City Council LIVE stream 8-4-26

[0:00:00] Chaplain and prayer. Um Gary and Marcela Jenkins. Let's start this off right please. >> Good morning everyone. >> Let's pray. Dear wise and loving father, first let me thank you for your many and abundant blessings. Thank you for the life itself, for the measures of health we need to fulfill our callings, for substance and for friendship. Thank you for the ability to be involved in a useful work and for the honor of bearing appropriate responsibilities. Thank you as well for the freedom to embrace you. Thank you for the loving us even so from your boundless and gracious nature. In the scriptures you have said that citizens ought to obey the governing authorities since you have established those very authorities to promote peace and order and justice. Therefore, if I pray for our mayor, Mayor Tom Thompson, and the various levels of city officials in particular, for this assembly of council, and for our first responders, I'm asking you that you graciously grant them wisdom to govern among the conflicting interest and issues of our times. A sense of the welfare and true needs of our people. A keen thirst for justice and righteousness. Confidence in what is good and fitting. The ability to work together in harmony even when there is honest disagreements. Personal peace in their lives and joy in their task. I pray for the agenda set before them today. Please give an assurance of what would please you and

[0:02:04] what would benefit those who live and work in and around the beloved city of St. Angelo. It is in your precious blessed name I pray. Amen. >> Amen. >> Pledge after me please to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Honor the Texas flag. I pledge algiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one indivisible. >> Thank you. Okay. With no proclamations or pledges this morning, we'll move straight into public comment. Members of the public may raise issues or concerns not listed on the regular agenda. During this time to participate, please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in order they signed in. When speaking, citizens must speak from the podium. Address all comments to the disas. Begin by stating your name and address or single member district number and limit your remarks to three minutes or less. Heather, let's start public comment, please. >> Judy Fulgrim. >> Hello. I'll start by um saying my name, Judy Buljam. I always have to um correct the pronunciation of my name. Um, I am a resident of district 5 and um, I wanted to come today to talk about the issues of trust in the city council.

[0:04:11] And I'm I'm concerned about the lack of trust that I hear other people talking about. And although this is my first time speaking, it won't be my last. And um I I spent my career as a teacher. And believe it or not, and you'll probably believe this, the hardest part of being a teacher was handling parent anxiety. And especially for me because I was a kindergarten teacher and I knew I knew that I had to establish an in-person face-to-face contact with those parents of the children that I was charged with. [clears throat] And especially today in this age of misinformation over information in [laughter] challenges in communicating I think face to face is the way we I need to go and that's why I'm here meeting you face to face because I want you to recognize my name when it starts appearing in emails and I want you to trust me that I am putting my trust in you to responsibly lead the city and also remind you that there are a lot of emotional issues that you deal with on a daily basis and it's your job to manage the anxiety that's produced

[0:06:14] by these issues. That's part of your job. Just like it was part of my job as a teacher to manage the anxiety of my parents, you need to be able to manage the anxiety of the community. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, J. Jamal Schumpert. >> Oh, Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. She had a really good point and as a educator myself, she is right. Uh those parents, once you lose them, you've lost everything. Uh but um on on to my subject, I've been wanting to do this all summer long. I want to congratulate Miss Karen Hessie Smith on changing my environment for my life. Uh the dogs aren't running in packs. They aren't attacking kids in my area in SMD3. Uh is it is a dramatic change. I think whatever she put her hands on this last year and did it was a success. And I would like you guys to focus on the women and listen to them. Uh, since I've been up here listening to the women, they've done nothing but great things. Miss Lucy Gonzalez back here wanted sidewalks in public safety and at the end of her term, she she enrolled and she finally got it at the end of her term with Mr. Patrick Fry's and the government's assistance. Uh, but she pushed so long for community connectivity and it it just kind of slipped out of y'all's purview, I guess, over development and trying to expand. And Mayor Gun, although might not agree with you too much with the downtown fixing up and the the one of the things you have on agenda

[0:08:15] today, uh, the concert venue we have down there. But look at it now. We put all that money into it. We should have finished that uh probably right as she was getting out or before. We put way more money into other projects. We're on what? Phase two. We should be completed. I've looked at you guys' projects. Um one of you guys mentioned paying employees more. I talked to employees. They haven't got paid much more. Not not not of any substance. Uh another person's was the arena. We haven't started construction on it and I yet to hear about the $25 million extra private investment and mayor yours was planes, trains, automobiles. Uh the airport's been sucking up money and we we've actually put in a study so that we can see who actually uses the airport if it's feasible. So the women have far exceeded you guys. It's not to to push you guys down or anything, but it's to to give you guys a lift up to say, "Hey, maybe we should step up. Maybe we should listen to them and maybe we should co-lead and have all voices have a seat at the table." Thank you. >> Thank you, Jamal. >> Coco Simpson. >> Coco Simpson, SMD1. uh have a couple things that I wanted to talk about today. Um the [clears throat] first one and I know this is kind of a touchy subject but uh new city manager I don't know why you sit up there with them and I think this is an old subject but the elected officials should be the ones sitting at the dis no offense and I don't mean that any way personally um that's where the elected officials should go not anybody else. Second thing, um, I sat at the meeting, the last meeting we had, and there was one thing I was still really confused about, the buying properties on the north side that flooded. Did y'all spend $1 million or $5 million on that? Um, and then

[0:10:19] looking through the rest of the stuff, the money that was allocated during that meeting, it was like $11 million. I mean, it y'all spend money like drunken sailors. It's pretty wild. And at what return? Um, I mean I I have empathy for everyone whose home was was harmed and everyone who was harmed period in those floods, but where does that end? We bought flooded homes that have flooded once in a century. What happens to the people whose homes are damaged by her tornadoes? We're not hurricanes here, but tornadoes. It happens all the time on the north side, Great Creek. Are we going to start buying their homes? Um, I think it was just a was a it was a bad precedent to set and it was a lot of money that was spent on people who bought homes, who made an investment. They didn't figure another way out of their home if it was a bad investment. That's not your responsibility. That's not our responsibility as taxpayers. Um, the backhoe, y'all spent $178,000 on a backhoe. You can go down to the Yellow House or John Deere and buy three back hoes for what y'all spent for one. Um, and it was all on by board. And I understand what board is for. for it so y'all don't have to run comps on anything. But it costs us money. That is my That is my money. Y'all don't generate revenue anywhere. It's all taxpayer funds. We need revenue for our police services. We need revenue for our city officials. We need revenue for all kinds of things. We we need to it would be helpful if you guys in your position would start looking at where the revenue that is generated from taxpayers goes instead of just rubber stamping things and using the easy way out of it. Thank you. >> Number four, >> China Young. China. [clears throat] >> Uh, good morning, council and mayor. Uh, my name is China Young. I am a resident of SMD4. Um, so the first amendment of the United States Constitution. It reads, "Congress

[0:12:23] shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or a bridg a bridging of the freedom of speech or of the press or the right of the people peaceibly to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. As we all know, there are many petitions circulating the community right now. Um, and I want to just remind the council as well as citizens here in the room and watching somewhere else, um, that it is our first amendment right to pet petition our government officials, uh, to to address grievances as citizens. Um, you know, whether we agree or disagree with those grievances, it is our right. It's called exercising our rights because it's a muscle that we must use to keep toned and able to use when we need it. Um, and I believe that we are in a moment where citizens have just taken our rights for granted. They they will be there whenever we uh assume that they will be there to work for us. But I think history and many events today show us that unless we are actively exercising those rights, they are potentially not going to be there for us. And so the citizens of St. Angelo are exercising their rights right now in various petition forms. And I just want to honor that. Um it is a time when all citizens should be exercising those rights and toning these muscles so that we can be a stronger nation and a true nation of we the people. So I just want to again encourage um the support of that exercising of rights and um discourage the comments from official leaders uh from their official seats to

[0:14:28] discourage that exercising of rights because that is what we have experienced and it feels mildly insulting to the citizens. So um just take the note and let's see what happens. Um, so thank you. >> Any additional public comment? >> So, does that complete our public comment today? General. >> Gotcha. All right. Now, we're going to move into the consent agenda. As we move down the dice, we'll see if anybody has anything to pull. We'll start with you, Mary. Have you got anything you want to pull? >> No, sir. >> Karen, I do not. Patrick >> E. >> Patrick wants to pull item E. I have nothing to pull. Harry, >> nothing to pull. >> Joe, >> nothing. >> Mr. Heert. >> All right. So, I'll look for a motion for all items except item E. >> I have a first from Harry Thomas and a second from Joseph. >> Is there any public comment on any of those items except E? >> Uh Jamal Schumpert for B and D. Which ones? >> B and D. >> Gotcha. Thank you, Patrick. Jamal. >> Uh Jamal Shump with SMD3. I just uh wanted to know a little bit more information on B. Uh I didn't know what it was for. Uh a lot of stuff. Maybe I missed some of the meetings y'all had about it. Uh I just didn't know a lot about what's going on with B. thought maybe I would pull it and discuss it. But uh with D, as I I spoke about last time, I know the public comment period is over for it, but I I emailed staff for email for like a link or something for me to put a public comment in like you did with the capital improvement plan, but I never got a response. So, I didn't know if there was a link for those public comments to be placed on there because it it's being submitted for, you know, funds. And I wanted to

[0:16:32] make sure my public comments on there because I made a public comment on the annual action plan I think 3 years and I haven't really seen it adjusted or reflected in annual action plans. So, I just was wondering maybe could y'all create a link for next year's annual action plan so that the public can actually put comments in and it don't be geared towards the people y'all have on y'all's housing committee cuz I think that's the only public comment I see coming >> [clears throat] >> uh to you guys because up here nobody comes to speak about houses. Uh nobody speaks about your home programs, nobody speaks about your rehab programs. It's some of the greatest work you guys are doing. So, I'm not understanding what is it. Is it really that great or is there some type of edge to it? You got to know somebody or something. But yeah, I I just wanted to be sure that my public comment would be included on the annual action plan. Uh and also if y'all guys could create a link next year. Thank you. >> Thank you, Jamal. >> Any additional public comment? >> And Coco Simpson for item G. Oh, once again, Koko Simpson SMD uh one. Um my concern is um the the gentleman came and gave a a beautiful speech the other day last few weeks ago about the flag banners. Um is this really a problem? It it seems like y'all are going to or the enforcement code enforcement is going to spend a lot of time and energy regulating flag banners in businesses on businesses and to what end are they falling in the road and they're hurting people or are they causing a distraction? Um the the one the one picture he put up here of the corner of uh what was that? Oaks and Chadburn and and L or whatever. There are like 10 businesses in there. Um there is no way that those businesses

[0:18:34] can afford to put a real sign up in that in that shopping center nor is there a place for it. Sometimes flag banners are all that you have and all that you can afford. I mean the economy is not doing that fabulous for most people in this world. So I mean banners are as being a business owner banners and signs are expensive. They are really expensive and sometimes that flag banner is all that you can afford to advertise your business or to draw attention to your business when you're in a crowded shopping center of 10 different businesses. Um, it's item G on your thing. I understand the signage about the estate sales. I understand the signage about real estate. I understand 90% of it. The flag the flag banners I do not understand, nor do I agree with. And I think that y'all are going to create a huge issue. Um, who's going to maintain what's been up for 30 days? You know, there's a whole other there's a whole other issue there that y'all are that that code enforcement is not even thinking about. You're going to waste an exorbitant amount of money trying to enforce a stupid rule. Please reconsider that item. Thank you. >> Any additional public comment? >> No. >> All right. I have a first and a second on all items except E and what was the other one? >> Just D. >> Just E. >> We'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? All items passed except item E70. We'll go to item E. Consider authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Technology Towers LLC in accordance with chapter 380 of the Texas Local Government Code for reimbursement of property taxes to be paid in an amount not to exceed 75% of the increase in value only in property tax payable to the city for a period of not to exceed 5 years commencing with tax year 2026. Ryan Getty, but you're on. >> Good morning, city council mayor, Mr. Uridia. Um, yeah, I think Brandon and I were going to tag tag team this one. uh he'll address primarily the legal issues and I'll try to address the operational

[0:20:37] issues, the business issues. So, could I answer any questions? >> Uh well, it's it's mostly to show people what we're the city is getting out of giving any kind of tax abatement. So, on this um just to clarify a few things. So, it's 75% of the increase in value. So, it's so what the building was worth before they they put several million into it, right? 6 million or something like that personally, >> correct? So before that, we're going to get the full tax revenue from that. Correct. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Yeah. >> And then so then they spent their money and increased it and we're going to give them a little help on that as long as they have um several employees, 40 50. >> Yeah, they're going to maintain I think the uh in the contract it's going to be 59 employees combined between the two entities. >> And do they have a certain wage that they have to keep paying on that or is it just that many employees? Well, they've already made the investment. So, typically most most uh abatements or any incentives at the development corporations are based on the amount of investment and typically either new jobs or retained jobs. So, this is a combination of you know new and retained jobs. So, >> so to answer the question about the wages, that that is something that we could put in there in the draft that's before you, we don't have that, but um I think we'd have to figure out what the average wages for that type of position. And I don't know what >> Yeah, we >> what all jobs they have. >> We didn't we do have their wage information, so we could incorporate something like that in the contract. >> Well, I believe they're currently they're over 50,000, right? Is their average on their 59 employees? >> Yes. So we at least do we know what they are currently? >> Yes, we have their we have their wage information. So yeah, we know what their current salaries are and we can make you know we can incorporate into the contract the at least that amount of wages going forward which I I would expect that would happen anyway, >> right? No, no, I think it's a I just this was um and Brandon maybe you can kind of speak to it. So this was kind of

[0:22:39] talked about before they invested in this building, right? They they this was kind of worked out beforehand. It's just now getting actually. >> Yeah. So, it was originally intended as an abatement. It council created the zone um before they did all that. There's some much harsher procedural um guidelines that you have to follow for abatements and uh there were some timing issues in order to do the abatement. So, that's why we've uh gone with the 380. But yes, it was all contemplated well in advance um about the improvements that they would be doing. >> So this uh not only they I'm sure created a ton of jobs while they were putting six and a half million into it, but they they were under the impression this was going to happen. It's just timing. So this allowed them to keep moving on it, spend the money on it, and then this would help them down the road. >> That's right. >> Yeah. No, uh I'm I'm for it. I know tax payments are a touchy issue. Um but they've they've spent a ton on the building. They employ a lot of people. Um, and that building was sitting just going down if if somebody wasn't going to take it over. So, they're one of the few that seems like they have the manpower needed to take it over and utilize it. So, yeah. And one clarification, it's not technically an abatement. They are going to have to pay their property taxes up front and then it's going to be a reimbursement once we've, you know, got all the records that they paid and all that good stuff. >> Perfect. And it's only five years, >> right? Thank you. >> No, you are. >> So, Ryan, once they complete with all the compliance, then we start the rebates. Correct. >> Correct. >> Thank you. I need a first. >> First, >> I got a first from Patrick Key of Keely. I'll make a second. Any public comment on this item? >> Jamal Schumpert. >> Jamal. Jamal Schumpert. SMD3. Uh, thank you, Mr. Kitty, for pulling this item. I wanted to hear a lot more about it. Um, I was uh I was want y'all to focus more in the future on good jobs, ones that offer medical, maybe paid time off. Uh, he could this company could have a

[0:24:43] fouryear, fiveyear fiverr project and hire all contract workers, not offering any of that and pay them low and mistreat them and y'all have issues. So part of that development corporation is to bring in those jobs, but they want really good they want good jobs. Those are the jobs that my generation wants wants y'all to offer us. We don't want to go all in for for a contract type situation. Some of these companies pay their workers good enough to even offer dental and all these other things, medical, but they don't. Uh it just doesn't make any sense why you wouldn't even match them or even give them a $100, $200 towards it. Uh those are the type of jobs we want coming into St. Angelo. Maybe I'm speaking for myself. I don't know about the town, but I would guess if you want to pick a job with the same pay, you would want medical and you would want maybe paid time off and maybe some of those employee access center things like uh discounted child care. Several different things where it's a difference between a job that's just a job and a career. So, uh, I'd like the development corporation to focus more on jobs that bring in career career-minded people and not jobs that bring in bag chasers is what we call them. Thank you. >> Any more public comment? With that, we'll take a vote. All in favor favor of item E say I. >> Any opposed? E passes 70. At 900 PM, we will move into the regular agenda. Comments regarding items on the regular agenda may be made by the public when each item is discussed as outlined above. To participate, please sign in with the city clerk prior to the beginning of the meeting. Speakers will be called in the order they signed in. Comments are limited to less than three minutes. Applicants, proponents, and appellants are exempt from the time limit above and instead must limit the remarks to less than 5 minutes. Item A, consider approving task order 13 for ETJ

