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

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

AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE WEAPONS, REAPPOINTMENTS AND/OR REMOVALS TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, TASK FORCES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS AND AREA GOVERNMENT

APPOINTMENTS. >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY NAMES TO PRESENT TONIGHT, BUT WE DID RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF RESIGNATION FROM OUR ETHICS REVIEW BOARD , SO IF THERE ARE ANY CITIZENS LISTENING OR WATCHING WHO ARE INTERESTED IN SERVING THE CITY OF HUTTO AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO SERVE ON THE ETHICS BOARD, WE LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING AN APPLICATION AND I BELIEVE THAT'S THE ONLY OPENING WE HAVE . IS THAT CORRECT?

>> ALSO , THE LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE , WE DID MEET TO TALK ABOUT AND DISCUSS TOPICS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO COUNSEL . THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE IS MADE UP OF COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON , GORDON AND MYSELF. THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WE WILL BE BRINGING A

POTENTIAL RESOLUTION IDEAS TO THE COUNCIL. >> WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE

SUBCOMMITTEE. THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE THINGS. >> I WILL BRING THAT UP END OF

THE MEETING. >> ANY DISCUSSION ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS? WE NOW MOVE ON TO

[9.1. Presentation and update on the Justice Center Facility (CIP F02-2024) Planning and Programming Update (Matt Rector)]

PRESENTATION AND UPDATE ON THE JUSTICE CENTER FACILITY , PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING

UPDATE. >> THIS IS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WE AGREED THAT WE WOULD DELAY. THE OTHER ITEM IS THE PRESENTATION , WHICH WAS SCHEDULED FOR LATER.

>> FOR THE CITY MANAGER , I WAS LATE IN ASKING HIM, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO GO VERY LATE TONIGHT AND WITH PRESENTATIONS WHERE I'M ASKING IF THOSE THINGS CAN BE MOVED.

[10.1. Consideration and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-072 amending the Capital Improvement Budget for the fiscal year of October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025. (Alberta Barrett)]

CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER O-2024-072, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR OCTOBER 1, 2024 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2025.

[00:35:02]

>> THANK YOU . FOR THE RECORD, ALBERTA BARRETT, FINANCE DIRECTOR. THIS ITEM IS ON THE AGENDA, BECAUSE DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS WHEN THE BUDGET GOT ANALYZED, AND EXCLUDED OUR BUDGETS . A SOMEWHAT INCLUDED AND AT THIS POINT WE WANTED TO PRESENT THESE TO YOU AS WE DISCUSSED IN THE BUDGET PROCESS AND AMEND THE BUDGET TO INCLUDE THOSE. THE FIRST ONE IS THE SERIES 22 ON THE TAX PORTION. WE ARE ESTIMATING ABOUT 300,000 IN INTEREST INCOME . IT IS FOR THE EAST-WEST ARTERIAL AND WE ARE BUDGETING 6 MILLION AS EXPENDITURES IN 2024 2025 .

ONCE IT'S COMPLETED, WE SHOULD HAVE ALMOST 300,000 REMAINING FROM THAT. THE NEXT ONE THAT WAS EXCLUDED WAS 17, SERIES 23 A GENERAL OBLIGATION FUND BOND ISSUANCE. HERE, WE HAVE THE INTEREST OF ABOUT 589,300 EXPENDITURES FOR FRITZ PARK AT 8.3 , WHICH WILL LEAVE US AT $3.7 MILLION AFTER THE PROJECT. THE NEXT IS 31, WHICH IS OUR SERIES AND THIS ONE WAS ISSUED IN JUNE . WE HAVE BUDGETED FOUR PROJECTS OUT OF THE ISSUANCE WITH THE LEGENDS OF HUTTO DRAINAGE, RECONSTRUCTION , EXCHANGE BOULEVARD AND INNER LOOP INTERSECTION AND COUNTY ROAD 132 BETWEEN COUNTY ROAD 133. THOSE PROJECTS TOTAL $9,430,000 AND AFTER ALL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES , WE WILL HAVE PROJECTED AS A FUND BALANCE. MOVING ONTO THE NEXT WAS ISSUED IN JUNE AND IT'S THE SERIES 24 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND ARE TWO PROJECTS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE ISSUANCE. COUNTY ROAD 137 ECKSTEIN 60 AND LIVE OAK RECONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF IT. THOSE TOTAL OF 15,600,004 76 AND THOSE PROJECTS ARE FINISHED AND WE SHOULD USE ALL OF THOSE . JUST VERY LITTLE LEFT. THE NEXT IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING FOR THIS YEAR FOR SERIES 25 AND IT INCLUDED FIVE PROJECTS . T7 WAS ON A ROAD 132 OVER 179. T 21 IS ALLIANCE AND EXPANSION . THE NEXT ONE WAS LIMITED LOOP FROM INNOVATION AND THE FINAL ONE AT COUNTY ROAD 132 TO FM 1560. ORIGINALLY, WE PROPOSED ALL OF THOSE AT 29,000,237 837 AND I INCLUDED AMENDED, BECAUSE BASED ON OUR DISCUSSIONS IN THE LAST MONTH OR SO, WE WERE GOING TO PUT IT ON HOLD . THAT WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE BORROWING IN THIS COMING YEAR. THAT LOWERS THE POTENTIAL TO 22,900,000 . IF YOU RECALL, WE ARE DOING THE ENGINEERING STUDIES TO GET A MORE ACCURATE CONSTRUCTION COST . ON THAT NOTE, THOSE COULD BE REVISED UP OR DOWN BASED ON ESTIMATES OR STUDIES COMING UP WITH. THE NEXT ITEM IS OUT OF SELF-SUPPORTING ISSUANCES , WHICH IS THE UTILITY FUND , WHICH IS OUR SERIES CO AND THIS ONE WAS NEAR COMPLETION AND WE HAVE FOUR PROJECTS OR THREE PROJECTS REMAINING IN THE LITTLE OVER 4.2 MILLION. THAT WILL CONCLUDE THE FUND ISSUANCE. THE NEXT IS SERIES 24, WHICH IS FUND 58 AND THERE ARE SOME PROJECTS IN THERE. PROBABLY ABOUT 10 OR SO, WHICH

[00:40:06]

TOTALED 214,004,865 . WITH THE COMPLETION OF THESE PROJECTS AS BUDGETED, WE WILL HAVE ALMOST 6 MILLION THAT WILL GO TO OTHER WATER AND WASTEWATER PROJECTS AS YOU SEE FIT. THAT IS SO THAT

WE CAN AMEND BUDGETS AND INCLUDE THEM. >> QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL ? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE O-2024-072 AS PRESENTED.

>> DO HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY THOMPSON.

DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? >> THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE BUDGET DISCUSSION AND IT'S REALLY MORE OF A PAPERWORK ERROR OR TOOL ERROR WHERE IT DIDN'T GET

CAPTURED CORRECTLY AND BE SURE THAT WE ARE RECORDING IT. >> THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THIS.

EXACTLY. THEY WERE IN THE BUDGET WORKSHOPS THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THE BUDGET PROCESS.

AGAIN, IT WAS A TECHNICAL GLITCH WITHIN THE NEW BUDGETING SOFTWARE , SO NOW THAT WE KNOW WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES AND WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT. IT IS PAPERWORK TO GET IT OFFICIALLY

ADOPTED AND WE WILL UPLOAD THOSE TO THE BUDGET. >> WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM YOU BACK ON NOVEMBER 6TH, WHICH WAS BUDGET DIFFERENCES WITH RESPONSES AND EXPLANATIONS REGARDING BUDGET DIFFERENCES . IS THAT FROM US EMAILING YOU GUYS? WHAT GENERATED THAT ?

>> THAT WAS GENERATED BASED ON THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE ON SEPTEMBER 12TH . FROM THE BUDGET THAT WE PROPOSED IN THE GENERAL FUND VERSUS CHANGES MADE AT THE MEETING . I THINK THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS AS TO EXACTLY WHICH LINE ITEMS WERE CHANGED AND WHAT THEY WERE CHANGED TO, SO THAT'S WHY I SENT THAT TO DOCUMENT WHAT WE RECORDED AND HOW WE GOT TO THE NUMBER FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE FINAL ADOPTED NUMBER FOR THE GENERAL FUND.

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS NOT ON YOU, BUT LESS AS A COUNCIL AND THAT WAS A MEETING WHERE EVERY FIVE MINUTES, THERE IS A CALL TO VOTE AND WE WERE VOTING , THEN WE CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THE BUDGET AND WHAT I FIND IS THAT WE DID A MONTH OF NOTHING , THEN WE TRY TO CRAM ALL BUDGET WORK . AGAIN, EVERY FIVE MINUTES WE ARE CALLING A BOAT AND WE END UP PASSING THE BUDGET AND SUBSEQUENTLY WE START ASKING QUESTIONS . WHAT HAPPENED THERE AND A MONTH LATER, AND NOT THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE CAUGHT THIS, BUT WHEN WE GO LINE BY LINE AND IF WE SPENT MORE TIME AND WE ALL READ AND QUESTION EVERYTHING, THEN WE MAY HAVE UNCOVERED THINGS AND HAVE LESS QUESTIONS. IT FELT LIKE OBAMACARE WHERE IT WAS PAST IT AND WE WILL FIGURE OUT WHAT'S IN IT LATER, THEN WE FIGURED OUT LATER . I HOPE NEXT YEAR WE SLOW DOWN AND TAKE YOUR TIME TO READ IT AS A COUNCIL , ASK QUESTIONS IN PUBLIC . A GOOD QUESTION ABOUT QUESTION, THE PUBLIC OUGHT TO KNOW WHAT WE ARE QUESTIONING . THREE PEOPLE DO A GREAT JOB ON A BUDGET, BUT YOU HAVE SEVEN MORE PEOPLE LOOKING AT IT ASKING QUESTIONS AND IT'S BETTER TO FIGURE IT OUT BEFORE WE PASS THE BUDGET AS OPPOSED TO AFTER. THAT IS A STATEMENT. THAT'S NOT TO KNOCK ON YOU GUYS AND IT WILL BE TAKEN AS IT IS. THIS IS ONE OF OUR MOST IMPORTANT JOBS. ANY TIME WE PUSHED TOO FAST , IT'S A LITTLE EMBARRASSING FOR US TO COME BACK IN NOVEMBER AND TAKE CARE OF THE ACTUAL AGENDA ITEM . THE BUDGET TO INCLUDE SOME OF THE CAPITAL BUDGETS, WHICH WE SHOULD HAVE GONE AND ISSUES WITH THE SOFTWARE, WHICH I GET.

I HOPE THIS PASSES, BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED SPENDING THE MONEY AND WE GOT TO GET OUR

BOOKS AND ALL OF THAT. >> ME FOR THE RECORD SO YOU ARE AWARE THAT ALL OF THE DATA WAS VISIBLE AND IT WASN'T UNTIL WE EXPORTED IT INTO THE PDF. THAT EFFECTIVELY IS WHAT THE ISSUE

[00:45:02]

IS. IT WASN'T THE BUDGET WE TALKED ABOUT, BUT ALL OF THE THE MAP WAS INCLUDED. IT WAS WHEN WE PUBLISHED THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENT , THESE DID NOT PUSH OUT AND IT GOT LOST IN THE SHUFFLE AND NOW WE REALIZE IT AND WE FIX IT AND MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

>> I THINK THE BULK OF MY COMMENT WAS PARTNER EDUCATION . WHAT WAS THIS? WE ASK THE

QUESTION. >> I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE, BUT IT'S MORE OF , WE SHOULD KNOW AND IN MY OPINION FREQUENTLY OUTVOTED AND I'M HAPPY WITH THAT. WE AS A COUNCIL WHEN WE PASS A BUDGET AND SAY I, WE SHOULD KNOW EVERYTHING IN THERE. YOU DON'T PASS A BUDGET AND COME BACK TWO WEEKS LATER AND SAY, WHAT'S THIS ITEM FOR $8825? THOSE ITEMS ARE THIS. IF WE HAD A QUESTION, THAT SHOULD BE IN THE BUDGET WORKSHOP AND YOU DON'T PASS A BUDGET AND QUESTION, BECAUSE ONE DAY IT WILL BE IN THERE AND IT WILL BE 8820 5000 . WE JUST RAISED PEOPLE'S TAXES . THAT IS ALL I'M SAYING . AS I GET DONE TALKING , FEEL FREE TO ARGUE WITH ME, BUT I HAVE AN OPINION AND THEY DON'T MIND BEING THE ONLY PERSON WITH AN

OPINION. I DIDN'T BRING THAT QUESTION UP. >> I WANT TO MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION . WE WERE ALL SITTING UP HERE WITH IT OPEN ON OUR SOFTWARE AND YOU SAW IT ALL ON THE PAGE. IT'S ONLY AFTER WE TOOK THE BOAT AND THEY PRINTED OUT THE PDF TO POST TO THE WEBSITE TO POST THAT THIS IS THE BUDGET AND THAT IT WAS MISSING. WHETHER WE HAD OVER FIVE DAYS , THREE WEEKS OR OVERNIGHT , THE SAME PROBLEM WOULD HAVE HAPPENED, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN UNTIL THEY PRINTED WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT VIRTUALLY UP HERE. FOR YOU TO INSINUATE THAT BECAUSE WE TOOK A BOAT IN ONE NIGHT THAT IT WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THIS. IT'S FACTUALLY UNTRUE. THEY CAN'T TRUST THE PUBLIC OFFICIALS THAT HAD BEEN ELECTED . THAT IS THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH YOUR STATEMENT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

>> WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET SOFTWARE ISSUE. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ARE CONFUSED BY THAT. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE QUESTION ABOUT THE ATRIA BANQUET $10,000. WAS THIS FOR THE CHRISTMAS BANQUET? DOES THAT MEAN NO BANQUET WILL BE HELD THE? THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? IS THAT A SOFTWARE ISSUE.

>> IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ORDINANCE?

>> WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET AMENDMENT AND EVERYTHING IN THE BUDGET. ANY QUESTIONS ON

THAT? >> I'M HAPPY TO REPLY. IT'S MY EMAIL THAT THE MAYOR IS INSINUATING AND HE'S TRYING TO BAIT ME INTO SAYING SOMETHING. YOU WERE COPIED ON THE EMAIL THAT I SENT AND YOU KNOW IT WAS FOR ME. WHAT I WAS ASKING FOR IS I CAN SHOW YOU THE NOTES THAT I HAVE IN THE BUDGET DISCUSSION AND MY NOTES WERE ALL OVER THE PLACE AND WE KEPT GOING BACK AND FORTH AND CHANGING MOTIONS AND PASSING THINGS , THEN RESENDING MOTIONS AND PASSING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. WHAT I WANTED WAS CLARIFICATION COMPARING MY NOTES WITH WHAT WAS ACTUALLY PAST. THAT IS THE REASON I WAS ASKING FOR THE EMAIL WAS ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION . IT WASN'T BECAUSE I PASSED A BUDGET THAT I DIDN'T READ AND DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I PAST AND NOW I'M ASKING -- THAT'S A COMPLETE AND TOTAL MISCHARACTERIZATION BY THE MAYOR FROM THE EMAIL I SENT. THAT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME YOU HAVE DONE THAT. HOLD ON. I COPIED THE ENTIRE COUNCIL BY MISTAKE AND I SAID WORKS. I SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT. I WAS ASKING TO MAKE SURE HOW THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING. IS THIS REALLY WHAT HAPPENED? ALSO, THERE IS A LOT OF AMBIGUITY FROM PART OF STAFF SAYING THAT WE CUT OUR BUDGET BY THIS AMOUNT ON THIS ITEM AND I WANTED TO KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT WE CUT. I WANTED TO KNOW MORE SPECIFICS AND THEY SAID THAT WE CAN CUT OUR ANNUAL BANQUET DOWN BY 10 GRAND . WHAT DID WE LEASE? WHAT ARE WE CUTTING OUT? ARE WE NOT FEEDING OUR EMPLOYEES ANY MORE? ARE WE CHANGING THE VENUE? WHAT WAS THE ACTUAL DECISION BEHIND WHAT WAS SAID? THERE WERE THINGS THAT WERE CUT AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE FROM WHAT I REMEMBER IN THE DISCUSSION , THIS IS THE REASON IT WAS CUT. IS THAT CORRECT? I WAS CONFIRMED YES OR NO. AGAIN, IT'S A MISCHARACTERIZATION OF THE EMAIL AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT IF YOU WANT TO PUT A SEPARATE AGENDA ITEM TO TALK ABOUT IT IN DETAIL. IT'S NOT EVEN ON THIS ITEM.

[00:50:09]

>> IT'S ABOUT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET AND IT SOUNDS LIKE A TOPIC HAS BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD ON THE GENERAL FUND. ARE WE APPROPRIATELY DISCUSSING THINGS?

>> CONFINE YOUR MAX TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET. >> THANK YOU.

>> ALSO, NO BACK AND FORTH. >> IT'S TOUGH IF I SAY SOMETHING. WE HAVE TO HAVE

SOMEBODY RESPOND. >> WHEN YOU MISCHARACTERIZE COMMENTS, YOU'LL GET A

RESPONSE. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >>

[11. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]

>> MOTION PASSES 7-0. >> NEXT, THE CONSENT AGENDA. ANY ITEMS YOU WISH TO REMOVE?

>> 11.1 AND 11.2. >> 11.5 AND 11.6. >> TO APPROVE ITEMS 11.3,

THROUGH 11.11 AS PRESENTED. >> MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION BY ALBERTA BARRETT -- THORNTON . DISCUSSION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

[11.1. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-296 authorizing the City Manager to execute Work Authorization #3 with Archer Western for Construction Manager At Risk (CMAR) services associated with the South Wastewater Treatment Plant (SWWTP) expansion to 6.0 MGD in the amount of $106,823,875.11 (CIP WW-06 2023). (Matt Rector)]

ACTION ON THE ORDINANCE 2024-296. OPERATION CITY MANAGER AND ARCHER WESTERN FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOUTH WASTEWATER TREATMENT

PLANT AS DAVITA BDP EXPANSION IN THE AMOUNT OF $823,875.11. >> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE

A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 296 AS PRESENTED. >> MOTIONED BY CLARK AND SECOND

. ANY DISCUSSION? >> I JUST WANT THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS SAID ABOUT $300 MILLION IN THE BANK AND WHAT'S BEING SPENT? ONLY ONE THIRD IS BEING SPENT. I WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE TOOK OFF THE DEBT AND IT'S BEING SPENT. I JUST WANT THAT TO BE OUT THERE AND THIS IS WHAT IS DEFINITELY NEEDED FOR THE CITY TO GROW BASED ON REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT'S GOOD THAT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. >> THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR THIS TO BE POLLED, BECAUSE IT IS A NINE FIGURE CONTRACT AND WE ARE NOT THAT BIG OF A CITY THAT WE CAN JUST CONSENT ON OVER $100 MILLION. I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO GIVE UP US A BREAK BRIEF PRESENTATION. YOU CAN APPROVE ONE $100 MILLION CONTRACT AND NOT TALK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE APPROVING.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES YOU CAN SAY IN A MEETING. >> HE MADE THAT ONE COME UP.

DON'T BE SO SURE. >> TO HAVE THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS ATTACHED?

>> FOR THE RECORD, CITY ENGINEER, MATT RECTOR. WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM WESTERN AND GARVER, SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE ACTUAL DESIGN ENGINEER OR CONTRACTOR, THEY WILL BE WORKING ON THIS THIRD GMP. THIS IS THE THIRD OF THREE , AS YOU ARE AWARE . WE HAD ESTIMATED THE TOTAL PROJECT COST TO BE ROUGHLY $180 MILLION AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT BREAKDOWN AND I KNOW THIS ONE IS OVER $100 MILLION AND I THINK THE FIRST ONE -- I KNOW THAT THE PROJECT IS COMING IN AT $172 MILLION , WHICH IS INCLUDING ABOUT $35 MILLION OF

[00:55:04]

CONTINGENCY THAT THE CITY HAS IN CASE WE NEED IT. THIS IS A GMP TYPE CONTRACT , SO WE SHOULD NOT GET ANY CHANGE ORDERS. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE WILL FIND THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE CONTINGENCY FUNDS. WITH THAT, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND COME UP, BECAUSE THEY PUT THE SLIDES TOGETHER AND I WILL BE FLYING BY A LITTLE BIT.

THIS IS THE THIRD GMP. >> YOU REALLY NEED TO SAY THOR, WRITE?

>> YES . DID YOU BRING YOUR HAMMER? PACKAGE ONE WAS THE LONG WAIT AND EARLY SITE, THEN PACKAGE THREE WAS THE TANKS FOR SECONDARY CLARIFIERS . PACKAGE FOUR WITH WORK AUTHORIZATION AND ELECTRICAL. THIS IS THE THIRD WORK AUTHORIZATION, WHICH IS BASICALLY EVERYTHING ELSE WE

HAVEN'T COVERED. >> THAT IS THE TIMELINE FOR YOU. I WILL FLY THROUGH THESE.

DO YOU WANT TO JUMP UP HERE WITH ME IN CASE I FLY OVER SOMETHING?

>> THIS IS HOW WE CAME UP WITH THE COST OF THE WORK AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS. IT GIVES US THE TOTAL WORK AUTHORIZATION. IT IS ABOUT 35 OR $32 MILLION FOR OWNERS CONTINGENCY.

>> IT IS 3.5 IN THE WORK AUTHORIZATION. >> TOTAL OF THE $172 MILLION?

>> IT IS ABOUT 5% TOTAL AND THERE ARE TWO CONTINGENCY BUCKETS AND THE CONTINGENCY, WHICH IS FOR ITEMS THAT WE FIND IN THE FIELD THAT THE CONTRACTOR CAN PULL FROM. THESE ARE UNKNOWNS AND A LOT OF PACKAGES WERE BIG AND WE WERE STILL WORKING ON THE PROJECT.

YOU CAN START CONSTRUCTION WHILE WE ARE STILL IN DESIGN. THAT IS THERE CONTINGENCY BUCKET TO PULL FROM AS WE FIND THINGS IN THE FIELD THAT WE NEED TO FIX AND WE CAN PULL FROM THAT AND CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCE. WE WILL HAVE THE FIRST TWO WORK AUTHORIZATIONS THAT WERE APPROVED BY COUNCIL AND ANOTHER CONTINGENCY ALLOWING 3.1 MILLION WITH THIS WORK AUTHORIZATION. IF THOSE FUNDS ARE NOT USED, THEY GET RETURNED TO THE CITY, SO IT'S A BUCKET OF MONEY SET ASIDE FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO USE. WE ALSO INCLUDED AN OWNERS CONTINGENCY AND THIS WAS OWNER PREFERRED CHANGES, SO AS WE GO THROUGH DESIGN AND IF THEY DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT AND WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE AND THE FUNDS SET ASIDE APPROVED BY COUNCIL THAT WE CAN DRAW FROM AND YOU CAN ONLY DO THAT WITHIN WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE OWNER AND IT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT TO CARRY ON A CONTINGENCY IN A CONTRACT AND WE WENT PRACTICE -- IT WAS $180 MILLION AND WE KNEW WE WERE GOING TO COME RIGHT TO THAT BUDGET AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO CARRY ANY MORE DOLLARS THAN WE NEEDED, BUT THE FINAL WORK AUTHORIZATION CAME IN AROUND $172 MILLION, SO I SUGGESTED THAT WE CARRY THROUGH .5 MILLION ABOUT 2% OF THE CONTRACT VALUE IN OWNER CONTINGENCY JUST SO WE HAVE IT IN CASE WE NEED IT. AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE FOR OWNER DIRECTOR CHANGE ORDERS. THE BIGGEST ITEM WHERE WE COULD SEE AS THE OWNER CONTINGENCY AND WE ARE ON A FAST SCHEDULE AND HOUSES ARE FLYING UP LEFT AND RIGHT AND THERE HAVE BEEN TALKS OF POTENTIALLY IF WE EXCEED THE FLOWS OF CURRENT PLANT AND ROOF WE CAN BRING INTERIM PACKAGE PLANT, WE WILL PULL FROM OTHER $.5 MILLION AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL AND WE CAN ONLY USE IT WITH WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITY, THEN IF IT'S UNUSED

IT GOES BACK TO THE CITY AT THE END OF THE PROJECT. >> LOOKING AT THE DRAWINGS, CMAR CAME IN WITH AN ESTIMATE, $181 MILLION. OUR TOTAL COST, THIS INCLUDES THE $3.5 MILLION OF OWNER CONTINGENCY IS AT 176 MILLION. WITHOUT THE OWNER CONTINGENCY, WE WERE SITTING AT 172.5. WE SUGGESTED CARRYING AN ORDER CONTINGENCY JUST IN CASE

[01:00:02]

WE NEEDED. WE CAN ONLY USE IT WITH WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITY. SO, WE ARE STILL UNDER THE CITY BUDGET. WE HAVE OWNER CONTINGENCY, WE HAVE CMAR CONTINGENCY AND, LIKE MATT SAID, THE BULK OF THE WORK HERE IS WORK AUTHORIZATION, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WASN'T APPROVED HASN'T BEEN APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL YET APPEARED THE FIRST ITEM IS WORK AUTHORIZATION ONE AND WORK AUTHORIZATION TO GO, LONG LEAD ITEMS WE WANTED TO START PICTURING BEFORE WE WERE FINISHED WITH DESIGN SO LONG LEAD ELECTRICAL GEAR. WE WANTED TO START EARLY SITE WORK. THIS WORK AUTHORIZATION THREE IS EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THOSE AND WILL ALLOW THE CMAR TO COMPLETE THE JOB. I THINK THAT IS EVERY

SLIDE. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR

THE RECORD. >> JEFF MEADOWS, PROJECT MANAGER WITH GARVER LLC.

>> I MAY BE THE ONLY ONE THAT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THIS. WHEN YOU SAY OWNER CHANGES APPROVED BY THE CITY IS THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS TO APPROVE IT OR WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED ALL OF THIS AND SO OUR DISCRETION IS GONE, IT IS NOW STAFF CAN MAKE A $2 MILLION DECISION? WHO IS

APPROVING THAT AT THIS POINT? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT HAS TO BE ONE WEIGHT OR THE OTHER.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT IS CHANGES, CHANGE OF SCOPE, THOSE GO TO CITY COUNCIL. IF IT IS NOT, NOT IF IT IS LIKE THIS MACHINE WE BOUGHT, THIS COMPONENT WE THOUGHT WAS GOING TO COST THIS AND THIS SYSTEM WORKS BETTER AND THAT IS AN UP CHARGE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD MAKE IT TO CITY COUNCIL. IF IT IS A CHANGE TO ANYTHING, IT WOULD. LIKE THE EXAMPLE OF BRINGING IN A PACKAGE PLANT, THAT WOULD BE A CITY COUNCIL ACTION.

>> SO, AND UP CHARGE ON WE DON'T WANT TO USE THIS TYPE, THERE IS A FANCIER PUMP WE WANT TO USE, IT IS AN EXTRA $4 MILLION, STAFF CAN MAKE THAT CALL ON THEIR OWN? I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS. ANYTIME WE START TALKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS SITTING OUT THERE AND THE CONSULTANT IS LIKE THIS IS UP THERE FOR THINGS COME UP WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. WHO IS APPROVING? TYPICALLY WHAT I SEE IS WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED 181, 631, 135, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS. AND SO WE HAVE ALREADY, I FEEL WE HAVE GIVEN OUR AUTHORITY UP ON ANYTHING AND STUFF JUST HAPPENS UDY MADE ME THINK MAYBE THERE IS A WAY TO PEEL SOME OF THIS BACK. WE AGREED TO THE PLANT, AGREED TO WHAT IT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. I DON'T WANT OTHER CHANGES, I WANT WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO BUILD AND IF WE CAN SAVE, HOW MUCH IS THE UNDER CHANGE

CONTINGENCY? >> 3.5 MILLION. >> IF WE CAN SAVE 3.5 MILLION, IF THERE IS A BUCKET OF MONEY THAT CAN BE USED FOR OTHER THINGS, I COULD WALK DOWN THERE AND SAID I WOULD LIKE ALL THAT WAS PAINTED ORANGE, COULD YOU DO THAT? $50,000, DONE. OKAY, GO DO IT APPEARED TO ME, I DON'T KNOW. BUT, AS YOU GUYS ARE WELL AWARE, YOU SEEM TO BE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT THINK THAT WAY BUT THAT IS ALL RIGHT. I DIDN'T REALIZE WE HAD A CONTINGENCY WHERE SOMEONE IN THIS BUILDING CAN DECIDE WHERE 3.5 MILLION GHOSTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE IN FRONT OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED IT.

>> JEFF, THAT EXAMPLE THAT YOU GAVE ABOUT A PACKAGE PLANT, WOULD THAT, ANY IDEA WHERE THAT

WOULD GO, RIGHT NOW, POTENTIALLY? >> YES, SORRY.

>> GO AHEAD. >> IT WOULD GO ON-SITE. CURRENTLY THE FACILITY IS RATED FOR 2.5 MGD. IF WE GOT TO A POINT WHERE WE WEREN'T READY TO ACCEPT FLOWS, WE WOULD NEED TO BRING OUT A HALF MILLION GALLON PACKAGE PLANT TO GIVE US MORE ELBOWROOM, YOU CAN RENT THAT EQUIPMENT, WE WOULD PUT IT ON SITE AND IT WOULD DISTRICT THE SAME DISCHARGE POINT, IT WOULD OPERATE UNDER THE SAME PERMIT UNDER THE SAME EFFLUENT QUALITY PERMITS.

>> JUST WITH ALL OF OUR PAST ISSUES WITH PACKAGE PLANS, IT IS GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND THIS WOULD GO ON YOUR SITE ALREADY SUITABLE FOR WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON WITH THIS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. IT WOULDN'T DETER ANY NEIGHBORHOODS OR BE IN SOMEONE'S BACKYARD. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, JEFF. SO, CAN YOU SPEAK TO I GUESS WHERE THE CITY IS AT WITH TC Q AND OUR CAPACITY I GUESS MAXIMUMS OR APPROACHING THAT CURRENTLY AT THE SOUTH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT? I KNOW OBVIOUSLY MORE HOMES, BUSINESSES ARE BEING PUT ON THEM, THAT IS WHAT IS STRESSING THIS. THIS IS WHAT IS LEADING TO THE NEED FOR THIS. WHERE ARE WE AT WITH TCQ IN RECEIVING THOSE NOTICES THAT WE ARE REACHING CAPACITY OR AT THAT

[01:05:03]

CAPACITY? >> IT IS THE 75/90 RULE. WHEN YOU ARE AT 75 CAPACITY FOR THREE MONTHS, YOU HAVE TO BE DESIGN. A 90%, YOU HAVE TO BE AT CONSTRUCTION. WE ARE NOT YET AT 90%. WE ARE AHEAD OF THE BALL, PICKING AT CONSTRUCTING BEFORE WE HIT 90%. THAT IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE OF THE RATE AT WHICH YOU GUYS ARE GROWING. I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS OFFHAND. WE DO, WE GET THE CONTRACT OPERATOR, WE GET QUARTERLY UPDATES FROM THEM ON THEIR LOADINGS AND FLOW INTO THE PLANT. WHAT WE DO IS WE PUT A LINEAR REGRESSION TO SAY HERE IS YOUR CAPACITY FROM A HYDRAULIC STANDPOINT, HERE IS YOUR CAPACITY FROM A SOLIDS LOADING STANDPOINT, AND THEN WE PUT A LINEAR TREND AND WE HAVE THE DAY OF WHEN WE ARE GOING TO BE OUT OF CAPACITY. WE UPDATE THAT EVERY THREE MONTHS. ONCE WE GET CLOSE, RIGHT NOW, IT SHOWS US BEING REALLY CLOSE TO OUR ESTIMATED SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION DATE OF FEBRUARY, 2027, RIGHT AROUND THE TIME OUR LINEAR REGRESSION MODEL AS SOON AS WE ARE GOING TO RUN OUT OF CAPACITY. WE ARE RIGHT THERE BUT WE ARE WATCHING IT LIKE A HAWK AND IF WE FEEL THERE IS A THREAT WE RUN OUT OF CAPACITY BEFORE THE PLAINTIFF SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE, WE WILL HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH MATT AND RICK AND PATRICIA INSTITUTE THE HERE IS WHERE WE ARE AT, HERE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND PULL A GAME PLAN TOGETHER FOR THEM. WE ARE

KEEPING A VERY CLOSE EYE ON IT. >> PERFECT, THANK YOU. I WANTED THAT INFORMATION TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD WORKSHOPS ABOUT THE GRID AND THE CLAIMING OF IT AND JUST SO THAT IT MAKES SENSE ON WHERE WE ARE AT. THANK YOU SO

MUCH. >> SURE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> CAN YOU WALK, WALK ME THROUGH AGAIN, YOU SAID THERE IS AN OWNER CONTINGENCY, WHICH IS THE CITY, AND THERE IS A CMAR CONTINGENCY AS WELL, SO WHEN WOULD EACH OF THOSE KICK IN, WHEN WOULD YOU USE THE CMAR CONTINGENCY VERSUS THE OWNER CONTINGENCY?

>> OWNER CONTINGENCY IS OWNER PREFERRED CHANGE. WE DESIGNED AROUND PUMP X AND NOW YOU WANT A NEW FANCIER PUMP, IT IS AN UP CHARGE SO WE PULL FROM OWNER CONTINGENCY OR AND AND FOR SAME THING LIKE A PACKAGE PLANT. THE CMAR CONTINGENCY IS TIED TO A RISK REGISTER, WHICH IS, I BELIEVE IN THE WORK AUTHORIZATION . ESSENTIALLY, THERE'S A LOT OF RISK ITEMS THAT ARE OUTLINED. THIS ISN'T A HARD BID JOB. THEY ARE PULLING TOGETHER WORK PRACTICE BEFORE WE ARE DONE WITH DESIGN SO THEY ARE COMING TO YOU GUYS STATING THIS IS OUR GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE BUT WE ARE IN THAT MAXIMUM GUARANTEED PRICE, WE ARE ALLOWING OURSELVES SOME CMAR CONTINGENCY TO PULL FROM IF WE NEED IT AND THOSE ARE JUST THE UNKNOWNS ASSOCIATED WITH BIDDING THINGS BEFORE THE DESIGN IS COMPLETE. IT IS TIED TO INDIVIDUAL ITEMS IN THE RISK REGISTER. IF ARCHER WESTERN WANTS TO PULL FROM THAT CMAR CONTINGENCY, THEY HAVE TO TAKE IT TO AN ITEM IN THE RISK REGISTER AND THEY HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FOR THE PROCESSING.

THOR, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT QUESTION >> MAKE SURE YOU STATE YOUR

NAME. >> FOR THE RECORD, SORRY BENSON, ARCHER WESTERN. I THINK OUR RISK REGISTER IS PROBABLY CLOSER TO 500 ITEMS. IT CAN BE ANYTHING FROM CONDITIONS THAT WE DIDN'T EXPECT, IF WE GET INTO HEAVY GROUNDWATER, IF WE HAVE A VENDOR THAT GOES OUT OF BUSINESS DURING PROCUREMENT, IF THERE IS INCREASED COSTS, JUST STUFF THAT WOULD NOT BE EXPECTED AT THE TIME WE PUT TOGETHER OUR PRICING. WE HAVE ALL THE ITEMS LISTED ON THE RISK REGISTER AND WE HAVE FORMULA AS TO WHAT THAT VALUE COULD BE AND WHAT WE COULD PULL OFF OF IT. JUST TWO VERY SMALL EXAMPLES OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN THAT COULD ALLOW US TO REQUEST

MONEY OUT OF THAT CONTINGENCY AMOUNT. >> NEXT QUESTION IS MORE FOR THE CITY MANAGER. SO, WHAT STEPS WOULD WE NEED TO TAKE TO PUT SOME PARAMETERS AROUND WHEN

THE OWNER CONTINGENCY CAN BE USED AND UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS? >> I DON'T KNOW, FRANKLY.

>> CAN I? I WAS GOING TO ADDRESS THAT, ACTUALLY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO ADD A CLAUSE TO THE RESOLUTION REQUIRING THAT ANY USE OF THE OWNERS

CONTINGENCY REQUIRES CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. >> WHAT I WANT TO DO IS REMOVE

AMBIGUITY. >> DOES ANYONE WANT TO SECOND AMENDMENT?

>> SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH. SO, THAT IS REALLY WHAT I WANT TO DO. I WANT TO REMOVE ANY AMBIGUITY AT ALL SO THAT WE KNOW APPEAR WHAT WE ARE DOING AND WHAT THE PARAMETERS ARE.

>> MY QUESTION IS AT WHAT POINT, THE I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT BUT WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL TO SLOW DOWN THE PROJECT FROM AN AGENDA ITEM, TWO WEEKS LATER, THEN GET APPROVAL FOR THAT? OR, IS IT GOING TO BE, IN YOUR OPINION, YOU ARE GOING TO ENOUGH TO BE LIKE WE NEED TO GET A PACKAGE PLANT, WE NEED TO COME, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE?

>> I WOULD SAY IT DOES HAVE THE POTENTIAL OF SLOWING DOWN APPROVAL OF ITEMS THAT CITY IS

[01:10:07]

ASKING FOR, CHANGES THAT ARE BEING MADE. >> YOU GUYS ARE PROFESSIONALS, RIGHT? SO, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT YOU COULD COME TO WORK ON A MONDAY AND BE LIKE OH MY GOD, WE NEED A $3 MILLION OWNER CHANGED TODAY AND IF WE DON'T GET THIS TODAY YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE TIME? YOU GUYS SURELY WOULD NO CAPACITY IS GETTING THERE ON THIS ISSUE IS COMING UP, OKAY, THEY ARE MEETING A WEEK FROM THURSDAY, LET'S GET IT, SURELY YOU GUYS WITH NO, WE DON'T HAVE SURPRISES LIKE THAT ON THE OWNER CHANGE, NOT ON A, YOU HAD SOME ROCK YOU DIDN'T KNOW WAS THERE AND HAD TO EXCAVATE, WE ARE TALKING OWNER CHANGES.

>> FOR EXAMPLE, IF DURING THE SUBMITTAL PROCESS OF A PIECE OF THE CLIMATE, A DECISION IS MADE TO GO WITH A DIFFERENT HIGHER-LEVEL STAINLESS, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN OWNER CHANGED AND WHAT THE DOCUMENTS. IF WE HAVE TO WAIT A MONTH OR TWO WEEKS TO GET ON THE DOCKET FOR CITY COUNCIL, THAT IS DELAYING THE APPROVAL UNDER THE LEASE OF THAT INCREMENT,

POTENTIALLY. >> LET'S AGREE THAT THAT WOULD BE STAFF AT THE LAST MINUTE MAKING A CHANGE, STAFF PUTTING, THE CITY MANAGER CAN PUT ANYTHING ON THE AGENDA. IT WOULD BE A STAFF DELAY, NOT NECESSARILY, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A SURPRISE ITEM COMING UP. IF WE WERE DOING OUR JOBS ON OUR SIDE, WE WERE TO SAY HEY, WE WANT WHATEVER PIECE OF EQUIPMENT, WE WANT AN UPGRADE, IT SHOULD BE ON US, RIGHT, TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL AND SAY WE

WANT TO SPEND THE NEXT $2 MILLION BECAUSE THIS THING? >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

>> IF IT IS THAT IMPORTANT, WE ARE 72 HOURS AWAY FROM THE NEXT MEETING.

>> IF I HAVE TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING BECAUSE THERE IS A CHANGE, THEN --

>> IF YOU ARE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT, THAT IS PERFECT. >> THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST

QUESTION. >> ANY POTENTIAL ORDER, THAT COULD LEAD TO SIGNIFICANT

DELAYS. >> I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THIS SUGGESTION. BUT, THERE ARE PROFESSIONALS IN THE BUSINESS THAT ARE WORKING ON THIS PROJECT SO THE SEVEN OF US, I'M NOT QUITE SURE OUR KNOWLEDGE OF BUILDING A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND THE NEEDS, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS COMPANY, THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WOULD BE OUTLANDISH WITH WHAT IS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT. I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE MAYBE $50,000 WAS SENT, WHICH IS WHAT THE CITY MANAGER IS, SOMETHING, SOME KIND PARAMETERS, WHICH IS WHAT HE IS ABLE TO APPROVE WITHIN THAT, CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL, I THINK THAT MIGHT WORK MAYBE BETTER. I'M NOT QUITE SURE OF COST OF THINGS. FOR EACH AND EVERYONE TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL, I DO THINK THAT IS, CAN DEFINITELY GO DOWN AND PUSHES THE PROJECT OUT FOR

AND WHAT IS NEEDED FOR OUR COMMUNITY. >> MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION?

>> YES OR. >> IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WOULD BE ASKING FOR

THE MONEY FOR VARIOUS CHANGES? LIKE THE CONTRACTORS? >> YES.

>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OWNER CHANGES, WHICH WOULD NOT BE THEM COMING TO US, IT WOULD BE MET SAYING HE WANTS SOMETHING DIFFERENT, JAMES WALKING SAYING HE WANTS SOMETHING DIFFERENT. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT THAT THEY HIT SOMETHING IN

THE FIELD THAT WAS UNKNOWN, THE UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS. >> THAT IS THE CMAR.

>> I THINK THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT -- >> THE CHANGES FROM THE CITY TO

THE CONTRACTOR. >> THE CITY DECIDES TO WALK IN AND GO WE WANT A DIFFERENT COLOR, STAMPED, CONCRETE MY RIGHT IN SAYING THAT CUSTOMER CONSISTENT CONTRACTORS, THIS IS

YOU MAKING CHANGES. >> RIGHT. BUT, AGAIN, KIND OF TO THE POINT. ONLY CAN APPROVE UP TO $50,000.00 ANYWAY. IF IT IS $50,000.01, IT IS GOING TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL

REGARDLESS. >> AND THAT WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED YOU SPENT 3.5 MILLION.

>> IT IS NOT THE SAME. >> WHY HAVE THIS IN AT ALL? >> THE CONTINGENCY?

>> IF IT HAD TO COME BEFORE US ANYWAY, WOULDN'T IT JUST BE A CHANGE ORDER?

>> IT IS A BUDGET ITEM. >> IF IT IS IN THE CONTINGENCY, IT IS, I DON'T THINK OF THE CHANGE ORDER CANCELLATION WORKS THE SAME. I THINK THAT HELPS YOU. TWO, IT IS BUDGETED SO WE KNOW THE MONEY IS SITTING THERE SHOULD THOSE ITEMS COME UP SO CITY COUNCIL HAS A FUNDING SOURCE TO PAY FOR IT. THAT WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH IT. AS MUCH AS I WOULD LOVE THE NOTION

[01:15:03]

OF BUILDING A 3.5 MILLION DOLLAR HIPPOPOTAMUS WITH ITS TAIL AND POINTING TOWARD THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OR WHATEVER, THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS.

>> WE HAVE DONE STUFF LIKE THAT IN THE PAST . >> PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE IN HERE. WE ALREADY HAVE A 50,000 AGREEMENT. THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING LICENSE BY THE STATE OF TEXAS MY SENIOR MANAGER, SENIOR ENGINEER, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING FOR THE CITY. HE'S NOT GOING TO ASK TO DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE OVER 50,000, IT'S GOING TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL ANYWAYS. I KNOW WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED IT.

>> MATT, HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE IT IF IT HADN'T COME UP? HOW WOULD YOU HAVE HANDLED IT

ANYWAY QUESTION >> I WOULD HAVE HANDLED IT IN LINE WITH THE PURCHASING POLICY OF THE CITY, WHICH IS BASICALLY PER THE PURCHASING POLICY, IT IT IS LESS THAN $10,000 A SENSE, AS IT APARTMENT DIRECTOR, OF THE AUTHORITY TO SIGN OFF ON IT. IF IT IS ABOVE MY AUTHORITY, I HAVE TO GO TO THE CITY MANAGER AND HE HAS UP TO $50,000.00. ABOUT THAT, IT WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL. AND, I LOOK AT THE CONTINGENCY AS A BUDGETING PROCESS, NOT A CHANGE ORDER PROCESS. WHEN WE HAVE A CHANGE ORDER ON A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY SITTING THERE SOMEWHERE, I HAVE TO SCRAMBLE AND GO TO ALBERTA AND SAY ALBERTA, CAN YOU SHAKE THE CUSHIONS AND FIND EXTRA MONEY FOR ME SO THAT I CAN TAKE THIS CHANGE ORDER TO CITY COUNCIL? THE CONTINGENCY BASICALLY SAYS WE HAVE THIS MONEY SET ASIDE, WE ARE NOT PLANNING ON SPENDING IT BUT, IN CASE WE NEEDED, IT IS ALREADY THERE.

>> IS IT IN YOUR UNDERSTANDING THIS AMENDMENT WILL TAKE THE MONEY AWAY?

>> NO. >> THE WAY I INTERPRET IT IS IT TAKES AWAY MY DISCRETIONARY.

THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD BE. >> WHICH SEEMS WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT OVERREACH BY SEVEN

LAYPEOPLE IN WASTEWATER DESIGN BUT THAT IS JUST ME. >> THE REASON I ASKED FOR IT WAS BECAUSE MY ASSUMPTION, BASED ON THE ANSWERS THAT THE MAYOR WAS GIVEN, THE CONVERSATION THAT WAS PICKING HAD, WAS THAT YOU COULD AUTHORIZE A $3 MILLION CHANGE AND IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BEFORE COUNSEL. THAT IS WHY I WAS SITTING I WOULD NEED TO REMOVE THE AMBIGUITY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, AND THE CITIZENS, UNDERSTAND WHO CAN APPROVE UP TO WHAT AMOUNT. IF YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT TENDERLY AND GOES UP TO YOU AND 50 GRAND GOES UP YOU AND $50,001 COMES TO US, I DON'T THINK WE NEED IT ANY MORE. THAT

GIVES ME THE CLARITY I WAS SEEKING. >> THAT IS THE PROCESS I WOULD FOLLOW BECAUSE THAT IS THE PURCHASING POLICY FOR THE CITY WE HAVE TO FOLLOW WITH

EVERYTHING WE DO. >> THERE WAS A WORRY THAT THIS WOULD BYPASS THE PURCHASING

POLICY. IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS DOES NOT. >> I DON'T

>> HAVE THE AMENDMENT CLARIFYING FOLLOWING THE PURCHASING POLICY .

>> FOLLOW THE PURCHASING POLICY? >> THAT IS FINE.

>> DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? >> NO.

>> WHOEVER YOU DID, I PUT DOWN. I HAD COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD AS A SECOND.

>> FOR THE PUBLIC AWARENESS, IT IS $50,000 WASN'T COMMUNITY. IT IS NOT 50,000 PER ITEM.

>> I MADE THE INITIAL MOTION , WE WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON THE INITIAL MOTION.

>> IT CAN BE TWO VOTES. >> ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? HEARING NONE, PLEASE

CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. >> AYE. >> TRAIN FOR.

>> AYE. >> AMENDMENT PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE AND HAVE ANOTHER APPEARED ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE OVERALL MOTION AS AMENDMENT ? ON THE 1295 ONE OTHER QUESTION, WHAT IS THE UNDERSTANDING COLLECTIVELY AS A GROUP, WHO IS SUPPOSED TO FILL THEM OUT? WHO IS CONTROLLING AND WHO IS INTERMEDIARY? I COULD TELL YOU WHAT THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION SAYS BUT I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS THINK BEFORE I SEE WHAT THEY SAY AND THEN WE

CAN -- >> I CAN INTO THE FIRST PART OF THE QUESTION. THE CONTRACTOR IS SUPPOSED TO FILL THEM OUT. AS FAR AS CONTROLLING AND INTERMEDIARY, THAT IS, I WILL

DEFER TO THE EXPERTS. >> WHO APPROVES THEM IN THE CITY?

>> LEGAL. >> THEY ARE SUBMITTED ON THE WEBSITE, A COPY IS IN YOUR PACKET. WHEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVES IT, THE CITY SECRETARY GHOST IN AND ACCEPT IT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY VERIFY WHAT THEY PUT IN. BUT, WE DO HAVE THE INFORMATION FROM THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION WEBSITE AND WHAT ALL THE

DEFINITIONS ARE, IF ANYBODY ASKS US A QUESTION. >> SAYS THE TECHNOLOGY, 11/14.

[01:20:07]

WHO ACKNOWLEDGES THE RECEIPT QUESTION >> SECRETARY STAFF OF THE CITY.

>> I'M GOING TO DRAG IT OUT TONIGHT BUT THERE IS NOT ONE INTERMEDIARY ON THIS. THAT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE. AND INTERMEDIARY WOULD BE AN ATTORNEY THAT NEGOTIATED A CONTRACT, UNLESS THESE FOUR PEOPLE NEGOTIATED THIS CONTRACT THEMSELVES, THERE WOULD BE AN INTERMEDIARY. FOR ME, THE WHOLE POINT OF THE 1295 IS TO FIGURE OUT, IS THERE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NEGOTIATING THESE DEALS, WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THESE DEALS AND THE TOPICS TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION SAYS THEY ONLY HAVE TO HAVE THE FOUR OFFICERS THAT ARE MOST HIGHLY COMPENSATED AS A CONTROLLING INTEREST. THE INTERMEDIARY IS AN INTERESTED PARTY, HAS AN INTERMEDIARY INTEREST IN THE CONTRACT IF A PERSON ACTIVELY PARTICIPATES IN FACILITATING A CONTRACT OR NEGOTIATING THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT WITH THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY, STATE AGENCY, THIS INCLUDES A BROKER COINCIDENTALLY AND INTERMEDIARY, AND ADVISOR, ATTORNEY, REPRESENTATIVE OF AN AGENT FOR THE BUSINESS ENTITY WHO MEETS THE CONDITIONS, THEY RECEIVE COMPENSATION FROM THE ENTITY FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION, THEY COMMUNICATE WITH THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY. I WOULD ASSUME IF AN ATTORNEY, WHOEVER NEGOTIATED THE CONTRACT WITH THE CITY, AND THEY ARE NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THE BUSINESS ENTITY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE ARE DOING THESE, THE WHOLE POINT OF THESE IS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT, I WANT THE CONTRACTORS TO BE LIKE MAN, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS. WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BID ON THIS ONE BECAUSE MY BROTHER IS ON THE CITY COUNCIL. IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS STUFF SERIOUSLY WE HAVE BEEN SUED ON THIS, WE EVEN HAD A LAW PASSED OVER THE 1295. I WOULD THINK THERE ALMOST ALWAYS IS GOING TO BE AN INTERMEDIARY, AT MINIMUM, ON A CONTRACT, UNLESS ONE OF THE FOUR HIGHLY COMPENSATED, NOT SOMETHING THESE GUYS AREN'T QUALIFIED, BUT UNLESS THEY NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT AND THEY SPOKE WITH MATT RECTOR HIMSELF. IF ANYBODY IS A CONSULTANT THAT DOESN'T WORK FOR ARCHER WESTERN CONSTRUCTION, AS I UNDERSTAND IT IN TALKING TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION, THEY HAVE TO BE AN EITHER INTERMEDIARY. THERE IS ONE COMPANY THAT DID IT RIGHT. TO ME, THEY TAKE IT SERIOUSLY.

THE REST OF THIS STUFF, THE REASON I THINK YOU GUYS OUGHT TO TAKE IT SERIOUSLY IS BECAUSE YOU, YOUR CONTRACT COULD BECOME NULL AND VOID IF YOU DON'T DO THIS QUICKLY. FOR $108 MILLION, I WOULD WANT THAT FILLED OUT IRONCLAD AND NOT HAVE A GUY LIKE ME COME UP AND START CHARGING YOU WHEN I FIND OUT HE LIKES THOR BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE COUSINS AND THAT IS THE REASON WE GOT ALL THE STUFF, IS TO MAKE SURE YOU NEVER TAKE THAT CHANCE, THE CITY MANAGER OR AN ENGINEER OR WHOEVER BECAUSE THE CITY HAS A HISTORY OF THESE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING. I'M GOING TO VOTE YES ON THIS ONE BECAUSE AT LEAST YOU PUT SOMETHING DOWN, SOME PEOPLE DON'T EVEN PUT ANYTHING DOWN. BUT, AS A STAFF, I MEAN, I'M GOING TO DRAG EVERYTHING OUT UNTIL I SEE WE ARE TAKING SERIOUSLY THE ONE LAW THAT PROTECTS THIS

ASSISTANCE FROM CONFLICTS. >> OUTLET RESPOND, IF I CAN. >> FROM OUR SIDE, FROM ARCHER WESTERN, WE DID NOT HAVE OUTSIDE COUNSEL, WE DID NOT HAVE, EVERY PERSON WHO NEGOTIATED THE CONTRACT WITH CITY STAFF IS A DIRECT EMPLOYEE OF THE COMPANY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING LEGALLY, AND INTERMEDIARY, WHO SHOULD BE LISTED ON THE FORM, WOULD BE SOMEBODY THAT IS NOT A DIRECT EMPLOYEE. WE DON'T HAVE, WE ARE A LARGE ENOUGH CORPORATION, WE HAVE IN-HOUSE ATTORNEYS, WE HAVE IN-HOUSE STAFF, WE DO OUR OWN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS. I DON'T BELIEVE WE FILLED THE FORM OUT INCORRECTLY. I BELIEVE THE FORM IS ACCURATE FOR WHAT

SHOULD BE ON IT. >> I AM GLAD YOU KNOW HOW TO FILL IT OUT AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING THOSE STEPS TO KNOW THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR STAFF KNOWS. SOME OF THESE LATER ON, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ANYBODY FILLING ANYTHING OUT. I DO APPRECIATE THAT AND I UNDERSTAND. I WORK FOR A COMPANY THAT HAS ALL IN-HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MAYOR TO MAKE ACCUSATIONS IN THE MATTER THAT HE JUST DID. AND, I THINK, FOR YOU TO HAVE TO COME UP HERE AND TRY TO DEFEND YOURSELF IN THAT WAY, I AM SORRY. I APOLOGIZE. I THINK THAT, I DON'T WANT TO SAY. OTHER THAN THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT AND MAKING SURE WE ARE DOING IT. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY. DO YOU FEEL WE ARE NOT TAKING OUR JOBS

SERIOUSLY? >> AS I SAID BEFORE, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY TO GO IN AND TRY TO VERIFY IF THERE IS INTERMEDIARIES IN THEIR COMPANY. ESSENTIALLY, IT IS THERE, IT IS THEIR BURDEN TO PUT THE INFORMATION ON THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION AND

[01:25:03]

THEY PRINT OUT THE FORM AND GIVE IT TO THE CITY. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT IN THE LOVE FOR US TO VERIFY ANYTHING. TYPICALLY WE DON'T. WE WOULD KNOW THAT THERE IS AN INTERMEDIARY THAT HAD NEGOTIATED, WE WOULD CERTAINLY QUESTION IT AS A STAFF.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THAT IS ENOUGH, THANK YOU.

>> FOR A LETTER OF, WE SEE A LITTLE DARK SPACE ON THE DATE OF BIRTH, WE HAVE HAD SOMEBODY RAISE THE ISSUE THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE PUTTING THAT IN THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. WE DO

HAVE A COPY OF THAT. >> I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL CONCERNS ON ETHICAL INFORMATION IN A SHED IN THE CITY HIRE AN ETHICS LAWYER IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES?

>> IT WOULD BE THE TEXAS ETHICS MISSION THAT SOMEBODY WOULD FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THEM AND THEY WOULD INVESTIGATE AND THEIR LAWYERS WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER THE FORM WAS FILLED OUT INCORRECTLY AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. IT IS NOT ANY ENFORCEMENT ON BEHALF OF

THE CITY. >> ALL RIGHT. ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION?

THESE CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

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

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

[11.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-194 authorizing the City Manager to execute an Individual Project Order (IPO) with WSB, LLC. in the amount of $410,791 for the Legends of Hutto Drainage Improvements project (D01-2024). (Matt Rector)]

>> AYE. MOTION PASSES 7-0. NEXT, WE HAVE ITEM 11.2 , CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2024-194 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER WITH WSB LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $410,791 FOR THE LEGENDS OF HUTTO DRAINAGE

IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 01-2024. >> SO, I ASKED THIS TO BE PULLED OUT BECAUSE I LIVE IN LEGENDS OF HUTTO. I FILLED OUT THE FORMS SO I DIDN'T KNOW, ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T VOTE ON THE APPROVAL OF , DO I NEED TO NOT VOTE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE EXPENDITURE?

>> THE FORM IS ON FILE. >> THOUGHT SO. I MEAN, I FELT IT LAST TIME. I DIDN'T KNOW IF I HAD TO DO IT AGAIN FOR THIS VOTE. I TOOK IT OFF THE ORIGINAL WHEN WE APPROVED THE PROJECT. THAT IS WHY IT HAS TO BE PULLED, I CAN'T VOTE ON IT.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION R 2024-194 AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? >> WHAT, I LOOKED THROUGH THIS, I CAN'T TELL WHAT DITCHES WE

ARE DOING AND WHICH ONES WE ARE NOT. >> IT IS THE MAP IN BLUE.

>> PART OF THAT WE ALREADY DID LAST YEAR. WHICH ONE ARE WE DOING?

>> SO, FOR THE RECORD, MATT RECTOR, CITY ENGINEER . THESE MAPS ARE IN YOUR PACKET. THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS SHOWING ALL OF THE DISLOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE LEGENDS OF HUTTO AS WELL AS POND LOCATIONS. THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED PHASE ONE. YOU CAN SEE THE PINK AND PURPLE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT COLOR THAT IS, PINK, PURPLE AND BLUE, THOSE ARE THE ENTIRE AREA THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THESE IMPROVEMENTS. THE BLUE AND PURPLE LINES BEHIND THOSE SHADES ARE THE ACTUAL DISLOCATIONS, ALONG WITH THE POND ITSELF THAT WILL BE

UPGRADED AS PART OF PHASE ONE. >> SOUTHSIDE, DIDN'T WE DO

THAT LAST YEAR? >> THERE WERE 50. >> YOU HAVE RECUSED YOURSELF.

>> I CAN DISCUSS. >> UNLESS YOU, LET ME ASK COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, DID WE NOT

DO ANY WORK ON THE SOUTHERN AND BY THE POND LAST YEAR? >> NO. IF YOU, DO YOU SEE, IT WAS HERE. WE DID THIS LITTLE SECTION HERE. WE WENT TO THAT POND DOWN THERE. DO YOU CONCUR?

>> THAT WAS MY PUBLIC WORKS AND NOT BY ENGINEERING OR OUTSIDE CONTRACTOR. I BELIEVE IT WAS TO ADDRESS SOME EROSION AND CAPACITY ISSUES. IT WAS AND WHAT THE FOCUS OF THIS PROJECT WAS, WHICH IS FIXING THE OVERALL ISSUE THROUGH THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> SOMETIMES I GET TOLD TO ASK YOU GUYS , PROFESSIONALS, THEN I AM SUPPOSED TO ASK THE

[01:30:01]

COUNCILMEMBER THE OTHER THINGS. ONE OTHER QUESTION, I'M JUST GOING TO ASK IT AND I APOLOGIZE FOR MYSELF BEFORE ANYBODY ELSE HAS TO TAKE THE TIME. THERE IS ONE PERSON THAT IS A CONTROLLING INTEREST ON THIS. I AM ASSUMING THEY NEGOTIATE TO THE CONTRACT AND THEY HAVE NO

OUTSIDE PEOPLE? >> WSB IS HERE. SHE IS THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE

PROJECT, SHE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION BETTER THAN I CAN. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING UP AND I'M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS, AND ME TO INSINUATE YOU SOMEHOW CHEATED US.

>> ANGELA POINTS, WSB SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER. THE PERSON LISTED ON THE 1295 IS THE CEO.

HE DID NOT NEGOTIATE THIS CONTRACT. I DID. I HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH MATT RECTOR

AND MS. DAVIS AND WITH OUR PROPOSED SOBS. >> NO OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL WAS

INVOLVED? >> NO SIR. >> GREAT JOB.

>> I'M WORKING ON IT. I DON'T WANT YOU, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO APOLOGIZE EVERY TIME I SPEAK. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON.

[*11.5. Consideration and possible action relating to Resolution No. R-2024-299 authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute documents for a Second Amendment to Contract for the Wholesale Delivery and Sale of Potable Water including the Groundwater Reservation by and between Recharge Water, L. P. and the City dated September 12, 2023 as amended by the First Amendment, dated December 10, 2023. (Legal)]

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASSES 6-0. NEXT, THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 11.5, ADMINISTRATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION RELATED TO RESOLUTION R 2024-299 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE DOCUMENTS FOR A SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR THE WHOLESALE DELIVERY AND SALE OF POTABLE WATER INCLUDING THE GROUNDWATER RESERVATION BY AND BETWEEN RECHARGE WATER LP AND THE CITY DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 2023 AS AMENDED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT DATED DECEMBER 10TH, 2023. I FORGOT TO PUT THE PAGE BUT I WANT TO SAY THEY DID A GREAT JOB. THEY HAD INTERMEDIARIES, THEY HAD A CONTROLLING INTEREST, THEY HAD THE WHOLE THING, NINE PEOPLE

WERE LISTED. >> MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2024-299.

>> SECOND. >> SPONSORED BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

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

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

[11.6. Consideration and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-073 approving a two-year extension of the contract for solid waste and recycling collection services with Al Clawson Disposal, Inc. (Matt Wojnowski)]

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> TRAIN FOR. >> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES MINNESOTA MISSOURI. WE HAVE CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON O 2024-723. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS WITH THE CONTINGENCY THAT THE FORM 1295 BE FILLED OUT BEFORE I OR

THE CITY MANAGER, WHOEVER HAS TO SIGN IT SINCE IT. >> IS THAT A MOTION QUESTION

>> YES. >> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER, I

ALMOST SAID YOUR FIRST NAME. >> YOU CAN, IT WOULD BE FINE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

TONYA, ON THIS ONE, THERE IS NOTHING FILLED OUT ON IT, IT IS JUST NOTARIZED. IN MY MIND, THERE HAS TO BE AT LEAST A CONTROLLING PARTY. I WOULD ASK STAFF TO AT LEAST MAKE SURE. WE MAY NOT KNOW WHO THE INTERMEDIARIES ARE BUT IF THEY COME IN PLINK, WE HAVE TO AT

LEAST GET THEM SIGNED. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. ON THE FORM, IT SAYS IF THERE ARE INTERESTED PARTIES, YOU FILL OUT SECTION 4, IF THERE ARE NO INTERESTED PARTIES, YOU SKIP SECTION 4. IS THAT THE REASON WHY THERE IS NO NAMES IN SECTION 4, THERE ARE NO

INTERESTED PARTIES? SO, IT IS FILLED OUT CORRECTLY? >> TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION SAYS AN INTERESTED PARTY IS A PERSON WHO HAS A CONTROLLING INTEREST IN THE BUSINESS ENTITY WITH WHOM THE GOVERNMENT ENTITY OR STATE AGENCY CONTRACT. SOMEONE HAS TO HAVE A CONTROLLING

INTEREST IN THE BUSINESS. >> NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE OTHERWISE, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THAT SECOND SECTION WHERE IT TELLS THE PERSON THEY COULD SKIP THAT SECTION IF THERE IS NO INTERESTED PARTIES. IF THERE IS ALWAYS AN INTERESTED PARTY, WHY DID THEY ALLOW THEM TO

LEAVE IT BLANK? >> THERE ARE EXAMPLES. NO INTERESTED PARTIES ARE NEEDED FOR PUBLICLY TRADED COMPANIES. THOSE PARTIES ARE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE AND CAN BE OBTAINED

ELSEWHERE. THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE REASONS. >> THERE IS ANOTHER EXCEPTION,

IF YOU HAVE 10 MEMBERS ON YOUR BOARD. >> I'M JUST BRINGING UP

[01:35:04]

QUESTIONS. IF THE CITY COULD VERIFY THAT IT MEETS IT ALL , THEN I AM HAPPY TO SIGN, I DON'T KNOW WHO SAID IT, ME AND THE CITY MANAGER, HAPPY TO SIGN IT. I'M NOT TRYING TO SLOW IT

DOWN. >> IN YOUR, IN YOUR LEGAL OPINION, WAS THIS FORM FILLED

OUT CORRECTLY OR INCORRECTLY? >> ONCE AGAIN, WE DON'T, WE ARE NOT REQUIRED. I CAN'T GIVE A LEGAL OPINION ON THAT WHETHER THEY DID IT CORRECTLY BECAUSE I AM NOT THERE LAWYER. BUT, WE CAN ASK THEM IF, WHY THEY DID NOT PUT A CONTROLLING PARTY. STAFF CAN DO THAT.

>> THEY HAVE A 10 MEMBER BOARD, THEY DON'T HAVE TO. >> THERE IS ANOTHER ONE ON FOUR OR FEWER OFFICERS OR SERVES AS ONE OF THE FOUR OFFICERS. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS. I

DON'T KNOW. >> ALL I AM ASKING IS INTERNALLY, WHEN THINGS COME IN, CAN WE AT LEAST SAY WE ASKED AND WE ARE GOOD TO GO INSTEAD OF I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK IT IS UNDERSTAND OUR LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ARE BUT THERE IS WHAT IS THE LEGAL TERM, LEGAL AND WHAT YOU SHOULD DO, I THINK IF WE ARE A, OUR FIDUCIARY DUTY IS TO WATCH THE TAXPAYER DAUGHTER, THE GOVERNMENT SAYS WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE. I'M JUST ASKING THAT WE AT LEAST GLANCED AT THEM AND HAVE TO CONVERSATIONAL WITH THE PEOPLE, JUST TO VERIFY AND WE HAVE NO INTERMEDIARIES. YOU HAVE NO CONTROLLING AND I WOULD LIKE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PLANNING TO GO WE DIDN'T PUT THAT DOWN BECAUSE WE HAVE 10 MEMBERS ON OUR BOARD, WE DIDN'T PUT THAT DOWN BECAUSE WE ARE A PUBLIC COMPANY. THAT IS ALL I'M

ASKING. >> THE ETHICS BOARD DOESN'T ASK THAT QUESTION. THE SAME

NUMBER FIVE, CHECK FOR THIS REASON. >> THEY WILL TELL US IF THEY ARE PUBLICLY TRADED AND SO WE WILL PUT THAT IN THE CONTRACT, NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE PUBLICLY TRADED OR IF THEY HAVE 10 MEMBERS. WE WILL, SOME OF THEM WILL COME TO US AND SAY WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO IT AND TELL US WHY AND WE WILL WRITE IT IN THE CONTRACT.

>> OKAY. WALK ME THROUGH THIS. A BUSINESS IS ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. THAT BUSINESS HAS TO LEGALLY FILL OUT FORM 1295 ON THERE AND. WHENEVER IT IS RECEIVED BY THE CITY, THERE ARE NO MECHANISMS, PROCEDURES TO CHECK THAT INFORMATION LEGALLY? IS THAT

CORRECT? >> THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY CHECK THE INFORMATION.

IF SOMEBODY KNOWS, SEES THAT FIVE IN THE CITY COUNCIL PACKET AND KNOWS THEY HAVE A CONTROLLING INTEREST, THEY COULD GO FILE A COMPLAINT, A CITIZEN COULD.

>> IF WE WANTED TO. >> IT IS A VERY HEAVILY WEIGHTED ON THAT BUSINESS

WANTING TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. >> YES. IT IS THEIR OBLIGATION.

>> IT IS NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THE CITY CAN FORCE ON THAT BUSINESS IN THE CONTRACT.

TO REQUEST IT? >> WE WILL PUT IT IN THE CONTRACT IT IS REQUIRED UNLESS WE GET INFORMATION THAT THEY ARE PUBLICLY TRADED OR HAVE THE 10 BOARD MEMBERS OR THEY ME TO

THE OTHER ACCEPTION WITH THE SMALLER NUMBER ON THE BOARD. >> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO FILL THIS OUT. THERE IS NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR US TO CHECK THE INFORMATION. BUT, THERE IS NOTHING THAT STOPS US FROM JUST HAVING A CONVERSATION. WE HAVE HOW MANY HUNDRED MILLION IN PROJECTS RUNNING THROUGH HERE AND NOBODY UP HERE THINKS WE OUGHT TO HAVE A CONVERSATION LIKE WE JUST WANT TO VERIFY YOU FILL THIS OUT CORRECTLY, WE ARE JUST GOING TO SIT THERE AND SAY IT IS COMPLETELY UP TO THE COMPANY TO FILL IT OUT AND WE DON'T WANT TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS? YOU GUYS ARE MAKING A REALLY BIG DEAL OUT OF SOMETHING WHERE WHOEVER IS BRINGING IT AND PUTTING A PACKET, HELLO, I JUST WANT TO VERIFY THIS THING IS BLANK, ARE YOU A PUBLIC COMPANY? NO. DID YOU HAVE LESS THAN 10 MEMBERS WERE MORE THAN 10 MEMBERS ON YOUR BOARD? DO YOU HAVE THIS? YOU MIGHT WANT TO FILL THAT OUT. WE CAN'T REQUIRE YOU TO FILL THAT OUT BUT IF SOMEONE COMPLAINS, YOUR CONTRACT COULD GO BUST. OKAY, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT. THESE ARE DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO FILL OUT. I SPENT A LOT OF TIME WITH THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION FIGURING OUT HOW TO DO THIS IN MY DAY JOB AND THAT IS ALL I AM ASKING. 400 MILLION IN PROJECTS AND WE JUST WANT TO LEAVE IT UP TO THE CONTRACTORS TO TELL US IF THERE IS A

CONFLICT OR NOT THERE IT >> IF YOU GUYS WANTED TO CHANGE IT, WOULD THAT BE A CHANGE TO

THE BYLAWS? >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY JURISDICTION TO DO THIS. BUT, IF CITY COUNCIL WANTS STAFF TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

[01:40:05]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN, SOMETHING TO WHERE WE KNOW WHAT THE JURISDICTION, DOES A LOT PREVENT US FROM FOLLOWING UP OR IS THE LARGEST?

>> THE LAW IS SILENT. ANYTHING, NOT ANYTHING THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO DO.

>> WE ARE NOT REQUIRED BUT THERE IS NOTHING IN THE LAW YOU KNOW OF TODAY THAT WOULD

PREVENT US FROM FOLLOWING UP? >> CORRECT. >> IT STILL SAYS YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT IT. EVEN IF THEY FILLED IT OUT WRONG. RIGHT NOW, THIS IS FILLED OUT CORRECTLY. AS FAR AS IF I WAS SAYING TO THE CITY SECRETARY, THEY CHECKED THE BOX THERE IS NO INTERESTED PARTY.

WHERE DO WE PUT THE BURDEN FOR HER SHE IS SUPPOSED TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT THEIR COMPANY AND SEE HOW MANY BOARD MEMBERS THEY HAVE? ARE YOU GOING TO HIRE STAFF TO GO DO THAT?

>> DID YOU LISTEN TO WHAT I SAID? DID YOU HEAR WHAT I SAID? I SAID ALL I AM ASKING IS THAT STAFF ASK THE QUESTION. NOT THAT STAFF GOES AND CHECKS AND VERIFIES CAN I GET A COPY OF THE RESOLUTION WITH ALL YOUR BOARD MEMBERS. LISTEN TO WHAT I'M SAYING. I AM ASKING FOR STUFF, WHEN THEY GET IT, TO MAKE A FIVE-MINUTE PHONE CALL, A TWO-MINUTE CONVERSATION JUST WANT TO VERIFY THIS INFORMATION THAT IS ALL I AM ASKING. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HIRE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET STUPID WITH ARE YOU WANTING TO GET THROUGH THIS.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YOU TAKE THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT SO MUCH.

>> MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS DO WE GIVE THEM THE FORM TO FILL OUT AS PART OF THE CITY WHEN

THEY COME IN FOR A CONTRACT, DO WE GIVE THEM THE BLANK FORM? >> THIS IS ALL ELECTRONIC. THEY GO INTO THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION WEBSITE, THEY INPUT THE INFORMATION, THEY SENT THE FORM OUT TO GIVE TO THE CITY SECRETARY SO SHE KNOWS IT IS WAITING FOR CITY COUNCIL

APPROVAL FOR HER TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT. >> I GET THAT. MY QUESTION IS, WE GIVE, IF ANYBODY COMES TO US WITH THE CITY, BEFORE THEY GIVE THIS FORM, WE GIVE THEM SOMETHING, RIGHT? A PIECE OF PAPER, CONTRACT, SOMETHING? WE DO SOMETHING TO THE PEOPLE

BEFORE THEY FILL OUT A 1095 1295. >> THE CONTRACT HAS BEEN NEGOTIATED. IF THEY ARE REQUIRED TO FILL OUT THE FORM, IT IS IN THE CONTRACT.

>> MAYBE THE WAY WE HANDLE THIS IS WE CREATE, HAVE TO CITY SECRETARY CREATE AN INSTRUCTION

SHEET FOR HOW TO FILL OUT 1295. >> NO. NO BECAUSE OF THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION ALREADY CREATED THAT QUESTION AND ANSWER HOW TO FILL IT OUT AND THE NUMBER TWO IF THEY ARE HAVING TROUBLE WITH IT. IF YOU MAKE US DO THAT, YOU ARE

TELLING US TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT REQUIRED BY LAW. >> WHICH IS WHAT THE MAYOR IS ASKING. THAT IS WHAT THE MAYOR IS ASKING YOU TO DO. IF YOU JUST SAID YOU PRINT OUT THE FORM AND THERE IS INSTRUCTIONS THAT SAYS IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN INTERESTED PARTY OR THIS IS

WHAT -- >> HE'S ASKING WE VERIFY IT, THAT IS ALL HE'S ASKING FOR AND I KIND OF AGREE WITH THAT. HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE PHONE CALL IS NOT GOING TO TAKE AWAY FROM ANYBODY'S DAY JOB, I THINK IT IS WELL WITHIN, WELL WITHIN THE STRUCTURE THAT WE ARE APPROVING THINGS FOR, JUST A SIMPLE PHONE CALL, HEY, JUST VERIFYING, THANK YOU, BYE. I DON'T THINK THAT IS A DIFFICULT THING TO

ASK. >> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. SO, THIS 1295 FORM IS ACCEPTED , HOWEVER, IT IS FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS FILLED OUT INCORRECTLY, WITH LACK OF INFORMATION. DOES THE CITY BRING THAT INFORMATION TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION OR DOES AN INDIVIDUAL, PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL BRING THAT TO THE ETHICS COMMISSION?

>> ANYBODY COULD FILE A COMPLAINT, WHETHER THE CITY INSTRUCTED STAFF TO BRING IT TO THEIR ATTENTION OR IF A CITIZEN WAS AWARE OF IT AND FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE TEXAS ETHICS

COMMISSION. >> THAT WOULD BE REALLY MESSED UP IF A CITIZEN COMES AND TELLS US THAT SOMEBODY DID IT WRONG AND WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO GO INTO

VERIFY IT. >> THAT IS THE THING. IT IS NOT ON US TO VERIFY IT.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS I HAVE NO PROBLEM, I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA FOR THE CITY SECRETARY TO JUST, LIKE YOU SAID, DO A QUICK PHONE CALL AND SAY , WE ARE JUST VERIFYING YOU FILLED THIS OUT RIGHT, YOU FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTIONS, YOU FILLED OUT CORRECTLY, YES, GREAT, WE ARE GOING TO PUT IT IN THE PACKET AND GIVE IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. WE NEED TO HAVE A PROCEDURE TO DO THAT. IF WE DON'T GIVE DIRECTION, AND IF WE DON'T HAVE A WRITTEN DOWN PROCEDURE TO DO THAT, THE NEXT CITY SECRETARY THAT COMES ONLINE, SHE OR HE IS NOT GOING TO KNOW TO DO THAT. THE NEXT STAFF MEMBER ASSIGNED TO DO THAT, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO KNOW TO DO THAT. RATHER THAN US JUST SAYING THIS, WE SAY A LOT OF STUFF UP HERE ON THE DAIS AND IT DOESN'T GET AND LIMITED BECAUSE WE DON'T GIVE PROPER

[01:45:03]

DIRECTION AND CLEAR DIRECTION. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS SOMEHOW DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT A PROCEDURE THAT WOULD FULFILL WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO PUBLISH YOUR.

>> WE ARE NOT POSTED FOR THAT. THAT WOULD BE FUTURE. >> WILL ADDED TO A FUTURE

THING. >> THE APPLICANT IS HERE. I KNOW YOU ARE WANTING TO COME UP TO SPEAK, I THINK. COULD YOU? COULD YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE? SORRY.

>> TONYA CLAWSON WITH AL CLAWSON DISPOSAL REGARDING THE 12TH AND FIVE, WE ARE HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANY INFORMATION AS TO HOW THE FORM WAS COMPLETED. IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT IS REQUIRED, WE WILL HAVE OUR ATTORNEY RESPOND ACCORDINGLY AS WELL.

>> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, DO YOU MEET TO THE EXCEPTIONS THAT ALLOWS YOU TO CHECK THE BOX?

>> CAN YOU READ THAT TO ME WHEN YOU ARE REFERENCING THAT BEFORE I ANSWER? WHICH BOX YOU ARE

REFERENCING? >> IT SAYS YOU CAN LEAVE I AM FOR PLAINTIFF THERE ARE NO INTERESTED PARTIES. SO, THE QUESTION IS WHY IS THAT BLANK?

>> WE HAVE NO INTERESTED PARTIES. >> OKAY?

>> THE REASON I BRING THIS UP IS WHEN WE HAVE WHATEVER THAT COMPANY WAS, EVERYBODY STARTS READING THE STUFF, I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING WE DO, WE JUST WANT TO VERIFY YOUR

>> FOR THE 1295, YOU WILL FIND OUR PRIOR FORMS THE SAME WITH NO CHANGE.

>> RIGHT ON THAT QUESTION AND SEND THAT TO THE CITY MANAGER, THAT IS THE QUESTION. THANK YOU

FOR THE FIVE-MINUTE PHONE CALL. >> THANKS, TONYA.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THANKS FOR COMING UP HERE. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? >> DOES THE AMENDMENT NEED TO GET WITHDRAWN? CLEARLY WE DON'T WANT TO HOLD UP APPROVING THIS UNTIL WE REACH OUT TO THE APPLICANT THAT JUST

HAPPENED. >> IT WASN'T AN AMENDMENT >> THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL

MOTION. >> HOW DO YOU REMEMBER THE ORIGINAL MOTION?

>> THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED, WITH THE PROVISION THAT IT DOESN'T GET APPROVED UNTIL THE CITY MANAGER VERIFIES WITH THE PARTY IT ONCE A CORRECTLY FILLED OUT 1295.

>> I THINK HE MAY HAVE VERIFIED IT HERE SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE CAN PASS THIS AND I CAN SIGN IT. LIKE COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON SAID, I DIDN'T WANT TO VERIFY IT IN PUBLIC BUT I AM OKAY DOING THAT AS WELL. NOT EVERY IDEA I HAVE IS GOING TO BE A TERRIBLE IDEA. THEY WILL BE

SOME. ANYWAY. >> WHO WAS THE SECOND? >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

DARE I SAY EVAN. >> IF WE VOTE YES ON THIS, JUST CLARIFYING , THIS WAS CONTINGENT ON THE 1295 BEING FILLED OUT CORRECTLY? SINCE IT IS FILLED OUT CORRECTLY, IS A VOTE YES FOR YOU TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE MAKING SURE THAT IS FILLED OUT CORRECTLY?

>> TO I UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE A VOTE YES, IT HAS BEEN VERIFIED AND NOW WE SIGN.

>> THE MOTIONS IS CONTINGENT. HOW IS THAT VERIFIED? >> CAN I ADJUST TO TO GET THE CONTINGENCY? WHEN I MADE THE MOTION, WE WERE BRINGING HER UP TO VERIFY?

>> THE CONTINGENCY HAS BEEN FULFILLED. >> WE TOOK CONTINGENT OUT. JUST

AS PRESENTED. >> THAT IS GREAT. >> THE MOTION WILL BE AS

PRESENTED. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR THE

VERIFICATION IN PUBLIC. >> THANK YOU FOR REQUIRING US TO DO THAT IN PUBLIC BY

BRINGING IT UP THE WAY YOU DID. >> NO PROBLEM. PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

[12.1. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-301 to award a contract to Matrix Imaging Solutions for utility bill printing and distribution services for an amount not to exceed $300,000 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the contract and all necessary documents. (Alberta Barrett)]

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE. MOTION PASSES 7-0. I HAVE LOST MY PLACE. 12.1, CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION 2024-3012 AWARD A CONTRACT TO MATRIX IMAGING SOLUTIONS FOR UTILITY BILL PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION SERVICES FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000 OR CENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. >> ALBERT BARRETT, FINANCE

[01:50:03]

DIRECTOR. SO, THIS ITEM, WE STARTED BACK IN JULY AND AUGUST WITH THE ADVERTISEMENTS WITH TAYLOR PRESS. THE DEADLINE FOR THE SUBMITTAL ONCE AUGUST 30TH. WE RECEIVED SEVEN. ONE OF THOSE WEST IS QUALIFIED. FROM THERE, WE HAD THE SELECTION COMMITTEE, WHICH CONSISTED OF UTILITY BILLING MANAGER, THE UTILITY BILLING COORDINATOR, CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES, AND A SENIOR ACCOUNTANT REVIEW THE RESPONSES FOR ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS. AFTER THE EVALUATION, MATRIX ONCE THE HIGHEST SCORING OF THE PROPOSALS. SO, WE WOULD LIKE TO ENTER INTO A NOT TO EXCEED 300,000 DURING THE TERM, WHICH IS A ONE YEAR TERM WITH FOUR OPTIONAL ONE YEAR RENEWALS AND THIS IS THE SERVICE WHERE THEY PRINT AND MAIL OUR UTILITY

BILLS ON A MONTHLY BASIS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE R-2024-301 AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK,

SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> THE ONE QUESTION I DID HAVE, THE MAYOR BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT BEFORE WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL DATA TO THE BILL COULD BE ADDED, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER STUFF. SO, I KNOW IT SAID A RESIGN, SO IS THAT YOUR INTENTION THAT WE ARE GOING TO ADD THOSE FEATURES THAT WE DISCUSSED THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETING? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL AGENDA ITEM, WE CAN HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY WITH THIS NEW CONTRACT.

>> YES. WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND MONICA IS HERE. SHE CAN PROBABLY ADDRESS THAT. I KNOW SHE REACHED OUT TO THEM TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT COULD BE ADDED,

WHERE IT COULD BE ADDED. >> MONICA BURKE, UTILITY BILLING MANAGER. THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, THOSE CHANGES THAT WERE REQUESTED. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY GETS A

PRINTED BILL FROM US. >> IDEA BUT I DON'T WANT TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS TO IT.

>> GO DIGITAL, SAVE PAPER. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS. BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENTS AND DISQUALIFYING SOMEBODY THAT IS NOT UP TO PART, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

APPRECIATE IT. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> IS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE

COMPANY HERE? >> IS WHAT? >> A REPETITIVE FROM THE COMMITTEE. THEY HAVE TO BE A PUBLIC COMPANY. I DON'T THINK IT IS A PUBLIC COMPANY. I THINK IT IS A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY THAT IS NOT PUBLIC. ANYWAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY

DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? >> IF I COULD SAY, MAYOR, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE WE DID CONTACT THE OWNER TO MAKE SURE IT WAS FILLED OUT CORRECTLY .

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU ARE QUITE WELCOME. >> DID IT TAKE A LOT OF TIME

OUT OF YOUR DAY TO DO THAT QUESTION >> QUITE HONESTLY, IT DID TAKE

A WHILE. >> DID IT? >> IT DID.

>> SHE HAS ALREADY ASKED FOR MORE STAFF. >> 5% INCREASE.

>> I DON'T WANT TO DO IT ANYMORE. >> THERE WERE SEVERAL BACK AND FORTH PHONE CALLS. SO IT DID TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN JUST A FIVE-MINUTE.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR HONESTY. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE BUSINESS BILLING? LIKE, TO IT, I GUESS, ELECTRONIC INITIALLY BUT IF YOU WANT TO RECEIVE A PAPER BILL,

YOU CAN OPT IN? IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO LEGALLY? >> WE ALREADY DO THAT. WHEN WE SET UP THE ACCOUNT, IT IS ALREADY IN THE THE BILL. IF THEY WANT A PRINTED BILL, THEY

HAVE TO REQUEST IT. >> PERFECT, THANK YOU. IT HAS BEEN A WHILE SINCE I DID THAT,

2018. APPRECIATE IT. >> WE SHOULD SEND A PSA OUT ABOUT THAT. LONGTIME RESIDENTS, THERE WAS ONLY A PAPER BILL SO ONLY HAVE EVER GOTTEN A PAPER BILL. IT WOULD BE NICE TO GO

PAPERLESS. >> SHOULD AT IT TO THE QR CODE. THAT WAY PEOPLE CAN SCAN IT.

>> HOW MUCH IS THIS A YEAR? >> IT IS AROUND 50, 58. 59,000. >> $20 MILLION BUDGET, IT IS 50

GRAND. >> ALSO THE COST OF POSTAL. AND THE MONTHLY COST.

>> MONICA, YOU HAVE TO STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE. >> I'M SORRY. MONICA BURKE,

[01:55:02]

BILLING, THE POSTAGE IS THE COST AND THEN THE ACTUAL PRINTING OF THE BILL IS ABOUT

$1000.00 AVERAGE. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

[12.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-302 authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to IPO 2023-06 and 2023-16 with Garver LLC related to the CR 132 Overpass project (CIP T07-2023). (Matt Rector)]

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE. >> NOACK

>> AYE. >> WE HAVE POSSIBLE ACTION ON TCQ AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO IPO 2023-06 AND 2023-16 RELATED TO THE 132 OVERPASS

PROJECT CIP T07-2023 . >> GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. SO, HERE WE GO AGAIN. ON THE 132 OVERPASS PROJECT, THIS ONE HAS HAD ITS UPS AND DOWNS. SO ON THE SLIDE UP THERE, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BRIEF BACKGROUND AS YOU MAY RECALL, WE BROUGHT THIS BACK TO YOU IN SEPTEMBER BECAUSE WE HAD A RECOMMENDATION FROM MIDWAY, WHO IS WORKING WITH THE EDC AND IN SEPTEMBER, IN THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO PLACE A HOLD ON THE GARVER LLC CONTRACT WHILE BE VOTED OUT OF THE MIDWAY ALTERNATIVE. SO, WE, I LET GARVER LLC KNOW THEIR CONTRACT HAD BEEN PLACED ON HOLD, WE STARTED CONVERSATIONS WITH MIDWAY AND DAWSON . EDC WAS INVOLVED. THE ENGINEERING TEAM WAS INVOLVED. DURING THOSE CONVERSATIONS, MIDWAY AND DAWSON SUGGESTED THAT BECAUSE GARVER LLC HAS MUCH MORE IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE ON THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, THEY ALREADY HAVE CONNECTIONS TO PEOPLE AT WILLIAMSON COUNTY, UPR, THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THROUGH THEIR DESIGN, THAT IT MIGHT BE WISER AND MORE BENEFICIAL FOR ALL INVOLVED IF WE LET GARVER LLC TAKE THE MIDWAY DESIGN, IT MEANS IT TO A BETTER POSITION SO THAT WE COULD FULLY THAT IT WITH TXDOT, UPR, WILLIAMSON COUNTY. THIS IS THE PURPOSE OF THE SECOND , TO DO AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT. I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH WADE AT GARVER LLC TO COME UP WITH BUT THAT LOOKS LIKE, HOW THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE THE INFORMATION WE ALREADY HAVE GOTTEN, WE HAVE ALREADY COLLECTED FOR THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, IMPLEMENT THAT WITH THIS MIDWAY, DAWSON ALTERNATIVE. WE DON'T WANT TO GO AS FAR AS WE DID WITH THE OTHER STUFF. WE WANT TO GET IT TO THE POINT WHERE WE CAN PUT IT IN FRONT OF TXDOT AGAIN, UPRR AGAIN WHERE THEY CAN LOOK AT IT IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DEPTH BUT NOT FULLY VET IT OUT 100% DETAILED DESIGN. I HAVE SENT EVERYTHING TO TXDOT, UPRR, WILLIAMSON COUNTY, WHICH IS WHAT CITY COUNCIL HAD DIRECTED US, START TALKING TO THEM AND SEE WHAT WE CAN COME UP WITH. THEY HAVE ALL SAID THAT HERE IS OUR HIGH-LEVEL ISSUES BUT WE NEED MORE INFORMATION. WE NEED TO SEE HOW WE ARE GOING TO CLEAR THE RAILROAD TRACKS, WE NEED TO SEE IF YOU REMEMBER THE DAWSON STUFF BUT IT WAS ONE-DIMENSIONAL, TWO-DIMENSIONAL. WHAT WE NEED IS WE NEED SOMEBODY TO TAKE IT TO MORE OF A THREE-DIMENSIONAL PIECE SO THAT WE CAN PUT IT BACK IN FRONT OF UPRR, BUT IT BACK IN FRONT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, PUT IT BACK IN FRONT OF TXDOT AND SEE WHAT THEIR TRUE FEEDBACK IS. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS ITEM. I THINK MAYBE , SOME THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. I DO HAVE WADE HEAR FROM GARVER LLC, IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO HIM ON HOW HE THINKS THIS IS GOING TO PLAY OUT. HE AND I HAVE HAD MANY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS. THE AMENDMENT IS IN

YOUR PACKET. WITH THAT, I WILL FIELD ANY QUESTIONS. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

RESOLUTION R-2024-302 AS PRESENTED. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER

THOMPSON, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON >> WHY DON'T WE REACH OUT TO THE COUNTY? THIS IS A TXDOT ROAD AND UPRR. THERE ARE COUNTY ROADS TO THE SOUTH BUT SINCE

THEY ARE NOT PUTTING ANY MONEY IN? >> YOU ARE CORRECT. CURRENTLY, THE COUNTY IS NOT PUTTING ANY MONEY INTO THIS SPECIFIC PIECE. ALTHOUGH, BACK WHEN THEY DID THEIR LAST BOND PUBLIC HEARING SAYING EVERYBODY COME PITCH YOUR PROJECT, I DID PITCH THAT

[02:00:07]

THEY WOULD HELP US WITH THIS PROJECT. I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH BOB DAY TO GET THIS ON THE CAMPO PLAN AND GET IT EXPEDITED. I AM WORKING WITH THE COUNTY TO GET THEM TO PARTNER. ONE OF THE DIRECTIONS WE GOT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS WAS TALK TO ALL OF THE PARTNERS, MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS ON BOARD WITH THIS PLAN. THAT IS WHAT I AM TALKING TO THE COUNTY. I AM TRYING TO GET MONEY OUT OF THEM. WE CONNECT TO THEM ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH AND I WANTED THEM TO BE IN THE LOOP BECAUSE THEY ARE

ONE OF OUR PARTNERS. >> WE ARE PAYING TO THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH, THERE ARE CIP PROJECTS FOR ANOTHER $60 MILLION OR SOMETHING TO DO 132 NORTH OF THE BRIDGE AND SOUTH

OF THE BRIDGE? >> THERE ARE FUTURE CIP PROJECTS. DURING THE CIP CONVERSATION LAST SUMMER, CITY COUNCIL SAID PUSH THOSE OUT FURTHER AND THEN LET'S ONLY SPEND MONEY ON THE ONE PROJECT THAT IS IN OUR CIP IS HERE TO SHOW WE ARE SERIOUS AND GET MORE FUNDING FROM TXDOT AND THE COUNTY. IN 2029, 2028, I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHERE HE PUT IT, WE PUSHED THOSE PROJECTS OUT AND IT IS ANOTHER 30 AND 20 SOMETHING MILLION DOLLARS, I THINK. THE DIRECTIVE FROM CITY COUNCIL BACK IN JULY ONCE PUT THEM OUT AND SEE IF WE CAN GET

OTHER MONEY OUT OF SOMEBODY ELSE. >> MET, HE DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR REPRESENTATIVE. THE PLANES THAT WERE FORMULATED BY MIDWAY, I KIND OF FEEL LIKE THEY WERE, WE GAVE THEM A LOT OF SUGGESTIONS ON THE EDC. I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE TIME FRAME LOOKS LIKE FOR THE PLANES TO BE SOLIDIFIED FOR THAT TO BE OUR, BUT WE ARE

LOOKING AT GOING FORWARD? >> WADE BENTON WAS GARVER LLC. I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD PUT A TIME FRAME ON THAT SPECIFICALLY. I KNOW THIS EFFORT IS TO TAKE THAT CONCEPT PLAN, WHICH IS, IT NEEDS SOME MODIFICATIONS TO HIT WHAT IS OUT THERE. TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE AT LEAST GRAPHICALLY WE SHALL WHAT IS THE INTENTION AND HENCE THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH AGENCIES. AS PART OF THAT, WE HAVE EFFORT IN HERE TO RUN A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR THAT CONFIGURATION, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID ON THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS. SO, WHEN WE DO SIT DOWN WITH TXDOT, THAT IS THE FIRST QUESTION THEY ARE GOING TO ASK YOU, WHAT IS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ON 79. WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, THAT WILL ALSO HELP INFORM WHAT THE TURN LANE CONFIGURATIONS MIGHT NEED TO BE AT 79 AND 132 TO OPTIMIZE THE FLOW IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. SO, THAT EFFORT IS GOING TO TAKE A FEW WEEKS. WE ARE TARGETING WITHIN ABOUT A MONTH'S TIME TO HAVE THE TRAFFIC DATA. THAT WILL HELP INFORM THE GRAPHICS TO PREPARE AND GET THOSE MEETINGS SET. WHERE IT GOES FROM THERE, I CAN'T PUT A TIME FRAME ON IT BUT THAT IS TO GET

TO THAT DISCUSSION. >> THAT IS GREAT AND THAT IS WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR. I KNOW IT WAS MORE SPIT BALL AND IDEAS WHENEVER THE, I FEEL LIKE WHEN THE PLAN WAS FIRST CREATED IT.

JUST HEARING THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE MORE INVESTIGATION, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME MODIFICATIONS THAT COME OUT OF THAT INVESTIGATION, THAT IS WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.

WHENEVER YOU DO GET THAT PLAN, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE, AND ALSO TO THE EDC AND RESENTING

THAT? >> ABSOLUTELY. ONCE WE GET THE FEEDBACK FROM THE AGENCIES, WE WILL WORK WITH STAFF TO SUMMARIZE THAT AND MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> PERFECT. I KNOW THE EDC WAS A VERY HEAVILY INVOLVED AS WELL AS THE INVESTIGATION WORK. THAT IS SOMETHING THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN, JUST WITH THE PLANS THAT THEY HAVE GOING

FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR THAT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, WADE. SO, THE PRIOR DESIGN WAS

AT 60% COMPLETION BEFORE IT WAS PUT ON PAUSE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> WE WERE AND 60% ON THE SCHEMATIC PHASE. WHAT THAT, THE DIFFERENTIATOR THERE IS WITH THE TXDOT FACILITY, THE SCHEMATIC IS A HIGHER-LEVEL DESIGN THAT HELPS DEFINE THE RIGHT WAY, UTILITIES, SOME OF THE BIG ITEMS. HOW YOU ARE GOING TO HANDLE DRAINAGE. BUT THE FACILITY IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. ONCE THAT IS AGREED UPON, THEN WE WOULD MOVE INTO CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS AND SPECS

[02:05:01]

AND THE WHOLE PACKAGE. I WOULD CHARACTERIZE THAT AS A DRAFT SCHEMATIC, BASICALLY.

>> WE WERE AT 60% SCHEMATIC DESIGN? >> YES.

>> WITH PUTTING THE PROJECT, THAT DESIGN, THAT SCHEMATIC ON PONDS, WHERE ARE WE NOW WITH STARTING WITH TRAFFIC COUNTS AND MOVING FORWARD? WHAT PHASE ARE WE IN NOW?

>> WELL, AT THIS POINT, WE ARE, WE HIT PAUSE ON THE SCHEMATIC. WE ARE TAKING A STEP BACK AND EVALUATING POTENTIAL CHANGE TO THE SCHEMATIC. THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS THAT WE ARE POSTING TO DO IS GOING TO USE THE SAME DATA WE USED PREVIOUSLY BASED ON THE CAMPO MODEL AS WELL AS SURFACES PLANNED, TIAA TO DEVELOP OUR BEST ESTIMATE OF WHAT THE FUTURE TRAFFIC DEMAND WOULD BE IN THE AREA. WE ARE GOING TO USE THAT SAME DATA WITH THIS NEW CONFIGURATION TO RUN THE MODELS AND IDENTIFY WHAT THAT TRAFFIC SIMULATION WOULD SHOW FOR EXISTING TRAFFIC

AND FUTURE PLANS. >> WITH THE INFORMATION YOU ALREADY HAVE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY DONE MOST OF THAT WORK, CORRECT, LIKE GARVER LLC HAS DONE THAT WORK, WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU PUT THAT AT, WITH GARVER LLC ALREADY HAVING THAT BASELINE INFORMATION THAT YOU

JUST MENTIONED? WHERE WOULD THAT PUT THIS PROJECT AT? >> I'M NOT SURE.

>> WHAT PHASE IS THIS AT? >> WHAT WE ARE DOING NOW IS WE ARE BASICALLY JUMPING BACK TO THE ALTERNATIVES PHASE REAL QUICK TO DO A QUICK ANALYSIS ON A CONCEPTUAL CHANGE TO THE OVERALL DESIGN. IF THAT , IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT THIS PROJECT ENDS UP GOING, WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE SCHEMATIC THAT WE HAVE JOINTLY DEVELOPED, OBVIOUSLY.

SOME OF THE ASPECTS ARE STILL GOING TO COME INTO PLAY, THE EXISTING UTILITIES ARE OUT OF THEIR. WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, SURVEY INFORMATION. WE HAVE A LOT OF THE BASEMENTS THERE. THIS WOULD BE A, THIS COULD CHANGE THE, WHAT IS NEEDED MOVING FORWARD

WITH THE EFFORT NEEDED. >> WILL GARVER LLC BE WORKING WITH MIDWAY ON THIS DESIGN? MIDWAY BROUGHT CONCERNS OF THE FORMER DESIGN TO THE EDC AND THE CITY COUNCIL, BASED ON THEIR END USERS. SO, IS GARVER LLC WORKING WITH MIDWAY IN ANYWAY ? BECAUSE IS GARVER LLC

COLLABORATING WITH MIDWAY ON THIS DESIGN? >> TO DATE, YES. WE HAVE BEEN RECORDING WITH THEM, WORKING THROUGH THE EDC. RIGHT NOW, WE ARE BASICALLY TAKING THE CONCEPT IDEA THAT THEY HAVE, WHICH IS AN INTERSECTION WITH A POTENTIAL OVERPASS. AND EVALUATING WHAT THAT CONFIGURATION WOULD LOOK LIKE. BASICALLY TAKING THEIR CARTOON.

IT IS REAL LOVE REF. MEDIANS AREN'T IN THERE. SOME OTHER LIMITS. REALLY TAKING A LOOK AT THAT. ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE GOING TO DO AS WE DO THIS IS WITH THE OVERPASS ELEMENT AND HAVING THE AT GRADE PORTIONS, THAT AFFECTS THE SPACING ON WHEN THE NEXT INTERSECTION IS GOING TO BE. SO, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT, IF ANY, THE CURRENT LOCATION OF THAT INTERSECTION AS WE CURRENTLY HAVE IT SHOWN ON THE SCHEMATICALLY? I DON'T THINK IT IS GOING TO CHANGE.

COULD IT SLIGHTLY. IT WILL OBVIOUSLY IMPACT WHAT THE FOOTPRINT IS GOING TO BE ON 79.

WE WILL LOOK AT THAT SPACING FOR THE INTERSECTION. WE ARE GOING TO BE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THEIR INTEREST OR WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR, WORKING WITH JD AND NOT RELATED TO THAT. AT THE SAME TIME, PROVIDING SOME FEEDBACK ON DRIVEWAY SPACING, FOR EXAMPLE, ON 79. WHAT IS TYPICALLY STANDARD OR SAFETY MEASURES SPECIFICALLY FOR A FULL ACCESS INTERSECTION? YOU CAN ONLY FIT SO MANY ON THE STRETCH OF 79. THAT WILL BE LOOKED AT AS PART OF THIS AS

[02:10:10]

WELL. THROUGH THE CONVERSATIONS WITH TXDOT AND THE RAILROAD. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> WADE. I GIVE YOU TROUBLE BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAD A TON OF PROJECTS. I HAVE ONE CONCERN. I JUST WANT TO AIR IT AND I APOLOGIZE AHEAD OF TIME FOR WHAT I'M ABOUT TO ASK YOU.

CITY ENGINEERS AND PEOPLE THAT WERE PRESENT CITIES TEND TO FOCUS MORE ON 420 FEET, WE HAVE TO DO THIS, WE HAVE TO DO THAT. THEN WE HAVE THE GROUP OF ENGINEERS, SAME SCHOOLING, SAME DEGREES THAT WORK FOR DEVELOPERS THAT ARE LIKE A, IF YOU ADJUST THIS THIS WAY, IF YOU DO THIS, YOU COULD PROBABLY SQUEEZE IN 375. YOU TO KNOW WHAT I DO AND YOU HAVE BEEN ON BOTH SIDES. ARE YOU ABLE TO PUT ON THE DEVELOPER HAT AND GO AND FIGHT FOR WHAT IS BEST FOR ALL THE ENGINEERING ON THE MUNICIPAL SIDE ABOUT WHAT IS BEST FOR DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY? WE ARE IN A WEIRD PREDICAMENT AND THAT IF WE PLAY LIKE THE CITY'S PLATE, IT IS PARALLEL ROADS AND ALL THIS STUFF AND DEVELOPERS HATE THAT AND WON'T DEVELOP THE PROPERTY. I DON'T WANT IT TO BE UNSAFE WHERE WE ARE STRICTLY GOING WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO DEVELOP THIS INTO THE NEXT STONE ? ARE YOU ABLE TO PUSH BACK ON WHOEVER AND TXDOT AND GO, LOOK, WE HAVE TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE 240 ACRES. HE WILL ARGUE IT IS $3000 WAS SENT A DAY IN CARY COST. WE HAVE OWNED IT SINCE FEBRUARY OF 2023 . WE ARE COMING UP ON THE ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY, WE PICKED MIDWAY, THE TWO-YEAR ANNIVERSARY ON THE LAND. AT SOME POINT SOMEONE WANTS A GROCERY STORE. ARE YOU ABLE TO DO ALL THAT WHERE YOU CAN SAY, GUYS, I AM BEING PAID TO HAVE ACCESS FOR THESE GUYS?

>> I HAVE BEEN ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ANKLE. >> WE HIRED YOU FOR ONE SIDE.

>> NOT ONLY THAT BUT I HAVE DONE DEVELOPMENT WORK IN THE PAST. I KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND THE PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND WHAT YOU ALL ARE TRYING TO DO. THERE ARE MINIMUMS AND THERE ARE DESIRABLE ON THE DESIGN. SO, TRYING TO FIND A BALANCE OF THOSE, I THINK FROM AN EXCESS STANDPOINT ON 79, I THINK REALITY IS YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET A LOT OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS. THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES TO DO SOME OTHER TYPE OF INTERSECTIONS THAT MIGHT NOT BE WHAT WE WOULD THINK OF AS A TRADITIONAL FOR

CORNER RED LIGHT INTERSECTION. >> AT THE CURRENT SPEED.

>> RIGHT. >> IF I CONVINCED EVERYBODY TO DRIVE THAT ROAD AT 3:00 IN THE AFTERNOON AT 45 MILES PER HOUR FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS AND WE DID A SPEED STUDY, I COULD PROBABLY ARGUE TO TXDOT THAT THE SPEED IS NOW ALTERED TO A POINT WHERE YOU CAN NOW DROP THE SPEED LIMIT. BUT, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT CURRENT EXISTING, NONEDEVELOPED, IT IS GOING TO BE VERY HARD TO GET SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS.

>> YES. YES. I ALSO THINK, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY FROM EVEN AN EXCESS STANDPOINT, YOU WANT TO TRY TO OPTIMIZE HOW MANY SIGNALS YOU HAVE, JUST FROM A FUNCTIONALITY TO BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF SOMEWHERE. WE WILL LOOK AT THAT. OBVIOUSLY TXDOT HAS A CERTAIN SEPARATION DISTANCE IN MIND. I AM SURE MATT HAS HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS. SO WE ARE GOING TO LOOK TO SEE WHAT CAN WE DO HERE TO TRY TO PROVIDE ACCESS AND MAINTAIN SOME REASONABLE

AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC FLOW ON 79 AND 32. >> THANK YOU, AGAIN, SORRY.

>> FOR THE RECORD ON THE 1295, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OUTSIDE COUNSEL.

>> YOUR CONTRACT IS ALREADY IN, I WASN'T GOING TO BRING IT UP.

>> I THINK WE ARE GOOD ON THAT. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> THANKS, WADE.

>> CALL TO VOTE. >> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

[12.3. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-304 appointing directors to the Williamson Central Appraisal District Board of Directors in accordance with Section 6.03 of the Texas Property Tax Code. (Alberta Barrett)]

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 7-MISSOURI. NEXT, I AM 12.3, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON R-2024-304, APPOINTING DIRECTORS TO THE WILLIAMSON

[02:15:04]

CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 6.3 OF

THE TEXAS PROPERTY TAX CODE. >> ROBERTA BARRETT, FINANCE DIRECTOR. THIS ITEM, WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT ASKING THAT THE CITY OF HUTTO, WHICH HAS A TOTAL OF 50 VOTES, HELP THEM APPOINT THEIR NEXT FIVE DIRECTORS. SO, FROM THE EMAIL THAT THEY SENT US, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO MEMBERS SERVE A ONE-YEAR TERM AND THREE MEMBERS SERVE A THREE-YEAR TERM. AND, WITH THOSE 50 VOTES, YOU CAN VOTE FOR ONE CANDIDATE OR YOU COULD SPREAD IT AMONGST ALL. THEY ALSO INCLUDED THE BIOGRAPHIES ON EACH, KIND OF A SMALL SNIPPET OF THAT INFORMATION. BASED ON YOUR VOTE, BY RESOLUTION, THE PALLET IS INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION. WE WILL RETURN THAT TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT BY THE 15TH

OF DECEMBER. >> WE EITHER VOTE SOME PEOPLE FOR ONE, SOME FOR THREE, ALL

FOR ONE, 043, MAKES IT ALL OF THE QUESTION MAKES >> HOWEVER YOU WANT, AS LONG AS

IT TOTALS 50. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO MAKE THE VOTES BE FOX, GIBBS, AND

UFAMATA FOR THREE-YEAR TERMS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THAT. I WAS WANTING TO DO 25 FOR

GIBBS AND THEN REDUCE THE OTHER TWO BY THAT AMOUNT. >> I DON'T CARE. WORKS. 25 AND

THEN FOX 13 AND UFAMATA, 12? DOES THAT WORK? >> I THINK SO.

>> IS THAT A SECOND? IS THAT A SECOND ESTIMATE >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT, MOTION BY MAYOR SNYDER, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, GIBBS 725, FOX 13, UFAMATA WITH 12. THEY WERE THE ONLY THREE PEOPLE WHO HAD REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE. EVERYBODY ELSE HAD VERY DISTINGUISHED CAREERS BUT NOT IN REAL ESTATE AND HAVING BEEN, I DON'T KNOW IF WE GO IN FRONT OF THESE PEOPLE BUT WE SHOULDN'T BUT HAVING BEEN PERSONALLY PROTESTED TAXES, I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE APPRAISING THEM THAT SOMEHOW HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE IN REAL ESTATE SO IT IS EASY TO SAY EVERYTHING WENT UP 15, 20%, IT IS A LOT BETTER FOR A REAL ESTATE PERSON TO LOOK AT HOLISTICALLY, BUT I COULD BE WRONG. I DON'T KNOW.

>> WHAT WERE THE NAMES? >> FOX, GIBBS, AND I AM CURRENTLY MISPRONOUNCING THEIR

NAME, UFAMATA. >> WEIGHT IS FORMER MILITATE AS WELL.

>> IT SAID HE WAS. IT NEVER SAID WHAT HE ACTUALLY DID. AND, LISA DON'T HURT ME, I LIKE YOU

A LOT. >> SO, FOR ME, I WOULD BE VOTING AGAINST THIS. I JUST WAS PLANNING ON EQUALING THEM OUT AGAINST THE VOTES OR WHATEVER GIVEN THE ARE ALL EQUAL. THAT

IS WHERE I AM NOT ON THIS. >> YOU MIGHT AS WELL JUST VOTE. >> FAIR ENOUGH. I JUST WANTED

TO SAY WHY. >> I KNOW. >> WAS HE ARGUING WITH YOU AND

AGREEING WITH ME ON SOMETHING? >> 1%? OUR VOTE DOESN'T HAVE, OUR VOTE TO BE FAIR, OUR 50 VOTES DON'T HAVE HEAVY WEIGHT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.

>> OUR ARTICLES REQUIRE EVERYONE TO VOTE, THOUGH. OUR COUNSEL PARTICLES REQUIRE

EVERYONE TO VOTE. >> SHE SAID SHE WAS GOING TO VOTE NO.

>> I'M JUST SETTING. >> HE HAD SAID JUST DON'T VOTE.

>> I AM SAYING, IF YOU SPREAD THEM EQUALLY ACROSS ALL OF THEM IT IS AS IF WE DIDN'T SUBMIT A

PALLET. THAT IS WHAT I MEANT. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

[13.1. Consideration and possible action on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for FY 26-29.]

[02:20:06]

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES, 6-1. NEXT , ITEM 13.1, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 THROUGH 29. WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO PUSH THAT BUT I WANTED TO ASK ONE QUESTION. ON PAGE 589, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM NOT MISTAKING THIS. OR MISCONSTRUING . WHAT ARE SOME OTHER ADJECTIVES? ON THAT PAGE, IF WE MAKE NO CHANGES TO OUR CIP LIST, AND HYPOTHETICALLY IF WE APPROVE IT AS IS PRESENTED , TO I READ THIS RIGHT, THAT IT , 26 WOULD BE A 19% INCREASE IN PROPERTY

TAXES, 27 IS 18, 28 IS A 27 AND 29 IS A 40? >> I THOUGHT WE WERE POSTPONING? CAN THE CITY ATTORNEY CLARIFY? I THOUGHT THIS WAS A POSTPONED ITEM?

>> THERE IS A REQUEST TO POSTPONE. >> CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION?

>> YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION, UNLESS YOU HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND OF POSTPONEMENT.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE THE ITEM, JUST LIKE WE AGREED.

>> MOTIONED BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. DISCUSSION

ON THE MOTION? >> YOU COULD DISCUSS. >> I FEEL LIKE I WAS TOLD WE WERE GOING TO POSTPONE, I WOULD LIKE TO DIG IN A LITTLE BIT MORE BEFORE ANY QUESTIONS OR BACK AND FORTH COMES UP. THAT IS WHY I MADE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE.

>> MICHAEL MY QUESTION IS, MAYOR, DIDN'T YOU SUGGEST TO POSTPONE?

>> I MADE A SUGGESTION TO MOVE ITEMS OFF FURTHER DATES. >> THAT IS POSTPONING? OR

MOVING ITEMS OFF TO FUTURE DATES? >> I DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY THIS ONE. IT WAS SUGGESTED BY STAFF. I THINK IT IS A GOOD SUGGESTION. I DO THINK IT WOULD MAKE FOR A BETTER CONVERSATION IF A COUPLE THINGS ARE KNOWN AND ONE OF THEM, BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN ACCUSED 10 TIMES APPEAR FOR MISCONSTRUING, MISSTATING, SO I AM ASKING, IT IS FUNNY, I ASK ONE QUESTION, WE HAVE TO POSTPONE THE ITEM. I'M JUST ASKING FOR INFORMATION, WE DIDN'T HAVE TO STUDY, STAFF DOESN'T HAVE TO DO RESEARCH, IT IS EITHER, I'M JUST ASKING,

IF YOU WANT TO POSTPONE, THAT IS FINE. >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO STUDY IT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT IT.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SO, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POSTPONING AND MOVING ITEM TO A

FUTURE DATE? >> IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING. IT IS POSTPONE TO A DATE CERTAIN OR POSTPONE. THE DISCUSSION EARLIER WAS IT IS GOING TO BE ON THE 12/5 AGENDA.

>> WHICH WE SAID EARLIER IN THE MEETING. WE ALREADY SAID WE WERE GOING TO SKIP IT IN THE

BEGINNING OF THE MEETING. >> MAHER ASKS ONE QUESTION, POSTPONE THE ITEM, WE DON'T

WANT THE ANSWER TODAY. >> IT IS NOT A QUICK ANSWER BECAUSE IT IS A WATERFALL

CASCADE OF QUESTIONS. >> IT IS ONE QUESTION. AS I READ THIS TODAY, AS IT IS PRESENTED, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT NO CHANGES ARE MADE, AM I UNDERSTANDING WHAT THOSE NUMBERS MEAN? TO ME, IT IS A YES, YOU ARE CORRECT, WE ARE HOPING TO MAKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF CHANGES . NO, YOU ARE INCORRECT, HERE'S WHY. WE WILL ANSWER IT LATER. RIGHT NOW, I BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE ANSWER. YOU LIKE TO SAY I HAVE MISCONSTRUED THINGS. I TRY TO

GET CLARIFICATION. >> DIDN'T SAY THAT. SAID ONCE THAT QUESTION IS ONE OF THOSE JESTS, BUT THERE WILL BE CAVEATS TO IT. JUST GETTING INTO ALL OF THAT WOULD BE

ANOTHER HALF HOUR TO AN HOUR DISCUSSION. >> KIND OF LIKE THE HALF-HOUR

DISCUSSION WE ARE HAVING ABOUT POSTPONING. >> SIR, DID YOU SAID EARLIER

YOU WOULD LIKE TO DRAG THIS ONE, THIS MEETING ON? >> WE CAN. LET'S KEEP IT

GOING. WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA? >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> DID YOU SAY IT PRIOR IN THE MEETING BEFORE, YES OR NO, THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DRAG THE

MEETING ON? >> I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL. >> POINT OF ORDER, CAN WE CALL

A VOTE PLEASE? >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON.

[02:25:03]

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> NO. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> NO. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

[13.2. Consideration and possible action on the Public Works New Facility (CIP F01-2024) Planning and Programming Update (Rick Coronado)]

>> NO. >> MOTION PASSES 4-3. NEXT, WE HAVE ITEM 13.2, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY, CIP 01-2024, PLANNING AND

PROGRAMMING UPDATE. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. CORONADO, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. TONIGHT, WE ARE DISCUSSING 13.2, CONSIDERATION, POSSIBLE ACTION OF PUBLIC WORKS NEW FACILITY, PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING UPDATE. IF YOU RECALL BACK IN JULY, WE HAD THE INITIAL PRESENTATION AND WE HAD A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT WE WANTED TO PUT INTO THE PROGRAMMING. WE HAVE SINCE GONE BACK AND DONE SOME ADDITIONAL WORK IN THE PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING PORTION OF THIS. TONIGHT, I HAVE DALE AUSTIN AND TRISTAN SNYDER TO HELP PRESENT THROUGH THIS AND ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AS WELL. WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO

TURN IT OVER TO DALE AND WE WILL CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION. >> HELLO. IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US BACK. WE ARE PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU SINCE OUR LAST CONVERSATION. ONCE AGAIN, MY NAME IS BILL AUSTIN, THIS IS MY COLLEAGUE, TRISTAN SNYDER. THE MEMBERS REPRESENTING OUR TEAM HERE TODAY. AS WE TALKED ABOUT IN JULY, THIS HAS BEEN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM, ALL OF THE TEAMS THAT WENT IN ON THE DESIGN SIDE FOR PROGRAMMING AND DEVELOPMENT. ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE CITY STAFF THAT WE HAVE INTERACTED WITH BETWEEN RICK AND MATT AND PATRICIA AND ALL OF THE OTHER FOLKS THAT REPORT SPRING. IT HAS BEEN A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS. SO, THE ISSUE HERE, AND IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE TASKED WITH AS A CITY COUNCIL, YOU ARE EXPERIENCING EXPONENTIAL GROWTH. FOR DECADES, YOU WERE PRETTY EVEN ON YOUR POPULATION GROWTH. 1980S, 2000 , THAT CURVE HAS STARTED. HERE WE ARE TODAY, TALKING TO YOU. YOU HAVE 41,000, GIVE OR TAKE, IN YOUR POPULATION. BY 2029, PROJECTING AROUND 60. AS YOU KNOW FROM THERE, IT IS GOING TO KEEP GROWING. IT IS A GOOD THING THAT YOU ARE RECOGNIZING THIS CURVE, AND THAT YOU ARE TAKING ACTION NOW BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO CONTINUE. SO, WITH THAT, THAT BRINGS UP THE NEED OF THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS COMPLEX. I AM GOING TO LET MY COLLEAGUE, TRISTAN TAKE OVER AND RUN YOU THROUGH THE PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE HAD AND I WILL CATCH UP AT

THE END OF TO TALK ABOUT PROJECTS AND SCHEDULES. >> THANK YOU, GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN. I JUST WANT TO RUN THROUGH INITIALLY KIND OF A RECAP OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE LAST MEETING. WHERE THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS CURRENTLY AND WE CAN KIND OF GO FROM THERE INTO THE NEW PROGRAMMING AND SITE ANALYSIS AND THEN EVENTUALLY THE COST ESTIMATE. CURRENTLY, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS SPLIT BETWEEN SOME STAFF BEING LOCATED AT CITY COUNCIL, HERE, AND SOME STAFF LOCATED AT THE PRIMARY LOCATION, WHICH IS ABOUT SLIGHTLY EAST OF DOWNTOWN, IT IS A 4.5 ACRE SITE . UP ON THE SCREEN, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS COMPOSED OF THREE STRUCTURES AND VARIOUS SITE ELEMENTS LIKE PARKING, EQUIPMENT STORAGE, LAYDOWN YARDS, MATERIALS STORAGE, AND SOME VARIOUS OTHER STRUCTURES.

THERE IS AN ANIMAL CONTROL PANELS ALSO LOCATED ON-SITE. BUT, ANYWAY, JUST WANT TO DIVE INTO THE EXISTING FACILITY. ONE OF THE STRUCTURES, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY OFFICE BUILDING ON THE SITE, IS A PORTABLE OFFICE BUILDING, IT IS FOUR OFFICES, TWO BATHROOMS AND THE BREAK ROOM FOR THE TEAMS AND THE CREWMEMBERS LOCATED THERE. HERE IS JUST A PICTURE OF IT, IT IS A PORTABLE OFFICE BUILDING. THIS IS THE BREAK ROOM. IT IS A VERY WELL AND OVER UTILIZED SPACE. BUT, LOVELY. OKAY. BUT, A LOT OF THESE OTHER SPACES ARE ALSO OVER UTILIZED. JUMPING

[02:30:08]

INTO KIND OF WHERE ALL THE MAIN WORKSPACE THAT HAPPENS ON SITE. THEY HAVE A MULTI-DIVISION BUILDING ON SITE WE ARE YOU BASICALLY FOUR DIVISIONS, UTILIZING A THREE VEHICLE BASE SPACE WITH ABOUT A HALF VEHICLE BASE WORTH OF STORAGE FOR ALL OF THOSE DIVISIONS AND AS WELL AS A SMALL LOCKER ROOM AND ENTRY HALL , BREAK ROOM AREA, A RESTROOM, AND A LITTLE WORKSTATION, OFFICE. HERE IS THE BUILDING. IT IS A BUILDING WITH THREE VEHICLE BASE. A LOT OF THESE SPACES HAVE MULTIPLE USES. SOME OF THEM PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE MULTIPLE USES.

BUT, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. SOMETIMES THIS CAN CAUSE INEFFICIENCIES AND BE A LITTLE BIT DANGEROUS AT TIMES. SO, IN GENERAL, THE EXISTING SITE IS PRETTY OVER UTILIZED . JUST FOR THE RECORD, LIKE THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN DURING THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY WHEN MOST OF THE VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT OUT OF THE FIELD DOING SERVICE. AND, SO, THE SITE, EVEN WITH MOST OF THE VEHICLES GONE, IS A PRETTY DENSELY PACKED AREA FOR THE CITY'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THIS IS THE THIRD STRUCTURE, WHICH IS JUST AND EQUIPMENT COVERING FOR SOME OF THE SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT. AND IN THE BACK, YOU CAN SEE THE MATERIALS STORAGE AND, FURTHER ON IS THE LAYDOWN YARD AS WELL AS UP FRONT THERE ARE SOME SERIOUS OTHER STORAGE STRUCTURES. TO RECAP, SPACE WISE, IT IS A VERY DENSE. A LOT OF OVERUTILIZATION OF THESE SPACES. THE TOP RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE 120 IN THE BUILDING IS ALSO BEING USED FOR EQUIPMENT OR UNIFORM STORAGE . THEN, IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT, YOU HAVE THREE VEHICLE BAYS BEING UTILIZED BY MULTIPLE CREWS, FOUR DIVISIONS WHEN YOU REALLY NEED SUBSTANTIALLY MORE. SOME, THEN, AS FOR THE SITE AREAS, AS THE CITY KEEPS GROWING, AND AS THE CITY BRINGS ON MORE PUBLIC WORKS STAFFING, YOU ARE GOING TO NEED MORE EQUIPMENT, YOU ARE GOING TO NEED MORE SPACE FOR MATERIALS, YOU ARE GOING TO NEED MORE LAYDOWN AREA. SO, THERE'S NOT VERY MUCH SPACE FOR THIS SITE TO EXPAND CURRENTLY OR BE UTILIZED MORE EFFICIENTLY. SO, TALKING ABOUT STAFFING CURRENTLY, THE DIVISION, THE DEPARTMENT IS BROKEN UP IN SIX DIVISIONS WITH A TOTAL STAFF OF 51 PEOPLE. SOME OF THE STAFF ARE LOCATED HERE IN CITY HALL. A LOT OF THE STUFF UTILIZED THAT THE SITE THAT YOU JUST SAW , WHICH IS ALREADY BUSTING AT THE SEAMS. OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS EXPECTED TO NEARLY DOUBLE IN STAFFING. THAT IS KIND OF THE TIMELINE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WHEN IT COMES TO THE URGENCY, I GUESS, OF THIS SITUATION. SO, AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR REPORT, AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR EFFORT TO WE WERE APPROACHED BASICALLY WITH THE GOAL, THE LONG-TERM GOAL THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS A CONSOLIDATED FACILITY, WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE A GROUP IN CITY HALL OR OFF ON THIS SITE, IT IS ALL BROUGHT TOGETHER, WHICH GAINS A LOT OF EFFICIENCIES AND COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT AND THE CREW AS WELL AS INTRODUCES A VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED FOR EQUIPMENT AT THE CREW, WHICH THEY ARE EXPENSIVE PIECES OF EQUIPMENT AND YOU WANT TO REDUCE THE WEAR AND TEAR ON THEM. AND, YOU ALSO CAN ENCOURAGE DUAL USES OF THE FACILITIES SO YOU ARE NOT DUPLICATING PROGRAMS AND SPACES IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT SPOTS OF THE CITY. NOW, IDEALLY, YOU WOULD WANT THAT TO BE DONE DAY ONE. THAT IS YOUR GOAL. YOU WANT THAT TO HAVE, YOU WANT IT TO HAPPEN. YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY DO THAT. WE CAME BACK AFTER A PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEETING WITH AN OPTION AND THAT IS TO DO A PHASED APPROACH WHERE YOU DON'T JUMP INTO THE CONSOLIDATED FACILITIES STRATEGY, YOU WALK YOUR WAY UP TO IT AND THAT IS THROUGH OUR TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE ARE CALLING THEM EASILY IDENTIFIED NEEDS, WHICH IS THE CONSOLIDATED FACILITY AND THE INITIAL BUILDOUT. THIS IS THE INITIAL BUILDOUT PHASE, WHICH IS THE PHASED APPROACH IS KIND OF A STRATEGY THAT INITIALIZES THE CONSOLIDATION PROCESS WHILE CONTINUING TO UTILIZE WHAT THE CITY HAS. I AM GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THAT KIND OF AGAIN.

[02:35:03]

WE HAVE THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS, WHICH IS, WHAT WAS IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE PROGRAMMING EFFORT WITH ALL OUR WORKSHOPS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH LEADERSHIP. AND, THAT IS THE CONSOLIDATED FACILITY, THE LONG-TERM GOAL AND KIND OF CATCHING HUTTO UP TO ITS CURRENT GROWTH. THEN YOU HAVE THE INITIAL BUILDOUT, WHICH IS THE PHASE STEP UP TO A CONSOLIDATED FACILITY. JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR, THOSE ARE THE TWO STRATEGIES AND TWO OPTIONS WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT AS WE

GET INTO THE PROGRAMMING. >> NOT SITTING WE ARE STARTING THAT PROCESS. WE HAD CERTAIN FOLKS OVER INTO THE NEW FACILITY BUT YOU MAY STILL ALSO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE CITY HALL SPACE AND UTILIZE THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS SPACE, THAT IS WHY WE ARE SAYING IT IS PART

CONSOLIDATION. >> SO, KIND OF TALKING ABOUT THE GENERAL PROGRAM ELEMENTS THAT WE DISCUSSED THROUGHOUT OUR WORKSHOPS. THESE ARE ELEMENTS THAT ARE A PART OF BOTH STRATEGIES. THESE ARE THE 15 ELEMENTS THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY PROVIDE SERVICES TO THE CITY.

SO, ON THIS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT PRIMARY TYPES OF BUILDING. ADMINISTRATION, CREW, DIVISION, FLEET AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING. THOSE ARE THE PRIMARY BUILDINGS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT. THEN, IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU HAVE 11 OTHER SITE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE VARIOUS PURPOSES BUT ARE A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. SO, BASED ON THE LAST CONVERSATION AT CITY COUNCIL, WE WERE KIND OF FLOATING THE IDEA OF POSSIBLY GETTING A SITE , LIKE POSSIBLY THE CITY COULD NEED A SITE. IT TURNS OUT, CITY DID HAVE A SITE AND YOU ALREADY OWN IT, WHICH IS GREAT NEWS. THE SITE IS THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT.

CURRENTLY, YOU ALL ARE UNDERGOING A PRETTY BIG EXPANSION. EVEN AFTER THAT EXPANSION, THERE SEEMS TO BE APPROXIMATELY 31.5 ACRES OF UNUSED LAND THAT IS DEVELOPABLE NOT IN A FLOODPLAIN AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL PORTION OF THAT SAID ARE STILL AVAILABLE FOR FUTURE EXPANSION OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE SITE AND WE WERE BROUGHT, WE WERE PREP THE SITE BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND WE ANALYZED IT AND CONFIRMED THAT IT WOULD BE ADEQUATE FOR NOT JUST THE IMMEDIATE NEEDS BUT ALSO THE FULL CONSOLIDATION AND EVEN FUTURE FACILITY NEEDS AFTER THAT. IN ADDITION, YOU HAVE THE EXISTING 4.5 ACRE SITE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED AS THE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY.

TOGETHER, YOU HAVE 36 ACRES, APPROXIMATELY 36 ACRES OF LAND. SO, APPLYING SOME OF, I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU THE SITE PLAN AND THEN WE WILL WALK BACKWARD FROM THAT FOR THE PROGRAM. THIS IS THE PHASED APPROACH INITIAL BUILDOUT OF THAT SAID AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE DONE ON THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS SITES. OUR FIRST GOAL WOULD BE TO CONSTRUCT A MODERATELY SIZED FACILITY ON THE SOUTH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE, INCLUDING TWO BUILDINGS, WHICH WOULD HOUSE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND THE DIVISION WAREHOUSE BUILDING KIND OF COMBINED. AGAIN, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY, VERY EARLY SITE PLAN. THIS CAN BE ARRANGED AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS. BUT, THIS WAS KIND OF OUR ATTEMPT AT A MOST EFFICIENT LAYOUT WHILE STILL ALLOWING FOR EXPANSION IN THE FUTURE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE RANGE IS THE REMAINING LAND AREA AND THE LIGHTER GRAY IS THE SITE ELEMENTS WITH EQUIPMENT STORAGE, COVERED EQUIPMENT FOR STORAGE, MATERIALS STORAGE, LAYDOWN YARDS, AND EMPLOYEE PARKING AND VISITOR PARKING, IF THERE ARE ANY. AS FOR THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS SITE WITH THE INTENTION IS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS MODERATELY SIZED FACILITY ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE, THE ORIGINAL FACILITY WOULD BE RENOVATED AND RE-GEARED TO BECOME JUST A FLEET MAINTENANCE BUILDING. THE THREE VEHICLE BAYS IN THE EXISTING SITE WOULD BECOME A DEDICATED FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY, WHICH ARE DESPERATELY

[02:40:02]

NEEDED, AS YOU WERE GROSS EQUIPMENT NEEDS FOR PARTS CONTINUE TO GROW WITH THE STAFFING. THEN, SO, I WANT TO KIND OF MOVE FOR. WHAT AN EXPANSION WOULD LOOK LIKE, WHAT THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS OR THE FOUR CONSOLIDATED VERSION. THEN, WITHIN THIS, WE HAVE ANOTHER SERIES OF OPTIONS REGARDING THE FLEET MAINTENANCE BUILDING. SO, THERE IS AN OPTION TO CONSTRUCT A WHOLE NEW FLEET MAINTENANCE FACILITY ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE, OR YOU COULD JUST CONSTRUCT A NEW BUILDING ON THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS SITE.

THESE ARE OPTIONS THAT WOULD BE THOROUGHLY DESIGNED IN A FUTURE PHASE OF THE PROJECT. HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU HAVE THE ORANGE BLOCKS ARE THE EXPANSION OF THE STRUCTURES AND BUILDINGS AND THE LIGHTER ORANGE THE EXPANSION OF THE SITE WORK ON THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SITE. THEN, THE BLUE. SO, KIND OF WANT TO GET INTO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE STUFF CONVERSATIONS. I FIRST WANTED TO IDENTIFY THAT MOST OF THE SITE IS GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO SITE WORK AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY WHAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NEEDS. VEHICLE EQUIPMENT STORAGE, LAYDOWN YARDS, ALL THE REALLY NECESSARY SITE STUFF THAT WE HAVE LISTED.

IT COMES OUT TO OVER 75% OF THE SITE WILL BE DEDICATED TO THAT. LESS THAN 25% IS GOING TO BE DEDICATED FOR BUILDINGS. BOTH THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS AND THE INITIAL BUILDOUT. THAT IS HOW THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS, IT IS SAID CONTENTS. I WANT TO GO ONE BY ONE ON THE BUILDING SPECIFICALLY, AND GO THROUGH THE INITIAL VERSUS THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS VERSION OF THOSE BUILDINGS. SO, THE INITIAL BUILDOUT FOR AN ADMINISTRATION AND CREW BUILDING, IT IS A PREDOMINANTLY OFFICE-BASED BUILDING WITH CREW SUPPORT SPACES. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PRIVATE OFFICES, OPEN OFFICE SPACE, TRAINING SPACES, MEETING SPACES, LOCKER ROOMS, THE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS CENTER, WHICH IS THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE THAT WOULD BE ON GENERATOR POWER. SO, IT IS MORE HEAVILY GEARED TOWARD LIKE AN OFFICE PROGRAM WITH SOME CREW SUPPORT ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN IT. IDENTIFY NEEDS IS NOT DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT. JUST IN THE DIFFERENCE IS MOSTLY IN THE AMOUNT OF OFFICE SPACE PROVIDED. KIND OF PLANNING FOR THAT LARGER STAFF INCREASE OVER THE 10 YEARS SO YOU ARE NOT IMMEDIATELY CONSTRUCTING AND ADDITION AFTER YOU BUILD THIS FACILITY. IT HAS THE SAME COMPONENTS. IT IS A CREW AND OFFICE-BASED PROGRAM. SO THE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS CENTER IS KIND OF THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE CENTER WHERE IT WOULD BE A SERIES OF OFFICES DEDICATED TO LIKE A GENERATOR POWER WHERE THEY HAVE THE SEPARATED DATA ROOM SO THAT THE DATA CLOSET SO YOU ARE NOT LOSING POWER TO DATA SYSTEM AS WELL AS IT WILL HAVE A COUPLE OF BUNK ROOMS FOR 24-HOUR SHIFTS THAT HAVE BEEN DURING EMERGENCIES AND A COUPLE OF OFFICES AND WORKSTATIONS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN UTILIZE THAT SPACE WHILE THE OTHER PART OF THE FACILITY IS OUT OF POWER. BUT, IT IS NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT PART OF THE FACILITY, EVEN THOUGH IT IS ONLY LIKE 80% OF THE ACTUAL FOOTPRINT. IT IS A PRETTY IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE PUBLIC WORKS. SO, IN ADDITION, I KIND OF WANTED TO TOUCH A LITTLE BIT MORE ON SOME OF THE PROGRAM SPACES. WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT CREATING A PHASED APPROACH, A LOT OF EMPHASIS WAS PUT ON FINDING WAYS TO USE MULTIPLE MS BASIS FOR MULTIPLE PURPOSES AND REDUCING THE FOOTPRINT AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. SO, WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE TRAINING AND MEETING ALL, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE. THIS IS, FOR EXAMPLE, IS ABOUT JUST SLIGHTLY LESS THAN THE SIZE OF THIS. IT WOULD HAVE PARTITION WALLS SO MULTIPLE TRAINING ROOMS CAN BE CREATED FOR THE CREWMEMBERS TO DO THEIR CONTINUING EDUCATION.

[02:45:11]

THEY WOULD BE KIND OF A STORAGE CLOSET AND POSSIBLY AN ATTACHED BREAKROOM SO THAT SPACE COULD BE TURNED INTO A LARGER BREAKROOM DURING NORMAL DAYS. IT ALSO COULD FUNCTION AS A MEETING HALL FOR AN ALL HANDS MEETING THAT HAPPENS AS WELL AS IT COULD BE CONFERENCE ROOMS. IT IS A MULTIPURPOSE SPACE. BUT, BY TRYING TO DESIGN IT THAT WAY, WE CAN REDUCE PROGRAMS AND OTHER SPACES, AS WELL AS WE WANTED TO PROVIDE A COMPARISON. THE CONFERENCE ROOM SIZES AND BREAK ROOMS AND THEN LATER YOU WILL SEE THE OFFICES . GENERALLY, A SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM IS SMALLER THAN THE CONFERENCE ROOMS WE HAVE HERE IN THE CITY HALL. BREAK ROOMS SMALLER THAN THE ONE WE HAVE AT CITY HALL. THE OFFICES ARE THE SAME SIZE TO THE TYPICAL OFFICES HERE, 120 SQUARE FEET AND THEN WE ARE PROVIDING HUDDLE ROOMS, WHICH ARE JUST LIKE YOU COME TO CONFERENCE SPACES THAT CAN, THOSE ROOMS COULD BE TURNED INTO EXTRA OFFICES SHOULD IT BE NEEDED. IN THE MEANTIME, THEY FUNCTION AS A PRIVATE ROOM WHERE PHONE CALLS CAN BE TAKEN OR LITTLE CONFERENCES COULD HAPPEN. THEN, SO, THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION IN OUR PROGRAMMING. THIS IS THE ONE BUILDING, THE DIVISION WORKSHOP BUILDING THAT WE ARE NOT PROPOSING A REDUCTION IN SQUARE FOOTAGE BASED ON COMPARED TO WHAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY NEEDS FOR THE FUTURE. THIS SPACE IS SUCH AN INTEGRAL AND IMPORTANT PIECE TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND A LOT OF THESE SPACES, THEY REALLY CAN'T BE REDUCED IN SIZE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT STORING A 42 FOOT LONG VACUUM TRUCK IN A SPACE OR PULLING IN A VEHICLE TO UNLOAD AND OFFLOAD WITH GANTRY CRANES. YOU CAN'T REALLY REDUCE THAT MUCH. IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT REDUCING SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT GETTING RID OF A WHOLE BAY OR GETTING RID OF TWO WHOLE DAYS. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE BUILDINGS WHERE WE WERE JUST LIKE HIM AWARE WE WERE EMMA WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE PROGRAM.

THIS IS WHERE THE CREWS ARE DOING A LOT OF THEIR WORK AND PREP FOR GOING OUT IN THE FIELD. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING FOR THEIR FUNCTION OF THE FACILITY. THESE ARE SOME OF THE TYPICAL SPACES WE WILL WORKSHOP MULTIPURPOSE WORKSHOP FOR WELDING, YOU COULD PULL A TRUCK IN, DO A MOVABLE CRANE AND OFFLOAD MOTORS OR WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO. ON THE RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE AN EXAMPLE OF A VEHICLE BAY WHERE YOU COULD USE IT AS EMERGENCY STORAGE FOR INCLEMENT WEATHER. YOUR SENSITIVE EQUIPMENT DOESN'T GET DAMAGED. THEN OUR FLEET MAINTENANCE BUILDING IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT WHEN IT COMES TO THE INITIAL VERSUS THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS.

THE INITIAL BUILDOUT IS JUST A RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS APARTMENT BUILDING. SO, THIS WOULD BE A RENOVATION TO GEAR THESE THREE VEHICLE BAYS, SPECIFICALLY TO FLEET MAINTENANCE. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BRINGING IN SOME MORE LIFTS, MAKING SURE THAT THE STORAGE RACKS ARE PROPER FOR TIRES AND ALL OF THE MATERIALS THAT THEY NEED, AND TALKING ABOUT REDOING THE BATHROOM AND RECONFIGURING OFFICES, IF NEEDED, OR SPACE FOR A CREW TO BE OUT THERE WITHOUT ANY OTHER SUPPORT SPACE. AND THEN IDENTIFY NEEDS.

THIS WOULD BE AN INCREASE FROM THREE VEHICLE BAYS TO SIX VEHICLE BAYS. THAT IS WHAT THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS OF THE CITY, BASED ON OUR CONVERSATIONS. AGAIN, THE OVERALL PROGRAM BREAKDOWN IS RELATIVELY THE SAME. IT IS JUST A LARGER BUILDING TO HOUSE MORE VEHICLE BAYS FOR MORE EQUIPMENT. THIS IS A TYPICAL PROGRAM. ON THE LEFT, YOU WILL SEE THE EXISTING PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLE BAY AND THIS WOULD BE CONVERTED INTO A FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY. TO GIVE YOU A SIZE COMPARISON OF THE ONES THAT WOULD BE A PROPOSED, KIND OF A MORE TYPICAL STANDARD FOR A VEHICLE BAY. THEN, FINALLY THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING. THIS IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD BUILDING. THIS IS A WAREHOUSE SPACE. WE ARE PROPOSING A REDUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF

[02:50:03]

WAREHOUSE SPACE FROM THE INITIAL, BETWEEN THE INITIAL AND IDENTIFIED NEEDS. BOTH THE WAY HEALTH SPACES WILL STILL HOLD HAZARDOUS MATERIAL STORAGE, COVERED PIPE STORAGE, MAJOR STORAGE, AND CHECK OUT, PARTS CHECK OUT. ALONG THE SAME LINES, JUST LARGER PER THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS. AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER SAID STRUCTURES. I DON'T WANT TO KIND OF GLAZE OVER THIS BUT, I MEAN, THE DIFFERENCE IS YOU NEED MORE FOR A CONSOLIDATED FACILITY THAT IS PLANNING FOR THAT 95 STAFF MEMBERS THAN A MORE IMMEDIATE NEED. AND THEN, LASTLY, WE WANTED TO RESENT SOME RELEVANT IMAGES JUST TO TALK ABOUT DESIGN AND WHAT YOU COULD ANTICIPATE PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY LOOKING LIKE FOR A FACILITY THIS SIZE AND A SIMILAR CONSIDERATION. SO, THESE ARE JUST SOME FACILITIES LOCATED AROUND THE COUNTRY WITH DIFFERENT DESIGN STRATEGIES. AS YOU CAN TELL, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TREAT EVERY BUILDING THE SAME. OBVIOUSLY, AND THEN A DIFFERENT, MORE LOCAL DESIGN STRATEGY. I'M GOING TO HAND IT

BACK OVER TO DALE FOR ALL OF THEM FUN STUFF. >> I'M GOING TO GO BACK UP A COUPLE OF SLIDES TO POINT SOMETHING OUT. THIS BOTTOM RIGHT PICTURE, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, HOW YOU CAN, IF WE COMBINE A BUILDING AND BRING A SPACE TOGETHER TO GET MULTIPLE USES OUT OF IT. YOU CAN SEE THIS ROOM HERE, THIS FUNCTIONS AS ALL HANDS ON MEETING DECK SPACE. IT COULD BE HAVING PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS, IT CAN FUNCTION AS A LUNCHROOM. IN THE VERY BACK, YOU SEE A KITCHEN, BAR TOP. ALL OF THOSE ARE RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE. IT IS SURROUNDED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICES. SO, EVERYBODY IS RIGHT THERE. THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO COLLABORATE WITH EACH OTHER. THAT IS A SPACE THAT ANSWERS MULTIPLE USES. ALL RIGHT. SOME, AS WE MENTIONED THE STRATEGY, WE HAVE THE INITIAL BUILDOUT STRATEGY VERSUS THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS STRATEGY. AS WE SAW IN THE STAFFING EARLIER, YOU HAVE 51 DOWN, YOU ARE EXPECTED TO DOUBLE THAT. THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT, THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN IN ONE YEAR OR TWO YEARS, IT IS GOING TO BE A GRADUAL INCREASE. IT DOESN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO JUMP RIGHT IN AND WAIT TO CATCH UP.

THAT IS KIND OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT. AS WE JUMP INTO THE COSTS, JUST WANTED TO SET THE MOOD TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT. IN OUR MEETING WILL BE WERE TOLD IN 2018, CITY ALWAYS GIVE OR TAKE $12 MILLION. WE DID A COST ESCALATION ON THAT TO 2028. THE SAME BUILDING AT 2028 IS A $19 MILLION BUILDING. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THINGS HAVE ESCALATED SINCE 2019 AND WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GO. WITH THAT, WE WILL MOVE INTO THE BUDGET HERE. I WILL START WITH THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, THAT IS WHAT EVERYONE IS LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, THE SCHEDULE ON THE RIGHT, YOUR IDENTIFIED NEEDS. WHEN WE PUT IT ALL TOGETHER, THE BUILDINGS WE DISCUSSED, ALL THE SITE IMPROVEMENTS, THE COST OF DOING THE WORK, PAYING FOR THE WORK, THE MANAGEMENT FEES, SURVEYS, EPIGRAPHIC, WHOLE NINE YARDS, WE ARE AROUND $88 MILLION. THAT IS QUITE A NUMBER TO DIGEST. WHEN THE ESTIMATE CAME IN, THEY ALL HAD THAT MOMENT AND SAID OKAY. WE NEED TO THINK THIS THROUGH. SO, THUS, WE ARE BRINGING THE INITIAL STRATEGY, THE BILL TO YOU. EVERYTHING THAT TRISTAN JUST WENT THROUGH, HOW WE REDUCE SPACE, COMBINE BUILDINGS, DURING THE STRATEGY OF USING EXISTING SITES, ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AND WORKED INTO THIS BUDGET LINE ITEM. YOU CAN SEE THE BUILDINGS AT THE TOP, YOU CAN SEE THE SITE AREA, THE COST OF BUILDING, DESIGNING, MANAGING, WHOLE NINE YARDS, EVERYTHING YOU CAN EXPECT THERE. SO, WHAT WE ARE PROTECTING AS THE INITIAL BUILDOUT IS ROUGHLY $39 MILLION, PLUS OR MINUS. THIS IS JUST HOW THE PROGRAM HAS TURNED OUT. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S A LOT BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME WE DO SITE DESIGN OR WE DECIDED TO DO THIS. ALL OF THESE THINGS CAN BE, DURING THAT I CAN BE DISCUSSED. YOU MIGHT COME BACK AND SAY ONLY HAVE IS 25. WE JUST HAVE TO FIND A STRATEGY TO

[02:55:02]

GET THERE. WHAT IS THE FIRST STEP TO GET YOU TO THAT POINT? ALL AND ALL, JUST KNOWING WHAT THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS ARE. IT WOULD BE UNDER 42 MILLION TO GET TO THE IDENTIFIED NEEDS.

KEEP IN MIND, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TO DO ALL THAT AT ONE TIME. THIS COULD BE AN INCREMENTAL STEP APPROACH. MAYBE A VEHICULAR COVERED STORAGE AREA. AT SOME MORE PARKING ON OF THE YEAR. YOU CAN WORK YOUR WAY INTO THAT. WITH THAT, WE WILL FINISH UP HERE WITH THE SCHEDULE. THIS IS JUST THEORETICAL. SORT OF THE TIMELINES THAT IT IS GOING TO TAKE, WHEN YOU COULD EXPECT TO OPEN THE DOORS AND START USING THIS FACILITY. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE CRITICAL ABOUT THIS, THE CONTRACTING METHODS. ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO DESIGN THE BUILDING, FUNDING, THAT IS GOING TO BE THE KEY. WHEN CAN YOU FIND THIS? SIX YEARS FROM NOW, TWO YEARS FROM NOW? THAT IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE BIGGEST ITEMS IN THE SCHEDULE. THE SCOPE, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT. HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT IS GOING TO BE BUILT OUT AT THE TIME AND THE MATERIAL ITEMS. I BELIEVE YOU ALL HAVE THIS IN FRONT OF YOU. I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO READ BECAUSE I CAN'T. THE POINT OF THE SCHEDULE IS THE TOP HALF OF THE SCHEDULE, BID, BUILD, IT IS RIGHT THERE. THAT TENDS TO BE THE LONGEST PATH, IF YOU WILL, TO THE END. YOUR CONTRACTOR IS COMING ON AT THE END. THAT IS ALSO THE PATH WHERE YOU FIND OUT HOW MUCH OF THE PROJECT IS GOING TO COST DOWN THE ROAD. SOMETIMES THIS CAN BE A SURPRISE, WHICH CAN THROW A MONKEYWRENCH IN THE WORKS. THAT WOULD SHOW YOU TAKING OPERATION OF THE SPACES IN JANUARY OF 2029. IF YOU CAME IN WITH THE CMAR METHOD, THAT IS PREFERABLE. YOU COULD BRING ON THE CONSTRUCTION RISK AT THE SAME TIME AS THE DESIGN AND THEN YOU COULD , THE DESIGN IS CURRENTLY CMAR CAN WORK CONCURRENTLY WITH EACH OTHER TO UNDERSTAND THE DESIGN, TO DEFINE COST , TO USE DIFFERENT MATERIALS. MAYBE WE CAN'T AFFORD A SPEECH OR WHATEVER THAT IS. IT IS MORE OF A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH. THE NICE THING ABOUT THE CMAR METHOD IS THE ABILITY TO FAST-TRACK CONSTRUCTION, START RELEASING EARLY PACKAGES SO CONSTRUCTION CAN BE UNDERWAY WHILE DESIGN IS STILL UNDERWAY.

YOU GET THE GMP MUCH EARLIER IN THE PROCESS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE VERY END. JUST CROSS YOUR FINGERS AND HOPE YOU GET THE NUMBER. YOU GET THE TARGET, YOU KNOW WHERE YOU ARE GOING WITH THAT. SO, THAT, RIGHT NOW IN THIS SCHEDULE WHAT WE HAVE SHOWN IS FIVE OR SIX MONTHS EARLIER. THIS IS JUST THEORETICAL GET THE GMP AND THEY ARE VERY AGGRESSIVE, WE START BRINGING THAT BACK. AS I MENTIONED THESE GREAT BARS HERE, THESE ARE THE UP FRONT, THAT IS FUNDING. WHEN CAN WE FUND THIS? THE BEST CASE SCENARIO, IT MIGHT BE THE END OF 25 BUT IT MIGHT BE 26 OR 27. I DON'T KNOW. WE JUST HIGHLIGHTED THOSE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IS WHERE THE CLOCK IS TICKING. THE FURTHER OUT RIGHT YOU GET TO COMPLETION, IT ALSO HAS AN EFFECT ON THE COST. JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEAS OF WHERE WE STAND. SO, THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION. JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU.

AND, WE HAVE ENJOYED WORKING WITH THE CITY AND THE STAFF. IT HAS BEEN A GREAT EXPERIENCE. WE

ARE OPEN TO QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.

>> I HAD ONE FOR RICK. SO, IN THE STAFF REVIEW, IT SAYS THE ESTIMATED COST IS 20 MILLION AND THEIR PRESENTATION SHOWED 39 MILLION. I AM CURIOUS HOW WE ARE OFF BY 50%.

>> REFERRING TO THE CNP PROJECT AMOUNT, 20 MILLION? >> ON THE ITEM WE ARE ON, UNDER FISCAL NOTES, IT SAYS THIS FACILITY IS INCLUDED IN THE FIVE-YEAR CIP PLAN SCHEDULED TO BEGIN FISCAL YEAR 25 AT AN ESTIMATE COST OF 20 MILLION AND HE JUST GAVE A PRESENTATION OF

[03:00:07]

40 MILLION. I'M JUST CURIOUS BUT, THE SHORT ANSWER IS WHENEVER THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE CIP, WE PUT IN A 20 MILLION LEASEHOLDER. THAT IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE CIP

BUDGET. >> OKAY. THAT IS THE REASON IT WAS THERE. WE ALREADY KNOW THAT

THAT IS HAVE. >> NOW WE DO. >> WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF THE THING WE POSTPONED, IT IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE WE ALREADY KNOW THAT

NUMBER IS OFF BY 20 MILLION. >> IF YOU BUILT EVERYTHING THEY ARE PROPOSING THE WAY THEY ARE PROPOSING, IT IS. YOU COULD ONLY SAY, SORRY, IT IS 20 MILLION, GO FIGURE IT OUT. YOU

COULD DO THAT. >> YOU COULD SAY YOU'VE GOT 5 MILLION NEXT YEAR, 5 MILLION NEXT YEAR. YOU COULD SAY YOU HAVE $88 MILLION. THE REASON I LIKE TO KNOW WHAT OUR DEBT LEVELS WILL BE IN TAX INCREASES IS HOW DO YOU HAVE THE CONVERSATION, HOW DO WE HAVE IT WITH RICK AND SAINT WE COULD DO 20, 30, I DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE WILLING TO DO IN 2025 ON TAXES. ONE QUESTION, I'M NOT GOING TO KEEP DEBATING THE TEXTING. IS THERE ANY CONCERN, BUT, HAVING THIS RIGHT NEXT TO A TREATMENT PLANT? WHEN I AM OVER BY KALAHARI, I SMELL IT WHEN THE WIND BLOWS RIGHT. EVERY TIME, I DON'T PLAY A LOT BUT FOUR, FIVE ROUNDS OF GOLF AT STAR RANCH, I DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE BUT I CAN !. IS THERE ANY CONCERN WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THIS GIANT WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT, WE ARE GOING TO BUILD $90 MILLION IN OFFICES RIGHT NEXT TO IT? I FEEL SORRY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO WORK THERE. THEY DON'T GET PAID ENOUGH BUT ANY CONCERN THAT MAYBE WE OUGHT TO NOT PUT ALL OF OUR OFFICES AND ALL OF THAT THERE AND MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOME OF OUR OTHER 500

ACRES THAT WE HAVE? >> HERE'S MY OPINION ON THAT. OBVIOUSLY, A FACILITY BETWEEN THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT ALSO PROVIDES, THE EXPANSION OF THE WASTEWATER PLANT WILL HAVE ODOR CONTROL. THAT IS KIND OF ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS DESIGNED IN THOSE PLANTS IS UNDER CONTROL IN MAINTAINING THAT ORDER CONTROL. TO ME, IT IS A BENEFIT TO BE THERE, UNDERSTAND IT, AND TO KNOW THAT IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES, YOU ADDRESS THOSE WHILE THEY ARE THERE RATHER THAN LET THOSE LINGER. THAT IS PART OF THE BENEFIT OF BEING ON SITE AND ADJACENT TO OTHER FACILITIES THAT YOU HAVE TO MANAGE, EVEN IF THEY ARE CONTRACT OPERATIONS, IT HELPS YOU KEEP AN EYE ON ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON, THAT OTHERS MAY EXPERIENCE AS WELL, NOT JUST THOSE THAT ARE WORKING THERE, BUT THOSE THAT ARE SURROUNDING AND LIVE THERE.

>> THAT MAKES SENSE. THE BOSS IS WORKING THERE AND THEY SMELL IT, CHANCES ARE IT WILL GET ADDRESSED VERSUS IF IT WAS BUILT OUT AND A FEW PEOPLE WORKING, THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> IT PROBABLY CAN'T BE WORSE THAN HAVING JACKETS IN THE BATHROOM, RIGHT QUESTION

>> OR GOING INTO THE SEWER TO CLEAN STUFF. >> ORDER, THEY ARE ALREADY NEXT

TO A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, RIGHT NOW. >> I WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU GUYS FOR IDENTIFYING ENGLAND THAT WE ALREADY OWN AND NOT HAVING TO GO OUT AND BUY OTHER LAND, THAT IS GOOD USE OF THE SPACE THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION

THAT WE ACCEPT THE PRESENTATION AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> THE MOTION IS TO ACCEPT THE PRESENTATION? DO I UNDERSTAND IT RIGHT?

>> YES SIR. >> CAN I AS A SECOND, CAN I MAKE AN AMENDMENT?

>> YOU CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS TO DO. >> I WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE A PART OF OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING, THIS TOPIC SO THAT WE CAN GET AHEAD OF IT ON THE FRONT END BEFORE WE GET INTO BUDGET TALKS. I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF TO HAVE THIS COORDINATED

IN OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING . >> IS THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?

>> I WOULD CONSIDER THAT. >> ACCEPTING AND ADDING TO THE STRATEGIC PLAN. ANY DISCUSSION

ON THAT? >> THANK YOU FOR MAKING IT SO THOROUGH.

>> THANK YOU FOR IDENTIFYING LAND WE ALREADY HAVE. I KNOW THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT I HAD MENTIONED AND I DON'T REMEMBER HOW THE CONVERSATION WENT OBVIOUSLY, WITH THE EXPANSION GOING ON, IT WAS ONSHORE BUT I GUESS MAYBE NOW THAT THE EXPANSION IS KIND OF FINALIZED

[03:05:02]

DESIGN, YOU ARE MORE AWARE OF THE FOOTPRINT AND OPTIONS AND POSSIBILITIES.

>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. WE DID HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND LOOK AT THE FLOODPLAIN A LITTLE DEEPER AND ALSO THE EXPANSION, INCLUDING POTENTIALLY FUTURE EXPANSIONS OF OTHER FACILITIES THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE THERE. I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> PLEASE CALL TO VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

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

[13.3. Discussion and Possible action regarding uses and fees associated with the Gin Building. (Mike Snyder)]

>> TRAIN FOR. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

>> AYE . MOTION PASSES 7-MISSOURI. NEXT, ITEM 13.3, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING USES ENTRIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE GIN BUILDING. TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER, AS I CUSTOMARILY BRING TO THE COUNCIL BEFORE I ASK ANYBODY, I JUST DON'T ASK, THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE OR DO ANYTHING FROM A STAFF LEVEL, UNLESS CITY COUNCIL HAS A DESIRE. IN TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER, THE GIN BUILDING, WHICH ARE A WEEK OR TWO AWAY

FROM IT BEING ABLE TO BE USED? >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> I WAS LIKE WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH IT? THERE HAVE BEEN IDEAS ABOUT BE AS PART OF THE CO-OP, IT COULD BE A FARMERS MARKET MOTHER COULD BE OTHER USES AND I THINK TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER, WE NEED TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE WANT TO SEE DONE AND THEN WE NEED AN ORDINANCE TO INSTITUTE FEES. WITHOUT THAT, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE USE IT BECAUSE EVERY TIME ONE OF US WILL HAVE AN IDEA, RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE NOTHING TO USE IT FOR. DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT? MY IDEA TO THROW IT OUT THERE, THAT WOULD BE A DEDICATED FARMERS MARKET THAT COULD BE USED, WE COULD COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF FEE ARRANGEMENT WHERE PEOPLE CAN SET UP MORE OF A STANDARD THING AND TO BE MORE OF A TRADITIONAL FARMERS MARKET, WITH WHAT YOU TRADITIONALLY SEE IN A FARMERS MARKET. PRODUCE, VEGETABLES, THINGS THAT ARE PREPARED AROUND HERE. IN MY MIND, PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE CITY, THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT, THEY WOULD HAVE REDUCED FEE VERSUS THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OUTSIDE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO SET IT UP AND THEN IT BE 50 BUCKS A MONTH TO BE THERE AND IT IS ALL PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIVE OR PAY TAXES IN THE CITY OF HUTTO AND PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF HUTTO ARE ASKING GOD WHY GET INTO MY OWN BUILDING I AM PAYING FOR BUT I DON'T WANT TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIVE AROUND HERE BUT YOU COULD HAVE A TIERED DEAL. I THOUGHT ADDING IT UP FOR DISCUSSION BASED ON WHAT WE SAY HERE. WE FORMULATE SOME SORT OF MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO BRING BACK SOME KIND OF ORDINANCE ON THE USE AND A FEE SCHEDULE THAT WE CAN THEN DISCUSS IN MORE DETAIL. RIGHT NOW, AS IT IS, IT IS GOING TO

BE A GREAT BUILDING THAT HAS LIMITED USES. >> WOULD THIS BE A REQUIREMENT FOR FARMERS MARKETS, LIKE THEY HAVE TO BE AT THE GIN BUILDING OR IS THIS JUST AN OPTION?

>> TO ME, IT IS AN OPTION. IF YOU WANT A COVERED OPTION. >> ARE YOU WANTING THE CITY TO RUN A FARMERS MARKET OR ARE YOU WANTING US TO MAKE IT AVAILABLE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO RUN A FARMERS MARKET THAT COMPLIES WITH POLICIES THAT WE SET FOR HOW THEY OPERATE?

>> FOR ME, MY OPINION, WITH MY LIMITED GOVERNMENT PUSHED, I WOULD PREFER SOMEONE ELSE RUN IT AND IT HAVE THE ABILITY, KIND OF LIKE THE AMPHITHEATER. WE COULD GO DOWN RIGHT NOW AND SOMEONE COULD SAY I WOULD LIKE TO RENT THE AMPHITHEATER ONE WEEK, THE FIRST WEEKEND OF EVERY MONTH TO PUT ON A CONCERT SERIES AND WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE, IT IS ALLOWED, IT HAS TO STAY A CERTAIN DECIBEL AND THEY PAY THE FEES AND GO THROUGH THE CITY IN TERMS OF THE PLANNING AND MAKING SURE THEY HAVE THEIR PLANS. TO ME, I COULD IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SOMEONE COMES UP AND SAYS I WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON A FARMERS MARKET, THIS IS GREAT, WE HAVE, HERE IS THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW, AND THAT IS THE PREFERRED WAY. I DON'T KNOW THE BEST WAY TO GET IT GOING. I THINK WE HAVE THREE OF THEM THAT OPERATE IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW AT VARIOUS TIMES. THERE IS A WEDNESDAY, A SATURDAY, SOMETIMES A FRIDAY.

>> MY ARGUMENT IS WHY. >> WHEN WE HAVE THE LIMITED GOVERNMENT, LIGHT , WHAT YOU ARE WANTING TO SAY, THAT COULD BE THE ONLY USE OF THAT SPACE, RIGHT?

[03:10:01]

>> NO. >> THE PARKS DEPARTMENT SETS THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR ALL OUR DIFFERENT FACILITIES. WOULDN'T IT BE WE ASK THE DEPARTMENT TO COME UP WITH A FEE SCHEDULE, JUST LIKE WE DO FOR THE AMPHITHEATER, JUST LIKE WE DO FOR THE AFFILIATES IN OUR OTHER

PARKS? >> THE GIN BUILDING IS IN THE FEE SCHEDULE , IT HASN'T BEEN AVAILABLE. ONE OPTION WOULD BE TO CHANGE THE FEES TO SOMETHING ELSE, IF WE WERE TO RESTRICT IT, THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE IF YOU HAVE A PREFERRED USE OF IT BEING A FARMERS MARKET, YOU DISCOUNT THE FEES. THAT WAY IF THE FARMERS MARKET IS IN, MAYBE, WELL, IT IS LISTED AS A FULL DAY RENTAL FOR A RESIDENT, $560 A PERCENT. YOU MIGHT SAY, THAT IS FOR PRIVATE PARTIES,

THAT SORT OF STUFF. >> THAT IS EXTENSIVE. >> CITY COUNCIL CAN CHANGE

THOSE NUMBERS. >> THAT'S WHY I PUT IT UP. >> MAYBE YOU COULD SAY BUT IF IT IS A FARMERS MARKET, WE ONLY WANT THAT TO BE $150.00. THE NONRESIDENT FEE IS $840.00 FOR THE FULL DAY RENTAL. THAT, SO, THE RESIDENT, NONRESIDENT IS KIND OF CONTEMPLATED ALREADY.

IT IS JUST, THERE IS NO FOCUS ON ITS ACTUAL USE AND WHAT YOU WANT TO INCENTIVIZE, OR NOT.

>> YOU CAN RENT A PARK FOR $2000.00. LET'S SAY YOU WANTED --

>> AMPHITHEATER, NONCOMMERCIAL RIGHT DAY FOR A RESIDENT IS $2000 A PERCENT.

>> IS THIS THE ONLY USE? >> NO. >> THIS IS AN OPTION, YOU COULD USE IT FOR FARMERS MARKET BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE OTHER USES.

>> JUST GIVE A DISCOUNT FOR FARMERS MARKET VERSUS OUR REGULAR FEE SCHEDULE.

>> I'M JUST ASKING WHAT THE USE IS. >> IT IS WHAT DO WE PREFER TO SEE THERE? WHAT WE PREFER, WE CAN SET THE FEES ACCORDINGLY AND IF WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE GET COMPLAINTS IN DOWNTOWN ABOUT THE FARMERS MARKET, YOU HAVE THE CO-OP, LET'S TRY IT. THEN YOU COULD DISCOUNT IT TO WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIKE OKAY, THEN I CAN RENT THIS PLACE OUT AND HAVE A FARMERS MARKET FOR $200 WAS CENTS ON A SATURDAY. AND THEY DO IT EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK BUT IF YOU WANT TO COME IN AND HOLD RECEPTION THERE, MAYBE THERE IS ANOTHER FEE. THERE, I AM THROWING IT OUT THERE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW ANYBODY IS GOING TO USE IT UNLESS WE, WHAT DO WE WANT TO SEE THERE? BE WE DON'T WANT A FARMERS MARKET BUT IT STARTS BEING USED AS A FARMERS MARKET AND SOMEBODY HAS A GREAT

IDEA OF IT COULD BE AN EVENT SPACE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE STAFF COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS, LIKE INCLUDING THE FARMERS MARKET BUT LIKE WHAT ELSE COULD

BE ? >> WHAT ARE OTHER OPTIONS? THERE ARE NO RESTROOMS AND

THERE'S NO RUNNING WATER, CORRECT? >> WE HAD TO PUT IN A BID FOR WATER FOR THE FIRE CODE. THERE IS ONE WATERBED AND THE FIRE SUPPRESSION. THERE IS THAT.

THERE ARE NO SINKS. >> NOT FOR DRINKING. NO DRINKABLE WATER.

>> IT IS A WATERBED FOR A HOSE. >> SOME PEOPLE MAY DO A RECEPTION AND BRING THEIR ENTIRE STUFF. IT WOULDN'T REALLY MATTER IF THERE ARE BATHROOMS.

>> OR JUST HOLD IT. >> TODAY, AS IT STANDS, ANY EVENT THAT WOULD BE THERE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE TO BRING IN RESTROOMS, THE TRAILER, PORT-A-POTTIES, WHATEVER. THAT IS JUST A REQUIREMENT. IN THE FUTURE, THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC RESTROOM RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. WHENEVER THAT HAPPENS, THEN ARGUABLY PEOPLE COULD USE THE FACILITY WITHOUT HAVING TO CHOOSE TO BRING, NOT BE COMPELLED TO BRING IN RESTROOMS, MAYBE THEY WOULD CHOOSE TO BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE AIR-CONDITIONED AND NICE AND RIGHT OUTSIDE, WHATEVER. IF THE INTENT IS, I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE INTENT IS. IT IS THE VISION THAT I HAVE BEEN HEARING SINCE I HAVE BEEN HERE IS TO TRY TO HONOR THE AGRICULTURAL HERITAGE HERE AND THAT IS ONE WAY TO DO IT IS TO INCENTIVIZE BY REDUCING FEES FOR THINGS THAT SUPPORT AGRICULTURE, A

FARMERS MARKET IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS. >> THAT WAS A GREAT COMMENT ABOUT ASKING STAFF. THE ONLY REASON I SHIED AWAY FROM ASKING STAFF TO BRING RECOMMENDATIONS IS I FEEL LIKE STAFF , A LOT OF TIMES, WE FAILED TO GIVE DIRECTION AND WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING IS EXCITING HERE IS WHAT WE, IN MY OPINION, OUR JOB IS TO SAY HERE IS WHAT WE ENVISION THIS BEING USED. STAFF, CAN YOU BRING BACK ORDINANCES, FEE SCHEDULES, TO GIVE US WHAT WE

WANT. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS LIMITING STAFF BECAUSE THAT IS LIMITING THEM TO WHAT WE ONLY THINK ABOUT. THEY PROBABLY HAVE EXPERIENCE SEEING OTHER CITIES DO THIS, THAT, AND THE THIRD WE WOULDN'T EVEN MENTION. THAT IS WHY I THINK STAFF, AND BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS AND THEN FROM THERE WE CAN TAKE THOSE ACCOMMODATIONS AND SAY I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THIS BUT NOT LIMITING STAFF TO JUST OUR

IDEAS. THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

[03:15:02]

MOTION TO , I'M NOT QUITE SURE THE WORD, TO SET THE USE FOR THE GIN BUILDING , FOR FARMERS MARKETS AT A FEE OF ZERO DOLLARS AND FOUR STAFF AND TO BRING BACK OUR FEE SCHEDULE AT

THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT WE CAN DISCUSS THAT FOR OTHER USES. >> I WILL SECOND BUT CAN I MAKE

A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? TO ADDING RECOMMENDED USES AS WELL. >> YES, RECOMMENDED USES WOULD

BE GREAT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE, HOLD ON. I HAVE TO MAKE SURE I GOT THE FIRST ONE. IT IS TO SET THE PRIMARY USE AS A FARMERS MARKET WITH A FEE AND ZERO DOLLARS AND

FOUR STAFF TO BRING BACK OTHER QUESTION >> TO BRING BACK THE FEE

SCHEDULE FOR THE GIN BUILDING WITH OTHER INTENDED USES. >> YES SIR.

>> WAS GOING TO SAY BECOMES WHOEVER RUNS A FARMERS MARKET, THEY ARE GOING TO GET SOME MONEY BUT WE WILL HAVE STAFF TIME FOR THEM TO RENT IT OUT, KEEP A CALENDAR. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT SAYING IT IS $50 A PERCENT. IF YOU PAY NOTHING.

>> SHE MADE A MOTION OF ZERO. >> WE HAVE TO SEE IF YOU GET A SECOND.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION BY CLARK TO SET IT AT 50. SECOND BY THOMPSON. THEN WE

CAN DISCUSS MAKING IT 50. >> I'M NOT EVEN SURE THAT IS THE RIGHT APPROACH. IF YOU ARE RUNNING A BUSINESS, YOU WANT TO HAVE A SUCCESSFUL FARMERS MARKET, YOU NEED A DEPENDABLE LOCATION SO YOU CAN ADVERTISE THAT WHEN STATES IS HERE, FRIDAY NIGHTS, IT IS HERE. YOU NEED SOMETHING. I THINK A BETTER APPROACH MIGHT BE THAT WE CONTRACT WITH PEOPLE TO RENT IT IN A CONTRACT, LIKE WE DO WITH STING SOCCER, LIKE WE DO WITH HYBUSA SO WE CAN DECIDE WITH THE TERMS NEED TO BE SAID THEY ARE BRINGING IN, IF WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO BRING IN PRODUCE GROWN WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE OF HUTTO, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE . WE CAN GET THOSE TERMS IN THERE. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS JUST RENTING IT OUT AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE DIFFERENT PEOPLE TRYING TO RUN FARMERS MARKETS AND IT IS ALMOST CHAOTIC.

>> YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT, YOU ALREADY HAVE THE STANDARD SET BY THE, I FORGET THE COALITION OR WHOEVER. WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THAT WHERE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE STANDARDS THEY

HAVE TO ABIDE BY PER HAVING A SPOT AT A FARMERS MARKET. >> I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, I'M WORRIED ABOUT HOW TO SOMEONE SUCCESSFULLY RUN THE BUSINESS

IF THEY HAVE TO GET THEIR RESERVATION IN EVERY WEEK? >> WOULDN'T THAT FALL UNDER THE PARKS DEPARTMENT? IF WE, IF WE, I SEE IT AS MORE PAPERWORK, MORE THAT SOMEBODY ELSE HAS TO DO THAT MAY NOT BE QUALIFIED TO DO IT. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD WANT, WHY YOU WOULD WANT US TO CONTRACT WITH THEM VERSUS JUST THE FARMERS MARKET, THAT IS PROBABLY ONE DUE TO GOING IN CITING RUNNING THIS FARMERS MARKET AT THIS TIME AND THEN HERE ARE ALL OF MY

VENDORS. >> THAT IS WHAT STING SOCCER DOES. THE PARKS DEPARTMENT NEGOTIATES WITH THE PERSON RUNNING IT. THEY SAY WE NEED IT THESE DAYS OF THE WEEK FOR THESE HOURS AND THESE ARE THE THINGS WE ARE GOING TO DO. IN SOME CASES, WE WILL TAKE CARE OF THE MAINTENANCE OR THE CITY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT. THERE ARE DIFFERENT TERMS. IT IS NOT NEGOTIATING WITH EVERYONE WHO COMES IN, IT IS GOING TO ONE PERSON WHO IS GOING TO RUN IT.

AND, NEGOTIATING WITH THEM THAT THESE ARE THE TERMS, THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO SEE YOU BRING

IN. THEY GO AHEAD AND TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING ELSE. >> OKAY, UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU.

>> WHY ARE WE, WHY ARE WE LIMITING OURSELVES? I GUESS I JUST DON'T GET THESE MOTIONS.

MAYBE I AM MISSING SOMETHING. WHY ARE WE LIMITING OURSELVES? THIS IS A VENUE. IT IS IN OUR FEE SCHEDULE. ANYONE CAN RENT IT WANTS TO RENT IT, WHY WOULD WE SAY WE ARE GOING TO LIMIT IT TO FARMERS MARKETS? IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DO A WEDDING THERE, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO DO A PARTY THERE, SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO SOMETHING ELSE THERE, WHY ARE WE SAYING, I GUESS I AM JUST GETTING LOST AS TO CURRENTLY TODAY, IF WE OPEN IT NEXT WEEK ON PLAN, ANYONE IN THE CITY COULD RENT IT OUT, RIGHT? IT IS IN THE FEE SCHEDULE. THEY COULD PAY THE CURRENT FEE, ARE WE GOING TO, ARE RETURNING TO MAYBE JUST, I THINK I GET BACK TO ARE WE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE

[03:20:05]

IT TO SAY THIS IS OUR PREFERENCE, WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE FARMERS MARKETS HERE? THAT IS WHY WE ARE GOING TO GIVE YOU A DISCOUNT BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE YOU TO

COME HERE? WE ARE STILL GOING TO ALLOW? >> THE MOTION I AGREED TO STAFF

BRINGS BACK RECOMMENDED USES. THAT WAY IF LIKE -- >> WHY DO WE HAVE TO HAVE RECOMMEND USES? WHY LIMIT IT? WHY NOT JUST HAVE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO RENT IT FOR THE PRICE,

THEY CAN DO. >> THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THE COMMENTED USES IS ANYTHING ELSE, TBD. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE PARAMETERS. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE A FREE-FOR-ALL.

YOU COULD HAVE SOMEBODY THAT DOES SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T WANT HAPPENING THERE. I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE SOME PARAMETERS SO YOU ARE NOT JUST, I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING YOU WOULDN'T

WANT SOMEONE TO BE DOING AT THE GIN BUILDING. >> DO WE HAVE PARAMETERS AROUND

PEOPLE RENTING THE PAVILION? >> YES. >> WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS? I

THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE THE SAME. >> THEY FILL OUT THE FORM AND THEN THEY SENT IT IN AND THEN THE FORM, THE CITY STAFF SAYS NO OR YES.

>> THAT IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE ARE DOING TODAY WITH THE GIN BUILDING.

>> I'M JUST SETTING RECOMMENDED USES , THEY HAVE THE DISCRETION TO SAY YES OR NO BASED ON WHAT THAT INDIVIDUAL WANTS TO USE THE GIN BUILDING FOR.

>> WHY WOULD YOU HAVE A MOTION WHEN THAT IS BAKED INTO THE CURRENT PROCESS?

>> I DON'T THINK IT WAS. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE MAYOR TO BRING IT UP, THERE IS NO , THERE IS NO PARAMETERS AROUND IT. HE'S SAYING, HEY, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDED USES I THOUGHT WOULD BE FOR FARMERS MARKETS. CAN YOU BRING SOMETHING BACK AND ALL I AM SAYING IS LET'S

EXTEND THAT TO BE WHATEVER OTHER USES. >> FOR ME, I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO OVER COMPLICATE IT. THE GIN BUILDING IS THE GIN BUILDING. IT IS VERY SIMPLE.

THE FOUR WALLS ARE NOT WALLS. AND, IT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS, IT IS A STAPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, IT HAS REMAINED IN THE SPOT. THE DEVELOPERS HAVE LEFT IT THERE. NOW THE CITY HAS OWNERSHIP OF IT. AND, TO KEEP IT AS IT ONCE IN THE COMMUNITY AND TO BRING THE AGRICULTURAL FEEL BECAUSE THE SILOS ARE OUT THERE STILL AND JUST I GUESS IT IS MORE ABOUT CULTURE, THIS IS HOW I AM VIEWING IT, AND NOT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO GENERATE A LOT OF REVENUE TO HOST AS MANY EVENTS AND COMING INTO IT BEING LIKE PRETTY HEAVILY FARMERS MARKET RELATED THAT COULD, THAT COULD BE KIND OF LIKE AN INCUBATOR FOR SMALL BUSINESSES. THEY START OFF AT A FARMERS MARKET. THE HUTTO BUSINESS OWNERS, MAYBE FROM GEORGETOWN OR WHATEVER, THAT IS FINE, THEY ARE STARTING TO SELL THEIR PRODUCTS. MAYBE THEY CAN BECOME BIGGER OR START SELLING THEIR PRODUCTS TO ENTITIES, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO OVER COMPLICATE IT.

WE NEED TO KEEP IT SIMPLE AND IT IS JUST IT IS A STAPLE IN THE COMMUNITY AND IT IS AN

AGRICULTURAL SYMBOL OF HUTTO THAT IS REMAINING. >> THAT IS WHAT I THINK THE POTENTIAL USES, THAT KIND OF COVERS THE SIMPLICITY OF IT. IT IS LIKE STILL HAVE SOME SORT OF PARAMETERS. THE DISCRETION IS WITH THE CITY, JUST LIKE WE HAVE ON ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS YOU COULD PRINT OUT. I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT COMPLEX. I JUST FEEL LIKE YOU WANT SOME

PARAMETERS. YOU DON'T JUST WANT IT TO BE A FREE-FOR-ALL. >> RIGHT NOW, YOU CAN RENT IT FOR $560.00. IF IT IS SOME CRAZY THING LIKE AN INAPPROPRIATE RALLY WAS GOING TO BE IN THAT BUILDING, STAFF COULD SAY NO, WE WANT TO GET APPROVAL FOR IT IF YOU WANT THIS TO BE THERE. JUST LIKE WHAT WE DO FOR ALL THE OTHER FACILITIES IN THE CITY. THE QUESTION IS DO YOU WANT ONE NUMBER LOWER. I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF IT IS 0 , THEN I'M GOING TO FILL OUT A FORM AND I'M GOING TO SELL MY COOKIES OUT THERE. THAT IS MY FARMERS MARKET FOR THIS WEEKEND. THEN SOMEBODY ELSE GOT APPLES OF THE TREE OFF THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE. OH, IT IS FREE. I'M GOING TO GO HAVE THE WHOLE BUILDING FOR THE DATE. HERE ARE

SOME APPLES. >> I THINK THAT IS, I THINK WITH A $50 WASN'T FEE, IT IS

[03:25:01]

MORE, IF IT BECOMES LIKE IT FILLS UP THAT EVERYDAY THERE IS A FARMERS MARKET OR SOMETHING, IT BECOMES WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT PARKS MAY BE. PARKS IS COLLECTING ON THIS FEE.

>> IT HAS TO BE ENOUGH TO COVER THE CLEANING OR A PENALTY. THAT IS WHAT I THINK WE LET STAFF COME BACK WITH SOME STUFF. THEY KNOW WE WANT TO DO AN AGRICULTURAL THING, LET'S SEE WHAT IS FEASIBLE BASED ON WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO. IS THERE GOING TO BE A PENALTY IF IT IS NOT CLEANED OR IS THERE A CLEANING FEE OR WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE AT LEAST INITIAL ENOUGH THAT WHEN THE STAFF GOES BACK OUT THERE AFTER THEY VACATE, JUST LIKE THEY DO ON THE OTHER ONES, WE HAVE ALL THE OTHER STUFF. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THE CODE

FOR THE GIN BUILDING RIGHT NOW. >> I HAD SOMETHING TO SAY.

>> YEAH. >> IF WE HADN'T HAD THE LAST 35 MINUTES OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS, BUT I WOULD HAVE DONE IS, I WOULD HAVE COME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL TO EMPHASIZE THE FARMERS MARKET BUT NOT RESTRICT THE USE OF THE GIN BUILDING FOR OTHER PURPOSES .

IN FACT, WE ARE PLANNING TO HAVE OUR CHRISTMAS BANQUET AT THE GIN BUILDING IN ORDER TO SAVE MONEY . THAT IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW IT COULD BE USED. THAT IS NOT A FARMERS MARKET. I WOULD'VE COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE THE COST FOR FARMERS MARKETS, DEFINE WHAT A FARMERS MARKET IS THAT IS ACCEPTABLE, AND, ARGUABLY, IF YOU WANTED TO RENT IT FOR MORE THAN SIX CONSECUTIVE WEEKENDS, THEN IT WOULD BE A CONTRACT. THAT IS HOW I WOULD HAVE TACKLED IT. SO, IF THAT IS NOT SATISFACTORY TO EVERYBODY , THEN, I NEED TO HEAR THAT. OTHERWISE, THAT IS ALMOST EXACTLY WHAT I'M GOING TO BRING BACK TO YOU.

>> I LIKE THAT. >> I LIKE WHAT COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON BROUGHT UP. IF WE SET IT IS $50 OF CENTS A PERSON TO SELL, WHO IS GOING TO PATROL? ANYBODY COULD GO USE A PAVILION. THE ONLY TIME YOU RUN INTO A PROBLEM IS IF SOMEONE PAID FOR THE PAVILION. I WANT TO LIMIT STAFF, I LIKE THE WAY HE'S TALKING ABOUT IT IS THE SAME WAY. IF YOU TREAT THE GIN BUILDING LIKE YOU DO THE SOCCER FIELDS, IT IS A CITY ASSET. YOU CAN USE IT OTHER TIMES BUT WE KNOW THAT ON WEDNESDAYS AND WHENEVER, SUNDAYS, IT IS USED FOR OUR FARMERS MARKET.

>> FIRST AND THIRD SATURDAYS. >> THEY CAN SIGN AN AGREEMENT, IT SHOULDN'T BE THAT BIG ON STAFF TO COME UP WITH IT, THAT WHEN YOU HAVE ONE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING IT CLEAN, THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PICKING SURE EVERYBODY IS LICENSED. YOU CAN STILL USE IT FOR OTHER THINGS. I DO THINK ANYBODY IS TALKING ABOUT LIMITING IT. I DON'T ATTRIBUTED TO THE SAME AS A PAVILION BECAUSE A PAVILION COST A COUPLE HUNDRED GRAND AND WE HAVE THEM BUILT ALL OVER THE PLACE. THERE WILL BE ONE GIN BUILDING . WHAT ARE WE GOING TO USE IT FOR? IF YOU DO IT WRONG, IT WOULD BE A GREAT PLACE TO HAVE A GUN SHOW. NOT EVERYBODY IS IN FAVOR OF GUNS AND THERE WOULD BE RALLIES THERE AND WE PROBABLY DON'T NEED A TRUMP TRAIN MAKING A STOP AT THE GIN BUILDING. THERE ARE SOME THINGS WE COULD PUT IN THAT IF WE MAKE A COMBINATION OF THE FEE SCHEDULE AND WE TASK STAFF WITH JUST TALKING ABOUT BEING OPEN, SOMEONE WILL COME TO YOU GUYS AND HOW DO I DO A FARMERS MARKET QUESTION

>> I KNOW FOR A FACT THE FARMERS MARKET THAT IS A CROSS AT THE GREEN, THAT RE WANTING T MOVE OVER BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE IN A COVERED AREA. SO, YOU ALREADY HAVE AT LEAST ONE THAT IS INTERESTED IN TRANSITIONING OVER AND TOASTING IT REGULARLY IN THE SAME SPOT THROUGHOUT THE

YEAR. I KNOW THAT EXISTS. >> $200.00 A WEEK OR WHATEVER YOU GUYS COME UP WITH AND THAT WAY THAT GOES FOR THE MAINTENANCE, THE EMPLOYEE TO COME BY TO MAKE SURE THE TRASH GETS DUMPED AND ALL OF THAT. I THINK THERE IS A WAY TO HAVE A HYBRID. I WOULD HATE TO HAVE YOU GUYS HAVE TO MONITOR 20 PEOPLE, DID THEY PAY? YOU WOULDN'T PAY UNLESS YOU WERE

AROUND A TABLE OR A SPACE. >> AND IT IS NOT LIKE, IT IS NOT LIKE THEY ARE MASSIVE ENTERPRISES, THE FARMERS MARKET THAT WE HAVE HERE. THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE MASSIVE.

>> IF YOU OPEN IT UP AND YOU SAID YOU GET TO SHOW UP AND SELL ON A SUNDAY, I THINK SOMEONE HAS TO BE THERE TO REGULATE IT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A FREE-FOR-ALL.

>> THE WAY THAT YOU, THE WAY THAT I WENT THINK THAT HE WOULD DO THAT IS YOU WOULD REQUIRE IT TO BE A CERTIFIED FARMERS MARKET, BECAUSE THERE IS A CERTIFICATION FOR THAT, THAT MEANS, I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY BUT IT IS SOMETHING LIKE 80% OF THE VENDORS HAVE TO BE SELLING PRODUCE OR DERRY OR THINGS LIKE THAT IN ORDER TO GET THAT CERTIFICATION.

