[1. CALL SESSION TO ORDER]
          [00:00:07]
          >> IT IS 9:02. JUST A POINT OF HOUSEKEEPING , I DON'T THINK WE CAN OFFICIALLY CALL THE MEETING UNTIL WE HAVE A QUORUM OF PEOPLE. WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE I KNOW WILL NOT BE HERE WITH A FOURTH ON THE WAY. WE WILL GO AHEAD AND START THE DISCUSSION AND AT THE POINT WE HAVE FOUR PEOPLE WE WILL START THE MEETING AND OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? I CAN'T LET 
          [3.1. Consideration and possible action on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for FY26-29. (Matt Rector)]
PUBLIC COMMENT GO UNTIL WE HAVE THE MEETING. WHAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSING HIS THE CIP PLAN FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. 
          >> MAYOR, IF YOU CONSIDER THIS MORE LIKE A TOWNHALL WHERE YOU AREN'T HAVING AN ACTUAL MEETING AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT BEING ON THE RECORD YOU CAN STILL POTENTIALLY ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC I WOULD THINK IF THEY WANT SOMETHING ON THE RECORD THAT WOULD HAVE TO WAIT. 
          >> WE DID IT AS A TOWNHALL -- I THINK WE WILL TALK AMONG OURSELVES WHILE WE WAIT FOR A QUORUM AND AT THAT POINT WE CAN 
          START DOING SOME ACTION. >> OR WE COULD GO TO MARIO'S. 
          >> OF ARTIE BEEN SUGGESTED WE CAN HAVE IT DOWN THERE. 
          >> WE CAN'T DO PUBLIC COMMENT UNTIL? 
          >> I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO TOWNHALL BUT IT WOULD JUST WAIT UNTIL ONE OF THE MEMBERS GETS HERE AND WE WILL DO IT. I CAN SEE WE HAVE OUR LIST OF ALL THE PROJECTS. WE HAVE OUR LIST OF WHAT WE HAVE ON THEIR, NOT THAT WE ARE GOING TO FINALIZE THAT. 
          WHICH ONES HAVE BEEN PARTIALLY FUNDED AND WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN FUNDED, I THINK WE ALSO HAVE ONES RIGHT NOW WE THINK WILL REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL TO CONTINUE. THAT IS THE PUBLIC WORKS, POLICE STATION, REC CENTER AND AQUATIC CENTER. ANY 
          DISAGREEMENTS TO THAT SO FAR? >> AS FAR AS GENERAL OVERVIEW , FOR ME, THERE'S A FEW HIGHLIGHTED AREAS LIKE THE MAYOR SAID . THE POLICE DEPARTMENT , THAT'S A PRIORITY . OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL TO GO TO THE RESIDENCE OF HUTTO TO APPROVE THAT . JUST THINKING TIMELINE WISE THIS IS HOW I THINK ABOUT IT. THIS NEXT YEAR WE WILL WORK THROUGH SOME OF THE DETAILS OF THINGS , SO THAT IS 2025, 2026 AND LATE 2026 GOING THROUGH POTENTIALLY DESIGN AND ASKING VOTERS FOR APPROVAL. 
          27, 28 IS CONSTRUCTION AND BY 29 TO HAVE A FACILITY. JUST KIND OF GIVING PEOPLE A PERSPECTIVE OF THE TIME AND LABOR OF LOVE IT TAKES TO ACHIEVE THESE PROJECTS AND SOMETHING LIKE A STATION WE ARE NOT GOING TO GO TO THE FULL BUILDOUT. WE WILL DO IT IN A REASONABLE MANNER, BUT JUST TO KIND OF GIVE PEOPLE AN IDEA OF HOW THE MONEY IS SPREAD ACROSS YEAR-OVER-YEAR AND THE TIME IT TAKES IN ORDER TO GET THAT KIND OF PROJECT ACHIEVED. IT'S DIFFERENT FOR OTHER PROJECTS OF COURSE, BUT JUST KEEPING SOME OF THESE ON THE TIMELINE IT'S ON IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE PUSHING IT OUT YEAR AFTER YEAR THEN JUST EXTENDS THE TIMELINE. THE CONDITION OF THE LOCATION OF OUR CURRENT POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ITS ISSUES AND WE ARE ALL AWARE OF THOSE. JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE THAT IT'S NOT ONE OF THOSE LET'S TAKE OUT A TON OF MONEY AND IT'S GOING TO HIT YOU HARD ON THE TAX ROLLS AND GOING TO BE A SLOW LABOR OF LOVE. SAME WITH SOME OTHER PROJECTS WE ARE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING TWO. TRANSPORTATION IS BIG. ROADS. 
          CIP. TENDS TO ME NO BOND DOLLARS OR TRAFFIC IMPACT DOLLARS. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO PAY FOR THOSE. AT THE END OF THE DAY IT'S TAX DOLLARS THAT ARE GOING TO BE USED TO PAY FOR THESE BIG PROJECTS. THERE'S A LOT ON THE DOCKET I SUPPOSE ARE ON THE 
          [00:05:08]
LIST. ANOTHER FOR ME, I'VE TALKED WITH THE RESIDENCE AND FOLKS ON OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AND I THINK WE NEED TO RETHINK HOW PEOPLE MOVE IN THE CITY. A LOT I LIKE TRAFFIC , TRAFFIC, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE ROAD SITUATION AND WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT GETTING PEOPLE OFF OF 79. WHETHER THAT'S THROUGH LIVE OAK , CHANDLER ROAD , WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT PRIORITIZING ROADS THAT WOULD GET THEM TO GET OFF OF 79, TO GET THEM QUICKER TO THOSE OF ROADS SO THEY CAN MOVE EAST, WEST IN TOWN. NORTH, SOUTH, THE COUNTY IS WORKING ON THE HIGHWAY SO THAT WILL TAKE PEOPLE OFF OF OUR LOCAL ROAD AND KEEP THEM MOVING ACROSS TOWN WHEREVER THEY NEED TO GO. THE LOCALS AND RESIDENTS OF HUTTO CAN USE THEIR LOCAL ROADS. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO RETHINK THE ROADS EXPANDING , THAT IS SOMETHING UNDER DESIGN RIGHT NOW . THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IN THE FUTURE. WE NEED TO RETHINK. 
          IT'S NOT ABOUT ACTUALLY LAYING THE MATERIAL DOWN. WE NEED TO MOVE PEOPLE AROUND TOWN DIFFERENTLY. DEFINITELY LOOKING FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION AS FAR AS GOING THROUGH PROJECTS . 
          SEE WHERE IT GOES. >> ANY THOUGHTS? 
          >> I AGREE WITH A LOT OF THAT. THIS IS GOING TO BE A DIFFICULT DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO EVERYTHING ON THE LIST SO IT JUST ALL COMES DOWN TO PRIORITIES. HOW WILL WE PRIORITIZE, WHAT WILL WE PRIORITIZE? WE WON'T ALWAYS AGREE BUT I THINK WE HAVE THE CONVERSATIONS, WE LISTEN TO EACH OTHER AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THE CITIZENS WANT, WHAT WE FEEL THE CITIZENS HAVE ELECTED US TO DO . I THINK WE JUST NEED TO FOCUS ON WHAT WE CAN AFFORD THESE NEXT YEARS. IT WORRIES ME WHEN WE PUSH OUT TOO MANY THINGS BECAUSE THEN IT'S LIKE IN MY VIEW IT IS DELAYING THE INEVITABLE AND NEW PUSH THINGS OUT NOT ONLY IS IT GOING TO COST , THE COST WILL HIT LATER, BUT THE COST IS ALSO GOING TO GO UP . WE ARE LOOKING AT CERTAIN NUMBERS IN THE FY 29 COLUMN. YOU CAN GUARANTEE THE NUMBER WILL NOT REMAIN THAT. IT WILL INCREASE YOUR AFTER YEAR BECAUSE IT'LL BE A LOT MORE. I WANT TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          >> I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I WOULD ARGUE THE PUBLIC WORKS POLICE , I DON'T THINK THAT'S REQUIRED TO GO TO VOTERS IN THE ONLY WAY IT GETS DONE , I THINK THERE IS ANOTHER PATH. WE ARE LOOKING AT LIKE 20 MILLION IF THE CURRENT DATA CENTER IS BUILT ALL THE WAY OUT AFTER INCENTIVES ARE DONE IT COULD BE UP TO 20 MILLION A YEAR IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE. ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE HAD WITH A THREE YEAR DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE AND MAJORITY OF THE VALUE BEING IN EQUIPMENT I WOULD NOT WANT TO BORROW MONEY, PERSONALLY, WITH THE THOUGHT WE WILL PAY THAT BACK WITH THE 20 MILLION WE GET FROM DATA CENTERS BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY THERE'S A BUST, A MOVE EQUIPMENT OUT AND WE HAVE BILLIONS NOT THERE BUT WE BORROWED THE MONEY. IF I REMEMBER, WE TAKE THAT MONEY, PUT IT INTO A SEPARATE PILOT EACH YEAR AND SAY 20 MILLION , SAY WE DECIDE WE WANT A POLICE STATION FIRST IN TWO YEARS TIME WE PAY FOR THE POLICE STATION WITHOUT GOING TO VOTERS. WE PRIORITIZE ONE-OFF CIP PROJECTS THAT WAY . I THINK THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE AS WE BUILD THOSE IT GOES UP AND THERE'S COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT BUT THEN WE ARE NOT CONSTANTLY GOING BACK TO VOTERS TRYING TO GET THEM TO APPROVE 50 MILLION FOR THIS AND 50 MILLION FOR ROADS BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY THE GENERAL MESSAGE I'VE GOT FROM THE PEOPLE IS THEY DON'T CARE HOW WE FUND THE STUFF OTHER THAN THEY DON'T WANT TO BE PAYING MUCH MORE IF ANY IN TAXES AND I THINK SOME RECOGNIZED TAXES WILL GO UP BUT IT'S A MATTER OF HOW MUCH. IF YOU RAISE AT 10% AND ASK FOR 10% INCREASE TO FUND ROADS I THINK WE WILL HAVE A PROBLEM BUT IF WE MOVE THINGS AROUND WITH AT LEAST THAT DATA CENTER MONEY WE HAVE ONE MORE POSSIBLY COMING AND ANOTHER MAY BE COMING. THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY WHERE WE CAN LOOK AT THINGS IN A PRIORITY MANNER AND BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN STAFF CAN 
          [00:10:02]
MAKE PREPARATIONS , THE PUBLIC CAN MAKE PREPARATIONS . I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY TO BE HAD. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PRIORITIES. HAVING A REAL CONVERSATION ABOUT WHY WE CAN'T DO CERTAIN THINGS AND ALSO I'M NOT OPPOSED TO RAISING TAXES MODESTLY IF IT IS MY OPINION I GUESS IF WE HAVE A LIEN BUDGET. 
          WE ARE NOT OUT SPENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS DOING OTHER THINGS NOT NEEDED THEN I DON'T MIND GOING TO THE VOTERS AND SAYING WE HAD TO RAISE TAXES 5% THIS YEAR TO FUND SOME OF THIS, BUT STAFF IS RUNNING LIEN, EVERYBODY IS RUNNING LIEN BUT WE HAVE THINGS THE PUBLIC WILL BE NOT HAPPY WITH LIKE TRIPS LIKE THAT I THINK PRINCIPALLY SPEAKING WE JUST HAVE TO ALL BUCKLE DOWN THROUGH THE FIVE YEARS AND REALLY GO WITH NECESSITIES WE HAVE TO HAVE. I THINK RHODES IS THE NUMBER ONE THING. A LOT OF THESE I THINK OUR WANTS AND DESIRES. I WANT PARKS TO BE IMPROVED BUT THAT IS NOT A NEED. WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE MORE TRAILS BUILT AND LIGHTING IF THERE'S WAYS WE CAN FUND THAT IN CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS AND OTHER MEASURES AND GRANTS BUT IF WE PICK AND DON'T DO AN INTERSECTION THAT CAN SAVE LIVES AND INSTEAD SPEND 10 MILLION ON SOME OTHER PROJECT THAN THE NEXT ACCIDENT WHERE SOMEONE DIES I LOOK AND GO WE MISS PRIORITIZED. I THINK THERE'S A WAY TO DO IT AND I THINK IF WHAT WE OUGHT TO DO IS FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH WE ARE WILLING TO SPEND EACH YEAR ON PROJECTS AND THEN FIGURE OUT HOW TO PRIORITIZE. IF WE DO THAT IT'LL COME CLEAR SOME PROBLEMS WE HAVE AND IT'LL FOR STAFF AND THE CITY MANAGER TO COME UP WITH NOVEL OPPORTUNITIES. IF SOMEONE PAYS FOR PARK IMPROVEMENTS I THINK AT THIS TIME WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT EVEN IF THEY WANTED TO PAY $1 MILLION TO PUT A SWING SET IN IT MAY NOT BE 
          EVERYBODY'S FAVORITE CHOICE. >> FROM PROJECTS WHAT YOU GUYS SEE AS AN AMOUNT OF TAXES WE CAN RAISE NEXT YEAR ? IT'S GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT BUT SOMETHING WE CAN BUCKLE DOWN AND PUSH 
          THROUGH? >> SOME THAT WAS RUN BY FINANCE THIS IS A PAPER THAT WAS GIVEN TO US PREVIOUSLY. Y'ALL MAY NOT HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US. BORROWING $10 MILLION AT AN INTEREST RATE OF 4.3 PERCENT THEY BREAK IT DOWN ON PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST IN A 25 YEAR TIMEFRAME . THAT IMPACT TO OUR INS TAX RATE WOULD BE POINT 01298 . A PENNY ON THE INS PORTION. WHEN IT GETS BROKEN DOWN INTO IT SAYS AN ANNUAL TAX LEVY PER THE AVERAGE HOME. AVERAGE HOME, I THINK WE ARE USING 350,000. IT DOESN'T SAY RIGHT HERE, BUT ANNUAL COST FOR TAKING OUT WOULD BE $40 AND 41 SENT. JUST KIND OF BASIC MATH OF 10 MILLION COSTING $3.37 PER MONTH . 
          >> NEXT YEAR IF WE DON'T MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THIS, WHICH I FULLY EXPECT WE WILL, WITH ALL THE GROWTH AND EVERYTHING FACTORED IN , TELL ME WHEN I GET THIS WRONG , WITH EVERYTHING WE HAVE FIGURED OUT WITH DATA CENTERS COMING, ACADEMY, EVERYTHING WE THINK IS COMING WE HAVE A 9.08 PERCENT INCREASE IN TAXES FOLLOWED BY 2026 AT 20.33%, AND 27 18.41% , 2028 AND INCREASE IN TAXES AND 2029 BEING WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PROJECTS ON THE LIST IN THE FIVE-YEAR SPAN AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THE 
          [00:15:03]
BULK AT THE END? SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. WHAT CAN WE TELL THE PUBLIC I DON'T THINK WE CAN GO AND SAY NEXT YEAR IS 9% INCREASE AND AFTER THAT TIGHTEN YOUR BELTS. I THINK IF WE PUT THE PLAN AND SAY WE WILL STICK TO THE BUDGET AND MAKE IT LEAN AND MEAN WE FACTOR IN 5% IN 2025 OR WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE START LIVING PROJECTS AROUND AND GO HOW DO WE GET THAT 7%? OR WHATEVER THAT RATE IS. IT'S STILL SIGNIFICANT FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE. SOMETHING TO ME IN 2026 AND THEN 2025 , FOR INSTANCE , I THINK WE ALL AGREED IF WE CAN FIND A PATH TO MAKE DOWNTOWN ONE-WAY ROAD AND AWAY WE AGREE THEN I THINK WE ARE IN AGREEMENT LIFE OAK IS THE MAIN CONDUIT THROUGH TOWN. THE QUESTION IS DOES THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED TO 2025? I DON'T THINK WE WILL BE READY BECAUSE PUBLIC MEETINGS WRAP UP IN THE SUMMER AND THEN YOU HAVE A YEAR OF DESIGN SO IT'S PROBABLY MORE 2026. YOU CAN MOVE IT OUT OF 2025 TO 2026 AND THEN GO THROUGH 2025 WHEN ALL THESE PROJECTS. THIS YEAR WE HAVE THE LOOP EXPANDING. IT'S IMPORTANT TO YOUR POINT. WE NEED OTHER CONDUITS. ARE WE GOING TO BE READY FOR THAT IS TO MARK SOME CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER WHERE WE HAVE A WHOLE SECTION OF CONSTRUCTION SO THAT'S WHAT I'M HOPING WE CAN DO. I THINK IN REALITY WE WILL FIND MOST PROJECTS WE CAN'T DO WHEN WE HAVE THEM SLATED JUST BECAUSE OF THE DESIGN WORK, THE RIGHT OF WAY. I WOULD HATE TO BORROW MONEY AND PROMISE PEOPLE SOMETHING THAT WHEN WE REALLY DIAL DOWN IT'S MORE 2027 AND YOU LOOK AT 2027 AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE SOME MOVING AROUND 
          TO DO. >> BRINGING IT BACK TO LIFE OAK, IT IS UNDER DESIGN, NOT QUITE SURE THE PERCENTAGE OF DESIGN BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN HALFWAY FUNDED OR LET'S SAY PARTIALLY FUNDED BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CODES HERE. THAT'S PARTIALLY FUNDED . DEPENDING ON WHEN DESIGN WILL BE DONE I FEEL IT'S BEEN UNDER DESIGN FOR TWO YEARS AND PRIOR TO MYSELF BEING ON COUNSEL THERE WAS SOME OTHER ISSUES THAT MAYBE THE MAYOR PRO TEM CAN SPEAK TO OR UNDERSTAND. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IT WOULD COST FOR IT TO MAKE THE ROADS SAFE BUT TO POSSIBLY DO THAT AND THEN ONCE THE ROAD FINALLY GETS DESIGNED TO THEN MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S PARTIALLY FUNDED . AT THE TIME THE CONSTRUCTION WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD THEN IT CAN BE FUNDED. ON THAT ONE WE ARE LITERALLY HALFWAY THERE. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO FOCUS ON SAFETY OF THE ROAD AND THAT MEANS DOING A LITTLE BAND-AID 
          PATCH FIX. >> IT IS A FULLY FUNDED PROJECT. 
          FULLY FUNDED. I THINK WE STILL HAVE GAS LIGHTS THAT HAVE TO BE MOVED. BY THE TIME ALL THAT GETS DONE I'M NOT SAYING DON'T DO IT, BUT WE ARE LIMITING WHAT WE CAN DO IN 2025 ON THE PROJECT WE 
          ONLY HAVE SIX MONTHS LEFT. >> WE NEED TO MEET -- MAKE THE ROAD MOVABLE SO THEY CAN GET OFF 79 ONCE IT GETS CONNECTED HERE ON THE OTHER SIDE. IF THEY WANT TO USE THAT , THAT IS A ROUTE 
          FOR THEM TO USE. >> OBSCENE DISCREPANCIES ON THE LIVE OAK RECONSTRUCTION . WHAT I SEE ON LINE WITH WHAT WAS PRINTED OUT. IS IT FULLY FUNDED OR NOT? ONCE IS PARTIAL IN ONE SENSE FULL. YEAH. THE LINK WE GOT SENT. IF I LOOK AT LIVE OAK RECONSTRUCTION IT SAYS STARTED AND THERE IS A GREEN CIRCLE AND THEN FOR FUNDING IT SAYS PARTIAL BUT ON THE PRINTOUT WE RECEIVED 
          [00:20:01]
IT SAYS THE FUNDING IS FULL . CAN SOMEONE ANSWER THAT ONE? 
          >> I JUST ASKED HER TO FIND OUT WHEN THE DESIGN IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE BEFORE SHE GAVE YOU HER ANSWER. 
          >> DAN, CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY? >> CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME? 
          >> PERFECT. >> WITH DAN HERE LET'S DO THIS. 
          CAN WE CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER? 
          >> WE STILL CAN'T TAKE ANY ACTION. 
          >> IT'S A WORKSHOP. JUST DISCUSS. 
          >> WE ARE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION UNTIL WE GET IN HERE. WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE FOUR OF US DO THIS . 
          >> I AGREE. >> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 9:23. WE WILL TAKE ROLL CALL. 
          COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON . 
          DON'T HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON HERE LISTED BUT I'M GOING TO BRING UP PUBLIC COMMENT NEXT. WE WILL GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. FIRST UP WE HAVE IS MIKE FELLER. 
          >> GOOD MORNING MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I WOULD LIKE TO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT KICK THE CAN FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD ON LIVE OAK AND TO GO AHEAD AND START IT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 
          ON THE CIP I THINK THERE'S A VERY IMPORTANT THINGS AND LIVE OAK IS JUST ONE OF THEM. IT HAS BEEN A PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN BASICALLY AROUND SINCE THE BOND ISSUE OF 2018 AND 2019. SIGNS WERE POSTED ABOUT THE IMMINENT PROGRESS ON LIVE OAK STREET PROJECT AND NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST SIX YEARS ON IT. WE HAVE PRETTY MUCH TORN UP THE STREET. THERE IS AN ENTANGLEMENT THAT'S GONE ALL OVER THE WHOLE TOWN THAT'S GOING TO MAKE YELLS PROCESS A LOT MORE DIFFICULT FOR EVERY STREET AND EVERY STREET SHOULD BE ADDRESSED IN OLD TOWN. DO IT ALL. I KNOW YOU CAN'T DO IT ALL AT ONCE. DO IT AS YOU CAN . ON THE LIVE OAK STREET PROJECT IT'S BEEN ENGINEERED TWICE NOW, TO MY KNOWLEDGE , AND NEED TO HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS AND LIVE OAK THAT EVERYONE ELSE IN TOWN HAS AS FAR AS DRAINAGE, CURBS AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS , LIGHTING , SAFETY CONCERNS , STOP SIGNS WOULD DO A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF HELP FOR HUTTO OLD TOWN . I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE THE COUNSEL AND STAFF ON THE TOUR AND SHOW YOU SOME CREATIVE WAYS WE CAN GET SPACE OUT OF THE LAND WE ALREADY OWN ON THESE STREET IN OLD TOWN. I'M NOT SURE ONE-WAY STREETS ARE THE ANSWER IN OLD TOWN. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT BUT I THINK WE CAN DO A LOT MORE STUFF BY BEING CREATIVE, NOT ONLY IN OUR THOUGHT PROCESS , BUT WITH OUR FINANCING. ONE THOUGHT WOULD BE TO INCLUDE ALL OF OLD TOWN IN THE CO-OP CHURCH. BOTH SIDES. NOT JUST IN OUR SIDE, BOTH SIDES. IT CREATES SOME CONNECTIVITY UNDER HIGHWAY 79 
          [00:25:05]
PER FOOT TRAFFIC THROUGH THE CO-OP . ALL I'M REALLY HERE TO ASK IS I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE A LOT OF THINGS AND YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO DO EVERYTHING. A NEW POLICE STATION IS IMPORTANT, PARKS ARE IMPORTANT. RATHER THAN PUT THINGS ON -- OFF , GET THINGS DONE. I WILL BE HAPPY TO, AGAIN, TAKE STAFF AROUND, TAKE THE COUNSEL AROUND. I DO HAVE A FEW PICTURES I WILL LEAVE WITH THE CITY SECRETARY OF DURANGO FARMS AND A COUPLE OF MY STREET, LIVE OAK STREET, WITH THE CITY SECRETARY. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. APPRECIATE IT. 
          >> NEXT UP WE HAVE BROOKE HUDSON. 
          >> GOOD MORNING, RECUT SIN. I GOT THREE THINGS THIS MORNING. 
          FIRST I KNOW COUNCILMEMBERS HEARD THIS . WE NEED TO MAKE VERY SURE ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING CONTEMPLATED IN THE EDC OR EXECUTIVE SESSION GET ON THE CIP LIST. THAT IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN LEGALLY CHARGE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES AND WATER IMPACT FEES. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. I DON'T CARE HOW SECRET IT IS BUT IT NEEDS TO GET ON THIS ONE. NUMBER TWO, I HOPE AFTER LAST WEEK'S MEETING THAT COUNSEL HAS ACTUALLY GONE AND LOOKED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMENTS ON THE CIP LIST. 
          WE SPENT LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF MAN-HOURS COMPILING THIS AND AFTER LAST WEEK A LOT FEELIKE W SPINNING IN THE WIND. PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT OUR COMMENTS. I'M GOING TO QUOTE OFF OF YESTERDAY, BUT IT WAS REITERATED AGAIN THIS MORNING , YESTERDAY THE MAYOR POSTED AS WE STAND NOW, QUOTE, WITH NO FURTHER ACTION FROM THE CITY COUNCIL WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT TAX BILL INCREASES OF 2025 9.08% , 2026 , 20.33%, 20 2718.14%, AND 2029 30.90%. ANY COMPETENT MEMBER OF CITY COUNCIL KNOWS THAT YOU CANNOT INCREASE THE TAX RATE BY MORE THAN 3.5%. THAT IS STATE LAW. GOOGLE IT. IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS UP WITH THE VOTERS THROUGH ELECTIONS WHERE IS THAT IN THE BUDGET? WHERE IS THAT SCHEDULED? THIS IS ALL A BUNCH OF PIE IN THE SKY SCARE TACTICS SAYING YOUR TAXES ARE GOING TO GO WAY UP WHEN, LEGALLY, THAT CAN'T HAPPEN . IF COUNSEL BUDGETS AND SCHEDULES, SPECIAL ELECTIONS FOR THESE ITEMS OR FOR TAX INCREASES AND THE MEASURE PASSES THE VOTERS BY A MAJORITY VOTE AND COUNSEL DOES NOTHING TO MODIFY THE CIP LIST THEN THESE RATES CAN COME INTO EFFECT. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN AND IT'S A LOT MORE THAN 
          NO FURTHER ACTION. THANK YOU. >> IF I COULD, I NORMALLY DON'T ENGAGE BUT I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT ON THE 3.5 WHEN IT PERTAINS TO THE AND THE DOUGH RATE, NOT THE INS RATE. IF YOU LOOK YOU WILL FIND WE CAN ISSUE $1 BILLION IN DEBT AND RAISE TAXES 80% IN ONE YEAR WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL. I WOULD ALMOST BET MY POSITION ON THE DAIS WHICH WOULD MAKE SOME PEOPLE HAPPY IF I WAS WRONG, BUT WE CANNOT BY LAW 3 1/2% , WE ARE UNLIMITED ON THE INS RATE. 