[0:26:46] jurisdiction flood plane study in the amount of 350,000 sourced from storm water fund balance under Idiq PW123 master contract with freeze and nickels incorporated and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Patrick Freric, you're on. >> Good morning, mayor, council. This item has been queued up for staff for a little while now, for almost a year now, as we work through the best approach for for this particular project. Um, this is an item that was brought forth to us by the development community in order to help them with the assistance with the the federally mandated storm water uh obligations that they have in their developments. So as you well know in a new development um they are required to accommodate the additional storm water runoff that that new development is going to is going to generate based on compared to the existing conditions. In most cases that means that they're going to be building a little bitty pocket pond within their subdivision taking up valuable real estate for themselves in order to accommodate that that regulation. What this item is going to do is it's going to give us a broad study that's going to show us as development happens throughout the city where where can we be focused on regional detention instead of smaller pocket ponds. The development community has also come to us as staff as a city to say how do we properly maintain these ponds in perpetuity. From staff's perspective we don't want a little bitty bun a bunch of little bitty ponds throughout the city. We would rather have regional detention where we can focus our efforts, focus our resources and mow those and maintain those in efficiency or with efficiency. So what this study does is this is the first step in identifying where are those places for regional detention. So, it's going to be looking at our entire ETJ doing looking at the topog topography of the existing terrain and then identifying where those natural drainage flows, where would the best place for regional detention be and where might the city look at either acquiring

[0:28:49] property or working with developers to to get property in order to have a regional detention in that area instead of a bunch of pocket ponds. This is the first step to identify the where and then we can identify the what and the how moving forward. But we need to get this in place so that we're not just throwing money at something. We have a very succinct plan in place and we know that we're using our money wisely as we make those investments in property moving forward. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Well, I think what's what's great is this is planning. It's not emergency response. Okay. And so anytime we start forward with that, it has been a big discussion for a long period of time for those people uh that are watching and I know the previous assistant city managers worked with this is where are we going to put retention and detention ponds? Where do we structure this? When do they take them over? When does that become responsibility of the city versus a citizen? I've had sever several conversations with Shane. I think this is long overdue. Um and I think it's a great thing that we actually plan those. We actually had a discussion earlier about people that may be wanting to provide some property that they don't want developed actually for a basically a retention or a detention pond. And with that, I'll open it up to the dice. I'm highly in favor of this. I'm glad to see it. Mr. Heert, your light is flashing red. Maybe that's a warning you shouldn't talk. I don't know. Maybe borrow Joe's mic. Okay. Thank you, Patrick. What kind of time frame are we looking at uh for the study to take? >> It should take about 9 months, 9 to 10 months to get this done. Um we have most of the topography already flown. So, they'll be pulling that in and then any gaps or any holes, they'll just have to go and they'll get have to get survey on that and then it's just running it through their models to identify where those flows are going to be. So it should be a fairly quick turnaround. >> So is this something is this like a plugand play that the development

[0:30:52] community can have once these areas are identified uh their engineer can take what is produced out of this study put in their data and then that will give them where they need to direct their train. >> You're absolutely correct. So the way we intend this is to have a so as those developers are making investments in property now they know they know that if as I develop this particular parcel I'm going to need to funnel my storm water into this particular area. So they're having a bunch of that information on the forefront instead of having to figure out after they've invested their money into a particular piece of property and maybe could find out that it's really not going to work or it's going to be super expensive in order to get drainage and so on so forth. So, it's getting more more information on the forefront so that they can make an informed decision when they're investing their dollars. >> All right. Um, I ag I agree with the mayor. I have just just in the last 6 weeks, eight weeks been through a situation where detention retention was a question. Um, and it would have been nice to have something already available to do something like this. So, I agree with the mayor. This is something and I also agree with him stating that this is this is a planning tool and not something that we're it's a need it's not a knee-jerk reaction um to to put out a fire. So, thank thank you Patrick. And just for clarification on the timeline of why is it today and not a year ago, we've been we submitted an application to the Texas Water Development Board Flood Infrastructure Fund. This is a qualifying project for that program. We submitted that application two, three years ago and we've been waiting on that award. To date, the that the Texas Water Development Board has not granted any money out of that program. We got tired of waiting. we're going to pay for it up front and and get

[0:32:55] this done. So, we've been waiting on for grant for grant money to get it done. Got tired of waiting. We need to move forward and get this get this available to our development community. >> You just having said that does that mean we might qualify? >> I can't get reimbursed for it. So, we're just going to have to drop that off off of that request. >> But, will it increase future eligibility? >> Potentially. >> It absolutely will. Anytime you have a plan in place, it it absolutely gives you better better credit to those those u people looking at grant applications. >> Right. So there's a you know question of FEMA risk, but as long as it increases our grant eligibility. >> Absolutely. >> Right. >> So this says ETJ make sure um does this give us the ability to control that stuff that's out right outside the city limits in the ETJ? >> It doesn't necessarily give us any ability to control it. It just gives us a plan as those an as those are annexed in as it develops as it that we can we can again point developers. It doesn't mean that just because they're building in the ETJ that they can't use this information. It just means that the city may not have devel direct control over it, but it's still valuable information no matter what you're doing in the ETJ. >> And that's that's a challenge we face on the north side across from 21105. It got developed. that's outside city limits and there's no retention ponds and it all comes into the city and so um I think that's good for anyone in the future that might look to that and so >> right and it gives us that tool too to to say you're doing something we know this is is going to have a potential problem in this direct area let's work together to accommodate it so it doesn't become a problem >> Harry take my miss my opportunity. Uh when I first came on council a number of years ago, one of the first plans I worked on with city staff was the Avenue P detention pond that we put up uh behind

[0:35:00] Intertel. Uh and that has worked. We know that there are several uh areas in the city per the hazard mitigation plan that need some help and hopefully this will allow builders to go ahead and take care of that before we get any additional areas that need uh need help. So, thank you. I appreciate that. >> Thank you, Patrick. This is tough. So, we're going to do the study, but the developers don't have to do it. Um, we have no control over anything. It's just giving us ideas of where it needs to be if they are willing to do it >> in the ETJ, but it'll also encompass everything inside the city limits as well. So, we absolutely have control over that within the city. And this is like I said, this is the what and then we figure out the how and the or this is the where. This is then we figure out the when and the why or the how. The how and it comes down to the regulatory side of it. If y'all adopt this as a thou shalt contribute to here or you know we got to work through those issues then because in the in the end that the developers want the city to maintain these ponds. So we do have a little bit of clout. We do have a little bit of say so in in those in that regulatory sense, but how y'all adopt this and how we utilize this in regul regulations moving forward is that'll that'll come from future councils and future decisions. But irregardless of that, we need this in place so that we can we can plan properly and developers can plan properly. >> So what are they using now when they do a new development in the city limits? Because they do a they do a >> right now study, right? Right now, they're required to put a detention pond on the property that they own. So, you have these little bitty pocket ponds all over the place that are 1 acre, acre and a half in in size. That's taking up buildable lots. That's taking up

[0:37:02] profitable lots. It's also taking off property off the tax role that the city could benefit from in there. So, we're utilizing we're putting holes in the ground where we don't need holes in the ground. Let's get that into a singular place. Let's get it into regional detention so that we can manage it appropriately and we can make sure that we're maximizing the buildable space within those develop developments so we can maximize our tax revenue off of that as well. >> Will it be able to help any of the ones that are already there? Like will they be able to fill those in, put houses on them and find a >> potentially I mean potent there's that potential. Um are they willing to make that investment? I you know that's that's for them to figure out if those lots are valuable to them to do that and get that infrastructure to get it into that regional detention. That's a business decision that they'll have to make. But can we require that? No, we we won't necessarily require that. But it's absolutely a decision that will be available to them after this plan is in place. That's all I've got. >> Karen or Mary, >> you have emphasized that this is a proactive measure rather than a reactive measure and you've given lots of supporting data to as to why you think that's critical. Can you kind of distill that for us, those of us listening, and can you tell us how this kind of notion of planning, pre-planning will slot into the upcoming comprehensive plan? >> So, the comprehensive plan is the guide and it also references all these other plans that whether it's the downtown master plan or the master drainage plan. If you remember the master drainage plan that we just had updated in 2020 that identified areas of existing storm water drainage problems. So we know so we now have a plan that shows what needs to be done on existing problems. This will be the plan to avoid those and and get it done uh moving forward. But every one of these plans should be referenced back to

[0:39:06] the comprehensive plan as that guiding document as we move forward as both as staff and as the development community. So as long as we have that comprehensive plan updated and in place and it's referring back to these documents. So policym ordinance ordinance establishment all of those decision-makings are tying back to these plans. That's the end goal. That's why we're investing the money in here so that we get something done on the forefront and not having the large expense of having to fix it on the back end. >> Miss Mary, any question? >> Just a couple of you most of you have already answered some of these, but I just want to make sure this these new ponds will be owned and maintained by the city, right? >> That's the intent. So the intent is again multiple developments contributing to a single spot. Right now in our in our storm water plans there is an option for developers to turn over those small ponds to the city. We have some construction requirements in order to do that so that we can ensure that we can maintain that in perpetuity. Those requirements aren't necessarily supported by the development community because they're they're costs, right? anytime we add something, it costs them more money. And so we want to do away with that. And we want to make sure that we can build a pond that meets our requirements for long-term maintenance and that they can contribute to. How they contribute to it and and you know what that partnership is needs to be determined. But ultimately, we want this singular place that we can send all of our resources to in one spot instead of go mow an acre here and then go travel 2 miles down the road and do another acre and then another acre in the middle of neighborhoods, right? And so anytime you're running bat wings and mowers and weed eaters inside a neighborhood is disruptive. We want these to be more isolated, more in, you know, in in planned areas so that we can avoid not only the nuisance but, you know, the lack of efficiency as well. Will the developers have a have a say or at least

[0:41:09] have an input into this? >> They always have input. Yes. [laughter] >> So, we do we do listen to our development community very very well. Um sometimes we don't move as fast as they necessarily want us to move, but we do listen and we do work with them closely to make sure what we're trying to do meets what they're trying to do and that we can come to a good compromise in the end. >> Good deal. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. So just to be clear on that Patrick, we'll have jurisdiction and governance over inside the city limits and outside and into the ETJ will be marginal >> as we annex in or as developments go. It can at least be a reference document for those for future, you know, ETJ is future growth patterns, right? >> It's planning >> and so we we need to make sure that we can have as much influence on that ETJ as we possibly can even if we don't necessarily have the authority to require something. >> Gotcha. With that done, I'll look for a motion or if you got more questions, Tom. >> No, no, no. I'll make a motion approve as presented. >> Question. >> Sure. Question. >> Okay. >> Hey, Patrick. Um, how did you all come to the the freeze on this one? How did you come to them as the >> So, we've worked closely with Freeze on several projects. So, several drainage related projects. um they're the ones that helped us with um the Bell Street, you know, right there at the East Angelo draw. So, they're well aware of it. They did our drainage study for the Avenue Pond. They actually designed that. So, we've had good relationship with Freeze when it comes to drainage when it comes to these type of plans. They were a natural segue into continuing using the data that they've already collected for us, utilizing that again to go ahead and develop this plan. So, it's kind of an efficiency thing, kind of a using using past um investment that we used with them in order to not have to duplicate work. If we used a different firm, they may have to duplicate some of the work that Freeze has already done. So, again, kind of driving that cost down a little bit because we're utilizing data that already exists. >> I'm just curious on that cost because if

[0:43:11] you look um and unless I'm reading it wrong, their hourly rates, even their interns going to get paid $74 an hour. So, it just seems like they're very expensive um for something that doesn't have to be done now that we ought to put out for a bid at least see if if they're in line with everyone else or if they're not. >> They're they're part of our Idiq. So, those rates are are established for us. Um but again, our comfort with with freeze, the relationship that we have with them, I'm fully confident they also helped to in the master drainage plan. So, again, they're they're veryware aware of our existing issues. it it just gives us a leg up and gets this thing started much much quicker than someone else that's having to come in dry and and figure this out. So our comfort level the fact that they already have existing data just led us to believe that that freeze is the best pick for this particular project. Councilman also on professional services uh we're not allowed to bid those out. Um it's an RFQ process. It's based on qualifications not on price. So are they the only ones qualified? >> No, there are are other qualified firms and through through our Idiq process. Uh they've just gone through because of their existing experience with this existing firm that they've uh chosen this firm uh based on their qualifications and based on our experience with them um in this engineering uh realm. Okay. questions. >> Just a point of clarification, Aaron did tell me we do have some supervision over subdivisions in the ETJ. I don't know what the limitations are of that necessarily, but that's more his world, but apparently there is some regulation that we do have in that. So, I'll work with Aaron to figure out exactly where this when we get to the how I'll work with Aaron closely to make sure that we get those those coordinated. >> I think he's probably talking about platting in the EPJ. I just don't know how the storm water works that. >> But

[0:45:14] anymore Philip, did you have a comment? >> No, sir. Combination. >> All right. I've got a first from Tommy Heert. Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Second from Harry Thomas. Is there any public comment on this item? >> Jamal Schumpert. >> Uh Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. That there was a lot of discussion on there. went a lot of different ways. Uh, one of the things I wanted to look at was are we going to require independent drainage studies after we've done this one uh on those properties being annexed. Uh, I think that's some of what Mr. Vanoi was talking about. And I know that we we've cut a lot of these uh what is called restrictions, red tape that the developers like to talk about on some of our things that we just passed. Does that affect this in any way? Uh, can they get a variance? Uh, I I I didn't because y'all passed that stuff so quick. It's hard really to go over. You have to go back over and go back over. But another issue is would this eliminate the requirement if we do have a requirement for them to do do independent drainage studies? Cuz it looks like we're going to do one in entire area. And I would think that if we annexed it that the property we annexed would be similar in order with the properties we already have here which have drainage studies and areas. Um another thing is um these are going to be ponds built for aesthetic looks but we're going to use them for water. Why would we let that water just evaporate? Why haven't we put our engineers or even went at the state level and asked them to create us some type of rainwater catchment system underground to where that water runs into the area just like a pond but gets sucks into the ground and then gets pumped out and put into our water system. That seems like a more reasonable effort in collaboration between local, state, and federal government to fix the issues we have. Um it just just seems like if we're going

[0:47:18] to be preventative, u maybe they would have did this three years ago without waiting for the the funds. But it seems like every crisis, especially when it comes to lowinccome people, y'all want to jump on and fix for the developers to take advantage of us and continue taking advantage of us. Do you think that this study is going to actually help the town with the problems we have? I don't I don't even think this is preventative. I just think this is just eliminating tape for some of your developers so they don't have to spend money on drainage studies. It is a good idea, but it should have been done like you said two or three years ago. I'm just I'm just tired of the inefficiencies we got going on. And it's it's just the decisions y'all making behind not here, but at your your bars, at your clubs, at your your family get togethers that you're talking to your people. Cuz I can tell the things y'all said up here isn't really being enacted down here where I'm at living. But thank y'all. >> Patrick, do you have some comments? So the requirement for a drainage study is not eliminated by this. They still have to do a drainage study. They still have to determine how much runoff that their particular development is going to contribute and we have we'll be able to use that data to figure out what the remaining capacity within our existing ponds are as we identify these regional detentions. So that requirement on the developers is not going to be exempted by this process. It's only going to be enhanced by this process because now they know as they go through that development and that drainage study where they can contribute water to and how they need to push that water. Gotcha. >> All right, Patrick. Thank you. That's all I'm going to do with is there any more public comment, Heather? >> With no more additional public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Item passes 61. Thank you, Patrick. >> Thank you. Item B, consider approving change order one with basic IDIQ in the amount of $146,865

[0:49:22] for the Bill AR Memorial River Stage project utilizing [clears throat] $32,145 of civic events fund balance and authorizing city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Presentation made by construction manager Alfonso Torres. Al, >> thank you, mayor, council, city manager. Uh, my name is Al Torres. I'm the construction manager for the city of St. Angelo. And as you know, we've been working on the river stage trying to get it improved. Uh this phase one has been mostly ADA issues, but we've also added storage capacity, green room space, increase the size of the ticketing booth, the concession area. So, we're getting a lot lot done. Uh we're nearing completion, but we've got some change orders that uh some of it was stuff that was unforeseen circumstances as we went through construction. Um, some of it is stuff that we kind of did some value engineering at the beginning, pulled it out and we're now we're getting close. We have a contingency fund and we have uh and we're well under the 25%. So, we want to go ahead and put that money back into there and get some of these things done. So, this is a list of what we're doing. uh electric and I'll explain each one of these as I go through but electrical relocation 64880 retaining wall at entrance curb at pavers 6400 mini split AC and concrete slab uh 48,000. So the original contract amount on this project was 1,ion318126 and 17. Um, this change order is a total of 146,865, which brings us up to a total of 146491. And like I said, those funds are available um in this account number. So, change order number one, uh, underground electrical. Uh, as we were adding on to the concessions building, we ran into an underground electrical line that we weren't aware of. You can see the the the panels over there. uh that line was running right underneath

[0:51:26] where we were adding onto our building. Nobody knew it was there. So, in order to keep construction going, we went ahead and authorized him. I mean, he went ahead and put it in because we didn't want to stop construction, but that's a change order that that we needed to put in there. Uh item two is a retaining wall. Uh basically, this is at the entrance to the, you know, the concessions is over here to your left. You can see there's a hill and that retaining wall was going to go right along here to keep all that u erosion from running out onto the sidewalk. So they in order to when we had their July 3rd concert, they wanted to go ahead and control the crowd. So they went ahead and put this fence in on the right side, but that's still going to cause maintenance issues. It's going to cause erosion is going to go on the sidewalk. We have to clean it up and maintain it. So we still want to put that retaining wall. The contractor will go back in there and just cut that fence loose, put the retaining wall in, and then put the fence back up. >> Al, do they get to reuse the fence? >> Pardon me. >> Are they going to reuse that fence? >> Uh, yes. >> Okay. >> So, the curb at pavers, uh, again, this is at the entrance right by the ticketing, and these pavers here extended all the way out, uh, to the end over here. But for ADA compliance, it didn't quite meet the slope. We had to put concrete in here to change that slope. It it's creating a little bit of a tripping hazard here. So, we had them put in a curb there. And then they're going to fix these pavers to to where it's pretty. And then they're going to have a rail that comes down along that curb and this way and then down the stairs. So, again, to not slow work down, they went ahead and put it in, but it's work that's not in the contract. uh mini splits. There are there is a air conditioning back there uh but wasn't quite enough. So, we need to put another mini split in uh to kind of help alleviate those new dressing room areas. And then lastly, uh this is an issue.

