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. ]

THAT. NEXT WE HAVE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITH POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE EMPLOYMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS AND REMOVALS TO CITY REPORTS, COMMISSIONS, TASK HORSES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS AND AREA GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS.

>> MAYOR, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TONIGHT, BUT I DID WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ESPECIALLY TO OUR RECENT GRADUATES , WE DO HAVE ONE OPENING ON ONE OF OUR BOARDS AS THE ETHICS REVIEW BOARD. ANY OF YOU OUT OF GONE DRIP YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A WAY TO SERVE, GO ONLINE AND LOOK FOR THAT

[00:25:05]

APPLICATION, WE WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO DO THAT. ANYTHING ELSE

THAT I MISSED? >> ALSO, WE DO HAVE THE HUNDRED AND 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF HUTTO THAT IS SLATED FOR 2026, BUT WE ARE GOING TO BE PLANNING IN 2025 FOR THAT CELEBRATION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CELEBRATE OR GET ON BOARD, THAT WOULD BE

[8.2. Consideration and possible action regarding recommendations from City Council subcommittees (i.e. Legislative). ]

GREAT, AS WELL GET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO VOLUNTEER FOR

THAT. >> THANK YOU. CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY

COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES. >> OKAY, SO, THE SUBCOMMITTEE WHICH IS MADE UP OF A COUNCILMEMBER THORTON, MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON AND MYSELF, WE MET A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND WE DISCUSSED SOME ITEMS THAT WE WOULD LIKE THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE WOULD LIKE RESOLUTIONS DRAFTED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SO THAT WE CAN RELAY THOSE MESSAGES ON LEGISLATION AND POLICY DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE TOPICS OF CONVERSATION FOR THE UPCOMING LEGISLATIVE SESSION IN JANUARY AT THE STATE LEVEL. SO, WE HAVE FOUR POLICY OR TOPICS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT TO THE REST OF CITY COUNCIL. THE FIRST ONE BEING LEGISLATION REQUIRING CITY CONSENT BEFORE TCE Q AUTHORIZES A PERMIT FOR WASTEWATER PACKAGE PLANT PERMITS. THE SECOND ONE BEING LEGISLATION TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE CONCEPT OF THE E TJ, BENEFICIAL CHANGES TO SB 2038 FROM THE PREVIOUS LEGISLATIVE SESSION. THE THIRD ONE BEING LEGISLATION PROHIBITING TXDOT FROM REQUIRING MUNICIPALITIES TO COVER REVENUE REDUCTIONS AND MAINTENANCE COST FOR TOLLROAD, FRONTAGE, AND RAMP IMPROVEMENTS. AND THE FOURTH ONE IS LEGISLATION REQUIRING THAT AN ESD ENTER INTO SALES AND LAND USE TAX SHARING AGREEMENTS WITH THE CITY UPON ANNEXATION AND IF NEGOTIATIONS DO FAIL, ENGAGE IN ARBITRATION OR MEDIATION. DOES THAT SOUND CORRECT TO THE OTHERS?

>> READ THE LAST ONE AGAIN. >> BEST ENTERING INTO SALES AND LAND USE TAX SHARING AGREEMENTS.

>> YEAH. FOR ME, AS WE DISCUSSED THIS, MY THINKING WAS THESE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE COME UP REPEATEDLY THAT IMPACT OUR CITY IT WHERE THE LEGISLATURE HAS TAKEN ACTIONS THAT HAVE SOMETIMES BEEN DETRIMENTAL TO THE CITY'S INTEREST AND WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO EXPRESS TO MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE, HOW IMPORTANT THESE ISSUES ARE TO US AS A CITY AND HOW THEY IMPACT US ENOUGH TO BE SENDING STAFF DOWN TO OUR CAPITAL TO LOBBY, BUT SENDING RESOLUTIONS, CONTACTING LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES TO POSSIBLY SENDING LETTERS TO COMMITTEES OR SOMETHING, IF THAT IS APPROPRIATE. BUT NOT A FULL COURT PRESS LOBBYING EFFORT, MORE OF A GET OUR FEELINGS ON THESE ISSUES OUT THERE AND THE IMPACT OF THE CITY TO BE KEY LEGISLATORS AND LET IT GO FROM THERE.

>> BACK AND BE MY MOTION BECAUSE IT IS LONG AND I CAN SEND THIS TO WHOMEVER NEEDS IT TO TRACK THEIR RESOLUTIONS.

>> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR, WE HAVE A SECOND.

>> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. RESOLUTION PREPARED FOR THOSE FOUR ITEMS. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> THANK YOU FOR GETTING THIS DONE.

>> PLEASE CALL THE BOAT. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? THANKS I -- COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON?

[9.1. Gallup Employee Engagement Results and Plan of Action. (David Amsler) ]

>> THE MOTION PASSES 7-0. GALLUP EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT RESULTS AND PLAN OF ACTION.

[00:30:09]

>> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND COUNCIL, DAVID ENDLER, DIRECTOR AND STRATEGIC OPERATIONS FOR THE RECORD. TONIGHT IT IS MY HONOR TO PRESENT THE RESULTS OF OUR HUTTO EMPLOYEE FEEDBACK SURVEY THAT WAS CONDUCTED FROM JUNE 20TH TO JULY 5TH. THIS SURVEY WAS TO ASSESS ENGAGEMENT LEVELS THROUGHOUT THE ORGANIZATION'S AS WELL AS TO IDENTIFY INSIGHT TO DRIVE ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENT. SO, FIRST QUESTION IS, WHY DOES ENGAGEMENT MATTER? ENGAGEMENT IS MORE THAN JUST A MEASURE OF SATISFACTION. IT IS A PROVEN DRIVER OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE, EVEN IN CHALLENGING TIMES. WHEN EMPLOYEES FEEL VALUED AND SUPPORTED, THEY BRING A HIGHER LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE TO THE ORGANIZATION. GALLUP'S RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS THAT ENGAGEMENT EMPLOYEES ARE THE BACKBONE OF ORGANIZATIONAL SUCCESS. THE NEXT QUESTION THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS IS WHY DID THE CITY OF HUTTO CHOOSE GALLUP SPECIFICALLY TO HELP US WITH THESE EFFORTS. GALLUP WAS SELECTED FOR ITS PROVEN EXPERTISE IN EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SUPPORTED BY DECADES OF RESEARCH AND ITS INDUSTRY RECOGNIZED Q 12, WHICH MANY OTHER INSTITUTIONS THAT DO SIMILAR WORK FRAME THEIR QUESTIONS FROM THESE ORIGINAL 12, TO SLIGHTLY CHANGE THE WORDING TO NOT HIT COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT OR TRADEMARK AND THEN ONE STANDOUT FEATURE THAT I PERSONALLY NOTICED DURING MY RESEARCH WAS THE UNIQUE SCORING ALGORITHM FOR THEIR SCALE.

TYPICALLY A THREE ON THAT SCALE, THE ONE THROUGH FIVE SCALE, THREE IS USUALLY CONSIDERED NEUTRAL. GALLUP SPECIFICALLY CONSIDERS THAT A POLITE NO OR A NEGATIVE RESPONSE. SO, TO ME, THAT NUANCE REINFORCED THE PRECISION IN THEIR METHODOLOGY. WHAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN NOW IS THE QUESTIONS. THEY ARE DESIGNED IN A SIMILAR FASHION, A HIERARCHY OF NEEDS, SIMILAR TO MASLOW STARTING WITH BASIC NEEDS AND MOVING ALL THE WAY UP TO GROWTH. RIGHT HERE IS OUR OVERALL RESPONSES. SO, THE SURVEY CAPTURED RESPONSES FROM 128 EMPLOYEES. AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY, AT THE TIME THAT THE SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED, THIS WAS A 77% PARTICIPATION RATE WHICH IS EXCELLENT FOR OUR FIRST YEAR OF THIS TYPE OF PROGRAM, BUT IDEALLY WHERE WE WOULD WANT TO BE IS 80% OR ABOVE EACH TIME THAT WE CONDUCT THIS SURVEY. YOU WILL SEE THAT OUR ENGAGEMENT IS A 3.84, WHERE THAT PUTS US IN COMPARISON TO OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THAT ARE IN THE GALLUP SURVEY BASE IS AT THE 40TH PERCENTILE OR ESSENTIALLY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE WHEN COMPARING TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. THAT I WANTED TO GO OVER HOW THE QUESTIONS WERE DESIGNED AND THE SPECIFIC RESULTS. SO, THE FIRST TWO QUESTIONS ARE BASIC NEEDS OR CAN BE DEFINED AS THE EMPLOYEE ASKING THE ORGANIZATION, WHAT DO I GET? I KNOW WHAT IS THE ACTED AT ME AT WORK. THIS REFLECTS A SOLID UNDERSTANDING AMONG EMPLOYEES OF THE ROLES.

THAT SCORE WAS A 4.31, WHAT PUTS IT IN THE 45TH PERCENTILE, AGAIN, PRETTY MUCH AVERAGE WHEN COMPARING THESE THE OTHER CITIES. QUESTION TWO WAS A STANDOUT QUESTION, I HAVE THE MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT I NEED TO DO MY WORK RIGHT. NOT SCORED THREE SIX, WHICH WOULD PUT IT IN THE 32ND PERCENTILE. THE NEXT PART OF THE HIERARCHY IS WHAT DO I PERSONALLY GET TO THE ORGANIZATION? OVERALL WE SCORED A 3.90, WHICH AGAIN, PUTS US IN THE MIDDLE. OUR AVERAGE WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. QUESTION THREE, AT WORK I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO WHAT I DO BEST EVERY DAY. THIS HELPS EMPLOYEES FEEL ALIGNED WITH THEIR STRENGTHS WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS NUMBER, CURRENTLY, THEY ARE MODERATELY ALIGNED, BUT THERE IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, SAME WITH QUESTION FOUR. IN THE LAST SEVEN DAYS I HAVE THE RECOGNITION OR RACE FOR DOING GOOD WORK WHEN I GET TO THE ACTIONS THAT WE HAVE TAKEN THUS FAR, THIS WAS A QUESTION THAT WE IDENTIFIED TO FOCUS ON AS AN ORGANIZATION AS A WHOLE BECAUSE IT WAS OUR LOWEST SCORING IN THE FIRST SIX QUESTIONS. THOSE ARE THE FOUNDATION AND THOSE NEED TO BE

[00:35:05]

IN ORDER IN ORDER TO DRIVE HIGHER ENGAGEMENT ON THE NEXT SIX QUESTIONS. NEXT, QUESTION FIVE, MY SUPERVISOR OR SOMEONE AT WORK TO CARE ABOUT ME AS A PERSON. THE ORGANIZATIONS WERE HIGHER THAN THE AVERAGE MUNICIPALITY, 4.36 AND THEN THERE IS SOMEONE AT WORK WHO ENCOURAGES MY DEVELOPMENT, AGAIN HIGHER THAN AVERAGE AT 4.06. NEXT IS TEAMWORK. THIS IS DO I BELONG HERE AT THE CITY OF HUTTO ? CURRENTLY WHEN YOU AVERAGE THESE OUT OF 3.67 WHICH PUTS US IN THE 43RD PERCENTILE.

QUESTION SEVEN WAS AT WORK, MY OPINIONS TO COUNTER THAT PUT US THE AVERAGE AT 48 PERCENTILE, SAME WITH QUESTION EIGHT, WHICH IS THE MISSION OR PURPOSE OF MY ORGANIZATION IS TO MAKE MY JOB -- MAKES ME FEEL THAT MY JOB IS IMPORTANT. THAT IS IN THE 44TH.

CURRENTLY WE ARE SITTING AT 3.03 AND THAT IS I HAVE A BEST FRIEND AT WORK. THE NEXT TWO QUESTIONS, HOW CAN I GROW? THIS WAS A POSITIVE IN THE ORGANIZATION ON MASLOW'S HIERARCHY, THIS WOULD BE SELF ACTUALIZATION. WE SCORED A 3.89, WHICH IS ABOVE AVERAGE WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES.

QUESTION 11 WITH THE LAST SIX MONTHS, SOMEWHAT AT WORK HAS TALKED TO ME ABOUT MY PROGRESS. WE SCORED AVERAGE. IN THE LAST YEAR I HAVE HAD OPPORTUNITY IS AT WORK TO LEARN AND GROW WHICH PUT US AT 50TH PERCENTILE. NEXT IS OUR ENGAGEMENT INDEX. WHICH CURRENTLY, WE ARE AT A 3.27 SO, FOR EVERYONE WE DISENGAGE EMPLOYEE WE HAVE JUST OVER THREE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED. THE IDEAL NUMBER TO BE THERE IS A FOUR.

BUT WITH THIS BEING OUR FIRST YEAR, THESE ARE VERY NORMAL RESULTS TO AS SHOWN BY THE AVERAGE ARE TWO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES. WE HAVE 36% OF ACTIVELY ENGAGED EMPLOYEES AND THEN WHEN IT SAYS EMPLOYEES ARE ESSENTIALLY UNATTACHED TO THEIR WORK AND COMPANY, BECAUSE THAT ENGAGEMENT NEEDS ARE CURRENTLY NOT BEING MET THESE ARE YOUR NORMAL INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE DOING THEIR JOB IN A REGULAR BASIS AND DOING IT WELL, BUT MAY NOT VEST THOROUGHLY BE GOING THE EXTRA MILE ON A DAILY BASIS. SO, THAT IS REALLY THE GROUP THAT WE FOCUSED ON IN OUR ACTION PLANNING. WHICH, WHAT WE DID, INCLUDING SEVERAL MEMBERS OF OUR LEADERSHIP TEAM. SO, THANK YOU TO CHIEF YARBOROUGH, KRISTI BARNES, KATE MORIARTY, NOT RECTOR ANSWER MONTES FOR VOLUNTEERING TO HELP FACILITATE SOLUTION ORIENTED DISCUSSIONS WITH EVERY SINGLE DIVISION IN THE ORGANIZATION. SO, THEY WENT TO OUR BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT, THEY WENT TO OUR PARKS MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT AND SAT DOWN AND HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THEM TO IDENTIFY WHAT ISSUES ARE -- OR OBSTACLES ARE BLOCKING TEAM SUCCESS AND PINPOINT THE SPECIFIC Q 12 QUESTION AS LONG AS IT WAS WITHIN THE FIRST SIX QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE WERE FOCUSING ON THOSE BEFORE WE START FOCUSING ON THE SECOND SIX QUESTIONS AND PINPOINT ONE VERIFIABLE ACTION ITEM TO IMPROVE THAT FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS APPROACH EMPOWERS MANAGERS AND TEAMS TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF ENGAGEMENT AND FOSTERS LOCALIZED SOLUTIONS. WHAT WORKS FOR OUR ACCOUNTANTS WHEN IT COMES TO ENGAGEMENT MAY BE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THING FOR WHAT WORKS WITH OUR PUBLIC WORKS GUYS WHO ARE OUTSIDE ALL DAY. NEXT STEPS, WE WILL CONTINUE TO MONITOR PROGRESS AND INTEGRATING SCORES INTO THE BUDGET BOOK FOR GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY AND OUR NEXT SURVEY IS AND MAY, WHICH WILL PROVIDE AN UPDATED PICTURE INTO ENGAGEMENT AND GUIDE ONGOING

[00:40:04]

STRATEGIES. AS WELL AS SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND FOR THE COUNCIL AND ANYONE WATCHING, THIS SURVEY CURRENTLY IS JUST ONE SNAP IN TIME BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT TAKEN A SURVEY AND CANNOT COMPARE DATA YEAR OVER YEAR. HOWEVER, AS WE CONTINUE TO TAKE ACTION THAT ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO OUR SCORES AND CONTINUE TO TAKE SURVEYS, WE CAN TRACK PROGRESS AND GET A BETTER PICTURE OF OVERALL ENGAGEMENT. IN CONCLUSION, THIS FEEDBACK WAS A VALUABLE TOOL FOR BUILDING A CULTURE OF HIGH-PERFORMANCE IN COLLABORATION WITH COUNSEL SUPPORT AND CITY LEADERSHIP SUPPORT, WE CAN CONTINUE FOSTERING AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE ALL EMPLOYEES DEAL VALUED AND MOTIVATED TO CONTRIBUTE TO HUTTO SUCCESS. THANK YOU AND I WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNT.

>> ANYTHING FROM COUNSEL? >> HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT METHODOLOGY . ONE IS WHEN YOU SEE A QUESTION LIKE GIVE A BEST FRIEND AT WORK, IF YOU HAVE A WORKPLACE LIKE OUR CITY DOES WORK AND ALSO A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE ONLY BEEN HERE A COUPLE YEARS, THIS LITTLE BIT HARDER. IF YOU BEEN THERE 20 YEARS, YOU PROBABLY HAVE A BEST FRIEND. IS THERE ANY ACCOUNTING

FOR THAT? >> YES SIR, THE METHODOLOGY, QUESTION SEVEN THROUGH 12 HAVE LESS WEIGHT TO THE OVERALL MEAN SCORE THAT THEY GIVE FOR US. WE ARE ABLE TO DIVIDE BY TENURE, WE ARE ABLE TO DIVIDE BY LEVEL OF LEADERSHIP. WE ARE ABLE TO DIVIDE BY DEPARTMENT ON THAT QUESTION SPECIFICALLY, PD VASTLY OUTSCORED THE REST OF THE DEPARTMENTS. THAT IS A EXPLAINABLE VARIABLE BECAUSE TYPICALLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE OUT ON THE FIELD, THEY ARE TRUSTING THEIR LIFE WITH ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL. THEY TEND TO CREATE A DEEPER RELATIONSHIP QUICKER. SO, THAT IS THE SCORE THAT WE INTEND TO GO UP WITH

CONSISTENT -- >> OKAY, THE OTHER THING COMPANY SIMILAR PERSPECTIVE IS THE GENERATIONAL CHANGES WITH HOW PEOPLE VIEW WORK BOOMER INTO JEN X, THERE IS PROBABLY MORE ENGAGEMENT WITH WORK FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE. IN YOUNGER GENERATIONS IT IS MUCH MORE, WORK IS SOMETHING THAT I DID FOR THIS 40 HOURS A WEEK AND IS NOT MY LIFE. FOR A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE IT IS DEFINED THEMSELVES FOR WHAT THEIR JOB IS. IT SEEMS LIKE A TEASER TO GET A YOUNGER WORKFORCE, YOUR ENGAGEMENT SCORES ARE GOING TO SUFFER TO A CERTAIN EXTENT BECAUSE OF THAT DIFFERENCE IN MIND-SET VERSUS A PROBLEM IN THE ORGANIZATION.

AND THAT IS A CHALLENGE FOR HOW YOU ACCOUNT FOR THAT BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO IGNORE IT. I THINK THE VALUE FOR THIS, IF YOU AGREE, A LOT OF THE VALUE OF THIS IS GOING TO BE CONTINUING YEAR-TO-YEAR, NOT NECESSARILY WHERE WE ARE TODAY BUT ARE WE GETTING BETTER OR WORSE NEXT YEAR.

>> YES . WE ARE TAKING IT AS A SNAPSHOT. AS I SAID EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE WE HAVE ONLY TAKEN IT ONCE. IT IS HARD TO SAY IF THIS IS CORRELATED CURRENTLY. BUT WE ARE TAKING ACTIONS BASED OFF OF IT TO SEE IF WE CAN ENACT CHANGE FOR THE NEXT SURVEY. I WILL SAY, SURPRISINGLY, GALLUP WAS SURPRISED ON THIS, OUR YOUNGER GENERATION IS ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR MORE ENGAGED DEMOGRAPHICS. WE BELIEVE WE CAN ATTRIBUTE THAT TO PROGRAMS SUCH AS HIGH FIVE AND BANQUETS THAT WE DO AND IDEALLY, IF YOU JUST LOOK AT IT AS A WHOLE, DEPARTMENTS TO HAVE MOBILE WORK AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK. THEY ARE ACTUALLY MORE ENGAGED THAN OUR GEN X GENERATION. PRINTMAKING THERE IS SOME TRUTH TO THAT. IF YOU PROVIDE THE ENVIRONMENT THAT PEOPLE GET THEMSELVES INTO, THEY ARE GOING TO BE MORE COMFORTABLE VERSUS THIS IS HOW WE DO IT AND IF THAT DOES NOT WORK FOR YOU, YOU ARE NOT ENGAGED.

>> YEAH. THANK YOU. PRINT AND WHAT WERE SOME OF THE ACTION ITEMS? I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON WHAT COMES NEXT, BUT WHERE ARE THE SPECIFIC ACTION ITEMS THAT COME OUT OF THE TEAMWORK SECTION OR THE GROWTH SECTION AS IT PERTAINS TO DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, OR IS THIS KIND OF JUST ENCAPSULATING THE CITY OF HUTTO. FROM THERE, WHEN WE DO THE SURVEY IN MAY, IS THAT WE WILL HAVE SOME HISTORICAL DATA . NOW WE CAN START DOING THINGS FROM THERE TO IMPROVE OR CONTINUE ON WITH THE SCORES

[00:45:01]

THAT WE HAVE. >> YEAH, THERE IS AN ACTION ITEM THAT WAS DEVELOPED, AT LEAST TWO ACTION ITEMS DEVELOPED FOR EACH DEPARTMENT DEPENDING ON THE QUESTION. ONE WAS A CONSISTENT THEME THAT CAME OUT OF SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS FOR RECOGNITION QUESTIONS WHICH WAS HAVE I BEEN RECOGNIZED IN THE LAST SEVEN DAYS? A VERY STANDARD ACTION PLAN THAT CAME OUT OF THOSE GROUP WAS FOR RECOGNITION TO BE AT THE DEPARTMENT LEVEL. SO, CURRENTLY, WE DO THE HIGH FIVE AND THEY ARE RECOGNIZED ONCE A MONTH WITH THE CITY AS A WALL, BUT A LOT OF DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DEPARTMENTS WERE ASKING FOR THAT RECOGNITION TO HAPPEN WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENT WHETHER IT BE A TEAM MEETING WERE FOR PARKS. FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK THEY ARE PUTTING UP A BOARD. THERE IS A SPECIFIC TERM, I DON'T KNOW IT, BUT THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC TERM THAT IS GOING TO HIGHLIGHT ACHIEVEMENTS FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES. SOMETHING ELSE THAT CAME OUT WAS HOW CAN I RECOGNIZE EMPLOYEES BETTER? SO, EACH DEPARTMENT, SEVERAL OF THEM ARE MEETING WITH THEIR DEPARTMENT OR THEIR EMPLOYEES TO HAVE THEM TELL THEM HOW DO YOU WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED, RIGHT? WE HAVE SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE COMING UP TO A PODIUM WERE STANDING UP HERE UP FRONT IN AN EMPLOYEE MEETING IS NOT HOW THEY WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED. ALSO GIVE THEM ATTENTIVE ANXIETY. THEY WOULD PREFER A THANK YOU IN THE BACK ROOM. SO, GATHERING THAT DATA FROM OUR EMPLOYEES AND GIVING THEM THE AUTONOMY TO TELL US HOW THEY WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED HAS BEEN CRUCIAL.

>> UNDERSTOOD. YEAH. I MEAN, HOWEVER WE FORMULATE THIS, I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF GREAT THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE CITY ON A WEEKLY, MONTHLY, QUARTERLY BASIS. SO, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DEVELOP INTO SOME SORT OF NEWSLETTER OR SOME SORT OF, YOU KNOW, OUTWARD, EXTERNAL RECOGNITION PER DEPARTMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BUT YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOME GOOD SCORES FROM WHAT I CAN. BEING ABLE TO AMPLIFY THOSE GOOD WORKS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON BY DEPARTMENT TO THE PUBLIC, I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT COULD REALLY HELP US IN RESETTING A MORE PRODUCTIVE AND OPTIMISTIC ATMOSPHERE HERE IN THE CITY. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. AS YOU ARE CONTINUING ON IN THE SURVEYS AND GATHERING THE DATA, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE SEE SOME SORT OF EXTERNAL AMPLIFICATION OF THE GOOD THINGS THAT WE ARE DOING FOR DEPARTMENT THAT WE CAN AMPLIFY OUT TO THE PUBLIC.

THAT IS GOOD FEEDBACK. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER.

>> YEAH, I JUST HAD ONE COMMENT AND SOME QUESTIONS. I LOVE THIS. I HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR FIVE YEARS SINCE I HAVE BEEN ON COUNSEL. MY EMPLOYER DOESN'T ANNUAL SURVEY OF AND I TO GET IS DONE -- WORKED REALLY WELL.

I'M GLAD THAT WE IMPLEMENT TO THIS. A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH A STABLE GOVERNMENT NOW WITH SOME STABILITY AND LEADERSHIP AND I THINK IT REALLY PLAYS INTO THAT, SO, THANK YOU FOR PRIORITIZING THIS. SO THE QUESTION I HAVE.COM IS IS AN ANNUAL SURVEY OR A DATE -- I ANNUAL SURVEY QUESTION? THIS IS CURRENTLY I BUY ANNUAL SURVEY WITH VALOR FOR THREE YEARS. WILL RE-EVALUATE AND SEE IF WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE MORE A DIFFERENT PROGRAM.

>> I THINK YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION DO WE HAVE THE MATERIALS TO DO MY WORK RIGHT? IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW IF THOSE HIGH SCORES WERE PUBLIC WORKS OR PD OR SOME OTHER, YOU DON'T WANT TO BE FILLING THE WRONG NEED IF SOMEONE HAS ALL OF THE TOOLS THEY NEED IN A SPECIFIC DEPARTMENT. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WERE ABLE TO DO THAT. THAT WAS THE LOWEST SCORE IN MY TEAM. WE DON'T HAVE THE TOOLS, WE NEED BETTER TOOLS. NOW WHAT DOES THAT SURPRISE ME THAT IT IS LOW. I THINK MY LAST QUESTION WAS, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE SPECIFIC ACTION PLANS DOWN TO THE DIRECTOR LEVEL AND THE MANAGER LEVEL ABOUT HOW THEY

CAN CHANGE IN THE GROUPS. >> YES SIR. THOSE ARE CURRENTLY BEING INPUTTED INTO THE GALLUP SOFTWARE THAT WILL ALLOW US TO TRACK IT AND UNDERSTAND IF IT IS BEING COMPLETE AND THERE IS A FIT -- INTENTION FOR THE FACILITATORS TO GO BACK AROUND TO ALL OF THE GROUPS THAT THEY HAVE AND CHECK IN WITH THEM ON

THE NEXT SURVEY . >> BREAK IT DOWN WHEN

[00:50:09]

INDIVIDUALS GO INTO GALLUP, IT IS TOTALLY SEPARATE FROM THE CITY SYSTEM, THEY CAN HAVE THAT FEELING OF AN AMENITY, THEY CAN BE HONEST IN THEMSELVES THERE.

>> TO ENSURE THAT IT WAS ANONYMOUS, WE CANNOT BREAK IT DOWN BELOW FOUR PEOPLE. SO, IF YOUR DEPARTMENT ONLY HAS TWO PEOPLE IN IT, CITY SECRETARY IS A GREAT EXAMPLE, THEY WERE ROLLED UP INTO A LARGER DIVISION TO SHOW THE SCORES.

YOU HAD TO HAVE AT LEAST FOUR RESPONDENTS. THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE ACCESS TO THE BACK END TO BUILD A SURVEY TODAY IS MYSELF ONLY. THERE IS NO ONE ELSE, BUT EVEN I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO SEE HOW INDIVIDUALS RESPONDED TO THE POINT THAT EVEN GALLUP DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS. THE PEOPLE, THE PROJECT MANAGER THAT ARE HELPING WITH THIS DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO SEE HOW PEOPLE RESPONDED., DURING OUR MESSAGING TO EMPLOYEES, IT WAS CRUCIAL THAT WE EXPLAINED HOW THERE IS NO ABILITY FOR US TO IDENTIFY WHO THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE AND A LOT OF COMPANIES WILL SOMETIMES ASK QUESTIONS THAT ALLOW YOU TO TYPE AND GIVE AN OPEN-ENDED RESPONSE, WE OPTED TO NOT DO SUCH A THING BECAUSE KEEPING THE SURVEY ANONYMOUS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO US. SOME PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO IDENTIFY INDIVIDUALS BASED ON HOW THEY WRITE.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

[10.1. Conduct a public hearing and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-075 for the proposed Specific Use Permit request for the property known as 140 S FM 1660, to allow a funeral home in the SD-A (Special District) zoning district. (Ashley Bailey) ]

>> NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 10.1, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 140 SOUTH FM 1660, TO ALLOW A FUNERAL HOME IN THE SDA SPECIAL USE BUILDING DISTRICT.

>> FOR THE RECORD, ASHLEY BAILEY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR. THE ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF THE

APPLICANT. >> THAT IS THE WRONG SPOT TO PUT A FUNERAL HOME. IS THIS A SECOND AND HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN? IT HAS NOT BEEN WITHDRAWN? IS THAT CORRECT? IT WAS ON THE AGENDA AND THEY PAUSED. IT HAS BEEN ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENDA TWICE. OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> HAS LEARNING AND ZONING VOTED ON IT?

>> THEY VOTED AGAINST. IT WAS UNANIMOUS, --

>> A REAL STEEP HILL TO CLIMB.

>> YOU OUGHT TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE IS SOMEONE IN

THE AUDIENCE THINKING TO . >> WE WILL OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:52 P.M. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK REGARDING THIS USE? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE

[10.2. Conduct a public hearing and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-076 for a Specific Use Permit property known as 2599 Innovation Boulevard, Lot 1 Block A of the lronwood Subdivision, to allow a Data Center in the LI (Light Industrial) zoning district. (Ashley Bailey) ]

THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:53. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 10.2.

CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 0-2024-076 FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT PROPERTY KNOWN AS 2599 INNOVATION BOULEVARD, LOT 1 BLOCK A OF THE IRONWOOD SUBDIVISION, TO ALLOW A DATA CENTER WITH THE LIGHT

INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT. >> FOR THIS ITEM YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR THE UPC WHICH WAS DEVELOPED IN 2024 TO ALLOW THESE USERS. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THIS IS THE SOUTHERN AND SOUTHWESTERN MOST END OF THE DEVELOPMENT JUST OFF OF IRONWOOD. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN SHOWING THE PURPLE, WHICH IS THE EMPLOYMENT CENTER AND THIS IS CURRENTLY THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THE REMAINDER OF THE DEVELOPMENT. WITH THIS YEAR, IT IS A QUICK SNIP THAT WE HAD AT PLANNING AND ZONING SO WE CAN SEE WITH THE BUILDING IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE. TONIGHT WE ARE DISCUSSING THE USE AND TO SHOW YOU WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE SO THEY CAN CONTINUE THROUGH THE STEPS IF THEY NEED TO ADVISE INTO A TIAA AND THAT DEVELOPMENT. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND PAEANS HE ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL

>> WE WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:54 P.M. IF ANYONE LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK REGARDING THIS ITEM. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:54 AND UP TO

[00:55:05]

COUNSEL DISCUSSION OR ACTION. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

OBVIOUSLY, I AM AWARE THAT THIS IS A DATA CENTER AND THE ZONE'S EMPLOYMENT ZONE WERE USED. I GUESTS, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROJECTED EMPLOYEE COUNT FOR A FACILITY LIKE THIS?

>> THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP EMPLOYMENT IS ZONE THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE. FROM WHAT I AM JUST CURIOUS. YOU KNOW THAT DATA CENTERS ARE LOWER STAFFED, SO

JUST CURIOUS. >> WE ALSO HAVE A PRESENTATION IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT ON OUR END, AS WELL.

>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. >> AS FAR AS EMPLOYEES, WE ARE NOT QUITE SURE. AND IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT TYPE OF FACILITY IS GOING INTO THE BUILDING WITH EMPLOYEES BEING NEEDED, HE COULD BE 15 TO 30, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. I DO KNOW IT IS LOWER, GENERALLY

SPEAKING. BUT >>, WE DON'T KNOW THE SQUARE

FOOTAGE BUT -- >> I AM AMANDA BROWN WITH HD BROWN CONSULTING. INFECTED YOU THIS EVENING WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP EAST OF STATE HIGHWAY 130 AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INNOVATION BOULEVARD ON 179. OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS DESIGNATION WITH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. I DO WANT TO POINT WHICH REQUIRES THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE DATA CENTER SPECIFICALLY, I DID WANT TO MAKE ONE POINT HERE. THERE IS SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING TO THE NORTH, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY INDUSTRIAL USES AND HAVE BEEN FOR MANY DECADES, THEY WERE JUST ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY WHEN THEY WERE ANNEXED INTO THE, BUT THERE ARE NO SINGLE-FAMILY USES NEAR THE PROPERTY. THESE ARE GENERALLY A BUILDING LAYOUT, IT IS VERY, VERY CONCEPTUAL. WE HAVEN'T REALLY GOTTEN VERY FAR IN THE DESIGN PROCESS, BUT THIS GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF HOW WE EXPECTED TO BE SITUATED ON THE SITE. AFTER LISTENING TO THE CONCERNS BROUGHT UP BY STAFF, I WANTED TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS IN TERMS OF WHAT THE FACADE FACING BOTH 75 AND INNOVATION WILL LOOK LIKE. SO WE HAVE PLANNED LANDSCAPING WITH THE PUBLIC AREAS. ANOTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT ANY PUBLIC VIEW FROM THE RIGHT AWAY. THE LONG INNOVATION, THE PARTICULAR DATA CENTER IS UNIQUE WITH THE CUSTOMER ENTRANCE FACADE, WHICH I THINK IS REALLY NICE AND I WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT IN THE NEXT LINE. I ALREADY PULLED THIS ONE UP. BUT WE HAVE NOT DONE RENDERINGS FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE. WE'RE SUPER EARLY IN THE PROCESS, BUT OTHER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY HAS DONE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL CONTENT OF WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT TO SEE HERE. THESE TWO IMAGES SHOW A NICE FRED FACING FACADE THAT WE WOULD EXPECT TO GO ON WITH THE GLAZING WITH THE PUBLIC ENTRANCE. THEY CAN COME IN AND TALK TO I.T. PROFESSIONALS COMPLETED THE SHUT OFF AND GAVE IT HAS A MORE OPEN FEEL WHICH MIGHT BE A NICE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE. THE ENTIRE FACILITY WILL MOST LIKELY NOT ENTIRELY GATED, BUT WHEN WE DO HAVE GATES WE ARE PLANNING FOR HIGH QUALITY IRON ROD TYPE FENCING IN ADDITION TO THE BURNING AND LANDSCAPING PROVIDED, AS WELL. GREENING BOTH A LOG 79 INNOVATION, THIS PARTICULAR FACILITY IS VERY INNOVATIVE IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL THE WATER SYSTEM THAT DOES COOL THIS FACILITY IS ON A CLOSED LOOP, SO THAT WATER IS RECYCLED MAKING IT MORE EFFICIENT. THE EQUIPMENT IS HIGHER-QUALITY MORE EFFICIENT GENERATOR THAT WE ARE PROPOSING ON THIS RIGHT WHICH WOULD CONSERVE WATER. WE ARE EXPECTING THIS FACILITY TO BE APPROXIMATELY $500 MILLION INVESTED IT WILL GENERATE TAX FOR THE CITY. THIS WILL BE VERY LOW IMPACT WITH THE

[01:00:01]

INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES. LITTLE TO NO V NUCLEAR TRAFFIC.

LOW WATER ON THE WASTEWATER USAGE COMPARED TO THE STANDARD INDUSTRIAL. WITH THAT I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, AMANDA. >> MAYOR, I HAVE ONE

>> GO AHEAD, PETER. GO AHEAD. NOT RELATED TO THE SEP.

TYPICALLY THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE SUBSTATION RIGHT NEXT TO IT SO IS THERE ANY LOOK AT HOW YOU WOULD DRAW THE POWER TO THIS THING BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE A SUBSTATION FAIRLY CLOSE TO IT, BUT YOU GET TRANSMISSION LINES OVER THERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO IMPACT RESIDENTIAL. SO I AM KIND OF CURIOUS, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO GRANT THIS YEAR AND I DO THINK THERE WOULD BE AN IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ARE GETTING THE PLANNING FROM WILL YOU HAVE HIGH POWER LINES GOING OVER RESIDENTIAL WHICH WILL BE BACK THERE REVENUES. AS FAR AS THE DISTRIBUTION OF POWER, AGAIN, WE ARE EARLY IN THE PROCESS, WE DON'T KNOW HOW EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTED. WE DO KNOW TWO THINGS. A PART OF THE STUDY HAS BEEN DONE. WE DO KNOW THAT THE POWER COMPANY CAN PROVIDE THE SITE. THEY HAVE CAPACITY. ADDITIONALLY, FROM THE SUBSTATION, MULTIPLE ROUTES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE.

EITHER VIA EXISTING EASEMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE OR THROUGH THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY THE ROUTES WILL MOST LIKELY BE ON ONE OR ANOTHER BUT THERE IS NOT AN ANTICIPATED NEED TO CREATE IN RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.

>> GRADE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE PUBLIC NOT BE WORRIED ABOUT THAT IF WE GO DOWN THIS PATH. THANK YOU.

>> MY QUESTION, IS THAT ESTIMATED VALUE IS 500 MILLION TO THE CITY. IS THAT INCLUSIVE OF THE PROPERTY

>> YES. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I GOT ONE. CAN WE GO BACK TO WHERE WE HAVE LANDSCAPING SITE

PLAN? >> THE LANDSCAPING IS THERE .

IN AN IDEAL WORLD WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE LANDSCAPING THERE.

DRIVING THAT ROAD EVERY DAY, IF WE ARE GOING TO FORCE YOU GUYS TO DO SOMETHING, MY PERSONAL THING IS, I WOULD RATHER YOU NOT MONEY DONATED TO OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT TO DO SOMETHING. IF WE MAKE YOU PUT A SCREEN AND SEE THE SAME THING ANYWAY, I AM NOT AS CONCERNED WITH THE PEOPLE AT 129 SEEING THE DATA CENTER. WE WANT TO SCREEN THINGS, BUT IN MY MIND, ONCE WE SEE IT, I THINK WE WILL COMBINE -- YOU ARE -- WHY ARE THEY MAKING US BUILD ALL OF THIS? YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TREES AND STUFF. IT IS BETTER SPENT AT A PARK WHERE PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THEM. AGAIN, SIX-STORY OR FIVE-STORY

BUILDING. >> THIS ONE IS NOT THAT HIGH AT

ALL. TWO STORY. >> I JUST SAW THAT AND DIDN'T KNOW. BUT EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT ON THINGS.

>> WITH THE METAL FENCING, IS THAT BECAUSE IT IS A CITY REQUIREMENT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS MORE SECURITY FOR THE FACILITY TO ERIE? THANK YOU.

>> EDDIE OTHER QUESTIONS OR ACTION? AND WHAT DO WE DO

PUBLIC HEARING? >> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 00 2407 SIX IS RESENTED.

[01:05:04]

>> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. ANY MOTION?

>> I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TRANSMISSION BUT SOMEWHAT OVER IN THIS AREA DRIVES IT REGULARLY. I DO KNOW THAT IT IS A MAJOR EASEMENT. FULL 100 FOOT EASEMENT THAT COMES OUT OF THAT SUBSTATION AND GET SOUND TO INNOVATION NOT THE FULL TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION USING THE SAME ROUTE COMING THROUGH, BUT I THINK I TOLD YOU THIS, NEED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT STRINGING HIGH POWER LINES. THIS IS MORE OF AN IDEAL PLACE TO BE. THIS INDUSTRIAL AREA HAS BEEN A HEADACHE BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE TRUCKS. BUT I THINK THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO HAVE A HIGH-VALUE ITEM THAT WILL BE BUILT AND LOOK GOOD AND PROVIDE TAX REVENUE FOR INDUSTRIAL USES THAT THEY TEND TO HAVE. HEARING NOTHING ELSE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? MAYOR SNYDER? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD?

[10.3. Conduct a public hearing and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2024-077 for the proposed Specific Use Permit request for the property known as 210 Janis Mae, to allow an accessory dwelling unit in the SF-1 (Single-Family) zoning district. (Ashley Bailey) ]

>> PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 10.3, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ORDINANCE NUMBER 0-2024-0774 THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC PERMIT USE FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS 210 JANICE MADE TO ALLOW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IN THE SF ONE SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.

>> GOOD EVENING AGAIN, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THIS LOT THAT YOU WERE GOING TO SEE IN YOUR PACKET IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN ADDED SINCE THE 90S AND COUNTRY ESTATES, THIS IS ONE OF THE LARGER HOUSES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO FIGHT IN THE UDC. WITH THE CODE YOU HAVE TO HAVE 780 SQUARE FEET . THEY HAVE THREE SQUARE FEET OVER THAT, THEY MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. THE PROPOSED PLANS WILL HAVE TO BE REDUCED SLIGHTLY WHAT THEY SHOWED US TO PROVE THAT YES THEY CAN DO THIS PROPERTY ARE A LITTLE BIT LARGER. JUST A LITTLE BIT OVER ON THAT 33%. YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE SINGLE-FAMILY, SAME WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THIS IS COMPLETELY PATENTABLE BUT WHAT WE HAVE IN THE ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT. THERE ARE SOME CONDITIONS . WE ARE PRETTY MUCH TALKED THROUGH THEM. THE ONLY ONE THAT IS IN HERE THAT CHANGED SLIGHTLY WAS IT STATED IT HAS TO BE ATTACHED AND WHAT PLANNING AND ZONING WANTS TO ALLOW THEY CAN CHOOSE TO HAVE IT ATTACHED OR DETACHED. I AM NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE THAT CAME FROM. WE JUST WANTED TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE LEEWAY ON HOW THEY WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE THIS WORK FOR THEIR PROPERTY. SO WITH THAT ON THE SCREEN THAT IS THE PLOT PLAN.

YOU CAN SEE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT FROM THE UDC.

ON THE RIGHT IS THE SCHEMATIC SHOWING THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO SET AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ON THEIR WITH THE SETBACKS HERE IS A MOCKUP OF WHAT THAT WILL LOOK LIKE TOO MUCH THE HOUSE SIGNIFICANTLY. IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH UNTIL BUILDINGS AND REVIEW. WE ARE ONLY SAYING IT HAS TO LOOK LIKE THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO, WITH THAT WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING, IT WAS IN NOVEMBER AND RESCHEDULED TO DECEMBER. WE DID HAVE A 6-ONE VOTE FROM PLANNING AND ZONING FOR YOU. I WAS NOT IN THE PANIC -- PACKET BECAUSE IT HAD TO BE SCHEDULED PRIOR TO TONIGHT. WE DID HAVE APPROVAL WITH PLANNING AND ZONING WITH A 6-1 VOTE IN FAVOR. WITH THAT, IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

>> I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:09. ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC

[01:10:01]

HEARING AT 8:09. WE WILL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.

>> ACTUALLY I HAVE A QUESTION. IS IT A TWO-STORY BUILDING?

>> AT THIS POINT, NO, IT IS NOT. IT COULD BE IF IT WAS OVER

THE GARAGE IN THE CODE. >> OKAY. THE ONE CONCERN I HAVE IS, A SECOND STORY. IF THEY PUT A WINDOW LOOKING INTO THE OTHER PEOPLE'S YARD, THAT PUTS THE WINDOW MUCH CLOSER THAN A NORMAL HOUSE WOULD BE. THAT WOULD HAVE A CONCERN. SO THAT IS THE ONLY ISSUE I HAD, SEEING THOSE ADDITIONAL HIGH WINDOWS ON THE END, IF IT IS NOT TWO STORIES, THAT IS JUST FOR LIGHT, THEY ARE NOT LOOKING EVEN CLOSER INTO THE NEIGHBORS YARD AND I AM OKAY WITH THAT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT TWO STORIES LOOKING IN THE NEIGHBORS YARD TO

>> IF THAT IS A CONCERN FROM COUNSEL, IF YOU WANTED TO MAINTAIN A ONE-STORY STRUCTURE. THIS IS REALLY JUST SCHEMATIC THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH BUILDING AND REVIEW AND THAT IS NOT PART RIGHT NOW TO HAVE A SINGLE STORY BUT THAT IS

SOMETHING COUNSEL DESIRES. >> OKAY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PAGE IT IS. YEAH, RIGHT HERE, THE TOP OF THE RIDGE IS 19.5.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS 10 FEET AND THEN IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS STORAGE OR SOMETHING ABOVE THAT WERE IN MY MIND, DOES IT NOT

MAKE IT A TWO STORY BUILDING? >> TWO STORY BUILDINGS ARE

TYPICALLY 35. >> 35?

>> THERE WAS A PLAN THAT HAD LIKE AN ATTIC .

>> YOU CAN HAVE AN ATTIC, BUT NOT ABOVE A SINGLE STORY.

>> DO YOU KNOW IF IT IS A ONE STORY ON THE SIDE ON THE BACK

OF THEM? >> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF

MY HEAD. >> THAT WAS THE SAME THING I WAS GOING TO ASK COUNCILMEMBER CLARK . IF THERE IS A TWO STORY, IS THAT LOOKING INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S YARD MARK YOU KNOW? IS ANOTHER TWO-STORY ON THE BACKSIDE OF IT SO IT IS A WINDOW LOOKING OUT A WINDOW? I CAN SEE HOW THAT WOULD BE NOT PREFERRED. BUT ALSO, IS THERE A POTENTIAL BUT THIS COULD HAVE AN HLA THAT IT WOULD VIOLATE ANY POTENTIAL RESTRICTIONS OR

CODES THAT THEY WOULD HAVE? >> THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PREDATES

HOAS. >> OKAY.

>> I GUESTS JUST UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS ON THE SIDE OR THE BATH, JUST IN CASE, IF YOU HAVE A WINDOW. YOU KNOW? IS IT A PARALLEL WINDOW TO THE NEIGHBORING --

>> CERTAINLY UNDERSTOOD. ONE THING I WOULD CAUTION IS IF THEY WANT THIS TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE AUTONOMY, THEY DID INDICATE THAT THIS WILL BE FOR THERE. OR ONE OF THE PARENTS.

IF THEY WANTED TO JUST EXPAND THEIR HOUSE, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT 10 FOOT SET BACK WITH WHATEVER SIZE THEY WANT.

THAT IS WHY STAFF DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT TO EXPAND THE HOME TO A TWO-STORY IN THE REAR AND CREATE EXTRA SPACE ACCESSIBLE THROUGH THE MAIN STRUCTURE IF IT IS A CONCERN OF GOING TO A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE BECAUSE OF THE CONCERNS THAT BOTH YOU AND COUNCILMEMBER CLARK HAVE STATED I WOULD THINK THE CONDITION IS TO BE A ONE-STORY HOME ONLY.

>> OKAY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. I WANT TO HELP MYSELF UNDERSTAND THIS. THERE IS ROOM IN THE UDC FOR THIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE BASED ON THE LOT SIZE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> THE SECOND DWELLING THAT IS NOT ATTACHED . SO, WHAT IS THE SEP IF IT IS ALREADY ALLOWED?

IS JUST AFTER PROVE IT. >> IT IS ALLOWED BY THE PERMIT.

ALLOWING THESE BY RIGHT. FOR US RIGHT NOW IT IS DONE WITH A

SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. >> HOW MANY OTHERS ARE WE AWARE OF IN HUTTO ? I'M GOING TO SAY SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THIS IS IN TOWN. IF IT IS A BIGGER LOCKED, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE EXIST.

>> I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY WITH OUR PEERS SPECIFIC PERMITS THAT WE

[01:15:03]

HAVE. I KNOW THERE ARE A FEW IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT BECAUSE THEY ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. AS FAR AS THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, I HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT IN MY TIME, THE SEVEN YEARS. I THINK THEY WILL BE A LOT MORE PREVALENT IN THE FUTURE IF THEY MEET THE LOT SIZE MINIMUMS AND THINGS LIKE

THAT. >> THE PROBLEM IS THE H AWAY IS GOING TO BLOCK A LOT OF THEM RIGHT NOW.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, BECAUSE YOU AT ANOTHER VENUE , WE HAVE A COUNCILMEMBER SPEAKING IF HE CAN FINISH HIS QUESTIONING AND THEN WE CAN CIRCLE AROUND AND COME BACK TO YOU. OKAY?

>> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THE H AWAY. ASHLEY ALREADY STATED THAT THIS IS NOT INITIALLY. MY ONLY CONCERN, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE IS EVER BEEN TO CERTAIN PARTS OF AUSTIN, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF PRECEDENT THIS SETS, I UNDERSTAND IT IS ALLOWED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, NOT TRYING TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE HOMEOWNER HERE, I UNDERSTAND BASED ON WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO, BUT WHEN THEY SELL THE HOUSE, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PROPERTY VALUE FOR THAT HOUSE HEAVEN AND EXTRA DWELLING ON IT AND MAYBE NOT THEM, MAYBE SOMEONE ELSE, JUST RINSE IT INTO AN AIRBNB AND LEASES IT OUT. YOU KNOW? YOUR PARKING ISSUES. THERE ARE OTHER CONCERNS FOR ME AS FAR AS THAT GOES. THAT IS WHY I WAS ASKED, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHERS?

>> AT THIS POINT, WE DON'T. FOUR THE PARENTS, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY PARKING BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE PERSONAL GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY STILL BUT I DO UNDERSTAND THE POINT AND I THINK THAT IS WHY THEY ARE COMING IN FOR THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT IS IN THE TRADITIONALLY ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY AREAS.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, DID YOU HAVE MORE QUESTIONS?

>> I WAS JUST SAYING I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WE WOULD POSSIBLY GET THE MATURITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE EACH AWAKE CONTROLLED AND UNTIL HOAS CANNOT PERMIT YOU TO HAVE A BUILDING DWELLING IN YOUR STATE, HOAS IS GOING TO PREVENT THIS. THERE ARE NOT TO BE THAT OF THE HOME THAT ARE NOT IN AN AGE AWAY IN THE CITY. WE WILL NOT GET A PROLIFERATION COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD WAS ASKING FOR THAT IS WHAT I WAS

TRYING TO SAY. >> HAVE A GUN IN SCR YET ON

THIS? >> I THINK THEY ARE NOT GOING

TO BECAUSE OF THE SIZE. >> SO IF THEY HAVE ANOTHER BUILDING AND SHOWER AND TOILET IF IT IS GOING TO BE A SEPARATE

UNION -- UNIT. >> TYPICALLY WOULD BE ONE MORE RESTROOM AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK THROUGH TO MAKE SURE THE CURRENT METER TYING INTO THE CURRENT METER OR A SECOND METER POTENTIAL TO HAVE THE CAPACITY IN THOSE LINES.

>> WOULDN'T THAT BE THE PROCESS BEFORE WE GO TO WHEN SU P ? I AM CONCERNED IF YOU LET JUAN DO IT, GET A DIFFERENT LOOK, I CAN SEE THE VALUE, IT IS ALMOST LIKE WHAT CAUSING THE -- THE GENTRIFICATION OF PARTS OF AUSTIN. HOW DID THIS HOUSE BECOME $1 MILLION AND IT IS A LITTLE HOUSE? IT IS NOT WHAT THE HOUSE IS WORTH, IT IS THE PROPERTY IS WORTH. HOMES THAT HAVE A 7800 LOT WERE MORE THAT ARE IN HUTTO, NOT IN ANY WAY -- 808 BUT THESE LOTS, ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY BECOME VALUABLE BECAUSE YOU CAN STICK ANOTHER HOME ON THEIR LOT. I HAVE A CONCERN. HOW MUCH CAPACITY DO WE HAVE AND AT WHAT POINT ARE WE TRACKING IT? WE ARE ACTUALLY AT SUPER CAPACITY BECAUSE WE HAD 50 OF THESE COME UP ALL OF A SUDDEN. I DO QUESTION, HOW DO WE FIND OUT THAT THIS PERSON SELLS? PEOPLE WHO ALL THE TIME.

AS I UNDERSTAND, NOT THE EXACT WORDING, BUT IT HAS TO BE SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THE HOME. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORDING WAS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE IT UP THERE. YEAH, IT IS NOT PART OF THE BACKGROUND. I GUESTS MY QUESTION IS, IF WE ARE SAYING THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE, BUT HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT IS NOT GOING TO BE?

>> IT WOULD FUNCTION ON ITS OWN. I KNOW WHAT THE APPLICANT

[01:20:02]

AND HOMEOWNER IS DATING RIGHT NOW, THERE WOULD NOT BE THOSE CONCERNS. BUT ON AN APARTMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>> I DON'T WANT THE POLICE KNOCKING ON DOORS SAYING CAN YOU VERIFY YOU ARE RELATED TO THESE PEOPLE? WE DO HAVE A CONCERN, I HAVE SHARED IT. THERE ARE WEBSITES OUT THERE WERE PEOPLE ARE BUYING HOMES AND RENTING OUT BEDROOMS TO FAMILIES AND THEY ARE PUTTING MULTIPLE FAMILIES NOT RELATED TO IN THE HOMES. SO THIS POTENTIALLY COULD START A TREND IN MY MIND AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO STOP IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS JUST A MOTHER-IN-LAW, THE PARENTS, THE SISTER. 10 YEARS FROM NOW WE ARE GOING HOW DID WE HAVE ALL OF THIS HAPPEN? ONCE YOU MAKE THE DECISION, UNLESS YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT WAY ON HOW YOU STOP THAT?

>> EACH SU P IS ON ITS OWN, MAYOR. YOU CAN APPROVE OR DENY EACH ONE . APPROVING ONE DOES NOT GET PRECEDENCE FOR THE

OTHERS. >> KNOW IT DOESN'T GET IN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, IF YOU GET A VARIANCE FOR ONE PROPERTY, IT DOES NOT ENTITLE EVERYONE ELSE TO ASK THE SAME THING PROOF. I MEAN, EVEN AS THE CITY ATTORNEY IF I AM

MISTAKEN. >> LET'S DO THIS. WE ARE GETTING INTO DISCUSSING. EVERY TIME, NOT EVERY TIME, A LOT OF TIMES COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD HAS ASKED A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO STOP AND YOU ENTER THEM. I'M ASKING A QUESTION, YOU ENTER THEM. I WISH YOU WERE HERE BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO ASK QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR EXPERIENCE LEVEL IS ON PRECEDENCE SETTING IN ZONING CASES AND ALL OF THAT, BUT WE ARE IN A QUESTION-AND-ANSWER PERIOD. PER OUR BYLAWS WE WILL DO A MOTION. IF IT IS ACCEPTED WE WILL DISCUSS THE MOTION. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM?

>> ASHLEY, THE NEIGHBORS, I AM LOOKING AT WHAT IT IS SHOWING AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A TWO STORY ON THE SIDE, A ONE STORY ON THE SIDE. I GUESTS, YOU WOULD NOT GO TO THE NEIGHBORS AND THE LIKE ARE YOU OKAY WITH THIS?

>> WE DID IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WERE SOME NEIGHBORS WITHIN NOT. THEY STILL ONLY HOPE OVER HERE AND THEY WERE AGAINST IT. BUT WE DO HAVE THOSE ATTACHED TO YOUR PACKET, AS WELL, ON THOSE RESPONSES. WE REALLY DID NOT GET A LOT OF RESPONSES, WHICH IS FAIRLY TYPICAL FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. BUT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM AND NOT JUST STAFF. BLESS YOU. MY ONLY HESITATION IS, YOU PUTTING ANOTHER DWELLING UNIT ON THE PROPERTY AND I THINK IT WAS ALREADY SAID, YOUR TRAFFIC, YOU START TO TAKE UP PARKING SPACES THAT AT THE SAME TIME, HAVING ANOTHER UNIT WHEN NO OTHER ENTITY, HOUSING ENTITY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SOMETHING YOU KNOW THE PRECEDENT THAT IT SETS WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REGULATE THAT RIGHT NOW. AT THE SAME TIME, HOW DO WE PUT A CAP ON THAT POTENTIALLY THAT BECOMES A PROBLEM. THERE ARE SO MANY QUESTIONS THAT THIS

RAISES. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

>> SURE. STATE YOUR NAME. >> I AM SAMANTHA MCGRAIL. FROM

WHAT I AM MOISES CASTRO. >> WE ARE THE HOMEOWNERS.

>> WE ACTUALLY PURCHASED THIS HOME BECAUSE THE LOT THAT IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO OUR BACKYARD, THEY HAVE A TWO STORY EDU ALONG THE FENCE WITH THE EASEMENT IN BETWEEN THE FENCE IN THE HOME, BUT THEY HAVE THAT ALREADY. THERE IS ALSO ADDITIONAL PDUS. I WAS WALKING MY DOG YESTERDAY AND I WAS ABLE TO SEE THEM TWO STREETS DOWN. SO THIS THIS CERTAINLY WOULD NOT SET A PRECEDENCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAVE SEEN TWO WITH THE CLOSEST ONE TO OUR PROPERTY BEING OUR BACKYARD NEIGHBOR. I BELIEVE THEIR NORMAL HOUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT IS TWO STORIES, BUT THE EDU IS APPROACHING TWO STORIES. OUR NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR IS A TWO STORY HOME AND THEY ACTUALLY CAME TO THE MEETING TWO DAYS AGO AND SPOKE IN FAVOR OF US.

OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE RIGHT, IT WOULD NOT BE ALONG THE OUTSIDE

[01:25:01]

OF OUR PROPERTY, BUT THEY ARE A ONE STORY HOME. THE NEIGHBOR WHO SPOKE OUT AGAINST US, THEY RENT THE HOME AND THEY ARE UPSET BY THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ON THE ROAD. WE DON'T HAVE ANY VEHICLES ON THE ROAD AND THEY ACTUALLY FOUND OUT WHILE THEY WERE LEAVING, THE VEHICLES ON THE ROAD ARE OUR NEXT-DOOR

NEIGHBORS. >> CAN ASK ANOTHER QUESTION?

>> RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE NOT ADDING ANY MORE VEHICLES. ONCE IT IS BUILT, IT IS THE NEW LAW. SO HOW DO WE -- HOW DO YOU GUARANTEE THAT WHEN YOU SUBSEQUENTLY SELL THE HOME, THAT IT WON'T HAVE A FAMILY OF EIGHT THAT LIVES THERE WITH FOUR CARS CONNECTED TO YOUR OLD HOUSE? THAT IS THE PROBLEM I STRUGGLE WITH. IT IS LIKE THE GUYS WITH THE DATA CENTER, ONCE YOU SAY YES TO THAT, THEN YOU CANNOT GO BACK AND SAY NO LATER. SO YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL WITH NOT JUST WHAT YOU ARE SAYING TODAY LIKE THE ZONING CHANGE THAT GOES. HOW WOULD WE ENSURE THAT I DID, OTHER THING THAT YOU COULD NEVER SELL THE PROPERTY WITHOUT ANOTHER GUARANTEE, HOW DO WE GUARANTEE THAT WOULD NOT CHANGE TRIM I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE COULD DO THAT FOR YOU. I CAN GIVE YOU THE SECURITY THAT IT WOULD NEVER BE USED FOR RENTAL PURPOSES IF WE SOLD THE HOME IN 10 YEARS. IT WILL NOT BE A TWO-STORY EDU. HIS MOTHER HAS ISSUES WITH MOBILITY. IT IS ONLY GOING TO BE ONE STORY.

