5.2. Conduct Oath of Office for newly elected Councilmember Place 1 - Jerrel W. Reynolds. (Judge Lucas Wilson)

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

>> THANK YOU. >> NOW WE HAVE NO OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. WE MOVE ONTO ITEM 8.1. CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE APPOINTMENTS, RE-APPOINTMENTS AND/OR REMOVALS TO CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, TASK FORCES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS AND TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARDS, AND AREA GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, JIM MORRIS, SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR, THE SUBCOMMITTEE DID NOT MEET BUT WE HAD A FLURRY OF NEW APPLICATIONS HERE IN THE LAST RELAY 3-6 WEEKS SO WE WILL BE TACKLING WITH THOSE AND TALKING WITH THE CHAIRS.

BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF VACANCIES.

I MEAN WE HAVE PROBABLY FOR BOARDS THAT HAVE AT LEAST ONE VACANCY BUT I CANNOT THINK OF ANYBODY THAT HAS TWO VACANCIES.

THE RESPONDENT WITH THE LIAISON AS THE 150 SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE LIAISON FOR THE 150 SUBCOMMITTEE.

THEY MET THIS PAST SATURDAY. WE HAVE NEW MEMBERS.

STILL HAVE A COUPLE VACANCIES. BUT I LIKE THE ACTIVITY THERE AND THE FOCUS. AND A NEW PROJECT A LIST IS COMING OUT IS AVAILABLE NOW SO IT KIND OF LETS NOT ONLY THE GROUP, THE 150 GROUP SEE WHAT THEY'RE PRIORITIZE AND WHAT IS NOT GETTING DONE, AND HOW CAN THE CITY ASSIST THAT BUT ALSO

[00:10:02]

FOR CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS FOR ALL THE WORK THEY ARE DOING. SO HATS OFF FOR THAT.

>> YOU PUT 11-2. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM. YOUR CALL.

YOU ARE CALLED WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OR

SPEAK ON ITEM 11-2. >> NO PROBLEM.

>> HOLD ON THE SECOND. I ONLY HAVE ONE RESPONSE FOR THIS. ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NO, SIR. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

AS WE DIRECT STAFF TO BRING US BACK PROBABLY AT THE NEXT MEETING TO BRING US BACK THE REPLACEMENTS AND THINGS.

HOW DO YOU GUYS PLAN TO HANDLE THAT GAP BETWEEN NOW AND WE HAVE

THE SUBCOMMITTEE. >> WE HAVE TO HANDLE THE CURRENT

PROTOCOLS. >> DISCUSSION 8-1.

[7. PUBLIC COMMENT (Part 2 of 2)]

NO OBJECTIONS I WILL RECALL ITEM SEVEN PUBLIC COMMENT HEARING NONE AND WHAT WAS YOUR NAME, SIR.

HEAR YOU ARE. COME ON UP, DANIEL.

YES, SIR. AND JUST IF YOU SPEAK ANYMORE TO AGENDA ITEM THAT WILL MAKE YOU SPEAK ON THAT AGENDA ITEM IF YOU JUST PUT LIKE PC OR PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU PUT THAT WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO ENGAGE WITH YOU ON THE ITEM IF YOU DO THE SPECIFIC ITEM BECAUSE WITH NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC WE ARE ABLE

TO ENGAGE WITH YOU. >> OKAY.

YES. >> OKAY SO IF YOU ARE DESIGNATING TIME THEN IF YOU DESIGNATE YOUR TIME YOU HAVE TO MARKED YES IN THE BOX. BUT YOU PUT NO.

YOU SAID YES THAT YOU LIVE IN HUTTO CITY LIMITS.

OKAY. OKAY.

SO 9 MINUTES. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. >> HELLO SO I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK HERE.

SO A COUPLE THINGS. I AM HUTTO RESIDENT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT A COUPLE THINGS MY MAIN TOPIC IS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BUT BEFORE I DO THAT I WANTED TO TALK WITH A COUPLE OF YOU PERSONALLY. SO I WANTED TO THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER FOR LISTENING TO THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS AND GIVING THEM A VOICE ON THE MAP FOR THE COUNCIL.

I KNOW I ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND YOU ANSWER EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM SO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

ALSO YOU RELEASE YOUR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS WHEN YOU DID NOT HAVE TO SO I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THAT THAT IS POWERFUL FOR THE PEOPLE SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I EMAIL ALL OF YOU EVEN THOUGH I DID NOT GO THE SAME WAY YOU VOTED I WANTED TO TELL YOU I APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU TOOK.

SO WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE THIS AGREEMENT BUT I RESPECT YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO RESPOND TO MY EMAIL.

NOW I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

MY ONLY ASK TONIGHT, AND I AM ASKING YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER THIS IS THAT WHEN WE CREATE OUR OWN MUNICIPAL FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND YOU ASKED CITY STAFF TO REMOVE THAT FOR THE 2027 BUDGET I BELIEVE THAT IS AN OCTOBER FIRST.

I WANT TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT WHY I THINK THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA GOING FORWARD. SO LOOKING AT THE CITY'S OFFICIAL FAQ. THEY JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROJECT DOES NOT HAVE THAT, RIGHT.

BUT THE PRIMARY ARGUMENT FOR CREATING OUR OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT IS THAT WHEN YOU PROTECT A $972,000 A YEAR, WE CURRENTLY RECEIVE THAT WAS SIGNED A COUPLE WEEKS AND MONTHS AGO.

NOW THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL, RIGHT? WE GET IT RIGHT NOW. NOW THE SAME INFORMATION THAT THEY POST ON THE INFORMATION HERE A FEW WEEKS AGO 1.5 TO ROUND IT. NOW ON THE FAQ THEY STATED ONE

[00:15:03]

FOR THE PROPERTIES AND THAT IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO BE WITHIN A CERTAIN DISTANCE TO RESPOND.

SO A LOT OF DIFFERENT HYPOTHETICALS, SO I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SUMMARIZE THESE. WORKING IN CREATING THIS FIRE DEPARTMENT YOU ARE ASKING THE TAXPAYERS TO SPEND A LITTLE OVER $3 MILLION TO PROTECT US FROM A HYPER COAL -- HYPOTHETICAL 972,000. I BELIEVE THAT IS NOT A GOOD

IDEA. >> THAT IS BASED ON THAT HYPOTHETICAL. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT FOR THE

SECOND. >> WE WILL GET THAT 972,000 A YEAR. AND EXPENSE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND WE WILL HAVE TO INCREASE THE TAXES OF THE RESIDENTS. THAT'S GO ABOUT THIS HYPOTHETICAL. LET'S SAY THEY CANCEL SAY THERE IS A 10-YEAR CONTRACT I DON'T KNOW I'M NOT A LAWYER.

BUT THE TRUE CONCERN OF THIS IS THE LANGUAGE AND THE POSSIBILITY OF THE CANCELATION OF THIS THAN I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK INCORRECTLY LANGUAGE AND LANGUAGE AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS A POSSIBILITY NOW I UNDERSTAND IT IS DIFFICULT SOMETIMES TO UNDERSTAND DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW AND UNDERSTAND IT HAS EXTREME DIFFICULTY.

BUT I WOULD SUGGEST THAT I DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE YOU IN THAT.

BUT AS COUNCIL LEADERSHIP FOR THE CITY YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CANNOT SIT THERE AT A BASIC LEVEL, AND IF YOU HAVE THE KEYS TO THIS CONTRACT I WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH SOLUTION.

BUT I BELIEVE THAT IS BETTER THAN GOING IN THIS WAY.

I WOULD SAY THIS CREATES A JOINT COMMISSION OR COMMUNITY IN WHATEVER LANGUAGE. BUT A COUPLE OF RESIDENTS THAT HOPEFULLY HAVE SOME KIND OF BACKGROUND IN FIRE OR ECONOMICS OR WHATEVER. AND YOU HAVE YOU KNOW FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE, THREE RESIDENTS, TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND THEY WILL NOT BE ALLOWING THEY WON'T BE MAKING THOSE DECISIONS BUT THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO SIT AT THE TABLE AND NEGOTIATE THE PART OF THE CONTRACT THAT IS PROVOKING THESE FEARS.

NOW AS A SIDE SUGGESTION I THINK IT WILL BE GREAT TO CANCEL PEOPLE OUT AND THAT COMMITTEE. AND WE HAD THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE USD AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL GET SOMEWHERE.

ONCE THEY WILL FIGURE SOMETHING OUT THEN THEY CAN BRING THAT DRAFT THERE TO THE CITY COUNCIL SO THEY CAN VOTE ON IT AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND A RESOLUTION WHERE WE DO NOT HAVE THE FEAR OF LOSING THE $900,000, AND MAKE THAT MISTAKE OF SPENDING TWO AND A HALF MILLION JUST TO TAKE OVER FOR THAT.

I'M SORRY ABOUT THIS. AGAIN, JUST TO DRIVE THE POINT, THERE IS OTHER SOLUTIONS DOING SOMETHING WITH A MATHEMATICAL PERSON MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IT IS A NET NEGATIVE.

SO WHERE THAT IS THAT COMMITTEE OR SOMETHING ELSE, AGAIN I THINK THERE IS THAT PROBLEM ACCORDING TO THE CITY IS THE LANGUAGE OF THIS CONTRACT. SO LET'S WORK ON THAT FIRST.