[0:53:30] You can see any time it rains, uh we get a lot of water ponding here. This is a new dock uh that was added on the end there. So, this change order will cut out all of this concrete here, regrade it to where it goes out to the U street that's been newly paved. I don't know if you guys I'm sure you went out there for the July 3rd concert. Uh, you saw that all of this over here was regraded. We had an area where buses were losing mufflers as they came over that hill. So, we regraded that and repaved it. Uh, when they did that, they re changed the slope so that all that drains out. However, it's still catching right here in this area. So, we're going to have cut all that out, regrade it to where it goes to uh where it's going to start over at the other end. And then also part of this is this. We're going to fix this gate issue that's here. U Maria, you saw that um >> it caused an issue during the July 3rd concert and we all and we all realized that we just we just couldn't fix it that day. So, but we are going to fix that as part of this. So, so that's our change orders. Um, if you have any questions or if you have any questions about [clears throat] the progress overall, let me know. >> No. So, we're bouncing back in with the contingency there. So, two or three of those things to see there are unforeseen. You know, we can't help that. And there's things there that show up as we we've dealt with that on Chadurn on 29th everywhere. So, those are certainly understandable. Are some of these design related problems that we could avoided up front? >> Yes, the mini split for instance. Uh, in a way it's my fault that engineers were supposed to put in uh new AC, but they it wasn't on the drawings and and I missed it. Um, the gate was another one. It it should have been a double gate. It was a It was a double gate there before, right? >> But and when we did the drawing, somehow or another it became a 10-ft gate. Uh, so that was a design issue as well. >> Right. But we've gone through and requested these changes to make. This is going to be one of the best things as we develop and come back to more reliance on our river stage. Um, we're going to I think nobody understands how much

[0:55:32] pressure y'all were in to get it rolling prior to the July 3rd. Correct. >> You did get it there by the hair of your chinny chin chin, but we we had it. It's going to be great to get it finished. All right. And I think we'll be looking for this to be great for our river. With that, I'll open it up to the dice. Mary, we'll start down there with you. >> Thank you, Al, for that. And it did. It went off without a hitch toward the end. And there's a little bit of a vapor lock sort of on on me. U there's that a lip and I don't know this may get corrected but going into that gate where it was a double gate you know and it was a pretty good eight or 10 inches up but he was high centering pulling a >> that that will be corrected as part of this. Like I said that concrete's all going to be regraded to where it's >> it slopes down to match with the existing concrete down there >> is going to be gone. Yeah. What are you going to do with the gate that you're that having to be re >> It'll probably be reused. It probably just get another gate that matches the size and everything and then just >> in other words, we're not going to buy two more gates. We're going to have one more gate and then >> Good. Good deal. >> You know, re rework the where the posts are, support posts are. >> What's the time estimate on this? >> Uh I'm not I don't have an exact time frame. I'm guessing it's going to add 30 days. >> Okay. So, it's not going to be July 2nd. >> No. >> Okay. I can only handle one nervous breakdown a year. So anyway, well, thank you very much for that, Al. I appreciate it. >> Morning, Al. >> Morn, >> um on So this is uh this was bid out, correct? >> Uh correct. >> And then what was the original contingency amount that we had set aside? >> Uh I don't remember the exact amount. It was uh almost 200,000 that we had. We had 1.5 million in that account and we bid it at 1.3. So, >> have have we already blown through the 200,000 or is it okay? >> Yes. And and to let you know, there's two or three other items that we're looking at. Uh but we didn't have enough in the contingency for those items. So, right now, Civic Events is is pursuing

[0:57:35] funding for those items. U they are aesthetic items. So, if they don't happen, they don't, you know, we can work on that later. Um, but hopefully we'll it'll come through with those. >> On on that picture you've got up there, is that new concrete that was put in there? >> Yes. >> Why is their responsibility to fix the grading if they have it where it's pulling? >> Oh, no, no, no. This is existing concrete. >> Okay. >> I thought you meant the dock itself. >> No, no, that where it's pulling there. >> Yeah. No, that that's existing. Um, and then if you'll go to your electrical picture, how did we not know it was in the ground right there? I mean, looking at it, that's the only place it could be to me. >> Uh, it wasn't on any of the information that we had when we designed this. >> We do um the engineer didn't show it. Didn't have I mean, everybody can see the the meters there, but originally it was going this way, right underneath the the addition that was being put in, but nobody knew what direction those those conduits were going. As far as we knew, they were going to back towards the swimming pool. >> Do we do we get these line located before beforehand to kind of find all those places so they know what's got to be moved? >> Uh, I'm sorry, I didn't understand. >> Line located. Oh, yes. But they don't typically do stuff on private property. >> And so we have no way to find out where um is that going to be. >> Not unless we go out there and start digging potholeing. >> Yeah, that was $64,000. Not seeing that, >> right? For for something like that, it might have been a good idea to to try to go in there and figure out where that was. [snorts] >> What can we do going forward to um actually get these projects to go off without having to use all our contingency funds? What are we missing? uh more like like you're saying suggesting more exploration I guess if you know if you suspect something like that but sometimes it's hard to know this is an old facility a lot of it was just kind of done without a lot of plans I mean the river

[0:59:38] stage itself had a lot of plans I've got those plans so we had a pretty good idea of what was there but the lift station for instance we don't know where any of those lines were going where the lift stations are but and a rough idea of which way they're headed but on a project like this, it's just kind of hard to pinpoint everything >> with our software and technology. Now, is your predecessor in 20 30 years going to be able to look at that and say and know exactly where things are so this doesn't happen in the future? >> Should be able to. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, we've we've kind of got that figured out where [clears throat] at least in the future we know where everything is. >> Yes. Assuming nobody goes in there and deletes my files. >> Yeah. >> Let's try to do that. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Mhm. >> Does that go into our GIS system to some degree? Gotcha. Any additional questions >> with uh with all of our new stuff that we're doing now with water lines throughout the city, any any of our utilities, any of our things that we do, we actually do go out there uh our GIS team will go out there and they'll actually take points of all of that stuff as they're moving along. So we actually will now moving forward know exactly where our stuff well within a foot or so we'll know where all of our uh utilities are. >> Right. >> And as a reminder we are going to be doing a phase 1B on this. Uh we don't have the funding for it but we're going to start we've started designing and looking at it and it involves a new lift station, new water lines. Uh and the lift station is going to serve this and the swimming pool. So it's going to be an increase but yeah it's going to take a lot of exploration to figure out where all those lines are. Shane, what about other utilities that are not city related? Do we when when we make a discovery like this, is that something that is noted in GIS? In >> sometimes internal utilities like on a project like this where it's our property, we will go ahead and map um other utilities as well. If if a lot of times out in the field like we're reworking a street, those type things um we don't always collect that data. Um

[1:01:41] but um but Atmas or for gas and or a with electrical they are collecting that data for their databases and we are we do work with them very well uh in our coordination when we are working utilities in the streets and things like that. If we had updated technology at some point, could we all get get that in our system so we would know where Atmas A other utilities? >> We would have we'd have to work we would have to work with them probably on some agreement because it's a lot of times um maybe maybe not so much on AP but a lot of times gas and things like that. uh those folks get fairly protective of u uh locations and things like that for security purposes. >> Yeah. And like on this one, the contractor did work with a uh to make sure that we're, you know, using the right size lines and everything, but it's on private property. So when you call dig test or or call you before you dig, typically they'll give you information up to the property line and it won't go onto the property. seems like if we could figure out a system to everybody maybe not be quite so protective that we could avoid things to Patrick's point avoid things like this down the road when we have other projects around the city. So yeah, >> I don't know what that would take, but >> well and and Digtest or uh any of those companies like that, once it gets past the meter, they they don't do those. And so this is something that we, you know, since it's on our private property, it's one of those things that we need to map because they're um once it goes past the meter, they're our lines basically at that point. They no longer belong to the utility. So um at that point in time, that's that's it's on us. Uh once it's past the meter, >> may be instructive for the future. Harry, >> since this is a middle district three, just in case I'm not around, by the time we get ready to uh do the ribbon cutting, and I'd like to have an invitation to come back.

[1:03:42] >> Of course. >> I know where you live, [laughter] >> any additional questions. With that, we'll look for a motion on item B. So move. >> I have a first from Tommy Heert, a second from Patrick Keley. >> Any public comment, Heather? >> All right. With no public comment, we'll look for a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Item B passes 70. We'll move to item C. submission of the recall petition filed on July 15th, 2026 pertaining to council member Harold Harry Thomas SMD3 and the city clerk certification that the petition is sufficient pursuant to section 48 of the city charter presentation made by city clerk Heather Stats. >> Good morning, council. Um so this is just to certify the petition that was um filed in the city clerk's office on May 29th. Um the petitioners did uh return their signed petitions in a timely manner on July 15th. Uh my office then went through to validate those signatures. Um there were 53 total signatures which did make the petition sufficient. Um so that is what is presented to you today. >> As this is a non- voting item, this is an action item. Is there anything further we need to do? >> Uh not at this time. There's just one public comment. Okay. Public comment. >> Candy pool. >> Good morning, council staff. Thank you for letting me speak um in public comment on this particular item. Um I've been around a long time. I've uh served on many and numerous boards uh committees, subcommittees of the St. Angelo um for St. Angelo and the city of

[1:05:47] St. Angelo. I've been involved for over 25 years. I've sat here and watched this council in years past um almost every month. And um I just want to say that uh in my opinion um a petition like this causes division. Uh and that's a factor that St. Angelo we've never experienced really. Um, I would also like to say that um, uh, I've never sat in this audience and watched a city council individually as a member or as a whole try to undermine u the, the St. Angelo public's trust or uh, keep their best interests at bay. I've always seen uh continued deliberation and forethought and study on the items that come before you on an agenda. Um, I'd also like to say in behalf of my dear friend Harry Thomas, um, as a councilman, I've watched him work for now over seven years and before that when he was on other committees and things, um, tirelessly uh, and he continues to do so. Um, I've just um, uh, thank you, Harry, for all that you've all done for St. Angelo. I would like to say that this type of petition is a citizen's right. Um, I helped redo the uh charter, so I know the wording of those things and um I understand it, but I'm just not at all sure that all the citizens that sign petitions really understand exactly what they're signing, especially against someone that I believe to be a citizen dedicated to his role as a councilman. Um, I would encourage anyone who signs a petition to read it thoroughly, study the facts, and

[1:07:52] get to know what it is that you're signing about or against before you put your John Hancock on a petition. Um, I regret that we've had such a situation involved here in St. Angelo and I look forward to a grand um recovery uh for all of the citizens of trust and understanding with everybody. >> Thank you, Candy. >> Is there any additional public comment? [clears throat] So, I will make a comment right here um to reiterate just what Candi said. I have served many years with Harry Thomas. Never once has anything not been for the betterment of the city. I have issues with um how trust is valued. I think there have been comments made um on this and to follow up on Miss P's comment, the clarity and how people solicit signatures on this need to be very well defined. I think there are cases for slander and liable where people have made comments even recently up and down my street about a fellow councilman making claims and statement that are untrue. I think those should be documented. I have a question for legal. I think um people set up on city property which is fine but isn't there a process to set up and solicit on city property that has to be followed? >> Mayor, I'm I'm glad to give you a legal opinion on that. I don't know that right now is the appropriate time to go. >> Well, I think it deals with how his petition signatures were followed. >> Mhm. >> So, maybe we could throw that if you want to. If you feel better, we'll throw that up on a followup. >> Sure. >> And put that on there. But with that, we're going to go. Is there any additional comments on this item? Okay. We'll go ahead and move to item D. Consider resolution calling a special election for November 3rd, 2026 for the

[1:09:54] purpose of determining whether council member Harold Harry Thomas, single member district 3 should be recalled from office, providing for the holding of an election to be administered by the Tom Green County election office and authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute all related documents. Heather. >> Uh, so most things are in the uh caption there, but this is a resolution to call that recall election for single member district 3 council member Harry Thomas. Uh, the election would be held on the uniform election day of November 3rd. Um, this is in line with our interlocal agreement with the Tom Green County Elections Office. Um, they will set forth the uh voting judges, voting locations, and um, so forth. uh they have the authority to make those changes as needed. Um early voting is set to uh commence October 19th and end October 30th. Um so we will do our best to um publish all of those early voting locations, but like I said, they are subject to change based on Tom Green County Elections Administration and then um just to authorize the city manager to um negotiate uh the individual contract for this particular election. Right. So to be clear, Harry stays in his seat until the results of this election, November 3rd. >> That is correct. >> All right. This will be a single ballot item on the midterm on the elections in November. Correct. >> This will be a single ballot item for the city. This is a midterm election with, you know, uh, >> and it will be in his district. >> His district only will be able to vote. Yes. >> All right. Any further questions or comments from council? Harry, >> just a real quick question. What is the ballot language going to say? >> Uh, sure. I do have that for you here. Um, give me just a moment. My computer, you have it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, the charter actually spells out exactly what the ballot has to say. And so, it begins, the ballot at such recall election shall conform to the following

[1:11:57] requirements with respect to each person whose removal is sought. The question shall be submitted. and then begin quotation. Shall name of the person be removed from the office of naming the office in parenthesis by recall. Immediately following each of such questions, there shall be printed on the ballots in separate lines in the order here set out the words for the recall of naming the person and against the recall of naming the person. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Any additional comments? So once again, this is a non- action item. We'll move on to item >> no, that is incorrect. Need a motion and a second and a vote to call that election. >> So I'll need a first. >> Does anybody want to make the motion? >> I think the citizens expressed their right and I think Harry well regardless what I think will happen with Harry, but um I think they did what they were asked to do and so I make the motion. >> Okay, we've got a first from Patrick Keley. Tom, I'll second it. >> I have a second from Tommy Heert. Any public comment? >> No. >> With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? I. Item passes 61. Move to item E. Presentation and discussion on the final perform of the financial performance claims experience and funding projections of the health insurance plan for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Presentation made by hub international senior account executive Julian Fontana. Human resources director Veronica Sanchez and finance director Jonathan Flores. Veronica, you're on. >> Good morning. >> Maybe. Good morning, mayor, council, and staff. Um Veronica Sanchez, HR director. A few meetings ago, there was a budget amendment item on the agenda that was pulled um was not discussed because we

[1:14:01] didn't we wanted to provide you an update on the financial um a financial update on the health insurance. And so Hub International is here to do that. Both Julian um and Corey are here to give that for you. Um there is a presentation. I'm not. It's actually printed that was provided for you in case I Oh, there it goes. So, they'll be going over this information for you. With that, I'll let Julian come up. Thank you, Veronica. Uh Julian Fontana, Hub International. Corey Hood is also here with me. Uh, mayor, council, I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you all this this uh this morning. Um so the memorandum that was prepared uh for you all is to uh one provide some context around um hub's work with the city. Uh we were um contracted uh for the employee benefit consulting role in April of last year and through our due diligence of the uh plan review, the contracts and underlying funding um we had discovered that uh or uncovered that uh contractually uh the city was funding about 71.8% of the plan uh costs. And um what that means is once you develop what the contractual costs are, the underlying planned administrative cost, the stop-loss reinsurance, there are financial liabilities that are protected in the uh stop-loss reinsurance contract which create an expected claims value and a maximum claims value. And so that's the sum of the uh self-funded plan, the health plan. Um and the premium equivalent rates are what are designed to fund that [clears throat] liability. The portion funded by the

[1:16:03] city and the portion funded by the employees. And the total of that um premium equivalence was only funding 71.8% of the plan costs back in in 2025 for fiscal uh 2025. Um it had been uh a practice of the city to uh fund revenue to the health plan in a rears, you know, once those costs were incurred that perhaps exceeded what the funding of the plan was for the city. But um we had worked with uh staff and finance to kind of create some transparency and some understanding about the different uh inner workings of the health plan and how it needed to be uh managed going forward. So, with the uh plan renewal for plan year uh 26, the the year that we're in, uh plan design changes were made um to the benefits that uh the health plan benefits that employees were offered as well as uh premium equivalent contributions uh were increased by 36% over um what was in place. uh there was no change in funding um to the city's budget of $9.1 million or whatever it was during the fiscal last year for fiscal 26. Um and so that's kind of where we're at today with regard to the request that's being made to make up funding um for fiscal 26 uh through uh the plan year for 2026. Um plan funding is set uh at 14,455 uh077. Uh that includes the premium equivalent contributions of 12,655670. Health fund contributions that's funding to a health reimbursement account for employees. uh and projected rebates of a million542907 with an expected plan cost of 14 million24,395.

