Apr 17, 2025 City Council

[00:00:16]

CALL. >> THORNTON?

>> HERE. >> KOLAR?

>> HERE. >> PORTERFIELD?

>> HERE. MAYOR SNYDER'S HERE. NEXT, IF YOU RIDE, IN THE CASE

AND BY DANNY COOK -- >> FATHER, WE ARE TRULY GRATEFUL FOR TODAY, GRATEFUL FOR THIS WEEK IN WHICH WE ANTICIPATE RESURRECTION SUNDAY. WE ASK THAT YOU WOULD INDEED BE THE PRINCE OF PEACE THIS EVENING. LORD, YOU WOULD GIVE WISDOM, YOU WOULD GIVE GRACE AND MERCY, AND -- IN THE NAME OF JESUS, AMEN.

>> AMEN. >> JOINED ME IN THE PLEDGE.

>>I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER

GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. >> NEXT WE HAVE CITY MANAGER

[5. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ]

COMMENTS. CITY MANAGER? >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. CITIZENS OF HUTTO, GUESTS, JAMES EARP, CITY MANAGER, FOR THE RECORD. FIRST I WANT TO REMIND THE HUTTO UTILITY CUSTOMERS TO PLEASE SIGN UP FOR THE NEW BILL PAYMENT SERVICE THROUGH THE WATER PORTAL BEFORE YOUR MAY BILL IS DUE. WE DO HAVE DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS ON OUR WEBSITE, AND THIS LOVELY QR CODE THAT POPS UP WILL TAKE YOU TO A PAGE THAT HAS A LINK TO ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT. WE'D ALSO LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THE HUTTO SOLVENT.

IT'S A BRAND-NEW RESIDENT SERVICE REQUEST APP. THAT'S AVAILABLE ON BOTH MOBILE AND, IT'S ON, LET ME TRY THAT AGAIN.

IT'S AVAILABLE BOTH AS A MOBILE APP AND THE WEB, GIVING YOU THE FLEXIBILITY TO REPORT ISSUES ANYTIME, ANYWHERE. AND JUST TWO WEEKS SINCE OUR LAUNCH, WE'VE HAD 1000 RESIDENTS DOWNLOADED THE APP, AND ARE ALREADY ENJOYING IT'S EASY TO USE FEATURES WITH THE ABILITY TO TAG LOCATIONS, UPLOAD PHOTOS, AND PROVIDE DETAILS HUTTO SOLVE IT HELP US ADDRESS THE CONCERNS IN THE COMMUNITY QUICKLY AND EFFICIENTLY, SO IF YOU DOWNLOAD THE APP, YOU CAN GET STARTED BEING A PART OF THE SOLUTION.

POTHOLES, BURNED-OUT LIGHTS, HIGH GRASS, ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF, THAT'S ALL GOOD THINGS TO TURN IN. HUTTO PUBLIC LIBRARY WILL BE CLOSED ON MONDAY, MAY 19TH, THROUGH WEDNESDAY THE 21ST TO COMPLETE THEIR YEARLY INVENTORY, SO MAKE SURE, IF YOU ARE A LIBRARY USER, THAT YOU PAY ATTENTION TO THOSE DATES. ALSO, EARLY VOTING WILL BEGIN HERE AT HUTTO CITY HALL APRIL 22ND THROUGH THE 26 FROM 8:00 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M. DAILY, AND APRIL 28TH AND 29TH FROM 7:00 A.M. TO 7:00 P.M. THERE WILL BE NO VOTING ON SUNDAY, APRIL THE 27TH. ELECTION DAY IS SATURDAY, MAY 3RD, AND DEVOTING HOURS WILL BE FROM 7:00 A.M. TO 7:00 P.M. ON MAY 3RD.

CITY HALL IS GOING TO BE THE ONLY HUTTO LOCATION FOR THIS ELECTION YEAR . HOWEVER, ANY WILLIAMSON COUNTY REGISTERED VOTER CAN VOTE AT ANY WILLIAMSON COUNTY POLLING LOCATION, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE IN HUTTO. YOU CAN VOTE AT OTHER WILLIAMSON COUNTY VOTING LOCATIONS. SO PLEASE NOTE ANY LOCATIONS ALWAYS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PER THE COUNTY, AND YOU CAN ALSO CHECK WAIT TIME ESTIMATE ON HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE FOR YOU TO VOTE AT WILCOTX.GOV ON THEIR ELECTIONS WEBSITE. SPEAKING OF UPCOMING EVENTS WITH THE LAUNCH OF HUTTO CONNECT CALENDAR AND THE USE OF THE QR CODE ON THE SCREEN , MY COMMENTS ARE GOING TO BECOME SLIGHTLY MORE ABBREVIATED REGARDING OUR EVENTS, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT AS MUCH REASON FOR ME TO EXPLAIN AS MUCH, SO GET ON THE CALENDAR. GET, GET, GET ON THE END OF WHAT'S HAPPENING. SO HERE, HERE ARE THE QUICK SNIPPETS. JOIN OUR LIBRARY DIRECTOR FOR LUNCHTIME AND VIRTUAL BOOK CLUB. MEETINGS WILL BE EACH MONTH ON THE SECOND TUESDAY STARTING MAY 13TH FROM NOON TO 1:00. THE MAY BOOK IS VERITY BY COLLEEN HOOVER. AND THEN CALLING ALL THE LOCAL BUSINESS OWNERS TO ATTEND THE RISE AND THRIVE HUTTO BUSINESS APPRECIATION EVENT. THESE ARE TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO CONNECT THE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ON TUESDAY, MAY 6TH THROUGH THURSDAY, MAY 8TH FROM 7:30 TO 9:00 A.M. CHAT ABOUT BUSINESS RESOURCES WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TEAM, JOIN COFFEE AND PASTRIES. NEXT WE HAVE A, A INVITATION TO ATTEND HIPPOS HELP THE EARTH. THIS IS A FREE EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY EVENT FOR ALL AGES AT THE PETERSON COMMUNITY DEMONSTRATION GARDEN ON SATURDAY, APRIL 26TH FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M. NOW, LATER THAT DAY, WHEN YOU'RE DONE IN THE GARDEN, ENJOY 23 BACK TO BACK EVENT AT ADAM MORGAN. FIRST WE HAVE CHILDREN'S DAY AND THEN MOVIE IN THE PARK. SO YOU CAN

[00:05:07]

IF YOU'RE A BUSINESS OWNER, FAITH-BASED GROUPS, NONPROFIT, OR COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION, COME LEARN ABOUT BUSINESS CONTINUITY FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION AND DISCUSS THE PLAN FOR DISASTER RESPONSE AND RECOVERY COORDINATION BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS. THERE WILL BE WORKSHOPS, KEYNOTE SPEAKERS, PANEL DISCUSSIONS, LUNCH, AND AN EXHIBIT HALL WHERE YOUR ORGANIZATION CAN NETWORK, BUT REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED. NEW THIS YEAR, HUTTO WILL BE HOSTING HERO'S DAY PARADE , A MEMORIAL DAY, MONDAY, MAY 26TH. IT'S A BIG DEAL FOR US IN HUTTO, SO I HOPE IF YOU HAVE A GROUP, ORGANIZATION, CLUB, OR BUSINESS THAT WANTS TO PARTICIPATE, PLEASE VISIT THE HUTTO PARKS AND REGISTRATION PAGE, OR EMAIL THE PARKS DEPARTMENT THROUGH THEIR EMAIL ADDRESS ONLINE. ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 28TH, FROM 6:00 TO 7:00 P.M., WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS WILL BE HOSTING INTERVIEW SKILLS SOLUTIONS AT THE HUTTO LIBRARY, SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN POLISHING UP YOUR INTERVIEW SKILLS, PLEASE COME OUT FOR THAT. AND THAT BRINGS ME TO INTRODUCING TO, TO THE COMMUNITY ANOTHER COHORT OF OUR HUTTO CITIZENS UNIVERSITY PARTICIPANTS. THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT, THEY'RE, THEY'RE EXCITED BECAUSE THEY ARE NOW GRADUATING THIS EVENING, SO LET'S PUT OUR HANDS TOGETHER FOR THEM. SO FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH THE HUTTO CITIZENS UNIVERSITY, THIS IS A NINE WEEK COURSE, AND THESE, THESE PARTICIPANTS WENT THROUGH THE NINE WEEK COURSE.

THEY TOURED THE HUTTO POLICE DEPARTMENT . THEY, THEY PARTICIPATED IN THE CITY'S BUDGET SURVEY, AND THEN SOME EVEN ATTENDED THE PUBLIC BUDGET WORKSHOP ON THIS SATURDAY. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE NUMBER OF GRADUATES THAT WE HAVE TONIGHT.

WE'RE GOING TO CALL THEM UP BY NAME AND PRESENT THEM WITH THEIR GRADUATION CERTIFICATE AND THEIR HUTTO CITIZENS UNIVERSITY CHALLENGE GOING. HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE UNIVERSITY? ALL RIGHT. THERE'S A COUPLE OF ALUMNI IN HERE. ALL RIGHT. Y'ALL BE SURE TO T-REX ROLLOUT FOR YOUR NEW MEMBERS.

OKAY. ATTENDEES, WHEN YOU HEAR YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME UP TO THE FRONT, RECEIVE YOUR MATERIALS, BUT STAY UP HERE SO WE CAN GATHER FOR A GROUP PHOTO AT THE END. SO FIRST WE WOULD LIKE TO CONGRATULATE KEITH BURRIS. ALL RIGHT. NEXT, RICKY FRANKLIN.

APPLAUSE ] >>

>> ALL RIGHT, NEXT, ALLISON KIRSCH.

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

[00:10:08]

>>

>> OKAY. >> ED TROXEL.

>>

>> ABLE TO JOIN US TONIGHT, SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ THEIR NAMES COLLECTIVELY. MICHELLE NEWBY, CHRISTIAN SANDOVAL, VERONICA MAXEY, AND AMY FERNANDEZ LITHGOW. BUT THIS IS YOUR GRADUATES OF YOUR HUTTO CITIZENS UNIVERSITY 2025 COHORT.

>>

>> THOSE OF YOU THAT JUST STOOD UP, Y'ALL HAVE TO KEEP

CLAPPING. >> I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU GUYS TO STEP IN FRONT OF THE PODIUM SO I CAN GET ALL OF Y'ALL -- JUST RIGHT HERE IN FRONT. PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. HERE WE GO. THANK YOU

FOR BEING HERE. >>

>> OKAY, I, I PANICKED JUST FOR A MOMENT, BECAUSE I LOOKED AND THERE'S STILL TWO MORE PAGES. BUT LUCKILY IT'S JUST ANOTHER

[6. PUBLIC COMMENT ]

COMMENTS FOR TONIGHT. >> THANKS, SIR. NEXT WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THERE WILL BE A LIGHT. IT'LL TURN GRADE WHEN THERE'S 30 SECONDS LEFT IT'LL GO TO YELLOW, AND IT GOES TO READ, YOUR TIMES UP. BEFORE WE GET STARTED WE DID RECEIVE AN ONLINE COMMENT FROM TERESA AND RUSTY BONNETT, SO THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET A COPY OF THAT EMAIL TO THEM. FIRST UP, WE HAVE TRICIA

PALMER. >> OKAY. HI, MY NAME'S TRICIA PALMER, AND WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WAS THE 257 ACRE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT ON COUNTY ROAD 137 AND EAST WILCO, AND AS I SIT HERE, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME TO EVER BE TO A MEETING, SO THANK YOU ALL FOR LETTING ME SPEAK FIRST. I

HAVE NO IDEA, LITTLE NERVOUS. >> YOU'RE DOING JUST FINE.

>> BUT I WAS LOOKING, AND I SAW THE CITY OF HUTTO PILLARS, AND TWO THINGS THAT REALLY STOOD OUT TO ME ARE GROWING RESPONSIBLY AND SUSTAINABLY, AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT THE 250 ACRE, 257 ACRES THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED, POSSIBLY DEVELOPED IN MY OPINION, AND IT IS JUST MY OPINION, BUT I'M SURE THERE'S OTHER FOLKS HERE, BUT TO ME THAT IS NOT GROWING RESPONSIBLY, AND IT'S NOT GROWING SUSTAINABLY. AND ALSO WHEN I LOOK AT, CREATE THE HIGHEST QUALITY OF LIFE, I LOOK AT THAT, AND FOR ME AND MY FAMILY AND THE FOLKS THAT LIVE OUT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT IS NOT THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE ARE WANTING AND EXPECTING FROM THE CITY OF HUTTO. SO JUST ASK THAT YOU RECONSIDER POSSIBLY DEVELOPING UP THAT PROPERTY, AND ALLOWING US, AS, AS FOLKS WHO LIVE OUT THERE, TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THAT IS NOT WHAT WE WANT. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS.

>> I'M KIDDING, I'M KIDDING. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I'M SORRY I

DON'T HAVE ANY MORE TIME. >> CAN I ASK A CLARIFICATION QUESTION? IS THAT OKAY? IS IT THE ONE THAT OFTEN REFERRED TO AS THE GATEWAY PROJECT? IS NOT THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

>> I BELIEVE SO. YES, SIR. >> IN QUEUE.

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT UP WE HAVE ANGELA BOREN.

>> AS YOU CAN PROBABLY SEE, I'M FRIENDS WITH TRISH, BECAUSE I'M SITTING WITH HER. WE'RE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE IN THE SPRING VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ARE BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY EAST WILCO HIGHWAY, AND ON THE SOUTH BY CR 130 A. AND SO THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO YOU WILL DIRECTLY IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY, AT ONE TIME, WILCO WANTED TO PUT EAST WILCO HIGHWAY THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WERE ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY WORK WITH RUST

[00:15:01]

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. >> NEXT WE HAVE DAN FOLEY, AND I BELIEVE YOU'RE GIVING YOUR TIME TO JAMES. AND SO THEN WE HAVE JAMES WEAVER. DID I DO THAT RIGHT?

>> WE'VE BEEN A LITTLE SLOW TODAY. GOOD EVENING, MR. MAYOR.

MY NAME IS JAMES WEAVER, AND I DO LIVE HERE IN HUTTO. A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED IN OUR PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM 9.2, DEALING WITH WATER DRAINAGE AND UPDATED FLOOD MAPS. OUR CITIZENS WHOSE RESIDENCES AND OTHER STRUCTURES WILL NOW BE LOCATED WITHIN THESE FLOOD MAPS AREAS MAY WELL BE FACED WITH A SHOCK DUE TO THE REQUIREMENT OF FLOOD INSURANCE. DRAFTS OF THESE MAPS ARE ALREADY CIRCULATING IN SOME QUARTERS. ONCE PUBLISHED AND DISSEMINATED, SEVERAL ACTIONS WILL BE TRIGGERED. THESE MAPS WILL BECOME VERY IMPORTANT IN A SHORT TIME. SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED DURING THIS PRIOR MEETING WAS THAT ONE OF THESE FLOOD MAPS ARE SO IMPORTANT TO OUR CITY. WE WILL HAVE MORE STRUCTURES, CITY BUSINESSES, CITY RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT WILL FALL WITHIN THE NEWLY DEFINED 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN CATEGORIES. MOST PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW OR APPRECIATE WHAT DRIVES THESE FLOOD MAPS, OR WHAT RESULTS HAPPEN TO HOMES AND BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOW WITHIN THESE NEW FLOOD AREAS. UPON PUBLICATION OF THESE MAPS , MANY INSTITUTIONS WILL EVALUATE THEIR LENDING PORTFOLIOS, AND ANY STRUCTURES WITHIN THOSE FLOODPLAINS WILL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN FLOOD INSURANCE OR GENERALLY HAVE THEIR MORTGAGE CALLED. THAT MEANS THE BANK IS GOING TO GET YOUR INSURANCE, OR YOU'LL BE REQUIRED TO PAY THE LOAN OFF. THE 5000 TO 6000 HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS HERE HAVE CAUSED A MAJOR IMPACT ON DRAINAGE. UPDATES AND IMPROVEMENTS TO INFRASTRUCTURE, SUCH AS THE ADDITION OF LANES TO THE INTERSECTIONS AND CLEARING OF BRUSH, WILL ALSO IMPACT YOUR DRAINAGE. YOU'RE CHARGING, YOU'RE CHANGING THE DRAINAGE PROFILE OF THE LAND BEING DEVELOPED, AND WHEN YOU COVER 30% TO 40% OR MORE OF YOUR NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERN WITH BLACKTOP AND CONCRETE, YOU CAN CREATE MAJOR DRAINAGE PROBLEMS, THE LEAST OF WHICH ARE NEW FLOODPLAIN AREAS. IF CONDOR AND DRAINAGE PLANS ARE NOT PROPERLY DESIGNED AND IMPLEMENT IT, WE COULD BE HAVING WIDESPREAD CHAOS BY CREATING NEW FLOODPLAIN AREAS AND IMPACTING EXISTING STRUCTURES. ANOTHER ISSUE DISCUSSED IN PRIOR MEETINGS IS

[00:20:02]

IF THE BLOCK OF FOR CONTINUED TO APPROVE INCREASED BUILDING OF SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS OF THE CITY MAY BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR CAUSING LITIGATION, FOR CAUSING THIS LITIGATION. YOU, BEING THE CITY COUNCIL, AND HAVING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF MAJOR SHORTFALLS OF WATER STARTING IN AROUND 2028, THERE AGAIN, SHOULD NOW BE SHOWING RESTRAINT IN APPROVAL OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS. THE EAST WILLIAMSON COUNTY MINUS SET UP DEVELOP IT AT ALL COSTS, EVEN LEADING TO DESTRUCTION OF A SOUND CITY, JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DEVELOPMENT IS NOT WHAT ANYONE I HAVE SPOKEN TO WANTS. HOWEVER, YOU, AS CITY COUNCIL, GENERALLY VOTE FOR -3 TO CONTINUE TO APPROVE NEW DEVELOPMENTS, AND DISREGARD OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT INFORMATION. THIS MAY WELL IMPACT THE SUCCESS OF THE PROPERTIES BEING DEVELOPED , AND A SHORTFALL OF WATER AVAILABILITY MAY VERY WELL DAMAGE THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THIS CITY AND IMPACT THE SALES AND RESALES OF NEW AND USED PROPERTIES. LACK OF PROPER DISCLOSURES COULD ALSO RESULT IN SUITS GENERATED BY YOUR DEVELOPERS AND/OR PROPERTY OWNERS. DO NOT PROMISE SERVICES TO BE, TO NEW DEVELOPERS IF YOU CANNOT ASSURE DELIVERY. YOU MAY COME UP TO REGRET THAT APPROVAL ON THE KURTZ TRACK. THAT WAS ITEM 13.3 THAT WE JUST, I WAS JUST MENTIONING. AT THE MOST RECENT COUNCIL, THE, THAT REPRESENTS A LARGE NUMBER OF RESIDENCES UTILIZING A LOT OF WATER. THINK ABOUT THESE THINGS CAREFULLY IN THE FUTURE. THANK

YOU. >> THANKS, SIR.

>> ARE YOU SPEAKING, OR ARE YOU DONATING TIME? OKAY. SO WE HAVE DONNA FOLEY -- HAVE GIVEN THEIR TIME TO KATHLEEN COOK.

>> YOU'RE HELP. >> KATHLEEN COOK. I -- ASK WHY HUTTO IS STILL NOT GETTING OUR ROADS, DITCHES, AND OTHER PROMISED INFRASTRUCTURE ACCOMPLISHED. IT IS BECAUSE OUR COUNCIL IS BACK TO ITS FORMER CORRUPT STATE OF A FEW YEARS AGO. THE CURRENT MAJORITY OF FOUR PLACED THEIR AGENDA ABOVE ALL. TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING, WE MUST GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING. AT THAT TIME, DOUG GAUL WAS MAYOR, AND -- IN THE MAJORITY ON THE COUNCIL ALLOWED A CITY MANAGER, OTIS JONES, TO TAKE CONTROL OF DECISIONS FOR THE CITY. ALTHOUGH WE WERE TOLD HUTTO'S WATER SUPPLY WAS GOOD FOR THE NEXT 100 YEARS, NO MEASURES TO DELIVER THE PROMISED WATER WERE TAKEN.

INSTEAD, BACKROOM DEALS PREVAILED, BORROWED MONEY THAT WAS APPROVED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE WENT TO THIS COUNCIL'S PERSONAL AGENDA ITEMS. MR. JONES WAS PERMITTED TO USE ROAD BOND MONEY TO MAKE PURCHASES AND IMPLEMENT SECRET CONTRACTS THAT GAVE DEVELOPERS, BONDSMEN, AND OTHER NEFARIOUS GROUPS FREE REIGN.

THUS THE PLANNED MEGA EXPANSION AND GROWTH OF HUTTO BEGAN . --

[00:25:03]

MIKE BECAME OUR MAYOR AND LET OUR NEW COUNCIL TO BEGIN HUTTO'S RESTORATION. HANNAH ROSE BECAME MAYOR PRO TEM, AND WORKED WITH MIKE TO RESTORE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. HUTTO'S REPUTATION IN FINANCES BEGAN TO TURN AROUND. PETER COULD NOT MOVE FORWARD UNLESS HE COULD GET BACK A MAJORITY THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE HUTTO EXPANSION VISION AND CONTINUE UNWISE DEALINGS WITH DEVELOPERS, BONDSMEN, AND SELF-INTEREST GROUPS. WE ALL KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF ELECTIONS AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES. WHILE HUTTO CITIZENS REMAINED AT HOME , THESE GROUPS PLACED RELATIVELY UNKNOWN INDIVIDUALS ON THE BALLOT THAT WOULD BE WILLING TO FOLLOW PETER'S PLAN TO THE RETURN TO THE OLD WAYS. THEN THEY VOTED, AND MOST OF HUTTO NEGLECTED TO GO TO THE POLLS.

ABOUT THAT TIME, TANNER'S JOB REQUIREMENTS FORCED HIM TO MOVE TO FLORIDA, AND HE RESIGNED IN JANUARY OF 2022. PLEASE NOTE, NO LEGAL HOLDOVER, NO ILLEGAL HOLDOVER PROVISION WAS USED TO KEEP TANNER ON COUNCIL. ONCE AGAIN, PETER HAD THE MAJORITY HE NEEDED, AND HE DID NOT WANT TANNER'S OPPOSING VOTES. -- MISSED USED TEXAS HOLDOVER PROVISIONS AND VIOLATED OUR CITY CHARTER WHEN IT BENEFITED HIS INTEREST. WHILE TAXPAYERS TOOK THEIR EYE OFF THE IMPORTANCE OF VOTING, THOSE PETER SERVED DID NOT. NOT ONLY WAS THE COUNCIL RESTORED TO ITS FORMER AGENDA, BUT IT'S PEOPLE WERE ONCE AGAIN PLACED ON BOARDS SUCH AS PNC AND EDC AND OTHER IMPORTANT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. THESE GROUPS CAME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS TO RETURN TO THE DEVELOPMENT AT ALL COSTS GROWTH PLAN. ONCE AGAIN, OUR CITY COUNCIL BEGAN MAKING DEALS TO REDUCE IMPACT FEES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS, TAXES FOR NEW BUSINESSES COMING TO HUTTO WERE ALSO REDUCED. MIKE REMAINS FAITHFUL TO THE CITIZENS, AND CONTINUES TO WARN US WE ARE PLAYING WITH FIRE. THIS COUNCIL IS AGAIN RESISTING MAYOR MIKE'S WARNINGS THAT TAKING ORDERS CARTE BLANCHE FROM OUR CITY MANAGER IS WRONG AND DANGEROUS. ANY CITY COUNCIL SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE OVERSIGHT OF THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF. OUR CURRENT CITY MANAGER AND MOST OF HIS STAFF HAVE HOME OFFICES.