AND IF IT DOES NOT WORK WE WORK ON OTHER OPTIONS LIKE GOING AHEAD AND TAKING THIS OUT FOR 90 DAYS THAT WILL INCREASE OUR TAXES ON THE MONEY WE SPEND. GOOD IDEA.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO FORCE THE 2.1 AND WHATEVER THE RIGHT WORD IS INTO THE TAXPAYERS. TO SERVE THE SIMPLE CONTRACT LET ME TAKE IT BACK. TO SOLVE THE CONFLICT.

SO IF YOU HAVE SOME THINK YOU CAN DO YOURSELF LIKE COUNCIL MEMBERS FIX THE PROBLEM WITH THE COMMUNITY FIX THAT PROBLEM. I LOVE THEM A CHANCE TO FIX THIS AT ZERO COST. SO I URGE YOU TO COME FORWARD AND RETHINK THE WAY YOU ARE VOTING TO MOVE FORWARD AND TO PLEASE ASK THE CITY STAFF TO REMOVE IT FROM THE 2027 BUDGET

THANK YOU. >> THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR

[8.2. Consideration and possible action regarding recommendations or updates from City Council sub-committees (i.e. HISD, CIP, Fire Safety).]

COMMENTS AND CONSIDERATION POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS OR UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEES HAS NOT MET IF YOU GUYS HAVE MET? AND THEN FIRE SAFETY WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW AT 9:00 A.M. WITH THE EST.

[9.1. Presentation and possible action on recommendations from the Charter Review Commission. (Laura Hallmark)]

SO WE WILL HAVE AN UPDATE TO THE NEXT MEETING.

[00:20:03]

RIGHT? NONONE, PRESENTATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION. FROM THE CHARTER REVIEW

COMMISSION. >> MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, OR YOU GOING TO BE, LAURA WILL YOU BE RUNNING THE SLIDES?

>> I CAN IF YOU LIKE ME TOO BUT YOU ALSO HAVE THE REMOTE.

I DO NOT NEED THAT. >> I AM THE CHAIR OF THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, THERE WERE NO RECOMMENDATIONS FROM US ON THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT BOUNDARIES, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, NOMINATIONS, AND ELECTION INITIATION REFERENDUM FRANCHISE OR GENERAL UTILITIES, GENERAL PROVISIONS, OR TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS. WE DID HAVE SOME POSSIBLE PROPOSITIONS TO PUT ON THE BALLOT FOR NOVEMBER I BELIEVE IT WAS. THE ITEM THEY HOLD OVER PROVISION VERBIAGE. WITH ANY VACANCY THAT SHOULD OCCUR ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REMAINDER OF THE VAN KIT TERM OF OFFICE IS MORE THAN ONE YEAR, A SPECIAL ELECTION SHE'LL BE CALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW TO FILL THE VACANCY IN THE SAME MANNER DESCRIBED HERE AND REGULAR ELECTIONS FOR ARTICLES WAS THAT SECTION 16, 17 OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, THE COUNCIL MEMBER FORFEITING THEIR POSITION WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE IN THE STATUS UNTIL THE SUCCESSOR IS ELECTED UNLESS THE VACANCY OCCURRED DUE TO REMOVAL FROM OFFICE.

I THINK THAT KIND OF ADDRESSES THE FORMER CITY COUNCIL PERSON

FROM TWO YEARS AGO. >> CAN YOU ELABORATE MORE ON WHAT THE EXAMPLE IS? THEY MOVED TO HOUSTON THEY CAN

STILL SERVE AS COUNCIL? >> UNTIL ONE IS ELECTED.

>> YOU GUYS ARE OKAY WITH SOMEBODY WHO DOES NOT LIVE ON THE CITY SERVING ON COUNCIL UNTIL SUCH TIME AS WE HAVE AN

OPEN SLOT? >> SPECIAL ELECTION AS QUICKLY

AS POSSIBLE. >> YOU SAYING THAT IF WE GO BACK

ONE,. >> TO THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP THE PERSON ON THEIR.

>> THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM TO STAY ON.

>> I MEAN AS YOU SAY INVESTIGATORS SAYING.

>> YES THE CONSTITUTION SAYS THAT THEY SERVE IN A HOLD OVER STATUS UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN REMOVED.

>> I ASSUME THE ATTORNEY AGREES WITH THAT?

>> YES, IT IS A HOLD OVER UNTIL THE POSITION IS FILLED BY ANOTHER PERSON, IT IS STILL A HOLD OVER UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN OFFICIALLY REMOVED FROM THE OFFICE.

>> IF IT IS A RESIDENCY ISSUE, THE COUNCIL DOES HAVE THE CONSTITUTION ALLOWS THE COUNCIL TO REMOVE THAT PERSON IMMEDIATELY IF IT IS A RESIDENCY ISSUE.

>> BECAUSE THEY ARE NO LONGER. >> IF THEY MOVE OUT OF STATE.

>> THEY WOULD NOT BE QUALIFIED TO RUN FOR OFFICE BUT UNTIL THE POSITION IS FILLED THERE IS STILL A HOLD OVER UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM OFFICE. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOUR LOCAL PROVISION SAY ABOUT REMOVAL FROM OFFICE BUT GENERALLY IT IS VERY HARD TO REMOVE SOMEBODY FROM OFFICE EVEN WHEN IT IS A

RESIDENCY ISSUE. >> SO TELL THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> OKAY SO HERE IS ONE THAT HAS BEEN I HAVE BEEN ON A CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION THREE TIMES, AND I THINK THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE AT LEAST TWICE. AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE BALLOT VERBIAGE WAS WRITTEN RIGHT.

WHAT WE DISCUSSED ABOUT THIS NEXT ONE IS A QUORUM.

AN END OUR CHARTER CURRENTLY IT SAYS FOR REVIEW TO CONSTITUTE A QUORUM, BUT IT TAKES FIVE OF YOU TO VOTE AND TO ME IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE FOR YOU TO EVEN HAVE A MEETING IF YOU DO NOT HAVE FIVE SO WHY EVEN HAVE THE QUORUM? SO WHAT WE SAID WAS THE QUORUM IS FOR YOU CAN HAVE A MEETING WITH FOUR, YOU CAN DISCUSS THINGS WITH FOUR PEOPLE, YOU COULD EVEN TAKE A VOTE WITH THE FOUR PEOPLE, BUT IT WILL STILL BE AS IF THERE WERE SEVEN PEOPLE UP THERE.

SO IN OTHER WORDS YOU HAVE FOR PEOPLE THERE.

I ALSO WANT TO PREFACE THIS BY SAYING IN THE 31 YEARS THAT I HAVE LIVED IN HUTTO I HAVE NEVER SEEN THREE PEOPLE ON CITY COUNCIL IN THE SAME MEETING.

BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT PAST PERFORMANCE DOESN'T GUARANTEE FUTURE RESULTS. SO THIS CAN HAPPEN BUT I DO NOT

[00:25:02]

SEE ANY REASON WHY IF YOU HAVE A QUORUM OF FOUR, WHY WOULD IT TAKE FIVE IF YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR SAY IT MAKES NO SENSE.

SO YOU PUT THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT WITH THE CORRECT VERBIAGE AND MAYBE IT WELL, MAYBE IT WON'T WHO KNOWS.

BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ANY OF US ON THE COMMISSION TO HAVE A QUORUM OF FOUR PEOPLE THAT WOULD REQUIRE US TO DO ANY BUSINESS AND ON THIS ONE IT IS BASICALLY CORRECTING SOME LANGUAGE. BONDS INCONTESTABLE.

BASICALLY ALL OF THE BONDS ISSUED AND STRIKING OUT, AND SOLD AND DELIVERED STRIKING OUT TO THE PURCHASER THEREOF.

SHALL THEREAFTER BE IN CONTENTS THE -- INCONTESTABLE AND ANY STANDING BONDS PREVIOUSLY ISSUED SHALL BE INCONTESTABLE.

A BUNCH OF LEGAL STUFF THAT I REALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND BUT

THAT IS WHAT WE CAME UP WITH. >> WITH THE COUNCIL.

>> BOND COUNCIL. >> OKAY.

>> BASICALLY JUST CLARIFYING REFUNDING AND EXCHANGE JUST CORRECTING SOME VERBIAGE. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS NO LONGER REQUIRED BY STATE LAW ANNUALLY RECOMMEND ANNEXATION PLANS TO CITY COUNCIL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS WE HAVE A BUNCH OF THEM UP THERE. SO THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL HAVE THE POWER BY ORDINANCE TO REARRANGE ALL ARTICLES, SECTIONS, SUBSECTIONS, PARAGRAPHS, AND SUBPARAGRAPHS OF THIS CHARTER OR ANY AMENDMENTS HERETO AS THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL DATE APPROPRIATE INCLUDING THE POWER TO CORRECT TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS AND TO PERFORM CROSS REFERENCES IN THE BODY TEXT OF THIS CHARTER SO LONG AS NO SUBSTANTIAL TO CHANGE IS MADE WITHOUT COMPLYING WITHOUT -- WITH SECTION 13 THAT HIGH FOR 11 -- SECTION 13.511 OF THIS CHARTER.