[1:18:08] Now within the stop-loss reinsurance contract, there is an expected cost and there is a maximum cost. The city's claims are running more toward the maximum plan cost this year. Um I think it says it's 135% of expectant and 100% of the maximum claims attachment. So uh on average the funding of the plan uh needed to be more aligned toward the maximum plan cost versus expected plan costs. And we'll do another review of that uh during the budget planning for uh fiscal 27 that is going on right now. Um just for your information, the plan in and of itself um is experiencing uh increased claims cost but medical inflation inflation on on medical costs is an average of 9% and pharmacy costs uh are between 12 and 13%. So in the budget projection that we've initially provided uh of 19% a large portion of that is purely attributable to um increased medical and and pharmacy costs that are inherent with uh uh you know economic inflation that we're all seeing today. So um the budget projection that we have initially uh provided is for fiscal uh 27 of 19% uh but for the plan year a 22% increase to uh premium equivalent rates. The fiscal year does not coincide with the plan year the fiscal being October through September but the plan year running from January through December. And so we've got a little bit of carryover cost uh at the end of the the fiscal the beginning of the fiscal and the beginning of the plan year. So that's why those numbers are different. Um any questions y'all have I'm I'm happy to uh answer or entertain. I'll kick it off. I mean this is a as we

[1:20:12] get to here. Um is this a one time is this structural? I mean how are we looking at this expense and how are we prepping for it for next year? I mean, this does come at the tail end of our budget. We've got to come in so structured or are we looking for a one-time? Is this something we're going to see again or do we have a few specific claims that have driven this? >> I think this is this Julian can speak to the the projected costs as far as what we're planning to fund in the budget in this fiscal year for 26. We are requesting onetime funding, but we will be building some portion of this into the fiscical year 27 budget. I think right now we've currently got it budgeted at um the FY26 levels. We're going to need an additional increase there. So during the budget cycle, we'll be bringing that to you guys for consideration for funding. >> How's that going to affect employee contributions in 27? Or is there are we getting a little in front of the eightball here? We we haven't made that decision quite yet. Um but it's something we're considering. >> Right. Well, it's something that a lot of people watching. Well, that will be a primary concern and I asked that just to let everybody know. We will be watching that specifically. >> I'm sorry you got a lot of us up here because a lot of us are working [laughter] on this itself. Um so to answer your first question, um and Julian can speak more to this, but the plan itself is functioning as it should function. The issue is the underfunding that has occurred in the past. Um, as far as what does this mean for um premiums um that's still in the works like Jonathan said um once we know what the funding looks like there are we do like to get a little bit more of claims data um in order for us to make those decisions. Um this is what I would consider a bad claims year. Um so we have had some significant claims. So we do have stop loss for that but it does

[1:22:15] still affect obviously the the funding. So >> okay thank you. With that I'll open it up to the dice. Mr. Heert Julian how much help are we going to get from our specific stop-loss coverage and our aggregate stop stop-loss coverage. there is um a significant portion that um at the end of the plan year is expected uh on the aggregate side of the of the of the equation. I think it's you know $600,000 potentially that uh that we'll see. Unfortunately, what appears to me to be just a perfect storm. Probably the the biggest be piece being that we have not done our job probably as a council funding this appropriately. Um and now this is what we're faced with. Um plus then you've got the medical trend of inflation which is not helpful at all and that is not going away ever. um and it's probably going to be in the 8 to 10 maybe 12% range on a go forward basis. So that's not going to go away. And then unfortunately this has just been a bad claims year. We've got folks unfortunately that have had to call upon this and glad glad that we have it but uh again this is this is unfortunately a perfect storm that now we've we've got to deal with. I did want to make one comment just in terms of context. So, Hub International does a public entity benchmark that shows the uh average uh per capita cost for uh health insurance and how that's split between the employers and and um the employees. So, the public entity benchmark for 2026 uh was a per capita cost of 14,955. The city of St. Angelo's premium equivalent contributions were only 12 million uh I'm sorry 12,61

[1:24:20] and and that's so that's kind of what we're looking that 20 25% difference between what the plan's reflecting as the cost and what the true cost really is that wasn't being communicated appropriately. Um, so I think we we have a good plan in place with the uh the changes and benefits that were made in January are just now being kind of realized and I think we'll get some more uh participation in the health fund plan in the in the new year. Uh it's running at a much more favorable claims uh per capita cost than the than the PO plan uh itself. So, >> it looks like we need to hedge a little as we go into 27 on what we're going to have to fund. But once again, this affects every staff employee and infects retirees and it's something that every one of today with that. Any additional questions? Any additional questions? Patrick >> one >> or Mary? Mary, you were up. >> The um last year we had this too. It was a $4 million deficit. I'm not trying to put you on the spot. Do we know what it was the year before that? Because if I'm reading this correctly, we're at least um a million dollars better than we were last year. I know we had to make up some difference, but when's this going to when's this going to what's the stop loss on this loss that we incur? It seems every year. >> So, um we haven't funded the health fund appropriately in the last couple years. We've been relying on the fund balance in that 310 fund to help cover those costs. Um that's depleted now. So there's no fund balance in the health fund to cover those costs. Um which is why we brought that amendment last year for the funds to cover a little bit. Um why we're bringing this amendment today and while we'll talk about in the future covering this on the front half of the budget rather than bringing this to you guys um as a budget amendment uh halfway through the year.

[1:26:21] >> That that timing does help. Good man. >> Makes it a little more palatable. But >> well, I appre I know a lot went into this and it's just uh one of the unfortunate things of our city government and but we do have to take care of our employees. I mean without them we don't have a city. It's to me it's our citizens are employees and it's just it hate to say this but it is what it is. But um I do appreciate your diligence and your attention to this because this is a very big deal and we cannot fail our citizens and our employees. >> Thank you. >> Morning Julian. Um on the um expected claims, are are y'all the ones that set that number? Do you just look at past claims and and kind of come up with a a an expected number? Do you use our current staff to kind of use them specific actuarial table based on the age of our staff? How do you come up with the expected claims? >> So when we um when the stop-loss reinsurance is is purchased, it has a uh maximum claims attachment factor which is 125% of the expected. So through the math the derived value of the uh expected claims is a factor of the maximum claims attachment. Okay. So and then within our budget projection our own uh benefit analysts um make a projection of the uh future claims which is is what we're staying here. We're we're not procuring stop-loss at this at this time. That'll be done later in the year. But our budget projection um includes inflationary trends and um indexes to cover the cost of uh plan year 27 from January of 27 through December of 27. So again there are additive factors for that time period. um and these uh these

[1:28:26] factors uh based on medical inflation and um pharmacy in inflation that go into creating that number. But the expected and the maximum are are derived from the stop-loss reinsurance contract that's purchased. >> But where does the initial um claims amount come from? It comes from the proposals and the the carriers that are bidding on the stop loss and we validate it with our benefit analyst determination of what that factor should be. >> So they they basically look at our city and say here's where we think your claims would be. >> Yes. And where we're willing to reinsure you at. >> Gotcha. Thank you. >> Right. >> Harry, you got a question? >> More of a comment. Um we talked about the last 2 or 3 years uh during budgets that we come up shortfall but there was a period of time and Tommy can attest to this where this particular city funded that and at the end of the year there was a positive fund balance. Now, we've gotten away from that a little bit, but part of it has to do with the condition of this whole country and the cost of pharmaceuticals and medical and all those things that and that's why you guys are here today to get ahead of this particular game. There was a period of time when this group up here did what they needed to do and funded that and at the end of the year we had a positive fund blown. So I want people to understand this group has traditionally done what they needed to do. Coughs of this stuff just got away from us. So thank you >> Tommy. >> This may be a Jonathan Veronica or it may be the hub folks too. I don't know who who the question is for. How what does this teach us that we need to do either beginning right now or that we

[1:30:30] should have begun or that we begin in the future to avoid another one of these situations for the for the for the for future councils. >> I think we all have a little bit to add to that based on our perspective roles within the city or as a consultant. I would say we need to work on our wellness program um in order to be able to control some of those costs. Um Jonathan would probably tell you and I would echo that we need to fund this appropriately um so that we can start creating that fund balance and rely on that when we do have bad claims years um and hub I won't speak for you. I I think you know what Veronica said it's it's really just proactive planning and you know prior to hub coming on board I don't know what the discussion or dialogue with finance and the council was in regard to you know what the real cost is and and how the funding was being managed. But um we're having these conversations today to make sure that there's you know clear communication. we we we we look to you. You folks are the subject matter experts. Um we look to you for your your advice and then we have to to weigh that. So, I I would say um to our to our folks, as painful as it may be, when when you come to us with the with the funding levels, let's make sure they're adequate um on a go forward basis so that next year's council hopefully [clears throat] doesn't have to deal with something like this. Um, and then whatever plan design changes may need to be implemented, whatever it may be, so that we can get the get the fund back on on solid financial footing. Thank y'all for um I know y'all probably took over a tough situation, Julian, um, from from where we were. So, u, thank you for your your cander and and your work to to show us

[1:32:32] where we are. So, as we look at changing our reserves and we understand and you answered my question earlier in statement that y'all take in and factor the pharmaceutical cost and I mean it's not any new news. They're looking at taxing pharmaceuticals and generics 50% on incoming which affects probably 70% of what we would get dispensed to our staff. Um we're looking you know it's a $1.2 $2 million ask far as put more reserve fund in there to help us to go with that. Is that comparable with what other cities are doing? I know you talked about our per capita being at 12,000 versus 14,000. Can you give us a quick Julian, I asked you this last time you presented quick benchmark of what maybe where we sit against our comparable cities? I know it's a hard ask, but are we following the right track? You know, are we missing something? Are there questions we're not asking? Well, again, I can't speak to the gap before we started that, you know, this kind of >> the cliff kind of yell went off the cliff, but um our uh practice is to fund the plan appropriately, you know, through through council and finance and to uh recommend uh that the fund [clears throat] balance the reserve beyond what the funding is creating is 25 to 35% of annual claims. So you if if you had that fund balance today, you would have between three and $4 million in in a reserve that when you have these years where you're running to maximum plan costs, you're able to pull some of that money to offset the next year's revenue needed. So um it's just guidance and planning and communication. >> Well, and we understand and y'all are in a very hard position. one of the most extreme things uh healthc care becomes probably one of the most significant costs for staff we have and that's something there's a lot of eyes a lot of optics on it and a lot of scope. So with that number one we thank you very much

[1:34:33] for what you've done for us. We understand you're in our court. We look for you to help us as much as we can if you see ways for us to get back within the guidelines and the guardrails and you know keep from getting outside of we appreciate that very much. All right, Jonathan, how are we going to wrap up item E >> there? I think it's just a presentation discussion item. So, we can move on to the next item which will have the action >> with that. Thank you very much. We'll go to item F. First reading and public hearing of an ordinance amending the budget for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2025 and ending Sep September 30, 2026 for health insurance claims and premiums. Jonathan, you're on. >> So this is the budget amendment for fiscal year 26. These are the numbers Julian was talk talking about as well as some numbers for the over 65 portion of the plan. Uh we're looking at contributing out of the operating funds about $4.2 million. Just for um additional background, the general fund portion of that is about 3.2 million and then water and wastewater make about another half a million of that $4.2 million. Um and then on the operating funds contribution for the over 65 uh as a total that's a smaller increase of $98,000 uh from the funds. Um and then we're budgeting appropriately in the health insurance fund for those as well so that we can continue to make those payments, those premium payments. there any questions? >> Just how we have to fund it. I mean, does anybody on the d have questions? >> Tell us one more time where you're getting the money. >> So, uh the 4.2 million is sourced from all the operating funds. Um that includes general fund, water, wastewater, storm water, uh anything that has some personnel costs in it. 3.2 million of that's coming from the general fund and about half a million is coming from water and wastewater combined. Does that put any of our fund balances

[1:36:37] less than 90 days? >> Um, no. There they're there maybe one or two. Maybe with the sports complex some of those smaller >> minimal, but as long as we're maintaining at least 90 days. >> Yes, sir. >> I don't feel at risk. >> Okay. Any additional questions from council? >> With none, I'll look for a motion. >> I got a first from Karen. >> Second. Second from Tommy Heert. Any public comment, Heather? >> With no public comment, we'll take a vote. All those in favor of item F say I. I. Any opposed? None opposed. Item F passes 70. At 10:11, we'll move into close session. Executive session under the provision of government code title 5, open government ethics, subtitle A, open government chapter 551, open meetings, sub chapter D, exceptions to requirement that meetings be open under the following sections. Item A, section 551071, consultation with attorney regarding county withdrawal from the tax incre increment reinvestment zone. Item B, section 551071, consultation with attorney regarding Texas Local Government Code, chapter 380 and Texas Tax Code, chapter 312. Item C, section 551074, personal matters to deliberate the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of the city manager. With that, we'll move in close session at 10:12. I thought that was so Anyway,

[3:15:11] all right. All right, we're going to ahead and bring the meeting back to order at what time have we got? 11:49. Um, coming out of close session, we're going to do follow-up and administrative issues. We're going to consider items discussed in executive session if needed. I don't believe we have anything there. Um, have any announcements or considerations for future agenda items? I'll start with you, Mary, if you got anything for future items. >> No. Karen, >> Harry. >> Patrick, >> no. >> I just didn't shake [laughter] here. I just I heard him move. I was trying not to give it away that I missed it. Anyway, my apologies. >> No, >> Tommy. >> No, sir. >> All right, Joe, I skipped you. Are you good, Joe? Okay, I've got one. Um, with the demand on the infrastructure that appears to be coming to the north side of town, I'd like to look and investigate the potential of a second tier zone, a tier zone that would include the tax base of the industrial park and the uh avenue that it runs across. We'll have to be very specific on how we define it, but I would like for that to include um parts of North Bell Street. want to make sure that also um includes the old Ballinger Highway. This is for critical infrastructure. I look for it to come across the city limit side of 21105, carry over to um North Chadurn from 29th Street North and also North Bryant. We'll it'll be a map that will take uh some time to look and define, but we also need to base that on incremental revenue, not off existing. So, I want that to only come off any incremental taxes that come in so it doesn't burden anybody any further. That's the only thing I have for now. Any other additional items? If not, I'll take a motion to close. >> Move we adjourn. >> Can I get a second? Got a first from Tommy and a second from Harry. All in favor say I. >> Meeting closed. We will go have a grab lunch for a working lunch and come back to the dis and we'll work through our

[3:17:14] budget. Hopefully, we'll be starting within the next 10 minutes. Anybody