THEY WORK BEHIND THE SCENES TO KEEP DEVELOPERS, BOND SALESMAN, AND PROFITEERS HAPPY. AT THE SAME TIME, THE CITY STAFF ARE REQUESTING MORE HELP TO ACCOMPLISH THEIR JOB. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE ALMOST DOUBLE CITY WORKERS, YOU WOULD BE HARD-PRESSED TO FIND THOSE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO SERVE US AT THE CITY HALL OFFICES. WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PUBLIC SERVANTS ARE LEFT TO WORK FROM HOME. CAN YOU IMAGINE IF TEACHERS, PHARMACISTS, MEDICAL PROVIDERS, AND GROCERY DEPARTMENT STORE EMPLOYEES WORKED FROM HOME? MOST OF US REMEMBER HOW VIRTUAL LEARNING WORKED OUT WHEN OUR CLASSROOMS CLOSED. CITY STAFF NEED TO BE PRESENT AT CITY HALL IN ORDER TO PROPERLY SERVE ITS CITIZENS. THE CURRENT CITY MANAGER WANTS TO WORK FROM HOME, AND OUR MAJORITY OF -- CONTINUE REPEATING PAST MISTAKES. THIS COUNCIL MAJORITY ALLOWS HIM TO DETERMINE WHAT IS AND IS NOT ACCOMPLISHED IN CITY LL. THAT IS THE REASON WHY OUR VOTES AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE ARE DELAYED, WHILE WISH LIST PROJECTS MOVE FORWARD. NEWSFLASH, IT IS THE CITY MANAGER, MR. JAMES EARP, THAT CAN'T BRING HIMSELF TO INSIST

[00:30:04]

THE OTHER THREE CERTAINLY DIDN'T WANT MORE ATTENTION BROUGHT TO THEIR DEALINGS. WE WERE TOLD RESOLUTION NUMBER R 2025-085 WAS AN OLDER ITEM PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED AND DENIED. IT WAS THE KURT TRACK DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUTTO AND MASON GARRETT HANKS . THEIR PLAN TO DEVELOP A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AND COMMERCIAL TRACK REQUIRED THAT THEY BECOME PART OF THE HUTTO WATER AREA. IT WAS STATED THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT COULD BE RECONSIDERED BECAUSE OF NEW INFORMATION. PETER NOW PROCLAIMED THAT WE CAN VOTE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT AND GIVE THEM THE PERMISSION TO BE PART OF THE HUTTO WATER SUPPLY BECAUSE THEY'RE USING A LITTLE LESS WATER NOW. OF COURSE, THE APPROVAL WAS GIVEN BY PETER'S MAJORITY OF FOUR. MAY I SUGGEST , THE NEW INFORMATION WAS THAT MONEY PASS IN EXCHANGE FOR THIS FAVORABLE VOTE? FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL. THIS IS NOT LOOKING OUT FOR HUTTO CITIZENS. THIS IS WHAT MR. GIDEON CALLS THE -- COUNTY MIND-SET. JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF CORRUPTION AT ITS FINEST. HE IS PETER'S MAN OF THE HOUR.

MODEST GROWTH IS WHAT WE NEED. WE HAVE THE MEANS TO SUPPLY WATER WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. WE MUST ALSO DEAL WITH THE NEW FLOODPLAIN AREAS THAT WERE CAUSED BY OVERDEVELOPMENT OF GREEN SPACE. WE MUST HOLD OUR CITY MANAGER ACCOUNTABLE SO THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS -- WILL FINALLY BE COMPLETED. MIKE WILL ONCE AGAIN PUT HIS BACK ON THE RIGHT TRACK IF WE GIVE HIM THE SUPPORT HE NEEDS, GOING BY VOTE FOR MAYOR MIKE -- PLACE

THREE. THANK YOU. >>

>> AND NEXT WE HAVE IDA WEAVER. >> THANK YOU, KATHLEEN. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR SNYDER, CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITY COUNCIL PERSONS. MY NAME IS IDA GAIL WEAVER. I AM A 10 YEAR HUTTO CITIZEN VOTER. WHY DOES THIS COUNCIL CONTINUE TO DENY THE WATER CRISIS WE HAVE IN HUTTO, AND ALLOW DEVELOPERS OUTSIDE HUTTO'S WATER AREA TO HAVE OUR WATER ? WELL, AT THE SAME TIME, IMPOSING WATER RESTRICTIONS AND MASSIVE INCREASES IN UTILITY BILLS? HELLO? WE HAVE A WATER SHORTAGE.

HAVING A FEW EXTRA GALLONS IN PREVIOUSLY DETERMINED DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO WATER MY LAWN AND GARDEN, AND I DON'T WANT MY RATE INCREASES TO FORCE, I DON'T WANT RATE INCREASES THAT FORCE REDUCTION OF WATER USAGE.

JUST SO WE CAN BRING IN MORE DEVELOPMENTS. WHY DOES THIS MAJORITY OF FOUR INSIST ON SELF-DESTRUCTION? THEY CONTINUE TO DENY THE TRUTH. WE HAVE SERIOUS WATER AND SEWER ISSUES.

AND MR. GIDEON REPLACES MAYOR SNYDER, AND AMBERLEY KOLAR KEEPS COUNCIL 66, THE COUNCIL MAJORITY CAN INSTITUTIONALIZE THESE POLICIES AND CONTINUE WITH THIS BADNESS AS THEY RAISE OUR PROPERTY TAX RATES. CITIZENS OF HUTTO, WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. GROWTH MUST BE CONTROLLED, AND OUR WATER KEPT FOR HUTTO CITIZENS . UNTIL WATER RATES COME DOWN AND RESTRICTIONS ARE REMOVED, WE SHOULD NOT BE GIVING ANY OF OUR WATER TO OUTSIDERS. UNTIL WE HAVE A WATER SURPLUS, AND HUTTO CITIZENS CAN RETURN TO NORMAL WATER USAGE , AGREEMENTS TO SUPPLY WATER TO DEVELOPMENTS OUTSIDE THE CURRENT HUTTO WATER AREAS SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED. WE NEED TO RE-ELECT OUR MAYOR AND GIVE HIM THE MAJORITY HE NEEDS TO SAVE HUTTO FROM THIS CONTINUED SACRIFICE OF HUTTO CITIZENS NEEDS JUST TO PROMOTE GROWTH FOR GROWTH'S SAKE

[00:35:04]

YOU CAN COME RIGHT IN HERE TO CITY HALL TO VOTE. THANK YOU.

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

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT, NEXT, THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 7.1, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENTS, AND/OR REMOVAL TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, TASK FORCES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS, AND AREA GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS.

>> MAYOR, WE, FOR THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, WE HAVE NOT MET OR INTERVIEWED SINCE LAST MEETING. WE DO HAVE SOME NEW APPLICANTS, AND SO WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THOSE, AND WE'LL BE CONTACTING YOU THIS WEEK. THAT BEING SAID, WE STILL HAVE AN OPENING FOR ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, PARKS ADVISORY BOARD, AND TWO OF THE TOURS, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE THEY ARE. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME FOR SOME REASON. ANYWAY, SO WE DO HAVE THOSE OPENINGS, SO PLEASE CONSIDER SERVING, AND, YOU KNOW, GET IT IN QUICK, BECAUSE WE'LL BE CONTACTING YOU THIS WEEK. THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE, UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING,

COUNCIL MEMBER THOMPSON. >> NOPE. WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN MEANING TO CONTACT INDIVIDUALS FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M WILLING TO HELP OUT WHERE NEEDED, IF NEEDED, BUT, YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET THESE FOLKS INTERVIEWED.

[7.2. Consideration and possible action regarding recommendations or updates from City Council sub-committees (i.e. Legislative, HISD). ]

>> ALL RIGHT. NEXT UP, ITEM 7.2, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS OR UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL

SUBCOMMITTEES. >> MAYOR, THE LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE DID MEET. IT WAS MYSELF AND COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. THAT MET. WE DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO BRING FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL AT THIS TIME. WE JUST HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT SOME TAX LEGISLATION THAT'S MOVING FORWARD IN THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW TO KIND OF JUST PUT ON OUR WATCH LIST, AND SO WE ARE JUST KIND OF WATCHING THAT, AND WHENEVER WE'RE READY TO BRING IT TO THE COUNCIL, WE WILL. THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAD THE, THE MAYOR PRO TEM AND I MET WEDNESDAY WITH THE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE POSITIONS ARE. THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE, WHAT'S AMY? I'M NOT SURE. TWO BOARD MEMBERS OF THE, OF THE SCHOOL BOARD. TOPICS WE HAD WERE, WE DISCUSSED OUR CURRENT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, POSSIBLE CHANGES THAT WILL BE COMING UP TO CITY COUNCIL. WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT POTENTIAL CONCERNS TO PLACEMENT OF THE BUS BARN, AND THEN I THINK HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER ON SOME OF THE SITES. WHAT ELSE?

>> THAT'S MAINLY IT. >> ALL RIGHT. SO , DON'T KNOW, I THINK THE ISD IS WORKING ON THEIR END WITH SOME CHANGES THEY'D LIKE TO SEE, SO I WOULD JUST ASK THE CITY COUNCIL TO

[8.1. Receive a presentation from Es Vedra, LLC regarding the Hooky Entertainment facility in Hutto. (Charlie Tiantawach; Chris Cline) ]

ENTERTAINMENT FACILITY IN HUTTO. >> THERE'S A CLICKER UP THERE

FOR Y'ALL TO USE -- >> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. I'M CHARLIE TIANTAWACH, AND THIS IS CHRIS. WE WANTED TO COME AND UPDATE THE GROUP ON PROGRESS AND WHERE WE ARE, AND THE BRAND, AND THEN JUST TAKE ANY QUESTIONS Y'ALL MAY HAVE. BUT WE'RE ON PACE AND MOVING QUICKLY. I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO CHRIS TO KIND OF GET SOME PICTURES OF WHERE THE BUILDING IS AND THE

FACILITY. >> HI, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AS WE ARE TODAY, I WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHERE I'M AT TODAY . THE SCREEN IS ACTUALLY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT FURTHER ALONG TODAY AS WHERE IT SITS. THE SCREEN FRAME IS ACTUALLY UP AS OF TODAY, AND, AND WE'RE MOVING RIGHT ALONG. SO THAT WAS MY MAIN

[00:40:02]

THE EXTERIOR'S LOOKING GOOD. IT'S COMING ALONG. IT'S FINISHING OUT NICELY, ALL THE CONCRETE IS DONE AROUND THE BUILDING, LIGHT POLES ARE GOING IN. PAINT IS COMPLETE ON THE BUILDING. LOBBY'S FINISHING OUT AS WELL. THE PICTURE TO THE LEFT IS ACTUALLY THE BAR, THE, THE PICTURE IN THE MIDDLE IS ACTUALLY AS YOU ENTER THE BUILDING, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE GUEST SERVICE. YOUR GRAB AND GO IS BEHIND THAT, AND BOWLING WOULD BE TO THE RIGHT. BOWLING IS INSTALLING AS WE SPEAK.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE WORKING TOWARDS BEING COMPLETED IN AROUND TWO WEEKS. THIS IS THE KITCHEN THAT'S COMING ALONG AS WELL. THE INSTALLERS ARE IN THERE, AND THEY'RE EXPECTING, AS WELL, TO BE DONE IN AROUND THREE WEEKS. BATHROOMS, AS YOU CAN SEE, ARE, ARE COMPLETING. JUST MISSING VANITIES, WHICH THE MILLWORKS STARTS NEXT WEEK. THE AUDITORIUMS ARE COMING ALONG.

SCREENS ARE UP. SOUND SYSTEMS ARE INSTALLING. PROJECTORS ARE IN. SUPERIOR DIGITAL EXPERIENCE WILL THE UTMOST AUDITORIUM IS COMPLETING. SCREEN IS GOING UP NOW, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT. THE SPEAKERS ARE SET UP THERE ON THE STAGE BEHIND THE SCREEN. SEATING IS NOW ON SITE AS WELL. THESE PICTURES DON'T REFLECT THAT, BUT THE SEATING IS ACTUALLY GOING IN. AGAIN, THIS IS THE IMAX AUDITORIUM, SHOWING ITS, WHERE IT'S AT IN ITS STAGE. ON MONDAY, WE TOOK THE IMAX PROJECTOR AND ALL THE EQUIPMENT. THIS REFLECTS THOSE PICTURES, THOSE BOXES ARE ACTUALLY IMAX EQUIPMENT, AND WE ARE ALL BOOTH READY. THEY, THEY WILL BE, IMAX WILL BE POWERED UP, I'M ACTUALLY SHOWING IMAGES WITHIN A WEEK. FOUR WEEK LOOK AHEAD.

WE'RE GOING TO FINISH THE SCREENS OF THE STX AND IMAX.

LIKE I SAID, THE CHAIRS DELIVERED THIS WEEK. BOWLING TO FINISH IN 10 DAYS. WE HAVE THE KITCHEN START UP POINT. MILK, MILLWORK DELIVERS AND INSTALLS ACTUALLY STARTED NEXT, FIRST OF NEXT WEEK. WE'RE COMPLETING THE WALL AND FLOOR FINISHES, AND WE'RE PLANNING ON OPENING THE END OF MAY. SO WE'RE LOOKING GREAT. AND THEN I'LL, I'LL GIVE IT TO CHARLIE NOW. WE'RE GOING TO, WE HAVE A FEW MORE SLIDES TO GROW THROUGH. WE THANK

YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> SO THIS IS THE BRAND. IT IS HOOKY ENTERTAINMENT, AND IT IS A FULL PREMIUM ENTERTAINMENT CENTER, AS CHRIS WAS DESCRIBING, WITH AN IMAX SCREEN. SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW, SOME OF YOU MAY NOT KNOW, BUT IMAX HAS A 10 MILE RADIUS RESTRICTION UPON ANY OTHER IMAX. SO THIS WILL BE THE ONLY IMAX WITHIN 10 MILES OF HERE. IT IS IMPRESSIVE WHEN YOU SEE IT IN PERSON. SO WE ARE FULL, 12 LANES, 5500 SQUARE FEET OF GAME SPACE, RESTAURANT -- KITCHEN, AND A FULL EIGHT SCREEN AUDITORIUMS. SO WHEN YOU THINK OF HOOKY, THESE ARE SOME OF THE COMPONENTS WHICH WE WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT. IT'S GETTING AWAY FROM THE DAILY, AND THE DAILY, SOMETIMES, FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD BE ON YOUR PHONE, SCROLLING, AND WHAT WE'RE FOCUSED ON IS MORE SOCIAL CONNECTION . GETTING PEOPLE TOGETHER. GETTING PEOPLE TO COME TOGETHER WITHIN OUR BUILDINGS TO HAVE A GOOD TIME, TO ENJOY OUR FOOD, TO ENJOY THE GAMES. THIS IS THE FACADE. THE SIGNAGE, AGAIN, VERY LATE. THE IMAX SIGN, VERY PROMINENT. THIS IS A RENDERING, BUT IF YOU CAN SEE, CHRIS'S PICTURES WERE VERY CLOSE TO THIS. BOWLING, A LITTLE MORE OF THE, THE PLAYFULNESS IN TERMS OF LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL. WITH THAT, THOSE BOWLING LANES WILL LOOK LIKE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CHRIS DID NOT DESCRIBE, ACROSS THE BOWLING AREA, WE WILL HAVE A 20 BY 70 FOOT LCD SCREEN. IT IS VERY LARGE, VERY MASSIVE, AND VERY IMPRESSIVE. SO AS YOU'RE ROLLING, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO ENJOY SPORTS, YOU'LL ENJOY THE, THE STUFF THAT WE'RE SCROLLING THROUGH BOWLING, AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN TERMS OF GETTING THOSE TURKEYS OR WHATEVER THEY ARE ON THE BOWLING LANES. THIS IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE TAGLINES, IS GET OFF YOUR PHONES, OUR SCREENS ARE BETTER, AND THE POINT IS JUST COMING TOGETHER. WE DID TAKE A FOCUS GROUP AROUND THE NAME, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD POSITIVE REACTIONS TO THE NAME. I WON'T

[00:45:01]

>> ALL RIGHT, THANKS, SIR. QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

>> CHARLIE, CHRIS, THANKS FOR COMING, AND THANKS FOR THIS PRESENTATION. I'M REALLY EXCITED FOR THIS PROJECT TO, TO COME THROUGH, TO FRUITION. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING. THINK THERE'S A LOT OF CITIZENS THAT ARE EXCITED TO HAVE AN ENTERTAINMENT VENUE HERE IN THE CITY, SO GREAT JOB. CAN'T WAIT TO, TO WELCOME YOU TO THE COMMUNITY, SO THANK YOU.

>> YEAH. WE'RE EXCITED. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO IT ONE IMAX THEATER, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> SO HOW MANY PEOPLE KENNET

STATE IN THE IMAX, IN THE ONE? >> 218.

>> OH, WOW. OKAY. AND THEN FOR THE REGULAR EIGHT SCREENS, HOW MANY FOLKS CAN WATCH A MOVIE ON THAT? ON JUST ONE, LIKE, ON ONE?

>> SO THE TOTAL FEE ACCOUNT IS RIGHT AROUND 900, SO IMAX IS 200 OF THE 900. AND IN THE OTHER AUDITORIUM, WHICH IS A LARGE LOAN, WHICH IS STX, SIMILAR TO IMAX. THE DIFFERENCE IS REALLY IMAX HAS, WHEN THEY FINISH A FILM, THEY, LIKE, POSTPRODUCTION FOR IMAX ONLY. STX IS ALSO VERY, IT'S A GREAT PICTURE, AND THE WHOLE, ALL THESE SCREENS ARE DOLBY, WHICH IS SPEAKERS ALONG THE SIDE, SPEAKERS BEHIND THE SCREEN, SPEAKERS BEHIND YOU, AND SPEAKERS ON TOP OF YOU, WHICH YOU'LL HEAR ALL OF THAT.

>> 900 WHAT YOU SAID? >> RIGHT AROUND 900 SEATS.

>> YEAH. 900 SEATS. YEAH, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON, SO, LIKE, BOWLING CAN ACCOMMODATE -- I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA OF JUST CAPACITY AND THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT CAN ENJOY, ENJOY THIS. SO.

>> 12 LANES, PROXIMATELY SIX PER LANE, RIGHT AROUND 72.

>> YEAH. YEAH, THANK YOU FOR COMING TO GIVE US AN UPDATE. THE OPENING DATE IS APPROACHING, SO IT'S GOING TO BE SUPER EXCITING. I APPRECIATE THAT Y'ALL WERE AT THE CRAWFISH FESTIVAL THIS WEEKEND. SEEMS LIKE Y'ALL HAD A LOT OF INTERACTION AND PEOPLE APPROACHING Y'ALL, AND YOU WERE DOING GIVEAWAYS AND FUND TOUGH, SO THANK YOU ALL FOR INTERACTING WITH THE COMMUNITY. THAT'S BIG. A LOT OF PEOPLE WENT OVER THERE AND WALK AWAY, THEY WERE JUST LIKE, HEY, THAT'S A NEW PLACE, HOOKY. THIS IS THE NEW SPOT. SO, I MEAN, PEOPLE ARE, ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH IT, AND THEY'RE REALLY, YOU KNOW, ACCEPTING IT, AND, AND , YOU KNOW, GETTING THAT RECOGNITION, I GUESS, BECAUSE THAT, THAT'S A BIG, BIG THING. AND SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S BIG THAT Y'ALL WERE PRESENT. AND IT'S ALSO GOOD FOR YOUR BUSINESS AS WELL, RIGHT? SO THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING THAT, AND LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS OPENING AND ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT THE RESIDENTS OF HUTTO AND SURROUNDING CITIES CAN COME TO HUTTO TO ENJOY. A LOT OF PEOPLE WERE VISITING THE CRAWFISH FESTIVAL THIS WEEKEND FROM ALL OVER, AND SO THEY WERE COMING INTO HUTTO, SO THIS IS GOING TO DRAW A LOT OF PEOPLE IN HERE AS WELL, SO IT'S GREAT.

>> YEAH, THANK YOU. MY KIDS HAD A GREAT TIME. THEY HAD SO MANY

CRAWFISH. IT WAS AWESOME. >> LOVE IT.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANKS. >> SO I HAD A QUESTION. I, I WATCHED YOUR PRESENTATION TO THE EBC, AND I NOTED YOU WERE, YOU WERE CAREFUL TO, TO USE , WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT OPENING UP, YOU WERE CAREFUL TO USE THE, THE WORD TCO, WHICH IS NOT SURPRISING. I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF COMMON. YOU GET A TCO WHILE YOU'RE FINISHING SOME THINGS UP. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY , YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE A TCO, YOU KNOW, ALL THE SAFETY ISSUES ARE TAKEN CARE OF. THERE'S, THERE'S STANDARDS THAT HAVE TO BE MET. WE DON'T JUST GIVE AWAY A TCO. BUT I'M, I'M WONDERING, WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT YOU EXPECT ARE GOING TO GO OUT BEYOND THE OPENING DATE THAT YOU'LL STILL BE WORKING ON GETTING YOUR FULL PERMANENCY OF?

>> OUR GOAL IS, OUR GOAL FOR THE TCO IS JUST TO GET TRAINING DONE. BRING PEOPLE IN. OUR GOAL FOR THE CO IS PREOPENING.

>> OKAY, SO YOU'RE EXPECTING A FULL SEO BY THE, BY THE MEMORIAL DAY OPENING, BASICALLY. OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> I GOT A CHANCE TO MEET RICKY, ONE OF THE OWNERS OF YOUR , THE CONTRACTOR THAT'S BUILDING IT, AND, BECAUSE I JUST, LIKE, LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SAYING, HOW IS THIS GOING TO BE READY BY

[00:50:02]

IT. >> YEAH, WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR OWN CREW, THEY'RE WILLING TO DO A LOT MORE FOR YOU BECAUSE THEY KNOW YOU. YOU'RE INVESTED IN THEM AS THEY'RE INVESTED IN

YOU. >> I BELIEVE IT.

>> ALL RIGHT, GUYS, THANKS. >> THANKS AGAIN.

>> QUICK QUESTION. IN YOUR GUYS'S MIND, AND I HAVEN'T REVIEWED THE AGREEMENT, WHAT, WHAT DATE DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR CO BY? THE AGREEMENT FOR THE, THE AMENDMENT ON THE EXTENSIONS -- DO YOU REMEMBER OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? DOES THAT, DOES THE CO HAVE TO BE DONE BY MEMORIAL DAY, OR?

>> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT WE WILL BE OPEN

BEFORE MEMORIAL DAY. YEAH. >> WE WISH YOU LUCK.

>> YEAH, THANK YOU. AND FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

>> PLEASE COME OUT IF YOU NEED TO. WE'D LOVE TO GIVE YOU A

TOUR. >> WOULD LOVE TO, AND I CAN TELL YOU, I WAS A FLEX PERSON BACK BEFORE THE COVID, AND THERE'S VERY BIG EXCITEMENT FOR FLEX TO COME IN. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO HAVE -- WHEN I GO OUT, I DON'T GET TO DRINK A BEER BECAUSE I GOT TO DRIVE HOME, BUT I CAN HAVE MY KIDS TAKE ME HOME AFTER, AFTER A MOVIE, SO IT'S, LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVE SOMETHING VERY CLOSE TO HOME. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE IN HUTTO ARE VERY EXCITED. SO I WOULD IMAGINE SOLD-OUT CROWDS FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, DEPENDING ON WHATEVER THE MOVIE IS AND HOW THAT WORKS. SO YEAH.

>> AND WE'RE REALLY EXCITED, HONESTLY. THAT WEEKEND IS MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 35. I'M NOT SURE WHAT NUMBER IT IS, BUT IT'S, IT'S A BIG ONE WITH TOM CRUISE, AND IT'S A VERY UNIQUE SPACE. AGAIN, WITH THE IMAX AND THE RESTRICTIONS. WHEN YOU SEE THE SPEAKERS, YOU SEE THE SCREEN, IT'S VERY IMPRESSIVE, AND SO WE HOPE YOU GUYS AND ALL OF YOUR FAMILIES, AND ENJOY.

[8.2. Receive a presentation from Staff regarding the annual review of all active Incentive Agreements of the City of Hutto and Hutto Economic Development Corporation. (Cheney Gamboa) ]

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL SEE YOU THERE.

>> YEAH, THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT, THANKS, GUYS.

>> ALL RIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 8.2, RECEIVED A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF REGARDING THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE ACTIVE INCENTIVE AGREEMENTS OF THE CITY OF HUTTO AND HUTTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPING

CORPORATION. >> HI, GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL.

CHENEY GAMBOA, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I'M HERE

WITH CHRISTINA BISHOP. >> HI, EVERYONE, CHRISTINA

BISHOP, CITY CONTROLLER. >> AND WE'RE GOING TO TAGTEAM THIS PRESENTATION BECAUSE YOU GOT THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION AND I GOT THE DETAILS ON THE AGREEMENT, SO HERE WE GO.

>> SO WE BROKE THIS DOWN INTO CITY INCENTIVES, EXCLUSIVELY CITY INCENTIVES, SO NO EDC PARTICIPATION, EDC INCENTIVES THAT DON'T HAVE CITY, AND THEN THE ONES THAT ARE COMBINATION OF CITY AND EDC CONTRIBUTIONS, AND THEN WE'LL GO OVER THE TOURS.

SO THE AGREEMENT THAT OUR CITY EXCLUSIVE OUR CARMEL CREEK, STAR RANCH, WHICH IS THE AGB DEVELOPMENT, LONGHORN REAL ESTATE VENTURES, WHICH IS A EMD, PARADIGM, SOUTHSIDE MARKET, TITAN, WHICH IS WESTERN INDUSTRIES, CABAL AND SKYBOX.