THAT EXTRA USE OF TOP, SHE HAS CHRISTMAS DECORATIONS 40 YEARS OF BEING AN ADULT, STUFF LIKE THAT. THERE IS NO WAY FOR US TO GUARANTEE THAT WILL RESOLVE THIS HOME IN 15 YEARS, IF WE OUTGROW IT THAT SOMEONE WILL KNOCK IT DOWN.

>> IF YOU MIND SHARING WITH HER, THE RECENTLY ADDED EDU.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS A PROCESS. IF SOMEONE JUST BUILDS ONE IT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE BAD FOR THEM. THANK YOU THANK YOU FOR

FOLLOWING THE RULES. >> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BY TRYING TO KEEP IT SIMPLE AND NOT TO COMPLICATE FUTURE POTENTIAL EDU COMING TO PROPERTY. FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL, I GUESTS, HOW WE ARE OVERSTEPPING THE BOUNDARIES, BECAUSE THEY ARE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS OUR ROLE AS CITY COUNCIL. OBVIOUSLY THEY ARE GOING TO BE PROCESS WITH US TO SEEK APPROVAL. THEY ARE GOING TO THE RIGHT AVENUES. I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE TO QUESTION CARS, TRAFFIC, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN THE HOME BECAUSE THAT IS PERSONAL AND PRIVATE PROPERTY. OBVIOUSLY, THEY ARE VERY CLEAR AS TO HOW THE USES, WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE USED FOR. BUT THERE COULD BE HOMES IN HUTTO RIGHT NOW , 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOME THAT DOESN'T HAVE AN EDU, BUT THERE ARE FOUR FAMILIES LIVING IN IT, AND THAT IS PERFECTLY FINE. THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST HOMINY PEOPLE CAN LIVE IN A HOME AND HOW MANY CARS CAN BE IN THE DRIVEWAY AND OBVIOUSLY, ONLY ENMITY AS YOU CAN FIT. BUT HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN BE PARKED ON THE STREET. SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO REGULATE IN THIS SCENARIO AND KEEP IT SUPER SIMPLE. THEY ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS, THEY HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT AS TO WHAT THE USES GOING TO BE AND WE NEED TO RESPECT THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY AND WHAT THE POTENTIAL USES GOING TO BE.

THAT IS WHERE I AM NOT GOOD I THINK THIS IS GREAT, ESPECIALLY FOR WANTING TO EXPAND YOUR LIVING SPACE WERE ALSO TO KEEP YOUR LIFE PRIVATE FROM OTHER LOVED ONES, TOO. I WOULD LOVE TO EXPAND MY HOME BECAUSE I HAVE DEFINITELY OUTGROWN IT, I THINK THIS IS GREAT THAT YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT , COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I HAVE AND THANK YOU GUYS FOR COMING UP. I WAS A LITTLE WORRIED THAT BUILDING SOMETHING THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY POWER OVER OTHER PEOPLE'S HOMES, UNDERSTANDING AND HAVING THE CLARITY THAT THIS WILL BE A ONE-STORY, NOTHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW? NOTHING FROM THE VENDOR THAT WE GOT, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME. HEY, IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND AN ANGRY NEIGHBOR COMES UP

[01:30:07]

AND SAYS HOW COULD YOU APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT IS IMPEDING ON MY PRIVACY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT IS WHAT I WAS AFRAID OF. I APPRECIATE YOU, AND IDENTIFYING

THAT PRECEDENT. >> WE REALLY APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. AND IF THERE ARE ANY STIPULATIONS, THE ULTIMATE GOAL, HIS PARENTS HAVE THEIR FREEDOM AND FEEL LIKE THEY ARE RESPECTED BY US AND WE HAVE OUR REVIEW THAT WE ARE RESPECTED BY THE AND WE CAN ALL STAY TOGETHER. WE ARE REALLY VERY OPEN AND THERE ARE SITUATIONS. AND WHEN I AM NOT A BUILDER.

WHAT IS THE LOWEST HEIGHT THAT THEY CAN HAVE TWO SET UP APPROPRIATELY. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN FOR ONE STORY, BUT A 20

FOOT TALL BUILDING. >> I THINK THAT IS A TRICK QUESTION. WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY IT .

WHAT IF IT WILL BE MORE THAN 12 FEET TALL WITH STORAGE. THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS THE LAST 400 SQUARE FEET, WHATEVER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, THAT JUST DICTATES LIVING SPACE. IT DOES NOTHING -- IF IT WAS ME, I MAY HAVE A THREE-STORY

BUILDING. >> WE DO HAVE A MAX HEIGHT.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS SAYING, IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO GO I HAD TO DEAL WITH THE CONDITION OF ONE STORY AS STATED, IT IS LESS THAN 20 FEET BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT USUALLY SEEING SEVEN FOOT, EIGHT FOOT. YOU COULD GET THE MAX HEIGHT AT 16, 17. JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE HEIGHT FOR THE TRUSSES.

>> I DON'T WANT MAX STORAGE SPACE, THAT IS VERTICAL.

>> THERE IS A CONCERN THAT WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO WITH THEIR HOUSE THAT I AM ALL ALONG WITH PROPERTY RIGHTS ALONG WITH PROPERTY RIGHTS DON'T AFFECT OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY RIGHTS. PREVIOUS COUNCILS THAT YOU CAN BUILD A PATIO BECAUSE YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT. THAT IS YOUR RIGHT. THEY BUILT IT WITHIN FEET OF SOMEONE ELSE'S HOUSE WHERE IT WAS LIKE A 16 FOOT TALL FENCE OR SOMETHING AND THAT IS A BEACON OF HOPE THAT CONTINUES TO HAVE ISSUES WITH PEOPLE LIVING IN IT. SO DO I THINK THAT PEOPLE CAN HAVE A PATIO? SURE. SHOULD THEY BE ALLOWED TO HAVE MUSIC OUT THERE THAT IMPACTS NEIGHBORS? NO. I DRAW THINGS AS RIGHT NOW, YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE OKAY AND THE NEXT COMES DOWN AND I KNOW WE ARE KEEPING PRECEDENCE, BUT PRECEDENCE, COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, IN EARLIER EVENT OR ACTION THAT IS REGARDED OR AN EXAMPLE TO BEACON ENTERED WITH OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES. THAT IS MY FEAR IS THAT WE SAY YES, YOUR NEIGHBOR IS OKAY. WHAT DO WE DO WITH PRISM THREE DOORS DOWN AND THEN FOUR DOORS DOWN WHILE, WE HAVE BEEN SAYING YES. EVERYBODY HAS PROPERTY RIGHTS. ONE OF THE REASON PEOPLE MOVE TO THE SUBURBS -- I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY. IF WE DENY AND THEY COME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT GUARANTEES A CERTAIN WAY, DOES THAT PUT THEM IN FOR A YEAR?

>> THEY ARE ABLE TO COME BACK WITH A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT

OPTION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY

THIS 2024-077. >> SECOND.

>> WE ARE REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSING AFTER MOTION.

HERE'S MY REASON. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE UTILITIES.

AGAIN, I CANNOT MAKE DECISIONS AS ONE OFFS. BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE TO START ALLOWING EVERYONE TO START DOING THIS AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT -- YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS. I DO BELIEVE IT SETS A PRECEDENT AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS A PRESIDENT THAT WE WANT IN THE CITY BECAUSE YES, THEY ARE COMMON IN AUSTIN, BUT AUSTIN IS A WALKABLE COMMUNITY AND AUSTIN WHETHER THE PEOPLE LIKE IT OR NOT. OUT OF AUSTIN TO BE SUBURBS, I WOULD IMAGINE SOME OF THESE TO GET AWAY FROM COMMUNITIES DOING THIS. DOES THAT MAKE OTHER PEOPLE -- JUST BECAUSE THEY DID NOT SPEAK UP IN OPPOSITION AND THEN WE -- AT

[01:35:10]

19.5 FEET, THAT IS HIGH. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THERE IS NOT AND 808

-- HOA. >> ALL ZONE SINGLE-FAMILY.

>> THERE ARE NO OTHER ORGANIZING DOCUMENTS? ANYWAY, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE KEEP RIGHT NOW WITH A MOTHER-IN-LAW SUITE, I DON'T HOW WE KEEP ADDITIONAL. ANOTHER IS A CONCERN WE CANNOT TELL PEOPLE HOW TO LIVE IN A HOUSE. I THINK WE CAN, IT IS A FIRE CODE. IT IS HOW MANY PEOPLE IN A ONE-BEDROOM HOUSE OR A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE. AND I DO HAVE FEELINGS ABOUT THE RENTAL UNIT. YOU GO TO SOME NEIGHBORHOODS AND THERE ARE SIX CARS PARKED IN A DRIVEWAY. IT HAS BECOME A STOMPING GROUND FOR WORKERS. THAT IS KIND OF MY REASON. I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN, NOT YOUR CONCERN, BUT YOUR DESIRE AND I HOPE YOU LOOK AT IT AS IF I MAKE A MOTION, DON'T WORRY, IT USUALLY BAILS. IF IT DOES PASS, COME BACK AND HAVE DIFFERENT DRAWINGS THAT CAN THEN LIMIT MAYBE EVEN IF YOUR NEIGHBOR SIGN SOMETHING THAT SAYS AS LONG AS WE SEND OUT THE PAPER WE OPEN IT UP AND READ IT. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY OF DOING IT. MAYBE IF THERE IS A WAY TO KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS OKAY WITH IT. THINK BUILDING WHEN YOU COME INTO TOWN WE JUST HAD PART OF THE PEOPLE HERE THAT BUILT THAT BIG BUILDING. EVERYBODY SAID WHAT THE HECK IS THAT?

>> PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NO ONE EVER NOTICES. WE WOULD LIKE TO FIND A WAY TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS I JUST DON'T KNOW IF I

CAN DO IT WITH 19.5. >> OKAY, I WILL BE VOTING

AGAINST THIS MOTION. >> I WILL BE VOTING AT THIS MOTION. THIS MOTION SMACKS OF GOVERNMENT OVERREACH. WE ARE WAY TOO FAR INTO THEIR BUSINESS OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THEM DO AND CONVINCE THEM THAT THEY HAVE TO COMMIT THE NEW OWNERS IN 15 YEARS THAT THEY WILL NOT USE ANY SPECIFIC KIND OF WAY. I DON'T KNOW. FOR ME, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE DONE YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. YOU TALKED TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AT LEAST THE ONE NEIGHBOR IS FINE WITH THAT, THE ONE WITH THE TWO STORY HOUSE SEEMS TO BE FINE WITH THAT. YOU HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING BEHIND YOU THAT IS TALLER THAN WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING ALREADY.

NOT TO SAY THAT THIS WAS RECENT, THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT 15 YEARS AGO AND THEY KIND OF GOT APPROVAL SO WHO KNOWS WHEN THAT WAS DONE. KNOWING, IT PROBABLY WAS A RECENT BUILD. KIND OF WHAT REALLY STOOD OUT TO ME WAS THIS DOES ALIGN WITH OUR 2040 PLAN. WE DO HAVE A MISSING MIDDLE THAT WE NEED HERE. IF YOU CAN GET YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW AND YOUR MOM TO COME IN YOUR PARENTS TO LIVE WITH YOU AND TO BE ON THE SITE WITHOUT BEING ON YOUR HOME I THINK THAT IS GREAT. OUR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR ANSWERED THE QUESTION, IF THERE IS NO CAPACITY WITH THE EXISTING METER, ANOTHER METER WOULD HAVE TO BE INSTALLED, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO, THERE IS NOT A CONCERN FOR ME BECAUSE OF IT IS GOING TO HAVE THAT EXTRA GLASS OF THE -- CAPACITY AND WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, LIMITING IT TO ONE STORY I THINK IS REASONABLE. THAT IS THE REASONABLE THING THAT I WOULD SAY WITH ONE-STORY STIPULATIONS ANYTHING THAT IS FINE. ANYWAY, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON IT. FROM WHAT I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THIS, AS WELL. I THINK YOU SHOWING UP AND TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE REALLY HELPS TO PROVIDE CLARITY. SO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME OUT OF YOUR NIGHT TO SHOW UP TO SPEAK ON IT. ALSO, WITH UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS ANOTHER UNIT BEHIND YOU THAT HAS THE SAME. I GOT REALLY ADDRESSED MY CONCERN SPECIFICALLY WITH IT BEING SO HIGH AND POTENTIALLY PEEPING IN ON OTHER NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR NIGHT TO SHOW UP AND GOOD LUCK.

>> THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO ADD AND CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, ASHLEY. WHEN YOU SAID BEFORE IF IT WAS ATTACHED THEY COULD BUILD OUT THEIR HOUSE ALL THE WAY TO THE GOLD LINE AT A TWO STORY HEIGHT ALL THE WAY TO THE 10 FOOT BEFORE THE FENCE.

CORRECT? >> CONCEIVABLY, YES.

[01:40:01]

>> YES, WRITE YOUR BACON CONCEIVABLY. MY POINT IS, ALL OF THIS IS CLEAR GOVERNMENT OVERREACH BECAUSE IF YOU ALREADY HAVE THAT ENTITLED THAT YOU COULD DO THEORETICALLY, JUST NOT HAVING IT ATTACHED AND YOU ARE FREAKING OUT FOR THEIR PERSONAL PROPERTY RIGHT WE HAVE A PROCESS, IT IS IN OUR CODE.

THEY HAVE NOT VIOLATED ANYTHING WE HAVE SAID TO DO. THIS IS PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE. IF MORE THAN LIKELY, IF THEY HAD A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE A THREE BEDROOM TO A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE ON THE SAME WATER LINE GOING INTO THAT HOUSE. SO, IF THEY HAVE A THREE BEDROOM HOUSE NOW THEY ARE ADDING A ONE BEDROOM BEHIND IT, THEY ARE STILL UNDER FIVE. THERE WILL NOT BE ANY INCREASE IN WATER USE IT MORE THAN WHAT WOULD ALREADY BE CONSUMED FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY SF ONE LOT THAT IS JUST MORE SMOKE AND MIRRORS FROM OTHER PEOPLE SO I WILL BE VOTING NO I'M NOT. YEAH.

>> HE DID MAKE ME THINK OF THE QUESTION. HOW DO WE ACCOUNT FOR IMPERVIOUS CONFIRMATIONS. HOW DO YOU ADD SOMETHING LIKE THAT

MARK >> WE WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THE DRAINAGE BECAUSE IT WAS 1999 WITH THE DRAINAGE ANALYSIS HOW MUCH THEY WERE COLLECTING FOR EACH LOT. ADD ON TO ANY HOME BY RIGHT UP TO A TWO STORY HOME AND ASK FOR PERMISSION BESIDES THE PERMIT -- BUILDING PERMITS IN THE ADMINISTERING THE

PROCESS. >> BUILD A SHED AND ATTACH IT TO THE HOUSE, I HAVE TO COME UP AND GET APPROVAL.

>> IF YOUR SHED IS LESS THAN 200 SQUARE FEET, YOU DON'T NEED

APPROVAL. >> IF IT IS OVER.

>> IF I BUILD SOMETHING OVER, I CAN JUST DO IT. FROM WHAT THEY WERE AT TO ADD ON TO THEIR HOME, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND GET BUILDING PERMITS. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE DRAINAGE.

>> YEAH. MOTHER WOULD NOT BE COMING BEFORE COUNT , MAYOR. IT

WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE. >> THEY WOULD NOT BE. IT WOULD NOT BE. THAT IS WHAT YOU JUST SAID THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DO NOT SKIP OVER THAT POINT IN YOUR TABLE. IF YOU PULLED OVER A 200 FOOT STRUCTURE THAT WAS SOMEHOW ATTACHED STILL TO YOUR HOUSE, IT WOULD BE HANDLED ADMINISTERED UGLY, IT WOULD NOT BE COMING HERE IN SEP AND GETTING GRILLED IN THE PUBLIC.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> ANY MORE DISCUSSION?

>> I HAVE SEVERAL THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT, ADDRESS. ONE IS YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY REVIEW RIGHTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, THAT IS A BIG PART OF THIS AREA DON'T DRAW CONCLUSIONS IMMEDIATELY. I THINK I AM OKAY WITH THIS WONDERFULLY LIMITED TO ONE STORY I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD NEED TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT BECAUSE OUR TWO STORY HOUSES ARE NOT GOING TO STICK UP IN SOMEONE'S VIEW. BUT I DO HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT SETTING PRECEDENTS AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR THAT. SPECULATING WHAT THE LEGISLATURE MIGHT DO IS TOUGH, BUT IT IS VERY CONCEIVABLE THAT THE H AWAY CANNOT REGULATE THESE ANYMORE. REGULATES EVERY JOY TO HAVE THIS POSSIBILITY. WHEN HE -- THE COST. YOU CAN GO PUT SOME CONCRETE DOWN IN YOUR YARD AND DRAG YOUR UTILITIES OVER FROM ONE HOUSE TO WHERE THE ATU IS AND HAVE IT DELIVERED TO YOUR HOUSE AND THE COST IS GOING TO BE MUCH LESS THAN IT WOULD TO ADD A BEDROOM IN A ROOM TO YOUR HOUSE. SO, YOU CAN DO IT ON A COST BASIS THAT IS MUCH LOWER. IF YOU START LOOKING AT THE MAP ON THAT, IN YOUR CASE, YOU ARE DOING IT FOR YOUR FAMILY, 100% I UNDERSTAND. BUT IF YOU ARE SOMEONE WHO IS LOOKING AT IT IS GETTING EXPENSIVE TO LIVE HERE, YOU CAN GO IN ORDER A LETTER A DU ON 25, $30,000 PUT DOWN SOME CONCRETE AND UTILITIES OVER IT AND YOU MIGHT $2000 IN AND CHARGING $1000 A MONTH IN RENT. THAT CAN BE A POSITIVE TO YOUR HOUSEHOLD INCOME. IT IS GOING TO START MAKING MATHEMATICAL SENSE FOR PEOPLE TO DO THAT AND THAT HELPS PULL PEOPLE IN THAT DIRECTION. SO, THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME DESIRE TO DO THAT TO HELP WITH AFFORDABILITY BUT THEN THAT CREATES ISSUES ON THE CITY'S SIDE WITH MORE PEOPLE LIVING ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY

[01:45:04]

AND COULD HAVE LIVED THERE BEFORE. MORE CARS, MORE SERVICES AND NOT NECESSARILY A LOT OF TAXABLE VALUE FROM THAT.

SO, THERE IS SOME CONCERN ABOUT PRECEDENTS. YES, EVERY SEP IS INDIVIDUAL. IF YOU LINE UP A FEW SEP THAT WERE APPROVED AND THEN YOU WANT TO START DENYING THEM, THEN SOMEONE CAN SUE AND GO TO COURT AND SAY LOOK AT ALL OF THESE THEY HAVE APPROVED.

THEY ARE DISCRIMINATING AGAINST ME AND YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT. THERE IS NO TELLING THAT WILL TURN OUT. THERE IS SOME PRECEDENTS THERE. BUT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO TELL YOU THAT THIS IS NO SO I WILL BE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS IF WE LIMIT IT TO ONE STORY.

>> PLEASE CALL THE BOAT. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? MAYOR SNYDER?? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? COUNCILMEMBER

GORDON? >> MOTION FAILS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> WE NEED LIKE A BUTTON OR SOMETHING. COUNCILMEMBER

THOMPSON HAS THE FLOOR. >> I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE 10-3

AS PRESENTED. >> I WILL CHECK IN WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IT IS ONE STORY.

>> IS NOT ACCEPTABLE? >> YEAH.

>> LIMITED TO ONE STORY. >> THE ONE BEHIND YOU, I AM LOOKING AT IT, IS THAT A ONE STORY?

>> I THINK IT IS TWO STORIES. >> THERE IS A WINDOW UP TOP.

>> I CAN SEE THAT. IT HAS THE COVER OVER IT.

>> HISTORY IS IRD ASKED CODE ENFORCEMENT TO GET OUT THERE.

>> I CAN SEE IT, IT IS PRETTY TALL.

>> ASHLEY, BY CODE, WHAT IS ONE STORY.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, HOLD ON A SECOND. WE HAVE COUNCILMAN THOMPSON TALKING AND THEN YOU START TALKING GOOD YOU HAVE TO

GIVE US A MINUTE. >> I WAS SAYING THAT FROM THE PICTURE IT LOOKS PRETTY TALL AND THEN THERE IS A SHADED OVER THE SECOND STORY WINDOW. SO I APOLOGIZE THAT IS WHAT YOU GUYS CAN SEE AND TAKE SOME COMFORT IN KNOWING THAT WE WILL GET OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT OVER THERE PRETTY QUICKLY. I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL LIKE WE ARE PUTTING THIS RESTRICTION ON YOU BUT GOING TO LET THAT ONE IN THE BACKSLIDE. YEAH, I CAN SEE

THAT. >> THERE ACTUALLY REALLY TALL

TREES. BUT THANK YOU. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY YOU A GREAT TREE COVERAGE. BECAUSE OF THE IMAGE OF THE AREA, THOSE TREES ARE NICE NOW. UNLIKE MOST OF THE CITY OF HUTTO. YOU GOT

GREAT LANDSCAPING. >> THANK YOU GUYS FOR FOLLOWING

THE RULES. WE APPRECIATE IT. >> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK?

>> ASHLEY, BEFORE WE CALL THE BOAT WHEN WE SAY STIPULATE TO

ONE STORY. WHAT IS OUTING CODE? >> WE DO NOT HAVE A HEIGHT STIPULATION FOR ONE STORY. SO, ONE LIVABLE STORY WITH SPACE ABOVE IT BUT TYPICALLY WHAT WE ARE SEEING IS NO MORE THAN 25.

>> MODIFIED TO SAY NOT TO EXCEED 25 FEET .

>> FOR CLARIFICATION, THE INITIAL PLAN IS ONLY 19.5 FEET.

CAN WE APPROVE IT AS PRESENTED A 19.5. WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE

IT NO MORE THAN 25. >> IN THAT CASE, WHY DO WE HAVE TO SAY IT HAS TO BE LIMITED TO ONE STORY. NOW THAT YOU CLARIFIED AND SAID ONE STORY. THEY NOW COULD GO, BECAUSE I WAS A PRELIMINARY DESIGN, RIGHT? THEY COULD GO BACK AND SAY THERE IS NO LIMIT WERE HOW HIGH IT IS. THAT IS WHY I WAS

ASKING THE QUESTION. >> SOMETIMES I GET CONFUSED.

>> THE SEP ALLOWS THE USE, IT DOES NOT SPECIFY THE USE

ACCORDING TO THE PLAN. >> CORRECT, EXACTLY. THAT IS A RENDERING DRAWING. RIGHT? THAT IS WHY I AM SAYING ONE STORY, I WAS ASKING ASHLEY, HOW TALL DOES THAT MEAN? RIGHT NOW, IT SAYS WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A LIMIT. SO IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO BE LIMITED, YOU SHOULD SAY TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT, WOULD SOUND LIKE 25 IT IS REASONABLE.

[01:50:05]

>> AT THE MAKER OF THE MOTION, I AM TOTALLY FINE WITH THAT SO

I'M GOOD TO GO. >> I AM FINE WITH WHAT I MOTIONED. I AM FINE WITH MY EXISTING MOTION NOT BEING CHANGED. I GUESTS I SECONDED IT.

AND I WAS GOING TO SAY IT IS MY MOTION.

>> SORRY TO YOUR MOTION. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

>> PEOPLE AT CODES COME OUT THERE OKAY WITH WHAT THEY ARE

ALREADY DOING. >> DOING SOME RESEARCH ON THE BACK END IF THEY WERE NOT APPROVED PRIOR, IT COULD BE SINCE 99 THAT THEY HAVE HAD THAT AND YOU HAVE TO GO LOOK AT

THE AERIALS. >> THEY COULD'VE BEEN APPROVED BY FARLEY 15 YEARS AGO AND ALL OF A SUDDEN PEOPLE FIND OUT -- THEY GO BACK TO BUILD APARTMENTS AND WE CANNOT STOP THEM AT THAT POINT IN TIME BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN

GIVEN APPROVAL. >> WE HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK SOME THINGS BUT I AM NOT SEEING ANY SEP'S, BUT THEN THIS ALPHABET.

SPECIFIC USE PERMITS FOR THAT AREA BUT HALF STAFF DO A DEEP DIVE TO THE SAME RULES, IF IT IS NECESSARY

>> WHEN DO YOU INTEND TO BUILD?

>> IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE QUITE A FEW LOOPHOLES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE TOWN WITH INSPECTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE HAVE AN ARCHITECT ALREADY, WE ARE LOOKING TO USE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS DONE THE RIGHT WAY. I WOULD THINK IF WE CAN BUILD, START BUILDING IN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, THAT WOULD BE. -- COOL. BUT OF COURSE, WE ARE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THE RIGHT WAY. BUT IF IT TAKES LONGER THAN THAT, IT IS OKAY.

>> COUNSEL IS TO SAY IF YOU DID NOT BUILD IN FIVE YEARS, IT

WOULD EXPIRE. >> ABSOLUTELY , THAT IS

REASONABLE, >> ONCE YOU START SUBMITTING TO

THE CITY. >> I DID WANT TO SAY THAT WITH THE ORDINANCE , JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE IS ALREADY A BULLET POINT IN THERE THAT THIS IS ONLY GOOD FOR ONE YEAR. THE APPROVAL, THEY HAVE TO START THE NEXT PROCESS IN THAT YEAR.

>> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK, THE

ELSTAD? >> NO, SIR.

>> MAYOR SNYDER? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR?

>> THE MOTION PASSES 5-2. GOOD LUCK, GUYS ARE

>> BEST OF LUCK, GUYS. >> YOU EARNED IT.

>> THINK YOU WILL BE OR TYPE CAN HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.

[11. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]

>> WELCOME TO THE CITY OF HUTTO.

>> WE LOVE IT HERE. AND WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM ONE

THROUGH 11.13. >> I WOULD LIKE TO 11 .2.

>> I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS 11 THROUGH

13-11.2. PREVALENCE OF IT. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. ANY

DISCUSSION? >> WHO PRESENTED THE MOTION?

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. PLEASE CALL THE BOAT. MAYOR SNYDER . COUNCILMEMBER GORDON. COUNCILMEMBER CLARK.

COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR.

COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. CATHOLIC REPORTED FEEL. -- THE

[11.2. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-306 authorizing the City Manager to execute a task order with Arias in the amount of $18,095 for construction materials observation and testing services related to the Southeast Loop Wastewater Interceptor project (CIP WW10-2023). (Matt Rector) ]

MOTION PASSES. 5-2. 11.2 CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION. 2024-306 AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO DOCUMENT A TASK ORDER WITH RES IN THE AMOUNT OF EIGHT THOUSAND $95 -- $18,095 FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS OBSERVATION AND TESTING SERVICES RELATED TO THE SOUTHEAST WASTEWATER INTERCEPTOR PROJECT. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR MATT.

[01:55:02]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. COUNSEL. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE COUNTY ARE BUT FUNDING. WHY IS THE COUNCIL -- COUNTY GIVING US 10 GRAND FOR THIS?

>> THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS ASSOCIATED WITH 11.1 WHICH IS ALSO IN THE CONSENT PACKET. THIS IS THE SOUTHEAST WASTEWATER LINE THAT WE ARE REFERRING TO IT GUYS. WE HAVE A LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY AND TAYLOR TO PROVIDE THAT LINE THAT PROVIDES A SERVICE TO THE WESTERN PORTION OF TAYLOR'S LOWER YOU TJ. THAT IS THE COUNTY REGIONAL AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE REGIONAL WASTEWATER SERVICE AND THAT IS WHY THE COUNTY IS CHIPPING IN THE $10 MILLION OF FUNDING.

>> MY BIG THING IS, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT PARTNERSHIP REALLY LOOKS LIKE WITH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF TAYLOR BEING ABLE TO COME TOGETHER TO GET THIS DONE. SO I WANT TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD THAT WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL TO THE COUNTY FOR MAKING THAT COMMITMENT AND LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING THIS PROJECT COMPLETED. THANK YOU.

WITHOUT I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 11.2 AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER

KOLAR. ANY DISCUSSION? >> HEARING NONE, PLEASE PREPARE

THE BOAT. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? MAYOR SNYDER?

[12.1. Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2024-317 approving the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between Hutto Independent School District Police Department and Hutto Police Department; authorizing the City Manager to execute the MOU. (Jeffrey Yarbrough) ]

>> PASSES 6-1. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 12.1, CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING HUDDLE INDEPENDENT POLICE DEPARTMENT AND HUTTO POLICE DEPARTMENT AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE M.O.

YOU. GEEZ, HOW ARE YOU DOING? >> I'M DOING WELL TO THE MAYOR. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL , HUTTO POLICE DEPARTMENT GOOD I'M COMING TO YOU THIS EVENING WITH RICK WEST FOR THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE HUTTO POLICE DEPARTMENT AND ISD. UNDERSTANDING IS SOMETHING THAT A STATE LAW REQUIRED TO THE TEXAS EDUCATION CODE 37.081.

ANY AGENCY THAT HAS OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION SHOULD ENTER INTO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING SO THAT WE CAN COORDINATE COMMUNICATION AND EFFORTS IN THE EVENT OF CRITICAL -- BASICALLY ENHANCING CONTINUITY OF OPERATIONS IN A VARIETY OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT SCHOOL DISTRICT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH OVERLAPPING JURISDICTION MAY FACE WHETHER IT IS DEALING WITH TROPIC ACT INVOLVING A SCHOOL BUS OR INCIDENT THAT OCCURS ON THAT BUS TO MORE DRAMATIC ISSUES LIKE AN ACTIVE SHOOTING EVENT WERE CRITICAL INCIDENT SUCH AS THAT. SO, BASICALLY THAT IS WHAT THIS MEMORANDUM IS LOOKING TO ASK FOR APPROVAL OF IT. I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OR ACTIONS FOR COUNSEL?

>> A MOTION TO APPROVE 12.1 AS PRESENTED.

>> SECOND. >> SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER

KOLAR. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> WE HAVE AN M.O. YOU AND PLACE, RIGHT? THIS IS JUST AN UPDATE?

>> YES, SIR. THE M.O. YOU IS DRAFTED FOR A FIVE-YEAR TERM IT IS RENEWED EACH YEAR UNLESS ONE OR MORE PARTIES WANTS TO MODIFY OR REMOVE THEMSELVES FROM THAT.

>> IS IS SOMETHING THAT CHIEF EDWARDS IS AWARE OF? IS IT SOMETHING THAT HE WILL NEED TO AGREE TO? OR IS THIS JUST SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF JUST WITH THIS?

>> IT IS A MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHIEF EDWARD AND THE HUTTO ISD AND POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEY BROUGHT THE PROPOSAL TO US AND THAT IS TYPICALLY HOW THAT WORKS . THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WILL BRING THAT MOU SO THAT THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NEW LEGISLATION CODE.

>> I JUST DID NOT WANT CHIEF EDWARDS TAKING MY KID.

>> YOU, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROMISE AND THE DILIGENCE OF KEEPING IT UP TO DATE. OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE VERY ACTIVE IN COMMUNICATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES, ESPECIALLY OUR LOCAL IIS AND POLICE DEPARTMENT. IT GIVES US A LOT OF COVERAGE

[02:00:01]

THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY FROM YOUNG KIDS TO THE ADULTS IN THE COMMUNITY. SO, I APPRECIATE THAT AND THANK YOU FOR DOING

YOUR HOMEWORK. >> WE ARE PROUD TO DO IT. PROUD

TO DO IT. >> THANK YOU.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROAD -- ROLE. COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? MAYOR SNYDER? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK?

[13.1. Discussion and possible action regarding the updated Water growth data (Matt Rector). ]

THE MOTION PASSES 7-0. >> ITEM 13.1, DISCUSSING POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE UPDATED WATER GROWTH DATA.

>> GETTING THE, AGAIN, MAYOR AND COUNCIL BEFORE THE RECORD, MATT RECTOR, CITY ENGINEER. SO BACK IN THE SUMMER, IT SEEMS SO LONG AGO NOW. WE STARTED A CONVERSATION ABOUT WATER GROWTH AND HOW THAT COMPARES TO WHAT IS IN THE PLAN. WE STARTED LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN COMPARE WHAT WAS READILY AVAILABLE IN THE MASTER PLAN AND HELP FACILITATE ACTUAL DATA FOR YOU TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT WE ARE ASKING YOU TO MAKE ON A REGULAR BASIS, WASTEWATER PRODUCTS, CIP IN GENERAL. WE HAVE BEEN UPDATING THIS BEAR WITH US, AS SOON AS WE GET THIS UPDATED SOMEBODY COMES IN AND CHANGES SOMETHING. SO WE ARE CONSTANTLY CHASING OURSELVES ON THIS. THE MAP IS HARD TO SEE, IT IS IN YOUR PACKAGE AND IT IS A PDF YOU CAN ZOOM IN OR OUT OF. I PUT A COPY ON THE POWERPOINT JUST OUT EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO SEE IT CAN SEE IT. WALK YOU THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE DONE WITH THE TABLES UP THERE. THE TABLE BLOWN UP ON THE RIGHT IS ACTUALLY ON THE MAP IN THE LOWER CENTER AND THAT IS WHERE WE STARTED WITH THIS PROCESS. SO WE SAID WHAT DO WE HAVE ON THE GROUND TODAY? SO, THAT WAS THE FIRST QUESTION WE NEEDED ANSWERED. YOU CAN SEE RIGHT THERE, WE WENT TO THE METERS AND WE GOT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF METERS AS OF 10-11.

SO AS OF TWO MONTHS AGO. SHOWS YOU HOW QUICKLY EVERYTHING CHANGES. AS SOON AS WE GET THIS MAP UPDATED, ALL OF THE NUMBERS CHANGE AND WE TRY TO UPDATE IT AGAIN AND IT TAKES IS A FEW WEEKS LONGER. SO, 8000 METERS IS ROUGHLY 10,000 AND WE PRESENTED SOME OF THIS WHEN WE WERE GOING TO THE WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT SHEET. SO SOME OF THESE SUMMER SHOULD SOUND SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR TO YOU. THE NEXT STEP WE TOOK AND YOU CAN SEE I AM TRYING TO BUILD IT UP AS I GO ALONG HERE. WE SAID ALL RIGHT, HOW MANY SDR TO BE HAVE OUT THERE? WE BROUGHT THEM UP INTO USE GROUPS RATHER THAN EVERY SINGLE ONE BECAUSE THAT IT BECOMES A BUNCH OF TABLES THAT WOULD NOT REALLY CONVEY MUCH INFORMATION. THEN WE LOOK AT THE LAND THAT IS IN OUR ZONING MAPS AND SAID WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED? I WILL COME BACK TO THE SECOND. WE SAID ALL RIGHT, GO BEYOND THAT IN OUR TOTAL CCN AREA, WE HAVE LAND OUTSIDE OF THE ZONED AREA, SO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS AND SAID WHAT CAN BE BUILT? SO, BACK ON ZONING, WE WENT THROUGH THE ZONING MAPS AND SAID WHAT KIND OF DENSITY ARE WE ALLOWED AND WHAT DO WE WANT TO ASSUME? I DON'T REMEMBER ALL OF THE NUMBERS. WE BASICALLY SAID WE DON'T WANT TO GO TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT ZONING SAYS IS THE DENSITY AND WE DON'T WANT THE TOP OF WHAT ZONING SAYS THE DENSITY. WE DON'T WANT TO BE SUPER CONSERVATIVE AND OVERESTIMATE ALL THE GROWTH. WE DON'T WANT TO BE SUPER LIBERAL AND UNDERESTIMATE THE GROWTH. WE WANT TO KIND OF GO RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE MOSTLY BECAUSE I AM AN ENGINEER AND I DON'T LIKE TO BE AT EITHER EXTREME. I LIKE TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE AT. SO, THAT IS WHAT WE DID WITH ZONING. STANDING WITH FUTURE LAND RUTH AND SAID ALL RIGHT. WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM THAT FUTURE LAND USE PROJECTS WHAT IS THE MINIMUM A PROJECT. WE GET TO THE MIDDLE? ALL RIGHT, TAKE THAT BASED ON THE ACREAGE THAT WE DREW OUT ON THE MAP, THAT IS HOW WE CAME UP WITH ALL OF THESE. WE TOOK THE EXISTING 10,000, WE ADDED UP ALL OF THE ONE AND SAID ALL RIGHT. THAT IS A NUMBER. THEN WE TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER AND WE SAID WE ARE ALL GROWING. WE KNOW WE ARE GROWING. WE ARE GETTING A LOT OF HER LAST DEVELOPERS ON A REGULAR BASIS SAYING I KNOW WE ARE IN THE CCN AND COMMANDO CCN. CAN YOU SERVE US? BACK IN JULY, WE HAD OUR INTERNAL

[02:05:10]

CONVERSATION FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE, THAT IS JUST MATH AND SCIENCE. SO, CAN YOU SERVICE? WE RUN THE MODEL, WE RUN THE MODELS AND WE SAY YES, WEEKEND, OR NO, WE CAN'T. IT IS A SIMPLE MATHEMATICAL EQUATION AND I LOVE THAT YOU WERE A GET MURKY IS WHAT I HAVE TO BRING IF YOU THEY ARE WE GOING TO SERVE THEM? THAT IS A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. RIGHT? THAT IS THE DECISION THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE, I DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT. THAT IS WHY GET MY BY MY NUMBERS. SO, WE RAN THOSE NUMBERS AND SAID OKAY, WHAT DOES THAT DO FOR US? YOU SEE THE TABLE HERE, I AM ADDING UP ALL OF THESE NUMBERS. I ACTUALLY TAKE YOU STEP-BY-STEP THROUGH WHAT WE DID. YOU SEE THAT IT COMES TO TOTAL WATER DEMAND OF 51,300 AND SIX. IF WE DID EVERYTHING THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING SERVICED, ALL OF THE SDR THAT WE HAVE TODAY.

ALTHOUGH WE HAD A FEW WEEKS AGO WHEN WE PUT THIS PRESENTATION TOGETHER ALL OF THE ZONING'S THAT WE KNOW TODAY ON THE ZONING MAP. ALL OF THE FUTURE LAND USE AND WE TOOK OVER THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF JONAH DOWN BELOW THIS SITE ON THE SOUTHEAST LOOP ON 1660 SOUTH, ALL THAT AREA. IF WE TOOK ON PORTIONS OF MEN WELL. FOR EXAMPLE IF YOU LOOK ON THE MAP WHERE YOU SEE BECAUSE I CENTER OF THE MAP WITH YELLOW AND RED AND THE STRIPED AREA RIGHT BELOW THE GREEN CREEK THAT IS A PRODUCT THAT WE HAVE ASKED AND ARE IN FOR NOW. BEEN NO WATER, WE ARE NOT GOING TO SERVE YOU, AT LEAST NOT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. MIDDAUGH SAYS WE ARE NOT SERVING YOU. IF YOU WANT OUT, YOU CAN GET OUT, BUT YOU HAVE TO FIND SOMEONE ELSE'S REVIEW. THEY HAVE ASKED IF WE WILL SERVE THEM. THAT IS THE KIND OF STUFF I'M TALKING ABOUT. BACK AT THE AGE OF 50,000. SO, WE HAVE BROKEN IT DOWN BELOW SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE NUMBERS AND HOW THEY ALL JUST BREAK UP INTO THAT 51,000. SO THEN, I TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER AND I SAID OKAY. FOR MOST PEOPLE I'M NOT SAYING ANYBODY APPEAR, BUT FOR MOST PEOPLE 51,000 MAY SOUND LIKE A LOT, BUT WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN. SO, I NEED TO TELL THEM HOW MUCH WATER WE ACTUALLY NEED THAT IS WHERE YOU GET THIS BOTTOM-LINE NUMBER. WE WOULD NEED 29.5 MILLION GALLONS A DAY PER WATER TO SERVE THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH WATER. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SUGARCOAT THAT, WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH WATER. NOW I WANT TO WALK YOU GUYS DO THIS SO YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT, THE LOWER TABLE THAT I JUST SHOWED YOU IS THE 29.5 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY. ON THE RIGHT, I HOLD THAT STRAIGHT FROM THE WATER MASTER PLAN SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE WE ARE. YOU CAN SEE THAT WE ARE STARTING OFF IN 20 TWO WHEN YOU APPROVE THE WATER MASTER PLAN, WE HAD ABOUT 4.05. THEN THEY SUGGESTED THAT IN 23 WE BUY THREE EXTRA TO GET US TO 7.05 AND THEN WE WOULD NEED AN EXTRA FIVE IN 2020 LIKE TO GET US TO 12.5. SO ON AND SO FORTH ACROSS. SO, YOU CAN SEE THAT 29.5 IS WHAT WE ARE PROJECTING BASED ON AVERAGE DENSITY FOR THE LAND USES. 20 IS WHERE WE WOULD GET IF WE FOLLOW THE WATER MASTER PLAN. CURRENTLY, YOU ARE ALL AWARE, WE HAVE THE 4.05 THAT WE HAVE. WE HAVE A CONTRACT FOR ONE WATER SUPPLIER THAT THE CONTRACT IS FOR FOUR BUT BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SYSTEM WE CANNOT GET THAT FOUR FROM IT. IT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE A PLUS OF ABOUT 1.7 IS GOING TO BE ADDED TO THE SYSTEM. THAT WILL BRING US TO ABOUT 5.75. DOING THAT MATH IN MY HEAD ROADWAY. A SECOND WATER SUPPLIER THAT IS SUPPOSED TO COME ON A COUPLE YEARS LATER. THAT ONE COMES ON AND 26 FOR THE NEXT ONE IS RUN 2028 DOLLARS FOR AN EXTRA FIVE MGD. THAT WOULD PUT US UP TO 10.75 MGD AND 2028. THAT PUTS US -- I GIVES US AN IDEA OF WHAT WE HAVE RESERVED, RIGHT NOW, COMPARED TO WHAT THE MASTER PLAN SAID WE SHOULD BE. YOU CAN SEE IN THE MASTER PLAN WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT 12.05 STARTING IN 2025. THAT GIVES YOU AN IDEA WE ARE NOT QUITE WHERE THE MASTER PLAN SAYS WE

[02:10:04]

SHOULD BE. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE. IT IS PROBABLY A GLARING ISSUE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO RESOLVE IT IS THE MASTER PLAN IS BASED ON TIME MY GROWTH PATTERN IS NOT BASED ON TIME IT IS BASED ON AND EVERYTHING WAS BUILT RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY ARE ALL GOING TO BUILD.

EVERYTHING IS HAPPENING FAST. IT IS VERY DYNAMIC. DO I THINK THEY ARE ALL GOING TO GO TOMORROW? NO. ONE AND WE ARE GOING TO BE FULLY BUILT OUT IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS? NO. BUT I CANNOT GIVE YOU A DEFINED TIMELINE ON WHEN WE WILL BE BILLED OUT. MY PURPOSE OF PRESENTING THIS TO YOU IS BECAUSE YOU NEED TO KNOW THE WATER CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE RIGHT NOW WILL NOT SERVE US FOREVER. WE HAVE TO DO MORE.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO DO MORE TONIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THE INFORMATION SO YOU ARE IN THE LOOP SO THAT WHEN WE START HAVING THE I.D. CONVERSATION AND PRESENTING YOU WITH COST PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT THAT WE ARE COMING TO YOU WITH THIS PROJECT OVER HERE, WHO WANTS TO BE IN CCN BECAUSE THEY ARE COMMANDO OR JONAS AND THEY WANT TO BE IN HOURS, YOU HAVE SOME BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE TO FACILITATE THOSE DECISIONS BUT OTHERWISE I'M ASKING YOU TO MAKE A DECISION YOU DON'T HAVE THE DATA FOR. THAT IS MY PURPOSE IN PRESENTING ALL OF THIS TO YOU. THE OTHER THING THAT I DID, I SAID ALL RIGHT, ON THE OFF CHANCE THAT COUNCILS AS YOU KNOW WHAT, NO. OUR CCN IS OUR CCN, WE ARE PUTTING OUR FOOT DOWN. WE ARE NOT CROSSING THAT LINE. WHAT DOES THAT DO? THAT CHANGES, I ELIMINATED JONAH AND MANDEL THAT REDUCES IT DOWN TO 28,007 26 THAT COMES OUT TO 6.6 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER, WHICH IS ACTUALLY LOWER THAN WHAT THE MASTER PLAN PROJECTED OF OUR CCN. THAT IS IT. WE ARE NOT GROWING OUTSIDE OF OUR CCN, THIS IS ALL WE ARE GOING TO DO EVER, DONE. THAT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF ULTIMATE WATER WE NEED TO SERVE OUR CCN ALONE. I WENT TO NOT REALLY QUICKLY. IT IS A LOT OF INFORMATION. WE ARE ABOUT TO ASK YOU TO MAKE DECISIONS ON THE CI Q AND YOU NEED THIS BACKGROUND DATA AND WE HAVE BEEN SCRAMBLING TO TRY AND GET IT ALL FOR YOU, WE JUST DO NOT HAVE IT. I AM MAKING A LOT OF PROGRESS TRYING TO GET CAUGHT UP. BUT I WANTED TO PRESENT THIS IN HUMANS ONLY GET TO THE CIP, BUT I SAID ASKED ME TO MAKE DECISIONS, YES AND BACKGROUND. ALSO, ANY CONVERSATION THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE NOW ABOUT POLICY THINGS THAT YOU THINK YOU MIGHT DO, I JUST WENT TO A CONFERENCE IN OCTOBER WHERE A LOT OF CITIES ARE SAYING THAT IS IT. IF YOU'RE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS WE ARE NOT SERVING YOU. WE ARE NOT EXTENDING OUT THERE , WE ARE NOT DOING IT. BECAUSE OF WATER ISSUES AND COST ISSUES AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE FACING. SOME CITIES ARE DOING THAT. I'M NOT SURE THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER, I'M JUST PUTTING THIS INFORMATION OUT THERE SO THAT YOU HAVE INFORMATION TO HAVE A CONVERSATION TO MAKE A DECISION. OR MAKE A DETERMINATION AND SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. STAY THE COURSE, WE ARE GOING TO DO THE CIP AND COME BACK TO US IN THE YEAR WHEN WE HAVE MORE CLARITY. SO WITH THAT, I WILL STOP RAMBLING AND I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY KIND OF CONVERSATION OR DIRECTION. PRINT WITH THE CITY THAT DON'T SERVE PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS, OUT OF THIS POST GET

WATER? >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO CREATE THEIR OWN LINE OR GO INTO THEIR OWN WATER PROVIDER. FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW THAT THERE IS A VERY BIG CORPORATION NOT THAT FAR FROM US HERE. THEY HAVE BOUGHT THEIR OWN WATER SOURCE.

SO THEY ARE PAINTING THEIR OWN WATER INTO THAT LOCATION. I THINK RIGHT NOW WHILE THEY WERE IN CONJUNCTION THEY WERE USING OUR WATER. BUT ONCE THEY WERE ONLINE THEY USE THEIR OWN

WATER. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. BUT RUSSIAN FOR CLARIFICATION. CURRENTLY WE ARE AT 4.05.

>> 4.05 URINE OKAY. THEN WE ARE GOING TO GET BUMPED UP, ADDING

THE 1.75? >> CORRECT.

>> IN WHAT YEAR? 2026? >> OKAY.

>> WE WILL GO TO THE 10 MGD BY 28 OR 29?

>> SUPPOSED TO COME ONLINE IN 2028.

>> 2028, OKAY. THANK YOU. VERIFICATION ON TIMELINE

INCAPACITY. -- AND CAPACITY. >> HOW MUCH MORE ARE WE HEADING

[02:15:01]

IN? 15. >> FIGHT EVEN?

>> YES, SIR >> 210.

>> 210. THANK YOU. YOU TOOK A LOT OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD. THIS INFORMATION IS VERY HELPFUL. I HOPE IT IS OKAY THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE WE DO AN ACTION ITEM I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE A MOTION WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT PEOPLE ARE

GUESSING. >> I WOULD LIKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS THE UPDATED WATER GROWTH DATA MAP AND FOR STAFF TO PRESENT THIS TO COUNSEL BY ANNUALLY, KIND OF HOW IT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IN DECEMBER AND ANOTHER MORE DETAILED DIVE GOING THE BUDGET, OR AS NEEDED. I WANT TO ADD AS NEEDED BECAUSE IF HE HAS A RED FLAG THAT HE SEES LIKE A LOT OF STUFF IS HAPPENING REALLY FAST EMMA WE ARE GOING IN THE RED ZONE, MAYBE WE NEED TO -- HOPEFULLY THAT IS NOT THE CASE. MAYBE HE CAN UPDATE US ON THINGS. AND I WILL UPDATE THAT.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE THIS MAP AND HAVE STAFF PRESENT BY

ANNUALLY OR AS NEEDED. >> TWICE A YEAR. SEMIANNUALLY.

>> SEMIANNUALLY. >> I'LL MAKE SURE I HAVE THAT

RIGHT . >> I APOLOGIZE.

>> YES SIR. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.

>> HERE IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE US TO TRY TO DO GOOD TO KNOW IF WE GET THE MANY DIRECTION . IT IS NOT THAT HE WANTS US TO APPROVE THE MAP YOU WANT TO KNOW IS IF WE DO WE WANT TO GO OUTSIDE AND OUR CCN? WITHOUT HIM KNOWING THAT KNOWLEDGE, I'M PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH. I DON'T THINK THAT MATT OR CITY MANAGER KNOWS WHAT DO WE PUT ON THE PLAN? ARE WE PUTTING MORE PIPES RUNNING THROUGH? I HAVE THIS SMOKING HOT APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL WILL I DO IT? WE DON'T HAVE WATER. DID MATT SAY NO, SORRY, WE DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THE BOARD WITH IT OR IS IT CASE-BY-CASE SOME SORT OF DIRECTION, WHAT DO

WE WANT TO DO AS OF TODAY >> YEAH, MR. MAYOR, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU RAISE WHEN WE HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IS WHY DO WE CONTINUE DOING THEM OUTSIDE OF OURS CN? I PUSHED BACK A LITTLE BIT ON THAT AND I SAID WHAT I STARTED THIS OFF WITH HIS FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS HEY I WANT TO DO AND ASK ARE CAN YOU SERVICE?

>> FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE, THAT IS EASY. BUT I DON'T KNOW FROM THE COUNCIL IS WHAT THE APPETITE IS TO CONTINUE LOOKING OUTSIDE OF OUR SEAS HE AND. THE SAME THING WHEN WE GET TO WASTEWATER. WE WANT TO CONTINUE THE ABOUT THAT, OR IS THERE SOME TRIGGER THAT CITY MANAGER AND I USE AND WE SAY NO, THERE IS NO POINT IN DOING THIS OR TRYING TO DO THIS BECAUSE COUNSEL SAYS NO WAY, KNOW HOW, WE ARE NOT DOING THAT. I DON'T KNOW. RIGHT NOW, EVERYBODY, I WILL ANSWER YOU AND YOU HAVE TO GO TALK TO COUNSEL ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL SERVE YOU. IN A ROUNDABOUT WAY, I AM ROUTING EVERYONE TO YOU GUYS. IF THERE IS A DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL SAYING DON'T RATTLE THEM ALL TO US ANYMORE THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO DRAW THE LINE THAT AT LEAST THE CITY MANAGER AND I

CAN KNOW THAT. >> WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH

ROUTING IT TO US EVERY TIME? >> IT SOUNDS LIKE MAKING A BLANKET, NO, THIS IS NOT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE LIMITING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY HARM IN ROUTING EVERYONE INTO YOU. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS WHAT COUNSEL REALLY WANT. EVERY DEVELOPER THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT WITHIN OUR CURRENT CN WERE RIGHT UP AGAINST OUR CCN FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT EVEN IN OUR YOU TJ THAT ARE ASKING US FOR SERVICE AND YOU AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM SENDING THEM ALL YOU GUYS, BUT THE QUESTION WAS RAISED WHY ARE WE EVEN DOING THIS. I SAID THAT IS NOT AN ENGINEERING DECISION TO MAKE. IF THAT IS A DIRECTION THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS AND THE ENGINEERS TO JUST KEEP SAYING YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, AS LONG AS THE NUMBERS ARE GOOD AND THE

[02:20:03]

CAPACITY IS THERE, KEEP SAYING YES, GO TALK TO COUNSEL. YES, GO TALK TO COUNSEL. AND THAT IS FINE. BUT THE QUESTION WAS RAISED THIS SUMMER WHEN HE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT SHOULD WE KEEP DOING THIS? I CAN'T ANSWER THAT.

>> IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE SENDING YOU GUYS AND WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT CRITERIA FOR YOU. LAST TALKING ABOUT IS SOMETHING HAPPENS WITH THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, WE WANT YOU TO COME TO US. WE TOLD THEM WE WANT YOU TO COME TO US. THAT WE WOULD TELL YOU GUYS KNOW, DON'T COME TO US. THIS IS WHAT THE PROTOCOL IS THAT IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE SENDING A REFERENCE ONLY DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. IS THIS SOMETHING THEY WANT US TO COME TO THEM ABOUT OR NOT? I THINK IT IS JUST A BLANKET, SEND IT ALL TO US, BUT THAT IS JUST MY POINT OF VIEW. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD MAKE IT SO COMPLICATED. HE, IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO COME TO US OR NOT?

>> I BROUGHT IT UP. MY DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THOSE TWO, I CANNOT PUT WASTEWATER AND WATER IN THE SAME CATEGORY.

ONE IS A VERY FINITE AND YOU HAVE TO SCRAMBLE TO GET IT. THE OTHER WE CAN JUST EXPAND, EXPAND, EXPAND. WASTEWATER TO ME IS NOT AS BIG OF AN ISSUE BECAUSE IT CAN SOLVE THAT WITH MONEY. I DON'T KNOW THAT IN 10 OR 15 YEARS WE CAN SOLVE PROBLEMS WITH MONEY WHEN IT COMES TO WATER. IF YOU CANNOT GET WATER THAT DOES NOT EXIST IN CENTRAL TEXAS IS OUT, WHAT

YOU DO? >> I CANNOT PUT THE TWO TOGETHER . THE DIRECTION LAST WEEK IN THE PAST MEETING, WE ARE SPENDING $3 MILLION. I THINK HE NEEDS TO COME BEFORE COUNSEL. WHAT BROUGHT THIS ON IS THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT 800 OR SOMETHING, 400 IN JULY, WHY ARE WE THINKING OF THAT.

>> THEY HAVE COME BACK TO US. YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE

THAT IS IN TAYLOR >> THE ONE THAT SAID WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS IN THE CCN? IT WAS THE AMOUNT OF WATER.

>> ASKED THE CITY MANAGER WHY DID THE CITY -- POLITICIANS GET TO DECIDE THIS. IT IS EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO GET WATER. AND IT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE. EVERY TIME WE REQUIRE 3 MILLION GALLONS, WE PUMP UP PEOPLE'S WATER RATES. WE GO TO GET 5 MILLION, WE JACK UP EVERYONE'S WATER RATE IN THE CITY OF HUTTO. SO, IF WE HAVE A GUY THAT WANTS TO BUILD 500 APARTMENTS OR SOMETHING AND THEY DO NOT HAVE WATER AND COMMANDO CANNOT SUPPLY THEM . FOR THE PEOPLE I REPRESENT, THAT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM. THAT'S A LIKE A DEVELOPER PROBLEM IN THEIR AREA. IF WE GIVE THEM 500, THAT IS 500 THAT WE HAVE TO PICK UP SOMEWHERE ELSE. I WILL BE DUPLICATE UP, MAKE NO MISTAKE, WE WILL BE RAISING PEOPLE'S WATER. YOU ARE RAISING PEOPLE'S WATER BILLS TO GET GROWTH TO COME IN.

SO, I THINK WHAT PEOPLE ARE WANTING US TO DO IS FIND SOLUTIONS ON HOW TO LOWER THEIR WATER BILLS, NOT FIGURE OUT WAYS TO INCREASE IT, LIKE B6 A5-130. GREAT, IT APARTMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL. YOU DON'T HAVE WATER OR LANDFILL. DON'T COME TO US AND INDICATE TRAFFIC IS A LITTLE BIT OF TAX REVENUE, YOU CANNOT SHOW THAT MAKES MONEY BECAUSE OF IT MADE SENSE WE WOULD NOT BE RAISING TAXES EVERY YEAR WE WOULD NOT BE TRYING TO PUSH WATER PRICES UP AND WE WOULD HAVE FOUR -- FORECAST WE CAN SEE IN 10 YEARS WILL SEE A DECREASE. WE CANNOT SAY THAT. HOW THIS CAME ABOUT, YEAH, WE NEED TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS AS A COUNSEL SO THAT APARTMENTS AND RESIDENTIAL COME TO THAT AREA, MATT WILL GIVE THEM 1500 FOUR WATER THAT IS PRECIOUS AND WE WILL FIGURE IT OUT LATER. TO ME WE ARE VOTING TO INCREASE PEOPLE'S WATERS BILL IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU DON'T FIND WATER. INTACT FEES DON'T COVER THAT.

I WAS ONLY COVERING, AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, IT IS ONLY CALLED BRING LINES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, NOT THE SUPPLY. AND WE HAVE TAYLOR CONTRACT, IT IS NOT MUCH, BUT IT GOES AWAY AT TIMES. SO WE HAVE WATER CONTRACTS EXPIRING. SOME OF THEM HAVE DIFFERENT INCREASES. TO ME, I THINK IT IS OUTSIDE OF CCM. THAT IS ON THE DEVELOPER, COULD YOU IMAGINE RAISING PEOPLE'S WATER IN HUTTO TO HELP PEOPLE OUT ELSEWHERE? WE HAVE DONE STUPID STUFF LIKE THAT BEFORE BUT I DON'T SEE US DOING THAT BUT I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE TO THAT. I THINK WE OUGHT TO DO IS ASK MATT TO PROCESS EVERY SDR, BECAUSE HE GOT NOTHING TO DO. LET'S WORRY ABOUT THE HUTTO WATER AND THE CITY OF HUTTO. EVERYTHING ELSE IS A NO AND I THINK HE IS SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT IF SOMETHING COMES AROUND LIKE A REALLY GOOD DEAL THAT IS COMMERCIAL USE LOG 33-49, I THINK HE CAN SEE THE DIRECTION HAS BEEN NO BUT I WILL SEND

[02:25:02]

THIS BY BECAUSE I THINK IT IS WORTH LOOKING AT. TO ME, WE ARE MAKING THEM DO ALL OF THIS WORK TO COME UP, I HOPE WE ROSE TO A APARTMENT COMPLEX AND EVERY RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS WHO WANT THE WATER. THE PEOPLE TELLING RESIDENTIAL AND THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT WE KEEP APPROVING ALL OF THIS AND A LOT OF IT, WE CANNOT CONTROL DEVELOPMENT IN TJ BASED ON WASTEWATER PACKAGE PRINTABLE WATER IS THE ONE THING WE HAVE LEFT. IT IS THE ONLY TOOL WE HAVE LEFT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THE DEVELOPMENT. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GIVE IT TO RESIDENTIAL.

WE CAN JUST SAY NO AND IT WILL BE DEVELOPED. TO ME, IT IS OKAY THE CHUNK OF THE CITY'S GROWTH 5000 WERE THE NEXT YEARS, I THINK IT IS OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOU DOING ALL OF THIS AND GOING THROUGH IT. THE ONLY THING I SAY IS I THINK THE HUTTO LINE IS MISLABELED. I THINK IT IS MAKING THE CITY LIMITS ONE AND

THE TJ LINER COMBINED. >> I WILL DOUBLE CHECK THAT.

>> I COME AT IT FROM A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE BUT OVERLAP. THE ONLY WAY THAT A CITY CAN CONTROL, ANY REASONABLE CONTROL OVER ITS GROWTH AND RATE OF GROWTH IS CONTROLLING THE WATER SUPPLY. IF YOU DON'T HAVE CAPACITY, THEY COULD GO TO THE VANTAGE POINT. THAT IS THE REALITY OF IT TODAY. IF YOU'RE THE WATER SUPPLY AND YOU CAN SAY YEAH, YOU WERE IN THE CCN, WE CANNOT SUPPLY UNTIL 10 YEARS FROM NOW, THAT IS THE ANSWER. THERE IS NOT REALLY VIABLE WAYS PAST THAT THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING OUT AND DOING. IT IS WASTEWATER BYPASSING, WATER IS NOT REALLY BYPASSING. SO NOT OWNING THE JONAH AREA RESTRICTS OUR ABILITY TO HAVE CONTROL OVER HOW IT GROWS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENS REPEATEDLY, WE HAVE SEEN IT, WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH IT. SOMEBODY IN JONAH GETS APPROVAL FOR THEIR PROJECT, GETS A LOT OF THE NEED FOR JONAH IN THE REAR LEFT EITHER THEY CAN STAY IN TJ NO TAXES PAID ON SUPPLY SEWER SO WE HAVE GOT ALL THE GROWTH WITH NONE OF THE TAX MONEY AND PACKAGE PLANS ALL OVER THE PLACE OR WE CAN ANNEX THEM IN AND GET THE PROPERTY TAX AND THEN WE HAVE TO GO AND SERVE THE SEWER. SO, WE ARE LOOKING AT -- TO SAY THAT IS ONE OF 20,000 TO GO CRAZY BECAUSE THAT IS A TON OF WATER WILL HAVE ACCESS TO IT IS LIKE A 60% INCREASE IN THE WITHOUT THAT THE WATER SUPPLY. DON'T HAVE THAT. BUT TO SAY THAT TOTALLY TURN A BLIND EYE TO THAT AND THAT IF JONAH FINDS AND INCREASES THEIR SUPPLY AND CAN SUPPLY THAT, THAT AREA IS GOING TO BE A HOTBED OF DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THEY CANNOT WATER AND OTHER PLACES WILL NOT. THEN WE ARE GOING TO BE LEFT CONSTANTLY REACTING ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE AND THAT IS NOT A GOOD POSITION TO BE IN EITHER. SO FIGURING OUT HOW TO BALANCE THAT IS A MAJOR CHALLENGE. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SUPPLY 20,000 FOR WATER. THAT IS NOT A GOOD ANSWER. BUT, IT DOES SEEM LIKE YOU SHOULDN'T NECESSARILY JUST BE DOING EVERY CCR THAT COMES TO YOU. IT SEEMS LIKE IF IT IS OUTSIDE OUR AREA YOU DON'T DO IT IF THEY WANT YOU TO DO IT, THEY SHOULD COME TO COUNT ALL AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD AND IF WE SAY YEAH, OKAY, LET STAFF GO AHEAD AND WORK THIS, THAT IS FINE. IF THEY CAN'T COME TO US AND TELL US WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU ARE WASTING TIME, POTENTIALLY, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT IS GOING TO GO FORWARD OR NOT. IF THEY HAVE TO COME TO US ANYWAY TO SEND THEM TO US. IF WE SAY YEAH THAT MAKE SENSE TO KEEP GOING, MAYBE WE CAN HAVE OTHER STUFF THAT GOES WITH IT WITH THE FEEDBACK AND OPPOSITION TO BECAUSE STRATEGICALLY, MY ANSWER WOULD NOT BE NO TO EVERYTHING THAT COMES IN THAT AREA. MAYBE SOMETHING WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO SERVE 100,000 ON A PROJECT AND GET CONTROL OVER IT. HOW WE DO THIS WITHOUT COORDINATING WITH JONAH AND WHAT JONAH WANTS TO DO, THAT IS KEY TO THIS WHOLE FUTURE . IT IS MORE OF AN IMPACT TO BE WRITTEN ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE THE OF THE WATERSIDE I WOULDN'T WANT TO TAKE THAT ON UNLESS YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO SERVE THAT. THAT IS SOUNDING IN SEEM TO BE RIGHT UP YOUR TREATMENT CAN I ASK YOU A

[02:30:01]

QUESTION? >> WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH SERVING ON A COMMITTEE WITH JONAH SO WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT SO THEY ARE NOT JUST APPROVING EVERY PROJECT. SOME

SORT OF PROCESS >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> IF WE CAME UP TO AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IN ORDER TO IMPROVE WATER THE DEVELOPER HAS TO GET WASTEWATER SERVICE ALSO TO GO FORWARD, WOULD YOU BE SERVING ON SOME SORT OF

COMMITTEE? >> YEAH, IF THERE IS A WAY THAT ORDINATION . I WAS ONE OF MY FAULTS IN THE DOCUMENT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO TO COORDINATE WITH THEM LEGALLY.

BUT ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO COORDINATE WITH THEM, I THINK IT IS IN THE CITY'S BEST INTEREST. ABSOLUTELY I'LL BE HAPPY TO DO WHATEVER I CAN DO TO HELP WITH THAT.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR HAS

BEFORE. >> FOCUSING ON THE WATER SEES THE END GEOGRAPHICALLY BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO KNOW CAPACITY, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY CAN BE DIFFERENT USES. SO, GEOGRAPHICALLY, HOW MUCH OF OUR CCN HAS BEEN DEVELOPED VERSUS

UNDEVELOPED? >> I CANNOT GIVE YOU . I WILL HAVE TO RUN THE NUMBERS AND COME BACK TO YOU.

>> OUR CCN FOR WATER IS MUCH SMALLER THAN WASTEWATER.

CORRECT? GEOGRAPHICALLY OBVIOUSLY FOR CAPACITY. SO WE ARE LIMITED. IN THE FUTURE, DO I SEE THE CITY OF HUTTO SERVING ALMOST 30 MGD PER DAY? I DON'T. I THINK RIGHT NOW, IT IS PREMATURE, BECAUSE WE ARE A FAST GROWTH COMMUNITY IS BECAUSE CENTRAL TEXAS, TEXAS IN GENERAL. MANUFACTURING IN THE AREA. WE ALL HAVE GROWTH. I THINK IT IS KIND OF PREMATURE TO SAY NO WE ARE ONLY SERVING OUR CCN. I THINK THE NEXT, WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THAT NEEDS TO BE REASSESSED AND THEN I THINK THAT COUNSEL CAN MAKE THAT DECISION THINGS, THE LANDSCAPE WOULD CHANGE. RIGHT? SO, I AM NOT IN THE CORNER OF SAYING NO TO JONAH BECAUSE WE ARE TAKING ON MORE SUPPLY WITHIN FIVE YEARS OR SIX. WE WILL HAVE THAT TO USE, TO SERVE THE AREA IT IS NOT GOING TO BE BUILT OUT, RIGHT, THE CCN? OUR CCN IS NOT GOING TO BE BUILT. THAT IS WHERE I AM NOT WITH

THAT. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, I WOULD NOT HAVE A BLANKET AMOUNT, BUT I WOULD NOT HAVE A BLANKET YES.

>> A NO AND THEN CONVINCE ME IF THERE IS A REASON TO SERVE

SOMETHING SPECIFIC. >> I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT YOU SAID , BUT TO DRAW THAT LINE TODAY IN A HIGH-GROWTH AREA I THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE MORE OPEN TO THAT. THAT IS WHY AS NEEDED BECAUSE OF B.E.T. J OR THE OUTSIDE, NOT THE TEACHER, SORRY, FORGOT ABOUT THAT. IF THE GROWTH IS BEYOND OUR CCN, IF THAT IS REALLY HAPPENING, IF THAT GROWTH IS REALLY DOMINATING IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, AND THE CITY OF HUTTO CCN IS NOT ABLE TO HAVE THAT RED FLAG, WE ARE REALLY GIVING 60% OF OUR WATER TO OUTSIDERS, THEN THAT USED TO BE A RED FLAG RAISED TO PLANNING, OVERALL PLANNING. FOR THE FUTURE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS VERY CLEAR.

>> YOU CANNOT GIVE 50% OF YOUR WATER TO OUTSIDERS.

>> I AM NOT AN ENGINEER WITH HOW ALL THAT WORKS .

>> YOU CANNOT APPROVE, APPROVE, APPROVE, AND THEN SAY WE CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE. THEN WE SUPPLIED ALL OF OUR WATER OUT.

IS THIS COUNSEL WILLING TO >> POINT OF ORDER. POINT OF

[02:35:06]

ORDER. >> WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

>> YOU ARE TALKING AGAIN AND I HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO TALK ONCE.

>> SORRY, I FORGOT YOU WERE THERE. GO AHEAD .

>> SO, A COUPLE OF THINGS, CURRENTLY WE ARE AT FOUR MGD INSIDE OURS IS THE OUR EXTENDED USE INSIDE OUR CCN ONLY IS 16 BASED ON MAPS DRAWING, ASSUMING 50% USAGE. WE COULD BE AT 60% UTILIZATION, WE COULD BE AT 40%. HE PICKED A 50% NUMBER SO YOU ARE ALSO FACING WE ONLY NEED 16, HE IS ASSUMING THE MID RANGE OF USAGE IN OUR OWN CCN. WE CAN ALREADY LOOK OUT UNTIL 2040 AND CANNOT GET TO 16 AND WE DON'T EVEN HAVE IT SET HOW WE CAN GET OUR ADDITIONAL THREE THAT WE NEED IN 2031 AND ANOTHER FIVE IN 2030 -- OR, 2040. IT MAKES COMPLETE SENSE TO SAY NO, WE STAY IN OUR OWN SEES THAT ONLY AND THEN YOU SIT THERE AND SAY WHAT I WOULD WANT FROM STAFF IS TO COME BACK AND SAY OKAY, WHAT IS OUR LONG-TERM PLAN SO WE ARE NOT STRUGGLING.

I KNOW WE WENT AND GOT A CONTRACT, WE DON'T HAVE WATER FOR ANOTHER THREE YEARS AND WE ARE AT THE LINE OF LOU ON TCE Q FOR WATER. IF WE ARE GOING TO BE A GOOD COUNSEL IN THE FUTURE, WE NEED TO HAVE THAT WERE THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN AGAIN. THAT THIS IS THE WORST IT WILL EVER BE BECAUSE OF POOR PLANNING IN THE PAST. ONE THING I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT IS OKAY, I KNOW WE DID NOT DO A BRACKISH WATER PLAN PREVIOUS BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO AND TREAT THE WATER? AT THAT POINT, THE WATER AND THE SIZE OF OUR CITY AND REVENUE STRUCTURE WOULD BE SUCH THAT WE COULD AFFORD TO PULL UP THAT BRACKISH WATER INTO A BRACKISH WATER TREATMENT PLAN ON RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE THE CHEAPEST COMPARED TO HAVING TO PUMP SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE LONG TERM WE WOULD BE OUR OWN SUPPLIER. WHAT IS THE CAPACITY ON THAT ELECTED THAT COST? ALSO, WHAT ABOUT RECLAMATION FROM OUR WASTEWATER TO BE TREATED TO RECYCLE IT TO REDUCE THE MGD RATE WITHIN REVERSE OSMOSIS AND ALL THE THINGS WE CAN DO. UNTIL WE HAVE DEDICATED 16 MPE WHICH IS THE PRESENT MARK OF OUR INTERNAL CITY, WE DON'T GET ANYTHING OUTSIDE. THEN, IF WE ARE THEN ABLE TO AFFORD THE BRACKETS AND ABLE TO SAY, BECAUSE OF THE STREAM AND WE CAN GET UP TO 25, THEN WE CAN SAY, WE HAVE 25 MGD LOCALLY, WE KNOW IT IS OUR MAX BUILDOUT. NOW WE HAVE NINE AND HE CAPACITY BUT WE CAN GO WITH THE SERVICE AND BE A WHOLESALER PROVIDER OUTSIDE OF THAT BUT WE SHOULD NOT START THERE TODAY NOR SHOULD WE EVEN CONSIDER IT. IF YOU LOOK AT THIS MAP, IF YOU WATCH THE BLUE LINE AND USING THE MEGA SITE AND YOU SEE THE BLUE LINE AND YOU SEE IT COME ALL THE WAY DOWN AND GO OVER, BIG ORANGE AND PURPLE AND COMMERCIAL ALL-AROUND THE SOUTHEAST LOOP, THAT IS ALL GOING TO DEVELOP. NONE OF THAT IS IN THE SEAT AGAIN. SO YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE STAFF BREAK ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS TO US BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN OUR CCN, THEY ARE DEVELOPING FASTER AND SOME OF THE INTERIOR BUILDING HERE BECAUSE IT IS NAKEDLY AND IT IS GOING TO BE ALONG THE LOOP. IF JONAH CANNOT PROVIDE IT, WE COULD LOSE -- THAT IS PROBABLY WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THIS EXTRA FIXED THE -- 15 MGD PUT THE REST OF THE CITY IS THAT ONE SQUARE IS A GOOD PORTION OF IT. SO YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL TO SAY -- THAT IS PUNTING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND NOT MAKING A POLICY DECISION. SO, NO, I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF SAYING AS NEEDED AND BRING THEM TO US AND WE NEED TO HAVE A PLAN OF HOW CAN WE EVEN GET ECONOMICALLY, THE BEST ECONOMIC PLAN TO GET OUR INTERNAL CCN TO ECKSTEIN WITHIN THE NEXT REASONABLE TIMEFRAME . WE ARE ALREADY BEHIND, IT LOOKS, BY 2031. THAT WAS THE OTHER QUESTION, WHEN YOU GO TO THE WATER DEMAND.

THIS CAPACITY THAT YOU ARE SHOWING RIGHT NOW, THAT IS ASSUMING, IF I AM ASKING, THE BLUE GRAPH SHOWING WHERE WE ARE AT AND WHERE THESE ENTERED REQUIREMENTS ARE. THAT IS ONLY SUPPLYING FROM OUR CCN IN THAT GRAPH. CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THE RIGHT SIDE, THAT IS FROM THE MASTER PLAN. THEY DID NOT LOOK OUTSIDE OF THE CCN.

>> THAT IS MY POINT. WHEN I HEAR DAN AND AMBER LEE SAY

[02:40:03]

LET'S BRING IT IN. LOOK AT THIS GRAPH. WE CANNOT EVEN HAVE A PLAN TO DO WHAT IS IN OUR CCN, WHY WOULD WE EVEN CAN UTTER ANYTHING OUTSIDE? IT IS GOING TO BE EVIDENTLY MORE EXPENSE TO DO IT. THE MOMENT THAT WE DO AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ACCELERATE WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IN OUR OWN CITY TO THE

COST OF OUR CONSTITUENTS. >> YES. GO AHEAD.

>> I THINK YOU ARE KIND OF MISUNDERSTANDING WHAT WAS SAID BUT I DON'T THINK EITHER OF US ARE IN FAVOR OF JUMPING OUT AND SERVING ALL OF IT IT IS JUST THAT THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITIES THAT ARE AN EXCEPTION FOR ME, ANYWAY.

>> YOU GO AHEAD. YOU HAVE NOT GONE YET.

>> I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH PRETTY MUCH WHAT DAN SAID. WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR OWN CCN, IN MY OPINION. THAT IS THE ONE THAT WE ARE COMMITTED TO, RIGHT? IF SOMEBODY IS WITHIN OUR CCN AND WE ARE COMMITTED, WE HAVE TO SERVE THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE IN OUR SEES THE END. RIGHT? IF WE HAVE THE SUPPLY WE HAVE TO SERVE THEM. MAYBE ONE OF THOSE FIRST. THAT IS WHO WE ARE COMMITTED TO SUPPLY. SO IN ONE WAY I AM IN FAVOR OF A POLICY SAYING OUR CCN COMES FIRST. THEN IF THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS THAT COULD REALLY BENEFIT THE CITY AND WOULD BE WORTH THE COST OF SERVING THEM AND WE CAN OFFSET THE COST BY ADDITIONAL TAXES THAT WOULD COME IN OR PAY FOR THE WATER IN SOME WAY OR WHATEVER. BUT I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THE MAYOR THAT FOR YOU TO GO AND DO THEM AUTOMATICALLY, I THINK THAT IS KIND OF WASTING YOUR TIME A LITTLE BIT, IN MY OPINION. IS UNLIKE MOST OF US ARE UNCOMFORTABLE PULLING 51,000 YOU KNOW, ENOUGH TO DO 30 WHERE THERE IS JUST NO WAY WE CAN GET THERE. MAGIC WANDS ARE NOT GOING TO GET HIS. SO, YEAH, I LIKE THAT PLAN OF SAYING THAT IS THE DEFAULT, THAT IS WHAT IT IS ON. ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT, HE NEEDS TO COME TO COUNSEL. HE NEEDS TO COME TO US AND THEY NEED TO MAKE THE CASE TO US. HERE IS WHY WE THINK YOU SHOULD SERVE US IN HERE IS WHY WE WON'T MAKE IT A BURDEN ON THE

EXISTING -- >> ARE YOU OKAY LIMITING IT TO COMMERCIAL USES ONLY? NOT RESIDENTIAL?

>> IS A RESIDENTIAL MAKES A CASE, I CANNOT IMAGINE THEY WOULD. I THINK IT WOULD MOSTLY BE COMMERCIAL, BUT IF THEY MAKE A CASE TO WEAR AND WORK I DON'T WANT TO JUST LIMIT IT WITHOUT HEARING, YOU ARE RIGHT, BUT I DO MOST OF IT WE CAN SAY

NO TO. >> I THINK YOU COULD SAY COUNSEL IS NOT REALLY LOOKING FOR RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL BUT EVEN THEN, I AM NOT INCLINED TO SAY YES TO IT.

>> I THINK YOU ARE BRINGING EVERYTHING TO US.

>> I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW , WE HAVE DONE THE SCR. YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IN THAT LOWER SIDE, I CAN TELL YOU, WE ARE RUNNING ONE RIGHT NOW FOR A PROJECT AND IT IS IN TAYLOR'S E TJ BECAUSE WE DID WASTEWATER BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THE JOINT ACCESS AREA ON THE SOUTH. YOU HAVE AGREED TO GIVE US WASTEWATER SERVICE BECAUSE OF HIS PART OF THE AGREEMENT. WHAT

ABOUT WATER? >> I CAN RUN IT FOR YOU, YOU ARE NOT IN MY CCN, YOU'RE NOT EVEN IN MY EAT TJ, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK TO COUNSEL. BUT THAT IS HOW WE ARE OPERATING RIGHT NOW SAYING WE WILL RUN THE SCR BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT SAYS I SHOULDN'T OR I CAN'T AND THEN TALK TO CITY COUNCIL. IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THAT DIRECTION, WHICH DOES REDUCE THE WORKLOAD ON MY STAFF

>> IF THEY COME TO US TO MAKE THEIR CASE, DO THEY NEED THE SCR IN PLACE FOR US TO BE TO MAKE A DECISION?

>> FOR US TO SAY YES OR NO DO WE NEED TO KNOW HOW MANY WOULD

BE IMPACTED? >> THEY CAN RUN THE NUMBERS FOR

THEM WITHOUT ME. >> HOW WOULD YOU VERIFY THAT IT

IS CORRECT? >> THEY SUBMIT THE APPLICATION ALREADY AND SAY THIS IS HOW MANY AND THEN THEY ARE GOING TO

[02:45:02]

DEAL X NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS, COMMERCIAL, WHATEVER THE CASE IS, RIGHT? THEN WE RUN OUR OWN NUMBERS AND IN THE DOCUMENT THIS IS THE NUMBER YOU GAVE US. 500, WE RAN THE NUMBER AND IT IS ACTUALLY 600. SO THEN THE 600, WE RUN AFTER ALL OF THE PIPES AND EVERYTHING OUT OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AND TAKE IT INTO THE WATER PLANT OR THE WATER TOWER OR THE WASTEWATER PLANT THESE ARE THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THAT. SOME OF THAT MAYBE YOU MAY HAVE TO WAIT TILL THE THIRD EXPANSION OF THE WATER TREATMENT. THE WATER TELLING YOU ABOUT IN TAYLOR'S E TJ. YOU HAVE TO BUILD A NEW ELEVATED STORAGE TANK BECAUSE

HE WILL USE THAT MUCH WATER. >> YOU SAY YOU DO THE SCR TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS CORRECT THAT YOU WOULD ALREADY BE DOING THE SCR. CORRECT?

>> THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DOING RIGHT NOW. WHAT MY POINT IS, IF THEY WERE GOING TO COME TO YOU GUYS FIRST, THEY CAN TELL YOU THE COUNT AND WE COULD TELL YOU BASED ON THIS NUMBER, THIS IS THE IMPACT OF THE SYSTEM. WE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO RUN THE CALCULATIONS TO VERIFY WE CAN ESSAY BASED ON THESE NUMBERS THIS IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO YOUR SYSTEM. BUT IF YOU WANT, WE CAN DO WITH THE OTHER WAY WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE NOW AND THEN THEY COME TO YOU AND SAY THIS IS THE SCR, THEY ARE DOING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, COST SHARE AGREEMENT, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. AND THE SCR IS ATTACHED TO THEM. HE WILL SEE THE ONES THAT SAY WE WANT 500 AND YOU WILL SEE LATER ON WHERE IT SAYS NO, NO, NO, YOU SAID 500. THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO NOW TO FIX OUR SYSTEM.

>> IT IS A PROCESS THAT YOU WERE ALREADY DOING SOME KIND OF SCR WORK SO DO NOT DO THE SCR SEEMS LIKE WE ARE LEAVING IT UP TO REALLY NOTHING. JUST AN ESTIMATE.

>> OBVIOUSLY I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE COUNCIL, BUT IT FELT LIKE YOU ARE MORE INTERESTED IN THE ECONOMICS OF THE PROJECT SO IF THEY COME IN AND SAY WE HUNT 500 FROM YOU GUYS THEN WHAT ARE THE ECONOMICS, WHAT IS THE TAX PAYOFF? WHAT IS OUR RETURN ON INVESTMENT KIND OF STUFF. THEN THE FAT CELLS, RIGHT, AND YOU SAY YEAH, THAT IS A GREAT RETURN ON OUR INVESTMENT. LETS A SAMSUNG PART TWO COMES AND SAYS I WANT TO BE IN THE LOWER SOUTHEAST SIDE OF HUTTO. OKAY, WELL, WHAT IS OUR RETURN ON INVESTMENT, YEAH, WE WILL GIVE

YOU THE 500. >> CLEARLY MAKING AN EXTREME CASE. THERE HAS TO BE SOME KIND OF GUIDELINE. SO WE ARE PROCESSING AND YOU ARE TAKING A RESOURCE. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW WE ARE GOING TO GET IT. WE CAN FIND A TON OF WATER 38 MILES EAST OF HERE. A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT TO GET THE WATER HERE. THAT IS THE ULTIMATE FEAR FOR ME IS YOU CANNOT JUST GO GET 5 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY NEED TO BE PART OF SOMEONE WHO IS ABLE TO ACQUIRE 40 OR 50 MILLION AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GO SELL THE REST OF IT AND THEN THEY HAVE TO GO FIND IT AND WE HAVE ALREADY HAD ISSUES WITH PEOPLE HAVING PROBLEMS FINDING PIPELINES AND THEY ARE HAVING PROBLEM GETTING WATER RIGHTS AND THEN YOU HAVE TO MOVE IT 40 OR 50 MILES AND WE ARE SAYING THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION IS TRYING TO STOP US FROM GETTING WATER. THAT IS TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT. DOES ANYONE THINK THAT IS GETTING BETTER IN FIVE OR 10 YEARS? IT IS GOING TO BE WORSE. WHY WASTE OUR TIME OR OUR STAFF'S TIME SCREWING AROUND WITH GETTING WATER TO SOMEONE NOT EVEN IN OUR E TJ BECAUSE THERE IS NO BENEFIT TO THAT UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO PAY FOUR TIMES THE WATER RATE BECAUSE WATER TODAY IS THE CHEAPEST WE ARE GOING TO GET IT THE WATER IN 10 YEARS THAT WE HAVE GIVEN AWAY IS GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE. THE OTHER CITIES ALTHOUGH THE REASON WHY THEY DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS IN THE DEVELOPED CITIES, THEY PUT THE GUARDRAILS ON AND THERE IS A CORRECTION. THIS IS PROBABLY WHY WE HAVE THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MATT DOES HIS JOB WHERE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROJECTS WE NEED TO WORK ON QUESTION I GUESTS WE NEED TO WORK ON ALL OF THEM SAYING YES TO TAYLOR'S ETA TO BUILD A WATER LINE OUT THERE.

IT SEEMS TO ME MORE ABOUT YOUR CCN, SOME BIG PROJECT COMES UP THAT IS NOT RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL THAT IS A SMART GUY.

BETWEEN HIM AND THE CITY MANAGER, THIS MIGHT BE WORTH LOOKING AT. LOWERING ABOUT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND SOMETHING

[02:50:01]

THAT IS HAPPENING IN DANVILLE AND TAYLOR, WE ARE BURNING UP STAFF TIME, THAT IS WHY WE ARE GETTING STUFF DONE AROUND HERE.

WE ARE FOCUSING ON SERVICE AND WE NEED TO BE FOCUSING ON OUR

PEOPLE. >> THE SCR WOULD STILL GET ON IN THE PROJECT COULD MOVE FORWARD. OUR ENGINEERING DOES NOT HAVE TO WASTE TIME ON IT UNTIL IT IS REACHED THE POINT WHERE THEY ACTUALLY COMMITS THAT YOU SHOULD LOOK AT THIS, AND THEN WE CAN SAY WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND STAFF TIME ON

THAT. THERE IS ENOUGH THERE. >> ENOUGH INFORMATION RUNNING

THEIR NUMBERS. >> NOT UNLESS WE SAID WE WANT

THEM TO. >> ONE WOULD THAT EVER MAKE

SENSE TO DO THAT? >> I DON'T THINK IT WOULD.

>> ALL HYPOTHETICALS. WHAT CAN HYPOTHETICALLY GO THERE? ALL YOU ARE GOING TO DO IS SUPPLY THEM WATER AND MAKE MONEY ON

THE WHOLESALE. >> IF IT IS NOT ON OUR AREA AND HE DOES NOT WORK ON IT AND THAT IF THEY WANT TO COME TO COUNT , THEY CAN ALWAYS DIRECT THAT. ANYONE CAN COME TO COUNSEL. I GUESTS IF WE DO IT THAT WAY. I DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT WE

TOLD THEM >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF

WHAT WE WERE SAYING. >> A FEW MORE THINGS , SO, WITH THE WATER, LIKE THE MAYOR SAID, WATER IS ONLY GOING TO INCREASE MOVING FORWARD, NOT BECAUSE OF LACK OF WATER SUPPLY, IT IS ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO GET FROM POINT K TO POINT B.

THAT IS WHY THE PRICE OF YOUR WATER RATES ARE GOING UP, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO SERVE OUR CCN FIRST.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH CAPACITY OR WHAT IS IT, HAVE ENOUGH THAT WE CAN SERVE THAT. IN THIS AREA, IT IS SUCH HIGH GROWTH, THERE ARE BUSINESSES AND DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTIAL, MULTI FAMILY, WHAT HAVE YOU. THEY ARE PAYING A WATER RESERVATION FEE. IT HAS BECOME SO DOG EAT DOG THAT IS COMPETITIVE, THAT PEOPLE WANT TO BE IN THIS AREA. PEOPLE WANT THE WATER, THEY ARE WILLING TO PAY A RESERVATION FEE FOR THREE YEARS I THINK IT IS GOOD FOR. THERE WILL THE MONEY ON THE TABLE BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE HERE IN THE HUTTO AREA. I THINK THAT IS ONE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT WE MAY NOT BE CONSIDERING IS THAT IT IS A HIGHLY COMPETITIVE MARKET AND I DO UNDERSTAND. WE NEED TO SERVE OUR PEOPLE AND OUR CCN FIRST, BUT IF THESE BIG PLAYERS THAT WANT TO BE IN THE AREA ARE WILLING TO PUT MONEY ON THE TABLE TO HELP WITH THE CITY RESERVING AT THAT WATER TO ACQUIRE THAT WATER IN THE NEXT TWO TO FIVE YEARS AND BEYOND WHATEVER DEALS ARE MADE, THEN THAT IS BENEFICIAL. THE CITY AND THE TAXPAYERS DO NOT HAVE TO PUT THAT MONEY ON THE TABLE TO GET THE WATER TO US. THAT IS IS ANOTHER DYNAMIC. THAT IS PART OF THE CONVERSATION. IT MAY CONFUSING OR CONVOLUTED WORK, BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW. I THINK THAT JUST HAVING IT, SOME OF THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ECONOMICS OF THE AREA, IT CONFUSING, I GUESTS . I AM NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT FOR ME, IF THE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT, IT MAKES SENSE. I AM IN THAT BOAT IF IT MAKES SENSE THEN IT MAKES SENSE I GUESTS. SO, I GUESTS ON SOME THINGS, I AM FLEXIBLE ON HOW TO INTERPRET IT. BUT I GUESTS I AM AND NOT IF YOU CAN RUN THE NUMBERS AND IT IS NOT HUGELY IMPACTFUL AND IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IT CAN BE SERVED. THAT IS

WHERE I AM NOT. >> DO WE HAVE A DISCUSSION AND

EMOTION. >> WHAT IS THE VIRTUAL MOTION,

MY APOLOGIES. >> APPROVED THIS MAP AND HAVE

THEM COME BACK AS NEEDED. >> GO AHEAD.

>> I WAS GOING TO SAY I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION, MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO ALSO SPECIFY THAT WE DO NOT PROCESS ANY OUTSIDE OF OUR CCN UNTIL THAT PROJECT HAS COME TO COUNSEL FOR APPROVAL THAT IS COMMERCIAL IN NATURE.

[02:55:03]

>> IT IS CRAZY, I'M GOING TO SECOND THIS AND WE MAY HAVE

ENOUGH TO MAKE A MOTION. >> ALL RIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE BOAT.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? MAYOR SNYDER? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK?

>> THE MOTION PASSES 5-2. >> NOW, THE AMENDED MOTION IS TO APPROVE A MAP FOR STAFF TO COME BACK SEMIANNUALLY AND FOR STAFF NOT TO PROCESS ANY OUTSIDE OF THE CCN UNTIL WE DECLARE THE PROJECT FIRST. DOES EVERYONE AGREE WITH THAT?

>> WITH A PREFERENCE OF COMMERCIAL BUT, YEAH, I GUESTS

I WAS FINE. YEAH. >> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? MAYOR

[13.2. Discussion and possible action regarding the updated Wastewater growth data (Matt Rector). ]

SNYDER? >> MOTION PASSES 6-1 . THAT BRINGS US TO 13-2. POSSIBLE ACTION WASTEWATER.

>> BASICALLY THE SAME THING, I WILL WALK YOU THROUGH IT LIKE I DID WITH THE WATER. OBVIOUSLY, THE MOP -- MAP IS ZOOMED OUT A LOT FURTHER BECAUSE IT IS A BIGGER AREA WHICH BASICALLY COVERS THE ENTIRE E TJ PLUS THE PORTION THAT WE HAVE SHARED DOWN IN THE SOUTHEAST SIDE. WE STARTED WITH WHAT IS ON THE GROUND TODAY AND YOU WILL SEE IF YOU REMEMBER, ROUGHLY 7000, I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER, THE WATER METERS ON THE GROUND.

ALMOST 13,000 WASTEWATER CUSTOMERS RIGHT NOW, THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THE DIFFERENT WASTEWATER . WE DID THE THING WHERE WE LOOK AT ALL THE SCR AND IS DOWN BY CATEGORY AND INTO THE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE, AGAIN, ASSUMING MIDRANGE ON DENSITY, WE BROKE IT DOWN SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT SCR IS OWNED IN THE FUTURE. WE BROKE IT -- SO, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT ULTIMATELY COMES OUT 238,428, WHICH COMES UP TO 37.6 MGD, JUST FOR REFERENCE. SO HEADING OVER ON THAT CURRENTLY EXPANDING THE SOUTH WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO SIX. THE CENTRAL PLAN IS CURRENTLY AT .99. TO JUST UNDER SEVEN. WE ARE PROJECTING AT FULL BUILDOUT, EVERYTHING IN THE HUTTO AREA PLUS THE AGREEMENT AREA IS ALMOST 40 MGD. THEY BROUGHT IN THE WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN GRAPH THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2022. YOU CAN SEE HOW PROJECTED WASTEWATER GROWTH TO GO IN TWO DIFFERENT COLORS WITH THE SOUTH PLANT IN CENTRAL PLAN AND REMEMBER THAT YOU HAVE THREE PHASES FOR THE SOUTH PLANT EXPANSION IN TWO DAYS AND THAT YOUR CENTRAL PLANT. SOUTH PLANT PHASE ONE IS IN CONSTRUCTION NOW. THAT IS TO GO FROM 2.5 TO SIX. THE SOUTH PLANT THESE TWO HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED OR FUNDED YET, THAT THE EXCESS FROM SIX TO 12.

PHASE THREE TAKES US FROM 12 TO 15.5. 16 ROUGHLY. CENTRAL PLANT ONLY HAS TWO PHASES. RIGHT NOW WE ARE AT .99, THE FIRST PHASE IN THE MASTER PLAN TAKES US TO 1.75, THE SECOND PHASE TAKES US TO 2.25. AND SO, YOU CAN SEE I HAVE BROKEN THIS DOWN SO AGAIN, KIND OF THE SAME THING WHERE WE HAVE THE SCR THAT IS IN OUR CURRENT AREA, THOSE THAT ARE OUT OF OUR CURRENT AREA. S E.R.

IS THE ZONE WITHIN THE AREA FUTURE LAND USE IN AND OUT.

GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF HOW THAT GETS BROKEN DOWN. AGAIN, THE

[03:00:08]

38.76 IS A LOT. THE OTHER THING I WILL POINT OUT, IT IS KIND OF HARD TO SEE THE AMOUNT IS SO SMALL, BUT YOU ALL KNOW IT FLOWS DOWNHILL, GENERALLY SPEAKING. SO YOU CAN SEE UP IN THE NORTHERN SIDE OF HUTTO, WE HAVE MULTIPLE WATERSHEDS. LUIS WATERSHEDS FOLLOW THE WATERSHEDS SO, RIGHT NOW, EVERYTHING THAT IS PRETTY MUCH ON THE NORTHERN -- I WILL SAY IN THE OLD AREA IS BEING PUMPED AROUND THE CITY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE ENCLAVE WHERE IT GETS PUMPED IN THE SOUTH PLANT.

AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW NORTH YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO HAVE TO DO MORE PUMPING AND MORE PIPES DEPART AROUND THE CITY OR AT SOME POINT WHEN WE GET THAT UP THERE, WE MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER A THIRD PLANT. I WANT YOU TO ALL BE AWARE OF THAT WITH THE POTENTIAL FACTOR WHEN WE START. THOSE ARE YOUR ONLY OPTIONS. IT IS ALL GOING TO DRAIN TOWARD THOSE CREEKS THAT YOU SEE IN THE GREENISH COLOR. THE ONLY CHOICE IS TO BLOW AND PUMP IT OUT OF THERE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE CITY TO ONE OF YOUR PLANTS OR YOU WILL HAVE TO TRY TO EXPAND TO A THIRD PLANT.

BASICALLY, THE SAME CONVERSATION WE JUST HAD WITH THE WATER. MUCH BIGGER AREA APPEARING AT YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE A LOT OF STUFF STRETCHING OVER INTO THAT TAYLOR AREA SOME OF THOSE ENGINEERING FIRMS, THE DEVELOPERS ARE TALKING TO OTHER DEVELOPERS THAT ARE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 79 IN TAYLOR AND THEY HAVE STARTED ASKING. I'M HOLDING THEM OFF EARLY BECAUSE I WANTED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOU GUYS TO SEE IF THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONTINUE DOING TO THE NORTH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY AGREEMENT. WE DON'T HAVE A DEAL WITH THE COUNTY, WE DON'T HAVE A DEAL WITH TAYLOR. THE AGREEMENT IS FOR RCR PARK AND THE SOUTHWEST SIDE. THAT IS ALL THAT IS IN THE AGREEMENT. SO, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE NORTH OF 79, HOLDING THESE OTHER GUYS OFF SO I CAN GO THROUGH WITH YOU GUYS FIRST TO SEE IF THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER. ON TOP OF BUILDING THE SOUTHEAST AREA THAT WAS AWARDED, WE HAVE TO EXTEND ALL OF THE STRUCTURE UP ACROSS 79 TO GET UP TO 101 TO GET UP WHERE THESE GUYS ARE AT. AGAIN, SAME TYPE OF CONVERSATION WE JUST HAD LOOKING FOR WHAT THE COUNSELED APPETITE IS TO CONTINUE DOING WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING WITH THE SCR AND SAYING YEAH, BRING IT, BURN IT, BRING IT, WE WILL BRING THE NUMBERS AND WE CAN DO. WE CAN SERVE YOU. GO TALK TO COUNSEL ABOUT HOW YOU ACTUALLY GET THAT DONE OR IS THERE SOME OTHER DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO? SO, AGAIN, HIGH-LEVEL, SAME

PROCESS. WE CAN SEE THE NUMBERS >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. SORRY, GO AHEAD, ASK YOUR QUESTION.

>> MY QUESTION IS, WITH THE FUTURE DEMAND OUTSIDE WASTEWATER CCN, ARE THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN NOBODY'S CCN

OR ANOTHER CNN ? >> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WATER AND WASTEWATER CCN IS VERY LOW PEOPLE ARE GOING INTO ANOTHER CCN. PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING IN OUR AREA IS COVERED WITH WATER, RIGHT NOW. I DON'T THINK THERE ARE ANY GAPS WASTEWATER, THERE ARE GAPS. MOST OF THESE ARE IN NO MAN'S LAND. YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE BURRELL ESTATES PROJECT PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO. THEY ARE ALSO ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT IS PARTIALLY IN OUR WASTEWATER CCN AND PART OF THE PROJECT IS IN NO MAN'S LAND. NO ONE CCN. A LOT OF THESE THAT ARE OUTSIDE

OUR CCN ARE JUST IN NOWHERE. >> THEY ARE COMING WHOEVER IS

CLOSEST , HOWEVER, >> FOR THE MOST PART THEY ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF 333 THEY WILL COME TO US WERE ROUND ROCK . THEY WERE WILLING TO WORK WITH DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE SERVICE IN THAT AREA. IF YOU GO TO THE EAST SIDE OF HUTTO, IF THEY WERE ON THE WEST SIDE , TAYLOR IS BASICALLY SAYING I

[03:05:02]

DON'T HAVE ANYTHING OUT YOUR TOOTH TO SERVE YOU. SO, FIGURE IT OUT. SO, THEY ARE COMING TO US. WE ARE ACTUALLY, AND THAT WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE TRYING TO UPDATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN US IN TAYLOR ON HOW WE ARE GOING TO MANEUVER ALL OF THESE DEVELOPERS? THEY'RE COMING TO ME SAYING I WANT YOU TO SEND ME MENACING HOLD ON, YOU ARE NOT IN MY AREA, YOU NEED TO TALK TO TAYLOR. THEY SAID WE ALREADY DID. WHERE'S THE DOCUMENTATION? WE DON'T HAVE ANY. I DON'T THINK THEY EVER CAME AND TALKED TO US. IT IS A CAT AND MOUSE GAME THAT WE ARE PLAYING. SPLIT TWO ALSO ROUND ROCK AS THEY ARE CAPABLE. WE ARE FURTHER ALONG IN CLOSER TO THEM. ARE WE DOING WHAT IS IN

OUR CCN AND NOTHING ELSE? >> THEY DID NOT BREAK IT DOWN LIKE THAT WASTEWATER. LET ME GO BACK. SO, OUT OF OUR CCN, IT IS 18 50. ABOUT 77,000. I WILL GET THOSE FOR YOU REAL QUICK. I'M ROUNDING. 70,000 -- 280 IS 21.6 OF THE 38.7. SO I GET THIS BACK TO ROUGHLY 17, 16, SOMEWHERE IN THAT CATEGORY

>> HALF, OKAY. >> COUNSEL IN THE CAR, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A MOTION. WHAT I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION MIRRORING WHAT WE DID FOR THE WATER, THAT WE DO NOT TALK TO ANY SCR OUTSIDE OF OUR WASTE WATERS CN. UNLESS THEY WANT TO COME TO COUNSEL. PRIORITIZING THAT AND FOR SURE NOTHING IN LETTER ETJ EXCEPT WHAT IS PART OF OUR ARBA AGREEMENT WITH THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT AGREEMENT NOW. WE NEED TO TAKE THOSE.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> THE REASON THIS IS DIFFERENT TO ME IS BECAUSE THE PACKAGE PLANS. IT IS NOT THE SAME THING. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD ENTERTAIN SCR WITHIN OUR VTJ WHETHER THEY ARE IN OUR CCN OR NOT. WE SHOULD ENTERTAIN CCR WHERE THE FLOW OF THE PACKAGE PLANS TO COME INTO OUR RTJ. IF IT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE AND THE FLOW IS GOING AWAY FROM CANTU, BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE PROBLEM THAT IS OUT THERE, WE ARE GOING TO START FINANCING CRITERIA OF WHICH ONE. MAYBE PEOPLE SEND A LETTER BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT A TON OF EFFORT INTO STOPPING SOME OF THE AS IF THEY ARE FLOWING AWAY FROM HUTTO BECAUSE WE CANNOT STOP EVERYBODY ELSE'S PACKAGE PLAN PROBLEM. TO ME, THAT IS KIND OF WHERE IT IS AT. LET'S DEFEND OUR UPJ AND OUTSIDE OF THAT SORRY, YOU'RE KIND OF OUT

OF LUCK. >> WASTEWATER TO ME AS A BUSINESS. YOU CAN PRIORITIZE. HOW MUCH DO I HAVE TO CHARGE YOU DID WITH THE LINES AND AND HAVE THE CAPACITY TO SERVICE.

WATER IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GO HUNT IT, FIND IT. I AM OKAY WE GO OUTSIDE OF THE TJ. IT IS NOT A BUSINESS LIKE PERL ESTATE. I DON'T WANT A WASTEWATER PROBLEM SO THEY CAN SAY OUTSIDE AND GET SERVICED. HOW WILL IT TURN OUT BECAUSE THE MONEY COMING OUT OF IT IN THAT SERVICE OF RUNNING IT BLIND TO 130. READING THE LINE RIGHT ACROSS 79, THAT IS THE DEAL. THEY CAN PUT IT BACK INTO IT. BUT IF IT IS IN NO MAN'S LAND, NORTH OF -- YOU NEED A WASTEWATER PLAN AND SOMEONE SAYS HEY, WE ARE GETTING READY TO PUT HOMES OUT HERE. YOU CAN BUILD A WASTEWATER TREATMENT LAND AND YOU REBUILT IT, WE HAVE IT WORKED OUT. I CAN BE THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I WOULD

[03:10:02]

NOT WANT TO GO SPEND $40 MILLION TO HELP SOMEONE GET WASTEWATER OUT OF OUR AREA. THEY CAN GO WITH CONSTRUCTION AND WITH MASTERS MAINTAINING IT AND ALL OF THAT. NOT TO DEFEND AGAINST THE PACKAGE PLAN I FORGET, WE LET THEM GO AND SOMEONE ELSE THEY OUTSIDE THE TJ. WHEN IT IS EXTREMES, I DON'T KNOW IF IT MAKES SENSE TO SPEND MILLIONS TO CONNECT 800 PEOPLE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT WE ARE DOING

ON OUR WASTEWATER. >> SO, QUICK QUESTION FOR THE SOUTHEAST LOOP, IS IT IN INTERCEPTOR? IF WE WERE TO SERVE THESE YELLOW TINTED AREAS IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE HOOKED UP TO THAT INTERCEPTOR.

>> LOOKING UP THE YELLOW COLORED ONES SIDE BETWEEN US

AND DEALER? >> YES.

>> YES . >> ALL OF THAT IS ANTICIPATED TO FLOW INTO THAT SOUTHEAST LOOP INTERCEPTOR.

>> OKAY. FOR ME, THAT MAKES SENSE. THE SOUTHEAST PORTION WHETHER IT IS HE TJ OR THE CITY, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE IS A LOT OF ACTIVITY IN THAT AREA. NO MAN'S LAND HERE IN THE PURPLE, I THINK THAT IS WHERE WE COULD LET PACKAGE PLANS PROBABLY HAPPEN WERE LIKE THE MAYORS THAT IN 10 YEARS, IF THAT BECOMES THE AREA, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE LIKELY, THAT THERE TREATMENT PLANT -- SO, YEAH, I DEFINITELY VIEW THIS DIFFERENTLY THAN THE WATER THAT WE NEED TO TRY AND SERVE OUTSIDE THE CCN. OUR SEAS YET IS RATHER LARGE AND WE CAN ASK BAND AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE GETS PUT IN. THEY PAY FOR IT. I MEAN, WE ARE EXPANDING OUR SOUTHEAST WATER TREATMENT PLANT NOW AND ALSO POTENTIALLY BE CENTRAL. SO IT MAKES SENSE.

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ONE?

>> I'M SORRY. LET ME WAKE UP MY COMPUTER.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE THE WASTEWATER TO COME SEMIANNUALLY TO COUNSEL AND TO PROCESS OUTSIDE CCN SCR.

>> THE PROCESS ALL . >>.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT IT CAN BE MODIFIED TO BE

>> THORTON, HOW DID YOU WORD IT? IF IT IS PACKAGE PLAN THAT

WOULD FLOW INTO OUR -- >> IF IT IS IN UTJ OR WOULD FLOW INTO DTJ PURITAN WITH THOSE OF THE ONES THAT WE WOULD

EAT. >> YES, THAT WAS TOTALLY FINE.

SO IF THE FLOW IS DOWNHILL >> DOWNHILL TO THE CENTRAL

HEALTH. >> WE ARE GETTING PRETTY GOOD DIRECTION TODAY. ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? COUNCILMEMBER GORDON? COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? MAYOR SNYDER? COUNCILMEMBER CLARK? COUNCILMEMBER THORTON? COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON.

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

>> THAT PASSES 7-0. NEXT WE HAVE 13.3. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR PHYSICAL YEAR 2026 THROUGH 2029.

>> HERE IS WHAT I SAID SUGGESTING THAT WE COULD ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND NOT DIG INTO THE PLAN AND LET'S DO A SATURDAY THING. WE CAN AGREE SORRY, NOT TO INTERRUPT YOUR PRESENTATION. IF WE CAN INTEGRATE THAT WITH NO CHANGES OR AT LEAST WHAT THE NUMBERS MEAN THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WE CAN GO BACK AND SPEND TIME ON OUR OWN, HOW WOULD BE PRIORITIZE PROJECTS OVER FIVE YEARS AND THEN HAS COME UP ME ON A SATURDAY. I WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL THAN US HAMMERING IT OUT AND BEING HERE UNTIL 2:00. I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO ASK WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR MAYBE RESCHEDULING THIS ITEM. I THINK

[03:15:05]

THE CIP IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO GIVE IT ITS OWN SPECIAL MEETING. OBVIOUSLY WE ARE GOING TO DISCUSS AND WE ARE NOT ALL GOING TO AGREE WITH WHATEVER IT IS. BUT I WAS GOING TO ASK THAT, AS WELL, IS IT APPROPRIATE TO MOVE THIS ITEM SO WE CAN REALLY DIVE IN BECAUSE THIS IS JUST MORE THAN

CIP. IT'S EVERYTHING. >> I DON'T WANT TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT ONE OF THE THOUGHTS THAT WE HAVE IS JUST FINISHING THE BUDGET HERE. HERE WE ARE TWO MONTHS AFTER. NORMALLY WE WOULD NOT BE TALKING ABOUT THIS UNTIL MARCH, APRIL, MAY TIMEFRAME. IT WAS TO GIVE YOU MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO DIG IN TO THE WEEDS AND TALK THROUGH THE STUFF, YOU KNOW? WHEN WE WENT THROUGH IT IN JUNE, JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, WE WERE PRETTY MUCH FOCUSED ON FY 25, WITH NO WE ARE CURRENTLY EXIT USING WITH SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT YOU AWARDED TONIGHT. WELL, LET'S GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO 26, 27, 28, 29, BECAUSE I STILL HAVE TO TAKE INTO PLANNING AND ZONING FOR THE CHARTER TO HAVE THEM RECOMMEND THE FULL FIVE YEAR WHICH WOULD BE UP TO 2030. THE THOUGHT OF IT IS YOU ARE YOU 26, 27, 28, 29. DIG INTO THAT, GIVE YOU OPPORTUNITIES TO DISCUSS IT.

DIG INTO THE WEEDS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT, AND THEN YOU ARE GIVING PLANNING AND ZONING CLEAR DIRECTION AS THIS IS OUR PRIORITY FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS AND YOU ARE RECOMMENDING THAT FIFTH-YEAR AND THEN WE JUST KEEP SLIDING THINGS SO THAT WE ARE NOT COMPLETELY REDOING EVERYTHING EVERY TIME THAT IS KIND OF THE THOUGHT. BUT I'M OPEN TO HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT. FROM WHAT I HAVE SAID THIS IN THE PAST, IT IS HARD FOR ME TO THINK ABOUT CIP. IT IS GREAT TO SAY I WANT TO DO THIS, BUT WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE FOR OUR BUDGET? I WOULD AGREE WITH THE MAYOR THAT WE NEED TO SEE ONE MORE YEAR OF BUDGET AT A TIME TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE IT IS A BIG PLAN. WE ARE BUDGETING FOR THE GROWTH OF THE CITY. IN MY OPINION WE ARE BUILDING A BUSINESS. WE DON'T TAKE IT

LIGHTLY. >> HERE IS WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR. IF WE CAN JUST AGREE, SAY THE WATER SHEET TELL ME WHAT I MISS IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT. I THE PROJECTS ARE CURRENTLY LISTED IN THE YEARS THAT THEY ARE LISTED WITH THE FORECAST OF THE TAXABLE VALUES AND THE USAGE AND ALL OF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS ON THIS PAPER AS WE SEE TODAY, IF WE JUST PASSED THIS AND LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES 2026 WE WOULD HAVE TO RAISE WATER, REESE WATERS, 10 62. 1027 PER MONTH. 1020 7298 PER MONTH. 612 PER MONTH AND 9 TO 3 PER MONTH. BY READING THAT AND SAYING IT RIGHT, ONE THING WE CAN DO IS AGREE WITH NO CHANGES WE CAN MAKE THE NUMBERS HIGHER ON OUR OWN BUT THAT IS WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING AT. WE ARGUED MORE ABOUT WHAT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS ARE THE AND ABOUT WHAT THE PROJECTS ARE. IF WE CAN AGREE TO A NUMBER THEN WE CAN SAY HOW DO I MAKE THE 10 62? HOW DO I MAKE THAT GO TO EIGHT DOLLARS? MY RIGHT ON THOSE NUMBERS?

>> FOR THE RECORD, OUR SITTING INTEGER, THE NUMBERS THAT THE MAYOR IS QUOTING WERE FOUND ON PAGE 628 OF THE PACKET. IT IS THE TOP OF THE PAGE IT IS WHERE WE PUT THE TOTAL PROJECTED ANNUAL EXPENSES SORRY, TOTAL PROJECTED MONTHLY EXPENSES TO THE HOMEOWNER SO, PROPERTY OWNERS FOR US FOR THESE INTENTS AND PURPOSES ARE HOMEOWNERS. WHAT IT WOULD END UP BEING AT ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY SLATED IN EACH OF THE YEARS AS THEY ARE SLATED ARE FUNDED AND IT ALSO INCLUDES IMPACT FEES THAT WOULD BE GENERATED AND THAT SORT OF STUFF. THIS IS AS GOOD OF A SNAPSHOT OF WHAT WE THINK WOULD LIKELY HAPPEN FINANCIALLY AS WE CAN PROVIDE TODAY. TO COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD'S POINT WE NEVER INTENDED FOR YOU TO BE ADOPTING THE CIP TONIGHT. THIS WAS MEANT TO GET THE INFORMATION INTO COUNSEL'S HANDS SO YOU HAVE MORE TIME WITH IT THAN TRYING TO FAST-TRACK EVERYTHING IN JUNE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE MORE TIME WITH THE DATA AND THAT GIVES YOU

[03:20:02]

PLENTY OF TIME TO SCHEDULE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING THAT YOU ARE ASKING OR THE SATURDAY MEETING. MAYBE MULTIPLE ONCE FOR THAT

MATTER. >> YOU SAID THIS INCLUDES THE IMPACT FEES AND SKYBOX, AS WELL?

>> BE BUILT IN THE PROJECTIONS OF WHAT SKYBOX SAID THEY WOULD HAVE IN THE EVALUATIONS EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY THINK ABOUT AS A POSSIBLE SCENARIO WE TRIED TO PUT INTO THE SNAPSHOT. AGAIN, IT IS A SNAPSHOT, IT IS FALLIBLE, IT IS NOT TRUE, PER SE. BUT IT IS A WAY THAT YOU CAN HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT OUR BEST GUESTS AND ESTIMATE IS ON WHAT WE THINK WOULD HAPPEN TO EVERYONE WHO LIVES IN THE COMMUNITY FINANCIALLY IS THESE PROJECTS ALL GET APPROVED BY COUNSEL, ALL THE DEBT GETS ISSUED, ALL THE DEBT SERVICE START, ALL OF THAT.

>> SO, THIS IS LIKE A REALISTIC APPROACH

>> THIS IS AS REAL AS WE CAN MAKE IT KNOWING THAT THERE ARE 15 VARIABLES THAT PLAY INTO THE SPIRIT OF ANYONE VARIABLE SHIFTS, THE NUMBERS SHIPPED THE POINT IS TO NOT BE ACCURATE TO THE PENNY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THE POINT IS TO GIVE YOU ALL AN ACTUAL WAY TO LOOK AT THE DATA YOU SO YOU CAN MAKE DECISIONS, RIGHT? SO ALL THAT CONNECTS WITH THAT SORT OF STUFF. IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE COST IMPLICATIONS COULD POTENTIALLY BE, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT, I THINK. THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY IN CLOSING, IT IS ALSO A METHOD AS WHY WE PRESENTED IT TONIGHT THE WAY THAT WE DID. WE GOT YOU ALL OF THE WATER DATA ALL OF THE WASTEWATER DATA. YOU ALREADY HAVE THE TRANSPORTATION DATA BECAUSE THAT WAS THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN. YOU HAVE ALL OF THAT DATA NOW PLUS, HERE IS WHERE THE CIP SITS. SO, NOW YOU SHOULD HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION TO BE ABLE TO START LOOKING AT, INTERACTING WITH, ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT, THAT SORT OF STUFF.

>> IN ADDITION, IN YOUR POCKETS, WE HAVE TABLES FROM THE WATER MASTER PLAN, THE WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN THE PARKS MASTER PLAN, THE TRAILS MASTER PLAN. A LOT OF THOSE, THE ABILITY PARKS AND TRAILERS, THOSE WERE ALL APPROVED AFTER WE DID THE CIP. SO, WE WANTED YOU TO HAVE ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS BECAUSE THAT MIGHT COMPLETELY CHANGE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IN 2026, 2027, 2028, 2029. WE DON'T KNOW. WE JUST KNOW THAT IS THE MASTER PLAN DATA. THAT IS WHAT IT WAS LOOKING LIKE IN JUNE WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON THAT PROCESS.

LIKE THE CITY MANAGER WAS SAYING, YOU ALL THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF YOU TO WRAP YOUR HEAD AROUND ALL OF THIS.

>> IS THERE A WAY TO GET THIS DECISION AND MORE OF -- I UNDERSTAND IN A REALISTIC APPROACH IS GOING TO BE SUBJECTIVE BUT, IS THERE A WAY TO GET A MORE CONSERVATIVE

APPROACH WITH THESE NUMBERS? >> WHAT YOU MEAN BY

CONSERVATIVE? >> LET'S SAY IF THESE ARE THE REALISTIC, WHAT YOU ARE PROJECTING AS THE REALISTIC NUMBERS, IS THERE A WAY TO GET SOMETHING MORE CONSERVATIVE SAYING BASED ON HOW YOU HAVE BEEN TRACKING THE PAST THREE, FOUR YEARS. THIS IS WHAT THE NUMBERS WOULD LOOK LIKE.

>> THAT IS WHAT THIS ALREADY DOES. IF YOU ARE SAYING CONSERVATIVE IN THE SENSE THAT YOU WANT THE NUMBERS TO BE GREATER THAN THEY CURRENTLY ARE SHOWING CONSERVATIVE IN MY MIND ON EXPENSE MEANS YOU ESTIMATE THE EXPENSES HIGHER, NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF LOWER BECAUSE THEN THE EXPENSE COMES IN HIGHER YOU'RE IN A BAD SPOT. IF I WERE TO GO TO CONSERVATIVE, WHAT I WOULD DO IS PULL DOWN THE GROWTH RATE THAT WE ASSUMED, I WOULD PULL DOWN THE HOME VALUE GROWTH THAT WE ASSUMED AND THAT IS BASED OFF WHAT WE HAVE SEEN PRETTY STEADILY HOPPING YEAR AFTER YEAR. IF I KEEP IT DOWN TO A SMALL NUMBER BY DOING THAT, I CAN ALSO PULL DOWN THIS IS WHAT I NEED BY SO MANY VARIABLES. I CAN PULL DOWN HOW MUCH IMPACT FEES ARE COLLECTED. I CAN PULL HOW AGGRESSIVE SKYBOX IS MAYBE I SAY I TAKE THEIR SCHEDULE AND I'M GOING TO ADD TWO YEARS.

THAT WOULD THEN MAKE ALL OF THESE MONTHLY DOLLARS MUCH LARGER. THAT ARGUABLY COULD BE CONSERVATIVE, BUT IS THAT REAL? I DON'T KNOW. TO US, THE BEST THING TO GET YOU ABLE TO TALK

[03:25:04]

ABOUT SOMETHING AND THIS IS WHY IT IS SO FRUSTRATING TO ME BECAUSE I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO EXPRESS IT. IT IS JUST SOMETHING SO YOU CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT. YOU KNOW THAT THIS PROJECT IS THREE TIMES THAT PROJECT. IF YOU DO THAT, THEN CHANCES ARE THIS IS THE MONTHLY OUTCOME. BUT IN REALITY, ALL OF THESE NUMBERS ARE ON A SLIDE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, UP OR DOWN. THE REAL NUMBERS ARE GOING TO BE

DIFFERENT. >> I THINK IT IS BETTER TO HAVE TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS TO LOOK AT VERSES THIS IS WHAT IS BEING PROJECTED, THIS IS WHAT IT IS, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO GO OFF OF. IF WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE CAN MEASURE TO KIND OF GET IN THE MIDDLE OR MOVING TOWARDS WHAT YOU ARE REALISTICALLY PROJECTING, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE HELPFUL VERSUS ONE SNAPSHOT.

>> I WOULD ASK, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE? AS I UNDERSTAND THIS, THIS IS COMPLETELY BASED ON EVERY PIECE OF INFORMATION, EVERY DEVELOPMENT, AND WE DRINK INTEREST RATES ARE GOING TO DROP, WE CAN LIMIT AT 3.5%, BUT IF WE WANT TO CHANGE, WE NEED TO TELL THEM. THEY ARE DOING THIS AS REALISTICALLY AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN KNOWING THAT THE BIG ONE COULD BE ANNOUNCED AND I COULD MAKE WATER RATES GO UP OR DOWN WITH USAGE SO I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE UP TO THE COUNCIL TO TELL THE STAFF WHAT WE WANT TO SEE AND HOW WE MAKE THIS DIFFERENT. IF WE AGREE TO THAT, I THINK WE NEED SOMETHING TO AGREE TO MAKE CHANGES ON ONE. I AM MISLEADING PEOPLE AND I SAY WHAT NUMBER DO I WANT TO TELL PEOPLE DO YOU WANT ME TO TELL PEOPLE? IF WE DON'T MAKE CHANGES, YOUR WATER IS GOING UP, YES. WE NEED TO BE EDUCATING THE PUBLIC. HERE IS WHAT WE ARE STRUGGLING WITH, HERE IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO. WE CAN EVEN AGREE ON WHAT THE POSSIBILITY OF INCREASES COULD BE, -- I DON'T WANT TO TELL ANYBODY ANYTHING. I WANT THE COUNCIL AND BODY TO TELL ME WHENEVER I AM COMMUNICATING TO PEOPLE. THIS IS WHAT YOUR WATER BILL COULD GO UP TO IF WE MAKE CHANGES WITH THE INFORMATION WE

HAVE TODAY. >> THE COLUMN THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT, THIS IS INS. THIS IS INS. LOOK AT THE BOTTOM, 1060 FOR 2026. WE NEED TO RAISE WATER 10 62 PER MONTH. RIGHT?

>> LET ME LOOK REAL QUICK TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY BASED OFF OF USAGE, BUT I THINK THIS WHOLE COLUMN IS ITEMIZED.

>> I THINK WHAT I WAS SAYING --

>> HOLD ON, COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON HAS BEFORE.

>> GO AHEAD, COUNCIL MEMBER CLARK

>> WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY WAS , HAVING THIS WHERE THIS IS WHERE WE THINK THE TAX REVENUE IS GOING TO BE, CONSERVATIVE IN NATURE ALREADY. THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO GO WITH. NOW, WHAT I WOULD CAUTION, THIS IS WHAT I WOULD ASK THE MAYOR TO WAIT ON IS LET US HAVE THAT SATURDAY MEETING. LET COUNSEL COME OUT AND SAY THESE ARE WHERE WE THINK WE WANT TO CUT AND HOW WE WANT TO DO IT AND GET TO THAT FIRST PASS NUMBER. NOW, THE COUNSELORS WORK TOGETHER AS A GROUP. THIS IS WHAT STAFF IS PUT TOGETHER. WE GO THROUGH IT AND SAY NOW, BASED ON MY COUNSEL HAS CURRENTLY DONE, THIS IS WHAT WE THINK HAS HAPPENED. IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE. I THINK WE WOULD THEN SAY THESE NUMBERS, GUESTS WHAT, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO OUT FOR BOND ENOUGH VOTERS TO APPROVE TO GET TO THIS INS NUMBER. WE ARE NOT JUST GOING TO DO IT IN A VACUUM. SO, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO GET SO HUNG UP ON THE NUMBER LIKE THAT IT WILL BE DUE NEED TO SAY IS YEAH, WE THINK IT WOULD BE $19, BUT LET'S SAY IT'S NOT 19 RIGHT NOW. LET'S HAVE OUR MEETING BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY ARE PUTTING IN THAT $80 MILLION BRIDGE, WHICH IS DEFINITELY GOING TO IMPACT THAT $19 NUMBER. WE ARE TO GIVE DIRECTION TO MATT SAYING WE ARE TRYING NOT TO GO THAT ROUTE . TRY TO GO THE ULTIMATE ROUTE WITH UNION PACIFIC OR CONTROLLED LIKE THAT IT MAY ONLY BE TWO LANES OVER IN THE FUTURE AS DEMAND REQUIRES, RIGHT? WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE HEADING THAT $80 MILLION IN FISCAL YEAR 2026. RIGHT NOW, $56 MILLION OF IT IS IN THE 26 PLAN. SO, PUTTING OUT TOMORROW THAT $19 IS WHAT IT IS GOING TO BE IS ALSO MISSED MEETING I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS LOOK AT OUR SATURDAY MEETING, PROBABLY IN FEBRUARY, AND THEN WE GO THROUGH THAT. WHEN THAT NUMBER IS THERE WE SAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE THE STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION THAT THE PUBLIC CAN TALK ABOUT TO SAY IF

[03:30:04]

WE ARE GOING TO DO THESE, WE HAVE TO GO OUT TO BOND FOR THEM. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE WAYS I CAN IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO GO FOR BOND, ON THE BALLOT, YOU FIND OUT IF THE PEOPLE WANT TO DO THOSE PROJECTS, IF THEY FAILED TO THAT INS RATE GOING BACK TO TRINITY'S POINT, NOW IT IS NOT A BUDGETING ISSUE ANYMORE. THAT INS RATE FOR IT CORRECTLY, WE DO IT RIGHT.

THESE ARE THE ONES WE ARE GOING TO DO. IT IS GOING TO BE $100 MILLION AND IT IS GOING TO ADD FIVE CENTS TO YOUR INS RATE. IF THE VOTERS APPROVE THAT, THAT THAT IS INDEPENDENT OF THE REVENUE. THE CITY OPERATIONS. THAT IS NOT THE INS RATE. WE GO OUT FOR BOND APPROVALS AND WE GET THOSE AND WE DON'T DO THEM AS THE OTHER TERM WHERE THE CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION. WE ARE GOING TO SPEND IT WE DID NOT GIVE THE VOTERS A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT IT. I WOULD JUST SAY LET'S WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE THE SATURDAY NUMBERS. WAIT TILL WE HAVE THIS PIECE OF DATA AND AS A COUNSEL WE AGREE HOW WE ARE GOING TO MOVE IT. THE WAY COUNSEL AGREES RIGHT NOW, THIS IS THE DIRECTION YOU'RE GOING TO GO, WE ARE GOING TO ASK WORST BOND. GOING TO COME OUT FOR THAT PROJECT SAYING I DON'T THINK ME TO GO AGAINST THE BOND MISSION, THAT IS THE POLITICAL CAPITAL TO DO SO. BUT AT LEAST LET US GET TO THAT SATURDAY MEETING.

>> I AM NOT GOING TO DO THAT. >> I HAVE BEEN UP HERE FIVE YEARS. IN FIVE YEARS WE HAVE MADE STEPS WE CONTINUE TO NOT EVEN AGREE ON WHAT THE INCREASE OR WHAT WE EVEN WANT TO -- I'M GOING TO STICK WITH WATER ABOUT TO GET INTO ROADS YET. THE CONVERSATION -- WE NEED TO MOVE PROJECTS AROUND AND NOT EVEN KNOW THE IMPACT ON PEOPLE AND THEN GO TO THEM AND SAY, WHAT DO YOU THINK. HOW MUCH CAN YOU STOMACH, HOW MUCH CAN YOU PASS ON THE PEOPLE EACH YEAR. IF YOU GO BACK, BASED ON WHAT THE PUBLIC IS SAYING THAT THE 10% INCREASE. WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO XYZ. I'M NOT GOING TO WAIT FOR FEBRUARY BECAUSE TWO YEARS I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR US ALL TO AGREE AT THE INCREASE OF WE ARE LOOKING AT. AFTER WE PASSED THE INCREASE WE ARE WAITING ON THE INCREASE TO PASS. LET ME CORRECT THE RECORD. I WAS ON .620 WHICH IS INS. YOU ARE ON PAGE 24 OF THE PACKET, THAT IS MY FAULT FOR PULLING OUT THE WRONG PAGE. IF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY APPROVED WITH THE YEARS THAT ARE ANTICIPATED, $420 FOR WATER CUSTOMERS AND FOR WASTEWATER INCREASE TO THE $10.62 FOR WASTEWATER CUSTOMERS.

>> THAT IS WHY I LIKE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS. THAT IS NOT THE TOTAL -- IT IS THE INCREASE.

>> THAT IS RIGHT. EACH LINE IS ITS OWN LINE . AVERAGE WATER INCREASE, AVERAGE WASTEWATER INCREASE. TWO ME, THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS, IF WE ALL AGREE TO THAT, I THINK WE CAN HAVE A MORE BENEFICIAL CONVERSATION. HYPOTHETICALLY, WHAT CAN WE MOVE FROM 2026 TO 2027 BECAUSE WE HAVE INCREASED. WE MOVED $8 MILLION, WHAT WOULD THAT DO? YOU CANNOT JUST MOVE IT OVER AND THEN 27 GOING TO TRICKLE THROUGH AND BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT. WHAT DOES THAT DO? I THINK FOR PROPER PLANNING, WHETHER WE AGREE OR NOT, WE CAN AT LEAST GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC SAYING BASED ON WHAT JUST HAPPENED, YOU NEED TO BE PREPARED FOR THESE INCREASES, KNOWING A NEW DEVELOPMENT, A DEVELOPMENT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. IN $18 INCREASE

[03:35:12]

FOLLOWED BY WE ARE -- NOT TO ACTUALLY MAKE IT WORSE FROM WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, THESE NUMBERS THAT YOU ARE SEEING, THESE INCREASES, THEY ARE ONLY FOR THE CAPITAL PROJECTS.

>> I WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT . >> WITH ELECTRICITY COSTS GO UP, LABOR COSTS GO UP, WITHIN THE UTILITY, IT IS ITS OWN THING. WE ARE PROJECT THAT AND WE THINK WE HAVE THAT BALANCE BUT YOU CAN END UP WITH THIS BEING AN $18 INCREASE FOR THESE PROJECTS AND THAT ALSO A $2.50 INCREASE FOR EXISTING UTILITY.

>> RIGHT. >> I AGREE WITH YOU. I DO THINK WE HAVE TO AGREE WITH THESE NUMBERS, MIKE, NOW THAT WE ARE ON THE RIGHT PAGE. YOU ARE CORRECT. THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY, IF YOU ARE SAYING WHAT WHEN YOU MOVE OUT OF THIS YEAR 2026, THAT IS THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT WHICH IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS TO BUILD. SO, I DON'T THINK WE CAN REALLY

GET AROUND THAT $18 INCREASE. >> I JUST USING A HYPOTHETICAL.

>> OKAY. BUT I AM JUST SAYING WHAT WE ARE DOING SIZES, THE HOW IN THE PRIVATE WORLD THIS IS HOW COMPANIES DO IT, WE CANNOT SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY NEXT YEAR, HOW DO WE DO IT? CASH FLOWS, SALES PROJECTIONS, WE THINK WE CAN DO X. I THINK THAT IS WHAT WE CAN DO AS A COUNSEL. AS I TOLD JAMES, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GUYS DO YOUR JOBS BECAUSE WE DO IT ONE YEAR AT A TIME, IF WE GET IT AT A YEAR AND WE STARTED TO, BUT YOU GUYS HAVE TO FIGURE OUT, DO WE START DESIGNING FOR THIS PROJECT IN 2028? IF WE SAY GO YOU NEED TO BE DESIGNING IT IN 2020 WITH THE PROJECTED COSTS IN 2028. SO ANYWAY, ON THIS, EVERYBODY AGREES ON THE SNAPSHOT TODAY THAT COULD CHANGE TOMORROW, THESE ARE THE INCREASES ON WASTEWATER FOR THE

NEXT FOUR YEARS. >> YEAH, MAYOR, I WILL MAKE A MOTION. I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THE CIP AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND FOR US TO SCHEDULE A SATURDAY MEETING AT A FUTURE DATE, YOU CAN THROW OUT WHAT DATE YOU WANT TO DO, BUT TO DO A DEEPER DIVE INTO THE PROJECT LIST.

>> SECOND. >> FOR THAT SATURDAY MEETING, IF THERE IS A WAY TO LOOK AT THAT CIP MEETING SAYING I KNOW THESE ARE, IT IS NOT OFFICIAL, BUT A WAY TO COLORCODE THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CIP, SOMEHOW, SO WE KNOW WHICH PROJECTS ARE PREREQUISITES TO OTHER PROJECTS, SO WE ARE NOT JUST MOVING THINGS OUT. IF WE MOVE SOMETHING OUT, THAT ESSENTIALLY AFFECTS THIS PROJECT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN THIS YEAR. IF WE DON'T KNOW THAT BUT WE ARE JUST MOVING THINGS OUT TO HAD A DOLLAR AMOUNT, WE COULD BE HANDICAPPING YOU GUYS IN THE CURRENT YEAR. DOES THAT MAKE

SENSE? >> I THINK I AM FOLLOWING.

>> IS THERE A WAY TO COLORCODE WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT SO THAT WAY WE KNOW WHICH PROGRESS -- PROJECTS ARE DEPENDENT ON OTHER

PROJECTS GETTING DONE. >> I GUESTS, POSSIBLY. LET ME TELL YOU WHY I AM BEING EVASIVE.

>> THE SNAPSHOT THAT WE JUST HAD UP THERE, THAT SNAPSHOT, THAT IS A SPREADSHEET WITH THE CITY MANAGER, FINANCE DIRECTOR AND I HAVE WORKED MANY, MANY, MANY HOURS TO BUILD AND PUT TOGETHER. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS A WAY IN THAT SPREADSHEET TO BE ABLE TO CONVEY THAT MESSAGE THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR. SO, THAT IS WHY I AM BEING EVASIVE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A WAY TO SHOW YOU THE PREREQUISITES AND BE ABLE TO HAVE A MOOD THINGS AND HAVE IT ALL ADJUSTED THE SAME TIME. I THINK THAT HAVING BEEN DISCONNECTED TO WHERE YOU CAN SEE, AGAIN, I'M FOCUSING ON WATER AND WASTEWATER IN FACILITIES IS ITS OWN THING. THOSE FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER, I THINK THE EASIEST THING WOULD BE TO HAVE THE HOLE IN FRONT OF YOU, THAT IS KIND OF COLOR-CODED BY PROJECT. THIS IS

[03:40:10]

PROJECT 02-2022 WHAT HAVE YOU. IF YOU MOVE THAT ONE, WHAT HAPPENS? WAIT, NOW ALL OF THESE OTHER PROJECTS CANNOT HAPPEN.

SO, I THINK WE COULD DO IT THAT WAY. THAT DEFINITELY WORKS FOR WHAT I AM ASKING. MAYBE IT IS NOT A COLORCODE. THAT IS JUST A THOUGHT THAT I HAD. GOT TO BE ABLE TO KNOW IF WE MOVE SOMETHING, WHAT THE RESIDUAL EFFECT IS GOING TO BE. JUST MOVING SOMETHING WITHOUT KNOWING THAT, AGAIN, I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE SEEN AT SPECIFIC TIMES DURING THIS YEAR WHERE WE MOVE THE PROJECT OUT WE COME OUT HERE, WE CANNOT GET THAT DONE, DO YOU REMEMBER MOVING THIS PROJECT OUT A COUPLE MONTHS AGO? THAT IS WHAT I AM TRYING TO ESSENTIALLY AVOID SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT WE ARE DOING THINGS THAT CONNECT IN THE CITY VERSUS WE COMPLETED A PROJECT OVER HERE NOW WE CANNOT DO THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE MOVE THIS OUT ANOTHER YEAR. I DON'T

WANT TO SEE THAT. >> YOU ARE ASKING FOR A CHART?

>> FLOWCHART , WE WILL GET YOU THERE.

>> I LIKE IT ALL. NUMBERS IN SCIENCE AND THEY GET TO DO

THAT. >> I AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON. A LONG-TERM VISION. WE CAN SEE THAT, SOME OF US HAVE BEEN HERE LONGER MAY ALREADY KNOW THAT, I AM NOT BIG ON COLOR CODING BUT WHATEVER YOU THINK TIES IT TOGETHER.

>> OKAY. >> THESE FIVE PROJECTS IN ORDER

>> HE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE FANCY.

>> THE FIRST ITERATION OF THE CIP SPREADSHEET WAS PUT TOGETHER BACK BEFORE WE EVEN HAD CLEAR GOLF. IT WAS IN SEQUENTIAL ORDER BECAUSE I WENT TO THE MASTER PLAN AND FOR THAT PROJECT I HAVE TO BUILD THIS PROJECT.

>> YOU BUILT IT ALL THAT WAY. >> YEAH.

>> TRYING TO LINK ALL OF THAT INTO YOUR PRESENTATION .

>> ALL YOU DO IS TAKE YOUR LINK THAT YOU MADE AND JUST PUT THE PROJECT NAMES AS THEY EXIST WITH THEIR WW WHATEVER AND LIST THEM IN THAT TRAIN ON A SEPARATE TABLE OR WHATEVER.

>> I WOULD ASK THAT TO BE FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, ROADS, I UNDERSTAND IS A LARGE UNDERTAKING, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS RIGHT THAT WE ARE MOVING THINGS IN AND OUT AND GIVING YOU NOT A COHESIVE PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. SO, EVEN THOUGH IT IS A LARGE UNDERTAKING IT WILL HELP US TO SAY IF WE DO THAT WE NEED TO BE OKAY WITH THESE PROJECTS NOT GETTING DONE. THANK YOU.

>> JUST A FEW COMMENTS FROM ME . THANK YOU FOR PRINTING OUT ALL OF THESE MAPS AND THE CONTENT, I HATE LOOKING AT THE STUFF ON THE COMPUTER SO I APPRECIATE IT. I ALSO KEEP THESE THINGS WHENEVER I HAVE MY FIRST MEETING I STILL HAVE THOSE CIP PLANS AND THEY ARE SIMILAR TO WHAT IS IN HERE. I THINK THE NUMBERS MAY HAVE GOT RECODED. BUT I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE HARD WORK I JUST WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY OF HUTTO HAS NOT HAD A CIP LIST UNTIL 2022. SO, JUST TWO YEARS AGO THERE WAS ACTUALLY A CIP LIST. BEFORE THAT IT WAS FLY BY THE SEAT OF OUR PANTS, MAYBE GET SOME DONE HERE, INVEST HERE, BY THIS, WORK ON THIS PROJECT. THERE WAS NEVER A PLAN OR A LIST OF PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE, WASTEWATER, WATER FACILITIES, ROADS AND DRAINAGE, THIS IS A NEW PROCESS. THE CITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL WERE OPERATING YEAR-BY-YEAR AND WE ARE STILL IN I YEAR-BY-YEAR APPROACH. THIS IS ALL NEW TO US. WE NOW HAVE A FIVE-YEAR CIP PLAN AND IT EXTENDS OUT TO 10 YEARS, AS WELL. BUT THE FOCUS IS REALLY THIS CURRENT FIVE-YEAR PERIOD FROM 2025 TO 2029. SO, BECAUSE WE HAVE PROFESSIONAL STAFF WHO ARE PAID

[03:45:05]

WELL I CAN BRING THIS DATA AND INFORMATION THAT NEVER EXISTED BEFORE, THAT THEY CAN GET PRETTY CLOSE. THEY CAN GET PRETTY CLOSE TO PROJECTING EXPECTATIONS BASED ON OUR GROWTH DEMANDS ON INFRASTRUCTURE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE CITY PROVIDES AND THEY ARE PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION.

THIS INFORMATION IS GREAT AND HOPEFULLY WE ARE GOING TO PASS THIS AND WE CAN USE THESE NUMBERS AS WE CAN TELL THE PEOPLE, AS IT SITS NOW, IF NOTHING CHANGES, THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO CHANGE TO YOUR AGONIST TAX RATE OR YOUR UTILITIES. AS IS, RIGHT? SO, WE HAVE THE SOPHISTICATION TO REJECT THIS. THIS MAY SCARE PEOPLE, BUT IT IS A REALITY. I AM NOT HERE TO SUGARCOAT THINGS IN A OH, HUTTO RESINS, IT IS GOING TO BE OKAY, I PROMISE YOU. IT IS NOT GOING TO BE EASY, IT IS HARD. THESE DECISIONS ARE NOT EASY BUT WE ARE A FAST GROWING COMMUNITY. WE ARE GOING TO SERVE EVEN MORE PEOPLE. I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE PEOPLE WELL. I AM NOT GOING TO SCARE PEOPLE INTO HOW THIS IS GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT YOU.

INVESTING IN THE COMMUNITY DOES COME AT A COST AND THE PRICE OF THINGS ARE EXPENSIVE, UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS THE WORLD THAT WE LIVE IN. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT GETS PUT INTO THIS, AND THE CITY IS BECOMING MORE SOPHISTICATED SO THAT WE CAN PROJECT THESE THINGS. ALSO, I DO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE CIP LIST IS FLUID. IT IS NOT A SET IN STONE FOR THE YEAR, IT IS. PRETTY MUCH. BUT FOR FUTURE YEARS, IT CAN BE CHANGED, IT CAN BE MOVED, IT IS NOT SET IN STONE. SO, THOSE THINGS CAN CHANGE. THEY CAN CHANGE TO BECOME MORE EXPENSIVE. THEY CAN CHANGE TO BECOME LESS EXPENSIVE. UNTIL THAT CITY COUNCIL GETS TO THEIR POINT AS A RESIDENT, THAT IS WHY THE DECISION WILL BE MADE . AT LEAST THE CITY COUNCIL, AT THIS POINT, HAS AT LEAST A FIVE-YEAR SNAPSHOT OF WHAT IS COMING TO AND WHAT IS TO PREPARE FOR PROJECTS TO SERVE YOU PHYSICALLY, AND FOR WATER, WASTEWATER, TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, FACILITY OF THOSE WHERE THE EMPLOYEES WORK TO SERVE YOU THAT WE ARE GOING SOMEWHERE AND IT IS GOING TO COME AT A COST.

THIS IS SHOWN RIGHT HERE. AGAIN, THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR ALL OF THE WORK BECAUSE THIS IS GREAT. NOT DOING YEAR-BY-YEAR, FLYING BY THE SEAT OF OUR PANTS AND PICKING UP RANDOM PROJECTS.

WE ARE PLANNING. THIS IS PLANNING AND IT IS GREAT YEAH,

THAT IS IT. THANKS. >> PAGE 628 , WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS OF GROWTH RATES, TAXABLE VALUES, INTEREST RATES, ASSUMING VOTERS APPROVED DIFFERENT MEASURES IN 2026, 2027, 2028. MY MISLEADING PEOPLE IF I SAY WITH ZERO CHANGES TO THIS AS WE SEE IT TODAY, YOU CAN EXPECT A 20.33% INCREASE IN YOUR TAXES AND 2026, 2382 PER MONTH. 18.14% 24.89% INCREASE IN 28 OR 3402. NO CHANGE IN 2029 YOU CAN EXPECT A 30.9 INCREASE IN YOUR TAX RATE OF $45.68 PER MONTH.

>> BASED ON THE SNAPSHOT THAT WE HAVE .

>> THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ME BECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS TO MAKE IT INTO POLITICS . HERE IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME. THERE ARE PROJECTS WHERE WE ARE DOING THEM TODAY WERE IF

[03:50:01]

YOU ARE TRYING TO STOP A 31% INCREASE IN YOUR TAXES AND FOUR YEARS, DO YOU DO THIS OBJECT TODAY? IS IT REALLY A NEED, OR IS IT A NICE TO HAVE? WE HAVE REAL PROJECTS OUT THERE. I WILL USE ONE OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD. THE HOA DOES NOT WANT US TO SPEND $4 MILLION ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT WE ARE GOING TO SPEND $4 MILLION. WE ARE NOT PLANNING AHEAD BECAUSE WE ARE NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT. THIS YEAR WE ARE SPENDING $4 MILLION ON A PROJECT NOBODY WANTS AND IT IS NOT NECESSARILY NEEDED. WE COULD MOVE OUT TO 2030 AND HAVE THAT RIPPLE THROUGH. I THINK THAT IS GOING TO BE PUSHING PEOPLE. HOW MUCH CAN WE STOMACH IN AN INCREASE, HOW MUCH CAN YOU GO BACK TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND SAY I CAN RAISE YOUR TAXES 10%. THIS IS JUST ON THE CIP, RIGHT? YOU WANT TO BUILD SIDEWALKS, STREET MAINTENANCE. YOU HAVE TO FACTOR ALL OF THAT IN. THIS IS JUST A PROJECT. YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY, WHAT ARE WILLING TO TELL PEOPLE THEY HAVE TO PAY AND THEN WE HAVE TO PRIORITIZE PROJECTS WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE UP AT LIVE OAK. IF YOU GO THROUGH THIS WHOLE THING, I DON'T KNOW IF $10 MILLION ON LIVE OAK IS THE BEST USE OF MONEY. MAKE IT SMOOTH. YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OUT OF A 20% INCREASE OR A 25% INCREASE, BUT IF WE KEEP GOING AT ONE YEAR AT A TIME, WE ARE GOING TO DO THE 4 MILLION EVERY YEAR, GOING TO DO THE 10 MILLION. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE A 31% INCREASE IN 2029 AND NOW WE ALL AGREED TO THE INCREASES, WE EITHER SCARE PEOPLE BECAUSE WE CANNOT MAKE DECISIONS THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO FIX IT, OR WE SAY WE ARE GOING TO BATTEN DOWN THE HATCHES AND YOU MAY BE REALLY UPSET, BUT THERE IS A PROJECT -- THE LOOP MAY NOT GET WIDENED THIS YEAR. THEY MAY NOT WANT IT DONE FOR FOUR YEARS BECAUSE IN THIS CHART WE HAVE DECIDED AS A BODY THAT THAT IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, TO WIDEN IT. OR WE SAY IT IS AND WE HAVE TO GIVE UP SOMETHING ELSE. THAT IS WHY I KEEP PUSHING THIS. ONCE WE AGREED TO THE NUMBERS, NOW WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY THE MAYOR IS LYING WHEN HE SAID THE 20.33% OF INCREASE IN TAXES AND SAYS WE DON'T DO ANYTHING. THE LIE WOULD BE AS IF I SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING THAT IT IS GOING TO GO OUT. THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN SAYING IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING. I PLAN ON SATURDAY, NAILING IT DOWN AND GOING OKAY, WHAT INCREASE IN TAXES DO YOU NEED TO RUN THE CITY EACH YEAR? I WILL ADD THAT INTO WHAT CAN WE DO WANT CIP? RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY HERE, THIS DOUBLES PEOPLE'S TAXES IN FIVE YEARS.

I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY OUT THERE WHO WAS OKAY WITH THAT. SO, WE HAVE TO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU COULD DO BECAUSE THAT IS REGULATED. THIS IS EASIER. YOU ARE WAITING IN TRAFFIC AND YOU TAKE IT FOR LOWER TAXES OR WE HAD EVERYBODY. IF THE PUBLIC WANTS THEIR TAXES TO DOUBLE, WE HAVE TO PLAN FOR IT. THEY SAY FIGURE IT OUT I DON'T WANT MORE THAN 10% OF YOUR INCREASE, THAT WE HAVE TO KICK SOME PROJECTS. THE BRIDGE IS A BIG ONE. BUT THAT IS A BIG DROP IN 2026 WHAT CAN YOU MOVE FROM 27 UP. THIS OFTEN IT OUT. THAT IS ALL FOR US I AM LOOKING TO DO.

LET US HAVE AN ARGUMENT AND FIGHT ABOUT WHICH ONE ARE WE GOING TO SPEND 10 MILLION ON. THAT IS SO MUCH MORE PRODUCTIVE

THAN WHAT WE HAVE BEEN. >> CAN OFFER ONE POINT OF

CLARIFICATION. >> I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IN 2029, REMEMBER, THE STATE LAW CHANGE ON OUR MOBILITY PLAN WORKS AND WHAT WE CAN ASK FOR FROM DEVELOPERS UNLESS IT IS IN OUR CFE. SO WE DECIDED THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT EVERY PROJECT THAT WAS IN OUR MOBILITY PLAN INTO THE CIP SO WE JUST PUT THEM INTO 2029 IS A PLACEHOLDER. IT IS NOT THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY PLANNING ON DOING THEM IN 2029, NECESSARILY, THAT WAS THE LAST YEAR OF THE FIVE-YEAR CIP AND BECAUSE WE HAD TO HAVE THEM ALL IN THE PLAN DUE TO STATE LAW,

WE STUCK THEM ALL IN. >> THANK YOU. I WILL PUT A STAR AS A DISCLAIMER ON HOW TO WORD IT. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW IF YOUR BARELY MAKING ENDS MEET, IT IS GOING TO BE A TOUGH FIVE YEARS. THERE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE INCREASES OR IF YOU THINK YOU ARE GOING TO GET RAISES THAT YOU THINK YOU NEED OR EQUIPMENT I THINK YOU NEED, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE IT AND WE HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION BUT FIRST WE HAVE TO AGREE, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT AND THEN ONCE WE AGREE TO THOSE NUMBERS WITH AN ASTERISK AND ALL OF THAT, MAYBE WE DON'T NEED TO DO A WIDENING ON 132 BECAUSE IT SAVES IS 18 MILLION. MAYBE WE PUSH IT OFF TO 2029

>> I JUST HAVE ONE THING. WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING -- ARE WE DOING

[03:55:10]

÷25.30? THAT WOULD GREATLY REDUCE THE MONTHLY INCREASE TO TAXPAYERS IF WE CHANGE THE AMORTIZATION ON THE INS. MANY,

MANY LOVERS. >> THEY'RE GOING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. HOLD ON. IT MAY NOT BE A LEVER.

>> I WILL ASK THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO COME UP HERE.

>> TYPICALLY WE PLAN FOR 25 YEARS. I AM NOT SURE.

>> FOR THE RECORD, FINANCE DIRECTOR. YES, TYPICALLY WE USE THE 20 TO 25 YEAR. I WOULD HAVE TO ASK AND CHECK WITH OUR FINANCIAL ADVISER IF WE CAN GO LONGER THAN THAT. I KNOW THERE ARE SOME 30 IS OUT THERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW FOR THESE TYPE OF PROJECTS I WOULD HAVE TO GET CLARIFICATION ON IT BEFORE I

COULD SAY FOR SURE. >> THE KEY IS YOU DON'T WANT TO BORROW THE MONEY FURTHER THAN THE LONGEVITY OF IT.

>> I DON'T THINK YOU CAN. YEAH.

>> BUT USUALLY THE STREETS WITH YOUR WATER AND INFRASTRUCTURE

HAVE MORE THAN THAT. >> FOR ME, I THINK THAT WHEN WE ARE COMMUNICATING TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE NEED TO COMMUNICATE PEOPLE PICTURE . IF WE ARE SAYING THIS IS WHAT YOUR RATES WILL BE, I THINK THAT IS MISLEADING. I THINK IF YOU SAY THIS IS WHAT IT COULD BE OR WHAT IT MIGHT BE, I THINK THAT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE ACCURATE. IT MIGHT BE EVEN MORE THAN THIS. IT MIGHT BE LESS THAN THIS. WE HAVE HEARD THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF VARIABLES. WE LOOK AT THOSE MAPS AND THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE THE SINGLE BAND OF WHERE IT IS GOING TO GO, IT WIDENS OUT BEFORE TIME GOES OUT, THE WIDER THAT THE END IS.

THE FURTHER OUT WE GO OUR PROJECTIONS ARE GOING TO BE THIS IS THE BEST GAS WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TODAY WITH ALL THE VARIABLES THAT AND THE DOZEN DIFFERENT VARIABLES SAID AT CERTAIN POSITIONS, THIS IS A BEST GAS. I AM ALL ABOUT COMMUNICATING NOT TO THE PUBLIC. I LOVE THE FACT THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING THE SATURDAY WORK SESSION WHERE WE CAN WORK THIS OUT. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GIVE THE PUBLIC WHAT THEY WANT. YOU ASKED THE PUBLIC WHAT YOU WANT, THEY WANT ALL THE ROADS FIXED. OKAY? BUT YOU SAY, THIS IS WHAT IT IS GOING TO COST TO FIX ALL OF THOSE ROADS. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO SIT AT THIS TRAFFIC LIGHT FOR MORE THAN FOUR CYCLES. ALL RIGHT. HOW MUCH IS THAT WORTH IT TO YOU? TO ME, WHEN WE POSITION IT THAT WAY AND WE SAY HERE IS WHAT YOUR WANTS ARE, HERE IS WHAT YOUR NEEDS ARE, HERE IS HOW MUCH THIS COST. WHAT IS YOUR STOMACH FOR HOW MUCH YOU ARE WILLING TO PAY. NOT EVERYONE IS GOING TO BE WILLING. SIT THROUGH A FEW CYCLES OF THIS LIGHT TO KEEP MY TAXES LOWER. THAT MAY BE THE ANSWER. BUT I LOVE THAT WE ARE GOING TO WORK TOGETHER AS A

COUNSEL TO FIGURE IT OUT. >> ALSO, JUST FROM THIS CURRENT CIP LIST AS IT IS, THIS WAS AGREED UPON THIS CURRENT COUNSEL. SO NOBODY IS NEW, NOBODY IS FRESH. I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT WE PRIORITIZED IN A SATURDAY WORKSHOP, I BELIEVE, AND THAT IT WAS PUT INTO THE BUDGET AND THAT ALSO PASSED A 7-0 VOTE FOR THE BUDGET. SO, I THINK THAT WE ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS WHAT IT IS. NO PROJECTS HAVE CHANGED CAPTIONERS TRANSITIONING ]OR MOVED. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> I AM JUST SAYING THAT THAT SATURDAY.

>> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >>

[13.4. Fishing regulations at the Co-Op update. (Mike Snyder) ]

[04:00:04]

>> IT PASSES 7-0. THE NEXT ITEM IS 13.4 AND WE DO HAVE THIS ON HERE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMUNICATION HAS BEEN GOOD WITH THE PUBLIC BUT TELL ME IF I HAVE THIS AND YOU CAN INTERRUPT ME. WE HAD SIGNS GO UP FOR NO FISHING OUT HERE AT THE CO-OP NORTH AND SOUTH AND THE INITIAL THING THAT STAFF DID WAS TRY TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER ON HOW WE GET FISHING BACK AND FURTHER LOOKING WE DETERMINED WE OWNED THE NORTHERN LAKE AND SO YOU CAN FISH THERE UNTIL THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES YOU CAN'T FISH THERE. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> THE POA DOES HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MAINTENANCE AND DOES HAVE, I BELIEVE, ACCESS TO THE DRAINAGE. I DON'T KNOW IT IS ENTIRELY CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THE CITY CAN JUST SAY IT IS OUR LOT SO YES OR NO BECAUSE WE ARE INSIDE OF THE CO-OP BUT THAT SAID, THE NEXT COMPONENT I THINK YOU ARE ABOUT TO MENTION IS THE DEVELOPER DID RESPOND TO BACK THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO BACK OFF OF THEIR NO FISHING WITH THE RESTRICTION THAT THEY REALLY DON'T WANT PEOPLE ON THE GRASSY BANK ON THE NORTH POND SO IF FISHING WERE TO OCCUR IN ANY OF THAT AREA WHICH IS ALONG THE BRIDGE AND ALONG THE AREA, ANYWHERE THAT IS REELED, THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT AND THEN ALSO TO BE AWARE THAT THERE IS A FOUNTAIN IN THE MIDDLE THAT YOU CAN SEE OUT THERE. SO CASTING AND THAT SORT OF STUFF THAT WOULD SNAG ON THAT, WE DO TRY TO AVOID. I THINK ALSO YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER CATCH AND RELEASE OR WHETHER IT BE CONTROLLED FISHING IN PONDS AT ALL.

>> WE DIDN'T WORD IT LIKE THAT ARE WE DIDN'T CORRECT YOU.

>> FISHING REGULATIONS AND CATCH AND RELEASE.

>> WHAT I CAN SAY IS I DID TALK ABOUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY FISHING REGULATIONS SO WHERE CAN WE FISH OR NOT FISH AND IS A CATCH AND RELEASE AND WHAT WERE THE RULES BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING SO YOU HAVE PEOPLE FISHING OFF OF DOCS WHICH IS FINE AND OFF OF BANKS AND I DON'T KNOW BUT I THINK IN MY MIND THE COUNCIL NEEDS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE WANT FISHING AND WHERE WE DON'T AND I THINK IF YOU WANT TO FISH OFF OF THE BANK NORTH OF THE LAKE YOU PAY THE TAXES AND YOU GET TO DO IT AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT BUT YOU GUYS HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE THAT DECISION AND DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THE CITY HOW TO USE THEIR LAND? OR DOES THE CITY HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THE CITIZENS HOW TO USE IT?

>> HOW MUCH IS IT IF A LINE GETS SNAGGED ON A PUMP?

>> I DON'T KNOW. THAT COULD BE A RESTRICTION LIKE THE RESTRICTION WOULD BE YOU CAN ONLY BAITFISH AND YOU CAN'T USE LORES. AND IT WOULD BE BOBBERS AND THAT SORT OF STUFF.

>> IT WOULD HAVE A HOOK BUT I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD BE CASTING THAT TO THE CENTER OF THE POND. AND YOU CAN GO BAR

BLISS HOOKS. I DON'T KNOW. >> THERE ARE FISH IN THE POND.

>> I HAVE 100% SEEN PEOPLE PULL FISH OUT AND I'VE SEEN SUNFISH AND PERCH AND I ACTUALLY SAW NOT A GREAT SIZE BUT ABOUT THAT BIG OF A LARGEMOUTH AND THE NEXT THING THE DEVELOPER SAID FOR THE CO-OP IS THAT AFTER HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY REALLY UNDERSTOOD HOW MUCH INTEREST THERE WAS IN THE FISHING BUT THEY WERE RESPONDING TO THE DAMAGE THAT WAS BEING OCCURRED IN THE TRASH BEING LEFT BEHIND AND THAT SORT OF STUFF. SO NOW THAT THE COMMUNITY EXPRESSED THEIR BEING UPSET ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY COULDN'T FISH THERE ANYMORE AND THEY BECAME MORE AWARE OF THE DESIRE, NOW, THEY ARE EVEN WILLING TO CONSIDER MAYBE WE COULD ACTUALLY EVEN TAKE THE BIGGER LAKE AND STOCKETT AND HAVE A FISH DERBY DAY AND ACTUALLY START TO PROGRAM IT SO WHAT STARTED OUT AS , HEY, PEOPLE ARE LEAVING TRASH AND STEP BEHIND AND I WILL JUST PUT UP A NO FISHING SIGN HAS RESULTED NOW AND, OKAY, MAYBE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME CONTROLS PUT IN PLACE AND MAYBE THERE ARE SOME FUTURE

[04:05:01]

EVENTS OR TYPE THINGS THAT HAPPEN AT THOSE PONDS THAT THE POA IS BASICALLY COORDINATING.

>> IS THERE A WAY TO TURN OFF THE PUMPS DURING A CERTAIN TIME TO ALLOW FISHING? BECAUSE LIKE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE, I MEAN, IF YOU ARE FISHING WITH PUMPS IN THE CENTER, YES, THERE IS RESTRICTION AND YOU CAN'T CAST OUT TO WHERE THE PUMPS ARE, BUT WHO IS GOING TO WATCH THAT?

>> NOBODY IS GOING TO WATCH IT. THE PUMPS ARE THERE WHETHER THEY ARE ON OR NOT AND WHAT IS CAN HAPPEN IS A WILL GET DAMAGED AT SOME POINT IN TIME AND THE POA IS GOING TO START SQUAWKING AND SAY, HEY, THIS ONLY HAPPENED BECAUSE PEOPLE

ARE FISHING. >> SO I MEAN WHAT IS THE REMEDY? WHAT IS YOUR SUGGESTION TO BE THE REMEDY? I WOULD SAY

JUST DON'T FISH IN THAT LAKE. >> THAT OPENS ME UP TO FLYFISHING AND THAT'S CAME PULL.

>> I HEARD TRASH IN THE BANK AND I KNOW THE DEVELOPER SAID AND I AM BY THERE PRETTY REGULARLY AND I DON'T KNOW -- I HAVE NOT NOTICED AN ABUNDANCE OF TRASH THERE.

>> IN ALL FAIRNESS THEY LITERALLY HAVE A CREW PERSON AT THAT PUMP HOUSE EVERY DAY OF THE WEEK THAT WOULD BE PICKING

THINGS UP. >> THIS IS THE SAME DEVELOPER THAT ALL THE SUDDEN TELLS THE TENANTS TO TAKE YOUR HIPPOS AWAKE BECAUSE THEY DON'T LOOK GOOD AND THINGS GET SAID AND I WOULD LIKE TO ACTUALLY SEE AND IF WE SAY THERE IS A TRASH ISSUE, OKAY SAYING IT BUT NO ONE HAS SEEN IT SO WE START RESTRICTING PUBLIC LAND BECAUSE OF WHAT SOME DEVELOPER SAID ONE DAY AND WE ARE WORRIED ABOUT PUMPS BREAKING IN THE PUMPS HAVE BEEN BREAKING AND I DON'T KNOW THAN ANYBODY FOUND A HOOK IN THERE. SO TO ME BEFORE WE START WORKING ON SOLVING PROBLEMS, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE ARE THERE EVEN PROBLEMS THAT EXIST. I THINK THE STAFF NEEDS TO FIND OUT WHO HAS THE RIGHTS TO THAT POND AND JUST BECAUSE THE POA HAS MAINTENANCE ON IT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. IS THAT MEAN WE CAN'T -- WE MIGHT AS WELL GIVE IT TO THE POA AND MAKE THEM PAY TAXES ON IT. BECAUSE, RIGHT NOW, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UPKEEP AT LEAST IN TERMS IF THERE IS SOMETHING DAMAGED OVER THERE IT IS CITY LAND AND UNLESS IT IS SAID DIFFERENTLY I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND CONVEY TO THE PUBLIC CAN THEY FISH THERE OR NOT BECAUSE IT STILL SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T

REALLY KNOW. >> I DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER TO MY QUESTION. JAMES, WHAT IS YOUR REMEDY FOR FISHING IN THE

POND WITH A PUMP? >> I DON'T HAVE ONE BECAUSE THE PUMP IS NOT BEYOND THE ABILITY TO CAST. I MEAN, I COULD EASILY CAST ACROSS THAT POND IF I WANTED TO. THE PUMP BEING IN THE MIDDLE -- THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF IS YOU MAKE IT A SOLID CAME PULL WITH NO MORE THAN 10 FOOT OF LINE AND THAT IS JUST RIDICULOUS. WHAT I WOULD SAY IS YOU ALLOW FISHING AT THE RAIL AND BE DONE WITH IT AND WHENEVER THE DAMAGE HAPPENS IN THE POA WANTS TO SQUAWK ABOUT IT, THEN WE CROSS THAT BRIDGE WHENEVER IT HAPPENS.

>> WHAT IS THE POTENTIAL COST AMOUNT?

>> I HAVE NO IDEA. YOU WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THE HOSES THAT WILL GET DAMAGED, LIKELY, RIGHT? IF THEY HOOK INTO THE

ELECTRICAL, THEY WILL KNOW. >> WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THAT

HAPPENS? >> I WOULD ASSUME.

>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROVE IT WAS DAMAGE FROM THE FISHING AND THAT MAYBE THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS FOR THE POA. OUR PO

CONTRIBUTION IS FIXED. >> THAT THEM ASSUMING THAT THEY EVEN WANT FISHING AND I THINK WE HAVE TO DECIDE IF WE WANT THAT THERE AND IF WE DO YOU DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.

>> FOR FISHING REGULATIONS YOU CAN GET WILD AND LIMITED TO THE SIZE IF YOU WANT BAR BLISS OR BARBED OR THE SIZE AND STYLE OF THE HOOK AND GET CRAZY BECAUSE THEY DO IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS AND GOOD REASON. I FOR ONE THINK THERE IS AN ACTION TAKEN ON THIS AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US PROMOTE FISHING AND I USED TO BE A CERTIFIED INSTRUCTOR FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR FISHING FOR YOUTH PROGRAMS. I AM ALL ABOUT THAT AND I LOVE THE IDEA. SO I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT FOR THE CITY EVEN IF WE CREATED AN ORDINANCE THAT SAID IT IS CITY-OWNED OR CITY MANAGED PROPERTY AND WE ALLOW THIS UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

>> THE ONE THING IS SINCE IT IS IN A RUNOFF AREA, FOR SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE, THE CONTAMINANTS THE FISH COULD HAVE IT HAS TO BE CATCH AND RELEASE ALSO SO MORE PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THE FISHING. THAT WOULD BE THE ONE THING I WOULD THINK PARKS AND

[04:10:07]

REC SHOULD COME BACK WITH A FISHING ORDINANCE THAT WE COULD WORK THROUGH IS A COUNSEL OR FALSITY PARKLAND BECAUSE IF WE SAY WE DON'T HAVE ONE AND WE HAVE A LAKE OUT -- AT THE OTHER PARK AND WE WILL HAVE ONE AT FRITZ PARK.

>> WE WERE LISTENING TO YOU. >> THAT IS ALL HE WAS SAYING IS THERE IS A HEALTH SAFETY THING ABOUT CATCH AND RELEASE AND HOPEFULLY MORE PEOPLE CAN USE IT AND IT ISN'T FISHED OUT.

AND THE SAFETY OF EATING THEM.

>> SINCE WE DON'T STOCK, I DON'T THINK ANY OF THE PONDS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TROUT THING WHICH THE TROUT DIED BUT SINCE WE DON'T STOCK I WOULD SAY IF CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO ALLOW FISHING YOU SHOULD GO ACROSS THE BOARD AS CATCH AND

RELEASE. >> I WILL ASK FOR AN AGENDA ITEM AND WE WILL HAVE IT BROUGHT UP FOR THE SECOND

MEETING IN JANUARY. >> I DO SORT OF REMEMBER THE LAST CO-OP NEGOTIATION WE GOT EVERYTHING BACK UP AND RUNNING BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT DOING WAS TURNING OVER ALL OF THE DRAINAGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO THE POA FOR MAINTENANCE. SO I DON'T REMEMBER IF WE WERE SUPPOSED TO ALSO TRANSFER THE UNDERLYING LOT. SO I HAVE TO GO BACK AND IF YOU COULD LOOK THE CONTRACT AND SEE.

>> REMEMBER LIKE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE FOOTBRIDGE THAT WHEN ACROSS AND THE WALL THAT IS IN THAT BIG POND, THE STONE WALLS? NONE OF THAT HAD ACTUALLY EVER BEEN COMPLETELY CONVEYED OR ACCEPTED, AND I THINK WE IMMEDIATELY TURNED OVER ALL OF THAT BACK TO THE POA, WHICH MEANS WE MAY HAVE GIVEN UP OUR INTEREST IN THE LOT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

>> WE HAVEN'T GIVEN UP ANYTHING.

>> WE HAVEN'T OFFICIALLY DONE THAT.

>> I WILL BRING THAT BACK IN THE SECOND BUT I WANT US TO HAVE AN UPDATE AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE PUBLIC IS OUT FISHING RIGHT NOW BUT THERE ARE SOME HARD-CORE PEOPLE THAT DO.

[13.5. Discussion and possible action regarding City street and building naming protocols. (Mike Snyder) ]

>> 13.5 WAS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING CITY STREET AND BUILDING NAMING PROTOCOLS. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GET IT IN THE DROPBOX THE CURRENT ORDINANCE?

>> IT IS IN THE TEAMS FOLDER. >> IT WAS EMAILED THE SECOND WEEK IN NOVEMBER AND BACK IN THE SECOND WEEK OF NOVEMBER BUT SHE DID PUT IT INTO THE TEAMS FOLDER TONIGHT BECAUSE IT'S

ONLY FOR TONIGHT. >> I DID RESEND THAT EMAIL.

>> WHAT BROUGHT THIS UP AND I TALKED TO JAMES ABOUT THIS BEFORE IS SOMEWHAT WITH PROCLAMATIONS AND MAYBE TALK TO ISAAC ABOUT THIS. BUT ALSO I HAVE BEEN ASKED OCCASIONALLY CAN WE NAME A STREET AFTER SOMEBODY AND WHAT IS THE DEAL FOR NAMING BUILDINGS AND THINGS. I DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD A POLICY AND WE HAD IT DOWN AS IT SEEMS LIKE IT PRETTY WELL WRITTEN POLICY BUT JUST MORE OF THERE IS A POLICY FOR CITY COUNCIL AND THERE ARE CHANGES AND WE NEED TO COME UP AND MAKE CHANGES BECAUSE WE DO GET ASKED AND I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ONE -- I AM NOT ONE FOR NAMING BUILDINGS AFTER ANYBODY. SO THE DISCUSSIONS WHEN THEY REACH OUT TO ME GOES PRETTY QUICK AND IF THERE IS A PROCESS I THINK THEY HAVE TO BE DECEASED AND THERE IS AN APPLICATION PROCESS WITH STAFF GOING THROUGH THAT AND I THINK MAYBE IN ONE OF THE OLDER POLICIES WE HAVE THAT SOMEBODY MAY WANT TO UPDATE. THAT IS WHAT KIND OF BROUGHT IT UP.

>> I WAS THE ONE WHO ORIGINALLY ASKS THIS FOR AN AGENDA ITEM, MAYOR. MY THOUGHT WAS I WANTED TO SEE IF WE WANTED TO HAVE A COMMITTEE FOR STREET AND BUILDING NAMING AND I WAS THINKING STREETS NOT NECESSARILY BUILDINGS AS A BOARD FOR THE CITY OF CITIZENS TO BE ON THAT THEY CAN CONSIDER BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE MORE, IT GETS COMPLEX WHEN IT'S A RENAMING BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE TO GET ADDRESSES CHANGED FOR PEOPLE'S STUFF AND THEY HAVE TO GET ALL THE HOMEOWNERS TO AGREE FOR THE LANDOWNERS TO AGREE AND I WAS THINKING MORE COULD WE LOOK AT HAVING A COMMITTEE FOLLOWING THE PROTOCOL WITH NEW STREETS BEING BUILT SO DEVELOPERS DON'T DO

[04:15:05]

SOME RANDOM NAME BUT MAYBE WE COULD DO SOME HISTORICAL THINGS FOR OUR TOWN BECAUSE THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE ORIGINALLY IN KARL STERN AND HOLLAND DRIVE AND THAT PERSON ISN'T DECEASED SO ALSO ON THE POLICY IT WAS IF THEY WERE A CITY OFFICIAL OR ELECTED OFFICIAL OR A CITY EMPLOYEE A YEAR AFTER THEIR SERVICE THEY COULD ALSO BE ON THERE SO IT WASN'T JUST DECEASED. ANYWAY, I THOUGHT MAYBE IT WOULD BE A NEW COMMITTEE FOR CITIZENS TO THEN GO THROUGH THESE REQUESTS AND I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN WE GET THEM BUT YOU SAID YOU GET THEM AND NOTHING GOES ANYWHERE SO I WONDERED WE GET A LIST AND THEN ADD NEW STREETS IT GOES TO THAT COMMITTEE AND WE SAY DO WE HAVE ANY LISTS AND ANY THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THEN THEY PROPOSE THOSE JUST LIKE THE OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THEY WOULD PROPOSE THAT BACK TO US FOLLOWING THE NAMING POLICY OF THE POLICY WE HAD AND THEN THAT WOULD COME TO COUNSEL AND THEN WE WOULD DO YAY OR NAY BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT IT IS ONLY A DEVELOPER AND ONE OWNER AND WE HAVE THAT AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS AND THEY GET SOME PERMISSION TO NAME X NUMBER OF STREETS INSIDE YOUR DEVELOPMENT AND THEN WE HAVE THAT IS A PROCESS SO THAT WAY IT ISN'T CHANGING ADDRESSES FOR NEW HOMEOWNERS OR PEOPLE OR PREVIOUS OWNERS BUT JUST KIND OF A PROCESS GOING FORWARD BECAUSE THAT IS HOW TRAN ONE

USED TO BE. >> I WILL MAKE ONE COMMENT. I DON'T WANT US AND WE JUST WENT THROUGH THIS ABOUT GOVERNMENT BEING TOO INVOLVED AND I COULDN'T EVEN IMAGINE SOMEBODY BUILDING A NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVING TO RUN THROUGH THE STREET NAMING THROUGH A COMMITTEE AND HAVING TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL AND IT'S HARD ENOUGH GETTING A 911 ADDRESS ANYMORE LET ALONE THAT I DON'T HAVE ANY INTEREST IN THE. IF THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO NAME THE NAMES THE WAY THEY WANT THAT CORRESPOND WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS ON THEM AND THEY HAVE TO SELL HOUSES FOR IT. I WAS IN HERE 20 YEARS AGO SO I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT NAMED OR THE STREETS AND WHERE THEY LIVE OR NOT AND I JUST KNOW WHAT THE POLICY IS TODAY AND THAT IS WHY BRING THIS UP IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT CHANGE, THERE IS ORDINANCE AND YOU CAN MAKE CHANGES AND WE ARE

OKAY WITH IT AND NOW WE KNOW. >> WE WILL MOVE AND 13.6

[13.6. Discussion and possible action regarding TxDOT's request for additional funding for the construction of bridges at road-rail intersections and associated proposed legislation. (Peter Gordon/Amberley Kolar) ]

DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BRIDGES AT THE INTERSECTIONS AND ASSOCIATED PROPOSE LEGISLATION.

>> I WILL DO MY SPEECH. >> SO THIS IS IN RESPONSE TO AN EMAIL WE RECEIVED FROM GO RAIL.ORG, AN ORGANIZATION THEY SAY THEIR TAGLINE IS UNITES A COALITION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS, CIVIC AND BUSINESS LEADERS AND STAKEHOLDERS TO SUPPORT REAL SOLUTIONS FOR TOMORROW'S THE TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES. KIND OF A BROAD OVERVIEW IS THAT TXDOT HAS AN EXCEPTIONAL ITEM THAT THEY WILL BE BRINGING TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THEY HAVE MULTIPLE EXCEPTIONAL ITEMS, ONE OF WHICH IS $175 MILLION FOR LOCAL REAL GRADE CROSSING SEPARATIONS. SO THEY WOULD BE REQUESTING THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROPRIATE THOSE DOLLARS. THIS MONEY WOULD NOT BE COMING FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY FUND BUT COMING FROM GENERAL REVENUE AND THERE IS A HURDLE TO GET OVER IN ORDER TO GET THIS FUNDED BY THE STATE.

BUT I DO THINK IT IS ADVANTAGEOUS FOR US TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST OF TXDOT BECAUSE THEY BUILD BRIDGES OVER BUSY ROADS. THEY CAN DO UNDERPASSES IN HIGH GROWTH AREAS. IT IS TO HELP ALLEVIATE LOCAL COSTS TO BIG PROJECTS LIKE SAY SOMETHING LIKE 132 PROJECT AT 79. IT IS RELEVANT. IT IS A FUTURE THING THAT IF IT GETS FUNDED, IF THE PROGRAM IS IMPLEMENTED, THEN THE CITY OF TRAN ONE COULD LIKELY BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS AND

[04:20:04]

HAVE A FUNDING RESOURCE FROM THE STATE TO HELP WITH HUGE FINANCIAL COSTS FOR A BRIDGE OVERPASS OVER THE RAILROAD SO

THAT IS ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW. >> IT IS FROM THAT EMAIL BUT I THINK ALL THE COUNCIL RECEIVED IN, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS, NOVEMBER I THINK MAYBE EVEN OCTOBER. I JUST THOUGHT IT MAY BE WORTH OUR WHILE TO EITHER JOIN THEM OR WRITE A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THEIR EFFORTS TO GET THE LEGISLATURE TO GIVE THIS EXTRA FUNDING TO TXDOT SO THEY COULD HOPEFULLY THEN GIVE IT TO US AND I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE IF IT WOULD BE ANOTHER RESOLUTION AND WE ARE READY TALKED ABOUT DOING FOUR RESOLUTIONS IN SUPPORT OF DIFFERENT POSSIBLE LEGISLATION AND THIS ONE WOULD ALSO AFFECT THAT. I THINK IF THE COUNCIL WERE AGREEABLE TO WE COULD DO A RESOLUTION AS WELL AND LET THEM KNOW WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS EFFORT TO SECURE EXTRA FUNDING FOR CROSSINGS.

>> I AM IN FAVOR AND WHEN IT CAME OUT NOVEMBER 19 I SAID TO JAMES, AND HE HAD ASKED ME DO YOU WANT THIS TO BE A CITY COUNCIL DECISION TO ENDORSE AND I SAID MAY AS WELL BECAUSE UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD MIND THE MAYOR WRITING A LETTER AND I TALKED TO JAMES ALL THE TIME ABOUT THIS BUT I WAS LIKE I THINK I COULD DO IT ANYWAY AND I THINK IT WOULD MEAN MORE THAT WERE SIGNED BY EVERYBODY IN THE CITY COUNCIL SO MAYBE A LETTER OR RESOLUTION AND I THINK IT MEANS A LOT MORE WHEN YOU HAVE A UNITED CITY COUNCIL ASKING TO PUT THE REQUEST OUT BUT I DIDN'T KNOW YOU GUYS HAD IT AND I DIDN'T WANT TO WRITE A LETTER WITHOUT ANY PERMISSION

TO COUNCIL . >> SO I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO CREATE A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION AND FUNDING TO INCREASE FUNDING FOR TXDOT TO SUPPORT TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS BENEFITING CITIES FOR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING RAIL AND TO ENHANCE CITY REAL CROSSINGS AND INSTALL SIGNAL LIGHTS WHERE SAFETY CONCERNS ARISE.

>> CAN WE SAY A RESOLUTION THAT SUPPORTS THE REQUEST FROM GO

RAIL? >> SURE.

>> SECOND. >> THERE IS THE SECOND AND ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

[14. EXECUTIVE SESSION ]