[3:27:44] seen Patrick? >> I think as Patrick says So, we have a quorum. Let's roll. >> We're going ahead and open the city council budget workshop. Today's August 4th, 2026. Um, notice is hereby giving a regular meeting of the city council of the city of St. in Angela V Hill, August 4th, 2026 at 8:35 a.m. We're a little late for that. At the Mcnes Convention Center, South Meeting Room 501, Real Cons, San Angelo, Texas. We're going to call this meeting order. We'll go to a workshop itinerary. A discussion of matters regarding the fiscal year of 2026 and 2027. Budget preparation including but not limited to one, enterprise funds, revenue, and expenditures. And number two, other items needing council direction presentation by made by finance director Jonathan Flores. Jonathan, you're up. Good morning, mayor, council. Um, like you said, we are going over the enterprise funds today. That is primarily made up of the utility funds. We're going to go over the airport. Uh, we'll go over CCDC as well as hot funds and funds supported by the hot funds programs. Um, so to start off, um, just an example of what we'll be going over today. We'll start with the water fund. Sales are currently being budgeted at $37,000, an increase of $37,000. That's primarily due to consumption trends. We've seen an increase over the last uh bit or so. So, uh we're projecting that increase of $37,000. Um in the other revenue line, we're projecting an increase of $460,000. Uh that's primarily due to interest of $455,000. On the expenditure side for the water fund, we're seeing an increase to personnel. Um that increase is primarily due to overtime and the benefits

[3:29:47] associated to that overtime. On the operations and maintenance line, we've got an increase of $700,000 for contract services. Uh that's made up of uh $260,000 of uh an increase for our data pros contract. That is the contract that we have for uh paper billing. So they send out our paper bills to citizens every every single month. Uh that's increasing $260,000. The water fund is now paying for that. It was previously in the general fund. Um we're also seeing an increase for software maintenance of of $300,000. Uh in that $300,000 increase, uh Neptune is increasing $120,000. And then we are purchasing new engineering software at $120,000 as well. in the capital line. Um we're seeing a a decrease there on the capital line and that's really to offset the increases that we're seeing in the operations and maintenance revenue isn't increasing enough to cover our um the inflation that we're seeing on O andM. So we're having to decrease the amount that we contribute to capital. This will just impact the amount of projects that we can fund paywise as well as at the end of the year the amount that we can add to fund balance for future capital projects as well. The other expenditures line there is primarily made up of indirect cost and some um a transfer out for debt service as well. The next slide we have for you is just considerations. We kind of wanted to go over the water sales again. Uh slight increase due to consumptions trends. We did want to let you know that we are currently in the middle of a rate study uh that is being conducted for the the water fees, sewer fees, as well as some storm water fees as well. um this will go to helping us cover those future capital needs as well as the increases to on and m as we saw on the slide before we're having to decrease our capital and we've got some big projects coming up our currently in our CIP we have about $462 million worth of projects in our cap that need to be

[3:31:50] funded um and then on top of the capital needs we spoke about this morning health benefits are increasing for 27 and then we would like to implement some version of the comp and class study so uh Both those three items there at the bottom aren't addressed in this budget quite yet. Um, but we wanted to make you aware of these. The next fund we're going to go over is the water reclamation fund. The water reclamation fund is increasing on our fee or not increasing the fees, we're seeing an increase on consumption, which is increasing the total amount of revenue of $425,000. On the other line there, that is primarily due to interest, that full $245,000 there. Um, on the expenditure side, there's a slight increase to personnel. This is due to a new position, a wastewater operator position, uh, that we'll have out at the wastewater plant. And then operations and maintenance is increasing 230,000 uh 165,000 of that is due to vehicle maintenance. uh and the remainder is made up of indirect cost and it uh we are able to contribute a little bit to capital on this fund uh primarily due to that increase in consumption and so that'll go to funding uh payroll projects or at the end of the year falling to fund balance that we could then pull for future capital projects as well. Uh other expenses is increasing slightly for debt service payment as well as building payments. Considerations for this fund looks very similar to the water fund. Um we have a slight increase in revenue due to consumption trends. This is also part of the rate study that's currently being conducted and we'd like to with that rate study hopefully fund future capital needs as well as health benefit increases and a complass study as well. [clears throat]

[3:33:54] The storm water fund is seeing a slight increase uh for consumption again uh $67,000 there. Uh on the other line, we aren't seeing the same growth in in interest in this fund that we saw in the other two funds and that's due to the fact that we have been using the fund balance in the storm water fund. So there's not a uh as much in this fund to continue earning that interest. Um so we're seeing a slight decrease in our projections for FY27. On the personnel side, um on the expenditure side, personnel is decreasing $41,000. Um that's primarily due to uh changes, restructurings in the storm water fund. Uh operations and maintenance is increasing $135,000 and that is primarily due to vehicle maintenance of 100,000 and systems maintenance of 37,000. Systems maintenance is where we use uh that that's the account we use to purchase uh materials like pipes, uh lumber, storm drains, uh grates, and then there's slight increases to it as well in the operations and maintenance line. The capital line is decreasing next year $44,000. This line we're is offsetting the increases to operations and maintenance. Again, operations our revenues aren't increasing enough to cover our operations and maintenance increases. So, we're having to pull from the capital lines in order to balance the funds. Um, this fund in particular is really hurting on the capital side. Um, we're we're not able to um fund PGO projects at the level that we need to. Uh, in the past, this capital account was funded at $400,000 or at least there was a line in there for $400,000 for uh PIO projects. Um but we've had to reduce that um over time to cover the operations and maintenance lines. Uh other expenses is made up of uh transfers out for indirect cost as well as billing charges. And then for the considerations for the

[3:35:58] storm water fund, we'd we we'd like to uh request uh the ability to increase storm water rates by 5%. Um, so we'd appreciate some direction on that. When it comes to the storm water rates, this would help us with that operations and maintenance increase. Um, that 5% would uh add an additional $159,000 to the budget. Uh, not only would it cover the operations and maintenance, but it would al help us cover health benefits, uh, implementation of complass study, um, and help offset that decrease in the capital budget lines. Just for uh example, residential customers at most will only see a 26 cent increase on their monthly water bill. >> Can you say that again? >> The residential customers at most at the highest tier will only receive a 26 cent increase on their monthly water bill. Um and again, that brings us to this next slide. We wanted to uh give you a picture of what that would look like uh implementation wise. So, of course, fees would increase to a total of 226,000. Uh, that would allow us to cover on the personnel line health benefit increases as well as a three-year implementation uh and a 2% COLA for personnel for comp and class study. Operations and maintenance would be at that 135,000 and we would be able to leave capital relatively flat um at least for this this um budget year. This fund is included in the rate studies. So, we'd like to come back with um an additional whatever that rate study comes back of what it's needed for capital. We have some capital needs in this fund as well. So, we'll bring that when we bring water and sewer rates. >> Jonathan, do you have a target on your capital balance? Is it back to 400, 450? >> I think I think a part of that rate study, we take our capital projects and we'll build that number in. It it's going to need to increase. 400 was was good. three, four years ago. It's probably

[3:37:59] going to be need to be a little bit more. Um, but uh we'll build those projections into that rate study. >> Jonathan, when's the last time storm water had had a rate increase? >> I believe it was 201 2020 2023. >> Okay. >> But Tommy, before that it it was 2010 before I'd seen a rate increase. So in 2023 we did a 4% across the board um rate increase just to kind of keep the fund afloat um in in lie of the rate study that we're working on. Like I said at the end of the meeting we are requesting some direction on this fee. So we'll need uh input on this at the end of the meeting. uh solid waste fund. Uh these uh user fees are increasing contractually on both the residential and the customer and the commercial side. On the other line that is primarily made up of interest again, $19,000 increases to interest. The rest is an increase to leases. On the personnel side, we had a position move out of the solid waste fund. So we're seeing that decrease of $66,000 on the personnel line. operations and maintenance is staying flat in this fund and then we're contributing uh the majority of the increase in revenue to the capital line. We'll use that for future permitting of the closure of the landfill. Other expenses has a slight increase for indirect cost and billing charges as well. The next fund we'd like to go over is the airport fund. The airport fund is currently projecting a decrease in revenue of $102,000. Uh the primary decrease to this fund is related to Hertz um uh no longer operating out at the airport. Um on the other revenue line uh that is $33,000

[3:40:03] that's primarily made up of interest as well. The personnel line is increasing $28,000 for benefits, primarily group insurance, as well as a slight increase to retirey insurance. And then on the operations and maintenance line, there's several line items here. They have a $25,000 increase to indirect cost, a $24,000 increase to contract services. That's where we pay our our trash services, uh enterten of the escalator. Uh and then are also seeing an increase to insurance liability as well as slight increases to vehicle maintenance and natural gas. The capital line in this fund is taking a hit $195,000 and that's to cover the loss in revenue that we're seeing in leases as well as the increase in operations and maintenance. U that's primarily coming out of the vehicles account. So, uh, the ability to cover vehicles, um, going forward is is decreasing $183,000 and that leaves $84,000 in that account for vehicle replacement. >> Jonathan, real quick on that. >> Um, with the loss of her, do we expect to get any more revenue from the other from Enterprise or anybody or is it >> Justin's coming in? Yeah. add some context to that. >> So, just to clarify, we uh we did not lose Hertz. What we lost was Dollar and Thrifty. There were two brands that operate under Hertz, and they were not performing. And those those two companies pay a $2,500 per month concession fee. And the revenue that they were generating was surpassed by the concession fee. So, it made sense just to pull those two brands. So, we lost $5,000 a month just by those two rental car companies pulling the concession fee. So, Hertz is still operating and they're still performing

[3:42:05] quite well. We still have Avis and Herz operating. >> But is it is it basically is our our revenue only coming from them being on site, not per actual rental? Does that make sense? >> Yeah, it's per rental. Well, every every we get 10% of the revenue that they generate at the airport. So, if somebody rents a car at the airport, we get 10% of that revenue. >> Do we think that their portion will go up any like I realize we don't have a guarantee, but do we think they'll be bringing more vehicles now because dollar and thrifty are gone? >> They're going to continue supporting the Hertz brand and as long as Hertz continues to support continues to perform strong, then I think Hertz will continue operating at the airport. >> Okay. >> And it's also tied to our our passengers as well. more people we have, the more rental cars we have. So when we have strong passenger and playments and deplaimments, we have strong rental car and concessions within the terminal. >> That that's what kind of was going to. So is it have we lost playments and deplants? Are our numbers down overall? Is that why we think >> we had a strong year last year? We did have a strong year 50 58,000 in playments, which was a good year for us. Uh so we're holding that trend. We might be a little below it right now. Uh we are seeing our rental cars down. If you look at our trend data, our rental cars are down uh across Avis and Herz. So it's down over prior years and that could just be utilizing other services uh utilizing Ubers and lifts and other taxi taxi operators uh rather than rent a car, right? >> Whatever is more affordable right now. >> Perfect. Thank you. If there aren't any other questions on the airport fund, we'll move on to the next fund, which is COCDC economic development. Uh COCDC is funded by half cent sales tax. 25% of that half cent or 28% of that half cent sales tax goes to the economic development fund and we are

[3:44:08] planning on budgeting for an increase in sales tax of about 2.87%. Um we believe that number is a little conservative right now. We're waiting on August payments to come in before we set that number. So, we might have a little bit room up or down depending on how sales tax comes in in August. Um, right now we're budgeting for an increase of $102,000. Interest on investments is increasing $26,000 and on the expenditure side, operations and maintenance is increasing for increase grounds maintenance at the industrial park. partner affiliations is increasing 14,000 and this is actually uh for chamber events. This was previously budgeted in the operations maintenance line and we're just reclassing it to partner affiliations. So it's not a genuine increase but it's showing up as an increase in that partner affiliations line. COCDC staff is increasing 20,000 for their support. City services is the indirect cost portion uh to that's paid to city for services provided to the development corporation. that's decreasing slightly in this economic development fund. And then advertising is increasing $12,000 for the marketing agreement with Media Advantage. And then the remaining amount of revenue is falling to future projects. That full $2.4 million is what the development corporation and their board can use for business incentives allowed by the type B sales tax. on the ballot side. So, this is the 72% of that half cent sales tax. We're seeing sales tax at the same increase. This is going to bring in an additional $263,000 into the fund. Um interest on investments of $32,000. Um and then on the expenditure side, city services, this is the indirect cost portion on the ballot side is increasing to $26,000 and then a slight increase to debt service payments for ballot projects. And then the remaining amount of the

[3:46:10] revenue is falling to future projects that can be used for future water supply projects. And that's restricted by the ballot that the voters uh post uh voted approved. Next up is hotel occupancy tax. Right now we are projecting revenue flat. We're seeing revenue at budget in the current fiscal year. we don't see a need to increase that budget for next fiscal year at at this point in time. So that budget is staying flat. There is a slight increase in interest income of about $9,000. The on the expenditure side um the destination marketing organization is allocated $950,000. We're the third year of that contract with them. The next three lines are contributions to different city funds. Uh Fort Concho, civic events, the sports complex. Um n 90,000 for Fort Concho, 1.1 million for civic events, and $200,000 for the sports complex. And those go towards maintaining those facilities. Um wayfinding improvements is decreasing $25,000. We had set aside that money for uh wayfinding for the water lily garden and we've accomplished that goal and so we don't see a need to budget that going forward. And then we have $444,000 budgeted for arch programs. These are the programs that uh bring in hotel uh stays uh for different events. >> Can you itemize what's in that category, please? So that that's made up of uh 50,000 for the Performing Arts Council, 50,000 for the Museum of Fine Arts, 50,000 for Art and Common Places, uh 25,000 for the Railway Museum, 100,000 for downtown St. Angelo, 100,000 for Concho Christmas, um and then we have some smaller ones. 25,000 for the symphony, 16,100 for the ballet, 15,000 for the Angelo Civic Theater, 17,000 for

[3:48:13] the Broadway Academy, and then we have three events that or two events that we fund um for the Hispanic Heritage Museum at uh 2,500 and the mini Miss Wool pageant at $1,900. So that's what makes up uh majority of that $444,000. We are currently in the application process for those organizations. So we've sent out applications for those organizations for funding for this year. Um those applications are due August the 21st. Once we get those applications, we'll go through and vet them. Uh those applications are meant to have those organizations show to us um their attendance, how many hotel stays they're actually uh intending to bring into the city as well as why hot funds are needed uh for their program and how it enhances the the hot fund revenue overall. And so we'll get those applications on the 21st and then we'll provide those to you guys the next week in your Friday packet. And then we tentatively have scheduled on September 1st uh an item on the regular agenda to go over the allocations of those funds for the next fiscal year. >> I made a request to get some information from the chamber to help quantify the traffic. I Jeremy, could you come up and tell us a little bit how datafy would actually assist in how we evaluate some of these items? >> [snorts] >> Good afternoon. Jeremy Barts, vice president destination marketing with the chamber. Um, we utilize a software called Betafy. Most of you have heard of I don't I mean it's not a secret. Most of you have seen our u our presentations on this. Essentially what it does is it utilizes these things. Uses uses a a location device, location service to tell us where our visitors are coming from, essentially how long they spend in town. uh gives us a a spending um breakdown essentially of what they've

[3:50:15] spent while they're in town as well as uh whether or not they might stay in hotels. So, we set a radius within this software at 75 miles. Now, again, as we've talked in the past, I know that if people driving from Sonora or Abalene are coming to St. Angelo, they may or may not stay in hotels, but if they're coming in for a sports tournament, the idea is they would have, you know, a 5:00 game on Friday, but an 8:00 game on Saturday morning. We've taken my kids up to Abalene for sports tournaments in the past, and we will stay in a hotel because you've got that early morning game. So, the idea is setting that 75 miles just to understand we're not pulling any local traffic into these analysis at all. We want to maintain as many people outside that 75 just so that we know. But to give you a little bit of context, 2025, uh, Museum of Fine Arts essentially had 21,000 visitors from outside that 75 mile radius who had an average length of stay at about a 1.4 day. Now again, we get into the semantics of 1.4, 2 days, a day and a half. We don't need to go through all that. Downtown St. Angelo, same similar situation. We use all points of interest in downtown St. Angelo. Essentially 149,000 visitors who came through, spent time on average about 2 days within downtown St. Angelo. Okay. But again, you're talking essentially from Sixth Street at the loop back down past SA. So we're I mean it's a it's a broad range of of places that they can go. Lily Garden, same thing. We can do it for each individual organization that that is on this list as well as those that that Jonathan mentioned for Sabbath, for Angelo Civic Theater. Just to kind of give you some breakdown there. Angelo Civic, I did do that um an average of 1.3 days with 6,000 visitors who came into the Civic Theater in 2025. In 2026, we obviously will only have through July. This is a long process. It's not something that we just get, you know, immediate results, but these are these are numbers that we

[3:52:18] have for 2026 and they mirror very closely to 2025. We're not seeing a huge increase uh through the first half of the year at this point. But to give you some context, St. Angelo Museum of Fine Arts, roughly 6,700 visitors, average stay again 1.4 days. Downtown, average stay of 2 days, 98,000 visitors coming in from outside of 75 miles. So again, I think that the the context of this is that we're tracking the best we can to see where these people are coming from, where they're spending their time. It's not big brotherish enough that we can say they stayed at the uh can I say hotel names in in this discussion? >> A specific hotel. How about that? They didn't stay at this specific hotel and eat at this specific restaurant. I can't tell you that when Tom walked into town, he went here, here, here, and here. But what I can tell you is that these folks are coming in from outside of those those radius that we set up. They are staying in town. They are spending money. We can't guarantee you that they're staying in hotels, but we can also tell you that they are here for more than one day. They're not stopping through, grabbing gas, and hitting the road again. Uh they are actually spending some time here. So that's sales tax dollars, that's hot tax dollars. It's kind of a combination of everything. a concurrent visit where they visit two or three of these. How does that track? >> It's it's very difficult because again it's it's kind of one of those things. I I can't see specifically that they stayed at this particular hotel, ate at a particular restaurant downtown, but also visited SA. I can't tell you that that same person did those three things, but what I can do is just get an understanding of, okay, there were a lot of people here for this particular weekend. Um, and at that time, at that particular time, St. Angela Museum of Fine Arts had a brand new art show unveiled and we saw people that came in spent two to three nights in hotels. They stayed downtown. They spent a lot of money downtown, but they also attended SAMA. That's essentially what we can do. It's correlated data. >> Well, every year when we get to this,

[3:54:21] there's always a I would say a struggle to figure out how to allocate these funds. >> Yes. >> So, we're trying to do this the most fair and appropriate way based on headcount and traffic. >> Yes. And datify helps us solve a lot of these questions. >> Absolutely. And I'm willing to do this for any of the organizations that are mentioned here. Uh we do this free of charge. I mean, this is this is kind of my job. So, um it it's it's part of that job and I'm happy to do that. So, when any of these organizations have reached out to me in the past or even just in the last couple of weeks, I'm happy to do that. Uh I'll give them everything that I can. Obviously, it's again, it's all representative sample. There are people out there um I was in the AT&T store just a few days ago. I saw that they still have flip phones. I would buy one. I would take one right now, but they still sell flip phones. Those don't have location services on them. So, it's primarily smartphone data that we're analyzing. Uh we also utilize that software for targeted marketing which helps us out. Uh because we are going after them where they live. We're not just hitting them with with a blind ad. We're going where they are. We're utilizing that software for that purpose to draw those people to St. Angelo and for all of these organizations, not just for ourselves. >> So, thank you, J. Does anybody have any questions for Jeremy? Thank you, sir. >> Absolutely. >> Jonathan, the last piece on the hotel tax fund is operations and maintenance. Uh we're having an increase of 25,000. This is going to go to fund hotel audits as well as short-term rental software that'll help us um collect from those as well as uh keep them in compliance as well. [clears throat] The next couple funds are all hotel tax supported funds. Uh Civic Events is the first one up. Again, they receive 1.1 almost $1.2 million in hotel occupancy tax funding. Uh the big

[3:56:24] change in their revenues here is in the other line. This is related to concessions of about $10,000 out at the Coliseum. Um we're planning on renovations uh eating into our ability to collect those concessions. We're not going to have as many events out there. Uh we're seeing a slight decrease in personnel of $2,000. And then in the operations and maintenance line, the majority of that decrease in operations and maintenance is to electricity. Again, we're we're planning on seeing less events out at the Coliseum while renovations take place, so we won't need to pay as much in utilities. The next fund is the Texas Bank Sports Complex Fund. Um program fees are increasing 100 to 150,000. That's an increase of 44,000, almost $45,000. That increase in program fees allows the general fund transfer in to decrease a little bit as the fund becomes more self-sufficient. it doesn't need as much of a transfer in from the general fund to uh help with operation. So, that's decreasing $35,000. The other line is interest um an increase on interest earnings. On the expenditure side, personnel is increasing $10,000 for uh the maintenance out at the sports complex field. And then operations and maintenance is increasing $13,000 primarily for uh operations and maintenance of the turf and the grass and the fields out there. the Fort Concho fund. We are seeing an increase in Fort Concho of rent of 16,000. This is rent that the state office building place to the fort. And then in the other line as well, that increase of 60,000. $51,000 of that is made up of by a transfer from the state office building again to cover or help with the fort's operations and maintenance. Um on the expenditure side, we're seeing an increase on the personnel line. This is uh for the addition of an a part-time assistant archivist position. Uh so the the

[3:58:28] increase in salary and benefits is an increase of $27,000. Operations and maintenance is increasing $28,000 and that's due to an increase in insurance liability of about $15,000. And then we are able to contribute a little bit to this capital line of $21,000 for any projects that they need out at the fort. The state office building uh is increasing their rents as well, $53,000 uh in the next year. This is this is rent received by uh the state office building from the state. The state rents out some offices there. Uh and so that's a contractual increase. The other line is an increase to uh interest personnel is a slight decrease or slight increase. Operations and maintenance is also increasing slightly. Uh the big change on the expenditure side is that transfer out to help support the fort at $51,000. The Fairmont Cemetery Fund. Next year we are planning a decrease in charges for services. Um, we saw we last year we increased uh the the price of the burial plots out there up to $4,000. We think uh that kind of priced us out of the market. So, we're not seeing the same volumes sold. So, we're uh re going to recommend a decrease to that feedback down to the 3500 which is what it was at previously. We think that will help um us maintain competitiveness in the market. Um but as a function of that we're going to see a slight decrease in that charges for services line. >> So are we going to do a study shar so to compare where we sit pricing versus others? >> Yeah. Yes sir. That's um part of part of what we do annually is a fee review. And so Jeremy will go out and get some market rates uh for different cemeteries. And so we believe that

[4:00:31] $35,000 is going to get us in that market range. Jonathan, real quick on that. >> What is our plan for long-term maintenance of it, though? If if we drop our rates and then don't have a fund balance of eventually we'll run out of space or or even any lots to sell. >> So, the Fairmont Cemetery has a trust fund. $500 of every burial plot sold goes to that trust fund that then earns interest to help with the maintenance of the Fairmont Cemetery once all the plots are sold. Um, also at that time we'll have less operations. We'll be doing less funerals at that point. Um, less services and so we will see a decrease on in our operations and maintenance. It should level out a little bit. I I think we're going to get to the point where we might have to subsidize it a little bit, but these numbers will change significantly when we get to that point. >> Is the um the 500 that's going to that will that remain the same even if we lower our rates? >> Yes, sir. Yeah, that'll stay in effect. >> Thank you. tomorrow. [clears throat] >> Just a couple of notes because the public is listening to this. The space sales we had we bumped them up last year to $3,000. We're requesting bump down to 2500. You said 4,000 to 3,000. It's the spaces aren't that that high. and we're requesting to bump him down for next year because we did see a a trend going downward in our sales. Um the other thing is that we have that one project we purchased the Kelly Moore paint building and uh we're finishing the the renovation design work on that. Once that that's done, we'll have a better idea what it's going to take to renovate that. We'll come back to council u asking for some funds to renovate that. Once we do that, that'll free up the existing office building, which we could sell to help pay off part of what we've used to do these projects, purchase the building and renovate it.

[4:02:35] And then also because that the new renovated building would have the offices and the maintenance function. will vacate the maintenance building, free up that space, and because a while ago we were looking at using the property we acquired from ASU to build a new office, that will also free up that space. And with those two spaces combined, we can increase um spaces by,400, which will help extend the life of the cemetery with space sales and services. That's looking longterm. >> Thank you. Good information. The next slide we have for y'all is just an overall slide. This slide titled general fund considerations, but all these funds that we went over today are seeing um increases similar to these that we're seeing in the general fund. The first one we spoke about this morning is uh we're going to expect to see a projected uh increase to health benefits. Um, >> this is this is the amount that we need to cover next year's claims as well as administration of the plan. And then we are uh on the tail end of the class and comp study. Um, we're looking at what a three-year implementation of that study would look like. Um, just for context on both those numbers, for health insurance, at the low end, we're expecting uh an additional increase uh in the general fund of $1.7 million for health benefits. For the class and comp study, and again, that's uh the three-year implementation with a 2% COLA would be a $2.4 million increase um that we need to fund. And then specifically for the general fund, the fire pension, um we're looking at what an increase would need to be for that pension fund. Um right now that's coming in at about 1.5%. Uh which means that we'll have to increase uh total contribution dollar amount by $250,000 a year. And that one

[4:04:40] and a half percent would be staggered over the next five six years uh to get us to where the fire pension is fully funded appropriately. And then we have contractual increases. These contractual increases are made up of increases for software we currently own. They also include increases for uh contracts like uh the contract that we have with the appraisal district. Um so those contra contractual increases equate up to $489,000. And then we've got department target increase requests. These are requests from departments. Uh majority of these requests help departments maintain their current level of service. Um these requests total up to $887,000. Um, and so we just kind of want to put these in front of you guys um, as we go through the rest of the presentation as well um, as considerations as we move forward through the budget process and in advance of the next general fund workshop as well. >> Jonathan, as we look at that, we get down to the target increase request, everybody always throws something out. And so what we did with budgeting our sales tax at a more aggressive level, we avoid that end of the year. Everybody goes for a grab. As you come to this target increase request, I would like for you to prioritize those as they come forward and maybe assign them a number on importance and significance of one through five and what that is for that department success to get the next one year, two years or three years. All right? Because sometimes we have these things that we can manage to get by. Sometimes we taking advantage of something to like our fire truck to do it all at once. But I would like to at least be able to look at these and go that one's a heavy priority. This one is not. And I don't mean it bad, but when everybody comes up to ask, including myself, oh my my priority is better than anybody else's, but I think we need an assessment. And I would look to the two ACMs and Philip to manage the priority

[4:06:43] ranking of what those are. >> Yes, sir. >> Just an FYI. >> Yes, sir. Yeah. And and we go through those requests with the city management as well, but we'll go down and prioritize those a little bit more. >> It would just help us be able to look at those and understand where that fits into the puzzle. >> Yes, sir. >> And that is my last slide for the day. I'm going to turn the presentation over to Patrick and he's going to go over these land use categories. >> Jonathan, was that your first maiden voyage? >> That was my finance. >> Yes, sir. My first budget workshop under the belt. >> Thank you very much. >> Yes, sir. >> Now, let's go into what would be the 4hour conversation with Patrick. >> 4 hour or four minute? It depends on you guys. >> I'm with you. I'm with you. No, this is this I need you to talk a little bit about why and then go into this. >> So, you just saw some of the priorities that Jonath, >> excuse me. Some of the priorities that you just saw Jonathan go over um were obligations and and um and stresses on the general fund itself. In addition to that, we have some general fund stresses within our operational divisions, most namely from our street and bridge division and our traffic operations division. Those two divisions are solely funded out of the street and bridge or out of the general fund as well as is their equipment replacement and and their other activities like seal coating and stuff like that. That is all coming out of the general fund right now. So you see that we have a burden on the general fund right now that we're trying to figure out how to take care of. This is one possible solution to that. So want to kind of walk you'all through the methodology of this. You've seen this twice before in our strategic planning workshops based on your direction there. We're bringing this back to you in a final form with a couple different options in order to get some true direction from you guys on how we would like to move forward with in this particular um project. So, what we have,

[4:08:48] [clears throat] what I'm going to present today is a right-of-way infrastructure fee. Um, what this would do is it's a fee that would take those those two divisions specifically, the street and bridge and the traffic operations division, and it would give them their own isolated funding source out of from the general fund. So these this particular um fee would generate revenue that would be then dedicated and attributed to the operations within our ride ofway in order to fund those activities. If [clears throat] you remember back whenever we presented this there's this this rightway infrastructure fee it t it it impacts the residential and non-residential properties within the city. So every property within the city whether it is a home whether it is an apartment whether it is a business whether it is a nonprofit a church whatever the case may be um a profit for-profit business this fee would be assigned to to that particular business. The methodology behind this is all driven off of in on the non-residential side is all driven off of these land use categories. Land use category is a category that is defined within a nationally published institute of transportation engineers manual. This is a manual that is that looks at every business type in the nation and attributes a trip factor or the amount of traffic that that particular business generates on average per factor per unit. So whether that's per thousand square feet or per acre or per per fuel pump whatever the case may be. We took that entire manual and we paired this down to the top 49 land use categories that are most applicable for the businesses within St. Angelo. And that's what you see before you there. So essentially there are 49 land use categories. They're they're similar to a single family equivalent. So it's the number of trips that a single family would use. And we'll get into that just a little bit more when we start looking at the rate tables. But for the most part, these are the 49 categories that

[4:10:51] each business and each entity within St. Angelo that is non-residential would be attribute would be assigned underneath. So we wanted to bring you guys a couple of options. If you'll remember back in the strategic planning workshop, we presented what what I call a comprehensive right-of-way maintenance um approach. What that does is it takes our entire street and bridge division and its activities, our entire traffic operations division and its activities, our equipment replacement. Those things are happening today. So it takes those moves those over. In addition, it provides us an alley maintenance program that is not funded and not has no resources assigned to it today so that we can properly maintain and and ensure the viability of our alleys as well as provide some uh some capital money for pay as you go projects. So whether we cash flow those or we we invested in debt or whether we use that as grant matching funds, there's some availability of cash there in order to do capital infrastructure projects. And when I say capital infrastructure, I'm talking streets, curbing, sidewalks, traffic signal, ADA, pedestrian, anything within our rideway will be will can be handled by this this particular fee. So, if you give me the full gamut of those of that program, the full comprehensive program, I need about $16 million a year in order to do that. The fee table there in front of you generates that amount of revenue on an annual basis based on this fee. Like I said earlier, there is a residential component and a non-residential component. For the residential component in this $16 million structure, you're looking at about a $23 per unit uh fee for that. So that is per house or that is per apartment unit or anything that is is residential in nature would have a $23 fee assigned to it. For the non-residential, there's nine different

[4:12:52] categories that they could fall within. And within that there's we go from $50 all the way down to $1,400 depending on which category um is in there. I'm going to back up one slide because I think there was a slide that I missed. There it is. This was supposed to be before that rate table. So let's talk about how does that how is that figured out, right? Let's talk about the um the formula then on how this works. So you we just said we have a land use category and in that land use category a particular business is assigned assigned a category. So in this example we have a medical clinic a walk-in clinic. That walk-in clinic is classified as a clinic down there as you can see and the department unit of that clinic is per thousand square feet. So based on this table and based on that IT trip manual there a clinic generates 3.2 28 trips per thousand square feet per day. So if you look down there at the formula at the very bottom of that screen, you have a 2,000 square foot clinic. So 2,000 divided by the,000 per square foot unit gives us 2 times the 328 trip fee 656. And that carries you over to the right hand side to that [clears throat] to that uh fee table. And you see that that 6.56 falls in between the five and the eight, which is a C4. So in this case, this particular clinic would have a $150 per month charge for their for their trip generation. Now this is again I think you can clearly see this is all dependent on on that development unit. So not every clinic is 150. Bigger clinics may have a higher may have a higher rate. Smaller clinics may have a smaller rate. So it's all depends on that that development unit and that formula. So every entity in sound we would assess this form assign this formula to come up with that that category and then what a subsequent

[4:14:57] rate would be for that. So again following that methodology brings you to which category in that C1 through C9 it would fall into. So in the $16 million um exam or option you're going to either pay $50 a month all the way up to $1,400 a month depending on which category. based on that formula you fall within. We also wanted to bring back to you kind of a barebones approach um and a bare bone barebones option for you. What I want to note is based on that comprehensive program that I that I talked about earlier, this gets us nothing more than what we're doing today, but it gets it still isolates this fund the those particular funds from the general fund. So in a 10 to do street and br our street and bridge budget, our traffic operations budget and our equipment replacement, I need about $10.5 million this first year in order to to cover the cost of of those funds. Those are the funds that are budgeted today for those particular divisions exactly within the general fund. So, in this in this example, um to generate $10.5 million of revenue, I need about $15 per single family unit. And your non-residential rates are going to go anywhere from $25 to $1,000, depending on which tier they fall within on that formula. In both of these cases, we as staff would encourage you to um also appoint an annual escal escalator to this. We've seen within the solid waste fund, we did that and we were able to sustain that fund and that funding source um with very little um or actually no um no issues. Contrarily, on the on the storm water fund, we implemented that in 2010. We did not have an annual escalation in that. And you see with the problem that

[4:17:00] we're at today within that that storm water fund. It just slowly trickles down. Your margin trickles down to where it's not functional anymore. If we are going to implement this program, I want to make sure that it's sustainable in the long term. So, I want to make sure that we plan for inflation, we plan for personnel adjustments, we plan for insurance cost, and we have that annual escalation to make sure that our revenues are fully covering the cost of this program without us having to come back in year three, four, five, asking the general fund then to contribute back to this program. I want to make sure that it's a standalone and that it that it sustains itself in perpetuity. So, let's kind of talk about what that looks like and what the distribution of it is and kind of give you some real world examples of where these would fall based on those two options. If you'll notice there that tier one, almost 40% of the non-residential businesses are going to fall within that tier one. So, they're going to be paying $50 to $25 depending on which option the council would like to would like to pursue. your your tier two through tier six, you're about 10%, you know, in each one of those. And in those higher tiers, those tier sevens through tier 9, that's really where you see a low low majority of the businesses. It's those large impactors. It's those large generators are going to be falling in there. But those are very few few businesses, especially in those higher tiers. There on the right are a couple a few examples of of tangible if you will um examples of where particular entities would fall depending on the two. So um Trinity Church $50 or $25 because they're in that C1 category, that C1 tier. If you look at um Grace Temple Baptist, it's a little larger church. So it'll be $80 to $40 per month. um all the way down to Taco Bell, you're looking at 325, 250. And you can just read through that list and kind of pick out some real world examples about how this would be applied um based on actual businesses here in St. Angelo.

