[00:00:02]
>> [NOISE] GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.
[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
I'M GLAD TO HAVE YOU HERE THIS MORNING.IT IS 9:00 AM AND WE ARE OFFICIALLY OPENING OUR WORKSHOP MEETING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL HERE IN GALVESTON FOR FEBRUARY 23RD.
I WANT TO WELCOME COUNCIL. GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL.
GLAD TO SEE EVERYONE AND GOOD MORNING TO EVERYBODY HERE IN ATTENDANCE.
STAFF, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
FOR THOSE THAT MAY BE WATCHING THIS TELECAST IN THE COMMUNITY, WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM HERE, BUT JANELLE.
COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS IS ABSENT TODAY.
>> VERY GOOD. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.
COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS WILL NOT BE WITH US THIS MORNING AND COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS WILL MISS OUR EVENING OR AFTERNOON MEETING TODAY ALSO.
SHE IS OUT OF TOWN ON BUSINESS.
BEFORE WE START OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS, JUST SOME CLARIFICATION OF SOME ITEMS HERE.
ITEM 3I FOR THE CLARIFICATION OF THE SENATE BILL 434 IS ON OUR AGENDA.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SALLY BACO PARTICIPATE WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, AND SHE IS IN AUSTIN.
WE HAVE POSTED THIS AS A FINAL POSTING THAT CAME IN TEN O'CLOCK MONDAY MORNING.
COUNCIL, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO APPROACH THAT SUBJECT UNTIL AFTER 10:00.
SALLY'S SCHEDULE IS VERY BUSY TODAY AT THE LEGISLATURE, SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO, IF IT MET COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT 3I UP TO AS CLOSE TO TEN O'CLOCK OR RIGHT AFTER IF WE CAN SO THAT WE CAN GET SALLY GOING ON ON THAT.
I WANT TO START THE CLARIFICATION OF THE AGENDA ITEMS FIRST.
[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 (40 Min)]
IF WE COULD, JANELLE, 3A PLEASE, MA'AM.>> 3A, CLARIFICATION ON CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL, THEY ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON CONSENT AND [NOISE] ITEMS.
MIKE BOUVIER, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE AGENDA?
IN ONE OF THE REPORTS, IT SPECIFIED SOMETHING ABOUT A SPECIAL LETTER FROM THE LIBRARY.
>> THE LIBRARY AGREEMENT WAS CHANGED IN 2021, TO REFLECT AN INCREASED FOR THEM EACH YEAR THAT WAS EQUIVALENT TO WHAT THE CITY WAS EXPERIENCING IN A GIVEN YEAR.
BUT WE STILL WANTED TO BUDGET FOR THE FIVE CENT TAX RATE THAT THE CHARTER CALLS FOR FOR THE LIBRARY.
THE WAY THE LIBRARY AGREED TO THAT IN THEIR AGREEMENT WAS THE DIFFERENCE IN THOSE TWO NUMBERS WOULD SHOW UP AS A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY.
THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY IT BACK.
THEY NORMALLY PAY THE LESSER AMOUNT, WHICH REPRESENTS THE INCREASE THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO WHAT THE CITY'S INCREASE IS.
WE JUST MADE A PROCEDURAL ERROR AND LEFT THAT LARGER NUMBER OUT OF THE BUDGET.
IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE THEIR ALLOCATION AT ALL.
I TALKED TO MIKE MILLER ABOUT IT YESTERDAY.
HE ACTUALLY HAD SEEN IT BEFORE I WAS ABLE TO TALK TO HIM ON THE PHONE AND THE BOARD WAS BRIEFED IN. JUST AN ERROR.
>> ARE WE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE ORDINANCES LATER ON OR ARE WE GOING TO GET THOSE NOW?
>> WELL, WE HAVE DOWN ON OUR WORKSHOP AGENDA.
I THINK ON YOUR ITEMS, MIKE, THE ORDINANCE.
LET ME MAKE SURE. WHAT ORDINATES YOU GOT?
>> IT'S THE ADDENDUM TO THE ORDINANCE FOR 10B.
>> ON 10B. LET'S GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THAT NOW, SIR.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF WE COULD MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THAT ORDINANCE.
FIRST OF ALL, DO YOU HAVE ANY NEEDING CLARIFICATION ON THE AGENDA ITEM ITSELF?
>> YOU'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND A CHANGE TO THAT ORDINANCE ON 10B?
>> I WOULD HOLD THAT IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TO OUR REGULAR MEETING AND WE'LL BRING THAT UP AT THAT TIME.
[00:05:04]
>> 11C, DO WE NORMALLY DO THIS FROM THE AIR OR THE GROUND, THE MOSQUITO ABATEMENT?
>> IT'S THE COUNTY THAT ACTUALLY DOES THE SPRAYING.
WE JUST HAVE TO BASICALLY APPROVE FOR THEM TO DO AERIAL SPRAYING OVER THE ISLAND AND THEN PRIMARILY JUST USE THAT OVER THE EAST END PLANTS AND THE FAR WEST AND THEY DO IT OVER THE MASHES.
>> THAT'S WHAT MY SECOND QUESTION WAS, OPEN AREA POPULATIONS.
>> THEY DO BOTH GROUND AND AERIAL.
>> THEY DO GROUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE WE HAVE STREETS, BUT THE AREAS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE STREETS, THE MASHES [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY EVEN FLY SOMETIMES, IF IT'S REALLY BAD, OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> THAT'S WHAT PROOFS US EVERY YEAR.
>> THAT'S A STANDARD. I HAVE SNEAKING SUSPICION THEY'RE GOING TO BE BAD THIS YEAR.
>> 11E. IT'S GOOD TO SEE THAT ALL THAT'S BEEN TAKEN CARE OF.
>> WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION ON THIS? DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE E PLAN? BECAUSE I WANT TO BRING THAT UP.
>> BECAUSE I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
>> ON 11E. FIRST OF ALL, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON 11E OR QUESTIONS?
>> THAT WAS REALLY ONE OF THE TWO THINGS I'VE BROUGHT UP HERE.
BRIAN, DO WE HAVE A COMPLETE PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT ON SEAWALL PARK?
>> HOW CAN WE MOVE FORWARD, THINGS LIKE THE FISHING PIER EXTENSION TECHNIQUE? BECAUSE AS I RECALL, ONE OF THOSE IS COMING OUT OF SEAWALL BUDGET.
AM I CORRECT? THAT SOUTH PARK RESIDENCE.
>> I THINK THAT THIS WAS LONG DISCUSSED BEFORE WE GOT INTO THE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PROFIT AND LOSS AND THE OTHER THINGS.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY MERITORIOUS TO HAVE THAT BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A-
>> [OVERLAPPING] DEMAND FOR IT.
>> YEAH, THERE'S A BIG DEMAND FOR IT.
>> I THINK IT MAKES GOOD BUSINESS SENSE REGARDLESS OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT.
>> I OUGHT TO SEE THE LEGACY PROFIT AND LOSS ON SEAWALL PARK.
THE OTHER IS ON THE [INAUDIBLE].
THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED SINCE HURRICANE IKE.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH FULLY FUNDED WITH FEMA MONEY.
>> DEPENDS ON THE ONE YOU TALKED ABOUT.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE MOORING PROJECT.
>> THAT'S FEMA MONEY. AM I RIGHT?
>> IS THAT FEMA MONEY, DAN ON THE MOORING PROJECT?
>> MOORING PROJECT I BELIEVE WAS FEMA MONEY AND THEN MONEY FROM A RESERVE THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS THAT THEY GENERATE AND OPERATING THE STEWARD AND THE KAHALA FOUNDATION.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I THOUGHT I'D SEEN THAT.
>> THE BULKHEAD, IS THAT GALVESTON PROPERTY?
>> NO, IT'S NOT. THAT'S WHY IT'S DEFERRED BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO ANYTHING THAT WAS THE BUDGET. SORRY TO INTERRUPT, MIKE.
>> JUST HOW DOES THE KAHALA FOUNDATION RELATIONSHIP WORK?
>> QUESTION FOR THE PARK BOARD. I DON'T KNOW.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION, MARIE, AGAIN?
>> WAS ABOUT THE KAHALA FOUNDATION.
MAYBE BEYOND THIS KABBALA OR WHATEVER.
>> THEY HAVE A BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP, THE PARK BOARD AND THAT FOUNDATION, WITH THE NAVAL MUSEUM.
I THINK THEY'RE SYNONYMOUS THAT THEY HAVE A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP SEPARATE APART FROM OUR OPERATIONS AT SEAWALL PARK.
>> THEY HAVE A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP IN THE NAVY.
THE US NAVY IS INVOLVED TOO WITH SOME TYPE OF REARRANGEMENT WITH A PARTNERSHIP OF THE KABBALA FOUNDATION IN THE PARK BOARD.
>> THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A VERY NICE DAY, DAN.
>> WHAT DO YOU HAVE, AN INTERVIEW?
>> 11M. IS THERE A TOTAL OF $10 MILLION WE'RE GOING AFTER, OR ARE WE JUST ABLE TO DO THAT LESSER OF THE TWO?
>> GOOD MORNING. THE TWO MILLION DOLLARS IS COMING FROM A CONGRESSIONAL PARK.
WE REQUESTED LAST YEAR FROM OUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES IN WASHINGTON SOME EARMARKS.
WE HAVE TWO $10 MILLION EARMARKS THAT ARE COMING TO THE CITY FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS.
>> ESPECIALLY THE CAUSEWAY WATERLINE CROSSING IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US BECAUSE RIGHT NOW OUR CHIPS ARE ON THAT OLD BRIDGE AND THIS WILL ACTUALLY RUN WITH THE NEW BRIDGE.
>> WE WILL PAY THE ADDITIONAL.
THIS APPROXIMATELY IS $17.5 MILLION PROJECT AND WE WILL PAY THE REST OF THAT WITH THE GLO REGIONAL MITIGATION FUNDING
[00:10:01]
THAT WE'RE ANTICIPATING RECEIVING HERE SHORTLY.>> MOVING THAT 36-INCH WATERLINE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT ARE WE MOVING.
IT AND WE'RE CREATING A THIRD ONE FOR REDUNDANCY.
>> THERE'S TWO. THERE'S ONE ON TOP OF THE OLD BRIDGE, ONE IN THE OLD BRIDGE, AND THEN THIS WILL BE A THIRD ONE.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A FOURTH ONE THAT SUBMERGED, BUT IT WAS ABANDONED YEARS AGO.
DO WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO THIS OURSELVES OR DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WOULDN'T DO THIS?
>> WE SHOULD HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF MAINTAINING THIS GENERATORS.
WE DON'T HAVE THE MECHANICS ON BOARD OR THE EXPERTISE TO MAINTAIN THESE.
>> THESE ARE LIKE SMALL LOCOMOTIVES THERE.
THIS INCLUDES EVEN POLISHING THE FUEL, DOING ALL THE THINGS.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPECIAL EQUIPMENT TO DO ALL THAT.
>> AN INSERT A LIGHT. IF YOU HAVE GENERATOR IN TOWN, ANNUALLY, THEY CHECK IT.
>> WE DO QUARTERLY INSPECTIONS AND AN ANNUAL OIL AND FILTER, SO WE'RE PREPARED FOR HURRICANE SEASON.
>> IT'S ALSO GOOD FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL STANDPOINT THAT THEY DO THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE NO WAY TO DISPOSE WHAT COMES OUT OF THESE GENERATORS.
11R, THE RATIFICATION OF THE EMERGENCY REPAIR TO THE 36 INCH CAUSEWAY.
>> FOR THE FIRST TIME IN OUR HISTORY THAT WE KNOW OF, THAT LINE FROZE.
WE'VE GOT PICTURES IN TORINO, IF YOU WANT TO SEE THEM.
>> IT'S AMAZING WE KEPT WATER FLOW AND CONNECTS TOTAL CREDITS TO TORINO AND HIS TEAM IN PUBLIC WORKS THAT WE KEPT WATER MOVING AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THE ISSUES, BUT THOSE ARE ALL THE JOINTS AND VALVES ON THE CAUSEWAY.
BUT WE HAD SUCH HIGH WINDS WITH THIS ONE AND WE HAD FREEZING OF THOSE VALVES AND THEY BROKE.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S THE NEWEST LINE, THE ONE THAT FROZE.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY WAY OF GETTING AGAINST THAT IN THE FUTURE? GLOBAL WARMING IS OUR PRIORITY.
>> WE'RE DOUBLING DOWN ON EVENTS.
>> WE CAN'T EAT THAT LINE, I GUESS.
>> WAIT A MINUTE, IT STAYED PRESSURIZE THE WHOLE TIME.
WE KEPT WATER FLOWING, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE LEAKS.
>> MIGHT HAVE A WORD ON THIS PICTURE.
>> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS VERY GOOD.
THAT SEEMS QUITE A BIT OF MONEY TO REPLACE THOSE SIX INCH EVERY THESE VALVES.
>> I THINK THAT'S THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR EVERYTHING IN THERE.
>> WELL, NO. IF YOU LOOK DOWN, THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY ROOM WELD REPAIR.
>> IT WAS THE COMPLETE REPLACEMENT OF THE VALVE, NOT JUST THE AIR RELEASE PART BUT THE ACTUAL.
>> AND THE VALVE ITSELF, THE ENTIRE VALVE ASSEMBLY.
IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE LABOR TO HAVE THE CONTRACTORS COME IN.
MIND YOU ALL OF THIS WAS DONE ON AN EMERGENCY, LIKE EMERGENCY SHIPPING, GET TO DROP WHAT YOU'RE DOING, MAKE US A PRIORITY SO THAT [OVERLAPPING] ADDS TO THE PRICE THAT WAS DONE ON CHRISTMAS DAY.
>> WHEN I SAW THE INVOICE I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THAT WASN'T THE DATE FROM WHEN ELABORATE PAIR WAS.
>> IS THAT THE INVOICE IS GETTING LATER.
>> I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE PIPELINE. GO BACK TO THE OTHER PIPELINE.
WHY WOULD THAT OTHER PIPELINE WILL BE ON THE NEW VERSION.
IS IT THAT MUCH MORE MONEY TO GO UNDERGROUND WITH ONE OF THOSE PIPES?
>> WE'VE LOOKED AT IT BOTH WAYS, TREE AND THEM.
>> IT WAS FIVE EXTRA MILLION TO GO UNDERGROUND.
>> BUT THE NEW BRIDGE WAS DESIGNED WITH THAT IN MIND.
WE WERE TEXTS THAT THE COUNTY DID WHEN THEY WERE BUILDING IT YEARS AGO, FOR INSTANCE.
>> THIS IS GOING TO BE SUSPENDED.
>> WE CAN PICK OUT A TEAM. I GUESS THESE 36 COMPLIANCE DON'T FREEZE VERY OFTEN.
>> WE HAVEN'T HAD THIS ONE FREEZE BEFORE, BUT IT DID FREEZE IN THIS.
>> THEY CAN UNDER WITH THE RIGHT TEMPERATURE.
THEY HAVE VISUALIZE VOLUME OF WATER MOVING.
WHEN WE GO OUT THERE AND WE DO THIS, THE MATERIAL WILL BE SPENT PROPERLY TO HANDLE MORE WEATHER EVENTS.
BUT YES, YOU GET THE RIGHT WHEN THE STORM URI AND WIND COME THROUGH AND ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
[00:15:01]
>> BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO GET REDUNDANCY, SIMPLE.
>> THE GOOD NEWS IS TYPICALLY, IN ONE OF YOUR WORD, ARE LOW CONSUMPTIVE POINTS SO WE CAN TOP OFF OUR TANKS AND WE CAN RUN OFF ONE OF THE THREE LINES IF WE HAVE TO MAKE REPAIRS.
>> THAT'S GOING TO BE SURE REPAIRING THAT FINE.
>> YEAH. [LAUGHTER] HANGING UNDER A BRIDGE.
>> THAT'S NOT JUST DRIVING AROUND THE BRIDGE.
>> I THINK THIS ONE WAS EXPENSIVE BLANK.
>> HOPEFULLY THEY WOULD PULL THESE VALVES UP THROUGH SO YOU GET THROUGH THEM. THAT WAS IT FROM ME.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. MIKE. JOHN PAUL?
>> I THINK IT WAS MY QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED IN WORKSHOP.
>> ALL RIGHT VERY GOOD, DAVID?
>> I THINK MINE AS WELL, I DON'T THINK WE ALL SHOULD ALWAYS START WITH JOHN.
>> I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SINCE THE START.
>> NO, SO I'M GOOD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. [BACKGROUND] WILLIAM?
>> TWELVE A, IT'S THE SKY MASTER RODE AROUND.
MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED WHEN I MUST OVERLOOKED IN A SENTENCE REALLY WHEN IT SAID THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO APPLY THEIR GRANT ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE ISLAND, BUT IN THIS ONE LOCATION, CORRECT.
I THINK THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO DISCUSS IT, BUT WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER PROBLEM.
>> WHAT ABOUT SOME OF THE PROPERTIES FURTHER NORTH OF THAT THAT WE GO DIRECTLY OUT, LIKE FOR FIVE WHERE THAT WE ALWAYS.
>> WELL, IT'S A LAND ON LEASE WITH NEW YORK STAND.
I MENTIONED IT TO JONES, BUT THAT MEANS HE WOULD HAVE TO GIVE UP PARKING AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT I DON'T THINK.
>> ACTUALLY, THERE'S A SECTION NUMBER THERE WHETHER ISN'T A LOT.
>> IT'S ABOUT A FOOT DEEP THERE.
>> YEAH. WELL, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO IT.
>> YEAH. I GET. I JUST IN LINE IN THERE WHAT IT SAYS, FOR A COMMUNITY LIKE OURS WITH SO MUCH WATER AT ONE PUBLIC ACCESS.
BUT IT'S JUST WHERE DO YOU PUT IT? I GUESS THAT'S THE ISSUE.
>> WHAT ABOUT ON OUR WORKING SITE SOMEWHERE?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PROPERTY THERE. THEY'D HAVE TO BUY THE PROPERTY.
>> THEN YOU GOT TO PROVIDE PARKING.
>> THEN YOU PUT IN THE CHANNEL AS WELL.
>> BUT EVEN WHEN THE [OVERLAPPING] PARKING IS PROVIDED THOUGH, THE PARKING IS PROVIDED THERE.
>> THE PERMITTING AND [OVERLAPPING] ROBBERS IDEA TO REMEMBER TOO, YOU'RE GOING TO HIT SHALLOWS WELL BEFORE THE END.
>> WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THE SHALLOWS ANYWHERE IN THAT AREA.
>> UNLESS YOU DROPPING IT RIGHT INTO A CANAL.
>> AND THE COMMAND AT THE CANAL AND ON SHELL OBVIOUSLY.
HENCE THAT'S WHY THE PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS GOING TO TURN AND USE LAKE WHICH ALREADY HAS WATER ISSUES.
>> WELL, YOU'VE TALKED TO THE HOME OWNERS A LITTLE BIT MORE THERE THAN I HAVE.
BUT ARE THERE ANYTHING THAT BESIDES FINDING A NEW LOCATION? OR IS THERE ANY DAY THAT CAN MITIGATE THOSE?
>> BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT THEY WERE TOLD IT WOULD BE A KAYAK, NON MOTORIZED BOAT RIDE.
THEY FEEL THAT THE ITEM WAS MISREPRESENTED TO THEM.
>> TO CLARIFY, I WAS ASKING, IN HOMEOWNERS MEETING, WILL THERE BE A KAYAK LAUNCH HERE, AND I SAID, YES.
>> THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT STORY.
BUT YOU KNOW JUST WHEN YOU DO WHISPER DOWN THE LANE. BUT ANYWAY, WE HAVE HAD AND CONTINUE TO HAVE WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN LAKE VANILLIN AND THIS WILL JUST ENHANCE IT MORE.
NOT TO MENTION TRASH, WHICH IS ALREADY AN ISSUE, NOT TO MENTION THE LEAKS AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.
>> IN 2019, IT WAS BROUGHT TO COUNSEL AS A VOTING ACCESS GRANTS.
IT WAS NEVER MISCONSTRUED AS KAYAK.
>> I ADMIT WITH THIS. COUNSEL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS SAID IN THE LEGWORKS [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT WE UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WAS A BOAT RAMP.
>> RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE APPLIED FOR [OVERLAPPING] IN 2019.
>> I'M JUST TELLING YOU THE PEOPLE ARE ADAMANTLY AGAINST THIS [OVERLAPPING] AND I'M GOING TO OPPOSE THIS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WELL, THE PEOPLE ON THE WATER ARE OPPOSED TO IT, RIGHT? THE PEOPLE ON THE WATER?
>> SEVENTY-EIGHT PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE IN THE MADELINE LAKE VIEW AREA ARE OPPOSED TO IT.
>> DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING FROM THEM? PETITION OR ANYTHING?
>> SURE. [OVERLAPPING] I KNOW A MAN THAT HAS A COPY OF IT.
>> IT'D BE GREAT TO JUST PUT THAT IN THE RECORD.
>> DO YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT PRESENTED TO YOU BEFORE THIS AFTERNOON, JOHN?
>> IF WE HAVE IT, ABSOLUTELY, YEAH.
>> I'LL GO GET IT. I UNDERSTAND
>> I DON'T HAVE IT, BUT I UNDERSTAND.
>> WELL, JUST SO WE COULD GET IT TO COUNSEL BEFORE [OVERLAPPING] OUR AFTERNOON MEETING ON THAT.
[00:20:01]
>> WILLIAM, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> NO. THAT'S IT. I HAD SOME OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT THEY WERE ANSWERED IN OUR LITTLE DISCUSSION THERE, SO THAT'S ALL.
JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT. THANK YOU.
>> YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION, AND THIS MAY HAVE BROUGHT IT UP, ABOUT 11A.
11A IS ON THE ABOLISHING COUNTY TREASURER.
>> WHERE ARE THE OTHER CITIES IN THE COUNTY ON THIS? DOES ANYBODY KNOW?
>> WELL, I HAVE TALKED TO THE COUNTY TREASURER, DUGIE, [OVERLAPPING] A COUPLE OF TIMES ON THIS.
ALMOST ALL THE CITIES IN THIS COUNTY HAVE APPROVED THE RESOLUTION THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.
WHEN I TALKED WITH HIM, I THINK IT WAS A WEEK OR SO, I THINK IT WAS SANTA FE, LAKE CITY, AND OURSELF.
BUT IT WAS ON THE AGENDA FOR THOSE CITIES AND IT'S ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.
>> I THINK LAKE CITY DID TAKE ACTION ON IT.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT SANTA FE.
AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT? DID YOU MENTION THAT ABOUT LAKE CITY?
>> I DON'T WATCH ANY EXTRA COUNSEL MEETINGS [LAUGHTER].
>> [NOISE] [OVERLAPPING] ESPECIALLY NOT THEIR LAST ONE.
IT HAD 300 PEOPLE IN ATTENDANCE.
>> LEFT THAT ONE TO JOHN. [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIS ITEM TWO IS THE RESOLUTION.
THIS WILL HAVE TO BE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, AND THIS GOES BEFORE THE VOTERS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS I UNDERSTAND.
>> WELL, OKAY. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THAT.
MAYBE SOMEBODY CAN ANSWER THAT, BECAUSE THE WAY THIS READ, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE OR THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW GALVESTON TO DECIDE, [OVERLAPPING] THAT CERTAIN OTHER COUNTIES HAVE MADE THAT DECISION.
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE MECHANISM WAS THAT ALLOWED THEM TO DO SO, WHETHER IT WAS SOME ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE, WAS IT IN OUR CONSTITUTION, ONE OF OUR 400,000 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS. DO YOU KNOW?
>> POSITION OF COUNTY TREASURER'S A CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION.
>> IT WOULD NEED TO BE VOTED ON BY ALL THE PEOPLE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO ELIMINATE THAT POSITION.
TO GET THERE, THERE HAS TO BE AN ACT OF THE LEGISLATURE PROVING SUBMISSION OF THE ITEM ON A BALLOT, TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION, AND THE ENTIRE STATE GETS TO VOTE ON WHETHER GALVESTON COUNTY SHOULD ELIMINATE ITS TREASURER'S OFFICE.
>> DO THE ENTIRE STATE VOTES TO ALLOW GALVESTON COUNTY TO VOTE, OR TO ALLOW THE COMMISSIONERS TO ELIMINATE? [OVERLAPPING]
>> ON PASSAGE OF THE VOTE, THE POSITION WOULD BE ELIMINATED.
>> BUT THAT'S BEEN DONE FOR SEVERAL OTHER CITIES IN THE PAST.
>> [OVERLAPPING] COUNTIES, FIVE, MUCH SMALLER. [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO, I WASN'T [OVERLAPPING] THERE OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW.
>> NO, I DON'T THINK SO. IT'S BEEN PRETTY MUCH SMALL COUNTIES, I THINK IT'S [OVERLAPPING]
BECAUSE ELIMINATING THEIR TREASURER POSITION, YOU'RE GIVING FREE BRAIN AND NO OVERSIGHT.
>> TO WHOM? THE COMMISSIONERS? EXPLAIN THAT ONE ANYWAY.
>> WELL, THEY'VE GOT A TRIPOD SYSTEM OVER THERE WHERE YOU HAVE THE COMMISSIONERS THAT APPROVE THE BUDGET, THE AUDITOR PROCESSES AND AUDITS, AND THE TREASURER ACTUALLY CUTS THE CHECK.
>> HE'S THE THIRD CHECK IN THAT GO [OVERLAPPING]
I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT IT TO REALLY HAVE AN OPINION ON IT, BUT I HAVE ZERO PROBLEM WITH A LOT OF THE PEOPLE SPEAKING ON IT.
>> THAT'S WHAT THIS IS FOR, TO GIVE THE PEOPLE OF TEXAS THE RIGHT TO CONSIDER WAIVING ON THIS.
>> YOU DIDN'T GO VERY FAR [LAUGHTER].
>> I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTION AS OPPOSED TO EVERYONE ELSE.
SOME OF THEM, I THINK, I WROTE.
>> B AS IN BOY. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE GAS COMPANY AND THE GRIP, SOME OF THEM ARE ADJUSTING THE RATE.
>> THEY ARE GOING TO ADJUST THE RATE UNDER WHAT'S CALLED THE GRIP SCHEDULE, WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO UNILATERALLY ADJUST THEIR RATES.
BUT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A FULL RATE HEARING EVERY FIVE YEARS.
SO GRIP ADJUSTMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO ANY ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS OR ANYTHING BEFORE THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.
>> THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASING RESIDENTIAL [OVERLAPPING] OVER COMMERCIAL, WHICH I FOUND INTRIGUING AND IT'S TOO BAD WE CAN'T TIE THIS BEFORE WE VOTE IF THEY NEED OUR APPROVAL TO GET GAS LINES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WELL, THERE'S OTHER THINGS STEERING ALONG THIS FRONT.
DON AN AND I MET WITH SOME OTHER COUNSELS. [OVERLAPPING]
[00:25:01]
>> THEY WILL BE IN MATTERS BROUGHT TO YOU NEXT MONTH ON GAS RELATED ITEMS.
>> THIS IS FOR THIS, EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING, MARY, BUT THIS IS FOR ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD.
THIS IS FOR VOTING OF SUSPENDING THE APRIL 10TH EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> IT IS DELAYED, I BELIEVE, 75 DAYS.
YOU GET TO DO THIS BECAUSE THE CITY HAS PRIMARY JURISDICTION OVER GAS RATES, BUT ONLY JUST AT THE INITIAL STAGE.
BASICALLY, YOU'RE BUYING YOUR CONSUMERS TWO-AND-A-HALF MONTHS OF CHEAPER RATES.
>> YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS [OVERLAPPING], WHATEVER.
>> YOU CAN EXPEND ON ANYTHING ELSE WHAT YOU SAID THE OTHER DISCUSSION.
>> HOPEFULLY I'LL BE MEETING WITH THEM ON THE 2ND IN AUSTIN, SO IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU WANT TO RELAY.
G, 11 G. ACTUALLY, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT A NUMBER OF THE SOFTWARE STUFF, SO G AND H. [NOISE] YOU WANT TO GIVE ME MORE DETAIL.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE CONSTANTLY UPGRADING SOFTWARE, WHICH IS A GOOD THING.
THEN WE CONSTANTLY SEEM TO HAVE INADEQUATE SOFTWARE.
IF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO, NO BUT IT IS, [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE PROBLEMS AND DEFICIENCIES.
IS WHAT WE'RE BUYING THE TOP OF THE LINE THE BEST AVAILABLE NOW? BECAUSE IT JUST SEEMS LIKE I HEAR NOTHING BUT COMPLAINTS ON PEOPLE WHO USE A LOT OF SOFTWARE, WHETHER IT'S PLACED, WHETHER I HEAR COUNTY HAS ISSUES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIS ISN'T AN ISSUE WITH SOFTWARE, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT WE'RE REPLACING.
THIS WAS A SPECIALTY SOFTWARE THAT'S GOING TO BE USED BY THE ENGINEERING TEAM SPECIFICALLY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IS IT SOMETHING THEY ASKED FOR IMPACT?
>> ABSOLUTELY. ROB, DO YOU WANT TO [NOISE]
>> THIS IS STORMWATER MODELING SOFTWARE.
AS YOU'RE AWARE, WE'RE HAVING STORMWATER MEASURE PLAN TO BE DONE RIGHT NOW.
THEY'RE DEVELOPING A ONE-DIMENSIONAL AND TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL THAT TRACKS HOW THE WATER FLOWS OVER THE ISLAND AND WE DON'T HAVE THIS SOFTWARE IN-HOUSE.
SINCE THEY PURCHASED THAT SOFTWARE, SO WE CAN TAKE THAT MODEL AND ACTUALLY OPERATE IT IN-HOUSE.
THEN AS TIME GOES BY, WE CAN IMPROVE THE MODEL BY PUTTING THE NEW IMPROVEMENTS IN THERE AND SEE HOW THAT CHANGES.
ALSO WHEN YOU RUN DIFFERENT SCENARIOS OR IF WE WANT TO PUT A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PROJECT IN, WE CAN SEE HOW THAT IMPACTS BOTH ON THE ISLAND.
>> THIS IS THE STATE OF THE ART IN PLACE OF [OVERLAPPING]
THERE'S THE INFOWORKS PROJECT AND THEN THERE'S A BENTLEY WATERGEMS TYPE PROJECT AND WE USE OUR SOFTWARE ALREADY.
WE'RE STICKING ON THE OUTER BECAUSE THAT HAS MORE FAMILIARITY. THAT'S WHAT THE MODEL THING IS ABOUT.
>> CAN I INTERJECT FOR A SECOND?
>> WE'RE BASING THIS OFF THE LIDAR SURVEY, RIGHT?
>> HOW WILL WE RENEW THAT DATA? THE SURVEY ITSELF, THE LIDAR.
>> WE CAN BRING IN NEW LIDAR IN IT AS IT BECOMES AVAILABLE.
>> WELL, HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN? DO WE HAVE A CONTRACT OR JUST DO IT ON A REGULAR BASIS? DO WE HAVE TO DECIDE EVERY 2, 3, 4, 5 YEARS?
>> THE LIDAR DATA TYPICALLY COMES FROM A LARGER RESOURCE IN THE STATE, WHETHER IT'S A GLO OR SOME OTHER AGENCY PUTTING THAT DATA OUT HERE.
>> WE'RE NOT DOING THAT RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S A PRETTY COMPREHENSIVE THING.
BUT IF US DOES SOMETHING, THE CORE OF ENGINEERS WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT DATA, SO WE SHOULD BRING THAT INFORMATION IN.
>> BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT SEEMS TO STEM OFF OF STORMS OR SOMETHING HAPPENING, I WONDER IF WE WENT THROUGH LIKE, PRAISE LORD, LIKE A PRISTINE YEAR WHERE EVERYTHING WAS PERFECT.
THE BEACHES ARE ACTUALLY GRADED AND WHATNOT, IF IT WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR US [OVERLAPPING] TO DO LIDAR JUST TO HAVE A BASELINE OF NORMALCY.
>> IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE THAT.
I THINK WE'VE MADE SOME REQUESTS, ADDED INTO HMP PLAN OR HAZARD MITIGATION PLANS.
YOU HAVE UPDATED LETTER DATE ON A FREQUENT BASIS BECAUSE WE ARE IN SOCIAL SUSCEPTIBLE AREA TO DAMAGE.
WE'VE MADE THAT REQUEST, BUT THAT'S [OVERLAPPING]
>> CAN WE MAYBE LOOK AT HOW WE MIGHT MOVE THAT REQUEST UP ESPECIALLY IF THINGS CONTINUE TO HAVE A GREAT BASELINE VERSUS ALWAYS WORKING FROM DAMAGE,
[00:30:10]
LIDAR IS NOT A GOOD THING.IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THEY ACTUALLY DO LIDAR DATA EVERY YEAR, AND OUR STATE DOESN'T DO THAT.
>> MOST RECENT LIDAR DATA THAT WE HAVE FOR THE ENTIRE AREA IS 2018.
>> THAT PROBABLY STEMMED AFTER DANIEL.
>> ON THAT ONE. JASON, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? CAN YOU FIND US SOME MONEY SOMEWHERE TO GET THAT DONE?
>> SURE, WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR MONEY.
WE CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR MONEY.
THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY OUT THERE TO GIVE, SO WE'RE CUTTING IT DOWN AND BRINGING IT IN.
>> WHATEVER, I WORK QUITE A BIT WITH ROB AND TRENO, AND BRANDON ON WHAT THEY THINK WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD ON, AND GO WITH BRIAN AND DAN TO SEE WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE AND WHAT THEY WANT FUNDS.
WE'RE CONSTANTLY LOOKING, WE'RE CONSTANTLY PUTTING IN APPLICATIONS.
>> WELL, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, ROB AND YOUR FRIEND.
THAT'S FOR OBVIOUSLY THIS ROOM.
WE RECEIVE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE AUDIO IN A WAY.
WE BROUGHT A COMPANY IN AND HAD THEM ARCHITECT AN AUDIO SOLUTION THAT WE ANTICIPATE WILL RESOLVE SOME OF THE AUDIO SOUNDS AND ISSUES THAT WE HAVE.
THE PROBLEM THAT YOU HAVE IN THIS ROOM AND YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF EXTERNAL FACTORS, BUT IT'S JUST A LOT OF FACTORS.
>> THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS THAT AFFECT AUDIO AND EVEN BACK HERE AND THE SPEAKERS AND THE SIZE OF THE ROOM AND EVERYTHING.
CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW IF YOU LOOK AT TOP, THOSE ARE YOUR SPEAKERS UP HERE ON THE CEILING?
THIS IS GOING TO BE YOUR SPEAKERS MOVING FORWARD.
>> YOUR MICROPHONES. WHEN MIKE LOFTON GETS UP HERE AND SPEAKS VERSUS BRIAN, [LAUGHTER] THAT SOUND'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
[OVERLAPPING] THIS SOLUTION SHOULD RESOLVE THE PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE EXTERNALLY.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THESE, WE'RE GOING TO REPLACE THAT.
THERE'S GOING TO BE EIGHT OF THESE ON THE TABLE.
>> HAVE YOU JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I INTERACT WITH A LOT OF ZOOM MEETINGS.
WE STOPPED DOING HYBRID, WHICH I STILL ALWAYS HEAR COMPLAINTS ABOUT FROM PEOPLE.
BUT HAVE YOU TALKED TO VERY ISSUES OTHER CITIES THAT ARE STILL DOING HYBRID OR WHO TELEVISED TO SEE WHAT THEY USE?
>> IT'S REALLY NOT AN APPLE TO AN APPLE.
THE [OVERLAPPING] PROBLEM ALL YOU HAVE IS THERE'S A LOT OF ROOM LOGISTICS.
WE'VE GOT THE SIZE OF THE ROOM, YOU'VE GOT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, YOU HAVE THE AC AND CONDENSERS.
WHEN WE SAT DOWN AND WE LOOKED AT THIS THEY DID ON THE EXTERNAL NOISE, THEY DID A TEST ON THAT.
IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THAT WAS WHEN THE AC IS ON.
THEY'VE ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT WE DO SOME STUFF ON OUR WALLS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] DID WE JUST TALK OF ONE COMPANY OR DID WE TALK ABOUT THEM ALL?
>> WE ACTUALLY VISITED WITH TWO.
>> YOU ABSOLUTELY PUT THE HYBRID MEETING ISSUE ON A FUTURE AGENDA THAT'S REALITY.
>> LET'S STAY WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM RIGHT HERE.
>> WELL, I HOPE IT WORKS BECAUSE WE DO GET A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ON THAT.
>> BUT I WOULD STILL ESPECIALLY, IF THEY INTRODUCED THEIR WHOLE SYSTEM THEY USE A BUNCH MORE SOPHISTICATED.
THEN WHAT ARE THEY CURIOUS TO FIND OUT WHO THEY'RE USING AND LOOK AT IS THIS REALLY THE BEST WAY TO GO.
>> WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK.
>> IS THAT IT? YOU GOT ANOTHER ONE.
>> ON THAT SUBJECT, I THINK SO.
ACTUALLY MY QUESTION, AND I KNOW IT'S FOR BARBARA OR DIANE.
[00:35:04]
THE SAME. THE COMPANY WE'RE CHOOSING, ISN'T THERE A RELATIONSHIP TO SOMEONE IN CITY MANAGEMENT.>> DAN ADDS UP ALL IN THE DECISION PROCESS.
>> THAT SAID NOT THE CONTRACTOR THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PRACS. I WOULD IMAGINE.
>> YEAH, THIS FOR TWO COUNTIES.
>> I GUESS IT GOES BOTH WAYS. RELATIONSHIP, THEY'RE ON BOTH ENDS.
>> IN PRACTICE DOES TEND TO GET MOST CORRESPONDENTS APPROVED [LAUGHTER].
>> IS THERE ANY CONCERNS WITH OUR NEPOTISM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>> BECAUSE IT'S LEGALLY BID AND EVERYTHING AND THEY JUST RUN THROUGH LEGAL.
BUT IF THERE'S A CONCERN WITH COUNCIL, WE'LL CERTAINLY DRAW THE HIGHER BID.
>> NO. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW HOW WITH THE NEPOTISM [OVERLAPPING]
>> WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE SELECTION PROCESS, MIKE CARUSO WAS INVOLVED.
WHEN WE WENT WE SAW THAT MR. UNBEHAGEN HAD BEEN, I WENT STRAIGHT TOLD THE CITY MANAGER HE'D HAVE SIGN ALL DOCUMENTS WHICH HE NORMALLY DOES.
ACTUALLY, MR. BUCKLEY HASN'T BEEN INVOLVED AT ALL.
>> WE WERE VERY CLOSE WITH THIS.
LIKE IF WE HAVE PEOPLE DOING BUSINESS WITH US OR EVEN CLIENTS AND MY WIFE, I EXCUSE MYSELF FROM IT.
>> EXACTLY MR. BUCKLEY RIGHT AWAY SAID THAT.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS ONE ACTUALLY.
WHAT EXACTLY ARE THEY DOING HERE? WE SEE THIS, BUT HE DIDN'T REALLY TELL US WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING.
>> ACTUALLY, WE ARE GOING TO REDO THE ENTRANCE WAY TO THE RECREATIONS CENTER.
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THOSE DOUBLE DOORS THAT GO INTO THE MAIN PART OF THE REC CENTER SO NO ONE HAS TO TOUCH A DOOR.
EVERYBODY CAN JUST WALK THROUGH FREELY.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT DOWN NEW FLOORING, BUILD A NEW COUNTER SPACE THAT WILL MEET THE NEEDS OF THE PUBLIC BETTER TODAY THAN WHAT IT WAS WHEN WE BUILT THE BUILDING AND FINISHED IN 2009.
A LOT OF FACTORS HAVE HAPPENED.
THIS IS A COVID FUNDING AND COVID GAVE THIS TO THE CITY TO TRY TO IMPROVE NON TOUCHING THINGS.
SO THERE'LL BE ENCLOSE MORE OR LESS UPFRONT SO STAFF HAVE TO HAVE THOSE CHEAP PLASTIC THINGS IN FRONT AND OVER IN WRIGHT CUNEY, WE ARE TOTALLY TAKING OVER A DIFFERENT OFFICE BUILDING A COUNTER AROUND IT, OR THERE'S GLASS WINDOWS ARE READY THAT THEY CAN OPEN AND CLOSE AND WE'RE GOING TO CUT ANOTHER WINDOW OUT AND WHAT WAS OUR STORAGE AREA AND THAT'S WHERE OUR REC MANAGER WILL BE SITTING.
WE DON'T NEED ANY NEW FORCE OVER THERE THAT WAS REPLACED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
NOT ONLY IS IT GOING TO FRESHEN UP THE REC CENTER, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT.
>> WHEN WE BUILT THE REC CENTER IN 2009, THERE WERE MANY OTHER REC CENTERS OPERATING IN GALVESTON, RACQUET CLUB CLOSE AS OUR VOLUME IS GOING TO MOVE UP THERE.
IT'S A GOOD DEAL FOR PEOPLE AND WE LIKE TO PROVIDE IT, BUT WE GOT TO KEEP KEEP ON TOP OF IT AND KEEP IT FRESH.
>> JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW, WHEN WE WENT UP TO THE FIVE DOLLARS, AND SLOWED DOWN [LAUGHTER].
>> I ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE WE SEE THINGS LIKE THIS ALL THE TIME.
ON THIS ONE, WHAT WE GOT IN OUR PACKET WE WOULD HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS GOING ON THERE WHATSOEVER.
THERE WAS NO MENTION OF ANY OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID IN THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED HERE.
>> WE'RE ON A TIME CRUNCH ON THIS MONEY AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THAT OTHER STUFF WAS NOT UPLOADED.
BUT I CAN GET YOU A COPY OF THE PLANS IF YOU'D LIKE.
>> I DON'T I'M JUST WONDERING WHY THIS WAS DIFFERENT.
MAYBE THE TIME ISSUE WAS THE REASON.
>> THIS MEAN SOMEDAY WE MIGHT ACTUALLY GET THE HANDICAP ACCESS AND GOES TO TWO DOORS AND THEN THE HANDICAPPED PERSON WOULD BE STUCK THERE AT THE ENTRANCE [LAUGHTER].
CAN WE USE SOME OF THAT MONEY AND FACE THAT DO?
>> ACTUALLY IT NEEDS CODE, BUT I AGREE WITH YOU.
>> YEAH, IT'S LIKE, WE GOT THROUGH THE FIRST TWO ORDERS NOW YOU'RE STUCK AND SOMEBODY COMES BY.
>> I THINK I'VE SECOND ONE, NOW I'M DONE.
>> [LAUGHTER] VERY GOOD. GOT JUST TWO QUICK QUESTIONS.
CAN BE COUNCILMAN BOUVIER BROUGHT THIS UP.
IT'LL BE, I THINK WHEN [INAUDIBLE] ALTERNATIVE THOUGHTS ON THAT.
BUT MIKE IS MIKE OFTEN HEAR THIS 10B. IS MIKE HERE?
>> WOULD YOU JUST CLARIFY REAL QUICKLY, MIKE, THIS 10B, THE CHANGE THERE AND HOW THAT CAME ABOUT, SIR?
[00:40:02]
>> YEAH. FOR YEARS, I THINK THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD HAD TWO TRANSFER DATES THAT THEY USE.
ONE WAS BASICALLY THE 23RD OF MONTH [NOISE], THE OTHER WAS THE THIRD DAY OF THE MONTH.
THE 23RD DAY OF THE MONTH WAS TO ALLOW PARK BOARD THREE DAYS TO RECONCILE WHAT CAME IN ACCORDING TO THE STATE'S CURRENT COLLECTION DATE ON THE 20TH.
THE FIRST WAS JUST THE END OF THE MONTH, SO YOU HAVE A CLOSING FOR THE MONTH.
THIS REALLY TAKES US BACK TO THE PREVIOUS TIMING WITH THOSE TWO DATES, AND IT IS REALLY PREFERABLE FOR BOTH PARTIES.
>> VERY GOOD. I KNEW THAT WAS THE CASE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS TO PUBLIC CAN ONLY HAVE TO. YES.
>> THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE IN THERE TOO.
ARE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE DATES ON THAT ORDINANCE?
>> THE DATES THAT WE RECEIVED THAT WE CORRECTED.
YEAH, WE DID THAT. WE CHANGED TO WHAT BRYSON SAID.
>> RIGHT. BUT THEN THERE'S ANOTHER PART OF IT.
THERE'S ANOTHER AMENDMENT THAT'S BEING MADE.
>> I'D HAVE TO DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THAT.
>> WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO SPECIFICALLY?
>> THE AMENDMENT SAYS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL RECEIVE [NOISE] THE HOT CONTRACT FOR APPROVAL ON MARCH 1ST.
>> THAT WAS AN ORIGINAL ORDINANCE.
>> I CHANGED THAT ON MY OWN INITIATIVE.
>> RIGHT. NOW IT JUST SAYS SOMETIME IN MARCH.
>> MARCH 1ST IS NEITHER A COUNCIL DAY OR ANYTHING.
I BELIEVE I MADE A MISTAKE WHEN I FIRST WROTE IT AND MY INTENT WAS TO COUNT THE CONTRACT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL MARCH MEETING.
>> RIGHT. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, MIKE.
BRIAN THIS MIGHT BE A COMMENT.
THIS IS ON THE AUDIT THAT WENT OVER AND DID THE TERMINAL.
I KNOW THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS THAT STAFF HAD ABOUT THE MONIES AND SO FORTH ON THIS, PROPERLY RECORDED AND RECEIVING PROPER COMPENSATION.
HAS THAT BEEN PRETTY WELL? KERRY?
>> I COULDN'T HEAR. WHAT WERE YOU ASKING?
>> THE AUDIT, I THINK THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE FLOW OF THE MONIES AND COMPENSATION TO THE CITY ON THIS TERMINAL AND SO FORTH OVER THERE.
>> YES, THAT WAS IN 2019 WHEN WE DID THE ORIGINAL AUDIT.
BUT NOW THEY'VE TAKEN CARE OF IT, FINANCES, WORKING WITH THEIR FINANCE, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ISSUES AT ALL GETTING MONEY OR GETTING THE DOCUMENTS THEY NEED NOW.
>> YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. KERRY. APPRECIATE THAT.
ITEM 11W. GOOD MORNING, CHIEF.
THIS IS ABOUT THE MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAM AND SO FORTH IN THE GRANT, WHICH WAS JUST WONDERFUL.
MY QUESTION IS, MOVING FORWARD, THIS GRANT MONEY IS ONLY FOR ONE YEAR, IS THAT CORRECT? OR JUST -.
>> IF THAT PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL, I ASSUME THAT WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR FUNDING IN SOME WHAT WAY TO CONTINUE THIS FORWARD?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO EVALUATE AND SEE ANY IF THERE'S A MEANINGFUL IMPACT.
BECAUSE WE'RE PUTTING IN AT LEAST 150,000, IF NOT MORE, THE FIRST YEAR.
FOR US TO SPEND THAT LEVEL OF MONEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE SOME IMPACT AND THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T 100% THROW ALL THE MONEY ON IT WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SPEND BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO KEEP COMING TO YOU GUYS BECAUSE I WANT YOU TO KNOW IF I'M HAVING TO KEEP COMING TO YOU FOR MORE MONEY, YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO KNOW WHAT BENEFIT WE'RE GETTING OUT OF THIS AND IF IT'S MERITORIOUS TO CONTINUE THIS, DO WE NEED TO TWEAK IT [NOISE]? DO WE NEED TO APPLY FOR OTHER GRANTS? DO WE NEED TO SUSPEND IT? THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH.
>> THANK YOU, CHIEF. APPRECIATE IT.
VERY GOOD. TIM SAY I THINK ORIGINALLY WE HAD A PARKING ORDINANCE, BUT THIS IS A NEW PARKING ORDINANCE DONE.
WHAT WAS IN OUR ORIGINAL PACKET MATERIAL, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE HAS BEEN SOME AMENDMENTS TO IT TO INCLUDE THE HOTEL SITUATION, I'M SORRY.
>> I WILL SPEAK ON THAT. IN THE PACKET FOR THE WORKSHOP THERE WAS THAT AMENDMENT HAD NOT BEEN ADDED THAT EXCLUSION,
[00:45:05]
BUT IN THE PACKET FOR THE REGULAR MEETING IT IS THE CORRECT VERSION THAT'S HOW.>> WE HAVE MOVED TO A FLAT FEE, CORRECT?
>> YOU HAVE A COPY ON THE TABLE THERE?
>> IS THE VERSION THAT'S IN THEIR REGULAR MEETING.
>> THIS IS DIFFERENT NOW I WANT TO MAKE SURE COUNCIL REALIZES.
>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
>> THAT THE REPORT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED IN A PACKAGING MATERIAL IN THE BOOK REPORT.
>> IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, CORRECT?
>> THE ADDITIONS WOULD BE 133A, WHERE THE LAST SENTENCE INCLUDES ALL THE EXCLUSIONS AND WE ALREADY HAVE.
>> THE EXCLUSIONS INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL PARKING, PARKING BY EMPLOYERS, RECREATIONAL VEHICLE OR CAMPER RESORTS AT SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THE LAST WORKSHOP.
WE'VE ADDED THE INSTITUTES OF HIGHER EDUCATION [NOISE] HOTEL PARKING INCIDENT TO THE RENTAL ON THERE WAS JUST ADDED AS WELL.
>> MAY I ASK MARY, IS THE ONE ON THE TABLE, THE ONE THAT'S ONLINE, THE ONE THAT PRESENTS OUR BACK.
>> IN THE REGULAR AGENDA, CORRECT.
>>> ACCORDING TO HER AGENDA THANK YOU.
>> NOW ANY OTHER ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS IN THIS?
>> WE ADDED SOME LANGUAGE TO THE FEE PORTION JUST TO ALLUDE TO THE EARLIER SECTION THAT DOES SAY THAT THE LOT OWNERS CAN RETAIN 10% OF FEE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF IT.
>> THAT LANGUAGE IS ALREADY IN THERE.
WE JUST ALLUDE BACK TO IT TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR.
>> VIA THE COMPENSATION, TREVOR?
>> IF YOU REVIEW THESE [INAUDIBLE].
>> THE PAYMENTS LAID OUT IN 19136 AND THE LAST SECTION, WHICH IS FEE AND IT STATES THAT THE FEE IS $1.15 PER DAY.
THE LANGUAGE JUST AFTER THAT REFERS BACK TO SUBSECTION C ABOVE THAT SAYS, THE OWNER OPERATORED TO OBTAIN THE AMOUNT OF 10% THE FEE COLLECTED PER VEHICLE.
THAT LANGUAGE WAS ALREADY IN THE LAST WORKSHOP.
WE JUST ADDED THE REFERENCE BACK TO IT.
>> THE PARKING FEE THOUGH IS PER DAY, PER CAR?
>> WELL, IT IS I THOUGHT IT WAS A FLAT FEE THOUGH.
>> NO. WE GOT DECIDED AGAINST THAT.
>> NO, I THOUGH DAN TOLD ME WE WERE BACK TO A FLAT FEE.
>> LET'S GET THIS CLARIFIED BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE HARD.
>> IT WAS IN THE RIGHT DOLLAR PER DAY, WHICH WAS MY LAST UNDERSTANDING.
IT DOESN'T APPLY UNTIL THE DEFINITION OF LONG-TERM KICKS IN, WHICH IS AFTER 48 HOUR BUT THE FEE IS ABOUT $1.15 PER DAY.
>> BRIAN, LET ME CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE I WANTED TO FLAT FEE.
>> YOU TOLD ME WE WOULD DO A FLAT FEE?
>> NO, WE CAN'T DO A FLAT FEE BECAUSE IT'S JUST PROPORTIONAL TO PEOPLE WHO WORK SEVEN DAYS OVER THREE DAYS.
WE'VE TALKED WITH CITY AUDITOR, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW TO MAKE IT FAIR AND EQUITABLE.
KEY TO A FLAT FEE THEY MIGHT BE EASIER TO AUDIT.
BUT THE FACT OF MATTER IS YOU'RE IN CHARGE OF FEE WILL BE DISPROPORTIONAL ONE AND THE IN INSPECTOR SO MANY VARIOUS LENGTHS APART.
I WANT TO GET CLEAR THAT THIS 10C SITTING ON OUR TABLE IS WHAT WE'LL BE VOTING ON.
>> IS NOT WHAT I ASKED ASKED YESTERDAY.
YOU TOLD ME IT WAS A FLAT FEE.
IT INCLUDES THE VERBIAGE THAT ADDRESSES HOTEL PARKING.
>> ULTIMATELY THE FLAT FEE VERSUS $1 PER DAY PER CAR IS UP TO YOU GUYS.
THAT'S POLICY DECISION AS TO HOW YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT?
>> DANIEL BROUGHT UP THE AUDIT.
WHAT IS THE AUDIT SYSTEM FOR THIS?
>> WELL, IT IS SIMPLY, YOU GO BACK AGAINST ANY OF THE PROVIDERS WHETHER IT'S BEFORE WHETHER IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL, PROPERTY OWNERS.
YOU SEE HOW MANY CARS PARKED AND THEN YOU TRY TO TEST.
YOU RUN THIS MATHEMATICAL OR STATISTICAL TEST TO SEE IF THE DAY PARKED PEOPLE THE FEES COLLECTED THOSE TURN OVER TO THE CITY.
>> YOU GOT TO BENCHMARK ALREADY BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO FALL SALES TAX REPORTS.
GLEN, I WOULD SUSPECT WE WOULD RECONCILE AGAINST THE SALES TAX REPORTS TO SEE IF WE'RE JOBBING UP.
>> YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR THE ACTUAL BOOKS OF ANY OF THESE PRIVATE OWNERS?
>> I CAN'T IMAGINE WE WOULD UNLESS WE HAD A PROBLEM.
THERE WAS OBVIOUSLY SOMEBODY THAT WASN'T TURNING OVER THE TAX THROUGH A FEE COLLECTED.
I DON'T WANT TO SAY TAX IT'S A FEE.
>> IT'S A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD JP, BECAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THEY DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN THEIR BOOKS.
BUT THEN AGAIN, TOO IF I'M FOLLOWING THE RULES AND OPERATING DECREASED PARKING AND I'M PAYING.
BECAUSE I CAN ALREADY SEE HOW THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
THERE IS GOING TO BE SOMEBODY THAT TRIES NOT TO DO IT.
THEY'RE GOING TO WANT US TO DIVE INTO IT, DO SOMETHING ABOUT AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT ABILITY.
THE SAME GUYS THAT MAY NOT WANT US IN THEIR BOOKS ARE GOING TO BE VERY UPSET IF SOMEBODY CIRCUMVENTING IT AND UNDERCUTTING THEM.
>> WHAT'S THE MECHANISM IN PLACE? WHAT'S THE MECHANISM TO GO IN THERE AND AUDIT SOMEBODY?
>> I THINK THE EASIEST WAY BRIAN DESCRIBED IT GLEN IS GOING TO COMPARE SALES TAX.
[00:50:04]
>> NO. I MEAN, IF YOU SAY, HEY, WE HAVE A PROBLEM HERE.
WE NEED YOU TO TURN OVER YOUR RECORDS.
>> THEY'RE GOING TO BE FILLING REPORTS SHOWING THE FEES COLLECTED THE NIGHTS PARKED TO DAYS PARKED.
YOU WOULD SIMPLY TEST THAT AGAINST THE REVENUES THAT THEY GENERATED FROM PARKING.
>> YOU'RE NOT ASKING TO GO INTO THEIR BOOKS AT THAT POINT.
YOU'RE JUST SAYING, HEY, YOU FILED THESE RECORDS.
>> THE COLLECTING FEE AND THEY'RE RETAINING MONEY FOR THAT.
THAT'D BE FALSIFYING THE GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT IF THEY PROVIDED US SOMETHING THAT IT WAS NOT.
>> I CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S THAT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN WHEN SOMEONE REPORTS A COMPANY IN A SHORT-TERM RENTAL TO GLENN.
THEN HE DOES HIS AUDIT OF WHETHER THEY'RE SUBMITTING SUFFICIENT HOT TAX OR NOT.
HE DOESN'T HAVE TO GO IN AND TAKE THEIR BOOKS.
HE'S ABLE TO DO IT BY COMPARISONS AND SO FORTH.
>> HE MAY COME UP AND SAY [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S ANALOGY BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE IN THE PAST GLENN PROBABLY WOULD COLLECT CONTINENT NUMBER AND OVER BOLSTERING THE REVENUE BUT THEY COLLECT THE HOT SO THAT IS A GOOD ANALOGY.
>> I CAN DISCUSS WITHIN SECTION 134 IT'S D5 LISTS, WHEN THEY REGISTERED WITH THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO PROVIDE.
THEN THERE IS A CATCH-ALL THAT WE I'LL USE IN OTHER SECTIONS BECAUSE SUCH OTHER INFORMATION AS THE CITY MANAGER OF THIS IS REASONABLY NECESSARY TO EXTRA DOLLAR.
>> WITH WHAT? [LAUGHTER] IF YOU WANT TO FIGHT SOME ANYTHING WE ASKED FOR HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE ASKED OF OTHERS.
THEY CAN ALWAYS FIGHT THAT IF THEY FELT THAT IT WAS SOMETHING OTHERWISE.
>> THE REASON I BRING THIS UP, IT'S GOT TO TALK TO SOME OWNERS AND THEY SAID, WELL, WE CHARGED FOR DIFFERENT SERVICES.
HOW DO YOU ACTUALLY COMPARE THAT? HOW ARE YOU ACTUALLY GETTING THAT INFORMATION? BECAUSE WHAT WE CHARGE, YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SEE HOW.
>> HOW THEY DO IT FOR SALES TAX.
>> SALES TAX ACROSS THEIR REVENUE IT'S NOT JUST LIKE INDIVIDUAL CAR.
IT'S ON WHAT THEY TAKE IN SO THEY CHARGE A DIFFERENT FEE OR DIFFERENT SERVICES, THEY'RE STILL PAYING SALES TAX ON IT. I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU WOULD.
>> I THINK IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO TRY TO GET OVER ON A CITY THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO GET OVER CITY.
>> IT'S NOT THERE TRYING TO GET OVER ON THE CITY.
I THINK SOME PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THAT, ANYBODY'S CONCERNED WITH SOMEBODY COMING INTO THEIR BOOKS AND LOOK AT WHAT THEY'RE DOING IF THEY'RE LEGIT IS LEGIT.
BUT NOBODY WOULD THIS LINE IN THERE YOU COULD ASK FOR THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE HEY, I NEED EVERYTHING.
>> WE OPERATE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT EVERYBODY IS OPERATING LEGITIMATE BUSINESS THAT IS THE ASSUMPTION WE OPERATE UNDER.
I WOULD GUESS IT WOULD BE ONLY ON.
IF WE SIT HERE, RECEIVED A COMPLAINT OR SAW EVIDENCE THAT SOMEBODY WASN'T TURNED OVER FEES COLLECT OR THEY WEREN'T PROPERLY ENACTING THEIR ORDINANCE THEN WE ASK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
>> AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOU START ASSESSING FEES, WE OWE IT TO THE TAX-PAYING PUBLIC THAT WE WERE FAIR AND EQUITABLE WITH IT AND THIS IS JUST PART OF IT.
THAT'S JUST PART OF ANY FEE STRUCTURE.
WE DO IT WITH EVERY FEE WE COLLECT PUT.
>> IT LIKE A HOTEL IF GLENN IS DOING HOT TAX.
>> THEY LOOK AT DIFFERENT THINGS.
>> WHAT'S THAT SCARY HOW SHE WOULD GO ABOUT AUDITING?
>> WE WOULD ASK THEM IF THEY HAVE OTHER SERVICES.
WE WOULD GO IN AND TALK TO THEM AND SAY,"WHAT ARE THE OTHER SERVICES?" WE COMMUNICATE WITH WHO WE AUDIT.
IT WOULDN'T JUST BE SOMETHING WE'RE DOING RANDOMLY AND NOT GETTING INPUT FROM THE ACTUAL VENDOR.
WE WOULD MAKE SURE WE DO IT RIGHT.
>> NORMALLY WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU ASK A BATCH OF QUESTIONS THEY GIVE YOU INFORMATION.
THEN YOU RUSH THROUGH ALL THAT.
>> YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO GO IN THERE, LOOK AT THEIR BOOKS.
>> NO, WE ASKED FOR SPECIFIC DOCUMENTS.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THEIR OVERALL ACCOUNT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> NO, WE PROBABLY ASK THEM FOR THINGS LIKE THEIR CAR CHANNEL?
>> ULTIMATELY IT'S COUNCIL'S DECISION IF YOU GUYS WANT TO MOVE FROM $1 PER DAY PER CAR, OR IF YOU WANT US TO CALCULATE A FLAT FEE, THAT WOULD GENERATE THE SAME REVENUE.
>> WHAT I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO DO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, BRIAN IS GET WITH STAFF AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS BEFORE US THAT STAFF IS TOTALLY IN.
>> I'M FEELING THAT MY STAFF DISAGREES WITH MY RECOMMENDATIONS [LAUGHTER].
I'M A FLAT FEE GUY, BUT IT'S GOING TO WORK.
WE'RE UNDER CHARGED TO RAISE REVENUE AND THAT I WOULD TELL YOU THE DOLLAR PER DAY PER CAR WILL RAISE YOU MORE REVENUE.
[00:55:02]
>> IT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING WE COME A DOLLAR A DAY.
>> ABSOLUTELY. I BROUGHT IT UP AFTER THE LAST MEETING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AND THERE IS.
THE ISSUE IS THAT YOU HAVE VARYING LENGTHS OF CRUISES HERE.
YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S NOT THE SHORT-TERM CRUISER IS GOING TO PAY MORE.
BUT THEN AGAIN, TOO OUT IN MY MIND THERE'S MORE WEAR AND TEAR ON INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THE SHORT-TERM CRUISES BECAUSE YOU HAVE MORE COMING AND GOING THAN THE CAR TIER TWO WEEKS BUT ARE WEAK.
BUT THAT'S REALLY IT THAT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.
>> WE HAVE THIS ON OUR AGENDA IS PRINTED HERE.
COUNCIL, THIS IS WHAT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT.
[NOISE] I WOULD IF POSSIBLE, I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE BRIAN THE STAFF IS EVERYBODY IS ON BOARD WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
>> I WILL TRY TO GET YOUR REVENUE ESTIMATE.
WHAT WE WOULD DO IS IF YOU GUYS SAY FLAT FEE WILL CALCULATE REVENUE ESTIMATE IT EQUATES TO WHAT THE DOLLAR.
>> WHEN YOU WERE TALKING FLAT FEE, WHAT WE'RE YOU TALKING ABOUT? WHAT NUMBER?
>> WE'RE TALKING $5 OR $6 PER CAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> THE ORIGINAL WAS FIVE BUCKS PER STAY.
>> THAT WAS GOING TO RAISE QUITE A BIT LESS MONEY.
>> JOHN, GO RIGHT AHEAD THEN I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT.
>> IT SEEMS IT WOULD BE EASIER TO DO THE $1 A DAY.
THEY DON'T DO FLAT FEE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT THAT'S WHERE THE PUSHBACK CAME FROM SOME OF THE CRUISE OPERATORS THEY WERE WORRIED, BUT IF COUNCIL IS COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE GOING IN AND REQUESTING ALL THEIR REVENUE, I'M SURE THERE'S A LOT OF CASH BUSINESS IN THIS.
WE'RE JUST INTERESTED IN CAR COUNT AND THE COLLECTION OF THE FEE.
>> I KNOW MURRAY WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING, LET ME JUST MAKE A STATEMENT.
WE'RE IN A PORTION OF THE AGENDA TO CLARIFY THESE ITEMS. THIS IS THE ITEM THAT WE'VE CLARIFIED.
IF COUNCIL FEELS THAT WE WANT TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER, GET MORE INFORMATION, WE CAN DEFER THIS AND SO FORTH.
BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK IT'S AN ARB DECISION PASS.
>> [BACKGROUND] JUST GOT A COMMENT, THE PUSHBACK I'VE HEARD FROM INDEPENDENT PEOPLE IS THEY FEEL THEY ARE NOW PAYING EVEN MORE BECAUSE THE PORT CHART CHARGES THEM 30 DOLLARS EVERY TIME THEY CROSS INTO THE CRUISE TERMINAL.
THAT WAS THE PUSHBACK I'VE RECEIVED.
THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING 30 DOLLARS EVERY TIME THEIR BUS GOES IN.
NOW THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE DOUBLE PAYING.
>> WELL, THEY'RE NOT PAYING ANYTHING.
THEY'RE PASSING ALONG THE FEE.
LET'S BE REAL CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
IT'S SALES TAX, NOBODY SALES TAX EXCEPT FOR THE BUYER.
>> THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT THE BOARD SUPPORT LEVEL.
IT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE THAN THIS, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YES, [OVERLAPPING].
>> THIS IS ACROSS THE BOARD FEE, NOT ONLY ARE THE PRIVATE PLOTS PAYING THIS THE PORT THEY'RE ALSO IN THIS PAYMENT [OVERLAPPING]
>> [OVERLAPPING] I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S EVEN PAYING THIS ORDINANCE.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT THEY NEED TO [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE PRIVATE ENTITIES FEEL LIKE THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING MORE, BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH US.
>> THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHEN YOU GO AND PARK AT IAH AS I DO BEING A COMFORT CREATURE, I PARK IN THAT AIRPORT PARKING LOT AND THEN I VALET PARK.
I'M PAYING A FEE AND A FEE FOR BOTH.
THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF OUTSIDE COMPANIES CHARGE THAT BECAUSE I NEVER PARK THERE.
>> BRIAN, I THINK YOU MENTIONED YOU WOULD IF YOU COULD GET TO COUNSEL BEFORE OUR MEETING THIS AFTERNOON, YOUR PROJECTIONS OF WHAT THE REVENUE WOULD BE FROM THIS. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
>> ONE THING THAT YOU MENTIONED.
I THINK IT IS A CITY ISSUE ABOUT THAT GATE FEE OR THAT BUS FEE TOO.
IT'D BE GOOD TO BRING THAT UP AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE TOO.
>> I'LL ALSO SAY, ON DAYS DON'T BUT WHAT I DON'T BARGAIN I TAKE A CAR TO THE AIRPORT.
THOSE CARS OR ANY COMPANY IS CHARGED TO GO INTO THE AIRPORT.
THAT'S NOT AN UNCOMMON CHARGE.
WELL, IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT ON IN FUTURE [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF WE WANT TO DO THIS LET'S GET IT ON THE AGENDA SO WE'RE GETTING WAY OFF TOPIC ON THIS.
[NOISE] I'LL JUST MAKE TWO FINAL COMMENTS.
[01:00:01]
COUNCIL, YOUR WISH IS OUR COMMAND.JANELLE HAS JUST SENT YOU THE PETITION THAT'S ON YOUR E-MAIL, SO YOU GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THAT PETITION FOR THIS ITEM 12A THAT'S COMING UP.
>> IT'S 10:00 AM IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED.
I'M TRYING TO GET THIS OUT THE WAY.
JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S IN THE AGENDA.
THE OTHER THING IS THAT ON 12B WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SOME APPOINTMENTS THIS AFTERNOON TO THE ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD.
JANELLE HAS SENT [NOISE] THOSE APPLICATIONS TO YOU, AND THEREFORE, YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH THOSE IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND.
WE'LL ENTERTAIN NOMINEES FOR THE ARTS AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD THIS AFTERNOON.
>> WE HAVE A ZONING OPPOSITION AS WELL.
>> I THINK [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE ZONING.
>> THAT SOUNDS GREAT. VERY GOOD.
WELL, IT IS 10 O'CLOCK AND THAT MAGIC HOUR IS
[Additional Item]
HERE I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND COUNCIL IF THIS MATCH YOUR APPROVAL.WE'RE GOING TO MOVE UP ITEM 35 FOR DISCUSSION.
I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS WITH COUNCIL.
THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION OF SENATE BILL 434.
THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION IF WE NEED TO MAKE CHANGES IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD ENTERTAIN AT A FUTURE COUNCIL DAY IF ANY OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WANTED TO.
I APPRECIATE IT. WE COULD ENTERTAIN THAT AT FUTURE DATE IF WE WANT TO.
THIS IS ONLY FOR CLARIFICATION OF THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
JANELLE, IF YOU WILL READ THAT, PLEASE MA'AM.
>> CLARIFICATION OF SENATE BILL 434 AS IT APPLIES TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON 2023 STATE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA FOR THE 88TH LEGISLATURE.
>> I HAD PUT THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
I HAVE AND I SUSPECT THAT MOST OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE RECEIVED COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IN DECEMBER.
[NOISE] MY COMMENTS HAVE BEEN COMING FROM INDIVIDUALS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS UP AND DOWN THE COAST.
THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONFUSION IN SOME PEOPLE'S MINDS ON EXACTLY WHAT THIS BILL MEANS.
THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION ONLY.
WE'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTING TODAY.
DON, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO OPEN THAT UP.
SALLY, THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US TODAY.
WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP WITH DON OUTLINING THIS BILL.
THEN SALLY CAN GIVE SOME INPUT AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP.
>> HER VOLUME STILL HAS TO HAVE TO BE TURNED UP.
I CAN'T HEAR HER. I'LL BE RIGHT BACK.
>> DO WE NEED TO TURN SALLY'S VOLUME UP? [OVERLAPPING]
>> SALLY, WOULD YOU SAY SOMETHING AGAIN, PLEASE?
>> YES, WE CAN. THANK YOU, SALLY.
>> I HAVE A CHEAT SHEET AND THIS APPLIES TO WHAT WE CALL LITTORAL LANDOWNERS.
A LITTORAL LANDOWNER IS A PERSON WHO OWNS REAL ESTATE ADJACENT TO A BODY OF WATER.
[NOISE] RIGHT NOW UNDER THE OPEN BEACHES, THERE IS PRESUMED TO BE AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC THAT RUNS FROM THE MAIN WELL-WATER TIDE TO THE VEGETATION LINE.
IF A PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO CHALLENGE THAT EASEMENT, YOU MUST FILE A DECLARATORY [NOISE] JUDGMENT ACTION, AND THE BURDEN IS ON THAT LANDOWNER TO PROVE THAT SUCH AN EASEMENT DOES NOT EXIST.
SECOND, DEPRESSIVE STATUTE SAYS THAT THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE WILL BASICALLY DRAW A MAP OF WHERE THE PUBLIC BEACH ENDS AND THAT MAP BECOMES PRIVATE FACIAL EVIDENCE, MEANING ALL THE INITIAL ELEMENTS ARE MET OF WHERE THE PUBLIC BEACH EASEMENT EXISTS.
THE STATUTE AS IT IS WRITTEN NOW CREATES PRESUMPTIONS THAT OPERATE AGAINST THE LANDOWNER AND SHIFTS
[01:05:03]
THE BURDEN ONTO THE LANDOWNER WHO WANTS A DECLARATION THAT THEIR PROPERTY IS NOT BURDENED BY PUBLIC EASEMENT.SENATOR MIDDLETON'S BILL CHANGES THAT AND ELIMINATES THE PRESUMPTION.
BASICALLY, IT SAYS, IF THERE IS A DEC ACTION, THE PERSON WHO ASSERTS THE EASEMENT EXISTS HAS TO PROVE IT.
THERE IS NO PRESUMPTION OPERATING AGAINST THE LANDOWNER.
THIS APPLIES BOTH IN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND IN TRIAL COURT HEARINGS.
THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL, BASICALLY REMOVING THE BURDEN OF PROOF, SHIFTING STANDARD.
SALLY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD OR MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT THIS AT THIS POINT?
>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD WOULD BE A COUPLE OF THINGS VERY BRIEFLY, AND THAT IS WHAT THE BILL DOESN'T DO.
IT DOES NOT ADDRESS TITLE, WHICH IS LARGELY GOVERNED BY SOVEREIGN STATE.
IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY CHANGES WITH REGARD TO REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING BEACH CONSTRUCTION, PERMANENT RULES CONTINUE TO APPLY.
[NOISE] BASICALLY SENATOR MIDDLETON'S BILL IS TAKE THE OPEN BEACHES ACT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL FOCUS, WHICH WAS, AS DON SAID, REMOVING THE PRESUMPTION.
THAT PRESUMPTION WAS PUT IN PLACE IN 1991, BUT PRIOR TO THAT, THE BURDEN WAS NOT PLACED ON THE LANDOWNER TO PROVE A NEGATIVE.
AT THIS POINT, THE BILL HAS BEEN REFERRED TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
NO ACTION HAS TAKEN PLACE YET.
THE LEGISLATURE CONSTITUTIONALLY CANNOT ACT ON LEGISLATION OTHER THAN RESOLUTIONS AND EMERGENCY ITEM FOR THE FIRST 60 DAYS OF SESSION.
IT WON'T BE UNTIL AFTER MARCH 10TH THAT WE'LL START SEEING HEARING AN ACTION ON REGULAR BILLS FILED.
AND I WILL SAY THAT THIS IS LEGISLATION THAT WAS FILED BY SENATOR MIDDLETON WHEN HE WAS IN THE HOUSE LAST SESSION IN 2021.
>> EXCUSE ME, RAY. I'D LIKE TO GET ONE POINT CLARIFIED THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.
THIS BILL, DOES IT IN ANY WAY UNDERMINE THE OPEN BEACHES ACT PORTION THAT ALLOWS BEACH ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC?
>> ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT.
LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS.
NOW COUNCIL, WERE JUST CLARIFYING.
WE'RE NOT ARGUING THE PROS AND CONS NECESSARILY. YES, DAVID.
>> WELL, I WOULD SAY TWO THINGS.
ONE, WHEN WE APPROVE THIS ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, THIS IS NOT WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS REQUIRING ANYONE WHO LAID CLAIM TO THE BEACH.
>> TO THE RESTORED BEACH, RIGHT?
>> I DON'T THINK WE SPECIFIED THAT BUT THAT'S WHAT'S GENERATED WAS RESTORED BEACH.
PEOPLE ARE LAYING CLAIM TO THE OWNERSHIP OF RESTORED BEACH.
I THOUGHT WE WERE PUTTING THE BURDEN ON THEM TO DEMONSTRATE IN OPPOSITION TO THE OPEN BEACHES ACT THAT THEY HAD PROPRIETARY RIGHT TO THAT PROPERTY.
BUT YOU SAY IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE OPEN BEACHES ACT.
[NOISE] IF THE BEACH MOVES, SOMEONE FINDS THE WATER CLOSE TO THEIR HOUSE, [NOISE] WHO WOULD GO OUT AND BEGIN MITIGATING, BUILDING A FULL [OVERLAPPING] WARRANT COUNCIL.
HOW DOES THIS PREVENT THAT? THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE WOULD DO.
IF SOMEONE WOULD GO OUT THERE, THEY WOULD HAVE THE PRESUMPTION THAT IT WAS THEIR PROPERTY.
THEY CAN GO OUT AND BUILD ON THE BEACH.
>>NO, BECAUSE IT STILL FALLS UNDER THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ARE IN PLACE FOR COASTAL CONSTRUCTION AND SO FORTH.
[01:10:01]
EVEN TO START WITH YOUR FIRST QUESTION, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NEWLY NOURISHED BEACH.WHEN A BEACH IS NEWLY NOURISHED, THERE IS A LSLS SURVEY THAT HAS TO BE DONE, AND THE MEAN LOW WATER, THE WEB BEACH, AND SO FORTH IS ESTABLISHED.
IF THAT CHANGES THEN TO SOME EXTENT DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE PERIOD OF TIME HAS BEEN, WHO OWNS BEACH.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION DOES NOT ALLOW SOMEONE TO GO OUT AND BUILD A WALL OR TO GO OUT AND DO A, BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE STILL IN EFFECT.
THEY STILL HAVE TO FOLLOW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION, GLO PERMITS, CORE PERMITS.
>> PARDON ME, BUT ARE YOU SAYING THAT THIS WOULD NOT IMPACT THE PUBLIC EASEMENT PORTION? THAT THE PUBLIC EASEMENT WOULD NOT MOVE AS A RESULT OF [OVERLAPPING]
>> PUBLIC WILL NOT USE ACCESS TO THE BEACH.
>> THE GLO HAS BEEN VERY SLOW ABOUT REGARDING THAT LINE.
FOLLOWING ON EVULSIVE EVENTS, I HAVE A HURRICANE LAURA.
IT WASN'T DECLARED EMERGENCY, BUT YOU CAN STILL MOVE THE BEACH PRETTY MUCH IN FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE.
THEN IF THE GLO HAS GOTTEN AROUND DRAWING THAT LINE, STAY OUT OF- THEY HAVE.
BUT IT REALLY TOOK HIM A COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> WHAT HAPPENS [OVERLAPPING]?
>> YOU'RE A LAWYER. YOU'D DO BETTER ANSWERING THAT.
>> NUMBER 1, HOPEFULLY IT WOULD MAKE THE GLO PROMPT IN PERFORMANCE OF ITS DUTIES.
NUMBER 2, WHEN THE GLO DRAWS THAT LINE, AS THEY WILL, THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE [INAUDIBLE] EXIST WOULD BE NOW WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE TO THEM.
THEY WILL HAVE TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE DRAWN THE LINE CORRECTLY.
THERE'S ONLY ONE THING IN THIS THAT GIVES ME PAUSE WITH A CITY.
SOMEBODY COMES IN FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, FROM TIM OR WHOEVER, AND HE SAYS, NO, I'M DENYING THIS BECAUSE IT'S ON THE PUBLIC BEACH AND MAY SAY, NO, IT'S NOT, AND THEY FILE A SUIT AGAINST US.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT PRESUMPTION.
NOW, THAT'S KIND OF OUT THERE.
[OVERLAPPING] IT IS OUT THERE.
>> IT IS AND IT ISN'T BECAUSE THAT WAS EXACTLY THE CASE THAT I THOUGHT WE WERE ADDRESSING IN SUPPORTING THIS.
>> BUT WE DON'T HAVE A PRESUMPTION.
>> WOULD YOU HAVE A SAY AGAINST THAT?
>> WE HAVE A PRESUMPTION RIGHT NOW THAT WE WON'T LATER.
>> BELIEVE IT EVEN HAPPENED AFTER I WON PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THE PURPOSE OF THIS LAW WOULD BE SEASCAPE.
THE GLO CAME IN AND THEY CUT OUT THEIR PERFECTLY GOOD GO2, WHICH WAS THEIR FORM OF PROTECTION.
SEASCAPE SUED THE GLO AND THE GLO LOST THEN AGREED THAT SEASCAPE CO-SIGN AN EASEMENT.
WE HAVE EASEMENTS IN PLACE NOW.
EASEMENTS WOULD ALWAYS BE NEEDED TO FOR ANY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DO NOW.
THAT'S HOW THEY PARTICIPATE IN THE END OF THE SEAWALL.
>> THEY GOT THEIR BUILDING BUILT THAT WAY.
>> MAYOR, IT SEEMS THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS OUR HABIT NOT THE MARRIAGE OF THIS BILL THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] FROM THIS FILE, BUT WITH OUR SUPPORT OF IT FROM OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, AND I JUST DON'T FEEL THAT WHAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE PROVING A LEGISLATIVE AGENDA COMFORTS WITH THIS.
>> I KNEW WHAT I WAS VOTING FOR.
>> I WILL SAY I PROBABLY GAVE THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA SHORT SHRIFT WHEN IT WENT BIASED.
I CHALLENGE ANYBODY IN THE ROOM TO TELL ME EVERYTHING THAT'S ON A IT, AND I DOUBT THEY CAN.
EXCEPT FOR MAYBE MR. LISTOWSKI. GOOD FOR YOU.
>> YOU SHOULDN'T SAY THOSE SINS IN FRONT OF SALLY.
>> BUT IT GIVES US THE QUESTION WHETHER ISN'T THE VALIDITY OR THE MERIT OF THIS BILL.
THE QUESTION IS OUR SUPPORT FOR IT.
>> YES. TODAY IT'S FOR CLARIFICATION OF THIS, NOT ONLY FOR OUR EDUCATION BUT FOR THE PUBLIC'S.
[01:15:02]
BUT SECONDLY, IF A COUNCIL MEMBER OR COUNCIL MEMBERS, OF COURSE, WANT TO PURSUE THIS AND MOVE THIS FORWARD TO QUESTION IF THIS SHOULD BE ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, THAT'S THE RIGHT OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND WE COULD PUT THAT ON OUR MARCH MEETING.>> SO FAR AS FOR THE CLARIFICATION TO THE BILL ITSELF, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS REALLY WILL BE EFFECT IN A STORM EVENTS WHEN WE HAVE A LOT OF EROSION.
>> WITH THE WAY IT IS NOW, WHERE THE BILL WOULD PUT IT, WOULD BE THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD PROVE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THEY COULD GO AND REBUILD THEIR PROPERTY?
>> PROPERTY OWNER CAN ALWAYS PROVE THEIR OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE HAVE A DEAL.
QUESTION IS WHETHER THAT NEED IS BURDENED BY AN EASEMENT.
THE CHANGE IS THAT AREAS IF THEY WANTED TO CHALLENGE THAT EASEMENT TODAY, IS A STATUTORY PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR THAT THE EASTMAN EXISTS.
AND THIS BILL PASSED AND PRESUMPTION DISAPPEAR.
>> IT'S ALL LOOKING FOR A SCENARIO ON HOW THIS WOULD PLAY AT.
>> SO IF I HAVE A BEACH HOUSE AND THE WATER WASHES UNDERNEATH THE SLAB THAT ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE.
>> LET'S SIMPLIFY. SAY THERE'S A STORM AND PART OF YOUR PROPERTY GETS ERODED.
>> AND I STILL THINK I SUSPECT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
GAO WOULD WAIT A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME FOR THE BEACH TO REACH THE [OVERLAPPING] AND THEN THEY WOULD DRAW THE MAP JUST SAME WAY THE PUBLIC EASEMENT IS.
>> BECAUSE THAT EASILY ENROLLS.
>> THEORETICALLY, THE PROPERTY OWNER COULD SEE THAT MATH AND SAY THAT AIMED RIGHT THAT EASE MY NAME THERE.
AND NOW, THE GAO HAS TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT IS WHERE THE EASEMENT LINE IS.
>> SO NOW IT'S FLIPPED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RESIDENT HAS TO DO THAT.
>> RIGHT NOW UNDER THIS STATUTE, ONCE THEY DRAW THAT MAP AS PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF WHERE THE FINE IS.
>> BUT ALSO THEN YOU CAN STATE IT DIDN'T HOLD UP IN THE SUPREME OR TEXAS SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THEY LOST HER CASE.
AND I REMEMBER THE DAY THAT THEY LOST THEIR CASE.
ONE OF THE JUSTICES ASKED THE LAWYER FROM DLL AND HE SAID, "SO YOU'RE SAYING EVERYTHING ROLLS OVER THE ISLAND AND SECURE JANOV STORM AND IT HITS AND KILLS ALL THE VEGETATION OF THE GALVESTON COUNTRY CLUB THAN THAT YOUR WORTH?" AND THEY SAID YES.
>> DAVID. SO WHY ARE YOU AGAINST THEM?
>> NOT NECESSARILY AGAINST IT.
I JUST GO BACK I DON T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
>> IT IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
>> IT'S NOT WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. PERHAPS IT'S MY FAULT.
>> SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, IF THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU THOUGHT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, BUT YOU UNDERSTAND IT TODAY OR WOULD YOU BE AGAINST THAT?
>> I'D LIKE SOME MORE INFORMATION ON THAT.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M NOT SURE WE'RE HEARING ALL THE IMPACTS.
>> I WOULD JUST ADD TWO THINGS.
ONE, THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ISSUE WAS DESCRIBED IN THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA WITH LANGUAGE THAT I [NOISE] FROM THE BILL ANALYSIS DONE BY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
PROBABLY NOT TERRIBLY HELPFUL AND LAYING THIS OUT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, SO I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT, I'M SORRY.
SECONDLY, I THINK SIMPLY PUT, THIS IS BASICALLY JUST IDENTIFYING THAT WHOEVER MAKES A CLAIM TO AN EASEMENT, THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON THAT EASEMENT, IS THERE A RESPONSIBILITY TO SHOW.
THAT RESTORES THE OPEN BEACHES, THAT IS WHAT ITS ORIGINAL STATE WAS PRIOR TO 1991 WHEN THE PRESUMPTION WAS PUT IN PLACE.
>> I WOULD JUST COMMENTS, I LIKE THE GAO HAS NOT BEEN QUICK TO DEFEND THESE THINGS SINCE SEVERANCE.
ANYWAY, THAT PRESUMPTION ARE NOT,
[01:20:04]
IS THE PRACTICAL MATTER IS THE PROPERTY OWNERS FREE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.I DON'T NECESSARILY OBJECT TO THAT.
BUT YOU SAY YOU TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT CLARIFYING THIS? I READ THE BILL. I DIDN'T FEEL ANY MORE EDUCATED.
>> I DON'T THINK A LOT OF THE CONFUSION ON THIS SITUATION IS BEING CREATED BY EXTERNAL GROUPS THAT BELIEVE AT RETREATING, THAT BELIEVE IN THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY BEACHES AT THE HOUSE THAT BELIEVED CONSTRUCTION SHOULDN'T BE AT THE BEACH AT ALL, AND SO FORTH.
BECAUSE TO SAY, YOU'VE BEEN BOMBARDED WITH QUESTIONS. WHAT IS IT? SIX, I HEARD FROM ONE-FLOOR PERSON IN CORPUS SURF RIDER.
SURF RIDERS ARE TRULY AGAINST ANYTHING BUILT ON THE BEACH.
ANYWAY, THERE ARE EVEN AGAINST BEACH NOURISHMENT.
THEY WANTED TO JUST REMAIN THE WAY IT IS.
>> IT'S TURTLE SUPPORTERS [OVERLAPPING].
>> EXCUSE ME, THIS IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA THOUGH, RIGHT?
>> SO WE'RE JUST HERE TO GET CLARIFICATION ON IT.
I WANT MORE UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE I READ THE BILL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT.
>> THE WAY THE BILL IS WORDED IS UNBELIEVABLY CONFUSING IN IT.
AND I READ THAT OVER AND OVER TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS BILL. LET ME JUST SAY.
>> CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT, PLEASE?
>> LET ME FINISH THIS THOUGHT THAT THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION.
WE GOT THIS THOUGHT OUT THERE.
WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO PUT THIS ON A FUTURE AGENDA TO LOOK AT EVEN ACTION ON OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, WE CAN DO.
>> SO THIS WAS IN THE LAST LEGISLATION.
IT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY THROUGH THE COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND ON THE FLOOR.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY HOUSE [NOISE].
>> IT'S 150 HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES AND I DON'T RECALL WHAT THE VOTE WAS.
SO IT JUST ABOUT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY THROUGH THE HOUSE.
IT DIDN'T GO IN UNTIL LATE, SO IT NEVER MADE IT THROUGH THE SENATE PROCESS.
>> BUT THE SENATE WASN'T IMPRESSED. I DON'T THINK THE SENATE WAS IMPRESSED BY THAT.
>> NO I TAKE THE SENATE HAVE ONE CONCERN AND IT HAD TO DO WITH GETTING THE COASTAL DISTRICT FUNDING DISTRICT DEVELOPED.
>> I THINK [NOISE] BUT I DON'T THINK SO.
>> QUITE FRANKLY, THERE WAS ALSO A TIMING ISSUE.
BUT, THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS JUST REPEAT.
THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE OBLIGATION THAT PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE THEY DO ANY FORM OF DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION ON THE BEAM.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE BEACH CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS THAT PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE TO GO THROUGH REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE'S A DECENT BUT THEY ARE NOT.
>> HOW DOES THIS AFFECT OR ALIGN WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF TEXAS? I'VE HEARD FROM CONSTITUENTS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE VOTED ON NOT BECAUSE IT CHANGES THE OPENED BEACH ACT.
>> IT DOESN'T CHANGE YOU [OVERLAPPING].
>> OPEN BEACHES ACCESS WAS UPGRADED INTO THE CONSTITUTION.
HOW THAT RIGHT IS ESTABLISHED IS AFFECTED BY THIS BILL THROUGH THE SHIFTING OF PRESUMPTIONS.
>> BUT IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE OPEN BEACHES.
PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT TO ACCESS THE BEACH.
>> COUNSEL, [NOISE] I ADVISE YOU TO SEEK MORE INFORMATION IF YOU'D ON THIS AND WE CAN ONLY [OVERLAPPING] JUST ONE SECOND BREE, AND I WOULD INVITE YOU IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE THIS.
LET'S PUT IT ON THE AGENDA IN THE FUTURE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT.
GO RIGHT AHEAD, LET'S [NOISE] THIS UP.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THERE IS AGENDA THAT WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN THE MAYOR CAME IN AFTER HE RECEIVED SIX CALLS WITH CONCERN.
DON CAN FORWARD THAT TO YOU THAT WAS DONE BY STEVE SHULTZ.
>> BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING
[01:25:01]
AND THIS GOES A LONG WAY AS TO WHY I'VE BEEN MARRIED 30 YEARS.APPARENTLY, I MISHEARD WHAT DAN TOLD ME AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO CONFUSION THERE.
THIS HAPPENS A LOT AT MY HOUSE, IT PROBABLY HAPPENED HERE TOO.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON THAT.
>> WE CAN ALL FALL BETWEEN [NOISE] I CAN TELL YOU THAT.
>> CERTAINLY IT WASN'T THAT I WASN'T LISTENING BECAUSE THAT'S FOR MY WIFE.
[3.B. Discussion Of The Structure And Mission Of The Redevelopment Authority/Galveston Housing Finance Corporation And Authority (Brown - 30 Min)]
>> LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3B PLEASE, AS IN BOY.
SALLY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DON.
>> IF I CAN BE OF ANY FURTHER HELP, YOU KNOW WHERE TO FIND ME.
>> THREE B, DISCUSSION OF THE STRUCTURE AND MISSION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND AUTHORITY.
>> MICHELLE HAVE A SEAT, TREVOR HAVE A SEAT IF YOU WOULD.
>> MICHELLE OF COURSE, IS OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR, WORKS WITH THE LIAISON FOR THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION GROUP AND FOR THE RDA.
TREVOR IS OUR ESTEEMED ATTORNEY THAT IS THE LIAISON WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON THIS.
THIS IS BROUGHT BEFORE YOU COUNSEL, THIS IS A ACTION I BROUGHT FOR YOU.
AS YOU MAY REMEMBER IN THE YEARS PAST, WE MADE SOME MOVEMENT TO COMBINE THE RDA, THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
THERE WERE ARGUMENTS BACK AND FORTH IF THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA, BUT WE MOVED FORWARD TO DO THAT AND LEGAL TECHNICALITIES HAVE BEEN SET IN MOTION TO ESTABLISH THAT.
AS THIS COMMITTEE HAS BEEN MEETING, THERE SEEMS TO BE STILL A DIVISION OF THE INTEREST OF THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND THE RDA.
I'VE TALKED WITH THE CHAIRMAN OF THIS GROUP, PATRICIA BOLTON-LEGG TWICE NOW ON THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT AND I HAVE TALKED TO STAFF ABOUT THIS TO GET MORE INPUT ON WHERE WE STAND WITH THAT.
WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF MEETINGS ON THIS.
BEFORE YOU TODAY I WANT TO BRING OUT SOME THOUGHTS FOR COUNCIL'S DIRECTION ON THIS.
NUMBER 1 IS THAT, DO WE NEED TO KEEP THESE GROUPS TOGETHER OR SHOULD WE SEPARATE THESE GROUPS APART.
I THINK THAT'S A ITEM THAT SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, COUNCIL MEMBER ROB HAS MENTIONED BEFORE LOOKING AT SEPARATING.
>> I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO DISCUSS WHAT THE RDA NEEDS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT.
SECONDLY, THE RDA PORTION OF THIS, THE RDA CURRENTLY IS REALLY THE OVERSEER OF THE TOURS.
WE MAINLY HAVE TOURS 13 THAT THEY ARE OVERSEEING.
>> THEY ALSO OVERSEE ALL THE PITS.
>> THEY DO. THE KIDS, YEAH. THEY DO.
>> THEY DO MORE THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PITS THAT EXISTS.
>> I THINK THERE'S ONLY ONE [OVERLAPPING] FOUND.
THEY CITED WATERMAN'S PIT, ACTUALLY [OVERLAPPING] IS NOT PART OF IT.
>> WELL, THE BASE SIDE OF WATERMAN'S STILL PAYS THE MONEY TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND IT IS DISTRIBUTED.
THEY TECHNICALLY GET AFFECTED BY THE EXPEDIENCY OF OUR RDA.
>> THE RDA IS ENOUGH TO PROVE THAT WHEN THEY ONLY HAVE [OVERLAPPING].
>> THEY DON'T HAVE TO PROVE IT, BUT THEY STILL DISTRIBUTED THE FUND.
LET'S SAY THE RDA DOES MEET FOR FOUR MONTHS.
EVERY KID IS AFFECTED BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET THE MONEY THAT THEY'RE DUE.
>> CORRECT. THERE IS SOME PIT INVOLVED IN THERE, THEIR MAIN DUTY AND WAS ESTABLISHED ORIGINALLY AS COMMANDING THE TOURS IS STILL ON THE ISLAND.
IN TALKING WITH STAFF, I'M GOING TO THROW OUT ANOTHER THOUGHT.
WE HAD ONE, AS I MENTIONED, POSSIBLY SEPARATING THESE GROUPS.
NUMBER 2, THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RDA SEEMS TO BE VERY ADMINISTRATIVE AND THERE HAS BEEN RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF TO RECONSTITUTE THE RDA.
IF WE SEPARATE THESE GROUPS OUT AND HAVE STAFF SERVE AS THE MEMBERS OF THE RDA SINCE THESE ARE MAINLY [NOISE] ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS THERE.
>> THAT WOULD BE HIGHLY UNUSUAL.
>> WELL, WE'RE GOING TO GET EMPTIED.
[OVERLAPPING] I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION ON THOSE TWO TOPICS.
I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO MICHELLE.
DO YOU WANT TO INTRODUCE ANY THOUGHTS THEN WE'RE GOING TO LET TREVOR MENTION SOME THINGS,
[01:30:04]
WE'LL OPEN UP TO QUESTIONS.>> YOU ACTUALLY HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.
WE COMBINED THE RDA WITH HOUSING FINANCE, PROPERTY FINANCE THINKING, ONE UMBRELLA THE BOARD.
OVER THE PAST ALMOST A YEAR, I THINK THAT WE'VE BEEN MEETING, THE PRIMARY FOCUS HAS BEEN ON HOUSING FINANCE, RP FINANCE INITIATIVES, AND NOT REALLY MUCH FOCUSED ON ANYTHING RDA RELATED.
WHEN THINGS COME THROUGH, THE PAYMENT FOR THE TOURS AND STUFF, IT'S JUST GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BE DONE, AND NOTHING MORE EXPANDED UPON THAT COMMITTEE THAT SEEMS TO BE MUDDIED IN THERE.
>> LET'S GET TREVOR TO GIVE HIS THOUGHTS.
>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE IT WAS MENTIONED BY YOU.
I KNOW WE KEEP SENDING THE DOCUMENTS UP TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND THEY KEEP SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T WORK.
>> WELL, WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT.
LET'S LET MICHELLE FINISH AND TREVOR GO RIGHT AHEAD IF YOU WOULD.
>> ON THAT POINT, THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION, WE AMENDED IT.
IT'S BEEN SENT BACK TO US THREE TIMES.
I'VE SENT IT BACK OFF FOR A FOURTH TIME.
THIS LAST ONE, ONE OF A COUPLE OF THINGS THEY BROUGHT UP WAS THE WORDING AND THE NOTARY SHOULD BE A DIFFERENT WORDING.
WE HAD IT NOTARIZED TWICE, ONE WITH THE WORDING THEY WANTED, ONE WITH THE WORDING WE USE WHEN WE PASS SUBORDINATES.
I'VE SENT IT BACK TO THEM, BUT IT'LL BE ASSIGNED TO SOMEONE NEW AND HOPEFULLY, THEY WON'T FIND SOMETHING ELSE THEY DON'T LIKE AND SEND IT BACK.
THAT HAPPENED TO THE IDC AS WELL AND THEY'RE USING THEIR OWN COUNSEL, RISK REDOING HIS FOR A FOURTH TIME AS WELL.
>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS TREVOR YOU WANT TO MENTION?
>> THE ONLY THING WE WOULD NEED TO AMEND IF WE WANTED TO STAFF IT WITH ANYONE DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER TWO BOARDS, WE PASS SOMETHING IN JUNE.
IT'S THE AUTHORITIES AND COMMISSIONS, THE GENERAL ORDINANCES THAT WE HAVE THAT SAYS APPOINTEES TO THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, THE PROPERTY FINANCE AUTHORITY, AND THE RDA MUST BE ELIGIBLE TO SIT ON ALL THREE BOARDS IN ORDER TO GAIN APPOINTMENT.
WE JUST PASSED THAT BECAUSE WE COMBINED THESE AND PROBABLY RECOMMEND THAT WE GET RID OF THAT SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO VET SOMEONE'S QUALIFICATIONS, TO ALL THREE BOARDS AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO [NOISE].
>> MARIA, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, LET'S SEE IF WE START WITH QUESTIONS AT COUNCIL.
[OVERLAPPING] I KNOW YOU HAVE A NUMBER, BUT LET'S SEE IF OTHERS [OVERLAPPING].
>> NO, NOT AT ALL, BUT LET'S GET SOME OTHER THOUGHTS.
ANY QUESTIONS AT ALL, COUNCIL HAS [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF WE WERE TO SEPARATE THE RDA FROM THE HOUSING BOARD, WE KEEP THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TWO HOUSING BOARDS, QUALIFICATIONS WOULD BE THE SAME?
>> CORRECT. [OVERLAPPING] WE JUST DELETE THE RDA OUT OF THAT MENTION.
>> BECAUSE I HAVE YET TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RDA DOES FOR A LIVING. THANK YOU.
>> I WILL SAY OTHER QUESTIONS.
I KNOW JOHN SERVED ON THAT GALVESTON HOUSING [OVERLAPPING].
>> JOHN, CAN YOU TALK [OVERLAPPING]
>> JUST ONE SECOND. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY ARE, BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT EFFICIENCY, WHY WOULD WE NOT HAVE ALL THESE THREE TOGETHER? IF THEY EACH HAVE THEIR PIECE OF THE PUZZLE IN THEIR TOOLS THAT THEY CAN USE IN DEVELOPMENT.
BUT WE DON'T USE ALL THESE TOOLS ALL THE TIME.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IN PROPERTY FINANCE.
I HAVEN'T BEEN DOING MEETINGS ON THIS IS A QUESTION, NOT REALLY A COMMENT.
THIS IS A QUESTION, WHAT HAVE THEY DONE REALLY SINCE THEY BUILT THE FOUR OR FIVE HOUSES OVER HERE, A FEW BLOCKS AWAY.
I DON'T REALLY KNOW ANYTHING THAT THEY HAVE DONE SINCE THEN. THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS.
THEY HAVE A GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY TO DO SOMETHING WITH AND WHICH IS GREAT.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM DO SOMETHING, BUT I KNOW COUNCIL HAS NOT GIVEN ME ANY DIRECTION SINCE WE COMBINE THESE BOARDS, SO WE'VE LEFT THEM TO JUST FLOUNDER OUT THERE ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT ANY REAL DIRECTION.
I THINK IT'S REALLY OUR FAULT THAT WE WERE NOT HAVING THIS CONVERSATION TODAY.
>> YOU DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE RDA, WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
THEY HAVEN'T DONE MUCH BESIDES MANAGE THE TOURS.
WE ONLY HAVE ONE TOURS. THEY DON'T DO A LOT.
WHY DO WE NEED A WHOLE SEPARATE BOARD TO DO WHAT THEY HAD DONE IN THE PAST.
IF THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT COMES UP, JUST BRING IT TO THE SAME BOARD AND GET THEM TO LOOK AT IT.
>> YOU'RE GOING UNDER THE ASSUMPTION.
YOU'VE HAD PREVIOUS COUNCIL THAT WERE ANTEATERS.
THERE ARE STILL SOME AREAS THAT IN THIS ISLAND THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM TOURS.
[01:35:04]
>> I AGREE 100%. LET'S GIVE THEM DIRECTION.
>> THE PURPOSE OF AN RDA OR REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, WHICH IS USUALLY SEPARATE FROM THE CITY AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF EXCELLENT RDAS THROUGH OUT THE STATE WHO OVERSEE TOURS AND WHATNOT.
THE CITY HAD PREVIOUS COUNCILS THAT WERE PER STATUES, BECAUSE THEY REALLY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THEM.
THEREFORE, WE HAVEN'T DONE TOURS.
BUT TO BLAME THAT ON THE RDA AGAIN, I BLAME IT ON COUNCIL.
I QUITE FRANKLY, HAVING WATCHED THE GROUP THAT COMBINE THE THREE TOGETHER, IT NEVER MADE SENSE TO ME.
THE RDA IS A REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.
THE HOUSING FINANCE IS FOCUSED ON LOW TO MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING, OR WHAT ARE THEY?
>> HOUSING AUTHORITY, BUT HOUSING FINANCES. HAS NO RESTRICTIONS.
>> THEY ACTUALLY HANDLING FINANCE CORP HAS THE RESTRICTION TO LOW MOD THE PROPERTY FINDS AUTHORITY DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY.
>> RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING] YEAH. BUT THEY'RE EACH DIFFERENT ENTITY.
THEY'RE, AND THAT'S WHY TAKING THE RDA AND GROUPING THEM TOGETHER MAKES NO SENSE.
>> YOU ALREADY HAD THIS HAPPENING WITH HOUSING FINANCE AND PROPERTY FINANCE.
THANKS. TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES.
THEY WORKED IN HARMONY FOR YEARS TOGETHER, SAME BOARD.
NOW YOU HAVE RDA THAT YOU'RE JUST PUTTING THAT SAME BOARD ON WITH THE TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT THEY COULD DO IF COUNCIL GAVE DIRECTION.
>> HOUSING FINANCE AND PROPERTY FINANCE AND THEY WORK WELL TOGETHER BECAUSE THEIR FOCUS IS SAYING HOUSING.
>> IF THE RDA IS A PIECE OF THAT THEN, WOULD NEED TO DO, IS HAVING FOLKS WHO UNDERSTAND THERE COULD BE THIS OTHER COMPONENT THAT IS [OVERLAPPING] INDUSTRIAL.
>> WELL, LET ME JUST SAY FIRST OF ALL, ONE OF OUR MOST SUCCESSFUL TOURS THAT WE'VE HAD IN THE CITY CAME FROM A HOUSING PROJECT, A RESIDENTIAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
>> WHICH ONE ARE YOU REFERRING TO?
>> THAT MONEY WAS GENERATED THROUGH RESIDENTIAL HOUSES.
AGAIN, THEY WORK HAND IN HAND.
>> BUT I'LL CITE ANOTHER SUCCESSFUL TOURS THAT REALLY CHANGED THE ISLAND.
IT WAS THE ONE THAT MITCHELL DID ON THE STRAND THAT HAD TO DO WITH COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
>> IF THEY WERE MIXED TOGETHER, THEN YOU COULD [NOISE] HAVE DONE THAT IF YOUR FOCUS IS ON THE HOUSING.
>> WELL, LET ME CLARIFY SOME THINGS TO WOULD THEY MADE CURRENTLY AND GUIDE ME ON THIS, MICHELLE, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN WATCHING THEM AS THEY'VE MOVED ALONG WHEN THEY MADE, THEY'RE MADE AS TWO SEPARATE GROUPS ALMOST THEY MADE ON HOUSING ISSUES AND THEN IF THERE'S TOURS ISSUES, THEY ADDRESS THOSE.
BUT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE PUT A LOT OF ATTENTION ON, THEY HAVE AROUND $900,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT.
THEY'RE PUTTING A LOT OF ATTENTION TO WANTING TO PURCHASE PROPERTIES ON THE ISLAND HERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH EITHER MIDDLE-INCOME OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THEY HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT THEY HAVE THEIR ATTORNEY THERE HAS WRITTEN, I THINK TREVOR AND I, YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT?
>> THEY HAVE AN ORDINANCE THEY WANT TO BRING TO COUNCIL TO GET COUNCIL TO APPROVE THEM GOING OUT AND BUYING PROPERTIES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HOUSING.
THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THIS DISCUSSION AS WE MOVE FORWARD HERE. YES.
>> JUST A QUICK CLARIFICATION QUESTION THAT WE DIDN'T COMBINE THE BOARDS.
WE SET IT UP SO THE SAME PEOPLE SERVE ON THE THREE BOARDS, SO THEY'RE ALL THREE SEPARATE ENTITIES, SO WHEN THEY MEET, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THEY'LL DEAL WITH THE ISSUES CONFRONTING THIS BOARD.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ADJOURN AND RECONVENE, BUT THEY DEAL WITH THEM SEPARATELY.
IT'S NOT AS THOUGH WE JUST DO THIS ALL IN THE MIXER.
>> WELL, THE AGENDAS RIGHT NOW ARE SORT OF.
>> BUT THE ISSUES WERE SEPARATED
>> THAT'S HOW WE ALWAYS DID IT.
>> WE JUST OPENED UP ABOVE MEETING AT THE SAME TIME AND WE HAD COMMON AGENDA.
>> BUT THAT'S WHAT AMOUNTS TO RIGHT.
IT'S NOT A SINGLE MEETING AND THAT'S WHERE I CAN TURN YOUR MEETING CONCURRENTLY.
THESE BOARDS, THEY JUST HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THAT.
>> THEY OPEN ALL THREE READINGS THE SAME TIME.
>> VERY GOOD. THE QUESTION THOUGH IS, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVEN'T GIVEN THEM A GREAT DEAL OF
[01:40:04]
DIRECTION AND THAT THEY ARE FOCUSED ON HOUSING BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE FOCUS HAS BEEN.THERE ARE PLACES WHERE WE COULD DO SOME MORE DEVELOPMENT VERSUS THREE DAYS, WHATEVER, OTHER THINGS IN THEIR TOOLBOX.
LET'S SAY WE BOUGHT A BIG CHUNK PELICAN ISLAND AND WE WANTED TO DO SOME INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE.
DOES THAT FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE RDA?
>> THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE RDA OR NOT, THAT'S WHAT THE OTHER- YEAH.
>> THEN IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH HOUSING.
BUT HE COULDN'T, [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] WHAT DO YOU KNOW MEANS THERE?
>> CITY COUNCIL WOULD CREATE THE CHARGES AND THEN WOULD HAVE TO ASSIGN IT TO BE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE RDA.
>> NO, NO, NO, THAT'S A VERY FAIR POINT.
THE MURRAY'S POINT ABOUT TOURISTS, YOU SAID PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE BEEN ANTI-TOURISM.
I HAVE NOT HAVE BEEN THE GREATEST FAN OF THE WAY WE'VE WRITTEN TERMS IN THE PAST.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD TOOL. IT'S JUST I DON'T THINK [OVERLAPPING]
>> SOME BE GOOD, SOME OF THEM BAD?
>> BUT IT'S NOT RDAS FAULT THAT THIS ONE IS SUCCESSFUL AND THAT ONE, IS NOT.
THAT'S JUST THE WAY THAT THE ECONOMY CRUMBLES.
BUT IF WE WERE REWRITING THEM, COUNCIL HAS THE WHEREWITHAL TO WRITE THAT TERMS ANYWAY AND THEN ASSIGN ITS MANAGEMENT TO RDA.
>> THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST TOO.
>> YEAH, SO WE GOT TO NEGOTIATED A COUPLE OF TIMES.
>> MAYBE WE NEED TO BE MORE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT IN THE FUTURE.
>> WELL, LET ME SAY TWO POINTS HERE.
IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME TO SEPARATE THESE BOARDS IF YOU NEEDED DIFFERENT EXPERTISE ON THOSE BOARDS OR THE WORKLOAD WAS TOO GREAT FOR ONE BOARD.
IF EITHER ONE OF THOSE THINGS ARE HAPPENING, THEN I WOULD BE TOTALLY IN FAVOR OF SEPARATING THE BOARDS.
>> BUT I DO WANT TO READ INTO THE RECORD.
EARLIER, I WAS DENIED THE ABILITY TO SPEAK EVEN THOUGH I FALLOW POLICY.
POLITICAL OR NON-POLITICAL PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE, AND THAT THE MAYOR CHOSE THE MALE COUNCIL MEMBERS OVER FEMALE [BACKGROUND] UNTO YOUR RECORD.
>> WE THOUGHT THAT THE PARLIAMENTARY ASPECTS WOULD BE WON BUT THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
>> PARLIAMENTARY, BUT THAT'S TRUE.
I THINK WE'VE LIMIT OURSELVES IN NOT SEPARATING THEM.
THERE'S BEEN SO MUCH SUCCESS IN THAT TERMS. THE CHAIR SHOULD NOT BE FOCUSED ONLY ON HOUSING BUT WE PUT THE HOUSING PERSON AS THE CHAIR AND ANYTIME THERE ARE DISCUSSION, MY UNDERSTANDING,, AS EVERYTHING IS JUST RELATED TO HEALTH.
>> THAT'S CERTAINLY BEEN THE FOCUS IN THE GENERAL MAKEUP OF THE BOARD.
I THINK MOST FOLKS THAT ARE THERE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE HOUSING PIECE AND WE DON'T HAVE DIRECTION YET ON REALLY WHAT WE WANT THE RDA TO DO FOR THERE TO BE MUCH DISCUSSION.
RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST THE PASS-THROUGH FOR THE TOES AND MANAGING THAT.
IF THERE WERE DEFINITELY THINGS THAT COUNTERSEES FOR THE RDA TO ACCOMPLISH THEN THE KEY IS THE FOLKS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON BOARD THERE, THAT'S THE SAME, THEY HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL THE EXPERIENCED TO DO THE CRITICISM.
>> IT'S BEEN MY THINKING THAT PERSONALLY, I DON'T THINK IT REALLY MATTERS IF THEY'RE SEPARATED OR NOT.
I THINK WHAT MATTERS IS THEY NEED TO GET DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE NOT DONE TO GIVE THEM PROPER DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THINGS.
NOW, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT MAY BE COMING TO COUNCIL AT OUR NEXT MEETING OF PURCHASING PROPERTY AND SO FORTH.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WILL NEED TO LOOK AT AND GIVE DIRECTION TO THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
THAT WAS THE QUESTION I HAD TO MICHELLE AND TREVOR.
TREVOR, IF THIS MOVES FORWARD, IF THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, NO MATTER IF THEY'RE COMBINED OR NOT, IF THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY THAT ALL OF THOSE ACTIONS NEED TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
>> RIGHT NOW, CORRECT. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHAT THEY'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY IS GETTING A PRE-APPROVAL OF COUNCIL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF PROPERTY UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT SO THAT THEY COULD MOVE QUICKER IF SOMETHING BECAME AVAILABLE.
>> CAN THAT BE DONE? THAT'S UNDER COUNCIL'S PURVIEW TO BE THERE.
>> YES, THAT WOULD BE YOU ALL APPROVING OF
[01:45:01]
THE ACTION PRIOR TO WITHIN CERTAIN PARAMETERS.>> IT HAD SIMILAR PROGRAMS BUT THIS ONE MORE OF IN THE PAST, IT WAS PURCHASING THE PROPERTIES TO BUILD HOMES.
THIS PARTICULAR ONE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT COULD BE JUST PURCHASING THE PROPERTIES AND HANGING ONTO THEM RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE MARKET AND THE AFFORDABILITY OF DOLLAR THAT'S BEEN [INAUDIBLE] .
>> IF IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY ARE ARE ASKING FOR AN ORDINANCE TO BE ABLE TO GO OUT AND MAKE CERTAIN PURCHASES WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL.
THERE HAD BEEN ORDINANCE IN THE PAST THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO [OVERLAPPING]
>> COUNCILOR BRAD, I ASKED HIM THE QUESTION.
>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WANTED TO MOVE ON PROPERTY FASTER.
THEY WANTED DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL IN THE FORM OF AN ORDINANCE GIVING THEM APPROVAL TO SPEND X AMOUNT ON A CERTAIN KIND OF PROPERTY.
THAT WAY THEY COULD MOVE FASTER.
>> IF THEY SOLD THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULD PURCHASE IT?
>> WITHIN THE GUIDELINES, WHETHER WE APPROVED OF THAT OR NOT, WHETHER WE[OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE WE WOULD GIVE THEM PRE-APPROVAL.
>> WELL, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE GIVING THEM APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PURCHASES OF PROPERTY UNDER CERTAIN CONSTRAINTS.
>> IT'S JUST LIKE WE GAVE BRIAN HAS ALREADY TO SIGN CONTRACTS UNDER A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON THIS, JOHN?
>> I APOLOGIZE. I THINK BEFORE I WOULD CHANGE THE MAKEUP OF THE CURRENT POLICIES AND BOARD, I WOULD TRY TO GET THEM TO SOME DIRECTION AND THINK ABOUT WHERE WE WANT THESE BOARDS TO GO.
IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE EXPERTISE ON THEIR CURRENT BOARD, THEN THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING A REASON WHY WE WOULD SEPARATE THOSE BOARDS.
>> BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING PROPERTY FINANCE CORPORATION, AND WE'RE TALKING TO JOHN HERE, THEY CAN BUY FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'VE NEVER DONE THAT BUT THEY COULD.
>> I THINK IT'S A PROPERTY FINANCE.
IF THERE WAS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT NEEDED TO BE HEARD.
>> BUT THE RDA COULD AS WELL AND THEY COULD GET THAT MONEY FROM PROPERTY FINANCE.
>> PROPERTY FINANCE, YES, CORRECT.
>> WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT RESTRICTED AND UNRESTRICTED FUNDS IN A LITTLE WHILE, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHOSE FUNDS THAT $900,000.
>> MOST OF IT IS PROPERTY FINANCED ALREADY.
>> THEY HAD THE HOMES, THAT WAS THE CLARA BARTON DEVELOPMENT.
>> THEN IN THE OTHER HOMES I THINK WE HAD A LEASE.
>> WE HAD CLARA BARTON AND THEN WE'VE BUILT SOME TOWN HOMES OVER THERE FOR HERTZ LANE, AND THEN THESE FOUR OR FIVE HOUSES OVER HERE, SO WE'VE PARLAYED THAT.
NOW,[OVERLAPPING] WHERE DID THOSE FUNDS ORIGINALLY COME FROM, THAT'S WHERE I DON'T REALLY KNOW BECAUSE ORIGINALLY WHERE THEY GOT THAT MONEY WERE THE SALE OF BONDS BACK IN THE '80S, EARLY '90S.
>> I HAVE TO GET BACK IN BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING].
>> I REALLY WOULD GET ON THAT.
>> NO, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR THAT ANSWER WHERE IT CAME FROM.
>> I DO KNOW THOUGH THEY SELL OF THE HOMES APARTMENT SQUARE IN THIS WHOLE.
>> WELL, BUT THEY HAD TO GET THE MONEY ORIGINALLY TO FUND THAT PROJECT.
>> ONE MORE THING. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE BROUGHT THESE BOARDS TOGETHER IS BECAUSE PROPERTY FINANCE AND HOUSING HAD NO CITY STAFF HELPING THEM WITH ANY OF THIS.
FOR THE LONGEST TIME, SINCE THEY WERE CREATED UP UNTIL WHEN WE COMBINED THEM, THEY WERE OUT THERE ON THEIR OWN OPERATING, DOING A GOOD JOB WITH NO HELP FROM CITY STAFF.
WE HAD SANTOMANI THAT WAS SPEARHEADING THAT FOR THE LONGEST TIME WHO WAS THE GENIUS BEHIND THIS.
WHEN SAM PASSED AWAY [OVERLAPPING].
>> JOHNNY WAS OUR CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AT ONE TIME.
BUT SAM WAS THE PERSON WHO IS ACTUALLY DOING THE DAY-TO-DAY BUSINESS.
HE WAS MAKING THINGS HAPPEN, HE WAS DOING A LOT OF LEG WORK.
THEN ONCE HE PASSED AWAY, WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE THAT.
THE BOARD SAT AROUND FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE THE BOARD MEMBERS DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO GO OUT THERE AND BUY PROPERTY AND OVERSEE CONTRACTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT WAS THE OTHER REASON WHY WE TRY TO COMBINE THESE BOARDS SO WE COULD GET STAFF ON BOARD TO HELP WORK ON SOME OF THESE TASKS?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO SUMMARIZE AND THEN MURRAY, DID YOU WANT TO SAY THEN BEFORE WE WRAP THIS UP.
>> NO, I'M SO NOTED FOR THAT AND DID NOT PREVIOUSLY [LAUGHTER].
[01:50:02]
>> NO, IT WAS PURPOSELY, PEOPLE WAS LOOKING DOWN ON THE CAMERA.
>> IT WAS NOT DENIED, IT WAS OTHER INDIVIDUALS HAD THINGS TO SAY AND I WANTED TO GET THAT.
I KNOW JOHN HAD SERVED ON THAT.
>> ELEMENTARY PROCEDURE HAD BEEN FOLLOWED.
>> ANYWAY, THANK YOU JOHN FOR YOUR INPUT.
WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS ON THE WORKSHOP HERE, I'D LIKE TO SEE IF COUNCIL FELT COMFORTABLE.
WE'LL PUT THIS ON THE WORKSHOP FOR OUR MARCH MEETING.
WE'LL WORKSHOP NOT ONLY THIS SUBJECT, AND MAYBE ALSO WE'LL WORKSHOP THE ORDINANCE THAT THEY HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD, MICHELLE, SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THAT FOR THE PURCHASE OF PROPERTY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL, ON THIS?
>> WOULD WE BE VOTING ON THAT ORDINANCE OR NOT.
WOULD YOU WANT TO GET A SURVEY?
>> NOT IF WE COULD, JUST FORGET THIS.
>> NOT IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY QUESTIONS.
>> NOW WE CAN JUST GET IT IN MARCH.
>> WE'LL HOLD IT UP [OVERLAPPING]
>> ON THE ORDINANCE FOR THEM FOR THE PURCHASING OF THE PROPERTIES AND SUCH, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT FOR?
>> WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, I THINK THE ORDINANCE WILL BE FAIRLY SPECIFIC ON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
WE COULD HAVE MEMBER OR A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GROUP SIT WITH US HEARING IF THEY PUT ON ANSWERING QUESTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'RE MOVING RIGHT ALONG HERE.
[3.C. Discussion Of Cruise Parking Ordinance (Brown - 20 Min)]
ITEM 3C, COUNCIL, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS UP AGAIN ON THE CRUISE PARKING? WE HAD DISCUSSED THIS AT A CLARIFICATION.ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO DISCUSS THIS MORE AT THIS POINT?
>> MY WENDOVER PAID FOR THE RECORD THAT BRIAN SAID THE SAME, CORRECT.
>> BRIAN, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ON THIS?
>> NO, DID YOU SAY SOMETHING THAT YOU HAD DISCUSSED IT.
>> I STAND CORRECTED, IT WAS NEVER CHANGED TO A FLAT FEE.
>> OBVIOUSLY, MUCH LIKE MY WIFE, DAN SPEAKS TOO LOW AND I CAN'T HEAR.
[LAUGHTER] LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3D PLEASE, JANELLE.
[3.D. Discuss Negotiations With The Gulf Coast Water Authority Relating To The Municipal Customer Contract, Interim Water Supply Contract, Advanced Funding Agreement, And A Letter Of Intent Regarding The Maintenance And Operation Of The City’s Water Wells (B. Cook - 15 Min)]
>> 3D, DISCUSS THE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY RELATED TO THE MUNICIPAL CUSTOMER CONTRACT, INTERIM WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT, ADVANCED FUNDING AGREEMENT, AND A LETTER OF INTENT REGARDING THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE CITY'S WATER WELLS.
>> I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DENSE AGREEMENTS ON THERE.
REALLY, I JUST WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE ADVANCED FUNDING AGREEMENT AT THIS POINT.
THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST PRESSING PROJECTS THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
DUE TO A TIMING ISSUE, RIGHT NOW, THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY IS CURRENTLY BIDDING OUT THE RELOCATION OF THE 42 INCH WATER AND THEY'RE REQUIRED [NOISE] TO MOVE IT DUE TO THE TEXTILE WIDENING PROJECT ON 146 THERE.
THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER PROJECTS, THE FM 517 WIDENING IS ALSO A TEXTILE PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME RELOCATION AND THERE'S SOME MAINTENANCE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE ON THERE.
WE INCLUDED THESE IN OUR 2022 CO ISSUANCE LAST YEAR, ABOUT $6 MILLION WORTH.
THIS IS A DEPARTURE FROM PAST PRACTICES.
THIS ADVANCED FUNDING AGREEMENT REALLY IT GIVES US CONTROL OVER OUR MONEY AND THE DEBT THAT'S BEING ISSUED ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
INSTEAD OF BEING TACKED ON TO OUR WATER RATES, WE'RE HOLDING THE MONEY, WE'RE COLLECTING THE INTERESTS, AND WHEN THE BIDS COME IN, WE'LL GIVE THEM OUR PRO RATA SHARE OF WHATEVER THOSE COSTS THAT ACTUALLY COME IN ON BIDS, INSTEAD OF THEM HOLDING ONTO THE POTS OF MONEY AND DRAWN DOWN AS THEY NEEDED.
IN THIS MARKET THAT WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW, BIDS, THEY FLUCTUATE VERY WIDE.
LIKE I SAID, IT JUST GIVES US MORE CONTROL OVER THIS KIND OF STUFF.
THE OTHER AGREEMENTS THAT ARE IN THERE, I JUST REALLY WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY IN RELATION TO SOME JEWEL FOR WATER RIGHTS THAT THE CITY PURCHASE BACK IN 2006 AND ALSO A WELL AND MAINTENANCE OPERATING AGREEMENTS FOR OUR MAINLAND WELLS THERE WHICH WILL PROVIDE US MAYBE ADDITIONAL WATER RIGHTS.
BUT WE'RE STILL IN THOSE NEGOTIATION PROCESSES SO ALL OF THOSE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE,
[01:55:02]
WE REALLY HAVEN'T COME TOGETHER YET.BUT WE JUST WANTED TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT THOSE NEGOTIATIONS ARE TAKING PLACE AND ONCE ALL THE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE COME TOGETHER, WE'LL BRING YOU BACK A RECOMMENDATION EMBEDDED THROUGH COUNCIL AND GET SOME FEEDBACK THERE.
>> BUT WE'RE KEEPING OUR WATER WELLS IN SOUTH PORT.
WE MAY TURN OVER MANAGEMENT OF THEM AND OPERATION OF THEM TO THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY TAKE THE WATER.
>> WE'VE BEEN CHARGING THEM FOR THAT WATER.
>> THAT'S TO BE NEGOTIATED ON HOW WE WORKED THAT OUT.
>> THEY'VE JUST GIVEN US A LETTER OF INTENT RIGHT NOW WITH THESE THINGS.
THE DIVE IS ALWAYS IN THE DETAILS ON WHAT THE AGREEMENT SPELLED OUT AND WHAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO REPRESENT TO THE TCQ AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> BECAUSE WE NEED MORE CAPACITY.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR BRANDON AT ALL? YOU'LL BE BRINGING THIS BACK, BRANDON.
>> YES. THIS PARTICULAR ONE, THE ADVANCED FUNDING AGREEMENT, WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO YOU AT YOUR NEXT MEETING FOR APPROVAL.
IT WILL JUST DEPEND ON NEGOTIATIONS GO AS FAR AS THE LARGER AND MORE COMPREHENSIVE PACKAGE ON THE WATER RIGHTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AS THOSE NEGOTIATION'S PAYING OUT.
>> IF WE GET THE DOCUMENTS PRIOR TO OUR WORKSHOP NEXT TIME.
>> THEY'RE ON THE WORKSHOP AGENDA.
THIS IS JUST AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IN THE ADVANCED FUND AGREEMENT BECAUSE ALL OF THEM ARE PRETTY DENSE AND YOU MIGHT FALL ASLEEP IF YOU'RE READING IT AT NIGHT TIME IN YOUR BED OR SOMETHING.
I JUST PUT THIS TOGETHER AS AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY JUST FOR YOUR OWN BENEFIT TO TRY DRILL DOWN THE MAIN POINTS OF IT.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, BRANDON. I APPRECIATE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE QUESTIONS FOR MR. COOK?
[3.E. Discussion Of Hotel Occupancy Tax As It Relates To City Ordinances 22-073 And 22-074 (Bouvier/Brown - 30 Min)]
>> ITEM 3E, PLEASE, BRING IT NOW.
>> THE DISCUSSION OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX AS IT RELATES TO CITY ORDINANCES 22-073 AND 220743.
>> MIKE, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO YOU, SIR.
>> GOOD. LOOKING AT TODAY VERSUS WHEN THIS ORDINANCE WAS PRESENTED TO US IN SEPTEMBER, IT WAS PRESENTED THAT THE MONEY WAS JUST GOING TO CHANGE THE LOCATION FROM ONE BANK ACCOUNT TO THE OTHER AND DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS WOULDN'T CHANGE MUCH.
BUT A LOT OF CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE OPERATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THERE IS AN ADDENDUM ON THE TABLE TO CHANGE THE DEPOSITS FROM THE PARK BOARD TO THE CITY FROM THE FIRST AND THE 15TH TO THE THIRD AND THE 23RD.
THERE'S ALSO A CHANGE IN THAT ORDINANCE FROM THE FIRST OF MARCH TO MARCH TO BE PRESENTED FOR THE HOT TAX CONTRACT.
WHAT I DON'T SEE IS A WAY FOR FUNDING TO HAPPEN FOR THE PARK BOARD AS THIS IS BEING MOVED A LITTLE BIT.
IN 22-073, SECTION 5, IT STATES THAT THE PARK BOARD SHALL TRANSFER TO THE CITY, ALL HOT FUNDS IN IT'S POSSESSION AND MAY RETAIN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 120 DAYS OF RESERVES SHOWN ON EXHIBIT DAY AND MAY RETAIN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 AND THE AMOUNT OF 112 DAYS OF MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION FUNDS.
ANY DISPUTE OVER THE CALCULATIONS AND MONETARY AMOUNT SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CALCULATED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND HIS DECISION IS FINAL.
THERE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR ANY MORE MONEY TO BE DISPERSED TO THE PARK BOARD.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IN THAT ORDINANCE THAT IS PRESENTED TODAY IS PUT SOMETHING IN THERE FOR THE PARK BOARD TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS SOME OF THE FUNDS OR SOME OF THE EVENTS THAT ARE COMING UP.
THEY HAVE SOME EVENTS AND THEY HAVE TO BE GEARING UP FOR THE SUMMER TIME ALSO.
WHAT I WAS THINKING TOWARDS THE END OF SECTION 5, I HAVE ONE THAT'S REALLY WORDY AND I HAVE ONE THAT'S PRETTY SHORT.
THE SHORT ONE IS, IF THE CONTRACT IS NOT APPROVED IN MARCH 2023 OR NEEDS TO BE
[02:00:06]
INTERRUPTED THE PARK BOARDS OPERATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THE PARK BOARD MAY MAKE A WITHDRAWAL REQUEST TO THE CITY FOR THE DELIVERANCE OF THE HOT FUNDS TO THE PARK BOARD.THE WITHDRAWAL REQUEST WILL INCLUDE LINE ITEM, LISTINGS OF EXPENDITURES THROUGH JUNE 30TH, 2023.
THE PARK BOARD MAY SUBMIT WITHDRAWAL REQUEST BY MARCH 15TH AND THE CITY WILL DELIVER THE FUNDS BY APRIL 1ST.
SO I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR SOME HELP ON THAT.
>> WE'VE RECEIVED SENT OUT BY THE CITY MANAGEMENT YESTERDAY, A COPY OF THE EMAIL IN CONTRACT THAT WAS SENT OVER TO THE PARK BOARD ON JANUARY 31ST.
THEY HAD DONE NOTHING TO NEGOTIATE IN IT.
>> MAY I SPEAK? IN ALL FAIRNESS, I DID GET A TEXT FROM MR. SIMMONS SAYING HE'S FINISHED WITH HIS RED LINES.
HE IS READING FROM RED LINES FOR THE STAFF, WHEN HE HAS THEM HE'LL SEND THEM TO ME.
>> I WOULD SAY THERE WAS A MEETING RECENTLY.
I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT MARCH 1ST WAS THE DEADLINE FOR HAVING THEIR MATERIAL OVER TO THE CITY.
I THINK ARE THEY FUNCTIONING UNDER THAT DEADLINE.
>> ACTUALLY, I THINK THEY'VE MOVED IT UP, I THINK THEIR ATTORNEY IS BRINGING IT OVER TO DAN ON THE 27TH.
>> THE LAST THING I HEARD FROM THEM.
>> TWENTY-SEVEN OF THIS MONTH?
>> WHEN YOUR ORDINANCE WAS DONE, WE LEFT THEM 120 DAYS RESERVE, AS WELL AS WE FUNDED THEM FOR EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THEIR BUDGET FOR THAT PERIOD OF THE FIRST QUARTER.
>> AS FAR AS OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE, YES.
>> BUT NO, EVERYTHING IN THEIR BUDGET WAS FUNDED.
THAT WAS IN THERE FIRST-QUARTER?
>> YOU'VE GOT FOR 4TH OF JULY, YOU HAVE JUNETEENTH, THERE'S A HANDFUL OF PROJECTS IN THERE.
>> COULD YOU COMMENT ON THAT, DAN?
>> PROBABLY THE EASIEST THING FOR US TO DO IS SAY WE'RE HOPING ANYTHING WITH PARKBOARD, IF THEY WANT TO COME FOR FUNDING BUT WHICH ALL APPROVED THE FUNDING FOR THE PARKBOARD AND THEN 120 DAYS AND THEN THE RESERVES, 112 DAYS BASED ON AUGUST 31 NUMBERS.
PARKBOARD ALSO RECEIVED SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, HOT PAYMENTS THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THAT.
THEY'VE GOT THREE ADDITIONAL MONTHS OF FUNDING IT'S JUST OUT THERE.
RIGHT NOW IT WASN'T ALLOCATED ANYMORE.
>> THOSE HAVE BEEN EXPENDED ALREADY.
>> THEY HAVE BARKED BY THE ORDINANCE, THEY HAVE TURNED OVER ALL THE HOT THAT IS IN THEIR POSSESSION AND THAT INCLUDED THOSE MONTHS.
>> THAT ACTUALLY STARTED GIVING IT TO US [OVERLAPPING].
>> WAIT, JUST ONE-SECOND COUNCIL IF YOU DON'T MIND.
MIKE IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT, COULD YOU COME FORWARD HERE SO THAT WE CAN ALL HEAR?
>> THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT FROM OUR SIDE ANTICIPATED THE EVENTUALITY THAT COUNCIL MEMBER BOUVIER IS TALKING ABOUT BY GIVING THE PORT FOR IT A CHANCE TO REQUEST WHAT THEIR NEXT ADVANCE WOULD BE IN WHATEVER LEVEL OF DETAIL THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE.
WE DIDN'T SPECIFY THE LEVEL OF DETAIL, AND I'VE EMPHASIZED IN MY CONVERSATIONS WITH BRYSON THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THIS POINT, IS MANAGING CASHFLOW BECAUSE COUNCILS ARE ALREADY APPROVED A BUDGET, AND IF A REQUEST COMES INTO US, IS PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACT THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH AND IS WITHIN BUDGET, WE'LL ADVANCE THE MONEY.
FROM MY STANDPOINT, THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE'RE RUNNING IN THE MIDDLE OF NEGOTIATING WHAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL AGREEMENT, AND IT KEEPS COMING BACK HERE.
WE'D LIKE TO FINISH OUR JOB NEGOTIATING THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL AGREEMENT, AND IT'S A BIG ENOUGH ISSUE.
YOU ALL CAN HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS US FROM DOING THAT.
>> BECAUSE IF WE DON'T WORK HARD ENOUGH NOW FOR FREE, [OVERLAPPING].
>> WILL WE GET PAID BY THE MEETINGS?
>> [BACKGROUND] [OVERLAPPING] THE NOMINATION.
[02:05:01]
>> FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THIS PARKBOARD, IF THEY HAVE SPECIAL REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THEIR QUARTERLY FUNDING, AND THEY JUST MAKE THAT REQUEST TO THE CITY, AND IF THAT'S IN THEIR BUDGET, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE BUDGET THEN THAT FUNDING WILL BE PASSED ON.
>> WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SUMMER MONTHS MAY HAVE A GREATER DEMAND FOR FUNDING THAN THEY'RE END MONTHS.
THE QUARTERS THAT DON'T RELATE TO THE SUMMER AND SPECIAL EVENTS AND WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE FUNDING REQUESTS ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER FOR SOMEONE LOWER THE OTHERS.
OVERALL, WE'RE MANAGING AN ANNUAL BUDGET THAT'S IT.
>> WHICH INCLUDES ALL THE SPECIAL PROJECTS?
>> IT DOES INCLUDE THOSE ACTIVITIES.
>> INCLUDING JUNETEENTH AND FOR [OVERLAPPING]?
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'D BE DONE OUTSIDE OF THEIR BUDGET.
>> AGREEMENT ALSO PROVIDES FOR THEM TO MAKE ONE-TIME REQUEST FOR THINGS THAT WEREN'T ANTICIPATED.
NOW WE HAVE SOME EMERGENCY, THEN THEY CAN REQUEST THAT TOO AFTER THEY'VE GOTTEN THEIR QUARTERLY FUNDS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S IN THE PROPOSED CONTRACT?
>> THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT HAS THE TRIGGER FOR THAT RIGHT NOW.
>> WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S DEPENDENT ON THIS AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FINISH INSTEAD OF DOING A PIECEMEAL.
>> WHAT'S NOT IN DID YOU SAY IT'S NOT? SAY THAT AGAIN MIKE.
>> THERE IS NO MECHANISM IN THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW BEYOND THE 112 DAYS OF FUNDING THAT A RETAINED AFTER TURNING OVER ALL THE HOT FUND.
>> THAT WAS MY PROBLEM WITH THIS ORDINANCE.
YOU PUT THE ORDINANCE IN PLACE, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MECHANISMS TO MAKE THE ORGANIZATION WORK WHILE THIS CONTRACT WAS BEING NEGOTIATED.
RIGHT NOW, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, PLEASE, THERE'S NOTHING IN WRITING SAYING HOW THEY REQUEST THIS FUNDING.
>> IN THE CONTRACT HAS NOT BEEN AGREED TO BY THE PARK BOARD.
>> RIGHT NOW, THERE'S NOTHING IN WRITING THAT SAYS THAT THEY CAN REQUEST FUNDS FOR, SAY, JUNETEENTH OR 4TH OF JULY.
THERE'S NOTHING IN WRITING RIGHT NOW FOR THAT.
>> THEY'RE OPERATING ON JUST THE 120-DAY RESERVE.
>> THAT IS RESERVE IN TWO-QUARTER FUNDING.
>> FOR BUDGET, THEY'VE BEEN FUNDED.
>> AND IF IT'S IN THEIR BUDGET, IT WAS FUNDED.
REMEMBER, WE DIDN'T APPROVE SIGNED [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M NOT IN THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION OF THIS.
>> YEAH. BUT THAT'S THE WAY IT IS, AND ALSO THE OTHER DETAILS THAT ARE NEGOTIATED INTO THE CONTRACT WOULD HAVE TO BE FINISHED NEGOTIATION.
THERE'S BEEN RESISTANCE ON THE PARKBOARD SIDE TO NEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT.
>> WELL, LET ME SAY DAVID HAS BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING ONE TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT WHAT JOHN IS SAYING IS CORRECT.
THERE'S NOTHING AND I THINK WHAT MIKE SAYING IS CORRECT.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT OUTLINES THE MECHANISM OF THIS FUNDING SPECIFICALLY UNTIL WE GET THIS HOT CONTRACT FINALIZED.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME, YOU HAD BEEN TALKING TO BRYSON MIKE AND HAVE WORKED OUT A MECHANISM FOR HIS REQUEST AND HOW THAT'S ON HER, HAVE YOU NOT?
>> I THINK MY SUGGESTION YESTERDAY TO HIM WAS TO GIVE US A FORMAL REQUEST TO SEND IT OVER AND LET US REVIEW.
>> ARE THEY CLEAR ON AND THEY HAD AT PARKBOARD LEVEL?
>> I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT IN EVERY CONVERSATION.
>> HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY REQUEST FROM THEM?
>> YOU MAY HAVE RECEIVED ANYTHING.
>> I PUT AN EMAIL OUT THERE A COUPLE I THINK IT WAS A WEEK AGO FOR CLARIFICATION ON HOW THE PARKBOARD TO MAKE A REQUEST TO THE CITY FOR FUNDS, AND I STILL TO THIS DAY HAVE NOT GOTTEN AN EMAIL THAT TELLS ME WHAT TO DO.
>> LET'S ANSWER MIKE'S QUESTION FIRST.
MIKE, ON THAT EMAIL, IS THERE SOMETHING IN WRITING THAT YOU CAN GIVE TO COUNSEL BOUVIER ON HOW THIS PROCESS SHOULD WORK LIKE?
>> I THINK IT'S MOST APPROPRIATELY COMING FROM THE CITY MANAGER.
>> I JUST NEED TO ASK. I'VE BEEN SAYING THAT EVERY TIME I TALK TO THEM, ALL YOU GOT TO DO IS ASK.
>> MIKE, DID WE NOT TAKE THEIR ENTIRE YEARLY BUDGET BASICALLY SLICE IT INTO FOUR QUARTERS AND CAUGHT O&M?
>> THAT WOULD NOT WORK BECAUSE OF THE PEAK TIMES OF THE SUMMER AS RYAN DISCUSSED.
>> WE'RE NOT FUNDING IT THAT WAY.
>> THE ESTIMATE IS THE WHOLE BUDGET AND
[02:10:03]
THEN THEY MAKE THE REQUEST BECAUSE SUMMERS ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER, BUT THE SHOULDER SEASONS ARE GOING TO BE LESS.>> IF THEY NEEDED MORE, THEY JUST NEEDED TO ASK FOR IT.
>> DAVID'S HAD HIS HAND UP FOR QUITE A WHILE HERE. GO AHEAD, DAVID.
>> IT'S NOT FOUR EQUAL SLICES, BUT IT WAS ALLOCATED AND FUNDED AT THEIR REQUEST.
THE SLICES THEY REQUESTED WE DIDN'T DECIDE THAT.
THEY CAME AND SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED FOR Q1, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED FOR Q2, AND WE FUNDED THAT.
NOW, [NOISE] THIS END AROUND HERE ON FUNDING THINGS IN Q3 WITHOUT A CONTRACT, I STILL CONTEND THAT ANY FURTHER FUNDING, WE'RE VIOLATING THE LAW IF WE DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT.
THERE'S A SOLUTION TO THIS, PARK BOARD SIGNS A CONTRACT.
BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO COME DOWN FROM WHAT I HEAR TO WHAT IS RESTRICTED, WHAT IS UNRESTRICTED.
THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED THERE, BUT COUNCIL NEEDS TO ANSWER THAT.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE PARK BOARD.
THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THE COUNCIL TO DECIDE.
>> WELL, THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA.
>> ISN'T THAT NOT ALL WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING?
>> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DECIDE.
THEN IN MY OPINION, THAT [NOISE] HAVE A CONTRACT.
>> THE PARK BOARD WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN?
>> UP UNTIL 2015, THIS IS HOW IT WAS ALWAYS DONE, THE WAY IT'S BEING DONE NOW.
IN 2015, I THINK YOU WERE CHAIR OF THE PARK BOARD THEN?
>> NO, I WAS ON COUNCIL AT THAT TIME.
>> OKAY. WHO WAS CHAIR OF THE PARK BOARD?
>> MAYBE JOYCE KELVIN. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT WAS CHANGED HOW IT FUNCTIONED.
FROM '64-2015, IT WAS DONE THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN IN THE CHARTER, THE WAY WE'VE BROUGHT IT BACK TO BY ORDINANCE WITHOUT ANY ISSUES JUST LIKE IT WILL BE NOW, WITHOUT ANY ISSUES.
BUT IT'S THE WAY IT OPERATED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER, WHICH WE ALL TAKE AN OATH WHEN WE TAKE OFFICE TO COMPLY WITH THE CHARTER.
IF ANYBODY NEEDS TO BE VERSED ON THE OATH THAT WE TAKE, I HAD ASKED DAN TO BRING THAT WITH US.
WE DID ORDINANCE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER, WHICH IF THE CHANGE HADN'T BEEN MADE IN 2015, WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE BEEN NECESSARY BECAUSE IT HAD ALWAYS OPERATED THIS WAY.
SO MANY HOURS AND STAFF TIME HAVE BEEN PUT INTO THIS.
IT IS SO LUDICROUS WHEN PRIOR TO 2015, THIS IS EXACTLY HOW IT FUNCTIONED.
THE RESISTANCE AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE I HAPPEN TO HAVE BEEN IN CITY HALL A NUMBER OF DAYS DEALING WITH OTHER THINGS, AND THE PARK BOARD ALWAYS COMES UP, IS COMING FROM THE PARK BOARD SIDE OF REFUSING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD AND IT'S MOVE IT FORWARD BECAUSE THEY SAY IT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I HAVE TALKED TO PEOPLE, I'VE SERVED ON THE PARK BOARD FOR YEARS UPON YEARS, AND IT ALWAYS FUNCTIONED THE WAY THAT WE PUT IT BACK TO IN THE ORDINANCES.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS TAKING SO MUCH TIME.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE PARK BOARD IS BEING SO RESISTANT TO PUTTING THIS BACK INTO COMPLIANCE, BUT THE ONE THING I DO UNDERSTAND IS TIME IS MONEY, AND I'LL BET YOUR CITY STAFF HOW MANY HOURS A WEEK ARE PUT INTO THIS?
>> OTHER THINGS ARE BEING NEGLECTED BECAUSE THE PARK BOARD REFUSES TO NEGOTIATE, NO, WE WANT IT BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS CHANGED DURING '15, WHICH IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER.
THE PARK BOARD NEEDS TO PARTICIPATE.
AN EMAIL, I THINK, WAS SENT OVER SAYING THAT THEY NEVER RECEIVED THE CONTRACT.
WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL ON THE CONTRACT BEING SENT TO THEM IN JANUARY AND YET THEY WERE SAYING THEY NEVER RECEIVED IT.
THIS IS A BUNCH OF BS GAMES AND WE'RE WASTING A BUNCH OF TIME AND MONEY.
[02:15:06]
I'VE HEARD THE DIRECTOR OF THE PARK BOARD SAY, BUT WE USE OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY.OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY IS MY MONEY, YOUR MONEY, YOUR MONEY, YOUR MONEY, PEOPLE'S MONEY, THE CITIZENS THAT WE ALL REPRESENT, THAT WE'RE PUT IN THE OFFICE TO REPRESENT.
[NOISE] AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, IF THEY REFUSE TO NEGOTIATE THROUGH MARCH, THEN THEY DON'T RECEIVE THEIR PAYMENT.
THEY'RE THE ONES REFUSING TO NEGOTIATE.
WHAT WE DID WAS PUT IT BACK INTO COMPLIANCE TO THE WAY IT OPERATED SINCE 1963 WITHOUT ANY ISSUES.
>> JOHN, YOU HAD A QUESTION OR A COMMENT?
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW LAW.
DO WE CONTINUE OPERATING UNDER OUR EXISTING CONTRACT?
>> WE DO NOT HAVE A HOT CONTRACT WITH PARK BOARD.
WE HAVE AN INTERLOCAL, BUT THAT DOES NOT GOVERN THE ALLOCATION.
>> WE'VE NEVER HAD A HOT CONTRACT?
>> YOU'RE ALWAYS BREAKING THE LAW.
>> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT, BUT FROM 2015 WITHOUT A DOUBT.
>> LET ME MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THAT IS CORRECT.
WE'VE NEVER HAD A HOT CONTRACT, BUT IN SOME OF THE INTERLOCALS, WE'VE ADDRESSED SOME OF THESE ISSUES THAT ARE IN THE HOT CONTRACT.
>> WE'VE JUST DONE IT IN DIFFERENT WAYS. IT'S NOT A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A HOT CONTRACT AND AN INTERLOCAL?
>> NO, YOU DO. YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE A HOT CONTRACT.
>> WELL, YOU CAN'T HAVE THOSE IN THE SAME CONTRACT.
>> I THINK THEY HAVE TO BE SEPARATE.
>> NO, YOU CANNOT HAVE THOSE IN THE SAME CONTRACT?
>> BECAUSE THE INTERLOCAL CAN CONTINUE FOR AS LONG AS YOU LIKE.
WE CAN JUST AUTOMATICALLY RENEW THAT.
THE LAW SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ANNUAL HOT CONTRACT.
351105 PRETTY CLEAR THAT YOU GOT TO HAVE A CONTRACT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THE INTERLOCAL ALSO ADDRESSES A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE CONTRACT.
PARK BOARD DOES A LOT OF NUMBER OF THINGS FOR US THAT AREN'T HOT RELATED.
>> THEY MANAGE ASSETS FOR US, THEY DO HARD COLLECTIONS [OVERLAPPING] FOR US, THEY MANAGE SEAWALL PARK, THEY MANAGE DELLANERA PARK, THEY PICK UP TRASH ON THE SEAWALL.
THOSE AREN'T NECESSARILY DRIVEN BY EXCLUSIVELY THE HOT CONTRACT. THOSE ARE SERVICES.
>> I GUESS, WHY HAVE WE NEVER DONE THIS IN THE PAST?
>> WELL, HE'LL ANALYZE THAT SITUATION.
AS ROB SAID, SHE SPOKE WITH PAST MEMBERS AND IT WAS DONE THIS WAY IN THE PAST. [OVERLAPPING]
WHY HAVE WE NOT HAD A HOT CONTRACT IN THE PAST? WHY HAVE WE NOT FOLLOWED THE LAW IN THE PAST? IS THIS NEW OR?
>> NO, THE LAW IS CERTAINLY NOT NEW.
THE LAW EXISTS AT LEAST FROM '87.
>> [OVERLAPPING] SOME OF THE THINGS WERE DISCUSSED IN PRIOR INTER-LOCALS.
[OVERLAPPING] THEY HAD THE INTER-LOCALS GO BACK TO IN OUR DISCUSSION OF THE BUDGET AND THE FUNDING.
>> WE THOUGHT WE WERE FOLLOWING LAW WITHIN THE INTER-LOCAL?
>> I THINK YOU COULD PROBABLY ARGUE THAT THEY FELT THAT THE INTER-LOCAL WAS A CONTRACT.
>> BUT THAT'S NOT WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
>> I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN.
>> PREVIOUS COUNCILS. WE ARE NEVER READY TO TALK ABOUT RESTRICTED AND UNRESTRICTED ARGUMENTS.
>> I'M NOT ASKING TO CHANGE WHAT'S HAPPENING NOW, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE HOT CONTRACT IS CRAZY.
ALL I'M REQUESTING IS A MECHANISM FOR THE PARK BOARD TO REQUEST MONEY FOR THEM TO OPERATE, THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
>> TO ADDRESS THAT, THANK YOU, MIKE FOR BRINGING US BACK TO WHERE WE WERE.
>> WELL, CRAIG, LET ME BE REAL CLEAR.
THERE'S GOT TO BE A REASON FOR IT.
YOU JUST CAN'T SAY I WANT THIRD-QUARTER FUNDING, THERE'S GOT TO BE A REASON FOR AS TO WHY YOU STEPPED THROUGH FIRST AND SECOND QUARTERS WITHOUT.
>> LIKE JUNETEENTH, THE REQUEST CAME IN FOR A 100,000, THE 100,000 WAS ALREADY IN THEIR BUDGET, RIGHT?
>> RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR.
MIKE'S QUESTION IS HE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE MECHANISM UNTIL WE GET THIS HOT CONTRACT FINALIZED.
>> SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE BECAUSE THEIR NEXT DRAW IS IN APRIL AND THE CONTRACT'S GOING TO GET DONE BEFORE APRIL.
>> THEY MAY HAVE A REQUEST PRIOR TO THAT FOR FUNDING ON WHAT I HEAR MIKE SAYING.
WHAT'S THE PROCESS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC NEED OR A SPECIFIC ISSUE, THEY SHOULD BRING IT FORWARD, WE'RE HAPPY TO TALK TO THEM.
>> MIKE AND YOU'VE TALKED TO BRYSON [OVERLAPPING] AND OUTLINED EXACTLY HOW YOU WOULD LIKE BRYSON TO RESPOND, IS THAT CORRECT?
[02:20:01]
>> I SAID YES TO THAT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'VE GOT SINGLE SHOT ITEMS. IT'S NOT LIKE FROM THEIR STANDPOINT THEY INTEND TO ASK FOR A QUARTER, BUT UNTIL WE GET A WRITTEN REQUEST, WE'RE DEALING WITH HYPOTHETICALS.
>> MIKE, IF YOU COULD PASS THAT WORD ON TO THE PARK BOARD THERE.
>> I WOULD LIKE THE VERBIAGE IN THIS AMENDMENT FOR THIS ORDINANCE THAT HAS THE WRITING THAT SAYS THAT.
>> NO, THAT GOES IN THAT CONTRACT.
WE CAN MAKE THIS EXPIRE JUST LIKE THIS WHOLE ORDINANCE EXPIRES AS SOON AS THE HOT CONTRACT IS IN PLACE.
>> WHAT WORDING DO YOU HAVE, WORDING YOU WANT IN THERE MIKE?
>> I THINK IT'S WELL WRITTEN. IT WAS WHAT I READ.
I'M NOT A LAWYER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO WRITE.
BUT IF A CONTRACT IS NOT APPROVED BY MARCH 2023 OR AS NEEDED TO UNINTERRUPT THE PARK BOARD'S OPERATIONS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS AS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE PARK BOARD MAY MAKE A WITHDRAWAL REQUEST TO THE CITY FOR THE DELIVERANCE OF HOT FUNDS TO THE PARK BOARD.
THE DRAW REQUEST WILL INCLUDE A LINE ITEM LISTING OF EXPENDITURES.
>> WELL, BUT WHAT YOU JUST ASKED FOR IS IF THE CONTRACT'S NOT APPROVED, THEY HAVE A MECHANISM. THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN IF THEY NEED SOMETHING BEFORE THE CONTRACT GETS APPROVED APRIL 1.
>> BUT YOU COULD PUT WHATEVER CONSTRAINTS YOU WANT ON IT, DATES OR WHATEVER.
I JUST NEED SOMETHING THAT SAYS THIS IS HOW YOU DO IT.
>> MIKE, THAT ITEM WILL COME UP TO US AND YOU WANT TO PUT THAT IN THE CURRENT ACTION ITEM BEFORE US THIS AFTERNOON.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I JUST WANTED TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT IN OUR LAST MEETING ON THIS WITH BRYSON, HE ASKED THAT FINAL DETERMINATION BE MADE BY COUNCIL.
HE DIDN'T WANT TO TALK TO STAFF ABOUT THAT ANYMORE, BUT I THINK IT'S YOUR NEXT ITEM.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT PUTTING WORK AROUND SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH US.
>> WE'RE COMING TO THE TABLE FULL OPEN READY TO TALK TO THEM AND THEY'VE ALREADY TRYING TO TELL US THEY WON'T TALK TO COUNCIL, IT'S [OVERLAPPING] A VIOLATION IN AND OF ITSELF.
>> MIKE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AMENDING THE ITEM THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA TODAY?
>> BRING THAT FORTH AT THE REGULAR MEETING TODAY.
GET YOUR WORDING TOGETHER ON HOW YOU MIGHT WANT THAT AND WE CAN SEE WHAT COUNCIL'S RESPONSE IS THEN.
>> VERY GOOD. NOW, DAVID HAS BEEN STILL SITTING AND WAITING.
DAVID, GO AHEAD. YOU'VE BEEN VERY PATIENT.
>> THAT'S NOT OFTEN SAID ABOUT ME.
>> I WANT TO JUST BRIEFLY REVISIT SOMETHING THAT WAS A CONVERSATION WE HAD EARLIER.
I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH BRYSON THAT HAVING A BUDGET APPROVAL, HAVING FUNDING FOR Q1 AND Q2 DOES NOT FUND THINGS LIKE JUNE 10TH BECAUSE THAT IS IN Q3, WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED FUNDING FOR THEM.
THEY MAY HAVE THE MONEY IN RESERVES AND SO FORTH, BUT WE HAVE NOT FUNDED THAT ITEM.
REMEMBER, THEY DON'T BUDGET BY QUARTERLY, THEY BUDGET BY YEAR.
THEY HAVE SPECIAL PROJECTS, $297,000 AS A LINE ITEM AND THEY WOULD HAVE RECEIVED HALF OF THAT ALREADY.
THEY RECEIVED HALF OF THE 297,000 SO WHERE THE JIM 10TH LIES OUT, THEY'VE ALREADY GOT HALF THE MONEY NEXT QUARTER THEY'LL RECEIVE MORE.
EXCUSE ME JUST A SECOND MATE. THAT MAY BE SO, BUT ANYBODY WHO HAS EVER BEEN IN THE CHRISTMAS BUSINESS KNOWS THAT YOU DO YOU'RE BUYING IN JUNE, YOU DON'T DO IT IN DECEMBER.
IF THESE GROUPS ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH JUNE 10TH PROGRAMS, THEY NEED TO HAVE THAT FUNDING NOW.
THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T FUNDED IT OR PARK BOARD DOESN'T SEE IT THAT WAY, THAT'S SOMETHING IN THE AIR.
I'M MEETING WITH COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS ON MONDAY TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE CAN PROVIDE SOME JUNE 10TH FUNDING FOR THE WHOLE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OUT OF EXISTING CULTURAL ARTS MONEY.
I THINK THE CITY ACTUALLY HAS A LARGER ROLE IN ACTUALLY FUNDING THESE EVENTS THAN THE CBP DOES.
CBP HAS DONE A FINE JOB OF THAT, BUT I THINK THIS IS A CITY FUNCTION WE SHOULD BE TAKING ON.
I WANT TO BE SURE THAT NEITHER JUNE 10TH NOR JULY 4TH GET SHORTED BECAUSE WE'RE STILL ARGUING ABOUT THIS SO I DON'T DISAGREE WITH COUNCIL MOVING ON THAT.
THE PROBLEM WITH WRITING IT THIS WAY IS THIS SIMPLY PERPETUATES THE PROBLEM.
IT PERPETUATES THE PROBLEM BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONTRACT, WE KNOW WHAT WE NEED IN THE CONTRACT AND I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO START DISCUSSING WHAT IS RESTRICTED AND WHAT IS NOT RESTRICTED HERE PRETTY QUICK.
THAT SEEMS TO BE THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE
[02:25:03]
AND THERE ARE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS I HAVE WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT TOO.BUT I WILL REPEAT WHAT MR. MAXWELL JUST SAID.
CHARTER PROHIBITS COUNSEL FROM NEGOTIATING A CONTRACT WITH A VENDOR, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS AMOUNTS TO.
THIS SHOULD BE DONE BY STAFF AND PRESENTED US IN MARCH, THIS IS OUR CONTRACT.
FRANKLY, I THINK YOU NEED TO GO BACK TO YOUR CHAIRMAN AND TELL HIM GET TO THE TABLE.
IF THE PROBLEM IS MANAGEMENT OVER THERE, FIND SOMEBODY ELSE TO DO IT.
BUT GET TOGETHER WITH OUR STAFF AND GET THIS NEGOTIATED.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S MUCH NEGOTIATION TO DO.
OUR MINDS, OUR GOAL, WE'RE SETTING THESE PRIORITIES AND WE HAVE APPROVED THEIR BUDGET.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE DISAGREE WITH WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH IT SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RELUCTANCE, I JUST DON'T.
EXCUSE ME. JOHN, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? WELL, IT DEALS WITH MIKE'S AMENDMENT HERE AND IF THEY DO NEED FUNDS FOR THESE SPECIAL EVENTS, HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS BEFORE THE CONTRACT IS IN PLACE.
BUT BECAUSE I HEARD SOME DIFFERENT THINGS THERE MIKE, YOU SAID THAT THE CITY MANAGERS ISSUE.
BUT THEN I HEARD THAT YOU'VE TALKED TO BRYSON ABOUT THIS.
MIGHT REQUEST IT FROM BRIAN HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS, WRITTEN PROCESS.
I TOLD MIKE AND I SEND IT OVER.
DID YOU REQUEST THAT? THAT WASN'T EXACTLY THE THING.
WHAT I WAS TOLD WAS THEY HAVE 120 DAYS EMERGENCY FUNDS, THEY SHOULD JUST PULL IT FROM THERE.
I SAID IN THEIR BYLAWS, THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TOUCH THAT, THAT'S NOT THEIR PRACTICE.
>> I HAVE A VERBAL, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN ORDINANCES AND DEADLINES AND TIMELINES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT.
ALL I'M ASKING IS TO WRITE THAT PAY.
WRITE US A THING, WE'LL LOOK AT IT.
SOMETHING SIMPLE, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE HARDER OR IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE VERY LONG.
IT COULD BE A ONETIME SHOT, WHATEVER, WE'RE GOOD.
>> SOUNDS GOOD. MIKE, YOU WILL PRESENT TODAY IF YOU WANT TO AMEND THE CURRENT ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL DO THAT AND WELL, YOU'LL BRING THAT TO COUNCIL AND SEE IF THEY WANTED TO [OVERLAPPING] REPAIR THAT.
>> I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING.
I WOULD HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT THE CAPTION OF THE ORDINANCE THAT'S BEEN PUT IN THE AGENDA AND OF WHICH THE PEOPLE HAVE NOTICED, DOES NOT INCLUDE SUCH AN AMENDMENT.
DOES THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO AMEND THAT ORDINANCE?
>> NO, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND OUR CHARTER.
YEAH, WE'VE. [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE TO DRAW A VERY CAREFUL LINE.
BUT NOW WE'RE ADDING SOMETHING IN IT SUBSEQUENTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE CAPTION IS.
THE CAPTION APPLIES TO AMENDING TWO DAYS WITH A TRANSFER OF FUNDS AND PRESENTATION OF THE CONTRACT TO THE COUNCIL IT IS ALL IT SAYS.
I DON'T HAVE ANY WIGGLE ROOM IN THERE.
>> THIS IS ABOUT TRANSFERRING FUNDS.
YOU CAN STRIKE SOMETHING OUT, BUT YOU CAN ADD SOMETHING UP, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M JUST SAYING THAT I CAN'T IMAGINE A WAY TO MAKE THIS WORK.
>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TOO, IS THE WAY IT WAS LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
IF COUNCILMAN BOUVIER WANTED TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES, THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL AS A SEPARATE ITEM AT A FUTURE MEETING.
>> WE HAVE THE HAWK CONTRACT MARCH.
COUNCILMAN BOUVIER, YOU HAD THE RESTRICTIVE, NON-RESTRICTIVE DISCUSSION ON THIS ALSO.
DID YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? I'M PRETTY DEFLATED RIGHT NOW, GIVE ME A SECOND.[LAUGHTER] LET ME START OUT. EAVESDROPPING THERE.
THIS GOES BACK TO THIS ORDINANCE AND REALLY SECTION 5 OF 73, THE TRANSFER OF THE HOT FUNDS.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE REAL DISCREPANCY WAS ON THE NUMBERS WHEN CITY AND THE PARK BOARD CAME TOGETHER ON THAT.
[02:30:01]
WHETHER IT'S RESTRICTED OR NON-RESTRICTED PARK BOARD WE'RE SAYING THESE ARE NON-RESTRICTED, FUNDS, CITY SAYING THAT THEY'RE RESTRICTED. WHAT ARE THEY? I AM GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT.HOPEFULLY, THIS DOESN'T CONFUSE ANYMORE.
WE HAD A MEETING WITH SCOTT JOSLOVE RECENTLY, WHO IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE TEXAS HOTEL LODGING ASSOCIATION.
I WAS THERE. COUNCILMAN BOUVIER WAS THERE.
I'M GOING TO PARAPHRASE WHAT WAS [NOISE] CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT THERE IS NO CLEAR-CUT GUIDANCE IN STATE LAW, WHATEVER THAT DETERMINES WHAT THE CONCEPT OF RESTRICTIVE OR NON-RESTRICTIVE FUNDS. YES, SIR.
HOT FUNDS ARE PER SAY, MY STATUE RESTRICTED TO HOT PURPOSES.
HIS COMMENT DEALT WITH PROFITS MADE BY ENTERPRISES FUNDED WITH HER.
CORRECT. IT'S THE DEFINITION OF NON-RESTRICTED FUNDS.
IF THE PARK BOARD HAS A MAGAZINE THEY ADVERTISE THE CITY IN THAT MAGAZINE, AND SELL ADS IN THAT MAGAZINE, THAT MAGAZINE COST FROM $100,000.
IF THEY GENERATE, SAY, $10,000 IN INCOME, THEN THE PAKT BOARDS, CONSIDERING THAT 10,000 IS NON-RESTRICTIVE FUNDS, WILL NOT APPLY TO THE HOT TAX LAWS.
WHAT WOULD WE DISCUSSED IS THAT THERE IS NO STATE LAW THAT REALLY ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE OF RESTRICTIVE HARD AND NON-RESTRICTIVE MONEYS GENERATED BY HOT.
THE COMMENT WAS THAT MANY CITIES CONSIDER THAT CONCEPT OF NON-RESTRICTIVE FUNDS IS THE WAY THEY DO BUSINESS.
THERE ARE SOME FIT CITIES THAT DO NOT.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT IS DETERMINED BY THE MUNICIPALITY IN A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT.
OKAY. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I ACTUALLY DON'T THINK THE PROFIT FROM THE MAGAZINE IS WHAT'S REALLY DRIVING THIS.
I THINK THE QUESTION IS, IN THE FUND TRANSFERS, HOW YOU CLEAN HOT MONEY WITHIN THE FUND TRANSFERS? THAT I DON T THINK OTHER CITIES ARE DOING IT.
BUT THEN IF THEY'RE DOING IT, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT YOU TELL US OPINION ON THAT IS, BUT I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT THEY ARE NOT SEPARATE ENTITIES WITH PEOPLE'S MONEY DOING IT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE FUND SOMETHING WITH TAX MONEY, IT'S TAX MONEY.
WHAT COMES OUT THE OTHER END OF THE PARK BOARD IS MONEY BECOMES UNRESTRICTED.
TWO THINGS I WOULD SAY ABOUT IT. IT'S STILL THE PEOPLE'S MONEY, THOUGH THAT IS NOT APPARENT FROM THE WAY IT'S HANDLED.
SECOND MEANING IT SHOULD COME BACK TO THE CITY.
IT SHOULDN'T BE. THAT MONEY BELONGS TO THE CITY.
IF SOMEBODY IS TAKING OUR TAX MONEY, THEY'RE MAKING MONEY WITH IT OR THEY'RE TRANSFERRING IT BETWEEN FUNDS TO MAKE UNRESTRICTED MONEY.
IT'S STILL THE PEOPLE'S MONEY.
ANY OVERAGE BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE.
DOESN'T BELONG TO THE PARK BOARD.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PARK BOARDS ARE DOING WITH IT.
THAT DOESN'T FALL UNDER HOT RULES ANYWAY.
I UNDERSTAND HOW THEY'RE MANIPULATING [NOISE] ALONG WITH HOT TO CLEAN SOME OF THIS MONEY, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS.
WHAT WE'RE ON. CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE INTER-FUND TRANSFER AND HOW THEY ARE DOING, WHICH YOU SEE? OKAY. I SUBMITTED THIS QUESTION TO BRYSON AND HE WASN'T ABLE TO ANSWER IT BECAUSE I THINK THE BOARD DIDN'T WANT TO ANSWER IT.
I HAD THIS ON THE TABLE OF OUR LAST MEETINGS, PAGE 89, FROM THEIR BUDGET.
I HAD SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THREE INTER-FUND TRANSFERS THAT COME OUT OF TOURISM DEVELOPMENT.
THEY TOTALED $1.4 MILLION, 800,000, WHICH IS ABOUT 10 PERCENT OF THEIR TOURISM BUDGET, GOES DIRECTLY TO GENERAL ADMINISTRATION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW GAUSSIAN AND SO ON LODGING ASSOCIATION HAS ASKED FOR AN AUDIT OF THAT.
THAT'S JUST MONEY THAT JUST FLOWING OUT THE DOOR AND I DON'T SEE.
I WAS A TRUSTEE FOR THREE YEAR AND I NEVER UNDERSTOOD WHAT THAT WAS BASED ON [NOISE]OTHER THAN IT LOOKS LIKE 10 PERCENT OF THE BUDGET BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SEEM TO HAVE EXPENSES OUT OF IT FIRST AND THEN TRANSFER.
[02:35:02]
THE EXPENSES WERE PAID OUT OF THE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT BUDGET.BUT SECONDLY, THEIR MONEY BEING TRANSFERRED FROM TOURISM DEVELOPMENT INTO A COUPLE OF THE PARKS INCLUDING SEAWALL PARK.
HOW DO YOU GET TOURISM DEVELOPMENT MONEY INTO SEAWALL? [NOISE] IF I MISUNDERSTAND WHAT THAT SAYS IN THE BUDGET POINTED TO ME AND I'VE NEVER GOTTEN AN EXPLANATION AT ALL, I'VE QUESTIONED MR. WALTON ABOUT IT AND HE TAKES A SOMEWHAT HIGHER GENERAL VIEW OF HOW THIS ALL GOES.
YOU'RE TRYING TO YES, MIKE, SPECIFIC QUESTION.
THE ANSWER IS WELL, YOU SEE, DAVE? [LAUGHTER] I HAVE A WHY QUESTION THEN IF WE HAD MR. JOSLOVE IN TOWN THIS WEEK, WHY DON'T WE HAVE EVENT THIS EVENING? [OVERLAPPING].
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO SCOTT, HE KNOWS MORE ABOUT THIS.
HE WROTE ALONG THIS LINE, KNOWS MORE ABOUT THIS NEW BUDDY, BUT HE IS STILL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF A LOBBY GROUP, SO I RESPECT WHAT HE THINKS ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NECESSARILY NEED TO GUIDE LOW CODE BASED ON WHAT HE SAID.
[BACKGROUND] HE SAID THAT AS I UNDERSTAND THAT HE'S NOT 100 PERCENT SURE THAT HE WOULD AGREE WITH AWAY SOME OF THESE CITIES WERE DOING THIS.
LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION SINCE IT'S A POLICY ISSUE.
WHY WOULD WE WANT TO RESTRICT THAT MONEY? [BACKGROUND] BUT THAT'S A FINE QUESTION.
BECAUSE IF IT'S UNRESTRICTED FOR THE PARK BOARD, IT'S UNRESTRICTED FOR US.
YOU GOT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT I WOULD HOPE WOULD TRIGGER [BACKGROUND].
THAT'S WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE USING IT.
JUST TO SAY THAT MR. JOSLOVE SAID, IF THERE ARE EXCESS FUNDS THAT ARE UNRESTRICTED, IT GOES TO THE MUNICIPALITY, TO THE CITY? NO, HE DID NOT SAY THAT.
HE SAID THAT SOME CITIES DO HAVE A MECHANISM WHERE THEY IDENTIFY RESTRICTED HARD FUNDS AND THEN UNRESTRICTED FUNDS THAT ARE PRODUCED FROM HOT FUNDS.
[BACKGROUND] YOU SET THE FIRST TIME AND IT GOES TO VISIT MUNICIPALITY? YES.
[OVERLAPPING] IT'S ALL WITHIN THE CITY YOU CAN BEGIN WITH.
CAN I TYPE SOMETHING? I HEAR CITY MANAGEMENT.
YOU ASK WHY WE WOULD WANT TO RESTRICT THOSE FUNDS.
I'VE HEARD THESE GUYS SAY WHICH WE COULD USE HOT MONEY FOR THIS.
HE HAS THE AG OPINION THAT DEALS WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER AND BASICALLY SAYS, YOU PUT HOT MONEY, HOT MONEY COMES OUT.
SO WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE HERE NO WHAT THE CITY HAS.
NUMBER 1, [NOISE] PARK BOARD AND WE HAVE THE AG OPINION.
THE AG OPINION DOESN'T SAY THAT.
THAT'S YOUR ANSWER. WE'RE THE ONLY ONES PARK WHAT'S THAT MATTER? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESTRICTED OR NON-RESTRICTED FUNDS AND WHERE THOSE RESTRICTED FUNDS ARE USED FOR.
IN OTHER CITIES DEAL WITH ORDINANCE, THEY HAVE ORDINANCES IN PLACE.
THERE ARE ACTUALLY STATES THEY ACCEPT NON-RESTRICTIVE FUNDS OR THEY DON'T. YES.
YEAH. IT GOES BACK TO I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO DEFINE THAT FIRST BECAUSE WE [OVERLAPPING] IF WE BUY ORDINANCE BY FEAR COULD MAKE THE TRICKLE-DOWN NON-RESTRICTED MONEY THAT I THINK THE ARGUMENT WITH THE PARK BOARD WOULD PALE IN COMPARISON, WE'D LOVE TO JUST TAKE THAT MONEY AND POST TO THE GENERAL FUND OR WHATEVER ELSE.
[NOISE] I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THAT AG OPINION FROM 2011 SAYS ABOUT THE TRICKLE-DOWN.
THE HOTNESS THAT IS EXPANDED IS HOT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS.
>> WHEN I READ THE AG'S OPINION, IT DIDN'T SAY THE HOT EXPENDED IS RESTRICTED AND ANYTHING THAT WAS MADE AFTER THAT WAS EXPENDED IS STILL HOT.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE THAT SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
>> I WOULD HAVE DONE YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT MEAN?
>> [OVERLAPPING]. CAN I INTERJECT MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND? IF THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT ON THAT, THAT'S FINE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THE COUNCIL, WE, NEED TO DECIDE HOW WE TREAT MONEY,
[02:40:01]
TAX MONEY GOING IN.IS IT TAX MONEY COMING OUT, IS IT RESTRICTED [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT'S ALL TAX MONEY, I MEAN. THAT'S NOT A QUESTION THOUGH.
>> BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING] YOU HAVE AN APPOINTED BOARD DECIDING AFTER THE FACT WHAT TO DO WITH TAX MONEY THAT THEY'VE EARNED OR TRANSFERRED. [OVERLAPPING]
>> HAVEN'T WE TAKEN CARE OF THAT WITH THE ORDINANCE AND WITHIN THE CONTRACT THOUGH?
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE TAKE IT YOU'RE HOT BUT ONCE IT'S NOT HOT ANYMORE, I THINK YOU'D HAVE TO ARGUE WHETHER THAT MONEY EVEN STAYS WITH THE PARK OR DOES IT COME BACK IN TAX [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE DON'T APPROVE THEIR COMPLETE BUDGET?
>> WHY DO WE NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER THAT?
>> I WOULD THINK ANYTHING IN EXCESSIVE OF THE BUDGET WOULD REMAIN WITH THE CITY.
BUT WE DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT ON THAT YET.
>> LET ME JUST SUM THIS UP, IF I COULD.
YOU'RE DOING A HOT CONTRACT THAT'S GOING TO COME TO COUNCIL IN MARCH.
I HAVE NOT SEEN THE HOT CONTRACT, I PURPOSELY DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS CONTRACT.
>> IT'S IN YOUR EMAIL. I'LL WARN YOU.
>> IT'S IN YOUR EMAIL. I'LL JUST WARN YOU.
>> IT WAS SENT YESTERDAY. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'VE GOT A COPY OF IT ON THE COMPUTER.
>> BECAUSE THEY SAID THEY DID NOT RECEIVE IT.
>> I DID NOT KNOW THAT BUT ANYWAY, I'LL GUESS I'LL LOOK AT IT THEN.
BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS THAT THERE WAS 14 MILLION DOLLARS TRANSFERRED TO THE CITY AND THE CITY CONSIDERING ALL OF THIS MONEY IS HOT.
THEREFORE, THE PARK BOARD SAID FOUR MILLION OF THAT WAS UNRESTRICTED AND THE CITY SAYS NO, IT'S NOT AND THEY DID TRANSFER THE 14 MILLION.
>> NOW IN THE HOT CONTRACT THAT'S GOING TO COME TO US IN MARCH, I THINK IT'S IN THAT CONTRACT.
I HEARD THAT THE CITY CONSIDERS ALL OF THAT HOT.
THERE IS NO NON RESTRICTED MONEY.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL BE HERE TO COUNSEL IN MARCH.
>> BEFORE I WOULD APPROVE A CONTRACT LIKE THAT I WOULD WANT TO KNOW WHY WE ARE CONSIDERING THAT ALL HOT.
>> BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AG OPINION THAT SAYS HOT IN HOT OUT.
>> BUT THERE ARE CITIES ALL OVER THIS STATE THAT DON'T EVEN COMPLY WITH THAT AG'S OPINION OR DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
>> WELL, THERE'S A FUN POINT HERE AND THAT IS THE DEGREE TO WHICH YOU'RE DECLARING POST [BACKGROUND] EXPENDITURES REVENUES AND THERE'S A SUGGESTION THAT WE WOULD TAKE A FIVE MILLION DOLLAR BALANCE THAT EXISTED IN BOTH BEACH PATROL AND BEACH CLEANING AND TREAT THAT IS NON HOT BECAUSE A SMALL PORTION OF IT MAY ACTUALLY BE NON HOT.
ON A FIRST IN, FIRST OUT BASIS OVER A 20 YEAR PERIOD OF TIME, YOU'VE ACCUMULATED A BALANCE THAT IS JUST NON HOT.
WE'VE ALL SEEN HOW THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX JUMPED THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
UNTIL I SEE MATHEMATICAL PROOF THAT WHAT BRYSON IS SAYING IS THE CASE, I'VE GOT TO THINK THAT THE BIGGEST PART OF THAT BALANCE TODAY IS HOT BECAUSE THE REVENUES HAVE COME IN SO FAR IN EXCESS OF WHAT WAS BLANK.
>> IF IT'S NOT WHAT BE? I MEAN, WE GOT STUFF WE CAN DO WITH OUR MONEY.
>> THE REASON WE STUCK TO THAT NUMBER THE WAY WE DID WAS BECAUSE THE INSTRUCTIONS IN THE ORDINANCE WAS TO GET RESTRICTED REVENUE ACT.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS MR. JASPER SAID WAS THE MOST FASCINATING THING TO ME AND I'D HAD THIS THOUGHT WAS THAT WHEN HE LOOKS AT THE OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT THE PARK BOARD DOES THEY'RE ALL HOT ELIGIBLE.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY DO YOU NEED NON HOT REVENUE TO STAY WITH THE PARK BOARD WHEN THE ONLY THINGS THEY COULD SPEND IT ON ARE HOT ELIGIBLE?
>> I'VE ALWAYS FELT IN THIS DISCUSSION, MAYBE I'M OVERLY SIMPLIFYING THIS BUT THE PARK BOARD IS ARGUING FOR NON RESTRICTIVE FUNDS.
IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THEY SHOULD BE ARGUING FOR THE OPPOSITE, THAT THEY WANT TO PROTECT THIS MONEY OVER THERE.
THE CITY IS SAYING THAT IT'S NO, IT'S HOT.
IF YOU WERE REALLY LOOKING AT THE CITY, YOU'D BE ARGUING FOR NON RESTRICTIVE FUNDS THAT WE CAN USE FOR ANYTHING.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BACKWARDS BUT, HEY THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.
TO ME, I THINK IT WOULD BE IN THE PARK BOARD'S BEST INTERESTS TO CONSIDER ALL OF THIS HOT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THE PROBLEM IS THAT YOU HAD WHAT WE CALL COMMINGLING, WHICH IS NOT JUST CASH.
YOU CAN'T COMMINGLE IN A FUND ACCOUNTING WAY BUT THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOREVER.
BUT THE PROBLEM NOW IS, HOW DO YOU PULL THAT APART? IT'S THIS VERY DISCUSSION AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF SOLUTIONS TO THAT.
ONE, YOU DETERMINED FINALLY WHAT YOU THINK IS NOT HOT.
PUT IT IN ANOTHER FUND AND THEN AS THAT REVENUE COMES IN, IT GOES IN THAT OTHER FUND SO THAT YOU HAVE JUST HOT MONEY IN ITS OWN FUND,
[02:45:01]
OR YOU DECLARE THAT EVERYTHING IN THE HOT FUND IS HOT RESTRICTED.I MEAN, THAT'S ONE OR TWO WAYS TO ADDRESS IT GOING FORWARD.
>> COUNCIL, WE COULD GO ON FOR THIS.
>> I WANT TO BRING MY COMMENT FULL CIRCLE.
WE'VE NOW WASTED ANOTHER HOUR OF OUR LIVES. [LAUGHTER].
>> I DON'T THINK IS A WASTE OF TIME AT ALL. [OVERLAPPING].
>> RESTRICTED HOT FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT?
>> IT'S NOT 100 PERCENT TRUE. [OVERLAPPING]. WE RESTRICT THE $0.03 JUST TO INCREASE THE FUND AT CVP.
WE RESTRICT THAT [OVERLAPPING] IN THE CHARTER BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY RESTRICTED TO STATE LAW.
[OVERLAPPING]. BUT THE OTHER, THERE ARE CERTAINLY THINGS IN THE LAW THAT YOU CAN USE.
>> IT'S JUST THE $0.03 PER CVP?
>> COUNCIL WE'LL PROBABLY DISCUSS THIS MORE AS THE HOT CONTRACT COMES TO US IN MARCH. THAT'LL BE GOOD.
I THINK IT'S A VERY WORTHWHILE DISCUSSION BECAUSE THESE THINGS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND AS WE'RE MAKING OUR DECISIONS AND IT'S IMPORTANT THESE DECISIONS ARE GOING TO LAST FOR A LONG TIME WITH THIS CONTRACT COMING UP WITH THE PARK BOARD.
LET'S GO TO 3F, PLEASE. CHANEL.
[3.F. Discussion Of The Repeal Of Ordinances 22-073 And 22-074 ( Bouvier/Brown - 20 Min )]
>> 3F. DISCUSSION OF A REPEAL OF ORDINANCES 22,073 AND 22,074.
I WOULD LOVE TO REPEAL THEM, BUT THERE'S NO SENSE OF IT EVEN RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I CAN'T EVEN GET A SIMPLE EXPLANATION IN SOME WRITTEN DOWN ON HOW TO TRANSFER FUNDS TO SOMEBODY THAT'S STRUGGLING, AND YOU THINK THAT THIS IS ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE JUST CRIPPLING AN ENTITY THAT IS SUCCESSFUL, MAKING MONEY, AND DOING THINGS LIKE THAT.
NOW WE'VE GOT THEM STRAPPED UP, MONEY IS IN THE BANK, AND HERE'S A CONTRACT TO GET A SIGN, BUT YOU ARE NOT GETTING YOUR FUNDS UNTIL YOU SIGN THIS.
HAMMER OVER THE HEAD THAT'S MY POINT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY.
>> THANK YOU, MIKE. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3G, PLEASE FOR NOW.
[3.G. Discussion Of Homelessness Research And Recommendations (Brown/Robb - 20 Min)]
>> 3G, DISCUSSION OF HOMELESSNESS RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
ONE, I'VE BEEN ON HOMELESS POPULATION AND THAT DATE FROM THE TASK FORCE ON OUTCOME OF THE RECENT POINT IN TIME COUNT.
>> ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC COUNCIL, I THINK JOHN YOU HAD BROUGHT THIS BEFORE COUNCIL AND I THINK COUNCILWOMAN ROB HAD SOME ISSUES ON THAT.
HI MARSHA, HOW ARE YOU? HAVE A SEAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> SO THE COUNCIL HAD DIRECTED BRIAN AND I TO DO SOME RESEARCH AND COME BACK WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
IN THAT RESEARCH THAT WE HAVE DONE [NOISE] AND BRIAN AND I HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS ON THIS, WE HAD MET WITH MARSHA RAPPAPORT, WHO IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE HOMELESS COALITION HERE IN GALVESTON AND MARSHA IS AT THE TABLE HERE.
WELCOME, MARSHA, GLAD TO HAVE YOU.
WE HAVE MAPPED WITH THE PERMANENT ENDOWMENT FUND THAT HAS AN INTEREST WITH THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC AND IS ALSO MOVING FORWARD WITH SOME ACTIVITIES THAT THEY ARE MOVING FORWARD ON THEIR OWN ENTITIES THAT ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE.
WE HAD MET WITH THE INTERIM UTMB PRESIDENT, DR. MOUTON OVER THERE AND DISCUSSED THESE TYPES OF ISSUES WITH HIM AND THE ROLE THAT UTMB HAS WITH THIS.
WE HAVE MET AND BRIAN HAS MET WITH THE POLICE CHIEF ON THIS SUBJECT.
WE HAVE RECEIVED INPUT FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY HERE IN TOWN AND FROM RESIDENTS CONCERNING THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC.
TO START THIS DISCUSSION, WE WANTED TO KNOW WHERE WE STOOD WITH THE COUNTS ON THE NUMBER OF HOMELESS ON THE ISLAND.
EACH YEAR, THERE IS A PIT COUNT DONE, WHICH IS A POINT IN TIME [NOISE] DONE FOR THE HOUSING FOR HUD, TO PROVIDE HUD WITH INFORMATION CONCERNING THE NUMBER OF HOMELESS IN A PARTICULAR AREA.
THE HOMELESS COALITION IS THE HUD RECOGNIZED GROUP THAT PERFORMS THIS COUNT FOR THE ENTIRE GALVESTON COUNTY.
THE COUNTS THAT HAVE COME UP FROM THEIR JANUARY 26 MEETING, ARE THEIR COUNTS THAT HAVE COME UP HERE RECENTLY ARE SHOWING THAT WE HAVE
[02:50:04]
APPROXIMATELY 237 INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE CONSIDERED HOMELESS ON GALVESTON ISLAND.THAT IS UP FROM '22, BUT LESS THAN IT WAS IN '21.
>> HOW DO THEY QUANTIFY THAT? HOW DO THEY COUNT THEM?
>> YOU CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> THE WAY THIS WORKS, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME FRAMEWORK THIS.
I'M DEPENDENT ON TOURISM, [LAUGHTER] SO THERE IS A WAY TO FIX THIS, I'M NOT 100% SURE WHAT THAT IS RIGHT NOW.
IT'S A COMPLEX PROBLEM AND IT'S HAPPENING ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES.
IF YOU HAVE A BEACH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE HOMELESSNESS.
WE NEED THE BEACH FOR TOURISM SO WE CAN'T GET RID OF OUR BEACH.
LET'S START WITH THAT [LAUGHTER].
WE'RE NOT VENICE BEACH WHERE THEY HAD 22,000 HOMELESS LAST WEEK.
LET'S COUNT OUR BLESSINGS HERE.
WHAT HUD DOES IS PROVIDE A POINT IN TIME COUNT WHICH IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WINTER TIME, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO SHOW YOU THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS, UNSHELTERED MEANING LIKE A CARDBOARD BOX, OR SHELTER IN A SHELTER.
THIS TIME WE WERE ABLE TO GO TO THE MAINLAND AND WE HAVE VOLUNTEERS FROM THE MAINLAND, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ON THE MAINLAND WERE ACTUALLY HOMELESS.
A QUARTER OF THE 322 PEOPLE COUNTED WERE ON THE MAINLAND.
WE HAD SOME DEVASTATING VIDEO WHICH I WILL SHARE WITH THE MAYOR'S SECRETARY, AND SHARE WITH YOU ALL FROM THE MAINLAND SHOWING AN ENCAMPMENT.
THE BAD NEWS ON THAT IS ONLY ONE MAYOR TO MY KNOWLEDGE, MAYOR JOHNSON APPLIED FOR ANY FUNDS FOR THE HOMELESS.
THEY CAN ALL GO TO GALVESTON ROUTINE.
THAT OBSERVATION WAS 100% CORRECT.
THEY DO FEEL THAT THEY CAN JUST COME HERE.
I'VE ALSO HAD SOME ANECDOTAL I PULLED AFTER MY MEETING WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR, I PULLED OUR MEMBERS.
THOSE WHO DO DIRECT SERVICES WITH THE HOMELESS.
ONE OF THE BRILLIANT THINGS THAT CAME UP IN CONVERSATION WAS THE CITY MANAGER BROUGHT UP THE OBVIOUS, IF WE NEED TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION FOR PEOPLE TO GET OFF THIS ISLAND BECAUSE WE'RE CUT OFF FROM THE BUS SERVICE.
HOW DID THEY GET HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE? WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO ASK THAT QUESTION BY HUD, THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS WE COULD NOT ASK BY HUD, LIKE WHAT CITY DID YOU COME FROM? OF COURSE, HOW DID YOU GET HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE IF WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE GETTING YOU HOME? WE HAVE SEVERAL FACTORS.
UTMB WE AS DIRECT PROVIDERS AS A GRANT WRITER FOR THE CHILDREN'S CENTER, WE HAVE THE HOMELESS SHELTER FOR THE FAMILIES AND OLDER HOMELESS YOUTH.
WE DON'T HAVE THE EXPERIENCE WITH UTMB, THEY BRING THEM BACK TO US.
I WAS UNAWARE OF THE FACT THAT UTMB WAS ACCEPTING PEOPLE FROM THE COUNTY JAIL AND THEN JUST PUTTING THEM OUT ON THE CORNER.
I GOT CONFIRMATION FROM GULF COAST CENTER, THAT IS ALSO HAPPENING TO THEM NOW.
UTMB IS RELEASING THEIR PATIENTS AND PUTTING THEM OUT ON THE CORNER.
I ALSO GOT VERIFICATION FROM THE SALVATION ARMY THAT ST. JOSEPHS WHICH IS OUR ONLY MENTAL HEALTH OUTLET, IS TAKING OUR PEOPLE AND THEN DROPPING OFF IN FRONT OF SALVATION ARMY, OFTEN UNMEDIATED.
ALL THOSE OBSERVATIONS ARE 100% TRUE, I VERIFIED THEM.
THESE ARE SERIOUS PROBLEMS. I DID CHECK WITH JOHN PROCHASKA, WHO IS THE DATA GURU AT UTMB THIS WEEK HE SAYS, THEY HAVE INTERNAL DATA ON WHOSE POVERTY STRICKEN IN THE CITY LIKE THEIR FOOD DESERT MAP THAT HE DID.
THEY DON'T HAVE ANY DATA ON HOMELESS PEOPLE THAT COME AND GO.
BUT HE WILL WORK WITH US ON THIS.
>> MARSHA AND I ARE BOTH GRADUATES OF 1997 LEADERSHIP GALVESTON I MIGHT ADD.
ALONG WITH [INAUDIBLE] AND ONE OTHER PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE CITY.
BUT DID YOU COUNT THAT PEOPLE SAY HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE ARRESTED IN LAKE CITY, THEY ARREST THEM, BRING THEM DOWN TO THE COUNTY JAIL FOR 24 HOURS AND NEVER RELEASE THEM HERE AND THEY DO NOT COME BACK, DID YOU COUNT THAT NUMBER?
>> THOSE PEOPLE DON'T EXIST SUFFICIENTLY FROM THOSE MUNICIPALITIES.
THAT'S WHY THEY DID NOT APPLY FOR ANY MONEY TO HELP THEM.
THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO A SURVEY AND GIVE THAT INFORMATION.
>> THIS COUNT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RELEASED FROM THE PRISON [OVERLAPPING]
>> [OVERLAPPING] DOES NOT INCLUDE.
>> DOES NOT INCLUDE AND HUD WILL NOT PROBABLY
[02:55:01]
ALLOW US TO INCLUDE THAT PARTICULAR POPULATION.BUT ON AN INDEPENDENT SURVEY, WE CAN DO WHAT WE WANT.
>> HOW DO YOU KNOW, IF I MAY, HOW DO YOU KNOW IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THAT POPULATION IF YOU'RE DOING THE PIT COUNT?
>> BECAUSE WE SEND PEOPLE ON THE PIT COUNT.
WE SEND HUMAN BEINGS WHO ARE USUALLY MASTER'S DEGREE IN SOCIAL WORK.
WE SEND THEM TO LAKE CITY, WE SEND THEM TO TEXAS CITY, WE FOUND A WHOLE LOT, AS YOU WILL SEE ON THE VIDEO THAT WE HAD IN SAN LEON.
>> WELL I KNOW ABOUT IT, BUT IF SOMEBODY IS PICKED UP FOR WHATEVER REASON, DELIVERED TO COUNTY JAIL, AND THEN RELEASED AND THEY'RE JUST ON THE STREET, HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THEM AND SOMEONE WHO GOT HERE OUT OF THE HOSPITAL?
>> WE CAN ASK [OVERLAPPING] UNDER THE HOOD UMBRELLA.
WE CAN'T DO THAT ON THEIR DIME.
WE CAN ASK INDEPENDENTLY, BUT I'M ALSO I DID ASK THE UNOFFICIALLY LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THAT INFORMATION.
THEY ARE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO REPORT THAT INFORMATION IN A UCR REPORT TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
OUR CURRENT NUMBERS AREN'T THERE, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE A REPORTED THEM.
BUT I WOULD HAVE TO GET THAT OFFICIAL INFORMATION FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT AT OUR JAIL.
THEY WOULD HAVE THE POINT OF ENTRY AND WHERE THE PERSON IS FROM.
IN AN INDEPENDENT SURVEY, WE CAN ASCERTAIN THAT INFORMATION WITH THEIR COOPERATION.
BUT FOR THIS, OUR PURPOSE IS FOR AN INDEPENDENT SURVEY, WHICH IS GOING TO ASK PEOPLE.
PEOPLE THAT GET PUT OUT OF UT&B, PEOPLE WHO GET OUT OF THE COUNTY JAIL.
BY THE WAY, WE CAN FIND THE BIGGEST COLLECTIVE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT WE NEED TO TALK TO AT THE SALVATION ARMY.
THEY WALK FROM THE COUNTY JAIL TO THE SALVATION ARMY.
THE SALVATION ARMY, BY THE WAY, IS EXTREMELY UPSET BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW IF THE GUY IS A SHOPLIFTER OR IF THE GUY IS A MASS MURDERER.
THAT'S THE WAY THINGS REALLY ARE.
WE HAVE TO ENGAGE THEM, OUR TEAM, WHICH IS GOING TO BE BASICALLY EDUCATED PEOPLE WITH MSWS.
WE'RE GOING TO GET SOME ACADEMIC UNDERPINNING FOR THIS SO THAT THE NUMBERS ARE VERIFIED SO THE CITY CAN'T BE DISMISSED.
[OVERLAPPING]. LAKE CITY IS NOT GOING TO ADMIT TO YOU THERE'S EVEN A POOR NEIGHBORHOOD IN LAKE CITY, BY THE WAY. [LAUGHTER].
>> BY THE WAY. LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
WHAT GOOD IS IT GOING TO DO FOR YOU TO KNOW THAT THEY CAME FROM TEXAS CITY OR THEY CAME FROM LAKE CITY? WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?
>> [NOISE]. HERE'S ONE THING WE'RE GOING TO DO.
WE'RE WORKING ON A VERY SMALL PIECE, WHICH IS AN EARLIER CONVERSATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR FOR TRANSPORTATION TO TAKE YOU BACK HOME.
FIRST OF ALL, SOME OF THESE FOLKS WANT TO GO BACK TO LAKE CITY.
THEY WANT TO GO BACK, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT IN A NEUTRAL MANNER SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE CLASH OF MUNICIPALITIES.
LAKE CITY IS NOT GOING TO LET YOU LIVE THERE.
THEY DON'T ADMIT YOU THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>> THEY'LL SAY THEY DON'T HAVE ANY HOME LEFT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] NO THEY DON'T.
>> EXCEPT THEY'RE HERE. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE TAKING RESPONSIBILITY WITH THE HUD MANDATED HOMELESS COALITION, WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH GULF COAST CENTER, WHICH IS THE STATE MANDATED MENTAL HEALTH AGENCY.
THEY ALREADY HAVE A VAN PROGRAM.
WE'RE ALSO LOOKING FOR A WAY TO DO THIS COST-EFFECTIVELY.
WE WILL SIGN THE MOU WITH THEM AND THE RED CROSS, WHICH HAD A NATIONAL GRANT WHICH WE'RE TRYING TO GET REINSTATED.
WE ACTUALLY HAD A PROGRAM ON THE ISLAND TO TAKE YOU BACK.
THE NATIONAL RED CROSS PRIOR TO, WE WOULD INTERVIEW YOU, MAKE SURE YOU'RE JUST NOT TRYING TO BE HOMELESS IN ANOTHER CITY, AND TAKE YOU BACK HOME.
THAT IS WE'RE WORKING ON THAT PLAN OR ANY EFFECT.
I'M SUPPOSED TO MEET WITH THEM TODAY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO LOGISTICALLY DO THAT, BUT THEY'RE ALREADY DOING IT TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
ON THE OTHER HAND, WE DO HAVE TO HAVE LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORT.
THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED THAT WE NEED TO DO IT AS AN EXTRA JOB SO THAT WE DON'T GET BLED OUT [NOISE] FINANCIALLY ON THIS.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AN EX-MURDERER EITHER AND WE DON'T [LAUGHTER] WANT TO RISK OUR CASE MANAGERS, WHICH ARE USUALLY WOMEN TAKING YOU BACK TO TEXAS CITY AND THEN YOU MUG US.
>> IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE.
>> WE DON'T WANT TO BE PEOPLE WHO HAVE DONE SOME THINGS THAT I THINK AREN'T RIGHT BY JUST DUMPING PEOPLE IN PARKING LOTS.
>> WE OWE THESE PEOPLE THE RESPECT AND CARE WE WOULD GIVE ANY OTHER HUMAN BEING.
>> THAT'S WHY THIS PROCESS HAS TO BE IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE HAVE A RECIPIENT ON THE OTHER END TO TAKE THEM BACK.
BUT UNTIL WE CAN DETERMINE WHERE THESE PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM, HOW THEY GOT HERE, WHY THEY WERE HERE TO BEGIN WITH AND WE KNOW THAT THEN WE CAN BEGIN EXPLORING PARTNERSHIPS WITH AGENCIES AND OTHER CITIES TO RECEIVE PEOPLE BACK INTO THE COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY'RE FROM AND WHERE THEY WISH TO BE.
>> I THINK THAT TO ME IS THE NEXT STEP.
[03:00:01]
WE'RE PLAYING AND MARSHA'S DONE A GREAT JOB OF CONFIRMING WHAT WE THOUGHT WE KNEW, BUT WE'RE MISSING THAT PIECE OF THE PUZZLE AND HOW TO SOLVE IS WE KNOW YOU GOT DROPPED IN RANDLES PARKING LOT IN AN UNMARKED WHITE VAN. WE KNOW THAT.>> WE KNOW ALL THIS HOW THIS HAPPENED.
NOW, WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHY THEY DID THAT, HOW WE KNOW ALL THE IFS, ANDS, OR BUTS BECAUSE WE ALL DRIVE ACROSS THAT CAUSEWAY PRETTY REGULARLY.
NOW I'M NOT SEEING A WHOLE HOST OF PEOPLE JUST WALKING ACROSS THE CAUSEWAY.
WE KNOW THEY'RE GETTING PUT HERE.
THEY'RE PEOPLE AND I THINK IT'S JUST AWFUL THAT OTHER CITIES AND OTHER AGENCIES ARE DOING THIS.
THESE ARE PEOPLE AND WE'RE BETTER THAN THAT GUYS.
BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT LIKE THAT BREAK-IN IN MY DISTRICT ON THE SEAWALL WAS A HOMELESS PERSON.
WE'VE HAD HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN BROKEN INTO AND TAKEN OVER AND DESTROYED IN MY DISTRICT AND IT WAS DONE BY HOMELESS PEOPLE.
WHEN THEY'RE ARRESTED, DID WE FIND OUT HOW THEY ENDED UP HERE? BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING [OVERLAPPING] INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO KNOW.
>> THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY JAIL OR IS IT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY JAIL AT THE SAME PLACE?
>> WE NEED TO GET THAT INFORMATION FROM THEM BUT I WOULD NEED APPROVAL AND ALL THOSE THINGS AND THEIR COOPERATION.
I DID ASK ANECDOTALLY, FOR EXAMPLE, I FOUND THE EXAMPLE OF A YOUNG WOMAN FROM LAMARCK WHO GOT ARRESTED FOR DWI, WAS PUT IN THE JAIL, DIDN'T GET OFF FOR SIX MONTHS.
SHE WAS ARRESTED IN THE SUMMERTIME AND GOT OUT IN DECEMBER.
ONE OF OUR AGENCIES PROVIDE HER WITH CLOTHING BECAUSE SHE WAS IN HER FLIP-FLOPS AND SHORT ON.
[NOISE]. THAT'S AN EXAMPLE, THAT YOUNG LADY SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET BACK HOME.
SHE WAS ONLY GOING TO LAMARCK. THAT'S A PROBLEM.
>> NOW SHE'S HOMELESS HERE IN GALVESTON?
>> NOT ANYMORE. WE REARRANGED GALVESTON CENTER TO TAKE HER HOME.
>> WISH SHE HAD HOME. [OVERLAPPING] THIS CITY MIGHT NOT ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE HOMELESS LIVING IN GALVESTON CITY, BUT I'M SURE THEY DO [OVERLAPPING] EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE ONE WOULD GET PICKED UP FOR SOMETHING AND IN BROUGHT DOWN HERE AND NOW THEY'RE HOMELESS DOWN HERE.
THERE'S NO PLACE TO BRING IT BACK TO.
>> I COME FROM FURTHER AWAY [OVERLAPPING]
>> PEOPLE FORTHCOMING FURTHER WAY THAT.
>> WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO TAKE IT BACK TO?
>> WELL, [OVERLAPPING] HERE'S OF THE DEAL.
THE RED CROSS HAS A SCREENING PROCESS WE CAN USE.
IT'S NOT GOING TO SOLVE OUR ENTIRE PROBLEM.
THIS ISN'T A MAGIC ONE, THIS IS A PIECE-BY-PIECE PROBLEM.
WE CAN START WITH THE FOLKS WE HAVE IN OUR COUNTY GETTING THEM TO THEIR HOMES.
THE RED CROSS GRANT WE HAD WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES.
BUT AT THAT TIME WE'RE COULD TAKE IT TO THE 25TH STREET TO THE BUS STOP, THAT WOULD TAKE YOU TO THE BUS STOP IN HOUSTON AND YOU COULD GO HOME.
[LAUGHTER] APPARENTLY THAT GOT REALLY COMPLICATED APPARENTLY, EVEN DIRECT CONNECT CAN TAKE IT TO A PARKING LOT IN LAKE CITY.
DROP YOU OFF AND THEN YOU HAVE TO WALK FOUR MILES TO WEBSTER TO THE PARK AND RIDE AND THAT'S LIKE A HORROR MOVIE.
CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT? THE GUY IN THE MASS COMES OUT OF THE BUSHES AND GETS YOU ON THE PARKING LOT.
[OVERLAPPING] YOU SHOULD TALK TO WILLIS GARNDY BECAUSE WHO OWNS HOTELS ON STUART ROAD.
HE WILL ASK PEOPLE AND HE IS HAVING AN ISSUE AND THEY'VE BEEN HAVING THAT ISSUE ENTERING INTO THEIR LOBBIES, THREATENING AND SO FORTH.
IT'S WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND WE TALK ALL THE TIME.
BUT IT WAS ONE COUPLE THAT CAME UP WHO WERE HOMELESS THEY WERE FROM OKLAHOMA. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE GOT PEOPLE WHEN I WAS AT ST. FRANCIS HOUSE ON THEIR RED CROSS CAMP GRANT.
I WAS THE GRANT WRITER THERE FIRST, WHO WOULD SIT IN MIAMI.
IT ISN'T GOING TO SELL 100% OF OUR PROBLEM, BUT IT WILL GET SOME PEOPLE BACK HOME.
AS FOR THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, I WAS UNAWARE AGAIN UNTIL I WAS IN THIS MEETING THAT THE LEVEL OF AGGRESSION HAD INCREASED.
I CERTAINLY SHOULD HAVE ASCERTAIN THAT THE LEVEL OF AGGRESSION IN THE SHELTERS, DESPITE HOMELESS FIRST WHERE WE HAVE TO PUT YOU HRMLESS FIRST.
SOME FOLKS NEED TO GO TO REHAB BECAUSE WE HAVE KIDS IN THEIR SHELTER, THAT'S REALITY.
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON MORE AGGRESSIVE DRUGS HAS DRAMATICALLY INCREASED.
>> IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF HOMELESSNESS.
[03:05:02]
>> IT'S A DIFFERENT HOMELESSNESS.
THAT IS A LAW ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.
THERE ARE SOME GRANTS BY THE WAY, THIS GRANT THAT JUST CAME OUT FROM OJJDP, TO COPE WITH OLDER HOMELESS YOUTH WHO ARE CAUGHT IN THOSE POSITIONS.
THAT THEY CAN PROVIDE FUNDS AND GET THEM TREATMENT.
IF WE CAN FIND TREATMENT IN THIS AREA THAT'S AFFORDABLE, THAT'S ANOTHER PROBLEM.
BUT WORKING TOGETHER PIECE BY PIECE, I THINK WE COULD BECOME A MODEL.
WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT THE ONLY BEACH BEING INUNDATED.
HILTON HEAD'S GETTING INUNDATED WITH THIS WEEK AND WE'RE ALL IN TROUBLE IN A GROUP.
BUT IF WE CAN DEVELOP A MODEL THAT TREATS PEOPLE HUMANELY AND WITH DIGNITY, BUT ALSO IS REALISTIC ABOUT THE EXTRA PROBLEMS THAT COME WITH THIS, THE CRIME PROBLEMS, THE DRUG PROBLEMS THOSE ARE REAL TOO.
WE CAN BEGIN TO BUILD THIS STEP-BY-STEP.
WE STARTED WITH THE TRANSPORTATION PIECE ONLY BECAUSE BRIAN MENTIONED WHERE THEY COME.
[LAUGHTER] I KEEP GOING BACK TO THAT AS LIKE, HOW DID THEY GET HERE? BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET THEM OFF WITHOUT SOME COMPLEX SITUATION WITH A BAND AND GALVESTON CENTER AND THE POLICE.
WE'LL START THERE, IF THAT'S OKAY.
>> YOU BEGAN BY SAYING THAT YOU DO THIS PIT COUNT IN THE WINTER BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN THE FEWEST PEOPLE.
>> BUT IT IS. BUT IF YOU'RE HOMELESS IN MINNEAPOLIS AND THE WONDER YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM BUT YOU HOMELESS HERE, MOST OF YOU [OVERLAPPING] DON'T HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM.
>> NO, WE HAVE COMPLAINED TO HER ABOUT THIS.
>> NO, AND HUD IS IMMOVABLE ABOUT IT.
THEY'VE DONE THAT UNOFFICIAL COUNTS IN JUNE.
>> LET ME ALSO SAY THAT WE HAVE SOME GREAT ORGANIZATIONS ON THE ISLAND THAT ARE DOING GOOD WORK.
BUT I'M NOT SUGGESTING THERE IS A PANACEA OR SOME ONE SIZE FITS ALL SOLUTION.
BUT WE NEED TO HAVE EVERYBODY IN THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE MURRAY TALKS ABOUT WHO TELLS HIM TO SEE WHAT WE HAVE IS THE VERY SAME PROBLEM IN THE HOTELS, IN THE ALLEYS AROUND THE HOTEL DOWNTOWN, EXACT SAME PROBLEM.
AROUND BUSINESSES, A COUPLE OF CHURCHES HAVE HAD TO LOCK THEIR DOORS.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT IS NOT HOW THE SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE THESE GREAT ORGANIZATIONS LIKE SALVATION ARMY, CHRISTMAS, OUR DAILY BREAD THAT PERFORM ONE PIECE OF THIS FUNCTION.
THEY FEED PEOPLE WHICH IS ESSENTIAL.
BECAUSE MOST PEOPLE ARE JUST RIGHT DOWNTOWN WAITING IN MASS FOR THE NEXT TIME THE KITCHEN OPENS AND THERE'S NO INTERIM, THERE'S NO INTERVENTION.
THERE NEEDS TO BE A LARGER VISION PROGRAM TO DO IT.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE ORGANIZATION, I'VE HAD TO COPE WITH COVID AND AFTERMATH OF COVID WHICH IS MASS HOMELESSNESS.
OUR SHELTERS ARE OVERCAPACITY, EVERY INCH IS FILLED.
WE ONLY HAVE SEVERAL ON THE ISLAND AND ALL OF THEM ARE CAPACITY.
THAT HAS BEEN MY WORRY AND FINDING FUNDING HOPEFULLY THAT WILL BEGIN TO EASE THAT UP JUST IN THE PLACES THAT WE HAVE.
I FORESEE US MEETING WITH THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND BRINGING I WAS UNAWARE THAT PROBLEM.
I'M TOTALLY UNAWARE JUST LIKE I DIDN'T KNOW UTMB WAS [LAUGHTER] INVOLVED IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS.
ME I WANT TO SIT DOWN AND BRING OUR MEMBERS AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.
MAYBE THERE IS PART OF THIS KIT THAT CAN BE FIXED.
>> LET ME TUNE THIS MIC, MARSHA HAD HELPED BRING THIS TOGETHER A LITTLE BIT FOR YOU AND THE COUNCIL.
WHEN BRIAN AND I MET, WE CAME UP WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BRING TO COUNCIL AND I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THOSE SO THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THEM.
ONE IS MARSHA'S ALREADY OUTLINED.
WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE HOMELESS COALITION AND THE GALVESTON CENTER ON TRANSPORTATION.
FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS BACK TO THEIR POINT OF ORIGIN.
[NOISE] THIS INVOLVES GPD AS MARSHA MENTIONED, IT INVOLVES OUR MENTAL HEALTH OFFICERS AND OUR MARSHALS TO SEE HOW WE COORDINATE THAT SO THAT WE HAVE PROMPT HERE, PROPER SAFETY FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE TRANSPORTING THOSE BACK.
>> THEY ARE DEALING WITH A TON OF PROPERTY COMPLAINTS RIGHT NOW.
>> WE'RE GETTING A LOT. IN MARSHA YOU'RE WORKING WITH GULF COAST CENTER?
[03:10:01]
>> JUST SET THAT UP AND IF WE COULD GET A REPORT BACK ON HOW THAT'S MOVING FORWARD AND WORKING WITH OUR OFFICERS HERE AND EVERYTHING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO COUNCIL TO SEE THAT'S MOVING FORWARD.
GOLF COURSE CENTER IS GOING TO BE THE KEY TO THIS BECAUSE THEY DEAL WITH THIS.
THEY HAVE THE TRANSPORTATION AND THEY HAVE BACKUP RESOURCES.
>> PART OF YOUR OTHER GRANT THE MENTAL HEALTH GRANT.
>> IN THE MENTAL HEALTH HOUSE.
>> THEY'RE ALREADY WORKING WITH GPD.
THEY'RE ALREADY PART OF THIS PROCESS AND I WILL KNOW MORE AFTER I MEAN, WHETHER THIS AFTERNOON. [LAUGHTER]
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. THE OTHER THING IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE PERFORM A SURVEY PROGRAM THAT MARSHA MENTIONED, THAT THE PIT COUNT, THEY DON'T GET INFORMATION ON THESE INDIVIDUALS.
THIS WOULD BE A SURVEY THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH THE HOMELESS COALITION, GULF COAST CENTER, AND UTMB SO THAT WE CAN PUT TOGETHER A SURVEY AND KNOW WHERE THESE PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM AND GET SOME OBJECTIVE DATA ON THAT.
THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE CITY OF GALVESTON HAS FUNDING NOW THROUGH THE RESCUE PLAN.
IS THAT RIGHT BRIAN? THAT WE WILL BE INTERFACING WITH NON-PROFITS IN THE COMMUNITY TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO ASSIST AND SUPPORT ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY.
THEN THE LAST ONE IS AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MAY WANT TO DISCUSS A LITTLE MORE, IS ENHANCED ENFORCEMENT OF OUR CURRENT KNOWN ORDINANCES AND TO POSSIBLY EXPLORE [NOISE] ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GOING ON THAT ARE BEING DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY AT THIS POINT.
I TALKED TO BRIAN YESTERDAY ON THIS.
WE HAVE ORDINANCES IN PLACE THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO ENHANCE THE ENFORCEMENT.
>> WE HAVE SOME BUT ALSO, YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER NEW ORDINANCES LIKE YOU COULD MAYBE, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, I DEFER TO DOMINANT, BUT YOU WANT TO MAKE YOU MAY WANT TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO DEALT SOMEBODY HERE.
TO ME, IF WE CAN GET THE MAIN SIDE OF IT STOOD UP TO WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY BENEFITING GETTING THESE PEOPLE HOME, THEN YOU CAN STRENGTHEN YOUR ORDINANCES ON LOITERING AND TRESPASS AND THOSE OTHER THINGS, AND YOU CAN STRENGTHEN THOSE.
BUT YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE LOOPHOLES AND THEY'RE GOING TO FIND THEM AND IT'S HARD.
BECAUSE AGAIN, THESE ARE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS.
WE HAVE SOME ORDINANCES ON THE BOOKS THAT WE COULD PROBABLY DO A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB ENFORCING.
ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STRENGTHEN THEM AND REALLY GET THE RESULTS THAT YOU'RE DESIRING.
IN MY MIND THE RESULT IS TO DRIVE THESE HOMELESS PERSONS INTO THE SYSTEM WHERE WE CAN GET THEM WHERE THEY NEED TO BE.
>> MAUREEN, YOU HAD A COMMENT.
I WAS GOING TO AGREE WITH BRIAN THAT THESE ARE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS, BUT THERE'S A FINE LINE BETWEEN BEING A FINE CITY WHO HAPPENS TO BE A RESORTED ISLAND AND BECOMING THE MECCA FOR SOME OF US.
>> TOTALLY AGREE, BUT AN EXAMPLE, WHETHER YOU'RE HOMELESS OR WHETHER YOU'RE A MULTI-MILLIONAIRE, YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO WALK DOWN THE SIDEWALK, BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO SET UP AN ENCAMPMENT, AND HAVE ALL YOUR WEARS HANGING UP THERE ON THE SIDEWALK AND OBSTRUCT THE SIDEWALK, OR TO DEFECATE ON THE SIDEWALK, OR TO HARASS PEOPLE ON THE SIDEWALK.
WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ON HOW WE STRUCTURE THE ORDINANCES TO DO THAT.
THE OTHER THING WOULD BE I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANT TO GO THROUGH AND TRY TO GET AS MANY PROPERTY OWNERS IN GALVESTON TO SIGN AGREEMENTS TO WHERE THE POLICE CAN REMOVE [OVERLAPPING]
>> EVEN IF THEY HAVE THOSE, THE OTHER THING THAT A LOT OF BUSINESSES, AND I'D BE GLAD TO CHAT WITH THIS BECAUSE IT IS VERY MUCH A CONCERN OF MINE, AND I HEAR FROM BUSINESSES IN MY DISTRICT, JOHN'S DISTRICT, BUT THERE'S ALSO A TRESPASSING WARRANT THAT CAN BE EFFECTIVELY USED AND THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTING INFORMATION TO PULL NUMBERS FROM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HELPS A BUSINESS KEEP THE HOMELESS FROM ENTERING THEIR BUSINESS.
>> THE GOOD NEWS WITH THINGS LIKE THAT IS THAT IF WE HAVE ACTIVE ORDINANCES ON THE BOOKS OR WE PUT NEW ORDINANCES IN THE BOOKS, THAT WILL ACTUALLY ALLOW US TO PICK THESE FOLKS UP, AND TAKE THEM, I'M NOT SAYING INCARCERATE THEM AND MAKE CRIMINALS OUT OF THEM, BUT IF WE GET THEM TO THE JAIL, THAT'S WHERE WE CAN SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND WE CAN SAY, HOW DID YOU GET HERE?
[03:15:01]
WHY ARE YOU HERE? WHERE ARE YOU FROM? CAN WE GET YOU BACK HOME? IS THERE SOMEBODY THERE TO RECEIVE YOU? IS THERE AN AGENCY IN THAT AREA THAT WE CAN GET YOU TO? IT GETS THEM INTO THE SYSTEM, AND WHEN I SAY THE SYSTEM, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE JAIL SYSTEM.I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SYSTEM OF HELP WHERE WE CAN START SOLVING THIS PROBLEM.
I DON'T WANT ANYBODY THAT'S WATCHING THIS TO THINK THAT MARSHA IS GOING TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM TOMORROW BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A CITY THAT'S DONE IT YET, BUT WE CERTAINLY NEED TO WORK TOWARDS BEING ON EQUAL FOOTING WITH EVERY OTHER CITY THAT'S LEAVING PEOPLE HERE THAT'S JUST DROPPING PEOPLE LIKE STRAY CATS IN AN UNMARKED VAN.
I'M SORRY, THAT'S JUST [OVERLAPPING] UNACCEPTABLE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] CAN I ASK SOMETHING?
>> AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK.
THE IDEA HERE IS NOT TO PUT EVERYONE WHO'S HOMELESS IN JAIL.
MOST OF OUR CLIENTS ARE NOT CRIMINALS.
THEY'RE JUST HOMELESS AND THEY'RE HOMELESS FOR A WHOLE VARIETY OF REASONS.
AGAIN, AS BRIAN POINTED OUT AT AN EARLIER MEETING, IT'S JUST AN ENDLESS REVOLVING DOOR.
IT COSTS MORE MONEY TO INCARCERATE SOMEONE.
IT'S A HUGE BURDEN ON THE TAXPAYER.
WE DON'T WANT TO GO BANKRUPT WITH THIS BECAUSE WE'RE A TOURIST TOWN.
OUR MIGHT OF OUR MONEY, WE DON'T WANT TO [LAUGHTER] SPEND ON THE JAIL.
THAT'S NOT COST-EFFECTIVE IN ANY EVENT. THAT'S A.
B, WE ALSO NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE IN A STATE WHERE THIS HAS TURNED INTO A HUGE ISSUE.
HB 1925, THE ANTI-TENTING LAW, CAMPING LAW IS IN EFFECT IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
IT BECAME LAW LAST YEAR IN SEPTEMBER.
WE ALSO NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH THAT BECAUSE THE STATE IS LESS THAN FESTIVE.
THEY THREATEN TO TAKE YOUR FUNDING AWAY IF YOU DON'T TEAR DOWN THE TENTS.
I DIDN'T WANT TO UPSET ANYBODY, BUT WE ALSO HAVE THAT LITTLE ISSUE HANGING OUT IN AUSTIN.
WE ALSO HAVE OBVIOUSLY A LANDMASS PROBLEM.
THIS IS GALVESTON ISLAND, THIS AIN'T NEW YORK CITY, WE DON'T HAVE EMPTY HIGH-RISES TO PUT PEOPLE IN, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN ABILENE.
WE DON'T HAVE MILLIONS OF ACRES OF LAND TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING.
WE ARE ALSO FACING THOSE RESTRICTIONS.
IT'S IN OUR BEST INTERESTS TO BE VERY CLEVER AND INNOVATIVE AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITHIN OUR LIMITATIONS, AND WE DO HAVE A FEW.
I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.
THESE ARE PEOPLE, WE DO WANT TO HELP THEM.
THE FIRST PERSON I CALLED WAS THE RED CROSS AND SAID, WHERE'S THAT GRANT? WHAT CAN WE DO TO GET THAT? HE SAID, WE DISCONTINUED THAT.
WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NEEDED ANYMORE.
I WENT BACK TO THE RED CROSS AND I BEGGED FOR THEM TO REINSTATE THAT.
HAD WE HAD THAT THIS ENTIRE TIME, IT MIGHT HAVE NOT SOLVED THE PROBLEM, BUT IT COULD HAVE PUT IN A LITTLE INCISION IN THAT.
>> IT'S A FINE BALANCE BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, MARSHA, THESE ARE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE RIGHTS AND DESERVE RESPECT.
ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE'RE BALANCING THAT WITH THEIR INTRUSION INTO BUSINESSES, CAUSING PROBLEMS, CAUSING CONCERNS THAT ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO BUSINESSES HERE, SO WE'RE TRYING TO BALANCE THIS.
THERE'S PROBABLY A VERY FEW OF THESE INDIVIDUALS ON THE STREET PERCENTAGE-WISE THAT ARE DOING THAT, BUT BRIAN, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND IF YOU MAYBE COULD VISIT WITH CHIEF BALLEY, SEE AND BRING BACK TO COUNCIL IF YOU FEEL THAT WE NEED TO AMEND OR TO ADD TO OUR ORDINANCES IN ANY WAY.
>> DON, CAN YOU LEND ME EITHER TREVOR OR SOMEBODY ON THAT TO HELP ME WITH IT?
>> YEAH. WE SHOULD ASK THE DA TO SEND SOMEBODY TOO.
>> THAT'D BE MOST HELPFUL. BECAUSE IT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING AND IT'S GOOD TO PICK THEM UP, IF THEY'RE JUST [NOISE].
>> ALONG WITH THAT, COULD WE DO SOME CORRELATION TO THE INFORMATION WE MIGHT ALREADY HAVE WHERE THERE ARE TRANSPARENT WARRANTS BECAUSE I THINK YOUR NUMBER ON HOMELESS IS LOW.
>> COULD YOU TELL ME THAT NUMBER ONE MORE TIME?
THIS IS THE MIDDLE OF DECEMBER AND WAS 30 DEGREES.
THAT IS NOT EVEN REALISTIC FOR JIM.
IF WE DO A SURVEY, WE'RE GOING TO DO IT IN THE SUMMER TIME LIKE JUNE.
ONE THING I WOULD LIKE IS, IS THERE ANY WAY FOR ME TO GET PRONOUNCE OF COMPLAINTS OR THESE INCIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING.
[03:20:02]
>> [OVERLAPPING] WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, THEY'RE [OVERLAPPING].
>> BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS IS HAPPENING [OVERLAPPING] AND WE WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THOSE FOLKS.
YOU DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THE PERSON WHO BROKE INTO THE TWO MAN HOUSE HOUSE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WAS ONE OF THE VICTIMS, NEEDS TO GO BACK TO FLORIDA OR SOMETHING.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON ON THAT LEVEL, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU WOULD JUST FORWARD ME OR FIND A WAY FOR ME TO ASCERTAIN WHAT THOSE COMPLAINTS ARE, I WOULD LOVE THAT.
>> I HAVE TWO ON MY EMAILS RIGHT NOW, CAME IN HERE JUST RECENTLY FROM TWO BUSINESSES.
>> CAN I SHARE MY EMAIL WITH YOUR SECRETARY?
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE A COALITION EMAIL, NOT MY PERSONAL EMAIL.
THIS BECOMES CERTS TO GET AN EMAIL STREAM THAT'S OFFICIAL.
SAME WAY AS THE PIT COUNT, WE DO A MAP, WE DO LOCATION TRACKING SO THAT WE KNOW THAT I CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH THE STATISTICAL DATA SHOWING WHERE THIS IS HAPPENING, MAYBE HOW OFTEN THIS IS HAPPENING, AND GET SOME RELATIONSHIP GOING WITH GPD OR WHEREVER WE NEED TO GET THAT GOING WITH.
THEY HELP WITH THE PIT COUNT BY THE WAY.
WE'RE ENORMOUSLY HELPED WITH CHIEF BALLEY. IT WAS HELPFUL.
THEY DID IT IN AN INTRUSIVE WAY SO THAT WE COULD OPERATE SUCCESSFULLY.
WE WOULD NEED THEIR HELP AGAIN BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
>> JUST SO WE CAN WRAP THIS UP, MOVE ON TO ANOTHER ITEM, BUT JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE ARE BILLS BEING FILED TODAY THAT PREEMPT A LOT OF THE AUTHORITIES THAT WE WOULD THEN PUT INTO ORDINANCES TO STOP THIS.
THERE IS A BIG PUSH TO LESSEN MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES IN THESE AREAS.
WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO WORK WITHIN THOSE COMPETENCE.
THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPERATIVE TO HAVE THE DA AND DON INVOLVED IN IT AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. MARSHA, THANK YOU.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE DON'T WANT AUSTIN RUNNING OUR BUSINESS.
>> THANK YOU, MARSHA, VERY MUCH.
>> [OVERLAPPING] NOT THIS WEEK ANY WORSE. > THANK YOU.
>> BRIAN, WOULD YOU CHECK IF THERE'S CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE OR ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES THAT YOU COULD HAVE SOMETHING MERGE FOR US?
>> IF NOT WE'LL HAVE AN UPDATE FOR YOU.
[3.H. Council Updates (Brown/Robb - 10 Min)]
ONE, HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD.
TWO, INTERLOCAL CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD.
>> I THINK 1, WE BEAT THAT FOR WORSE TO DEATH, BUT NUMBER 2, I HAVE TALKED TO KELLY ABOUT THIS AND WE BOTH HAVE OUR BANDWIDTH STRETCHED ON THIS.
KELLY HAS ASKED THAT WE NOT TAKE ON THE INTERLOCAL UNTIL WE GET THE HOT CONTRACT DONE.
I AGREE THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH LOFTEN, BRYSON, ME, DAN KELLEY, KIMBERLY TO GO AROUND AND WE'RE STILL TRYING TO DO DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE IT ONE STEP AT A TIME.
AS SOON AS WE GET THE HOT CONTRACT FINISHED, WE WILL IMMEDIATELY JUMP IN ON THE INTERLOCAL.
>> MUCH OF THE SECOND FOLLOWS FROM THE FIRST.
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. VERY GOOD.
ANY QUESTIONS, BRIAN, ON THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC? BRIAN, JUST REAL QUICKLY, IN YOUR MIND, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HOT CONTRACT AND THE INTERLOCAL CONTRACT.
>> HOT CONTRACT IS VERY SPECIFIC TO THE FINANCES, THE INTERLOCAL CONTRACT IS VERY SPECIFIC TO THE OPERATIONS. TWO TOTALLY SEPARATE.
>> THANK YOU. JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. YES.
>> THE HOT CONTRACT IS DONE EVERY YEAR.
>> THE INTERLOCAL GOES FOR [OVERLAPPING] UNTIL THEY NEED TO DO THAT.
>> GOOD GRAVY, THAT'S A LOT OF WORK.
>> IT IS A LOT OF WORK. COUNCIL.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU'RE PREACHING TO THE CHOIR.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR TIME AND EXPERTISE TODAY.
WE'VE GONE THROUGH EVERYTHING IN THE AGENDA.
WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.