NOW I'LL LET YOU TAKE -- >> SURE. SO I'LL PROBABLY HANDLE MOST OF THE CITY AGREEMENTS. SO THIS FIRST AGREEMENT IS WITH HUTTO MESS HOLDINGS. IT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2012 . THIS AGREEMENT WAS TO REIMBURSE THE DEVELOPER FOR VARIOUS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE COMPLETED IN THE CARMEL CREEK AREA. THIS, THE REPAYMENT STRUCTURE WAS 80% OF IMPACT FEES PAID IN BY THE DEVELOPER, 80% OF SALES TAXES GENERATED FROM THE AREA, AND 100% OF PROPERTY TAXES THAT WERE GENERATED FROM THAT AREA. WE ACTUALLY MADE THE LAST PAYMENT ON THIS AGREEMENT THIS MONTH, THIS APRIL, FOR $330,000. THAT CAME OUT OF IMPACT FEES, SO I DIDN'T HAVE TO TOUCH OUR GENERAL FUND WITH OUR SALES TAX OR PROPERTY TAXES. THAT BROUGHT THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT TO JUST UNDER $10 MILLION, AND SO BOTH THE DEVELOPER AND CITY HAVE COMPLETED THIS UNDER THE

AGREEMENT. >> WE HAVE A COMMENT. YOU WANT

TO WAIT TO THE END? >> FEEL, I THINK IT MIGHT BE EASIER JUST TO MAKE THE COMMENTS NOW, SO WE'RE NOT

BACK-AND-FORTH. >> I LOVE DEALS LIKE THIS BECAUSE INSTEAD OF THE CITY BORROWING A BUNCH OF MONEY TO BUILD THE CARLSON EXTENSION AND THE CITY TO RUN A BIG TRUNK LINE OF SEWER, AND TO DO ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE WORK THAT HAPPENED, WE STILL BE PAYING THAT FOR 20 MORE YEARS, EVERYBODY'S TAXES WOULD'VE GONE UP. THE REASON I LIKE THIS SO MUCH AS A DEVELOPER PUT THEIR MONEY FIRST. IF THEY COLLAPSE AND DIDN'T BUILD ANYTHING, THEN THEY DON'T GET REIMBURSED. AND THEN BY THEN BUILDING AND BEING SUCCESSFUL, THEY GOT REIMBURSED WITH TODAY'S DOLLARS FOR MONEY THEY SPENT BACK IN 2012. SO IT SEEMS SO MUCH BETTER, IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, THEN HOW SOME OF OUR OTHER DEALS, WHERE WE SPENT ALL OF OUR MONEY, WE RAISE

[00:55:01]

TELL YOU THAT. JUST SAYING . >>'S A QUICK QUESTION, ON THE SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT. SO THERE'S NOT TOO MUCH COMMERCIAL, I MEAN, RECENTLY THERE HAS BEEN MORE ACTIVITY, SAY, IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS. SO I GUESS THE PAST, LIKE, EIGHT YEARS, THERE'S PRETTY MUCH BEEN, LIKE, A ZERO REIMBURSEMENT ON THAT, BUT THEN AS THOSE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS KIND OF CAME ONLINE, THEN WE WOULD, WE REIMBURSED THE 80% ON THOSE. IS

THAT HOW IT WORKS? >> YEAH. SO OVER THE $10 MILLION, THE SALES TAX WAS A VERY, VERY, VERY SMALL SLIVER OF IT. IT WAS MOSTLY THE PROPERTY TAX IMPACT FEES.

>> YEAH, OKAY, THANK YOU. >> SO HOW MUCH PROPERTY TAX WILL WE BE COLLECTING GOING FORWARD? DO WE KNOW?

>> OH, I DON'T WANT TO SHOOT FROM THE HIP, BUT I THINK THE LAST TIME WE PAID OUT PROPERTY TAXES, IT WAS CLOSE TO $2 MILLION A YEAR. FROM THAT AREA.

>> SO, SO WE'LL BE NOW EARNING IN $2 MILLION MORE A YEAR?

>> YEAH. ACTUALLY, THAT WAS EFFECTIVE THIS YEAR, BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY OUT ANY, ANYTHING FROM PROPERTY TAXES. IT WAS ALL IMPACT FEES. OH, SORRY. OH. JUMPING AHEAD. OKAY. THE NEXT ONE WAS WITH TACT DEVELOPMENT AND H-E-B. VERY SIMILAR TO THE LAST AGREEMENT, THIS AGREEMENT REIMBURSES A DEVELOPER FOR VARIOUS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STAR RANCH AREA. THIS REPAYMENT STRUCTURE IS 60% OF SALES TAXES COLLECTED IN THAT AREA, NOT TO EXCEED $9.3 MILLION. THE ONLY THING LEFT ON THE DEVELOPERS AND IS A FINISHING PHASE FIVE AND SUBMITTING THOSE FINAL COSTS AND GETTING ACCEPTANCE, BUT THE REST OF THE PHASES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED, AND WE ARE CURRENTLY IN REPAYMENT WITH THEM. SO THIS TIME LAST YEAR WHEN WE PRESENTED THIS, THERE WAS A LOT OF MISSING PIECES, A LOT OF MISSING PAPERWORK. THAT'S ALL BEEN RESOLVED. SO TODAY, WE PAID OUT $3.6 MILLION TO THEM, AND WE'RE, WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR THAT FINAL PHASE FIVE COST, BUT WE STILL HAVE ABOUT, ESTIMATING ABOUT $5 MILLION LEFT TO GO.

HOPEFULLY WRAPPED UP BY 2032. AT THIS POINT, WE ARE PAYING OUT MONTHLY TO H-E-B INTACT DEVELOPMENT. OKAY, THE NEXT AGREEMENT IS WITH LONGHORN REAL ESTATE VENTURES AND A EMD. SO THIS ONE WAS TO INCENTIVIZE A COMPANY TO RELOCATE TO THE CITY.

THIS DEAL WAS STRUCTURED AS A 50% AD VALOREM REIMBURSEMENT FOR 10 YEARS. WE HAVE PAID OUT $9000. THE OUTSTANDING DELIVERABLES BY THE COMPANY IS ANNUAL PROOF OF AN FTE COUNT, PROVIDING ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND CONTINUING OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY FOR 10 YEARS. WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT WE MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER $60,000 TO PAY OUT TO THEM TO BE WRAPPED UP IN 2031, AND ONE THING I DO WANT TO NOTE IS THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED FOR REIMBURSEMENT SINCE 2022.

>> SO, QUESTION ON THAT ONE. IF IT'S A 10 YEAR DEAL, WHY ARE WE PAYING OUT BEYOND THE 10 YEARS?

>> SO , WHEN IT'S ESTABLISHED IN 2018, I THINK A LOT OF IT IS, HAS TO DO WITH COMEDY, THE DEAL MIGHT'VE BEEN COMPLETE, OR THE AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED IN 2018, BUT THE INCENTIVE PERIOD DOESN'T BEGIN UNTIL LATER, ONCE THEY ACTUALLY FINALLY MOVE HERE

AND GET UP AND RUNNING. >> OKAY.

>> IS GOING TO BE KIND OF COMMON AMONGST THESE AGREEMENTS.

>> FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. >> THE NEXT AGREEMENT IS WITH PARADIGM. AGAIN, THAT WAS TO INCENTIVIZE THE BUSINESS TO RELOCATE TO THE CITY. THIS IS A 60% PROPERTY TAX REIMBURSEMENT OVER 10 YEARS. THEY'RE OUSTING DELIVERABLES HAVE ENOUGH -- COUNT OF 125 GROWING UP TO 300 . REMAINING OPERATIONS DURING THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT AND SUBMISSION OF THEIR ANNUAL PROPERTY TAXES PAID. WE HAVE PAID OUT ALMOST $118,000 TO THEM, WITH AN ESTIMATED $231,000 REMAINING, AND THIS ONE IS PRETTY CURRENT. THEY LAST SUBMITTED THIS PAST FALL.

>> SO WHENEVER WE LOOK AT GROWING THE FTES, IS THAT, WHO IS DETERMINING THAT? BECAUSE THAT SEEMS KIND OF SUBJECTIVE, IF THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, WAITING UNTIL THE VERY END, GET ALL THOSE 300, WHAT, WHO DETERMINES THAT?

>> I, I THINK IT'S WHOEVER, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE ACTUAL NEGOTIATION SIDE OF THE FTE. I DON'T KNOW IF CHENEY CAN SPEAK TO HOW THESE GET NEGOTIATED. BUT, YEAH, IT'S PROGRESSIVELY INCREASING OVER YEARS. I, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THAT

PIECE OF IT. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> I THINK IT DOES BRING UP A GOOD POINT, THOUGH. SOME OF THE -- I'VE SEEN, WE JUST SAY, YOU'VE GOT TO GO FROM 125 TO

[01:00:02]

>> AND THIS IS ANOTHER ONE WHERE THE FTE COUNT IS GOING TO BE A, BE A THING. SO SOUTHSIDE BARBECUE WAS THE NEXT AGREEMENT.

THAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019, AND THIS WAS TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO OPEN A LOCATION IN THE CO-OP DISTRICT. THERE'S IS A 60% SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT, NOT TO EXCEED $180,000 OVER 15 YEARS.

SO WE PAID OUT $60,000 THROUGH THIS MONTH. HOWEVER, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PAID SINCE 2022, AND THIS IS BECAUSE WHEN THEY SUBMITTED AROUND THIS TIME LAST YEAR, THEY TRIED TO CATCH UP A COUPLE YEARS, AND WE THOUGHT THERE FTE COUNT AND THEY DID NOT MEET THEIR FTE REQUIREMENTS. SO THE CURRENT STATUS OF THAT ONE IS, CHENEY AND I WERE IN COMMUNICATION WITH THEM TO SEE, WHAT CAN WE BRING BACK TO COUNCIL? AND SO THEY, LAST WE CHECKED, WERE KIND OF TRYING TO EVALUATE WHAT THEIR FTE, ACTUAL NEEDS WERE GOING TO BE GOING FORWARD. SO THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PAID OUT SINCE THEIR 2022 REIMBURSEMENT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT MET THEIR FTE COUNT, AND WE ARE STILL, STILL IN COMMUNICATION WITH THEM, TRYING TO WORK OUT.

>> WHO DETERMINED THEIR FTE? >> WHOEVER NEGOTIATED THE AGREEMENT. A LOT OF THESE PREDATE MYSELF AND CHRISTINA, SO WE GO WITH WHAT'S IN THE AGREEMENT.

>> WELL, THIS ONE REPORTED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE 43 EMPLOYEES, BUT THE OTHER ONE, WE CAN'T TELL.

>> WELL, YEAH. LET ME SPEAK TO THAT. SO THEY'RE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN EMPLOYEE AFFIDAVIT WITH THEIR SUBMITTAL EACH YEAR FOR COMPLIANCE, SO WE LOOK AT THE AGREEMENT. TO THE MAYOR'S POINT, THERE'S REALLY NOT ANYTHING TO PREVENT SOMEONE FROM HOLDING THEIR 125 FOR NINE YEARS, AND IN THE FINAL YEAR, THEY DO A BIG HIGHER. BUT NOT VERY LIKELY, BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF EFFORT TO GO THROUGH TO, TO MEET THAT. HOWEVER, SOME OF THE AGREEMENTS DON'T HAVE SPECIFIED STEPS ALONG THE WAY, SO BY YEAR THREE, YOU HAVE 175 FOR THE PARADIGM CASE, IT'S JUST AN EASIER CALCULATION, BY YEAR SEVEN, YOU HAVE 208, YOU HAVE 250, AND THEN 10, YOU HAVE 300. IT'S NOT STEPPED OUT THAT WAY. SO THERE'S DEFINITELY AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW THAT GROWTH OVERTIME TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE A SUSTAINABLE WORK HORSE AT A SOLID NUMBER. WITH THIS ONE, THEY SUBMITTED THEIR, THEIR AFFIDAVIT, AND IT DOES NOT MEET THE COMEDY

REQUIREMENT. >> OKAY. NO, AND THAT'S GREAT.

I MEAN, WE, I KNOW WE PITCHED WORK-PLAY-LIVE HERE IN HUTTO, AND SO JUST MAKING SURE THAT THESE FTES ARE , WE'RE HOLDING THESE ENTITIES ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE INCENTIVES THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE GIVING. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

>> SO, IF I UNDERSTAND RIGHT, YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING AT, SOUNDS LIKE THE RENEGOTIATION AGREEMENT.

>> IT WAS MORE OR LESS JUST A, YOU DIDN'T MEET YOUR FTE COUNT.

WHAT FTE COUNTS DO YOU THINK YOU CAN EVEN ACHIEVE? WHAT'S REALISTIC FOR YOU JUST TO EVEN BRING A PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL?

>> WHAT WOULD WE BRING A PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL? IF WE ENTERED INTO A DEAL, WE SAID YOU DO A, WE'LL DO B, AND THEY DON'T DO A. DIDN'T THAT -- WE DON'T DO B, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE WE GET INTO A HABIT OF MAYBE RENEGOTIATING, PEOPLE WILL PROMISE WHAT WE WANT AND THEN COME BACK A YEAR LATER AND GO, I DIDN'T GET IT. CAN YOU HELP US OUT? IS, YOU KNOW, WE WERE LOW ON MONEY, AND THEY HIT THEIR NUMBER. WE TELL THEM, MAYBE, HEY, WE HAVEN'T -- THAT WAS ONE THING. AND THE OTHER ONE, I RECUSE MYSELF ON THIS ONE WHEN IT FIRST CAME BEFORE COUNCIL IN 19 -- I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS IN THIS, BUT I SEEM TO REMEMBER THE CO-OPS 75% OF PROPERTY TAXES AND 75% OF SALES TAXES GO BACK TO THE TOURS. AND SO IF WE GET 75% BACK OF OUR SALES TAX TO THE TOURS, AND THEN WE ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT GIVING 60%, ARE WE ACTUALLY GIVING MORE THAN 100% OF OUR SALES TAX BACK, OR IS IT 60% OF THE 25% THAT'S LEFT OVER THAT

WE DIDN'T GET TO THE TOURS? >> SURE, SO THE 60%, SO WE HAVE THIS CITY, I GUESS THE 75% THAT'S RETAINED BY THE CITY AND THE 25% THAT GOES TO THE EDC. SO THIS IS 60% OF WHAT IS KEPT BY THE CITY. THE TOURS PORTION OF IT IS THE PERCENTAGE THAT IS WITH THE EDC, BECAUSE THAT AGREEMENT IS WITH THE EDC TO GO BACK TO THE TOURS. OKAY. LET ME TRY AND --

>> BECAUSE HERE'S WHAT I'M WONDERING. THE -- SO -- YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THE CO-OP AGREEMENT IS ONLY GETTING 75% OF THE QUARTER PLANT SALES TAX THAT THE EDC COLLECTS. BECAUSE I'M ALMOST POSITIVE IT'S 75% OF ALL SALES TAXES COLLECTED BY THE CITY. WE DON'T HAVE TO LABOR IT HERE, BUT IT WOULD BE SOMETHING,

[01:05:06]

-- AN OFF-LINE DEAL. >> OKAY.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, BACK TO THE FTES. YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, BUT HOW FAR OFF ARE THEY FROM THE 43? IS IT, LIKE, SUBSTANTIAL, OR IS IT JUST A FEW? AND, AND YOU CAN ALWAYS GET BACK TO US ALSO, LIKE, LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, BUT JUST, YOU KNOW, 43 WAS, IT WAS -- BUT IT

WAS 39. >> 39? OKAY, YEAH. THAT'S WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT, YOU KNOW? IN MY OPINION. SO. OKAY,

THANK YOU. GOOD TO KNOW. >> THE NEXT AGREEMENT IS WITH ICOM TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO MOVE INTO THE CITY. THIS AGREEMENT WAS STRUCTURED , IT WAS EXECUTED IN 2019, BUT AMENDED IN 2022 TO SORT OF RESTRUCTURE HOW THE FIRST YEAR WORKED. SO THE FIRST YEAR IS A 90% PROPERTY TAX REIMBURSEMENT IN YEAR ONE. 45% PROPERTY TAX REIMBURSEMENT OVER THE REMAINING, OVER THE REMAINING OF THE 10 YEARS. SO FAR WE'VE PAID OUT ABOUT $30,000. WE'RE ESTIMATING ABOUT ANOTHER $92,000 TO GO. AND SO THEIR OUTSTANDING DELIVERABLES ARE ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT RECEIPTS, QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AND MAINTAIN 85+ FTES, AND THE MOST RECENT PAYMENT ON THAT WAS AS OF 2023.

THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED LAST YEAR. THE NEXT ONE IS TITAN, TITAN WITH WESTERN INDUSTRIES. THIS WAS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPING WITHIN THE CITY. SO FAR, ZERO DOLLARS HAS BEEN PAID OUT IN THIS ONE. WE'RE EXPECTING THAT REMAINING PAYMENTS WOULD BE $70,000 IF THEY MEET THEIR OUTSTANDING DELIVERABLES, WHICH IS PROVIDING QUARTERLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, PROOF THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MEET THEIR CAPITAL INVESTMENT, THAT THEY'VE MET THEIR CAPITAL INVESTMENT, AND PROOF OF 64 FTE.

AND THAT ONE WOULD EXPIRE IN 2033. THE NEXT AGREEMENT IS CABAL. SO THAT IS TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPING WITHIN THE CITY. THIS WAS STRUCTURED AS A 20% PROPERTY TAX REIMBURSEMENT, NOT TO EXCEED $140,000 OVER 10 YEARS. THEIR DELIVERABLES WERE TO SATISFY FTE REQUIREMENTS AND MEET VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION DEADLINES, AND THIS ONE DID NOT MEET A CO DEADLINE, SO THIS IS ACTUALLY BEING DISCUSSED LATER TONIGHT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AS WELL. THEY SUBMITTED JUST THIS PAST YEAR, AND SO WE ARE BRINGING IT TO YOU. AND THEN THE FINAL ONE THAT IS JUST WITH THE CITY IS SKYBOX. THIS IS WHERE OUR OTHER PROPERTY TAX DEALS ARE MORE OF, LIKE, A REIMBURSEMENT. THIS IS AN ABATEMENT. SO 50%, THIS IS A 50% ABATEMENT OF TAXABLE VALUE FOR THEIR FURNITURE, FIXTURES, AND EQUIP IT WITH SKYBOX, AND THAT IS REALLY ALL HANDLED THROUGH THE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, AND NOT WITH THE CITY. WE'RE KIND OF OUT OF THE PICTURE ON THIS ONE. SO, SO, AND THAT WRAPS UP THE CITY ITEMS, AND CHENEY'S GOING TO GO OVER ONES THAT ARE WITH THE EDC OR COMBINED.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO FOR THE EDC EXCLUSIVELY, WE HAVE A SEPARATE AGREEMENT WITH AMD, K TONIC, OF EVO, HUTTO HOSPITALITY, WHICH IS OUR TOWNE PLACE SUITES THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, AND THEN -- SO FOR A EMD , I DID HAVE CITY ON HERE, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AGREEMENTS, BUT THEY'RE SEPARATE. SO FOR THE EDC PORTION OF THIS ONE, IT WAS A, A GRANT BASED ON, IT WAS A WORKFORCE GRANT, SO IT'S BASED ON THEIR FTE COUNT. SO YOU CAN SEE THERE THAT WE PAID OUT $150,000 WITH $25,000 LEFT TO GO ON THAT ONE.

FOR K TONIC, THIS IS ALSO A WORKFORCE GRANT. SO THIS IS A 10 YEAR PERIOD. REMAINING PAYMENTS ARE $10,000. WE PAID $120,000.

FOR OVER EVO, SIMILARLY, THIS IS A WORKFORCE GRANT, SO THEY HAVE A, THE EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS, SO THE WAGES AND INSURANCE WAS INCLUDED IN THIS ONE. THAT'S A LITTLE UNIQUE COMPARED TO THE OTHER WORKFORCE GRANTS THAT WE'VE DONE. SO WE PAID $25,000 FOR YEARS THREE THROUGH FIVE, AND THEN 21,000 YEARS THROUGH 10. SO WE HAVE ABOUT $205,000 LEFT TO PAY ON THIS ONE. HUTTO HOSPITALITY , THIS WAS A SINGLE PAYMENT OF $300,000. IT'S EFFECTIVELY STRUCTURED AS A LOAN, SO IF THEY DON'T HIT

[01:10:03]

HAPPY -- WAS ALSO A SINGLE PAYMENT --

>> ALL RIGHT, CHENEY, THAT HUTTO HOSPITALITY, IS THAT STARTING

WHENEVER THEY OPEN? >> NO, THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN DISPERSED ALREADY. SO EFFECTIVELY IT WAS A LOAN, SO WE DISPERSED THAT AMOUNT, AND THEN THEY'RE REQUIRED TO GIVE THEIR CO BY AUGUST, IN ORDER TO KEEP THE FUNDS, AND THEN THEY WOULD

BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAYING. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> HAPPY PANINI, THIS WAS A SINGLE PAYMENT, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY PAYMENTS LEFT. IT WAS A $30,000 SMALL BUSINESS INCENTIVE GRANT FROM THE EDC. THAT WAS DISPERSED ONCE THEY RECEIVE THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY DO HAVE TO REMAIN OPERATIONAL FOR FIVE YEARS. THERE'S FTE REQUIREMENTS AS WELL, AND THE MINIMUM CAPITAL -- REQUIREMENTS. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE EDC ONES? YOU'RE ALL REAL QUIET. OKAY.

>> THOSE WERE JUST EDC ONES. >> YES. EXCLUSIVELY EDC. THESE ARE THE COMBINATION ONES, WHERE CITY AND EDC ARE BOTH CONTRIBUTING IN SOME FORM OR FASHION, SO WE'LL BREAK THOSE DOWN FOR YOU GUYS. J RS, THIS AGREEMENT HAD SOME DEVELOPMENT FEES THAT WERE WAIVED, PROPERTY TAX REIMBURSEMENT, AND THEN ALSO A WORKFORCE GRANT PAYMENT. SO THEY HAVE NOT COMPLIED WITH THE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT . THEY HAVE HAD A LETTER OF DEFAULT ISSUED, AND THEN THIS IS ALSO PART OF A JOINT LAWSUIT WITH WILLIAMSON COUNTY. SO EDC, CITY, AND THE COUNTY HAVE ALL ENGAGED IN THIS LAWSUIT, TO, TO RECOVER THOSE FUNDS. SO EDC'S AGREEMENT WITH A EMD, THINK WE ALREADY WENT OVER THIS. MIGHT BE A DUPLICATE HERE. YES IT IS. SO PROJECT V , YOU HEARD FROM THE HOOKY TEAM TONIGHT, SO WE HAVE ALL THE NAMES UP HERE FOR CLARITY. SO PROJECT B IS WHAT THE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT WAS ENTERED INTO UNDER THAT PROJECT NAME. IT IS NOW HOOKY. IT WAS PREVIOUSLY EVO. SO THIS AGREEMENT CAME ABOUT IN 2023. WE HAVE ABOUT 5 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS LEFT ON IT, BECAUSE THEY DON'T START RECEIVING DISBURSEMENTS UNTIL THEY OBTAIN THEIR CO. THAT'S THE FIRST MILESTONE. AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE CONTINUED OPERATIONS FOR THE ENTIRE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT, AND THERE'S A COMBINATION OF A PERFORMANCE GRANT THAT'S $4 MILLION, AND THEN A SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT COMPONENT OF $1.5 MILLION MAXIMUM , AND THE PERCENTAGE OF THAT REIMBURSEMENT VARIES OVER THE TERM. IT STARTS OUT AT 100% FOR THE FIRST TWO YEARS, AND THEN GOES DOWN YEAR-OVER-YEAR, DOWN TO ABOUT 50% FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS. FOR IN QUEUE 2, THAT WAS THE PROJECT NAME, FOR GEOGRAPHY, THIS IS TOWNE WEST COMMONS PHASE TWO, SO THIS CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF ACADEMY AND CHEWIES. THEY WILL HAVE OTHER BUILDINGS UNDER CONSTRUCTION HERE THIS SUMMER AS WELL. SO THIS WAS ALSO A 2023 AGREEMENT. WE'VE PAID OUT THE INITIAL $350,000. WE HAVE $8.65 MILLION LEFT. THE STRUCTURE IS A PERFORMANCE GRANT OF $4 MILLION MAXIMUM. IF THEY HIT THEIR MILESTONES AND ADDITIONAL SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT OF $5 MILLION OVER THE 12 YEAR TERM , THAT'S STRUCTURED SIMILARLY WHERE THERE IS TWO YEARS AT 100% SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT, AND IN THOSE PERCENTAGES DECLINE OVER TIME TO 50% FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS. SO THEY DO HAVE SEVERAL CONSTRUCTION MILESTONES THAT CONSIST OF GETTING CO IS, WHICH IS CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY OPEN STORES AND, AND STOREFRONTS, AS WELL AS A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET. THEY ALSO HAD SALES REVENUE MILESTONES, AND AN UPDATE HERE FOR 2023, THE FULL FIRST YEAR, THEY DID NOT MEET THEIR REVENUE GENERATION REQUIREMENT, SO, PER THE AGREEMENT, THEY WERE REIMBURSED A PRO RATA SHARE FOR THAT. OKAY, NEXT WE HAVE HUTTO WINE BAR . THIS IS A 2023 AGREEMENT, SORRY, THAT DATE LOOKED WEIRD. AND WE, THIS IS A COMBINATION OF GRANTS, AS WELL AS SALES TAX REIMBURSEMENT. SO THIS IS A THREE-YEAR TERM ON THE GRANTS SIDE, SO IT'S $10,000 PER YEAR. THEY RECEIVED THEIR FIRST PAYMENT WHEN THEY RECEIVED THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THEY JUST CELEBRATED THEIR ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY, SO WE'RE EXCITED TO SEE THEM KEEP GOING.