>> I DO THAT THROUGH A CONTRACT. YOU DO THAT LIKE HOW THORNTON WAS SAYING. OTHERWISE,

[03:30:02]

WE ARE GOING TO DRIVE UP THERE AND GO, THIS GUY IS SELLING TOY COLLECTIBLES. WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? I THOUGHT YOU GUYS COULD SELL HERE. IF YOU DO WHAT HE IS SAYING , WHEN YOU WANT TO DO THE FARMERS MARKET, THEN THEY SIGN AN AGREEMENT, YOU GUYS ABOUT HIM, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A

PLANET YOU CAN COME BY ONCE A MONTH AND VERIFY. >> I'M NOT DISAGREEING. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID I WOULD HAVE BEEN BECAUSE THE REASON, I WOULDN'T HAVE APPROACHED IT FOR THE SAME REASON THAT COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON BROUGHT IT UP. I WAS APPROACHING IT BECAUSE IF I AM DOING A MARKET, IF I AM NOT GOING TO RENT IT FOR EVERY SUNDAY FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR ALL AT ONE TIME, BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD TO, I WOULD ASSUME, UNLESS WE MAKE IT ZERO, ARGUABLY, BUT IF IT IS SOME AMOUNT AND THAT MULTIPLIES BY 52, THAT IS A LOT OF MONEY OUT OF POCKET RIGHT UP FRONT. I DON'T DO THAT AND SOMEONE ELSE COMES AND SAID, SOME SUNDAYS LATER ON, THAT IS WHAT I WOULD DO IT BY A CONTRACT WHERE IT IS YOUR SPACE DURING THIS WINDOW OF TIME , FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, HOWEVER WE DECIDE WHATEVER THAT IS, AND THESE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS YOU HAVE TO HAVE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO USE IT, OTHERWISE

YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE CONTRACT. >> WE HAVE A RIGHT TO REVOKE.

>> WHICH WE WILL HAVE TO BID, BY THE WAY. >> WITH A 1295.

>> I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION, MY INITIAL MOTION. >> ALL RIGHT. AND DOES ANYONE

WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT WHAT WE WANT TO DO? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED

TO. >> JUST ERECT MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF. THE CITY MANAGER TO DO

WHAT HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO DO ANYWAYS? >> AS YOU WERE.

>> TO DO HIS CITY MANAGER THINGS BECAUSE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

>> THAT IS WHAT I DO. >> BY WHAT DATE? >> BY THE SECOND MEETING IN

DECEMBER? >> I WOULD SAY IN JANUARY. THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY

FARMERS MARKET OVER CHRISTMAS FOR PRODUCE. >> SECOND EATING IN JANUARY.

>> TELL YOU WHAT. >> WHEN YOU ARE READY. >> I WILL GET IT TO YOU IN

JANUARY. >> SECOND. >> IF THE FARMER'S MARKET ASKS, I HAVE THE DISCRETION TO WAIVE THE FEE. I CAN CHOOSE TO DO THAT FOR A FARMER'S MARKET BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU, IF THEY WANT TO BE IN THERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE THERE OR NOT. I COULD DO THAT, JUST WHILE WE ARE TREADING WATER TO GET TO THE

POLICY. >> THAT IS GOOD. YOU CAN WAIVE THE FEE AND YOU COULD TELL THEM IT MIGHT BE A NOMINAL FEE BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE STAFF COME BY.

>> WE HAVE TO PICK UP TRASH. >> AND IT MIGHT IF THEY MAKE A KILLING OUT THERE BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN ALWAYS PUSH THEM TO YOU NEED TO CLEAN UP A LITTLE BIT MORE, YOU NEED TO DO MORE, YOU ARE MAKING GOOD MONEY. MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON TO HAVE STAFF COME BACK WITH A PLAN TO USE IT FOR, PLANT USES FOR THE GIN BUILDING. ANY OTHER

DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> TRAIN FOR.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER. >> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

[**13.4. Discussion and Possible action on signage in Old Town including monument, parking and way finding. (Mike Snyder) ]

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE.

>> MOTION PASO 7 HAVING A 0. NEXT, 13.4, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON SIGNAGE AND OLD TOWN, INCLUDING MONUMENT, PARKING, AND WAYFINDING. THIS PIGGYBACKS ON COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON'S REQUEST. HE ASKED HIS NAME TO COME OFF AND TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS IN THE WAY. WE HAVE SIGNAGE. WHAT I'M WANTING TO ASK CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR VIEWPOINT ON THESE THERE HAS BEEN SOME SKIRMISHES LATELY WHEN IT COMES TO PARKING IN DOWNTOWN, FOR ONE. WE HAVE PEOPLE PUTTING SIGNS UP, WHO'S PARKING IS WHOSE. AND, TALKING TO CITY MANAGER, WE DON'T KNOW OF ANY ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO DO THAT. SO, DO WE WANT THAT TO OCCUR? BASICALLY PEOPLE CAN MARK UP WHAT THEY WANT, THAT IS ONE PART. THEN, WITH THAT, PARKING, IS THERE OTHER THINGS WE COULD DO WITH PARKING AND THE CITY MANAGER HAD A GOOD IDEA. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS CALLED. WHAT DO YOU

CALL THAT WITH THE APP ? >> LIKE A KIOSK. >> MOST DOWNTOWNS WHEN THEY GET TO THRIVING, THEY RUN INTO A PARKING ISSUE. THOSE THAT YOU OWN A BUSINESS DOWN IN THAT AREA, YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT WORK THERE ALL DAY AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE DROPPING OFF THEIR

[03:35:01]

CAR AND MEETING SOMEBODY AND THEN YOU HAVE EMPLOYEES PARKING THERE AND THEN YOU HAVE ON 111 EAST WHEN THEY HOLD AN EVENT, THEY TOOK THE ENTIRE DOWNTOWN OF PARKING TO HOLD A WEDDING. I APPRECIATE THEM BRINGING PEOPLE DOWN HERE. THE PEOPLE AREN'T LEAVING THE WEDDING AND HANGING OUT AT HALL OF FAME, THEY ARE NOT LEAVING THE WEDDING AND THEY CATER THEIR OWN FOOD IN.

THE MEAN PERSON I AM, I TOLD THE CITY MANAGER, THEY COME IN HERE, THEY DON'T PROVIDE ANY KIND OF TAX REVENUE, THEY DON'T PAY ANYTHING BUT YET THEY TAKE ALL THE PARKING SPOTS IN DOWNTOWN. SO, ALL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO COME DOWN HERE AND SPEND MONEY AND FREQUENT THE BUSINESSES, THEY ARE THE ONES STRUGGLING TO FIND PARKING. SO, HE HAD THIS IDEA, AND I WAS LIKE I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT IT, TAKE THE PARKING AWAY, NO DEDICATED PARKING SPOT. YOU DON'T ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO PARK. YOU SET A TIME LIMIT OF SOME SORT, LIKE THEY DO IN AUSTIN ON A LOT OF THOSE PARKING SPOTS , WHERE THEY ARE ONLY GOOD FOR AN HOUR OR TWO. THEY CAN BE, WHAT IS THE TERMINOLOGY WHEN YOU GO TO THE RESTAURANT? THEY CAN BE VALIDATED AT RESTAURANTS. IF YOU DO EAT LOCAL, YOU CAN GET VALIDATED. IF YOU ARE THERE FOR THE EVENT, YOU MAY HAVE TO PAY $5.00 TO PARK THERE AND ALL THE MONEY RAISED CAN GO INTO BEAUTIFYING THE LANDSCAPING AND KEEPING IT UP BECAUSE, RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO PARKING, WE HAVE NO PLAN TO ADD MORE PARKING. THAT IS ONE PART WITH SIGNAGE. THE WAYFINDING, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THESE. I TOLD THE CITY MANAGER, SOMETHING CAME UP IN DOWNTOWN AND THEY COME UP. I DON'T KNOW WHO IS PAYING FOR THEM BUT THEY TYPICALLY HAVE HOMEBUILDERS. I JUST MAY NOT UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM. IF WE ARE PAYING WITH OUR BUDGET TO BUILD SIGNS, IN

MY OPINION, AND WE HAVE HOMEBUILDERS ON THEIR -- >> IT IS NO COST TO THE CITY.

IT IS RUN BY THE NATIONAL SINE PLAZA. THE CONTRACT WITH THE HOMEBUILDERS TO GET THEIR SIGNS SO WE DON'T HAVE ALL OF THOSE SIGNS STUCK IN THE GROUND ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD. THEN, THE CITY GETS SO MANY FACES OF SIGNAGE FOR FREE THAT WE CAN UTILIZE ON THE DIFFERENT SIGNS, OR WE CAN REQUEST THAT THEY PUT A SIGN IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION THEY ARE NOT MARKETING, THAT IS

WHEN WE WOULD PAY FOR IT. >> THAT IS EVEN BETTER. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE ALL GO AWAY.

ALL WE ARE DOING IS ADVERTISING BUILDERS EVERYWHERE AND IT GETS UP AND I'M LIKE --

>> WE HAVE SOME THAT HAVE BUSINESSES ON THEM THAT DON'T EXIST ANYMORE. THEY ARE CLEARLY

FADED. >> IT IS LIKE A TRAILBLAZER ON THE HIGHWAY.

>> IT'S LIKE WHAT? >> IT'S LIKE THE TRAILBLAZER ON THE HIGHWAY. SOMEONE ELSE IS PAYING TO PUT ALL THAT STUFF ON THERE. I LOOK AT IT AND I GO, I SAW MORE GO UP, LIKE WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR THESE? IS THIS WHAT WE WANT ? IF YOU HAVE FIVE HOMEBUILDERS AND TWO BUSINESSES, OR PEOPLE PAYING ATTENTION TO THE BUSINESSES? I WOULD RATHER SEE, IF THE IDEA IS TO HELP PEOPLE SEE DOWNTOWN AND SEE OUR BUSINESSES, WE JUST INSTALLED THEM OURSELVES.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHY HUTTO CHOSE TO IMPLEMENT THEM. I CAN VENTURE A GUESS, BECOMES WE IMPLEMENTED THEM AND CALLED FOR THE EXACT REASON I AM ABOUT TO SAY IS THE RIGHT OF WAYS WERE SO POLLUTED WITH BANDIT SIGNS OF ALL THE HOMEBUILDERS COMPETING, THERE WERE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF SIGNS. WE WERE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME THROUGH AND PICKING ALL OF THOSE OUT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WE WENT TO THE KIOSKS SYSTEM AND THEN THAT BUILDERS STOPPED USING ALL OF THOSE BANDIT SIGNS AND THAT HELPED CLEAN UP THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND IT REDUCED EFFORT ON US AND WE DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY TO MAINTAIN. THAT IS WHY HUTTO DID IT.

>> WHEN I GOT HERE IN 2006, HE WOULD HAVE NO SIGNS ALL OVER EVERYWHERE FOR EVERY SINGLE BUILDER, TURN HERE THIS WAY, THAT, THEN THEY WOULD BE ON EVERY INTERSECTION TO GET YOU TO GO SEE CAMPBELL HOMES OR WHOEVER. IT IS A VAST IMPROVEMENT FROM WHAT IT ONCE

BEFORE YOU WERE LIVING HERE. >> TO THE MAYOR'S POINT ABOUT THEM BEING MIXED, THOUGH, I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE, YOU CAN DICTATE SOME OF THOSE THINGS. YOU CAN SAY WE WANT SPECIFIC COLOR BACKGROUNDS TO BE FOR BUSINESSES AND WE WANT THIS ONE TO BE SPECIFICALLY FOR

BUSINESSES. >> IS THERE A CONTRACT FOR THIS?

>> THERE IS ONE CONTRACT YOU SIGN AT ONE TIME AND THEN IT IS IN PERPETUITY. THAT IS USUALLY

HOW THOSE THINGS GO. >> IT IS A BUSINESS THAT SELLS THE SIGNS, RIGHT QUESTER

>> IT IS THE NATIONAL SINE PLAZA. >> DECIDE LENNAR AND LENNAR PAYS THEM TO HAVE IT AND I GUESS I ACQUIRE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SO IT IS LIKE AN

ASSET FOR THEM TO HAVE. >> THERE MAIN CONTRACT IS THE ABILITY TO USE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THAT IS THE REAL CONTRACT. THE REST OF IT, THERE'S NO MONEY FLOWING

[03:40:05]

THROUGH THE CITY, THERE IS NOTHING THAT WE ARE DOING, WE ARE NOT TOUCHING THOSE AT ALL.

>> HOW MANY CAN THEY PUT UP? I WOULD JUST ASK FOR THE CONTRACT TO COME BACK. I WOULD THINK, AGAIN, WE HAVE MEMORIES OF WHAT WE DID 20 YEARS AGO AND HOW WE DID IT AND I DON'T KNOW TODAY BUT IF THEY HAVE UNLIMITED USE, TO ME, IT IS STARTING TO GET A LITTLE JUNKY. I KNOW SOMEONE IN THE CITY KNOWS BECAUSE WE HAD A COUNCIL MEMBER THAT MADE IT A PRIORITY TO GO GET HIS MISSUS ON THEM AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY WERE POPPING UP ON THERE BUT I DON'T KNOW WHO THESE

CONTACTS ARE. >> THAT IS WHERE WE WOULD PARTNER WITH THE CHAMBER.

>> WHAT IS THAT COMPANY CALLED ? >> NATIONAL SINE PLAZA. AND SP.

>> DO WE NEED TO? >> THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT YOU CAN PARTNER WITH TO CUSTOMIZE. YOU CAN CUSTOMIZE THE LOGO ON THE TOP, YOU CAN CUSTOMIZE THE COLORS OF THE POLES, YOU CAN CHOOSE SPECIFIC COLOR BACKGROUNDS OF THE SIGNS WITH DIFFERENT THINGS. IF YOU WANT CITY FACILITIES POINTED OUT, LIKE ON TXDOT, BROWN ARE FOR PARKS AND BLUE IS FOR MEDICAL, YOU CAN DO STUFF LIKE THAT . YOU CAN ACTUALLY CUSTOMIZE THEM A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE. IT IS JUST PICKING RAN HANDS-FREE RIGHT NOW.

>> DO I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION FOR STAFF TO COME BACK WITH PAID PARKING OPTIONS WITH THE ABILITY TO DO VALIDATION FOR AND THE BUSINESSES ? IT WAS WHEN I SAW THIS ITEM AND WHEN I HAD MY MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER, BEFORE YOU WROTE IT, I SAID HEY, WHY DON'T WE LOOK AT PARKING METERS, NOT WHERE YOU HAVE A KIOSK WHERE YOU TAKE A PICTURE OF YOUR LICENSE PLATE, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE, THEN YOU BROUGHT UP THEN YOU COULD DO THE VALIDATION AND IT CLEARS THE FUNDS, YOU GET REFUNDED BACK YOUR FEE . PEOPLE BITING STUFF IN HUTTO AREN'T PAYING FOR PARKING. I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. THE PLAN IS IF YOU ARE USING A BUSINESS IN HUTTO, YOU WOULDN'T PAY FOR PARKING. THAT WAY IT ALSO ALLOWS US TO TYPE IN MORE WITH THE OLD TOWN BUSINESS ALLIANCE. THEY COULD THEN SIGN UP TO MAKE SURE THEY GET THOSE CREDITS.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. I WOULD TELL CITY COUNCIL, WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE,

THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING BACK THE COST. >> IT IS GOING TO COST

SOMETHING, IT WILL COST SOMETHING TO MAINTAIN THEM. >> I AM OPEN TO OTHER IDEAS TO DO SOMETHING PARKING. WE DON'T HAVE THAT ON OUR PROJECT WAS TO BUILD A PARKING GARAGE, WHAT IS

THIS ONE OUT HERE, 10 MILLION? >> THAT WAS TWO YEARS AGO. >> THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS HERE'S A PROBLEM WE ARE HAVING. THE DENTIST IS GONE. YOU HAVE HAD MORE BUSINESSES CLOSE DOWNTOWN. I AM NOT SAYING IT IS ALL BECAUSE OF PARKING BUT THERE ARE, MESQUITE CREEK OUTFITTERS WOULD LIKE TO COME DOWNTOWN AND THE REASON THEY ARE NOT COMING HERE , THERE IS NO PARKING. AND, THEY DRIVE DOWN AT 5:00 TWO WHAT IS IT LIKE DOWN HERE AND LET I LIKE MY GOD, YOU CAN'T PARK A CAR HERE. HOW DO I FIT 20 EMPLOYEES AND 100 PEOPLE? I DON'T KNOW THE FIX TO THAT. BUT, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COME DOWN HERE, WE JUST HAVE TO

FIGURE THE PARKING THING OUT. >> IN RELATION TO THAT, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO BRING BACK THE

OLD TOWN DURING THE ONE-WAY STREETS? >> YOU WANT THAT AS A FUTURE

AGENDA ITEM. >> IT HASN'T COME BACK UP. I'M JUST SAYING.

>> OLD TOWN. ALL RIGHT. >> IT IS RELATED BECAUSE IT IS PARKING.

>> JUST TO BRING BACK PAID PARKING OPTIONS. >> FUTURE AGENDA ITEM.

>> DOES THAT INCLUDE THE ITEM YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT PEOPLE HAVING THEIR OWN, PUTTING THE SIGNS OR MARKERS UP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? WOULD THAT NEGATE THAT ISSUE?

>> I THINK SO. I THINK THE CITY MANAGER IS GOING TO ADDRESS THAT ANYWAY. WITH THE PEOPLE

THAT HAVE THE CONES, THE SIGNS PUT UP. PEOPLE PAINTED. >> YOU CAN'T PUT UP PERMANENT SIGNS THAT RESTRICT PARKING. THAT IS NOT ALLOWED. I THINK WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED TAKING THOSE DOWN, I THINK. THE ONES THAT ARE LIKE SANDWICH BOARDS OR TEMPORARY, THEY ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE. YOU CAN PUT UP A SANDWICH BOARD THAT SAYS NO PARKING EXCEPT FOR WHATEVER FACILITY FOR 30 MINUTES AND IF I PARK THERE AND I GET TOWED, THEY DID NOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO

[03:45:06]

TELL ME FOR THAT. >> HAVING THAT SIGN, YOU CAN'T JUST PUT SIGNS ON THE SIDEWALK.

>> YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BUT YOU KNOW HOW THOSE THINGS GO. THERE IS NO STAFF RUNNING AROUND ON SATURDAYS OR WHATEVER ELSE DOWNTOWN PULLING THEM ALL UP. GENERALLY, THE SANDWICH BOARDS ARE GENERALLY ALLOWED. THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY AUTHORIZED BUT THEY ARE GENERALLY ALLOWED BY PRACTICE . AS LONG AS YOU PICK THEM UP AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU PICK UP THE SANDWICH BOARD. COME GET COFFEE, COME GET A COOKIE, WHATEVER, THAT IS OKAY AS LONG

AS YOU PICK IT UP AT THE END OF THE DAY. >> AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE A

PERMIT. >> WITH LEE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ASSOCIATION, THEY COULD PROBABLY GET THE COMMUNICATION OUT OF THAT, HEY, LOOK, YOU HAVE TO START FOLLOWING THE RULES OR THERE IS A POTENTIAL THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO START COMING BY, ISSUING TICKETS OR SOMETHING. IF WE JUST PLAY NICE WITH EVERYBODY AND NOT HAVE THESE ISSUES DOWN THERE, THEN THE CITY WILL STAY OUT OF YOUR BUSINESS. OTHERWISE, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO START HAVING

TRAFFIC POLICE. >> WILL, IF WE GO TO CONTROLLED PARKING, WE WILL HAVE TO DO TRAFFIC TICKETS. OUR PARKING TICKETS, GENERALLY WHAT WE WOULD DO IS IF THERE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE UNAUTHORIZED, AND IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHAT HAVE YOU, WE WOULD CONFISCATE IT AND THEN WE WOULD GO PUT IT SOMEPLACE INCONVENIENT FOR PEOPLE TO RECLAIM SO THEY GET THE POINT NOT TO DO IT. YOU GO PUT IT OUT AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, THERE IT IS.

IF YOU WANT YOUR CONSTANT SIGNS BACK, YOU HAVE TO COME BACK AND GET IT. WE CONFISCATED IT

BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. >> IT IS EASY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE HOLD THE NOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE. >> TRAIN FOR.

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES 7-00. THE ONLY OTHER PERSON WAS A MONUMENT SIGN. THE BUSINESSES WANT SOME KIND OF SIGNAGE. THOSE OF US THAT HAVE LIVED HERE A WHILE KNOW THERE IS A DOWNTOWN. MANY PEOPLE LIVE HERE DO NOT KNOW THERE IS A DOWNTOWN. THERE IS A SLIGHT LOT. IF THERE IS AT ALL ANY INTEREST ON A MONUMENT SIGN, I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN, WE CAN COME BACK UP, WORK IN TERMS OF WHERE IT WOULD SIT AND STAFF CAN WORK ON WAYS TO GET IT FUNDED OR ERECT IT OURSELVES. WE HAVE A FLAG LOT THAT GOES RIGHT UP TO 79 IN BETWEEN THE LOOP STATION AND THE LARRY, HE FORGOT HIS LAST NAME. BUT, THERE'S NO INTEREST IN HAVING A MONUMENT SIGN, I DON'T WANT STAFF WORKING ON IT. IF THERE IS BY CITY COUNCIL, THAT IS SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO WORK ON TO BRING SOMETHING TO DOWNTOWN.

>> MAYBE TO THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE TO COME UP WITH THAT.

>> THEY ARE NOT GOING TO LIKE THE SIGN DOWN THERE. NOT HISTORICALLY. I MEAN, IF THAT IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO RUN BY THEM, CAN YOU GUYS WORK ON , FOR INSTANCE, IF IT IS CITY COUNCIL'S DESIRE TO HAVE A MONUMENT SIGN, IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GO TO THE HBC AND SAY WE WANT TO HAVE A MONUMENT SIGN, CAN YOU SOUGHT ONE TO BE OKAY WITH BUT IT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE? IT'S NOT GOING TO BE HISTORICAL. IT WILL BE DIFFERENT. THEN THEY CAN COME BACK WITH HEY, IF YOU ARE GOING TO BUILD A SIGN DOWN THERE AND IT WILL BE 30 FEET TALL, PLEASE MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THIS. I THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE. YOU TALK TO PEOPLE

DOWN THERE. >> I THINK THERE IS SOME INTEREST IN THAT FOR SURE. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO AT LEAST GET AN IDEA. I DON'T KNOW WHO IS ON HBC AND

HOW MUCH OF A PURIST THEY ARE IN REGARDS TO HISTORICAL. >> THEY ARE PRETTY..

>> I KNOW MY PAINT COLORS WERE PRETTY SPECIFIC. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO GET

SOME INFORMATION AND JUST SEE, GET A GAUGE ON THINGS. >> LAURA JUST REMINDED ME THAT NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, THE DOWNTOWN PRESENTATION IS SLATED FOR, FINALLY SLATED FOR THE

WORKSHOP. SO, SIGNAGE. >> DOWNTOWN, THE HPC PEOPLE? >> NO, THEY DID THE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND THE AUDIT THAT CAME OUT AND MADE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DOWNTOWN.

THIS IS THE ONE REQUEST A NUMBER OF TIMES BECAUSE WE HAD CONFLICTS SO SIGNAGE COULD BE

SOMETHING THAT GETS BROUGHT UP. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE AN ISSUE IF I TALK WITH MEMBERS OF THE HPC, CAN YOU GUYS TALK AMONG OURSELVES ABOUT A MONUMENT

[03:50:02]

SIGN? IS ANYBODY OPPOSED TO A SIGN LIKE THAT DOWN THERE? >> IF IT FITS, IT WOULD BE GREAT. ONE THING TO CHECK IS IF IT IS A FLAG LOT, HOW WIDE IS IT AND WHAT IS THE RESTRICTION

ON THE SIGN BEING NEXT TO SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY? >> YOU WOULD BE SURPRISED. THAT IS A GOOD POINT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE, IF I REACH OUT TO THEM, I'M NOT GOING TO GET HAND

SLAPPED? >> I DO KNOW IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS I HAVEN'T CHECKED RECENTLY BUT I SAW THAT THE TIRE COMPANY, THE PROPERTY WAS UP FOR SALE.

>> PEOPLE HAVE HIGH EXPECTATIONS DOWN THERE. THERE IS ANOTHER ONE. OKAY. ANNUAL ,

[13.5. Consideration and possible action to release to the public two documents relating to Board & Commission Qualifications: (1) Mayor Pro Tem Gordon email to City Attorney Dorothy Palumbo dated 8/29/24, with the subject line "Board/ Commission Qualifications." (Peter Gordon); and (2) The Legal Memo sent to the City Council from City Attorney Dottie Palumbo dated 9/18/24 for Item 10.2 of the City Council Meeting, dated September 19, 2024. (Mike Snyder/Peter Gordon) ]

ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT ONE? WE WILL GO TO 13.5, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC TWO DOCUMENT RELATING TO BOARD AND COMMISSION QUALIFICATIONS. ONE, MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON EMAIL TO CITY ATTORNEY, CITY ATTORNEY DOROTHY PALUMBO WITH THE SUBJECT LINE BOARD COMMISSION QUALIFICATIONS AND TWO, THE LEGAL MEMO SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FROM CITY ATTORNEY DOROTHY PALUMBO DATED 9/18/24 FOR ITEM 10.2 OF THE CITY

COUNCIL MEETING DATED SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2024. >> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE

A MOTION TO RELEASE BOTH ITEMS, THEY ARE LISTED UNDER 13.5. >> SECOND.

>> SUBMITTED BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, ANY

DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. >> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER.

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK. >> AYE.

>> TRAIN FOR. >> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES. NOW, THE TIME

OF 10:53. >> I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ BOTH ITEMS TO THE

PUBLIC, IF THAT IS PERMITTED. >> IS THAT PERMITTED, CITY ATTORNEY?

>> SO, I WILL READ, THE FIRST ONE IS THE EMAIL THAT I SENT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY DATED THURSDAY AUGUST 29TH, 12:11 P.M. THIS IS WHAT STARTED THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION AROUND WHO CAN SERVE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. SO, THE FULL TEXT OF THE EMAIL READS AS FOLLOWS.