GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, IT IS NINE A.M. 
          [00:00:04]
I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING WITH THE WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OFFICIALLY TO ORDER 
          [1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
FOR DECEMBER 9TH, 2021, I WANTED TO WELCOME COUNCIL. 
          GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. 
          GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE AND STAFF. 
          AND FOR THOSE THAT MAY BE WATCHING IN THE COMMUNITY, WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, JANELLE, COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. 
          MAYOR BROWN? PRESENT, MAYOR PRO TEM COLLINS? PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS? HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHUSTER> HERE. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER QUIROGA? PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI? PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB? HERE AND IN THE CHRISTMAS COLORS. 
          AS SHE IS IN AND WE'LL ALL BE IN CHRISTMAS COLORS FOLLOWING OUR WORKSHOP MEETING THIS MORNING FOR A GROUP PICTURE IN FRONT OF OUR CHRISTMAS TREE HERE AT CITY HALL. 
          SO LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. 
          JUST SOME ITEMS BEFORE WE GO INTO THE DISCUSSION ITEMS TO UPDATE COUNCIL ON. 
          FIRST OF ALL, COUNCIL WE HAVE FOR ITEM 3B, WE HAVE MR. GILBERT GAVRON FROM FEMA THAT WILL BE PRESENTING TO US WITH ITEM 3B MR. GAVRON. GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING. 
          WE WILL BE GETTING TO YOU HERE SHORTLY. 
          WE HAVE ONE ITEM PRIOR TO THAT, BUT GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US AND WE'LL KIND OF GET INTO YOUR PRESENTATION VERY SHORTLY. 
          ALSO, COUNCIL. 
          ITEM 3D, I HATE TO TELL YOU, WE'RE GOING TO DEFER THAT AGAIN. 
          I TALKED WITH TXDOT LAST WEEK. 
          THE MOU HAS BEEN FINISHED BY THE CITY OF GALVESTON. 
          WAS SENT TO TXDOT. 
          THEY SENT IT TO THEIR ATTORNEYS IN AUSTIN TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS EXACTLY THE WAY THEY WANTED IT. 
          TALK TO THEM A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, THEY SAID THEY WOULD HAVE THAT TO US HERE TODAY. 
          I GOT A MESSAGE FROM THEM BEFORE WE WENT ON THIS MORNING THAT THEY'VE MADE A FEW CHANGES. 
          THEY'RE MINOR, BUT THE DOCUMENT IS NOT READY TO GO. 
          I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT WE WILL HAVE THAT ON OUR NEXT MEETING FOR JANUARY, FOR SURE. 
          THAT DOCUMENT WILL BE FINISHED. 
          SO WE'RE JUST ABOUT THERE ON THAT. 
          SO WE'LL BE DEFERRING ITEM 3D. 
          LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3A, PLEASE, JANELLE. 
          [3.A.
Clarification of Consent and Regular City Council Agenda Items - This is an opportunity for City Council to ask questions of Staff on Consent and Regular Agenda Items (20 minutes)]
ITEM 3A CLARIFICATION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. LET'S MOVE AROUND THE TABLE. 
          COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER, ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY THOUGHTS FROM THE? 11G ABOUT 90 DAYS AS A RESULT OF THE EXTENSION FOR THE COMMITTEE. 
          IS THIS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS OFTEN WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT? IT'S NOT JUST THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          WE'VE DONE PD AS WELL. 
          IT'S WHEN OUR OFFICER, FIREFIGHTERS ARE INJURED. 
          THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. 
          BUT IF WE FEEL LIKE THEY CAN GET IT BACK, WE'LL GIVE THEM AN EXTENSION. 
          SURE. SO THIS IS ACTUALLY WE'VE DONE SO IN THE PAST. 
          FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S BEEN MANY YEARS, BUT THIS JUST ALLOWS THE EMPLOYEE TO HAVE AN EXTENDED LEAD BEYOND THE TIME PERIOD IN WHICH THEY WERE ON A INJURED LEAVE. 
          AND SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS EXTEND THAT FOR 90 DAYS IS LIKELY BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE EMPLOYEE. 
          THIS PERSON WILL ACTUALLY COME BACK BEFORE THAT PERIOD OF TIME, SO IT SHOULDN'T BE. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE A WIN-WIN FOR HIM, BUT WE WANT TO EXTEND HIM THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT EXTENDED. THE FIREFIGHTERS ARE IN SUPPORT OF US. 
          THEY ARE. 
          QUESTION. I'M SORRY, DID YOU? NO, NO. YEAH, LARRY REACHED OUT TO ME YESTERDAY AND I WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF ASKING WHAT OUR DEAL WAS WITH THIS. 
          AND I THINK IT'S MORE THAN FAIR. 
          WE DO HAVE A LOT OF CITIES DON'T DO. 
          AND IS THIS? COULD I ASK A QUESTION ON THAT, TOO? THERE HAS BEEN A QUESTION BROUGHT UP CONCERNING THIS TOPIC THAT THE 12 MONTH PERIOD STARTS WHEN THAT INDIVIDUAL IS ON A LEAVE OF ABSENCE. 
          THIS INDIVIDUAL, I THINK, HAS BEEN WORKING LIGHT DUTY. 
          DOES THAT START WHEN LEGALLY, WHEN DOES THAT START? SO YES, SO WE'VE BEEN ACTUALLY SPEAKING ABOUT THAT SAME TOPIC. 
          NO, NO, NO, NO. THE MAYOR IS ASKING ABOUT WHEN THE ONE YEAR PERIOD STARTS FOR THE LINE OF DUTY. THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE ONE YEAR ACTUALLY STARTS WHEN THE FULL TIME, WHETHER IT'S POSITION STATUS IS NOT. 
          [00:05:04]
HE'S NOT IN HIS STATUS POSITION? AS A FULL TIME FIREFIGHTER. 
          FULL TIME FIREFIGHTER OR DOES IT START WHEN HE'S ACTUALLY ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE? CHIEF OLSEN JUST TALKED TO THE FIREFIGHTER AND HE WANTS TO GO AHEAD AND GO FORWARD WITH THE EXTENSION WHILE WE FIGURE THIS OUT. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO YOU'LL STILL BE LOOKING INTO THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC TO CLARIFY THAT? CORRECT. IT'S WORKER'S COMP VERSUS CHAPTER 143. 
          THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. AND SO THE ITEM THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA TODAY, COUNCIL CAN MOVE EITHER TO APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE THAT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. BUT THE FIREFIGHTER WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THAT EXTENSION. 
          SO THE FIREFIGHTERS' UNION WOULD LIKE THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE UNION. 
          THEY WOULD. OK. 
          ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. 
          I'M SORRY. NO, NO. 
          THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. 
          THANK YOU. THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. 
          YEAH. 11A,THIS IS THE QUALIFICATIONS ENGINEERING FOR THE EXISTING FIVE PUMP STATION. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? YES, IT IS. 
          SO WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. 
          YES, WITH THE 14TH STREET, 15TH STREET. 
          THAT'S WELL UNDERWAY. WELL UNDERWAY, AND THIS IS JUST A FOLLOWING ON? THIS IS A NEW SEPARATE PROJECT. 
          BUT IT'S THE SAME, ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE DOING THE SAME THING? THERE ARE FOUR MORE OF THEM IN THE PIPELINE. 
          YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OK. I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, IF THE COASTAL SURGE PROTECTIONS GOES FORWARD AS IT WAS PERCEPTION THAT ACTUALLY GETS GATED OFF AND PUMPING INTO THE BAYOU WOULD CAUSE MORE ISSUES. 
          WELL, NO. IN TALKING TO THE CORPS, THE BIO BECOMES A RETENTION POND AND THEY CLOSED THE GATES AT LOW TIDE. SO YOU'VE GOT TWO TO THREE FEET OF FREE BOARD IN THE BIO AT THAT POINT TO BE A RETENTION POND. 
          BECAUSE IF YOU GET OFF THE BIO, THE CITY STILL HAS TO DRAIN OR ELSE THE CITY WILL JUST FILL UP WITH WATER. SO THE BIO BECOMES A BIG RETENTION POND. 
          AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE DOING IT WHERE WE ARE, BECAUSE THAT'S THAT ACTUALLY WORKS IN THAT FAVOR. SO KEEP IN MIND MOST OF YOUR INNOVATIONS. 
          VARIES WHERE IT DEPENDS. BUT SOMEWHERE AROUND THE AIRPORT AREA AND THE BIO BECOMES IN THEIR LAST PRESENTATION AS THE BIO BECOMES A BIG RETENTION POND FOR US. 
          AND IF YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE SOME RETENTION OR ELSE IT DOES. 
          CLOSE THE GATE, ALL THAT WATER'S INSIDE ANYWAY. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. NOW KEEP IN MIND AND KEEP IN MIND THERE. 
          GATE ALSO INCLUDES A MASSIVE PUMP ON THE APP THAT PUMPS OVER THAT IN CASE THE BIO BEGINS TO DECREASE. BUT YOU'LL HAVE ABOUT FOUR FEET IS THAT I THINK YOUR LOWEST ELEVATION AROUND THE BIO OF HABITABLE SPACE IS ABOUT FOUR FEET. 
          SO IN THE WORST CASE, WE'RE HANDING WATER OFF FROM THE CITY STREETS INTO THE BIO. 
          VERY SIMILAR TO MOSES LAKE. 
          VERY SIMPLE. YOU CONTINUE TO PUMP AND SHUT OFF. 
          YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE AN ISSUE VERY SIMILAR TO MOSES, LIKE THERE'S AN OUTER LEVEE AND AN INNER LEVEE. AND ONCE THEY HIT THAT OTHER LEVEL, THEY START PUMPING OVER THE TOP. 
          ANYTHING ELSE, DAVID? OH, I'M SORRY. YOU KNOW, I DID WANT TO ASK THE. 
          WELL, EXCUSE ME, BILL, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT ITEM? YEAH, ON THIS ONE, BEFORE WE SWITCH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PUMP STATION. 
          YES, I GOT TWO THINGS ON HERE. 
          I DON'T SEE ANY REVENUE. 
          WHAT'S IT GOING TO COST TO INITIATE THIS WHILE THE BACK? IT'S IT'S ABOUT A FIFTY SIX MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT IN TOTAL, INCLUDING THE ENGINEERING, AND IT'S ALL FUNDED BY THE GLO. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          BUT SHOULDN'T WE HAVE ITEMIZED AT EACH STEP AS WE GO? WHAT'S IT GOING TO COST FOR THE PRELIMINARIES AT IT? SO ON, SO FORTH? PLUS IT? LET'S ASK THAT QUESTION. WELL, THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE ENGINEER IS GOING TO DO IS SCOPE OUT THE PROJECT AND GIVE US THOSE NUMBERS. 
          THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING IS APPROVING THE INITIAL DESIGN AND ALL THAT. 
          BEFORE ANY MONEY IS SPENT? BUT WE HAVE TO PAY THEM TO DO THAT WORK. 
          OK. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. 
          I CAN SEE THE MONEY UP FRONT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SPEND FOR THE INITIAL COST OF PREPARING FOR THE JOB YEAH. NOW SEE THE ENGINEER AND DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. 
          COUNCILMAN. CURRENTLY, WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO START SCOPING THE PROJECT WITH THE ENGINEER. SO WE WILL ACTUALLY DEVELOP THE SKILL AND COME BACK TO YOU ONCE WE DEVELOP THAT SKILL. 
          WITH THE BREAKDOWN OF THE ITEMIZED WHAT IT COST? THEY'RE THE ONES BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THE WELL IS GOING TO BE AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF RIGHT NOW AND TRYING TO I THINK THAT'S YEAH, THAT'S THE GRANT. 
          HOW DID THAT NUMBER COME IN? BASICALLY, I BELIEVE THAT WAS JUST IN GENERAL ESTIMATES, BASICALLY TAKING OVER FOR KING 
          [00:10:05]
STREET, LOOKING AT THE DRAINAGE AREA, EXTRAPOLATING TO COME UP WITH A REASONABLE. 
          AND THERE'S SOME TYPE OF BREAKDOWN ON THAT NUMBER; CORRECT? I MEAN, THE GENERAL BREAKDOWN ON, YOU KNOW, ENGINEERING INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE GET. 
          BASICALLY, ALL I'M LOOKING FOR IS THE BREAKDOWN OF THE MONEY WE'RE GOING TO SPEND AS WE GO FORWARD AS WE GO. 
          BUT THIS IS NO COST HERE. 
          THIS IS JUST THE SCOPE AND SEE WHAT IS GOING ON AND YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT IN YOUR DEPARTMENT. WELL, WE'RE NOT DOING THE DESIGN IN-HOUSE. 
          WE'RE WORKING WITH TEABAGGER SMITH, SYMANTEC AND I FORGET HERE FROM KEVIN, BUT I HAVE A COUPLE OF THE ENGINEERS HERE THAT ARE DOING IT FOR US, BUT WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THEM TO DEVELOP THE SCOPE. 
          THAT'S TRUE. THAT'S TRUE. 
          I JUST I'M JUST TYPE OF PERSON LOOKED AT ALL THE FINANCES, WHAT WE COST FOR, RIGHT? SO WHAT COST, IF ANY, RIGHT NOW DO YOU ANTICIPATE EXTENDING? DOLLAR WISE, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE FUN AND THEN THERE'S ENOUGH TIME. 
          SO WHAT IS THAT, THOUGH? THAT'S GOING TO BE A HUNDRED THOUSAND OR SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND? I MEAN, IF THIS ONE WAS I'M SURE THEY COULD JUST MAKE THEIR TIME RIGHT AND SPEND IN TWENTY THIRTY. 
          HE'S SAYING HE'S NOT GOING TO . AND IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, SIR. 
          ALL RIGHT. THEY SAY THE ENGINEERING FIRM. 
          YES. YES, SIR. ENGINEERING FIRM HERE WITH INTRACOASTAL AND HIMSELF PROJECT. 
          THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY COST ASSOCIATED WITH US PUTTING TOGETHER THE SCOPE AND THE ENGINEERS ESTIMATE TO DO THE PROJECT. 
          AND ONCE THAT'S PROVEN, ALL THAT, WHEN WE GO FORWARD TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION AND ALL THAT, THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING. 
          AND THEN THERE'LL BE THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL GET. 
          THEY'LL GIVE US THAT GREAT. 
          THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. SO THIS IS THE COMPANY THAT WE'RE PRE-QUALIFYING. 
          THAT WASN'T DIDN'T. 
          I MEAN, I NEVER QUITE SURE HOW THE PRE-QUALIFY MAYBE THEY WEREN'T UNQUALIFIED CITY, CORRECT. AND WE WENT IN FOR THIS PROJECT. 
          WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SEPARATE RFQ. 
          AND WE HAD SEVEN DIFFERENT FIRMS GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT QUALIFICATIONS. 
          WE NARROW THAT DOWN TO THE TOP THREE. 
          WE HAD INTERVIEWS WITH THOSE TOP THREE FIRMS. WE NARROWED IT DOWN TO TWO FINALISTS. 
          AND THEN, THROUGH THE FINAL INTERVIEWS, THE [INAUDIBLE] CONSULTING TEAM WAS SELECTED AS THE BEST QUALIFIED FIRM TO GO AHEAD AND WORK ON THIS PROJECT. 
          SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE COMING TO YOU TO NEGOTIATE WITHIN THIS GROUP. 
          DID YOU MENTION? THANK YOU. 
          ONE MORE QUESTION. A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. 
          WHAT HAVE WE DONE AS FAR AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNED NOISE POLLUTION, WHETHER ELEMENTALS, WE HAVE DONE A NUMBER OF CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM WITH REGARDS TO THE INTERVIEWS THAT WE'VE HAD, AND THEY'VE PROVIDED SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND SOME DIFFERENT THINGS WE'VE GET WITH SOME OF THEIR PAST PROJECTS THEY'VE DONE AND ALSO SOME THINGS THEY WOULD EMPLOY ON THIS PROJECT TO MEDICATION. 
          ANY SORT OF ANY FORM OUT OF THE WATER WITH THE DISCHARGE, A WHOLE SERIES OF DIFFERENT CONDITIONS. SO THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED AS WE GET FURTHER INTO THE NEGOTIATIONS AND ALSO THE DESIGN. HAVE WE SURVEYED THE PEOPLE ON OUR HOMES, RIGHT? VERY GOOD. ONE LAST QUESTION IS I'M HEARING A LOT OF INPUT, ESPECIALLY AS WE KIND OF TOUCHED ON IT IS I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT WHATEVER WE DECIDE TO DO. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT DR. 
          MERRILL WOULD SAY ABOUT THIS. 
          HE'S AN EXPERT. 
          I THINK HE CAN GIVE US SOME INPUT ON THIS PROJECT AND DRAINAGE ALONG THE CITY ALSO. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO BUY HIM FOR SOME KIND OF INPUT. 
          BRIAN, DID YOU WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT? I DON'T KNOW. THAT BILL WANTS TO PUT HIS IMPROMPTU ON THIS, BUT. 
          YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, BILL UNDERSTANDS THE PROJECT, SO IT'S JUST MORE INPUT TO GET TO THE PUBLIC SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM TALKING TO BILL. 
          SOUNDS GOOD, AND ALL I DO IS DIVERT YES. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANKS, JOHN. ALL RIGHT. 
          AND JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION WITH THIS. 
          SO THE 56 MILLION DOLLARS, IT'S THERE, IT'S READY TO GO? I MEAN, THIS IS THIS FRONT IS FULLY FUNDED? YEAH. WELL, IT'S REIMBURSEMENT. 
          IT'S A RAINBOW PROJECT, BUT THE MONEY'S THERE. 
          YEAH, WE'LL BE LOOKING TO BRING THE CONTRACT TO YOU GUYS IN JANUARY FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          AND WHAT KIND OF TIMEFRAME DO YOU THINK THIS FROM START TO FINISH THIS? 
          [00:15:03]
THIS IS A THREE YEAR PROJECT, HUH? YEAH. FOUR YEARS OR LONGER, WE'RE ABOUT TO. 
          I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. 
          AND LET'S JUST SAY THE RING MONEY NEVER COMES INTO FRUITION. 
          SO THIS WILL JUST SERVE AS A [INAUDIBLE] AND DRAINAGE. 
          IT'LL HASTEN DRAINAGE. 
          FOR WHAT CORE AREA? IT'S A BASIN AREA. 
          THAT'S PART OF WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT. 
          IT COULD, IN THEORY, REACH ALL THE WAY BACK INTO THE AREA AROUND BOARD HIGH SCHOOL BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TIE AND [INAUDIBLE] PIECES AND SEVERAL OF THE OTHER BIG SYSTEMS THAT WE'VE BEEN PREPARING FOR THAT WITH SOME OF OUR NEW LINES, BUT IT'LL SUCK THAT WATER RIGHT OUT. THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THIS AREA IS BETWEEN 61ST STREET AND SOLARIA AND WORKS HIS WAY SOUTH TOWARDS SEAWALL. 
          AND THEN THE DRAINAGE WATERSHED GOES A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE EAST. 
          WE HAVE THE OPTION TO SQUARE THE OUTFALL AS THE SYSTEM IS GREAT ADJACENT TO THIS PROJECT THAT ISN'T DIRECTLY INCORPORATED THROUGH THE GRANT. 
          SO THAT'S KIND OF BEEN EXCLUDED, BUT WE CAN MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS, HOPEFULLY TO ALLOW A FUTURE CONNECTION BECAUSE IT DROPS IN THE SAME WELL AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO WE WILL USE THAT KNOWLEDGE AS WE GO FORWARD WITH DESIGN. 
          IN THIS PROJECT, BRIAN, JUST TO REITERATE, IS FUNDED BY THE GLO GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED JUST RECENTLY? WELL, THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. 
          APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, DAVID. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, 11C, BRIAN, WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THIS? I CAN. BUT HISTORICALLY WHEN WE HAVE A WATER MAIN BREAK OR A SEWER LINE BREAK, WE HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME, BUT WE HAVE AN OLD VALVE SYSTEMS. THEY'RE VERY SPREAD OUT. 
          WE RUN AROUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE TRYING TO SHUT ALL THESE VALVES DOWN. 
          A GOOD EXAMPLE WAS WHEN THE WAL-MART TRUCK TOOK OUT THE HYDRANT ON 69TH AND SEAWALL, THE VALVE THAT FINALLY NAILED IT WAS NEAR THE BOAT CLUB, AND SO WE COULD GET IT SHUT DOWN AND WE PAY THESE COMPANIES. 
          I THINK IT'S CALLED STOP RANGE LINE. 
          YES, SIR, WE BRING IN A RANGE LINE AND THEY THEY INSTALL LINE STOPS FOR US. 
          WE HAVE TO PREPARE THE HOLE FOR THEM. 
          SO THAT'S  AN EFFORT ON OUR SIDE. 
          AND THEN THEY CHARGE ANYWHERE FROM FIVE TO TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE, AND THEN THEY REMOVE IT AT THE END OF IT. 
          THE EASY VALVE WILL ALLOW US TO BYPASS ALL THAT. 
          WE'VE INSTALLED A VALVE ON A LIFELINE, SHUT IT DOWN AND IT'S PERMANENT. 
          AND WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FIVE HOURS FROM THE PEOPLE FROM HOUSTON TO GET DOWN HERE TO DO IT. SO WE'RE STILL SOURCING THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO DO IT? WE'RE STILL SOURCING THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT PROVIDE IT. OK, I'M A LITTLE KID. 
          CAN YOU EXPAND ON THAT WITH ACTUALLY DOING? SO WHEN WE HAVE A BREAK ON A WATER LINE OR SEWER LINE, THAT FLOW COMING OUT? WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ISOLATE IT. 
          THEN OUR CREWS ARE EITHER HAVING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO EXPAND THE AREA AND HAVE A LARGER POWER OUTAGE, OR THEY HAVE TO WORK IT HOT, WHICH CAN BE DANGEROUS. 
          AND SO WHEN THEY INSTALL A LINE STOP, THEY FIND A SPOT ON THE MAIN AND THEN THEY INSERT A PLUG THAT STOPS THE FLOW. 
          AND THAT'S THE STEEL WORK, RIGHT? WHAT THE EASY VALVE DOES INSTEAD OF INSTALLING A PLUG. 
          WE FIND THIS SPOT ON THE MAIN AND WE INSTALL A GATE VALVE ON A LIVE LINE, WHICH MEANS ALL THE GATE VALVES. WE'RE ABLE TO CLOSE THE VALVE AND THAT STOPS IT. 
          THEN WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE OUR REPAIR FROM THAT POINT ON. 
          WE HAVE A PERMANENT VALVE FOR THE NEXT TWENTY FIVE YEARS. 
          SO LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, IN THAT SEWER HIT THAT WE HAD, WHICH WAS ON THE FORCE MAIN, WE HAD TO PREPARE THE HOPE FOR A LINE STOP AND THEN WE HAD TO WAIT FOR THEM TO GET HERE AND THEN DO THE JOB. AND THERE WAS A GOOD EIGHT HOUR PERIOD OF TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS JUST PREPARING WAY WHERE WE HAD THE EQUIPMENT ALREADY IN HOUSE. 
          WE WOULD HAVE DUG THE HOLE, INSTALLED, THE VALVE CLOSED. 
          IT MADE THE REPAIR EVEN SOONER, SO WE COULD USE IT ON EITHER WATER OR SEWER. 
          OK, GOOD. AND THIS IS ONE HUNDRED TEN THOUSAND COST? YES, SIR, BUT THERE'S SOME VALVES IN THERE AS WELL. 
          THE EQUIPMENT ITSELF IS LIKE 70, 70 TO 80 AND THEN WE HAVE VALVES OF EVERY SIZE FOR THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT SO THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN STOCK. 
          BUT WE BOTH AS A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT ABOUT FOUR TIMES ALREADY BECAUSE I'M DOING THIS ONE OVERNIGHT. ABSOLUTELY. 
          YEAH, STUFF. WHAT COUNT IS THIS COMING OUT OF THAT'S COMING OUT OF OUR VALVE REPLACEMENT CAPITAL PROGRAM. 
          OK. IT IS LINE ON IT FOR THAT? 
          [00:20:02]
YES. ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD, THANK YOU. 
          SURE, YOU KNOW, DAVID, IT'S COOL. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW I GOT MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED. 
          ALL RIGHT, BILL. OH MY 10B. B, AS IN BOY. 
          DAVID, I MEAN, B, IS IT BOY. 
          OK? NO, THANK YOU. 
          OH YES. 
          10B HEY, I'M SORRY. 
          THAT'S OK. 
          YEAH. BASICALLY, IN READING THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THIS IS WHERE YOU KNOW WHAT THE LOCATIONS ARE BEING. 
          THE MONEY'S GOING TO BE ALLOCATED FOR THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT'S GOING TO BE ALLOCATED FOR THESE LOCATIONS. 
          SPECIFIC AMOUNT LIKE NOW IT'S GOING TO BE IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT WOULD PULL IT OUT? I DON'T BLAME YOU, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT IT DOES. 
          WHAT DOES IT DO? OK. 
          YOU HAVE. HOW DO WE EXPLAIN THE [INAUDIBLE]? LET ME GO MAKE AWARDS BASED ON A PART OF THE PENNIES ALLOCATED FOR ARTS AND HISTORIC, BUT WE DON'T AWARD AT ALL. 
          AND THERE'S A REMNANT LEFT OVER OR SOMETIMES AN THE ORGANIZATION WON'T SPEND ALL THEIR MONEY AND WE'LL HAVE A REMNANT PENDING. 
          SO WE'LL HAVE THIS A LITTLE SURPLUS. 
          WHAT THIS PROVIDES AND CLARIFIES THAT THAT LITTLE SURPLUS CAN BE USED BY THE CITY MANAGER TO CLEAN UP CITY OWNED PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE EXPENDITURES OF THESE PROPERTIES, FOR INSTANCE. 
          I THINK THE CEMETERY ON BROADWAY IS PROBABLY THE BEST EXAMPLE. 
          THEY CAN DO MAINTENANCE ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S A HISTORIC SITE THAT ACTUALLY I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF PEOPLE. WE CAN REPAIR THE LITTLE BUILDINGS OUT THERE. 
          WE COULD WORK. WE COULD DO WORK ON THE MONUMENT ON TWENTY FIFTH STREET. 
          ANYTHING THAT'S DEEMED HISTORIC AND QUALIFIES AS A HISTORIC THAT THE CITY OWNS. 
          WE COULD USE SOME OF THAT. GARDEN. 
          GARDEN WOULD BE ANOTHER ONE. 
          I AGREE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          SURE. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. 
          BUT I WAS LOOKING, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THE CEMETERY OF GARDEN VARIETY, IS THERE MONEY ALLOCATED OR IS IT JUST SET ASIDE WHERE WE GET? ALLOCATED VERSUS SET ASIDE? IT'S SET ASIDE UNDER ARTS AND HISTORIC. 
          IT'S NOT ALLOCATED SPECIFICALLY FOR ANY TYPICAL. 
          THIS GIVES HIM THE AUTHORITY TO ALLOCATE IT ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS. 
          BUT ANYTHING OVER FIFTEEN THOUSAND WOULD HAVE TO COME TOGETHER ANYWAY? YEAH. COULD I ASK A QUESTION ON THAT? SURE. I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THIS. 
          THIS ORDINANCE, YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE UNALLOCATED FUNDS THAT THE ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD DOES NOT ALLOCATE WELL THOSE AND UNAPPROPRIATED MONIES THAT YOU JUST GOT LEFT OVER IN THE PROCESS. 
          WELL, AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS, DOES THAT ADDRESS THE 1/8TH PENNY? THAT IS DESIGNED FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION. 
          ALSO, I AM TOLD THAT IT DOES. 
          I DON'T SEE IT. 
          IT DOES IT WITH CONCERNS ME IN THE ORDINANCE, IT SAYS UNALLOCATED FUNDS. 
          DON, WHAT IT CONCERNS ME IN THE ORDINANCE, IT SAYS UNALLOCATED FUNDS. 
          IT DOESN'T DEMARCATE WHAT THOSE FUNDS ARE. 
          IS IT THE 1/8TH PENNY THAT'S SET ASIDE OR IS IT UNALLOCATED FUNDS FROM THE ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION? BOARD? WELL, I'M NOT SURE THAT THE ORDINANCE MAKES A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THOSE THINGS THAT THERE'S THERE ARE RESERVE FUNDS AND THERE'S THE 1/8TH PENNY THAT IS NOT GENERALLY ALLOCATED TO THE NONPROFITS? CORRECT. SO IT'S WHATEVER BETWEEN THE IT'S THE DELTA BETWEEN WHAT IS ALLOCATED AND NOT SURRENDERED. 
          NO, THIS IS ALL. 
          IT'S 7/8TH PENNY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX THAT FLOWS TO THE CITY. 
          AND DAVID, YOU MAY BE CORRECT, IT'S JUST UNCLEAR IN THE ORDINANCE. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ME. 
          I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING WHAT FUNDS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          I WILL ENDEAVOR TO DO A CLARIFICATION BEFORE THE END OF THE DAY. 
          [00:25:01]
I KNOW YOU WILL YOU DO A FINE JOB. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, SIR. 
          HAPPY TO. 
          LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET MICHAEL PETER MR. LAWSON. COME ON, MIKE, YOU WANT TO SIT OVER HERE?  WE'RE DELEGATING ALL THIS MONEY. 
          ONE THING THAT CAUGHT MY EYE AS UNCOLLECTIBLE RECEIVABLES OVER FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND TO BE WRITTEN OFF. I DON'T LIKE TO WRITE OFF THAT KIND OF MONEY. 
          CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? WELL, WHILE I'M ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, I'M GOING TO ASK TAMMY JACOBS TO COME UP AND HELP ME WITH SOME OF THE PROCESS. 
          BUT THAT'S WHY THERE'S A COUPLE OF PAGES IN THE STAFF REPORT, PAGES EIGHT AND NINE THAT DESCRIBE THE WHAT I WOULD CALL [INAUDIBLE] PROCESS. 
          WE'VE BEEN THROUGH SOME OF THESE. 
          SOME OF THESE BILLS GO BACK TO EVEN THE PERIOD OF HURRICANE IKE AND WHAT SHE'S DONE. 
          OUR STAFF PERSON HAS CONTACTED THE DEPARTMENT. 
          SHE'S WRITTEN LETTERS TO THE PEOPLE THAT ORIGINALLY OWED THE MONEY, IDENTIFIED MANY SITUATIONS WHERE THE BILL WAS PAID, NEVER RECORDED IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM. 
          AND OR THERE IS JUST A SERIES OF DIFFERENT KINDS OF ERRORS MADE WRONG OWNERS OF PROPERTY AND THAT THEIR AMOUNTS THAT WE'RE NEVER GOING TO COLLECT. 
          THAT'S KIND OF HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND, BUT I GUESS, DON, HOW CAN WE COLLECT THESE REVENUES? SOMEBODY HAS TO OWN THEM. 
          YEAH, BUT SOME OF THEM DIDN'T EXIST. 
          I MEAN, I HAD ONE HAPPEN TO ME AND IT WAS A WATER BILL FOR A HOUSE THAT WAS NO LONGER THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE SOME OF THEM ARE. 
          BUSINESSES, THERE ARE BUSINESS, TOO. 
          YEAH, YEAH. WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, ANY BUSINESSES IN THE BUILDING BUSINESS HAS BAD DEBT. 
          THAT'S REALLY WHAT SOME OF THIS IS REALLY. 
          A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION IS WHEN IS THE JUICE WORTH THE SQUEEZE? YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, BUT IF YOU CARRY THESE ON THE BOOKS, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE CARRYING MORE MONEY THAN WE ACTUALLY HAVE. SO THAT'S NO GOOD EITHER. 
          I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BUT THERE'S A PRETTY GOOD ACCOUNTING OF THAT IN THE LAST PAGE OF THE REPORT. 
          YOU KNOW, THERE'S MORE DETAIL ABOUT THOSE NUMBERS IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT. 
          JUST DISAPPOINTING THAT WE CAN'T COLLECT THAT MONEY, BUT. 
          WELL, MY GUESS MY LAST QUESTION. 
          IT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT, BUT IT GOES BACK LIKE 15 YEARS. 
          YEAH. DO WE HAVE MECHANISMS NOW IN PLACE THAT THIS CAN BE STOPPED? YES. YES. IT'S PRIMARILY GOING TO BE BASED ON BETTER COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN SO THAT'LL BE FINANCE, WATER DEPARTMENT OR WHOEVER. 
          RIGHT. IT'S PLANNING MIKE, I WOULD ALSO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO THE LINEBARGER FIRM THAT'S BEEN HERE. 
          YEAH, WE KNOW THE PROBLEM WITH FINES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE. 
          AFTER IKE, THERE WAS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT PLAYED LEFT. 
          THERE WAS A LOT OF VACANT PROPERTIES. 
          THERE WAS A LOT OF UNKEMPT PROPERTIES THAT WE THOUGHT LIENS ON THAT WE COULDN'T COLLECT ON A LOT OF THAT. 
          MIKE SAYS SOME OF THIS GOES BACK TO THAT ERA. 
          WE'VE BEEN SLOWLY BUT SURELY CHIPPING AWAY AT IT. 
          YOU GUYS HAVE DONE SOME OF THIS PRETTY MUCH ON EVERY END OF THE YEAR SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO CHIP AWAY AT IT. 
          WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY IS WE DO THIS EVERY YEAR BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST SOME OF THESE THINGS JUST EDGE OUT BECAUSE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF A RENTER SKIPS TOWN LIKE, IN WATERVILLE, UNDER STATE LAW, WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GO BACK. 
          PROPERTY OWNER. LINEBARGER DOES THEIR BEST TO DO IT, SKIP TRACING AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT AT SOME POINT THEY DON'T. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DEBATED WHETHER JUST TO HOLD THE PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT, BUT MOST OF THEM REQUIRE THEM TO GET THE WATER IN THEIR TENANT'S NAME. 
          I MEAN, THERE'S ONE PERSON IN PARTICULAR THAT I KNOW THAT HE ALWAYS COMES IN AND MAKES GOOD ON IT BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT ANY ISSUES. 
          HE'S JUST HE'S JUST A GOOD LANDLORD. 
          BUT THOSE ARE NOT ALWAYS THE CASE. 
          LET ME CLARIFY SOMETHING I DIDN'T GET INVOLVED IN THIS PARTICULAR SET OF RECEIVERS, RIGHT? THIS WORK WAS ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS DOING IT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. LINEBARGER IS WORKING ON THE WATER BILL, AND MIKE HAS SOMEBODY FULL TIME 
          [00:30:02]
RIGHT NOW. THEY'RE GOING THROUGH ALL OF THESE THINGS. 
          IT'S A YEAR ROUND EXERCISE. 
          IT'S NOT JUST IN. 
          OK, THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, BILL, OR ANY OTHER TOPIC, THOUGH? ALL RIGHT. LET'S LOOK AT 11A. 
          THANK YOU. MY PLEASURE. 
          I'M THE WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP THIS CHAIR AND GET ON CAMERA AND EVERYBODY GO WHEREVER. CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME A RUNDOWN ON THIS? WHAT'S IT GOING TO ACTUALLY DO? AND SO IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE THE ACCURACY OF OUR FIELD MEASUREMENTS. 
          SO RIGHT NOW, WE'RE ON AN OLD 3G SYSTEM AND THE BASE STATIONS ARE GETTING READY TO BE UPGRADED TO 5G NETWORK. 
          AND OUR EXISTING EQUIPMENT WILL NOT WORK ON THE 5G NETWORK. 
          SO IT'S GOING TO GIVE US IMPROVED RELIABILITY, BETTER ACCURACY AS WE TAKE OUR SHOTS. 
          AND SO WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET BETTER, TIGHTER SPACING AND ELEVATIONS. 
          THIS CAN BE DONE THROUGH A GRANT. 
          THIS IS DONE THROUGH YOUR SYSTEM. 
          THIS IS ROUTINE EXPENSE FOR US. 
          WE HAVE AN IN-HOUSE SURVEYOR AND THIS IS THE EQUIPMENT THAT THEY NEED TO DO THEIR JOB. 
          THE EQUIPMENT THEY USE IS FAIRLY OLD. 
          HE WAS VERY EXCITED TO GET THIS EQUIPMENT. 
          YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, THE EQUIPMENT HE'S USING. 
          TALK TO ME FOR 30 MINUTES. 
          YOU KNOW, THE EQUIPMENT HE'S USING IS, YEAH, IT'S PRETTY ARCHAIC AND. 
          YOU KNOW, YEARS AGO, HE USED TO ACTUALLY HAVE [INAUDIBLE] TO HAVE TWO PEOPLE DOING THIS WITH THIS NEW EQUIPMENT, YOU KNOW, THIS NEW ROBOT WILL HAVE BETTER TRACKING OF THE EQUIPMENT SO WE CAN BE A LITTLE MORE EFFICIENT. 
          YEAH. WELL, THAT ANSWER ONE OF YOUR QUESTIONS. 
          IT WILL BETTER HELP US TO INTEGRATE THIS INTO OUR GIS SYSTEM BECAUSE WE'LL BE GETTING DIGITAL FORM. THAT'S COOL. 
          THAT'S ALL I ASK. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OUT OF THIS? OK. APPRECIATE IT. 
          YES, SIR. 11B. 
          B IS A BOY OR D LIKE IN DAVID?  WHAT DOES ALL THIS TELL ME, JUST A QUICK SYNOPSIS, WHAT WE DOING? YES, SIR. SO THIS, I BELIEVE, IS THE STOP LOSS OF OUR HEALTH PLAN. 
          SO THEIR SPECIFIC STOP LOSS AND AGGREGATE STOP LOSS FOR THE PLAN, WE CAST A BROAD NET. 
          WE WENT UP [INAUDIBLE]. 
          WE TYPICALLY DO SO ONCE A YEAR FOR ANY STOP LOSS. 
          SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND THAT'S ALSO ASSESSED DURING THIS PROCESS. 
          FIFTEEN PEOPLE, FIFTEEN COMPANIES RATHER WERE INCLUDED IN THAT DIRECT SEARCH. 
          ONLY THREE OF THEM ACTUALLY RESPONDED WITH COMPETITIVE BIDS BASED ON WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO FIND OUT. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD CAME IN WITH THE MOST COMPETITIVE BID WITHOUT ANY LASERS THAT WERE ATTACHED TO THAT, AND LASERS ARE BASICALLY THEY ASSESS YOUR POPULATION. 
          THEY ASSESSED WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS, AND IF THEY FEEL LIKE THEY NEED TO CARVE OUT ONE OR TWO EMPLOYEES AND SET A HIGHER DEDUCTIBLE FOR THOSE EMPLOYEES, THEY WILL OR CAP IT RIGHT. 
