San Angelo City Council 11-3-15

[0:00:00] It is 902 and it's time to get this meeting call to order. We're going to start with prayer. Brother Murphy, come forward. Jim is the minister at the North Side Church of Christ. He will open us in prayer. Stand as your able. Good morning, sir. Gracious father, it's with joy that we approach your throne of grace this morning and thank you for all the good things that you do for the world and for us. And we pray for our nation and people that are running for and to be president and we ask for their protection, ask for your kindness upon them to give us strength to do the things that we need to do. And especially we pray for our city and for election that's going on this day for people that are hurting. We ask you to bless them and strengthen all of us that we may live the life that we ought of love and love you with all our heart and may the sunshine of your love continue to shine in our lives as we continue to do the things that are right and bless the council today bless us as we do your will and Jesus name we pray. Amen. Got a problem. I don't have anybody help me with the pledge. Darren you were in in third grade three years you ought to be able to help me come forward and help me with plays Darren Fentress, close to a student as I can get. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, and your God, one in the middle of this is all.

[0:02:06] Thank you very much. He graduated from the fourth grade. Proclamation! Empty bowls of ants, Mary Herbert. Y'all come forward and let me read this. bring you a group with you so we can recognize all of you. Good morning ma'am. It's quite a group you brought. Yes you do. The Texas Hunger Initiative is a collaborative capacity building project focused on ensuring that every Texan has access to three nutritious meals a day, seven days a week, and further develops strategies to end hunger through research policy, education, community organization, and community development. The Empty Bowls project is an international grassroots effort to raise both money and awareness in the fight to in hunger. Many people and families, including one in four children in San Angelo, are considered food insecure because they may not know from where the next meal is coming. The Wesley Trinity Daily Bread Soup Lunch Program conceived in 1984 out of a concern for God's less fortunate and homeless provides nourishing hot meals at noon Monday through Saturday every week of the year for children, women, and men who would not otherwise have a sustaining meal on a daily basis. The soup kitchen, as it is known, provides an average of 200 meals each day with the help of 125 volunteers. Community members are invited to the Empty Bowls event to enjoy a simple meal of soup and bread on November the 10th, 2015 at the Cactus Hotel with soup being donated by a variety of restaurants and as a part of the $20 ticket price, guests will get the The opportunity to choose a handcrafted pottery bowl made by local and area artists to take home is reminded that there are still many empty bowls in the world, including those in our local community. Simply put, Empty Bowls is a community-wide event that ensures that fewer people in San Angelo go home to an empty bowl.

[0:04:08] Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the City Council do hereby proclaim November 10, 2015 as the first annual Empty Bowls event In San Angelo, Texas is a way of educating the citizens about the way we can work together to make our region food secure. I will present that to you and turn the microphone over to you. We are really very, very excited about having the first annual Empty Bowls fundraiser and we could think of no one other group that would be better suited to receive the funds from this first empty bowls project than the soup kitchen and they serve meals Monday through Saturday every week of the year and we think that they do an amazing job in our community and we wanted to do what we could to help them. Now I want to remind you it is November 10th that's next Tuesday from 11.30 to 1.30 it's going to be in the ballroom of the cactus it's just $20 and And for that $20, you get a soup and bread lunch, as well as getting to take home an original handcrafted bowl by a local artist. And so we wanted to see if you could possibly join us. And in fact, if you have lunch groups that go or people from your office, we would love it if you would just get a whole group together. You can buy tickets at our office, the Texas Hunger Initiative office, which is on the mezzanine floor of the cactus hotel just around the corner from the ballroom. And so come over and get your tickets ahead of time. Or if you need to, you can buy them that day as you come. Pam, you want to say something? Thank you so very much for honoring us today. We really appreciate your support. The Wesley Trinity Daily Bread Program, as everyone has said, meets six days a week, Monday through Saturday.

[0:06:09] and we're open from 11 until one. We have approximately 200 people that come in and we're seeing more and more each day. And I think it has a lot to do with what's going on in the community now. Your support is needed. So if you come out and support us through the empty bowls or call us at the office to volunteer your time, we'd appreciate it. Thank you so much. Anybody else? I've got an open microphone and a captive audience preacher if you want a chance. Let's take a picture. Where do you want us, Brian, back here? Stay where you are, Brian. This next one is a recognition for our own Brian Groves. Brian Groves, the City of St. Angelo's multimedia coordinator has cemented his status as one of the municipal government's top performers by consistently producing award winning work over the past three years. The latest example of that occurred October 16th, when Groves collected three statewide awards at the annual conference of the Texas Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors. Groves was recognized for programming. He produced for SATV, the city's government access channel, channel 17, suddenly. Specifically, judges awarded Groves second place honors

[0:08:09] in the document category for a seven minute video about Ford Consular Red Actors, marching in Governor Greg Abbott's inaugural parade. The video previously won a second place trophy in another statewide competition. Groves also won the third place award for documentaries with documentaries, with a 17 minute video about a day in the life of a San Angelo fire department's B-ship. In the event category, Groves took third place with his coverage of the San Angelo Stock Show and Rodeo, so well respected his Groves statewide that he led a session regarding the merits of two different cameras. Therefore I, Dwayne Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo on behalf of the City Council, do hereby recognize and applaud Brian Groves for his service and positive determination to make a difference in our community. Thanks, sir. Congratulations. I'm just gonna keep it simple. It's an honor to do what we get to do. And thank you for watching and stay tuned. So I'm just questioning you back here. Mayor, we do need to get Brian a bigger office. The awards he's getting just don't fit in there anymore. Just way too many of them. We'll just give him a bigger title. Okay. Recognition for the City of San Angelo Finance Department for earning the certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting. Who's going, Tina, you're going to be saved this, ma'am? Ranging the rest of them with you. Good morning. Tina Katiers. Not Muscatiers, Tina Katiers. Oh, the City of San Angelo Finance Department continues to earn honors, awards, and recognitions from financial professionals for the efficient, effective and transparent way in which it manages to tax dollars with which the city is entrusted.

[0:10:09] Last month, the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada once again awarded the Finance Department with the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The honor relates to the comprehensive annual financial report which is the annual financial audit conducted by external auditors. The award represents the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting. The GFOA said the city's annual finance report demonstrated a constructive spirit of full disclosure to clearly communicate its financial story. The award is the latest earned by the finance department which previously claimed the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the city's 214-215 budget and the State Comptroller's Platinum Leadership Circle Award for achieving the highest level of financial transparency. Therefore, I'd Wayne Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, on behalf of the City Council to hereby recognize and applaud the City of San Angelo Finance Department for its service and positive determination to make a difference in our community. Thank you. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. We're very proud to have earned this award for the second year in a row. And of course, I want to thank our accounting division for all the time and effort that they put into it. Thank you. Anybody else? Max Oak. Where do you want to thank you?

[0:12:14] Okay, a couple of comments that we need to make before we get started here. This meeting will recess at noon in order to hold a special joint meeting with the Zoning Board of Adjustments and at the conclusion of the special joint meeting, this meeting will reconvene. So at noon, regardless of where we are on our agenda, we're going to break and we're going to have a special meeting with the Zoning Board. So one other announcement, this is voting day and right now the early voting is not quite where we hoped it would be. So you can go to our city's website and all of the voting places are there, they're listed so that you can find them, but I would encourage everyone to go vote because this has some city charter provisions, it also has some state charter provisions, these are ours, we need the letter of voice be heard so I would ask that you go vote. This is the time that we take public comment and anyone in the audience that desires to approach the city council with anything that is not on the agenda. This is your opportunity. Let me read the legate the legalese on this and then I will open up for public comment issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium began by stating their name and limit remarks to less in five minutes. Council members may request that a discussed item be placed on a future agenda. The council takes public comment on all regular agenda items during discussion of those items. So if you would please form a line at the front at the microphone and the we're now in public comment. This is your opportunity to approach the council. Pro or con begin by stating your name you got five minutes. Look like there's such a line I'd go ahead and start first. you that's first just one. I'm Ladeen Harten and I'm here again and I believe I'll be okay because it's not only agenda about the microchipping. In

[0:14:14] research on that I don't know that some of the people know that doesn't guarantee that you're gonna get your pet back. The person that finds the pet has to turn it into someplace that has a microchip reader. The microchip reader has to be in in good working condition. The microchip has to be, is on three different frequencies in case you weren't aware of that. And also in researching this, I found out that it does in some cases, in some pets, does cause cancer. I live by myself, and my cats are my children. If you're forcing me to implant a microchip, that causes cancer, which one of you on the council is going to come hold my hand when I have to put that pet down. Mr. Fleming, you're my representative. Are you going to come hold my hand? Mr. herself, we go to church together. Will you hold it? Mr. Silva, as we go a long ways back with the mariachi, how about you? How about some of you council ladies? Someone's got to be there to come for me. if I have to put my pet down for something I didn't want to do. I don't know if you've seen the movie or not, but one of my favorite movies is Legally Blind 2. And in there, I think you may have read my mind just about what I wanted to say, Mayor. But in that movie, she talks about how this elite salon that she finally gets a chance to go to, gives her the wrong hair color, gives her the what the hair person the washes the hair gave her the wrong solution they cut her hair wrong and she was mad at the it's a salon until she realized she said there and took it she didn't use her voice and yes today is

[0:16:18] voter day I have voted early and I'm letting you know right here right now Now I'm making my voice heard by letting you know that this week I will be filing a petition to have that repealed the microchipping part repealed this week with the city clerk. I just want you to know that because I want my voice to be heard and I want the voices of several of the people of San Angelo who I've talked with who want that repealed also. A lot of us are okay with the spater-neutered part, but it's the microchipping that we're being forced to. Thank you. Thank you, Dan. Next. Good morning, Mayor, Council, City Management, James Flores, Neighborhood and Family Services. As you know, we have been interviewing for a veterinarian position for the last couple of months and through tons of applications and meetings and interviews. interviews. I proudly announced that as of yesterday, we officially hired Dr. Koopa Nagaraj from California. He has a ton of experience in the spay-nooter capacity. He's been with the ASPCA program, so he's got about 70,000 plus spay-nooters under his belt. So we are hitting the ground running with the veterinarian on board and I wanted to introduce you to Dr. Nagaraj and if you have any questions, he'd like to answer them for you. Good morning. Good morning. We're glad you're here. Thank you. I have about over 12 years of experience out of 20 years and I worked in a high volume, high quality spay nutters in East BSPCA as well as human society of Tucson. I have done over 70,000 and wherever I went, I have maintained the quality and also the

[0:18:23] safety of the pets and I established a real protocol procedures training to the staff giving them guidelines how to monitor how to do the procedures so if you have any questions I'm more than happy to. In addition to working in speniotro clinic I used to work for Banfield as a franchise owner for eight years. I had my own clinic for three years. In East BC, I worked for eight years and human society of Tucson, I worked for two years. If you have any questions, I'm more than happy to. We're glad you're here. Welcome aboard. Thank you. I hope you stay real busy. I do my best. Next, don't let you off easy today, Charlie. Charlie thought there'd be a whole bunch of comments today. Are you ready? Any other comments from the public before we close this session of our council? No other comments from the council then I from the citizens and I will close this portion of the public comment and I will go to the city council for any comments that you may have any announcements or anything that you would like to pull from the consent agenda to be reckoned with in the regular agenda. Start with you Ms. Grindstaff. I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed making a difference day out of the shelter even though it was in the rain. I think Mayor I had just missed you, someone pointed out a dog that you wanted to take home. If it's not there I'd be happy to give it to you for Christmas. I have another chat set up for next week and I'll provide that information to Becky. My constituents will see it on Facebook or through direct email. I think we'll have an open mic night and not be specific to topic. I know we have a lot to do today, but I would like to pull the item on the trench repair.

[0:20:31] As this is something when I was on staff that was always questioned as to how that worked, so I just have a few questions on that. So that would be item B? Item B under consent. All righty. Anything else, ma'am? That's all. I don't have anything to pull, but I did want to say that as of November 1st Our water restrictions have changed from twice a day to once a day. So I went to let everybody know about that Yeah, it was November 1st. Oh I'm sorry. Thank you Charlotte once a week Get our water going like the water started to have anything man Well, I don't dare pull anything because Marty and the mayor might shut me down the stairs again I was in the other building, but I do have a couple of remarks, and one of them is to let everyone know that I will be having a town hall meeting Tuesday, November the 10th, 6 p.m. at Southland Baptist Church, and our guest will be Tech Stott to explain to the people all of the work that is starting to take place and is taking place out on southwest Boulevard And hopefully what their plans are to help us relieve some of the congestion. So I encourage everyone to please, please come if you have questions, because TechStop will be there to answer them. And the other remark that I have or comment that I have, you know, I mentioned last council meeting that I'd traveled nine states, not true, ten states. And I wanted to mention something with this rain that we had Friday. And while I was gone, we had rain, and it was beautiful, the scenery. There just wasn't trash bags, paper cups, plastic bottles, just laying everywhere, blowing in the wind. And that's because of the people that live in those areas, absolutely they are to be commended

[0:22:33] for caring about their city, their state, their county in keeping that picked up. I want to say something to our recreation folks and our streets and bridge folks. It's not their job, the four or five of them, to pick up after a hundred thousand people. It is our jobs. We the people, individuals to be responsible for ourselves and picking up the trash and keeping it gathered. It's not republic's responsibility. They're responsible for picking it up once you have gathered it. And if you witnessed what I witnessed at all the runoff spots during our rain which I drove and you witnessed all of the cups, sacks, bags, trash that flows into our water system that you, the city, the people have to pay to have cleaned up just so you can drink. It was appalling. So I would like to see the people be a little more responsible for themselves and govern themselves with the trash. And go vote. If you don't go vote and speak what your choice is, you're telling us everything's wonderful. Everything is fine. So go vote, please. You have until seven o'clock this evening. That's all. Johnny? No, Mayor. I don't have anything. Marty? I have a question about number B, but I'm sure Ms. Grindstaff can get an answer for you. I bet we'll cover it. Anything else? No. Rodney? I basically was going to say what she said was that we need to get out there and vote. And I had a lot of phone calls about the trash on the rain episode that we had over, especially off of college hills. And you said that very well in saying that they need to get out there and do some people or getting too reliant upon the trash company or the city. I got all these phone calls. I don't work for the trash company.

[0:24:34] I'm not the one that's going to be going out there and picking it up. If it was at my house and my house trash can got washed down the road, you know what? I would walk down the road, I'd pick up the trash can, I'd pick up the trash on the way back to my house. That's just a simple thing. It's a common sense deal. What I'm getting tired of is social media is running how people look at political situations. They are big talkers, but nobody is getting out there and vote. You need to get out there and vote. You need to stop bashing people on social media and get out there and actually do something. Get out there and make your voices heard. Not on social media. It's so easy to bash someone behind a computer screen. Come up here in person, say it to me right here, right to my face, and do something about it. Don't just come up here and complain to me, but come up here and have a plan to do something about it. If there is a plan. These trash contracts, I got tons of phone calls yesterday on about this trash contract. The trash contract is done. We had two companies that bid on this contract, And both companies would have been picking up your trash from the front, and they both would have been using the same types of trucks. So get over it. There's nothing that we can do on that part of it. We just need to move on. That's my ram. Hey, deep say anything now. I do have one comment that I would like to make, a comment, on a press release that went out from the City of St. Angelo last Friday, and it has to do with this spay and neuter and microchip program. So I'm going to piggyback on you ma'am. I want to read the press that went out, the press release. All pets at the San Angelo animal shelter will be available for adoption for $10 from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. Saturday. I applaud you on that. I think that's wonderful. I'd rather give an animal way than to kill it. But what bothers me about this is that we create an ordinance for 100,000 people in the city of San Angelo

[0:26:35] that makes it illegal for any one of us to sell an animal in the city limits of San Angelo without facing a $500 fine per event and if the city exempts her self from the very ordinance that it deals. That's a double standard and it's wrong. There's more comment on that part. Let me read the rest of it. The discounted adoption rate cost is an effort to reduce the number of animals in the shelter after a particularly high number of intakes this week. We have been in this ordinance for two weeks and we're already seeing animals being dumped at the town at the shelter. We're seeing them being dumped at the areas outside of town. People are unloading their pets because they're facing such a tremendous high penalty for the pets and they are going underground. They're dumping animals. Two weeks into this we're already seeing not the decrease in the number of euthanization and the decrease in the number of of animals that are dropped at the shelter as we were promised but we're seeing an increase and this will no sir this is not public comment James this is my time this huh no it's not it's not it's different this other on the agenda and I read that it has to do with these. This is doing a press release. This is going to continue. We are going to- The same subject matter, isn't it? Okay. I'll hold off and wait until the next one. I think it's a different subject matter, but if you- if- do I need to hold off to say the rest of what I was going to say? I'll hold off until we get to the first agenda item. You want to? Thank you. All right. Let's- I will entertain a motion Now to approve the consent agenda, A, C, one and two with the exception of B, do I have a motion? So moved. Do I have a second? Do I have a motion and a second to accept consent with the exception of B?

