[1. CALL SESSION TO ORDER]
[00:00:17]
>>> IT IS 7:00 MCAULEY CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING FOR THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 TO ORDER. COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? CASIMIR CLARK?
>> HERE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? PORTERFIELD? MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? MAYOR SNYDER IS HERE?
[3. PUBLIC COMMENT]
NEXT WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT, WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. WE WILL START OFF GREEN, WHEN IT GETS TO YOU YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT, WHEN IT GOES TO RIGHT, -- SO FIRST UP WE HAVE KARINA.>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL AND MY FELLOW CITIZENS HERE IN HUTTO.
I AM IN A HURRY TODAY BECAUSE I HAVE TO COACH SOME LITTLE GIRLS SOFTBALL, HOWEVER, I NEEDED TO COME IN AND MAKE PUBLIC STATEMENTS. AS I STAND BEFORE YOU STILL DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE ACTIONS AND BEHAVIORS OF OUR MAYOR AND SOME OF THE FELLOW CITIZENS WHO HE HAS GOT ON BOARD WITH HIM TO AGREE WITH WHAT HE IS DOING. WHAT I WANT TO DRIVE HOME IS THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHEREVER WE END UP IN OUR BUDGET, WHATEVER OUR HUTTO CITIZENS ACTUALLY WANT, IT IS NOT -- OKAY. WE ALL WANT A BETTER HUTTO, WE HAVE DIFFERENT WAYS OF GETTING THERE. WE DEFINITELY HAVE DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS AND EXPERIENCE'S AND DESIRES. I CARE ABOUT CONDUCTIVITY AND ACCESS, I AM A MEMBER OF THE DI COMMITTEE WHICH MEANS I CARE ABOUT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVING CONNECTED TRAILS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCESSIBILITY, NOT JUST RECREATION. I CARE ABOUT THE FIVE THINGS YOU LISTED WHICH IS PUBLIC SAFETY, INVESTMENT IN OUR TEST MESSENGER, INVESTMENT IN MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE EXTRA POLICE OFFICERS WE SAID WE WANTED THAT OUR CHIEF HAS SAID THEY NEED. I CARE ABOUT OUR CITY STAFF HAVING RESOURCES THEY NEED AND HANGING ONTO THEIR BENEFITS. I DON'T WANT THE STATUS QUO, WE ARE A GROWING COMMITTEE AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO INFORM WITH THAT GROWTH LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE CONTRARY TO SOME NARRATIVE THAT IS BEING PUSHED BY SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR, THIS IS NOT GROWTH FOR GROWTH'S SAKE. GROWTH IS COMING TO HUTTO AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK TOGETHER , WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF OUR FAMILIES AND KIDS IS GOING TO BE. LAST WEEK I ACTUALLY SHARED A LIST OF PRIORITIES WITH THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO WORKED HARD TO ORGANIZE, PRIORITIES THAT REFLECT THE TRUE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. YET THE MAYOR AND HIS ALLIES HAVE DISMISSED THESE PRIORITIES TIME AND TIME AGAIN AS UNDESERVED ONCE IN A BLATANT ATTEMPT TO DOWNPLAY THE DESIRES OF THE VERY CITIZENS OF HUTTO HE CLAIMS TO REPRESENT. THEY CHOSE TO STIFLE ANY MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION AROUND THESE ISSUES BY SAYING THEY WOULD NOT VOTE ON ANYTHING ABOVE NO NEW BUDGET BEFORE DISCUSSIONS EVEN BEGAN. THAT HAS BEEN VERY DISAPPOINTING TO SEE FOR SOME OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS. THE LIST OF PRIORITIES IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE, WHO WANTS TO SEE IT. JUST TO RECAP THE LIST, THE TOP FIVE INCLUDED THE JUSTICE CENTER, POLICE OFFICERS , PARKS AND RECREATION CENTER, PUBLIC WORKS IN OLD TOWN INCLUDING THE STREETS, POLICE, ADDITIONAL CRISIS SUPPORT, TRAIL CONDUCTIVITY AND PARKS.
THOSE ARE THE TOP FIVE THE CITY OF HUTTO LOOKED TOGETHER MULTIPLE TIMES TO SAY WE WANTED. THESE ARE THINGS WE WANT TO BRING TO HUTTO THAT WE WANT , NOT TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO. WE CANNOT BE A CITY WHO DOES NOT RESPOND TO THE GROWTH THAT IS COMING TO US. CHANTRY HAS BEEN AN OFFICER FOR FOUR YEARS, HE HAS FAILED TO PROPOSE MUCH OF ANYTHING DURING THAT TIME. TO HELP THOSE RESIDENTS WHO ARE TRULY STRUGGLING TO GET BY. HE TAKES ADVANTAGE AND LOVES TO PANDER WITH FALSE DECLARATIONS OF LOOKING OUT FOR THE CITIZENS OF HUTTO BUT WHERE IS THE ACTUAL ACTION? IF HE TRULY CARED ABOUT SERVING ALL THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO, NOT JUST THOSE WHO SUPPORT HIM POLITICALLY, AND THOSE OF US THAT WANT TO INVEST IN THE COMMON GOOD, HE WOULD BE OFFERING SOLUTIONS, NOT JUST STIFLING PROGRESS AND CONVERSATION. HE SHOULD BE WORKING TO MEET THE DEMANDS, NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY. IF MIKE SNYDER WERE A CAPABLE LEADER AND NOT SIMPLY A PANDERER, HE WOULD KNOW HOW TO LEAD, HOW TO COMPROMISE AND HAD TO GET A WIN FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO. INSTEAD WE GET DEFLECTION AND DIVISION , HE CRIES: WE CALL HIM OUT ON HIS ACTIONS AND BEHAVIORS, DISPARAGES HIS CRITICS AND CONTORTS THE TRUTH. CASTING FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY STAFF AS ENEMIES OF THE PUBLIC. AND, FALSELY ACCUSING THEM OF WANTING TO RAISE TAXES FOR SOME THE VARIOUS PURPOSES. HE IS QUITE AN EXPERT AT THIS AND I HOPE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT HAVE CITY COUNCIL STAFF WHO LOVE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON COUNSEL AND THEY ARE ON STAFF AND THEIR FAMILIES REMEMBER THE WORDS HE IS SAYING ABOUT TAKING AWAY BENEFITS OF
[00:05:01]
STAFF , WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR HIM TO WANT TO GET REELECTED AGAIN IN MAY. HE IS NOT OUR FRIEND, HE IS NOT LOOKING OUT FOR THE CITIZENS OF HUTTO. HE IS A BUSINESSMAN, HE IS LOOKING OUT FOR HIS OWN INTERESTS AND KEEPING TAXES LOW FOR HIMSELF AND HIS EMPLOYER WHO GETS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO HIS REELECTION CAMPAIGN. WE HAVE REALLY GOT TO THINK ABOUT, WHO IS HE REPRESENTING? IT IS A SHAME BECAUSE HE HAS SO MUCH POTENTIAL TO DO GOOD AND INSTEAD HE CHOOSES TO PLAY GAMES AND GO ON FACEBOOK AND DISPARATE PEOPLE INCLUDING TWISTING MY WORDS, MY EXPRESSION OF COMPASSION FOR PEOPLE AND NEIGHBORS WHO ARE REALLY STRUGGLING TO GET BY AND TURN IT INTO A STATEMENT OF ELITISM AND SAYING THAT IT IS A CLUB WE ARE TRYING TO CREATE FOR THOSE OF US WHO CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE AND THOSE WHO CAN'T. MAKE NO MISTAKE, WE ARE BY NO MEANS WEALTHY, WE ACTUALLY REPRESENT A REALLY LARGE SECTION OF HUTTO WHO ARE JUST WORKING HARD, WORKING MULTIPLE JOBS, VOLUNTEERING OUR TIME IN OUR COMMUNITY, LOOKING OUT FOR OUR KIDS IN SCHOOL, GIVING EXTRA TIME TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A THRIVING, CONNECTED AND DIVERSE COMMUNITY AND LEADERSHIP WHO STANDS UP FOR US AND LISTEN TO THE NEEDS AND DEMANDS WE CONTINUE TO EXPRESS. I HOPE EVERYBODY HERE WHO LISTENS TO MY PUBLIC COMMENT AND ALL THE PEOPLE THAT CARE ABOUT THIS REMEMBER THIS WHEN MAY COMES AROUND AND THINK ABOUT, WHAT KIND OF LEADERSHIP WE WANT AND WHAT WE REALLYDESERVE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WAS THERE A REQUEST IN HIS BUDGET FOR
POLICE OFFICERS? >> MAYOR, THE REQUEST WAS TO FULLY FUND THE FOUR THAT WERE BUDGETED FOR ONE DAY THIS FISCAL YEAR. BUT NOT NEW POLICE OFFICER POSITIONS.
RIGHT? >> I BELIEVE THAT THREE PEOPLE DEFERRED THEIR TIME TO MYSELF.
>> YES. >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.
COUNSEL, HUTTO CITIZENS. I WANT TO BEGIN BY REMINDING EVERYONE HERE THE COUNCILS DUTY IS TO REPRESENT THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE'S INTEREST AND TO ADVOCATE FOR THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THIS TOWN. I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE AS AMERICANS THE DEMAND AND EXPECTATION TO BE FREE TO LIVE AND BE DILIGENTLY REPRESENTED BY OUR GOVERNMENT ARE VALUES THAT RUN DEEP. IT IS MY DUTY TO FIGHT FOR THESE PRINCIPLES WITH I AM CALLED TO DUTY ARE CALLED TO THIS PODIUM. MY PURPOSE IS TO REINVIGORATE A SENSE OF COMMITMENT OUT OF THE PEOPLE WE ELECTED TO REPRESENT US, I AM ALSO HERE TO BRING DISCOURSE REGARDING THE DUTIES OF THE BUREAUCRATS, OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OUR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR, OUR HIRED CITY EMPLOYEES AS WELL AS PAID CONTRACTORS. THE BASIS OF ANY ORGANIZATION AND BUSINESS ARE THE FOLLOWING, BROUGHT TO YOU BY THE STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONAL THEORY. PURPOSE, TO KEEP OUR CITY SAFE AND THRIVING WE MUST SUPPORT DEFENSE, POLICE AND EDUCATION. SEEING AS OUR LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE TOWN IS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS SAFE TO SAY WE HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF GRATITUDE TO OUR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, TEACHERS AND SUPPORT STAFF. MAKE SURE TO THANK THEM. WITHOUT POLICY IN PLACE TO DICTATE HOW WE KEEP THIS TOWN RUNNING THERE IS NO PROCESS. MAKE SURE YOU THINK OUR ACCOUNTING PROFESSIONALS, ENGINEERING EXPERTS AND PURCHASING STAFF. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EXPANSION, GROWTH AND PROSPERITY OF THIS TOWN. CLIENTELE, THAT IS YOU LISTENING TO ME RIGHT NOW. WE MUST PRIORITIZE OUR CHILDREN, VETERANS AND THE ELDERLY. KEEP THEM IN MIND WHEN YOU VOTE OR CHOOSE NOT TO VOTE. IF YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF AS HAVING A STAKE IN THIS TOWN, SHOW UP TO VOTE AND LET IT BE KNOWN. SOME OF US HAVE ANCESTORS WHO HAD TO FIGHT TO BE SURE WE WOULD BEACH -- REACH THE BALLOT BOX.
WITHOUT A PLACE TO CALL HIM THERE IS NO IDENTITY, CULTURE, SOCIETY, BODY TO GOVERN AND NO CONSTITUENTS TO SERVE. THIS PIECE OF LAND USE IT ON TODAY BELONGS TO ME AND TO YOU, IF WE LIVE HERE AND PAY TAXES HERE WE GET TO SET THE EXPECTATIONS OF THOSE WHO REPRESENT US. IF YOU ARE SITTING OUT THERE NOW THAT YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ME, TO THEM AND TO EVERYONE WHO MAY BE AT HOME BLISSFULLY UNAWARE OF THE THINGS YOU DO HERE AND BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. THE GOAL SHOULD BE TO DEVELOP A HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP TO THE BUREAUCRATS AND AGENTS OF THIS ESTABLISHMENT. THIS MEANS RESPECT, COLLABORATION, MEDICATION AND COOPERATION MUST FLOW FROM THE TOP DOWN AS IT DOES FROM THE BOTTOM UP. MIGHT I ADD, SIDE-TO-SIDE. THAT IS BETWEEN ALL OF YOU. THE EXERCISE OF A HIERARCHY, THE EXISTENCE OF A HIERARCHY DOES NOT MEAN ANYONE IS BELOW YOU.
YOUR POSITION AS ELECTED OFFICIALS DO NOT MAKE YOU ANY MORE VALUABLE TO THE CITY AS ANYONE ELSE. YOU ALL HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO LEAD WITH CIVILITY, DECORUM AND SELF-CONTROL. YOUR REPRESENTATION OF US AND YOU WILL BE HELD TO A STANDARD. UNDERSTAND THIS, EVERYONE. THE GOAL IN SOCIETY THAT RACERS TO THRIVE SHOULD BE TO HAVE ENOUGH RESOURCES FOR EVERY PERSON AT AN ACCEPTABLE STANDARD, THAT A STANDARD OF OPERATION, FACILITY, EDUCATION, SOCIAL SERVICES AND STANDARD OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND FINANCIAL WELL-BEING. IF WE HAVE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS I WILL BE HERE. AT THE AGE OF 37, 57, 87, IF ME OR MINE LIVE IN HUTTO I WILL BE HERE. I WILL BE HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR YOU. YOU WHO AGREE WITH ME AND YOU WHO DISAGREE, I DON'T CARE IF WE SHARE VIEWS ON POLITICS OR NOT, I DON'T CARE IF WE SHARE VIEWS ON THE
[00:10:03]
CITY BUDGET, I DON'T CARE IF YOU SMILE AT ME WHILE THINKING ABOUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A TIKTOK OR FACEBOOK POST ABOUT THIS LATER. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THAT YOU AND OUR NEIGHBORS ARE NOT DRIVING UPPER POTHOLES RISKING OUR LIVES CROSSING 79, READING IN TRAFFIC AS WE FIGHT TO GET TO SCHOOL AND WORK ON TIME, SEEING OUR POLICE OPERATE OUT OF AN OUTDATED BUILDING WITH NO STORAGE OR ADEQUATE RESOURCES. WATCHING THE AMERICAN LEGION PLAY TETRIS WITH THEIR SMALL STORAGE SPACE.SEEING OUR KIDS BORED OUT OF THEIR MINDS AND GETTING INTO TROUBLE BECAUSE OUR PARKS ARE INADEQUATE OR BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A RECREATION CENTER. THERE IS SO MUCH MORE WE CAN DO TO ENSURE EVERY NONCITIZEN HAS THEIR NEEDS MET. I WANT TO REMIND YOU ALL COME YOUR NEEDS WILL NOT ALWAYS BE THOSE OF OTHERS. OTHERS NEEDS MAY SEEM FRIVOLOUS OR UNNECESSARY TO YOU AND THAT IS OKAY FOR ADVOCATE FOR WHAT YOU NEED, EVEN IF YOU DON'T CARE TO ADVOCATE FOR WHAT I NEED. WILL ADVOCATE FOR MYSELF, FOR YOU AND FOR OTHER PEOPLE WITH HER I UNDERSTAND THEIR NEEDS ARE NOT. THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF NEIGHBOR VERSUS NEIGHBOR, IT IS A MATTER OF COMMUNITY VERSUS SOCIETAL AILMENTS. THE GOAL IS NOT TO WIN, TO THE LITTLE ONE ANOTHER, TO HAVE THE LAST WORD OR RIDICULE EACH OTHER UNTIL PEOPLE GET RUN OUT OF TOWN OR OUT OF THEIR POSITIONS AS PUBLIC SERVANT, WE HAVE SEEN THAT HAPPEN IN THIS TOWN TOO MANY TIMES FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE TALENTED AROUND OUT OF THIS TOWN OUT OF SERVING BECAUSE OF THE THINGS THAT ARE SAID AND BECAUSE THEY WERE TARGETED. THAT IS NOT A COMMUNITY. THE GOAL IS TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES AND COME UP WITH PLANS TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES AND HOLD THESE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING RESULTS. THAT IS ACCOUNTABILITY. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT, I HAVE BEEN IN TALKS WITH SO AND SO, WE MUST REMEMBER THAT UNTIL THEY PUT THEIR PINS TO PAPER AND TAKE A VOTE, NOTHING IS A GIVEN. WE MUST NOT BE FOOLED INTO THINKING WE ARE GAINING GROUND SIMPLY BECAUSE OF PROMISES IN THE WORDS OF POLITICIANS. IF YOU THINK ANY OF THESE PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE SELF-INTEREST, YOU ARE WOEFULLY NAÏVE. YOU CAN LOOK UPON THEIR FACES AND BE SURE THAT EACH OF THEM HAS AMBITIONS. MAYBE THOSE AMBITIONS ARE TANGIBLE AND MAYBE SOME ARE INTRINSICALLY HELD BUT TRUST ME, THEY ARE THERE. HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE, DON'T BE TEAM MAYOR OR TEAM PLAYS WHATEVER, BE TEAM THAT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR. YOUR DEMANDS FOR ABILITY, THIS IS NOT A COMPREHENSIVELY, IT IS ONLY A FRACTION. I WILL BE BACK AT FUTURE MEETINGS WITH MORE.
NUMBER ONE, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY WORKED TIRELESSLY TO KEEP US SAFE, TO WORK THESE ACCIDENTS THAT PLAGUED OUR STREETS. CALLS TO ADDRESS MENTAL HEALTH CRISES, CHILD ABUSE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WHILE LEADING -- WHILE DEALING WITH THEIR OWN PERSONAL STRUGGLES DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE CALLS. THE DANGERS THAT LIKE IN OUR TOWN WHICH MOST OF US ARE UNAWARE OF. TELL ME YOU DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE THINGS THAT HAPPEN IN THIS TOWN THAT ARE KEPT OUT OF PUBLIC VIEW SO AS NOT TO AROUSE PANIC. AS OUR CITY PUBLISHING GROWTH THE RESEARCH IS NEEDED BY OUR PD GROW TOO. WHAT IS THE PLAN TO PROVIDE THEM WITH AN ADEQUATE JUSTICE IS SERVED? TO GRANT THEM MORE PERSONAL, VICTIMS ADVOCATES, DETECTIVES? DON'T INSULT ME BY SAYING THINGS LIKE IT IS IN THE WORKS, WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IT, WE HAVE A PLAN WHEN I KNOW THAT EVEN IF THIS WASN'T THE PLAN IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REALIZED FOR AT LEAST ANOTHER FIVE YEARS OR SO. THAT IS ONLY IF WE CAN MEET THE FINANCIAL DEMANDS OF A GROWING CITY. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE TALK ABOUT THE CITY BACKING OUR PD OR WILL YOU ONLY BACK WHEN IT COMES TO DENIGRATING THE CONCERNS OF PEOPLE OF COLOR IN THIS TOWN? I BRING UP THIS NEXT POINT BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE MAYOR'S FACEBOOK POST FROM LAST WEEK WHERE HE STATED HE WAS BEING CALLED A BELIEVER NOT BACKING DOWN. LET ME CLARIFY THAT WAS NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS THAT AMATEUR CYBER BULLYING IS NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR THE TOP EXECUTIVE OF A CITY. IN THE POST CONCERNS ARE BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE AMERICAN LEGION NOT HAVING A SPACE TO OPERATE OUT OF. THE MAYOR RESPONDED WITH REASSURANCE THAT SOMETHING IS IN THE WORKS. I WANT TO BRING AWARENESS TO THIS TYPE OF LANGUAGE , I CHECKED VARIOUS MEETING AGENDAS, I CHECKED THE COUNCILMEMBERS, I CHECK WITH THE PUBLIC, NOTHING IS ACTUALLY IN THE WORKS. THE MAYOR DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO PROMISE ANYTHING THE COST MONEY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PROVIDE OUR PD WITH A JUSTICE CENTER OR TO COMPLETE DOZEN DIFFERENT PRODUCTS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS. IS A VETERAN AND ADVOCATE OF PREVIOUS VETERAN SERVICES UNDER THIS COUNTY AND THE CURRENT EMPLOYEE OF THE TEXAS VETERANS COMMISSION I WILL NOT STAND FOR ANY PANDERING TO OUR VETERAN COMMUNITY. I WILL NOT STAND FOR PANDERING TO OUR VETERAN COMMUNITY. I'M WILLING TO TAKE ANY INTENDED ACTIONS OR PROMISES TO THE STATE TO KEEP THAT IN MIND. ONE CERTAINLY TO INFURIATE ME IS TO MAKE EMPTY PROMISES TO VETERANS. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE POWER TO DELIVER, IF YOU DO NOT HAVE UNILATERAL POWER TO SPEND YOU DO NOT GET TO MAKE SUCH CLAIMS. AND THAT POST THE MAYOR ADMITS IT IS NOT ACTUALLY IN THE WORKS, ONLY AN IDEA OF HIS. AS SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS GOVERNMENTAL PROCESSES, THAT THERE WILL NOT BE A BUILDING ERECTED AND GIFTED TO THE AMERICAN LEGION ANYTIME SOON BUT MAYBE THIS COUNSEL WILL PROVE ME WRONG AND I HOPE THEY DO. JUST KNOW THAT I WILL NOT VOTE OR SUPPORT -- SHOW SUPPORT FOR A CANDIDATE WHO GIVES FALSE HOPES FOR VETERANS. SHOW ME MONEY, BUT YOU MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS.
DON'T BE SWINDLED INTO BELIEVING YOUR DREAMS WILL COME TRUE BY VOTING FOR CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS. OUR DREAMS COME TRUE WHEN WE HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE. FINALLY THIS BUDGET HAS REALLY BEEN A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE. ABOUT THAT I WILL SAY THIS, I BELIEVE WE CAN BRING IN THE REVENUE TO PAY FOR THE JUSTICE CENTER. FOR COMMUNITY BUILDING, RECREATION AND THE AMERICAN LEGION AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO COME IN AND DO GOOD THINGS, TO PAY FOR PARKING LIBRARY NEEDS AND TO FUND OUR ROADS AND SCHOOLS. I WOULD NOT MIND GIVING UP A COUPLE TRIPS PER MONTH TO PAY FOR THESE THINGS, EVEN IF THEY WERE RESOURCE THAT I COULDN'T USE. I WOULD KICK A BAD HABIT, CURB MY ONLINE SPENDING, STAY HOME ONCE OR TWICE A MONTH . I
[00:15:02]
KNOW THAT NOT EVERYONE AGREES WITH INCREASED TAXES, AS A HOMEOWNER, I DON'T LIKE THE SOUND OF IT EITHER BUT THE REALITY IS WE ARE NOT FIGHTING FOR NICE THINGS. WE ARE ASKING FOR SAFE ROADS, ADEQUATE SCHOOLS, TRAINED PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES WHO CAN DO THEIR JOBS EFFICIENTLY AND ACCURATELY, COMMUNITY GATHERING PLACES, EMERGENCY SERVICES, SAFE ROADS.LIVABLE WAGES AND AFFORDABLE HEALTH BENEFITS FOR OUR CITY EMPLOYEES. THOSE THINGS ARE NOT NICE THINGS, THE THINGS ARE IMPERATIVE FOR A GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL OF US. WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THAT OR NOT IS NOT THE POINT. THE POINT IS WHATEVER WE DECIDE AS A PEOPLE IS THEIR RESPONSE ABILITY TO DELIVER. NO ANTI-PROMISES, GET OUT AND VOTE, ATTACKING STRANGERS ON FACEBOOK IS NOT HOW YOU EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN A REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY OF GOVERNMENT. IT IS JUST , OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS IT HAS REALLY BEEN VERY DISHEARTENING TO SEE , TIME AND TIME AGAIN, FIGHTING ON FACEBOOK, ARGUING ON FACEBOOK, PUTTING PEOPLE DOWN, TELLING PEOPLE THEY ARE WRONG, WHEN PEOPLE ARE JUST VOICING THEIR CONCERNS AND THEIR ISSUES AND THE THINGS THAT THEY NEED AND WANT. MY KIDS LIVE IN THIS TOWN. I AM SURE YOUR KIDS LIVED IN THIS TOWN TOO OR LIVE IN THIS TOWN OR THEY ARE GOING TO LIVE IN THIS TOWN. THEY ARE THE FUTURE OF OUR SOCIETY HERE IN HUTTO AND WITHOUT THEM WE REALLY HAVE NOTHING. LET'S TAKE CARE OF THEIR NEEDS AND STOP TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE WANT AS ADULTS, WE REALLY NEED TO START THINKING ABOUT THE FUTURE BECAUSE THEY ARE IT. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT WE HAVE VICTOR RODRIGUEZ. THEN WE HAVE MARIA
RODRIGUEZ. OH, YEAH, SORRY. >> HELLO, EVERYONE. GOOD EVENING. COUNCIL AND CHAIRMAN CITIZENS, MY NAME IS MAYA RODRIGUEZ AND I AM A STUDENT HERE IN THE NINTH GRADE CENTER.
RECENTLY I HAVE BEEN NOTICING A LOT OF POWER OUTAGES, WHICH HAVE BEEN CAUSING -- WHICH HAS BEEN CAUSING ISSUES OR DISRUPTIONS IN CLASS AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET AS MUCH WORK DONE AS I WOULD LIKE TO. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEND THE TIME THAT WE ARE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THESE POWER OUTAGES, INSTEAD DOING ASSIGNMENTS OR REVIEWS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE MOST RECENT POWER OUTAGE I CAN THINK OF, WE WERE DOING REVIEWS FOR ONE OF OUR SCIENCE CLASS TESTS. HOWEVER, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DO MOST OF THE WORK BECAUSE OF THE POWER OUTAGE AND WE WERE STUCK WITH ONLY SO MUCH THAT WE COULD DO. AND NOT TO MENTION THAT IT ALSO PUT US ON A HOLD AS WELL SO WE COULDN'T DO THE ENTIRETY OF OUR FULL NINTH PERIOD. SO I SIMPLY ASK HERE IF WE CAN HAVE SOME ROOM IN OUR BUDGET TO HELP FIX THESE ISSUES AT THE NINTH GRADE CENTER OR EVEN ANYWHERE ELSE THAT I AM NOT AWARE OF THESE ISSUES HAPPENING. THANK YOU.
MORGAN. >> GOOD EVENING, HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DEVELOPER OF THE 77.81 ACRE MULTIFAMILY PROJECT , WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE PROJECT REMAIN AT THE RATE CONTEMPLATED THROUGHOUT OUR REVIEW AND FINAL APPROVAL PROCESS . OUR PLOT IS RECORDED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 2025. IT WILL PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF HUTTO INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ROAD, WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE AS WELL AS 18 ACRES OF PARKLAND INCLUDING THE GLOBAL COURTS, A DOG PARKS, TRAILS AND AN 18 HOLE DISC GOLF COURSE ALL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
THE DEVELOPER WILL PROVIDE OVER 1200 UNITS OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND THE ASSOCIATED AMENITY CENTERS. THIS PRODUCT HAS BEEN CONTEMPLATED WITH THE EXISTING IMPACT FEES -- FEE RATES FOR OVER TWO YEARS SINCE OUR ORIGINAL PRE-DEPARTMENT MEETING ON JULY 7, 2022. THE NEW IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE ORIGINALLY BROUGHT BEFORE COUNSEL ON SEPTEMBER 5 AND ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT AS ITEMS 4.4, 4.5, WILL INCREASE THE WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES FOR THIS PROJECT FROM 2.9 MILLION TO 13 MILLION. INCREASING OUR PROJECT COST BY APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION. PLEASE NOTE THIS PROJECT WILL NOT BE FEASIBLE IF IT IS BURDENED WITH THIS ADDITIONAL COST. THEREFORE STAFF SUGGESTED WE WRITE A LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING OUR COST-SHARING AGREEMENTS TO ALLOW THE PROPERTY A GRACE PERIOD FOR IMPACT FEES SO LONG AS THE FINAL PLAT IS RECORDED BEFORE JANUARY 1, 2025. OUR CAUTIONARY AGREEMENT ARE ON SCHEDULE FOR APPROVAL VERY SOON ON OCTOBER 3
[00:20:04]
AND UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE UNABLE TO REPORT THE PLAT PLAYER TO THE STATE. GIVEN THAT WE HAVE BEEN DILIGENTLY WORKING WITH STAFF ON THIS PROJECT FOR OVER TWO YEARS , AND THAT WE ARE ALMOST OVER THE FINISH LINE FOR PLAT REPARTITION, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE GRACE PERIOD TO ALLOW THE PROJECT TO BE DEVELOPED SUBJECT TO THE EXISTING IMPACT FEES. THANK YOUSO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >> NEXT WE HAVE JAMES WEAVER.
>> MY NAME IS JAMES WEAVER AND I AM MAKING A PRESENTATION FOR THOMAS COOK. MR. COOK WAS NOT ABLE TO COME TO THE MEETING TODAY, HE ASKED ME TO READ HIS PRESENTATION. HE IS CONCERNED HIS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED IF YOU SEND IT IN ON EMAIL. NUMEROUS PUBLIC COMMENT FROM SENIORS INCLUDING HIS THAT WERE SENT IN FOR LAST WEEK'S REGULAR MEETING WERE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED. SOMEONE SUGGESTED TAXPAYERS THAT CAN'T AFFORD THIS PADDED BUDGET SHOULD GO TO THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS THAT ASSIST THE POOR RESIDENTS. THERE AREN'T ENOUGH RESOURCES AND PROGRAMS NOW TO HELP THOSE WITH FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS. LET ALONE ADDING TO THE NUMBERS WITH NUMEROUS CITIZENS UNABLE TO BEAR THE SELFISH , WASTEFUL OVER TAXATION IN THE HUTTO BUDGET. HOW SELFISH OF THE GREEDY , THOSE POLITICIAN SPEECHES THAT IS PARAPHRASING AS SOCIALISM AT ITS FINEST.
MARGARET THATCHER SAID THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIALISM IS THAT YOU EVENTUALLY RUN OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. OVERTAXING WILL DO THE SAME. HUTTO WANTS TO TAX WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, COUNSEL, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTING YOUR HUTTO CITIZENS. COST OF PERSONAL AWARDS, BUT AWARD FEES AND SELF-PROMOTION. THERE ARE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT MUST BE REMOVED FROM THIS BUDGET. PLEASE DO YOUR JOB AND INSIST THE NECESSARY CUTS TO THIS BLOATED BUDGET OCCUR TONIGHT.
YOU MUST CONCENTRATE ON GETTING THE ROAD, WATER, SEWAGE, DRAINAGE AND SAFETY FUNDED. WHILE ELIMINATING WASTE AND A WISH LIST OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT CAN WAIT UNTIL HUTTO RECOVERS FROM ITS PAST MISMANAGEMENT OF FUNDS , WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO THEN HELP THE AMERICAN LEGION FIND A HOME. THEY HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY. THEY ARE GIVERS NOT TAKERS. GIVE THEM THE SPACE TO BE ABLE TO COORDINATE ALL THEY DO FOR VETERANS AND CITIZENS OF HUTTO. THOMAS COOK, SIGNING OFF.
>> KATHERINE COOK, 205 LEGENDS OF HUTTO TRAIL. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THOSE WHO INSIST ON PAYING HIGHER TAXES , IF YOU ARE WEALTHY, YOU WANT ALL THOSE EXTRAS , GO WHERE THEY ARE. YOU WILL HAVE THE HIGHER TAXES YOU ARE PROMOTING AND YOU WILL BE HAPPY AND EASIER TO PAY. AUSTIN IS LOOKING FOR YOU. YOU CAN HELP EACH OTHER OUT. DON'T BURDEN THE REST OF US WITH UNREASONABLE TAXATION. THIS IS NOT JUST THE MAYOR'S OPINION, IT IS FELICITOUS AND THAT SOME PEOPLE CLAIM THEY REPRESENT , RANDALL, I HOPE YOU'RE AWAKE, NOT SURE WHETHER YOU'RE IN HOUSTON OR ON VACATION OR WHERE YOU ARE BUT I SEE YOU UP THERE AND YOU DON'T EVEN LOOK LIKE YOU ARE PAYING ATTENTION. ANYWAY, WE DON'T NEED TO SEE WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER CITIES, TO KNOW WHAT HUTTO'S INCREASES , AN UNNECESSARY WASTE OF CITIZENS HARD-EARNED MONEY . OTHER CITIZENS MUST DEAL WITH THE CORRUPTION IN THEIR CITIES. WE MUST DEAL WITH IT IN HUTTO'S. TAX INCREASES TO SUPPORT OVERSEAS TRIPS , SPECTACULAR MEALS , WORKSHOPS WHICH ARE OVERINFLATED BUDGETS , OR PAYMENTS TO RECEIVE AWARDS THAT SERVE SELFISH AMBITIONS OF OUR CURRENT CITY MANAGER , HAVE NO PLACE IN HUTTO. IT WAS MR.'S RESPONSE ABILITY TO PRESENT A FAIR AND EQUITABLE BUDGET TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE MORE OF YOU HAVE ENCOURAGED
[00:25:03]
OVERTAXING AND STILL REFUSE TO DO AS THE CITIZENS HAVE ASKED.YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING TO CUT THE FAT FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S BUDGET. YOU REPRESENT US, THE TAXPAYER, NOT YOURSELVES. WEEKS AGO, PETER GORDON, WEEKS AGO , PETER GORDON. WEEKS AGO , PETER GORDON. I AM GLAD YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME SINCE YOU LOOK AT YOUR SUPPORTERS. YOU REQUESTED TIME TO REDO THE BUDGET . AS OF THIS TIME, NEITHER MR. , RANDALL, AMBERLEY OR BRIAN HAVE MADE ANY CUTS TO THE BUDGET AND HAVE ONLY WORKED TO PROMOTE TAX INCREASE. TONIGHT YOU PLAN TO VOTE TO ACCEPT THE BLOATED BUDGET. INSTEAD, DO WHAT THE CITIZENS HAVE REPEATEDLY REQUESTED. MAKE THE BUDGET CUTS. IF YOU ARE UNPREPARED TO MAKE THE REQUESTED BUDGET CUTS , LET EVAN AND DAN AND MIKE DO IT FOR YOU. THEY ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IT AND FOUND HOW MUCH THAT HAS BEEN PLACED IN THEIR. CONCENTRATE ON ROADS, WATER, SEWERAGE, DRAINAGE AND SAFETY. CUT THE FAT, WEIGHT ON THE PARKING IMPROVEMENTS, THE TRAILS, THE NEW LIBRARY. IF WE STOP WASTEFUL SPENDING , OUR CITIZENS WILL NOT BECOME DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS. THESE THE SAME PEOPLE REMAIN CAPABLE TAXPAYERS AND UPSTANDING CITIZENS.
>> WE HAVE GOT TO CUT YOU OFF. THANK YOU.
>> OTHER PEOPLE WEREN'T CUT OFF, WERE THEY?
>> NEXT WE HAVE RUDY PEREZ. >> RANDALL, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE IN HEAVEN, OR IS THAT THE BOTANICAL GARDENS IN HOUSTON? ALL RIGHT. HERE IS MY DEAL. COUNCILMEMBER BRIAN THOMPSON, WEEKS AGO YOU DISRESPECTED THE MAYOR WITH YOUR FOOLISH STATEMENT THAT YOU DON'T CARE WHAT HAPPENED IN 2018, BUT WE DO. AS HUTTO CITIZENS. AND TAXPAYERS, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL OUR TAX MONEY GOES HERE IN HUTTO, IT IS NEVER ANCIENT HISTORY TO US, CITIZENS AND TAXPAYERS. THINK ABOUT THE HUTTO CITIZENS INSTEAD OF YOURSELF. WE EXPECT YOU TO BE MORE PROFESSIONAL AS A COUNCILMEMBER FOR THE CITY OF HUTTO, SAME AS FOR PETER, RANDALL AND AMY. WE HUTTO VOTERS AND TAXPAYERS KNOW WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES AND LAST , LET'S NOT FORGET ABOUT THE HUTTO POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR BETTER PAY AND SAFETY SO WE CAN PREVENT MORE CRIME AND KEEP HUTTO, TEXAS SAY FOR OUR FAMILY. THANK YOU.
>> IS SPECIFIED AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING THAT I HAVE A FAMILY -- FROM LAST WEEK, JARED THOMPKINS, THOMAS COOK AND KATHLEEN COOK , I THINK IN THE REST COMING DOWN HERE THEY WERE HERE BUT WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER INFORMATION SO THAT IS 100% ON ME THAT WE DID ALL GET THEM AS A COUNSEL. I KNOW THAT WE DID GET THOSE. ALL RIGHT, I HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR ITEMS 4.4
[4.4. Consideration and possible action relating to updating the 2024 Update: Hutto Transportation Impact Fee Program by adding the TxDOT on-system projects to the Capital Improvement Plan including the CR 132 Overpass Project to include in the calculation of the updated maximum allowable service unit calculations for the Roadway Service Area.]
AND 4.5 UP FIRST, IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS ? HEARING NONE, WE WILL GO TO ITEM 4.4, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RELATING TO UPDATING THE 2024 UPDATE: HUTTO TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FREE PROGRAM BY ADDING THE TEXDOT ON SYSTEM PROJECTS TO THE CAPITAL AND PREVENT PLAN INCLUDING VCR 132 OVERPASS PROJECT TO INCLUDE IN THE CALCULATION OF THE UPDATED MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SERVICE UNIT CALCULATIONS FORTHE ROADWAY SERVICE AREA. >> AND EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AS WE PRESENTED LAST WEEK , WE HAVE MR. EDDIE HAAS HERE TO PROTECT -- PRESENT THE UPDATED INFORMATION PER COUNCIL
REQUEST. >> GOOD EVENING, EDDIE HAAS.
PER YOUR DIRECTION LAST WEEK, WE MADE TWO AMENDMENTS TO THE COST PER SERVICE CALCULATION , NUMBER ONE WAS THE STATE HIGHWAY, THE 132 OVERPASS , INCORPORATING FULL COST THAT WOULD BE INCURRED BY HUTTO ON THAT. THAT WAS $100 MILLION PROJECT, I BELIEVE. THE RISK WAS ABOUT 95 MILLION IN CHANGE,
[00:30:01]
SOMEWHERE IN THEIR. WE HAVE INCORPORATED THAT INTO THE NUMBER OF GRAMS. WE HAVE ALSO INCORPORATED UPPING THE LOCAL PERCENTAGE, IN OTHER WORDS, ASSUMING THE CITY IS GOING TO BE FUNDING THE COST IN SOMEWE INCORPORATED THE FULL LOCAL PARTICIPATION, WHAT THAT HAS DONE IN THE TABLE THERE DEPICTS THE CHANGE IN THE NUMBERS. THE MIDDLE COLUMN FOR THE NUMBERS WE PRESENTED LAST WEEK , THE COLUMNS ON THE FAR RIGHT ARE THE UPDATED NUMBERS. SO YOU WILL SEE THAT SERVICE AREA FOR EXAMPLE, SERVICE AREA NORTH, JUMPED FROM 2774 TO 3208 , SERVICE AREA E JUMPED FROM 1089 TO 2642. SERVICE AREA SOUTH, 3645 TO 3801 SERVICE AREA WEST, AND 91 TO 1298. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THESE COSTS REFLECT THE COSTS PER SERVICE UNIT. COST PER VEHICLE MILE, NOT THE IMPACT FEE. SO WHEN THE DEVELOPMENTS COMES IN, THERE IS A SERVANT UNIT EQUIVALENCY BASED ON THE TYPE OF USE, THE INTENSITY AND RESULTING CHARACTERISTICS, YOU WOULD MULTIPLY IT BY THE APPROPRIATE FACTORS TO ARRIVE AT THE ACTUAL IMPACT FEE. WHAT THIS DOES IS IT RAISES THE BAR FOR THE INCREASE IN THE COST INTO THE PROGRAM , SO THOSE ARE THE NEW CEILINGS YOU CONSIDER UP TO. IN THE LEFT COLUMN JUST TO THE RIGHT, YOU PREVIOUSLY WERE UNDER ONE SERVICE AREA , HUTTO FELL WITHIN THE SIX MILES IN 2018 NOW THAT THE CITY HAS GONE AND ENCROACHED ON THAT, WE BROKE THE CITY INTO FOUR SERVICE AREAS, BUT THE MAXIMUM NUMBER IN 2018 WAS 1960. FROM THERE, IN TERMS OF A POLICY CONSIDERATION , COLLECTION RATE THAT WAS ADOPTED , THERE IS A SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL VERSUS NONRESIDENTIAL , THE NONRESIDENTIAL COLLECTION RATE WAS $400 A SERVICE UNIT, THE RESIDENTIAL WAS 74. THAT WAS A POLICY DECISION. SO IF YOU ALL WERE TO CONTEMPLATE, LET'S JUST SAY FOR EXAMPLE, A SERVICE AREA WEST , IF YOU ARE CURRENTLY COLLECTING 784 PER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND YOU WANTED TO INCREASE THAT COLLECTION RATE IN TERMS OF THE COST PER SERVICE UNIT YOU CAN INCREASE IT UP TO 1298. IF YOU WANTED TO DO THE SAME FOR THE OTHERS, YOU HAVE THOSE FEELINGS, IF YOU WANTED TO CONSIDER SOME KIND OF ACROSS-THE-BOARD, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU PICK THE LOWEST ON AND USE THAT ACROSS-THE-BOARD, YOU WOULD TAKE THAT APPROACH.SO THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE ON THE RESULTS. THIS IS AGAIN THE SERVICE AREA STRUCTURE THAT THE WHOLE ANALYSIS WAS PREDICATED ON , INCLUSIVE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS. TO CHANGE THE SERVICE AREA STRUCTURE IS TO REDO ALL THE WORK. BUT WE MAINTAIN THAT STRUCTURE, WE SIMPLY INCORPORATED THE COST OF THE IMAGE TO THE RIGHT OF THAT, THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS THAT WERE CONSIDERED, THAT ARE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE IMPACT FEE CIP. YOU MIGHT RECALL THESE BENCHMARKING SLIDES. THE PURPOSE OF THESE SLIDES ARE TO MEASURE , WHERE WOULD HUTTO BE , WHERE IS HUTTO CURRENTLY IN TERMS OF A COLLECTION FOR A SPECIFIC LANE USE ? I.E., THIS CHART SHOWING A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT AT -- SORRY, 3167 . THAT IS WHAT IT CURRENTLY COSTS FOR THE IMPACT FEE FOR ONE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. HUTTO IN ORANGE, THE DARK BARS.
YOU CAN SEE THE HEIGHT OF WHERE THE COLLECTIONS WOULD BE UNDER THE NEW CEILINGS. IF YOU WILL. YOU ALSO HAVE PIERCE CITY IS ADJACENT TO HUTTO, ROUND ROCK, GLOBEVILLE, TAYLOR, GEORGETOWN, AND THEIR COLLECTION RATES BASED ON THEIR ADOPTED ORDINANCE AND ALSO BY THEIR RESPECTIVE SERVICE AREA STRUCTURE. WE HAD THREE OTHER LAND-USE TYPES , THIS YEAR IS GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ON A PER THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT BASIS.
AND SO HUTTO , FOR A 1000 SQUARE FEET OF GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, YOUR CURRENTLY COLLECTING $1464 AS THE IMPACT FEE AND YOU CAN SEE OBVIOUSLY HOW HIGH THOSE NUMBERS WOULD GO PER THEIR RESPECTIVE SERVICE AREA. YOU ALSO SEE YOUR PIERCE CITY, YOUR ADJACENT CITIES THAT HAVE IMPACTING PROGRAMS AND WHERE THEY CURRENTLY COLLECT FORCES THEY ARE STEALING. THE DARKER BARS ARE ALSO WHAT THEY ARE COLLECTING BY ORDINANCE.
SHOPPING CENTER CURRENTLY PER 1000 SQUARE FOOT BASIS, $22,464 IMPACT FEE HERE IN HUTTO. THE DARK BROWN BARS OF LIGHTER ORANGE DEPICTING THE CEILINGS. AGAIN, YOUR ADDITION PIERCE CITY IS AND WHAT THEY ARE COLLECTING PICK SOME OF THOSE PIERCE CITY'S ARE COLLECTING ACROSS THE BOARD, THEY SELECTED ONE NUMBER ACROSS-THE-BOARD, OTHERS, PERCENTAGE OF MACS, THEY APPLIED THAT TO EACH SERVICE AREA. THE LAST BENCHMARK SLIDE IS GENERAL OFFICE. WITH THAT MIGHT BE, $3456 HERE IN HUTTO, THAT IS YOUR CURRENT COLLECTION RATE .
[00:35:01]
THEN OBVIOUSLY WITH THE NEW CEILINGS , THE CALCULATED MAXIMUMS. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE REGARDING THE UPDATED COST PER SERVICE.>> THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS OR ACTION FROM COUNSEL?
>> YEAH, COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE FIRST SLIDE? YES. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IF WE ADOPT BE THE EQUIVALENT
>> OKAY, GOT MY HANDY CALCULATOR HERE. 1237 DOLLARS
>> OKAY, SO 2800. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL WILL DIFFER -- IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT A UNIFORM RATE FOR ALL NONRESIDENTIAL IT WOULD VERY BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS ARE DIFFERENT BY EACH TYPE OF LAND-USE. JUST FYI.
>> SOME CITIES COLLECT DIFFERENT COLLECTION RATES WITH LAND USES. OTHER HAVE A UNIFORM FOR THE ONES WE HAVE DEPICTED, THEY HAD A RESIDENTIAL AND A NONRESIDENTIAL SO THEY LUMPED EVERYTHING. I THINK PFLUGERVILLE, THOUGH, I THINK THEY HAVE SOME BREAKOUTS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES, THOUGH.
>> COUNCILMEMBER, IF I COULD JUMP IN REAL QUICK, I WANT TO MAKE SURE FOR CLARIFICATION YOU ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT HE IS SAYING. EACH OF THESE DIFFERENT USES HAVE A DIFFERENT MULTIPLIER OF VEHICULAR TRIPS THAT ARE GENERATED PER
>> IN GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT WOULD BE 765. THAT WOULD EQUATE TO, YOU SAID 2800? OKAY.
>> SECOND. CAN YOU REPEAT THOSE NUMBERS AGAIN?
>> 1237 PER SERVICE UNIT MILE FOR RESIDENTIAL, EQUIVALENT TO 5000 PER HOME AND 765 SERVICE UNIT FOR COMMERCIAL. SECONDED
BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> YEAH, SO I GUESS MY CONCERN HERE IS I KIND OF WANT TO APPROACH THIS OF LIKE, HOW WE WANT TO GO ABOUT THIS POLICY WISE. SHOULD WE DO IT ACROSS-THE-BOARD? ACROSS-THE-BOARD NUMBER? OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD HAVE TO GO INTO THE RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL
[00:40:03]
SHOPPING CENTER OFFICE. HOW I ENVISIONED IT WAS DOING A PERCENTAGE OF THE MAX SO I WANTED TO DISCUSS THAT AMONGST THE COUNCILMEMBERS TO KIND OF GET THE GAUGE AND IF WE WANT TO KEEP IT IN THE ZONES, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE WANTED TO DO DIFFERENT NUMBERS FOR THE NORTHEAST, SOUTHWEST. SO I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF TAKE IT HIGH-LEVEL AND GOTTEN DOWN A LITTLE BIT LOWER. INSTEAD OF JUST KIND OF DOING THIS RESIDENTIAL, NONRESIDENTIAL NUMBERSGENERALLY SPEAKING. >> SO WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMITTEE TO HAVE IT STILL SEPARATED AS RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL? SORRY. YOU DIDN'T HEAR MY QUESTION. SO, WITH A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMITTEE TO HAVE SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL STILL, OR TO COMBINE IT?
>> THEY DID, THEY RECOMMENDED TO CONSIDER COLLECTING UP TO THE MAXIMUM. IN THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE LETTER, IT WAS PART OF YOUR PACKET, THEY HAD SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION TWO DIFFERENT COLLECTION RATES FOR SPECIFIC KINDS , TARGETED TYPES OF LAND USES, THEY ARE IN YOUR ADVISORY
COMMITTEE. >> SO THE NUMBERS HERE, SO THEY TOLD 98 FOR WEST, IF THIS MOTION PASSES , THE MAX RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE 1237, MAX COMMERCIAL WOULD BE 765, SO WE WOULD BE BELOW THAT LIMIT FOR EVERY AREA.
>> I NEED TO POINT OUT SOMETHING THAT THESE REVISED NUMBERS THAT WE HAVE CALCULATED , THEY WERE NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL POSTING. OF THE 30 DAY REQUIRED POSTING. SO THAT IS A REQUIREMENT. 395. WE ARE ADOPTING A COLLECTION RATE HIGHER THAN THOSE LIGHTER COLORED NUMBERS THAT WE PRESENTED, WE NEED TO REPOST SO WE CAN COMPLY WITH 395.
>> THAT IS OVER ADDING A PROJECT TO THE CIP. I THINK WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
] >> THEY ADDED IT . WHAT THEY DIDN'T DO
>> THE PROJECTS WERE THERE, HOWEVER THE POSTED NUMBERS --
>> RATE. >> YEAH. AND IF WE ARE GOING TO GO BACK , IT WOULD BE WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW IF YOU WANT US TO REVISIT THIS WITH THE ADVISORY. SO I GUESS WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IF, RIGHT NOW, THE RECOMMENDATION OF TOKELAND 37 FOR RESIDENTIAL, IT WOULD BE CAPPED AT 991 IN WEST, 1089 IN EAST, ONLY BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE POSTED NUMBERS IN THE PUBLICATION. WE REPOST, YOUR NEW CEILINGS WITH ENVY OUT
THERE. >> DISCUSSION FROM COUNSEL? CITY MANAGER, AT OUR LAST SATURDAY MEETING, YOU HAD SOME REVISED POTENTIAL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS . IS THAT
SOMETHING YOU CAN SEND TO US? >> TODAY OR YESTERDAY, ONE OF
THE TWO, BUT YES. >> MY ONLY CONCERN WITH WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING INTO TOWN AND GIVE THEM TAXES BACK IN FORMS OF TAX ABATEMENT, TAX REFUNDING. WE GET GRANTS, WE DO ALL SORTS OF THINGS AND SO EVERY TIME I LOOK AT IT IS , EVERY TIME WE DO THAT, WE ARE TAKING THE SALES TAX DOLLARS THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC AND LOWER THEIR TAX RATE AND WE GIVE IT BACK TO THE COMPANY TO OFFSET IMPACT FEES. AND SO THE MORE IMPACT FEES WE CHARGE , ONE OF TWO THINGS I THINK ARE GOING TO HAPPEN, WE WILL EITHER HAVE LESS DEVELOPMENT, IT TRICKLES THROUGH THIS INFAMOUS FEBRUARY 15 SPREADSHEET THAT WE ARE STILL , WE HAD LAST WEEK THAT HE WAS OFF . IT RATTLES THROUGH THERE AND EVERY TIME DEVELOPMENTS GOES DOWN AND WE DON'T HAVE 18.8% GROWTH , PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PAY MORE BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE 18.8% GROWTH OTHERWISE PEOPLE'S WATER RATES ARE GOING TO GO UP BECAUSE IT IS FINALLY CALCULATED, THAT IS ONE WAY. THE SECOND THING I SEE, WE MAKE THE IMPACT FEES TOO HIGH , THEN EVERY TIME A DEVELOPER COMES IN THEY ARE GOING TO SAY I WOULD COME TO YOUR CITY BUT FOR YOUR IMPACT FEES SO IF YOU WILL GIVE ME ALL MY PROPERTY TAXES BACK FOR 10 YEARS AND YOU GIVE ME GRANTS WHICH IS WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE HAPPENING, AND WE KEEP SAYING YES TO THAT, THAT ALL WE DO IS GIVE THE WHOLE BENEFIT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING FOR THE PUBLIC, WE GIVE IT RIGHT BACK TO THEM. SO I DON'T KNOW
[00:45:01]
WHAT THE CORRECT ANSWER HERE IS THAT WE HAVE GOT TO BE REAL CAREFUL BETWEEN THE SUN AND WATER AND WASTEWATER, THAT WE DON'T MAKE IT SO EXPENSIVE WE HURT GROWTH AND THE ONLY GROWTH THAT COMES COMES WITH HURTING THE PUBLIC BY GIVING ALL THE TAX MONEY BACK. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE HAD A DEVELOPMENTS COME IN HERE IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD SOME KIND OF REBATE, REFUND ABATEMENT AND YOU WEREN'T HERE FOR THIS BUT WE HAD A PROJECT AND WE WANTED TO GIVE THE GUY $3 MILLION TO BUILD A STRIP CENTER. THAT WAS NO BENEFIT IN TAX INCREASE FOR 10 YEARS SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS IS ALL HELPING THE PUBLIC. I THINK WE NEED IMPACT FEES, THREE YEARS AGO WE DID NOT EVEN COLLECT THEM. WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY FROM ROGUE PERSONNEL, JUST GIVING THEM AWAY TO NOW, WE COLLECT THEM. SO I DON'T KNOW AGAIN WHAT THE NUMBER IS ON THE 5000 PERHAPS IS GOING TO DRAMATICALLY DECREASE 18% RATE WE NEED TO GROW TO MAKE THE NUMBERS WORK BUT -->> SO WHERE WOULD THIS MOTION PLAYS US COMPARABLE TO
GEORGETOWN? >> IN THE CASE OF THE RESIDENTIAL, THE $5000 , YOU CAN SAY ROUND ROCK IS CURRENTLY COLLECTING 64 -- 6420 ACROSS-THE-BOARD IN THEIR SERVICE AREAS. THE BIBLE IS COLLECTING 6780. IF YOU'RE
COLLECTING 5000 -- >> THAN A LITTLE BIT HIGHER
THAN GEORGETOWN'S MAX . >> OBVIOUSLY IT LOOKS LIKE GEORGETOWN, THEY HAD SOME , IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE SOME NUMBERS THAT FELL BELOW A CERTAIN THRESHOLD AND THEN THEY
JUST KEPT THE OTHERS AT 4580. >> THE GROWTH IS GOING 500 ALSO. AND OTHER AREAS OF THE TOWN THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE THAT MUCH.
FEE CALCULATION ? HOW MUCH? >>
>> WE DO HAVE SOME SLIDES THAT WE WERE GOING TO BRING UP AS PART OF THE LU A CIP AND IMPACT FEE FOR THE ROADS WATER, WASTEWATER THAT SHOWS ACCUMULATIVE NUMBERS COMBINED
UNDER THEIR MAXIMUMS. >> FOR OTHER CITIES TOO?
>> YES, WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THE CITIES. WE HAVE TAYLOR AT ROUND ROCK, PFLUGERVILLE AND GEORGETOWN.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION, IF IT FAILS, I'M GOING TO SEE IF IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE COUNCIL TO COMBINE 4.5 INTO 4.4. I THINK REALLY THEY ARE ALL KIND OF ONE AND THE SAME. , HEARING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER THOMPSON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER THORNTON? >> NAY.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK? >> AYE.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCIL AND RETURN IT? >> NAY.
>> COUNCIL OF OTRANTO? >> AYE.
>> MOTION PASSES, 4-3. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM --
>> I AM SORRY, WE JUST DID THAT BUT WE HAVE THE NOTICE?
>> WHEN WE GET TO THE PUBLIC HEARING --
>> HOLD ON. IF WE CAN LET THE CITY ATTORNEY GIVE HER LEGAL
OPINION. >> WHEN WE GET TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEN WE CONTINUE AND CLOSE, YOU WILL HAVE TO DIRECT THE ROADWAY TO GO BACK. TO THE PUBLICATION.
>> YOU ARE TALKING THE 4.1 OF THE CARING? ITEM 4.1?
>> CORRECT. >> IS IT ALLOWABLE TO VOTE TO APPROVE A FEW THAT WE HAVEN'T PROPERLY NOTICED? THAT IS WHY I VOTED NO BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS.
>> I MADE A COMMENT I MADE BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO WITHDRAW IT SINCE WE WERE TOLD WE --
>> WE COULD TAKE THE NOTICE UNDER ADVISEMENT AND REVISE ALL THE CHARTS SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS RECOMMENDATION LANDSBERG THEN AFTER THE FORMER -- FORMAL 30 DAY POSTING --
>> THE POSTED ITEM IS TO ADD THE
>> CUSTOMER SERVICE UNIT, STICKLEY.
>> TO INCLUDE IN THE CALCULATION THAT THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SERVICE AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ROADWAY SERVICE AREA. SO THIS WOULD BE A MAXIMUM CALCULATION WHEN YOU INCLUDE THE BRIDGE, THAT IS HOW I INTERPRETED IT.
>> >> IT IS A SEPARATE CALCULUS,
[00:50:04]
SEPARATE FROM THE FORMAL PROGRAM, THAT IS THE NEXT ITEM THAT WE THEN NEED TO REPOST. IF THE COLLECTION RATE GOES ABOVE.>> THAT IS HOW I LOOKED AT IT. THAT IT WAS WITHIN THE POSTED ITEM. AND WHEN WE GET TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE HAVE TO DIRECT IT TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS. THAT WAS EXPLAINED THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PROCESS IF THAT IS WHAT
[4.5. Continue a public hearing and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-053, amending the Hutto City Code Section A. 12.004, Impact fees; adopting updated Land Use Assumptions; adopting updated Capital Improvements Plans for Water and Wastewater and for Roadway Impact Fees; and Updated Maximum Allowable Service Unit Calculations per service area. (Matt Rector) ]
YOU DID. >> RIGHT, OKAY. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 4.5, CONTINUE A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION, ORDINANCE NUMBER OH- 22 4-053 AMENDING THE HUTTO CITY CODE SECTION 8.12 .1004 , IMPACT FEES, ADOPTING UPDATED LAND-USE ASSUMPTIONS, ADOPTING UPDATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRARED IMPACT FEES, AND UPDATED A MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SERVICE UNIT COMMISSIONS FOR SERVICE AREA.
IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO COME UP AND SPEAK? PLEASE COME UP. I GUESS WE NEED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEN. SO, WE WILL CONTINUE KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. UNTIL -- I GUESS, OCTOBER 24. SINCE OCTOBER 10
WILL NOT BE 30 DAYS? >> NO, THAT HAS TO -- WE CAN CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND A DIRECT THAT THE WATER WASTEWATER CAN BE TAKEN UP FOR CONSIDERATION, BUT THE ROADWAY WILL HAVE TO GO BACK FOR PUBLICATION .
>> THAT WILL BE A WHOLE NEW PUBLIC HEARING FOR THEM WHEN IT
COMES BACK. >> I DO HAVE ONE LEGAL QUESTION. IS THERE A POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR EVAN PORTERFIELD TO VOTE ON
>> CAN A PERSON HAVE A PARENT THAT IS AN INDUSTRY?
>> THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS IF EVAN OR HIS FATHER OWN 10% OF THE BUSINESS THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THIS VOTE. THAT IS DIFFERENT IN PART FROM ALL THE OTHER BUILDERS. I DON'T THINK IT AFFECTS HIM SINGULARLY LIKE THAT. HE PROBABLY OBVIOUSLY OWNS MORE THAN 10% IN HIS BUSINESS SO THIS IS THE FIRST CONFLICT OF INTEREST HURTLE. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS, IS IT CONFERRING A SPECIAL BENEFIT ON HIM , SEPARATE APART FROM
THE PUBLIC? >> LIKELY VOTE ON PROPERTY TAXES, IF YOU OWN A HOME AND VOTE TO REDUCE YOUR TAXES, OBVIOUSLY YOU BENEFIT BUT YOU DON'T BENEFIT DIFFERENTLY THAN EVERYBODY ELSE, WHICH IS WHY WE ALL DON'T HAVE TO RECUSE OURSELVES AND WE VOTE FOR TEXAS. SO DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY BENEFIT YOU?
>> I DO NOT HAVE ANY OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE BUSINESS THAT MY FATHER WORKS FOR, NOR DOES HE HAVE OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THAT AS WELL. DOES THAT HELP CLEAR IT UP?
>> SHOULD WE HAVE HIS DAD COME UP AND DISCLAIM 100%? BECAUSE LAST TIME WE HAD THIS -- EXCUSE ME, SIR. SIR, EXCUSE ME, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, POINT OF ORDER. SHOULD HE COME UP? COUNCILMEMBER GETS -- IS ALWAYS STIRRING OUT THESE COMPLEX THINGS SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE THIS CLOUD OVER
>> WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP AND STATING FOR THE RECORD YOUR
NAME AND YOUR EMPLOYMENT? >> MY NAME IS RICK PORTERFIELD , I WORK FOR P AND L BUILDERS , I AM THE EMPLOYEE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, I HAVE NO OWNERSHIP IN IT OR ANY OTHER BUSINESS AT THIS TIME, OTHER THAN A COOKIE BUSINESS.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. SORRY TO HAVE TO HAVE YOU COME UP HERE.
>>'S PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT I DON'T BELIEVE IT RISE TO THE LEVEL WHERE FIRST TEST WITHIN THE RELATIVES.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, ANY OTHER CONCERNS ON THE LAST ITEM? ALL RIGHT. HEARING THEN, -- GO AHEAD. OKAY. RIGHT, SO GO
[00:55:03]
BACK TO PUBLIC HEARING, IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK ON A PUBLIC HEARING, COMING UP. IF NOT, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:55 P.M. ON SEPTEMBER 12 . ALL RIGHT. I FORGOT NOW, DID I READ ITEM 4.5? I WILL DO IT AGAIN JUST IN CASE. I DID? OKAY, ALL RIGHT.>> WE ARE GOING TO TAKE WATER AND WASTEWATER SEPARATE RIGHT
NOW. >> SO, DISCUSSION ACTION .
>> WAS THERE A PRESENTATION? >> COME ON UP.
>> SWITCH IT TO MY POWERPOINT, PLEASE.
>> THAT EVENING, COUNSEL, MAYOR. FROM THE FEEDBACK LAST WEEK WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT SOME OF THE NUMBERS THAT WERE PRESENTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL STAFF AND COMPARED THOSE AGAINST WHAT WE HAD AND FIGURED OUT WHAT IT WAS WHERE THE DISCREPANCIES ARE SO WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THAT, THEN I'M GOING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPLANATION IN HOW WE DETERMINE THE GROWTH RATES AND SOME OF THE SERVICE UNITS AND THOSE COME FROM AND HOW WE HAVE DEVELOPED OUR PLAN ON THIS. WE COVERED THOSE IN THE FIRST HALF , THE SECOND HALF OF THE SLIDES ARE THE SAME ONES TO YOU ALL SAW LAST WEEK. SO SKIP PAST THOSE IF YOU WANT OR WE CAN RUN THROUGH THEM BUT I WILL GET THINGS GOING NOW. IT IS BASICALLY WHAT I JUST SAID, THE OUTLINE OF THIS PRESENTATION. FOR WATER. THE NUMBERS EXPLAIN.
LAST WEEK, MAYOR, YOU HAD A NUMBER FROM FINANCE THAT STATED WE HAVE 7917 CONNECTIONS. THOSE ARE CONNECTIONS AND I WILL EXPLAIN THIS IN A FEW MORE SLIDES. ARE CONNECTIONS, THAT NUMBER WAS, I BELIEVE, MARCH, 2024. IT COULD HAVE BEEN FEBRUARY. OUR NUMBERS FOR CONNECTIONS WAS 7802. THAT IS DECEMBER 31, 2023, RIGHT? SO THAT IS IN LINE, THAT IS THE NUMBER OF METERS THAT YOU HAVE. SERVICE UNIT, I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU HOW WE CALCULATE THESE. WE ARE PRESENTING, CURRENTLY , DECEMBER 31, 2000 118 SERVICE UNITS. CITY STAFF CHECKED THEM FROM A MAP IN JULY, THEY HAD AROUND 10,429.
WE BELIEVE THAT CHECKS OUT AS WELL. THAT IS THE NUMBERS.
MOVING THROUGH THIS , THERE HAVE BEEN QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT GROWTH RATES OVER THIS SO I KIND OF WANTED TO SHOW YOU FROM THE MASTER PLAN AND COMP PLAN HOW WE OBTAIN THESE GROWTH RATES AND AS I SAID BEFORE SPECIFICALLY THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT AREAS OF GROWTH IN THE TEN-YEAR PERIOD AND WE TOUCH ON THEM AT 18.8. 5.9 AND 2.1. HERE IS A CHART THAT SHOWS, OR A GRAPH, THAT SHOWS HOW WE DEVELOP 10.45, YOU TAKE THE AVERAGE OUT OF THESE AND THAT SHOWS HOW WE DEVELOP THAT POTENTIAL GROWTH RATE. WE USE THIS MASTER PLAN TO DEVELOP THE GROWTH RATE AND THEN WE APPLY THAT TO OUR SERVICE UNITS MOVING FORWARD FOR THE IMPACT FEE. AS I SAID BEFORE, THIS IS YOUR NUMBER OF METERS, THIS IS A BREAKDOWN, THIS IS FROM THE CITY OF HUTTO STAFF. 7802 AND MOST OF THEM ARE 5/8 INCH WHICH IS THE EQUIVALENT OF ONE HOUSE, RIGHT? SO THAT IS WHERE WE ARE AT. ON USING SERVICE UNIT METHOD , THIS TABLE, THIS IS FROM THE AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION, IT IS A VERY COMMON TABLE USED IN DEVELOPING IMPACT FEES, A 5/8 INCHES ONE SERVICE UNIT, A TWO INCH METER IS EIGHT. USING THIS INFORMATION IS HOW , WE APPLY THAT TO THE SAME TABLE I SHOWED YOU BEFORE, THE NUMBER OF EXISTING CONNECTIONS OR METERS, WE HAVE 10,118 SERVICE UNITS. APPLYING THAT GROWTH RATE, HERE IS OUR FORMULA , OVER 10 YEARS. WE GET 27,337 SERVICE UNITS AT THAT GROWTH RATE WITH AN ADDITION OF 17,219 SERVICE UNITS. THAT IS THE NEW INFORMATION I HAD TO PRESENT TO YOU, I HOPE THAT WAS HELPFUL. PROVIDE SOME CLARITY AND HOW WE GOT THESE NUMBERS. I DON'T KNOW, DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR DO YOU WANT TO SEE THE NEXT FLIGHT? IT IS THE SAME THINGS WE SHOWED LAST WEEK WITH THE IMPACT FEE.
[01:00:07]
>>> THE CIP WE WENT THERE BEFORE. A LIST OF 16 PRODUCTS.
THE CITY OF HUTTO THAT HAS IDENTIFIED IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES. HERE IS THE MAXIMUM ACCESSIBLE IMPACT FEE FOR WATERPIK 6808. DOWN WHAT IT WAS NO BECAUSE THERE'S NOT -- YOU KNOW, IT'S COMPARABLE. THERE'S A HIGHER PROJECTION. THAT IS THE WATER. WASTEWATER . WITH THAT, THERE'S A LITTLE HIGHER GROWTH RATE . 13,700 UNITS, THE CITY OF HUTTO DATA WE HAVE. APPLYING MET WITH RAY, WE LOOK AT -- APPROXIMATELY 37,000 IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS. 37,704 SERVICE UNITS. THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITION OF 24,000, JUST OVER 24,000 SERVICE UNITS. AGAIN, HERE IS YOUR WASTEWATER SERVICE AREA. THE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. THERE'S A TON OF THEM. MAINLY BECAUSE THERE'S NOT WASTEWATER SERVICE INTO THE ETJ. THERE ARE EXPANSIONS. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS. PIPES ON THIS. THERE IS 49 PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR IMPACT FEES. HERE IS THE MAXIMUM ASSESSABLE IMPACT FEE WE FOUND. HER TENURE RECOVERABLE COST. DIVIDED BY 24,000 293 , YOU GET $6070 AND IMPACT FEE. FINALLY, HERE IS OUR COMPARISON CHART WE SHOWED BEFORE IN THE REGION. WE HAD HUTTO CURRENT. WE HAVE YOUR NEIGHBORS ON THERE. YOU ARE NOT THE HIGHEST. AS WE TALKED ABOUT, LOTS OF VERY LARGE WASTEWATER PROJECTS GOING ON, NEEDED TO SUPPORT THIS GREAT , SO EVERYONE CAN KEEP MOVING
INTO HUTTO. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THESE AS PRESENTED. .
>> MOTIONED BY COUNCILMAN CLARK TO ADOPT AS PRESENTED. SECOND? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION DIES. HAD WE COME TO TERMS WITH THAT THERE, WHAT WOULD BE -- UGH I WANTED TO OPEN UP A COFFEE SHOP. HOW MANY WHAT A COFFEE SHOP USE? I AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT -- THESE ARE JUST NUMBERS ON THE PAPER. I THINK WE HAVE A HOTEL IN CONSTRUCTION. I THINK THE IMPACT FEES BEFORE THIS IS 600 SOMETHING THOUSAND DOLLARS. THE NEXT HOTEL HAS TO PAY WHAT, IF WE ADOPT THOSE? NOT EVEN INCLUDING ROAD IMPACT FEES.
>> AND I OFFER ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION? HE ALLUDED TO IT, BUT I DON'T THINK WE EXPLICITLY TOLD YOU GUYS. THIS IMPACT FEE IS PER SERVICE UNIT. HISTORICALLY , THE CITY HAS BEEN CHARGING PER LUE , BUT THAT CREATES CONFUSION FOR SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS, AND MOST OF THE OTHER CITIES DO IT ON A PER METER SIZE BASIS. THAT'S WHY WE WENT THROUGH THE SERVICE UNIT CALCULATION THAT LANDS COVERED. WE ARE SWITCHING BACK TO THE METER RATE THAT EVERY OTHER CITY USES . WHEN HE SAYS PER SERVICE UNIT, -- CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE THAT SHOWS HOW MANY DIFFERENT SERVICE METERS ARE --
>> EVERY OTHER CITY -- >> I DON'T KNOW EVERY OTHER CITY. I DON'T THINK EVERY CITY, BUT THE MAJORITY IN THE REGION DO IT ON METER SIZE. WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS, FOUR OF 5/8 INCH METER IT WOULD BE ONE SERVICE UNIT . FOR A THREE INCH METER, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A HOTEL GOING IN RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE USING A THREE INCH METER. THEY WOULD HAVE 17.5 SERVICE
UNITS. >> LET'S TAKE 17.5. CURRENT RATES. 17.5, WHAT DOES THAT COST? SOMEHOW IT GOT TO
$600,000 AND IMPACT FEES. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY
LUE'S THEY ASSUMED. >> I AM ASSUMING THAT THEY ASSUME WHATEVER YOU TOLD THEM TO ASSUME ON WHATEVER THEY ARE GOING TO NEED. EVERY DEVELOPER COMES IN AND THEY NEED THE LEAST AMOUNT AND IT COMES BACK AND THEY SAY YOU ARE LOW ON THAT. ASSUMING 200 ROOMS. WHEN I VOTE ON THIS, 17.5, THAT'S
[01:05:09]
NOTHING. THAT'S A COUPLE CUPS OF COFFEE. ALL OF A SUDDEN A GUY COMES UP AND SAYS $3.5 MILLION. I AM DONE. I'M WALKING. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WHEN I VOTED FOR -->> WHEN WE GO RUN THE NUMBERS.
>> THE CURRENT IMPACT FEES WE PROPOSED , USING THE EXAMPLE MATCHES GAVE ON A THREE INCH METER , 17 1/2, THAT WOULD BE
$340,000 IN IMPACT FEES. >> FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.
THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO, NOT WHAT WE ARE AT.
>> THAT IS WHAT IS PROPOSED, CORRECT.
>> OKAY. >> WE MUST HAVE MORE THAN -- LUE FOUR. I COULD HAVE SWORN HE WAS 660 OR SOMETHING.
>> WAS THE SLIDE WE WERE SEEING NOT
>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT HELPS TO SPLIT THEM UP, BUT WHENEVER IT COMES, MAYBE WE HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT ONE BUT NOT THE OTHER.
FOR WATER. I GUESS I WILL PUT IT OUT THERE TO SPLIT THEM UP.
I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO -- FOR THE WETTER -- WATER IMPACT FEE TO BE AT THE MAX, 6808, WHICH IS DOWN FROM --
>> MAKING THE IMPACT FEE BE 6808. WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION?
>> WHAT DOES IT RIGHT NOW? >> 8832 PER SERVICE UNIT.
>> HEARING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
ONE DOWN. >> LET'S FOCUS ON WASTEWATER.
>> REMIND YOU, TOO, ON THE WASTEWATER, THE WATER IS SMALLER. IN SOME OF THE ETJ , IT IS NOT ADDING BOTH OF THOSE.
THEY ARE GOING TO PAY THE WASTEWATER.
>> DIFFERENT, FOR SURE. >> ONE QUESTION, WHAT IS THE
>> THREE PEOPLE SAID THAT. WHAT WAS IT?
>> 2788. >> THAT'S IN THE SERVICE UNIT
DENOMINATION. 2788 . >> 2788 HER LUE. THAT'S THE
CURRENT RATE. >> WE ARE SWITCHING MEASURING.
2788 IN LUE LANGUAGE. WHAT DOES THAT EQUAL IN SERVICE UNIT? IS IT THE EXACT SAME THING, A LITTLE DIFFERENT?
>> IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT WAY OF MEASURING IT. WE ARE UPDATING IT TO THIS WAY. I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT EQUATION OF WHAT THEY WOULD BE. LUE IS A PLANNING TOOL. YOU LOOK AT A BIG AREA. YOU HAVE DENSITY AND DEVELOP BASED ON THAT. THE METER IS VERY SPECIFIC. ONE LUE IS ONE HOUSE, ONE 5/8 METER.
RIGHT? THAT WOULD BE 2788. 13,000 -- I'M SORRY, 12,000
600 AND -- 12,670. >> IF THE CURRENT COST IS $2788 IN LUE MEASURING, LIVING UNIT EQUIVALENT, AND WE WENT TO SERVICE UNIT AND IT STAYED THE SAME AT 2788, IS THAT GOING TO COMPUTE WHEN THEY GET THAT DONE WITH THE MOUTH, THE EXACT SAME BILL? I GET IT ON A HOUSE, LUE SERVICE UNIT. WHEN YOU TRICKLE DOWN METER SIZES AND ALL OF THAT, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO A 200,000 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING. IS THAT APPROXIMATELY THE SAME, OR JUST BY SWITCHING UNITS IS AUTOMATICALLY 50,000
MORE IN FEES? >> WE RAN AND ANALYSIS ON THIS A WHILE BACK. ON THE LOWER AND OF COMMERCIAL , I BELIEVE, IT IS ACTUALLY HIGHER. THE HIGHER YOU GO -- THE LUE --
>> IT'S NOT THE SAME. >> IT'S NOT THE SAME.
>> I DON'T WANT TO DRAG YOU OUT HERE UNTIL MIDNIGHT AGAIN,
[01:10:07]
IS IT THE SAME, NO IT'S NOT, OKAY. IF YOU HAD TO DO AN ANALYSIS, AND YOU CANNOT SPIT OUT A NUMBER TONIGHT, THAT TELLS ME SOMETHING TO BE COGNIZANT OF. ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU JUST ADDED A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS TO A PROJECT AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT. OKAY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT HIGHER, BUT IT DEPENDS ON AS YOU GO UP METERS.>> THE OLD IMPACT FEE DO NOT NEAR SEPSIS HAVE NEAR THE WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS. FROM 2021, THERE'S NOT NEARLY --
>> WE WEREN'T CONTEMPLATING 300 MILLION. OKAY, CURRENTLY 2788 LUE, SWITCHING TO SU . THE REQUEST IS -- WE VOTED NOT TO DO THAT BASED ON A PREVIOUS MOTION.
>> THAT IS COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE. THAT IS THE MAX RATE. YOU CAN SET WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT.
>> ONE OTHER THING FOR CLARIFICATION, SINCE THE PROPOSAL IS TO GO TO SERVICE UNIT -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG -- I THINK THIS IS A -- IS CORRECT. IT'S GOING TO BE WHATEVER METER SIZE YOU PULL. THAT'S THE MULTIPLIER, THAT'S WHAT IT A. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR USE IS ANYMORE. IT'S BASED OFF YOUR METER SIZE. TODAY YOU MAY HAVE ONE PERSON PAY A DIFFERENT MULTIPLIER FOR THE SAME METER SIZE. THE PERFECT EXAMPLE WAS WHATEVER WE WERE HAVING WITH THE RESTAURANTS. A PARTICULAR METER SIZE, BUT BECAUSE THE MULTIPLIER WAS SO HIGH FOR RESTAURANTS, THEIR PAYMENT WAS REALLY HIGH FOR IMPACT FEES. THIS DOES AWAY WITH THAT DIFFERENCE. IT IS IF YOU HAVE A THREE INCH METER YOU PLAY THE MULTIPLIER THAT MANY SERVICE UNIT, WHATEVER BUSINESS YOU ARE
DOING. >> I AM SOMEWHAT CONFUSED
BECAUSE OF THE HOTEL -- >> AND YOU GO BACK A COUPLE OF PAGES. THE NUMBER OF UNITS
>> I AM SOMEWHAT CONFUSED BECAUSE --
>> I WILL WAIT UNTIL HE'S DONE. GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER
CLARK. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY, WE HAD A RESTAURANT THAT HAD A 5/8 LINE , OR SAY A ONE INCH LINE, NOW THE NEW NUMBER WOULD BE 2.5 TIMES 12,000, IT WOULD BE 30 GRAND. WHEREAS NOW WE WOULD CHARGE , EVEN THOUGH IT'S A ONE INCH LINE, IT'S A RESTAURANT THAT USES FIVE LUE, YOU SAY FIVE TIMES WHAT OUR IMPACT FEE WAS. IT MAY REDUCE BASED ON USAGE THE FACTS. I WAS TRYING TO POINT OUT IS, ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS WE'VE HAD , WHEN IT COMES TO THE CALCULATION AND IMPACT FEES, IS THAT IT DEPENDS ON THE USE AS TO WHAT THEIR MULTIPLIER IS. WE ARE MOVING AWAY FROM THAT TO AN AVERAGE , BASED OFF OF METER SIZE. NOW IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR USE IS. IF YOU NEED THE THREE INCH METER, YOU ARE PLAYING -- PAYING A MULTIPLIER OF 17.5. IF YOU NEED A TWO INCH YOU ARE PAYING THE MULTIPLIER OF A.I.D.S. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE BURGER SHOP OR BARBERSHOP. IF YOU ARE USING THE TWO INCH METER YOU ARE PAYING EIGHT TIMES THE IMPACT FEE. THAT'S HOW MUCH WATER IS CAPABLE OF GOING THROUGH THE TWO INCH METER ON AVERAGE. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT?
>> YES. THIS REMOVES A STEP FOR STAFF, AS WELL. BEFORE, WITH THE LUE, YOU CALCULATE AN IMPACT FEE, THEY STILL NEED TO KNOW WHAT SIZE OF METER TO PUT IN. THEY NEED THOSE CALCULATIONS . THE FLOW, METER CAPACITY. HOW MUCH GPM IS DEMAND ON THE METER, THAT GIVES YOU THE SERVICE UNITS.
OTHERWISE IT IS A TWO-STEP PROCESS.
>> HOW ARE WE DETERMINING THE METER SIZE?
>> IT DEPENDS ON THE USE, RIGHT? PUTTING IN A RESTAURANT OR WHATEVER, IT COMES FROM THAT ENGINEERING GROUP, THE MVP THAT IS DESIGNING IT, THE FIXTURE ACCOUNTS AND ALL OF THAT. FROM THE PLUMBING CODE . AND DEVELOP A TOTAL GPM , WHATEVER THAT IS THEY ARE GOING TO NEED. THAT DETERMINES WHAT SIZE OF METER
THEY HAVE. >> THIS WAY SEEMS TO BE A LOT
MORE FAIR. >> YES, I THINK SO.
>> IT IS BASED ON -- SOMEONE IS NOT GOING TO PUT IN A FOUR INCH METER IF THEY DON'T NEED A FOUR INCH METER. IT'S GOING TO
[01:15:02]
BE BASED ON WHAT THEY ARE USING IT FOR. THE CONNECTIONS, ALL OFTHAT. >> MAYOR PRO TEM, THE THING ABOUT FAIRNESS, THE CALCULATIONS, BOTH OF THEM ARE FAIR DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE SITTING. THE OTHER CALCULATION IS FAIR IF I AM NOT A BIG WATER USER, BUT I NEED A BIG METER BECAUSE I NEED , MAYBE , A BURST OF WATER, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO USE A LOT OF IT. I WOULD PAY LESS, RIGHT ?
>> IS THAT COMMON? >> I WOULD PAY LESS THAN AVERAGE. IF I'M A BIG WATER USER I WOULD PAY MORE THAN AVERAGE. AVERAGE -- THEY ARE BOTH FAIR DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE SITTING IN THE CALCULATION AS TOO MUCH --
>> WHAT IS MORE COMMON? >> THIS IS MORE COMMON.
>> TO GET A BIGGER LINE THAT THEY TYPICALLY WOULDN'T USE DAY-TO-DAY , OR JUST GET WHAT THEY NEED?
>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS HAPPENING, SO MUCH. MAYBE MATT CAN CORRECT ME IN MY RUMBLING AROUND. I THINK WHAT WAS HAPPENING IS A TWO INCH METER CAN HAVE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT VOLUMES. BUT IT DOES HAVE A MAX VOLUME. A DIFFERENT USER WITH A TWO INCH METER THAT DIDN'T USE A LOT OF WATER BASED OFF OF THE USE, WOULD PAY LESS. THE SAME TWO INCH METER FOR A WATER USER AT THIS END OF THE CAPACITY OF THE METER WOULD PAY MORE , BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE MULTIPLIER WORKED. NOW IT IS JUST AVERAGE. WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
>> I AM LOOKING FOR THE HOTEL . FIND OUT WHEN THEY SAY PERMIT FEES, I'M TRYING TO SEE WHAT MADE UP THEIR $600,000. MY ONLY FEAR IS WE ARE SWITCHING CALLET -- CALCULATIONS. IT'S LIKE WE ARE GOING FROM METRIC TO STANDARD OR STANDARD TO METRIC.
WE ARE DOING THAT AND CHANGING FEES AND WE MAY WIND UP COLLECTING LESS OUT OF PEOPLE.
>> WE WILL LOOK UP THE HOTEL YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND TELL YOU WHAT IT IS THEY PAID, AND WHAT THEY WOULD BE PAYING NOW THEY STOP THE MULTIPLIER. YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT THE EQUIVALENT DOLLAR AMOUNT WOULD BE .
>> I HOPE HE'S NOT WATCHING, BUT I HAVE A FEW EMAILS FROM
HIM. >> OKAY, WE'VE GOT IT RIGHT HERE. TOTAL PERMIT FEE WAS $648,149.21. OF THAT, THE WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE WAS $124,066 . THE WATER IMPACT FEE
WAS $393,024. >> WATER WAS 389,000?
>> HE'S TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT WOULD EQUATE TO NOW. THEY WERE ON A THREE INCH METER?
>> THEY PUT IN , IN THEIR DESIGN, A THREE INCH METER.
>> YOU WOULD TAKE THE 300,000 AND DIVIDED BY 7.9 --
>> NO WASTEWATER. THE 124. >> THAT WATER NUMBER SEEMS
>> WASTEWATER WEST -- WAS 2788, AND --
>> IF YOU TAKE THE $393,024 AND DIVIDED BY THE 17.5 THAT COMES
OUT TO 22,000 AND -- >> THE EQUIVALENT YOU WOULD HAVE TO SET THE WATER IMPACT FEE ON THIS CALCULATION TO RESULT IN THE SAME AMOUNT OF REVENUE FROM THAT USER.
>> WE HAVE TO SET IT AT 23,000.
>> 22 -- >> GOING TO BE DRAMATIC LOST FOR MOST CUSTOMERS
>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, HE JUST NOW TOLD US HE CHANGED THE MEASURING . THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION IS TO MAKE SURE WE ARE MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION. I DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS AND CHANGE THINGS UNTIL I UNDERSTAND. I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING GOING TO SU WOULD MAKE THINGS HIGHER. NOW IT SEEMS IT IS COLLECTING SIGNIFICANTLY LESS MONEY. NOW THEY ARE SAYING 124,000 IN WATER WOULD ALL OF A SUDDEN --
>> WASTEWATER. HUNDRED 24,000.
>> OKAY. WASTEWATER WOULD GO TO 124 TO 37,000, THAT'S
[01:20:03]
COLLECTING 90,000 WAS. >> DEPENDING ON WHAT NUMBER YOU SAID. 17 1/2 TIMES WHATEVER NUMBER YOU SAID.
>> 200,000 IN WASTEWATER. >> TODAY? CURRENT RATES?
>> IF YOU ADOPT THIS RATE. >> WHEN YOU SAY NOW --
>> PROPOSED RATE. 12,670. THREE INCH METER. 17 1/2 SERVICE UNITS. 221,007 25 FOR WASTEWATER.
>> DOUBLING ITS. >> YOU SAID IT WAS AND IS. THIS
GUY JUST SAID -- >> PAYING 300,000 THEY WOULD BE 17.5÷6 8008. WHICH IS 100 AND --
WASTEWATER RIGHT NOW. >> WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT ADOPTING A RATE, AS YOU SAID, LOOK AT BOTH OF THEM. HIS TOTAL BILL OF WATER AND WASTEWATER IN THE CITY WOULD GO DOWN RELATIVE TO WHAT IT WAS BEFORE. THE WATER NUMBER DROPS . AND THEY CHANGE THE CALCULATION. YOU GET MORE SAVING ON THE WATER INAUDIBLE ] IT IS WHERE WE CAN SPEND THE MONEY. WE NEED TO SPEND THE MONEY ON WASTEWATER SIDE.
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE REVENUE TO WASTEWATER, BUT NOT MORE MONEY FROM THE DEVELOPER HOLISTICALLY WHEN YOU COMBINE WATER AND WASTEWATER FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN ON THE CALCULATIONS.
>> I AGREE IT SHOULD BE ALL COMBINED. I'M TRYING TO FOCUS ON THE WASTEWATER CALCULATIONS. WE KEEP GETTING IT CONFUSED. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE WERE ASKED.
>> AND WE GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT COMPARES US TO THE OTHER
CITIES? >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T ALL OF US AND TAKE IN LESS MONEY BECAUSE WE ARE AFRAID TO GO TO THE MAX. LET'S GO TO 9000 AND REALIZE --
>> YOU WILL BE VERY CLOSE. IT DOES AGAIN DEPEND ON THE USE.
THE WASTEWATER LUE IS CALCULATED BASED OFF OF A DIFFERENT FORMULA THAN WHAT THE WATER LUE IS CALCULATED OFF THE DIFFERENT TABLES. WHENEVER YOU GO TO AVERAGING, SAY THE HOTEL MAY HAVE A MORE -- EXCUSE ME -- MORE INTENSE WATER USE, BUT MAY BE A LESS INTENSE SEWER USE. DEPENDING ON POOL, IRRIGATION, ALL OF THESE THINGS. A DIFFERENT USER MAY BE FLIPPED AROUND. THEY ARE MORE INTENSE ON THE SEWER .
>> I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING YOU GUYS ARE SAYING. I UNDERSTAND IT VERBALLY. SEEING IT IN DOLLARS AND CENTS A NUMBER SO WE COME UP WITH A PRICE SO THAT IN SIX MONTHS YOU DON'T COME BACK AND SAY HEY, YOU SCREWED SOMETHING UP, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT. I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THE VERBAL, WE ARE TRYING TO SEE HOW THAT CALCULATES TO THE SPREADSHEET AND WHAT THAT DOES TO IMPACT FEE COLLECTION AND ALL OF THAT . I DON'T MIND GOING TO THE MAX IF YOU TELL ME THE MATH SAYS IT'S SOMEWHAT OF A DECREASE. I THINK THAT'S ALL
WE ARE TRYING -- >> WHEN I LOOK AT THE HUTTO CURRENT, AND THAT'S THE COLLECTION RATE. THE COLLECTION RATES ARE BASED OFF OF LUE AND NOT SERVICE UNIT, WE COULD BE COLLECTING A LOT MORE DOLLARS ON THAT RATE THEN WE WOULD BE ON THE HUTTO PROPOSED RATE BECAUSE OF HOW IT'S CALCULATED. THAT IS WHAT I AM HEARING FROM THIS DISCUSSION.
THE NUMBER -- THIS BAR LOOK SCARY BECAUSE IT IS SO HIGH, BUT REALLY, WHEN IT EQUATES TO THE DOLLAR AMOUNT WE ARE COLLECTING POTENTIALLY LESS BECAUSE WE ARE CHANGING HOW WE
CALCULATE. >> CALCULATION, YES, SO YOU GET LESS DOLLAR.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CONSULT AND
TALK TO THE MAYOR PRO TEM. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, YOU ARE NOT COLLECTING LESS. THIS IS THE FINANCING TOOL MECHANISM OF THESE. THERE IS NOT -- YOU KNOW -- YOU ARE COLLECTING THE SAME AMOUNT. 117 MILLION ON WATER,
[01:25:05]
300 MILLION ON WASTEWATER. IT IS JUST HOW IT IS MEASURED IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THIS WAY MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE. IT DOES COLLECTING THE SAME AMOUNT . THE NUMERATOR STAYS THE SAME,RIGHT? >> WHO IS GETTING HIT? ONE EXAMPLE OF THE HOTEL IS A DECREASE, WHO'S GETTING THE INCREASE? IT'S ALL ABOUT THE METER SIZE, BUT WHAT ARE WE MISSING? I'M TELLING YOU, SOMEONE IS GOING TO COME UP HERE AND GO, YOU KILLED MY PROJECT. WE ARE GOING TO LEAVE HERE GOING, I THOUGHT WE WERE SAVING YOU MONEY.
>> IT WOULD BE A PROJECT THAT NEEDED, BY ITS CALCULATION, A THREE INCH METER, BUT BY ITS USE HAD FEWER LUE'S THAN WHAT THE TELL -- HOTEL USE WAS CALCULATED AS. THAT'S THE SCENARIO WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE TO LIKELY PAY MORE ON AN AVERAGE CALCULATION THAN IF THEY WERE ABLE TO DO IT OFF THEIR USE. WHAT USE WOULD THAT BE SPECIFICALLY? I DON'T KNOW.
MAYBE MATT CAN THINK OF ONE. YOU THINK OF A HOTEL HAS A LOT OF DOORS, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN IT, THAT SORT OF THING. IT MAKES THAT IF THIS MAKES SENSE IT WOULD BE ON THE FAR END OF THE EXPENSE SIDE. IF YOU HAD SOMETHING THAT NEEDED A THREE INCH METER THAT DIDN'T HAVE AS MUCH USE, DIDN'T HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE, IT WOULD BE ON THE SAND. THAT'S THE SCENARIO THAT WOULD BE PAYING MORE THAN AVERAGE . THEN PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY PAYING MORE WOULD COME DOWN AND PAY LESS WITH
AVERAGE. >> I IMAGINE A DATA CENTER MAY BE USES A LOT OF WATER ONE TIME. WHATEVER THEY ARE FILLING UP CANNOT DO A ONE INCH. THEY NEED A FOUR INCH. QUICK CYCLE, WHATEVER THEY ARE DOING. I'M THINKING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> A BIG FIRST AND THEY DON'T NEED IT FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. AND THEN A BIG BURST. FOR THEM, THEY WOULD BE PAYING, PROBABLY MORE, BASED OFF OF THE AVERAGE THEN IF WE HAD CALCULATED BASED ON THE LUE MAPPING OF WHATEVER THAT IS.
>> MY LAST ASSUMPTION IS, WE HAVE A ONE INCH EQUALS WHATEVER NUMBER. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE -- CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG -- THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE A ONE INCH METER FOR INSIDE , AND THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE MAYBE A ONE EACH METER FOR
IRRIGATION, OR 5/8. >> RESIDENTIAL
>> I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE BUSINESSES WE KEEP GIVING INCENTIVES TOO. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T ALL OF A SUDDEN COME UP AND REALLY WANT A BUNCH.
>> YOU DON'T PAY WASTEWATER ON IRRIGATION, RIGHT?
>> YOU DON'T PAY WASTEWATER RATES. CURRENTLY BECAUSE WE USE LUE'S, TYPICALLY WE DO NOT INCLUDE IRRIGATION IN OUR LUE CALCULATIONS. WE ARE LOOKING AT YOUR INSIGHT DEMAND WHEN WE ARE CALCULATING OUR LUE'S. THAT'S ONE OF THE 14 -- THAT WILL CHANGE WHEN YOU GO TO THE SERVICE UNIT METHOD. EVERY METER THAT IS INSTALLED HAS AN IMPACT FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
WHEREAS CURRENTLY, ONLY THE METER SERVING THE INSIDE OF THE BUILDING WHERE WE CALCULATE YOUR LUE'S IS GENERATING THE
IMPACT. >> THAT IS WHAT I WAS JUST SAYING. RIGHT NOW, YET , MY HOUSE USES ONE LUE OF WATER BUT I HAVE TWO METERS. THAT'S ONE COST. NOW GOING FORWARD, THE COST IS, I WOULD ASSUME, THE WATER WILL DOUBLE ALMOST BECAUSE -- I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS IN YOUR CALCULATIONS, BUT IF THE WATER WENT TO 6808, BUT REALLY YOU HAVE TWO METERS NOW , NOW RELEASED THE WATER FOR THE HOUSE IS NOT 6808 -- IT WAS 38 -- NOW IT'S GOING TO 6808÷2. ONE FOR THE HOUSE METER AND ONE FOR THE IRRIGATION. YOUR WATER JUST WENT FROM 8832
TO 13,000. >> YOU NEED TO METERS.
>> JUST ONE METER AT A HOUSE. >> HYPOTHETICALLY. IF YOU ARE WATERING THAT MUCH, WHERE YOU -- YOUR 5/8 METER DOESN'T HANDLE IT, THAT IS A SEPARATE METER AND THAT'S A REALLY HIGH
-- >> I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE TWO METERS. AT LEAST COMMERCIAL. THEY HAVE TWO
METERS. >> COMMERCIAL YOU DO SEE THAT.
RESIDENTIAL YOU DON'T. >> I AM USING RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CALCULATE A 250,000 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, OR A MOVIE THEATER. REALLY, IN A WAY WE
DOUBLED PEOPLE'S WATER. >> LIKE YOU SAID, IT IS NOT THAT STRAIGHTFORWARD OF A CALCULATION. WHEN WE DO THE LUE METHOD WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE PEOPLE COME AND SAY -- IN OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE THERE'S A WAY THEY CAN CHALLENGE THE CALCULATION. WE JUST SAY HERE'S A TABLE. IF YOU HAVE THIS MANY SQUARE FEET OF X TYPE OF USE, IT'S THIS MANY LUE'S.
[01:30:04]
BUT IF YOU WANT TO CHALLENGE THAT THERE IS A PROCESS TO WHERE YOU CAN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT LANCE DESCRIBED.YOU GIVE US ALL YOUR DIFFERENT FIXTURES INSIDE THE BUILDING AND SHOW OTHER SIMILAR AND USE , AND SAY, WE ONLY GENERATE THIS AMOUNT OF WATER. THE CITY ENGINEER, BY ORDINANCE, HAS THE ABILITY TO REDUCE YOUR LUE'S CALCULATION.
NOT EVERYBODY DOES THAT. ONLY THE PEOPLE WHO GO THROUGH THE EXTRA STEP, THE EXTRA ENGINEERING, WOULD , POTENTIALLY, SEE THEIR WATER DOUBLE THEIR IMPACT FEE. IN REALITY IT WOULD PROBABLY BE ABOUT THE SAME AS WHAT WE ARE ALREADY CHARGING. THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THE EXTRA STEP TO GET
THERE WAS REDUCED. >> SOMEONE DOWN BECAUSE WE WEREN'T THINKING ABOUT THE IRRIGATION METERS. THE HOTEL IS GOING TO HAVE THREE INCH FOR THE INSIDE AND A ONE INCH FOR THE IRRIGATION. THEY WILL SEE AN INCREASE IN WATER, NOT THE DECREASE WE THOUGHT THEY WERE GOING TO GET.
>> THEY WOULD SEE -- I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBERS. WHAT EVER
>> 17.5 TIMES -- WHAT'S THE RATE?
>> 5/8 IS ONE. CALL 18.5. >> ONE IS 2.5. THEY WOULD HAVE
20 TOTAL SERVICE UNITS . >> 21. 17.5, YEAH. OKAY. NOW IT IS MAKING SENSE IN MY MIND. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO IS PAYING MORE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BE GIVING US EXAMPLES PAYING LESS. WE WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION TO THE IRRIGATION.
OKAY, THAT'S A BIG DEAL THERE. ALREADY VOTED FOR THE WATER INCREASE. THAT'S GOING TO HURT.
>> HOW MANY BUSINESSES IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT? IS THAT COMMON FOR A BUSINESS TO HAVE TWO METERS? INSIDE AND OUTSIDE?
>> GENERALLY ALL OF YOUR NONRESIDENTIAL PREFER TO HAVE A DOMESTIC METER AND IN IRRIGATION METER. THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY THE WASTEWATER RATE FOR IRRIGATION.
>> WHICH IS WHATEVER CITY DOES, CORRECT?
>> I MISSPOKE WHEN I SAID EVERY OTHER CITY. THE MAJORITY OF THE OTHER CITIES IN THIS AREA DO THE SAME THING WE ARE RECOMMENDING WITH THIS METHODOLOGY.
OUR PIPES BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE WATER.
OTHER SURROUNDING CITIES DO . >> THE OTHER QUESTION THAT HASN'T BEEN BROUGHT UP IS THE IMPACT ON APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THERE. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT SIZE METERS DO WE HAVE ON THOSE? HOW MANY APARTMENTS ARE THEY SERVING PER METER? SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE WE STAND THERE. RIGHT NOW, SINCE WE ARE CALCULATING LUE'S, IT'S BASED ON THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS IN THE APARTMENTS, RIGHT? THAT'S THE CALCULATION. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE. IT RELATES TO THE AMOUNT OF WATER THEY ARE USING . THAT'S ONE CALCULATION. WITH THE SIZE OF THE METERS, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE. AND WHERE WE ARE GOING
TO END UP THERE. >> ASHLEY SAID SHE'S GOING TO
LOOK UP -- >> YEAH, I FIGURE THAT'S WHAT
SHE GRABBED THE. >> WE CAN LOOK THAT UP. I CAN TELL YOU THAT , IN A PREVIOUS LIFE, WHEN I WAS DOING PRIVATE-SECTOR STUFF, I DID SOME OF HER BANK COMPLEXES.
THEY WERE DOING RELATIVELY LARGE METERS. I THINK 4 TO 6 INCH WAS THE TYPICAL FOR MOST OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES I DID. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT -- OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT COMPARES TO THE PREVIOUS METHOD VERSUS
THIS METHODOLOGY. >> SIX INCH , THAT IS SERVING PROBABLY -- COULD BE FOR 500 APARTMENTS.
>> COULD BE. >> WHICH, IN TERMS, COMPARING THAT TO HOUSES IS STILL A COUPLE HUNDRED HOUSES AT LEAST,
RIGHT? >> LOWER THAN RESIDENTIAL IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME. IT'S GOING TO MOVE THAT LOWER PER -- WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY IS GOING TO LOWER THEIR COST.
>> GENERALLY, I DO KNOW IT'S BASED OFF OF BEDROOMS, BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE YOU END UP SEEING A .6 PER APARTMENT TO CONVERT THAT OVER TO A HOUSE LUE. YOU HAVE 300 UNITS, YOU WOULD TAKE
[01:35:07]
60% OF THAT, RIGHT? THAT NUMBER WAS WAY SMALLER THAN 60% . ON WATER, THE IMPACT FEE WOULD GO DOWN. ON WASTEWATER, THE IMPACT FEE , BASED OFF THE SERVICE UNIT, WOULD GO UP.>> IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, THE BIGGER YOU GET, THE MORE SAVINGS . SMALLER GUYS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO GET HIT.
>> I THINK HE WAS SAYING THE OTHER WAY AROUND. OR DID I HEAR
THAT WRONG? >> WE HAVE TO LOOK. I CAN REMEMBER. WE DID IT AND I CAN'T RECALL OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD. IT WAS A FLIP-FLOP. >> WHAT HE JUST SAID WITH THE APARTMENTS, YOU ARE GOING TO SEE A PRETTY DRASTIC DECREASE.
A ONE INCH LINE FOR IRRIGATION. A GUY BUILDING A SINGLE COFFEE SHOP HAS TO HAVE HIS -- WHATEVER THEY MAKE HIM HAVE A TWO INCH WATER LINE AND A ONE INCH WATER LINE. HE'S PAYING
TWICE. HE WOULD PAY MORE. >> WE HAVE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX HERE THAT WAS DONE IN THE CITY. THEY HAD A FOUR INCH METER .
RUNNING THE NUMBERS RIGHT NOW TO SEE WHAT THEY PAID .
>> IF WE DO THIS AGAIN IN A COUPLE OF YEARS, WE HAVE EXAMPLES OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS.
>> FAIR. ANYTIME YOU ARE SHIFTING METHODOLOGY AND MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. THE OVERALL DESIRE WAS TO GO TO MORE OF AN AVERAGE POPULATION. THIS IS BOTH AVERAGE AND SERVICE UNIT.
IT IS TWO THINGS AT ONE TIME. >> THEREFORE INCH METER, IF I'M RUNNING THE NUMBERS RIGHT, THE WATER IMPACT BECAUSE IT WAS
MULTIPLE PHASES, WAS -- >> AND WHAT WOULD IT BE IN THE
>> 30 TIMES . >> PLUS A ONE INCH.
>> 32.5. >> THAT'S FOR THE WATER.
WASTEWATER. >> THAT WAS THE WATER
CALCULATION. >> THE WATER CALCULATION IS THE 30 FROM THE FOUR INCH, AND THE 2.5 FROM THE ONE INCH
IRRIGATION METER. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS, BUT PREVIOUSLY WE HAD A CONVERSATION. HOW IS THE WATER GOING DOWN? HOW IS IT GOING DOWN? REMEMBER I KEPT SAYING THAT? IT'S NOT GOING DOWN, IT'S GOING UP. IT CONCERNS ME THAT FOR A MONTH I WAS, LIKE, HOW IS THE WATER RATE GOING DOWN? IT'S IMPOSSIBLE WITH ALL THE WATER PROJECTS. THAT WAS THE ARGUMENT LAST WEEK. THERE SOMETHING WRONG IN THE MATH.
SOMETHING IS WRONG IN THE MATH. WE CHANGED THE MEASURING UNIT AND ACTUALLY IT'S ALL GOING UP. WHERE I GET CONCERNED, WE -- AN HOUR DEBATING, WHY IS OUR WATER COST GOING DOWN WHEN IN REALITY IT'S GOING UP. JUST A LEARNING LESSON . WHEN YOU ARE PRESENTING THIS AND SWITCHING STUFF AS A CONSULTANT, THE MATH PROBABLY WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG LAST WEEK, WE JUST FORGOT THE ONE THING ABOUT THE IRRIGATION, WHICH CHANGES THE DYNAMICS.
>> SURE, UNDERSTOOD. >> THE RESIDENTIAL WILL GO
DOWN. STILL ONE-TO-ONE. >> LET'S BE HONEST. WE ARE NEVER GOING TO INCENTIVIZE NEIGHBORHOODS. WHAT DO WE TYPICALLY INCENTIVIZE? COMMERCIAL. WE ARE GIVING THIS GUY HUNDRED PERCENT, THIS GUY 50% BACK. I'M COGNIZANT OF THE COST. AT THE BEGINNING EVERY TIME WE GIVE A REBATE BACK IT'S COMING OUT OF THE PEOPLE'S POCKETS AND A EFFORT TO HELP SPUR UP DEVELOPMENT. IT DOESN'T HELP IF WE INCREASE THEM. AT THIS POINT I THINK WE JUST NEED TO GET A RATE. WE CAN ALWAYS MOVE DOWN, RIGHT? IN A YEAR WE CAN MOVE IT DOWN, WE CAN MOVE IT UP. WE CAN NEVER GO ABOVE THE MAX. WE CAN CHANGE IN
YOUR. >> YOU CAN COME DOWN. TO GO ABOVE THE NUMBER YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A NEW CALCULATION. YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A NEW STUDY TO JUSTIFY THAT.
>> IF THE MAX IS 12 AND WE PICKED 12 TODAY WE CAN GO DOWN.
IF THE MAX IS 12 AND WE GO SIX, AND WE WANT TO GO UP IN A YEAR
>> YEAH. >> IS THROWING A NUMBER OUT
[01:40:03]
] AS PRESENTED. >> DID YOU ALREADY CONSIDER
THAT? >> MOTIONED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. APPROVING WASTEWATER CHARGE OF 12.670.
>> DIDN'T WE ALREADY CONSIDER THAT?
>> FIRST MOTION WAS COMBINED. >> A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. MAKING THE WASTEWATER $12,670 PER -- I FORGOT.
SERVICE UNIT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE
>> MOTION PASSES 5-2. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR PACKET ON PAGE 156, THERE'S THE ORDINANCE YOU ARE TRYING TO PASS THAT WOULD ASSUME THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. YOU ARE ONLY DOING IT FOR WATER, WASTEWATER IN THE UPDATED MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SERVICE CALCULATIONS FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER. IN THE ORDINANCE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT PAGE, IT HAS, ON PAGE 157, IT HAS SECTION 2, YOU ARE IN -- ENACTING WATER AND WASTEWATER.
SECTION 3 WAS THE ROADWAY. IF YOU MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE, WITH THESE UPDATED FEES -- MAXIMUM FEES YOU JUST VOTED , BUT REMOVE THE SECTION FOR ROADWAYS AND DIRECT STAFF TO REPOST IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW , THAT WOULD BE
MY RECOMMENDED MOTION. >> CAN YOU REPEAT WHAT SHE JUST
SAID? >> THE ORDINANCE NUMBER IS --
IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT, WITH THE MAXIMUM IMPACT FEES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER , AND TO REMOVE THE SECTION 3 FOR ROADWAY AND DIRECT STAFF TO REPOST THAT
ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER , AND TO REMOVE SECTION 3 REGARDING ROAD IMPACT FEES. AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO --
WHAT? >> AND INCLUDE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FEES YOU JUST VOTED ON. WE WILL PUT THOSE IN THE ORDINANCE AND DIRECT STAFF TO REPOST THE ROADWAY.
>> PUT THE MAXIMUM IN THE ORDINANCE AND DIRECT STAFF TO
REPOST ON THE ROADWAY FEE. >> DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I AM GOING TO VOTE NO BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A CLEAR IMPACT ON WHAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ON DEVELOPMENT . I
ANTICIPATE WE WILL FIND OUT. >> AS YOU SAID, WE CAN LOWER IT. WE CAN ALWAYS LOWER IT. WE CAN ALWAYS LOWER IT.
>> YEAH. >> YOU HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON IT , SEPTEMBER 19TH. WE WILL BRING THE FULL ORDINANCE WITH THE FEES IN THEIR. THIS WAS ADOPTING THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND SET THE
MAXIMUM FEE ORDINANCE. >> ASKED STAFF SEPTEMBER 19TH.
GIVE US REAL-WORLD EXAMPLES. RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS REALLY KNOW, AND I KNOW WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT. WE ARE JUST VOTING ON INCREASES . WE WILL FIND OUT WHEN THE DEVELOPER WORLD COMES BACK AND SAYS THESE PROJECTS START DYING. AND DEALS ARE GETTING DROPPED. I WOULD RATHER KNOW THAT AHEAD OF TIME WHAT WE ARE DOING. MAYBE I AM THE ONLY CLUELESS ONE. I'M NOT THE BEST AT MATH.
>> WE WILL HAVE REAL-WORLD -- >> WE DO SEPARATE THE WATER AND
[01:45:10]
WASTEWATER. WE CAN MENTALLY UNDERSTAND THE WASTEWATER APPLIES.>> MOTION PASSES, 5-2. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTIONS, IF I UNDERSTAND THIS RIGHT, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM 4.3 UP NEXT. ALL RIGHT, HEARING NONE,
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING -- >> I THOUGHT WE WERE TOLD LAST WEEK WE HAD TO ADOPT THE BUDGET BEFORE WE CAN DO THE TAX RATE.
>> 4.3 IS PUBLIC HEARING, I BELIEVE, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> IT SAYS OF ORDER. YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION OR NOT?
>> I DO. >> OKAY, HOLD ON. WE HAVE AN OBJECTION. I DON'T REMEMBER HOW THIS GOES, BUT I WILL CALL ABOUT TO MOVE IT UP NEXT, OKAY? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE WILL HAVE 4.3, NEXT.
>> IS IT A STATE LAW WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE TAX RATE PRIOR TO
THE BUDGET? >> YOU TYPICALLY APPROVE THE BUDGET. THE BUDGET HAS THE TAX RATE. YOU RATIFY THE TAX RATE, AND THEN YOU PASS THE ORDINANCE. IS THE ORDER.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. YOUR BUDGET HAS TO BE ADOPTED BEFORE YOU ADOPT YOUR TAX RATE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING INCLUDING YOU FROM DISCUSSING THE TAX RATE, BUT YOU CANNOT ADOPT IT BEFORE YOU ADOPT YOUR BUDGET.
>> CAN YOU SHOW ME IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE WERE IT SAYS WE HAVE TO DO THE TAX RATE FIRST? EVERYTHING I HAVE READ , I THINK IT IS CHAPTER 59, 52, 62 , THERE ARE CERTAIN ORDERS DEPENDING ON WHAT YOUR INTENDED ACTION -- HERE'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. NORMALLY GOVERNMENT GOES OUT , THEY EARMARKED ALL THE MONEY, THEN THEY HAVE SOME PEOPLE TELL YOU WHAT THE TAX RATE HAS TO BE TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT.
>> BUILD A BUDGET, LIKE YOUR CREDIT CARD LIMIT. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, GO TO THE GROCERY STORE, PICK ALL THE ITEMS WE WANT, WALK UP TO THE CASHIER AND FIND THE TOTAL. WE WALK IN WITH THE BUDGET AND GO, WE CAN BUY X AMOUNT OF STUFF. THAT'S WHY I DON'T KNOW STATE LAW SAYS YOU HAVE TO DO THE TAX
RATE FIRST. >> I FIRST IS WHAT --
>> BUDGET FIRST. I THINK IT TYPICALLY GOES THAT WAY BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU DETERMINE HOW MUCH YOU ARE GOING TO CHARGE PEOPLE ONCE YOU FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO BUY.
>> OPINION, ASKED FOR STATE LAW THAT DETERMINES THE ORDER. WE DON'T KNOW UNTIL SOMEONE SHOWS US THE STATE LAW THAT SAYS THE
TAX RATE HAS TO COME FIRST. >> BUDGET.
>> THE BUDGET, I AM SORRY. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE STAFF NEEDS TO DO RESEARCH. CAN WE ASK FOR A 10 MINUTE RECESS?
>> CAN WE VOTE ON -- THERE WAS AN OBJECTION TO IT. LET'S CALL THE VOTE WHETHER WE SHOULD MOVE IT UP OR NOT, RIGHT? MOVING IT
[01:50:01]
UP IS A YES -- NOT MOVING -- >> I DON'T WANT TO MOVE IT UP IS -- IF THERE'S A STATE LAW THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO DO THE BUDGET FIRST. IF IT'S HOW IT'S TYPICALLY DONE, EVERYONE KNOWS I'M ATYPICAL. I WOULD RATHER NOT BREAK THE LAW.
>> MOST OF THE DEADLINES TALK ABOUT WHEN YOU PUBLISH, HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, THE PUBLICATION HAS TO BE IN THE NEWSPAPER. WHAT YOU CAN DO , AND WHEN YOU CAN ADOPT IT. I COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO ADOPT THE BUDGET BEFORE THE TAX RATE. BUT IN ORDER TO SET THE TAX RATE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE BUDGET . I THINK THAT IS WHY PEOPLE DO THE BUDGET -- CITIES DO THE BUDGET FIRST.
>> I'M PRETTY SURE WE ARE GOING TO SPEND ALL THAT MONEY.
IF WE GO THROUGH THE WHOLE BUDGET AND ARGUE ABOUT THE BUDGET ON THAT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT STILL HAS TO COME TO THE SAME NUMBER. I THINK IT WOULD SAVE US A LOT OF TIME IF WE HAD A VOTE AND KNEW WHERE WE WERE GOING TO BE OUT. IF YOU WANT TO DO THE BUDGET FIRST , I AM HAPPY TO SKIP AND GO THAT ROUTE AND BE HERE UNTIL 2:00 IN THE MORNING. NO MATTER WHAT WE COME UP TO IT IS STILL NOT GOING TO PASS.
>> YOU MADE IT VERY CLEAR YOUR OPINION. NO COUNCILMEMBER CAN HAVE ANY CUTS. EVEN THOUGH WE ALREADY
>> WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY CUTS AT THE LAST BUDGET.
>> OKAY, HERE WE GO. THIS IS ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS TAX CODE. THE CITY ADOPT ITS BUDGET BEFORE ADOPTING ITS PROPERTY TAX RATE. TEXAS TAX CODE 626.0 1A. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 102.0
>> I REAL -- WILL RESCIND MY REQUEST TO DO THE TAX RATE
[4.1. Conduct a public hearing and related items in consideration and possible action to approve Ordinance No. O-2024-058 of the City of Hutto, Texas approving and adopting a budget for the City of Hutto for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2024 and ending September 30, 2025 for the City of Hutto, Texas (Alberta Barrett) ]
NEXT. WE WILL GO TO ITEM 4.1. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND RELATED ITEMS IN CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER O 2024-058 IN THE CITY OF HUTTO, TEXAS, APPROVING THE AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF HUTTO FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 2024 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2025, FOR THE CITY OF HUTTO , TEXAS. DO WENEED TO OPEN IT? >> WE CONTINUED IT.
>> I'M SORRY? >> WE CONTINUED IT.
>> ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK REGARDING THE BUDGET? ALL RIGHT. HEARING NO ONE WE WILL --
>> WE HAVE ONE. >> RICK PORTERFIELD. HERE IS WHAT I KNOW. WHEN I RUN A BUSINESS, FOR SOME REASON I DON'T HAVE THE MAGIC WAND TO JUST MAKE PEOPLE COME AND BUY MY SERVICE. A CITY HAS THAT MAGIC WAND. WHAT BOTHERS ME IS -- AND I QUESTION ALL OF YOU , NO EXCEPTIONS. ARE YOU PASSING A BUDGET THE WAY THE U.S. CONGRESS DOES? YOU DON'T READ A SINGLE PAGE , DON'T KNOW WHAT IS IN IT AT ALL? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT'S IN IT? I'VE LOOKED THROUGH AND I'M NOT A VERY SMART MAN, BUT TRUST ME, IF THE CITY WERE MY BUSINESS , THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF WASTE , FLUFF , COMFORT , EGO IN IT. I DON'T CARE TO PAY MORE TAXES.
IT REALLY AGGRAVATES ME TO PAY MORE TAXES WHEN YOU ALL ARE SPENDING MONEY LIKE YOU ARE A TRUST FUND KID. YOU PASS THE BUDGET TONIGHT , I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU PASS , BUT IF YOU
[01:55:02]
CAN'T -- WHEN I ASK YOU INDIVIDUALLY IF YOU READ THAT BUDGET, AND WHEN I ASK YOU A QUESTION, AND YOU DON'T GET IT RIGHT, I AM NOT GOING TO BE A HAPPY CITIZEN. AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DON'T WANT YOUR JOB, OKAY? AT THE END OF THE DAY I DON'T WANT YOUR JOB. I WANT YOU TO DO YOUR JOB THE BEST YOU CAN FOR YOUR CLIENTELE , AND THAT IS ME.>> THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. YOU WANT ME TO THROW OUT A --
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO START THE
>> ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REDUCE THE SIDEWALK AND DRAINAGE CREW THAT INCLUDES FOUR FTE 'S AND EQUIPMENT FOR A TOTAL OF $412,000 -- 412,007 1356 -- BY $500,000. I WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE PARITY IN THE HR DEPARTMENT BY 289997. REDUCE THE LONGEVITY IN THE HR DEPARTMENT BY 54995. REDUCE THE CERTIFICATION PAY IN THE HR BUDGET BY 164000. REDUCE THE FEASIBILITY STUDY IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT BY $75,000. AND FINALLY, TO REDUCE THE CONTRIBUTION TO CIVIC PROGRAMS UNDER CITY COUNCIL BY $22,000.
FOR A TOTAL OF 1,518,000 1518355.56.
>> WHAT WAS THE SIGN -- SIDEWALK DRAINAGE?
>> 412713.56. >> WHAT WAS THE TOTAL AGAIN?
>> 1518305.56. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND. >> WHO SAID THAT? COUNCILMEMBER
THOMPSON. DISCUSSION? >> IN ORDER TO GET TO KNOW NEW REVENUE , IF I REMEMBER IT'S AROUND 2 MILLION? DOES THAT
SOUND RIGHT? >> CITY MANAGER, I BELIEVE THAT IS CLOSE TO THE RIGHT NUMBER. I WILL LOOK UP THE EXACT DOLLAR REALLY QUICK THAT WAS THE FUND BALANCE, THE REVENUE THAT WOULD BE GENERATED BY NO NEW REVENUE. ALL OF THOSE NUMBERS WOULD REQUIRE THAT AMOUNT OF EXPENSE FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
>> DISCUSSION ON THIS. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT FORWARD ABOUT THE SIDEWALK AND DRAINAGE CREW, AND THE COST THAT THAT WOULD BE -- THIS WOULD BE A NEW -- NOT A NEW DEPARTMENT, BUT A NEW SERVICE FOR THE CITY. UNFORTUNATELY, WITH THE TAX RATE CONSTRAINTS WE ARE REALISTICALLY HAVING TO UNDERGO , CUTS ARE, UNFORTUNATELY, HAVING TO BE MADE. THAT IS A SERVICE THE CITY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE , ESPECIALLY OLD TOWN AREA. SOUTH OF 79, AND ALSO NORTH OF 79. ALSO, REDUCING THE STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR , THIS FISCAL YEAR WE WERE OUT 1.2 MILLION . THE MAYOR WAS LIKELY SAYING LAST YEAR, IN ORDER TO -- IT WAS BUDGETED AT 750. IT IS BUDGETED AT 2.1 MILLION. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DUE TO BUDGET CONSTRAINTS, AND TAX RATE CONSTRAINTS, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO FULLY FUND OUR STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2025. THAT DOES IMPACT THE WHOLE CITY . UNFORTUNATELY, THE PARITY PAY , IT IS CUTTING SOME OF THE PARITY PAY FOR OUR CITY STAFF, BUT IT ALSO IS GIVING THEM $500,000 , THE SAME AMOUNT WE
[02:00:04]
GAVE PD LAST YEAR. THIS WOULD GIVE THEM $500,000 TO BRING THEM UP TO MARKET . NOT BRING THEM UP TO, BUT BRING THEM CLOSER TO MARKET PAY. LONGEVITY, THIS IS COMPLETELY -- OUR STAFF WILL BE -- WILL CONTINUE TO GET LONGEVITY PAY .THAT NUMBER WILL JUST NOT BE INCREASED. LET'S SEE .
CERTIFICATION PAY , THAT IS COMPLETELY TAKEN OUT. WITH THE AQUATIC FEASIBILITY STUDY, THIS WAS SOMETHING I FOUND IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT UNDER GENERAL FUND. IT IS ACTUALLY -- THE AQUATIC FEASIBILITY STUDY IS IN THE PID FUND. THAT WILL BE DONE UNDERNEATH WITH DEVELOPER DOLLARS, AND NOT TALKS -- TAXPAYER DOLLARS. UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OUR BUDGET IS BEING CONSTRAINED DUE TO TAX LIMITS , WE ARE UNABLE TO FULLY FUND OUR CIVIC PROGRAMS FOR NONPROFITS THAT ARE LOCAL TO THE CITY OF HUTTO. WE WILL HAVE TO DECREASE -- WE WILL HAVE TO CUT THAT BY $22,000.
>> TAKE OUT THE LIBRARY STUDY AS WELL?
>> THE LIBRARY STUDY IS NOT IN THE GENERAL FUND.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM, THE AMOUNT I SENT AROUND ON EIGHT-17, VIA EMAIL TO COUNCIL WAS $2,057,000.
>> I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE IT CUTS IT CUTS STREET. -- REBOOT PAIR AND INFRASTRUCTURE. SOMETIMES THOSE COULD BE OFF TO POSITIONS. I ASKED HIM TO PUT TOGETHER, HE GOT IT TO US TODAY. HERE'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THE POSITION. BUT WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS TELL YOU THERE'S A POSITION OUT THERE THAT THE ANNUAL SALARY THEY ARE GETTING TODAY, IF I UNDERSTAND THIS RIGHT, THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN BUDGET IS 7.97% INCREASE. IF THE PARITY PAY GOES THROUGH AS PROPOSED, THEY GET ADDITIONAL 17.6 -- 17.62% INCREASE. THAT IS WITHOUT THE PARITY INCREASE.
THESE PEOPLE ARE GETTING NINE, 12, SIX. EVERYBODY DESERVES INCREASES IN PAY. BEFORE PARITY INCREASE , THAT'S NOT -- I DON'T THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. IF EVERYONE GOT A 5% INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD, I THINK EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE HAPPY. WE ARE TALKING 700 -- AFTER YOUR YOU GET THE NINE,
12, SIX, FOUR, -- >> I CANNOT GO TO THE PUBLIC AND SAY, SO-AND-SO IS GETTING A 30% INCREASE IN PAY. I JUST CAN'T DO THAT. IF THEY GOT A REASONABLE RATE AND WE CAUGHT THEM UP OVER TIME. FOR ME, THE REASON I VOTED FOR THE POLICE TO HAVE A PARITY PAY WE HAD ONE ISSUE. ALMOST A HALF OF OUR POSITIONS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WERE UNFILLED. WE HAD COPS MAKING 52,000 A YEAR, WORKING NIGHTS, WEEKENDS.
HOLIDAYS. WE HAD PEOPLE THAT WERE -- MY WIFE IS AN ADMIN. WE HAD ADMIN'S MAKING MORE THAN A POLICE OFFICER. I DIDN'T THINK
[02:05:02]
THAT WAS APPROPRIATE. LAST YEAR I SUPPORTED PARITY PAY BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE TO COME OUT OF THE FIELD. JAMES HAS HAD NO PROBLEM HIRING PEOPLE. EVERY MONTH THERE ARE PEOPLE UP HERE.TO ALL OF A SUDDEN SAY TO KEEP ALL THESE PEOPLE THEY NEED AND 18 PERCENT ON TOP OF THE -- ON TOP OF THE 9% THEY GOT LAST YEAR. THAT'S JUST ONE OF THE DEALS. THERE'S ALSO A PARITY PAY IN A WHOLE DEPARTMENT JUST ON ITS OWN. WHOLE OTHER .
THERE'S ONLY ,-, 22,000 -- >> CITY MANAGER, CAN YOU HELP US? I'M NOT FOLLOWING ANY OF THAT. UNFORTUNATELY. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MAYOR IS TALKING ABOUT. LOOKING AT THE SPREADSHEET. I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND IT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COLUMNS MEAN.
>> WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO PROVIDE WAS A COMPARISON , SALARIES FOR SPECIFIC POSITIONS LAST YEAR. THAT'S THE FIRST PART. WHAT THE PARITY STUDY SAYS , THE FIRST STEP OF THAT
PAYGRADE SHOULD BE. >> THAT'S THE LOWEST.
>> THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD HIRE SOMEONE BRAND-NEW .
>> THAT'S THE RED COLUMN. >> OKAY. THE COLUMN TO THE LEFT OF THAT THAT SAYS ANNUAL SALARY, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE
GETTING PAID NOW. >> CORRECT. OCTOBER 1ST OF
2023. >> OCTOBER 1 OF 2023, A YEAR AGO. THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE GETTING PAID A YEAR AGO.
THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY GETTING PAID BECAUSE THEY HAVE
NOT GOTTEN A RAISE. CORRECT? >> WE HAVE NOT DONE A SECOND
PARITY. COST-OF-LIVING. >> TODAY IS SEPTEMBER 12TH OF
2024. >> ARGUABLY, MAYBE, MAYBE NOT.
SOME OF THEM MAY HAVE HAD THEIR ANNIVERSARY. THEREFORE THEY WERE ELIGIBLE FOR THEIR MARRIAGE. SOME OF THEM GOT PARITY LAST YEAR. OKAY? WE DO PUT IN 400,000, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. PARITY FOR MOMS WARREN LASTER. I BELIEVE IT WAS 800,000 FOUR PB PARITY. SWORN AND CIVILIAN PD .
>> SOME ARE MAKING MORE THAN THE SPREADSHEET MAKES IT LOOK LIKE THEY ARE GETTING. THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY BE GETTING A BIGGER RACE THAN THEY REALLY ARE.
>> OCTOBER 1ST DATE, RAY, IS WHAT THEY OUGHT TO BE MAKING.
KATE IS THE ONE THAT PREPARED THIS. WHAT THEY OUGHT TO BE MAKING IN THIS BUDGET YEAR. IT MAY NOT BE DAY ONE, OCTOBER 1.
IN THE BUDGET YEAR. PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT ANNIVERSARY DATES.
THEN WE WERE ASKED IF THERE WAS A PARITY CHANGE, WHAT WAS THE PARITY CHANGE? AND WHAT MADE UP THE $720,000 PROPOSAL. THAT'S THE PARITY BY 9-30-25. PERCENTAGEWISE, THE MAYOR IS RIGHT. IT'S ALL OVER THE PLACE. IF YOU ARE MAKING LESS SALARY, AND SAY YOU ARE MAKING 20 BUCKS AN HOUR, 41.6, AND YOUR PARITY SAYS YOU OUGHT TO BE MAKING 45,000 A YEAR, THAT IS A 10 OR 12 IN -- PERCENT INCREASE. THEN YOU HAVE OTHER POSITIONS AT THE TOP. YOU MIGHT GO UP A LITTLE BIT. IT COULD BE A BIG PERCENT -- I'M SORRY, IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
SMALL PERCENT, BIG DOLLAR AMOUNT. THE PERCENT IS ALL OVER THE PLACE. THE POINT IS TO STANDARDIZE THIS WHERE IT'S THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. IF YOU ARE A BRAND-NEW HIGHER, YOU GET HIRED AND AT WHAT MID-MARKET IS. THAT'S 50%, THAT'S THE PARITY NUMBER. 50% OF MARKET IS PARITY. THAT IS FOR NEW HIRE.
IF YOU ARE A NEW HIRE WITH EXPERIENCE, WE PUT STEPS . 3% BETWEEN. IF YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR THREE OR FOUR YEARS, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN 3% MERIT INCREASES. THAT IS HOW WE ARE ADJUSTING IT TO SEE. THAT'S WHAT THE LATERAL TRANSFER POLICY IS THAT WE ARE UTILIZING IN PD . SETS THE EXPERIENCE, BUT IT'S COP TO WHERE YOU CANNOT CAPITOL .
>> CAN I PAUSE YOU ON THAT POINT? CAN WE SET PARAMETERS ON THIS PARITY PAY TO SAY IF YOU ARE HIRED WITHIN A 12 MONTH SPAN, THIS PARITY PAY -- YOU DON'T GET IT FOR THIS PARITY PAY, BUT IF YOU -- I DON'T KNOW, IF YOU ARE , YOU KNOW, COMING INTO THE ORGANIZATION FROM ANOTHER -- IF YOU ARE
[02:10:06]
DOING NOT LATERAL STEP , DEPENDENT ON IF YOU GOT PARITY -- IF YOU'VE ALREADY GOTTEN PARITY AT YOUR PREVIOUS STOP, THAT WOULD PASS YOU BY. CAN WE PUT PARAMETERS IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE VALUING THE PEOPLE THAT HAVEN'T GOTTEN PARITY VERSUS PEOPLE THAT HAVE JUST COME INTO THE ORGANIZATION. >> YES, YOU CAN PUT ALL KINDS
OF BUMPERS OR PARAMETERS. >> I THINK THAT WOULD ONLY BE
-- >> BUT, ON THAT NOTE , IF WE HAVE HIRED THIS YEAR, WE HAVE HIRED AT MARKETS. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO GET PARITY ANYWAY. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WE HIRED THEM AT MARKET. THERE'S A NUMBER OF POSITIONS THAT WILL APPLY TO BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN HIRED IN THE LAST YEAR. THERE IS ONE OR TWO EXCEPTIONS TO THAT. THAT'S BECAUSE THE INCUMBENTS HAVEN'T YET HAD THEIR PARITY HIT , BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T -- THEY WERE EITHER IN -- THE WAY WE DID PARITY LAST YEAR, AND THIS WAS THE WEST FROM COUNCIL, WE ALL THOUGHT IT WAS FAIR, WAS TO TAKE THE 250 AND PUSH IT DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE ORGANIZATION. OR PEOPLE WHO WERE EGREGIOUSLY OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT THE MARKET SAID THEY SHOULD BE GETTING PAID. THAT GROUP OF EMPLOYEES GOT TAKEN CARE OF LAST YEAR, TO THE EXTENT WE HAD MONEY. FOR AN EXAMPLE, I CAN USE THIS EXAMPLE BECAUSE IT IS A REAL THING. LET'S SAY UTILITY BILLING CLERKS. UTILITY BILLING CLERKS -- I GUESS THEY ARE CALLED CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES. CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES. LAST YEAR WE MOVED UP TO $20 AN HOUR IF THEY WERE BELOW $20 AN HOUR. ALTHOUGH, THE PARITY, OR THE MARKET FOR THAT POSITION, IS SUPPOSED TO BE 49,000, WHICH IS CLOSER TO $24 AN HOUR. WE ONLY WENT TO 20 BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THE MONEY WE HAD. AS WE HAVE HIRED NEW UTILITY BUILDING CLERKS, WE'VE NOT HIRED THEM AT MARKET BECAUSE WE WOULD BE IN A POSITION OF HIRING BRAND-NEW PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING MORE MONEY THAN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY HERE. WE HAVE MADE THAT CLEAR TO THEM IN THE JOB OFFERS. WE ARE NOT HIRING YOU ABOVE WHAT OUR INCUMBENTS ARE MAKING. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE. THE ORGANIZATION IS AWARE WE ARE LOOKING TO TRY TO RECTIFY THIS. THAT HAS WORKED JUST FINE.
THERE'S ONLY A FEW PEOPLE THAT APPLIES TO. OTHERWISE, IF THE POSITION WAS VACANT AND WE FILLED IT, WE FILLED IT WITH WHAT THE NEW MARKET RATE IS, SO WE ARE NOT CONTINUING TO BE FURTHER AND FURTHER BEHIND. POSTING JOBS THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE -- WHICH IS WHY WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO HIRE PEOPLE BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN HIRING THEM AT THE MARKET RATE, WHICH IS WHAT OUR TARGET IS. 50% OF THE MARKET. THAT WOULD BE MY ARGUMENT THERE. ALSO, THERE WAS A CONCERN EXPRESSED -- AND THIS IS IN THE PAID PLAN SHE IN YOUR FOLDER. YOU CAN SEE THE STEPS.
YOU CAN SEE THE PAY GRADES. THERE WAS ANOTHER CONCERN. THIS JUST CAN'T KEEP GOING ON FOREVER. THAT'S TRUE. WHEN YOU GO TO A STEP PLAN YOU TO CAP OUT. YOU HAVE A TOP END, RIGHT? THE TOP AND IS STEP 10. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 32% DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BEGINNING PAY STEP AND THE LAST PAY STEP, WHICH IS ABOUT WHERE YOU TYPICALLY HAVE IN SWING BETWEEN MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM IN A PAY RANGE. WHEN YOU GET TO STEP 10 , AFTER YOU'VE BEEN HERE 10 YEARS AND YOU'VE HAD 10 YEARS OF GOOD REVIEWS , AND YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO BE ELIGIBLE TO MOVE TO THE NEXT UP BECAUSE OF TIME, GRADE AND PERFORMANCE. ONCE YOU REACH STEP 10 YOU DON'T HAVE ANOTHER STEP. ALL YOU GET IS, IF THERE'S A COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT THAT CHANGES YOUR BASE SALARY BECAUSE THE COST OF LIVING HAS GONE UP, THEN YOU WOULD GET THAT. YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING ELSE BEYOND THAT. THAT IS HOW THE PAY STRUCTURE IS STRUCTURED. ON THE PARITY ROLLOUT, THE 700,000 NUMBER , WHAT I DID THERE IS I LISTENED TO THE CONCERN AND FEEDBACK ABOUT NOT DOING A PERCENTAGE, BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO MAKE MORE MONEY GET MORE WHENEVER IT'S BASED OFF A PERCENTAGE, AND PEOPLE WHO GET LESS GET LESS WHEN IT'S BASED ON A PERCENTAGE. I CALCULATED A DOLLAR AMOUNT. IF YOU ARE UNDER -- LET'S SAY IF YOUR CURRENT PAY WAS 15,000 UNDERWEAR IT SHOULD BE, I CAPPED IT AT 10.
THAT MAY MEAN YOU ARE ELIGIBLE FOR 20%, RIGHT , INCREASE, BUT YOU ARE GETTING 10,000. OR THE PERSON MAKING HUNDRED AND 50,000, THEY ARE 15,000 UNDER AND I CAPPED IT AT 10. THEY ARE
[02:15:02]
GETTING A PERCENT, OR 7% PAY INCREASE , PERCENTAGEWISE, IT BUT THEY ARE CAPPED AT 10. THE PERCENTAGES ARE ARGUABLY ALL OVER THE PLACE. THAT'S WHY THEY ARE ALL OVER THE PLACE .THE EFFORT TO TRY TO EQUALIZE IT, AND TO PUSH THE PAY RAISES, BE A PARITY, TO A DOLLAR AMOUNT CAP, AND NOT A PERCENTAGE.
THAT'S HOW THE METHODOLOGY RESULTED .
>> A LOT OF THESE RAISES ARE FOR PARITIES BECAUSE THEY ARE UNDERPAID FOR THEIR POSITION COMPARED TO WHAT OTHER CITIES
ARE, CORRECT? >> COMPARED TO THE 50TH PERCENTILE , RIGHT, WHICH SETS THE FIRST PAY STEP , AND A CONSIDERATION FOR HOW MANY YEARS -- WHERE THEY SHOULD BE IN THAT PAY GRADE. THE REASON WE ARE DOING THAT , IF I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 10 YEARS, AND I AM MAKING THAT 41.6, AND I HIRE PETER, A BRAND-NEW PETERSON -- PERSON AT 41.6, IT CREATES PAY COMPRESSION AND THAT'S NOT GOOD IN WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN YOUR ORGANIZATION. WE ARE COUNTED UP TO SIX YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE STEPS. PD GETS THE SEVENTH YEAR BECAUSE THEY WILL GO INTO STEP SEVEN, POTENTIALLY, AND WE'VE BEEN HIRING A LOT OF PD AT STEP SEVEN. THEY ARE COMING TO US WITH MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS EXPERIENCE. FOR NON-PD -- I SHOULD SAY FOR NON-SWORN PERSONNEL, WE HAVE CAPTIVE FOR FIVE YEARS IN ADDITION TO YOUR FIRST YEAR REQUIREMENT. YOU HAVE 10 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, INSIDE THE ORGANIZATION TODAY, YOU WILL GO TO THE CORRECT STEP. IF YOU'RE COMING INTO THE ORGANIZATION AND YOU ARE 10 MORE THAN WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FOR THE MINIMUM PAY STEP, YOU CAN ONLY GET UP TO PAY GRADE 6, OR STEP SIX OF THE PAY GRADE.
>> REMIND ME, THE PURPOSE OF THIS PARITY STUDY WAS TO SEE WHERE WE WERE AT, TO SEE IF WE WERE UNDERPAYING, OVERPAYING, WHERE WE SHOULD BE AND WHERE WE ARE AT BASED ON THE MARKET, BASED ON WHAT IS GOING ON. WE PAID A GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY TO
HAVE THE STUDY DONE, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. IT WAS ACTUALLY LAST YEAR. WE DID NOT DO THE STUDY THIS YEAR. WE DID THE STUDY LAST YEAR THE RESULTS OF THAT WERE PRESENTED. THE CITIES THAT WERE CHOSEN WERE TAKEN FROM THE CITY COUNCILS FISCAL POLICY AT THE TIME. RIGHT? THE 50TH PERCENTILE WAS A POLICY DECISION ON WHERE THE ORGANIZATION WANTED TO BE BASED OFF OF COUNCIL'S POLICY DIRECTION.
>> WE DID 80TH PERCENTILE? >> WE CHANGE THAT ARGUABLY. WE WENT TO 50TH TO 80TH%. WE USED THE 800,000 GIVEN TO PARITY TO RESET WHAT THE PAY GRADES NEW TO THIS IS NEED TO BE TO GET US TO THE 80TH PERCENTILE. THAT'S EFFECTIVELY WHAT WE'VE BEEN
ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, THAT
HELPS ME UNDERSTAND. >> IF YOU REDUCE PARITY BY NML, THAT'S OKAY, I WOULD STILL PREFER IT BE CAPPED AT A DOLLAR AMOUNT. NO EMPLOYEE IS MORE THAN ELIGIBLE -- ELIGIBLE FOR MORE THAN A DOLLAR. WHOEVER IS CAUGHT UP , THEY ARE CAUGHT UP, THEY ARE NO LONGER ELIGIBLE FOR PARITY, AS FAR AS BUMPERS GO.
THE EMPLOYEES THAT ARE STILL BEHIND, WE PUT INTO A SEPARATE CATEGORY AS FAR AS PLANNING GOES. EXTERIOR WE TRY TO GET THOSE EMPLOYEES TAKING CARE OF. EVENTUALLY WE WILL HAVE EVERYBODY TO WHERE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE.
>> THE GOAL IS TO GET EVERYONE WHERE THEY SHOULD BE, NOT JUST TO GIVE PEOPLE RESIST JUST TO GIVE PEOPLE RAISES.
>> LET'S NOT GET INTO FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS BECAUSE IT WILL BE CONFUSING. IT IS A BIG DEAL IF YOU WANT TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT THAT YOU F5, I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN THAT.
>> YOU ARE MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO CAP THE PARITY RAISES NO
MORE THAN 5000 PER EMPLOYEE? >> YES, SIR
>> I AM ASSUMING THIS IS MINUS POLICE. 150 EMPLOYEES.
>> THE POLICE DON'T NEED PARITY ANYMORE. WE FIXED THE
[02:20:03]
POLICE. THEY ARE NOT IN THAT CALCULATION.>> 192 FTE'S RENTAL? >> YES, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
>> SWORN IN PD -- THAT IS WHO IS FIXED.
>> HUNDRED AND 44 PEOPLE, $5000.
>> 720,000. IF YOU CAP IT, IT COULD BE UP TO --
>> NOT EVERYONE IS GETTING -- >> NOT EVERYONE IS GETTING
5000, NO SIR. >> NOT EVERYONE RECEIVES PARITY
PAY. >> SOME GOT IT LAST YEAR. AND
THEY ARE OKAY. >> WHEN I AM LOOKING AT THE SHEET HERE, THAT DOES THE COPY -- HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
>> SOME GOT PARITY PAY LAST YEAR. IN BETWEEN TODAY, IF WE PASS PARITY AND WHAT THEY CALL LAST YEAR, 23.8% INCREASE. I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW YOU SOLVE IT TO THE PUBLIC. IT'S ONE THING TO CATCH PEOPLE UP. IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT MAYBE GOT A 2% RAISE, HOLY COW, PEOPLE IN THE CITY GOT 24% INCREASE IN PAY, BUT THEY WERE UNDERPAID. THIS SOUNDS REALLY TOUGH, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A BUNCH OF OPEN POSITIONS YOU ARE TELLING -- WE ARE STRUGGLING TO FILL THESE POSITIONS. I THINK PEOPLE NEED TO GET THE RACE. EVERY TIME I GO THROUGH HERE WE HAVE A HIGH PLAYED EMPLOYEE VERSUS LAST YEAR. WE HAVE ANOTHER PERSON GETTING A 17.8 . A PERSON GETTING A 23.8. THIS IS EXTENSIVE. WE ARE NOT DOING CALCULATIONS RIGHT BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER PARITY LINE FOR 100 AND SOME THOUSAND DOLLARS IN A WHOLE OTHER DEPARTMENT IN THE GENERAL REVENUE WE ARE NOT CALCULATING INTO THIS.
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE.
>> YOU DON'T KNOW ME, BUT I GO THROUGH LINE BY LINE.
LITERALLY, A COUPLE YEARS AGO WHEN WE LAID OFF 44 PEOPLE, HOW MUCH OFFICE SUPPLIES DO YOU REALLY NEED? DO YOU REALLY NEED $100 IN OFFICE FURNITURE? TAKE IT OUT. I'M NOT PROUD I AM WIRED THAT WAY, THAT'S JUST HOW I AM. I WENT THROUGH
EVERYTHING. >> THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANOTHER
PARITY BEYOND THAT. >> 164,900 --
>> I'M SORRY. 164,966. UTILITY FUND.
>> THAT'S NOT THE GENERAL FUND.
>> THE BEST I COULD TELL , IN YOUR BUDGET, IT WAS COMING OUT OF THE REVENUE, NOT OUT OF UTILITY. THREE WEEKS AGO , 20% RAISES, WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT? I DO THE MATH. I'M ONLY GETTING 23.8, 22.1, 18.9. I'M NOT TRYING TO BE MEAN, BUT I GET TOLD HOW WRONG I AM TO ONLY COME UP AND GO, PERSON MADE 60 GRAND, NOW THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE 80 GRAND IN A YEAR. THE $20,000 INCREASE OF PAY IN ONE YEAR, HOW DO YOU SELL IT TO THE PUBLIC ? WHY COULDN'T THEY GET A 5000 OR $6000 INCREASE? THAT WOULD STILL BE A GOOD INCREASE. OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS WE WILL GET YOU CAUGHT UP. BUT ONE BUMP. LAST YEAR, TO COUNTER COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR 'S POINT, I FEEL WE RAISE TAXES BECAUSE WE BORROWED MONEY AND PAID TAXES FOR THE SPINE ROAD.
NOTHING ELSE. THIS IS WHY IT'S OVER. YOU PRESENTED NO NEW REVENUE BUDGET LAST YEAR. I WAS PROUD OF THAT. THIS YEAR I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO GET PEOPLE CAUGHT UP, BUT UNLESS YOU SEE HERE AND TELL ME -- WHICH I WOULDN'T BELIEVE IT -- IF WE DON'T GIVE EVERYBODY 20% INCREASES ARE 15 WE ARE GOING TO LOSE 100 EMPLOYEES TOMORROW. I THINK EVERYONE WOULD BE HAPPY WITH AN EIGHT, 10, 9% INCREASE. I THINK THEY WOULD BE HAPPY.
THAT'S 9% MORE THAN THEY MADE LAST YEAR. THEY PROBABLY WON'T BE HAPPY WITH IT, BUT IT MIGHT BE THE RIGHT MOVE. OVER TIME.
ONE YEAR GET EVERYBODY CAUGHT UP.
>> AGAIN, NOT EVERYBODY IS GOING TO RECEIVE THE PARITY PAY . AS PART OF THE MOTION, OVER $500,000 , AS MY MOTION PROPOSES, HALF 1 MILLION CUT THAT DIRECTLY IMPACT STUFF. I KNOW YOU WON'T BE HAPPY UNTIL THE NUMBER IS ZERO, BUT THIS IS -- IN MY MOTION IT WAS DECREASED . THOSE DOLLARS, HALF A MILLION DOLLARS, IS IMPACTING STAFF THAT I AM WILLING TO CUT . I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC. WE ARE NOT GIVING EVERYBODY A 15 AND 18% RAISE , JUST BECAUSE THEY WORK
[02:25:03]
AT THE CITY OF HUTTO, BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH THE JONESES. THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE.>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, LAST YEAR , WHEN I STARTED TO PROPOSE PAY INCREASES, I WAS PRESENTING PERCENTAGES. I WAS TOLD DON'T DO PERCENTAGES BECAUSE THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE MORE MONEY GET MORE, AND PEOPLE WHO GET LESS GET LESS. DO AS A DOLLAR AMOUNT. THAT'S WHAT I DID THIS YEAR. WHATEVER THE POLICY YOU ALL WANT TO FOLLOW IS FINE, BUT IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR ME TO GIVE YOU THAT DATA TO MAKE DECISIONS OFF OF IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE LIPS AS IF WE ARE NOT CONSISTENT IN WHAT WE ARE DOING. THAT'S A FRUSTRATION ON MY PART IN THIS CONVERSATION, IN THE SENSE THAT I THOUGHT I WAS GIVING YOU WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR BY CAPPING IT AT A DOLLAR AMOUNT. THAT WAY WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT PERCENTAGES ANYMORE. WE ARE LOOKING AT DOLLARS.
>> THAT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR A PARITY INCREASE, IT WOULD REDUCE IT DOWN TO -- HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I NEED TO ADD THESE TWO NUMBERS
TOGETHER. >> I UNDERSTAND YOUR FRUSTRATION. WHAT I'M FIGHTING IS ARBITRARY. JUST AN ARBITRARY
THING. >> IT'S NOT ARBITRARY. IT'S
VERY SCIENTIFIC >> THERE'S A LOT OF COMPANIES.
YOUR PAYROLL IS X. YOU CAN GO UP 3%. YOU ARE THE SUPERVISOR.
YOU FIGURE OUT WHO'S GETTING 4%, TWO, ONE, WHO'S GETTING NONE. I DON'T KNOW MANY COMPANIES THAT ARBITRARILY GO OUT AND SAY EVERYBODY IS GETTING A PERCENT INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD OR WE ARE CAPPING INCREASES. NOT EVERYBODY -- IF YOU HAVE 200 PEOPLE -- NOT EVERYBODY -- THEY ARE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB AND THEY DON'T DESERVE 3%. YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO THE ORGANIZATION WOULD COLLAPSE IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THEM, AND MAYBE THEY GET THE EIGHT OR 9%.
TO ME IT'S NO MORBID -- NO MORE THAN FIVE. IT GIVES YOU THAT USING THIS. I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT THE REGULAR PEOPLE HAVE TO DO. I WILL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. IN 2023 OUR SALARIES WERE JUST UNDER 14,500,000. LAST YEAR IT WENT TO 18 MILLION. AT 25.5% INCREASE . SOME OF THAT IS INCREASE POSITION, SOME IS INCREASED WAGES. THIS YEAR IT IS PROPOSED THAT 23.6 MILLION, WHICH IS A 29.66% INCREASE. IN TWO YEARS WE'VE GROWN OUR SALARIES BY 62 -- ALMOST 63%. THAT'S NOT SUSTAINABLE. YOU CANNOT GROW THE FTE 'S AND WAGES AT THIS HIGH-SPEED PACE. IF YOU ARE GROWING AT 63% THE PUBLIC HAS TO PAY FOR THIS. THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE STRUGGLING WITH. THEY WANT EVERYBODY TO BE HAPPY. THEY WANT EVERYONE TO HAVE GOOD BENEFITS. WE CAN ALWAYS HAVE 29% INCREASES, 25% INCREASES IN PAYROLL. AT SOME POINT THE PAYROLL CANNOT GO ABOVE THE INCOME GROWTH BECAUSE EVERY TIME IT EXCEEDS IT YOU HAVE TO ROB IT OUT OF THE MAINTENANCE FUND, WHICH I'M NOT GOING TO DO. YOU HAVE TO INCREASE PEOPLE'S TAXES, WHICH, HISTORICALLY, I DON'T THINK I EVER VOTED FOR A TAX INCREASE.
>> ON THAT NOTE, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO SAY I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH. WHENEVER YOU ARE PAYING MARKET AND YOU ARE PAYING APPROPRIATE DOLLAR AMOUNTS FOR THE PHYSICIANS BASED OFF OF WHAT THE DATA SAYS, THAT DOES DEMAND BETTER PERFORMANCE. AND IT, GENERALLY, RECRUITS BETTER EMPLOYEES. BOTH. YOU GET A MULTIPLIER ON THAT. AS FAR AS THE AMOUNT OF DOLLARS GOING UP -- LAST YEAR WE ORDERED -- ADDED 40 FTE'S. I THINK YOU TOLD ME 33 OR 35% INCREASE OF FTE 'S. ALMOST 50%. FAIR ENOUGH . MY POINT IS WE INCREASED OUR EMPLOYEE COUNT NOT JUST BY SOME , ALMOST 50% OF WHAT WE HAD. THAT IS THE LION SHARE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT. THE REASON THAT -- I KNOW YOU ARE AWARE ABOUT THIS, TOO, THE REASON YOU DIDN'T SEE ALL OF THOSE DOLLARS LASHES BECAUSE WE DIDN'T BUDGE ALL THOSE POSITIONS TO START DAY ONE IN THE BUDGET. THIS YEAR WE ARE ONLY -- IN THE PROPOSAL ANYWAY, I THINK IT WAS 13 FTE'S. I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK. WE ARE REQUESTING ALL THOSE START DAY ONE THIS YEAR.
ALL OF THE DOLLARS ARE IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR. I DID IT THAT WAY BECAUSE I COULD BASED OFF OF THE TAX RATE. OBVIOUSLY, THOSE ARE THE THINGS YOU CAN GIVE AND TAKE ON NEGOTIATIONS.
WE ARE NOT GOING TO HIRE THIS, ALL YOUR, WHATEVER. I WAS
[02:30:02]
TRACKING ALL YOUR LONG HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL SALARIES I WOULD HAVE HITTING THIS YEAR. WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST YEAR, THAT WOULD BE A THING, AND IT'S A THING. THE FOUR PULLEYS -- POLICE POSITIONS , ALL OF THOSE HITS THIS YEAR. THAT'S GOING UP REGARDLESS. THAT'S WHAT IS CONTRIBUTING TO THE GROWTH.UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT IS BEHIND IT. IT'S NOT JUST WILLY-NILLY PAYING PEOPLE. ARGUABLY, TO ME, THIS IS A -- HAVING A MARKET RATE STARTING PAY, AND HAVING A STEP PLAN THAT ACCOUNTS FOR EXPERIENCE WHEN PEOPLE COME TO WORK HERE, AND WHENEVER PEOPLE ARE GETTING PROMOTIONS, TAKES OUT ANY OF THE GUESSWORK, AND IT TAKES OUT ANY OF THE DESCRIPTION OF BEING, LIKE, I LIKE MY, I'M GOING TO PAY HIM MORE MONEY TO COME WORK FOR ME.
NO. ARE YOU ELIGIBLE FOR STEP THREE? YOU ARE GETTING STEP THREE. THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS. THAT GETS US TO A MORE PROFESSIONAL, LESS DISCRETIONARY TYPE OF THING. IT MAKES IT MORE TRANSPARENT. THE PUBLIC HAS MORE RESPECT AND FAITH IN THE WAY THINGS ARE BEING DONE. WHO'S GETTING HIRED TO DO WHAT AND ALL OF THAT. THAT IS WHAT IS IN THIS.
IF WE DO THE 5000 C.A.P. FOR ALL OF THE NON- -SWORN PERSONNEL, WE WOULD NEED 538,001 89. IF WE WANT TO KEEP IT UNDER 500,000, THEN WE WOULD JUST NEED TO CAP IT AT 4500. NO MORE THAN 4500. NOT EVERY EMPLOYEE GETS THAT. NO MORE THAN 4500. IF YOU ARE ELIGIBLE FOR MORE THAN 4500, I WOULD, THIS YEAR, PUT YOU AS AN EMPLOYEE , I WOULD HAVE A CONVERSATION. SOME PEOPLE WOULD BE, LIKE, YOU'RE HIRING THE NEW PERSON. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I WOULD HAVE A CONVERSATION. THEY ARE IN A CATEGORY, THEIR OWN CATEGORY.
NEXT YEAR I WILL BE ADVOCATING TO GET THE LAST CATEGORY OF PEOPLE CAUGHT UP TO WHERE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE, BASED ON
THE MARKET. >> COUNCILMEMBER CORK, ARE YOU WILLING TO AMEND THE NUMBER FOR 5000 TO 4500?
>> THE ONLY COUNTER I WILL HAVE, AND WHEN I SAY THIS I WILL GET SOMETHING THROWN AT ME. YOU TALK ABOUT WORLD-CLASS ORGANIZATIONS YOU WORK FOR, FOUR OF US WORKED FOR COMPANIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY LAYING PEOPLE OFF. I'VE BEEN THROUGH THAT ONCE BEFORE. NOT PERSONALLY HERE AT THE CITY, AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO A HABIT OF -- WHATEVER THE REASON WE LAID THEM OFF OR, OVER HIRING, OVERPAYING, WHATEVER IT WAS, AND COMING BACK AFTER YEARS OF RECESSION AND REDUCING PAY, REDUCING POSITIONS. I'VE BEEN THROUGH THERE. YOU SAY YOU WORK FOR WORLD-CLASS ORGANIZATIONS AND THIS IS HOW
[02:35:01]
THEY DO IT, I DON'T WANT WHAT WORLD OR -- WORLD-CLASS ORGANIZATIONS ARE DOING. THEY COVER 401(K)S WHEN TIMES GET TOUGH. THEY CUT HEALTH BENEFITS, POSITIONS. IT'S ARBITRARY. A CONSTANT ROUND OF LAYOFFS. PARENTS WHO GREW UP IN THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR, YOU GO TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR A CONSISTENT JOB WITH CONSISTENT INCREASES. TYPICALLY , AT LEAST FROM MY FOLKS 'S EXPERIENCE, YOU DON'T MAKE WHAT YOU GET IN PRIVATE, YOU GET BETTER BENEFITS, -- AND THAT SORT OF THING. WE CAN DEBATE AND DEBATE, BUT LET'S JUST VOTE.FIGURE IT OUT. EVENTUALLY WE STILL HAVE TO GET DOWN TO 2.2 MILLION NUMBER. PARODY IS ONLY ONE PIECE OF THAT PUZZLE , I
CAN ASSURE YOU. >> IT HELPS ME AND STAFF TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COUNCIL IS THINKING IN REGARDS OF HOW TO IMPLEMENT THESE THINGS. AND WHATNOT. THE CONVERSATION IS GOOD FOR US, REGARDLESS OF THE FACT IT DELAYS A VOTE . THANK
YOU. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO CAP THE PARITY PAY ON A PER PERSON BASIS 4500, NOT TO EXCEED 500,000, DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT?
>> YES, SIR. >> YOU A -- DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT? ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THAT AMENDMENT? HEARING NONE --
>> VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT? >> JUST THE AMENDMENT. PLEASE
CALL THE VOTE. >> TO CLARIFY THIS IS JUST FOR
>> MOTION PASSES, 5-2. NOW WE HAVE THE AMENDED MOTION. REDUCE SIDEWALKS AND DRAINAGE BY $412,713.56. STREET REPAIRS BY 500,000 -- TERRIBLE HANDWRITING. PARODY, THANK YOU.
LONGEVITY BY -- CERTIFICATION BY $164,000. THE AQUATIC STUDY BY 75,000 PER EXHIBIT PROGRAMS BY 22,000 FOUR COMBINED TOTAL OF $1,518,305.56. DO WE AGREE WITH THAT? ANY MORE DISCUSSION
ON THAT? >> I WOULD REALLY RATHER HOLD OFF ON THE STREET MAINTENANCE AND THE SIDEWALK PARTS OF THIS.
THOSE ARE HIGHER PRIORITY ITEMS IN THE BUDGET THAN SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS. I WOULD RATHER NOT HAVE THOSE. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HERE. BUT FOR THIS AND TRY TO BRING THOSE BACK ? OR BOTH THIS DOWN AND TRY TO TAKE LESS? I PREFER TO SPLIT THOSE OUT FOR NOW. THAT IS MY PREFERENCE.
>> ABSOLUTELY. IT WASN'T AN EASY DECISION, FOR MYSELF , TO COME UP WITH THIS. I WOULD LOVE TO FULLY FUND THE SIDEWALK AND DRAINAGE CREW AND HAVE TO $.1 MILLION FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR. I KNOW THE REALITY WE ARE FACING AND WHAT WE ARE MOVING TOWARDS. THIS IS WHAT I CAN OFFER UP. UNFORTUNATELY .
DISADVANTAGE TO THE RESIDENTS OF HUTTO.
>> I AM WITH COUNCILMAN THORTON . I'M GOING TO VOTE YES ON THE SO WE CAN KEEP -- GET GOING. I'M HOPING THE MAYOR ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBER CAN PROPOSE SOMETHING ELSE THAT IS A BETTER REDUCTION AND WE CAN PUT THIS BACK IN . THESE BACK IN.
>> MOTION PASSES, 5-2. >> THE NUMBER WE NEED TO GET TO
IS 2,050,000? >> 2,050,000. THAT INCLUDES THE
>> I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT ONE OF THE IDEAS TALKED ABOUT YOUR LAST BUDGET MEETING WAS TO FUND THE SIDEWALK AND DRAINAGE CREW USING THE BOND FUNDS WE HAD
SLATED FOR THOSE PROJECTS. >> TWO CREWS.
[02:40:07]
REALLY QUICK. THE REASON I WAS PUTTING OUT --.ON THE TABLE WAS IN DIRECT RESPONSE OF THE OBJECTION OF CUTTING THOSE OUT.WE CANNOT MOVE THE ROAD MAINTENANCE INTO BONDS. WE CANNOT PAY AUTOBAHNS. OKAY, THE NUMBER RIGHT NOW IS -- ALBERTA IS NOT DOING MATH, I WILL DO MATH. 531695. 531695.
>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. I WILL DO IT BY DEPARTMENT. SO EVERYONE CAN FOLLOW ALONG. PAGE 355 OF THE BUDGET, THAT WILL BE THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET. WITH SOME COUNCILMEMBER HOPE WE TOOK A DIFFERENT APPROACH. WE DIDN'T CONCENTRATE ON THE HUNDRED THOUSAND, WE CONCENTRATED ON THE FIVES, TENS, 750. FOR THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WE WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE OFFICE SUPPLIES BY -- ACTUALLY, IF YOU WANT TO COPY. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE THROWN IT AWAY. I WILL PULL IT OUT OF THE
WASTEBASKET. >> LINE ITEM AT THE BOTTOM.
>> DO YOU HAVE IT ELECTRONICALLY?
>> HERE'S THE THING, I SENT IT TO TWO PEOPLE. LET ME DO THIS.
I WILL SEND IT TO THE CITY SECRETARY. I DON'T WANT TO GET FRIED FOR VIOLATING THE -- OKAY, IT IS COMING YOUR WAY,
COUNCILMEMBER IS ONE. >> AND WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE
RECESS? >> YOU CAN. I'M SURE YOU GOT THE BUDGET OPENED OR PRINTED OUT WHERE YOU ARE AT. WE CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. EACH DEPARTMENT HAS A PAGE NUMBER SO WE CAN QUICKLY GET -- AND I DON'T WANT TO CREATE A FIGHT THE PAIN -- BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS. SOME IT WAS TOUGH.
OTHERS GOT CUT MORE, POTENTIALLY. DID IT COME? SHE JUST SENT IT TO YOU. ALL RIGHT I WILL MAKE A MOTION, THIS IS IN THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET, REDUCE OFFICE SUPPLIES BY $150.
REFERENCE BOOKS BY $650. FOODS AND MEALS BY 1000. CLOTHING BY 700. TECH EQUIPMENT BY 300. FUEL MILEAGE BY $250. OTHER SUPPLIES BY 200. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DECREASE $3353.
TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT DECREASE OF $34,300. TRAVEL AND LODGING DECREASE $3748 FOR A TOTAL OF $51,651. IS THE
MOTION. >> IS THAT TAKING ALL OF THESE
>> COULD YOU TELL US WHAT -- >> OFFICE SUPPLIES GOES FROM 250 TO 100. REFERENCE BOOKS -- WAIT A MINUTE. LET ME SEE. CAN
I GET A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND.
>> SECONDED BY PORTERFIELD. OFFICE SUPPLIES 250 TO 100 .
FOOD AND MEALS FROM 8000 TO ZERO. CLOTHING FROM 700 TO 0.
TECHNOLOGY 500 TO 300. FUEL AND MILEAGE, 250 TO ZERO. OTHER SUPPLIES FROM 250 TO 50. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE --
>> THERE WAS 250 THERE? >> THERE WAS 250 THERE.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOES TO ZERO. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT GOES TO ZERO. TRAVEL AND LODGING GOES TO ZERO. THAT DOES NOT AFFECT ANY OF OUR CIVIC PROGRAMS. I DON'T KNOW. IF THIS PAST WITH THAT TRUMP WHAT WE JUST DID ON THE CIVIC PROGRAM? WOULD IT BRING IT BACK UP?
>> THE SEVERE PROGRAM GOES DOWN AUTOMATICALLY BECAUSE IT IS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL BUDGET.
>> IT IS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE. THE DIFFERENCE IS A LESS AMOUNT OF REVENUE. SO CIVIC GOES DOWN THE
22,000 REGARDLESS. >> REMIND ME WHAT PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES IS. >> PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 433 53 IS THE CITY'S MEMBERSHIP OF THE CLEAN AIR COALITION. THAT
WOULD BE ELIMINATING -- >> OKAY.
[02:45:04]
>> THAT IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF FOR A LONG TIME. EVEN THE FORMER CITY MAYOR
>> YEAH, FOR ME, TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT AT 34,300 . HOW IT PANS OUT IS 18,004 THE MANAGEMENT CONNECTION. THAT IS TRAINING FOR SEVEN COUNCILMEMBERS APPEAR . IT ALSO INCLUDES STRATEGIC PLANNING FOR 11,500. I'M NOT WILLING TO CUT OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING. I FEEL THAT IS ONE OF THOSE MEETINGS IN THE SPRING THAT REALLY SETS -- THAT STARTS THE CONVERSATION AS TO WHAT STAFF NEEDS TO BE PUTTING IN THE BUDGET.
OTHERWISE, THEY WOULD JUST THROW STUFF IN THE BUDGET, I GUESS. I DON'T KNOW. WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING, I THINK ZEROING NOW AND NOT HAVING THAT ITEM, I THINK THAT IS A MISTAKE. OF COURSE TML IS $2800. I AM OKAY WITH GETTING RID OF THAT. BUT I DO WANT TO MAINTAIN STRATEGIC PLANNING. IF YOU ARE OPPOSED TO STRATEGIC PLANNING I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHY YOU ARE OPPOSED TO STRATEGIC PLANNING IN THE
SPRING. >> IT'S NOT THAT I AM OPPOSED, THE IDEA IS TO CUT . FOR US TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS, LIKE WE ARE HAVING. IS THAT SOMETHING WORTHY OF DOING? IF IT IS, ARE WE GETTING VALUE OUT OF IT, WE SHOULD PUT IT BACK IN.
>> I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION IS NOT OPPOSED TO STRATEGIC PLANNING, DOESN'T HAVE TO COST THAT ? ARE THERE OTHER WAYS WE CAN DO WITH THAT DON'T COST THAT?
>> YEAH. I AM OKAY WITH GETTING RID OF CLOTHING . A BIG TALKING POINT FOR THE MAYOR IS GETTING RID OF CITY COUNCIL MEALS. I AM OKAY WITH THAT. THAT IS JUST ONE OF HIS PLUS UPS. I AM WILLING TO CUT THAT. HIS STAKE DID TASTE GOOD THAT NIGHT THAT HE HAD. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO MAINTAIN , AT LEAST $10,000 FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING. I'M OKAY WITH EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN AT LEAST 10,000 FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING.
>> THAT'S IN TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT?
>> YES. >> I WILL SECOND THAT.
>> OH YES, AND CAPCOM. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO
>> -13 -- WAIT, HOLD ON. >> I'M GOING TO DO A PLUS. I HAVE AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET. +10,000 STRATEGIC PLANNING , BACK IN AT 3353 FOUR C.A.P. CALLED. THAT IS YOUR MOTION,
COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? >> SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT?
>> THE C.A.P. CALLED, SOMEONE UP HERE EXPLAINED TO ME THE BENEFIT OF THAT. ARE WE JUST JOINING A CLUB FOR FUN SO WE CAN BE LIKE OUR NEIGHBORS? WHAT ARE WE ACCOMPLISHING WITH THAT? I AM CURIOUS TO KNOW. I AM NEW HERE.
>> FOR EXAMPLE, 911 SERVICE AND HOW WE ROLL IT OUT
] >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? ALL RIGHT, HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
[02:50:12]
BRINGS UP THE AMENDED MOTION, A DECREASE OF $38,298. ANYDISCUSSION ON THAT? >> OKAY, SAY THAT AGAIN, I AM
SORRY. >> DECREASE OF $38,298.
>> 298. 38 TO 90? >> YES. ALL RIGHT, HEARING
NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >>
>> MOTION PASSES, 7-0. >> I GUESS WHILE WE ARE STILL IN THE CITY COUNCIL , I GUESS, ARENA, I KNOW YOU PROPOSED SALARIES FOR COUNCILMEMBERS . I DO HAVE -- THIS LIKELY WILL PROBABLY NOT PASS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, WORKING WITH UTILITY BILLING, WE HAVE ABOUT 10% OF OUR WATER CUSTOMERS THAT ARE SEEING FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS, AND UNFORTUNATELY CANNOT PAY THEIR BILL. THE CITY DOES WORK WITH SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT CANNOT PAY. THEY SET UP A PAYMENT PLAN. THERE ARE PROTOCOLS IN THE CITY. AS LONG AS YOU ARE COMMUNICATING WITH THE CITY ON THAT THEY WILL WORK WITH YOU. I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN A HUGE ADVOCATE FOR IT. I WOULD LIKE TO -- I DON'T KNOW. LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING YOU WOULD ALL LIKE TO DO, BUT PLEASE TWO, FIVE, SIX AND THE MAYOR TAKING THEIR CITY COUNCIL PAY AND PUTTING IT INTO A FUND. IT IS STILL GOING TO MAINTAIN THERE, BUT IT WILL BE A FUND FOR RESIDENTS TO HAVE THAT MONEY THAT WOULD PAY. YOUR SALARY BEING PAID TO YOU, BUT IT WILL HELP PAY FOR RESIDENTS THAT HAVE FINANCIAL HARDSHIPS.
OBVIOUSLY WE WILL DIRECT STAFF ON PROTOCOLS OR HOW WE WANT TO HAVE THEM DO IT. ONE TIME A YEAR WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE THINGS, OR CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE BILL. I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT. NOT A CHANGE IN DOLLAR AMOUNT, A CHANGE IN
ALLOTMENT. >> MOTION TO TAKE PLACE TWO, THE MAYOR, AND PLACED FIVE SALARY AND PUT IT TOWARDS
UTILITY FUNDS? >> AND SIX AS WELL.
>> I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE SALARY IN THERE.'S
>> OKAY, YES. >> TO WE HAVE A SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? I WOULD LIKE TO AMENDED THAT THE WHOLE COUNCIL DOES THAT . IT IS ODD TO SINGLE OUT PEOPLE. IT SOUNDS LIKE COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON IS ON BOARD. I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT PLACES ONE, TWO, THREE , FOUR, FIVE , ANY THAT COMES UP FOR PLAY SIX IN THE FUTURE, AND THE MAYOR PUT THE SELLERS TOWARDS THE UTILITY FUND.
>> DOTTIE, IS THIS -- >> BEFORE WE DISCUSS HAVE TO
SEE IF I HAVE A SECOND. >> I WILL SECOND THAT.
>> OKAY, DOTTIE, WHAT IS THE LEGALITY OF THAT?
>> YOU SHALL BE PAID A SALARY. SO YOU ARE SET -- THE CHARTER DOESN'T SAY HOW MUCH THAT SALARY IS.
>> I WILL RESEND MY MOTION THEN.
>> YOU WILL STILL GET YOUR TAX FORM , BUT YOU CAN DONATE IT AND SET UP A FUND VOLUNTARILY.
>> I DON'T -- DONATE MY MONEY NOW. I DONATE IT TO DIFFERENT GROUPS. FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE DEPARTMENT. FOR ME IT'S A REALLOCATION. I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT THE COUNCIL VOTES IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND HAS AN AUTOMATIC TAX DEDUCTION EVERY YEAR AND GIVE THE SALARIES TO THE UTILITY
FUND. >> AND I RESEND MY ORIGINAL MOTION AND SAY, HEY, LET'S CREATE A FUND FOR COUNCILMEMBERS TO CONTRIBUTE TO A UTILITY FUND.
[02:55:03]
>> VOLUNTARILY ? >> VOLUNTARILY.
>> I MEAN, WE CANNOT OVERWRITE THE CHARTER. THE CITIZENS HAVE SPOKEN. YOU SHALL BE PAID, THIS IS HOW MUCH YOU SHALL BE PAID.
>> JAMES AN ALBERTA, IF WE ARE CREATING A SPECIAL FUND, WE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO PUT IT IN THIS BUDGET. THIS IS FOR MUNICIPAL FUNDS. IF IT IS WAS A FUND WHERE PEOPLE DONATE TO DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THIS PARTICULAR BUDGET? OR CAN WE DO
THAT AT A LATER DATE? >> ALBERTA BARRA, FINANCE DIRECTOR. I WOULD SUGGEST, IF THEY WERE TO START IT THIS YEAR, WE WOULD SET UP A SEPARATE CASH ACCOUNT TO MONITOR THOSE. YOU CAN RECORD THE DONATIONS AND HOW IT IS ALLOCATED OUT. BUT IT WOULDN'T REQUIRE A SEPARATE FUND WITHIN
THAT, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> ALLOW A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE EVERYBODY GIVE THEIR MONEY TO A FUND VOLUNTARILY , AND POST ON A WEBSITE FOR EVERYONE TO SEE , AND BE DONATED. TO BE FAIR, YOU
PICKED. >> I THINK THIS IS OUTSIDE THE
BUDGET DISCUSSION. >> I WILL JUST RESEND MY
MOTION. I AM SO SORRY. >> LET ME JUST MENTION -- WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO THIS, I THINK IT SHOULD BE A SEPARATE POSTED AGENDA ITEM. AGAIN. WHATEVER. THE COUNCIL AS A
WHOLE. >> I WILL MAKE THAT AGENDA ITEM. IF WE ARE GOING TO SAY, HEY, THESE GUYS DON'T WANT TO WASTE TAXES, THEY ARE GOING TO DO CERTAIN THINGS. I AM PAYING HIGHER TAXES THIS YEAR BECAUSE THE BOD -- BODY VOTED FOR LAST YEAR. WE ALL FAIL OR ALL SUCCEED AT ONCE. OR AT LEAST A VOTE OF IT. OKAY, YOU HAVE RESCINDED. ANYMORE ON THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET FOR NOW? ALL RIGHT. I WILL MAKE A MOTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER BUDGET . TO REDUCE SEASONAL LABOR BY $20,000. WHICH, I BELIEVE, TAKES THAT TO ZERO. THE VEHICLE ALLOWANCE FOR THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, DECREASED BY 6000. LONGEVITY PAY, DECREASES BY $780. TO ZERO. REFERENCE BOOKS , DECREASED BY $690. THAT TAKES THAT TO ZERO. SPECIAL EVENTS. DECREASED BY $7235, WHICH MAKES THAT GO TO $3000. I DIDN'T WRITE THE EXACT REASONS ON THAT, BUT I BROKE IT UP.
DECREASE FOOD AND MEALS BY $12,240. THAT TAKES THAT TO 3000. DECREASE CLOSING BY 500, WHICH TAKES IT TO ZERO. FUEL AND MILEAGE BY 250, WHICH TAKES THAT TO 250. DECREASE --
>> 500 TO 250? >> YES, SIR. DECREASE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BY $45,000. THAT TAKES IT TO ZERO.
DECREASE TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT BY 50,000. $480.
WHICH TAKES THAT TO ZERO. DECREASE TRAVEL AND LODGING BY $13,500. WHICH TAKES THAT TO ZERO. A TOTAL OF $156,675.
[03:00:13]
>> SECOND. >> CITY MANAGER, HOW MANY OF THESE ARE PART OF YOUR CONTRACT? I THINK, IN YOUR CITY MANAGER'S CONTRACT WE AGREED TO CERTAIN CERTIFICATIONS OR TRAINING, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER.
>> THERE ARE CERTAINLY SOME. THAT IS JUST FOR ME. A LOT OF THESE NUMBERS INCLUDE THE REST OF STAFF UNDER THE CMO OFFICE.
A LOT OF THE PROGRAMS WE DO THAT ARE RAN THROUGH THE CITY
MANAGER'S OFFICE. >> IF WE TOOK THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO ZERO WITH THAT VIOLATE YOUR CONTRACT?
>> THE COUNCIL HAS OBLIGATED TO PAY FOR ME TO TEND -- ATTEND
CONFERENCES . >> WE WOULD BE VIOLATING YOUR
CONTRACT. >> HOLD ON. I DIDN'T DECREASE MEMBERSHIPS AND -- DID I DECREASED THAT? NOW YOU ARE PUBLICLY SAYING THE MOTION VIOLATE YOUR CONTRACT, WHAT IS IN THAT MOTION THAT VIOLATES YOUR CONTRACT?
>> IT WOULD BE THE ATTENDANCE AT ICMA AND TCMA. YOU WOULD POTENTIALLY BE VIOLATING THE SPIRIT OF THAT. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE INTENT IS BY ANY MEANS.
>> SAYS YOU. IT SAYS SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS. I WOULD SAY , TO BE QUITE FRANK WITH YOU, WHEN WE FIRST SAID WE ARE NOT -- THREE OF US ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS. AMIRA PRO TEM SAYS LET'S GIVE THE CITY MANAGER TIME TO COME UP WITH A BETTER BUDGET. I AM BEING FRANK, YOU'VE HAD SIX WEEKS. ZERO CUTS. NOT EVEN ONE DOLLAR. YOU HAD TIME TO GO BACK AND SAY, OKAY, OKAY, GOOD FAITH, LET ME DO SOMETHING TO AT LEAST GET THREE PEOPLE TO MAYBE COME UP. I MAYBE COULD HAVE COME UP WITH AN INCREASE. BUT FOR THE PAST SIX WEEKS WE ARE ALL ARGUING.
THE MAN IN CHARGE OF THE ENTIRE BUDGET , BASICALLY, IS M.I.A.
IN MY MIND. IT IS SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION. IF PEOPLE WANT TO PUT IT BACK IN AND CUT SOMETHING ELSE. YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY WHEN YOU CREATE THE BUDGET, YOU AND I TALKED SINCE THE LATCH -- LAST BUDGET, I THINK WE ARE SPENDING TOO FAST, MOVING TOO FAST. NOT SPEAKING FOR COUNCILMEMBER THORTON, HE DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT. EVERYBODY KNOWS , YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR 20 YEARS IN GOVERNMENT, IT TAKES FIVE PEOPLE. YOU WENT FOR THE GOLD STANDARD, THE TOP 14.8% INCREASE. TO ME, WE ARE GOING TO DEBATE WHETHER OR NOT YOU GET THOSE THINGS. IF EVERYBODY APPROVED EVERYTHING, THREE OF US ARE OFFERING, THERE'S OVER $1 MILLION THAT CAN BE ADDED BACK. IT CAN BE 10,000 HERE, 5000 HERE. I'M TRYING TO SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERYBODY THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, AND AFFECTED PEOPLE FIRST. WE HAVE TO START DOING THINGS. ABLE START TALKING ABOUT MY VIEWS ON THE AMERICAN LEGION, HUTTO RESOURCE CENTER. EVERY YEAR WE DO EVERYTHING. WE GIVE CAR ALLOWANCES, EAT OUT, TROUBLE. WE DO THAT. NO ONE IS SPENDING MONEY ON THE PEOPLE.
WHAT I AM TRYING TO DO THIS YEAR IS GET EVERYONE REFOCUS .
EVERYONE IS SITTING IN THEIR MEETINGS, HEY, IF THIS MEAL OR TRAVEL ITEM AND GOING TO SEATTLE WAS TO BE MADE PUBLIC, WHAT WOULD PEOPLE SAY? IF THE ANSWER IS THEY ARE GOING TO COME UNGLUED, WE SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DON'T GO TO IT. ONCE WE GET CAUGHT UP AND HAVE A FOOD PANTRY THAT'S NOT FALLING APART, WE HAVE VETERANS THAT ARE RAISING MONEY JUST TO PAY RENT ON BUILDINGS , AMONG OUR OTHER CHARITIES, ONCE WE GET THAT FIX, I DON'T MIND PEOPLE DOING THINGS. WE HAVE TO, AT SOME POINT, FOCUS ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CITY AND HOW TO SERVE 40,000 PEOPLE. I'M FRUSTRATED. I'M TRYING TO BE AS POLITE AS I CAN. I GET IT. HOLY , I HAVE NO DOUBT --
>> I GUESS -- >> CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THE LONGEVITY. THAT THE STATE LAW. SECTION 1 4103 TWO OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. THE AMISSAH POLITY OF THE POPULATION OF 10,000 MORE, EACH MEMBER OF THE FIRE OR POLICE -- WE DON'T HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT, BUT IT AFFECTS OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER MONEY SERVICES REPAID, LONGEVITY PAY OF FOUR DOLLARS A MONTH FOR EACH YEAR OF SERVICE IN THE DEPARTMENT, NOT TO EXCEED 25 YEARS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE --
>> THAT IS POLICE, RIGHT? >> JUST POLICE. IT IS A STATE
>> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, CITY MANAGER.
[03:05:04]
>> THIS IS ONLY CITY MANAGER. >> CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
>> OH, YEAH. >> LONGEVITY IS AN EXISTING BENEFIT, FOR ALL THE EMPLOYEES, NOT JUST PD. FOR EVERYONE UNDER
CMO. >> SEASONAL LABOR, REMIND ME
WHAT THAT IS? >> THE 20,000 FOR THE SEASONAL LABOR -- LABOR WAS TO BRING IN A VETERAN.
>> THIS WOULD GET RID OF THE --
>> SO I WON'T BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE THE 20,000 , IT IS FOR OUR FELLOW -- VETERAN FELLOWSHIP. THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT, SUPPORTING OUR VETERANS COMMUNITY. THIS LITERALLY -- THE CITY MANAGER CAN EXPAND ON IT MORE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS WOULD BE A VETERAN THAT IS WELCOMED INTO THE CITY, CAN LEARN ALL ASPECTS OF CITY FUNCTIONS , AND MAYBE, THAT CAN SPARK THEIR INTEREST IN WANTING TO SERVE FOR THE CITY. I THINK THAT WOULD -- THAT'S NOT SOMETHING -- I WANT TO SUPPORT THE VETERAN COMMUNITY. YES IT'S GOING TO BE ONE PERSON. IF THAT ONE PERSON SPARKS AN INTEREST IN CITY GOVERNMENT, I THINK THAT'S GREAT. FOR $20,000 . ALSO FOR SPECIAL EVENTS, UNDER SPECIAL EVENTS, THINGS THAT ARE HOUSED UNDER THEIR, THE PUBLIC BUDGET WORKSHOPS THAT INVOLVE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT, YOUR INPUT, WHENEVER THE COMMUNITY COMES OUT AND SAYS, HEY, I WANT THIS ROW DONE AND THAT ROAD DONE. OR I WOULD RATHER PASS ON THAT. SOME OF THE PUBLIC, WE HEARD EARLIER. THE TOP FIVE THINGS THE RESIDENTS WANTED AS A RESULT OF THOSE PUBLIC BUDGET WORKSHOPS WERE STATED APPEAR IN PUBLIC COMMENT. ALSO , HUTTO CITIZENS UNIVERSITY IS HOUSED UNDER THAT AS WELL. THAT HAS BEEN A HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
THAT CONTINUED. >> TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S WHY WE
DIDN'T DROP IT 20. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
THESE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT TO HAVE PUBLIC INPUT AND PUBLIC ACT VIVIDLY AND INTEREST IN OUR CITY 'S FUNCTIONING. THAT IS
WHERE I AM AT WITH THINGS. >> PLANS TO KEEP THE HUTTO UNIVERSITY, PUBLIC BUDGET WORKSHOP , AND HAVE SOME STAKEHOLDER EVENTS. ON THE VETERANS, JAMES AND I MET WITH THE AMERICAN LEGION. THE IDEA WAS, JUST WHAT YOU SAID, I WON'T SAY IT WAS TAKEN BAD, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I SAID IS WHY WOULD YOU TRY TO HIRE A VETERAN FOR JUST THREE MONTHS? BECAUSE THEY COME OUT OF THE MILITARY, THEY ARE HIGHLY SKILLED IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT AREAS. WHY NOT JUST TRY TO WORK TO GIVE THEM JOBS TO HAVE VETERANS COME FIRST. TWO ME, HIRING SOMEBODY TO GET THEM ACCLIMATED WITH CITY LIFE, AND AT THAT END OF THE TIME GO, IT'S OVER. YOU HAVE TO GO BACK TO DOING WHAT YOU ARE DOING. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT BENEFITS.
THEY ARE NOT COMING OUT UNSKILLED. YOU REMEMBER, I TALKED ABOUT, MOST OF THE PEOPLE COME OUT OF THE MILITARY HAVE A HIGHER WORK ETHIC THAN MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE CIVILIAN LIFE. IF ANYTHING, IF WE HAD A BUNCH OF VETERANS THAT STARTED WORKING HERE , MORE THAN LIKELY THEY WOULD OUTWORK PEOPLE IN THE BEGINNING BECAUSE THEY RISE AT A CERTAIN TIME,
THEY ARE PUNCTUAL. THEY WORK. >> FOR ME, I CANNOT VOTE ON THIS . THIS TRAINING -- THERE'S A LOT OF TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT HERE THAT I SEE IS NEEDED . WE ARE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES IN THE CITY . WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE ARE LACKING . THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE AND SEE ON A BIWEEKLY BASIS WHENEVER WE HAVE COUNCIL MEETINGS . NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT CUTTING TRAINING TO ZERO FOR THE CITY MANAGER. I AM SEEING TRAININGS IN HERE FOR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, AS WELL AS TRAINING IN HERE THAT REFERENCES THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. FOR THAT, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT , YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ONLY AS GOOD AS THE TRAINING YOU RECEIVE. THAT IS SOMETHING I'M NOT WILLING TO PART WITH FOR THIS BUDGET --
FOR THIS DEPARTMENT. >> WHAT IS IN HERE THAT'S
[03:10:43]
>> WHICH TRAINING WAS POLICE RELATED?
>> AN ADDITIONAL 10,000 FOR POLICE STAFF.
>> THE HUTTO FORWARD IS A DAY OFF FOR THE WHOLE CITY SHUTS DOWN FOR TRAINING. I DON'T KNOW OF ANY COMPANY THAT FULLY SHUTS DOWN. WE DID THAT LESSER. I DON'T KNOW IT NEEDS TO BE DONE EVERY SINGLE YEAR. WE BRING IN GUEST SPEAKERS. I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO WHAT WE SPENT MONEY ON LAST YEAR.
>> I AM READY TO VOTE. >> JUST CALL THE VOTE.
>> CHANGES TO THE CITY MANAGERS? DEPARTMENT.
>> CAN I BRING UP TWO SPECIFIC ITEMS?
>> NO. THE REASON I SAY THAT IS NOW WE ARE DEBATING IT. IT'S BEEN SIX WEEKS. I THINK WE NEED TO GET THROUGH THIS. WHEN YOU ARE ADDING AND IT CREATES CHAOS BECAUSE WE START GOING BACK. WE SHOULD'VE HAD THAT IN THE BEGINNING.
>> I AM INTERESTED IN HEARING. DO WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT SO I CAN LISTEN TO MY CITY MANAGER?
>> GO AHEAD. >> THE DEMOGRAPHER WAS $45,000.
IF WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN DOING A DEMOGRAPHER, THAT'S AN AREA YOU CAN SAVE MONEY. THAT WAS A NEW SERVICE OUT TO GIVE US BETTER PROJECTION OF OUR GROWTH TO HELP, BUT THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CUT. >> I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION TO REMOVE THAT. IT'S NOT, LIKE WE WOULD LISTEN TO THAT DEMOGRAPHER ANYWAY. PLEASE REMOVE THAT.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON TO REMOVE THE DEMOGRAPHER. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. ANY OTHER
DISCUSSION? >> I WON'T BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE WE NEED THE DEMOGRAPHER. BECAUSE THERE ARE CONSISTENTLY QUESTIONS ABOUT NUMBERS AND PROJECTED -- PROJECTIONS THE ALWAYS CREATES DOUBT AMONGST PEOPLE WHO ARE PROFESSIONALS PRESENTING TO US . THAT IS AN EASY WAY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO DISCREDIT THEM . I THINK IF WE HAD SOMEONE WHO IS A PROFESSIONAL -- MAYBE TO THE POINT OF COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON, EVEN IF WE DO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL, BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL SITTING IN FRONT OF US ALREADY, EVEN IF WE HAVE ONE WE MAY STILL, YOU KNOW, NOT TAKE INTO THEIR CONSIDERATION. BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING
THE CITY NEEDS. >> I TRUST THE MAYOR.
>> YOU ARE GOING WITH YOUR GUT. YOU ARE PROBABLY GOING TO BE RIGHT. I WANT TO BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS.
>> I AM NOT MAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS TOWARD YOU. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY SOMETHING IS UNPROFESSIONAL IF YOU TRUST THE MAYOR. SAID NOTHING ABOUT DEMOGRAPHICS. NOTHING. IT IS SMART ALEC STUFF LIKE THAT THAT YOU GET MAD LATER ON ON HOW I HANDLE IT. I WOULD JUST SAY, IF YOU WANT ME TO BE PROFESSIONAL,
>> YOU BE PROFESSIONAL BACK. >> I SAID I TRUST YOU. THAT'S
>> OTHER THINGS ON THE CITY MANAGER?
>> THAT WAS 45,000 OUT OF THE CITY MANAGERS?
[03:15:06]
>> CITY SECRETARY. MAKE A MOTION TO REMOVE $50,000 FOR I AM NOT, WHICH I BELIEVE TAKES IT TO ZERO. NO SECOND? THAT
MOTION DIES. >> ANOTHER ITEM ON THERE. I WAS
WAITING FOR YOU TO READ IT. >> START WITH THE SMALLER ONE.
>> YOU HAD LONGEVITY. >> YOU WANT TO KEEP LONGEVITY.
>> I WAS WAITING FOR YOU TO KEEP READING. I WILL SECOND IT.
>> THAT'S THE DOCUMENT STORAGE, CORRECT? THE OFF-SITE
DOCUMENT STORAGE. >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> WHAT DO WE LOSE IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT?
>> WE DON'T HAVE OFF-SITE STORAGE. WE WILL CONTINUE TO
STACK THINGS IN CLOSETS. >> WHAT'S THE DOWNSIZE --
DOWNSIDES? >> IT USES UP STORAGE AREAS HERE FOR DOCUMENT STORAGE INSTEAD OF --
>> THEY ARE NOT DIGITIZED. YOU HAVE TO LOOK FOR AND HUNTER FILES , PHYSICAL FILES, THAT KIND OF THING?
>> THEY ARE GOING TO BE PHYSICAL FILES WHETHER THEY ARE HERE OR ELSEWHERE. THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS WHEN YOU MOVE THEM OFF-SITE FOR DOCUMENT STORAGE, YOU ARE MAKING IT TO WHERE YOU HAVE -- THEY ARE BOTH GOING TO BE LISTED. THEY ARE BOTH GOING TO BE BOXES. THE DESTRUCTION RECORD DATES ON THEM. REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU PUT THEM. ONE IS WE STUCK THEM IN A CLOSET IN OUR EXTRA SPACES AND UNDER DESKS, OR ARE WE SHIPPING THEM AND PAYING FOR OFF-SITE STORAGE. THAT'S THE
ONLY DIFFERENCE. >> I THOUGHT THEY WERE BEING
DIGITIZED. >> WE ARE DIGITIZING, YOU CANNOT DIGITIZE EVERYTHING. SOME THINGS HAVE TO STAY
HARDCOPY. >> I THOUGHT THE COST WAS DIGITIZING. I GUESS I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT THE PURPOSE
WAS. >> WE PAY CURRENTLY 3500 FOR SHREDDING. THAT'S THE DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION AT END OF LIFE. THE 15,000 IS TO INDEX EVERYTHING. NOT EVERYTHING IS INDEXED AND BOXED. IT IS BOXED, BUT NOT NECESSARILY INDEXED. INDEXED AND SHIP IT AND PAY FOR OFF-SITE. IN THAT SERVICE, IF YOU NEED A DOCUMENT, YOU SUBMIT A REQUEST AND I BRING THE BOX BACK TO YOU. WE DIGITIZE EVERYTHING WE CAN.
>> GOT YOU. >> WHAT CAN WE DIGITIZE?
>> I WILL HAVE TO LET THE CITY SECRETARY ANSWER. USUALLY IT ENDS UP BEING -- LET THE CITY SECRETARY ANSWER. WHAT CAN WE NOT DIGITIZE AND HAVE TO KEEP IN HARD COPY?
>> AS LONG AS YOU HAVE PAPER RECORDS DESIGNATED AS YOUR OFFICIAL COPY YOU HAVE TO KEEP A HARDCOPY.
>> FOR HOW LONG? >> ORDINANCE, RESOLUTIONS, PERMANENT. HR IS ESSENTIALLY 75 YEARS.
>> SO MANY INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE CLOUD COLLAPSE, OR YOU HAVE BACKUP FAILURE. A LOT OF CITIES, WHILE THEY DO DESIGNATE AN ELECTRONIC COPY FOR THE PERMANENT RECORDS, THEY STILL MAINTAIN -- WHICH IS A SMALLER PORTION OF OVERALL RECORDS, THE PERMANENT RECORDS, JUST TO HAVE THE EXTRA SAFETY MEASURE.
>> IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW SOFTWARE PROGRAMS, THAT DIGITAL COMPONENT IS INCLUDED IN THOSE. WE ARE ALREADY GOING TOWARDS FEWER PAPER DOCUMENTS. IT IS JUST WHAT WE HAVE HELD
>> FOR ME, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS , FOR THE PRICE TAG OF 15,000, NEXT YEAR, LIKELY IN THE BUDGET THERE WILL PROBABLY A $30,000 BOX SITTING OUTSIDE OF CITY HALL TO STORE OUR
[03:20:03]
DOCUMENTS. I RATHER THAT NOT BE THE SCENARIO, OR POSSIBLE SCENARIO. I WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN THIS LINE ITEM.>> WE ARE GOING DIGITAL IN THE FUTURE.
>> YOU MAY HAVE SOME PAPER RECORDS ALWAYS. OVERALL, EVENTUALLY YOU WILL PHASE OUT TO HAVE MAJORITY DIGITAL .
>> BETWEEN UTILITY BILLING , ALL THE STUFF GENERATED IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT, AND OUR OTHER DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS, WE ARE STORING STUFF IN THREE OR FOUR -- HOW MANY DIFFERENT CLOSETS RIGHT NOW ARE FULL OF DOCUMENTS?
>> THAT HAS NOT BEEN FULLY ASSESSED SINCE MY ARRIVAL.
>> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. ANYWAY, TO THE MAYOR'S PLAN COUNCILMEMBER BUSTER, THE POINT IS WE DO WANT TO DIGITIZE AND GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE ARE DIGITIZING AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE, I WOULD ASSUME, THINGS THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT WANT TO PART WITH THE PHYSICAL COPY OF IT UNTIL IT REACHES ITS TERMINATION DATE, IN WHICH CASE
YOU CAN THEN DESTROY IT. >> THE BEST WAY TO GET US TO DIGITIZE IS NOT STORING STUFF. YOU STORE STUFF AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE -- EVERY YEAR WE WILL START AGAIN. WE WILL GET TO IT. THE BEST WAY TO ME AS WE ARE GOING TO THE TECH WORLD.
EVERY PROGRAM I USE IS IN THE CLOUD NOW. I DON'T KNOW THAT -- EVEN WHAT WE DO HERE. I DON'T EVEN USE A CITY LAPTOP BECAUSE EVERYTHING WE GET IS CLOUD. THE IDEA IS WE ARE GOING DIGITAL IN THE FUTURE, THEN LET'S DO IT. I WOULD RATHER YOU SAY I NEED $15,000 IN SEASONAL LABOR TO SCAN AND DIGITIZE THING AND GET US THERE NEXT YEAR. THAT WAY IT'S GONE.
YOU WILL SAY I'M A HYPOCRITE. LATER ON THERE SOMETHING DIGITAL THAT I DON'T WANT TO BE DIGITAL. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION ON REMOVING IRON MOUNTAIN? HEARING NONE, PLEASE
>> MOTION PASSES, 5-2. ANYTHING ELSE IN THE CITY SECRETARY
>> THAT'S AWESOME. MOORE MEANS WE CAN ADD MORE BACK IN. OH, YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY WRONG.
>> AT LEAST ON MY SPREADSHEET. 204,000. ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE CITY SECRETARY OFFICE? ALL RIGHT,
COMMUNICATIONS. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE REMOVE THE MULTIMEDIA SPECIALIST AT $90,511. I BELIEVE THAT SALARY INSURANCE ON BENEFITS. DIGITAL MARKETING SPECIALIST . BUSINESS MEALS , TAKE AWAY $500. I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE BALANCES WERE. I DIDN'T FIGURE THAT OUT. TAKES THAT TO ZERO. REMOVE $580 IN CLOTHING. THAT TAKES THAT TO ZERO. REMOVE $21,825 IN DIGITAL ADS. REMOVE $4000 IN MARKETING GIVEAWAYS , WHICH TAKES THAT TO ZERO. REMOVE $14,085 FOR THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE POLL , WHICH TAKES THAT TO ZERO.
$-6500 IN SUPPLEMENTAL MEDIA . $-15,000 IN SOFTWARE FOR HOOT
[03:25:15]
SUITE. TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT. I THINK ON THIS ONE IT IS SPECIFIED TAMIO. OKAY. A TOTAL OF -- 237, YEP,684. >> THAT'S THE MOTION I HAVE.
>> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.
>> MY QUESTION OF -- >> I THOUGHT THERE WAS ONLY ONE POSITION BEING ADDED THIS YEAR. THERE'S TWO POSITIONS BEING
CUT. >> IS THERE ONE THAT IS NOT FILLED TODAY THAT SHOULD BE FILLED AND THEY ARE HIRING?
>> THE MULTIMEDIA SPECIALIST WAS OPEN. AND HAS BEEN FILLED.
>> IS THAT RIGHT? OKAY. LET THEM TALK? THEY KNOW BETTER. GO
AHEAD. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC OPERATIONS FOR THE RECORD. THE DIGITAL MARKETING SPECIALIST IS A FILLED POSITION. WE DO HAVE SOMEONE IN THAT POSITION TODAY. THE MULTIMEDIA SPECIALIST WAS THE NEW POSITION THE DEPARTMENT WAS REQUESTING.
>> IT WAS VACANT A MONTH AGO? >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT. I WILL AMENDED. TAKE THAT PART
>> YES, SIR. WHEN YOU ARE NOT LOOKING -- IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT JUST THE PAPER DIGITAL BUDGET BOOK, IT DOESN'T BREAK OUT SUB- LINE ITEMS INTO THE SAFE TYPE OF DETAIL THAT THE SOFTWARE DOES. IT IS HARDER TO SEE YEAR-OVER-YEAR. BUT WE ARE TAKING 75% OF WHAT WE SPENT IN PRINT ADS AND MOVING IT OVER TO DIGITAL ASSETS. THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT FINDING THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT THROUGH PRINT ADS. SIMILAR TO YOUR POINT EARLIER, WE ARE TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS THE DIGITAL AGE. THAT LINE ITEM ADVERTISING IS NOT AN INCREASE YEAR-OVER-YEAR, IT'S THE SAME.
>> HOW MANY PEOPLE DO WE HAVE ON OUR FACEBOOK PAGE?
>> 15,000 FOLLOWERS CURRENTLY.
>> HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO POST ON THAT?
>> IT DEPENDS ON THE AD. >> MARTIN ADDED, JUST MAKE A
>> THAT'S WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE 15,000. IF WE FIND A WAY TO ENGAGE PEOPLE MORE, AS WE TALKED TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT THIS -- PEOPLE LOVE HIGH-SPEED CHASES. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE DIDN'T THROW THAT OUT THERE. HEY, WHERE'S THE NEXT ONE. WE HAD ANOTHER INCIDENT AT THE POLICE TO STATION. WE TALKED ABOUT. ECONOMICS GUARANTEE IF WE POSTED THAT, FOR FREE, WE WILL GET PEOPLE'S ATTENTION. TO ME, YOU GUYS ARE PROFESSIONAL IN THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT.
YOU HAVE 15,000 PEOPLE IN FACEBOOK . FREE TO POST, FREE TO PUT STUFF OUT. I FIND IT CRAZY WE WOULD SPEND MONEY. I KNOW CITIES DO A KIND -- DO IT. THE CITY FACEBOOK PAGE. POLICE DEPARTMENT FACEBOOK PAGE. PARKS PEOPLE, THEY POSTOPERATIVE OR EVERYTHING. WHOEVER'S DOING THAT ONE, THEY ARE -- EVERY SINGLE WEBSITE HAS SOMETHING ABOUT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE TO FIRST WORK WITH WHAT WE HAVE. THEN YOU CAN COME BACK AND SAY HOW MANY -- I NEED $20,000 TO PUT DIGITAL ADS OUT.
THAT IS JUST MY -- I'M CONFIDENT YOU CAN DO IT. WHAT WAS HOOT SUITE? I DON'T REMEMBER.
>> SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGEMENT, I THINK.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. SOMEONE BROUGHT IT UP UP HERE.
IT WAS A PROGRAM THAT WASN'T NEEDED BECAUSE WE HAD SOMETHING ELSE. DON'T THROW THE LAPTOP AT ME.
>> COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER. I WILL NOT THROW LAPTOPS, I PROMISE. FOR HOOT SUITE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL SOLVE, IF YOU NOTICE ON PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND OPINION SOFTWARE, THAT LINE
[03:30:02]
ITEM IS REDUCED FROM 36,000 TO 17,000, THAT SOFTWARE WE USED LAST YEAR TO DO MULTIPLE THINGS. ONE WAS THE SURVEY. YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THE PARK SURVEY WHERE WE GOT OVER 1200 ENGAGEMENTS. WE DO A LOT OF OTHER SURVEYS ON THAT. BUT THEY HAVE SPLIT THEIR SOFTWARE INTO TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS. NOT EVERY CITY WANTS TO USE IT THE WAY THEY HAVE BUILT IT. ONE IS FOR SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGEMENT, THE OTHER SIDE IS FOR SURVEYS.NOW THAT THEY HAVE DONE THAT, THEY SPLIT OUT THE WAY YOU CAN PAY FOR THE DIFFERENT PLATFORMS. WE LOVE THE SURVEY SIDE, WE DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY ARE DOING FOR THE SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGEMENT. THE REDUCTION FOR HOOTSUITE, IT'S BEEN AROUND A LOT LONGER. THEY ARE MUCH BETTER . WITHOUT HAVING A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, THOUGH, IF WE HAVE, SAY, SIX USERS THAT ARE ALL ON FACEBOOK OR INSTAGRAM, WE HAVE TO HAVE THEM AUTHENTICATE THROUGH THEIR OWN SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT. THROUGH HOOTSUITE IT IS MORE SECURE OF A CONNECTION. IT'S AUTHENTICATED THROUGH THEIR HUTTO DOCK EMAIL. THEY CAN HAVE PERMISSIONS AND AUTHENTICATIONS . SOMEONE CAN BE A CONTRIBUTOR OR EDITOR AND HOW TO GET APPROVALS. WE GET THE ORGANIC ANALYTICS SO WE CAN SEE IF IT IS WORTH BOOSTING AN AD, OR POSTING TO A CERTAIN AREA OR NOT. AND WHICH PAGES WE WOULD HAVE THE MOST BENEFIT TO POST TO, AND ALSO BE ABLE TO POST TO MULTIPLE CHANNELS AT ONE TIME. INSTEAD OF HAVING TO SEARCH MULTIPLE GROUPS AND GO TO MULTIPLE PAGES TO POST THE SAME ANNOUNCEMENT, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO HIT ONE CLICK OF A BUTTON THE HABIT PUBLISH ACROSS MULTIPLE STREAMS AT A TIME.
MORE EFFICIENT WORKFLOW AS WELL.
>> OF ALL THE ORGANIC -- IT IS JUST AN OFFSET COST FROM THE SOFTWARE FROM USHER. IT IS ACTUALLY A REDUCTION.
>> I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF GUTTING OUR COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT.
WE HAVE A HARD ENOUGH TIME GETTING OUR MESSAGE OUT AND GETTING PARTICIPATION FROM CITIZENS. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF GUTTING OUR COMMUNICATIONS AT ALL.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. I LOOK AT IT LIKE THIS. IT IS NOT FOR ME, MATTER IF WE NEED THE POSITION. THEY DO GREAT. WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE. WE CAN HIRE 10 PEOPLE AND ADD TO YOUR DEPARTMENT, AND WE CAN HAVE THE MOST ROBUST COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT OUT THERE. BUT IS THAT WHAT PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT. WE LOOK AT THE SURVEYS, WE DO WELL IN COMMUNICATION. IF ANYTHING, LIKE WE SAID BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW YOU HAVE TO GO TO EVERY SINGLE EVENT TO TAKE PICTURES.
I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO SAY, LOOK, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO TO THE KICKBALL TEAM. WE LOOK TERRIBLE. WE ARE DOING BAD.
IT'S NICE TO GET OUT THERE, BUT YOU CAN ALSO SAY HEY,
[03:35:01]
PEOPLE THAT THEY KICKBALL, SEND US YOUR PICTURES AND PEOPLE DO THE WORK AT THESE EVENTS. MAYBE FOCUS ON THE BIGGER EVENTS. IT IS NOT A MATTER OF NOT DOING GOOD, IT'S A MATTER OF DOING GREAT. NOT NECESSARILY NEEDING TO GROW A DEPARTMENT JUST TO BE BIGGER. IT'S LIKE OUR PARKS. WE CAN GROW PARKS EXPONENTIALLY. AND HAVE GRASS. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT TO PAY FOR. THEY WANT A GOOD PARK. THEY WANT GREAT AMENITIES. WE HAVE TO HAVE A BALANCE. I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO DO GREAT COMMUNICATION, PERSONALLY, THAT MAYBE WE ARE NOT ADVERTISING. I KEEP SAYING KICKBALL. WE HAVE 30 EVENTS.YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO TO EVERY SINGLE EVENT. I DON'T WANT TO PUT US IN A POSITION NEXT YEAR. PART OF OUR PROBLEM THIS YEAR IS WE APPROVED BUDGET POSITIONS AND THEY WERE UNFUNDED LIABILITIES THAT WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS YEAR. I WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK WHERE THEY -- WE SPEND IT ON POSITIONS. OR EXPAND SERVICES. I GET IT. LET'S TRIM STUFF DOWN. LET'S GO FOR THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK. WE CAN ADD BRANDED THINGS AND SWAG. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS WOULD FEEL LIKE. OH MY GOD, THEY ARE GOING TO CUT UNTIL WE DON'T GET ANYTHING. I THINK WE HAVE TO REFOCUS WHAT WE ARE DOING AS A CITY. TO ME, IT'S GOVERNMENT IN GENERAL. AND MUNICIPAL. I KNOW WE DISAGREE, BUT THE LATEST SPREADSHEET IS, 15 TO 20% INCREASE IN PROPERTY TAX THE NEXT FIVE YEARS UNLESS WE DO WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY.
THIS IS HORRIBLE TO HAVE TO DO THIS. IF WE START TODAY AND DO THIS NEXT YEAR, MAYBE IT'S A 3% INCREASE AND NO ONE IS UPSET ABOUT IT. ANYWAY. THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING . COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. I DON'T WANT TO GET THE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT. I JUST WANT US TO FOCUS ON THE BIG THINGS THAT GIVE US THE MOST BANG. WHAT IS THE INTERNAL PERFORMANCE? I NEVER DID ASK
YOU. WHAT IS THAT? >> THAT IS OUR EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SURVEY WE STARTED THIS YEAR . WE ARE CURRENTLY ON A THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT WITH THEM. THEY COME IN AND PROVIDE, IT IS CALLED Q 12. THE 12 QUESTIONS WE CAN COMPARE TO A DATA PASS -- DATABASE. THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR WE CONDUCTED THE SURVEY. NEXT YEAR IS TO COMPARE YEAR OVER YEAR . IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO DEVELOP ACTION PLANS. CURRENTLY WE ARE TAKING THIS DATA AND DOING FACILITATED SOLUTION SESSIONS WITH EACH DIVISION FROM FIVE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT THE DEPARTMENT HEADS.
THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE GOING IN THERE AND PICK TWO OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE LOW-SCORING AND FOCUS ON A SOLUTION WE CAN PROVIDE THAT DOESN'T HAVE BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS TIED TO IT. IT IS ENGAGEMENT. AND IMPLEMENT THAT AND TRACK IT THROUGH THE ACTION PLANNING PORTION OF THE WEBSITE , AND THEN YEAR OVER YEAR WE CAN USE THIS TO EVALUATE SUPERVISORS
WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES. >> RAISE A QUESTION, WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE AN HR APP? WHY WOULD THAT BE IN COMMUNICATIONS? IT SOUNDS LIKE IT IS A HUMAN RESOURCES ITEM.
>> IT WAS BUDGETED IN THERE IN FISCAL YEAR 2023 BEFORE I WAS OVER THIS DIVISION. I CANNOT SPEAK TO THAT. I AM JUST
CONTINUING THE PROGRAM. >> YOUR OPINION. WHY WOULD YOU GUYS DO IT AND AND NOT GO TO IRENE'S DEPARTMENT?
>> IN MY OPINION, EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT , THE TAKING OF THE SOFTWARE TO GET PEOPLE TO TAKE IT, WE WERE ABLE TO GET 77% OF OUR EMPLOYEES TO TAKE THAT SOFTWARE. I THINK THERE IS AN ATTITUDE, JUST OVERALL , INCORPORATE CULTURE, THAT IS NOT AS TRUSTING OF HR THAT IT USED TO BE BACK 20 YEARS AGO.
THAT'S WHY A LOT OF COMPANIES ACTUALLY TAKE THIS PORTION OF HR AND CALL IT A DIFFERENT APARTMENT. SUCH AS OUR CULTURAL DEPARTMENT. I WASN'T GOING THERE. I THINK THAT PORTION IS PART OF IT. HAVING A PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATOR GO TO EACH OF THE DIVISIONS, AND EXPLAIN TO THEM THIS IS AN ANONYMOUS SOFTWARE, GIVEN THAT GUARANTEE, AND OVER COMMUNICATING HOW THE ANONYMITY WILL BE SECURE , AS WELL AS MARKETING OF THE POLE TO ENSURE THAT WE GET IT HIGH ENOUGH NUMBERS, SUCH AS 77% OF OUR EMPLOYEES SO IT IS
[03:40:03]
STATISTICALLY VALID DATA. >> LAST QUESTION. WE HAD THIS ISSUE A COUPLE YEARS AGO. WE HAD 62% TURNOVER. WHAT IF THERE WERE -- WHAT IF THIS POLL HAPPENED, AND THERE IS GLARING ISSUES? HOW WOULD WE KNOW ABOUT THAT? I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE PULLING OUR EMPLOYEES ON THINGS. HOW WOULD WE KNOW THERE ARE ISSUES, WE ARE DOING GREAT. POTENTIALLY THE POLL SAYS OUR PAY IS TERRIBLE. WE MADE CHANGES THERE. IT SEEMS IF WE ARE SPENDING THAT KIND OF MONEY --
>> THIS REPORT IS COMING TO COUNCIL. THIS WILL BE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO GO THROUGH AND SHOW YOU THE METHODOLOGY BEHIND IT AND WHAT OUR SCORES WERE, AS WELL AS THE SOLUTION THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED INTERNALLY. AND THEN FOR COUNCIL FEEDBACK TO SAY, HEY, THE SOLUTIONS ARE GREAT, LET'S CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD THIS WAY, FOR YOU TO SAY I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT
SOLUTION, LET'S TRY THIS. >> MAYOR, THE LAST THING TO ADD TO THAT, THE LONG-TERM VISION IS TO HAVE THE SURVEY RESULTS BUILT INTO THE BUDGET SHEET FOR EACH DEPARTMENT THAT HAS ENOUGH PEOPLE IN THE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE A STATISTICALLY RESPONSIVE SURVEY. AS THE BUDGET COVERSHEET IN THE DEPARTMENT, YOU WILL SEE HOW THAT DEPARTMENT SCORED IN SATISFACTION FOR THAT YEAR, SO ON AND SO FORTH. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SEE HOW IT TRENDS OVER TIME, TOO.
>> I AM GOING TO BE UNKNOW ON THIS VOTE. I THINK THIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY THE REASON WHY AM SO AGAINST COUNCIL GETTING INTO THE WEEDS HERE. WE ARE GOING LINE BY LINE. I KNOW THE MAYOR LIKES TO DO THAT. I DON'T. BECAUSE I'M NEVER -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU NEED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DON'T NEED. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M CUTTING OUT A PIECE OF SOFTWARE, HOOTSUITE, WHAT THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT. NOW YOU CAN DO YOUR JOB ON ANOTHER AREA BECAUSE WE GOT SOMETHING ELSE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS IS FOR, BUT I'M CUTTING IT. FOR ME, THAT'S THE FRUSTRATION. AT SOME POINT, WE HAVE TO TRUST YOU, AS THE PROFESSIONALS , OF WHAT YOU NEED AND WHAT YOU DON'T NEED.
MAYBE WE CAN ASK DETAILED QUESTIONS ON A FEW OF THE THINGS. REALLY, WHERE I'M AT, I'M GOING TO BE UNKNOW ON THIS VOTE -- VOTE , BECAUSE YOU TOLD US WHAT YOU NEED AND FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT. LIKE COUNCILMEMBER TOM PENN -- THOMPSON SAID I'M NOT TRYING TO -- JUST TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER. I AM NOT
PREPARED TO DO THAT. >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ECHO THE SAME COMMENTS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON AND MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. CUTTING DIGITAL ADS BY ALMOST 22,000 , THE FTE SOFTWARE THAT CAN MAKE THEM MORE EFFICIENT SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO HIRE MORE FTE'S NEXT CYCLE, ET CETERA.
UNFORTUNATELY I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT YOU TO GET FRUSTRATED BECAUSE WE COME UP WITH ALL THESE CUTS. PLEASE DON'T TAKE IT PERSONAL, WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SAY MAY SOUND WEIRD. I DON'T TRUST YOU ALL EITHER. THE PEOPLE I REPRESENT DON'T TRUST YOU. IT'S NOT THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THAT YOU SHOULDN'T BE TRUSTED. WE ARE PLAYING WITH THEIR MONEY, NOT OURS, NOT YOURS. UNFORTUNATELY YOUR MONEY COMES FROM WHO I REPRESENT. PLEASE DON'T TAKE THAT PERSONAL. WHEN THESE CUTS COME THROUGH. IT'S NOT BECAUSE YOU ARE A BAD PERSON , DOING A BAD JOB, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET INTO THE WEEDS. I AM NOT A PROFESSIONAL AT BUDGETING , BUT I'M PRETTY GOOD AT IT BECAUSE IT'S WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING. I THINK IF YOU DON'T GET INTO THE WEEDS THEN YOU WILL FIND YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE A LOT OF MONEY. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. THE COMPANY I WORK FOR IS VERY DETAILED, VERY METICULOUS AND VERY MICROMANAGEMENT OF THE MONEY. I LOOK AT EVERY MINUTE THAT IS SPENT ON MY JOB. THAT'S HOW DETAILED IT IS. FOR ME, GETTING IN THE WEEDS IS NOT A PROBLEM.
I AM WILLING TO CONCEDE ON A FEW THINGS. I THINK IT'S ODD THAT THE MOTIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING RIGHT NOW ARE NOT GETTING FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS, THAT'S DISAPPOINTING. THEY ARE JUST GETTING NOSE. I AM WILLING TO CONCEDE ON A FEW THINGS. A FEW THINGS WE CAN LEAVE AND FOR YOU. I THINK SOME OF THEM , TO MIKE'S POINT, WE JUST NEED TO TIGHTEN UP AND FIGURE IT OUT.
THAT'S FOR EVERYBODY. I JUST WANT YOU TO GET DISHEARTENED .
BY THE WAY, YOUR HAIR IS BEAUTIFUL. IT'S ALL I HAVE TO
SAY. >> I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
[03:45:03]
FURTHER QUESTIONS. I LOVE DECISIONS, AND YOU CAN'T MAKE THOSE WITHOUT ASKING QUESTIONS. ANYTHING ELSE I CAN ANSWER ON THE LINE ITEMS MENTIONED, I AM HERE.>> THANK YOU. >> AURIT, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. HAVING A MULTIMEDIA SPECIALIST HALF THE YEAR.
>> I DON'T LIKE THE PRACTICE OF SAVING MONEY THIS YEAR FOR SOMETHING THAT IS AUTOMATICALLY MORE EXPENSIVE NEXT YEAR, BUT IF THE OFFER -- OPTION IS SAVE MONEY THIS YEAR OR DON'T SAVE MONEY THIS YEAR I WILL SAVE MONEY.
>> THE ONLY PROBLEM IS, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT WITH THE MONEY, WE ARE JUST TRYING TO HURRY UP AND GET AS QUICK AS WE CAN TO THE NO NEW REVENUE SO WE CAN GO HOME. I'VE HEARD IT SEVERAL TIMES. HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE LEFT TO WORK ON? WE SHOULD GO THROUGH EVERY DEPARTMENT. THAT'S WHY EVERY YEAR WE PASS A BUDGET AND GET NOTHING DONE BECAUSE WE SPEND IT ON SALARIES, DEBT SERVICE, AND BENEFITS. WE ARE NOT SPENDING ON ANYTHING THAT THE PUBLIC SEES. IT'S NOT TO MAKE THE EMPLOYEES UPSET, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ALL WORK FOR ANOTHER PERSON. EVERYTHING WE DO HAS TO BE FOR THEM.
>> I AGREE WITH THE MAYOR. I FEEL WE SHOULD FULLY FUND IT.
WE ARE TRYING TO -- NOT VALUE ENGINEER, BUT VALUE CITY COUNCIL IT. WHATEVER THAT MAY BE. THAT ACTION. VALUE NO NEW REVENUE TO GET TO IT. IF WE FUND IT AT HALF THE YEAR HALF THE COST NEXT YEAR, IT'S GOING TO BE FULL COST.
>> I WILL SAY, PERSONALLY, I'M NOT TRYING TO JUST GET TO THE NUMBER, I'M TRYING TO GO AS FAR AS WE CAN . IF WE CAN GO 45,000 FURTHER, THAT'S BETTER THAN NOTHING TO ME. THAT'S WHY
I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS. >> I GET YOUR POINT.
>> IT'S TOUGH FOR ME. IT'S BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE. I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE DID MORE THAN ONE YEAR BUDGET AT A TIME.
OKAY, GREAT. 45. WE ARE NOT MAKING A DECISION ON NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, BUT WHAT DOES THAT MAKE NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET LOOK LIKE? THEN WE COULD PLAY WITH , I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, MORE REAL NUMBERS. NOT JUST SLINGING IT OVER HERE. WHEN YOU'RE ONLY GOING WHEN YOU'RE AT A TIME. MAKES IT TOUGH.
>> ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> 2-FOR? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REST OF THE BUDGET AS PRESENTED. I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THAT WAS. >> 2-4? THE REST OF THE BUDGET AS WE'VE AMENDED IT. AS THE CITY MANAGER HAS PRESENTED IT.
>> WE HAVE AGREED TO, AND EVERYTHING ELSE AS PRESENTED BY
THE CITY MANAGER. >> WHICH I HAVE BEEN KEEPING TRACK, WE ARE $433,000 OVER THE NO NEW REVENUE NUMBER.
>> ARE A, BEFORE WE DISCUSS MORE, THERE'S A MOTION. IS
>> I MAKE THE MOTION BECAUSE WE ARE NOT CUTTING IT UP AND DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE MAYOR PRO TEM SEND WE HAVE 400,000 LEFT. WE ARE GOING TO CUT STUFF. AS SOON AS WE GET TO 400,000, WE WILL PAT OURSELVES ON THE BACK AND GO HOME. I'M TELLING YOU NOW
[03:50:04]
WE NEED TO FIND MONEY FOR THE AS A RESOURCE CENTER, THE AMERICAN LEGION, AND WE NEED TO START DIGGING IN HERE. WE ARE NOT CUTTING FOOD, WE ARE NOT CUTTING CLOTHING. WE ARE NOT CUTTING ANY OF THIS STUFF. LET'S APPROVE AND GO TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. WE WILL PICK THE TAX RATE TO MESSY HOW THAT GOES. WE WILL COME BACK AND START OVER AGAIN AND DO IT LIKE EVERY YEAR UNTIL IT'S 4:00 IN THE MORNING . THE LAZIEST WAY OF EVER SEEN BUDGETING. I MEAN NOT AS SOFT AS I CAN. WE ARE TRYING TO CUT THE BEAR MINIMUM TO GO HOME. I READ THIS BUDGET FOUR TIMES. I READ THE 2023 BUDGET AND THE 2022 BUDGET. I TRIED EVERYTHING I COULD HAVE -- YEAR OVER YEAR. LESTER WE THREW IN A BUNCH OF GOODIES. I WASN'T IN FAVOR OF THE EXPANSION GOVERNMENT LAST YEAR. ONE YEAR LATER WE HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING TO THE PEOPLE IN HUTTO TO HELP THEM. WE HAVE A RIGHT TURN LANE, AN INTERSECTION UNDER CONSTRUCTION. WE TOOK A LOT OF SURVEYS. WHAT DID WE DO WITH THEM? NO ONE IS HAPPIER.THEY WANT TRAFFIC FIXED. THEY WANT ROADS FIXED, SIDEWALKS .
THEY WANT INFRASTRUCTURE. ALWAYS DOING IS DOING EVERYTHING BUT THAT. YOU EVEN CUT OUT 500,000 OUT OF STREET REPAIR. I CAN'T EVEN BELIEVE THAT. THAT'S WHY SAY LET'S HURRY UP AND GET TO THE TAX RATE. GET TO THAT. WE CAN COME BACK AND AT LEAST ARE WORKING.
>> I WILL NOT VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE IT IS PASSING A BUDGET THAT IS OVER WHAT THE NO NEW REVENUE -- WHERE WE ARE AT BECAUSE THREE COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE A PLEDGE THEY WILL NOT INCREASE TAXES. THIS IS, KIND OF, CONTRADICTORY THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO PASS A BUDGET THAT IS OVER THE NO NEW REVENUE UNLESS YOU WOULD LIKE TO RESEND YOUR PLEDGE TO THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT, IF THAT'S AN OPTION FOR YOU. IF YOU ARE WILLING TO INCREASE TAXES ABOVE $.39 . I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, $.39 IS WHERE WE ARE AT . HONESTLY SPEAKING.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM. >> IF WE HAVE A BUDGET , I'M WILLING TO RAISE THE TAXES. WE SET HER ON SATURDAY. I WILL BORROW MONEY . I WILL GO UP TO 15% ON A TAX INCREASE IF THE WELL TO NEEDS. IN MY MIND, INFRASTRUCTURE, SIDEWALKS, INFRASTRUCTURE , ROADS. NOT NEW POSITIONS . PEOPLE ARE HIRED TO CUT GRASS AND WE JUST PAID SOMEONE ELSE 500,000 TO CUT THE GRASS. TWO YEARS AGO WE HIRED PEOPLE. WE BOUGHT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF MOWERS. WE BOUGHT SPECIAL PLATES. WE DON'T EVEN CUT OUR OWN GRASS ANYMORE. WE KEEP DOING THINGS .
YEAH, I WILL RAISE TAXES WHEN IT IS A NEED.
>> I HAVE MORE CUTS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE ALL 2 MILLION AND $50,000 AS A MOTION. WE COULD, TECHNICALLY, GET BELOW, AND THEN ADD SOME THINGS BACK IN
>> I AM JUST SPEAKING TO THIS. I ASKED -- THE REASON I DID AND ADDED TO MY MOTIONS. I ASKED THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING TO SHARE ON THE MESSAGE BOARD SOME OF HIS CUTS, AND HE SAID NO.
>> I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING. >> YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DO IT. I ASKED HIM. IT JUST DIDN'T HAPPEN.
>> WHY DID I TELL YOU TODAY I WOULDN'T DO THAT.
>> I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T RECALL.
>> I THINK JAMES WORKS AGAINST THAT. HE WORKS WITH THE PRO
TEM. >> YOU ARE POLITICIZING -- POLITICIZING THE CITY MANAGER.
>> I SPENT A YEAR GOING, WHAT ARE WE DOING? WE ARE NOT GETTING ANYTHING DONE. I LOOK AT THE BUDGET AND GO, WHO WOULD PRESENT A BUDGET WITH A 15% TAX INCREASE KNOWING THREE PEOPLE
ARE GOING TO VOTE FOR IT? >> HOW WOULD HE KNOW THAT?
>> THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON OUT THERE WHO DOESN'T THINK I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR A TAX INCREASE. IF YOU LISTEN TO HIM FOR FIVE MINUTES, HE'S WORSE THAN I AM. COUNCILMEMBER THORTON HASN'T VOTED FOR TAX INCREASE OF FIVE YEARS HE'S BEEN UP THERE. IT DOESN'T TAKE A ROCKET SCIENCE TO FIGURE OUT MAYBE WE NEED TO GO FOR 2% INCREASE, 3% INCREASE. 14.86.
THAT'S THE EASIEST KNOW IN THE WORLD. 3%, I LOOK LIKE A NOT DOING THINGS FOR A MEASLY 3% INCREASE IN TAXES. I'M CALLING
THE OBVIOUS SHOTS. >> WE ARE GOING BACK AND FORTH.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE MAYOR A QUESTION. YOU'RE SAYING I'M WORKING WITH THE CITY MANAGER TO DO WHAT?
>> IT FEELS LIKE , AT OUR WEDNESDAY MEETINGS, THEY ARE MADE TO DIVIDE THIS COUNCIL. THEY ARE MADE TO GET CERTAIN THINGS THROUGH. I HAVE BEEN AGAINST --
[03:55:04]
>> GIVE ME A SPECIFIC, PLEASE. I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE
YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS. >> I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS IN THE PAST ON AN ARGUMENT. ALL OF A SUDDEN I GOT -- COUNCILMEMBER CLARK GOT THE SAME REBUTTAL. SOME OBSCURE ARGUMENT. I'M NOT GOING TO SHARE INFORMATION ANYMORE. I DON'T TALK ABOUT ISSUES WITH THE AGENDA FOR REASON. I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE EVER TOLD YOU THAT. THAT'S WHY I'M NOT DOING THAT. I'M NOT SAYING YOU ARE DOING THAT, BUT IT FEELS THAT WAY. I FEEL, LIKE, PEOPLE GET PREPARE FOR AN ARGUMENT I HAD IN THE CONVERSATION. NEXT THING YOU KNOW I'VE GOT THREE PEOPLE AUTOMATICALLY AGAINST BEING -- ME. GOING FORWARD I WILL KEEP MY THOUGHTS TO MYSELF. WE TALKED ABOUT ROAD ISSUES, PUBLIC ISSUES. ISSUES PEOPLE HAVE IN THE CITY. THAT'S WHAT WE SPEND OUR WEDNESDAYS ON. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING, BUT I'VE BEEN VERY ADAMANT BEFORE. I THINK WE ARE BORDERLINE BREAK IN THE LONGER WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE AGENDA. I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE SHOULD -- THAT'S WHAT THEY COME UP TO THE DAIS TO DO. NOT BEHIND THE SCENES AND BACKGROUNDS. I'M OVERLY SENSITIVE TO IT. MY HISTORY WITH WHAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH IN THE PAST, AND I THINK EVERYTHING OUGHT TO BE DEBATED. AN EMPLOYEE COMES UP AND CANNOT DEBATE THE ISSUE AND GIVE US THE FACTS. IMPACT FEES.
WE PUNT IT UNTIL PEOPLE COME UP UNTIL THEY GIVE US ALL THE INFORMATION. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE ARGUE. EACH OF YOU GET DIFFERENT INFORMATION THAN THE OTHER ONE. NOW THEY HAVE TWO DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS. WE ARE ARGUING.
>> YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION.
>> YOU ARE MAKING ACCUSATIONS OF. YOU JUST MADE AN
ACCUSATION. >> ANYONE THAT TALKS ABOUT AN AGENDA ON THE WEDNESDAY BEFORE THE MEETING.
>> OKAY. I WILL GIVE YOU -- >> COUNCIL I THINK THIS IS
BEYOND THE POINT. >> I NEED TO PUT IT ON. I NEED TO CLARIFY THE ACCUSATIONS COMING FROM THE MAYOR TOWARDS
ME ANOTHER COUNCILMEMBERS. >> IT'S TOWARDS THE PROCESS.
>> WHATEVER. I ASKED CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA. I DON'T ASK HOW SHOULD I VOTE. HOW SHOULD I PUT ON THIS ITEM MR. CITY MANAGER , SO YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO.
I'VE NEVER DONE THAT. >> I DON'T THINK YOU DO.
>> ALL RIGHTS. >> I WILL GIVE AN EXAMPLE. LAST BUDGET, THE CITY MANAGER PROPOSED THE ROAD MAIDMENT --
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. I MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE SOMETHING.
I DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR IT. I JUST WANT TO GET A BOW ON THE RECORD. I FORGET, DO I HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS? OKAY. I FORGET.
>> YOU CANNOT ARGUE FOR IT AND THEN VOTE AGAINST IT. YOU
ARGUED FOR IT. >> YOU MADE THE MOTION. YOU SAID HERE'S WHY THEY SHOULD DO IT.
>> WE ARE ON COMMUNICATIONS, CORRECT?
>> YOU ARE ON THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET.
>> DOES THAT GO TO THE ATTORNEY? WHAT HAPPENS IF I DO
THAT? OKAY. >> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE BUDGET AS AMENDED AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
>> WAS THERE A SECOND? I DON'T RECALL.
>> GO AHEAD, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO
>> WHAT I SEE IS THE RULE IS YOU CANNOT SPEAK AGAINST YOUR MOTION, BUT YOU CAN VOTE AGAINST IT.
>> HE SPOKE IN FAVOR OF IT, BUT HE CAN VOTE AGAINST IT. OKAY.
THAT WORKS. >> WHAT ROLE DOES THAT BREAK?
>> IT'S A THING TALKING ABOUT -- I BELIEVE IT IS CORRECT.
>> ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
[04:00:12]
COUNT. NOT ONE PERSON VOTED FOR IT.>> YOU DID IT BEFORE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A GENERAL MOTION. I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF TO GO THROUGH EACH DEPARTMENT AND CALCULATE FOR CLOTHING AND FOR FOOD. THAT
HASN'T ALREADY BEEN ASKED. >> CITY COUNCIL HAS BEEN ASKED.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION SO WE CAN CONSIDER IT.
>> I WANT TO SAY ONE THING -- >> WAIT, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK,
HOLD ON. >> SHE'S MAKING A MOTION.
>> YOU CAN SECONDED AND DEBATED. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DEBATE UP BEFORE SHE GETS A SECOND. YOU WANT TO HAVE THE STAFF TO ADD UP CLOTHING, AND WHAT? CLOTHING AND FOOD. I WILL SECONDED SO WE CAN HEAR FROM COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.
>> NOT INCLUDE -- AMENDED TO NOT INCLUDE PD.
>> WHAT ABOUT STREETS ? >> WE ARE KEEPING IT SIMPLE.
>> ALL THEY ARE DOING IS ADDING IT UP. THEY ARE NOT CUTTING
>> I DON'T MIND VOTING TO GET THE TALLY. THEY SHOULD GET CLOTHING. IF IT IS AND THE EXECUTIVE PERSON, ANYONE THAT WORKS INSIDE THIS BUILDING, AND COUNCIL, AND PEOPLE THAT MAKE EXECUTIVE LEVELS, THEY NEED TO BUY THEIR OWN CLOSE. IT LOOKS NICE, EVERYONE HAS HUTTO, I WOULD RATHER THERE BE A PROGRAM , INSTEAD OF HAVING HI-FI PIZZA PARTIES AND ABLE DO GOOD, HEY, WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT? -- CLUBS. I THINK GIVING THEM TO PEOPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT. I THINK OUGHT TO BE SOMEWHAT EARNED OR -- I DON'T MIND THE TALLY OF THE
>> I DID. I WANTED TO HEAR WHAT COUNCILMEMBER CLARK HAD TO SAY.
>> SOME OFFICE-SUPPLY CUTS, FOOD, MEALS. TECH EQUIPMENT, FUEL MILEAGE.
[05:12:55]
ROOMS FOR THE CITIZENS BREAK ROOM, I HAVE A BREAK[05:13:01]
ROOM AT MY WORK THAT'S A TABLE, AND I BRING A SNACK[05:13:05]
FROM HOME. IT'S LITTLE THINGS --[05:13:10]
[05:13:11]
[05:13:12]
>> IF I CUT THAT IN HALF, MAKE A MOTION TO CUT IT IN THE
[05:13:15]
HALF, IS THAT GOING TO FREAK PEOPLE OUT AND CAUSE THINGS[05:13:21]
NOT TO HAPPEN?[05:13:22]
[05:13:24]
[05:13:26]
>> WE'RE NOT GETTING BEEF JERKY ANYMORE, CUTTING THAT
[05:13:30]
OUT. NO MORE POP.[05:13:33]
>> POP? OH MY GOD, WHERE ARE YOU
[05:13:41]
FROM?>> THAT'S JUST TAKING A HATCHET TO THE -- MAYOR PRO TEM, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S FULL
>> I'M ASKING YOU TO REPEAT IT.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> YOU DON'T THINK 68 GRAND IN FOOD IS A LITTLE --
>> THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID. WHAT I SAID WAS GETTING THE NUMBER AND NOT KNOWING WHETHER YOU'RE CUTTING FROM A PROJECT OR A FUND YOU WANT TO DO VERSUS ONE YOU DON'T, I'M NOT SAYING IT CAN'T BE CUT BUT THE MAYOR PRO TEM MAKES A MOTION TO CUT IT IN HALF, WHO DECIDES WHAT HALF YOU CUT IT FROM?
[05:15:24]
>> YOU HAVE 30 GRAND WERE 20 GRAND TO BUY FOOD . IF HE STOCKS EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM WITH FIJI WATER AND BEEF JERKY AND THEN HE RUNS WITH NO FOOD THAT HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO HEAR ABOUT IT LIKE, HEY, WHY ARE WE DRINKING FIJI? AND PEOPLE GET NOTHING. IT PROBABLY HELPS YOU MOST, NOT IN TROUBLE
WITH THEIR VIDEOS. >> ABOUT $17,000 OF THAT IS FOR -- THAT'S ALSO A LETTER. SORRY, I THOUGHT IT WAS ON. I
APOLOGIZE. >> IT WAS OFF. ABOUT 17,000.
LOOKS LIKE IT'S FOR THE SUMMER CAMP FOR PARKS.
>> AND HOW MUCH FOR THE CITIZEN MEETINGS? WOULD YOU GUESS?
>> I'M NOT GUESSING. I'M GOING TO LOOK IT UP. JUST GIVE ME A SECOND. CITIZEN UNIVERSITY IS 3960. OF COURSE THAT'S PERDIEM'S AND TRAVEL STUFF. 3960 MEETING 3860?
>> 3960 FOR CITIZENS UNIVERSITY.
>> HE SAID THAT INCLUDES PERDIEM'S?
>> MILLS? >> MILLS INCLUDE PERDIEM'S AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF. NOT FOR THAT.
>> THIS IS WHERE I STAND . THERE IS ONE VIEW ON CITY COUNCIL , THERE WILL NEVER BE ENOUGH CUTS TO THE CITY. AND I RESPECT THAT. THE CITY STAFF, THEY ARE HIRED. THEY ARE TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS . THIS IS AN ABOUT FOOD OR WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT POINT IT WILL MAKE THOSE MEMBERS ON COUNSEL HAPPY AND TO BE WILLING TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET. THIS IS THE REALITY THAT WE ARE IN, UNFORTUNATELY. I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IS WORTH IT TO TAKE THESE NUMBERS, THE $60,000, OR NITPICK AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
UNTIL WE ARE AT , YOU KNOW , I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE NUMBER BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY APPEARS GOING TO BE HAPPY. I'M NOT HAPPY WITH HOW THINGS LOOK ON MOTIONS THAT I'VE MADE. I'M WILLING TO WITH MY FELLOW COUNCILMEMBERS WERE DRYING A HARD-LINE IN THE GRASS , GROUND, SAND, ON A TAX RATE.
AND I RESPECT THAT. WHAT GIVES? THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
>> I CURRENTLY HAVE A MOTION ON THIS TABLE, A VASCULAR VOTE,
AND WE HAVE A VOTE. >> I HAVE AN AMENDMENT COMING.
>> WHAT CAN I DO TO ASK FOR A VOTE OF WHAT'S ON THE TABLE?
>> YOU'D SAY, YOU'D SAY, CALL THE VOTE.
>> MOTION TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION PICK
>> SECOND. I HAVE MORE WANT TO OFFER AS WELL.
>> COMBINES COMMUNAL, RANDALL, WHEN YOU TRIED TO SHUT IT DOWN IS NEED A MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION. YOU GET A SECOND.
WE ARE BACK IN BUSINESS. >> WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT PICK
>> WE NEED A VOTE PICK >> BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SHUT IT
DOWN AFTER ALL. >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S CALL A VOTE TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION.
[05:20:03]
FINISH THE DISCUSSION OFF? >> JUST KEEP AMENDING IT. WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU GOT? WHAT ELSE HAVE YOU GOT?
>> WE HAVEN'T SPENT ANY HOT FUND MONEY. THE ONE DOLLAR HOT FUND. I TALKED TO THE CITY MANAGER AND SAID, HEY, SOME OF THE THINGS WE ARE DOING, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GET CLARIFICATION FOR THIS, THESE HOT FUNDS ARE BRINGING PEOPLE AND THE CITY TO SPEND MONEY. OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE BALLPARKS AND BUILT THINGS LIKE THAT. WITH A SEPARATE EVENT, OR TO THE EVENT, CANNOT BE, IN YOUR OPINION, CAN USE HOT MONEY FOR THAT SINCE IT'S A FESTIVAL?
>> WE HAVE A PROCEDURE FOR THE APPLICATION OF YOUR HOT FUNDS AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE'VE EVER USED IT. IT'S FOR ANY ORGANIZATION WANTING YOU TO USE THE FUNDS. THERE IS AN APPLICATION PROCESS FROM JULY TO AUGUST 15TH. YOU SHOULD PROBABLY AMEND THAT PROCEDURE. IT SAYS ENTITY. IT DOES SAY THAT THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE APPLICATION PROCEDURE TO USE THE HOT FUNDS. TYPICALLY, CITIES HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT TAKE ALL THE APPLICATIONS AND DECIDE USING THE TWO-PART TEST. IS THIS EVENT GOING TO BRING HEADS IN BEDS AND MEET ONE OF THE EXCEPTIONS? I MEAN, ONE OF THE PROVISIONS IN THE LAW FOR THE USE OF HOT FUNDS.
>> MAYOR, I BELIEVE THE HOLIDAYS IT'S ONE THAT GOT MOVED TO THE COMMUNITY FUND. SO IT'S ALREADY OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND EXPENSE. >> THAT'S FINE. IF I CAN GET OUT OF THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT . ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, I'M TELLING YOU, I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING AT THIS UNTIL WE FIGURE OUT SOME WAY TO PUT SOME MONEY. IF IT'S BY LAND THIS YEAR AND MILLILITER, BUT LAND FOR A RESOURCE CENTER AND AMERICAN
LEGION PICK >> I GOT ONE FOR YOU.
>> I THINK EVERYBODY IS READY TO HEAR PICK
>> WE ARE ALL YEARS. >> EVER BUT HE WANTS TO GO
HOME. >> THIS IS LINE ITEM UNDER STREETS AND DRAINAGE. IT ENDS IN 6403 BUT IT'S CONTRACT LABOR. WE HAD BUDGETED $480,000, THIS IS FOR THE MOWING . COUNSEL JUST AWARDED THE CONTRACT. SO NOW WE KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS. WE DIDN'T KNOW WHEN WE STARTED BUDGETING.
SO THE ACTUAL NUMBERS NOW GOING TO BE 358 , 361 , WHICH IS A
SAVINGS OF $121,639. >> THAT'S MONEY JUST SITTING
OUT THERE PICK >> THAT IS MONEY JUST SITTING
OUT THERE. >> WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE?
$121,639. >> WHAT ELSE? WE NEED A COUPLE
MORE. >> I WILL KEEP LOOKING. THAT'S
ONE FOR SURE. >> BEFORE WE SPEND THAT ON
SOMETHING . >> TO THAT POINT, CAN WE TAKE THAT MONEY ? I GUESS I SHOULD MAKE IT A MOTION. THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS GOING DOWN . THAT IS LESSENING THE AMOUNT THROUGH THE NONPROFITS . CAN WE THEN FULLY FUND OUR NONPROFITS THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL, THE BUDGET ITEM ?
>> I BELIEVE THE LANGUAGES FIRM THAT YOU ALL ADOPTED LAST TIME, WHICH IS TO CAP IT AT NO MORE THAN 1% OF THE REVENUE.
>> UP TWO PICK >> THAT'S RIGHT. UP TWO, NOT BEYOND. AND YOU ALL ARE FIRM IN THAT LANGUAGE . IT'S VERY TOUGH OF REASON, WE DO NOT WANT THE ABILITY TO EXCEED 1%.
>> THEY ARE CUTTING BUT OUR POLICY SAYS WE ARE NOT TO BE SPENDING MONEY TO HELP PEOPLE HIRE EMPLOYEES IN ONE OF OUR
>> I FORGOT THE EXACT ORGANIZATION. IN OUR GUIDELINES THE MONEY IS NOT TO BE USED FOR STAFF OR FTE. I FORGOT THE
LINKAGE. >> ONE OF THE NONPROFITS.
>> GOING TOWARDS AN FTE, WHICH HISTORICALLY, SHIED AWAY . SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO USE THE $121,639 AND PUT THAT TOWARD A LINE ITEM FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND AND OUR CONSTRUCTION OF
THE AMERICAN LEGION. >> I REQUEST THAT WE SPLIT THAT
>> HERE'S THE THING. I DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.
I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CUT A SPECIFIC , THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO TIE A SPECIFIC CUT TO A
[05:25:01]
SPECIFIC AD. MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT I WOULD RATHER AND BACK. MAYBE I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOME OF THE STREET IN ITS BACK RATHER THAN DO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.>> I'M NOT ARGUING TO SPLIT THE VOTE.
>> I JUST WANT YOU TO STOP IT.
>> IF WE CUT IT SOME IS GOING TO HURRY UP AND MAKE A MOTION TO SPEND IT ON SOMETHING. I'VE GOT 20 PAGES HERE. I'M LOOKING FOR $100,000 AND EVERY TIME WE FIND IT I SPEND IT ON SOMETHING. WE'VE GOT TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER.
>> YEAH, MAYBE DIFFERENT COUNSEL NUMBERS WANT TO SPEND
ON SOMETHING DIFFERENT. >> FIND THE 100,000, CUT IT AND PUT IT TOWARDS WHAT YOU WANT TO. I TOLD WILL IS GOING TO DO EVERYTHING I COULD THIS YEAR. AND EDDIE. SO WE'LL SPLIT UP.
SO THE FIRST VOTE IS TO, WHAT WOULD YOU CALL US? TO CUT THE MONEY , TO TAKE THE SAVINGS FROM THE MOWING CONTRACT.
>> SO REDUCE THAT LINE ITEM BIO 121.
>> WHAT DID YOU SAY IT WAS QUICK
>> WE WILL REDUCE THE MOWING BY $121,000 639. DISCUSS EMOTION? I'M HEARING ON. THESE CALL THE VOTE.
>> OKAY. >> I'M SORRY, MAYOR. DID YOU
HAVE A SECOND? >> DID I? I DON'T THINK I DID.
>> THEN I WILL SECOND INSINCERITY SAID .
>> GOOD CATCH. NAY. -- >> ALSO CLARK?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER THORTON? COUNCILMAN THOMPSON?
>> MOTION PASSES, 6-1. >> OKAY, MAYOR. HAVE ANOTHER
ONE FOR YOU. >> THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS TO THEN USE THE $121,000 639. THE 121,000 FOR LINE ITEM FOR THE AMERICAN LEGION TO PURCHASE LAND CONSTRUCTION WE ARE SPLITTING IT UP. RIGHT? I NEED A NEW SECOND.
>> SECOND. >> WE CAN CUT 121 OUT OF THE BUDGET. THAT WAS THE FIRST ONE. HE WANTS TO EARMARK IT. HE
WANTS TO EARMARK IT . >> I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT WE
WERE, OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. >> IT'S NOT A GRANT. IT'S NOT GIVEN IT. JUST LIKE THE SANDBOX , IN MY MIND, WILL STILL OWN THE LAND WHEN THE BUILDING GETS BUILT. HOPEFULLY WITH OUR MONEY, WE WILL ON THE BUILDING . IN AN IDEAL WORLD THE AMERICAN LEGION WILL KEEP IT UP AND IF THEY EVER CEASE TO EXIST OR GO AWAY THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER ASSET. SO WON'T BE A GIFT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE SAYING, HEY, EVERYBODY , THE CITY IS GIVING
OUT $100,000 CHECKS. >> YOU ARE PROPOSING THAT
$121,000 PAYS FOR LAND ? >> IT WILL COVER LAND. WILL PAY FOR THE LAND OR IF WE FIND LAND. WHO KNOWS? IF THERE'S A
BUDGET ITEM. >> IT'S LIKE WE ARE MAKING DECISIONS AT 12:20 A.M. THEY CAN HAVE SOME IMPACT OR NOT EVEN AN IMPACT FOR AN ORGANIZATION.
>> WILL YOU HAVE TO START WITH SOMETHING. WE ARE AT ZERO. ZERO GETS YOU NOTHING . AT 121,000 THERE MAY BE A GUIDE COME UP AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M AT THE END. MY FATHER JUST PASSED AWAY. I JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY FOR THE TWO ACRES AND I WANT THE REST . WHATEVER. CAN YOU PAY FOR THE LEGAL BILLS? WE PAY $20,000 FOR LEGAL, WE HAVE 100,000 LEFT TO START THE CONSTRUCTION OR AT LEAST THE AMERICAN LEGION CAN TELL ANYBODY WE HAVE $50,000 . WE NEED TO RAISE 200 MORE. WE HAVE A BUILDING. BUT IF YOU START WITH ZERO YOU ARE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE NOTHING, WHICH IS WHAT WE KEEP DOING IT FOR YOUR -- EVERY YEAR. AT SOME POINT SOMEBODY HAS TO SAY, IF WE DON'T DO THIS YEAR WE ADDED 121 NEXT YEAR. OR ALL OF A SUDDEN A VERDICT COMES UP THAT'S A SALES TAX ARE BOOMING, WE ARE $300,000 OVER ON SALES TAX. I WILL BE THE FIRST GUY TO GO. I WANT TO SPEND THAT MONEY BEFORE IT GETS TAKEN OUT BY SOMETHING ELSE. TO ME, THERE'S GOT TO BE A START.
THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR. >> BACK TO SOME OF THE REALITIES, THE YMCA. THEY ARE BURSTING AT THE SEAMS . THEY HAVE OUTGROWN THEMSELVES AND THERE'S BEEN NO INITIATIVES TO EXPAND THAT OR MAKE THAT SITUATION ANY BETTER. BUT THAT
[05:30:02]
IS THE CITY-OWNED PROPERTY. SAME THING WITH THE SANDBOX AT MADELEINES. THIS ORGANIZATION IS OPERATING IN A CITY, A DILAPIDATED OLD HOME . AND THIS IS THE REALITY FOR OUR NONPROFITS. ABOUT OUR CITY FACILITIES, THEY ARE JUST IN BAD CONDITION. I CAN'T BELIEVE WE ARE ALLOWING THIS TO GO ON THAT WE CAN'T EVEN INVEST IN NONPROFITS AND OUR OWN CITY FACILITIES . I APPRECIATE THE START OF THE CONVERSATION ON THIS BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS A FIX.THIS IS NOT A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM IS FOR THE AMERICAN LEGION IN THE CITY. THAT'S RESTING AT THIS.
>> WE HAVE INVESTED MONEY INTO YMCA THIS PAST YEAR TO THE TUNE OF $500,000 FOR THE IMPROVEMENT AND EXPANSION. SO TO SAY WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING, WE HAVEN'T BUILT A $40 MILLION FACILITY LIKE WE COULD PROBABLY USE . BUT WE DID PUT 500,000, IF I MEMBER CORRECTLY, THE MATCH $500,000 ALSO. SO THERE'S $1 MILLION GOING INTO THE BUILDING. SO WE ARE DOING THINGS. THE MADELEINE SANDBOX, WE RENEGOTIATED AT LEAST .
INSTEAD OF A YEAR-TO-YEAR LEASE WE MADE I WANT TO SAY 10 YEARS OR 15 YEARS FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO FUND RAISE TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BUILD A BARN . THEY WANT TO BUILD, I FORGOT WE CALL IT, INDOORS. IN ORDER TO DO THAT THEY NEED A BETTER LEASE. SO EVERY TIME PEOPLE ASK US FOR STUFF, IN MY MIND, WE HAVE DONE
A LOT. >> HOW MUCH ARE WE SPENDING ON
THE JUSTICE CENTER THIS YEAR? >> ZERO NOW I THINK. THAT
WOULDN'T GET CUT >> THERE IS NO MONEY PER DIEM BECAUSE STAFF IS GIVING US A YEAR TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILS.
BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD THE STUDY.
>> RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. >> YOU HAVE TO STUDY BEFORE YOU KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD. RIGHT?
>> THAT IS GENERALLY THE WISER THING TO DO.
>> SO WE ARE DOING IT. I WAS THINKING THE AQUATIC AND THE
OTHER ONES. >> I KNOW THAT THE MAYOR HAS PREVIOUSLY TOLD ME THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE I GUESS MAYBE HE SEES THE BUILDING. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK ON YOUR PATH. MAYBE YOU CAN CLARIFY . YOU KNOW, JUST FUTURE VISION AS THE CITY DOES BUILD UP AND ITS FACILITIES USING THE CURRENT LOCATION FOR OUR NONPROFITS . THAT COULD MEAN NOT A LOT OF COST CAPITAL. BUT THAT'S OBVIOUSLY DELAYED OUT FIVE YEARS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT.
>> THAT'S KIND OF MY VISION . IF AND WHEN WE DO A NEW YMCA AT ANOTHER LOCATION WE HAVE THAT BUILDING THAT'S OURS. WE ARTIE OWN IT. WE CAN MOVE PLENTY OF NONPROFITS IN THERE IF WE WANTED TO DO THAT AND IF THE COUNCILS AT THE TIME CHOSE TO DO THAT. I'M GOING TO SAY NO ON THIS ONE. IT'S NOT BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THE AMERICAN LEGION OR I DON'T LIKE OUR VETERANS. I HAVE TALKED TO MEMBERS OF THE OMEN POST AND NOT EVERYONE IS ON BOARD WITH WHAT THE MAYOR HAS BEEN SAYING . THEY ARE ALL ANTSY TO GET TO ANOTHER BUILDING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A COHESIVE STATEMENT FROM THAT GROUP. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THEY HAVE NOT TAKEN A VOTE. THEY HAVE NOT DISCUSSED IT IN THEIR MEETINGS TO SAY THIS IS REALLY WHAT WE WANT. WE ARE ASKING FOR THIS FROM THE CITY . TO ME, THIS IS MORE OF A WANT AND A NEED. THEY HAVE A HOME TODAY. IT MAY NOT BE IDEAL BUT THEY ARE IN A HOME . WHEN I COMPARE THIS TO STREET MAINTENANCE, WE HAVE A HALF-MILLION OUT OF STREET MAINTENANCE, I WOULD RATHER PUT IT IN THERE. WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE CITIZENS IS STREETS, STREETS , MORE STREETS AND MAYBE SOME ROADS AND THEN SOME STREETS. SO I WOULD RATHER PUT IT THERE . THAT'S WHY WANTED TO SPLIT THE VOTE. I SEE OTHER
PLACES THAT I CAN -- >> THEY TOLD JAMES THEY PLAN ON RUNNING OUT OF MONEY WITHIN TWO YEARS.
>> JAMES, ARE WE DOING THE PUBLIC WORKS TODAY AS WELL?
>> WE ARTIE DID THAT. >> WE ARTIE DID THAT ONE.
>> THE PUBLIC WORKS, THE POLICE, THOSE ARE UNDERWAY .
>> OKAY. AND WE GOT PRESENTED THAT ONE. OKAY.
>> YEAH. I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE BEEN PRESENTED PD. THAT
WAS NOT BAKED. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
[05:35:07]
>> I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT. WE PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A PROPOSAL FOR DI TRAINING. THE COUNCIL RECEIVED IT PROBABLY ABOUT A MONTH AGO. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD $15,250 TO THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET TO FULLY FUND PROPOSAL NUMBER ONE AT $3800 , PROPOSAL NUMBER TWO AT $4600, PROPOSAL NUMBER THREE AT $2850 . AND THEN ANOTHER $4000 TO BE USED BETWEEN PROPOSAL FOUR AND THE ADD-ON SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN
>> THAT'S FINE. >> DENTAL EQUALS $15,250.
>> $15,250. AS FAR AS TRAINING GOES, IT'S THE MOST
COST-EFFECTIVE TRAINING . >> AMENDED MOTION BY COUNCIL
MEMBER THORTON. SECONDED . >> I CAN OFFER, I THINK COUNSEL HAS $5000 SITTING RIGHT NOW FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN THE BUDGET. YOU CAN CHOOSE TO OFFSET.
>> I THINK WE HAD A REQUEST FROM HPC FOR SOME STUFF .
>> FAIR PICK >> JUST ADD THIS AND BELIEVE
THAT $5000 TO BE AVAILABLE. >> YEAH.
>> ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
HE FOUND SOMETHING ELSE? >> ALBERTA PASSED ALONG TWO ITEMS IN FINANCE THE HAVE ALSO BEEN AWARDED SINCE THE BUDGET WAS PROPOSED. THAT IS THE AUDIT AND THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES. SO THAT IS ITEM , I'M SORRY, LINE ITEM 1020 001.
THE ITEM IS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES . WHEN YOU GET UNDERNEATH IT TO THE AUDIT IS CURRENTLY LISTED AT $77,500. WE AWARDED THE CONTRACT FOR $55,000. SO THAT HAS A SAVINGS
OF $22,500. >> WHAT WAS THE FINANCIAL
ADVISOR ONE? >> THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY ONE WAS BUDGETED AT 75 AND WE AWARDED THAT AT $42,500. THAT IS A SAVING OF $42,500. BY MY MATH ON THE PAPER IT $55,000
TOTAL. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO REDUCE THOSE TWO LINES MIGHT $22,500 AND $22,500 FOR
FINANCIAL ADVISOR PICK >> SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? I'M HEARING ON. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> I SEE THAT RIGHT NOW WE ARE AT 238, 230 8K IN REVENUES. WE WILL ADD 25,000 BACK TO MAINTENANCE.
>> SECOND. >> WE HALF OF THAT BACK.
>> AND THAT'S AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR MOTION?
>> APPARENTLY THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DOING.
>> JUST DOUBLE CHECKING HERE. AND WHO SECONDED THAT?
>> I SECONDED IT. >> BACK TO MAINTENANCE.
>> WE ARE STILL 275 SHORT. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> MEMBER CLARK, HOW MUCH MONEY DO WE HAVE LEFT? 280-225.
>> WE ARE ABOUT $13,000 UNDER.
>> YOU SAID WE ARE AT TODAY? >> WE JUST TOOK THE TO 25.
[05:40:03]
>> 280-225 660 GRAND. RIGHT? >> I THINK IT WAS 230
SOMETHING. >> AFTER THE 15,000 AMENDMENT YOU ARE SITTING AT 233 I THINK. SOMEWHERE IN THERE. SO I JUST TOOK 225 POINT THAT'S CLOSER MORE LIKE 8000. I'VE GOT A LOT OF NUMBERS COMING AT ME FROM DIFFERENT PLACES TOO. SOME TRYING TO KIND OF KEEP UP WITH IT.
>> DID WE TAKE THE POOL STUDY OUT OF THE PARKS AND REC?
>> YEAH. >> THE AQUATIC CENTER?
>> YET. >> THERE'S 139 AND COMMUNITY
>> MOTION. PRETTY SOON WE WILL START CUTTING PEOPLE THAT ARE WORKING HERE BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE GIVING ME NO OTHER OPTION.
A MOTION TO USE 139,000. LET ME DO THIS. LET ME JUST DO A MOTION. RUSSIAN MOTION. MOTION TO MAKE 139,000 FOR THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE AND PUT IT TOWARDS A LINE ITEM FOR THE AMERICAN LEGION TO PURCHASE LAND AND OR CONSTRUCTION
MATERIALS >> I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE CAN BE USED FOR THAT. WE WILL HAVE TO
DO A LITTLE RESEARCH ON THAT. >> PENDING LEGAL. OKAY.
>> IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SOMETHING THAT BENEFITS THE CITY IS ALL. NOT JUST ONE ORGANIZATION. I DON'T THINK
THAT IT WOULD QUALIFY. >> I WILL RESEND THE AND WHAT CAN I CUT OUT OF THE BUDGET THAT CAN GO TO COMMUNITY BENEFIT? ALL IT IS IS JUST MOVING MONEY AROUND PICK
>> IN A SECOND. >> THE SIDEWALK IS A COMMUNITY
BENEFIT. RIGHT? >> YES. YOU CAN MOVE THE MONEY THAT'S IN FOR THE MATERIALS FOR SIDEWALKS FOR THE COMMUNITY
BENEFIT. >> MOTION FOR $139,000 FOR SIDEWALKS OVER TO COMMUNITY BENEFIT.
>> IT'S GOT TO BE TIED TO SIDEWALKS THAT BENEFIT THAT PARTICULAR COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE.
>> I THOUGHT WE RELEASED THAT TO WHERE YOU COULD USE IT FOR ANY PURPOSE BECAUSE WE JUST MOVED IN A BUNCH OF FESTIVALS INTO THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FUND.
>> IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SOMEWHAT TIED .
>> SO YOU THERE HAS TO BE THE WHOLE CITY OR WHERE IT CAME
FROM. >> YEAH. YOU CAN USE IT OUTSIDE OF THE PIT AS LONG AS IT BENEFITS.
>> WHICH PIT MONEY IS LEFT? DO WE HAVE DURANGO PIT MONEY? BECAUSE THEY ARE GETTING SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE. A MENTORING TO GET US LIKE, YOU KNOW PICK
>> I DON'T HAVE IT THAT GRANULAR RIGHT NOW IN FRONT OF ME. THEY WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH OF THE DURANGO COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE IS STILL REMAINING THE HASN'T BEEN SPENT. AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE ACCOUNTING FOR THAT WAY BECAUSE THERE IS A FUND BALANCE AND THEN WE HAVE PROJECTS. WE ARE NOT TIME PROJECTS TO THAT SPECIFIC DOLLAR BECAUSE THE DOLLARS HAVE BEEN RELEASED TO BE USED THE ON THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PIT. SO IF YOU WANT A GRANULAR ASSESSMENT OF THAT THAT'S GOING TO TAKE A MINUTE. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT
TONIGHT I DON'T THINK. >> SO YOU HAD ASKED ME , WHAT CAN WE DO TO VOTE ON THIS AT THE NEXT MEETING . I THINK YOU WOULD VOTE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE BUDGET AS AMENDED TO POSTPONE THAT FINAL BUDGET VOTE TO SEPTEMBER 19TH.
>> NOT TO PLAY GAMES, BUT ONE TIME I MADE A MOTION AND THEN THEY REALLY, DONE, YOU MAY THE MOTION. SO HOW DO I DO IT TO WHERE I CAN KEEP ADDING AMENDMENTS UNTIL WE FIGURE THIS
OUT? >> THAT WOULD BE HER FINAL.
THIS WOULD BE HER FINAL. ONCE YOU ARE DONE WITH AMENDING AND YOU GET TO WHERE YOU ARE THEN YOU CAN MAKE A FINAL AMENDED MOTION TO POSTPONE IT TO SEPTEMBER 19TH.
>> I'M GOING TO TRY TO FILIBUSTER. I DON'T KNOW THAT
I'M GOING TO GET THAT VOTE. >> ALBERTA IS QUESTIONING WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN POSTPONE IT BECAUSE OF THE POSTING.
>> DOTTIE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT , IF WE DON'T VOTE ON THE BUDGET TONIGHT FOR THE TAX RATE, THAT WHEN THE TAX RATE COMES UP , AND CAN BE VOTED ON BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ADOPT YOUR
[05:45:04]
>> SO ACCORDING TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT WE WILL HAVE TO RE-ADVERTISE OUR PROPERTY TAX INCREASE NOTICE. THE SOONEST WE CAN DO THAT WOULD BE THE 22ND I BELIEVE. AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO MEET THAT FRIDAY TO MEET THE TIME REQUIREMENTS.
>> THAT'S A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. RIGHT?
>> IT'S ON YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE.
>> I THOUGHT THAT WAS JUST AN INCREASE.
>> KNOW. YOUR PROPERTY TAX RATE CAN ONLY BE VOTED ON AFTER YOUR BUDGET IS ADOPTED. IF YOU DON'T BUDGET , APPROVE THE BUDGET TONIGHT , YOU CAN'T ADOPT YOUR TAX RATE TONIGHT.
>> CORRECT. >> YOU THEN HAVE TO RE-ADVERTISE YOUR PROPERTY TAX NOTICE IN THE PAPER , SENT TO THE 22ND . FIVE DAYS AFTER THAT IS THE FIRST TIME YOU CAN HAVE YOUR MEETING, WHICH THEN PUTS YOU TO SEPTEMBER 27TH, WHICH IS A FRIDAY , TO THEN VOTE ON THE BUDGET AND THE TAX RATE. AND THEN YOU CAN HAVE YOUR SECOND MEETING ON THE 30TH, WHICH IS
THE LAST DAY >> OR WE CAN JUST TASK THE BUDGET TONIGHT AND QUIT PLAYING GAMES.
>> YEAH YOU ARE. >> I MAKING A MOTION.
>> MOTION TO CALL ABOUT. >> THERE'S ONE THING LEFT ON THE TABLE THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED . I'M SORRY POINT
>> MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION.
>> WAIT, WE HAVE TO CALL THE VOTE.
>> ACTUALLY HAD ON THE QUESTIONS THAT I WANTED TO ASK
BEFORE WE RUN THE BUDGET. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> I'M SORRY. MOTION BY MAYOR . CONTINUE DISCUSSION.
>>'S PICK >> GIVE US A SECOND?
>> I'M SORRY TO DRAG IT OUT, BUT YOU ASKED ABOUT WHAT WAS TIED TO DURANGO. AS A LOOKING AT THE DURANGO PIT WHAT WE EXPECTED TO BE FUNDED FROM THAT POOL OF MONEY , BUT THIS MAY NOT BE EXACTLY DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR. SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT. THIS YEAR IS $500,000 FOR THE VETERANS MEMORIAL.
>> WAIT, THAT'S COMING OUT? >> WE APPROPRIATED THAT.
>> YMCA, $500,000. >> AS GOD IS MY WITNESS. HOLD ON. NOT TO SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRE AMERICAN LEGION BUT DID THEY NOT SAY THEY'D RATHER HAVE A BUILDING BEFORE THEY HAD A
MEMORIAL? >> THE TO THAT MET WITH US DID
SAY THAT. >> THAT'S THE POST COMMANDER.
>> AND I'VE MET WITH OTHERS IN THE POST WHO DON'T AGREE WITH
THAT. >> I HEAR YOU . THE REMAINDER OF IS $333,000 FOR COUNTY ROAD 137 REPAIRS.
>> AND WE DID THAT THIS YEAR. >> THAT'S ARTIE BEEN SPENT.
I'M SORRY. NEVERMIND. SO IT'S JUST THOSE TWO HAVE BEEN
BUDGETED AGAINST DURANGO. >> THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO MOVE $500,000 FROM THE PID FOR THE VETERANS MEMORIAL FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FOR THE
AMERICAN LEGION. >> YOU WANT TO DEFUND THE MEMORIAL IS WHAT YOUR MOTION IS?
>> THAT'S STILL USING PID DOLLARS FOR THE ORGANIZATION.
>> YOU STILL CAN'T DO THAT. >> ASKED TO PLEASE CALL A VOTE.
PLEASE CALL A VOTE. >> MOTION TO CONTINUE
DISCUSSION. >> SECOND. I STILL HAVE A QUESTION I DIDN'T GET TO ASK.
>> NOT FOR YOU. >> NOW FOR ME.
>> YOU KNOW I LIKE IT . IS THAT SEVEN?
[05:50:03]
>> IS THERE MOTION TO TAKE SOMETHING OFF? WE ARE SPENDING MORE TIME CONTINUING THIS. IS THERE A WAY TO GET HIS TO GO
>> WE HAVE TO VOTE IT DOWN. >> HERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION.
SORRY, I'M STILL WORKING ON THIS.
>> IS MONEY IN THE AMERICAN LEGION.
>> WHY WOULD THEY BE? IS A HOTBOX OVER ON FRONT STREET AND NOW THEY ARE MEETING AT A TEMPORARY BUILDING UP OVER 419.
>> DAN ASKED. HE LET DAN COLLYNS.
>> SIR? >> WE EXTENDED IT. AND THEY MAY HAVE VOTED FOR DAN BUT I'M STILL TRYING TO GET THE QUESTION ANSWERED ON THIS $500,000.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOW COUNCILMEMBER THORTON TO SPEAK
>> SECOND PICK >> NEXT. OKAY. SO WHAT ITEMS
>> I MADE A MOTION PICK >> AXES BECOME A POINT OF ORDER. WHAT ITEMS CAN BE MOVED AROUND THAT'S IN THE BUDGET THAT CAN BE SPENT WITH THE PID DOLLARS TO FREE UP GENERAL
REVENUE? >> TWICE DESPERATE TO GET THEM? HAVE YOU MADE SOME KIND OF CAMPAIGN PROMISE TO THIS GROUP TO WHERE YOU ARE SO DESPERATE TO TRY TO FIGURE THIS OUT? WHAT
IS GOING ON HERE? >> OF GOING AFTER THE RESOURCE
CENTER NEXT. >> A GOOD NIGHT. IF I WAS SITTING TRYING TO MAKE DECISIONS I WOULD LOOK FOR THINGS THAT ARE RELATIVELY INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED.
SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE . THOSE ARE EASY WANTS TO .2. THAT'S NOT $500,000 I DON'T THINK ANYMORE. THAT'S THE FIRST PLACES I WOULD LOOK. THEN, ONCE I KIND OF FINISH THERE, THEN THE NEXT THINGS I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR ARE THINGS THAT I CAN ARGUE THAT IF IT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY NEXT TEAR WOULD BE BECAUSE USUALLY I HAVE STOPPED AFTER ROADS AND SIDEWALKS. I HAVEN'T GONE ANOTHER STEP. SO THE STUFF THAT'S IN THERE RIGHT NOW , WE PUT THE FEASIBILITY STUDIES IN THERE. RIGHT? BUT THOSE ARE OVER ON THE GENERAL FUND ANYMORE. SO NOT ENTIRELY SURE WHAT ELSE I CAN PULL OUT. MAYBE THE MOWING. MAYBE YOU COULD SAY THE MOWING PICK
>> I TRY SOMETHING THAT MIGHT SETTLE THIS? MAYBE.
>> PLEASE! >> OF DOTTIE WOULD GO WITH THIS. WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE IF WE WANT TO ALLOCATE THE $139,000 THAT IS UNALLOCATED IN THAT FUND RIGHT NOW? WE WANTED TO ALLOCATE THAT FOR THIS CITY TO SECURE FACILITIES FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. FOR USE BY NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN THE CITY. AND THEN WE HAVE TO DETERMINE WHICH NONPROFITS THAT IS. BUT NONPROFITS THAT BENEFIT THE CITY. IS THAT ENOUGH COVER FOR US THERE?
>> IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE . THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT IF HE IS
SUPPOSED TO BE -- >> I'M JUST TRIED TO SETTLE
THAT. >> IS OF PARK IMPROVEMENTS. ANY PARK IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE IN THE GENERAL FUND?
>> HERE'S THE DEAL, THOSE PID DOLLARS WILL NOT GO AWAY. IF WE PASS A BUDGET WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND MAKE AN AGENDA ITEM OF ALLOTTING $139,000. LET THE CITY ATTORNEY TO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH AND LET'S PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO THE BUDGET FOR THE PID DOLLARS. IF DOTTIE GIVES US THE GO-AHEAD TO
CHECK THE RULES PICK >> ON THOSE PID DOLLARS, EITHER WITHIN THE PID OR AN AREA CLOSE ENOUGH TO BENEFIT THE PID. FOR EXAMPLE, IN DURANGO, WE ARE IMPROVING THE STREETS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF TIE. MONEY FOR NONPROFITS I DON'T THINK
>> I WILL ASK THE AMERICAN LEGION TOLD VOTE TO SATISFY HER THE MAYOR. THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT FOR THE MEMORIAL. THEY ARE FIGURING OUT TO MOVE MONEY AROUND IN THE PID FUND TO TAKE IT OUT OF GENERAL REVENUE AND THEY WILL HAVE ANOTHER MEETING.
>> AND I DISAGREE WITH THAT 100% BECAUSE , ALTHOUGH THEY DO A REALLY GOOD JOB AND THEY REPRESENT A GOOD PORTION OF OUR VETERANS THEY DON'T REPRESENT ALL VETERANS. SORRY.
>> OKAY. I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT, SINCE WE ARE PROVING THE BUDGET AND SINCE THE ECONOMIC BUILDING CORPORATION BUDGET IS INCLUDED THE PRESENTATION ARE WE APPROVING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BUDGET WITH THIS MOTION? BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED ANY OF THAT. I THINK PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. SO THAT'S MY QUESTION . IS THIS APPROVING
ALL THIS? >> YES. THE BUDGET IS IN THIS
[05:55:02]
BUDGET. >> TO YOUR POINT, THERE'S PROBLEMS IN THERE. WE BUDGET SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T AGREED TO PAY FOR YET BUT NOW WE ARE HALF A GREEN. IT'S NOT A REFUNDING AGREEMENT I WOULD THINK.
>> TO APPROVE, WE HAVEN'T EVEN DISCUSSED THAT BUDGET.
>> CALL A VOTE! THAT WAS IT. >> THE BUDGET HAS THEIR OWN
REVENUE PICK >> CALLED A VOTE.
>> WHAT YOU CALLING? >> VOTE ON THE BUDGET .
>> ON RANDALL'S MOTION. >> OKAY.
>> MOTION PASSES , 4-3. THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 4.2. POSSIBLE ACTION FOR RESOLUTION 201 RATIFYING THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE REFLECTED IN THE CITY FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 OPERATING
BUDGET >> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO SET THE PROPERTY TAX RATE AT 0.244 -- WAS IS EFFECTIVELY A 5.6% INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE ABOVE NO NEW REVENUE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025. THAT IS OUR CURRENT TAX RATE.
>> WHAT'S THE NUMBER? >> .42214.
>> MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECONDED BY MAYOR TIM
GORDON. >> I AM OFFERING UP THIS MOTION . IT'S FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. IT IS NOT FATTENING A BUDGET .
IT DOES BRING IN MORE REVENUE, ABSOLUTELY. WITH THE INCREASE FROM 0.399 AT NO NEW REVENUE TO 0.422 THAT WOULD GIVE THE CITY $1,163,496 IN ADDITION TO THE INCREASE OVER THE NO NEW REVENUE. WITH THOSE DOLLARS WE COULD FULLY FUND OUR ROAD MAINTENANCE . WE COULD ADD $225,000 TO ROAD MAINTENANCE TO MAKE THAT HOLE. $2.1 MILLION. WITH THE EXTRA REVENUE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THE SIDEWALK AND DRAINAGE CREW , ALONG WITH OUR EQUIPMENT, FOR $412,000 . 412 -- $.56. AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT WOULD BE $525,000 . I WOULD LIKE THAT AMOUNT TO BE ADDED TO OUR RESERVE FUND BALANCE BECAUSE, IN MY OPINION, IS SOMETHING LIKE A WINTER STORM OR FLOODING , A TRAIN DERAILMENT , COUNSELOR THOMPSON EARLIER SAID LITIGATION BEING FINALIZED . I THINK IT'S JUST WISE AND FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE TO HAVE A RESERVE FUND BALANCE.
ANNOUNCING THAT $500,000 IS GOING TO HELP WITH THE CATASTROPHE THAT MAY HAPPEN TO OUR COMMUNITY OR FOR ANY KIND OF SETTLEMENTS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT. BUT I JUST THINK THAT'S RESPONSIBLE TO HAVE SOME OBSERVED FUND BALANCE. IT'S NOT WISE TO OPERATE AT THE MINIMUM. THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING.
I ALSO DO REALIZE THAT THREE MEMBERS ON THE CITY COUNCIL MAY NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS. I JUST WANTED TO PUT IT OUT THERE.
WITH THIS INCREASE IT IS INDEED AN INCREASE OF 5.65% IN YOUR TAXES . I GUESS FOR MONTHLY AMOUNT COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM FIVE TO EIGHT DOLLARS DEPENDING ON YOUR EVALUATION PER MONTH.
SO IT'S PRETTY MUCH CUTTING IN HALF WHAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS AT AND I THINK IT'S MANAGEABLE. I DON'T THINK IT'S OUTRAGEOUS . AND I THINK THAT THIS WILL SERVE THE RESIDENTS VERY WELL. AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE DONE WELL MAKING CUTS TO
[06:00:03]
THE BUDGET THAT WE JUST ADOPTED AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION.>> CLARIFICATION, THIS IS A VOTE ON A TAX RATE. WE CAN'T MAKE ANY MORE BUDGET CHANGES. RIGHT? THAT SHIP SAILED.
>> YOU CAN RECALL THE ITEM. >> I KNOW.
>> WE CAN DO A BUDGET MEETING.
>> POINT OF ORDER, I'M ASKING THE ATTORNEY FOR LEGAL ADVICE.
IT SOUNDED LIKE THE MOTION WAS A TAX RATE AND THEN TO MOVE THE MONEY TO THE STEEL, THE STEEL, AND THE STEEL, AND ADD SOME
OVER HERE. >> THAT WASN'T MY MOTION. THAT
WAS MY DISCUSSION PICK >> ON YOUR AGENDA YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO RATIFY THE TAX RATE AND THE BUDGET THAT YOU JUST PASSED. 4-2. SAY YOU SKIP DOWN TO 4.3. WITH THE TAX RATE ORDINANCE. REMEMBER, YOU HAVE TO DO THE RESOLUTION RATIFYING YOUR TAX-FREE IN THE BUDGET FIRST.
>> YEAH, 4.2. >> SO IF SHE WANTS TO SET THAT OF 4.2 THAT'S WHAT SHE'S DOING.
>> BUT THEN WE HAVE TO REDO ALL OF THESE CALCULATIONS BECAUSE
YOU HAVE TO SAY THAT. >> BECAUSE YOUR TAX-FREE HAS TO
MATCH WHAT YOUR BUDGET IS. >> YEAH.
>> SO WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? BECAUSE WE DID THE BUDGET WE HAVE TO OPEN THE BUDGET BACK UP TO THEN GET TO 42?
>> WHATEVER YOUR BUDGET IS AND WHATEVER YOUR TAX RATE WOUND UP AT WITH THE BUDGET AND THE AMENDMENTS .
>> QUESTION. HOW DOES THE TAX RATE AND UP ANYWHERE WHEN NOBODY VOTED TO CHANGE THE TAX RATE IN THE BUDGET? THAT MONEY WOULD JUST GO IN THE GENERAL FUND.
>> WOULDN'T YOU CALCULATE THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN AMENDED AND MOVED AROUND TO GET THE NEW TAX RATE? WOULD YOU JUST DROP
EVERYTHING TO THE RESERVE? >> IT WOULD ALL DROP TO THE
RESERVE. >> AND YOU USE THAT TAX NUMBER.
>> THE TAX NUMBER WOULD BE THE PROPOSED TAX NUMBER UNTIL THERE'S SOME SORT OF ACTION TO CHANGE THAT. IT'S OBVIOUS WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. I DON'T KNOW MECHANICALLY HOW YOU DO IT
POINT >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO ACTUALLY. WE JUST DEBATED A BUDGET TO DO REVENUE.
LET'S POP THE TAXES BY $1 MILLION.
>> I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO GET TO KNOW NEW REVENUE AND HAVE THE DISCUSSION FOR $.42 OR NOT. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DO THAT. TECHNICALLY, WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO IS, BACK WHENEVER MAYOR WAS ASKING ABOUT DO YOU REDUCE THE FUN BALANCE YOU HAVE TO REOPEN THE BUDGET , SUBTRACT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS OUT TO GET DOWN TO NEW REVENUE FROM THE FUND BALANCE.
>> SEE HER TELLING ME WE CAN OPEN THE BUDGET BACKUP.
>> YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.
>> BUT WE DID THAT WE WOULD GET TO WORK ON THE BUDGET.
>> YES. >> YOU ARE NOT DONE UNTIL YOU
ARE DONE. >> THAT'S WHAT I LIKE TO HEAR.
>> HOLD ON. SO IF WE DO SET THE RATE . BECAUSE WE ENDED UP LOWER THAN 39. A LITTLE BIT. BUT THE BUDGET WAS UNDERFUNDED.
>> WHAT MOTION SAID CHANGE THE TAX RATE? NO MOTION SAID CHANGE THE TAX RATE. EVERY MOTION REDUCED SPENDING BUT NO MOTION
CHANGED THE TAX RATE. >> SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS
RIGHT NOW -- >> RIGHT NOW THE TAX RATE IS 4.9607. BECAUSE NOBODY CHANGED THE TAX RATE IN THE BUDGET.
>> I JUST MADE A MOTION. >> THE PROBLEM IS --
>> WAIT A MINUTE, WE ARE GOING TO RAISE TAXES 50%. WE DIDN'T EVEN SPEND THE MONEY. IT'S ALL GOING TO RESERVES.
>> THAT'S WHAT I THINK HAPPENED . YEAH. MECHANICALLY, I THINK THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
>>'S WE JUST FORGOT A PIECE OF THE MOTION?
>> WE DIDN'T DO THAT LAST YEAR.
>> LAST YEAR WE WERE LOW AND YOU ALL WENT UP IN THE BUDGET.
THEN WE RECALCULATED ALL THE NUMBERS AND GIVE YOU WHAT TO SAY. THIS YEAR YOU WERE HIGH AND YOU ARE TRYING TO COME DOWN. THE MAYOR ASKED IF WE CUT OUT THAT $700,000 ON THE FUND BALANCE. THEY MOVE IT OUT OF THE BUDGET TO REDUCE THE REVENUE IN THE BUDGET. WHICH THEN, IN TURN, IS A NO NEW
REVENUE TAX RATE >> AND THEN USE THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE NUMBER. AND VOTE ON THAT.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE WITH 39.995
CENTS. >> WE HAD A MOTION WITH THE
[06:05:02]
>> YEAH. I RESEND IT. >> I WILL SECOND IT. I LIKE THE WAY THIS IS PLANNED OUT. THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH RUSHING TO GET THINGS DONE IS YOU ARE RUSHING INTO A 15%
INCREASE. >> THAT'S THE PROBLEM WHEN YOU ARE MAKING VERY IMPORTANT DECISIONS AT 1:05 IN THE
MORNING PICK >> WITHOUT A MEAL.
>> WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS THREE WEEKS AGO.
>> I AGREE. I WISH SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE MADE A MOTION TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING PICK >> YOU ARE RATIFYING THE TAX INCREASE. CAN YOU RATIFY WHAT YOU'VE DONE WITH THE BUDGET WITH THE DROP IN THE TAX RATE THAT YOU DID IN ADJUSTING THE
BUDGET NUMBERS? >> LIKE A SECOND MOTION. LIKE
TO LISTEN TO MOTIONS? >> GET A VOTE.
>> THE PROBLEM IS, WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS YOU CAN DO A 42 TO 114 BECAUSE IT'S GOT TO BE 105. IN THE BUDGET PICK
>> THAT IS WHAT IS ANY RATIFICATION MOTION . HOWEVER, THE BUDGET THAT YOU ADOPTED, YOU CUT .
>> STILL UP THERE? >> LET'S REOPEN FOR ONE THEN.
>> AFTER RECONSIDER 4.1. >> LET'S RECONSIDER 4.1.
>> MOTION TO RECONSIDER 4.1. >> YOU CAN'T.
>> WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
>> WHICH IS? >> I RESCINDED MY SECOND.
>> RESEND YOUR MAIN MOTION. >> I HAVE A PROCEDURAL MOTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. SINCE THE MOTION IS TO FIX THE TAX RATE , LEGALLY, CAN YOU DO THAT BEFORE YOU'VE RATIFIED? SO IS
THE MOTION MOVE? >> NO. WHATEVER YOU'RE GOING TO RATIFY YOU ARE GOING TO RATIFY WHATEVER YOU'VE DONE WITH YOUR BUDGET. SO RIGHT NOW , IF YOU MOVE ON TO 42, YOU HAVE TO LIVE WITH WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET. UNLESS YOU GO BACK TO 4.1 AND CORRECT IT. THAT WOULD BE MY OPINION.
>> SAY THAT AGAIN PICK >> AFTER RECONSIDER 4.1 TO ACCOUNT FOR THE MONEY THAT YOU'VE MOVED AROUND AND REMOVED FROM THE BUDGET THAT'S GOING TO DROP DOWN TO THE FUND BALANCE, WHICH WOULD CAUSE THE TAX RATE TO BE WHATEVER THAT
NUMBER IS AND VOTE ON THAT. >> SOMEBODY WHO VOTED FOR THE BUDGET WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER PICK
>> RECONSIDER. >> SHE STILL ASKED FOR MOTION.
>> RIGHT NOW WE ARE ABOUT TO CALL A VOTE ON A TAX RATE THAT IS AN INCREASE OF 5.65%. UNLESS YOU RESEND.
>> CALL THE VOTE. >> WE ARE DOING SOMETHING
ILLEGAL. >> YOU HAVE A MOTION. ALL YOU
>> I SECOND AND YOU. >> I SECONDED YOU.
>> WE NEED TO FIX THAT UP IN THE BUDGET.
>> ARE WE ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO OPEN THE BUDGET BACKUP FOR
DISCUSSION? >> I MADE A MOTION THAT YOU CONSIDER 4.1 TO ADJUST THE BUDGET TO REMOVE THE EXCESS FUNDS . I DON'T KNOW WHY I COULDN'T.
>> PROCEDURALLY , YOU CAN EITHER RECONSIDER 4.1 BUT YOU CAN'T RECONSIDER AN ITEM WITH AN ARROW THING. RIGHT?
>> THE FIRST THING IS IF YOU WANT TO RECONSIDER 4.1, VOTE ON
THAT. >> IS AFTER BEFORE .1 OR CAN WE NARROW IT DOWN TO THE EXACT THING HE WANTS TO RECONSIDER IN 4.1? I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH YOU.
>> HE WAS TO RECONSIDER PICK >> I'M NOT GOING TO GO TO THE BUDGET. YOU GUYS ARE OUT VOTING US AND THAT'S FINE. WE WILL HAVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS EACH MONTH.
>> WELL, YOU CAN SAY MOTION TO RECONSIDER 4.1 TO REOPEN THE BUDGET DISCUSSION TO DO THIS AND CAUSE THE TAX RATE IN THE BUDGET TO BE REFLECTED AS THIS. WHATEVER THOSE ITEMS ARE.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEM 4.1 TO ADJUST THE REVENUE SIDE OF THE BUDGET TO AFFECT -- REFLECT THE NEW RATE WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDS. WE ARE GOING BACK TO THE GENERAL
FUND BALANCE. >> DOES THAT MOTION WORK? DO WE
[06:10:01]
>> DISCUSSION ON A MOTION . APPEARING ON. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> SO NOW, IF YOU WANTED THE NUMBER TO BE A DIFFERENT NUMBER, THIS IS WHERE YOU HAVE TO DO IT. NOT LATER.
>> WE MADE A MOTION TO ADOPT IT.
>> I THOUGHT YOU ALL MOVED TO RECONSIDER IT FOR THAT PURPOSE.
>> WHAT'S THE NO NEW REVENUE NUMBER AGAIN?
>> EVENT TO RATIFY. >> TIMEOUT. WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THE MOTION, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, IS TO RECONSIDER THE BUDGET. WITHIN THE SCOPE OF SETTING THE REVENUE TO REFLECT THE NO NEW REVENUE AMOUNT. WE MOVED TO RECONSIDER DOESN'T THAT THEN HAVE TO HAVE ITS OWN? HE MOVED TO RECONSIDER. THAT'S A VOTE . THEN YOU HAVE TO VOTE ON REDUCING THE THING.
>> VOTE ON THE BUDGET AGAIN. >> YES PICK
>> WITH NO NEW REVENUE. >> I WOULD ASSUME THE MAYOR WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO REDUCE THE REVENUE TO REFLECT THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A VOTE AND WE WOULD THEN READOPT THE BUDGET AT THAT.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ASSUME . DOES THAT NOT TRACK?
>> DOES THAT WORK? >> THAT WORKS.
>> BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT RATE. THIS IS WHERE SHE
CAN MAKE HER ARGUMENT. >> SAME ARGUMENTS THAT I MADE WITH THE TAX RATE. MY APOLOGIES FOR CONFUSING THE ORDER OF THINGS. I WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT TAX RATE AT 0.42 CENTS BECAUSE OF THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS THAT I MADE .
THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL HERE THAT HAVE PRETRADE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, CITY GOVERNMENT, STAFF, COUNCILMEMBERS, THOSE INVOLVED IN SURVEYING THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY SPECIFICALLY IN A SCARY GOVERNMENT OVERREACH , IN-YOUR-FACE, TAKING OVER YOUR LIFE AND YOUR FINANCES . I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT ANYONE WHO WORKS FOR THE CITY OR ANY OF THE PEOPLE APPEAR ON THE DAIS , I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHY THEY DO WHAT THEY DO. IT'S DEFINITELY NOT WHY I DO WHAT I DO. I GUESS MAYBE SOME PEOPLE HERE AT THE CITY COUNCIL DO WANT TO SCARE PEOPLE ABOUT GOVERNMENT . AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE A GROWING COMMUNITY AND WE ARE SERVING MORE PEOPLE. WE ARE CONTINUING TO SERVE MORE PEOPLE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE WANT TO GROW BIG GOVERNMENT. I'M NOT FOR THAT.
I WAS NEVER FOR $.45 BUT I HAVE BEEN PRETRADE THAT I WAS FOR $.45 AT THE PROPOSED RATE. I AM FOR MAINTAINING OUR TAX RATE AT $.42. WE'VE HAD IT FOR TWO YEARS NOW. THIS WOULD BE THREE YEARS. I KNOW THAT THOSE ARE DIFFERENT IMPLICATIONS BECAUSE PEOPLE'S VALUES HAVE GONE UP SO THEY WILL BE PAYING MORE.
SOME PEOPLE'S VALUES HAVE GONE DOWN. THEY WILL BE SAVING MORE.
IT'S ALL CRAZY TAX NUMBERS AND STATUTE THAT'S GOING RIGHT THERE. SO NOT HERE TO ARGUE THAT. I'M JUST HERE TO BE FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE . I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE TALK ON BEHALF AND SPEAK ON BEHALF OF PEOPLE THAT COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND THEY DO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS. THERE ARE ALSO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S 35,000+ PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE CITY . WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THEIR DESIRES AND WANTS TOO. THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE IT . IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT AVENUE
. THAT'S IT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL.
>> STAY OVER HERE. >> I'M WILLING TO FIGHT AND TRY FOR EVERYBODY TO TRY TO MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY . BUT WE DID
[06:15:03]
CUT A LOT OF MONEY. >> THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WE ARE
>> A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF REVENUE? SHE'S PROPOSING WHAT THE $.42 WOULD GENERATE ON THE BUDGET PICK
>> SO YOU WOULD VOTE ON THAT? AND THEN WE WOULD VOTE ON THE BUDGET WITH THAT NEW NUMBER. SO IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT?
>> I WILL BE HONEST, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WE HAD A FIRST.
>> THERE WASN'T A MOTION PICK >> OKAY. DO WE HAVE TO CUT
EXPENDITURES? >> THAT IS HOW THE BUDGET CURRENTLY EXISTS. 'S YOU HAVE REOPENED IT NOW TO REDUCE THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM $.45 TO SOME NUMBER BETWEEN THEIR AND THE NEW REVENUE . NO NEW REVENUE IS REVENUE.
>> SO WE HAVEN'T VOTED ON BRINGING IT DOWN YET?
>> VOTING ON EXPENDITURES BEING REMOVED BUT WE DIDN'T GO UP
REDUCING REVENUE PICK >> LET ME HELP. RIGHT NOW THE VOTER APPROVAL RATE THAT WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WAS THE ZERO POINT 59. THAT GENERATED $797,000 I'M PULLING THIS FROM THE SHEETS THAT WE SHARED WITH YOU ALL WITH THE TAX RATE
>> JUST DON'T CALL THE BOAT. SO, HYPOTHETICALLY, YOU KNEW THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T, THEN WE GO TO 14.3, AND YOU DON'T GET FIVE VOTES, WE HAVE TO OPEN IT BACK UP AGAIN, START ALL THE OVER AT 4.1 AND COME ALL THE WAY BACK TO AGAIN,
CORRECT? >> CORRECT, IF YOU GET DOWN TO VOTING ON THE TAX RATE ORDINANCE AT NO NEW REVENUE, YOU'D HAVE TO GO BACK UP, AND CORRECT EVERYTHING.
>> OKAY. SO I FEEL LIKE THIS IS ACADEMIC THING THAT IS NOT
GOING TO HAPPEN, SO WHATEVER. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M ON THE RECORD AS NOT, I'M $.45, I DO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE LIKELY HEADED, BUT MAYBE SOME PEOPLE HAVE COMPASSION FOR
OUR COMMUNITY. I DON'T KNOW. >> THAT RIGHT THERE IS
POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING. >> IT'S GETTING POLITICAL, SO,
>> IS RIGHT, IT'S GRANDSTANDING.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO SUPPRESS 0.99553 AND CALCULATE THE REVENUE TO MATCH THAT NUMBER. IN THE BUDGET.
>> THAT'S THE TAX RATE, WE'RE IN THE BUDGET.
>> SECOND. I'LL REITERATE WHAT I SAID BEFORE. I'M OKAY
RAISING TAXES. BUT, >> ABSOLUTELY NOT.
>> THE BUDGET THING, NOT ONCE, NOT ONCE HAVE WE, WE DIDN'T CUT OUT A SINGLE ITEM IN THIS WHOLE THING.
>> WE DID. WE DID, THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET.
>> WE CAN A TON OF STUFF OUT. >> THAT WAS A GIVEN. WE'RE STILL, WE'RE WE CANNOT CHARLESTON.
>> TALKING POINTS THAT YOU CONTINUOUSLY USE IN YOUR FAVOR, YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO BE HAPPY. YOUR GOAL IS TO HAVE ZERO DOLLAR TAX, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE, WE WILL NOT HAVE PUBLIC SAFETY, ROAD MAINTENANCE, WE WILL NOT HAVE ANYTHING, I CAME TO YOU AND SAID LET'S GET THE BUDGET SO WE CAN PAY CASH MONEY AND YOU SAID YES, LET'S DO IT, I SAID BUT YOU MAY HAVE TO RAISE THE TAX RATE, YOU SAID ABSOLUTELY NOT, YOU SHUT IT DOWN, THERE IS NO NEGOTIATING WITH YOU.
>> MAY I FINISH? NO ONE SAID, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO GO UP A PENNY. AND PUT MONEY TOWARD THE AMERICAN LEGION AND THE RESOURCE CENTER. THE CONVERSATION NEVER HAPPENED, ALL IT WAS WAS NO, NO, NO, SO NOW RAISE THE MONEY SO WE CAN
[06:20:01]
PARK MONEY IN AN ACCOUNT BECAUSE WHO DOESN'T WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES SO WE CAN EARN MORE INTEREST BECAUSE WE'RE TURNING SO MUCH INTEREST THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PAY DEBT SERVICE WITH THE INTEREST ON THE PREVIOUS DEBT SERVICE. WITH GRANDSTAND ALL YOU WANT, I'LL SLEEP GOOD TONIGHT.>> WE YOU WILL POLITICAL GRANDSTAND EVERY DAY YOU DO.
>> WHAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE WAS SAID, WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO RAISE A PENNY, TWO PENNIES? I WOULD NEVER GET TO $.45.
>> ME EITHER. >> ME EITHER. IT'S ALL ABOUT NEGOTIATING AND WORKING WITH PEOPLE. IT'S, IT'S FRUSTRATING, I APOLOGIZE FOR TALKING OUT, AND USING POLITICAL THINGS, BUT I'M TRYING TO MAKE WHAT'S RIGHT FOR ALL OF HUTTO, WE REPRESENT DIFFERENT PEOPLE. AND WE HAVE A VOICE FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE. I'M TRYING TO BE THE MIDDLE GROUND. I KNOW THAT'S NOT APPRECIATED HERE ON THE DAIS, I
GET IT. BUT I'M TRYING. >> THE REASON I DON'T EVER GO FOR THE MAXIMUM TAX RATE IS BECAUSE IN 2019 THAT'S WHAT THEY DID, AND THAT'S WHEN I LEARNED FROM TOM HINES ABOUT MAKING A MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION BECAUSE THEY SHOW THE DISCUSSION DOWN, THEY POPPED THE RATE BY 29%,
>> THEY SET THE MAX POSSIBLE. THAT WASN'T SETTING THE RATE.
>> WHAT IS THE RATE END UP BECOMING?
>> IT WAS THAT AFTER TWO MONTHS OF DISCUSSION. SO YOU KEEP SAYING TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE SET THE RATE, NOT WHEN YOU'RE
LYING. >> THE REASON I DON'T DO THAT IS THE ONE TO SET THE MAX RATE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS, YOU CAN SPEND TWO MONTHS TALKING AND THAT'S WHAT THE RATE IS GOING
TO BE. >> THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN LAST
YEAR. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT IT ENDED
>> IT WAS LOWER. >> WE SET IT TO THE RATE, THAT WAS NOT WHAT WAS ADOPTED, YOU ARE ALREADY MISSPOKEN FROM THE DAIS, FROM LAST YEAR. THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. JUST CALL THE
>> HOLD ON. I THINK YOU'RE DONE, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK SAYS WE'RE CALLING THE BOAT, PLEASE CALL THE BOAT.
>> I NEED TO CLARIFY, COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON, COULD YOU PLEASE REPEAT THE RATE AMOUNT?
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY. IT'S A REDUCTION OF REVENUE OF $3,083,644. THAT'S WHAT MY MATH SAYS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING FROM 16.7 MILLION TO 13.7 MILLION AND CHANGE. IT'S $3,083,644 REDUCTION IN REVENUE.
>> WAS LEADS TO A TAX RATE OF >> NO NEW REVENUE, CORRECT.
>> HOLD ON, SIR, THERE IS A CLARIFICATION THAT THEY WERE DOING. YOU CALLED THE VOTE. WE'RE DONE DISCUSSING.
>> COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE REPEAT THE MOTION?
>> THE REVENUE FROM PROPERTY TAX TO $13,713,847. CORRECT?
>> THAT IS JUST THE PORTION, YOU'RE REDUCING THE REVENUE BY 3 MILLION, THEY GET $3644. THAT'S THE BETTER WAY OF
>> YOU AGREE WITH THAT, SECOND?
>> I THINK SO. WE'RE JUST TALKING DOLLARS ON WHAT THE RATE IS, RIGHT? CALL BACK A PORTION.
>> WE'RE VOTING ON THE REVENUE THAT WOULD GET YOU TO A TAX
RATE THAT IS NO NEW REVENUE. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER? HE CALLED THE VOTE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? >> NAY.
>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> AND A.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? >> NAY..
>> MOTION PASSES FOR MINISTRY. FOR THE RECORD, I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED 42 BUT I'M SICK OF THE NONSENSE TONIGHT.
>> WE JUST FINISHED 4.1. >> SO NOW YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE
ON ADOPTING THE BUDGET. >> STILL 4.1.
>> STILL 4.1. ALL YOU DID WAS AMENDED AND NOW YOU'RE VOTING
TO ADOPT IT AGAIN. >> ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADOPT
THE BUDGET. >> SO IT NEEDS TO READ THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE PACKET, MAYOR. RIVER IS GOING TO DO IT,
[06:25:04]
I MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE, AND WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE THE NUMBER. OF ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING, THAT LANGUAGE THAT'S IN BOLD. RIGHT THERE. NOW IT'S NOT ATAX INCREASE. >> SO WE DON'T, 4.2, NO ACTION. THEY'RE STILL ON FOR .1.
>> WE NEED TO ADOPT THE BUDGET.
>> NOW WE'RE ADOPTING THE BUDGET AT THE NO NEW REVENUE
RATE. IS WHAT WE'RE DOING. >> SO, THE MOTION NEEDS TO INCLUDE THE LEGAL LANGUAGE THAT'S IN BOLD, IT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THE TAX RATE. WE'RE MOVING TO ADOPT THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, ENDING SEPTEMBER 30TH. THAT'S THE PART THAT'S IN BOLD.
>> IF THIS VOTE FAILS WHAT HAPPENS?
>> YOU HAVE TO CONTINUE AMENDING THE BUDGET UNTIL YOU
GET A BUDGET THAT WILL PASS. >> WE'RE ON FOR .1.
RE-ADOPTING THE BUDGET, NOW THAT YOU HAVE REDUCED THE REVENUE DOWN, NOW YOU NEED A NEW RECORD VOTE TO ADOPT THE
BUDGET. >> SO WE'RE ENTERTAINING A MOTION TO ADOPT THE BUDGET, ORDINANCE NUMBER, THE REST OF THAT SENTENCE, WHOEVER WANTS TO MAKE THAT MOTION.
>> IT NEEDS TO BE READ. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE OF APPROPRIATIONS OF THE CITY OF HUTTO THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH 2025, THE CITY OF HUTTO FOR THE 2024-25 FISCAL YEAR PROVIDING FOR CLAWS AND LOW CONVENIENCE
CLAUSE. >> DOES IT HAVE TO CITY
ORDINANCE NUMBER? >> ORDINANCE NUMBER ] I BELIEVE I STARTED WITH THAT.
>> OKAY, WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, DO WE HAVE
>> SECOND BY COUNCILWOMAN KOLAR. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.
>> COUNCILMAN THORNTON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILWOMAN KOLAR? >> AYE.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMAN THOMPSON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMAN PORTERFIELD? >> AYE.
>> MAYOR SNYDER? >> AYE. MOTION PASSES, 7-0.
>> YOU DO NOT HAVE TO DO FOR .2 BECAUSE WE'RE NOT RAISING
[4.3. Conduct a public hearing and related items in consideration and possible action to approve Ordinance No. O-2024-059 of the City of Hutto, Texas, levying Ad Valorem taxes for the use and support of the municipal government for the City of Hutto for the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 (Alberta Barrett) ]
TAXES ABOVE NO NEW REVENUE. >> ITEM 4.3, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND RELATED ITEMS IN POSSIBLE ACTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER ZERO HUTTO, TEXAS, LEVYING AD VALOREM TAXES FOR THE USE IN SUPPORT OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE CITY OF HUTTO FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025. SO, WHAT IS THE DEAL
ON THAT ONE? >> YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE, YOU
GOT TO >> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
OVER THE PUBLIC HEARING FIRST.
>> IS ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO COME UP TO SPEAK, WE WILL OPEN UP THE HEARING AT 1:28 A.M. ON
SEPTEMBER 13TH. >> GOOD MORNING, I THINK. I'VE BEEN TAKING NOTES TONIGHT, JUST MAKING, MOST OF WHAT HAPPENED.
I WANT TO FIRST THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER, FOR ATTEMPTING TO BE REASONABLE IN ALL OF THIS. IN ATTEMPTING TO BE A MODERATE PERSON IN ALL OF THIS. THAT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED.
IT'S NOT EASY TO GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO SPEAK UP LIKE THAT.
THAT IS APPRECIATED. I MOSTLY JUST HAVE GENERAL STATEMENTS THAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH EVERYONE HERE, WITH THOSE WHO ARE MAYBE STILL WATCHING, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S CRAZY ENOUGH TO STILL BE UP WATCHING THIS, AND ALSO TO THOSE WHO ARE WE WATCHING THIS IN THE MORNING WITH SOME COFFEE WHICH I WISH I HAD RIGHT NOW. SO, I WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS. BECAUSE A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN SAID, A LOT OF MISCONCEPTIONS, A LOT OF DEMONIZATION OF GOVERNMENT, A LOT OF DEMORALIZATION OF OUR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS WHO WORK SO HARD TO BRING POLICY TO LIFE IN THIS CITY. WHICH I THINK IS REALLY UNFAIR. AND THIS WHOLE NO NEW REVENUE THING, WE'RE A GROWING CITY AND THERE'S NO WAY TO STOP THAT, IF ANYBODY HERE THINKS THAT THEY HAVE THE
[06:30:03]
POWER TO STOP THE GROWTH IN THE CITY, YOU'RE WRONG. WE'RE GOING TO SEE THAT WHEN WE HAVE NO MONEY WHEN WE HAVE A RAINY DAY, AND WHEN SOMETHING PREPARED FOR THOSE THINGS AND THAT IS PART OF CARING FOR OUR CITIZENS AND MAKING SURE WE ARE PREPARED SO WHEN THINGS DO HAPPEN, WHEN ICE STORMS HAPPEN, WHEN LITIGATION HAPPENS, SO THAT WE HAVE THIS BACKUP FUND TO BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE EXPENSES. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID THAT I WANT EVERYBODY TO KEEP IN MIND, ALL OF YOU WHO ARE HERE AND ALL OF YOU WHO ARE WATCHING THE RECORDING LATER ON, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID HERE. ABOUT TAXES GOING UP, AND ANYBODY WHO WOULD VOTE FOR TAX INCREASE ARE SOCIALISTS OR WHATEVER. THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY IS TRYING TO DO. I'M A REGULAR MOM, I HAVE THREE KIDS, I'VE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS, I MAKE AN AVERAGE INCOME, I'M NOT RICH, I'M NOT MAKING A TON OF MONEY, I'M RAISING THESE KIDS TO BE GOOD PEOPLE, GOOD CONTRIBUTORS TO OUR SOCIETY. YOU HEARD MY DAUGHTER SPEAK TODAY, SHE'S INCREDIBLY INTELLIGENT, SHE'S GOING TO DO A LOT FOR THIS CITY WHEN SHE GROWS UP, WHICH SHE LOVES THIS CITY. AND MY KIDS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ME. WHENEVER I THINK ABOUT OUR TAXES GOING UP, I'M NOT IMMEDIATELY GOING TO THROW ALL OF YOU UNDER THE BUS AND ACCUSE YOU OF BEING A BIG GOVERNMENT AND ACCUSE YOU OF TRYING TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF MY POCKETS, I'M GOING TO LOOK IN MY POCKETS AND SEE WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME. WHAT AM I SPENDING ON? BECAUSE I'M NEVER GOING TO SKIMP ON PROVIDING FOR MY CHILDREN. AND I'M NEVER GOING TO SKIMP ON PROVIDING FOR THEIR WELFARE. I'M NOT GOING TO SKIMP ON THE DEPARTMENTS THAT KEEP THEM SAFE, THAT REGULATE OUR ROADS, THAT REGULATE OUR SCHOOLS, THAT REGULATE OUR PUBLIC SAFETY. SO, I'M JUST SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE HERE A LITTLE BIT POWERLESS, BUT THIS WHOLE, ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO RAISE THE TAX RATE IS EVIL , YOU'RE WRONG. THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY HERE IS TRYING TO DO, WE WANT TO SEE HUTTO THRIVE, WE WANT TO SEE EVERYONE DO WELL AND A LOT OF US DIP INTO , DO YOU PARTICIPATE IN MEDICARE, IN SOCIAL SECURITY? ARE YOUR KIDS IN PUBLIC SCHOOL? DO YOU USE THE POLICE, EMS, FIRE, STATE PAID TUITION, VETERANS BENEFITS? ALL OF THAT IS PAID BY TAX DOLLARS. IF I WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING, PEOPLE ARE SAYING IF RAISING THE TAX RATE MAKES PEOPLE SOCIALISTS, THAN ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF MAKES YOU A SOCIALIST, TOO BY WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING. THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY IS TRYING TO DO. I ALSO WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT OUR CITY MANAGER. WE HAVE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS HERE, THE CITY MANAGER IS HERE TO PREPARE AND MANAGE THE BUDGET AND ADVISE THE CITY COUNCIL AND ENFORCE OUR ORDINANCES. THIS IS A COUNCIL MANAGER, A FORM OF GOVERNMENT, IT IS NOT A MAYOR COUNCIL FORM OF GOVERNMENT. WE NEED TO TRUST OUR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS JUST LIKE WE TRUST OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS.HOPEFULLY WE WANT TO TRUST THEM THAT THEY KNOW HOW TO RUN THE DEPARTMENTS, THAT THEY KNOW WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE, THEY KNOW WHAT THEIR BUDGET NEEDS ARE, THEY KNOW WHAT THEIR PERSONNEL NEEDS ARE. SO, I JUST REALLY WANT EVERYBODY TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, AND UNDERSTAND THAT NOBODY IS TRYING TO DO ANYTHING TO ANYBODY HERE, IF ANYTHING WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE HUTTO IS PREPARED IN THE FUTURE, AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE A STRUGGLING DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE WE MADE DECISIONS TODAY THAT ARE GOING TO PIGEONHOLE US INTO MAKING TOUGH DECISIONS IN THE FUTURE. I DON'T THINK THAT THREATENING PEOPLE'S JOBS AND SAYING I'M GOING TO SNATCH THIS JOB, THAT JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAKE MORE CUTS, MAKE MORE CUTS RUN GOING TO SNATCH JOBS, THAT'S AWFUL. THAT'S NO WAY TO RUN THE GOVERNMENT. THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE COMMUNICATION. I NOTICED WHEN ALL OF YOU WERE VOTING MORE PRODUCTIVELY , YOU ARE DOING IT WHEN YOU ARE COMMUNICATING, AND I DON'T MEAN WHEN YOU'RE BEING PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE AND SASSY, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY COMMUNICATING, ASKING QUESTIONS, SEEKING CLARIFICATION AND UNDERSTANDING. THAT IS WHAT IS NEEDED WHEN YOU'RE HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER AND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM OTHER THAN JUST WANTING TO DIG YOUR HEELS IN AND BE RIGHT, THAT IS NOT THE WAY THAT WE RUN GOVERNMENT.
SO I'M EXHAUSTED. I REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE TO SHARE, BUT, I REALLY HOPE THAT MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO KEEP EVERYONE IN CONSIDERATION.
THERE'S PEOPLE THAT DON'T HAVE TIME TO BE ON FACEBOOK GOING OFF ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE MAD ABOUT. LET'S NOT FORGET THAT WHEN IT COMES TO ANY SORT OF REVIEW, BECAUSE WHAT PEOPLE SAY ABOUT YOU ON FACEBOOK THOSE ARE REVIEWS. PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO LEAVE A NEGATIVE REVIEW THAN THEY ARE TO SAY POSITIVE THINGS, SO I'M GOING TO SAY THIS. I'M REALLY PROUD OF YOU FOR STICKING IT THROUGH, AND FOR BELIEVING IN WHATEVER
[06:35:04]
IT IS THAT YOU BELIEVE IN, AND FOR BEING HERE, BECAUSE IT IS EXHAUSTING. AND I GET IT, BUT JUST LIKE YOU ARE HERE, EVERYBODY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS HERE. EVERYBODY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS HERE, SO YOU CANNOT THREATEN THEIR JOBS, YOU CANNOT THREATEN THEIR INCOMES, YOU CANNOT THREATEN THEIR BENEFITS, YOU CANNOT THREATEN THOSE THINGS. THESE PEOPLE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE MAKING THIS CITY ACTUALLY RUN.NOT YOU. YOU SET THE POLICY. THEY RUN THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SIDE OF THINGS. THEY BRING IT TO FRUITION. THEY MAKE IT HAPPEN. AND THEY WORKED REALLY HARD TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
SO IT'S REALLY DISHEARTENING TO SIT HERE AND LISTEN TO PEOPLE TALK ABOUT CUTTING THIS AND CUTTING THAT AS IF IT NOTHING. MAYBE TO YOU IS NOTHING, TO THEM IT'S NOT NOTHING. TO SEE THE DISAPPOINTMENT IN PEOPLE'S FACES THAT THEY'RE HEARING HOW THEIR DEPARTMENT IS BEING GUTTED, THAT IS DISGUSTING. AND IT'S REALLY EMBARRASSING AND SHAMEFUL. AND I'M SITTING HERE PAST 1:00 A.M., I DIDN'T GET TO TALK MY KIDS INTO BED AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I'VE NEVER GOTTEN INVOLVED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL, WHY I HAVE NEVER RUN. BECAUSE OF MY KIDS. BUT TONIGHT, THEY TALKED THEMSELVES INTO BED, I DIDN'T GET TO BE THERE. AND ALL THESE PEOPLE, THEY DIDN'T GET TO TAKE THEIR KIDS IN EITHER AND NEITHER DID ANYBODY APPEAR THAT HAS KIDS. WE'RE ALL HERE FOR THE SAME PURPOSE, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MOVE FORWARD, THAT WE XL. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. NOT TO DRIVE FORWARD PERSONAL AGENDAS. NOT TO BE RIGHT. NOT TO GET VOTES. NOT TO BE POPULAR, NOT TO BE LIKED, WHATEVER IT IS THAT Y'ALL ARE GOING FOR UP HERE. THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE, THINK ABOUT OUR FUTURE, THINK ABOUT OUR NEEDS. AND I MAY NOT BE IN CITY COUNCIL OR READY TO RUN OR WHATEVER, BUT YOU BETTER BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE ARE WATCHING. PEOPLE ARE WATCHING, AND PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT EVEN BE ALL THAT AFFECTED BY ANY SORT OF INCREASE, PEOPLE WHO MAYBE ARE OVER 65, AND THEY GET TO DEFER A PORTION OF THEIR TAXES, OR THEY GET A TAX EXEMPTION, OR THOSE WHO HAVE VA DISABILITY THAT GETS TO WRITE OFF THEIR TAXES. LET'S TALK TO THE PARENTS, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RAISING KIDS, BECAUSE I, FOR ONE, WOULD GO WITH ] TO MAKE SURE MY KIDS HAVE WHAT THEY NEED. SO I'M STRUGGLING TO PAY MY BILLS LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE, I'M STRUGGLING TO PAY MY BILLS LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE MY KIDS GO WITHOUT. AND I'M NOT GOING TO SIT APPEAR AND BE SASSY AND BE PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE AND TRY TO BE FUNNY. THIS IS REALLY SERIOUS, AND YOU ARE IMPACTING PEOPLE'S LIVES. MAYBE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. I REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH ELSE TO SAY TO ANY OF YOU. BUT, WHATEVER WE HAVE GOING ON, ACCUSING HER CITY MANAGER OF THINGS, OF COLLUSION, WE CONSIDER PURE AND SAY THAT ABOUT ANY OF YOU, BECAUSE WE SEE IT. AND ASSUMPTIONS ARE MADE AND THINGS ARE SAID, JUST LIKE PEOPLE ARE MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT YOU, PEOPLE MAKE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT YOURSELVES AS WELL. SO WE'RE HERE AND WE'RE ALL TIRED, WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR SIX HOURS, WE'RE ALL HUNGRY AT THIS POINT. WE'RE ALL TIRED OF THIS POINT. BUT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. CAN WE PLEASE CONTINUE ON WITH MORE RESPECTFUL DISCOURSE, AND BE MORE PRODUCTIVE INNER CONFLICT AND NOT JUST COMBATIVE. AND I DON'T HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE. >> FOR THE RECORD, WOULD YOU MIND STATING YOUR NAME, PLEASE?
>> MY NAME IS BEATRICE. >> THANK YOU.
>> I'M JUST GOING TO CONTINUE THE COMMENTS FROM THE REGULAR MOMS. WE'RE RAISING KIDS HERE, ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU CALL ARE FOR WHAT YOU DID, I THINK THAT WAS TRULY BRAVE. WE ALL KNEW COMING INTO THIS THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE LIKE THE MAYOR AND THE PEOPLE THAT HE'S ROUNDED UP TO SIT ON HIS LAP AND DO HIS BIDDING WHICH IS DISAPPOINTING, DAN. WE'RE NEVER GOING TO THINK ABOUT WHAT THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO REALLY WANT, WHAT THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO REALLY NEED. THE BEST THING I CAN DO WITH MY TIME, WE HAD SOFTBALL PRACTICE AND WE'RE ALL TRYING TO LIVE OUR LIVES AND THINK ABOUT WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE COMMON GOOD. I STRUGGLE TO PAY MY BILLS JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
TO MY NEIGHBORS POINT. BUT OUR FAMILY IS WILLING TO STRETCH AND BUDGET FOR THE COMMON GOOD. IF THAT'S FIVE DOLLARS MORE A MONTH, $20 MORE A MONTH, MOST OF THE PEOPLE HERE IN HUTTO ARE GOOD PEOPLE, AND WE HAVE SOME EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE SELF-SERVING, BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO, THIS IS WHY I'M HERE. I LOVE MY COMMUNITY, I'M PROUD OF WHAT WE'VE CREATED HERE. IT'S IMPORTANT -- UNFORTUNATE THAT
[06:40:01]
THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE CONCEITED AND SELF-SERVING AND STUBBORN AND ABOUT GETTING THEMSELVES BACK AMADEUS AND HOLD ONTO POWER INSTEAD OF THINKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE. IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW YOU TRY TO PAINT IT, IT'S STILL A PIG.YOU'RE A PIG FOR WHAT YOU'VE DONE HERE TONIGHT. IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING. TO MY POINT, THE BEST THING I CAN DO TONIGHT IS TO REMIND THE PEOPLE OF HUTTO WHAT HAS HAPPENED HERE TONIGHT.
AND THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE THAT POWER BACK FROM PEOPLE LIKE THESE THREE APPEAR BY NOT CONTINUING TO SUPPORT THEM. NOT CONTINUING TO ENABLE THEM, NOT CONTINUING TO VOTE FOR THEM. EVERYBODY HAS A VOTE, AND IT MATTERS, AND I WANT TO REMIND ALL OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS HERE, ALL OF THE STAFF WHO HAS BEEN DISPARAGED, ALL OF THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, ALL OF YOUR NEIGHBORS, REMIND THEM WHAT HAPPENED HERE TONIGHT. AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY WHO CAN VOTE IN HUTTO ABSOLUTELY SHOWS UP AND VOTES AND GET THIS PERSON OFF THE DAIS AND MAKE SURE THAT ANYBODY WHO CONTINUES TO ENABLE HIM
GOES WITH HIM. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.
>> GOOD MORNING. BRANDON DELEON. JUST REAL QUICK, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING THE TIME TO GO THROUGH THE BUDGET LINE BY LINE, I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO ASK DEPARTMENT HEADS AND WHAT THEY'RE SPENDING ON. I DON'T BELIEVE INAPPROPRIATE SPENDING SHOULD BE ALLOWED, THAT BEING SAID, I LOVE THE CONFLICT, UNLIKE OTHER PEOPLE. I APPRECIATE IT. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE IT. DIFFERING VIEWS, IF YOU GUYS WERE ALL THINKING THE EXACT SAME, YOU NEVER GET ANYTHING DONE. SO, AGAIN, I APPRECIATE IT. I'M GOING TO BE HERE MORE OFTEN, I HAD TO VOLUNTEER FOR A FEW THINGS BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, I APPRECIATE THE CITY STAFF TAKING THEIR TIME AS WELL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER? >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STATE THAT WHENEVER COUNCILMEMBER CLARK MADE THE MOTION TO PASS THE BUDGET, AS WE NEGOTIATED IT DOWN, THAT IT PASSED 4-3. THERE WERE THREE MEMBERS THAT VOTED AGAINST THE BUDGET, COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON, MAYOR SNYDER AND COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. AFTER SOME BACK AND FORTH CAUSED BY MYSELF, IT WAS BROUGHT BACK UP, THE MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON TO PASS THE BUDGET WITH THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE, BEFORE, AGAIN, I WILL REITERATE, I DO RESPECT YOUR POSITION AND THEIR COMMITMENT, I SAID MY PIECE ON MAINTAINING OUR CURRENT TAX RATE AT $.42, THAT VOTE OCCURRED AND THE BUDGET WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. SO, EVERY SINGLE PERSON APPEAR, ALL SEVEN OF US HAVE AGREED ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET.
THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ANYMORE. SO EVERYBODY AGREES WITH EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THAT BUDGET, SO I'M PROUD OF US FOR WORKING TOGETHER AND WE DID IT. AND IT MAY NOT BE WHAT I WANTED, AND MAYBE WHAT YOU WANTED, BUT IN THAT BUDGET, WHAT WE SET, EVERYBODY VOTED YES TO IT. THAT WAS SEVEN, IT WAS UNANIMOUS. THAT WE SUPPORT THIS BUDGET, THAT WE ARE GOING TO PUT FORTH FOR FISCAL YEAR 25. THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK AMONGST MY FELLOW COUNCILMEMBERS. THANK YOU, STAFF FOR BEING HERE, THANK YOU TO THE PUBLIC, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND SHOWING PASSION AND BEING INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS AND EVERYTHING. I APPRECIATE IT, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A ROLLER COASTER OF A NIGHT ESPECIALLY FOR ME, BUT, I WANTED TO LAY EVERYTHING OUT ON THE LINE, AND I DID JUST THAT. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
>> I NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THERE ANY OTHER COUNSEL COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT
WISHES TO SPEAK THAT HASN'T? >> MY NAME IS TRAVIS BOWSHER. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE HERE, EVERYONE, FOR STICKING IT OUT THIS LONG. I'VE BEEN THROUGH BUDGETING AT WORK, IT'S HARD.
AND, WE'RE IN A POSITION WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO GET EVERYTHING WE WANTED, JUST BY SHUFFLING STUFF AROUND, BUT HERE, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. AND EVERYONE HERE MADE HARD DECISIONS. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 1:45 A.M. ON SEPTEMBER THE 13TH.
[06:45:09]
>> MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE OF
>> AND YOU HAVE TO SPLIT OUT YOUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS AND DEBT SERVICE, SO THAT YOU WOULD BE RECOMMENDED MOTION IS TO APPROVE ORDINANCE E- 2024 MINUS 059 SETTING THE TAX RATE AT 0.3995533, THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS RATE AT 0.925 AND THE DEBT SERVICE ON THE BONDS AT 0.333 --
>> 0.133. >> 0.133632, AND THAT'S IT, YOU'RE NOT INCREASING TAXES, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY THAT PHRASE. THAT YOU'RE INCREASING TAXES. THAT WOULD BE YOUR
>> MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER THOMPSON? IS THERE A SECOND?
>> IS THIS ONE WHERE YOU HAVE TO READ THE ITEM?
>> YOU SECOND IT? DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?
>> FOR ME, I WON'T BE BUILDING IN FAVOR OF THIS, I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS ULTIMATELY WHERE WE WOULD END UP. I'M AWARE OF HOW THE VOTE WILL GO, BUT BASED ON MY PERSONAL PRINCIPLES, I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS.
>> JUST CLARIFYING, WE JUST HAD
>> TAX RATE. >> WE JUST HAD THE SPEECH ABOUT BEING 7-0 ON THE BUDGET, SO, WHAT IS IT WE'RE VOTING ON, THE TAX RATE THAT GOES TO THE BUDGET? WHAT IF WE VOTE NO ON THIS? WHAT IF FOUR OF US SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS?
WHAT HAPPENS? >> WE HAVE TO START OVER. I
DON'T KNOW. >> WE JUST VOTED 7-0 TO APPROVE THE BUDGET, NOW WE'RE STARTING TO VOTE NO, SO I'M TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT. >> BASED ON MY PRINCIPLES, LIKE, YOU GUYS ASSIGNED A PLEDGE FOR NO NEW REVENUE. AND I RESPECT THAT, BUT, I DID NOT SIGN THE PLEDGE AND I'VE MADE MY CASE FOR MAINTAINING THE PROPERTY TAX RATE.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BEFORE I VOTE NO, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, WHAT AM I GETTING MY VOTE ON.
>> DOTTIE, LET'S SAY THIS ABOUT DOESN'T GET FIVE, IT TAKES FIVE VOTES TO SET A RATE ABOVE NO NEW REVENUE, CORRECT? AND THIS VOTE, IS NO NEW REVENUE. SO, LET'S SAY NOBODY VOTES FOR IT. 0-7, WE ALL SAY NO.
>> THEN WE HAVE TO RE-ADVERTISE
>> DOESN'T IT JUST GETS SET AT NO NEW REVENUE ANYWAY?
>> AT THE END OF THE MONTH. BUT I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS STILL
TIME TO RE-ADVERTISE. >> SO WE'D HAVE TO RE-ADVERTISE AND DO EVERYTHING? I GUESS.
>> DOTTIE, COULDN'T THEY, THEY COULD STILL VOTE ON SOME RATE, WHATEVER RATE THEY SET. THEY COULD STILL DO THAT TONIGHT.
>> THE QUESTION WAS, WHAT HAPPENS,
>> IF THEY DON'T , IF THEY VOTE ON SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET THEN WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND CORRECT
THAT IN THE BUDGET. >> HOW ABOUT WE VOTE AND THEN IF THAT'S A PROBLEM WE CAN ADDRESS IT.
>> NOW I DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR IT AFTER WE ALL VOTED 4-0 AND NOW I DON'T WANT TO IF A BUNCH OF PEOPLE HAVE SECOND.
>> AS LONG AS FOUR OF YOU AGREE ON NO NEW REVENUE.
>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE 60%. >> ABOVE NO NEW REVENUE. THIS
IS NO NEW REVENUE. >> OKAY. I STAND CORRECTED.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS?
>> I WILL JUST SAY THAT I'M WITH COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR, MY VOTE WOULD BE TO MAINTAIN AND FUND SOME THINGS THAT I WANTED TO FUND, AND GIVE OURSELVES MORE BUFFER IN THE RESERVES.
THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MY PREFERENCE. BUT I AM NOT INTERESTED IN STARTING OVER AND CAUSING A RUCKUS FOR STAFF, SO I'M GOING TO BE VOTING YES ON THIS EVEN THOUGH, IN PRINCIPLE, I WOULD'VE PREFERRED WE WERE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>> I CAN, THAT'S REASONABLE FOR ME, I SAID MY PIECE. I WILL
[06:50:03]
BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS TAX RATE. AND TO FOLLOW THE SENTIMENTS OF, THE RATIONALE. COMING FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM.>> IF I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON THE BUDGET AGAIN I WOULD JUST ASK COUNCIL, DON'T SET THE HIGHEST RATE. DON'T DO THAT. BECAUSE I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE, IT GOT VOTED NOT TO EXCEED THE HIGHEST RATE, THAT'S THE BUDGET THAT WENT THROUGH, AND I'M NEVER GOING TO VOTE FOR A RATE, THE HIGHEST THAT I NEVER GOING TO VOTE FOR. SO AS I SAID IN THE BEGINNING, HAD YOU GONE WITH A TWO, THREE, FOUR, 5% INCREASE, THAT'S ONE THING. YOU COME OUT OF THE GATE WITH 15%, YEAH. AM I HAPPY WITH HIS BUDGET? HECK NO. THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF WE LEFT OUT, WE'RE NOT GETTING OUR ROADS DONE. ALL RIGHT. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE, WE'VE STILL GOT EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DO.
>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMAN THOMPSON? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILWOMAN KOLAR? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMAN PORTERFIELD? >> AYE.
>> COUNCILMAN THORNTON? >> AYE.
>> MAYOR SNYDER? >> AYE. MOTION PASSES, 7-0. YOU
[5. EXECUTIVE SESSION ]
GUYS WANT TO DO EXECUTIVE SESSION OR WAIT UNTIL NEXT>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY NEW INFORMATION TONIGHT. WAS NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE THE MEMO BECAUSE OF THAT.
>> I'M GOING TO READ THE ITEM BECAUSE I GOT SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT THAT. 5.1, RECEIVED LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY AND DELIBERATE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.087 DELIBERATION REGARDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS RELATING TO CLAIMS RELATED TO THE REDESIGN OF THE MEGA SITE SPINE ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. I UNDERSTAND WE'RE SPENDING $5000 A DAY FIGURING THIS OUT. RIGHT?
>> YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.
>> HEARING NOTHING ELSE? WE'LL ADJOURN THE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.