[4:19:09] So, what would we do with this? Again, like I mentioned earlier, this would allow us to comprehensively take care of everything that we need to do infrastructurewise within our ride ofway, our streets, our signals, our striping, signs, sidewalks, ADA. I think you are all very aware that we've been very successful in our grant program. We've acquired over $31 million in grants with that. Most of those grants have a matching component to it. I don't have any more money for for match. I am tapped out on all my matching money. So for us to pursue more grants, I need a funding source for matching. I would be able to acquire some level of funding for for a matching component for those grants. So I have to be very selective today moving forward on on what grants I apply for. Um and I don't want to do that. I want to make sure that I'm grabbing all the all the free money out there that I possibly can. So that that's $31 million that the city of St. Angelo didn't have to pay on infrastructure improvements. Um, and we're getting that for usually 20 cents on the dollar. Equipment replacement, we're making sure that we can keep our equipment up and up to date, that we can keep it serviceable, that we're maximizing our value in that, um, that we're replacing it on an appropriate replacement cycle, that we're not overly spending money on repairs unnecessarily, that we're getting out of those out of those pieces of equipment before they become costly in repairs. Signalized uh, signal replacements. We have a TRIR for you guys every year for signal replacements. Those things are about $450,000 a piece. Some of our signals in town are were put up in the 60s. So, you can imagine the age of that infrastructure, just what the wear and tear does on them. We've replaced some through some grants through text, through our our street rehabilitation programs, but those are few and far between. We have probably well over a hundred signals that need to be replaced within town, but there's currently no funding source in order to do that. This would allow me to systematically at least one signal per year start tackling that that burden.

[4:21:14] And then capital projects as well. Um, I think you all can can acknowledge how amazing that $80 million was for our streets, for those main roadways in town, but I think you can also acknowledge just comparatively how far that did not go. There are still a bunch of streets that need to be handled, a bunch of streets that need to be rehabilitated within our within our street infrastructure um inventory. If I just to kind of put it in into perspective, if I tackle Avenue in Johnson Street and um the the little the golf course road off of 29th Street out there, I need about $35 million just to take care of the roadways to rehabilitate the roadways that I have currently designed and currently on my list. If I take the top 10 roadways, I need about 120 million. Jonathan has told me, he laughs at me every time I tell him I need 35 million. and it says we have no more debt capacity in order to do that. So, I don't know how I'm going to do Avenue in and Johnson Street um moving forward. We're still actively talking about that, still strategizing. this would help take care of that if you were able to fund it at that $16 million rate and give me a little bit of capital cash that I then could invest back into debt service to at least take care of those top four and then also give me a little bit of money toward grants that I could match um and hopefully ease some of that financial burden on future projects. Like I acknowledged earlier, this takes care of the full street and bridge budget. It takes care of the full traffic operations budget, our general replace general fund equipment replacement within those two divisions, and it also gives me and I also have a fund balance requirement if we turn this into its own dedicated fund of about three and or two and a half to $3 million. So depending on which which option council would like to uh give us direction to move forward on, um we'll we'll determine exactly what we can tackle here, how we manage it, and what

[4:23:16] we're able to do. So, with that, I'll open it up to to any questions and we can go back to the slides if y'all want to and look at those rate tables or um I'm willing. So, so I think in a discussion yesterday, I asked why are we doing this? And I wanted this presentation to lead with our tax appraisals, revenue, and what has happened this year, what's coming in. Does anybody have that handy? >> Yes, sir. So, just um a quick update on where we are with tax appraisals. Uh after market value increases and increases to exemptions this year, we had um $175 million come off the tax roll just related to new legislation uh for business personal property exemptions. That exemption increased and so we lost $175 million off of valuations. After you factor those in, our property value number, our certified taxable value did not increase as much as we were expecting. It only increased by 9%. Um, which means that we don't have the uh revenue uh up to that 3 and a half% cap. So, we'd have to go up. Um, and that's that's already on top of the previous um impacts that we identified to uh that we always bring to you guys in the general fund workshop. The impacts on um uh the over 65 freeze, the circuit breaker cap 20% on commercial properties under $5 million, uh the 10% cap on uh homesteads, homestead growth. Um and then of course we're limited on the amount of revenue that we can raise to the 3 and 12% cap uh per the state. Um so uh we're already feeling a lot of those pressures and we continue to feel those pressures from the state. One of the things that's uh upcoming in the next legislative session is looking at that cap percentage uh lowering that cap percentage down. I've seen it as low as 1%. Um so we're seeing a lot of

[4:25:20] pressures on the general fund and general fund departments in order to fund these uh with taxes, property taxes. And so uh this is an example of a way that we can fund uh a portion of our operations without having being impacted by the decisions made up at the state level. >> And that and that's really what I'm looking forward to. Right. Y'all charged me in in the public works department with making sure that our top priority, our infrastructure, is well taken care of. You guys gave us a phenomenal bump in that in 2015 with the $80 million plus increasing our operations money by $4 million in order to get a true eight-year cycle on our seal coat program done. That eight years has turned into 12 for me. That $80 million is gone after I get Sunset done. So moving forward, y'all have tasked me with an obligation that frankly is very stressful on how I'm going to continue doing that um just through inflationary cost and through the expenditure of the funds. So we're looking for a way in order to sustainably and proactively manage this infrastructure in perpetuity and something that we can plan for, we can manage, and we can move forward and give the citizens back what they're always asking for, which are nicer, smoother roadways, which you all know is not only just an infrastructure thing. It's also a quality of life thing for us too, not only for the citizens but for our visitors as well. So it has a trickle down effect for sure and we just want to make sure that we can sustainably manage a program and and proactively do that inside without these external entities messing with us. So I think one of the key things we've looked at here and across the dis from all of us is how this affects some people that typically have not been in a status to provide us compensation for the infrastructure we provide. This also is insulated from anything that the state would drive downhill and force upon us with reg regulatory on property tax. So why don't you give me 30 seconds of how this would affect the

[4:27:24] large people that typically do not pay any type of property tax. Now >> start with Shannon Goodfellow ASU the city. >> So this particular >> so this particular program will be assigned to and assessed to every property and every entity within St. Angelo, whether it's a nonprofit, whether it's Shannon Hospital who who does not pay property tax because of its status, um it's it's equitable across the board, right? So, you don't have some entities supporting the the usage of our infrastructure by other entities as it currently stands today. And and that's what you get whenever you you're working off of a tax base. This is not a tax. This is a fee that can be assessed to everybody and would be assessed to everybody equally across the board. So, everyone's paying their fair share. Everyone is assigned equitably placed on that nationally published manual. This isn't something that the city of St. Angelo came up with. This entire concept isn't something that we dreamt up. This is something that's used across the state in several municipalities already. Um, and we're just basically copycatting what's working there in order to to provide that benefit now to the city of St. Angelo. How would you execute it as far as how we how would we decide who gets an invoice? >> So, it's going to be assigned in in our world, what we envision is it's going to go it's going to be placed on your utility statement. So, lack of a better description, the water bill. It'll just be another line on that water bill. It'll be paid just like that. It'll be So, there won't be a separate bill that comes for it. There won't be a separate thing that we need to set up. It's just working with um our billing agency and making sure that that that fee gets assigned on there as another line on that water bill and then it's paid just through its normal fact normal ways that everybody's set up to pay right now. >> So how about things that have a common meter multiple entities under one common meter? How would that play out? Because

[4:29:27] you evalu evaluate it by visits to a specific square footage. So, we do have in some we do have a listing of it's called multi-use properties. So, it's single properties that have multiple meters. Obviously, those would be paired out and it would only be charged to a single meter within that property use. Now, if it's two separate properties with two separate meters, that's two separate fees, right? So, if it's a clinic right across the street from a hospital, the clinic gets a fee and the hospital gets a fee. So, it's going to be it's because those two buildings are going to generate their own traffic. And so we need to make sure that again this is equitable and even across the board for those two buildings. So if they have multiple meters on a single property then it'll only be charged to a single meter. But if it's multiple properties it would be on on multiple water bills. >> And this places some things that we're not going to work into. Correct, Philip? >> All right. Microphone's working there. Uh yes, Mayor. I appreciate appreciate that. And so I think uh um looking at the the budget and being in discussions yesterday, I think the uh the city staff is cognizant of what other rate increases are potentially out there. As we talked about in the last uh discussion or last meeting, uh the only increase that was uh was proposed uh as it related to a utility was storm water fee and that was a 26 cent on the highest end for residential customers. So knowing that uh increase would be the only one, this is an opportunity for us to look at this fee to be able to assist with streets. But I did want to provide some context as I departed the city of uh Garland for this role and we were in the middle of budget discussions and uh at this point of their their budget they're looking at a 5% water and sewer increase as well as a 5% landfill and sanitation fee increase. And so uh they have increases going across the board. Uh talked to the city of Odessa this morning and they're looking anywhere from a 3 to 4% increase across all of their utilities. And so this would just be an increase that we would focus on at this point related to storm water and this uh rightway use fee. And so I think

[4:31:30] that's important to keep in mind that we don't see other increases beyond this. >> Okay, cool. Thank you, Philip. Let's open it up to the dice. Tommy, looks like you got your finger ready over there. >> It's green. >> Let it roll. >> I I want to go back. Patrick, you said something that that jumped out at me. Um you said 8-year has moved to 12 year. What what are you what are you talking about? >> So, if you'll remember in 2015 when the council graciously gave us an moved us from $600,000 annually for a seal coat program up to $4 million annually for a seal coat program. They also attached the performance measure on that that every every roadway in the city of St. Angelo be seal coated within an 8-year cycle. We met that goal proudly. We met that goal, but moving forward, we had to tap in pretty hard into our operational funds in order to meet that goal just due to inflationary cost. What we're seeing now as we go through and we started over in that 8year cycle, we're almost having to cut those those areas that we did in year one, we're almost having to cut them in half in order to just make sure that I have enough funding. So, I'm still spending three and a half to$4 million, but I'm getting about half of it done. So that 8-year cycle has moved to 12 years now. And if we continue that with no no absorption, we've asked every year for budget for a TIR for about 800,000 to be to go into that program since 2015. That pro that has not been granted. So again, we did an amazing job up front, but we haven't sustained that. Hence why we want to make sure that that that annual escalation is in this program so that we can make sure that we sustain that and we get back to managing proactively managing our infrastructure and keeping it deteriorated. We just spent $80 million on several roadways in town. We want to make sure that we protect that investment and I can't do that in the current funding scenario that I have

[4:33:32] today. You just answered my next question because it it sounded like we were going to be stretching the timeline on those newly rehabbed streets, >> right, >> from 8 to 12, which what what does the data tell you all in terms of when do at what point do things start to break down and then become problematic? So, every street has a has a deterioration curve on it. Um, brand new roadway, I mean, it it's good. It has a 20-year life to it, and then it starts deteriorating. And about that year 7 to 8, if you haven't done anything, that falls off very, very hard. So, what we as staff has done is we have changed our operation now so that whenever we put a new roadway in, within the first three to four months, we're coming back in with a rejuvenator. We're basically locking in all the good stuff within the roadway. Within about 3 to four years after that, we're coming in with either HA5 or a seal coat. We're capping that so that that new pavement doesn't oxidize beyond and become brittle and and just and come be start deteriorating any further. So, we're slowing we're we're slowing and we're smoothing out that deterioration curve proactively. I want to do that and I want to keep that up. We've been we've been prioritizing that. Again, protecting that investment just like changing the oil in your car. You've got to change you've got to maintain these roadways in order to protect that investment. I want to keep doing that. This this program will allow me to keep doing that. >> So, does the 10.5 million keep you on the 8-year cycle or does the 10 a.5 million keep you on the 12 12ear cycle? the 10 and a half million keeps me on this sustained deterioration that I'm at right now. So, I'm going to It's the 12-year cycle plus. So, that 12 is going to turn to to a 13, going to turn into a

[4:35:35] 14 as those inflationary um impacts continue to press down on us year over year. So, the 10 and a half again gets me nothing more than what I'm doing today. And it also isn't necessarily sustainable to bring start bringing that curve or flattening that curve back out as far when it comes to maintenance. >> Thank you. >> I'm good and I appreciate [clears throat] Patrick >> that gives me as a numbers person helps me as I sit in front of the citizens. Uh but I don't think we can sustain infrastructure today unless we do something similar to this. >> You mentioned equitable several times. Um the only thing that to me still needs to be looked at as a residential part. It's not equitable. It's a flat rate per home. Correct. >> It is a flat rate per home. Yes, sir. with um with our new zones that we have with um just the disparity in lot size. Um I think that needs to be looked at. It's I think it's going to unduly burden some people that are already barely making it as it is. Uh adding this onto their utility bill. Um I think it's going to unduly burden them. So I think that's something that needs to be looked at to try to make that equitable. Um I have a big lot for instance. I to me somebody that has a very small lot with a small house on it shouldn't be paying as much as I should because they're not using near as much um use street use as as I am. So again, when we talk about street use, it's not necessarily the amount of street in front of your property. It's when you get on that roadway and you drive somewhere and you come back, it's it's that impact on the roadway that we're talking about. So it is it's equitable in the sense that every every home has trips assigned with it. Um and that it's not necessarily based on bigger lots, smaller lots in any of the

[4:37:38] in any of that regard. So it's the number of trips that is that is the factor there. How much impact those trips are having on our infrastructure um is is how this is assigned. >> Right. But that kind of goes my point. So, uh, for instance, you could have probably 10 houses on my lot. That would and we're all going to use the same amount of street. Um, so you're just saying that there's less cars on the road. >> And so that's why it's the same. I mean, cuz to me, I'm looking at it like, well, the street that has to be built and maintained. Um, if you're going down my street, I'm the one taking up all of it for quite a bit. So, I'm I'm the one going up and down it. And so I just I feel that the same rate to me that we have it um based on the other uses, we have the commercial usage, non non-residential usage. Um to me, I see where you're coming from. I just I still think there's an issue there. You're um same lot size, property rate size, all that. To me, it might be tough to go off of property tax value. You know, we can't quite do that because again, some of the lots may have a big house, but it's not a big lot. But to me, lot size, street length size, something like that. Um, if you're if we're going to keep bringing up equitable, I think something needs to be done about that part of it. Um, that's my opinion. >> So, I'm going to pile on Patrick a little bit. Um, maybe you can just quickly help us draw a line through some of these things over 65s. So again, those are some considerations that need to be accommodated. Um, we understand that there is a segment of our community that may have um some low some lower income, some fixed income, and in that case, what we as staff would would advise is piggybacking off of what's already been established. So within our water and our sewer fund, they already contribute money to the CVCAA to distribute out for those in need, right? they can put in an application. They're vetted out through the CVCAA and then those utilities and

[4:39:42] that money is strictly there to help um with those utility bills. What I would propose in this in this program is we attribute some amount of that revenue over to CVCAA in order to assist further assist those entities as well. um whether that's over 65 or whether that's you know low income >> if you're struggling you you can go there and you can find that assistance so that's how I would like to manage those those two entities that you brought up >> vacant lands vacant buildings >> so vacant buildings um they don't necessarily have a use so we I need to figure out the exception on on what we would do with vacant buildings um obviously ly if they don't if they're vacant, they're not going to have a water bill typically. And so just through natural causes, you're probably not going to have that fee assessed to them. >> Um if they just have a landscape meter, this wouldn't be assessed to landscape meters, obviously. So I would say through the through your normal activity, if you don't have a water bill, you're not going to have this fee. >> That makes sense. Um agricultural property, >> so far use it is. So there's a there's a parks and an open space um category in here that would be assessed that and so it's based on the number of acres and so it would just fall right in that formula for for that particular category. >> So we learned this yesterday but for the public discussion city lease land or parks. >> So just like we did our council directed us to do with the storm water fee every entity will pay this fee including city facilities. City parks would pay it. city facilities would pay it. It would not we would not would not be an exclusion for governmental entities in this particular case. Um and so again for equity purposes I mean [snorts] this building generates its own traffic. It needs to help contribute to to that impact on the infrastructure. >> Uh bigger picture there were some pretty spicy conversations about needing to

[4:41:48] tidy up our CIP. um in the not tooistant past. So, a little bit maybe cart before the horse, but thinking ahead to that. So, maybe that becomes a the next workshop. Um so that we're ready for this. Tommy, you want to comment? [laughter] I just said to Joe, you were looking at me when you were talking about a spicy conversation, a [laughter] comment I made about the about the CIP couple of months ago. Um, well, I'm I I'm going to I want to back up um just a minute. Um I I can't get out of my What I can't get out of my mind is if we do nothing, this problem is not going to go away. If we only do 10 and a half million, this problem is not going to go away. Am I missing something there, Patrick? I'm I'm That's stuck in my brain. >> No, sir. I I think you're spot on. I mean, obviously we say the reason our streets are in the condition that they're in today is because we did nothing in the past. We kicked that can down the road. We didn't proactively plan. We didn't proactively take measures to make sure that those deterioration curves are mitigated as they go forward. It's there. The sun's going to continue to shine. The rain's going to continue to fall. The snow's going to continue to to to accumulate. And all of that is going to continue to deteriorate this infrastructure. Whether we put money into it or not, those things are going to happen. The best thing to do is to put a rain slicker on, put some sunscreen on, and make sure that we're protected from it moving forward. Well, again, back to back to Karen's point, um, if my if my memory serves correctly, one of the biggest things that generates comments when the public can comment on our CIP is the condition of our streets. Is that accurate?

