the legal department or does it go to the city manager or to you. We go to the parties in the within the city who are working on the agreement is myself Russell John in planning and development and then Daniel will be the one who authorizes the final agreement And do we need to include that in the motion or second motion for that or is it okay? That's fine. Just Daniel negotiating and executing its efficient. Right, so then all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes 7-0 All right, we're gonna have an update on the sales tax revenue performance by Tina Dursky And then Mayor Council, Mr. Valenzuela, have a quick update for you on sales tax. For the month of June, we were up 13 and a half percent over the same month last year. We are still under our original budget for that sales tax revenue by $552,000 a year to date. So we're cautiously optimistic. We have not yet received the confidential sales tax report so that we can determine if there were any outliers like glass, I don't know if you remember last month we had the

[4:30:02] $180,000 audit adjustment. So we haven't received that yet, we're waiting on that, and we should have some more information available for you, but that's where we are right now. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer. One more month, Daniel says, and then we can celebrate. And I might do cartwheels down the aisle. Thank you, Connor. That's true. Maybe. As we had conversation earlier this morning, about 8.30. I'm cautiously optimistic that we're on the right track. I agree. Thank you, Tina. We remain hopeful. Thank you. Item Q, consider an appointment of a council member to represent the city of San Angel and the ports of planes advisory board. I move to bring to Gunter as our representative and ports of planes. Seconded. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to consider pointing council member representation on the following boards and committees. Yes. Yes, ask you a question. Is this for nomination or do we just volunteer or what I didn't want to get in there and then be left not just jumping in there and saying what I'm interested in. Oh, there went a cell phone. Why not? Put your phone? Probably was. Yes, Charlotte. Charlotte. Oh, okay. It's been laying here. It's not mine. She went fishing. She went fishing. Yeah. She went fishing to answer your question Billy very often I think there are certain people who have been on these committees before so I think we would continue with some of those members on those ongoing committees but we'll go over those today and then where we don't have an existing city council member then people can be nominated or they can volunteer I guess. And Brian will take it from there as far as which point he would go on each board as well.

[4:32:03] Right I think we can discuss the audit committee first because that is there is one vacancy there and there's only one opening there so I think that's an obvious place to start Charlotte farmer was the person in that position and so we can and I attended the last couple of meetings from the audit committee so I certainly from my financial background would like to volunteer for that. I move Harry Thomas be on the audit committee. We could we could take it as one whole thing and we can list him as one and then we can take one motion to approve all of these suggestions. Okay, next up is the Consul Valley Council of Government's Executive Committee. Currently, vacant again, and it was Charlotte Farmer in that position as well. Do I have anyone who would like to volunteer themselves for that committee? Currently, Lane and Lucy are on the General Assembly, so if they have some experience with it. Let's say that. Elaine or Lucy want to be on the executive committee. Elaine, you're going to be the executive committee. All right on General Simbley. General Simbley, now we have an opening previously held by Lane Carter and Lucy Gonzalez is currently scheduled there so if you if you want to leave it that way that certainly else prerogative however there are two slots there Brian there are two slots one is currently occupied by Lucy Gonzalez and the one was just opened up was previously held by lame Carter as of a couple of seconds ago let me ask you a question on

[4:34:06] on the, uh, no, no question, pass on that. So you can, yeah, no one wants to serve on the general assembly. Well, I think we have to have someone on general assembly. I'll make some money. I'll make some money. Because I would say that I can't be on general. Right, okay. And we make some decisions today, and if there's, if we can't fill all of these things, can we bring it back to council? The Consul Valley Council of Governments is asking for some action and I put them off to this point Because I wanted a tranted board really got three people involved in that and and I'll you know I'll stay but Duane and Charlotte were both on it. So that's a three person on the transit didn't really and I can be on that right? I think We have some interest in that one, but for for this general assembly we just if Lucy's willing to continue to serve I think we just need one extra person. Well, I guess I can do it. With the transit board, as Harry has just stated, that he's willing to continue to serve. But I think we have interest from both Lucy and Billy on that. We have to flip the coin. No, we have two openings. You both can do it. Oh, but I think if Harry's willing. Well, he's already on there, but we have two additional vacancies. So we have three spots total. you're there, Billy. That's kind of bored to the board. What's the way it is? Is it? All right. I'm serving on the investment oversight, so I could stay there, but they either gave two positions there. That's correct. The other vacancy was, and it looks like Lane is interested in serving on

[4:36:11] that with Harry. That's good with the council. And if you want, if we can make a motion to approve of all of those nominations that we could just take it in one. Oh my, thank you. Let me ask you a question on the executive committee of C.V. C.O.J. does the mayor usually serve on that? It's kind of all over the place. Sometimes it is. Like most recently, it was Charlotte. So we'll leave it like it is. Mayor Pro Tem was Charlotte. Now it's Lane, so I think it's appropriate. It's fine. OK. And so we're going to do lane on the investment oversight committee as well. So we have a motion and a second to approve these appointees on the various boards. I guess we don't need to vote on it because we've all agreed or we do. Well, yeah, if we could take a take a vote on it and there's not really much need for public comment unless somebody's really interested. All right, a motion and a second all in favor of these appointees say aye. Motion passes seven zero. All right, we're going to move to number 10, follow-up and administrative issues, I believe. We already discussed the items discussed in Executive Session A. So we're going to go to B, consider approval of the withdrawal of a resignation and reinstatement of the Jenny Wilson SMD2 to the Animal Services Advisory Committee. The reasoning behind this is she had resigned, there was a meeting called, if she was able to withdraw her resignation before it caused a lack of quorum, then we would probably have to take this action, but it caused a lack of quorum. So I think we need to formalize any reinstatement of her to that board. And that was an appointment from SMD 2.

[4:38:13] And she comes on there as a member of a welfare council. She does not have to reside within the city limits for that appointment. So I just want everybody to be clear on that one. I've spoke with Morgan and with Bob, and so we are plenty good with the reinstatement of Ms. Wilson. Why has she resigned twice? All I'm aware of is resignation. Wands, I think she turned out the first time, but we could look into that. That's just going off of my memory. I think she turned out the first time, and then she set off the board long enough, and then was reappointed. This just puts her back to her to her regular original term it's I guess it's essentially an unexpired term. It's an unexpired term that was previously filled by her. Do I have a motion to accept Jenny Wilson as being reinstated on the animal services advisory committee? I'll move. Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right, consider approving the following board nominations for the Animal Service Advisory Committee, Timothy Davenport Hurst, SMD1 to an unexpired term in the January 2018, Ryan Smith SMD4 to a first full-term ending January 2019. You want me to read all of these at the same time? Coast of DC, Bill Dendell, SMD 2 to a first full term ending February 2019, Port Consul Museum Board, Cathy Keene, SMD 6 to first full term ending January 2020, Public Arts Commission, Susanna Agari, SMD 3 to a first full term ending April 2020, tears Jim Cummings to an unexpired term ending July 2019. I would like to appoint Jim Cummings as the tax increment reinvestment zone board chair.

[4:40:39] in favor aye any opposed aye passes 7-0 discuss possible cancellation or rescheduling to the August 1st 2017 meeting due to the West Texas Legislative Summit July 31st to August 1st 2017 discussion we have it later that week We can do whatever y'all decide to, and there might be an impact to some of the planning items that I believe John is here if you have any questions about how that affects him. I think we can, it also could affect the truth and taxation requirements for the budget process. So I think, I think we probably need to have an additional meeting, but. Yeah, it'd be good not to cancel that meeting, but we've determined that based on our notification schedule, moving the meeting would not impact any notices that we've already put in the newspaper or sent out to citizens. So from the planning standpoint, that should be okay moving that meeting. Let me ask you another question. I think that that legislative session is over late afternoon. we do like a six o'clock on Tuesday meeting? We certainly could, of course, depending on how heavy that that agenda would be, could go pretty late if we do that. We could certainly schedule it for Thursday, if that's your prerogative. However, you want to do it, we'll make it work with the posting. Andrew, isn't there two people up here that kind of control what goes on that agenda? We probably could control the agenda items. And so I just, I would suggest that maybe we try to do it Tuesday evening versus Thursday, but I'm, I can do either.

[4:42:40] So I would like to confirm and go with that because we have a rodeo benefit shoot later on in the week that's affecting just preparation in that. It's one of our largest events. So if we were to go earlier in the week, it would probably suit better for me. If we're late in the week, I'm out. I am Tuesday evenings are out for me. I have standing meetings on Tuesday evening that so that and that y'all can meet without me obviously, but Tuesday evenings any other evening is fine, but Tuesday's don't work so Harry, Harry your position. I can do Friday evening as long as we we don't have a Tuesday evening Tuesday Tuesday evening Yeah, I Think it was someplace that I was gonna have a happy hour Billy I can do either Lane Lucy I I am proposing that we do it on Tuesday August the 1st at 6 p.m. That way we don't mess with any of the other boards or other things that are normally scheduled. And we move it to 5.30. I think that most of you everybody can get off by that time and get here. By the time we do the first part of the meeting they'll be here before 6 anyway. I'm going to suggest that we change that to 5.30 on Tuesday August the 1st. All in favor, everybody say yes, no nays, so passes 7-0. Okay, so any announcements or consideration of future agenda items, anything from the Council? Sure, Lucy and I will host a town hall meeting on August the 8th on Bell Street Reconstruction and that first phase is from the river to Harris Street, and the engineering department will give details on that.

[4:44:43] 5.30 in the council chambers on August the 8th. Any question for you on strategic planning? It was hard to tell everybody got there. Okay, so maybe, are we ready yet? Yeah, I was going to suggest the 27th, which will be next Thursday, and I need at least four hours of that time for workshop. that would be canceling the one on the 20th which was originally scheduled and moving back to the 27th. So we would not have the one this Thursday. Harry, I'll show you how to cancel it. And we would then have it on the 27th starting at what time, Daniel? It would be either it just it's at the pleasure of the city council. It could be in the morning, it could be in the afternoon, it could be later. It's up to you. I'm open for some suggestions. How about how about if we started early afternoon and if we needed more than four hours because I'm just my guess one of my questions is is four hours really enough for us to do some really comprehensive serious strategic planning do we need to do more than one day absolutely I mean as far as the the comprehensive, if we're doing a strategic plan, all that strategic plan, I can narrow that down to six hours, but there's actually other topics other, I think the planning guidelines that we actually want to address, and Mayor and I have been talking about that as well, certain, it is planning, it's not your typical SWOT analysis, like you're thinking, I can narrow it down quite easily to four to six hours to be honest with you. So we can discuss the topics, there's gonna be probably three main topics that we'll be discussing, and we can narrow that down. If you wanted to, though,

[4:46:43] if you want to do a strategic planning workshop, where you do all the SWOT analysis yourself, then we would have to schedule a day to day and a half. But typically what we do is we go through a workshop, with the understanding is we get the guideline from the city council members, and the staff can work on the other part of the SWOT and get everything put together so that we can come up with a formulated plan as well. We really we're looking at four hours so it's up to you as you as you mentioned the afternoon will be fine with us it's really up to the city council morning afternoon or a little bit later I maybe started to and if we've got to go till seven o'clock we'll go to seven o'clock we've got to go to we do afternoon rather than morning when you're really fresh and can generate the idea I guess I'm a morning billi on on this one out of respect for my employers I'm still I try to keep my hours away from the office to a minimum But what that does is the flexibility in the evening if we do need to go later we can go later and it doesn't impair But that's not a whole thing long story. So that's the reason you'll see me go for the later afternoon We're here at two o'clock then is that we're at what I'm hearing it correct is everybody okay with that two o'clock on Thursday the 27th And can we settle on the location? will it be here or East mezzanine we actually we're looking at the East mezzanine at this point we had we had talked about another option but that wasn't available so it'll be the East mezzanine it'll be what the East mezzanine in the city hall in the first four two o'clock are there any other announcements Billy I brought up starting council about 6 a.m. one time and Brenda spanked me real quick you don't own a restaurant I was told I didn't own a restaurant yeah so with that are there any more announcements that we

[4:48:44] need to make today we have our public official workshop August 2nd at 1300 at the EOC for the newly elected I wasn't able to go last year because that's when my son Jackson was born so I'm going this year but August 2nd at one o'clock afternoon at the EOC with that may I ask for a motion for in a second I'm a suspecting everybody says yay, yes, yes, no nays meaning adjourned

Transcribed 2026-07-26 with faster-whisper (base.en) · source: youtube.com/watch?v=TYfENI2z9iQ