          [00:30:01]
YOU'LL SEE IF WE DO NO ACTION ON THIS AND KEEP IT AS IT IS THOSE INCREASES ARE ALL BASED ON INS RATE INCREASES THAT DON'T NEED YOUR VOTE AND DON'T NEED YOUR OPINION. WE CAN ACT ON HER OWN AND COMPLETELY DO IT BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE IT BEFORE. I THINK WE DID 30 OR 40 MILLION LAST YEAR WITHOUT ANY APPROVAL BY THE 
          VOTERS. WE TOOK AN OPTION . >> CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION COUNSEL CAN VOTE TO DO WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL. GEO REQUIRE VOTE 
          OF THE PEOPLE. >> INS INCREASES ARE NOT LIMITED 
          BY LAW? >> IT IS NOT LIMITED BY LAW. IT WOULD STILL REQUIRE THE COUNCIL VOTE TO APPROVE. 
          >> I DON'T WANT IT TO BE A SCARE TACTIC THAT IS UNWANTED. I WANTED TO BE FAX SOME PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT AND SAY THAT SCARES ME AND SOME PEOPLE CAN SAY I CAN AFFORD A 20% INCREASE THAT IS ALL BASED WITH NO ACTION, NO CHANGES TO THIS PLAN BY THIS COUNSEL AND ASSUMING WE VOTE TO RAISE THEM YOU WOULD SEE THOSE INCREASES. THE CITY MANAGER IN OUR BUDGET CANNOT RAISE THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION, STREET REPAIRS AND SALARY PAYMENTS. WE CAN'T FUND MORE THAN 3 1/2% A YEAR WITHOUT A REFERENDUM BY THE VOTERS . I WANTED TO MAKE THE CLARIFICATION. I TOTALLY AGREE. IT HAS SCARED SOME PEOPLE AND I THINK THAT'S WHY THIS IS AN IMPORTANT MEETING. 
          >> THE CLARIFICATION WOULD HELP UP FRONT. 
          >> I'LL MAKE SURE TO PUT THAT IN THE NEXT ONE. 
          >> I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO CLARIFY WHEN TALKING ABOUT THESE PERCENTAGE INCREASES EVERY CITIZEN I'VE TALKED TO WHO HAS SEEN THE POST ABOUT PERCENTAGE INCREASE ALWAYS UNDERSTAND DID THAT IS THE ENTIRE BILL THAT'S GOING TO GO UP. THAT'S THE WAY THEY TAKE IT AND UNDERSTAND. I THINK WE SHOULD ALSO BE CLEAR WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INCREASES IN PERCENTAGES, THAT'S A PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF YOUR CITY PORTION OF TAXES AND YOUR CITY PORTION OF TAXES, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT PERCENTAGE, BUT I THINK IT IS -- A FOURTH OF YOUR TAXES ARE CITY TAXES? I THINK THAT'S HIGH. I THINK IT'S LOWER THAN THAT. IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT A 10% INCREASE OF 25% THAT IS FAR LESS THAN THE PERCEPTION OUT THERE. LET'S BE TOTALLY CLEAR WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THESE ARE ESPECIALLY PERCENTAGES. THAT'S WHY I PREFER TO TALK DOLLAR AMOUNTS BECAUSE PEOPLE PAY THEIR BILLS BY USING DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND NOT PERCENTAGES OF THEIR 
          TOTAL INCOME. >> COUNCILMEMBER CAME IN AT 9:34. WE OFFICIALLY HAVE A QUORUM. WE HAVE A FIFTH ONE ON 
          THE LINE. >> WE HAVE FOREIGN PERSON AND 
          ONE ONLINE. >> FOR TO GET STARTED OFFICIALLY. WE HAD TO HAVE FOUR PRESENT. OKAY. ONE OTHER 
          COMMENT. >> MY NAME IS COREY . LIKE THE MAYOR WAS SAYING, THE LIST IS LONG. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADDRESS A COUPLE THINGS AS A PARKS ADVISORY BOARD MEMBER. ON THE CIP THERE ARE TWO PROJECTS THAT ARE THERE TO RENOVATE . I BELIEVE THEY ARE STILL ON THERE. WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ON THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD IS INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL WE HAVE THE MONEY TO RENOVATE THOSE PARKS, WHICH IS SEVERAL MILLION , THAT WE GO AHEAD AND FUND PLAYGROUNDS IN BOTH OF THOSE PARKS SO AT LEAST WE ARE MOVING FORWARD RATHER THAN WAITING MAYBE 10 YEARS TO GET THOSE RENOVATED AGAIN. THE OTHER I WOULD LIKE TO ADVOCATE FOR HIS CONCERNING TRAILS. WE HAVE A GREAT TRAILS MASTER PLAN, BUT A LOT OF THAT MASTER PLAN AND SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ON THE CIP INVOLVED THE VERY NICE, EXPENSIVE CONCRETE PATHS WITH LIGHTS AND TREES. WHAT I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR IS INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL WE HAVE THE 
          [00:35:02]
MILLIONS TO DO THAT PROJECT FOR THOSE PROJECTS BECAUSE THEY ARE KIND OF SEPARATE THAT WE GO AHEAD AND DO THE WORK WE NEED , THE LEGAL WORK TO ACQUIRE THE LAND AND THE RIGHTS TO COMPLETE SOME TRAILS PARTICULARLY ON LONG BRUSHY CREEK THERE IS A COURT OR WE CAN ACTUALLY BEGIN WORKING ON AND WE UTILIZE THE LABOR OF VOLUNTEERS WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TO GO AHEAD AND CLEAR SOME NATURE TRAILS SO PEOPLE CAN BEGIN TO USE THAT 
          POTENTIAL AMENITY. THANK YOU. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. WE 
          HAVEN'T DONE MUCH. >> I'VE BEEN IN THE BACK LISTENING FOR A LITTLE WHILE. I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT 
          IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. >> ALL RIGHT. I PROPOSE WE LOOK FIRST AND HOW MUCH WE ARE ABLE . HOW MUCH WE CAN STOMACH RAISING TAXES THROUGH THE INS . FOR THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR YEARS KNOWING THE LAST YEAR , LAST HAD A 95% INCREASE IN TAXES. YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THE CIP LIST. I DON'T THINK IT DOES ANY GOOD TO PUT IT ON 2028. THE REASON I LIKE PERCENTAGES AND NOT DOLLAR AMOUNTS IS IT GETS DOWN TO THE TALK FOR THE PRICE OF A CUP OF COFFEE A MONTH YOU CAN HAVE THIS , YOU GET EVERYBODY TO APPROVE IT AND THEY WAKE UP WITH MY HOUSE PAYMENT WENT UP 100 BUCKS WHY DID THAT HAPPEN? IT WAS ONLY $20 A MONTH. WHEN WE DO THAT IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES THAT IN THE COUNTY DONE IT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A COST-OF-LIVING ISSUE BECAUSE EVERYONE BOILS DOWN TO 20% OF THE BILL AND GET YOU FOR THE 20 BUCKS AND AT THE END OF THE MONTH FOR THE YEAR WHEN TAXES COME OUT IN THEIR BILLS CHANGE WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT PEOPLE THINK THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS UNDER US, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CITY ROADS. WE TAKE A LOT OF LAME FOR THE POOR ROADS WE DON'T CONTROL. WE TAKE BLAME FOR TAX BILLS WE ONLY REPRESENT A FIFTH OF WHAT I THINK SOMEONE AT SOME POINT HAS TO TAKE A STAND. WE NEED TO LIMIT OUR INCREASES AND HOPEFULLY OTHERS WORK IN TOGETHER THE PEOPLE'S 
          TAX BILLS ARE LIMITED. >> HOW-TOS USING A PERCENTAGE RATHER THAN DOLLAR AMOUNT FIX WHAT YOU SAID? 
          >> I DON'T WANT MY HOUSE GOING UP 15% A YEAR. 
          >> YOU'RE TELLING PEOPLE THE TAXES WILL GO UP 9% AND THEY ARE ASSUMING THAT'S MY HOUSE BILL. IT'S NOT ACCURATE. 
          >> ARE PUT IN THEIR CITY TAXES. IF WE GO UP 10% OF THE COUNTY GOES UP 10 THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GOES UP 10 AND ESD GOES UP 10 -- 
          >> NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THAT IS. YOU'RE SAYING 10%. 
          >> LAST YEAR THE COUNTY WENT UP 15 PERCENT . 
          >> GIVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT SO THEY KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO GO UP. 
          WHATEVER. I DON'T WANT TO WASTE TIME ARGUING OVER SEMANTICS. WE 
          NEED TO FOCUS ON CIP. >> A $15 INCREASE ON THE HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL. WHY DO YOU CARE WITH THE PERCENTAGES? IF I TELL PEOPLE IT'S A INCREASE HE'S LYING IT'S ONLY $15 IT'S THE 
          SAME NUMBER. >> NOT WHEN THEY ASSUME THE 15% -- YES YOU CAN. THAT'S WHY USE PERCENTAGES TO BE DECEPTIVE. 
          >> I THINK IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND. WE GO WITH DOLLAR AMOUNT SO AT THE END WHEN THE TAX BILL DOUBLES PEOPLE ARE PAYING $2000 , YOU GET TO SATES ONLY $20 A MONTH AND THAT WAS ONLY 10 AND THIS IS ONLY FIVE AND YOU VOTED FOR THIS AND YOU APPROVED IT . 
          IT'S YOUR FAULT. WE KNOW THE WAY THIS PLAN IS PEOPLE'S TAXES, CITY TAXES DOUBLE IN FIVE YEARS. WHY YOU DON'T WANT TO ADMIT THAT AS A PERCENTAGE I DON'T CARE. CAN YOU GUYS COME UP WITH IF THE CITY TAXES WERE 10% WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT IS 
          PER MONTH ? >> IT'S IN THERE. 
          >> THE SPREADSHEET IS IN OUR FILES . 
          [00:40:02]
          >> $9.85. IT'S RIGHT THERE. >> ARE YOU OKAY DOING THAT EACH 
          YEAR FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? >> IT DEPENDS WHAT PROJECTS I 
          GET. >> EXCUSE ME, I THINK YOU BOTH HAVE A POINT. I THINK THE PERCENTAGE IS IMPORTANT BUT I THINK THE DOLLAR THE PERCENTAGE REPRESENTS IS IMPORTANT SO I THINK IT'S VALID. WE NEED TO SAVE IT'LL BE THIS DOLLAR WHAT PERCENTAGE WILL THAT BE? IF THAT DOLLARS 15% MAYBE WE AREN'T COMFORTABLE. MAYBE WE NEED TO GO WITH NINE AND SEE WHAT THAT IS. 
          I THINK YOU'RE BOTH CORRECT. IF WE CAN MOVE FORWARD THAT WOULD 
          BE EXCELLENT. >> BOTH THOSE NUMBERS ARE PROVIDED IN THE TABLE. PERCENTAGE AND MONTHLY IMPACT. 
          >> SORRY, WHERE EXACTLY IS THIS? THIS ONE? OKAY. 
          >> THE ONE PRINTED DOESN'T HAVE THE EXTRA INFORMATION AT THE 
          TOP. >> I HAVE THE SPREADSHEETS. I JUST NEED SOME DIRECTION ON WHICH TO PULL UP. 
          >> I THINK THE ONE -- 2024 087 CIP UPDATE . NEXT YEAR WHAT DOLLAR AMOUNT DO WE OKAY? WHAT ARE WE OKAY RAISING? 
          >> FUNDAMENTALLY I DISAGREE. TO ME THAT'S DOING IT BACKWARDS. 
          TO ME I DON'T THINK YOU SAY WHAT COLOR AMOUNT ARE WE ABLE TO STOMACH WHAT PROJECTS CAN WE PUT IN? WHAT I FOUND FOR MYSELF AND A LOT OF PEOPLE AND WHEN WE DO THE CITIZEN BUDGET WORKSHOPS PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO EITHER PAY A LITTLE MORE OR PAY A LITTLE LESS DEPENDING ON WHAT THE PROJECT IS. I SAW SEVERAL PEOPLE WHERE THE FIRST AROUND WE WENT THROUGH THEY PRIORITIZE WHAT OBJECTS THEY WANTED AND THE SECOND ROUND WHEN IT CAME TO HOW MUCH EACH WERE GOING TO COST PEOPLE STARTED REPRIORITIZING BECAUSE THEY SAY I WOULD RATHER HAVE THIS THAN THIS. I'M WILLING TO PAY MORE IF I CAN GET THIS THING AND I'M GOING TO FORGO THESE OTHER FIVE THING. I THINK MAKING A DECISION IN A VACUUM AND SAYING HOW MUCH AM I WILLING TO PAY IN TAXES WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT I GET, OF COURSE THE NUMBER WILL BE ZERO. YOU CAN'T SHOW ME WHAT I GET FOR MY TAXES I DON'T WANT YOU TO RAISE THEM. IF YOU CAN SHOW ME FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR $9.85 A MONTH YOU CAN GET THESE 12 PROJECTS THEN I MAKE A DECISION AND THAT'S WHY I LIKE THE WHOLE THOUGHT . I PREFER GOING TO VOTERS. I PREFER BECAUSE THEN THEY CAN TELL US. DO YOU PREFER PD , A LIBRARY, WHATEVER AND THEY TELL US WHAT THE PRIORITY IS. FOR ME IT IS HARD TO SAY THIS IS THE NUMBER I WILLING TO GO TO AND LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT CAN FIT. 
          >> WHAT CAN WE GET IN THE BUDGET? 
          >> I FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE. >> THIS IS ALL NEEDED. HOW DO YOU BUDGET THAT IF YOU DON'T FOR SAY WHAT IS THE BUDGET GOING TO BE OTHERWISE WHAT ARE WE HERE DOING? THEY ARE ALL IMPORTANT 
          AND NEED TO BE DONE. >> YOU'RE MISSING THE CONCEPT. 
          YOU DO IT LIKE WE DID IT WITH THE BUDGET WORKSHOP FOR THE CITIZENS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ATTENDED THAT. WHAT YOU DO IS PRIORITIZE PROJECTS YOU WANT AND SAY HERE IS ALL THE PROJECTS YOU WANT AND IF YOU GET EVERYONE THIS IS WHAT YOUR TAX RATE WILL BE. IN THE WORKSHOP EVERYONE SAID I'M NOT WILLING TO PAY THAT MUCH. IF IT IS NO NEW REVENUE HERE IS THE LINE. IF IT'S KEEP THE TAX RATE THE SAME HERE'S THE LINE AND ALL THE PROJECTS YOU GET TO KEEP AND IF I WANT TO RAISE TAXES HERE'S THE LINE. YOU PRIORITIZE WHAT YOU FEEL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THEN YOU SEE WHAT THE BUDGET WILL BE AND SEE WHAT THE TAX RATE WOULD BE AND SEE IF YOU STOMACH IT. THAT'S WAY TOO HIGH EVEN THOUGH I WOULD LIKE THESE PROJECTS THAT IS WAY TOO HIGH FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO STOMACH INCREASING THE TAXES SO WHAT PROJECT DO I START TAKING OUT? I THINK IT'S A MORE ITERATIVE PROCESS WHERE YOU GO THROUGH, PRIORITIZE THE ONES MOST IMPORTANT AND FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH THAT COST AND BACK IT OUT. 
          >> YOU WANT TO PRIORITIZE ALL 200 AND MOVE AS MANY TO NEXT 
          [00:45:02]
          YEAR AS YOU CAN ? >> I THINK WE NEED TO SAY WHAT 
          GOES IN 2526 2728 . >> LET'S GO NEXT YEAR. WHAT WOULD YOU ADD OR SUBTRACT? IF YOU HAD ONE VOTE. 
          >> I WOULD PULL IN PUBLIC WORKS. YOU'VE GOT 2026 AS 4.3 MILLION IN 2027 , I WOULD PULL THE 12 MILLION INTO 26. I WOULD TRY TO 
          GET THAT DONE SOONER. >> AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. YOU ADD 12 MILLION. ANY OTHER CHANGES YOU WOULD MAKE? 
          >> I WOULD LIKE THE POLICE STATION. 
          >> I WANT TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING AND TRY TO DO YOUR 
          PROCESS. >> THIS ISN'T ABOUT ME. THIS IS A DISCUSSION. IT'S NOT JUST ME GOING THROUGH AND SAYING WHAT I 
          WANT. >> IF YOU JUST ADDED $35 MILLION TO THE PROJECTS TO A TIME THAT'S ALREADY 20% JUST KNOW YOU'RE IN THE 30% RANGE. WE THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT WE THINK IT'S A GOOD MOVE. WHAT DO YOU THINK? I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. WE ADD PROJECTS AND ONE BY ONE WE WILL BE HERE UNTIL TOMORROW MORNING. WHAT OTHER CHANGES WOULD YOU MAKE FOR 2026? 
          >> TO OFFER A MORE BROAD VIEW ON THINGS INSTEAD OF REALLY TRYING TO GET INTO THE NITTY-GRITTY OF DOLLAR AMOUNTS IN FISCAL YEAR 20 FOR OUR TAX RATE WAS $.42, THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IS 39%. IT LOWERED BY TWO CENTS YEAR-OVER-YEAR. WHAT WE AS A COUNCIL CANNOT CONTROL IS THE VALUATION THAT CONTINUE TO INCREASE BY UP TO 10%. YOUR RATE IS GOING DOWN, IT EVEN AT THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE THIS YEAR YOUR TAX BILL STILL WENT UP BY ABOUT 3%. YES. THE CITY TAXES WENT UP . THE TAX SYSTEM IS COMPLICATED . WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT RIGHT NOW 2.26 CENTS. INS RATE IS $.13. WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN GET TO. OUR MNO WILL BE STRENGTH . WHAT WE CAN GET TO ON THE INS RATE I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THAT INS RATE BECAUSE THESE ARE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. THESE ARE NOT PROJECTS THAT CAN JUST BE PAID FOR IN ONE YEAR. THESE ARE PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO SPAN OVER TWO, THREE, FIVE YEARS. WE HAVE TO BE STRATEGIC AND WHAT WE ARE DOING AND WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN DOING FOR YEARS, THIS IS OUR THIRD YEAR OF OFFICIALLY DOING THIS, WE HAVE BEEN GOING YEAR BY YEAR AND FLYING BY THE SEAT OF OUR PANTS. WE HAVE GOT TO STOP THAT. WE HAVE GOT TO PLAN AND PLANNING INVOLVES DESIGN AND TIME FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION AND TIME FOR CONSTRUCTION . IT MAY SEEM SCARY UP FRONT, BUT THE $20 MILLION FOR PUBLIC WORKS WILL NOT BE ACHIEVED IN 2026 . JUST TRYING TO TAKE IT BACK UP TO HIGH-LEVEL WE WILL HAVE TO GET INTO THE NITTY-GRITTY. JUST TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT FORCES AND DIFFERENT ASPECTS AT PLAY. I WOULD LIKE THAT TO HOPEFULLY CALM THE CONVERSATION AND NOT NECESSARILY PUT IT ON ONE COUNCILMEMBER TO MAKE DECISIONS ON UNCERTAIN PROJECTS. I THINK 
          [00:50:02]
WE ARE AT A GOOD SPOT RIGHT HERE. WE ARE FIGURING IT OUT. WE ARE MAKING SOME GOOD DECISIONS. WE'VE GOT TO FOCUS ON THE INS RATE WHEN MNO IS GOING TO GO DOWN BECAUSE VALUATION IS GOING TO GO UP. THAT IS HOW THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT WORKS. I KNOW THERE MAY BE DISAGREEMENT WITH THAT BUT I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT AS CLEAR AS I CAN WITHOUT CONFUSING IT . I'M TRYING TO KEEP IT CLEAR, HIGH LEVEL. IT IS A CONFUSING TOPIC. 
          >> I THINK YOU ARE CONFUSED. WE HAD THIS ISSUE LAST YEAR. WE CONTROL THE TAX BILL. WE CONTROL THE TAX RATE TO THE EFFECT THAT RAISING PEOPLE'S TAXES. THE APPRAISALS COME OUT. ANYTIME I HEAR ANYBODY SAY ANYTHING OR INSINUATE WE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH MAKING TAX RATE GO DOWN PEOPLE'S VALUATIONS WENT UP. 
          THE NO NEW REVENUE RIGHT , WE HAVE SLIGHT INCREASES BASED ON VERY SMALL THINGS. THE WHOLE POPULATION DID NOT GIVE 
          INCREASE. THEY JUST DID IT. >> YEAH. 
          >> THE WHOLE POINT IS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE VALUATION INCREASES AND THAT'S WHY THE RATE GOES DOWN. MANY PEOPLE SAY THIS OUT THERE. WE VOTED TO REDUCE YOUR TAX RATE. YOUR BILL WENT UP BECAUSE OF VALUATION. WE SENT THE TAX RATES IN AUGUST. 
          IT'S TWO NUMBERS IN THE MATH EQUATION. THE REASON PEOPLE'S TAXES GO UP IS BECAUSE THE PEOPLE VOTING APPEAR MADE THE TAXES GO UP WHILE HE MAY TAXES GO DOWN. THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT HAS ZERO TO DO WITH IT. IF YOUR HOME DOUBLES IN VALUE AND WE DO NO NEW REVENUE RIGHT YOUR RATE AUTOMATICALLY GOES DOWN HALF BECAUSE IT'S TO GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY. THAT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE TO CLEAR UP. THE VALUE FOR YOUR HOUSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR TAX BILL. IT'S THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT AS AN EXCUSE TO RAISE YOUR TAXES MORE AND BLAME IT ON SOMEONE THEY DON'T CONTROL. WE SET THE TAX RATE. 
          >> WE SET THE TAX RATE. I'M LOOKING AT MY TAXES FROM THIS LAST YEAR. THE TAX RATE WENT DOWN THREE CENTS AND MY TAX BILL WENT UP $58 FOR THE CITY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE THAT IS. IT'S BECAUSE MY HOME VALUE WENT UP. THAT'S WHY. MY TAXABLE 
          VALUE WENT UP 10%. >> THAT IS THE PART. 
          >> THE MEAT AND BREAD AND BUTTER OF OUR REVENUE STREAM ARE THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES. THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RESIDENTS HERE, THE PEOPLE THAT DRIVE OUR STREETS EVERY DAY. THERE'S RENTAL PROPERTIES THAT DON'T HAVE THE HOMESTEAD CAP, THERE ARE BUSINESSES, BUT THE BREAD AND BUTTER IS THE HOMESTEADERS. WHEN THOSE PEOPLE ARE STILL SEEING 9% AND I THINK HERE THE NUMBERS RUN BY FINANCE THEY SAID IT AT 8% , THAT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT IS A SERIOUS CHALLENGE . THAT IS AT PLAY WHEN THOSE HOMESTEADERS YEAR AFTER YEAR ARE GETTING THAT INCREASE OR ARE HITTING THE CAP AT THE 10%. YEAH. IT IS SOMETHING WE'VE GOT TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT FOR WHEN TALKING ABOUT MNO VERSUS INS AND WHAT WE 
          CAN STOMACH FOR INS. >> I KNOW YOU WANT TO PAY CASH MONEY FOR THESE PROJECTS BECAUSE THAT IS THE SMART WAY INSTEAD OF FINANCING OVER 25 YEARS BUT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS TRYING TO PUT THAT TAX BILL ON THE BACKS OF THE TAXPAYERS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR AND THIS IS ABOUT THE FUTURE, THE NEXT 20 YEARS OF HUTTO. YOU'VE GOT TO PLAN AHEAD INSTEAD OF THE CURRENT YEAR. I GET IT, LET'S HAVE A LEAN BUDGET SO WE CAN PAY CASH FOR THAT. THERE IS NO PROJECT THAT CAN BE PAID FOR BY $5 MILLION 
          [00:55:04]
CASH MONEY TODAY, WE WOULD LITERALLY NOT GET THROUGH THIS 
          LIST. >> I NEVER ADVOCATED PAYING FOR 
          CASH. >> I KNOW THAT IS SOMETHING YOU ADVOCATE BECAUSE YOU VOTE NO ON A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND BOND ISSUANCES. I RESPECT IT. I DON'T SAY HERE 
          -- >> WE ARE BORROWING WHEN HE HAD THREE YEARS. THIS PAST YEAR WE HAVE BUDGETED TO BORROW $30 MILLION TO PAY FOR PART OF THAT WITH THE INTEREST ON THE CURRENT THAT WE ALREADY BORROW. WHEN YOU GO OUT AND BORROW MONEY THAT SITS IN THE BANK AND YOU EARN INTEREST AND SAY I USE THE INTEREST TO BORROW MORE MONEY THAT IS JUST BAD BUSINESS. YEAH I'M GOING TO FIGHT AGAINST THAT. I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING WE ARE TRYING TO FIND FOUR YEARS AWAY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANY OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH 2025'S LIST, 2026. 