[0:28:37] Do I have public comment on this item before we vote? Do I have council comment before we vote? All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 on it. All right, number B is consider awarding RFB WU-1015 trench repair to CEM construction company of San Angelo, Texas for a period of 12 months in the amount of $110,540. For the repair of city streets and alleys due to operation and maintenance of water distribution and wastewater collection systems, and authorizing the city manager or his designee to execute contract documents. Mr. Field? Yes sir and this is a contract for repair of when we have broken water main or sewer mains any type of construction needed in the city street or right of way and it's for the CM construction to follow up with repair either you know patching it with asphalt or you know placing dirt you know whatever the extent may be here to answer any questions. Ms. Ryan, Sam? I think that we all get a lot of calls as does staff about the length of time that a trench may be filled but not completely repaired. And what is the performance expectation of the contractor in this contract? Once the contract or once the permit has been issued to the contractor, they have 21 calendar days to get that patch repaired. And is staff monitoring that? Yes, yes. I have an inspector that's dedicated solely to this project. And he works in conjunction with our distribution and collections department daily, along with CM construction to coordinate all the efforts. We do keep every permit that is open, has a start date.

[0:30:40] And, you know, the 21-calendar day, you know, they'd be completed. And then, you know, if they get to that 21-calendar day, then we can issue liquidated damages per day on that individual permit. And does that inspector also sample what's being put back in the trench to make sure it? Correct. Yes, we do keep track of all the material that's used, you know, whether it be base material or asphalt, you know, we do test, oh, randomly test those trenches. You know, we can't, you know, trudging or testing everyone would not be cost prohibitive, but we do continually monitor every trench that's being backfilled. Well, it certainly has to do with the long-term integrity of the street if it's not done properly. Correct. I'm, thank you. Sure. I read in background that 20, this was since 20 people, I couldn't find a bid tabulation. Was it not included with that? I thought I had included it. We only received one bid from CM Construction. Okay. All right. For the amount shown on the. Okay, but it was a caption. Great. Okay. Further questions? I'd like to make a motion to approve. Second. Do you have a motion to approve in a second? Do I have any further council questions? Do I have public comment on this item before we vote? All in favor accepting as proposed please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 on that. That takes care of our consent agenda, regular agenda number 8, Discussion on low or no-call spay-mooter program, Presentation of Neighborhood Services Assistant Director James floors. May I now complete my statement? Okay. I could not have written a better script than this press release to make the point that I'm

[0:32:40] trying to make. Two weeks into this, and we have already had a particularly high number of intakes at our family shelter, at our animal shelter. This is not going to get better. This is going to continue. Can they start with their presentation first before we have comments? No, ma'am. I guess if I could finish my statement and she said yes. This is not actually how goes. It's not improper under the law. This is a terrible terrible ordinance that is going to kill more animals than anything we ever envisioned. This is part of the unintended consequences of an ordinance that is going to cause people to dump their animals. There will be more animals at the shelter, there will be more animals euthanized and that is the exact opposite of what you told us when we voted on this. I'm going on record right now as to say this ordinance is bad, this ordinance beads to be rescinded and I don't know how many animals unnecessary animal deaths it's going to take before we realize we made a mistake like the American Kennel Club has already told us and rescind this but when three other people on this council get ready I stand with a 72 hour notice I'm ready to rescind this ordinance and I've turned it over to you Mr. Flores. Good morning James Flores never had family services you know I don't know if I should expand upon any of that but I will touch base it's been two weeks and these animals the reason we did that sale was because animals have been there for 70-80 days so I don't want to assume that because this ordinance I don't as the manager and director of that place who sees everyday operations I don't want to assume that we got to a population that we got to because of an ordinance that we enacted two weeks ago I don't agree with that but these animals are 80-90 90 days old and therefore we decided with our new tacked to try to get animals out the door. We should have done this a year and a half ago. We should have done it two years ago. We should have done it when I first started.

[0:34:40] We didn't. We waited until we got lots of protocols in place and cleaned up and got better as a shelter and we're going to continue doing $10 sales because that is the sad fact of the day. When we close the side kennels people said the same thing about chaining dogs to the the chain link fence. Not a one dog has been left chain to the chain link fence over that. The euthanization rate, that was what I got up for originally was to clarify, we have lowered the euthanization rate, but no one item is going to help that. It's a cumulative of so many practices that we've got to be better at, and that's what I'm trying to do at that place. It seems like there's days we're not good at it. It seems like there's days we're great at it but at the end of the day I think the concerted effort at that place under my direction is a cumulative of so many practices and so many ordinances that we have to come together and get better at so that we do lower the euthanization rate. Thank you. With the low cost pain unit program that we got on board right now Council asked that we bring this to them in light of the two-week old ordinance that we just passed and so we have I think we've come up with the proposed plan that again these are this is proposed and it's definitely going to take some work we are studying successful shelters every single day who have microchipping spay neutering they have everything that we're trying to get implemented and we couldn't start a proposed plan or we couldn't really solidify a plan until we hired a veterinarian as of yesterday we have that on board full-time staff veterinarian so we our goal is to use of veterinarian to conduct procedures at the shelter, set aside one or two days a week for appointments. This is for the proposed pay-neuter program for our low-mod income. Our vision is to, we're looking at hours, we're looking at efficiencies and inefficiencies, and right now Saturdays are proven to be one of the most inefficient days for the citizens of San Angelo who pay taxes that support my salary and some staff salaries.

[0:36:44] We can come back at a later date and time for that. But with longer hours during the week, our goal is to probably offer an extended day for this event to take place, to start the vetting of the animal, to physically look at the animal, ensure that it's gonna make surgery. And that would probably be an extended hour event after that number of, we're thinking 10 to 20 a week, 30 a week, depending on when dot gets settled and our equipment gets here to do that and provide for us so that they can pick those animals up following day so they can recover, go through their pain management and the low cost program is going to be based off of federal poverty guidelines. 125% of the federal poverty guideline is what we used. State definition of low income, most state-funded social services programs use 125%. And just to give an example of eligibility, again, our goal is not to involve ourselves with private practice veterinarians. Our goal is to capture that client that is not entering their doors today. And so, at 125% of poverty, a single person would be making $14,588. Obviously, that person, the 100% category is $11,670. So, if we were to offer that person the ability to come use our services, they could make no more than $14,588, and they would have a lower cost. Family of four, that same 125% is $29,813, and the key here is going to be vetting that at the front office. If you make $14,589, I don't think you qualify for this program, that's just how it's got to be because if it's 14, 5, 89 is 15, okay is 15, 3, okay is 17, okay. I don't want to get into that business. I think we need to stick to guidelines and use what we've successfully used in our week departments and in our housing departments and this is similar. So the goal

[0:38:47] is in your poverty level from 0 to 50% of that poverty, so 0 to 50% of 11,000 for one individual, they should not pay for this cost, in my professional opinion. 51% to 75% should be a $20 fee. 76 to 100 should be 30, 101 to 125, because again, 1115% of that is 14. That person from 111 to 14 should pay $40 for that cost of the spay neuter in a basic wellness check. So again, our goal is, and we're just proposing this, we were looking at hours, we're looking at days, we're looking at pulling, maybe getting some citizen input on what a better day would work for them. Right now, we think a Wednesday is a good day. Kind of breaks up the monotony of our everyday life that goes on at the shelter to accommodate the animals and accommodate citizens. So this is going to be a new venture for us. So we're looking at all All kinds of options. But the main goal is to stick to spay neuter, I mean, a low cost, and those are the guidelines. Any questions on that? Marty? Well, James, I just want to say to me, it appears it looks pretty good. I know you were putting a tough situation, and I just want to go on record as applauding you for what you've done. Do we have the best scenario? I don't know, but to say we're gonna put animals down at the right, we were putting them down, was wrong. I don't think it was fair. We asked you to do something and you've taken the bull by the horns and you've struck out and you're going forward and I just wanna applaud you for that. I think you've taken a bad situation and started moving forward and I just wanna say thank you. You're welcome. Rodney, let's show it, then you, Rodney.

[0:40:49] James, thank you. You did take a bad situation, and it has been a tremendous job, and you're not finished. That's what I love about your attitude. There's more to be done. I don't think there was anything wrong with the ad and reduced fees for adoption. Inventory, what was already there, and in stock, we have to deal with it. And you've made some really tough decisions. I wouldn't want your job. You couldn't pay me enough money to do your job. So I empathize with the decisions that you have to make and the funds that you don't have to make them with. I want to sport you. Two weeks is not enough time to set any kind of record or opinion on, in my opinion, that it's going to take some time to turn this around. Also, you know, you have to take consideration the normal time that we get more pets and I think this is the time that we normally get a lot of pets and it kind of increases things out there. So I do support what you're doing and trying to do and just like me, the Lord's not finished with me yet. So I know you'll get the job done. Thank you. Rodney? First, I don't want to go behind Charlotte anymore because Charlotte just says everything I'm going to say. James, I am totally behind you a hundred percent on this. And the main thing that I wanted to come back to Charlotte just said was the two weeks. Two weeks is no time at all. In fact, I think to me it needs to be two years or more to see a true track record on what's going on. You know what they say about the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We're trying something different. We're doing something different. We've done the other thing over and over again and it did not work. It didn't. That's clear to see. And all I care about is saving animals. I'm a huge animal

[0:42:54] lover and I want to make sure that we can do anything. If we just save 100 animals out of the 800 that go in there or 10 even, I see that as a success. So I applaud you for the job that you're doing. I I think you're doing a great job out there. And I think we're on the right track, but this is a long journey. This is not, we're at the very beginning of this journey. We've taken our first step. I want to see, hopefully two years from now, this will be doing a lot better. And if it's not doing a lot better, maybe we try to figure out the next step. We do something totally different at that point. Absolutely. And I concur with the two year that's about the standard. When ordinances like this get implemented, Hopefully by no means no one grades me in two weeks. I would like an opportunity to get a lot more than two weeks. And at the end of the day, if I'm not successful in two years, then I don't need to be there. It's not entirely up to you on this situation. Well, I mean, we can change is what I'm saying. My staff is very resilient, and we change every day. There is not one Sanhartio every day that happens every the same way. You know, we also got to remember that this is the public that's bringing these animals to us. This is not your fault. This is not our services fault. This is the general public that's bringing in and abandoning these animals. And that's who the biggest problem is. And I hope that we do some more. I really love that y'all are getting out and advertising a lot on the $10 thing. I thought it was a great deal. I thought we should do that all the time. And I can see that there is a difference between us lowering and having a price of selling those animals and an owner. We're not the owner of that animal. All we're trying to do is find that these animals a future home. Absolutely. And we're not trying to make a profit off of this. We're trying to cover our expenses off of this. So I see that as a difference, for sure. Elizabeth? Well, as I just to repeat, and I'm very happy to be the fourth

[0:44:56] to agree with the three that have spoken before me, because that's a majority, as I counted. I would much rather spend tax dollars, stay in neutering and having animals that can be adopted and be safe and healthy and live with families in our community than to spend tax dollars to kill animals. I think that's ridiculous. I think it's embarrassing that we're not comfortable looking at best practices from other cities. And I want us to always look at best practices from other cities because we're not in this alone. So thank you again for what you and Bob have done in examining and formulating something that you think will work. If after two years, like Rodney said, if we don't have the perfect solution, then we change it. That's what we're able to do. Absolutely. As for the AKC, we all know that the AKC is a breeding organization. So do I expect them to be a spay and neuter proponent? Absolutely not. I think that we all know where everybody comes from, but at least the majority of us are very compassionate toward the pets and want to see safe and healthy community and again a community that takes care of its pets rather than kills them. Johnny? I just want to, James, I just wanted to add as a proponent of this idea of this ordinance of this whole thing. I remember somebody adding the audience once saying that, you know, I think we talked about this, we kicked this can down the road so many times for over 20 years, so we've got to try something. Is this perfect? I don't think it is, but I think it's a good start. Is that animal sitting right there ready to be euthanized? If a $10 bill is gonna save its life, then I'm okay with it. And I think it's something, we've got to start somewhere where it goes, we'll never know. But it is a start. And I too appreciate what you're doing. The leadership of you guys. Lizzie? I just wanted to say that I agree with everyone up here.

[0:46:56] I want to say that I am very proud of you. Like I said before, you have taken this place and you have really tried to improve it. And I'm very proud of that. I support you also. And I know that you're going to do your very best. Elizabeth? On the vid, I'm not going to use that word. We overuse that word. On the examination of financial eligibility, will you actually be using some other documentation? You're not. People aren't going to bring in. I mean, how are you going to check eligibility? Are you going to use other programs where they show their 125%? You know what I'm saying? Are you going to rely on another process? That's a strict guideline. I don't know of many others that, I mean, if there's the ability to do that absolutely, but at the end of the day, it's real easy to get a current paycheck stub. And we can, yeah, we can do it right there in five seconds. So a 30 day old paycheck stub, 40 day old, three-week old paycheck stuff. Keep it simple. That's it. That's it. I mean it's it's it's these numbers or or or it's not. Any other questions? Someone want to... Are you looking for a motion? I am. It doesn't say action, but discussion. I would make a motion that we... Do you need a motion on this or discussion? Do you just want consensus? Okay. Direction. Yes, sir. Okay. Everybody happy with it? Yes, sir. Yes. I'm happy. Okay. All right. it's going to be which is discussion review of the animal services annual budget and fees. I guess I'll call for public comment on that if I fail to do so. So if there is any public comment on on aid this is the time. What I have to say prones be heard without the mike again I'm with Dean Harton and with that I don't think any of us I think y'all have kind of taken it off the grid there but none of

[0:48:58] us want to see a pet killed. None of us. Okay. And some of us just have a problem with the microchipping, which doesn't fall under those guidelines. And whereas someone like me would fall right in between the cracks on that guideline up there, where I would have to pay for it myself, which I can't afford. So that might be why some of the people are coming that they fall in between the cracks and instead of doing something they dump their pits. So again, price. Thank you, ma'am. Further public comment? My name is Bill Weir. I'm a little confused. When this ordinance was being adopted, there was some conversation over the adoption fee being $85. The mayor thought that was too high. And in response to that, Mr. Fleming said, if the people can't afford $85, maybe they don't need a dog, this low cost stuff falls into that same category. I think the adoption fee should be less because without it there's a lot of people can't afford a dog and the same goes for this. I believe that the low cost spay and neuter should be in place because there are people out there with young kids who would love to have a dog and would take good care of it,

[0:51:03] but they can't afford to spay and neuter a dog. I'm for this but I'm still a little confused. Thank you. Thank you sir. Jim were you coming up? Yes my name is Jim Turner and before I get started I'd like to ask a question. Will this low-cost spay and neuter also include the cost of the microchip? We just need you to make comments. Comments wait James. James is uh Jim as far as the agenda it says no-cost spay-neuter program. Nothing said about the microchip, so I would say according to the agenda it does not include it. So and on top of the whatever it is for this fan-neuter they're still going to have the additional cost for the microchip likely to be there, and that really does need to be addressed. One of the there's a number of issues still that need to be resolved with this. One of the problems with this whole sequence that I see here is that the Animal Shelter Advisory Committee didn't get involved in this as far as an action item or agenda or anything like this until it had already been decided by staff, and it was never cleared through them. Doesn't mean that this is bad, but we have an animal services advisory committee by state law to deal with things like this. There's supposed to be one setting the policy, not just staff. That's a statutory requirement. Why weren't they involved in this policy decision? If we're going to have them, if we're not going to have them, then we need to take and look at that as well. Second thing is, there's an awful lot of concern about repealing this, but right now, because, again, of another animal ordinance,

[0:53:05] we now have, in effect, that you cannot change an ordinance except by a super majority for six months. So you're going to have to live with this for six months, no matter what, unless you get a super majority to agree to it. Third, I think there was some bad policy and bad precedent here when they bundled all three of these different actions together as one statute, one ordinance that was brought before city council, including not only the good part, which is a low cost pay and new program, and there may be some benefit out of a mandated spain neuter, but to require the microchipping in the same ordinance at the same time, on the same boat, and to require better restrictions on how people can deal with their own personal property. And by Texas state law, animals are personal property also, not just companions. Although that's how most people think of them. Legally, they are property, and you've just changed how people can deal with their property, but that got buried under all the discussion and the emotion of the spay and neuter ordinance. That's a policy, I think, that was bad and a very bad precedent. That's not how it should have been done. The spay and neuter programs need to be looked at, they need to be implemented, they need to have some time. Two weeks is not enough time to evaluate anything. After agree on that. But at the same time when you start bundling these things together, and you're saying this fan neuter did this, we don't know how much impact the other parts of this change also had on it. And that's bad policy. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Further public comment before we move on to item date reveal vinyl services and no budget and fees. This floors. Okay, James Flores again, this was an issue again brought up by council, so we have compromised

[0:55:24] our budget, this is a brevity shot here, it's not the entirety, it's the entire numbers, but I think we have everything that we need to discuss today. Bottom line is from a budgetary standpoint 2014, we had the revenue of 128 expenditures of 927, salaries of 583, overtime 36, 7, utilities 31, custodial maintenance 33, vehicle maintenance 31, fuel 36, so on and so forth, to compromise the entire budget. Any questions on that screen? Just tell us where you revenue comes from, just like the adoptions like you've been talking about? Revenue is from the other options. It's from donations, which there's a screen later on down the road here that we can talk about. But the majority of revenue is the amount of money we intake from the citizen for performing the spay and neater at some of veterinarians office. Registration, city tags, micro chips, that's the revenue line. Any other questions? Our shelter fees, which in In line with budget, I think the next couple of screens will probably be the most informative, I guess, or maybe the most questions generated there of. But currently these are shelter fees. They are all up to date. If we impound a dog, that's basically the animal services officer leaving the site, going to a location, impounding the dog, bringing it back. There's an $18 fee. Once we bring the dog into the shelter, there is a processing fee of $18. And that's just a rounded number, that's an even number. That is from 0 to 10 pounds is what that costs. The majority of our inventory that we intake are the 15 plus category, so the numbers go

[0:57:26] up. But we as a shelter only process for $18. That includes six shots. Your basic inoculations for worms, for parbo, distemper, boarding fees. if your dog has to spend the night at our shelter, it's $10 a day. City registration is seven, rabies is eight, heartworm is seven, we euthanize for $7. The adoption fully vetted, dogs is 85, cats is 50, altered dogs is 28, and the reason for that number is it's basically 20, but we get our $8 rabies vaccination back from that. Any questions on our fees? I'm not suggesting anything by my question, But are these directly related to the cost of the service? How do these compare to the cost of the service? They were years ago. They probably were years ago. Lots of shelter. And how long? Because an impound fee of $18 does not seem like a lot. If you're going out the time involved in picking up an animal and taking it back, it just seems awfully low. Absolutely. And that's what I mean by they were relative probably 10 years ago. Most of these are are very irrelevant today. They're not efficient. They're not recouping anywhere near cost. You've got a one ton truck that leaves we're out in the county almost. So for us to get anywhere, it's a good track and a track back and those things get about four or five miles of the gallon. You got an hourly rate employee that's spending anywhere from an hour to two hours trying to capture this dog or or at a bite report or an aggression situation. And so $18 is, that's usually in customary around the business though. I think we're not out of whack from that standpoint. I would like to see it more obviously because it's nowhere near recoup and cost. Well, if we're trying to keep them down, I'm not necessarily saying they should be at market, but I just wondered the last time they were studied. Sure. And I think again, with the veterinarian coming on board

[0:59:26] and us doing a lot of procedures internally, these are just going to get offset. Is it going to be my job to do that? Absolutely. right now to answer your question, me impounding a dog for $18 is not cost effective. Neither is processing. As I said, I've got it broke down further in here for information sake, if we're posed the question. But from 10 pounds, 11 pounds on up, I lose money at $18 processing fees. So yes, we have a lot of chew-offs, but we got a lot of pit bulls too. So it's probably an average of 30 pound dog in our shelter. Anything else? Okay. Okay. This screen here is basically going to talk about what we've done over the past year, and I think really what we've done is about since March, we've been able to save 100,000 of that budget. It's a little more. It's kind of funky on how that's derived, but I went conservative. We can prove that we've saved $100,000 since we took over, since we changed processes and protocols out there. A lot of it was in disinfectants. A lot of it was the over usage of, a lot of it was an overtime, a lot of it was in food that was not, it just wasn't worth serving to the dogs. We weren't getting the nutritional value out of it, hence, I don't want to get too good a test here, but. You've already explained all that. Okay, well then good. The professional technical services breakdown of the Hunter K is 21K in professional technical services, 16K in custodial utilities and maintenance, 58K in supplies. Here's where your food, gas, chemicals come into effect. Donations was 36,000 last year, 10K of that was from Daniel Supisi, which was the first to make a difference day national award-winning program, and we followed that up with this last two weeks ago, the anniversary of that event.

[1:01:27] And mind you, that event alone was a $3,300 affair for the shelter. So granted it was cold, rain, everything else, but in one Saturday we look up and there's $3,300 that we can apply to this donation category. Of course, we hired a city veterinarian in November 2nd, and we converted unfilled admin position to the vet position to offset that cost, and payments to local vets for Spay-Newter were in the 60K range last year. And it's probably more than that, but again how we have to enter our deposits, 60K is a conservative figure that I can prove was paid out to local veterinarians for spay-neuter programs. Any questions on that screen? Okay. I didn't see the microchip category in there, but for the record, it's $13 to microchip at my shelter. Any questions? Well, if we look at the cost as he presented it on spay-neuter dog cat, I guess the question is long-term, and just like Mr. Turner brought up, I think we all have a different opinion about where we want to see that cost. But going forward, do we want to see it held lower, or do we want to see it at that rate? I think that was in my question. Also, if we look at

[1:03:30] But if I looked at maintenance fees on vehicles, vehicle maintenance was the same cost as fuel. Do we want to see more vehicles out on the road? I mean, what do we want to see out of animal services as we're taking a new approach to this issue? And I don't think that we ever get a chance to discuss that when we're in budget, and that's why I wanted to do it now while the issue is, you know, on our minds. There's a lot of that depends on the plan that we put forth as far as what's going to be done. I know that there's already a lot in play at this point, but those recommendations will come from James and Bob as far as the planning moving forward. What exactly resources will be necessary in order to do the job and that's kind of what we're looking for. As far as looking as far as the fees at the level that they should be, that's something that really will be coming as a recommendation from these gentlemen. Well, and I would like to hear it today. At least a preliminary thought on some of that. Believe it or the vehicles, how many do we have now, and is that enough, James, I guess what the question might be. How many vehicles do we have out? Well, we have five vehicles on the ground that you can depend on. I guess there's six that we pay for. The problem with my vehicles is their mileage. We mile them out real fast. This is a big town to cover. And that's typically what gets you in trouble with maintaining them is your higher miles. Ryan and Kramer and I are proactively working out some situations that, again, it's probably going to be a long-term deal. But where we can recycle these vehicles way before some of these get to the mileage they get to, because then we don't get anything form at the auction. So I think we're really looking at that right now. But I've got six on the ground, and they are hot. Some of them are very, very high in mileage. Their age is new, but the mileage is high.

[1:05:31] Am I envisioning the vehicles that actually pick up dogs? Is that what we're talking about in those vehicles? Yep. And there's going to be a lot of, there's just so many changes. You know, we did a lot of stuff that I think will eliminate some of the maintenance and the mileage of my vehicles, i.e. picking up carcasses at every veterinarian's office every morning. That was a, that's a mildly effect. I mean, and it was inefficient, and we don't do that no more. But we did that for many years, and that was the first two hours of every guy's job, and they were going all over this town, picking them up and then dumping in our dumpster like we do now. So we don't do that anymore. Cats and traps were asking people to be a little more responsible if they're going to be trapping, please, be cognizant of the fact that you need to bring that cat to us. We have too many other health and safety welfare issues that we've got to deal with. So, and it's all working out. But again, I think it's just something we're finally getting into. I would love more fleet. I'd love more potties, you know, one of the reasons we, and we're gonna discuss that from an ASAC committee standpoint. We are bringing to the ASAC board this November meeting, some recommendations. I think I've showed where there's some money there. That recommendation will be brought forth to obviously Mr. Valenzuela and then the City Council. So, and I think that's my job. I think I got to manage the numbers out there. And I think we got some money that we can manage to hopefully implement some more bodies. And all of us are on that page. Daniel and I, Michael and I have talked about that. It's just kind of up to me to start watching the dollars out there. Mayor? Question? Mayor? Yes. I could. It seems like we've spent a lot of time, and we've been at this a long time. But really, the combination of Bob and James together working on this issue has not been one full fiscal year yet. And so we've just started a new fiscal year. This is the first budget that they've created. And we've changed the ordinances.

[1:07:32] We've got lots of changes to try to implement and generate results from. So far, we've been very supportive from the city manager's office perspective in trying to facilitate the changes they need. I'd like to give them some time to generate an impact as a result of the changes that they've brought and the council has implemented. And so, while I don't want to say don't bring us ideas, I'd like to give them some time to work on those things, but keep bringing us their needs. And let's give them some time to operate. I would like council to ratify this flexibility that James, idea that James has had. He talks about inventory management. When that inventory gets old, his mindset is, we need to discount that inventory and get it moving, because we don't move it out the front door. It'll have to go out the back door. And so what I'd like to see is counsel ratify that. And for staff to look at if any further action is necessary, for James to be able to take those animals that have been in there too long, and find a way to move them out the front door. If he's got to discount them, I'd like counsel to bless that concept. I had asked for these items to be on the agenda. And my interest was in having, I think, more of a policy discussion about how we wanted to price these animals that are in the shelter. And so I don't want them to have lots of time. They've done a lot in a short amount of time. And I don't want this to languish. I don't think the public does. I think hiring the veterinarian was an excellent idea. And if we're going to have a mandatory program, we have to be able to offer something to our lower income citizens so that they can comply. But I want the public to have trust in what we're doing and that to be somewhat defined.

[1:09:32] And if we sort of say philosophically that we want a lower cost, spay, neuter animal to be able to leave that shelter, That's our job. We don't have to wait. They want our direction, too. They want to know they have our support to recommend something. But I don't think we're going to wait six months on what's the price of an animal. If we were serious about getting animals moved, then I think we need to look at dropping that price and know that we are offering an animal that's fully vetted for less than the cost of vetting that animal. That's where public funds are being used to keep that animal alive and have it placed in a home rather than it being destroyed. Okay, is that the only issue you're aware of that we need to take action on? Because I'm not aware of anything other than ratifying that course of action. I'm not aware of needs that they've made requests of that we haven't satisfied. I think that I mentioned before that I wanted someone investigate the need to vaccinate for rabies every three years because if that or I mean every year if that was not a state law why are we over vaccinating animals because that's another savings for our citizens if it wasn't necessary. So again all encompassing and maybe I also want to look at the makeup of the board because as I understand it the board is to make make sure we're complying with state law, but they don't necessarily, they may or may not generate policy depending on what the council wants them to do. All right. Help me with the to do list. I think I heard. Well, I think this needs to go through the animal control board. We're setting here talking staff and us. This needs to go through the animal control board. That's what the animal control board is for. Well, that's not necessarily true. That's not what, that's not, I think we're adding to their mission, which is fine.

[1:11:32] But we need, I'd like to hear maybe from Daniel at another time about that. Sure. That would be a good problem. Any other questions before we call this one at an end? If not, it's 10-13 calling for a 15-minute break, about 10-30 will start back. 33, let's get this meeting back in order, please. You're still here. Item number C is discussion on issues related to enforcement of improperly placed groups garage sale signs, Mr. Flores. James Flores, good morning, I guess. It's not happening quite yet. No slides for this one. Again, this was an item that Council wanted to bring up for discussion. I think what we've done since the last time we heard about it is we kind of proactively got involved with a recommendation that we'd like to bring forth, kind of get your approval on it to solidify this process that we've implemented. Signs are nuisance everywhere. I don't think there's a district that's more infested with them than not. It may seem so, but they're just everywhere, from free puppy signs to $10 dog signs to garage cell signs to moving signs to whatever. The problem with signs is that they are affixed or attached to a utility pole, a stop sign, a light pole. And that's where we have a problem with them. And if they would come back and get them, You know, it'd probably be okay, but 90% of the people that stick those on those signs don't come back and get them. So on Mondays, my guys are going, and they're picking them up, and they're filling up the bed of their trucks with them. We tried some enforcement tacked, and it's been successful. Again, I think some of this stuff is seasonal. We got into the time where garage sales

[1:13:32] are not gonna be as predominant due to the weather, so everybody was blowing out their garage for the last couple of 45, 60 days. So it seemed like they were just going on everywhere. So, what we decided is, since we last heard that there's, and we've had tons of complaints, we have some very active citizens that send me, iPhones are amazing because they can send me to the T of where a violation is at, so we respond to that. And of course they do that to you guys on council. And what we decided was, or what our thought was, and this is kind of a proven track type of enforcement tact, we decided to blitz the media, blitz the radio, blitz the channel 17, Mr. Wilson out. I think I do that quite often for him with him with all the things that we do, but and send out an educational blitz for the next two weeks to the citizens and let them know that enough is enough. We're not going to take these signs anymore and give everybody the opportunity via the radio, via the television, via the internet, Facebook, social media, newspaper, whatever they read their daily information on. And after the two week time, I think we start some heightened enforcement. My guys are broken up into districts. As you well know, we have pulled the six, seven guys that have an individual district out and brought them into an affected district. And we have kind of like just overcome the issues with seven or eight people versus one guy in a district. It's proven to be a great success. But the key is, educating people and letting them know, we're going to start focusing on this. After the two weeks expired, we started dealing with signs, I think it's time to cite. I think if we do the educational aspect accordingly, it's time to, you know, send you to a semangidimensional court for the violation of hanging signs on public waterways or public utility poles. And I'm open for any suggestions. Again, it's just something we're asked to bring back or bring up.

[1:15:34] It is fire. I have a question. question. Yes ma'am. Can I as a citizen take a sign down? Absolutely. That's what do I turn it into you or just pitch it in the nearest dumpster? No what we what we do like is if you could I know you're pretty good with your iPhone so let's take a picture of it because we get we need an address we need to deal with it I don't want to just throw it away that's what we're doing now that's what we've been doing for many years and again when you look at the numbers there's a lot of any efficiencies that that we perform that I wish we never got into but I would like to simply send that person a letter of a notice of violation to let them know that, hey, we know you did this. This is your sign. This is your address. And please be aware that this is illegal. And there's their first notice. Again, it's an educational piece. Second time we deal with them, there's just really no other option but to cite. I think there's several things going on. Generally, a garage sale, let's say, if it's done properly is only several times a year. Correct. then you have, you know, use diabetics, strips. There's all sorts of bizarre signs now that are in the rights of way. Those are businesses. I buy ugly houses. Those are businesses. That one's all over. Right, they're all over. So, you know, I get, I'm inundated with this complaint. And I've told people, if it bothers you that much, go get it, just go take it down. And I do have citizens that take them down in my district. The problem is, James, when we call you to go get them and you send this letter out, which I think is great, these are also people looking for zoning violations and other environmental violations. I mean, how much can how many officers do? Well, I mean, there's not enough time in the day. There's not. I mean, and we can say that for the other division as well, you're right. Right. So, I mean, to me, it's like, where do they prioritize their time, because I don't think

[1:17:34] there's anything wrong with our citizens again like we were saying earlier taking it upon themselves to clean up this community rather than thinking the answer is to pay another 40 $50,000 staff person to do what we should be doing ourselves. Just my thought. I think any comment I have James is you're right. I mean if that person puts up the sign you would it be one thing for them if they would just take it down. I mean, that's fine. But they're illegal anyway, are they not? I mean, they're against our ordinance. I mean, they're, it's not supposed to happen. But, and I get that same phone call many times about folks that, you know, put them on boxes with a brick holding the box and on post. You named it all. But I think it'd be, it's one thing, if that person was more responsible, if you have that garage sale on Saturday and it's over, go and get your sign. Don't leave it there the rest of the week. But yeah, I get that time and time again. So I'm glad we're finally looking to it, but the education part is going to be big. If it's been illegal forever, I mean, it's sad that we're at this point where we've allowed it, but I'm glad we're looking into trying to at least remove that. Those ugly sites of those signs being left behind. Sure, and I think history's shown, you know, we're not aggressively citation issuing departments. That's not our goal. I don't think that's how you clean the city. I think you clean the city by educating the folk of the ordinance expectation up to cleaning it yourself, which is me and my staff, and then dealing with the habitual violators because we do know we have a ton of those folks. And we can deal with those folks through the citation level. It's just when we start getting citation happy or citation aggressive is when you guys get the complaints phone calls. That ordinance has been in the book since 1959, so it's rather old. And I want to be careful because I can see where if somebody had a beef

[1:19:35] against me, which some folks do, they could not, you know, just create a fictitious sign. Yes. Create a fictitious sign with my address on it. Do you, do you guys go and verify that, hey, in fact, there wasn't a garage sale going on it? Well, and we changed tack back when the ordinance came out with garage sales a couple of years back. We limited the people to three a year. The 72 hours was always the 72 hours. But when that ordinance changed is when we became a little smarter on dealing with it. So yes, to answer your question, we do go verify that there is some type of activity going on that correlates with the signage on the utility pole. I haven't ever had that happen, but I could imagine that could start happening. You're exactly right. So if we pull the sign and we go to the house, there's no cell. The dates are usually on there. The times are usually on there. Some of them aren't. Some people are pretty good. They just put cell and they put an arrow down the road. But it is protocol for the officer to find the location related to the signage. And at that opportunity, it's a door knock, typically they're there. So it's a great opportunity for us to educate the person about or dis-expectation used to we didn't used to we just threw him in the trash Johnny I always take picture and send it to James with the address and the violation and send it to him and so that he's got proof or verification that picture doesn't lie but if I may Mr. Maristin's we're talking about signs I want to throw something in this is a sign it's right here in front of me if any of you want to come and get your picture made later it'll be here all day, take your picture of selfie and send it to the city's website, you'll be eligible for a prize up to $500 next September. So everybody gets a picture later on the agenda. Are you kidding us? Is that on there? Is it on the agenda? No, I said signs. I'm going to take a liberty here. Rodney, I think that the education and the media

[1:21:35] Blitz would be the biggest thing and really I didn't know how legal it would be even to go up and take those signs down as a just a resident from the city in the city so I think that's what needs to be pushed the most on this is to get that out there if you see something do something and just take it in you know Dwayne was telling me a story about him getting a complaint the other day about some trash and the guy was complaining about the trash Dwayne drove over there, picked up the trash for that person. Why didn't the person just pick up the trash to begin with? If you're going to complain about it, you could complain about it, take a picture of it, but then you pick it up and get it out of the way you think it's a hazard in the street or for somebody, then you take care of it. We're getting too reliant on you guys as a city to have to do all this stuff, and we don't have the budget to do these things. That's exactly right. We can't take care. We can't take care of everybody and do everything. You have to get off your rears and do some stuff for yourself. So hopefully this media blitz will be talking about that. I think the next time I see one, there's one over by my office at the five-way stop that's there all the time. They constantly put it up and it's a business that's doing that and I'm going to start just ripping it down. Well, take a picture of it so we can get the address and then it doesn't have addresses. That's what I was going to ask you. It has phone numbers on it. doesn't have an address. What do you do about that? We call them. You call our customer. Okay. Thank you. I'm just curious how much are the citations? I mean if you get if you go an issue and how much is what did well any breach of ordinance for for ordinances classy misdemeanor up to $500. So it could vary habitual offenders are dealt with at a higher capacity obviously but I can't I really just say it's $50, $100, it's up to $500. Could we throw in a puppy?

[1:23:36] I'm sorry? Could we throw in a puppy? A free puppy? I can, we can. I've got some nice free puppies we can get here. Does that give you what you need? I just wanted, yes, sir, it was a concern, and I just wanted to let you know that's our goal. And if you get some phone calls, just direct them to me. So anybody in their own neighborhood, they've once to clean it up, they can start on their own. Take a picture, take it down. I'm gonna start doing that. Take it down. We've got a lot of folks that are doing that. Cleaning it up. I'm over to having you in Johnson and you'll stay busy. Oh yeah. I think your media blitz is a good idea. Any public comment on this before we move on? Let's move on then to item number D. First public hearing and consideration of the ordinance, many chapter 10 of the code of ordinance is to reduce the maximum speed limit on US Highway 277 beginning at the exit of US Highway 277 South from US Highway 87 south, extending south, to the city limits from 60 to 65 miles per hour, to 55 miles per hour. Patrick Frerich, you are on serve. Good morning, Mayor, Councilman. I come to you this morning as a reprieve from Mr. Flores. He's been up here the bulk of the time, so. Actually, we're here this morning to get your approval or seek your approval on an amendment to the motor vehicle ordinance that will in effect change the speed limit along a portion of Highway 277 to our city limits down to 55 miles an hour. Councilman Fleming, I believe, brought this to our attention and facilitated this item at the request from his constituents, so with that, this is a state of Texas roadway. We have John DeWitt, the Director of Transportation Planning development for text out here to speak to this item he's going to give you let you know what the change is kind of the mentality behind the change and kind of the logistics behind it so with that I'll turn it over to mr. DeWitt welcome

[1:25:40] done thank you Mayor and thank you Patrick good morning by the way that is just to break the ice and put you at ease that is not a picture of 277 at Canal Road. It's worse in the morning. It could be. As Patrick said, we've been working throughout the summer with city staff in particular as per Councilman Fleming's initiative to make some recommendations and work together to seek safety improvements at that particular location, Command Road at 277. And as part of that process, Mr. Fleming organized two public opportunities, Town Hall meetings, conducted on these dates on my next slide, actually in September and early October, to kind of vet what we had discussed with staff up to that point and help fine tune it further. I'm going to take a lot of time, but I am going to walk you through what we presented at those two public meeting opportunities to lead you to the specific item that's on your agenda this morning. Also should mention that outside those two public meetings, we had some meetings at the request with other stakeholders there specifically with Southgate Church of Christ staff and the school there also, as well as some residents in the neighborhoods down there concerned about the effects on circulation back in their neighborhoods based on one of the features we were discussing pretty deep into the whole conversation. So Canal wrote at 277, and I'll show you this slide, we'll go zoom in pretty quick, But just want to make the comment that anything we do at this particular location obviously has a lot of ramifications to the neighborhoods back behind there in the traffic circulation

[1:27:43] patterns on the city street network in there and County Road for that matter. So nothing's an isolated issue. Turning north to the left of your picture here and zooming in a little bit further and I'll go pretty quickly through this. This is the area that we focused on, and then I can illustrate a few things too that we did discuss as part of this whole conversation during the course of the summer. Remove that label so you can see it better, but there again, Canal Road over on the right hand side of the screen. The first thing that we proposed and brought to public comment was the idea of taking traffic that sought to travel south on 277 toward Kristoval, take that traffic load out of the rather strange configuration of the intersection of Canal Road N277. It's kind of a five-legged intersection. This is not statistically valid, but we did go out and take a traffic count over a 24-hour period and counted a little over 900 vehicles on that frontage road. I don't exactly know what the split was, where they were headed, but significant portion of that you would expect to need to travel south on 277 and to do so they have to travel through that canal road intersection. So adding to the crossing traffic and the potential traffic conflicts at their section of 277. So this particular proposal was designed to, they're again less than the load on that particular intersection. Currently we coupled that with the idea of severing the connection between Country Club Road and Canal Road, the existing frontage road. There again, in the interest of less mean amount of traffic that's all to use that intersection and forcing Southbound traffic onto 77 to use that ramp.

[1:29:45] But as we found through the two public meetings, and especially in the second one, was a problem, was an issue for the restants there. We took that out of the conversation kind of late in the game as we moved into the second public meeting. We were willing to consider that and at the time the idea was still to construct the ramp, leave that section of a French Road intact connecting to Canal Road, put it in operation, see how things work, continue to monitor the issue there at Canal Road in 277, and then keep up with it as time goes on if necessary. There again in the second public meeting, by the way, Councilman Fleming, thank you for arranging those for us because they were very instructive to us. I'm terrible at guessing a number of people and we didn't take a roster but I guess helped me with this probably 60 to 75 people somewhere in there and made probably more between those two meetings. Yes. Got to weigh in on this. The second time and probably about 30, 25 to 30 the first time. So again, this particular proposal still generated some concern and heartburn about overall traffic circulation and its effect on the neighborhoods back behind there. We eventually at this pointer took that off the table and we're not proposing that to you for your consideration and support today and be something we'll keep in our hip pocket if necessary as time goes on and traffic builds in that area. What we are bringing to you today is what's on your agenda, the proposal to lower the speed limit on 277 in the vicinity of Canal Road. This particular slide shows the current configuration or current speed limits on 277, which is 55 in areas shown in orange, excuse me, 65 in areas shown in orange and 60 the

[1:31:49] stretch shown in green. We propose and it's been supported by the appropriate traffic analysis and speed analysis that's going into this to lower the speed limits to 55 is shown in green here down to Templin Road and then let it transition to 65 then on 75 South of town. I lost my train of thought but that is once on the table before you today it's obviously an incremental step will continue to monitor the performance of the zero section the accident history there and certainly be open to further dialogue about improvements in future but this is I think a sensible recommendation and incremental step we can take right now. It's on pending your council action. I understand there's actually two readings that need to take place on this. The way things time out and things never worked this way but they did this time. It's our commission agenda, the Texas Transportation Commission agenda for their consideration on November 19th. Once they act on that and approve it, we're ready to go put the signs up. We expect that we can have the speed limit changed out there officially by the end of this month. So with that Patrick or there Mr. Council, I'd never tell you. I think it's a wonderful idea. Charlotte you had a comment? Yes I do. I think it's a wonderful idea. I come in Mr. Fleming for pushing this. I've mentioned a few years ago about that intersection. It's horrible and it's very sad that somebody had to die to get it this far. But my great-grandbaby is in a vehicle that goes that intersection two three times a day and travels that road and I would love to see something done and I support it as well. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. And we see it on 87 right now coming in from the north. It goes from 65 to 55 on down to 45. So you know this is a good step. What do you what? Ready.

[1:33:49] First of all I'd like to move to approve as presented. The second thing is I appreciate text dot spending the time that they spent on this and us trying to do something of course you know and if this was the idea world we would put a red light there or something like that our overpass would actually be the the perfect situation but we don't have the money to do that or cut off canal road yeah but I'm not sure I want that on public record we don't have the money to do those things and so this is something that will help I believe it's a first step like he said and that if we do continue having problems like this maybe we will go to to the ramp and do the ramp is the next step on there. I'd like to second his motion. Have a motion. I would do have a second. Any other comment from the council? Do I have public comment on this item? All in favor of accepting this as proposed, please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 on that one, please. Thank you, John. Thank you. Thank you. All righty. Consider approving water and water reclamation rate increase as recommended by the water advisory board. Bill Riley. Thank you, Mayor. Council, Mr. Valenzuela. Good to see you all. And while he's looking for that, I'd like to say that I was corrected during the break. When I mentioned my town hall meeting at Southland Baptist Church, I said, according to someone in the audience on Southland Street, the repair in its Sherwood Way is where the state is working with us to change, but it will be at Southland Baptist Church. appreciate the opportunity to come before you this morning and talk about the water rates again. You have all have seen the the presentations made by the rate consultants and so I certainly won't go through all of that today in the interest

[1:35:51] of your time and the the load that you have before you. But I do want to share with you the changes that have been made since the last meeting and the recommendations that that you had proposed and what we have been able to do to lessen the impact of the race. Again I won't go through the entire presentation but I do want to just kind of start by just refreshing just a little bit on the challenges that are facing the utility and first and foremost of course is just financial sufficiency. Actually having the revenue meet the requirements of the operation. Financial sustainability which is of course meeting the financial targets that we set which would be the fund balance, the days of cash on hand, and the debt service coverage. And then water supply. Obviously, very important to this community is the continued search and development of water supplies for the future. And then reinvestment into the existing infrastructure to maintain what we have, which obviously relates to water supply and the service levels that we provide to the community. So I just want to take a minute to just talk about where the utility is, and again, the challenges that we're facing financially. Obviously, the consumption of water has an impact on the revenue generation, and while we've talked a lot about conservation, conservation does impact the revenue stream, and so we've got to take some steps to remedy that. And you can see from this slide that the green is what our budgeted revenue has been starting in 2012 through 2015, and you can see that as the consumption has been reduced through the per capita demand, the revenue stream has also reduced as well, and which obviously relates to the first item that we talked about was financial sufficiency,

[1:37:52] the revenue is not there to meet our operational needs. This slide will show us what our budgeted expenses have been during that same time versus what our actual expenses were and in part based on the reduced revenue stream. It's also, we did have some help in cutting expenses during this time because we were impacted greatly in a part of our fixed costs which is salaries on the oil field having an impact on our employees and the number of positions that we were able to have during that time. And then finally, this slide I think shows the real picture of the condition of the utility. As you can see in the blue, again in 2012, what our actual expenses were versus what our budget, I mean what our actual revenue was, which is the green bar. The black line is what our fund balance has been. As you can see in 2012 the fund balance was about 4.5 million. That is reduced drastically through the years and this slide shows it's At about 300,000 and it's actually at this point has dropped under into a negative number The target at this point for the the fund balance would be 3.8 million dollars and the financial plan that has been prepared by the consultants actually takes into consideration this target and that moves us towards meeting our goals. So the financial plan this just kind of shows the relationship of where we are what the revenue baseline is with no increase and that's in the orange bar and in the two is where we the blue rather is what we would need to increase the revenue over the five-year period to meet our financial targets our revenue requirement. Just some of the key assumptions that went into the financial plan and these

[1:39:52] are some of the changes that were made over the last couple of months after meeting with you back in August. First and foremost though, from what you would expect in the relationship between your revenues and expenditures is that annually you would have a slight surplus in your revenues and that would build up your fund balance. As you know, water sales are dependent not only on or affected rather, not only by conservation, but also by weather patterns. And so you're not going to have a consistent annual revenue generation. So the financial plan takes that into consideration, normalizes the revenue generation and the demand over annually and then projects that out over the five-year period so that in the five years we would meet the financial goals and then the day is cash on hand as anticipated or the goal is at least 75 days. You can see on the slide it says and the consultant had talked about this at the last meeting that highest-rated utilities have as much as two years of cash on hand. I don't think that's realistic for municipality of the size of San Angelo but I certainly think that 75 days would be a minimum, 90 days would probably be better. But the financial plan currently takes into consideration of the five-year period to get us to the 75-day cash on hand. And then, of course, the debt service coverage at 1.25 times. Again, some of the assumptions that we're taking into consideration as far as the impacts on the rates and the revenue, of course, in water, we've got considerable capital expenditures. We have water replacement needs. We have some improvement needed at the treatment plant and then of course the biggest drivers is future water supplies. And the wastewater side is the same. We have maintenance needs, rehabilitation needs, and in both in the collection

[1:41:54] infrastructure and also in the treatment facilities. Can I ask a question Bill? Yes, ma'am. So on your slide water reclamation is not water reuse this is water treatment it's it is correct it's which it's water treatment water it's our wastewater system okay but not the reuse of water because we haven't voted on that yet correct okay although I will say and you'll see this in a minute the we we have used in the beginning we still are using that project is built into the cost of that project is built into the rate structure. Then I'll talk to you when we get okay when we get there. We're almost there. Good. Some other additional key assumptions that went into to these rates again is future water supply which again this plan takes into consideration the cost of the reuse project which was split from 80 million into the water utility side and 56 million in the in the wastewater side for a total of 136 million financing for that to begin in 217 with the first full year of debt service in 2018 with a 25-year term and a three and a quarter percent interest. It also includes the half cent sales tax money from the half cent sales tax used to offset the debt service. Just so some of the key assumptions that were considered in the financial plan as far as expenses. The last payment for the debt service on the Ivy Reservoir was this year, and the last payment on the Twin Buttes Reservoir was this year. The actual last payment for the Ivy Reservoir is actually in 2016, but there's a reserve fund that pays that so we've made our final payment on the debt service on the reservoir. The last payment on the debt service for the pipeline is not until 2021. This again anticipates the debt issuance of $136 million for the water supply project in 2017,

[1:43:55] first full payment proposed in 2018, and then additional costs in 2019 for any additional operational costs. So why are you putting a cost in there of a project that we haven't approved? We're gonna need to do some sort of water supply project. Okay, so why, because we're also right now studying the retaroyo and its opportunity. We haven't seen any results on that. We haven't seen the results on the reuse. So I would be much happier with this if we simply said project yet to be identified. Because at this moment, we don't have the results to identify that that is the project. It hasn't been publicly vetted. Sorry, I used that word again. So to me, if you go back on that slide before, that's a project, or project money, capital money, for a project yet identified. Because I don't think we've prioritized anything, have we? We have not. And I would anticipate or hope that you do very soon. This does not affect the rates until the 2017 year. Well, and I think we all understand in our workshop session agreed that a rate hike is necessary for this fund to be self-sufficient. But when you put in a project yet that we haven't voted on, I'm uncomfortable with that. Because I'm supportive of the idea of reuse, but I also want to see what the other options are. And so, to me, that is yet to be identified what the priority project is until we have the full results of all of the studies

[1:45:56] that we're paying for. That seems a little presumptuous to me. Then we can plug in a number with no name. That would make me very happy. But I'm good with the rate hike because it's gonna get us where we need to be, but I don't think we've identified the project yet. So the water supply project is a non-project. there's it's not out there. We haven't approved it yet. Right. We're in steady mode. That's always been our discussion as far as the the water supply project. It wasn't any one particular project is the understanding that we're going to need a project in the future to acquire the supply that we need. So I know that sometimes it slips out we mentioned the water recommendations but we're not talking about that we're talking about we need a project that'll bring us a little bit more water and this is what this actually signifies. I'm happy with a project, but that one says reuse and we haven't voted on that yet. Okay. Am I the only one that remembers in the workshop that we had upstairs that should have been televised? We discussed since this is going to be such a shock to the citizens that they're going to be an increase and they're going to expect the kind of increase for five years. We know we're looking at potable water being cleaned. know and we need to do this all at once. I think we gave staff the go ahead to include it so that we could have it all at once so that we didn't have to redo and the citizens think that we were hitting them again and again. I agree, Elizabeth, with you that maybe there shouldn't be a name on it because we hadn't approved it yet, but the dollars definitely should be in there so all of this work is done and covered. It's just we haven't, the public, we have voted on the project. The public hasn't been through a public hearing with any of those recommendations, I'm happy with a project or several projects, and we're going to approve dollars to get us there today. That's what you're asking us for, but we haven't approved that project per se. I agree with you on the...

[1:47:59] Okay. Tometa Tomato. No, it's a public hearing process. Well, and the other thing that I wanted to ask is so much of the public has stated, well, And you just jumped into this decision without us knowing what's going on. We've been working with water and working with this for months and months and months and months. I don't want to see us approve the rate structure today. What I would like to see is these charts, these graphs, put in two Sunday newspapers and send out and have it on the website for people to look at and to call and ask us questions before we vote on it. I'm just wanting the public to know and have time to digest what we've been looking at for months and months and months so that they can see before we just jump in here and vote on it and the people think why this is the first time they've heard about it right or after I want them to see these graphs I want them to know by means of a public even if you have to put out a flyer to put this in a booklet so people can understand it before we vote on it. I agree. Okay. Let me show you what changes made from what the last, what we had presented the last time. Some of the changes that were implemented to help to smooth out the rates over the five year period was the transfer from the landfill that y'all approved of 1.8 million into the water fund. the additional half-cent sales tax revenue. Initially, we had anticipated that that would be banked over two years and then not implemented until 2018. We moved that back to beginning that, using that money in 2016 at about $1 million out to about $2.5 million in 2020, that's about 50% of what's available in the half-cent sales tax. And then, of course, we had showed a change to cost of service between residential and commercial. We put that

[1:49:59] off a year and then had a three-year phasing for that. We moved that back to begin that in the first year. And this is what the changes it makes to if you recall and what was presented back in August, the increase for an average residential user in the first year would be for total for water in and waste water would be about a little over $10 that is changed to about $5.88 and just to to show you these two together. The one on the left is what we had presented back in August. And so that went from 1023 to 588. You see it, it's a little bit more in the next two years to keep the, to make up for what was not done in the first year to write the ship as we had said. And so it truly becomes a five year plan to get us to where we meet the financial targets that were developed into the plant. and that the actual dollar figure goes from the combined this again is based on a residential average user of the combined bill at currently at $51 to in 2020 at $79 the original plan going back to the agency was at $82 at the end of the five years so it's the overall plans about $3 less in the at the end of the five years again bill that's both combined water and water water in which I just water right this slide shows the breakout of the two what that same slide only broken out So it'd be about three forty five for the water fund or the water bill and the sewer bill would be two forty three And then again the cost of service we'd plan to go directly into to a cost of service transition to where the actual customer class, residential and commercial would be, their rate would be based on what their impact on the water rate actually is. And that would be a three-year phase in. And

[1:52:01] just quickly to show you the, I can't see the colors, the horizontal line is where our current targets are in our revenue and then the lighter colored would show with this rate change what would happen with our revenue over the period of the five years. This is the fund balance and again the horizontal bar shows what our target is, the blue vertical bar shows what would happen to our fund balance over the five year period. in the debt service coverage in the same, the horizontal bar is what our target is, the blue is what our debt service coverage on each year, and ultimately where it would be at the end of the five-year period. This is what the actual fixed rate charge would be for residential customers. Again, just won't go through all of these, but a five-eighths meter, which a normal residential meter would go from 1912 to 2137, and this is what it would be over the five years as increase out each year. This is what the volumetric rate would be for residential. It would go from 249 for the lower usage up to 274 and then also the number of tiers would be reduced. The upper tiers you can see there's practically no usage in those tiers. There's no reason to have all of that that rate structure so those would all be combined and so we would go from eight I think to to five tiers. And then this is what the volumetric rate would look at, look like over the five-year period. One of the things that I think is important to point out that we made sure that we did not capture too much in the fixed charge while that would stabilize rates by having more in the volumetric rate it does give folks an opportunity or the ability to control their bill a little bit through their usage. And then non-residential would be just a single rate for all non-residential

[1:54:07] And that would go from $4 to $4.62. And then the five years, this is what the five year plan would be for all non-residential. Non-residential landscape would be a tiered rate. Instead of having the multiple tiers, that would go to two tiers. You can see what it would go from 404 to 446 in 2016. And then that's what the five year plan would look like for non-residential landscape. And then the untreated water would have, there would not be any tears in that, it would just be a single rate. That's a very small amount of usage. And then that's what the five years of untreated water would look like. And water reclamation fixed charge for each meter size. And then below that would be what the volumetric rate is for residential and for non-residential, with the residential being capped at 15,000 gallons. And that's what the five year would look like for the fixed charge forecast for water reclamation. For drought rates, what we did was take the, looked at what the reduction in usage was for as different drought levels were implemented. Fortunately or unfortunately, we had a good model for that this last year. So we're able to see what the reduction was and calculate what the reduction in revenue would be for those different drought levels and determined how much of a multiplier would need to be. So the process would be to apply a multiplier to the different rate structures, rate classes during a drought level to the basically as we were implementing different drought level requirements, we would stay relatively in revenue neutral. And those are the rates that we are proposing to you.

[1:56:10] When you do adopt this, and I was anticipating asking you to adopt this effective January 1, as you can see from the slide that I show you, we are continually going into the hole with our fund balance. And obviously, I understand your concern, this farmer, but I think that we do need to move forward with adopting this race. It's also I would ask that you adopted the five-year plan because this is a five-year plan. The first year does not, while it begins to help, we do not meet the financial targets until we get through the five years. That was the way to, obviously, to ease the impact on the customers. Charlotte? Is there a law that states that we have to notify the people a number of days in advance of a rate change? Well, what's gonna happen is that we're gonna have to modify a city ordinance to make these rates effective. So there'll be two public hearings and that's the notice that they'll be provided. So before January 1, even if we postponed so that we could run it for the next Council meeting two Sundays back to back, we still can meet a January 1. I've just, we're going to have to. Literally have lived through the trash contract, which we did everything that we could and we did right, but I just want to put up more information than we did the last time. and not vote on this until citizens have the opportunity to call me. Charlotte, I'm not just to advertise it, but again, have an evening time meeting. We welcome citizens to come in and talk to us and share their thoughts on that. I think that's important. An idea as well. I'm happy. I'm happy giving a consensus that this is the way we're going and preparing ordinance, but I don't want any action taken until there's public input in a venue away from here. and I don't know if it's two night meetings or one, but certainly something in another time and location.

[1:58:12] Rodney, you have been patiently waiting. First of all, time is of the essence on this, because we are losing so much money on this deal. One of the things that I'd ask for in the executive meeting was I would like to have a chart, and I loved it, Charlotte's idea, like I'm with Charlotte all the way today, I don't know what's wrong with me. Sending a minute, wow. I would love to have the chart comparing our rates to the other cities. I wish we would have had that today. And I'd ask for that last time, because I think that we are lower than most other cities. Is that correct? I'm just correct. I would love to have that. And I think that is something that the public would truly like to see. It's a lot easier to swallow when you're sitting there going, well, you know, we're ours is going up, but ours has been so much lower than all the rest of them. And I think that is the case, if I remember, right, that we're a good bit lower. And we haven't been, when was the last time that we had a rate increase of this time. Six or seven. It's been quite a while since we raised rates. I was talking to a resident yesterday and trying to explain that shouldn't happen. We shouldn't go eight years or nine years without a rate increase because generally, everything increases. Gas is the only exception right now, but everything else is increased. And we need to steadily, and I love how you've broken this down over a five year period, we're not socketed to them over one year, and I think that this is a good plan, but I am in agreement with Charlotte and Liz on this that I think that we should have meetings quickly, quickly, and explain to people, not just say like we're shoving this down your throat, we're explaining what the dire position we're in, and we are in a dire position on this, we have to get this fixed quickly. We're what, 20 months of water right now to buy these, What, 15, 16%? I was at 13%. 13%. You know, I'm more than happy to take advantage of my meetings, town hall meeting on the 20th. If staff would prepare several, just the pages of the graphs

[2:00:14] that I could pass out at that meeting. This is another subject we would like you to review. It's take up. But it has to be done this month, because really, if we have to have two readings, I really would. I'm with Bill on this. It needs to be done by January 1. She has a meeting next week and I have a regular meeting next week. And the newspaper ads. I love the newspaper ad deal. And if you could have what Abilene's pan and Midland and Odessa's pan and some of our sister cities and show, I think it's a lot easier for me as if I was the layperson out there sitting there going, well, my bill is high, but it's not as high as those cities was or is right now. Aren't you glad you live in St. Angelo? John, did you have a question? So Bill, I like the presentation how you put it together. But I have to be honest with you, some of those slides were greek to me, because they went pretty fast. But in all honesty, when you talk about water, and you painted a pretty picture on one of the bills, a water usage of 51-17, but that doesn't take in consideration the trash and the sewer does it. And it doesn't take in consideration the fixed charge. So you're already up to $70 with just those two. So even though it's a minimal increase, when you start adding everything else, You're looking at about $70, $80 a month already. Are you not? Or did I added wrong or did I see it wrong? This does take into consideration the fixed charge for water and wastewater. That is the entire water. 1981. That's correct. The 1981 is the fixed charge. So what made up that 51-17 that you talked about? The fixed charge for both water and wastewater and the volumetric rate. So that included both? That's correct. So then that did not include the sewer or the trash. It included sewer. The non-trash. We're only talking about the water and wastewater rates. OK, that sounded on top of it. OK, another $15. Yeah, it would be, Herbert. And again, the idea of feeding it to the public for them

[2:02:15] to decipher, because it goes fast up here. And some people think we know everything when we sit back here. And we don't. I mean, what's presented to us, you've got to catch on quick. But questions like that is what need to be answered. And a bigger picture painted that it's not just this little minimal increase, it's going to add up. And that first year, if you're paying 60, 70 now, that first year could already be up to 80, depending on, of course, the usage. But education, it's going to be the key here, like everybody else is saying. But we are going to have to raise this. I mean, this is just like me running my business. And if I'm running a negative income balance, I have to raise it or I close. That's a simple fact, that's economics 101. If you're not bringing in enough, you're not going to stay surviving, you're not going to keep going. I don't have any trouble making a motion that we move forward with the writing of an ordnance. I think you've done a good job of keeping it as manageable for the citizen as possible. I know we can't keep working in a, you know, in a negative position. We have to appreciate water and pay for the cost of it, and that's what for whatever reason historically we've never wanted to do that. So I'll make a motion as long as we get meeting set up for public input that could modify this slightly. We recognize that as we get the public input and come back to the next meeting. And also that we don't identify what the projects are, but know that we then have capital dollars to help with those projects once we have full data to examine. Second. So the motion is that we accept the rates and accept the five-year plan with the caveat that we put this out for people to understand.

[2:04:18] So we'll take the first vote today and we will wait for the second vote until all of the information is gone out. No, we're directing staff to create an ordinance, but there could be some modification as we hear more from the public other than the five that may speak to this today. I mean, that's part of the public hearing process is we can modify the ordinance. Yes, you can. But we know we're going to be looking at probably some increase, January or February. Mayor, I don't have a problem with that. Mayor Comet. Yes. And along those lines is, did you say we have, how many months applied do we have now, 20 months? No, it's probably closer to 30, 30 months, okay. And I'm with Rodney before the folks out there behind those computer screens started badgering us on this idea of an increase, this increase affects us too, affects me and these guys too. But the bottom line is we're looking at the future of the city itself, we need to go out there and search for water. So it's not just wanting to raise taxes, I mean, raise water, raise just to raise them, we're running out of water. So those folks need to understand that we're not just wanting to create a revenue for the city, just for the heck of it, it's for the livelihood of all the citizens, so clearly. We were at least water rates, about $14.75 a month in July 2011 for clarification, it's the last way. That would have been for Higree with us. Yes. That would be accurate. 2011, yeah, July 2011. And I can see that a lot of people are going to have concern over these projects. And I agree with Liz on this that I I hate to name it without approving it, although I think that that is probably the best thing because it's guaranteed water, but we have to have that money in place to do some projects. We're doing something, we have to do something.

[2:06:19] And so I don't wanna be that counsel to just sit there and did nothing for the future. And you have to plan on these water situations because we don't know next year we could have a situation where God doesn't save us and God did save us last year on that rainfall. We were in dire, dire straits and we were, I mean, it was going to get super bad and one weekend that all changed. And then everybody forgot how bad the drought was. I don't forget about how bad the drought is. I think about it daily and I worry about my kids' future and my grandkids' future about getting water here in the desert. We live in the desert. Marty, Mayor, can we name it a rainy day water project fund? I think more people remember than you think. But I just want to make sure or just your motion was just to direct staff to to write the ordinance, right? Okay. You'll have two readings on it. We can change. Liz is correct and we can change. If the public out I believe that the public outcries super bad on this and there's and and they have a legitimate argument on it that we could possibly change the ordinance at that time. I don't know what those legitimate arguments would be. Right, okay. And this isn't the first public? No. No. No. Okay. Okay, state your motion one more time so that we know exactly what we're voting on. I told him that I would make a motion to support the rate structure that he has proposed proposed and for staff to write a draft of an ordinance in accordance with that, as long as we did not identify what the projects or projects were until we have the benefit of the consultants' summaries. And this is for five years, the five-year program has presented.

[2:08:21] Right, it's a five-year program has presented. And that there would be public education? Absolutely. to include new to you approve on your second okay to include newspaper correct yes newspaper and public meetings after hours meetings thank you everybody comfortable with that yes yes any further comment from council do I have public comment on this item Jim my name is Jim Turner and I think that you're going in the right direction with this I remember Over when we had the last big rate increases and everything, the city has done a lot to stop using the water fund as a cash cow. We eliminated the pilot from the water fund, which was a very large grain, where we were transferring rate payer money into the general fund. We're no longer doing that. And the water fund, like any public utility, should be, to a very large degree, self-supporting. We shouldn't be subsidizing it anymore than we're subsidizing lights and a lot of the other stuff that's out there. The cost that the rate payer sees should reflect actually what the cost is to get the water here. And if it takes a rate structure that is higher, unfortunately, that's the way it is. is going to have to pay for the water to get here. So much is going to have to pay for it to be processed, the salaries, everything that's involved with it. And the fair thing is the people that use it, pay for it. As far as how you have the tears in there, which is something we, again, we added that in during one of the previous rates structure to make it more fair, where it can help the low income people more than the heavy water users and separate to commercial from the residential use.

[2:10:23] But that's a matter of fine-tuning. The rates are going to have to go up to actually pay for the water to get here, be processed, and so on. Until we can come up with some other auxiliary related business to help pay for water, that's the only way you can do it. It's not fair to put it on property tax or other taxes. The people that use the water, unfortunately, need to pay for it. That's just life. Thank you. Donner any further public comment on this item Darren Morning council mayor mr. Villan's well up Darren Fentress. Yes, my name is Darren Fentress. I'm sorry. I was getting there. I am a licensed Professional engineer in state, Texas, and I work with municipalities in West Texas as well as in East Texas So you could say I have one foot in the mud puddle and I have another one in the sand But just so everyone knows this is not not a topic that is isolated to St. Angelo. Water rates is an issue across the state. Aging infrastructure is an issue across the state as well as, I venture to say, the United States. California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas. We're all struggling with water and water supply. We're all struggling with aging infrastructure, not just water infrastructure, but as well sewer infrastructure, sewer plants have to be rehabbed about every 10 to 20 years, 15 years. So I applaud you for tackling this tough subject. It is not easy to go to your citizens and say we're going to take some more of your money, but it is their facilities and we are all responsible for paying for it. I don't remember what my second point was, but again, oh, Miss Farmer, I'm really glad you brought up the point of having some public forums. I've been part of a rate increase where that did not happen and it was not successful at all. I think

[2:12:25] that make the transition much smoother and again I apologize for tackling this and as a private citizen to pay taxes I pay my water bill. I support the rate increases is what I've seen reviewed. It's not an easy pill to swallow but it's It's necessary to keep the city functioning. Thank you. I do want to clarify with that, that I have fought Mr. Fleming head, toe, nail, all the way on a rate increase for nearly two years now. I wanted justification as to why it needed to be increased and I wanted a long-term plan. I think staff has done that justification beautifully. Yes ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, Darren. Any further public comment on this before we vote? then I'm gonna call for the vote. All in favor of Liz's motion and Charlotte's second, that we'll go ahead and go into this. We approve the rate structure with the ordinance to be created with the caveat that she placed. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Put a 7-0 on that one, please, ma'am. Number F, consider adoption by resolution allowing the city of St. Angelo and Fairmount Cemetery to exchange properties with the Angelo State University to the mutual benefit of both parties. David Namp is not here. I suppose this will be you, Rick. Council, this is an item that I think most of you are familiar with. We've discussed often on for some time looking at the exchange of land that would benefit both Angelo State University and the City of San Angelo. So we're going to go over that today. The slide before you before you right now just kind of shows the two parcels. But basically, the city of San Angelo and Angelo State

[2:14:26] wish to make an exchange of properties. This is pursuant under chapter 272 of the Texas local government code on terms and conditions that serve the best interest and benefit of the public with respect to the exchange of these two properties. So you'll notice the square in blue is over close to off Jackson Street is in the ASU campus and it's owned by the city, it's 0.693 acres, has a water tank on it, also a tower where we have our meter reading system on it and a small structure. You'll notice the block in yellow is 1.5 acres, it's on the southeast corner of Fairmont Cemetery. So what we're proposing is to adopt a resolution that's before you today to proceed with this potential land exchange, and we would then take that to the Regents for them to consider. The things that are really important in this, and there are several members here from Friends of Fairmont and the Fairmont Cemetery Board who can speak to it as well, they've helped to move this project along. But basically, there are a few things. One, the city would split any fees and there's a little bit of clarification in the background minimum of us versus the resolution. But in the resolution, if there's the fees associated with surveying or environmentals or appraisals, those would be shared jointly between the two entities, ASU and the city. As far as the site itself, we would, the city would be responsible for removing the tank, the foundations, the fences, those things, to make it a clean piece of property that ASU would get. One of the challenges we've had in that is initially we thought that was going to be pretty simple, wasn't going to be very costly. In this particular case, as they've gotten into looking at it and getting bids, the tank itself has some lead in the paint,

[2:16:28] which makes removal of that tank a lot more expensive. And so you'll see those cost figures in your background. We have sought out numerous leads on that. We've been able to get one. So you'll see that in there. So the city would be responsible for that. As far as the foundations, those kind of things, we would remove those. Ricky's crews would do that, and we would have a year to do that with our own crews, thus reducing the cost of that. The last component is there's also a tower on that site that the city has, that we have our meter reading system for the water meters. So we would relocate that. ASU will agree to allow us to put that meter reader on their tower that's over at their maintenance site, which actually is a much higher tower and better for us. And so we would have the expense of relocating just that meter reading system. Specifically on cost, we mapped out those anticipated amounts. And we don't anticipate that the surveying and all that stuff that we would share would go over $10,000. The demolition of the tank bid is $44.9. And the relocation expenses for just the meter reading system is about $6. So you're looking at a potential expense of somewhere around $60,000. We've talked with a budget about that. So Tina and Morgan are here to answer questions on that, but basically they said that they were able to find those dollars within cost savings from other projects, several other projects that they could put together to cover this expense and they can give you more detail on that if you need, but that's how they're recommending that we go about paying for this if Council chooses to move forward. So looking for your input, if you approve it, then we will forward this resolution onto the Board of Regents. For them to adopt, if they adopt it, then we will start the process to actually exchange the land.

[2:18:29] Move to approve this presented. Second. Any further council talk on this? Public comment on this? I know fair amounts. You're going to speak to fair amount? I'm in West with friends of fair amount. And I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank you for this opportunity. I wanted to thank Dr. May, Rick Weiss, and David Namp, who have navigated us through the proposal and how to go about doing this, been available to answer a multitude of questions and help us understand how it all goes about to acquire this. As you understand, our property is completely landlocked. And to go forward with our master plan and this Fairmount Annex would be a tremendous benefit to the cemetery through gathering places, through educational purposes. And we hope that the offices would be relocated within the property as well. So we think that it would be a tremendous boost to Fairmount Cemetery, and we appreciate for y'all to consider this today. Thank you, Ms. West. Do I have further public comment on this item? Motion has been made. We accept this present. It has been seconded. If there is no further public comment, I will call for the vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Put a 7-0 on that one, please ma'am. Moving on, item number G, which is considering approving a new agreement between the city

[2:20:30] and Lee and Gail Brown for the lease of the Spring Creek Marina on Lake Nazworth in authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute the agreement. Carl White, you have the floor, sir. Yes, sir. We seek approval of a new lease agreement with Mr. and Mrs. Brown for the Spring Creek Marina at Lake Nazworth. Currently, there's a lease with about 10 years left on it, and that lease also has two amendments. The Browns have asked us the city to renew the lease with a new term of 20 years. Staff supports this request and has drafted a new lease incorporating all the existing terms with the original and the amendments with the new draft and updated insurance requirements. Mr. Brown, who is present at the meeting has reviewed the draft lease in the terms and is in favor of the new lease. The basic terms are a 20-year lease, one option to renew for an additional 10 years, and angle payments that increase over the term of the lease. The Browns are in good standing with the requirements of their existing lease agreement, and staff recommends approval. This is yours Rodney, move to approve as presented. Do I have any further questions from Council on this item? Do I have some of the comment? Comment, it's prime property that the city does own. Certainly understand, you know, leasing it out. But I'm going to oppose this for reasons that are mine. And I don't need to publicize, so. They are in good standing with the city. Yes, sir. And staff does recommend we go ahead with the lease. Yes, sir. There has been a motion. There has been a second. Do I have any further comment from Council? Do I have comment from the public? and I'm going to call for the vote. All in favor as presented, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Aye. Let's put a 6-1 on that one. Thank you very much. Number eight is reporting discussion to the Stripes River Fest 215.

[2:22:30] Carl White, you are still on, sir. Got a quick two minute video to play. I think it's ready. It'll sound good. There it is. Is that ready? Yeah, 15 minutes. It'll be less than that. Yeah. Angelo, Texas. Hey, what's up, guys? This is me, Danny Goki in San Angelo, Texas, and you know what? We're excited to be here at Stripes River Fest 2015. See ya. You know, here we are in the middle of probably the worst drought we've seen in hundreds of years, and still, he's got the most beautiful lilies in the world right here for us to look at. It's amazing. Great deal with city puts it on. I mean, Amarillo are in the barns and stuff like that in the local deal, but this is neat City has something like that, it's very neat. With the new AV setup, that'll be easier to find the presentation.

[2:25:17] Just try it quick, this will be really quick. Just want to hit the highlights. This is the third annual stripes we were professed. And this year we estimated 10th was about $11,430. Last year we estimated about $10,000. Revenue we did net $12,000. Revenue over expenses. And last year was about $7,000. Our concert Friday night was the most well-attended one that we had yet with Riverfest, and it was a free concert which helped. A little over 2,200 attended that. We had the Color Up Dark event Saturday night with about 1,400 participants. We expanded all the activities at the Neffs area. We went actually east of Oak Street this year. The Vega Washer pitching tournament was successful as it has been the last two years, three years now. They raised $1,500 for the Wooded Warrior Project. Kixi joined us this year to bring the river raft raised, as you saw in the video, which was a lot of fun. They want to participate next year as well. The Girl Scout canoe races were well attended. We worked with new organizations, including the YMCA, the San Angel Bandits, and Grogan's Farm and Ranch Supply. That worked out well. Rain did threaten all the day Saturday, and it did eventually rain, as it has for every river fest. near Saturday evening. We did learn that we were looking at moving the run back to the morning because when we had the run in the morning the first two years that kind of kicked off the event, created a lot of energy, kept folks downtown. So we're looking at moving the run back to the morning to do that. We're looking at adding a central stage in the next area to have different performances during the day. Work with a different mix of inflatable toys, and then continue to work with the Friday night concert promoter. That worked really well. And we're also looking at maybe moving the event a week earlier or a week later, primarily to try to add more exhibitors to the event, because right now we're on a date that

[2:27:20] there's another exhibitor event. And so that's basically the quick update, unless you'll have any questions or heard any feedback from the public you'd like to let us know about. We plan on having it again next year. If it rains every time, let's do it more often. Every month, right? Every month, right. Every month, right. Feedback's been very positive. So, good work, Carl, and good work pushing us to support it. Thank you. And it was fun. It was very well. I will say that I warn people about those inflatables and you and myself and even Dan and winners will attest to that. I'll never call another one of those things. Two days later, well, men should not be in those. Why am I in pain? Why am I in pain? Then, men, they hurt. Don't they, Dana? They hurt. The only negative that I heard was I didn't know about it. I would have come to San Angelo, but I don't know how else we reach people, but that's the only negative I've heard. So whenever you'd like to have it, get after it. Thank you. Thank was successful. Thank you, Carl. So you think about a stage there at the old naps, is that what you said? The naps are arriving at a stage bringing different kid performances. We know that works well with other events, and when we had the drum line performance, we moved them to the Central Area NFS, and folks were watching that really getting engaged with that. So it taught us that we need to add that stage, and have different, like the ballet, do performances, and different kids groups. And we'll have a new concession stand ready, going next year, would you be in a class? Very well. and we'll have a miniature golf tournament. Oh, we're gonna have a train. Yes, we could. We'll have a train. We'll have a train. And a carousel. Thank you. Thank you. We have one other item and we have 10 minutes to get through with it. That's consideration of resolution finding a public purpose and approving financial assistance to the financial of friends of the environment safe recycling to host a household hazardous waste

[2:29:21] collection event in an amount not to exceed $50,000. Jeremy Miller. Morning Mayor or Council. Jeremy Miller, the Solid Waste Division Contract Manager. Today's staff is seeking your approval of a resolution to provide funding to safe recycling to conduct a hazardous household waste collection event. Many products found in homes contain chemicals that are potentially harmful to people and the environment. Chemical products such as oven cleaners, paint removers, pesticide, solvents, things of that nature. The average American household generates about 15 pounds hazardous waste annually. Currently, there's a lack of options to properly dispose of these items, so it leads to improper disposal, such as discarding them with your household waste, or port them down the drain or on the street, and when items are properly disposed of, they propose a threat to the environment and to the citizens. If they combine with other products, they can be combustible and flammable. We've had instances where trash trucks have caught on fire, and if they make it to the landfill, There's contamination issues, which subsequently can contaminate the groundwater, or when they're poured down the drain, they make it to our surface water, which, you know, poses a threat to the environment as well as increase water treatment costs. So the city is in support of this to provide an option for the citizens at no cost to properly dispose of these items. And I've invited Ms. Paskel, the Director of Safe Recycling, to speak to you regarding the logistics of the event and to answer any questions you might have about what we're doing. Thank you Jeremy, welcome ma'am. Hi, thank you. My name is Lloyd Pascal, I'm the director at Safe Recycling or San Angel of Friends of the environment, the full name. The last time we had a hazardous household waste collection was 2009, it was well attended, it was from 9 o'clock to 1

[2:31:22] and we're proposing also 9 o'clock to 1 on November 21st. We've started this back in September, although Shane, Kelton and I have been talking about this for about a couple of years. Just because we don't want to get into the groundwater, a lot of the paint, solvents, oil, different things like that. I'm going to have somebody with clean harbors is the company that we used in 2009. They're the same company that we have contracted with. It was about 31,000 plus in 2009. And their estimate is around 38,000, but that's just using the numbers we had from 2009. So it's an estimate. And I talked with Jeremy and Lishane about not to exceed 50,000. I don't think it's going to cost that much from their estimates. Some of the things that we collected in 2009, we actually collect on a basis every day of TVs and batteries. So those actually aren't in the cost of that. Tires. And fortunately, no, that is going to be the next thing I talked to Shane about, as a matter of fact, I had talked with Karen Threke, I held a text dot to find out about tires who they use in the state. And I actually have a COG meeting tomorrow. And there's some different people that know about tires. So that is the next thing, because I know tires is one of the worst things to try and get rid of. Any questions? Questions, Council? I'll let me thank you. Yes, Charlotte. I saw you in Paddaberry this week, good presentation. And I truly love what you all do and the cleanup and getting people to dump their trash and bring it.

[2:33:24] They participate. I need to know, you're a private business. We're a nonprofit. A nonprofit. What bothers me is the financial that is provided here is to what the actual monies would be used for. And I don't see anything that shows what the actual income is to you from selling these items. I don't see an offset there. We don't get anything for this. We don't get anything. So it's all not going to expense. It's all expenses. you just simply survive on donations? Well, excuse me, for the hazardous household waste cleanup collection is all outgo. Now, on a day-to-day basis, yes, we do get money for the mixed metals and plastic and those type of things, but it is not enough to cover our overhead. I understand that, but I don't see it on paper as presented to and to give even a nonprofit up to $50,000 is a little disturbing to me, not knowing what the exact minis would be used for, and what an offset of income to the city. It would all go, I would give the invoice that we would receive from clean harbors to the city, and then it wouldn't be $50,000. It would be whatever their total amount is. $250,000. A $250,000, correct. Not to exceed. And it's I can show you what we paid in 2009 and what their estimate is this year is only about $5,000 difference. But did you pay in 2009? It was $31,000, $31,279.34. Does it depend on what is brought in?

[2:35:24] Correct. It depends on what's brought in, because it's based on the differences as far as if it's paint, if it's oil, if it's round up, if it's an unknown liquid. Appliances. We take appliances. This is separate from that. We're doing the appliances the week before for our Texas Recycles days. So much. Go ahead, Marty. No, go ahead, Jen. I think I understand the concern of Ms. Farmer. We're basically handing you over a $50,000 check, okay? Up two. Up two, but it doesn't mean you're gonna use it all. But I do like the idea that you're going to take all these hazardous waste materials from being taken to, do they go to the landfill anyway? No, no, they go down to San Antonio and it is where clean harbors there. Some will go there, some go to, they have facilities. So you collect all the hazardous? Everything is collected here. And clean harbors picks them up from you. They will be there and people will be there, they're technicians and everybody, they have their hazmat suits on for collection and they will do all the collection there. Then they will, in turn, will take it. They will give you an invoice, you'll submit the invoice to the city or pay the invoice. Correct. So it won't be coming to safe recycling at all. Okay. So one of the main reasons why there is a lack of options is it's an expensive process. There's certain permits you have to have and licenses just to be able to handle these materials. So, but at the city's standpoint, you know, when these are improperly disposed of, we have costs on the backside of this as far as treating the surface water and the ground water. So it provides a good service to the citizens, and it's, you know, there's a variable and fixed costs associated where if nobody uses it, there's still a cost associated with having the people there,

[2:37:24] having the supplies ready in case there's a spill or something like that. And then the variable costs would be the types and the amounts of products that are collected, which could lead up to the 50,000. So. definitely want the city cleaned up and I want public's participation and you do a great job of organizing and getting it done and I'm willing to make the motion to approve up to the amount of the invoice I just don't like putting a tag of that amount of money but up to an approved amount staff approved amount of the invoice and not to exceed fifty down that yeah that was the yeah that was the main thing we just didn't want this open-ended to where people could bring in two hundred thousand dollars worth of material because we only had budgeted up to fifty thousand for this event so that's why we put the fifty thousand is so we there was a cutoff point that wouldn't exceed what we had budgeted for this and so I just wanted to make that clear so it possibly could be first come first serve yes yes one of the things that I discussed with the gentleman that clean harbors is we have it set for nine o'clock to one and if it looks like it is going to exceed that amount before one o'clock then we will close it well I will make the motion up to the amount of the invoice not to exceed fifty thousand second that. Can I ask Jeremy one more question yes okay just to be clear these are items that shouldn't be going into the waste stream shouldn't be in the landfill so right now there's no other disposal method correct yeah our landfill is not permitted to accept these items so I mean they make it there improperly which poses a threat which is why everyone to hold this excellent thank you this comes out of your budget chain or republic's budget or what do you have a motion and a second to have further counsel come in public comment

[2:39:29] on this item before a vote calling for the vote to accept this has presented for the amount not to exceed fifty thousand dollars all in favor please say aye aye oppose nay put it at 7.01 it is 12 o'clock perfect perfect timing let me read the closed session executive session under the provision of government code Title 5, Open Government Ethics, Subtitle A, Open Government Chapter 551, Open Meeting, Subchapter D, Acceptance, Requirement that Meetings Be Open Under the Following sections, A, Section 551-071, A, Console With Attorney. When the Government of Body Sexy Advice, if it's Attorney About Pending or Compton Played Litigation Regarding Number 1, 2013 Seal Coating Program Contract Number 2, Marta for Hirschfield Energy System, L-S-C-E-T-A-L, and Number 3, construction and section B section 551074A1 to deliberate the evaluation to city manager Daniel Valenzuela 1201 we are now executive mayor we also have a joint that's right we have the joint meeting we also have a joint meeting at noon a special joint meeting with the zoning board of adjustments and at their conclusion the special joint meeting this meeting will reconvene. Thank you. Wendell? That'll do it. Call this meeting back to order. We are now ready for item number J, which is consider awarding VMO715, fleet data monitoring hardware and service to asset works LLC under the purchasing co-op US General Services Administration contract, GS35F4731G, and an amount of $66,730 in initial hardware cost and $131,602 and a subscription cost thereafter and substantially attached form and authorizing the city manager to execute said contract. Ryan Kramer, you had the floor, sir. Afternoon, Mr. Mayor and Council, Mr. Valenzuela. Thanks for a little time to consider this item.

[2:41:30] We had originally put this on the regular agenda because there's a component of the pricing. We want to make sure it's very clear. And also, this gives us a little chance to discuss some of the true attributes of a program, such as a data monitoring program for our fleet. So if I may, I'll take just a few minutes to discuss some of the pricing aspects, as well as some of those benefits. And of course, please feel welcome to stop me at any time to ask questions if there's something that comes to mind. So this is our request to award the contract through GSA for the hardware purchase for these devices, as well as the annual subscription fees. And we'll look at those costs here in just a moment. But that does include, of course, the hardware, the wiring, the device to install in the vehicle, as well as the fees associated with providing us with access and with data there. This program, if you recall, was discussed at council, I believe, on the August 4th budget discussion, where that was approved to move forward with the project as a whole for our fleet services, enhanced services to our customers as a data monitoring system. So, just to hit you with the numbers initially here, hardware costs, and this is across 583 units, which is the identified units, the scheduled units for the city as a portion of our fleet. The initial hardware costs, just over $66,000, and these are one-time costs. So, these units are not disposable, so to speak. They should have a good solid life for us. for us. The only reason we should expect any difference from that is a technology failure as we all experience. So 583 devices approximately at $66,000, $66,730. The subscription fees related to these items at approximately $18.95 a month per unit. There is some fluctuation there depending

[2:43:32] on what style of unit is needed for the installation, but it goes from there down, 1895 or down. The $131,602 that you're seeing there, that is if we had all 583 units installed and active for one full year. So this is a monthly fee. It does include an annual subscription, so it's much similar to your cell phone as you subscribe to your cell phone plan and you're obligated, but it is a monthly fee. So as we initialize and activate these units, those fees will start and obviously we are in November as we speak and this plan won't move forward with installations until December at the earliest but most likely January before it really gets ramped up. So there's already a few months there in our first year that this cost will obviously be less than that. So the $131,602 that is for 12 full months of subscription fees on all 583 devices. So just a little bit of information about really what we're gaining here because as we can tell this is not a small amount of money that we are proposing happens every year but just a little bit of information on exactly what we see other cities getting from a similar program, what we fully expect to get, and what, through our pilot program, has shown us that is, in my belief, easily obtainable for us to do. The first one there is a decrease fuel consumption. We as a city use a tremendous amount of fuel to do our daily operations, and that's a necessary requirement for what we do. But just in comparison to how much fuel we use versus the small amount that we could save that would drastically impact the cost of this program if you'd like to consider it that way. At 95 cents a day, for the full month, that would pay for the subscription fee. So

[2:45:41] to put that in perspective, if we can reduce fuel consumption by half a gallon a day, only half a gallon a day, the program will be paid for annually. So that's very significant. Half a gallon is, of course, easily obtainable, as I said. Another way to look at this, two mile a gallon, increase, two miles per gallon, increased on our fleet, will also pay for the program, would result in approximately $400 of savings per year per vehicle and at $18.95 a month that obviously will pay for the program as well. The other option, the other way to look at this is through idle time. We can reduce idle time significantly by monitoring and knowing where we are with our idle time. And again, all we need is at this point, at the price of fuel now is we need 95 cents a day or about a half a gallon. On average, our vehicles burn approximately half a gallon per hour at idle. So if your vehicle idled for one hour, you would use approximately 0.5 gallons. And so that's where these numbers are coming from. And that is on average. Some vehicles will do better than that. Some will do much worse. So saving half a gallon or one hour of idle time a day completely pays for a vast majority of this program. And that always depends on our fuel price at the given moment. Fuel is low right now. So we would see less of an impact now as we would exactly one year ago when fuel was 70 cents higher, 70 to 90 cents higher by my record, so at that price we would be saving a considerable amount more for those units that are equipped. Liability associated with the vehicles, the fleet, as you well may know, we have a considerable

[2:47:41] number of accidents that some are not necessarily avoidable but some of them definitely are. My records show me that I see coming through our facility accidents that average $1,200 per accident. Now granted that doesn't take much to get $1,200 if you've had anybody work done but that's an average so this is a more major accident that may cost $3,000 to $5,000, averaged in with those dents and dings that may be just $5 to $800. So $1,200, let's say we can reduce one accident by safe driving by encouraging our drivers and operators to be more mindful of what they're doing. That pays for 63 months of fees or 63 units for one month. So $1,200 savings, one accident, one ding pays for 63 units for one month or 63 months of service fees and that doesn't include all of the man hours that my department the risk department and other spend managing the paperwork and the claims involved with this taking vehicles out of service in order to fix a repair at a body shop which can take in some cases weeks so that doesn't even include any of that cost associated with that maintenance and repair including downtime. As we've briefly discussed in our previous meeting there's some some costs that we can save by being much more proactive about our fleet maintenance and repair. Lights come on check engine lights come on maintenance intervals that are extended a little too long. All of those things do cost us money and for each unit depending on the time frame it may not be a lot but the fleet of our size it definitely adds up quick. This program also contains within it, including in the cost, a free roadside assistance program. For example, one towing charge for the city right now is at $115.

[2:49:41] With this program, we get free towing as part of this service. We also get free jump-starting, free fuel if we happen to run out of fuel somewhere. locksmith service if we've ever locked the keys in our car at approximately $75 for us. This also included a tire change as well as well as any theft locating protection vehicle is stolen. We can simply track it. It's a very simple process at this point. For our vehicle downtime we've estimated for quite some time and I do believe this is low but this is the best estimate we can provide at this point. Any vehicle that sits down for one full day costs the city about $100 and that is for the departments that don't have access to it. That's for my staff who takes their time to repair it and all of the process involved which do include purchasing parts, waiting on parts to be ordered, the crews having to adjust and find something different to do for that day, about $100 a day on a standard vehicle and any specialized vehicle beyond that increases that dramatically. In the labor and overtime category, this is where we get to discussing our efficiencies as operations within our departments. I wish to provide our using fleet departments with as much information as they can have in order to best manage the vehicles assigned to them and to truly work their crews in the best way possible for our citizens. And that means that in order to do that, we definitely have to use our time wisely. So for example, if we have a trip that we need to make across town with some equipment or just in a vehicle, the most direct route will definitely be the most efficient. It will also save fuel, it will save time for those crew leaders and in

[2:51:45] essence if that happens multiple times per day, across multiple crews, across multiple departments and there's significant savings that can be seen in just our efficiencies and where we're providing the biggest impact of our service. On job time, of course, monitoring and reporting on that as our departments are on site and seen and performing work. Improved dispatching, knowing where our crews are so that a customer, excuse me, citizen complaint can be addressed quickly and easily instead of calling a crew that may be across town when we don't realize it. We can call the crew the closest dispatching efforts. We can geofence, which simply means that we can designate an electronic area on a map where we want that crew or that select group of vehicles and equipment to be, and report on that data as they move in and about that area, also knowing when they leave that area. So in other words, when they may go back to the yard, the department facility, so that they have that information. The Fort Worth Water District did this program as well, a similar program, I should say, and they saw about one hour per day of savings in their crew efficiency. So it's just an example of what we could get, we could achieve, and that all depends on where we are now compared to the motion that we make to be more efficient. For supervisors, this is really one of the big ones. been asked by many of our superintendents and supervisors of the other departments for something similar to this for some time now. There's been many requests. And so that being said, our supervisors and superintendents are extremely interested in being able to manage their fleet and their crews actively. It's a proactive measurement. When we know where

[2:53:45] they are, we know how to best handle a situation that may come up outside of our daily plan. or superintendents and supervisors of those crews, that's a tremendously important thing. Yes, we can often call on radios, we can potentially call on cell phones and figure out where things are, but when we don't get an answer, when we don't get a response and it's a critical nature, then we are looking for the nearest and closest and best responded there. And we're also using real data, and again, we're still talking about labor and overtime associated with our crews and how this program can benefit us there. When we're talking about real data, where we see real numbers and how long crews are spending in areas, how long they do jobs, how long it takes them to get places, how long it takes them to get back. These are the efficiencies that I know our supervisors and superintendents are hoping to gain. So having a real oversight over personnel, and that may be current personnel, that may also be personnel that we are asking for, having a concept of what our personnel and our crews are doing now compared to what I'm asking for. If I'm asking for an additional crew, this provides data to back it up or to negate it either way. So it does offer opportunities dealing with personnel issues over time, equipment usage, as well as budget associated with those things to really impact how our departments are managing and implementing some of their techniques as they serve our citizens. The next one on your list, I believe, is vehicle maintenance, or excuse me, vehicle replacement. And this is one area that we are doing our best everyday in improving. Vehicle replacement is a necessary thing for us. We do replace equipment and vehicles as needed, and that's based on our evaluation and our assessment in our department. And the better we maintain, as you well know,

[2:55:45] with your personal vehicles, the better we maintain, the faster we repair to avoid additional expenses, the better off our fleet is gonna be as a whole. If we can keep costs down initially, maintenance is so much cheaper than repairs ever are. And so if we can continue to monitor and maintain that, then we can keep our vehicles longer, potentially. We could have some impact in how often we have to sell and take a loss due to depreciation on these units. So there's a lot of benefits due to vehicle equipment replacement. The last item here on this slide is our carbon footprint. It's something that in West Texas we don't often think about because we're not an emissions-controlled county in Tom Green County, but there are other counties that are the area around Austin, Travis County. Many of the counties around Houston, the DFW area, these are all emissions-controlled counties. And what that means is that they've gone to a measure by which they inspect vehicles more stringently and attempt to reduce their carbon footprint, their vehicle emissions significantly by those programs. This is a system monitoring this data, it helps us do that. Now again here we are not restricted by law to change our missions but anything we can do to help protect our environment is a very worthwhile venture and while it's not a significant impact, any impact we can make over a fleet the size of ours is and does calculate to be significant. For example, one vehicle at 10 miles per gallon, traveling approximately 15,000 miles a year produces near 31,000 pounds of carbon dioxide. So if we can reduce that slightly, again, if we can improve our fuel economy by 2 miles per gallon, we can decrease that by 5,000 pounds of CO2 or carbon dioxide every year, so across this mini units that's an important feature of doing our best to monitor all the data we

[2:57:45] have. So just briefly I'll discuss the data available to our departments, just a quick rundown of these things, reporting associated with idle time, with usage of the vehicles, with driver behaviors as well, including hard-breaking and acceleration, speeding, etc. All of those things help our drivers. All of those, knowing all of those things help our drivers be the best they can be while they're in a city vehicle, as well as in their personal vehicle that will translate. Locations, knowing where vehicles are, accidents related to that, dispatching as well. Diagnostics for our fleet services group and for the department, helping reduce those costs. Routing, dispatching again, driver efficiency, hopefully traveling to job sites quickly and again encouraging our drivers and in certain events where we know that they might not be as efficient as it could be. This will also help increase productivity. Driver safety training knowing where our drivers may or may not be as safe as they could be and encouraging that aspect as well as preventing accidents of course associated there. Alert reports we can have almost any of this information alerted to us instantly are alerted to me in my department, which some of that information won't do us any good, but it will do the department's a tremendous amount of good, including idle times, speeding events, et cetera. If a division manager, a superintendent, a supervisor, a crew leader knows that a vehicle is left running, maybe we just forgot, maybe we did, and if we can notify our crew to get that vehicle turned office as soon as possible then we're going to save every chance we get. Geofencing again is the ability to control where our vehicles go. Excuse me, know where our vehicles go by simply making a border on a map. We can determine if those vehicles move in or out of that area so that we can monitor routes such as animal control routes. We discussed that earlier today

[2:59:47] I believe. Code compliance routes so we know where our guys are, where our crews are and where their spending their time. So again, just some of the areas that some of the data areas that we can produce data and of course that is that is data that we can use in multiple ways to to show counsel where we need to consider improving perhaps adding crews, adding vehicles, potentially some areas that we can be more efficient and we can work on that at our department levels as well as the fleet services department as we work at getting our vehicles in and out of there as fast as possible. So if you have any questions, please ask. I do have more detailed information on some costs. If you're interested in that, but please let me know. Questions, Council? Well, I believe this is the program during budget that I lost money to training. But I think definitely you've demonstrated the cost savings, both short-term and long-term, to the city. So I think it's may well spent. Any other questions or comments? We got this through the GSA. Yes, sir. This contract is a GSA contract. Yes, sir. Why didn't we bid it? The product that we would end up with is a similar product. It would be a telematics program. There are telematics programs around. But through GSA, GSA is a very restricted pricing program. And through just our basic quoting process of asking those vendors about how much they would be looking at, this is tremendous savings for us. Plus, it is similar to by-board or any other pre-bid contract. This is that same format as GSA. So it has been pre-bid, so to speak. And it is a federal government level bid.

[3:01:48] I would like to see a follow-up to all of the proposals after you have a track record. I'm very excited to see where we're going to go, because I do feel that we have a great potential in a program like this. Are we gonna take these for these workers that have radios and cell phones that we're already paying for? If we go to this, are we taking those away from them? Well, I can't answer that, Mr. Mayor. I think if we've got to have somebody to tell us that somebody's idling a vehicle, looks to me like our supervisor could say when you get out of the vehicle, cut it off. Are you gonna be walking? Sure, and that's... but if you want to call somebody and ask them if their vehicle's idling, you've got a telephone, all of them carry a cell phone that the city provides. They've got a radio. This is, I'd rather take the $200,000 and put it in street repairs than, I'm not sold on this at all, Ryan, I think it's waste money. Sure, well, if I could speak to that, for example, if we have a vehicle idling across town, it's very often those crews are sent out to work and there are some legitimate reasons that those crews need to leave their vehicle idling. One of those is working in the street with their lights on. We need to notify the public that we're there, so for safety aspects. Beyond that though, had we known the numbers from our pilot program that we experience, had we known that, which there's unfortunately no way to know ahead of time without gathering data, just as with any study, whether a street study or a water study or et cetera. Without knowing the data, we really don't know where to improve. We don't know what aspect we can move to be more efficient and to gain those costs, so. I think that's a supervisor's job. What all vehicles are they going to be? You said all vehicles? Yes, sir. It's fleet wide. Yes, sir. And so we've classified our fleet into groups that allow us to make very valid decisions on the data that we could gain from that unit.

