[00:00:03] >> [BACKGROUND] GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. [Call to Order] IT IS 9:00 AM AND I WOULD LIKE TO OFFICIALLY CALL THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR OCTOBER 27TH, 2022. [NOISE] >> THERE YOU GO. >> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. I'D LIKE TO CALL THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR OCTOBER 27TH, 2022 TO ORDER. IT IS 9:00 AM. I'D LIKE TO WELCOME COUNCIL THIS MORNING AND STAFF, THANKS FOR BEING HERE. FOR THOSE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE WATCHING US THAT INCLUDES MIKE BOUVIER, I'M GLAD TO HAVE YOU THIS MORNING AND [NOISE] THANKS FOR EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY BEING HERE. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, BUT COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL TO ANNOUNCE. >> MAYOR BROWN? >> PRESENT. >> MAYOR JIM COLLINS? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER SCHUSTER? >> HERE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER BOUVIER? >> HERE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER LITOWSKI? >> HERE >> COUNCIL MEMBER ROBB? >> PRESENT. >> WE DO HAVE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT. VERY GOOD. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3A PLEASE, GENELLE. [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 THE SAME REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. >> COUNCIL, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, I'M GOING TO PUT TOGETHER A LITTLE DIFFERENT FORMAT THIS MORNING ON THIS DISCUSSION OF CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA. FROM THE STANDPOINT OF GETTING STAFF INVOLVED AND GETTING THEM OUT OF HERE AS SOON AS WE CAN, I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE INVOLVED ON THE AGENDA THAT INVOLVE STAFF BUT EXCLUDING THE ITEMS ON SHORT-TERM RENTAL WHICH IS 10I AND 11A. LET'S DISCUSS THAT IN ITEM 3C THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA, AND THEN ON THE PART MORE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE ITEM 10F, 10G, AND 10J AS ADJOURNED. I'D LIKE TO PUT THOSE OFF AND LET'S GET OUR OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA OUT OF THE WAY SO WE CAN FREE UP STAFF AND THEN WE CAN MOVE INTO THE PART 4 OF THAT AGENDA. LET'S START ON THAT. WILLIAM, DO YOU HAVE ANY ITEMS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH? >> IN ESSENCE THEN, I'M OKAY RIGHT NOW. >> DAVID? >> I HOPE YOU GET TO BE REAL QUICK. [NOISE] I DON'T THINK SO. I MAY RESERVE THE RIGHT TO JUMP BACK INTO IT. YOU'VE TAKEN PRETTY MUCH THE HOTLINE ITEMS AND MOVED THEM DOWN, SO I'LL BE ALL RIGHT. >> VERY GOOD JOHN. >> ABSOLUTELY. [LAUGHTER] >> LET'S ALWAYS START WITH THEM ANYWAYS, SO YOU CAN START WITH [INAUDIBLE]. >> EIGHT-C >> EIGHT-C IS CHANGE THE ZONING. I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THIS. USUALLY I'M VERY PRO DEVELOPMENT AND UNDERSTAND WHY THESE THINGS ARE DONE, BUT IN THIS CASE THIS COULD AFFECT SOME FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE AND I'M A LITTLE WORRIED ON HOW IT WOULD AFFECT IT. I KNOW WE USUALLY DON'T LOOK AT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE CASES, BUT I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED WITH THIS. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW TO GO ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT CHANGES SOME REQUIREMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE IF THIS IS DONE. I'M INTERESTED IN HEARING COUNCIL'S OPINION ON THIS IF YOU'LL HAVE ONE. >> TO LIST BEFORE WE GET THOSE TIM, WOULD YOU JUST SURMISE WHAT THIS MEANS HERE? >> SURE. THIS BASICALLY TAKES THREE TRACKS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH ZONING ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE SEAWALL AND MAKES THEM CONSISTENT. IT'S THE ONLY THREE TRACKS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE SEAWALL THAT HAVE THIS INCONSISTENCY AND IT CLEANS THAT UP. THE TRACKS THEMSELVES IT'S THE COUNTY OWNED STRIP OF LAND THAT'S JUST ADJACENT TO THE SEAWALL THAT OF COURSE IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING THE SEAWALL ITSELF. THE PEER'S SEAWALL, THE PILINGS, OR THE GRANITE ITSELF THERE. [00:05:04] IT ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT MAINTENANCE. WHAT'S BEING REZONED? ACTUALLY IT'S JUST THE STRIP AND IT'S SO VARYING WIDTHS. THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN OCCUR IN THESE TRACKS THAT ARE BEING REZONED. AS JOHN MENTIONED, THERE ARE TRACKS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO IT. NOT ON ONE OF THE TRACKS THAT'S OUT FURTHER WEST, BUT THE ONE NEAR YOUR SPEECH DRIVE AND THE ONE NEAR [INAUDIBLE] THAT HAVE SOME ADJACENCY. THINGS DEVELOP AROUND IT. IT JUST MAKES IT CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT, OUTSIDE OF IT. >> JOHN, WOULD YOU STATE YOUR OBJECTION TO THIS AGAIN BECAUSE I THOUGHT THIS WAS A NO BRAINER. EVERYTHING ABOVE IT IS THE FLATS AND THAT'S ZONE, THAT OTHER ONE? >> YES, I THINK SO. >> THERE'S PROBABLY MAYBE SOME COMMERCIAL AND NUMBERS ARE ONE. THESE ARE THE ONLY THINGS THAT SOUTH OF THERE THAT AREN'T COMMERCIAL OR PROTECTED WETLANDS. THERE'S PLENTY OF THAT IN THERE AS WELL BECAUSE SOME OF THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE LAGOON AND THAT PROPERTY. I THOUGHT THIS AS A NO BRAINER. >> BUT BY GOING TO THIS COMMERCIAL ZONING CATEGORY, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER HAS DIFFERENT SETBACKS. DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY PLAN ON DOING WITH THE PROPERTY, THEIR SETBACKS WOULD INCREASE OR DECREASE. >> TRUE. >> IT DEPENDS WHAT YOU WANT OUT THERE. >> BUT THERE ISN'T ANYTHING ON ANY OF THESE TRACKS [OVERLAPPING] >> WITHOUT CUTTING OFF MR. BOUVIER. >> WHAT IT IS MARIE IS IF YOU DRIVE AT EAST, AT SEAWALL, WHEN YOU PASS. THERE'S AI STRIP BETWEEN EAST BEACH DRIVE AND APPLE PARK ROAD AND THEN SOME BEYOND THAT OR IS IT ALL IN-BETWEEN THEM? >> IT'S ON BOTH SIDES, EAST BEACH DRIVE. THERE'S A SPECIAL SMALL PIECE THERE ON BOTH SIDES AND THEN THERE'S A LARGER PIECE DOWN BY VERTICAL ROAD. >> THERE'S NOTHING DEVELOPED OUT THERE NOW. IN MUCH OF IT, YOU COULD HAVE DEVELOPED SHORTAGE CLOSE TO IT. BUT FOR POTENTIAL HOTEL DEVELOPMENT. JUST TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S VERTICAL. >> IT MAY BE OVERLY ATTACHED. AGAIN, IT COULD INCREASE OR DECREASE SETBACKS DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THE LAMB. YOUR LAND, YOU, [NOISE] WHEREVER YOU PUT ON THE LAND, HAS DIFFERENT SETBACK REGULATIONS. IT'S NOT JUST ALL LAND USES HAVE THE SAME SETBACK. DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WANTED, LAND USE YOU WANT TO DO OUT THERE, YOU COULD GET YOUR SETBACKS INCREASED OR DECREASED. THAT COULD AFFECT WHAT GOES ON THE PROPERTY. >> BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE BEING REZONED, THESE ARE ROTTEN AND BUILDABLE, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YEAH. THE TRACKS THEMSELVES, THE ADJACENT TRACKS, OF COURSE, ALREADY COMMERCIAL. >> I THINK JOHN BRINGS A GOOD, IT SEEMS LIKE IN MY OPINION, IT WOULD INCREASE THE SETBACK, USUALLY. >> RESIDENTIAL. >> IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD DECREASE THE SETBACK. >> BY GOING INTO COMMERCIAL, IT DECREASES SETBACK REQUIREMENT DOES NOT RESULT. >> IN SOME LAND USES. >> WHAT'S DRIVING US? >> THIS IS STAFF INITIATED. I PUT IT ON REALLY TO CLEAN UP THE THREE TRACKS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT. BUT YEAH, THERE'S DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ON THOSE TRACKS. >> IT'S COMMERCIAL WOULD BE THE MOST OPEN TO DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE YOU [OVERLAPPING] THE PROPERTY COUNTY. >> THE COUNTY. >> IT'S CANADA, ROAD WAY. >> WHAT HAVE WE GOTTEN ANY? >> NO. >> IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE USE SO MUCH OF THE COUNTY PROPERTY. IT WOULD AFFECT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY BY HAVING THIS PROPERTY GO TO A COMMERCIAL ZONING. >> IS F L WROTE THE SONG, LOOKING AT IT. IS THAT THE BASICALLY THE DIVIDING LINE OF THE PROPERTY, EAST BEACH DRIVE? >> THINK SO. >> LET ME COME AROUND. TO STRIP RIGHT HERE. >> WHICH IS BETWEEN THE SPEECH DRIVE AND APPLE FARM? >> YES. THEN IF YOU GO THIS WAY, IT'S A STRIP THAT'S ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS PITCH. >> I GUESS THE CONCERN WAS LIKE, I WASN'T THERE TO VOTE. >> YES, PLEASE. >> A LITTLE LOGS RIGHT HERE. >> WELL, NOT LOTS OF POTENTIAL IS ESSENTIAL FOR [00:10:01] DEVELOPMENT NORTH OF THESE BEACH DRIVE IN THAT AREA. >> THE WHOLE PURPOSE IS TO BRING THIS TOGETHER AND MAKE A MORE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S BEING ZONED OUT THERE NOW. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YEAH. GENERALLY, IT'S COMMERCIAL USES, NOT COMMERCIAL ZONING, EXCUSE ME, RIGHT NOW AND WHATEVER IS ABLE TO HAVE IT IN COMMERCIAL, IS AFFECTED BY THE ADJACENT ZONES. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTION HERE SEAN? ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? AND THEN ANYTHING ELSE, JOHN? >> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING ELSE. >> THANK YOU KIM. [NOISE] TODAY TALKS ABOUT THE DONATION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO. SO I BROUGHT THIS UP IN OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WHEN THE PLANNING SOLVENT, WE STILL HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH GISD USE OF THE 28TH STREET RIGHT AWAY. IS THAT RIGHT? THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYTHING WITH 28 STREET NOW. THIS IS JUST WHAT RUNS UNDERNEATH THE STADIUM. ALL THE WAY TO THE MIDDLE OF 28 STREET, CORRECT? I THINK IT STOPPED AT THE CURVE. I THOUGHT. SO 28 STREET IS AN HOUR YET? YES, IT'S NOT FULL WIDTH STREET. BUT IT IS A FULL WIDTH STREET IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT'S ALSO GOOD FOR FULL WITH RIGHT-OF-WAY. YEAH. AND SO MY CONCERN THAT I BROUGHT UP TO PLANNING IS THAT WE ABANDON THIS RIGHT OF WAY. APPARENTLY, THE LAW SAYS THAT WE CANNOT ABANDON A PORTION OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY LENGTHWISE. I'M COMING IN, I WASN'T ABLE TO BE HEAR. YES. I'M SORRY. YES. I'M SEEING YOU TALK ABOUT [INAUDIBLE] WE HAVE THIS CONVERSATION OF PLANNING. FURTHER FOR THE SAKE OF THE COMMUNITY, WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND WHAT YOUR STATUS IS, PLEASE? DONNA FEEL WITH THEIR SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. I DON'T WANT THE CAMERAS. [LAUGHTER] WITHIN OUR PACKAGE HERE, WE DIDN'T GET THE DEAF REPORT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH WOULD HAVE SHOWN THE DETAILS OF THIS AND THE 28TH STREET RIGHT AWAY AS WELL AS THE M AND A HALF RIGHT AWAY. WE WE'RE ABANDONING THE M AND A HALF RIGHT AWAY, FROM 27-28. SO LET ME CLARIFY. WE'RE NOT ABANDONING WERE LITERALLY DONATING THAT. OKAY. BOTH AREAS TO GISD. AND THE REASON BEING IS. NO, GO AHEAD. LEGISLATIVELY, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT. I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE HISTORY OF WHAT GISD IS DOING WITH THAT CORE BILL AREA. BUT CLEARLY THEY'VE BEEN USING THAT AREA FOR STADIUM PURPOSES IN THE CENTER FOR DECADES. BUT AGAIN, THEY WILL ALLOWS US TO DO THAT. THIS STARTED OFF WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEN WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY A WAY TO DONATE THE AREA WITH A WRITER REVERSION THEM IS THAT IT IS NOT USED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, THAT GISD IS THAT IT'S AN INTER LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THEN IT REVERTS BACK TO THE CITY. SO IT'S NOT FALL OUT OF BED I MEAN WE DO HAVE PROVIDED REVERSE. WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS ON THE ABANDONMENT, BUT THAT'S NULL AND VOID. YES BECAUSE WE HEARD WHAT THE COMMISSIONERS HAD TO SAY AT SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE, IT'S GISD, IT'S AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. IT'S BEEN HERE FOR YEARS. THEY'VE BEEN USING IT. I THINK NOTHING DONE FOUND THAT LEGISLATIVE REGULATION THAT ALLOWS US TO DO IT. BECAUSE IN THE ABANDONING PROCESS, WE'D HAVE TO GO FOR AN ALL WE'D HAVE TO GO OUT FOR AN APPRAISAL AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO ACTUALLY GET PAID FOR THE PROPERTY. TYPICAL, [INAUDIBLE]. OKAY. LET ME COMMENT. THIS ONE IS WE'RE GIVING IT TO THE SCORE. CAN WE GIVE HALF OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY AWAY? THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES LEGISLATIVELY THAT IT SEEMS IF WE DON'T HAVE TO ABANDON THE FULL RIGHT AWAY TO THE ADJOINING OWNER'S. I THINK TIM DID SOME RESEARCH ON THAT AS WELL. BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ABANDONING THAT. WELL, THAT'S WHY I ASKED CAN WE DONATE HALF RIGHT AWAY? YES. SURE. IF YOU WANTED TO. [00:15:01] SO CURRENTLY, THIS JUST GOES THROUGH THE BASICALLY THE CENTER OF THE STADIUM FROM 27-28. GISD HAS IMPROVEMENTS BUILT ON HALF OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OWNING A HALF. ALREADY, YES. SO IT'S A LITTLE UNCLEAN IN THE SENSE THAT THEY HAVE THESE IMPROVEMENTS ON A CITY RIGHT AWAY. SAY YES. [INAUDIBLE] EXACTLY [LAUGHTER]. WHAT PART DO YOU WANT TO KEEP BUILDING ON? [LAUGHTER] NO. I WANT TO DONATE THAT TO THEM I MEAN. [OVERLAPPING] I THINK THE OTHER HALF OF 50 PERCENT IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSED AT SOME POINT PROBABLY IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A FIRM PLAN AS TO WHAT THEY'RE DOING YET WITH THE STADIUM. I THINK THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON THAT. [OVERLAPPING] I WOULD SAY. BUT THIS GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE CENTER OF THE STREET. CORRECT. SO WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM THAT PORTION OF IT. RIGHT. BUT WE'RE STILL IN TALK ABOUT. WELL BUT I THINK [OVERLAPPING]. DO NOT EXPAND THIS. SO THAT'S THE KICKER IS THAT GISD CANNOT EXPAND MORE THAN WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE. RIGHT. SO WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE OTHER SIDE? THAT'S [OVERLAPPING] NOT THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT. I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE TRUE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE STREET AS IT'S ORIGINALLY PLANTED. I THINK THEY'RE ALREADY THERE. IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. WE IMAGINE THEY ARE. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING. THEY TAKE UP HALF OF THE STREET CURRENTLY. HALF IS THE M AND A HALF RIGHT AWAY. WHY NOT DONATE THAT HALF TO THEM AS WELL? THE HALF THAT THEY'RE ALREADY BUILT ON. THAT WE DID. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING THROUGH THIS. SAYING I DON'T HAVE ANY. WE ARE DOING BOTH WE ARE DOING THE MIDDLE SECTION AND WE'RE DOING THAT M& HALF, WHATEVER GISD IS GOING TO BUILD ON IS THEIR TASK. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO. IF WE HAD A SURVEY OF THIS WILL BE OR WRITE PICTURE OF THIS WILL BE MUCH HOPE. WHATEVER GISD HAS ALREADY. [OVERLAPPING] NOT ONLY FROM 27-28TH. BUT FROM WHAT IS IT? M2. YEAH [OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S DEFINITELY THERE. WILL NOT BE THE FIRST ONE OF THESE THAT WE BRING TO YOU AS A RESULT OF THE GISD PROJECT? NOW WE'RE KEEPING ONLY HALF OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM M-N? I BELIEVE THERE'S TWO PROPERTIES IN THERE THAT REQUIRE ACCESS. IF GISD WANTED [INAUDIBLE] I THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL HOUSES ON THAT YET. IF THEY HAVE ACCESS FROM ADJACENT STREETS. THE ONLY THAT I THINK THERE'S TWO THAT ARE LANDLOCKED IN THERE. SO GISD WOULD DO ANYTHING FURTHER THEY'D HAVE. THEY'D HAVE TO REMEDY THAT. SOMETHING. IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. I WAS VERY CONFUSED SINCE THIS CAN EVENT PLANNING COMMISSION AS AN ABANDONMENT AND THEN IT GOT TO COUNSEL AS A DONATION? YES. THANKS. SORRY FOR ALL THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] I JUST THREW A WRENCH IN THERE BUT ALSO HAD QUESTIONS ON THE SAME THING. WHAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING IS THE LAND THAT THE STADIUM IS ALREADY ON, THAT IS THE PORTION THAT WILL BE ACTUALLY DONATE IT TO GISD. THEY'RE NOT GOING ANY FURTHER WEST ON THAT LEVEL TOO AND THEY'RE NOT GOING ANY FURTHER EAST? THAT'S CORRECT. CORRECT. OR NORTH AND SOUTH? OR NORTH AND SOUTH, YES. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. [OVERLAPPING] AS FAR AS AS OF NOW, THEY HAVE NOT ASKED FOR ANYTHING. BUT THEY ARE STILL IN WORKING ON THAT STATEMENT? YEAH. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? GREAT. [NOISE] >> [NOISE] STRAIGHT. >> CAN'T WAIT. [LAUGHTER]. >> PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO WASTE SO MUCH TIME. >> THAT WAS A GOOD HISTORY LESSON. >> I KNOW. >> [INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS A GOOD HISTORY LESSON. BEEN PLAYING IN YOUR HEAD THAT DAY? >> OH, YEAH. >> THERE'S A STREET UNDER THAT. >> OH, YEAH. >> DIGITAL DESIGN. [OVERLAPPING] >> THERE'S UTILITIES UNDER THE STREET. >> YES. >> JOHN, ANYTHING ELSE? >> YEAH. LET ME SEE HERE. CITY RELEASE OF THE MARQUETTE TRACK WITH 10 B. >> TEN D, OKAY. >> B AS IN BOY. >> I'M SORRY. >> WE HAD AN AGREEMENT WITH MARQUETTE ON THIS TRACK FOR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES. THE CURRENT DEVELOPER THAT IS BUYING THE PROPERTY, DO THEY HAVE TO ABIDE BY THAT AGREEMENT WE HAVE OR? [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. THE WAY I SEE IT WE'RE RELEASING IT BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING LESS DENSITY THAN WHAT'S IN THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE'RE JUST RELEASING THIS AGREEMENT. WE WON'T HAVE ANY AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER? >> YOU ANSWER. >> IT'S FIRST REINHARDT THAT'S GOING TO BE. >> CORRECT. >> YEAH. WE WILL HAVE AGREEMENTS; SO MANY BUILDING SERVICES, [00:20:04] AND LET ME SEE WHAT WE [INAUDIBLE]. >> THIS IS ALSO NOT THE FIRST OF THESE WE'VE DONE. >> RIGHT. >> SAY AGAIN. >> THIS IS NOT THE FIRST OF THESE WE'VE DONE. >> NO, BUT WHY CAN'T WE? >> WELL, THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. >> IT FAILED AND IT'S BEEN DORMANT NOW FOR AT LEAST 12 MONTHS. >> YEAH. [INAUDIBLE] SO FOR EXAMPLE, WHERE THEY WERE DOING THE HOTEL AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH THEY'RE GOING TO DO SINGLE-FAMILY. >> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THIS. I'M JUST GETTING CLARIFICATION HERE. THIS AGREEMENT IS BASICALLY NULL AND VOID, CORRECT? >> IT WILL BE AFTER TODAY. WE'RE RELEASING THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE [INAUDIBLE] MARQUETTE. >> THEN THE NEW OWNER WILL GO THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. >> THEY HAVE ALREADY GONE THIS YEAR. >> YEAH. I MEAN, THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE TO DEVELOPMENT. >> WE'RE [INAUDIBLE] DEVELOPMENT. >> PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL PLAT. >> YEAH. >> OKAY. THIS AGREEMENT THOUGH IS WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN THE NORMAL PROCESS THAT MARQUETTE WENT THROUGH. THIS IS NOT A STANDARD WAY THAT WE NORMALLY DEVELOP PROPERTY IN DALLAS. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> NO, DISAGREEMENT WITH MARQUETTE. >> THAT'S UNUSUAL. >> [INAUDIBLE] AGREEMENT THAT ACCOMPANIES LARGE PROJECTS. >> WELL, IT IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE WHOLE PROJECT AND THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND ORIGINALLY. >> THE NEW DEVELOPER WILL GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THEY'LL DO THE NORMAL PROCESS. THEY'RE GOING TO GO PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL PLAT. >> CORRECT. >> YEAH. OKAY. I'M GOOD, THANK YOU. >> NEXT ON 11 L. THIS TALKS ABOUT THE FREE LIGHTING FOR ROSENBERG. >> THIS IS FUNDED BY? >> THE PARK BOARD FUNDING. >> WE'RE FUNDING THE MONEY AND WE'RE GOING TO GET REIMBURSED. >> WE COULD USE THIS MODEL IN DOING OTHER STREETSCAPES IN THE FUTURE? >> YEAH. >> WELL, MODEL MEANING THE PARK BOARD FUNDING. >> YEAH. >> THAT WOULD BE THE QUESTION. IT'S A POSSIBILITY. >> YEAH. >> THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> IT HAS TO OBVIOUSLY MEET SOME OF THE CRITERIA FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF THOSE FUNDS. >> [INAUDIBLE] ON TUESDAY [INAUDIBLE] APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF THOSE FUNDS TO THE CITY [INAUDIBLE]. >> OKAY. >> AND THE LIGHTING PACKAGE HERE, IT IS A PERMANENT LIGHTING PACKAGE? >> YES. >> IT'S GOING TO STAY UP YEAR-ROUND AND WE CAN CHANGE THE COLORS AND WE CAN MAKE IT MORE DEVELOPED THEMED, WE CAN MAKE A CHRISTMAS THEMED, WE CAN MAKE A BIG THEME. >> OKAY, GREAT. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS ON 61ST STREET. >> I'D LOVE TO SEE TREES ON 61ST STREET. [LAUGHTER] WELL, I GUESS TREE LIGHTING [INAUDIBLE]. [LAUGHTER] >> CAN I COMMENT ON THAT BRIEFLY? DOING IT ALSO ON 61ST STREET HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, BUT [INAUDIBLE] IS ABOUT TO TEAR INTO 61ST. >> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE TREES [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH. >> I AGREE WITH YOU DOWN THE ROAD WE NEED TO INCLUDE 61ST STREET.>> YEAH. >> IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE MORE THINGS DONE [INAUDIBLE] >> WESTEND DEFINITELY NEEDS MORE STUFF DOWN THERE. >> ALL THE WAY AROUND. >> WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE'LL GET TO THAT. >> THE ISSUE IS GETTING POWER IN 25TH STREET. WE DON'T HAVE POWER ON [INAUDIBLE] BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> DO YOU HAVE ELECTRICITY ON BROADWAY TO DO LIGHTS? >> WELL, TAMMY [INAUDIBLE] WE HAVE STREET LIGHTS WHICH IS 240, SO WE'D HAVE TO [OVERLAPPING]. >> I'LL TELL YOU ONE THING, THE ELECTRICITY ON 25TH, THAT'S ENOUGH ELECTRICITY TO POWER THE ENTIRE CITY. >> WE DID THAT IN ANTICIPATION. >> YES. >> 11 BB AND NOT REALLY JUST THIS ONE, BUT WE'RE BUYING VEHICLES ON SEVERAL LINE ITEMS HERE. THE 11 BB THE FUNNY COMES OUT ON HERE. LET ME PULL IT UP. >> IT DEPENDS ON WHERE THESE TRUCKS ARE COMING FROM. ARE THESE MAY OR ARE THESE? >> THEY'LL BE USED TO MAINLY PUBLIC WORKS AND MUNICIPAL UTILITIES. >> YEAH. >> DEPENDING ON WHERE [INAUDIBLE] UTILITIES OR PUBLIC WORKS, IT'S EITHER GENERAL FUND OR UTILITY ACCOUNTS, SO LIKE THESE. [00:25:03] DAVID FOUND THESE TRUCKS BECAUSE OUR FORDS ALL GOT CANCELED. IN YOUR FINANCIAL IMPACT REPORT HERE IT SAYS ASSIGNMENT, MUNICIPAL UTILITIES, PUBLIC WORKS FUNDING SOURCE VEHICLE CAPITAL OUTLAY. THAT WOULD COME OUT OF THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES BUDGET? >> EVERY DEPARTMENT YOU HAVE A VEHICLE CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR YOUR GENERAL FUND AND THEN YOUR OTHER FUNDS HAVE VEHICLE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT FUND AND THAT IS MY [INAUDIBLE]. >> OKAY. THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL. >> LOOK FOR MORE BECAUSE THEY GOT MORE TRUCKS IN. AN OILFIELD COMPANY ORDERED THESE AND THEN BACKED OUT. WE ARE SCOURING THE STATE FOR POLICE VEHICLES AND HE FOUND THESE, SO WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING MORE TO YOU JUST LIKE WE BROUGHT YOU THE THREE DODGE CHARGERS LAST MEETING. >> RIGHT. OKAY. >> IF WE FIND MORE, WE WILL BUY WHAT WE FIND. >> THANKS, DAVID. >> THIS ARE PRETTY NICE TRUCKS. >> I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE STUART BEACH DR. REPAIR WORK IN THE WORKSHOP? >> WE CAN SURELY. >> IT'LL PROBABLY BE BETTER IF WE CAN KEEP THAT AND BRING THAT UP. >> I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> [INAUDIBLE] GOLF CARTS? >> NO. [LAUGHTER] >> JOHN, LET'S GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A HURRY ON THE AGENDA HERE THAT CAN REALLY FIT IN THERE. LET'S GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS THAT. >> MY QUESTION IS HERE. >> WHICH ITEM? >> THIS IS 12A. >> 12A, STORE BEING VERY CONCRETE REPAIR. >> MIKE, CAN YOU HEAR US? >> YEAH. >> OUR LIAISON TO THE PARK BOARD. MIKE, THERE'S A QUESTION FROM COUNCILMAN WHO HAD ASKED YOU ABOUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA ABOUT THE APPROVAL OF THEIR 1CIP PROJECT FOR THE PARK BOARD. COULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT? >> RIGHT. THIS IS BASICALLY REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE DONE IN ORDER FOR US TO GET OUR CLEAR INSURANCE. THEY SAID THAT THE BUILDING NEEDS TO HAVE THESE REPAIRS DONE IN ORDER TO CLEAR FOR INSURANCE. WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND GET THIS DONE INTO THAT MORE LIKE A BAND-AID ON THE BUILDING LEVEL OR THE BEACH PATROL WHILE THERE HAS TO A PLAN COMING TO A JOINT VISION FOR WHERE WE CAN DEVELOP THE BEACH. >> WE'LL BE ON FREE DO. WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE OTHERS, JOHN, BUT THIS SPECIFIC ONE IS THE ONLY ONE PULLED OUT FOR ACTION TODAY. >> MIKE, CAN YOU TALK TO US ABOUT [NOISE] HOW LONG THE PARK BOARD THINGS SO WE'RE USING THIS FACILITY? PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT VILLAGE HAD BEEN TURNED DOWN A LONG TIME AGO, AND THEN WE'RE SPENDING 200 GRAND TO KEEP THIS THING FUNCTIONAL. A BIT OF A WASTE OF MONEY TO ME, BUT I KNOW THERE IS A NEED FOR ME TO DRILL. >> THERE WERE OTHER [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE'LL TRY THEM UP. >> EXCUSE ME, MIKE, WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE VOLUME HERE. NOW, MIKE. >> WHAT THEY WERE, THERE WERE OTHER OPTIONS, MOBILE AMENITIES, AND ALSO MOVING THE OPERATIONS ACROSS THE STREET AND IN ORDER TO KEEP PATROL GOING, THIS WAS THE LEAST AMOUNT TO KEEP IT GOING. THEY OFTEN DO THIS ONCE INSTEAD OF TEARING IT DOWN AND THEN PUTTING MOBILE AMENITIES UP FOR MOVING EVERYTHING ACROSS THE STREET. >> THANKS, MIKE. >> VERY GOOD. >> SINCE WE BROUGHT DOWN IN HERE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? YOU WERE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. [00:30:01] >> OKAY. >> ANYTHING ELSE, JOHN? >> NO. I THINK I'M GOOD. >> SHE SHOULD GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> WHATEVER BECAME OF, WE WERE DOING ENGINEERING STUDIES AND WHATNOT OF THE BUILDING TO LOOK AT. >> WELL, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS WE WERE IN THE DISCUSSIONS TO HIRE THIRD-PARTY CONCRETE SPECIALIST TO ASSESS THE PAVILION AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE PARK BOARD HIRED THEM BEFORE WE COULD AND SO THAT PROCESS IS ONGOING RIGHT NOW. THIS SEEMS LIKE IT MAKES SENSE. IT'S TO CORRECT YEARS OF LACK OF MAINTENANCE AND IT'S NECESSARY TO MAKE THE ABILITY TO SAVE THEM. WE FULLY SUPPORT IT. >> I THINK IT'S THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE FOR A TEMPORARY SOLUTION FOR BEACH PATROLS, THAT WE CAN WORK OUT THE DETAILS ON A PERMANENT SOLUTION. >> HALFWAY. WHEN ARE THEY EXPECTED TO HAVE ANSWERS TO THAT? >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET ONE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THERE'S VERY LIMITED COMPANIES THAT DO THIS STUFF. >> THEY'RE DOING ONE CAN WE GET A COPY OF THAT? >> BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING A STUDY ON IT. THEY'RE JUST DOING THE REPAIRS. >> ARE THEY, MIKE? >> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY CONVERSATION ON THAT FOR THE ONE OR TWO PLEADINGS, BUT I'VE BEEN THERE. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ON IT. >> DO WE FIND THE ABSOLUTE DETAILS? >> I CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT. WHEN THAT COMPANY WAS HIRED BY THE PARK BOARD, I THINK THEY'RE EVER THOUGHT THAT WE WERE THINKING ABOUT USING THEM TO DO CAME TO A HALT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE A FULL ENGINEERING REPORT ON IT. >> WE DON'T. BASICALLY, THE ENGINEER SAYS ANYTHING CAN BE FIXED. IT'S HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO SPEND. WE GOT TO THAT HOW MUCH DO YOU WANT TO SPEND PART AND THAT WAS THE CONCRETE EXPERT THAT WAS GOING TO LOOK AT IT. WELL, THEY HIRED HIM TO DO THE REPAIRS AND THE CONCRETE GUY SAID, LOOK, I DON'T WANT TO GET BETWEEN YOU TWO GUYS SO WE JUST BACKED OFF BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY NEED TO MAKE THE REPAIRS. >> THIS IS GOING TO BE $200,000 AND THIS IS GOING TO GET US TO WIN NEXT YEAR. [OVERLAPPING] DOLLARS INITIALLY. >> WELL, IT WAS ABOUT $175,000 A YEAR, PROJECTED OUT FOR A TOTAL OF FOUR YEARS, WHAT THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES APPROVED SO THAT IN THE WORST-CASE, BEACH PATROL COULD STAY ACTIVE IN THAT BUILDING FOR FOUR YEARS WHILE ANOTHER SOLUTION IS FOUND. [OVERLAPPING] >> THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS WHEN WE TALKED BRIEFLY ABOUT REHABBING THE BUILDING. >> YEAH, [BACKGROUND] COMPLETELY. >> YEAH. >> I MEAN, WE'RE LOOKING TO SPEND $500,000 THE FIRST YEAR [OVERLAPPING] >> PROBABLY A TOTAL. >> $800,000. >> GREAT, GOOD. MORE AND MORE. >> YOU WOULD SPEND QUITE A BIT MOVING PETER, WHILE YOU BUILD SOMETHING ANYWAYS. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> WHEN EITHER COST ANALYSIS. >> I THINK WHAT MIKE WERE SAYING EARLIER IS THAT WE HAVE TO DO AT LEAST THIS MUCH TO IT JUST TO MAINTAIN THE FEMA. >> THE INSURANCE COVERS, FEMA >> MIKE, DID YOU WANT TO SAY MORE [INAUDIBLE] WELL-PLACED IN BETWEEN. >> I'M NOT FOR SURE EXACTLY THAT MR. COLLINS WAS SAYING $800,000. THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS AWARE OF. I WAS AWARE OF THIS $200,000 REPAIR, SO WE WILL BE ABLE TO INSURE IT. I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS FUTURE REPAIRS THAT COST THAT MUCH. >> IT WAS MAINTENANCE, MIKE. WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WAS THIS INITIAL BAND-AID AND THEN POTENTIALLY KEEPING IT IN CONDITION TO USE FOR BEACH PATROL OF THREE YEARS ADDITIONALLY, SO IT TOTALED UP TO ABOUT $795,000, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. NOT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IT IT'S JUST THAT WAS BUDGETED IN CASE WE NEEDED TO KEEP THESE PATROLLING THERE THE WHOLE TIME. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. >> GOOD. I'M SURE THEY'LL DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN NOT TO HAVE TO SPEND ALL THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO ENSURE. >> ANYTHING ELSE, JOHN? >> NO. >> VERY GOOD, SHARON. >> NO. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES. HE ALREADY COVERED SOME OF MINE. ALTHOUGH I HAVE SOME OTHER. I HAVE A QUESTION ON 10D INSIDE YOU SEE A BUDGET FOR APPROVING 2023 [NOISE]. LET'S SAY WHATEVER THERE'S A PROJECT THAT COMES UP THAT QUALIFIES FOR IDC, WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO AMEND THAT BUDGET. >> ALWAYS. >> PERFECT. JUST CONFIRM. >> ALWAYS. >> THIS IS JUST THE OPERATING BUDGET. THIS IS NOT THE BUDGET THAT WE WOULD USE FOR PROJECTS. IT'S JUST FOR OPERATING EXPENSES. >> MAY I ASK WHAT IS THE TOTAL HIGHEST IDC? WHAT DO WE ANTICIPATE TOTAL IDC RECEIPTS? >> WE HAVE BUDGETED FOR WE 1.7 MILLION, [00:35:04] [OVERLAPPING] WHICH IS PROBABLY CONSERVATIVE. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A TOTAL OF 6.8 BUDGETED TOTAL IDC. YEAH. >> PROBABLY WANT TO TAKE IT, BUT IT'S LIKE THEM, BUT THE BUDGET AND THEN YOU GET THE PROFIT WILL BE HIGHER. OKAY, THANK YOU. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> YES. CAN I GET SOME EXPLANATION AS TO WHY WE'RE CUTTING IN POSITION IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS? >> WE'RE NOT CUTTING THE POSITION. WHAT HAPPENED WAS IS THAT WHEN MARK MORGAN BECAME THE EMERGENCY MANAGER, HE WAS A BATTALION CHIEF AND HE WANTED TO RETAIN HIS RANK IN FIRE, SO WE JUST ADDED A BATTALION CHIEF FOR HIM. WE'VE POSTED THE POSITION NOW AS A CIVILIAN POSITION, SO THAT BATTALION CHIEF POSITION IS NO LONGER NEEDED OVER THERE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE AN EMERGENCY MANAGER IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. BUT IT WASN'T AN ACTIVE FIREFIGHTER POSITION, IT WAS THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITION. >> BUT WE'RE GOING FROM 112 TO 111, SO THAT'S CUTTING POSITION. >> NO. BECAUSE THE POSITION WASN'T THERE UNTIL YOU ADD IT LAST YEAR OR TWO WHEN WE MADE MARK MORGAN THOUGH. IT'S NOT A FIREFIGHTING POSITION, IT WAS EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT POSITION. WE DID THAT AS A COURTESY TO MARK MORGAN TO RETAIN HIS RANK IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, SO HE DIDN'T HAVE TO GIVE UP ALL THAT. >> BUDGET-WISE. >> WE APPROPRIATED THE POSITION IN THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. >> OKAY. >> WELL, ON 11B, WHERE WE GIVE THE APPROVAL FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN ANY LETTER THAT COMES ACROSS WITHOUT US SEEING IT. ONE, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA THAT IT'S DISTRIBUTED TO EVERYONE WHETHER OUR SIGNATURES ARE NECESSARY. BUT TWO, I THINK WE'RE DOING INJUSTICE TO OURSELVES BECAUSE IF A LETTER IS GOING TO SAY A SENATOR, IT MAKES MORE SENSE FOR ALL OF US TO SIGN IT THAN JUST THE MAYOR. HAVING DEALT IN THE COASTAL WORLD OR IN THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ADVOCACY, MORE SIGNATURES DOES SHOW BETTER BUY-IN. I WOULD LIKE US TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT IT AND IDENTIFY CERTAIN, IF IT'S A LETTER GOING SAY FOR, WE BACK THIS ISSUE THAT WE HAVE THE ENTIRE COUNCIL SIGN IN. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. >> LET ME MENTION THIS. I ERR ON THE SIDE OF BRINGING EVERYTHING TO THE COUNCIL. THERE ARE A FAIR NUMBER, I WAS TALKING TO GENELLE THIS MORNING LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS. OUR SECRETARIES OFFICES BECOME A RECEPTACLE FOR CERTIFICATES OF RECOMMENDATION, FOR PROCLAMATIONS, AND FOR LETTERS OF SUPPORT. I GET A LOT OF THESE, A LOT OF THESE HAD NO BEARING REALLY ON COMMITMENT OF THE CITY HERE. THEY'RE ON SHORT TIME-FRAMES TOO. ALL THOSE THOUGH, WE HAD ONE THAT I FELT THAT NEEDED TO HAVE COUNCIL'S APPROVAL AND WE HAD TO JUST TELL HIM WE HAD TO COME IN LATE. WE COULDN'T GET IT IN THEIR OWN TIME, BUT I BROUGHT IT TO COUNSEL AND SO FORTH. BUT WE HEAR AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, I'M FINE WITH THAT, MARIE. >> I JUST THINK IT REALLY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO THE OFFICE FOR SAVING THE LETTER AND I CAN ASSURE YOU OF THAT. I JUST THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA THAT EVERYONE GETS TO SEE IT. YOU'RE SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT SUPPORTING WHATEVER THAT MAY NOT BE NECESSARY FOR EVERYONE TO SEE BUT OTHERS OR YOU COULD JUST COPY US. >> WHAT THIS DOES, DON, DID YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS BECAUSE YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS? >> I THINK IS GEARED TOWARD THE SUPPORTING YOUR HIGH-SCHOOL TEAM THAT GO ON TO THE PLAYOFFS ON FRIDAY, I GUESS AT TUESDAY. IT'S REALLY NOT I'M OUT OF TIME. >> I KNOW, BUT SHE COULD HAVE OUR ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES. FOR YOUR HIGH SCHOOL TEAM, THEY'VE PROBABLY LIKE TO SEE EVERYONE'S NAME ON IT. >> SURELY, THAT'S YOUR OWN CHOICE. >> JUST PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. >> WE'LL HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA. ANY OTHER THINGS? [00:40:01] >> [BACKGROUND] SO ON THE ITEM 11MM, ALL THE 49TH STREET IMPROVEMENTS, LIKE WHAT'S DRIVING THAT? >> THEY WERE CLOSING OUT THE PROJECT. WE HAVE OUR ENGINEER, ROB WINNICK COMING FORWARD. >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. >> HI. ROB. >> HI. HOW ARE YOU? >> GOOD. >> THIS IS A CLOSEOUT CHANGE ORDER FOR COORDINATE PROJECT. IT'S PRETTY MUCH DONE. THERE'S A COUPLE OF LINGERING ITEMS FOR GETTING SORTED OUT WITH THE CONTRACTOR ON THE SIDEWALK. THIS IS JUST A DEDUCTIVE CHANGE OR A CLOSE OUT PROJECT. >> I'VE ALWAYS JUST REALLY WONDERED WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT? >> IT WAS BASICALLY REDO THE STREETS, SIDEWALKS, [INAUDIBLE] I BELIEVE THERE'S A NEW WATERLINE PUT IN AND I'M NOT SURE THERE WAS A STORM DRAIN ON THAT PROJECT. [OVERLAPPING] >> I JUST DON'T THINK OF 49TH STREET AS A MAJOR THING. >> BUT THAT'S WHAT IT TOOK TO GET THE WATER LINE AROUND IN HIS BIO. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THEN YOU MIGHT AS WELL STAND UP WITHIN THE NEXT ITEM, OR THESE ONE WORKS FOR YOU? >> YES, MA'AM. >> THIS STRAND STUDY, CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THAT? >> BASICALLY THE CITY GOT A SEPARATE GRID FROM TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD THROUGH FMA MITIGATION MONEY TO GO AHEAD AND DO A STUDY FOR THE STRAND AREA SPECIFICALLY. AS PART OF THE MASTER PLAN, WE CARVE THAT LITTLE AREA OUT KNOWING THAT WE HAD A SEPARATE PROJECT. WE'LL DO A SEPARATE STUDY OF THE STRAND AREA ITSELF. THEN THAT WILL GET INCORPORATED BY REFERENCING [INAUDIBLE] MASTER PLAN. >> WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE STRAND AREA, ARE WE LOOKING AT THE EXPANDED STRAND AREA, BECAUSE IT'S EXPANDING BEYOND 25TH STREET? >> YOU KNOW THE BOUNDARIES, TESSA? >> YES, IT DOES [OVERLAPPING] >> TESSA, COULD YOU COME FORWARD SO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR PLEASE? >> GOOD MORNING. >> MORNING. >> IT IS ENCOMPASSING THE NEW STRAND AREA. WHAT THIS ALLOWS IS FOR ONCE THIS STUDY IS COMPLETED, WE TURN THAT BACK IN TO TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND WE'RE ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR FUTURE FEDERAL MITIGATION ASSISTANCE GRANTS UNDER THAT PROGRAM. >> I'M ON THE FLOODPLAIN BOARD, AND SALLY IS ALSO A REPRESENTATIVE ON THEIR, NON-VOTING. SO WE CAN HOPEFULLY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO, OF COURSE, WE'RE COMPETING AGAINST EVERY RIVER PROJECT ABOUT THE ROAD. WE'RE FIGHTING THEM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO DO NATURAL BERMS AND THIS WILL WORK. WE'RE COASTAL COMMUNITY, DIDN'T WORK THAT WAY SO SADLY IN OUR WORK IN HEAVY ON THAT RIGHT NOW. >> WELL, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT INCLUDED THE EXPANDED AREAS. >> IT DOES. >> I THINK WE WOULD BE LIMITING OURSELVES IF IT WASN'T. >> WE WERE ALSO HEARING THIS TOWARD SOME OF THE POTENTIAL REMEDIES FOR MITIGATION TO THE BUSINESSES. TO SEE WHAT POTENTIAL MITIGATION CAN BE DONE THERE FOR FLOODING. >> WEIGHT-BASED THINGS LIKE THAT. >> THAT WAS IT. THEN MY NEXT QUESTION WOULD BE 11 BD. >> WHICH IS A W. [LAUGHTER] >> ARE WE PAYING FOR PAST SERVICES OR WE'RE SAYING THAT WE EXPECT TO SPEND 72,000 WITH VOLUMES FROM NEXT YEAR? >> I THINK IT'S A [OVERLAPPING] >> [INAUDIBLE] COME ON UP. >> HEY, HOW YOU ALL ARE DOING? >> GOOD. >> FROM BACK THERE YOU SOUNDED LIKE YOU SAID BB. [LAUGHTER] SO WE'RE TALKING MORE LIKE A [OVERLAPPING] >> BB, I THOUGHT [INAUDIBLE] >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO BE USING THE ENTIRE AMOUNT. EVERY YEAR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR WE'LL START OFF WITH A LARGE ENCUMBRANCE PO SO THAT WE HAVE THEIR SERVICES. NOW THIS YEAR ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WE'RE WORKING ON IS EXTENDING OUR SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOW INITIATIVE. WE'VE BEEN ON A CONTRACT WITH TCQ FOR NEARLY 13 YEARS AND IT EXPIRES NEXT YEAR. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS CRITICAL ABOUT GETTING THAT EXTENDED IS THE FACT THAT WHAT TCQ ALLOWS AS TO DO WHILE WE'RE PART OF THAT PROGRAM IS SO LONG AS WE'RE BEING PROACTIVE WITH OUR MAINTENANCE DOING OUR REPLACEMENT PROJECT LIKE WE DID IN [INAUDIBLE] AND WHATNOT AS WE HAVE OVERFLOWS OR OTHER INCIDENTS THEY DO NOT FIND US UNLESS WE WERE JUST GROSSLY NEGLIGENT. [00:45:07] IF WE LOSE THAT EXTENSION EVERY SINGLE SANITARY OVERFLOW WILL BECOME A FINE AND THAT'D BE COSTLY. [OVERLAPPING] THESE FINES RANGE FROM 500 TO THOUSANDS. >> HOW DO WE AVOID THAT WHEN WE COME TO THIS STORM WATCH OVER ANOTHER SEPTIC TANK WE STILL HAVE OUT THERE? >> I MEAN, WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SEPTIC TANKS SO ANY OVERFLOWS THAT OCCUR ON SEPTIC SYSTEMS WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT. >> IF THERE'S A DECLARED DISASTER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THE STATE WAVES ALL THAT. >> THAT'S TRUE. >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO FIND THEMSELVES HOST. >> OKAY. >> BUT THE MAIN THING IS WE DON'T RETAIN ATTORNEYS SO THAT COMING TO COUNSEL FIRST. >> HOW DID WE PICK THE NUMBER 72,000? >> WHAT WE DID IS WE LOOKED AT, TYPICALLY WE HAD BEEN DOING THE LAST FEW YEARS 50,000 AND EVERYTHING AND IN EACH OF THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE'VE GONE OVER THE 50, AND THEN WE DISCUSSED WHAT OTHER ACTIVITIES WE WOULD HAVE ON OUR PLATE THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE HAD THE SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOW INITIATIVE, WE ALSO HAD THE STORM WATER REPORT THAT WE HAVE TO TURN IN ANNUALLY SO WE INCLUDED THAT INTO THIS AND THEY GAVE US WHAT THEY THOUGHT IT COULD COST AND ALL THAT. >> I THINK WE ALSO HAVE, INSTEAD ON THE AGENDA THE UPDATE ON THE NEW SMART METERS. >> IT IS NOT. >> OKAY. >> SINCE YOU BENT INTO ECQ, I WONDERED WHAT WAS COMING IN WITH A BAD TEST AGAIN, THE METERS. >> AM I ALLOWED TO SHARE? >> WELL, I THINK WE'RE GETTING OFF-TOPIC HERE ON THIS AND [OVERLAPPING] >> WHY DON'T YOU DO THIS ONCE YOU PREPARE AN UPDATE ON THAT? WE'LL SEE [OVERLAPPING] >> I'LL SEND THE COUNCIL IF YOU WOULD RIGHT NOW. >> BECAUSE IT'S GOOD STUFF. >> YEAH. >> THANK YOU. >> THANKS, TRISH >> THANK YOU, TRISH >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> GOOD. >> ASIDE FROM THE PARK BOARD PLACE. >> ALL RIGHT. >> WE'RE DONE >> MIKE, ANY CLARIFICATION? YES. >> NO, I'M ALL SET. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WOULD DO A ROUND 2? [LAUGHTER] I DID >> GIVE A LINE [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] >> SORRY GUYS. >> BUT WILL [OVERLAPPING] >> OKAY. >> THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU FOR ROUND 2. >> THANKS. >> I JUST HAVE ONE 8B, TIM ON 8B AS IN BOY. THAT'S CHANGING TO COMMERCIAL HEIGHT AND DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. QUICK QUESTION. WHAT'S THE HEIGHT IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD? HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS? >> IS IT 50? >> 50. >> EXCUSE ME. >> FIFTY. >> FIFTY FEET? >> YES SIR. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO KNOW. THANK YOU. >> WHAT'S DRIVING THAT CHANGE? >> THERE YOU GO. [LAUGHTER] >> WHAT'S DRIVING THAT CHANGE THE APPLICANT HAS PLANS TO DO SOME IN-FIELD RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LIKE HE'S DONE ACROSS THE STREET. >> YEAH. >> BASICALLY, THE SAME SPOT. >> YES. [OVERLAPPING] >> SAME SPOT IN. >> WILL RESPOND TO THAT. >> MORE OF THAT WAITING FOR THAT MINIMUM LINE SO I'M GOING TO TURN [INAUDIBLE] >> IT'S HEALTH FOR SURE. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, TIM. ISN'T BETTER THAN THE EYE CLINIC. >> IT DOES. [OVERLAPPING] >> A GREAT JOB AND ONE OF THE EMPTY [INAUDIBLE] >> JUST CLEANING THAT OVER THE AREA. >> THE BACKUP TOOL. >> JUST WANT TO BRING TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION ON ITEM 10H, AS IN HENRY, JUST FOR YOUR KNOWLEDGE AS WE COME TO THAT COUNCIL IS NOT ONLY APPROVING OR CALENDAR FOR 23, IT'S ALSO FOR SETTING THE START OF OUR WORKSHOP IN THE START TIME OF OUR REGULAR MEETING SO I JUST WANT YOU TO MEET. >> I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT. >> IF IT'S DISCUSSING PROS AND CONS LET'S HOLD IT TO THE MEETING. IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, SO. >> CAN I MAKE A STATEMENT? >> SURE, GO AHEAD. >> WELL BECAUSE I TOOK THE TIME SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THIS STATEMENT EARLY TO SURVEY MY CONSTITUENTS SINCE I HAVE A LOT OF HOME MATTER MEETINGS AND THEY WERE ADAMANTLY IN SUPPORT OF KEEPING THE MEETING AT 5:00. THEY ALSO FELT IT WAS DISRESPECTFUL TO MOVE IT DURING THE DAY BECAUSE IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE, IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO TAKE OFF WORK TO GET HERE, SO I DID DO A SURVEY OF MY DISTRICT. >> GOOD. VERY GOOD. NOW, JOHN, WE HAVE A GOOD POINT OVER HERE. >> GREAT. I'LL BE QUICK. 10C THE WATER AND PIT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COMES TO US EVERY YEAR. ANY CHANGES TO THIS? >> YEAH. >> MICHELLE, I DON'T THINK SO. >> IT JUST SAID, YEAH THE ANNUAL UPDATE IS PRETTY MUCH HAPPENING TO THE CITY. >> YEAH. THEY COLLECTIVELY, [00:50:01] WHICH IS PART OF THE IDEA WE HAVE TO >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. THE FINDINGS WANT THIS TO ASK. IN 11O, ON THIS WAS. >> EXCUSE ME, GENELLE YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> I WAS GOING JUST SAY AFTER JOHN, WE'VE GOT ITEM 11 F AS IN FRANK IS BEING PULLED ON STAFF THEN THAT WILL BE BROUGHT BACK IN NOVEMBER. >> OKAY THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> IS THE BOAT RAMP THERE? WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND SO I GUESS WHAT IS THE SCHEDULE FOR THIS TO HAPPEN? >> WE'RE GOING AFTER DESIGN RIGHT NOW. >> OKAY. THIS WILL COME BACK TO US ONCE DESIGN COMES OUT. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> PRIVILEGE DESIGN AND AUTHORIZATION TO BID AND THEN YOU'LL ACTUALLY GET TO APPROVE IT AGAIN ONCE THE DATA COMES IN AND WE AWARD CONTRACT. >> OKAY. SO THIS IS A GRANT FROM TEXAS [OVERLAPPING] >> THE WEEK AFTER OCTOBER THEN. >> YES. >> BECAUSE THERE'S AN OLD ONE THERE. [OVERLAPPING] >> SO PART OF IT YOU'RE GOING TO USE [OVERLAPPING] >> BASICALLY. >> WERE BASICALLY AWARE. >> IT'S GOING TO BE PUBLIC. >> PUBLIC PROGRAM. YES, MA'AM. >> THEN PEOPLE WHO HAVE AREAS THAT ARE BEING CLOSED WILL BE ABLE TO USE IT? >> YEAH. >> YES. >> YES. >> OKAY. >> GOOD. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M SORRY, I WILL GET FREE TO PHONE CALL. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M SLOW BUT I'M WITH YOU. [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT WAS THAT BOTH OF YOU? >> ONCE THAT I DON'T KNOW 11 [LAUGHTER] 11 00. >> YOU SAID 11 [LAUGHTER] >> I'M DONE. >> VERY GOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >> SURE. [LAUGHTER] >> LET'S MOVE NOW. MIKE, I'M GOING TO MENTION TO YOU AS WE GET INTO THIS DISCUSSION OF THESE OTHER ITEMS, PLEASE SPEAK UP. I'VE GOT MY BACK TO YOU SO PLEASE SPEAK UP WE'LL LET YOU INSERT YOURSELF INTO THE CONVERSATION ANYTIME YOU WANT >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. COUNCIL, WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT NOW I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE TAKE ITEMS 10F, 10G, AND 10J, THANK YOU, STAFF, AS A COMBINATION TO BRING ALL THESE TOGETHER FOR DISCUSSION. 10B MAY NOT FIT REALLY WITH 10G AND 10J BUT IT'S MORE [OVERLAPPING] >> I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD I WOULD HAVE GONE TO BE WITH MIKE TO MAKE SURE IF HE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE WITH HIM. I WOULD'VE DONE THAT FOR YOU MIKE IF YOU'D ASKED ME, I'D BEEN THERE WITH YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> I'VE ALREADY OFFERED YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> LET'S LEFT THE ROOM. >> TAKE A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK AND START AFRESH. [LAUGHTER] >> I'LL GO RIGHT OVER HERE. >> COUNCIL, WE'VE HAD SOME MINOR CHANGES ON THOSE PARK BOARD ITEMS. >> RIGHT. >> NOT ALL THE ONES THAT YOU MENTIONED. [NOISE] >> [NOISE] THE MEETING IS STARTING AGAIN. THANK YOU. >> [BACKGROUND] [LAUGHTER] WELL, GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. AGAIN, CAN WE HAVE EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION. WE ARE NOW STILL ON ITEM 3A WITH OUR AGENDA. WE'RE MOVING INTO THE PARK BOARD ITEMS, 10F, 10G, AND 10J, AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO TO COMBINE THESE ITEMS IF NEED BE, WE DON'T NEED TO NECESSARILY TAKE THEM SEPARATELY. THEY'LL GO TOGETHER AND WE'LL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT [NOISE] THEM AND SO FORTH. BEFORE WE START THAT THOUGH, DON, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU CLARIFY TWO QUESTIONS IF YOU WOULD BEFORE WE START OUR DISCUSSION QUESTION. ON THE ITEMS OF THE DEPOSIT OF THE FUNDS AND ITEM OF THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET, WHAT IS THE BASIS OF YOUR OPINION? NOT TO GET INTO THE OPINION, BUT IS IT A TAX CODE OR IS IT A CHARTER REQUIREMENT? LET'S TAKE THE DEPOSIT OF THE MONIES FIRST. >> DEPOSIT OF THE MONIES IS REQUIRED UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, [00:55:02] [NOISE] MONIES ARE GOING TO BE DEPOSITED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. UNDER OUR CHARTER, IT ALSO SAYS THAT ANY MONEY COMING INTO THE HANDS OF ANY PERSON THAT'S CITY MONEY, THAT HAS TO DO EVERYTHING PLACED IN THE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> NOW, THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET. >> I'M REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A BUDGET AND PROPOSED TAX EXPENDITURES HERE. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT THAT BUDGET. I GUESS YOU CAN AMEND IT IF YOU WANT, AND YOU APPROVE IT. WELL, WHAT I'VE PROVIDED IN THESE ORDINANCES IS THAT I HAVE CONTRACT. THEY DIDN'T GIVE US A BUDGET. THEY DID GIVE US IF NOT BREAK OUT HOT WITH ANY PARTICULARITY, SO THESE GUYS ARE STILL LOOKING AT IT, BUT HER TAX HAS TO BE PUT IN THE CITY DEPOSITORY, AND THAT IS A FUNCTION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THE CHARTER. >> NOW, [NOISE] I'M GOING TO MAKE MISTAKES, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. ON THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET THAT WE HAVE AN OPTION IN THE CONTRACT, THAT DOES NOT NEED TO COME FOR APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE FILED AND REVIEWED HERE? >> IT'S A CONTRACT? >> NO, BUT IF WE PUT IN THE CONTRACT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE FILED AND REVIEWED, BUT WE DON'T PUT THE APPROVAL PROCESS THERE, CAN WE DO THAT? >> I THINK THAT YOU CAN APPROPRIATE THE MONEY BASED ON YOUR BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR. >> THE WHAT? >> FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR. I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS. >> WELL, LET'S DISCUSS A LITTLE MORE WHEN WE GET INTO THIS AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO GET INTO IS THERE HAS BEEN SOME MENTION OF AN AG'S OPINION. I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO OUTLINE BRIEFLY WHAT THAT INVOLVES, WHAT THE AG CAN RULE ON AND WHAT THEY CAN'T RULE ON. >> AG HAS OPINION COMMITTEE. THEY RECEIVE QUESTIONS ABOUT STATE LAW ALL THE TIME. IF THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT A STATE LAW SAYS, YOU CAN ASK THE AG FOR AN OPINION. TO GET TO THE AG, I JUST CAN'T WALK IN. YOU JUST CAN'T WALK IN AND SAY WE NEED YOUR OPINION. WE HAVE TO FIND SOMEBODY WHO'S AUTHORIZED TO SEEK AN OPINION. PEOPLE THAT ARE AUTHORIZED TO SEEK AN OPINION OR LOCALLY THE DA AND I BELIEVE THE COUNTY OR STATE SENATORS CAN ASK FOR AN AG OPINION. TEXAS REPRESENTATIVES CAN ASK FOR AG OPINION. THE HEAD OF ANY AGENCY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS CAN ASK FOR AN AG OPINION. HOWEVER, A CONSTRAINT IS THAT THE AG DOES NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT CITY CHARTERS. >> VERY GOOD, CLARIFYING THAT A LITTLE BIT. LET'S OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION. DAVID. >> WELL, YOU SAID YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS AS ONE GROUP. >> WELL, NOT NECESSARILY. I'M FINE NOW. THE DISCUSSION WOULD PROBABLY GO BACK AND FORTH TO SOME OF THESE, BUT IF YOU WANT TO START BEFORE, DAVID,. >> WELL, HERE IS THE DEPOSITORY. THIS IS 10G. >> YES, SIR, YEAH, 10G. >> I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S STATE LAW IS IN THE CHARTER AND IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE LOCAL. IT'S JUST NOT BEING DONE. THE LAST TIME THIS PROCESS HAS MENTIONED THIS IN THE NOVEMBER 2014 UNDER LOCAL WHERE IT SAYS ITEM 1.3A, ALL ACTUAL LOCAL HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES COLLECTED WILL BE MAINTAINED IN THE CITY'S ACCOUNT DESIGNATED FOR SUCH TAXES. THERE'S A 2019 INTO LOCAL, BUT IT DOESN'T OBVIATE THAT CLAUSE. THAT OF COURSE WAS SIGNED BY SEVERAL PEOPLE WE KNOW AND SEE ANYMORE, [01:00:02] [INAUDIBLE] SIGN THAT, ROBIN WILLIAMS WAS CHAIR AT THE TIME. IT IS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE IN THE ACCOUNT, IT'S WHY THEY SHOULD [NOISE] BE DOING IT, WHICH THEY ARE NOT. THEY AGREED IN 2014 AND THAT DIDN'T CHANGE IN 2019 TO PUT IT IN THE CITY'S ACCOUNT. IT'S JUST NOT GOING THERE NOW. >> WHAT'S GOING THERE THEN? >> I'M ASSUMING. I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE NO IDEA WHEN FOLLOWING THIS, IT STARTED BEING PUT INTO CITY'S ACCOUNT. >> WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN? >> I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I'M HEARING AND I DON'T REMEMBER THIS THAT APPROXIMATELY 2015 OR SO IT WAS SOMEWHAT INFORMALLY DISCUSSED, IT WAS NEVER TO MY KNOWLEDGE, A VOTE OF THE COUNCIL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THAT THE PARK BOARD, SINCE THEY WERE COLLECTING IT, JUST LET THEM KEEP THE MONEY AND ALLOCATE THE FUNDS, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING NOW. HOW THAT OCCURRED AND WHO DID THAT, I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE. WE JUST MOVED ON. IT'S AN INTERESTING SITUATION, IS DAVID, IN 2014, IT WAS OUTLINED IN THE DOCUMENT AND I THINK POSSIBLY EVEN EARLIER [OVERLAPPING], I SAW IT MAYBE 2011 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT WAS OUTLINED IN THE LOCALS FOR THE PARK BOARD TO DEPOSIT THE MONEY HERE AND APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET, BUT THAT WAS NEVER ENFORCED. WE NEVER DID THAT. >> WHY? >> WELL, I DON T KNOW. >> IT WASN'T 2011. IT HASN'T BEEN SINCE THEN. >> I DON'T KNOW, IN THE 2019 IN THE LOCAL WHICH ADDS, IN MY OPINION A LITTLE CONFUSION TO THIS IS THAT IT WASN'T REALLY HIGHLIGHTED AND BROUGHT FORWARD IN A CLEAR MANNER, THE DEPOSIT OF THE MONIES AND THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET AS IT WAS IN THE 2014 IN LOCAL. I TALKED TO DON ABOUT THAT AND DON MIGHT BE ABLE TO TELL YOU WHY IT WASN'T IN THERE. I DON'T KNOW. >> WHERE'S DON? >> I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NOT IN THERE. 2014 IT WAS IN THERE, 2019 BASICALLY SAYS THAT IT'S TOO HOT. THE PROVISIONS OF THE 2014 AGREEMENT, WHICH IS CANCELED, THE RELEVANT TERMS ARE INCORPORATED INTO 2019. THAT IS NOT A VERY SATISFACTORY METHOD. BUT NOTHING IN THAT INTERVAL OF 2019 PROVIDES FOR THEM TO SHOW US THEIR HOT TEXT BUDGET FOR GET IT APPROVED. WE'RE ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT. THOSE ITEMS ARE IN THE TAX CODE SPENT. >> BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE ITEM. I KNOW IT GETS CONFUSED WITH THE PUBLIC'S MIND. THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET IS THE NEXT ITEM WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, BUT THIS IS ABOUT THE DEPOSIT. THE LAST AGREEMENT WE HAD WITH THE PARK BOARD REFERENCING THIS, THEY WOULD DEPOSIT IT IN THE CITY'S ACCOUNT, THAT COMPORTS WITH THE LAW, WITH THE CODE, WITH THE CHARTER. THE QUESTION WOULD BE WHY ISN'T IT DONE THAT WAY, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NOT BEING DONE THAT WAY. >> OKAY. >> BUT I COULDN'T PROVE THAT IT HAD NEVER HAS BEEN DONE THAT WAY. SOME OF IT IT IS DEPOSITED IN THE CITY'S ACCOUNT. BUT I DO WANT TO COMMENT THAT WHEN THIS WAS DONE, MR. MOSER WAS THE CFO OF THE PART BOARD, AND THERE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THE MOST METICULOUS RECORD KEEPING EVER SEEN OVER THERE. SINCE BRYSON FRAZIER HAS TAKEN OVER CFO, HE HAS CONSIDERABLY SHARPENED UP THIS. THIS IS NOT A QUESTION ABOUT WHO COLLECTS THE TAX, BUT WHO AGGREGATES IT FROM THE HOTELS AND THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS. PRICES OFFICE DOES THAT. THEY DO A SUPERIOR JOB OF IT. I DON T THINK WE HAVE ANY COMPLAINT AT ALL. IT'S ABOUT WHERE THAT MONEY WINDS UP BEING DEPOSITED. THAT'S THE ONLY OPEN QUESTION THAT'S IN MY MIND. WERE THEY [INAUDIBLE] WAS CONCERNED. >> SO UP UNTIL 2015, IT WAS DEPOSITED AT THE CITY AND THE CITY DIDN'T NOTICE THAT IT WASN'T? >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD PROVE IF ANY OF THAT IS TRUE. >> HOW CAN WE PROVE THAT. THIS SEEMS VERY EASY TO FIND OUT WHERE THIS MONEY WAS BEING DEPOSITED IN 2015. [01:05:04] BUT IF NOBODY WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE IT WAS GOING, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT WASN'T DEPOSITED SOMEWHERE IN THE RECORD [OVERLAPPING]. WHY IS THIS IN DEBATE ON WHERE IT WAS BEING DEPOSITED IN 2015? WHY DON'T WE HAVE THAT ANSWER? > NO, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE DEBATE ABOUT WHERE IT WAS BEING DEPOSITED. I THINK THE DEBATE IS ABOUT WHAT THE AGREEMENT WAS. THE AGREEMENT WAS THAT WE WOULD COME TO THE CITY? >> WELL, I HAVEN'T HEARD THE ANSWER YET ON WHERE IT WAS BEING DEPOSITED. >> IT DOESN'T MATTER. >> WELL, I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT QUESTION, THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. >> FROM 2015 FORWARD, IT WAS DEPOSITED AT THE PARK BOARD. >> WE KNOW THAT. >> YES. >> HOW ABOUT 2014? >> OR 2011, 2012. >> WELL, THE COMMON WISDOM IS THAT IN SOMETIME IN 2015, IT WAS LIKE, NO, YOU GUYS JUST KEEP IT. >> BUT WHY ARE WE SAYING, OH, IN SOME TIME IN THIS YEAR, WE THINK THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED? WHY DON'T WE KNOW THAT? >> IT HASN'T BEEN A FOCUS OF MY WORRY. I'LL SAY THAT. >> I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT QUESTION ANSWERED. >> THE SALIENT POINT HERE THOUGH IS, AND I AGREE, WE CAN GET THAT AND WHERE IT WAS DEPOSITED IN THE PAST, BUT THE POINT IS, FROM THIS POINT FORWARD, WHAT DOES COUNCIL WANT TO DO AND WHERE DO WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS? AND WE HAVE ORDINANCES [INAUDIBLE]. GO AHEAD, MIKE. >> YES. I HAVE A QUESTION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INNER LOCAL AND ON TRACK, AND WHAT THIS IS, WHERE THE ART IS DEPOSITED NOW. SO IF THE INNER LOCAL AND THE CONTRACTS ARE UP, AND WE'RE GOING TO RENEGOTIATE, AND WE FIGURED IT IS BROKEN, AND THE SYSTEM IS THERE, THEN WHY DON'T WE JUST REWRITE THE INNER LOCAL AND THE CONTRACT, WHERE IT REMAINS WHAT IT IS NOW. >> BECAUSE THAT IS CONTRARY TO THE CHARTER. >> IT'S CONTRARY TO THE CHARTER AND THE LAW. >> BUT THE LAW STATE THAT IT HAS TO BE DEPOSITED IN THE CITY DEPOSITORY AND THEN IT'S KINDLY CUT OFF RIGHT THERE. BUT IF YOU CONTINUE TO READ, IT SAYS, DEPOSITORIES AND IT'S ALSO APPROVED WHERE IT GOES BY THE CITY COUNCIL. >> YES, AND WE HAVE A DEPOSITORY THAT'S BEEN DETERMINED A LONG TIME AGO. >> RIGHT. >> THAT'S FALLS BACK. YES. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> GO AHEAD, MIKE. >> IT SAYS, CITY DEPOSITORY OR DEPOSITORY. IT DOESN'T SAY ONLY THE CITY DEPOSITORY. SO IF THE PARK BOARD HAS THE DEPOSITORY AND IS AN APPROVED DEPOSITORY BASED UPON THE STATE LAW, THEN WHY DOESN'T IT JUST STAY IN THEIR DEPOSITORY. >> BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE CITY'S DEPOSITORY. >> NO, THAT'S NOT THE CITY. >> HE'S QUESTION IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER. IF YOU READ THE COMPLETE SENTENCE, HE'S SAYING, I DON'T HAVE THE PARAGRAPH IN FRONT OF ME HERE, BUT HE SAYS, THE CITY DEPOSITORY OR DEPOSITORIES, DESIGNATED BY THE COUNCIL. HE'S SAYING, IT SAYS CITY DEPOSITORIES OR DEPOSITORIES DESIGNATED BY THE COUNCIL. >> RIGHT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ADDRESSING TODAY. WHERE THE COUNCIL WANTS THE FUNDS DEPOSITED. >> WELL, THE QUESTION IS, IS DON SAYING THE LAW IS THAT IT HAS TO BE IN A CITY DEPOSITORY. MIKE IS QUESTIONING THE LANGUAGE IN THAT PARAGRAPH. >> I THINK WE NEED TO GET THAT LANGUAGE. DON, PULL THAT UP. >> WELL, THE LAW IS GOING TO TRUMP THE CHARTER ANYWAY. >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I THINK THE LAW, DOESN'T THE TAX CODE SAY THAT IT CAN BE APPOINTED BY COUNSEL ON WHERE THE MONEY IS DEPOSITED? THE TAX CODE DOESN'T SAY IT HAS TO BE A CITY DEPOSITORY, RIGHT? OR DOES IT? >> IT'S THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THE CHARTER THAT DICTATE THAT THE CITY MONEY GOES INTO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> MIKE IS QUESTIONING THE LANGUAGE WITHIN THE CHARTER. >> COULD YOU READ THE LANGUAGE IN BOTH THOSE DOCUMENTS, DON. >> LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND THEM. >> DON, PLEASE SPEAK UP, BECAUSE YOU'RE BREAKING UP, I DON'T KNOW WHY, IT'S ONLY YOUR VOICE, BUT YOUR VOICE THAT'S BREAKING UP ALL THE TIME. >> SECTION 13 OF THE CITY CHARTER IN THE ARTICLE 7 SAYS, "ALL MONEY RECEIVED BY ANY PERSON, DEPARTMENT, OR AGENCY OF THE COUNTY OR OF THE CITY, OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE AFFAIRS OF THE CITY, SHALL BE DEPOSITED PROMPTLY IN THE CITY DEPOSITORY OR DEPOSITORIES, WHICH WILL BE DESIGNATED BY THE COUNCIL IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH RULES AND SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS [01:10:01] AS SECURITY FOR DEPOSITS AND INTERESTS AS MAYBE ESTABLISHING." >> AND MIKE IS QUESTIONING THAT STATEMENT, THAT SENTENCE RIGHT THERE. WHERE IT SAYS, CITY DEPOSITORIES OR DEPOSITORIES DESIGNATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. >> RIGHT. WE CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> THAT'S THE QUESTION. IS IT CITY DEPOSITORY OR DEPOSITORIES? AND IT SHOULD BE READING EXTENDED DEPOSITORY OR CITY DEPOSITORIES? >> OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT READING, THE LANGUAGE RECOGNIZES THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE MORE THAN ONE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> OKAY. >> WHAT DOES THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SAY ABOUT THIS? >> LET ME SEE. >> WELL, YOU JUST READ THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. >> NO THAT WAS THE CHARTER. >> THAT WAS CHARTERED. [OVERLAPPING] >> WITH MY MEMO OF OCTOBER 4 I WROTE, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 105073 PROVIDES THAT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE DESIGNATION OF THE CITY DEPOSITORY THE DESIGNATED OFFICER IS TO TRANSFER ALL MUNICIPAL FUNDS UNDER THE DEPOSITORY TO THE DESIGNATED DEPOSITORY. >> THAT'S NOW TERRIBLY CLEAR [LAUGHTER]. >> THE WAY I INTERPRET THE CHARTER AND I HAVE A LEGAL OPINION HERE, BUT THE WAY I'M INTERPRETING THAT, IS COUNCIL CAN DESIGNATE THE DEPOSITORY WHERE THAT MONEY GOES TO. >> BUT IT HAS TO BE PROCURED THROUGH THE CITY. THE DEPOSITORY DOES FIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES, AND IT HAS TO BE A CITY DEPOSITORY, MEANING THE CITY HAS ACCESS TO THAT DEPOSITORY. THAT'S THE WAY IT READS. >> LET ME ASK YOU THIS. IT COMES DOWN TO THE PROCUREMENT. YOU KNOW YOU HAVE TO PROPERLY PROCURE FROM A DEPOSITORY. YOU JUST CAN'T PICK A BANK RIGHT? LET ME ASK YOU THIS IF WE CAN DO THIS, WITHIN THE LOCAL AGREEMENT, CAN WE DESIGNATE THAT ACCOUNT AND CAN WE EVEN IF IT IS A DESIGNATED CITY DEPOSITORY ACCOUNT AND GIVE THE PARK BOARD ACCESS TO THAT ACCOUNT? >> I DON'T BELIEVE YOU CAN GIVE ANYBODY ACCESS TO THOSE FUNDS WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL OF THE EXPENDITURES BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF YOUR EXPENDITURES IN THE CHARTER. YOU CAN'T GIVE CHARTER BLANCHE ACCESS TO THE CITY FUNDS WITHOUT COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THEIR EXPENDITURES. >> YOU'RE SAYING RIGHT NOW, NOT ONLY ARE THEY BREAKING THE LAW BY NOT PUTTING IN A DEPOSITORY, THEY'RE ALSO BREAKING THE LAW BECAUSE THEY'RE SPENDING THE FUNDS WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL? >> THAT'S RIGHT. YOU'RE NOT APPROVING THEIR BUDGET. >> WE ARE IN BREACH AS WELL BY NOT APPROVING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE POINT. NOW YOU'VE JUST HIT IT, YOU'VE JUST SUMMARIZED IT. >> WELL, WE TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO AND I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT REVIEWING THEIR BUDGET, BUT NOT NECESSARILY APPROVING THEIR BUDGET. >> WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE BUDGET. >> WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT. CORRECT. >> OR CONTRACT, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE. >> WHICH WE DON'T HAVE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE IT IN A LOCAL. >> NO, SWEDEN NOT CONTRACT ON MANAGEMENT FUNDS AND PROGRAMS. THAT'S WHY I KEEP SAYING THAT WHAT THE INTERVAL SAYS ABOUT THE DEPOSIT IS ONE THING. BUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET IS LONGER THAN EVERYTHING. WE DON'T REVIEW AND APPROVE THE BUDGET AND THAT'S NOT INSISTING ALL THESE YEARS WITHOUT IT. >> WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT HAPPENED? >> I BELIEVE 2011 IF WE RESEARCHED IT. >> I WOULD SAY I'VE BEEN ON THE COUNCIL SINCE 2014 AND WE'VE NEVER OBSERVED THE ANALOGIES SINCE THAT TIME. >> I THINK WE DID WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL '12 TO '14 SITTING [OVERLAPPING]. >> TWO QUESTIONS WE NEED THE ANSWER. WHEN DID THESE FUNDS STOP GOING INTO A CITY DEPOSITORY AND WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THE COUNCIL APPROVED THE BUDGET? >> I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE WANTING TO DO THAT, BUT THAT'S REALLY ACADEMIC TO WHAT IT IS NOW. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION NOT BAD TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION. IT MIGHT TAKE A LITTLE RESEARCH, BUT THE FACT IS WE NEED TO KNOW WE NEED TO TAKE STEPS, IN MY OPINION, TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW NOW. >> BRIAN. >> YES. >> HERE IS A STATEMENT JUST A MINUTE AGO. CAN THE MONEY BE DEPOSITED IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET AS IT IS IN THE PARK BOARD'S DEPOSITORY NOW AS IT IS? [01:15:03] >> NO, NOT ACCORDING TO WHAT ELSE [OVERLAPPING]. >> LET ME GIVE THE LAST STATEMENT. CAN IT BE DEPOSITED IN THEIR, IN THEIR DEPOSITORY IF THE COUNCIL GIVES APPROVAL FOR THAT TO BE A DESIGNATED DEPOSITORY? >> NO, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE PROPER PROCUREMENT PROCESS FOR THAT DEPOSITORY, NOR CAN YOU ALLOCATE CITY FUNDS. YOU CANNOT DELEGATE YOUR AUTHORITY TO EXPAND CITY FUNDS OUTSIDE. THERE HAS TO BE A PROCEDURE THEREFORE TO APPROVE THAT EXPENDITURE. >> OKAY. FINE. LET ME FINISH MY QUESTION. CAN THE COUNCIL GIVE APPROVAL TO KEEP THEM DEPOSITING THE DEPOSITORY THE PARK BOARD IS USING NOW? ANY EXPENDITURE OF THOSE FUNDS USED TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL? >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO BECAUSE WE'D HAVE TO KNOW HOW THEY PROCURE THE DEPOSITORY. >> WHAT IS YOUR COLLATERALIZATION? THERE ARE A WHOLE LOT OF ISSUES THAT GO INTO HOW YOU CHOOSE A DEPOSITORY AND HOW YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO CHOOSE THE DEPOSITORY BY STATE LOAN, BY CHARTER. I'M NOT SURE CLEAR WHETHER THEY'VE DONE THAT OR NOT. >> IN THE RESURGENCE OF THAT DEPOSITORY IS THEN THROUGH THE ACTUAL STATE LAW, CAN WE ASK BELSON? >> IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GO THROUGH OUR BID PROCESS AND IT WASN'T APPROVED BY COUNCIL, SO IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER. I GUESS IT'S ACADEMIC. IT'S THE SAME WAY IT'D BE GOOD TO KNOW IF THEY PROCURED IT PROPERLY AND HOW THEY'RE COLLATERALIZED AND WHAT THEIR SPECIFICATIONS ARE, AND HOW THEY CHECK ALL THAT. BUT I BELIEVE THE WAY THE CHARTER READS, IT HAS TO BE YOUR DEPOSITORY, WHICH MEANS BID AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF GALVESTON. >> IF THEY'RE DOING IT THE CORRECT WAY AND DEPOSITING THE FUNDS AT THE CITY IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING AS FAR AS WHAT THE PARK BOARD HAS BUDGETED? >> REPEAT THAT, PLEASE. >> IF WE ARE APPROVING THE PARK BOARD BUDGET, AND THE FUNDS ARE DEPOSITED AT THE CITY, THE PARK BOARD WILL STILL GET THE MONEY THAT THEY WOULD HAVE RECEIVED IF THEY HAD IT DEPOSITED IN THEIR DEPOSITORY? >> ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THE COUNCIL WOULD THEN KNOW, BUT WHAT MAKES THAT PROPER IS THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE APPROVED THOSE EXPENDITURES. >> AND TRANSFERRED THE MONEY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> I'M ABOUT FOLLOWING THE LAW AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FUNDS BEING DEPOSITED IN THE CITY DEPOSITORY. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO MICRO-MANAGE THE PARK BOARD. WE'RE GOING TO TRANSFER A LUMP SUM ON WHAT THEIR CURRENT BUDGET IS. >> WE WILL TRANSFER IT BASED ON CASHFLOW NEEDS LIKE JUST LIKE THE CITY MOVES MONEY FROM ITS ACCOUNTS. WE DON'T KEEP ALL OF OUR MONEY SITTING IN A CHECKING ACCOUNT. WE KEEP IT IN CERTAIN INVESTMENTS THEN WE TRANSFER THE MONEY SO THE PARK BOARD WOULD GIVE THEIR CASHFLOW ANALYSIS AS WHEN THEY NEED THE CASH AND WE TRANSFER IT AS THEY NEED IT. >> PRESUMABLY ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, AND OFTEN THAT THEY NEED WELL THE ORDINANCE ANTICIPATES THEM HAVING 120-DAY RESERVE THE SAME AS WE DO AND BEGINNING WITH A 90-DAY OPERATING BUDGET ON TOP OF THAT SO IT'S BASICALLY SEVEN MONTHS AND IT GOES IN AND THEN ON A QUARTERLY BASIS, THAT WOULD BE TRANSFERRED OUT OF THE CITY'S ACCOUNT. >> WELL, IN JANUARY WE GET ANOTHER QUARTER OF PAYMENTS AND THE ORDINANCE SAYS, HAVE A CONTRACT WRITTEN BY MARCH. >> YEAH. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BY CONTRACT? >> MIKE, YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING. >> AM I RIGHT TO SAY THAT THE PARK BOARD IS STILL COLLECTING THE HOT AND ARE THEY THEN PUTTING IT INTO THEIR ACCOUNT AND THEN TRANSFERRING IT EVERY WEEK TO THE DEPOSITORY? >> NOT TODAY. WE KNOW THAT THAT IS HAPPENING. >> HE IS ASKING HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK. >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS ORDINANCE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT. THIS IS THE TRAIL THAT IT'S TAKING. THESE ORDINANCES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS A PROOF THAT THE PARK BOARD LIKE THE HOT WHICH IT INTO THEIR ACCOUNTS AND THEN TRANSFERS IT TO THE CITY DEPOSITORY EVERY WEEK? >> YES. >> YES. THAT MEANS THE LAW. >> THAT 52 DEPOSITS A YEAR. [01:20:01] >> THIS ORDINANCE IS AN INTERIM SOLUTION WHERE WE BUY THE CONTRACT, AND THAT WOULD BE THE PERMANENT SOLUTION. >> WELL, THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT, WE GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION. NOW THE WAY IT WOULD WORK IS THEY DIRECT WHERE THOSE DEPOSITS COME IN AND WHEN THE FUNDS COME IN FROM HOTELIERS AND THE PEOPLE COLLECTING HOT THEY HAVE DIRECT WHERE THOSE DEPOSITS GO SO IT'D BE DIRECTED TO THE CITY'S ACCOUNT AT THAT POINT. >> BUT THE FUNDS HAVE TO COME TO ACCOUNT, BUT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO BE COLLECTING THEM. THEY'RE GOING TO COLLECT THE FUNDS AND THEN THOSE FUNDS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE CITY DEPOSITORY INSTEAD OF INTO THEIR OWN ACCOUNT. >> IT WOULDN'T BE 52 TRANSACTIONS A YEAR. THAT WOULD JUST BE INSTEAD OF GOING THERE COME TO THE CITIES AND DEPOSITORY. >> IT COULD HAPPEN DAILY, I MEAN, THE RAPID FUNDS [OVERLAPPING] COME IN. >> NO PAYCHECK, THAT IF YOU DESIGNATED FOR YOUR PAYCHECK TO BE DEPOSITED, YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO DO ANY DAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. ON A REGULAR BASIS, THAT'S WHERE THE FUNDS ARE DIRECTED. >> IT'S AUTOMATICALLY DIRECTED TO IT'S OWNER. >> WE CURRENTLY PAY THE PARK BOARD TO COLLECT THE FUNDS. THERE IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, BRYCE IS SHAKING HIS HEAD NOW. >> THE COLLECTED ADMINISTRATIVE FEES. >> YEAH. >> WE TRANSFER ADMINISTRATIVE FEES? >> JUST A SECOND. BRYSON, COME FORWARD HERE, PLEASE. BRYSON. HAVE A SEAT UP HERE. WOULD YOU PLEASE SEAT HERE? >> EVEN BRYSON HAD TO WEAR THE ORANGE TIE. >> THAT'S IN HONOR OF HALLOWEEN THERE. [LAUGHTER] >> I DON'T HAVE A BASEBALL TEAM, BUT I FIGURED WHEN IN ROME, SO I MIGHT AS WELL CHEER [NOISE] FOR THOSE STROKES. OUR ADMINISTRATIVE FEES ARE TAKEN OUT OF THE PORTION THAT IS ALLOCATED TO THE PARK BOARD. THERE IS NO CHARGE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT TAKEN FROM THE CITY'S PORTION. THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST OF COLLECTING, IT IS MORE EXCLUSIVELY BY THE PARK BOARD. >> WELL, THEY'RE PAID FROM WHAT? >> FROM HOT TAX. >> FROM THE HOT TAX ALLOCATED TO THE PARK BOARD, NOT THE PORTION ALLOCATED. >> CAN YOU, OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, TELL US WHAT THE COST OF THAT COLLECTION IS? >> PROBABLY RIGHT AROUND $200,000 A YEAR. >> CERTAINLY, YOU NEED TO MAKE THE PARK BOARD HOLD ON THAT IF WE CONTINUED TO ASK THEM TO PERFORM THE FUNCTION FOR IT. >> CORRECT. DAN IS SHAKING HIS HEAD OVER HERE. DAN, YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD. >> I'M SHAKING MY HEAD. I THINK BRYSON IS INCORRECT TO SOME EXTENT, CLEARLY UNDERSTANDS HOW THE CASH FLOWS DO THEIR BUSINESS. THEY USE HOT TO FUND THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, SO HOT THAT COMES INTO THAT IS COLLECTED, A PORTION THAT IS USED TO PAY THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. SO THERE IS HOT USED FOR THE COLLECTION [OVERLAPPING] >> WITHOUT A PARK BOARD [OVERLAPPING] THERE IS NO PORTIONS, ALL HOT. >> HE'S SAYING THE PORTION THAT GOES TO THE CITY, THEY DON'T TAKE A FEE OUT OF THAT. >> WHAT PORTION MIGHT THAT BE THAT COMES TO THE CITY? >> THE [INAUDIBLE], THE CONVENTION CENTER STUFF. [OVERLAPPING] IT'S EXCEEDINGLY COMPLEX AND CONVOLUTED. BUT THE WAY THE CASH FLOW OF THE HOT WORKS INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND MOVEMENT IN ONE OF THE PARK BOARD BUT HOT FUNDS THE ENTIRE OPERATION. >> SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO EVEN MAKE IT MORE CONVOLUTED. >> WELL, NO. IT'S QUITE EASY WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE FUNDS COME IN, YOU'RE FUNDING THEM BASED ON AN APPROVED BUDGET. [NOISE] THE REAL DIFFERENCE IS THERE'S APPROVED BUDGET, LET'S JUST SAY IT'S A MILLION DOLLARS. IF HOT COMES INTO TWO MILLION DOLLARS, WHERE'S THAT OTHER ONE MILLION DOLLARS? THAT MILLION DOLLARS IS AT THE PARK BOARD AND NOT AT THE CITY OF GALVESTON WHO LEVY THE TAX. >> WHAT'S THE CITY GOING TO DO WITH IT? >> IT WILL BE USED FOR HOT PURPOSES AND MAY BE A PROJECT THAT THEY DO WITH THE PARK BOARD, THE SMOOTH PERMISSIBLE PROJECT. >> HOW MUCH MONEY RIGHT NOW DO WE HAVE IN THE CITY BUDGET FOR HOT THAT HAS? >> IT'S JUST TRIPLED DOWN TO SEVERAL MILLION. >> WELL, THAT'S A LITTLE MORE STEP FORWARD. >> IT HAS RECENTLY INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY. >> WELL, JOHN BRINGS UP TWO GOOD POINTS. FIRST OF ALL, THE MONEY'S THE HOT, THE EXCESS MONIES THAT COME IN. WHAT IS THE CITY GOING TO DO WITH THAT IS THAT OR PARK BOARD GOING TO DO? >> IT'S A CITY TAX AND IT SHOULD RESIDE WITH THE CITY, AND THE COUNCIL WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AND IT MAY BE AN APPROVED PARK BOARD BUDGET. >> CORRECT. >> IT MAY BE ALLOWABLE, WHO KNOWS, IT'S ANYTHING THAT'S ALLOWABLE THROUGH THE LAW, THE COUNCIL CAN ALLOCATE THAT MONEY FOR. >> MY POINT IS, I DON'T MIND HOLDING ONTO THAT MONEY, BUT WE WANT TO USE IT AND SO I'M ASKING WHAT THE CITY IS GOING TO DO WITH IT. >> IT'S ON PROJECTS, IT'S UP TO COUNCIL. >> WHAT HAVE WE DONE WITH IT THE BEST? >> YOU'VE NEVER HAD IT. >> YOU'VE NEVER HAD IT. [OVERLAPPING] [BACKGROUND] >> WE CURRENTLY HAVE HOT TAX WITHIN OUR CITY [NOISE] ROUTE. >> WHICH YOU HAVE IS DIMINISHING AMOUNT OF CITY AND TRICKLED DOWN BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO RUN OUT. REMEMBER, THAT HAS A DEFINITIVE END TO IT AND ONCE YOU'VE BEEN USING FOR, IT'S PRIMARILY FUNDING TROLLEY OPERATIONS. >> BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE USING IT FOR NOW. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE IT FOR? WE'RE ASKING TO TAKE THIS MONEY OVER INTO OUR COFFERS. [01:25:02] I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE USED FOR. >> I THINK THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL POLICY [OVERLAPPING] IT IS STILL TAX MONEY. >> I CAN COME UP. >> WELL, EXCUSE ME. MAUREEN IS NEXT AND THEN DAVID AND THEN SHARON. DAN, PLEASE COME UP JUST FOR A SECOND. >> I ALMOST LAID OUT. [LAUGHTER] >> I WANT TO GET MY SECOND QUESTION ANSWERED, AND THAT IS WHAT DOES THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET ACTUALLY MEAN? I'M CONCERNED AS MAUREEN [NOISE] MICRO-MANAGING THE PARK BOARD? >> ONCE THE BUDGET IS APPROVED, THEY GO WITH IT. >> WELL, NO, BUT WHAT DOES APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET? THEY SEND THEIR BUDGET OVER HERE FOR APPROVAL. WHAT DO YOU DO WITH IT? ARE YOU GOING TO GO THROUGH EACH LINE ITEM? >> WHAT WE SHOULD DO IS SIT DOWN. BRYSON, GO THROUGH THE LINE ITEMS, DISCUSS VARIOUS THINGS. THE BIG PART OF IT THAT'S OUTSIDE THE NORM IS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PROJECTS [OVERLAPPING]. THE M&O IS PRETTY CLEAN-CUT. THIS IS WHAT IT COST TO OPERATE? THIS IS WHAT IT COST TO CLEAN THE BEACHES AND PROVIDE LIFEGUARD SERVICE AND ALL THOSE THINGS. AND ONCE YOU APPROVE THOSE, THAT'S APPROVED. CITY IS NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT. THERE'LL BE QUARTERLY REPORTS BACK TO THE CITY. PARK BOARD IS GOING TO REQUEST THE FUNDING AND THE CITY PROVIDES THE FUNDING PER THE APPROVED BUDGET. >> SO THE M&O BUDGET, YOU SAY THAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THE PARK BOARD, THEREFORE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT. IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? >> NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT WHAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED THROUGH DON IS THAT THE COUNCIL WILL GIVE A PROVISION APPROVAL OF THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE IT ALL HAPPENS SO LATE. >> NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT COMING FORWARD, IS THAT WHEN THEY SEND THEIR BUDGET OVER HERE, THE M&O BUDGET, YOU JUST SAID SINCE IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THE PARK BOARD, YOU PROBABLY NOT GOING TO GET INTO THAT MUCH. YOU'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THEM. >> CHANCES ARE. I THINK THAT THEY PRUDENTLY DEVELOP A BUDGET DEALING WITH THE OPERATIONS OF THE PARK. >> WILL IT GIVE IT THE SAME CURSORY CHECKS WE GIVE OUR BUDGET? SO I MEAN, IF THERE'S SOMETHING EGREGIOUS AND THEY REPORT THAT TO COUNCIL, WE'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF ANYTHING AT THE STAFF LEVEL. WE'RE JUST GOING TO POINT THINGS OUT TO COUNCIL AND IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO LET IT FLY, WE ALL LET IT FLY. >> I UNDERSTAND. WE HAVE MARIE. >> OKAY. YOUR QUESTION, JOHN, WHAT ARE THESE PROJECTS GOING TO BE USED FOR? THERE IS A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT HOT TAX COULD BE USED FOR. >> I KNOW THAT. [OVERLAPPING] I'M A PROPONENT OF USING HOT TAX FOR ALL KINDS OF STUFF, ESPECIALLY TO REDUCE OUR TAX RATE. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE. IF THEY CAN BE DONE, I MEAN, YOU WANT TO SEE MORE WEST END BEACH RENOURISHMENT DONE. >> RIGHT. >> I DON'T KNOW WHY [OVERLAPPING] THE CITY WOULD WANT TO TAKE ON THAT CHARGE TO DO THAT WHEN THE PARK BOARD ALREADY HAS BEACH NOURISHMENT GOING ON [OVERLAPPING] >> THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THE WEST TOWN. >> THEY DO NOT COVER THE WEST TOWN. A MATTER OF FACT, UNDERSTAND. >> AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO BE EFFICIENT AND STUFF. IF THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO TELL THE PARK BOARD TO DO, WE NEED TO TELL THE PARK BOARD TO DO THAT AND GO THROUGH THAT PROJECT. I THINK IT'S RIDICULOUS THAT WE TAKE ON THE- >> I AM NOT SAYING THAT WE TAKE ON, BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT CAN BE DONE BY HOT TAX. [OVERLAPPING] CAN YOU BE QUIET FOR A MINUTE? IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT IT IN EQUITY IN HOT TAX, CURRENTLY 53 PERCENT OF THE HOT TAX IS GENERATED BY SHORT-TERM RENTALS, OF WHICH MY DISTRICT HAS 49.2 PERCENT OF THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, OF WHICH MY DISTRICT BECAUSE OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS. ACTUALLY, PEOPLE ARE PAYING MORE TAXES AND THEY'RE HAPPY TO PAY OUT OF THEIR POCKETS FOR EXTRA SECURITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE OF THINGS THAT ARE A RESULT OF HOT TAXES. THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT, COULD WE USE IT TO PUT LIGHTS ON 61ST STREET? YEAH. COULD WE USE IT FOR BOAT RAMPS? YEAH. COULD WE USE IT FOR EXTRA SECURITY [NOISE] ON THE BEACH WHICH IS BECOMING AN ISSUE? YES, BECAUSE THAT IS APPROVED BY HOT TAX. WHAT KIND OF PROJECTS CAN WE DO? THAT'S JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. YES, WE COULD USE FOR BEACH PROJECTS. I DON'T CARE HOW YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT. WE CURRENTLY COMPETE WITH THE PARK BOARD FOR BEACH MONEY AND THAT SIMPLY IS NOT APPROPRIATE. A PERFECT EXAMPLE, AND I CAN CITE IT, IS WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE DESIGN AND ENGINEERING OF A BEACH. THAT PROJECT DIRECTED BY THE PARK BOARD WAS GOING TO STOP AT 8 MILE ROAD. WHERE IS THE MOST CRITICAL POSITION IN THE CITY RIGHT NOW? [01:30:03] IT'S FROM 8TH MILE ROAD TO 12 1/2 MILE ROAD WHERE WE'RE LOSING BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE AND IT WAS GOING TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PROJECTS UNTIL THE CITY GOT INVOLVED. WE WENT TO THE [INAUDIBLE] AND SAID WE NEED TO DO DESIGN AND ENGINEERING. WHAT CAN WE DO WITH HOT TAX? WE CAN ALSO USE IT TO BOND PROJECTS ALONG WITH IDC. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN. BUT I'M SORRY, I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IF THE COUNCIL ISN'T INVOLVED THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE OTHER PROJECTS, WHAT BEHIND THE SEAWALL THAT HAPPENS. [NOISE] >> THAT MONEY THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COULD VERY WELL BE UTILIZED BY THE PARK BOARD AND THEY COULD USE IT FOR STUART BEACH IN SOME WAY AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO IT'LL BE AT COUNCILS IN THE DECISION ABOUT BEACH SAND AND ALL THAT. WE'VE GOT THAT COMING IN NOVEMBER 17TH ON OUR AGENDA. >> WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE DIVERTED HERE. >> WE ARE. >> JOHN'S QUESTION WAS IF THERE'S EXCESS MONEY [OVERLAPPING]. >> WHAT KIND OF PROJECTS [OVERLAPPING]. >> WHAT IT WAS IN THE CITY, WHAT WILL THE CITY DO WITH IT? WELL, THEN BEGS THE QUESTION, WHAT WILL THE PARK BOARD DO WITH IT? >> IF IT'S CITY TAX MONEY, WHICH IT IS, THE CITY SHOULD BE DECIDING WHAT TO DO WITH IT AND 61ST STREET IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE. IF WE DECIDED TO SPEND TWO, $300,000 TO LIGHT 61ST STREET, THE WAY WE'RE DOING 25TH STREET, THAT'S A CITY PROJECT. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU'D GO TO THE PARK BOARD AND SAY, PUT IN SOME LIGHTS ON A CITY STREET. >> OR YOU DECIDE TO BOARD SECURITY ON THE WEST END. [OVERLAPPING] >> LET'S NOT FORGET THE SHIRTLESS CHILDREN. YOU SAID, "SEEK THE LIGHTS ON 61ST." THAT'S A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT ONE OF THE PROJECTS WE COULD DO WITH IT. I'M NOT PROPOSING ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT, BUT THAT'S A DECISION WE WOULD MAKE WITH HOTEL TAX MONEY THAT'S IN OUR ACCOUNT THAT WE HAVE PURVIEW OVER AS OPPOSED TO GOING TO THE PARK BOARD AND SAYING, DO YOU HAVE ONE MILLION DOLLARS? CAN YOU PLEASE PUT SOME LIGHT STREET ON 61ST STREET? THAT'S NOT THEIR CHARTER, THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE THERE TO DO, SO WE CAN GET CONFUSED ABOUT SAND AND ALL THAT STUFF. BUT IF WE'RE FOLLOWING THE LAW, IT'S OUR MONEY AND IF IT'S SOMETHING WE WANT THE PARK BOARDS TO DO FOR US, AND THEY'RE AMENABLE, AND THEY SAY, WELL, IT'S GOING TO COST TO TWO MILLION DOLLARS. WE ARE LIKE, OKAY, WE'VE GOT THAT MONEY OVER HERE, TWO MILLION DOLLARS. HERE'S $14 MILLION, DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. >> SHARON. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> MY QUESTION. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU GAVE ME SECTION 13 OF THE CHARTER AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT [NOISE] CODE. CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY AGAIN WITH THE TAX CODE SAYS [INAUDIBLE] FOR ME REGARDING THE COLLECTION OF THE HOT TAX? >> [NOISE] THAT THING CAN BE TAX CODE AND SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES OUR SITUATION OF GIVING MONEY TO [INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS DONE BY INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT [NOISE] EVEN BEFORE 2014. BUT IN TERMS OF STATUTE THAT SAYS THE CITY SHALL GIVE THE PARK BOARD THE MONEY, THE CITY SHALL HAVE THE PARK BOARD COLLECT IT. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT. >> I TOO WOULD LIKE TO, I KNOW YOU GUYS CALL IT ACADEMIC, BUT IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT BECAUSE I KNOW A COUNCIL SAID HERE, THE MAYOR AND EVERYBODY ELSE FOR 2015. JUST SO THAT HABITS WON'T OCCUR AGAIN, I THINK IT'S GREAT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, WHERE THE MONEY WAS DEPOSITED FOR WHATEVER. MY LAST WAS THAT I TOO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE HECK ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE MONEY? BECAUSE DISTRICT 1 DEFINITELY MADE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHTS. WE HAVE TAXPAYERS WHO LIVE OVER THERE. WE'RE STILL BEGGING FOR STREET LIGHTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. I TOO WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. EVENTUALLY I KNOW WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT TODAY, BUT I HOPE THAT IS ON THE AGENDA SOMEWHERE TO ADDRESS. [NOISE]. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, SHARON. WILLIAMS. >> LET'S SAY, WE APPROVE THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET, WE HAVE EXCESS AMOUNT AND THAT COMES TO COUNSEL'S APPROVAL FOR PROJECTS. IT HAS TO BE DONE IN THE NAME OF TOURISM. NOTHING THAT CAN BECOME RATHER GENERAL FUND. YOU GET A COUNCIL, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW THEY WANT TO PROMOTE SPORTS TOURISM. THEY DECIDE, HEY, LET'S DO 500,000 IN IMPROVEMENTS AT CROCKETT PARK, MAKE A TURF AND PROMOTE TOURISM. WELL, LAW SAYS THAT IT'S GOT TO GENERATE X AMOUNT OF STAYS IN HOTELS. IT'S GOT TO PRODUCE X AMOUNT REVENUE IN HOTELS. [01:35:01] WHO AT THE CITY WOULD THAT FALL ON? BARBARA TO PROMOTE THAT UNDER PARKS AND RECREATION AND TO FOLLOW THAT? >> [OVERLAPPING] AUDIT IT. >> YEAH. OR TO AUDIT IT, OR REALLY JUST TO [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE DO A NORMAL INTERNAL AUDIT PROCEDURES [INAUDIBLE] AUDIT'S HOT NOW. >> WELL, I'LL SAY MORE SO HOW WOULD WE GUARANTEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE THE TOURISM OFF OF THAT AND BE ABLE TO AUDIT IT? [OVERLAPPING]. WHO'S GOING TO PROMOTE THE TOURS ABOUT THE CITY? [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE PARK BOARD [OVERLAPPING] >> THE HISTORY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE DECIDED TO PUT $500,000 INTO DEVELOPMENT FIELD, IMPROVEMENT OF THE FIELD. THAT THERE'S NOTHING TO SAY THAT WE DON'T GO CBB AND SAY LOOK, NEW FIELDS, HELP US PROMOTE SPORTS, TOURISM. THEY DO THAT NOW. THEY DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF IT. WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF SPORTS TOURISM, BUT IT'S ON THEIR AGENDA, BUT BUILDING A NEW BALL FIELD OR IMPROVING A BALL FIELD, THAT'S NOT IN THEIR PURVIEW. THAT'S NOT PROMOTION. >> DAVID'S RIGHT THOUGH. IF WE WERE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE WOULD TURN TO THE PARK BOARD AND THEIR EXPERTS TO PROMOTE IT. THEY HAVE METRICS AND THEY HAVE GREAT SOFTWARE THAT THEY'VE DONE. WE'VE PARTNERED WITH TO TRACK THOSE USES AND TO SEE IF WE'RE GETTING THE HITS ON IT. THAT WE NEED TO GET HITS. >> THAT WAS THE QUESTION. I'M I'M SORRY. I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT. HOW DO YOU KNOW IT'S PUTTING HITS AND BITS? IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO LOOK AT ONE ITEM AND SAY, WELL, THAT LOOKS EVERYTHING. I MEAN, WHEN YOU HAVE CONVENTIONS THE CBB TRACKS CONVINCE THE HOTEL ROOM NIGHTS BOOKED WITH CONVENTIONS, THAT [INAUDIBLE] BUT FOR THESE ANCILLARY THINGS LIKE WHAT IS IT? HOW MANY HITS DOES A TROLLEY GENERATE? WE DON'T KNOW, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S AN ENHANCEMENT OF TOURISM AND ALL OF THIS IS AN ENHANCEMENT. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE THAT GO TO BRIAN MUSEUM [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT YOU CAN PROVE IT BY LOOKING AT THE PENNY FIVE YEARS AGO AND THE PENNY TODAY. >> WELL, THAT'S HOW YOU ATTRACT THIS. >> THAT WHAT I'M SAYING THAT'S HOW YOU PROVE THAT YOUR PLANS ARE WORKING. >> I GO TO THE BRIAN MUSEUM. NOBODY'S EVER ASKED ME IF I'M STAYING IN A HOTEL. >> THEY HAVE A- >> I KNOW YOU'RE NOT. [LAUGHTER]. >> I SEE GUYS. >> THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT MY STATUS IS AT THE MOMENT [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING]. >> GUYS, WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE [INAUDIBLE] >> RIGHT NOW? >> ANNUALLY. >> THIS YEAR. >> WHAT IS BUDGET FOR IT. WHAT DID [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT WE ACTUALLY COLLECTED? THIS YEAR OVERALL, WE'RE THINKING IT WOULD BE AROUND 30 MILLION, WE JUST GOT THE FINAL DISTRIBUTION. ACTUALLY, EXCUSE ME, ONE MORE DISTRIBUTION FROM THE STATE THAT WE'RE WAITING FOR TO FINALIZE THAT NUMBER. >> I WANT DAN, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO TAKE THE DEPOSIT, GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT THE SALIENT POINTS ARE IN THE ORDINANCE FOR THE DEPOSIT THAT WILL BE ON OUR AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON. DO THE SAME FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET SO THAT YOU WOULD OUTLINE AND ANSWER. WE COULD GET QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL [OVERLAPPING] >> CAN I ASK YOU ONE MORE. WHAT IS YOUR BUDGET, THE CURRENT? >> THIS YEAR I THINK IT'S AROUND 47 MILLION. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> [INAUDIBLE] THIS YEAR IS ABOUT 60 MILLION. >> [INAUDIBLE] I DO HAVE AN ANSWER TO YOU ALL. PRIOR TO 2015 PARK WAS COLLECTED BY THE CITY INTO THE CITY REPOSITORY. I REMEMBER, SHORTLY AFTER I GOT HERE IN 2014 OR WHATEVER THE COUNCIL AT THE TIME DISCUSSED. WELL, THEY GET ALL THE MONEY. LET'S JUST LET THEM HANDLE IT. I COULDN'T TELL YOU WHAT MEANING IT HAPPENED. I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS AN OFFICIAL ACTION. I JUST REMEMBER THOSE DISCUSSION. BUT PRIOR TO THAT TIME IT CAME TO THE CITY [INAUDIBLE] REPOSITORY. >> BASED OFF OF WHAT I'VE SEEN. THAT'S EXACTLY CORRECT. >> DAN, GO THROUGH THE DEPOSIT TO ORDINANCE. THAT IS ITEM 10G, OUTLINE THE POINTS THERE AS YOU WOULD, PLEASE. >> OKAY. THE SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE AND THE MOST SALIENT ARE IN SECTION 2, COUNSELORS DIRECTING DEPARTMENT, [INAUDIBLE] ALL CITY HAPPENS IN ITS POSSESSION. THE CITY MANAGER OR BY DEPOSIT INTO THE CITY DEPOSITORY, I UNDERSTAND THE TRANSFER OF MONEY BACK-AND-FORTH ELECTRONICALLY, SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO PHYSICALLY CARRY IT OVER IN THE BANK WITH PANICS. WE HAVE LOST COUNCIL IN BOBI [OVERLAPPING]. >> I MONITOR, JUST DONE MY [OVERLAPPING] >> WELL, I'M TRYING TO GET CLOSE ENOUGH. DAN, IF YOU COULD JUST SPEAK UP JUST A TINY BIT MORE IT REALLY HELP ME OUT. >> I'M HERE TO SERVE. IT SAYS PARK BOARD, [INAUDIBLE] THE CITY HAVE FUNDS IN YOUR POSSESSION. [NOISE] IT CAN BE PLACED IN A CITY DEPOSITORY. [01:40:02] >> WHICH SECTION ARE YOU ON? >> THAT SECTION 2. >> GOT. THANK YOU. >> THEN SECTION 3. A COPY OF THE PARK BOARD'S HOT BUDGET IS ATTACHED. THE PARK BOARD CAN RETAIN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 120 DAYS OF RESERVES AND 90 DAYS OF M&O, SO KEEP THOSE TWO AREAS. THEN THE NEXT POINT SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO PASS ANOTHER ORDINANCE. THAT'S ALSO IN YOUR POCKET THAT DEALS WITH DELIVERY AND FUNDS TO THE PARK BOARD. THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT SHE SAYS. >> IT SAYS THE FUNDS WILL BE OF THE DATE OF THE PASSAGE OF THIS ORDINANCE. SHE'LL BE TRANSMITTING TO THE CITY ON A WEEKLY BASIS? >> YES. >> THAT'S A VERY DOABLE THING WITH [INAUDIBLE] >> FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT, THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE DIFFICULT FOR US TO ACHIEVE. COLLECTING THE MONEY AND TRANSFERRING IT ISN'T THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS ALL THE DIFFERENT CLIENTS THAT WE HAVE, ALL THE DIFFERENT TAXPAYERS AND HAPPY TO SET UP WHERE THOSE DEPOSITS ARE GOING TO GO. WE'RE GOING TO DEPOSIT DIRECTLY INTO THE CITY ACCOUNT. WE HAVE TO CHANGE THOSE GATEWAYS AND API IF THE PAYMENTS ARE DONE ONLINE. IF THEY'RE WIRE TRANSFERS, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GET THE PROPER WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS. IT'S A MAJOR CHANGE FOR OUR CLIENTS AND THAT'S ONE OF OUR BIGGEST ISSUES. THAT WOULD BE MY BIGGEST CONCERN FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT IS GETTING ALL THAT DONE. THERE'S OTHER EXAMPLES I CAN COME UP WITH THERE, IT'S COMPLICATED THAT WOULD BE HARD FOR ME TO DO IN SEVEN DAYS. THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS. >> SHOULD BE RIGHT. THAT'S JUST WHAT SECTION 5 SAYS. SECTION FIVE SAYS THAT THOSE FUNDS COLLECTED WILL BE TRANSMITTED TO THE CITY. AS YOU DO TODAY, TWICE A MONTH, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. >> YOU TRANSMIT THE FOREIGNER QUARTER 498. >> IT GOES INTO YOUR ACCOUNT. >> THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT FOLLOWS STATE LAW ACCORDING TO DAN. >> IF THEY AGGREGATE THEM IN URBAN CITIES ACCOUNT IN A TIMELY MANNER [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT HE'S SAYING, HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE IT QUICKLY? >> NO. [OVERLAPPING] I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. I THINK HE SAID HE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET ALL THESE CLIENTS TO REDIRECT TO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> WERE TALKING ABOUT. LET'S FIRST OF ALL GET JOHN'S QUESTION ANSWERED. >> THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO PUT THIS MONEY IN THEIR ACCOUNT. THEY'RE GOING TO COLLECT IT. PUT IT IN THEIR ACCOUNT? >> CORRECT. >> THEN THEY'RE GOING TO TRANSFER MONEY TO THE CITY. [OVERLAPPING] THAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCORDING TO STATE LAW, THAT IT GOES INTO THEIR ACCOUNT, THEN GOES INTO THE CITY ACCOUNT, AND THEN IT'S TRANSFERRED BACK TO THEIR ACCOUNT. [NOISE] >> WHY WOULD WE DO IT IN THAT WAY? >> WELL, RIGHT. JUST A SECOND. >> BUT YOU CAN'T FLIP A SWITCH. THAT'S WHAT BRYSON IS SAYING. IT CAN'T HAPPEN. >> RIGHT. >> YEAH. >> ALL RIGHT. WAIT. I WANT TO GET JOHN'S QUESTION ANSWER HERE. >> YEAH. >> EXCUSE ME. >> GO AHEAD AND CONTINUE. WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION? >> HOW'S THE LEGAL? >> PRECEDENTS GO. >> HOW'S THE LEGAL? OKAY. >> THAT WOULDN'T BE A FINAL OUTCOME. >> WHAT? >> IT WILL TAKE TIME TO REDIRECT ALL THE DEPOSITS THAT COME IN TO THE CITY OF MOSCOW. >> CAN I JUST POINT OUT THAT THAT'S HOW WE DO IT. WE HAVE OUR OWN TAX. WE DON'T COLLECT IVORY TAX. THE COUNTY COLLECTS IVORY TAX AND TRANSMIT IT TO OURS. >> CORRECT. >> JUST A SECOND. I WANT TO GET JOHN'S QUESTION ANSWERED, DAN. >> YES OF COURSE. >> IS THAT LEGAL TO DO IT THAT WAY? >> I BELIEVE IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO DO IT THAT WAY. THEIR LAWYERS HAVE SAID THE PARK FOR WHICH IS AN AGENCY OF THE CITY. I WAS DELIGHTED WHEN THEY SAID THAT FOR OTHER REASONS. BUT I HAD ORIGINALLY WRITTEN THIS ORDINANCE FOR THEM TO TRANSFER THE MONEY DAILY BUT CHANGED IT TO WEEKLY, TO LESSEN THE BURDEN. BUT I THINK IT'S OKAY FOR THEM TO [NOISE] HOLD IT IN THEIR ACCOUNT A FEW DAYS AND THEN SEND IT TO US. >> WHY WOULD WE DO IT THAT WAY? WHY WOULDN'T THEY JUST EVENTUALLY HAVE ALL THEIR. >> DEPOSITS DIRECTLY. >> DEPOSIT DIRECTLY INTO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. >> I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. >> THAT'S THE WAY IT WOULD WORK. >> EVENTUALLY. >> THIS IS WHAT BRYSON JUST IS ADDRESSING IT, AND SO MATCHING THAT AGAIN BRYSON IF WE MOVED IN THAT DIRECTION. >> IT WILL TAKE SIX MONTHS TO GET IN THAT DIRECTION. >> TO MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION, IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY TAKE SOME TIME TO GET IT DONE. ANOTHER OPERATIONAL CONCERN FOR MYLES IS IF MY STAFF THAT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS DOESN'T CONTROL THE PROCESS FROM START TO FINISH. OR WHAT I MEAN IS FROM THE COLLECTION THAT COMES IN TO THE POINT THAT IT'S RECONCILED AND POSTED TO THE ACCOUNT. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE IS CLEARED UP ALL THE WAY TO THE POSTING OF CASH ON THE BALANCE SHEET IN THE BANK RECONCILIATIONS IN-BETWEEN. [01:45:04] MY STAFF NEEDS CONTROL OF THAT PROCESS FROM START TO FINISH IN ORDER TO GET IT DONE. IF WE'RE ONLY DOING DEPOSITS THAT I WOULD HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS. WHO'S DOING THE RECONCILIATION? WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR ACCOUNTS FIRST? >> WE HAVE AN ENTIRE STAFF HERE. >> WHY? SO WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK THOSE THINGS [NOISE] AND YOU CAN'T FLIP THE SWITCH, YOU CAN'T DO IT IN SEVEN DAYS. >> I AGREE. >> EVEN WEEKLY TRANSFERS IS DIFFICULT BECAUSE THERE'S ONE DUE DATE FOR TAX, ONE DURING THE MONTH. HAVING TO DO THESE WEEKLY RECONCILIATIONS WOULD MEAN SOMETHING THAT WE DO TWICE A MONTH NOW, I'M NOW GOING TO HAVE TO DO EVERY SINGLE WEEK ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCES WRITTEN DOWN, WHICH IS STILL PRETTY BURDENSOME FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT. >> WELL, HOW WOULD WE RESOLVE THAT? >> THIS IS JUST MY OPINION, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY SO BEAR WITH ME. A QUESTION WAS ASKED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER. WHY COULDN'T WE JUST DESIGNATE OUR ACCOUNTS OR EVEN MAKE IT A JOINT ACCOUNT, GIVE THE CITY COMPLETE ACCESS TO THE ACCOUNTS, HAVE THE CONTROL IN THAT WAY, THE PROCESS STAYS THE SAME. WE'RE NOT DISRUPTING OPERATIONS, BUT THE CITY STILL HAS CONTROL EFFECTIVELY, OUR ACCOUNTS BECOME CITY ACCOUNTS. NOW, THERE WAS THE PROCUREMENT ISSUES THAT BRIAN RAISED AND THAT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR CURRENT CONTRACT. BUT I COULD TELL YOU HOW WE GOT THERE ABSOLUTELY. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT WOULD JUST BE A REALLY QUICK AND EASY WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS. >> I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF THE JOINT ACCOUNT SAYING LET'S NOT SHARING CREDIT CARD HERE. IT'S CITY MONEY AND IT BELONGS TO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. IF IT NEEDS TO BE DONE FOLLOWING THAT MONTHLY DUE DATE, THEN THAT'S JUST IT. >> IT'S A WAY THEY COULD HAVE ACCESS TO REVIEW THE ACCOUNT, TO SEE THE POSTINGS FOR THEIR RECONCILIATION PURPOSES. BUT IT WOULD TAKE TIME TO SET UP THIS PROCESS. >> THIS ORDINANCE, IF IT'S PASSED, IS A LITTLE TOO QUICK IN GETTING EVERYTHING. >> WELL, YEAH, [OVERLAPPING] SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE AT MINIMUM TO GET ALL THE FUNDS REDIRECTED TO THE NEW ACCOUNT. IT WOULD TAKE AT LEAST A MINIMUM OF I WOULD SAY YOU COULD ACHIEVE IT IN SIX MONTHS. I MEAN, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS HAVING TO HAVE EVERYONE FILE A NEW FORM TO WHERE THE FUNDS ARE DEPOSITED. IT'S ACHIEVABLE, BUT IT ISN'T ACHIEVABLE QUICKLY. >> BUT IN THE INTERIM, SOME OF THE FUNDS ARE BEING TRANSFERRED TWICE A MONTH NOW. ALL THE FUNDS CAN BE TRANSFERRED TWICE A MONTH NOW. >> I KNOW. I'VE BEEN IN THE ORDINANCE. IT SAYS WEEKLY. >> YEAH, I WOULDN'T OBJECT TO CHANGING THE THE ORDINANCE TO TWICE A MONTH OR WHATEVER PRICE IS CURRENT PROCESSES. >> BUT I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS IN THE ORDINANCE. >> WE'VE MADE SOME BIGGER STRIDES. IT'S MADE IT A LOT EASIER ON THE COLLECTION NOW THAT WE HAVE THE PLATFORMS COLLECTING THAT MONEY, SO WE DON'T HAVE A BAJILLION, DIFFERENT THINGS COMING IN. YOU HAVE A LOT OF IT DIRECTED THROUGH SPECIFIC PLATFORMS WHICH MAKES IT MUCH EASIER. >> WE CAN MOVE TOWARD THAT AND WE CAN MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION. BUT THE CURRENT PROCESS ALLOWS FOR DOING THIS AT A MINIMUM OF TWICE A MONTH. BUT IT SEEMED TO ME WITHOUT THE YEAR OF ACCESS. >> BUT I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANT TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE FURTHER GOAL IS IF WE'RE EVENTUALLY GOING TO HAVE IT DIRECTLY DEPOSITED TO THE CITY'S DEPOSITORY ACCOUNT. >> A SECOND NEW ORDINANCE PROVIDES THAT WITHIN SIX MONTHS BY MARCH 1ST, WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH DEPARTMENT. WE CAN HANDLE ALL THESE. >> DETAILS. >> IN THAT CONTRACT. >> WHY WOULD WE PASS THE ORDINANCE ON DEPOSITORY TODAY WHEN WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING THAT IN A CONTRACT. >> YOU BRING UP THE LAW AND THE CHARTER. >> FROM SUCH TRACK. >> YEAH, EXACTLY. THEN YOU SAY, OH, NO. YOU KEEP COLLECTING THEM, PUT THEM IN YOUR ACCOUNT, AND THEN JUST WRITE US A CHECK. >> NO, I HAVEN'T GOTTEN THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'S AN ESTABLISHED PROCEDURE BY THE STATE. THAT'S AN APPROVED PROCEDURE BY THE STATE THAT SAY EXACTLY HOW YOU COLLECT YOUR PROPERTY TAX RIGHT NOW. SHERYL DOESN'T CARRY A BAG OF MONEY. >> WHY DON'T WE JUST ASK THEM TO DO THAT TO TO PUT MONEY INTO IT, TO SET A AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY DEPOSITED INTO THE CITY. I MEAN, THIS ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THEY NEED TO DIRECTLY DEPOSIT THOSE, I THINK. I WOULD RATHER SEE THERE'S DEFINITELY A DISCONNECT BETWEEN CITY STAFF AND THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING ANSWERS FROM THE PARK BOARD HERE AND WE'RE GETTING DIFFERENT ANSWERS FROM CITY STAFF. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU ALL HAVEN'T HAD A MEETING TO WORK THIS OUT AND THEN BRING US SOME JOINT RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU ALL. >> WHAT WILL DRIVE THE INNER LOCAL IS WHATEVER ACTION THIS COUNCIL TAKES. WE CAN'T NEGOTIATE AND UNDER LOCAL AND HOW IT'S HOW IT'S GOING TO [01:50:01] FUNCTION UNLESS WE KNOW WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS. >> SO YOU WANT US TO PASS AN ORDINANCE THAT DOESN'T WORK? >> NO, [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING RIGHT NOW. [OVERLAPPING] >> WHY WOULD THEY NOT WORK? >> BECAUSE THIS SAYS IT GOES INTO EFFECT IN SEVEN DAYS. >> OKAY. YEAH. I THINK SO. >> HE'S SAYING YOU CAN'T DO IT. THAT'S NOT WHAT HE SAID. >> HE SAID HE DOES IT BY MONTHLY, DOING IT WEEKLY, WOULD BE A LOT OF CUMBERSOME WORK SO WE CAN CHANGE THE ORDINANCE DIVERSE. >> WHY WAS IT THAT, TALKED ABOUT BEFORE IT CAME TO COUNSEL? THAT'S THE BIG DISCONNECT HERE. >> IS A GIANT DISCONNECT BETWEEN THEIR STAFF AND OTHERS. GIANT. >> SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OUR OTHER OR TWO. >> YEAH, IT DOES, AND I THINK THAT'S IT NEEDS TO BE WHO'S LOCKED IN THE ROOM. >> OKAY. >> I'M TRYING TO GET COUNSELING ROOM. HE'S HERE. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND]. >> BUT I'M ONLY COUNSELED TO DO IS TO SET THE PARAMETERS AND WE'LL WORK WITH THEM. WHATEVER PARAMETERS YOU'LL SET. I CAN'T, THOSE ARE POLICY ISSUE, GUYS. I DIDN'T SET THE POLICY. YOU ALL DO. >> WELL, THAT'S FINE. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE BRINGING US THE ORDINANCE THAT MIGHT NOT WORK. >> I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY IT WOULDN'T WORK. YOU WANT TO CHANGE THIS WENT FROM DAILY TO WEEKLY, BY MONTHLY, WHATEVER THE CURRENT PROCESS IS, BECAUSE THERE IS CURRENTLY A PROCESS THAT TRANSFERS 4 AND 18 PENNIES FROM THE PARK BOARD TO THE CITY DEPOSIT STORY TWICE MONTHLY. THAT PROCESS IS IN PLACE. SO I DON'T SEE THAT THAT'S A GREAT EXTRA BURDEN HERE. IF THERE ARE PROCEDURAL ISSUES ABOUT RECONCILIATION, ABOUT HOW THAT'S DONE AND ABOUT WHETHER WE EVENTUALLY GO TO DIRECT DEPOSIT INTO THE CITY AS OPPOSED TO THE AGGREGATION WHICH DOESN'T SEE LIKE A DIFFERENCE. THE LAW, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE WORKED OUT IN THE CONTRACT. BUT THIS IS FAIRLY SIMPLE. THIS COMPLIES WITH THE LAW. THIS GETS US IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER. IT'S DOABLE. I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO DO IT AT ALL AND ARE USING DEFERRAL AS A FRANKLY A SMOKESCREEN TO KEEP THIS FROM HAPPENING AT ALL, BUT THIS IS DOABLE. ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS CHANGE THAT TO TWICE A MONTH. FINE. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING AT ALL. I MEAN, I WANT A BETTER RUN ORGANIZATION AND A BETTER LINE OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN BOTH STAFF, COUNCIL IN THE PARK BOARD. >> FIXING THE LINE OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THESE ORGANIZATIONS. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT IN AN ORPHANAGE YOUNG BUSINESS ORDINANCE. >> SO WHY WOULD THIS ORDINANCE? >> THIS IS EFFECTIVE. THIS DOESN'T FIX YOUR GENERAL LINES OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PARK BOARD. THERE'S BRIAN. >> I'M I TO SPEAK? >> MIKE, SPEAK UP. >>GO FOR IT MIKE. >> WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING COMING UP IN THESE VERY VAGUE WHAT JOHN PAUL SAYING HERE. IT SEEMS VERY ONE-SIDED. WE'RE MAKING ME AN ORDINATE BENEFITS TO REACHING PEOPLE. AND IT DOESN'T FEEL THAT THE OTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE HAVE A SAY IN HOW THIS IS GOING TO GO. BECAUSE THERE'S LOT OF TRAINING, THERE'S THINGS THAT NEED TO DO YOU NEED TO BE DONE, ON BOTH SIDES. WE'RE GETTING AN ORDINANCE WRITTEN BY THE CITY WITHOUT THE PARK BOARD. YEAH. THAT'LL WORK WITHOUT LEG WORK. I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A JOINT MEETING OR DO WE HAVE A MEETING NOW, WHETHER THE ORDINANCE WAS WRITTEN FOR BOTH PARTIES TO MAKE SURE THAT IS BEING EXECUTED EFFICIENTLY AND PROPERLY. >> WHAT I HEAR JOHN SAYING, JOHN IS NOT SAYING THAT HE'S NECESSARILY AGAINST TRANSFERRING THE MONEY INTO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. I THINK WHAT I HEAR JOHN SAYING IS HE PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE [NOISE] COMFORTABLE IF WE GET ALL THE DETAILS WORKED OUT, AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND PUT IT IN THE ORDINANCE TO THAT EFFECT SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON AND MOVE FROM THAT POINT. >> WELL-STATED. >> THEN I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT THE DETAILS OF THIS AREN'T GOING INTO AN ORDINANCE. THE WAY THIS FLOWS, THE WAY IT'S RECONCILED, WE'RE NOT GOING TO WRITE THAT INTO AN ORDINANCE, THAT'S PROCEDURE IN THE CONTRACT. THIS SAYS IT'S TAX MONEY DIRECTED INTO THE CITY'S TAX ACCOUNT. [NOISE] THE PROCEDURE ON HOW THAT'S RECONCILED AND SO FORTH, THAT'S FOR THE CONTRACT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT MIKE IS SAYING. LET'S GET EVERYBODY HAPPY BEFORE WE PASS THE LAW. >> NO. >> THAT'S NOT REALLY HAPPENING. [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. I DID NOT SAY LET EVERYBODY GET HAPPY, WHAT I SAID WAS, LET'S GET BOTH SIDES TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO WORK. >> IT'LL WORK LIKE THIS. >> WELL, IT WORKED IN THE PAST. [01:55:02] >> IT WORKED IN THE PAST, AND HALF THE FUNDS ARE TRANSFERRED THIS WAY RIGHT NOW, SO WE KNOW THERE'S A PROCESS THAT WORKS. INSTEAD OF TRANSFERRING HALF OF IT TWICE A MONTH, TRANSFER IT ALL TWICE A MONTH. I'M NOT INCLINED TO SAY LET'S HAVE A JOINT MEETING AND SEE IF THIS SUITS EVERYBODY, WHICH IS WHAT I'M HEARING. THIS WILL WORK AS IT'S WRITTEN IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT FOR CRISIS CONVENIENCE TO TWICE A MONTH, I HAVE ZERO PROBLEM WITH THAT. >> THEN HAVE A CONTRACT FOR DOWN WITHIN SIX MONTHS THAT COVERED THE OTHER DETAILS THAT [OVERLAPPING] THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH. >> WELL, PROCEDURALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT AN ORDINANCE HERE THAT PUTS THE MONEY TO THE PARK BOARD AND THEN THEY TRANSFER THE MONEY OVER HERE, AND IT'S ON A WEEKLY BASIS. NOW, IF WE CHANGE THAT TO TWICE A MONTH, IT'S STILL THE MONEY IS MOVING OVER TO THE PARK BOARD, AND WHAT I HEAR IS PROCEDURALLY, YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO DO THAT IN THE LOCAL, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE IT WHERE THE MONEY COMES STRAIGHT TO THE CITY, IS THAT RIGHT? >> YEAH. THAT'S PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING YOU'D PUT AN ORDINANCE, BUT YES. >> WELL, WE'VE GOT AN ORDINANCE NOW. >> WELL IT JUST SAYS HOW OFTEN THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT. THAT'S SOMETHING, IF TWO WEEKS WORKS, I DON'T KNOW THAT MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE THAT THAT PROCESS IS ALREADY THERE. BUT I WILL TELL YOU WHEN YOU GET DOWN INTO THE WEEDS, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO THOSE TYPES OF DETAILS GOING IN ORDINANCE. THOSE ARE THE THINGS YOU HAD TO SIT DOWN AND TALK TO BRYSON AND SAY, WELL THAT REALLY DOESN'T WORK OR IT DOESN'T WORK. HERE'S HOW MANY ACCOUNTS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S MORE OF YOUR CONTRACT OR INTERLOPE. >> THAT'S AN OPERATIONAL ISSUE, IT WILL WORK OUT IN THE STAMP. PRICING SUPPOSE IS VERY WILLING TO WORK [OVERLAPPING] >> IF YOU GIVE SIX MONTHS TO DO IT, I THINK THAT'S VERY REASONABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT. >> YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT ON THE CONTRACT TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. >> NO. NOT AS LONG AS THEY HAVE PLENTY OF FINDING TO OPERATE ON AND THE PROCESS IS IN PLACE TO CONTINUE THEIR FUNDING THROUGH THEIR APPROVED BUDGET, WHICH COUNSEL DOES THE PROVISIONAL APPROVAL THERE'D BE NO REASON FOR THEM TO HAVE ANY DIFFICULTY. >> IT'S TOTALING TO 10 DAYS. >> DON, LET'S MOVE TO THE PROOF OF THE BUDGET. COULD YOU GO THROUGH THAT. [OVERLAPPING] [NOISE] THAT IS 10J, DON. [NOISE] >> WOULD YOU LIKE A FRESH ONE? [NOISE]. >> MY SCREEN KEEPS FREEZING ON ME. >> WHICH ONE, 10J? >> 10J. [NOISE] >> THANK YOU, SIR. [NOISE] >> IT SAYS [INAUDIBLE] PARK BOARD ITS PERSON WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE TEXT CODE. THE PARK BOARD HAS BEEN COLLECTING IT, AND THAT'S PROPER. HERE'S WHAT IT SAYS. BY GIVING A PROVISIONAL APPROVAL TO THE USE OF THE HOUSE HAS CONTAINED IN THE RECENTLY PASSED [NOISE] ANNUAL BUDGET. THE REASON I HAVE DONE IT THIS WAY IS, I UNDERSTAND FROM MANAGEMENT [NOISE] THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE A STANDALONE HOT BUDGET. THE HOT FUNDS AND OTHER FUNDS ARE ALL HIGHLY INTERCHANGEABLE IN THEIR BUDGET, LET'S SAY, AND IT MAKES IT PRETTY DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING. BUT WE'RE GIVING A PROVISIONAL APPROVAL SO THAT THEY HAVE AN APPROVED BUDGET, THAT TAX CODE REQUIRES THERE BE AN APPROVED BUDGET WHEN YOU'RE DISTRIBUTING HOT FUNDS FOR THE USE OF A THIRD AGENT. [02:00:08] IT SAYS, YOU CAN'T USE ANY OF THESE HOT FUNDS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, YOU HAVE TO GET A SEPARATE APPROVAL FROM THE CITY. THAT BASICALLY FALLS [INAUDIBLE] [NOISE]. IF THEY ARE GOING TO DO A COPY, THEY HAVE TO COME TO THE CITY. >> MIKEY, DID WE LOSE YOU? >> YEAH. >> THIS TIME WE MIGHT BLOCK THEM ALL TOGETHER. >> NO. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] >> OKAY. VERY GOOD. [OVERLAPPING] >> [NOISE] THE PARK BOARD IS TO GIVE THE CITY ALL THE HOT FUNDS IN ITS POSSESSION, BUT RETAIN [NOISE] 20 DAYS OF RESERVES AND THE FIRST QUARTERS AT 90 DAYS RESERVES FOR O&M. THEN, ON JANUARY 1ST, THEY GET ANOTHER 90 DAYS, O&M. THEN IT SAYS CITY STAFF IS GOING TO WRITE A CONTRACT FORMAL CLASS TO DELIVER A USE OF HOSPITAL WHERE THE PARK BOARD THE REST OF FISCAL YEAR 2023 AND ADD IT BACK TO THE CITY. WHICH STATEMENT SHARED IN MARCH. OKAY. THEY TRANSFER US THE MONEY, WE GIVE THEM 120 DAYS RESERVES, 90 DAYS OF OPERATIONAL, THAT'S ONE-QUARTERS, WE DO THAT NOW, IT GIVES THEM ANOTHER QUARTER IN JANUARY AND WE HAVE A CONTRACT BACK HERE IN MARCH. >> OKAY. QUICK QUESTION. PROCEDURAL HERE, ARE THE QUARTERLY REPORTS AND 351 WRITTEN INTO THIS? >> NOT SPECIFICALLY. >> THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO TRANSFER YOUR MONEY, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO SEE THE QUARTERLY REPORT? >> IT DOES PROVIDE FOR THE SUBMISSION OF QUARTERLY REPORTS. WHERE IS IT? >> IT DOES IN THIS. >> REFERENCES AND EXHIBIT WE DON'T HAVE THE EXHIBIT. >> THE EXHIBIT IS REALLY JUST THE BALANCE SHEET. IT'S ON THERE TWICE. >> DON ALSO, YOU MADE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE PARK BOARD AND THE WAY THEY'RE MANAGING THEIR MONEY WITH THE HOT, WOULD YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT? >> ABSOLUTELY. WE TRACK HARD EXPENDITURES. OUR BUDGET IS VERY DETAILED. MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIT DOWN WITH ANYBODY ON THE STAFF TO TALK ABOUT IT, ANSWER QUESTIONS. ABSOLUTELY, IT'D BE CAPABLE OF PROVIDING OUR SPECIFIC BUDGET. THAT'S NOT WAS ASKED FOR, WHAT WAS ASKED FOR IN OUR ENTIRE BUDGET AND THAT'S WHAT I PROVIDED IN ITS FULL DETAIL. [NOISE] >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS PARTICULAR ORDINANCE? >> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I'M A LITTLE STILL CONFUSED ABOUT THE BEGINNING OF THIS TRANSITION. WERE THEY GOING TO THE PARK BOARD, AND THEN THE PARK BOARD HAVING TO TRANSFER IT WHEN EVENTUALLY IT'S GOING TO BE GOING DIRECTLY TO THE CITY'S ACCOUNT. >> YOU MEAN A PORTION OF IT. >> THAT PORTION WILL GO DIRECTLY, BUT TEMPORARILY, IT WON'T START THAT WAY. >> IT'LL COME TO THE CITY AND PORTION OF IT WOULD GO BACK TO THE PARK BOARD. >> [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING. YES. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. >> I WONDER IF THAT CONCEPT WILL SURVIVE. NEGOTIATION OF A CONTRACT, WHETHER THAT'S PRACTICAL TO DO THAT WAY. BECAUSE IT CAN'T GO BACK TO THE COUNTY. WE DON'T COLLECT VALOREM TAX. CHERYL JOHNSON COLLECTS VALOREM TAX AND TRANSMITS THAT SOME FASHION SCHEDULED TO THE CITY, THAT WORKS JUST FINE. THAT MAY BE THE WAY WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO IT. I UNDERSTAND DON'S CONCEPTION OF THIS IS THAT EVENTUALLY THE HOTEL TAX PAYMENTS, THE PLATFORM PAYMENTS WOULD COME DIRECTLY INTO THE CITY DEPOSITORY. BUT IF THAT CREATES TWO LARGER RECONCILIATION ISSUE, [NOISE] THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE SOLVED IN THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATION. [02:05:01] >> BUT IN THIS ORDINANCE, IT DOES PROVIDE FOR THE PARK BOARD TO GIVE PERIODIC REPORTS, AT LEAST QUARTERLY. THIS THING, THE EXPENDITURES MADE THE TAX REVENUE. [NOISE] I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE I DIDN'T SEE THAT. JUST PERSONALLY IN THIS ORDINANCE, THIS WHEREAS HAS NOT SUBMITTED THEIR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE USE OF HOT AND SO FORTH, AND SO I THINK THAT'S MISLEADING IN THIS. >> THE TAX CODE REQUIRES. >> NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT'S MAKING A STATEMENT THE WAY THE PARK BOARD HAS RESPONDED NOT THEM. I DON'T THINK THAT IT OUTLINES EXACTLY WHAT THE SITUATION IS HERE. >> IT WAS AN ENTIRE BUDGET THAT WAS PROVIDED. WHICH IS WHAT WAS ASKED. [OVERLAPPING]. >> DO YOU ALL HAVE AS HOT SPECIFIC BUDGET? >> I HAVE A HOT SPECIFIC SUMMARY. >> NO, I'M GOT A HOT SPECIFIC BUDGET. DO YOU EVEN HAVE ONE THAT YOU COULD PROVIDE TO US? >>THE HOT SPECIFIC BUDGET IS IN THE BUDGET THAT I GAVE YOU. THERE'S THE HOT REVENUE THAT'S IN THERE, WE HAVE BEACH CLEANING, BEACH CONTROL, AND TOURISM DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY FUNDED THROUGH HOT. THERE'S SOME OTHER REVENUE SOURCES THAT COME IN. LOOK AT THOSE THREE FUND BUDGETS AND YOU'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH HOT. I HAVE A SUMMARY WHICH I CAN PROVIDE BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ON THE PHONE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND THEN I STARTED WITH THE SUMMARY, I CAN START WORKING ON THE DETAIL REPORT VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO WITH THE BEACH USER FEES. IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO BUILD, BUT I CAN DO THAT. WE GUESS WE HAVE A HOT SPECIFIC BUDGET, IT'S HELD OUT IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT I GAVE YOU. >> THEN I THINK TO GET TO THE POINT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE JUST WORK TOGETHER TO DEVISE THIS IS THE METHODOLOGY, THIS IS THE WAY TO PRESENT IT SO THAT EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME PAGE, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. >> THAT'S WHAT MAKES [OVERLAPPING] THAT PAGE MISLEADING. >> LET'S REMOVE THE WHEREAS THE PARK BOARD HAS NOT SUBMITTED THEIR PROPOSED BUDGET. LET'S JUST TYPE THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. >> WE HAVE THE BUDGET. >> LET'S JUST TYPE THAT OUT. >> OKAY. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? VERY GOOD. BRYSON, THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YES MIKE. >> ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THAT THE PARK BOARD JUST GIVES THE CITY THE HOT BUDGET OR DO THEY NEED TO HAVE THE WHOLE BUDGET LIKE THEY GAVE ALREADY? >> I CAN ADDRESS THAT. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> THE CURRENT INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT REQUIRES US TO PROVIDE THE PARK FUND BUDGETS, THOSE ARE OUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS. THOSE ARE ALREADY PROVIDED. IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS THE HOT BUDGET, WHEN YOU COMBINE THOSE TWO THINGS, YOU GET OUR TOTAL BUDGET, OUR OVERALL BUDGET WHICH IS WHAT WAS PROVIDED. >> ISN'T OUR BEACHES OR FEES INCLUDED IN THE PARK NUMBERS? BECAUSE THAT'S A SEPARATE LIST ITEM. >> YES. WE KEEP SEPARATE FUNDS FOR ALL THOSE. THE PARKS THAT RECEIVE BEACH USER FEES HAVE THEIR OWN SEPARATE FUNDS AND THEIR OWN SEPARATE FUND ACCOUNTING. >> BUT THAT COMES IN THAT PARK BUDGET. >> YES. >> WE'RE REALLY JUST TALKING TWO PIECES HERE, THE PARK BUDGETS AND THEN THE CIP AND ALL THAT IS INCLUDED IN THAT AND THEN HOT EXPENSES. [NOISE] >> THE CIP THE ISSUES A WHOLE SEPARATE. >> THAT'S A WHOLE SEPARATE ACCOUNT WATCH. YEAH. >> BRYSON, THANK YOU, DAN, THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE]. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO 3B PLEASE, GENELLE. [3.B. Discussion concerning Charter Change Recommendations (Brown - 20 minutes)] >> THREE B DISCUSSION CONCERNING CHARTER CHANGE RECOMMENDATIONS. >> I PUT THIS ON HERE, WE HAD TALKED IN THE PAST ABOUT POSSIBLY CONSIDERING CHARTER CHANGES BRINGING THAT TO THE PUBLIC. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO. IT'S HERE TO SEE IF COUNCIL HAS ANY THOUGHTS OF WANTING PRESENT THAT TO THE PUBLIC CHARTER CHANGES. DAVID. >> YEAH, I HAVE ONE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY MAJOR THINGS IN THE CHARTER THAT NEED TO BE CHANGED RIGHT NOW AND SINCE WE ARE PUTTING IDC ON THE BALLOT, ASSUMING WE'RE PRETTY NICE TO IDC ON THE BALLOT, DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS GO TOMORROW WITH A CLOSE WE MAYBE; [LAUGHTER] SORRY. >> SORRY. [LAUGHTER] >> WE'RE TRAILING AWAY. [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] WE HAD THIS EXPERIENCE A FEW YEARS AGO, DID WE NOT? WE PUT ANY NUMBER OF CHARTER ITEMS OUT THERE? SOME OF THEM SMALL AND DETAILED AND PEOPLE HAVE ANTI CHANGED BIAS WITH THEM. THEY SEE 12 OF THEM AND THEY'RE LIKE, "NO," SO WE WANT TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHAT WE PUT OUT THERE. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT DAN, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE REQUIRED TO DO VISA-VIS THE RECEIPT OF GIFTS. WHAT IS EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE? >> WE FOLLOW THE STATE ON CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS. [NOISE] I'M GOING TO ASK BARRY TO COME IN HERE IF HE'S LISTENING BECAUSE HE IS MY GUY ON THAT. [02:10:05] BUT I THINK THAT YOU CANNOT ACCEPT GIFTS IN EXCESS OF $100. THERE IS AN EXCEPTION UNDER STATE LAW FOR ENTERTAINMENT AS LONG AS THE BUSINESS DOING THE ENTERTAINING INCLUDES AN OFFICIAL OF THAT COMPANY THAT CAN MAKE DECISIONS THAT BINDS THE COMPANY. >> THAT'S THE FEED, THE LEGISLATURE EXEMPTIONS I RECALL. >> PRETTY MUCH. >> YEAH. BUT SO BY LAW, I COULDN'T ACCEPT A GIFT OVER $100 OR I COULDN'T ACCEPT ONE WITHOUT REPORTING IT, OR WHAT'S THE? >> I THINK YOU HAVE TO REPORT IT, I'M NOT SURE. I'M GOING TO HAVE BARRY COME IN HERE. >> OKAY. >> IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE AFFIDAVIT AS IT RELATES TO THAT? NO CHARGE CRUISE? >> WELL, THAT'S JUST THE LATEST. BUT I WONDER? >> TO YOUR POINT THOUGH. I KNOW YOU WANT EXPLAIN THAT. >> THANK YOU. MY POINT IS THAT ANYTHING THAT APPLIES TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO OUR APPOINTMENT BOARDS. [NOISE] THAT CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD COULDN'T TAKE A GIFT THAT I COULDN'T TAKE OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME REQUIREMENT. >> [NOISE] LIKE A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER COULD NOT ACCEPT GIFTS AND UNDER THE SAME RULES AND REGULATIONS. >> THE SAME THING THAT WOULD COMPARE JOHN FROM ACCEPTING GIFTS FROM A DEVELOPER WOULD APPLY TO A MEMBER OF THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> I WAS [INAUDIBLE] GETTING CALLED IN. >> I AM NOT STUCK ON THIS. IT'S JUST WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGES THAT THAT THIS IS WHAT I HAVE. DID YOU COME LATE TO THIS CONVERSATION? >> YES, SIR. >> WE HAVE WHAT AMOUNTS TO THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE THAT ACCEPTS GIFTS OVER A CERTAIN AMOUNT. DON THINKS IT'S $100 ARE SUBJECT TO WHAT? AN AFFIDAVIT, TO REPORTING, WE CAN'T TAKE IT, WHAT'S THE DEAL? >> THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS INVOLVING THIS. TYPICALLY WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU'LL HAVE TO MAKE A DECLARATION OF THE GIFT AND THAT'S BY FORM OF AFFIDAVIT, IT'S FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY. NOW, WHETHER IT'S CAN PROPERLY BE ACCEPTED THAT'S WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE UNUSUAL. THERE'S EXCEPTIONS UNDER STATE LAW FOR FOOD, ENTERTAINMENT LIKE IF YOU'RE A GUEST OF SOMEONE AND IF THAT PERSON THAT'S MAKING THE GIFT IS A CORPORATION, THEY HAVE TO HAVE SOMEBODY THERE THAT COMBINE THE COMPANY. IT'S LIKE A LOBBYING EXCEPTION, IT MIGHT BE A GOOD WAY TO ANALOGIZE IT. >> YOU HAVE TO SIGN A DISCLOSURE? >> THAT'S WHERE THE AFFIDAVIT COMES IN, WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT [NOISE]. >> WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO REQUIRE THE SAME OF OUR APPOINTED BOARDS? COULD WE DO THAT BY ORDINANCE OR DOES THAT NEED TO BE IN THE CHARTER? >> I THINK IT'S ALREADY IN. >> WE CAN DO IT BY ORDINANCE. >> I THINK IT ALREADY APPLIES TO THE APPOINTED BOARDS. >> WELL, IT'S NOT BEING OBSERVED [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT MIGHT BE. >> WELL, I'M NOT SURE IT HAS TO BE IN THE CHARTER, I THINK IT CAN BE DONE BY ORDINANCE. >> IT COULD BE. >> YOU COULD MAKE THE ORDINANCE APPLICABLE TO ALL THE PLAINTIFFS THAT HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL? >> I DON'T KNOW OFFHAND. I CHECK THAT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT DID APPLY TO THE BOARDS. >> OKAY. >> THIS IS AN ITEM FOR A CHARTER CHANGE. WHY DON'T WE RESEARCH THIS, LET COUNCIL KNOW ON THIS WHERE WE STAND, AND WHERE WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE A CHARTER ITEM. >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, [INAUDIBLE]? >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE COULD WORK AS A COUNCIL ON THE ORDNANCE, BUT JUST RESEARCH THAT AND LET US KNOW. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH DON THAT COULD PROBABLY BE DONE BY ORDINANCE, THAN NECESSARILY MAKING A CHARTER. >> MARRIE. >> AREN'T WE STILL LOOKING AT DOING AND THE MAYOR ELECTION FOR THE SALES TAX. >> YES MAM. >>I THINK WE WANT TO STAY AWAY FROM CHARTER CHANGES BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD JUST CONFUSE PEOPLE. >> KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. [02:15:02] >> I AGREE. >> I AGREE. I HAVE NO CHARTER CHANGES IN MIND. >> IF WE CAN HANDLE THIS BY ORDINANCE IN THE FUTURE, THEN I HAVE NOTHING ADDITIONAL. >> IF YOU COULD LET US KNOW, GIVE OUR COUNCIL A REPORT ON THAT. >> I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO [INAUDIBLE]. >> ON THE IDC, THING. WE DO THAT IT MAY TO EXTEND IT. WOULD WE DISCUSS IN A FUTURE DATE THE DETAILS OF, WOULD THAT BE INDEFINITELY? I NOTICE TALKING ABOUT COMBINING POSSIBLE SILO. >> IT'S ON OUR AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER 17TH. YES, SIR IT IS. >> THANK YOU. >> VERY GOOD. I'VE HAD A REQUEST BY COUNCILWOMAN ROB, SHE WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE PARK BOARD OR ITEMS. >> TEN F. >> TEN F, SHE SAYS. >> WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? >> THANK YOU, BARRY. >> SURE THING. >> YEAH. THIS WAS ME. THESE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS. WHEN CITY COUNCIL EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS HAVE BEEN APPOINTED IN THE PAST, WE'VE TREATED IT AS THOUGH IT WAS AN EXCEPTION TO THE APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEE. BUT IF YOU READ THE LAW, AT LEAST ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO BE APPOINTED AS A TRUSTEE. BUT IT'S STILL A TRUSTEE, IT'S NOT SOMETHING SPECIAL. MIKE, HE IS A TRUSTEE OF THE PARK BOARD. HE'S A VOTING MEMBER BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT HE'S BEEN APPOINTED AS EX-OFFICIO, BUT HE'S STILL A VALID VOTE MEMBER OF THE PARK. HE IS A TRUSTEE OF THE PARK BOARD. REMEMBER, WHEN WE MOVED APPOINTMENTS FROM JUNE TO SEPTEMBER BECAUSE THERE WAS SO LITTLE TIME BETWEEN ELECTIONS AND THE APPOINTMENTS THAT WE DID THAT, WE TOOK PARK BOARD WITH IT. WE TOOK WILLIAM BUT THERE WAS NO PROHIBITION AGAINST US DOING THAT. BUT THOSE STATUTE PROHIBITS US FROM DOING THAT. IN MY READING HAD NOT AGREED WITH ME FOR THE PARK BOARD. THIS NEEDS TO BE STRAIGHTENED OUT, SO THAT WHEN WE DO PARK BOARD APPOINTMENTS IN JUNE, THE EX OFFICIO TRUSTEE IS APPOINTED AT THE SAME TIME. I WAS APPOINTED TO FILL A TERM, THEN THERE WAS THE SCREWY ELECTION IN 2020. I WAS REAPPOINTED UNTIL JANUARY OF 2021, WHICH WAS SEVERAL MONTHS LATE. THEN, THIS TIME DIDN'T APPOINT MIKE UNTIL SEPTEMBER BECAUSE THAT'S JUST WHEN WE HAD THE EX OFFICIO APPOINTMENTS. SO MIKE'S CURRENT TERM SHOULD EXPIRE BY LAW IN JUNE OF 2024, AND THEN WE SHOULD RENEW IT OR WHATEVER WE COUNT, WE PROCEED. >> [OVERLAPPING] BUT YOU'RE ALSO ADDING IN ALL THE PARK BOARD MEMBERS. THERE'S PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO UNEXPIRED TERMS, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THAT? >> IT DOESN'T, BUT SOMEHOW THAT GOT MESSED UP TOO, SO THAT WE WERE INSTEAD OF POINTING FOUR MEMBERS APART FOR ONE YEAR AND FOUR MEMBERS OF OUR BOARD OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER THE NEXT YEAR, WE WERE DOING FIVE NONE COUNCIL MEMBERS. >> BECAUSE IT WAS IN UNEXPIRED TERM. >> NO. THEY WOULD PROBABLY GOT OFF WITH BECAUSE IT WAS DONE EXPIRED TERM, BUT IT WAS OUT OF SYNC. THIS JUST SPECIFIES WHICH POSITIONS IN WHICH YEARS. IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY HOW ANYBODY WHO SITS ON THE BOARD WITH ADEQUATE SERVE. >> NOBODY'S TERM IS IMPACTED BY THIS. [BACKGROUND] >> WE HAVE FOUR TO A POINT NEXT YEAR, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE FIVE INCLUDING MIKE IN THE JUNE OF 2024. >> FOUR IN JUNE? >> YEAH. SOMEBODY APPOINTED TO THAT UNEXPIRED TERM, THAT DOES NOT COUNT AGAINST THEM ON THEIR TERMS ON IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> CORRECT. >> CORRECT. YEAH. >> YOU CAN [NOISE] SERVE FOR MORE THAN SIX YEARS. [NOISE]. >> THEY'RE CERTAINLY SERVING CLOSE TO EIGHT YEARS. >> YEAH. [NOISE] THE DIFFERENCE HAS BEEN OVER FOR A LITTLE WHILE. [LAUGHTER]. >> BECAUSE THEY STARTED ON UNEXPIRED TERM. [BACKGROUND] YOU'RE A HOLDOVER, WE'VE GOT POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN [INAUDIBLE]. >> [OVERLAPPING] HOLD ON, I WAS ON BOARD FOR LIKE 15 YEARS, IT SEEMED. >> THEY LOVED YOU. >> IT'S DOG YEARS. [LAUGHTER] >> WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS TOO, THERE HAS BEEN SOME QUESTIONS ON MEMBERS OF BOARD SERVING ON MULTIPLE BOARDS? >> CORRECT. >> [OVERLAPPING] I WAS TRYING TO STAY ON TOPIC HERE. WOULD THAT BE A SITUATION WITHIN THE PARK BOARD? PROBABLY NOT, I THINK IT WAS. >> NO. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, I GOT SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT WHENEVER WE GET TO YOU. >> IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS LET DON KNOW. >> [INAUDIBLE] FOR COFFEE. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> SOUNDS GOOD. IS THAT ALL YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? >> I'LL TAKE UP ON IT. >> YEAH. I GUESS IT WAS. >> VERY GOOD. [3.C. Discussion of Short Term Rental Registration Fees, Parking Requirements and other related items (Legal - 20 minutes)] >> LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3C, PLEASE? >> 3C. DISCUSSION OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION DAYS, [02:20:01] PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND OTHER RELATED ITEMS. >> THIS DESIGN, [NOISE] IS BASICALLY 10A ON OUR AGENDA. [NOISE] THERE IS A SHORT-TERM ITEM 11A. BUT 10A, DON WOULD YOU GO OVER THE POINTS UP IN ITS OWN RIGHT AGENDA FOR ACTION? >> JUST AS A BACKGROUND, A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, A CITIZEN REGISTERED THEIR [INAUDIBLE] AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND OPEN CONCEPT. [LAUGHTER] A SHORT-TERM RENTAL WITHOUT WALLS. SHORT-TERM RENTALS HAVE TO BE A STRUCTURE. WE'VE ADDED IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS, GIVE US A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOUR STRUCTURE IS. WE WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY [INAUDIBLE]. IT'S A WAY OF CHECKING THAT IT'S ACTUALLY STRUCTURED THERE. [NOISE] >> TOLD ME ALREADY HAVE AN ORDINANCE OF THESE VIEWS STRUCTURE. >> NO. >> A PREVIEW. >> NOT REALLY. >> BECAUSE WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WHEN OR WHERE IT CAME TO LIGHT. WHEN OUR ZEROS CAME INTO PLAY, PEOPLE WOULD GO AHEAD AND REGISTER A LOT AS THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHT TO RENT THEIR PROPERTY. >> NEXT, IS THE ORDINANCE. [NOISE] THIS IS FOR YOU BECAUSE THIS IS A PROBLEM IN YOUR DISTRICT. WE ARE LIMITING, WE'RE REQUIRING THE STR OWNER TO SUBMIT A PARKING PLAN. >> CORRECT. >> I THINK IT'S [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] FOR EVERY BEDROOM, AND YOU CAN USE TWO SPOTS ON THE SCREEN. GO AHEAD. >> IS IT ABOUT THE PARKING? >> YEAH. >> CORRECT. >> THIS TO ME SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER ORDINANCE THAT CAN BE ENFORCED. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MONITOR THIS? IS IT GOING TO BE WHEN COMPLAIN COMES IN? I THINK CONCEPTUALLY IT'S A GREAT IDEA, BUT HAVE YOU MONITORE THIS? HOW DO YOU ENFORCE THIS? WHO'S GOING TO BE THE WORKFORCE BENEFIT? >> ISSUE BECOMES YOU MAY SUBMIT A PARKING PLAN, BUT WILL MARSHAL THAT'S BEEN CALLED OUT WHEN ONLY COMPLAINT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT LAND ON A SATURDAY AFTERNOON. >> RIGHT. >> THAT COULD BE AN ISSUE. >> SEEMS LIKE RESIDENTIAL PARKING MIGHT BE THE ONLY PLACE BECAUSE YOUR LIMIT ON HOW MANY CLASSES YOU CAN GET IT. >> PLUS WE DO SOME [OVERLAPPING] >> I KNOW IT DOES HELP FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT THEY DO, WHETHER PEOPLE USE IT OR NOT, THAT'S A THING, BUT IT WOULD HELP US UPON REGISTRATION TO KNOW THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO SLEEP BY BEDROOM, [OVERLAPPING] WELL, THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH PARKING FOR THAT AND YOU'D HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT AND WHETHER WE CAN GO OUT AND ENFORCE THE FACT THAT ARE THEY USING THEIR PLAN? ARE THEY BETTER AS TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I THINK BY HAVING THE PLAN AND HAVING A SHORT-TERM RENTAL OWNER SAY, "YES, I HAD THIS MANY BEDROOMS AND I PROVIDE THESE MINI PARKING SPOTS. I THINK THAT IS WONDERFUL NOW WHETHER THEY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THOSE PARKING SPOTS, OR BUY SOMEPLACE ELSE IS A MATTER FOR ENFORCEMENT, AND I DON T KNOW HOW WE WOULD ENFORCE THAT DON AS WELL. >> I AGREE. >> YEAH. >> IT'S ALREADY IN THE BOOKS FOR, [OVERLAPPING] TEAM CHECK AND IT DOES NOT APPLY ISLAND WIDE. >> THAT'S GOOD. LET ME MAKE SURE BECAUSE THIS BOOK WAS PUT HERE IN ABOUT 2015 IS WHEN WE PUT IT IN. IT DOES NOT APPLY EITHER WAY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WHY WOULDN'T WE? >> [OVERLAPPING] I WAS TOLD IT DID COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. >> YEAH. I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU WERE TOLD THAT THEY DID SOME MORE DIGGING IN THE LDR AND, [INAUDIBLE]. >> TIM COME ON UP AND HAVE A SEAT. >> [OVERLAPPING] TIM HAVE A SEAT. >> THANK YOU. >> BUT THEY DID A THING FOR DAVE AND FOUND [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES, THE LIMITED STANDARDS ARE DEFINED IN OUR USE TABLES AND NOT DEFINING IT BUT REFERENCED FROM THE USE TABLES. THEY USE TABLE ITSELF IS PERMITTED IN EVERY SINGLE CATEGORY EXCEPT OURS THAT WAS NOT PERMITTED AND IN R3, WHICH IS THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, THAT'S [NOISE] LIMITED. [02:25:04] THAT PARKING PROVISION APPLIES TO THE LIMITED CATEGORY AND THAT IS ONLY R3. >> IT'S A LIMITED PERMITTED USE? >> CORRECT. >> IT'S ONLY IN R3 THAT THAT'S TRIGGERED FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> CORRECT. WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IN THIS ORDINANCE IS THAT IT WOULD APPLY CITY-WIDE. >> THAT WASN'T REAL CLEAR TO ME IN THIS ORDINANCE [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] THEY CAN EASILY BE A LITTLE CLEARER IN MY MIND IF THAT'S OUR INTENT, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE CLEARER THAT IT ISLAND-WIDE WIDE. YES, MA'AM. >> FURTHER QUESTIONS. THE RENTAL CEMENTS THE PLAN TO THE CITY OR TO THE PARK? >> CURRENTLY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY ANYTHING. >> RIGHT, [INAUDIBLE]. >> PART OF THE REGISTRATION PROCESS. >> IS THE REGISTRATION. >> YEAH, IT'S JUST THE REGISTRATION. >> WE'D GO IN THE SOFTWARE. >> THE CITY WOULD BE PROVIDED FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY WITH WHAT THE PARKING PLAN IS? >> WELL, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO WORK OUT WITH THE PARK BOARD, IS A COORDINATION CLAUSE, SO TO SPEAK, TO ALLOW OUR REVIEW OF THOSE UNITS AS THEY COME IN. THAT'S CURRENTLY NOT HAPPENING. I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYONE'S FAULT, IT JUST HASN'T BEEN PUT TOGETHER. >> CORRECT. >> BUT I THINK IF WE CAN AT LEAST HAVE A HAND IN THE PLAN REVIEW PHASE, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED TO COORDINATE WITH PARK BOARD. >> YEAH. THIS WOULD APPLY FOR LACK OF BETTER DESCRIPTION SINCE WE HAVE AN ANNUAL REGISTRATION, THERE'S NO GRANDFATHERING IN THIS. WELL, I HAD A UNIT BEFORE 2015. NOW THAT THERE IS AN ANNUAL REGISTRATION WHEN THEY REGISTERED, THIS APPLIES TO THEM TO EVERY SHORT-TERM RENTAL. >> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT HAPPENED? OH, SORRY. GO AHEAD. >> IS THIS CORRECT? >> NOW, I NEED TO POINT OUT. THE ONLY CRITICAL THING IN THIS ORDINANCE IS THE SETTING OF THE ANNUAL FEE. >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> IN TERMS OF PARKING PLANS, WE CAN PEEL OUT IF YOU WANT TO WORK IT OUT. >> AS I INTERESTED, PARKING TO MEMBERS OF THE TASK FORCE, THE SOFTWARE IS CAPABLE OF DOING THIS, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE STAFF TO YIELD RECORD, MR. FRAZIER TO BE SURE THAT THIS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED EASILY IN THE REGISTRATION PROCESS, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT DONE BY DECEMBER 1ST, WHICH IS WHY WE WANT TO GO AHEAD WITH SETTING THE FEE. >> [NOISE] YES. >> LET'S NOT A BALL UP IN THE SETTING OF THE FEE WITH DISCUSSION OF [INAUDIBLE]. >> SAY THAT AGAIN. >> GO AHEAD. >> NO, I AGREE THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE, BUT SINCE WE HAVE MEMBER IN THE AUDIENCE THAT HAS TO DO WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS, COULD WE ASK THAT MUCH THIS PARKING PLAN? >> LET'S HOLD OFF. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED GETTING ALL THIS. LET'S GET TO OUR DISCUSSION HERE. >> OKAY. >> LET'S GET THIS GOING FIRST AND THEN WE CAN TAKE SOME INPUT. >> [OVERLAPPING] CAN WE CONFIRM WITH FRAZIER THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT SOFTWARE CAN DO? >> SURE, BUT I'LL NEED YOUR ADVICE ON IT. IT COME ON UP. >> PRETTY GOOD. >> I CERTAINLY HAVE IT HERE FOR BRYSON, BUT I THINK THERE'S SOME STAFF AUDIT DISCUSSED WITH HIS OFFICE NOW. HOW CAN IT BE DONE? WHAT IT NEEDS? WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE THERE FOR REGISTRATION? >> THANK YOU. I GOT CUT OFF READING ABOUT ANOTHER ISSUE, SO I MISSED THE QUESTION. >> THIS IS IN TALKING TO THE PARKING PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE RENTAL PROPERTY THAT IS TIED TO THE AMOUNT OF VEHICLES THAT ARE TIED TO THE AMOUNT OF BEDROOMS? >> IS THE QUESTION CAN ARGUE SOFTWARE TO HANDLE SOMETHING LIKE THAT? THERE ARE OPTIONS AND WE'RE WORKING ON SOME OF THAT STUFF RIGHT NOW WITH THE VENDOR. WHAT TYPE OF QUESTIONS WE WANT TO ASK? WHAT TYPE OF DOCUMENTATION WE WANT IN THE REGISTRATION PROCESS? WE CAN ADD A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE A PARKING PLAN. NOW, THE SPECIFICS OF THAT PARKING PLAN AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE ARE INCLUDED, HOW EXACTLY WE WOULD GO ABOUT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING ELSE WHETHER THAT'S A MANUAL REVIEW OR SOMETHING WE CAN SET UP AUTOMATICALLY FOR THE SYSTEM, I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD PROBABLY SAY RIGHT NOW IT'D BE A MANAGER WILL BE WITH SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO GO AWAY AND LOOK AT THE APPLICATION, LOOK AT THE PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT IT AT LEAST CONTAIN THE DATA THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE ORDINANCE. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION MORE SPECIFICALLY, YES. THE SYSTEM CAN REQUIRE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IN THE REGISTRATION PROCESS. >> OKAY. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, GRACE. ALSO PART OF THIS TENURE IS THE REGISTRATION FEE. [02:30:04] WE CURRENTLY HAVE $50 REGISTRATION FEE AND SO LET'S OPEN THAT UP TO DISCUSSION. IT'S ON AN ACTION TONIGHT THIS AFTERNOON. >> WELL, WE DO KNOW THE $50 JUST PUT IN BECAUSE THAT GENERALLY COVERS PARK BOARD'S COSTS. THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE PLACES. IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK PARK BOARD TO SURPRISE HIS OFFICE TO DO THIS FOR US, WE NEED TO BE SURE HE HAS MADE HOLD ON THESE FEES. THE REASON WOULD DISCUSSION WE HAD WITH THEM LAST MONTH OR MONTH OR WHENEVER IT WAS SEEMED TO SUGGEST THAT SOMEWHERE $50-70 IS MORE LIKELY WHAT THAT'S GOING TO COST. >> $70? >> SOMETHING IN THAT RANGE BECAUSE SOMEBODY MAY BE ABLE TO RETAIN SOME HOTEL TAXES TO COVER THIS AND SO FORTH. SO IT'S NOT PERFECTLY STRAIGHTFORWARD, BUT THEN WE HAVE ENFORCEMENT COSTS, WHICH IN CONVERSATION MR. MAXWELL IS PROBABLY GOING TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL IN THE MARSHALL'S OFFICE, ONE OF WHOM WOULD BE MARSHALL ENFORCING THIS, BUT ANOTHER TO DO STAFF WORK BECAUSE THESE REPORTS ARE GOING TO BE COMING OUT. THERE'S GOING TO BE THE REPORTS BACK FROM THE HOT-LINE, WHEN AND HOW THEY GOT ESCALATED, THE GBD NON-EMERGENCY, HOW THAT WAS RESPONDED TO THIS. IF WE WANT DATA BACK OUT OF THIS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE STAFF IN THE MARSHALL'S OFFICE ANALYZING THAT. THE NUMBER THAT WE'VE KICKED AROUND A NUMBER OF TIMES IS $250 A YEAR. >> BUT DOES THAT COVER THEN THE PARK'S BOARD PORTION? >> IT'LL COVER THE PARK'S BOARD PORTION, AND BRIAN WILL HAVE TO ANSWER THIS WITH THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. >> I MEAN, IT'LL DEPEND ON WHAT LEVEL OF ANALYSIS. >> OKAY. >> I MIGHT. [LAUGHTER]. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> THOUGH WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE COST OF THE SOFTWARE AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A NUMBER TO MAKE IT FULL WITH LIKE 175,000 OR NOT 175, $175 WAS THE OPERATING COSTS OF WHAT SOFTWARE. >> NO, THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST ADDRESSING, MIKE. I THINK THAT $75 WOULD COVER THAT, $250 WOULD GIVE US THE LEEWAY IF IT'S MORE THAN $75 OR LESS THAN $7,500, RECOVER THAT, BUT IT'S NOT JUST NOT $175. NOW, WE'RE GOING TO ASK MR. BRYSON, BRYSON, COME ON, WHAT AMOUNT OF DOLLARS WOULD COVER THE PARK BOARD COSTS? >> LET ME MAKE SURE, $100 WE HAVE 5,000 SHORT-TERM RENTALS. WE'RE TALKING $500,000. >> SOUNDS FAMILIAR. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS MUCH LESS THAN THAT BRYSON, THE ANNUAL FEE WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 300 AND SOMETHING. >> THE ANNUAL. >> MAINTAIN THE SOFTWARE. >> MAINTAINING THE SOFTWARE IS ABOUT $300,000 A YEAR. >> RIGHT. >> A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT, THERE'S THE STAFF COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. >> ADDING THE STAFF COSTS ADDS HOW MUCH TODAY? >> I THINK IT'S ABOUT, IF I'M RECALLING CORRECTLY, ABOUT 450 TO $475,000 A YEAR IS WHAT WE WOULD NEED AND THAT CAN BE COVERED BY THE VIEW IF IT GETS SOMEWHERE AROUND LIKE $97, IF YOU WILL. >> OKAY. SO 475 IS STAFF COST AND THE SOFTWARE? >> [NOISE] YES. >> YES. >> DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY? >> NO, IT DIDN'T BRING THE TITLE HERE FOR LOW-RISE. >> SOMEBODY ANSWERED THE DAY. >> [LAUGHTER] I HEARD SOMEONE, THEY CAME FROM TALKING WITH PEOPLE AND WHATNOT. I THINK THAT PHASE SHOULD BE MORE 300, 350 TYPE AMPLE BECAUSE WE ARE NOW ADDING ANOTHER PIECE IN WHICH WOULD BE THE PARKING PLAN TO BE ABLE TO ADEQUATELY REIMBURSE THE SHORT-TERM PARK BOARD AS WELL AS THE COVER ADDITIONAL DISEASES. >> THE FEE IS TOTALLY A COUNCIL PURVIEW AND POLICY DECISION, I WOULD SAY THAT DON'T GET HUNG ON THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE A STATIC NUMBER OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS. I KNOW IT'S IN EVERYBODY'S MIND THAT THEY WILL FOREVER GROW, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE. I THINK YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO START SEEING THESE FOLKS HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO START SEEING A DIMINISHMENT IN THAT, BUT THAT DOES NOT DIMINISH THE AMOUNT OF EXPENSIVE ENFORCEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, SO DON'T UNDERESTIMATE YOUR FEE BASED ON TODAY'S NUMBER BECAUSE I BELIEVE TODAY'S NUMBER MAYBE A PEAK, NOT STARTING POINT IN TERMS OF TOTAL REGISTERED SHORT-TERM RENTALS. SO GIVEN THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ADEQUATELY, I KNOW BRYSON IS BEING VERY SPECIFIC ON WHAT HE NEEDS AND I THINK IF HOPE WAS HERE, SHE WOULD TELL YOU THAT TO THINK YOU KNOW WHAT SOFTWARE IS GOING TO COST THREE YEARS FROM NOW, [02:35:01] YOU'RE GUESSING IT THAT SO I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE UNLESS COUNCIL WANTS TO JUST KEEP TALKING ABOUT THIS EVERY QUARTER AND WE BRING THE ADJUSTMENTS, REMEMBER YOU ONLY REGISTERING ONCE A YEAR SO YOU GET ONE SHOT TO GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME. SO I JUST WANT TO BRING THOSE IDEAS UP TO YOU BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION OR A NUMBER. THEN ALSO I WANT TO SAY THAT TO WHAT DEGREE OF ANALYSIS DO YOU WANT? WE'RE GOING TO BE GIVEN THANKS TO THE WORK THAT BRYSON AND HOPE AND HER TEAM HAVE DONE ON THE SOFTWARE. WE'RE GOING TO BE GIVING A PLETHORA OF DATA AND TO WHAT DEGREE YOU WANT TO CRUNCH THAT DATA, EXTRACT DATA, AND USE THAT DATA IS A FUNCTION AS TO HOW MUCH, BECAUSE THE COMPUTER WILL SPIT IT OUT ALL DAY LONG, BUT IT TAKES A PERSON TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT. IT'S EASY TO SAY, WELL WHAT MARSHALL, BUT ONE MARSHALL WHO'S RUNNING AROUND THE NEXT DAY ON A WEEKEND TRYING TO DEAL WITH ALL THE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS THAT CAME THROUGH THE HOT LINE IS NOT GOING TO BE SITTING AT A DESK, AT A COMPUTER CRUNCHING THE DATA, SEEING WHERE THE CALLS CAME FROM, HOW MANY REPEAT CALLS HAS IT BEEN? WHAT WAS THE PART? >> THAT SOFTWARE I MEAN, THE SOFTWARE CAN RUN REPORTS THAT HAVE THAT, CORRECT? >> YEAH, BUT YOU GET THE DATA OUT. >> BRYSON, TO GET THAT DAY DATA, COME ON GUYS, DON'T ACT LIKE YOU'RE DONE. >> NO, BUT I'M SAYING. [LAUGHTER] >> THE DATA IS LIKE GIVE ME A REPORT OF HOW MANY CALLS CAN YOU MAKE WITH IT. >> [OVERLAPPING] WELL, THAT'S MY POINT THOUGH, IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO GENERATE A LOT OF DATA IF WE DON'T HAVE STAFF TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE DATA AND YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY THAT STAFF TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE DATA, THE DATA DOES YOU NO GOOD. >> I THINK WHEN YOU FIRST GET THE DATA, YOU'RE GOING TO REALLY WARRANT REVIEW IT. >> YEAH. >> I MEAN, AS TIME GOES ON, YOU PROBABLY WOULD COME BACK ON REVIEWING THE DATA, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE AT RIGHT NOW. >> AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS, YOU GO FROM SPECIFIC ANALYSIS TO TREND DATA, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO ANALYZE, BUT NOW ANALYZE [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] >> IS FOR ANNUAL REGISTRATION FEE. >> YES, SO WE MAY PRICE AND HAUL WE COVER OUR SITE ON IT OR ADD THE 25,300 RANGE AND A YEAR FROM NOW YOU GET 20 COMPLAINTS, 20 NOISE COMPLAINTS. DO WE JUSTIFY STAYING AT 300 OR IS THAT ENOUGH TO GO UP OR IS THAT ENOUGH TO GO DOWN? >> LONG AS HE KEEPS REDUCE OUR TAX RATE. >> CAN YOU DO THAT TO REDUCE YOUR TAX RATE? >> YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING AS TO REDUCE YOUR TAXES, YOU SHOULD BE DOING THIS TO COVER YOUR ENFORCEMENT. >> ACTUALLY, I LOOK AT IT MORE AS A HINGE, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU ARE STOPPING FUTURE INCREASES IN YOUR TAX RATE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, IF YOU DON'T DO THIS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE USING GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO FUND THIS ENFORCEMENT, FUND THIS ANALYSIS, AND FUND THOSE THINGS. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO RETROACTIVELY TAKEN MONEY, [NOISE] REDUCE YOUR TAX RATE, BUT IT'S VERY GOOD TO LOOK PROSPECTIVELY THAT THIS IS GOING TO HEAD OFF INCREASING COSTS IN THAT AREA AND KEEP IT FROM BECOMING A BURDEN. >> IF TWO YEARS FROM NOW. [NOISE] EXCUSE ME. [NOISE] [NOISE] THE UNIVERSAL SHOWCASE. >> NO. >> I'M SORRY. THERE WAS A 3, 4 VOTE. [LAUGHTER] >> IF YOU NEED TO ADJUST, THERE'S TWO YEARS FROM NOW. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> EXCUSE ME. >> YOU ALL RIGHT? >> YEAH. [LAUGHTER] >> [INAUDIBLE] HAVE TO USE IT ON YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA. THE PARKING SITUATION, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT DOES COVER ISLAND WIDE AND WHAT IS WRITTEN HERE? >> YES. MS. FEAR WETHAN? >> YES. JUST TO CLARIFY, COUNCIL, YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED THE UPDATED VERSION, THE ORIGINAL THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET. WE REVIEWED IT, WE FELT THAT IT NEEDED A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY, SO WE DID PUT IN THAT IS SPECIFICALLY [NOISE] FOR AMOUNT OF BEDROOMS IT HAVE AND YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ON STREET PARKING SPOTS [NOISE]. WE DEFINED THE AGREEMENT WELL, AND SO THAT'S CLEAR AND THAT WOULD BE A PART OF CHAPTER 19 UNDER THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION ORDINANCE AND THAT WOULD BE CITYWIDE OR ISLAND WIDE. >> I HAVE QUESTION. >> THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE THAT SAYS ISLAND WIDE. >> IT'S GOING TO BE UNDER THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL CODE AND THE CODE IS ISLAND WIDE. >> DOES THAT NEED TO COME TO US TO CHANGE OR THAT'S ALREADY THAT WAY? >> THAT'S THE ORDINANCE AS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY IS TO MODIFY THE MUNICIPAL CODE, THE CODE REGULATION CHAPTER 19. >> CHAPTER 19 IS NOT IN THE LDR, SO THE LDR PORTION, THAT CHAPTER 9 SUPERSEDES THAT AND IT'S ISLAND WIDE. >> THAT'S IN THIS TENDER I THAT WE HAD BEFORE US? [NOISE] >> THE ORDINANCE IS SPECIFICALLY TO AMEND CHAPTER 19, THE SHORT TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION ORDINANCE. >> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, IF I WAS TO READ THIS, I WOULDN'T FIGURE OUT THAT IT WAS ISLAND WIDE. >> I GUESS MAKE IT EVEN CLEARER AND SAY, [02:40:04] ALL DISTRICTS, I MEAN, ALL AREAS. IT IS THE CITY CODE. >> FIRST OF ALL, SHORT-TERM RENTALS? >> FOR ALL SHORT TERM RENTALS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION AND THAT'S WHY IT COULD BE HELPFUL TO BRING CLAIRE INTO THIS DISCUSSION. CURRENTLY, THEIR CONTRACTS GET A PARKING PLAN THAT DOES NOT ALLOW ON STREET PARKING. IN THIS CASE, WE'RE MAKING IT BECAUSE THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS IN NEIGHBORHOODS, [NOISE] SO WE'RE THEN MAKING IT MORE LENIENT IN SOME CASES. >> WELL, WE CAN'T SUPERSEDE A DEED RESTRICTION [NOISE] SUPERSEDE US. >> A PARKING PLAN IS GOING TO BE WHAT THEY CAN PROVIDE, I MEAN, THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE TWO ON STREET PARKINGS BUT THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT THE PARKING PLAN, WHAT DO THEY HAVE? MAYBE THEY HAVE A FOUR CAR GARAGE. >> THE BAD PLAYERS HAVE CARS EVERYWHERE, AND THE GOOD PLAYERS FOLLOW THE LAW AND MAKE THE LAW EVEN MORE SO AND THE BAD PLAYERS LINE PEOPLE UP ON THEIR LAWN [NOISE] AS THEIR EXTRA PARKING SPOTS. >> WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THAT, MARIE? >> I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S WHY WE'D LOVE TO GET CLAIRE'S AND PUT INTO THIS AND SEE SOMEONE WHO DEALS WITH THAT. >> I'M CHOKING AND TRYING TO TALK. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE SEPARATE THESE QUESTIONS AND CONSIDER WHAT WE CAN TO DO ABOUT THE PARKING AND GET THOSE ANSWERS. THEN WITHIN TONIGHT, GO AHEAD AND SET THE FEE. >> SET THE FEE WITHOUT THE PARKING PLAN. >> IF WE'VE GOT THIS MANY OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS ABOUT PARKING, OR WHERE IT APPLIES TO, HOW WE WANT TO APPLY IT ON AND WHY? [NOISE] AGAIN, LET'S NOT LET THIS HOLD-UP, SETTING THE FEE. BRYSON NEEDS THIS FEE NOW SO THAT BY DECEMBER 1ST IT'S IN PLACE. >> ONE LAST THING THAT TIM WANTED TO KNOW. WHY WOULD WE DO SOME LANGUAGE REVISION ON THE LDRS INCLUDE ALL OF OUR, IT'S ONLY CATEGORIES? >> WE CERTAINLY COULD. I THINK ESPECIALLY IF YOU CAN SEGREGATE, [NOISE] THAT COULD BE AN APPROACH, OF COURSE, HAS TO GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THERE WAS A TIME FRAME INVOLVED THAT WE THOUGHT WAS COVERED BY THE ORDINANCE. >> SAY THAT AGAIN, JOHN. >> WELL, YOU WERE JUST ADMITTING THE LDR TO INCLUDE DISTRICT REQUIREMENT IN ALL OUR ZONING CATEGORIES. SO CURRENTLY IN R3 IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A PARKING PLAN FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS? >> BUT ALL THE OTHER CATEGORIES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE RO, ARE RENT PERMITTED, AND THEN WE COULD CHANGE THAT V TO AN L SO THAT THOSE SAME STANDARDS APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD. THAT'S ANOTHER MEANS OF ACHIEVING SAME THING. >> BUT IN THE INTERIM, ONCE WE GET SOME QUESTIONS, WE CAN PUT AN ORDINANCE ABOUT THE PARKING PLAN IN PLACE SO THE SOFTWARE COULD BE SET UP CORRECTLY AND THEN ADDRESS IT IN THE LVRS. BECAUSE LIKE IN A MASTER PLANNING COMMUNITY, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT. TRUE MASTER PLAN LIKE A BEACH SIDE VILLAGE, THEY HAVE A SEPARATE PARKING DEED RESTRICTION ALREADY IN PLACE OR IN PIRATES. WE CAN COME BACK AND ADDRESS IT THROUGH THE LDRS THAT TAKE AWAY THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED TODAY. >> NOT AN ORDINANCE. >> I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE CLEANER THAT WAY TO GET THERE. >> THAT'S WHAT'S CONFUSING WITH SOME OF OUR REGULATIONS. YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE TO LOOK SOMETIMES. IT COULD BE AN LDR, IT COULD BE AN ORDINANCE. YOU GO BY THE LDRS AND THEN YOU REALIZE THAT THERE'S AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE OVER HERE THAT RESTRICT YOU FROM DOING SOMETHING. >> SO THE DOT IS AT LEAST WE'RE TAKING THIS PARKING OUT OF 10I, IS THAT RIGHT? MOVING IT MORE TO GOING THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS AND SO FORTH IN THE LDR CHANGES. >> WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE SAYING THAT. I'D SAY I THINK WE NEED THE PARKING PLAN IN BECAUSE HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THE SOFTWARE. YOU DON'T WANT THE SOFTWARE BEING SET UP TO NOT HELP OUR PARKING PLAN, BUT WE ADDRESSED IT IN LDRS, AND MAKE IT CLEAR THAT, CAN YOU WRITE THE ORDINANCE IN SUCH A WAY THAT IF THAT DEED RESTRICTIONS TRUMP THE PARKING PLAN OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE. [NOISE] >> WE CAN ADD IN THE PLAN FOR THAT TODAY. [02:45:01] >> THE DEED RESTRICTIONS SHALL [INAUDIBLE]. >> SAY THAT AGAIN, DONA. >> I DON'T BELIEVE WE INVITE AN ORDINANCE THAT STATES DEED RESTRICTIONS TRUMP A CITY ORDINANCE OR THE LVR. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REQUESTING? >> NO. THERE ARE STIFF RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE STRICTER THAN OUR PARKING PLAN OR RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ARE STRICTER. WHAT WE DO, MAYBE WE JUST TAKE IT OUT AND ADDRESS IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. BECAUSE IF WE'RE CUTTING OFF OUR NOSE, TO SPITE OUR FACE BY SAYING, WELL, NOW YOU CAN DO THIS EVEN THOUGH YOU COULDN'T BEFORE, WE'RE MAKING IT MORE LENIENT VERSUS WHAT OUR GOAL IS. >> ANNA, AND I BELIEVE, I THINK IN THIS ORDINANCE ADVOCATES [INAUDIBLE] WORKING PLAN ESTABLISHED BY AN HOA. >> HOA OR SHORT-TERM RENTAL? >> WELL, SHORT-TERM RENTAL. >> WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT SAYS A BUNCH NEIGHBORHOOD AS IT IS LIKE SANDED SEEDS PLAN. [OVERLAPPING] WELL, I'M LIKE, IF WE HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE WHERE IF PEOPLE CAN'T, THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE PARKING IN THEIR PARKING DRIVEWAY AND NOT HAVE VEHICLES ON THE STREET, AND IF THAT'S IN PLACE NOW AND NOW WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN HAVE TWO CARS ON THE STREET. >> YES, THAT'S WORST THING. BUT STANDARD C SAYS, NO, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR CARS IN YOUR DRIVEWAY, THEN THAT'S A REGULATION TO THEIR [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S IN THEIR CONTRACT. >> THAT'S OUR CONTRACT. >> WE'RE SETTING THE FLOOR NOT THE CEILING. [OVERLAPPING] >> HOW CAN A SHORT-TERM RENTAL DECLARE TWO STREET PARKING SPACES? WE'VE STAYED IN SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN OTHER PLACES AND THEY HAVE TOLD ME NO PARKING OR YOU MUST GO AND PARK IN THIS GARAGE. IT'S LOCATED OVER HERE. SO WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO THEY'RE NOT EVEN GIVEN THAT PRIVILEGE. WHY IS IT SHORT-TERM RENTAL GIVEN TWO ON STREET PARKING? >> WE'RE NOT GUARANTEEING THEM TWO SPOTS, WE'RE JUST SAYING THAT WE DO THIS WITH BUSINESSES AND GALLOPS ALL THE TIME BECAUSE OF THE LIMITED SPACE, WE ALLOW THEM TO USE STREET CAR PARKING IN THEIR PARKING CANNON. DOESN'T MEAN THOSE RESERVE FOR THEM OR THEY'RE EXCLUSIVELY, THEY'RE USED. BUT THERE'S AVAILABILITY OF THAT MANY SPOTS FOR USE IN THAT AREA. >> SO IF THE NEIGHBOR GOES OUT THERE AND SAY, WELL, THIS IS MY PARKING SPACE OR THIS IS WHERE I PARK. >> CAN'T HAPPEN. WE DON'T RESERVE PARKING SPOTS ON CITY RIGHT AWAY. >> JUST UTILIZED IN THE COUNTY. >> JUST UTILIZED IN THE COUNTY. >> [INAUDIBLE] CARS PARKED ON SOMETHING ELSE. >> HAPPENS. [LAUGHTER]. >> ON THIS AGENDA, IF YOU COULD WORK WITH DON, GET SOME CLEAR LANGUAGE ON THAT, THAT MAKES THIS ISLAND WIDE AND SO FORTH. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT BRINGING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO. >> NO. BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT DEAL. THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD BE CHANGING THE LDR, SO DO WE WANT TO HAVE THIS PARKING THING IN PLACE WITH THE FEE? >> CORRECT. NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YES. >> SO IF WE EXPAND WHAT WE HAVE IN R3 ISLAND WIDE AND [NOISE] IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD, IF YOU HAVE TO REGISTER NOW BASED ON THE CURRENT PARKING PLAN, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE ON-SITE PARKING, WHAT DO I DO NEXT YEAR? >> WE'RE NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO, WE'RE JUST SAYING YOU HAVE TO SHOW IT. >> OKAY. ON-SITE? WHAT IF I DON'T HAVE THAT? I'VE BEEN OPERATING FOR NINE YEARS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU CHANGE THE LDR WHERE I'VE BEEN OPERATING MY BUSINESS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. I'VE BEEN OPERATING MY BUSINESS FOR NINE YEARS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I CAN'T OPERATE THAT BECAUSE I DON'T NEED THE PARKING PLAN AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THAT THE DIRECTION WE WANT TO HEAD WITH IT? >> WELL, THIS PARKING LAW HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS SINCE 2015. >> BUT IT'S ONLY FOR OUR THREE [NOISE]. >> IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THIS PARKING PLAN WAS MADE FOR BED AND BREAKFAST? >> NO. >> [OVERLAPPING] NO? THAT IS WHAT I REMEMBER. >> IT WAS FOR SHORT-TERM. NO. I'M THE ONE WHO PUT IT OUT THERE. I WAS THE CHAMPION AND PUT THAT INTO THE LDRS. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH BED AND BREAKFAST, IT HAD TO DO WITH THE COMPLAINTS OF CITIZENS OF PARKING CONCERNS WITH SHORT-TERM DRIVERS. >> [OVERLAPPING] IT'S STILL THE CHAMPION TOO. >> EXCUSE ME. >> IT'S STILL THE CHAMPION. THIS IS YOUR FAULT. [LAUGHTER]. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS AROUND HERE. >> I DON'T KNOW, MY THOUGHTS ARE I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW YOUR REGISTRATION FEES SEPARATE TODAY JUST BECAUSE PARKING IS BRINGING, WE JUST BROUGHT UP TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES. [OVERLAPPING]. >> CAN WE ADDRESS IT AT THE NEXT? >> LET'S PUSH IT FORWARD, I AGREE WE NEED TO DO IT. [OVERLAPPING]. [02:50:03] >> WELL, WE NEED TO DO IT FOR PRICES. >> THE REGISTRATION FEE. [NOISE] >> WELL, NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING PLAN ON THE REGISTRATION, BECAUSE THESE ARE GOING TO START REGISTERING DECEMBER 1ST. >> I BELIEVE A PARKING PLAN IS STILL REQUIRED FOR R3, SO THAT HAS PART OF THE PROCESS ANYWAY. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW MANY, I GUESS, WOULD BE THE ISSUE. BUT R3 STILL REQUIRES A PARKING PLAN. I BELIEVE, RIGHTFULLY WE STILL HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. >> IT COULD BE PUT IN PARKING PLAN AND THEN THE NEXT MEETING WE CAN WORK OUT THE PARTICULARS. >> WELL, IF YOU'RE SAYING FOR THE R3S THAT WOULD BE REGISTERING DECEMBER 1ST. >> IT IS ALREADY IN THE LDR. >> I THINK THAT WOULD MEAN THAT BRYSON WOULD NEED TO INCORPORATE THIS IN TO THE REGISTRATION [OVERLAPPING] PROCESS IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE R3S AS WE EXPAND IT ISLAND WIDE BETWEEN NOW AND DECEMBER 1ST. [OVERLAPPING] >> VERY GOOD. WE'LL HAVE IT ON THE NOVEMBER 17TH AGENDA. COUNCIL WANTS TO PULL THE PARKING OUT OF IT. WE'LL DO ONLY THE REGISTRATION FEE. VERY GOOD. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL, WE HAVE FOOD HERE. IT'S ALMOST NOON. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ITEMS STILL TO GO. WE HAVE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS FOR REVIEW OF OUR EMPLOYEES HERE. [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT DON'T YOU FINISH THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS, AND THE YOU ALL COULD EAT LUNCH DURING. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M JUST GIVING YOU AN UPDATE ON THAT OF WHERE WE ARE TIME-WISE. [3.D. Review of Park Board’s Capital Improvement Projects for 2022 - 2023 (Bouvier/Brown - 20 minutes)] ITEM 3D, PLEASE. >> TREE-D, REVIEW AT PARK BOARDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR 2022-2023. >> MIKE, I'M GOING TO LET YOU OPEN THIS UP. YOU HAD SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS. >> COULD WE TAKE A QUICK BREAK THOUGH? >> EXCUSE ME. >> THE TWO OF US NEED A BREAK. >> YOU STILL HAVE A QUORUM. >> THEY WHAT? >> YOU STILL HAVE A QUORUM. >> I HAVE A QUORUM. >> MIKE, DID YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON THIS? >> YEAH. THERE SHOULD BE A HAND DOWN I PRODUCED THE PARK BOARD, [NOISE] GID OF DOABLE CAPITAL PROJECT OUTLINE. >> WE ALL HAVE THAT. >> WE ALL HAVE THAT. >> YOU GOT THAT? >> YEAH. >> WE DO. >> OKAY. [NOISE] SO BASICALLY, WE'D LIKE TO SEE; THIS IS MY SUGGESTION. LIKE TO SEE THREE BLIPS PROVIDED BY THE PARK BOARD. ONE WOULD BE NEED, OR SOMETHING TO DO WITH SAFETY LAW AND THE CLIENT. THE SECOND LIST WOULD BE SUGGESTION, SOMETHING THAT WOULD IMPROVE SOME OF THEIR PROJECTS OR A PARKING THAT WOULD IMPROVE AN AREA THAT THEY'RE MAKING A BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR OUR VISITORS. AND THEN THE LAST ONE WOULD BE LARGE PROJECT. AND I'LL TAKE [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] PARK AS AN EXAMPLE WITH THE B PART AND THINGS THEY WANT TO DO THERE. THAT WOULD FIT OR BE A LARGE PROJECT AND $2 MILLION WORTH. AND THAT ONE WOULD HAVE MULTIPLE REVIEWS. THE FIRST REVIEW WOULD BE A VERY MINIMAL EXPENSE REVIEW. IT WOULD BE A SKETCH DESCRIPTION AND A ROUGH ESTIMATE. THAT WAY THE CITY COULD LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF IT'S A PROJECT THAT WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH OR IF'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL MAYBE MAKE ADJUSTMENTS OR AMENDMENTS TO. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS GOOD, THEN WE'D GO TO THE SECOND REVIEW. THE SECOND REVIEW WOULD BE WHETHER THEY WOULD SPEND MONEY TO DEVELOP OLD PLANS FOR THE PROJECT AND HARD ESTIMATE [NOISE] WOULD BE, WHAT WOULD GO OUT TO BID FOR THEIR CONTRACTORS. AND THEN THE THIRD REVIEW, IF NEEDED, WOULD BE THE ACCEPTION OF THE CONTRACT. >> IT'S A GOOD LOOKING PLAN, I LIKE THIS. I LIKE YOUR STAFF'S INPUT ON IT. >> I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE A STRUCTURE TO THAT. THESE PROJECTS, WHO DETERMINES THE NEEDS, WANTS IN LARGER PROJECTS, MIKE? >> THAT WOULD BE BASED UPON, I THINK THE PARK BOARD. I'M PRETTY SURE, LIKE THE ONE THAT WE HAVE IN THE [INAUDIBLE] CONCRETE, THAT'S THE NEED. IF THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, THEN THEY WOULDN'T GET THE CLEAR INSURANCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED FOR THAT BUILDING. SO THERE WOULD BE A NEED. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT WE COULD TRUST THEM TO PROVIDE US WITH THE LIST THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR. [02:55:08] >> [OVERLAPPING] GO AHEAD MIKE. >> SO ALSO AS THEY PRESENT THESE LISTS, AND THEY WOULD BE PRESENTED ALL THE TIME AS JUST LIKE THEIR CIP THAT THEY GIVE NOW. THEY WOULD HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE FOR THE PROJECT. I WOULD THINK, AND THIS IS MY FEELING, IS THAT THE FIRST FEW LISTS WOULD BE SOMETHING WE CAN PROBABLY MAKE AN APPROVAL ON. PROBABLY 90% OF THOSE WOULD BE APPROVED. I'M SURE THERE WOULD BE SOME THAT WE WOULD HAVE QUESTIONS ON, THAT WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO KEEP DOWN THE ROAD, [NOISE] A LITTLE BIT. BUT FOR THE MOST PART THEY WOULD HAVE ALL THOSE READY TO GO. >> ALL RIGHT. AND THESE WOULD BE PRESENTED WHEN THEY PRESENT THEIR CIP, WHICH WOULD BE PROBABLY WITH THEIR BUDGET, WHICH WOULD BE MAYBE JULY, SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE. THEN THAT'S WHERE THEY WOULD OUTLINE WHAT CATEGORY THESE GO IN, THEY PRESENT THEM THAT WAY? >> YEAH, THEY HAVE A LIST NOW WITH BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF EVERYTHING, I THINK ALL IT WOULD JUST BE IS TO CATEGORIZE THAT LIST TO SHOW THE FIRST, SECOND, OR THIRD, WHATEVER LIST IT IS, ON THEIR MAJOR LIST. JUST RE-CATEGORIZING OR SHUFFLING THEM AROUND, SO WE CAN SEE THEM. >> OKAY. ANY COMMENTS? >> WELL, LIKE I SAID, AS LONG AS STAFF SEES THIS IN ADVANCE AND COUNCIL SEES IT IN ADVANCE, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH DOING IT THIS WAY BECAUSE THERE'S CERTAINLY SMALL THINGS THAT WOULD FALL UNDERNEATH FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL THAT WOULDN'T BE LONG TERM PROJECTS OR BIG ITEMS. AND THEN THERE'S OBVIOUSLY THOSE IN THE LARGER CATEGORY. I'D BE INTERESTED HERE WITH STAFF HAS TO SAY ABOUT THIS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S YOU OR MR. [INAUDIBLE]. >> DAN COULD COME IN. I CERTAINLY LIKE THE IDEA OF US HAVING WHAT THEIR PRIORITIES ARE. >> YEAH. >> IT'D BE NICE TO KNOW IN ADVANCE. >> HAVE A SEAT MAM. FOR THE CURRENT CIP PROJECTS, WE RECEIVED THE LIST OF CURRENT PROJECT THAT WERE SENT, GENELLE SENT THOSE OUT TO COUNCIL. WHERE DO WE STAND ON THE ON ADDRESSING THIS NOW? DO WE NEED TO SEND THESE BACK TO THE PARK BOARD AND HAVE THEM RESTRUCTURE THESE AS FAR AS NOW, CAN YOU GET US A COPY OF THE LIST, PLEASE? >> YES. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I COULD ADD TO THAT THE LIST THAT WE ALREADY HAVE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE TIMING ON THIS WILL BE GOOD FOR THE LIST WE HAVE NOW BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY SEPTEMBER SO WE SHOULD HAVE APPROVED THE LIST BACK WHEN WE GOT THE BUDGET. NOW WE'RE REALLY DEEP INTO WHERE THEY NEED TO REALLY START THESE PROJECTS. I THINK WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT THAT NEXT YEAR WHEN WE GET THE ACTUAL BUDGET AND THE VIP LIST. THIS VIP LIST WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO REVIEW WITHIN THE NEXT MEETING OR TWO TO MAKE SURE THEY CAN GET THEIR PROJECT OFF IN A TIMELY MANNER. >> WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THIS VIP APPROVAL? WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME. OUR INITIAL COMMENTS TO COUNCIL WAS THAT WE THOUGHT THERE NEEDS TO BE A PROCESS WHEREBY COUNCIL AND IT MAY BE IN YOUR JOINT MEETING, PROVIDED GUIDANCE TO THE PARK BOARD ON WHAT COUNCIL'S PRIORITIES WERE. BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN LACKING THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS, IS THAT IT SEEMS THE PART WHERE IT BRINGS HERE AND TELLS COUNCIL WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE INSTEAD OF VICE VERSA. WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO WORK TOWARD A PROCESS WHERE COUNCIL ESTABLISH THE PRIORITIES FOR THE PARK BOARD OF WHAT THEY WANT DONE IN OUR PARTS, WHAT THEY WANT DONE AT THE BEACHES, WHAT THEY WANT DONE THAT WAY, AND THEN THE PARK BOARD WILL BRING PROJECTS BACK SAYING TO FULFILL COUNCIL'S WANTS HERE'S WHAT WE SUGGEST WE DO. THE NEEDS, I THINK THERE WAS A PROCESS IN PLACE AND SPECIFICALLY AS IT ADDRESSES CITY-OWNED ASSETS, WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE THAT WORKED FOR THAT NOW AND THE CONCRETE WORK ALL MR. BEACH BRAZILIAN, IS IN THAT PROCESS. I MEAN, IT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT IT'S ROUTINED BECAUSE IT'S AN ABSOLUTE SAFETY ISSUE. BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT IS WE THINK THAT AS PART OF THIS, I ACTUALLY LIKED THIS PROCESS, BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING WHERE COUNCIL PROVIDES PARK BOARD, ITS DESIRES, AND THEN PARK BOARD WOULD THEN ACT ON THOSE INSTEAD OF THEM TELLING THE COUNCIL WHAT THE PROJECTS WOULD BE. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT OF COURSE, [03:00:02] THEY SOMETIMES THEY DO HAVE WORTHWHILE PROJECTS THAT THEY SEE THOSE ARE OPERATING THE PARK EVERY DAY AND WANT TO BREAK THAT FORWARD. I THINK THE IMPROVEMENTS OF [INAUDIBLE] LAST YEAR WAS THE EXAMPLE THAT I'VE ALWAYS INSISTED THE PARK BOARD THAT IT'D BE NICE IF YOU WENT TO ASK COUNCIL IF THEY WANTED TO EVEN DO THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO ENTERTAIN THIS BEFORE GET WOUND UP IN THE BUDGET. THE WAY MY DETAILS OF THE CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS, THAT THING COULD SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. BUT I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE IN THIS PROCESS MEANS FOR COUNCIL TO DETERMINE WHAT HIS PRIORITIES ARE AND TRANSMIT THAT TO PARK BOARD. THAT MAKES SENSE, MIKE? >> IT DOES. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I MEAN, OTHER THAN THE CITY, I'M NOT FOR SURE HOW WE CAN IDENTIFY VIP FOR THE PARK BOARD. >> WELL, BUT PROJECTS YOU CAN SAY, [NOISE] BEACHES ON THE EAST END. THE RV PARK WESTERN SIDE. >> WESTERN [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] >> I THINK WE PROBABLY COULD COME TO SOME AGREEMENT THAT RV PARK AT SEA WOLF IS A GOOD IDEA. THAT'S BEEN KICKED AROUND FOR YEARS. BUT FOR JUST TO PUT IT IN PARK BOARD BUDGET AND SAY, WE'RE MOVING FORWARD ON THIS WITHOUT EVER HAVING BROUGHT THAT TO COUNCIL, I THINK IS A [NOISE] MISCOMMUNICATION. THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THE THING WE WOULD SAY, [NOISE] WE WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT IMPROVEMENTS ARE GOING TO DO IN THAT PARTICULAR PARK. EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO SAY, WELL, WE NEED THIS, THAT THE OTHER RV PARK HAVE THAT DISCUSSION BEFORE WE EVEN GET TO THAT CONCEPTUAL DRAWING PHASE. IF THERE'S SOME EXTRAORDINARY THING THAT PARK BOARD THINKS OUGHT TO BE DONE, THEN BRINGING THAT FORWARD, LET'S HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. BUT THE WAY IT'S BEEN HISTORICALLY AS PARK BOARD IS DOING WHAT IT WANTS AND NOT ASKING THE CITY IF THEY THINK IT'S EVEN A GOOD IDEA AND IN ITS OWN AND THE CITY'S CAPITAL PROJECTS ON THE CITY'S PROPERTY. >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND THEY'RE DOING THIS. THIS ACTUALLY DOES EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO. THEY'RE PREVENTING THE LARGE PROJECT IN THE FIRST REVIEW, IS A CONCEPT REVIEW. WITH THAT, THIS IS THE TIME THAT THE CITY GIVES THEIR INPUT WHETHER, HEY, THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT FOR NOBODY WANT TO SHUFFLE THIS ROUND AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> I GET THAT AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD PART OF THE PROCESS. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'VE ADDED THAT HERE. BUT I THINK WHAT MR. BUCKLEY'S CONCERN IS THAT THERE IS NO POINT IN THIS PROCESS WHERE THE PARK BOARD APPEARS INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT THE CITY THINKS ABOUT THESE PARKS AND WHAT WE THINK SHOULD BE HAPPENING IN THESE PARKS AND OTHER ASSETS, AS OPPOSED TO WAITING FOR THE PARK BOARD TO COME BACK AND TELL US WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO. >> WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A JOINT MEETING COMING UP HERE IN NOVEMBER 17. WE WILL HAVE A VISIONING, AND ONE OF THE ITEMS WE'LL BE VISIONING FOR THE PARKS. WE CAN GIVE INPUT. WE'RE GOING TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS SEA WOLF AND STUART BEACH PARK COMING UP HERE. THE OTHER THING IS, IN MY MIND IS THE TIMING. IF THEY BRING THIS CIP TO US AND IN JUNE, JULY, THAT GIVES TIME FOR COUNCIL TO REVIEW THAT AND START ASKING QUESTIONS AND THEN START GIVING INPUT AND WHAT PROJECTS WE FEEL IS IMPORTANT ALSO, IN MY MIND. >> WHAT PROBABLY TOO LATE? >> WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST? >> I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE A PROCESS THAT WE SPEND THIS YEAR DECIDING WHAT THE PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE NEXT YEAR BASED ON COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE AND THEN PUT THE PLANS TOGETHER AND BRING THOSE TO COUNCIL AS PART OF THE PROCESS AND THEN BY TIME YOU GET TO BUDGET, BUT HONESTLY, WE'RE SNOWED ON BUDGET IN JUNE AND JULY AS THEY ARE. >> YOU SHOULD BE AT THE APPROVAL STAGE. >> WE SHOULD BE WORKING ON PROJECTS NOW FOR THIS COMING YEAR ON WHAT THEY WANT TO PRESENT, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. ONE OF OUR OBJECTIVES THAT YOU GUYS ASSIGNED TO US WAS TO DERIVE SOME REVENUE OUT OF THE PARKS. WELL, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING AN RV PARK AT SEA WOLF, WHO'S GOING TO GET THE REVENUE FROM THAT? IF WE'RE GOING TO DO CERTAIN THINGS WITH CITY ASSETS, WE SHOULDN'T CONTROL THE ASSETS. HOW'S THAT REVENUE IS GOING TO BE SPLIT? HOW'S IT GOING TO BE RECEIVED? HOW THE BUDGETS ARE GOING TO BE APPROVED? ALL THOSE THINGS WE NEED TO WORK OUT IN ADVANCE. I THINK THAT WE PROBABLY INTERNALLY CAN SET UP A PROCESS TO DO THAT. WHERE STAFFS WILL MEET, COUNCIL WILL PROVIDE THEIR GUIDANCE. [03:05:01] STAFF WILL MEET, FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THINGS FORWARD THEN. BY THE TIME THE CIP GETS HERE, EVERYTHING'S BEEN WORKED OUT. INSTEAD OF STARTING WITH THE CIP AT THE BUDGET AND THEN TRYING TO PLAY CATCH UP. >> I WOULD DISAGREE THAT THERE'S 22, 23 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO SITTING HERE NEEDS TO BE JUST APPROVED WHOLESALE AND WE KICKED THIS PROCESS DOWN TO THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. >> I THINK THE THINGS THAT ARE ON THIS PAGE NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WE NEED TO SEE, I MEAN, IF THE ARI APPLE BEACH DRAINAGE, BEACH CONTROL HEADQUARTERS, FISHING PIER EXTENSION, THOSE THINGS WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THOSE AHEAD OF TIME TO DECIDE WHETHER WE EVEN WANT THOSE THINGS DONE ON OUR ASSETS AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. I DON'T THINK WE CAN JUST SAY, YEAH, LET'S SKIP ACROSS THIS ONE AND GO TO THE NEXT YEAR. I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THESE ISSUES. >> THAT WAS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. IS TO PROVE M&O WOULD NOT APPROVE THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> CORRECT. >> THE CIP WILL BE ON OUR AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER 17TH WITH OUR JOINT MEETING WITH THE PARK BOARD. >> WELL, I THINK THAT'S FAST, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE ON DECEMBER 10TH AND WE CAN DISCUSS. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE'RE GOING TO MEET WITH PARK BOARD ON NOVEMBER 17TH. WE CAN PUT IT ON THE DECEMBER AGENDA, OF COURSE, FOR APPROVAL AND THINGS, RIGHT? >> OKAY. >> YEAH. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS ITEM? >> I HAVE ONE WORD ON IT. I'M NOT GOING TO COME ON. WE HAVE A PARK BOARD APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE, AND I'M LOSING THE WAY THE PARK BOARD IS SUPPOSED TO DO THINGS. I THOUGHT THE PARK BOARD WAS THERE AND WE APPOINTED PEOPLE ON THE BOARD TO REPRESENT US AND REPRESENT THE CITY TO GET THESE THINGS APPROVED, AND WE WERE JUST TO LOOK AT THESE AS THEY WERE APPROVED AND DEVELOPED BY THE PARK BOARD AND THEN PUSH THOSE ON. I'M FRUSTRATED ON WHAT THE WHOLE PARK BOARD IS DOING. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT GIVING THEM, I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST FRUSTRATED FROM WHAT I'M HEARING. >> WELL, I CAN SPEAK TO SOME OF THAT, BUT SPECIFICALLY AND GENERALLY. GENERALLY, WE HAVE ASSIGNED THE IDC THE TASK OF MANAGING PROJECTS WITH OUR HASHSET SALES TAX. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY DON'T CONCEPTUALIZE THESE THINGS AND COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND SEEK APPROVAL. WHEN IT COMES TO THE PARK BOARD, I SAID I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES AND IT CAUSED CONSIDERABLE DISCORD AT THE TABLE. IF YOU'RE GOING TO PROPOSE BUILDING A BEACH PATROL HEADQUARTERS OR A NEW FACILITY OR NEW PAVILION OR WHATEVER IT IS TO REPEAT, IT MIGHT BE NICE IF YOU GO ASK COUNCIL IF THAT'S SOMETHING THEY WANT TO ENTERTAIN, AND I WOULD SIMPLY REFUSE. THEY JUST REFUSED TO DO THAT. THEY WERE GOING TO DO IT WITHOUT COUNCIL. I POINTED OUT, YOU CAN'T DO THAT AND IT COSTS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UPSET. THE FACT THAT THESE CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS HAVE NEVER APPEARED AT THIS TABLE, NOT SINCE THE $27 MILLION PAVILION IS NEITHER YOUR FAULT NOR MINE. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE COUNCIL OF REPRESENTATIVES REFUSING TO BRING IT BACK. IT'S ABOUT THE PARK BOARD WANTING TO BE A PART OF THIS PROCESS AND CONCEPTUALIZE THESE THINGS AND GET INPUT FROM COUNCIL ON WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE BUILT BEFORE THEY DECIDED TO GO BUILD THINGS. >> BASICALLY, WE'RE AT THIS POINT BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID. THE PARK BOARD SHOULD BRING THEIR IDEAS, OR THEIR CIP, OR WHATEVER, BEFORE COUNCIL. NOT THAT THEY'VE DONE A BAD JOB IN DECISION-MAKING FOR PROJECTS, BUT THAT SHOULD BE THE PROPER PROCEDURE. NOW FOR ALL OF THESE PROJECTS, IS IT THE PARK BOARD THAT SIT AND DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD DO THE WORK? [NOISE] >> CORRECT. THE CITIES HAD NO INPUT IN ANY OF THE REGION. >> OKAY, AND THAT'S WHAT THE CITY WANTS AND THE HOT TAX FUNDS DEPOSITED TO THE CITY. >> I'M NOT SURE THAT YOU'RE DIRECTOR RELATED, YEAH. >> OKAY. I MEAN, THEIR CHOICE OF PROJECTS WON'T REALLY GO AWAY BECAUSE THEY CAN PRESENT A BUDGET, RIGHT? >> WELL, BEFORE THAT AS DAN IS SAYING THEY COULD COME AND CONCEPTUALLY PRESENT THESE CIP ITEMS [03:10:01] AND SAY THESE ARE THE THINGS WE THINK WE OUGHT TO BE DOING IN THESE PARKS, AND THEN THEY COULD GET FEEDBACK FROM COUNCIL WHAT WE THINK YOU OUGHT TO BE DOING THIS OR WE LIKE THAT, WE DON'T LIKE THAT WHATEVER. >> IT'S A LOT LIKE WE DO. WE'LL BRING FORTH THE PROJECT TO YOU GUYS AND WE ALL SPIT BALLING AROUND THE TABLE TELL US WHAT YOU WANT WE GET YOUR INPUT AND YOU TELL STAFF GO BACK OUT AND FURTHER DEVELOP IT. OR THIS LOOKS GREAT, LET'S MOVE IT FORWARD. [OVERLAPPING] YEAH. IT'S VERY MUCH THE SAME AS WHAT WE DO HERE AT THE CITY. >> THE KEY IS WE JUST NEED TO GET A TIMELINE ON THIS AND LET THE PARK BOARD KNOW THAT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT ON HOW WE PROGRESS WITH THIS. >> IT SEEMS LIKE IT CAN'T BE SO QUICKLY. >> DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT, BUT IT SHOULD BE. >> CAN BE WHAT, DONE QUICKLY? >> DONE QUICKLY. >> AFTERNOON. [OVERLAPPING] >> ALL RIGHT. IF WE KNOW WHAT WE WANT. [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S WHY I'M NOT PLACING A BLAME ON ANYBODY BECAUSE YOU REALLY SHOULD DO PARK BOARD COMING TO US TO TELL US WHAT THEY WANT BUT I WOULD SAY WE HAVE SOME OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY TOO. I MEAN WE NEED TO FACILITATE SOME OF THIS WITH THEM AND COMMUNICATE WITH THEM. >> WE'LL BE A SHADOW OF DOUBT. BOTH OF YOUR COMPONENT UNITS ARE CONTROLLING VAST AMOUNTS OF YOUR ASSETS >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I NEED YOUR INPUT. >> YES. >> YEAH. >> WE NEED TO DO OUR PART [OVERLAPPING] >> WE NEED TO BE INVOLVED, WE'RE ANOTHER RESOURCE FOR THE PARK BOARD AS THEY PUT THESE THOUGHTS TOGETHER. I'LL BE ON ACCOUNT. PARK BORN ON SOME OF THESE PROJECTS KNOW FAR BETTER THAN WE DO ON HOW TO DO THESE AND WHAT SHOULD BE DONE IN THE PRIORITY. BUT IT NEEDS TO COME HERE. IT'S SIMILAR AND I TRY NOT TO OVERSIMPLIFY THIS BUT IT LIKE GETTING [INAUDIBLE] AUDIT PLAN, HE PUTS THAT TOGETHER, HE BRINGS IT TO COUNSEL, WE REVIEW IT, WE CAN MAKE CHANGES OR WHATEVER TO THAT AUDIT PLAN BUT WE NEED TO HAVE A PROCESS HERE AND A TIMELINE THAT WE ALL AGREE UPON AND THE PARK BOARD KNOWS WHAT'S EXPECTED OF THEM. THAT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. >> MAYOR, I TELL YOU ONE THING ABOUT BRANDON AUDIT PLAN IS THAT HE INVOLVES STAFF. HE COMES TO THE MANAGER, HE COMES TO ME BEFORE HE DEVELOPS IT AND SAYS ARE THERE AREAS OF HIGH RISK? IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS THAT YOU THINK THAT I NEED TO FOCUS ON. HE MAY OR MAY NOT TAKE THOSE BUT HE ESTABLISHES THE DIALOGUE BEFORE HE EVER DEVELOPS A PLAN SAYING WHAT DO YOU ALL NEED? THEN HE DEVELOPS THE PLAN. >> THAT'S A GOOD SEGUE, DAN I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT. IT'S A GOOD SEGUE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF PARK BOARD STAFF IN THE COMMUNICATION WITH CITY STAFF THAT NEEDS TO BE HEIGHTENED QUITE A BIT. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. VERY GOOD, LET'S MOVE TO [OVERLAPPING] >> I WILL SAY UP UNTIL ALL THIS STUFF HAPPENED KELLY AND I WERE MEETING REGULARLY AND WE HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP. >> LET US MOVED TO AN EASY SUBJECT NOW I'M 3E IF WE COULD. [3.E. Discussion of the condition of West End Roads and the inequity of funding (Robb/Brown - 10 minutes)] >> 3E DISCUSSION AND THE CONDITION OF WESTON ROADS IN THE EQUITY OF FUNDING. >> WELL. >> MY FAVORITE TEMPLATES. [OVERLAPPING] >> WELL WE'RE COPY OUT [LAUGHTER] IN DECEMBER AND THIS SHOULD BE ADVENTUROUS TO YOU WILLIAM [LAUGHTER] AND DECEMBER WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THE STREET REVIEW AND SO FORTH. BUT AS I'VE LOOKED AT INFORMATION IN THE PAST. WELL WE HAVE A MAJOR INEQUITY AS FAR AS CURRENTLY THE STREETS BUDGET IS DIVIDED BY SIX. WHERE THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IS MY DISTRICT IS 20 MILES LONG SO DIVIDING THE BUDGET BY SIX IT SHOULD BE DONE AREA WISE. ALSO THERE SEEMS TO BE AN EQUITY AS TO WHAT PROJECTS GET MOVED UP. I HAVE SOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVEN'T EVER BEEN TOUCHED SINCE THEY WERE DEVELOPED. WHERE STREETS, THE BLACK TOP'S GONE IT JUST LOOKS LIKE GRUMBLE AND I WOULD JUST CREATE A BETTER SYSTEM ESPECIALLY IN THE FACT THAT SO MANY OTHER DISTRICTS QUALIFY FOR CBDG FUNDS AND MY DISTRICT DOESN'T. AGAIN, MY DISTRICT IS 20 MILES LONG AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US ADDRESS IT. STREETS MORE TERRITORIAL WISE AS FAR AS IT'S A 32 MILE LONG ISLAND THAN JUST SAYING WELL YOU ONLY GET THIS BUNCH OF THE PIE BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SIX DISTRICTS. >> HAS THAT REALLY HAPPENED? >> IT DOES. >> WE'D BEEN AT IT FOR THE GENERAL FUND YOU SAID [03:15:02] ONLY ONE-SIXTH OF OUR THREE BUDGET IS GOING INTO THIS REQUESTED. >> NO [OVERLAPPING] >> WELL LET ME CORRECT THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> WHAT WILL YOU SAY >> I HAD BRANDON BOLDED NUMBERS AND ABOUT ONE-THIRD OF THE STREET MILES PAVED IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS HAVE GONE TO DISTRICT SIX ALONE. THE OTHER TWO-THIRDS OF THE STREET PAVING HAS GONE OVER BUT MARIA IS CORRECT AND THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ALLOCATING THE INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE MONEY WHICH IS THE TAX MONEY GOING TOWARDS STREETS WE TRY TO DIVVY IT UP IS EQUAL AS WE CAN. NOW IF WE GET CDBG MONEY FROM MS. LEWIS THAT FREES UP MORE OF THE MONEY TO BE SPLIT UP AMONGST THE OTHER DISTRICTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE QUALIFIED FOR THAT AND IT'S AN OFFSET IT'S NOT AN AD. OVER TIME WE HAVE PUT WAY MORE MONEY INTO DISTRICT SIX STREETS I THINK WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER ROB IS ARGUING IS THAT SHE HAS MORE STREET MILES THAN ANYBODY ELSE AND PERHAPS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A DIFFERENT METHODOLOGY OF HOW WE DIVIDE UP AND HOW WE PRIORITIZE OUR STREETS. WERE GOING THROUGH THE STREET STUDY, WE'RE GETTING READY TO HAVE A COMPLETE LOOK AT ALL OF OUR STREETS AGAIN, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT TIME TO SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT HOW YOU GUYS WANT TO PRIORITIZE THE STREETS. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU SUMMARIZED THAT VERY WELL. >> YEAH. >> YOU KNOW I WOULD BE FOR THAT AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. THIS ISSUE OF WE PAY MORE TAXES WE SHOULD GET MORE, THAT JUST DOESN'T READ WELL. >> OH IT'S 20 MILE, THAT'S 20 MILES STREET [OVERLAPPING] I NEVER SAID THAT. >> HE TALKS A LOT. [LAUGHTER] >> YES YOU DID. >> I NEVER SAID TAXES. >> MANY TIMES IN THE PAST YOU HAVE. >> WELL, TODAY I HAVEN'T. [LAUGHTER] >> OVERALL BUDGET COME FROM TAXES. >> TALK ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, BRIAN. PUT HOW MUCH INFRASTRUCTURE. >> OVERALL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT SKEW NOW BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE, WE DO SPEND SUBSTANTIALLY MORE ON THE WEST THAN WE DO ANYWHERE ELSE. BUT THAT INCLUDES ALL YOUR WATER PROJECTS, AND AGAIN [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'S THEY'VE BEEN IGNORED FOR SO LONG. SO NOW YOU'RE HAVING TO MAKE BIGGER INVESTMENT. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S ALL BEEN IGNORED FOR A LONG TIME AND WE'VE BEEN ADDRESSING IT. THIS YEAR, WE'VE HAD WITH OUR WITH OUR IMPROVEMENTS IN HUGE CREDIT NEUTRINO AND HIS GROUP ARE DOING THIS, BUT YOU'VE PROBABLY HAD THE BEST WATER PRESSURE. YOU'VE EVER HAD IT THERE BECAUSE WE'VE MANAGED WE'VE GOT OUR AIRPORT SYSTEM UP. SO WE'VE PUT A LOT OF EFFORT AND WE'RE SPENDING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT, ALMOST ALL OF OUR BIG CAPITAL PROJECTS THIS YEAR OR WEST. >> WASTEWATER PLAN. >> WASTEWATER AND INI AND THINGS THAT SO WE CAN FURTHER DEVELOP IT UP THERE. >> CAN WE JUST ASK YOU TO BRING US BACK WITH THE STREET STUDY REPORT ON WHAT SPENT WHERE? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> IF BOTH OF THE STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE LET'S GET A GOOD PICTURE OF THIS. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. WE TEND TO LOOK AT THINGS MORE. WHAT BENEFITS EVERYBODY, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO DIVIDE IT UP FOR YOU GUYS. >> WHAT'S THE STUDY BEING DONE ON. >> STARTS IN DECEMBER. >> WE'RE STARTING TO STUDY IN DECEMBER. >> HOW LONG DOES THAT TAKE BRIAN, YOU GET THAT? >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THE QUESTION WHO IS NOT HERE? I DON'T BELONG HERE, BUT I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO TAKE A COUPLE OF MONTHS. >> I THINK THEIR PLANS ARE TO TAKE A WISER APPROACH AND LOOK AT EVERYTHING ON STREETS WHERE BEFORE WE TALK MORE ABOUT LIMITED VIEW, THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SIGNAGE AND OTHER THINGS. >> ONE OF THE THINGS TO HIS PRIORITIES CHANGE. THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBER, WANTED US TO REALLY EMPHASIZE STREETS THAT HAD SUBMERGED PROBLEMS OR WATER ISSUES BECAUSE THAT CAUSES MORE DEGRADATION IN THE STREETS. THE PRIORITIES ARE Y'ALLS. WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE YOU THE DATA. THESE ARE THE WORST STREETS AND THESE ARE THE BEST STREETS, BUT HOW WE PRIORITIZE THEM AND WHO GETS WHAT, WHEN AND WHERE. I WOULD ASK THAT WE NOT POLITICIZE OUR STREETS. WE DON'T PICK WHO WE KNOW AND WHATEVER, BUT WE PROVIDE A GLOBAL SYSTEM TO LOOK AT THESE AND CERTAINLY ROAD MILEAGE AND IT SHOULDN'T BE PART OF IT. I THINK TRAFFIC VOLUMES SHOULD BE PART OF IT BECAUSE IT'S TOTALLY IGNORED BECAUSE NOBODY DROPS FROM THE SKY ON THE WEST END, THEY HAVE TO COME THROUGH OTHER DISTRICTS TO GET THERE. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF RETAIL ON THE WEST END. THERE'S NOT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF RESTAURANTS ON THE WEST END, SO THEY HAVE TO COME INTO TOWN TO USE THOSE THINGS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE SAME FOLKS THAT WERE PAYMENT THEIR STREETS OUT IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSES, DON'T FALL INTO SINKHOLES, GO INTO KROGER'S, SO WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP IT BALANCED. BUT I DON'T DISAGREE AT ALL WITH CHANGING METHODOLOGY BASED ON DISTANCE. >> WELL, WE NEED TO SEE WHAT THAT METHODOLOGY IS. >> BRIAN, LET'S SAY WHEN THE STREET REPORT GOES BACK TO SIX MONTHS, WE'LL HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS IN IT. [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT IT DOES IS IT CATEGORIZES OUR STREETS BY BASICALLY A COLOR CODE RED, YELLOW, AND GREEN. THEN WE HAVE SOME OTHER SHADES IN THERE THAT WE USE INTERNALLY LIKE PINK, WHICH TELLS US, LOOK, THIS STREET WAS YELLOW BUT IT'S REALLY PINK [03:20:01] BECAUSE WE KNOW BEFORE WE GET THE NEXT STUDY AND GET TO IT, THIS IS GOING TO TRANSITION TO RED BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC COUNTS ARE HIGHER LEVEL THEN WE USE FOR INTERNAL PLANNING, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO GET A GOOD FIRM RATING OF THE WORST, AND WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE TEND TO ADDRESS THE WORST ONES FIRST, AND WE WORK OUR WAY UP FROM THERE. >> WE HAVE STREETS IN DISTRICT 6 THAT HAD BEEN RED FOR THE LAST FIVE REPORTS, AND THEY HAVEN'T EVER BEEN ADDRESSED. >> WE ADDRESSED RED STREETS IN DIFFERENT WAYS. SOME ARE RED FOR BASE FAILURE, SOME ARE RED BECAUSE OF UTILITY FAILURE. MOST OF MARIE STREETS ARE JUST BAD BECAUSE THE BASE FAILURE BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T HAVE A TREMENDOUS MANY UTILITIES EVER NEED THE STREETS OF THERE. THEY HAVE OPEN DITCHES, SO THE UTILITIES ARE OFF TO THE SIDES MORE. BUT THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS THAT WE ADDRESS OUR STREETS THROUGH DIFFERENT METHODS TOO, WE HAVE OUR BILL AND OVERLAY AND IF IT WAS JUST AS SIMPLE AS LAND ASPHALT, WE'D BE FURTHER ALONG. BUT, AS YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO ADDRESS UNDERLYING UTILITY ISSUES BEFORE WE PUT ASPHALT ON THE STREET. >> WHEN YOU SAY YOU BRING OUR REPORT IT BACK TO COUNCIL, WHERE DOES THE FUNDING GO TO ADDRESS THAT PART OF CRP? >> IT'S TYPICALLY PART OF OUR MILLION OVERLAY MONEY THAT SHE SAYS. WHAT I'D RATHER YOU GUYS, WHAT I REALLY DON'T WANT IS YOU GUYS SAY, WELL, I WANT THIS ONE AND I WANT THIS ONE, I WANT THIS ONE, WHAT I'D RATHER YOU DO IS GUYS TO DEVELOP METHODOLOGY AND STAFF WILL APPLY THE METHODOLOGY TO ASSURE FAIR TREATMENT OF THE STREETS. >> BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE STREETS, THE DISTRICT 6 HAS GOTTEN A THIRD OF ALL THE MONEY OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS. >> THEY'VE GOTTEN A THIRD OF THE LINEAR FEET PAY >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> BUT WE'RE 20 MILES LONG. >> YOU'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A THIRD OF THE STREETS, BUT YOU'RE GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A THIRD OF THE STREETS PAVED. RIGHT NOW WE'RE FAIRLY EQUAL, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. RIGHT NOW, WE TRIED TO DIVIDE IT EQUALLY [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE TWO-THIRDS OF THE STATE. >> NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE YOU REMEMBER YOUR STREETS. WE HAVE THE ROAD BALLS AND WE'LL PROVIDE THAT AS PART OF THE DEAL. BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER TOO, AS WE LOOK AT THESE STREETS AND WE PRIORITIZE THEM. ONE DISTRICT MAY HAVE A LOT OF RED STREETS, AND IF WE TRY TO DIVIDE THINGS THAT WERE EQUALLY, WE MAY NOT GET TO ALL THOSE RED STREETS AND HAVE COUNCIL SAYS WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS RED STREETS FIRST. WE WILL FOCUS WHERE THERE'S MORE RED STREETS. THOSE ARE METHODOLOGIES THAT WE NEED COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AND WE'LL BRING BACK SOME OPTIONS FOR YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT METHODOLOGIES AND TAKE YOUR INPUT AND WE'LL DEVELOP THAT PLAN. I KNOW YOU GUYS LAUGH AND JOKE ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK MS. ROB BRINGS UP A VERY GOOD POINT AND I THINK WE NEED TO FOLLOW UP ON IT AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE GOOD, SOLID PLANS TO DO IT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK WHAT MARIE BRINGS UP IS A GOOD POINT THAT WE NEED TO RELOOK AT THIS POLICY ON OUR STREETS. >> WHEN WE STARTED, WE HADN'T PAID ANY STREETS, SO WE WERE TRYING TO SHARE THE LOVE, BUT WE MAY BE BEYOND THAT BECAUSE WE PAY ME A STREET IS PAVED IN GALVESTON EVERY SINGLE DAY. >> WELL, I KNOW WE'RE READING A MEMORY. WE'RE NOT EVEN WAIT FOR THE MACHINES TO COME BACK INTO SERVICE WE'RE RUNNING THEM. >> BRIAN, LET ME KNOW WHEN THE DAVID COLLINS. >> YOU GUYS GET SO SHOCK UP OVER HERE. [LAUGHTER] >> LET ME KNOW WHEN THAT STREET STUDY AND WE'LL GET IT DONE [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'LL GET BRANDON TO SEND YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ON TIMELINES ON THAT BY EMAIL, SO YOU HAVE A GOOD IDEA, WE'LL KEEP YOU UPDATED. HAPPY TO DO THAT. THIS IS THE STEP I REALLY ENJOYED DOING MORE SO THAN TALKING ABOUT BARBARA. [LAUGHTER]. >> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT, MARIE? VERY GOOD. IT IS 12:27 PM. WE ARE THROUGH WITH OUR OPEN SESSION [4. EXECUTIVE SESSION] OF WORKSHOP WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. AT THIS POINT, PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551074, PERSONNEL MATTERS TO DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT, OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, SPECIFICALLY EVALUATION AS CITY MANAGERS, CITY ATTORNEY, CITY AUDITOR, AND CITY SECRETARY. WE ARE NOW INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. [BACKGROUND] >> JOHN I'VE GOT YOU DOWN FOR CATHOLICS DAUGHTERS AND MONTH PROCLAMATION. >> WELL, THAT'S GREAT. I LOVED THAT [BACKGROUND]. >> DAVID I GOT YOU DOWN FOR CHIROPRACTIC, MONTH PROCLAMATION [LAUGHTER] WE ARE ON. IT IS 02:22 PM. WE HAVE NOW FINISHED OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE'RE BACK IN OPEN SESSION. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH EVERYTHING ON OUR AGENDA FOR TODAY AND WE NOW ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.