THERE ARE 19 ADDITIONAL OCCURRENCES OF THAT.

SEPARATED INTO TWO DISTINCT STATEMENTS.

ALL MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL IN ATTENDANCE SHALL VOTE ON EVERY RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE EXCEPT WHEN THERE IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 171 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

OR BE SET WIN THE MEMBER OF CITY COUNCIL ABSTAINED FROM VOTING IN ORDER TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY AS DEFINED IN THE HUTTO ETHICS CODE OR PROTOCOLS THE REASON WHICH SHALL BE CCAN'S -- STATED CONCISELY IN THE RECORDS.

ADDING THE PERCENTAGE ASSIGNED TO PARENTHESES EQUAL IN NUMBER TO AT LEAST TEN% SPELLED OUT PARENTHESES TEN% NUMERICAL.

THAT IS PRIMARILY IN RECALL SECTION OF THE CHARTER.

THE MISSING PERCENTAGE A MINIMUM OF TEN%.

10% INSTEAD OF TEN THE BUDGET MISSING WITH ORDINANCE IN THE BUDGET. DROP PARAGRAPH CROSS REFERENCING TRANSITION FROM TWO YEARS TO THREE YEAR TERM TO PRESERVE FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE. NOT DOING STAGGERED SO REPLACED GENERAL WITH COMPREHENSIVE ANNUALLY REVIEW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANY CHANGE AND WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS I WILL SAY SIMPLY BECAUSE IT WAS SUGGESTED BEFORE THE MEETING AT NO TIME DID ANY CITY COUNCILOR WHEN WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING, DID ANYBODY PUT ON THE MESSAGE BOARD THAT THEY HAD ANYTHING THEY SPECIFICALLY WANTED US TO LOOK AT.

SO WE ARE KIND OF JUST GOING ON OUR OWN GUT FEELINGS.

OUR OWN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS AND THIS IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND YOU PUT ON THE BALLOT.

AND PRIOR COMMISSIONS I HAD BEEN ON I BELIEVE THE FIRST ONE I WAS ON WE HAD 19 PROPOSITIONS THAT WENT ON THE BALLOT THE LAST 12022-2023. WE HAD 23 PROPOSITIONS I THINK

[00:30:03]

IN THIS ONE WE ARE ONLY DOING TWO MAJOR PROPOSITIONS.

THAT IS IT. >> WHEN QUESTION.

I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE SOME ERRORS OR ADDITIONS WHATEVER THE LAST ONE WAS WE HAD THAT SO WE CAN MAKE THOSE SAME CHANGES NOW MAY

BE NOT. >> THAT IS JUST SHOWING THE ABILITY OF COUNCIL TO MAKE THE CHANGES.

>> OH, THEY DON'T HAVE TO VOTE THAT IS JUST WHAT YOU GUYS SO WE WILL CHANGE IT IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH IT.

>> THE FIRST OF POSSIBLE PROPOSITIONS WERE THE ONES TO GO TO THE VOTE. POSSIBLE CLERICAL CONNECTIONS.

ONE STATEMENT WAS TO OUTLINE COUNCIL HAS THE ABILITY TO DO

THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. >> WHAT IS THE DEADLINE FOR

GETTING US ON THE BALLOT. >> AUGUST.

>> WE DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO TAKE ACTION TONIGHT BUT WE CAN.

WE CAN GO TO THE MESSAGE BOARD AND ADD SOME STUFF FOR YOU.

>> WE ARE NOT MEETING ANYMORE SO YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.

[LAUGHTER] >> UNLESS THEY INSTRUCT US TO GO BACK AND YOU DO INSTEAD OF PUTTING THE STUFF ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT YOU WANT TO PUT IT ON THE MAY BALLOT.

I BELIEVE THAT IS ALL PART OF YOUR.

>> AT THIS POINT WHAT WE HAVE DONE WE WILL BRING IT BACK UP TO DISCUSS AND COUNCIL CAN TAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MODIFY THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND NOT TO WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED AND THEN ADD THEIR OWN AND THEN VOTE ON EACH ONE, AND THEN FROM THERE BEYOND

THE BALLOT. >> UPDATE AGAIN.

>> SECOND MEETING IN AUGUST AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> LOWER HALLMARK, CITY SECRETARY FOR THE RECORD.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOU AND YOUR GROUP FOR GOING THROUGH ALL OF

THAT. >> GREAT DETAIL.

[10. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS]

>> ANYTIME I DON'T MIND IT AT ALL.

>> NEXT WE HAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UP FOR CONSIDERATION. IF THERE ARE ANY YOU WISH TO HAVE REMOVED OR PULLED LET US KNOW WITH THE MOTION TO APPROVE

AS PRESENTED. >> I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE AS

PRESENTED. >> SECOND.

>> OF PROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING COULD NONLET'S CALL VOTE.

>> COUNCILMEMBER REYNOLDS. >> MEMBER THORTON.

COUNCIL MEMBERS... >> PASSES 7-0.

[11.1. Consideration and possible action electing a Mayor Pro Tern pursuant to Hutto City Charter Section 3.05. (City Council)]

NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 11-1 ELECTING A MAYOR PRO TEM PERSON WENT TO HUTTO 3.05 -- PURSUANT TO HUTTO 3.05.

TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW THIS CORRECTLY.

WHEN IT COMES TO MAYOR PRO TEM LIKE HOW WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST. THERE WAS A MEMBER WHO ASKED ME I DON'T THINK THERE IS A PROCESS BUT YOU NOTE NOMINATIONS.

GOING TO BE UNDER NUMBER 1, PARAGRAPH ONE OF THE COUNCIL PROTOCOLS. PARAGRAPH H, NOMINATION VOTING PROCEDURES FOR PETITIONS NOT SUBJECT TO COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS NOT SUBJECT TO DOMINATING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION CITY COUNCIL SHALL CALL THE PROCEDURE FOR NATIONS HIM DOWN BELOW. CALL FOR NOMINATIONS TO THE COUNCIL SO NOMINATIONS NOW IN ORDER FOR THE OFFICE OF MAYOR PRO TEM. MEMBERS NEED NOT BE RECOGNIZED BY THE PRECEDING -- PRESIDING OFFICER TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION. UNTIL THEY HAVE ALL BEEN MADE OF. AND THEN WE WILL TAKE A VOTE SO WE WILL START WITH NOMINATIONS NOMINATIONS FOR MAYOR PRO TEM.

>> I HAVE A NOMINATION. >> IF HE ACCEPTS TO NOMINATE

COUNCILMEMBER KING . >> COUNCILMEMBER KING .

>> I HAVE A NOMINATION. COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD.

[00:35:05]

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHERS. ALL RIGHT.

NOMINATIONS ARE KING AND PORTERFIELD, VOTES CAN BE CAST FOR A PERSON ELIGIBLE FOR ELECTION.

CALLED UPON BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER OF REMEMBER IN TURN WILL STATE WHO THEY ARE VOTING FOR. THEY SHALL BE DROPPED.

ONCE THE NOMINATE RECEIVES FOUR VOTES THE MOTION WILL BE ACCEPTED AFTER THE MOTION IS SECONDED DISCUSSION ON THE EMOTIONS AND THEN A FORMAL VOTE FOR NOMINEES CONDUCTED.

SO BASED ON THAT WE WILL JUST GO DOWN THE LINE YOU WILL SEE KING AND PORTERFIELD SO LAST NAMES VERY WELL COUNCILMEMBER

REYNOLDS. >> KING .

>> MAYOR PRO TEM THORTON. >> PORTERFIELD.

>> I WILL PICK PORTERFIELD. >> KING .

>> PORTERFIELD. >> KING .

>> PORTERFIELD. >> THAT IS FIVE VOTES.

SO WILL MAINTAIN THE MOTION. >> SO MOVED.

>> SECOND. MAYOR PRO TEM THORTON A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER MORRIS. AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. IT IS KIND OF BACKWARDS HOW WE DO THIS BECAUSE TO ME THE DISCUSSION SHOULD HAPPEN BEFORE HAND BUT I GOT OUTVOTED SOMETIMES.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPEAK. >> THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IS IF THE MOTION PASSES YOU MIGHT JUST SHORTEN IT TO MY FIRST NAME BECAUSE IT WILL BE MY FULL FOUR YEARS.

>> SO I THINK I WOULD APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM THORTON'S WORK OVER THE PAST YEAR.

AND WHAT I HAVE DONE EACH YEAR HAVE TRIED TO DO IT A DIFFERENT PERSON TO BE MAYOR PRO TEM BASED ON THE EXPERIENCES SO WE HAD GORDON AND THEN LAST YEAR I THINK EVERYBODY WAS NEW.

SO COUNCILMEMBER THORTON AND THEN FOR ME, PORTERFIELD, IT IS NOT A KNOCK ON KING OR ANYBODY ELSE, HE IS JUST THE NEXT SENIORITY. AND THEN I HOPE NEXT YEAR WE WOULD MOVE ONTO THE NEXT WHICH WOULD THEN BE KING OR MORRIS.