SO WE HAVE TWO MORE YEARS LEFT OF THE $10,000, AND THEN THEY'RE

[01:15:01]

QUESTIONS ON THAT? >> IF THE CO-OP IS PART EDC AND CITY, WE DECIDE THAT, CAN WE PUT THAT ON THAT, CAN WE MOVE IT TO THAT SLIDE INSTEAD OF CITY ONLY?

>> YEAH. ALL RIGHT HE. OKAY. TERS. I'M GOING TO HAND THIS

BACK TO CHRISTINA. >> SURE. SO THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT TO THESE SLIDES. JUST SORT OF A FEAR THAT THIS, OUR BASE YEAR, AND WHAT THE CURRENT INCREMENT IS THAT. FOR THE TERS CO-OP, THE BASE YEAR IS 2018. THE BASE VALUE WAS $1.25 MILLION. CURRENT VALUE IS $28,789,000, SO THAT PUTS US AT AN INCREMENT OF ABOUT 27 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS. THE NEXT ONE IS TERS 2. THAT BASE YEAR IS 2019 . THE BASE VALUE IS $548,000.

CURRENT VALUE IS $1,789,000, SO THAT PUTS OUR INCREMENT AT $1,241,000. AND FINALLY, THE BIG ONE IS THE MEGA SITE RIGHT NOW.

THE BASE YEAR WAS 2022. BASE VALUE WAS $1,634,000. THE CURRENT VALUE IS AT $112,449,000, SO THAT PUTS THE

INCREMENT AT $110,000,814. >> I FORGOT, ON THAT ONE, IS THERE DEBT ON THAT TERS 3? OR IS IT JUST --

>> YEAH, THE EDC HAS MEGA SITE THAT ON THE, ON THE LAND THERE, BUT WE DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT IN THE INCREMENT BECAUSE THAT IS, IF IT'S OWNED BY THE EDC, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A TAXABLE VALUE.

>> YEAH. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE -- IS THERE TERS 3 DEBT. AS I UNDERSTAND THE TERS, YOU'RE TAKING THAT IN MENTAL VALUE INCREASE, YOU'RE TAKING THOSE TAXES, YOU'RE PUTTING THEM OFF TO THE SIDE TO THEN FIND IMPROVEMENTS OR PAY BACK DEBT.

SO DO WE EVER TAKE OUT ANY DEBT ON --

>> KNOW. >> SO THAT MONEY --

>> SO -- >> OH, GO AHEAD, DAN.

>> THE TERS 3 IS GOING DOWN A ROAD OF SOME REIMBURSEMENT FOR SKYBOX FOR SOME ITEMS, STARTING IN 2027, BUT THAT HAS NOT, THAT'S STILL IN, IN PROCESS. THAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED YET.

>> SO ON, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BUDGETS, I ASSUME WE, IF IT'S A TERS, HOWEVER IT WAS SET UP, THERE'S MONEY BEING KEPT TO THE SIDE, RIGHT, THAT'S NOT COMING TO THE CITY, IT'S COMING TO THE

TERS. IS THAT RIGHT? >> NOT GET. I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY THE FIRST YEAR THAT IT BEING REPORTED FOR THE COUNTY, AND IT WILL BE PUT INTO THE TERS.

>> OKAY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY, WHAT WE'RE REIMBURSING OR

ANY OF THAT, BUT -- >> THERE'S NOTHING CURRENTLY IN THE, IN THE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN FUNDED WITH DEBT OR ANYTHING TO THAT THE GREAT, BUT ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING BUILT OUT THERE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO BE REIMBURSED WITH THIS MONEY THAT SET ASIDE, THE TERS BOARD WOULD HAVE TO VOTE TO AUTHORIZE

TO DO THAT. >> RIGHT. SO WHEN WE HAVE A CIP DISCUSSION, WE HAVEN'T BEEN DISCUSSING TERS 3 AS A REVENUE

SOURCE. >> THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A REVENUE SOURCE UNTIL THIS NEXT YEAR.

>> RIGHT, BUT WE'RE DOING A FIVE-YEAR CIP PLAN, RIGHT?

>> CORRECT. >> AND SO IN MY MIND, WHEN I'M THINKING FIVE YEARS OUT, I DON'T WANT TO CHARGE, I DON'T WANT TO SELL DEBT, PERSONALLY. CHARGE PEOPLE MORE MONEY FOR A PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT IN TWO YEARS, WHEN IN TWO YEARS, TERS 3 CAN FUND IT. SO I THINK, SOMEHOW, WE NEED TO CIRCLE THAT UP TO WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH, LIKE, I THINK I SHOWED YOU BEFORE, I'VE SEEN OTHER CITIES, THEY'LL HAVE A ROAD PROJECT, AND I'LL SAY, 500,000 FROM THIS, 100,000 FROM THIS. BECAUSE IF WORD -- ALL THIS MONEY, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE COME ACROSS A BUNCH OF MONEY IN TWO YEARS, WE'RE JUST GOING TO BLOW IT ON SOMETHING ELSE, WHEN THE NECESSITY WOULD'VE BEEN WHATEVER THE WATER LINE IS. AS I LOOK AT IT, WE RAISE WATER RATES IN ORDER TO FUND INFRASTRUCTURE. PART OF IT IS OUT HERE AT THE MEGA SITE. AND SO IF WE DON'T NEED TO BE DOING THAT, OR IF IT'S A TEMPORARY DEAL, I GUESS IT'S MORE OF A JUNE MEETING, WE CAN BE READY FOR THAT.

>> IT CERTAINLY CAN PLAY INTO THAT, MAYOR, FOR SURE. THE, THE BUDGET ASPECT WOULD GENERALLY, WHAT I WOULD'VE BEEN INCLINED TO DO WOULD'VE BEEN TO TAKE THESE REVENUE SOURCES AND TO USE IT TO PAY FOR THE PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ENCUMBERED, TO START SHIFTING THAT BURDEN OFF OF THE TAXPAYERS AND RATEPAYERS

TO THE TERMS. >> YEAH. LIKE I SAID, THAT'S PROBABLY A JUNE CONVERSATION. ALL RIGHT, BUT THAT'S GOOD. $10

[01:20:03]

>> YEAH. AND THAT, I THINK, WRAPS UP OUR PRESENTATION. IF

THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. >> AWESOME JOB. I KNOW IT PROBABLY TOOK YOU GUYS A WHILE, ONE, TO FIND SOME OF THESE AGREEMENTS, BECAUSE I KNOW SOME OF THEM DIDN'T EXIST -- BUT WE GOT THEM. WE KNOW WHICH ONES ARE LEGAL. WE KNOW WHICH ONES ARE PERFORMING. WE KNOW , NOW WE CAN LOOK BACK, WHAT'S WORKING, WHAT'S NOT WORKING, AND SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS DOING ALL THAT, BECAUSE I CAN ONLY IMAGINE THE HEADACHE IT WAS TO FIND

STUFF THAT WE DID IN 2019. >> AND, QUICK QUESTION. LAST YEAR WAS THE FIRST YEAR WHEN Y'ALL STARTED PRESENTING THIS, RIGHT? SO THIS IS THE SECOND YEAR UPDATE. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES. >> AWESOME. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR PUTTING THAT TOGETHER AND CONTINUING TO UPDATE US ON WHERE WE STAND WITH ALL THE AGREEMENTS, AND CONTINUING TO JUST BE TRANSPARENT AND HAVING THE INFORMATION OUT THERE. THANK

YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO ADD, SORRY, GO AHEAD.

>> NO, THAT WAS YOU. GO. >> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ADD, YOU KNOW, YEAH, HOPEFULLY THE SECOND YEAR WAS A LITTLE BIT EASIER THAN THE FIRST TO PUT TOGETHER, BUT ONE THING I NOTICED IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND WHEN IT'S A REIMBURSEMENT, THAT'S NOT REALLY THE CITY AT RISK, BUT WE'VE HAD A COUPLE WHERE IT'S BEEN GRANT MONEY, AND SO CLAWBACKS COME INTO PLAY. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK CAME UP DURING THE JRS, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF GETTING INVOLVED IN LITIGATION, IS POTENTIALLY PUTTING INTO AGREEMENTS THAT IF THEY FAILED TO MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS , AND WE'RE GOING TO CLAWBACKS, THAT WE WOULD, THEY WOULD AGREE THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT A LIEN ON THEIR PROPERTY, IF IT'S A REAL PROPERTY SITUATION, SO THAT WE BE GUARANTEED THAT THEY CAN'T JUST, YOU KNOW, TAKE OFF AND, AND, YOU KNOW, NOT GET US OUR MONEY BACK. SO. JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AS WE LOOK AT FUTURE

AGREEMENTS. >> YEAH, DEFINITELY. I THINK THAT'S A BEST PRACTICE, SO WE'LL DEFINITELY INCORPORATE

THAT MOVING FORWARD. >> YEAH, AND I'D LIKE TO -- I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PROVIDES TRANSPARENCY, AS WELL AS HELPS US TO, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE INVESTMENTS THAT WE'RE MAKING OUR, OUR BENEFICIAL. AND SO I LOVE THE PRESENTATION. JUST ONE THING THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IS JUST US TIGHTENING UP THE FTE RECOMMEND, OR, THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE ENTITIES TO US REGARDING THEIR FTES. I JUST LIKE TO SEE THAT TIGHTENED UP A BIT, SO THAT WAY WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT RESIDENTS HERE IN HUTTO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TRULY LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY HERE IN THE CITY. AND SO THAT'S

[8.3. Presentation and discussion of the Limmer Square Project and correlating proposed Public Improvement District by Metcalfe, Wolff, Stuart, & Williams, LLP and the developing party. (Talley Williams) ]

JOB. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 8.3, PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF THE LIMMER SQUARE PROJECT AND CORRELATING PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BY METCALFE, WOLFF, STUART, & WILLIAMS , LLP AND THE

DEVELOPING PARTY. >> GOOD EVENING. TALLEY WILLIAMS WITH METCALFE, WOLFF, STUART, & WILLIAMS .

>> BECAUSE WE LIKE YOU, WE GOT YOU HERE BEFORE MIDNIGHT, OKAY?

>> I WAS HOPING IT WAS GOING TO BE BEFORE, LIKE, 8:00, BUT.

>> OH, SORRY. >> WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN.

I'M GOING TO TRY TO WORK THIS, BUT I'M PROBABLY NOT THE BEST.

AM I GOING THE WRONG WAY? >> NO, YOU'RE PERFECT.

>> THIS IS, OH, THIS IS JIM'S PRESENTATION.

>> YEAH, THIS IS THE ONLY PRESENTATION I HAVE.

>> YOU DON'T HAVE THE OTHER ONE. YOU DON'T HAVE MINE. WELL, MAYBE I DON'T HAVE TO GET IT NOW. THAT'S OKAY. DID YOU GET

THE ONE FROM SARAH? >> SHE ONLY SENT LEGIONS.

>> OH, OKAY. WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO GO ON THE FLY. THAT'S OKAY. SO THE, THE REASON WE ARE HERE TONIGHT, AND, JIM, WE HAVE YOUR PRESENTATION NOW. NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. NO. SO THE REASON WE'RE HERE TONIGHT IS BACK IN NOVEMBER, THERE WAS AN ITEM BROUGHT BEFORE COUNCIL FOR A RETAIL WASTEWATER AGREEMENT FOR THE, WE, WE CALL IT LIMMER SQUARE NOW. I THINK Y'ALL ARE USED TO IT BEING CALLED PEARL ESTATES. SO IT'S A 112 ACRE SITE THAT'S AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 130 AND THE LIMMER LOOP. SO IF I HAD MY PRESENTATION, I WOULD SHOW YOU GUYS A MAP. BUT ANYWAY, THERE WAS A RETAIL WASTEWATER AGREEMENT THAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE YOU GUYS, AND COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A, YOU SAY, USE A PID AS THE FINANCING VEHICLE VERSUS A AND UD. SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING, THE DEVELOPER AND THE PFG AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY STAFF COME UP WITH A DEVELOPING AGREEMENT, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT LATER ON YOUR AGENDA ITEM, BUT WE HAVE BASICALLY TAKEN ALL OF THE TERMS THAT YOU GUYS HAD LOOKED AT IN THE WASTEWATER SERVICE AGREEMENT, WE PUT THAT INTO A DEVELOPING AGREEMENT FORMAT WITH THE CONCEPT THAT A

[01:25:01]

>> YEAH, I WOULD JUST SAY, I WANT TO THANK YOU GUYS FOR WALTER MEETING AND GOING THROUGH THIS. YOU GUYS HEARD THE COMMENTS EARLIER FROM SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT A 257 ACRE DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF TOWN. IT'S NOT IN THE COUNTY. IT'S GOT A LOT OF SIMILARITIES. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE DOING, THE SAME THING WE , IF WE'RE BEING HONEST, MAYBE PUSH YOU GUYS TO DO IS TO COME INTO THE CITY, GO THROUGH THE PID PROCESS AND ALL THAT. THAT WAY IT'S PART OF THE CITY. AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHY, LIKE, FOR ME, I'M REAL SUPPORTIVE OF THIS PROJECT. NOT THAT IT MAY NOT, IT MAY CAUSE TRAFFIC ISSUES, MAYBE A LOT OF THINGS, BUT IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT THIS, YOU GUYS HAVE THE ABILITY TO GET THE WATER FROM JONAH. YOU COULD'VE STAYED OUT IN THE COUNTY. WE WOULD'VE HAD ALL THE IMPACTS THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE REGARDLESS. IT'S JUST, NOW THAT THERE'S CONTROL, LITTLE BIT, OVER THE DEVELOPMENT WORKING TOGETHER, IT'S MORE OF A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT, AND I KNOW IT'S NOT YOUR GUYS PREFERRED FINANCING MECHANISM, BUT MUD'S HAVEN'T BEEN KIND OF OUR, OUR THING. I THINK WE'RE MORE OF, LIKE, A PID GROUP. ALL THAT TO SAY, THANK YOU FOR GOING THROUGH. HOPE IT WENT AS SMOOTH AS MAYBE I WAS REALLY HOPING AND SAYING IT WOULD GO, BUT, SO THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> INTERESTING EVENING. I'VE, I SENT THIS PRESENTATION EARLIER, AND, AND WE WERE SITTING BACK THERE, AND THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM SAID, WE SENT OUR PRESENTATION.

WE'RE GOING TO GIVE IT. I SAID, I THINK THEY'D RATHER HEAR FROM YOU. BUT MINE CAME AND THEIRS DIDN'T FOR SOME REASON. SO LATER TONIGHT, THERE'S A NUMBER OF ACTION ITEMS. RESOLUTION APPROVING A DEVELOPING AGREEMENT, PID CREATION, ANNEXATION OF CITY. ALL IMPORTANT ITEMS. BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T DISCUSS FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF IT. BEING A FINANCE PERSON, I KIND OF BELIEVE YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU END UP FINANCIALLY BEFORE YOU GO FORWARD WITH THESE MORE DEVELOPMENT RULES AND REGULATION ITEMS. AND MY UNDERSTANDING, WORKING WITH SARAH AND ALBERTA FOLLOWING ALL THE EMAILS, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED AS AET J MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, AND THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS AND REQUESTS BY THE COUNCIL, THEY HAD DECIDED TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY IF THE CITY WOULD DO A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. SO THERE'S 111 ACRES IN THE ET J.

THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA ULTIMATELY WOULD MEAN THAT THEY WOULD ANNEX INTO THE CITY, CITY WOULD APPROVE ZONING, CREATE A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, LEVY ASSESSMENTS, AND ISSUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS TO FUND INFRASTRUCTURE TO DEVELOP THIS MIXED-USE PROJECT. THIS 111 ACRES WILL REALLY HAVE A BUILDOUT INVOLVING A 40 FOOT FRONT LOTS, TOWN HOMES, MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL, ABOUT HALF $1 BILLION IN BUILDOUT.

IT'LL BE ABOUT $1 MILLION ANNUAL AD VALOREM TAXES AT THE CURRENT CITY TAX RATE. AND THEY'LL PLAY A COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE OF ABOUT $2,715,000. AND UNIQUELY, IT'S STRUCTURED THAT, THAT'S BASED ON 10% OF THE BOND SIZING. THAT'S THE FULL SIZING. IT MAY SPLIT IN PHASES OR MAY BE DONE AT ALL ONE TIME. I'M NOT SURE YET, HOW THEY'RE GOING FORWARD, THOUGH WE'VE HAD SOME INITIAL DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM. SO TH IS PROPOSED IS ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA . OUR NUMBER OF RESOLUTIONS, AGAIN, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE PID CREATION AND ANNEXATION, AND THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE ON MAY 15TH, AT WHICH TIME THE HOPE IS

[01:30:08]

[01:35:02]

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. >> QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL?

>> SINCE WE'RE NOT VOTING ON IT TONIGHT, ARE THOSE RATES LOCKED IN, OR WILL THEY, WILL YOU BE REDOING IT AS, AS IT BECOMES

MORE -- FIRM? >> THE GOOD AND THE BAD NEWS, NOTHINGS LOCKED IN TONIGHT FORMALLY, BUT I DO THINK THAT, AGAIN, AS YOUR ADVISER, WHEN, WHEN WE'VE BEEN PRESENTED A PLAN AND A FINANCIAL PLAN IS WHAT THEY PROPOSED TO GO FORWARD WITH, WHEN THEY COME FORWARD THIS FALL OR NEXT YEAR WHEN THEY'RE READY TO GO FORWARD, AND THEY WANT TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS, I WOULD BE DISAPPOINTED, AND I WOULD DEFER TO YOU TO ASK WHY YOU'D VARY FROM THIS PLAN, YOU KNOW? THIS IS WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. BUT NONE OF THESE ACTION ITEMS INDICATE THAT, YOU KNOW? THE, THE, THIS ACTUALLY, AND THE WAY THINGS ARE DONE HERE IN CENTRAL TEXAS IS IT'S A TWO STEP PROCESS. BUT TO ME, I, I THINK THESE ARE THE BENCHMARKS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE, AND, AND I'D REPORT TO YOU IF THERE WAS A VARIANCE, AND THERE MAY BE A JUSTIFICATION, BUT I THINK I'D LET THEM SPEAK TO THIS, BUT THIS, THIS IS WHAT YOUR WHOLE ECONOMICS IS BASED ON. THE INTEREST RATE, IT'S GOING TO BE AN INTEREST RATE THAT, THAT WE HAVE AS WE GO FORWARD. IT'S GOING TO -- I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF WHERE WE ARE. WE'RE NEAR HISTORICAL HIGHS IN INTEREST RATES. WE'VE PLACED SOME BONDS THIS WEEK, TO GIVE YOU A FEEL.

IT'S NOT THE KIND OF NEWS I TELL PEOPLE, BUT I WAS GOING TO PREPARE A SALE. I LOOKED AT THE HISTORICAL RATE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, AND LAST WEEK, OUR BOND BUYER INDEX SAID THAT WE WERE HIGHER THAN RATES 93% OF THE TIME THE LAST THREE YEARS, SO WE'RE PRETTY NEAR THAT HIGH, AND I THINK WE'RE KIND OF, KIND OF BUNCHING UP ON THESE HIGH-YIELD BONDS, KIND OF A CEILING WITH WHAT CAN BE DONE. A COUPLE DEALS WE'VE GOT TO PULL TO THE MARKET. SO TO ME, I THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE PLAN, AND, AND IN MY MIND, PRESENTING TO YOU IS SOMETHING , SO WHEN YOU COME FORWARD, WHEN THEY'RE READY TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT I EXPECT THEM TO DO GOING FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND LET ME SAY THAT MY, MY EXPERIENCE HERE IN WORKING WITH YOUR STAFF, YOUR STAFF, WHEN THEY GO THROUGH TWO STEP PROCESS, NO ONE HAS VARIED FROM WHAT THEY PRESENTED ORIGINALLY, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING I THINK THAT WAS FULLY EXPLAINED AND DISCLOSED TO THE COUNCIL, AND I WAS HERE TONIGHT, UNUSUALLY -- JUST SO YOU SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING AND YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION.

>> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, JIM, FOR BEING HERE. CAN YOU GO BACK OR GO TO, I GUESS, PAGE FOUR? OKAY, SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS. SO THE $.84 RIGHT, THAT IS THE PID ASSESSMENT. DOES THAT INCLUDE THE $.40 CITY OF HUTTO TAX RATE?

>> NO, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE -- >> OKAY, THANK YOU. SO, SO THERE WILL BE A, SAY, IF IT WERE INTO FRUITION RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? THERE WOULD BE A LINE ITEM FOR CITY OF HUTTO TAX RATE FOR $0.40. THEN THERE WOULD BE A PID ASSESSMENT OF $0.84. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THAT YOUR TAXES -- WOULD AMEND THE CONTRACTED -- NOW ACTUALLY COLLECT FOR THE LIMMER SQUARE PID, AND THERE WOULD BE A SEPARATE LINE ITEM, AND, ACTUALLY, THERE'S TWO SEPARATE LINE ITEMS. ONE IS THE CAPITAL RECOVERY, WHICH IS $0.78, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE ONE FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATION OF IT, WHICH COULD BE $0.06, IN THIS CASE. VERY SIMILAR TO YOUR CITY -- BUT IT WOULD BE CLEARLY INDICATED AS THE PID ASSESSMENT RATE, DISCLOSED A VARIETY OF WAYS, UP FRONT -- SOMEONE'S ASSIGNING CONTRACT, DISCLOSED TO THEIR ESCROW AND THEIR MORTGAGE LENDER. BUT AGAIN, CLEAR, YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S GOING TO BE IN ADDITION TO WHAT YOU'RE PAYING RIGHT NOW.

>> PERFECT. AND THEN CAN YOU CLARIFY HOW THE DIFFERENCE CAN BE VIEWED? IS THAT THROUGH THE WILLIAMSON COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE OWNER WOULD SEE ON

THEIR MORTGAGE STATEMENT? >> WELL --

>> OR BOTH. >> IN, AND MY THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT, THAT THIS WOULD BE DONE IN YOUR OTHER PID. THIS WOULD BE ACTUALLY COLLECTED BY YOUR TAX ASSESSOR COLLECTOR AS PART OF THE PROCESS. IN FACT, WHAT MAKES THESE SUCCESSFUL IS THAT THE BILL IS, IS ACTUALLY ON THE, THE OVERALL TAX STATEMENT. SCHOOL DISTRICT, COUNTY, CITY. SO THEY WOULD ACTUALLY COLLECTED. AND, AND WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN THE BONDS ARE ISSUED AND THE -- ASSESSMENT PLAN PUT IN PLACE, IT'S GIVEN TO THEM. THEY MODIFY

[01:40:03]

>> OKAY. AND THEN, SO YOU ARE SAYING -- ONE OF THE SLIDES THAT ABOUT, LIKE, RIGHT NOW IT'S ABOUT 5.75% INTEREST RATE. WHO PAYS THAT INTEREST RATE? IS IT THE DEVELOPER THROUGH THE PID FINANCE FUNDING, OR IS IT THE USER, AND USER?