          AND SO AND MOST AND ONE OF THE SCENARIOS THEY INCLUDED A LASER, WHICH WAS TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND ABOVE OR TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ABOVE OUR CURRENT STOP OR CURRENT AGGREGATE. I'M SORRY SPECIFIC STOP LOSS, WHICH MEANS THAT THE PLAN WOULD HAVE TO EAT THAT THE ADDITIONAL LASER. 
          THAT OCCURS AT THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, NOT AT THE AGGREGATE LEVEL? RIGHT. AND SO BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE, THE THE MOST COMPETITIVE BID WAS BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD. THEY CAME IN LOWEST AND THEY DID RECOMMEND THAT WE STAY AT THE TWO HUNDRED SPECIFIC STOCK LEVEL WHEN WE SELECT THIS GROUP AND OUR EMPLOYEES SIGN UP FOR IT. 
          IS THERE PLACES IN TOWN THERE SPECIFICALLY TO GO TO TO CUT DOWN THE COST? WE HAVE A NETWORK. YOU HAVE A NETWORK, WE DO, BUT WE REMEMBER WE'RE A SELF-FUNDED PLAN. 
          SO WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR AND WE HAVE A NETWORK THAT THAT THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR ADMINISTERS FOR US. 
          THEY NEGOTIATE WITH UTB AETNA RIGHT NOW, MAINLAND CENTER, YOU KNOW, ALL THE DIFFERENT ONES THEY NEGOTIATE WITH. 
          WE HAVE A POT OF MONEY THAT WE SET ASIDE. 
          THE THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR PAYS THE CLAIMS. WE HAVE STOP-LOSS INSURANCE, SO THAT WAY, BECAUSE WE WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO FUND 
          [00:35:02]
ENOUGH MONEY IN THIS IN CASE WE HAD A CATASTROPHIC ISSUE OR COVID, AS IT TURNS OUT, WAS WE NEED TO. 
          SO WE HAVE STOP-LOSS, WHICH KICKS IN ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL AND THEN ON AN AGGREGATE LEVEL. SO MEANING ON YOU, IT'S TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, IT'S CUT OFF. 
          THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE THE STOP LOSS IS INDIVIDUALLY. 
          BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE AN AGGREGATE STOP LOSS WHERE IF WE HAD A, YOU KNOW, AGGREGATE LEAD, IF THE ENTIRE PLAN WENT OVER AND I FORGET WITH THE ATTACHMENT POINT IS ON. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY IN THAT. 
          YEAH, IT'S A MUCH LARGER NUMBER IN THE MILLIONS, THEN THE AGGREGATE STOP LOSS KICKS IN. 
          I DON'T THINK WE'VE EVER HIT THE AGGREGATE STOP. 
          ALSO, WE HIT IT ON THE INDIVIDUAL. 
          AND WHAT THEY'LL DO IS IF YOU GET A VERY SERIOUSLY ILL PATIENT THAT LINGERS THROUGH SEVERAL POLICY YEARS, THEY WILL COME IN AND THEY'LL DO WHAT THEY CALL LASERING THAT EMPLOYEE, MEANING THEY'LL SAY, OK, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE YOUR [INAUDIBLE]. 
          THIS IS HOW INSURANCE COMPANIES MAKE MONEY. 
          WE'RE GOING TO DO YOUR STOP LOSS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO LASER THIS INDIVIDUAL AND INSTEAD OF ATTACHING IT TO HUNDRED THOUSAND FOR THIS INDIVIDUAL, WE'RE GOING TO ATTACH AT FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND. OR THEY MAY JUST SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO ATTACH IT ALL ON THIS INDIVIDUAL, THEY'RE LASERED OFF ALTOGETHER. 
          WE'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN IN THE PAST AS WELL WITH OTHER THIRD PARTY OR OTHER REINSURERS. 
          SO BUT WE DO CARRY REINSURANCE LOOK JUST LIKE THE STATE DOES FOR WINDSTORM AND EVERYBODY ELSE DOES. SO IT PROTECTS THE CITY FROM THOSE HUGE HITS. 
          NOW, DON'T EVER THINK THAT IT'S FREE BECAUSE IF WE HAVE A HUGE HIT IN ONE YEAR, THEY WHICH IS THE REASON WE'RE PAYING AN ADDITIONAL 10 PERCENT FOR THAT SPECIFIC STOP LOSS FOR THE NEXT YEAR. THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND SO WHAT YOU HAVE IS ANYONE WHO HITS THAT TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND SPECIFIC DEDUCTIBLE, ANYTHING ABOVE THAT WE DO RECEIVE BACK IN TERMS OF REIMBURSEMENT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. 
          LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION. 
          THIS MAP SHOWS THAT WE GOT A NETWORK, NOT A PROBLEM, BUT WHAT ARE THE SAFEGUARDS WHEN YOU SEND SOMEONE TO ANY FACILITY FOR TREATMENT? AND AT WHAT POINT DO THE EMPLOYEE OR THE CITY JUMP IN AND SAY, HEY, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THIS OR THAT OR WHATEVER, SO WE WANT TO GET ANY COST OVERRUNS THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO PAY? SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? WELL, THE THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATOR, THAT'S WHAT THEIR JOB IS TO DO. 
          CASE MANAGEMENT. OK, THAT'S GREAT. 
          SO MIGHT DEFINE LASER FOR ME. 
          SO LASER IS GOING TO BE AN EMPLOYEE THAT LET'S SAY THEY HAD CANCER, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THAT PERSON GENERATED A TON OF MEDICAL BILLS AND RS CLAIMS IN THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS. 
          WHEN THEY GO OUT FOR STOP LOSS, THAT STOP LOSS CARE IS GOING TO LOOK AT THAT PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GOING TO BE LIKELY FOR THEM TO CONTINUE WITH THESE LARGE CLAIMS. IF SO, THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THAT PERSON AND SAY, YOU'RE NOT SUBJECT TO THE TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND. YOU'RE NOW GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLAR DEDUCTIBLE. OR NOT AT ALL. 
          I MEAN, JUST A LASER, AN ACRONYM. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY A TERM THAT'S. 
          TERM OF ARC IN THE INSURANCE, RIGHT? I SEE LASER. 
          WHO ELSE CAN WE USE THAT WITH? READ MY MIND. 
          YES. 
          PARK BOARD IS A PARTNER, AND IT WAS. 
          HOW ABOUT FOUR? THEY ARE. THEY WERE PART OF THE ISSUE IN THE LAST PLANNING YEAR BECAUSE THEY HAD A DIFFERENT POPULATION THAT WAS CAUSING US ISSUES ALONG THESE LINES. 
          AND THE [INAUDIBLE] HAD THE DECISION TO STAY WITH THE CITY PLAN OR TO MOVE INTO THEIR OWN PLAN AND THEY ELECTED TO MOVE TO THEIR OWN. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY HELPED US. 
          RIGHT. 
          OK. THANKS TO THE AREA MAYOR 11F. 
          [INAUDIBLE]. 
          CAN YOU GIVE US SOME MORE DETAILS ON THIS PROGRAM WE HAVE, IS THIS SPECIFICALLY FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE OR IS IT GOING TO BE MONEY SET ASIDE FOR? I GET A LOT OF CALLS WHERE PEOPLE AND I TALKED TO BRIAN ABOUT. 
          THAT THEY NEED HELP IN THEIR REPAIRING THEIR HOMES. 
          [INAUDIBLE]. 
          IT CANNOT BE USED TO REPAIR. 
          AND IT'S SPECIFIED THAT WAY WE CAN'T? YES, IT IS STRICTLY FOR WHAT THEY CALL THE QUALIFYING POPULATIONS THAT IS THE HOMELESS. 
          SO THERE ARE IN THE STAFF REPORT, IT WENT OVER. 
          THERE ARE FOUR CATEGORIES THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS, IN OTHER WORDS, THEY'RE SLEEPING IN A PLACE THAT'S NOT INTENDED FOR LIVING PURPOSES OR THEY'RE STAYING IN A SHELTER. 
          THOSE POPULATIONS AND OR THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE AT RISK OF BEING HOMELESS. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE PEOPLE WHO ARE, SAY, GETTING ASSISTANCE LIKE WE FUND [INAUDIBLE] SYSTEMS 
          [00:40:02]
ALREADY AND THEY GET ASSISTANCE, BUT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT WITHOUT THAT ASSISTANCE. SO THEY MAY BE AT RISK OF BECOMING HOMELESS OR PEOPLE, VETERANS OR FAMILIES WITH VETERANS THAT ARE IN THOSE POPULATION CATEGORIES. 
          THOSE ARE THE FAR FLUNG POPULATIONS. 
          IT CAN BE USED FOR CORE ACTIVITIES THAT IS THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING. 
          SO WE WOULD HAVE TO PROCURE OR GO OUT FOR STANDARDS FOR LIKE A DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP. 
          AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING. 
          THAT WOULD BE USED JUST. 
          WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING DOING THAT? YES, HOPEFULLY WE'RE NOT. 
          NO OFFENSE TO DO THAT. 
          SO FOR IT COULD BE USED FOR TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE THAT WOULD GO JUST TO PAY THOSE POPULATIONS RENT OR IT WOULD BE SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE INDIVIDUALS OR FAMILIES THAT QUALIFY. 
          AND THERE'S A CERTAIN LIST THAT YOU CAN USE, WHICH IS PRETTY BROAD, SUCH AS CHILD CARE, ANYBODY HELPING THOSE PEOPLE TO BECOME SUSTAINABLE. 
          GIVEN THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE'RE GETTING NOW, ESPECIALLY AROUND OUR DAILY BREAD AND STUFF, I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT TRYING TO HELP DO SOME TRANSITIONAL HOUSING OR CONTRACT FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, FOR PEOPLE TO GET THEM OFF THE STREET AND GET THEM TOGETHER. 
          THERE'S A COUPLE OF HOMELESS PEOPLE THAT ARE SLEEPING OUT ON BENCHES, AND SOME OF THEM DON'T WANT HELP. BUT THE ONES THAT DO, WE CAN. 
          WE CAN DO, WE'RE LOOKING AT, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS FIRST. 
          THIS IS BACKWARDS THE WAY WE USUALLY WORK WITH HUD. 
          USUALLY I COME TO YOU, WE DEVELOP PROGRAMS, THEN WE GO TO HUD, PROVIDE THAT AND THEN THEY CONTRACT WITH US. 
          THIS TIME THEY'RE CONTRACTING IN ADVANCE WITH US. 
          AND THEN BECAUSE THEY'RE ALLOWING YOU TO USE FIVE PERCENT OF THE FUNDS FOR DEVELOPING HERE, YOU HAVE TO CONSULT WITH ALL OF THE HOMELESS AGENCIES WHAT'S CALLED THE CONTINUUM OF CARE, WHICH IS A HUD DIRECTIVE AND AREA PROVIDERS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY TO SEE WHAT YOUR GAPS ARE. 
          WE KNOW ALREADY THAT THERE IS A BIG GAP AND PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO AFFORD THEIR RENT ON THE ISLAND. THERE'S ALSO GOING TO BE A PROBLEM THAT WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BE FACED WITH FINDING THIS HOUSING. 
          SO WE MAY HAVE TO LOOK AT EVEN PROVIDING HOUSING OFF THE ISLAND, RENTAL HOUSING, PAYING FOR AROUND. IF WE CAN'T FIND HOUSING. 
          THAT'S I'M NOT SAYING WE ARE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, NORMALLY WE LIKE TO KEEP ALL OF OUR MONEY ON THE ISLAND. BUT SO WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS IN OUR PROCESS OF DEVELOPING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO SPEND THIS MONEY ON AND MAYBE THAT WE GO OUT FOR ONCE WE FIND THESE GAPS AND RENTAL. 
          AS BRIAN SAID, THAT'S ONE OF OUR BIGGEST PROBLEMS. THESE PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD RENT AND OUR RENT OBVIOUSLY IS ESCALATING ON THE ISLAND. 
          SO WE HAVE LIMITATIONS THAT WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT ON HOW MUCH WE CAN PAY. 
          SO ALL OF THAT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          WE DON'T HAVE THE PROJECTS YET, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE WITHIN THAT PARAMETER. 
          THIS IS APPROVAL OF RECEIVING THE GRANT? YES. AND US TO BE ABLE TO AGREE TO A CONTRACT AND WE WOULD BRING UP, BECAUSE ON 45TH STREET, WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE SLEEPING ON BENCHES AND. 
          OTHER ISSUES, WE'LL JUST LEAVE THAT, BUT IS THERE A PROGRAM WHERE WE CAN GO AND APPROACH THEM SAYING, YOU NEED THIS HELP, WE CAN. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO FOR THEM OR? NO. IT'S A PROBLEM IN ALL THE CITIES RIGHT NOW. 
          IT BECOMES AN ISSUE FOR US BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE COME TO GALVESTON FOR DIFFERENT REASONS. THEY COME HERE TO SEEK TREATMENT AT ETB AND STUFF, AND THEN THEY DON'T THEY DON'T GO BACK TO WHERE THEY ORIGINALLY CAME FROM. 
          SO WE END UP WITH THEM BEING HERE. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF MENTAL ILLNESS AS PART OF THIS, AND WE'RE TRYING TO WORK CHEAP. 
          ALI AND I'VE BEEN WORKING IN THE MAYOR WITH THE MEADOWS FOUNDATION, HOPEFULLY TRYING TO ESTABLISH SOME HELP WITH THAT AND WITH AND WITH UTNB, WHO IS ALSO GOING TO BE WITH THEIR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWERS, IS GOING TO HAVE SOME OUTPATIENT PSYCHIATRIC CARE AS WELL AS HARRIS COUNTY IS BUILDING A REGIONAL PSYCHIATRIC CARE FACILITY THAT WE CAN TRANSPORT TO IF NEEDED. RIGHT NOW IT GOES TO ST. 
          JOE'S, I THINK, AND IT'S VERY LIMITED AND PEOPLE DON'T STAY THERE VERY LONG. 
          THEY THEY'RE BACK PRETTY QUICK AND THEY DO A GOOD JOB OF RETURNING THEM TO US AT THAT POINT. BUT THEY'RE GOING TO MISS ANYTHING ON THAT. 
          I MEAN, IT'S I'M SURE AND ONE OF THE OTHER CONCERNS OR REAL LIFE SITUATIONS YOU HAVE IS 
          [00:45:02]
IF SOMEONE SHOWS UP IN LAKE CITY OR SANTA FE OR HITCHCOCK OR TEXAS CITY, IT'S VERY EASY TO. SOMETIMES WITH MENTALLY ILL, THE ONLY TOOL WE HAVE IN OUR TOOLBOX ARE HANDCUFFS, AND THAT'S THE SAD REALITY OF THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. 
          BUT THEY PUT THEM IN COUNTY JAIL AND WHEN THEY GET OUT OF JAIL, THEY LIVE IN THE OUTSIDE. 
          BUT WHY SHOULD THAT BE A POLICE MATTER? WELL, BECAUSE THAT'S THE CALL WHEN YOU COME OPEN YOUR BUSINESS AND SOMEBODY'S ASLEEP ON THE BENCH OUTSIDE YOUR BUSINESS. 
          THEY CALL PD. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ANOTHER SHELTER THAT'S. 
          PRETTY MUCH FULL. YEAH, WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE OFF TOPIC. 
          LET'S GO BACK TO THIS ONE. 
          THESE FUNDS CAN'T BE FOR GENERAL SHELTER. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. OR GENERAL SHELTER NUISANCE. 
          IT HAS TO BE THE NON CONGREGANT TYPE SHELTER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT INTERNALLY IS POSSIBLY WORKING WITH ONE OF THE GROUPS HERE ON THE ISLAND THAT DEALS WITH THE HOMELESS FOR IT AND TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN'T PLUG IN AND HAVE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER IMPACT WITH THEM. 
          MR. GAMBLER IS ONE OF THEM AND. 
          MARSHALL RAPOPORT'S GROUP. 
          YEAH, MARSH HAS TALKED ABOUT IT AS PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID AT THE END OF THE DAY, BECAUSE WHILE THE GRANT AMOUNT IS EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND, THE ACTUAL EXPENDABLE AMOUNT IS CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN THAT. 
          SEVEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY, YEAH. 
          AND THEN WHEN YOU START TRYING TO IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT BUILDING A NON CONGREGATE SHELTER, THAT'S NOT GOING TO GO VERY FAR. 
          NO. AND TRYING TO KNOW WHAT BEST YOU CAN HOPE TO DO IS TO PARTNER WITH A GROUP THAT'S ALREADY DOING THIS AND LEVERAGE THIS MONEY A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          THAT WAY, YOU CAN MULTIPLY IT OUT AND TRY TO GET. 
          SOME HAVE SOME IMPACT AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MONEY TO BRING TO THE TABLE TO GO. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND PLUS WE HAVE THE [INAUDIBLE] AND YOU HAVE A FIFTEEN YEAR AFFORDABILITY PERIOD THAT WE HAVE TO MONITOR THESE PROJECTS AND THEY HAVE TO STAY IN USE FOR THAT 15 YEARS. 
          AND IF COUNCIL APPROVES THIS, THEN YOU'LL BRING BACK. 
          AS BRIAN MENTIONED, YOUR FUNDS WILL BE EXPANDED. 
          AND WE HAVE HOW LONG YOU SPEND THIS MONEY? 2030? YOU HAVE UNTIL 2030. 
          THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN US A DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING THIS ALLOCATION PLAN TO HUD FOR THEIR APPROVAL FOR THE REST OF THE FUNDS. 
          THEY'RE SAYING AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE WITHIN A TIMELY MANNER, SO WE WILL HAVE TO MOVE ON THIS WITHIN. YOU COULD EASILY SPEND THIS AMOUNT ON ONE HOMELESS PERSON. 
          OH YEAH. THANK YOU, ALICE. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? ANY OTHER THINGS I'LL DO THERE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GREAT JOB, AS ALWAYS. 
          COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS? JUST ONE, ON 8A, IS THAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT'S THERE? IS THAT A MISTAKE? THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THERE, AND THEN THE SECOND COMMENT QUESTION OR WHATEVER. 
          THIS IS PART OF CATHERINE GORMAN'S QUEST TO LANDMARK THE WORLD. 
          AND RIGHTLY SO, I SHOULD SAY. 
          I'M SORRY, I WAS IN THE BACK. I DID HEAR THE QUESTION. 
          OH, OK. PAGE ONE. 
          THE LAST PARAGRAPH IS THAT NUMBER AN ERROR? THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW? THIS PROGRAM FREEZES THE TAX VALUE OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO THE VALUE BEFORE THEY DID THE WORK. SO THE VALUE BEFORE THEY DID THE WORK WAS SEVENTY THOUSAND. 
          OH, THERE'S AN EXTRA ZERO. 
          OH, IS THERE WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT? WELL, LET ME SEE. IT'S SEVEN ZERO FIVE ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO. 
          SEE IT. LOOK IN THE ORDER. 
          OH, IT'S IN THE ORDINANCE. YOU'RE LOOKING IN THE ORDINANCE. 
          IT COULD BE A TYPO OR. 
          IT WAS IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH, THE LAST PARAGRAPH, THIS IS A TEACHER, SHE READS THESE THINGS WITH A REMARK THAT, OH YES, I SEE THE ERROR THERE. 
          YES. WE WILL CORRECT IT. 
          I JUST NEED AND YOU CAN EMAIL ME THIS. 
          JUST SOME GUIDANCE OR INFORMATION ON HOW A COMMUNITY OR AN AREA IS DECLARED THE STORE. 
          YES. OK. 
          SHE'S YOUR SHE'S YOUR POINT PERSON ON THAT. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, KATHERINE. 
          VERY GOOD. ANYTHING ELSE YOU'RE HEARING? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. ALL RIGHT. 
          [INAUDIBLE] TURNS OUT OF HER SYSTEM ON A DAILY BASIS. 
          ASKING QUESTIONS. 
          . A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT I HAD 12A, JANELLE, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WITH YOU. 
          [00:50:01]
WE ARE APPOINTING A PRESIDENT OF THE RDA AND COMBINED GROUP WITH THE GALVESTON HOUSING PROPERTY FINANCE AUTHORITY AND ALL THAT? THIS WE'RE DESIGNATING WITH THIS A TERM OF ONE YEAR FOR THAT OFFICER. 
          IS THAT CORRECT IN THIS ORDINANCE? THAT IS CORRECT. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT I RECOMMENDED BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER OFFICERS OR ELECTED OR APPOINTED ANNUALLY, BUT YOU CAN CHANGE THAT TERM. 
          NOW THAT'S FINE. 
          AND THAT DOES NOT CHANGE INDIVIDUALS THAT SERVE OUR SERVE FOR TWO YEAR TERMS. IS THAT CORRECT OR THREE YEAR TERM TO YOUR TERM? SO ALL ACROSS THE. 
          THAT SOUNDS GREAT. 
          OK, THANK YOU. 
          AND THE LAST ITEM IN MY HEAD WAS 12B AS IN BOY. 
          THAT'S ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD I HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF COUNCIL MEMBERS APPROACH ME AT DIFFERENT TIMES TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL. 
          COUNCILMAN COLLINS RECENTLY HAS TALKED WITH ME. 
          DAVID, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THIS BEFORE? WELL, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS AND WE KIND OF PREFERRED THIS. 
          I THINK BY DEFAULT LAST MONTH BECAUSE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING TIMES AND HAVING TWO MEETINGS A MONTH AND SO FORTH. 
          AND WHEN WE TOOK THAT OFF, AND I THINK BECAUSE WE HAD TALKED, YOU KNOW, YOU SAY SEVERAL COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE EFFICACY OF MEETING IN THE EVENING. 
          IT TAKES A FAIR AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL STAFF TIME. 
          COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER BROUGHT THIS TO US LAST YEAR. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK THE BEST OF INTENTIONS BECAUSE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, MOST CITIES HAVE THEIR MEETINGS IN THE EVENING. 
          BUT THE QUESTION THAT I ASK IS, HAS IT INCREASED ATTENDANCE? AND I THINK, AS MARIE POINTED OUT, WHEN YOU HAVE A HOT BUTTON ITEM ON THE AGENDA, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SHOW UP NO MATTER WHEN, WHAT TIME OF DAY IT IS. 
          I STILL WOULD LIKE TO SURVEY OUR CITIZENS. 
          I HEARD YOU SAID IT, BUT HOW DO YOU DO THAT? I MEAN, BECAUSE SEEING SURVEY UP ON THE INTERNET AND YOU ASK THEM TO SAY, WHAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE TIME? SOME RESPONSE TO THAT WAS THE SURVEY IS ESSENTIALLY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ATTEND WHO BECAUSE I MEAN, CATHERINE, I MEAN, JANELLE IS GIVING US A LIST OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON FACEBOOK FOR EACH MEETING FOR THE LAST YEAR. 
          AND IT'S INTERESTING INFORMATION. 
          BUT YOU CAN SEE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT AND I THINK IT'S PROBABLY NOT CONSISTENT BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SOME GOLF CARTS YOU HAVE TO SAY ARE ZERO. 
          IF YOU KNEW, IF YOU KNOW WHAT THAT ITEM IS, YOU KNOW, THE GOLF CART. 
          OH, I THINK THEY DID IT WITH THE HOT BUTTON. 
          I MEAN, I KNOW THEY DO SURVEYS AND EACH ONE OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS AND GET THEIR FEELING WELL. I MEAN, WE REPRESENT THE PEOPLE AND IT SHOULD BE VERIFIED. 
          I GET THAT. BUT THE QUESTION SEEMS TO ME IS, ISN'T SO MUCH OF WHAT PEOPLE THINK THEY OUGHT TO DO OR WANT TO SEE US DO. 
          BUT WHAT ARE PEOPLE ACTUALLY DOING? YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WHEN WORKSHOP ON FEBRUARY 25TH, WE HAD ZERO. 
          NOBODY, NOBODY WAS THERE. 
          SOMETIMES IT'S FIVE OR THREE PEOPLE. 
          I MEAN, JUST WORKSHOPS IN THE MORNING, OBVIOUSLY. 
          BUT YOUR REGULAR MEETINGS, THE SIX O'CLOCK MEETING, FIVE O'CLOCK MEETING, THEY HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF GIVE IT. 
          THAT WAS THAT WAS WORKSHOP WHEN THERE WAS NOBODY THERE THAT WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FREEZE WHEN PEOPLE WERE TOLD TO GIVE BACK. 
          AND WE WERE ASSUMED UNTIL WORKSHOPS. 
          WORKSHOPS REALLY DON'T COUNT BECAUSE THEY'RE NINE O'CLOCK ANYWAY. 
          BUT BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE REGULAR MEETINGS, THOSE THOSE ARE INTERESTING NUMBERS. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE ATTENDING A REGULAR MEETING, I MEAN, IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO ATTEND THE MEETINGS, JUST PUT GOLF CART ON THE AGENDA EVERY TIME. 
          THAT'S THE WINNER WITH FIFTY THREE. 
          NO GOLF CARTS ARE REAL ISSUES, AND OBVIOUSLY MY PEOPLE, BECAUSE LIKE EVERY I DON'T THINK THIS IS BROKEN DOWN BY GOLF CART  BUT MY POINT IS THAT THERE'S YOUR SURVEY, RIGHT? THERE IS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ATTEND IS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED. 
          WHAT I'M SAYING IS I'M NOT OPPOSED. 
          I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A CONTINUOUS MEETING, BUT I THINK WE ARE ALL SITTING HERE BECAUSE PEOPLE VOTED US INTO A SEAT TO REPRESENT THEM. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO DEFER OUR FINAL DECISION UNTIL JANUARY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT OUT 
          [00:55:04]
TO MY NEIGHBORHOODS AND TO MY DISTRICT AND ASK THEM WHAT THEIR PREFERENCE IS. 
          ALL RIGHT, IT'S ON OUR YES. 
          AND JUST QUICKLY, I'M CHOOSING TO AGREE WITH MS. ROBB BECAUSE I HEARD YOU SAY THAT WE WERE ON ZOOM UNTIL A CERTAIN TIME WE HAD A PANDEMIC. 
          AND I JUST DON'T THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH GOOD INFORMATION HERE TO MAKE THE DECISION. 
          AND I TOO WOULD LIKE TO SEE HOW PEOPLE FEEL OUT IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT IT. 
          SO THESE NUMBERS ARE FACEBOOK NUMBERS. 
          I GOT THAT. BUT. 
          WE HAD SOME OTHER VARIABLES THERE, SO THAT I THINK WOULD AFFECT ATTENDANCE. 
          IT'S ON OUR AGENDA FOR 12B COMING UP, SO WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AS WE GET TO IT THIS AFTERNOON. WELL, I JUST SAY I'M SORRY THEY'RE TURNING IT OFF BECAUSE ONE THING WITH THE NOTICE IS YOU'RE RIGHT, WELL, AGAIN, JUST LIKE A TOTAL OF HOME RUNS, AND I'M LOOKING AT IT LIKE, MAN, I HIT FIFTY THREE THAT YEAR. THAT'S PRETTY GOOD. 
          IS THAT COMPARED TO, YOU KNOW? YOU KNOW THAT. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS REGULAR ATTENDANCE. 
          THIS WHEN YOU SAY AND THEY WERE VERY, VERY INTERESTED IN THAT. 
          AND THE COMMENT WAS, I'M NOT ARGUING THIS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME BECAUSE IN EVENING. 
          BUT THE COMMENT WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF OVER, OH YEAH. YEAH, HOW MANY? HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU KNOW? ONE OTHER THING TO NOTE WE WOULD BE THE ONLY COUNCIL THAT ISN'T MEETING IN THE EVENING AND WHY DO PEOPLE IN THE EVENING? BECAUSE FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THEIR CITIZENS. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO ASK MY CITIZENS, ALL YOUR CITIZENS, WHAT THEIR PREFERENCE IS. YEAH. I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE TO JUST HAVE TO REITERATE. 
          I THINK PEOPLE EXPRESS THEIR PREFERENCE BY SHOWING UP OR NOT SHOWING THEM. 
          WELL, I DISAGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE THE TOPIC IS WHAT GENERATES IT. 
          SAME WITH THIS MEETING HERE. 
          THE LENGTH OF OUR MEETING IS PREDICATED BY WHAT THE TOPICS ARE IN OUR AGENDA. 
          AND IF SOMEBODY IS WORKING AND THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT AN ITEM, THEY CAN'T LEAVE WORK IN A LOT OF CASES TO COME AND PRESENT THEIR ISSUE. 
          I JUST THINK WE SHOULD ASK THE CITIZENS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR US SITTING AT THIS TABLE. 
          THESE ARE ONLINE NUMBERS. 
          OK. SO I GUESS WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS AT THE MEETING, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE NUMBERS ARE GOING BY YOUR KIND OF TRAIN OF THOUGHT THERE. 
          IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER ABOUT THE NUMBERS. 
          NOW, WHAT MARIE IS KIND OF SAYING IS THAT IF A CITIZEN HAS AN ISSUE, THEN THEY MIGHT NOT SHOW UP TO ALL THE MEETINGS. BUT WHEN THEY DO HAVE AN ISSUE, THE MEETING ISN'T AVAILABLE TO THEM, RIGHT? SO THE NUMBERS, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN GO. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T REALLY CARE WHERE THE MEETING IF THE MEETINGS IN THE MORNING OR AFTERNOON OR IN THE EVENING. BUT I THINK MORE TO THE POINT IS, DOESN'T REALLY A SURVEY IS NOT GOING TO REALLY SHOW ANY NUMBERS. 
          IT'S NOT IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT A NO ISSUE. 
          IT'S JUST WHETHER OR NOT IF SOMEBODY IN THE CITY HAS AN ISSUE AT SOME POINT IN TIME THAT THEY ARE HAVE MORE AVAILABILITY TO THE. 
          I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, I THINK DAVID'S POINT IS CORRECT, TOO, THAT THE NUMBERS DON'T SHOW THAT OUR MEETINGS ARE MORE ATTENDED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. 
          WELL, I THINK IT WOULD BE INTRIGUING TO SEE 2018 AND 2019 BECAUSE HAVING BEEN A CITIZEN WOULD COME TO CITY HALL. 
          I REMEMBER MANY A CROWD OF MANY ON MANY A TOPIC, AND, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN'T COME DURING THE DAY. 
          IN MY OPINION, I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL FOR QUITE A LONG TIME. 
          I DON'T, WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS TO DO ON THIS SUBJECT, BUT I WOULD SAY IF YOU HAVE A HOT BUTTON TOPIC, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER IN MY MIND WHEN THE TIME IS, THEY COME WHENEVER THAT TIME IS TO STATE THEIR OPINION, BUT THEY MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE THE DAY OFF FROM WORK. 
          [01:00:01]
JUST ONE THING WE'VE DONE IS WE NOW ALLOW THE HYBRID WHERE YOU CAN YOU CAN CALL IN YOU CONTENT AND SEND IN WRITTEN COMMENTS. 
          THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA FOR 12B. 
          WE'LL TALK, WHICH IS A GREAT IMPROVEMENT. 
          THAT'S ONE GOING TO SAY ONE GOOD THING CAME OF COVID. 
          THAT'S A GOOD THING. IT'S A VERY GOOD THING. 
          THERE'S JUST THE THOUGHT, TOO, YOU TO REQUEST 2019, 2019 STATS. 
          I TALKED TO JANELLE ABOUT IT AND THOSE ARE NOT AVAILABLE. 
          IS IT RIGHT? NO. 
          IN ALL FAIRNESS, I DON'T KNOW. 
          YEAH. BUT YOU CAN TELL HOW MANY PEOPLE SIGNED IN, BUT HAVE NEVER AFFORDED PEOPLE THAT FUNDED. WE COULD HAVE A TURNSTILE AT THE DOOR AND MAKE THEM PAY FOR THAT. 
          ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE FORWARD. 
          [3.B.
A Presentation of the Proposed FEMA Flood Insurance Risk Rating 2.0 and its implications for property owners in Galveston ( T. Tietjens - 45 min )]
WE HAVE A GENTLEMAN FROM FEMA WAITING AND HAS BEEN PATIENT. 
          COULD YOU READ ITEM 3B, PLEASE? YOU KNOW THREE THINGS DISCRIMINATION OF THE PROPOSED FLOOD INSURANCE RISK RATING 2.0 AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS IN GALVESTON. 
          WE HAVE MR. GILBERT DHIREN FROM FEMA TO PRESENT AND, TIM, YOU'RE GOING TO INTRODUCE THIS SUBJECT. YES, SIR. THANK YOU, MAYOR. 
          GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, TIM, WITH THE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY. 
          RISK RATING 2.0 IS A COMPLEX SUBJECT AND THERE'S THERE'S A LOT TO IT. 
          I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS WILL BE INTERESTED IN THIS MEANT TO BE INFORMATIVE. 
          YOUR CONSTITUENTS WILL CERTAINLY BE INTERESTED IN THIS AS WELL. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO MUCH DETAIL BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF COMPLEXITY AND GILBERT'S GOT A LOT TO GO THROUGH ON THIS. 
          BUT I WILL SAY, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF RESOURCES WITH OUR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. WE'VE GOT CRS PROGRAM THAT JUST RECENTLY COMPLETED OUR CYCLE VISIT. GIL HAS ASSISTED IN TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, AND HE'S A GREAT RESOURCE. 
          DEBBIE VIRSEC, WHO'S OUR CONSULTANT FOR OUR CRC PROGRAM, IS ALSO AVAILABLE HERE. 
          SO I'LL JUST KICK THIS OFF TO GIL. 
          AND THEN THERE'S A PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          EXCUSE ME, PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF AGAIN, DIFFERENT ASPECTS AND PHASES OF THIS IN TERMS OF TIMING, THE WHY, HOW AND AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE REALLY VERY PERTINENT TO THIS ISLAND. 
          AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS ISLAND. 
          SO, GOOD MORNING, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF THIS COUNCIL. 
          WE ARE THE REGIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE LIAISON FOR FEMA. 
          I AM GOING TO JUMP RIGHT TO MY SCREEN AND LET'S GET THIS PRESENTATION STARTED. 
          I AM GOING TO GIVE YOU A LOT OF INFORMATION FAIRLY QUICKLY. 
          TIM SAT THROUGH A CONDENSED VERSION OF THIS PRESENTATION JUST THIS WEEK AND WE EXCEEDED AN HOUR. BUT I WAS ABLE TO REDUCE THE THE TIME FRAME HERE TO ABOUT HOPEFULLY WITHIN 30 MINUTES. AND IF I CAN JUST SEE CONFIRMATION THAT YOU ARE SEEING MY SLIDE DECK? YES. YES. OK. 
          SO I'M JUST GOING TO START RIGHT OFF. 
          RISK PARITY 2.0 IS A MAJOR TRANSFORMATIONAL LEAP FORWARD. 
          BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT RISK 2.0, LET ME TALK ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE NOW. 
          CURRENTLY, WE HAVE FIVE MILLION POLICIES IN OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS. 
          AND NOW THAT IS NATIONWIDE, YOU KNOW, TEXAS AND LOUISIANA ARE ONE OF THE TWO OF THE LARGEST STATES WITH A NUMBER OF POLICIES IN FORCE. 
          WE HAVE OVER 1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS IN TOTAL COVERAGE NATIONWIDE AS WELL. 
          AND WE HAVE TWENTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE COMMUNITIES WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE VOLUNTARY NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. 
          WELL, HOW THESE NUMBERS ARE IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE THIS NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM WAS CREATED IN NINETEEN SIXTY EIGHT BACK IN 1968, AND FIP WAS MEANT TO BE A STANDALONE PROGRAM, SOMETHING THAT WE COLLECT PREMIUMS. WE USE THE PREMIUMS COLLECTED TO PAY OUT CLAIMS. HOWEVER, STARTING IN 2005, WE HAD THREE MAJOR EVENTS, WHICH WE HAD TO PAY OUT OVER SEVENTEEN POINT FIVE BILLION DOLLARS. 
          THAT WAS RITA, KATRINA AND WILMA, AND SINCE 2000. 
          I'M SORRY. AS OF 2020, WE HAVE PAID OUT CONSECUTIVELY 1.2 BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS. AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THIS PROGRAM IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. 
          WITH THAT, WE HAD TO TRANSITION TO A MORE FINANCIALLY SOUND METHOD IN WHICH TO DETERMINE INDIVIDUAL RISKS FOR PROPERTIES AND TO DETERMINE A DIFFERENT METHODOLOGY A NEW METHODOLOGY OF HOW TO WRITE FLOOD INSURANCE RATES. 
          SO WHAT THAT MEANS THAT WE ALL KNOW THAT WATER IS NOT GOING TO STOP BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE ON A MAP. HOWEVER, THAT IS THE WAY FLOOD INSURANCE IS RATED RIGHT NOW BASED ON RISKS, EITHER YOU'RE IN OR YOU'RE OUT ON THAT PAPER MAP. 
          [01:05:01]
AND BASED ON MY EXPERIENCES, WE HAVE SEEN GREATER NUMBERS OF DAMAGE HAPPENED TO STRUCTURES OUTSIDE OF OUR SPECIAL FLATHEAD AREAS. 
          MY VERY FIRST DISASTER IS OKLAHOMA 4222 2015. 
          SIXTY PERCENT OF DAMAGED STRUCTURES WERE OUTSIDE OF THE SPECIAL FLOOD [INAUDIBLE]. 
          SO WHAT WE ARE SEEING ARE RATE ECLIPSE. 
          WE HAVE A HOUSE THAT IS INSIDE OF THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAS AREA WHICH PAYS A HIGHER PREMIUM THAN RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. 
          BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE ON A MAP, THAT HOUSE IS DEEMED AN AREA OF MINIMAL FLOODING AND PAYING A LOT LESSER OF A PREMIUM, BUT IN REALITY, THE RISK IS A LOT HIGHER. 
          WE ARE JUST LIMITED ON WHAT WE CAN MAP OUR. 
          THE [INAUDIBLE] CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS REQUIRE OUR MAPPING ARM OF FEMA TO MAP TO THE ONE PERCENT ANNUAL EVENT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE DO. 
          IF WE WERE TO MAP TO MORE DETAILED THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS MORE LIKELY WOULD INCREASE. BUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE IS ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF EQUITY RISK. 
          RATING 2.0 IS FULLY AN EQUITY IN ACTION AND HOW WE ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE WE WENT OFF TO FLOOD ZONES IN RELATION TO THE BASE OF ELEVATION. 
          SO IF YOU HAD TWO HOUSES AND TERRORISTS ARE SAYING BASED ON THOSE RATING CRITERIA, BUT ONE OF THEM WAS VALUED AT $2 MILLION AND ONE OF THEM IS VALUED AT ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. WELL, THEY WOULD PAY THE SAME EXACT PREMIUM. 
          SO IN ESSENCE, YOU WOULD HAVE LOWER VALUED HOMES SUBSIDIZING HIGHER VALUE HOMES. 
          IT'S REALLY NOT FAIR TO UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          WE ARE ADDRESSING THIS AND WE ARE BRINGING IN A VARIABLE THAT IS GOING TO BE USED DIRECTLY ON THE RATING PRINCIPLES AND IT'S GOING TO BE REPLACING WITH COST VALUES. 
          SO HIGHER VALUE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE ARE GOING TO HAVE A HIGHER PREMIUM UNDER RISK RATE 2.0 AND PREMIUMS. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS WHILE THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING ON. 
          I DO KNOW I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME AND I LEFT, WHICH I HOPE WAS A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF TIME AFTER THE PRESENTATION FOR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. 
          SO I'LL LET YOU DECIDE HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT. 
          CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUICK QUESTION IF THE MOST PEOPLE BUY TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OF FLOOD. 
          SO WHETHER YOUR HOUSE IS WORTH THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND OR MILLION, YOU'RE STILL ONLY BUYING TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY OF COVERAGE. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ENACTED BY CONGRESS RISK RATING 2.0 IS A MAJOR TRANSFORMATION FORWARD. 
          HOWEVER, WE DID NOT CHANGE ANYTHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE CONGRESS'S APPROVAL. 
          WE ACTED WITHIN OUR OWN SCOPE OF AUTHORITY, SO A COUPLE OF THINGS WE COULD NOT CHANGE AS WE COULD NOT INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF COVERAGE OFFERED FROM THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. SO THAT HAS REMAINED AT TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND CONTENT FOR RESIDENTIAL [INAUDIBLE] BUILDING FIBER CONTENT FOR NONRESIDENTS. 
          BUT YOU'RE SAYING IF YOUR HOUSE COSTS MORE, YOU WILL BE PAYING MORE A HIGHER PREMIUM, EVEN THOUGH YOU'LL NEVER DO A CLAIM. 
          YES, BECAUSE THAT HOUSE WILL EXPERIENCE MORE DAMAGE. 
          THEY WILL REACH THAT TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND CAP A LOT FASTER THAN THE LOWER VALUE HOMES. AND THOSE ARE A MAJORITY OF OUR CLAIMS AREAS AND MINIMAL FLOODING ZONES ARE A VAST MAJORITY OF FEMA CLAIMS. NOW, A LOT OF THEM DON'T EXCEED THE 250000, BUT A LOT OF THEM REACH VERY HIGH AMOUNTS. 
          SO YES, IF YOU HAVE A HIGHER VALUED HOME, THAT WILL BE A DIRECT COST OF YOUR FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUM [INAUDIBLE] GO AHEAD AND THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION AND WILL HOLD OUR QUESTIONS AND LET YOU FINISH THROUGH ALL YOUR THOUGHTS. 
          OK, THANK YOU, SIR. 
          SO THE NEXT SLIDE, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE CHANGING AS WE ARE REMOVING SOME OF OUR POPULAR PRODUCTS. ONE OF THEM IS THE PREFERRED RISK POLICY. 
          AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE NUMBERS, IT'S FULLY 50 PERCENT OF OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS. 
          NOW, THIS WAS NOT TAKEN LIGHTLY. 
          WE UNDERSTOOD THE POPULARITY OF THE PIER PIECE AND WE UNDERSTOOD THE LOW COST OF THE PIER PIECE. BUT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AN UNDERWRITING ASPECT, YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND AND REALIZE THAT THE PIER PIECE WERE NOT BASED OFF A RISK. 
          THEY WERE BASED SOLELY ON THE LOCATION, ON A MAP. 
          SO THEY ARE OUTSIDE OF OUR SPECIAL HAZARD AREAS, SO THEREFORE THEY RECEIVE THE BEST PREMIUM. ALTHOUGH WE KNOW SOME AREAS OF POSSIBLE FLOODING WERE AT A GREATER RISK, JUST NOT AS MUCH OF A RISK OF THE ONE PERCENT WELL UNDER RISK 2.0. 
          EVERY BUILDING IN OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS WILL BE RATED SOLELY ON THE INDIVIDUAL RISKS OF EACH BUILDING. WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE ARE REMOVING THE PREFERRED RISK POLICIES AND WE WILL NO LONGER BE USING SPECIAL FLOOD HAS OR MAPS AS A DIRECT VARIABLE. 
          INSTEAD, WE'LL BE USING THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH BUILDING IN OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO TOUCH ON IS GRANDFATHERING. 
          GRANDFATHERING IS GOING AWAY. 
          NOW I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN OF GRANDFATHERING A LOT OF PEOPLE UNDER THE MISCONCEPTIONS THAT WE HAVE MILLIONS OF POLICIES THAT ARE GRANDFATHERED. 
          BUT IN REALITY, WE HAVE ABOUT ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY FIVE THOUSAND POLICIES OUT OF OUR FIVE MILLION THAT ARE GRANDFATHERED. 
          [01:10:02]
SO TO REDUCE THE COMPLEXITY AND CONFUSION OF WHAT IS THE NFIP, WE WERE DOING AWAY WITH SOME OF THESE PROGRAMS AND GRANDFATHERING IS ONE OF THEM. 
          NOW GRANDFATHERED WILL STILL BE OF A BENEFIT BECAUSE AS I TALK ABOUT THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE COMING FORWARD, GRANDFATHERED IN IS GOING TO BE A LOT LOWER STARTING POINT AS PEOPLE PROGRESS UP THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE, WHICH IS GOING TO BE CALLED THE GLIDE PATH, WHICH I WILL TOUCH ON ON HERE IN A SECOND. 
          SO THE OTHER ONES ARE WE HAVE TWO OF THEM THAT ARE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, SO THEY'RE STAYING IN PLACE. BUT THE WAY THE DISCOUNTS ARE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT, THAT IS THE NEWLY MAPPED PROPERTY AND THE PREMIUM SUBSIDIES. 
          SO INSTEAD OF HAVING A VERY CONFUSING RATE CALCULATOR ON THE SIDE, YOU'RE SIMPLY GOING TO RECEIVE A $30000 DISCOUNT OFF OF THE FIRST THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS IN COVERAGE. 
          THAT EQUATES TO ABOUT A 15 PERCENT INCREMENTAL INCREASE INSTEAD OF 18 PERCENT. 
          BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON EACH STRUCTURES AND THE VARIABLES THAT COMPRISE THEIR OVERALL PREMIUM. BUT THIS NEXT SLIDE IS KIND OF A BREAKDOWN OF HOW WE CHARGE FLOOD INSURANCE NOW UNDER THE LEGACY SYSTEM, THE OLD SYSTEM. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, WE GO OFF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE NOW, THE BASEMENT ELEVATION, THE FOUNDATION TYPE AND STRUCTURAL ELEVATION OF THE GROUNDS AROUND THE ELEVATION. 
          THAT IS IT. WE'RE REALLY ONLY CONCERNED WITH TWO FLOODING PERILS AND THAT WAS FLOODING FROM RIVERINE OR IN CASES OF COASTAL FLOODING FROM COASTAL. 
          BUT IN REALITY, THERE COULD BE A LARGE NUMBER OF FLOODING PERILS THAT WERE NEVER ADDED ON THAT. THAT MEANT THE POLICIES WERE NOT PROPERLY RATED AT THE TRUE RISK. 
          UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF MORE OF WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DETERMINED FOR THEIR FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUM, AS YOU CAN SEE THE DISTANCE TO FLOODING SOURCE AND TYPE. 
          THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A BIG IMPACT AND THE DISTANCE IS GOING TO BE ABOUT A THOUSAND YARDS AND FLYING SAUCER TYPE ARE GOING TO BE A MAJOR [INAUDIBLE]. 
          IN YOUR CASE, YOU'LL BE CLOSED OF SOME CASES WILL BE RIVERS, MAJOR CANALS, BUT IT HAS TO BE A MAJOR FLOODING SOURCE. 
          I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT A SMALL TRIBUTARY. 
          THERE IS THE BEST BACK OF YOUR HOUSE AND A CREEK BUILDING OCCUPANCY IS ALSO GOING TO HAVE A BIG IMPACT AS WELL. 
          PRIMARY FOCUS OF THE NFIP IS ENSURING PEOPLE HAVE PROTECTION FOR THEIR PRIMARY HOME. 
          WHEN YOU START HAVING MULTIPLE HOMES AS A BUSINESS, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO RECEIVE THE GLIDE PATH THAT YOU WOULD IF IT WAS YOUR PRIMARY HOME CONSTRUCTION TYPE. 
          WE ARE STARTING TO UNDERSTAND THAT DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION METHODS. 
          BUILDING HOME OFFER MORE PROTECTION, FOR EXAMPLE, MASONRY TYPE CONSTRUCTION JUST WITHSTANDS FLOODING BETTER THAN WOOD FRAME. 
          SO IF YOUR HOME IS BUILT WITH MASONRY ROBB BRICK STONE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOWER FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUM THAN IF YOU BUILD WITH WOOD FRAME. 
          NOW, FOUNDATION TYPE IS A BIG THING RIGHT NOW. 
          IT'S VERY CONFUSING. 
          WE HAVE OVER 80 DIFFERENT DIAGRAMS, AND WE KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION METHODS OUT THERE. FOUNDATION TYPES. 
          WE ARE TRANSITIONING THAT FOUNDATION TYPE TO SIX SIMPLE DIAGRAMS AND ALL THE BUILDING METHODS OUT THERE WILL BE ROLLED INTO THE FOUNDATION. 
          SO THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          THE GROUND ELEVATION IS JUST AS IMPORTANT UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 AS AS IT IS NOW. 
          THE BASE OF ELEVATION PEOPLE HAVE FREE BOARD. 
          THEY BUILD HIGHER. THE ELEVATION IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND SO IS THE GROUND THAT'S RUNNING ELEVATION AROUND THAT STRUCTURE UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          WE WILL NO LONGER BE USING BASE FOOT ELEVATION AS A VARIABLE. 
          WE WILL BE USING WHAT IS CALLED THE FIRST FLOOR HEIGHT, AND WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING THE QUESTION HOW HIGH IS THE FIRST FLOOR FROM THE LOWEST POINT ON THE GROUND? WE CALL THAT THE LOWEST. 
          IT'S GREAT. THAT IS IT. 
          THE MORE CONFUSING COMPUTATIONS CONVERSIONS, IT'S GOING TO BE SIMPLE. 
          WHAT IS THE FIRST HEIGHT AND ESPECIALLY WE NOW HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION THAT ALLOWS FEMA TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS, YOUR YOUR, YOUR HOMEOWNERS. 
          SO THEREFORE, WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT ELEVATION CERTIFICATES WILL NO LONGER BE REQUIRED FOR INSURANCE. 
          NOW, PLEASE REMEMBER, EVERYTHING I'M REFERRING TO NOW IMPACTS THE INSURANCE SIDE OF THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. 
          IT HAS NO CHANGES OR BEARING TO THE COMPLIANCE SIDE. 
          SO IF ELEVATIONS ARE, YOU ARE SERIOUS COMMUNITIES. 
          SO THE COLLECTION AND RECORD KEEPING OF ELEVATION CERTIFICATES ARE STILL REQUIREMENT JUST NOT BEFORE PURCHASING A FLOOD INSURANCE. 
          NOW, IF YOUR HOMEOWNERS BELIEVE OUR INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, THEY CAN STILL SUBMIT THE INFORMATION FOUND ON THE ELEVATION CERTIFICATE. 
          AND FEMA BELIEVES THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE THE BEST AVAILABLE DATA. 
          SO IF THE INFORMATION [INAUDIBLE] SHOWS THAT IT PROVIDES A MORE FAVORABLE RATE, WE WILL ACCEPT THAT AND WE WILL PROVIDE THEM THE MORE FAVORABLE RATE. 
          SO A NUMBER OF FLAWS HAS BEEN VERY CONFUSING, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM TYPE BUILDINGS TOWNHOMES. 
          THERE WAS A CALCULATION TO DETERMINE WHAT FLOOR WOULD ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED THE FIRST FLOOR WELL UNDER THE RISK RATING 2.0 BASEMENTS WILL NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED A FLOOR, AND THAT IS A GOOD THING FOR RATING PURPOSES. 
          IT WILL BE INCORPORATED TO THE FOUNDATION TYPES, WHICH I WILL SHOW YOU A DIAGRAM HERE IN A FEW MINUTES, BUT FIRST FLOOR WILL BE REGULATED AS 1ST FLOOR SEEING ARE. 
          FOR RESIDENTIAL HOMES. 
          [01:15:02]
IT CAN BE THREE PLUS IT'LL BE THREE PLUS ALL THE WAY UP TO NINETY NINE. 
          THEY'RE EQUAL TO NINETY NINE. 
          NOW, PRIOR CLAIMS ARE A BIG THING NOW UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 AND THE LEGACY SYSTEM CLAIMS WERE A DIRECT VARIABLE OF HOW A PREMIUM WAS DETERMINED. 
          HOWEVER, UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 WE ARE KIND OF STARTING OFF EVERYONE WITH A CLEAN SLATE. 
          THERE MAY BE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE SOMEONE HAS A SEVERE, REPETITIVE LOSS. 
          THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A SURCHARGE, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PAYING NOW ANYWAY. 
          BUT UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 IF YOU HAVE THREE LOSSES, IT WON'T BE A DIRECT VARIABLE UNTIL YOU FILE YOUR FIRST CLAIM UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          AT THAT TIME, THE PRIOR LOSSES WILL COME BACK, BUT UNDER THE NFIP YOU DO GET ONE FREEBIE. 
          SO IF YOU HAVE THREE LOSSES, YOU FILE FOR YOUR COURT UNDER THE RISK RATING 2.0. 
          YOU HAVE A VARIABLE OF THREE PRIOR LOSSES. 
          SO I KNOW THIS IS A I CAN BREAK THESE DOWN TO INDIVIDUAL FOR YOU AT A LATER TIME OR PROVIDING MORE INFORMATION. 
          BUT THESE ARE NORMALLY WHERE I RECEIVE A LOT MORE OF THE QUESTIONS. 
          NOW WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE ON A LITTLE BIT HERE ON WHAT IS CHANGING FOR THE NEW PRICING METHODOLOGY. OK. 
          SO WHAT WE ARE DOING, ADDING ON NEW INFORMATION, NEW TECHNOLOGY, WE HAVE WORKED WITH CONTRACTORS AND WE'VE PROVIDED DATA SETS WHICH HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CREATE NEW PROPRIETARY PRODUCTS THAT GIVE US A LOT OF OUR MAPPING. 
          WE OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE 10000 YEARS OF RECORDS TO WHAT WE DID. 
          IT WAS USE THE MONTE CARLO MODEL AND WE SIMULATED WORST CASE SCENARIOS FOR PAST 10000 YEARS TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE FLOOD RISK FOR EVERY POINT ON OUR MAPS. 
          SO ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES, WE HAVE NO [INAUDIBLE] PRIVATE INDUSTRY INTO THE WAY WE ARE DETERMINING FLOOD INSURANCE. 
          WE HAVE TAKEN A REAL WIDE MODELING [INAUDIBLE] LOGIC AND CAN'T RISK MODELING TO INCORPORATE AND PROVIDE THE DATA SETS NEEDED TO DETERMINE ALL THE VARIABLES THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED TO HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR RISK IS. 
          AND ALL THIS IS HAPPENING AUTOMATICALLY BY WHAT WE CREATED CALLED THE RISK RATING ENGINE. 
          AS I MENTIONED THE FREQUENCY OF EVENTS, WE OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE TEN YEARS OF RECORDS, BUT WE USE THE MODELING ON THIS AND THAT HELPS US DETERMINE THE RISKS AND THE RISKS ARE IMPORTANT BECAUSE AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE SIX PERILS OF FLOODING NOW THAT CAN BE IMMENSE FROM HEAVY RAINS, WHICH IS A NEW ONE, AND THEN FLOODING FROM RIVERINE FLOODING FROM COASTAL COASTAL EROSION AND GREAT LAKES, WHERE THEY FIND TSUNAMI FLOODING. 
          SO BEFORE YOU USED TO ONLY BE RATED AGAINST ONE OF THE PERILS, NOW IT CAN BE UP TO SIX. 
          AND IF ALL THE PARALLELS ARE APPLIED, THEN THAT WILL HAVE A WEIGHT ON THE OVERALL PREMIUM. TO REBUILD THE REPLACEMENT CONSTITUTES IS A BIG THING. 
          IT'S ALREADY INDUSTRY WIDE AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR WE ARE JUST NOW CUT CATCHING UP. 
          WE USED TO USE DEPRECIATION, WHICH OFTEN PROVIDED A LOWER CLAIM PAYOUT TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS. SOME HOUSES ARE JUST NOT MAINTAINED TO THE LEVEL WHERE THE DEPRECIATION TOOK A BIG CHUNK OUT BECAUSE THE VALUE WASN'T THERE UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 ALL STRUCTURES WILL BE RATED AT REPLACEMENT COST VALUE AND THIS IS THE GOOD THING THIS IS THAT ADDRESSES THE EQUITY ISSUE WHERE YOU HAVE LOWER VALUATION HOMES SUBSIDIZING HIGHER VALUE HOMES. 
          AS I MENTIONED, THE RATING VARIABLES HAVE CHANGED. 
          NO LONGER WILL YOU BE ABLE TO GO IN THE [INAUDIBLE] INSURANCE MANUALS, WHICH ARE VERY CONFUSING TO BEGIN WITH. 
          MOVING FORWARD, THE WAY TO DETERMINE YOUR FLOOD INSURANCE COSTS WILL BE TO SPEAK TO A LICENSED INSURANCE AGENT WHO HAVE ACCESS TO THE RISK RATING ENGINE. 
          THE QUOTES ARE ALMOST INSTANTANEOUSLY AS LONG AS THE APPLICATION AND THE INFORMATION PUT IN BY THE HOMEOWNER AGENT ARE CORRECT. 
          BUT WE HAVE FOUND THIS PROCESS LEAD TO LESS MISTAKES, WHICH IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US. 
          SO I MENTIONED THE FOUNDATION WE ARE TRANSITIONING TO SLAB ON GRADE BASEMENT NOT ELEVATED, SO THEREFORE BASEMENTS AND WILL NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED THE LOWEST FLOOR. 
          THE BASEMENT WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE FOUNDATION TYPE. 
          AND WE ALSO HAVE CRAWLSPACE THAT'S ELEVATED, INCLUDING ON ELEVATED SUB CRAWL SPACES. 
          NOW WE DO HAVE, IN YOUR CASE, MORE ELEVATED STRUCTURES SO ELEVATED WITHOUT ENCLOSURE AND POSSIBLY ELEVATED WIDTH ENCLOSURE OR ELEVATED WITH ENCLOSURE NOT POSSIBLE ON SOME TYPE OF SHARED WALL. NOW WE KNOW THERE'S MULTIPLE TYPES OF FOUNDATION TYPES, EXCUSE ME, LIKE SPLIT LEVEL THAT'S GOING TO BE CONSIDERED [INAUDIBLE] GRADE OR MID-LEVEL ENTRY THAT'S GOING TO BE ELEVATED WITH ENCLOSURE NOT CLOSE TO PYLON PIER. 
          SO WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THE POPULAR METHODS IN WHICH A LOT OF THE ELEVATED STRUCTURES ARE BUILT TO AND THE FOUNDATION TYPE OR CORRESPOND TO THAT METHOD OF THE FOUNDATION TYPE. 
          WELL, I ALREADY TOUCHED ON PRIOR CLAIMS, BUT I WANTED TO BRING UP ON THIS SLIDE IS THAT WE ARE ALSO INCORPORATING A 20 YEAR ROLLING WINDOW FOR PRIOR CLAIMANTS UNDER THE LEGACY SYSTEM. ONCE YOU HAD A PRIOR CLAIM, IT STAYED ON YOUR YOUR RECORD INDEFINITELY, UNDER RISK RATING 2.0, ONCE A PRIOR CLAIM IS HIT 20 YEARS, IT WILL ROLL OFF. 
          SO THAT IS NEW AND THAT IS EXCITING. 
          [01:20:02]
I UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE SEEN A LOT OF REPORTS. 
          THEY HAVE FALSE CLAIMS FROM THE 1970S, REALLY HAVE NO BEARING ON THE RISK OF TODAY. 
          SO WE HAVE ADDRESSED IT THAT. 
          SO FEMA CAN PROVIDE A LOT OF INFORMATION. 
          WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE GEOGRAPHIC VARIABLES. 
          WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT BY CONVERTING THE ADDRESS TO LAT AND LONG, AND WE'RE GOING TO PING THEM OFF OF OUR ALL OF OUR NEW DATA SETS. 
          WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE FIRST FLOOR HEIGHT. 
          WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL VALUE AND THE NFIP HISTORY, BUT WE'RE LEAVING AVENUES FOR THE HOMEOWNERS TO EITHER CONFIRM OR WANT TO USE DIFFERENT INFORMATION. 
          THEY CAN CONFIRM THE GROUND ELEVATION BY STAMFORD FIELD SURVEYS OF FIRST FLOOR HEIGHTS BY INFORMATION ON A STAMPED AND SEALED ELEVATION CERTIFICATE. 
          THEY HAVE NEW APPRAISALS FOR THE REPLACEMENT VALUE OR, YOU KNOW, FEMA DOES MAKE MISTAKES. 
          I'LL BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT THAT, AND SOMETIMES THE MISTAKES ARE FOUND IN CLAIMS OF NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPER ADDRESS, SO THEY CAN PROVE THAT THEY HAVE A CLAIM ON THE RECORD THAT WASN'T THEIRS. 
          WE CAN TEST THAT AND GET THAT REPAIRED. 
          NOW, UNFORTUNATELY, SOME THINGS ARE NOT CHANGING. 
          FEES AND SURCHARGES ARE STILL GOING TO PLAY. 
          WE HAVE THE RESERVE FUND ASSESSMENT FEE, WHICH IS 18 PERCENT OF THE PREMIUM THAT YOU APPLY A SURCHARGE, WHICH IS TWENTY FIVE FOR PRIMARY RESIDENCE, 250 FOR NON-PRIMARY. 
          THE FEDERAL POLICY FEE IS $47 AND JUST WON'T APPLY. 
          PROBATION IS IF A COMMUNITY IS FOUND NOT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT REGULATION, AND THIS COMPENSATION WILL EQUATE TO A $50 CHARGE PER POLICYHOLDER IN THEIR JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES. 
          SO WHAT IS CHANGING OUR STATUTORY AND MITIGATION CREDITS? RISK RATING 2.0 IS DESIGNED TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO MITIGATE, TO ELEVATE, TO USE BETTER CONSTRUCTION METHODS. SOME OF THOSE STATUTORY DISCOUNTS ARE ENACTED BY CONGRESS, SO WE COULDN'T CHANGE THEM. THOSE ARE PRETTY FIRM [INAUDIBLE] DISCOUNT. 
          THE POLICY WILL TRANSITION TOWARD ITS TRUE RISK AND LOWER RATE AND ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT RISK RATING 2.0. 
          IF THERE IS A LAPSE IN COVERAGE AFTER A 30 DAY WINDOW, WE HAVE A 30 DAY GRACE PERIOD. 
          IF THERE'S A LAPSE IN COVERAGE THAT CONSTITUTES A FULL LAPSE, NO LONGER WILL WE ENTERTAIN TRYING TO GET SOMEONE BACK AGAIN FROM 30 TO 90 DAYS, AS WE DO UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM. 
          THE COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM AND I APPLAUD YOUR COMMITTEE FOR DOING ALL THE EXTRA HARD WORK NECESSARY IS CHANGING. 
          THE COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM OFFERS A PERCENTAGE DISCOUNT FOR EVERY POLICY RIGHT NOW IN [INAUDIBLE] UNDER RISK. FREE TO THAT PERCENTAGE DISCOUNT IS GOING TO BE OPENED TO EVERY STRUCTURE IN YOUR JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES. 
          THE ONLY CAVEAT IS THAT THOSE OUTSIDE THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA HAVE TO BE AT FULL RISK GRADE TO RECEIVE THAT DISCOUNT, BUT IT IS NOW OPEN TO ALL OF YOUR BUILDING JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES. SO THAT'S A BIG THING. 
          ALL THAT HARD WORK YOUR COMMUNITY IS DOING IS REALLY GOING TO PAY OFF TO HELP ANY HELP HEDGE AGAINST ANY POSSIBLE INCREASES IN FLOOD INSURANCE. 
          NOW, MACHINERY EQUIPMENT IS A BIG THING FOR ME. 
          IT'S EITHER ALL OR NONE. 
          IT'S ONLY A FIVE PERCENT DISCOUNT, BUT IT'S ACHIEVABLE IN AREAS THAT HAVE A LOT OF HOMES THAT ARE ELEVATED. THE THING ABOUT THE ALL OR NONE IS ALL THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT HAVE TO BE ELEVATED TO THE CORRESPONDING FLOOR. 
          NOW IF YOU HAVE A SLAB ON GRADE TYPE. 
          THE CORRESPONDING FLOOR WOULD BE THE ATTIC. 
          NOW THAT IS UNREASONABLE, CONSIDERING IF YOU HAVE A CONTENT POLICY, REMEMBER YOU HAVE YOUR BUILDING POLICY AND YOU HAVE YOUR CONTENT, YOU PUT YOUR HOME IN YOUR PALM OF YOUR HAND, YOU SHAKE IT, TURNED UPSIDE DOWN. 
          SHAKE IT. EVERYTHING FALLS OUT YOUR CONTENT THAT INCLUDE YOUR WASHER, DRYER OR DISHWASHER. WELL, UNDER THE MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT, THIS IS GOING TO BE HAVE CONTENT INSURANCE. THOSE APPLIANCES ALSO HAVE TO BE ON THE CORRESPONDING FLOOR, AND IT'S NOT PRACTICAL TO HAVE YOUR WASHER DRYER OR DISHWASHER AND YET. 
          NOW, HOWEVER, FOR ELEVATED STRUCTURES, THE THE FLOOR WILL BE THE NEXT HIGHEST FLOOR, SO THAT CAN BE THE FIRST FLOOR IN SOME CASES WHERE YOU HAVE A CRAWL SPACE OR IF YOU'RE ELEVATED [INAUDIBLE] POST. 
          SO THAT'S A VERY ACHIEVABLE FIVE PERCENT DISCOUNT. 
          NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I'M HAPPY TO SAY IS THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BUILT THEIR HOMES IN IN AREAS THAT ARE PRONE TO FLOODING BUT NOT HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR FLOOD VENTING. 
          FLOOD VENTING IS NOW GOING TO BE A DISCOUNT, BUT ALSO AVAILABLE JURISDICTION WISE. 
          NO, NO LONGER ARE YOU REGULATED, JUST STRUCTURES THAT ARE FOUND INSIDE OF THE SPECIAL FLOOD AREA. I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT FIRMS ARE FLOOD STRUCTURING MAPS WILL NO LONGER BE USED AS A DIRECT VARIABLE TO DETERMINE FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS, BUT IT WILL STILL BE DETERMINED BY THE FIRMS WILL STILL BE USED TO DETERMINE STRUCTURES THAT ARE LOCATED INSIDE A SPECIAL FLOOD HAS AREA TO DETERMINE WHAT'S CALLED MANAGEABLE PURCHASE OF FLOOD INSURANCE. THAT MEANS THAT FEDERAL DOLLARS TOUCH THIS MORTGAGE MANDATORY PURCHASE OF FLOOD INSURANCE AS REQUIRED. 
          BUT THIS FLOOD BENEFIT DISCOUNT IS DEPENDENT ON A CALCULATION ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ENCLOSED AREA. IT CAN BE THREE TO 27 PERCENT. 
          THE BEST THING ABOUT THESE DISCOUNTS IS THEY CAN COUNT EACH OTHER. 
          THEY CAN BE ADDED ON TOP ON TOP OF EACH OTHER AND REALLY HELP HOMEOWNERS WHO HAVE TAKEN 
          [01:25:02]
THE MITIGATION AND CONSTRUCTION DISCOUNTS TO THE AS FAR AS THEY CAN GO. 
          AND THEY CAN RECEIVE A LOT LOWER FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUM WHEN THOSE DISCOUNTS APPLY. 
          ALREADY TOUCHED WHAT'S GOING AWAY, SO I'VE ALREADY TOUCHED ON GRANDFATHERS. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON THAT, BUT ONE THING THAT IS IS STILL IN PLACE IS THE 18 PERCENT GLIDE PATH. 
          NOW THAT IS IN PLACE BECAUSE 80 PERCENT GLIDE PATH IS A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ENACTED BY CONGRESS. WHEN THEY PASSED THE HOMEOWNERS FLOOD INSURANCE AFFORDABILITY ACT IN 2015. 
          THAT ACT STATED THAT FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS WILL INCREASE NO LESS THAN FIVE PERCENT, BUT NO MORE THAN 18 PERCENT. 
          THEY HAVE FULL RISK RATE. 
          THE PROBLEM WAS THEY NEVER IDENTIFIED WHAT WAS FULL RISK RATE AND RISK RATING 2.0. 
          WE DO. SO THE RATE INCREASE WILL STILL BE CAPPED AT 18 PERCENT. 
          BUT ALL OF OUR POLICYHOLDERS, ONCE THEY RECEIVE THEIR DECLARATION PAGE, WILL KNOW WHAT THEIR FULL RATE IS AND THEREFORE CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS ON HOW TO ANTICIPATE THEIR INCREASE. AND THE INCREASE WILL BE BASED ON THE 18 PERCENT UNTIL THEY HIT [INAUDIBLE]. 
          SO A COUPLE OF THINGS GOING AWAY ALREADY TALKED ABOUT PREFERRED RISK POLICY, THE MORTGAGE PORTFOLIO PROTECTION ACT. 
          WE HAVE ONE HUNDRED OF THOSE IN OUR ENTIRE BOOK OF BUSINESS TO REDUCE COMPLEXITY. 
          WE ARE REMOVING THAT FROM OUR PROGRAM AND ALSO SUBMIT THE RATES. 
          THOSE ARE STRUCTURES THAT WERE FOUND WOEFULLY UNDER THE BFD OR UNIQUE STRUCTURE, SUCH AS A PLANE CONVERTED TO A HOME. 
          THE RISK RATING ENGINE THAT AGENTS WILL BE USING HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE VERY ACCURATE QUOTES FOR ALL MANNERS OF STRUCTURE. 
          SO THEREFORE TO REDUCE THE COMPLEXITY, WE ARE REMOVING THAT THE RUG FROM OUR PROGRAM AS WELL. SO WHAT'S NOT CHANGING? MANDATORY PURCHASE REQUIREMENTS STILL IN PLAY. 
          A FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENT ARE STILL IN PLAY. 
          REMEMBER, THIS IS FOR INSURANCE. 
          YOUR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IS A GREAT PROGRAM TO BE ABLE TO JOIN THE SERIES AS A MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENT, SO NOTHING IS CHANGING ON THAT SIDE. 
          STATUTORY CAPS HAVE REMAINED THE SAME. 
          I ADDRESSED THAT TO TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND BILLION HUNDRED THOUSAND CONTENT FOR RESIDENTIAL. THOSE ARE STATUTORY CAPS. 
          WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CHANGE THOSE UNDER OUR SCOPE OF AUTHORITY. 
          BUT THERE ARE OTHER BILLS ON THE HILL THAT MAKE CHANGES LATER ON. 
          BUT UNDER RISK RATING 2.0, IT WILL REMAIN THE SAME ASSIGNMENT TO A NEW OWNER IS ALSO REMAINING. THIS IS BENEFICIAL, ESPECIALLY AS I MENTIONED GRANDFATHERING GOING AWAY. 
          BUT THE HOW RISK CREATED 2.0 IS YOUR LAST RATE UNDER THE LEGACY SYSTEM WILL BE A STARTING POINT FOR THE NEW SYSTEM. 
          SO A GRANDFATHERING LAST RATE WILL BE TYPICALLY LOWER THAN A STANDARD FLOOD INSURANCE POLICY, BUT THEREFORE THE STARTING POINT WILL BE MUCH LOWER IN THE 18 PERCENT AMOUNT WILL BE MUCH LOWER. THIS GIVES EVERYONE TIME TO PLAN ACCORDINGLY FOR THE RATE INCREASE. 
          NOW WE'RE SCREENING 2.0 HAS ALREADY STARTED IN OCTOBER WITH NEW BUSINESS THIS YEAR, AND IF YOU'RE FOUND TO HAVE A RENEWAL TIME AFTER OCTOBER, BUT BEFORE APRIL, YOU CAN CHOOSE TO OPT INTO RISK FREE 2.0 AFTER PROVIDES A BETTER AND MORE ADVANTAGEOUS RATE. 
          OR YOU CAN CHOOSE TO REMAIN WITH THE LEGACY SYSTEM UNTIL APRIL OF 2022, IN WHICH THAT TIME ALL POLICIES WILL TRANSITION TO RISK RATING 2.0 UPON THE RENEWAL. 
          NOW A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN NOW. 
          SINCE PRP'S ARE GOING AWAY, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO CHANGE COVERAGE AMOUNTS AND INCREASE THEIR DEDUCTIBLES IF THEY SO CHOOSE WHEN THEY TRANSITION TO RISK FREE 2.0. 
          REMEMBER, THE PREFERRED RISK POLICY WAS NORMALLY A SET AMOUNT. 
          MOST PEOPLE MAXED OUT AT TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND CONTEXT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE OPTIONS TO REFLECT THEIR COVERAGE AND THEIR DEDUCTIBLES AND THEIR DEDUCTIBLES WILL STILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE PREMIUM. 
          HIGHER DEDUCTIBLES THE LOWER THE PREMIUM, BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PAY THAT DEDUCTIBLE. WHEN YOU'RE INITIATING A CLAIM, A VERY UPFRONT LAPSE OF COVERAGE IN 30 DAYS, IT'S REALLY IMPERATIVE THAT YOUR CONSTITUENTS UNDERSTAND THE UNDER RISK SCREEN 2.0. 
          FEMA DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO PAST 30 DAYS AND AND BRING BACK YOUR POLICY UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          THEY ACTUALLY SAY THAT ONCE YOU HIT THAT 30 DAY WINDOW AND YOU'RE AT THIRTY ONE, YOUR POLICIES ARE LAPSE AND YOU'LL HAVE TO COME BACK IN AS NEW BUSINESS. 
          THE PROBLEM THERE IS OR THE CONCERN THERE IS THAT WHEN YOU DO HAVE A LAPSE, YOU LOSE ANY BENEFITS. SO IF YOU HAD A 18 PERCENT GLIDE PATH, YOU LOSE THAT IF YOU HAD A GRANDFATHERED RATE BASED ON THE 18% USE THAT YOU HAVE TO COME BACK AT NEW BUSINESS, WHICH MEANS FULL RISK GREAT RIGHT ON THE BEGINNING. 
          SO IT'S REALLY IMPERATIVE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A VERY BIG CONSEQUENCE OF NOT MAINTAINING FLOOD INSURANCE WITHIN THE WINDOW ALLOTTED FOR PREMIUM PAYMENT. 
          NOW THESE ARE A COUPLE OF LINKS AND THESE ARE AVAILABLE. 
          YOU HAVE THE PDF DOCUMENT. 
          RESTRAINT 2.0 IS A GREAT SOURCE. 
          IF YOU SCROLL HALFWAY DOWN THAT WEBSITE, YOU CAN FIND A LINKS THAT CAN SEND YOU TO WEBSITES THAT CAN GIVE YOU SPECIFIC DATA BASED ON ZIP CODE. 
          AND I SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THE MANPOWER TO DO THAT FOR ALL THE ZIP CODES IN MY FIVE STATES, BUT MAYBE YOU MAY HAVE SOMEONE AT YOUR LEVEL CAN DO THAT. 
          IT GIVES YOU A REALLY GOOD IDEA ON THE EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT YOU CAN EXPERIENCE FOR 
          [01:30:04]
DECREASES ONCE RISK RATING 2.0 GOALS, DIFFERENT ORDER BOOK POLICIES AND ALSO POTENTIAL INCREASES PER YEAR. 
          THE OTHER WO LINKS ARE JUST GREAT. 
          THE FACT SHEET OF THE SIX STATES FACT SHEET GOES INTO WHY. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO DO TODAY IS THAT OUR CURRENT METHOD OF WRITING FULL INSURANCE IS BASED ON 1970S MYTHOLOGY, WOEFULLY OUTDATED, VERY CONFUSING AND COMPLEX. WE'RE HOPING TO CORRECT A LOT OF THAT WITH RISK RATING 2.0. 
          AND WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE TIME YOU HAVE ALLOTTED ME FOR THIS PRESENTATION. COULD YOU GO BACK TO MY CONTACT INFORMATION? BUT JIM DOES HAVE MY CONTACT INFORMATION. 
          I WOULD NOW LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR IF WE HAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONS. 
          I DO. CAN I JUST MAKE ONE STATEMENT? I'M GOING TO SEND THIS PRESENTATION OUT TO TO YOU ALL. 
          SO YOU HAVE IT. OK, VERY GOOD. 
          WE'LL HAVE THAT. FIRST OF ALL, YES, MARIE, JUST ONE SECOND. 
          MR. GARRON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          YOU WENT THROUGH A LOT OF INFORMATION IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, AND WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT. AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO PICK UP THE PRESENTATION THAT TIM WILL SEND OUT AND GET THAT DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY. 
          WE DO HAVE QUESTIONS COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB. 
          WELL, THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS A STATEMENT QUESTION. 
          SO WAS IT THAT LONG AGO, FIVE YEARS BACK WHERE THEY REDID ALL THE MAPS? THEY SPENT TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND NOW WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE THEM? WELL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO NEED THEM FOR FLOOD INSURANCE. 
          THOSE MAPS ARE STILL VITAL FOR COMPLIANCE TO HELP DETERMINE WHERE FLOODING RISKS ARE GREATER. TO HELP DETERMINE WHERE FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES SHOULD BE BUILT, THEY'RE JUST NOT GOING TO BE USED AS A DIRECT VARIABLE. 
          NOW, DON'T GET ME WRONG, ANY WORK DONE FOR FLOOD CONTROL MEASURES ARE STILL GOING TO BE VERY BENEFICIAL IN REGARDS TO THE FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUM. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE'S A FLOOD CONTROL MEASURE THAT AFFECTS MASTER DRAINAGE, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE GROUND THAT'S RUNNING ELEVATION AND THAT IS A DIRECT VARIABLE ON THE PREMIUM. 
          SO THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE HELPFUL. 
          THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS ARE JUST NOT GOING TO BE USED AS A DIRECT VARIABLE THEMSELVES BECAUSE WE NOW HAVE THE ABILITY TO DETERMINE THE INDIVIDUAL RISK FOR EACH BUILDING. OK, SO YOU'RE LET'S SAY YOU'RE IN A HOUSE THAT HAS NEVER HAD A FLOOD PLAIN. 
          IT IS CURRENTLY IN AE ZONE AND THERE'S TWO HOUSES NEXT TO EACH OTHER, AND NO ONE HAS EVER HAD A FLOOD CLAIM. 
          THE HOUSES ARE ELEVATED. 
          ONE HOUSE IS WORTH A MILLION. 
          ONE HOUSE IS WORTH THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND. 
          EVEN THOUGH IT'S IN A REALLY NO RISK AREA, THE PERSON WITH THE MORE EXPENSIVE HOUSES STILL GOING TO PAY MORE. 
          YES. NOW, IF IT'S AN AE ZONE, THAT IS A HIGH RISK FLOOD ZONE, BUT THIS IS THE WAY TO ADDRESS THE UNFAIRNESS AS BEFORE. 
          BASED ON OUR OLD DATA, THOSE HOUSES WOULD HAVE PAID THE EXACT SAME PREMIUM BEFORE. 
          EVEN THOUGH FLOODING DOES HAPPEN, THE HIGHER VALUE HOME WOULD EXPERIENCE MORE DAMAGE, BUT NOT ACTUALLY SET UP. 
          BUT SO WILL YOU BE TAKING IN PARAMETERS OF HOW HIGH THE HOUSE IS AND WHAT NOT? OR JUST IF YOU HAVE A MORE EXPENSIVE HOME, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU'VE DONE, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE. [INAUDIBLE] BEING A DIRECT VARIABLE, MORE LIKELY YES, NOW IT IS GOING TO TAKE IN CONSIDERATION THE FIRST FLOOR HEIGHT, THE GROUND AND SURROUNDING ELEVATIONS. 
          SO THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A BIG IMPACT. 
          SO IF ALL THESE STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN MITIGATED, THEY'VE BEEN IN AE ZONE AND NEVER SEEN WATER BEFORE ON THE COAST. 
          CHANCES ARE THEY'RE VERY WELL MITIGATED AND THAT WILL HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON THEIR PREMIUM. BUT STILL, THE HOUSE THAT IS OF A HIGHER VALUE WILL PAY MORE EVEN IF THEY'LL NEVER, EVER USE FLOOD INSURANCE. 
          YES, IT WILL PAY MORE. 
          ONE OTHER QUESTION THE 18 PERCENT GLIDE PATH. 
          I'M NOT SURE I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE 18 PERCENT OF? OF COURSE, SO CONGRESS, WHEN THEY PASSED [INAUDIBLE] IN 2015, SAID WE CANNOT INCREASE FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS MORE THAN 18 PERCENT A YEAR. 
          OK, SO ONCE AGAIN, WE COULD NOT CHANGE ANYTHING THAT WAS ENACTED BY CONGRESS. 
          SO WHAT WE HAVE DETERMINED UNDER RISK RATING 2.0, A LOT OF AREAS ARE GOING TO SEE RATE INCREASES AND WE CAN'T TAKE THEM TO THEIR FULL RATE INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE STATUTORY CAP OF 18 PERCENT. SO POLICIES THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, COME BACK AND A LOT OF PRP POLICIES ARE SEEING INCREASES OF SEVERAL HUNDRED DOLLARS THAT WOULD EXCEED THE 18 PERCENT CAP. 
          SO EVERY POLICY THAT DOES EXPERIENCE INCREASE WILL EXPERIENCE AN INCREMENTAL INCREASE OF 18 PERCENT A YEAR UNTIL THEY HIT THE FULL RISK RATE. 
          [01:35:01]
NOW, WHEN THEY GET THE , WHEN THEY GET THEIR DECLARATION PAGE, THEY WILL HAVE TWO NUMBERS. ONE NUMBER WILL BE THEIR FULL RISK RATE. 
          THE SECOND NUMBER WILL BE YOUR ANNUAL PAY RATE. 
          SO THE ANNUAL PAY RATE WILL BE WHAT THEY PAY THE NEXT YEAR THAT ANNUAL PAY RATE WILL INCREASE TO 18 PERCENT NEXT YEAR, 18 PERCENT UNTIL IT EQUALS TO THE FULL RISK OF RATE. 
          AND THEN THAT'S WHEN THE INCREASES STOP. 
          YEAH, STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT IS EQUITY ANALYSIS FOR FIVE YEARS, YOU BASICALLY GET TO [INAUDIBLE] OVER IT, OVER IT. 
          BUT NOW YOU DID SAY FOR PURPOSES OF GALVESTON THAT EVERYBODY STARTS WITH A CLEAN SLATE WITH 2.0. NOBODY HAS ANY FLOOD CLAIMS ON THEIR RECORDS DAY ONE, CORRECT? THAT WOULD BE EXCLUDING ANYONE THAT MAY BE DEEMED TO [INAUDIBLE] BUT EVEN THEY START OFF WITH A CLEAN SLATE, BUT THEY PAY A 18 PERCENT SURCHARGE FOR BEING A SEVERE [INAUDIBLE] BUT YES, SIR, EVERYONE IS STARTING THEIR FLOOD LOSS HISTORY WITH A CLEAN SLATE. 
          OK, BECAUSE BASICALLY HERE ON THE ISLAND, 2008, WE HAD A LOT OF HOMES FLOOD, BUT THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THOSE HOMES FLOODED IN SEVENTY FIVE TO A HUNDRED YEARS AND THEY HAVEN'T FLOODED SINCE. SO WHEN 2.0 ROLLS IN, THAT'S NOT A PENALTY TO ANYBODY. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER REPETITIVE LOSSES. 
          NO AND EVEN IF THEY DID, EVEN IF THAT DID CARRY IT OVER, REMEMBER YOU GET ONE. 
          YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE A RATING VARIABLE OF ZERO, EVEN IF THAT ONE CARRY IT OVER. 
          BUT EVERYONE STARTED RISK SCREENING 2.0 WITH A CLEAN SLATE FOR THEIR FLOOD LOSS HISTORY. 
          WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS, LIKE WHO VOTED THIS INTO PLACE? SO WE CAN NOT VOTE FOR THEM. 
          THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVE. 
          THIS WAS PURELY DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY? NO. YES. WELL, FEMA HAS THE OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN A SOUND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND THE THE OLD METHOD OF DETERMINING FLOOD INSURANCE RATES WAS NO LONGER FEASIBLE. 
          IT WAS NOT SUSTAINABLE. 
          SO IN KEEPING WITH THE REQUIREMENTS PLACED ON US BY CONGRESS, WE'VE WORKED ON THIS FOR FIVE YEARS TO DETERMINE THE BEST METHOD TO RATE FLOOD INSURANCE RISK AND THEN HAVE THE FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS BASED OFF THAT RISK. 
          SO WERE THERE ANY? [INAUDIBLE] ARE THERE ANY AREAS EXEMPT LIKE THERE WAS IN THE BIGGERT-WATERS? ARE THERE STILL AREAS THAT DON'T FALL UNDER THIS? I'M SORRY, I'M AFRAID I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. 
          WONDER THE BIGGERT- WATERS ACT. 
          THERE WERE AREAS IN CALIFORNIA THAT WERE EXEMPT FROM THE RULES. 
          THE VAST MAJORITY OF BIGGERT-WATERS WAS RETRACTED WHEN HFIAA CAME OUT. 
          SO I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT. 
          SO THAT TELLS ME THAT IT WAS PROBABLY RETRACTED AND IT WAS NEVER IN ANY OF MY TRAINING COURSES. BUT NO, THIS IS THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMS. THE FLOOD INSURANCE ADMINISTRATORS PROGRAM, FIMA, AND IT IS IMPLEMENTED NATIONWIDE. 
          YOU KNOW, MR. GARRON, YEAH, JUST ONE QUESTION HERE. 
          I THINK WE ALL KNEW THAT THE FEMA PROGRAM WAS GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THESE RATES IN SOME MANNER BECAUSE WITH THE NUMBER OF STORMS AND THE SEVERITY OF THESE STORMS, WE KNEW THEY WERE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY. 
          AND I THINK WHAT'S CONCERNING TO EVERYBODY IS THESE INSURANCE RATES THE WAY THEY'RE GOING UP, AND EVEN WITH THIS 2.0 PROGRAM, THAT PUTS QUITE A BURDEN ON INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE IN THIS THAT NEED FLOOD INSURANCE THROUGH YOUR PROGRAM. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY WAY AROUND THAT, BUT I ASSUME THAT THERE'S NO APPEAL PROCESS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FOR HOMEOWNERS. 
          NO, THERE'S NOT. AND THIS HAS BEEN ASKED BEFORE. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS IT PAINS ME TO SAY THIS AS A FEMA EMPLOYEE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE COULD NOT TAKE IN CONSIDERATION WHEN WE DETERMINE THE NEW RATES UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 IS AFFORDABILITY, THAT LATITUDE WAS NOT GIVEN TO US BY CONGRESS. 
          CONGRESS SAYS THAT YOU WILL MAINTAIN A FINE, A SOUND FINANCIAL NFIP PROGRAM. 
          NOW WE HAVE SUBMITTED AFFORDABILITY STUDIES TO CONGRESS, BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, NONE OF THEM HAS BEEN ENACTED OR PASSED. 
          SO UNTIL SOMETHING THAT'S CHANGED AT THE LEGISLATION LEVEL, WE CANNOT INCORPORATE AFFORDABILITY INTO THE EQUATION ON DETERMINING FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS. I WISH WE COULD. 
          I REALLY DO WISH WE COULD HELP A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING INCREASES WHO ARE ON FIXED INCOMES. I LIVED WITH OUR ENTIRE LIFE THERE, BUT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS WITHIN FEMA SCOPE OF AUTHORITY. 
          SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO REACH OUT TO YOUR SENATORS, YOUR CONGRESSMEN, AND TRIED TO ENACT THAT CHANGE AT THE LEGISLATIVE LEVEL. 
          ALL RIGHTY. COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI. 
          [01:40:01]
THANKS FOR BEING HERE TODAY FOR US TO GO OVER THESE QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL START OUT WITH WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME OF IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM? SO PHASE ONE FOR NEW BUSINESS HAS ALREADY BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE A RENEWAL BETWEEN OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR AND APRIL OF NEXT YEAR. 
          THEY CAN GET A QUOTE FROM A LICENSED AGENT AND DETERMINE WHAT COURSE IS BETTER SUITED FOR THEM IF THEY WANT TO STAY WITH THE LEGACY SYSTEM THEY CAN RENEW. 
          IF THEY WANT TO OPT INTO RISK RATING 2.0, THAT IS THEIR OPTION. 
          BUT AS OF APRIL ONE OF 2022, ALL OF OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS WILL TRANSITION TO RISK RATING 2.0 UPON THEIR RENEWAL. 
          AND THAT'S EXISTING POLICIES, NOT NEW POLICIES? NEW POLICIES, IF A PERSON GOT A NEW POLICY TODAY, IT WOULD BE ON THE NEW SYSTEM. 
          THERE'S NO OPTION. 
          OK. CAN I JUST ANSWERED YOU? SO YOU'RE SAYING PEOPLE WHO ARE AFTER APRIL? SO THE PEOPLE WHO RENEW FROM OCTOBER TO APRIL ONE CAN ALWAYS STAY ON THE LEGACY OR JUST UNTIL THEIR NEXT RENEWAL? THEIR RENEWAL TIME. SO THEY MIGHT GET A BREAK THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, THEY COULD STAY IN THAT OLD PROGRAM AND THEN ONCE IT RENEWS, THEY'RE GOING TO GO INTO THE NEW PROGRAM. 
          NOW, AS YOU MENTIONED, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, THOUGH, TO GO TO 2.0 IF IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR THEM AT THIS POINT. 
          YEAH. OK, GOOD. 
          THANKS. THANKS FOR THAT ANSWER. 
          LET'S TALK ABOUT FLOOD MAPS REAL QUICK. 
          SO FLOOD MAPS, YOU'RE NOT USING THE FLOOD MAPS TO COME UP WITH A RATES CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. AND SO WHAT ARE THE WILL THE FLOOD MAPS BE REEVALUATED AT ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE? OR ARE YOU PRETTY MUCH THE FLOOD MAP IS WHAT IT IS, AND WE'RE NOT EVEN KIND OF MESSING WITH THE FLOOD MAPS ANYMORE. 
          SO, I MEAN, IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT I'M ON THE INSURANCE SIDE OF THIS. 
          THE FLOOD MAPS ARE DONE BY A BRAND OF MAPS ARE STILL IMPORTANT FOR COMMUNITIES TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THEIR RISK IS SO THEY CAN PLAN FUTURE MITIGATION PROJECTS. 
          SO FLOOD MAPS TO FLOOD TERRITORY MAPS WILL STILL CONTINUE TO BE PRODUCED. 
          TO THAT WAY, THE COMMUNITIES KNOW WHERE THE RISKS ARE, AND EVERY ASPECT OF THAT WILL STILL BE PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          THE ONLY PURPOSE OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS HOW IT IMPACTS INSURANCE WILL BE TO IDENTIFY STRUCTURES THAT HAVE THE MANDATORY PURCHASE REQUIREMENT. 
          REMEMBER, THAT IS WHEN FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT BE FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC, VA, HUD IF THEY TOUCH A MORTGAGE, MANDATORY PURCHASE OF FLOOD INSURANCE IS REQUIRED IF THEY RESIDE WITHIN THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA ON THOSE FIRMS. BESIDES THAT, FOR THE INSURANCE SIDE, THE MITIGATION IS COMPRISED OF THREE BRANCHES. 
          YOU HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE, YOU HAVE YOUR RISK ANALYSIS AND YOU HAVE YOUR COMPLIANCE. 
          FLOOD INSURANCE WAS THE FIRST BRANCH TO RECEIVE A ENOUGH DATE, AS YOU WILL KEEP IT SIMPLE. OUR PLAN IS TO GET ALL THREE BRANCHES UPDATED TO A POINT WHERE WHERE IT FINALLY BRINGS IN BEST PRACTICES ON PRIVATE SECTOR. 
          WE'VE MODERNIZED OUR SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF DOING THINGS. 
          A LOT OF OUR STUFF, DON'T FORGET THIS ACT WAS IN WAS PASSED IN CONGRESS IN 1968, AND NOW THERE HAVE BEEN SOME AMENDMENTS, BUT A VAST MAJORITY OF THE VERBIAGE IN THE 44 CODE OF BETTER RELATIONS. ALL THAT STILL GOES BACK TO THE LATE 1960S. 
          SO EVENTUALLY, THE OTHER BRANCHES WILL RECEIVE UPDATES, AND THAT IS WHEN THE FIRMS, THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS WILL BE MORE ADDRESSED. 
          AS OF RIGHT NOW, THEY WILL CONTINUE AS THEY ARE, BUT THEY'LL STILL BE USED FOR COMPLIANCE FROM THE REGULATORY STANDPOINT. AND WE USED TO HAVE THE OLD X ZONE HERE ON THE ISLAND THAT WENT AWAY. 
          IS THE WHOLE ISLAND CURRENTLY A SPECIAL HAZARD ZONE? THERE IS ANY WORD OR THERE STILL PLACES WHERE... 
          ONLY ABOUT 15 PERCENT, BUT IT'S A SMALL AMOUNT. 
          BUT WHAT ARE THOSE ZONES CALLED NOW? SO WE STILL DO HAVE X ZONES. 
          OK, OK. BUT REMEMBER JON, THE IMPORTANT THING IN THIS PROGRAM IS THAT YOUR INSURANCE RATES ARE GOING TO BE BASED UPON THE ATTRIBUTES OF YOUR PROPERTY. 
          YEAH. WELL, AND THAT'S MY NEXT QUESTION. 
          YEAH. SO SO ELEVATION CERTIFICATES AREN'T REALLY ARE REQUIRED NOW IN THE NEW PROGRAM, CORRECT? SO THAT'S CORRECT, BUT THEY CAN STILL BE SUBMITTED IF THE HOMEOWNER BELIEVES THAT INFORMATION IS NOT CORRECT OR THEY JUST WANT TO CHECK THE ACCURACY. 
          OK, SO HOW, HOW IS A HOMEOWNER WITHOUT AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE PROVIDING DATA TO THE RATER, THE INSURANCE COMPANY? THEY'RE NOT, WE ARE. 
          WE NOW HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO PROVIDE DATA FOR FULLY 80 PERCENT OF THE BUILDINGS IN OUR 
          [01:45:01]
BOOK OF BUSINESS. SO THERE ARE SOME CASES WHERE WE WON'T HAVE IT. 
          AND THEN WE HAVE TWO ALTERNATIVE METHODS. 
          ONE OF THEM IS FEMA ASSUMPTIONS, AND WE DON'T WANT TO GO THERE. 
          OUR ASSUMPTIONS MAPS THAT TWO FEET. 
          AND IF YOU HAVE ELEVATED FIRST FLOOR IS CLEARLY ELEVATED, WE WANT TO GO WITH THE THIRD SYSTEM OR THIRD METHOD, WHICH IS AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE. 
          SO 80 PERCENT OF OUR FIVE MILLION POLICIES WILL HAVE THE FIRST FULL HEIGHT PROVIDED BY FEMA. HOW ARE YOU ALL PROVIDING THAT? WE HAVE WORKED WITH A CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION NATIONWIDE. 
          IT'S A PROPRIETARY PRODUCT THAT WAS CREATED SOLELY FOR RISK RATING 2.0. 
          HOW IT DOES IS IT HAS TAKEN INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES IN OUR BOOK OF BUSINESS, AND THAT HAS COME FROM MANY DIFFERENT DATA STREAMS AND WE HAVE DETERMINED THE FIRST OF ALL BASED OFF THIS MODELING. AND HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU DETERMINE NEW STRUCTURES? WELL, IT'S UPDATED THE RISK RATING 2.0. 
          I'M SORRY, IT'S GOING TO BE CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED. 
          BUT IF YOU FIND THAT THE UPDATE IS TAKING TOO LONG, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION CAN ALWAYS SPEND AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE IF THEY SO CHOOSE. 
          HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU DETERMINE STRUCTURES THAT AREN'T BUILT YET? IT WON'T BE WE WON'T FORGET WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INSURANCE. 
          AND IN ORDER FOR INSURANCE TO BE APPLIED TO A STRUCTURE, IT HAS TO BE FAR ALONG IN THE CONSTRUCTION STAGE TO MEET OUR DEFINITION OF A STRUCTURE. 
          SO BANKS REQUIRE BUILDERS RISK INSURANCE, INCLUDING FLOOD THAT'S PROVIDED BY FEMA BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. 
          THEY CAN STILL GET. THEY CAN STILL GET QUOTES. 
          NOW THAT THAT'S MORE LIKELY, THAT'S NOT FLOOD INSURANCE BECAUSE WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT WE'RE BUILDING UNDER CONSTRUCTION TO MEET A CERTAIN LEVEL BEFORE FLOOD INSURANCE CAN BE OFFERED. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? SO OUR BANKS, OF COURSE, REQUIRE FLOOD INSURANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION AT CLOSING BEFORE THE HOUSE IS BEING BUILT OR STRUCTURE THAT'S PROVIDED BY FEMA. 
          THE ONLY FLOOD INSURANCE WE CAN GET IS THROUGH FEMA, SO WE DO OFFER INSURANCE COVERAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 
          BUT HOW DO YOU DETERMINE ELEVATIONS? I'M SORRY. DRAWINGS, YOU CAN GO OFF OF FROM DRAWING THE PLAN UNTIL FINAL CONSTRUCTION. 
          HOW DO WE PROVIDE THAT DATA TO THE RATER? ELEVATIONS CERTIFICATE, BASED ON DRAWINGS OR DURING CONSTRUCTION? OK. SO IT'S STILL WISE TO GET AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE IN EITHER CASE? YEAH. YEAH. OK. 
          GOOD POINT. OK. 
          YOU'RE NOT IN KANSAS ANYMORE. NO, NO, THIS IS THIS IS A WHOLE ANOTHER LEVEL. 
          AND SO RATES ARE BASED OFF OF GROUND ELEVATION, NOT SEA LEVEL. 
          GROUND AND [INAUDIBLE] ARE ONE OF THE VARIABLES NOT TO SEA LEVEL. 
          SO BASED OFF WITH THAT, SO LET ME LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THIS. 
          IF I HAVE A HOUSE, TWO HOUSE IS RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER, TWO STRUCTURES RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. ONE OF THEM IS BUILT ON THE GROUND, SAY THE FIRST FLOOR IS 10 FEET IN THE AIR. THAT'S MY FIRST FIRST LEVEL LIVING HERE ON THE ISLAND. 
          OF COURSE, MOST OF OUR STRUCTURES ARE BUILT ON PILINGS. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF SLAB ON GRADE CONSTRUCTION HERE. 
          SO FIRST OF ALL, OF LIVING IS 10 FEET ABOVE THE GROUND SAY THE LOT NEXT DOOR HAS NINE FOOT OF FILL ON IT, AND THEN THE HOUSE IS ON PILINGS AND IT'S 10 FOOT ABOVE THE GROUND. 
          SO IN REALITY, ONE HOUSE WOULD BE 10 FOOT ABOVE SEA LEVEL. 
          THE OTHER HOUSE WOULD BE 20 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. 
          THOSE HOW THOSE TWO HOUSES WOULD HAVE THE SAME RATING. 
          THEY MAY HAVE DIFFERENT RATINGS BECAUSE ONE OF THE RATING VARIABLES NOW WILL BE THE FOUNDATION TYPE. SO THE ONES THAT ARE ELEVATED ON [INAUDIBLE] POST RECEIVE A LOWER RATING, EVEN THOUGH PHIL HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN FOR THE OTHER HOUSE BUT STILL A [INAUDIBLE]. 
          IT'S NOT. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. 
          LET ME LET ME. LET ME LET ME CLARIFY MY ELEVATION. 
          LET ME CLARIFY, TWO HOUSES, SAME FOUNDATION, IDENTICAL HOUSES, SAME FOUNDATIONS. 
          ONE. IF WE WERE GOING OFF THE OLD WAY, THEY WOULD BOTH HAVE. 
          ONE WOULD HAVE A BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OR SEA LEVEL ELEVATION OF 10 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. 
          THE OTHER WOULD HAVE A 20 FOOT ABOVE SEA LEVEL ELEVATION. 
          SAME FOUNDATIONS, ONE HAS [INAUDIBLE] ONE DOESN'T. 
          YEAH ONE. THEY'RE BOTH RAISED ON PIERS. 
          THEY'RE BOTH ON THEIR OWN STILTS. 
          BUT THE LOT ON THIS SIDE IS FIVE FOOT HIGHER OR 10 FOOT HIGHER THAN THIS LOT. 
          THE HOUSES ARE IDENTICAL. 
          THEY'RE BOTH ELEVATED 15 FEET. 
          YOU'RE BASING IT ON THE ABOVE GROUND LEVEL. 
          [01:50:02]
YOU'RE NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE GROUND LEVEL ITSELF. 
          BUT IT'S GROUND AND SURROUNDING ELEVATION, SO IT WILL HAVE A LOWER PREMIUM, THE ONE THAT IS NOT AS HIGH. OK. 
          I DON'T. I DON'T. I HOPE THAT'S THE CASE, BUT IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT. 
          SO, SO IT'S A PRIME EXAMPLE. 
          I JUST GOT AN ELEVATION. 
          I JUST FINISH THE HOUSE. 
          THE INSURANCE POLICY, IT WAS AN AE ZONE. 
          OLD RATING SYSTEM. 
          IT'S FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS. 
          BUILDING THE SAME HOUSE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO IT JUST GOT A QUOTE ON IT, FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS. SO I'M HOPING THAT THERE IS SOME AND I'VE TALKED TO THE AGENT SEVERAL TIMES NOW, SEVERAL DIFFERENT OCCASIONS. 
          I'M HOPING THERE IS SOME ERROR THERE BECAUSE.. 
          YEAH, WELL, FIRST OFF THERE'S AN 18 PERCENT CAP, SO IT WOULDN'T HAVE INCREASED THAT DRASTICALLY. NEW HOUSE, THIS IS A NEW HOUSE. 
          THIS IS AN EXISTING HOUSE JUST FINISHED UNDER THE OLD RATING, GETTING READY TO BUILD THE SAME HOUSE NEXT DOOR. 
          FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS DIFFERENCE. 
          FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS DIFFERENCE IN THE QUOTE RATE. 
          SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO GIVE THE GENTLEMAN MY EMAIL ADDRESS, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO LOOK AT THE DETAILS OF THESE PLANS. 
          AND IF YOU CAN PROVIDE ME THE QUOTE NUMBER, I'LL ALSO LOOK INTO THAT. 
          OK. BUT THERE ARE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES IN V ZONES WHERE YOU CAN SEE A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE BECAUSE OF THE NEW PERILS ADDED TO A PREMIUM. 
          WHAT IS OFTEN OVERLOOKED HERE IS THAT BEFORE REMEMBER, YOU'RE ONLY BASED ON TWO PERILS, [INAUDIBLE] FLOODING OR COASTAL FLOODING. 
          SO EVEN THOUGH YOUR ELEVATION AND ELEVATION IS IMPORTANT, JUST AS IMPORTANT UNDER RISK RATING 2.0 AS IT WAS UNDER THE LEGACY SYSTEM. 
          BUT WHAT'S DIFFERENT NOW IS YOU'RE ADDING MORE PERIL ON, SO IT APPEARS THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE SAME BENEFITS FROM BEING ELEVATED. 
          IT'S THE SAME WHEN YOU'RE PROTECTED BY LEVEE. 
          A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE PROTECTED BY LEVEE HAVE A CLOSER DISTANCE TO FLOODING SOURCE. 
          A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE IN LOW LYING AREAS, WHICH IS A NEW VARIABLE, WHICH IS RAINFALL, WHICH WAS NOT DONE BEFORE. 
          SO THESE NEW PERILS ARE ADDED ON TO THAT PREMIUM AND MAKING THE PREMIUM HIGHER. 
          SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WERE NOT RECEIVING THE BENEFIT FROM PROTECTED BY LEVEE OR THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING THE BENEFIT OF ELEVATION. 
          BUT IN REALITY, IF THEY WERE NOT PROTECTED BY LEVEE OR NOT ELEVATED HIGHER, THE PREMIUMS WOULD BE EVEN HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY'RE SEEING. 
          BUT I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GO OVER ALL THESE WITH. 
          BE SURE IT'S REALLY HARD FOR ME TO ADDRESS SPECIFICS ON HOUSES BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME. ABSOLUTELY. 
          BUT IF YOU CAN PROVIDE ME THE QUOTES AND OTHER VARIABLES, YOU WON'T HAVE TO LOOK INTO THIS. HAVE YOU HAVE TO DO THAT? ONE MORE QUESTION. SO YOU KNOW, HERE HERE ON THE ISLAND, OF COURSE, WE'RE AN ISLAND. 
          WE'RE SURROUNDED BY SEA LEVEL. 
          THE AND I UNDERSTAND EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT WERE THAT WERE BUILT AT LOWER ELEVATIONS HAVE HIGHER RISK. 
          THEIR PREMIUMS PROBABLY SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, COMPARABLE TO THEIR LEVEL OF RISK. 
          MY MY BIGGER CONCERN IS THAT, OF COURSE. 
          WE WANT TO BUILD STRUCTURES SO THEY DON'T FLOOD. 
          AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING A PROPER RATE BASED ON BUILDING BEST BUILDING PRACTICES TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. 
          MY CONCERN NOW IS THAT WE'RE KIND OF NOT, YOU KNOW, WITH THOSE TWO QUOTES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT ONE ON ONE. 
          BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN STILL BUILD THESE STRUCTURES IN A MANNER THAT REDUCES THE RISK. BUT BUT IT'S BUT THE RATES SHOW SHOW THAT. 
          AND IF IF OUR NEW STRUCTURES ARE GOING TO HAVE THESE FIVE THOUSAND FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS, IT IS REALLY GOING TO AFFECT US DOWN HERE. 
          SO THAT'S NOT, BRIAN, YOU HAD A QUESTION. 
          YEAH, AND I THINK YOU KIND OF ANSWERED IT A LITTLE BIT FOR ME, BUT RISK RATING 2.0, HOW IS THAT IMPACTED BY LEVEES, PUMPS, SEAWALLS, THINGS LIKE THAT? DOES THAT FACTOR IN AT ALL? BECAUSE I KNOW DISTANCE TO WATER IS ONE OF YOUR FACTORS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. 
          BUT FOR INSTANCE, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S AN X ZONE NOW. 
          WE'RE FAIRLY CLOSE TO THE GULF, BUT I'VE GOT A 17 FOOT SEAWALL BETWEEN ME AND THE GULF. 
          SO HOW DOES THAT PLAY IN OR DOES IT FACTOR IN OR HOW DOES THAT WORK? GREAT QUESTION, SIR. AND YES, IT DOES. 
          IN FACT, THE PROTECTED BY LEVEE IS BEING OPEN A LITTLE BIT MORE UNDER RISK FREE 2.0 THAN IT WAS UNDER LEGACY SYSTEM. 
          UNDER THE LEGACY SYSTEM, IN ORDER TO RECEIVE AN INSURANCE BENEFIT FOR A LEVEE, IT HAD TO BE CERTIFIED BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. 
          THAT MEANS THE LEVEE HAD TO NOT ONLY BE BUILT WITHIN STANDARDS. 
          THERE HAD TO BE A PLAN IN PLACE TO ADDRESS PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE AND THEN IT WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON INSURANCE. 
          WELL UNDER RISK RATING 2.0. 
          [01:55:01]
WE HAVE INCORPORATED ALL OF ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DATA SET FOR ALL LEVEES, REGARDLESS IF THEY WERE CERTIFIED OR NOT. 
          AS LONG AS THESE LEVEES PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF PROTECTION, THAT PROTECTION IS COUNTED AND WEIGHTED AGAINST THE OVERALL PREMIUM. 
          SO WE ARE OPENING UP A LOT MORE AVAILABLE LEVEE PROTECTION FOR THE INSURANCE SIDE WITH THIS CHANGE REMOVING THE CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FROM THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. 
          SO YES SIR IT'S STILL BEING ADDED AND IT'S GOING TO ENCOMPASS MORE AREAS. 
          WE HAVE A LOT OF COMMUNITIES, HAVE OLDER LEVEES, NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAINTAIN, BUT THEY STILL PROVIDE SOME LEVEL OF PROTECTION. 
          SO WE HAVE INCLUDED THOSE AS WELL. 
          YEAH, LETS KIND OF START TO WIND THIS UP, IF WE COULD TIM. 
          I JUST HAVE ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO WHAT BRIAN HAD MENTIONED. 
          SO A LEVEE SYSTEM IS BASICALLY COMPLETELY SURROUNDING PROPERTIES VERSUS A SEAWALL, WHICH IS SURROUNDING IT ON SORT OF ONE SIDE. 
          CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCES THERE? WHAT WOULD IT APPLY IN THE SAME WAY? WELL, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THIS ONE BECAUSE OUR DOCUMENTATION OF RISK RATION 2.0 APPLIES SPECIFICALLY TOWARDS LEVEES. 
          AND I DON'T WANT TO GIVE ANY WRONG INFORMATION. 
          SO THIS WILL BE AN ACTIONABLE IN MY END. 
          LET ME FIND OUT HOW SEAWALLS WILL IMPACT THE RATING VARIABLES, AND I WILL GET THIS INFORMATION TO TIM. YEAH, BECAUSE BECAUSE KEEP IN MIND THE SEAWALL RIGHT NOW UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM, THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT GAVE YOU YOUR AE ZONES HERE ON THE ISLAND BECAUSE YOU WERE PROTECTED FROM THE BATTERING SURGE. 
          WE HAD V ZONES FOR AREAS THAT WERE MORE AFFECTED BY STORM SURGE AND DIRECT WAVE IMPACT. 
          SO YOU KNOW WE DIFFERENTIATED HERE ON THE ISLAND BETWEEN RISING WATER FROM TIDAL SURGE COMING IN FROM THE BAY VERSUS WAVE IMPACT, WHICH CAUSES ANYTHING THAT'S 90 PERCENT OF OUR DAMAGE IN A HURRICANE AS WAVE ACTION. 
          MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, AS COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB KNOWS. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT, AND I APPRECIATE YOU GETTING BACK WITH TIM ON THAT AS TO WHAT BENEFIT THE SEAWALL IS PROVIDING TO THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE BEHIND IT HERE IN GALVESTON. AND IT ALSO DOVETAILS INTO OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AS TO RING LEVEES AND THE DIKE AND FORTIFIED DUNES, WHICH ARE GOING TO BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE PART OF THE EYE, WE CALL IT THE IKE DIKE HERE, PART OF OUR COASTAL SPINE SYSTEM THAT THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS IS PUSHING FORWARD RIGHT NOW INCLUDES OUR SEAWALL, BUT IT ALSO INCLUDES FORTIFIED DUNES, WHICH ARE A FLOOD. 
          I MEAN, THEY FUNCTION AS A LEVEE WALL, BUT THEY ARE FORTIFIED DUNES. 
          I ASSUME IF THE CORPS IS APPROVING THIS, THAT THEY'LL CERTIFY THEM. 
          BUT WE ALSO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT THAT ANY DESIGNS FOR THIS PROJECT INCLUDE IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BENEFIT US ON FLOOD RATING 2.0, WE NEED TO START TALKING TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS ABOUT THAT, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW PLUGGED IN THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS BEEN TO FLOOD RATING 2.0. 
          WE HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION OK. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS, I MEAN, WHAT BANKS BANKRUPTS FEMA IS PEOPLE WHO DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE, AND EVERY TIME THERE'S A BIG STORM AND THE GOVERNMENT PAYS OUT A LOT, THE PEOPLE WHO DO HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE, THEIR RATES GO UP AND WE'RE PAYING MORE. 
          SO BASICALLY, WE'RE SUBSIDIZING THE WHOLE SYSTEM. 
          SO IS EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY NOW GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE NO MATTER WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED. 
          NO. AND LET ME EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          THERE'S TOW DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES. 
          WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE, THAT'S INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE. THAT'S DISASTER ASSISTANCE, IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE FLOOD INSURANCE SIDE. 
          THE FLOOD INSURANCE COLLECTS PREMIUMS WHERE WE'RE HAVING ISSUES IN THE AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING NEAR PRP'S WHO AVERAGED ABOUT $500 A YEAR RECEIVING MAX PAYOUTS WHEN THEY EXPERIENCE FLOODING EVENTS. 
          AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'RE SEEING 60, ALL THE WAY UP TO 85 PERCENT OF DAMAGED STRUCTURES IN AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING. 
          SO WE'RE PAYING A LOT OF MONEY FOR AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA. 
          BUT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S TWO DISTINCT FUNDS. 
          FLOOD INSURANCE HAS NO BEARING ON THE PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE DISASTER ASSISTANCE AND VICE VERSA. SO WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING, WHAT PUT US IN BANKRUPTCY IS THE SEVERITY AND FREQUENCY OF LARGE EVENTS. 
          THE 2012, WE PAID SEVENTEEN POINT FIVE BILLION IN ONE YEAR, AND EVERY SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHING ONE POINT TWO BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. 
          BUT WE'RE NOT COLLECTING THE AMOUNT OF MONEY NEEDED AND ARE WE HAVE TO BORROW MONEY FROM THE TREASURY. WELL, FEMA RECEIVES MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT, RIGHT? IT'S A LOT OF MONEY AND THAT'S ALL WE GET. 
          WE DON'T BRING ANY MONEY IN OUTSIDE OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS, SO WE HAVE NO WAY OF PAYING THE TREASURY BACK. 
          SO WE'RE TWENTY POINT TWO BILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT TO THE TREASURY FROM THE PAST EVENT, 
          [02:00:03]
FROM THE SEVERITY THE SIZE OF THEM. 
          AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD 2012 WILMA KATRINA, THEN YOU HAD HARVEY. 
          THOSE ARE WHAT PUT US IN SITUATIONS WHERE IT WAS. 
          PEOPLE DIDN'T HAVE INSURANCE THAT DROVE IT UP. 
          BUT INDIVIDUAL ASSISTANCE IS A SEPARATE PROGRAM. 
          I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PHRASE MY QUESTION DIFFERENTLY. 
          SO MY DISTRICT, NOT BEHIND THIS SEAWALL. 
          AND WE HAVE THE WE'RE MORE LIKELY TO HAVE DAMAGE, BUT LESS LIKELY TO EVER HAVE A CLAIM. 
          AND OUR COVERAGE KEEPS GOING UP IN PRICE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S RARE FOR ANYONE TO EVER GET REIMBURSED. FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS LIKE NOBODY EVEN FILES A CLAIM BECAUSE FLOOD INSURANCE DOESN'T PAY, BECAUSE OUR HOUSES ARE ELEVATED. 
          BUT YET YOU KEEP RAISING OUR RATES. 
          EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T, WE CAN'T MAKE CLAIMS. LIKE, IT'S HARD TO UNDERSTAND, AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO RAISE SOME MORE BECAUSE IT'S HIGHER VALUE PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE A CLAIM. 
          WELL, OK, LET'S LET'S WIND THIS UP. 
          I KNOW WE COULD GO ON FOR PROBABLY A LONG TIME ON THIS SUBJECT. 
          FIRST OF ALL, TIM, YOU'LL GET THE PRESENTATION TO EACH COUNCIL MEMBER AND I WILL GET YOU GILL'S CONTACT INFORMATION AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU. AND MR. GARRON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. 
          I GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT. 
          I KNOW THIS IS A HARD THING FOR YOU TO BRING THESE MESSAGES TO ALL THESE COMMUNITIES AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR PERSONAL AND CONTACT INFORMATION. 
          YOU'LL BE HEARING FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS I'M SURE. 
          DO THEY ASSIGN YOU ALL BODYGUARDS? BECAUSE YOU'VE GONE TO YOUR HOME ADDRESS AND WHERE YOUR FAMILY LIVES WOULD BE [LAUGHTER] [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] ON MY CARDS. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE AND TAKING THE TIME TO EDUCATE US. 
          APPRECIATE IT! MY PLEASURE. 
          THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. YOU ALL HAVE A BLESSED DAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. 
          I WOULD SAY IT'S VERY EDUCATIONAL, NOT WHAT WE WANTED TO HEAR, NECESSARILY, BUT IT'S GOOD TO KNOW. LIKE MANY THINGS, THERE WAS A LARGE BLACK BOX THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND. 
          ABSOLUTELY. IN RELATION TO THIS? OK. TIM HAS JUST A COUPLE MORE MINUTES OF THINGS HE WANTS TO MENTION THIS. 
          I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP  WHAT GILBERT HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT. 
          IS THIS RATING 2.0 GOING FORWARD, SAVE AND EXCEPT ANY LEGISLATIVE ACTION. 
          SUBSEQUENTLY, THAT MIGHT HAPPEN. 
          THERE ARE TWO BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED. 
          SALLY'S PUT TOGETHER AN EXCELLENT RESOURCE DOCUMENT ON THAT, THAT ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO BE PENDING SOME CHANGES TO THIS PROGRAM, AS GIL HAS MENTIONED. 
          SO I'M GOING TO HAND THIS OUT IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS. 
          I KNOW SALLY IS THE BEST KEEPER OF THAT INFORMATION, BUT WE ALL CAN ANSWER THIS OR TRY TO ADDRESS IT. AND IT WOULD AFFECT IT WOULD AFFECT LITERALLY HOW THE TWO POINT OLD PROGRAM MIGHT BE CHANGED IF CONGRESS DECIDES TO DO THAT IN THESE SENATE BILLS, THERE ARE TWO BILLS THAT ARE THAT ARE ADDRESSED IN THIS THAT MIGHT IN FACT HIT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE 18 PERCENT ANNUAL REDUCING IT TO NINE, BUT IN ONE OF THE PROPOSALS. 
          BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT IT'S ALL STILL GOING TO GET THERE EVENTUALLY AND THAT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND 250 CHARGING MORE FOR ONE HOUSE. 
          I CAN'T CLAIM MORE THAN  250 VERSUS ANOTHER HOUSE THAT CAN CLAIM 250. 
          THAT'S LUDICROUS. 
          WHAT NEEDS TO OCCUR? I'VE HAD THE SAME TALK AND SALLY WILL TELL ME SHE'S HEARD THIS FOR ME A THOUSAND TIMES. 
          THERE NEEDS TO BE STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN BOTH FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE AND IN TWEA IT IS GOING TO DO NOTHING BUT GET MORE EXPENSIVE AS LONG AS THEY CONTINUE TO DO BUSINESS THE WAY THEY DO. AND THAT IS BECAUSE THESE FOLKS ARE OUT THERE COMPETING IN THE PRIMARY INSURANCE MARKET. THEY SHOULD NOT BE IN THE PRIMARY INSURANCE MARKET. 
          FEMA AND TWEA BOTH SHOULD BE REINSURERS, AND THEY SHOULD ALLOW PRIVATE INSURANCE INTO THESE MARKETS. AND PRIVATE INSURANCE IS NEVER GOING TO GET INTO THESE MARKETS IF THEY HAVE TO COMPETE WITH THESE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES AT THE PRIMARY LEVEL. 
          I THINK THIS WILL DRIVE THE BIRTH OF A LOT OF PRIVATE [INAUDIBLE] IT SHOULD. 
          IT SHOULD, ESPECIALLY WITH THIS THING THAT JUST BECAUSE YOUR HOUSE COSTS MORE, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE EVEN THOUGH YOUR [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S LUDICROUS. 
          BUT REMEMBER, THEY ONLY HAVE TO UNDERCUT FEMA, AND IF FEMA IS HIGH AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO 
          [02:05:04]
DROP TO WHAT THE MARKET WOULD BEAR. 
          SO I BELIEVE AND I STILL BELIEVE IN SALLY WILL CONTINUE TO PUSH FORWARD THE MESSAGE FROM GALVESTON THAT THERE MUST BE FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN THE CHANGES IN THE WAY THESE AGENCIES ARE STRUCTURED AND HOW THEY DO INSURANCE BUSINESS. 
          AND BY THE FACT THAT THAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH GOVERNMENTAL ADJUSTERS AND YOU'RE DEALING, THAT SHOULD STOP. THERE ARE PROFESSIONALS IN THESE AREAS THAT DO THIS ALL DAY LONG. 
          STATE FARM, ALLSTATE, FARMERS, I CAN START NAMING THEM ALL. 
          ALL THE ONES THAT DON'T RATE ON THE ISLAND. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. WELL, THEY DON'T. 
          BECAUSE. BUT WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS? WELL, THIS THIS BRINGS UP THE POINT THAT WE NEED TO INCREASE AS WE HAVE BEEN WITH SALLY, OUR RAPPORT WITH OUR CONGRESSMEN AND SENATORS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          IT HAS TO COME FROM THEM AND A STATE, ESPECIALLY A FEDERAL LEVEL, TO MAKE THESE CHANGES. 
          HOW CAN AN AGENCY JUST MAKE THESE CHANGES? WELL, IT WAS PRE AUTHORIZED IN PREVIOUS LEGISLATION, AND THEY'RE SIMPLY IMPLEMENTING IT. 
          THEY HAD. TO BECOME SOLVENT IS ALL SO, BUT I WILL AT ONE ONE POINT ONE OF THE BILLS ADDRESSES DELAYING 2.0'S FURTHER ROLLOUT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH OF 2022, WHICH THEORETICALLY SHOULD GIVE SOME TIME TO AT LEAST RESEARCH OF PROCESSES AS MS. MAXWELL AS MENTIONED THINGS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH RESTRUCTURING PROGRAMS. SO, YOU KNOW, IF THOSE BILLS GO FORWARD, I THINK IT'LL BE A GREAT BENEFIT. 
          BUT THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT IFS, SALLY, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO DO? I JUST WANNA, THIS IS A BIT COMPLICATED AND PROBABLY MORE INFORMATION THAN YOU REALLY WANT. BUT RIGHT NOW, CONGRESS IS DOING SHORT TERM EXTENSIONS ON NFIP. 
          ALL RIGHT, SIX WEEKS AT A TIME, EIGHT WEEKS AT A TIME. 
          THE BACKDROP OF ALL OF THIS IS THE TUG OF WAR BETWEEN THE MAJORITY AND MINORITY PARTIES IN CONGRESS ABOUT HOW TO FUND THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR. 
          RIGHT. THERE'S REAL DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN DOING AN OMNIBUS BILL THAT WILL FUND FISCAL YEAR TWENTY TWO UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2022. 
          THERE ARE THOSE WHO WANT TO DO A CONTINUING RESOLUTION, WHICH WOULD KEEP FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING LEVELS AT FY21 LEVELS. 
          SO AS LONG AS THESE CRS KEEP GOING, WE'RE GOING TO SEE THESE SHORT TERM EXTENSIONS. 
          MEANWHILE, SENATOR CORNYN HAS BEEN CO-SPONSORING LEGISLATION AND THERE IS A COMPANION HOUSE BILL. THEY'RE BOTH BEEN REFERRED TO COMMITTEES. 
          THIS IS A GOOD SIGN. 
          SOMETIMES THEY'LL REFER THEM TO SUBCOMMITTEES NEVER TO BE SEEN AGAIN, BUT THEY'VE BEEN REFERRED TO COMMITTEE. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE REALLY HOPING FOR, AT LEAST THE COALITION THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING FOR, IS DOING A YEAR EXTENSION ON NFIP. 
          DELAY 2.0., GIVE US SOME TIME TO WORK OUT SOME OF THESE REALLY COMPLICATED ISSUES. 
          THERE ARE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. 
          HENSARLING, WHO WAS CHAIRMAN OF FINANCIAL SERVICES IN THE PRIOR CONGRESS, WAS ONE OF OUR MOST DIFFICULT CHAIRMEN AND HE WAS HE WAS ONE OF THE TEXAS DELEGATION MEMBERS. 
          THERE ARE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO ARE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO ANY KIND OF SUBSIDY FOR NFIP THAT NFIP HAS TO BE A STANDALONE INSURANCE PROGRAM THAT IS FINANCIALLY VIABLE. 
          AND THAT IS THAT IS THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE WE'RE FACING AND TRYING TO ADDRESS THESE NFIP ISSUES AND IN PARTICULAR 2.0, BECAUSE BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS DELAY MAKING THIS PROGRAM FINANCIALLY SOLVENT. 
          AND THERE ARE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THAT ARE PUSHING BACK HARD ON THAT. 
          AND SO BUT THE GOOD THING IS, IF WE CAN BUY SOME TIME FOR COMING UP WITH SOME REAL SOLUTIONS, THIS DOES OPEN THE DOOR FOR ADVANCING THE ARGUMENT ON THE PRIVATE MARKET ENTERING THIS, LOW COST ATTACHMENTS, THE SAME TYPE OF DISCUSSION WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO HAVE WITH TWIA FOR FOR QUITE SOME TIME. 
          BUT WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO COMMUNICATE TO YOU IN MY WEEKLY REPORTS IS THIS WHEN YOU SEE MY DISCUSSION ON C.R., IT HAS IMPLICATIONS FOR NFIP AND THE LENGTH OF THOSE EXTENSIONS. 
          THANK YOU, SALLY. APPRECIATE IT. 
          ONE QUESTION. WHAT ARE WE DOING TO DISSEMINATE THIS INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC IN LAYMAN'S TERMS? OH, WE DO. 
          CAN YOU GIVE ME THAT INFORMATION IN LAYMEN'S TERMS. I THINK THIS IS AT LAYMEN AS IT GETS. AGAIN, THIS IS SORT OF THE BEGINNING RIGHT HERE. 
          IT'S NOW BEING IMPLEMENTED IN THIS PHASE TWO IS COMING. 
          [02:10:04]
SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE HAVE TALKED WITH KERRY IN SOME DETAIL ABOUT THIS. 
          WE DO NEED TO GET OUT TO THE PUBLIC. 
          BUT YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU ASK SOME OF YOUR BEST INSURANCE AGENTS THAT 30 DAYS AGO TO EXPLAIN THIS, THEY'RE LIKE, I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT. 
          SO A LOT OF COMPANIES THIS PAST WEEK, RIGHT? YEAH, YOU'RE STILL LOOKING. JUST JUST REMEMBER, GUYS, THESE ARE BUSINESSES AND YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES WHEN YOU OWN A BUSINESS. 
          WHEN THINGS START GOING THIS WAY, YOU CAN EITHER JUST GO UP ON YOUR PRICES AND PASS ALONG, OR YOU CAN LOOK AT THE WAY YOU'RE DOING BUSINESS. 
          THEY'VE CHOSEN THAT FIRST OPTION. 
          THEY JUST WENT UP ON THEIR PRICES. 
          I THINK THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO GO ABOUT THIS, AND SALLY AND I ARE WORKING DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO GET THAT ADDRESSED BOTH AT TWIA AND FEMA. 
          BUT WE'RE WE'RE JUST ONE VOICE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP BANGING ON ABOUT IT. 
          BUT THE GOOD THING ABOUT THAT YOUR ONE VOICE. 
          BUT THERE'S A LOT OF VOICES OUT THERE THAT ARE OPEN TO JOIN AND JOIN IN ON THE COASTAL SIDE. EXACTLY. 
          SO THIS IS I DON'T THINK WE'RE A LONE WOLF OUT THERE BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION. 
          ONE LAST, WE'RE NOT DOING IT FOR TIM. 
          OUR TWO PERCENT CHANCE ZONE. 
          IS THAT CONSIDERED A SPECIAL HAZARD ZONE? WELL, IT'S NOT THE FIVE HUNDRED YEAR, IN ESSENCE, THE 500 YEAR FLOOD ZONE. 
          I THINK IT IS A RISK. YEAH, IT'S NOT. 
          IT SAYS TO THE POINT TWO PERCENT ANNUAL CHANCE. 
          AND THEN THERE'S AN X ZONE THAT'S A DIFFERENT ZONE. 
          YEAH, SO. TWO DIFFERENT POINT TWO IS A SHADED X IS WHAT HE'S SAYING. 
          AND IT HAS A HIGHER RISK THAN JUST YOUR STANDARD X BECAUSE IT'S THE FIVE HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PLAIN. BUT AGAIN SO BUT BUT MY QUESTION PERTAINS TO INSURANCE OR ARE THEY NOW GOING TO LOOK AT THE POINT TWO PERCENT ZONE AS A HAZARD ZONE? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, SOMETHING I DON'T. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE SO. ONE OF THE BIGGER THIS RATING SYSTEM IS THE FACT THAT WE'RE ON BARRIER ISLAND IS SEPARATE FROM THE ZONE ISSUE. 
          WELL, WE COULD PROBABLY GO ON THE WHOLE DAY ON THIS. 
          THANK YOU TIM. APPRECIATE IT. 
          THANKS, EVERYBODY. 
          WE'LL GET IT ON. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT COUNCIL. 
          SO LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM THREE. 
          BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THAT, I WANT TO ANNOUNCE COUNCILMAN COLLINS NOTIFIED VIA TEXT, HE HAD TO LEAVE AT 10 15 A.M. 
          FOR A FOR A COMMITMENT HE HAD. 
          HE WILL BE BACK HERE SHORTLY WITH US, SO LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT. 
          PLEASE READ ITEM 3C PLEASE, JANELLE. 
          [3.C.
Discussion Of The Rosenberg Library Memorandum Of Understanding (Legal - 15 Minutes)]
ITEM 3C, DISCUSSION OF THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. 
          WE HAVE WITH US ON THE LINE HERE, MIKE MILLER, WHO IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LIBRARY BOARD IN THE LIBRARY THERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          IF THAT COMES UP. 
          THIS, I THINK, I READ THRU. 
          IF YOU READ THROUGH YOUR PACKET, THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM SUMMED IT UP BEAUTIFULLY. WE HAD A NUMBER OF DOCUMENTS THERE, BUT STAFF PUT TOGETHER ABOUT A THREE OR FOUR BULLET PRESENTATION ON THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS. 
          THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD BY STAFF AND BY COUNCIL DISCUSSED THIS MANY TIMES IN THE PAST, AND WE DO HAVE A MOU THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY STAFF. 
          I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF TO GIVE INPUT ON THAT AND WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD, AND IT LOOKS, IN MY OPINION AND STAFF'S OPINION, THIS IS A GOOD CONTRACT TO MOVE US FORWARD IN THE MANNER THE COUNCIL KIND OF HAS DIRECTED US IN THE PAST. 
          IT IS. IT IS ITEM 11 E ON OUR AGENDA FOR THIS AFTERNOON TO EITHER APPROVE OR NOT APPROVED THE LIBRARY BOARD HAS ALREADY MET AND THEY HAVE APPROVED THIS IN MR. MILLER AND REPRESENTING THE LIBRARY BOARD HAS SIGNED THIS DOCUMENT AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S BEFORE YOU IN YOUR PACKAGE. 
          DON, GO RIGHT AHEAD. 
          WELL, UNDER THE CHARTER, THE CITY IS TO SET ASIDE A LEVY OF BETWEEN FIVE AND EIGHT CENTS PER HUNDRED FOR THE CONDUCT, MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT AND EXTENSION OF THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY. THERE HAVE BEEN VERSIONS OF THIS LANGUAGE IN CITY CHARTERS SINCE AT LEAST NINETEEN FORTY SIX. 
          THE LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER DOES NOT ADDRESS EVEN WHETHER THE MONEY HAS TO BE DELIVERED 
          [02:15:03]
OR HOW IT WOULD BE DELIVERED. 
          THERE HAVE BEEN ORDINANCES IN THE PAST THAT ADDRESSED THAT FOR SOME REASON HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO LAPSE OR HAVE BEEN REPEALED IN TWENTY EIGHTEEN. 
          WE WORKED OUT A AN ADMINISTRATIVE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING THAT JUST BROKE DOWN THE PROCEDURE BY WHICH CITY MONEY WOULD BE SENT OVER TO THE LIBRARY WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE ENTIRE LEVY WAS TO BE DELIVERED. 
          THAT WAS NECESSARY BECAUSE THE INITIAL SUPPORT OF THE LIBRARY IS BASED ON AN ESTIMATE BASED ON COLLECTIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, AND WE NEEDED A WAY TO BASICALLY QUOTE UNQUOTE [INAUDIBLE] UP THE AMOUNT OF CONTRIBUTIONS ON A YEARLY BASIS. 
          YOU MAY RECALL DURING THE BUDGET HEARINGS THIS YEAR, IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT DUE TO THE TAX CAP IMPOSED BY THE STATE THAT THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE WOULD HAVE DIMINISHED OPPORTUNITIES AND ITS BUDGET FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE. 
          BUT THAT CONSTRAINT WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE LIBRARY. 
          SO THERE WAS A CONCERN OF EQUITY BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE LIBRARY, AND WE SOUGHT TO APPORTION THAT TAX CAP INTO THE SUPPORT OF THE LIBRARY ITSELF. 
          MR. LOFTON HAS WRITTEN A METHODOLOGY FOR THAT ALLOCATION TO OCCUR. 
          THE LIBRARY HAS BEEN RECEPTIVE TO IT AND THEY HAVE ACCEPTED IT. 
          WE HAVE PROVIDED FOR A FIVE YEAR AGREEMENT HERE. 
          I THINK WE CAN GET OUT EVERY YEAR. 
          AS I RECALL, IT BEGINS EFFECTIVE THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 21. 
          SO WE'LL BE USING THIS METHODOLOGY THIS FISCAL YEAR. 
          AND THEN I GUESS WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES, WHAT THINGS CHANGE IN THE FUTURE, AND WE'LL BE BACK TO VISIT THIS IN FIVE YEARS. 
          THAT'S ESSENTIALLY IT. 
          YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE AGREEMENT, IT SAYS VERSION SIX POINT FOUR. 
          THAT'S HOW MANY PERMUTATIONS WE WENT THROUGH ON THIS. 
          WORKING IT OUT. BUT IN THE END, I THINK WE HAVE A GOOD, WORKABLE AGREEMENT THAT EVERYBODY IS IN HARMONY WITH. 
          AND WITH THAT. 
          THANK YOU DON. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. 
          I WANT TO THANK STAFF. 
          IT WAS A LOT OF MAN HOURS THAT WERE PUT INTO GETTING WORKING WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD ON THIS, AND I WANT TO THANK THE LIBRARY BOARD AND AND MIKE MILLER FOR ALL THE INPUT THAT THEY GAVE TO COME UP WITH THE DOCUMENT THAT I FEEL IS VERY EQUITABLE FOR BOTH ENTITIES, THE CITY AND THE LIBRARY. 
          IT BRINGS WITH THIS DOCUMENT IF THIS IS APPROVED BY COUNCIL. 
          BRIAN, HOW MUCH WOULD THIS BRING TO THE CITY THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE NORMALLY THIS YEAR? IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS WOULD BRING TO THE CITY BACK, AND THIS IS GOOD FOR FIVE YEARS. 
          THERE IS, AS DON MENTIONED, THERE IS DETAILS IN THERE WHERE THIS CAN BE TERMINATED BY EITHER PARTY GOING THROUGH A PARTICULAR PROCESS ON THAT. 
          BRIAN, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS AT ALL? NO, I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S I WANT TO THANK MIKE. 
          HE'S BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH ON THIS, HAVE BEEN VERY PATIENT WITH ALL OF THIS, BUT IT'S AND I BELIEVE IT'S IN KEEPING WITH WHAT WAS INTENDED WITH THE INITIAL LEGISLATION OF THE THREE AND A HALF PERCENT CAP AS WELL. 
          SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE LIBRARY'S HELP WITH THIS AND IT'LL HELP US GOING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE YEARS AS WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO KEEP THINGS AFFORDABLE, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF EVERYTHING ELSE IT'S NOT. 
          THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS ON... 
          MR. MILLER ON THE PHONE? YES, SIR, HE IS. 
          MIKE, IT'S BILL QUIROGA. 
          I'LL HAVE TO UNMUTE HIM REAL QUICK. 
          GIVE ME ONE SECOND. GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING, MIKE. WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. 
          MIKE I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU IS JUST VERY SIMPLE IS THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY, THE BOARD OPEN TO THIS AND RECEIVING THIS WITH OPEN ARMS? YEAH. DID THE LIGHTWOOD AS AS A PRESENT FEEL THEY YOU KNOW, THEY APPROVED IT AT OUR LAST 
          [02:20:01]
MEETING. YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE A LITTLE DEFENSIVE, BUT I THINK OVERALL, THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT THE REALITY OF THE CURRENT TAX GAP WITH 2019 LEGISLATURE FOLLOWING THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT YOU KNOW THEY CONFLICT WITH, THE NINETEEN SEVENTY NINE LANGUAGE OF GREED IS A GOOD WAY TO RECONCILE THAT SO THAT WE CAN BOTH MOVE FORWARD. 
          OK. THANK YOU, MIKE. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? VERY GOOD, MIKE. 
          THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          DON, THANK YOU. THIS WILL BE ON OUR AGENDA 11E THIS AFTERNOON ON THAT. 
          MAYOR, CAN I ASK A FAVOR? YES, YOU DO MIND TO GET THIS FIRST BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO ATTEND A LEGISLATIVE LUNCHEON AT THE CHAMBER. OK, WE'RE MOVING INTO THAT RIGHT NOW. 
          YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU DON VERY MUCH. 
          ITEM THREE D COUNCIL, AS WE TALKED ABOUT, WILL BE DEFERRED TO OUR JANUARY MEETING. 
          [3.E.
Council Discussions (30 minutes)]
WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM 3E COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS. 
          WE HAVE WE HAVE ITEMS THREE AND ITEMS FOUR THAT HAVE COME FROM COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. 
          MARIE. WON'T YOU GO AHEAD? LET'S READ THOSE. 
          JANELLE, COULD YOU READ ALL FOUR OF THOSE REAL QUICKLY, PLEASE? SURE. ONE, DISCUSSION OF ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF OPENINGS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          TWO, DISCUSSION OF THE CITY AUDITOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUDITS AS IT PERTAINS TO THE CITY CHARTER. THREE, DISCUSSION OF THE SEWER ISSUE FROM NOVEMBER TWENTY NINE THOUSAND TWENTY ONE ON JONES ROAD. 
          FOUR, DISCUSSION AND THE INCREASING ISSUES WITH COYOTES AND FIVE, PRELIMINARY AUDIT DISCUSSION, FORTY FIFTH STREET. 
          LET'S GO TO ITEM THREE BILL. 
          DOES THAT MEET YOUR APPROVAL? IT'S FINE. LET'S GO TO ITEM THREE, DISCUSSION OF THE SEWER ISSUES FROM NOVEMBER TWENTY NINTH. MARIE. 
          WELL, I MEAN, WE SEEM TO HAVE HAD A LOT OF ONGOING SEWER ISSUES, AND I KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER TO THIS IS. 
          BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ACTUAL WHERE OUR MAPS SAY WHERE THE SEWER LINES ARE. 
          THEY AREN'T LOCATED. 
          BUT IS THERE SOME WAY WE COULD DO SOME SORT OF PIPE TEST? I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE [INAUDIBLE] I HAD A SERIES OF COMPLAINTS FROM THE PEOPLE AND LIKE MADELEINE, THAT THEY'RE TIRED OF HAVING CRAP IN THEIR CANAL, SO THERE MUST BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO THAT WOULD PROTECT THAT FROM HAPPENING. 
          WELL, I MEAN, YOU'RE RIGHT AND WE'RE DOING, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS WE WE ARE REMAPPING EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NOT A GOOD TECHNOLOGY OUT THERE THAT HELPS US ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PINPOINT IN OUR SOCIAL SERVICES AND EVERYTHING WHERE IT IS. 
          BUT AS WE WE'RE GETTING GOOD MARKS ON EVERYTHING AND MATTER OF FACT, THE WHOLE TIME WE WERE OUT THERE DEALING WITH THIS, WE HAD OUR PEOPLE AS WE WERE DIGGING, MARKING AND AND UPDATING GIS AS WE GO. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO GALVESTON. 
          THIS HAPPENS IN ALL OLD CITIES BECAUSE THE MAPS ARE JUST NOT REAL ACCURATE. 
          THIS PIPELINE THAT WE GET WAS PROBABLY 20 30 YEARS OLD. 
          IT WAS NOT ON THE [INAUDIBLE] AS IT'S ACTUALLY GOING OFF AT A FORTY FIVE DEGREE ANGLE FROM WHERE THE MAP SAID IT WAS. 
          SO WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO DO LOCATES. 
          WE DO OUR VERY BEST WITH IT. 
          WE DON'T WANT TO BE COST PROHIBITIVE IF WE HAD TO COME IN AND DO SOME TYPE OF FORENSIC WORK BEFORE EVERY RESIDENT WANTED TO DIG AND WE DID UTILITY LOCATES, THE COST WOULD BE SO ASTRONOMICAL THEY'D NEVER BE ABLE TO BUILD ANYTHING ON THE ISLAND. 
          SO WE'RE PERHAPS ONE. 
          WE'RE WORKING AROUND THAT WASTEWATER PLANT. 
          WE COULD BE A LITTLE MORE DILIGENT SINCE IT ALL SEEMS TO BE TIED TO THE SAME PROJECT. 
          WELL, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER PROJECT. 
          ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, EITHER. 
          LET'S GO. THERE'S ACTUALLY A WHOLE DIFFERENT COMPONENT. 
          I MEAN, NOT EVEN NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO THE OTHER. 
          SO OK. 
          BECAUSE ODDLY ENOUGH, THE DOLPHINS SEEM TO LIKE IT BECAUSE WE'VE TAKEN SAMPLES AND EVERYTHING. WE HAD THAT IN THE REPORT THAT WAS EMAILED TO EACH OF THE SAMPLES ARE VERY POSITIVE IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS WE DID A VERY GOOD JOB THAT NIGHT OF CONTAINING IT MOSTLY TO THE LAND. 
          AND SO THE AMOUNT THAT WENT THE WATER WAS A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF WHAT WE LOST. 
          WELL, THE THING THAT WAS MOST APPRECIATED WAS GETTING THE INFORMATION OUT QUICKLY, WHICH DIDN'T HAPPEN IN THE LAST CASE. 
          SO I WAS ABLE TO GET IT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD QUICKLY. 
          SO PEOPLE WEREN'T FISHING OR KIDS WERE [INAUDIBLE]. 
          AND YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THING IS IS THAT THE CRUISE TOOK VERY QUICK ACTION AND SHUTTING DOWN THOSE STATIONS AND ALL THAT. 
          BUT I THINK THE BIGGEST ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE WHOLE THING, IF THERE WAS AN ACCOMPLISHMENT, WAS THAT WE NEVER LOST  SERVICE TO ANYBODY. 
          [02:25:03]
THAT THE NEXT OPTION WOULD HAVE BEEN IS TO SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN. 
          AND THAT'S NOT AN OPTION FOR US IN THAT AREA. 
          SO WE MANAGED TO DO THAT. 
          WE KEPT TRUCKS RUNNING, KEPT EVERYTHING GOING AND WE MAINTAINED IT. 
          SO KUDOS TO OUR GUYS WHO WERE DIVING INTO THE PIT THAT WE DUG TO MAINTAIN IT AND THEY WERE IN STUFF THAT'S DEEP. 
          SO. AND YOU GAVE A WRITTEN REPORT ON THIS COUNCIL RECEIVED WITH COMPLETE TIMELINES IN THIS ON THAT IN WASTE MOUNTS. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT, MARIE? I HAVE A QUESTION, MA'AM. 
          YES. IN LOOKING AT THE INITIAL REPORT THEY WERE DIGGING FOR TO PLANT TREES. 
          SO THAT SEWER LINE WASN'T THAT FAR DOWN. 
          FORCE MAIN'S USUALLY AREN'T THAT DEEP. 
          BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ONE ON SEVENTY FOURTH STREET? THAT'S PRETTY DEEP ISN'T IT? AND. THAT MY FREEDOM. 
          THE TWO DIFFERENT LINES, CORRECT, SO THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT LINES, THE ONE ON SEVEN TO FOURTH STREET IS GOING UNDER OFF ITS FORCE BY TWO. 
          I MEAN, IT IS COMING BACK UP ON THE MOODY GUARDING SIDE AND THEN HANGING THE LEFT, GOING TO THE PLANT. THE ONE THAT WAS HIT IS THE ONE COMING OFF OF JONES DRIVE, WHICH IS CROSSING THE CANAL, COMING BACK UP IN THAT PLOT OF LAND THAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. 
          THEN IT ANGLES OFF TO THE FRONT SIDE OF THE FOUR INCH LINE. 
          NO, NO, THAT'S A 10 INCH LONG, 10 INCH LINE. 
          THAT'S A 10 INCH LINE. WHY DIDN'T WE DO SOMETHING LIKE DIG TEST? YOU GOT CABLES OUT THERE, PROBABLY AND TELEPHONE CABLES OR WE DID. 
          THE THING IS THAT OUR GIS AND OUR RECORDS SHOW THAT LINE RUNNING PARALLEL WITH JONES DRIVE ALL THE WAY UP TO SKY MASTER. 
          AND IT DID NOT. 
          ONCE IT CROSSES THE CANAL, IT TAKES A FORTY FIVE DEGREE ANGLE, GOES IN SO MANY, SO MANY FEET, AND THEN TAKES ANOTHER FORTY FIVE TO GO TO THE PLANT. 
          SO NONE OF OUR NONE OF OUR AS BUILDS THOSE NO RECORDS IN OUR GIS HAD THE ACCURATE INFORMATION. SO NO MATTER WHAT, WE WOULD HAVE PROVIDED THE WRONG INFORMATION DURING THE LOCATE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT WERE TAKEN. 
          AND THAT IS NOT UNIQUE TO US TO I MEAN, IT HAPPENS WITH THE GAS COMPANY HERE IN AN OLD UTILITY SYSTEM WHERE THEY WERE DOING DIGGING OVER ON SEALY AND THE GAS COMPANY LOCATED THE LINE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET. 
          AND SURE ENOUGH, THEY HIT IT. 
          IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN THESE OLD UTILITY SYSTEMS. I WAS TALKING TO SOME FOLKS AT TXDOT OUT THE OTHER DAY AND THEY'RE HITTING THEM ALL OVER THE PLACE IN LAMARCK RIGHT NOW. 
          SAME ISSUES. IT'S JUST THE MAPPING IS JUST NOT THAT ACCURATE AND THE AS BUILDS. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT WENT ON HERE YEARS AGO, BUT THEY JUST DID NOT REQUIRE GOOD AS BUILDS. 
          ACTUALLY, MOST OF THESE DON'T EVEN HAVE AS BUILDS. 
          IT'S JUST PRELIMINARY PLANS. 
          HARD TO BELIEVE THERE WAS A BUILDING SITTING ON THIS FORCE MAIN AT ONE POINT IN TIME. 
          HOW DEEP WAS THE FORCE MAIN? THAT FORCE WAS BETWEEN THREE AND A HALF TO FOUR FEET DEEP. 
          SO WHY WOULD THEY BE PLANTING TREES? BIG TREES, BIG TREES OR OAKS OR PLANTING THEM ALONG THE EDGE OF THAT BIG? IT WAS MOODY GARDENS, THEY HAD THE TREES THEY WANTED TO DRESS UP THEIR ENTRANCE, THEY ASK US IF THEY COULD PLANT THEM THERE. 
          WE SAID, YOU PLANT THEM, THAT'S FINE. 
          AND THEY WERE USING A TREE SPADE TO DO THAT. 
          MM HMM. BIG PIECE OF EQUIPMENT IN PLACE FOR EMERGENCY COST. 
          RIGHT NOW, WE ARE. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM THREE? LET'S MOVE TO ITEM FOR DISCUSSION THE COYOTE ISSUE. 
          THIS IS WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS MANY, MANY TIMES, BUT GO RIGHT AHEAD. 
          WELL, I MEAN, THE SITUATION JUST KEEPS GETTING WORSE AND THEN SOME OF MY NEIGHBORHOODS ESPECIALLY SEA ISLE. 
          THE COYOTES ARE BEING VERY AGGRESSIVE. 
          SO NOW THEY'RE NOT ONLY GOING AFTER DOGS OR CATS, THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING AFTER PEOPLE WHO ARE WALKING DOGS OR CATS. 
          BUT WE PROBABLY IN JUST THE LAST TWO MONTHS ABOUT SEVEN OR EIGHT INSTANCES. 
          AND I KNOW PART OF THAT IS BEING DRIVEN BY THE WORK THAT'S GOING INTO THE STATE PARK BECAUSE APPARENTLY ONE OF THEIR DENS WERE THERE SOMETHING SOMEONE WAS TELLING ME? BUT THE THE ISSUES AND THE AMOUNT OF HYPE IS GROWING IN LEAPS AND BOUNDS. 
          IN MY DISTRICT, SO, JOSH, WHY DON'T YOU COME ON OVER HERE AND HAVE A SEAT? JOSH HENDERSON WITH THE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE HERE AT THE CITY AND OUR COYOTE EXPERT. 
          SO JOSH, NICE TO HAVE YOU. 
          NICE TO BE BACK. 
          I MIGHT HAVE ENOUGH OF THESE. 
          YOU MAY REMEMBER WE PUT A GPS COLLAR ON YOUR SPEAK OF THE STATE PARK AREA COYOTE. 
          THIS IS WHERE HE'S GOING. 
          JUST TO START WITH, I BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH FOR ALL OF YOU. 
          [02:30:01]
AND JUST BEFORE I ADDRESS THE I AM AWARE OF ONGOING ISSUES THERE, JUST TO HIGHLIGHT THIS DATA. EACH OF THOSE DOTS REPRESENTS FOR OUR TIME FRAME AND WHAT'S FROM THE EAST END TO THE WEST DOT. 
          HE'S RUNNING ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF SQUARE MILES. 
          NO, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S A WHOLE PACK OF COYOTES. 
          THAT'S JUST NOT ONE. 
          NO, I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND IT. 
          SO THIS IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ONLY THE ONE COYOTE IN THAT PACK. 
          OUR GOAL WOULD BE TO CONTINUE GPS COLLARS FROM THE EAST END TO THE WEST END OF THE ISLAND. BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE BEEN ABLE TO PRESENT THAT DATA SINCE THIS COYOTE WAS COLLARED SEPTEMBER THE 20TH. 
          AND SO SINCE I'M HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT COYOTES, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT WORTH SHARING WITH COUNCIL. 
          NOW IN SEA ISLE, SEA ISLE ACTUALLY IS CURRENTLY THE HOME OF MY ONE REPORTED. 
          NOW, SEA ISLE, HISTORICALLY, IS A LOCATION THAT HAS NOT REPORTED COYOTE ACTIVITY. 
          I'M REALLY PLAYING CATCH UP A LOT WITH THE COYOTE RELATED ACTIVITY OUT THERE. 
          JUST AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS MAP, THE AVAILABLE AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE IS FOLK SEE COYOTES OUT THERE MUCH, MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THEY EVER WILL CALL AND REPORT THEM. 
          SEA ISLE DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF GREEN SPACE. 
          SEA ISLE IS A LOT OF HOMES. 
          SEA ISLE HAS GREEN SPACE IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING IT. 
          AND SO WHILE IT'S NOT INCLUDED ON THE MAP I GAVE YOU IF IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIG MAP HERE ON THE WALL, THE GREEN SPACE THAT SURROUNDS EITHER SIDE OF IT AND THEN THE MOST RECENT INCIDENT THAT HAS BEEN REPORTED THAT I'M AWARE OF OCCURRED IN, I BELIEVE IT WAS NOVEMBER THE 14TH 15TH ISH. 
          THERE WAS A LADY AT TWO O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING WITH HER SMALL DOG IN HER BACKYARD. 
          NO LIGHTS. 
          THREE FOOT PICKET FENCE. 
          COYOTE JUMPED OVER THE PICKET FENCE. 
          GRABBED HER CHIHUAHUA. SHE WAS ACTUALLY ABOUT AS FAR AS YOU AND I AWAY FROM THE DOG. 
          WHEN THIS HAPPENED, THE DOG WASN'T ON A LEASH. 
          AND SO WHEN SHE SAW THAT A COYOTE HAD JUMPED HER FENCE, SHE WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO TAKE TWO OR THREE STEPS FORWARD, KICK THE COYOTE AND RETRIEVE HER DOG. 
          HER DOG IS ALIVE AND WELL AFTER SOME VETERINARY TREATMENT. 
          AND I CURRENTLY TODAY HAVE GAME CAMERAS WATCHING THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, WHERE THE COYOTE HAD COME FROM INTO HER YARD, AS WELL AS EVALUATING THE SURROUNDING AREA, IDENTIFIED A GAME TRAIL WHERE THEY'RE COMING OUT OF THE WILDLIFE AREA ABOUT SIX HUNDRED FOOT AWAY FROM HER FENCE. 
          NOW. WHAT I FOUND SO FAR IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS WITH GAME CAMERAS OUT THERE IS I'M GETTING A I'VE HONESTLY GOT MORE RABBITS ON THERE THAN COYOTES. 
          I HAVE GOT COYOTES A COUPLE OF TIMES ON THERE AND I'M REPOSITIONING CAMERAS TRYING TO SEE EXACTLY HOW FREQUENTLY THEY'RE COMING IN AND OUT OF THAT AREA. 
          ONE OF THE IF JOSH ARE THE COYOTES, IS THE POPULATION EXPANDING AND CAUSING MORE CONCERNS IN YOUR MIND? IT'S NOT. 
          I DON'T HAVE THE DATA SHOWS THEY'RE EXPANDING... 
          REPORTING TO YOU BECAUSE LIKE HERE, LIKE THIS IS SIGHTINGS OR JUST THAT ONE COYOTE. 
          THIS IS ONLY THAT THAT THE ONLY THING ON THAT MAP REPRESENTS THAT ONE COYOTES GPS DATA. 
          BECAUSE I CAN TELL YOU FIVE PEOPLE REPORTED OR I'M IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ON FACEBOOK. 
          THERE'S MORE COYOTES. 
          AND I CAN SAY THIS, THAT DOG THAT GOT CAUGHT THAT WHILE WE MAY RIGHT PHYSICALLY MENTAL HEALTH WISE. SO THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO SPREAD AROUND IN A PLACE LIKE SEA ISLE. AND HONESTLY, I'D LIKE TO COME UP WITH ONE THAT THE YOU GIVE ME ONE THAT I COULD PUT ONLINE. MA'AM, YOU CAN TAKE THAT ONE WITH YOU, BUT CAN'T YOU JUST SEND ME THAT I CAN SEND YOU THE PDF DIGITAL COPY? I ABSOLUTELY CAN. 
          SO EVERYBODY SEEING QR CODES ON IF YOU'VE GONE TO A RESTAURANT IN THE LAST YEAR. 
          THIS HAS BECOME A REALLY EASY WAY TO PULL UP THE SHORTHAND LINK TO GET TO OUR GIS MAP IS 
          [02:35:02]
NOT SOMETHING I CAN EXPLAIN TO YOU OVER THE PHONE. 
          YOU'LL NEVER GET IT RIGHT. 
          BUT IF WE WERE PLACES LIKE THE COMMUNITY MAILBOXES AND SOME OF THOSE OUT WEST NEIGHBORHOODS, OR ESPECIALLY THE HAVING ACCESS TO OUR ONLINE REPORTING TOOL HAS GIVEN ME MORE DATA ON THE COYOTES, ESPECIALLY WEST OF SEVEN OR EIGHT MILE ROAD, FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS AS I'VE BEEN TRACKING COYOTES, GETTING ANY INFORMATION ON WHAT COYOTES ARE DOING WEST OF EIGHT MILE IS. 
          I MAY GET A DOZEN, MAYBE 20 REPORTS IN A WHOLE YEAR. 