>> THE IDEA OF MAYOR PRO TEM SOME PEOPLE TAKE IT MORE AS IT MEANS SOMETHING MORE THAN WHAT IT REALLY IS.

AND ALL OF THIS FIND THIS A MEETING AND YOU SIT HERE OR I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU SIT HERE AND OUTSIDE OF THAT ANY OTHER ENGAGEMENT THAT CANNOT BE THERE SO DOES NOT HAVE TO BE MAYOR PRO TEM, AND SO WHEN I THINK I HAVE MISSED TWO MEETINGS IN SEVEN YEARS IT IS BECAUSE I DO NOT EXPECT TO MISS A LOT, BUT SO IT MAY BECOME REALLY IMPORTANT TOMORROW.

BUT THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE PORTERFIELD IN REVIEW.

>> THAT IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT YOU SAID IS THE REASON I PICKED

PORTERFIELD OVER MYSELF AS WELL. >> THANK YOU FOR THOSE WHO CALLED MY NAME OUT. I APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT I AGREE THAT COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD IS NEXT IN LINE.

I KNOW THAT MAY NOT BE HOW THE PROTOCOL AND PROCESSES WERE, BUT THAT IS HOW MY VOTE WOULD HAVE GONE EITHER WAY.

>> HEARING NO OTHER DISCUSSION OF PLEASE CALL THE VOTE.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM THORTON... >> THE MOTION PASSES 7-0.

[11.2. Discussion and possible action regarding the long-term financial and operational implications of a City-owned fire department. (Councilmember Zepeda)]

NEXT WE HAVE ITEM 11-2 DISCUSSION -- 13.2. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE LONG-TERM FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF A CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT. (COUNCILMEMBER ZEPEDA)

>> THIS IS TO RESPOND TO THE REQUEST FROM THE PUBLIC TO HAVE

[00:40:01]

TRANSPARENCY AND CLEAR COMMUNICATION ON THE FULL COST OF HAVING A CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT.

SO SPECIFICALLY THE WAY THAT I WROTE IT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE STAFF TO BE DIRECTED TO DO THE WORK AND PRESENT THE ACTUAL COST FROM YEAR ONE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE YEAR 20.

SO THAT US AS ELECTED LEADERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC CAN HAVE A FULL PICTURE AND A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL COST OF RUNNING A CITY-OWNED FIRE STATION WOULD BE. BECAUSE WE DO BEAR AS TAXPAYERS WE DO BEAR THE BURDEN OF IT OVER A LONG TERM.

IT IS A MASSIVE PROJECT AND SO FAR PUBLIC INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED ABOUT WHAT THE FULL COST WOULD BE.

AND SO GOOD GOVERNANCE REQUIRES THESE TYPE OF RIGOUROUS CONVERSATIONS AND TRANSPARENCY, AND SO PUTTING THIS OUT THERE WOULD WANT, HELP TO BRIDGE SOME OF THE GAPS AND THE PUBLIC TRUST IN OUR DECISION MAKING. IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW US TO HAVE INFORMED INFORMATION AND. BACK UP OUR POSITION AND OUR.

WHY WE WOULD MAKE SUCH A LARGE INVESTMENT THEY APPRECIATE STAFF'S WORK SO FAR IN PRESENTING THE POTENTIAL REVENUE PROJECTIONS. THAT IS ONE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT WAS ALSO ASKED FOR, FOR THAT ITEM ASKING THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO PRODUCE THIS RECORD. IT IS A GREAT STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND MAKING SURE THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BEAR THE BURDEN OF IT FULLY UNDERSTAND WHY THE TAXES ARE GOING TO GO UP, AND HOW MUCH AND HOW MUCH THAT OUTLOOK REALLY LOOKS LIKE.

SO THAT IS WHAT THAT IS. >> SO PER THE COUNCILOR PROTOCOL AS WE DISCUSSED WITH THE MOTION FIRST WE HAVE THE QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS AND THEN WE HAVE TO HAVE THE MOTION AND KIND OF ACCEPTED A SECOND MOTION AND WE CAN DISCUSS THE ITEM.

>> OKAY ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.

>> MY ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE I DO NOT DISAGREE BUT HOW IT WOULD STAFF GET THE INFORMATION IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DIRECT THEM TO HIRE THE CONSULTANTS THAT ARE REQUIRED.

>> STATE THE QUESTION AGAIN? >> IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY YOU WANT STAFF TO BRING BACK WHAT IT WOULD COST TO OPERATE THE FIRE

DEPARTMENT? >> YES.

>> ALL THE COUNCIL HAS DONE SO FAR IS ASK STAFF TO BRING BACK FIRE APPARATUS CONSULTANT SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT EQUIPMENT WE WOULD NEED. SO HOW WOULD STAFF BE ABLE TO GET ALL OF THIS INFORMATION? WITHOUT HAVING THE CONSULTANTS AND THE EXPERTS TO TELL US WHAT WE NEED TO DO.

>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WHAT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DIRECTED TO DO IS TO HAVE A CONSULTANT AND TO LOOK AT ACQUIRING THE LAND OF COURSE SO THAT PART OF THAT WOULD BE EVEN IF WE ARE GOING TO HIRE THEM WE WOULD STILL NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THAT COST GOING TO BE WHERE IT IS GOING TO COME FROM.

IT WOULD ALL BE COMPREHENSIVE FROM HIRING THE CONSULTANTS TO BUILDING OUT THE FORECAST TO DOING ALL OF THE PIECES SO THAT THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHAT IS THE FULL COST OF HAVING A CITY-OWNED FIRE STATION. EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF.

BECAUSE THIS IS AN ECONOMICALLY BULIMIC PROJECT THIS IS WHAT IT IS WHICH IS FAIR AND OTHER MUNICIPALITY IS TO BE FAIR HAVE ALSO DONE THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO INVEST IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND BECAUSE IT IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRESENT ANALYSIS AND NUMBERS ABOUT WHAT WE ARE ESTIMATING WHAT THEY COST OF IT IS GOING TO BE. SO NOT SAY RINK KNOW TO HIRING CONSULTANTS WILL SAY WHAT THAT IS GOING TO COME FROM AND LAY IT ALL OUT JUST WITH ANY OTHER MAJOR INVESTMENT THAT WE ARE

ASKING THE CITY TO TAKE ON. >> SO DOESN'T DIRECT STAFF TO DO ANYTHING BUT SHOULD WE FIRST DIRECT STAFF TO BRING THIS BACK? WHAT CONSULTANTS WE NEED TO ALLOW THEM TO GET THE INFORMATION. ALL WE HAVE DONE AS A COUNCILOR IS ASK THEM TO BRING BACK THE FIRE APPARATUS CONSULTANT

OPERATION. >> WOULD THAT BE A BETTER WAY.

TO BRING BACK THE WHAT IT COSTS TO HIRE THE CONSULTANTS TO TELL US AND THEN THEY CAN WORK WITH THE CONSULTANTS DETERMINE WHAT THEY COST WOULD BE WHEN WE HAVE THE REAL NUMBERS.

IF WE DETERMINE HOW WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD OR NOT.

>> THAT WOULD BE FAIR. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I AGREE. A GOOD POINT.

WE CAN DISCUSS WE WOULD HAVE THE MOTION.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. >> CAN I MAKE THE MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO DO THE BUDGET THE LONG-TERM

[00:45:06]

FINANCIAL OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF A CITY-OWNED

FIRE DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND.

>> SECOND. I WANT TO DISCUSS THAT.

SO WE WILL DIRECT STAFF TO BRING THAT BACK BUT WE CANNOT GET THAT WITHOUT THE CONSULTANT. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> THAT IS WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE FIRST DIRECT STAFF TO BRING US BACK INFORMATION A CONSULTANT THAT WE NEED TO HIRE TO GET THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE WE JUST DIRECT THEM TO DO A BUDGET. WE HAVE NOT GIVEN THEM THE RESOURCES TO GET THE BUDGET. UNLESS WELL.

>> I WOULD RATHER HAVE THE CONSULTANT WHO IF THEY CAN GIVE US A NUMBER ON WHAT THE CONSULTANT COSTS AND I THINK THAT IS A GOOD START BUT THEN AFTER THAT WE WOULD DO REAL NUMBERS I THINK. AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT WHEN YOU SAY THAT DIRECT STAFF TO BRING BACK WITH THE COST OF THE CONSULTANT WOULD BE? AND START THERE.

>> AS A FIRST STEP. >> SO WE CAN GET TO WHERE YOU

WANT TO GO. >> I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE AN OBJECTION. I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE ANY OBJECTION TO SINGING FIRST WE ARE GOING TO DIRECT AUTHORIZE THE LANGUAGE TO GET THAT CONSULTANT SO WE ARE WORKING WITH NUMBERS SO THIS IS WHERE WE ARE AT WITH COMMUNICATING AND

ASSOCIATING. >> DIRECT STAFF TO LET US KNOW HOW MUCH THAT CONSULTANT WOULD COST SO WE CAN GET THE NUMBERS.

>> SO WOULD THAT BE WHAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT PROCESS FOR THAT?

IS THAT RIGHT? >> AGAIN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC OPERATIONS. YES, WE WOULD NEED TO GO THROUGH PROPER PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES WHICH WOULD INCLUDE AN RFP AND

THE SITUATION. >> COULD OR WELL.

