[3.A Joint Workshop Between The City Council And The Park Board Of Trustees To Discuss The Following: Discussion of having Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL), in collaboration with an integrated City of Galveston/Galveston Park Board Taskforce, develop an RFP that will solicit site development proposals from qualified companies (Brown/Collins)]

OUR SOLE PURPOSE TO BE HERE TODAY IS TO DISCUSS THE RESOLUTION THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS SENT OVER TO US. A COUPLE OF PEOPLE HAVE ASKED WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS MEETINGS? BECAUSE EVERY YEAR, AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR, WE HOPE TO HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE PARK BOARD, BESIDES WHICH THE INTERLOCAL WE HAVE WITH THE PARK BOARD REGARDING CITY OWNED PARK BOARD MANAGED PROPERTIES REQUIRES THE PARK BOARD TO COME TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND THERE'S ONE ON THE TABLE AT PARK BOARD AND MR. FLUKE IS WITH US THIS MORNING, MARTY FLUKE, OUR CHAIR OF THE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP COMMITTEE AT THE PARK BOARD, AND I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR US THIS MORNING.

INDEED, I DO. WELL, PLEASE PROCEED.

I'LL BRING UP THE FIRST SLIDE, IF YOU WILL, GO TO THE NEXT.

. SO THIS IS THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING, AND I'LL TRY AND KEEP IT SHORT AND SWEET AND TO THE POINT, AND I HAVE AN ASK AT THE END FOR THE RESOLUTION AS PROPOSED BY THE PARK BOARD. AND FIRST OF ALL, YOU KNOW, AS AN INTRODUCTION, I'M MARTY FLUKE.

I'VE BEEN ON THE PARK BOARD FOR THREE YEARS.

WE STARTED THIS PROJECT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND I INHERITED THE POSITION OF CHAIRMAN OF THIS COMMITTEE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WITH US, I WANT TO INTRODUCE MR. NEIL MURPHY, WHO IS OUR DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS AT THE PARK BOARD.

HE'S RETIRED LIEUTENANT COLONEL FROM THE MARINE CORPS.

SO HE'S NOT ONLY MY HELP IN DEVELOPING THIS SLIDES, HE'S MY BODYGUARD AS WELL.

SO YOU GUYS BE NICE.

SO I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU THROUGH A SHORT HISTORY OF STEWART BEACH.

I'LL TAKE YOU BACK TO 1941 AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

AND I WANT TO DESCRIBE THE METICULOUS AND THOUGHTFUL PROCESS THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED TO GET TO THE END OF JOB FOR WHAT WE WILL CALL THE STEWART BEACH ENRICHMENT INITIATIVE, STEWART BEACH ENRICHMENT INITIATIVE.

AND THAT'S ENRICHMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST FOR THE TOURISTS, BUT ENRICHMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND THEN WE HAVE THREE COURSES OF ACTION THAT COUNCIL CAN TAKE.

AND OBVIOUSLY, I'LL GIVE YOU THE ONE THAT WE AT THE PARK BOARD AND THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND. AND WHEN YOU GUYS GO INTO COUNCIL, YOU CAN DECIDE WHERE YOU WANT TO GO WITH THIS INITIATIVE AND THEN WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.

I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL YOUR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.

NEXT SLIDE. SO WE BELIEVE THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS AT A DEFINING MOMENT WITH STEWART BEACH.

WHEN WE FORMED THIS COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE STARTED OUT WITH TWO GOALS.

ONE WAS TO ENHANCE THE RESIDENT AND VISITOR EXPERIENCE AT THIS 69 ACRE PARK.

AND THE SECOND WAS TO GENERATE OPERATING INCOME FOR THE CITY.

SO THERE ARE FOUR POSSIBLE REVENUE STREAMS FOR THE CITY FROM THIS INITIATIVE.

ONE IS THE LEASE PAYMENT.

SECOND, ONE WOULD BE SALES TAX.

THE THIRD ONE IS HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX AND THE FOURTH ONE WOULD BE PROPERTY TAX.

[00:05:01]

AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF IN A CONUNDRUM WITH PROPERTY TAX, WHERE WE CAN ONLY INCREASE AD VALOREM TAXES THREE AND A HALF PERCENT PER YEAR, AND WE NEED NEW CONSTRUCTION TO TRY AND KEEP UP WITH THE SIX TO EIGHT PERCENT INFLATION WE HAVE OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS. SO THE MORE TAXES WE CAN GET, THE MORE REVENUE WE CAN GET INTO THE OPERATING INCOME OF THE CITY, THE BETTER OFF THE CITY AND THE COMMUNITY IS AS A WHOLE.

SO THEN WE WANTED TO MOVE INTO A SUSTAINABLE PLAN FOR THE BEST USE OF THIS PREMIER PROPERTY. WE BELIEVE THIS IS THE PREMIER PROPERTY ON THE TEXAS GULF COAST AND NOW IT'S JUST SIXTY NINE ACRES OF SAND AND SURF.

AND WE THINK THERE'S A HIGHER USE FOR THIS PROPERTY, AND THE USE MIGHT BE MORE THAN JUST BUILDING A NEW PAVILION.

SO AS WHEN WE GOT INTO THIS INITIATIVE, WE LOOKED AT IT AND THERE ARE SIXTY NINE ACRES AND THERE'S TWO THOUSAND FEET OF BEACH FRONT.

AND THIS INITIATIVE, THE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, WOULD USE LESS THAN 10 PERCENT OF THE AVAILABLE SIXTY NINE ACRES.

IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.

SO WHAT WE NEED IS WE NEED CITY COUNCIL TO AGREE TO A RESOLUTION THAT ADOPTS THE VISION OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AS PROMOTED BY THE COMMITTEE AND BY THE PARK BOARD.

THE SECOND STEP WOULD BE TO ASSIGN TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INTEGRATED PARK WORK TASK FORCE, SO WE WANT TO COMPLEMENT THE TASK FORCE OF THE COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE NOW WITH TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

NEXT SLIDE. A VISION BECOMES A REALITY.

SO THIS IS A QUOTE ON JULY 17TH, 1941, THE GALVESTON CITY COMPANY GRANTED A DEED TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON FOR THESE SIXTY NINE ACRES.

ON JULY 18TH 1941, MACO STEWART WAS QUOTED IN THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS.

YES, IT WAS THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS BEFORE IT WAS THE GALVESTON COUNTY DAILY NEWS BUT IN THE GALVESTON DAILY NEWS THAT SAID THAT A BEACH IS MORE THAN SAND AND SURF AND THE SATISFACTORY PUBLIC RESORT FACILITY IS A PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY.

SO THE VISION AND PRIVATE GENEROSITY WILL MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR THIS VISION TO BE REALIZED. SO STEWART'S VISION WAS BUSINESS EXCELLENCE AND COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE, AND OUR COMMITTEE AND THE PARK BOARD HAS TAKEN THAT TO HEART AS WE'VE LOOKED INTO THIS PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

SO PRIOR TO 1941, THE CITY TOOK TRIPS AROUND THE UNITED STATES AND THE IDEA WAS TO BUILD A SUPER JONES BEACH, A CONEY ISLAND, A BETTER MIAMI FACILITY OR A BETTER JERSEY SHORE FACILITY. AND IT'S NOW WE BELIEVE IT'S THE PUBLIC'S RESPONSIBILITY, ALONG WITH A PRIVATE PARTNER TO IMPLEMENT THAT VISION.

NEXT SLIDE. SO I WANT TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THE BEACH AND OF THE PARK BOARD'S INITIATIVES IN THIS BEACH WITH YOU FOR A MOMENT, IF I CAN.

SO LIKE I SAID IN 1941 IN JULY OF 1941 BEFORE THE WAR, THE SIXTY NINE ACRES WAS GRANTED BY THE GALVESTON CITY COMPANY TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AND IT WAS DESIGNATED TO BE CALLED STEWART BEACH.

AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, A PUBLIC FACILITY, A PUBLIC FACILITY WAS BUILT ON STEWART BEACH. HOWEVER, IN 1983 DURING HURRICANE ALICIA, I KNOW SOME OF YOU WERE HERE.

SOME OF YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN BORN, BUT SOME OF YOU WERE HERE IN 1983 AND ALICIA SUFFICIENTLY DAMAGED THE PAVILION TO WHERE IT NEEDED TO BE RECONSTRUCTED.

SO THE CURRENT PAVILION WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1985.

NOW, AS YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT MIGHT TIP YOUR MEMORY THAT IKE CAME THROUGH IN 2008 AND IT TOOK US TILL 2020 TO GET PUBLIC, TO GET FEMA FUNDS TO RAISE THE PAVILION AT STEWART BEACH. SO I WASN'T HERE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

BUT I SUGGEST THIS WASN'T A FEMA PROJECT THAT THE CITY UNDERTOOK THIS AND REBUILT THE PAVILION QUICKLY, AND IN 1985, THE PAVILION WAS BUILT.

SO THE PAVILION HAS DETERIORATED TO A POINT WHERE IN 2015, THE PARK BOARD UNDERTOOK A MASTER PLAN AND THE MASTER PLAN WAS TO LOOK AT FACILITIES AND AMENITIES.

MAYBE A MASTER PLAN ISN'T THE RIGHT WORD, BUT THE PARK BOARD UNDERTOOK AN INITIATIVE TO CREATE A VISION FOR STEWART BEACH AND WHAT AMENITIES WOULD BE USEFUL FOR STEWART BEACH.

AND AS A RESULT OF THIS, AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM CALLED ROGERS PARTNERS WITH HOUSTON OFFICES AND NEW YORK OFFICES WAS ENGAGED TO DEVELOP WHAT A VISION FOR A NEW PAVILION AT

[00:10:07]

STEWART BEACH WOULD BE.

IF I CAN, I'LL QUOTE FROM AN ARTICLE IN THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS THAT I HAVE HERE, AND IT WAS WRITTEN ON JULY 3RD 2018.

THEY SAID IT WILL REPLACE THE CURRENT FIFTY TWO THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT PAVILION, DESIGNED BY GALVESTON ARCHITECT [INAUDIBLE] PARTNERS.

IT SAID, AS DETERMINED DURING THE COURSE OF SEVERAL PUBLIC MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS, WHICH WAS THE 2015 EFFORT.

THE PAVILION SHOULD INCLUDE AN AMPHITHEATER, PLAYGROUND, CONCESSIONS, RESTROOMS AND SHOWERS, A VENUE FOR EVENTS, SPACE FOR BEACH PATROL AND PARK ADMINISTRATION, A ROOFTOP RESTAURANT, TERRACE, SHADE SEATING AND COVERED PARK ADMINISTRATION.

GET THAT IN YOUR VISION, RIGHT.

GET THAT IN YOUR VISION WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN FOR STEWART BEACH TO HAVE THOSE AMENITIES RIGHT? THAT WAS JULY 3RD 2018.

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS.

SO TYLER SWANSON, WHO IS THE PARTNER AT THE FIRM, MADE A QUOTE, SAID WE ASKED THE ARCHITECTS TO RETHINK THE EXPERIENCE OF SPACE AND INCREASE REVENUE GENERATION. SO WE'VE ALWAYS HAD REVENUE INCREASE, GENERATION INCREASE IN MIND AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THAT. NOW, THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS WENT ON TO QUOTE AT THE END OF THE ARTICLE CONSIDERING GALVESTON'SS PERMANENTLY PRECARIOUS ECONOMIC STATE, THE CITY WILL IN ALL LIKELIHOOD NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT WITHOUT [INAUDIBLE].

SO WE BROUGHT THIS PLAN TO CITY COUNCIL AND IT WAS A TWENTY SEVEN MILLION DOLLAR PLAN AND IT WASN'T ADOPTED.

SO AT THAT POINT IN TIME, I THINK MS. DE SCHAUN AND MR. JACOBY GOT TOGETHER AND SAID, WHY DON'T WE LOOK FOR A DIFFERENT PUBLIC PARTNER TO HELP REALIZE THIS VISION THAT WE HAVE FOR STEWART BEACH.

AND THEY DID AN AWESOME JOB.

SO AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IN 2019, WE FORMED THE COMMITTEE TO A PARK BOARD COMMITTEE TO LOOK INTO A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP TO DEVELOP THIS VISION THAT MACO STEWART HAD AND THAT THE RESIDENCE HAD FOR STEWART BEACH.

CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

NEXT, I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH.

HERE I'LL GIVE YOU A HANDOUT, SO IT'LL BE EASIER FOR YOU TO FOLLOW.