>> IS ACTUALLY, THE ACTUAL INTEREST RATE OF THE BONDS. SO, SO LET ME EXPLAIN SOMETHING. SO, AND I'M GOING TO KIND OF QUOTE SOME NUMBERS. SO THESE ARE THE RATES $0.84. BUT THE WAY THAT THE BONDS ARE STRUCTURED, IF YOU TAKE ALL THOSE PARCELS TIMES WHAT THEIR ANNUAL PAYMENT IS TO GET A, ANNUAL CASH FLOW. AND SO THE, WHEN WE PUT THESE SERVICE ASSESSMENT PLAN IN PLACE, THE ONE CONSTANT IS THE FIXED ANNUAL AMOUNT THAT THEY PAID THEIR CAPITAL FEES. SO A PID IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN A TAX RATE. AND YOU CAN SET THIS RATE, IF, IF, IF THERE'S A VARIANCE IN THE HOME, OVER OR UNDER THE PROJECTED VALUE, THEY PAY THAT SAME DOLLAR RATE. SO THEY PAY THAT DOLLAR RATE. GENERALLY CONSIDERED GOOD NEWS IN TEXAS AS HOMES ESCALATE IN VALUE, THAT RATE DOESN'T CHANGE. SO NOW WE TAKE THOSE CASH FLOWS, AND WHAT TAKES PLACE IS WHEN I SHOWED YOU THE -- AMOUNT OF BONDS, WHEN WE DISCOUNT THAT CASH FLOW AT 5.75%, WE GET A PRESENT VALUE OF $27,155,000. SO IF THE INTEREST RATE WENT UP, THE, BECAUSE WE HAVE A HIGHER DISCOUNT RATE, WE HAVE A LOW AMOUNT OF BONDS. SO HYPOTHETICALLY , AND I ACTUALLY -- DID AN ANALYSIS -- IS THAT, YOU KNOW, AS INTEREST RATES WENT UP -- BONDS WENT DOWN. THE CASH FLOW , ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, STAYED THE SAME, BUT IT WAS A HIGHER INTEREST RATE. SO WHAT WOULD TAKE PLACE IS, IS THAT, THAT, IF INTEREST RATES GO UP OR DOWN, IT ACTUALLY AFFECTS HOW MUCH THE PROJECT FUND IS FUNDED. AND SO THE VARIABLE WOULD BE PROJECT FUND, AND IN THE DEVELOPERS CONTRIBUTION. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. WHERE THE HOMEOWNERS, AND IT'S BEEN A DISCUSSION ON RECENT BOND ISSUES WE'VE DONE WITH THIS, WAREHOUSE AFFECTED, AFFECTED HOMEOWNER -- THEY MAKE IT SEEM ANNUAL PAYMENT, WHETHER INTEREST RATES ARE UP OR DOWN. OF COURSE, THE DEVELOPER, LIKE INTEREST RATES, AND BE EFFICIENT, BECAUSE THEY GET A LITTLE BIT MORE PRODUCT FUND, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> OKAY, PERFECT. AND THEN, THIS MIGHT BE A, A CITY ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER QUESTION. THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS DESIGNED THE AVERY LAKE ONE AND TWO WASTEWATER LINES, IS THAT

CORRECT? >> GOOD EVENING, FOR THE RECORD THE CITY ENGINEER. SORRY, I WAS TRYING TO NOD MY HEAD BACK THERE, BUT I REALIZE THAT NOBODY CAN HEAR ME NOD MY HEAD. YEAH, NOTHINGS -- QUITE YET. BUT YES, IT IS THE AVERY LAKE ONE AND

TWO. >> OKAY, SO IT'S IN THE CIP. SO THEY HAVE DESIGNED IT, AND, ALONG WITH THE CITY, WILL BE PARTNERING TOGETHER TO CONSTRUCT IT. OR CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH, I GUESS, NEXT, NEXT -- SO THEY HAVE THE DESIGN OF THE WASTEWATER LINES. WHAT IS THE NEXT PHASE? OBVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTION, AND, AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? RESPONSE

ABILITY? >> SO, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE WAY THE AGREEMENT WAS WRITTEN OUT IS THAT THEY WILL FINISH THE DESIGN. THEY WILL GET THE DESIGN PERMITTED THROUGH US.

ONCE WE SIGN OFF AND SAY, YES, IT'S GOOD, IT'S PERMITTED, WE ALSO HAVE TO GET IT PERMITTED THROUGH TXDOT, CROSSING TXDOT.

WE ALSO HAVE TO GET IT THROUGH, PERMITTED THROUGH -- WATER CONTROL, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE NEAR THEIR RESERVOIR. WE ALSO HAVE TO GET IT PERMITTED THROUGH THE PRR, BECAUSE WE'RE CROSSING UNDER THEIR RESERVOIR. WE'LL ALSO BE CROSSING UNDER 130.

THERE'S A LOT OF CROSSINGS. ONCE IT'S ALL PERMITTED, THEN THE IDEA IS THAT WE WOULD BID IT OUT. THE CITY WOULD BID IT OUT.

AND THEN WE WOULD, WE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE CONSTRUCTION.

>> OKAY. AND THEN, I GUESS, I KNOW THIS MAY BE HARD TO SAY A TIMELINE. GOING THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS WITH ALL OF

[01:45:03]

TIMELINE? >> --

>> BECAUSE I DO KNOW IT TAKES TIME, BUT.

>> THE CITY PROCESS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, I CONTROL THAT ONE. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WORKING IT THROUGH, MAKING SURE

EVERYTHING IS DESIGNED -- >> WITH THE OTHER ENTITIES,

YEAH. >> TXDOT IS PRETTY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD, BECAUSE WE JUST GO THROUGH THEIR, THEIR UTILITY LICENSING AND PERMIT SYSTEM, OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED. -- IS THE ACRONYM. YOU PRR IS THE, IS THE OBVIOUS MAJOR HURDLE, BUT I THINK BETWEEN WALTHER WITH LJ EIGHT AND THE CITY BOTH REACHING OUT, I THINK WE CAN GET THAT PUSHED THROUGH FAIRLY QUICKLY.

IT'S HARD TO GIVE YOU A TIMELINE, BECAUSE THEY'RE

UNPREDICTABLE AT BEST. >> YEAH.

>> BUT WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE 42 INCH LINE PERMITTED PRETTY QUICKLY. SO AS LONG AS WE JUST CHECK ALL THE BOXES, I THINK, IS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD PROCESS.

>> AND THEN FOR UPPER BRUSHY CREEK, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? IS THAT PRETTY --

>> IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. I'VE ALREADY BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM, AS HAS LJ EIGHT, AND SO THEY KNOW WHAT'S COMING.

THEY'RE AWARE OF IT. IN FACT, THEY ARE LOOKING TO US TO BE ABLE TO SEE IF THEY CAN PIGGYBACK ON ANY OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE ABLE TO GET ACCESS TO THEIR UP THERE. AND SO, GENERALLY, I TOLD THEM, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS YOU'RE NOT BLOCKING OUR ACCESS TO OUR WASTEWATER LINE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS TO IT. SO WE'VE DONE A LOT OF PRIMING THE PUMP AND GETTING EVERYBODY THAT WE CAN ON BOARD EARLY, SO I, I THINK THE PERMITTING PROCESS WILL GO FAIRLY QUICKLY. I CAN'T GIVE YOU A GOOD TIMELINE.

>> THAT'S FINE. YEAH. OKAY, PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. THANK YOU.

[11.1 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-108 approving a development agreement between Limmer Holdings, LLC and the City of Hutto for the property known as Limmer Square; approving the City Manager to execute the Agreement. (Legal) ]

>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS, GUYS. THERE'S NO OBJECTION, WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM 11.1.2 AND .3 UP NEXT. THEN I'LL DEAL WITH

THIS DEVELOPMENT. >> OH, OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT, HEARING ON, I'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 11.1, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-0108 APPROVING A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BETWEEN LIMMER HOLDINGS, LLC AND THE CITY OF HUTTO FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS LIMMER SQUARE , APPROVING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THAT RESOLUTION R-2025-108 AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF TWEAKS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IF YOU TURN TO PAGE 14 OF THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT, WE CLARIFIED THAT THE DEVELOPER SHALL PAY TO THE C■ITY HE IMPACT FEES IN 3.17 A. IN B, THE IMPACT FEE IS CALCULATED AT THE CURRENT RATE, BUT IF WE CHANGE THE IMPACT FEE TWO YEARS AFTER THE LAST BOND ISSUANCE, THE IMPACT FEE WILL GO TO THE INCREASED RATE, IF THAT'S WHAT THE CITY HAS ADOPTED. WE JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE AGREEMENT, THAT, SHOULD THE CITY CHANGE THE IMPACT FEE OVER THE COURSE OF THE AGREEMENT, WHEN THE DATE WOULD BE FOR THE NEW FEE. ALSO, THERE'S JUST A MINOR EDIT ON PAGE 22. IT WAS 7.04, APPROVAL OF PERMITS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW, THERE WASN'T A DEFINITION FOR APPLICABLE LAW. IT WAS CITY REGULATION, SO WE JUST CHANGE THAT WORD. AND I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE DOES ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO SERVE AS THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION, AND THAT IS IN THE ANNEXATION SECTION OF THIS DEVELOPING AGREEMENT. IT ALSO ALLOWS THE AGREEMENT TO SERVE AS A SERVICE PLAN. SO YOU WILL NOT SEE A RESOLUTION WITH A DIFFERENT SERVICE PLAN OTHER THAN THIS

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, DOTTIE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION ON THIS ITEM?

>> YES, I, I HAD A QUESTION. SO WE JUST HEARD THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT, IF APPROVED, AND IF THE PID IS APPROVED, WOULD HAVE APPROXIMATELY A 3X EQUIVALENT TAX RATE? ABOVE WHAT A REGULAR CITIZEN, CITIZEN OF HUTTO PAYS? IS THAT, THAT ACCURATE?

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL. THE PFG. WE ARE PROPOSING A

[01:50:01]

DOWN. >> RIGHT. BUT THEY WOULD BE PAYING AN EQUIVALENT, AND SO CURRENT CITY OF HUTTO TAX TODAY IS 39, JUST OVER $.39, JUST UNDER 40. AND THAT IS EQUIVALENT WAS, BEST SOUND LIKE IT WOULD BE BETWEEN 78 AND 84, SOMEWHERE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO MOVING IN, A NEW, A NEW HOMEOWNER WOULD BE PAYING, CITY PLUS THE PID WOULD BE ROUGHLY 3X.

>> AND MOST OF THE NEW DEVELOPERS HAVE PID'S --

>> RIGHT. SO MOST OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS -- AND I GUESS THAT'S WHAT'S KIND OF ASKING -- ARE WE CONFIDENT WE'RE GOING TO BE SELLING HOMES? IN THIS DEVELOPMENT? I MEAN, YOU GUYS SOUND PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT YOU CAN BUILD HOMES AND SELL HOMES AT THAT, AT THAT RATE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE -- I KEEP HEARING ON, ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT $.39 IS KILLING EVERYONE AND NO ONE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE. THIS IS GOING TO

BE ONE DOLLARS AND $.23. >> THE REALITY IS IF THE DEVELOPER IS UNSUCCESSFUL AT EXECUTING SALES TO BUILDERS AND BUILDERS, THEY WILL TAKE ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF MAKING

PAYMENTS. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DOUBLE

CHECKING. >> ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR ACTION ON THIS ITEM?

>> OH, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THEY SUBMITTED THEIR HOUSE BILL 1295, BUT WE WOULD REQUIRE THAT PRIOR TO THE CITY MANAGER SIGNING.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 11.2. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-109 ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PID PETITION AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CREATE A LIMMER SQUARE PID.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IF YOU DON'T APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND YOU SHOULDN'T CONSIDER 11.2 OR 11.3. BECAUSE THE CREATION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT CALLING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT DEPENDS ON THE DETAIL IN THE DEVELOPING

AGREEMENT. >> ALL RIGHT, SO WE SHOULD RECALL A LATE OF 11.1 TO DISCUSS IF WE WANT TO PROCEED. RECALL 11.1. 11.1, IF WE SAY NO, THEY'LL JUST DEVELOP AN

ACCOUNTING. >> IF YOU SAY NO, THEY'LL HAVE AN MUD. THEY'LL DEVELOP THIS ANYWAY.

>> MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-108 AS PRESENTED WITH THE 1295 AGREEMENT.

>> SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE

CALL THE VOTE. >> COUNCILWOMAN KOLAR?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMAN THOMPSON?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMAN THORNTON?

>> AYE. SIX >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.

[11.2 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-109 accepting the Public Improvement District (PID) petition and calling a public hearing to create the Limmer Square PID. (Legal) ]

>> MOTION PASSES 6-0. BACK TO ITEM 11.2, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-109, EXCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PID PETITION AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CREATE A LIMMER SQUARE PID.

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, I BELIEVE IN YOUR PACKET YOU HAVE THE PID PETITION THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROVIDES THAT IN ORDER TO CREATE THE PID, THEY DO HAVE TO SUBMIT THE PID PETITION. THIS ITEM IS A RESOLUTION CALLING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO COME AND SPEAK AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A PID SHOULD BE CREATED.

>> ALL RIGHT. DISCUSSION AND ACTION, MORE ACTION FOR THIS

ONE? >> MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-109. AS PRESENTED.

>> ALL RIGHT, MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. WE HAVE A

SECOND? >> AL SECOND.

>> SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER? >> AYE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> AYE.

[11.3 Consideration and possible action on Resolution No. R-2025-110 calling for a public hearing regarding the voluntary annexation of approximately 111.851 acres of land located West of Texas 130 and South of Limmer Loop in Williamson County; authorizing publication of a notice in the newspaper, posting at City Hall and posting on the City website; authorizing notification of the public hearing to entities as required by law. (Legal) ]

>> MOTION PASSES 6-0. NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 11.3. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION NUMBER R-2025-110: FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF

[01:55:03]

>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THIS RESOLUTION FOLLOWS A DEVELOPING AGREEMENT PROVISIONS FOR VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION IN THE FIRST STEP IS TO CALL THE PUBLIC HEARING, PUT THE NOTICES IN THE NEWSPAPER, AND THE NOTICE TO THE LANDOWNERS.

>> DISCUSSION OR, OR ACTION ON THIS ONE?

>> MAY I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE R-2025-110?

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

>> MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER THOMPSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> I, ALSO, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO BUDGET DISCUSSIONS, I KNOW THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE ONLINE IN, SAY, TWO TO FIVE YEARS, BUT WE NEED JUST TO BE AWARE OF, YOU KNOW, PD COVERAGE ON THAT SIDE OF 130, AND, AND PREPARING FOR THAT AS A CITY. GETTING AHEAD OF THE GAME.

>> YES. ALL RIGHT, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD? >> AYE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON? >> AYE.

>> MAYOR SNYDER? >> AYE. MOTION PASSES 6-0. AND

[9. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ]

TO POSTPONE ITEM 9.13. >> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

CONSENT AS PRESENTED. >> MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER

THOMPSON. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> AL SECOND, IF THAT INCLUDES

THE -- OF 9.13. >> RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER KOLAR?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON?

>> AYE. >> COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD?

>> AYE. >> MAYOR SNYDER?

>> AYE. MOTION PASSES 6-0. BRINGS US TO ITEM 10.1,

[10.1. Consideration and possible action on Ordinance No. O-2025-015 electing to readopt Article 20.04 of the City of Hutto Code of Ordinances regarding Reinvestment Zones and Tax Abatement Agreements, as amended herein, authorizing the participation in tax abatement agreements and establishing guidelines and criteria governing tax abatement projects to encourage economic development in the City of Hutto. (Legal; Cheney Gamboa) ]

HUTTO. >> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING AGAIN. CHENEY GAMBOA, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. I WILL DEFER TO LEGAL ON MOST OF THIS, BUT EFFECTIVELY, THIS IS JUST REAFFIRMING THAT ORDINANCE SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO OFFER TAX ABATEMENT AS AN INCENTIVE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS.

>> AND PRETTY MUCH, THIS READOPT THE ORDINANCE, WITH JUST A FEW GRAMMATICAL CHANGES. WE DID LOOK AT THE TEXAS TEXT CODE , BECAUSE WE'RE OUTSIDE THE TWO YEAR PERIOD, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THE COUNCIL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK, AND SO, TO POSTPONE ACTION ON THIS ITEM SO WE CAN POST IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 1ST READ BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES COUNCIL WANTS IN THIS ORDINANCE BEFORE WE SCHEDULE IT FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

>> ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE THIS. YOU WANT FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL ON ANY POSSIBLE CHANGES, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 1ST.

>> CORRECT. >> BACK ON SCHEDULE TONIGHT.

>> WHAT IS THAT? MAY 1ST, YOU SAID?

>> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ONTO

ISLAND AMOUNT 11.4. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, WE DO HAVE AN ATTORNEY THAT CAME FROM HOUSTON TO TALK ABOUT THE MCGINNIS LAWSUIT, IF YOU WOULD ENTERTAIN AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON 13 POINT WHATEVER THAT WAS. 13.5.

>> DID YOU WANT TO GO BACK OR FINISH THE LAST FOUR ITEMS?

>> LET'S GO BACK. >>

>>> COUNCIL TO COMMENT SO WE CAN DO IT THAT WAY BEFORE GOING TO EXECUTIVE. THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED.

[11.4 Discussion and possible actions relating to Resolution No. R-2025-111 finding that the actions of the Hutto Economic Development Corporation at the meeting of March 10, 2025, for Agenda Item 7.3 were contrary to the Texas Open Meetings Act. (Mayor Mike Snyder) ]

>> I AM GOOD TO STAY. >> DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE

[02:00:04]

>> HELLO, HI. MY NAME IS AUDREY GUTHRIE AN ATTORNEY FOR THE HUTTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU TODAY. AS AN ATTORNEY , I AM HERE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS ISSUE AND TO ASSURE YOU THAT ALL THE ACTIONS TAKEN ON MARCH 10 WERE DONE UNDER THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF GEORGE HYDE, THE HEDC GENERAL COUNSEL IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. SO, REQUIRED NOTICE OF THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS THAT ARE TAKEN IN MEETINGS. ON MARCH 10 THE HEDC NOTICED DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION FOR AMENDING THE CORPORATE BYLAWS AND THEN WHEN IT CAME TO THE ITEM DURING OPEN SESSION, THEY DISCUSSED THE CORPORATE BYLAWS, THEY DISCUSSED CURRENT BYLAWS, CALLING OUT SEVERAL SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. THEY DISCUSSED INTENTION BEHIND THE BYLAWS . WHEN THEY WERE ADOPTED IN 2022, THEY DISCUSSED POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT NEEDED TO BE MADE IN LIGHT OF RECENT EVENTS AND MOST RELEVANTLY THEY DISCUSSED THE CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS WITHIN THE BYLAWS AND THE HEDC LEGAL RIGHTS AND PRACTICAL NEED TO HAVE THEIR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION NOT BE SHARED WITH ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE HEDC. SO AFTER HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS, THE BOARD CONSIDERED A MOTION TO PROTECT THE INTENDED CONFIDENTIALITY WITHIN THEIR CURRENT BYLAWS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS AMENDED BYLAWS THAT PROVIDE GREATER SPECIFICITY COULD BE DRAFTED AND APPROVED. SO THE MOTION WHICH I WILL READ TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE SAYS TO TEMPORARILY AND IMMEDIATELY PROHIBIT ANYONE OTHER THAN BOARD MEMBERS, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CORPORATION GENERAL COUNSEL FROM ATTENDING EDC EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETINGS UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE BOARD IN OPEN SESSION UNTIL SUCH TIME AMENDED BYLAWS MAY BE APPROVED AND CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THEM TO FURTHER ENSURE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE BOARD'S CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INCLUDING INFORMATION EXCHANGE WITH LEGAL COUNCIL AS WAS THE INTENT OF THE BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL IN 2022 WHEN THEY APPROVED THE CURRENT BYLAWS. NOW WHEN THIS ISSUE OF PERCEIVED POTENTIAL VIOLATION AROSE, THE BOARD TOOK IT SERIOUSLY AND REVIEWED THE AGENDA AND THEY REVIEWED THEIR MOTION AND DISCUSSION AND CONSULTED AGAIN WITH LEGAL COUNCIL AND ON APRIL 14 THEY ULTIMATELY CONSIDERED AND PASSED A RESOLUTION THAT SPECIFIED AGAIN , ONE, THAT ALL THE ACTIONS ON MARCH 10, DISCUSSION AND MOTIONS WERE DONE AFTER CONFERRING WITH AND FOLLOWING ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNCIL AND WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT BECAUSE THEY WERE ALL RELATED TO THEIR PLAN FOR AMENDING THEIR BYLAWS. I ACTUALLY BROUGHT A COPY OF THE AGENDA AND THE RESOLUTION THAT WAS PASSED FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION. AND, I HOPE THAT THIS INFORMATION PROVIDES YOU GREATER CLARITY ON THE COMPLAINS . I CAN PASS THIS OVER TO YOU.

>> I'VE GOT A QUESTION. SO YOU ARE SAYING THERE WAS AN ITEM POSTED FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON AMENDING THE BYLAWS THAT SUBSEQUENTLY HAD DISCUSSION AND THE MOTION WAS MADE TO CHANGE SOME STUFF PENDING A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS

AT A FUTURE MEETING? >> THE MOTION WAS MADE TO IMMEDIATELY ENACT THE CHANGES THEY WERE INTENDING FOR THE BYLAWS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE BYLAWS COULD GO THROUGH THE COMPLETE CHANGE PROCESS WHICH INCLUDES BOTH THE BOARD APPROVAL AND CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. THE CHANGE THEY SAID THEY PUT IN PLACE IS THE CHANGE THAT THEY IDENTIFIED FOR THE BYLAWS.

>> THEY MADE A MOTION TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS IMMEDIATELY

[02:05:02]

>> THEY MADE A MOTION. >> I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE MOTION, I'M TRYING TO ASK YOU, I'M NOT A LAWYER SO I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND ARE YOU SAYING THEY MADE A MOTION TO MAKE A

CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS? >> THEY MADE A MOTION TO PUT A CHANGE IN PLACE THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS ARE GOING TO BE AND TO PUT THE POLICY IN PLACE UNTIL THEY CAN FULLY CHANGE THE BYLAWS.

>> SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE SAYING , THEY MADE A MOTION TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS PENDING THE ULTIMATE CHANGE IS APPROVED BY THE BYLAWS. AM I SAYING THAT WRONG? WHAT PART OF

WHAT I AM SAYING IS WRONG? >> THE CHANGE THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE IS THE CHANGE THEY INTENDED FOR THE BYLAW.

>> THEY MADE THE MOTION TO CHANGE THE BYLAW COMMITTEE PENDING ULTIMATE APPROVAL OF THE BYLAWS.

>> THEY MADE A MOTION TO ENACT A POLICY THAT THEY WERE GOING TO PUT INTO THE BYLAWS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THEY COULD FULLY CHANGE

THE BYLAWS. >> I THINK WE ARE SAYING THE SAME THING, YOU'RE NOT ONE TO AGREE WITH ME BUT I GET THAT A LOT. WHAT IF THEY MADE A MOTION AND SAID SOMETHING CRAZY, LEGAL BUT COMPLETELY CHANGING THE WHOLE BYLAWS. INSTEAD OF ONE ITEM DEAL, THEY CHANGED LIKE 15 THINGS AT ONCE, AND ACTED IMMEDIATELY PENDING THE ULTIMATE APPROVAL OF EVERYTHING AND IF THEY DO THAT WOULD IT BE OKAY IF THEY DID THAT?

>> IF IT WAS ALL A TOPIC FOR THE CHANGES THEY INTENDED FOR THE BYLAWS AND NOT ANYTHING UNRELATED TO THE CHANGES OF THE

BYLAWS, THEN YES. >> I THINK THAT IS A COMPLETELY ROGUE AND CRAZY IDEA, A BOARD THAT CAN GO OUT, MAKE A MOTION, MAKE IMMEDIATE CHANGES WITH THE CONCEPT OF WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVING IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT THE LEGISLATURE INTENDED FOR THINGS TO HAPPEN, BUT AS IT WAS EXPLAINED TO US, I THINK WE ARE WORDSMITHING, IT WAS EXPLAINED IT WAS NOT A CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS BECAUSE BY LAW WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE CHANGES. IT WAS LIKE A POLICY CHANGE WHICH IS WHAT I THINK AND COUNCILMEMBER CAN CORRECT ME. I THINK THAT'S WHERE HE FLAGGED ARE YOU CHANGING POLICY OR BYLAWS AND I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS, YOU GUYS DO THIS FOR A LIVING YOU PROBABLY HEARD CHANGE YOUR BYLAWS IMMEDIATELY PENDING CITY COUNCIL THAT BYLAW HAS TO APPROVE THE CHANGES. IT SOUNDS CRAZY, I'M GLAD THIS IS THE ONLY CHANGE YOU MADE BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU COULD'VE MADE DRAMATIC CHANGES IMMEDIATELY HOPING WE WOULD I GUESS ACCEPT THEM. THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS BECAUSE COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON WAS PART OF THE VOTE IS IT A CONFLICT IF HE IS VOTING ON

WHAT WE'RE DOING? >> NO BECAUSE NOW HE IS VOTING AS A COUNCILMEMBER. NOT A PERSON ON THE HEDC BOARD.

>> THAT'S ALL I HAD. SEEMS LIKE A CRAZY MESS WITH THINGS RUNNING IN LINE I THINK IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY BYLAW CHANGE YOU HAVE TO MAKE MAYBE SAY BYLAW CHANGE BECAUSE OF MAYOR SNYDER AND DO IT LIKE THAT SO THE PUBLIC HAS A BETTER IDEA. WHEN THE COUNCIL DOES NOT KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND WE HAVE BOARD MEMBERS TRYING TO EXCLUDE THEMSELVES FROM THE VOTE AND WATCHING A VIDEO IT SEEMED LIKE A CIRCUS AND I LIKE WHAT YOU TRYING TO DO? TRYING TO CHANGE THE BYLAWS WITH COUNCILMEMBERS FROM GOING IN AND I DID NOT KNOW WHY. I WASN'T EVEN THERE SO I CAN'T TAKE CREDIT FOR CAUSING THIS, BUT ANYWAY.