          >> I'M TRYING TO GET US TO FOCUS ON WHAT WE CAN STOMACH WITH INS TAX RATE. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING -- 
          >> WHATEVER THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS I CAN STOMACH THE 5% INCREASE IF WE RUN A LEAN BUDGET, WE ARE GOING TO CHARLESTON. 
          >> KOREA WASN'T. >> YOU VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE 
          BUDGET. IT WAS A 7-0 VOTE. >> CAN I GET CLARIFICATION FROM OUR FINANCIAL DIRECT. SOMETHING THE MAYOR SAID IS NOT TRUE AT ALL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE CITIZENS LISTENING AND WATCHING REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TRUTH IS. 
          >> WHILE SHE MAKES HER WAY UP I WILL CERTAINLY SAY IT'S NOT A 
          PONZI SCHEME. >> DO YOU BORROW MONEY ON YOUR CREDIT CARD AND USE THAT TO FUND THE PAYMENTS OF MORE DEBT YOUR BORROWING? DO YOU DO THAT? IT WOULD BE BEST -- 
          >> WHAT WE DID DO AND I CLARIFIED THIS DURING THE BUDGET DISCUSSION AND I WILL DO IT AGAIN. MAYBE I DIDN'T DO A GOOD JOB EXPLAINING, WHENEVER WE ARE AND TO DISSIPATING WE HAVEN'T ISSUED THAT YET WE HAVE TO BUILD THAT INTO THE INS RATE DURING THE BUDGET SEASON TIME. RATHER THAN BUILD IN THE INS RATE FOR THE CITIZENS SO THEY WOULD START PAYING IMMEDIATELY AFTER WE ADOPT THE TAX RATE FOR DEBT WE HAVEN'T ISSUED YET AND WASN'T SURE WHEN WE WOULD ISSUE WE OUGHT TO NOT BORROW MONEY BEFORE WE ARE READY FOR IT AND NOT BE HAVING CITIZENS PAY FOR DEBT WE HAVEN'T ISSUED YET. I CALCULATED, IF WE ISSUED DEBT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR AND WHATEVER TIME COULD WE MAKE THE FIRST PAYMENT WITH THE INTEREST INCOME RATHER THAN COLLECTING TAX DOLLARS FROM CITIZENS AHEAD OF TIME BUT WE WEREN'T SURE ON TIMING AND DOLLAR AMOUNT. THAT IS WHAT WE BUILT THE BUDGET OFF OF, FOR THIS FIRST YEAR YOU USUALLY ONLY HAVE TWO BOND PAYMENTS POSSIBLE YEAR ANYWAY , SO WE MAY NOT HAVE EVEN HAD A BOND PAYMENT THE FIRST YEAR. IF I HAD COME BACK AND SAID WE NEED TO RAISE THE INS RATE TO PAY FOR THIS DEBT ISSUANCE WE MAY NOT DO OR HAVE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT FOR WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT OVERTAXING THE CITIZENS TO SOON. I SAID IF WE DO THAT AND IF WE DO HAVE TO MAKE A PAYMENT WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY IN THE INTEREST FROM THE MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT FROM THE OTHER DEBT PROCEEDS TO MAKE THAT FIRST PAYMENT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO 
          INCLUDED IN THE TAX RATE. >> THE NEXT YEAR THEN YOU'RE LIKE YOU GUYS MADE THE DECISION LAST YEAR SO WE HAVE TO NOW RAISE TAXES THIS YEAR TO PAY FOR DEBT WE ISSUED LAST YEAR AND THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE GET CAUGHT OFF GUARD. THEY ARE LIKE WE DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. WE THOUGHT WE WERE TAKING CARE OF THAT. WE USED OTHER MONEY. IT'S LIKE WE HAD AN OLD CITY MANAGER WITH THE DEBT ISSUANCE. WE DO IT NOW WHERE WE SAY IT IS -- HE WOULD MANIPULATE THE PAYMENTS OUT THE SCHEDULE FOR WHERE THE NEXT FOUR YEARS THERE WAS NO TAX INCREASE. 
          FOUR YEARS LATER WE HAVE A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN OUR PROJECTED TAX PAYMENTS OR DEBT SERVICE BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE ALL BUILT . EVERYTHING IS SMOOTH AND THE NEXT PERSON HAS TO DEAL WITH 
          [01:00:01]
IT. YOU USE INTEREST TODAY TO MAKE A PAYMENT ON DEBT THAT YOU'RE NOT SURE. WE ARE NOT SURE IF WE WILL ISSUE IT , NOT SURE IF WE WILL NEED IT. YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO. YOU'LL PAY FOR IT WITH INTEREST EARNED ON OTHER DEBT AND SAY NEXT YEAR IS WHEN WE ASSESS FOR IT. YOU'VE ALREADY GOT A TAX INCREASE BUILT IN BEFORE YOU STARTED PLANNING THAT BUDGET ALL BECAUSE OF A PREVIOUS MOVE. IF YOUR GOING TO BORROW THAT YOU SHOULD KNOW WHEN YOU DO IT, WHAT YOU DO IT FOR AND HOW YOU'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT AND PLAN THAT WAY. OTHERWISE THAT'S A PONZI SCHEME. YOU SAYING I'M NOT GIVING THE FAX TODAY. I'M GOING TO MANIPULATE THINGS TO WORDS BETTER FOR YOU TODAY AND WE WILL FIGURE IT OUT TOMORROW AND THE NEXT DAY AND EVENTUALLY YOU GET TO WHERE YOU CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT ANYMORE AND THERE 
          IS A MASSIVE INCREASE. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR STANCE. I DISAGREE. I DISAGREE PRETTY VEHEMENTLY BECAUSE THE DIRECTION WE'VE BEEN GIVEN AS STAFF IS FAIRLY CLEAR. WE NEED TO DO THESE PROJECTS AND WE NEED THEM DESIGNED BUT WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN THE DESIGNS WILL COMPLETE AND WE CAN'T, GENERALLY , ADVOCATE TO ISSUE DEBT FOR PROJECTS WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY WILL BE COMPLETED BECAUSE OF THE POSITION AND DIRECTION THE COUNCIL HAS ALSO TAKEN THEY WILL ISSUE DEBT AHEAD OF TIME WHICH IS THE WAY IT USUALLY HAPPENS. WE ISSUE THE DEBT, WE DO THE DESIGN AND COME BACK AND BUILD THE PROJECT. THE DIRECTION HAS BEEN LET'S NOT DO THAT. I THINK IT IS MUCH MORE LEAN TO DESIGN YOUR PROJECTS AND WHENEVER THEY ARE READY TO GO YOU ISSUE THE DEBT FOR THEM TO BE BUILT. WE HAVE A FEW RIGHT NOW WHERE WE HAVE THE DEBT WE ARE HOLDING ONTO BECAUSE WE DID AT THE OLD WAY AND THE CRITIQUE AND CRITICISM WAS WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT ANYMORE. WE RESPONDED TO THAT AND THE PROJECTS THAT COUNCIL APPROVED TO THIS YEAR ARE IN SOME PHASE OF DESIGN. WE ANTICIPATE THEY WILL BE COMPLETED SOMETIME DURING THE FISCAL YEAR BUT WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN AND THEY WILL BE READY TO GO OUT TO BID AT WHICH POINT WE WILL COME TO COUNSEL TO ISSUE THE DEBT. IF I HAD ASSUMED WE WERE JUST GOING TO ISSUE THAT DEBT FOR THE FULL YEAR AND PUT THAT INTO THE TAX RATE WE WOULD BE TAXING PEOPLE MORE THAN WE NEED TO NOW WHICH I THOUGHT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE LAMENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF NOT DOING IT THAT WAY. IT'S NOT THAT WE ARE MANIPULATING NUMBERS, IT'S THAT WE ARE BEING LEAN IN ORDER THAT WE ARE NOT COLLECTING TAXES FROM THE TAXPAYERS UNTIL WE ACTUALLY ISSUE THE DEBT AND WE ARE NOT DOING THAT UNTIL WE ARE READY TO GO TO CONSTRUCTION. IF I'M UNCLEAR THAT'S NOT WHAT COUNSEL WANTS THAT'S FINE. I'LL SAY I MISUNDERSTOOD BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE LEANEST WAY THAT WE COULD DO WHAT COUNSEL IS ASKING US TO DO. I'M HAPPY TO SHIFT OR CHANGE IT. THAT'S WHERE THE INTEREST ASPECT CAME IN. WE HAVE MONEY THAT IS BUILDING INTEREST AND CAN ONLY USE IT FOR CERTAIN THINGS AND ONE IS MAKING A DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT. IT MADE SENSE TO USE $1 MILLION OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER WAS TO SAY IF WE ISSUED THE DEBT AND WE HAD TO MAKE A PAYMENT FOR THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR WE HAD A WAY OF DOING THAT WITHOUT RAISING TAXES 
          TOO EARLY. >> HE JUST DID. THAT'S WHAT HE JUST SAID. YEAH. ARE WE DOING A PONZI SCHEME? HOLD ON. YES OR NO? OKAY. WERE WE INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING THE PUBLIC BY TRYING TO TRICK THEM INTO THINKING WE WEREN'T GOING TO RAISE ANY TAXES BUT DO IT LATER AND WE ALL DID IT AS A WAY TO TRICK THE CITIZENS? OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD . I HEARD BOTH OF THOSE COME TO THE MAYOR SO IT SOUNDS A LIKE BOTH ARE NO. WHAT I HEARD FROM THE CITY MANAGER IS THE REASON WE ARE USING THE INTEREST DEBT TO PAY THAT IS SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO RAISE THE INS RATE AND TAX THE CITIZENS TOO EARLY. OKAY. 
          >> WE DID INCLUDE TO BORROW MONEY THIS YEAR. WE ARE WAITING TO BORROW UNTIL WE GET A CLEAR ESTIMATE. WE ARE GETTING 
          [01:05:01]
ENGINEERING DONE, THE DESIGN PORTION BEFORE WE ACTUALLY BORROW THE MONEY SO WE KNOW A CLOSER NUMBER OF WHAT WE NEED 
          VERSUS WHAT WE ORIGINALLY THINK. >> WE HAVE 14 SOMETHING MILLION BUDGETED ON A PROJECT WE JUST KICKED OFF A MONTH OR SO AGO. 
          THIS IS A CITY COUNCIL THING. IT'S NOT HAPPENING THIS FISCAL YEAR SO WHY ARE WE BUDGETING MONEY? WHY ARE WE PLANNING TO BORROW MONEY FOR A PROJECT AND NO ONE'S TIMEFRAME WILL WE BE ABLE TO DO THAT. THAT'S WHY I TELL YOU WE ARE MISLEADING THE PUBLIC. DON'T PUT STUFF IN THE BUDGET YOU KNOW WILL NOT HAPPEN. 
          I'M LOOKING AT RIGHT HERE. 7.44 MILLION BUDGET FROM INNOVATION . 
          WE HAVE ANOTHER 7.9 MILLION . WE ARE NOT DOING THAT. THAT IS PART OF THE MONEY WE ARE LOOKING AT MAYBE BORROWING AND WE KICKED OFF ENGINEERING. THAT'S WHY I SAY THE CITY COUNCIL OUGHT TO BE A SURREALISTIC TIMEFRAME WE ARE DOING STUFF BECAUSE WE ARE DOING ALL THIS. THE SIGNAL HAS BEEN THE BUDGET FOR TWO YEARS NOW. 
          WHY ARE WE BUDGETING PROJECTS? WHY ARE THEY BUDGETING PROJECTS ? IT'S REALLY POOR BUDGETING TO THROW MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PROJECTS IN THAT HAVE NO CONCEIVABLE WAY OF GETTING DONE. 
          >> THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE. I LOVE HOW YOU BROUGHT THIS UP. 
          LIVER LOOP . AM I HEARING CORRECTLY THE MAYOR HAS SAID I WOULD LIKE STUFF TO CONFIRM THERE'S NO WAY WE WILL BE ABLE TO WORK ON THESE AND THEREFORE NO NEED TO TAKE DOWN THE MONEY THIS YEAR. WOULD THAT BE ACCURATE? 
          >> I BELIEVE THAT'S ACCURATE. >> I RECOMMEND WE MOVE THOSE OUT. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO KNOW COMING HERE. WHAT PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THIS COLUMN AIN'T HAPPENING THAT WE NEED TO 
          MOVE OUT? >> THIS HAS BEEN THE WHOLE ARGUMENT FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS. WE KEEP DOING THIS. I DON'T BLAME STAFF BECAUSE THEY DO AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. MATT GOES OUT AND IS BUSTING HIS BUTT ON PROJECTS AND I KEEP SAYING WE CANNOT FUND ALL THIS AND HE'S GOT SO MANY PROJECTS GOING ON WE ARE GOING THAT SOUNDS GOOD, DO IT. WE DID THAT LAST YEAR AND WE ARE OUT OF HERE BY NOON. HOW MUCH AT 15.3 MILLION MINUS 
          DESIGN MONEY ? >> FOR THE RECORD, CITY ENGINEER. I DON'T HAVE DOLLARS I CAN THROW AT YOU RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT PIECING OFF THE PROJECT. WE'VE ORDERED DESIGN ON PROJECTS. THOSE CONSULTANTS ARE WORKING. 
          MY DIRECTION IS WE WANT TO BE AWARDING CONSTRUCTION BY THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. THAT'S WHAT I TOLD THEM. THAT'S THE DIRECTION COUNSEL HAD GIVEN ME. IF THE QUESTION IS ACTUALLY ARE WE GOING TO SPEND THE ENTIRE BUDGET IN FY 25 I CAN TELL YOU WE WILL NOT. I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MUCH. MY DIRECTION TO CONSULTANTS IS GATED IN DESIGN AND GET INTO CONSTRUCTION. MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE HAVE TO ISSUE THAT DEBT BEFORE WE CAN AWARD THE CONTRACTOR. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS. 
          >> WE DO KNOW HOW MUCH WE WILL SPEND THIS FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE WE AWARDED THE CONTRACT. PENDING THE CHANGE ORDER WE KNOW WHAT WE WILL SPEND. YOU'RE HOPING BY THE END OF THE COUNTY YEAR . 
          RIGHT. >> BEFORE OCTOBER WE SHOULD BE BIDDING THIS OUT FOR CONSTRUCTION. 
          >> THE FIRST BILLS WILL COME IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER. 
          >> WE CAN'T AWARD THE CONTRACT UNTIL WE ISSUED THE DEBT. 
          >> IT COULD BE 1 MILLION IN DESIGN AND 1 MILLION THIS YEAR IN CONSTRUCTION. JUST THROWING THAT OUT. 
          >> WE WOULD HAVE TO ISSUE THE 15 MILLION IN DEBT. 
          >> WHICH WOULD IMPACT 26. >> WE SAID WE BORROWED MONEY FOR FUTURE PROJECTS. WE AREN'T DOING THAT ANYMORE. FROM THE 
          [01:10:01]
CASH MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT ARE WE NOT ABLE TO USE A PROJECT THAT IS THREE YEARS AWAY WE HAVE THE MONEY IN THE BANK FOR AND USE THAT MONEY TODAY ? WHEN THE PROJECT COMES OUT TO BID WE SELL THEN. THE OTHER ARGUMENT IS IT CAN'T ALL GO TO RHODES. SOME IS THIS HERE. WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ALREADY EARMARKED FOR PROJECTS THAT AREN'T HAPPENING. A PORTION OF THAT IT SEEMS TO ME LOOKING AT THE LIST IS FOR PROJECTS THAT IF WE MOVE A PROJECT THAT IS FUNDED $4 MILLION THAT'S ALREADY FUNDED. WE MOVE THAT, ARE WE NOT ABLE TO USE THAT FOR PROJECTS WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS YEAR OR NEXT YEAR? 
          >> I WOULD SAY THERE ARE INSTANCES THAT COULD BE TRUE. 
          YOUR LIMITATIONS WOULD BE IF IT WAS BOND DOLLARS THAT WERE FOR SPECIFIC USAGE. THAT WOULD NOT BE A POOL OF MONEY EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT RIGHT AWAY. 
          >> HYPOTHETICALLY IF WE HAD THAT MONEY SITTING IN A BANK AND SAID THIS HAS BEEN A NIGHTMARE AND IT'S BEEN DELAYED WE COULD THEN CONCEIVABLY USE THAT 10 MILLION TO A PROJECT TODAY . 
          >> SO LONG AS THE CO THAT WAS ISSUED ASSUMING IT WAS A DEBT. 
          AS LONG AS IT WAS ISSUED FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND OTHER RELATED PROJECTS Y'ALL DO HAVE FLEXIBILITY AND ABILITY TO SAY THE TIMING OF THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT AND WE HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY THAT IS ALSO ELIGIBLE AND WE WANT TO SWAP THOSE. I DON'T THINK THE LIST IS VERY BIG. I THINK IT EXISTS . ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME UP EARLIER WAS LIVE OAK . THAT'S ONE THAT WE HAVE MONEY FOR BUT HAD ISSUED THE DEBT FOR AHEAD OF TIME AND WHENEVER IT FINISHES DESIGN IS MEANT TO TO CONSTRUCTION AND WE HAVE THE MONEY SITTING FOR WHAT WE ESTIMATED THE PROJECT WOULD COST WHEN WE DID THAT. THAT IS ONE. I SUSPECT THERE AREN'T AS MANY BECAUSE THE BULK OF THAT 400 MILLION IS UTILITY FUND AND THE BOOK THAT HIS WASTEWATER TREAT AND THAT WAS 185+. 
          >> MNO IS IN THAT. THE 450 MILLION IS IT JUST THAT. 
          >> THAT'S THE CASH STATEMENT. >> 
          >> THAT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE TOTAL CASH THAT INCLUDES 
          ACCOUNTS. >> YES. 
          >> IT DOESN'T INCLUDE MONEY COMING IN I ASSUME FOR WHATEVER. 
          RIGHT. I WAS SAYING IT DOESN'T INCLUDE WE MAY BE COMING IN . 
          >> INCLUDES ALL THE MONEY RECEIVED IN TAXES FROM CITIZENS. 
          TO FUND SALARIES AND INSURANCE AND BENEFITS AND ALL THAT. 
          >> THE SPREADSHEET YOU ARE WORKING FROM, WHENEVER ITEMS ARE PARTIALLY FUNDED OR ARE FUNDED THOSE HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED SO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHERE YOU CAN FOCUS IN ON. I SUPPOSE WE COULD PRODUCE ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL LIST OF PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY FUNDED OR PARTIALLY THAT ARE NOT UNDER CONSTRUCTION YET THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR EVERY APPROPRIATION. I SUPPOSE WE COULD DO A SEPARATE LIST OF THAT. 
          >> I THINK IT IS SMALL ENOUGH. FOR INSTANCE, LIVE OAK. I WOULD ARGUE LIVE OAK WILL NOT HIT CONSTRUCTION THIS FISCAL YEAR. 
          I'M GOING TO GO OUT ON A LIMB, HAVE SIX MONTHS LEFT IN THE YEAR. I DON'T SEE A PATH WHERE ALL OF THAT YOU BURN THROUGH 9.9 MILLION . IF WE DECIDE TO DO IT NEXT. I DON'T SEE IT STARTING 
          BEFORE. >> HOLD ON. I THOUGHT THE WHOLE REASON DELAYING MOVING THE GAS LANES IS BECAUSE THEY LOOK AT US AND WE KEEP DELAYING THE PROJECT AND THEY ARE LIKELY WON'T DO IT UNTIL WE SEE YOU'RE COMMITTED TO DO THIS ROAD, IS THAT NOT 
          ACCURATE? >> KIND OF. ORIGINALLY ATLAS 
          [01:15:07]
WASN'T WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T SURE IF THEY EVEN NEEDED TO DO THE RELOCATION. WE RESTARTED DESIGN OF THE PROJECT IN MID TO LATE 2023. WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH THE UTILITY COMPANIES . SPECTRUM, AT&T, ALL THIS COMPANIES. THAT'S BEEN THE MAJORITY OF TIME WE SPENT TO DATE JUST TRYING TO GET DRY UTILITY TO AGREE . I THINK WE HAVE A PATH FORWARD NOW. I THINK THE OTHERS WILL FALL IN LINE VERY QUICKLY. AT THE SAME TIME, AT MISS CHANGED THEIR DESIGN. 
          THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE FROM ONE LOCATION TO ANOTHER. THEY SAID WITH THEIR DEMAND IN THE REGION THEY NEED TO CHANGE IT TO A MEDIUM PRESSURE LINE WHICH MEANS NOW IT IS A COMPLETE REBUILD. WE ARE NOW COORDINATING THAT WITH THEM ON TOP OF THE OTHER DRY UTILITY COMPANIES BECAUSE THAT CHANGES THE DESIGN 
          ASPECT OF WHERE THE LINE GOES. >> SO IT'S PROBABLY NOT HITTING 
          CONSTRUCTION. >> IF I HAD MY WAY IT WOULD BE IN CONSTRUCTION IN AUGUST BUT I HAVEN'T GOTTEN MY WAY YET. 
          EVERY TIME I THINK I HAVE A PATH FORWARD SOME OTHER UTILITY COMPANY THROWS A WRINKLE I HAVE TO FIGURE OUT. YOU ARE CORRECT. 
          THERE IS VERY HIGH PROBABILITY HE WILL NOT HIT CONSTRUCTION 
          UNTIL EARLY NEXT FISCAL YEAR. >> WHAT ABOUT 1660? 
          >> WE ARE SILVER THROUGH THAT WHEN. 
          >> THAT'S ANOTHER NINE .9 MILLION. PEOPLE CAN DRAG ME OUTSIDE AND BEAT ME. I DON'T THINK IT'S HAPPENING THAT FISCAL YEAR. THE REASON I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF WE SAY THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT YEAR IN ADDITION WE WILL DO 1660 SOUTH AND 79 HOPEFULLY NEXT YEAR. DO WE NEED TO DO BOTH OF THOSE AT THE SAME TIME? I DON'T KNOW HOW PEOPLE IN THE SOUTHEAST WILL NAVIGATE . DO YOU DO 1660 AND 79 FIRST AND BUMP 137 AND 1660 OUT TWO YEARS TO GET PAST THAT AND WORK ON A MITIGATION THAT COULD BE A RIGHT TURN LANE EASTBOUND OR SOUTHBOUND 1660 AND A RIGHT TURN LANE SOUTH TO THE SCHOOL TO HELP ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC ? HOW DO WE MITIGATE THAT? ONE OF MY FEARS IS WE HAVE A LOT STACKED IN AN AREA AND I DON'T KNOW HOW PEOPLE NAVIGATE. THEY ARE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH CARL STERN BUT CARL STERN IS A NIGHTMARE SO THE ONLY WAY I KNOW HOW TO GET ANYWHERE IS CARL STERN WHICH IS ALREADY A MESS. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO ALL THIS AT ONCE. THAT'S WHAT I THINK YOU BEING A TRAFFIC GUY CAN TELL ME I'M CRAZY BUT IF IT'S GOING TO BE MESSY MAYBE 137 WE ARE NOT SAYING IT'S NOT NEEDED, WE ARE SAYING YOU WILL HATE US IF WE DO THIS AT ONCE. WE BUMP THAT TO 2027 OR IT HAS TO BE 2028 BECAUSE TEAL FOR IS GOING TO TAKE UNTIL THE END OF 2027. YOU CAN JUST GET EVERYTHING AND THEN GET IT TO THE PUBLIC AND THEN FUNDED A CERTAIN WAY BUT WE MAKE SURE PEOPLE CAN NAVIGATE EFFECTIVELY THROUGH THE CITY OR CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE YOU'VE ALSO GOT THE SOUTHEAST LOOP COMING IN CONNECTING TO 137 AT THE SAME TIME WHICH SHOULD GIVE PEOPLE AN ALTERNATE ROUTE OUT BUT THAT'S A NIGHTMARE BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING . WHAT IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THERE? THE TRAFFIC BACKUP. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO BE TRAPPED IN THEIR HOMES. THAT'S ANOTHER PROJECT TO ME. WHEN WILL IT HAPPEN AND WHEN IS THE BEST WAY? 
          >> I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS ON ROADS. ANYBODY I TALKED TO ON 
          [01:20:02]
FACEBOOK. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW IS IRRELEVANT SO I THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT DISCUSSION TO HAVE. I THINK YOU HAVE A POINT. I'VE COME FROM THAT 1660 SOUTH AND 79 AREA AND I'M ABOUT READY TO BULLDOZE EVERYBODY BECAUSE IT IS A MADHOUSE. THERE ARE NO RULES. I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT. WE NEED TO SHUFFLE THINGS AROUND AND I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE ROADS. I KNOW WE HAVE ADVOCATES FOR LIVE OAK HERE , BUT TO ME THERE IS SO MUCH MORE TRAFFIC ON 1660 AND THE 137 AREA. THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE. I LIKE THE IDEA OF MOVING SOME MONEY AROUND AND BEING REALISTIC ABOUT IT AND OBVIOUSLY NOT OVERLOADING THAT WITH 120 PROJECTS. I WANT TO SET YOU UP FOR FAILURE EITHER. YEAH. IN A GENERAL SENSE AND WITH YOU ON THIS SO FAR ON MOVING SOME FUNDS AROUND AND PUSHING A COUPLE THINGS OUT AND REPRIORITIZING BASED ON CURRENT GROWTH AND THEN TRAFFIC EVERYBODY IS DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE CURRENTLY. 
          >> ON 1660 , THE WAY I LOOK AT IT 1660 AND 79 IS PRIORITY. WE CAN'T LET THAT BE DELAYED. AS SOON AS THAT'S READY TO GO IT NEEDS TO GO. I THINK THE ISSUE WITH 1660 AND 137 IT WHEN IT BE GREAT TO DO THEM BOTH AT ONCE , BUT THE WAY THE PROJECT AT 79 IS GOING I THINK WE NEED TO TRY TO BE FLEXIBLE IF WE CAN WHAT IF WE THINK WE CAN GET THE 137 PROJECT ON FIRST BECAUSE THE 79 PROJECT IS STILL IN THE PLANNING PROCESS THEN GET IT DONE. I WOULDN'T WANT TO PUSH IT OUT . WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND HAVE THAT BE WAY OUT FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. IT'S TOUGH TO HANDLE AND TOUGH TO MANAGE. I COULD VERY WELL SEE WE COULD FINISH THE PROJECT AT 137 BEFORE WE BREAK AROUND 79. 
          >> I AGREE. I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE. 1660 AND 79, HOW FAR ALONG , WHEN WOULD YOU GUESS WE WOULD BE READY TO 
          START CONSTRUCTION ON THAT? >> IT WOULD BE A COMPLETE GAS BECAUSE IT INVOLVES TXDOT AND THE ISSUE WE ARE HAVE IS TXDOT FIGHTING WITH TXDOT SO AT THE POINT WE ARE RIGHT NOW, THEIR SIGNAL WHICH IS THE SIGNAL UP FRONT IS 90% DESIGN AND WE ARE WAITING ON THEIR DESIGN TEAM AND DESIGN REVIEW GROUP TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE. ONCE WE GET THE DESIGN COMPLETED WHERE EVERYONE IS ON BOARD WE GET TO RENEGOTIATE OR RESTART THE NEGOTIATION AND HOW THE PROJECT WILL PLAY OUT WHICH IS WHERE WE WERE THIS TIME LAST YEAR BEFORE TXDOT THROUGH THE WRINKLE AT US. 
          I THINK AT THAT POINT LAST YEAR WE WERE STILL SIX MONTHS AWAY FROM HAVING THE AGREEMENT. IF I HAD TO THROW A GUESS THAT YOU I WOULD SAY WE ARE STILL A GOOD EIGHT MONTHS AWAY FROM STARTING 
          CONSTRUCTION. >> EIGHT MONTHS TO START CONSTRUCTION. TO THORNTON'S POINT , YOU'VE STILL GOT RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH TXDOT. HOW MANY MONTHS UNTIL YOU CAN START 
          CONSTRUCTION? >> BEST CASE SCENARIO I SAY WE START ON THAT ONE IN FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS. 
          >> FROM 137 AND 1660 SOUTH CAN YOU DO IT IN THE MAY, JUNE, JULY 
          TIME PERIOD THAT SCHOOL IS OUT? >> IT'S NOT A THREE MONTH CONSTRUCTION. IT'S KIND OF LIKE 1660 WERE YOU SEE IS MOVING TRAFFIC CONTROL AROUND. IT'S GOING TO BE LIKE THAT. IT'S GOING TO BE A DRAWN OUT PROCESS WHERE WE TAKE DOWN A LANE OR TWO AT A TIME AND MOVE EVERYBODY OVER THERE AND THEN OPEN A NEW SECTION AND SO WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE SCHOOL. 
          EVERYONE IS AWARE OF THE ISSUES WHICH I BELIEVE WE WERE ESTIMATING AT LEAST A 12 MONTH LONG CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. 
          [01:25:06]
          >> STARTING POTENTIALLY IN FIVE MONTHS. 
          >> IF THE TIMELINES I GAVE YOU OUR BEST CASE SCENARIOS IT MEANS YOU WOULD THEN HAVE 1660 AT 79 IN CONSTRUCTION WHILE YOU HAVE 137 IN CONSTRUCTION. TO YOUR POINT I CAN'T TELL YOU IT'S 
          NOT GOING TO GET MESSY. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE SHOULD KEEP GOING FOR A FEW MONTHS AND WHEN WE GET TO A POINT ASSUMING 137 IS POTENTIALLY READY FIRST THEN WE HAVE A CALL AT THAT POINT. DO WE THINK WE ARE CLOSE ON 79 AND SHOULD PUSH THIS OR SHOULD WE 
          HURRY UP AND GET THIS ONE DONE? >> IT'S A 12 MONTH BILL. 
          >> FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW WE MIGHT FIND OUT WE ARE NOT CLOSE ON 79. 
          WE ARE READY TO PUT THIS ONE IN BID . WE WON'T HAVE MUCH OVERLAP IF WE GET THIS IN CONSTRUCTION. THE WAY IT LOOKS TODAY IT'LL BE BAD BUT THE WAY IT LOOKS FOUR OR FIVE MONTHS 
          FROM NOW WHO KNOWS? >> THAT'S TRUE. 
          >> IF WE ARE BEING HONEST, IT NEITHER ONE BECAUSE WE AREN'T STARTING CONSTRUCTION ON EITHER . THEY ARE BOTH 2026. IT DOESN'T REALLY AFFECT THE MONEY NECESSARILY 
          >> 1660 AND 79 WAS ONE BOND PROJECT. I WILL DEFER TO THE EXPERTS I DON'T THINK YOU CAN MOVE THAT TO OTHER PROJECTS. 
          >> IF YOU KNOW YOUR SPENDING 5 MILLION NEXT YEAR YOU CAN DO IT NEXT YEAR OR AN ASTERISK OR SOMETHING. HE IS SAYING THERE'S ONLY SIX MONTHS LEFT. IF YOU'RE SAYING HE THINKS IT CAN BE READY 
          -- >> SEPTEMBER. WE HAVE NINE 
          MONTHS. EIGHT MONTHS. >> WE COULD START. 
          >> THAT IS DESIGNED IN FIVE MONTHS. MONTH. 
          >> WHEN YOU CALL CONSTRUCTION STARTING? 
          >> WITH TXDOT BEING INVOLVED WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO ACTUALLY START CONSTRUCTION. I WOULD SAY DESIGN WOULD BE DONE IN FIVE MONTHS BEST CASE SCENARIO. THEN YOU GO THROUGH AT LEAST A MONTH. HERE LOOKING AT SIX OR SEVEN MONTH MAYBE . 
          >> HE'S AN OPTIMISTIC PERSON. I'M PESSIMISTIC. I LIKE TO GIVE PEOPLE WORST-CASE BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD BE GREAT TO GO TO THE PUBLIC THEN YOU COME OUT AND GO GREAT NEWS . WE KEEP PUSHING. HE SAID THIS WOULD BE READY IN FIVE MONTHS. LET'S TELL PEOPLE IT'S HAPPENING YOU HAVE 12 MONTHS TO HIT THAT WINDOW. WE ARE GOING TO BE ON YOU AT THE END OF AUGUST. I'M NOT AGAINST OPTIMISTIC PEOPLE. I'M HAPPY TO SAY I'M PESSIMISTIC. PLAN FOR THE WORST 
          AND HOPE FOR THE BEST. >> THAT'S WHY I TRY TO GIVE YOU USUALLY NOT BEST OR WORST CASE. WHAT I DO BASED ON THE DIRECTION YOU GIVE ME IS I TELL THE CONSULTANT YOU HAVE TO HIT THIS CASE BECAUSE WORST-CASE IS THEY ARE HITTING THE TIMELINE I GAVE YOU GUYS. THAT'S HOW I MANAGE OUR PROGRAM. 
          >> LET'S SAY THE TIMELINE HAPPENS AS YOU WOULD EXPECT AND SHOVELS ARE IN THE GROUND AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER. THAT MEANS WE NEED THE MONEY IN THE FISCAL YEAR TO DO THAT. IF WE ARE PLANNING ON A WORST-CASE SCENARIO AND BASED ON THAT WE MOVE THE MONEY TO NEXT FISCAL YEAR IF YOU COME AND YOU'RE READY IN AUGUST IT AIN'T HAPPENING . FOR SURE. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO WAY FOR IT TO HAPPEN IF WE PLAN ON WORST-CASE. 
          THAT'S WHY I PREFER TO PLAN ON BEST CASE. IF IT SLIPS OUT AT LEAST THE MONEY IS THERE SO WE CAN START WHENEVER IT STARTS. IF 
          [01:30:02]
YOU PLAN ON WORST-CASE AND MOVE THE MONEY ACCORDING TO THAT YOU 
          GUARANTEE IT WON'T HAPPEN. >> YOU COMMUNICATE BOTH. HERE IS BEST CASE , WE FUND FOR THIS BUT WORST-CASE IS THIS ISN'T HAPPENING BUT WE PUT THE MONEY THERE BECAUSE WE WILL TRY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PUBLIC WILL HEAR BUT THAT'S THE MESSAGE WE PUT OUT. NOT WE ARE DOING IT BECAUSE WE ARE FUNDING IT. 
          THERE'S A CHANCE IT WON'T HAPPEN BUT JUST IN CASE . 
          >> WORST-CASE SCENARIO IS NOT DONE EARLY AND WE DON'T START FOR THREE WEEKS. WE ARE TALKING FUNDED RIGHT NOW BUT WHEN YOU GET LATER YOU WILL MOVE AROUND AND TALK ABOUT UNFUNDED AND THAT WILL AFFECT TAXES AND EVERYTHING ELSE. THE WIN32 OVERPASS , 53 MILLION NEXT YEAR. I WOULD BUMP ALL OF THAT AT LEAST A YEAR BECAUSE WE JUST STARTED REDOING ALL OF THAT. I DON'T SEE US 
          BUILDING A BRIDGE NEXT YEAR. >> I WOULD AGREE. WHEN THIS WAS ALL DONE IT WAS LAST SUMMER. THIS WINTER, THIS FALL IS WHEN WE DECIDED TO PAUSE THE PROJECT AND LOOK AT A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONCEPT. I WOULD AGREE THERE'S NO WAY WE GET TO 
          CONSTRUCTION ON THAT ISSUE. >> THAT'S BETWEEN WILMER AND 
          133. >> THAT WHEN WE AWARDED DESIGN AND THAT WAS THE ONE WE WERE SAYING BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE WHOLE ARTERIAL AND WE WERE TALKING OF HOW WE CAN GET THE STATE AND COUNTY ONBOARD. WE NEED TO SHOW THEM WE ARE SERIOUS THIS TIME SO WE SAID LET'S DO WHATEVER THE LOW HANGING FRUIT IS. WE HAVE ALMOST ALL THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SO IT IS CONNECTING 132 AND 133. THAT ONE IS THE OTHER PROJECTS PUSHING IN ON THAT BY THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. 
          >> IT SAYS IT'S NOT , PROJECT STATUS IS NOT STARTED . 
          >> CORRECT. >> THAT STARTED LAST COUNCIL 
          MEETING YOU AWARDED DESIGN. >> IS THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR THE CITY RIGHT NOW TO WIDEN THE ROAD ? DOES THAT TAKE 
          PRIORITY OFF? >> TIMMY IT WOULD BE HIGH-PRIORITY BECAUSE WE COULD FOR MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS FROM THE COUNTY AND STATE AND EVERYONE ELSE. WE KEEP START STOP AND THEY DON'T TAKE IT SERIOUS AND WE AREN'T GIVING YOU ANY NOW. THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST. 
          BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN WISHY-WASHY TO ME THAT WOULD BE A SHORT-TERM GAIN FOR LONG-TERM LOSS. GAIN 2 MILLION THAT WE PUT TO ANOTHER PROJECT BUT LOSE FROM THE COUNTY AND STATE BECAUSE WE ARE DELAYING. I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS 
          ON THIS ONE. >> YOU CAN'T LIST 30 MILLION ON 
          A $19 MILLION PROJECT. >> IT'S ANOTHER 14 MILLION THAT DEALS WITH THE SAME THING. THE EXPANSION. 
          >> THERE ARE MULTIPLE PROJECTS . THAT'S CURRENTLY THE OLD-SCHOOL COUNTY ROAD . 
          HAVE $100 MILLION NEAR IN PROJECTS TO WIDEN THE ROAD. NO ONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT THE INTERSECTION AND 100 MILLION TO BRING IT TO A STATE STANDARD IN THE HOPE SOMEONE FROM THE COUNTY HAS YET TO GIVE US ANY MONEY FOR ANYTHING. THE STATE WOULD GIVE US MONEY TO HELP SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO BUILD TO A STANDARD WE 
          [01:35:02]
HOPE THE STATE WILL ONE DAY TAKE OVER AND IT'S $100 MILLION TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW THAT DOESN'T AFFECT ANYBODY. IT'S GREAT TO HAVE THE ROAD IF THE STATE WANTS TO BUILD IT. IT'S THINGS LIKE THAT WERE NEXT YEAR WE GET CRUSHED ON ROADS I DISAGREE. I THINK THERE SO MANY PRIORITIES IN THE CITY PEOPLE WANT DONE. IF WE TELL THEM WE WILL REBUILD FROM THE SOUTHSIDE CITY TO THE NORTH WE WILL PUSH ALL THE OTHER PROJECTS. 
          >> I WOULD NOT THIS AGREE. LAST SUMMER WHEN WE HAVE THE CONVERSATION I SUGGESTED IF YOU WERE GOING TO ASK ME MY PRIORITIES FOR THE CITY IT WAS THE LOOP . 
          >> JIM CAGE ONCE WE GOT 1660 AND 79 DONE TO POP UP RIGHT AFTER THAT TO WORK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM DESIGN READY TO WEAR THE MINUTE WE OPENED THE ROAD UP WE HIT THE NEXT ONE THEN WE OPEN UP 1660 AND 137. THAT WAY WE ALLEVIATE SOME ISSUES BUT THAT ONE IS LIKE FOUR YEARS AWAY. THE BIG PROJECTS WE HAVE NEXT YEAR ARE NOT WARRANTED OR IMPORTANT. THAT'S PUSHING EVERY OTHER PROJECT . I WOULD MOVE TO CHANGE RECONSTRUCTION WELL BEFORE. 
          REBUILDING EXCHANGE IS MORE IMPORTANT. WE HAD OUR MAIN FIRE STATION, THE BASE IS DESTROYED AND SINKING. WE HAVE ALLOWED 800 SOMETHING APARTMENTS . THE SCHOOL IS TRYING TO GET TO ALL OF THAT. WE HAVE A MIDDLE SCHOOL AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT IS LITERALLY CRUMBLING AND WE HAVE THAT IN 2028. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO THROW UP HISTORY WITH YOU GUYS BUT I HAD THAT SLOTTED FOR THIS YEAR AND NEXT YEAR AND COUNSEL SAID IT WASN'T AS URGENT . YOU WANT TO FOCUS JUST ON THE EXCHANGE IN MY BOOK. IT'S ACTUALLY COMING TO YOU NEXT WEEK FOR DESIGN. 
          >> I WOULDN'T BUILD IT. IF IT WAS ME I WOULD SAY HOW-TOS BUILDING THAT ROAD SOLVED THE PEOPLE MOVING THERE? IF THE PEOPLE MOVING HAVE TO WAIT IN LINE SO BE IT. I WOULD RATHER THEM WAIT IN LINE THEN WHO HAS BEEN HERE WAITING TO GET DONE. I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE A DESIGN SO WHEN THEY START COMPLAINING WE CAN GO. WE GOT THE PROJECT READY. I THINK THAT'S A FUNDAMENTAL THING. WE ARE OUT DOING PROJECTS TO DO MORE BUSINESS IN AND PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT EVERY NEW BUSINESS THAT COMES BECAUSE IT BRINGS TRAFFIC. I WOULD BUMP THAT OUT. THE 132 , I THINK 199 IS A GOOD MOVE . I THINK WE FINISH THAT OUT TO WHERE WE PUT ALL THE CONSTRUCTION TO FINISH BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT DATA CENTER PEOPLE USING IT. 
          >> SORRY TO CUT YOU OFF. IT SAYS 500,000. REMIND ME WHAT THAT IS 
          FOR? >> SORRY, THE SCREEN IS NOT 
          MATCHING UP. T 19 ON PAGE THREE. >> I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT I KNEW SO I GET TO ASK STUPID QUESTIONS. I DO REMEMBER EVERYTHING FOR EVERY NUMBER. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT THESE ARE FOR SPECIFICALLY. 
          >> THAT WAS ANOTHER WE HAD SLOTTED. IT WAS PART OF LAST 
          [01:40:03]
YEAR'S CIP. WE WERE GOING TO CONSTRUCTION THIS YEAR AND COUNCIL VOTED TO NOT GO SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE LATER ON WE HAVE AN EXTRA 19 MILLION. 500,000 FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE ARE FINISHING UP DESIGN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS THERE THE DESIGN 
          IS THERE. IT DID NOT INCLUDE -- >> IT WAS JUST FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY . THE DESIGN WAS ALREADY FUNDED. IT'S JUST GET US TO THE POINT WHERE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS THERE AND THE DESIGN IS DONE AND YOU SAY GO REBUILD THE WHOLE ROAD. YOU'VE GOT PLANS ON THE SHELF, ON THE LAND. 
          >> THAT'S IN MNO . >> THANK YOU. 
          >> MOST OF THE NEXT TWO YEARS PROJECTS ARE ROAD PROJECTS . I DON'T MIND BEING CALLED NAMES. THEY MAY HAVE IMPORTANCE TO THE COUNTY AND STATE BUT WHEN YOU'RE THIS FAR BEHIND I THINK YOU NEED TO START PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR FUTURE BUT YOU NEED TO START CONSTRUCTING WHAT YOU'RE BEHIND ON . 
          >> ONE THING I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS THE T 23 . IT IS THE 1660 NORTH EXPANSION. IN TALKING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT IS RIGHT THERE BY THE NINTH-GRADE CENTER AND THE NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL I BELIEVE IS OPENING IN FALL OF THIS YEAR AND NINTH-GRADE CENTER FULL BUILDOUT WILL BE IN 27. IF WE WANT TO GET AHEAD OF THE GAME AND START MITIGATING I THINK WE NEED TO AT LEAST DESIGN IT, SEE HOW MUCH IT'LL COST BUT IN 26 NOT THE FULL 9 MILLION. THE 10%. IT'S GOING TO GO UP, IT'LL COST MORE. I THINK WE NEED TO APPROPRIATE 1 MILLION FOR 26 FOR DESIGN TO SEE WHERE WE ARE AT AND OBVIOUSLY WE ARE WORKING WITH THE STATE ON THIS BECAUSE IT'S STATE ROADS SO THERE WILL BE HURDLES AND TIMELINES THAT ARE GOING TO BE PUSHED OUT . 
          IT'S STILL GOING TO BE SOMETHING DELAYED. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON TIME FOR THE SECOND HIGH SCHOOL COMING ONLINE. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO REPRIORITIZE AND MOVE 
          UP FOR DESIGN. T 23. >> I THINK THAT'S A VERY SMART 
          MOVE. >> THERE'S ALSO NEIGHBORHOOD ON 
          THE WEST SIDE IN THAT AREA. >> MOVE IT TO WHEN? 
          >> DESIGN IN 26 . IF ALL GOES WELL WITH STATE WE WOULD BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN 27. WE WILL STILL BE BEHIND ON MITIGATING TRAFFIC BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO GET AHEAD 
          ON. >> WHAT DID YOU SAY THE 
          EXPANSIONS WOULD BE OPEN? >> MARTINEZ OPENS LATER THIS YEAR. NOT TOO TERRIBLE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING. WITH THE NINTH-GRADE CENTER BECOMING HIGH SCHOOL IN THE FALL OF 2027 -- GO AHEAD. WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE. 
          >> I JUST WROTE LETTERS FOR THOSE SCHOOLS. I CAN TELL YOU YOU ARE RIGHT. I ASKED FOR A TIMELINE. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO COME ONLINE AND THE FULL HIGH SCHOOL EXPANSION WILL START 
          AUGUST '27. >> WHAT YOU WANT THE MAJOR ROAD 
          BUILT BEFORE THE TRAFFIC HITS? >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. DESIGN AND WORKING WITH THE STATE WHAT IS THE TIMELINE ON THAT? 
          >> IT'S TOUGH TO START NOW. YOU HAVE TO CUT OUT THE MILLION OF 
          SOMETHING ELSE. >> IT WOULD BE GREAT TO DO A 
          BUDGET AMENDMENT. >> 
          [01:45:04]
CITY AND ISD HAVE BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THAT ENTIRE 
          CAMPUS SINCE 2017 , 18? >> 
          >> SUPPOSED TO GO OUT AND GET SPONSORS TO FUND THAT SO WE PUT THE DOLLARS THERE AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO THE FUNDING BEFORE. 
          >> THE CREDIT CARD AND PARKS CREDIT CARD AND SET A CHARGE I JUST DON'T DO THAT THEN I DON'T HAVE TO MAKE A PAYMENT AND I CHARGE ANOTHER ROAD CREDIT CARD SO I'M STILL IMPACTING THE SAME WAY MY OPINION HAS ALWAYS BEEN DEBT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IS ALLOCATED OR PROVED BECAUSE IT COST WHEN YOU GO ISSUE BUT THAT'S WHEN YOU START. 
          >> IN THIS CASE ONLY IF THE COUNCIL CHANGES ITS DIRECTION . 
          RIGHT NOW IT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING IS I HAVE A RHODES CREDIT CARD . WE ARE PROPOSING TO GO TO DEBT BECAUSE THEY SAID WE WILL NEED TO FIND CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS OR SOMETHING. 
          >> WHAT WE ALSO -- HOWEVER MANY MILLION THAT WAS FOR THE DESIGN WE COULD USE THAT MONEY FOR SOMETHING ELSE. I REMEMBER THE DIRECTION IS TO BORROW MONEY AT SOME POINT TO REPAY BACK THE PARKS FUND. AS LONG AS WE DON'T DO THAT THERE IS MONEY ALL OVER THE PLACE IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHICH CREDIT CARD YOU'RE GOING TO USE, WHO IS PAYING WHETHER IT'S A DEVELOPER, COUNTY, STATE BUT I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA . THERE'S A HUGE GAP FOR PEOPLE . THERE'S LIKE NO PROJECTS GETTING DONE AND THEN EVERY PROJECT IS AT THE VERY END OF THE CIP WHICH IS WHY I THINK YOU HAVE AN INCREASE. THE BULK OF EVERYTHING IS ON 132. IT'S ALL ALLOCATED. EVERYTHING ELSE IS SHIFTED . YOU MOVE THE ONE PROJECT AND SAY WE CAN'T UNTIL EARLIEST AT 29 AND THE COUNCIL CAN THEN DEBATE TO THE USE SOME DATA CENTER MONEY TO OFFSET COST AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND THEN HE OPENED UP WITH A LOT OF ROAD PROJECTS. TO ME THEY ARE MORE PRIORITY THAN WHAT WE HAVE SET UP. THE CHANDLER ROAD INTERSECTION, I THINK THAT IS A MAJOR NEED. THERE'S PEOPLE DYING OUT THERE. THEY ARE NOT JUST FENDER BENDERS, THESE ARE PEOPLE GETTING COMPLETELY MESSED UP. THAT WAS SCHEDULED TO 29. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE START MAY 
          BE GETTING NOT AS IMPORTANT. >> TERMITE COUNSEL THE STATE CHANGE REGULATIONS ON THE ROADS AND WHAT YOU CAN ASK DEVELOPERS TO DO. THE COUNCIL DIRECTION WAS IN ORDER FOR US TO BE COMPLIANCE WHILE WE ASK DEVELOPERS TO DO THINGS IS TAKE EVERYTHING FROM OUR TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN AND PUT IT IN THE LAST YEAR OF CIP . THAT'S WHAT WE DID. ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT TRANSPORTATION YOU WILL SEE A MASSIVE LIST BECAUSE WE JUST TOOK EVERYTHING WE WEREN'T EVEN READY TO START TALKING ABOUT AND 
          [01:50:06]
          WE PUT IT ALL RIGHT THERE . >> I GET IT. I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT IT FLOWS TRAFFIC THROUGH THEIR BETTER IMPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION WHERE PEOPLE MAKE A RIGHT . TIMMY YOU DON'T NEED TO SPEND ALL THE MONEY, YOU JUST NEED THE INTERSECTION FOR THE BULK OF THE ISSUES . THERE'S TRAFFIC BUT COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE CITY I WOULD ARGUE PEOPLE DOWN 685 WE VIEW THAT AS A MUCH BIGGER ISSUE THAN THE FUTURE INTERSECTION OF 
          LIMERICK AND INNOVATION. >> ANOTHER IS IF WE ARE ABLE TO GET THE FRONTAGE ROADS BUILT AT LIMMER THAN IT CAN BECOME ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE ROUTE. JUST BE CAREFUL WHENEVER YOU'RE CONSIDERING TODAY THAT YOU DON'T COUNT AGAINST WHAT COULD 
          BE IN THE FUTURE. >> I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION OF BRINGING UP DESIGNING THAT ACCESS ROAD. WE NEED TO ALLOCATE SOME MONEY TO GET THAT UNDER DESIGN, WHAT IT WOULD COST FROM 79 TO GET IT TO LIMMER AND THE CITY PAYING FOR IT. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO GO TO TXDOT OR TOLL AUTHORITY OR WHOEVER TO COMMUNICATE WITH THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT WE HAVE TO RETHINK HOW TO GET PEOPLE OFF 79 WHICH IS NOT A CITY ROAD AND THAT IS ONE WAY WE CAN DO IT IS GETTING THE ACCESS ROAD TO CONTINUE UP SO PEOPLE CAN STAY OFF OF SCHMIDT TO GET NORTH AND GET THEM ON LIMMER. I DO AGREE MOVING FORWARD WITH EXPANSION. I KNOW WE EXPANDING LIMMER LOOP AND WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THAT WILL MOVE MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF PEOPLE EAST AND WEST OFF OF 79. THEY CAN'T GET UP THERE. THEY HAVE TO GET OFF AT 79 OR GET OFF AT CHANDLER ROAD. THERE IS NO IN BETWEEN. IT'S NOT A FUN CONVERSATION TO HAVE BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO BE A COSTLY ITEM DEALING WITH A TOLL BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT COULD BE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DRIVER FOR US , THE BUSINESSES THAT WOULD COME TO THAT ROAD THAT COULD DRIVE BUSINESS, WHETHER IT'S HIGH-TRAFFIC GAS STATIONS OR ANYTHING. THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD COME WITH HAVING THE ROAD, ALSO ACCESS SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO ON TO INNOVATION OR ALLIANCE . JUST KIND OF MOVING PEOPLE TO THAT WAY I THINK IS A CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE AND START THAT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT ROADS ADDRESSED. SOMETIMES IT'S ABOUT QUALITY, BUT IT'S ABOUT THINKING ABOUT MOVING PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY AND WE NEED TO START DESIGNING THAT ROAD. THAT'S MY OPINION. 
          >> I AGREE. NO ONE IN OUR CIP DOESN'T TALK ABOUT FRONTAGE 
          ROAD. >> IT DOES. 
          >> I THINK IT GOT PUSHED OUT. >> I WANT WIDEN LIMMER TODAY FOR A PROJECT THAT MAY BE THREE YEARS AWAY. IF ANYTHING I WOULD HAVE THEM BOTH DESIGNED, FIND OUT THE SCHEDULE AND BUILD FRONTAGE ROAD AND WIDEN AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE YOU CAN SPEND 20 MILLION DOING LIMMER TODAY AND NO ONE IS ON IT WHILE WE 
          WAIT ON FRONTAGE ROAD. >> RIGHT NOW IT IS SLOTTED FOR 
          2029. >> OKAY. I WOULD MOVE TO GET 
          THAT STARTED. >> 33? 
          >> I CAN ALWAYS FIND . >> IF YOU FLIP OVER THE TAB ON THE COMPUTER THEY ARE IN ORDER ON THAT SHEET. THIS IS THE INS 
          SHEET. >> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK BUT THAT WHOLE THING WAS NOT JUST -- IT WAS TO PAY FOR 
          [01:55:02]
THE STUDY BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAY CT RMA OR WHATEVER THEIR ACKERMAN IS NOW. THEN YOU HAVE TO START THE DESIGN PROCESS , COORDINATION WITH TXDOT AND THEN GET CONSTRUCTION. 
          >> DOES IT INCLUDE THAT PENALTY WE HAVE TO PAY FOR PEOPLE NOT 
          USING THE TOLL ROAD? >> WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT 
          NUMBER IS. >> THAT'S NOT BAKED IN SO IT 
          WOULD BE MORE? >> THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE STUDY IS TO GET TO THAT NUMBER AND WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THERE IS A PENDING BILL TO TAKE THAT AWAY WHERE WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT. WE CAN'T BET ON IT BUT I WOULD HESITATE TO SPEND MONEY ON STARTING THE PROCESS TO FIGURE HOW MUCH TO PAY WHEN SIX MONTHS FROM NOW WE MIGHT NOT HAVE TO. 
          >> I THINK YOU PUT IN 2026? >> I WOULD HURRY TO SPEND THE 
          MONEY. >> IT WOULD BE DONE IN 2026 BECAUSE WE WOULD KNOW BY SEPTEMBER 1ST WHETHER THAT WOULD BE ENACTED OR NOT. LIKELY HOW TOLLS ARE FUNDED , IT'S MONEY. 
          THAT WOULD BE HARD. I THINK PUTTING IT IN 2026 JUST BEGINNING THE PROCESS TO START TO DO THAT . 
          >> WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PROJECTS? 
          >> WE WOULD NEED TO SHOW THE MAP . IT'S TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. 
          >> IS THE OTHER SOUTH BOUND? >> BETWEEN LIMMER AND 79 ? BOTH 
          OF THESE? >> I WOULD NEED TO GO BACK AND 
          LOOK. >> YEAH. I THINK THEY ARE BOTH BETWEEN LIMMER AND 79 LET ME CONFIRM. 
          >> THERE'S NO WAY IT TAKES $80 MILLION TO BUILD A BRIDGE OVER 
          132 . >> IT'S GOT TO BE AT LEAST WHAT IT COST. I REMEMBER THE COUNTY TELLING ME THEY WOULD FUND THAT. 
          >> I DON'T WANT TO TELL YOU DEFINITIVELY YES OR NO. 
          >> WHAT I'M MAINLY INTERESTED IN IS 79 TO LIMMER NORTHBOUND. 
          AS PRIORITY ONE, SECONDARY WOULD BE NORTHBOUND TO SOUTHBOUND JUST THINKING OF FOLKS WORKING IN AUSTIN, WORKING AT TESLA . I 
          KNOW GEORGETOWN IS GROWING. >> I WOULD PRIORITIZE NORTHBOUND 
          OVER SOUTHBOUND. >> WE ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE 
          OFF 79 . >> IF PEOPLE ARE GOING WEST ON 79 TO GET ON 130 TO SOUTH THEY COULD GO LIMMER TO SOUTH . RIGHT 
          NOW YOU CAN'T DO THAT. >> I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          >> PLUS YOU HAVE LIMMER. YOU HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE WEST OF TOWN AND TAKE THAT ROUTE ALL THE WAY DOWN TO GO OUT TO 
          THE MEGA SITE . >> IF YOU REALLY NEEDED TO GO NORTH YOU COULD GO UP TO CHANDLER BUT NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN 
          GET ON CHANDLER CAN YOU? >> IS DESIGNED TO FORCE PEOPLE 
          TO PAY THE TOLL. >> GOING SOUTH BOUND AND YOU CAN 
          GET OFF. YEAH. >> YOU CAN ONLY GO NORTH ON 
          LIMMER AND YOU CAN'T GO SOUTH. >> I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP. 
          >> IT'S BASICALLY THE TWO ACCESS ROADS CONNECTING BETWEEN 
          LIMMER AND 79. >> I MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE DONE 
          DUE DILIGENCE. >> GOING NORTH IT'S LIMMER TO 
          118. >> SOUTHBOUND FRONTAGE FROM LIMMER GOING SOUTH TO 79 , WOULD IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO JUST CONVINCE THEM TO DO AN ON-RAMP? PEOPLE JUST WANT TO GET ON THE TOLL ROAD. UNLESS THEY ARE TRYING TO GO INTO ROUND ROCK. 
          [02:00:07]
          >> THEY HAVE A WIDENING OF THE ROAD. I WOULD IMAGINE DISCUSSIONS LIKE THAT NEED TO HAPPEN QUICK. 
          >> IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS SO MANY PARTING ONTO 130 FROM LIMMER , YOU CAN SEE THEY MADE THEIR OWN ON-RAMP. 
          >> THE ONLY THING I WOULD PUT OUT THERE IS WE HAVE A LOT OF POTENTIAL PROJECTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF 130 THAT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP BUILD THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE ROAD SO MAYBE FOCUS ON ONLY THE ON-RAMP AND LET THOSE PROJECTS HELP PAY. 
          >> I KNOW THERE'S A PROJECT BETWEEN 79 AND LIMMER THAT WANTS TO GO IN THERE NEAR WHERE THE VIEWERSHIP WANTS TO . I THINK 
          THEY WOULD HELP PAY. >> WE CAN GET PARTICIPATION. 
          >> DEVELOPERS WANT TO BUILD THAT LAND BECAUSE THEY WANT THE ACCESS AND IT JUST BENEFITS EVERYBODY . WE HAVE TO SPEND 
          LESS MONEY. >> WE NEED TO DO FRONT WORK IN ORDER TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO PARTICIPATE IN. 
          >> IF NO ONE HAS ISSUES WITH DESIGN DOLLARS? 
          >> NO. >> WE ARE STILL STUCK ON '26 
          AND '27. >> THAT IS '26. 
          >> THE BULK WE JUST ADDED. AT SOME POINT WE NEED TO TAKE SOME AWAY. YOU CAN ALMOST TAKE THE OTHER ONE TO REPRESENT THE BULK. 
          >> I THINK THE 132 OVERPASS, ALL OF THAT IS KIND OF TO BE DETERMINED. OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE MONEY AVAILABLE. 
          >> I CAN'T MAKE THE DECISION BUT I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S NO WAY WE SPEND 50 MILLION NEXT YEAR ON 132. 
          >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. I THINK YOU'RE SAFE PUSHING THAT OUT AND THAT CHANGES YOUR CONVERSATION. THAT FREES UP 50 
          MILLION. >> WHEREVER WE ARE I DON'T KNOW. FOR ME THE WHOLE PROJECT IS ON PAUSE EVEN THOUGH I KNOW IT'S NOT TRUE BUT JUST FOR ME IT IS BECAUSE IT GOT ASKED WHERE IT WAS. THAT IS GOING TO BE A PROJECT RIGHT HERE THAT IS 80 MILLION. RIGHT NOW WE ARE PROBABLY AT 120. THAT WAS LIKE THREE YEARS AGO SO WE ARE PROBABLY AT 120. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE EDC CITY COUNTY PROJECT AND POSSIBLY STATE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE SO MASSIVE THAT THE CITY OF HUTTO WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE 
          THAT ON. >> I DISAGREE WITH THE FACT YOU INFLATE THE NUMBERS BUT REMEMBER THE NEW DIRECTION THAT WE ARE NOW EVALUATING IS TO TAKE MORE OF A PHASED APPROACH STARTING ON THE GROUND WITH SOME TURN LANES, SIGNALS AND AT SOME POINT ADDING IN MAYBE OVERPASS OR INITIAL TURN LANES BEFORE YOU GET TO THE FINAL APPROVAL. WHILE I DON'T US AGREE THE NUMBERS ARE GOING TO GO UP BECAUSE OF THE NEW DIRECTION. 
          >> EVEN 10 MILLION FOR THIS YEAR AND 50 MILLION FOR NEXT YEAR CAN 
          BE PUSHED OUT TO '27. AND 28. >> SHIFT ALL OF THOSE TWO CELLS 
          OVER. >> I WOULD DO T 28. 
          >> HOLD ON. >> T 41 . THE WIDENING. 
          >> THE EXPANSION. >> IF I REMEMBER THAT'S ALL 
          RELATED? >> I'M NOT IN FAVOR . THAT'S THE ONE WE JUST APPROVED FOR DESIGN CORRECT? 
          >> THAT WAS -- >> IT SAYS IT'S WIDENING BUT IT'S CONSTRUCTING A ROAD THAT DOESN'T EXIST. WE HAVE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR IT, BUT THE ULTIMATE ALIGNMENT OF 132, 133 IS INSTEAD OF TURNING 90 DEGREES AND GOING UP IT JUST IS A SOFTER BEND AND CONNECTS STRAIGHT TO 133. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE DOING 
          [02:05:03]
NOW. WE ARE DESIGNING THAT DIAGONAL CONNECTION WHICH WOULD CREATE THE ULTIMATE FOOTPRINT FOR THE BIG UNTIL YOUR PROJECT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ON FOR YEARS. 
          >> WOULD YOU GO IF WE DON'T DO THE REST? 
          >> THE HIGHLANDS PEOPLE WOULD USE IT. I KNOW THEY'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT IT ON FACEBOOK ON WHEN THAT WILL GO THROUGH . 
          >> THOSE PEOPLE THAT ALL HAVE TO FILTER OUT TO 1660 WOULD BE ABLE TO JUMP ON OR GET ON 1660 NORTH AND NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH TOWN. 
          >> THERE'S NO DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION. 
          >> THE DEVELOPERS ALREADY GIVEN US THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. WE NEGOTIATED BACK WHEN WE WERE TALKING WITH COUNTY AND STATE LAST TIME. THE COST FOR CONSTRUCTION IS ON THE CITY 
          RIGHT NOW. >> JUST FOR FUN , LEAVE THAT ONE IN BUT THE OTHERS WE TAKE OUT OR WHATEVER YOU WERE GOING TO SAY? 
          >> ANYTHING THAT RELATES I DON'T SEE REASON TO WIDEN THE ROAD TO INTERCHANGE THAT RIGHT NOW THAT DOESN'T EXIST OR IS UNSAFE TO USE. IF WE ARE PUSHING THE BRIDGE THAT GOES BACK A COUPLE YEARS . TO ME THAT IS A 28-29 ISSUE AND THEN PEOPLE ARE WOUND UP. QUITE HONESTLY THERE WAS A STUDY DONE AND I CAN FIND IT FOR PEOPLE, BUT IF YOU BUILD AND WIDEN ROADS YOU CREATE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. BEFORE LONG YOU HAVE TRAFFIC JAMS AGAIN. 
          THERE ARE SOME ROADS I DON'T KNOW WE NEED TO MAKE AN EXPANDED EFFORT TO BRING ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. WE ALREADY HAVE AN ISSUE MEANING WE SINK ALL THE MONEY AND THE SHIP SET SAIL BUT I WANTED TO ANOTHER ROAD LIKE THAT TO SPUR DEVELOPMENT WHEN RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T AFFORD DEVELOPMENT. WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING DEVELOPED FIRST TO PAY US BACK. IT'S NOT ON HERE TO BE SLATED SOON BUT THERE IS ANOTHER ROAD FOR THAT SAME REASON. 
          >> THAT'S THE NORTH-SOUTH ROAD. I SUGGESTED WE PUSH THAT OUT BECAUSE WE COULD HAVE THE DEVELOPERS BUILD THAT FOR US. 
          >> IF YOU PUSH THOSE OUT TO THE LAST 28 OR 29 JUST NEXT YEAR ALONE, THAT'S $86 MILLION CASH SORRY. THAT IS 76 -- 77 MILLION IN PROJECTS. REALISTICALLY WE MAY NOT BE READY TO DO NEXT YEAR ANYWAY. THAT HE PUSHED TO THE END AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHAT THE NEW RATE IS AND THEN YOU'RE ABLE TO MOVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF UP. THERE'S A LOT OF 2 MILLION, 3 MILLION. WE ARE STUCK IN MY MIND OF 100 SOMETHING ON A COUPLE HUNDRED PROJECTS. 
          >> I LOOK AT IT AS A BIG DEBT AND LITTLE DEBT. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LITTLE DEBT. WE COULD KNOCK OUT AND SHOW SOME PROGRESS AND HOPEFULLY ALLEVIATE SOME PAIN IN DRIVING. 
          >> THAT'S A 2029 PROJECT. THAT'S NOT HELPING THE PEOPLE COMPLAINING ON FACEBOOK. EXPENDING THAT DOES NOT HELP THEM. IT HELPS EVERYBODY THAT COMES IN FOR A DAY AND LEAVES. 
          THOSE PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT IN LINE. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM. I WOULD RATHER THE DAY WORKERS WAIT IN LINE AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND HAVE TO DEAL WITH TRAFFIC, THEY GET BUT FIRST FOR ONCE. ANYMORE IT SEEMS LIKE HOW DO WE DRAG MORE BUSINESS IN? I WANT TO FLIP IT AND GO HAD WE MAKE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO LIVE HERE NOT SUFFER ? IF IT SLOWS DOWN SOME DEVELOPMENT AT BUSINESS PARK WE BUILT ALL THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, MAYBE COME UP WITH 2.7 MILLION AND THEY CAN WIDEN IT IN AN EFFORT TO HELP DEVELOP MORE LAND. I DON'T THINK IT GOES OFF THE PLAN. I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ON FOR IMPACT FEES BUT IT'S JUST NOT A 
          PRIORITY FOR ME. >> FOR SIDEWALK, IS THE YEAR-OVER-YEAR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION SOMETHING THAT'S 
          [02:10:02]
NOT IN MAINTENANCE OPERATION? IT'S FUNDED VIA BOND DOLLARS? 
          >> I DON'T BELIEVE -- I DON'T BELIEVE FOR T-1 WE ARE USING DEBT DOLLARS. I BELIEVE WE ARE USING ACTUAL THINK YOU GUYS PRIORITIZED SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION AS PART OF 
          YOUR REGULAR BUDGET. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> THAT IS CORRECT. WE ARE NOT USING DEBT MONEY FOR THAT. THIS CURRENT YEAR WE ARE USING BENEFIT FUTURE YEARS WILL BE 
          FROM OPERATIONS. >> THANK YOU. 
          >> INNOVATION EXPANSION, WHAT IS THAT IN SUMMARY? 
          >> THAT IS EXPANDING INNOVATION OVER THERE BETWEEN 79 AND GLIMMER BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATE MORE GROWTH. 
          >> THE SAME WE HAVE FOR ALLIANCE. 
          >> IT'S NOT IN DESIGN OR ANYTHING? 
          >> THE COUNCIL SLATED IT FOR '27 . 
          >> IF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY GETS AN UPROAR IT'S A 30 MINUTE WAIT TRYING TO GET OUT OF MY INDUSTRIAL BUILDING. WE'VE GOT IT DESIGNED AND READY. IT'S JUST NOT A PRIORITY BECAUSE WE HAVE TAXPAYERS WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO. IF TRAFFIC LIKE THAT IS NOT AS UNSAFE AS SOME THINGS WE HAVE THAT ARE VERY SAFE I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW WE FIX THAT. IT'S GOT KIDS, CARS, ACCIDENTS, CRAZY STUFF HAPPENING. MORE IMPORTANT LINED UP TRYING TO GET IN AND 
          OUT OF WHATEVER BUSINESS. >> THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN 
          SUGGESTING WE SHOULD BE FIXING. >> WHAT ABOUT THE INTERSECTION? 
          >> WE ARE BIDDING THAT RIGHT NOW. 
          >> I CAN SPEAK MORE TO CARL STERN. WHAT NUMBER IS THIS? ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO GET PEOPLE OFF 79, MOVE THEM THAT WAY THERE IS MORE DEVELOPMENT AND THE SOUTHEAST SIDE THERE'S MORE RESIDENTIAL AREAS POTENTIALLY, SOME COMMERCIAL GOING ON IN THE AREA. WHERE ARE WE AT? 
          >> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING. 
          >> MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADD. IF WE CAN GET THEM WITH TRAFFIC IMPACT TO IMPROVE THAT AREA . 
          >> I FOUND ANOTHER 130 ACCESS ROAD. 
          >> I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY YOU FOUND SOME MONEY. 
          >> NORTHBOUND . >> I DON'T SEE IT. 
          >> I DID A SEARCH, THERE'S NOTHING THAT COMES UP. THE MAC I PUT HERE HAD A CARL STERN ITEM. DEPENDING ON HOW QUICKLY , THE SCHOOL OWNS ALL THE LAND. THAT OUGHT TO BE A REALLY EASY CONVERSATION TO GIVE US RIGHT-OF-WAY. DEPENDING ON WHEN PEOPLE HAVE TO GET OUT IF WE DECIDE CARL STERN IS THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY IF THERE IS A WAY TO BUMP THAT UP THAT IT DOES MAKE SENSE TO DO THAT INTERSECTION KNOWING YOU FLOCKED EVERYBODY OUT OF THE EASTSIDE BUT IF WE ARE JUST DOING A PROJECT JUST TO DO A PROJECT WITHOUT A PLAN I DON'T KNOW. 
          >> WHAT WERE SUGGESTIONS ON IMPROVEMENTS TO CARL STERN? IT'S PRETTY WIDE RIGHT NOW. THERE'S BIKE LANES THAT ARE GREAT. THAT POTENTIALLY BE MOVED ? 
          >> I BELIEVE THE MASTER PLAN CALLED FOR IT TO BE ULTIMATELY A 
          [02:15:02]
FIVE LANE ROAD. TWO EASTBOUND LANES, TWO WESTBOUND, TWO LEFT 
          TURNS IN THE MIDDLE. >> IF THAT'S GOING TO BE THE ROUTE WHILE WE FIX THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN WE NEED TO DO THAT. 
          UNLESS THE TURN LANE -- I THINK YOU HAVE TO DESIGN THE WHOLE INTERSECTION AND THEN ADD A TURN LANE. YOU DON'T WANT TO DESIGN AND THEN COME BACK AND DESIGN AND INTERSECTION BECAUSE IT'LL 
          HAVE CONFLICT. >> I WOULD SAY TO THE INTERSECTIONS FIRST. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO SO FAR BACK TO GET THE TURN LANE IN THAT FOOTPRINT AND FILL IN WHATEVER 
          GAPS YOU'VE CREATED. >> WE NEED TO PUT CARL STERN ON THAT INTERSECTION BUT A GENERAL WIDENING . 
          >> DO WE HAVE A LIST OF THE PNC NOTES? 
          >> IT WAS IN YOUR LAST TWO OR THREE CIP CONVERSATIONS. I CAN ADD IT TO THE FOLDER . HERE WE GO. 
          >> IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T READ THESE. WE HAVE SO MANY VERSIONS AND THINGS WHERE I HAVE EVERY ONE OF THEM. 
          >> THERE WAS A NOTE. T '27 CARL STERN EXPANSION. IT'S NOT ON HERE. THEY ACTUALLY SAID REMOVING COMPLETELY SINCE IT'S NOT BENEFITING BOTTLENECK OF WESTBOUND. I THINK THAT'S WHENEVER IT GOES TO A ONE LANE ROAD. YEAH. YEAH. 
          >> LET'S GO AHEAD. WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST NIGHT. DOES THIS 
          ADDRESS CHRIS KELLY OVER? >> I BELIEVE THAT P 29 PROJECT IS WEST OF CHRIS KELLY. WE RUN INTO THE BOTTLENECK THERE AND AT THE ACCESS ROAD. WHY WIDEN IT? WE CAN'T GET MORE TRAFFIC THROUGH THAT INTERSECTION AT THE ACCESS ROAD AND DOING SOMETHING 
          MAGICAL AT THAT ACCESS ROAD. >> IT USED TO BE T '27 BUT IT 
          ENDED UP GETTING REMOVED. >> WE SUGGESTED REMOVING THAT ENTIRELY BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. 
          >> SO IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE LIST. OKAY. THAT ADDRESS IS THE WEST PORTION FROM CHRIS KELLY OVER TO WEST. 
          >> IT WASN'T AT CHRIS KELLY. >> GOT YOU. 
          >> IT WAS THAT SMALL BIT OF TRAFFIC I GUESS YOU COULD SAY. 
          IT WASN'T SIGNIFICANT IN OUR PERSPECTIVE. 
          >> WHAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS -- CHRIS KELLY EAST. RIGHT. 
          >> IT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AND THIS DIDN'T EVEN TAKE CHRIS 
          KELLY INTO CONSIDERATION. >> OKAY. 
          >> YEAH. WE ALREADY HAVE ONE ROAD CUTTING TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO YOU GO BACK AND SAY CHECK THIS OUT. YEAH. RUN IT STRAIGHT INTO THE ACCESS ROAD DOES IT MAKE ANY SENSE. 
          >> YEAH. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          >> BACK TO THEN IT SAYS THE COUNTY COMPLETES THEIR ALREADY 
          [02:20:03]
PLANNED PROJECT THESE WOULD BE MINIMAL. 
          >> WE JUST ADDED THE ELECTRONIC VERSION TO YOUR FOLDER . I BELIEVE THERE NOW MOVING IT OVER TO YOUR TEAMS. 
          >> I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO GET INTO TEAMS REGULARLY. 
          >> IF YOU GO INTO THE CITY SECRETARY FOLDER TODAY ALL OF THE ATTACHMENTS WE PUT IN THERE I'VE GOT THE ENTIRE SPREADSHEET IN THERE. YOU CAN SCROLL THROUGH. 
          >> ALL RIGHT. GOING BACK TO 132 BECAUSE NOT THAT WE ARE TAKING VOTES BUT THAT PROJECT MOVING TO 29 . 
          >> MOVING TWO YEARS IS WHAT I HEARD? 
          >> I'M TALKING LIVING IT TO '29. 
          >> WHICH ONE TO CLARIFY? >> THE 132 OVERPASS, THE 
          WIDENING AND THE 132 FROM CR . >> I WANT TO HANG ON. I WOULD LIKE 132 LIMMER AND 133 . '26 IF WE ARE IN DESIGN RIGHT NOW. 
          >> WHAT IS A SECTION OF ROAD ON THIS MAP HERE? 
          >> PLEASE. THE CENTER OF THE SCREEN UP TO THE RIGHT. A LITTLE BIT . 
          ZOOM IN. YOU SEE THAT DIAGONAL SECTION THAT'S BEEN SKIP BY THE DEVELOPER IF 133 WERE TO CONTINUE SOUTH IT WOULD HIT 132? THAT IS THE SECTION WE ARE RRENTLY DESIGNIN 
          >> YEAH. >> T 41 IS WHAT WE ARE WORKING ON NOW. THAT IS THE ONE WE ALLOTTED FOUR. 
          >> CELL '28 IS EXPANDING THOSE ROADS? 
          >> T 41 IS TO BUILD THE SAME BACK AND START WIDENING THE 
          ROAD. >> WE GOT $33 MILLION. WE ARE IN THE FAR NORTHEAST SECTION OF THE CITY AND IF WE SPENT 33 MILLION ON THAT FAR RIGHT SECTION WHAT DOES THAT GET US? ALL IT DOES IS 
          GET THEM TO STILL GO WESTBOUND. >> THE FIRST PHASE WE ARE CURRENTLY DESIGNING IS IN THE GREEN SECTION THAT GOES RIGHT 
          THROUGH HUTTO HIGHLANDS. >> THE TOT TS NETOT ADD ANI'LUY WEEV T ROIN. ATARTHE SPECS ON TE UNDER DESIGN 41 , IS IT THREE 
          LANES ? >> IT'S BASICALLY A THREE LANE. 
          WHERE WE NEED TURN LANES IS WHERE WE HAVE THE THIRD LANE . 
          THAT IS T 41 RIGHT NOW. >> PRIORITIZE THAT ONE. 
          >> WE SAID LET'S SHOW EVERYONE WE ARE SERIOUS. THAT IS A TOKEN PROJECT. WE HAVE THE ROAD STARTED WITH THE HOPES WE CAN CONVINCE THE COUNTY AND STATE TO COME BACK WITH SOME FUNDS TO DO 
          THE ARTERIAL PROJECT. >> WE SHOULDN'T NEED TO WIDEN THAT ANYTIME SOON. I DON'T WANT TO BE BUILDING ROAD TO HELP THE FLOOR UNNECESSARILY. WHEN THEY COMPLAIN THEY COME UP AND WE HAVE TO TELL THEM YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE CITY . YOU NEED TO 
          TALK TO THE COUNTY. >> ON THE OTHER SIDE I KNOW IT'S NOT AS BIG WE DO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY. 
          >> YEAH. GREEN METHIN 
          >> O >> EV THEN YOU HAVE A THE AR TOP COMPARED  SOME HEY 
          >> LET'S  AND LET'S VE WHNOVEIT T'?  IT TO 28. 
          >'29  FI. TH5, 32 . >>65IS WIDENG BUT IT'S 132 FROM2 TO 1660.FURTR UTH. 
          ISPUSHINPEOPLE WN9. >>SOUTOF79 PLEASE. KEEP 
          [02:25:01]
GOG.FOLLOW 13TOWHE IT DS  GO  THE EA. TH SPENDI 9GREES TOEASTIS SUEDTO BASALLY FOOW THE SOUTH AND CONNECT ALTHY PROJECT . TH'ATIS 
          >> ONG THE EAERN DA . IT'LL OW ALG E MEADBRK PROJT .  TI INTO 10. 
          >> THAT COULD GOUT. >>ATWHATPOT ISHAT 2? POIN  IT RIGHT THE?E ROAD?  YOU TALKING THE EXISTI ARRIALPROJECT ISTHE CTN PRECT.FR LMER TOTY'S CHANER  SUOS  BEA TO 10 IT'S SUPPOSED TO COUN OJECT BUWE READY HAD OSE INOUR MASTER PLASO THAT'S Y THEY ARE SHOWINON CIANTHEN  SUMMERWH WE I WAYINGTOSPDED UP BEUSE CAE COUNTY DN'T INCLUDE IT T ENCOUNL S LIKE WHWOULD  END THAT MONEIF E COUNTY DO RUSTY MARK 'S WHENI SAID WE WERETHE BEREIN2017AND 2018BUT USE E TYTOOK ND ON THE ERPASSTHE COUNTY D STATSAID  WILLTAKEOUR PROJECTO SHOW TH WE ARE SERIOUS, AT'S WHERE 41 CAAN AND WE PH BECAUSE WE COUNTY AND STATCAN COTO THE 
          YEAR. >> WE AROUT A LOT BU REED TO SIGN ER TO TH STATE,TO THE UNTY TH WE STRONGLYURGE THEM TO HE US D I INK E PRLEM IS 8% OF R PELEVO IN THOS ELTIONS. IFYOU' ROWING MONEARND HUTTISNOT AT THE TO IFYOU' JU PLAIN VOTES. THE WAY EYWIDE183 AND RONALDEAGAN UP OUIN THE MIDD OF NOWHEREAND U'RE NOT EVEN HITTI THE DEVEPED YOU YS ARPLAYINCAH-UP MY VOICE DON'T CAY MUCH IGHT. 
          >> THE ST DENI NA REAGANOUTO FARLAND AND WE' GOBOTTNECKS, IS H-UP. A TEAND IF YOHEW N HELP BUILD-- EVERY TI WE HAVE GROUBREAKI ANHUTTO TAKEPARTEVENHEN THEYD'T FUND THE AD. WHENIT COMES COULBEIMPAED TO THEA I DEVELOPMENT WILLDRUP IFWE DON'T PURDS IN BUI DON'T THINK IT'S OUJOTOFUND L ESE  E FURE TO G ROAD FST AND WORRLATER. 
          SIE  ARDOWN ATABOU LIAN EXPSIONIS THE AN OBJECTION  NDINTHE DESIGN ? 
          >> THIS TH2.75 MLION. >> WOD SATHME WITH INVATI. WE DEGN THEM D OUT. TH CAN COMMUNICE TO E COMMCIAL OPLECOMI IN . ME POINT IT'S A SIGN PROJT BUT THCOUNL FEELS AT THISTIME  NES  BE 
          VELOPER. >>MAYBE CAN SAY HE. 
          I KEEP PUTTG HALF 1 MIN FOR DEGN. EP THE DESI OF OSO PIES  INNOTION EXPANSIOBUT PUSH THE COTRUCONDOLLARS OUT TO 25-29 . AN ASTERK  WHER EY SAY IT APPEARS  BE IF YOU NT TO CONE. 
          >> WE DESIGN IN'26 BUTHEN PUSHIT TO'. 
          WH ARWE DESIING AN '26 
          >>ALLIANCE D INNOVAON PANSION. 
          LIANCE ISGOING TO COME NEXT WK. COTRUCTION FROM '27 ?PU THE DESIGN I I ON IN WE HE A MAJOR COANCOME IN IFTH COMETO US MAYBE AT'S E INCENTIVE AGENT.  SAY 
          [02:30:08]
PAYCHECKS. TH'IF YOU WANT TO ME TO HTO. WE ARRED OF BUILDING FOR OTHER PEOPLE. THAT ONE. DY HAPPIN FO 
          ' IS TECHNICALLY THLA H. >> THAT WAY  ARE ETTY MUCH TO AOINT THE BIGGESPROJECTS CABE ADDETO'26. 
          >> F '  WE NEED TO HAVE DESI DLARS AT LET ALLOCATED BEUSE TH IS ONLY OVERPA SO  SHOULD JUST MO 
          >> U ALCATE$10 MIION IN FY 2 WE ARE NOT SPENNG 10 
          MILLION. >>CAN WE CREATA W E TH 132 INTERSECTION IMPVENTS THAT WILLBE THE AT GRADE LEFT TURN NE  ATEVERI ESS , WHOEVER IS WORKINON THAT ? 
          THAT DIFFERE? >> WE USE THSA CONTRA . I WOULD COMMEND EATI A BRAND-NEW PROJECUNTIL YOU MO IT OVERTO THAT PROJECT. I CAN TA TO G WH WE N SPEND THIS YR REDUCE THE 10 MILLION ANPUSH THE 53AND 20 OUT. IT'S CONSTENTWE FIGHT NTRAS AND L THATTUFF. 
          >> THA'S READY GO NEW YES. 
          >>THE WHOLPROJT TO'29 IT'S GOINTO LESS. IDDLE. 
          STT CONSTRUCON ASMING WE TH? 020 28HOW ABT ON 132. 132 WIDENING DESIGN FOR E ALLIANCE AND INNOTION DESIGN. FRONTAGE ROAD T 54 , CARL ERN . I CAN'T REMEERWHATWE SAI TH IS LIMM LOOP. 
          >>I WOULLI TO KEEPHAT. >> WHATABOUMOVING AT 28? YOU'RE RELYNOGOG TO NEED LIMM LOOUNTIL U KNOW AT Y'RE DNG ON TAGE ROADS I THINK  SHLD AY ON TOP OF IT. RIT NO ARE JUST SE BDS. IF  HA  AS TO END OFTHFIAL YR WE COULD D D EVEN IF WE PUSHED'27 26 WOD BE WIING TO PU IT OUT RTR. 
          >>THTWO PROJTS BETWEEN NOVATION. 
          >> MOVEHOSE? T BOTT DESIGN JU STARTED. 
          >> IS THAT ATYOU E YING TANG T THE NEY . 
          >> IS THATGOOD ORAD? SO WEVE TGOBA ANERYTHG RE-WATCHTHE VIDE IF WE EAK FOLUNCH WE N UPDATEHIS. THENWE CAN  IT AGAIN. I INK WHAT WEVE NE W IS '26  '27 IS WIDE OPEN AT TH POIN. 
          NT  TAACK IF DIGNEGETTINDO IN 12 MONTHSTHEN WE NT  MOVE INTO THOSE DOLLS AND'26 . STT 
          IT. >>I DIDN'T WA START IN 
          [02:35:02]
27BECAE HANG WIDENED LIER LP WI T PUT ANY 
          TWICE THE ROAD CAPACITY. HAVE >>  WILL REVIT E NEXT 
          COUNCIL. WE WILL HAVE TO HANDLE. >> DESIGN ISSTILL 25. 
          >> CONSTRUCTION '27. >> THAT OPENS UP TO PAGE FOUR. I THINK A LOT OF ISSUES WILL BE A T OF DESIGN TYPE STUFF CAUSE WEAVE BEEN FOCUSED SO MUCH ON THESE MAY BE THREE-MONTH SOME OF 
          DESIGN. >> I WANT  MAYBE BACKTRACK . 
          199.I KNOW UNSEL DID DECIDE TO MAIL AND OVERLAY IT AS OPPOSED TO RECONSTRUCTION EXPANSIOTHAT I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE MONEY FOR ALREADY. I CAN GET CORRECTED ON THAT. I GUESS MY THINKING HERE IS THE MI AND OVLA REGARDLESS, IT LL SMOOTH OUT THE ROAD. WITH R DEVELOPMT HAPPENING  ST OVERHERE THERE'S SOMEBIG HOMES YOU CAN SEFROM 79 THAT I'JUST T ARE OF. JUST GETTING TH OJECT TO REE LANES WITH THTURN LANEIN THE DDLE SO THE PEOPLE IN E APARTMENT COLEX , IT'S JUST MITITING TRAFFIC CAUSE THERE WILL BEA LOT OF PEOPLE ON THAT AD. THE'S ALREAD NEHBORHOODS THAT EXIST. THERE'S APARTMENTS AND MORE HOING OCCURRING. TO JUST RECONSTRUCTED AND GET IT MO SAFETYREASONS SO IT DOESN' BOTTLENECK AT 166AN79 WHEN THAT DOES COME ONLINE JUST MOVING PPLE . INCONVENIENCING 
          NOW VERSUS LATER. >> WE D LA YEAR . IT WAS NOT THE ENTIRE THING. THE $500,000 MAINTENANCE WORK. THIS WAS TO FINISH DESIGN AND PURCHASE RIGHT AWAY. AS FAR AS I'M OPERATING RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO WORK GOIN TO BE DONE. OTHER THANFINIING 
          UP THE DESIGN. >> THIS YEAR WE GET THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND HAVE OUR BOWS TIED. BE READY FOR 
          RECONSTRUCTION. >> WE WILL WAIT FOR YOU GUYS TO GIVE US THE GREEN LIGHT TO GO TO CONSTRUCTION. 
          >> I COULD BE WRONG . >> I DID MOVE OUT OF THERE. 
          CHECK MY CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT FOR MY NEW ADDRESS. RANDALL IS NOT HERE. ALL RIGHT. IN MY OPINION THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IS NOT THE PROBLEM. THE QUALITY OF THE ROAD IS. IT WOULD BYPASS AND KE PEOPLE SISFIED AS FAR AS I'M AWARE. THE PROBLEM WITH 199 IS HOW DO YOU GET OUT OF THERE? WHEN YOU DO YOU'VE GOT TO SIT 
          AND WAIT . >> I THINK THAT'S WHY WE MOVED 
          IT. >> THE PROJECTS NOW THAT THE INTERSECTION IS DONE AND I THINK IT WORKS GOOD BECAUSE THE DATA CENTERS ARE BUILT, WE TEAR THAT UP NOW . I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL THOSE PEOPLE WILL COME IN AND 
          OUT. >> IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET 
          WORSE. >> YOU COULD BUILD THAT TODAY . 
          NOW THEY ARE STACKED UP. >> NOT NECESSARILY 199. 
          >> IT WILL BE COMING UP. IT'LL BE NICE AHEAD OF TIME. 
          >> I THINK THAT'S ONE PROJECT WE ACTUALLY HAVE OUR TEES CROSSED AND EYES DARTED AS OPPOSED TO 1660. WE ARE STILL WORKING ON ACQUIRING THAT. THAT'S JUST A PROJECT WE CAN 
          MOVE FORWARD WITH. YEAH. >> THE OTHER THING I WILL REMIND 
          [02:40:06]
COUNSEL OF HIS A SIGNAL PROJECT AT 132 AND 79 WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE ONLINE IN JANUARY WHICH MAY ALLOW SOME TRAFFIC TO EAST 
          TO GET ONTO 79 . >> IF THERE IS NO OTHER PROJECTS WHAT I SAID BEFORE IS I DON'T WANT A ROLLER COASTER TO WHERE WE HAVE YEARS WHERE TAXES ARE DROPPING TOO MUCH BECAUSE WE ARE NOT BORROWING MONEY SO WE HAVE TO LEVEL THINGS OUT TO WHERE WE HELP EACH YEAR 50 MILLION , NEXT YEAR 60 MILLION SO MAYBE THAT DOES MOVE UP IF WE GO THROUGH THE REST OF THESE. THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT WE CAN BRING UP TO '26 . 
          >> I KNOW BUT 132 WILL BE ON ROAD MAINTENANCE THIS YEAR TO BE TIDIED UP? THOSE ARE ROUGH WATERS FOR SURE. I KE THE TURN. JUST THINKING ABOUT THAT AREA. IT'S HARD . IT'S A TRAP. 
          WE NEED TO GET PEOPLE USING CARL STERN. 132 SAFELY. I KNOW THAT'S NOT HER JURISDICTION . IT'S TOUGH. THE PEOPLE ALREADY 
          LIVE THERE. >> LAST NIGHT I WAS COMING BACK AND I VISIT THERE OFTEN . IT WAS A NIGHTMARE GETTING OUT. 
          EVERYBODY GOING NORTH ON 1660 , THEY WON'T LET YOU OUT. YOU'VE GOT TO TRY TO LEARN HOW TO BE FRIENDLY. 
          ON THE MAINTENANCE PLAN THERE IS A SECTION FOR 199 HEADING NORTH ON 132 HAS MILL AND OVERLAY LAID OUT POTENTIALLY 
          THIS YEAR. >> 132 AND 199. THERE IS AN EXTENSION HEADING NORTH. THERE IS A PLAN TO HAVE MILL AND 
          OVERLAY. >> WHAT ABOUT EXCHANGE FROM 28 
          TO '26? TO MOVE IT FROM WHERE? >> 2028 TO 2026. 
          >> WE ARE DESIGNING RIGHT NOW SO RECONSTRUCTION FOR THAT TO MARK 
          >> COUNSEL CHANGED LAST SUMMER TO JUST BE FOCUSING ON THE INTERSECTION OF LIVE OAK AND EXCHANGE. THAT'S WHAT IS BEING DESIGNED. WE HAVE NOT DONE DESIGN FROM 79 ALL THE WAY UP . 
          I WANT TO SAY HOLBROOK. THANK YOU. 
          >> I GOT A GREEN DOT. IT SAYS PROJECT STATUS . IT'S PARTIALLY 
          FUNDED . >> WE ARE ONLY FUNDING THE 
          INTERSECTION PROJECT. >> THAT'S FROM 79 UP. 
          ORIGINALLY WE WERE GOING TO DO IT ALL AT ONCE. 
          [02:45:09]
          >> CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON EXCHANGE? THE ORIGINAL WAS ENVISIONED TO RECONSTRUCT EXCHANGE FROM 79 TO HOLLAND. LAST SUER WHEN WE HAD CIP NVERSATIONS WE HAVE GOT DEVELOPERS WORKING AND THEY HAD DONE OVERLAYS D PAHED . WE WANT TO FOCUS ON FIXING EXCHANGE AT LIVE OAK. THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING DESIGN ON RIGHT NOW. 
          >> IT'S BROKEN UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS. 
          >> WE MOVE DESIGN DOLLARS NOW TO START DESIGNING THE REST OF THE RECONSTRUCTION SO WE CAN MOVE THAT . '26 IS WIDE OPEN . WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF SHOVEL READY TYPE STUFF. 
          >> THE HUTTO STATION APARTMENTS ARE STILL A SECOND PHASE OF THAT. YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE LEFT SIDE. THERE SO CONSTRUCTION COMING AND THERE'S ALSO APARTMENTS GOING IN AT THE CO-OP RIDE ALONG EXCHANGE SO THEY WILL STILL BE SIGNIFICANT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT TIME IS TO JUMP ON REBUILDING THE ROAD WITH THAT IN MIND. 
          >> MAYBE '27. AND CONSTRUCTION '27 . ND '26 
          >> I THINK IT HAS TO GO TO HILTON. 
          >> I WOULD ONLY GO NORTH OF WHERE THE APARTMENTS ARE GETTING ON. THAT'S A BIG PART THAT NEEDS TO BE RECONSTRUCTED DOWN. 
          >> FROM NORTH OF POST OFFICE THAT IS ROUGH. COULD WE GET BY WITH A MALE AND OVERLAY FOCUS ON THE INTERSECTION AND DESIGN IN 
          '27? >> YOU SAY KEEP IT AS IT IS. 
          >> YEAH. IT'S PROBABLY A THIRD OF A MILE. 
          >> THEY DID A MALE AND OVERLAY HALFWAY TO 79. THAT SOLVED A LOT 
          OF ISSUES. >> START DESIGNING NEXT YEAR. 
          >> PART OF IT IS YOU'RE REALIGNING. 
          >> PART OF THE ROAD IS NOT IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. 
          >> WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH DEVELOPERS TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SO WE CAN COME BACK. 
          >> THAT'LL TAKE SOME TIME. DESIGN IN '26. 
          >> DON'T MESS IT UP. I WILL MAKE SURE WE GET WHAT'S IN THE 
          DESIGN. >> WE ARE TALKING ROADS. I'M LOOKING THROUGH HERE, UNLESS I'M WRONG IT WILL GET TO THE T 30 AND 40. NONE OF THESE ARE READY. IF WE HAVE A SECTION OF '26 I WE HAVE PROBABLY ROUGHLY 20 MILLION WE CAN DO WE DON'T HAVE ROAD PROJECTS READY. I THINK IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO MAINTAIN THINGS TO LOOK AT WHAT YOU CAN DO FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS STANDPOINT . IF WE CUT OUT 50 MILLION AND ADDED 10 MILLION WE ARE OKAY AND GO FROM 9% OR WHATEVER THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS. 
          WE CAN KEEP THAT . DO WE THEN DO THE PUBLIC WORKS BECAUSE NOW WE 
          FREED IT UP? >> I THINK WE NEED TO GET INTO THE DESIGN FOR SURE. THIS ALL IS GOING TO TAKE TIME AND WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE IT TO FRUITION ON COUNCIL. MAYBE YOU 
          [02:50:01]
MIGHT . IT'S GOING TO BE A FIVE-YEAR PROJECT. PUBLIC WORKS. 
          >> DO YOU WANT TO BREAK FOR LUNCH? 
          >> WE WILL HAVE LUNCH AT 12:30. >> SPEAKING OF ROAD , STARTING ON PAGE THREE . JUST PUTTING HALF 1 MILLION AS A PLACEHOLDER FOR DESIGN. IT'S PROBABLY MORE THAN THAT. WE HAD DESIGN AND THEN LOOK TO '26 . WE SUBTRACTED . THE OVERPASS. WE KEPT 132, 133 . WE KEPT THAT IN. WE MOVED OUT 132 , 133 EXPANSION. -14 MILLION. WE MOVED OUT 4.3 MILLION. WE ADDED HALF 1 MILLION. WE MOVED CLIENTS MONEY AROUND FROM 25 TO '26 . WE ADDED HALF 1 MILLION FOR INNOVATION EXPANSION . WE ADDED 1 MILLION FOR T 23 1660 NORTH EXPANSION . 
          >> I THOUGHT IT WAS DESIGN. OKAY. 
          >> WE ADDED HALF 1 MILLION TO START THE DESIGN OF FRONTAGE ROAD. ONE OF THE FRONTAGE ROADS. WE ADDED MONEY FOR DESIGN THERE. 
          HALF 1 MILLION FOR CARL STERN DESIGN. 
          >> MOST OF THAT BEING ABSOLUTELY THE OVERPASS. THAT CAN BE 
          ATTRIBUTED TO THAT. >> WHILE MAKING PROGRESS ON 
          OTHER PROJECTS. >> I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHAT THIS ENTAILS. THIS WILL CUT TO INCREASE DRAMATICALLY LOWER. NOW WHAT WE DO IS WE GOT THAT IN 2027 . WE JUST MOVED A COUPLE PROJECTS TO '27 THAT BASICALLY WE MOVE THAT TO '27 BUT WE MOVED 39 MILLION FROM '27 TO '29 . WE MOVED THE CONSTRUCTION DOLLARS FOR INNOVATION . THEN WE MOVED 7.8 MILLION . THAT'S PROBABLY A NET OF 30 MILLION. WE'VE CUT OUT . TO ME THIS FREES UP A LOT FOR PUBLIC WORKS , THE POLICE STATION . WHEN THE DATA CENTER MONEY COMES WE DON'T HAVE TO BUILD A PUBLIC WORKSTATION . EVERY YEAR A ROAD CAN COME IN. I DON'T KNOW WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BORROW MONEY TO BUILD ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          SOMETIMES YOU CAN USE SALES TAX REVENUE OR TO CASH FLOW AND SOMETIMES YOU CAN DO THE ONE OFF. ADA CENTER CUT TO CHECK AND WHEN THE CHECK COMES IN YOU CAN PULL A PROJECT FORWARD . I THINK THAT IS A WAY TO FUND WHAT IT DOES TO THE TAX RATE. YOU GET TO WHATEVER YOU DECIDE BUT THEN YOU CAN MOVE PUBLIC WORKS AND A PRETTY GOOD LOOK ON THE POLICE STATION BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE GAP WHEN WE TOOK OUT IN BOTH OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE TO YOUR 
          [02:55:04]
PROJECTS TO BUILD. IF WE START DESIGNING TODAY WE CAN HAVE THOSE RUNNING . AGAIN, THAT'S WITH AN INCREASE. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE TO THE VOTERS OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITIES BECAUSE MOST DON'T KNOW WHAT PUBLIC WORKS DOES. I THINK POLITICALLY WE OUGHT TO SAY WE DO IT. WITH THE POLICE STATION YOU KNOW YOU'LL BUILD IT. IF THEY SAY THEY DON'T WANT TO FUND THE POLICE STATION WE HAVE TO FUND IT. PART OF ME IS WE SAY WE ARE GOING TO DO IT. HERE'S THE NEXT THREE YEARS OF TAXES AND DRAMATICALLY CUT STUFF OUT AND PUSH STUFF ON DEVELOPERS. 
          >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE TIMELINES BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME. THE PUBLIC WORKSHOP TO BRING THIS FOR DISCUSSION, THAT'S THE ONE IN MARCH? I THOUGHT IT WAS FOR CIP? 
          >> NOT JUST FOR CIP BUT A LOT OF ITEMS THAT GET GENERATED RESULT IN CIP. IT'S NOT UNIQUELY CIP. IT COULD BE WE NEED TO HIRE 
          POLICE OFFICERS. >> WE HAD ONE LAST YEAR DIDN'T 
          WE ARE NO? >> WE HAD THE CIP ONE THAT OCCURRED IN THE JULY AUGUST TIMEFRAME WHERE WE MET UP ON A SATURDAY. THAT WHEN WE DID DO TO HELP THE PUBLIC GET INPUT ON WHAT IMPACT COULD BE AND GIVE FEEDBACK ON PROJECTS BUT MOST CIP IS NOT DRIVEN BY THE PUBLIC ASKING IN THAT TYPE OF FORMAT. 
          MOST IS DRIVEN BY THE PUBLIC ASKING THROUGH DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN UP TO COUNCIL AND PMC. 
          >> IF WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS WE CAN GO TO THE PUBLIC. YOU HAVE MODEST INCREASES COMING, TXDOT WORKING ON SIGNALS SO THAT WILL MAKE THAT SAFER , WE ARE STILL DESIGNING GROUND-LEVEL SURFACE INTERSECTION , BUT IN EXCHANGE FOR PUSHING THE BRIDGE BECAUSE IF THE PUBLIC WANTS A BRIDGE YOU WIPE OUT EVERYTHING FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS. IT'S BUILD A BRIDGE AND DO NOTHING ELSE OR YOU PUSH THE BRIDGE OUT AND DO PUBLIC WORKS, POLICE STATION , A LIBRARY OR WHATEVER TO THE BIG TICKET ITEMS AND THEN YOU HAVE PROJECTS MOVING UP AND THEN DESIGN OF OTHER PROJECTS MOVING UP TUMOR YOU HIT 28 I MEANT TO ASK YOU THAT. THESE NUMBERS OF TAX INCREASES, PERCENTAGES AND DOLLARS IS WITH OR WITHOUT KEEPING DATA CENTER MONEY SEPARATE? 
          >> I'M PRETTY SURE THAT DATA CENTER MONEY WAS IN THESE PREDICTIONS. THE CONVERSATION ABOUT PULLING OUT SEPARATELY OCCURRED AFTER THIS DATA WAS ALL MADE. I DON'T KNOW THAT DECISION HAS ACTUALLY BEEN GIVEN TO STAFF AS THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO BUDGET ANY DATA CENTER MONEY COMING IN FOR THE REGULAR BUDGET , WE WANT SEPARATELY AND THEN WE WILL APPROPRIATE THAT. Y'ALL HAVE DISCUSSED IT BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT DIRECTION COME TO STAFF IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WISH TO HAVE HAPPEN. 
          >> I WAS THINKING DATA CENTER MONEY TO KEEP THE MONEY TO NOT MAKE OUR TAX RATES GO UP AND DOWN. IF THEY HAD $10 BILLION IN EQUIPMENT AND PUT IT IN THERE ONE YEAR WE WOULD TAX IT AT 10 
          BILLION AND THE RATE WOULD DROP. >> IT DOESN'T AFFECT THAT. 
          THAT'S WHY WE ARE OKAY THERE. >> IS JUST THE BUILDINGS ACTUALLY AND IT'S ONLY HALF THE VALUE BECAUSE WE ARE GIVING 50% 
          BACK. >> NO. IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE CHANGE IN THE RATE. IT'S BAKED INTO THESE NUMBERS SO IF WE DON'T GET THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY THAN THE INCREASES WILL BE HIGHER. TO MAKE THE SAME BUDGET. 
          >> IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE CALCULATIONS FROM THE COUNTY IS 
          MY UNDERSTANDING. >> IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE TAURUS CALCULATION. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT. 
          [03:00:07]
          >> TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. >> AT SOME POINT WHEN WE REMEMBER AND HAVE TO REFRESH OURSELVES I WANT TO MAKE SURE POTHETICALLY 10 BILLION IN BUSINESS PROPERTYWAS BUILT AND IT HAS A PLAN . WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS WE TAX AT 10 BIION ONE YEAR AND THIS IS GREAT AND THENNEXT YEAR IT 6 BILLION. I KNOW IT DOESN'T GO THAT WAY ONE YEAR. ONE YEAR SOMEONE ADDS TO BILLION AND NOW IT'S 1.2 OR SOMETHING BUT WE WERETRYING TO FIGURE T HOW TO MANIPULATE IT IN A WATOWHER WE D'T HAVE SWINGS IN INCOME AND WE DON'T GO TO PEOPLE EVEN IF THERE'S NO NEW REVENUE YOU DON'T WANT $.30 ONE , 40 THE NEXT, '29 THE NE . MAYBE WE REFRESH THAT AND MA SURE WE ALL FIGURE IT OUT. I DO KIND OF AGREE SAYING THAT THE SPREADSHEET LLARS IS ACCURATE . I DO THINK THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT TAX RATE WHERE BUSINESS PROPERTY IS NOT INCLUDED. WE HAVE INCOME BUT I DON'T REMEMBER HOW THAT. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? ALL OF US GOING TO SAY WAS DEPENDING ON THAT AND HOW THAT GOES SOME OF THESE PROJECTS WE MAY NOT WANT TO PAY WITH GENERAL REVENUE OR BOND DOLLARS BECAUSE SAY 9 , BUT IF THE'S ANY PRECTS IN HERE THAT CAN BE PAID FOR WHEN IT IS UP AND RUNNING YOU OUGHT TO NOTIFY THOSE TO WHERE WE CAN SAY WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT INAS A BOND PROJECT. NOW IT'S 
          A TOURIST PROJECT . >> THE UNDARY IS 137 BUT BECAUSE 199 CONNECTS 137 . 132 IS THE BOUNDARY SO GENERALLY SPEAKING AS LONGAS WHAT YOUR IMPROVING BENEFITS THE DISTRICT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE IMPROVEMENT ONLY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND. WHAT YOU CAN'T DO IS SAY THE TOURIST IS HERE BUT THIS BENEFITS US . 
          >>  CAN ALSO GO BACK AND DO THIS ONE LAST TIME LATER AND GO WE NOW KNOW WHAT WE PUT INTO THE TAURUS PROJECT TEMPORARILY AND 
          WHAT WE THINK WILL BE IN THERE. >> ANYTHING TODEAL WITH 132 INCLUDING E OVERPA. ANYTHING ON 3349 . THE NORTH SIDE WHERE THE COTTONWO PROPERTIES ARE LOTED IS ALSO TOURIST PROPERTY TWO. THAT CAN ALSO HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE BE PAID FOR . 
          YOU'RE LOOKING AT SOTHING ON THE CIP. 
          >> IF I CAN ADD THIS, ON THE SHEET YOU HAVE IN ONT OFYOU IT SHOWS THE LIBRARY COMMUNITY CENTER AND AQUATIC CEER ALL BEING FUNDED THIS YEAR. THIS IS AN OLD SHEET. YOU VOTED TO NOT DO THOSE THGS. WE HAVEN'T STARTED. YOU GOT THE PRELIMINY STUDY AND THE TWO PUBLIC PRESENTATIONON PUBLIC WORKS BECAUSE WE WERE PLANNING THOSE OUT AND TELLING YOU HOW BIG THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE. WE HAVEN'T STARTED ANY OF THOSE ON YOUR SHEET HERE FOR THLIBRARY , COMMUNITY CENTER OR AQUATIC CENTERMAKE SURE YOUR TRACKING THAT SO YOU WEREN'T THINKING WE 
          WERE WORKING ON THAT. >> YEAH, '27. 
          >> WHAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT? WE CAN BACK INTO WHEN THEY 
          SHOULD START DESIING . >> FOR ME, PUBLIC WORKIS THE MOST IMPORTANT FOLLOWED POLICE STATION. FOLLED BY A COIN TOSS ON LIBRARY AND I THINK LIBRARY IS IN THE MIDD . MAYBE IT'S PUBLIC WORKS , AQUATIC CENTER. 
          >> MY RANKING IS PD, PUBLIC WOS, COMMUNITY CENTER , I NOT NECESSARILY PARATE  INTO ONE ENTITIES. 
          [03:05:08]
          >> MY VIEW IS PD AND PUBLIC WORKS E EDED TO OPERATE THE CITY SO THEY ARE ONE CATEGORY AND EVERYTHING ELSE , THERE'S DIFFERENT LEVELS. YOU CAN HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH IS REIRED OR NOT BUT TH ARE NOT THE SAME LEVEL OF REQUIREMENTO OPERE THE CITY. WE N SHUT DOWN ANOTHER PROJECTS ANKEEP ING BUT WE CAN'T AVOID PUBLIC WORKS. 
          >>I THINK 'S ALMOST READY IN TERMS OF THE NEXT PHASE. THE 
          STUDIES ALL THE WAY DONE. >>WE KNOW WHERE U WANT T BUILNG AND THE SIZES OF EVERYTHING. WE ARE READY  GO TO DEGN ON THAT O. PD IS NOT QUITE THERE YET. THERE'S STILL ANOTR ROD COMING BASED ON FEEDBACK YOU GAVE THEM BEFORE WE GET TO THIS SAME POINT D THEN THOTHEONES WE HAVEN'T 
          STARTE >> THINKING ABOUT PUBLIC WORKS . 
          IF WE GO INTO DESIGNED IN '26 AND THEN CONSTRUCTION IN '27 BUT THE WASTATER TREATMENT PLAN  UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION POTENTIALLY 28. WHAT IS THE IMPACT ? 
          >> THROUGHOUT THAT OLE PROCESS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING THE PUBLIC WORKS YARD. I WAS VERY CLEAWITH THE CONSULTANT DOING THE PUBLIC WORKLAYOUT THAT THEY ULD NOT HAVE ANYTHING THAT IMPACTED THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IN MY MIND TH STATERREATMENT AND WAS CRITAL TOTHE CITY. PUBLIC WORKS NEEDTO DOWI IT BUT I'S T AS CRITICAL SO I SENT THIS CANNOT. THEY ID ERYTHING OUT TO AVOID THE. 
          WHEN THE CONTRACTORS E OUT THE'S NO BUILDI OVERLAP. 
          >> THERE'S PLENTY OF SPACE OUT THERE TOO. 
          >> FROM E CA MANAGEMENT STANDPOINT WE HAVE 9.3 MILL NDED FOR LIVE OAK ON PROJECT WE CAN'T ACTUAL START TODAY. 
          I'M TRYING TO FIND OUT TO GO AHEAD AND START THE DESIGN. YOU CAN TRADE DOLLS IN KIOFF PUBLIC WORKS DEGN NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IFALREADBECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY MOY THERE. 
          YOU JUST TAKE AY FROM LIVE OAK. YOU VE THAT TO 2026. 
          >> IT DEPENDS WHERE THE SOURCE OFTHE MONEY FOR LIVE OAK'S. 
          THAT WAS R NOT FOR DESIGNING FACILITIES. 
          >> THAT WOULD BE AN ALBERTA QUESTION. 
          THE ONES ON PAGE THR THAT HAVE THE GREEN DOTS NEXT  IT AS FAR AS DESIGN AND MONEFOR CONSTRUCTION. I KNOW MAYOR, TO YOUR POINT, IT'S MONEY SITTG FOR LIVEOAK BUT I'S ONE OF THOSE. I'S 425. WE DON'NEED A BUDG AMENDMENT FOR THIS YEAR EVEN THOUGH IT'LILY HAPPEN NEXT YEAR. I THINK IT'S ONE OFTHOSE AT WE ARE GOING FORWARD. WE HAVETHE MONEY THEN E TRANSAION NEEDS TO Y HAPPEN AND CONSTRUCTION NEEDS TO OCCUR INSTEAD OF TAKING MONEY AW TO GIVE IT TOANOTHER ONE. 
          >> ANY OF THESHAVE IN THEM? LKING ABOUT LIVE OAK WAU WERE THROUGH GEO AND SEO. OKAY. ON YOUR FUND WE ARE DOG SOME DESIGN FOR THE LIBRARY,THE RECREATION NTER IN FUTURE YEARS . IT N BEUSED FOR THAT. WE ARDOING SOME PARK PROJECTS. 
          THERE IS MONEY FOR LIARY. >> WE HA IT OUT INTO '. WE 
          PUSHED IT. >> TH'MONEY IN THE BANK 
          RIGHT NOW. >> CORRECT. 
          BE BENEFIDOLLAR I SAY NEXT  CAN NTH NOSAYING YOU HAVE TO BRING SOMETHING BUWE COULD NOT PROLONG TH. IT'S MONEY SITTING IN THE BANK THAT'S WAITING FOR A USE. GET THE PUBLIC WKS STARTED IN DESIGNED ANIF THERE'S ANHING ELSE WE 
          [03:10:02]
CAN DO I'M SURE I'LL BE MORE TH HA 1 MILLION. WE CAN 
          FINISH FUNDING AT . >> IF YOU LOOKED AT YOUR COMMUNITY BEFIT FUND IF YOU DID L THE PROJTS AND WOULD HA 475,000 TO GO  SOME OTHER PRECT. YOU HAVE TH MONEY. YOU ALSO HAVE THE JAIL BONDS. BASED  TH23 A CONSTRUCTI COST WE HAVE FOR UNDERGD, ELECTC YOU'LLSES PROBABLY HAVE 2.7 MILLION. YOU BROUGHT UP EARLIER WHETHER YOU PARKIMPROVEMENT FUND OR USE IT TO DO OTHER PARK PROJECTS. 
          >> RIGHT NOIN COMMUNITY >> IS THAT BASED OFF OF THE BEGIING FUND LANCE OR DOES THAT INCLUDE WHAT WE EXPECT 
          >>IT TAKES ARE BEGINNINFUND BALANCE FOR THE YEAR THAT WE END LAST YEAR WITH SO WE START WITH THAT BALANCE, PLUS OJECTED REVENUPLUS EXPENDITUR IF THE PROJECTS ARE SPENT AS  BUDGETED D REVENUES COLLECT AS BUETED 
          >> MY NCERN IS IF U MAKE A DECISION  FUND SOMETHING NOW AND TH WE GO START SPENDING OSE LLARS D THE RENU DON'COME IN WEAD DGETED FOR E AR IT COULD ENUP 
          A NEGATIVE FUND BANCE >> WA TO KNOW WHATTHE PROJECTED REVENUISAND WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF AUTHORIZING. 
          >> I WOULD AGREE WITHHAT. SHE'S GOT TO BE READING THE BUDGET NUMBERS D WE WOULDN'T HAVE KNOWEXACTLY WHICH ONES ULGO SO I WOULD RAER FIRM  AND TELL YOU WHAT WE KNOW  CERTAIN AND YOU BUDGET AGAINST THAT. 
          >> W MUCH OUT OF THAT IS LOCATED TO ONE? 
          >> 119,0 OUT IN 226. >> WHAT OTHER THINGS WE E PROBABLY NOT GOING TO DO WE COULD USE THAT MONEY FO 
          >> WEHAVETHE REEATION NTER. YE 
          >> BASICAL EVERYTHING ON PA E. I'M LOOKING AT HENUMBERS 
          HERE. >> IF THE COUNCIL SAIDE WANTED TO START ONHIS WECAN FUND PUBLIC WORKS ANTHE POCE THPUBLIC WORKS NTERWAS A ING COUNITY BENEFI WE COULD MOVE MONEY OUT OF E LIARY AND REC CENTER AND SCHEDULED TO BE SPENT XT YEAR AND START SPENDING THIS FISCAL YEAR AND NEXT YEAR STILL HA A BIG GAOFMONEY TO SPEND. WE COULALWAYS BAFILL AGAIN. IT COULD BE PAID DEDED TO PUT OUT THERE.THAT WE 
          >> WE CAN APPROVE THAT. WE COULD E HALF 1 LLION.TH  CAN USE THAT MONEY TO DESIGN. ESN'T HAVE TO BE GENERAL RENUE. CAN CHSE TO REIMBURSE. URSE. YOU CAN YOU MOVE THE NEY AROUND? WHY WAIT NEXTEAR? IF YOU HAVE 37ALLOCATED SOMETHING Y'RE NOT ING TO SPEND FOR ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO GO AHD AND SPEND THAT TODAY. WHEN 
          THE TIME COMES YOU JUST USE THE >> GENERAY SPEAKING THATIS WHAT YODO AS BODY IS DECIDE PRRITIES  LIMITED RESOURCE WE HE ANTIMING. TH COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEFUND IS TO USE ONE OF THE SOMEWHAT FUNGIBLE IN THSENSE THAT IT'S REVENUE WE HAVE WE CAN SPENON PROJECTS BUT YOU CAN ALSO SPENIT ON A PRECT ANCHOOSE TO REIMBURSE IT WITH A DIFFERT SOURCE OF REVENUE , A LEGAL REIMBURSEMENT. WAS VEN HIS BECAUSE MAYBE YOU 
          [03:15:03]
INTOTHPAS IMPROVEMENT FUNDCK ANSAY TELL US HOW YOWANT TO DO IT OR YBE YOD'T. THE TO MAKE E DECISIONS. EXILITY 
          >> ASSUMINGLEGAL YS YOCAN USE COMMUNITY BENEFIT NEY TO START TO DESIGN A PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY DOESANYONE VEAN ISSUE WITH USING THE LIBRY OF REC MONEY TO START TODAY ? SO WE CAN HAVE THAT IN CONSTRTION NEXTFISCAL YEAR? 
          >> I'M NOT OPPOSED BUT I HAVE CONCERNS OF DOING A BUDGET AMENDMENT . LET'S SAY $3,000 FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. 
          >> WE COULD FIND OUT A BUNCH OF AMENDMENTS.  PROBABLY GOT LES TAX BUT THAT WOULD MOVE UP THE DESI OF PUBLIC WORKS BY 
          SEVEN MONTHS. >> I THINK IT WOULD BE RECT STAFF WERE MOST  TO SAY INTERESTED IN EING THESE PROJECTS GO MOVE FORWARD IN DESIED, ME BACK  US ON THE WAY TO PAY FOR IT OWING WE ARE LOOKG AT MOVING THESE DIERENT PROJECTS AND THAT YOU D'T HAVE TO FIGURE MONEY ON THE SPOT. WE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ATTEMPNG TO DO. I THINK TH'S APPROPRIATE  YOU . CIDE YOU NTTO PRIOTIZE BACK , THA'S TAKING MONEY WE Y ARE ITING TO USE. WE COULD USE AND ' OR'27. WE NE MONEY AND  TO GET SOMETHING GOING. 
          >> IF WE ARREADY TOGO TO THE NEXT PHASE. 
          >> READY ON PUIC WOR. >> 
          >> FOR THE RECORD NO ONE IS FILLG ANY POTHOLES. 
          >> WE ARE FILLING IN POTHOLES. >> I STILL HAVE ONE. WHAT'S CHANGING MY PRIORITIES IS THE SAME THING.ONSISTENTO WORK A FIVE-YR PLAN, A CONSISTE INCREASE OR CONSISTENT STEADY NUMBERS OPERATING ON OR GO BACK TO TELL THE PUBLIC . WE CAN AT LEAST EXPLAIN TO THEM SOME MAJOR PROJECTS , REFOULAT SOME THINGS AND IN DOING SO WE FREED UP A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MON THAT YOU CAN'T SEE BUT YOU'LL SEE IT IN TERMS OF HOW ROADS ARE 
          DONE AND HOW STAFFING WORKS. >> I KNOW WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT PARKS, BUT THAT IS ANOTHER AREA WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED IN DEALING WITH FACILITIES. I THINK WE ARE DONE WITH FACILITIES FOR 
          PARKS CORRECT? >> LAST SUMMER YOU APPROVED AND THEN ANY PARKS MASTER PLAN. WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY STUDY FOR 
          AQUATIC CENTERS . >> I FEEL LIKE THERE WAS A 
          STY. >> 6,000,027. WE HAV'T TOUCHED YET. I LIKE WHAT THE PARKS BOARD IS SAYING. SPEND 8 MILLION , SPEND 1 MILLION AND TO THE PLAYGROUND AND STUFF AND THEN COME BACK LATER. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING 
          SIGNIFICANT IN THE PARKS. >> I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING YOU GUYS MAY HAVE SEEN WAS ON THE DURANGO FARM LANTHEY DEDICATED YOU SAW SOME RECOMMENDATION OF NEW PARKS . I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS FULL FEASIBILITY. 
          >> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT . IF JEFF WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY. WE HAD SO MANY STUDIES COMPLETED. MONEY HA BEEN SPENT ON STUDIES, PLANNING AND IT'S A LOT TO TAKE ON. 
          ARE GROWING, CHANGING AND MAKING DECISIONS HERE. I DON'T WANT FOR IT TO SIT ON THSHELF. WE WILL DESIGN THESE PROJECTS D 
          [03:20:03]
THEY MAY SIT ON THE SHELF FOR A AROR O. I WOULD HOPE THEY WOULDN'T SIT FOR FIVE YEARS BUT YOU NEVER KNOW. IF U WANT TO 
          CLARIFY. >> MATT IS RIGHT. THE PARKS AND MASTER PLAN DID NOT INCLUDE A SPECIFIC DESIGN STUDY . AT 3.14 ACRES . ONE OF THE PROPERTIES WE OWN WAS TO COME UP WITH AN OPTION. IT'S A GENERAL OVERVIEW . I BELIEVE THE PRICE WAS AROUND $8 MILLIONNEW OFFICES CONVERTING SOME SPACE INTO SOME MORE PASSIVE PARK THINGS TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY ENGINEERING. 
          >> MAYBE WE NEED TO ADD A STUDY . I DON'T KNOW IF ANNE WANTS TO GOFF OF THIS. WE N'T CESSARILY HAVE TO DO STUDY. 
          AT LEAST ADD THAT LINE ITEM AS FUTURE CONSIDERATION. 
          >> I DON'T KNOWIF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO THEIR OFFICE. 
          >> I N'T WANT TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. 
          >> INN IS A PORTABLE MOBILE BUILDING . 
          >> WHEN U SAY PORTABLE BUILDING IT MAKES IT SOUND , I DON'T WANT THBLIC TO INK IT'S NOT THAT BAD. 
          >> WHEN YOU HAD TO GO TO THE EXTRA CLASSES, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. I WOULD ASK WHO HAVE BEEN READ LONG ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAN BUT IT WAS THE CONSTRUCTION TRAILER WH THEY FIRST BUILT THE PARK AND IT WAS USED THEN. 
          TH WAS 2006. IT'S T EDITS AND YET . IT'S GETTING CLOSE. 
          >> I WOULD ALMOST SAY IT NEEDS TO BE DONENEXT YEAR AS WELL 
          RIGHT? >> YEAH. 
          >> MAY I THROW IN? YOU CAN PUT PARKS ADMINISTRATION WITHIN THE REC CENTER . THEY OUTGREW IT. IT CAN BE DONE. 
          >> WHEN WE WERE HAVING THE CONVERSATION ABOUHOW WE WOULD USE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEES CK IN THE FALL WHEN WE ALLOCATED A CERTAIN AMOUNT TO THE YMCA AND ALL THAT ONE YOU HAD ASKED US TO LOOK AT WAS COULD YOCOMBINE A COMMUNITY MEETING REC CENTER WITH A RKS BUILDING ON THAT PIECE OF LAND? ALL OF THESE PARK BUILDING, AQUATIC CENTER, ALL OF THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT HOW YOU CAN GAIN EFFICIENCY BY OVERLAPPING IF THE'S ANY ROOM AND WHAT 
          PROGRAM . >> DO WE WANT TO RECESS UNTIL 
          EAT AND TRY TO UPDATE THIS?  TO >> I WILL WORK ON THAT WHILE YOU EAT. CHICK-FIL-A IS OVER HERE. THERE'S ENOUGH FOR FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE AND STAFF. PLEASE HELP YOURSELF AND ENJOY. 
          >> WE ARE JUST RECESSING. 
          >> ON IT. IT IS 1:20. WE ARE BACK FROM RECESS. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN BUT A COUPLE OF CHICK-FIL-A SANDWICHES WERE EATEN. WE'VE GOT UPDATED NUMBERS. IN 2026, WE HAD 83,400,000 IN PROJECTS. THAT IS NOW 58,700,000 IN PROJECTS. OH, 
          SORRY. THAT IS 25. >> WE NOW HAVE 23 MILLION. IN '27, WE HAD 67 MILLION. NOW WE HAVE JUST UNDER MILLION. WE HAVE JUST OVER 50 MILLION. IN 2029, WHICH IS THE 
          [03:25:12]
          DOSE >> THE HOLDER EAR. 
          >> WE WERE UNDER 152 MILLION. IT IS AT 296 MILLION. THAT IS TO GET EVERY PROJECT ON THE C.I.P. LIST. 
          >> THAT IS JUST ROADS. >> THAT IS NOT THE EXPECTATION. 
          >> ALL OF THIS IS MULTIPLE FUNDING SOURCES. IT IS TAXES. IT IS BONDS. IT IS IMPACT FEES. IT IS FUNDING ALL OF THIS. IF A CITIZEN WERE TO SAY 296 WORTH OF PROJECTS -- YOU HAVE TO BORROW THAT MONEY. 
          DEFINITIVELY THAT THIS IS WHAT WE ARE DOING IS PRETTY MUCH THE CUP.NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. THE $296 MILLION BIG BUCKET HOLDER THAT WE ARE DOING , YOU ARE RIGHT. IT COULD BE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES. IT COULD BE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEES. 
          IT COULD BE DEBT. IT COULD BE OPERATIONS. IT IS ANYONE'S GUESS THAT PART OUT.  ARE LITERALLY PUTTINEVERYTHING OUT THERE AT IS A PLACEHDER FOR WHAT WNT  ACCOMPLISH WI 
          OUR MASTER PL. >> IT SEEMLIKETHE RK WE HAVE DONE ON TRANSPORTAON ONLY TODAY -- TYPICALLY -- THAT MAYOR AND I WERE TAING. THIS IS OUR THIRD YEAR DOING C.I.P.. REALLY, HER SECOND YEAR OF LOING AT NUMBERS. THE FIRST YEAR WAS OKING ATPROJECTS. SO'S BEEN A YEAR-TO-YE SITUION THAT WE HAVE BE DETERMINING THIS. SO NOW, JU BASED ON THE NUMBERS, ITLOOKS LIKE WE ARE PLNING FOR THE NEXTTHREE YEARS. I SEE IT AS WE ARE PLANNING WELLWITH HOW THE MAYOR LAID T THE NUMBERS.OUR FORM 5, THOSE GET STICKY. AT LEAST THOSE WILL BE DERMINED IN TH NEXTEA EN WE LL BE TAKING ON THE '28 CHALLENGE. INSTEAD OFGOING YEAR-TO-YEAR PLANNING, WE ARE GOING FROM ONE YEARTO THREYEARS, SO WE ARE MAKI PROGRESS, D ENTUALLY, WE WI BE IN A FIVE-YEAR, U KN, AREA, AND THEN BEYOND AT, O. I FEEL GOOD ABOUTHE PROGRESS THAT WE HAVE MADE IN THREE YEARS. 
          >> MAYOR COUNCIL, I HAN'T INTRUCED MUSCLE TODAY. SO RRY ABOUT THAT. MEEARP, CITY NAGER. I KNOW LOT CITIES WHOSE C.P.DOESN'T NOTHING  YEARS TWO, THREE,  BE FOUR. EY'RE NOT THINKING ABOUT THEIR NEEDS RIGHT NOW. 
          THEY E NOT ABLE TO INK ABOUT THEIR EDS INTO THE FUTURE. IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE DIALED IT DOWN TO WHERE IT IS PRETTY ACCURATE, TH IS A PRETTY BIG ACMPSHMENT. YOU ARE NOT DONE YET, T U ARE FAR AHEAD OF MANY CITIESIN THAT REGARD. 
          THEIR LIST WOULD LOOK FLIP FLOP, WHERALL THE EXPENDIT WOD ATE FROFTHE C.I., D THENTH ARDEDINGAT THEYARE PUNTING BECAUSE THEY C'T DO IT ISYEARWHAT E GOOD JOB. HIS YE? PUNTING. SO, WHEN IT COMES TO ROADS, STAFF IS GOING TO COME BACK. THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE CALCULATIONS TO GIVE US A NEW X RATE, TAX BASED ON THE ASSUMPTIONS. 
          INAUDIBLE ] THE NEXT STEP WHEN IT COMES TO RO C.I.P. IS TO BRING THISBACK MAE ATA WORK SESSION THAT SPILLS OVERINTO THE CITYCOUNCIL MEETING. BUT TO BRING A COUPLEF MEMBS OF CITY COUIL AT ARE T INVOLVED, TCH THEM UP, SEE WHAT THNUMBERS ARE AT THAT POINT. WE VE THE DEBATE. 
          HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH WE ARE AB TOINCREA. THIS IS ONLY DEBT. AS I WAS TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER AT THE BREAK, WE HAVE E PRESSURES OFGRING GOVERNMENTAND THE NEEDS OF GOVERNMENT ITSELF. WHILE THIS MAY SAY A 6% INCREASE OR 7, WE 
          WILL STILL HAVETHAT DEBATE. >> AND THE UTILITY FUND IS A 
          SERA THG, TOO. >> SO THERE MAY BE OPPORTUNITY. 
          WE MAY LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, WE CAN ADD STUFF TO '26. 
          >> WE MAY HAVE TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF BORROWING LIMITED AMOUNTS OFMONEY, SAY, IN 2026 TO USE FOR PROJECTS IN 2027 IN ORDER TO LEVEL OUT PEOPLE'S TAXES, THAT WAY, YOU DON'T HAVE 
          [03:30:01]
ONE YEAR WE ARE UP TWO. ONE YEAR WE ARE UP 10. WE ARE UP FOUR. 
          INAUDIBLE ] FOR PLANNING, IT MAY BE BETTER IF WE HAVE A MORAL LEVEL APPROACH AND A SYSTEMATIC WAY TO LOOK AT THINGS. THIS DOES BRING UP SEVERAL PROJECTS TO THE FRONT. IT BRINGS UP THE PUBLIC WORKS. I DON'T KNOW. I THINK WE HAVE 1 AND 2 -- POLI STATION BEAT 1 AND 2 AND LIBRARY AND AQUATIC, AND PARK OFCE WOULD BE THREE, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX, IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER. DOES THIS SAY THAT? OPPORTUNITY WITH THE AQUATICS CENTER AND THE PARKS CEER TO PARTNER WITH OTHER ENTITIES. THE ISD. THINK Y'RE GOING TO GET A LOT MORE OPPORTUNITY TO GET PRIVATE FUNDING FOR AT. I KNOW THE YMCA IN GEORGETOWN CEIVED MONEY FROM SOME HAIRCUTTING PLACE. SPORTSCLIPS. IS THAT WHO IT WAS? THEY RECEIVED 1 MILLION FROM THEM THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES WHERE ONCE WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE CAN DO THE REC CENTER, WE CAN FIND THOSE RESOURCES. 
          >> OKAY. THAT LEFT US WITH PARKS. WE D'TOUCH PARKS. 
          I UNDERSTAND, MOST OF PARKS FUNDED BY RKING FEES AND OTHER NTRIBUTED MONEY. I DON'T THINK THERE IS A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY THAT IS FUNDIN PARKS. IT  EXISTING MONEY AND EXISTINGSOURCES. IS THAT FAIRLY CUTE? 
          >> ALBERTO CAN COME APPEAR AND CHECK ME, BUT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE SOME MONEY LEFT ON THE G.O. BONDS THAT YOU COULD ISSUE IF YOU WANTED. EVERYTHING THAT WE VE BEEN TRYING TO FIND S BEEN OUT OF COUNITY BENEFIT, OREXISTING BOND DOLLA , OR EXISTING FUND BALANCES. TO THE PRESSU. NYMORE, WE AD 
          >>LIKE IF WE DECIDED ON A REC CENTER, I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS APPROVED BY THE BOND LANGGE WITH THE REMAINING MONEY. NOT THAT 30 MILLIOWOULD GET  A NEW REC CENTER , BUT THAT ULGO INTO THAT. BUTHAT IS NOT SOMETHING 
          WE ARE PRIOTIZING. >> THERE, YOU ARE TALKG ABOUT A FACILITY. WE WOULD ED TO REARCH THAT BEUSE THAT IS A FACILITY. IT  NOA PARK. AY. SO WHAT YOHAVE IS ABOUT 30 MILLION THAT  AUTHORIZED TO BE ISSUED THAT WE HAVE NOT ISSUED, BUT IT WOULD  FOR PARKS. 
          >>WE, I THOUGHT IN THE 2018 BOND, IT WAS COMMUNITCEER. 
          NOT NECESSARY RECENTER, BUT COMMUNITY CENTER. 
          >> OKAY. >> I HAVETO RESEARCH THE 
          WORDING ON IT. >> OKAY. MY ONLY QUESTIONIS, THESE ARE ALREADY FUNDED PROJECTS, FOR THE MOST PART. 
          THAT NUMBER, 3 MILLION, ISTIED INTO OUR CALCULATIONS FOR TAX RATEAND PROPERTY TAX INCREASES. WHEN WE SEE 9.08 INCREASE, THATTAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE PROJTED FUNDING WE NEED FOR T15 ATHLETIC FIELDS. 
          >> THOSE WERE BASED  IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE SOURCE FOR THE FUNDS AND WE THOUGHT WE WOULD PAY FOR IT WITH DEBT, THEY GETS ROLLED UP INTO THE INCREASE. SINCE THIS WAS PRODUCED, THE COUNCIL SAID WE ARE NOT FUNDING TRAILS. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO TAKE TIME TO RECALCULATE HOW THE DATA IS GETTING PULLED AND PUT 
          TOGETHER. >> I'M GOING THROUGH THIS. I THINK THINGS ARE GOING TO COME OUT BETTER BECAUSE WE HAVE THINGS NOT TOUCHING PARKS. THERE ARE FUNDS -- PARKS TO BE FUNDED AND BALL FIELDS. WE HAVE TO BORROW MONEY BUT IF WE BORROW MONEY -- $3 MILLION IN 2026, ALONG WITH ALL OF OUR OTHER BORROWINGS AND WHATEVER WE ARE DOING, THAT IS FACTORED IN. WE HAVE MONEY FOR ROADS. WE DIDN'T EVEN TOUCH PARKS AT ALL. BECAUSE MOST OF THE STUFF IS PUSHED UP FURTHER OUT. AND THEN WATER AND WASTEWATER. WE WERE TALKING. I THINK WATER IS A NECESSITY. 
          ROADS ARE NICE TO HAVE. IT'S NICE TO NOT BE SITTING IN TRAFFIC, BUT YOU HAVE TO HAVE WATER COMING OUT OF THE FAUCET. 
          WE SPENT THE WHOLE DAY ON ROADS AND PRIORITIZING ROADS. 
          [03:35:02]
INAUDIBLE ] THE PARKS ARE UNTOUCHED. WASTEWATER, 
          UNTOUCHED. >> YEAH. I WOULD LIKE TO GET CLARIFICATION ON THE INTERCEPTOR. THAT IS DESIGNED BY THE DEVELOPER OVER THERE ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF TOWN. 
          >> THEY ARE DOING THE DESIGN. YES. THOSE DOLLARS ARE NOT BEING SPENT. IN 2025, THOSE ARE NOT BEING SENT -- SPENT BY THE CITY 
          FOR THE DESIGN. >> THE WAY IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME IS THE AGREEMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN FINALIZED. THE AGREEMENT WOULD BE THAT THEY DO 100% OF THE DESIGN. THEY HAND THE DESIGN OFF TO US. WE DID IT, PER OUR NORM PROCESS, SELECT A CONTRACTOR. THEY WOULD PAY FOR SO THE TIMENE THAT THEY ARE . 
          LOOKING ATWOULD BE LATER THIS YEAR. LATER TH FISCAL YEAR. 
          ART THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, SOME OF THOSE DOLLS THIS YEAR.NG 
          >> GOTIT. I GUESS, FOR ME, WE PUT THIS ON THEC.I.P. LIST JUST BECAUSE  DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE. IT WAS ON THE MASTER PLAN BUT NOT ON THE C.I.P. LIST. FOR ME, I THINK IT IS GREAT THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS THE DESIGN. I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS ADVANTAGEOUS FOR THE CITY TO CONSTRUCT -- I GUESS -- MAYBE IF I SAW MORECLEAR NUMBERS  BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE -- THESE TWO PROJECTS ARE THINGS THAT I WOULD PUSH OUT TO '28, 
          '29. 13 AND 23. INTERCEPTOR >> WHY ARE THEY HIGHLIGHTED? 
          >> OH, HERE. >> OH, WASTEWATER. 
          >>WASTATER. >> I WOULD BE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THAT BECAUSE IF YOU PUSH THOSE OUT, YOU JUST CREATED INAUDIBLE ] NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS, AT THE CENTER OF OUR 
          CITY. >> ARE THEY AMENABLE TO NOT DOING THE INAUDIBLE ] NOT IN CITY LIMITS. IF YOU BUILD THIS, YOU STOP IT. 
          >> I WAS THINKING OF HAVING THIS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMT, TO TAP INTO AND TO COST PARTICIPATE IN. BUT I FEEL LIKE SPENDING -- LET'S SEE. WHERE ARE WE AT? HOW MANY? 
          >> IT IS 24. >> ALMOST 50 MILLION -- $15 JUSTIFY, I GUESS, PREVENTING THAT. WE CAN'T BE THE WASTEWATER PACKAGE PLANT WARRIORS. AND THAT IS IN OUR ETJ CURRENTLY, AND SO, IF IT GOES INTO THE CITY LIMITS, NOW, OU POLICE OFFICERS HAVE TO GO ACROSS 130, PATROL THE AREA, AND THERE IS NO CONTIGUOUS -NESS INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. YOU'RE PUSHING THEM FORWARD TO DO A P.I.D. TO COME INTO CITY LIMITS. 
          I THINK THAT WAS BE SOMETHING THE TURE THAT MAY LOOK RIGHT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT MAKES SENSE RIGHT NOW. 
          >> WE CAN VOTE ON THAT ONE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW -- I CANNOT IMINE US ADVOCATING FOR SOMEONE TO PUTHAT. YOU WANT TO BUILD FRONTAGE ROADS BUT YOU DON'T WANT THE LAND ON THE WEST 
          SIDE OF 130 TO BE IN THE CITY >> WELL, THE LANDSURROUNDG THAT IS AN ETJ. THEY ARE BEING SERVED BY ROUND CK ANYWAY. 
          >> THIS GROUP IS GHT ALONG 130. THEY ARE LOOKING TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY, DO A P.I., PROVIDE COMMUNITY BENEFIT DOLLARS, AND I GUESS PAY THEIR IMPA FEESFOR THAT PART OF THE WASTEWATER LINE THAT THEY E DESIGNING. IFWE SCRAP IT, WE 
          [03:40:03]
GET NO COMMUNITY BENEFI WE GET NO COMMUNITY DOLLARS, BUT YOU WILL HAVE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE USING OUR ROADS THIS NEEDS TO BE A COUNCIL VOTE, I THIN AND  NEED TODO IT 
          QUICK. >> I GUESS I NEED TO UNDERSTAND I GUS, OBVISLY, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE DESIGN AND THEN THEY ARE GOING TO CONSTRUCT IT. WHAT PORTION ARE THEY WIING TO PAY, AND WHAT PORTION ARE WE GOING TO BE ON THE HOOK NOT SUR 
          >> I CAN TELL YOU THAT IN THE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE, HIS NUERALL CAME IN LOW. ESE ARE THE MAST AN MBERS THAT THEY ASSUMED. IS 30% OPC NUMBERS WERE BELOW MY NUMBERS. AND SO, BASED ON HIS DESIGN AN EVYTHING THAT HE IS CALCULATING AS HE DOES BY $2 MILLION BASED ON HIS JECT ENGINEERS TIMATE. WE AR ALREADY REDUNG THAT PRICE TAG THAT IS THERE,AND I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE THE CITYMANAGER OR SOONE ELSE HAS THE MOST UP-TO-DATE NEGOTIATIO BETWEEN THE CITYAND THE DEVELOPER CAUSE THERE ISA DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT YS THAT THEY WI CONTRIBUTE X DOLLS TOWARDS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS HALF OR A QUARTER. I DON'KNOW WHERE THEY'REAT. THEYARE PAYING SOME PORTION OF THE CONSUCTI OF THAT. MY ASSUMPTION IS IT IS SOME SORT OF PRO RATAIF THEY ARE PART OF THAT LOAD GOING TO THAT LINE, THEN THEY WOULD PAY UP TO 10% OF WHEVER THE FINAL 
          COST  THE PROJECIS. >> OK. SO WE WOULD BE ON E 
          OK FOR 90%. >> FOR 90, AND WHEN OTHER PROJECTS COME IN TO DEVELOP ALONG THAT STRETCH OF LAND, THEN CAN RECOUP THE COSTS FR THEIR FE  USE CAPITAL TO 
          COVER IT. >> OK. I DIDN'T WANT THE PERCEPTION TO BE WE ARE GOING TO SPEND THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY ON TRYING TOSQUASH A PACKAGE PLAN. I WAED IT TO BE MORE BEFICIAL. IT KIND OF MAKES SENSE. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE OTHER DEVEPMENTS THAT CAN E INTO IT. OBVIOUSLY, WE LL HAVE TO FRONT THE MONEY, BUT THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO COLLECT IT IN THE 
          FUTURE. >> THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OWNS LAND UTH OF THERE. THERE IS HER LAND THAT CAN BE VED SOUTH OF THERE.  HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH IT NCE BEFORE GOBACK TO THE CITY. POTENTIALLY, WE WOULD GET SOME RECOVERY IMPACT 
          FEES TO COVER THOSE COSTS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. LIKE I SAID, I DI'T WANT  BE BASED ON INAUDIBLE ] . WE CAN TRY OUR BE BUT NOT ALWAYS ADDRS OTHERS. IT GOES BEYOND THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          >> I AGREE. I FORGOT THE GROUP THAT WAS UP TO THE NORTH. I WAS AN ADVOCATE FOR RELEASING THEM OUT OF THE ETJ OR OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. HI V OR WHATEVER. I SEE NO REAS TO GO SPEND A BUNCH OF MONEY . BUT IF IT SPURS A CORRIDOR OF DEVELOPMENT -- MY BIGGEST FEAR IS, IF ONE PLACE GOES TO A 
          INAUDIBLE ] >> SORRY. I'LL DO BETTER. 
          COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD, THE REASON THOSE WERE HIGHLIGHTED IS THOSE THREE PROJECTS THATARE HIGHLIGHTETHERE, THEY ARE PARTLLY FUNDED BUT NOT FULLY FUNDED. THEY ARE PARTIALLY FUND WITH A FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCE. 
          >> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION ON THAT. 
          >> ALL RIGHT.SO I THINK WE HAVE FOUR YEARS. I THINK WE HAVE FOUR YEARHAMMERED OUT ON PROJECTS. THE 50 YEAR, BEING THE CATCH ALL YEAR. WE CAN'T PLAN TO YEAR FIVE. I THINK IT ISA 
          INAUDIBLE ] C.I.P.. >> TO BE FAIR, WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU THIS SUMMER WITH A FULL THERE WILL BE A C.I.P. THAT GOES UNTIL TODAY. THAT IS WHY YOU LY SEE ISD, '27, '28, '29. 
          [03:45:09]
          >> WITH THAT, UNLESS THERE IS MORE DISCUSSION ON THE FACILITY REVIEWS, PARKS, ROADS, AND WASTEWATER, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS MUCH MORE ACTION TO DO. OR MUCH MORE DISCUSSION TO DO. 
          IS THERE? WE ARE GOING TO BE HERE UNTIL 9:00 TONIGHT, 9:15, I THINK. READY TO ADJOURN IT? DO WE NEED TO DIRECT U ALL? 
          >> CAN WE JUST TAKE TH DIRECTION THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN THROUGH THE CONVERSATION RATHER THAN HAVING TO GO LISTED OUT? 
          >> I WAS THINKING THERE WAS A POLICY CHANGE BUT I DON'T 
          REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS. >> WH IS THAT? 
          >> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT THAT WAS? 
          >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE DATA CENTER MONEY? 
          >> THAT'S RIGHT. DO WE NEED TO TRY TO -- WE ARE GOING TO NEED DIRECTION ON THAT. DO WE WANT THAT SEPATED OUT TO WHERE WE 
          CAN SA HEY -- >>  YOWANT US TO LL THAT OUT AND NOT USE IT IN OUR COGNITIO ON WHAT THE IMPACT TO THE TAXPAYER WILL? WE NEED TO KNOW THAT. 
          >> I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SEPARATE LINE. NOT THAT IT SS WITH THE TEXT INCREASES. -- TAX INCREASES. 
          >> LONG-TERM, COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON SAID WE FOCUSED ON USING THE ONE-TIME ITEMS. WEARE USING THAT AS A RECURRING -- I DON'T NT TO BOOW MONEY BASED ON USING THATTO PAY FOR IT. I WANT TO USE THE CASH MONEY. 
          >>EAH. AND WHAT I WROTE ABOUT THE TIMEWHEN ROUND ROCK RAN INTO TH, THEY WERE RELIANT ON DELL, AND THEY HAD BAD YEARS. 
          ALL OF A SUDDEN, THEIR BUDGET WAS IN TROUBLE. THEY HAD TO FIX IT. WHEN THEY CAME OUT OF IT, THEY END UP BASICALLY -- AND THEY ARE IN A DIFFEREN FINANCIAL SITION THAN US. THEY TOOK THAT MONEAND PUT IT OF TO THE SIDE. NO U N ASK ROUND ROCKWHAT IS DELL DOING OJEC . SOME LIKE THAT WOULD BE USUL FOR USTO AVOID PITFALLS OF UNEV TAX INCOME. 
          IT IS ALSO HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT THAT BUSINESS BROUGHT THE COMMUNITY. IT KIND OF WORKS BOTH WAYS FOR ME. 
          >> BECAUSE WEARE GIVING REBATES, TOO. WE HAVE ANOTHER DATA CENTER COMING. THEY BOUGHT THE LAND. IT IS GOING TO BE A BIGGER ITEM WHERE IF THERE IS A DATA SLOWWN, I DON'T WANT US TO GO, WE CAN FIX THIS. WE HAVE $100 MILLION AND IT IS PAID FOR, AND THEN ITDRIES UP. AND WE'RE HAVING TO BE LIKE, OH, THOSE IDIOTS FOUR YEARS AGO DID ALL OF THIS, AND WE HAVE TO RAISE YOUR TAXES. THE DEBT CENTER WENT AWAY, OR WHATEVER CLED DOWN. 
          >> I AGREE WITH DAN'S TAKE ON THINGS. I THINK IT IS GO TO STARTHAT OUT IN THE FIRST COUPLE OF YEARS,AND KIND OF SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT, AND FUTURE COUNCILS, IF THEY NT TO, YOU KNOW, COMBINE IT, GREAT. IF NOT, I GUS, JUST TO KIND OF SEE THE DIFFERENCE, BECAUSE SOME OF THAT MONEY WILL BE REBATED BACK. BACK TO THEM. 
          FIT COUPLE OF ARS, NOT TO BE TOO -- NOT TO EXPEND IT A LOT. 
          ALSO, I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS A POLICY THAT WE SHOULD MAYBE LOOK INTO THIS AND JUST BECOME THAT ARE EDUCATED ABOUT DATA CENTERS AND WATER USAGE. I KNOW THAT AS FAR AS LIKE FLUSHING THE TOILET AND THGS OF THAT SORT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF MANPOWER IN THE DATA CENTERS, THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE, BUT THE ISSUE OF WATER FOR OLING. I THINK WE NEED TO DIVE A LITTLE BIT DEEP INTO THAT WITH OUR WATER SITUATION THAT WE ARE IN. OF COSE, WE HAVE SOME PROJECTS COMING ONLINE, BUT WHAT THEIR TRUE IMPACT WOULD BE ON OUR WATER SYSTEM. I THINK IT WOULD 
          [03:50:01]
BE US GETTING AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT. NOT NECESSARILY FLUSHING TOILETS, BUT WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE USING, WHAT THEY RECYCLING TO COOL WHATEV G AND SERVERS MAY BE. I KNOW THAT WE ALREADY HAVE SKYBOXES HERE. THEY ARE WORKING ON THAT. THERE IS ONE THAT GOT APPROVED OVER RE IN IRONWOOD, I THK. IRONWOOD. 
          WE JUST REALLY NEED TO GET A HOLD OF THE WATER USAGAND HOW THEY ARE GOING TO BE RECYCLING IT OR WHAT HAVE YOU, SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF PUT THAT INTO OUR CALCULATNS, TOO, SO. 
          >>  THERE ARE TWO DIFFERT TYPES OF DATA CENTERS. THERE IS WATER COOLED AND AIR COOLED. EVEN THE AIR COOLED ES A FAIR AMOUNT OF WATER IN THE AIR EXCHANGERS FOR AIR COOLING. 
          MAKING SURE WE KNOW WHAT RANGE WE ARE LOOKING AT FOR EACH DATA 
          CENTER IS VERY IMPORTANT. >>YE. PERFECT, DA YOU KNOW 
          A LOT MORE THAN I DO, SO. >> THEY KNOW IT IS GOING TO BE AIR COOLED OR LIQUID COOLED. THEY DESIGNED THE FACILITY. IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL THE ONES THAT ARE PLANNED RIGHT NOW ARE AIR COOLED. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE THE 
          U.E.S WERE LOWER. >> DATA CENTERS, PARTLY BECAUSE OF THE SCALE FACTOR, BUT THEIR SCRS ARE VERY DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER. EVEN THOUGH EY'RE USING PRIMARILY AIR COOLED EQUIPMENT, THEIR WATER USE IS DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER. 
          >> I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE W THEY DID IT. BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU 
          SAY. >> LOWER OR HIGHER? 
          >> WHAT? >>TH ARE APPLYING FOR ONE 
          L.E.. >> ALL RIGHT. 
          >> MAYBE THEY ARE REUSING IT OR RECYCLING. FAIR ENOUGH. I'M OKAY WITH IT BECAUSE THAT'S CONSERVATION FIRST. 
          >> THEFOUND A WELL ON THEIR PROPERTY TT THEY ARE DRILLING. 
          >> TELL ME IF IS SOUNDS RIGHT. I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFTO SEPARATE DATA CENTER TES SEPARATE FROM PROPERTY TAX CANCELLATIONS IN REGARDS TO PROPERTY TAXES AND BUSINESS PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING T.E.R.S AND TAX REBATES. 
          >>SECOND. >> ANY DIUSSION ON THAT? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. MAYOR SNYDER 
          >> AYE.. COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. >> AYE.. 
          >> THE MOTION PASSES, 5-0. >> IF I PULL E DATA CENTER UP, 
          THOSE ARE GOING TO MP UP. >> I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE IT IS 
          FACTORED IN THERE. >> JUST LOOKG AT IT WITH THAT MONEY SET ASIDE WITH E WAY THAT IT IS RRENTLY SLATED, IT IS GOING TO MAKE THOSE NUMBERS BECOME BIGGER BECAUSE NOW, TH BURDEN IS GOING TO FALL MORE ON THE RESIDENTS. 
          >>I WOULD ADD A COND LINE. WHEN WITH DATA CENTERS. AND THAT 
          IS YOUR 9%. >> YEAH. I THINK THAT'HOW 
          I'M GOING TO DO IT. >> AND THEN ONE WITHOUT SO WE CAN SAY IT  NOT THAT BIG A DEAL,  WE CAN SAY, HOLY CRAP. 
          >> ARGUABLY, THE NEXT EXERCISE WOULBE, IF YOU DO ITTHAT WAY, NOW, STARPAIRING UP THE C.I.P.S THAT YOU PU OUT OF IT. 
          THERE'S ANOTR STEP THAT WILL HAVE TO COME. I'M PREPARING YOU FOR THAT SO KNOWN TSSTICKER SHOCK AND FREAKS OUT. 
          >> THEY WILL BE EXCID WHEN THEY SEE THE BIG BUILDINGS. 
          PEOPLE WILL SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? MAYBE THAT IS WORTH IT BECAUSE IT JUST SAD ME X AMOUNT OF MONEY IN TEXAS. 
          >> OKAY. >> WE HAVE OTHER ACTION ITEMS? OR TALKING POINTS? ALL RIGHT. WE WILL ADJOURN AT 1:51 P.M. ON THE 
          FIRST OF FEBRUARY. >> THANK YOU, STEPH. --
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.