>> IT WOULD INCLUDE THIS IN THE CONSULTATION.

>> THE EDC TALKED ABOUT SOME CONSULTANT ONE HIMSELF OR HERSELF HAD BEEN A FIRE CHIEF. AND A POLICE CHIEF AND A CITY

MANAGER FOR 30 YEARS. >> BUT THERE WAS A LIST THEY DID NOT TAKE ACTION ON IT AT THIS POINT.

>> SEVEN OF THE PRINCIPLES HAD OVER 200 YEARS.

FIRE DEPARTMENTS POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY MANAGERS.

>> SAYING WE ALREADY HAVE A GOOD CANDIDATE WE COULD POTENTIALLY

TAP ON. >> THE ONE THING WE COULD DO IS ASK EDC TO ASK SOME PEOPLE FROM THE PUBLIC HATE THE LANGUAGE IN THIS TO DIRECT THE EDC TO PRIORITIZE A CONSULTANT FOR THIS. WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO APPROVE WHATEVER. IF WE DIRECT THEM TO HIRE A CONSULTANT THEY WOULD THEN HIRE THEM.

WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO APPROVE THE BUDGET ITEM FOR THAT.

SO THAT IS ONE OF THE MISCONCEPTIONS WE ARE NEVER TAKEN OUT OF THE PROCESS. ALL WE ARE IS IF YOU GUYS KNOW LIKE WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT UPSTAIRS IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC PEOPLE THAT YOU WANT STAFF CAN GO DO AN RFP THAT WILL TAKE NINE

E-100 DAYS. >> SO THERE IS A METHOD TO WHERE WE COULD TAKE A MORE TARGETED APPROACH WITH THE WITH THIS CONSULTANT IF COUNCIL WAS TO AUTHORIZE THIS TO NOT EXCEED $50,000 THAT DOES ALLOW STAFF TO NOT GO THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS.

>> NORMALLY. >> YES.

>> OTHER THAN THAT WE ARE TALKING 3-4 MONTHS.

THIS COULD TAKE YOU GUYS A MONTH TO COME OUT WITH THE RFP IF YOU DROPPED EVERYTHING. SO WE ARE PROBABLY THREE MONTHS

BEFORE WE CHOOSE SOMEBODY. >> THROUGH THE CITY.

>> YES THROUGH THE CITY. IT NORMALLY TAKES ABOUT 60, 75,

90 DAYS. >> AND I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF FIREFIGHTING FRIENDS APPARENTLY SO TO ME IF THE EDC WENT AND SAID WE KNOW SOME PEOPLE WE COULD THEY COULD TAKE ON.

>> THIS IS ALREADY ON THE EDC RADAR.

>> GEORGE HIGH GENERAL COUNCIL FOR THE CORPORATION WITHOUT GETTING INTO BED BECAUSE IT WOULD BE WITH A COMMUNICATION

[00:50:05]

THERE ARE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS WITH REGARD TO THE SELECTION OF YOUR CONSULTANTS THAT MAY BE AND THEY MAY THEY MAY EFFECT THINGS DOWN THE ROAD. AND SO THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER ISSUE TO BE CONSIDERED. OR IF THE CONSULTANTS HAVE TWO SUPPORT THE QUALITY OF YOUR ULTIMATE FIRE DEPARTMENT THAN THEY WOULD BE POTENTIAL WITNESSES AND IF ARBITRATION OF THAT WAS A CONTEST, SO THEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT SELECTION OF EXPERT WITNESSES, WHICH WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD WANT LEGAL COUNCIL TO BE INVOLVED INTO A SYSTEM AS A WITNESS AS AN EXPERT, SO TO SPEAK, FOR PURPOSES OF THEIR EVALUATION AND THEN ARBITRATION. APPEALED TO A DISTRICT COURT.

>> OR YOU SAYING THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE EDC THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE TASKING THEM WITH? AND IT SHOULD STAY WITH THE

CITY? >> I AM SUGGESTING THAT THERE MAY BE A CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNCIL THAT MAY BE REPRESENTING YOU AND IN ANY DISPUTE WITH THE FIRE EST.

BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT NEED TO BE VETTED AS A POTENTIAL EXPERT WITNESS FOR PURPOSES OF TRIAL TESTIMONY OR ARBITRATION TESTIMONY IN THE EVENT THAT THERE WAS THAT YOUR FIRE STATION ONCE IT IS CREATED IS CONSIDERED INADEQUATE.

>> HOW DO YOU GO ABOUT GETTING THAT APPROVED.

THAT LIST OF. >> I THINK THAT IS WHAT HE IS SAYING SO IF YOU GO TO CHAPTER 775 DOT ZERO-POINT TO

TWO. >> SO BASICALLY YOU SUBMIT AND SAY THAT WE HAVE A FIRE STATION AND WE BELIEVE IT MEETS OR EXCEEDS SO WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE OVER THE SERVICE AREA.

THEY THAN LOOK AT THAT AND THEY WOULD SAY YES OR NO.

I THINK WHAT GEORGE IS SAYING IS HYPOTHETICALLY THEY SAY IT KNOW, THEN WE THEN HAVE TO SAY OKAY, NOW WE HAVE TO GO TO ARBITRATION. THAT IS ANOTHER MESS.

I PICK SEVEN PEOPLE OFF OF A STATE LIST.

NOT PEOPLE OFF UNTIL THERE IS ONE LEFT.

AND THEN GO OKAY LOOK WE BELIEVE WE MEET OR EXCEED.

THEY ARE GOING TO SAY THAT WE DO NOT AND I THINK WHAT YOU WERE SAYING IS IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT CONSULTANTS AND THEY SIT DOWN LIKE LOOK I HAVE 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE I WAS A FIRE CHIEF I WAS THE SITE WAS THAT IF WE PICK THE WRONG PEOPLE WE JUST PICK SOME GUY OUT OF COLLEGE THAT DOES THIS, IT MAY NOT CARRY THE SAME WEIGHT AS CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE DONE THE JOB.

LEGAL COUNCIL THAT WOULD BE AT LEAST INVOLVED.

>> THE ULTIMATE DECIDER AS TO WHO WOULD BE THE EXPERT ULTIMATELY TAKING THE STAND IN DEFENSE ABOUT YOUR FIRE STATION

QUALITY. >> SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT ART LEGAL AND YOUR LEGAL IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A SAY AND SELE

SELECTING. >> SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT

THAT BE THE PROCESS. >> IS THERE ANYTHING WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING OR THINK ABOUT WITH WHAT SHE IS PROPOSING.

>> I THINK SHE WAS GOING TO ANSWER.

>> I DO NOT DISAGREE, IS IT PICK IT UP NOW? I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH WHAT HE IS SAYING.

OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A LOT TO CONSIDER.

I THINK IN CHOOSING A CONSULTANT FOR THIS PURPOSE YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT SOMEBODY THAT HAS EXPERIENCE AND THAT WOULD RANK HIGHLY AND DOING. THIS IS ONE ELEMENT.

RAISING AN ISSUE THAT THERE MAY BE TO IT THAT THERE MAY BE MORE THAN JUST LOOKING AT QUALIFICATIONS.

YOU WOULD WANT TO SEE HOW COULD HAVE AN EXPERT WITNESS THEY WOULD BE I GUESS. HOW WELL THEY PRESENT OR WHAT THEIR SPECIFIC EXPERIENCES. BECAUSE SOME HAVE EXPERIENCES THEY HAVE SERVED IN MANY YEARS AND DOING THE JOB BUT THEY MAY NOT HAVE MANY YEARS AND ACTUALLY RUNNING FIRE STATIONS ARE EQUIPPING THEM. IT JUST DEPENDS ON THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. HE ALREADY HAD A LIST OF PEOPLE I THINK THAT YOU HAD BEEN CONSIDERING THAT SOMEBODY HAS PUT TOGETHER I GUESS I DON'T KNOW I HEARD THAT MENTIONED.

I ASSUME THEY ARE ALL PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE MAY BE IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU TALK TO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT LIST WAS

DEVELOPED FROM. >> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION AS WELL FIGURING OUT HOW THAT LIST WAS COMPILED AND WHAT IS ON IT AND WHAT IS GOING THROUGH IT THAT IT'S ON US AS COUNCIL.

WORKING WITH OUR LEGAL COUNCIL AND MAKE SURE WE ARE SELECTING THE RIGHT CONSULTANT. EITHER WAY WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE A CONSULTANT THAT ADVISES ON BUILDING THE FIRE STATION SO WE

CAN GET THE RIGHT COST OF IT. >> I THINK THAT IS WHAT YOU

[00:55:05]

WOULD DO WITH THE PROCESS WOULD REACH OUT INTO THE UNIVERSE AND ASK FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE THAT EXPERTISE, WHATEVER YOU PUT IN THAT LIST OF CRITERIA THAT YOU WILL PUT ON SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR. THIS IS WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE AND CAN YOU FULFILL THOSE IF SO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION BASICALLY.

SO YOU GET THOSE PROPOSALS BACK AND THEN THE CITY PROCESS TO GO

THROUGH. >> I THINK WITH HIM COMING UP HERE AND BEING PRIVY TO WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE EDC.