[4:43:50] >> Yes, sir. Yeah, we received 151 comments over our last CIP. uh 49% of those were strictly related just to infrastructure. So that does include water, sewer, and drainage. Um when you just looked at road fixtures just themselves, that's 27% of what was requested in those CIP comments. So it's >> and then there'll be a lot of other categories mentioned, not necessarily the one other category is not going to be 75%. It's going to be multiple categories in that other 75%. >> Correct? Yes. >> Is that accurate? >> Yes, sir. Yeah. So, 46% of that was uh water and sewer drainage. >> Okay. So, streets are always a hot topic. >> I don't think there's a one of us that when we when we ran for office, people didn't talk to us about the condition of the streets. And uh I remember twisting off in my first budget meeting uh nine years ago on the condition of our streets. Um, I'm still twisted off because we we've done what we can. You guys with the 80 million, you've maintained what you can, but now we're on a we've had to move to a 12-year cycle off of an 8year cycle. So, from the standpoint of a CIP, this only makes our CIP grow is what it does. Um, if we do nothing or we do 10 and a half million. Now, that's my opinion. Um, people can disagree with that, but anyway. So, uh, final point. I I agree with Tommy, and we asked you for this last year, >> and I'm glad to see it. Um, you mentioned a couple of different ways you thought it would work in the budget. You talked about it possibly becoming a separate fund, and Jonathan just spoke to percentages of public u opinion, shall we, shall we say? Uh, so how do you see that right now today? So you are ideally you would like for it to be dedicated completely to your department.

[4:45:53] >> So this would be in in in our vision and what we've discussed this would be its own isolated fund just like storm water is just like the airport just like any enterprise fund that you that you heard about today. This would be one more of those enterprise funds. So it would be isolated. It would be dedicated and it would be dedicated for these specific purposes. It would carry its own fund balance. It would not burden the general fund with the fund balance obligation. Um, and it also alleviates that street and bridge budget, that traffic operations budget to go back to the general fund to help accommodate some of the items that Jonathan led in with um, in when we started this this discussion and this presentation. So, yes, it would be an isolated fund. It would be fully restricted and fully dedicated to right-of-way infrastructure and committed to that. how we utilize that both from an O andM standpoint, a personnel and then a capital standpoint really determine is is going to be decided based on the direction that you all give at the end of this presentation on what we can do with that. Ultimately, I would love to see the payo come into effect. What that does is it gives me some extra money to get my last two bond issues so I can get Johnson and Avenue in done and that and that other roadway finished. And then it also gives me some extra cash so I can keep pursuing these grants as well as cash flow a few projects. We've had several discussions about Avenue J, Main Street, um Rick's Drive, Buoie. I I've got a list of roadways that need help and I don't think anyone is is ignorant that there's some additional work that needs to be done. As it stands today, once I do Sunset Drive, which is coming up first quarter of next year, um I'm through rehabbing streets. I don't have any more money to do any more rehab rehabilitations. >> Yeah. Through. So, are you are you saying just bear with me here um this would do away with

[4:47:57] the solid waste fund? >> No, it would have no impact on the solid waste combining or taking >> it's it's similar to the solid waste fund in the fact that it's an enterprise fund. It's standalone on itself, earns its own revenue, and provides its own expenses, >> but it would have no bearing on the solid waste fund itself. This thing would be strictly for street operations and rightway rightway infrastructure. I guess I misunderstood. I thought you said there were a couple of funds in here that this takes the burden >> the general fund. It takes the burden off the general fund itself. So, the street and bridge fund right there that you see, the traffic operations budget, the general fund equipment replacement, this would remove that obligation that the general fund is currently carrying and basically frees up that amount of money to go back to the general fund to be distributed out at your that you >> discretion. I'm sorry, 7.9 almost 8 million. >> So, the 7.92, the 155 and and some general fund equipment replacement fund money could go back to the general fund. Patrick, let me jump in there. And I think where the confusion may have come in that um when I was discussing the the rate increases that are are potentially out there that there were no increases taking place and the water and the sewer fund, there was just the storm water increase that we we discussed. And so that may have caused a confusion of funds being combined. It was just showing a big picture of what increases that the residents and commercial customers may see across across the board. So they there would not be a combination of funds. >> Okay. Thank you. On this um IT trip deal, and you went over this yesterday, how were those numbers calculated? I know I know it came from a manual, but what size entity did those come from? I mean, if it was a a thousand square foot building in Dallas is not the same as a as it as it would pertain to St. Angelo, >> right? And so that is why it's a national in um manual. It is based on the average for that type of entity across the nation. So obviously a clinic

[4:50:00] in Ballinger, Texas is going to be far different than a clinic in Dallas in Fort Worth, Dallas. But when you average that out, that's the number of trips that that type of business would generate based on the national average. So again, this isn't something that the city of St. Angelo has come up with. This is something that is a nationally published and nationally utilized manual so that we're staying consistent across that that nation. So we obviously don't have the resources to figure that out. That's why this Institute of Traffic Engineers use their funding and their money to figure out what this manual is and come up with those trips. But it's based on the national average for that type of business >> type of business. So it's um it's not a Ballinger gets calculated the same way that Indianapolis gets calculated. >> It's it's averaged all the way across. Right. >> That would just scare me to death. >> Right. Well, it's a manual about yay thick, you know, couple inches thick that we've paired down to 49 categories. So, notwithstanding a a difficult task >> and and two, keep in mind too that this land use category table is a fluid document, if you will. We can add to it if a cate if a particular business doesn't fall in doesn't reasonably fall into any of these categories, we can add a category to it. if our growth and our our future development within St. Angelo sees a different um business sector come in, we can add a category for that. So, it is a it's a live document that we can make sure that again we're being fair, we're being equitable, and we're not just putting somebody in a category where they don't assign just because it's what we have available to us. It's something that can be managed by staff very proactively. >> Okay, good deal. That that helps me. I'm just doing the math on it. Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Patrick, would there be any um way for a business um kind of looking at it to come to us and say, "Hey, I I don't think my traffic count's near what

[4:52:02] you know, projected and these others. Can y'all look at this and see if we can look at it for next year? Are we going to have a way to kind of they can appeal to us?" >> Yeah, absolutely. So, we have a customer service department right now with that takes care of our utility statements. If somebody came into customer service, they would bring them over. They would talk to us and we would sit down, take a look at it, walk through the methodology with them, and really um discuss it and figure out figure out what applies the best way and come to an agreement on that um or at least assign it in the in the best category that we possibly can. But yeah, if if a business wants to know, well, how do I fall into this category or this billing structure? Absolutely. Give me a ring and let me know and we can we can talk through that that uh methodology behind it. >> Perfect. Yeah, I don't I don't know of one off off hand, but just thinking of it and some of the big buildings that may not have a high traffic count just because they need a big space for whatever they're doing to make sure that we're not unduly, you know, justifying them. It kind of goes back to the residents because you're like, well, there's >> three vehicles traveling no matter what if it's a big house, a small house, or whatever, right? Right. Um, so I want to make sure they have a way to kind of appeal that and we can look at >> and that was some of the difficulty, right? You have a large warehouse, you have a medium warehouse, you have a small warehouse. >> How do we combine those? I mean, I don't want 200 categories that I'm having to assign people in. That just creates more discrepancy. So, we tried to pair it down to to reasonably grab as many as many businesses as we can with the fewest amount of land categories, but still keep it fair and equitable as we can. >> Perfect. That's what I would like to see as we go through and is if if it's approved and we kind of make the the rules following it is to make sure that we citizens have a way um to go out and look at it and appeal and whether it's appeal to us or where however we need to run that >> and how we add those categories. will come forth with a if if y'all approve this today, we'll come forward with an step two, step three is really define that billing structure, define those categories with our consultant QAQC, that list, as well as establish an ordinance bringing forth the fees and the application of it. So, how we adjust a land use table, whether that's an

[4:54:04] administrative function approved by um the public works department or by the city manager or if that has to come to the city council for approval, we can work through those those small details there. But I think there's absolutely a way to keep this fluid and and make sure that we're we're doing right by assigning the proper categories to the right businesses. >> Mayor Well, >> that side of the D had to control. So, I just wanted to make sure. >> Just not fair. [laughter] Feel free, >> Patrick. We're not reinventing the wheel. This is done in other cities. Matter of fact, Abene's got something very similar to this. Uh, so this is not something that was actually thought up last week or last month. I've been on this council a long time and we talked about this three, four, maybe five years ago or something similar. You've worked out details and maybe there's some refinement still need to be done on it, but from my perspective, we don't have any choice but to go forward with this. Now, whether the council decides to go with the 10 or the 16, I haven't made that decision yet personally, but we're going to have to do this. The the constraints on the budget, not only this year, but beyond my council time, is is going to continue to be significant. Next year's legislature is going to put caps on it that's lower than what we've got right now. we're not going to be able to generate as much property tax and unless we bring in some some additional businesses, we're not going to increase our sales tax that much. So, these types of things are key to the success of services that we can continue to provide to the citizens. Correct.

[4:56:10] >> That is correct. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yes, sir. That's all I'm >> I'd like to reiterate what Harry said on on the constraints with the budget and I mean we've already faced this once earlier today with our health insurance um rising cost an aging infrastructure or aging as well as just cost of the health insurance going up period. This is the same similar situation but we have to find a way to to keep it going because we have to provide that service and we can't let it just slip away into nothing. So, um, I'm I'm kind of like with Harry. It's it's it's a something we have to address and this is a good way. It's not something that just came up overnight. Other cities do it as well. So, I'm in favor of it. Just which one do we do? >> Patrick, we've heard from the DAS and it's pretty good consensus that we know this is a path we're going to have to follow. No doubt there. When I look at this and the distribution of the tiers as it goes down from tier one through tier nine, I would love to take 30% of that revenue generated off your bottom one or two tiers and move that up into somebody that's in the C4, C5. I don't don't know if that's a possibility. This is just something to take the burden off of some of the people we've talked about low income. We've talked about 65 and older. I think there's ways to move your curve towards the upper end of the people that are commercial and high revenue to where they look at this and go that's a couple bucks a day. I'm running 2,000 people through here doing a headcount. I get that. But the last thing we want to do is create a burden on somebody that is already strained. You've talked about ways we can handle that. I think what we're looking at overall is this is a good path forward for us to protect the citizens that they'll always have something to take care of the streets. They'll always have something to take care of their infrastructure with what you put forward here regardless of what the state is going to do over the next five years for this council and beyond these councils.

[4:58:13] We have to be concerned about providing you a path to keep us a functional city. So with that, we've we've heard from everybody here. It's great input all the way across the board. Now, um I I hear Patrick's talk about the size of the lot. To me, sometimes that would ignore the height of the building. You know, you have to look at how somebody uses the street. But what we're going after here is we're pursuing an avenue that typically has not paid before. All right? And that's going to bring everybody into a fair and consistent. We want to we want a tax base that's broad and thin. All right? And we haven't had that. We're trying to get it there. And this is a good first step. So, with that, we're we're going to wrap up. Philip, I'll let you close us on this one on what you think the next steps will be that you'll work with staff to bring this forward. >> Yes, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate uh appreciate that. Uh what I would like to do is uh to have further conversations with staff and we can answer some of the questions. I wrote down several of them such as the appeal process that may be out there. I think there's some uh areas that we can come back and give uh some some tie up some loose ends with the council. And so what I'll commit to and work with the council on is at the next meeting uh having an update and we may not have an ability to uh fully move forward but at least provide an update of where we where we are and what potential next steps will be. I think as we also heard from the council there's still um a decision that needs to be made of uh of which level they are wanting to feel comfortable on on the funding. And so that gives council the opportunity to ask further questions and also decide where they may uh want to be. But that gives us the opportunity as staff to work on on that. So, we will be back at next meeting with with an update of uh where we are. But mayor, I also want to ask about the the storm water fee before we go um before we go any further. We did want to receive some type of direction or consensus on uh being able to program that on the budget as well. And I may be jumping ahead, but didn't want to make sure we lose sight of that. >> Now, that was discussed and and you know, for 5% we have what? 26 cents. >> 26 cents on that highest tier. Yes, sir. on the highest tier >> and the bottom the lowest tier would be 10 cents a dime,

[5:00:14] >> right? Um >> per month. >> I will make the everybody's thinking it, but nobody wants to say it. I mean, what if we did 10 or 20%. I mean, you you went up to 50 cents or 75 cents and that's once a month. >> That's once a month. Yes, sir. >> Yeah. I I mean, so if you're looking at a way to get that number back near 400 where it was before, those are things we if you look at the total dollar amount of actually pennies that that cost is minimal. When you hear the percentage of it, it's great. That's the total theory of a tax base that's broad and thin is adjustments in that don't affect your wallet any more than the price of a soda, you know, or I would say minimal there. So, you wanted feedback on that, Philip? I I don't know if we go to the city. Heert's got the finger over there. >> Yeah, I'm ready to go. >> I'm in favor of the 5% Phil. I'm I would be in favor of the mayor's suggestion. I'm ready to to give my preference on 10 and a half or 16. If that's not appropriate at this time, okay. But I'm ready to to state my opinion on that, too. If if if you want that, mayor. If you don't, we'll save it till next meeting. I'll wait. But whatever, >> Mr. Mr. Mayor, if I if I may, um, one thing I would like to to provide a reminder of as it relates to the storm water fee, we do have the uh the fee that uh study that's taking place and that's looking at all of our fees. I think at this time the 5% gives us the opportunity to get some breathing room within the uh within the fund and then as we return next year with the study, we can have a clear picture of what type of increase we we may need uh related to the fund. So, that would be a suggestion I have as it relates to keeping the 5% uh this year for for the storm water fee. And uh if we want to have further discussion about the um the actual uh uh rate we're going to go with on the uh the rightway fee, I would encourage that we wait until the next meeting to do that. So, we do have that opportunity to provide uh more of an update and also get everybody on the same page. >> Heert's fixing to get us all in there. I

[5:02:16] think my gosh. >> So, with that, So, we finished up here. So, we're at the end of the budget meeting, budget workshop. I think we've heard lots of good input all the way around. You've heard our concerns, Jonathan, Patrick. Um, flip it over, Philip. Great summary on that. So, with that, we'll let them bring some things back. Look at some of the study work that's come. The you've heard them. The decision on the storm water was keep the existing 5%. Um, I don't agree with that, but I get that. All right. Doesn't mean we have to agree on that, but I understand how that applies. So, with that, I if there's not any further questions from council, Heather, you got anything to say? Just checking. You had to look. I'll take a motion to uh conclude the budget meeting. >> I got a first from Tommy. >> Second. >> Second from Karen. All in favor say I. >> Meeting's closed.

Captured 2026-08-05 · source: youtube.com/watch?v=bWQ4l46ERBw