          WELL, I THINK PEOPLE JUST ARE UNAWARE HOW TO REPORT THEM, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. BUT IF YOU CAN GET ME A DIGITAL THING, SO I WILL DEFINITELY DO THAT IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP AND I WILL TALK ABOUT THIS AT MEETINGS TO HELP US QUANTIFY IT BECAUSE SO THE POPULATION IS GROWING THE AND THEY'RE ALSO LOSING MEMBERS. 
          SO I'VE GOT A TWO SIDED PAGE. 
          I'LL LET Y'ALL LOOK AT NOW AND I'LL EXPLAIN IT. 
          SO THIS SIDE EXPLAINS THE COYOTES THAT HAVE ACTUALLY GOT ONTO MY TRUCK LIVE OR DEAD. 
          WE'VE PICKED UP EIGHT ROADKILL HIT BY CAR. 
          WE'VE PICKED UP FOUR THAT HAD TO BE EUTHANIZED DUE TO ILLNESS OR INJURY. 
          AND WE'VE IN ADDITION TO THE ONE THAT WAS RELEASED WITH THE GPS COLLAR PRIOR TO PICKING HIM UP, WE'D ALREADY PICKED UP AND RELEASED THREE OTHERS THAT WERE CONVENIENTLY CAPTURED FOR ONE REASON OR THE OTHER GIVEN WHERE THEY LANDED. 
          SO THE OPPOSITE SIDE IS THE RESULT OF OUR ONLINE REPORTING TOOL NOW BECAUSE YOU CAN EITHER VIA THE QR CODE OR GOOGLE GALVESTON COYOTE MANAGEMENT FIND THE LITTLE MAP. 
          YOU WANT TO. SO, JOSH, LET THE I THINK WHAT IS A LOT OF TIMES I HEAR IS PEOPLE WANT TO THEY WANT TO EITHER TRAP AND EUTHANIZE THESE COYOTES OR OTHER MEASURES THAT WILL HELP CONTROL IN THEIR MIND THE INCREASING POPULATION. 
          COULD YOU JUST GO TO THE BOTTOM LINE OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT AN. 
          ABSOLUTELY, IT'S BEEN TRIED. 
          IT'S BEEN TRIED, NOT ONLY HERE, BUT ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES. 
          WE ARE NOT THE ONLY CITY BIG, LARGE SMALL ISLAND THAT HAS TO DEAL WITH A NATIVE COYOTE POPULATION. IT'S IT'S PART OF LIVING HERE. 
          LAST MONTH, I, UH, I WAS ACTUALLY A SPEAKER FOR A GROUP IN OHIO. 
          TWO MONTHS BEFORE THAT, I WAS SPEAKING ABOUT COYOTES WITH PRESENTER HER FROM TORONTO. 
          THEY'RE ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, AND COYOTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS FOR DECADES HAVE TRIED BROAD LETHAL CONTROL. 
          LET'S JUST WIPE THEM OUT. 
          THEY'VE TRIED TO PICK THEM UP AND RELOCATE THEM. 
          LET'S CALL THEM OFF TO PICK A SPOT, AND THAT'S FINE. 
          BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, GALVESTON SEEMS TO BE A PRETTY GOOD PLACE HABITAT WISE FOR COYOTES. THEY SEEM TO DO PRETTY GOOD HERE. 
          SO WHEN THE CITY OF HOUSTON ASKS FOR US TO TAKE IN THEIR COYOTES, I'M GOING TO TELL THEM NO. WE YEAH, WE'RE NOT IMPORTING. 
          WE'RE NOT GOING TO IMPORT THEIRS. 
          BUT ON THE SAME TOKEN, I'M NOT WILLING TO TAKE IN HOUSTON'S COYOTES ANY MORE THAN PORT ARANSAS IS READY TO ACCEPT OURS. 
          I DON'T HAVE A RELOCATION PLACE THAT THAT PIPE DREAM SOUNDS AWESOME, BUT THERE'S NO REAL WORLD PLACE FOR IT. 
          YES, SIR. YES. SO WHEN YOU. 
          SO WHEN WE POST THIS ALL ON AND YOU'LL START TO GET MORE AND MORE AND MORE CALLS RIGHT, PLEASE. SO WHAT'S THE? SO IF I HAVE ONE CHRONICALLY AROUND TWENTY FOURTH AND WHATEVER, RIGHT? MIDDLE OF THE URBAN CORE, WHEN YOU ARE YOU COMING TO CAPTURE THE COYOTE FIRST? AND THE SECOND THING IS, ARE YOU RELEASING THAT? SO, IT DEPENDS ON THE SITUATION. 
          NOW, IF SO, THIS LOVELY LITTLE SCALE, RIGHT? WHAT IS THE COYOTE DOING IF THE COYOTES CRIME IS WALKING ACROSS THE STREET OR OOPS, HE GOT CAUGHT IN THE WRONG YARD? WHY NOT RELEASE IT? HOWEVER, IF THE COYOTE IS CAUGHT GETTING INTO TROUBLE, IF THERE IS A LETHAL CONTROL IS ON 
          [02:40:03]
THE TABLE, ALWAYS AS A TARGETED OPTION, SIMPLY NOT A BROAD SPECTRUM. 
          WE'RE KILLING IT BECAUSE IT'S A COYOTE HONESTLY WITH MY GIANT STAFF OF THREE. 
          EVEN IF WE WERE TO EMPLOY ALL OF THE RESOURCES OF THE ENTIRE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS BROAD SPECTRUM LETHAL CONTROL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE COYOTES HERE. 
          YEAH. AND SO. 
          MUCH LIKE THIS, THIS LAST YEAR, WE'VE EUTHANIZED FOR INJURY OR ILLNESS, AND IF WE NEED TO EUTHANIZE FOR AGGRESSION, WE CAN DO THAT. 
          BUT IF THERE'S NOT A IF THE SITUATION DOES NOT WARRANT IT, THEN THE ANIMAL WOULD BE RELEASED. WHERE IS HE RELEASE OR IF SHE OR SHE? SO YEAH, IF YOU JUST SEND ME YOUR ADDRESS. 
          YEAH, THAT'S COOL. 
          SO THE TWO DOGS AND CATS, HUH? SO IT DEPENDS. AS WE GO THROUGH THE ISLAND, THERE'S THE AMOUNT OF AVAILABLE GREEN SPACE. 
          IT'S REALLY EASY TO SCOOT ACROSS TOWN. 
          AND SO COUNCILWOMAN SCHUSTER, THOUGH, WAS REQUESTING WHERE DO YOU RELEASE THEM? IT DEPENDS ON WHERE THE ANIMALS PICKED UP. 
          WE. WE RELEASE THEM AS CLOSE TO THEIR TERRITORY AS POSSIBLE. 
          SO THE COYOTE THAT WAS PICKED UP AND RELEASED IN JAMAICA BEACH WAS RELEASED INTO WILDLIFE AREA ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE FROM WHERE IT WAS PICKED UP. 
          AND SO THE DATA SHOWS, AFTER HE GOT TO SPEND THE AFTERNOON WITH ME, COLLECTING BLOOD AND GETTING A HAIRCUT AND GETTING A COLLAR ON. 
          HE REALLY HADN'T SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME AROUND, PEOPLE. 
          HE'S BEEN IN ALL OF HIS TIME HANGING OUT IN THE COW PASTURE. 
          IT'S A REALLY AN AGGRESSIVE FORM OF HAZING TO GET TO GO ON A RIDE WITH ME. 
          IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN ALIEN ABDUCTION FOR A COYOTE. 
          SO DID YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR QUESTION? I GUESS I'M CONSTANTLY BEING ASKED BY MY CONSTITUENTS, WHAT CAN WE DO? AND THAT MUST BE ESPECIALLY IN SEA ISLE, BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD SO MANY THINGS GO ON. 
          AND WHEN THEY START BEING AGGRESSIVE TOWARDS PEOPLE AND I HAVEN'T TALKED TO THOSE FOLKS, I HAVEN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY MENTIONING, IF YOU CAN PUT ME IN TOUCH WITH THEM, PLEASE SEND THEM, SEND THEM THAT, SEND THEM MY BY ALL MEANS. 
          SEND THEM MY CELL PHONE NUMBER. OK, WELL, YOU'RE GOING TO EMAIL ME AT. 
          I'M GOING TO SEND YOU THAT AND THE. 
          COME THE END OF THE YEAR, IT DOESN'T TAKE ME A REMARKABLE AMOUNT OF TIME BECAUSE WE'RE NOW USING THE GIS MAP AS THE CORE OF HOW WE'RE COLLECTING THIS INFORMATION, BEING ABLE TO PULL THAT OUT INTO AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET AND DO ALL THE FANCY THINGS YOU CAN DO WITH AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET MAKES DATA COLLECTION SO MUCH EASIER. 
          AND OF COURSE, IF ANY COUNCIL MEMBER HAS A QUESTION SPECIFIC TO THEIR DISTRICT OR I'M AVAILABLE, YOU'RE AVAILABLE ANY TIME TO ADDRESS THAT, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. VAN SLYKE ANY QUESTIONS YET? I ASK YOU WHAT I'M HEARING HERE. 
          NO MATTER WHERE THIS COUNTY IS, YOU'RE GOING TO RELOCATE AND STILL BACK ON THE SITE ON THE ISLAND SOMEWHERE. 
          I DON'T HAVE AN OFF THE ISLAND RELOCATION OPTION. 
          I KNOW IT'S EITHER NEW RELEASE NEXT. 
          TAKE THEM. YOU FIND ME SOMEBODY WILLING TO TAKE THEM. 
          WE'LL ENTERTAIN IT. BUT I'M NOT AWARE OF THE RANCH AND I'M ALMOST IN THE SAME BOAT. 
          PEOPLE ARE NOT SAYING ANYTHING BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY, OH, WE'RE RELOCATING HERE, WE PUT IN A CALL. THEY DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT. 
          THEY WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE GETTING RID OF THE COYOTE PERIOD. 
          GETTING RID OF THE COYOTE IS HABITAT MANAGEMENT. 
          IT'S WHAT IS ATTRACTING THEM TO THE AREA IN THE FIRST PLACE. 
          WE'VE GOT A SPOT IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO OUT THE SPECIFIC ADDRESS, BUT IF THE IF THE GRASS IN THE BACK YARD HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND ITS FOUR FOOT TALL THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE YARD, IF THE ALLEY SPACE BEHIND IT IS ANOTHER FOUR FOOT TALL AND 15 FOOT TREES AND THERE'S NO THOUGHT OF DRIVING A CAR DOWN IT BECAUSE IT'S SO ILL MAINTAINED. 
          THE COYOTES ARE BEING INVITED IN TO THE I GO TO CHECK IT OUT AND THERE'S DEAD RATS IN THE 
          [02:45:03]
DRIVEWAY. IF WE UNINTENTIONALLY CREATE A INVITING HABITAT EVEN IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN, IF IF YOU BUILD IT, THEY WILL COME RIGHT. 
          SO IF YOU PROVIDE A FOOD SOURCE, SOMETHING'S GOING TO EAT IT. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER THING. 
          YOU MIGHT MENTION THAT PEOPLE WHO FEED FERAL CATS ARE FEEDING THE COYOTE. 
          SO AS FUN AS THAT LITTLE MATH IS, I HAVE A COMPANION MAP. 
          I CAN TAKE EVERY ONE OF THE DOTS THAT COMES FROM ONE OF THE THINGS YOU CAN DO WITH OUR GIS MAP AND PULLING IT OUT INTO A SPREADSHEET AS I CAN THEN PUT THAT INTO GOOGLE EARTH. 
          I CAN ALSO TAKE ALL OF OUR TRAP NEUTER, RELEASE COLONY CAT LOCATIONS AND PUT THAT INTO GOOGLE EARTH AND TO SEE HOW THEY OVERLAY EACH OTHER. 
          IT'S KIND OF SCARY, BUT IT DOES GIVE ME THOSE AS FAR AS CONFLICT MANAGEMENT. 
          IF WE HAVE AN ISSUE AT LOCATION X AND I'VE GOT PEOPLE HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE FEEDING FERAL CATS, THESE ARE PROBABLY SOME OF THE PLACES WORTH KNOCKING ON DOORS AND TALKING ABOUT WAYS TO NOT INVITE THEM SO HEAVILY INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          FERAL CAT SITUATION IS A WHOLE ANOTHER TOPIC THAT NOT GO AWAY. 
          THAT'S THAT'S ENOUGH. 
          WE'RE MONITORING THAT AS WELL. 
          COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS. YEAH, THE GENTLEMAN CAN COME IN TODAY. 
          AH, HE'S NOT HERE. 
          BUT AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE THE ONE WHO WENT TO HIS HOUSE. 
          IT'S LIKE ON THIRTY FIRST BETWEEN R&R AND A HALF THAT WHOLE, LIKE A LODGE FULL OF IF YOU WANT TO OUT THE ADDRESS, MA'AM, YOU BRING OUT THE ADDRESS. 
          BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING. 
          THAT'S THE EXACTLY THE HOUSE I'M TALKING ABOUT. 
          WE JUST HAD THE CITY MOW IT AND BETWEEN YOU, ME AND THE WALL. 
          SINCE, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'M CURRENTLY I HAVE TWO TRAPS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I WANT TO GET A COLLAR ON ONE OF THOSE COYOTES AND THEN I WANT TO GET RID OF ALL OF THE FOREST IN THE ALLEY AND WATCH HOW WELL HE IS ABLE. 
          AND THEN HE WAS CONCERNED. 
          I'VE SPOKEN TO A HANDFUL OF FOLKS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND I SPEAK TO SOMEBODY NEW IT SEEMS EVERY TIME I'M OKAY, AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE FIRST PLACE I'LL GO WHEN I LEAVE THIS MEETING TO CHECK MY TRAPS. 
          OK, LET'S LET'S KIND OF BECAUSE I KNOW JOSH'S THINGS TO DO IN COYOTES TO TRACK SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS SUBJECT COUNCILMAN. 
          I THINK THE MAIN THING IS TO GET PEOPLE TO SELL. 
          IF YOU CAN GET MAN, I WILL ABSOLUTELY. 
          I WILL ABSOLUTELY GET IT TO YOU. 
          AND I WOULD SAY, IF YOU HAVE AN HOA IN YOUR DISTRICT AND YOU WANT A SPEAKER THAT WILL HOLD THE ATTENTION OF YOUR AUDIENCE, IT WILL BE JOSH. 
          I'VE SPOKE TO MANY OF THEM AND IF HE DOES A GREAT PRESENTATION NOT ONLY ON COYOTES BUT OTHER ANIMALS ON THE ISLAND HERE. 
          SO THANK YOU, JOHN. 
          I'LL COME RUN MY MOUTH TO ANYBODY WHO WILL LISTEN. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          YOU'RE VERY WELCOME TO ALL OF US. 
          ABSOLUTELY. I'LL I'LL SEND IT TO JANELLE AND EVERYBODY. 
          THANKS. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JOSH.. 
          NICE TO SEE YOU. LET ME KNOW. 
          I WILL THANK YOU. AND LET'S GO TO ITEM MARIE. 
          WE'VE GONE THROUGH YOUR. I WOULD SAY AT 11:40, IS THAT CORRECT? 11:40 COUNCIL COUNCILMAN COLLINS HAS REJOINED US. 
          GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK. 
          LET'S GO TO ITEM ONE DISCUSSION OF ADDRESSING ISSUES OF OPENINGS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          CHIEF CAN COME UP HERE. 
          YES. HE WENT PAST. 
          COME ON. CHIEF NELLIE, COME ON UP AND HAVE A SEAT, SIR. 
          LET ME CHIEF BEFORE YOU GO ANY FURTHER, LET ME A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THE CITY'S ATTORNEY BROUGHT TO ME ABOUT THE SCOPE OF WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT. 
          YES, SIR. THAT WAS THE THE COST OF SERVICE AND THE SERVICE INDEX. 
          AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THIS. 
          BUT I'LL HOLD ON THAT UNTIL ALL THE TIME. 
          I APPRECIATE IT. YEAH, JUST SET IT FOR SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE. 
          NOT A PROBLEM. BUT WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT AND THROW THIS RIGHT QUICK HOPEFULLY WON'T TAKE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME. 
          IS THESE SHEETS HERE THAT I GOT IT WAS A COLLABORATION OF THE CRIMES THAT WERE SET TO THE WHOLE CITY, AND I'M HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEMS IN MY DISTRICT, NOT ONLY CRIMES, BUT DRUG CRIMES. ALSO THAT IS BEING PASSED OVER TO ME. 
          I DID CONTACT MR. MR. MAXWELL WHEN CHIEF HALE WAS HERE. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE DID OR OR WHATEVER, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO BRING UP, I NOTICED THAT Y'ALL PUT ON THE WEBSITE FOR A BRAND NEW CANDIDATES TO START OUT. 
          THEY WERE GETTING LIKE FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND AND TRANSFERS IN SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND. 
          WELL, WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CORRELATE AND TRY TO DO WAS TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO OFFER 
          [02:50:06]
SOME KIND OF INCENTIVES TO GET THE OFFICERS IN. 
          I DO KNOW THAT WE DID READ SOME NUMBERS OF CANDIDATES THAT THE AVERAGE COST TO TRAIN A CANDIDATE IS RIGHT ABOUT WITH BENEFITS AND EVERYTHING RUNS ABOUT NINETY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS. SO IF WE CAN OFFER SOME KIND OF AN INCENTIVE FOR OFFICERS TO THE STATE OR HOW WE NEEDED TO DO IT FROM OUT OF STATE TO COME IN, TO HELP HELP YOU OUT WITH THE AMOUNT OF CRIMES THAT WE'RE HAVING BECAUSE I JUST GOT A TEXT, I THINK IT WAS DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY WE HAD. I HOPE IT'S TRUE OR NOT. 
          THEY SEND IT TO ME A HOMICIDE AND MR. CAUSES DISTRICT. 
          SO WE HAVE MORE HOMICIDES THAN I CAN REMEMBER BEING PUT OUT MORE CRIME THAT PUT OUT. 
          I DID BRING THIS EARLY WHEN I GOT UP HERE TO THAT. 
          WE NEED TO BE AWARE OF THESE PROBLEMS. BUT SOMEHOW, IF WE CAN, I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWENTY SIX OPENINGS? CURRENTLY SIR. 
          IT'S TWENTY TO TWENTY TWO TOTAL WITH TWO TWENTY TWO VACANCIES, INCLUDING THE CHIEF'S POSITION. AND I'M JUST THROWING THIS OUT. 
          YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT NOW TO GET THEIR EXPERIENCE OFFICERS? THAT'S FINE BECAUSE IF WE TRAIN SOMEBODY LIKE I SAID, IT'S NINETY FOUR THOUSAND, WE'RE PAYING SOMEBODY SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND. 
          AND IF WE GIVE SOMEBODY A 10 PERCENT, I MEAN A TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR INCREASE, THAT'S STILL BELOW THE NINETY FOUR THOUSAND TO HAVE SOMEBODY TRAINED OUT. 
          SO BASICALLY WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF WE HAVE TWENTY TWO PEOPLE, CAN WE TAKE TWO OF THEM TURN AROUND AND SAY, HEY, WE HAVE THIS INCENTIVE PACKAGE TO BRING PEOPLE INTO THE ISLAND BECAUSE I'M PRETTY SURE MARIA WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE OFFICERS IN HER DISTRICT. 
          I LIKE TO HAVE A COUPLE MORE IN MY DISTRICT BECAUSE WE'RE STARTING TO SEE AS I GO AROUND THE DISTRICT, WE'RE HAVING MORE CRIMES OF DRUGS, AND THAT'S A BIG CONCERN BECAUSE WE'VE GOT CHILDREN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S PLAYING THERE. 
          A COUPLE OF CONSTITUENTS SHOW ME SYRINGES AND ALL THIS KIND OF STUFF, AND IT'S STARTING TO BE MORE AND MORE OF A PROBLEM. 
          AND ALSO, WE'RE HAVING A LOT OF IN THE DISTRICT FOR THE HOMELESS PEOPLE COME IN AND ANYTHING THEY CAN PICK UP AND SELL IT. 
          SO THIS WHOLE LINE OF DISCUSSION WHAT I WANTED, WHAT CAN WE DO TO HELP? IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF WORKING WITH BRIAN TO GET US AN INCREASE FOR A? X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR SIGNING BONUS. 
          AND YOU ALL WORK OUT THE DETAILS AND ALSO SOMETHING OF A MOVING EXPENSES. 
          WE'LL GET SOME MONEY FROM OUT OF TOWN WITH THE BUDGET YOU ALREADY HAVE FOR THE TWENTY TWO ? I MEAN, IF YOU GO AND LOOK AT OTHER CITIES OR YOU HEAR IT ON THE NEWS AND WHATNOT, CITIES NOW ARE BEING VERY AGGRESSIVE WITH SIGN ON BONUSES, ESPECIALLY FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. BECAUSE BOARD WITH THE SENSE OF WE DON'T NEED POLICE, I MAY NOT THANK GOD WE STILL HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE EAGER TO BE POLICEMEN BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY IS NOT AS THANKFUL JOB AS IT USED TO BE, BUT ESPECIALLY WITH AS MANY OPENINGS AS WE HAVE NOW. 
          YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE CAN TAKE SOME FUNDS FROM TWO OF THOSE POSITIONS AND USE THAT TO INCENTIVIZE, YOU KNOW, I THINK, LEAGUE CITIES DOING A FIVE OR TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR SIGN ON BONUS. WE COULD DO IT IF YOU'RE MOVING TO THE ISLAND, YOU KNOW, WE'LL PAY YOUR MOVING EXPENSES JUST SO WE'RE MORE COMPETITIVE WITH BECAUSE I KNOW WE TEND TO BE AVERAGE ON OUR PAY SCALE. YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN WE DO TO INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO COME AND NOT ONLY COME, BUT TO STAY? IS THAT SOMETHING TOO BRIAN? DID YOU WANT TO GIVE A COMMENT ON THAT? NO, IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE LOOKED AT AND KENT'S WORKING ON THAT FOR THIS AND NOT JUST PD WOULD GET THE SAME ISSUE IN A COUPLE OF OTHER AREAS AS WELL. 
          JUST IT'S A FINE LINE. 
          PARDON ME, I'M PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE ON OUTSIDE OF OTHER DEPARTMENTS, BUT I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE CRIME RATE IN THE CITY, LIKE GOING UP FORTY FIFTH STREET. 
          WE HAD A DRIVE BY SHOOTING, WE HAD ONE ON TWELFTH STREET, WE HAD A COUPLE ON 61ST STREET AND IT'S MORE AND MORE CONCERNED BECAUSE WHAT'S YOUR STAFF NOW CHIEF? WELL, LET'S EXCUSE ME, BILL, THAT'S THAT, BRIAN FINISH. 
          WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS KENT AND I TALKED ABOUT IT. 
          THE ONLY ISSUE YOU RUN INTO IS, IS IT SOMEWHAT UNFAIR TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY WORKING HERE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PAY SOMEBODY TO COME IN AND LEAPFROG THEM? THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT I'M OUT OF FAIRNESS, NOT NECESSARILY LEAPFROG, BUT JUST A BONUS TO 
          [02:55:06]
TO INCENTIVIZE THEM TO COME HERE FOR A BONUS. 
          BUT THEY'RE DOING IT ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE UP AGAINST. 
          AND I'LL TELL YOU, THIS IS NOT JUST THE GALVESTON PROBLEM. 
          EVERY DEPARTMENT AND PART OF IT IS, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE FINDING IS, IS MOST PEOPLE THAT ARE LEAVING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AREN'T LEAVING TO GO TO OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS, THEY'RE LEAVING THE PROFESSION. 
          NO, BUT THERE ARE A LOT LIKE WE JUST HAVE SOME VERY GOOD POLICEMEN WHO WENT TO THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY'RE WILLING TO PAY THEM MORE AND THEY'RE THEY INCENTIVIZED TO MOVE. 
          YOU KNOW, SO YEAH, THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT INCENTIVIZED HIM TO MOVE. 
          YEAH. WAS HE ALREADY LIVING HERE, IF HE IS WORKING FOR US? I DON'T KNOW, THEY'RE INCENTIVIZING HIM TO SWITCH DEPARTMENTS. 
          OKAY. I THINK WITH MORE OR LESS YOU TALK ABOUT IS THE RETIREMENT. 
          DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT RETIREMENT, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE VERSUS THE CITY? YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE IN THE CHANGE. 
          THEY HAVE A FANTASTIC RETIREMENT. 
          OK. SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THE SPECIFICS, BUT I HEAR THAT IT'S A VERY GOOD RETIREMENT. 
          SO AGAIN, THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM TOO. 
          SO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT TO KEEP OUR POLICE FORCE BECAUSE I KNOW OLDER POLICE OFFICERS THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS TO THE RETIREMENT PACKAGE FOR THEM AND THEY HAD OTHER ISSUES. 
          YOU HAVE TO WORK A LOT LONGER THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT TO GET YOUR PENSION TO. 
          I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. 
          I CAN. I'M IN THAT SYSTEM, I CAN TELL YOU. 
          BUT THE WHOLE JUST THING IS, WHAT CAN WE DO TO INCREASE THE POLICE FORCE, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH INCENTIVE? I GIVE THE SIGN OF TIMES. 
          I REMEMBER WHEN I STARTED WORKING, I STARTED OFF AT X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS. 
          NOW GRADUATES OR GRADUATES FROM COLLEGE NOW ARE MAKING AT LEAST TWENTY FIVE AND FORTY FIVE PERCENT MORE THAN I WAS MAKING. 
          SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST THE THE NATURE OF THE GAME. 
          IT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE USED. 
          WELL, LET'S EXCUSE ME, MARIE. 
          I THINK BILL POSED A QUESTION TO TO CHIEF VALLEY. 
          LET'S GET A RESPONSE THERE, AND FROM BRIAN ALSO. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. AND SO UPON CHIEF HELL LEAVING AND I WAS STEPPING INTO THIS ROLE, UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DID HAVE VACANCIES, UNDERSTANDING THAT WE NEEDED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE AND ADDRESS IT IMMEDIATELY AND THEN LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE'RE, I GUESS, NOT AS TRADITIONAL AS WE NORMALLY WENT TO IN THE PAST I DID WAS HAVE A LIST COMPILED WITH ALL EVERYONE WHO'S LEFT IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND THEN REALLY START STUDYING THAT AND LOOKING AT THESE CANDIDATES THAT DID LEAVE. 
          NOW I'M NOT PRIVY TO EXACTLY WHY THEY LEFT BECAUSE I WAS NOT PART OF THE EXIT PROCESS FOR ANY OF THEM, INCLUDING THOSE WHO RECENTLY LEFT UNDER CHIEF HALE. 
          THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT HE DID, AND THEN I BELIEVE THEY ALSO HAVE AN EXIT PROCESS THROUGH H.R.. SO LOOKING AT THAT LIST AND THEN ATTACKING IT AS TO HOW CAN WE RECRUIT? SOME OF THESE OFFICERS BACK BECAUSE WE'VE TRAINED THEM, WE'VE GOTTEN THEM UP TO SPEED AND WE'VE WE'VE MADE THEM MARKETABLE TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND THE GRASS ISN'T ALWAYS GREENER. WE HAD ONE AN OFFICER LEAVE ABOUT TWO AND A HALF THREE MONTHS AGO AND A FEW PHONE CALLS, AND HE'S ON HIS WAY BACK FROM MISSOURI CITY RIGHT NOW. 
          THE HIRING LETTER WAS SIGNED YESTERDAY. 
          IT WAS A GOOD COP, NEVER HAD ANY ISSUES WITH US. 
          NEVER BEEN A DISCIPLINARY PROBLEM. 
          AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT HIRE TO GET HIM BACK TO THE CITY. 
          THE THING ABOUT THE GRASS BEING GREENER ELSEWHERE IS THAT MOST OF THE TIME, OR AT LEAST SOME OF THE TIME, IT'S GREENER BECAUSE THERE'S A SEPTIC TANK SOMEWHERE IN THE AREA AND IT JUST TENDS TO GROW THAT WAY. 
          THERE'S A LOT TO BE SAID FOR WORKING ON THIS ISLAND. 
          THERE'S A LOT TO BE SAID FOR THIS COMMUNITY, AND THERE'S SO MUCH TO BE SAID FOR ACTUALLY WORKING FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SUPPORT YOU BECAUSE WE HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE CITIZENS. 
          SO THAT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO GET AN OFFICER PRODUCTIVE BY HIMSELF ON THE STREET. 
          IT'S ALSO THE CHEAPEST WAY. 
          WE DON'T HAVE TO TEST HIM. 
          WE DO HAVE TO DO A BACKGROUND FROM THE TIME HE LEFT UNTIL THE TIME HE OR SHE RETURNS. 
          THEN WE HAVE TO DO SOME H.R. 
          THINGS, BUT WE GET THEM BACK HERE, GET THEM IN A UNIFORM, PUT THEM IN A CAR WITH ANOTHER OFFICER TO RE FAMILIARIZE, AND WE CAN GENERALLY HAVE THEM ON THE STREET WITHIN ABOUT A MONTH, PRODUCTIVE BY THEMSELVES ANSWERING CALLS. 
          THE SECOND FASTEST WAY TO GET POLICEMEN IN HERE. 
          WE WERE LOOKING AT IT AND SAYING WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND ATTACK LATERALS. 
          WE'VE GOT TO GO AFTER THE WHAT IS OCCURRING TO US. 
          WE NEED TO TURN THE STAKES. 
          AND ARE THERE SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN OFFER THAT THESE OTHER AGENCIES MIGHT BE ABLE TO? SURE. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT WE CAN OFFER IN OTHER PLACES WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DEFUNDING 
          [03:00:06]
THE POLICE OR YOU DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE FOR HAVING THE POLICE THERE OR YOU'RE NOT SUPPORTING THE POLICE, WE HAVE SUPPORT HERE. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO MARKET THAT AND REALLY, YOU KNOW, GET OUT THERE AND TALK AND SELL YOURSELF, SELL YOUR ORGANIZATION AND SELL IT IN THE MOST POSITIVE LIGHT THAT YOU POSSIBLY CAN. IF WE'RE ABLE TO ATTRACT THEM AND GET THEM HERE, WE BRING THEM IN. 
          THEY HAVE TO TEST. 
          THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE HIRING PROCESS, BACKGROUND PROCESS, ET CETERA. 
          ONCE, ONCE THEY ARE IN THE DOOR, THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN IN-SERVICE. 
          WELL, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A VERY BRIEF IN-SERVICE ACADEMY. 
          IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE FOUR WEEKS OR LESS. 
          I LIKE TO HAVE IT LESS. 
          WE JUST HAVE TO REALLY NARROW DOWN WHAT IT IS THAT WE WANT TO DO AND WHAT WE WANT TO TRAIN THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE TRAINED UP BY OTHER AGENCIES. 
          SO THIS IS JUST BASICALLY BRINGING THEM IN AND SAYING, OK, HERE ARE YOUR POLICIES. 
          HERE'S HOW WE DO THESE THINGS HERE IN GALVESTON. 
          BECAUSE GALVESTON IS UNIQUE AND I MEAN, NO OTHER PLACE IN THE WORLD DO WE CHURN BEHIND EACH OTHER. BUT BROADWAY IS THIS VERY UNIQUE ANIMAL IN GALVESTON IS A UNIQUE ANIMAL. 
          SO WE HAVE TO TRAIN THEM UP ON THE GALVESTON WAYS, AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN DO THAT IN TWO TO FOUR WEEKS, MAX FOUR WEEKS, GET THEM IN A CAR WITH ANOTHER OFFICER AND A FIELD MODIFIED FIELD TRAINING PROGRAM. 
          GENERALLY SPEAKING, THEY CAN TRAIN FOR FOUR WEEKS BECAUSE THEY HAVE ALL THIS EXPERIENCE. 
          WE CAN EVALUATE THEM FOR ANOTHER TWO AND POSSIBLY HAVE THEM ON THE STREET WITHIN TWO AND A HALF MONTHS. SO THAT'S VERY FAST. 
          NOW, THE LAST IS THE CANDIDATE THAT OUR TYPICAL CANDIDATE WE NORMALLY HIRE. 
          THEY'RE NOT EXPERIENCED, THEY'RE NOT TRAINED, THEY DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE. 
          IT TAKES US ABOUT A YEAR TO GET THEM ON THE STREET. 
          WE HIRE THEM. WE GO THROUGH A BACKGROUND PROCESS, PUT THEM THROUGH AN IN-SERVICE ACADEMY, PUT THEM THROUGH THE STATE ACADEMY. 
          THAT'S ANOTHER FIVE MONTHS LITTLE TRAINING PROGRAM FOR FIVE MONTHS IF THEY COMPLETED IN THE FIRST GO ROUND. AND THERE'S NO, WE DON'T HAVE TO EXTEND THEIR TRAINING. 
          SO IT'S ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE WE GET THEM ON THE STREET AND HAVE THEM PRODUCTIVE. 
          NOW THERE ARE THINGS THAT OTHER AGENCIES AND OTHER CITIES ARE DOING, AND BONUSES ARE ONE OF THEM. 
          BUT ONLY THE HIGHEST I'VE SEEN OUT THERE IS ABOUT THIS FIFTEEN THOUSAND AND IT'S. 
          BUT THOSE ARE BIG AGENCIES, [INAUDIBLE] AND THEY'RE HEMORRHAGING OFFICERS. 
          THOSE GUYS ARE JUST LEAVING THE GUYS. 
          THE THE OFFICERS ARE LEAVING. 
          WELL, THESE ARE AREAS THAT WE'D LIKE TO MARKET TO AS WELL. 
          CALIFORNIA SEEMS TO BE RUSHING TO TEXAS, SO MAYBE WE CAN REACH OUT TO SOME OF THOSE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OUT THERE AND TRY TO MARKET TO THEM AND GET THEM TO THE COAST, AT LEAST BECAUSE THEY'RE KIND OF WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM. 
          SO IF WE COULD GET THEM BACK HERE OR GET THEM HERE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE IT WOULD IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR US. 
          WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE OURSELVES MARKETABLE AND SOME OF THE BEST THINGS WE CAN DO IS JUST PROMOTE A POSITIVE AGENCY CULTURE. 
          I, YOU KNOW, FROM THE MOMENT THEY TEST, FROM THE MOMENT THEY HAVE CONTACT WITH ANYONE FROM THE CITY OF GALVESTON NEEDS TO BE A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND FROM THE OFFICERS THAT THEY'RE ENCOUNTERING. 
          THAT NEEDS TO BE A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE. 
          AND WE'RE JUST HAMMERING THAT INTO TO OUR OFFICERS TODAY IS THAT, LOOK, WE NEED YOU OUT THERE RECRUITING AND WE'RE TAKING IT AS A HOLISTIC APPROACH THAT THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT YOU NEED TO BE RECRUITING. 
          AND WE'RE JUST ASKING AND BEGGING THEM TO GET OUT THERE AND SELL US IN A POSITIVE MANNER. 
          AND I THINK IT'S WORKING. 
          WE'RE HAVING FOLKS SIGN UP. 
          WE'RE HAVING SOME INTEREST IN POLICING AND COMING TO OUR ORGANIZATION, TO OTHER THINGS. 
          I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD. 
          I'M SORRY. THE OTHER THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT, OR AT LEAST I'M LOOKING AT AND KIND OF GOING OVER INTO MY MIND IS STREAMLINING OUR HIRING PROCESS BECAUSE IF IT'S TAKING TOO LONG TO GET YOU IN THE DOOR, WE'RE LOSING YOU, WE'RE LOSING YOU TO OTHER AGENCIES AND WE'RE LOSING YOU IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. 
          AND IT'S HAPPENING AND WE HAVE TO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T OCCUR. 
          SO IT HAS TO BE FROM THE TIME YOU TEST TO THE TIME WE OFFER YOU, EMPLOYMENT HAS GOT TO INCREASE SOME OF THE WAYS WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO THAT ARE HAVING OUTSIDE CONTRACTING OUTSIDE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATORS THAT THAT AREN'T WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. 
          WE'RE PAYING OVERTIME TO DO OUR BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS. 
          IF WE CAN OUTSOURCE THAT, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE IN CHEAPER. 
          WE'RE GOING TO GET IT MUCH FASTER BECAUSE THEY'RE WORKING FULL TIME ON THAT. 
          WHEREAS AN OFFICER, HE'S DOING HIS JOB AND THEN IN HIS FREE TIME, HE'S DOING BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION. SO. 
          SO LOOKING AT THAT, THEN REVIEWING OUR STANDARDS TO MEET CURRENT CULTURE, THERE'S THINGS 
          [03:05:03]
THAT ARE IN THE SOCIETAL NORMS NOW THAT WOULD AND HAVE BEEN FROWNED UPON BY OLD SCHOOL POLICEMEN FOR YEARS. 
          FACIAL HAIR IS ONE OF THEM, YOU KNOW, BUT WOULD ALLOWING A GUY TO KEEP A TRIM NICE BEARD, IMPROVE MORALE AND KEEP HIM HERE? I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S LEAVING BECAUSE THEY CAN GROW A BEARD AND WORK FOR HARRIS COUNTY. BUT IF IT MAKES THEM JUST A LITTLE HAPPIER, IT MAKES THEM A LITTLE MORE SATISFIED AND JUST GIVES THEM A LITTLE MORE SENSE OF INDIVIDUALISM. 
          IS IT EXACTLY? IS IT THAT BIG OF A DEAL? AND SO LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE THAT TO TO HELP US RETAIN GUYS AND THEN ALSO BRING THEM IN THE DOOR. 
          I KNOW FOR A LONG TIME THERE WERE THERE WERE OFFICERS WHO I WON'T GO TO THAT AGENCY BECAUSE I HAVE A VISIBLE TATTOO. 
          IT'S HOT DOWN HERE AND I DON'T WANT TO WEAR SLEEVES ALL SUMMER. 
          HOUSTON FIX THAT. 
          THAT WAS THE WAY IN HOUSTON FOREVER, AND THEY FIX THAT UNDER THE UNDER CHIEF ACEVEDO. 
          HE HAD THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO COME IN. 
          GET RID OF THAT. NOW YOU SEE, THESE AGENCIES ARE GOING TO ALLOWING FACIAL HAIR. 
          THEY'RE THEY'RE ALLOWING EXPOSED TATTOOS AS LONG AS THEY'RE NOT DISTASTEFUL. 
          AND SO THERE'S THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE. 
          WE DON'T HAVE TO RELAX OUR STANDARDS TO WHERE WE'RE BRINGING IN SUBPAR OFFICERS. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT TO DO. 
          BUT IF WE CAN DO SOME THINGS THAT THAT GIVE THEM MORE INCLUSION AND MAKE THEM FEEL MORE WANTED AND GIVE THEM MORE SENSE OF A LITTLE BIT OF INDIVIDUALITY TO KEEP THEM HERE OR ATTRACT THEM TO COME HERE, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT. 
          PRIORITIZING DIVERSITY INVOLVING THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT AND THE RECRUITING EFFORTS AND THEN KENT HAS IS INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US CREATE A DIVERSE DIGITAL MARKETING STRATEGY. 
          AND IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND DISCUSSING THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE HAVE BEEN CHOMPING AT THE BIT HERE, SO I'M I'M PLEASED THAT CHIEF VALLEY IS REALLY KIND OF TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS. 
          I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WE'VE DONE FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AND HOW WE PARTNERED WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. SO WE HAVE WHAT'S CALLED A NATIONAL MINORITY UPDATE. 
          THEY ACTUALLY HELP US WITH OUR NATIONAL RECRUITING OF SOME OF THESE OTHER AGENCIES IN CALIFORNIA, OREGON, SOME OF THESE PLACES THAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING, SOME EXITING IN MASS DROVES. WE'RE TARGETING THOSE PEOPLE. 
          WE'RE ALSO AS A NEW INITIATIVE. 
          WE'RE PARTNERED WITH COLUMBUS MEDIUM. 
          THEY'RE THE PARENT COMPANY OF ONE OF THE FOUR K OR BE ABOUT A DIGITAL BRANCH HERE THAT THEY'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET UP AND GOING. 
          AND SO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO FOR US IS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ABOUT FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY THOUSAND IMPRINTS, AND THAT MEANS THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE OUR GPD OFFICER SLOGAN IN OUR DIGITAL RECRUITING. 
          WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT. IN FRONT OF EACH PERSON 15 TIMES. 
          AND WE'RE GOING TO TARGET THAT AND IT'S GOING TO BE BASED ON A GEOFENCING TOOL THAT THEY UTILIZE. BUT WE'RE TARGETING THE SAN ANTONIO, HOUSTON, DALLAS FORT WORTH, METROPLEX AREA, AUSTIN AREA. WE'RE TARGETING THOSE FOLKS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WE GET OUR MESSAGE OUT THERE IN FRONT OF THEM. FURTHERMORE, I'D BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T INCLUDE THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. THEY'VE REALLY STEPPED IN AND TRY TO DO SOME THINGS FOR US FROM OUR FACEBOOK PROMOTION. 
          PERSPECTIVE AS WELL, SO WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS THEY'RE THEY'RE ALSO DOING SOME GEOFENCING AND TARGETING VARIOUS POLICE STATIONS, LARGER AGENCIES, REALLY THAT'LL BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE LEAVING. 
          AS AS I MENTIONED, WE PARTNERED WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST MOTIVATED THAT I'VE SEEN OUR OFFICERS IN TERMS OF GETTING OUT THERE AND REALLY DOING A GOOD JOB ON RECRUITING THAT I HAVE SEEN IN THE LAST 10 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. 
          SO EVERYONE REALIZES THAT WE'RE BLEEDING A BIT HERE AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A FIX AND IT'S A UNIFIED EFFORT. THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT OUTLIERS. 
          ONE YEAR AGO WE HAD ONE VACANCY IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT WAS THE BEST THAT I HAD EVER SEEN. 
          SINCE THEN, WE'RE OF COURSE, IN THE AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT, WE HAD 18 VACANCIES. 
          AND OF COURSE, A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CURRENT CLIMATE WITHIN POLICING AS A WHOLE WE DO. 
          AND DURING OUR EXIT INTERVIEW PROCESS, TRY TO CAPTURE SOME OF THAT DATA. 
          THESE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY LEAVING THE FIELD ALTOGETHER. 
          THEY'RE GOING INTO THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY. 
          OTHER OTHER FOLKS ARE HAVING OTHER CHALLENGES. 
          [03:10:01]
THEY ARE BEING RECRUITED. 
          WE ARE ONE OF THE FEW AGENCIES THAT HAVE A TRAINING GROUND FOR THESE FOLKS THAT ARE NOT TEKO CERTIFIED. WE'LL PUT THEM THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROGRAM AND MAKE THEM A FULL, FULLY AUTONOMOUS OFFICER. 
          AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY HAVE OPTIONS? SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS EXPLORE SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT RECRUITING TOOLS, SUCH AS WHAT YOU MENTIONED WITH THE BONUS STRUCTURES I'VE GOTTEN WITH LEGAL. 
          THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN OFFER. 
          SO I'LL BEGIN WITH THE CHIEF AND WITH BRIAN TO SEE IF WE CAN EXPAND UPON THAT. 
          I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS NOT ONLY FOR PD, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT IT. 
          WE GOT THE SAME PROBLEM IN PUBLIC WORKS RIGHT NOW. 
          CORRECT. CORRECT. 
          SO WE'RE REALLY GETTING UNIQUE AND INNOVATIVE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING FROM A RECRUITING STANDPOINT. 
          BUT WE THINK THAT THE PROGRESS THAT WE HAVE IS GOING TO BE IT. 
          IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WILL BENEFIT FROM. 
          AND AGAIN, EVERYTHING THAT I'VE MENTIONED FROM A RECRUITING STANDPOINT, THESE OTHER AGENCIES THAT WE USE, WE TARGET DIVERSE DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION PROGRAMS AND SOME OF THESE DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT THEY HAVE. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, WE TARGET TO HISPANIC ALLIANCE, AFRICAN AMERICAN ALLIANCE, VETERANS AFFAIRS, THE TRADE SCHOOLS, URBAN LEAGUES, YOU NAME IT. 
          THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT AREAS THAT WE TRY TO TARGET. 
          GET SOME FOLKS AT LEAST ONE OR TWO CANDIDATES IN THE DOOR. 
          YES, MA'AM. WHAT I MEAN, ALONG WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WOULD IT MAKE INSTEAD OF TARGETING THE CITIES AROUND US, LIKE GOING TO MINNEAPOLIS, PORTLAND, CALIFORNIA AND TARGETING THERE WHERE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE POLICE THAT ARE LEAVING BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS? RIGHT. AND SO THAT WAS THAT WAS JUST FOR THE CUMULUS MEDIA. 
          SO WE PAY MONEY TO HAVE THESE THINGS ADVERTISE. 
          CUMULUS MEDIA IS DOING THAT FOR US ONLY WITHIN THE STATE NOW, NATIONAL MINORITY UPDATES, THEY'RE DOING THAT FOR A NATIONAL SEARCH FOR US, AND THEY ARE TARGETING THOSE VARIOUS AREAS AS WELL. WHAT DO YOU MEAN, NATIONAL MINORITIES? SO THAT'S THAT'S ALSO A DIFFERENT TOOL THAT I UTILIZE. 
          AND SO THEY'RE THEY'RE PICKING UP SOME OF OUR OUR ADVERTISEMENT MATERIAL AND THEY'RE PUTTING THOSE IN FRONT OF THREE HUNDRED AND THOUSAND COMBINED FOLKS THAT ARE IN POLICING, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE OREGON AREA, IN THE MINNESOTA AREA. 
          THEY'RE THEY'RE SELECTIVE IN THEIR PROCESS, BUT THEY'RE PUTTING THOSE IN FRONT OF FOLKS THAT ARE NOT JUST IN TEXAS, BUT ALSO IN OTHER STATES. 
          VERY GOOD. I HAVE ONE LAST STATEMENT CHIEF [INAUDIBLE] I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOUR PRESENTATION WAS GREAT. 
          I ENJOYED IT. THE INPUT THAT KEN GAVE WITH HIS PACE THIS EXCELLENT. 
          BUT ONCE I LIKE TO SUGGEST THE COUNCIL THAT WE PUSHED US TO SEE BY GETTING MORE POLICE OFFICERS WHAT WE NEED FOR THE ENTIRE ISLAND BECAUSE AGAIN, I WAS I HAVE PEOPLE CALL ME ABOUT PETTY CRIME OR WHATEVER. 
          IT'S CRIME, AND IT'S GETTING MORE AND MORE SEVERE WITH MORE AND MORE HOMICIDE HOMICIDES COMING IN. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CHIEF GET ALONE WITH BRIAN AND KEN JUST SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO TO MAYBE PUSH TO GET MORE QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS TO COME INTO THE ARMY. WELL, I THINK THAT'S THAT'S FOR SURE. 
          BILL ON THAT AND I KNOW BRIAN IN MY VISITING WITH BRIAN AND SO FORTH, AND WE CAN'T. 
          AND NOW HEARING FROM CHIEF NELLIE, THEY'RE DOING THAT. 
          THIS IS NOT A SUBJECT THAT THEY HAVE KIND OF WORKING ON. 
          NOT AWARE OF IT. IN FACT, I THINK I CAN'T. 
          I WANT THIS RESOLVED BEFORE SPRING BREAK OR A RESOLUTION MOVING FORWARD THAT WAY, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE KIND OF IN A WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH SEVEN MILLION VISITORS RIGHT NOW. 
          YEAH, EXACTLY. AND THAT LET'S GO TO COUNCILMAN SCHUSTER AND THEN LISTOWSKI AS PART OF OUR QUESTION WAS JUST MORE RESOLUTION. 
          YOU KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT ON ALL THIS. 
          BUT ANOTHER THING JUST WITH THE TRENDS THAT I'VE SEEN ON THIS GRAPH, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE HAVE LEFT OVER THE LAST YEAR, YOU KNOW, NATIONWIDE, ARE YOU ARE YOU SEEING A TREND OF PEOPLE JUST NOT GETTING INTO THE THE FIELD LIKE JUST LIKE YOUNGER FOLKS? IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          IN ANSWER TO THAT, I BELIEVE, IS YES. 
          AND PROBABLY THE STRONGEST INDICATOR OF THAT IS WE'RE FRONT ROW AND CENTER TO GALVESTON COLLEGE, WHO HAS THEIR OWN POLICE ACADEMY. 
          TYPICALLY, YOU WOULD SEE NUMBERS OF FIFTEEN TO TWENTY FIVE CADETS IN EVERY ACADEMY. 
          THEIR CURRENT ACADEMY HAS FIVE. 
          YOU KNOW, THREE OF THEM ARE OURS. 
          SO THEY HAVE TWO ENTIRE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO SAID, I WANT TO GO TO THE POLICE ACADEMY, I WANT TO BE A CADET AND I WANT TO TRAIN AND BECOME A POLICE OFFICER. 
          THAT'S STARTLING. 
          IT'S DEEPLY DISTURBING. 
          THERE'S A LOT ON THE NEWS, THERE'S A LOT YOU THE REFORM POLICE REFORM THAT THAT IS 
          [03:15:01]
OCCURRING ACROSS THE NATION. 
          IT'S A LOT. AND SO IT'S A LOT FOR OFFICERS WHO ARE WHO ARE HERE AND THEN IT'S A LOT FOR YOUTH WHO YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. 
          YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. THEIR PARENTS DON'T WANT THEM TO DO THAT. 
          THEIR FRIENDS ARE GOING TO MAKE FUN OF THEM OR SOMETHING. 
          AND SO THERE'S THERE'S JUST A LOT GOING ON. 
          BUT WE CAN OVERCOME THAT AND DEPENDING UPON HOW THE ECONOMY IS GOING. 
          HIRING POLICEMEN HAS ALWAYS BEEN SORT OF CYCLICAL. 
          IF YOU HAVE A GOOD ECONOMY, IT'S TOUGH TO HIRE. 
          IF YOU'RE A BAD ECONOMY, IT'S MUCH EASIER TO HIRE BECAUSE THERE'S STABILITY. 
          SHORTLY AFTER THE GULF WAR. 
          NO PROBLEM. HIRING VETERANS WERE COMING IN AND FLOODING POLICE DEPARTMENTS ACROSS THE NATION. WE'RE NOT GETTING THOSE ANYMORE. 
          THE MILITARY IS DOWNSIZED QUITE A BIT. 
          THERE'S NOT AS MANY COMING OUT. 
          THERE'S A LOT GOING ON AND YOU HAVE THE IN THE BACK OF YOUR PACKETS. 
          PERF IS A POLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORUM, AND THEY'RE JUST A FANTASTIC INSTITUTE, A THINK TANK. THESE ARE SOME OF THE TOP CRIMINAL JUSTICE MINDS IN THE COUNTRY, AND THEY'RE THEY'RE ACTIVELY RESEARCHING EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A CITY. 
          THERE'S THERE MAY BE A FEW. 
          THERE'S PROBABLY NOT MANY CITIES ACROSS THIS COUNTRY THAT AREN'T HAVING THE SAME DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW. 
          IT'S TOUGH TIMES, BUT WE'RE GOING TO OVERCOME THAT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST SIT ON YOUR HEELS AND SAY, WELL, PER IT, IT'S OK BECAUSE EVERYONE'S HAVING PROBLEMS. WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO TO SHORE OUR NUMBERS UP. 
          AND IN THE MEANTIME, WE ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO ENSURE THAT WE GET AT LEAST MINIMUM STAFFING LEVELS OUT ON THE STREET AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT MEANS. 
          AND IT COULD MEAN THAT YOU MAY WORK IN THIS DIVISION, BUT WE'RE GOING TO ASK YOU TO PULL AT LEAST ONE SHIFT EVERY TWO WEEKS OR TWO SHIFTS EVERY TWO WEEKS. 
          AND THEN ONCE YOU DO THOSE SHIFTS, YOU WOULD GO BACK TO YOUR YOUR ASSIGNMENT. 
          THAT WAY, WE'RE NOT REASSIGNING PEOPLE FROM PEOPLE. 
          WE NEED DETECTIVES THEY HAVE. 
          WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMEONE TO INVESTIGATE THESE CRIMES OR STREET CRIMES UNIT IS SEPARATE FROM PATROL, BUT THESE GUYS ARE DOING GREAT WORK AND THEY'RE SUPPLEMENTING PATROL AND TAKING A LOT OF WORK OFF OF THEM. 
          SO REASSIGN THEM COMPLETELY JUST BACK TO PATROL WOODS AND JUST JUST BE IT WOULD NOT GO WELL. IT WOULD HURT MORALE. 
          AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE VERY CREATIVE IN HOW WE TACKLE THE VACANCY ISSUE. 
          JOHN PAUL YEAH. 
          SO BILL PRESENTED KIND OF SOME STATISTICS FOR US TODAY, WHICH KIND OF SURPRISED ME. 
          SO HOW DO OUR VACANT, HOW DOES OUR VACANCY RATE AFFECT THOSE STATISTICS BY HAVING 20 MORE OFFICERS, WOULD WE SEE A REDUCTION IN THE CRIMES BEING COMMITTED IN THE CITY? IT'S A GREAT QUESTION, AND TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I DON'T I CAN'T ANSWER IT AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT CAN BE ANSWERED. 
          AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT TYPICALLY, YOU WILL SEE CITIES OR POLICE DEPARTMENTS OR CHIEFS. 
          CRIME IS UP. I NEED COPS. 
          I NEED COPS. I NEED COPS. 
          WELL, SO IF CRIME IS DOWN, DO YOU NOT? AND AND SO THE INCENTIVE WOULD BE TO KEEP CRIME UP. 
          RIGHT? AM I WRONG HERE? I MEAN, THEIR STUDIES DON'T KNOW THIS. 
          THE INCENTIVE FOR THAT. 
          THAT THEORY, THAT MODEL IS YOU DON'T WANT CRIME GETTING TOO LOW. 
          AND THAT'S JUST SILLY. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW. 
          WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT YOU TURN ON THE NEWS EVERY DAY AND THERE'S MULTIPLE SHOOTINGS IN HOUSTON, THERE'S MULTIPLE DRIVE BY SHOOTINGS, THERE'S MULTIPLE ROAD RAGE INCIDENTS WHERE PEOPLE ARE BEING KILLED ON THE FREEWAY. 
          THERE'S SO MUCH GOING ON IN HARRIS COUNTY. 
          POINT YOUR FINGER AT IT AND NOT SURE EXACTLY WHY. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF SPECULATION THERE. 
          SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO TRICKLE HERE BECAUSE WE'RE SO CLOSE. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T KNOW THAT IF WE WERE FULLY STAFFED, THAT IT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED ANY OF THIS COULD VERY WELL HAVE, BUT IT WOULDN'T HURT TO BE FULLY STAFFED. 
          I GUARANTEE YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT TWO ITEMS YOUR YOUR POPULATION VERSUS DENSITY POPULATION. TRUE, BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE FIFTY THOUSAND, WE WOULD BE NOWHERE NEAR THE NUMBERS WE HAVE. 
          OUR NUMBERS WOULD BE MUCH LOWER. 
          OUR STAFFING WOULD BE MUCH, MUCH LOWER. 
          SO YOU LOOK AT CITY OF LEAGUE CITY, WHO HAS A MUCH LARGER POPULATION FULL TIME. 
          THEY DO NOT HAVE THE LEVEL OF STAFFING THAT WE HAVE, BUT THEY ALSO DON'T HAVE THREE 
          [03:20:06]
HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE COME OVER THE CAUSEWAY BECAUSE IT'S A PRETTY DAY AND THERE'S BLUE WATER AND ON SOME RANDOM WEDNESDAY THAT EVERYBODY DECIDES TO TAKE OFF WORK. 
          AND WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE BECAUSE IT DOES TRICKLE DOWN HERE. 
          THE BIG ITEM NOW IS STEALING OF THE CATALYTIC CONVERTERS. 
          I MEAN, AND I BELIEVE YOU ALL CAUGHT THREE OR FOUR APPREHENDED THEM COMING IN FROM TEXAS CITY [INAUDIBLE]. YES, SIR. 
          YOU FOUND MOST OF YOUR BIG CRIME STUFF IS COMING ACROSS THE BRIDGE. 
          YES, IT IS, JOHN. 
          AND I ASK THAT QUESTION NOT TO USE STATISTICS TO GENERATE THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS WE HAVE. 
          BUT MY ULTIMATE GOAL IS TO REDUCE CRIME, ESPECIALLY IN MY DISTRICT, WHEN IT'S THE SECOND HIGHEST INCIDENT RIGHT THERE. 
          AND SO AT A LATER, AT A LATER TIME, IT'D BE GREAT IF YOU CAME BACK TO US AND TALKED ABOUT TALK ABOUT SOME WAYS TO TRY TO REDUCE THOSE NUMBERS. 
          AND I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HOW THESE NUMBERS OF COMPARE TO THE YEARS PAST. 
          CHIEF YES, SIR. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THESE SOMETIMES DOESN'T GIVE YOU A CLEAR IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE DOING OR IT COULD BE ON A DOWNTREND IN MANY OF THESE, AS VERNON ALWAYS SAID, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TREND, NOT THE NUMBERS. 
          YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE. 
          NOT SO MUCH. JUST ONE ONE SNAPSHOT. 
          YOU HAVE AN ORGANIZATION THAT DOES THAT RIGHT, THAT PRINTS OUT, HAS THE STATISTICS FOR EACH YEAR. THE FBI MAINTAINS STATISTICS, BUT IT'S ONLY AS GOOD AS WHATEVER INFORMATION HISTORICALLY WAS PROVIDED TO. 
          WE DON'T HAVE AN IN-HOUSE TO PROVIDE THAT DATA. 
          WE WE HAVE AN ANALYST AND THIS ANALYST, HE GETS US NUMBERS AS OFTEN AS WE NEED. 
          AND SO MONTHLY, I RECEIVE A REPORT THAT HAS ALL THIS INFORMATION IN IT. 
          IT CAN TELL YOU BASICALLY, IT'LL BREAK IT DOWN TO EVEN A CERTAIN CRIME IF IT'S UP OR DOWN FOR THE MONTH. AND AS WE HEAD INTO DECEMBER, HISTORICALLY, WE HAVE HAD PROBLEMS AROUND THIS TIME OF YEAR BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE OUT SHOPPING OR ARE MORE DESPERATE, THEY'RE STEALING OFF THE PORCHES USERS AND AMAZON BOXES STACKED UP. 
          BUT WE'VE HAD AGGRAVATED ROBBERIES BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE DESPERATE AT THIS TIME OF YEAR. 
          SO HOPEFULLY WE'RE WE'RE CHECKING PARKING LOTS ALL HOURLY. 
          WE HAVE CERTAIN AREAS THAT HOURLY THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE SOMEONE THERE AND THEY HAVE TO LOG OUT THERE. THEY HAVE TO CHECK IN THAT THEY'VE DONE THIS JUST LITTLE INITIATIVES THAT SO YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT THAT OFFICER IS GOING TO BE THERE IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. 
          YES, MA'AM. THE ONE THING THAT THIS THAT DOES SHOW THAT APPLIES TO OUR DISTRICTS IS BECAUSE THAT WESTWARD WAY THE WESTWARD, WHATEVER THE COMMUNITY, THE ONE TWO THREE. 
          MOST OF OUR CRIME IS CONCENTRATED BETWEEN 61ST AND BECAUSE I'VE SEEN A BREAKDOWN OF THIS FURTHER 61ST THEN LIKE THE AIRPORT, LET'S SAY YOU'RE PAST THE AIRPORT. 
          SO ACCORDING TO THIS, I'VE SEEN IN DISTRICT, I'VE SEEN DISTRICT BREAK DOWN AND BECAUSE MOST OF YOUR CRIME IN YOUR DISTRICT IS LIKE CONCENTRATED IN THE 61ST WHAT NOT AREA. 
          AND AS I'VE WE'VE ALWAYS HAD CONCERNS THAT THAT LAST DISTRICT RUNS FROM 61ST TO THE SAN LOUIS BRIDGE. 
          WE NEED MORE POLICE. 
          AND THAT ARGUMENT WAS ALWAYS, THE NUMBERS AREN'T THERE, BUT THE NUMBERS ARE THERE. 
          IT SHOWS HERE THE DISTRICT ONE, TWO AND THREE IS A HOTBED AREA. 
          IS SOME OF THE MOST CRIMES ON THEM. 
          WELL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CONCENTRATION OF THE AREAS, THE NUMBERS OR LAY OUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT A BREAKDOWN BY DISTRICT. 
          WELL, THESE DISTRICTS DON'T GO THAT FAR WITH THESE. 
          ANYWAY, WE COULD GET JUST SAYING WE NEED ONE POLICE. 
          WELL, I THINK YOU HAVE A LITTLE AGENDA GOING ON. 
          YEAH. AND THE ONLY REASON I BRING THAT UP IS I'D LIKE TO GET YOU BACK HERE TO TALK MORE ABOUT HOW WE CAN REDUCE CRIME IN THE CITY. 
          SURE. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. 
          AND I COULD BRING NUMBERS IF YOU EVER AND I HOPE YOU GUYS SAW THE LIGHT THE NIGHT INITIATIVE THAT WE PUT OUT THAT WAS WE TALKED TO CHIEF BALLI ABOUT THAT. 
          THAT'S A HUGE THING THAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING AND SOMETHING THAT I'VE TALKED TO WEAVE ABOUT WHEN HE FIRST GOT ELECTED, WE CAN ONLY DO SO MUNICIPALLY, WITH STREET LIGHTING AND THINGS. IT'S LIGHTING THE YARDS, LIGHTING THE HOMES THAT WAY THAT TRIPLES THE EFFECTIVENESS OF YOUR POLICE OFFICER. 
          BECAUSE IF HE'S DRIVING BY AND HE CAN ACTUALLY SEE ON YOUR PROPERTY OR SEE AROUND YOUR HOUSE, THAT MAKES A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE. 
          [03:25:02]
SO WE'RE HOPING THAT CAMPAIGN REALLY TAKES ROOT. 
          NOT ONLY THAT JUST MAKES IT A MUCH MORE CONDUCIVE COMMUNITY TO WALK IN B AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS TIME OF YEAR. WE'RE QUICKLY APPROACHING THE SHORTEST DAY OF THE YEAR. 
          DECEMBER TWENTY FOUR POINT TWENTY THREE TWENTY FIRST. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. AND BRIAN, JUST BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS TOPIC, THE NUMBER OF POLICE THAT, UH, THAT WE HAVE ON THE FORCE OR OUR IDEAL NUMBER THAT'S CONTROLLED BY ORDINANCE. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. 
          CHIEF BALLI, THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT ABOUT THAT OPENINGS WE HAVE. 
          YOU CAN'T HELP BUT LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF OVERTIME THAT'S HAVING TO BE PAID WHEN WE'RE STAFFING WITH THAT MANY AND THEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT COMPARISON AND THAT THAT OVERTIME ISSUE, THOUGH, HAS BEEN WITH POLICE FORCE. 
          NO MATTER WHAT THE STATE IS, IT ACTUALLY DEPENDS ON HOW YOU LOOK AT IT. 
          SOMETIMES THAT'S AN INCENTIVE. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I'VE HEARD FROM OFFICERS THAT SOME OF THEM ARE EXHAUSTED, THEY DON'T WANT TO WORK THE OVERTIME AND SO OTHERS USE IT THEY LOVE. 
          THAT'S PART OF WHAT DRAWS THEM TO GALVESTON IS THERE'S SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY FOR OVERTIME. 
          YEAH. WHEN I DO TALK TO A LATERAL, I TELL THEM, YOU KNOW, IF THE STARTING IS SEVENTY FIVE, I ASK THEM IF IN REALITY YOU WANT TO MAKE ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS NEXT YEAR, DO YOU WANT A SIX FIGURE INCOME? IF YOU DO COME TO GALVESTON, TEXAS, YOU CAN GET IT. 
          AND REALISTICALLY, IT ISN'T ALL YOU CAN EAT. 
          BUFFET GALVESTON. 
          ABSOLUTELY. SO YOU HAVE TO CUT YOUR HAIR, SHAVE THAT BEARD. 
          WELL, WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD THERE. 
          I CAN'T THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHIEF BALLI. 
          THANK YOU. IT WOULDN'T BE OVER. 
          I'M NOT. MAYBE THAT WAS FOR ME. 
          THAT'S WHY I DID IT. ALL RIGHT. 
          LET'S GO TO ITEM TWO DISCUSSION AS TO THE OFFICERS RESPONSIBILITIES AND PRODUCTS AS IT PERTAINS TO THE CITY CHARTER BILL. 
          YEAH. GLEN, CAN YOU COME UP BACK SO I CAN SEE NO GO FOR THE GUEST? HE SERVED IN THE VANNA WHITE OVER HERE WITH THE. 
          YEAH, BUT THIS IS PART OF WHAT I'M DOING, BRINGING EACH EACH PERSON THAT REPORTS TO THE COUNCIL AND GETTING THEIR INPUT ON WHAT THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE THE LAST TWO ON THE NEW CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          BUT WE'LL WAIT ON THAT ONE. 
          THERE'S A FIVE PART SERIES THAT'S FOUR POINTS, BUT GO AHEAD. 
          THE REASON I HAVE IT HERE AND WHAT IS DISCUSSED, THE PROCESS WHEN SOMEBODY COMES TO YOU TO DO AN AUDIT. AND I KNOW I'VE TALKED I'VE GOT EMAILS FROM FROM DONALD AND DIFFERENT ASPECTS. THAT'S GOING ON. 
          BUT WHAT AS AS LAID OUT IN THE ORDINANCES AND IF ANYBODY WANTS A COPY, I GOT COPIES HERE IF YOU ALL WANT TO SPREAD THEM OUT, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY WHEN YOU STARTED. 
          I ALWAYS LOOKED AT AN AUDITOR WHERE IF I HAVE A PROBLEM, I'M GOING TO SAY, HEY, WE HAVE X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS. WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHERE IT'S BEING SPENT, HOW IS IT BEING SPENT? AND I'M NOT REALLY LOOKING AT TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY MISAPPROPRIATION OF MONEY. 
          BUT IS THE AUDIT TEAM CORRECT, ARE CHARGES BEING DONE TO THE RIGHT ACCOUNT NUMBER, SO ON AND SO FORTH? THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. 
          SO CAN YOU LEAVE OUT WHAT YOUR YOU THINK IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY, HOW THAT PROCESS IS TO GO ABOUT? AND IS THERE ANY INTERFERENCE THAT YOU MAY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN YOU DO AN AUDIT? YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE OUT IN THE OPEN, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH MONEY AND TAXPAYERS DOLLARS. 
          SO WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS WHAT IS YOUR PROCESS WHEN SOMEONE GIVES YOU AN ITEM? AND ANOTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS YOU WORK FOR COUNSEL. 
          LET'S SAY IF MR. MAXWELL WANTS TO COME TO YOU AND SAY, HEY, I NEED THIS AUDIT. 
          DOES HE GO STRAIGHT TO YOU OR DOES HE NEED TO COME TO COUNCIL AND SAY, HEY, I WANT TO START THIS AUDIT? AND THEN THAT PROCESS GO AHEAD BEFORE GLEN ANSWERS THAT. 
          I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY NO ONE GOES TO GLEN AND REQUEST AN AUDIT THAT COMES THROUGH COUNCIL. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT. 
          IS IT ONE MEMBER OR IS IT COUNCIL AS A WHOLE? IT'S COUNCIL IS A WHOLE OK, THEN I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I'VE NOTICED WHERE A STAFF MEMBER WANTED A AUDIT DONE AND ANOTHER [INAUDIBLE]. 
          YOU GAVE THAT YOUR BLESSING. 
          SO IT WASN'T BROUGHT TO THE COUNCIL TO SAY.. 
          WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO, BILL? IT WAS AN AUDIT AND WANTED TO BE DONE FOR PARKING. 
          OK, THAT WAS I DON'T BELIEVE I EVER BROUGHT UP TO THE COUNCIL TO TO START THAT AUDIT 
          [03:30:02]
PROCESS. WE GIVE, WE GIVE IT TO. 
          GLEN. GLEN DETERMINES IF IT'S EVEN SOMETHING HE WANTS TO DEAL WITH OR IF IT'S IN HIS PURVIEW. AND IF HE WANTS TO, HE BRINGS IT TO COUNCIL. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT I AGREE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I JUST TOLD THE OPPOSITE IT HAS TO COME THE COUNCIL BEFORE ANYONE GOES TO GLEN. 
          WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. THAT'S WHAT YOU LIKE TO DO. 
          TYPICALLY, WE ASK GLEN FIRST IF IT'S EVEN SOMETHING HE WANTS TO DEAL WITH. 
          IF THE ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BILL. 
          COUNCIL IS A WHOLE AS A BODY DIRECTS THE CITY AUDITOR PERIOD AND ONE COUNCIL MEMBER OR A MAYOR DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO TELL THE AUDITOR TO GO DO SOMETHING. 
          HE HAS AN ANNUAL AUDIT PLAN THAT HE APPROVES BY COUNCIL. 
          AND IF WE WANT TO AMEND THAT WHICH WE HAVE IN THE PAST, THEN THAT COMES TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL VOTES TO AMEND HIS AUDIT PLAN OR NOT. 
          OK, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID. 
          WELL, WE'LL TOUCH ON THE OTHER ITEM A LITTLE BIT LATER, RIGHT? BUT WHAT IS YOUR PROCESS OF WHAT YOU SEE, WHAT WITH THE MAYOR JUST SAID? WELL, ON SPONTANEOUS ISSUES, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE COMES TO ME AND SAYS, WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT MAY HAVE SOME VALUE. 
          WE WE LOOK AT IT FIRST TO DETERMINE IF IT IS AUDITABLE AND IF IT DOES HAVE VALUE. 
          AND THEN WE LOOK AT IT AND TAKE SPONTANEOUS ACTION AND WE REPORT THAT TO THE COUNCIL. 
          THE VERY NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. 
          EXCUSE ME, RIGHT THERE BECAUSE I'M GETTING TWO POINTS OF VIEW. 
          MS. MAXWELL SAID THAT IF THEY IF THEY WANTED AN AUDIT, THEY COME TO YOU. 
          BUT IF WE DON'T WANT IF WE DIDN'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN, THEN HE COMES TO COUNCIL. 
          THE MAYOR HAS SAID THAT THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE SETS THE GOAL FOR YOU TO LOOK AT IT, BUT WHAT YOU'RE JUST TELLING ME, IF YOU BECAUSE I GUESS I'M GOING HAVE TO GET THE ATTORNEY INVOLVED IN IT. BUT IF SOMEONE COMES TO YOU, YOU CAN START THAT PROCESS, BUT AT THE NEXT MEETING, YOU EXPOSE THAT TO THE COUNCIL. 
          YES. IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK I THINK GLEN GETS SOME INFORMATION THAT MAYBE SOME FRAUD HAS OCCURRED. 
          HE DOES AN INITIAL INQUIRY. 
          HE IS COMES TO, YOU KNOW, HE TAKES A LOOK AT IT, AND I THINK THE CODES WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, HE HAS TO MAKE A REPORT TO YOU. 
          AND AS PART OF THAT REPORT, I BELIEVE HE MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION OF FURTHER INQUIRY, WHICH RESULTS IN A CHANGE IN RESORT TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID. 
          OK. BUT MY POINT IS WHAT YOU SAID AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS STATEMENT. 
          IT COMES TO HIM. WELL, WHO GIVES IT TO THEM TO DO THE AUDIT? DOES CITY STAFF GO TO HIM AND DO IT, ACCORDING TO THE MAYOR, HAS TO COME TO COUNCIL TO GET THE APPROVED COMES FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. 
          YOU HAVE A HOTLINE. ANYBODY CAN CALL A WHISTLEBLOWER. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          I SAID THE PROCESS THAT STARTS, IF MR. COLLINS WANTS TO START ONE, DOES HE GO TO YOU AND SAY, HEY, WE NEED YOU TO LOOK AT X, Y AND Z AND THEN THE NEXT COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING YOU COME AND YOU PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL THAT MR. COLLINS SAYS, HEY, I WANTED THIS TO START SO YOU CAN LOOK AT IT. 
          IS THAT KIND OF IS THAT INCORRECT? YEAH, I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE THE THAT IS CORRECT BILL, AND THAT'S WHAT I JUST SAID. 
          IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? IF, IF, IF THERE IS AN ISSUE AND IF WHEREVER IT MAY COME FROM, THE WAY WE FOLLOW THIS IN THE PAST, THEY BRING THAT IF SOMEONE GOES TO GLENN PERSONALLY AND WANTS SOMETHING DONE, IS THAT FOR YOU GOING FOR IS THAT STAFF OR IS THAT ANYBODY ON COUNCIL THAT GOES TO ANYBODY BUT COUNCIL? WHAT WHAT YOU ACTUALLY SAID WAS ANYBODY BY COUNCIL CAN GO THERE? NO, THAT'S INCORRECT. 
          THAT'S INCORRECT. 
          IF YOU WE'VE HAD COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THE PAST GOING TO THE CITY AUDITOR AND REQUESTING CERTAIN AUDITS BE DONE. 
          OK, IF GLENN FEELS THAT HAS MERIT IN SOME WAY, HE CANNOT PROCEED WITH THAT AUDIT AND SPEND TIME WITH HIS DEPARTMENT UNLESS THAT IS APPROVED BY COUNCIL. 
          IS THAT A TRUE STATEMENT? BECAUSE HOW I READ IT, THAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO PARSE WORD BECAUSE HERE IS MY POINT OF VIEW. LET US SAY A CITIZEN DROPS A DIME ON THE PARKING ATTENDANT AT A CITY PARKING LOT AND THEY DROP IT TO QUINN. 
          AND THEY SAY, I THINK A CITY EMPLOYEE STEALING MONEY OUT OF THE RECYCLING CENTER OR 
          [03:35:01]
WHATEVER, HE CAN GO AHEAD AND DO AN INITIAL INQUIRY. 
          I CONSIDER THAT SEPARATE FROM AN AUDIT. 
          CORRECT. HE HAS TO MAKE A DECISION, WHETHER THERE'S SOME REASON TO BELIEVE THAT IT SHOULD GO FORWARD AND AN AUDIT BE DONE AND THE CODE REQUIRES HIM TO REPORT THIS TO COUNCIL. 
          IT'S A 30 DAYS OF THE NEXT SESSION, NEXT AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. 
          HE WILL REPORT I'VE MADE AN INITIAL FINDING THAT THERE'S NOTHING HERE OR IS SOMETHING HERE AND I SHOULD DO AN AUDIT OR I NEED MORE TIME TO LOOK AT IT AND GET BACK TO YOU IN A MONTH AT WHICH TIME HE COULD COME, AFTER WHICH TIME HE COULD SAY, I THINK I NEED TO AUDIT THIS AND THEN COUNCIL CAN SAY, GO AHEAD. 
          AND THAT BECOMES PART OF HIS AUDIT PLAN. 
          YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT IF WE'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THAT EXACT LINE OF PROCESS THAT HAPPENED WITH THE PARK BOARD. 
          BUT THERE'S A PIECE OF IT, I THINK, BEING LEFT OUT HERE. 
          GO RIGHT AHEAD. ONCE THAT HAPPENS, WHAT'S A SPONTANEOUS INQUIRY IS GENERATED GLENN'S NEXT DUTY TO REPORT ON THAT IS TO COUNSEL, NOT TO THE INDIVIDUAL WHO WHO INITIATED IT. 
          I CAN GO OVER AND SAY TO HIM, I THINK SOMEBODY'S RIGHT. 
          OH, SOMEBODY, I HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, HE DOESN'T OWE ME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A PHONE CALL OR PROVIDE AN AUDIT OR INFORMATION FOR ME. 
          HIS NEXT STEP IS TO BRING IT TO COUNSEL AND REPORT TO COUNCIL. 
          YES. AND IF THE COUNCIL HAS THE, THEN IF HE, IF HE WANTS, FEELS THAT A AN AUDIT IS REQUIRED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH GAINING MORE INFORMATION THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL AS A BODY AND BE HIS COUNTY'S AUDIT PLAN BE AMENDED. 
          THIS HAPPENED WITH THE PARK BOARD. 
          WE HAD A WHISTLEBLOWER AT THE PARK BOARD. 
          THEY CALLED THE WHISTLEBLOWER NUMBER OVER A YEAR. 
          GLENN GOT THAT HE BROUGHT IT TO COUNCIL. 
          HE HE DID AN INITIAL INVESTIGATION. 
          HE BROUGHT IT TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL DIRECTED TO HIM. 
          IF HE SHOULD DO A FULL AUDIT ON THAT OR NOT. 
          OH, I AGREE. THAT'S THAT'S CUT AND DRIED. 
          BUT MY QUESTION IS IF WE'RE GOING TO DO AN INQUIRY, CAN ANYBODY GO TO GLENN SAYS, I NEED YOU TO DO AN INQUIRY X, Y AND Z. 
          HE'S DOING AN INQUIRY. 
          IF HE FINDS THAT THE INQUIRY TAKES THE NEXT STEP TO DO AN AUDIT, THEN HE NEEDS TO COME IN HERE AND ASK COUNSEL FOR THAT AUDIT TO PROCEED. 
          IS THAT CORRECT OR INCORRECT? I AGREE, BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH MR. COLLINS OBSERVATION THAT NO FURTHER REPORT IS DUE OVERALL TO THE COMPLAINT. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE FIRST PEOPLE ON COUNCIL, RIGHT? EVERYBODY? YES. OK. 
          AND WE HAVE YOU DON'T OWE ME A REPORT. 
          YOU OWE COUNCIL CORRECT. 