IT IS CLEARLY STATED IN 0-22 AND 0-2 TO .1.

I WILL BE CLEAR, THE ODDS OF THIS GOING TO ARBITRATION IS VERY HI, NOT ONLY DO WE NEED CONSULTANTS THAT ARE.

>> AND REALLY COUNTING ON THE TOPIC OF JUST HOW WE ARE GOING TO DO THIS YEAR, AND I APPRECIATE MR. HEIDE BRINGING UP THIS ISSUE TO TALK ABOUT IT I DON'T KNOW IF WE REALLY WANT TO GET INTO A DEEP DISCUSSION OF YOU KNOW OF THE ISSUES OF POTENTIAL ARBITRATION OR ANYTHING.

BECAUSE NOT THERE YET. TRYING TO GET THE HARD TOPIC ON

THE AGENDA. >> I GUESS THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE THIS ON OR DO WE WANT THE EDC TO TAKE

THIS ON? >> YOUR MOTION WAS FOR THEM TO

GO. >> ACTUALLY COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD, MAYOR PRO TEM PORTERFIELD, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.

>> IT WAS TO DIRECT STAFF TO TAKE IT ON, BUT HONESTLY I AM MORE INCLINED FOR THE EDC. SO WE DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS OF ANYTHING DIRECTING THEM TO MOVE FASTER.

>> THAT IS FAIR. >> SO CHANGE THE ORIGINAL MO MOTION. IF YOU GUYS WANT TO RESCIND OR

RESTATE. >> SO JUST ADDING IN THAT

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT STARTING TO CHANGE. WE GO TO THE EDC SO IF YOU GUYS WANT TO GO THROUGH THERE I THINK YOU NEED TO RESCIND YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION AND THEN RESTATE IT.

>> OR WE CAN VOTE ON THIS. >> ELEVEN-POINT TO.

>> TO APPROVE OR DIRECT STAFF TO PRODUCE A LONG-TERM FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT.

AND THEY FIRE AMENDMENT WAS TO INCLUDE EDC TO DIRECT THE EDC TO COLLECT -- SELECT THE CONSULTANT THAT IS THE FIRST STEP OF THE

PROJECT. >> THE AMENDMENT WAS TO DIRECT

STAFF. >> COST FOR THE CONSULTANT.

>> MAKE THE MOTION. >> I CANNOT RESEND IT.

>> SO HAVE TO RESTATE. SO DISCUSS POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE LONG TERM DIRECTING THE EDC TO SELECT AND PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COUNSEL, AND SELECT A CONSULTANT TO GET US COPING ON PRODUCING LONG-TERM FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS -- OPERATIONS OF THE CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT.

>> WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS JUST SELECT THE CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION NEEDED TO UNDERSTAND THE OPERATIONAL AND

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS. >> CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT OR

DID YOU CATCH ALL OF THAT? >> COULD YOU PLEASE REPEAT THAT?

>> THE MOTION BE THAT THE EDC SELECT A CONSULTANT.

DIRECT THE EDC TO SELECT A CONSULTANT THAT CAN PROVIDE THE LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL COSTS OF THE

CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT. >> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PORTERFIELD ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT.

PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. >> MAYOR SNYDER...

>> THE MOTION PASSED 2-0. SINCE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUES OF LONG-TERM FINANCIAL UP -- OPERATIONS, AND DID PUT TOGETHER A FEW SLIDES TO BE DEALT WITH LONG-TERM FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL AND SO THE FIRST ONE IS ACTUALLY TEN YEARS AGO

[01:00:04]

THE CITY PUT OUT. >> WE INFORM THE PUBLIC OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE ESD SALES TAX.

HOW DOES THIS IMPACT THE CITY OF HUTTO? IF THE ESD SALES TAX IS PASSED AT THE CITY WILL NOT COLLECT SALES TAX AS IT GOES. THE SALES TAX WILL BE COLLECTED BY THE ESD IN PERPETUITY. SALES TAX REVENUE MAKES UP 20% OF THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND REVENUES.

SALES TAX REVENUE USED TO SUPPORT GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES SUCH AS POLICE PROTECTION, ROADS AND DRAINAGE, ADMINISTRATION, PLANNING, AND PARKS AND RECREATION.

THE CITY OF HUTTO IS APPROXIMATELY EIGHT SQUARE MILES IN SIZE TODAY HOWEVER THIS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO GROW OVER 50 SQUARE MILES IN THE COMING YEARS.

THIS REPRESENTS THE AMOUNT OF LAND CURRENTLY IN THE CITY LIMITS COMPARED TO THE CITY'S GROWTH AREA AND INTENDED USE.

ONLY 9.7 2% OF THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY IN THE CITY LIMITS.

THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY'S COMMERCIAL GROWTH AREA IS STILL OUTSIDE THE CITIES LIMITS. COMMERCIAL USE PROPERTY IS WHERE DALE'S TAXES MOST COMMONLY SELECTED.

MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED-USE RETAIL MAY ALSO GENERATE SALES TAX AS IT IS INTENDED TO BE A BLEND OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES. THE CITY OF HUTTO CURRENTLY HAS 145 DEVELOPED ACRES. THAT LAND GENERATES APPROXIMATELY $30,000 IN ANNUAL SALES TAX PER ACRE OF DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY.

OF THE 3200 ACRES PLANNED FOR COMMERCIAL USE 3222 ACRES ARE OUTSIDE THE CURRENT HUTTO LIMITS.

THE SALES TAX WOULD APPLY IF THE ELECTION IS PAST BY VOTERS.

2200 -- THESE ACRES COULD GENERATE APPROXIMATELY $86 MILLION ANNUALLY IN SALES TAX BASED ON TODAY'S A SALES TAX COLLECTION. HOW DOES THE SALES TAX ELECTION IMPACT ECONOMIC OF A LIMITED? THIS IS USED AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOUR OF THE COMMUNITY.

1% IS USED TO CREATE JOBS NONPROFIT SUBSIDIARY.

THE CITY ALSO USES SALES TAX IS AN ECONOMIC TOOL TO ATTRACT RETAIL BUSINESSES THROUGH SALES TAX REBATE AGREEMENTS.

THE CITY HAS AGREEMENTS LIKE THIS IN PLACE LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BOULEVARD AND U.S. HIGHWAY 79.

DEVELOPMENT LOCATED IN STAR RANCH COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

UNDER CONSTRUCTION. CITY OF HUTTO RESIDENTS VOTE IN THE ELECTION. NO.

RESIDENTS RESIDING IN THE CITY ELECTION ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO VOTE IN THE ELECTION AS THE FULL 2% LOCAL SALES TAX ALREADY COLLECTED IN THE CITY LIMITS. THE SALES AND USE TAX WILL ONLY APPLY TO AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENT CITY LIMITS AND INSIDE THE ESD BOUNDARY. ONLY RESIDENTS OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS MAY VOTE. WHAT ARE THE OTHER OPTIONS TO FUND FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES? THE CITY OF HUTTO IS ACTIVELY STUDYING THE PROS AND CONS OF GRATING ITS OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT TO MEET THE LONG-TERM FIRE PROTECTION NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. FOR MORE INFORMATION AND ANSWERS TO FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS VISIT HUTTO.GOV.

>> I DID NOT LIVE HERE THAN AND I WAS ON THE COUNCIL BUT IT IS INTERESTING I HEARD FROM A CONSTITUENT THAT SAID THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE FOR TEN YEARS AND THIS IS A BIG THING.

THE SELECTION ONLY 143 PEOPLE VOTED FOR THE OPPOSITION AND 95 VOTED AGAINST. SO 250 PEOPLE NOW STARTED COPING WITH. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE THIS IS A REAL WORLD EXAMPLE, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF A CITY-OWNED FIRE DEPARTMENT. THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT HOW WELL THE CITY MANAGES MONEY. AND I'M NOT PUTTING THIS TOGETHER TO KNOCK OTHER AGENCIES BUT IT IS MORE OF A BEAT ON A CHEST AND PROP TO CITY STAFF. OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS I THINK WE HAVE DONE AN EXCEPTIONAL JOB.

SO IT FLAT LINES AT 10%. AND COMING OUT OF COVID-19, EVERYBODY HAD A MASSIVE, WE HAD BACKUP, THIS IS PEOPLE WHO STARTED HERE IN 2019. NOT SOMEBODY WHO JUST MOVED HERE IN 24-25. MASSIVE INCREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES THAT GOT CAPPED AND OBVIOUSLY IT LOOKS LIKE AND 26 WE NOW COME DOWN THROUGH THAT SEALING.

BUT YOU START IN 2020 YOU SEE EVERYBODY'S PROPERTY TAX PERCENTAGE AND THIS IS BILLS NOT TAX RATES THIS IS ACTUALLY DOLLAR AMOUNTS SO YOU GO THROUGH THIS AND YOU SEE THIS REGULARLY THIS CITY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT IS NEGATIVE.

[01:05:02]

AND THE ONE TIME THAT WE HAVE BEEN UP THESE ARE UP ONLY BECAUSE OF THE TEN% INCREASES BUT EVEN WITH THOSE 10% INCREASES OVER ALL CITY TAXES HAVE DROPPED 6% OF THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. THE IST HAS DROPPED FIVE-POINT.

THEY ALSO HAD HELP FROM CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS.

THE ESD IS A 53.9 PERCENT, COUNTIES HAVE 23.9% AND COUNTY ROADS UP 71.9%. FOR ME LONG-TERM IMPLICATION OF THE CITY IS THAT THE ESD THOSE ARE NOT ELECTED MEMBERS.

SURPASSING BUDGETS AND YOU WILL SEE IN A MINUTE HOW BIG THE BUDGETS WE ARE ARE GETTING. EXTREMELY LARGE ALMOST 60% OF WHAT THE CITY'S BUDGET IS AND THEY ARE BEING PUT ON BOARD BY PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY WHO ALSO MAY HAVE A WAY TO CONTROL THEIR SPENDING BECAUSE THE COUNTY IS UP 29%.

SO WE KEEP GOING THIS ROUTE. THE ESD AT SOME POINT MAY HAVE A HIGHER BILL AS THE CITY. SO IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE THIS IS A PICTURE OF WHAT THE CITY LIMITS IN YELLOW WAS OF HUTTO BACK IN 2016 THAT EIGHT SQUARE MILES, THE BLUE AND THE ORANGE. IS ALL THAT THE CITY CAN GROW INTO AND THE RED. AND SO THE RED IS THE HUTTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, THE BLUE IS THE ET JAY.

SO IN TEN YEARS, TEN YEARS AGO I MEAN IT WAS NOT MUCH IT WAS NOT 15,000,017 I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE BUT THIS IS

AN ACREAGE. >> EVERY YEAR YOU WILL SEE STATE LAW CHANGES THINGS DRAMATICALLY BUT WE STARTED WITH 5200, 65 ACRES. WAS OUR CITY LIMITS.

JUST IN TEN YEARS OUR CITY HAS GONE FROM 5265 ACRES UP TO 9600.

82% INCREASE. ALL THAT EXTRA ALL OF THAT CANNOT COLLECT SALES TAX BY THE CITY.

ALL OF THE CITY AND YOU GUYS ARE AWARE AND COUNCILMEMBER REYNOLDS COUNCILMEMBER REYNOLDS AND COUNCILMEMBER ZEPEDA MAY NOT KNOW THIS, BUT WHEN WE FIRST TOLD EST WE ARE NOT REMITTING A SALES TAX, THEIR BILL WAS AROUND $400,000.

THAT WAS FEBRUARY 25 FOR APRIL OF 26 IT WAS OVER 1.4 MILLION, ONE A LITTLE AREA AND THAT WAS OUR 60% SPLIT LIKE THE 100% THAT ONE INDUSTRIAL PLACE HAS GENERATED OVER A MILLION DOLLARS. AND WE ARE TALKING 4300 ACRES OF LAND THAT NOW COME INTO THE CITY.

THAT WE PROVIDE SERVICE. WE PROVIDE ROAD WITNESS.

ANY OF THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IN THAT AREA'S PROPERTY TAXES, AND SO I HAVE IT BROKEN DOWN AND THIS IS I LITERALLY WENT THROUGH I WENT THROUGH EVERY ANNEXATION ON OUR WEBSITE, AND I ALSO LOOKED AT WHAT WAS BEING ANNEXED.

THE OTHER THING THAT POPPED UP THAT I DID NOT REALIZE WAS IN OUR AGREEMENT THAT IS ACTUALLY VERY IMPORTANT, WE ONLY IN OUR AGREEMENT WE ONLY SHARE SALES TAX ON LAND THAT IS OVER 5 ACRES. SO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 1660, THAT COMMERCIAL AREA WILL NEVER GET SALES TAX.

BECAUSE OUR AGREEMENT DID NOT EVEN COVER THAT.

MOST OF THE RETAIL IS TWO AND 3-ACRE DEALS.

THE MEXICAN GROCERY STORES HAVE BEEN OUT HERE.

SO SAYING ALL THESE LITTLE THINGS ARE UNDER 5 ACRES, WE WILL NEVER GET SALES TAX OFF OF, SO THEN THAT MAKES THE CITY HAVE TO START TELLING PEOPLE WE DO NOT WANT TO ANNEX YOU AT 4.9 ACRES WE NEED YOU TO PICK UP AN EXTRA .11 ACRE.

BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT ARBITRARILY SAYS THAT WE WILL NOT MAKE ANYTHING. SO WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO INCENTIVIZE A 4-ACRE DEVELOPMENT WHICH WE ALMOST.

WE ALMOST DID WITH THE PROJECT AS SLOW, WE WOULD HAVE INCENTIVIZED WE COULD HAVE INCENTIVIZED A DEAL UNDER 5 ACRES, AND WE WOULD BE PAYING MONEY OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND AND NEVER GETTING ANYTHING BACK IN.

SO THAT WAS INTERESTING. AND THEN IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PROBABLY GOT A COUPLE MORE.

SO THIS IS WHERE I THINK THE BIG IMPLICATION TO THE CITY IS.

THIS IS THE TAX PROPOSAL AND THERE IS 150 STATE LEGISLATORS.

I BELIEVE 80 HAVE ALREADY SIGNED ON OVER THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR.

HE HAS A FIVE-STEP PLAN. THE FIRST ONE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT. AND I WILL GO ON RECORD TO SAY I LOVE HIS PLAN. DAVID AND JAMES BOTH KNOW I LOVE IT BUT WHEN YOU ARE DELIGHTED YOU HAVE TO HAVE SALES TAX.

IF YOU DO NOT HAVE SALES TAX THE CITY WILL ONLY RELY ON PROPERTY TAX. THE FIRST ONE IS THE SPENDING

[01:10:03]

CAP. THEY WANT TO LIMIT OUR GROWTH AND OUR SPENDING REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING BASED ON POPULATION GROWTH PLUS INFLATION OR 3.5 PERCENTAGE WHATEVER IS LOWER.

WE JUST ENCOUNTERED AN AREA WHERE THEY SET OUT THE LATEST HOUSING NUMBERS. WHERE AT THE LOWEST SINCE I THINK IT WAS LIKE 2015 FOR HOUSING.

WE ARE ON PACE TO DO 500 NEW HOMES.

THAT IS DOWN FROM 2200 A FEW YEARS AGO.

SO IF WE HAVE THAT HAPPENED WITH SAY NEGATIVE INFLATION WE POTENTIALLY WOULD HAVE TO SOMEHOW TAKE MONEY A WAY FROM EMPLOYEES OR CUT SERVICES. EVEN 3.5%.

THAT LEAVES NOTHING FOR GASOLINE ANYTHING ELSE.

SO OUR SPENDING CAPS ON OUR PROPERTY TAXES WILL BE VERY, VERY LIMITED IF THIS PASSES. NUMBER 2 WE DID NOT HAVE AN ISSUE WITH HERE I DO NOT THINK WE ARE GOING TO HAVE BECAUSE IT REQUIRES A TWO-THIRDS VOTE FOR ANY TAX HEIGHT SPIRIT -- TAX HIKES. I DON'T THINK THE GOVERNOR UNDERSTANDS A TAX HIKE IS THAT THE TAX RATE HE DID NOT SAY HE JUST SAID TAX HEIGHT -- HIKE.

IF IT IS A TAX BILL THAT IS ONE BIG PROBLEM IF YOU GO A PENNY OVER YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO-THIRDS OF THE PEOPLE VOTING AND I KNOW HALF THE PEOPLE REALLY DO NOT LIKE TAXES AT ALL.

ROLLBACK ELECTIONS NUMBER 3. UP TO 15%.

VOTERS SIGN A PETITION I DON'T THINK THAT EVER COMES.

THAT IS ANOTHER BIG ONE, LOVE IT, BUT RIGHT NOW YOUR HOUSE CAN GO UP TEN% A YEAR. GOING FORWARD HE IS PROPOSING NO MORE THAN THREE% AND INCREASES EVERY FIVE YEARS.

SO WE GET A LOT OF MONEY BASED ON INCREASES AND THIS IS COMMERCIAL AND WE GET A LOT OF MONEY FROM COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

WE WOULD NOT GET THAT ANYMORE FOR FIVE YEARS SO RUN AND GUN BASICALLY A SHOESTRING BUDGET. WAITING FOR THE NEXT APPRAISAL INCREASE BECAUSE WE CANNOT RAISE A SPENDING VERY MUCH AND WE CAN'T RAISE TAXES WITHOUT 60 6% OF THE PEOPLE VOTING IN NOVEMBER SO YOU WOULD BE ASKING STAFF TO WRITE A BUDGET.

AND IF THEY VOTE NO AND THEN FIVE IS ELIMINATE TAXES BUT THROUGH ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ON HERE AGAIN, TO ME WE ARE TALKING LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF A CITY RUN A FIRE DEPARTMENT.

TO ME WE HAVE TO TAKE EVERYTHING INTO ACCOUNT.

NOW THIS IS INTERESTING THIS IS SALES TAX.

I TOOK ACTUAL BUDGETED NUMBERS THAT WERE AUDITED UP UNTIL THIS YEAR AND I PUT WHAT WE HAD BUDGETED.

AND MOST OF OUR CITY AREA IS COMPLETELY BOOKED OUT SO JUST HAD THEM AT FOUR% A YEAR A LITTLE BIT ABOVE INFLATION.

IN MY MIND UNLESS SOMEBODY TEARS SOMETHING DOWN AND BUILDS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING, THE CITY HAS FILLED OUT FROM 2016.

THE ORANGE, THAT IS ANNEXED PROPERTY.

IT STARTS WITH, WE HEARD ABOUT TODAY, IT STARTS WITH STAFF'S PROJECTION OF THE FIRST YEAR OF WHAT WE KNOW BETWEEN THE LONGHORNS AND SOME OF THOSE PLACES GENERATING SALES TAX.

THIS IS NOT A SPLIT THIS IS 100% 15% GROWTH RATE BASED ON THE PREVIOUS TIME WE WERE OVER 50%. AND TALKING ABOUT IT BEFORE YOU CAN SEE IT FLAT LANDING ON THE CITY SALE TAXES.

>> YOU CAN SEE AS YEARS GO ON AND 2036 THE ANNEXED PROPERTY IS ALMOST $5 MILLION. WE CAN ARGUE 15% SHOULD BE THE NUMBER IT SHOULD BE HIGHER IT SHOULD BE LOWER.

BUT WHAT YOU SEE IS HUTTO CITY LIMITS 2016 SALES TAX FLATLINE WILL ONLY GROW WITH INFLATION. THE ANNEXED AREA OF TOWN WHICH IS OVER TWO-THIRDS OF THE AREA, THAT IS WHERE THE SALES TAX GROWTH THIS AND RIGHT NOW WE RECEIVED NOTHING.

PRINTING AND AGREEMENT. GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THIS IS OUR SALES TAX REVENUE.

THIS IS REALLY INTERESTING TO ME.

IF YOU TAKE PRIMARY SOURCES PROPERTY SALES TAX DEVELOPMENT FEES MOST OF OUR DEVELOPMENT REVENUE IS PASSED THROUGH.

WE HIRE CONSULTANTS THAT VIEW SITE PLANS.

SO THE BULK OF OUR MONEY AND PROPERTY TAXES SO 24-25, WE TOOK IN JUST OVER $26 MILLION, AND WROTE A BUDGET ON THAT.

[01:15:02]

THE EST TOOK IN 16 MILLION, AND ON THEIR THERE ONE DEPARTMENT THEY ARE RUNNING 62 AND A HALF PERCENT OF WHAT THE CITY IS.

WE HAVE COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT, A LIBRARY, POLICE, ROADS, PUBLIC WORKS. WE HAVE ALL OF THAT AND THEY ARE RUNNING ONE DEPARTMENT 62 AND A HALF PERCENT.

AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FINANCES I MEAN I CAN BE CORRECTED BUT A 20% RESERVE AND THEY HAVE A 90% RESERVE.

AND SO THERE IS MONEY OUT THERE. THIS IDEA FOR ME IS NOT TO STARVE THE ESD, IT IS HONESTLY THE CITY CANNOT GROW WITHOUT SALES TAX. AND GROWING -- GOING FORWARD THAT 11-5 WILL GROW AT THE RATE OF INFLATION UNLESS WE START TEARING DOWN RESIDENTIAL AND START BUILDING COMMERCIAL.

I THINK THERE MIGHT BE ONE MORE SLIDE.

AND THEN WE WERE LISTED AS TOP 15 FASTEST-GROWING IN THE U.S.

>> THEY DON'T ACTUALLY SAY HUTTO IN THE ARTICLE BUT WE ARE THE FASTEST GROWING IN THE REGION AND 13TH FASTEST-GROWING CAN 2026 SO WE CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO THE TOP FASTEST GROWING CITIES IN THE NATION. SO RUNNING A VERY LEAN BUDGET.

PEOPLE CAN ARGUE AND SAY WE ARE DOING A TERRIBLE JOB WITH THAT AND ALL OF THESE THINGS. BUT WE HAVE ONE OF THE SAFEST CITIES WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC SAFETY WE HAVE THE HIGHEST PAID POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN OUR METRO AREA, WE ARE DOING ALL OF THIS RUNNING OUR TAXES ESSENTIALLY OVER SEVEN YEARS SIX% DOWN.

AND THE MAYOR PRO TEM ACTUALLY AND I WAS THAT IF YOU GUYS RAISE TAXES THIS WILL BE AN ISSUE. THE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TAXES RAISE, THEY WANT US TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROVIDE THEM BETTER SERVICES, LOWER COST TO SURFACE, AND NOT RAISING NEW TAXES.

THE THINK WE USED ALL WE SAY IS DIVERSIFY YOUR TAX BASE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SALES TAX AND GROW THE SALES TAX AND DEPEND ON OTHER PEOPLE. TO ME THIS IS A LOT OF LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS THAT HAS REALLY BEEN GUIDING MY DECISION.

WHEN YOU HAVE THIS OVER 20, 30 YEARS, IT GET SO BIG.

TALK YOU GET 86 BILLION-DOLLAR DIFFERENCE.

EVERY INVESTMENT STARTS OFF WITH A LOSS FOR THE FIRST FEW YEARS.

EVERY INVESTMENT NOBODY BUYS A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT AND BUYS MONEY ON IT DAY ONE. BUT WHEN YOU WORK ON IT YOU LOOK AT THE LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CITY.

I LOOK AT THAT AND I GO I DID NOT KNOW HOW WE CAN RUN THE CITY WITHOUT PROPERTY TAXES BEING THE MAIN SOURCE OF INCOME AND NOT TAXING PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR HOMES AND TO ME IF WE DO NOT DO THIS IT IS NOT A MATTER OF CAN WE AFFORD IT, IT IS A MATTER OF CAN WE AFFORD NOT TO IN MY MIND AND WE MIGHT AS WELL SHUT THE CITY DOWN AND RUN A POLICE DEPARTMENT UNTIL WE CANNOT RUN PARKS, THE LIBRARY, BUILDING A NEW LIBRARY, BECAUSE IN ORDER TO DO THAT ALL WE HAVE HIS PROPERTY TAXES. YOU CAN'T GROW PROPERTY TAXES MORE THAN THREE AND A HALF PERCENT PER YEAR.

>> WE'RE KNOWING WHAT IS YOUR NEWS WHAT THIS WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO PUT DATA THAT I HOPE PEOPLE CHECK THAT I HOPE THEY FACT-CHECK. MAKE SURE I'M NOT LYING AND DON'T HAVE A CONSULTED IN MY DEPARTMENT OR SOMETHING MAKING THE COMPANIES, REALLY FOR ME IT IS THE LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS TO THE CITY THEY KNEW IT TEN YEARS AGO, AND NOW WE ARE AT A POINT TO WHERE WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CITY FUTURE IS GOING TO BE. THAT WAS IT ON THE SLIDES,

RIGHT? >> AND I THINK THEY WILL SHARE IT WITH EVERYBODY BUT FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS ON ANY DISCUSSION FOR

11-POINT TO. >> POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE

[11.3. Discussion and possible action regarding the May 2026 agreement between the City of Hutto and the Williamson County Emergency Services District #3 - terms for sales tax sharing and termination timelines. (Councilmember Morris) (Part 1 of 2)]

MAY 2026 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUTTO IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT NUMBER 3 TERMS FOR SALES TAX SHARING AND TERMINATION TIMELINES.

>> THANK YOU. IN LIEU OF THE CONFIDENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMUNICATION MEMO DELIVERED YESTERDAY, THE

[01:20:01]

FURTHEST THAT EITHER TO AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSING,.

[12. EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT? HEARING NOTHING AND ANON WE WILL MOVE TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. ITEM 12-1.

RECEIVE ADVICE PURSUANT TO SECTION 50571.

A) RIVER CREEK DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ET AL. V. PRESTON HOLLOW CAPITAL, LLC, ET. AL, PENDING IN THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT; B) CITY OF HUTTO V. PRESTON HOLLOW CAPITAL, LLC, PENDING IN THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT; C) AMENDMENT TO THE INCENTIVE AGREEMENT WITH PARADIGM METALS; AND D) SALES TAX SHARING INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS AND PROPOSED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR FIRE SERVICES WITH THE WILLIAMSON COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES DISTRICT.

15.2. RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 (CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY) AND DELIBERATIONS PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 551.072, (REAL PROPERTY); 551.087 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEGOTIATIONS) RELATED TO PENDING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE HUTTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OR THE CITY OF HUTTO, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: (A) PROJECT CORE; (B) PROJECT FOOTBALL; (C) PROJECT BLUE HUB; (D) PROJECT HEARTBEAT; (E) PROJECT AIR; (F) PROJECT ORCHARD; (G) PROJECT SPROUTS; (H) PROPOSED CITY OF HUTTO FIRE STATION #1; AND (I) PROJECT 107 EAST ST.

>> IT'S 11:30 SIX, WE ARE BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION, NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. NEXT ITEM WE HAVE IS CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE ACTION RELATED TO ITEMS LISTED ABOVE.

>> CAN I RECALL 11-2 OR SHOULD I DO IT UNDER 13.1.

>> LET'S RECALL 11-2 AND ADDED TO 13-1 BECAUSE I DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO THINK WE ARE TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT --