San Angelo City Council 6-21-16

[0:00:00] for the freedoms and the privileges that we have as Americans. We're very thankful for this community that we live in and we appreciate the blessings that you have given to us and we pray always for the peace and the harmony and the unity that we can have between all 100,000 of us here in San Angelo, Texas. I pray for wisdom this morning and patience and courage for our City Council that we might be able to make the decisions that are best for your people and I pray that the things that we do and the things that we decide will always be for the best in your understanding. And we thank you so very much for the reigns that you have sent, Father. For the end of this horrendous drought that is now inside, I would ask you please to continue to send your general reigns and send your reigns on to our watersheds, to fill our lakes and our streams and our underground waters so that the balance of nature might once again be returned to our area. Be with us love us and forgive us. It's in the name of Jesus that we pray. Amen. And I would ask Brittany Mosiah to come forward and allow me to assist you with the pledges of allegiance. Good morning. This is the Texas One, State, Under God, One, and individual. Thank you so much. Did you get a picture? We do have two recognitions this morning. I am going to flip flop them on from where they We are on the agenda because we've got some time restraints and Dr. Hodges allowed me the permission to flip flop them.

[0:02:00] Tim, if you would, please come forward and anyone else that has to do, Anthony, with this proclamation, this recognition. It says that the city's public information office has garnered many honors the past three years, but June 10 marked the first for our wardening public information office on that day. information, finally one that is very loosey. First place trophy they have been seeking at the state conference of the Texas Association of Municipal Information Officers. Did your butt start this fire? A 32nd video produced by Multimedia coordinator Brian Groves and starred retiring purchasing manager Roger Banks and his vintage wagon, a very, very nice model laid forward. One first place for the educational public service announcement in cities with populations of 80,000 to 150,000. The public information officer also won second place awards to other videos produced by Groves entering the call. They've approved the spot for the San Angelo Fire Department, won the award of excellence in marketing public service announcements among cities up to 100,000 population, and remembering the fallen Sergeant Horvie Kennedy, a tribute to the latest APD officer who also won the award of excellence for special or of one-time programs for cities of 180,000 to 140,000. These honors underscores Mr. Groves and the public information's office efforts to inform, educate, and enlighten our citizenry about issues of importance, impact, and interest. Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, Mayor of the City of San Angelo, takes us on behalf of the City Council do hereby recognize and applaud the City of San Angelo Public Information Office for its achievements and positive determination to make a difference in our community. I want to just recognize some of the folks who are up here who I think really helped put the best face for St. Angelo Ford toward the entire state and chief among those is our multimedia coordinator Brian Gross who's really the source of these videos that are doing so

[0:04:05] much for our community. When I go to these state conferences everybody raves about his work and there's no doubt that he is among the most talented videographers in our industry in the entire state and there's not a city in this state or public information office that wouldn't like snatch him up immediately. So thank God that he loves St. Angelo as much as he does and he always does a great job of portraying our city in the best possible light. We did win at first place videos the first time we've ever won a first place award at this conference and it was for as the mayor said a PSA about trying to It convinced people not to throw their cigarette butts out the window and possibly start a wildfire. And AJ Deere-Dorf, who is in our IT department, flew the drone on the opening shot of that video. So if you get a chance, go to our YouTube channel at youtube.com slash city of St. Angelo TX. And you can see some marvelous videography that is not only the work of Brian, but AJ as well. And the opening shot is of our former, our retired purchasing manager, Roger Banks, in his vintage wagon flicking his cigarette butt out the window, so it's really cool. But for me, the most meaningful thing that happened at that conference this year was that we did win an award of excellence for a video honoring the late Sergeant Corbett Kennedy. I'm really proud that his family is here in Chibosquez as well to accept this award. We wanted you to have this, and I'd say the reason this video was so meaningful to us, I think it's probably the most meaningful thing that we ever did, and it's because it was just so meaningful to the community. And so thank you very much. We honor the Kennedy family and obviously the sacrifice that you made for our community. First off, I'd like to congratulate our public information office.

[0:06:11] They do a wonderful job, Anthony and Brian. This particular video, I think they were the tribute. They were able to capture a lot of what we were trying to accomplish in honoring Corby the service that he gave us and giving his life and the line of duty. And for that I think I want to thank you, I believe you gave not only the community but you gave the family something to always reflect on when they choose to and it's amazing. You know we're just days away from the year and so I ask that you keep your thoughts and prayers for the department and most especially for the family as we go through this next week We're gonna have some trying days. Thank you. Me? It is great being number one. And again, we are, so thank you very much for this. Dr. Hodges, would you come forward, please, sir? Good morning, sir. It is a wonderful thing to be able to honor Dr. Hodges too. On May 18th, Dr. Gary Hodges hosted a ribbon-cutting celebrate the opening of his western veterinary hospital at 2012, at the M2105. To help commemorate the occasion he invited the staff of the City of St. Angelo Animal Shelter

[0:08:14] with whom he worked during his 40-plus years of owning a private practice. To the surprise and delight of the Animal Shelter's contingency, Dr. Hodges presented them with a $2,000 donation to help support the facility's work. That of course includes caring for stray animals and surrendered pets, adopting homeless pets to new owners, and most recently altering pets to stem St. Angelo's pet overpopulation. efforts are greatly buoyed by the time, talents, and treasure of carrying and civilly engaged citizens such as Dr. Gary Hodges. Therefore, I, Duane Morrison, Mayor of the Great City of San Angelo, Texas, on behalf of the City Council to hereby recognize and applaud Dr. Gary Hodges for his achievements and positive determination to make a difference in our community. And I thank you, my friend. And there it is, and you've got the mic. Just like to say, thank you to the City of St. Angelo for over 40 years of support and my practice is in veterinary medicine. Thank you very much for this. And now it is the time of our council meeting where we allow anyone and everyone to come forward to the microphone. If you have anything for the City Council that you want to talk to us about, be it good are bad. This is the time we take your comments. I would ask that you gather at the front. You will state your name. You will be given three to five minutes. Let me read the legalities and then we'll start with you, sir. Issues or items that are not on the agenda may be raised by the

[0:10:16] public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium began by stating their name and limit remarks to less than five minutes. Council members may request that disgust item be placed on a future agenda. The council takes public comment on all regular agenda items during discussion of those items. First. Good morning Mr. Mayor and Council and everybody else. My name is RA Council and I want to just ask if there will be an opportunity for the public to comment on agenda items as they come up. You will have the opportunity to comment on any agenda item as they come up. I yield my time, except next. This is the opportunity. Good morning, ma'am. My name is Christina DeLeo, and I'm here to address some issues with our population in St. Angelo. We obviously have a huge problem here and a startling number of discarded and abandoned pets and strays. And I know that it gives a shelter a bad image, and it's not their fault. There are so many animals being dumped daily at the shelter. And I know that a large number of pets do not have tags and microchips. People aren't aware of the ordinances. I think that have been put in place to help the issues. But there's a lack of education, a lack of known resources by the public, and I know that the cost for the shelter, for the city is huge because apparently $71 the first day a pet is taken into the shelter is the average cost. And last month alone, there were 379 owner surrenders.

[0:12:19] Now, if you do the math, that's $27,000 for just day one that those pets were taken in as ridiculous. And we have to do something about it. Obviously, we're trying to make the steps. But I would like to propose that we do a huge community event by getting sponsors, by getting donations, and volunteers to put this on. I would really like to push the pet tags and microchips. And if we can make that a huge goal for an event, as well as doing a lot of education, regarding city ordinances, pet care, the resources available, re-homing resources. There's a lot more than dumping your pet at the animal shelter. And we can make it fun. We can have contests, games, working dog demos from the police or military. We can present the adoption options through all the rescues through the shelter being present there, as well as having veterinary representation and being able to schedule as many as possible, maybe discounted spay and neuters, to get some of the pet population under control more. And I know that the fees have been addressed before, but I'm wondering if there's any options that we can look at for pets that have been picked up as strays and that people find at the shelter. I know of several instances where the fees were amounted so quickly that the owners could not get those pets back without help and so many people have donated and come to the rescue of others to get their pets out of there. I just think that it needs to be addressed further. And is there any way that we can through veterinary care communicate better with the

[0:14:19] pet owners have the veterinarians report back to the city and make sure that those animals are getting spayed and neutered rabies, vaccines, microchips. I know my vet has never talked to me about any of the, well, the things that I haven't addressed. And I just think there could be more responsibility because people are bringing their animals into the veterinary. They maybe need to help educate the public to the city ordinances that are out there. And I just see daily so many backyard breeders posted for pets for sale on the city pages. And it's very discouraging because we need to find more ways to tackle this problem. Thank you, Sam. Mr. Mayor, as the city manager, places this young lady with the proper ones, too. Not only them being dumped at the shelter, they're being dumped in the county, too. It's a tremendous problem. Anyone else care to approach the council? Yes, ma'am. Jamie Thompson, I'm here also with concerns with our animal shelter. First of all, I don't feel like a lot of the issues could be brought up just due to time constraints. Possibly a meeting with a city manager, I know there's several of us that have concerns and I'd love to be at a later date maybe sit down and discuss some issues. Today primarily I'm new to rescue, just began fostering, really just began volunteering. My biggest concern with our city shelter is why is there such resistance? There's a huge problem, I think, that needs to be addressed with the attitude. My first attempt to pull through a rescue group, I was treated very poorly. I was basically intimidated. I don't feel like it's a public place that I should be able to go.

[0:16:22] I watched members of the public be ignored, walking up to the counter. the whole attitude there to me should not be negative. It doesn't matter to me who or what or how you're trying to pull an animal, whether it be a private person trying to adopt or someone trying to foster your rescue group. The ultimate goal, in my opinion, and it should be, I guess, for everyone. Let's just put them out. We know the end result is a good one. The environment for these animals, it's not a great place for them to be. And again, I think that any, whether it be, again, citizens or rescue groups should be faced with a little bit different treatment when they enter the shelter. I was bullied when I went in. To try to pull a particular dog, I was questioned numerous times why I was pulling this dog. And instead of another dog, I was told there are hundreds of other dogs in the back, and why am I focused on this particular animal? Well, I don't have a good answer for that. An animal tugs at your heart, they tug at your heart. I mean, whether it's this one or one that's been there three days, 10 days, 20 days, you know, let's just get them out. I don't, I'm confused and don't understand why me as a citizen was treated the way I was treated when I was just trying to help. Thank you, ma'am. You hear that, boss? May I be happy to schedule a meeting? I also will say that I feel that the analyst shelter has done a, they've been very conscientious in the efforts that they've made, the changes they've made. So I'll be more than happy to meet with you, ma'am. but I'd also like to encourage James to meet with us as well, the director, so we'll schedule a meeting, thank you. Next, microphone is open. Mayor, I'd like to remind everybody that our early voting started yesterday, continues through next Tuesday. It will be open for Saturday and Sunday at the Edby Keys Building, which gives everybody an extra opportunity

[0:18:22] because election day is on July 2nd. Thank you, Ryan. Yes, ma'am. most appeasy animal shelter advisory committee. I think I would just really like to encourage all of our citizens of our community who have any issues, whether they be really productive, changes that they would like to see with our shelter, complaints, concerns. To meet with the shelter staff first, please, go on up to shelter management, see if you can get those things addressed there. But our animal shelter advisory committee board meetings are open to the public, they're held the third Thursday of every month right here at noon, and we would just love to have people come, tell us your, you know, your desires, your hopes, your dreams for our shelter. We are a board that maybe in the past has not been particularly active, but that is changing. We are in the process of setting goals. When your goal, five-year goals, we have so many things that we would like to have happen that are shelter and we do need community support for that. We need the community's perception of our shelter to change. And I encourage all of those who have concerns to go through appropriate channels because when you have a concern and you put it out on social media, say for example, that spreads, it spreads like a wildfire. And it may be a legitimate concern, maybe something that has gotten kind of taken out of context or just kind of grown into something that it doesn't need to be. What happens is you reach a lot of people who have, maybe didn't have a perception of our shelter, maybe they do, but what starts to happen is they have this negative connotation, and ultimately what happens is our animals will suffer because people won't want to adopt from a facility that they believe has something going on there,

[0:20:25] something negative, and so ultimately our animals will suffer, and so I just encourage anyone who does have any issues, any complaints, to go through the appropriate channels. Let us work with you, let us hear your complaints, let's work together, because this is a community issue, and we do need to come together to solve this problem. Thank you. a piece of. And we do appreciate you and your son's efforts. My microphone is open. Anyone else care to approach? Yes ma'am. You see, I'm also going to address an issue with the shelter. I do want to applaud their effort. I know that they've come a long way. And they've been trying. I want to touch base again just on how they come off to the public. I think what she was saying was we did try to address the issue there. It was just a lot of tension that I think shouldn't have even been there. I think we were just trying to ask questions. And even with Mr. Flores, I don't know if there's bad blood that I'm just now coming into. I am also new to the rescue group. And I will definitely come to the advisory meeting. We were just trying to figure out how things were working. One thing that is really important to me, and I think it would also be important to the public and to the animal shelter, is the safety for our citizens going in to adopt. When we got there to pull a certain dog for a rescue group that we thought was already set up, the actual dog was in one of the visitation rooms with a citizen who was interested in adopting him.

[0:22:25] So my question, whenever the gentleman got there and went up to adopt him, they were told that the dog was aggressive, and that he could not be adopted out. So my biggest concern is the safety, and if the dog is deemed aggressive, we need to make sure that people are not being allowed to visit those dogs, because that's a huge liability issue. What if the dog had bitten that person whenever they were at the shelter visiting the dog, if it, I mean, if he is aggressive. So I just think maybe some more communication as far as that goes and protecting people that are coming in to visit animals. One other thing that I wanna touch on is maybe looking again at the fees, I think to help counterbalance the $27,000 that she was saying from last month for the owner's surrenders, maybe instead of a $10 fee, trying to increase that to help counteract some of that. I don't know if that's something that could happen or not, but just an idea. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Good morning. Sorry. Oh, I'm Jennifer McCon. Sorry for the get up. Everything's being packed. I feel like I've come to you guys on many occasions, so I hope that I have a little respect that I have experienced what's gone on at the shelter. I've experienced negative and I've experienced positive. I was relatively involved in this particular case with the dog who was deemed aggressive. There were things that had to take place. I think it was just a major breakdown in communication, maybe, with the people who were there. I would like to think there's policies in effect in general for dogs that are deemed aggressive if a rescue is going to intervene.

[0:24:25] I think that's pretty standard at most shelters, but maybe in hindsight, maybe if there's some sort of like cameras in place in the shelter lobby to monitor and protect not only the shelter staff from, you know, if a customer is frustrated or right, I rate, but maybe, you know, protect the customer as well. I know there's always a, you know, side A, side B and somewhere in the middle is where things really happened. So I know that the shelter is going to face a lot of heated situations. a very emotional situation on both sides. I think people who are there to pull the dog are in a panic. They want to get it out as quick as possible. Especially when you're told that dog should have been put down prior to ever having been networked out, which is ironic because if you meet him now, he wags his tail, he's super happy. So in the shelter's defense, a dog that maybe wouldn't have gotten out did, which is great, but a way to protect both parties. So then everybody can feel more comfortable going. I think there are proper channels to voice this, but I think sometimes those are not received very well. So if you all remember, this is kind of where I started as well. So I hope that, you know, maybe a, I don't know, monitoring system or something would be better for everybody. So that would be my two cents in suggestion. Thank you. Anyone else? If there is no more public comment then I will bring the public comment section of our agenda to a close. We will now move on to our consent agenda. This is the opportunity that staff has to pull anything from the consent agenda and place it on the regular if there is anyone in the audience that has something that they want to pull from the consent agenda. This is where we give you your opportunity. I'll start with you Ms. Grindstaff, anything you want to pull or any statements that you want to make them. No statements this morning and nothing to pull. Nothing to pull but I do want

[0:26:27] to say that the people that are actually putting books out on the curb if it isn't your time of the month that you that they're going to be picking up your stuff don't leave it there because I've seen it for weeks. I mean we're talking dishwashers and stuff like that that can actually be a hazard for people that are trying to drive on that street. So if If it's not your month for it to be picked up, please put it back until it can be picked up or have somebody call it out for you, I guess. But don't leave it on the street if it's not going to be picked up. I have one item to pull on the agenda, consent agenda item F and M1 statement. The statement has to do with our animal shelter and just want to recognize the work that they've done. That's it Harry you have any thanks, sir. No, sir at this time Marty Yep be not be but deep of the vending That is for the Parks and Recreation Nutrition program Which one was that sir? D. D. Yes, D is in dog. Okay Alright. Alright sir. Anything else? Alrighty. Well, I would like to pull E. Started out with a small regular agenda that has grown. Alrighty. I would now entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda that will be items A, B, C. Let me get that more. G, H, and I.

[0:28:27] move. Second. May I have a second? Bill? I got the motion from Bill to approve. I did get the second from Elizabeth. Am I right? Yes, sir. I was looking down when we said that. Okay, I do have a motion to approve. Do I have any public comment on this? Are there any items in the public? They would like to see brought forward to the regular agenda from the scene? Any further council discussion? All in favor of approving ABC, G, HNI, the consent? the consent agenda please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Put a 7-0 warning. Let's start with you, Bill. You're at item number D, which is consider authorizing the Parks and Recreation Nutrition Program to apply for vendor status of congregate meal sites for the area agency of aging of the Consul Valley and authorizing the mayor or city manager to execute related documents. What are your concerns? I'd just like that explained. Who would be the one? Good morning. Good morning. What exactly was. Please identify. My name is Sandra Aguilar. I'm the recreation supervisor for the senior services department for the parks and recreation. Explain what the item is about. Okay. Each year we have a vendor process where we receive grant funding for the nutrition program the grant is from the area agency on aging of the Country Valley Councils of government and we have to just do a regular application status and then once that's approved then we receive the actual agreement saying how much funding will receive from them. And those dollars are used to run the nutrition program where we serve the meals at the senior center. Yes sir. Thank you. You want to move to approve it? I move to approve. You have a second from Marty. Any further

[0:30:27] Council questions on this? Comments from the public. All in favor of approving as presented, please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Alrighty, put a 7-0-11, Brian. Number E is the one that I have pulled. It's considered a resolution approving first addendum to lease agreement between the City of St. Angelo through the special supplemental nutritional program for women, infants, and children collectively, Lee C., and Sacred Heart Cathedral Church of Colman, Texas as the lease or adjusting the use of the least premises and reducing yearly rent. Why are we spending San Angelo money in Colman, Texas? Well, it's it's an outreach location. We've been doing it for many years. We we serve the the area and Colman is one of those years we do serve. These are grant funds, understand that they're not really San Angelo funds, they're state funds. They want us to reach out and provide those services to neighboring cities. We do it at Ballinger. We do it at Coleman. And of course our grads have been reduced every year steadily, so this is the way to save some money. We're cutting back some hours trying to get under that cap that the state puts on us. But it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's not, it's an Angela money. It's, well, it is. It's state money. Well, they're reducing the rent, the rent is what has been reduced. We've gone from a lesser time, maybe not far away already. That's correct. So we're paying less rent? Yes. Less time there as well. This is a cost-saving action. I was just curious, I didn't know we, I thought maybe Colman County took care of Colman, Texas instead of Tom Green County, but I guess it's a Texas grant and we provide for a whole area. Yes, sir. We do. We are we are we are required to provide those services then I will move to approve it as presented second Do I have a second from here any further council discussion? Public discussion all in favor please say aye aye opposed nay, but a 7-0 on that one mr. Brian

[0:32:33] And we are now at item Number f and I was going to pull this and chart it if you did not so this worked well consider approving a contract with by recovery USA LLC for clean up and hazmat incident billings if the two one six and authorizing the city manager to execute all related documents what are your questions man two three things the first item there again for those who do not have the ability to pull up attachments and stuff to see the dollar amount is not quoted in the agenda page requested numerous times the amount, say, not to exceed a certain amount. It's on our backup sheet, but for people out there who can't see the backup or can't pull the backup up, the amount not to exceed. Also, in the backup, it mentions the income, the fees that we may receive from this and what that dollar amounts to, but it doesn't say what the expenses are for cleanup. I couldn't determine that easily in running through. So those are my questions and then, again, staff formed a committee and made their decisions, you know, before it came to council that the two were selected. So I'm curious as to if the other person was a financial company, those are my three questions. First off on the dollar amount, they received 20% of the gross amount collected. So I have no idea what that could be, depending on our amount of wrecks, if we have hazmat trucks that have a spill, the dollar amount's gonna be large. So whatever we collect, they get a gross receipt of 20% for that. But as far as the two companies, neither one of them was even in the state of Texas. That's the only two that even hit on it. And your third question. That's my question of the amount that we spend on recovery.

[0:34:33] What is the average of that being in years past? I know you have no idea each year, but what does it mean? We spend many thousands of dollars on the SPAC absorb, which is the stuff we put down on hydrocarbons, blaze out. The other expense is a tied to that, or it may, if we have money that we spend on equipment that we tear up, if we get battery acid on bunker gear, we have to replace it. Most of these things have to do with hazmat and or car wrecks that we climb around. So we collect about 50,000 from this. We're probably spending that much on equipment and materials to mitigate these incidences. Just feel like with previous budgets and financial in the blue books that could be added up for an annual average to present the council with some sort of ideas to what we're looking at expense wise. Those are my questions, Mr. Mayor. Okay. Well, I do have a few questions also. Brian, I've asked these questions every time this has come up. Where is this fire recovery USA located? This company is located in California. My second question, why is it in the city of San Angelo, Texas, 100,000 now 450 souls with the number one university in the entire God's creation plus the umbrella of Texas tech, why do we have to go to California to get anybody to build for us? Why can't we do this ourselves? We still have to get all of the information, we have to get all of the time, we have to give them all of the different materials that we use, we have to submit this, we have to key it in and send it to them, and all they do is take our information and put it in the form of a bill and bill it. Why are we sending our work to California when we've got people right here that can do that? I cannot tell you why someone else doesn't bid on it, Councilman, it's a mayor. Why don't we do it in house? Why don't we have, why don't we have, I mean, I guess we could look at that,

[0:36:34] but that you're talking about an expertise, it's not something that we have. There's so few companies that actually do this specific type of billing. It's kind of like the EMS billing also, there's so few companies that actually do it because of the rules and regulations that you've got to comply with. And there's even fewer on this side of stuff that do the fire billing. Don't you feel that between ASU and Texas Tech that we could develop a program to train a person to do this? I mean, they have a, this California company has a program that they use to train. Why can't we do this locally? Why are we sending our work to California when we have people needing work here? I'm sure it can be done. The question for that would be, would it be profitable for them if they're only doing one? I mean, this company does many, many, they got like a two-page sheet of the Texas cities that they actually built for. So, for it to be profitable for somebody, I couldn't answer that question. This is just billing. We're not talking about going back to the 90s, where you have a car wreck and these men put on the spacesuits to clean up the anaphrase and charge the big dollars, are we? You remember that program we had back in got rid of? Yeah, I don't remember who was doing that. This is for us cleaning up our stuff, or if we end up like a good fellow has to come to it, where we can get them back what they expended or used. We do it. We maintain it. We key it in, we send it to them. They put it in the bill and send it out and get 20%. Well, we send them the information. I don't know how on the back end of what they do. They have to have our information to be able to. They get what we did on our response, that's correct. I have no idea why we're sending this to California when we could do it right here in half. I do know. And that long list of Texas vendors, if we had a program here, they'd be coming to San Angelo to do it instead of sending it to California. I do know that there's also expertise with the insurance and how they talk to them and what they discuss and what was built out with them.

[0:38:35] I'm not going to vote for it, but someone else can move to approve it if they would like. We have to vote on it today? I'd rather not vote on it at all. If I do, it's going to be negative. I've got more confidence in my university than to say that we can't develop a program to do this. We can't develop something that California can. I don't understand that. Seems like we're losing and wasting our talent here. Let me just make a real quick comment and then I'll let Daniel talk. I don't know that anybody in this particular city has the expertise to do what we're talking about here. First thing is is I believe you're probably correct mayor that there are people that could develop this but today we don't have anybody in this particular area and when they went out for bids there were two companies that bid and one from California where the lowest bidder. So from my perspective, even though I don't like to do business out of city, out of state, I think we need to go forward with this so that the fire department can continue to do their operation and build a customer that are there. I'll move to approve. Daniel. All I want to say is this is a specialized type building with the coding and so forth. I know that you talk about maybe ASU development program. That'd be wonderful if we had a company here that could provide that service. Chief, is there any other fire departments if you know if they do their own billing on this item? I do not know any that do their own billing. I mean, I can research that. But like I said, even the one, I mean, we're here because the company that was doing it decided to get out of doing this business. So I had to find another one that would do it. I do not know any that do their own billing. And like I said, fire recovery had a list, probably two pages of Texas Fire Departments that they built for. Part of the whole deal, as far as coding with any type of insurance, is knowing what the service was that was provided, coding it properly to make sure that we see the proper money's back, the highest amount available as well.

[0:40:36] So I know that's part of it, and it is a very specialized type of coding system as well. So again, if we could have a Texas company that could do it, wonderful, we definitely would love to be able to go with that company. Again, the one that came back was California. Well, I would like to get more information because I do believe there is a company here in San Angelo that designs software for various things that they sell and I firmly believe that we need to look at that local company before we go out someplace else. We go talk. I believe it's Arlington is where our billing for our water utilities. We don't even build our water utility customers here. It goes out of town. Our collections, municipal court and all of the other collections, that goes out of town. This is a tremendous opportunity that we have in our city. We've got the college that is able to develop the programs. Why are we sending all of our work out of town when we can handle it right here in San Angelo? And that's what's bothered me, Brian, and we've talked about this every time this has come up. This is not a new deal got to have somebody that wants to be the entrepreneur to try to develop it You have a motion to approve from harry. I have not heard a second. I will say okay have a second So it will be dealt with any other party council comments on this item Bill yes, sir. Okay, how would this affect the fire department if it's not approved at this time? We'll continue doing what we need to do to mitigate the incidents. It's just the city will be at a loss of revenue of what we collect to take care of that. What is the term of the contract? I don't remember. It has a clause where 30 days in writing, either party can remove it, and that's what happened the other way. The other former company center in writing

[0:42:38] said they were going to... In order to protect our revenue right now, We could approve this and then start investigating other options, maybe locally or at least within the state. For the comments, public comment on this item? Motion has been made. Do we accept this as presented? It has been seconded. I will call for the vote. All in favor please say aye. Aye. All opposed nay? Nay. Put a 5-2 on that please Brian. Under agenda item A, first reading and public hearing for case Z1603 in order to approve and request from SA Bint Tree Apartments LP to authorize the rezoning from the General Commercial CG Zoning District and the Office Commercial CO Zoning District to the Low Rise Multifamily Residence RM1 Zoning District on 7.31 acres, generally located 300 foot west of the intersection of Sunset Drive and Foster Road. That's presentation by Planning Development Services. John James, you have the floor, sir. Thank you. Again, John James, Director of Planning and Development Services. This is a rezoning case, and you can see the location there. This is an apartment complex that is an existing apartment. You can see here the future land use map shows this as neighborhood center and you can see the zoning is general commercial. Some years ago the zoning ordinance was changed where in a commercial zoning apartments were not allowed. It takes apartment zoning although this was a pre-existing apartment complex. So this is really just a clean up of the zoning on the site and you can see that there's a couple of different zoning districts encompassing the site. This just cleans that up to make it for apartment zoning. You can see here that all they're proposing is a clubhouse-type fitness center, no really

[0:44:41] expansion to the apartments themselves, but again any expansion on the site requires the proper zoning and this is to clean that up. This is compatible with our plans and zoning ordinance as well as the surrounding area. We did send out our notifications to the surrounding properties within 200 feet. did not receive any responses in favor or in opposition. The staff is recommending approval as did the planning commission on May 16th. Again the zoning is from general commercial which it is today to the low rise multi-family residential zoning. That I'd be happy to answer any questions. And this is primary housekeeping that's just cleaning something up that's already there. Correct. And allowing them to build an additional building on the site. this is in your area would you like to either make a motion to approve or deny? I make a motion to approve. Second. Second from Elizabeth. Question? This one question they're wishing to build another building on their site but this is a tax credit property. Well what type of building is it an additional tax credit property issue or? No I don't believe so it's it's simply a clubhouse fitness center for the apartment residents. There are no additional apartment units being constructed. Did you wish to speak, sir? Please, please identify yourself and you have the mic. Thank you. My name is Justin Macdonald. I'm one of the owners of this apartment property. To answer Ms. Farmer's question, no, the tax credits on this property have expired. They've run their course. And so we are now taking this opportunity to renovate the property and do a pretty expansive of rehabilitation of the existing apartments, adding this additional fitness center and then remodeling the clubhouse as well to reposition it in the market and kind of freshen it up a little bit. Thank you, sir. Any further questions? Council? Public comment on this item? The all is moved that we approve this as presented.

[0:46:43] It has been seconded. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed nay? Put a 7-0 on that one, Brian. Item number B is the first public reading and public hearing for case PD-1601, in order to approve a request from Paul Holden to authorize a rezoning from the general commercial CG zoning district to a planned development PD zoning district on 5.116 acres, generally located 90 foot southwest of the intersection of Martin Luther King Drive and West 29. Director John James, you have the floor, sir. Thank you. This is another rezoning case. This is one you are familiar with. This is a low-income housing tax credit project that you all supported a few meetings ago. Location is there just across 29th Street, south of the north side of Walmart. It's your land use map. You can see here is Neighborhood Center, and the zoning is general commercial. Again, apartments like this would not be allowed in the general commercial zoning, so this would rezone the property. Rather than a straight multi-family zoning, this would be a plan development to allow some flexibility for the development on the site and I'll mention some of those flexibility built into that plan development in just a minute. Here's the site plan. You'll notice that the plan development ties to the site plan as well as the elevations. The PD says that it has to be consistent with these elevations. It also says it has to be consistent with this landscaping plan that they've submitted. Again these are all submissions by the applicants. But we've included these within the plan development as a reference. I'll note here that you can see, this is basically an emergency access onto Martin Luther King. The main entrance will be over here off of 29th Street. So this will not be a primary access. But I will also note that they have

[0:48:43] not only the internal sidewalk system, but they will be constructing a sidewalk connects will allow the residents here to connect up to the Wal-Mart and there'll be another sidewalk connection out to MLK providing connectivity to the ultimate sidewalk system. I'll note that the city is constructing a sidewalk along Martin Luther King currently as well. So starting to get an interconnected system so that folks who live in this location will be able to access some of the surrounding shopping without necessarily having to have a car. Given that this is, I didn't mention a senior law-income housing, there will be more prevalence of folks who may not own a car or may not be able to get around by car. We did send out our notifications. We received three in favor and none in opposition. Again, this is a rezoning from general commercial to a plan development that's based on multifamily zoning. Staff does recommend approval as did the planning commission. These are the conditions in the plan development, again conforming to the multifamily zoning, except as modified. It does have to conform to the site plan that they've submitted, the building facades per the elevations they submitted, and the landscaping plan. One of the flexibility issues that I mentioned was parking. Because this is a low-income senior housing, the plan development allows for fewer parking spaces then would normally be required for an apartment complex. Again because of low-income seniors tend to drive less and own fewer vehicles compared to the average population. It does require an urban design review so they'll have to submit their plans before they bring in their development. As I mentioned earlier, sidewalks are required as part of the development And they would not be allowed outdoor storage and they would require a replant of the property to comply with our

[0:50:43] subdivision ordinance. That I'd be happy to answer any questions. Miss Lucy, this is in your district. Share your wisdom, please. I'm just looking forward to this actually happening. I know that the negotiations are still in progress and stuff. So I moved to approve this presented. Question. It's 183 units and there's 133 parking. site so thinking that possibly 50 of the units wouldn't have vehicles. That concerns me because I'm looking at a facility on Oak Grove and I do believe almost every one of those have cars. If you feel comfortable that that is sufficient in that area of graphic concerns I won't have a problem with it. Yeah, and that was discussed with the applicants as we went back and forth with the site plans. And based on their experience with these kinds of projects, they're confident that that would meet their parking needs on the site. Go ahead, further. Second, go ahead, second. Do I have further council comment on this? Questions? Public comment on this, either. I have a question. I'm going to ask you this, I guess, for the public sake as well. But generally, apartment complexes are not in general commercial. And that is to, I guess, allow general commercial to flourish as well as residential where it needs to. Why is it that you're proposing this? And is it because of the neighborhood itself, what you've already seen developed? But what is your security in this? Security in terms of? I mean, that knowing what could be competing interests from a zoning perspective? Well, for one thing, there's quite a bit of commercial zoning in the area already. So we're not really taking, you know,

[0:52:44] pronged commercial land out of commercial because there's still plenty of available land, even on this particular site. See here in red is the entire site that is currently under one ownership that would be subdivided for this part. And so, I mean, you can see this is all developable commercial. There's other developable commercial in the area, so I'm not concerned about taking it out of commercial. This is an area that's primed for residential. We would like to see more residential in proximity to commercial, you know, having an apartment complex where people can literally walk across the street to get to shopping in the Walmart and other shopping in that area is ideal. fewer cars on the street providing those opportunities for people and I think that's a win-win. It makes it a very livable complex. Will there be a fence around that on the property loan? It will be a fence property. But as I mentioned, there will be that connectivity for vehicles out to 29th but then for pedestrians out to MLK and up to 29th. I did not very articulately state my question, but his answer was fabulous. And I think this is going to be a very, very nice complex, as you say, because people won't have to get in a car to access sort of daily needs. So this is very exciting for a piece of land that has not had any action on it in quite a long time. So thank you all for what you're proposing. Does the fence keep the men or us out? You'll have to ask them about that. Do you have any further questions from Council? Public comments, sir? My name is Paul Holden, and I'm the one who brought this in front of you. And I want to say thank you very much for the cooperation

[0:54:44] we've gotten from the planning staff, everyone that we've been in touch with at the city has just been great to work with. We think this is really going to be a nice location and a nice site, something we're all going to be proud of. Now, is the fence to keep them out or keep them in? I'm not 100% sure about that. But the bad thing about it, Mayor, is that everybody here is just about age to qualify to be in these. I don't think I could crawl the fence to get out. I don't think I could either. But anyhow, I just wanted to say thank you for the opportunity. Thank you, Mr. Elder. Any further public comment? I'll tell you my age after the meeting. Thanks. I'm forward, Dadra. Good morning, ma'am. I'm Dr. Butler. Good morning, council, citizens, mayor. I am the vice president of the NAACP and in the absence of president praise. We certainly think this is a wonderful thing for the Blackshire community. I'm also a property owner in that neighborhood. And one of the things that we suggested was that it was important that it have a fence around it. So thank you, Mr. Holden, for that. And I would say yes, to keep them in and yes, to keep others out. So we think it would be very uplifting to the community. Thank you. Thank you, Dadra. Any further comment? Come forward, Greg. I don't think Greg can climb it, if it's either. Greg Myers, in addition to what Mr. Unstaff said, and also to what Dudley said, this is a part. And I hope that the council, particularly with new folks,

[0:56:45] keep this moving. Because this is a part of a comprehensive effort in the Reagan and Black-Cheer area as well as Port Concho and Rio Vista to redevelop these neighborhoods. And this is one of the real missing pieces. Working with elderly folks throughout the community for about 30 years here, we find that in these lower income neighborhoods, people who are old enough to qualify for quality living continue to live in substandard housing because they hate to leave their neighborhood. And this has a value that goes beyond just some apartments for some elderly people. It provides access to people to their churches and their friends and their support systems and family that will benefit them greatly, as well as continuing to take up some unused properties that need developing to go along with all the other kinds of things that have redeveloped those neighborhoods. And the tax credit mechanism, the Granger McDonald's just left, and he's been a real asset to the community in bringing these tax credit programs here, that you keep in mind that almost all of these tax credit proposals need your real strong support to continue to do what you've done. And this is something that's been needed a long time, so thank you very much. Thank you, Greg. Further public comment on this before we vote? We do have a motion on the floor that we approve this as presented. I do have a second. I will call for the vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Put a 7-0 on that one, Mr. Brian. Let's see, item number C is an update and discussion on the activities of the West Texas Water Partnership presentation by Scott Hibbs, PPE in Protect, Hibbs and Todd, incorporated

[0:58:48] out of Abilene, Texas, and you have the floor, sir. Thank you, Mayor. That's a mouthful as usual. Yes. Mayor Morrison, Council, Daniel, my name is Scott Hibbs with the EHT, engineering out of Abilene and it's my pleasure to be here today to discuss the West Texas Water Partnership and give the Council and your citizens an update on what that entity is and what that entity has been pursuing over the last five years. See a couple of new faces on the Council so this will be a good opportunity for me to introduce this in a little bit more detail. A five years ago the cities of of San Angelo, Midland and Abilene in response to the drought that was intensifying at that time, got together and did something that is rather unique in the state of Texas. And that is a collaborative effort between three major West Texas cities that instead of competing for this resource, they decided to find a way to collectively and collaboratively go looking for the future water supply. I'm gonna give you a little bit of a history of the partnership, tell you where we've been over that last five years. Talk briefly about something that I know is near and dear to your heart and to everybody in West Texas, and that is the drought that we're just now starting to come out of. And then take a look at what the partnership is doing for that future water supply. And by future water supply, what I want to put in your mind is the same thing that over 40 years ago, the people sitting in your seats did with the Hickory. They made a decision back then that we may need, at some point in the future, a groundwater supply in McCullough County. And for 40 years, that groundwater supply sat there undeveloped. Then this drought hit, and it was the lifesaver for this community. That's what we're looking at. We're not looking at trying to find a resource

[1:00:50] to develop today. That's what's happening right now in a number of ways that I'll go through. But we're trying to find that next generational project so that 50 years from now, 70 years from now, when other people are sitting in your chairs and we need to develop a resource, we will have that opportunity. Let me give you just a little bit of a timeline. As I mentioned, this started back five years ago. In December of 2010, the first meeting was held in Abilene and through this timeline And I won't bore you with all the details. You'll see that the partnership has had a very strategic approach to making sure that the proper entities and the proper political aspects of this project were brought along the way. We have had briefings with our federal legislative folks. We certainly have had numerous briefings with our Texas legislative folks along with that, with the various funding agencies, the Water Development Board. We've spoken and tried to keep to the best of our ability the Colorado River Municipal Water District apprised of the efforts of the partnership and make sure that we have this collaborative effort that is extending pretty far and wide. And what I'd like the council to understand from a political standpoint, this is the poster child in Austin of how water supply for the future needs to be developed. Your legislative representatives and the agencies that are in Austin have rallied around what the three cities are doing. And they use this as an example when they go to meet with other communities in saying, look, this is how we're all separated by roughly 120 miles. But together, we're doing something that by ourselves would be an insurmountable task

[1:02:51] and certainly more expensive along the way. What did we start by doing? Initially in 2010, if you remember, that's when we all started becoming concerned about the drought that was hitting. And then 2011 hit, you talk about a long, dry summer. That was it, that was the new definition. So when the cities first got together, The thought was, can we collectively share the resources that we have and make it through this drought? And the resource that we're all connected to, obviously, is Ivy. The difference with Abilene Angelo and Midland is we're all customer cities of the CRMWD, not member cities of the Colorado River Municipal District. That puts us in a separate category from those folks that are member cities with CRMWD. So even though we have access to Ivy, we don't have access to the other supplies that the CRMWD members enjoy. So we started this by looking, can we do something cooperatively with Ivy? Back then, Ivy had a lot more water than it does today. But as 2011 hit and as the reality of this drought set in, we quickly realized that this was not going to be a short-term effort. And so the focus of the partnership moved to, let's, let's don't worry about how we're doing things collectively short term, but let's move to a longer term strategy and see what we can come up with. So we started looking at candidate strategies to take us further out into the future. And we did a number of screening techniques. We did a number of evaluations. And the bottom line is at the bottom of the screen you see that we're probably hunting collectively for somewhere around 58 million gallons per day of water. Somewhere, somehow we need to have about that amount to take us again through that history or that future of 100 plus years.

[1:04:57] Shifting just a little bit, gosh, I really don't have to spend much time talking to Angelo about the drought, you're ground zero. West Texas is ground zero. When everybody was celebrating the reservoirs filling a year ago, year in West Texas we were still wondering where our next drink of water was going to come from. This last round of rains has kind of filled up everything around the perimeter yet Ivy remains at 22-23% or something in that category. This map is very stark and tells a great story. If you have friends that live in East Texas, they have no idea what 20 inches of rain really looks like or 18 or 16. There are parts of are state that enjoy 70-plus inches of rain a year, and it fills and it refills their reservoirs and there are people that can actually draw water out of the streams as it flows by. We don't have stream flow here unless that thunderstorm hits in the exact right place and then it's here and it's gone. So this is an important map for us to realize in West Texas what we're dealing with. Then very specifically I know you've got a water advisory board that has been very diligent in looking at Ivy as your primary resource right now and what that means. Back in 1985 when Ivy was permitted each of the three cities, Angelo Midland and Abilene, had 15,000 acre feet of water allocated to each individual city a year. Back early in the drought cycle and this was about out in the 2011 timeframe, that 15,000 through some studies was reduced to about 11,000. Never was formally adopted, but we knew at that time that the drought was having a significant impact

[1:06:57] on Ivy. The bottom line numbers that you need to look at are the real telling numbers. Ivy in the current Region F plan has a yield for each of our cities of just slightly over 5,600 acre feet. We have lost 62 percent of the yield of IB due to this drought. The drought of the 50s that everybody remembers and talks about is no longer the drought of record. What we're experiencing right now is completely rewriting those records. I would, and when I talked to the other cities, I challenged them. If somebody came to you today and said we wanted to build Ivy and all you were going to get out of it was 5,000 acre feet, nobody would do it. So it's a dramatic change in something that we need to look at in the future. So what did this drought cost us? Wow. Aveline spent about $205 million looking at how to conjunctively use their current supplies. up and Abilene put in an indirect potable reuse project where wastewater is treated to an advanced level and put in Fort Phantom and we also just completed tying into Possum Kingdom Lake as a new water supply or friends in Midland $239 million to tie into what they called the T-Bar Willfield. Midland like San Angelo T-Bar was, I believe, purchased back in the 1960s. Sat there for 50, 60 years before the drought caused them to develop that project. They also purchased the Clearwater Ranch, but collectively with those two projects, they spent about 240 million dollars. You guys are up in the 120 plus million dollars in response to the drought. And this again is just since 2011 with bringing the Hickory groundwater online,

[1:08:57] taking a look at how you can conjugtively use your different supplies. I know you're piloting the DPR project right now and you've got a number of other things that your water advisory board is looking at. But just to put this in perspective, those are the three member cities. Now look at CRMWD, they went and developed what they call the Ward County Wellfield. They probably spent in the neighborhood of $200 million on that project. The city of Lubbock tied into they built Lake Allen Henry. If you guys remember back in the 80s, they have actually tied a pipeline and a treatment plant into Lake Allen Henry. That was to the tune of about 250 million. So if you look at those five entities in West Texas in response to this drought that started roughly in the 2010-2011 time frame. We have spent over $1 billion of taxpayer money just to have sustainable water for the current populations, not looking too far into the future, just to get us through this drought. That's a staggering number. That's a staggering number. If we had had a long-range project 10 years ago, that billion dollars would have more than built infrastructure to a new source. So it just kind of puts it in perspective to see how much our region has spent in response to what mother nature has done to us. So what does that look like for each of the cities? Aveline is pretty well positioned for zero to five years because of their indirect re-use project in time to PK. time Abilene 6 to 15 years we're looking for water and then long-term beyond 16 years they definitely need a new supply. Midland with developing T-Bar actually went from the city in the partnership that was in the worst shape to probably being the city in the partnership right now that is best positioned with their T-Bar and Clearwater Ranch. So they're not looking for any major need for the

[1:11:02] 15 year time horizon but 16 plus years again that generational type future water supply they are going to need to find another source. And then of course you guys are struggling right now with what is the best decision for the city to make it through the drought that is is still ongoing and and how to get through that and then of course in the intermediate and long-term we definitely need to be looking for additional supplies. So the partnership has taken a rather unique approach. This map may be kind of hard to see but it is one of the best maps that show what West Texas can do when we work together. The charge of the partnership was to cast a wide net to us as the technical consulting team. There's nothing too far, there's nothing too close, look at all the available resources that are out there. We looked as far and I'm going to try your technology. We looked as far as Lake Whitney. You can see Possum Kingdom is right here. So we had Lake Whitney. We had Possum Kingdom. We've got groundwater supplies out in far west Texas. We've got groundwater supplies that are down in south Texas that we've been looking at. We've got groundwater supplies that are in the Ward and Winkler County area that we've been looking at. So we tried to cast a pretty wide net. The other thing that's interesting about this graphic that you're seeing, look at how we're already connected. There's Angelo, there's Abilene, there's Midland. There are already pipelines between the cities that allow us or would allow us to cost effectively move water should we be able to find that future supply that we're looking for. So a long time ago, we in West Texas understood that having something five miles away was just not going to cut it.

[1:13:03] The distance from Ivy to Midland is a long way and it's uphill. So it is not uncommon for us in West Texas to have kind of a bigger picture when we look for our water supplies. So what are we looking at? We're looking at a combination of a variety of things. One is surface water supplies. Surface water probably scares a lot of people right now. When you look at the spans, when you look at Ivy, you certainly could see why. But you also look at some of the other reservoirs. You look at PK that was down nearly 50% and is now spilled for the last, gosh, eight or nine months or so. So surface water supplies are something that they at least need to be on the table as we continue to evaluate them. Groundwater supplies are really the component of the water portfolio that each city is most interested in. So we are actually probably spending more time with groundwater supplies than we are with anything else. We're looking at various sources in the Edwards Trinity. Of course, one of the legislative initiatives right now is brackish groundwater. How do we take the saltier groundwater that is available and treat it to drinking water standards. So we are certainly keeping brackish groundwater as a component of our supply strategies. And then the West Texan-Bolsan aquifer, which is again, a little bit deeper out West in the Colberson County area. So the partnership is looking at a number of options. This is not a quick process. The group has been, as I said, meeting for five years in general. They get together about three or four times a year. The mayors participate, typically one of the council members, city managers, utility folks. Historically, we have rotated the cities between Midland and Angelo and Abilene.

[1:15:06] And it's been just an incredible effort to collaboratively be looking for future water supplies in a time where cities are in competition for just about everything that is happening. When you're looking at industry, when you're looking at people, when you're looking at whatever the playing field is, this has been an opportunity for three cities to come together to share expenses, to look for future water supplies and the costs associated with that divided by three and so to divide it by one, and to have a range of opportunities that are out there that need to be looked at. So that's a quick overview of what the West Texas Water Partnership is, what it's about, what we've been doing the last five years, and I would be happy to answer any questions. Thanks. That's a very good presentation. I'll start with Charlotte. Anyone else have questions? line up behind her. Two questions. Where is Bolson, Basin? The West Texas at the Bolson aquifer is out in this area. And the other positions could you put an arrow or a map on the map is to where the other options possibly are? Well we're referenced as an angel. Councilwoman we're looking at a lot of different options. there's a number of possibilities out in the Fort Stockton area and when I talk about the brackish groundwater and what we call the Capitan reef that's the deeper water that is under the better Edwards Trinity and perhaps y'all are aware there's a well publicized fight over the water with Clayton Williams's group in Fort Stockton and in that area they're reluctant to let go of the Edwards Trinity, the good water, but they're very supportive of going deeper into the brackish groundwater, which is plentiful and we're trying to get a better handle

[1:17:11] on what that quantity looks like. We've also got a good amount of Edwards Trinity good groundwater down south of us, down towards the Del Rio area. Unfortunately, it's downhill if you had that direction, but the water quality is better. So we're trying to cover at least these three general areas and make sure that we have a good understanding groundwater law in Texas is complex. You have landowner rights. You also have legislative bodies that are in place with groundwater conservation districts and those types of entities. So it's not a quick and easy process. It's a process of kind of elimination. The other thing that we have faced, and I know that Daniel and his staff faces all the time, it is no secret that water is a precious commodity. So there are numerous companies out there that are trying to generate projects to not only develop a water supply, but to build the infrastructure and bring it to you. I probably talk with one a week, one every other week, and trying to sift through who might be credible, and who is just trying to make a quick dollar because we have a population base that needs water, so we're looking at those options. And my other question has, this presentation, which has been very good, has it been made to our water advisory board? I know it hasn't. Charlotte, I did talk with Bill Riley to make sure that we did put it on the agenda for them so they will have a presentation here in the next one. I'd be more than happy to do that. Thank you. I prefer the questions on the right wing down here. Yeah. Go ahead. No, I don't have any. What is the population of Midland? Oh, gosh.

[1:19:11] Councilwoman, don't hold me to this, roughly 120, 130,000. would be, yes, all three cities are in that 100,000 to 120 range. Well, you know, we've discussed going forward what, you know, are we one of three or we sort of more proportional to our population? When you started out, you said you were in search of 58 to 60 million gallons per day, and is that for the three cities? That would be for the three cities. the three cities total okay for long-term that's all I have right now thank you questions on the left wing yeah yep I don't remember the name of the aquifer that runs from North Dakota down to the Texas panhandle what would be the feasibility of tapping into that that would probably be your referring to the Ogilala aquifer it we did take a quick look at that the resources down in our part of the world probably would not sustain the types of supply quantities that we're looking at. As evidenced by Lubbock, Lubbock pulled a lot of water from like Meredith of northeast of Amarillo. As that reservoir went dry, they developed an extensive groundwater network. And instead of expanding that groundwater network, they chose to tie into Lake Allen Henry, which is a surface water supply. So that's pretty pretty good evidence with Lubbock being kind of right on top of the Ogallala that while it does provide a good amount of water, it's not the it's not the savior type source. You've got to have other supplies along with it. Thank you. Further questions? Do I have any public comment on this item? Any questions from the very good presentations got a very much appreciate you know just curiosity we

[1:21:17] were talking earlier about our colleges in Angelo State and takes it doesn't have lean have a college up there too I've heard that there's one or two in town I know you've got high school I think you've got a high school up there but you have a college as well yes sir thank you very much Scott you know you're You're paying to abuse him, right? That's all right. I'm taking your city attorney and your planning director back home with me today. Just leave me here. Hey, just got. It is 9.55. Why don't we take about 15 minutes and then come back? And Tina and I am calling the meeting back to order. Item number D is where we are in our agenda. That is discussion and possible action on withdrawing the Texas Water Development Board's swift funding application for the direct potable reuse project from consideration of 2016 funding. Bill Riley, you have the floor, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Council good to see you all this morning. You'll recall that way back in May, the city submitted an application to the Texas Water Development Board for low interest funding from the SWIFT program or as part of the SWIFT program for funding for a specific project, the direct pottery reuse project. Again, this was done prior, obviously without a decision to pursue that project, but to have funding in place in the event that the city decided to move forward that project. The application is currently going through the process. If the water development board has not been fully accepted at this time, but I believe Mr. Grindstaff had raised the question and requested the last meeting that this be discussed and see if it would be prudent to withdraw that application at this time if the city is not going to pursue that project. The Water Advisory Board met yesterday

[1:23:18] and did take up this issue and they voted unanimously to withdraw the application. I have received several calls from the Water Development Board in the last week. They are watching the process And so they know where we are, and what we're doing, they have stated that they understand that this is a normal process that a city would go through to determine what they're going to do as far as water supply and spending that they might do in that regard. And from their perspective, whatever we decide to do is okay with them. In other words, if we were to draw it, that's fine, we can resubmit in the future for any funding that we would want to as part of the future years funding. Also, they said that if you choose to leave the application in the process and pull it at a later date, that would be okay with them as well. So I think that whatever you decide to do is from a perspective of the future, it would not have any impact on us whether you withdraw it now or wait until the last minute, which would be September, late September, October, as long as we withdraw the application prior to them actually selling the bonds, we would not be subject to any fees. And that process is being watched. So from the perspective of the Water Advisory Board, there would probably be no decision to move forward with that project, and therefore I think they felt it would be prudent to withdraw the application. Elizabeth, this is yours. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Bill. My concern, of course, had simply been on the cost of the project if it wasn't necessary to bring the project online immediately. It seemed to me that we were working at what seemed to be a pretty fast pace moving toward a reclamation commitment when we didn't have a water

[1:25:19] plan, which we've now also committed to, the results of the pilot study as well as the results of the red arroyo study. So as I keep saying over and over again, I'm not going to tell you that I'm anti-reclamation. I'm just not certain that at this moment in time we need to feel as if this is our only source of water for the short term. This has nothing to do with the rains in my opinion. It has everything to do with what we can draw, though, from the Hickory. And what I had also wanted, Daniel and Mayor, was a little bit of discussion about the policy regarding use of the Hickory, because right now we're drawing only a little bit out. Of course, we don't need much more than what we're doing, because we have had the benefits of rain and the surface lakes have water in them. But generally speaking, when you have talked to the public, you don't calculate the volumes that we actually have in the Hickory. And so if we can, before we make this decision, hear a little bit more about what our take could be on a daily basis from where we are right now. I had a long day listening to presentations at the Water Advisory Board yesterday, and I'm simply repeating what they say. And I think they're right. You know, the Lord above has granted us something we've never really had in the past and that's a little more time, a little more time to take before we commit such huge amount of dollars when the funds will be there at the next go around. So I'm very supportive of withdrawing at this time. I mean it's Harry and then Bill. I just of course this decision was made prior to me sitting in this

[1:27:22] particular seat. But one of the things that concerns me more than anything else is, is the pace that we move forward on this thing. Not necessarily looking at DPR or any of that is just, I guess my question would be, don't we know when these deadlines for the state are for some of these types of things? And if we do, can't we do a little bit better job of planning for it so that we've got time to absorb some of this information before we make the decision. Bill? How much is it going to cost us to finish that pilot study? The cost of the pilot was $1.2 million and that's all. And that is, it's winding down now and that money has been spent, but there will not be any more money spent on the pilot. Thank you, my comments and then I'll get to you it didn't cost us anything to apply for this we've not obligated ourselves in any way to apply for this we haven't spent any money to apply for this it's similar when you're thinking about buying a house you go to the bank and you say here are my financials go ahead and approve me and when I find a house I'm already approved and that is the way you explained it the way I understood it when you explained it. We're simply making an application. We've not spent anything, we've not committed anything. It's just a process to go through to see if we can be approved and if it's something they're interested in. Why would we withdraw it two months after we got into it before we get an answer? I mean if it's we would not spend any money, if we could withdraw in September and not cost us anything before the the bonds are sold, why would we want to pull this now. What's the purpose in pulling it now? I see no purpose.

[1:29:30] Mayor, I could agree with you on that, and I think that your comments are very accurate. However, I also think that it's pretty clear that there will not be a decision to move forward with that specific project before we would have to be withdrawing that application anyway. So under that scenario, I think that it might be prudent to go ahead and do that so that they do not spend any time dealing with that application, reviewing that application, and they can make adjustments as they need to. But if we do decide next year or the year after to go through with this, wouldn't this give us a—to have an approval now, wouldn't it give us a step up? Actually, no. I asked that specific question. If we would have to go through another entire process, we would submit an abridged application in December and go through the entire approval process again. So taking it all the way through this time, even with approval, would not provide us any advantage next time. I don't mind doing things for logical reasons, but I don't like to do things for political reasons, and I feel that that's the reason we're pulling this. So I'm concerned, I don't see why. Elizabeth, you're next. My interest in this was not political. It's simply the fact that if you go and talk to people, they're concerned about the dollars, which we all understand, as we said, it's one of the most expensive, if not the most expensive project, that we would undertake. However, if we have some time, and you have us working through a water planning activity, and we're still waiting on two projects, the feasibility studies, and the results of those, if we have a year bill, I would rather wait a year. I don't think the public understands why we're submitting an application for something that we don't really have full results on. And I think that your pursuit of this project is a very prudent one when you want to talk about something that's drought tolerant for our future. I don't have any problem, as I said, with the science behind this.

[1:31:31] But if we have a year to wait, I think that we will have the political backing at the state level to support us in that. And I think that if our community is in such a state that we need to move forward, I think the whole community will be behind it. I just don't feel that this is the right time and that we have to do something tomorrow. If I were another city competing for these funds, I would hope that there was not a lot of cities that really didn't need the money and that weren't kind of clogging up the system. So I think it's important that if we're not 100% committed to this, that we go ahead and pull the application and look forward to resubmitting in the future. And I thank you for that. My reasons are not political, my reasons are based on economics, to tie up money at a state level for a city over $100,000 on a specific project, and this is specific oriented. I had asked the question last time, was this tied to the project, the application, and you told me you would check on it, you did. and reported yes it is a specific oriented and based on the results of the reports that we're working on to come into us there may be another project that we need to have this money for and it would be tied up in reclaimed water and we couldn't use it for this other project that we may find is a higher priority, better priority, and more less expensive, which is what I got from the meeting yesterday. And those are my reasons for supporting withdrawing at this time because of a couple of other projects that you yourself are researching, the Water Board is researching, that possibly are much more viable than the reclaimed water. For the comments from council, I'd like to make a motion to pull the application

[1:33:39] The motion in a second to pull the application do I have public comment on this good morning mayor Mayor my name is wadi web members of the council. I attended that water board meeting yesterday because I wanted to address not this particular issue, but they're their deciding whether or not to expand the capacity of the hickory and put it, start using the hickory on a more or less daily basis. Because I'm opposed to that for this reason. That water is underground and it does not evaporate. It's in my opinion, the source that you've got to when you don't have anything else. If Stephen Brown had that plan in a paper where the city would bring it online and use it from now to 2036, and that water that the city would take out in that period of time would not be, that aquifer does not recharge quickly. That's one thing that I remember from what Ed Reed, our hydrologist, told us way back in 1970s. How many years it would take the water that we would take over the next period of time and use. I don't know how many years it will take to put that water back in there. So there goes your bike. There goes our safety valve as far as I'm concerned. So I don't know whether you need to withdraw this application, but I think at some time we're going to do that project. Even Stephen Brown in his article said 2036, maybe we'll have to reuse our wastewater. The second, the thing you're not getting today, they have, the board

[1:35:45] has recommended that you spend the estimate that the water superintendent had from freezing nickel is 38 million dollars to expand the capacity of the hickory. If you're going to spend that kind of money, I'd like to see you do it on this. I don't want to see you expand the hickory because I think it needs to be held when we need it because that water, like I say, won't evaporate. It'll be there when we need it. It's not recharged quickly once it's gone, even though it's an aquifer. How many years will it take for that water to come back up to that level? So I don't know whether you need to withdraw this application now. The interest rates, if you can get along from the state to help build that reclamation project, saving the interest on that much money will be a big savings. Who knows when you're going to have to do that? You can't guess when the city's going to have to do it. You're going to have to pick a time and say, we need to do this going forward. And I think the time is sooner rather than later, rather than using that hickory aquifer, like the water board is going to they're going to send you a recommendation that's what that's what you do and I'd prefer that you not there was a fellow that yesterday said it can't possibly cost thirty eight million dollars to drill those whales and and get that infrastructure I don't know what it's going to cost but freezing that goes thinks it's going to cost 38 million that's going to come to you rather than have you spend that 38 million to expand that project I'd like to see you use it

[1:37:47] this project. My wife is not in favor of reusing that wastewater. You all will probably take a lot of heat if you ever decide to do that. I think that's the way we're going to have to go eventually. When you have to do it, I don't know. I don't know when you need to submit this application, but I don't want to see you spend 38 million dollars or whatever it takes and the capacity for the Hickory. Thank you. I appreciate so much. What you said, Mr. Webb, I agree with you 100% on that Hickory. That is not a finite water support. Water source. You're next, Winky. Where's the city council? If you'll bear with me just one second, I'll get the hands. Wally's doing that for the record. My name is HR Wardlaw. I'm born and raised and lived in Stangelaw all my life and practiced water law here for many years. Mayor doesn't like to know how many but it's been a long time. 46. Yes sir. We are actually close to 49 man anyway. I'm here in support of the the decision of the water advisory board that was made yesterday. I promise you it's imminently correct and you should follow that and you should go ahead and withdraw this application. Mr. Riley is correct. The water advisory board is not between now and the time you're going to have to make a decision the next couple of months and hopefully a lot of you'll be on vacation with your kids or grandkids or fishing somewhere and may not even have a quorum And, you know, you might have to react faster than you need to.

[1:39:47] It's just go ahead and do this right now. The between now and the time that the decision is going to need to be made an answer given to the water development board, the city water advisory board is not going to agree that all of a sudden we need to use the sewer treatment project, it's just not going to happen. In fact, their conclusion is, and their findings are, that the hickory is going to be fine for the next eight or ten years and that we don't need to have any urgency on making these decisions and not rush into something that we'd regret. In fact, interestingly enough yesterday, another source of water came up just south of town there on off Canal Road that could produce several thousand acre feet of water a year that nobody knew about. So, you know, there's just no hurry on this, and we got the cart before the horse. And what I've given you here is a bunch of the work I've done in compilation on the financial situation of doing this expensive project, and I've included in there part of the PowerPoint presentation made earlier by the staff, and it shows the total cost of this project plus operation is $314 million. And right now we can't afford this and the Water Advisory Board and its wisdom pointed out yesterday, and they're exactly correct, that we need to slow down, we need to pay off some of our debt. Our debt in this city is much higher than almost any city in the state of Texas and I provided that in here for you to see and being a banker, the chairman of the Water Advisory Board, understands that you can't just drown yourself in debt and so his recommendation is that we go about

[1:41:48] eight or ten years and pay down our debt that we have, which is right now our debt, including unfunded liabilities is running $4,700, really more than that, per capita, with people in the city of San Angelo, and in the average town, which I provided you around the state, the average per capita debt is $1,000 to $1,500 per capita. So we're about three to five times higher than most other towns in the state, and that's That's one reason these people concluded on the Water Advisory Board that we need to go ahead and pay down our debt and slow down and they are relying in part on the great advice and wisdom of the UCRA. The UCRA is the upper Colorado River Authority which has been here since 1935, it was created by the state legislature and is funded by a state legislature and it usually has historically about three hydrologists over there that are charged with giving their advice, assisting the people in the conchial valley with their water resources. And I've had the opportunity and the pleasure of working with those people for the last 30 years or so, and I know them all personally. They've got great reputations in the water industry. They're honest, they're conscientious, and their decisions are usually correct. day or high on the hickory and said we need to go ahead and use that as our backup source. Right now, all we need is what we got in the lakes. We've got five lakes here. I want to do some more research, but I don't think there's probably another town in the state that has five lakes that it relies on. The problem is, as the early presentation said, we're on edge of the desert and we're kind of on the western end and our lakes tend to go up and down but you know we've gone a hundred years without having to rely on the hickory or any

[1:43:53] other source other than our five lakes and so I think it just it's just eminently prudent to go ahead and withdraw this thing and then you can look at it again next year the money is going to be there year after year after year but the water advisory board unless the the, uh, the mix of those people on their change, uh, you know, they're, they're not going to be for doing this sewer retreatment plan any time in the next few years. That's about all I have to say and I hope you'll read my, my research information that I have and anybody has any questions they can call me at my house. Thank you, Mr. Ward. Law. Appreciate you putting that together for us. And just one other thing, uh, my good friend, uh, former Mayor Wiley Webb, uh, is imminently wrong on one of the things he says and he doesn't understand our hickory situation because he's obviously never read the district court judgment against the city of San Angelo which has a production schedule attached to it as to how much water we can use each year and how much we can bank out of the hickory and the way that thing is designed is that you have to use the water well we all know remember that you through 2026 we we can bank water but after that point we can't bank any more water but the problem is the the amount of use that we have as you go further along gets up to the total amount of use under the judgment which is also a contract gets up to the limit so in a certain point in time you can't bank any more water not only banking, but you can't use the bank water you have. So you have to use it or lose it, and I have a copy of a schedule made by the by the city of San Angelo and all this first came out and it was anticipated that this water would be used. And they actually started in 2014 rather than 2017, but that that bank water will be either used or lost. And so,

[1:45:56] know we can do whatever we want to with it but but keeping it forever like as a backup in his insurance policy as mr. Webb says just does not he just does not comport with the facts in the contract that we have with the peanut farmers down there McCullough County thank you good morning Jim good morning my name is Jim Turner. And just a couple points here. One, when you're applying for a loan or a grant or any assistance from the state, one of the things you're doing is you're telling the state that you are at that time committed to a specific project. And they are going to go out and combine all of those commitments from the different cities and areas and districts into one giant fund. If we're not really committed, it's kind of disingenuous and you're actually impairing the state's planning process by giving them information that's not really accurate. If we're not ready to spend the money now, don't ask for it. It's even when you're going to to buy a house, you go get the loan application when you're sure you're going to buy the house. You don't get a loan application and say, well, 10 years from my house, you're ready, you're committed to that process. That's what you're telling the state and if we're not committed, let's not tell them what we are. Second thing is, even with the redevelopment or the reclamation project, There's a number of different even strategies on reuse. It doesn't have to be direct potable. Sometimes you may want to look at some sort of gray water projects. They're much less expensive. They can be done on a neighborhood level.

[1:47:57] And you get most of the benefits of a total reclamation project without having investments in infrastructure, things like that. And within the next time frame we're talking about when we no longer can bank the water in Hickory. The technology for processing this water is going to be both less expensive. It's going to be proven. And there's a number of issues that still haven't been settled about how do you process some of the waste out of the water, especially when you're talking things like pharmaceuticals and other things that get into the water process that they're really not, they don't have long-term studies that show how effective the technology is yet. This is something that hasn't been done on a large scale and studied long enough to really know that this does work the way we think it does. We know that nature can do it, happens all the time, but we don't know if we can duplicate that with the technology we're using today. We do need to be more sure that and we do need to make sure that we have the best options out there and we're not somebody else's guinea pig on some of this we do have enough time we're not desperate for water not like we were and even without some of the rain we've been blessed with it recently we still are not at a point where we have to take and do something even if it's wrong because a lot of times it will be this project long-term, somehow we've got a finite resource here that's going to get reused how it gets reused whether it's it whether direct reuse here or through the traditional process of letting nature reprocess it to reuse it. It's going to happen. We're reusing water that the dinosaurs use but the complicated process

[1:50:04] the nature goes through. We're not completely duplicating yet and we're going to get better at it within the next decade or so. We don't have to do it now. And even on groundwater, if you look at groundwater across the country, you look at the Ogallala aquifer right now, they're dropping it about a foot a year and they're recharging it about an inch a year and it's actually dry in a lot of places. So you can't even guarantee that groundwater is going to be there because it's still getting it's water from the rain, just like every other water resource we use. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Jim. Your Honor, sir, I had to ask you aside for a special indulgence to speak after you are on the trail. Can trail. All right. All right, can trail. Still. and evermore. I ask your indulgence to speak after you've taken the vote please your honor. If you've got anything to say this is the time to say it this is the public comment portion of our because after we take the vote we're going to the next agenda so if you've got something to say this is the time. Well I'll just say what I have to say about this item after the next agenda item it won't make as much sense, but I'm going to say it anyway. Yes, sir. Mayor. I'd like to say I got started on this project in March or April, and I really appreciate what I've learned is everybody's diligence and effort in trying to do the right thing. I really believe that our City Council, Water Advisory Board are good people, volunteering their time, trying to figure out the right thing to do, and the Water Advisory Board

[1:52:06] has approved the withdrawal of the funding of the SWIFT project, DPR project. I think they made the right decision in addition to move forward with full development of the Hickory, and I just pulled out a document here from the city in 2013 that shows the recharge of the Hickory, and the annual recharge at that time was estimated to be 43,780 acre feet. Annual use at that time is 23,728 feet, so we have adequate wry charge in the hickory to supply the current needs, and that aquifer down there has been studied for 100 years, so we're Brady, Eden, Melvin, and those other towns have been getting their water for years, so it's not an unknown. Now, when we add our eventual 12,000 acre feet and 20 years, that number goes to 35,728 feet usage, and that's still below the annual recharge of 43,780. This is sitting document. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Brother public comment. Well, your honor your Folks have persuaded me that I ought to go right ahead and say what I had to say even if it may or may not make sense All right, so you are in spite of you're trying to not let me do it. I Have been trying to let you do it and you have the ones that have refused Anything you had to say you had the floor mr. Candrell mayor. Thank you I think that stopping this putable water project or this reuse project is the right thing to do, and I want to applaud Elizabeth Ryan's staff for her leadership and bringing it to a stop. I ran against her as the incumbent and against Lane Carter as another challenger, and they ran

[1:54:12] over me like dump trucks over a donkey cart. Didn't win. But it took some political courage to do this and my whole platform was I and I know this is a winning strategy here to present this to you my platform was if you want to stop the nonsense from downtown vote for me well they didn't but Elizabeth has stopped some of this nonsense and I applaud her for doing it and I think everybody ought to give her a round of applause now if you vote to go ahead with this thing I'm just gonna get hopping mad then, but I do have another object for my venting and that's the mesquite tree and I guess I shouldn't make it too mad because I'm gonna want you to help me get rid of those mesquite trees later on. Thank you. Any further public comment? Are you killing the reuse project? Are you killing the swift application that is what is on the agenda just for clarification. My interest and my motion would be to withdraw the current swift application that we have before the state. That's the way I understood it. Is that your second? You were not saying that we need to kill this reuse project forever and ever. You're saying you want to withdraw the swift application. Okay. Now that we understand the motion. Do I have any further public comment? Any further Council come in. I guess it's time to call for a vote. Motion has been made that we withdraw the swift proposal application at this time it has been seconded. All of those that are in favor of withdrawing the application please say aye. Aye.

[1:56:12] Those that would like to keep the application please say nay nay. Looks like I did the same thing as Cantrell I just got ran over by a dump truck it It failed six to one. Don't keep card. Don't keep card. The next agenda item is number E, discussion and possible action on the calculation and utilization of available water sources to meet current and future demands, Mr. Riley. This next item actually has two parts to it. One is pertaining to how we calculate available water supply, and the other is the utilization of our water sources to meet our needs, and again, both of these were requested for a discussion by Ms. Grindstaff. There has been, I think, some concern on how we calculate our available water supply, and I just kind of want to talk through that a little bit with you and show you what the rationale is behind that. Currently on Lake Ivy, we get those numbers or dates from the Colorado River Municipal Water District. They tell us when they think the lake will be at a level based on the usage projections at such a time that we would not be able to pump water from the lake into the pipeline that provides water to San Angelo. And just currently, they're saying that that is June of 2018. Just as a side note, the rains that we got, which were a tremendous thing, added about 11 months of time to that projection. So while it did buy some time, we're certainly still need to be working towards future water supply or how we meet our needs here locally in San Angelo. We currently use the hickory aquifer at a minimum amount of 1.5 million gallons a day. That is what is necessary for the treatment process

[1:58:14] to remove the iron and radium, primarily the radium, that has to be maintained, has to be utilized. And so we're using the hickory at the minimum amount to keep that media wet and viable. And then we take the local reservoirs, fish or twin-buttes, NAS-worthy, and a no-flow scenario. Now, we model into that, the evaporation as part of the Texas Watervound Board model, it's about a little over close to 68 inches a year of evaporation in this part of West Texas. So the model basically takes from today. It begins to subtract the time frame that we get from IV when it will be no longer available. And we start evaporating local water supplies plus IV today. To that point, in this case, it would be June 2018. So at that point, then we look at, according to the model, what is left in these local reservoirs And then, again, utilizing evaporation and our daily demands, we project out how long we would actually have supply. Currently, that's about 36 months. So we have 24 months available roughly in IV. In June of 2018, under a no-close scenario, we'd have about another year of worth of supply before we would not have surface water supplies available to us. There's a couple of thoughts. There's been some concerns that we have been misstating that because we were not using more of the hickory or not as part of the model, as part of the discussion. There's a couple of reasons for that. One is that our current drought or conservation plan is based on months of supply. So when we get to a certain level of supply that takes us into a different drought level

[2:00:15] and, of course, usage requirements or usage restrictions. If we did not do that, if we took the current eight million gallons a day that we have in the Hickory, we would never reach any of those drought levels. We would always have water supply. But at the same time, the reality is, is that if we run out, if we meet that 36 months and we have no surface water supplies and we're relying solely on the Hickory, we will be in drought stage three. because while at eight M.G.D., we cannot meet the city's daily demands. If it was expanded to 12 M.G.D., we could, but it would still be under severe drought conditions or drought restrictions. So it makes more sense to me anyway that as we identify months of supply, we separated out. And we need to do a better job of communicating that, I think, that we show that when we say we have 36 months of supply that that is on our surface water and that still applies to our drought restrictions because we don't want to run out of surface water. We want to extend that to the maximum extent that we can. So as we begin to run out, then we would need to have the specific drought restrictions based on the number of months remaining water that we currently have. The advisory board did take this discussion up yesterday. They did agree with that philosophy, they just felt like that we needed to be make a better, describe that better, and how we were accounting for that water. That the Hickory is being looked at separately from the surface water supplies, and that our drought restrictions would still apply to our available surface water. Yes, it was real simple. When we quoted, we say surface only. Even if it's printed in In the newspaper it says surface only.

[2:02:17] That's the gripes and the complaints that I had been receiving, well, you mean the hickory is already used, you know, because they're in their minds, and mine too, calculating that in there. And I want to be very honest with the public as to what we're referring to. Next question, suspense water, where does that empty empty empty empty empty empty that's Let's let out that it's run off into the Colorado River, into the Colorado River and that it is into Ivy Ivy The size of spans and I was just out there again last weekend It's amazing. I believe they're at 13 and have percent some 13.6 something capacity, which sounds a whole lot less than twin but their capacity if you put all of Fisher twin but as worthy in In dispense the acre feet they have more water than that and all of those combined Is that not correct? There's currently about 54,000 acre feet in spence it's currently in spence and have any acre feet and Nazworthy Nazworthy has about eight little or eight thousand acre feet and Twin buttes has 20 in what's at Fisher? It's okay. That's okay. I just am trying to make a comparison that even those spent seems like a very small amount. It does empty eventually down into IV. And when we speak of having, you know, four or five area surface areas, it just people get confused. You know, why do we have a spent's line or it eventually ends up in IV? Why aren't we not including spent's? Line to Spence though is in poor shape, right? I know that. Well, we don't we don't control

[2:04:19] Spence and we can't they're not releasing water from Spence other than what they have to for string flows CRM WD is using the Spence water for their other customers We unless we had the pipeline and a way to pump to our pump station from Spence right now We would have no means to calculate that into our available supply And I know it was done before your time that we have a line from Spence. I know where it opens up I know it's not in good operating position of availability right now but in doing all of this comparison into what would be the cost of Putting that online the availability just in case and don't we have a portion of Spence that we have paid for or are paying for monthly? Yes, ma'am. It's about 3,000 acre feet It's our annual amount from Spence. And that has been looked at, and the advisory board took that up when they were looking at all the options, is the feasibility and the return on the investment, if you will, of spending the roughly $20 to $25 million to upgrade the Spence line with it at only 13% in dropping. Okay. So the 20-25 million to upgrade giving us 3,000 acre feet versus having to purchase another twenty five hundred acre feet that we found out about yesterday that wasn't out there I just want it clear to the public that these portability are being discussed in all of these areas as to what can be done so that there is no confusion that we we don't have spent when we do we do have some it's out there we have a right or we have a contract for that amount if the water is there currently it's the water is not at a level that we could get that water. And that's the question. To spend the gamble of spending that money, the lake would have to come up. And currently the water is not there to go get. That has to be weighed with the

[2:06:21] feasibility of any other option. You wait out or average out the number of acre feet to get the capacity versus the actual that's there, you know, the capacity of spins or the capacity at IV. Do you do any kind of weighted average there? First case, best case. Is that what you're saying? And is applied to, I'm not sure I understand your question. If we got 25 inches of rain up at silver that would dump in dispense versus if we got a 17-inch rain that would dump into IV, do you do any kind of weighted average there? Because of capacity. I'll get with you later. I mean, as far as projecting what's going to what the inflow is going to be under a certain rain condition, I know we don't do that. So on spent is our is our take is that a is that a fixed number regardless of what the leg level is? Correct, okay, so fixed that's a fixed number And we have an idea of what the cost of realigning that line would be Right, so if you if you put everything on a spreadsheet in other words, we can get an idea of What the cost of that water delivered to San Angelo would be? certainly So if you looked and that's what you're trying to get to so I think what's interesting is if you look at that Taking the water out of Spence versus waiting for it to get to ivy What the cost then of that same water is to get it back to San Angelo? Okay, spreadsheets are pretty good even for someone like me the the rain That happened this spring didn't fall in the Spence No, but I'm just trying to make the point of the cost of that and the delivery cost of

[2:08:27] that and then ultimately what the consumer would pay versus maybe expansion of the hickory, the additional wells. But I think we're still at a point where it's a policy issue and I don't know that I expect this to be resolved today, but I think the discussion of how you calculate and what we We say to the public and how we respond to the public is pretty important because I've been very confused as to what we have when I worked for the city during the development of Hickory and then what you talk about which is you've explained is definitely surface water, what the Hickory can be expanded to and what the cost of all of that is because in the end we're all looking for something that is more drought proof than what we've been in and ultimately what the cost of that water is when it gets to again our customer. I think we're all after the same thing but this information has definitely helped me and I'm very interested again in the water plan that y'all have been approved to contract and to see what our projections are, what can be saved in water line and really where our money is best spent going forward. And we'll talk about, excuse me, utilization of the hickory, and that is the next piece of this. As far as the calculations, I mean, currently, obviously we know exactly what it would cost. No, we don't know exactly. We know what the projected costs are to rehab the spins line. And we know how much water we have available there. So understanding that cost of that water is not a difficult thing. The real question there is, I think, has been part of this discussion. is there going to be any water there. And currently, there's nothing there to include into the calculations. It basically, for my perspective, is at zero. So it's not part of the calculation.

[2:10:28] If it had water, we had a way to get it, then that would be part of the calculation. Part of the discussion of Spence is part of the bigger discussion of where we spend money for future water supplies. And what's the return on that? If we spend that $20 million, $25 million, do we think that that 3,000 acre feet will be there? Or do we spend that $25 million on something that we think might have a better return in water? Like me, people out there just like me, they acre feet, if you compare acre feet, it's spent, and you compare acre feet at twin views, it's not the same. 13% is not the same acre feet. if you had 13% in each lake, it's not the same acre feet. And maybe we are to just say acre feet because that's where people get confused. Okay, so, well, 50, the percentage of capacity, right, does not necessarily, does not compare between the lakes. Right. So, Spence has 54th out and the water levels is published every day, it shows both. It shows what the percentage of capacity is, and it shows what the actual footage of water is in the legs. It shows fans? It does. Are the questions down here? I meant that I think most people in the public would understand it better if it was gallons. I guess I need to ask the question, if y'all are in agreement with just continuing to calculate our water availability as we have, we'll just make sure that we specify that we're dealing

[2:12:34] with surface water and that we still apply our drought restrictions to the remaining supply as it currently is established. I'm saying I wasn't confused about it until this discussion. I'm sorry. Well that makes you an exceptional human being. So on the minimum daily hickory usage we can go from essentially 1.5 to 8 million gallons per day. We can treat eight. Okay, but we can't run on eight continuously. kind of the issue also right? We could. As long as there's water in the aquifer. But to push it then we need to, that might be when our systems would need upgrading if we had, if there was more strain put on that. Let me talk specifically to that and to the issue of utilizing our available sources if I might continue. So just to kind of talk through why we do what we do, why we use the Ivy versus versus the Hickory, is we currently have 15,000 acre feet a year, 14 million gallons a day roughly on a district daily basis, although we can produce according to the contract up to 25 million gallons a day. That is a take or pay contract. In other words, we're paying for that water we pay debt service on the lake and the pipeline we pay electrical costs for pumping the water here and we pay maintenance annual maintenance costs. We pay those whether we take a gallon of that water or all of it, we pay the same amount. It costs us to treat the water out of IV which would include the power cost to get it to San Angelo and then the cost to treat it once we get it here, which is electricity and chemical, about 23 cents a thousand gallons. On the other hand, the hickory, we currently use about 1.5 mgd, again, that's just strictly far keeping the media in use.

[2:14:35] We have a current maximum treatment capability of 8 million gallons a day. We have a well field capacity, we have 15 wells in the wheel that can produce roughly 10.8 million gallons a day. The capacity of the pipeline from the Wellfield to San Angelo is right at 12 million gallons a day. That's the maximum capacity. It costs us to produce and to treat the hickory water about 87 cents a thousand gallons. So it's roughly four times what it costs us to treat the ivy water. As long as the way we have been operating, as long as there is water in ivy, that's is our first source of water to take. It costs about $900,000 a year to treat the water from IV at roughly 12 million gallons a day. That same amount if we were treating 12 million gallons a day from the hickory would cost almost $4 million. So just from an operational perspective it's much cheaper to use the IV water if in fact we can. The other thing that I think needs to be understood with this is that if we were to ramp up the hickory we would expand the amount of surface water we have in IV very, very little because of the evaporation and because of the fact that the Colorado River Municipal Water District is going to use their surface waters before they use anything else, they would utilize the IV reservoir if we did not. That's their water, that's their source of income and they would continue to use that. So we don't really buy anything by ramping up the hickory. We are allowed to bank water. There's been a lot discussion about utilizing the bank water. I just want to make this comment about that. We currently have an allocation from the Hickory of 2750 acre feet a year. That goes through 2021 and then it goes to 5,026. It goes to 10,000. We're allowed under the current contract to bank, thank you, to bank water for a certain amount of time up until 2031. That opportunity

[2:16:46] allows us to utilize that water in the event that we needed because we have a maximum production right now of 15 million gallons of 15,000 acre feet. So if we needed that water, even though our allocation is 2750 acre feet, we could produce more right now up to up to 12 obviously because that's all that we could push through the pipeline. But that water is not like this block of water that we went out and bought that's sitting there, that if we don't use we lose. We have the opportunity to use it if in fact we need it. But in eventually our maximum amount will go to 12,000 acre feet a year. That water will still be in the aquifer. It's not lost. We're not paying any extra for it today. It's just something that we're allowed to bank in the event we needed in an emergency. So I think it's kind of a misstatement to say that we use it or lose it. It's still there. It's in the aquifer and we'll be able to produce 12,000 acre-feet a year. So I think it's important to understand that as we think through this. We have 36 months of surface water supply. We were very fortunate to pick up some water. Hopefully that will continue to happen. But from a water planning perspective, I don't think that's very prudent. I think we have to be planning towards the fact that it really could go away. We were down to less than right at a year, a little bit less. We got some great rain. It could have just as easily not rained in that watershed, and we'd be looking at just a few months left. I think we need to make sure that if we don't need to use that bank water, if it does not buy us anything, we ought to continue to bank it and utilize it as we currently are. One question on your Hickory groundwater and I'm probably crazier than a run-over dog and you can print that but I don't think so in this case the cost to produce and treat a thousand gallons is 87 cents.

[2:18:53] When we first started talking about the Hickory and the treatment plant, And my notes that I have and what I have is with the contract with the company was $0.67. How did it go from $0.67 to $0.87? And that's not, you know, $0.20 is not a lot of money, but when it comes to water, that's a lot of money. And I'm not sure what contract you're looking at, Ms. Foremer. This is based on our actual costs, the power costs and the treatment costs associated with the disposal of the media that takes the conduct we have with WRT that treats for the vessels that treat the radium and for disposal of the radium. And as the, this is based on a flow of 12 million gallons a day, it's actually higher than that today because of the smaller amount. We do see some savings if it was, so I did that based on a comparison of 12MCD. But those are based on actual costs of utilizing that water. Look into that. Every day. Thank you. Well, I, like I said, if you want to prove me crazier than a run over dog, I'd love it. But I, that 67 is imprinted in my mind from the contract that I have. Just look at what you have and we'll absolutely take a look at that and make sure we're correct. Thank you. Bill, if I could, I think you're saying that this is more than just that contract costs. These are the costs to transport the water also. You're concluding electricity. It is power costs, treatment costs, everything, total cost of getting the two, St. Angel and treating it. I understand. But not the development costs. This is simply after that. In comparison of the two costs, we left all the debt service out of it. It was just the power cost to get it here and the cost to treat it once we get it here.

[2:20:54] the questions? Anybody down here? Anybody down here? I agree with you. I can remember I can remember 20 years ago when they said that the Olga Lala was a was an aquifer that would never dry up just pull as much as you want. I remember back in 203 when we had the North Aquifer at Northern Tom Green County. It was an aquifer that would never dry up and then the city of miles pumped a couple of whales and drilled a took a pipeline to miles 20 miles away and started pumping that aquifer 24-7, and within six months, whales were drying up all over the north end of town, and that's the same thing that scares me about this hickory. We have some figures that this thing is replenishing at a faster rate than we're pumping it. We've got to be good neighbors in this, and I don't want to mind water. I don't want to pull more water than what that aquifer will provide, because I don't have many hundreds of thousands of people live over the top of that aquifer that depend on that aquifer as their only source of water. We need to be good neighbors with this, and we don't need to pump this excessively. And when we bought this, it was to be used as an emergency water supply, and that's exactly I think where it needs to stay. I don't think we need to be, I don't think we need to be being greedy with this hickory water, but use the surface water that we have, and use this as a backup, and it'll always be there, in my opinion. one other thing that was mentioned earlier sorry was the advisory board did discuss the expansion of the hickory we'll be bringing you those discussions back in July I don't want the good folks in co-county to start coming from me for going after spent that's not what I'm doing I'm trying to say you know 20 years ago developed and purchase for you know a health assist in a backup source We use that money for that purpose and we just seem to forget that it's out there, and we still get that 3,000

[2:22:56] acre feet That's the reason I mention it is so that people know that we do count it. It's very much part of the discussion of The portfolio if you will of whatever the water supplies out there where the best use of the funds is for the most return and water supply so it's very much still part of the discussion. But we just never talk about it and I don't want them to come trampum a garden. Thank you. Is that it? Thank you very much. Mayor Council members we do want to make sure that we're clear that we'll continue our calculations based on what he presented. Is that correct? I agree. Any public comment on this before we move on? Yes, ma'am. Yes, sir. I'm here to Are a Cantrol The entries in the newspaper are a little bit confusing and I've never figured out exactly why they're on the back page of the front section There's always a fairly comprehensive weather report that includes information on our water and at another section in the paper. There's a a a little entry that has the rooster and some bar charts for twin buttes and ivy, but it doesn't include a bar chart for Lake Fisher. If there's a reason why it doesn't, I don't know, I'll be glad to just hear the reason, but I'd like to see that little piece of information that the people receive in the newspaper clarified and made comprehensive. Another subject, the utilization of our current water supply. We, I think, are under-utilizing the rain that falls because our watershed is not in prime condition. I'd like to solicit your assistance in working on that problem. To that end, we're having a meeting over at Chuck Brown's office on June the 30th at 10 o'clock to try to organize people who are angry with mesquite trees.

[2:25:00] I'm nobody matter than me. But please, if you feel like it, come on over. Thanks. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Mary Casper, and just a comment, I would like everybody to mark this day with a great big red star because Dwayne Morrison and Charlotte Farmer said that they want to be good neighbors. I have talked to people that draw water out of aquifers. I have talked a number of times with the gentleman that has offered you the 2,500 gallons per day pumping out of his aquifer. And I understand that it's been said that it's never gone dry. I have it straight from his mouth about five, six years ago that yes, it did go dry. City of San Angelo was pumping 24-7 back in the 50s. And then the gentleman that owned the well that was being pumped turned it off. And the city said, you can't do this. He said, yes, I can because my neighbor's wells are dry and my well is going dry. The gentleman that owns that has access to that aquifer has about 11 or 12 wells out there that he's put in over the last couple of years. The wells out to the east, order up on Los Lomas when he is pumping to irrigate his crops. We'll go dry when the residents of Los Lomas get home at five o'clock and start running their dishwashers giving the kids their baths and everything else. We'll go dry and you will affect your neighbors. And I'm included. That's where I get my water from. So I will

[2:27:03] remember this day and I will write it down. And when you all decide to go ahead and buy that water, I will remind you of this. Okay? Thank you. noted thank you public comment well I guess we're through with that one let's move on now to the earth which is consider approving a recommendation from the city events advisory board amending the facility discounts policy for McNeese Convention Center and Foster Communications Coliseum presentation by city events manager Sidney Walker and convention and visitors bureau family miller and my life miller your own Sydney how you doing mayor council they are ready to discuss about a facility discounts policy CBB proposed to add two new tiers to the existing facility discount policy that we have right now for new conventions our civic events advisory board recommended the approval for the proposal which would be only for the McNeese Convention Center as well as the foster communications Coliseum now our current facility discount policy is is for the 200 room nights and they receive a discount of one half. The room nights are actually tracked by CVB and then the discount is applied through civic events and then applied to our final invoice. The proposed facility discount policy that they would like to see is 100 room nights or 150 room nights. For 150 room nights the discount would actually be one-third. for 100 room nights, the discount would be 1-4th and like I said, it would only be for the convention center and the Coliseum only and this is for new conventions, conferences or business meetings. Nothing old. This would be for a 3-year limit that we would try to make this happen for which

[2:29:03] would probably start July 1st of 2016 and then commencing on June, the last day of June and 2019. These groups would be verified through the CBB for room blocks and then this discount would only apply to the rental other facility. I have Ms. Pamela Miller from CBB, she'll explain what other markets are actually incentivizing to pull in these new business meetings as well. Welcome Pamela. I just went too far. One of the things that we did when we were looking at our discount is obviously we compete with the Convention of Visitors of Heroes all over the state. but we looked at the four that were probably our most consistent pieces of competition and that was Abilene, Amarillo, Lubbock, and Odessa. Collectively they have a lot of incentive programs as we do. Such things is transportation, free registration, coffee breaks, receptions, transportation, probably one of the strongest things but three of those four cities all have an incentive program for meeting space that goes as low as 100 room nights that if they have a hundred room nights in the meeting that day they would get a discount on the Convention Center Odessa is the city in that list that does not have the program so our thinking was what could we do to be competitive with these four that we were competing with the most. When our hotel prices were coming down, as they are now, and getting really low, and we were looking at this program, we thought this would be a great package for us to have great hotel prices and to better discount at our facilities. And just to reiterate that this is legal usage of occupancy tax, it can be used for promotion and incentive programs

[2:31:08] and things such as convention centers. Isn't it? Now we don't know what the financial impact would be right now, of course it would be unknown, but what we're trying to do right now is just designate to create a new business, and of course new revenue for San Angelo. As well as staff requests, we would gauge the impact for a year, CI goals, and then we would bring it back to the council in a year to report the financial impact and consider any types of changes that we would need for this policy. I think it's a wonderful idea. Any questions from Council? Harry? No, I just want to make a comment. Working, Sydney and Pamela and the two boards worked through this and want to emphasize, and Sydney said it several times. But this is only on new business. So those things that we're already doing right now that we're attracting, this is not going to impact that. This is to attract new business in here. I mean, and you can only make that promise or when she's selling, make that promise for three years. A three years, yes, ma'am. Well, I remember when we opened this convention center up after we refurbished it. And we took some tremendous increases on rental. And I fought them back then. So I'm glad to see them coming down a little bit so that people can afford to rent this. I'll entertain a motion from somewhere that we accept this, Harry, some one second. second. You have a second from Lucy. Any further council discussion? I think it's a good idea. Public discussion? Motion has been made that we accept the three tiers already in the proposal is a for 200 rooms. There is a discount. This will add 150 rooms for a third and 100 rooms for a quarter discount off of the price of

[2:33:11] Grenini Convention Center. All in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. What a 7-0 on that one Brian. Number G is public hearing to allow citizen input on requested projects to be considered for funding with grant year 216 community development block grants, CDBG, and home investment partnerships, HOME, grant funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and discussion and deliberation on funding allocations. Bob Solis you do have the floor sir. Thank Thank you, sir. We're here to get approval for the allocation of the 2016 Federal Housing Grants. We did incorporate public comment that we received in April for all our funding recommendations, and our recommendations to do support our five-year plan. We did receive a slight increase, and we did receive a slight increase in the CDBG count up to $3,000, but that is offset by a decrease in program income. So that's a wash. And we also received 24,000 in home grant funds above the norm, which is an increase, the first increase we've seen in over six years. So that's a plus. Here is a graph of our funding profile. And with exception of a few years, our funding has steadily declined. We expect the downward trend to continue, and we plan accordingly. And for CDPG, we're asking for, we recommend you a little over 142,000 for ADMIN, 123,000 for rehab program delivery costs, 150,000 for rehab projects, 109,000 for emergency housing repairs, 147,000 for debt payment for the producers at Real Visa Park, and then 38,000 to pay for our one code officer that patrols the neighborhood's

[2:35:13] re-target for revitalization. And on the home side, we're recommending 27,000 for admin, 111,000 for first-time home buyers assistance, 51K for a tenant-based rental assistance for our special needs clients, and 88,000 for a gallery CDC for a new home construction. And we're asking council to approve the recommendation, and we'll come back with the annual action plan for that approval. Everything looks to be in order. Is there anything out of order, Bob? No, sir. It's pretty systematic now at this point. Allocation went down. There was one allocation that was less than the proposed. Oh, we talked about it. It was a wash. No, not the wash. The next one back. See the debt payment service? Yeah, that's because we've been paid over the years. And that does change a little bit. As we continue paying, that number will change a little bit. Any questions? Listen, you still use the housing focus group? We haven't changed that program in a long time, so it was an ad hoc committee and we have not met years, so that we don't. Do you still have access to the $355,000? We do, that's the cost of the C funds for the affordable housing and the gap financing program. I bring that up because that's able to augment some of these funds as they decrease over time. They do exactly right. that we're trying to increase the program income as well. As we go along, I guess I'll get more loans, hopefully that'll be for our program income every year, which helps promote additional, I'll pay for additional more programs. Thanks for doing more with less. Absolutely, it's tough. That's all you can do. I'll entertain a motion to approve. So move, Charlotte, you want a second, Harry? Yeah, okay, I've got a motion. Charlotte, I have a second from Harry. Any further council discussion? Do I have public discussion on this?

[2:37:13] There's something. Look here. Yeah, that's what I say. Any public discussion on this item? Do I have a motion to approve? It's presented. I do have a second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Let's put a 7-0 on that one as well. Well, that has completed our regular agenda. We do have a closed session. Yes. OK, let me read the executive. Executive session under the provision of Government Code Title 5, Open Government Ethics, Subtitle A, Open Government Chapter 551, Open Meetings. Subchapter D, Acceptions, Requirements and Meetings be open under the following sections A. Section 551, 0711, A, Console with Attorney with the Government of Body Seeks the Advice. If it's Attorney about Pending or Captain Plated Litigation Regarding Number 1, 2013 Seal Coding Program Contract. Number 2, Temple to Construction, Incorporated number three. City of St. Angelo versus Lisa Carrasco and number four LSA Incorporated. Section B of the executive has been pulled. We will not be doing that. What do you think boss on this? Forty five minutes to an hour at the most. Okay let's say it's 11.30 if we say an hour that means we'll be back at 12.30 to complete the executive and the board nominations. 11.33 I'm taking us to We are officially back in session. Bow down to number eight, follow up in administrative issues. A is considered items discussed in the executive closed session if needed, there is nothing that we need to discuss, no decisions were made. B is consideration of approving various board nominations. CBAA, Jerry Carillo at large, to a second term ending February 2018.

[2:39:15] This is CBAA of Adjustment Board of Adjustments, okay. Construction Board of Adjustments, Kerry Rello, Carello at large, to a second term ending February, 2018. DHRC, that is downtown historic, design historic, review committee. William J. Carter, SMD2, historian, to a second term ending September, 2017. Sandra Morris, SMD5 designer, to a first term ending September, 2017. Kerry Donaldson, SMD-6, architect, to a second term ending September, 2017. Tears, which is our downtown group and the Lakeview Group, a tax reinvestment. Mike Campbell, from the mayor, to a first term ending July, 2-0-1-8, William Dindle, SMD-2, to a first term ending July, 2-0-1-8, Jason Fernandez, SMD-3, to a first full ending July, 1-9, Brenda Gunner, SMD-5, to a first term ending July, 2-0-1-9, and Tim Edwards SMD6 to a first-term ending July 2019. ZBA is the only Board of Adjustments, Gary Cortese, the Mayor as an alternate to a first-term ending January 2018. I will entertain a motion to accept. Move and approve. Marty? Second. Elizabeth seconds. Do I have any Council to talk on this? Any questions need to be asked? Do I have any personal, any comments from the public on this? I don't want to call for the vote. All in favor. Wait, wait, wait. Yes, ma'am. A question or a point to make if the city manager could make certain that all of our boards, they fall into their time that we least furnish them with ice water for them to have a pretty choked up and it's pretty dry out there. Thank you. Do you get ice water for our board members, boss? All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed nay? Put a 7-0 on that one. content, consideration, future agenda, and start with you, Ms. Liz. I have nothing, Mayor. Okay,

[2:41:18] Ms. Liz. I have nothing, Mayor. Ms. Charlotte. Would you come back to me? Harry. Yes, just why everybody to know that Brian is working on updating ordinances with some of the people in the community, and they'll be coming back to the council at some future time, making sure that the ordinances are in line with the city charter and also will state law. Thank you. Marty? Nothing. Bill? There will be a tear to board appointee from taking member district one on the next agenda. Okay, good deal. That'll catch us up there. I have nothing missing. Oh, I just have one thing. I just wanted to let everybody know. Be sure and go vote. And also let's make note of the meeting that the July meeting will be July the 12th and my right Brian July the 12th there will only be one meeting in July since the first Tuesday falls in the July holiday so are you ready for the big motion no one thing first one thing what it is Daniel is it true that staff is setting up public meetings to discuss trash service and the proposed changes we are looking at July 7th which is a Thursday to get that input from the citizens as they come in here at the McVee Center, so that's a date that we're looking at. Okay, thank you. I wanted to thank the public. If you've been on the southwest portion of City and the state has mowed, we have a whole lot less trash scattered and spread everywhere. Lord knows we've had the winds and that's due to a lot of businesses out there taking an extra effort and citizens taking an extra effort. We still got a ways to go, but it's better than it was. Also, I would like for the city manager to set up an appointment with me to work with some folks on the water board with the water conservation

[2:43:18] plan. There are some suggested changes and stuff going on, and Mr. Mayor, you and I both know, we hassled and fought the number of days, what not to do, water, car washes and all of that to great at links about three years ago. And I would like to pick up the notes and stuff from that meeting and what. So we don't rehash and redo a lot of stuff over again. So just want to be very careful in that department. Anything else? No. Now I'm ready. Move with you. Who's going to say it? I can't, I can't, I can't. Make Lucy's all in favor say after that. Hi.

Transcribed 2026-07-27 with faster-whisper (base.en) · source: youtube.com/watch?v=zO42LMGpVJ4