7.1. Consideration and possible action regarding possible appointments, re-appointments and/or removals to City Boards, Commissions, Task Forces, Economic Development Corporations, Local Government Corporations and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Boards, City Council Liaisons, and Area Government appointments

[7.1. Consideration and possible action regarding possible appointments, re-appointments and/or removals to City Boards, Commissions, Task Forces, Economic Development Corporations, Local Government Corporations and Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone Boards, City Council Liaisons, and Area Government appointments ]

>> ALL RIGHT. NEXT THAT BRINGS US UP TO ITEM 7. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS, AND/OR REMOVALS TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, TASK FORCES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT COOPERATIONS, AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS CITY COUNCIL LIAISONS AND AREA GOVERNMENT.

WE MET LAST NIGHT UP HERE AT CITY HALL, THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, CRYSTAL, MYSELF, AND COUNCIL MEMBER SUTTON.

WE ALSO HAD DON CARLSON PRESIDENT AND WE HAD FOUR CANDIDATES APPLY FOR OUR OPEN EDC POSITION AFTER THE CHAIR STEPPED DOWN. WE INTERVIEWED ALL THE CANDIDATES. THEY ALL WERE WILLING TO COME OUT AND SERVE AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYONE THAT CAME OUT TO DO SO BUT WE REACHED AN AGREEMENT TO BRING MATTHEW MINTON TOWARDS THIS COUNCIL TO PRESENT -- APPOINT ONTO THE AAC.

MATT HAS BEEN A RESIDENT OF HUTTO FOR MANY YEARS.

MOVED AWAY AND THEN THEY LOVED IT SO MUCH THEY MOVED BACK.

THERE WAS A UNANIMOUS AGREEMENT FROM THE BOARD AND THE CHAIR TO PUT THIS NAME FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL.

>> WHAT WAS THE NAME? >> MATTHEW MINTON.

IS THAT A MOTION? >> YEAH.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPOINT MR. MINTON TO THE EDC

BOARD. >> MOTION AND SECOND.

I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT MEETING SOMEONE SAID THEY WANTED TO HEAR QUALIFICATIONS OF PEOPLE SO SINCE THIS IS IMPORTANT CAN YOU

ALL SHARE HIS RESUME? >> I APOLOGIZE.

I MEANT TO SEND IT OUT TO THE REST OF COUNCIL.

I WASN'T ABLE TO DO THAT AT THAT NIGHT ONCE WE GOT TO THE PERSON SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. THIS INDIVIDUAL HAS A MASTERS IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING. HE'S AN ENGINEER BY TRADE BE DATA. ALSO AT ONE POINT HAS THE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE LICENSE EXAM AND PASSED IN THE STATE OF TEXAS BUT THEY'RE NO LONGER PRACTICING SO IT'S NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST SO THEY BRING THAT EXPERIENCE ALSO TO THE EDC BOARD WHICH IS SOMETHING WE DON'T HAVE TODAY.

SO -- >> YOU'RE SAYING THEY?

MATTHEW? >> MR. MINTON.

YES. SORRY.

IS HE HERE? >> HE IS.

HE'S IN THE AUDIENCE IF YOU WANT TO ASK HIM SOMETHING.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE HAD FOUR GREAT INTERVIEWS AND I THINK WE HAD A COUPLE OF OUTSTANDING ASSETS THAT CAME FORWARD FOR THE CITY OF HUTTO THAT CAN BE USED IN OTHER AREAS.

WE WERE FACED WITH A CHALLENGING DECISION BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SERVE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT ALSO HAVE SPOUSES THAT WORK FOR THE CITY AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THAT. IT WAS A GREAT CONVERSATION AND CHAIRMAN CARLSON DID A GREAT JOB AT ANALYZING AND DECIDING WHAT HE THOUGHT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE COMMISSION AND THE BOARD AT THIS TIME. UNFORTUNATELY, THE STATE OF THE CITY IS AT A PLACE WHERE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WHERE MEDIUM WANT TO STEP UP AND SERVE.

AND WITH FOUR APPLICANTS AND HAVING THE VACANCY OF EX-CHAIR WHICH IS A BIG CHAIR TO FILL WE HAD TO MAKE A DECISION TO KEEP MOVING US FORWARD IN OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO-TEM. >> AYE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER GORDON. >> AYE.

>> SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS, MATTHEW.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR 7.1? LEAS

-- >> I DON'T HAVE ITEMS

[00:20:01]

NECESSARILY TO PUT ANYBODY UP FOR NOMINATION.

BUT JUST IT'S BEEN WEIGHING ON MY MIND ESPECIALLY THE ETHICS REVIEW COMMISSION. AND JUST WANTING TO PUT THAT OUT THERE AS FAR AS TRYING TO REMIND THOSE MEMBERS ABOUT BEING AS UNBUYSED AS POSSIBLE AND I JUST HAVE BEEN SEEING A LOT OF THINGS ON FACEBOOK AND COMMENTS BEING MADE THAT COULD DEFINITELY BE SEEN AS NOT BECOMING OF AN ETHICS COMMISSIONER I GUESS YOU

COULD SAY. >> I DON'T WANT TO CUT YOU OFF.

>> THE ITEM IS JUST APPOINTMENTS AND REAPPOINTMENTS AND REMOVALS UNLESS THERE'S SOMEONE YOU WANT TO REMOVE.

>> WE'LL SEE. >> OKAY.

[8. EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> ANY OTHER ACTION ON 7.1? >> ALL RIGHT.

HEARING NONE WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST PULL ITEM 8.1.

>> I OBJECT TO THAT. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO 8.1.

>> SECONDED. >> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> THE REASON I HAD THIS AS A PULL IS OUR LITIGATION ATTORNEY IS NOT HERE. WE'VE HAD A LEGAL MEMO COME TO US. ANY QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ASK HIM OUT HERE OR NOT ASK HIM.

>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OUR LITIGATION ATTORNEY IS --

>> HE'S NOT ABLE TO. >> THAT'S CHANGED.

OKAY. >> I FIND IT FRUSTRATING THAT SINCE THIS VERDICT IN THIS RULING WE HAVE NOT SEEN OUR LITIGATION ATTORNEY AT A COUNCIL MEETING.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION

>> IF WE CAN JUST TALK ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO PULL THE ITEM OUT HERE TO TALK ABOUT OR IN THE BACK.

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S SAFE FOR THE CITY TO HAVE THE

CONVERSATION OUT HERE. >> OKAY.

>> AND I CAN'T PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE ON THIS ITEM.

>> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION THAT ANYBODY HAS ON WHETHER OR NOT WE PULL THIS ITEM OUT OF EXECUTIVE AND DISCUSS?

>> OKAY. HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR PRO-TEM GORDON. >> NAY.

>> I'M SORRY? >> NAY.

>> COUNSEL MEMBER KENSIE? >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES. 4-3.

IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM 8.4 OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION.

HEARING NONE, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM 8.5 OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION.

HEARING NONE. AND LAST, ITEM 8.7.

PULL THAT OUT FOR AS THEY START THE PROCESS BEFORE QUESTIONS THAT CAN BE ANSWERED OR ASKED IN PUBLIC.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED LEGAL ADVICE BASED ON THIS.

WE CAN ALWAYS GO TO THE BACK. >> I OBJECT.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PULL ITEM 8.7 OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS?

>> AS I STATED TWO WEEKS AGO, THIS IS A GENERIC TIME TO BE ABLE TO ASK SOMETHING OF THE ATTORNEYS.

THEREFORE IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE ON EXECUTIVE SESSION AS AN ABILITY TO FIND OUT PENDING STUFF THAT MAYBE WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT AND AS SUCH, IT NEVER NEEDS TO BE PULLED OUT.

I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU DO IT EVERY WEEK.

>> BECAUSE WE GO BACK AND DON'T ASK THE QUESTIONS.

WE GO BACK AND MAKE ACCUSATIONS AND SO I WOULD RATHER THE ACCUSATIONS BE MADE IN PUBLIC SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN HEAR THEM.

>> THAT IS NOT CORRECT AND YOU'RE MISCHARACTERIZING ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS OUT THERE. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> SORRY TO HAVE UPSET YOU, SIR. >> NO.

I JUST DON'T LIKE YOU CLAIMING IT'S SOMETHING THAT IT'S NOT.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER SUTTON. >> NAY.

>> COUNSEL MEMBER KENSIE. >> NAY.

>> SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> NAY.

>> NAY. >> COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK.

>> NAY. >> COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON.

>> NAY.

>> WAS THAT SEVEN? MOTION FAILS. 5-2.

ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT OR DISCUSS? ALL RIGHT.

HEARING NONE, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION WE'LL JUST GO AHEAD

[00:25:04]

AND DO THE ITEMS WE PULLED AND THEN IF THERE'S A LEGAL QUESTION TO BE HAD WE CAN ALWAYS GO BACK. HEARING NO OBJECTIONS WE'LL START WITH ITEM 8.1. RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE RELATING TO CASE NUMBER 120-CV-1210 JONES VERSUS THE CITY OF HUTTO AUSTIN DIVISION.

I WANTED TO PULL THIS OUT BECAUSE WE HAVE A DETAILED LEGAL MEMO SO I DON'T KNOW UNLESS THERE'S A QUESTION OF THE

LEGALNESS OF THE MEMO. >> I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION.

WHO AUTHORIZED THOSE?

>> AUTHORIZED WHAT? >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ONE

SENT WEDNESDAY? >> ARE WE VIOLATING ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE?

>> SO THEN WE JUST POSTPONE THIS UNTIL WE HAVE OUR LITIGATION

ATTORNEY PRESENT. >> I WANT TO SPECIFY THAT I ABSOLUTELY WANT THE LITIGATION ATTORNEY HERE AT THE NEXT MEETING ALONG WITH THE TML REP AND I WANT THAT TO BE PART OF THE -- I'M TIRED OF HIM DODGING US BEING ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT.

>> I REQUEST AN AGENDA ITEM ON THIS AS WELL AND THAT WAS NEVER

PUT ON THIS. >> WHEN DID YOU REQUEST IT AND

NOT SHOW UP? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS RIGHT AFTER -- I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ONE OR TWO MEETINGS AGO.

>> HE WAS HERE THREE MEETINGS AGO SO I DON'T KNOW -- HE SAT UP IN THE ROOM AND WAS HERE PHYSICALLY.

>> THIS IS NOT GERMANE TO THE AGENDA ITEM IF YOU'RE GOING TO POSTPONE AND REQUEST THE PRESENCE OF THE LITIGATION ATTORNEY PLUS THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT IS WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR

RIGHT NOW. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? DO WE NEED TO REQUEST THAT HAPPEN?

>> YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE BUT THAT WOULD FALL UNDER 9 1.

>> OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT.

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 8.4. >> WE'LL TAKE ACTION AT NINE.

>> CORRECT. >> 8.4.

RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND DISCUSS POTENTIAL ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE -- AND 551.072 RELATED TO ACQUISITIONS INCLUDING THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN IF NECESSARY OF REAL PROPERTY INTEREST.

AGAIN, MY REASON FOR PULLING THIS IS IT SEEMED LIKE WE HAD A VERY THOROUGH LEGAL MEMO. IT EVEN HAD IN THERE A POTENTIAL MOTION SHOULD SOMEONE WANT TO TAKE ACTION AND I WOULD HOPE IF ANYONE HAD ANY QUESTIONS THEY EMAIL OR ASK OUR ATTORNEYS SOME FOLLOW UP. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING ELSE COME

OUT. >> ON YOUR AGENDA IT'S 11.3 AND 4 ARE THE RESOLUTIONS SETTING OUT THE COUNCIL ACTION.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

HAVE ANY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAD UNTIL APRIL 24TH TO RESPOND

HAVE WE RECEIVED A RESPONSE? >> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

AND APRIL 24TH IF FOR SOME REASON WE GET AN AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT IT WE'LL BRING THAT BACK.

THIS JUST STARTS THE PROCESS. >> 90 DAY PROCESS IS THAT RIGHT?

>> YES. >> FOR SNH INVESTMENTS LLC THAT WAS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR EMINENT DOMAIN.

IT SAYS IT'S EXPECTED TO REACH THAT AGREEMENT.

HOWEVER WITH THE TIMELINES AND MAKING SURE THAT ALL OF THE APPROPRIATE EASEMENTS ARE TAKEN AT THE SET TIME AND THEY'RE ALL TOGETHER, SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND GO DOWN THAT ROAD AND THAT PROCESS? TO MAKE SURE THE TIMING AND TRIGGERS WE'RE NOT GOING TO RUN INTO THE SAME PROBLEM

>> RUNNING PARALLEL PROCESSES TRYING TO SEEK AGREEMENTS AND GET AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PAYMENT FOR THE EASEMENTS IF NOT THEN

[00:30:01]

WE'RE WELL ON OUR WAY ON THE ATTEMPT UNDERSTAND DOMAIN PROCESS. WE'RE -- EMINENT DOMAIN PROCESS.

>> THOSE WERE MY ONLY QUESTIONS. >> ALL RIGHT.

IF NOTHING ELSE, RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE 8.5 AND DISCUSS POTENTIAL ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 551.071 AND 551.072 RELATED TO RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS AT FM 1660 AND LIMMER LOOP.

I'M WONDERING THE DATES AND THE TIMELINES WE CURRENTLY ARE ON.

>> WE HAVE BETTER NEWS THAN THAT.

>> BETTER NEWS THAN THAT? >> BETTER NEWS.

YOU CAN SHARE IN PUBLIC? >> YES.

LET'S DO THAT. >> SO MAYOR COUNCIL FOR THE RECORD JAMES EARP, CITY MANAGER. WE HAVE A BONAFIDE OFFER -- THERE ARE FIVE OUTSTANDING PARCELS TO COMPLETE THE COBBLING TOGETHER OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS. MR. DAVENPORT IS THE PROPERTY OWNER WE HAVE AN OFFER FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER TO TAKE ACTION ON TONIGHT. THE OTHER REMAINING PROPERTY WAS MA -- I GOT AN EMAIL FROM THEIR ATTORNEY THIS MORNING STATING THEY HAD ACCEPTED OUR OFFER AND THEY HAD FED EXED OVER THE RIGHT OF WAY DOCUMENTS SO WE SHOULD HAVE THOSE WITHIN A FEW DAYS.

AND THAT WILL BE THE LAST OF THE FIVE PARCELS.

>> DAVENPORT SIGNED OR JUST -- >> GO AHEAD.

>> SO IF IT'S ALREADY WITH COUNCIL IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS IN OPEN SESSION WHAT HE WOULD REQUEST IS A PURCHASE PRICE OF $1 MILLION FOR THE EASEMENTS, ACCESS TO LAND FOR HIS FARM EQUIPMENT, TO RESTORE THE DRIVEWAY FROM THE TEXDOT ENTRANCE, AND THEN MAKE SURE THAT THE SURVEY PINS ARE IN THE GROUND TO REFLECT THE EASEMENT. THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE SETTALMENT OFFER WOULD BE -- SETTLEMENT OFFER WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT DRAFTEDED WITH THESE TERMS AND WOULD BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY AND IF YOU WOULD ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO EXERCISE A PURCHASING SALE AGREEMENT THAT WOULD BE THE TERMS AND PART OF YOUR MOTION SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO

ACCEPT HIS OFFER. >> OKAY.

>> YES. >> AND THIS -- THE FUNDING IS BUDGETED FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND WE DO HAVE THE AMOUNT THAT WE CAN PUT IN A PURCHASE AGREEMENT.

>> WE JUST NEED TO TAKE ACTION ON THAT.

>> CORRECT. >> SO IF YOU CAN WRITE OUT A --

>> I'LL STATE A RECOMMENDED MOTION AND THEN SOMEBODY CAN

EITHER TWEAK IT OR -- >> SO MAYOR IF I MIGHT JUST HAVE A MOMENT OF PRIVILEGE TO EXPAND ON THE INFORMATION A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY ASKED WAS THE SCHEDULE THAT WE'RE ON TOO. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC ACQUIRING THE RIGHT OF WAY IS THE ULTIMATE HURDLE THAT WE HAVE TO GET OVER. ONCE WE HAVE POSSESSION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IT'S ACTUALLY CONVEYED TO US, THEN -- AND I CAN BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE BY MY CITY ENGINEER IF I GET THIS WRONG BUT THE NEXT STEP SHOULD BE TO NOTIFY THE UTILITY COMPANIES THAT ARE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY TO BEGIN RELOCATING OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENTS. ONCE THAT OCCURS, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LENDING PROCESS THROUGH TEXDOT AND SO ON AND SO FORTH TO GET A CONTRACTOR AND THEN WE CAN MOBILIZE AND START CONSTRUCTION.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT GOING TO START CONSTRUCTION THIS FISCAL YEAR. I'M ASSUMING IT'S GOING TO

TAKE -- >> THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS.

>> THREE TO FOUR TO FIVE MONTHS TO RELOCATE.

>> I WOULD EXPECT THAT TO BE THE CASE.

I MEAN, THE UTILITY COMPANIES ARE ON THEIR OWN SCHEDULE.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT CAUSES THEM TO HAVE TO DELIVER IN ANY SET AMOUNT OF TIME. THAT SAID, I GENERALLY SEE ANYWHERE FROM SIX TO 12 WEEKS, TWO TO FOUR MONTHS FOR UTILITIES TO TYPICALLY RELOCATE AND MANY INSTANCES LIKE THE POW --

>> JUST FOR THE RECORD CITY ENGINEER.

[00:35:03]

JUST TO CLARIFY I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH HNTB WHO'S BEEN WORKING WITH TEXDOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN MOVE OVER THESE HURDLES AND WHAT SLE ARE AGREED TO TO HELP SHORTEN THE TIMELINE IS THAT WE DON'T VICE PRESIDENT TO WAIT FOR THEM TO BE RELOCATED BEFORE WE DO THE WORK. ONCE WE HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY WE CAN START MOVING UTILITIES AND SIMULTANEOUSLY GO OUT WITH TEXDOT SO ROUGHLY IT WILL TAKE A COUPLE OF MONTHS.

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD BE IN CONSTRUCTION THIS CALENDAR YEAR.

>> I VOICED ONCE AT A RETREAT AND THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ATTACK BUT I'LL SAY IT AGAIN HERE IN PUBLIC.

BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL, I'LL START WITH US FIRST.

THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF. WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT OUR -- AS HONEST WITH THE PEOPLE AS WE CAN BE BECAUSE THE MAYOR PRO-TEM AND I HAVE BUDGETED THIS SAME PROJECT FOUR YEARS IN A ROW AND WE STARTED LAST YEAR, LAST AUGUST, SAYING THIS PROJECT WILL START THIS FISCAL YEAR AND THEN HERE IT MAY HAPPEN THIS CALENDAR YEAR AND THE PROBLEM IS WE'RE MAKING MILLION DOLLARS DECISIONS TO BORROW MONEY AND PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE RIGHT NOW PAYING TAXES ON MONEY THAT WE'RE NOT USING. AND ALL THEY WANT IS FOR -- WE'VE OBVIOUSLY CHANGED CITY MANAGER.

WE'VE CHANGED CITY ENGINEERS. BUT MY EXPECTATION HAS NOT CHANGED SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS CONTINUING TO WORK ON THIS PATH AND FIGURING OUT A WAY WITH DAVENPORT AND MA PARTNERS TO COME TO SOME RESOLUTION FOR THE INEVITABLE WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.

CITY MANAGER COUNCIL STAFF DEFINITELY BUT WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT THE BIG BARRIER HAS BEEN LEAST IN MY OPINION YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG AS I KNOW YOU WILL, HNTB AS A THIRD PARTY. THAT WAS WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE HANDLED ALL OF THE RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION AND THAT IS WHO HAS ESSENTIALLY CONTINUED TO PUSH THIS PROJECT.

AND AS FAR AS THE OTHER FEE -- THAT WAS PUT INTO MUDDY WATERS BECAUSE OF THE CO-OP OUTSIDE SO I DON'T THINK THIS IS SIMPLY JUST TECH MANAGER NOT -- THE ENGINEER, MANAGER NOT DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. IT'S A MULTIFACETED REASON FOR HOW THIS PROJECT HAS TAKEN SO LONG.

IT'S A MULTITUDE OF REASON AFTER REASON AND AFTER THEY'RE 60 AND 80% DESIGNED DODD WE THEN JUMP SHIP AND GET ANOTHER CONSULTING COMPANY AND FLUSH THAT DOWN THE DRAIN? THAT'S WHERE IT BECOMES HASHED LOOKING FOR A DIFFERENT THIRD PARTY PERSON AND THEY'RE GOING TO USE SOMEONE ELSE'S DESIGN SO IT GOES DOWN TO 0% AND THAT'S WHY SOMETIMES THESE DECISIONS ARE SO HARD. THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS THE BEST DECISIONS OR THIS WAY IS RIGHT OR WRONG.

IT'S HOW CAN WE GET THERE SPENDING THE AT LEAST AMOUNT OF MONEY AND AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND SOMETIMES BOTH OPTIONS QUITE FRANKLY SUCK. SO I FEEL LIKE AS A COUNCIL AS A CITY MANAGER AS STAFF, WE'VE TRIED TO KEEP ON THIS PROJECT, KEEP MOVING THINGS LIKE COVID HAPPENED IN BETWEEN THAT TOO WITH THOSE LAST FOUR YEARS SO WHILE I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING I THINK MAYBE YOU'RE SIMILAR -- SI

SIMPLY -- >> THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE CITY

COUNCIL. >> SIR YOU'VE BEEN HERE LONGER THAN ANYONE. WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

>> I CONSTANTLY MAKE MOTIONS TO FIRE ENGINEERS AND WE KEEP MOTIONS TO HIRE THE ONES THAT AREN'T GETTING WORK DONE SO UNTIL IT WILL CITY COUNCIL TAKES ACTION NOTHING WILL GET DONE AND SO WE HAD MAYBE NOT EVERYBODY SAT UP HERE AND SEVEN PEOPLE SAT UP HERE AND MADE DECISIONS BEFORE IT GOT TO 90%, COULD HAVE MADE IT TWO YEARS AGO AND SO AT SOME POINT THE COUNCIL HAS TO TAKE ACTION OR TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR LACK OF INACTION.

AND I TRUST THE CITY MANAGER BUT WE ARE THE ONES THAT CAN DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO HAUL THAT ENGINEER UP HERE AND TERMINATE THEIR CONTRACT A YEAR AGO. TERMINATE THEM SIX MONTHS AGO.

DO WHATEVER BUT WHEN WE SIT UP HERE AND GO WELL I TRUST IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND WE JUST KEEP WAITING AND WE FIND OUT THEY'RE DOING THE PAPERWORK WRONG AND FOLLOWING THE WRONG LAWS AND ALL THIS STUFF I MEAN ONE REASON WE BROUGHT MATT ON BOARD WAS BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS ENGINEER WAS DOING POORLY AND WHAT DID WE

[00:40:01]

DO? HIRE THEM FOR A BUNCH MORE

PROJECTS >> ONCE AGAIN YOU CONFLATE THE ISSUE COMING IN AND HAVING A PERSON FROM A FIRM RUNNING AS A CITY ENGINEER IS NOT THE SAME AS THAT FIRM DOING THEIR ENGINEERING WORK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SOMETHING ELSE.

YOU TRY TO MERGE IT TO THE SAME THING.

>> THAT'S YOUR OPINION. >> AND WE ALSO HAVE PEOPLE SERVING ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS OVER THE LAST FIVE AND SIX YEARS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO A LOT OF OUR PROBLEMS AS WELL

THAT WE DON'T ACKNOWLEDGE. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL I THINK

SOME OF THIS -- >> WE'RE GETTING OFF SUBJECT.

>> DIALOGUE IS OUTSIDE THE POSTED ITEM.

>> SOUNDS LIKE WE MADE PROGRESS WHETHER OR NOT IT HAPPENS THIS YEAR TO BE SEEN IT APPRECIATE YOU WORKING ON IT.

IF YOU NEED HELP LAYING CURB OR WITH THE SHOVEL OR WHATEVER WE GOT TO DO JUST KNOW THAT THERE'S PEOPLE UP HERE THAT WILL DO

WHATEVER WE CAN TO HELP YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

WITH THAT OUT OF THE WAY WE'LL GO INTO EXECUTIVE DISCUSSION 74 #. -- EXECUTIVE SESSION 7:41.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS RELATED TO PENDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. INCLUDING PROJECT E ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. ITEM 8.3 RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 IN REGARDS TO CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS IN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN BROOKLANDS SECTION 12&2. ITEM 86 RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE AND DISCUSS ACQUISITIONS OF REAL ESTATE.

AND FINALLY EVERYBODY'S FAVORITE, ITEM 8.7 RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 RELATED TO PENDING LEGAL REQUESTS POTENTIAL CLAIMS PENDING LITIGATION POTENTIAL LITIGATION AND CITY COUNCIL LEGAL REQUESTS. TIME IS NOW 7:42.

[9. ACTION RELATIVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION]

. IT IS 10:13. WE'RE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. I BELIEVE OUR NEXT ITEM UP IS 9.1, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEMS. IS THERE ANYTHING ANYBODY WANTS TO --

>> FIRST ON ITEM 9, I WANTED TO DIRECT STAFF TO GET THE LEGAL COUNCILS OF GEORGE HYDE AND TML AT THE NEXT MEETING TO GIVE AN

UPDATE. >> THIS IS BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK DIRECTING A LEGAL UPDATE FROM GEORGE HYDE AND PERSON.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? >> YEAH. AND TML. IS THERE A

SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON? >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY? >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ANYTHING ELSE? WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM

10.1. >> WE GOT A BUNCH TO DO. I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO DO THE MOTION FOR 8.2.

>> I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. >> I'M MAKING A MOTION ON ITEM 8.2 TO DIRECT STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A 312 AGREEMENT RELATED TO PERSONAL BUSINESS PROPERTY.

>> SECOND. >> AND THEN ALSO THE RESOLUTION TO CREATE THE TAX ABATEMENT ZONE.

>> YES. CAN WE MAKE THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>> DIRECTING STAFF TO BRING BACK A 312 AGREEMENT IN

RESOLUTION -- >> FOR A TAX ABATEMENT ZONE.

>> FOR BUSINESS, PERSONAL PROPERTY. MOTION MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY THORNTON? DISCUSSION? HEARING

[00:45:04]

NOBODY NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER SNYDER? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. >> MAYOR, IN RELATION TO ITEM 8.3 WE ASKED FOR A BRIEF UPDATE FROM LEGAL COUNCIL. I ASK HE BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AND GIVE US AN UPDATE. THEN WE'VE GOT SOME

MOTIONS. >> AS DISCUSSED, WE HAVE AN

INVESTIGATION OF THE DEFECTS -- >> SORRY, COULD YOU LET

EVERYBODY KNOW WHO YOU ARE? >> SORRY. I'M JEFF CHAPMAN, SPECIAL COUNTY FOR THE CITY ON THE BROOKLANDS MATTER. WE HAVE A CONSULTANT FIRM CALLED THORNTON, THOMAS, EDDIE WHO HAS BEEN RETAINED TO INVESTIGATE THE DEFICIENCIES WITH THE BROOKLANDS SUBDIVISION PHASES 1 AND 2 AND THEY'VE RECOMMENDED A STUDY AND GEOTECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING EVALUATION TO EVALUATE THE CAUSE OF THE DISTRESS AND TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THEM TO THEN CREATE A DESIGN FOR THE REPAIRS NECESSARY TO BRING THOSE STREETS AND ROADWAYS BACK INTO GOOD WORKING CONDITION AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THEY'VE ASKED FOR A FEE OF $86,000 TO TAKE BORINGS, CONDUCT THE EVALUATION AND PREPARE THEIR REPORTING. IF COUNCIL IS AMENABLE, YOU ALL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT EXPENDITURE.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> MAYOR, I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION TO AUTHORIZE UP TO $86,000 FOR THORNTON THOMAS EDDIE TO CONDUCT A GEOTECHNICAL AND ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF ROAD CONDITIONS IN BROOKLANDS PHASES 1 AND 2 TO DETERMINE THE SCOPE AND METHOD OF REPAIR. AND TO DO THIS FROM BUDGETED

ENGINEERING FEES. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE PLEASE

CALL THE VOTE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL CLARK?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL SUTTON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR?

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL THORNTON?

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 7-0.

>> I'VE GOT A FOLLOW-UP MOTION TO AUTHORIZE FILING OF A LAWSUIT TO RECOVER DAMAGES RELATING TO THE NECESSARY REPAIRS TO BROOKLANDS PHASES 1 AND 2.

>> DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD?

>> HOLD ON. MAYOR PRO TEM MADE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND. >> SECOND BY COUNCIL THORNTON.

SORRY, MR. CHAPMAN. >> THANK YOU. WE HAVE APPROACHED OVER SEVERAL MONTHS THE DEVELOPER WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN STUDY OF THE EFFORTS TO EVALUATE THE DISTRESS AND COME UP WITH A REPAIR PLAN AND TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE REPAIRS. THUS FAR THE DEVELOPER HAS STEADFASTLY REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE AND DENIED LIABILITY AND THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO ADVANCE THE DISPUTE AND TO POTENTIALLY RECOVER DAMAGES TO PAY FOR THE REPAIRS,

LITIGATION IS NECESSARY. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION

ON THE MOTION? >> AT THIS POINT I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF GOING TO LITIGATION. I UNTIL FAVOR OF LOOKING AT THE PROJECT AND THE 86,000 WE DID JUST AUTHORIZE AND MOVING FROM THERE. THOSE ARE JUST MY PERSONAL PREFERENCES. I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE TO GO DOWN THE LITIGATION PATH AND COST AND PERCENTAGE WE POTENTIALLY CAN GET BACK. THAT'S KIND OF THE KEYWORD IS POTENTIAL. I DON'T KNOW IF IT OUTWEIGHS THE COST OF LITIGATION. THAT'S JUST WHERE I AM.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> COUNCIL CLARK?

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL KINSEY?

>> NAY. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL KOLAR?

>> NAY. >> COUNCIL THORNTON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> AYE. MOTION PASSES 4-3. THIS WON'T BRING RELIEF TO THE BROOKLANDS PEOPLE RIGHT AWAY, BUT IT'S A GOOD FIRST STEP. ANY

OTHER THINGS FOR 9.1? >> I GUESS IT FALLS UNDERNEATH

[00:50:05]

9.1 BUT REQUEST SEEING THE LAW FIRM FOR AN ACTUAL UPDATE.

>> SECOND. >> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO COME. BACK IN JUNE. I PUT THAT ON LAST NIGHT. LET'S REITERATE,

YES. >> WHAT DATE DO YOU ALL

PROPOSE? >> I PREFER WHEN GEORGE IS

THERE, TO BE QUITE FRANK. >> SO THAT IS MAY 4TH TO HAVE THE LAW FIRM IN PERSON OR ON THE PHONE?

>> IN PERSON. WE'RE PAYING THEM BY THE HOUR EITHER WAY,

CORRECT? >> NO. WE KEEP BEING TOLD WE ARE NOT PAYING ANY MONEY TO THE K ASAAB LAW FIRM. THAT'S 100%

CONTINGENCY, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

>> THAT'S CONFUSING PEOPLE. IN PERSON WE NEED TO KNOW YOU WANT THE KASAAB LAW FIRM IN PERSON MAY 4TH.

>> SOUNDS GOOD. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER

KINSEY. SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND.

>> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON. I DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE PLEASE

CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> AYE. >> GORDON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER GORDON?

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 7-0.

[10.1. Consideration and possible action regarding Ordinance No. O-2023-026 authorizing the issuance of City of Hutto, Texas General Obligation Bonds, Series 2023; authorizing the levy of an Ad Valorem Tax in support of the bonds; awarding the sale of the bonds; approving an official statement, a paying agent/registrar agreement, and other matters relating to the issuance of the bonds (Anne LaMere and Jim Sabonis, Financial Advisor Hilltop Securities) ]

NO OBJECTIONS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 10.1. CONSIDERATION AND ACTION WITH RESPECT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 0-2023-026 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A CITY OF HUTTO, TEXAS GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND SERIES 2023 AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF AN AD VALOREM TAX IN SUPPORT OF THE BONDS AWARDING SALE OF BONDS APPROVING AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT, A PAYING AGENT REGISTRAR AGREEMENT AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO ISSUANCE OF

THE BONDS. >> IF WE COULD CONFERENCE IN JIM SABONIS, PLEASE, OUR FINANCIAL ADVISER WITH HILLTOP

SECURITIES. >> SOUNDS LIKE WE DIDN'T GET

HIM. >> JIM, ARE YOU THERE?

YOU'RE MUTED. >> ONE OF THE THINGS I ASKED IS TO HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF ALL THE BOND MONEY WE'VE SPENT. HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO GET THAT TOGETHER YET?

>> OF THIS 12 MILLION OR OVERALL?

>> WE HAD A $70 MILLION PACKAGE. AFTER WE APPROVE THIS, THERE'S 8 MILLION LEFT. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SHOW FOR IT. WHERE DID THE PREVIOUS 50 MILLION IS EITHER PARKED OR

WHERE IT'S BEEN SPENT. >> SO YES, WE PROVIDED THAT.

WAS THAT NOT SENT TO COUNSEL? >> I DON'T KNOW. LET ME LOOK

QUICK. >> JIM, IS THAT YOU? JIM, ARE YOU ONLINE BECAUSE WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

THAT INFORMATION IS ALSO IN THE BOND DOCUMENTS FOR THIS SALE.

>> YES. WE PROVIDED THAT. WAS THAT NOT SENT.

>> JIM, I'VE GOT THE PHONE UP TO THE SPEAKER.

>> I'M ON THE LINE. CAN YOU HEAR ME, ANNE?

>> YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. YOU NEED TO MUTE THE LIVE STREAM ON

YOUR COMPUTER. >> IT'S MUTED. GOOD EVENING MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS. TODAY HILLTOP RECEIVED BIDS FOR THE

[00:55:04]

ISSUANCE OF FUNDING OF $12 MILLION OF GENERAL OBLIGATION FUNDS TO FUND ROAD PROJECTS. IN SUMMARY, IT'S BEEN A SUCCESSFUL SALE AND IF YOU TURN TO THE SECOND PAGE, THE GOAL WAS TO FUND 12 MILLION OF STREET AND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS FROM THE 2018 BOND ELECTION. WE HAD A 25 YEAR AMORTIZATION. THE NEW DEBT IS ACTUALLY WRAPPED AROUND THE EXISTING DEBT. THE COMBINED NEW DEBT AND EXISTING DEBT WILL NOT BASED ON THE MULTIYEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST FOR THE CITY WILL NOT RESULT IN AN INS TAX

INCREASE. >> I'M VERY PLEASED TO PRESENT TO YOU THAT THE CITY WENT THROUGH THE RATING PROCESS AND ITS AA MINUS RATING WAS CONFIRMED, BUT A COUPLE KEY THINGS TOOK PLACE DURING THAT RATING PROCESS. THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT OF THE CITY WAS INCREASED FROM STANDARD TO GOOD INDICATING SOME IMPROVEMENT IN THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES OF THE CITY. CONGRATULATIONS TO JAMES AND ANNE AND THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING THOSE EFFORTS IN A RAPIDLY EXPANDING TAX BASE, LARGE OPERATING SURPLUS.

THEY'VE INDICATED RESERVES INCREASED TO VERY STRONG LEVELS AND VERY GOOD MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, SO VERY POSITIVE REPORT AND AGAIN WHILE OUR RATING WAS STABLE, THERE'S VERY POSITIVE WRITEUP WITH ESPECIALLY THE IMPROVEMENT IN MANAGEMENT FROM STANDARD TO GOOD.

>> I CAME BEFORE YOU FEBRUARY 16TH AND WE MARKED THIS. TODAY WE RECEIVED TWO BIDS, A LOW BID FROM ROBERT W. BAIRD OF 4.89604%. IT WAS 11 BASIS POINTS LOWER THAN WHAT WE HAD PROJECTED WHEN WE DID THE PRESENTATIONS RESULTING IN TOTAL SAVINGS OF ABOUT $57,000 COMPARED TO WHAT WAS PRESENTED AND IF YOU TURN TO THE NEXT PAGE OF THE PRESENTATION --

>> I'M ON PAGE THREE. I THINK THERE'S A DELAY ON THE LIVE

STREAM. >> THANK YOU. TWO BIDDERS WERE ROBERT BAIRD AND K.D. SECURITIES. A COVER BID WAS WITHIN NINE BASIS POINTS. WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING TO THE CITY STAFF ABOUT THE BID PROCESS. THE MARKETS TRADED OFF EVERY DAY THIS WEEK. THERE'S A CONDITION ABOUT RISING INFLATION. THERE HAS BEEN LESS LIQUIDITY IN THE MARKETPLACE DUE TO CONTINUED RAMIFICATIONS OF THE SILICON VALLEY BANK AND COMMERCE BANK OF NEW YORK CHALLENGES AND MARCH 10TH WE DID DISCLOSURE ABOUT A LAWSUIT THE CITY HAD PROACTIVELY FOR DISCLOSURE, BUT WHILE WE ONLY RECEIVED TWO BIDS, THEY WERE VERY MARKED COMPETITIVE. ROBERT BAIRD IS A POWERHOUSE UNDERWRITER TOP THREE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS EACH OF THE LAST FIVE YEARS. WHILE WE DIDN'T RECEIVE AS MANY BIDS, WE DIDN'T EXPECT TO, BUT THE KEY THING IS WE RECEIVED GOOD BIDS.

>> WE'VE HAD FOUR -- IN THE LAST TEN DAYS, FOUR OR FIVE SALES. EACH OF THEM HAS SHOWN A DIMINISHED NUMBER OF BIDDERS WITH PEOPLE HAVING A LITTLE BIT LESS LESS LIQUIDITY. AT CLOSING THE BIDDER WILL PAY US PAR PLUS PREMIUM 592,000 TOTALING 12,352,000. THAT WILL FUND THE PROJECT OF 12 MILLION, PAY THE UNDERWRITER'S DISCOUNT OF 202,000 AND COST $150,000.

SO WE'LL HAVE A FULL $12 MILLION DEPOSIT EQUALING THE AMOUNT OF AUTHORIZATION THAT WE ACTUALLY UTILIZED.

>> IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, IT'S OUR FINAL CASH FLOWS. OUR

[01:00:06]

CURRENT INS TAX RATE IS 14.81%. THIS IS THE MULTIYEAR FINANCIAL PLAN ON COLUMN C INDICATING THE CONSERVATIVE PROJECTION OF TAXABLE ASSESSED VALUE REPRESENTING OUR EXISTING TAX SUPPORTED THE PRINCIPAL ISSUE AND INDICATING WHAT OUR NEW DEBT WILL BE AFTER THE ISSUANCE. NEXT YEAR BASED ON THIS WILL STAY AT 14.81 CENTS. WITH THESE CONSERVATIVE NUMBERS WE'LL BE ABLE TO EITHER DROP THE INS TAX RATE OR PROJECT TO

HAVE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY. >> THE DEBT STRUCTURE FOR THE CITY IS IN A MORE CONVENTIONAL DECLINING SCENARIO TO PUT THE CITY IN GOOD POSITION IN THE FUTURE TO FUND GROWTH OR WORK

TOWARDS TAX RATE. >> AS I INDICATED, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS FROM THE LAST -- WE'RE DIRECTED TO MOVE FORWARD. TALKED TO THE RATING AGENCY THAT'S MARKETING THE BONDS. WE HAD THE SALE TODAY. IF THE COUNCIL CONSIDERS AND APPROVES THE ORDINANCE THIS EVENING, WE SUBMIT IT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AND WE ANTICIPATE CLOSING MAY 18TH.

>> BART IS PRESENT IN CHAMBERS, CAN ANSWER ANY LEGAL QUESTION.

THAT COMPLETES MY PREPREPARED COMMENTS ON THE BOND SALE EXCEPT I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU AND CONGRATULATE JAMES AND ANNE, KRISTI AND THE REST OF THE TEAM ON THE VERY POSITIVE INTERACTION AND ULTIMATELY RESULTS RECEIVED FROM STANDARD & POOR'S . EVERYTHING THE CITY HAS DONE IS ON THE RIGHT PATH AND WANT TO THANK THE COUNCIL. WITH THAT ANSWER I'LL ANSWER

ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN. >> WHAT PAGE WAS THE EXPENDITURES OF MONEY LISTED OUT ON?

>> JIM, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL

STATEMENT? >> I DO HAVE A COPY OF THE

PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT. >> IN THE STATEMENT THERE'S A SCHEDULE THAT SHOWS THE AUTHORIZATION THAT WAS GIVEN BY THE VOTERS AND HOW MUCH OF THAT AUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN USED.

CAN YOU TELL US WHAT PAGE THAT SCHEDULE IS ON?

>> I SEE THAT. IT SAYS 41.5 MILLION.

>> YES, I CAN. BEAR WITH ME. I'M ON MY COMPUTER. IT WILL

TAKE ME A SECOND HERE. >> I SEE THAT. 70MILLION AUTHORIZED, 41.5 PREVIOUSLY ISSUED, 12 MILLION BEING ISSUED, UNISSUED 16.5. WHAT I WAS ASKING BEFORE IS I'M NOT VOTING FOR ANY MORE BOND FUNDS UNTIL WE KNOW WHAT DID THE 41.5 MILLION GO TO? I KNOW SOME'S LOCKED AWAY IS IN THE LOCKBOX, IF YOU WILL, FOR ROAD PROJECT WE PROMISED WE'D BE. EVERY TIME WE HAVE A ROAD PROJECT COME UP I'M LIKE WELL, HOW MUCH HAVE WE SPENT ON THIS PROJECT AND I GET YEAR TO DATE NUMBERS, BUT I DON'T KNOW PROJECT TO DATE NUMBERS, SO I HAVE YET TO KNOW.

>> FOR ME I KNOW WE'RE MAKING 6 MILLION ON INTEREST WITH ALL THE MONEY WE'VE ACCUMULATED NOT SPENT. WE SAY IT'S ALL EARMARKED, BUT I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MONEY HAS GONE TO. IN MY MIND, OTHER PEOPLE MAY UNDERSTAND IT BETTER. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S ALL GOING TO AND WHAT THE PLAN HERE IS BECAUSE AFTER THIS WE'RE DOWN TO 16.5 MILLION LEFT. AT SOME POINT SOMEONE'S GOT TO LAY SOME ASPHALT OR PUT A CURB

DOWN. I DON'T KNOW. >> I HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING TO DIAGRAM OUT PREVIOUS BOND ISSUES AND EXPENDITURES BY PROJECT, BUT I CAN GET HA INFORMATION FOR YOU.

>> WE'RE GOING TO NEED IT BECAUSE AT SOME POINT THE VOTERS WILL WANT TO KNOW WHERE THE 70 MILLION WAS. IT'S NOT YOU. IT'S NOT JAMES. FOR 3 1/2 YEARS I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THE MONEY WENT. I ALWAYS ASK AND VOTE FOR STUFF AND SAY OKAY NEXT TIME. SO NOW I'M PRETTY MUCH LIKE,

YOU KNOW. BE. >> I GET YOUR POINT. THIS ONE IS BEING BACKED FOR THE CITIZENS TO KNOW WHERE THE ADC

[01:05:03]

IS TAKING THE DEBT SERVICE COST. I WOULDN'T HOLD UP THIS ONE BECAUSE OF THAT REQUIREMENT.

>> WHEN WOULD YOU GET THE INFORMATION? IF YOU TRIED FOR 3 1/2 YEARS AND YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN TO A SINGLE TAXPAYER WHERE 41.5 MILLION WENT AND YOU ASKED THREE MONTHS AGO FOR THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF THAT MONEY? BE AT WHAT POINT HOW ARE

YOU GOING TO GET THAT MONEY? >> TOMORROW WHEN WE'RE MEETING AT THE PUBLIC OR SATURDAY? SOMEONE IN THE PUBLIC WILL WANT TO KNOW. I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND ALL NIGHT ON IT. I SAID MY BEEF THREE MONTHS AGO AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU IN. IF WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION, I'M VOTING NO.

>> TO RESPOND TO YOUR QUESTION, TABLE 10 ON PAGE 24.

>> THANK YOU, JIM. >> THIS WAS FOR THE ROAD?

>> DO YOU RECALL ME ASKING FOR THE DETAILED BREAKDOWN IN ORDER FOR ME TO VOTE YES FOR THIS? YOU PROBABLY DON'T REMEMBER THAT, BUT I SAID IT. I VOTED FOR THE BUDGET BEFORE AND SAID IF WE DON'T HAVE SOME DETAIL, I'M GOING TO VOTE NO IF WE RAISE TAXES AND I GO BACK TO NO NEW REVENUE.

>> I'M NOT ADC. YOU AND COUNCIL CLARK WITH PROBABLY ELABORATE

MORE. WHAT WAS YOUR POSITION? >> THE EDC ALWAYS AGREED THEY WERE GOING TO PAY FOR THE SPINE ROAD BECAUSE THE INTEREST RATE IS HIGHER BECAUSE WE AREN'T AS GOOD OF RATING. WE ASKED THE CITY TO ISSUE THIS BOND AND THE EDC WILL PAY THE INS RATE ON THIS. WHERE HE'S SAYING I DON'T WANT TO SPEND ANY MORE OF THE PUBLIC, I AGREE. THIS IS FUNDED BY THE EDC. I MAKE A MOTION WE

APPROVE THE BOND AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> IT'S GOOD IT'S BEING PAID BY SOMEBODY ELSE, BUT IT STILL GOES BACK TO THE POINT I MADE A FEW WEEKS BACK OF THE PUBLIC APPROVED $70 MILLION AND DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SHOW FOR IT AND THIS ROAD, GREAT, IT'S PAID BY EDC. IT'S NOT WHAT THE PUBLIC WAS APPROVING IN THE 70 MILLION. SO IT DOESN'T SATISFY THOSE NEEDS. WE STILL NEED BETTER ACCOUNTING WHERE THAT MONEY HAS GONE. I'M NOT GOING TO HOLD THIS UP, BUT UNDERSTAND WHY THE MAYOR IS, BUT WE NEED THE ACCOUNTING AND IN SHORT TERM. IF WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS, WHAT ANSWERS

DO WE HAVE? >> THIS IS THE GEO BOND. THIS ISN'T THE ROAD BOND. THIS ISN'T THE 2019 ISSUANCE OF ROAD.

>> I THINK THIS IS BEING DONE UNDER AUTHORIZATION OF THE GEO BOND BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD NEED TO BE A CERTIFICATE OF

OBLIGATION. >> I THINK EVERY TIME OUR CITY ENGINEER GIVES US A PRESENTATION AT THE FIRST MEETING EVERY MONTH, THAT SHOWS US WHERE THE MONEY IS GOING --

>> BUT THE MONEY HAS GONE TO PLACES IN THE PAST AND WE STILL NEED TO ACCOUNT WHERE THAT MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT.

>> AS OF FISCAL YEAR TO DATE LIKE IT WILL SHOW 1660 LIMMER, 50,000 THIS YEAR OUT OF 600,000 BUDGETED SPENT AND I WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE WE SPENT ON THAT INTERSECTION OVER THE COURSE OF FOUR YEARS AND I CANNOT GET THAT ANSWER OUT OF ANYBODY. THE ONLY ANSWER I HAVE FOR THE PUBLIC IS WE BLEW IT, BUT GOING FORWARD WE'LL DO BETTER. SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE 50 MILLION. WE'LL DO A BETTER JOB GOING FORWARD. I KNOW BART'S DONE WORK. SOME OF THE STUFF WE DID WAS SO TERRIBLE BEFORE WE DON'T HAVE A GOOD ACCOUNTING. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MUCH WE'VE SPENT ON DIFFERENT ROADS AND WE HAVE A AA MINUS STABLE. I BET IF WE COULD SHOW SOME OF THIS INFORMATION, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GO TO AA. I CAN'T SAY I KNOW

WHERE THIS STUFF IS. >> WHEN COULD YOU GET US THAT

INFORMATION? >> WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE INFORMATION, BUT I WILL SAY THE PAST RECORDS ARE NOT AS GOOD AS

[01:10:04]

WHAT I'D LIKE THEM TO BE. >> IT'S HARD TO DETERMINE SPECIFICALLY WHICH SPECIFIC PROJECT THAT MONEY WAS TIED TO?

>> YES. THE MOST DIFFICULT IS THE THREE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS FOR FM 1660 BECAUSE IN THE PAST THOSE WERE ALL LUMPED TOGETHER UNDER ONE. NOW WE SPLIT IT OUT UNDER THREE. SO WITHIN FINANCE I THINK WE'LL GIVE YOU GOING FORWARD WE'LL HAVE THREE SEPARATE NUMBERS, BUT FOR THE PAST I THINK WE'RE GOING TO COMBINE IT INTO ONE NUMBER. I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN PAST HOW MUCH HAS BEEN SPENT ON 1660 AND NOW WE CAN FOCUS ON

THE REST OF THE PROJECTS. >> WE'VE SPENT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT 1660.

>> WHEN IS THE DAY YOU CAN HAVE THAT REPORT TO US?

>> I BELIEVE BY THE FIRST MEETING IN JUNE.

>> OKAY. CAN WE HAVE THAT AS AN AR TRACK? THANK YOU, SIR.

MY SECOND QUESTION WAS WE DO HAVE UPWARDS OF $7 MILLION TIED UP IN THAT LAND ACQUISITION THAT WAS DONE IMPROPERLY WHICH KIND OF GOT US INTO THIS WHOLE MESS WITH THE A.G. THAT'S PART OF THIS MONEY, TOO, RIGHT? THAT WILL BE SHOWN.

>> ACCORDING TO THIS TABLE, I THINK THAT'S THE 8.5 MILLION

UNDER PARKS AND REC. >> WASN'T IT PAID OUT OF ROADS?

WE USED ROAD MONEY TO BUY LAND. >> I THINK THERE WAS SOME ON

ROADS, TOO. >> THAT IS PART OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNTANGLE AND LEARN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY. I DO BELIEVE IT WAS PARKS MONEY THAT WAS USED TO PURCHASE SOMETHING RELATED TO THE PERFECT GAME PROPERTY.

>> IT WAS ROAD MONEY, TOO. THAT'S THE WHOLE REASON WE COULDN'T USE ROAD MONEY IS BECAUSE ROAD MONEY WAS USED TO

BUY LAND. >> I MIGHT CALL YOU TO HELP ME THROUGH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THAT I CAN SEE THINGS IN THE LEDGER, BUT IT'S DIFFICULT TO UNTANGLE THEM AND A LOT OF THE FINANCE STAFF IS NEW AND WE DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY. WE'RE LEARNING AS WE DIG INTO THE FINANCIAL RECORDS.

>> APPRECIATE IT. >> I THINK YOU'LL FIND FROM AN AUDITING STANDPOINT, MY OPINION IS THAT THE BONDS WERE SOLD, STUCK INTO ONE POT AND THEY SPENT MONEY HOWEVER THEY DEEMED FOR WHATEVER THEY NEEDED, SALARIES OR WHATEVER THEY WANTED. AT SOME POINT THE HOUSE OF CARDS STOPS, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK 2019 WAS. IT MAY BE TOUGH TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHERE SOME OF IT WENT BECAUSE A COUPLE OF US WERE ALWAYS ASKING FOR SEPARATE FUNDS FOR EACH PROJECT OR EACH BOND DEAL SO YOU CAN SIT THERE AND SEE MONTHLY WHAT'S BEING SPENT.

INSTEAD WE GOT A CLUSTER. YEAH. >> SO UNDER CHRISTINA BISHOP'S LEADERSHIP OF THE FINANCE ORGANIZATION, SHE DID BEGIN TO SEPARATE OUT NEW MONEYS INTO SEPARATE FUNDS AND SEPARATE PROJECTS. WHAT WE'VE DONE ON THE CONSTRUCTION AND PROGRESS REPORT WHICH YOU'LL GET ANOTHER ONE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS WE'VE ADDED WHERE THE MONEYS WILL COME FROM FROM THAT PROJECT, WHETHER IT'S ARPA, GENERAL FUND, A SPECIFIC BOUND.

WE'VE ADDED AN ACCOUNT CODE ON THAT REPORT SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE SPECIFIC ACCOUNT WHERE THOSE MONEYS ARE COMING FROM FOR THOSE PROJECT. SO GOING FORWARD I BELIEVE WE HAVE GOOD TRACKING. IT'S THE HISTORY THAT WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH.

>> I BELIEVE THAT ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR THE CITY HAD COMPLETED AN AUDIT AND A THIRD PARTY KIND OF WENT THROUGH THE FINANCES, KIND OF TRIED TO TRACK THINGS AND WHERE IT WENT, WHERE IT WAS MOVED TO HERE, HOW THE MAYOR WAS TALKING.

IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FROM THE AUDIT THAT CAME BACK ABOUT THIS TIME

LAST YEAR. >> JUST BECAUSE IT'S DIFFICULT

[01:15:03]

DOESN'T MEAN IT CANNOT BE DONE AND THE FINANCE TEAM IS WORKING ON GETTING THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU AND IT'S OUR INTENT TO PUT THAT INFORMATION IN A PRIOR AMOUNT SPENT COLUMN ON THE CONSTRUCTION AND PROGRESS REPORT SO THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE HOW MUCH WAS SPENT IN PRIOR PERIODS, HOW MUCH IS OBLIGATED FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND WHAT THE PROJECTION IS FOR THE FUTURE. THEN YOU'LL HAVE THAT INFORMATION GOING INTO THE BUDGET PROCESS FOR NEXT YEAR.

>> I WANT TO CLEAR SOMETHING UP. I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET IT DOWN TO THE DOLLAR, BUT AS OFFICIAL POLICY OF THE CITY, WE STILL CONFUSE PEOPLE BECAUSE WE CAN'T AGREE ON WHAT WAS MISSPENT, MISALLOCATED OVER HERE. AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE COME DOWN TO A POINT WE'VE GOT HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW AND I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A STATEMENT THIS IS WHAT WE DON'T KNOW AND CLOSE THE BOOK. WE TEND TO LEAVE AND ONE COUNCILMEMBER TELLS PEOPLE WE'RE NOT MISSING MONEY. IT WAS ALL SPENT CORRECTLY AND I'M OUT THERE GOING NO ONE CAN FIGURE IT OUT. AT SOME POINT WE GOT TO OWN UP TO IT AND BE HONEST AND SAY EVERYTHING. THAT WAY WHEN ANYBODY UP HERE GOES ON THIS ROUTE OF OH, NO, THE MONEY WAS ALL SPENT CORRECTLY, WE KNOW WHERE IT'S AT, WE CAN PULL OUT THAT STATEMENT AND SAY THAT'S NOT TRUE. WE HAVEN'T GOT TO THAT POINT YET BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE STILL IN DENIAL. IT'S MY OPINION THE SOONER I TALK TO JAMES ABOUT THIS AND WE GET BRUTALLY HONEST WITH THE PUBLIC WHAT HAPPENED, WHAT STEPS WE'RE TAKING, THEN WE CAN ASK FOR MORE MONEY IN BONDS. UNTIL WE CAN DO THAT, WE'LL GET CRUCIFIED WHEN THAT DAY COMES AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO. WE'VE GOT A MOTION, ANY MORE DISCUSSION?

>> I HAD A QUESTION. HAVING THAT SPECIAL CERTIFICATE IN THERE BECAUSE WE ONLY GOT TWO, IS THAT PROBLEMATIC OR WHAT

DOES THAT MEAN? >> I'M THE CITY'S BOND COUNSEL.

WE DISCUSSED THAT THIS MORNING. THE PURCHASER OF THE BOND, BAIRD, THEY HAVE TO HOLD THESE MATURITIES A DIFFERENT WAY, HOLD THE PRICE, GET EVERYTHING IN ORDER AND ARE WILLING TO DO WHAT'S NECESSARY TO PROVIDE THAT CERTIFICATION BECAUSE THEY ONLY RECEIVED TWO BIDS INSTEAD OF THE THREE.

>> THAT DOESN'T DRAW OUT THE PRICE OR COST?

>> NO. WHEN THE BIDS COME IN, THEY DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BIDDERS THERE WILL BE. YOU WOULD SUBMIT TWO BIDS AND THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AFTER THAT. IT DIDN'T AFFECT THEIR PRICING AT ALL. I KNOW IT'S A BLIND BIDDING PROCESS UNTIL THE BIDS ARE RELEASED AND YOU FIND OUT

HOW MANY THERE WERE. >> UNDERSTAND, THANK YOU.

>> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCIL KOLAR?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> NAY. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY?

[10.2. Consideration and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2023-024 to amend Article 2.05, Financial Disclosure and Standards of Conduct of the Hutto City Code to provide for the Financial Disclosure Form to be filed by Elected and Appointed Officials (Second Reading) (Legal) ]

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES. 6-1. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 10.2, CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 0-2023-024 TO AMEND ARTICLE 2.05, FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT OF THE HUTTO CITY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM TO BE FILED BY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS. THE FORM IN HERE IS NOT THE ONE WE APPROVED ON FIRST READING THAT WAS IN THE PACKET. WE APPROVED THE LONG FORM AND LOOKED LIKE THE ONE IN THERE WAS A THREE OR FOUR PAGER.

>> I THOUGHT I TOOK THE FORM FROM THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION AND JUST REMOVED ALL THE INFORMATION THAT PERTAINED TO THAT FORM, THAT FORM NUMBER, THE FORM INSTRUCTION. THAT'S WHY IT'S SHORTER. ALSO THERE WERE PROVISIONS TO DISCLOSE PAYMENT TO LOBBYISTS WHICH REALLY DIDN'T APPLY. SO I TOOK THOSE OUT. SO I BELIEVE I AMENDED THE FORM PURSUANT TO

[01:20:02]

YOUR INSTRUCTIONS. >> IT LOOKS EXACTLY WHAT I

WANTED US TO SEE. >> THAT'S WHAT YOU WANTED TO SEE. I DIDN'T BECAUSE THIS TAKES OUT A LOT OF --

>> IT COVERS ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY, ALL FEES, SALARIES OR GIFT SECTIONS AND BUSINESS INTERESTS IN THE CITY THAT HAS ANY CONTRACTS, GIFTS, FEES OR OTHER STUFF, ANY REAL PROPERTY

YOU OWN. >> RIGHT. IT DOESN'T SAY WHO YOU OWE MONEY TO. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW YOU MAY OWN A $150,000 CAR, BUT WHO DO YOU OWE THE MONEY TO? YOU MAY OWN A HOME, BUT WHO DO YOU OWE THAT MONEY TO? DEBT GETS PEOPLE TO VOTE A CERTAIN WAY BECAUSE THERE MAY BE SOME SPECIAL THING THAT SOMEONE'S GETTING FROM A CERTAIN BANK BECAUSE THEY'RE VOTING FOR SOMETHING BECAUSE THE BANK HAS GOT A LUCRATIVE DEAL WITH THE DEVELOPER. THIS IS MISSING A LOT OF DIFFERENT DETAILS. IF WE'RE GOING TO PASS THIS, WE SHOULDN'T EVEN DO IT BECAUSE THIS WON'T COVER ANYTHING.

>> I THINK THIS IS MORE THAN FINE FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. IF YOU WANT TO FILL OUT THE LONG FORM AND POST IT TO YOUR WEBSITE, HEY, NO ONE IS STOPPING YOU FROM DOING THAT.

>> HERE'S SOME OF THE THINGS THE PUBLIC WANTS TO KNOW. THEY EVEN WANT TO KNOW, SOMETHING TO DO WITH CREDIT, DO PEOPLE HAVE LIENS AGAINST THEM LIKE MECHANIC LIENS BECAUSE WE'RE UP HERE MAKING THESE MILLION DOLLAR DECISIONS AND BORROW MONEY AND SELL DEBT AND IT'S OKAY TO RAISE PEOPLE'S TAXES, BUT I'VE HAD LOTS OF PEOPLE GO WHAT ARE YOUR GUYS' FINANCES LIKE? THEY WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH DO WE OWE, WHO TO? ARE WE GOOD STEWARDS OF OUR MONEY? HAVE WE FILED BANKRUPTCY FOUR TIMES IN OUR LIFETIME. THERE'S PEOPLE THAT WANT TO KNOW IF YOU'RE GOING TO RAISE MY TAXES AND MESS WITH MY MORTGAGE AND SELL BONDS AND SELL US ALL THIS STUFF, I'VE HAD A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY GO THEY WANT THE DETAIL. THEY WANT TO KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL WHEN IT COMES

TO FINANCES. >> PEOPLE HAVE AND WHEN THEY FOUND BANKRUPTCY, THEY'VE PLASTERED IT ALL OVER SOCIAL

MEDIA. >> THEY'LL HAVE YOUR REAL PROPERTY. THIS HE CAN PULL UP YOUR TAX RATE AND WHAT YOU OWE

AND THE VALUE. >> THOSE PEOPLE TAKE THE TIME

TO DIG ALL THAT UP. >> THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE.

>> IF YOU'RE IN HAWK AND OWE $1.2 MILLION TO A BANK, THAT

HAPPENS TO BE UP HERE. >> IF I OWE A BANK $1.2 MILLION, I DON'T THINK I'D BE LIVING IN HUTTO.

>> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE AN ETHICS COMMITTEE. THEY CAN FILE A CHARGE AND DO DISCOVERY. AT SOME POINT THERE IS SOME LEVEL OF TRUST OF WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO BECAUSE THIS IS ALSO GOING TO EXPAND TO EMPLOYEE CANDIDATES, ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUT ALSO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LGCS.

>> THE ONE WE PUT ON HOLD ALREADY DID ALL THAT. THIS IS NOT AN EXPANSION. THIS IS A WATERED DOWN VERSION OF WHAT WE

ALREADY HAD. >> THE ONE WE WERE USING DIDN'T

APPLY TO A CITY OUR SIZE. >> YOU TAKE OUT THE PARTICULAR

LAW AND IT APPLIES AGAIN. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AS PRESENTED AND SECOND READING. NO ONE CAME UP AND SAID THEY WEREN'T HAPPY WITH THIS FORM. I MOTION WE APPROVE

THIS AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND IT AND TO REPLACE THIS WITH A COPY WE APPROVED ON FIRST READING, THE FULL LONG FORM WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE STATE LAW.

>> NO, I DON'T AGREE TO THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>> I SAID JUST AMENDMENT. >> THAT'S COMPLETELY CHANGING THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE MOTION. YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON MY MOTION FIRST. YOU CAN'T SAY COMPLETELY FORGET --

>> I DID AN AMENDMENT THIS IS HOW IT WORKS. YOU MADE A MOTION. COUNCIL KINSEY SECONDED. I THEN AMENDED YOUR MOTION BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS WATERED DOWN AND I WANTED TO GO BACK TO WHAT WE PASSED FIRST READING AND I GOT A SECOND FROM COUNCIL THORNTON. NOW WE'LL DISCUSS THAT MOTION AND VOTE.

DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE DEPENDS ON THE OUTCOME OF

YOURS. >> GOT YOU.

>> I AGREE WITH MAYOR IT DOESN'T REFLECT THE FORM THAT WAS APPROVED LAST COUNCIL MEETING. I KNOW IT'S KIND OF

[01:25:02]

KICKING IT TO THE NEXT WEEK, BUT IF WE CAN GET THOSE, MAYBE IT WAS AN ADMINISTRATIVE THING THAT HAPPENED. I'M IN FAVOR OF JUST THE REGULAR ETHICS COMMISSION WHERE I WAS LAST

COUNCIL MEETING AND PRIOR TO. >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION. THE PARTS THAT YOU REMOVED THAT YOU SAID WEREN'T APPLICABLE, IF THEY'RE LEFT IN AND DON'T APPLY TO US, WE CAN SKIP THAT PAGE,

RIGHT? >> ONE OF THE PARTS WAS IF YOU'RE A STATE LEGISLATOR, YOU FILLED OUT THIS PART OF THE FORM. SO I TOOK THAT OUT BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT A STATE

LEGISLATOR. >> HOLD ON. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNCIL, I WOULD SAY YOU KEEP THAT IN THERE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THERE'S A SPECIFIC A.G. OPINION THAT SAYS THE LEGISLATIVE PART YOU WOULD RESIGN TO RUN, BUT SOME OF THE STUFF WHEN WE GET TO LOBBYING AND THINGS, I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY UP HERE ISN'T A LOBBYIST OR THE NEXT GROUP OF PEOPLE COULD BE. OUTSIDE OF THE LEGISLATOR ALONE BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS DIE HARD YOU CAN'T BE BOTH POSITIONS, THE REST OF THAT STUFF, I DON'T KNOW.

>> YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT. WE'VE GOT TO TRUST AT SOME POINT, BUT I WOULD SAY YOU'VE GOT TO EARN THE TRUST BEFORE YOU GET THE TRUST AND I DON'T KNOW ALL SEVEN OF US HAVE DONE ANYTHING

AS A COUNCIL. >> BELIEVE ME, THOSE PEOPLE

LOOK AND TRY. >> I'M SURE.

>> I KNOW YOU DO. >> SEEING NO DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT TO GO BACK TO THE LONG FORM WITHOUT REFERENCE OF WHATEVER THAT WAS. WHAT WAS THE BILL?

>> CHAPTER -- THERE'S A GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION AND THEN I BELIEVE IT WAS 145 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.

>> LAST TIME WE SAID TAKE THE 145 OUT.

>> RIGHT. THERE WAS ALSO A GOVERNMENT CODE REFERENCE, TOO, ON THERE AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO INSTRUCTIONS INSTRUCTIONS.

>> SAME FORMS, NO REFERENCE TO 145 OR TEXAS, 100,000 PEOPLE

AND ALL THAT BUT SAME FORMS. >> YES.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE'RE VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT TO ADD IN THE LONG FORM. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER SUTTON? >> NAY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? >> NAY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KINSEY? >> NAY.

>> MOTION TO AMENDMENT PASSES 4-3.

>> SO THEN THIS PASSED TO ADD THAT TO BE THE AMENDMENT TO

CHANGE IT TO THAT AMENDMENT. >> YES.

>> NOW WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION?

>> OKAY. BEFORE WE DO THAT MY QUESTION IS IF WE GO TO THE LONG FORM, IF YOU'RE NOW THIS, WHO IS IT GOING TO APPLY TO? IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT, WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT DEADLINES BECAUSE I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE FORM OF STATEMENT I THINK WE NEED TO STRIKE THE SECTION WHERE IT SAYS --

>> WE JUST ADD IN THE FORM WHO IT APPLIES IS THE SAME FROM

WHAT WAS IN HERE. >> WHICH WAS BROKEN BECAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, IT HAS IN HERE THAT IF YOU'RE A CANDIDATE -- UNLESS IT CHANGED IN THE FORM THAT I READ BEFORE. BUT IT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION OR 20 DAYS AFTER FILING PERIOD CLOSES. AND I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY FOR CANDIDATES, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST STRIKE THE, BECAUSE IT SAID WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE 20 DAYS.

YOU SAY 20 DAYS AFTER OR 5 DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. YOU SHOULDN'T SAY BOTH. IT WOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER.

>> WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT? >> WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR IS FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION BECAUSE THAT'S AFTER TAX DAY, AND IT'S AFTER YOU'VE DONE YOUR TAXES SO YOU HAVE THE DATA, AND IT'S EASIER TO FILL OUT THE FORM. A LOT OF PEOPLE WON'T BE

[01:30:01]

ABLE TO FILL IT OUT IF WE HAD FILING PERIODS. IT WOULD BE LIKE MARCH 1ST OR SOMETHING. THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE THEIR 1099

TO FILL IT OUT EASILY. >> 1099 WON'T BE NEEDED FOR

THIS. >> I MEANT K1.

>> IT'S NOT NEEDED TO KNOW. THOSE AREN'T IN K1S --

>> WELL, THERE IS LEGAL DOCUMENTS FOR TAXES AND ALL THESE PURPOSES YOU MIGHT NOT GET IF YOU'RE CANDIDATE FILING BY 20 DAYS AFTER THE FILING PERIOD.

>> I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONCERN IS --

>> RIGHT, SO -- >> STOCKS DON'T GO IN K1S.

THAT'S A BUSINESS INTEREST. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> 1099 IS INCOME. >> BUT IT'S POSSIBLE YOUR K1 COULD DETERMINE THE OWNERSHIP YOU HAVE AND THAT COULD CHANGE THE BOX YOU HAVE TO CHECK IN THE FORM, SO K1S CAN ALSO APPLY BECAUSE THE LONG FORM HAS EVERYTHING ABOUT TRUSTS AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT AND LIMITED LIABILITY --

>> OKAY -- >> NOT THIS SIMPLE ONE, IT'S

NOT IN THIS PACKET. >> THIS IS IMPORTANT HERE. ON THIS DETAILED ONE, WHEN YOU PUT YOUR BUSINESS INTEREST DOWN --

>> YEP. >> IT'S NOT ASKING YOU FOR THE PERCENT OF THE BUSINESS, IS IT?

>> YES. >> WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT.

>> WELL, THE THING IS LIKE 70 PAGES.

>> IT'S NOT 70 PAGES. IT'S LIKE 30.

>> MY POINT IS I THINK THAT SHOULD BE THE ONE CHANGE --

>> WELL, LET'S NOT SKIP ON IT. I'VE FILLED THIS OUT. YOU DON'T PUT THE PERCENT. I WANT TO HELP YOU OR YOU HELP ME. IF A K1 NEEDS TO GO BY PERCENTAGES, I THINK YOU MAKE A GREAT POINT. I DON'T THINK IT DOES THAT. I THINK YOU JUST NEED TO LIST WHAT OWNERSHIP YOU HAVE IN A COMPANY, WHICH YOU OUGHT TO KNOW. YOU DON'T GET SURPRISED WITH A PIECE OF MAIL THAT SAYS

I OWN 51% OF A COMPANY. >> I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS TOO MUCH, I'M JUST SAYING RIGHT NOW THERE WAS TWO DATES. WE COULD NEVER HAVE THE OTHER DATE HAPPEN --

>> THE DATE OF FIVE DAYS BEFORE.

>> I'M JUST SAYING MAKE IT FIVE DAYS BEFORE. THAT'S ALL I'M

SAYING. >> ALL RIGHT, I'LL MAKE A

MOTION -- >> WAIT, WE HAVE THE MOTION HE MADE. ARE YOU TWO OKAY TO ADD IN THE FIVE DAYS BEFORE?

>> FOR CANDIDATES. >> THIS IS NOT WHAT WAS IN THE PACKET AT ALL. THIS IS NOT WHAT WAS POSTED, AND I'VE HEARD SO MANY TIMES WHY WOULD YOU PASS SOMETHING WITHOUT THE COMPLETED THING IN FRONT OF YOU, AND NOW ON THE FLY WE'RE TRYING TO DO ALL THESE OTHER AMENDMENTS, SO NO, IT'S NOT FRIENDLY.

>> OKAY. >> SO ADDING THE DATE IS NOT -- POSTPONE THIS TO MAY 4TH, AND I KNOW WHOEVER WINS THE ELECTION WOULD HAVE TO FILE THEIR STUFF.

>> AND WHO IT APPLIES TO. >> IT SAYS WHO IT APPLIES TO AND HAS THE DATES. WE PASSED THIS ON THE FIRST READING. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SURPRISE THING. THE ONLY THING IS DATE IS DOING IS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO DO IT EITHER 20 DAYS AFTER YOU FILE OR FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. IF I UNDERSTAND, HE'S JUST SAYING YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO IT FIVE DAYS

BEFORE. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND TO STRIKE THE 20TH DAY AFTER THE DEADLINE FILING.

>> WHEN YOU SAY THIS, DO YOU MEAN THE ONE IN THE PACKET POSTED FOR THE PUBLIC OR THIS FROM TWO WEEKS AGO, CORRECT?

>> THIS FROM TWO WEEKS AGO BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOTION THAT

ALREADY PASSED. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> ARE YOU SAYING THIS AS IN THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR?

>> ON THE FLOOR TO PASS THE FORM WE AMENDED.

>> SO THE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM AS AMENDED, THAT'S THE

PROPER WORDING? >> OKAY, SO --

>> THAT ONE'S ALREADY PASSED. >> SO ANY DISCUSSION ON

STRIKING THE 20 DAYS? >> YEAH, I'M GIVING THANK YOU EXACT SECTION BECAUSE IT'S UNDER THE AGENDA POINT, SO IT'S

UNDER SECTION -- >> WHAT PAGE?

>> CITY CODE SECTION 205.043 SECTION D REMOVE PART 1.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT SAYS THE 20TH DAY AFTER THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPLICATION FOR PLACE ON BALLOT FOR THE ELECTION.

>> AND ALSO REMOVE THE WORDS THE EARLIER OF.

[01:35:02]

>> RIGHT. RIGHT. YEAH, SO GET RID OF THE EARLIER OF AND IT JUST SAYS NO LATER THAN THE FIFTH DAY BEFORE THE DATE OF

THE ELECTION. >> QUESTIONS ON REMOVING THE 20 DAY LANGUAGE? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> THORNTON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> WAS THAT 6-1 OR 5-2? >> 6-1.

>> MOTION PASSES. THE UNDERLYING MOTION AS AMENDED, THE LONG FORM FROM TWO WEEKS AGO WITH THE OTHER LANGUAGE REPRESENTING 100,000 PERSON CITIES OUT, AND THE 20 DAYS AFTER THE, UM, FILING, THAT LONG REMOVED.

>> RIGHT. SO THERE'S TWO OTHER PROBLEMS WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THOUGH BECAUSE IT SAYS DEADLINE FOR THIS YEAR IS MAY 1ST, BUT WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE UPDATED FORM, AND THERE'S NO WAY THEY'LL GET THAT FORM OUT TO THE CANDIDATES THAT AREN'T EVEN AT CITY HALL TO THEN FILE FOR MAY 1ST. AND THEN THE QUESTION IS WHEN IS OURS SINCE TECHNICALLY IT'S AFTER, IT'S APRIL 30TH, BUT THAT'S TEN DAYS FROM NOW. WE ALSO DON'T HAVE THE FORM YET. MY QUESTION IS, ARE WE GOING TO SAY FOR THIS ONE YEAR IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, JUNE 1ST OR SOMETHING FOR THIS YEAR? THAT WAY YOU GET PAST ALL THE CANDIDATE, OR JULY 1ST IN CASE THERE'S A RUN OFF? I'M JUST SAYING FOR THIS ONE

YEAR. >> SO THE ORDINANCE HAS A PROVISION THAT YOU CAN ASK FOR A 60-DAY EXTENSION AND THE SECRETARY WILL GRANT THE REQUEST IF RECEIVED BEFORE THE

FILING DEADLINE. >> SO I MAKE A MOTION THAT ALL COUNCIL GETS A 60-DAY EXTENSION BEFORE THE FILING DATE SO NO

ONE IS HIT -- >> AND CANDIDATES?

>> CANDIDATES TOO. LET'S BE REALISTIC, THEY NEED TIME TO

FILL IT OUT. >> MOTION BY CLARK, SECONDED BY

THORNTON. >> BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED TO DO IT ON THE ELECTION? WHY HAVE THE CANDIDATE THAT DIDN'T

WIN HAVE TO TURN IN THE FORM? >> WELL, IT SAYS THEY HAVE TO DO IT BY FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION RIGHT NOW, SO THEY'LL BE IN VIOLATION FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE SITTING COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO ARE CANDIDATES.

>> CORRECT. >> SO WE SHOULD JUST EXTEND IT

FOR EVERYONE FOR 60 DAYS. >> BUT THEN, IF IT'S AFTER THE

ELECTION -- >> WELL, THEY'RE NO LONGER A

CANDIDATE. >> OKAY, OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE DON'T GET MAD IF THEY DON'T GET ELECTED.

>> IT'S LIKE YOU'RE DEBATING YOUR OWN MOTION.

>> NO, NO. >> 60 DAY EXTENSION WITH THE

SECOND, STILL DOING IT? >> LET'S DO IT.

>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT AMENDMENT?

>> AND IT'S FROM APRIL 30TH. A 60-DAY EXTENSION FROM APRIL

30TH. >> AND WE CAN LEGALLY CHANGE

THIS DOCUMENT, DOTTIE? >> WELL, YOU'RE CHANGING IT A LOT ON SECOND READING TO, UM --

>> AREN'T WE JUST CHANGING IT BACK TO WHAT IT WAS ON THE

FIRST READING, THOUGH? >> YEAH, AND JUST FIXING THE

DATES. >> BUT REMOVING STUFF.

>> YOU CAN REMOVE STUFF. >> THE DATE.

>> ADDING STUFF IN THAT WASN'T THERE WAS HARDER.

>> I WAS JUST CLARIFYING. >> WELL, THE WAY IT'S POSTED IS CONCERNING THE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM. IF YOU'RE CHANGING, IF YOU'RE JUST, YOU'RE STILL REQUIRING IT TO BE FILED FIVE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. YOU'RE JUST REMOVING THE CONFUSING LANGUAGE, SO YOU'RE CLARIFYING. THEN YOU'RE EXCUSING PEOPLE FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE OF NOT ENOUGH TIME.

I'LL PUT THAT IN THE IMPACTED DATE.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> AND THEN THE FORM, YOU WANT ALL THAT LOBBYING STUFF IN THERE THAT DOESN'T REALLY APPLY

TO YOU? >> I THINK THAT MAKES IT MORE

CONFUSING. >> THE WHOLE SECOND PAGE IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, N/A. IF IT DOESN'T APPLY, JUST SLIDE

THROUGH IT. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE VOTING ON THE 60 DAY EXTENSION. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? HEARING NONE.

>> I HAD ONE QUESTION. THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TO REQUIRE COPIES TO EACH PERSON WITHIN A CERTAIN TIME FRAME. DOES THAT MATTER?

>> I'M SORRY, WOULD YOU ASK THAT AGAIN?

>> THE CITY SECRETARY IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE COPIES OF THE FORM TO THOSE WHO ARE REQUIRED TO FILL IT OUT BY A CERTAIN DEADLINE IN THERE. SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO

[01:40:03]

MEET THE DEADLINES EITHER. >> BECAUSE THE DEADLINES ARE EXCUSED FOR NOW, SO WE'LL HAVE TO WORK ON --

>> BUT DOES SHE STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE COPIES TO US? I DON'T WANT THAT EXCUSED. I WANT, I STILL WANT THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY SECRETARY TO PROVIDE TO CANDIDATES AND TO OFFICE

HOLDERS THE FORM. >> RIGHT, I'LL WORK WITH ANGELA ON HER, WHAT IS IT, RULES AND PROCEDURES, AND THEN HOW SHE

GETS IT OUT TO THE CANDIDATES. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> GORDON AYE. >> KINSEY NAY.

>> MOTION PASSES 5-2. NOW WE'LL VOTE ON THE AS AMENDED DISCLOSURE TEXAS 45 AND LANGUAGE TO THE HUNDRED THOUSAND PERSON CITY WITH THE 20 DAYS AFTER FILING REQUIREMENT AND THE 60-DAY, WHAT'S THE WORD?

>> WELL, I THINK IT'S NOT JUST CANDIDATES OR CITY COUNCIL.

>> WELL, THAT'S NOT THE MOTION YOU MADE.

>> I'M JUST SAYING, THEY STILL DON'T HAVE A FORM. IT'S THE

SAME PROBLEM. >> IT'S TAKING US LONGER TO APPROVE THIS THAN IT WILL TAKE TO FILL IT OUT.

>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT. >> IT HAS, I COULD HAVE DONE

THIS IN FIVE MINUTES. >> ME TOO.

>> I'LL JUST CALL THE VOTE. >> IS FINAL THING WITH ALL THE

AMENDMENTS? >> THAT'S NOT IN FRONT OF US.

>> I FOUND IT. >> I'M JUST SAYING.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> THORNTON. >> AYE.

[11.1. Consideration and possible action on Resolution 2023-090 authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with The Directors of Chaos (DOC) for management of the Brushy Creek Amphitheater (Kristi Barnes) ]

>> SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 6-1. NEXT ITEM, CONSIDERATION FOR POSSIBLE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DIRECTORS OF CHAOS DOC FOR MANAGEMENT OF

BRUSHY CREEK AMPHITHEATER. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. YOU HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION IN THE PACKET AS FAR AS PROPOSAL, SO MY PART WILL BE BRIEF, AND THEN I'LL INTRODUCE THE DIRECTORS OF CHAOS HERE THIS EVENING TO DO A BRIEF PRESENTATION. BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM COMMUNITY SURVEY AND ENGAGEMENT OVER THE PAST YEAR OR SO TO INCLUDE, UM, THE AFTERMATH OF THE NOISE ABATMENT STUDY, STAFF IDENTIFIED THE NEED FOR A FORMAL PARTNERSHIP WITH A THIRD PARTY VENDOR TO MANAGE AND PRODUCE ENTERTAINMENTS EVENTS THAT CELEBRATE THE DIVERSITY AT BRUSHY CREEK AMPHITHEATER. WE RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD WITH THE DIRECTORS OF CHAOS BASED ON THEIR PROPOSAL AND TERMS OUTLINED IN THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT. I WANTED TO MAKE NOTE OF A FEW ITEMS THAT STAND OUT TO US FROM THE OTHER VENDORS THAT SUBMITTED, AND THAT WAS THEIR INCORPORATION OF COMMUNITY EVENTS, THE DOCK SCHOOL TRAINING FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS WITHIN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY, THEIR LOCAL BUSINESS GROWTH STRATEGY, TALENT BY EXPERIENCE, THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF THE NOISE ABAITMENT STUDY AND CITY ORDINANCES, AND A FEW OTHERS.

AND NOW, HERE ARE THE DIRECTORS OF CHAOS.

>> I JUST HAVE TO SAY, THAT'S A PRETTY AWESOME INTRODUCTION.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT. HELLO. THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING US TONIGHT. I'M CHRIS STONE. I'M IN CHARGE OF BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS AT THE DOCK. I HAVE YEARS OF EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE WITH ARTIST VENUE AND FLOOR MANAGEMENT. I RELOCATED TO

[01:45:01]

TEXAS DURING THE PANDEMIC TO HELP REVIVE THE MUSIC INDUSTRY.

RELATIONS THROUGH THE DOCK. I BEGAN MY CAREER AS A BROADCAST OPERATION SPECIALIST FOR THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY WHILE STUDYING FILM IN NEW YORK, AND I'M HEAVILY EXPERIENCED IN OPERATING VENUES AND PRODUCING LARGE SCALE

EVENTS. >> I THINK WE NEED, WE GOT

SLIDES. >> I THINK WE'VE GOT SLIDES.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE A CLIFF'S NOTES VERSION TO SAVE TIME. WE PLAN TO OPERATE TEN PLUS CONCERTS FROM JULY TO THE END OF 2023 STARTING WITH LOWER CAPACITY EVENTS IN THE SUMMER TO MINIMIZE RISK AND GROW THE VENUE IN THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR TO ENSURE A STRONG 2024 CALENDAR.

>> AS FAR AS SOUND, WE'RE DESIGNING SYSTEMS TO REDUCE SOUND LEVELS ESCAPING THE PARK. WE WILL LIMIT THOSE DECIBEL LEVELS DURING SHOWS BY INCLUDING LANGUAGE IN ARTIST CONTRACTS AND WILL FOCUS ON BOOKING GENRES THAT DON'T RELY ON THE LOUDNESS AND BASS. WE'RE GEARING MORE TOWARDS COUNTRY, CLASSIC ROCK, COMEDY, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. ESPECIALLY IN

THE BEGINNING. >> WE PLAN ON EXECUTING COMMUNITY EVENT IDEAS WITH VARIOUS OCCASIONS. WE'LL CREATE A FLEXIBLE FRAMEWORK TO DELIVER FAMILY FRIENDLY PROGRAMMING IN ADDITION TO CONCERTS TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY SOMETHING TO LOOK FORWARD TO. THE FIRM WILL WORK TOWARDS INCREASING CAPACITY AS WELL, COORDINATING WITH MULTIPLE VENDORS. WE'LL PROVIDE AND SECTION OFF VENDOR SPACE FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES SUCH AS FOOD TRUCKS AND RETAIL SUPPLIERS. WE'RE ALSO EXCITED TO BRING OUR DOCK SCHOOL PROGRAM TO PROVIDE JOBS FOR RESIDENTS AND TRAIN THEM FOR THE REST OF THEIR CAREERS.

>> YEAH, THERE'S REFERENCES IN THERE. MORE ABOUT US, A PROPOSED SCHEDULE. WANT TO GET DOWN TO THE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS. FINANCIALLY WE'RE PROPOSING PROVIDING THE CITY A $3 PER TICKET CHARGE THAT GOES IN ON EVERY TICKET, AS WELL AS 15% OF THE NET SALES ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EACH EVENT. THE CITY WOULDN'T TAKE PART IN ANY LOSSES AND WOULD BE FULLY INSTITUTED FROM ANY FINANCIAL RISK. THIS EXAMPLE MODEL THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED IN THE PACKET IS BASED ON A THEORETICAL EVENT WITH 6,000 TICKETS SOLD, LIQUOR SOLD IN HOUSE, AND A PROMOTER PLUS TICKETING DEAL STRUCTURE. .

ONCE WE BEGIN THE ARTIST PROCESS, WE CAN UPDATE THIS.

EVERY SHOW IS DIFFERENT. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'RE HAPPY TO

ANSWER THEM. >> QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

>> I'M TRYING TO FIND WHERE I SAW IT IN THE AGREEMENT, BUT ONE PART OF THE LANGUAGE I WANT CHANGED IS WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT THE $3 FEE. IT SPECIFIES THAT YOU GUYS GET TO DIRECT THE IMPROVEMENTS ITS SPENT ON, AND I WANTED IT CONTROLLED COMPLETELY BY US. YOU CAN PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT

NEEDED TO BE CHANGED. >> HAPPY TO ASSIST.

>> IT SAYS RECOMMENDED BY THEM AND APPROVED BY THE CITY.

>> WHICH NUMBER? >> 5.1. BUT I AGREE. WE ALWAYS WANT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT ULTIMATELY YOU CAN RECOMMEND THREE GREAT IDEAS, AND WE'LL COME UP WITH A FOURTH HORRIBLE ONE, AND THAT'S THE ONE WE GO WITH.

>> YEAH, NO PROBLEM. WE'RE HERE TO HELP.

>> UM, I DO HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. WHERE ARE Y'ALL BASED OUT OF, AND I GUESS HOW WOULD THIS OPERATE?

>> WE BOTH LIVE IN AUSTIN. IF THIS GOES FORWARD, I'LL ACTUALLY BE MOVING UP HERE. I'LL BE VERY LOCAL.

>> OKAY. >> THAT'S HOW THAT WOULD WORK.

VENUES DO Y'ALL WORK WITH CURRENTLY?

>> WE WERE RUNNING A COMPANY DOWN IN AUSTIN, AND BEFORE THAT I OPENED NASSAU COLISEUM IN NEW YORK, I RAN SIX ENTERTAIN

COMPLEXES IN FORT LAUDERDALE. >> I WAS THE TOUR MANAGER FOR

SEAN MENDES AND JASON DERULO. >> AND WHAT KIND OF TALENTS

HAVE YOU WORKED PREVIOUSLY? >> THE LAST EVENT WE WERE RUNNING DIRECTLY, ACTUALLY HELPED PUT THE PRODUCTION

[01:50:03]

PACKAGE TOGETHER FOR THE LAST ASIAN BIKE MARKET IN THE PARK.

>> Y'ALL WERE A PART OF THAT? >> YEAH. AND THEN FLOAT FEST IN

GONZALEZ WITH VAMPIRE WEEKEND. >> DEADMAUS.

>> SPRINGSTEEN. >> AND I GUESS, AS FAR AS LIKE YOUR VISION FOR IT. YOU PROBABLY GET USED TO IT AND START SMALL, AND THEN KIND OF FIGURE IT OUT, NAVIGATE, I GUESS KIND OF WHAT DO YOU, I GUESS, SEE OR PROJECT AS LIKE

POTENTIAL, UM, ARTISTS? >> I WANT TO SEE BANDS LIKE KISS PLAY HERE. LIKE REALLY BIG BANDS, YOU KNOW. JAMES TAYLOR,

JASON ALDEAN. >> YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. WE'LL BE, AS I SAID, TALENT BOOKING CYCLES WORK SO YOU HAVE TO BE SIX TO NINE MONTHS AHEAD TO GET THE TOUR RIGHTS, SO WE'LL BE DOING GOOD TO GET 3,000, 4,000 CAPACITY EVENTS IN THE SUMMER, AND THEN TRYING TO GET THE BETTER TARGETS IN THE FALL, AND GETTING THE PLACE ON A NICE FOUNDATION TO ROLL OUT A VERY STRONG 2024. I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO DIRECT ARTISTS UNTIL I

START THE PROCESS. >> YEAH, FAIR.

>> AND WE'RE ALSO HAPPY, THAT'S ONE THING WE WANT TO DO IS HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS, FROM Y'ALL, WHAT ARTISTS Y'ALL THINK WOULD BE A GOOD FIT HERE, AND WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO WORK OUR

CONNECTIONS. >> AND ONE OF OUR MAIN GOALS IS TRY TO GET LOCAL TALENT TO OPEN UP FOR GREAT BANDS AND GIVE THEM POSITIONS WHERE THEY'D NEVER HAVE A SHOT ELSEWHERE.

>> AS WELL AS ALTERNATIVE REVENUE IDEAS LIKE DOING WATER PARK KIND OF STUFF AND FOOD FESTIVALS.

>> BARBECUE FESTIVALS. >> WE'RE TALKING TO A RODEO GROUP, BULL RIDING GROUP. WE WANT TO UTILIZE THE SPACE IN A

VARIETY OF WAYS. >> THANK YOU.

>> ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD IS, YOU KNOW, WE DID, WITH VERY SUCCESSFUL, KIND OF THE MAYOR HELPED FIND AND BRING WAS THE IBCA SHOWDOWN AND THE NATIONAL BARBECUE THING, AND I'M CURIOUS DOES THIS COMPLETELY DISRUPT THAT IF WE AGREE TO THIS OR HOW WOULD THAT WORK? I KNOW CERTAIN FESTIVALS ARE PROTECTED, BUT THAT'S ONE OF MY THINGS. I DON'T KNOW IF

YOU CAN SPEAK TO THAT? >> YES, GOOD EVENING AGAIN. IN THE AGREEMENT, UM, AND ESPECIALLY AS WE START, IF THESE, IF THIS MOVES FORWARD AS CHRIS AND TIM DESCRIBE, WE WOULD START FOUNDATIONALLY AND HAVE OVERSIGHT AS FAR AS WHAT IS APPROVED AND ISN'T APPROVED. IF THERE ARE EVENTS, ANNUAL EVENTS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE, WE WILL KIND OF, WE WILL WORK WITH THOSE VENDORS DIRECTLY, ESPECIALLY KNOWING, I BELIEVE JENNY WAS, UM, THE EVENT COORDINATOR. SO WE DEFINITELY HAVE THOSE EARMARKED, AND MOVING FORWARD HOW THAT WORKS TOGETHER, WE'LL BUILD THAT OUT FOUNDATIONALLY. WE WANT TO BE SURE WE'RE KEEPING THE ANNUAL EVENTS ANNUAL LIKE THE 4TH OF JULY COMMUNITY EVENT, THE GOAL IS TO REMAIN FREE AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC SO SPRINKLING THOSE IN ALONG WITH REGIONAL, STATE, AND NATIONAL TALENT ENTERTAINMENT AS WELL.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> IDEALLY WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE A PARTNERSHIP. WE WANT TO HELP YOU PUT THOSE THINGS ON AND MAKE THEM BIGGER, BETTER, MORE STREAMLINED. BUT WE WANT TO BE A PART OF THOSE EVENTS WHETHER OR NOT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A BIG CASH COW FOR US OR NOT. I THINK CREATING A STRONG COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT AROUND PROJECTS LIKE THIS ARE

PARAMOUNT TO OUR SUCCESS. >> I KNOW YOU SAID YOUR GOAL IS TEN, BUT THIS IS ONE OF OUR LARGER CITY PARKS.

>> YEAH. >> SO EVERY WEEKEND IS TIED UP, IT'S LIKE WELL WE HAVE FEES WHERE PEOPLE CAN RENT A BIRTHDAY PARTY, BUT IF IT'S TIED UP, IT'S WHEN DOES ANYONE GET TO USE THE PARK AS A NATURE PARK.

>> YEAH, SURE. I MEAN, RIGHT NOW FOR THE LARGER EVENTS, EVEN AT TEN, THAT WOULD BE ONE OR TWO A MONTH. NEXT YEAR WE'RE TRYING TO DO 20 OR 30, BUT IT EQUALS OUT, HITS A LITTLE HARDER, BUT IT'S REALLY JUST ONE OR TWO LARGER EVENTS AND THE REST WOULD BE MORE COMMUNITY GEARED AND MORE OF THE KIND OF ALTERNATIVE IDEAS LIKE THE FOOD FESTIVALS AND BARBECUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> OKAY. >> I LOVE IT. I'M EXCITED.

>> APPRECIATE IT, YEAH. >> GOOD JOB, STAFF, OR WHOEVER

FOUND -- >> HOW MANY BIDS CAME IN? THIS

ONE, AND ANY OTHERS? >> WE HAD THREE.

>> OKAY, PERFECT. >> ALL RIGHT, WE'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS. WHAT DOES THIS DO TO THE ORDINANCE ON RENTING THE

[01:55:04]

PARK, JAMES? >> MAYOR, I DON'T SEE HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THE ORDINANCE ON RENTING THE PARK AT ALL. IT JUST WON'T BE AVAILABLE TO RENT WHEN THE EVENTS ARE ONGOING. IT

WOULD BE LIKE IT WAS BOOKED. >> WEEKENDS OPEN, SOMEONE WOULD STILL APPLY THROUGH THE CITY TO RENT THE PARK, PAY THE FEE TO

THE CITY? >> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. IS

THAT NOT ACCURATE? >> THAT'S CORRECT, AND AS WITH ALL OF OUR EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EVENTS, WE GO THROUGH THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMITTING PROCESS, AND WE HAVE A MASTER CALENDAR, SO THIS WOULD JUST BE AN INCREASED, ONCE WE KIND OF GET THEM ON BOARDED, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING ELSE THAT THEY WOULD OVERSEE. JUST LIKE WITH ALL EVENTS, THEY'D GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS TO HAVE THE DATES MARKED.

>> WHEN YOU GUYS HAVE CONCERTS THERE AND ARE SELLING SHIRTS, WHAT PERCENT OF THE SALES ARE YOU GIVING BACK TO THE CITY?

>> MERCHANDISING? THAT ARTISTS ARE SELLING OR WE ARE SELLING?

>> WELL, WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE SAYING ALL ITEMS SOLD IN CITY PARKS, I TRIED TO GET RID OF IT, IT WAS A DUMB ORDINANCE, BUT I WAS OUTVOTED. BUT IT'S IN THERE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW AS THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, YOU SELL A SHIRT FOR SAY 100 BUCKS, IT'S LIKE 20% OR SOMETHING GOES BACK

TO THE CITY PARKS FOUNDATION. >> OKAY.

>> GOTCHA. >> USUALLY THE RULE ON THE TOUR SIDE, THEY USUALLY DO 80-20 SPLIT. THEY KEEP 80% AND GIVE 20% OF THE MERCHANDISE TO THE VENUE.

>> I THINK IT WAS 20, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER THE ORDINANCE.

>> THAT'S USUALLY A REGULAR THING, THAT'S A PART OF THE

BUYING PROCESS, USUALLY. >> RIGHT, YEAH.

>> SOMETIMES THEY'LL PUSH BACK AND NOT DO A MERCH SPLIT, BUT WE CAN FORCE IT BECAUSE IT'S A PARK.

>> AND THE REV SHARE CAN BE PUSHED UP TO 20%.

>> I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK. >> WE'RE HERE TO HELP.

>> YOUR PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE WITH LIVE NATION, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN, UM, DOCK, HOW MANY PEOPLE WORK FOR YOU?

>> FOR THIS PROJECT? >> NO, THE COMPANY ALL

TOGETHER. >> IT DEPENDS ON THE EVENT. WE

USE A LOT OF 1099S -- >> HOW MANY FULL TIME PEOPLE DO YOU HAVE WORK FOR YOU RIGHT NOW? IF WE WALKED IN YOUR

OFFICE? >> FOR THIS PROJECT --

>> NO, NOT THIS PROJECT. >> ON THE REGULAR, IT'S JUST US

TWO PLUS ONE PERSON. >> JUST LOOKING FOR WHATEVER THIS COMPANY IS, DIRECTORS OF CHAOS, HOW MANY PEOPLE WORK FOR

YOU. >> CURRENTLY WE ARE A SMALLER FIRM. IT'S MYSELF, CHRIS, AND THEN ONE OTHER FULL TIME PERSON. AS WE TAKE ON OTHER PROJECTS, WE BRING PEOPLE ON.

FOR THIS, WE HAVE A BIG STAFFING ROLL OUT WHERE WE'D BRING ON ABOUT FOUR TO FIVE FULL TIME PEOPLE IN THE BEGINNING. BUT WE'RE PROJECT-BASED, SO IF I HAVE A BIG THING, I BRING IN A STAFF.

>> WORKS OUT BETTER THAT WAY, THAT WAY PEOPLE AREN'T SPREAD

THING. DO A GOOD JOB. >> IT'S OUR GOAL TO BUILD IT TO

THAT. >> ALL RIGHT, AND BARBECUE, YOU'RE CALLING IT AS IT'S LISTED, THAT WOULD BE A

COMMUNITY EVENT? >> YES.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE HOLLY FESTIVAL? THEY CHARGE $5. DO THEY NEED TO CHARGE $8 NEXT YEAR?

>> WE COULD FIGURE THAT OUT. I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE

SPECIFICS ON THE EVENTS. >> IF WE'RE PROCESSING IT THROUGH TICKETING, THAT'S WHERE WE'D TAKE IT INTO ACCOUNT. IF WE WERE ABLE TO HANDLE THAT ONE, WE WOULD, AS PART OF THAT PROCESS TO RENT IT, TRY AND PUT THAT IN THE LONG THAT YOU NEED $3 IN TICKET SALES TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE CITY OUTSIDE OF US. FLEXIBLE, BUT THAT'S THE INTENTION.

>> OKAY. >> IT SAYS MANAGEMENT OF THE AMPHITHEATER, COMMON AREAS, PAVED PORTIONS. THAT'S WHAT

WE'RE CALLING THE PROPERTY. >> I THINK THE AREA WE'RE NOT

MESSING WITH IS THE COKE OTHER >> YEAH, THE AMPHITHEATER, PARKING LOT, AND GRASSY KNOLL PLACES.

>> YEAH. >> NO LOSSES TO THE CITY. SAY YOU BOOK A GUY, HE OR SHE COSTS $100,000 TO COME OUT. IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG EVENT, AND YOU'LL SELL $10,000 TICKET.

WHO'S PUTTING THE MONEY UP TO GET THAT PERSON?

>> US OR THE TICKETING AGENCY.

>> SO THEN IT, IT RAINS, AND WHEN IT RAINS OUT THERE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW THAT, BUT ALL THE ELECTRICAL IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE STAGE. EVERYBODY GETS FRIED OR YOU

[02:00:03]

CANCEL THE DEAL. IF YOU CANCEL IT, DO WE STILL GET OUR 15% OF

EVERY TICKET? >> YOU GET THE $3 FMF AT A TIME LATER. DEPENDS ON WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SHOW. WE WOULD HAVE INSURANCE AND LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT, SO EITHER THE SHOW IS CANCELED OUTRIGHT AND INSURANCE IS COVERED OR IT'S JUST RESCHEDULED. SO YOU GET PAID, JUST FURTHER OUT.

>> AND 6.7 SAYS IDENTIFY AND SOLICIT SPONSORS SUBJECT TO CITY APPROVAL FOR REVIEW, SO IF YOU GUYS GET SOMEONE THAT COMES OUT AND SAYS WE WANT TO PUT A BANNER ON THE FENCE, WE PAY

$15,000. >> THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THERE, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THESE, ESPECIALLY AT THE START WILL GO TOWARDS PUTTING THINGS IN THE PARK AND LOWERING OUR OPERATIONAL COST TO HAVE THAT SPLIT SHARE OUT OF THE HOUSE AND NOT WHEN TALKING TO THE TOURS DIRECTLY.

>> IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CAPITAL. IT JUST SAYS

SPONSORSHIPS. >> THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT

WAYS SPONSORSHIPS CAN WORK. >> YEAH, MY VERSION OF SPONSORSHIP IS IF A LOCAL BUSINESS WANTS TO SPEND TEN GRAND ON A SIGN, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY FOR THAT. IF YOU BRING IN A SPONSOR, BY ALL MEANS TAKE 80% OF THAT. BUT I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO COME UP TO US BECAUSE I'VE REFERRED PEOPLE BEFORE, AND IT REMINDS ME OF A CHARITY WHERE THE PERSON FUND RAISES AND DIDN'T DO ANYTHING, BUT THEY WANT TO KEEP 20% OF

IT. >> DO YOU WANT TO DO MAYBE X AMOUNT OF LOCAL SPONSORSHIP FOR FREE BECAUSE WE'RE DOING THE

BUSINESS ALLOTMENT -- >> I DON'T KNOW, IN MY MIND WE HAVE MILLIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS. IF SOMEONE CAME UP AND SAID I'LL GIVE YOU $50,000 TO PUT MY NAME ON THAT SHELTER HOUSE OUT THERE, I WANT ALL $50,000 TO IMPROVE THE PARK. THAT'S NOT A SLAM ON YOU ALL. NOW, IF YOU BRING 50,000 IN --

>> IF SOMETHING GETS FED THROUGH, LIKE A DIFFERENT BUCKET LIKE THAT, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE. WE CAN DEFINITELY REWRITE THAT LONG. IF WE BRING IT IN, WE STILL WANT TO, ESPECIALLY A LOT OF IT IS NOT CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION. IT'S WE'RE GIVING YOU A BIG DISCOUNT ON THE BATHROOMS.

>> YEAH, IT'S THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION. I DON'T REMEMBER

HEARING THAT. >> SURE.

>> THERE'S A THING THAT SAYS YOU GUYS L IDENTIFY AND MANAGE ALL AMPHITHEATER AND OTHER PROPERTY OPERATIONAL AND INFORMATIONAL NEEDS. YOU'LL ESTABLISH MAINTENANCE STANDARDS APPROVED BY THE CITY, MAKE REPAIRS, OTHER IMPROVEMENTS, AND KEEP THE PROPERTY IN COMMERCIALLY GOOD ORDER AND WE'LL PAY YOU BACK. THAT PART SCARES ME. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EVEN LEGAL. IF THEY SAY THERE'S A PROBLEM, GO OUT AND FIX IT, AND THEY DIDN'T BID IT. LIKE A MAJOR EXPENSE. WE'RE ALREADY AGREEING TO PAY FOR STUFF. WE AGREE, THE WAY I READ IT IS WE AGREE THERE'S AN ISSUE AND IT'S ALMOST LIKE CIRCUMVENTING THE BIDDING PROCESS AND COMING BACK TO US. LIKE YEAH, YOU HAVE TO FIX THE SOUND SYSTEM, AND THEN WE'RE JUST WRITING A CHECK.

THERE'S ONE ABOUT CREATING APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE, PROVIDING PORTABLE RESTROOMS. WHEN YOU'RE DOING AN EVENT, SOME OF THIS, THE MAINTENANCES AND EXPENSES ARE ON THE CITY.

>> RIGHT. >> BUT WE DON'T HAVE POTABLE WATER THERE. I THINK IT'S ON THE WAY. WE DON'T HAVE SANITARY, BUT THAT'S ON ITS WAY, AND WE ONLY HAVE ONE BATHROOM. USUALLY YOU HAVE TO BRING IN POTABLE WATER, WHO'S

PAYING FOR ALL OF THAT? >> THAT'S UNFORTUNATELY ON US IN THIS DEAL RIGHT NOW. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK IT OUT AS A SHOW

COST. >> ALSO IN LANGUAGE OF THE CONTRACT WAS MOSTLY FROM THE CITY SIDE. ONCE WE BEGIN THE PROCESS, THOSE ARE QUESTIONS WHERE WE CAN START WORKING WITH OUR PARTNERS HERE AND IDENTIFYING WHO THOSE THINGS IS. IT'S MORE OF LIKE A SIGNAL CHANGE THAT IF WE SEE SOMETHING, WE BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION. FOR CERTAIN FACILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS WE EITHER GO TO YOU BEFORE WE DO IT TO ASK FOR MONEY OR COVER IT AND HOPE YOU REIMBURSE IT.

>> OR YOU JUST PAY IT BECAUSE WE DID SOMETHING LIKE THIS A FEW YEARS AGO AND I THINK EVERY EVENT LOST MONEY. I COULD NEVER GET THE NUMBERS. I ALWAYS HAVE A HARD TIME --

[02:05:01]

>> OH, WE'LL GET YOU NUMBERS, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM.

>> BUT I COULDN'T GET OUT OF CITY WHAT WE WERE SPENDING TO PUT EVENTS ON. THEY'D JUST SAY THAT ONE COST $50,000.

>> SO, WE'D BE PAYING FOR ALL OF THAT. ONLY PERMANENT THINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PARK, SUBJECT TO YOUR APPROVAL. AS FAR AS PUTTING THE OPERATIONAL EVENTS ON, THAT'S ON US. WE HANDLE ALL THAT. NO RISK TO YOU. IF THE SHOW LOSES, YOU STILL GET YOUR $3 FMF. RIGHT, PORTABLE BATHROOMS I THINK IS SOMETHING THE CITY SHOULD PAY FOR.

>> YEAH, THAT'S PART OF HOW WE'RE CONSIDERING IT AND LEVERAGING SPONSORSHIP TO GET SPECIFICALLY THINGS LIKE THAT

DOWN IN PRICE. >> GOT A COUPLE MORE NOTES HERE. WE MAY BUT NOT REQUIRE BUDGET FUNDS NOT EXCEEDING $100,000 TO REIMBURSE YOU FOR COST FOR ITEMS WITHIN A SCOPE OF SERVICE. THAT'S IN SECTION 4. SECTION 4 WAS, I DON'T KNOW, USE OF THE PROPERTY? I READ THAT TO BELIEVE THAT THE 150 GRAND COULD GO TO WHATEVER, WHATEVER IT TAKES TO RUN THE

PROPERTY. >> WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. MORE LANGUAGE OR TERMS ON IT AFTER THE FACT IS FINE. A BUDGET ALLOCATION CAN GO DIRECT THROUGH YOU OR WE COULD DO IT MORE BLACK AND WHITE THAT IT'S ONLY APPLICABLE TO CERTAIN THINGS, BUT BECAUSE WE CAN'T FULLY IDENTIFY THINGS UNTIL WE GET IN THERE AND GET OUR HANDS DIRTY, IT'S LOOSE IN

THAT. >> THE BIGGEST WAY FOR US TO GET SIDEWAYS IS WE SIGN AN AGREEMENT AND THEN YOU THINK YOU'RE GETTING ONE THING AND WE COME BACK AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SAID AND YOU'RE LIKE OH, MAN, WHY DID I AGREE TO THIS.

13 WE TALKED ABOUT PROFITS. Y'ALL GET 85, WE GET 15 EXCEPT FOR 2023 SHOWS WITH A CAPACITY LESS THAN 1500. YOU GET 87.5.

THIS INCLUDES GROSS PROFITS, PROCEEDS FROM ALL FOOD AND BEVERAGE SALES. SO WHEN YOU DO AN ASIAN NIGHT, THE CITY IS GETTING 12.5 OR 15% OF EVERY EGG ROLL, MEAT SKEWER.

>> THAT'S IF WE SELL. YOU WOULD GET A CUT OF THE VENDOR FEES.

>> IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. IT SAYS THEY'LL GENERALLY DIVIDE NET

PROFIT ON THE AGREEMENT. >> SO IN THAT SITUATION, I WOULDN'T BE POTENTIALLY COLLECTING ON ALL THOSE DIFFERENT FOLKS' RESTAURANT FEES. I'D BE DOING LIKE A VENDOR FEE. YOU'RE GETTING 15% BEFORE WE SEE ANYTHING.

>> OH. >> SO IF I'M SELLING ALCOHOL OR MY VENDOR IS SELLING ALCOHOL AT MY SHOW, WHATEVER NET THERE IS,

YOU GET 15% OF THAT. >> BUT ASIAN NIGHT, THAT'S YOUR

SHOW, RIGHT? >> THAT WOULD BE A SECONDARY --

>> THAT'S LIKE A RENTAL COMMUNITY THING?

>> THAT WASN'T OUR SHOW. WE WERE HIRED AS A CONSULTANT.

>> WE WERE A VENDOR. >> OH, I THOUGHT YOU BROUGHT THAT. THAT'S HOW WE FOUND Y'ALL.

>> YEAH. WE WERE ASKED TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT TO DO THE PRODUCTION FOR IT. BUT THAT WAS NOT OURS. IN THAT SITUATION, IF WE WERE STRUCTURING, YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN 30K OUT OF THE $10,000 IN TICKETS AND 15% OF NET PROCEEDS LEFT AFTER.

>> ALL RIGHT. THE LAST THING IS THIS HAS A NO BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL, BUT THERE'S NO LANGUAGE ABOUT NO BOYCOTT OF GUNS OR, I CALL IT GUNS AND OIL, BUT THE 1295S IN HERE.

>> THE ENERGY COMPANY? >> YEAH, GUNS, AMMO, ENERGY.

OVERALL, THIS IS MY OPINION, I THINK WE'RE A YEAR OR TWO YEARS TOO EARLY FOR THIS AGREEMENT, AND I THINK THAT BECAUSE THE FACILITY I DON'T THINK IS SET UP IN A MANNER THAT PERSONALLY THINK IS A GOOD REPRESENTATION. IT'S MISSING BATHROOMS, POTABLE WATER. THE ROAD TO GET THERE, 137, NEEDS TO BE, YOU GUYS WILL TRY AND HOLD A CONCERT, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE BLOWING THIS ROAD UP, LIKE COMPLETELY DESTROYING AND REBUILDING IT I THINK LIKE IN 12 MONTHS. I FEEL LIKE WE DO ALL THIS, AND WE'RE BLOWING UP THE INTERSECTION WITH 1660, DOING ALL THIS STUFF. I THINK ALMOST ALL THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN BEFORE WE GO

[02:10:03]

AND BRING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE EVENT BECAUSE OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WILL SAY THIS PLACE IS TERRIBLE AND NEVER COME BACK, WHEREAS IF WE, THE COUNCIL PUTS MONEY INTO IT, ADDS BATHROOMS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, I THINK MY OPINION IS THAT'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT. I THINK THAT MAY HELP YOU GUYS ALSO GET MORE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH LIVE NATION AND OTHER PEOPLE, BUT LIKE, I KNOW FROM WORKING RETAIL THAT WORKING RETAIL WHEN I'M MANAGING SOMETHING AS A PARENT COMPANY IS A LOT EASIER THAN SUDDENLY BEING OUT ON THE STREET MYSELF AND DOING IT MYSELF AND ANSWERING THE

QUESTIONS -- >> JUST TO SPEAK ON THAT, I LAUNCHED A VENUE IN NEW JERSEY FOR FOUR PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES BY MYSELF, AND I HAD BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN LAUNCH IT, AND WE MADE $12 MILLION THE FIRST YEAR.

>> MOSTLY A SELF-STARTER, BUT MORE ON THE SMALLER COMPANIES.

NOT TRYING TO INTERRUPT. I DO DEFINITELY HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT PART OF WHAT WE DO IS FESTIVAL WORK WHERE YOU'RE BRINGING IN FULL FACILITIES AND CITIES. WEAR CONFIDENT IN OUR ABILITY TO MAKE THAT SPECIAL EVEN IN THE CURRENT STATE. AND WORKING WITH US ALLOWS YOU TO HELP BUILD THE FACILITIES OUT

QUICKER. >> THE AVERAGE SHOW WE WERE THINKING WERE GA STANDING IN THE LAWN WITH BLANKETS, THAT WOULD BE NICE. PORTABLE BATHROOMS BEING CLEANED, THE SEEDED MODEL IN THE FRONT HALF WOULD HAVE COMFORT STATION, FANCY TRAILER BATHROOMS. IT'S PRETTY MUCH AS NICE AS YOU CAN

GET -- >> THE LAST THING I WAS GOING TO SAY IS AT LEAST YOU GUYS WOULD WANT THE AGREEMENT WORDED MORE BLACK AND WHITE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF ASSUMPTIONS OR THINGS THAT ARE KIND OF VAGUE. IF YOU ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, I KNOW AT LEAST ONE PERSON UP HERE, THE MINUTE YOU THINK YOU OWE MONEY, THAT WILL BE ASKING WHEN ARE THEY PAYING THE MONEY WHETHER IT'S SHIRT SALES, SNOW CONES, WHATEVER YOU'RE DOING.

BUT ANYWAY. I DO APPRECIATE YOU GUYS COMING UP HERE.

>> I HAVE A FEW EXTRA QUESTIONS. AS FAR AS MARKETING, HOW DO Y'ALL DO THAT? DO YOU DO THAT YOURSELVES? BECAUSE, FOR THE ASIAN NIGHT, I DON'T KNOW, Y'ALL DIDN'T DO THE MARKETING

FOR THAT? >> KNOW A LOT ABOUT IT THOUGH.

WE KNOW HOW IT WAS DONE. >> YEAH, SO, I MEAN, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT IT, AND I WAS COMING HOME, AND THERE WAS

TRAFFIC. >> IT WAS PACKED.

>> HOW DID YOU NOT KNOW ABOUT IT?

>> YOU DIDN'T MARKET TO ME, WHOEVER.

>> IT DEFINITELY COULD HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH BETTER.

>> BUT, I GUESS MARKETING FOR THE SHOWS THE GET THE PEOPLE TO ATTEND SO WE AT LEAST HIT A THRESHOLD OF NUMBERS, IT'S GREAT FOR YOU, THE CITY, WHATEVER. MY SECOND QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU WORK WITH SAFETY, WITH THE, YOU KNOW, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, OF COURSE WE HAVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR WHO KIND OF MITIGATES POTENTIAL ISSUES, EMS, WHATEVER.

>> THAT'S SOME OF THE FIRST THINGS WE DO IS BASICALLY, IF THIS WAS ABLE TO BEGIN, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO. WE START TALKING TO PUBLIC WORKS, THE POLICE, AND START, WE WANTED TO WRITE IN SPECIFICALLY DOING WALK THROUGHS WITH YOUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO CREATE TAILOR MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS. I STARTED IN THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY FEMA SIDE. I COME FROM THAT TRAINING AS A BACKGROUND, AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DEFINITELY START WITH IS TRYING TO MEET WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT PIECES OF THE PUZZLE FROM THE CITY END. FIGURE OUT EXPENSES, COSTS, FRAMEWORK. ON A MARKETING SIDE, RIGHT NOW BY LEADING CANDIDATE WORKS WITH A LARGER CORPORATION, AND THEN

LOCAL IQ, ANOTHER COMPANY -- >> AS FAR AS MARKETING?

>> YEAH. >> OKAY, GOT IT.

>> AS FAR AS SAFETY, THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I'D COORDINATE CLOSELY WITH THE CITY DIRECTLY.

>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE'D BE SETTING THIS UP TO BE A REGIONAL PROFESSIONAL VENUE. IT'S NOT LIKE JUST A LITTLE THING. IT WOULD BE VERY PROFESSIONAL, WEATHER WATCHED, EMERGENCY BINDERS, THE WHOLE NINE.

>> I'M REALLY EXCITED. I THINK IT'S REALLY INTERESTING. IT'S THE KIND OF THING PEOPLE WANT AND COULD BRING IN DEVELOPMENT, AND AS WE BRING IN MORE RESTAURANTS, YOU HAVE OTHER STUFF. I WOULD SAY WITH THE ASIAN NIGHT, I WAS REALLY EXCITED. I WAS GOING TO GO AND SAID HEY, WHAT'S THE SCHEDULE, AND THEY SAID GO LOOK AT OUR TWITTER FEED.

>> THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD ME TOO.

>> I WAS LIKE FORGET IT, SO I DIDN'T GO.

>> YEAH, WE WERE JUST SUPPLYING LIGHTS AND SOUND FOR THAT.

[02:15:07]

>> FOR BEING UNORGANIZED, IT WAS HONESTLY A GREAT EVENT.

PEOPLE WERE VERY CALM AND HAD A GREAT TIME.

>> THAT'S GOOD. >> BUT YEAH, WE WERE LIGHTS AND

AUDIO FOR THAT ONE. >> I DON'T SEE THE DOWN SIDE. I MEAN. ESSENTIALLY THEY'RE TAKING ALL THE RISK. THIS IS WHAT OUR RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN SCREAMING FOR. QUALITY OF LIFE, THINGS TO DO. IT'S MARKETABILITY, REVENUE. I APOLOGIZE IF YOU FEEL QUESTIONING YOUR EXPERIENCE, I THINK YOU GUYS DID A PHENOMENAL, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE SOME SEMANTICS WITH THE WORDING OF THE CONTRACT, BUT THIS IS REVENUE I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MAYOR MIGHT THINK IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO WAIT TWO YEARS UNTIL

ROADS ARE FIXED? YEAH. >> WE COULD PUT THE $3 TOWARDS

THE ROADS. >> YOU COULD BUILD ALL THE

ROADS YOU WANT WITH THAT MONEY. >> I MEAN, THAT'S LIKE PIE IN THE SKY. I AM JUST, I THINK THAT ANY CITIZEN THAT'S WATCHING THIS AND WATCHING THIS PRESENTATION AND WE'RE GOING TO VOTE NO COME BACK IN TWO YEARS? I DON'T WANT TO ANSWER THOSE

E-MAILS. >> JUST TO SPEAK ON THE TWO-YEAR CONCEPT BEING MORE OF AN EXECUTIVE AND UNDERSTANDING LIVE NATION. WE ARE SPEAKING TO VICE PRESIDENTS, THE BIGGEST COMPANIES IN THE WORLD IN ENTERTAINMENT, AND THEY'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT AUSTIN RIGHT NOW. EVERYONE IS MOVING TO AUSTIN.

IF YOU DON'T ACT SOON, IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO

COMPETE. >> WHEN WE CHANGE, WE'RE NOT REPAVING THIS ROAD. WE'RE COMPLETELY TEARING IT OUT, CHANGING THE ELEVATION. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET PEOPLE THERE? I MEAN, IT'S THE ROAD THAT GOES RIGHT TO THE VENUE? WHEN IT'S TORE UP AND DOWN TO ONE LANE, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW

WE'LL DO IT. >> I RAN FLOAT FEST WITH ONE WAY IN AND OUT AND 30,000 PEOPLE THERE.

>> AND WE HAVE THE BACK ENTRANCE.

>> YOU DIDN'T GO TO ASIAN NIGHT --

>> THEY DIDN'T RUN ASIAN NIGHT --

>> WILL, I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THEY HAD TOO MANY

PEOPLE. >> NO ONE WAS RUNNING THAT ELEMENT OF IT. WE OFFERED OUR SERVICES --

>> WELL, THAT'S THE SCARY THING BECAUSE WE APPROVED THE PLAN.

IF THERE WAS A SHOOTING THERE, THAT'S MY BIGGEST FEAR.

>> I'M ON THE SAME PAGE. >> IT'S ALL JAMMED UP, AND THAT SCARES ME MOST TAKING ON ALL THIS AND APPROVING PLANS AND THEN YOU HAVE A DEAL, AND THE FIRST THING YOU GUYS ARE SAYING IS WELL, THE PLAN WAS MESSED UP, WELL, WE APPROVED IT. PART OF ME THINKS WE NEED SOME PROFESSIONAL HELP.

>> THERE'S ALWAYS A SOLUTION TO THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> AS LONG AS YOU HAVE A WILL. >> BUT SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT, AND SOMETHINGLIKE A SHOOTER IS THE THING THAT WOULD KEEP ME UP AT

NIGHT AS WELL. >> I'VE PERSONALLY DEALT WITH

THAT. >> AND I'D SHUT DOWN SHOWS IF

IT WASN'T SAFE. >> JUST BECAUSE PUBLIC SAFETY IS OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY AT ANY EVENT, I'VE ACTUALLY INTRODUCED THE GENTLEMEN TO BILL ZITO AND INVITED THEM TO SIT IN ON OUR COKE FEST MEETING, THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEETING, AND IN HOUSE, AGAIN. WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, THIS PARTNERSHIP TO BE AN EXTENSION OF OUR DIVISION, SO WE HAVE A LOT OF OVERSIGHT, AND THEY WOULD BE FOLLOWING THE EXACT SAME PROCESS AS COKE FEST DOES AS FAR AS PUBLIC SAFETY, OPERATIONALLY, ALL OF THOSE THINGS, AND WE'D HAVE THAT OVERSIGHT. SO IT WOULD BE A LOT DIFFERENT THAN AN EXTERNAL PARTY COMING IN AND JUST APPLYING FOR THE SPECIAL EVENT PERMITTING PROCESS. IT WOULD BE LOCKED DOWN, VERY SAFE. I JUST

WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. >> AND MARKETING-WISE, THAT'S THE OTHER THING TOO THAT, UM, WE DO OWN THE BRUSHY CREEK DOMAIN, AND WE'VE NOT UTILIZED THE WEBSITE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO PROGRAM IT. THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER PIECE OF WHAT THEY'D BE DOING ON THE BACK END OF THINGS IS MANAGING THE WEBSITE, MANAGING SOCIALS. REALLY MARKETING AND PUSHING THE EVENT AS WELL. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR AS

[02:20:02]

WELL. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> I MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DIRECTORS OF CHAOS OF MANAGEMENT FOR THE

BRUSHY CREEK AMPHITHEATER. >> SECOND.

>> MOTIONED BY KINSEY, SECONDED BY SUTTON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION

ON THE MOTION? >> I THINK WE'RE RUSHING INTO

AN AGREEMENT -- >> IT'S NOT AN AGREEMENT. WE'RE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT. I THINK THIS IS FANTASTIC. IT'S FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO AUTHORIZE HIM

-- >> TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT YOU HAVE. YOU HAVE TO ASK HIM TO CHANGE IT.

>> YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. WE'RE VOTING ON THE

AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED -- >> I WOULD --

>> THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT. >> I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND WELCOME ANY AMENDMENTS IF INDIVIDUALS WANTED TO FIX THINGS. THAT'S THE WAY I WAS GOING TO DO IT -- IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOT A LOT OF WORK.

>> YEAH, I WAS GOING TO ASK TO POSTPONE AND BRING IT BACK --

>> WHY, WE JUST PIECEMEALED THE LAST ITEM? YOU GUYS GIVE ME

WHIPLASH. >> HERE A MINUTE AGO YOU WERE

SAYING JUST VOTE -- >> OKAY. IT'S FINE. I RESCIND MY MOTION. I'M NOT WASTING MY TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH. I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT IT. I DON'T WANT TO CLOUD IT WITH NEGATIVITY. I THINK THE CITIZENS ARE BEGGING FOR THIS.

YOU GUYS ARE OFFERING PROFITABILITY AT NO RISK TO US, SO TO BE TURNING DOWN REVENUE AT THIS POINT IN TIME WOULD BE

A HUGE MISTAKE -- >> NO, I THINK, WE CAN HAVE THE VOTE. I THINK WE HAVE THE VOTE. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU'D RESCIND

-- >> YOU MAKING A MOTION?

>> YEAH, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT AS PRESENTED WITH THE CHANGE ON 5.1 THAT WE COMPLETELY CONTROL THE, UM, THE $3 PER TICKET FEE TO BE USED BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT SHOWS IT'S ONLY WITHIN THE FACILITY.

>> THE FIRST SENTENCE AND THEN SAY APPLIED AND PAID TO THE

CITY, AND THAT'S IT. >> OKAY, SO IT CURRENTLY SAYS THE FACILITY FEE DIRECTLY PAID FOR PROMPT IMPROVEMENTS, YOU DON'T WANT THEM EVEN RECOMMENDING ANYTHING?

>> THEY CAN RECOMMEND STUFF, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD GO DIRECTLY TO THE CITY. I DON'T WANT IT IN THE LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE TO GO WITH, THAT WE APPROVE WHAT THEY RECOMMEND. I FEEL LIKE IT WILL COME DOWN, NOT TODAY, BUT ANOTHER COUNCIL MAY BE TOLD NO, IT SAYS IN THIS AGREEMENT THAT THE PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS ARE RECOMMENDED BY US AND YOU JUST APPROVE THOSE.

WE TOLD YOU THE FIVE RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU CAN ONLY SPEND THE MONEY ON WHAT WE RECOMMENDED. APPROVE THE ONES YOU WANT TO DO. I'M LIKE NO, IT'S A FACILITY FEE, SO IT NEEDS TO BE WITHIN THIS PARK. I'M JUST SAYING, I DON'T THINK

IT'S, JUST STRIKE OUT THE -- >> SCRATCH OUT FOR PROPERTY

IMPROVEMENTS BY DOC. >> WHICH WILL BE DIRECTLY APPLIED TO PAY FOR PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS APPROVED BY THE

CITY. >> YES.

>> THERE YOU GO. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KINSEY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR CHANGES THAT NEED

TO BE MADE? >> ANY OTHER BIG ONES?

>> I'M TELLING YOU, I THINK THE WHOLE THING. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS IN HERE THAT ARE VERY VAGUE.

>> SO IT DOES NEED THE FIREARMS AND ENERGY COMPANY PROVISIONS TO BE ADDED. ANY TIME THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BID SOMETHING, THEY SHOULD BE FOLLOWING OUR PROCUREMENT POLICY. I CAN ADD

THAT IN THERE. >> FIREARM, ENERGY, PROCUREMENT POLICIES BEING ADDED. YOU TWO OKAY WITH THAT?

>> YEAH, THOSE DEFINITELY NEED TO BE THERE.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

[02:25:04]

VOTE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK.

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

>> NAY. >> MAYOR GORDON.

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER SUTTON.

>> AYE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER KOLAR.

>> AYE. >> KINSEY.

>> AYE. >> THORNTON.

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 6-1. THANKS,

[11.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2023-096, authorizing the acquisitions, including by use of eminent domain if necessary, of real property interests as part of the Glenwood Interceptor wastewater project (Lennar) (Legal) ]

GUYS. GOOD LUCK. >> WELCOME.

>> WE'RE EXCITED. >>> ALL RIGHT, 11.2, CONSIDERATION ON RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITIONS INCLUDING BY USE OF IMMINENT DOMAIN OF REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS AS PART OF THE GLENWOOD INTERCEPTOR WASTE

WATER PROJECT. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND. >> WELL, IF I COULD OFFER A MOTION TO Y'ALL THAT WAS IN THE LANGUAGE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF

IT'S EXACTLY -- >> NO, THAT'S FINE. IS THERE

SPECIFIC LANGUAGE? >> I MOVE THE CITY AUTHORIZE THE USE OF THE POWER OF IMMINENT DOMAIN THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GLENWOOD INTERCEPTOR WASTE WATER PROJECT.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION, THEN, HOW ABOUT THAT?

>> YEAH. >> MOTION BY GORDON, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> GORDON.

>> AYE. >> CLARK.

>> AYE. >> KINSEY STEPPED OUT.

[11.3. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2023-097, authorizing the acquisitions, including by use of eminent domain if necessary, of real property interests as part of the Glenwood Interceptor wastewater project (Hutto 372 Ltd) (Legal)]

>> SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 6-0. NEXT ITEM 11.3. CONSIDERATION ON RESOLUTION R-2023-097 AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITIONS BY USE OF IMMINENT DOMAIN AS PART OF THE GLENWOOD INTERCEPTOR WASTE WATER PROJECT. I FEEL LIKE THAT'S THE SAME THING.

WHAT'S DIFFERENT? >> ONE HAD TO DO WITH THE LENOIRE PROPERTY, SO IT'S TWO SEPARATE EASEMENTS.

>> BUT SAME MOTION? >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO I MOVE THE CITY AUTHORIZE THE USE OF POWER OF IMMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY INTERESTS WHICH ARE DESCRIBED MORE FULLY BY METES AND BOUNDS ATTACHED IN THE WRITTEN RESOLUTIONS NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GLENWOOD INTERCEPTOR WASTE

WATER PROJECT. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY MAYOR SNYDER, SECONDED BY GORDON. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER KOLAR.

>> AYE. >> SUTTON.

>> AYE. >> GORDON.

>> AYE. >> SNYDER.

[11.4. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2023-091 authorizing the City Manager the authority to acquire real property as authorized by Hutto City Charter Section 4.01(f) and to release, abandon and relocate easements under certain circumstances (Legal) ]

>> AYE. >> CLARK.

>> AYE. >> SUTTON.

>> AYE. >> KINSEY.

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 7-0.

>> NEXT CONSIDERATION FOR POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION

R-2023-091 AUTHORIZING. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, WE PUT A RESOLUTION WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LONG IN SECTION 2.5 ON YOUR DAIS. THIS RESOLUTION JUST PUTS INTO EFFECT THE AUTHORIZATION THAT THE CITIZENS GAVE IN THE CHARTER UNDER SECTION 401F FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO RELEASE TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS. ALSO, THE LANGUAGE WE ADDED BECAUSE WE JUST DISCOVERED THIS WEEK THERE'S A DEVELOPER AND A PROJECT WHO'S GOING TO BE PAYING FOR AN EASEMENT, SO WE ADDED THAT LANGUAGE. THE REQUIREMENTS ARE RESTRICTION ON THE CITY MANAGER THAT, UM, HAS THE SAME CHARTER LANGUAGE IN THERE, BUT WE ADDED THAT THE PROJECT'S BUDGETED, THE COST IS IN THE BUDGET, AND, UM, THE COST OF THE ACQUISITION IS PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER ON THE

[02:30:05]

PROJECT. SECTION 3 AUTHORIZES A PROJECT WHERE SOMEBODY NEEDS TO RELOCATE AN EASEMENT AND ABANDON AN EASEMENT. THESE ARE EASEMENTS THAT ARE ACQUIRED BY THE CITY IN THE COURSE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE BUDGETED OR PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER OR IN A PROJECT WHERE ONE NEEDS TO BE JUST RELOCATED. THIS WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THESE THINGS. AND WE WILL BE ASSISTING THE CITY STAFF WITH FORM EASEMENTS.

>> SO AS FAR AS, UM, PAYING FOR THIS, IS PART OF A BUDGETED ITEM OR IS IT PART OF LIKE UNDER THE PROJECT?

>> SO -- >> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES

SENSE -- >> UNDER LIKE, PUBLIC WORKS.

>> SO TECHNICALLY BOTH. WE HAVE TO HAVE MONEY TO BE ABLE TO PAY THE TASK ORDERS FOR THE ENGINEERS THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD TO DESIGN THE PROJECTS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. BUT INSIDE OF THAT TASK ORDER ALSO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE ENGINEERS INCLUDE A LINE ITEM FOR RIGHT AWAY ACQUISITION. SO WHENEVER COUNCIL AUTHORIZES THE CONTRACT FOR THE DEVELOPER, OR I MEAN THE ENGINEER UNDER THAT TASK ORDER, THEY MAY SAY THERE'S THIS MUCH FOR ACQUISITION. THAT IN TURN IS THE BUDGET FOR RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION UNDERNEATH THE BIGGER LINE ITEM IN THE PROJECT.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> SO BASED ON THAT, SHOOT, WENT AWAY. DANG IT. UM, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION R-2023-091 AS PRESENTED IN OUR PACKET.

>> AND THEN WITH THE ADDITION THAT IF THERE'S AN EASEMENT ACQUIRED USING DEVELOPER FUNDS THAT THAT WOULD ALSO BE, UM --

DOC YOU SENT US? >> THAT'S THE UNDERLYING PORTION I TALKED ABOUT. IN SECTION 2, THE COST OF THE ACQUISITION IS PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER OF THE PROJECT.

>> I THINK WHAT DOTTIE IS TRYING TO SAY IS THE ITEM THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET HAS BEEN MODIFIED SINCE, AND YOU HAVE A NEW VERSION HANDED OUT THAT INCLUDES THAT LANGUAGE.

>> IT'S IN DROP BOX. >> RIGHT, I PULLED IT UP.

>> SO WE NEED TO BE CLEAR YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE THAT INCLUDES THE DEVELOPER CONSIDERATION.

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> AS LISTED IN THE. >> I'LL SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? CALL THE VOTE.

>> SUTTON. >> AYE.

>> KINSEY. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> GORDON. >> AYE.

[12.1. Update on downtown beautification enhancements including, but not limited to trash cans, light pole banners, and tree lighting (Kristi Barnes) ]

>> KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> CLARK. >> AYE.

>> THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT UP ITEM 12-1, UPDATE ON DOWNTOWN PROJECTS. I WAS TRYING TO GET YOU OUT OF HERE BEFORE

MIDNIGHT. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. CHRISTY BARNES. THIS IS A QUICK UPDATE ON AN ITEM THAT WAS PRESENTED BACK ON MARCH 17TH OF 2022. JUST TO GIVE A QUICK UPDATE ON SOME THINGS THAT WE AS STAFF HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH AND TAKE CARE OF AND THEN KIND OF WHERE WE'RE LOOKING TO GO MOVING FORWARD. MANY OF THESE

[02:35:10]

THINGS WILL KIND OF FALL UNDER THAT AND WORKING WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ON, UM, A MORE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH. BUT THE LIGHT POLE BANNERS WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PURCHASE THOSE. IF YOU RECALL, WE DID REUSE BUT WE CURRENTLY HAVE THREE NEW SETS. KEEPING DOWNTOWN LOOKING FRESH AND UPDATED. UM, THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOLIDAY LIGHTING WHICH EVERY YEAR WE DO TRY AND EXPAND ON THE LIGHTING BECAUSE ALONG FARLEY STREET IT GETS VERY DARK, AND WE'VE HAD ISSUES WITH THE LIGHT POLES NOT WORKING AND BUSINESS OWNERS NOT ABLE TO SEE WHEN THEY'RE CLOSING UP AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. AFTER THE HOLIDAY SEASON THIS YEAR, WE WERE WORKING OR ATTEMPTING TO WORK WITH THE CURRENT LIGHT, UM, VENDOR, LIGHTING VENDOR TO LEAVE THE TREES ON FARLEY STREET WRAPPED YEAR ROUND AND MAKE THOSE MORE PERMANENT. DUE THE A FEW DIFFERENT REASONS, UM, WE HAVE JUST NOW RECEIVED THAT UPDATED COST, AND THAT IS IN HERE. THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO, WE HAVE THE FUNDS TO KIND OF REALLOCATE TO KEEP THE TREES LIT, BUT THEY'LL HAVE TO COME IN, REWRAP THE TREES, CONDUCT MAINTENANCE, AND HAVE THEM MORE PERMANENTLY FIXED BECAUSE SEVERAL RIGHT NOW ARE NOT LOOKING GREAT. EVERYTHING ELSE WE ARE LOOKING TO INCLUDE IN OUR BUDGET ASK.

>> WE MIGHT HAVE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, BUT ADDING A BENCH OR TWO. AT EVENTS AND FESTIVALS, THERE'S ZERO PLACES TO SIT.

>> YES, A COUPLE OF THE BENCHES THAT WE WERE AI BELIEVE TO ADD, NOT THIS PAST YEAR, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS THE YEAR BEFORE, WE DID WORK WITH THE LIONS CLUB TO GET A FEW INSTALLED ALONG EAST AND THE NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE E-STREET PARKING AREA, BUT I DO BELIEVE THE SEATING, YEAH, SEATING IS PART OF THAT DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO, AGAIN, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE THINGS WE ARE INVESTING THAT ARE MORE PERMANENT IN NATURE ARE ROLLED INTO THAT PERMANENT OVERALL PLAN. THOSE WILL COME INTO THE REQUEST FOR THOSE COMING BUDGET

YEAR. >> COUPLE QUESTIONS. WHO CURRENTLY EMPTIES THE GARBAGE CANS THERE AND HOW OFTEN?

>> THAT'S OUR PARKS CREW. I BELIEVE IT'S AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK DEPENDING ON, I THINK IN THE SUMMER IT INCREASES TO TWICE A WEEK. I'M NOT SURE. JEFF ISN'T HERE TO SPEAK ON

THAT, BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK. >> OKAY. SO THE MAYOR AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH A LOT OF DOWNTOWN BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS TALKING ABOUT CREATING A DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE.

IF WE DID APPROVE, FOR INSTANCE, DOING MORE LIGHTS AND GETTING THE LIGHTS FIXED AND UP TO DATE AND KIND OF RUNNING, UM, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT LONG TERM WE COULD TURN OVER AS AN ASSET TO THE DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE IF THEY WANTED TO KEEP THOSE AND MAINTAIN THEM GOING FORWARD? IS THAT SOMETHING WE

COULD DO? >> I'M SURE WE COULD DO SOME SORT OF, UM, AGREEMENT WITH THE ORGANIZATION SINCE IT WOULD BE ON CITY-OWNED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

>> YOU'RE ASKING IF IN THE

[02:40:01]

ABOUT THE LIGHTS. IF WE WANTED THEM TO START MAINTAINING AND TAKING OVER AND HAVE THAT BE PART OF THE ALLIANCE?

>> WHAT I WOULD TYPICALLY DO IS REACH OUT TO THE LEGAL TEAM AND ASK FOR THEM TO CRAFT A LICENSE AGREEMENT. IT WOULD ALLOW THE DOWNTOWN ALLIANCE OR WHATEVER THEY ARE GOING TO BE CALLED TO DO WHATEVER THE THING IS WE ARE ALLOWING THEM TO DO.

>> SOME OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IS COMPLAINTS . LEAVES DO NOT GET RAKED UP, LIGHTS ARE BURNED OUT ON THE TREE, THE TRASH CANS ARE FULL AND SO SOME OF THE THINGS HE BROUGHT UP, AND OTHER AREAS THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN ON THEIR OWN. HOW DO WE DO IT IN A MANNER WHERE THE IT IS A CITY ALWAYS DOING IT AND IT IS A CONTRACTOR ISSUE, WE TALKED LIKE TREATING WHATEVER YOU CALL THE NAME LIKE A BUSINESS ASSOCIATION TO HER WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE OUT THE PERSON IS THERE ON THE CORNER AND OPERATES A BUSINESS IS CALLING THE PERSON AND SAYING YOU NEED TO COME OUT AND FIX THE LIGHTS OR WHATEVER IT IS WHEREAS RIGHT NOW THERE IS A BUREAUCRATIC DEAL TO WHERE IT GOES TO A PERSON AND HAS TO WAIT UNTIL HE GETS TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE IT AND THEY EITHER WANT THE LIGHTS OR THEY DON'T OR THEY WANT THEM FIXED. THEY WANT TO SIGN OUT -- I WAS GOING TO WAIT UNTIL THE BUDGET BUT I THINK A LOT OF THESE ARE GREAT IDEAS WE HAVE ALL COME UP WITH BUT I DO NOT KNOW THAT THEY NECESSARILY HAVE THE SAME PRIORITY ON THINGS IN GENERAL AND TALKING TO THEM, THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT MINDSET, SOME OF THEM, ON THINGS. SO I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD, THAT IS WHY I ASKED ABOUT THE MEETING, WE SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THE THINGS THEY ARE SAYING, THEY ARE LOOKING AT. THERE IS A WAY TO MAKE THE DOWNTOWN BETTER.

BUT NOT NECESSARILY IT WOULD BE THE CITY COMING UP WITH THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE, BUSINESS OWNERS COME UP WITH HERE IS WHAT WE THINK NEEDS TO BE DONE AND THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT THEM PUTTING SKIN IN THE GAME, THEY ARE ASSESSING FEES TO EACH OTHER, THINGS LIKE THAT TO HELP PAY FOR THINGS, THAT WAY WE ARE NOT OUT THROWING DARTS AT A DART BOARD TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR DOWNTOWN. SOME LIKE THE LIGHTS, SOME DON'T. IF YOU ARE SERVING ALCOHOL AT 10:00 AT NIGHT YOU DO NOT WANT THE WHOLE PLACE LIT UP WHEN YOU'RE WALKING OUT TO YOUR CAR OR THE TRASH CANS, ONCE A WEEK, PROBABLY WORKED BUT NOW THAT FROSTY'S IS OPEN, WHAT NIGHT WAS I DOWN THERE? I WAS DOWN THERE ONE NIGHT RECENTLY AND IT WAS AMAZING, PEOPLE WERE DOWN THERE, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE. IN DOWNTOWN, THE TRASH CANS ARE FULL AND THEY ARE THROWING THEM

ON THE GROUND AND SO -- >> GENERALLY SPEAKING IT SOUNDS LIQUID YOU ARE DESCRIBING IS WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION WOULD DO FOR JOINT MAINTENANCE AREAS AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. I THINK WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT BUT I THINK THERE IS A BIT OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY THAT FALLS ON US TOO. IT IS JUST A MATTER OF HAS BEEN PRIORITIZED IN THE PAST? AS THE CONTINUE TO DEVELOP YOUR AND THERE AND ALL THE OTHER PLACES, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DELINEATE.

FOR EXAMPLE, THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF A SHOP, RIGHT? THERE ARE CITIES THAT COMPLETELY OWNED THAT AND DRIVE THROUGH WITH THE LITTLE ZAMBONI THING THAT CLEANS THE SIDEWALK AND THEN THERE ARE OTHER CITIES WHO DO NOT DO THAT AT ALL AND THE PROPERTY OWNER TAKES CARE OF THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THEIR AREA. THEN THERE ARE OTHERS THAT HAVE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHICH IS LIKE A PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD OR A BETTER WAY OF DESCRIBING IT AND THE PROBLEM WITH IT NOT HAVING EITHER THE CITY DOING IT ENTIRETY OR A PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION DOING IT AS A GROUP , IS BECAUSE IF I AM THE PROPERTY OWNER AND I CLEAN MY SIDEWALK AND YOU DO NOT CLEAN YOURS, YOU ARE NEXT TO ME, OR I CLEAN MINE ON MONDAY WHAT YOU CLEAN EARS ON THURSDAYS, THEN IT DOES NOT HAVE THAT CLEAN, ATTRACTIVE FEEL. THE TRASH CANS ARE NOT GETTING DUMPED, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

>> I THINK YOU'RE LOOKING AT, WE WILL TAKE CARE OF ALL OF THE STREET, WE WILL TAKE CARE OF FARLEY, WE WILL TAKE THE ONE THAT WENT UP TO PECAN OVER TO 1660, TWO WEST STREET, WILL MAINTAIN THE WHOLE AREA TYPE MENTALITY TO WEAR THEN WE DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE CITY TONIGHT PRIORITIZED, THEY DO NOT LIKE THE CITY TO PRIORITIZE THEM AT ALL AND IT IS THE LAST THING ON EVERYBODY'S MIND AND SO THAT IS WHY I THINK IT IS A BIGGER DISCUSSION TO BE HAVE THAT QUITE HONESTLY WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A YEAR AGO. WE HAVE GOT ANOTHER MEETING, WAS IT TODAY, TOMORROW? NEXT THURSDAY?

>> TUESDAY. >> TUESDAY.

>> I WILL NOT BE THERE, YOU CAN TAKE MY SPOT. BUT I JUST SAY WITH ALL THESE TO WHERE THEY KNOW, IF WE ARE GOING TO GO

[02:45:02]

SPEND $31,000 ON LIGHTS, SOME OF THEM MAY SAY WE WOULD RATHER HAVE A SIGN THAT TELLS, THIS IS DOWNTOWN BECAUSE THEY BROUGHT

THAT UP. >> I CERTAINLY WOULD ADVOCATE FOR KEEPING THE STRING LIGHTS, I DO NOT KNOW THAT WE NEED TO PAY $31,000 FOR AN OUTSIDE ENTITY TO DO IT. THEY ARE BASICALLY JUST STRING L.E.D. CHRISTMAS LIGHTS FOR LACK OF A BETTER THING. THAT IS A DIFFERENT THING AND KRISTIN AND I CAN TALK ABOUT THAT OFF-LINE BUT WHAT HAPPENS NEXT IS IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AT LEAST A MEDIUM AMOUNT OF LIGHT, THE NEXT THING THAT IS OWING TO START HAPPENING IS CRIME AND I USE THAT BROADLY BUT IT WILL BE FIGHTING IN THE STREETS, PARTICULARLY AS YOU HAVE PLACES THAT SELL ALCOHOL, STAYING OPEN LATER, YOU WILL HAVE FIGHTING IN THE STREETS, YOU WILL HAVE PEOPLE GETTING MUGGED AND I KNOW IT JUST HAPPENS. I HAVE SEEN IT HAPPEN TIME AND TIME AGAIN, AND LIGHT IS ONE OF THE KEY THINGS THAT REDUCES THAT LIKELIHOOD, IT DOES NOT MEAN IT WILL STOP IT BUT IT REDUCES IT. I THINK THE LIGHT LEVELS THAT WE HAVE DOWN THERE ARE NOT OBTRUSIVE, IT IS NOT LIKE SPOT LIKES. IT IS SOFT CHRISTMAS LIGHTS. I THINK IN THAT REGARD, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HEAR FROM THE FOLKS DOWNTOWN, WHAT THEY ARE EXPERIENCING AND SEEING BECAUSE WHEN I FIRST LAID THE TREES IN MY MIND, I WAS THINKING LANDSCAPE LIGHTS THAT WERE LIKE FLOODLIGHTS AND ALL THAT AND LATER I REALIZED, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WRAPPING THE TREES AND KEEPING THEM WRAP , I THINK THAT IS FINE. THERE ARE PLENTY OF DOWNTOWNS THAT DO THAT AND IT HELPS TO FIND THE SPACE WHERE IT IS, THE PEDESTRIANS HANG OUT, I THINK

THAT IS FINE AND APPROPRIATE. >> IS THE BEST IDEA . THEY WANTED TO BE KNOWN THAT THEY HAVE SOME

INPUT. >> AND, YOU KNOW, TO A POINT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT AS A CITY WE OUGHT TO BE DOING THAT WE ARE NOT CURRENTLY. FOR EXAMPLE, WE DO NOT HAVE A STREET SWEEPER. GENERALLY SPEAKING THE LEASE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, GENERALLY SPEAKING THAT IS HOW THOSE GET SPEAK OF IS THE LEAVES GET MOVED TO THE STREET, THE STREET SWEEPER COMES THERE AND COLLECT ALL THE LEAVES. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ONE ON CONTRACT SO THAT IS WHY YOU NOTICE THAT THERE IS GREAT AND GRAVEL AND ALL OF THE DOCTORS EVERYWHERE , THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF DEBRIS, WHAT I CALL GRITS AND GRAVEL, ASSUMING WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE BRING A SWEEPER ON CONTRACT , THEN PUTTING IT WHERE INSTEAD ON A REGULAR SCHEDULE, 2:00 A.M. OR 3:00 A.M. OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, ALL THAT CAN BE WORKED OUT TO WHERE THE LEAVES GET PICKED UP

REGULARLY AND OTHER THINGS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ALL -- ALL THREE OF THESE PROPOSALS GET PUT IN THE 2023 PROPOSED BUDGET AND AFTER YOU WORK WITH JAMES ABOUT OTHER LIGHTING OPTIONS, IF YOU ALL CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER PRICE TO COME BACK ON THAT ITEM WE CAN -- THAT WILL BE REDIRECTING A FUND WITHIN THIS YEAR.

>> DO WE ALREADY HAVE THIS MONEY IN THE BUDGET? IT IS JUST

A MATTER OF WHETHER -- >> THERE IS NO ACTION ON THE

ITEM, IT IS JUST AN UPDATE. >> THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED LAST TIME AS WELL, BACK IN MARCH OF LAST YEAR, LIKE YOU ARE SAYING, IF YOU HAD ADDRESSED IN A YEAR AGO MAYBE THEY WOULD FEEL MORE LIKE THEY GOT PAID ATTENTION TO BECAUSE IT WAS ANOTHER SEMANTIC THING WHERE IT WAS JUST A DISCUSSION AND THE PART ABOUT POSSIBLE ACTION GOT LEFT OFF.

SO FOR WHATEVER REASON -- >> YOUR MEMORY IS BETTER THAN

MINE. >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE WERE ASKED TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE SO THAT IS WHY IT IS LISTED ON THE AGENDA THIS WAY THIS TIME, BUT MY QUESTION WAS, I GUESS, AND KRISTI SHOULD KNOW, WAS THERE DOLLARS IN THE BUDGET FOR THINGS LIKE THIS? SO, THERE ARE.

>> WE ALREADY HAVE THIS BUDGET, IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF LAYING EVERYTHING OUT AS TO WHERE WE ARE AT CURRENTLY.

>> I DO NOT REALLY NEED A MOTION, IS WHAT I AM SAYING?

>> THAT WORKS. >> I DON'T NEED A MOTION NEXT

[12.2. Discussion and possible action relating to the background and preliminary information regarding the SE Loop wastewater line using $10M of ARPA money (Councilmember Amberley Kolar)]

TIME. >> ANYTHING ELSE ON THE UPDATE?

ALL RIGHT, KRISTY, THANKS. >> THANK YOU.

>> ITEM 12 TO , DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RELATING TO THE BACKGROUND AND PRELIMINARY INFORMATION REGARDING THE SOUTH EAST WASTEWATER LINE USING $10 MILLION OF ARPA MONEY.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO, WHENEVER I ORIGINALLY PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA, I KIND OF HAD SEEN IT JUST ON AND OFF OF OUR CMP UPDATES AND SO WHENEVER WE HAD OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING BACK A MONTH OR SO AGO, YOU HEARD BY LAUNDRY LIST OF ITEMS THAT I READ UP ON THE PHONE OF PRIORITIES. AT THE TOP WITH OUR BUDGET AND BUDGET PROCESS. THE

[02:50:04]