          WE HAVE HAD INSTANCES SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL. 
          AND LET ME SAY THIS, AND SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW THIS, BUT WHEN I GOT ON COUNCIL IN TWENTY FOURTEEN, THE CITY AUDITOR'S DEPARTMENT AND HOW THEY WERE RESPONDING TO COUNCIL WAS CHAOS. IT WAS COMPLETE CHAOS AND WE CLEAN THAT UP AND WE PUT TOGETHER A PROCESS SO THAT GLENN KNEW WHAT HIS RESPONSIBILITIES WERE AND SO FORTH AND SO ON. 
          AND WE'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THAT ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 
          WE HAVE HAD SOME HICCUPS IN THAT THROUGHOUT THE LAST SINCE. 
          TWENTY FOURTEEN OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TRYING TO PERSUADE THE CITY AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO DO THINGS AND GO THROUGH AN AUDIT WITHOUT COMING TO COUNCIL THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED AND WE HAVE CORRECTED THAT. 
          AND GLENN UNDERSTANDS THAT IF I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR YOU, GLENN, AND YOU AND YOU UNDERSTAND THE PROCESSES IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE. 
          AN [INAUDIBLE] PERSON COULD BE A WHISTLEBLOWER. 
          SURE. SURE. AND THEN HE COULD DO AN INITIAL INVESTIGATION AND THEN REPORT IT TO THE NEXT TO THE NEXT BECAUSE NO REPORTED AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING AS TO WHETHER SURELY THERE WOULD BE AN AUDIT APPROVED OR NOT APPROVED. 
          IT CORRECT. SO BASICALLY WHEN YOU WHEN YOU STARTED, YOU HAVE BASICALLY HE HAS AUTONOMY TO DO HIS OWN INVESTIGATION WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE FROM ANY OTHER PERSON, WHETHER NOT THE RECEIPT OF A COMPLAINT LIKE THAT WHEN HE STARTS HIS INVESTIGATION. 
          OH, COME OF FRAUD. 
          I THINK HE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE [INAUDIBLE] TO MAKE THE REASONABLE INQUIRIES. 
          HE NEEDS TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION WHETHER IT SHOULD GO FORWARD WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE. 
          OH, PREFERABLY WITHOUT. 
          OK. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE. 
          ANYBODY CALLING HIM FOR ANY REASON OR WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE DUE PROCESS WOULD BE YOU. 
          [03:40:06]
FROM A LEGAL POINT OF VIEW? EXCUSE ME. YEAH, I THINK THE CODE IS PRETTY CLEAR. 
          YEAH. DAVID, LET'S SKIP THE REPORTING. 
          REPORTING OUT ANY OF THIS AGAIN, THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE DOES NOT OWE ANY INDIVIDUAL OR REPORT ON ANY ON ANY INQUIRY, ANY COMPLETED AUDIT, ANY ONGOING AUDIT THAT YOU REPORT OUT TO COUNCIL AS A WHOLE. 
          BECAUSE I MEAN, THERE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT UP TO YOUR OFFICE TO GENERATE REPORTS FOR THAT'S CORRECT. 
          RIGHT. AND IT'S NOT IT'S NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GLENN'S OFFICE TO RESPOND TO INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS OR INPUT FROM ANYBODY FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS OR ANY LAYMAN. 
          WELL, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOUR I THINK WE'RE MIXING THINGS UP HERE. 
          I'M TALKING. BASICALLY, WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS HE HAS THIS INVESTIGATION, CORRECT OR INQUIRY. I THINK THERE BOTH THE SAME CORRECT? ONCE HE STARTS THAT, HE HAS, I GUESS THE WORD IS AUTONOMY TO DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO, WHETHER HE NEEDS TO LOOK AT RECORDS OR WHATEVER TO GET THAT KIND OF. 
          OH YEAH, IT'S NOT A PROBLEM. 
          BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, ONCE HE STARTS IT, OK, NO ONE SHOULD INTERFERE BY SAYING, DON'T DO THIS OR DON'T DO THAT IF HE HAS A PROBLEM AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IF HE NEEDS SOME KIND OF ASSISTANCE. THIS IS A YOUNG MAN HE NEEDS TO GO TO FOR APPLICATION FOR LEGALITY PURPOSES OR COME TO COUNCILWOMAN. 
          SO I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I'M OLDER THAN YOU ARE. 
          YEAH, BUT I AGREE. 
          THAT'S ALL. 
          ALL I'M SAYING IS HE SHOULD HAVE AUTONOMY TO DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO. 
          ONCE HE DOES THAT, HE CAN BRING THE COUNCIL AND WE CAN ASK FOR APPROVAL OR NOT. 
          AND THEN HE GOES ON ABOUT HIS MR., YOU KNOW, ARE YOU REFERRING TO A PARTICULAR CASE IF YOU ARE TALKING IN GENERAL? OH, SO YOU DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EVER HAPPENED OR NOT? NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. OK, VERY GOOD. 
          ALL RIGHT, THAT SOUNDS GOOD. 
          SO WE'RE ALL ON BOARD THAT BASICALLY HE DOES HIS INQUIRY. 
          IF HE NEEDS TO DO A FULL AUDIT, HE COMES BACK, HE GIVES IT TO COUNCIL. 
          WE MAKE THE DECISION GO FORWARD OR NOT NOW. 
          AND I THINK THAT THE KEY WORD IS INQUIRY HERE THAT'S UP TO. 
          CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GLENN. 
          BUT IN THIS INQUIRY, BECAUSE HE AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, THAT INQUIRY IS A CURSORY EXAMINATION OF THE SITUATION. 
          HE DOESN'T SPEND MONTHS AND MONTHS DOING HIS INQUIRY. 
          IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT THE INQUIRY PRODUCES. 
          IF HE'S SPENDING AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME DOING THE INQUIRY, HE COMES TO COUNSEL AND GETS COUNSEL'S DIRECTION ON AMENDING HIS AUDIT PLAN. 
          I THINK THE RULE IS HE HAS TO BRING IT TO COUNSEL AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND THE COUNCIL WILL DECIDE IF THAT'S WORKABLE. 
          HE COULD ALSO SAY, I NEED MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS. 
          SOMEBODY TO DO NEEDS TO MAKE COUNCIL AWARE OF IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. NEVER HAS NOT OCCURRED. 
          WE HAVE A WHISTLEBLOWER THAT AT THE ONSET IT LOOKS AND APPEARS THAT WE HAVE BROUGHT. 
          AND THEN SO MANY TIMES WHEN WE GO INTO IT AND DO A FULL AUDIT INVESTIGATION, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO FRAUD AT ALL. 
          THAT'S HAPPENED QUITE A BIT THAT HAPPENED. 
          THAT'S ONCE YOU GET THE PROGRESS STRICTLY UP TO YOU, TO WHETHER TO IF WE HAVE TO TAKE IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL. SO. 
          NOT A PROBLEM. I JUST DON'T WANT THE AUDITOR TO BE INFLUENCED BY ANYONE. 
          HE HE'S SO MAD. 
          AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, HE'S ALMOST JUDGE AND THE JURY. 
          HE MAKES THE DECISION BASICALLY ON AN AUDIT. 
          WELL, IF YOU KNOW AFTER THE INVESTIGATION, IF WE GO FOR IT. 
          BUT WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS I DON'T THINK ANYONE SHOULD BE INTERFERING WITH HIS INQUIRY OR HIS AUDIT. 
          WELL, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. 
          AND YOU'RE SAYING YOU'D HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT EVER HAPPENING? NOT AT THIS POINT IN TIME. 
          I'M STILL DOING SOME RESEARCH. 
          SO, SO BUT I KNOW I AGREE WITH YOU ON WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, AND THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A CITY AUDITOR IS EXACTLY. 
          TO BE FREE OF ANY INFLUENCE IS TO DO A UNBIASED AUDIT OF THE SITUATION, YOU SAID. 
          I AGREE WITH YOU. 
          OUTSIDE INFLUENCES AND I'M VERY CONFIDENT THAT THAT'S NEVER HAPPENED. 
          ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CALLING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S HEAR FROM THEM. 
          YOU MAY WANT TO STICK AROUND FOR THE NEXT HOUR WHEN WE GO TOO FAR. 
          WE HAVE A NUMBER FIVE, THE PRELIMINARY AUDIT DISCUSSION AT FORTY FIFTH STREET. 
          [03:45:03]
AND TO ADDRESS THIS SUBJECT, COUNCILMAN QUIROGA AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS. 
          WE'VE HAD I THINK HE'S HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS HERE AT THE CITY ON THIS. YOU HAVE RENDERED AN OPINION, SO I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO OPEN UP THIS DISCUSSION. 
          OK? GLENN IS CONDUCTING AN AUDIT ON FORTY FIFTH STREET AS PART OF THE AUDIT PROCESS IS SUPPOSED TO SEND HIS INITIAL FINDINGS TO MANAGEMENT FOR THEM TO COMMENT ON. 
          AND THEN IT'S SET BACK FOR THEM, FOR HIM TO FINALIZE WHEN IT'S FINAL, EVEN REPORTS IT BACK TO THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL. 
          I HAVE OPINED THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE LITIGATION PENDING ON 45TH STREET, I WOULD PREFER THAT IT RELEASE OF THAT AUDIT BE WITHHELD AT THIS TIME JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE AUDIT SAYS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S ALWAYS HELPFUL TO BE SPREADING OUT INFORMATION THAT THE OTHER SIDE SHOULD BE GETTING THROUGH DISCOVERY. 
          AND I DON'T WANT TO GIVE OUT ANY GIFTS THERE THAT WAS STANDING. 
          I UNDERSTAND YOU WANTED SOME INFORMATION FROM GLENN. 
          CAREY SAID IT'S ALREADY PUBLIC. 
          THAT'S FINE. IF IT'S ALREADY PUBLIC, THAT'S GOOD. 
          BUT IN TERMS OF AN AUDIT, I'M FORTY FIFTH UNTIL IT'S BEEN FINALIZED AND RELEASE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T REALLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. 
          SO THERE ARE MY THOUGHTS. 
          OKAY, I DID GET YOUR EMAIL. 
          THANK YOU. AT THE BOTTOM LINE HERE, IT SAYS IF ANY INFORMATION HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN MADE PUBLIC THAT GLENN CAN RELEASE IT, BUT IT SHOULD BE RELEASED TO ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS. 
          HARRY HAD TOLD ME THAT SOME OF THE STUFF YOU WERE LOOKING FOR, THEY'VE ALREADY RELEASED. 
          SO YEAH. EXACTLY. 
          SO BASICALLY THIS REPORT? WELL, EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING. 
          YOU HAD TOLD ME SOME. 
          WHAT DID YOU SAY? OH, THAT WAS THE THAT WE SHOULD SAY. 
          CHRIS IS RECORDING THE LEGISLATIVE THING. 
          OH, I'M SORRY. 
          I APOLOGIZE. I THOUGHT IT WAS. 
          GO RIGHT AHEAD. I'M SORRY. 
          SO BASICALLY ON THAT STATEMENT, I WENT BACK AND DID MY RESEARCH, AND I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT LET ME GO BACK TO THE THE AUDIT IS MORE OR LESS LOOKING AT FINANCE, THE ERRORS MADE SO ON AND SO FORTH, AND THAT'S ALL PUBLIC. 
          WE ALL AGREED AND TO HAVE THAT AUDITS DONE. 
          I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANY ANYTHING ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION ASPECT OF IT. 
          BUT IF YOU WANT TO READ, IT'S ALL PUBLISHED HERE ABOUT EVEN WHEN I RAN FOR THIS POSITION ABOUT WHAT I FOUND THROUGH ALL THE, YOU KNOW, THE ANDS, NOSE OR BUTS ABOUT THE. 
          BUT IT'S ALL OF A STANLEY KUBRICK WITH THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR SAYS HE GOT THEIR INFORMATION FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES. 
          THAT'S THE REASON WHY I SAY TO ME THERE'S NO REASON WHY TO DISCLOSE THE FINANCIAL ASPECT. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY OUT. 
          IT'S OUT. YEAH, IT'S NOT SO. 
          SO GO AHEAD. 
          SO I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY THE AUDITORS SHOULD NOT RELEASE BECAUSE IT'S DEALING WITH FINANCES AND WHAT WAS FOUND BASED ON WHAT I FOUND WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE, THE FIRST COUPLE OF MONTHS WHEN I STARTED DOING MY RESEARCH AND SOME OF THE STUFF YOU KNOW YOU GUYS MAY NOT LIKE, BUT IT ALL LEADS DOWN TO STAMP AND EVERYTHING. 
          WHEN WE HAVE TWENTY FIVE THIRTY FIVE FIFTY THINGS TO LOOK AT, ITS STAFF MOVED ON STAFF AND MOVED ON BECAUSE I'M A FRESHMAN JUST COMING IN HERE AND I LOOK AT THE NUMBERS, I SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, SOMETHING'S WRONG HERE BECAUSE FORTY FIFTH STREET WAS SUCH A HIGHLIGHT IN THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS. 
          YOU KNOW, I LOVE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, AND I TEND TO PARSE MY WORDS CLOSELY. 
          SO AND PERHAPS THAT'S A FAULT OF MINE. 
          BUT WHEN YOU SAY I WANT HIM TO RELEASE IT, THAT IMPLIES TO ME IT HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED BEFORE. AND THEREIN LIES MY. 
          I UNDERSTAND I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, SO I UNDERSTAND, BUT I I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          OH, OK. YEAH, WE HAVE A POINT WHERE WE HAVE MARIA AND THEN DAVID QUIROGA. 
          HENRY AND I HAVE THE LIKE. 
          THE REASON I AGREED TO SECOND THIS. 
          [03:50:02]
I HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHEN SO MUCH OF THIS HAS BEEN PUBLIC, HOW IT COULD AFFECT LITIGATION. WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NUMBERS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE JOB ITSELF. 
          I DO NOT KNOW WHAT GLENN'S AUDIT SAYS. 
          I HAVE NOT READ IT AS IT HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LITIGATION ALL THE TIME WHERE AUDITS CAN BE GOOD OR BAD. 
          AND YOU KNOW, WE RELEASE IT ONE TIME BECAUSE MAYBE WE THINK IT'S GOOD AND THE NEXT TIME WE DON'T RELEASE, THE OTHER SIDE SAYS, OH, IT MUST BE SO BAD, WE'RE GOING TO GO AFTER IT. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, I'M JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, I JUST HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING HOW AN AUDIT COULD AFFECT LITIGATION BECAUSE THERE MAY BE FINDINGS AND OPINIONS IN THERE BY A AGENT OF THE CITY THAT COULD BE NOT WELL SERVING OF OUR END GOAL. 
          AND I SAW ROBERT BOOTH AND WILL DENTON BANGING THEIR HEAD AGAINST THE WALL FOR THREE YEARS, TRYING TO GET AN AUDIT ON THE CDM CASE AND NOT BEING ABLE TO DO IT. 
          SO THERE'S THAT. 
          DAVID, THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. 
          BUT IN ANY CASE, GLENN'S OFFICE ISN'T THE SOURCE OF THOSE REPORTS. 
          I MEAN, GLENN REPORTS THE FINDINGS OF AN AUDIT BY CITY COUNCIL THAT GETS FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY. 
          CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE IS THE SOURCE FOR THIS REPORT. 
          IF I WANT TO HEAR FROM, IF I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE RESULT OF THAT AUDIT WAS. 
          I DON'T THINK GLENN IS THE PERSON I SHOULD BE GOING TO. 
          I SHOULD BE GOING TO JANELLE BECAUSE IF IT'S BEEN PUBLISHED, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE ALL FIND IT. IS THAT THE POINT THERE? OH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, EVEN THOUGH HE MAY COMPLETE HIS AUDIT? YOU'RE SAYING IT GOES TO DOES IT COME TO COUNCIL WHERE YOU LOOK AT IT, GAVE OUR OPINION AND GIVE IT TO JANELLE TO STAMP IT? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I'M KIND OF GLAD GLENN'S AUDIT REPORT COMES TO COUNCIL, RIGHT? PERIOD. 
          NOW, I THINK WHAT DAVID IS SAYING AND GUIDE ME ON THIS, DAVID, IF IT'S ALREADY BEEN RELEASED, WE CAN REQUEST IT FOR RELEASE IN THAT CASE. 
          MARIE JUST SAID IT'S ON HIS CHANNELS, AS SHE PUTS IT ONLINE. 
          YOU SEE FROM THE COUNCILMAN. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO COME TO COUNSEL. 
          BUT SO BUT STILL IT COMES FROM HER ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 
          THEY WERE COME FROM IT WAS DUMPED FROM PHILADELPHIA. 
          BUT WE KNOW AND TOLD NOT TO PUT IT ONLINE, NOT. 
          BUT COUNCIL COULD STILL SEE THE REPORT. 
          WELL, THAT'S KIND OF EXTRAORDINARY CASE IF YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING ONLINE. 
          BUT AS A MATTER, OF COURSE, WHEN YOU ARE DONE WITH AN AUDIT, YOU RELEASE THAT AUDIT. 
          YOU BRING THAT TO COUNCIL AS PART OF YOUR PLAN. 
          THAT'S PUT ON WEBSITE, BUT JANELLE'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE THAT INFORMATION PUBLIC. 
          SO JANELLE IS THE SOURCE FOR THIS INFORMATION, NOT YOUR OFFICE. 
          WELL, BUT IT WOULD BE ALREADY BANNED THEM POCKET IF IT WAS RIGHT. 
          MAYBE SO. BUT I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY'S PUBLIC, IF IF IT HADN'T HADN'T REACHED THE PACKET OR WHATEVER. WELL, HERE'S HERE'S THE TOTAL BOTTOM LINE WE GOT OUR CITY ATTORNEY HERE. 
          HERE'S ALL THE DOCUMENTATION AND EVERYTHING HAS BEEN RELEASED, BUT THIS TALKS ABOUT THE PROJECT. THIS IS WHAT I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT. 
          SO THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT A PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY IS GOING TO BE SMART ENOUGH TO GO, LOOK AT ALL THESE WHO WROTE IT AND THEN GO ASK THEM QUESTIONS OR SUBPOENA WHATEVER. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THE FINANCES, WHY THEY WERE DONE CORRECTLY OR INCORRECTLY AND GO FROM THERE. WHEN GLENN CAN PRESENT THAT TO THE COUNCIL, THEN WE LOOK AT IT AND THEN WE MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. 
          WHAT I'M SAYING IS I UNDERSTAND OUR CITY ATTORNEY. 
          HE'S I AGREE WITH HIM WHEN HE WHEN HE SAID HE AGREES WITH YOU. 
          YEAH, GO AHEAD. WELL, LET ME CLARIFY, I WANT TO GO OVER THE AUDIT REPORT THAT GLENN HAS COMPLETED FOR FORTY FIFTH STREET. 
          HAS THAT BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC? OK, THAT HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC AND IT HAS NOT COME TO COUNCIL, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S IN THE AUDIT REPORT. 
          AUDITS HAVE TO GO TO GET THE SCOPE OF THE OLSEN SECTION IN THE CODE, YOU KNOW, CAN DO. 
          IT SAYS THE CITY ASKS. 
          THE CITY AUDITOR MAY ISSUE THE REPORTS THE CITY COUNCIL AS NEEDED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION WHEN AN AUDIT IS NOT REQUIRED, REPORTS PRESENT. 
          [03:55:03]
WORK THAT IS GENERALLY ADVISORY AND INFORMATIVE IN NATURE. 
          IF CLINTON HAS SOME INFORMATION, HE CAN SHARE IT WITH THE ENTIRE COUNCIL, WHETHER GLENN'S OFFICE IS THE APPROPRIATE PLACE TO GO FOR THAT INFORMATION. 
          IT'S AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT QUESTION ENTIRELY, BUT DO YOU HAVE YOU HAD MADE A RULING ON THIS THAT THE AUDIT REPORT SHOULD NOT BE RELEASED OR THE DETAILS OF IT DISCUSSED PUBLICLY . I'VE EXPRESSED THAT OPINION. 
          AND AGAIN, AN OPINION, AND I AGREE WHAT HE'S SAYING, BUT ON THE OTHER TOKEN, WE'RE NOT. 
          MY ARGUMENT IS WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING ANY OF THE PROJECTS OTHER THAN THE FINANCIAL ASPECT OF IT. THAT'S ALL I'M LOOKING AT. 
          AND GLENN HAS THAT INFORMATION, I DON'T. 
          AND IT'S ALREADY BEEN PREVIOUSLY RELEASED. 
          THAT'S IT. SO IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S A MOOT POINT BASED ON.. 
          WHAT HAS BEEN RELEASED? YOU'D HAVE THE DETAILS. 
          I DON'T BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF IT. 
          IT HAS TO DO WHEN IT COMES TO MANAGEMENT. 
          [INAUDIBLE] BOARD STOP MAKING OF THE SCOPE OF THE AUDIT WHEN THE SCOPE OF THE AUDIT WAS GIVEN. WHEN COUNCILWOMAN. WHY? WHY WOULDN'T HE COME TO MANAGEMENT AND TO SEE IF IT CAN BE RELEASED WITHOUT QUESTION? BUT WITH IT, I HAVEN'T BEEN. 
          WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. SO WHY DO I HAVE AN OPEN DOOR? THIS IS NOT A GLENN AND US PROBLEM. 
          SO I GUESS MY QUESTION THAT'S ARE YOU. 
          ARE YOU GOING TO TURN TO YOUR STAFF? IS IT FINISHED? IT'S FINISHED AND IT'S BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE SAME MANAGER'S OFFICE TO BE TURNED OVER TO HIM. AND THAT'S THE BEST PLACE FOR YOU. 
          HE DOES HAVE TO COMMENT. 
          AND IT GOES BACK TO WAS THERE NOT CONVERSATION THAT YOU TOLD DAN STOP. 
          I SAID THAT I DID NOT WANT THE AUDITED DONE. 
          I THINK I DON'T KNOW. 
          I HAVE NOT LOOKED AT IT. SO IF IT'S IN YOUR OFFICE NOW, WOULD YOU? WHY WOULDN'T YOU ALL LOOK AT IT? SEE, IF THERE'S INFORMATION THAT YOU FEEL THAT HAS HASN'T BEEN RELEASED YET AND THEN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IF IT CAN GO FORWARD? I AGREE. WELL, LET'S HOLD UP LIKE THERE NOW. 
          WHAT? WHAT IS YOUR POINT? I HAVE TO KILL MYSELF JUST ONE SECOND COUNSEL. 
          STATE YOUR STATE YOUR QUESTION. 
          SO IT'S IN YOUR OFFICE, I BELIEVE. 
          DAN, DO YOU HAVE IT? YEAH. 
          THE PROCESS FOR THE REPORT SAYS GLYNN PREPARES HIS REPORT LETTER CARRIED. 
          THEY SENT IT TO OUR OFFICE. 
          WE COMMENT ON IT. 
          YOU SEE IT. AND THEN WE FIND LIFE. 
          WE DON'T KNOW. 
          AND SO DON ASK US TO STOP. 
          SO IT HASN'T EVEN GOTTEN TO BE YET. 
          IS DON PART OF THAT PROCESS? THE OVERALL REVIEW PROCESS I WOULD THINK SO, YES. 
          I WAS GOING TO THE MANAGER'S OFFICE AND I EXPRESSED MY PREFERENCE THAT IT NOT GO FORWARD. 
          WE FOUND THAT EVERY REPORT. 
          YEAH, WELL, BUT MY QUESTION HERE HADN'T BEEN ANSWERED. 
          OK, SO NEAL'S OFFICE, YOU'VE YOU'VE LOOKED OVER SOMEWHAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY. WHY HAVEN'T YOU LOOK OVER IT YET AND DETERMINE IF THE INFORMATION CAN GO FORWARD? YOU KNOW, AS A GENERAL RULE, IT'S MY RECOMMENDATION AUDITS IT'S NOT BE RELEASED WHILE PENDING LITIGATION. 
          NO MATTER WHAT. IT SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD. 
          THAT'S MY VIEW. YES, THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION. 
          OK. THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION. 
          OK. AND YOU KNOW, I WANT TO BILL, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I WANT TO CLARIFY THERE'S COMMENT. 
          THE AUDIT HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. 
          COUNCIL HAS NOT SEEN IT. 
          THERE IS A COMMENT THAT THERE ARE PORTIONS OF THAT THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE FINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. 
          THAT'S GOING TO SAY FIRST STARTED. 
          YES. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. THE SCOPE OF THAT PROVES THAT VARIOUS FINANCIAL PIECES OF THE AUDIT THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED IN THE DAILY NEWS AND IN COUNCIL MEETINGS. 
          YEAH. IF YOU REMEMBER WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THAT, THAT'S WHAT BROUGHT THIS WHOLE THING TO LIGHT. WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE CHANGE ORDERS, THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY IN NUMBERS. 
          SO THAT'S NOT THE FINANCES PUT IN THE STAFF REPORT, AND WE'VE CORRECTED THAT. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. AND THAT WAS IN THE STAFF REPORT, NOT IN THE AUDIT. 
          CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          YEAH, I'M NOT. YEAH, I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE THAT POINT. 
          THAT'S TRUE. OK. 
          YEAH, I DO REMEMBER THAT FOR SURE. 
          SO BUT THERE'S OTHER ISSUES THAT, IN MY OPINION, NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. 
          BUT HAVE YOU SEEN IT? 
          [04:00:02]
SEE WHAT THE AUDIT, WHAT ISSUES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BASED ON THE FIRST INFORMATION I GET? I HAVEN'T SEEN THE AUDIT NOW. 
          GLENN AND THE MAYOR AND I HAD A CONVERSATION HE HAD. 
          HE WAS GOING TO TAKE IT TO WHO WAS IT TO THE ATTORNEY OR. 
          YES. OK. SO WE WERE SITTING IN THE SAME OFFICE. 
          NO, WE HADN'T SEEN IT. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS A LOT OF THE OTHER STUFF HAS BEEN MADE PUBLIC, THE ERRORS THAT WERE FOUND. 
          BUT UNTIL THAT AUDIT IS RELEASED, SO WE CAN COMMENT ON IT TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHY THIS WAS DONE AND WHY WASN'T IN CHECK. 
          THAT'S WHAT I STATED EARLIER. 
          WE AS A COUNCIL ARE WEAK BECAUSE WE STAMP STUFF BECAUSE HERE AM I JUST WALKING IN THREE WEEKS AND I FIND ERRORS. 
          YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN HERE. 
          MAYOR, DAVID, JOHN PAUL, YOU ALL ARE HERE. 
          THE QUESTION IS GOING TO BE WHY? WHY DIDN'T Y'ALL CATCH IT? AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IF IT WAS ERROR, THEN WHY WASN'T A CATCH HE CAUGHT? AND IF IT WASN'T CAUGHT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE BOTTOM LINE? I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER LOOKED AT UNTIL IT WAS BROUGHT UP. SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY THIS WHOLE THING STARTED TO LOOK TO SEE WHAT WAS DONE. SURE. 
          YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINAL RESULT IS, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT. 
          SO LET ME ASK THIS BILL, YOU HAVE THE ITEM IS THE AUDIT DISCUSSION. 
          THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. WHAT DO YOU WANT? IS THERE A REQUEST? WELL, WHAT'S GOING TO BE ON NEXT ONE IS THAT HE RELEASED THE AUDIT TO US AND THEN WE PLACE IT DOWN TO SEE WHAT'S OUR NEXT COURSE OF ACTION. 
          DO WE NEED TO CHANGE POLICY? I HAVEN'T READ THE THE AUDIT PLAN OF WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE WHEN THIS THING FIRST STARTED. SO THE RELEASE OF THE AUDIT, DON, WHEN WITH THIS AUDIT BE RELEASED IN YOUR UNDER YOUR GUIDELINES, IT WOULDN'T. 
          NO, NO, NO, NO. 
          [INAUDIBLE] SEND IT BACK TO GLENN. 
          I'LL HAVE MY PEOPLE LOOK AT IT TO SEE IF IT DANGERS OF LITIGATION, WHETHER IT DOES OR NOT. I'M GOING TO SEND YOU A MEMO MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ON HOW TO PROCEED. 
          ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN PROCEED AS YOU WILL AFTER THAT POINT. 
          THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DONE. 
          WHEN IS YOUR TIMELINE ON GETTING THAT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL? SEPTEMBER 2028, [LAUGHING] WHEN IS OUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING IS JANUARY 6. 
          WELL IT'S A SPECIAL MEETING. 
          OUR REGULAR ONE BE JANUARY TWENTY SIX OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WELL HELL MARIE LETS DO OUR, SPECIAL MEETING, THAT SO I WON'T. 
          THE TWENTY SIX PEOPLE AFTER GLENN GETS IT TO ME. 
          EXCUSE ME, JUST A SECOND. 
          I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL CLEAR ON THIS NOW. 
          DAN WILL BE WORKING WITH BRIAN TO MAKE THEIR GIVE COMMENTS. 
          I THINK DAN STOPPED IT RIGHT WHEN [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN HE'LL GIVE THOSE COMMENTS BACK TO GLENN, AND THEN YOU'LL REVIEW THE AUDIT TO SEE IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO GET IT RELEASED AND WHEN. AND YOU'LL NOTIFY COUNCIL. 
          I SHALL DO SO. ALL RIGHT, I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION. 
          AND IT WILL BE YOUR DECISION ULTIMATELY. 
          THAT IS THIS DOES BRING HIM BECAUSE I READ IN THE CODE. 
          WHEN YOU SENT THAT OVER TO MR. BUCKLEY, HOW LONG AGO DID YOU SEND THAT OVER TO MR. BUCKLEY? I HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT MY EMAILS. 
          WAS IT  WAIT TWO WEEKS, THREE WEEKS. 
          THREE. IT'S GOOD. 
          I'M THINKING PROBABLY THREE. 
          THREE IS VERY. 
          IS THERE A TIME LIMIT? WOULD YOU ISSUE A LIKE THIS AUDIT? IS THERE A TIME LIMIT THAT GIVE IT BACK TO ME IN FIVE DAYS, 10 DAYS, WE'VE AGREED ON 10 DAYS IN THE PAST. 
          WELL, WHEN YOU AGREE ABOUT SOME, IF IT'S RIGHT, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO ARGUE WELL THE RANGE IS I CAN DO IT WHENEVER. 
          DOESN'T SPECIFIED THE DATE. 
          THERE'S NOTHING IN THE CODE THAT SPECIFIES A CALENDAR, EXCEPT THAT AFTER THE AUDIT IS RELEASED, THERE'S A TIME WITHIN WHICH THE AUDITOR CAN MAKE A REQUEST TO THE MANAGEMENT OFFICE. WHAT CHANGES, IF ANY, HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED AS A RESULT OF THE AUDIT FINDINGS? LIKE YOU SAID, I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT BEING LONGER THAN 10 DAYS. 
          I'M JUST CURIOUS. ALL RIGHT. 
          VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, GLENN. 
          THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. 
          ALL RIGHT. WE ARE ITEM THREE F, AH JANELLE. 
          [3.F.
Report of City Council's Park Board Representative (Collins/Brown - 10 minutes)]
          [04:05:04]
3F, SUPPORT OF CITY COUNCILS PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE. 
          COUNCILMAN COLLINS. 
          I WANT TO GET THIS BACK TO YOU. 
          YOU SEEM TO HAVE TAKEN OVER THE CONVERSATION OF PARK BOARD MEETINGS THAT I'M NOT INVITED. 
          I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT YOU GUYS DECIDED. 
          I DIDN'T EXTEND THE INVITATION, SO THAT WAS COMING FROM PARK BOARD. 
          THANK YOU. SO THAT WAS GOOD. 
          I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE NO COMMENTS ABOUT. 
          WE HAVE A NEW COMBINED MEETING JAN. 
          SIX, BUT YOU SEEM TO SUGGEST I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DO THAT MEETINGS BY ZOOM. 
          I'M HAVING SURGERY. 
          SO I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE OK TO BE HERE. 
          ALL RIGHT, GO AHEAD AND YOUR ASSISTANT WROTE YOU. 
          YOU SEEM TO BE PUTTING TOGETHER A TASK FORCE FOR THE PARK BOARD THAT THAT CAME OUT OF THIS MEETING. 
          I'M PUTTING NOTHING TOGETHER FOR THE PARK BOARD. 
          THIS WAS COMING OUT OF A IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IT, I THINK WE'RE GETTING OFF TOPIC HERE. HOW IS THIS NOT A REPORT ON THE PARK BOARD? EXCUSE ME. HOW IS THIS NOT A REPORT ON THE PARK BOARD. 
          I MEAN. WELL, IF LET'S GET IS DON? DON, YOU WERE AT THAT MEETING. 
          COUNCILMAN COLLINS, WE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT MEETING. 
          IS THAT UNDER THIS? HOW MAY I BE OF ASSISTANCE? THE AGENDA ITEM IS WHAT PARK BOARD REPRESENT BOARD REPRESENTATIVE. 
          IF YOU WANT TO REPORT WHAT YOU'VE HEARD, I SUPPOSE THAT'S A REPORT. 
          I KNOW NOTHING THEN. 
          WELL, DAVID, DISCUSS THIS PERSONALLY ON THIS. 
          THE PARK BOARD SET UP A MEETING HERE AT THE CITY. 
          THEY DID INVITEES, I WASN'T INVOLVED WITH WHO ATTENDED THAT MEETING. 
          I WAS ASKED TO ATTEND. 
          I CAME TO THE MEETING. 
          BRIAN WAS HERE. 
          DON WAS HERE. 
          CARLA KATROPIA FROM THE PARK. 
          BOARD. JASON HARDCASTLE FROM THE PARK BOARD AND ELLIE DASHON WAS HERE. 
          AND DAN BUCKLEY, WHO'S HERE. 
          AND THOSE WERE THE INVITEES. 
          I HAD NO IDEA WHO WAS REALLY GOING TO BE ATTENDING UNTIL I CAME INTO THE OFFICE AND THE HEAD OF THE CIA CAME INTO THE ROOM WHERE THE DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND THE AGENDA COMING UP FOR JANUARY SIX. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT THE AGENDA WAS IT. 
          I MEAN, THE DISCUSSION WAS THEY DISCUSSED I DIDN'T HAVE A DOG IN THE HUNT, BUT THEY DISCUSSED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ONLY ONE ITEM ON THE JANUARY 6TH AGENDA. 
          AND THAT WAS THE STATUS OF THE STEWART ART STEWART BEACH PAVILION AND THE POTENTIAL FOR AN RFP AND LOOKING AT IF THERE SHOULD BE A HOTEL BUILT ON THE PROPERTIES THERE. 
          AND I RECORDED THAT. 
          I ASK JANELLE TO BE SURE TO GET WITH DON AND HE WAS WORKING WITH CARLA WITH THE PARK BOARD TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC WAS TO BE, THAT WE GOT THAT WORDED PROPERLY FOR THE AGENDA. 
          BUT THE PARTICIPANTS AT THE MEETING FELT THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ONE TOPIC TO BE DISCUSSED, AND THAT WAS TO BE AND I'M WRITE A RESOLUTION BECAUSE THE PARK BOARD IS GOING TO HAVE SOME COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT RFP'S. 
          PARK BOARD SUGGESTED A COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT THE RFP PROCESS IF COUNCIL WANTS TO APPROVE SUCH. THAT'S TOTALLY UP TO COUNCIL. 
          YES, MARIE. WELL, I STILL HAVE A QUESTION OF THE LEGAL OPINION AS TO WHETHER A HOTEL COULD GO IN THAT LOCATION OR NOT. 
          WELL, I HAVE DONE. 
          THAT'S TRUE. THAT IS AN AGENDA ITEM. 
          I HAVE WAS ASKED THREE QUESTIONS BY COUNCILMAN COLLINS. 
          I ANSWERED THOSE THREE QUESTIONS. 
          I CIRCULATED MY ANSWER IN A MEMO TO YOU ALL, AND THAT IS AN ISSUE APPARENTLY OF ONGOING DISCUSSION AT THE COURT. 
          PERHAPS THAT MEMO SHOULD BE ON OUR JANUARY SIX OR DO WE HAVE A REGULAR MEETING THAT'S STRICTLY COUNCIL, ESPECIALLY FOR THIS WORKSHOP? WELL, I HAVEN'T POSTED YET. WE'RE GOING TO WE THE WAY, THE WAY IT WAS, IT WAS. 
          I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE MEETING THAT WE WOULD HAVE WE WOULD HAVE A DISCUSSION OF THE THE STEWART BEACH PAVILION AND THEN THERE WOULD BE ACTION ITEMS. IF COUNCIL WANTED TO SUPPORT MOVING IN ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER, WE WOULD HAVE THE 
          [04:10:05]
ABILITY TO MAKE THEM. 
          AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULDN'T QUITE NECESSARILY ENCOMPASS THE DISCUSSION OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ANSWERED. 
          THE YEAH OF COUNCIL. 
          THANK YOU. YEAH. 
          AND THE PARK BOARD WAS VERY THEY KNEW THAT IT WAS COUNCIL'S DECISION, THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY BIG DECISION FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE THIS HAS A BEARING NOT ONLY ON STEWART BEACH, BUT IT HAS A BEARING ON REALLY THE FACE OF GALVESTON, WHICH MANY VISITORS USE STEWART BEACH AS THE FACE OF GALVESTON. 
          AND THIS IS GOING TO BE A BIG DECISION. 
          IT'S A BIG DECISION FOR THE CITY BECAUSE IT INVOLVES A LOT OF LEGAL AND FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS COMING UP. 
          SO THE PARK BOARD IS GOING TO COME FORWARD. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PARK BOARD DAVID, YOU WOULD KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PARK BOARD IS DISCUSSING THIS ON THEIR END. 
          [INAUDIBLE] HASN'T HAPPENED YET. 
          IS THAT GOING TO COME UP IN YOUR NEXT MEETING? HOPE SO. 
          OK, WELL, THAT I'M LEAVING THAT UP TO YOU AND THE PARK BOARD. 
          YOU'RE THE LIAISON OVER THERE. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF COUNCIL, THEY'RE GOING TO BRING FORWARD SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT STEWART BEACH AND BUILDING A HOTEL AND OTHER ISSUES OVER THERE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED. AS MARIE MENTIONED, THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL ISSUE IMPLICATIONS HERE, AND WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT REAL THOROUGHLY. 
          THEY'RE LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE FROM COUNCIL. 
          THEY DO NOT WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND EXPEND A LOT OF ENERGY, TIME AND FUNDS UNLESS THEY HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL. 
          WELL, THAT WOULD. OUR THOUGHTS ARE ON HOW WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH STEWART BEACH. 
          AND WITH THAT, I GUESS IT'S TIME FOR LUNCH. 
          WE HAVE DAVID, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT. 
          WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF OUR ITEMS AND ON THE AGENDA WE ARE ADJOURNED. 
          IT IS 1:12.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.