>> IS IT OKAY IF I GO? ALL RIGHT SO IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THIS WAS NOT A CHANGE FOR THE BYLAW.

>> THIS WAS A VOTE OF THE POLICY IN PLACE AT THE BYLAWS WOULD CHANGE WHEN THEY GET APPROVED BECAUSE THE BYLAWS HAVE TO BE

APPROVED. >> F LIKE THE MAYOR WAS TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH SO LET ME ASK ANOTHER WAY. THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU TOLD US BEFORE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED AND AWARENESS OF THE MEMOS AND ALL THE STUFF THAT I READ WAS THAT , AND IF YOU READ THE MOTION AGAIN, THE MOTION WAS NOT TO CHANGE THE BYLAWS , THE MOTION WAS UNTIL SUCH TIME WE COULD CHANGE WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE A POLICY THAT SAYS WE ONLY WANT BOARD MEMBERS, STAFF AND LEGAL COUNCIL IN EXECUTIVE SESSIONS

[02:10:02]

>> RIGHT, A POLICY THAT IS A CHANGE THEY WILL PUT THE BYLAWS.

>> SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM READING OTHER LEGAL MEMOS FROM CITY ATTORNEY AND LEGAL MEMOS WE RECEIVED FROM GEORGE HYDE THAT THERE WAS AN ASSUMPTION IN THAT MEETING THAT NIGHT , THAT CITY COUNCILMEMBERS HAD AN INHERENT RIGHT IN THE BYLAWS TO ATTEND EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETINGS. THAT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AS NOT TRUE AND THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BYLAWS THAT SO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE A RIGHT TO BE IN EXECUTIVE

SESSION FOR THE EDC ACCURATE? >> CORRECT, NOTHING IN THE BYLAWS THAT SAY THAT AND THE AMBIGUITY CAUSED THE NEED TO PUT THE POLICY IN PLACE IN ORDER TO GET PROTECTION UNTIL THE BYLAWS COULD BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE THAT SPECIFICITY.

>> SOME FOLKS HAVE BEEN UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE BYLAWS GRANT EXPLICIT AUTHORITY BY THE COUNCIL TO ATTEND EXECUTIVE SESSION. IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING AND I HAVE TALKED TO CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS AND ASKED THE QUESTION. IS JUST BEEN A PRACTICE WE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE ASSUMED IT WAS IN THE BYLAWS BUT ON THE CAREFUL READING OF THE BYLAWS THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE A RIGHT TO GO BACK IN. THEREFORE THE BYLAWS NEED TO BE CHANGED TO PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING. THERE'S NO BYLAW CHANGE NEEDED FROM A WE ARE UNDERSTANDING.

>> TO PROVIDE SPECIFICITY. THE POLICY CHANGE DID NOT GO AGAINST ANY APPROVED BYLAWS THAT CITY COUNCIL, THE BYLAWS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED, ALL IT DID WAS REINFORCE THAT APPROVAL WAS GOING TO BE NEEDED UNTIL THEY COULD PUT THE LANGUAGE INTO THE BYLAWS AND THEN CITY COUNCIL COULD CONSIDER THE LANGUAGE AND

APPROVE. >> THE DESIRES TO PROVIDE CLARITY. TO MAKE SURE IT IS CLEAR. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM READING THE LEGAL MEMOS RECEIVED THAT BASICALLY, BASED ON SEVERAL ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS ISSUED, THAT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE A RIGHT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION ARE THE BOARD MEMBERS THEMSELVES AND LEGAL COUNCIL. AND SO ESSENTIALLY THE VOTE IN MY OPINION IN MY MIND AND THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THAT VOTE WAS UNNECESSARY. BECAUSE THEY WERE TAKING THE VOTE TO SAY THIS IS HOW WE WANT TO DO IT BUT THE RIGHT WAS INHERENT WITH WHAT WAS ESTABLISHED STATE LAW AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

>> RIGHT, JUST FOR CLARITY. >> SINCE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT BYLAW CHANGES AND STATE LAW REGARDING THE POINT OF ORDER WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS LEGALLY CAN COUNCILMEMBERS GO

BACK AND FORTH? >> THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING.

THE ITEM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS DO WE HAVE A VIOLATION OR NOT, NOT WHETHER OR NOT COUNCILMEMBERS CAN GO BACK AND IF ABEL WAS NEEDED TO BE TAKEN. I DON'T THINK THAT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION, WHAT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION IS DO YOU THINK THERE IS A TOMA VIOLATION OR NOT, IS THEY BOTH HAVE TO TAKE, YET TO STICK TO THE VIOLATIONS AND WE CAN OF THE BYLAW CONVERSATION.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING OF COUNCILMEMBER GORDON'S POINT WAS THAT THIS WAS RELATED TO THE BYLAWS. IT WAS CLARIFICATION, BUT IT WAS JUST CLARIFICATION OF THE BYLAWS SINCE THEY WERE SILENT ON THIS ISSUE AND I AGREE WITH THAT.

>> YOU GUYS HAD A POLICY CHANGE. >> TO CLARIFY THE BYLAWS IN THE PROCESS AS PART OF THE PROCESS OF ULTIMATELY AMENDING THE BYLAWS WHICH IS WHAT WAS NOTICED.

>> COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON. >> I FIND THAT TO BE A STRETCH.

THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT THE ISSUE UP, OUR LEGAL COUNCIL DOES NOT AGREE SO THE CITY DISAGREES WITH EDC AT THIS POINT. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE CONTINUING TO ARGUE THIS. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE ACCUSED OF A OPEN MEETINGS VIOLATION AND THERE IS POTENTIAL THAT SOMETHING COULD BE VOIDED AND BY THE WAY THE MOTION THAT WAS READ TONIGHT WAS NOT THE COMPLETE MOTION MADE. THAT MOTION HAD A LOT OF DETAILS ON SPECIFIC RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT ARE AN ISSUE AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED. THE SIMPLEST THING FOR THE EDC TO DO WOULD BE TO PUT IT ON THE PAST MEETING AGENDA AND THE FIRM THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED AND THEN THEY WOULD OF BEEN IN THE CLEAR OF ANY POTENTIAL TOMA VIOLATION. JUST BECAUSE THE ATTORNEY SAYS YOU DIDN'T AND SOMEBODY ELSE SAYS YOU DID , THERE'S ENOUGH THERE THAT YOU SHOULD BE WORRIED AND SOMEBODY

[02:15:01]

>> TO CONSIDER THE BYLAWS AND ARE HAVING A SPECIAL MEETING ON

MONDAY. >> THIS WAS NOT THE BYLAWS, THIS IS THE POLICY NOT THE BYLAWS. THAT'S WHAT WAS IMPROPER. YOU SAY BECAUSE IT IS RELATED BUT IT DOES NOT SAY OTHER RELATED POLICIES IN THE AGENDA ITEM. IT SAYS THE BYLAWS. I DID NOT FEEL PROPERLY NOTICED ON THE ITEM. I AM AN EDUCATED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO KNOWS WHAT TO EXPECT AND THAT BLINDSIDED ME , THE WAY

THAT MOTION WAS MADE. >> I JUST GOT A QUESTION FOR YOUR. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE MOTION SHE READ AS THE MOTION IS NOT THE COMPLETE MOTION, BUT PART OF THE MOTION THAT WAS READ

THAT NIGHT? >> CORRECT, THERE WAS A LOT MORE DETAIL IN THE MOTION WELL PROCEDURES AND DEADLINES AND

OTHER ITEMS. >> HOLD ON OKAY. NOT TRYING TO BE A JERK HERE. I GOT A QUESTION TO ASK YOU OTHERWISE I'VE GOT OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND IT'S A DIFFERENT ROLE, BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, NOW IN MY MIND IF YOU READ ME PART OF THE MOTION MADE AND NOT THE WHOLE COMPLETE MOTION, IT'S KIND OF CHERRY PICKING AND GEORGE HYDE AND I HAVE BEEN IN A LOT OF DEPOSITIONS OVER THE SAME THING WHERE PEOPLE GET SQUARELY AND START CHANGING THINGS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW GEORGE WHAT YOU DOING HERE? NOW I'VE GOT TO GO LOOK AT THE MOTION, READ IT UP, THERE WAS A FOUR PAGE MEMO OR SOMETHING OF A MOTION.

>> I WAS PRESENT, I CAN GIVE CLARIFICATION.

>> HE WAS PRESENT AND YOU ARE GOING TO DISAGREE WITH WHAT HE

SAYS. >> WHEN I HAVE MY TURN AGAIN I

WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. >> THERE WAS MORE TO THE MOTION.

INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF THE BOARD CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENT OF ONE BUSINESS DAY IN ADVANCE IN WRITING TO REQUEST TO ATTEND THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE RESOLUTION TO CONSIDER IS NOT TO FIND VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, IN SECTION 2 IT IS JUST TO FIND AND DECLARE THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE HEDC BOARD ON MARCH 10 TO INCLUDE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS TAKEN CONTRARY TO THE NOTICE PROVISION OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT.

NOT SAYING THERE'S A CLEAR VIOLATION, WE ARE SAYING TO PUT IT SIMPLY AGENDA ITEMS WAS FOR BYLAWS , MAKING A MOTION FOR POLICY CHANGE IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NOTICE FOR AN AGENDA ITEM FOR BYLAWS. THAT'S ALL WE ARE SAYING IS JUST CONTRARY AND THE COUNCIL WANTS TO POINT THAT OUT TO THE HEDC TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY FOLLOW THE SUPREME COURT MAKING SURE THE PUBLIC HAS SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO BE APPRISED OF WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA. IF THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE POLICY CHANGES THEY SHOULD HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM FOR POLICY CHANGES.

>> TO THE COUNCILMEMBERS POINT. IF YOU WANT TO FEDERAL CASE OUT OF IT I HAVE NO PROBLEM SPENDING MY WE CAN WRITING LETTERS TO EVERYBODY THAT WILL LISTEN TO GO HEY, WHO IS RIGHT? OR TO HIS POINT, INSTEAD OF HAVING A MEETING WE PASS RESOLUTION TALKING ABOUT HOW RIGHT YOU ARE, YOU COULD TAKE A STEP BACK AND GO COULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING BETTER? COULD WE HAVE DONE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY? SURE MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT WAY BUT THEN WHEN YOU COME UP HERE AND YOU ARE LIKE WE DID IT RIGHT AND YOU READ HAVE A MOTION AND LEAVE OUT DETAILS ON MOTIONS THAT'S NOT RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHAT MAKES ME THEN WANT TO SPEND MY ENTIRE WEEKEND DRAFTING UP MY OWN STUFF WOULD HAVE DONE BEFORE WHEN I DISAGREE I WILL DO IT AND THAT YOU DEAL WITH THAT YOU GUYS CAN SAY LOOK WE WILL DO A BETTER JOB AND OKAY SORRY. IF WE WANT TO PLAY WHO IS RIGHT THERE'S ONLY ONE MAN THAT CAN FIGURE THAT OUT AND THAT'S THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THEN GEORGE CAN SUE HIM GO TO DISTRICT COURT AND APPEAL AND SPEND THE NEXT SIX YEARS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO'S RIGHT. AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU'RE JUST READING PART OF THE MOTION BECAUSE IT SOUNDS DAMNING WHEN OUR ATTORNEY READS THE OTHER PART YOU'RE MAKING POLICY CHANGES ON AN ITEM THAT WASN'T DONE. I'M DONE. MAYOR

PRO TEM GORDON >> THIS IS EERILY REMINISCENT OF

[02:20:07]

SOMETHING OUT OF IT? >> I TOOK THE MOTION TEXT. THERE WAS A SEVERAL MINUTE DISCUSSION THAT INCLUDED REPETITION OF THE MOTION AND I TOOK THE MOTION LANGUAGE STRAIGHT AND COPY AND

PASTED IT. >> THAT'S WHAT I RECALL, THE MOTION WAS EXTREMELY LONG AND SOMEBODY SAID THIS CAN'T BE A MOTION. WE NEED TO FIX THIS, SHORTEN IT, IT NEEDS TO BECOME PRINCIPAL, LET'S REDO IT AND THERE WERE SEVERAL ATTEMPTS AT REDOING THE MOTION AND THE FINAL MOTION WAS MADE. I WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE AND UNDERSTAND IF THE MOTION THAT YOU READ TONIGHT IS THE FINAL FORM THAT WAS MADE THAT NIGHT.

>> ONE, YES I TOOK THE TEXT RIGHT OUT OF THERE. I DO NOT

BELIEVE THE EXTENDED . >> THERE WAS, THIS IS IN THE MEMO I PROVIDED BECAUSE WE TRANSCRIBED IT. THERE WAS MOTION TO AMEND, DID NOT GET A SECOND AND SOME DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION MADE WAS REREAD AND THAT'S THE MOTION THAT PASSED AND I BELIEVE COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON WAS THERE AND CAN VERIFY THE WHOLE MOTION WITH ALL THE DETAIL PASSED.

>> I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY REFERENCED CHANGES ANYTHING. I CLARIFIED ALREADY WHAT THE EDC WAS DOING WAS PUTTING POLICY IN PLACE THAT WAS THE CHANGE THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED FOR THE BYLAWS DURING AND PART OF THE BYLAW PROCESS. IT DOES NOT CHANGE MY CONCLUSION

IN ANYWAY. >> I THINK IT HELPS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO BECAUSE YOU KEEP SAYING POLICY CHANGE AND IT WAS NOTICE FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE BYLAWS AND THE WAR ON CAMERA USAGE A POLICY CHANGE, POLICY CHANGE, I DID NOT BRING THIS UP.

THIS IS TYPICAL BETWEEN US, THIS IS A COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON ISSUE SO HE IS THE ONE WHO HAS THE ISSUE. I PUT THE STUFF ON THE AGENDA BUT THE MORE YOU SAY POLICY CHANGE AND IT WAS NOTICE FOR BYLAW THE MORE ACUTE GOING HE'S NOT DREAMING, HE KEEPS SAYING YOU MADE POLICY CHANGE AND DID NOT NOTICE FOR POLICY CHANGE SO YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT SO I GUESS THANK YOU FOR SAYING IT WAS A POLICY CHANGE BECAUSE IN MY MIND I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE HAVING AN ARGUMENT OVER SOMETHING SO SMALL . WE HAVE DONE THAT, WE MAKE MOTIONS AND SHE'S LIKE YOU DIDN'T DO IT RIGHT, OKAY HOW DO YOU DO IT AND SHE TELLS US OR DON'T GO DOWN THAT ROAD YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THAT OKAY FINE WE GOT IN TROUBLE . YOU GUYS SAY WE DID IN RIGHT AND DON'T WORRY AND THAT'S FINE. LUCKILY IT WAS NOTHING MAJOR LIKE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. JUST A POLICY CHANGE, KICK COUNCILMEMBERS OUT OF THE

MEETING. >> TO CLARIFY THE BYLAWS DURING THE BYLAW CHANGE PROCESS WHICH WAS NOTICED AND THEN THE EDC CONSIDERED THE CHANGE TO THE BYLAWS THEY DISCUSSED AND NOW HAVE A MEETING ON MONDAY TO MAKE CHANGES AND POST THE CHANGES TO CITY COUNCIL. ALL PART OF THE BYLAW AMENDMENT PROCESS IS WHEN MAINTAIN IT WAS NOT OPEN MEETING VIOLATION.

>> WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AND LEGAL INTERPRETATION AND ANGLES AND BEERS SO WITH THAT SAID I WOULD LIKE TO GET INTO SOME ACTION AND MAKE A MOTION TO REQUEST THAT THE EDC BRING TO THE COUNCIL AMENDMENTS TO THE CORPORATION TYPE A AND TYPE B BYLAWS, BRING FORWARD TO BE REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED

[02:25:04]

>> THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. 11.4 IS

ACTION ON THE RESOLUTION. >> OKAY I PLAN ON MAKING THAT AN AGENDA ITEM SO WE CAN GET INTO ACTION AND REVIEW THE EDC PROPOSALS AND WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION AT THAT TIME.

>> ITEM 15.2. >> SORRY WE HAVE BEEN IN DEPOSITIONS OVER NOT DOING THIS CORRECTLY. WE MADE A MOTION

RIGHT AND DISCLOSED. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION

TO TABLE 11.4. >> TABLE 11.4 MOTION, SECOND? SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON.

>> AUDREY THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND EXPLAINING OUR PROCESS TO THE FOLKS WHO MAY BE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE TOPIC, I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING TIME TO DO THAT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. HAVE A WONDERFUL NIGHT.

>> YOU HAVE TO VOTE FOR IT OR AGAINST IT AND I THINK TABLING IT DOES NOT LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.

>> I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF TABLING THIS. WE HAVE AN OPINION FROM CITY ATTORNEY AND THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION WOULD CORROBORATE THAT OPINION AND IT'S NOT TRYING TO START WORLD WAR III OR MAKE A HUGE DEAL. I OFFERED A SIMPLE SUGGESTION FOR HOW THEY COULD CORRECT THIS AND THAT WOULD SATISFY THE ACTION BEING 100% ABOUT BOARD TOMA AND IT'S NOT HARD TO DO SO I THINK WE ARE MAKING A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLE HILL AND I'M IN FAVOR OF THE WRESTLING RESOLUTION NOT TABLING THIS. I DON'T WANT TO GO AGAINST THE CITY ATTORNEYS RECOMMENDATION.

>> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE TO TABLE.

>>

>> MOTION TO PASS THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED .

>> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD. ANY

OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I DO WANT A VOTE ON THIS I THINK WE NEED TO VOTE. I WON'T BE VOTING BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH HOW SECTION 2 IS WORDED WITHIN THE RESOLUTION WHERE IT SAYS WE ARE FINDING AND DECLARING THE ACTION THEY TOOK TO EXCLUDE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM THE HEDC BOARD EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS TAKEN CONTRARY TO NOTICE REVISIONS. I DO AGREE THE WAY THEY DID IT AND THE MOTION , I WOULD AGREE IT WAS IMPROPER.

WE DO IT ALL THE TIME AND CITY COUNCIL AND USUALLY IT IS CAUGHT, CITY ATTORNEY SAYS LET'S REWORD THIS. THE REASON I DISAGREE WITH HOW THIS IS WORDED IS AS WE HAVE HEARD FROM OUR OWN CITY ATTORNEY AND BASED ON PREVIOUS ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS, THE HEDC ALREADY HAD THE INHERENT RIGHT TO LIMIT WHO GOES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION MEETINGS. THE VOTE WAS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY. THEY ALREADY HAVE THE INHERENT RIGHT WITH NOTHING IN THE BYLAWS TO SAY YES TO LET COUNCILMEMBERS AND IF THEY WANT TO GO IN AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE ANYONE THAT THEY FEEL LIKE IS ADVERSE TO THEIR THINGS. TO ME THE VOTE MAY HAVE BEEN WRONG BUT IT WAS COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY AND ACTUALLY TOOK TO EXCLUDE CITY COUNCIL AND MYSELF, I WAS THERE. I WANTED TO ATTEND EXECUTIVE SESSION SO I WAS ALSO PRESENT IN THE MEETING, I STILL SUPPORT THE DECISION BASED ON THE INHERENT RIGHT THAT THEY HAVE AS CONFIRMED.

>> IF IT WAS JUST A MOTION TO SAY THEY COULD EXCLUDE PEOPLE I MIGHT AGREE WITH YOUR REASONING. BUT BECAUSE THEY PUT IN THE TOMA VIOLATION MAKES IT RE THE PROBLEMATIC FOR ME BECAUSE IT WASN'T NOTICED AND THEY SET SPECIFIC RULES ON SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT NOTICED PROPERLY. THAT'S WHERE THE ISSUE IS.

>> I AGREE. THAT IT WAS NOT A VIOLATION, IT WAS JUST CONTRARY.

[02:30:06]

>> I CAN MAKE A CORRECTION TO SECTION 2. TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

INSTEAD OF SAYING THE ACTION TAKEN, FIND AND DECLARE THE POLICY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD ON MARCH 10 TO EXCLUDE THEM WAS TAKEN CONTRARY TO THE NOTICE PROVISIONS BECAUSE REALLY THAT'S THE POINT COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON WAS TRYING TO MAKE. I DID NOT COME TO THE MEETING KNOWING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE THE POLICY. IT SHOULD'VE BEEN POSTED AGENDA ITEM IN SHOULD'VE HAD SUFFICIENT NOTICE ON WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO.

>> I THINK SO IF I UNDERSTAND THE CITY ATTORNEY RIGHT. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEIR DECISION EXCLUDING ME FROM THEIR MEETING. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE THAT INHERENT RIGHT TO DO THAT. I ALSO AGREE THE ACTION THEY TOOK AND THE VOTE THEY TOOK WAS IMPROPER. THEY DID NOT KNOW THAT OR INTENTIONALLY DO THAT BUT THEY DID IT. IF WE CAN REWORD THIS TO WHERE IT SAYS HEY THE VOTE YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN , BUT WE ARE NOT INSINUATING OR IMPLYING THAT THEY ARE IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THEY EXCLUDED ME FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION.

>> POLICY DECISION MADE , IT WAS CONTRARY.

>> HOWARD SECTION 2 READ? >> CITY COUNCIL FINDS AND DECLARES THAT THE POLICY DECISION MADE BY THE BOARD ON MARCH 10, 2025 TO EXCLUDE CITY COUNCILMEMBERS THE HEDC BOARD EXECUTIVE SESSIONS WAS TAKEN CONTRARY TO THE NOTICE PROVISIONS OF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT. WHEN YOU PASS A RESOLUTION IT IS THE COUNCIL SPEAKING TO THE BOARD TRYING TO SAY IT IS NOT LIKE A TOMA VIOLATION, IT IS CONTRARY. WE WANTED TO POST THESE THINGS, NOTIFY THE PUBLIC SO THEY CAN BE APPRISED OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING. SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SEPARATE AGENDA ITEM.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT AS A

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> THANK YOU.

>> A FEW COMMENTS, I WILL BE VOTING IN FAVOR WITH THE CHANGES MADE. I WANT TO BE CLEAR THE HETC DID NOT VIOLATE TOMA, THIS WAS POLICY ACTION NOT APPROPRIATELY NOTICED ON THE AGENDA ITEM.

>> PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >>

>> THE MOTION PASSES 6-0. >> YOU GUYS THAT TOOK LONGER THAN I THOUGHT. DO YOU WANT TO DO THIS FOR QUICK?

>> LET'S GO BACK SO HE DOESN'T HAVE TO SIT HERE.

[13. EXECUTIVE SESSION ]

>> WE WILL TAKE THESE UP AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE WILL GO BACK TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. THE TIME IS 9:34. 13.1 RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LAKESIDE NUMBER NINE, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY AND LAKESIDE , NUMBER NINE AND RIGHT-OF-WAY LICENSE AND USE AGREEMENT FOR DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES AT 200 EAST WITH THE RED GEM HOLDINGS.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS TO GO BACK FOR THAT? SKIP 13.1, 13.2% TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551 SKIP 13.1, 13.2% TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 ATTORNEY CONSULTATION REGARDING SENATE BILL 2030 PETITION RELATED TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 221 SPOTTED FAWN DRIVE ADDING PETITION TO THE LAWSUIT GRAND PRAIRIE VERSUS STATE OF TEXAS CAUSE NUMBER AND DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT. 13.3 PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.072 DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY CITY COUNCIL SHALL CONVENE TO DELIBERATE POTENTIAL ACQUISITIONS BY PURCHASE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY INTEREST AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITHIN CITY LIMITS AND EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION FOR PROMOTING

[02:35:03]

>> YES I AM HERE. >> WE ARE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE

[12.1 Consideration and possible action on establishing a budgetary policy for use of data center property tax - both real property and business personal property (Councilmember Dan Thornton) ]

CENTER PROPERTY TAX. >> THERE WAS A MOTION TO BE MADE . ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE ACTION ? TAKE THIS ONE AND THEN?

>> LET'S SEE, DATA CENTER PROPERTY TAX REAL BUSINESS

PROPERTY COUNCILMEMBER THORNTON? >> OKAY THE IDEA WAS WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE MONEY WE ARE EXPECTING TO COME IN AND WE HAVE NOT SET POLICY FOR WHERE WE WANT THE MONEY TO GO. I KNOW WE HAVE BEEN SENT INFORMATION. A FILE WAS SENT AND WHEN THOSE BUILDINGS GET BUILT, THAT PROPERTY STAYS PUT AND IT IS RELIABLE HEART OF THE PROPERTY TAXES THAT IS GOING TO BE THERE YEAR IN AND EURO AND THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY VARIES YEAR TO YEAR BASED ON DEPRECIATION, BASED ON HOW OCCUPY THE DATA CENTERS ARE ANY GIVEN TIME.

TRANSITIONING ]

>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER THORTON ON THIS.

WHEN IT COMES TO REAL PROPERTY, THE BUILDINGS THERE, WHETHER THEY HAVE A DATA CENTER IN THERE OR NOT, ICS BUDGETING LONG-TERM, I SEE US SELLING BONDS OFF THAT MONEY, ALL OF THAT STUFF. MY ISSUE WITH THE PERSONAL PROPERTY AND I AM JUST USING ROW NUMBERS BUT IF THERE IS FIVE BILLION DOLLARS IN THERE IN YEAR ONE AND I WANT TO SAY THEY SAID IT WAS A THREE YEAR DEPRECIATION, DID

SOMEBODY SAY THAT ONCE? >> YES.

>> IF IT IS 5 BILLION ON YOUR ONE AND WE BORROW MONEY BASED ON THAT OR HIRE PEOPLE BASED ON THAT IN THE NEXT YEAR IT DROPS TO 3 .5 BILLION THAT IS A SHORTFALL WE NOW DO NOT HAVE AND THE THIRD YEAR IT IS ASSUMING IT IS ALWAYS AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS DOWN TO 1 1/2 BILLION AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IN YEAR FOUR IT IS BACK UP TO FIVE ALIEN. I IMAGINE OVER YOU GOT W2 MILLION WHEN YOU'RE, THE NEXT YEAR WITH 3 MILLION AND THEN YOU HAVE FIVE, YOU CAN BUILD A PARK WITH THAT. I SEE THAT BEING A BETTER USE COME YOU CAN HAVE SEPARATE ONE-OFF ITEMS AS OPPOSED TO MY FEAR BEING IT IS PART OF A REGULAR BUDGET, WE START COUNTING IT IN AS WAYS TO BORROW MONEY AND HIRE PEOPLE AND WHAT IS THE WORD I AM LOOKING FOR?

>> ENCUMBRANCE. >> YES WE DO HAVE A RECURRING CHARGE EVERY YEAR.

>> ALL RIGHT I THINK YOU NEED A MOTION. EVERYBODY IS DONE.

>> I AGREE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A POLICY. I AGREE WITH THE PROPERTY TAX BEING IN THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. THE

[02:40:06]

>> I WOULD SAY HAVING IT IN A SEPARATE BUCKET THAT WAY IT IS NOT ADDED IN INADVERTENTLY AND WE BEGIN TO RELY ON IT BUT I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION COMING FROM STAFF ON HOW TO USE IT IS GOING TO BE KEY IN HOW WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE FUNDS. SO I DO NOT OBJECT TO HAVING IT IN A SEPARATE FIND TO KEEP EVERYTHING

IN LINE. >> CAN WE GET SOME INFORMATION ON HOW BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY IS ASSESSED BY THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT? IS IT ONE OF THOSE WHERE THEY GO IN AND THEY WALK THROUGH IT? IS IT SOMETHING THAT THE BUSINESS CONTRIBUTES THEIR NUMBERS TO THEM? DO THEY DO A DRIVE-BY AND THEY ARE JUST LIKE THIS IS BRAND-NEW, WE ARE JUST GOING TO SAY THIS AMOUNT OF DOLLARS? I DO KNOW THERE IS NOT A DETAILED METHOD TO ASSESSING BUSINESS PURPLE PROPERTY, I DO KNOW THAT. BUT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW ARE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IS GOING TO TREAT WHATEVER WE WANT TO CALL IT, THAT BIG SITE OF PROPERTY. WE NEED TO TALK TO THEM , WE NEED A MEETING WITH THEM, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WILL ASSESSED THAT. SOMEONE THAT ASSESSES A PROPERTY THAT IS A SMALL BUSINESS, SAY HAPPY PANINI OR SOMETHING VERSUS THE SAME PERSON ASSESSING THAT AND THEN GOING OUT TO A DATA CENTER.

I AM SURE THEY DO NOT HAVE A DATA CENTER STAFF APPRAISING.

>> SO WHEN WE STARTED DOWN THE PROCESS OF FIGURING OUT THE RIGHT WAY TO INCENTIVIZE THE PROJECT, WE DID HAVE THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT COME TO THE WORKSHOP AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT, THEY DID NOT GET INTO A TON OF DETAIL ABOUT HOW THEY APPRAISED IT BUT I THINK THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU RUN A INSURANCE OFFICE SAID YOU HAVE A COPIER AND A COUPLE OF COMPUTERS AND SOME DESKS AND FILING CABINETS VERSUS YOU HAVE A DATA CENTER THAT HAS POTENTIALLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF EQUIPMENT IN IT. I DO NOT THINK THEY HANDLED THEM THE SAME

WAY. >> THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING.

>> IF WE NEED MORE CLARIFICATION ON THAT I THINK IT IS FINE TO ASK THE COUNTY TO WALK US THROUGH IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.

>> I THINK IT IS BENEFICIAL FOR THEM AND ALSO BENEFICIAL FOR US TO JUST KIND OF HAD A IDEA. ALSO THAT DEPRECIATION. WE WILL SEE IT WHENEVER IT STARTS HAPPENING AND THEN THE FOLLOWING YEARS, 4-5-6, WE WILL GET INTO A TREND POSSIBLY AND THEN WE WILL KIND OF KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT POTENTIALLY.

>> COUNSEL IF IT IS ALL RIGHT I WILL ASK CHRISTINA TO REACH OUT TO LARRY AND HAVE LARRY PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE. NOW THEY HAVE DATA CENTERS OPERATING IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY I BELIEVE.

>> THERE HAS BEEN A DATA CENTER IN GEORGETOWN FOR A NUMBER OF

YEARS. >> I DO NOT THINK IT WOULD BE

LARRY. >> APPRAISAL DISTRICT, NOT THE TAX ACCESSOR, MY APOLOGIES. I WILL ASK THEM TO RESPOND IN WRITING THEIR POLICY AND PROCEDURE ABOUT HOW THEY APPLY THEIR METHODOLOGY FOR DATA CENTER SO WE CAN HAVE THAT DONE IN WRITING AND SEND IT SURROUNDED IF IT GENERATES TOO MANY QUESTIONS WE CAN TRY TO FACILITATE A IN PERSON MEETING.

I DO NOT WANT TO EAT UP A WORKSHOP IF IT IS A SIMPLE ANSWER BUT IF IT IS COMPLEX IT MAY NEED A 45 MINUTE IN PERSON

RESPONSE. >> I THINK IT IS JUST PERSONAL

CURIOSITY. >> LET ME SEE THIS CHART, DATA CENTER, SKYBOX. 2025 IS 231,000 WE ARE ANTICIPATING IN PROPERTY TAX MONEY OFF THE REAL PROPERTY, AND 26 IT IS NOT 1 .5 MILLION,

[02:45:01]

RIGHT? >> WHICH WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING

AT? JUST THE EXCEL SHEET? >> I AM NOT SAYING WE ARE GETTING 1 .3 MILLION , WE ARE ANTICIPATING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 26 AND 27. THAT IS CORRECT THERE WAS A EMAIL SENT OUT TO COUNSEL , AND HAS THE YEAR-OVER-YEAR AND THE ACCUMULATED TOTAL AND I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE CHART

IS THE ACCUMULATIVE TOTAL. >> SO WE ARE ANTICIPATING STARTING AT 26 ASSUMING THEY MOVE IN, WE ARE ANTICIPATING 18

MILLION? >> NOTE THAT IS CUT IN HALF AT A MINIMUM BECAUSE THE ABATEMENT WAS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

THERE. THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >> IT SAID ABATEMENT TO BE APPLIED TO THAT NUMBER SO IT WOULD BE LIKE 9 MILLION.

>> SO WE ARE ANTICIPATING, CALL IT 19 MILLION COMING IN. OF THAT WE ARE GIVEN HALFBACK AND IN 2027 BASED ON THAT WE ARE ESTIMATING 13 MILLION AS I GUESS THERE IS DEPRECIATION THAT WILL COME IN AFTER THAT WE GET 6 1/2 MILLION AND THEN WE ARE BACK UP TO 18 MILLION SO WE ARE ANTICIPATING WAVES IN THE MONEY?

>> CORRECT. >> THAT HELPS US KNOW POTENTIALLY WE COULD BE GETTING 8-9 MILLION PER YEAR JUST IN DATA CENTER MONEY WE CAN USE BETWEEN THE REAL PROPERTY, THE

BUSINESS PROPERTY -- >> WELL , NOT ENTIRELY BUT YES.

THAT IS THE FULL TAX RATE AS OF TODAY'S TAX RATE WHICH INCLUDES INS AND I AM OH. THAT IS BECAUSE IF IT IS INSIDE THE -- IT IS FIXED AT THE RIGHT THAT GOES INTO THE -- DOCUMENTATION. THAT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD WHEN I ASKED THE SAME QUESTION.

>> SO THE TAX RATE GOES DOWN TO $.10 IN THE CITY --

>> IT IS STILL $.42 IN THE -- UNLESS THERE IS A AMENDMENT IN THE DOCUMENTS. WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY IS YOU WOULD NOT HAVE 9 MILLION PER SE SITTING IN A FUND TO THEN GO BUDGET PROJECTS AGAINST. IN THE SENSE OF IT BEING A SPECIAL PROJECT FUND, THAT IS OKAY. WE DO THAT ALREADY WITH THE COMMUNITY BENEFIT FEE FUND, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FUND, IT WOULD BE A FUND FOR THAT BUT NOT ALL 9 MILLION WILL GO INTO IT BECAUSE A PORTION OF IT IS INS AND THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. THE INS WILL BE COLLECTED AGAINST THAT, WE CANNOT NOT DO THAT.

>> SURE, IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT AN ESTIMATE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE, IT LOOKS LIKE A HOT FUND. WE DO THE CIP INJURED, WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND GO IF WE WANT TO NEXT YEAR FIND 20 BILLION FOR BLOB WERE LOOK AT THIS AND GO YOU KNOW WHAT IN THREE YEARS WE WILL HAVE THE SAME MONEY AND MAYBE THE DESIGN ON THE JUSTICE CENTER, IT WILL BE DONE FOR A YEAR AND A HALF ANYWAY SO IF WE POSTPONE IT BY A YEAR THIS BUILDS UP.

>> YES I THINK WE WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE A CLOSE ENOUGH TO DO THAT, IT IS JUST WANT TO GET PAST THE FIRST YEAR IT BECOMES A LITTLE -- BECAUSE THIS VALUE WILL AFFECT THE NO NEW REVENUE RATES WHICH IN TURN WILL AFFECT -- SO IT WILL WREAK HAVOC ON WHAT THE ACTUAL TAX RATE IS. SO I GUESS WHAT I AM SAYING IS, YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS YEAR, ALL THAT HIT, WE KNOW WE ARE CURRENTLY COLLECTING .399 BUT NEXT YEAR AFTER THAT IT IS POINTED TO ONE OUR PROJECTIONS WILL NOT BE SHOWING THE RIGHT AMOUNT OF REVENUE BEING COLLECTED FROM THE PROJECT.

>> WHAT I TELL PEOPLE IS, WE CANNOT LOOK AT TAX RATES, WE DROPPED THE TAX RATE , WE DID A GOOD JOB. WOULD I HAVE BEEN TELLING PEOPLE IS WE CANNOT LOOK AT TAX RATES BECAUSE IT COULD BE .399 THIS YEAR AND A HUGE AMOUNT OF VALUE COULD COME IN AND DROP TO POINT TO FIVE NEXT HER AND THEN THE NEXT YEAR AND THIS IS JUST TALKING REVENUE RATES, IT COULD GO TO .3 SO THE RATES WILL START MOVING AROUND A LOT MORE AS OF RIGHT NOW THE VALUE GOES UP AND SLOWLY GOES DOWN, YOU COULD HAVE A BUDGET RANGE IN THE

[02:50:02]

>> I DO NOT WANT TO GET INTO A PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATE, I AM NOT SURE THE MATH PENCILS OUT THAT WAY. GENERALLY SPEAKING THE VALUE THAT IS COMING IN IS SMALL COMPARISON TO THE OVERALL VALUE OF THE CITY SO IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO WREAK HAVOC WITH THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE GENERAL TAX OF 8% GROWTH OF VALUATIONS WE HAVE SEEN AND THE NEW GROWTH, IF YOU LOOK NO NEW REVENUE HAS COME DOWN BY ABOUT THREE CENTS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, EACH YEAR. NOW WE SUDDENLY HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF 50% OF OUR VALUATION COMING IN , IN ONE YEAR IN A BIG PROJECT, THAT WILL NOT BE A 2-3 SENT REDUCTION, IT WILL BE A FAIRLY MASSIVE REDUCTION BUT IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE MONEY OVER HERE WILL BE PAYING FOR , I CANNOT THINK OF THE WORD I AM LOOKING FOR. I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS, IF MY VALUE HAS BEEN GOING UP ON MY HOUSE BY 8% AND THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE HAS BEEN COMING DOWN SLIGHTLY THAT IS OFFSET BECAUSE MY VALUE WILL NOT GO UP 50% THAT YEAR. IT WILL STAY HERE IN THE TAX RATE WILL STILL GO DOWN, I PERSONALLY WILL PAY LESS

IN TAXES. >> WILL THE BURDEN IS NOT BALANCED RIGHT BUT IT CHANGES RIGHT BECAUSE YOU HAVE ONE BIG PLAYER AND YOU ALSO HAVE A BIG PLAYER AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL, I KNOW IT IS MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT. IT HELPS REMOVE BURDEN OFF

THE RESIDENTIAL . >> YES THAT IS THE WAY I BELIEVE IT SHOULD WORK. WHEN THE COMMERCIAL HITS THAT YEAR, THE BIG NUMBER HITS, THEN THAT WILL BE NEW REVENUE YES BUT THAT WILL NOW MEAN THAT, I DO NOT KNOW, MAYBE WHAT WAS 50-50 OR 4060 WILL NOW BE 2080. NOW 20% OF THE MONEY WILL ONLY COME FROM OVER HERE. I THINK WHAT WE WILL SEE IS WE WILL SEE THE TAX RATE WILL COME DOWN AND THE RESIDENTIAL OUT-OF-POCKET SHOULD ALSO COME DOWN BECAUSE THEIR VALUES ARE NOT INCREASING AT THE SAME RATE AS WE ARE ADDING THERE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. I THINK.

>> HERE IS WHAT I AM TRYING TO GET TO. I THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MINIMIZE, I DO NOT KNOW IF YOU CAN DO NO NEW REVENUE EVERY YEAR I LET YOU FIGURE OUT HOW TO MINIMIZE THIS BECAUSE I THINK THE CITY IS WORTH 6 BILLION AND IN ONE YEAR YOU HAVE ONE AND HALF BILLION COME OFF, YOU CAN DROP IT ONE YEAR AND THEN TURN AROUND AND RAISE IT UP A CHUNK SO I THINK THERE HAS TO BE A WAY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO LEVEL IT OUT WHETHER IT IS THROUGH HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS OR WHATEVER IT IS, YOU CANNOT HAVE PEOPLE , YOU ARE RIGHT ON NO NEW REVENUE YOU WILL HAVE A DRAMATIC INCREASE ONE YEAR AND A DRAMATIC INCREASE THE NEXT YEAR AS SOON AS SOMETHING COMES OFF SO YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO LEVEL IT OUT WHERE SOME NEWS YEARS IT WILL BE MORE THAN NO NEW REVENUE OR SOME YEARS AND MAYBE OVER NO NEW REVENUE IF THE TAX BILL STATES THE SAME OR GRADUALLY GOES DOWN BUT I DO NOT THINK PEOPLE CAN HANDLE THEIR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS CHANGING THREE OR FOUR TIMES A YEAR, WE ARE TALKING YOU COULD BE DEPRECIATING 15-20% OF THE VALUE OF YOUR CITY, COULD P DEPRECIATED ONE YEAR. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO FIX THAT BUT I CAN SEE THAT IN MY HEAD GOING, YOUR BILLS WILL BE GOING UP AND DOWN AND PEOPLE WILL SAY DO SOMETHING TO MAKE IT LEVEL. THAT IS WHY I SAY I DO NOT KNOW IF PEOPLE ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE RATE, NOT EVERYBODY IS WORRIED ABOUT THE RATE, THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE TAX BILL SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER WE ARE DOING HOWEVER WE

SET UP THE POLICY. >> I GUESS WHAT I AM SAYING ABOUT THE RATE IS, SAY MY HOME IS WITH 350,000 THIS YEAR AND I AM PAYING $.40 OR $.39 IN MY HOUSE GOES UP BY 9% BUT THE CITY ADDS 50% MORE VALUE, THAT $.39 WILL DROP TO $.21 WHICH IS NOT A 8% DECREASE IT IS A MUCH GREATER THAN 8% DECREASE BECAUSE MY HOUSE DID NOT GROW AS FAST AS THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

[02:55:02]

>> WE SAID THAT YOUR FIRST YEAR HERE .

>> IT IS JUST THE OPPOSITE THAN THAT, THE HOME VALUES DOUBLED.

>> RIGHT BUT THEY WERE KEPT AT 10, THAT IS WHERE WE HAD THE THING WE COULD BORROW 45 MILLION IN DEBT AND PEOPLE STILL GOT A DECREASE IN TAXES AND THAT IS WHEN THORTON SAID WAIT A SECOND WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN THE VALUE LEVELS BACK OUT, WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THIS BEFORE SO WE ALREADY KNOW IT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, WE HAD PEOPLE WHO STILL WOULD GO DOWN $400 AND NOW WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE PAST THREE YEARS IS VALUES ARE DROPPING AND NON-HOMESTEAD PEOPLE ARE GETTING DECREASES IN HOMES THAT PEOPLE ARE GETTING INCREASES WE ARE TALKING $80 A YEAR BUT WHEN YOU START TALKING BILLIONS YOU ARE TALKING REAL MONEY WHICH IS WHY WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT, SINCE WE HAVE SEEN WHAT IT DOES, I DO NOT REMEMBER YOUR FIRST YEAR HERE.

>> IT WAS THE 22 YEAR. >> WHATEVER HAPPENED IN 22, OUR POLICY SHOULD SOMEHOW GO, NOT THAT WE CAN BUT WE WILL TRY TO LEVEL THINGS OUT SO AS A TAXPAYER YOUR VALUE COMES ON, THE HOMES THAT PEOPLE GET A BREAK, THE NON-HOMESTEAD PEOPLE GET NO BREAK AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THE NEXT YEAR, EXCEPT FOR IN THIS SCENARIO IT WILL BE HOMESTEAD AND NON-HOMESTEAD THE SAME BREAK THE NONCOMMERCIAL POVERTY WILL SWING BACK AND FORTH. YOU WILL HAVE BUSINESSES GETTING REFUNDS ONE YEAR AND THEN TO HAVE TO WRITE A CHECK FOR 5-6000 THE NEXT, SO THIS WILL REALLY MESSED UP PEOPLE'S PERSONAL BUDGETS.

>> THERE IS PART OF THIS I THINK IS GETTING MISUNDERSTOOD, NEW PROPERTY COMING IN WITH A HIGH VALUE DOES NOT SCREW UP NO NEW REVENUE NEXT YEAR, YOU CALCULATE WHATEVER YOU COLLECT THE NEXT YEAR AS THE BASE FOR THE NEXT YEAR, THE PROBLEM WITH NO NEW REVENUE CALCULATIONS GETTING YANKED AROUND IS WHEN THE EXISTING PROPERTY HAS CHANGES IN VALUE THAT ARE BIG. THAT CHANGES THE COMPOSITION OF THE ROCKET. THAT IS WHERE THE FLUCTUATION FOR DEPRECIATION IS A ISSUE FOR US. HAVING 4 BILLION COME ONLINE THE FIRST YEAR AND THEN WE HAVE THE 4 BILLION, WAS AT THE TAX RATE IN THE NO NEW REVENUE FOR THE NEXT YEAR IS LESS THAN WILL BE COLLECTED FOR THE WHOLE THING. NOW IF IT GOES DOWN THEN WE HAVE A ISSUE THE NEXT YEAR WHERE WE LOST $1 BILLION OF VALUE. IT IS NOT ABOUT INCREASED THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT IS THE DECREASES THAT ARE THE PROBLEM REALLY.

>> WITH JAMES IS SAYING IS IT IS NOT THE RIGHT, IT IS THE PERCENT OF THE BURDEN BEING COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL.

>> I THINK THE RATE WILL SHIFT. >> IF THESE NUMBERS ARE TRUE, WE WILL ADD 2 BILLION IN VALUE. OVER 2 BILLION EVALUATION IN ONE YEAR, THAT WILL NOT HAVE A IMPACT. IT IS WHEN THE 2 BILLION CHANGES TO 1 .7 BILLION NEXT YEAR , THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

>> I AGREE WITH THAT. WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS --

>> WE ARE LOSING 300 MILLION, WE ARE NOT LOSING 2 BILLION. WE ARE LOSING 300 MILLION. AS LONG AS THE LOSSES ARE NOT AS MAJOR IT

IS NOT AS BIG A PROBLEM. >> A DEPRECIATION IS NOT THAT

BIG OF A PERCENTAGE. >> WELL IT IS A 300 DEPRECIATION SO IT GOES TO ZERO AFTER THREE YEARS SO THEY BETTER BE REPLACED AGAIN, THAT IS WHAT THE PROBLEM COMES TO.

>> WRITE THAT IS HAVING ON THE BUSINESS SIDE OF THE LEDGER, IF YOU HAVE THE BALLOON WHICH IS ALL OF THE MONEY FOR NO NEW REVENUE FOR THAT YEAR AND YOU SQUEEZE THE COMMERCIAL THAN THE RESIDENTIAL WILL GET BIG AND IF YOU SQUEEZE THE RESIDENTIAL THAN THE COMMERCIAL WILL GET BIG AND THAT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY, I THINK THE FIRST YEAR, WHENEVER YOU HAVE SUCH A HUGE SWING ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, WHENEVER THAT STARTS TO DEPRECIATE AND FLUCTUATE , IT WILL HAVE DRAMATIC IMPACT OVER ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE BECAUSE IT IS NOT MOVING AT THE SAME RATE OR

RATIO. >> IT IS NOT IT IS NOT GOING TO BE AS DRAMATIC IT WILL NOT CUT THE PRICE IN HALF BECAUSE IT IS NOT MOVING THAT DRAMATICALLY. IT IS NOT THE MOVE FROM ZERO DOLLARS IN DATA CENTERS TO BILLIONS, THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

IT IS THE CHANGE AFTER THAT , THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

>> YOU GUYS ARE SAYING THE SAME THING.

>> I THINK SO. >> NO YOU WILL NOT GO FROM 39 TO

21, THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN. >> WE CAN RUN SOME NUMBERS, WHEN WE COME UP WITH A POLICY CAN WE ADD WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO? NOT THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE ARE DOING I DO NOT KNOW IF WE WILL

GET THIS RIGHT. >> THE OTHER ASPECT IS, WE ARE

[03:00:03]

>> I DO NOT HAVE A ISSUE WITH THAT. GENERALLY SPEAKING WHAT I WOULD BE COMING BACK WITH IS, THE INTENT IS, ONE GOOD THING IS BY BAITING 50% WE ARE REDUCING THE IMPACT OF FLUCTUATION BY

50%. >> YES.

>> BUT I WOULD COME BACK BASICALLY WITH A SEPARATE FUND WE WOULD CREATE FOR THE I AM AND NO PORTION OF THAT VALUE FOR THE BUSINESS PERSONAL PROPERTY TO THAT REVENUE STREAM TO BE PUT INTO A SPECIAL FUND AND IF IT IS $1 MILLION THAT YEAR, IT IS $1 MILLION IN THE BUDGET AGAINST IT. IF IT IS 25 MILLION THEN IT IS 25 MILLION AND WE BUDGET AGAINST IT. JUST LIKE WE DO WITH ALL OF THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS.

>> LET ME SAY THIS, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION WE NEED TO THE 50% VALUATION. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BIGGEST DECREASES OF AROUND 300 MILLION FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR THAT I SEE ON HERE. THAT WE ARE EXPECTING. IF WE LOOK AT HOW MUCH WE ARE INCREASING YEAR-TO-YEAR. WE ARE INCREASING ANYWHERE FROM 500 MILLION TO 700 MILLION A YEAR TODAY. ALL OF THAT WOULD MEAN , IS THAT IN A YEAR WHERE WE DECREASED THE DATA CENTER BY 300 MILLION WE WILL ONLY GROW OUR NET EVALUATION BY 400 MILLION BUT IT WOULD STILL GROW. NOW IF ALL OF THE OTHER GROWTH GOES AWAY WHEN THERE IS 300 MILLION THEN YOU START TO HAVE THE PROBLEM OF THINGS GOING UP BUT YOU ARE STILL GOING TO GROW YOUR TOTAL VALUATION YEAR-TO-YEAR. EVEN IF YOU ARE DECREASING THE DATA CENTERS UNLESS THINGS REALLY SLOW DOWN.