SO WHEN WE DEVELOPED THIS PROCESS, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD TAKE THREE PHASES, AND PHASE ONE INCLUDED INTERVIEWING AND DEVELOPING COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FIRMS TO HELP US DEVELOP THE RFQ RESPONSE FOR QUOTATION.

WE INTERVIEWED FIVE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FIRMS, THE COMMITTEE SELECTED JLL JONES LANG LASALLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPING THE RFQ.

WE SUBSEQUENTLY INTERACTIVELY DEVELOPED THE RFQ WITH JLL AND THE RFQ WAS COMPLETED AND WE ISSUED THE RFQ TO JLL'S MAILING LIST.

WE SET OUT SEVEN THOUSAND.

YES SIR.

DO YOU HAVE THE RFQ? NO. OK. WE'LL SEND YOU A COPY OF THE RFQ IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT.

I HAVE A COPY RIGHT HERE. DO WHAT? IS THIS IT? THAT'S IT.

YEAH, BUT DOESN'T MATTER.

I WAS GOING TO HAVE SEVERAL COPIES, BUT YOU CAN LOOK, WE'LL HAVE YOU THE RFQ IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT. SO WE ISSUED IT TO JLL'S MAILING LIST.

MAY, I ASK A QUESTION. GO FOR IT MARIE.

WHAT DID IT COST TO DO THE RFQ? CAN WE WAIT TILL THE END? WELL, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GET AN ANSWER OF WHAT IT COSTS.

WHAT DID YOU SAY? THE INITIAL COST TO DO THE RFQ? SO THE PART BOARD TO GET THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS THE PARK BOARD HAS AUTHORIZED ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS TO GET THE END OF STEP THREE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE PAID.

BRYSON, DO YOU HAVE THE ANSWER ON HOW MUCH WE PAID TO DATE TO JLL? I'M GOING TO SAY FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS.

IT'S IN THE FORTY THOUSAND DOLLAR RANGE.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

THANK YOU. YEAH, IT'S IN THE FORTY THOUSAND RANGE.

SO WE SENT IT TO THE MAILING LIST.

THANK YOU. WE HAD THREE RESPONDENTS THAT SENT IN APPLICATIONS THAT THEY WANTED TO BE CONSIDERED TO RECEIVE THE RFP, WE BROUGHT THE THREE RESPONDENTS IN, WE INTERVIEWED THE THREE RESPONDENTS.

THE COMMITTEE, IN CONJUNCTION WITH JLL, DECIDED THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE RFP BE

[00:15:07]

ISSUED TO TWO OF THE RESPONDENTS.

AND WHO ARE THEY? THE TWO RESPONDENTS ARE A COMBINATION OF AMERICAN LIBERTY HOSPITALITY AND ISLAND FAMOUS, AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE THRASH GROUP OUT OF MISSISSIPPI.

OUT OF MISSISSIPPI. AND THE OTHER ONES OUT OF? HOUSTON, GALVESTON COMBINATION.

SO WE'RE AT A POINT NOW WHERE WE MADE A GO NO GO DECISION, RIGHT, THERE'S A GO, NO GO DECISION AT THE END OF EACH PHASE AND THIS IS THE GO NO GO DECISION.

THEN THE COMMITTEE DECIDED TO GO.

WE WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND WE WANTED TO WE WANT TO ENGAGE JLL TO HELP US TO DEVELOP AN RFP TO ISSUE TO THESE TWO RESPONDENTS.

SO THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US HERE TODAY.

WE'RE GOING TO ASK CITY COUNCIL LATER FOR A RESOLUTION TO CONTINUE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP AND TO SUPPLEMENT OUR COMMITTEE WITH TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP. SO THERE'S REALLY NO RISK IN THIS NEXT STEP, RIGHT? VERY LITTLE IF ANY RISK IN THE NEXT STEP TO DEVELOP THE RFP.

SO AS WE GET INTO PHASE TWO, ASSUMING THAT WE HAVE A POSITIVE RESULT FROM THE COUNCIL MEETING TODAY WE DEVELOP THE RFP AND THERE BE A GO NO GO DECISION POINT BY THE CITY TO ISSUE IT OR NOT ISSUE AFTER WE'VE DEVELOPED IT.

WE HAVE A TEMPLATE DEVELOPED BY JLL THAT WE WOULD USE WITH THE COMMITTEE TO HELP DEVELOP THE RFP, AND STEP SIX WOULD BE THE ISSUE OF THE RFP.

STEP SEVEN WILL BE TO EVALUATE RESPONSES AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

THIS COMMITTEE WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL RATHER TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH ONE OR BOTH OF THESE FIRMS OR TO NOT ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS.

AND THEN IF THE DECISION IS GO, STEP THREE WOULD BE TO NEGOTIATE AND GET INTO A CONTRACT THAT'S CLEARLY A CITY FUNCTION TO NEGOTIATE AND SIGN A CONTRACT WITH THE SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT. AND OUR GOAL WITH THIS COMMITTEE IS TO CONTINUE TO LEARN, WE'VE LEARNED SO MUCH THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IT'S UNBELIEVABLE.

WE DON'T HAVE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT EXPERTISE ON OUR COMMITTEE YET.

AND SO WE'VE LEARNED A LOT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

WE THINK THIS IS A NO GO, NO RISK SOLUTION.

SO NEXT SLIDE. SO THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER RIGHT NOW.

ONE IS TO CONTINUE WITH THE ORIGINAL MOTION THAT'S PRESENTED BY THE COMMITTEE AND PARK BOARD TO ISSUE THE RFP TO DEVELOP THE RFP AND ISSUE IT TO THE TWO SELECTED DEVELOPERS.

THE CITY ATTORNEY AMENDED THE MOTION TO END AT ISSUE THE RFP BASICALLY TO THE WORLD THE WAY THE MOTION READS.

AND THAT'S BASICALLY A START OVER.

SO IF YOU GO WITH OPTION TWO WE ARE STARTING OVER, WE'RE GOING BACK TO SQUARE ONE.

WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF 2015, BASICALLY.

AND THE THIRD ONE IS JUST LET STEWART BEACH REMAIN AS IS A 69 ACRE SAND AND SURF UNDERDEVELOPED CITY PROPERTY, AND THAT'S THE THIRD OPTION FOR YOU.

SO WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO TAKE A NO RISK DECISION TO CONTINUE WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP AS WE MOVE FORWARD. CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE TWO MEMBERS ON THIS NEWLY CONSTITUTED COMMITTEE OR COMPLIMENTED COMMITTEE, AND WE ANTICIPATE THAT THIS WOULD TAKE THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AND WE WOULD BE BACK TO COUNCIL WITH A GO NO GO DECISION ON THE ISSUANCE OF THE RFP.

SO THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM IF I CAN.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU MR. FLUKE.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.

IF I COULD MAKE A NOTE, I DIDN'T CHANGE ANY MOTIONS.

I JUST CLARIFIED THE AGENDA.

WELL, AS I'VE POINTED OUT TO A FEW PEOPLE THAT THE WORDING OF THAT RESOLUTION IS UP TO COUNCIL IN TODAY'S MEETING.

THAT'S CORRECT. SO WHEN YOU GO INTO COUNCIL MEETING, SOMEBODY CAN MAKE A MOTION HOWEVER THEY WANT TO MAKE IT.

YOU KNOW WHAT WE BUILD AT STEWART BEACH I THINK SOMETHING THAT THE COMMITTEE THIS JOINT COMMITTEE NEEDS TO CONSIDER CAREFULLY.

I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T THINK WE'RE QUITE THERE BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT AMENITIES, THESE, I'M NOT 100 PERCENT SURE WE KNOW WHAT WE MEAN BY AMENITY.

BUT THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS I KNOW THAT HAVE TO DO IF WE TALK ABOUT A HOTEL.

THERE'S A WHOLE RAFT OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS THAT COME UP THAT OUR ATTORNEYS HAVE EXPRESSED SOME CONCERN ABOUT.

[00:20:01]

BUT ONE THING WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, I THINK BEFORE WE EVEN ESTABLISH A COMMITTEE IS WHO WOULD BE THE AUDIENCE FOR THIS RFP? NOW, OUR CITY PURCHASING AND CITY ATTORNEY, I BELIEVE, HAVE EXPRESSED SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT IT GOING ONLY TO THE TWO SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENTS OF THE RFQ.

GLYWASKY WOULD YOU CARE TO COMMENT ON THAT? WELL I'VE LOOKED AT THE RFQ AND I WISH I COULD GET IT TO YOU NOW.

THERE'S DUE TO A RECENT UPGRADE IN MY COMPUTER I CAN'T SEND IT TO YOU FROM HERE.

BUT THE RFP BASICALLY SPECIFIES UNDER POSSIBILITIES A HOTEL AND LODGING PLACE.

I SUPPOSE IF WE HAD PUT IN I DO NOT KNOW TO WHOM THIS RFP WAS SENT, BUT THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL WAS PASSED IN 21.

IT WAS 21017 THAT ASK THE PARK BOARD TO AHEAD AND DEVELOP AN RFQ.

AN RFQ IS A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS.

AND IN THE END, IT SAYS AT THE VERY LAST PAGE IT DOES ASK PEOPLE TO PRODUCE WHAT THEIR JOB EXPERIENCES AND WHAT THEIR VISION FOR THE PROJECT WOULD BE.

AND I THINK THAT KIND OF SKIPS A STEP.

I THINK YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BASICALLY ESTABLISH THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE ENTITY AND AFTER THOSE QUALIFICATIONS ARE ESTABLISHED, THEN GO AHEAD WITH AN RFQ.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE RFQ, WAS IS A TRUMP TAX BASE TAX, TRUMP TAX CUT TYPE OF THING.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS INCLUDED IN EXPERIENCE WITH THAT KIND OF THING WAS INCLUDED.

MIKE CARUSO IS ON THE LINE ALSO, I THINK HE WAS GOING TO CHIME IN.

HE'S ON THE SCREEN.

MR. CARUSO, YOUR COMMENTS.

YOUR MUTED, SIR. LET ME HOLD ON JUST A SECOND SIR.

WE PROBABLY DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS.

CAN YOU INTRODUCE HIM, PLEASE? HE'S, OUR PURCHASING AGENT.

OK. YEAH, MIKE IS HEAD OF PURCHASING FOR THE CITY? YEAH. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

I CAN VAGUELY HEAR MOST, BUT THE CONCERN AFTER READING IT.

TYPICALLY, WHAT I FIND WITH [INAUDIBLE], I'VE BEEN DOING THESE TYPES OF SOURCING EVENTS FOR OVER 30 YEARS WITH THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

TYPICALLY, WHAT I WOULD FIND FIRST AND AGAIN, IT MAY HAVE BEEN DONE, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN IT. THE FIRST IS TO HIRE A CONSULTANT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PURPOSE THE LAND.

AND THEN EVEN BEFORE THAT DO A REVENUE STREAM COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ON THE BANG FOR OUR BUCK. BEFORE WE EVEN HIRE A CONSULTANT.

AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, ONCE THAT WAS DONE, HIRE A CONSULTANT TO TELL US HOW TO PURPOSE IT, REPURPOSE THE LAND.

THEN FROM THERE, TYPICALLY WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE DO AN RFQ, WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION BASED UPON WHAT THE CONSULTANT WOULD TELL US.

AND SO IF WE WERE GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT LET'S SAY IT WAS A HOTEL WE TYPICALLY WOULD PUT AN RFQ FOR AN ARCHITECT TO WORK WITH A HOTEL IN THE BOX FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, LIKE A NATIONAL FIRM, THEN YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO A TWO STEP PROCESS WHERE YOU WOULD DESIGN BUILD AT THAT STATE.

BUT IF IT WASN'T A HOTEL, THEN WE WOULD HIRE THE ARCHITECT.

AND THEN ONCE THE ARCHITECT HAS DESIGNED THE PROJECT, SO FORTH AND SO ON, AND HAD THE ENGINEERING ATTACHED TO IT AS WELL, WE WOULD TYPICALLY PUT IT [INAUDIBLE] RFP FOR CONSTRUCTION FIRMS TO APPLY FOR THE PROJECT.

NOW AGAIN, IT ALL TIES BACK TO WHAT IS THE SOURCING THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR THIS PROJECT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT THROWS ANOTHER MONKEY WRENCH INTO IT.

SO AGAIN, THAT'S OUR TYPICAL PROCESS.

I THINK ONE OF THE OPEN QUESTIONS WE HAVE TODAY, MIKE, IS LET'S ASSUME WE ARE GOING FORWARD AND ESTABLISHING THIS JOINT COMMITTEE BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD TO DEVELOP AN RFP OR TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS.

[00:25:03]

IT SEEMS TO ME A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS CAN IT BE THAT RFP BE PRESENTED TO JUST THE TWO SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENTS TO THE PARK BOARD'S RFQ? OR MUST IT BE DISSEMINATED WIDELY? I THINK TO BE SAFE, IT SHOULD BE OPENED UP TO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE OPENED UP TO A GREATER AUDIENCE.

THAT SEEMS TO BE THE ONE QUESTION.

MR. COLLINS IF I MAY.

I HAVE A QUESTION. JUST ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. GO AHEAD, MARTY.

I DO BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS REQUESTED THAT GLENN V[INAUDIBLE] COME OVER TO THE PARK BOARD AND DO AN AUDIT TO FIND OUT IF WE'D FOLLOWED PROPER PROCESS HERE.

AND HE MET WITH BRYSON FRAZIER, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE FEEDBACK FROM MR. [INAUDIBLE] WAS THAT THIS PROCESS WAS FINE, THAT WE WERE GOING THROUGH A.

AND THEN B, WE INTENTIONALLY SENT OUT A BLANK CANVAS IN THE RFQ, AND ALL 3 RESPONDENTS CAME BACK AND SAID THE ONLY WAY THIS IS ECONOMICALLY GOING TO WORK WITH A RETURN ON INVESTMENT FOR US IS TO PUT A HOTEL IN IT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HAVE REVENUE GENERATION TO BE ABLE TO FUND THE PUBLIC AMENITIES THAT YOU GUYS WANT IN THIS PROJECT.

SO THE FEEDBACK FROM THE MARKETPLACE WAS THE ONLY WAY A PUBLIC ENTITY CAN MAKE THIS WORK.

THAT'S A FOR PROFIT PUBLIC ENTITY IS WITH THE HOTEL ON THE PROPERTY.

SEVEN THOUSAND PEOPLE HAD A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO THIS.

THREE CAME BACK ALL HAD A HOTEL.

AND REMEMBER, I'M PRETTY SURE 99 PERCENT SURE MR. [INAUDIBLE] CAME OVER AND INVESTIGATED THIS PROCESS AND DIDN'T FIND ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.

WELL, AND THAT MAY SPEAK TO THE PROCESS TO DATE.

BUT WHERE WE GO FROM HERE, MAYBE ANOTHER QUESTION.

MIGHT BE. MOST, ESPECIALLY IF A HOTEL IS AN ACTUAL REQUIREMENT IN THIS, YOU KNOW, ONE ALWAYS HAS TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION WHEN DEALING WITH PUBLIC MONEY.

REMEMBER, YOU'RE JUMPING AHEAD TO THE END OF PHASE TWO HERE.

WELL, WAIT, HOLD ON.

LET ME FINISH, IF YOU WILL.

WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP AN RFP AND YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION.

CITY COUNCIL HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE A DECISION RATHER TO ISSUE IT OR NOT.

SO A WHILE BACK, OUR CITY ATTORNEY ANSWERED THREE QUESTIONS THAT MR. COLLINS ISSUED TO US, AND THERE WAS A MODIFICATION ON IT.

I READ BOTH OF THEM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS LOOKING AT IS DID WE LOOK TO SEE IF WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A HOTEL OR ANY OTHER ENTITIES PRIOR TO? SO IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT'S ON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? WHAT IS IT COMPARED TO HOW IT DEALS WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER? SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS I'D LIKE TO KNOW.

IF IT'S IN VIOLATION, WHY ARE WE SPENDING MONEY NOW? BASICALLY, WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE IS THE WAY I LOOK AT IT.

SO I WOULD LIKE THE CITY MANAGER TO, I MEAN, THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ELABORATE ON THE MEMORANDUMS THAT WERE SENT OUT THERE.

GO AHEAD. AND IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE CHAIR.

YEAH. WELL, I'M HAPPY TO HEAR MARTY'S RESPONSE TO THIS.

BUT AND BILL, I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, BUT I'M STILL BACK ON THE WHAT WOULD THE PURPOSE OF THIS COMMITTEE BE? BECAUSE IF IT'S ISSUING IT TO THE TWO SUCCESSFUL [INAUDIBLE] RESPONDENTS FOR THE RFQ, THAT'S ONE THING. IF IT GOES OUT TO THE WHOLE WORLD, THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE.

THE QUESTION OF WHETHER IT MUST INCLUDE A HOTEL IS A SEPARATE AND I THINK MUCH MORE COMPLEX QUESTION. I THINK WE NEED TO ANSWER THE FIRST QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE? AND THEN IF IT IS TO DEVELOP AN RFP THAT MUST INCLUDE A HOTEL, THEN ALL YOUR AND YOUR QUESTIONS.

WELL, WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO LOOK BEFORE TO SEE WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE BEFORE YOU PRIOR? WELL, BEFORE YOU ISSUE AN RFP, YES.

BUT BEFORE WE ESTABLISH THE COMMITTEE, I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE CITIES INPUT HAS BEEN LACKING IN THIS PROCESS.

I AGREE.

YOU KNOW, AND I THINK OR AS YOU POINT OUT, SOME LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. LET. ME ASK FOR A QUICK WHO WAS ASKING ONLINE TO MAKE A COMMENT.

I WAS. OH, WELL, I THOUGHT I HEARD A MALE VOICE.

SURE, MARIE, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

I'M SORRY IT'S SORTA, WELL, IT DOESN'T EVEN SORT OF.

IT DEFINITELY APPEARS THAT WE'RE JUMPING FORWARD.

WE'RE SPENDING MONEY AND WE'RE COMPLETELY IGNORING ALL THE THINGS THAT STAND IN THE WAY OF THIS EVER HAPPENING, SUCH AS THE INITIAL LAND GRANT, WHICH WAS REALLY RATHER SPECIFIC AS TO WHAT COULD BE DONE WITH THE LAND.

[00:30:06]

BUT MORE SO THE CONTRACT THAT THE PARK BOARD SIGNED WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER.

[INAUDIBLE] I MEAN, I'VE READ THROUGH THE CONTRACT, I'VE READ THROUGH THE MEMO [INAUDIBLE] THAT CREATES ALL KINDS OF BARRIERS FOR THIS EVER HAPPENING.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY TO MAKE A THING HAPPEN.

AND AGAIN, WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.

I THINK THE IDEA IS GRANDIOSE.

I THINK THE IDEA IF THERE WEREN'T SO MANY BARRIERS COULD BE A GREAT ONE.

I THINK WE HAVE SOME [INAUDIBLE] MEN THAT ARE MOVING FORWARD SKIPPING THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE CITY AND THE CITY GOVERNMENT, AS MR. CARUSO SAID, IT'S A DIFFERENT PROCESS.

BUT YOU'VE ALSO SIGNED THESE OTHER CONTRACTS THAT ARE A HUGE [INAUDIBLE].

AND TO ME, THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE EXPLORING, EVEN IF THERE IS A POSSIBILITY, BECAUSE GOING INTO BREACH OF CONTRACT PUTS EVERYBODY IN JEOPARDY.

SPENDING A BUNCH OF MONEY BEFORE WE EXPLORE THAT SIDE, PUTS OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS WERE JUST THROWING DOWN THE DRAIN.

AND IT'S VERY CLEARLY [INAUDIBLE] CONTRACT THAT [INAUDIBLE] TAX DOLLARS CAN'T BE INVOLVED AND IT'S LIKE, Y'ALL ARE IGNORING THAT.

SO WHAT'S THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? I THINK EXISTS.

IS SHE FINISHED. [LAUGHTER] YEAH, YOU KNOW, MARIE I DON'T DISAGREE.

MY QUESTION IS THE ONE QUESTION I'M POSING.

MAYBE I'M NOT SAYING IT WELL IS SHOULD WE TRY TO DECIDE THOSE THINGS TODAY OR IS A JOINT CITY PARK BOARD TASK FORCE AS ENVISIONED ON THE AGENDA THE ANSWER TO WHERE WE GO TO GET THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

BECAUSE IN ANY SUCH TASK FORCE, I WOULD WANT AGAIN LEGAL COUNSEL TO BE A PART OF THAT EFFORT. JOHN PAUL, YOU HAVE A QUESTION.

WELL, YOU KNOW, LET'S START ANSWERING SOME QUESTIONS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.

OK.

I'VE BEEN BATCHED UP HERE FOR ABOUT 10 MINUTES.

SO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION ABOUT THE MEMO THAT YOU WROTE TO MR. [INAUDIBLE] HE RESPONDED TO.

I BELIEVE THERE WAS A MEETING BETWEEN THE GENERAL COUNSEL FOR THE PARK BOARD, CARLA [INAUDIBLE], MR. GLYWASKY, THE MAYOR, JASON HARDCASTLE, RON MAXWELL AND DAN BUCKLEY, TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. AND I THINK THOSE ISSUES WERE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED BY MILLS SHIRLEY.

AND EVERYBODY FELT COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD AFTER THAT MEETING.

DAVID AND I WEREN'T IN THAT MEETING.

SO, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS PURE CONJECTURE.

SECOND THING. HOLD ON DAVID I'M NOT FINISHED.

OK? SECOND THING, MARIE, THE DOCUMENT YOU REFERRED TO IS THE NON-COMPETE.

I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER IN THE VERBIAGE OF THAT NON-COMPETE.

IT SAYS WE WANT A NON-COMPETE TO PROTECT THE BONDS RIGHT? AND THE A BOND AND THE B BOND ARE PAID OFF BY HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.

HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FOR AND A EIGHT PENNIES GO FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER FOUR PENNIES TO PAY FOR THE DEBT ON THE BONDS AN 8TH OF A PENNY GOES TO [INAUDIBLE].

THIS YEAR, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE 10 MILLION DOLLARS TO PAY OFF THOSE TWO BONDS HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX IS THROUGH THE ROOF.

SO THE KIND OF THE ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THIS NON-COMPETE WAS TO PROTECT THE BONDS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BOND PAYMENT IS.

I WAS HOPING MIKE WOULD BE HERE AND HE COULD TELL US EXACTLY WHAT THE BOND PAYMENT IS.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A HUGE EXCESS IN THOSE FOUR PENNIES GOES TO THE TRICKLE DOWN FUND.

THE CITY'S GOING TO RECEIVE THE TRICKLE DOWN MONEY FROM THOSE.

AND BY THE WAY, IF THIS DEVELOPMENT GOES FORWARD, THEN IT'S JUST GOING TO PROVIDE MORE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX DOLLARS.

AND BY THE WAY, THERE'S NO CITIZENS TAX MONEY BEING SPENT ON THIS EFFORT RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT. IT ALL COMES FROM THE PARK BOARD AND WE ARE NOT FUNDED BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN

[00:35:02]

BEACH USER FEES AND HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES, BASICALLY.

A LITTLE BIT FROM SEAWALL PARK, BUT MOST OF THAT GOES TO THE CITY.

SO MS. ROBB, THERE'S NO CITIZENS TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO FUND THIS EFFORT.

AND I LOOK AT THAT AND I APPRECIATE THAT BILL YOU'RE RIGHT, THAT MEMO AND THAT NON-COMPETE, I LOOK AT THAT AS A SPEED BUMP.

YOU CALL IT A ROADBLOCK I CALL IT A SPEED BUMP.

IF I TURNED AROUND EVERY TIME I SAW A SPEED BUMP, YOU KNOW I'D BE SOMEPLACE ELSE THAN SITTING HERE WITH YOU GUYS.

SO I WANT TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN.

I BEG TO DIFFER. I WANT TO. I BEG TO DIFFER.

AND THEN BILL HAS A QUESTION, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO ANYWAY, I'D LIKE TO COMPLETE THIS VISION.

I WANT PEOPLE TO THINK ABOUT WHY WE CAN DO THINGS AND WHY WE CAN'T.

WE WANT THE WHY WE CANT'S.

WE WANT THE ISSUES FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER SO THAT WE BUILD SOMETHING.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET A HUNDRED PERCENT HAPPINESS WITH WHAT HAPPENS HERE.

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DETRACTORS.

BUT TRUST ME, OUR VISION IS JUST TO ENRICH STEWART BEACH, FOR THE RESIDENTS AND FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND NOT ONLY STEWART BEACH, IT'S THE ENTIRE EAST END.

ALL RIGHT. SO ONE OF THE CITY LEADERS THAT HAS A BUSINESS ON THE EAST END TOLD ME ONE NIGHT, HE SAID THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE COME TO THE TRIANGLE, WHICH IS 14TH STREET, BROADWAY AND SEAWALL.

HE SAID THE ONLY REASON THEY COME HERE AFTER DARK IS THEY'RE IN THE BACK OF AN AMBULANCE GOING TO THE HOSPITAL OR THEY'RE COMING TO BUY PIZZA.

WHAT WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT, RIGHT? WE WANT TO BUILD AN ANCHOR DEVELOPMENT DOWN THERE AT STEWART BEACH, WHATEVER IT IS, BECAUSE THE SEAWALL IS BEING DEVELOPED FROM 45TH STREET EASTWARD.

WE GOT A NEW HOME SWEET TRUE HOTEL HOME TO TRUE HOTEL.

WE'VE GOT A NEW RESIDENCE IN.

WE HAVE A REVIEW OF THE OF THE COMMODORE THAT GALVEZ HAS PUT SIXTY TWO MILLION DOLLARS IN. OH, BY THE WAY, NONE OF THAT GOES TO THE PROPERTY TAX BASE BECAUSE IT'S JUST NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT GOES TO THE PROPERTY TAX BASE.

PEARL LAND'S BEING REDONE.

WE COULD LIGHT UP THE EAST END WITH A MORE ATTRACTIVE PROPERTY TO ANCHOR THAT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE EAST END, SO WE BELIEVE THIS WILL RISE UP THE ENTIRE EAST END WITH THIS PROPERTY.

THANK YOU. AND I'LL PITCH IT BACK TO YOU, BILL.

[INAUDIBLE] I HAVE A COMMENT.

YES. THE MEETING YOU HAD WITH THE MAYOR AND MR. BUCKLEY AND MR. MAXWELL IN PART, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T MAKE THE DECISION THAT HAS TO COME TO THE COUNCIL.

I THINK SOME OF US FEEL LIKE WE'RE MUSHROOMS GETTING THE LAST END OF THE DEAL TO MAKE A DECISION THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS WOULD COME IN HERE TO ASK THE COUNCIL TO GO AHEAD AND EXPEDITE THIS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO OUT THERE.

BUT WE NEED TO KNOW HERE WE MAKE THE DECISION, NOT THE MAYOR BY HIMSELF [INAUDIBLE] THE CITY MANAGER OR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OR THE PARK BOARD.

WE AS A COUNCIL MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY THE REASON I'M HERE, BILL.

OK, BUT IF I MAY ADD A LOT OF THIS INFORMATION WERE SOME OF IT'S JUST GETTING OUT, I LIKE TO PREPARE AND HAVE EVERYTHING PUT IN HAND BEFORE I START TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GIVING Y'ALL MONEY OR WHATEVER WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

SO IT NEEDS TO BE PLACED HERE FIRST, AND I'M SEEING THAT WE'RE NOT GETTING THAT.

WE'RE SPENDING MONEY Y'ALL ARE SPENDING MONEY RIGHT NOW THAT I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO ADDRESS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE BLOCKED.

I I'M NOT A LAWYER.

THAT'S WHY I DEPEND ON THE CITY ATTORNEY.

SO THAT'S MY COMMENT.

I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE BEING LIKE A MUSHROOM ANYMORE.

WE NEED TO BRING IT UP TO THE COUNCIL AND HAVE INPUT.

WE MAY WANT TO CHANGE THE THE WHOLE ASPECT OF WHAT WE WANT THE PARK BOARD TO DO.

MAYBE WE NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH THE PARK BOARD AND COME UP WITH OUR OWN VISION, WHICH I THINK IS THE PURPOSE OF THE TASK FORCE.

THAT'S EXACTLY THE PURPOSE.

MARIE, YOU HAD A COMMENT.

COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. YEAH.

JUST TO CLARIFY THE PARK BOARD IS ONLY FUNDED BY PEOPLE'S MONEY, WHETHER THE CITIZEN OR THE VISITORS, IT IS FUNDED BY THE PEOPLE'S MONEY.

RESTAURANT. IT SAYS A DIFFERENT THING.

DID I LOSE YOU? NO, NO, WE'RE HERE.

SO, OKAY, IT SAYS A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS, IT'S NOT SIMPLY THE PAYMENT OF THE BOND, AND YOU ALL OR YOU'RE JUST IGNORING THAT.

I AGREE THAT WE NEED AN ENHANCEMENT TO EAST BEACH.

[00:40:03]

BUT I ALSO FEEL THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT THE INTENTIONS OF THE LAND GRANTOR WAS. AND IF YOU READ THROUGH THAT STATEMENT THAT YOU PULLED OUT, IT'S TO SATISFY PUBLIC RESTORED OR SATISFACTORY PUBLIC RESORT FACILITIES.

[INAUDIBLE] ELABORATE WE COULD HAVE SO MANY THINGS THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE VISITORS AND OUR CITIZENS.

WHY DO I HEAR FROM ALL THE YOUNG FAMILY THAT HAVE CHILDREN IS THERE ISN'T ENOUGH FOR CHILDREN TO DO ON THE ISLAND? WE COULD MAKE THAT INTO A SUPER INCREDIBLE AREA THAT KIDS CAN GO TO FROM AGES ZERO TO WHAT EIGHTEEN.

WE COULD HAVE FABULOUS FACILITIES LIKE A NUMBER OF BEACH AREAS DO.

I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS WITHOUT ONE BREACHING THE LEGAL SIDE OF IT AND TWO BENEFITING OUR CITIZENS BECAUSE THAT'S WHY WE'RE ALL ELECTED.

WE ARE THE PEOPLE ELECT US TO REPRESENT THEM, AND THE PEOPLE DO NOT FEEL THAT TOURISTS SHOULD COME FIRST.

LET'S JUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.

AND I THINK WE'RE NOT KEEPING THAT IN MIND.

ALL RIGHT. BUT THERE'S A WHOLE OTHER LEGAL SIDE OF IT.

THERE IS AND WE AND WE WILL HAVE TO GET INTO THAT SEPARATELY.

BUT LET ME LET ME LET MARTY RESPOND TO THIS.

AND THEN I BELIEVE SPENCER [INAUDIBLE] HAS A QUESTION.

SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY YOU THINK THAT THOSE AMENITIES WON'T BE DEVELOPED, RIGHT? WE HAVEN'T EVEN DEVELOPED THE RFP TO BE ISSUED YET.

AND AS YOU LOOKED AT AND WE CAN GO BACK TO THE ROGERS PARTNERS PLAN AT 27 MILLION DOLLARS AND THERE'S NO FUNDING FOR IT.

SO THAT WAS THE IMPETUS FOR THIS TO FIND A FUNDER TO ENRICH THE ENVIRONMENT OUT THERE.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THINGS LIKE SPLASH PADS, AMPHITHEATERS, PICKLEBALL COURTS BY THE WAY, THAT SIXTY NINE ACRES IS THE PREMIER BEACH VOLLEYBALL VENUE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND WE DON'T HAVE A BEACH VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT THERE, RIGHT? SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT SPORTS TOURISM, YOU KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE HUGE DOWN THERE AND BACK TO THE THE.

YOU'RE RIGHT, MARIE, I AGREE WITH YOU.

IT IS THE PEOPLE'S MONEY, BUT THERE'S NO AD VALOREM TAX.

THERE'S NO PROPERTY, THERE'S NO PROPERTY TAX, AD VALOREM TAX, NO SALES TAX THAT'S GONE INTO THIS, RIGHT.

SO NO PROPERTY TAX HAS GONE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS RFP.

ALL RIGHT. SPENCER, YOU HAD A QUESTION COMMENT.

HI, THERE. NO.

I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE HAVE BEEN TO CITY COUNCIL FOR NUMEROUS YEARS, EVER SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE PARK BOARD.

SO MANY OF YOU SITTING AT THE TABLE HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN IN PREVIEW AT THE PARK BOARD IS DONE. THIS IS WHY WE'RE TRYING TO COME BACK BY DEVELOPING THIS COMMITTEE THAT GIVES THE CITY COUNCIL THE OPTION TO [INAUDIBLE] AND SO I GET IT.

THE LAST YEAR DUE TO COVID, WE WERE DELAYED WITH BEING ABLE TO PRESENT IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL. YOU KNOW, WE COULD HAVE DONE ONLINE MEETINGS.

IF THAT WAS THE CASE, THAT AGAIN, MR. QUIROGA IS NOT HERE [INAUDIBLE].

AND THEN I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO CREATE A WORLD CLASS RESERVATION SYSTEM.

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT A HOTEL ON [INAUDIBLE] BEACH.

HOWEVER, MR. QUIROGA MADE A COMMENT THAT WE DIDN'T SEND OUT QUALIFICATION [INAUDIBLE] A LOT OF CONFUSION AND TALKING IN CIRCLES ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE AND WHAT WE HAVEN'T DONE. SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE PARK BOARD COMING TODAY TO ASK FOR THE COMMITTEE, AGREE.

AND I WILL REMIND EVERYONE, PARDON ME, THAT THAT LAST LAST YEAR WE DID HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE PARK BOARD, WHERE THE PARK BOARD REQUESTED PERMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNER INVESTIGATION OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP. TO SOLVE THIS, TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM SO THAT THAT DID HAPPEN LAST YEAR.

THAT'S CORRECT. MR. HARDCASTLE. YOU HAVE A COMMENT, SIR.

YES. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.

AND I WOULD JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE.

THAT COUNCILMAN QUIROGA COUNCILWOMAN ROBB MAKE MAKE EXCELLENT POINTS, AND THESE ARE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHEN IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COMMITTEE AND THESE ARE THINGS TO BE WORKED OUT, DEFINITELY IN THE FUTURE AND WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT AS

[00:45:01]

WELL, AND THERE IS GOING TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.

I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO FEEL LIKE THERE.

THERE'S BEEN ANY [INAUDIBLE] CONCERNS OR DISMISSED OR IGNORED.

IT'S JUST THAT WE AREN'T QUITE AT THAT STEP YET, IN MY OPINION, TO WHERE THESE CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE FULLY VETTED.

BUT THEY ARE EXCELLENT POINTS AND DEFINITELY THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED IN THE FUTURE SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE COMMITTEE THAT INCLUDES INPUT FROM CITY COUNCIL AS WELL [INAUDIBLE].

AND IF I CAN MR. QUIROGA, I'LL ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS.

I HAVE MADE MYSELF AVAILABLE TO EVERY CITY COUNCIL MEMBER AND I'VE MET WITH SEVERAL OF THEM AND ASKED THEM IF THEY HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROCESS.

SO I HOPE I'VE BEEN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ABOUT OUR COMMITTEE AND OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHERE WE'VE BEEN GOING AND I'M ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

YOU HAVE MY NUMBER, YOU HAVE MY NUMBER, YOU HAVE MY NUMBER, YOU HAVE MY [INAUDIBLE].

I HAVEN'T MET WITH YOU YET AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

I JUST MET YOU AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT, SO I'M ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROCESS OR WHAT WE'RE DOING OR WHAT OUR INTENTIONS ARE ACTUALLY EVEN MET WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND ONE OF THEM MADE THE COMMENT, AND I THOUGHT THIS WAS JUST A PROJECT TO LINE THE PARK BOARD MONEY WITH POCKETS. I DIDN'T KNOW YOU HAD THE CITY'S INTERESTS IN MIND, RIGHT? YOU WERE THERE, DAVID, RIGHT? I SAID NO, NO, NO, NO. WE'RE TRYING TO GENERATE REVENUE FOR THE CITY.

WE'RE TRYING TO REMOVE OR RELEASE SOME OF THE TAX BURDEN ON THE CITIZENS.

WE WANT PEOPLE NOT TO GO INTO BUC-EE'S BEFORE THEY COME DOWN HERE.

WE WANT THE DAY TRIPPERS TO GO TO A VENUE TO SPEND MONEY TO SUPPORT THE CITY.

THAT'S OUR GOAL HERE.

I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING NEFARIOUS ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THIS COMMITTEE.

WE'VE ALWAYS OPENED IN, YOU KNOW, OPENNESS, TRANSPARENCY DAVID'S' ON THE COMMITTEE.

JASON, WHEN HE WAS A CITY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] RECRUITED HIM TO BE ON THIS COMMITTEE.

NOW WE NEED MORE CITY COUNCIL INPUT.

AS WE MOVE FORWARD. WE NEED TO TAKE ALL THESE SPEED BUMPS, IF YOU WILL, OR INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RFP.

THEN WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH, YOU KNOW, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND PARK BOARD STAFF [INAUDIBLE] ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP ON THE COMMITTEE.

AND WE SAY, HEY, LOOK, THIS ISN'T GOING TO WORK, BUT WE SAY, HEY, WE RECOMMEND WE ISSUE THIS AND THAT'S THERE'S NO RISK OF MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS.

ABSOLUTELY NO RISK.

THERE'S ONLY UPSIDE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND, QUITE FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HONEST WITH YOU.

I THINK I CAN HELP CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT OF THAT.

I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE'S NO DOWNSIDE TO PUTTING TOGETHER A TASK FORCE BECAUSE THEN THAT ANSWERS TO COUNCILMAN QUIROGA QUESTIONS.

IF WE GET THE COUNCIL INPUT ON THIS AND THERE'LL BE REGULAR REPORTS BACK TO COUNCIL BEFORE WE GET THERE, IF WE HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS ENGAGED IN THIS TASK FORCE.

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A CLOSED WON'T BE A CLOSED DOOR THING.

THE FACT THAT IT'S HAPPENED, IT'S BEEN PUBLICLY DISCUSSED QUITE A BIT AT PARK BOARD, BUT SOMETIMES THAT INFORMATION DOESN'T FILTER OVER HERE FULLY.

AND MAYBE SOME OF THAT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY THAT WE HAVEN'T.

YOU DON'T KNOW MORE ABOUT IT AT THIS POINT THAN WE DO, BUT WE CAN.

WE CAN RECTIFY THAT GOING FORWARD AS WE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S A DOWNSIDE TO CREATING THE THE TASK FORCE TO LOOK INTO THIS FURTHER.

BUT THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WE DO NEED TO POSE TO THAT TASK FORCE.

I THINK A QUESTION WE NEED TO POSE TO COUNCIL FIRST IS DO WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE ADVISABILITY OR THE POSSIBILITY OF A HOTEL PROPERTY AT STEWART BEACH NOW? OR DO WE WANT TO THROW THAT TO THE TASK FORCE? BECAUSE CLEARLY, AS MARTY STATED, THE RESPONDENTS TO THE RFQ ALL CAME BACK AND SAID THEY NEEDED NOT JUST A HOTEL TO MAKE IT WORK.

BUT A HOTEL WITH 50, 60, 99 YEAR LEASE THAT THAT TRIGGERED.

THAT'S WHAT TRIGGERED MY REQUEST TO MR. GLYWASKY ABOUT THE THE THE PERMISSIBILITY OF SIGNING A LEASE LIKE THAT ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THOSE QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED.

THE BOND COVENANTS INCLUDED, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, WE'VE NOT SPOKEN TO GLO ABOUT HOW THEY WOULD FEEL ABOUT ABOUT THIS, AND THEY'RE PRETTY PICKY ABOUT WHAT GOES ON ON STEWART BEACH. SO THERE ARE A LOT OF LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ANSWERED, BUT DO WE WANT TO TRY TO ADDRESS ALL THOSE TODAY OR DO WE FORM THIS TASK FORCE AND HAVE THEM GO AND ADDRESS THESE. AS I SAY, IT NEEDS TO HAVE STAFF AND LEGAL COUNSEL ENGAGED IN IT AS WE GO.

BILL, YOU GOT ANOTHER QUESTION, JUST A COMMENT.

I AGREE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, NOT A PROBLEM.

IF THE TASK FORCE IS LOOKING AT ALL THESE OPTIONS, WHAT THEY WANT TO PUT IN, THE LEGALITIES THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T LIKE TO SPEND MONEY WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING MONEY.

I'M A LITTLE CONSERVATIVE ABOUT DEBT.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE WASTED DOLLARS AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WE LOOK AT THE LEGAL ASPECT.

WE CAN'T DO IT AND WE LOST FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS.

WELL, WE'RE MORE.

WE'RE FORTY THOUSAND DOWN THIS ROAD ALREADY, AND PARK BOARD IS ALLOCATED, I BELIEVE, A

[00:50:01]

TOTAL OF ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND WHAT'S THAT HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS TO TO INVEST ITS TASK FORCE TO DO ALL THIS OPERATION FIRST BEFORE WE EVEN SPEND SPEAKERS]. WELL, YES AND NO, EXCEPT THAT, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL DID TELL PARK BOARD GO INVESTIGATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT WAS THAT WAS OUR DIRECTION TO THEM LAST YEAR.

AND THAT HAS WHAT'S THAT IS WHAT HAS BEEN DONE, AS MARTY POINTS OUT, IS NOT BEEN AD VALOREM TAX OR SALES TAX MONEY TO SPEND ON.

THIS IS THE PARK BOARD MONEY BEING SPENT OVER THERE.

IT'S THE PEOPLE'S MONEY, BUT THERE'S NOT AN INAPPROPRIATE USE OF THAT.

THAT FUND, YOU CAN'T DO THIS FOR A NICKEL.

I'M NOT SAYING IT'S INAPPROPRIATE.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE SHOULD LOOK AT EVERYTHING BEFORE WE START TO SPEND OUR MONEY.

NOT NOT BEFORE PARK BOARD SPENDS MONEY ON THIS BEFORE WE GO VERY MUCH FURTHER WITH AN RFP. YES, WE NEED TO HAVE ALL THOSE QUESTIONS ANSWERED, AND IT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED IN AN OPEN CONVERSATION BETWEEN PARK BOARD AND THE CITY.

MARTY, CAN I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AND WE DID NOT HAVE THAT EXPERTISE ON OUR COMMITTEE, SO WE WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO GET JONES LANG LASALLE TO COMPLEMENT OUR COMMITTEE.

JONES LANG LASALLE IS A NINETY THREE THOUSAND EMPLOYEE, TWO HUNDRED AND EIGHTY OFFICE WORLDWIDE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT.

WE WERE ALSO VERY FORTUNATE TO GET MR. TONY PETERMAN, WHO'S THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF HOSPITALITY FOR JONES LANG LASALLE, TO SHEPHERD OUR PROJECT, THOUGH WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT EXPERTISE.

WE NEED JONES LANG LASALLE TO GUIDE US AND TRAIN US AND EDUCATE US AND LEAD US THROUGH THIS PROCESS. SO THAT'S THE REASON WE WENT OUT AND GOT THEM.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

WE DIDN'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE IN-HOUSE OR IN OUR COMMITTEE TO DO THAT.

AND WE WENT OUTSIDE AND HIRED A CONSULTANT TO HELP US THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

AND THEY'VE BEEN EXCELLENT.

I MEAN, I COULDN'T BE MORE PLEASED WITH THE PERFORMANCE, AND I THINK ALL STARS IN GUIDING US THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

SO AS AS WE RECONSTITUTE THIS COMMITTEE, MAYBE WE GET SOME REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT EXPERTISE ON OUR COMMITTEE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

SO, MARIE YOU HAD YOUR HAND? GO AHEAD, MARIE.

SO THE MAKEUP OF THIS COMMITTEE THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE MAKEUP? I KEEP HEARING TWO COUNCIL PEOPLE, BUT WHO ARE THE REP? WELL, WE DON'T. WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD BE IF WE IF WE GO FORWARD THIS AFTERNOON, WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN THIS WORKSHOP PORTION AND GO INTO COUNCIL CHAMBERS TO DISCUSS THIS AS A COUNCIL AND MAKE THE DECISION WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH THIS TASK FORCE AND JOINTLY WITH WITH PARK BOARD.

FROM THE PARK BOARD HOW MANY PEOPLE FROM THE COUNCIL? WELL I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY OUR INITIAL THOUGHT, MARIE WAS TWO PARK BOARD TWO CITY COUNCIL AND A MEMBER OF GEDB.

[INAUDIBLE] MY THOUGHT PROCESS IS BEFORE WE START MAKING ANY OF THESE GRANDIOSE DECISIONS, WE GOT TO GET THROUGH THE LEGAL HURDLE.

THE LEAD UP MOVING FORWARD WITH IGNORING THE LEGAL HURDLE TO ME SIMPLY MAKES NO SENSE BECAUSE THAT YOU JUST CAN'T IGNORE THE LEGAL HURDLE AND YOU TALK ABOUT OPINIONS THAT WERE MADE ON FIRST THE LAND GRANT, WHICH WE'VE HAD TWO OPPOSING OPINIONS.

ONE SAYS YOU CAN, ONE SAYS YOU CAN.

AND THEN WE HAVE THAT CONVENTION CENTER CONTRACT, WHICH VERY, VERY CLEARLY AND I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT YOU CAN READ THROUGH THAT AND IT SAYS YOU CAN'T WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF, AND THAT WOULD BE A HUGE HURDLE.

MAYBE, AND MAYBE NOT.

AGAIN, I THINK SO IF WE'RE GOING TO FORM A COMMITTEE TO ADDRESS THE LEGAL ISSUES.

THEN THAT WOULD BE WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME.

BUT NOT LOOKING AT THE LEGAL SIDE OF THIS FIRST AGAIN, WE'RE SIMPLY THROWING DOLLARS DOWN THE DRAIN. ALL RIGHT. MARIE, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S SUGGESTING THAT WE MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE LEGAL HURDLES.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, I THINK THEIR LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL IMPEDIMENTS OR ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. AND THAT IS WHY I'VE SAID REPEATEDLY THAT, HOWEVER, THIS TASK FORCE IS

[00:55:04]

COMPLIMENTED, IT WOULD INCLUDE CITY STAFF AND LEGAL STAFF TO TO ADVISE US.

THE MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE WOULD INCLUDE JONES LANG LASALLE.

WE REFER TO THEM COLLOQUIALLY AS JLL BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYERS IN THIS AND THEY THEY UNDERSTAND THIS MARKETPLACE.

AS FAR AS WHAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IS OUR LEGAL ISSUES ARE LOCAL ISSUES.

THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK I THINK WE SHOULD DEFER TO THIS TO THIS COMMITTEE.

WHEN WE IF WE IF WE GO FORWARD AND FORM THIS COMMITTEE, WE CAN CHARGE IT WITH WHATEVER, WHATEVER PURPOSE WE CHOOSE.

BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE JUST, IN MY OPINION, TO INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OF AN RFP TO IDENTIFY THE THE AMENITIES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ON STEWART BEACH, BECAUSE I'M STILL A LITTLE UNCLEAR ON WHAT EXACTLY WE MEAN BY AMENITIES.

AND THIRDLY, THAT WE ADDRESS ALL THE LEGAL CONTRACTUAL ISSUES AND IMPEDIMENTS.

AND IF WE CAN CLEAR ALL OF THOSE THINGS UP AND COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH AN RFP THAT WE COULD WE COULD ISSUE. MARTY, CAN I ADDRESS THE GRANT QUESTION THAT SHE RAISED, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE GRANTOR WAS THE GALVESTON CITY COMPANY.

IS THAT CORRECT? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE CONVEYANCE? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THE GALVESTON CITY COMPANY WAS DISSOLVED IN 1944.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

SO THE GALVESTON CITY COMPANY WAS DISSOLVED IN 1944.

SO THE GRAND TOUR DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE.

AND SO HOLD ON.

YOU'RE RIGHT. SO WE HAVE ALL THESE SPEED BUMPS IN THE WAY WE DO.

THERE'S NO QUESTION THERE'S SPEED BUMPS IN THE WAY.

AND AS LONG AS WE LOOK AT THEM AS BARRIERS, WE'RE GOING TO END UP IN 2026 WITH SIXTY NINE ACRES OF SAND AND SURF.

RIGHT? AND IF WE DON'T TAKE A PROGRESSIVE ATTITUDE TOWARDS INCREASING THE REVENUE FOR THE CITY, INCREASING CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ONE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE NEED SOMETHING LIKE FOUR HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF NEW CONSTRUCTION EVERY YEAR JUST TO MAKE UP THE THREE, THE DEFICIT BETWEEN THE INFLATION.

THIS WON'T DO IT.

THIS WILL PUT A DENT IN IT, THOUGH, SO WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH TRYING TO PRESERVE THE AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX THAT WE BURDEN OUR CITIZENS WITH.

AND THIS IS JUST ONE STEP TOWARDS THAT AND WE'VE ALWAYS HAD THAT IN MIND.

RIGHT. THERE'S ONCE AGAIN, THERE'S NOTHING NEFARIOUS ABOUT THIS COMMITTEE.

WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE AMENITIES.

I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE I'M ABOUT BEING SWORN IN.

MAYBE I OUGHT TO BE SWORN IN.

YOU KNOW, WE GOT THE PROSECUTOR HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROCESS. AND BY THE WAY, ONE OTHER ISSUE IS WE HOPE TO COME BACK IN APRIL WITH A DEVELOPED RFP AND THAT WILL BE BEFORE THE MAY ELECTION BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO REEDUCATE. I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU ARE HERE AFTER [INAUDIBLE].

I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS.

OK. RIGHT. FIRST OF ALL, JASON HARDCASTLE HAS ANOTHER COMMENT [INAUDIBLE]? YES, THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE] AND I'D LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, I I AGREE WITH WHAT DAVID JUST SAID ABOUT THE LEGALITIES ARE DEFINITELY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMITTEE.

SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD AND SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE A PRIORITY AS WE GO FORWARD AS WELL SHOULD CITY COUNCIL CONTINUE ON THIS PATH.

ALSO YOU KNOW THIS, I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A PRODUCTIVE MEETING BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD THE INPUT THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR.

[INAUDIBLE] A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARIFICATION ON WHAT AMENITIES ARE EXPECTED AS YOUR BEACH AND, YOU KNOW, FOR THE TERM RECREATIONAL PURPOSE PURPOSES.

I'VE HEARD THE TERM REVENUE STREAMS AS WELL, AND THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT A COMPENSATION COMMITTEE NEEDS TO CONSIDER MOVING FORWARD IN THIS PROCESS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, BILL. I JUST WANT TO SAY, DAVE, I THINK WE'RE BEATING A DEAD HORSE HERE. I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE IT INTO COUNCIL AND DISCUSS IT AND THEN GO FORWARD. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, BILL, UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE ON PARK BOARD HAS A COMMENT OR QUESTION. IF NO ONE ELSE ON THE COUNCIL.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW JOHN PAUL, WILL MRS. LEWIS, THE PEOPLE THAT HAVEN'T ASKED QUESTIONS IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME BEFORE WE MOVE INTO COUNCIL.

YEAH, OK, WE MAY.

[INAUDIBLE] BUT YEAH, BUT YEAH, WE WILL BE.

WE WILL BE ADJOURNING THE PARK BOARD MEETING AND THERE WILL BE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE WILL DISCUSS WHETHER TO DO IT AND WHAT THE CHARGE THAT THAT TASK FORCE WOULD BE.

[INAUDIBLE] I JUST HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION ON THE ONES THAT YOU SENT OUT, WERE YOU TO

[01:00:03]

SELECT ONLY TWO OR DID YOU JUST SELECT FOR TWO IF WE'D HAD FORTY RESPONDENTS.

THAT'S HOW MANY WE WOULD HAVE BEEN TALKING TO.

AS IT WAS, THERE WERE THREE.

AND THAT COMMITTEE DECIDED IN THE END THAT ONLY TWO OF THEM MET THE QUALIFICATIONS QUALIFICATION. OK, SO THAT'S HOW THEY WERE, [INAUDIBLE].

SO WHEN WE SET THIS OUT ALREADY AND OBVIOUSLY THE HOTEL WAS PART OF THE QUALIFICATION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THIS TRACT OF LAND OF PARTS WHERE IT'S PART C, RIGHT, THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THAT RESORT WOULD BE OR NOBODY WANTED TO USE [INAUDIBLE].

WELL WE DIDN'T. WE DIDN'T.

WE DID NOT SPECIFY A HOTEL AND WE DID NOT SPECIFY PART C.

WHAT WYNN WAS REFERRING TO IS THE PART SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW IS THE GO CART TRACK THAT AREA AROUND THERE.

WE DIDN'T SPECIFY WHICH HAD TO BE LOOKED AT OR DEVELOPED.

THE ALL THREE OF THEM CAME BACK WITH A PREFERENCE FOR THE A PROPERTY, WHICH IS THAT MORE OR LESS WHERE THE HELICOPTER IS, FOR THE PUBLIC.

NOBODY WANTED TO USE THE SEA PROPERTY.

NOW THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T GO THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS AND DESIGNATE THE SEA PROPERTY. YEAH, BUT WHEN WE SET OUT THE BLANK CANVAS, WILL EVERYBODY CAME BACK WANTING TO DEVELOP RETAIL SPACE, HOTEL BOARDWALK, YOU KNOW, SPLASH PAD, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO YOU CAN IMAGINE A SPLASH PAD GO BY [INAUDIBLE], LOOK AT THE SPLASH PAD, LOOK AT THE KIDS OUT THERE ON THE SPLASH, RIGHT.

YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M GETTING IS THE RESORT IS PART OF IT.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE BIG PART, BUT THERE IS THE AMENITIES AND THE OTHER PARTS TO GO WITH IT THAT I THINK [INAUDIBLE].

BUT THE BIG HICCUP IS DEFINED PUBLIC AMENITIES, YOU KNOW, IS THAT THE BEACH PART IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I TAKE MY KIDS DOWN THERE, BUT PUBLIC AMENITY, ME AND MY WIFE ARE GOING TO GO TO THE ROOFTOP OF THIS RESORT DURING THE SUMMER TIME.

SO WHAT OPPORTUNITY, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THAT'S MY ISSUE.

AND THEN WHEN YOU SAY PUBLIC AMENITIES, WHAT TYPE OF OPPORTUNITY IS THAT ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG STEWART BEACH? YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE ISSUES WITH TRAFFIC FLOW FROM INCREASED TRAFFIC GOING INTO IT.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AREA ABOUT MARIO'S, IS THAT THE BEST LITTLE AREA OF TRAFFIC THAT THAT'S DECIDED THE BEST CONTROL AS FAR AS TRAFFIC GOES? EVEN THE ROGERS PARTNERS PLAN HAD A ROUNDABOUT THERE AT THE END OF THE TRIANGLE, RIGHT? SO IN 2015, WE ANTICIPATED YOUR ISSUE FOR HAVING THE ROUNDABOUT FOR THE TRAFFIC FLOW.

ONE OF THE ONE OF THE ONE OF THE PROPOSALS TALKED ABOUT THAT BEING AN INSTAGRAM MOMENT [INAUDIBLE] OR STEWART BEACH, WHERE PEOPLE LIKE THE ENCINITAS, YOU KNOW, A RED ROCK OR AN INSTAGRAM MOMENT. PEOPLE TAKE A SELFIE UNDERNEATH STEWART BEACH, RIGHT? AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE 2015 [INAUDIBLE] CAME OUT WITH, PEOPLE WANT AN AMPHITHEATER, A PLAYGROUND, CONCESSIONS, RESTROOMS, SHOWER VENUE FOR EVENT SPACE FOR BEACH PATROL AND PARK ADMINISTRATION, ROOFTOP RESTAURANT TERRACE, SHADED SEATING, SHADED SEATING AND COVERED SPACE.

THAT'S WHAT CAME OUT OF THE 2015.

ISSUE THAT WE THAT WE DID.

SO THAT'S THAT'S SOME OF THE PUBLIC AMENITIES THAT WE CAN CONSIDER AS WE MOVE FORWARD PERSONALLY. I WANT [INAUDIBLE] VOLLEYBALL, I WANT PICKLE BALL.

I MEAN, AMERICAN PICKLEBALL ASSOCIATION.

AND WE NEED BETTER VENUES FOR OUR SPORTING TOURISM, RIGHT? AND I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT [INAUDIBLE] PARK, THOSE TENNIS COURTS ARE RARELY USED RIGHT AND WE NEED PEOPLE USING OUR PUBLIC AND THAT'S SOMETHING RESIDENTS ENJOY.

I MEAN, IT'S NOT ONLY SPORTS TOURISM, BUT I MEAN, HOW MANY OF THE LOCAL KIDS THAT PLAY VOLLEYBALL ARE GOING TO GO PLAY THE SAND VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT IN THE SUMMERTIME? YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF THAT PLAY? YOU KNOW, THE PICKLEBALL THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY GETTING COMPLAINTS ABOUT, NOT HAVING PICKLEBALL ARE GOING TO GO DOWN THERE AND PLAY THAT, YOU KNOW? AND THEN MY QUESTION ALSO IS RIGHT NOW, HOW MANY TIMES DOES ANYBODY AT THE TABLE OR ON THE SCREEN ACTUALLY BEEN DOWN TO STEWART BEACH IN THE LAST, YOU KNOW, TWO OR THREE YEARS? YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT WHAT OPPORTUNITY DOES THAT GIVE FOR RESIDENTS TO START GOING DOWN TO THAT PART OF TOWN BECAUSE THEIR BEACH? YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED THERE SINCE I WAS A KID, 14 YEARS OLD AND YOU KNOW, IT HAD I FEEL LIKE IN THOSE LAST 20 YEARS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY AND YOU KNOW, HERE WE ARE WITH COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, ABLE TO GIVE DIRECTION ON KIND OF A VISION THAT I THINK WE ALL WANT HERE. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I STAND ON IT NOW.

WE'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU.

THE LEGAL ISSUE IS, CAN WE BUILD A HOTEL DOWN THERE, RIGHT? AND CAN THAT HOTEL BE BUILT? IT'S THE LEGAL OPINION DOESN'T MATCH THAT OR WHAT CAN WE ACTUALLY DO, YOU KNOW, LEGALLY? I MEAN, THAT'S MY BIG THING IS, IS IN THE DEED, DOES THAT RESTRICT OR WITH THE CONVENTION

[01:05:01]

WITH MARIE [INAUDIBLE], YOU KNOW WHAT LEGAL ISSUES THAT WE HAVE IS, I THINK THE OPINION, YOU KNOW THAT OR AN OPINION COULD BE GIVEN KIND OF A BLESSING FROM LEGAL AS FAR AS BLESSING FROM LEGAL COUNSEL.

THEN YOU GIVE THE DIRECTION AS FAR AS WHERE WE WENT AHEAD WITH THIS.

I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE BLESSING OF LEGAL IS AN ABSOLUTE MUST IN THIS PROCESS.

LET ME GO BACK TO THE PARK BOARD [INAUDIBLE] HAD A COMMENT [INAUDIBLE].

MY NAME IS SPENCER I JUST WANTED TO TALK TO YOU BRIEFLY ON THE POINT OF WHATEVER AMENITIES WOULD END UP GOING DOWN THERE AND JUST RELATE TO EVERYONE THAT FROM THE OUTSET OF THIS PROCESS, ONE OF THE PRIMARY GOALS OF WHAT WE WANTED TO GET OUT OF STEWART BEACH WAS SOMETHING THAT WORKED BETTER FOR RESIDENTS.

I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WELL, THAT STEWART BEACH IS KIND OF NO MAN'S LAND FOR RESIDENTS RIGHT NOW.

I'VE GOT YOUNG KIDS. I NEVER GO THERE WITH MY KIDS, AND I THINK I SPEAK FOR A LOT OF RESIDENTS WHEN I SAY THAT.

SO THAT WAS PART OF ONE OF THE PRIMARY GOALS WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS WAS HOW DO WE MAKE STEWART BEACH A BETTER AMENITY FOR TOURISTS, BUT ALSO SOMEWHERE WHERE LOCALS WOULD WANT TO GO? WHAT WE SORT OF STOPPED AT THAT POINT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW ANY OF THE DISCUSSIONS HAVE GONE.

I KNOW INTERNALLY WE DISCUSSED THAT COULD BE GREEN SPACE.

IT COULD BE AMPHITHEATERS.

AS MARTY MENTIONED, IT COULD BE ANY OF MANY OTHER THINGS.

PART OF THE RFQ AND ULTIMATELY THE RFP PROCESS WAS TO IDENTIFY THE NEED FOR AMENITIES FOR LOCALS AND TOURISTS AND THEN ISSUED OVER TO THE PROS AND TO THE OPEN MARKET AND SEE WHAT THEY COME BACK WITH FOR US TO SOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS FOR US.

AND IF ULTIMATELY WE DO GET TO AN RFP PROCESS AND WE ARE REVIEWING RESPONDENTS, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON HEAVILY IS NOT JUST WHAT DOES THIS DO FOR THE TAXPAYERS, NOT JUST WHAT DOES THIS DO FOR TOURISTS THAT ARE COMING HERE, BUT WHAT DOES THIS DO FOR RESIDENTS? SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO CHECK ALL OF THOSE BOXES AND MORE BOXES WELL IN ORDER FOR ME TO CONSIDER THAT SOMEONE TO HAVE BEEN A SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT HERE.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE] I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP.

THANK YOU, DAVID, FOR THAT. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION.

ALSO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC AMENITIES.

THINK ABOUT WHAT MOODY GARDENS DOES.

THEY'RE A HOTEL AND THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL AMENITIES.

AND IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN THERE AS A RESIDENT, YOU KNOW YOU'RE MISSING OUT.

BUT WE'VE HEARD OTHER COUNCIL AND PARK BOARD MEMBERS SAY, YOU KNOW, THEY GO TO THE FAMILY RESORT FOR DINNER, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S NOT JUST A HOTEL IS JUST TO PUT YOUR HEAD IN.

THERE ARE GOING TO HAVE AMENITIES.

IF THIS COMMITTEE DECIDES THAT, THAT'S THE BALANCE YOU WANT TO PURSUE.

I'M NOT SAYING YES OR NO ABOUT THAT.

THAT WASN'T EVEN ON THE RFQ A HOTEL.

THOSE ARE WHAT WAS JUST MEANT BACK THEN WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR IT. YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD THE PARK BOARD TALK AND YOU'VE HEARD ME SAY THAT TOURISM PAYS TO LET OUR VISITORS HELP PAY FOR OUR AMENITIES.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING INTO THIS PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

SO KEEP THAT IN MIND.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT JUST THE CITY TO FUND THIS.

SO BUT THIS IS WHAT ALL THIS COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BREAK DOWN.

AND THAT'S WHY I JUST WANT TO STRESS THAT THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS IS TO GET THIS COMMITTEE. WE HAVE ALL THE ENTITIES TALKING.

THAT'S ALL I REALLY WANTED TO WRAP UP WITH.

THANK YOU. MARTY, LET ME LET ME GO BACK TO YOU AND LET'S LET'S WRAP THIS UP.

CLOSE THE WORKSHOP. I HAD A COMMENT.

OK, GO AHEAD. OK, GO AHEAD, MARIE.

AND TO EXACTLY WHAT SPENCER SAID AND WHAT DAVID SAID.

THE FIRST THING THAT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED IS THE LEGALITIES.

I MEAN, YOU REFERENCED THIS STEAKHOUSE BOOM THAT WOULD BE A BREACH OF CONTRACT.

YOU'VE REFERENCE AREAS, JUST THE HOTEL.

THAT'S A BREACH OF CONTRACT.

SO LET'S GET THE LEGAL THINGS CLARIFIED FIRST BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, BECAUSE THAT'S THE BIGGEST HURDLE WE HAVE.

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, MARIE.

MARTY, WRAP IT UP FOR US, PLEASE.

SO I'LL RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE.

THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO DEVELOP THIS RFP.

YOU'RE COMING TO THE END OF PHASE TWO WHEN YOU LOOK FOR THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS, RIGHT? WE CAN HAVE INPUT ON THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS IF WE GO THROUGH DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP.

LANG[INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP IS GOING TO PUT US INTO A NEW COUNCIL.

IT'S GOING TO KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.

THAT'S WHERE WE ALREADY ARE.

THERE'S NO RISK IN DEVELOPING THE RFP [INAUDIBLE].

THERE'S A GO NO GO DECISION AT THE END OF PHASE TWO, RIGHT VERY LITTLE MONEY SPENT ON DEVELOPMENT OF THE RFP, [INAUDIBLE] HIGHLY PAID VOLUNTEERS.

IT WILL BE ON THIS COMMITTEE.

SO I JUST CAN'T SEE ANY REASON NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RFP AND ADDRESS THE LEGAL ISSUES AS WE GO FORWARD.

AND AT THE GO NO GO DECISION, WHICH WILL BE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, HOPEFULLY IN APRIL.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MARTY, FOR AN EXCELLENT DISCUSSION.

[01:10:01]

SPENCER, I'M GOING TO KICK IT BACK TO YOU.

IF YOU WANT TO CLOSE YOUR MEETING, WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN OUR WORKSHOP AND MOVE INTO REGULAR SESSION. ALL RIGHT.

WE'LL GO TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR ADJOURNMENT, IT IS 10:11 A.M.

AND PARK BOARD WILL STAND ADJOURNED.

VERY GOOD. WE WILL STAND ADJOURNED HERE AT WORKSHOP AS WELL.

TAKE ABOUT A 15 MINUTE BREAK WHILE WE SET UP AGAIN FOR THE REGULAR MEETING IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. IF YOU'RE HERE TO MAKE PUBLIC, COMMENT WILL BE WILL BE MOVING TO THE

[4. PUBLIC COMMENT - Limited To Three Minutes (COUNCIL CHAMBERS)]

ALL RIGHT, IT IS 10:26, WE'RE RETURNING OUR MEETING TO ORDER HERE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE IN THE PUBLIC AND ONLINE WITH US.

THIS IS NOW A CONSIDERATION FOR ACTION.

BUT FIRST, I BELIEVE WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT, JANELLE.

NEXT ITEM IS.

OK. WE HAVE THREE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND READ, PLEASE DO. FIRST IS FROM BRADFORD DAVIS.

I HUMBLY REQUEST YOU DELAY PROCEEDING WITH THE RFP TODAY.

THE SVP VIP NEEDS TO BE FULLY APPROVED AND PERMITTED AS A PRECONDITION OF THE PPP RFP, IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT THE LANDOWNERS ADJACENT TO THE PARK BOUNDS WERE NEVER CONSULTED. THE COST, MAINTENANCE AND LIABILITY OF THIS DRAINAGE PLAN HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BUDGETED FOR OR EVEN ACKNOWLEDGED.

AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, THIS CANNOT PROCEED AS IS AND WILL HAZARD MY PROPERTY FOR REGULATORY TAKING.

LET'S DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY.

SECOND COMMENT IS FROM ARTHUR VEGA, AND IT'S ABOUT THE FOURTH OF JULY PARADE COST.

THE GALVESTON MARINE CORPS LEAGUE HAS ORGANIZED AND PAID THE MAJORITY OF THE COST TO HAVE OUR 4TH OF JULY PARADE FOR MANY YEARS.

THE 2021 PARADE COSTS WERE PAID ONE HUNDRED PERCENT BY THE LEAGUE.

THE CITY BENEFITS VIA TOURIST DOLLARS.

WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE CITY PROVIDE AT LEAST 50 PERCENT OF THE COST IF NOT ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. I WILL REQUEST A MEETING WITH MAYOR BROWN AND PRESENT A REQUEST TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

AND THE THIRD IS FROM CHARLES SMITH, AND IT'S RELATED TO THREE MINUTE MEETING ACCESS.

I WISH AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO SUBMIT MY PUBLIC COMMENT CONCERNING THE CONFLICT, THE CONDUCT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST BY HANGER OPERATORS AND THE ACCESS OF CONFIDENTIAL FAA RECORDS USED TO CONTROL BUSINESS ACCESS.

ALL RIGHT. DO YOU SEE ANYONE ONLINE WHO WANTS TO JOIN US FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO HAVE THREE MEMBERS FROM THE PUBLIC ONLINE ON THE ZOOM CALL, AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, PLEASE USE THE RAISE HAND FEATURE AT THIS TIME.

THERE ARE NONE. ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE.

LET'S OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC IN THE IN THE ROOM WITH US.

MR. DAVIS, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES PUBLIC COMMENT FOR EACH EACH MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE IS WELCOME TO MAKE A COMMENT, BUT PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

YES, SIR, BRADFORD DAVIS, BENEFICIARY OF THE STATE OF BENJAMIN DAVIS, STAKEHOLDER IN THIS PROJECT, [INAUDIBLE] MCDONALD'S AND THE VACANT TRACT NORTH OF THE STEWART BEACH BOUNCE, I JUST WENT TO CAVEAT MY COMMENTS THAT MY FATHER WAS AN INITIAL PROPONENT SUPPORTER OF A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

I DO AGREE THAT THE PARK BOARD WOULD BENEFIT FROM A SUSTAINABLE REVENUE SOURCE.

I JUST EXPRESSED MY QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS OF THE DRAINAGE PLAN THAT IS A PART OF THAT PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.

I SENT A LETTER TO COUNCIL AND THE PARK BOARD REQUESTING TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT.

I HAVE NOT BEEN TO DATE.

AND WITH THAT CAVEAT, I DO SUPPORT IN GENERAL THE PRINCIPLE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AND WE MISS YOUR DAD.

I DRANK COFFEE WITH HIM MANY TIMES.

[INAUDIBLE] MY NAME IS KAREN DAVIS.

I AM AN OWNER AND OF A THREE AND A HALF ACRE TRACK IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT AND SURROUNDED BY STEWART BEACH.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN CONTACTED ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF COMPETITION HOTELS BEING BUILT RESTAURANTS BECAUSE THAT'S COMPETITION IS GOOD FOR EVERYBODY, BUT I HAVE NEVER BEEN CONTACTED ABOUT THIS WHAT IS THIS THING RFP THING. AND THEN WHEN I FOUND OUT ABOUT IT, IT JUST BY ACCIDENT, WHICH APPARENTLY NOBODY REALLY WANTED TO LET ME KNOW ABOUT IT.

THERE IS A DRAINAGE ISSUE.

THEY WANT TO DRAIN ALL OF THE SILT, MOSQUITOES, WHATEVER, INTO A SOME KIND OF CONTAINMENT

[01:15:03]

POND RIGHT IN THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY BETWEEN ME AND THE GULF.

AND THAT WOULD ABSOLUTELY DEVALUE MY PROPERTY.

I HAVE WINGS AND MCDONALD'S AND A NICE PARKING LOT THERE, WHICH I WOULD PAY GOOD MONEY TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON EVERY YEAR TO RUN MY PARKING LOT.

AND THIS CESSPOOL OR CONTAINMENT POOL, WHATEVER IT IS THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT RIGHT BEHIND ME, WOULD BREED MOSQUITOES, BE A PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD AND NOT AND DEVALUE MY PROPERTY.

AND I'M A I'M ALL FOR DEVELOPING A HOTEL RESTAURANT, WHATEVER ELSE YOU WANT NEXT TO ME, BUT DO NOT PUT THAT CONTAINMENT POOL RIGHT BEHIND ME AND HAVE ALL THAT SILT AND CRUD DRAIN BEHIND MY PROPERTY.

IT WILL DEVALUE IT AND EVENTUALLY IT'LL TURN INTO MARSHLAND AND EVENTUALLY AND ACCIDENTALLY. I'M SURE THAT IT'LL START ERODING MY PROPERTY AND WE'RE UP 16 FEET AND WE HAVE WONDERFUL TENETS IN MCDONALD'S AND WINGS WE BRING, WE'VE BEEN PAYING TAXES OUT THERE FOR 50 YEARS AND FIVE DECADES AND AND NOBODY ELSE IS PAYING TAXES RIGHT BY US.

WE ARE SUPPORTING THE WHOLE THING.

NOT ONLY THAT, MY TENANTS WINGS, MCDONALD'S CONTRIBUTE A LOT TO SALES TAX AND I, I THINK THAT ARE BEING IGNORED AND THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT THIS CONTAINMENT POOL OR WHATEVER AND HAVE ALL OF THAT STUFF DRAINED BEHIND MY PROPERTY IS TOTALLY OUT.

I'M AGAINST IT, AND I THINK THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT PROBABLY WILL BE ALSO AND I WANT YOU TO VOTE FOR THIS PROJECT IF YOU WANT TO, BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD BE AN ENHANCEMENT TO GALVESTON, BUT NOT TO MY DETRIMENT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

ANYONE ELSE ON THE FRONT ROW HERE, SIR? DON'T HAVE TO, BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO.

BILL HOPKINS RETIRED FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.

JUST LOOKING AT THE PLANS, THE DESIGN FEATURES, I KNOW THESE AREN'T COMPLETED PLANS AND SPECS, BUT TO REVIEW THEM VERY DIFFICULT.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A MAJOR CONTAINMENT BASEMENT BETWEEN HER PROPERTY AND THE GULF.

YOU CAN'T SEE HOW DEEP IT'S GOING TO BE THE WIDTH, HOW YOU'RE GOING TO STABILIZE THE SAND. YOU DON'T DIG, YOU DON'T DIG DRAINAGE DITCHES.

IT'S INSANE.

BOTTOM LINE HADN'T BEEN THERE.

I CHECKED WITH THE CORPS HERE.

THEY DON'T KNOW OF ANY PLACE, SO THAT'S A MAJOR CONCERN.

THERE'S NO WALKWAY [INAUDIBLE] TO GET FROM HER PROPERTY OVER THE.

OVER THE DRAINAGE, THE CONTAINMENT, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY.

AND I KNOW THAT'S A DESIGN ISSUE.

EVERYTHING'S NOT COMPLETE, BUT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO INTERVIEW.

WELL, HOW DEEP THE DITCH IS GOING TO BE.

THE CONTAINMENT BASICALLY COULD GO DOWN AND HIT THE WATER TABLE.

YOU DON'T KNOW. IT'S VERY THAT'S A MAJOR THING THAT'S GOT IN THERE.

THEY DIDN'T SPEND ENOUGH TIME [INAUDIBLE].

I JUST LOOK AT IT FROM A TECHNICAL STANDPOINT, THIS THERE'S OTHER STUFF, TOO BUT THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, SIR.

MRS. DE SCHAUN. HELLO, GOOD MORNING, HAPPY NEW YEAR.

KELLY DE SCHAUN, CEO OF THE PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND A RESIDENT AT 4601 SHERMAN BOULEVARD. I'M HERE THIS MORNING TO ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON CONSTITUTING THE COMMITTEE AND ASSIGNING TO CITY COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN PROGRESS IN THIS DISCUSSION.

I'VE WORKED FOR THE CITY AND FOR OUR COMMUNITY NOW FOR THE LAST 10 YEARS, AND I'VE ADVOCATED STRONGLY THAT WITH A VISITOR ECONOMY OF SEVEN POINT TWO MILLION PEOPLE A YEAR AND FIFTY THOUSAND RESIDENTS, WE CAN BUILD A WORLD CLASS RECREATIONAL CENTER ON THE BACKS OF OUR VISITORS. STEWART BEACH IS BY FAR YOUR MOST VALUABLE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT YOU HAVE HERE IN THE CITY.

WE HAVEN'T LEVERAGED THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN.

THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO HAVE PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT DEVELOP OUT THE PUBLIC AMENITIES THAT WE WANT.

BY NO MEANS DID ANYONE START THIS VISION WITH A HOTEL IN MIND.

THE LIST OF AMENITIES THAT HAD BEEN TALKED ABOUT HAD NEVER ENCOMPASSED THAT.

BUT WHEN WE ASKED THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO FUND THAT, THEY SAID THEY NEEDED A HIGH PRODUCTIVITY ACTIVITY TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IN ON OUR BEHALF.

WE WANT TO MAKE THAT VISION TRUE OF HAVING A WORLD-CLASS RECREATIONAL SYSTEM HERE IN GALVESTON THAT THE VISITORS PAY FOR, AND THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO INVESTIGATE IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT POSSIBLE.

STEWART BEACH IS BY FAR YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE SOME REVENUES FOR THE CITY OF

[01:20:02]

GALVESTON. MAINTAIN THE BEACH USER FEES FOR THE PARKING THAT THE PARK BOARD ADMINISTERS AND BRING IN A PRIVATE SECTOR ENTITY THAT STARTS PAYING TAX AS WELL.

WE'D REALLY LIKE A CHANCE TO SEE IF WE CAN MAKE THIS VISION POSSIBLE, AND WE CAN ONLY DO IT WITH YOUR INPUT AND YOUR PARTICIPATION.

SO I ASKED FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, KELLY.

ANYONE ELSE? MR. BYRD, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

HI, GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS DENNIS BYRD.

I HAVE THREE BEACHFRONT PROPERTIES ALONG SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

MY COMPANY IS ONE OF THE TWO COMPANIES THAT PARK BOARD HAS SELECTED TO POTENTIALLY GO FORWARD WITH RFP.

I'M NOT SPEAKING IN THAT CAPACITY.

I WANT TO SPEAK IN THE CAPACITY OF WHAT'S GOOD FOR GALVESTON.

AND SO WHEN I LOOK EAST OF 25TH STREET, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A PROPERTY ON 17TH AND SEAWALL DOUBLETREE HOTEL, BUT SURE TO GO EAST OF 25TH STREET.

YOU'VE GOT THE GALVEZ, MY DOUBLE TREE.

YOU GO FURTHER DOWN, YOU HAVE AN EMERALD CONDOMINIUMS, PALISADE PALM FURTHER THAT YOU HAVE A TROPHY'S DEVELOPMENT THERE.

THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S NOTHING EAST OF 25TH THAT IS EVER SPURRED.

THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENS BETWEEN 25TH STREET AND THE SEAWALL CONVENTION CENTER. SEAWALL CONVENTION CENTER IS A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT HAS WORKED VERY WELL, RIGHT? IT PUTS HEADS IN BEDS.

TOURISM IS OUR NUMBER ONE ECONOMIC DRIVER.

BEACH IS OUR NUMBER ONE ATTRACTION, BUT A CONVENTION CENTER WAS PUT ON THE SEAWALL AND IT HAS PROVED THAT IT WORKS.

IT BRINGS MORE VISITORS TO THE ISLAND, PUT HEADS IN BEDS, AND I THINK THAT TO DEVELOP SOMETHING ON STEWART BEACH IS GOING TO REQUIRE A MUCH GRAND, GRANDER VISION THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SEEN.

AND EVERY DEVELOPMENT HAS ITS CHALLENGES, AS DOES THIS ONE HAVING TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO PROCEED WITH AN RFP.

BUT IF YOU REMEMBER BACK TO THE SEAWALL CONVENTION CENTER, THERE WERE CHALLENGES THERE AS WELL. THAT'S WHERE EL MINA HALL SAT.

AN AGREEMENT COULDN'T BE MADE.

ULTIMATELY, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE CITY THAT PROCEEDED WITH EMINENT DOMAIN AND THEN THE SEAWALL CONVENTION CENTER WAS BUILT, VERY CONTROVERSIAL AT THE TIME.

YOU LOOK IN HINDSIGHT AND IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION BECAUSE THE ENTIRE ISLAND BENEFITED FROM IT. SO I WOULD ASK THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PARK BOARD, WHOMEVER YOU ALL CHOOSE TO PROCEED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, IF YOU CAN GET TO AN RFP JUST TO BE OPEN MINDED ABOUT IF YOU SELECT THE RIGHT DEVELOPER AND THAT DEVELOPER HAS THE RIGHT VISION.

THERE IS THE POTENTIAL TO CREATE SOMETHING ON THE EAST END THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ABLE TO HAVE BEEN CREATED. IN ALL THE YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED HERE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE DEVELOPMENT EAST OF 25TH STREET BETWEEN STEWART BEACH AND THE PLEASURE PIER.

AND I THINK SOMETHING THAT ANCHORS AT STEWART BEACH LIKE WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED BY BOTH OF THE DEVELOPMENT FIRMS COULD BE THAT PROJECT.

SO I ENCOURAGE BOTH PARTIES TO BE OPEN MINDED AND HOPEFULLY WORK TOWARD A SOLUTION THAT BENEFITS THE ENTIRE ISLAND.

THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE ON THE SIDE [INAUDIBLE].

SIR, GO AHEAD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, FOR THE RECORD.

[INAUDIBLE] 4516 AVENUE R GALVESTON AS A LONG TIME RATHER THAN WE HAVE SEEN MANY, MANY HOTELS GET DEVELOPED HERE.

BEING A RESIDENT PASSER OF THE EAST END, THERE HAVE BEEN CHALLENGES WHAT DEVELOPMENT.

EMPTY PROPERTY.

VACANT PROPERTY.

BUT IF Y'ALL EVER BEEN TO STEWART BEACH DURING A HOLIDAY WEEKEND? IT'S A NIGHTMARE.

IT'S A MESS AND THE CURRENT PEOPLE THAT ARE RUNNING IT.

CAN RUN IT MORE EFFICIENTLY.

IT IS WE HAVE TO USE GPD TO OPERATE LIGHTS DURING A WEEKEND BECAUSE OF THAT HEAVILY TRAFFIC. SO IF, Y'ALL APPROVE THIS I'M ASKING FOR Y'ALL TO CONSIDER JUST NOT THE RESIDENTS OF GALVESTON, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, WE LIVE HERE 365 DAYS A WEEK. TOURISTS COME HERE ON THE WEEKENDS AND THE SUMMER.

WHY DO WE, THE RESIDENTS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH HOTELS, ALL THESE PROJECTS THAT GO ON, BUT VERY LITTLE INPUT GO THEN TO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, THAT WE PAY TAXES TOO, THE SMALL PEOPLE, JUST NOT THE BIG PEOPLE.

I'M A SMALL PERSON HERE ON THIS ISLAND, BUT WHAT I WANTED AND COUNCIL MEMBER SAID SOMETHING INTERESTING. EARLIER, I HAPPENED TO LISTEN ONLINE AND I GOT THAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION WHEN HE SAID, FAMILIES DON'T GO TO THE BEACH HERE.

[01:25:02]

YOU KNOW WHY? BECAUSE IT'S POORLY KEPT UP.

THINGS THAT PEOPLE DON'T GO HERE, PEOPLE CAN'T TAKE THEIR KIDS THAT LIVE HERE, GO FOR THEIR BOND AND PAY $80 A TICKET.

MAKE IT AFFORDABLE FOR PEOPLE.

THE RESIDENTS OF GALVESTON.

I KNOW THE CITY TOURISM IS ABOUT MONEY.

BUT BEFORE Y'ALL DECIDE ON THIS ACTION ITEM TODAY, I ASK Y'ALL, PLEASE CONSIDER IT.

I KNOW WE HAVE A NEXT ELECTION COMING UP IN MAY, BUT LET'S NOT PUSH THIS ISSUE.

AT THE END OF DAY, I EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER WE ALL LIVE HERE THINK ABOUT EVERY RESIDENT THAT LIVES ON THIS ISLAND.

YES, IT'S ABOUT MONEY SOMETIMES.

BUT THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT PUT YOU HERE IN THE IN THESES SEATS.

THE PARK BOARD HAVE A LOT OF WORK.

THEY HAD MANY TIMES TO EVERY TIME IT RAINS.

IF YOU ARE THIS PAST 4TH OF JULY, STEWART BEACH WAS NOT ABLE TO OPEN.

BECAUSE IT WAS COMPLETELY FLOODED, [INAUDIBLE] BEACH, STEWART BEACH.

IT'S LIKE A LAKE WHEN IT RAINS DOWN THERE.

AND YES, WE DO HAVE DEVELOPMENT TOWARD THE EAST OF THE ISLAND.

WE HAVE TWO BIG [INAUDIBLE] HOTELS.

WE HAVE THE ISLANDER EAST.

SO WE DO HAVE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT END OF THE ISLAND.

BUT BEFORE WE DECIDE TO PUT ANOTHER PLEASE PIER ON STEWART BEACH OR ANOTHER HOTEL.

LET'S THINK ABOUT THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE OUT THERE.

WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT ON THE DAY AND DAY BASIS.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[5.A Discuss And Consider The Approval For Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL), In Collaboration With An Integrated City Of Galveston/Galveston Park Board Taskforce, To Develop An RFP That Will Solicit Site Development Proposals From Qualified Companies. (Brown/Collins)]

ALRIGHT SEEING, NO ONE ELSE TO COMMENT, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING THIS BACK TO COUNCIL.

JANELLE ITEM FIVE.

ITEM FIVE A DISCUSS AND CONSIDER THE APPROVAL FOR JONES LANG LASALLE JLL, IN COLLABORATION WITH AN INTEGRATED CITY OF GALVESTON, GALVESTON PARK, BOARD TASK FORCE TO DEVELOP AN RFP THAT WILL SOLICIT SITE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS FROM QUALIFIED COMPANIES.

I HAVE TO ASK IS COUNCILWOMAN ROBB WITH US? DID YOU? YEAH, YOU ARE HERE.

YOU DID NOT DO A ROLL CALL BEFORE THE MEETING.

ONLY WE ONLY SUSPENDED THE MEETING FROM FROM EARLIER.

WE ARE WE ARE STILL IN COUNCIL SESSION.

THAT WAS A REGULAR COUNCIL SESSION.

WE OPENED AT 9:00 O'CLOCK THIS MORNING.

SO WE ARE WE'RE STILL IN SESSION.

I JUST WANT TO BE SURE YOU'RE STILL WITH US HERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER.