8.1. Texas Police Chief Association Accreditation and Police Department Quarterly Update Presentation (Chief Jeffrey Yarbrough)

[9.1. Continuation of a public hearing and consider possible action on Ordinance No. 0- 2024-037 for the zoning change request for the property known as 213 FM 1660 South, 1.08 acres, more or less, of land, located at FM 1660 Sand Evans Street, from OT-4R (Urban Residential) District to OT-4T {Transition) District (Ashley Bailey)]

TO SCHOOL. >> THANKS, SIR. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 9.1, CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER POSSIBLE ACTION OF ORDINANCE O-2024-03 SEVEN ZONING CHANGE FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 213 FM 1660 SOUTH, ACRES OF LAND LOCATED FROM RESIDENTIAL TO

TRANSITION DISTRICT. >> ASHLEY BAILEY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR. THE SITE IS COMPRISED OF JUST OVER THREE LOTS OUT OF THE HARRIS ADDITION THAT WAS A PLAT FROM 1893. THAT WAS THEN INCLUDED IN THE 1911 PLAT WHICH WAS ALSO USED AS THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY AND DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AGAIN IN THE 1960S AND THAT HOME REMAINS ON THE PROPERTY TODAY. IT IS URBAN RESIDENTIAL. URBAN RESIDENTIAL DOES ALLOW FOR SOME COMMERCIAL . IT ALLOWS FOR COMMERCIAL USES BUT MOSTLY IT IS JUST A BAKERY AND IT HAS TO BE A COMMERCIAL BAKERY AND A DAY CARE. JUST TO YOU CAN SEE ON THE SURROUNDING USES THERE IS SOME EXISTING RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH. THERE IS UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL ACREAGE OUTSIDE OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH AND EXISTING COMMERCIAL TO THE EAST OF THE SLOT. WITH THAT, I CAN GO FOR JUST A LITTLE BIT OF THE DIFFERENCES. LETTER C-4R IS REALLY FOR THE RESIDENTIAL FEEL. AS A MIX OF HOUSES, TOWNHOUSES. YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH THE FOURPLEX ADJACENT TO THE WEST. YOU COULD HAVE SOME LIMITED CORNER COMMERCIAL AGAIN. THE OT-4T ALLOWS FOR MORE TRANSITIONAL USES AND ALSO LITTLE BIT MORE COMMERCIAL . THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS ARE VERY SIMILAR BETWEEN THE TWO ALTHOUGH OT-4T HAS MORE SETBACKS REQUIRED IN THE LOT COVERAGES OF LITTLE MORE RESTRICTIVE, AS WELL. THIS IS IN YOUR PACKET. I WANTED TO SHOW THESE ON THE SCREEN. THESE ARE THE TWO SNAPSHOT PAGES OUT OF THE UDC BETWEEN OT-4R AND OT-4T SO YOU SEE WHERE THE SETBACKS ARE. WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT OBVIOUSLY THE HOUSE WOULD REMAIN AT THIS POINT AND ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO SEEK HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVAL. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THIS BLUE-COLLAR IS SHOWN AS DOWNTOWN TRANSITION WHICH DOES ALLOW FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND OTHER USES BETWEEN THE DOWNTOWN CORE. WE SENT OUT TO 129 PROPERTY OWNERS. WE RECEIVED TWO OBJECTION, TWO IN FAVOR BUT THIS IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND STAFF ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS BECAUSE OF THE TRANSITIONAL USE IN THE ADJACENT COMMERCIAL IN CONFORMANCE WITH FUTURE LAND USE MAP. AGAIN THIS DOES REQUIRE ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS OUTSIDE OF WHAT IS THERE, DOES REQUIRE THIS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM THE JULY 11TH

MEETING. >> IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:03 P.M. , JULY 18TH, AND WILL OPEN THIS UP FOR QUESTIONS OR ACTION FROM THE

COUNCIL. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM

GORDON. DISCUSSION ON THE ADAM? >> I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE POTENTIAL OPTIONS FOR THE USE UNDER TRANSITION AND JUST MAKING THAT VERY CLEAR AS TO WHAT THE OPTIONS ARE. I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT IT COULD NOT BE A GAS STATION BECAUSE I WAS AFRAID THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN SO THE CITY MANAGER WE FOCUSED IN ON POSSIBILITIES AND JUST THANK YOU FOR ADDING THAT IN THE PACKET. THAT WAS INFORMATION THAT WAS VERY

HELPFUL TO ME, SO. >> THAT SHOULD BE STANDARD WITH UDC COMING OUT TO GET EVERYONE AWARE OF ANY REQUIREMENTS ONCE THAT IS ADOPTED. WE ARE TRYING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE

THOROUGH WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION. >> PERFECT. IT WAS A CHALLENGE

[01:05:03]

BUT I GOT THROUGH IT. >> I WOULD JUST SAY TO THE PUBLIC THAT HAD A CONCERN, WHEN I RENT -- READ THE CONCERNS IT WASN'T A CONCERN SO MUCH OF WHAT THE LAND COULD BE USED FOR. IT WAS A CONCERN THAT WE'VE DONE A POOR JOB GETTING THE AREA READY WHEN IT COMES TO TRAFFIC SO I KNOW WE HAVE A PROJECT COMING NORTH OF THERE. WE HAVE A PROJECT SELF, SAME DESIGN. I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WOULD START CONSTRUCTION BUT I NOTED THERE ARE CONCERNS AND I APPRECIATE THE CONCERN FOR TRAFFIC BUT I AGREE WITH STAFF ON THIS. IT MAKES SENSE AND I DON'T SEE THIS BEING A GOOD PLACE TO PUT A HOME ALONG A MAJOR ARTERIAL SO I THINK A

TRANSITION IS APPROPRIATE FOR IT. >> AND, THE LOOK AND FEEL IS STILL PROTECTED OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, SO THERE IS THAT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> BEFORE YOU CALL A VOTE, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED AND YOU OPENED IT, BUT DID YOU CLOSE IT?

>> I DID, AT 8:03 P.M. >> MEMBER THOMPSON >> I

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD >> I CAN'T >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK >> I CAN'T

[10.1. 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. ]

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON >> I CAN'T >> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ITEM 10 ONE CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS AND/OR REMOVALS TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, TASK FORCES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS REINVESTMENTS ON BOARDS, CITY LIAISONS AND AREA GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS AND BEFORE WE START THIS, IF WE COULD TAKE OUT CITY COUNCIL LIAISONS. I

JUST NOTICED THAT. DID YOU GUYS MEET ON ANYTHING? >> WE DID. WE DO HAVE ONE NAME TO PRESENT. WE DID HAVE A RESIGNATION FROM OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND SO THERE WAS AN OPENING AND WE HAD INTERVIEWED WHO WE THOUGHT WAS A REALLY GOOD CANDIDATE A COUPLE MONTHS AGO SO WE WANTED TO PUT FORTH HAZEL SHERROD TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND IT WOULD BE IN SEAT NUMBER ONE TO REPLACE JUREK A LAWYER.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WILL SAY THIS. I NORMALLY DON'T SPEAK ON APPOINTMENTS VERY OFTEN. BUT I CONCUR WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM. I WAS VERY HAPPY TO SEE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PERSON AS I SAID BEFORE FOR ME PERSONALLY THERE ARE TWO BOARDS I AM MOST CONCERNED ABOUT. THAT IS PLANNING AND ZONING. I THINK IT IS REALLY GOOD TO HAVE PEOPLE WITH EXPERIENCE AND I HAVE NEVER MET HAZEL BUT I AM ANTICIPATING SOME GOOD DISCUSSION FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE, HER BEING ON THERE, SO I APPRECIATE HER APPLYING AND APPRECIATE THE BOARD RECOGNIZING HER QUALIFICATIONS IN GETTING HER

ON THERE. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR >> AYE

>> MAYOR SNYDER >> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD >> AYE >> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ANY OTHER

ITEMS? >> NOT FOR TONIGHT. WE WILL BE SCHEDULING SOME ADDITIONAL INTERVIEWS. WE HAVE SEVERAL APPLICATIONS THAT CAME IN. WE WILL BE REVIEWING THEM BEFORE

THE AUGUST 1ST MEETING. >> PROCEDURAL QUESTION. I GOT INTO THE SYSTEM TODAY AND IT LOOKED LIKE WHEN YOU APPLY FOR A BOARD WE ARE ASKING FOR LIKE YOUR WORK HISTORY, YOUR INCOME.

ARE WE ASKING FOR THAT ARE A PEOPLE JUST DOING THAT OUT OF THE KINDNESS OF THEIR HEART? BECAUSE THAT SEEMS PRETTY EXTENSIVE, LIKE I DON'T NEED TO KNOW YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY

NUMBER, BLOOD TYPE AND HOW MUCH MONEY YOU MAKE. >> I'M NOT PRIVY TO WHAT IS ONLINE NOW BUT HER PREVIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSION APPLICATION DID ASK ALL OF THAT. IT ASKING THE KIND OF BACKGROUND, WORK HISTORIES, HOBBIES, ANYTHING RELEVANT TO THE BOARD SOMEONE IS APPLYING FOR SO I THINK THEY JUST TRANSFER THAT INTO NEO-GOLF.

>> ANYTHING BECAUSE WE ARE USING THE JOB FUNCTION OF NEW YORK OF -- NEO- GOD . THE FIRST

[01:10:08]

TIME I READ IT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMING OUT IS LITERALLY LIKE AN APPLICATION FOR A JOB.

YOU GUYS SEE A REASON WE NEED THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL WHEN WE COULD JUST SAY EXPERIENCE , THINGS THAT MAY BE QUALIFICATIONS OR HOBBIES OR DOES ANYBODY SEE --

>> WE'VE HAD ONE FOR SURE MAYBE TWO MISS APPLICATIONS THAT IT WAS UNDERSTOOD AS A JOB AND IT SEEMS AS IF THEY WERE MAYBE LOOKING FOR A JOB BECAUSE THEY WERE A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND THEY WERE APPLYING FOR THIS POSITION AND SO WE WERE LIKE, THIS IS STRANGE. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A BOARD COMMISSION THING SO I DO THINK THERE IS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING WITH HOW THE APPLICATION IS. MAYBE WE CAN SIMPLIFY IT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS UNDER KATE'S PURVIEW BUT SHE WAS OBVIOUSLY WORKING WITH THAT SOFTWARE AND SHE COULD MAYBE TWEAK IT A LITTLE BIT TO MAYBE SIMPLIFY IT FOR FOLKS WANTING TO APPLY. I THINK IT IS GREAT THEY CAN GO ONLINE. IT IS EASY. CLICK, FILL IT OUT, BUT WE HAVE HAD SOME MISUNDERSTANDINGS, VERY FEW BUT NOT A LOT BUT IT HAS HAPPENED.

>> FOR THE RECORD, JAMES EARP, CITY MANAGER. WE DID TAKE THE EXISTING APPLICATION AND TURN IT INTO THE MODULE THAT EXISTS ON NEOGOV TODAY. MY ADVICE WOULD BE, OR MY -- WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS THAT WE DO A DIGITAL PRINT OF EVERYTHING WE ARE ASKING FOR BASED OFF OF THE APPLICATION, PROVIDE IT TO THE COUNCIL THEN YOU ALL DECIDE HOW YOU WANT IT TO AMEND BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GO IN AND TAKE THINGS OUT OF THE APPLICATION THEN YOU WILL BE LIKE WILL WAIT A MINUTE. THIS IS AN APPLICATION ANYMORE BECAUSE ALL WE DID WAS DIGITIZE WAS ALREADY

BEING ASKED FOR. THAT IS ALL HE DID. >> IF YOU ALL COULD DO THAT, DOUBLE CHECK. IT WOULD SEEM INTIMIDATING TO SOME PEOPLE WHO JUST ARE GOING, I JUST WANT TO BE ON THE LIBRARY BOARD. WHAT YOU NEED MY WORK HISTORY? IF WE COULD WERE THE ITEM AND MAKE A CHANGE SO ALSO THERE SHOULD BE A REQUEST. I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE WITHOUT ANY KIND OF HASSLE. ALL RIGHT. I APOLOGIZE. THE FIRST TIME I GOT IN THERE, NORMALLY I JUST TAKE EVERYTHING. I HEARD A CONCERN ABOUT A RESIDENT THAT WAS VERY QUALIFIED AND MAYBE WAS BEING OVERLOOKED SO THEN I STARTED LOOKING INTO IT. THIS NEXT ITEM HAS ME SWEATING A LITTLE BIT, BUT I HAVE SOME HELP FROM COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. ITEM 10.2,

[10.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-149 to create and appoint members to the Hutto Sesquicentennial Committee (Councilmember Amberley Kolar)]

CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION R-2024-149 TO CREATE AND APPOINT MEMBERS

TO THE PHOTO THE SESQUICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE. >> 150 YEARS. THIS IS JUST A FOLLOW-UP ON CREATING A RESOLUTION ON CREATING A COMMITTEE , FORMING A COMMITTEE OF RESIDENTS, BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. WE KIND OF DISCUSSED IT BEFORE, OF CELEBRATING HUTTO'S 150TH ANNIVERSARY. I DON'T WANT TO COMPLICATE THINGS. I JUST WENT OFF OF OUR DISCUSSION PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE WE KIND OF JUGGLED AROUND A FEW THINGS OF OPTIONS. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE CERTAIN BOARDS PARTICIPATING, SOME THAT DON'T NEED TO PARTICIPATE, LIKE PNC, BUILDING AND STANDARDS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE EDC INVOLVED , DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION, HISTORIC PRESERVATION , LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD AND PARKS ADVISORY BOARD. I WOULD SAY UP TO TWO OF THOSE MEMBERS CAN BE ON THIS COMMISSION . HAVE EACH, UP TO TWO OF EACH AND THEN I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE 10 CITIZENS PARTICIPATING, SO THAT WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 20 . IT MAY SEEM LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT I THINK THAT WHENEVER YOU GET A REALLY SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO MAKE DECISIONS. THEY MAY NOT WANT TO -- THERE MAY BE AFRAID TO THROW OUT LIKE HEY, I WANT TO HAVE YOU KNOW, FIREWORKS BUT WITH 20

[01:15:02]

PEOPLE IN THE ROOM MAYBE 12 PEOPLE ARE LIKE YEAH, YOU KNOW, LIKE I THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA AND I JUST THINK THAT YOU ARE MORE WILLING WHENEVER THERE'S A BIGGER GROUP AS OPPOSED TO A SMALLER GROUP SO THAT IS WHY I'M WILLING TO HAVE IT AS A BIGGER GROUP OF PEOPLE, MORE CASUAL AND THEN I ENVISION IT AS THEM GIVING A WISH LIST TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND HAVING A PRESENTATION, GIVING A PRESENTATION TO US SO THAT THEN IT CAN BE BUDGETED IN OUR BUDGET AND SO THAT THE CITY CAN PUT IT INTO ACTION. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO, THE CITY -- IT WOULD BE THE CITIZENS, THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS COMING UP WITH HOW WE WANT TO CELEBRATE THE 150TH HUTTO ANNIVERSARY OR 150 YEARS OF HUTTO, BRINGING IT TO US, GIVING US THEIR IDEAS AND THEN ONCE WE APPROVE THAT, THEN WE CAN GIVE IT TO THE CITY TO THEN, YOU KNOW , MAKE IT HAPPEN, SO. FROM THERE YOU KNOW, I AM OPEN TO DISCUSSION.

MOTION FOR A 20 MEMBER COMMISSION . >> I WILL SECOND IT. EDC, DNI, LIBRARY, PARKS, TWO FROM EACH BOARD AND ADDITIONAL CITIZENS.

>> IS THAT PART OF THOSE 10 OTHER CITIZENS, THOSE ARE GOING TO COME FROM COUNSEL PEOPLE?

>> SHE DIDN'T SAY. >> THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. >> TWO PEOPLE JUST THAT ARE NOT INVOLVED IN WORDS AND COMMISSIONS , THEY HAVE REACHED OUT I LIKE HEY, I WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS AND SO I WOULD JUST SEE THEM AS A CITIZEN THAT THEY ARE NOT ALREADY PART OF THE BOARD OR COMMISSION THAT THEY WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS.

>> HOW DO WE GET TO THE 10? LIKE YOU DECIDE TO THE TENOR? >> I DON'T KNOW. UP FOR SUGGESTIONS, I GUESS. MAYBE WE CAN DO THIS APPLICATION FOR NEOGOV . OR, IF YOU WANT TO

APPOINT. >> DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 20 PEOPLE?

>> I COULD SAY UP TO 20 PEOPLE BECAUSE WE MAY NOT REACH THAT, BUT I WOULD SAY UP TO 20

PEOPLE. >> I WOULD SAY AN APPLICATION. IT WOULD BE CRAZY IF WE HAD LIKE 30 PEOPLE APPLY AND WE HAD TO FIGURE THAT OUT. NORMALLY IN THESE SITUATIONS WE ARE LOOKING FOR 20 AND WE GET FIVE, AND IF GOD FOR BID 22 PEOPLE CAME UP I'M SURE WE COULD FIGURE OUT A

WAY TO INCLUDE EVERYBODY. >> IS THE THOUGHT FOR -- >> IF ONLY ONE PERSON OF EDC AND DNI WANTS TO DO IT, NOT TWO, THAT'S OKAY. AS LONG AS WE HAVE ONE PERSON. THAT'S WHY I SET UP TO TWO, SO AT LEAST ONE PERSON FROM EACH BOARD COMMISSION.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK. AS A PROCESS WE WILL CONTACT EACH OF THESE BOARDS AND SAY PLEASE NOMINATE ONE OR TWO OF YOUR MEMBERS WHO WOULD BE WILLING TO SERVE ON THIS, LET THEM PICK THEIR OWN KIND OF THING? I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD BECAUSE THEN THEY ARE SELECTING THEIR OWN PEOPLE IN THEIR VOLUNTEERING, THEY WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO FOLLOW THROUGH INSTEAD OF JUST YOU KNOW, OH GEEZ, I GET THE ASSIGNMENT. I DON'T WANT TO DO

IT VERSUS YES I WANT TO DO IT. >> ANY OTHER INPUT?

>> HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE BOAT. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK

>> AYE >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON >> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR

[12.1. Consideration and possible action to approve Resolution No. R-2024-150 to award a contract to Invoice Cloud for Utility Billing payment platform services and authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract and all necessary documents. (Alberta Barrett)]

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD >> I

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON >> AYE >> MAYOR SNYDER

>> AYE. MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 12.1, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION R-2024-150 TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO INVOICE CLOUD FOR UTILITY BILLING PAYMENT PLAT SERVICES AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE

CONTRACT. >> AT EVENING, COULD -- CHRISTINA BISHOP, CITY CONTROLLER. WITH ME IS MONICA BURKE AND TONIGHT WE ARE FINALLY BRINGING YOUR SOLUTION TO REDUCE THE CREDIT CARD FEES BEING CHARGED TO THE UTILITY FUND AND THE UTILITY CUSTOMERS.

TO RECAP WHERE WE ARE AT RIGHT NOW, THE UTILITY FUND IS CURRENTLY BEING CHARGED ABOUT 4.35% BY ITS CREDIT CARD PROCESSOR FOR UTILITY FEES. WE ARE PASSING ON 4.25% OF THAT TO OUR CUSTOMERS. ON TOP OF THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY BEING CHARGED TWO DOLLARS FOR EACH

[01:20:01]

TRANSACTION BY OUR SOFTWARE AND DESPITE ALL THE COSTS WE ARE MOVING TO OUR CUSTOMERS, THE UTILITY FUND IS SET TO IS ABOUT $250,000 IN FEES THIS YEAR. OBVIOUSLY WE NEED TO FIND A SOLUTION TO REDUCE THIS LOSS, ELIMINATE IT AND GIVE SOME RELIEF TO UTILITY CUSTOMERS.

STAFF HAS BEEN REVIEWING SOLUTIONS OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS. OBVIOUSLY, CREDIT CARD PROCESSORS ARE A DIME A DOZEN. THERE ARE HUNDREDS OUT THERE BUT OUR BIGGEST CHALLENGE IS FINDING ONE COMPATIBLE WITH OUR SOFTWARE. AS WE EVALUATE A SOLUTION, THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS WE LOOK FOR WORK IS IT COMPATIBLE WITH TYLER AND HOW MUCH EXPERIENCE DO THEY HAVE WITH THEM, GETTING COST AS LOW AS POSSIBLE, THE PAYMENT PLATFORM, WITH THE PROCESSOR, IS IT GOING TO BE A SEAMLESS TRANSITION FOR OUR CUSTOMERS AND AS WE SELECT THIS NEW PAYMENT PROCESSOR AND PLATFORM, AND THE COSTS GOING TO OUTWEIGH THE BENEFITS? WITH THAT BEING SAID, CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING INVOICE CLOUD AS OUR PAYMENT PLATFORM AND PROCESSOR. FOR CUSTOMERS, THAT MEANS CREDIT CARD FEES WILL BE REDUCED FROM 4.25% TO 2.7%.

THAT WILL STILL BE OFFERING FREE BANK DRAFT OPTIONS. WE WILL ALSO BE ENTERING THE 21ST CENTURY AND BEING ABLE TO OFFER APPLE PAY, PAYPAL, ACH AND EFT AND FINALLY, FOR CUSTOMERS, WE WILL CHANGE THE PAYMENT PLATFORM WHICH IS BASICALLY THE WEBSITE YOU ARE ACCESSING TO RETRIEVE YOUR UTILITY BILL AND MAKE PAYMENTS, BUT WE THINK THAT TRANSITION WILL BE VERY MINIMAL AND WON'T HAVE MUCH IMPACT ON THEIR EXPERIENCE. WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE CITY -- INVOICE CLOUD, WE WILL BE COMPLETELY OUT OF THE CREDIT CARD PROCESSING FEE PICTURE. WE WILL BE COMPLETELY BETWEEN THE PROCESSOR AND THE CUSTOMER. THE TWO DOLLAR PER TRANSACTION FEE WILL BE COMPLETELY ELIMINATED SO THAT IS GOING TO BE THE BIGGEST TRANSITION FOR CITY STAFF. WE WILL BE MOVING FROM REAL-TIME PROCESSING TO BATCH PROCESSING. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE DISCUSSED INTERNALLY AND TALKED TO OTHER CUSTOMERS OF INVOICE CLOUD. WE ARE WELL PREPARED TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES. FINALLY, THEY WILL BE WAIVING OUR IMPLEMENTATION FEE, SO THE ENTIRE TRANSITION WILL BE FREE OF COST TO US BESIDES OUR TIME, OF COURSE AND ANOTHER BENEFIT IS NOT ONLY IS THE SOLUTION COMPATIBLE WITH TYLER IN CODE, IT IS ALSO COMPATIBLE WITH WATER SMART OR THE WATER METER SOFTWARE YOU APPROVED A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO , SO AND FINALLY, THE OTHER REASON WE ARE RECOMMENDING INVOICE CLOUD IS THE WATER DISTRICTS AND MUNICIPALITIES WE TALKED TO THAT USE THE SOLUTION WITH TYLER HAVE GOTTEN RAVE REVIEWS.

NOT ONLY HAVE THEY BEEN WILLING TO TALK TO US, THEY HAVE BEEN EXCITED TO TALK TO US ABOUT IT.

THEY HAVE HAD NO COMPLAINTS, INCREDIBLE -- OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE INCREDIBLE CUSTOMER SERVICE AND THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL YOU SOMETHING BUT ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES WE HAVE TALKED TO HAVE SAID THIS CUSTOMER SERVICE HAS CONTINUED THROUGH THEIR WHOLE EXPERIENCE SO WITH THAT BEING SAID WE ARE RECOMMENDING INVOICE CLOUD IS OUR CREDIT CARD PROCESSOR AND EMPLOYMENT -- PAYMENT PLATFORM AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE 12.1 IS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. DISCUSSION ON THE

MOTION? >> THANK YOU GUYS. THIS IS ANOTHER EXEMPTION -- EXAMPLE OF US GETTING MORE PROFESSIONAL WAY SO NOT BACK -- MUNICIPALITIES ABOUT THE SOFTWARE OR TALKING TO THE COMPANY, HAVE THEY HAD ANY CYBER SECURITY BREACHES BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT IS BETWEEN THE CUSTOMER AND THEN PROCESSING PAYMENT. HAVE THEY HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THAT OR ARE THEY PRETTY SECURE IN THEIR

CYBERSECURITY WORLD? >> NO, THEY HAVE NOT HAD ANY EXPERIENCES WITH THAT AND I'M SURE IF THERE WERE INVOICE CLOUD, THEY WOULD NOT BE WITH INVOICE CLOUD ANYMORE.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE CITY WENT FROM FULLY SUBSIDIZING IT TO KIND OF LIKE A LITTLE BIT SUBSIDIZING IT THAN TOTALLY PUTTING IT ON THE CUSTOMER. AND THE RESIDENT . AT THE END OF THE DAY, AND EVEN BEFORE I GOT ON COUNSEL THIS IS SOMETHING I NOTICED PAYING MY BILLS. IT WAS

[01:25:05]

A CONCERN OF MINE AND AS IT CHANGED, IT ALWAYS WAS A RED FLAG AND I AM GLAD YOU ALL WERE HONEST AND TRANSPARENT WITH US ABOUT WHAT REALLY WAS GOING ON. WE HAD TO DIG INTO THE DETAILS AND HAVE MONICA TO REALLY EXPLAIN HOW IT WORKS BECAUSE YOU ARE USING THE SOFTWARE EVERY DAY AND SO I APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEEN WILLING TO GIVE US THAT YOU KNOW DIG INTO IT BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE JUST NEED TO BE HIGH-LEVEL BUT WITH THIS WE JUST DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE PERCENTAGE WAS SO-WE HAVE THE TWO DOLLAR TRANSACTION FEE AND WITH BILL'S KIND OF GOING HIGHER, REDUCING THE PERCENTAGE RATE WILL BE HELPFUL AS WELL AND THEN ALSO THE CITY WILL BE SAVING MONEY WITH GETTING RID OF THAT TWO DOLLAR TRANSACTION FEE AS WELL SO I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK. I KNOW IT HAS BEEN MONTHS OF TRYING TO FIND THE BEST COMPANY, SO THANK

YOU SO MUCH AGAIN. >> AS THIS LIKE A CONTRACT? >> YES, IT IS A FIVE YEAR

CONTRACT. >> AS THE 24 HOUR SUPPORT? WE HAVE AMPLE SUPPORT FOR IT?

>> YES, THAT'S ACTUALLY ANOTHER ONE OF THE SELLING POINTS WHY WE WANTED TO RECOMMEND THEM. WE'VE HAD INCREDIBLE FEEDBACK ON THE SUPPORT.

>> COOL. ARE THEY RUNNING REGULAR UPDATES TO OUR SYSTEM SO WE WILL GET TOP-OF-THE-LINE PIECE OF IT. INVOICE CLOUD ACTUALLY OFFERED TO BE HERE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AND I

DECLINED SO I REGRET THAT NOW. >> YES, JUST BE INTERESTING JUST WITH YOU KNOW , IF SOMETHING HAPPENED TO THEM, UNDERSTANDING WHAT THEIR BACKUP PROCESS IS , JUST BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE SO ESSENTIAL FOR THE CITY , UNDERSTANDING YOU KNOW WHAT THEIR CAPABILITIES ARE THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO UNDERSTAND. I'M PERSONALLY HAPPY APPLE PAY IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THE CITY IS OFFERING NOW. SO GOOD JOB, GUYS, THANK

YOU. >> THANKS. I KNOW SOME OF US WERE REALLY TOUGH ON THE SITUATION AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS NOT DROPPING EVERYTHING AND SPENDING A LOT OF FOCUS ON THIS. I KNOW 2% DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT BUT I THINK EVERY LITTLE BIT TO THE PEOPLE IT WILL HELP, MY NOTES FOR THIS ARE FIVE YEAR DEAL, OUT OF THREE URINALS AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP TRACK OF THE AUTO RENEWAL. I REALLY DON'T LIKE AUTO RENEWALS. I THINK WE HAD A DEAL , I WANT TO SAY IT WAS PARKS OR SOMETHING, SOMETHING HAPPENED WHERE IT WAS LIKE WE WANTED TO GET OUT OF SOMETHING AND THEY SAID WE ACTUALLY JUST RENEWED IT AND NOW YOU CAN'T GET OUT FOR ANOTHER TWO OR THREE YEARS AND THAT WAS A COUPLE YEARS AGO SO KEEPING TRACK OF THAT. THEY ARE BIG COMPANIES , CONCERNED ABOUT MONTHLY UPDATES OR YEARLY OR WHATEVER IT IS. THANK YOU GUYS I KNOW UNFORTUNATELY MOST PEOPLE WILL SEE IT AND YOU WILL GET COMMENTS BACK. I KNOW DEEP DOWN THEY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING FOR THEM.

>> IMPLEMENTATION SHOULD TAKE ABOUT 90 DAYS. I WILL BE ON THEM TO GET IT DONE FASTER.

>> ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CALL THE BOAT. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLA R >> AYE >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON

[12.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution 2024-151 adopting the Trails Master Plan (Jeff White)]

>> AYE >> MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 12.2, CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION RESOLUTION 2024- 151 ADOPTING THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN.

>> AT EVENING. THIS IS AN ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED IN THE FY 24 OUT OF PARKLAND IMPROVEMENT

FUND. WE HAVE MARRIED TO DO A PRESENTATION. >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE PARKS AND TRAILS PLAN SINCE LAST FALL AND SO I WILL GIVE YOU A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE DONE AND THE FINDINGS OF THE STUDY. THE OVERALL THEME OF THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN WAS THE IDEA OF BRIDGING NATURE AND NEIGHBORS SO THE TRAILS ARE AN EXCELLENT AVENUE TO DO THAT AND CONNECTING PEOPLE TO THE PARK SYSTEM WITHIN THE CITY AND ALSO PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE. THE WAY THAT WE APPROACH THE PROJECT WAS TO START WITH AN ANALYSIS PHASE FOLLOWED BY GATHERING INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY THROUGH AN ONLINE SURVEY AND THEN AFTER THAT WE DEVELOPED A VISION COMBINING

[01:30:09]

WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM THE ANALYSIS WITH THE INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THEN ULTIMATELY TAKING THAT INFORMATION IN PUTTING TOGETHER AN APPROACH OF HOW TO START TO IMPLEMENT THE TRAILS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. SOME KEY TAKEAWAYS. THE PLAN HAS ABOUT 27 N IT THAT PROPOSED. THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO THE PARK SENT TO SCHOOLS AND OTHER KEY ELEMENTS, KEY AREAS THROUGHOUT THE CITY WITHIN THIS. WE ALSO ARE LOOKING AT WHERE WE CAN PROTECT THE ECOSYSTEMS. YOU HAVE SEVERAL QUAKES -- CREEKS IN THE CITY SO THE IDEAS HOW CAN WE DEVELOP TRAILS ALONG THOSE CORRIDORS AND ALSO THINKING ABOUT HOW DOES THE CITY TRAIL SYSTEM LEAD TO THE REGIONAL TRAIL SYSTEM SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE HIGH-LEVEL PRINCIPLES THAT GUIDED THE PROCESS AND ALLOWED US TO DEVELOP THE PRIORITIES OF THE PLAN. HERE ARE SOME PICTURES OF WHERE YOU STARTED. THIS IS AN MAP OF WHAT THE EXISTING TRAIL SYSTEM LOOKS LIKE TODAY. THE TRAILS ARE SHOWN IN YELLOW ON THE MAP AND SO YOU CAN SEE THEY ARE CONNECTED IN SOME PLACES BUT LARGELY DISJOINTED AND AS YOU KNOW THE CITY IS CONTINUING TO EXPAND SO NOT ONLY DO WE LOOK AT WHAT THE GAPS WERE WITHIN THE CURRENT NETWORK AND CITY THAT IS THERE BUT ALSO TRYING TO ANTICIPATE SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENTS WE KNOW ARE COMING SOON AND SO HERE IS A MAP OF THE SOUTH AREA SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 79, AS WELL, AND WHERE THE TRAILS EXIST TODAY. JUST SOME HIGH-LEVEL ELEMENTS OF THE ANALYSIS. WE NOTICE THERE WERE AREAS WHERE THERE COULD BE ENHANCED SAFETY AND SECURITY, LESS INTERACTIONS WITH VEHICLES, TRYING TO FOCUS TRAILS ON AREAS THAT WERE NOT ALONG ROADWAYS PRIMARILY BUT TRY TO FIND PLACES FOR IT TO BE PRIMARILY OF THE STREAM AND ALONG THE CREEKS. WE ALSO WANTED TO IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY IN GENERAL. THERE ARE QUITE A FEW TRAILS. THE ONES THAT WERE THROUGH THE CITY THAT DO NOT CONNECT TO A NEARBY CUL-DE-SAC OR SIDEWALK SO THERE ARE SOME SEGMENTS THAT ARE QUITE SHORT BUT THE IDEAS THAT WE WOULD LINK TO THE PEOPLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE TRAIL SYSTEM ITSELF AND THEN ALSO DETERMINE WAYS YOU CAN REALLY NAVIGATE SOME OF THE OBSTRUCTIONS THAT ARE BARRIERS WITHIN THE CITY . THOSE ARE ANY MAJOR ROADWAYS, RAILROADS OR WATERWAYS THAT MAY PROHIBIT CROSSING RIGHT NOW 1 FOOT OR BY BICYCLE, SO TRYING TO DETERMINE WAYS THOSE ELEMENTS COULD BE RESOLVED. AS FAR AS THE OVERVIEW ON THE SURVEY, THE SURVEY WAS BOTH A SURVEY FOR THE PARKS AND THE TRAILS, SO IT COMBINED ALL OF THAT DATA TOGETHER, BUT WHAT WAS A TREND THROUGHOUT THE SURVEY RESULTS WAS THAT THE TRAILS WERE THE NUMBER ONE SELECTED AMENITY FOR THE COMMUNITY. THERE WERE 831 RESIDENTS WHO RESPONDED FOR THE TRAIL CONNECTIVITY AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE WERE BOTH THE HIGHEST RANKED RECREATIONAL AMENITIES THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. TAKING THAT INFORMATION, THERE WERE ALSO COMMENTS ABOUT WHERE THE TRAILS SHOULD CONNECT, COULD THERE POTENTIALLY BE NATURE TRAILS INTEGRATED INTO THE PROGRAM AND THERE WAS ALSO A BIG COMMENT ABOUT ENSURING THAT THE TRAILS HAD SHADE SO TAKING THAT INFORMATION WE CAN BIND IT AND OVERLAID IT INTO THE VISION AND SO THE VISION FOCUSES ON CONNECTING THE PEOPLE TO THE PARKS THROUGH THOSE GREENWAY CORRIDORS AND TRYING TO PROVIDE THAT SEAMLESS PATHWAYS, MINIMIZING INTERACTIONS OF VEHICLES WHERE POSSIBLE AND THEN IMPROVING THE OVERALL TRAIL USER EXPERIENCE AND SO THAT COMES THROUGH PROVIDING THE SHADE WHETHER THAT IS THROUGH SHADE TREES ALONG THE TRAIL, INCREASE IN REST AREAS THAT MAY HAVE SHADE PAVILIONS, BENCHES, DRINKING FOUNTAINS, JUST TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL EXPERIENCE ALONG THE TRAIL. THOSE WERE SOME OF THE COMPONENTS WE WERE LOOKING AT AND THAT ARE PRICED INTO THE BUDGETS WE HAVE DEVELOPED. IF YOU REMEMBER, THE MAP THAT HAD THE YELLOW, THERE WERE DISJOINTED AND VERY FEW LINES. YOU CAN SEE NOW HOW THE NETWORK STARTS TO COME TOGETHER. THERE ARE COMPONENTS SHOWN ALONG THE CREEKS THEMSELVES AND THEN THOSE ARE TRYING TO EXTEND AND CONNECT ALONG THE SPACES AND THEN HAVING THE PATHWAYS ALONG THE STREETS LEAD TO THOSE PRIMARY CORRIDORS. THE IDEA WAS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO CREATE A VERY COHESIVE SYSTEM ALLOWING ACCESS FROM THE DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES TO THE TRAILS AND ALLOWING THEM ACCESS THROUGHOUT THE CITY ITSELF, SO THIS WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE WAY FOR TRANSPORTATION IN ADDITION TO RECREATION AND SO THIS IS THE NORTH NETWORK OF 79 AND THEN SOUTH OF 79, SO ATTENTION WAS PAID TO BOTH SIDES OF THE HIGHWAY, SO IT HAS A COHESIVE ROUTE PROPOSED THROUGHOUT THIS AREA. THE COLORS THAT YOU SEE WE HAVE DESIGNATED TRAILS THAT ARE ALONG STREETS AND ONE COLOR TRAILS ALONG GREENWAY CORRIDORS AND WE ALSO -- THE ONES YOU SEE

[01:35:08]

IN RED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE FAR OUT DUE TO THE DEVELOPMENT NEEDING TO OCCUR FIRST, OR ROADWAYS BEING DEVELOPED, SO THAT HELPS TO KIND OF GUIDE YOUR PRIORITIZATION AS WELL, SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO LOSE THE FACT THAT THESE TRAILS NEED TO BE PLANNED FOR, TO SHOW THAT IT IS DOCUMENTED BUT ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT WILL BE SOME YEARS BEFORE THESE ARE REPLACED.

WITHIN THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, THERE ARE ENLARGEMENTS OF ALL OF THE ZONES LIKE THIS AND JUST TO SHOW YOU AN EXAMPLE, PART OF OUR PROCESS WAS TO INVENTORY THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF CROSSINGS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED THAT COULD IMPACT COST AND SO ON HERE YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENT COLORS OF THE DOTS AND HOW THOSE RELATE TO THE INTERSECTIONS CROSSING WITH ROADWAYS, WATERWAYS, POTENTIALLY WITH THE RAILROAD AND SO EACH OF THOSE ELEMENTS -- IT ALLOWS US TO REFINE THE BUDGETS BUT ALSO ALLOWS PLANNING AND TO UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF THESE, FOR EXAMPLE, CROSSING 79 WOULD REQUIRE MORE INTERACTION AND REGULATORY PERMITTING AND SO TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, ALL OF THAT INFORMATION THAT INFORMS PRIORITIZATION, AS WELL. ANOTHER COMPONENT OF THIS IS THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A SET OF TRAIL DESIGN STANDARDS SO THAT IT IS COHESIVE , THE WAY THE TRAILS ARE DEVELOPED, WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SHADE TREE PLANTING, SOLAR LIGHTING , THE FREQUENCY WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE SO THAT WE INSURED THE TRAIL USER EXPERIENCE AND SO THIS INFORMATION IS INCLUDED IN ADDITION TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR ACTUAL TYPES OF MATERIAL SO THERE IS A COHESIVE LOOK THROUGHOUT THE TRAIL SYSTEM SO THAT IS ALL WITHIN THE DOCUMENT, AS WELL. AS FAR AS THE IMPLEMENTATION, WE ARE LOOKING AT A 10 YEAR PROCESS. ONE TO THREE YEARS, FOUR TO SIX YEARS, SEVEN TO 10. THE IDEA IS THE ONE TO THREE YEARS ARE TARGETING TRAILS PARKS INTO SCHOOLS AND THE BUILDOUT OF THE REGIONAL CORRIDOR ALONG BRUSHY CREEK. IT ALSO THEN SOME CONSIDERATIONS WITHIN THAT ONE TO THREE YEAR TIME FRAME WILL BE LOOKING TO THE FUTURE FOR ANY TYPE OF ACQUISITIONS, PARTNERSHIPS THAT MAY NEED TO OCCUR IN ORDER TO SECURE LAND TO DEVELOP THE TRAILS. THE FOUR TO SIX YEAR RANGE ARE ONES THAT WILL BE SOMEWHAT DEPENDENT ON ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ARE SOME DEVELOPMENTS AND SO THOSE HAVE BEEN SHIFTED OUT TO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AND FOLLOWED BY THE SEVEN TO 10, WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT REALLY FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS NEED TO COME IN AND SOME ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD HAPPEN BEFORE THOSE ARE CONSIDERED OR WOULD REALLY BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY AND SO THIS IS HOW THE TRAILS HAVE BEEN GROUPED. EACH ONE OF THE ONES HAS BEEN PRICED AND THEY HAVE THE MILEAGE, PRIORITY LEVELS, COST, AND THEN ALSO THE CURRENT OWNERSHIP OF WHAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE TRAIL WOULD GO, AND SO IN SOME INSTANCES, IT IS WITHIN CITY LAND ALREADY. SOME OF IT IS ON HOA PROPERTY THAT WILL REQUIRE SOME PARTNERSHIP SO ALL OF THAT IS BEEN DOCUMENTED SO IT CAN BE USED FOR PLANNING WHEN EACH OF THESE TRAIL SEGMENTS IS BEING CONSIDERED. IT IS DIVIDED INTO TWO CATEGORIES, OFFSHOOT TRAILS, WHICH WERE ONES ALONG THE GREENWAYS AND PARKS AND THEN THE ON STREET TRAILS ARE THE ONES WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY'S THEMSELVES SO THAT IS BY A LARGE ALL IN THE CITY PROPERTY TODAY AND SO THESE WOULD BE THE TRAILS THAT ARE ALONG EXISTING ROADWAYS THAT MAYBE THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN REDEVELOPED BUT THE TRAIL HASN'T BEEN INSTALLED YET SO WE HAVE THAT NOTED HERE AND WHAT THAT COST IN DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE. OVERALL, THE DOCUMENT IS MEANT TO BE A GUIDING TOOL. WE KNOW THINGS WILL SHIFT AND CHANGE DEPENDING ON HOW THE PROJECTS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED WITH ROADWAYS. THIS WILL HELP GIVE AN IDEA OF HOW THE TRAILS CAN FOLLOW IN AND REALLY START TO CREATE THAT COHESIVE NETWORK. IT WILL DEPEND IF NEW COMMUNITIES COME ONLINE THERE MAY BE A NEED TO SHIFT ONE TRAIL HIGHER UP IN THE PRIORITY LIST THAN ANOTHER. THERE IS A FOCUS ON TRYING TO RELEASE CONNECTIVITY ISSUES BUT ALSO REALITIES ASSOCIATED WITH PERMITTING WITH SOME ENTITIES THAT ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH. THE OVERALL IDEA IS REALLY TRYING TO INCREASE ACCESS AND IMPROVE SAFETY FOR TRAIL USERS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY SO THOSE ARE THE PURPOSE AND THE GUIDING ELEMENTS THAT SHOULD INFORM ANY SHIFTS IN THE PLAN OR PRIORITIZATION. FINALLY, A FEW FUNDING SOURCES WERE IDENTIFIED. OF COURSE THERE ARE SOME GRANTS AVAILABLE THROUGH TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE. THERE ARE SOME FEDERAL GRANTS THAT ALSO FUND TRAILS PROJECTS, SOME OTHER SOURCES OR POTENTIAL CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS AND FINALLY UTILIZING SOME OF THE BOND FUNDING THAT EXIST TODAY, AS WELL. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> ANY QUESTIONS OR ACTION FROM COUNSEL? >> MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION

[01:40:03]

2024-151 IS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AN AMENDMENT TO THAT , THAT WE WILL HAVE TO COME BACK WITHIN THREE MONTHS ON A RECOMMENDATION PLAN FOR THE FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MASTER PLAN.

>> ACCEPT THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> IS LET ME KNOW SECOND?

>> YES. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. WE ALWAYS TAKE THESE PLANS AND THEN WE SHELVE THEM AND THEN WE END UP DEBATING LATER ON TO REDO TRAILS, TO REDO APART, DO WE DO ROAD AND I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS TO HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PRESENT PROFESSIONALS ON WITH THE RECOMMENDATION, HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO SEE LIKE YOU WANT US TO CONTRIBUTE $400,000 PER YEAR ON A 20 OR $30 MILLION PROJECT YOU GUYS ANTICIPATE SPONSORSHIPS IF THE BENCHES EVERY HALF MILE, THAT'S A LOT OF BENCHES SO YOU ANTICIPATE SOME KIND OF EDGE SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM TO GET THAT GOING BECAUSE I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT TO USE TAX DOLLARS ON THINGS THAT ARE VERY EASY FOR US TO CLEAR OUT AND THEN HOW WE CAN MONETIZE THE CURRENT TRAIL SYSTEM TO HELP FUND THE EXPANSION OF THE TRAILS AND THAT WAY IF WE GET SOME SORT OF PLAN MAYBE WE CAN LOOK AT THE COME UP HERE WITH A GREAT IDEA WE CAN SAY HEY, WOULD YOU ADDED HALF A MILE OF TRAIL AND THEY GO YEAH, WILL DO WHATEVER WE LIKE SIGN THEM UP SEGMENT WHATEVER BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT IS ONE OF THE MOST REQUESTED ITEMS BUT ALSO WHEN WE JUST SAID SATURDAY TO KIND OF PUNT AND COME UP WITH SPONSORSHIPS SO BECAUSE ROADS ARE SO BIG RIGHT NOW. SO I

APPRECIATE YOU SECONDING THAT. >> THE OTHER ASPECT FOR FUNDING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US PUSH AS MUCH AS WE CAN IS TRYING TO GET THE COUNTY INVOLVED. I KNOW THEY JUST ANNOUNCED THEY WERE BUILDING A TRAIL BETWEEN LEANDER AND ROUND ROCK AND I BELIEVE WE DID ASK FOR CONNECTIVITY ACROSS 130 WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING FOR PROJECTS FOR THE LAST BOND THAT THEY DID AND IT DID NOT MAKE THEIR LIST AND WE NEED TO KEEP TRYING.

THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANOTHER COUNTY PARKS FUND FOR PROBABLY A FEW YEARS BUT WE NEED TO KEEP TRYING TO GET THE COUNTY INVOLVED AND ANYTHING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED A REGIONAL CONNECTION WHETHER IT IS BETWEEN US AND TAYLOR OR US AND ROUND ROCK AND KEEP TALKING TO THEM, KEEP PUSHING THOSE PROJECTS AND TRY AND GET THEM TO FUND AS MUCH AS THEY CAN

BECAUSE THAT OBVIOUSLY HELPS US GET IT DONE SO. >> GREAT POINT. WE DO THAT. WE ARE KIND OF AT OUR ADJUST CITY LIMITS. WE NEED THEM TO KIND OF BRING IT FORWARD AND WOULD CONSTANTLY REMIND THEM OF THAT. THEY WERE ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN THIS PLAN, AS WELL, SO IT IS ALWAYS ON HER FOREFRONT TO HAVE THAT CONNECTIVITY BECAUSE THAT TRAIL WILL ULTIMATELY GET FROM HUTTO TO LEANDER OR LIBERTY HILL SO THAT'S A BIG BONUS FOR ALL THE BIKERS, THE WALKERS,

PEOPLE WHO GET OUT AND JUST HAVE A NICE WALK IN THE PARK. >> IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE WE CAN -- IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY SQUEEZE ANYTHING OUT OF LIKE TEXAS A&M FOR -- THAT WOULD GET -- IT'S NOT UP WITH TREES BUT IT'S LIKE THE TREE CITY ACCREDITATION THAT WE GET. IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN APPLY FOR OR LOOK AT POTENTIALLY THROUGH TEXAS A&M OR THROUGH ANY SORT OF ENTITY UTILIZING THAT ACCREDITATION TO SAY HEY, WE HAVE THAT AND APPLY

FOR SOMETHING? >> WE ARE ALWAYS ON THE LOOKOUT FOR ALTERNATE FUNDING SOURCES THAT SAVE OUR TAXPAYERS DOLLARS AND ONE OF THE HIGHLIGHTS HERE WAS THE TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE GRANT AND THAT IS AN 80-20 MATCHING GRANT SO THEY PONY UP 80, WE CONTRIBUTE THE PART 20 AND SO WE ALWAYS LOOK AT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. THOSE TYPICALLY ARE NOT AS EXPENSIVE IN DOLLARS, BUT EVERY BIT HELPS, SO WE CAN DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO EXPLORE THOSE

OPTIONS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, IF ANYTHING, SOMETHING THERE. I'VE

GOT TO IMAGINE THERE IS SOMETHING. >> YES AND TO COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON'S POINT, WE PITCH THIS TO THE WILCO WHEN THEY WERE DOING THEIR BOND INITIATIVES AS A CONNECTION POINT TO EXTEND THIS TRAIL OVER THE CREEK AND HELPING TO SPUR THEIR WISH TO CONTINUE EXPANDING THEIR TRAIL INTO OURS, SO THERE IS SOME

[01:45:01]

COLLABORATION THERE. IT JUST DIDN'T WORK OUT WITH ALL THE PROJECTS THEY HAD.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD >> AYE . WITH A FRIENDLY

AMENDMENT. >> THAT WAS JUST ADDING IN AN EXTRA ACTION ITEM. HE ACCEPTED THE REPORT AND SAID AND I'D LIKE A FUNDING THING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A MATERIAL CHANGE.

YOU MADE AN AMENDMENT, THAT'S FINE.

YOU GUYS GO AHEAD. >> SO WE ARE DOING TWO SEPARATE VOTES?

>> OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. AYE >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR >> HEY,

>> MAYOR SNYDER >> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON >> AYE. PASSES 7-0 . I WILL VOTE ON THE OVERALL ITEM UNLESS

THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL VOTE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON

>> AYE >> MAYOR SNYDER >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK >> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD

>> AYE >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON >> AYE

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR >> HEY, >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON

[12.3. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-152 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Work Authorization #1 with Archer Western for Construction Manager At Risk (CMAR) services associated with the South Wastewater Treatment Plant (S WWTP) expansion to 6.0 MGD in the amount of $38,224,957.64 (CIP WW-06 2023) (Matt Rector)]

>> AYE >> MOTION PASSES 7-0. ITEM THREE, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION AND RESOLUTION R-2024-152 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A WORK AUTHORIZATION NUMBER ONE WITH ARCHER WESTERN ASSOCIATED WITH SELF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND THE AMOUNT OF 38 MILLION 224,957 DOLLARS CIP WW -- THERE 62023.

>> GOOD EVENING AGAIN MAYOR COUNCIL. NORMALLY THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN ON CONSENT BUT WE FELT LIKE BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A LARGE NUMBER AND LARGE PROJECT FOR THE CITY, WE MIGHT WANT TO GO AHEAD AND PUT IT IN REGULAR RESOLUTIONS AND DISCUSS IT IN OPEN SESSION RATHER THAN PULLING IT OUT FOR DISCUSSION. AS INDICATED, THIS IS FOR THE SOUTHWEST -- WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. THIS IS THE FIRST AUTHORIZATION FOR ARCHER WEST. WE HAD SELECTED THEM LAST YEAR TO BE OUR CONSTRUCTION MANAGER. THE PROJECT WAS DESIGNED AND SO WE ARE ANTICIPATING FOUR ULTIMATE PACKAGES WERE THREE ULTIMATE PACKAGES . WORK AUTHORIZATION AND THEN WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU WITH WORK AUTHORIZATION TWO AND THEN WORK AUTHORIZATION THREE. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A COST SAVING MEASURE. IT IS A TIME-SAVING MEASURE. IT IS AN EFFICIENCY TOOL SO THE WAY WE DO THESE THINGS IS BREAKOUT THE WORK PACKAGES AND BASICALLY WHEN WE CREATE THESE, THERE IS A RISK REGISTER FOR WE SAY OKAY, THESE ARE THE RISKS. WE ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE RISKS, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. WE WALKED THROUGH ALL THAT WITH EVERYBODY. WE COME UP WITH THE COST AND THEN THEY SAY THIS IS THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE AS LONG AS NONE OF THOSE BAD THINGS THAT WE PUT ON THE RISK REGISTER HAPPENS THEN WE ARE NOT GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH THE CHANGE. AND SO THAT IS KIND OF WHERE WE ARE. HERE'S A TIMELINE SHOWING YOU FOR WHAT WE THINK IS GOING TO PLAY OUT SO WORK AUTHORIZATION ONE, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE DOING TONIGHT. WE WILL GET THE HUNDRED PERCENT DOCUMENTS TOMORROW AFTER WE APPROVE THIS . WE WON'T MOBILIZE NEXT WEEK AND THEN START THE PROCESS WORKING ON WORK AUTHORIZATION TWO AND BRING THAT BACK TO YOU NEXT MONTH AND THEN AFTER THAT WHEN WE WILL START BRING BACK WORK AUTHORIZATION THREE . GETTING THEM WORKING, GETTING THINGS MOVING, WE ALREADY HAVE THE MONEY . WE BORROW THAT MONEY EARLIER AND SO THAT IS HOW IT PLAYS OUT . AND I DIDN'T EVEN MENTION WE HAVE JEFF FROM GARVER AND THORTON FROM ARCHER WEST SO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR ME TALKING, YOU WANT TO HEAR THE GUYS WERE ACTUALLY DOING ALL THIS EXPLAIN IT TO YOU, I WILL BE GLAD TO SIT DOWN AND LET THEM TAKE OVER BUT IN THE MEANTIME I'LL KEEP RUNNING THROUGH IT AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS WE CAN CALL THEM UP AND THEY CAN TELL YOU WHAT I SAID WRONG. THE WORK AUTHORIZATION COST, THE COST OF

[01:50:03]

THE WORK PLUS THE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT COST PLOTS THE CMAR FEE PLUS THE CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCE.

HERE'S THAT BREAKDOWN , THE LONG LEAD EQUIPMENT , WHICH IS EVERYTHING IS TAKING LONGER TO ORDER NOW. THE EARLY SITE WORK, THE SECONDARY CLARIFIERS , GETTING A SURVEYOR OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE WORKING IN THE RIGHT SPOTS, THAT KIND OF STUFF AND THEN CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT

COST COME OUT TO ABOUT $38,000,224 . >> THAT WAS ABOUT?

>> ABOUT, AND ONE THING I DID WANT TO POINT OUT IS ALL A LONG WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT TOTAL WHEN WE ARE DONE BEING HUNDRED AND $80 MILLION PROJECT AND SO WHAT I TOLD THESE GUYS AS THE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO WANT TO KNOW AS WE WORK THROUGH THESE WORK AUTHORIZATIONS WHAT WE THOUGHT THE COST WAS GOING TO BE FOR THIS ONE, AND WHAT THE COST ACTUALLY IS SO WE CAN START TRACKING WHETHER WE ARE OVERBUDGET, UNDER BUDGET, ON BUDGET, ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS AND SO AS YOU CAN SEE, FOR THIS ONE , THE 90% COST THAT WE GOT FROM THE ENGINEER AND THE CMAR WAS THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT $24 MILLION FOR THIS -- THE ACTUAL ITEMS IN THE PACKAGE. THE ACTUAL COST AS IT WAS BID OUT FOR THOSE ITEMS IN THE PACKAGE IS 19 MILLION SO THAT IS SO FAR JUST REMEMBER WERE NOT DONE WITH THE PROJECT, THIS IS FIRST AUTHORIZATION WITH $4 MILLION UNDER WHAT WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BE, SO IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS, $108 MILLION PROJECT MAY NOT SEEM THAT GREAT BUT IT'S STILL $4 MILLION , AND SO THAT IS KIND OF THE END OF THE SLIDE THERE. I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A QUICK RUN THROUGH LIKE I SAID WE DO HAVE PEOPLE FROM ARCHER WESTERN AND WE HAVE JEFF FROM GARVER , AND HE IS OVERSEEING THE DESIGN TEAM ON THIS PROCESS SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY ANSWER MOST OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

>> QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL? >> I WILL SAY IT'S GREAT THAT WE ARE 4 MILLION UNDER AT THIS POINT , BUT THAT MAKES ME VIEW IT NOW IS $176 MILLION PROJECT, NOT AS $180 MILLION PROJECT

THAT HAS $4 MILLION TO PLAY WITH. >> UNDERSTOOD. MY DIRECTION TO

THE MOST LET'S SEE IF WE CAN DO THIS ON EVERY PACKAGE, BUT. >> GREAT.

>> GREAT. WITH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION R-2024-152

AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. I WILL SAY THIS, KNOWING THAT I KNOW THE OPPOSITE, BUT I'M NOT HAPPY WE ARE 4 MILLION UNDER BUDGET BECAUSE IT IS EASY TO THROW A BIG NUMBER OUT, COME BACK UNDER AND THEN WE'LL PAT OURSELVES ON THE BACK. I'M LOOKING MORE FOR -- I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOT TO BE IDENTICAL BUT LIKE IN MY WORLD, BEING OVERBUDGET IS JUST AS BAD AS UNDER BUDGET BECAUSE IT IS, HOW DID YOU NOT GET IT THAT GOOD AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHO

MADE THE COST. GARVER CAME UP WITH THE ESTIMATES? >> THE WAY THE COST MODEL WORKS WHEN YOU DO A CMAR IS THE ENGINEER WILL COME UP WITH THEIR OPINION AND PROBABLE COST AND THEN THEY WILL KICK THE ENTIRE DESIGN OVER TO THE CMAR AND THEN HE SENDS HIS TEAM OUT AND THEY ACTUALLY GO OUT AND TALK TO CONTRACTORS AND COME UP WITH A MORE ROBUST COST ESTIMATE. BECAUSE ENGINEERS, BY NATURE WE ARE CONSERVATIVE. WE TEND TO ADD CONTINGENCY AND ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS AND SO THE ENGINEER GIVES US A NUMBER AND THEN THE SEYMOUR -- CMAR COMES IN WITH THEIR NUMBER AND THEN WE GO THROUGH EVERYTHING AND LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCES AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE KIND OF CALM TO AN AGREEMENT ON THAT, THE NEXT STEP IS FOR US TO DO A WORKSHOP WHERE WE WENT THROUGH LINE ITEM BY LINE AUTO AND CITY WE REALLY NEED THIS, CAN WE BRING THIS COST DOWN SO YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS -- LET'S JUST SAY IT WAS $200 MILLION ONLY BECAUSE WE HAD 20% CONTINGENCY IN THERE. WE WENT LINE BY LINE ONCE WE HAD AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ENGINEER AND THE CONTRACTOR ON WHAT THAT COST WAS AND THEN STARTED PUSHING THEM SAYING DO WE NEED THIS, CAN WE ELIMINATE THIS? HOW DO WE REDUCE THIS? HOW DO WE CHANGE THIS? WHAT CAN WE DO FIND COST SAVINGS AND SO THEN WE SQUEEZED IT DOWN YOU KNOW , EVERY STEP OF THE WAY ON THOSE COST ESTIMATES BUT ULTIMATELY THOSE COST ESTIMATES DON'T

[01:55:02]

REALLY MEAN ANYTHING UNTIL WE GET TO THIS PHASE. >> WHERE I'M COMING FROM IS I DON'T WANT YOU TO SAY 20 MILLION, ESCO OH, WE'VE GOT 20 MILLION, WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO FUND IT AND THEN YOU GO WELL, WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT WE ARE UNDER BUDGET SO WE WILL JUST GET UP -- UPSET SO WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPEND IT SO TO ME, WHEN YOU GUYS BRING US STUFF, YOU SHOULD ALREADY HAVE EVERYTHING SQUEEZED OUT TO THE BARE MINIMUM AND THEN US FIGURE OUT AND SWEAT BULLETS ON HOW TO FUND IT BUT IF WE GO OUT AND BORROW $277 MILLION AND WE END UP OVER BORROWING 30 MILLION , WE ARE GOING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SPEND IT BUT ULTIMATELY THE TAXPAYER LOSES SO TO ME, I'VE ARGUED BEFORE, MOST OF OUR PROJECTS SEEM LIKE THEY ARE WAY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN ANYTHING ELSE OUT THERE. THE CITY MANAGER SAYS THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC. I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO SHARPEN THE PENCILS BETTER BEFORE YOU BRING IT TO US AND THAT IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT. 4 MILLION IS GREAT BUT I'D RATHER IT BE $400,000 BECAUSE WE NEVER CAME OUT OF 24 MILLION WE CAME OUT OF 4,500,000 SO THAT'S ALL I'M LOOKING FOR IS AS YOU'RE TALKING $300 MILLION IN PROJECTS , I'M GOING TO BE AS CLOSE TO THAT AS POSSIBLE AND EXCITED IF WE SAY 50 MILLION BECAUSE I'M SAYING THINGS. I GET THAT IT'S DIFFICULT EITHER WAY AND DISLIKE WILL THEN YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO BE HAPPY AND I GUESS THERE IS TRUTH TO THAT LIKE YOU NEVER GOING TO BE HAPPY UNLESS YOU'RE REALLY CLOSE BUT WE OUGHT TO KNOW PRETTY MUCH ENOUGH OF THESE GET DONE ACROSS THE COUNTRY WHATEVER PIPE COST AND CONCRETE COST AND HOW YOU GOT THAT. THE ONLY OTHER THING I WAS TRYING TO FIND IT, I DID NOT WRITE WHAT PAGE IT WAS ON, BUT THERE WAS A $2 MILLION ALLOCATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY IN HERE. WHERE ARE WE GETTING RIGHT-OF-WAY AT? I LOOKED, BUT SOMETIMES -- THERE IS THAT MOVIE, I THINK IT WAS A JOHN GRISHAM MOVIE, WHERE THEY ASKED FOR SOME LEGAL WORK I THINK IT WAS THE FIRM WHERE THEY ASKED FOR BOXES AND BOXES IN THE GOT EVERYTHING AND SO THE LAWSUIT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR SO SOMEWHERE I SAW LIKE 2 MILLION RIGHT-OF-WAY AND I WAS WONDERING WHAT WE WERE BUYING

WITH THAT. >> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE IS WHAT IS LISTED IN THE FISCAL NOTES ON WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS WE RECENTLY CHANGED THE WAY WE DO OUR FISCAL NOTES SO I HAVE INSTRUCTED MY STAFF TO DO WAS I SAID, HERE IS BECAUSE WHEN WE DID THE CIP, WE DID NOT BREAK IT DOWN THE WAY THE COUNCIL IS ASKING US TO BREAK IT DOWN NOW SO WE DIDN'T DO, YOU KNOW, IF THE BUDGET WAS $90 MILLION, WE DID NOT BREAK IT DOWN INTO ENGINEERING AND DESIGN EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS TESTING, RIGHT-OF-WAY, CONSTRUCTION AND SO WHEN WE WERE ASKED TO BRING THAT INTO THE FISCAL NOTES, WE HAD TO COME UP WITH A WAY TO APPROXIMATE A BREAKDOWN THAT WAS REASONABLE AND SO I THINK I MISSED IT BUT WITH MY ENGINEER DID WAS SHE DID WHAT I TOLD HER TO DO WHICH IS SHE SAID THIS PERCENT OF THE PROJECT IS FOR DESIGN. THIS PERCENT IS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THIS PERCENT IS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> AND RESAVE ANOTHER 2.7 MILLION? >> NO, SIR.

>> OKAY, IT'S ALMOST LIKE A TEMPLATE OF CUSTOMER TRADITIONALLY 5% GOES TO RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SHE JUST DID THERE? I SAW THAT AND I WAS LIKE I THOUGHT MAYBE WE WERE DOING SOMETHING WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY OR SOMETHING.

>> NO. I SHOULD'VE CUT THAT IN THE FISCAL NOTE. >> NO PROBLEM. THANKS. AND AGAIN , I GET IT. I'M NOT TRYING TO BE OVERLY CRITICAL BUT THEN I JUST COME ACROSS THAT WAY SO I APOLOGIZE. JUST THE BEST WAY WE CAN DO IT BECAUSE WE ARE UP HERE FIGHTING AND WORKING ON HOW TO FUND ALL THIS STUFF AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE GO OUT AND PAY PEOPLE'S TAXES WE'VE EXHAUSTED EVERYTHING SO IT'S JUST A DIFFERENCE OF SEQUENCE OF EVENTS, MAYBE. ANYWAY, THANKS.

>>> THAT WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF COMPETITION. AS WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE COST MODELS, WE ARE GETTING BUDGET NUMBERS FROM SUPPLIERS. WE DON'T HAVE THE SPECS FULLY DEVELOPED AT THAT POINT IN TIME. AS WE WORK WITH GARBER, AS WE GET COMMENTS BACK FROM THE MANUFACTURERS WE ARE

[02:00:05]

TALKING TO, WE DIAL INTO WHAT IS NEEDED FOR TREATMENT, BUT WOULD THIS EQUIPMENT. THAT JUST DRIVES THE PRICE DOWN. OUR 90% COST MODEL WAS BASED ON BUDGET NUMBERS THEY ARE GIVING US. THEY WON'T LOCK IN A PRICE UNTIL A PROJECT IS ACTUALLY BID. I THINK PART OF IT IS THEM BEING CONSERVATIVE . I WANT TO COME BACK HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY TOLD US IT WOULD BE FOR THE WHOLE YEAR. THE SECONDARY CLARIFIERS, THERE WAS LANGUAGE IN HERE REGARDING THE FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION CHANGE AS TO WHAT WAS NOTED . IT REQUIRED A SIGNIFICANT BIGGER SLAB TO RESIST THE UP LIFT FORCES IN CASE THERE WAS A MAJOR FLOOD.

WE HAVE THEM WORKING THROUGH TO POSSIBLY REDUCE THAT ALONG THE WAYS, WHICH WOULD COME OUT OF THIS AND GO BACK INTO THE

CONTINGENCY FUND. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> THAT QUESTION IS PROBABLY MORE FOR CITY MANAGER. ASSUMING THAT 4 MILLION DOESN'T GET EATEN UP IN THE LATER WORK AUTHORIZATIONS, COULD THAT MONEY BE SPENT ON ANY UTILITY PROJECTS, OR WOULD HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO WASTEWATER?

>> MAYOR PRO TEM, I BELIEVE THE CEOS WERE SOLD FOR THE PURPOSE OF UTILITY WORK, BUT IT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE DEPENDING ON THE NOTICE OF SALE, AND THE WAY THE LINKAGE -- LANGUAGES LISTED IN

THE BOND DOCUMENT. >> WE COULDN'T DO IT FOR ROADS, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD SHIFT IT AMONG OTHER UTILITY PROJECTS. I WASN'T SURE HOW THE BOND WAS.

>> YES. FINANCE DIRECTOR, FOR THE RECORD. YES, ONCE YOU DO AS IS STATED IN THE NOTICE OF INTENT, IT STATES FOR WATER, WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS. YES, THAT COULD BE THEN SENT TO ANOTHER PROJECT IN THAT CATEGORY. OKAY?

>> ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE BOAT.

[12.4. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-153 approving the municipal services agreement for the proposed annexation of the Penske tract, 19.804 acres, more or less, of land, located north of the northeast corner of US 79 and SH 130. (Ashley Bailey)]

HAVE ITEM 12-4. CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION APPROVING THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE TRACT, 19.804, ACRES, MORE OR LESS , OF LAND, LOCATED NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF U.S. 79 AND STATE HIGHWAY

130. >> GOOD EVENING AGAIN MAYOR AND COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, ASHLEY BAILEY, DIRECTOR SERVICES. THIS AGREEMENT IS A RESOLUTION. IT ATTACHES THE EXTENSION REQUEST AND IS A RESOLUTION THAT IS BEEN ATTACHED TO THE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE. THE PUBLIC HEARINGS HAVE ALL BEEN TABLED . WE CAN GO AHEAD AND GET THE SIGNATURES ON THE FOR THE VOLUNTEERING ANNEXATION WE WILL BE SEEING AUGUST 15TH.

>> QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL, OR ACTION?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE R-2024-153 APPROVING THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF

THE TRACT AS PRESENTED. >> DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE 19.8 ACRES, IS IT ALL THREE PIECES OF THOSE? ALL THREE, I GUESS THE LOTS RIGHT THERE. OR

IS IT ONE? >> IT IS NOT SHOWING UP ON MY SIDE. IT WILL BE THE TRACT AT THE FAR NORTH THAT ENDS IN 23.

AND THEN IT WILL BE THE SOUTHERNMOST TRACT FOR THE 895.

THIS IS THE FULL AMOUNT THAT YOU WILL END UP SEEING. IT'S THE TOPMOST AND SOUTHERNMOST IN THE MIDDLE WAS ACTUALLY ANNEXED SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND ZONED MULTIFAMILY. ARE THEY TAKING ON

THAT PIECE IN THE MIDDLE, TOO? >> THEY ARE.

>> OKAY. >> IT HAS NOT COME BEFORE IS BECAUSE IT HAS MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGREEMENT?

>> CORRECT. THIS IS FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TRACT , AND

[02:05:02]

OUR PROCESSES CHANGED A LITTLE BIT. THIS IS REALLY FOR THE FULL USE, BUT DEALERSHIPS ALSO HAVE -- SHOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH

OF A DIFFERENCE OF IMPACT. >> OKAY, YOU HIT ON MY QUESTION. ARE WE ALLOWED TO SAY WHAT THE PROPOSED USE IS GOING

TO BE AT THIS TIME? >> SURE, IT'S GOING TO BE A CAR DEALERSHIP. WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW IS IT WILL BE DEVELOPED ACROSS TWO PHASES. I'VE HEARD ONE THAT STARTS WITH A T THAT IS NOT TESLA, I AM NOT SURE IF THEY WANT TO --

WANT ME TO SAY THE ACTUAL -- >> IT IS NOT TESLA.

>> IN LAST WEEK'S PACKET. I GUESS IT IS TOYOTA. IT'S THE

OTHER T. >> HAVE WE DETERMINED, YET IF SOME FORM OF SALES TAXES GENERATED OFF THE CARS?

>> YES, ALBERTA DID LOOK INTO THAT AND GOT THE ANSWER. THE SHORT ANSWER IS, WE DO NOT COLLECT . DO NOT COLLECT SALES TAX ON NEW CAR SALES. WE DO COLLECT SALES TAX ON ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN THE MECHANIC SHOP, AND THE WORK THAT IS DONE THERE. WHENEVER THERE IS A SERVICE THAT'S DONE, THAT YOU DO COLLECT SALES TAX ON BUT NOT ON NEW CAR SALES.

>> WHAT ABOUT USED CAR SALES? >> DID YOU FIND THAT ONE? I KNOW YOU WERE LOOKING AT THAT ONE, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER THE ANSWER TO THAT ONE. I THINK THEY ARE ALL THE SAME. I'M NOT

SURE. >> YOU SAID NEW .

>> I SAID NO BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A NEW CAR

DEALERSHIP PREDOMINATELY. >> WE ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO TRADE

IN, RIGHT? >> FINANCE DIRECTOR, FOR THE RECORD. NO, IT WOULD BE TREATED LIKE A NEW CAR SALES, IT WOULD

NOT BE INCLUDED. >> CAR DEALERSHIPS WE DON'T

GET. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> YET. IT IS STATE. THE STATE HAS A PORTION OF THAT SALES TAX THAT GETS REIMBURSED TO THE COUNTIES THAT HELPS PAY FOR COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AND THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. BUT THERE IS ZERO THAT COMES TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

>> PAY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EACH YEAR.

>> PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX SHOULD BE ON THE INVENTORY WHICH IS WHY YOU USUALLY SEE THEM TRYING TO DIAL DOWN THEIR INVENTORY AT

THE END OF THE YEAR. >> SO THEY --

>> THEY HAVE LESS THAN SO MANY DAYS AND IT DOESN'T COUNT. ALL THE LOOPHOLES. THEY KNOW HOW TO DO IT.

>> ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE BOAT.

[13.1. Consideration and possible action on the allocation of Outside Agency Funds for FY2025 (Kristi Barnes)]

HAVE ITEM 13 ONE, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION OF THE ALLOCATION OF OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL.

BARNES COMMUNITY AND CULTURE OFFICER FOR THE RECORD. THIS YEAR, THE PLACES OF ONE, THREE AND FIVE MADE UP THE COMMITTEE THAT PROVIDED THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OUTSIDE AGENCY FUN DAY. I WILL ALLOW THEM TO DISCUSS WHAT THEIR FINDINGS WERE . FOR EVERYONE'S AWARENESS, WE DID RECEIVE 10 APPLICATIONS TOTAL THIS YEAR. FOR A TOTAL REQUEST OF $225,000. AND WE HAVE AROUND 228,000 -- $220,538 OF THE GENERAL FUND REVENUE. WITH THAT I WILL ALLOW COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON, CLARK , AND PORTERFIELD TO PRESENT THEIR

FINDINGS. >> BEFORE THE QUESTION, IT'S

UP TO 1%, RIGHT? POLICY. >> CORRECT.

>> ORIGINALLY, WE WERE GIVEN A DIRECTION WE HAVE ONLY 208. WE MADE CUTS. THEN WE WERE TOLD AFTER WE DID THAT TIME WE HAD 228 AVAILABLE. WE COULD HAVE FUNDED ALL OF IT. MY RECOMMENDATION WAS TO REFUND ALL THOSE REQUESTED. THEY WERE ALL WORTHY AND STUFF, TRYING TO MAKE CUTS BECAUSE THE ACTUAL BUDGET NUMBERS CAME IN WE HAVEN'T MADE CUTS. UNLESS I'M READING SOMETHING WRONG IN THE PACKET.

>> FOR THE RECORD, CITY MANAGER. LET ME CLARIFY. IT'S NOT THAT THE BUDGET IS 228, WHAT I WAS INDICATING WAS IS THAT , BECAUSE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS LEFT THAT ARE UNFUNDED THAT I FEEL FAIRLY CONFIDENT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO FUND IT BECAUSE THE PROJECTION THAT IS GIVEN, THERE ARE TWO THINGS.

ONE, THAT'S BASED OFF OF NO NEW REVENUE RATE, WHICH, I MAY OR MAY NOT PROPOSE, BUT THAT'S THE LOWEST IT COULD POSSIBLY BE. WITHOUT TAX CUTS. SECONDLY, WE ARE ALSO RUNNING OFF OF

[02:10:03]

EVALUATION ESTIMATES FROM THE COUNTY, WHICH WE JUST NOW GOT , TODAY WE GOT THE ACTUAL NUMBER. ONCE I DO THE MATH, THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO BECOME SLIGHTLY LARGER. I THINK, BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY 8000 SOME ODD DOLLARS LEFT, AND THE OTHER THINK THAT IS ALSO GOING UP IS THE ADVOCACY CENTER. THEY SENT IN THEIR REQUEST. THE REQUEST WENT UP 7000, WHICH IS A NET OF 15. I BELIEVE THE MATH WILL WORK OUT IN SUCH A WAY AS YOU COULD CHOOSE TO FULLY FUND ALL OF THE REQUESTS. IF I AM WRONG ABOUT THAT, THEN WHATEVER IS LEFT I WILL PULL FROM THE LAST ONE YOU ALL HAD INTENDED TO NOT FULLY FUND. THAT'S WHAT I WAS

TRYING TO INDICATE. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVED ALL AS PRESENTED FULLY FUNDED. IF WE FIND THAT WE HAVE TO DROP BACK WE GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS.

>> CALLED IT JUST A SECOND, SINCE THERE ARE THREE OF YOU.

WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE OTHER TWO PEOPLE AND WHY THEY PICKED IT, JUST SO WE KNOW. OKAY WITH THAT?

>> YEAH, THAT IS FINE. >> ANYTHING?

>> YES, I HAVE TAKEN SOME NOTES. I GET TO CLAIM NAIVETY HERE. FIRST OFF, I THINK THERE WAS -- TALKING WITH -- I'M GOING TO CALL YOU JAMES. CITY MANAGER, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> SORRY, MY BRAIN WASN'T WORKING. A COUPLE OF THINGS. NOT THAT IT IS LOW HANGING FRUIT, I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE CITY THAT WE DON'T. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO FUND THEM. I'M ALSO GOING TO COME FROM THE ASPECT THAT THESE ARE STILL TAX DOLLARS. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT EVERY DOLLAR. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS, I THINK, WE COULD FIND TUNE GOING FORWARD. THEY WERE QUICKLY RESOLVED BY STAFF. IT'S NOT A DIG AT THEM. SOME FINANCIAL ERRORS CAUGHT IN THE VERY BEGINNING. MYSELF AND COUNCILMEMBER CLARK . IT WOULD BE EASIER TO GO WITH FIRST NAMES. RANDALL FOUND SOMETHING AND EVAN FOUND SOMETHING. STAFF GOT THE PICS, IT WAS ALL GREAT. WE PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE ERRORS FIXED BEFORE THEY COME TO ANYTHING. NOT THAT WE CAN'T CATCH THOSE, BUT JUST SOMETHING I NOTICED. ALWAYS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. SECONDLY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GO ABOUT THIS, BUT MY THING WAS ALWAYS STAY UNDER BUDGET , IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO COMMENT OR PUT COMMENTS IN THE SPREADSHEET . I NOTICED TWO THINGS . ONE, THE UP TO 1% OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES, AND YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS, CITY MANAGER , THAT , YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE WORD? WE ARE PLAYING WITH MONEY WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT YET. YOU HAVEN'T PRESENTED A BUDGET WE HAVEN'T APPROVED A BUDGET. WE ARE GOING OFF A LOT OF WHAT IS.

YOUR SUGGESTION WE COULD FULLY FUND. THAT'S GREAT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW. I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS. THIS JUST A -- PROVES THAT WE CAN THROW IT IN THERE AND WE KNOW WHAT NUMBERS TO PLAY WITH AND WE CAN GO IN LATER DURING BUDGET AND CHANGE IT, RIGHT? IT WOULD BE, KIND OF IN NOT GOOD THING TO DO TO PROMISED MONEY AND TAKE IT AWAY FROM THEM. I WOULD RATHER NOT PROMISE IT IN THE BEGINNING TO BEGIN WITH. THESE ARE GREAT ORGANIZATIONS BUT WE ARE PLAYING WITH TAX DOLLARS. WE HAVE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. SECONDLY, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIND -- MAKE THIS BETTER. I THINK IF IN THE BEGINNING WE SEND EACH COUNCILMEMBER A FORM TO FILL OUT SO WE CAN'T SEE WHAT WE DO , I AM ONE OF THESE PEOPLE THAT IF I CAN SEE IT I AM GOING TO FIND IT. THE FACT THAT COUNCILMEMBER CLARK FILLED OUT COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON'S FOR HIM WAS VERY CONCERNING TO ME. I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THEY WERE ON THE PHONE HELPING EACH OTHER OUT. THAT'S FINE. THAT MAY BE ALLOWED. I THINK, EPICALLY, IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. THAT IS JUST ME.

STANDBY, SIR. AGAIN, FOR ME IT IS AN ETHICS THING. I DON'T WANT -- IF I AM A LEAD AND TO SERVE THE PEOPLE , NOBODY UP HERE IS GOING TO HAVE INFLUENCE AMOUNT. I AM GOING TO DO WHAT I THINK IS BEST. A COUPLE OF FLAWS THERE. I ALSO DID NOT APPRECIATE YOU, CITY MANAGER, COMMENTING WHAT YOU RECOMMENDED . IF IT'S UP TO US AS A SUBCOMMITTEE I THINK IT SHOULD BE UP TO US. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK THAT WAS APPROPRIATE AS WELL. I THINK WE FIND TUNE THIS GOING FORWARD, WE FUND WITH THE RIGHT SERVICES

[02:15:02]

PROVIDED TO THE CITY. WE NEED TO DO SO WITH INTEGRITY.

THAT'S ALL. AND I STAND BY WHAT I PUT IN THE SPREADSHEET.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> YEAH, I APPRECIATED BEING ABLE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. I APPRECIATED THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS FILLING OUT WHAT THEY WOULD USE THE MONEY FOR, AND FILLING OUT THE APPLICATION. I THOUGHT THAT WAS VERY INSIGHTFUL, WHAT THEY WOULD SPEND THE MONEY FOR. IT CAME DOWN TO -- IT HONESTLY CAME DOWN TO -- IT CAME DOWN FOR ME, TALKING WITH COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, WHAT REALLY THESE ORGANIZATIONS WOULD USE THE MONEY FOR. THAT WAS JUST A FEELING. IT WAS NEVER ANYTHING PERSONAL. IT WAS NEVER ANYTHING BIAS, IT WAS , YOU KNOW, WHAT I FELT , YOU KNOW, I WAS WILLING TO ALLOCATE, TO STRIKE -- TRY AND STAY UNDER THE TOTAL AMOUNT. SPEAKING WITH COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, THAT WAS SOMETHING I APPRECIATED HIS INSIGHT, AND HELPING ME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT ALLOCATION WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS. I APPRECIATED STAFF BRINGING THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS, THE APPLICATIONS, THE AMOUNTS , AND I APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER CLARK AND HIS COUNCIL ON WHERE HE THOUGHT DIFFERENT ALLOCATIONS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, AND THEN HELPING ME TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE THE APPROPRIATE CHOICES.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION, WERE THERE ANY APPLICANTS THAT -- FOR LAST YEAR TO THIS YEAR HAD A SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER ASK? IN

THEIR APPLICATION? >> I WROTE THAT IN THE COMMENT NOTES. THEY ARE THE ONLY BIG ONE. EVERYONE ELSE IS THE SAME.

THE RESOURCE CENTER HAD A 3% INCREASE, WHICH BASED ON INFLATION MAKE SENSE. AND THEN THE SOFTBALL LEAGUE.

>> THE FIRST TIME. >> FIRST TIME APPLICANT.

>> EVERYBODY ELSE WAS THE EXACT SAME DOLLAR AMOUNT THEY ASKED

FOR THE YEAR BEFORE. >> I REACHED OUT TO COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD . WE MET THE COMMITTEE WITH TWO. TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. THAT'S WHERE THIS CAME FROM. I DON'T LIKE THE CONFLICT. THE WHOLE POINT OF A SUBCOMMITTEE IS FOR THREE COUNCILMEMBERS TO DISCUSS.

>> DID YOU COME -- CONTACT ME ON TEAMS OR EMAIL?

>> I TRIED ON, I THOUGHT IT WAS TEAMS, AND I KNOW I SENT YOU A TEXT MESSAGE AS WELL. AND TRIED TO CALL YOU. BY 1:00 P.M. THAT

DAY. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS, WHAT CRITERIA DID YOU USE ON THE COMMITTEE IN SELECTING WHICH ORGANIZATIONS WOULD GET WITCHY MOUNTS?

>> THE EXACT THING I CAME THROUGH WAS, LOOK AT ALL THE APPLICATIONS, WHICH ONES WERE NEW. THE BASEBALL LEAGUE. I SAID HEY, I THINK WE SHOULD FULLY FUND THE ONES THAT

ALREADY USE THE MONEY. >> THE COMMITTEE. YOU SAID YOU WORKED WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. YOU SAID I DID THIS, DID THAT. WHAT DID YOU GUYS. WHAT DID YOU GUYS DO?

>> WHAT WE SAID WAS, WHAT ARE THEY USING THEIR FUNDING FOR? AND HOW MANY RESIDENTS WERE IMPACTED BY IT? ALL OF THEM WERE SUBSTANTIALLY EITHER IN THE CITY LIMITS, OR THE MAJORITY GOES TO RESIDENTS FOR ALL THE ONES ASKED FOR. THEN SAID, OKAY, WE SOUGHT TO CUT $16,000 WERE YOU CUT IT FROM.

JUST INCREASING THEIR FUNDING WITHOUT SHOWING THEY NEED IT THAT MUCH MORE . THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION WE AGREED TO.

THE BASEBALL WAS TO BUY ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT. WHETHER THEY GOT THE FUNDING OR NOT THEY WOULD STILL DO IT. THAT ALSO WAS SOMETHING -- IF ANOTHER FUND IF IT'S NOT FUNDED, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THEN YOU ARE IMPACT CITIZENS THAT DEPEND ON THAT SERVICE IF THEY CANNOT GO FORWARD. THEY WERE JUST TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE PROGRAM. THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT PRESENTED

THEIR APPLICATION. >> FOR THE FISCAL BUDGETARY

[02:20:09]

POLICY, IT SHOULD BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA. I HOPE YOU HAVE MATH ON HOW YOU SCORED BASED ON THIS. NOT JUST GUTS. ACCORDING TO THE POLICY WE IMPLEMENTED AND APPROVED, THE NUMBER OF CITIZEN SERVED BY THE ORGANIZATION, TYPE OF SERVICE PROVIDED AND WHETHER OTHER ORGANIZATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY PROVIDE THE SERVICE .

>> YEP. >> AVAILABILITY OF OTHER FUNDING SOURCES FOR THE ORGANIZATION .

>> YEP, WHAT I MENTIONED. >> DEMONSTRATION OF ABILITY TO HEAR ABOUT THE GUIDELINES OUTLINED IN THIS POLICY. YOU CHECK TO MAKE SURE THEY FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES OF THE POLICY?

>> WE DID WORK ON ALL THESE OTHER APPLICANTS THEY HAD TO SPECIFY WHETHER THEY USE THE MONEY A PURPOSES -- APPROPRIATELY, OTHERWISE THEY GET DINGED FROM STAFF. ALL THE OTHER NINE ORGANIZATIONS HAD MET AND USED EVERYTHING AS PRESENTED. THEY WERE ALREADY IN COMPLIANCE OF PREVIOUS YEARS OF GETTING THE MONEY. THEN I GAVE YOU THE EXAMPLE, THEY WERE THE ONLY ONE THAT WOULD STILL GO FORWARD, EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T GET THE FUNDING, SHOWING THAT ALTERNATE FUNDING SOURCES.

ADDITIONALLY, A COMPETING THING? THERE'S THE YMCA BASEBALL, THERE ARE OTHER LEAKS. THEY EVEN MENTIONED OTHER LEAGUES IN THEIR APPLICATION. I THINK BASED ON WHAT THEY WERE SAYING, WE MET EVERY ONE OF THE CRITERIA'S .

>> YES, EVERY ORGANIZATION FROM LAST FISCAL YEAR HAS BEEN UP-TO-DATE ON THE REPORTING. JUST A BIT OF CONTEXT FOR HOW THE PROCESS WORKS AFTER WE PRESENT THE OUTSIDE AGENCY FUNDING FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WHATEVER YOU ALL DECIDE AND IS AWARDED AT THAT TIME, FINANCE TAKES OVER, AND THEN

SPIT -- >> THEN WE CAN DO THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT, MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK TO FULLY

FUND EVERY REQUEST. >> CORRECT.

>> SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND.

>> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. DISCUSSION ON THE

MOTION? >> FULLY FUNDING REQUESTS, IS THAT THE 225,000 IN THE FIRST COLUMN THERE?

>> YES, CORRECT. >> THAT INCLUDES THE ONES THAT ARE AUTOMATICALLY FUNDED, OR THOSE ARE SEPARATE?

>> IF YOU LOOK IN THE PACKET THEY ARE UNDERNEATH. THEY SHOWED THE COUNTIES AND CITIES.

>> GOT YOU. >> BEAUX-ARTS --D THOSE ARE

ALWAYS FUNDED. >> THOSE ARE ALWAYS FUNDED,

CORRECT? >> AFTER THAT IT HOW MUCH FUNDING WE HAVE LEFT AFTER THOSE.

>> THOSE NUMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO INCREASE, IS THAT CORRECT,

JAMES? CITY MANAGER? >> THE THREE THAT ARE MANDATORY FUNDING? THE THREE THAT ARE MANDATORY FUNDING? I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OTHER REQUESTS FOR INCREASED FUNDING BEYOND THE ONE FOR THE ADVOCACY CENTER. MY ANSWER WOULD BE NO.

>> I GET TORN EVERY YEAR ON THIS BECAUSE I TALKED TO SEVERAL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, AND I HOPE WE ARE NOT USING TAX DOLLARS FOR THESE ORGANIZATIONS. THE POLICY SAYS -- THE FIRST THING WE DO IS IF IT'S UP TO A NUMBER, GIVE IT ALL AWAY. SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS I DON'T KNOW THEY MIGHT THE CRITERIA -- MEET THE CRITERIA. WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW CITIES THAT ONLY TWO OF OUR NONPROFITS HAVE A PLACE TO STAY. WE HAVE NONPROFITS THAT WORK OUT OF USED BUILDINGS, AND OTHER CITIES. THE CITY HAS FUNDED THE CONSTRUCTION OR PURCHASE OF BUILDINGS NONPROFITS FOR NOMINAL FEE, OPERATING OUT OF THEM. THE WHOLE POINT OF A NONPROFIT IS TO LESSEN THE BURDEN OF GOVERNMENT . GIVEN 15,000, SAY, FOUR BASEBALL EQUIPMENT, THAT'S NOT LISTENING THE BURDEN OF THE GOVERNMENT. THE LEASE WE HAVE WITH HYBSA APPROPRIATE. WE CHARGE THEM RENT AND GIVE THEM MONEY FOR

[02:25:02]

EQUIPMENT, IT'S LIKE WE CHARGE THEM TOO MUCH MONEY. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT SACRED HEART COMMUNITY CLINIC DOES.

>> FREE MEDICAL MEDICINE FOR RESIDENTS. IF THEY NEED A CRISIS CENTER OR OTHER SERVICES , THEY GET IN TOUCH WITH HEALTH AND WELFARE. THE FIRST SAFETY NET IF THEY ARE NOT PROVIDED IN

EMERGENCY ROOM. >> IT IS A HIGH SCHOOL ORGANIZATION THAT GOES

SPEAKERS ] >> WHAT'S THE MONEY FOR?

>> IT IS FOR THEIR COUNSELOR TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THEIR ADDITIONAL PEOPLE AND HAVE THEIR FUNDING.

>> THAT BRINGS UP A CONCERN, BECAUSE IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE FOR PERSONNEL. THAT WAS ANOTHER CRITERIA. IT'S GOT TO BE USED FOR A SPECIFIC PROGRAM RATHER THAN GENERAL OPERATING COSTS AND DEMONSTRATES PROGRAM STABILITY BEYOND THREE-YEAR PERIOD . FOR ME -- IT SAYS POLICY. FOR ME, HERE'S WHERE I'M OUT AT THIS -- ON THIS, IT SHOULD BE TO FULFILL NEEDS OF THE POPULACE THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT. I CAN SEE FEEDING THE 5000 . I CAN SEE THE YMCA SAVING YOUR SERVICES. I CAN SEE THE HUD RESOURCE CENTER, AND I CAN SEE THE SANDBOX . THE REST OF THESE ARE NICE TO HAVE, BUT IT'S UP TO -- AND BANK 100,000 AFTER A COUPLE YEARS, WE CAN BUY A BUILDING FOR ONE OF THESE PEOPLE TO OPERATE IN WHILE THEY PROVIDE THEIR SERVICES. THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS WE CAN DO.

I HOPE WHEN IT COMES BUDGET TIME WE REALLY FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY, THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO CATCH THE MOST IS THE EDUCATION FOUNDATION. LAST THEY SAW THEY HAD A $2 MILLION ENDOWMENT. WITH A $2 MILLION ENDOWMENT IN THE COUNTY GAVE A QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS LAST YEAR , THEY DO GOOD THINGS, BUT WE ARE GIVING 25,000 TO AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS AN ENDOWMENT . I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THE RESOURCE UNDER WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A $2 MILLION ENDOWMENT SO THEY CAN PROVIDE FOOD AND UTILITIES TO PEOPLE IN NEED. IT'S NOT TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE GREAT THINGS OTHER PEOPLE DO. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO CANNOT PAY THEIR MEDICAL BILLS. PEOPLE WHO CANNOT PAY UTILITIES. PEOPLE WHO CANNOT PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE. SOME OF THESE PEOPLE -- THE HUD RESOURCE CENTER IS OUT THERE PUSHING AND PUSHING FOR RESOURCES. SOMEONE WITH A $2 MILLION ENDOWMENT . $2 MILLION.

I GET TORN BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL GOOD ORGANIZATIONS, BUT WE HAVE REAL NEED THAT IS UNADDRESSED BECAUSE PEOPLE WITH MEANS ARE GETTING MONEY THAT THEY PROBABLY SHOULDN'T.

>> TO YOUR LIST, I WOULD SAY C.A.S.A. AND SACRED HEART COMMUNITY CLINIC ARE CLEARLY SERVING NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY.

>> YES. ONE OF THE ONES WE HAD TO GIVE. THOUGHTS ON OPTIONAL?

>> YEAH, IT'S OPTIONAL. >> THAT'S ONE WITH CHILDREN.

>> SPECIAL ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN.

>> GOLF TOURNAMENT. I WOULD AGREE.

>> THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THE RESOURCE CENTER, FROM SOME OF THEIR UPDATES, THEY ARE ACTIVELY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET A FACILITY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT FITTING WHERE THEY ARE AT. THEY ARE AT THE OF TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT. TO SAY MAYBE THE CITY SHOULD PARTICIPATE AMOUNT WITH THEM , I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. THEY ARE SETTING RECORDS CONSTANTLY, SERVING MORE AND MORE PEOPLE. THEY ARE ONLY ASKING US FOR 3000 MORE THAN THEY DID LAST YEAR, YET THEY ARE SERVING MORE FAMILIES EVERY MONTH. THEY HAVE PEOPLE CALLING FOR HELP WITH UTILITY BILLS AND THE MONEY IS GONE. IT REFRESHES ON THE FIRST OF THE MONTH AND IT IS GONE. YOU GO ON THE

SECOND , YOU ARE TOO LATE. >> THIS COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE DECISION. IT COULD BE CHANGED BY NEXT YEAR'S COUNCIL. WE COULD SAY WE WANT TO SPEND X AMOUNT OF MONEY TO BUY A FACILITY AND WE ARE GOING TO PAY FOR IT EACH YEAR FOR SO MANY YEARS, AND THE NEXT COUNCIL COULD CHANGE THEIR MIND. WE COULD DO THAT IN ORDER FOR SOMEONE -- IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN TO THE HRC, THEY OPERATE IN A 100-YEAR-OLD BUILDING. IT HAS HARDLY ANYTHING -- IN THE HEAT. YOU CAN PUT MORE REFRIGERATORS AND BECAUSE THE ELECTRIC SYSTEM IS SO OLD. THEY ARE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN. THAT IS ALL I AM SAYING. I WON'T SAY A ROOM -- ANYMORE. EVERY YEAR I TRY TO RAISE MONEY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY IN AN EFFORT TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF

[02:30:01]

THIS, BUT THE MORE YOU RAISE THE MORE PEOPLE COME IN. WE HAVE TO SAY, HEY, HOW DO WE REALLY HOPE THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO THE BEST? THAT'S NOT KNOCKING SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, IT IS JUST -- ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CALL THE BOAT.

>> I HAD A QUESTION WE VOTE, IF I CAN. I THINK COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD DOES MAKE A VALID POINT. SOMETIMES BETTER TO UNDER PROMISE, OVER DELIVER . IF WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY WE ARE REALLY GOING TO HAVE. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE CONFIDENT WE PROBABLY WILL. BUT IF WE DON'T, THERE MAY BE SOME BENEFIT GIVING WHAT THE ORIGINAL THOUGHT WAS. WE CAN GIVE THEM MORE. I WONDER IF THERE IS A WAY WE CAN REWORD THE MOTION OR HAVE THE MOTION BE FUNDED FOR WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED TONIGHT. WHATEVER THAT IS. WITH A CONTINGENCY THAT IF THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL FUND AVAILABLE, WE CAN FULLY FUND THE OLDER ONES. ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? ANY

OBJECTIONS? >> I WOULD BE GOOD WITH THAT.

>> YEAH, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, THE RECOMMENDATIONS , I HAVE ONE RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD WITH DIFFERENT NUMBERS FOR EACH LINE. THEN I HAVE RECOMMENDATION FROM COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON AND CLARK THAT ARE IDENTICAL. EVEN THOUGH THE TOTAL AMOUNT IS THE SAME, THE TWO AWAY 575, THERE ARE DIFFERENT NUMBERS THAT ARE NOT THE SAME. ACROSS THE COMMITTEE.

>> A 5% CUT, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT FULLY FUNDED. THEM -- THE COMMITTEE DECIDED THIS IS WHAT WE ARE PUTTING FORTH. WHICH IS WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA. PAGE 347. WHAT'S CUP IS -- BEN LET'S CUT TO THIS. YOUR MOTION WANTS TO BE THE LINE THAT SAYS AMOUNT RECOMMENDED BY COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE OKAY WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON?

>> CORRECT. >> OKAY. DISCUSSION ON THAT.

>> WHAT IS THAT NUMBER? I HEARD A DIFFERENT NUMBER FROM YOU?

>> 608 -- >> THAT'S THE NUMBER.

>> THE MOTION HAS BEEN CHANGED OR HAS NOT?

>> HAS BEEN CHANGED. >> LOOKS LIKE THERE WERE TWO

REDUCTIONS FROM THE REQUEST. >> AND SUBSEQUENT ACTION THAT WOULD COME BEFORE COUNCIL AND WE WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT AGAIN. OR WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE MOTION THAT IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL FUNDING LATER THAT THESE ARE FULLY FUNDED?

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

>> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD REQUEST. THAT'S HOW THE MOTION WOULD BE. WE FUNDED THE TWO AWAY 602.25 NOW. AND IF ADDITIONAL FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE, AFTER THE BUDGET IS FINALIZED, BUT THESE ARE UP TO FULLY FUNDED.

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> AGENCIES WAIT UNTIL THE BUDGET HAS ACTUALLY PASSED.

SINCE THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITY MANAGER. PLEASE

CALL THE BOAT. >>

[13.2. Discussion and possible action on City utility bill transparency (Mayor Snyder) ]

>> MOTION PASSES, 6-1. ALL RIGHT. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 13.2.

DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ON CITY UTILITY BILL TRANSPARENCY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THESE EXHIBITS TO SHOW.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MONICA BURKE.

>> THIS IS TO SHOW WHAT WE CAN HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO, TO SHOW MORE TRANSPARENCY ON THE BILLING. WE CAN PUT A LINK TO THE RIGHT PAGE, -- RIGHT PAGE, AND SEPARATE THE WATER BASE RATE , AND THE WATER CONSUMPTION. THE SEWER BASE RATE AND SEWER CONSUMPTION. WE CAN ADD READER ME DATES. I DID CONFIRM BY END OF DAY TODAY WE CAN ADD A METER SIZE ALSO.

>> WE CAN? >> YES.

>> CAN YOU SHARE WHAT I SEND IN? SEND OTHERS. SOMETIMES

[02:35:04]

THERE IS A CONCERN I AM HIDING INFORMATION FROM YOU ALL.

>> I DID SHERROD AND DROPPED IT INTO THE COUNCILS TEAM FOLDER

FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING. >> SO WE CAN DISCUSS.

>> I GOT AN EMAIL. I REALLY APPRECIATED THAT. IT WAS REALLY

HELPFUL. >> ARGUABLY, THE MAYOR DID PROVIDE THAT BACKUP MATERIAL LAST WEEK, AND IT WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION ON OUR PART. IT WAS INTERPRETED THAT WAS MEANT TO HELP STAFF UNDERSTAND WHAT WE NEEDED TO BE READY TO TALK ABOUT, NOT THAT IT WAS ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.

>> THAT WAY I CAN WALK -- >> SHE IS WORKING ON IT. SHE IS PULLING IT UP TO GET IT ON THE PRESENTATION.

>> WHERE THIS CAME FROM IS, ONCE WE STARTED WORKING WITH RATES, PEOPLE CAME AND WERE, LIKE, HOW DO I KNOW WHAT I'M GETTING CHARGE? I DON'T REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO THE BILL BECAUSE IT IS AN AUTO DRAFT. I LOOKED AT IT AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT METER SIZE I HAVE. THE MORE I LOOKED AT IT, I KNOW OVER TIME WE HAVE CHANGED WATER TO BE SOMETHING LIKE ZERO TO 5000 GALLONS.

5000, 10 OR 15. 15 OVER. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT. I WOULDN'T KNOW IF I HAD TO DO THE MATH ON MY BILL, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU HOW I GOT IT. I AM ASSUMING I HAVE A -- PROBABLY A THREE-QUARTER INCH FOR THE

HOUSE . >> 5/8.

>> ONE INCH FOR THE IRRIGATION?

>> RESIDENTIAL SHOULD -- >> RESIDENTIAL SHARES THE SAME METER. THERE'S NOT A SEPARATE IRRIGATION FOR --

>> RESIDENTIAL IT GOES TO THE SAME METER. SORRY, MONICA.

MONICA CAN ANSWER ALL YOUR QUESTIONS.

>> THAT'S OKAY. YES. SO -- >> I DID BLOCK OUT, IN FULL TRANSPARENCY, I BLOCKED OUT ALL MY ACCOUNT NUMBER, THE MIDDLE, DIDN'T WANT SOMEONE TO ACCIDENTALLY PAY MY BILL THIS MONTH. IF YOU ZOOM IN, YOU SEE WE JUST HAVE A WATER CHARGE, SEWER CHARGE, GARBAGE, A SALES TAX, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE WE ARE NOT HIGH-END WATER USERS. IF I WOULD LIKE TO GO OVER THAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE BREAKDOWN. THAT'S WHERE THE PARK CAME FROM. I THINK THE SECOND PAGE TO THIS IS THIS PART HERE. THIS LETTER THAT CAME OUT , AND IT ALREADY WENT OUT. FOR THE ONE WE ARE GOING TO SEND OUT NEXT YEAR. IF WE DO THAT WITH THE WATER BILL, THEN MY THINKING IS PEOPLE WILL KNOW WHAT THEY ARE GETTING, WITH THE CHANGES. RIGHT NOW, THREE QUARTERS INCH, AND YOU SAID 5/8. I ONLY GOT A TWO DOLLAR INCREASE. MOST HOMEOWNERS. THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS. PEOPLE COULD THEN NO WHAT YOU ARE GETTING CHARGED. BASE

RATE, WATER RATE . >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. ON THE CONSUMPTION PART WE CAN SO A TOTAL. IT WILL NOT BREAK DOWN FOR THE FIRST 5000. THE NEXT 10,000. THAT IS A LOT OF INFORMATION TO PUT ON THE BILLING. BUT WE CAN SHOW A TOTAL ON CONSUMPTION AND SEPARATE THE BASE RATE. WE CAN ALSO PROVIDE A LINK TO A CALCULATION TO HELP THE CUSTOMER .

>> THAT WOULD BE GOOD. 14,800 GALLONS. AND THAT WOULD BE

CLOSE? >> YES, SIR. THAT WOULD BREAK IT DOWN FOR THEM. THE FIRST 5000 WOULD BE THIS MONTH. THAT WOULD HELP THEM SEE A VISUAL AND HOW THAT'S BROKEN DOWN.

AND CALCULATED. >> THAT WAS THAT PART. THE OTHER HALF WAS WE GOT THIS OTHER THING IN THE MAIL THE

WATER QUALITY REPORT. >> YES. YES.

>> IF YOU CAN PUT THIS UP. I READ THIS FOUR TIMES, I STILL DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE GOOD WATER. I THINK IT'S GOOD

WATER. >> IT'S GOOD WATER.

>> BUT I CANNOT TELL WHAT IS HI.

>> IT IS LEGALLY ACCEPTABLE WATER.

>> AGAIN, THIS IS FOR NEXT YEAR'S REPORT. YOU GUYS KNOW?

>> THE COH W QR . >> I AM A SIMPLEMINDED PERSON.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY YOU ARE TWO PARTS PER MILLION OVER. . I THINK WHAT HAPPENS -- I TELL THIS TO JAMES ALL THE TIME. I THINK WHAT HAPPENS REALLY SMART PEOPLE WHO DO THIS EVERY DAY PUT TOGETHER EITHER IN THE CITY OR THROUGH AN AGENCY, PUT THIS TOGETHER AND SEND IT OUT TO PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON. THEN REREAD IT. MOST OF US JUST

CHUCK IT. >> I UNDERSTAND. BEAM --

[02:40:04]

>> WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE READING.

>> IT'S IN THE COUNCIL FILE. >> WHEN YOU GO DOWN TO WHERE

THE NUMBERS ARE, -- >> STOP RIGHT THERE.

>> TAKE BARIUM. THAT'S PROBABLY A BITTY BUT -- PRETTY BAD THING. THE HIGHEST LEVEL IS TWO. THE DRINKING WATER, BELOW IN THE HIGH . THE HIGHEST LEVEL ALLOWED. THE IDEAL GOALS IS TO -- WHAT DOES I -- IDEAL GOAL MEAN?

>> EPA -- THE HIGHEST LEVEL ALLOWED IS TWO, BUT THE GOAL IS TWO? I DON'T KNOW. IF YOU DON'T MIND.

>> OH, HEY. >> RICK, PUBLIC DIRECTOR.

>> PHOSPHORUS, WHAT WAS THAT? >> WE HAVE HAD SOME CHANGES TO THIS , WHAT WE CALL THE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT, THE WATER QUALITY REPORT. WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A LEGEND, ALSO ATTACHED TO THIS, TOWARDS THE BOTTOM, I DON'T WANT TO -- I CAN'T ZOOM IN ANY CLOSER THAN THIS, BUT THE FIRST COLUMN YOU SEE IS THE SUBSTANCE OR CONSTITUENTS. YOU HAVE WHAT YOU CALL EPA REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS YOUR MCL. YOUR MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS. THE NEXT ONE IS GOING TO BE WHAT WAS TESTED, WHICH IS THE DRINKING WATER COLUMNS. LOW, HIGH, AND A COLUMN THAT HAS VIOLATIONS. THAT TELLS YOU WHETHER OR NOT IT'S OUTSIDE OF THAT VIOLATION LIMIT. THEN THERE IS A TARGETED EPA GOAL. ALTHOUGH THERE MAY BE A MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL, THERE IS A GOAL THEY WANT TO ACHIEVE, WHICH SHOULD BE LESS THAN THE GOAL , THE MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL, MCL. IT MAY BE EQUAL OR LESS. THAT'S WHAT YOU WILL SEE ON THAT IDEAL GOAL COLUMN. THE LAST IS COMMENTS OF WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE SOURCES OF THAT CONTAMINANT WERE SUBSTANCE. THAT PROVIDES YOU WITH SOME GENERIC LANGUAGE THAT PEPA ALSO PROVIDES FOR EACH ONE OF THESE SUBSTANCES. IT IS VERY TECHNICAL BECAUSE IT IS INTENDED TO BE A LOT OF LABORATORY INFORMATION THAT COMES FROM EPA THAT IS NOW -- TC Q TAKES THAT AUTHORITY , AND PROVIDES YOU WITH A TEMPLATE TO START OFF WITH. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TOWARDS THIS TYPE OF REPORT OUT . EVENTUALLY IT WILL BE TWICE A YEAR. CURRENTLY, IT IS CONSIDERED AN ANNUAL REPORT . EPA IS LOOKING TO EXTEND THAT . THERE ARE OPEN COMMENTS, I BELIEVE, TO EXTEND THIS TO EVERY SIX MONTHS. IT HAS TO BE NOT ONLY REGULATORY DRIVEN, BUT THERE WILL BE , KIND OF, A MORE PERSONAL AND DESCRIPTIVE PART OF THIS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MASSAGE AS WE IMPROVE THIS. ON THE FIRST AND, YOU SAW SOME TEXT AND LANGUAGE. I THINK YOU WILL SEE IN THE FUTURE REPORTS, WHERE IT EXPLAINS AREAS , LIKE, LEAD AND COPPER. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SOME OF THE RESULTS ARE GOING TO BE MORE ON THE TAIL END. BUT AT LEAST IT WILL GIVE YOU A FEEL AND FLAVOR OF WHETHER YOUR WATER IS SAFE TO DRINK, AND I WILL SAY , HUTTO WATER IS SAFE TO DRINK, AND IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS . WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT IS LISTED ON HERE THAT HAD A VIOLATION. THAT WAS A GOOD THING. THOSE THINGS CHANGE OVER TIME THAT YOU HAVE TO REPORT OUT ON THINGS THAT WON'T REPORTED OUT THE PREVIOUS YEAR, BUT THEN ARE THIS YEAR. SOME OF THE NEW INFORMATION YOU MIGHT HAVE NOTICED WAS RELATED TO WHAT THEY CALL THE UNREGULATED OR CONTAMINANTS. WE ARE GOING THROUGH THAT . LITHIUM WAS ONE OF THOSE THAT GETS ADDED TO THIS REPORT THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE. YOU WILL HAVE TO REPORT OUT DIFFERENT THINGS EVERY YEAR. THAT TECHNICAL PART WILL HAVE TO STAY IN THERE, BECAUSE IT IS REQUIRED. BUT ON THE FRONT END, WE CAN DO SOME MORE MASSAGING OF THE INFORMATION TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE DETAIL, OR MAYBE EVEN EXPLANATION OF

THE DIFFERENT SUBSTANCES. >> CAN YOU GO DOWN TO IRON REALLY PUT? I WAS LOOKING FOR IRON . $20 MILLION TO TAKE OUT OF THE WATER? I WANTED TO SEE HOW MUCH DOES 20 MILLION TAKE

[02:45:05]

OUT OF THE WATER? WE ARE ALLOWED .3 . PARTS PER MILLION.

THE LOW END WAS GREATER THAN -- LESS THAN .01. THE HIGH WAS

JUST OVER .3. >>

>> LET ME EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT ONE. IRON HAS A SECONDARY LIMIT. IT'S NOT A PRIMARY, IT'S A SECONDARY. IT IS LISTED AS SECONDARY LIMIT, WHICH IS .3 MILLIGRAMS PER LITER. I BELIEVE THAT IS THE UNITS. THIS IS -- THIS WOULD BE THE BILL, I BELIEVE. ESSENTIALLY, YOU WILL SEE FROM OUR DATA THAT WE HAVE HAD FOR IRON, IT DOES SIMILAR INTO THIS RANGE. YOU WILL BE TAKING OUT THIS AMOUNT, AND GO TO WHAT WE CALL A NONDETECTABLE, THAT'S WHY IT'S MEASURED AS LESS

THAN. ROUGHLY .3. >> IS IT USUAL FOR THE YEAR TO BE SO FAR OFF. EVERY YEAR YOU WOULD COLLECT THE WATER AND TESTED. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, I'M SURE FLINT MICHIGAN HAD THE SAME REPORTING, BUT SOMEHOW THEY MISSED SOMETHING.

LET'S SAY ALUMINUM GOD HIGHER OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS. WHAT TRIGGERS THEM TO HAVE TO GET A NEW COLLECTION SAMPLE AND NEW

TEST? >> ANY OF THE WHOLESALE PROVIDERS WILL PROVIDE US WITH A WHOLESALE WATER QUALITY REPORTS. TYPICALLY IT IS DONE BY APRIL 1ST. WE USE THAT TO POPULATE INTO OUR CCR . THEY HAVE CONTRACTORS LIKE WE DO.

THEY WILL DO -- AND THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF, SAY, RADIO NUCLEOTIDES. THEY WILL DO CERTAIN AMOUNT ONE YEAR , AND THEN THEY WILL DO ANOTHER ANOTHER YEAR. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THIS ROUND OF TESTS WAS DONE IN 2022, BUT WASN'T UPDATED FOR 2023 BECAUSE THEY HAD OTHER TESTS THEY DID. THAT IS PROBABLY WHAT HAPPENED HERE, BUT NOT EVERY SUBSTANCE HAS TO

BE MONITORED EVERY YEAR. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M WONDERING.

ALUMINUM CAN BE EVERY 10 OR SOMETHING YEARS .

>> WE JUST PROVIDED YOU WITH THE LATEST COLLECTION YEAR FOR

THAT. >> IS THERE AN IRON FOR HUTTO?

>>? HE. >> IT'S NOT IN THE --

>> IT'S IN THE FIRST. >> BUT IT'S NOT IN THERE.

>> SO WE DON'T HAVE IRON. >> WE DO HAVE IRON, BUT WE

DON'T HAVE TO REPORT IT. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO MAKE IT EASIER.

>> WE WILL. >> I WILL GO AHEAD AND REPORT THE IRON. WE SPEND 20 MILLION IT GOES FROM 23 PARTS 2.2 .,, WE DIDN'T GET MUCH FOR $20 MILLION.

>> IT GOES FROM BROWN TO NOT BROWN.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> THE IRON REMOVAL. I'VE HEARD IN THE PAST IT REFERRED TO IRON AND MANGANESE. IS IT

BOTH? >> IT CAN BE BOTH, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT WAS MEASURED. WE WILL BE LOOKING AT -- WE HAVE LABORATORY INFORMATION WE CAN SHARE WITH YOU, BUT WE WILL LOOK TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT IT NEEDS TO BE INCORPORATED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. WE WILL HAVE IT, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT WILL BE THE CITY OF HUTTO, BUT IT WILL BE PART OF THE SYSTEM.

AT LEAST THAT'S THE TEMPLATE THAT COMES FROM TCQ. WE CAN ALWAYS ADD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS NECESSARY.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> I WANTED TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS. FREQUENTLY, I AM NOT -- I AM OUT HERE IN THE FIELD WITH MY THOUGHTS. I LIKE TO SEE IF OTHER PEOPLE SEE THINGS FOR ME. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT BASED CHARGE FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LINK TO THE -- HOW YOU COMPUTE. IF YOU GO BACK TO THAT ONE DEAL YOU HAD. SORRY, I TRIED TO DO IT MYSELF. THE

PRESENTATION. >> SORRY, WHERE AM I GOING?

>> BACK TO PRESENTATION. THE OPTIONS THAT CAN BE DONE. YEAH.

I LIKE NUMBER ONE, NUMBER TWO, THREE. FOUR AND FIVE. SIX. IN SEVEN AND EIGHT. TO ME, I WOULD INSTITUTE ALL OF THOSE ON THE BILL. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU THINK THAT IS NOT NEEDED .

[02:50:06]

>> I THINK THAT IS PERFECTLY --

>> SECOND. >> FOR ME, THERE'S NO HARM IN MORE INFORMATION FOR THE RESIDENT . OBVIOUSLY IT'S BEEN TRANSPARENT, GIVING AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE AS TO NOT CREATE CONFUSION OR QUESTION THINGS. FOR ME, PERSONALLY, THINK FOR MOST PEOPLE, YOU GET YOUR WATER BILL -- WITH THIS, IT IS WATER , SEWER, AND TRASH ON ONE. AS LONG AS IT STAYS WITHIN A CERTAIN RANGE, YOU KNOW WHERE YOU ARE WORKING IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD. YOU ARE OKAY. YOU DO GET RED FLAGS IF IT GOES UP SUBSTANTIALLY. THEN YOU WOULD WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON. YOU MAY HAVE A LEAK.

THINGS OF THAT SORT. I THINK THAT IS WHAT, YOU KNOW, MOST PEOPLE GO ON. OBVIOUSLY YOU STILL WANT WATER AND WASTEWATER AND TRASH SERVICE AT YOUR HOUSE. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE NECESSITY BILLS YOU HAVE TO PAY. THERE'S DEFINITELY NO HARM IN ADDING MORE INFORMATION TO PEOPLE , FOR PEOPLE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHERE, I GUESS, THE CHARGES ARE. SO

THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. >> I LIKE IT BECAUSE THE MINUTE MY KIDS MOVE OUT I SAID LOOK, YOU ARE WASTING WATER. YOU DROPPED OUT AND IT DROPPED 2000 GALLONS A MONTH. WHEN YOU COME

BACK, BE CAREFUL. >> PAY UP.

>> MY BILL GOES UP AND I CAN START CHARGING YOU.

>> IS THAT CONFIDENCE REPORT PUBLIC FACING ON THE WEBSITE?

>> IT IS. >> IT IS, OKAY.

>> YOU SAID YOU SECONDED THAT?

>> YES. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, HEARING THEM, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THE SECOND?

>> I WAS. >> MAYOR PRO TEM.

[14. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]

YOU. >> RA, NEXT WE HAVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. 14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 14 .5 , SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ANYONE WANTS TO PULL? I WOULD LIKE TO PULL 14.1, 14.3, AND 14.8. HEARING NO OTHERS, MOTION

TO APPROVE . >> SO MOVED. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. WE HAVE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? PLEASE CALL THE

[14.1. Consideration and possible action to approve Resolution No. R-2024-154 to award the Northwest Transmission Main Waterline Project to the lowest responsive bidder, Nelson Lewis, Inc., in the amount of $2,687,050 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract with Nelson Lewis, Inc (GIP Project W03-2023) (Matt Rector)]

HAVE ITEM 14.1, CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER R 2020 41542 AWARD THE NORTHWEST TRANSMISSION MAIN WATER LINE PROJECT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER , NELSON LEWIS INCORPORATED. IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,687,050 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT -- CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH NELSON LEWIS INCORPORATED. CITY PROJECT W03-203. I HAVE ON HERE , THE FIRST THING, I WOULD SAY, I DIDN'T HEAR BACK. WHEN I LOOKED UP THE FORM 1295, IT IS NOT FILLED OUT. IT'S NOTARIZED. BUT THEY DIDN'T PUT ANY NAMES. IN MY MIND, THEY

DIDN'T FILL OUT THEIR 1295. >> CORRECT, THEY HAVE TO PUT THE INTERESTED PARTIES, WHICH WOULD BE THE MEMBERS OF THE

CORPORATION , THE OFFICERS. >> AND THEN, DID WE ASK FOR THEM TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? I'M SORRY. MY PACKET, I AM NOT ABLE TO QUICKLY GO BACK TO THE THING.

AND THEN I HAVE CONCERN OVER BUDGETING ISSUES WITH BIDDING WHEN BUDGET IS HIGH. THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN ANOTHER ONE WHERE THE BIDDING CAME IN DIFFERENTLY. ANYWAY. I THINK WE OUGHT TO TABLE THIS UNTIL THEY FILL OUT THE 1295, AND THEN BRING IT BACK. THEY CAN DO THAT AUGUST 1ST IS WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING,

[02:55:05]

SINCE THEY DID NOT FILL IT OUT.

>> COULD THE MOTION TO APPROVE IT PENDING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 1295. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'LL -- WHY WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR TWO WEEKS . THAT IS PART OF THE RESOLUTION TODAY. WE CAN DO

THAT. >> HERE'S WHAT I DON'T THINK YOU DO THAT. YOU ASKED HIM ONE THING TO DO. FILL OUT THE FORMS, FILL OUT THE DOCUMENTS. THEY DON'T FILL OUT THE BASIC THING. THEN IT IS, LIKE, OKAY, YOU DIDN'T DO IT. THEY OBVIOUSLY DID IT ON PURPOSE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T ACCIDENTALLY NOT FILL IT OUT AND THEN NOTARIZE IT. THE WHOLE POINT THIS IS PRINT OUT THE 1295. THE WHOLE POINT OF 1295 , TO PREVENT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ENHANCE PUBLIC TRUST. NOW YOU APPROVE THE THING, PENDING THEY FILL IT UP.

THEY FILL IT OUT, OH MY GOD, THAT'S A HUGE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CITY MANAGER IS ON THERE. WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT. WE ALREADY APPROVED IT. THEY FILL IT OUT AND WE ARE IN A LAWSUIT OVER 1295 NOT BEING FILLED OUT.

>> THAT IS A VALID POINT, TOO.

>> I AM GOING TO MOTION TO TABLE UNTIL THEY FILL OUT THE

1295. >> SECOND.

>> POSTPONE, POSSIBLY ? >> WHAT'S THE TERMINOLOGY?

>> POSTPONE. >> ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT

COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> YES.

>> AND A DISCUSSION ON THAT? I WILL GET YOU NOTES, JAMES, -- I NEED TO PUT PAGE NUMBERS, I AM SORRY. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CALL

THE VOTE. >>

[14.3. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-156 authorizing the City Manager to execute a task order with Raba Kistner in the amount of $235,728.90 for construction materials observation and testing services related to the South Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion project (CIP WW-06-2023) (Matt Rector)]

>> MOTION PASSES, 7-0. 14.3. CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION R 2020 4156. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TASK ORDER WITH -- IN THE AMOUNT OF $235,720.90 FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS OBSERVATION AND TESTING SERVICES RELATED TO THE SOUTH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION PROJECT. CIP WW 06 2023. SAME ISSUE ON THIS ONE.

THERE'S THE 1295 IS NOTARIZED, WITH NO INTERESTED PARTIES OR

CONTROLLING INTERESTS. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THE 1295. THEY DID CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS THERE IS NO

INTERESTED PARTY. >> THERE IS ALWAYS AN INTERESTED PARTY. I DID A LOT OF WORK ON THIS. THE LEGISLATION DEFINES INTERESTED PARTY AS INDIVIDUALS OR ENTITIES -- OR INTERMEDIARIES WHO ASSIST IN THE CONTRACTING PROCESS. INTERMEDIARIES ARE IDENTIFIED AS THOSE WITH COMMUNICATIONS GOVERNMENT ENTITY WITHOUT BEING DIRECTLY

-- TO THE BUSINESS. >> OH, LAWYER.

>> YEAH, LORI. THE ONLY REASON I GET PARTICULAR ABOUT THIS IS I ACTUALLY HAD TO TRAIN LIPS AS I WON'T SEE THE CITY ON A 1295 DUE TO OUR LITIGATION. WE TRY TO DO A 1295 AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. WE EDUCATED THEM ON IT BASED ON EDUCATION.

LEAVE THAT OR NOT. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS UNTIL THEY HAVE THE 1295 FILLED OUT.

>> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER -- CAN WE FIX THAT? CAN WE JUST DO THAT? ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING MEN, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

[14.8. Consideration and possible action on the acceptance of the June 2024 financial report (Alberta Barrett)]

CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE

FINANCIAL REPORT. >> HE ALSO SAID 14.4. OR AM I

MISTAKEN? >> I THINK YOU ARE MISTAKEN.