[3:03:49] For example, a trailer we're not going to get much out of. So while that is a fleet unit, we're not installing these devices on things such as that. But any passenger vehicle, including our mowers and our tractors, again, giving us all the data that we could need to justify the costs associated with, for example, mowing a park to get tractors to the red arroyo to mow that area. Anything associated with data that we can gain And we can use to be as sufficient as possible, as well as to train and encourage our operators. And to, of course, show you where exactly we're at, what we're doing, and how much it's costing. Fire and police, too. The fire emergency vehicles, my understanding is they have a device on them already that they use for ambulance and fire pumper truck. But all of the admin vehicles within fire, all of police, yes, sir, all departments. Do you have anything Rodney? No. Public comment on this item. I think it's waste money. I am not going to support this. You got $200,000 that you can put to see if a car is idling, then I'd say take that $200,000 and let's put it in some pothole repairs, but that's just my opinion. Somebody want to make a motion one way or the other? Mr. Tipper, this is presented. Second. It's not just for, to see if a car is idling though, This is, I mean, he just did a whole program on this. And I think it's a good program. I think it's a tool for our supervisor to use. And this is just the future. If we can make something more efficient, especially when it pays for itself, I think it's a nice thing

[3:05:49] that it is paying for itself. And it is one more tool that a supervisor will have in order to make sure that we're being more efficient on working our patterns, our fuel consumption, it's the whole, it's everything. Yes, sir, and I really, I truly wish I could show you some of the soft costs that we just can't measure. We do this in our work. I mean, we have similar diagnostics that have to do with, you know, breaking action and how that affects fuel and how it affects the equipment and over time, how significant that is. So I'm, I get it. I mean, I think it's very important that we start using things like this to save money and make more efficient use of our money. The real issue then is supervisors going to use this as they should to make sure that employees then are changing their behaviors so that we can totally maximize it. I think we will find a vast number of those folks that, again, that have been asking for my entire tenure here so far. They've been asking for a system like this And they're just they're just desperate for information. They just they just want to know right? Absolutely, I think in an ideal world We I mean staff members would believe police themselves and make sure they're doing everything exactly right, but that doesn't happen I think that we've been behind the times to imagine that we haven't had a fleet management system in place is Kind of alarming for me to be honest with you. I I definitely believe that there's going to be savings, there's no doubt. We definitely can come back to the City Council and prove up those savings. Like you said, there's some costs perhaps that we can't show right now, but I know that here in the near future we'll be able to show what those savings were. That's right. Well, the main thing with me is the driver behavior, the alerts related to speed, vehicle routing tools, is whether we can save on gas. of these, you know, we're not, we're just people and the folks employed with the city are just people. And, you know, we're not perfect and maybe each of them need to be reminded from

[3:07:52] time and time that they're doing things they shouldn't. That's right. If we just know where we can improve and that's that's exactly what our pilot program has shown us. We've had this system in place for some time and just watching over that amount of time, being able to provide our crews, our departments, and specifically our operators with here's one step you can take to improve and that will make a small impact and it is small, but again over such a large number of units over such a large fleet that's where the impact is. I like coffee boat only as we discussed it. Yes sir. I would just like to say we use it in our business and I do believe in it. I'm going to vote against it primarily because I don't believe in the cost. I don't think we have the best pain for our buck and I think we can get it less expensive than what we're buying and paying it right now through the GSA. Well if I may, the GSA contract is restricted to the point, if I'm not mistaken, that if anyone bids less than those numbers, the company, specifically in this case, asset works through network fleet, can be fined for that and removed from their bids. So yes, it's possible we could. It's possible that another program out there could do some of the same things. Unfortunately, it's not possible for any program out there to integrate with our fleet management software that's in place that we work with in the shop, which also integrates into our parts program. Unfortunately, that's not possible. They don't do any work with anybody else. And again, if this company bid that to someone else at a lesser rate, either hardware costs or the annual fees related to that, they would have issues on their hands. And I can't speak to exactly what the issues are. So you're saying we're using these because of the equipment we already have? That's one aspect of what we're doing. Yes, sir, that's an important piece of the full program

[3:09:54] of what Fleet Services does. However, again, if we bid this out, we could potentially get another program that would have lesser quality to it, wouldn't have the integrative ability to it. And if this same company proposed the price, it would be more expensive than what's shown here. Okay. Motion has been made in seconded that we approve this as presented. I have asked for public comment, Call for the vote, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Nay. Got three ayes and three nays. I guess you're going to put it on the next agenda. Yes, sir. Thank you. Moving on now, items K and L. Do you want to just take these two together? Because we've got about 10 minutes in. I think that we're going to have started leaving. You've been waiting around all day long for this, ain't you, Blue Lord? Thank you, Mayor. K is, consider authorizing city staff to issue R.F.Q. for architectural services and design work for Fort Consul Visitor Center improvements at Barracks 1 and 2 and AL is considered authorizing staff to issue an R.F.Q. for architectural service and design work for the reconstruction of Fort Consul's Barracks and Mass Halls 3 and 4 presentation by Mr. Robert Bluthard. The clock is ticking so I will brief. These are separate issues but they are certainly adjacent. The first item K is sort of a rerun of the feasibility study. We tried but could not come to an agreement with the company and we believe that we can get better bang for the buck with an architectural RFQ. Money is there and this would be hard of a long-range process to improve our visitor's center at Barracks 1 and 2. Item L is even more exciting. It's not often I get to walk into City Council with $2 million, and $2 million has been donated through an anonymous donor to the San Angelo

[3:11:55] area foundation, Matt Lewis, the executive director is here. Also, I'm pleased the five members of my board who I believe compose the entire public division of the meeting at the moment, Mark Priest, Harry Thomas, Roger Banks, Darren Fentress, and Sarah Howell. Both boards foundation and Fort board think this is a delightful opportunity. This is the biggest thing frankly to be given to the fort and it's 85 year preservation history and if you have any questions on the donation I'm sure Matt can answer them if you have any questions on the process I believe I can. Two million dollars we have been given to do this. Makes every Wednesday. I tell you isn't it wonderful isn't it wonderful I am waiting for a motion. Waiting for a second. Waiting for a second. Have a second to have a motion. Any other discussion about this from Council. What do I have from the public? Do I have any public comment on this other than this is wonderful? Yeah, yeah. The word is giddy up. One windfall at a time, one windfall at a time. Most of it has been made and seconded that we approve both K and L, authorizing architectural services and authorizing for the Country of Barracks and the mess halls three and four all in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. There will be none. Put a 6-0 on that one and thank you sir. Thank you very much. Gentlemen thank y'all. And now we have M which is consideration of selecting vision provider related to RFPHR 0115. Lisa Marley you have the floor ma'am. Thank you good afternoon mayor council and city manager. I am here to talk about an RFP that we we put out for bid earlier this year and here we go. We issued the RFP in July and then it closed in August. We had six providers that submitted proposals to us. There's a couple notes I just wanted to remind you of

[3:13:55] that with the vision program we do not have any city funds that go towards this. The premiums are completely paid by the employees and this year as you recall you asked me to include retiree starting this coming January. Our current provider, which is superior vision, submitted a proposal which was a 4% increase to our current rates. We had four other proposals that came in and those increased premiums were anywhere from 8 to 43%. We did have one proposal that came in with a decrease of 3.9%, but they also were going to represent a significant disruption in providers that I'll explain here in a second. We convened our insurance review committee to look over the proposals and our consultant Holmes Murphy walked us through all of those. In 2015, we've had a total of 686 vision claims and 566 of those claims were at nine providers that would not be in the low bidder's proposals. So as a group, the committee recommended that we stay with our current provider superior vision, the disruption to the providers was just going to be too great for our employees to have to sustain. So originally, the proposal that Superior brought to us had a different rate for retirees from employees. So we asked for them to go back and look at it, see if they could come back with the same rates for employees and retirees, and they did agree to do that. In addition, there's no changes to any of the plans that will still offer two plans, a high and a low plan with the same benefits that we've always offered. So these are the premiums that are proposed. You can see it's a 4% increase. This is the high plan, and this is the low plan. And so staff recommends that we award the bid to our current provider, Superior Vision.

[3:15:57] I have a motion to approve. Did I hear a second down there? No. No. You asked a question. Yes. Ruddy. Did we go back to them and ask them if they would just hold at that because they were under bid? We can try that. I don't know if that goes for it. I would like to do that to go back to them and ask them that and give them the opportunity and not tell them what's going on. Otherwise, the numbers I think are skewed on this because I've actually used this program. I do have vision through the city and I pay for it. And I went to someone other than what I normally would have gone to because of that. So I think it, all those people that went, you showed on there, all those people that went to it. I think a lot of them were probably just like me. They couldn't go to the person that was doing it before. So now I'm kind of thinking, well, maybe that lesser person was the guy I was going to before. Well, I can tell you the lowest bidder is not in San Angelo. So they were just going to come to San Angelo. And the only promise that they could make to us was that they would contact all of these providers that are currently in our plan, but they couldn't guarantee that they would get them. So that was what they were supposed to do. I would not like to vote on this until we go back to them. And I think that's just a shrewd business to go back and say, you guys lost a bit on this. Well, and it did. Certainly, the only problem with waiting another meeting is that our open enrollment period. We're trying to finish that before the holidays get started, and we were trying to start that next week. Now, we can still approach them and see if they would consider going with their current rates, but I don't know that we can wait. Lisa. I would also like to see the language in the RFP as it was posted before making decision on whether or not we legally will be able to do that at all. Go back to the provider if we have to agree whatever they gave us.

[3:17:58] Lisa, you did already extract a concession from this vendor in them to bring their proposed rates for retirees down. Is that correct? Correct. Because originally they had increased our employee rates by 4 percent and the retirees were greater than that. So what we did not want them to do is to come back with the cost for our employees to be elevated even higher to offset the cost of adding the retirees. So they agreed to that concession to give retirees and employees the same rate. Julia did bring me the language and it does give us the ability to negotiate so we can go back. Mayor, before you call for the vote or ask for a second, I'd like to remind you that I'm a retiree and I have, I guess, the ability to access this as well, just for disclosure purposes. I don't see a problem with it. everybody on council. Okay. Yeah. To take advantage of this. Right. Did you want to, would it work to amend our motion that we would pay up to what it was before the 4% so that we could get it enrolled? I didn't make the motion. I know, but I'm just asking. Could we amend the motion to say that we will approve up to that five, nine, whatever that was before the 4% but if they don't then we got a problem well it's if you do a up to the 4% as proposed you know again if we can't get something lower or where we're before and we're locking at that 4% I mean if they come back and say we can't do that then if you say up to the 4% as proposed for us in case we can't get that other your motion was to accept is presented it was okay does anyone want second thing. I would draw my motion. I know that we do it the way you just explain it so we can move on. We need to get this done so that we can so our

[3:20:01] people can be enrolled in it if they desire it. So we will negotiate and see if we can keep the rates the same otherwise you're authorizing us to go up to the 4% that they've asked. Is that your motion? That's it, exactly. You did that very well. Okay. Haven't you heard other council comment on this? Do I have public comment on this? Call for the vote. All in favor of the proposal that Marty said, we would authorize to go back to the original, but authorize up to the 4%. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Drop six, oh well that one, ma'am. We have no minutes. Three o'clock. You gone? I can go a little bit longer. Can you go a few minutes? Yes sir. What do you have, 10 minutes, 15? 15 minutes. 15 minutes. Let's try and get this in discussion and consideration of appointing council member. Do y'all want to go? We do need a vote on follow-up and administrative issues. Let's go ahead and take that one. We can always come back to him at a later date if necessary. Let's take the follow-up and consideration of possible action on matters discussed in the executive session and the only thing I have that we need to discuss and this was the job performance of our city manager and the consensus of the council was that we were satisfied with his job performance however there was some discussion what I can't even read my own writing that there were goals that he continues to need to achieve the myself in this right how do I need to say this Teresa I make a motion that we evaluated the city manager and and he meets his expectations and and authorized a 5.12% right yes yes okay second that okay and there was a goal we were talking about the goals would be attached to his okay there would be there are goals that are listed on your on your expectations that you would still need

[3:22:03] need to meet in the future. Yes, sir. Is that right? Oh, that's always part of it. What I was trying to pass on to you from our HR director was that we also have goals for 2016. Yes. That were discussed. Okay. And we discussed the goals. Is that the way I need to say it Lisa? I tried Lisa. Try three different ways. You got to draw me a picture Lisa. We do have a motion to do. I have a second. Do I have any further counsel discussion on this? Public comment on this. All in favor please. I did. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed may 6-0. Now let's go back and see if we can pick up M and the seven minutes we have left. Discussion and consideration of appointing council members representation on the following boards and committees audit committee. I want it. Consul River Water Master Advisory Committee. CVCOG C-D-C-O-G Executive Committee, C-D-C-O-G General Assembly, C-D-C-O-G Transit Board, and Investment Oversight Committee, and I think, Maria, you probably have those names that are for each of these. Yes. Would you like to give them to me, please, ma'am? Okay. On the first one, Audit Committee is Charlotte Farmer. Okay. And on the second one, Country River is Dwayne Morrison, Marty Sealth, and currently vacant by Don Burdleman. So we need to pick one more. So we'll need to pick one up there. Oh, I'd like to do that. Who wants to do it? I'd like to do the water master advisory committee in Don's place. Okay. Did you want to do it too? No, not the advisory committee. The water. No. Let's talk about three. Oh, okay. Okay. So we're going to add then to the second one to be myself and Marty and Elizabeth. Elizabeth. Okay. And CBCLG Executive. okay that was going to be currently vacant but you want that one okay let's put

[3:24:03] Charlotte in that one CDC or general assembly Johnny Silva's and Charlotte's farmer you need to get on something yeah how about the do you gonna do the assembly I'll do the simpler the board on the who was on assembly Johnson Johnny service and Miss Farmer. Did you want to give your position to Lacey? Okay. Okay. CVCOG Transit Board. Dwayne Morrison, Miss Farmer, and Johnny Silva. Is that all right? And the investment oversight committee? That's Miss Farmer and Mr. Flame Rodney. All right I will accept a motion with those names that we would approve the names that we have spoken about for these six different boards if I could have a motion thus stating over approved second second do have a motion and a second public comment council comment all in favor please say aye aye opposed nay put a 6-0 on that one and that was all we had to do the other business that we tended to an executive there's nothing We still have 9B, consideration of approving various board nominations Planning Commission. I make a motion that we approve Sami Farmer as soon as it. And I second it. A lot of them have that on. Yeah, I see it. There it is. Yes, Planning Commission, Sami Farmer, SMD 4, to a first term ending January 2017. Motion to accept Sami. I do have a second. Public comment. Council comment. All in favor please say aye. Opposed nay, Sammy is the man, and that's got it. Okay, announcements and consideration of future agenda items, start with you Ms. Christamp. Mayor, I will have my next neighborhood chat

[3:26:04] on November 9th, which is now being converted to a water rate meeting if Bill Riley and others are available. We'll be there, we'll be there. We will meet at, yes, please. We will meet at 6 p.m. at the Board of Realtors on Peca Street, they have made available their facility. So, come on, come on. Let's see, did you have anything, ma'am? No. Charlotte, do you have anything? Remind everyone of town hall meeting on November 10th, 6 p.m. at South and Baptist Church, with reference to the Sherwood Way development by Text Dot and the changes that are upcoming. Well, there's also will be a water meeting public. Oh, yes, and if the staff will please provide. We'll be there and be there and provide the handouts The slides and that'll take care of our public forums and then you get busy And then it's a newspaper very well Marty. Do you have any thanks, sir? No Rodney Of my next town hall meeting the third Tuesday at 9 a.m. Here in this quarter No, let's talk about that calendar y'all and we do have a meeting that's numbered be that we will be here at 9 o'clock in the morning on November the 12th for our second meeting of this month. There was problems with the, I guess it was 17th. Yeah, we had problems anyway. The next meeting will be on November the 12th City Council, 9 o'clock AM. Is there anything else? I don't have anything. Let's hear it. Second. Second. All All in favour aye. Aye. 3-0-8 this meeting is over. Thank you.

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