>> THE YOU GUYS WANT TO TRY TO BRING SOMETHING BACK?

>> YES I WILL JUST TAKE A STAB AT IT.

>> OKAY, THAT IS FINE WITH ME. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS GOING. A YEAR FROM NOW IS WHEN WE REALLY NEED TO LOCKDOWN WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THE MONEY. A YEAR FROM NOW WE WILL KNOW THE NUMBERS FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR'S BUDGET. THIS YEAR WE ARE GETTING A EXTRA 200 IN THE BUDGET FROM THE PHYSICAL PROPERTY AND WE KNOW THAT NOW. NEXT YEAR IS WHEN WE HAVE TO REAL MONEY TO FIGURE OUT. WE NEED TO HASH THROUGH ALL THE IMPLICATIONS BEFORE THEN. THAT IS THE INTENT, TO MAKE SURE WE

DO THAT. >> UNDERSTOOD.

[12.2 Discussion and possible action relating to amending or clarifying Council Protocol section 1(f)(3) and (4) to determine if Council Subcommittee should only review/interview applicants when there is a vacancy to be filled. (Mayor Mike Snyder) ]

>> DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION RELATED TO AMENDING COUNCIL PROTOCOL SECTION 1-3-4 TO DETERMINE IF SUBCOMMITTEE SHOULD ONLY REVIEW AND INTERVIEW APPLICANTS IF THERE IS A VACANCY

TO BE FILLED. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IT IS

ACTUALLY SECTION 6 INSTEAD OF 4. >> OKAY.

>> IT SAYS THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE WILL REVIEW APPLICATIONS, INTERVIEW APPLICANTS AND PRESENT RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING HELD AFTER THE MEETING, THE NOMINATING CAN HE WILL NOTIFY THE SECRETARY THE NAMES AHEAD OF THE MEETING WHERE THEY WILL BE PRESENTED FOR A VOTE, THE SECRETARY WILL THEN NOTIFY THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS OF THE IMPENDING NOMINATIONS.

>> IS IT OKAY WE TALK ABOUT SECTION 6 WHENEVER IT SPECIFIES?

>> I THINK IT WAS A TYPO, I THINK THE WORDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> SOMEHOW IT SEEMS LIKE -- THERE IS SOME KIND OF -- WHERE ARE WE GETTING -- YOU CAN ONLY INTERVIEW IF THERE IS A OPENING?

>> SO THAT COMES FROM , WELL IT IS SECTION 1F IT IS NOT 6.

>> SHE WAS SAYING 1F 6. >> SO 1F 3 SAYS, THE PROCESS STARTS -- WE DO THAT NOW THROUGH THE TOOL, NEO GO. AFTER RECEIVING THE APPLICATION THE CITY SECRETARY WILL VERIFY EACH APPLICATION MEETS QUALIFICATIONS FOR SERVING AND THEN NUMBER THREE IS WHERE I AM GETTING IT FROM, THE LIST OF APPLICATIONS AND VACANCIES WILL BE SENT TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE FOR

[03:05:03]

>> MY ARGUMENT AND WE DISCUSSED THIS, I DISCUSSED IT IN OUR MEETING OR WHATEVER, MY ARGUMENT WAS, TO ME THE WORDING IS NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A VACANCY FOR A APPLICANT. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A VACANCY FOR A APPLICANT.

>> YOU SAID THEY ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE SO YOU CAN GO THE OTHER WAY, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE A VACANCY YOU CAN ONLY

HAVE A APPLICATION. >> MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE YOU DO NOT NEED A APPLICATION YOU JUST NEED A VACANCY.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND 1F3 TWO STRIKE AND VACANCIES. IN THE LIST OF APPLICANTS. THAT DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

>> SIDE I DO NOT KNOW IF WE CAN DISCUSS FREELY OR NOT.

>> BACK TO FREELY. >> TO ME IF WE ARE GOING TO BE SPECIFIC IT NEEDS TO SAY SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF , THAT WE ONLY , EITHER WE ONLY INTERVIEW FOR A VACANCY OR WE INTERVIEW A APPLICANT REGARDLESS OF VACANCY.

>> THAT IS WHAT I JUST DID, THE LIST OF APPLICANTS WILL BE SENT TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTERVIEWING, IS CONSIDERATION A INTERVIEW I GUESS? IS THAT HOW IT READS?

>> I DO NOT THINK YOU HAVE TO INTERVIEW BY WHO APPLIES, THAT IS YOUR CONSIDERATION, FROM THEIR YOU MAKE THE DECISION WHO YOU WILL INTERVIEW. IF THERE IS ONLY SOME PEOPLE , THERE IS NO REASON TO INTERVIEW A PERSON THAT IS NOT QUALIFIED. THEY MAY HAVE THE QUALIFICATIONS THAT THEY ARE LIVING IN THE CITY BUT YOU MAY HAVE FIVE APPLICATIONS AND FOUR OF THEM HAVE EXPERIENCE IN WHATEVER FIELD AND ONE DOES NOT HAVE ANY.

>> THAT TECHNICALLY SHOULD BE RESOLVED IN ITEM 2 WHERE IT SAYS THE CITY SECRETARY SECRETARY WILL VERIFY EACH APPLICANT MEETS THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR SERVING ON THE DESIRED BOARD

COMMISSIONS. >> I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING AT QUALIFICATIONS, RESIDENT OR E TJ, I AM TALKING QUALIFICATIONS LIKE , YOU ARE TALKING TO THE EDC, YOU ARE TALKING TO PEOPLE, NOT JUST A GOOD PERSON BUT THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE QUALIFICATIONS.

>> I DO NOT KNOW IF THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS THAT ROBUST TO KNOW MAYBE ALL OF THAT OVER TIME, WE CAN PROBABLY FIGURE THAT OUT, I DO NOT KNOW. I CLARIFICATION. IF I AM SETTING UP INTERVIEWS I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM DOING IT EFFICIENTLY SO I AM NOT WASTING TIME. IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET PEOPLE INTERVIEWED, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WE ARE INTERVIEWING AND

WIND. >> IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT A APPLICATION FOR A VACANCY THAT IS NOT VERY EFFICIENT. A PERSON APPLIES , WE DO NOT HAVE ROOM FOR YOU NOW BUT WE WILL KEEP YOU ON FILE AND YOU HAVE IT DONE FOR NEXT YEAR, THEN WHEN THERE IS A VACANCY YOU CAN TAKE IT UP, THAT IS PART OF THE PROBLEM. IF WE ARE WAITING FOR THERE TO BE A VACANCY BEFORE ACCEPTING A APPLICATION AND A PERSON APPLIES IN THEY HEAR NOTHING FOR 3-4 MONTHS, THEY DO SOMETHING ELSE, AND YOU HAVE A VACANCY AND THEN YOU TRY TO FIND THE PEOPLE.

>> THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS. >> IT IS INTERESTING BECAUSE COUNCILMEMBER THORTON AND MYSELF LAST YEAR, WHENEVER WE WERE ON THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE, WE DID TAKE IT AS THAT BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY VACANCIES AVAILABLE SO PEOPLE APPLIED, WE INTERVIEWED THEM, WE GOT THEM SAT ON THE BOARD AND COMMISSION AND THEY WERE STOCK FULL, -1-2 ETHICS BY THE END OF LAST YEAR SO THE SUM OF 2024 IT WAS 99% FULL, ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, NOW WE ARE FOUR MONTHS INTO THIS YEAR, WE HAVE SEVERAL VACANCIES AND SEVERAL APPLICATIONS. SO THOSE VACANCIES, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT HAS FALLEN APART IN FOUR MONTHS, MAYBE IT IS JUST PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE WITH

[03:10:04]

YOU. >> SO YOU ARE SAYING, YOU DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD INTERVIEW ANYBODY UNLESS THERE IS A

VACANCY? >> I JUST HAVE NOT BEEN IN THIS

SITUATION. >> THAT IS HOW IT WORKED LAST

YEAR. >> I JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PROCESS. THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKED LAST YEAR, WE HAD TWO SPOTS IN EDC THAT WERE FILLED, THEY WERE NOT

VACANT. >> THERE ARE ALSO TERMS.

>> THEY WERE VACANT. >> WE DO HAVE TERMS, EDC HAS TWO-YEAR TERMS, ALSO THERE ARE TERMS ON THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD AS WELL THAT ROTATE OUT AS WELL. HOW THE THREE OF US DID IT LAST YEAR, WE ASKED THAT PERSON FIRST, A BOARD MEMBER, SO AND SO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONTINUE SERVING AND THEY SAY YES OR NO.

IF THEY SAY NO THERE IS A VACANCY. IF THEY SAY YES THEN WE WOULD BRING IT BACK UP TO DECIDE AMONGST OURSELVES , THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE AND THEN BRING IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

>> SOMETHING HAPPENED WITH THE EDC, YOU HAD A FULL BOARD.

>> I AM NOT TRYING TO REHASH THE PAST, I AM TRYING TO MOVE

FORWARD IN THINGS. >> WITH THE EDC, WHAT HAPPENED WAS, WE HAD MORE APPLICATIONS AND INTEREST IN SERVING ON THE EDC BOARD AND WE HAD POSITIONS AVAILABLE. WE ASKED THE TWO INDIVIDUALS WHOSE TERMS ALREADY EXPIRED, THEY EXPIRED AT THE END OF JUNE, THIS HAPPENED IN JULY, ARE YOU INTERESTED IN BEING CONSIDERED FOR REAPPOINTMENT? ONE OF THEM SAID NO AND HE CHANGED HER MIND AND SAID YES AND THE OTHER SAID YES. WE ALSO HAD OTHER PEOPLE THAT WERE NEWLY SUBMITTED RESUMES AND WE INTERVIEWED THEM, WE INTERVIEWED A TOTAL OF FOUR NEW PEOPLE AND WE HAD THE TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT EXPRESSED INTEREST IN STAYING ON AND BEING REAPPOINTED. THEIR TERMS HAD EXPIRED. PER THE PROTOCOLS AND I AM HAPPY TO CHANGE THE PROTOCOL IF WE NEED TO CHANGE THE PROTOCOL. PER THE PROTOCOL IT SAYS NEW APPLICANTS NEED TO BE INTERVIEWED, EXISTING PEOPLE THAT WANT TO CONTINUE TO SERVE MAY OR MAY NOT BE INTERVIEWED, IT IS UP TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE IF THEY FEEL ANOTHER INTERVIEW IS NEEDED. IF WE NEED TO CHANGE THAT PORTION TO SAY WE NEED TO INTERVIEW ACROSS THE BOARD , I HAVE NO PROBLEM. I GETS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS HOW IT WAS MISTAKEN AND HINDSIGHT IS 20/20.

IF WE CAN DO IT AGAIN I PROBABLY WOULD RECOMMEND WE INTERVIEWED THOSE TWO. WE DID NOT BECAUSE THE PROTOCOL SAID IT WAS UP TO US. THE MAIN PURPOSE IS TO GET TO KNOW THE INDIVIDUAL AND UNDERSTAND WHO THEY ARE. WE AS A NOMINATING COMMITTEE, WE FELT LIKE WE KNEW THE TWO PEOPLE THAT HAD BEEN SERVING SO WE FELT LIKE A INTERVIEW WAS NOT NECESSARY. AGREE WITH IT OR NOT, THAT WAS THE DECISION MADE. WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY ON SOME OF THE OTHER ONES, I HAVE SOME EXAMPLES HERE. WE HAD MULTIPLE OPENINGS FOR THE DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION BELONGING COMMISSION.

WE HAD 1-2 OPENINGS AND WE INTERVIEWED A TOTAL OF FIVE PEOPLE. WE DECIDED TO NOMINATE 2-5 AND THE OTHER THREE, WE NOTIFIED THEM AFTER THE INTERVIEW AND SAID WE WILL NOMINATE ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL, ANOTHER APPLICANT, THANK YOU FOR APPLYING. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NOMINATIONS OF THE OTHERS, IF THEY ARE CONFIRMED BY THE COUNCIL WILL BE APPOINTED, ARE YOU OKAY IF WE LEAVE YOUR APPLICATION ON FILE FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION? TWO OF THEM SAID YES, LEAVE MY APPLICATION ON FILE AND ONE OF THEM SAID NO NEVERMIND I WILL WITHDRAW MY APPLICATION. THOSE WERE INTERVIEWED IN SEPTEMBER

[03:15:01]

MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE IF A OPENING COMES UP IN THE DIVERSITY INCLUSION BELONGING COMMISSION AT THIS POINT, THE NEW NOMINATING COMMITTEE WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY WOULD WANT TO REINTERVIEW THE INDIVIDUALS, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE TECHNICALLY BEEN INTERVIEWED BY S, MY ASSUMPTION WOULD BE THE THREE OF YOU WOULD WANT TO GET TO KNOW WHO THIS PERSON IS BEFORE YOU PUT THEIR NAME BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL.

>> YOU ARE SAYING THAT IS ONLY IF THERE IS A VACANCY THOUGH?

>> CORRECT. LET'S SAY FOR INSTANCE, WHAT I AM HEARING THE ARGUMENT IT, LET'S JUST INTERVIEW THE PERSON AS SOON AS THE APPLICATION COMES IN AND THEN IF AND WHEN A OPENING COMES UP LATER THAT INTERVIEW COUNTS AND WE DO NOT HAVE TO INTERVIEW THEM LATER WE CAN JUST SAY WE WILL NOMINATE YOU. SO SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENED FOR PLANNING AND ZONING. WE RECEIVED THE APPLICATION IN SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR FOR AN INDIVIDUAL INTERESTED IN PLANNING AND ZONING, I CALLED AND SAID THANK YOU FOR APPLYING, WE CURRENTLY DO NOT HAVE VACANCIES RIGHT NOW SO WE WILL NOT BE CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS BUT ARE YOU OKAY IF WE LEAVE THE APPLICATION ON FILE AND NOTIFY YOU WHEN A OPENING COMES UP AND WE WILL INTERVIEW AT THAT POINT? THEY SAID THAT WOULD BE GREAT. MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE IF WE INTERVIEWED THE INDIVIDUAL THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN INTERVIEWED IN THE MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER OF LAST YEAR. NOW THAT THERE IS A OPENING IN PMC INVENTORY, WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO REINTERVIEW THAT PERSON? IT HAS BEEN SIX MONTHS YOU WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO SAY LET'S INTERVIEW AGAIN BECAUSE IT IS A NEW NOMINATING COMMITTEE, PETER, AMBER AND DAN INTERVIEWED THAT PERSON, I DID NOT, I WANTED TO INTERVIEW THAT PERSON. YOU WANT TO SEE IF SOMETHING CHANGE YOU WANT TO REACH OUT AGAIN SO I WOULD THINK IF WE INTERVIEWED THIS PERSON BACK IN SEPTEMBER THEY INTERVIEW IN MY OPINION WOULD HAVE BEEN A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE THERE WAS NO OPENING AND THEY WILL GET INTERVIEWED AGAIN IN SIX MONTHS.

>> I DO NOT SEE HOW A NUMBER FOR YOU CAN INTERPRET IT, IF THERE IS NO VACANCY USED TO APPLY OR YOU STILL INTERVIEW, I CAN SEE HOW THAT CAN GET MISINTERPRETED SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CHANGE, WHAT IS THIS, ONE F3, TO SAY THE LIST OF APPLICANTS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITH A VACANCY WILL BE SENT TO THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION AND THEN IN PARENTHESES, AND IN THAT STANDING APPLICATIONS CURRENTLY IN THE SYSTEM TO BE INCLUDED IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS ALONG WITH

NEW APPLICATIONS. >> THEY ARE ALREADY IN THERE SO THEY WOULD BE CONSIDERED A NEW APPLICATION BASICALLY.

>> RIGHT. >> I WILL SECOND THAT.

>> CAN YOU REPEAT IT? >> SO IT WOULD BE THE LIST OF APPLICANTS FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WITH A CURRENT VACANCY WILL BE SENT TO THE NOMINATING KENNY FOR CONSIDERATION. IN PARENTHESES, CURRENT APPLICATIONS IN THE SYSTEM WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE INTERVIEW PROCESS ALONG WITH NEW

APPLICATIONS. >> YES I AGREE WITH YOU BRIAN BUT IT NEEDS TO BE WORDED A LITTLE DIFFERENT, I AM TRACKING, ON THE PARENTHESES PART. I AM GOOD.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? HEARING NONE. PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

THE MOTION PASSES, 6-0. >> LET ME ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION, DOES THAT MEAN NOW , BECAUSE WHAT I NEED SHOULD STILL HAPPEN AND WHAT IS A GOOD PRACTICE IS WHEN A APPLICATION COMES IN SOMEBODY SHOULD STILL REACH OUT TO THE INDIVIDUAL SO THEY KNOW THEIR APPLICATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND THEY ARE AT LEAST TOLD THERE IS NO VACANCIES RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE NOT GETTING

[03:20:03]

YOU. >> I DO NOT THINK THAT NEEDS TO

BE A PARTICLE, I DO THAT ANYWAY. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK WE

DO THAT ANYWAY. >> WE DO THAT ANYWAY, JUST AS

BEST PRACTICE. >> YOU DO NOT WANT TO LEAVE THEM

NOT HEARING FROM ANYONE. >> I JUST DO NOT WANT THAT TO BE

AMBIGUOUS. >> I DO NOT MIND TAKING ANOTHER MOTION AND ADDING THAT TO THE PARENTHESES AS WELL SO EVERYBODY

IS ON THE SAME PAGE. >> I DO NOT THINK IT NEEDS TO BE A PARTICLE, IT JUST NEEDS TO BE GOOD BUSINESS.

>> I MEAN I WILL MAKE THAT MOTION TO ADD IN PARENTHESES , APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED WITHOUT A VACANCY WILL BE CONTACTED CONFIRMING RECEIPT OF APPLICATION.

>> I WILL SECOND THAT ONE AS WELL.

>> I CANNOT SPELL IT BUT WE ARE GETTING THERE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> THE MOTION PASSES 6-0. ONE THING I NOTICED ON HERE, I DO NOT KNOW IF WE ARE DOING IT -- COMMITTEES -- PERSONNEL -- AHEAD OF THE MEETING -- PRESENT FOR A VOTE -- CITY SECRETARY WILL NOTIFY THE OTHER COUNCILMEMBERS OF THE IMPENDING NOMINATIONS.

>> THAT WAS DONE. THEY DID NOT DO IT LAST TIME BUT IT WAS THEIR

FIRST PUTTING FORWARD NAMES. >> I DO NOT KNOW IF I EVER GOT A EMAIL ABOUT WHO IS GOING TO BE NOMINATED.

>> WE DID IT LAST YEAR. >> MAYOR PRO TEM GORDON WOULD SAY CITY SECRETARY WE ARE PUTTING FORWARD THESE NAMES PLEASE SHARE WITH THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY WILL FORWARD IT

ON. >> WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT THIS NOMINATING COMMITTEE, NOTED, WE WILL DO THAT.

>> WE GO WITH THIS ITEM? >> I AM FINE CHANGING THAT ONE, I NEED TO FIND OUT WHERE IT IS. IS SAYS INSTEAD OF GIVING THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE THE LEEWAY WHETHER OR NOT TO INTERVIEW A EXISTING PERSON, I AM HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION TO SAY WE CHANGE THAT TO EVERYBODY NEEDS TO BE INTERVIEWED NO MATTER WHAT TO

KEEP IT CONSISTENT. >> WAIT WHAT NOW?

>> I THINK WE COVERED THAT WITH THE FIRST MOTION.

>> IT IS SPECIFIED. >> I DO NOT KNOW IT SPECIFIES YOU DO NOT HAVE TO, I READ IT AS YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED -- NOT REQUIRE AN APPLICATION BUT MAY CHOOSE TO INTERVIEW THE MEMBER.

>> DO YOU WANT IT TO SAY, WILL NOT REQUIRE A NEW APPLICATION BUT MUST INTERVIEW THE MEMBER? WOULD THAT MAKE PEOPLE MORE

COMFORTABLE? >> I WOULD RATHER SAY WILL OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY .

I LIKE THAT. >> I AM SORRY IS THIS ON NUMBER

12? >> YES. WOULD YOU MIND READING

NUMBER 12 WITH YOUR MOTION? >> I WOULD SAY CHANGE NUMBER 12, SECOND SENTENCE TO SAY THE NOMINATING KENNY WILL NOT REQUIRE A NEW APPLICATION BUT WILL OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY OF

THE INTERVIEW TO THE MEMBER. >> BASICALLY IT SAYS THE OLD APPLICANTS WILL BE INTERVIEWED WITH THE NEW APPLICANTS.

IF SOMEBODY HAS BEEN ON P AND Z FOR SIX YEARS I WANT TO CONTINUE, WE WILL SAY TO YOU WANT TO INTERVIEW AGAIN?

>> IT ALREADY SAYS THAT. >> HERE THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE SAYS WHETHER OR NOT TO INTERVIEW, I AM SAYING GIVE THE POTENTIAL NOMINEE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY I WANT TO BE

INTERVIEWED. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> I WILL SECOND ALL OF THEM.

>> -- MOTION -- BROUGHT BACK FOR A FINAL VOTE?

>> ONCE IT IS REDLINED? >> WE ARE APPROVING CHANGES --

>> LIKE A SECOND READING OR WHATEVER?

>> PUT IT ON CONSENT. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING

NONE. PLEASE CALL THAT VOTE. >> I THOUGHT WE WERE ALMOST DONE.

AYE . >> AYE.

[03:25:02]

>> AYE. >> AYE.

>> AYE. >> IT.

>> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSES 6-0. ANY OTHER CHANGES ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE? ALL RIGHT, ITEM 12

[12.3 Consideration and possible action to accept Purple Heart Sign Sponsorships from Snyder Family and Miller's Outpost Handyman Services (City Council) ]

SERVICES. >> WHO WANTS TO APPROVE?

>> I WILL SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> AYE

>> AYE >> AYE

>> AYE >> AYE

>> AYE >> AYE

[14. ACTION RELATIVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> THE MOTION PASSES SIX - IS ROW. IT BRINGS US TO ITEM 14 ONE, POSSIBLE ACTION LED TO EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA ITEMS

LISTED ABOVE. >> ONE FOR 13 AS WELL, ONE

SECOND. >> MAYOR AND COUNCIL I RECOMMENDED A MOTION ON 13 TO WHICH WOULD BE A MOTION TO DENY THE PETITION OF THE PARTLY LIVING TRUST PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SENATE BILL NUMBER 2038 ESTABLISHING SECTIONS 42.101 THREE 105 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE FOR THE RELEASE FROM THE CITY'S EXTRATERRITORIAL A PROPERTY LOCATED IN TEXAS BECAUSE THE CITY DOES NOT CONSENT TO THE RELEASE OF THE PROPERTY FROM ITS EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION AND PURSUANT OF LOCAL TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE --

>> SO MOVED . >> SECOND.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> AYE >> AYE

>> AYE >> AYE

>> AYE >> AYE

>> THE MOTION PASSES SIX - ISRAEL.

>> WE PULLED 13 ONE OUT, WAS THERE ANY ACTION NEEDED ON

EITHER OF THOSE? >> 13 ONE WAS JUST A STATUS

[15. CTY COUNCIL COMMENTS ]

UPDATE. >> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT, 15 ONE, GENERAL COMMERCE FOR CITY COUNCIL.

>> THANKS TO THE CHAMBER FOR HOSTING A GREAT EVENT. I WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND BUT I DID HEAR ISD MEMBERS AND ESD MEMBERS WERE ALL IN ATTENDANCE AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC SO INK YOU SO MUCH TO THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR PUTTING ON A GREAT CRAWFISH

FESTIVAL THIS YEAR. >> 15 TO, I DO NOT HAVE IT ALL WRITTEN DOWN, ADC , WHAT WAS THE REST OF IT?

>> AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS. FOR TYPE BAY, TYPE B CORPORATION. I ALSO HAVE ANOTHER ONE. FOR PRIORITY OF CITY COUNCIL AND EDC TO PARTICIPATE IN A TRNA CLASS WITH OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, REFRESHING THAT AS WELL .

>> ANY OTHER AGENDA ITEMS? >> ALL RIGHT, 15 THREE, FUTURE ADDITIONAL MEETINGS AS ALLOWED BY SECTION 102 -- ADDITIONAL OR RESCHEDULED MEETINGS . WAS THERE ANY OF THEM?

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO MOVE SOME AROUND FOR HIM?

>> HOLD PLEASE. >> CHECK JULY 4.

>> YES JULY 4, WHEN IS THAT. THAT IS A FRIDAY.

>> I THINK LAURA WENT OVER ALL OF THEM WITH YOU GUYS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR. WE SHOULD BE OKAY.

>> WE LIKE TO CHANGE THEM AROUND.

>> I KNOW. >> ALL RIGHT NO

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.