San Angelo City Council meeting 12-01-15

[0:00:02] That's test It is 904 and it's time to get this meeting started of the San Angelo City Council December 1st 2015 meeting and we welcome each and everyone of you here this morning to start us out in prayer I have John Pope the pastor at the Galilee Baptist Church I would ask you to come forward and start us off in prayer place. Good morning, sir You got the mic buddy, amen. Let us all bow for where to prayer Heavenly Father, we just come before you because Lord God, you are the one who made the world by your power. You establish the earth, the heavenly Father, by your wisdom, and you stretched out the heavens by your understanding. Lord God is the creator of all things. We commit this council meeting to you today. We ask Lord God that you would bless all of the council members who are going to be taking care of the business of the city of angels, that you would endow them with your wisdom, knowledge and understanding that you would give them your compassion to be able to balance the needs of the people along with the needs of the city. God, we pray your blessing over everyone who is in attendance at this meeting today, that they will be blessed by you. God, we thank you. We praise you. We give you all the glory in Jesus' name. We pray. Amen. Leslie Salas, would you please come forward? Leslie is a fifth grader at the and she's going to help us this morning. She's going, I am going to assist her with the Pledge of Allegiance. There's our mayor. Thank you. Couple of weeks ago, I went to Veterans Day thing at Lee Middle School.

[0:02:19] And these girls and boys were singing the National Anthem, and I've got to admit it must have been the allergies, cause my eyes are on the ground. Lee Middle School and these girls and boys were singing the National Anthem and I've got to admit must have been the allergies because my eyes began to leak and my back began to run when I heard them sing the National Anthem so I've asked them to come here this morning and sing the National Anthem for us and then I think they've got one other song that they're going to sing also so if you would please stand as you are able this is the Lee Middle School Choir with our National Anthem And this was our lead middle school choir, and I'll tell you what, the future looks bright

[0:06:53] for the City of St. Angelo. Appreciate you kids. Very good job. We do have one proclamation. This is for Lee Flueger. It's the Consul Christmas Celebration Day, December 5th, 2015. Come forward Mr. Flueger. And after I read this, then we expect you to sing a song as well. In 2015 marks the 21st anniversary of the annual City of San Angelo Cultural Christmas Celebration and the celebration with over three million lights is one of the largest Christmas lighting events in the state of Texas. The event offers a two and a half mile walking or driving tour beginning behind the main post office on the corner of Abe Street and 1st Street and ending at El Paseo ending at El Paseo day Santa Angela, you don't say the day elf. El Paseo de Santa Angela. Those involved consist of hundreds of volunteers including inmates from the Department of Corrections who assist with the installation of Christmas scenes, the San Angelo Restaurant Association who supply food to the inmates and RSVP volunteers who deliver the inmates food. The community Christmas lighting ceremony will be held Saturday the 2 15 at 5 15 p.m. at the corner of South Chadburn and West Conchoo Avenue activities will include the St. Angelo Community Band conducted by Dr. Constance Kelly of Angelo State University and the Twin Mountain Tones, undirected by Mark Clark. The Community Tree Lighting will be followed by the 14th annual lights of Christmas Parade at 6 which may be viewed on 2nd Street, between Oaks and Chadburn, between 2nd and Conchoo, on Conchoo between Chadburn and Oaks and on Oaks back to 2nd Street. The tour of lights can be seen

[0:08:57] Sunday through Thursday from 6 to 10 p.m. and each Friday and Saturday from 6 to 12 midnight. December 4th to December 31st to 2.15. Now therefore, I'm Dwayne Morrison, the mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas on behalf of the City Council. Do hereby declare Saturday December 5th to 2.15 is Consul Christmas celebration day and encourage citizens to join the activities and view the magnificent holiday lights that have become a community treasure. Mr. Blueville. Thank you, sir. You bet. Make a few words there. Well, it's as mayor said, this is we have over 400 volunteers, and it's all a community service that that does this and we appreciate the support of the city the city council and our community to enhance the The enjoyment of our holiday season for all our citizens And we thank everybody for that and invite everybody to come out and join us And we are now to the part of our City Council meeting where we invite public comment So, if there is anyone in the audience that chooses to address the City Council, if there's anything you want to say, pro-arcon, we are ready and we're ready to take your comments. Let me read the logalities of this and then I'll have you form a line at the front. Issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium, begin by stating the name and limit remarks to less than five minutes. members may request that the discuss item be placed on the future agenda. The council takes public comment on all regular items during the discussion of these items. So if you would form a line to the front and it is time for public

[0:10:59] commune. Good morning ma'am state your name you've got five minutes. My name is Ladine Harton and as a music person I would just like to say as far etiquette. Some may not be aware of this but when the national anthem is sung because it is our national anthem you are to put your hand over your heart. I did see a couple of the congressmen I've been watching. The councilmen and I appreciate that in the mayor. And normally I can't stand for a long I didn't want to speak on my normal subject. I have a friend who got a pet, and he was kind of busy. Go ahead, Ben. I'm trying to get my computer off. Okay. Do you think they seem off the busy side? Didn't know if they could multitask? who got a pet, and it was microchip and it does have a knot for the microchip is, microchip is. And there again is another reason not to have this done. I talked to, at the last meeting when I was here, I talked to the supervisor, Robert Dies, and he threw y'all into the bus pre-quit, said that the reason he came up with that was because y'all told him he had to come up with something and I agree that if something had to be done but do we have to do something that is done in large cities like Houston and Dallas and those places couldn't we have started with it might be if you'd done it through committee like that other gentleman said that he was supposed to have done if you had done it through committee if we

[0:13:03] couldn't have started with just the feral cats or dogs not the dogs that are around town. We have just started with that, instead of telling everybody you must do this. That's all I have and about my petition not out can't do it because I'd have to include the spater neutered part which I have no problem with because my animals are always spaded neutered so I don't have a problem with that part it's the microchipping I have a part with so Mr. Mayer I'm laying it in your hands and whatever I need to do you tell me I'll do it to help you out okay and I thank you for your support thank you very much Nick all right can't rule San Angelo can you hear me is this portion of the meeting to cover agenda items or not these are items that are not on the agenda yes if it's in the agenda item that we have to wait until the agenda item has been addressed and brought forward. Well, regarding the recently enacted crash plan, my councilwoman mentioned that prior to this new plan, we had a Cadillac plan that perhaps didn't deserve. Are you standing by that? We can't discuss during this part of the meeting. It's just public comment. You have the public. You have the floor. We have the floor, but we cannot. We do not apologize. But I'll be happy to speak with you to break, all right. I know. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Thanks. Good morning, ma'am. Good morning. Thank you for that. Yes, ma'am. My name is. I'm sorry. My name is Christina DeLeo.

[0:15:04] I live down in the Southland, I guess not technically, by the map that's seen, but across from Lamar Elementary School. And we have some serious safety issues coming up in that area. The expansion of the residential area that's been going on. And recently, some of us have been enlightened to the rezoning that took place some years back in a large area next to Lamar Elementary. It was re-zoned as neighborhood commercial. This presents a significant safety issue. Is this agenda? This is on the agenda. Number one agenda item. I'm sorry, I did not get that. That's not a problem. I've got to discuss this. Yeah. I'll put it on the agenda for the day because you'll be able to fill in at that time. Okay. It's the number one item on the regular agenda, ma'am. Yeah. Where would I send you? Thank you, ma'am. We have further public comment. All right, I will now take it to the City Council, and I'll start with you, Ms. Grindstaff, anything that you want to call off of the consent to put on the regular or if you have any comments that you want to make, and I hope you're going to say some wonderful things about our Bobcat. I will. Where about Lakeview? I have nothing to pull off the agenda, but as I was telling you before the meeting, it was a lot of fun Friday to be in Arlington at AT&T Stadium to watch the Bobcats play. But more fun was to see how many late-view supporters we had standing in line in the rain, waiting to get tickets and waiting to get into the stadium. It was really cool to see the whole town. And really, I think we had more people in stands than Denton Geyer did, and the game was in their backyard. Because every time the Jumbotron showed their side

[0:17:05] of the stadium about one-third of those photos. Somebody had an Allen T-shirt on, and they were in the stadium waiting for the next game to be played. So anyway, it was very humbling, but also very wonderful to see the support of the whole community there. I'll catch to the wonderful job. We just ran out of time, maybe. I don't think the best team won that day. Well, that's what we think, but we simply just ran out of time. Very good, thank you. Lucy? Yes, I do not. You shot it? One comment. How about them Bobcats? It was a great game to listen to and to be proud of and to know someone on the team that was playing was even made it more exciting. I would ask Mr. Mayor that we congratulate them in the way of inviting to a council meeting. Already asked Brian to coordinate that and get him here ASAP. Thank you so much. We need to recognize our and for the person that keeps continuing to call me and I keep missing his return phone call that the mowing on Manchester is not out of sight out of mine it is scheduling and it is being taken care of as quickly as we can get to it and that's all I have. And Miss Selvis is not here today he called just before the meeting and said something had come up that he could not avoid so he is not here so we'll go to Mr. Sale. Have nothing. Rodney? Well since we're talking about football I just want to congratulate our wall hawks. I am, my district is a kind of an odd district where I actually have two school districts inside of my district and wall happens to be one of them and I live in the wall side of it. So I actually believe I'm the first city council person to ever be elected that actually has kids that go to school in wall that lives in wall. So I want to congratulate them on a awesome season, and I know that they'll do really well next year. I don't have anything to pull off of the schedule.

[0:19:05] I do want to say something about text dot, we did get the speed change, they're doing that right now, out there at our intersection at 277, and so I'm very happy with that, and I'm glad that they worked with us on that. Thank you. Well, I do have grandkids at wall, so I share what you're saying, and we don't have to get brought next year. Yes, we'd like to point out on the agenda, the items that say not to exceed. I didn't pull anything off, but I've asked the city manager to look into some sort of cat being built in our computer system that will flag those items as they come up. So we definitely do not exceed the amounts of fruit. And I do have something I want to I would like to pull off the E and S okay well I was going to pull E off because I need to make comments so that worked out perfectly okay if there's nothing else then I will ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda A B C D G H I J K L M and N motion to approve I'll take Charlotte and now just you'll you'll second Elizabeth's okay well they'll do have a motion we'll do have a second the motion has been made that we accept the consent agenda with the exception of items e&f do I have any public comment on this at this time do I have any comment from council at this time not I will call for the vote all in favor please say aye aye any opposed say nay put a 6-0 on that one please Brian let's go to e which is consider awarding RFV V M O 2 1 6 police pursuit vehicles to Jim fast-forward San Angelo, Texas, in the amount of 237,000 per fiscal year for the purchase of six units with the option to purchase two additional units and authorizing the city manager or designate to execute any related documents. Mr. Sill. I have a question I guess for the chief. Is he here? Yes sir. Who exactly

[0:21:14] get these vehicles. Who gets these? Yeah. The patrolman. They're they're they're on the road. They're actually patrol. Yes. Well, we're going to do with these and we've made the discussion on these since we're going this route this time. We are actually going to assign them as take those which we normally do. We'll get new cars, but we're going to take one of these new ones and assign it to the fleet so so we can get a better evaluation on it in a very short time. Okay. I have no other question. And just for the public, what are you buying? They are Ford Police Interceptor Utilities, which in layman's terms would look like a Ford Explorer. I know last time we bought the Tahoe's, I don't have a problem one way or the other on this, but if it's something that y'all are satisfied with, I certainly don't have a problem. Really, we'd prefer the Tahoe's, but it was hard to justify the $10,000 increase. thousand dollar increase per vehicle. So we thought we'd give these a try. You know I just want to say when we did buy the Tahoe's last year we bought them from Chevrolet dealership in Caldwell, Texas. And Jim Bass Ford had bid on this and Jim Bass was high. And I'm not Jim Bass. Well I know Jim Bass said it was on some that's right. You're right. But there was another deal a year ago when we bought vehicles and it was between Caldwell and Jim Bass and I remember Todd from Jim Bass walking up to the podium and I thought oh we are now in for it. But you know the first words out of that man's mouth was we made a mistake when we bid this and y'all need to do what you have to do because we have perimeters that are set and he said I made a mistake in bidding it but he said I will not make a mistake again and obviously he did not because Jim Bass came in with the low bid And if I may say it was it was within our perimeter.

[0:23:15] Absolutely. Okay. Okay. And did they raise? I would sure like to see them match the low bid if they wanted to do that. Well they still have the opportunity. But we do have parameters we can work within to buy locally and last time he was way above it. And that's what he said. He said I made a mistake but I won't make that again. So we everyone on this council wants to buy locally. want our local merchants. So I'm just glad that it turned out like this is good for all of us. Marty, since you pulled it, you want to make a motion on this either way? No. Okay. I move to approve as presented. Second. You have a motion to approve from Rodney, I do have a second from Charlotte. Do I have any further council discussion on this? Do I have public comment on this? We'll call for the vote all in favor of accepting this as presented please say aye. Aye. And oppose me. No. Put a 5-1 on that please. Number F is consider awarding RFB-V-M0815 passenger vehicles to Jim Bass Ford, San Angelo, Texas in the amount of 95,000th fiscal year for the purchase of four units with the option to purchase one additional unit and authorizing the city manager designate to execute any related documents? Mr. Sale? I noticed this is similar to to the bit above it. We definitely didn't lock in on one particular type of vehicle, did we? These specs were actually written around a not a full-size vehicle, but just under that. It would be comparable to for fusion and need some Altima, Chevy, Malibu, any of those sizes of vehicles would have qualified for a special facility. Or to our Chevy or anybody could have bid it. Absolutely. Okay. All right. I'll make the motion. If no one else has any quick, I'll make the motion to approve. Okay. Do you have a motion to approve? Do I have a second? Do I have further council discussion? Do I have public comment on this? Motion has been made and seconded that we award 95,000 per fiscal year to Jim Bass Ford

[0:25:19] for the purchase of four units with the option to buy another all in favor please say aye. aye. any opposed nay? please put a six old one that one Brian and this takes us to our regular agenda which is a number a under the regular agenda this is one that council member Fleming has asked for it's discussion and public comment on the development at 60-25 southwest boulevard including a timeline of past approvals and surrounding zoning. you have the floor sir. what happened on this was i had a lot of residents from this area that were very upset with the the zoning that was in place on that property and they thought that the council had something to do with this this wasn't brought before the council so I asked that John come forward and give a presentation on the timeline of what did happen on this piece of property and also I would like to show what is surrounding on that and I believe John has a little thing that's gonna show us that and what the zoning is it's surrounding on the properties around so that they're well-informed on what the future could be around them. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Hello, John. John James, Director of Planning and Development Services, this is the presentation here. This is the timeline you received in your packet. This specific property was annexed in 2006 and as all properties do when they come in on annexation, they are zoned ranch in a state. following that in 2006 must be wrong because then it was zoned in 1996 one of those must have gotten flipped but then it was zoned neighborhood commercial that came before the council to zone from ranch in estate to the neighborhood commercial zoning the self-storage units that have been proposed for that site in our under construction are only allowed in neighborhood commercial with the conditional use that is a an approval that does not go to you all it does go

[0:27:20] straight to the Planning Commission and they are the final authority unless it's appealed to you in this case it was not appealed it did go to the Planning Commission in June of 2014 it was approved for a one-year period although the ordinance does allow that to be extended for an additional year which happened in this case the proponent the property changed hands different developer came forward, needed that extra year. The extra year was granted, as I mentioned, and that will expire in June of 2016. So if development isn't completed by June of 2016, then that conditional use will expire. Because of the size of the development, it does also trigger an urban design review, which means we review it for meeting standards in terms of aesthetics and those kinds of things impact on the surrounding neighborhood, and you'll see from some of the information provided what they've done to try to address that to make it a little more palatable to the surrounding neighborhood. This is the close-in zoning map of the area. You can see most everything in yellow around this particular site is residential, but the pink is neighborhood commercial. You'll also notice that there is another neighborhood commercial right there. That is currently undeveloped, but it is another tract that's already currently zoned neighborhood commercial in addition to the subject property. When it's zoned neighborhood commercial like that and it's already in place, there are certain items that can go there and there's really nothing that can be done to stop that if as long as it falls within the parameters of what neighborhood commercial is. Am I correct? That's correct. And once the zoning is in place, they're allowed to do anything within that zoning district short of the council rezoning it to something else. But once they're in the development process, and that applies to this particular tract, they are vested in the development that they've brought forward. So once they come in and apply for permits, even if you were to rezone it today, they are

[0:29:21] vested in that development that they've already received permits for. So the biggest question that I have on this, and I know that the residents around there have, is that most of this zoning was put in place before those neighborhoods were even there. understanding is that that's correct when the zoning went in most of these were if they were even platted home sites They they weren't built. I don't even think the school was there actually. I think it was done when the street first went in I'm not sure exactly when the school was was in place I do know that the school owned the site because one of the Opponents to both the rezoning and the conditional use the school district responded in opposition They didn't like the idea of commercial that close to the school, right? But again, they both both were approved This is just a zoom out looking at the whole area. You can see that other than the main streets, Sherwood, the Loop, and over on Nickerbocker, there's really not commercial in this area. It is largely residential, but again, the neighborhood commercial is intended to be commercial development that is generally compatible with being within a neighborhood. That was proposed by the developer and it's consistent or was consistent at the time with the comprehensive plan. That's correct. you wouldn't see like a general commercial typically zoned in an area like this but a small-scale neighborhood commercial like this is consistent with the comprehensive planning consistent with good planning practices. Can you let us know a few just a few examples of things that can go in there on that are under the current zoning now just so they would know that what could possibly go there. General retail is the kind of the typical commercial convenience store a small strip shopping center, those kinds of small-scale retail commercial development is kind of typical of neighborhood commercial. Okay. I'm sorry. No, I'm good. Okay. Charlotte. What is the objection that you're hearing on the other than, I mean, it's rental storage units.

[0:31:23] And I read in one of the deals where it was, they objected it being that close to a school. Well, there was multiple objections. There wasn't just one. One of them was being that close to the school. One was also being that several of the residents felt like they weren't notified of the zone change. And I went back and asked the planning department on that on the notifications that were sent out. And we have to send out within 200 feet of the property. And all I can go by is what they had told me that they had sent out. And I think there were 20-something. It was at 20 something that were sent out, and they were sent out both for the zoning case, and then for the conditional use. There were. For the zoning case, that would have been before there were even houses back there. So that- That's correct. That would have been- Now we did, actually, for the zoning case, we got two in favor and three in opposition. So there were some properties surrounding it when it was zoned that did submit a letter of opposition. Again, one of which was from the school district. And then with the conditional use, we also sent out the notifications and two in opposition and one in favor, again, one of those two was from a neighbor and one was from the school district. Some of the complaints we've heard are possible crime, people concerned about their kids walking to school and traffic that might be generated by this site, those kinds of concerns. There's a train that goes through there now regularly and there's probably nothing that generates more traffic at specific times than the school itself. The idea of neighborhood commercial is to provide some small commercial development that actually serves the neighborhood, that actually is beneficial to the neighborhood. We do this throughout the city, especially on our new developments, there's plan, there's a master plan on how these things are done, and usually we like to have correct neighborhood developments within those neighborhoods so there can be some relief of some sort.

[0:33:26] And that's the way this was proposed when the original development was proposed. And I will add that our staff meets with folks almost daily. We're happy to meet with people when they're looking at buying a house, wanting to know what's around them, what's zoned, what's planned for their neighborhood. That's something that questions we answer frequently and I would encourage anybody who's looking at buying a house or a property to ask us those questions or look on the website. Especially vacant land. I myself being a broker, that's one of the number one things I have. I have people that will say, well, what's that vacant lot going to be? If I don't know, I go find out because there's a liability on me. If I say, oh, it'll just be houses and it's not going to be houses. It could be a problem in the future, for sure. So you want to be informed of what's around you. And if there's an empty lot that's close to you and it's inside the city limits, It will eventually have something on it, whether it be business or ounces. So, I mean, it will be, it's just a matter of time before it catches up to you. Or the question, Charlotte? Yes, this is my district. That is the corner that I had come to council about quite some time ago, that long ago, wanting to put on the capital improvement plan. That short, very short piece of robe that is too lame and not forlaying like the rest of it. working on that now. Okay. I understand that. But that's my objection to whatever goes in there is the traffic that's going to be thrown out on that undeveloped portion. Is this particular development going to pay to have the road improved through there? Yes. As part of this process, they had to go through the planning process to legally plan the property and that included the obligation to improve the roads adjacent. Okay. I believe though this is my district. I wish that it was your district. It's not mine, so we'll see in our safe, aren't we? Everything, fairs, coffee, chills, please. This is a question from Council.

[0:35:26] I've got just a couple of pictures. I'll go through quickly. This is the plan of the site. There is a phase one and phase two, and so this line right about there, that's phase one to the right. Phase two has not been submitted, has not been planned, but that is a possible future phase if they can do that before the conditional use expires. And this just shows kind of the, as I mentioned, this had to go through an urban design review. They are doing mostly brick and wrought iron facing the street. The sides, the back sides basically are the metal you can see in the bottom left corner. But they did make an effort to make this look really nice given that it's in the middle of the neighborhood. And so that's kind of some of the look of it. In fact, the proponent is now talking with the neighbors about possibly making the north side that backs up to homes also brick. That's not required, but that's something that he, I know, is in discussion with the surrounding neighbors with that. We have to answer any other questions if you have. That's all I have, but I think there's a resident here. Do you have some questions? Any other comments from Council? We'll open it up to public. We'll open it up to public comment at this time. state your name and you've got five minutes. Thank you, ma'am. All right, thank you. My name is Christina Delayo. I live on Canadian Street across Southwest from the school. And along with all this expansion that's there, there's so many points I wish I had time to touch on with the planning that's going on. First of all, a lot of the residents there are boggled as to why the rezoning passed and these things passed when there was more opposition than proponents for it. So we're feeling a little bit unheard down there, as well as the 200-foot notice area is nothing.

[0:37:26] When that happened, there was hardly any houses because most of the properties were owned by builders. And so 24 letters were sent out, but probably 20 of them went to builders. And when people bought those houses, they were under the impression that houses were gonna be going in there. That's what I was told. You have a lot of young military families in there. We aren't told to go check with the city or anybody about the zoning. We were told by builders or real estate agents that it's all houses going in. So we're obviously frustrated with that. My main concern while I'm here today is about the school safety. And I understand with the storage units going in that they are required to put in sidewalks, or they are planning to put in a sidewalk along the property on Southwest. But there is no sidewalk between that property that's going in and the railroad tracks. That presents a big problem for the safety of children with the growing number of kids that are going to be walking to school from the opposite side of Southwest. And we want to propose that safety measures are taken immediately to decrease the risk of injury and even death. Studies have been done and approximately 100 children are killed every year walking to and from school, 25,000 injuries as a result of school zone accidents. We would like to see sidewalk put in from the new property, the sidewalk that's going in and extend that to Canadian Drive that wouldn't be a long section but it would come up to Toya and then between Toya and Canadian Street. And then also establishing a crosswalk from either the corner of Canadian or Toya across the street to the school with some type of lighting, crossing guard. There is a crossing guard on the north side of the railroad tracks and there's nothing on the south side. Also the speed limit is a serious issue.

[0:39:31] The most, the bulk of the morning traffic and the danger time zone is between 7 and 8 a.m. The morning is more rushed because parents are dropping off, trying to get to another school for drop-offs or rushing off to work. And I personally cross the four-lane street with three children every morning and have almost been hit. An elderly neighbor crossing for a walk with us was almost hit because even when traffic slows down in one lane, you have cars whipping around behind them to get through and almost hitting the children crossing. So we would like to see possibly, I know that there's a school speed limit in play, but people are coming from Twin Mountain on a 45-mile hour zone, turning the corner and expected to go immediately 20 miles an hour. That's not happening. Some people do, but a lot of people don't. And studies show that it's like 17% are driving distracted. That's the equivalent or the reaction time is equivalent to drivers that are drunk, driving through because of the distractions. They're checking phones, they're checking messages, they're rushing to get to work. We're getting a little bit off the topic of the item. Item is, yeah, exactly. All right, well this was the topic I was told to wait on. My topic is school safety. And it's getting worse than this. Well, as related to this lot, just go ahead and say, it is related to this lot, so you can talk about it. It is very related to the lot and the zoning because if we're expecting more traffic with businesses, and if the rezoning isn't changed, you're going to get stores, other things are going to attract outside residents, as well as the residents that are already there. So whether it's putting an officer in that, the peak traffic times to monitor and patrol, whether it's putting lighted crossings in, or something that forces traffic to stop legally, or even putting a digital speed limit, something that brings awareness

[0:41:31] and that allows the children to cross safely. It's ridiculous to start a car and drive them to school when it's two minutes away, and it takes longer to do that than to walk across the street. But the safety of our children is the most important, and I know the city doesn't want blood on their hands or injury, I'm not trying to dramatize it, but children's safety is at stake, and we're concerned about it. Thank you, thank you, ma'am. Is there anything that we can do, John, as far as doing another crosswalk there? How are we held to how many crosswalks and how far they can be apart from each other and things like that? Normally, we can put a crosswalk at any intersection. I guess I would defer to streets on, if I'm not aware of the city's policies on crosswalks and where we put those, but generally crosswalks. Legally, there's a crosswalk anywhere. There's a sidewalk, whether it's marked on the street or not, that in terms of painting them on the street, I would have to defer to someone else to answer that. We could do a study on that as far as the safety study to determine it, if in fact, that would be a feasible thing to do. I think that absolutely our kids' safety is really important to us. So that's something that I'll work with Shane, we'll take a look at that and see how. If we could take a look at that, the problem I would see as far as the sidewalks going in, there's a couple of problems. Actually, one is that easements on the property, The residential properties that are there now would have to gain that easements from them. The second thing is we'd have to get money because that will cost money to do that. The sidewalks, it's easy when you're putting in the development to tell them to do that, but you can't go back after the fact and tell like the homeowners that are there, you're going to be paying for a sidewalk in front of your house or to the side of your house. You can't do that. So I'm not so sure how or if we can even do that as far as putting in the sidewalks there. There's probably enough right-of-way because by definition, the sidewalk is not necessarily

[0:43:31] a paved thing. It's a distance behind the curb. So it would be the expense of the citizens for the city if we wanted to do that. Right. There's likely room for sidewalks. But like you said, it's easier to require that upfront prior to development. Yeah. I'd say, I mean, like this new developer, it's just part of his cost of putting in the storage units that they have to do sidewalks. It would be really nice in the future. And I think we're getting better at this on planning, especially residential around schools about getting sidewalks in there and making, you know, it would help. And I agree with her wholeheartedly on that, that would make it a lot safer if they could do that at the beginning. At the time of the development community fought it, you can go back and watch the video. It's lovely. Well, I would have been, I would have been for that. I appreciate that Rodney. That makes me feel better. That's good. Great sidewalk coordinates to you. Right. Well that, the side, overall sidewalk ordinance I have a problem with, but around the, around the schools. That's why we don't. That's why it's been so difficult. Now we are getting all caught. Yeah. Do I have further public comment? We'll have them take a look at that ma'am and see what we can do as far as doing another crosswalk to help alleviate some of the problem this, this storage building is put again. The one thing that I want to point out to you and the residents out there, I know that There will be some several people, according to how many phone calls and comments I've gotten on this, that property that's right behind there, that it is zoned, neighborhood commercial. The other side of that street on that other corner is neighborhood commercial. It will be probably some kind of business. It's just a matter of time before it goes in. So that's a good thing to know and, you know, further in the future, I wish that, you know, that you guys would, that would have been explained better to you in the past. Have we discussed this problem? Yes, we have, thank you. Let's move on to item B,

[0:45:31] which is consider approving a slate to propose city of San Angelo Logos for citizens consideration in an online survey. Anthony, you have the floor, sir. Good morning, council, Anthony Wilson, public information officer. And you may recall back in April, you approved our exploring the possibility of adopting a new logo, and you charged us with returning with a slate of options, which is what we're doing today. Just as a reminder, in our minds, the benefits of these are threefold. One is we think it would represent an aesthetic improvement over what we now have that would reflect the modern progressive forward thinking community that we are. We think it would lend some greater corporate consistency with use by all departments and divisions, and we could finally replace the bloodshot eye that we use as the city seal within the logo. So I see Councilman Fleming looking up there. That's not the bloodshot eye, but the city seal does look like that. Also, I think this is an opportunity to engage the public. Lately, we've been hearing a lot of citizens saying, why don't you let us vote on this, that, or the other? Well, this is an opportunity to let the citizens choose what the city's logo should be. The public information office, along with McLaughlin advertising, who is our contracted advertising firm, engaged in a information campaign to solicit some designs and some ideas from our public, and we did receive some of those. If approved, we would engage in a month-long campaign in our mass and social media, encouraging public participation in a survey that we would put on our website, and we would unveil that at a future council meeting, whatever the design is that the public chose. Today, I'm going to run through eight different designs. They are from a local graphic artist, from some of the artists from McLaughlin advertising, and one that was inspired by a citizen's suggestion. I do want to make clear that the survey would include our current city logos, so that would be one

[0:47:31] of the options that our citizens would be voting on, and I also want to stress that there's no financial cost to this endeavor whatsoever. We have not spent any money to date, we're not planning on spending any money, and the new logo would be phased in as assets are phased out. So with that, without further ado, this is the first option here, which Steven called the egg, I guess in memory of Don Vardaman. It's a modern representation of the current logo, and you may recall that Councilman Vardaman thought that it looked a bit like a fried egg, so we've fixed that by turning the white background into a blue sky. So there's number one, and you can- excuse me for interrupting, but he always related everything back to faith. I noticed that as well, Councilman. So, and you see, and we actually have two representations of this. You see this first one, there is the Twin Buttes represented on there, and then the second one without the Twin Buttes. So that's one design. Our next design is, we call every drop. Obviously, water is very important to this community, and it's something that we have, to a lot of West Texas communities don't, but we did not want a logo that implied that we have an abundance of it, and that actually reflects our city's history with water, and that is that we worry about, we pray for, and we plan for every single drop of water. So here is every drop. And you can see it maintains the current color scheme of blue, yellow, and green, which we kind of like. We think those colors have some vibrancy to them, and you can see there's a representation of one of our famed water lilies right there. So that's every drop. This is a geometric logo that you're going to see here. It's going to include some of the representations that we currently have in the logo, which is the Twin Buttes, the Sun, the Three Rivers. It is done through geometric design. So here is one of the Twin Buttes, the other Twin Buttes.

[0:49:31] Here's our Sun. And here is one, two, three rivers right there. So that's the geometric logo. This is an homage to the water lily collection, and it has a slogan that suggests that nature is very special here in St. Angelou. I really like the slogan, where the rivers meet. You can see here's one, two, there's our three rivers. And again, there is our water lily logo right there. The rainbow's end is a cue to a former slogan for downtown, downtown was once called the Rainbows Inn. It suggests a rainbows arch in the loops of neon lights, but it also has representations for, again, the sun, the three rivers, and the twin buttes, which are sort of in abstract. And here you can see this right here represents the twin buttes. We have one river, two rivers, three rivers, right there. And then, of course, we have, there's the sun representation right there. So that's one of our options. These next few logos are sort of highlight what was once the city hall or the city logo that featured our historic city hall. So this is sort of looking back retro as in right now. So there's the first option. And this is the only one that doesn't adhere to our current color scheme, but it has the color scheme of what once was the city logo. There is the second one and this one does have our color scheme. One of the things I kind of like about this logo is you can see the A represented there as part of the star. So I thought that was a very cool design feature and then there's the last one right there. I think that's a nice design as well.

[0:51:32] We have some that again pay homage to the rivers and this is done in the almost postcard tourist attraction type of style and there it is right there so I think I know Councilwoman Grindstaff is a Bruce Springsteen fan like I am it sort of reminds me of a greetings from Asbury Park to some extent and and this is spangles it's doesn't have any of the usual graphic representations but just some designs that suggest motion and fun and vibrancy via some abstract shapes This one right here, which I think is very nice. This was actually my wife's favorite. I showed her all of these. And then here's a take-off on that as well, right there. And so I ran through those really quickly, but there they are all in total. And what we're here today is to ask that you select maybe a slate of these that we can put before citizens via our website and let them decide what would be the city logo. this would, again, be one of the options that would be that our citizens would have to consider. So, again, our recommendation is that we approve an online survey to determine which of these, including the current logo should serve as the City of St. Angelo's brand moving forward. Well, I'd suggest we put all of them out there and let them decide as long as not following them any month. What's wrong with the one we have? There's nothing wrong with the one that we have and if the voters choose that then then I think that's that's great But this is an opportunity to let our citizens decide if that is in fact the best brand For St. Angelo, and if that's what they they choose I think we're all we're all fine and good with that and we don't have to go with anything We can stay with what we've got if we choose to but I Don't see any reason to do this, but that's just my opinion

[0:53:35] Well, if you want to put it out there and let it be proposed. I think it's a fun exercise. I think it's something nice to get the citizens involved in something that he said isn't negative. We've had a lot of difficult issues lately. I think it's a nice exercise. I think you need to bring us more stuff, Anthony. No. I like the items that you bring. Oh, oh, OK. I thought you meant more logo design. What I was about to say is there's a dozen of these not enough. I say we move forward and we go with, do we need to narrow it down or? That's purely the Council's prerogative. I mean, we wanted to, these are things that designs that Steven and I particularly liked. We actually had whittled down a much longer menu of these to get to these specific designs, but we wanted to bring them all before the Council. And if you decide now we don't like that one or we don't like that one or whatever the case might be, then we just wanted the council to have the prerogative to have a wide selection of what you might want to put before the voters. If there's something here that you just couldn't live with, then we don't have to include that in the survey. I'd leave them all out there. But Mayor, I have one request, and that's that we put the egg back as it was originally presented. With no blue sky. in agreement with that do you need vote on this or just want to we did we did submit it as an action item and we put the old logo up there with them when we're voting on all of them but it was certainly councilman what would be the most fair thing to do it I believe yes or what we are going to do is we're going to put with again whichever these that the council chooses we're going to put these on our website and the current logo will certainly be among those and if you if you want us to put that one as the first option or just throw it in there in the mix or I have a question yes ma'am with no more participation than we

[0:55:36] had here Thursday prior to Thanksgiving on water rates you feel like there's going to be participation on our logo well you know I don't know I don't know but but I think Steven and I will do our dead-level best to get this out in front of people. Again, without spending any money, you know, we previously wrote a column for the newspaper. We will do that again. I will go on all of the radio and TV shows and use our friends in the mass media in order to get word out. We'll use, obviously, SATV. We'll use all of our social media. We'll use our website. And, you know, I think this is like Councilwoman Grindstaff said. This is something fun. And I think people gravitate to things said are fun and interesting. I think we're going to know that we have a problem when he has a huge level of participation and we have five people attend a public meeting on water rates. But I was going to say I'd definitely like to have staff involved in this process as well as far as selection and being involved in this and again more participation in that area as well. So we'll definitely do that too. Yeah, we'll certainly make sure that all of our city staff knows about the survey and encourage them to Do you need to vote someone more than that? Yeah, I move that we move forward with taking the survey. All of them? Yes, sir. And changing the egg back. Putting the egg in. Just throw the egg in there. We'll do. It'll be 14 levels then. However, I didn't count them, but we'll definitely put the white background in as well. Does anybody want to second that? Second. Okay. We do have a motion to be able to second. If we put everyone of them in the ad and the current and the fried egg and put it out for the people and let them vote on it, it's not costing us anything. And the decision will be made later.

[0:57:39] Any further comment from council? Yeah, I see. I will open up the public comment. All right, council again. The logo behind the mayor, will that be changed? that is the logo. Will it be changed if you adopt a new logo? If so, will that be done for free? Will it cost any money? Are there any other instances where this doesn't cost any money except for the money that it costs? It will cost money if we go to a new logo. Everything will have to be changed. Well and and again what we will do though is we won't immediately throw out all of the assets that we have that have the current logo on it. If we do impact adopt a new logo we will phase those in and so for instance as a pickup truck is retired and we buy a new pickup truck the new logo would be placed on the pickup truck the same would be true for letterhead or uniforms or whatever the case might be you know I wouldn't envision us changing that back there behind it because I do think it would be an expensive endeavor and we would just say that's our that's our retro logo right there but that but that's one man's opinion or the public comment on this item name's Edwin Guthrie and personally I think the city has more pressing matters than to discuss our logo he keeps it really and it's gonna cost free there's nothing free period I'm totally against this I think the city should if you go forward in time you'll be disliked the trash service you see Dunbar trash trucks you see Republic trash trucks, you see waste management trash truck, a person visiting St. Angelo won't know where they're at.

[0:59:39] Thank you, sir. Turner? Yes, my name is Jim Turner and just another point on these web surveys and how useful they can be. The web survey was very important in putting together the charter amendments that were just voted on. So it can be an effective tool if it's used properly. Don't discount it, even though it's a slop poll. The people do sign in on their own and self-selecting. It doesn't get everybody in the community, but it does get a good sense of what the community wants because the people do that are going to be those that are most interested and most active in the community. Thank you. Jim. Further public comment on this item? You can hearten again. I agree that you have more important things to do, but I do agree that sometimes you got to throw the people a bone, so to speak. And you know, for those people that are out there going, you know, they're just up there doing everything and I don't have anything to do and they're running the city and I can't do anything about it. At least, you know, you're giving us a vote on something. My concern is though, people knowing about it, I personally don't take the paper, I read it online and sometimes you don't get the whole story there. I don't have local TV, I have direct TV, so I don't get local news, so I wouldn't know about it from that. I don't listen to the radio unless I'm in my car and I don't go that many places anymore, so I don't think I would know about it unless I was here. And I'm wondering how many other people would do that too. And if we can't even get them out to vote on a regular thing, I would have been there on that Thursday had I known about it, but I didn't know about it.

[1:01:40] You could have heard one other thing about chipping, but anyway, I'm just wondering how many would know about it and how many would actually vote, but anyway, it's a good idea and I voted for that. I guess 14 different ideas for public voting and concern, it's not going to cost us anything. When we adopt, it will cost, there will be an expense if and when we adopt the new logo, but as it stands now, it's costing us anything. if the local changes yes if the local changes it will be an expense always a possibility we'll keep the same one that's right so motion's been made second has been made all in favor please say aye aye any opposed nay nay put a five one on that one please and it is ten oh six and this number c is going to take some time so I'm gonna say let's take about a 15 minute break and come back 34 and time to get the meeting started again. Just a couple of housekeeping items on the agenda, number G which is the consideration with the United States Army Special Operations. We will be pulling this because Army was unable to be here today so we will be pulling item number G. On the back of the agenda we have item number L which is the fleet data monitoring hardware. We do have some people who want to speak to that we do have staff here for that first time we voted on this we had the exact same council and it was a 3-3 split and Johnny was unable to be here again today I see no reason to do it again today when we've already had a 3-3 split once but just put this thing off to another meeting when we've got a full council so that we can get a get an honest vote on this agreement on this I think they're all honest but I think since we delayed it

[1:03:40] Let's wait for Mr. Silva's to get back. So if you all agree, let's go ahead and pull item G, and let's pull item L. We'll just put it on a different next future agenda and deal with this. Which leads us at item number C, which is the first public hearing and it's consideration of our ordinance, amending Appendance A, Article A80000 subsection A8.002 monthly water rates. Mr. Riley, you are on, sir. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Appreciate being here. You'll recall that at the last meeting, we brought the proposed water rates to you, and you had directed us to proceed with putting the ordinance together in an updated copy that is being passed out to you right now. You also asked us to have several public meetings, which we did. We had a meeting with Ms. Grindstaff at her town hall meeting, hall meeting and also one with Ms. Farmer. We had a very good turnout at both of those where we discussed the proposed rate structure. And we also had another meeting here in this building where we invited the community. And as you mentioned earlier, we did not have quite as good a turnout at that, but we did. In all of these, we had very good discussion and very good questions to ask. And so, we also published in the paper On a couple of occasions, we had a radio spot as well, trying to get the information out as much as we possibly could. So we are bringing to you today the ordinance. This is again, the public hearing in the first reading. And just to kind of not gonna go through the whole presentation that we've done several times, but just kind of point out what the rates are. This is a five year plan, and this is what the proposed rates would move to. for the five years and I'm going to just kind of go through this if you have any

[1:05:42] questions please please stop me the volumetric rate for residential water would move to these rates and then just to kind of keep going through this the non-residential would again it's the five-year plan so we would have a rate for that and then the volumetric rate for non-residential landscape which would again have rate blocks. We would have an untreated water rate that would be for all customers. And then the water reclamation, which would be a base fee based on meter size and then the residential, which is based on a winter quarter average with a maxed at 15,000 gallons and the non-residential would begin at 4,000 gallons. And there would be no cap on that for non-residential rate, and that is the rates we also have is proposing this the drought rate which as we had discussed is a multiplier based on the projected water demand change or the less water used during the drought stages that would keep us revenue neutral, So it'd be a multiplier added to these existing rates to keep revenue neutral during that time. That's presentation. And that's it, yes, sir. Council? Where do you want to start on this? Who wants to start? We've been through this. We have seen, we hired a consultant to come in and configure this to take all the politics out of it. I think we got a very honest appraisal. They proposed something that was about twice as high is what we have now, and we cut them down. I think the first year from 215 to 216 is what, $5.50 a month increase? Or the combined water in wastewater, yes, sir? Well, the water bills from 215 to 216 will go up

[1:07:44] about $5.50, 60 cents, whatever that figure was. And then in 216, it'll go up, and it'll go up all five years. And I think overall, it's about a 38, 40% increase over the five years over now. Overall, it's probably a little bit more than that. Mayor is probably about 50% after the five years from what it is today. And nobody wants to go up and nobody wants to pay more, but we have to have water for our citizens. This includes possibly the wastewater treatment, which is $135 million project. We are doing a study on this right now and these rates would reflect us being able to do this. We also have some infrastructure that we're losing water. We have to fix it. We have to get started somewhere. It's a necessary evil. I have no problem with it and I think when they cut it from the 10 down to the 5, I think that it made it. People are not going to like it. But I'd rather pay a little more for water and have water than keep what we've got and not be able to provide water for our citizens because that of course is not an option. So I have no problem with this. If someone wants to start us with a motion, we can go from there. We want to have discussion. We just chat a little longer? Yes, yes. Well, I think it's also important to clarify that the water rebate will always be reviewed once a year, twice a year, in the event that there is the ability to pay back the citizen if we're in good shape with what we have in the lakes and all of that. I think that's significant and we did this in 2008 which is the last time we took an increase on the water bill except for the hickory we did take an increase for hickory. I believe it was oh seven or seven. So we've got two times a year if there is extra money we will rebate it and we have rebated it back

[1:09:47] twice I'm sorry and if I might make a point with it as well since this is we are proposing a five-year plan because that's what it takes to be financially sustainable but each year you get to look at this and so if if there's a you know a change that can be made based on whatever the the conditions are at that time you certainly have the opportunity to do that annually. Bill did you ever get the amount of money that the surrounding cities or the cities that are close by us whether for us to compare what we were paying with We actually have several slides, and I have some of those here to show you. This was based on 4,000 gallons, the average user residential user in St. Angelo, as you can see. And this slide has quite a bit going on, but for the combined, which is the blue bars here that we are about in the third highest of this group. like to just kind of take you through that and kind of show you what happens. It's very difficult to compare these because we really don't have any information when you look at a comparison like this. So what's going on in the other utilities and what their average uses are, are what might be holding their rates either up or down, whether that's more industry or subsidized through the tax rate. We don't know that, but it does give you kind of a picture of what where we are. And just to kind kind of go through and this is again a combined residential water and sewer. As you go up, you can see that we're still at 5,000. We kind of move up the bar a little bit. It's kind of hard to see this, but the blue here is the scared to touch this screen. It's the St. Angelo. But as we go up, you see that that begins to, these numbers begin to get real close together, is the usage patterns increase, and then as we move up into the 30,000 gallon range, we

[1:11:53] become one of the lower rates. And while our average is 4,000, we have quite a few people that are in the 20,000, 30,000 gallon a month range. So you can see that where we fall with that group. And it also kind of, I think, lends to the fact that you have to be, when you look at these comparisons, there's so many variables that you don't really know exactly what where you're following that group and then we go in the commercial which are your higher usage you can see that where you fall just below the median range there and then as you move up into the larger commercial we drop back down to the lower range so as you move through the through the usage patterns you see that we just we kind of fit within the whole range of users or the price range for the cities. Well we were at break someone said that they felt that that they were being penalized for conservation. How do we answer that? Well, that's a tough one. We've talked about that all the way through this process. As you, we had a water supply issue, asked people to conserve. And I've seen nobody step up to the plate with that more in this state than San Angelo has. But unfortunately, that has, it does have a negative impact on the revenue. And as we've talked about also, the utility business is a fixed cost business, just because the water usage drops, the costs don't go away. So it's a dilemma that we have to figure out how to fix. And unfortunately, we begin to have to look at how we value water. When we look at conservation, we have to keep in mind, the reason we do conserve is to standard water and make sure that we secure that water for the future of our kids and our grandkids. So whenever we are conserving, we're extending that water as well. So, although we're not experiencing the benefits as far as now we may be paying a little bit more. The conservation has a true benefit to this community in extending the life of the waters by way. I agree. Because whether we're acquiring water rights for development in the future, we keep expanding

[1:13:55] a facility, all of that cost money, and we pay for it, and this is the way to do it is through the rate. As you say, I guess we could use general funds, but then something else would suffer. So here we are. As I said at the last meeting, I think it's good that we have a plan that is not as aggressive as perhaps the consultants would have suggested, but something that we think that we can live with and something that provides us at least the security in the short term that we're comfortable with. But one comment that I would make before we vote is, I am not interested at this point in identifying what the next project is because I feel like that has not been vetted properly. that we haven't seen the results of the studies going on for retaroyo or the water, can I say, reclamation project? And so I agree that funds need to be set aside for the next project, but when I vote, it's not gonna, I'm not naming or supposing what that project is it? And we're not asking you today to do that. Verification, thank you. do you have any other questions? Ms. Farmer? Bill I want to thank you and Shane Kelton and Russell, all the city employees who attended my town hall meeting, excellent turnout which very surprising but even more surprising the number of questions. They really did grill you and Shane both and you handled it well but one of the things that kept coming up and were being punished. And in comparison to, the price of your hamburger has stayed the same. In my restaurant, I've not charged you more all year. But yet, I've had to pay a little more for the bun, for the mayonnaise, or for the mustard, or for the pickles

[1:15:55] to put that hamburger on the table. It's maintaining that taste, that quality. And the water is not any different. The cost of putting that water at your door at the tap stays the same. Even though that you have conserved, each of us has conserved out there and we're using less, but the cost has stayed the same. I found that the audience of 100 plus seemed to be more receptive to that, but their biggest griper complaint, or they can't see what we're doing. They can't see the results. And as explained to them that no, you dig a hole in the ground, replace the pipe, you can't see that. So possibly a better job that the city could do would be letting the citizens know on a quarterly or semiannually basis is to what improvements have been made and where they have been made the dollar that has been spent because they can't see it. I got on council because of water water rates and the spending of the city and I was they foolishly tried to hold the water rates down because of a campaign promise but when you get in here and you see the cost of maintaining you understand that we we have to adjust those rates and hopefully we have been more aggressive in looking at and not as bullish trying to handle this on a long range plan and tell you what your increase is going to be each year for the next five years. So therefore I'll make the motion to approve this plan as submitted for the water rates.

[1:17:55] Marty? Well, right wrong or indifferent, I think prior council had made the commitment to not have increases over the last eight years and to a certain extent we we did keep our rates the same and and once costs were going up it is the hamburger and analogy was just given I think prior counsel has worked very hard to keep rates the same and maybe we should have increased a little bit back in those times. But that's all water under the bridge. And so we have to move forward and bite the bullet. And I don't think anyone likes it, but it's a necessary evil. So I'll suck at the motion. I think I agree with Marty on this. This, you know, we kicked this can down the road far enough where now somebody has to pay for this and we and everybody doesn't like or no one likes having increases in our bills but it's kind of a just life things get more expensive as we go and especially where we're at we're out here in the desert and we get very little rain water will always be a problem for us always my kids my grandkids they'll always be worried about water when we're living out here on the edge of the desert. So this is an important thing. One other thing I'd like to point out is that we're different than other cities in that we can't compare just, you said it perfectly a while ago, you can't compare just the price to it because our infrastructure is different. How old is there infrastructure that's in place? Our infrastructure is very old and hasn't been replaced in a long, long time overall.

[1:19:56] And so we're behind on some of those things that will make it more expensive for us in the future. So, as comparing the price, just if you just went just with the price, that's not a good comparable for just doing just the price of the service. So, we need to get caught up, this is something this has been, you made the motion to approve it, it's already been seconded, I would have also, this is a good thing, I think, to move on down the road and try to get these projects. One of these projects is going to be very important to us, and we don't know what will, I'm sure, I probably won't even be on the council when it'll be voted on for the project, but one of them has to be done in our future for our future. And one further comment I would like to make, and Michael, you need to check me on my numbers here because I'm going from memory. But we had about a $1.8 million deficit in our water department that we had built up over the years when we were spending more than we were making. And when we went to the Republic trash, we received a check up front for $3.6 million, three point, we received a check for $3.4 or $3.6 million from Republic. And this council voted by seven or vote to take as much money as was possible off of that check and apply it to the water department deficit to bring that deficit up to zero. And I think it was about $1.8 million that we took of that money and applied to the deficit so that we could start this with zero instead of starting in at the hole. Am I right, Michael? Mayor, I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was a large number like that. And I think the amount was not a fund balance deficit, but an annual operating loss. I think we had a net loss in a year. You said, I want to cover that out of this check. And so that was a move that helped to keep these rates from being higher than they otherwise would have needed to be. We took money, it's an example of spreading that burden out, so that it didn't all fall again on those right pairs.

[1:22:05] The citizens didn't have to pay this money, but it was money that we were able to take and apply to a bill that affects all of our citizens, so we're able to start it as zero balance instead of starting with the balance in the whole, so it could have been worse. I think it's also important, I mean, without blaming all past councils, is that the council's responding to the citizen, and when we've tried so hard to keep rates low, you know, there's a cost to that, and you know, my neighborhood is really suffered from a lot of construction of late, same streets over and over again, construction ongoing construction inside with water lines and sewer lines failing. I'm happy to look at another source, and I think we have to keep doing that for the security of our future, but I think we have got to also concentrate on the infrastructure in the ground that we don't see because I'm still not convinced of what the true loss rate is, a treated water, but I think that we can't forget that. said what are we've already invested a lot in that we need to do what's right in trying to save as much of that for our use and consumption as we can well I've heard the comments from council before over that the public comments public comment come ahead morning ladies and gentlemen council public record I'm Daniel Cardenas I've heard the discussions and I've seen heard back and forth the discussions and a kind of disagree and I don't want to get an argument with anyone here but that's why we're here for it to give public comment. Mr. Mary you just said that it's not costing the taxpayers any any more money because we got this money from public from a Republic or treasure way. Well who's paying for that bill? We are okay. As I understand when we all went into

[1:24:07] executive session, all instructed republic that they had bid, their bid was too low. There was too much money left on top of the table. They amended their bid for the city of San Angelo with be gaining 8.2 to 12.2 million dollars over 10 years. As we see the funds coming in, as you just said, that republic just channeled 4 million dollars to the city of San Angelo, where did that come from, Mr. Mayor? They didn't come as a gift, come on. It came as a gift from the taxpayer. It's costing us the taxpayer. The constituency here in San Angelou, yours and mine, all over the city of San Angelo, most of us are middle low income people. We're barely making it, okay? It's a tax, indirect tax, okay? So if we are in these problems, as you are in your homes, you know what your salary is every month. You know what you can spend. You know you can't go get an audio or a Mercedes Benz because you can't afford it, I can't afford it. So you look at the bottom line, or in the middle of the budget, or whatever, to find those funds. So what do you do? You cut back on your spending. Well, as far as I know, it's what I've read so far. We received $2.5 million from Republic, and we're putting it into the auditorium. And we're talking that our infrastructure is falling apart. We need to somehow channel these monies to where we really need it. How many times a year do we utilize the auditorium? Now that being said, $16 million was spent on the renovation of City Hall. What happened to the auditorium? We have to hold people accountable. do. We accomplish projects. We never come back and say, okay, why didn't we have

[1:26:12] leftover over this project? We don't ask those questions. We don't hold people accountable. I know I've said what you said. I know that you're trying your best to do the best job you can possibly be, but we have to open up. This water rate, we need need to take baby steps. Like you all said, Marty, you said it well. In the past eight years, y'all have not gone out from rates. Okay, it's not hardfalls. Nobody else. It's nobody's fault. But then again, we keep making it up overnight. We got to take baby steps. If maybe even when from five years to eight years and do an accomplished deal, what you need to accomplish, that'd be a relief to a lot of us. The middle-of-income people are the ones that are paying for this time, for this feast, okay? Yes, if this was affected in Angelo State, Shannon Middle School Center, or the apartments here in this community, the big industries in San Angelo, this would be filled up, this whole area would be filled up with people, but you know what? know that the little people are picking up the tab because in the long run we're paying we're picking up the cost. Please ladies and gentlemen think about it and maybe look at it one more time. Maybe go seven years or eight years and still accomplish what you want to accomplish. If we're in that battle shape then that two point five million dollars is going to the auditorium should be going to to the water fund or infrastructure. I thank you very much and I sympathize with you with the decisions that y'all are having to make. Thank you very much. God bless then. Didn't we allow four thousand gallons which is about the average where all it goes up to just the monthly there's no additional charges which we are allowing the low users. We're not we're not going

[1:28:13] up on them as we are those who use more with the volume metrics. Yes, there will be a base rate increase. But if you use less than 4,000 gallons, that's all you're going to pay is the base increase. There's not a volume increase on top of that. So we have taken into account those that are using 4,000 gallons and less. We did not go up on them except for the base. Further public comment? Everyone, Guthrie? I was just wondering, I keep seeing on the charts, it's a proposed budget. So what would be the O&M cost if we took out the future toilet and tap project and the red or royal recapture point? I know cost of business went up. But what is that amount increased to myself, like an individual, like we all discussed earlier, cost of doing business increased. But there is nowhere in the charts to indicate that exact figure. We're just throwing in these future projects, which we probably need. Everybody here knows water is a precious commodity. But I'd like to know what the O&M cost is before the projects are added to the average home loan. Thank you. Thank you. Well, that's a really good point. The cost of any future projects are actually not shown in this plan until 2018. One of the reasons that the consultants recommended the first year to be with their original proposal, which was twice as what we're proposing today, was to in their words, write the ship. We have those issues today, whether there's any new projects or not, just to maintain just the financial sufficiency of the utility requires the first two years of increase. So that's the answer to this question. That is the impact to citizens

[1:30:16] just to meet our current needs and I'm trying to think I don't remember when uh two eleven when we did the hickory hickory was about a hundred and twenty million dollar project sure that helped me out here and twenty yeah and it seems if my memory is right help me daniel uh uh michael what did about seven dollars a month that we charged the citizen which was the dead service On the hickory in my right there was I think at least that much It may have been it may have been 11 that we were planning on debt service of approximately 6.9 to $7 million per year for 20 years and then operating costs on top of that there the treatment costs the staffing cost the The utility costs associated with moving that much weight from 60 miles out. So pretty significant The biggest piece of that was the debt service, you're right, but there were also the operating costs, so If my memory is correct and don't hold me to this because it's been too long ago But if I it was about $10 a month that we added to the customer's bills to take care of the $120 million That we spent for hit Creek. So if we're looking at this, we're looking at about $130 million 134, you know over spread out over this five-year period that might give you an idea, but but that's just a, that's just a guess. There were also increases on the usage side that for higher usage levels would have been a much higher increase than that, eight to $10 a year talking about. And I'm talking from memory, but that'll kind of give you an idea maybe, sir. There are one of the differences between what we did that year and what is proposed this year is that this year they are spreading out the needed increases over five years, rather than hitting a big lick all at once. So it is spread out. Further public comment?

[1:32:23] Yes, I'm still Jim Turner. And one of the things that makes the comparison of the Hickory Project to any other future problem, there's two things that need to be looked at. First on the Hickory Project, we were actually able to get a very low interest loan on that because of a special estate program. We may not be able to get that on the next project, so that's going to be an impact. And the amount of money that was put in there by the sales tax helped cover a lot of the debt services, or at least a significant portion of it, because if I remember right, without those two options, the increase would have had to be about $15. Which brings me to the other point on this whole project here, even though the city is trying to do better at the transparency, one of the things that compuses the public and even a lot of people within the government themselves, you can tell, is how the accounting numbers are presented and related to each other. And that's not clear. Different funds are necessary in order to keep the money straight. But because we have all of these different funds different projects and different ways of paying for stuff that isn't clear a lot of times to the people who are trying to make an informed decision outside the public and we need to get a lot better at that especially one we're trying to get the water department it's been an unspoken goal probably needs to be a much more visibly spoken goal ever since some of the long-term people up there have been on City Council, the water department should be paying its own way, it should not be paying the government, the rest of the city government, any money, but at the same time it should be able to take and pay for the cost of maintenance, repairs, new water sources and stuff out of

[1:34:29] the product, it's selling. It shouldn't be subsidized or subsidizing anything else, it should almost be like a standalone and treated like a standalone nonprofit resource that is there for one purpose, and that's the benefit to citizens of St. Angelo. That needs to be stated better, needs to be stated a lot louder, and it needs to be stated all the time. Every time we have a water review twice a year, that needs to be part of that discussion. And it needs to be very clear. The second thing is, the Romans discovered, right after they discovered in their plumbing, that they have to repair the pipes every so often. Nothing could bury, last forever. And across the country, we have infrastructure now in most cities, it's failing because a lot of the infrastructure was put in during, starting as part of the depression, getting out of the depression, and then continued on during the big boom after World War II. When everybody came back home and went into construction jobs, things like that. Most cities have got infrastructure that's at least 75 years old, some of them are much older. And they're just now waking up to the fact that, you know, first of all, often you have to plan to reproduce things. They've got a life cycle, play pipes, steel pipes, even the new PVC pipes don't last forever. And even though a lot of what we're doing is looking for new water sources, the bulk of the expense on the water bill right now is going to be supplying the water and making sure that the weight of supply it is there. If the pipes don't get repaired, and previous councils basically kick this can down the road to the current one,

[1:36:30] If the pipes don't get repaired pretty soon, you're gonna have to take and go pick up your water in five-gallon buckets someplace because the pipes won't be there. Thank you. For the public comment, come on, Harry. Harry Thomas, community volunteer. I hate to follow Jim Turner because he says it better than I will, but I will have to say this. As somebody that's retired and on a fixed income, I don't like to have to pay increase in anything. But the bottom line is is if we don't do something today our children and grandchildren will not have water And I'd rather be paying this today and getting this plan in place a very good plan five-year plan To do what we need to do don't worry about what happened before we can't change that But we got to go forward from here on out the bottom line is is this this has been vetted vetted and vetted and this is a great plan. We need to get on with it. Thank you. Very succinctly stated. Public comment further. Yes sir. Good morning all my name's Rich Drouble is one thing we don't talk about nobody said anything is let's look at efficiency if this were a business they'd be saying well where can I save some money how can I do things better and we've kicked the can down the road we've done things very inefficiently in the past. That's kind of why we're in the problem right now. But nobody talks about reducing the cost of doing business. If this were business they'd be doing that. I don't believe that this is a fixed cost. Everything has variables. Nobody looks at it. I think we should. or the public comment.

[1:38:38] Good morning. Oh, I have some comments on this. Overall, I know the plan is your name, please. Pardon me. I'm sorry. I'm Greg Holt. Anyway, I recognize we need to do something. I think overall the plan looks like it's a reasonable plan. NC, I do question somewhat about the $136 million being built into the rates and nothing's been approved. What I heard a minute ago, I think, said that doesn't really kick in until 2018. My main issue is some fairness issues. I think the reason people have not come to some of these meetings, like last Thursday, last Thursday, had the meeting. Nobody was here. It's a meeting two or three other people. Because this has been promoted as it's going to cost you six dollars a month more. Five years is going to cost you basically 20 dollars a month more. Most people hear that and think so what? It's not a big deal. Me too. Until you realize that this is being based on what's called a typical household or 4,000 gallons of water usage. And that's where you're getting this. It's going to increase six dollars. Well, I've asked a lot of people have much water they use and they don't know. But two, I don't think I know there's a lot of people who pay a lot more or use more water than 4,000 gallons. I'm one of them. I'm a single man and my just residents I'll use $3,000 3,000 gallons, maybe 4,000 to 5,000 gallons a month. Then I have a sprinkler meter than a landscape meter that depends on time of the year but we're

[1:40:38] used quite a bit more. This last my last bill that overall usage on my sprinkler which I did it within the guidelines of you know what we're supposed to do was thirty three gallons and my house three three gallons or thirty three gallons or thirty three thousand I'm sorry yeah I I wouldn't be here if it was that. 33 gallons, and my house was 5,000 gallons. That, my bill was $200.00, so when we talk about it's going to be 50% more in five years, that's $100.00 for me. It's not $20.00. but I recognize that we have to make a change. I mean, I grew up in the San Angel. I remember when we built the pipeline to Spence Lake, we got a Flying Fickle Finger of Fader Ward for that one. Make a pipeline between two dry lakes is how it was framed. We've been through a lot of this and we will continue to. I know this is a good plan, But I think it has some tweaks that need to be made to it. Bill, you can show something up on the screen from y'all's presentations. I've got several things, but like this one, I wish you did. On the residential rate, the volumetric rate, has gone,

[1:42:43] yeah, but now I'm looking for it. You just didn't have to compare this in 2015? Well, I wish it did. The volumetric rate for the citizens or for residents has gone up substantially. In the 2015 rates, or 16 to 39,000 gallons, it's $4.54. Now it's going to be $4.99. That's OK. But then, all of a sudden, we got whacked off And the rate jacked up to $9.13 from anything after that. 40 to 49,000 gallons used to be $6.04. Now it's going to be $9.13, no matter how much we use. When you look at the rates for commercial entities, there's one flat rate. Except we have winter rates and summer rates. not sure why that but anyway I figured my bill if I used the rates the plant rates for industrial my bill would be two dollars cheaper than it is and I didn't get into that high rate I'm not making a lot of sense anyway it seems like rates rates are not fair when you look at the commercial rates and rates that we've had in the past. I think a lot of, like I said a while ago, a lot of people didn't even come to these meetings because they were thinking, well, it's just going up a little bit. But I know that there's a lot of people in college hills, in Bentwood, Southland, that are using as much water as

[1:44:45] I think those rates need to be reviewed and brought down a little bit. It might take, you know, the plan overall is good, but you can modify different rates to make it work out where it's fair. And I don't think it's fair to just a regular citizen to be paying so much more for the water than then an apartment complex or hotel. I know when we're in the got about a minute left. Oh, I'm sorry. Well, anyway, I've got too much here to go over a minute. Anyway, I think those rates need to be looked at and adjusted. I think they're very punitive and unfair to people that are trying to keep their landscape alive and anyway that needs to be looked. I think that's wrong. There was another question about the drought rates. Bill, do the drought rates, are they different than the normal rates? These rates are higher. The drought rates, as we discussed a minute ago, are based on a multiplier applied to the current to the actual rate based on reduced usage during that drought stage to just keep the revenue neutral. I mean this 2016 rate this is the factor that's applied to correct okay but that's not what the 2016 rate shows over here just $2.74 all of these are higher in the 2016 rates based on the

[1:46:53] This is what this slide, which I don't have here, but it's showing the multiplier, the rate factors for each of the drought levels, and it's the multiplier that we apply to the other rate. If you took $230.74 times one, it would be $2.74, not $2.99. So, I don't know if these rates are right or if this is just a mistake. I'd have to have a calculator to figure that out. Okay. Alright. Well, it looks like we've got a different rate when we go into the drought. And if that's correct, a resident, like me, had a 9% rate increase. But non-residential, it's 5%. Landscape meters is 5%. The residents get hit with 9% increase. Then when you go into your multipliers on your drought levels, drought level one, I wish we had these charts. Restant gets hit with a surcharge of 1.20%. Whereas a non-restant pays up 1.05, 5% increase higher in drought level one at maximum usage where a resident is paying 20 percent more. I don't understand that when we go to drought level three maximum usage the residents paying 40% 1.40% that non-residents paying 1.1% why is that that doesn't seem fair I suppose when we get into those drought levels we'll have to look at this because we've looked at And at every time we'd been in drought level. And in Memorial Day of 14, we were just about to go into drought level 3. Right. And most of the citizens in this town are not going to have sympathy for people that use

[1:48:57] 40,000 gallons a month when they're trying to get violent, 4,000. So I think that the ones that use the water or the paper the water, I think that's the perfect system. Well, it is. Okay. I've already given you a minute, three minutes ago. Okay. I took the commercial rates on this bill and figured it versus my household rates and my commercial using commercial rates, my bill would be a little bit cheaper. Well I wish somebody would look at that and see, I mean I think some adjustments can be made and not affect the overall plan that can make it a little bit fair for the residents. I do wish these charts were right because they don't want to be put up there so you can see what I'm talking about. Thank you, sir. OK. Thank you. Further public comment? I hear about me. Yes, sir. I do want to point out that this is not a problem. It's unique to San Angelo, the public meeting that we had last Thursday. I mentioned that the American Society for Civil Engineers had done a study across this country to determine the infrastructure in the different cities. And what they figured is that there was at least a $3 trillion need and replacement of those lines, whether they're water or wastewater. Aside from that, when you look at how much money that costs, you know that a lot of these entities, a lot of these enterprises, water enterprises are actually owned by cities. They further went on to show that when they gave a report card for across the country, what is the report hard for water infrastructure and wastewater infrastructure. I said it was a D. That's one grade away from failing. And that's something that it's not just here. We keep hearing that the can was kicked down the road here in San Angela. Quite frankly, the can's been kicked down the road just brought everywhere across this country of ours. We see it also, even on surface transportation, where we've been over 20 years before there's

[1:50:58] been any type of adjustment for us to really address our needs on transportation. Well, it's the same deal right now. these are tough decisions that have to be made. I agree with Mr. Carter and I said quite frankly that we should be taking baby steps, but that should be done on a year by year basis as we review our fees. And make sure that we're not trying to do this all at once, eight years later. Again, I think that the system we have in place over a five year period really does address kind of those baby steps that need to be made, but they do need to be made. We have a dire need for future water and has been addressed on this plan. Again, across this country, The can has been kicked down the road, I think, because a lot of it had to do with politics. I'm quite happy at this point that this council really is addressing this point. It's a tough tough decision that has to be made, but it's also the right decision moving forward for our community. So again, this is not unique to us. It's something that's throughout this whole country. And it's just that the city of St. Andrew Runner is choosing to do something about it. Any further public comment? Any further comment from the council? I would have one concern though if the, if what Mr. Holt said is correct and that the one user is paying less and by percentage in drought level, I mean, I want our citizens to have the advantage there. So maybe that's something that we can amend later, but certainly the citizen shouldn't be penalized. Well, actually, Bill, he addresses one of our meetings which you address that as well as far as when you start comparing commercial versus the residential. Sure. And the fairness issue that Mr. Holt has talked about, it was a critical part of this study. A rate study like this, or anytime you look at your rates, it has to be based on cost of service. And when you look at what those costs are, the burden of that cost that's placed on the

[1:52:59] utility to deliver water to the different classifications, meaning residential or commercial, then you apply the costs appropriately based on the peaking factors generally that those provide. And let me explain that a little bit. The plant or the infrastructure has to be built to deliver water at the highest rate. But it's not delivering that water most of the time. Residential has a tendency to have a low rate and then peak high with irrigation. That puts a greater cost burden on the utility because you have this infrastructure to provide that. It's not providing that most of the time. Commercial on the other hand generally uses water at a flatter rate. So your infrastructure is built up front to provide that service at that flatter rate and you're collecting that revenue based on that. So, in general, residential has a higher cost. That's why when we look at the rate blocks, there's more rate blocks in the residential class. And those tend as you get to the higher blocks, there's a greater part of the cost burden associated with those higher blocks. And that's what Mr. Holt was talking about when we go from $6 to $9.33 for that last block. And just as kind of as a side note, And I said it earlier and I agree with it, you should not look and compare with other utilities. But Midland went to $45 a thousand at 50,000 gallons. And the reason for that was to show the value of that water at that usage patterns. I'm not in any way suggesting that we do that, but when you compare $9.33 to that, we've got it based on what the actual cost is to provide water at that level to that classification. How does this affect the non-residents,

[1:55:04] those outside of the city who are on systems that we support? The ordinance currently states that anybody outside pays 1.5 times and we've left that in, so they would continue to pay 1.5 times. And to finish your question about the drought rates, Again, the way that was applied, and it was applied to each one of the rate classes and the rate blocks, when we looked at historically, and we had last year to look at, because we had went into drought stage two and almost into drought stage three last year, it allowed us to look at what the reduction in demand was when those drought stages were implemented. Using that reduced demand of those drought stages, we applied a factor to each one of those rate blocks to again be revenue neutral for each one of those blocks. I think it's also important when you're talking about water supply philosophy or theory, whatever you're talking to us about now to understand that I don't know of any city that would put a high industrial rate in their rate structure. You want to encourage industrial development. You want to encourage commercial development because of what it does for your tax rate. And most of us that are paying a commercial rate are also paying a rate at a residence. So it's not, we're the same people essentially. So that's typical in a rate structure is to have slightly lower in those areas. That's correct. It is. They're double paying anyway. are they're paying they're paying more obviously because their usage is higher but they're providing a service jobs etc right but the cost to provide each one of those units is cheaper for that industry than it is for the high-peaking residential. Other public comment last call it has made the most of them we

[1:57:04] accept this rate study and these these rate increases as presented Marty has seconded that and if there is no further comment from the council I'm going to call for the vote. All in favor of accepting this as proposed please say aye. Aye. Opposed may. Put a 6-0 on it please. Let's see number D first public hearing and consideration that ordinance amending the San Angelo code of ordinances by amending section 6-0-3-0-3-1 adoption and amendments the leading section 6-0-3-0-6-3 and adding Article 605, open burning, as well as amending Chapter 10 traffic control section 1004008, fire lanes, Ross Coleman, you're up, sir. Good morning, Ross Coleman on the City Fire Marshal. Today, we wanted to talk to you about adopting the 2015 edition of the fire code. Excuse me, Mayor. Can we have that conversation taken out in the hall? Thank y'all about food talking. Out the hall, please. Go ahead, Ross. Okay. I'll just repeat myself. We wanted to talk to you today about adopting the 2015 edition of the fire code. There are some changes to the fire code and we want to go over some of those with you. Mr. Torres is going to talk to you right after I'm finished about adopting the 2015 of the International Building Code. Before I do that, what I wanted to discuss with you is that these are consensus documents, these fire codes. There's a three-year cycle and right now we're under the 2009 in addition of that fire code. There are two bodies of model codes. There's NFPA, and then there's the International Code Congress. Both of these groups cycle these codes out every three years. And they are done by consensus documents. So they usually work with a group of people to come up with the changes in each document. And those changes are determined on serious bodily injury and or death. So for instance, the size of a window

[1:59:07] is the minimum size that it is because somebody couldn't get through it so they enlarge the size of a window based based on that so this is how these types of things get changed so with that we met we formed some committees we formed a fire code committee there was actually three dates this says that we've met on September 2nd September 23rd I believe we also met on October the 7th prior to this meeting we sent out an email to these groups and we sent them a document document had all the changes that were published by the international fire code. So some of those members included automatic fire protection, the school district, Intertel, SKG, Kinney Frank Architects, PSI power systems, which is Paul Wilkerson, mechanical engineer, CSG Electric, Shannon Hospital, of course the San Angel of Fire Department, COSA engineering, of Fire Marshal's office, Logan construction, the permits and inspections division and some representatives from Sierra construction. So all of these groups had some input and we met for about a couple of hours each time we went over the concerns. Of those changes, most of the issues affect fire alarm installers and sprinkler installers. So there wasn't a lot of things that affected codes as far as building requirements. There was a few, but not a lot. And those changes that were done on the installers were basically clarifications to existing installation standards. So these were things that they were already doing, they were just clarifying the language. Along with that, we wanted to talk to you a bit about some of the things we have in our ordinance. I want to talk about that right now. Now we have a fire lanes by ordinance are required to have a sign in front of them, whereas the fire code did not require the sign. So we have two different things going on,

[2:01:08] and the ordinance, as I understand it, is more stringent. And that's what we're supposed to follow. So if we write a ticket for somebody parked in a fire lane and it doesn't have the sign right now, they can fight that. And we can end up losing the citation. They don't have to pay for the ticket. And so we have that issue. So we're requesting that we not require signs. The other thing with that is that we met with Ryan Ward with traffic and he indicated that the cost of signs to manufacturing installs about $177 a pop, I believe. And most fire lanes require two signs under the ordinance, going each direction, so that would end up being thousands of dollars and it's almost comprehensive to do something like that. So one change we're requiring or requesting is to not require signs of fire delays. There's a new appendix in the fire code. It's appendix M. It's high-rise buildings. This is a retroactive automatic sprinkler requirement. Now, many jurisdictions already have this requirement, and NFPA, which is used by the state of Texas, already requires that all high-rise buildings be equipped with automatic sprinkler protection. We would like to adopt this. We have a few buildings in town that do not have sprinklers in them. And we would like to adopt that, but only enforce it as they occupy those floors. So, if somebody has a seven-story high-rise building and they want to start occupying that building, we'd only request that they sprinkler it by floor as they move into it and occupy that structure. Open burning, we get a lot of calls on weekends, particularly, and after hours for open burning. We ask that we can clarify the language on this. People are burning materials. It's against state law to burn building materials in the first place, but we have people burning materials. We have people doing campfires on the ground, which is not prohibited.

[2:03:08] And we have people trying to burn brush too close to their house. The existing ordinance says you have to be more than 300 feet from a structure. You have to have low line winds. You have to have extinguishment capabilities. you can't have smoke going into a right-of-way and so forth. So really, you can't do that type of burning. We're clarifying the language in there, and they were also trying to add language to allow for the use of conversation pits. Conversation pits are these decorative items that people are putting in their backyards. Right now, the ordinance doesn't really allow that. So we have to look at that in case-by-case basis. It's becoming very popular, and so we want to allow that, but we want to just tell it, make sure it's away from the house, it's in a non-combustible structure and so forth. We also looked at the dangerous buildings ordinance. We wanted to update some of the definitions to allow a difference between those buildings that need to be demolished and those that need to be secured. Right now, it's very standard language and it's just kind of up to the board. So we want to be able to be specific when a building should be demolished and should be secured. We want to change some of the signage requirements to differentiate that so that people know when they see that warning sign up on their home, that that sign's telling them, okay, this needs to be secured, or this really is about to be demolished, because some people are coming to the board or coming to the office, getting this notice, and they only need to secure their home, they don't need to fix something, and they're not facing demolishment, but that doesn't exist right now. And we're also asking for a list of conditions that require abatement, define what requires abatement. For instance, a gigantic hole in your roof. That's something you have to get fixed, and that problem needs to be abated. Add statements on what is public nuisance. We don't really have that in our existing code. That's more on the code enforcement side, but not really in the dangerous buildings. And we haven't clarified the inspectors duties

[2:05:08] regarding those complaints of those buildings. Specifically, if we receive a complaint, we don't have anywhere in the ordinance that an inspector shall go inspect that structure. So that's specifically what we're looking for. and clarify the meaning of the orders issued by the construction board, so there's about I believe four or five or Different orders that they give and they're they're very ambiguous or not very clear We want clarity in this so people really understand what the orders are saying And we want to specify that the inspector has the authority to disconnect utilities 30 days after an order to remove or demolish a structure Once it's issued by the construction board right now. We don't have that And then we also don't have that any violation of that ordinance is something that we can go with with general penalties as opposed to some of the other things that we have in place. That is the gist of what we want to change with the fire code. We have no other issues that we brought up. And so the purpose in us bringing this forward to you is we did not adopt the 2012. The reason why there were no significant changes, there was really no reason for us to make that change. Now we've undergone an ISO PPC consultant for our insurance rates and when that gentleman came in and looked at that one of the things he noted was that we could improve our insurance rates by staying current with the adopted code. So that's what's precipitating us trying to get at a minimum the International Fire Code adopted and the International Building code adopted. I'll have any questions. What you're asking us to do is to give you information to go ahead and clarify these ordinances and bring it back. Well we'd have to come for a second reading. We just want to clarify we've already come up with the language. It's in the background information. We want to clarify that language. We want to basically we're coming here to get a your blessing on

[2:07:09] adopting the code. We'd obviously since it's a hearing have to come for a second around, but we want to adopt this fire code. Al's going to talk shortly about the building code, but we want to adopt the standards so that we can move forward and stay on track with our ISO consultant. The only problem I've got a problem with is that signage. I don't like taking away signs. I think signs are necessary, and if you're going to give someone a ticket for violating something, I think there needs to be a sign that tells them what they're violating. So I do have a problem with that. I don't think we're removing the signage. I think we're just clarifying what it says. Is that correct on fire lanes, okay, I'm sorry So you okay, well we can we can leave that in there wait a minute. We're just guessing We're just because what you're what you're saying is you're not recommending the installation of additional signs when a fire lane is already marked with a red paint stripe in a in a Correct subject or like in a commercial area. I think the red line is sufficient I don't think we should have to force a business to go add additional signs so that someone can So that you can defend writing a ticket for a red line that already exists in front of the movie theater or wherever else We're talking about So there may be a difference of opinion on the basic driving test. That's a you learn that and we're taking drivers education courses I think everyone understands that I think that's pretty quite well. Let's both out I think before you get the citizens to take it the citizens need to have they need to know exactly what they're violating that's that's just my personal opinion when they take a driver's test they know that the red line that says fire lane means fire lane and if you park there you can have your car towed we go back Ross to the on the the fire pits and the backyards and stuff what was that you explain that to me okay you may have seen at home depot or lows

[2:09:09] Wal-Mart, they're coming out with all these new fire pits. Under the existing ordinance, they're doing illegal outdoor burning because they're they're burning something they're not cooking and so we wanted to allow that use but allow it safely. So we want people to be able to use that in a specified container, have the wire mesh cover or whatever it comes with and be done properly. And so we get a lot of call-outs for this type of thing and some people have gone and it made a brick ring in the dirt and started a ground fire. Well that's a different story that can catch some grass on fire and that could spread to the neighbors house and so forth. So we want to allow the conversation, okay, we have a lot of people coming into the office with plans or schematics or things they've downloaded online saying you know I want to do this but you know I've I've heard I'm going to get a ticket for it. So technically, under our existing ordinance, yeah, they could, but that's not what we want to go. We just want people to use these items safely. So that's what it's about. But back to the question that the mayor had originally, we're not looking at an ordinance right now. We're not looking at specific changes. We're looking at changes to the- We're looking at concepts. We're not looking at actual verbiage. We are. We are looking at- We are. Okay, what was your question though, is this the first reading? If we're going to change verbiage, I'd like to see the verbiage that what we have and what we're changing to instead of just I could not pull up my background. Everything was, I couldn't get it over 50%. I couldn't even see it. Yeah, I was provided in the background. But I think if you're going to change verbiage, you need to put the verbiage that you're changing. This is what it said. This is what we're going to. I think it needs to be part of the

[2:11:09] presentation. That's that's what we provided in the background information. It's not provided here. It's not provided to people watching on television. All right. And those are our citizens that's going to have to abide by these laws. And I think that the citizens are not just a seven of us need to know what the verbiage is. They need to know what the changes are. That's my personal thing. Okay, well, I can I can come back and bring all that back. So that's what I thought you were doing. You were asking for our permission to go ahead and bring to write this verbiage and to bring this verbiage back into presenting to us as an ordinance so that we could approve it. But I've already done it. Yeah, we've already done it. I can bring it back at a subsequent meeting. I'm not going to vote to approve anything until I see what the verbiage is. Okay, personally. There are time crunch on this for our ISO rating. We were trying to, we tried to do this back in November, bring it to council and we did not just do to other things that were going on. Chief, we might be able to answer that question better myself trying to get it done before the actual grading took place but that did not occur the grading is still out right now I think we're probably okay because it is being presented before council so I don't think if they do look at it and say do you have this adopted well it is been presented before council will be adopted totally in the near future so I think we're probably okay in that aspect If there's anything and what's been presented if it's excluded would it hurt our ISO rating? Eviation from the code and that's all when they graded they look at that It can How much I don't know you got a certain section of the points that are tied to fire code? Points, so I couldn't tell you how much it would be but yes if you get too good from that do we do other things that may offset that a little bit? Yes, but you can lose

[2:13:13] points from, do y'all talk about egress from subdivisions or secondary access? I did not talk to him about that. In front of the microphone, you know I'm gonna ask you this. Can it affect it? Yeah, sure. It can affect it. If we go back to an action that we took about a year and a half ago, I asked you if that, those kinds of changes in subdivision ordinance or that's, I guess, suggested in the fire code, how does that impact the ISO rating? And I have a negative effect, sure. How much? I do not know. Ross, why did the group not look at that? And by the decision that y'all had already made. So we figured that that was going to be a standing. Ending a decision. So. Was that was that was that not discussed at all by the group? It was discussed in the third meeting because the language that was published after the meeting a year and a half ago did not adequately portray what y'all had decided. The numbers were ambiguous and it looked like a It looked like a merger of an old document and the new document, so it wasn't readable, so we simply were looking to clarify the ranges, if you remember there were ranges on the number of homes, and so we actually put those ranges in there for this adoption, and that's all we did with that, but yeah, we did discuss it. So is that reflected in, I have the ordinance opened up now, the red line, is that discussed in this? No. the clarification on the ranges is okay but that you didn't have that in your presentation I did not okay you know I'll be in what section that is here you

[2:15:13] haven't seen any of the red lines he's not the only one that hasn't seen him I was not able to open a step prior to and I'm just now reading it I haven't seen it either so yeah we need a not your fault it's all right it's not yours it's appendix D it's D one oh seven point one often is the ISO rating how often is that done it's unusually on request of the jurisdiction at a minimum of ten years maximum 15 according to them or if I think we can get a better rating I can call for a grading which is what I did so you did that after this This is the first time after we did that a year and a half ago then. Yes, because of some of the other things that were put in place that we've been working on for several years since the last grading, like the 100-foot aerial and several things, I figure we can bump up at least one grading. Okay. I don't think we're talking about an additional 10 slides. They've even that many to delineate the changes. I can't come back and redo this. I'd rather know exactly what we're doing before. Well, I'm not going to vote on it until I see what we're doing. I understand. And just because you've given it to us, does not mean that the 100,000 citizens of the city have seen it. Personal opinion. Well, they don't always open up every red line, but certainly we need to be able to see it too. And just like the issue with the separate egress. I didn't. I understand you're clarifying it. I'd still like to talk about it so that the public understands. We can come back. The negative impact of that because I don't think we fully understood that. We know that we want to help developers. We know that we want to encourage development, but there is a downside and just like the woman earlier said, I didn't know when I was buying. I think people need to understand the impacts of some of these decisions because it affects

[2:17:16] the insurance that they pay every day. When I heard you talking about the various people that you worked with, I apologize, I did not hear you mentioned working with the home builders or I just I didn't hear it I'm hoping that you did and they were a lot of those people in those organizations like Sierra Vista construction their home builders SKG engineering that I heard in her inner tell all those all those all those groups are in the home builders association well I know but they those individuals have a a different take or view or line, I just want to make sure that an actual builder or spokesperson from the Home Builders Association that constructs the building, not just installs equipment in one way or engineers the project in another way. I wanted to make sure there was an actual builder in that group. Syravistic construction, was there. Syravistic construction, Danny Aguero. Yes. Thank you. I'm our president of the Home Builders Association. That's right. So this and the next item are tied together, so if you table this one, you'll necessarily need to table the next one as well. I'd like to have more information. We could do that. I don't think we've got enough to vote on. Personally, I don't have enough to vote on. It's just time to read it all, Ross. Okay, and he's probably got the same setup that I did. Correct. We did our presentations together, so I also don't have the specific language in the slides. I've got more problems with you adopt in this 215 code than with him because I've heard some bad bad things about that so I was going to even grill you worse than him. So always two size to the story. I was to. I don't like that 215 code. I don't think it's good. So how would you clarify a little bit on what you discussed with the Home

[2:19:16] Village Association? Well and to be clear I'm not I was going to ask you after the meeting since you said that that I didn't want to mention here. We are only looking at the 2015 International Building Code. In the meetings that I've had, I've had very little resistance to the 2015 Building Code, where I have had a lot of questions and a lot of resistances, the 2015 Residential Code and the 2015 Energy Code. Yeah, that's one. But those are not ones that we're looking at today. We decided to push those off because we're getting a lot of discussion on those. So we're going to have more meetings. I told everybody I want to make sure everybody has plenty of time to look at all the issues and get their input in. So if I just wanted him to point out that from his standpoint, they're not looking at that whole thing, it's just a piece. And the piece that they're looking at, there is not a problem, as I've seen from the home builders, such as in those areas where there are problems, he's not proposing to bring that forward. You don't have the red lines neither. I'd rather have all the information we need before. we vote on something instead of voting in the dark. Personally, I don't know what the rest of your council thinks about it. I agree. Brian. And I just want to make an additional clarification that everyone has access to this background. It's not just the council. It is available on our website in multiple formats so that everyone in our citizenry has access to everything. It's completely a transparent process available on our website. I think our meetings need to be transparent as well though, personal opinion. I'd like to move this that didn't get all the information we need and let's look at it again would be my would be my suggestion if I can get a consensus right then Marty yes I'm happy to bring you back that would be both items D and E okay let's go then the F consider adopting a resolution authorizing San Angelo police department

[2:21:18] apply for the body worn camera program grant with a 25% match estimated to be $47,500 and designated the city manager as the authorized official. Chief, you are on, sir. We just want approval to apply for the grant so that we can try to get some body worn cameras. The city has to put a match up to it. You need your approval and your willingness to put that match. Motion to approve. Do I have a second? I second. Do I have a second? And I think it's time. I mean being forced to promise. Just a question, so the 25% match comes from where, is that in your existing budget? No. So that's in addition to your existing budget. Okay. Are the questions from council? Public comment? Motion has been made that we accept the 25% match for the Baltimore cameras. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. All right, we have pool G, H, consideration of authorizing staff to proceed with designing and requesting bids for the construction of new improvements to the Texas bank sports complex to include a new restroom, concession building, small pavilion, and other enhancements needed, utilizing existing half-cent sales tax funds allocated from sports and athletic some of these. Carl White, you are own sir. Carl White's not here. Where Carl White is. Gonna move on to another one and wait on him. Let's go to the next one then. Let's put that, let's go to I. This is uh, consider adopting a resolution and I'd like to do these one, two and three because I'm far two of them, I'm against one. So I'd rather do them one,

[2:23:18] two and three and take the votes. Number one, accepting the comprehensive financial plan and and in debatable funding from the City of San Angelo. City of San Angelo Development Corporation, the San Angelo Performing Arts Coalition, San Angelo Area Foundation, Rick. Well, I bring before you today an item that I think all of you have been waiting for for a while who are going to talk about the Auditorium Project and there's several items here today and we have I and J, both are sort of linked together, but we'll start with I and we start off with, we have the slides up here now, on the sports complex. We're gonna start off with the financial plan, and so what we wanted to do is go over with you that plan and how that all works. You'll see in your background information you should have all of the associated resolutions, the contract with Lee Lewis and everything I think tied into these items. So first we're gonna go over that plan. So I wanna go over with you, because we're gonna be talking about awarding the contract for this project. So I wanted to go over the revenues and the expenditures anticipated and show you exactly where we are financially. You'll also notice that in your background information, there was a resolution from SAPAC adopting these financials as they agree with where we are financially, both from the city standpoint and they agree with those. So we'll start off with the revenues you see, we have the original proceeds for the auditorium project which is you recall part of that work associated with plumbing, air conditioning, those kind of things. Some of that work was done during our city hall project because that was the most efficient time to do it. So these are all the proceeds. We have those original proceeds. We have some insurance money. We had the naming rights dollars that came in. We had the pledge from SAPAC. We have a security

[2:25:18] pledge from San Angelo area foundation for the million dollars. We have additional donations that have been received from SAPAC. We have the funds that Council allocated from the Civic Events Fund, from the Landfill Fund. We have COSEDC dollars that are associated with the construction of the annex, the rear portion of the building. And then we had an additional grant that came in from the Diane Graves ON Foundation, which gives us a total dollars that you'll see associated with the project of $14,419,000, 501. I think I watched how I said that. So then we go on to expenses. So you'll see that we have spent $1.8 of the original dollars on the work that has been done. We have spent some of the insurance proceeds. We have expenditures associated with the staffing with David's oversight of the project. SAPAC, as you recall in our contract, We actually required them to do the million dollar endowment, or we required them to have some operating dollars on hand. I think the contract actually requires 250,000 operating, so this calculates for 100, which is more than what our contract even requires. Killis' design and architectural fees and engineering, those type of things. The lead Lewis base bid of 10 million, over 10 million, that includes the base bid. So you'll see later, or you saw in your background information, the other things that aren't part of this base bid. We did some prior work as well as far as asbestos testing and removal and those type of things. We have built in a owner city contingency into the project. In addition to that, there's a contingency built in to Lee Lewis' bid, so I think there's about a half a million dollars contingency between the two in this project.

[2:27:22] And then the one thing that we did have to do now that is not part of the base bid is the actual seating. So as you recall, we're taking out reusing the ends, making those seats look historic, but it was cheaper for us to do that outside of the contract. So that's why the seating is listed as another item. it's an essential. We have to have seeds, or it's not going to function. So that gives us, you see the total there of 14.4 million, which leaves us just shy $23,000 of meeting the target for this. So basically that 23,000 at this point would come out of those contingency dollars. So here are the list of other things. So I want to point out that while this financial gets us to where we need to be to award the bid. It does not mean our fund raising is over. So say-pack is committed to doing that. You'll see that in the verbiage in your background information because there's other things that that need to be done. This is a list of basically those things and I would point out that there's there's a few of these alternates that we may not even recommend doing. So there are ones that we think we can save dollars on but these are the ones that were bid plus the items that are needed for the facility such as the the orchestra shell and lift those kind of things and and then actual finish out of the interior of the annex that will be constructed it'll have walls but those will be minimal on the interior so say PAX goal is to raise an additional 1.4 million dollars to finish out this and they I believe have a lot of good leads in that regard. I think some of you are in the meeting when we discuss that and so I think we'll see additional funds coming in toward that project. So as those come in then we will come back to council as we get additional dollars to see what

[2:29:22] additional work we want to award with this project. What's the upgrade on the roof that doesn't seem like I don't. That actually was going and David may be here, but it was really going from a different, like we did on City Hall, we put on a Duralast type roof, PVC type roof, and one was an 80 versus a 60. It was like that rolled roof, the last American company. And so the upgrade, that was one of those things that we feel the one that we're putting on is very, very, very good. This would be an additional, it may be overkill, so it may be something, that may be actually one that we choose not to take. So we'll go on to the recommended. Did any of you have any questions about the financials before I move on? So basically, staff recommends approval of the resolution. All of that in there, there are several components that will go over. It includes a financial plan. It also includes one of the components that we're proposing to do. say PAC is going to turn in for us. Once this is all approved, is we're going to apply for the historic tax credits. That's something I've mentioned to y'all, but with that tax credit, we really need to have a 50-year rental agreement. So our current one has a 20-10-10. We're changing that to a 30-10-10 is what we're proposing. So it's just altering that slightly to give us those years that we need to try to obtain that tax credit. If we do, we anticipate the tax credit will benefit this project probably anywhere from a million to a little more than that. So a substantial, but the way that works is it actually channels through SAPAC. So this also mends those two leases,

[2:31:24] one with the actual operating the auditorium space and then the office space. So we would make those coincide with each other. So that is the first item, and I'm here to answer any questions, and as the mayor said, that is broken down into three parts under item I and I'll answer any questions. Questions? Council? We will. So starting. I think it's a good thing. We need to move on with this. That auditorium is important. We need to get that thing open. We'll point out, just for information's sake, that once the contract is awarded when get on that. The anticipated construction time is about 13 months after we issue a notice to proceed. Do you define your description of land-filled money? I'm going to let Tina do that. Those are the items that count we brought back before y'all probably a couple of months ago. I mean, I know what it is, but. In mayor one, she's coming up here. I'm abstaining from this vote. question about the landfill money I'm sorry I didn't I'm sorry what was your question about the landfill money define landfill money oh okay so that's the the extra money the one time upfront payment that was received due to the Republic contract of three point six million dollars we brought that to council we gave one point two five million dollars for the auditorium project one point eight million dollars for the waterfront and the rest stayed in there Yeah the question I'll entertain a motion motion to approve is presented okay this is on item one I do have a motion to approve as presented Marty is abstaining from vote so it will be five of us to make the decision do I have any

[2:33:24] public comment on this item before we vote I will call for the vote all in favor say aye aye opposed nay but if I vote on that one number two you've already touched on it's a meaning of proving an amendment to the contract to in the city of San Angelo and the San Angelo Performing Arts Coalition say-pack extended the term to a 30-year contract with two tenure options to renew and this has to do with the lease and the it actually has to do with just the auditorium portion and number three will have to do with the lease. Okay anybody any comments on number two? Motion to approve this present. Do I have a motion from Elizabeth? I do have a second from Charlotte. Are you abstaining on this on his well Marty? Yes, public comment on this item, all in favor, please say aye, aye. Opposed nay, put a 5-0 on that one. The third one is proving the amendment to the office lease agreement between the City of San Angelo and San Angelo Symphony Society, Incorporated, extending the term to a 30-year contract and two 10-year options to renew, and this is the one I have a problem with. I feel that the city hall is better suited for city business instead of safe pack. I will vote against this one, but I will entertain a motion to get this from starting. Just to comment, I too believe that the office space at City Hall is prime, realty space. But I do recognize the say-pack in their offering and to run things in the auditorium, the symphony, which is for the public, for the people, the performing arts, for the people. It's easier to do so with the office right there. It's easier to coordinate various events that the performing arts does in the city

[2:35:27] that affected the auditorium or what's going to be right across the street in their performance facilities that's being constructed at this time. It paybacks for it to the people in involvement and programs that it would bring in that they have a better feel for. That's their expertise in doing and it's not us as a city but being right there at the facility is a better sale, a promotional, in my opinion, therefore I'm going to make motion to approve as presented on item three. Is this with the say pack or the symphony itself? With say pack, as I recall, the point of clarification would be that they already have an existing agreement for a 2010-10. So this is just making this one consistent. So even for somebody who didn't improve this one, they still have their existing one. So this is just making the two that, one, you just approved and this one run cohere. Well, I'll second Charlotte's motion and say that I think that when we looked at the consultants report and decided that we had the gem that needed to remain the center of our cultural activities in the city, that to have an office space that could help manage and promote that and be a point for ticket sales, et cetera, was a good thing. I also think it's a shame that we don't have any city staff in the lobby and so it's actually kind of helpful to the public to have someone that's available other than I suppose that's actually accessible to someone when they enter the building. So I think it's a good thing and I think that they've been a good partner and that we need to continue that. or the comments from council public comment most of them has been made and seconded that we extend the contract from 2010 and 10 to 30 10 and 10 which is a

[2:37:31] difference of 10 years 40 to 50 all in favor please say aye aye opposed may nay put a forward one on that one that got you bud got it now we got to do you want to go to the next one yes okay consideration of approving amendment number one to the construction manager at RISC CMAR contract with Lee Lewis Construction Incorporated for the Auditorium renovation expansion project in the amount of $10,369,494 in authorizing the mayor to execute sediment to the contract. OK, so this is the actual award with Lee Lewis. As you know, a while back, we selected Lee Lewis as our construction manager. So they have been working closely with us. And this item would actually allow us to execute that contract, the mayor to sign it, us to then get all of the necessary documents and then issue a notice to proceed. So as we pointed out in the item before, this is for the base bid, as we are getting additional dollars for additional items associated with the project and we'll bring that back to you as we go through that. This is just a quick overview as you see the auditorium project, the graphics, we've already talked about the financials associated with that and our partners, related expenses, and once again the base project has a guaranteed maximum price that is fully funded. So our construction manager is Lee Lewis, this would be the actual, actually called contract amendment number one, and there's your guaranteed maximum price for the base bid of 10 million $369,494. Can you remind us the difference in a typical bid and the use of a construction manager at risk? The typical bid, you know, we get in and things could fluctuate. The real great advantage here of a construction manager is we have a guaranteed price.

[2:39:32] We have guaranteed not to exceed price. So now if we go in and say, okay, we want something totally different done that wasn't in the design, then yes, we're responsible for that, and that would be a change order. But they build in that price, so if there are undiscovered things that they just miss bid, I mean, if there's, I shouldn't say undiscovered, if they find that something wasn't given to them, then that's our problem. But if there are things that they forgot or missed in their bid, that's not our problem. So they've given us that maximum not to exceed price. we lock in that price and there's much less exposure to the city as far as the actual construction goes you'll see here a list of one again once again some of those alternatives alternates that were listed some of these certainly need to happen others like those are ones that we may choose not to take but we'll bring those back to you as we go along other expenses that we still need to raise for or of course the lift and the shell and so forth. So I want the public to know that we're not through fund raising. So don't think just because we're awarding the base bit, we're done. CIPAC is still really searching for those contributors to allow us to really finish off the project and make it totally a top-notch facility. And with that said, I think staff recommends approval and we're ready to move forward. make a motion to approve. You have a motion to approve as presented if you have a second. Do I have any further council discussion? I'd like to say that I'm Matt Lewis and others that have been working diligently to fundraise. I think that's very important. I think as we look at all of the needs of the city in the future, we're going to have to kind of buckle down and work on some kind of basic services. And I think the it's great that

[2:41:34] the private sector can help us in the things that are sort of above and beyond and those kind of specific or discretionary wants and desire. So I appreciate your efforts and those that you've been working with. I just want to reiterate that if we hadn't had the partnerships we had with Unity, this project would not be happening at this level. It is just incredible. So it's been a joy to work with them. And we have seen partnerships. It has been great. that goes back to what I had said about the people with the expertise to do this I mean they have got the expertise to raise funds that we couldn't even begin to accomplish and the entire city benefits from this we do need about 1.4 million more Mr. this anybody come forward step forward we will give one point four three 23 Public comment on this item before we vote Marty you still would be a steamy. Yes, okay on favor. Please say aye aye any opposed nay put a 501 that one Thank you. Thank you, sir Okay, I guess we're back to Carl consideration authorizing staff seed designing and requesting bid construction to new improvements takes its moving sports complex include new restroom concession Small, pavilion, other enhancements you're allowing you to assist in health and sales tax, alligator for sports and athletic facilities, you are on, sir. Yes, sir. We're seeking counsel's authorization to proceed with some improvements, very needed improvements at the Texas Bank of Sports Complex. We've heard since the facility has been open since 2009, we've hosted several tournaments, we've had lots of season played during the year and one of the most consistent things we've heard is that we need additional restrooms concessions at the facility. So that's the main thing we're trying to tackle with this project is to add the restrooms and the concessions, mainly the restrooms. This will help us better compete for tournaments, additional tournaments to come to the city

[2:43:34] and will better help serve the folks who come to visit the facility and better protect them. These improvements I'll show you here include the new restroom concession building here quad two a small pavilion here at by the playground and then safety netting at each of the quads at least quads one through three and then also quad four that's safe netting over those over the stands off keep the foul balls off what we're looking at doing is is it right over the backstops I'm surprised I'm surprised somebody's not been hurt that is wonderful we need to get that done we need to do it. So that includes those improvements. And we took this item to the Parks Recreation Advisory Board actually twice. They approved moving forward with the restroom concession building and a pavilion. Good thing is funding is available now. Originally that was going to be the funds were going to be released later but we have those funds now because it's formed very well. So the funds are available. Of course what we're seeking is authorization to to proceed, we'll design the improvements and then bring them back and then bid them out and then bring them back to council for consideration. I move to approve your request to proceed and to throw in here that from the very beginning of the sports complex, this was always in mind that this would have to be done at a second base once the facility had a proven track record, had the opportunity to go out before the weather return code and walk the facility. I think we need to rent some golf carts out there so I can drive the facility. That's a lot of land, but I commend the staff for the upkeep and the management of the facility. It's in beautiful condition, beautiful shape. It still looks brand new even though it was in 2009. And it's to be as well used as it is

[2:45:36] and I'll make motion to proceed. Okay, take it Rodney. Yeah, this is, this is a, this is a jewel in St. Angelo's crown right here, this sports complex. Probably one of the few things that tries to make, maybe even make a little money if we could get it up and run it like we want it. Oh, community, community wide, it does make money. Oh, yeah, absolutely, it's wonderful, yeah. All right, do it up. That way it's a, I, I got a motion to it. I'm not going to say anything. I think this is money well spent. Any further council comment on this? No, sir. I'm doing like that. Public comment on this item. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Put a 6-0 on it. Thank you, car. Thank you. Yeah. I believe we through, aren't we? Everyone more. One more. One more to go, man. Where? That's OK. That's OK. OK, y'all. First part of the carrying introduction order that's amending the 215-216 budget for capital projects, incomplete projects, new projects and grants. Miss Chigwidden, you are on, ma'am. Thank you. I will go through these just the summary information on the additional information in your packet. The budget amendment, the first item there is our annual carryover of prior year's allocations. There's $5.5 million in unearned revenue that we need to carry over from last year's budget and additional 19.7 million in capital projects and complete projects. The next item is for the council pay increase. It's prorated for fiscal year 16 as approved by the voters on November 3rd. So that amount will come from general fund balance. The next item there is a health grant for those biological grade suits. The next item is an additional health grant for a defibrillator and a part-time employee, a part-time temporary employee. The next item there is related to concrete pavilion rentals and going right back into improvements to that facility revenue and expense so neutral to the water fund.

[2:47:36] The next item is the convention and visitors bureau as approved by the council last month will October 20th to increase by $70,000. The next item there for you is fair amount cemetery equipment. That's for a new mower there. It's neutral to you here but it's moving between funds. So it still had to come to the council for consideration. a $13,950 piece of equipment. The auditorium renovation, as discussed earlier, this is the council approved item from September 1st for $1.25 million from the civic events hotel occupancy tax surplus revenue and the other half $1.25 million from the solid waste as we've discussed earlier today. The next item there is related to the land exchange with Angelo State University and Fair amount cemetery not for $63,896. The next item there is development corporation sales tax. That's just true enough that development corporation adopted their budget early in the year and then we finalized sales tax projections for general fund late in the budget cycle and so we're just true enough to be consistent throughout the organization. And then the last item before you is development corporation, a full-time position to be funded with the type B sales tax, including benefits at $71,500, that is an increase to our full-time equivalence as well. For total amendments, total expenses of $23,675,633. Back up to the fund balance figure of the 19 million, 19 million, 669, it's 66. It's multiple times. It's very over for prior year allocation. So you're telling me that all that money is allocated to a project that's out there that has to be. Multiple projects, yes ma'am. And they're listed, you know, line by line. The, this is total across all funds, including capital funds. So you'll see the bulk of that 19.6 million is multiple million dollars in wastewater capital,

[2:49:39] water capital in general fund capital, that those multi-million dollar projects add up very quickly to make up the majority of that 19.6 million dollars. Are we adding another $70,000 position to our development corporation? The base salary, I think, is around $50,000 with benefits with this. We're adding another person? Yes, sir. A long way since we approved this, working with a board that got nothing. And now we have how many paid positions in the development corporation? So bring it to four total. We do know that in that particular function and what they do, I tried to parallel it with being a banker and a banking function when you're dealing with the businesses, the amount of paperwork that is involved and the expertise that is needed to have a good audit and all of our VEX lined up and in a row the way it should be, it takes a detailed person and experienced in that kind of work, in my opinion, to do that job, to do several phases of the job, whether it's just answering the phone. Yeah, I believe Roland had that discussion with his board as they discussed and worked up their budget in this last budget season. And so my understanding is they're fully informed in support of that proposal. My concern is this, when we approve this, when the voters finally approved this half since sales tax, there was no paid positions. It was all board operated. It was, there was no money at all. And then we added one, and then we added two, and then we added three. Now we've added four, and now we've got a budget

[2:51:39] probably a close to $350,000 each year for employees. That's what worries me. Maris, very difficult when you start looking at positions like development corporation to get true professionals in those positions and know what they're doing to try to really do what they can to benefit this community when it comes to economic development. It is not, I mean, I can't think of too many cities that have a development corporation really don't have any paid employees, especially for the size of the city of San Angelo. I know Roland could come up here and speak to the development corporation full-time position when it exactly didn't tell. Is this not something that we just drummed, that I'll guarantee you to the citizens right now. There's not just something that was drummed up, it's something that's absolutely necessity. But again, it is a service that is provided to the benefit of this community. And even though initially maybe it started off without a paid position, it's, I think, it's unrealistic to think that we can continue doing that and have a non-paid position, or pumping positions in that in that corporation. And the work is currently being done by city staff. And that takes away from other functions, whether it's the audit position, the finance position, vetting, the vetting of the various requests and stuff that comes in is currently being done by city staff. And that is enormous. It is a very from having offices across the state and doing work in quite a few cities. It's a very competitive world and we do need professionals to compete in that world if we're going to get the best bang for our butt or creating jobs. I would ask for a motion to approve all of the budget amendments except the 71-5 so I I could vote for it and then come back with the 71 five as a additional so I can vote against it. Well, I'm asking a question, Mr. Mayor.

[2:53:41] Isn't that why we have a board the development corporation and it's gone to their board and they have approved it for this budget amendment. I am responsible to the citizens of the city of San Angelo. I'm not responsible to the DC board to approve this. Yeah. I have a question. May I ask Morgan a question, please? or Rowland just Lucy and I are wondering what tell me exactly what the function of this position is I'll have to do it for now and for the job description the job title would be economic development specialist okay that's pretty vague can you tell us Rowland what you what you want to task this person with? Sure. The economic development position will be a catch all. We want them to do recruitment to assist the Chamber with recruitment. We want them to assist in the business retention and expansion responsibilities. We want them to be part of the entrepreneurial development of the small business development, business development incubator. And then we also have talked internally about sharing this employee to help fulfill some of the duties of the tier's responsibilities as well. So that, in essence, is sort of a four prong approach that we're taking with this position. Roland, do you feel like things are falling through the cracks as far as if you don't have this position, other issues and you mentioned as far as how it'll be used. Without that position, I mean, as far as the level of service is that decreased because we can't really properly handle those areas the way we should. I can tell you right now that the activity is increasing and as I told the board and as I will attest to you that as long as we continue to do our job,

[2:55:43] that activity is going to increase. Your, the ability to pay for this position is going to be shown in increasing the tax base, increasing the sales tax and creation of jobs. And I believe that we're fulfilling that. I mean, you're seeing some of those contracts coming to you now. I think I also want to point out that, I mean, there's been a lot of history, as you talked about, the business incubator, for example, at one point, had two employees and two part time employees to help facilitate the entrepreneurial development that no longer exist. At one point, we had two other employees in the economic development organization. Y'all combined responsibilities with community development, and then that went away. And for about a year and a half, you got two people that were trying to fulfill those responsibilities. And they were overwhelmed, and I can tell you right now that we can feel the overwhelming of that activity. My intention is that we're going to continue to solidify more agreements, the creation of jobs, and increasing the tax base. So I believe we need that personnel. I'd rather pay for it out of this fund where it's going to work than have the general fund supported in other ways that aren't as transparent. on. I'm very happy to support this. If I need to amend the emotion, I'll make my motion to approve the budget amendment with the exception of the last item development corporation full time position so that we may vote on it separately. Is it a second to that? I don't think I don't think I don't think I think that's the first motion. That's the first motion I made it in my mind. Will someone second her motion? I'll second. Do I have a motion to accept the budget amendments?

[2:57:43] Were you through, Morgan? Yes, sir, just that it is a public comment as well. We'll call for that. Do I have a motion to accept it with the exception of the $71,500 development cooperation full-time position? And it has been seconded. Is there any further public comment on this before we vote? From the Council? Do I have public comment on this before we vote? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, may. Put a 6-0 on it. Now I'll make the motion that we approve the budget amendment to the development corporation's full-time position of the 71-5 person, additional person. Okay. So the motion, I do have a second. Do I have further council discussion? Do I have public comment? Call for the vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, may. So put a 5-1 on that one, please. And that all the hand, thank you. Thank you, Dan. It is, what time is it? 1230. 1230. Closed session, executive session under the division of government code title five open government ethics subtitle A, open government chapter 5-5-1, open meetings, sub-chapter D, exceptions to requirements that meetings be open under the following sections. A, section 5-5-1-0-7-1-1-8, consult with attorney when the governmental body seeks the advice of its attorney about pending or contemplating litigation regarding number one, 2013 seal coding contract. Number two, Marta Farshfield Energy Systems, LLC, ET, AL, number three, timber constructions incorporated. Section 551, 072 to deliberate the purchase exchange lease or value of real property. Number one, located in 1923 North Chadburn Street, and number two related to drainage is the Avenue P project, which I think we up to pool since Johnny is not here. It is in his area. So with that, I will take us into executive that's probably 1231. It shouldn't be more than 30 minutes, Mayor. Probably we are now up to number nine, which is follow up in administrative issues, consideration of and possible action

[2:59:43] on matters discussed in executive closed session, if needed, there are none. Nothing needs to be discussed. Consideration of approving board nomination, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Donald Barnford, SMD5 to a second term ending December 2017. May I have a motion? Move to approve as presented. Okay. Second, I do have a motion and a second. Do I have council discussion? Public comment? None. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Nay, put a 6-0 on it. Announcements, consideration, the future agenda items. I'll start with you. Let's find a step. On December 8th, Monday. Is that the right date? Ready? 7th. 7th. 7th, Monday night, I have a neighborhood chat at MHMR, and I think Lucy's going to join me. We're going to invite both districts to come, and we have a facilitator, and we're going to do something special for the holiday, or in the spirit of the holiday season. So everyone's invited to come, and that's at 6 p.m. again on Monday at MHMR. Do you have anything, ma'am? No, sir, I did not. Ms. Charlotte, do you have anything? I would like someone in finance, would be Michael or Tina, make some time to meet with me between now and January 30th, to discuss graph to charge in our monthly reports, to give us a comparison. example was gasoline you know our budget for gasoline and are we doing better on all these supposedly better economic vehicles and being conservative in that area how we're comparing to last year what we spent in those type of expenditures and anyway some time to visit and do that and then to go over

[3:01:45] with me again about fun balances at the end of the year how it is rolled or not rolled over and any fun balances that are not committed funds like to sit down and briefing again on that if you will please that's it I have nothing. I have nothing. I'll end the motion to adjourn. All in favor say aye. This meeting is over.

Transcribed 2026-07-27 with faster-whisper (base.en) · source: youtube.com/watch?v=YIg7XtrLIv8