[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
[00:00:08]
GOOD MORNING. IT'S 09:00 A.M, AND I'D LIKE TO CALL THE WORKSHOP TO ORDER FOR THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26.GLAD TO HAVE EVERYONE HERE IN THE ROOM TODAY.
STAFF AND THOSE THAT ARE VISITING, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
OF COURSE, COUNCIL, GLAD TO SEE YOU.
ALSO, I LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE WATCHING THIS PROGRAM.
GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING.
WE HAVE GOT A BUSY DAY COUNCIL, COMING UP, SO WE'LL GET RIGHT INTO IT.
LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL, PLEASE, MA'AM.
>> VERY GOOD. ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT AND ACCOUNTED FOR.
VERY GOOD. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3A, PLEASE.
[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 (1 Hour)]
>> ITEM 3A, CLARIFICATION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS.
>> COUNCIL, I'D LIKE TO GIVE SOME GUIDANCE ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM THIS MORNING.
FIRST OF ALL, ITEMS 8A AND 8F ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA WILL BE DEFERRED TO NOVEMBER 16TH.
THAT'S ITEM 8A AND 8F TO NOVEMBER 16TH MEETING.
ALSO, COUNCIL, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS OF ITEMS THAT ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, LET'S MAKE SURE ALL OF OUR QUESTIONS ARE ANSWERED BY STAFF ON THIS CONSENT AGENDA.
THE REASON IS, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE, I THINK A VERY LONG PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION ON ONE OF OUR ITEMS THIS AFTERNOON, COULD GO FOR TWO OR THREE HOURS.
I DON'T WANT TO HOLD UP STAFF, SITTING WAITING FOR THAT TO BE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, LET'S MAKE SURE WE GET THOSE ANSWERED TODAY, SO STAFF WILL NOT BE HERE AND NEED TO STAY FOR THE MEETING TONIGHT.
ALSO, ITEM 8G ON OUR AGENDA, THAT IS, THE PROJECT AND THE PUD ON THE EAST END.
COUNCIL, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS AND CLARIFICATION ITEMS ON THAT, I'D LIKE TO KEEP THIS JUST CLARIFICATION ITEMS IF WE COULD.
IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS AND ALL OF THAT, THAT SHOULD BE HELD UNTIL OUR REGULAR MEETING THIS AFTERNOON.
THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION ONLY OF ITEMS ON THAT.
AS WE GET INTO THAT ITEM, IF WE GET TO THAT ITEM, AND THERE ARE QUESTIONS ON THAT, I'M GOING TO ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY, DON GLYWASKY TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS BEFORE WE START WITH THAT.
YOU DID RECEIVE A EMAIL FROM OUR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, DONNA FAIRWEATHER LAST NIGHT CONCERNING SOME OF THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH INCLUDES THIS ONE, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY MORE COMMENTS THAT DON WOULD LIKE TO MAKE BEFORE WE START THAT.
I WOULD ALSO REQUEST FROM COUNCIL IF WE DO WANT TO BRING ITEM 8G UP AT THE WORKSHOP.
IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, LET'S GET ALL OF OUR OTHER QUESTIONS OUT OF THE WAY ON THIS AGENDA, SO WE CAN FREE UP STAFF HERE TO MOVE ALONG AND THEN WE CAN GET INTO 8G ON CLARIFICATION IS OUR LAST ITEM ON THAT.
VERY GOOD. SAYING ALL THAT, MARIE, DID YOU WANT TO START THIS?
>> YOU CAN START WITH JOHN, SINCE I'M STILL GETTING MY STUFF OUT. [LAUGHTER]
>> JOHN, I KNEW THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. I JUST THOUGHT.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHEN FIVE BECAME ONE, BUT WE'RE GOOD.
>> WELL, I'M GOING TO COME BACK TO 8G AS YOU MENTIONED, JUST FOR SOME COMMENTS.
BUT I WILL START WITH 10A, RETIREMENT PLAN.
>> WE'RE BASICALLY JUST INCREASING THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY CIVILIAN.
>> CORRECT. WE CONTRIBUTE THE ABSOLUTE LEAST TO THE CIVILIAN PLAN AMONGST ALL THE PLANS,
[00:05:04]
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO GET THIS PLAN TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPETITIVE.I DON'T KNOW HOW FAMILIAR YOU ARE TO CIVILIAN PLAN, BUT THERE'S A CAP AS TO HOW MUCH YOU CAN GET AT RETIREMENT.
THE EASY THING TO DO WOULD BE TO GO AFTER THAT CAP, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BENEFIT JUST A FEW PEOPLE THAT MAKE MORE MONEY.
WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO ADDRESS THEM THE ACTUAL MULTIPLIER OF THE PLAN, SO THAT WAY THOSE THAT WORK THE HARDEST AT THE LOWEST END OF THE PAY SCALE WILL GET A BETTER RETIREMENT WHEN THE TIME COMES.
WE'VE INCREASED TO MULTIPLY, THIS IS TWICE NOW.
OUR GOAL IS TO GET IT TO BE QUITE HONESTY WITH YOU, TWO TO THREE, WHICH IS WHAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS.
EVEN AT THAT, WE WILL HAVE VERY FEW EMPLOYEES THAT CAP OUT.
>> BRIAN, WOULD YOU JUST VERY QUICKLY MENTION THE DEFINITION OF THE MULTIPLIER, AND WHAT'S THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> MULTIPLIER IS INFERABLY, BECAUSE I'M GOING TO REALLY SCREW THIS UP.
BASICALLY, YOU TAKE YOUR TOP FIVE AVERAGE MONTHLY COMPENSATION MONTHS AND YOU MULTIPLY IT BY THIS MULTIPLIER BY THE NUMBER OF YEARS THAT YOU WORK AND IT DETERMINES YOUR PENSION UP TO A CAPPED AMOUNT.
THE CAPPED AMOUNT IS THE REASON THIS PLAN HAS DONE SO WELL, AND IT'S SO WELL FUNDED.
WE ARE FUNDING WELL BEYOND NORMAL COST, SO THIS PLAN IS STILL HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
>> IN THIS PLAN, OUR LIABILITY.
>> UNFUNDED LIABILITY. THANK YOU, DAVID.
BUT WE GOT THIS DOWN TO LIKE 0.6, IS WHAT I READ IN THERE.
WITH THIS, IT GOES UP TO LIKE MAYBE SEVEN OR EIGHT, NINE, I DON'T KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> YEAH. THAT'S A CREDIT TO THE CAP THAT'S ON THAT PLAN.
BUT WE'VE HAD SO MANY OLDER EMPLOYEES RETIRE NOW THAT RETIRED UNDER THE CAP THAT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THAT MANY.
THERE'S PROBABLY FIVE OF US THAT HAD THE CAP, AND I DON'T WANT TO RAISE THE CAP, ESPECIALLY AS LONG AS IT IMPACTS ME, I'D RATHER HELP THE LESSER PAID EMPLOYEES.
>> DAVID COLLINS HAD A QUESTION.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
WE HAVE THREE RETIREMENT PLANS.
>> CIVILIAN. THEY OPERATE INDEPENDENTLY.
>> IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY OR ADVANTAGED GETTING THE CIVILIANS IN THIS TEXAS RETIREMENT IN THIS TMRS [INAUDIBLE] TO A MUTUAL [OVERLAPPING]
>> WITH NEW TALENT ON STAFF, THAT BEING [INAUDIBLE], WE HAVE ALREADY REACHED OUT TO TMRS AND WE HAVE BEGUN TALKS WITH THEM AGAIN.
HISTORICALLY, TMRS, THEY DON'T WANT PIECES OF YOU, THEY WANT ALL OF YOU, AND THEY WANT THAT TO BE COMPLETELY FUNDED.
A CIVILIAN PLAN, THAT IS QUITE FEASIBLE IN.
NOW THAT THE OTHER TWO PLANS AROUND CLOSE 30S WE ARE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
IF YOU COULD CONVINCE TMRS TO DO THE CIVILIANS AND THEN WE PHASE IN THE OTHERS AS THEY BUY DOWN, THAT'S DEFINITELY AN OPTION.
BUT IT'S SOME TIME OFF ON THOSE, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE TIME.
>> HERE'S THE WAY. BUT THE REASON I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE CIVILIAN IS BECAUSE I KNOW, NOT TO GO INTO SPECIFICS, BUT WE LOST AT LEAST ONE GOOD POTENTIAL NEW EMPLOYEE BECAUSE SHE COULDN'T BRING HER TMRS.
WE LOSE ON THE RECRUITING TRAIL EVERY DAY ON THAT, AND WE ALSO LOSE CURRENT EMPLOYEES WHO GET OPPORTUNITIES TO GO BUILD A MUCH BETTER PENSION.
THE CIVILIAN PENSION, I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S TERRIBLE, BUT WHEN YOU'RE CAPPED AND YOU'RE TRYING TO RECRUIT AT PROBABLY DIRECTOR LEVEL AND UP, IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE.
>> BRIAN, JUST WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS TMRS SITUATION FOR A LITTLE WHILE.
I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE BACK TO COUNCIL REPORT, AND LET'S LOOK AT IT.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM OBJECTIVELY WHERE WE STAND WITH THE TMRS, WHAT THE FUNDING IS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT, AND IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER DETERMINE IF THIS IS SOMETHING FOR THE MIRROR OR DISTANT FUTURE FOR THIS CITY.
IF WE COULD GET THAT DATA, I KNOW THAT AT ONE TIME THEY SAID IT'S ALL OR NONE.
>> THERE'S BEEN SOME CRACKS IN THE BELL ON THAT ONE, WHERE THEY'VE ACCEPTED A COUPLE.
I THINK WE HAVE AN EXCEPTION WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN GOVERNING STATUTES AND EVERYTHING ELSE, PLUS THE FACT THAT AS GOOD AS TMRS IS, IT PALES IN COMPARISON TO OUR FIRE DEPARTMENTS PLAN.
THEY WOULD NEVER WANT TO GET IT INTO THE TMRS. IT'S VERY GOOD.
>> IF WE COULD GET THAT ON OUR AGENDA SOON AS YOU COULD GET THAT DATA TOGETHER.
>> NOT ON THE RETIREMENT PLAN.
NEXT ONE WOULD BE 10B, THE SCOOTERS. JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE.
THERE WAS A NEW DEFINITION PUT IN THERE FOR A HANDICAP TYPE OF SCOOTER.
[00:10:02]
>> I GUESS THOSE AREN'T REQUIRED TO HAVE LIGHTS ON THEM.
>> WHAT ABOUT THE HANDICAP SCOOTERS? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
>> WE'RE JUST ADDING THE REQUIREMENT TO PUT LIGHTS ON THESE MOTORIZED SCOOTERS AT ALL TIMES OR JUST AT NIGHT?
>> THAT'S THE WHOLE THING IS THAT WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE TRANSPORTATION CODE AND I LOOKED AT IT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AS WELL.
WHAT WE DID IS WE WANTED TO MAKE THE SAME SAFETY REQUIREMENTS THAT THERE ARE FOR BICYCLES IS THEY WOULDN'T BE FOR MOTORIZED SCOOTERS.
>> JOHN, ON THAT. I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP AND I WANT TO THANK COUNCILMAN, FRANKLY, HE BROUGHT THAT FORWARD TO COUNCIL.
I READ THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE COUPLE OF TIMES.
I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW THE IMPAIRED SCOOTER IS INVOLVED WITH THIS.
>> GOOD MORNING. I'M SURE I JUST OVERLOOKED IT, BUT I READ THROUGH THIS, SHOW ME IN THE WHERE IT SAYS THE IMPAIRED SCOOTERS HAVE TO HAVE THIS LIGHTS.
>> THEY DON'T. WHAT WAS YOUR INTENTION?
>> WELL, THESE ARE OUT THERE AT NIGHT.
>> THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE IMPAIRED MOBILITY SCOOTER.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE WERE ABLE TO REQUIRE THAT.
>> THIS IS REALLY FOR THOSE WHEELCHAIR TYPE HAITI'S WORD VEHICLES BUT SCOOTERS BECAUSE THE DEFINITION WASN'T IN OUR ORIGINAL ORDINANCE.
I'VE PUT IT IN THERE JUST TO HAVE IT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE SOME OF THAT DEFINED WHAT IT WAS.
BUT I UNDERSTOOD FROM COUNSEL FRANKLY THAT HE REALLY WAS JUST THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT YOU WALK AROUND WELL, ROLL AROUND ON, I GUESS.
>> WE SEE A FAIR AMOUNT OF WHEELCHAIRS THAT ARE MOVING AROUND AT NIGHT.
>> MAYOR HAS KNEE SURGERY AND HE'S WORRIED ABOUT SCOOTER.
>> IS THERE SOME WAY TO BROAD BRUSH THIS BECAUSE NEXT SEASON IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T THINK ABOUT, SOMETHING THAT'S NOT DEFINED.
I MEAN, SO IS IT EVERY VEHICLE ON THE ROAD?
>> WELL, IF COUNSEL CAN RECALL, WE TRIED TO UPDATE THE CHAPTER LAST YEAR AND THERE WERE SOME ISSUES BUT WHICH TYPE OF SCOOTERS, CONTRAPTIONS, BIKES, NON BIKES.
I CAN BRING IT BACK AGAIN FOR A FULL UPDATE OF THE CHAPTER.
THIS REALLY WAS JUST TO ADDRESS THE LIGHT SITUATION.
>> YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THEM FROM COUNCIL, I THINK HIS POINT OF VIEW THAT THIS IS A BIG GAP.
>> BUT DO WE HAVE OTHER GAPS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT SCOOTERS ARE STRICTLY [OVERLAPPING].
I CAN BRING THE WHOLE THING BACK AND THE WHOLE CHAPTER DID TALK ABOUT DIFFERENT THINGS.
>> I THINK FOR SAFETY PURPOSES, LET'S APPROVE THE LIGHTS AND IF YOU WENT DOWN TO BRING IT BACK, LET'S DO THAT.
IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MY CONSTITUENTS WAS VERY WORRIED ABOUT IT.
>> I GET WHY YOU ADDRESSED THIS SPECIFIC THERE, BUT THE QUESTION IS, DO WE STILL HAVE THINGS ON THE STREET AT NIGHT OR NEXT YEAR YOU COULD HAVE THE NEW, LATEST AND GREATEST SOMETHING?
>> BUT SO IS THERE NO GENERIC WAY TO DO THAT TO SAY IF YOU ARE DRIVING A VEHICLE ON THE MOTORIZED.
>> YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE HOVERBOARDS FROM BACK TO THE FUTURE?
>> THAT'S PERHAPS A COMMON ONE.
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, AGAIN, THANK YOU TO OUR Q2 COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD.
JOHN, DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> VERY GOOD. IF WE WANT TO EXPAND THAT, WE CAN GET BACK INTO THAT AT A FUTURE MEETING. THANK YOU, DONNA.
[00:15:05]
IF I UNDERSTAND THIS RIGHT, WE'VE GOT 10E(1) IS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT WE SAW AT OUR PENALTY AND LAST MEETING.>> I'M SORRY, DUSTIN BENDER, DIRECTOR OF SOLID WASTE.
>> HE TOO TALKS ABOUT SOME ADDITIONAL FEES THAT IF YOU KNOW LOUD SO MUCH ON THE CURB FOR BULK PICKUP AND THERE'S FINES IN THERE IF YOU DO THINGS WRONG.
HIS PHONE CALLS. THEN E3 IS OF ALTERNATIVE TO E1.
IT'S LIKE, WE ASSUME THAT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL COST OF THE DEPARTMENT THE SAME TO COLLECT.
IT'S NOT TRUE, BUT IF WE MADE THAT ASSUMPTION AND SAID WE'RE GOING TO SPREAD IT EQUALLY BY CAR CUSTOMER REGARDLESS OF SECTOR.
THAT WAS THE NUMBER THAT WE CAME UP WITH.
>> BUT E1 DOES NOT RAISE THE COST ON RESIDENTIAL SERVICE AT THIS TIME.
>> BUT IT RAISED SINCE IT ON COMMERCIAL, NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL AND ON SMALL, IT'S INCREASING THE RATE.
>> WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. THIS IS A CROSS A BOARD QUESTION, FIRST OF ALL.
WHY DO WE ONLY CHARGE I THINK SIX DOLLARS IF YOU WANT ADDITIONAL CARTS.
>> WE HAVE PROPOSED SIX IN ONE OF THE ORDINANCES.
>> THAT'S RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL?
>> WHY DO WE DO THAT? WHY WHY WOULD YOU NOT? IF YOU HAVE TWICE THE WASTE, WHY WOULDN'T YOU CHARGE TWICE THE PRICE?
>> WELL, WE ARE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE CURRENTLY.
IT'S LIKE THAT. WE ISSUED TWO CARTS.
IF YOU SIGN UP FOR A COMMERCIAL CITY CART SERVICES.
SO IT'S A LITTLE MORE THAN DOUBLE OF THE RESIDENTIAL.
>> IT'S TAKEN ME OUT ADDITIONAL THAT AT THEIR REQUEST OR UPON THEIR NEEDS.
>> IT'S 53, 12 FOR 2 CARTS AND THEN CURRENTLY IT'S $5 PER..
>> I DON'T, UNDERSTAND WHY WE DO IT LIKE THAT. THAT'S ONE.
>> IT'S A REASON. IT'S A LEGACY RATE STRUCTURE.
WE'RE JUST WORKING OUR WAY THROUGH IT.
>> SO WHY IS IT NOT MORE USER BASE STRUCTURE? WHERE IF YOU USE MORE CARDS AND PAY MORE MONEY, I MEAN, $5 IF NOT MORE MONEY.
>> SINCE THAT FIRST ORDINANCE, DOES THAT YOU HAVE, WE'RE BASING IT ON THE AVERAGE, OR THE COMMERCIAL PRODUCER.
AND TYPICALLY THEY HAVE MORE THAN THREE CARTS.
AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT COMPARED TO THE RESIDENTS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT IT COMPARED TO THE TWO YARD COMMERCIAL SERVICE, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM SERVICE THAT IS OFFERED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
>> BUT AGAIN, YOU'RE JUST AVERAGING IN AND OUT.
AND SO THE COMMERCIAL USERS THAT MAY BE USING ONE OR TWO CARTS IS PAYING THE SAME RATE AS THE COMMERCIAL USER THAT'S BEEN USING FOUR CARTS.
>> BUT THE FOUR CARTS GUYS IS USING TWICE AS MUCH CASH.
>> BUT THE TWO-CART CUSTOMER CAN ALSO HAVE, FOUR CANS WORTH OF GARBAGE SITTING ON THE SIDE WHICH WE CURRENTLY COLLECT TOO.
>> BUT YOU COULD ALSO HAVE A COMMERCIAL TWO CART THAT NEVER USES MORE THAN ONE CART.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ARE BOUND BY CHARTER TO HAVE RESIDENT SERVICE.
WE HAVE GOTTEN IN FUNCTIONING LIKE OTHER CITIES.
THE REASON IT'S COBBLED TOGETHER THIS WAY IS BECAUSE OF THIS VERY DISCUSSION WE'RE HAVING NOW.
AND WE HAVE GOT TO OPERATE LIKE A LEGITIMATE CITY OR WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE COST ON OUR RESIDENTS.
I WOULD NOT, I HATE TO SAY THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE OF THE BEST TRASH SERVICES IN THE WORLD, BUT WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO BE AT A COST DISADVANTAGE TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO BID THIS OUT AND HAVE THE OPTION OF A HAVE ACCESS TO 1,000 TRUCKS BY WASTE MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT PICKS UP THE TRASH.
BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT UNTIL WE GET SERIOUS ABOUT OUR TRASH RULES, AND WE GET SERIOUS ABOUT CHARGING THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNTS.
THIS IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE A BURDEN ON OUR RESIDENTS.
>> BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE.
I WANT THE CITY TO COLLECT THE AMOUNT THAT THEY NEED TO OPERATE OUR TRASH SERVICE.
I WANT TO MAKE IT ON A USER BASE FEE SCHEDULE.
IF YOU DON'T USE THE SERVICE, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR THE SERVICE.
AND SO WE ARE IF YOU HAVE FOUR CANS OUT THERE, YOU NEED TO BE PAYING $120,000, BUT IF YOU HAVE ONE CAN OUT THERE AND YOU'RE NOT PROVIDING ANY ADDITIONAL COST TO THE CITY, THAT RESIDENT THAT HAS ONE CAN OUT THERE, YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE PERFECT SENSE.
[00:20:02]
>> HOWEVER, WHAT WE HEAR IS WE CONTINUALLY GET BENCHMARKED AGAINST OUR TRASH COST VERSUS OTHER CITIES, AND THE REASON OUR TRASH COST FOR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS IS MORE IS BECAUSE WE CONTINUE.
BECAUSE WE, WHAT THEY DO IN OTHER CITIES IS IS THEY HAVE ONE HAULER WHICH I BROUGHT TO YOU GUYS, YOU DECLINED.
AND THEY USE THAT TO SUBSIDIZE THEIR CURBSIDE RECYCLING AND TO SUBSIDIZE THEIR RESIDENTIAL TRASH COST.
WE HAVE CHOSEN A DIFFERENT APPROACH, AND MORE BUSINESS POSITIVE APPROACH.
MORE WE FAVOR MORE ON THE BUSINESS SIDE WHERE WE WANT TO EQUAL THAT OUT.
WE WANT TO GIVE THE BUSINESSES A BREAK.
WELL, WHEN YOU DO THAT, IT COSTS THE RESIDENTS MORE MONEY.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO BRING YOU A MODEL THAT PROBABLY 99.9% OF EVERY OTHER CITY DOES.
IF YOU WANT TO GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
WE'VE GIVEN YOU SOME OPTIONS, BUT JUST TO UNDERSTAND, YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HEAR FROM YOUR RESIDENCE AT OUR TRASH SERVICE IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN OTHER CITIES AND IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THAT WAY UNTIL WE BEGIN DOING WHAT MOST NORMAL CITIES DO.
>> COUNCIL LET ME JUST SAY WE'RE GETTING OFF INTO A DISCUSSION OF DIFFERENT WE NEED TO BE BACK TO THE CLARIFICATION OF THESE PARTICULAR ITEMS. AND IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS ALTERNATIVE WAYS AND FIND OUT ALL THAT, WE CAN GET IT BACK ON.
WE CAN DEFER THESE ITEMS AND GET IT BACK ON.
>> I'M TRYING TO MAKE SOME PROGRESS ON THIS AND NOT HAVE TO DEFER IT.
IF I CAN DO THAT THEN I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THREE DIFFERENT ORDINANCES IN FRONT OF US.
WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON TWO OF THEM.
>> ONE OF THEM IS AN ALTERNATE TO AN ORDINANCE.
AND SO IN STAND ALONE ONE THAT E2, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE IT MORE OF A FEE-BASED STRUCTURE, EVEN ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.
WE LOOKED INTO THE PAY AS YOU THROW, AND I THINK THAT WAS THAT WAS DERIVED FROM THE CONVERSATION WE HAD AT THE WORKSHOP AND SUBSEQUENT COUNCIL MEETING AND SAY TEMPORARY.
>> IS THAT TO TRY TO REDUCE COST ON THE RESIDENTIAL SERVICE SIDE?
>> WHAT IT'S TRYING TO DO IS TO COMPENSATE THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE INEFFICIENCIES THAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU HAD AN EXTRA GARBAGE, WHICH MEANS SOMEBODY IS IN A CART OR TWO CARTS RESIDENTIALLY, THREE CARTS.
IT IS SO MUCH MORE EFFICIENT TO HAVE ONE DRIVER AND ONE TRUCK CYCLE THOSE CARTS.
THE MINUTE THERE'S A BAG ON THE GROUND, I'M SENDING A REAR LOADER WITH THREE GUYS IN IT.
IT'S TO PROTECT THE COMPLIANT RESIDENT WHO HAS THE PROPER AMOUNT OF SERVICE AND THEN ACTUALLY CHARGE ACCORDINGLY FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE EXTRAS ARE UPSIZED OR, THAT BRING AN UNDUE BURDEN TO THE DEPARTMENT WITH GARBAGE AND LITTER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> IF I'M HEARING YOU ALL RIGHT, IT SOUNDS LIKE IF WE DON'T DO THIS, THEN THE RESIDENTIAL SERVICES IS GOING TO HAVE TO INCREASE IN PRICE.
IF WE DO DO THIS, WE STAY AT THE SAME PRICE.
WE DON'T REDUCE THE PRICE, BUT WE SAID WE ARE ABLE TO STAY AT THE SAME PRODUCTS.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WE'RE MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS.
YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER WE DON'T HAVE THE MODEL IN PLACE WHERE WE KNOW OVERLOADED CANS, EXTRA BULK PILES, WE'RE GOING TO GENERATE THE REVENUE THAT WE NEED.
WE WERE MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS BASED ON SOME DATA, WHICH IS, THAT'S HOW YOU START.
>> MY ONLY ASK IS, I'M OKAY WITH THIS, I THINK YOUR SCHEDULE HERE, WE'LL SEE HOW IT GOES AND HOPEFULLY WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CITIZENS COMPLAINING ABOUT HAVING MORE THAN A THREE BY THREE BY FIVE PILE OF BRUSH OUT THERE AND THEN THEY GET CHARGED FOR IT BECAUSE THAT'S BASICALLY THE MAXIMUM RIGHT NOW.
>> THAT'S FINE. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF CALLS ON THIS, BUT.
>> I'M FINE WITH TRYING IT OUT.
>> I THINK WHATEVER WE DO, WE'RE GOING TO GET THEM THREE GO IN WITH INCIDENTAL CHARGES.
IT'S GOING TO BE A FAIRLY HEAVY LIFT ADMINISTRATIVELY AND OTHERWISE, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ACCUSTOMED TO IT, THEY'RE GOING TO BE CONTESTING.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A FAIRLY HEAVY ADMINISTRATIVE OVERLOAD, BUT WE'LL GET THROUGH.
>> I JUST HAD A CONSTITUENT IN MY DISTRICT JUST THIS PAST WEEK GO, HEY MAN, THE CITY SERVICES ARE AMAZING, I CUT DOWN A BUNCH OF TREES IN MY YARD, AND I HAD A HUGE PILE OUT THERE ON THE STREET AND THEY CAME BY AND PICKED IT ALL UP.
>> YES, WE DO. HE WAS JUST THRILLED TO DEATH ABOUT IT.
AND IF HE WAS STANDING THERE WITH PICKED HIM UP TO.
>> HE'S GOING TO BE LIKE, WHAT HAPPENED? I JUST GOT MY TREES AGAIN AND THEY CHARGE ME 150 BUCKS.
>> WELL, IF WE GO THROUGH THE SECOND OPTION, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OUTREACH AND INFORMATION BECAUSE,
>> YOU'RE ASKING FOR US TO VOTE ON THIS TODAY, THE RIGHT, THE SECOND E2?
>> WE PRESENTED IT HERE, AND THAT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO VOTE FOR IT, BUT THE DEPARTMENT [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
>> BUT I DON'T THINK WE WOULD IMPLEMENT IT TOMORROW.
I THINK THERE WOULD BE A LARGE-SCALE EDUCATION PROCESS ON THAT ONE.
[00:25:04]
>> THE ONLY ASK I HAVE IS THAT YOU CHANGE THE COMMERCIAL SERVICE TO A HURRICANE FEE STRUCTURE.
IF YOU HAVE FOUR CANS OUT THERE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM CHARGING $158.
>> SO WOULD YOUR PREFERENCE BE TO TAKE THE 53, 12 WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND MAKE THAT THE MULTIPLIER FOR THE ADDITIONAL GAINS FOR THE COMMERCIAL?
>> WELL, UP TO A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE PRICE YOU HAVE IN HERE.
>> 129, WHICH IS BASED UPON FOUR CARTS.
>> IF YOU GET ABOUT FOUR CARTS, YOU GOT TO GET A DUMPSTER.
>> BUT THAT THE MULTIPLIERS NOT CORRECT THERE.
>> YES. $25 A CART, $26 A CARTON.
>> SO THE MULTIPLIER WOULD BE?
>> [OVERLAPPING] SO FLOODING DIVIDED BY TWO.
>> I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE CALCULATION. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF THE LITTLE PLACE THE LADY THAT SHE HAS COMMERCIAL TRUCKS.
SHE'S COMMERCIAL, THE LADY THAT DOES THE SEWING STUFF. SHE GOT ONE CAN.
>> I'M NOT AGAINST THAT EITHER. EXCUSE ME, MARIE.
I'M NOT AGAINST THAT BUT IF WE DO THAT, YOU NEED TO CHARGE THEM EXTRA FOR ALL THAT STUFF THEY PILE UP.
>> YEAH. WELL, THAT'S WHAT THEY'LL DO.
THEY'LL HAVE ONE CAN AND THEN THEY'LL PILE A BUNCH OF STUFF.
>> BUT I THINK THAT THE VERBIAGE AND THE CURRENT ORDINANCES AND THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS PUT IN SOME OF THESE ALTERNATIVES.
IT GIVES THE DIRECTOR OR THE CITY THE OPTION TO SAY, LOOK, YOU'RE PRODUCING WAY MORE THAN YOUR SERVICE AND YOU NEED TO PUSH YOURSELF.
>> JUST AS BACKGROUND AND THE WAY IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN THIS WAY LONG BEFORE I GOT HERE.
THE REASON WE ARE SO CHEAP ON SECOND AND THIRD CANS FOR RESIDENTIAL IS BECAUSE WE ONLY HAVE ONE DAY A WEEK SERVICE.
IN THE COST OF GOING TO TWO-DAY-A-WEEK SERVICE WITH THE SMALL OPERATION LIKE WE HAVE, WE'D HAVE TO DOUBLE OUR TRUCKS, WE WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE OUR STAFF, THE COSTS WOULD BE EXPONENTIAL.
SO IT'S CHEAPER FOR US TO PROVIDE THE SECOND CAN AND DO THAT AT A DISCOUNTED RATE. MARIE.
>> WELL, I HAVE TO SAY, I 100% AGREE [OVERLAPPING] WITH WHAT JOHN PAUL IS SAYING BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE HERE, AND THEN WE RECONNECT ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, WE WERE ROBBING PIDOR.
>> THAT'S HOW MOST CITIES DO IT.
>> PAUL, BECAUSE I'VE HEARD FROM A LOT OF SMALL BUSINESS.
ONE, FOR EXAMPLE, A CHIROPRACTOR.
SHE DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF TOURISTS.
WE HAVE A WAREHOUSE, WE HAVE NO TRASH, WE JUST USE IT FOR STORAGE.
THEN I'M GOING TO BE PAYING, I MEAN, I WOULD PAY IT OBVIOUSLY, BUT IT MAKES SO SENSE.
BUT THEN IT PRESENTS A WHOLE OTHER QUESTION THAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS.
A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS A BUSINESS.
A SHORT-TERM RENTAL CAUSES OUR BIGGEST TRASH ISSUES.
>> WELL, GO DOING IT YOUR WAY.
THEY'RE GOING TO GET CAUGHT UP IN THAT AND THEY'LL PAY MORE.
>> WELL, NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE THAT'S STILL THE RIGHT CALL.
IT'S CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL AND THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT MULTIPLIER.
NOW, IF YOU WANT TO PUT THEM UP ON OUR RESIDENTIAL, I'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S HOW IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW.
>> BUT PUTTING THEM ON FIRM RESIDENTIAL WOULD REALLY BURDEN OUR RESIDENCE.
IS BURDEN THE WORD YOU WANT THERE, BURDEN OR SHIFT THE COST TO.
>> IF I HAVE TWO CANS AND I'M HAPPY TO PAY THE FIVE BUCKS FOR THE SECOND CAN.
>> WE USE IT ABOUT ONCE A MONTH?
>> OH SAME BUT I'M SAYING BUT I MEAN,.
>> THAT'S WHY AMAZON BOXES IS GOOD.
>> BUT YOU CAN HAVE UP TO 4 AND.
>> THAT I THINK IS PROBABLY A BURDEN ON THE CITY.
>> WELL, I THINK WHAT BRIAN IS SAYING IS THAT MOST CITIES USE COMMERCIAL TO SUBSIDIZE RESIDENTIAL.
>> WE ARE USING RESIDENTIAL TO SUBSIDIZE COMMERCIAL.
>> BUT MARIE HAS A GOOD POINT.
I MEAN, THAT THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL THAT HAS FOUR CANS OUT THERE.
>> BECAUSE THEY ALWAYS HAVE BAGS THAT BLOW AND THEN PEOPLE HAVE TO GO OUT AND PICK IT UP AND THEY'RE PAYING THE SAME THING AS CERTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD, JUST ONE CAN.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. E2 ADDRESSES OUT A LITTLE BIT IF THEY HAVE THE BAGS BECAUSE NOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR THOSE BAGS.
>> BUT IT DOESN'T ADDRESS HAVING FOUR CANS OUT THERE AND ONLY PAYING FOR TWO CANS PLUS $5.
>> WELL, ONE THING WE COULD DO GUYS, IS WE COULD ALLOW RESIDENTIAL TO HAVE A SECOND CAN FOR $5 AND ANYTHING OVER TWO CANS.
AS THE THIRD AND THE FOURTH CAN FOR EVEN RESIDENTIAL SERVICE GOES UP.
>> I THINK IF WE DO THAT WE WILL NEED TO HAVE SOME INCIDENTAL FEES BECAUSE I BELIEVE WHAT PEOPLE WILL DO IS GAME IT, EVEN IF YOU.
>> BECAUSE THEN SHORT-TERM RENTALS, IT SHOULD BE MANDATORY FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS TO HAVE AT LEAST FOUR CANS.
AND THEY SHOULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL,
[00:30:04]
THEY SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS COMMERCIAL.>> BUT WE'RE PENALIZING SMALL BUSINESSES.
IT'S INSANE TO ME THAT WE HAD TRASH PICKUP EVERY DAY AND THE STRAND AND THEY WERE PAYING NO DIFFERENT THAN XYZ.
THEY WERE PAYING A LITTLE BIT, BUT NOT TO COVER.
>> THEY WEREN'T PAYING NEARLY ENOUGH.
>> EVERY DAY AND I UNDERSTAND WHY WE NEED IT.
BUT THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET A DUMPSTER.
>> ALSO WE'RE BENCHMARKING THE COMMERCIAL SERVICES.
[OVERLAPPING] IF YOU GO TO A COMMERCIAL SERVICE, YOU CAN SCALE BACK THAT COST PROBABLY LESS THAN EVEN WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING BECAUSE IF YOU ARE THAT SMALL OF A USER, YOU CAN HAVE THAT THING PICKED UP ONCE A MONTH.
>> I WOULD LIKE ONE MORE THING WE NEED TO.
>> I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING YOU NEED TO WHERE YOU HAVE SO MANY DAYS PER YEAR THAT YOU DO PICK UP BULK.
>> WE DO THAT BUT WE ONLY DO THAT MAYBE ONE OR TWO DAYS.
>> WE DO IT FOR A WEEK, WEEKENDS.
>> CAN WE PUT SOMETHING IN THAT ORDINANCE THAT SPECIFIES?
>> WE WOULD DO CHRISTMAS TREES TOO
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO REQUIRE YOU TO BOX UP THE CHRISTMAS TREE.
>> YES, WE DO THE SPRING CLEAN.
I MEAN, THAT'S PRETTY WELL UTILIZED.
WE'VE HELD OFF ON THE FALL SPRING BECAUSE WE END UP IF WE GET A FREEZE OR SOMETHING WEATHER-RELATED THAT DRIVES NEED FOR A LOT OF OLD PICKUP HOLDING OUT.
>> CERTAINLY IF WE HAD SOME TYPE OF TROPICAL EVENT OR WE HAD A WINTER STORM WEEKEND, WE CAN MAKE EXCEPTIONAL.
>> THAT A WHOLE DIFFERENT DEAL WHEN YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT REIMBURSEMENT FOR DEBRIS TANK GUY.
>> DO YOU HAVE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT.
>> IF YOU NEED THE LANGUAGE SHOULD GIVE YOU.
>> I'M WILLING TO WRAP IT UP, BUT I HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS.
ONE, YOU NOTE THESE EXTRAS AND BILL AFTER THE FACT THEY SEE THAT ON THE NEXT MONTH'S BUT SO YOU HAVE SOME DOCUMENTATION BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE WHY AM I NOT SUFFICIENT?
>> WE'D HAVE A PICTURE WITH THAT WOULD ATTACH TO THE ACCOUNT.
>> THERE IS SMALL PEOPLE WHO WILL KNOW THAT.
>> SECOND, ARE YOU ASKING US TO APPROVE 2 AND 103?
>> I THINK 3. I MEAN 3, WHICH IS SOMETHING I GOT OUT OF THE CONVERSATION LAST TIME.
>> LAST ONE. WE DON'T NEED THREE.
IF WE PASS THREE, IT SEEMS LIKE.
>> YEAH. I THINK MY DESIRE WOULD BE TO PASS DOWNTOWN SERVICE PIECE AND THEN THE BULK OF THE SECOND ONE. THAT WOULD BE MY LEGEND.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ONE, IT'S EITHER ONE OR THREE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I AM TRYING TO DECIDE.
>> IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE ONE, DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO CHANGE IT BEFORE THIS AFTERNOON OR DO YOU NEED TO DEFER IT AGAIN?
>> DONNA WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
>> DONNA HAS GOT PLENTY OF TIME. [LAUGHTER]
>> ALWAYS. I FEEL LIKE I'VE DONE EVERY SINGLE ORDINANCE ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
I DID NOT HEAR THAT LAST QUESTION, BUT I DID WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT, IS THAT THIS CHAPTER ALSO HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND IT'S JUST WAITING FOR DUSTIN TO GET TOGETHER WITH ME AND SOME OF THE CHANGES AND COMMENTS THAT I HAVE HEARD.
WE CAN TALK ABOUT AND WE CAN BRING A FULL ORDINANCE WITH UPDATES.
BUT I DO THINK WE JUST NEED TO FOCUS ON THAT THREE ORDINANCES THAT WERE PRESENTED.
>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE COMMERCIAL SERVICE.
ONE IS THAT THE FEE STRUCTURE FOR A CAN IS THE 50 SOMETHING DOLLARS THAT IT CURRENTLY IS AND THEN THERE'S A MULTIPLIER FOR UP TO TWO ADDITIONAL CANS SO THERE IS TWO CANS AT 50 SOMETHING DOLLARS AND THEN IT'S 25 OR 30 DOLLARS PER CAN AFTER THAT UP TO FOUR CAN.
>> WE'VE DONE BEFORE, I CAN GET WITH DUSTIN AFTER THE WORKSHOP TO COME UP WITH THAT LANGUAGE, IF THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE BULK OF COUNSEL AND WE CAN PRESENT THAT TO YOU BEFORE THE EVENING.
>> WHEN SOMEBODY AND I WILL SAY THIS ON TV, IF SOMEBODY GETS UP TO THE FOUR CAN LEVEL, IT WOULD BE THEM TO SHOP THE COMMERCIAL SERVICES BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET A BETTER DEAL.
BECAUSE THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR SERVICE, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET FOUR CANS SERVICE ONCE A WEEK.
THEY MAY ALWAYS SHOP THE PRIVATE SECTOR, WE DON'T WANT TO COMPETE AGAINST THE PRIVATE SECTOR, AND THAT'S THE OTHER THING AND I HAD THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE CHAMBER BECAUSE WE HAVE SEVERAL WAYS COMPANIES THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE CHAMBER.
[00:35:02]
THE OTHER THING I DO NOT WANT TO DO IS BE IN DIRECT COMPETITION WITH A TAX-PAYING BUSINESS IN GALVESTON.>> ARE WE ALSO GOING TO PUT IN THERE, THAT SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE CONSIDERED COMMERCIAL?
>> I THINK WE NEED TO BRING IT BACK AND LOOK AT THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.
THE NUMBER OF CANS AND THE PRICE PER CANS.
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE AND THAT IS NOT CONTEMPLATED ANY CHANGES.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO BRING THEM BACK.
>> IF WE WANT TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA, WE CAN.
BUT THAT OPENS UP NOT ONLY TRASH PICKUP, WE MOVE INTO SHORT-TERM RENTALS, MOVING INTO COMMERCIAL, THAT OPENS UP A WHOLE OTHER.
>> I JUST LOVE OPEN UP [LAUGHTER] SO MUCH FUN.
>> SAME WE GET TO SPEND MORE HOURS HERE FOR FREE.
>> MARIE, LET ME. YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IN THE FUTURE MEETING TO MOVE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL DISCUSSION FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THE SECOND GLOBALLY OR WE JUST DISCUSS IT AS.
>> WELL, NO, BUT IF WE GO TO TRASH, WE NEED TO DISCUSS WITH LEGAL THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO. WE CAN DISCUSS THAT, BUT SOME APPOINTED DISCUSSION.
>> SO THAT WE DON'T GO THROUGH THE WHOLE MORNING ON TRASH DISCUSSION.
>> I WOULD DO THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> LIFE. VERY GOOD. JOHN, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTIONS IN YOUR DIRECTION ANSWERED ON THAT?
>> VERY GOOD. WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE ON THAT AND ANY OTHER THING? [NOISE]
>> THANK YOU. IT WAS NICE TALKING TRASH ABOUT IT.
>> DUSTIN, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.
ALL OF THIS IS BASED ON THE FINANCES OF THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT AND SO FORTH.
HAVE YOU RUN THE NUMBERS TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT SHOULD BE SO THAT WE'RE IN HERE MAKING THESE DECISIONS.
>> THAT'S WHAT HE'S GOT TO DO. THAT'S WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO RIGHT NOW.
>> YOU NEED TO RUN THOSE NUMBERS.
I DON'T WANT TO MAKE A DECISION, AND LET'S DO THIS AND THAT.
>> LIKE WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS, IS THIS GOING TO PRECIPITATE? IF ALL OF A SUDDEN NOW EVERYBODY'S GOING TO SAY, WELL THE HELL WITH THIS, I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO TWO CANS, AND I'LL JUST PAY THE PENALTY, AND THEN WE START GETTING OVERWHELMED WITH TRYING TO ASSESS PENALTIES, AND COLLECT PENALTIES, AND ALL THAT.
>> THEN AGAIN, I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY WITH THAT VERBIAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THAT WE CAN ENCOURAGE THEM TO CHANGE THE SERVICE LEVELS, WHETHER THAT'S WITH OUR EQUIPMENT OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR THOUGHTS ON CHANGING THESE FEES COVER THE FINANCIAL GOALS.
>> I THINK WITH THE PENALTIES, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WISH WE'D HAVE GONE THE OTHER ROUTE.
>> I THINK WE'LL, PROBABLY OVER THE COURSE OF ABOUT SIX MONTHS, MAYOR BROWN, BECAUSE WE'VE THE SOPS IN PLACE WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY IN SYNC WITH THE FIELD, AND BILLING, AND CUSTOMER SERVICE.
I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY ON A PRETTY GOOD PATH IF NOTHING ELSE.
IF WE GET PEOPLE ACCUSTOMED TO PUTTING THEIR EXTRA GARBAGE IN AN ADDITIONAL CART FOR $5 OR $6 A MONTH, WHATEVER WE DECIDE, WE GET THE OPERATIONAL SAVINGS WHERE WE'RE NOT PICKING UP A BUNCH OF STUFF ON THE GROUND WITH A THREE-PERSON TRUCK.
>> I THINK THERE'S BENEFITS ALL ACROSS THE BOARD.
>> I MEAN, OUR RESIDENTS REALLY DO FEEL LIKE THEY'RE BEING BURDENED BY SHORT-TERM RENTALS, BY LIKE DRAINAGE COST, THIS COST, THAT COST.
WE'RE SAYING WE'RE LOWERING TAXES, WHICH WE DIDN'T, AND THEN WE'RE ADDING ALL THESE EXTRA CHARGES, SO I THINK WE NEED TO BE VERY [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SERVICES.
>> WELL, WE'RE ACTUALLY PROVIDING LESS SERVICE NOW ON A HIGHER PRAISE.
>> HOW ARE WE PROVIDING LESS SERVICE?
>> BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO PICK UP THE RIDICULOUS STUFF.
>> NO, WE'RE GOING TO PICK IT OUT, BUT THEY'RE JUST GOING TO PAY FOR IT.
>> YOU KNOW, I'VE TOLD YOU BEFORE AND I HAVE CALLED BRIAN AND SAID, I'M WATCHING THE TRASH GUYS PICK UP THINGS THEY SHOULDN'T BE PICKING UP.
CALL THEM AND TELL THEM TO STOP.
>> IT'S VERY DIFFICULT WHEN YOU'RE IN THE FIELD WITH THESE GENTLEMEN.
>> RIDICULOUSNESS IS EXPENSIVE.
>> THANK YOU GUYS. JOHN, ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?
>> EACH ACCESS ON 10F? THAT'S ON OUR WORKSHOP, RIGHT? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THAT BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THIS PRESENTATION IN PLANNING, BUT THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN WE SAW LAST TIME AT COUNCIL, CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. COUNCIL RESOURCES MANAGER.
>> MY FIRST QUESTION, THE SPECIAL USE AREA.
ARE WE ELIMINATING A WHOLE SPECIAL USE AREA ONLY THE 1,000 FEET AND REPLACING IT AS ELSEWHERE?
[00:40:03]
SO WE STILL HAVE 1,000 FEET ON THE EAST SIDE OF STEWART BEACH?THANKS. THAT'S REALLY MY ONLY QUESTION.
>> I HAVE. WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH THE CARTS IN BERMUDA BEACH? EXPLAIN TO ME BECAUSE THEY'RE THINGS THAT HAS TO DO WITH BERMUDA BEACH.
>> THE CHANGES IN HERE, THESE WERE WHAT WERE AGREED UPON BEFORE I CAME ON BOARD.
THE TWO YEARS THAT TIM AND CATHERINE WORKED WITH GLO TO GET US BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
THIS IS LANGUAGE THAT WHEN WE SENT UP THE THREE AMENDMENTS AT THAT TIME, WE WERE BEING TOLD THAT WE DID NOT HAVE TO SEND THIS LANGUAGE UP AT THE TIME.
BUT IT CAME BACK. WHEN I SENT UP OUR PLAN, THIS LANGUAGE IS WHAT THEY HAD IN TRACK CHANGES.
THIS IS WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE.
THE BERMUDA BEACH, THEY'VE REMOVED SOME OF THE PARKING ALONG THE BERMUDA BEACH ROAD DRIVE, AND THEY WIDENED OUT THE ON-BEACH ACCESS.
THERE'S STILL PARKING THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT THEN THEY ACTUALLY WIDENED SOME OF THAT.
>> BECAUSE THAT ROAD NOT BEING THERE.
>> WE'RE GOING TO GO. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING TO PARK CARS IN AREAS THAT [INAUDIBLE].
ONCE WE GET THESE PASSED, WE NEED TO JUMP ON THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
BECAUSE THERE ISN'T TWO ROADS IN BERMUDA BEACH, THERE'S ONE ROAD.
>> IF WE PASS THIS TODAY, THIS WILL BE SENT UP TO GLO, WE'LL APPROVE IT.
[LAUGHTER] FOR A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME.
[LAUGHTER] WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE TOO.
BERMUDA BEACH BEING ONE OF THEM BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S PLANNED IN THAT AREA.
THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE SOME OF THAT PARKING.
>> THE OTHER THING THAT WE'LL BE WORKING ON WITH OUR PLAN TO GET IT MORE IS VERY COBBLED TOGETHER, AND WE'RE GOING TO START WORKING ON CLEANING UP MORE OF THE LANGUAGE.
WE'VE GOT SOME CONTRADICTORY LANGUAGE IN THERE.
>> I'LL JUST MENTION IT BECAUSE I DON T THINK IT WAS LIKE THIS WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED TO US LAST TIME BUT WE ARE ADDING 300 SPACES TO STEWART BEACH NOW FOR FREE PARKING.
>> [OVERLAPPING] STRAIGHT UP FREE PARKING?
>> OUR EROSION RESPONSE PLAN WAS PASSED, I THINK, IN 2014 SAID THERE WAS 2,600 PARKING SPACES ALONG THE SEAWALL.
SUBSEQUENT SURVEYS SAID THAT THERE WAS ONLY 1,993.
THE GLO, CITY, AND THE PARK BOARD WORKED AT ESTABLISHING THAT PARKING LOT AT STEWART BEACH WITH THE 300 ADDITIONAL PARKING.
>> IT WAS 256 AND WE HAVE SOME SURPLUS.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED WAS IS THEY JUST MEASURED THE SEAWALL AND DIVIDED IT, AND THEY DIDN'T TAKE OUT THAT AT THE INTERSECTIONS, YOU CAN'T PARK CARS, THERE'S THE PARKING FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
WE HAVE TO SPACE BACK ON CORNERS, BUS STOPS.
ALL THOSE THINGS WE HAD TO ACCOMMODATE.
>> YEAH. QUICK COMMENT. I WANT TO NOTE FOR THE PUBLIC'S BENEFIT THAT WE'RE ADDING, IF I READ THIS CORRECTLY, 500 NEW FEET OF HANDICAP ACCESS ON THE WESTERN EXTENT OF STEWART BEACH. SOMETHING I KNOW.
>>YOU WILL SEE THAT GRAPHICALLY WHEN [OVERLAPPING]
>> POCKET PARK 1 AND AT POCKET PARK 3, TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE 1,000 FEET THAT IS BEING REMOVED.
>> ADDING SOME HANDICAP ACCESS TO THE WESTERN OF THE STEWART BEACH WOULD BE SOMETHING I KNOW THE PARK BOARD TRUSTEES HAVE CONTEMPLATED MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST.
I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT WE'RE DOING THAT.
SECOND, I WANT TO PUSH BACK ON SOME PUBLIC PERCEPTION ABOUT OUR CONVERSATION WITH THE GLO.
I THINK IT HAS BEEN IMPROPERLY REPORTED AND COMMENTED ON IN THE PAST.
TO ME, IT LOOKS LIKE GLO IS BEING A GREAT PARTNER ON THIS THAT THEY'VE WORKED WITH.
>> WE HAD THE BEST WORKING RELATIONSHIP WE EVER HAD.
>> DAVID GREEN, AND THE COMMISSIONER, AND THE [INAUDIBLE] HAVE BEEN FANTASTIC TO WORK WITH.
>> I JUST HAVE TO SAY THIS. ALL THIS CHANGE HAS COME ABOUT SINCE COMMISSIONER BUCKINGHAM TOOK OFFICE.
BUT I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT THEY'RE NOT SLAPPING DOWN IDEAS.
[00:45:04]
THEY'VE BEEN A PARTNER IN DISCUSSING THIS.>> THE BIGGEST PLUS TO COMMISSIONER BUCKINGHAM IS SHE REALIZES THAT ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.
THE COAST CHANGES AS YOU MOVE UP AND DOWN THE COAST, AND WHAT WORKS IN ONE AREA MAY NOT WORK FOR US AND VICE VERSA.
>> THAT'S NEW, GLAD TO HEAR THAT.
>> JUST ONE LAST COMMENT. THAT FREE PARKING THERE AT STEWART BEACH, THE 550 SPACES, IF WE EVER WANTED TO DO ANYTHING WITH THAT PROPERTY, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND AMEND THIS ACCESS POINT.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> EVENTUALLY OUR GOAL IS TO GET ALL CARS OFF THE BEACH.
>> OF COURSE. YEAH. NOT MANY THOUGH.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 11C, THE COOL DECK AT THE POOL, $50,000 DONATION FROM BETTER PARKS.
THAT'S GREAT. THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB.
BUT THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO DO THE COOL DECK AT THE POOL, RIGHT?
>> IT WOULD BE NICE. NOW, THIS IS JUST THEY'RE GOING TO PAY ABOUT HALF OF IT AND THEN THE CITY THROUGH IDC, OUR POOL ACCOUNT WILL BE PAYING THE OTHER HALF.
>> OKAY. SO WE'LL BE SEEING [OVERLAPPING]
>> BURNING MY FEET. [NOISE] A LITTLE BIT.
BUT THANK YOU TO PETER PARKS, THEY ARE A FANTASTIC WAY.
11 E THE AUDIT WITH WHAT THEY CAN.
THE CDS CONTRACT WITH WHITLEY PENN, WE'RE NOT RENEWING IT, BUT THEY WERE ORDERED [OVERLAPPING] AND WE EXTENDED IT.
AND THEN THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE AUDIT AT THE PORE? YES, SIR.
>> WELL, THE AUDIT AT THE PORE IS 11AF.
WELL, IT DOES, BUT IT'S ON THE SAME AGENDA.
RIGHT. SO ON THE AGENDA, BUT 11AF IS THE AUDIT FITS WITH THE SAME FIRM ENOUGH.
>> SO I'LL GO INTO THAT TOO REAL QUICK.
JUST THAT AUDIT IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE BY JANUARY.
WHAT'S ON THE TIMELINE? JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.
>> COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, SHEILA.
>> SHEILA REGANI, FINANCE, WILL BE PEN HAS GIVEN US A SCHEDULE STARTING NOVEMBER AND COMPLETING IN JANUARY.
I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE PORT AND IT IS THE END OF THEIR FISCAL YEAR, AND SO WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE SOME IMMEDIATE SCHEDULING ITEMS ON THEIR CHECKLIST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DISRUPTING ACTIVITIES AT THE PORT THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR THEIR YEAR-END, BUT ALSO ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE OUR TIMELINE.
>> GOOD [INAUDIBLE] DONE BY JANUARY.
>> THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, END OF JANUARY, WE SHOULD BE GOOD.
>> VERY GOOD. MARIE HAD A QUESTION THAT DAVID.
>> TO GO TO 11A, I FOUND THESE TWO ITEMS VERY CONTRARY BECAUSE 11A OR GIVING A SECOND TIME EXTENSION TO WET LAKE PAN TO FINISH AUDITS FROM 1920 AND 1921 AND THEN IN 11F, WE'RE AWARDING THEM A CONTRACT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO FINISH IN 3 MONTHS.
>> THERE ARE TWO ENTIRELY SEPARATE THINGS, THE WAY.
>> I UNDERSTAND. [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE WHITLEY PENN CONTRACT FOR THE CITY, LIKE ALL THE CITY'S CONTRACTS IS A 3-YEAR CONTRACT WITH 2,1 YEAR EXTENSIONS.
AND THE FINAL 1-YEAR EXTENSION WAS ACTUALLY STARTED BACK IN MAY, OUR FORMER FINANCE DIRECTOR GOT TO SIGN THAT.
THAT ALLOWED THEM TO START THE AUDIT PROCESS ON THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR '23, AND SO THAT HAS ACTUALLY STARTED ALREADY, AND ALL YOU'RE DOING WITH THAT AGENDA ITEM IS CONFIRMING THE EXTENSION OF THAT CONTRACT FOR THE FINAL YEAR OF THE CITY'S AUDIT.
AS A PART OF THAT, WHITLEY PENN IS UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY AND THEY'VE GIVEN US A QUOTE TO COMPLETE THE AAUP AT THE PORT BECAUSE THEY ARE STILL COVERED UNDER THAT FIFTH YEAR OF OUR CONTRACT.
>> WE DID NOT BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE AN ACTIVE CONTRACT WITH THEM.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
WHITLEY PENN WAS AUDITOR'S WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL LAST, IN 2012.
HOW MANY YEARS HAVE THEY BEEN ON OUR AUDITOR? IS IT A REALLY A GOOD IDEA TO STAY? I KNOW I'M PUBLIC COMPANIES SEC AS ROTATING AND SO FORTH THAT YES, SOME OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH PARTNERS, SOME OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH COMPANIES.
BUT IS IT REALLY A GOOD IDEA TO STAY WITH THE SAME AUDIT COMPANY FOR?
>> MOVING INTO THE NEXT YEAR, WE WILL REBID.
[00:50:01]
IT'S AN RFQ WITH AUDITORS, BUT WE WILL GO THROUGH AN RFQ PROCESS WITH THE AUDITORS THIS COMING YEAR, AND COUNSEL WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW A BUNCH OF PROPOSALS AND SELECT A NEW AUDITOR OR THE SAME AUDITOR MOVING FORWARD FOR THE NEXT 3-5 YEARS.SO IT IS AN ACTIVITY THAT COUNCIL PARTICIPATES IN EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS WHERE THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO CHOOSE A NEW AUDITOR.
THERE ARE SOME REASONS TO CONTINUE FOR A WHILE BECAUSE SOME FAMILIARITY ALLOWS AN AUDIT GROUP TO KNOW WHERE TO LOOK FOR THINGS, BECAUSE THEY'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE ORGANIZATION AND HOW IT WORKS.
BUT AT SOME POINT, THERE IS A BENEFIT, OBVIOUSLY TO HAVE A NEW SET OF EYES, AND SO IT'S JUST FINDING THAT BALANCE.
>> FAMILIAR RD COULD GO EITHER WAY.
>> THIS WILL BE WHITLEY PENN'S 50TH YEAR.
BEFORE THAT, THERE WAS ANOTHER FIRM HERE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE DID NOT HAVE GOOD EXPERIENCE WITH THEM, BUT WE ADD ANOTHER WORKER, DAVID FINKER.
>> THIS IS THE SECOND OF THE SECOND ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO THE WHITLEY PENN CONTRACT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS WE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY THAT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME OF STARTING A WORKS BOARD AUDIT, WE WANTED TO CHECK TO 1, MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE CONTRACT WITH WHITLEY PENN BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO OUT TO THE MARKET TO BID THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE.
AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE SEEN THIS ONE THE 2 YEAR, EXCUSE ME, 1 YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION AND THEN THE PROPOSAL FOR THE SCOPE OF SERVICES UNDERNEATH THAT CONTRACT FOR THE WORST PART.
>> CORRECT. SO ONE YEAR CONTRACT EXTENSION WOULD HAVE COME BACK TO THIS MEETING REGARDLESS.
IT WAS ABOUT THE SAME TIMEFRAME LAST YEAR AS WELL AND IT'S JUST COINCIDENTAL THAT WE'RE DOING THESE TWO THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
>> THE PORT AUDIT, THE OPINION OF COUNCIL WAS WE WANTED TO COMPLETE THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>> AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE[OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT WAS CORRECTION, SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ON THAT JANUARY.
IS THAT RIGHT THERE WORKING WITH [OVERLAPPING].
>> NONE ON THAT ITEM. 11G, THE FINANCIAL SOFTWARE.
>> YES, SO WILL THIS REPLACE OUR EXISTING?
>> [INAUDIBLE] EXISTING TOPICAL.
>> CURRENTLY WE'RE USING BANNER AND THIS IS THE ERP THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT PROJECT THAT YOU'LL BE HEARING ABOUT SOON.
BUT GRAVITY IS A SOFTWARE THAT OUR FINANCE TEAM, SPECIFICALLY OUR ACCOUNTING TEAM, HAS USED TO ASSEMBLE THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE LAST YEAR OR TWO AND THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF AN UPGRADE, AND IT WILL ALLOW US TO HAVE MORE TOOLS AND GREATER REPORTING RELATED TO SOME OF THE NEW THINGS THAT GATSBY IS REQUIRING, AND SO WE'VE DECIDED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT UPGRADE.
AND OVER THE COURSE OF THE CONTRACT, THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE CONTRACT WAS ADOPTED LAST YEAR, IT WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL $27,000 AND THAT IS WHY IT'S COMING BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> THAT INCLUDES IMPLEMENTATION AND AN ANNUAL FEE, IT'S TOTALLY.
>> ITS TOTALLY IN AGES TIED TOGETHER.
[OVERLAPPING] ARE THEY TIED TOGETHER?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, SHAWN?
>> LAST QUESTION, JUST ON THE NEW FIRE TRUCKS, SO THIS IS A NEW TOWER TRUCK.
>> YES SIR, WE'RE LOOKING AT, THIS WILL TAKE THE PLACE OF THE EXISTING TOWER TRUCK AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE EXISTING TOWER TRUCK?
>> I WANT TO REHAB AND KEEP IT AS A SPARE.
[OVERLAPPING] SO, ASSUMING THIS ONE DOESN'T TAKE TEN YEARS TO GET HERE.
>> I ACTUALLY WANT A NEW ONE TO RIDE AROUND ON WEEKENDS.
>> THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MARIE, WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO YOU.
FROM THAT QUESTION, MINE SAID THEY BID THIS OUT.
>> 11H, SHEILA DID THAT GET OUT.
>> THEY DID IT AND ACTUALLY, WE WERE JUST HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.
WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO PULL THIS FROM THE AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT PROCESS, AND SO 11H IS GOING TO BE PULLED FOR THIS EVENING'S CONSENT AGENDA, AND WE'RE GOING TO BRING IT BACK PROBABLY IN NOVEMBER, BUT WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THAT.
>> THEN I HAVE BEEN AND WHAT THEN [INAUDIBLE].
>> 11O. WHAT DID YOU SAY? ELEVEN WHAT? YEAH. REMEMBER WHAT MY QUESTION WAS.
CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THIS? SO THIS IS OUR GRANTS AND WHAT NOT.
I TRUST EVERYTHING YOU DO TESS.
>> GOOD MORNING. THIS IS THE INITIAL PHASE OF PLANNING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO TO REPLACE FIRE STATION 2 AND DO A PARTNERSHIP PERHAPS WITH UTMB FOR A SACRUM TO LOOK TOWARDS APPLYING FOR A GRANT OR ANOTHER CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK IN FEBRUARY, SO THIS WILL BE THE INITIAL PHASE OF COORDINATION BETWEEN THE CITY UTMB,
[00:55:01]
WHAT TYPE OF FACILITY WE THINK WOULD BE BEST FOR BOTH ENTITIES TO SHARE AND MOVING FORWARD WHAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY GET GRANT FUNDING FOR AND NOT, SO THIS IS THE FIRST PHASE OF THAT.>> THIS IS THE ONE FOR THE MATERIAL TESTING IN SAN TILDE BRAIN, SO THIS WASN'T PART OF THEIR NATIONAL BID OR WE'VE UNCOVERED SOMETHING OR, TELL ME ABOUT THAT.
>> NO. AS WE GO AHEAD AND DO CONSTRUCTION, WE GET A CONTRACTOR OUT, BUT WE DO QAQC OF THE MATERIALS, SO WE PROVIDE THAT, SO WE COME OUT AFTERWARDS AND GET A SECONDARY CONTRACT FOR THAT.
>> TO MAKE SURE THEY USED WHAT THEY SAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO USE.
>> THEN WE CAN [INAUDIBLE] CORRECTLY AND DO WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.
>> GOOD. THAT'S ALL LIKE THAT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MIKE BOUVIER.
>> IT'S FINE LIKE JOHN DIGGER FIRST.
>> THE SAME. ALL MINE ARE ANSWERED.
>> THANK YOU SHARON. COUNCILMAN, COLLINS.
>> BUT I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR JANELLE 12A APPOINTMENTS.
>> DO YOU MEAN THE APPOINTMENTS THEMSELVES OR MY QUESTION.
>> WELL, WE HAVE SOME APPOINTMENTS.
>> WE HAVE NOMINATIONS FOR THOSE APPOINTMENTS. WE HAVE NOMINATION.
>> BUT I'M A LITTLE CURIOUS ABOUT NUMBER FOUR, CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION, WE HAVE AN OPENING?
>> YES. WE NEED TO REPLACE MARY LONGORIA, AND I THINK MS. LOUIS HAS SOMEONE.
>> I THOUGHT WE DID THEM. NEVER MIND. FINE. GOT IT.
>> YOU GET ONE BITE OFF THE APPLE. [LAUGHTER]. WELL, I DIDN'T WANT TO [INAUDIBLE]
>> BY ALL ALL MEANS, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO 8G.
BEFORE WE GO TO 8G, I WANT TO BRING UP 8B AS IN BOY.
I NEED SOME GUIDANCE FIRST OF ALL, FROM COUNCILMAN FENTLEE ON THIS AND THEN JOHN BEING ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ANDREW, GOOD MORNING TO YOU.
IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
>> YOUR MONTH TO MONTH PLANNING DIVISION.
>> THANK YOU, ANDREW. THEY'RE WANTING TO THAT PORTION THAT'S NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY, THEY WANT TO CHANGE THAT FROM URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD TO COMMERCIAL AND THEY WANT IT IN THE HYPHEN DENSITY. IS THAT CORRECT?
THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A PARKING LOT ON THAT.
I UNDERSTAND. WHY DID THEY NEED TO HAVE HYPHEN DENSITY? WHY DON'T WE JUST DO THE COMMERCIAL ONLY?
>> JUST FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES.
THE PARCEL CLOSEST TO THE SEAWALL, IT'S HEIGHTENED DENSITY, IT'S PAST THE HEIGHTENESS AND DEVELOPMENT ZONE OVERLAY ZONE RATHER.
IT'S JUST FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES, IT'S BEST PLANNING PRACTICES.
>> ONLY CONCERN I HAVE IF YOU MOVE THAT NOW BLOCK FURTHER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOW THAT HYPHEN DENSITY AND REQUIREMENTS MOVE WITH THAT AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS THERE.
I WOULDN'T DIFFER THOUGH TO BOTH THESE GENTLEMEN. JOHN.
>> I HAD SOME CONCERNS WITH THIS AND PLANNING AND I VOICED THOSE CONCERNS.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PLANNED FOR THE RESTAURANT AND PARKING LOT.
MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT ZONING IS FOREVER.
>> WHAT THEY HAD THEY COULD DO.
>> [LAUGHTER] FOREVER UNTIL YOU SEND IT TO ME.
>> MY ISSUE IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO A LESS RESTRICTIVE ZONING CATEGORY.
IN ANYTIME WE DO THAT, IT OPENS POSSIBILITIES.
THERE'S NOTHING THERE THAT THEY WANTED TO DO THAT THEY COULDN'T DO WITHIN THE EXISTING ZONING.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY MY QUESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'RE DOING IT.
>> I GOT AN EXPLANATION AND THE EXPLANATION WAS TO BE CONSISTENT ON THE PROPERTY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS A GREAT EXPLANATION, BUT IT IS.
>> THAT'S MY QUESTION BECAUSE IF WE PASS THIS AS WRITTEN AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO A PARKING LOT THERE, THEY COULD MOVE ALL THE WAY BACK INTO THAT THAT NORTH PROPERTY AND GO INTO HYPHEN DENSITY REQUIREMENTS, WHICH MOVES ON TO FIVE OR EIGHT STORIES RATHER THAN 50 FEET.
>> THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE HDDZ, WHICH IF IT GOES ALL THE WAY TO AND HAVE,
[01:00:01]
IT PROVIDES FURTHER PROTECTION FOR THE HIGH-RISES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.>> THERE'S TRANSITION AREAS SO YOU HAVE TO ADHERE TO.
>> I REALIZE AND ALL OF THAT AND ANGLES AND ALL OF THAT.
BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS IF THEY WANT TO DO A PARKING LOT THERE, THEY CAN DO THAT AND PRETTY MOVE IT TO COMMERCIAL.
CAN THEY DO IT IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD?
>> THEY COULD DO IT AS AN ACCESSORY PARKING LOT, YES.
AS ACCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN USE.
>> IF THAT'S THE CASE, I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE DOING THIS. DAVID.
>> I HAVE A FAMILY EMERGENCY. MY DAD'S GOING [INAUDIBLE].
GO RIGHT AHEAD. WELL, THAT'S MY CONCERN AND THEY KEEP SAYING THEY'RE DOING IN PARKING LOT.
I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE MOVING INTO AN EXPANSIVE BUT THEY CAN DO THAT JUST WITH THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD GUIDANCE, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> CORRECT. THIS JUST CREATES A MORE CONSISTENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
IT'S ALSO UNIQUE TO HAVE SPLIT ZONING ON AN INDIVIDUAL PARCEL.
AGAIN, IT'S JUST FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES.
>> ALSO FOR HYPHEN DENSITY THAT WAS NOT MADE FOR JUST LIKE THE ROUGH KNOW, THE C1 NOW AND TAKES IT FURTHER BACK.
ACTUALLY, IF YOU GO ALL ALONG THE SEAWALL, SOMETIMES IT EXTENDS AS FAR BACK AS TWO STEWART ROAD, SO IT DOESN'T EXTEND BACK.
IN THIS AREA, IT TERMINATES RIGHT THERE.
THIS WOULD MOVE IN ANOTHER BLOCK FURTHER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS?
>> BECAUSE THIS IS AN ODD SHAPE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE LETTERED STREETS AT THE SEAWALL.
THIS IS THAT TRIANGULAR PIECE, WE ABANDON THE ALLEY TO MAKE IT A SINGLE PLOT.
>> IT WOULD ONLY BE WITH THE ONE-BLOCK.
THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT [OVERLAPPING]
>> FROM THE ABANDONED ALLEY FORWARD TOWARD THEM AND A HALF.
>> THAT IS ALL THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS?
>> THAT'S ALL THAT WOULD GO INTO HDDZ?
>> THEN I DON'T THINK I SEE THE PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT'S JUST NOT A VERY BIG PIECE OF PROPERTY.
>> ONLY AT THE WHITE POINT IS IF GIVEN HALF A BLOCK?
>> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF ADVISE THEM TO DO.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS IS SOMETHING THEY WANTED TO DO.
>> I THINK IT'S A BIT OF BOTH.
I THINK STAFF AS ADVICE TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION AND AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT CREATING.
>> THERE WAS A DELINEATION POINT UNTIL WE ABANDONED THE ALLEY.
NOW, YOU ALMOST GOT TWO DIFFERENT ZONING CATEGORIES ON THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY.
>> I UNDERSTAND. I JUST WOULD COMMENT.
>> WE'RE TRYING TO CLEAN IT OUT.
>> WHAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION IS THEY WANTED TO DO A PARKING LOT THERE.
I THOUGHT, WELL, THEY CAN DO A PARKING LOT THERE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
>> I KNOW NEIGHBORS OR CONCERN THAT ONCE IT'S CHANGED THEN GRANTED, THEY WANT TO DO A PARKING LOT NOW, BUT THEY SELL THE PROPERTY IN A YEAR AND WE'VE OPENED UP A WHOLE LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD HAPPEN.
>> THAT'S MY CONCERN. PLANS ALWAYS CHANGE.
BELIEVE ME I LOVED THEIR IDEA HERE.
I WANT TO SEE KATIE IS UP THERE.
I'M ALL FOR WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO WITH THE RESTAURANT.
I JUST DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NEEDED RIGHT NOW.
>> I AGREE ON THAT. THANK YOU, ADRIAN. I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO IT WAS, BUT HE'S LIKE, HE'S THE BEST THING IN PLANNING. I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU THAT.
>> VERY GOOD. RYAN, 11B AS IN BOY.
THIS MONEY THAT WE'RE RECEIVING AND SO FORTH.
>> IN THE SETTLEMENT FUND, IS IT NOT OR DOES IT GO BACK IN THE WATER FUND? I THINK THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT GOES BACK INTO THE WATER FUND.
I THOUGHT WE ALREADY REIMBURSED THE WATER FUND.
THIS GOES TO YOUR LEGAL SETTLEMENT FEES.
WHERE'S IT GOING AGAIN, BRIAN?
>> SETTLEMENT ACCOUNT WHERE WE PUT SETTLEMENTS ACT.
>> WATER IS ALREADY BEEN REIMBURSE.
WE HAVE OTHER, IF SOMEBODY SLIP AND FALLS OR DAMAGE OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> WHAT ARE LEGAL FEES ON THAT?
I DO RECALL THAT AS THE INITIAL SETTLEMENT PAYMENT BETWEEN DAN AND DOWN IN KHARTOUM, $900,000 WAS SET ASIDE TO PAY ATTORNEY'S FEES.
>> THIS SEEMS LIKE NOT A GOOD THING. [OVERLAPPING]
NOW, COUNCIL LET'S MOVE INTO ITEM 8G IF WE COULD.
THERE'S A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS THERE, I KNOW.
[01:05:01]
DON, FIRST OF ALL WOULD YOU PARAPHRASE ANY THOUGHTS WE WERE SENT LAST NIGHT IN THE EMAIL ON THAT.>> OF COURSE. RIGHT NOW I SENT OUT IN SIMPLE MANNER.
>> BASICALLY, [NOISE] HAVE THE DISCRETION THROUGH ISSUE [NOISE].
ANY CHANGES YOU REQUIRE, YOU HAVE SEEN THESE ARE CONSISTENT WITH CHANGES THAT YOU HAVE MADE IN THE PAST.
IF YOU HAVE APPROVED A 30-FOOT ROAD IN THE PAST, AND THEY WANTED TO BUILD THE 30-FOOT ROAD, GRANTING IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL OFFICE.
IF YOU WANT TO GET CONSISTENT, YOU NEED TO AVOID THE CLAIM OF PUTTING ARBITRARY CAPRICIOUS.
LOOK AT THAT. WE WANT TO AVOID A CLAIM THAT WE'RE PASSING ZONING IN A MANNER THAT'S ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS.
CONSISTENCY OF ACTION IS THE BEST SHIELD AGAINST THAT.
>> BUT AGAIN, THERE'S CONSISTENCY OF ACTION IN.
>> CONSISTENCY IN YOUR DECISION-MAKING IS THE BEST DEFENSE AGAINST CLAIMS OF ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUSNESS.
HOWEVER, YOU WANT TO MAKE A RULING THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THINGS IN THE PAST, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE WHY YOU HAVE A ONE-OFF HERE.
>> IF IN THE WAY I INTERPRET THAT AND COUNCIL, FOR OUR KNOWLEDGE TONIGHT, IS THAT IF THERE'S A MOTION FOR A DENIAL, WHOEVER THAT MAKES THAT MOTION NEEDS TO ARTICULATE ALL THE SPECIFICS OF WHY THAT MOTION WAS MADE.
>> THAT'S THE BETTER PRACTICAL.
>> NO, I THINK YOU CAN IMPROVE IT WITHOUT DEFENDING IT BECAUSE WE'VE DONE IT SO MANY TIMES IN THE PAST.
IN FACT, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS ALMOST IDENTICAL BACK-TO-BACK ON THE AGENDA.
REALIZE ONE OF THEM HAS BEEN DEFERRED, BUT THEY'RE ALMOST IN IDENTICAL VARIANCES.
FROM WHAT I HEAR PEOPLE, I'M JUST READING THE STAFF REPORT THAT-
>> [OVERLAPPING] THEY MAYBE DIFFERENT FEET BECAUSE THE IDEA YOU -
>> LET'S HAVE THAT ARGUMENT TONIGHT.
>> BUT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ESSENTIALLY IS THAT THE LDRS, THEY'RE ONLY VALID, INSOFAR AS PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE NOT BOUND US TO DECISIONS OUTSIDE HER VARIANCES FROM THE LDRS.
>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
I THINK A PUD IS USED TO DEVIATE FROM THE LDRS AND TILLER PIECES OF LAND, AND A MAN WHOM WE'RE CONSISTENT WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT.
>> BUT THAT MAY AS WELL BE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS BECAUSE I'M NOT A DEVELOPER.
I KNOW ONE, BUT MY CONCERN HERE IS THAT IT JUST SOUNDS TO ME LIKE YOU'RE SAYING THAT NOT JUST DECISIONS WE'VE MADE, BUT DECISIONS PAST COUNCILS HAVE MADE THAT SUSPEND OR VARY FROM THE ESTABLISHED LDRS.
TIE US TO DOING SO NOW OR IN THE FUTURE.
>> WELL, PAST PRACTICES COULD BE USED TO DEMONSTRATE ANY INCONSISTENCY.
>> I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND SAY COUNCIL HAS BEEN INCONSISTENT ON THIS OVER THE YEARS.
>> WELL, PERHAPS FOR A FUTURE TIME YOU MAY WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT CONTOURS A PUD CAN, HOW FAR YOU'LL GO INSIDE A PUD? AS FAR AS INCONSISTENCY.
>> COULD YOU BRING SUCH A THING TO US IN THE FUTURE?
>> YEAH, I THINK THAT'D BE FUN.
>> I HAVE TO WORK WITH PLANNING.
>> YEAH, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE PROBLEMS, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF IN THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TONIGHT, BUT ONE OF THE PROBLEMS BETWEEN WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO DECIDE HERE AND WHAT CONCERNS THE PUBLIC HAS, THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME.
WE ARE NOT UNLIMITED AND WHAT CHANGES WE CAN MAKE EVEN WITHIN A PUD, EVEN WITHIN THE LDR.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. COUNCIL, LET'S DO THIS.
I HAVE SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON THIS.
[01:10:04]
BUT LET'S START OUT.ARE THERE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON ITEM 8G, AND THESE ARE FOR CLARIFICATION.
NOW WE WILL DISCUSS IF THERE IS A DISCUSSION OF PROS AND CONS ON THIS THIS AFTERNOON OR THIS EVENING.
QUESTIONS? CATHERINE, COME ON UP, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
JOHN, AND WE'LL LET YOU READ THAT.
CATHERINE GORMAN, OUR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, IS WITH THIS.
JOHN, YOU WANT TO START US OFF?
>> THE ONLY COMMENTS THAT I WILL SAY FOR CLARIFICATIONS THROUGHOUT THE MEETING TONIGHT WOULD BE WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE DEVELOPER AT THE MEETING TONIGHT IS A CONCERN ABOUT MAINLY PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ALONG EACH SPEECH DRIVE, AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TO MITIGATE THAT.
I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS, POSSIBLY BIKE PATH REQUIREMENTS AND LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS ALONG EAST BEACH DRIVE.
THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO GET THE APPLICANT PREPARED FOR TONIGHT.
>> VERY GOOD. CATHERINE, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UTILITIES THERE.
THIS PROJECT, DOES IT DETRACT IN ANY WAY HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE CURRENT AND FUTURE DEMAND FOR UTILITIES OF THE OTHER OTHER CURRENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE OUT THERE?
>> TYPICALLY, ALL PUDS ARE REVIEWED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE PRIVATE UTILITIES, AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY OBJECTIONS OR ANY COMMENTS.
>> NEXT QUESTION I'M GOING TO ASK ABOUT IS, WHAT IT'S IMPACT ON UTILITY AND CITY SERVICES OUT THERE IS GOING TO BE AT THAT. IMPORTANT THAT WE ADDRESS THAT.
>> BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY BEEN ISSUES WITH AS FAR AS WATER CAPACITY AND THE NEEDS FOR WATER TANK.
>> NOT AT THIS POINT. BUT ON THE WATER CAPACITY NOW IS THERE GOING TO BE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. THAT'S THE QUESTION.
>> THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED, CATHERINE, ON THE DRAINAGE SITUATION OUT THERE AND STAFF AND OUR ENGINEERS HAVE PASSED ON THAT. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WELL, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY APPROVAL.
IT'S THE FIRST IN A SERIES OF APPROVALS.
ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND THE PRIVATE UTILITIES HAVE REVIEWED IT AT THIS POINT, BUT THEY'LL REVIEW IT AGAIN IN MORE DETAIL IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND FINAL PLAT PROCESS.
>> DOES THAT COME BACK TO COUNCIL AT ANYTIME?
>> THOSE GO TO PLANNING AND COMMISSION.
>> CORRECT. THEY DO NOT COME TO COUNCIL?
>> THEY DO NOT COME TO COUNCIL.
>> IT'S GOOD TO KNOW. I DID NOT REALIZE THAT.
>> THAT'S THE LENGTH FUNDAMENTALLY PROBLEM I HAVE ON PUDS AND APPROVING THINGS AND THEN PRELIMINARY PLAT BECAUSE WE'RE SAYING GO AHEAD, YOU CAN DO WHATEVER AND THEN WE NEVER SEE IT AGAIN.
I HAVE I HAVE MORE THAN SAFE DISCERNS THAN JUST THE SIDEWALKS ON THE EAST BEACH.
THERE'S TRAFFIC, SAFETY CONCERN, I LIVED OUT THEIR, PALISADE PALMS WHEN I LOST MY HOUSE THINKING I DIDN'T WANT TO DO THE BEACHES THING.
AFTER 30 DAYS, I'M LIKE NOT A HIGH-RISE GIRL, BUT I WATCHED A PERSON DIE IN AN AMBULANCE BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC.
NOW, WE'RE ADDING ALL THIS DENSITY AND WE STILL JUST HAVE A TWO-LANE ROAD.
IN THEIR PLAN, THEY MENTIONED PARKING ON ONE SIDE, A 26-FOOT STREET.
THAT WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL WOULD APPROVE.
I DON'T THINK YOU COULD GET A FIRE TRUCK DOWN THE ROAD.
THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS IN THIS.
I JUST SEE SO MANY THINGS AND IT'S A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND WE'RE ASKING TO APPROVE A PUD AND THEN WE'LL NEVER SEE IT AGAIN.
THAT'S THE ANSWERS I'M LOOKING FOR BECAUSE I HAVE A HUGE ISSUE WITH THE DENSITY.
>> CATHERINE, ALSO QUESTIONS I HAVE IN THE PACKET OF MATERIAL THAT I RECEIVED FOR THIS PROJECT, THERE WERE PHOTOGRAPHS OR RENDERINGS OF ON-GRADE STRUCTURES.
IS THERE ANY ON-GRADE STRUCTURES IN THIS?
>> NO, THAT WON'T BE ALLOWED FOR THE CITY'S FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS.
THEY'VE PROPOSED AN ELEVATED BOARDWALK THAT WILL CONNECT THE AMENITIES AND THE HOUSES.
[01:15:01]
YOU MAY HAVE BEEN SEEN THAT IN THE RENDERINGS.>> NO, THEY ARE ACTUALLY IN THEIR RENDERING BECAUSE I GOT THE SAME PACKET THE MAYOR GOT AND THEY HAD HOUSES PHOTO GRADE.
>> BUT I'M JUST SAYING IT MAKES YOU QUESTION HOW AWARE THEY ARE OF TEXAS SPEECH RULES BECAUSE IF YOU'RE PRESENTING A PACKAGE THAT HAS THE HOUSEHOLD GRADE, THAT'S UNUSUAL WHEN WE ALL KNOW, AND IF VE ZONE THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN.
>> ALSO, THERE IS A SECTION OF THE PROJECT, CATHERINE, THAT IS THE SWIMMING AREA, SWIMMING POOL, AND ALL THAT IN THE CENTER OF THE PROJECT.
THE RULES OF PROVIDING WHERE THEY CAN'T HAVE IMPERVIOUS MATERIALS WITHIN A CERTAIN LOCATION CLOSE TO THE BEACH, THAT'S STILL APPLIES HERE. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> WELL BE DIFFERENT REGULATIONS ARE 1,000 FEET FROM THE MEAN HIGH TIDE, THE IMPERVIOUS MATERIALS, AND WE'LL LOOK TO [INAUDIBLE] ON THAT PROJECT.
THE DISTANCE FOR IMPERVIOUS MATERIALS AT 200 FEET FROM THE LINE OF VEGETATION.
>> LARGE-SCALE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN.
>> KYLE, COME FORWARD SO WE CAN GET YOU ON MICROPHONE.
>> IMPERVIOUS COVER IS FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE CONSIDERED LARGE-SCALE CONSTRUCTION, ANYTHING OVER 5,000 SQUARE FEET, AND THAT'S JUST WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS FALLS WITHIN LIKE 1,000 FEET.
THAT'S ALL REGULATION DOES NOT FROM YELLOW OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S SOMETHING TO SAY TO GALVESTON ADDED IN OUR PLAN.
>> OF COURSE, THIS PROJECT, IF ANY OTHERS AND ANY OTHERS THAT WOULD BE BY THE BEACH WOULD HAVE TO ABIDE BY THAT.
VERY MUCH TO YOUR OTHER QUESTION THAT'S MENTIONED IN 4.78 UNITS PER ACRE.
DID THEY CALCULATE THAT INCLUDING THE WETLANDS IS PART OF THAT ACREAGE OR IT WAS THAT? HOW IS THAT CALCULATED?
>> IT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AND I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS YES, THEY INCLUDED THE WETLANDS. I'VE LOOKED AT MICHELLE.
>> WHY DON'T WE LET THE ANSWER. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MICHELLE, HEY, THE CITY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATE WHO'S BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE APPLICANTS SAYS NO, THAT IT WAS DID NOT INCLUDE THE WETLANDS.
>> OKAY. SO IT DID NOT INCLUDE THE WETLANDS TO CALCULATE THAT.
I'M GOING GET DIRECTION FROM YOU.
I THINK WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE PROJECT HERE.
WOULD COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO INVITE ONE OF THOSE OPPORTUNITY FOR?
>> I'D REALLY RATHER HAVE THIS CONVERSATION THIS EVENING.
[OVERLAPPING] WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE HERE.
I'M GOING TO HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN GREAT NUMBERS.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO HEAR.
>> THESE I AGREE JUST WANTED TO OFFER.
>> I JUST WANT TO THANK CATHERINE.
TIM HAD TO LEAVE AND SHE CAN GO BACK DOWN STICK PINS AND HER TIM DOLL FOR HAVING YOU DO THIS, BUT SHE'S PINCH HITTING AND DOING A GREAT JOB. THANK YOU, CATHERINE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. COUNCIL, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON ADG? THIS WILL BE QUITE A DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.
I THINK YOU GET A FLAVOR OF WHAT OUR THOUGHTS ARE.
I THINK THE APPLICANTS GET THE FLAVOR OF WHAT OUR THOUGHTS ARE.
FOR MORE DISCUSSION THIS AFTERNOON, DON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT AND DONORS. YES, JOHN.
>> COULD YOU AFFORD THE EMAILS OR THE PACKETS THAT YOU RECEIVED WITH THE PHOTOS, RENDERING OR WHATEVER?
>> I HAVEN'T BEEN IN MY CAR AND I CAN BRING IN.
>> BUT I HAVE PAPER COPIES FOR ALL OF YOU.
I CAN GIVE THEM TO YOU NOW OR AT THE MEAN.
>> THAT WOULD BE GREAT. YEAH. LET'S GO AHEAD AND PASS THOSE OUT AND THEN WE'LL DO OUR MORE DISCUSSION AND CLARIFICATION THIS EVENING.
VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON A AG, COUNCIL? VERY GOOD. WE'RE FINALLY GETTING TO YOU HERE.
[3.B. Discussion Of An Ordinance Amending The Code Of The City Of Galveston To Provide Regulations On The Use Of Recreational Vehicles (RVs) As Short Term Rentals (STR) And Removing “Or Accessory Building” From The Definition Of STR (X. Vandiver -Gaskin - 10 Min)]
LET'S GO TO 3B, IF WE COULD, PLEASE.>> OKAY. 3B, DISCUSSION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON TO PROVIDE REGULATIONS ON THE USE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND REMOVING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS FROM THE DEFINITION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
[BACKGROUND] READY? THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE MISS VAN DIVER GASKIN.
>> I'M NOT SURE THAT TITLE GOT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION.
>> OKAY. READ THAT AGAIN, PLEASE.
>> 3B, DISCUSSION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON TO PROVIDE REGULATIONS OF THE USE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND REMOVING ALL ACCESSORY BUILDING FROM THE DEFINITION OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
[01:20:04]
>> GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US. THANK YOU.
>> IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE CAMERA, PLEASE.
>> YES. MY NAME IS SOCHEE VANCOUVER GASKIN.
I'M AN ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY.
>> HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE YOUR FIRST NAME AGAIN?
>> LIKE THE WAY COOL RESTAURANT IN HOUSTON?
>> CORRECT. WHICH IS AN EXCELLENT RESTAURANT I HIGHLY RECOMMEND.
SHE JOINED US TWO, THREE MONTHS AGO IN MAY AND WE'LL [INAUDIBLE]. [LAUGHTER]
>> IN MAY OF 20, AND I HAD HEARD STR CASES PILING TO COLLECT UNPAID TAXES, THAT THING WHILE DOING THAT AND WHERE SHE STUMBLED UPON AND RB HAVING DONE THE PATIENTS BY THE PARKWAY, PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY BE USED AS SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
>> SHE HAS FOUND A NUMBER OF OTHERS.
>> THAT ARE REGISTERED WITH THE PARK?
>> VERY GOOD. SOCHEE, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND GO THROUGH THE ORDINANCE HERE, JUST AN OVERVIEW AND SEE IF COUNCIL HAS ANY QUESTION.
>> SURE. IT'S A SIMPLE HOPEFULLY SOLUTION TO THE RV ISSUE.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REGULATIONS SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE CODE AND THE LVRS THAT THAT PROHIBIT PEOPLE CAN'T LIVE IN RVS PARKED NEXT TO YOUR HOUSE.
YOU CAN BE AN RV PARK, THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU COULDN'T RENT AN RV IN RV PARK BECAUSE RV PARKS AND ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE PERMANENT.
I GUESS THE ONLY ONE WOULD BE TO MAKE A BEACH THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU HAVE TO MOVE EVERY 60 DAYS.
>> RIGHT, SO YOU COULD RENT THAT?
>> SO LONG AS IT MOVES EVERY 60 DAYS TO A DIFFERENT SPOT.
>> WELL, THAT SEEMS LIKE A MAJOR HUB WE NEED TO FIX TOO.
>> THAT'S TOTALLY A POLICY DECISION.
>> I THINK YOU WILL AGREE THAT PARK IN AN RV AND YOUR DRIVEWAY AND RANCHING IT OUT IT'S NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE LVRS.
IT'S NOT BEHAVIOR WE WISH TO JUST IGNORE.
>> YEAH. I THINK LAST I CHECKED THERE WAS FOUR OF RVS.
THEY'RE ALL IN THE WEST END THAT ARE REGISTERED AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WHICH IS LIKE I SAID, IT'S SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE CODES.
WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THIS IS TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR UPFRONT IN THE DEFINITIONS IN THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL CODE THAT RVS ARE NOT ALLOWED OUTSIDE OF AN RV PARK TO BE REGISTERED ARE USED AS SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS THE ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
THE DEFINITION OF AN ACCESSORY BUILDING IN THE LVRS INCLUDES THINGS THAT WE PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE THIS SHORT-TERM RENTALS LIKE A GAZEBO AND A GREENHOUSE OR A CARPORT.
TECHNICALLY AS OF RIGHT NOW, IF YOU WANTED TO RENT OUT YOUR CARPORT AS AN STR, YOU COULD BECAUSE OF THE DEFINITION OF STR THAT'S IN THE CODE RIGHT NOW.
TO CLEAN THAT UP AND NOT HAVE THINGS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE REGISTERED AS STRS.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS A CARPORT REGISTER RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S JUST THAT TECHNICALLY YOU COULD.
JUST TO TAKE OUT THOSE THREE WORDS AGAIN TO MAKE IT PRETTY CLEAR THAT WE DON'T WANT A GAZEBO BEING REGISTERED AND RENT IT OUT AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
>> GO AHEAD AND BRING. WE HAD COUNCILMAN COLLEGE, BUT DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING?
>> VIDA ONLY KNOWN I HAD COULD BE MONETIZING MY GARDEN SHED.
>> I GET IN TROUBLE WITH YOUR WIFE TO SLEEP IN THERE.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT PEOPLE WILL GET UP TO.
YOU WRITE THESE THINGS FOR MAJORITY AND THEN SOMEBODY IS ALWAYS GOT SOMETHING COOKING.
I WILL NOTE THAT THE PARK BOARD AND REGISTERING THESE DOESN'T DO SITE VISITS.
IF I GAVE HIM THE ADDRESS, MY GARDEN SHED AND SAID THAT, INSTEAD IT'S JUST A RESIDENCE AND THEY HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT.
>> I AM HOPING THAT THIS WILL AT LEAST ALERT THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF SCATTERED AROUND.
>> THE QUESTION IS ABOUT, WHAT CAN THEY DO ABOUT IT? AGAIN, IF I HAVE AN RV SITTING IN THE DRIVEWAY AND THE ALLEY OR WHATNOT AND I WANT TO RENT IT OUT AND I REGISTERED THAT.
THERE'S NO WAY THEY'RE GOING TO KNOW THAT.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE'RE ALERTING THEM TO.
>> WELL, I MEAN, THIS WILL MAKE IT.
[01:25:01]
>> EASIER TO READ. RIGHT NOW WE JUST KIND OF EMAIL LIKE WITH THE FOUR THAT I FOUND, I JUST EMAILED THE PARK BOARD AND SAY, HEY, THESE ARE REGISTERED THERE, THEY REALLY SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BE REGISTERED AND SO CAN YOU RANK THAT REGISTRATION?
>> I WOULD HATE TO PUT AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON THE PARK BOARD.
SAY, HEY, YOU GOT TO GO OUT AND MAKE SURE THIS ISN'T A RV BECAUSE I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S PRACTICAL.
>> ITS PRACTICAL. WE WERE NOTIFIED THEM AFTER THE FACT AND WE DISCOVERED THIS TO REMOVE THESE REGISTRATION.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN DOING NOW.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. WE HAVE COUNCILWOMAN ROBBINS AND BOUVIER.
>> THIS IS ALSO COVER A TENT IN THE BACKYARD.
I REMEMBER WHEN I WENT OUT TO SEE THAT TOTAL ECLIPSE IN PORTLAND AND PEOPLE WERE PUTTING UP MULTIPLE TENTS IN THE IN YARD AND SHORT TERM RENTING THEM.
>> THE CURRENT LANGUAGE WHICH IS NOT GOING TO BE CHANGED SAYS RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT, WHICH IS DEFINED, WHICH I DON'T THINK INCLUDES A TENT IN THE BACKYARD.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN STOP SOMEBODY FROM RENTING OUT THEIR BACKYARD.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT A TENT IS ALREADY EXCLUDED BY THE DEFINITION.
>> ONE OF THE DISCONNECTS I HAVE AND THEN TIES INTO THIS AMENDMENT IS, WE CREATE THE ORDINANCES WE HAVE.
WE'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ORDINANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, AS WHAT WAS MENTIONED WHEN THEY REGISTER, THEY DON'T DO A SITE VISIT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT CITIES SHOULD BE THE ONES REGISTERING THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
SINCE WE'RE THE ONES WHO HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON THE ORDINANCES.
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT EITHER.
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO [INAUDIBLE] IN THE MARSHALL 5,000 [OVERLAPPING]
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THERE IS A SERIOUS DISCONNECT, I DISAGREE WITH YOU.
>> IT'S NOT A SUBJECT THAT'S ON THE AGENDA, BUT IT DOES TIE INTO IT.
THERE IS A DISCONNECT, HAVING ONE AGENCY REGISTERING AND HAVE ANOTHER AGENCY FOLLOWING UP ON ORDINANCES.
>> WE CAN GET INTO THAT AND EDIT ANOTHER TIME ON THAT, BUT THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
>> I JUST THINK WE NEED TO BE AS ALL INCLUSIVE, ARE WE GOING TO BRING UP NOW THE THING ABOUT THE SEPTIC TANKS BECAUSE THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD ONE TO PULL HIM WITH THIS ONE AS WELL, THE LUMEN ON OCCUPANCY?
>> SEPTIC TANK ISSUE IS NOT A VIABLE APPROACH.
>> IS NOT APPLICABLE? EVEN THOUGH IT'S A STATE LAW?
>> WE'RE GETTING OFF THE TOPIC HERE.
>> HOW DID YOU DISCOVER THEY WERE RVS? WAS IT THE ADDRESS? [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE DISCOVERED THE VERY FIRST ONE BECAUSE THE MARSHALLS GOT A COMPLAINT ABOUT IT, SO I COULD JUST, BECAUSE I'M NOSY, SO I START LIKE SEARCHING AIRBNB AND THEY'LL ADVERTISE IT AS AN RV.
YOU JUST DO A GOOGLE SEARCH OF LIKE GALVESTON AIRBNB RV [OVERLAPPING]
>> KUDOS TO THEM FOR REGISTERING AND PAYING HOUSE TAX. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]
>> THEY'LL PROBABLY USE THE ADDRESS LIKE THE ADDRESS OF THE HOUSE AND THAT'S WHERE THEY GET THE MAIL AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD, OTHER THAN MAKING SURE THAT THEIR AD SAYS RV OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IT WASN'T LIKE THEY SAID, OH, YEAH, RVS, WE'D GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
THEY WERE FOLLOWING WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO.
>> RIGHT. BECAUSE IT WASN'T VERY CLEAR IN THE CURRENT CODE THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT.
>> WE DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS CLEAR TO THE PARK BOARD AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION WHETHER IT WAS AN RV OR NOT?
>> BECAUSE THERE'S A PHYSICAL ADDRESS TYPE.
AFTER LOOKING OVER THIS, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THE SOFTWARE WOULD INCLUDE AN UPLOAD OF A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY, IS THAT LEGAL?
>> I DON'T THINK SO. THE SOFTWARE THAT PARK PORT IS USING TO REGISTER, I WOULD DOUBT IT. I'D BE HONEST WITH YOU.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS GOING TO BE IS THAT, THEY COULD HAVE PROVIDED A PICTURE OF THIS ADDRESS AND HAD IMPROVEMENTS ON IT, WOULDN'T HAVE THE RV IN THE DRIVEWAY.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION SOCHEE, IF WE PASS THIS ORDINANCE, THE FOUR THAT ARE REGISTERED, ARE THEY NOW NOT REGISTERED IN KENT OR DID THEIR GRANDFATHER DID?
>> [INAUDIBLE] GRANDFATHER BECAUSE HE USES [BACKGROUND]
>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE NOTIFIED THAT THEY ARE NO LONGER.
>> I'VE ALREADY NOTIFIED OR ASK THE PARK BOARD TO NOTIFY THEM.
[01:30:01]
>> AT THE PARK BOARD, WITH THE VERY FIRST ONE THAT WE FOUND, THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.
THE PARK BOARD ALREADY YANKED THE REGISTRATION AND I'VE ASKED THE PARK BOARD TO, WITH THE OTHER ONES I'VE FOUND, TO PLEASE INFORM THEM THAT THEY NEED TO NOT BE REGISTERED TO YANK THEIR REGISTRATION.
>> THESE SITUATIONS, THE RV IS PARKED ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THERE'S A HOUSE ON IT A LOT OR WHAT?
>> YES. ALL OF THEM ARE ON A WARRANT.
THERE'S A HOUSE ATTACHED TO IT AND THEY ARE LIKE ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING AND IT'S ALL [OVERLAPPING]
>> QUICK QUESTION. DID WE ALREADY DEAL WITH THE NOTION OF SOMEBODY PARKING RV ON A VACANT LOT AND RUNNING IT?
>> I BELIEVE YOU CAN'T USE AN RV.
>> YOU CAN'T, THAT'S THE THING THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> REGARDLESS, YOU CANT JUST PARKING AN RV ON A LOT WITH THE HOUSE, WITHOUT A HOUSE AND LEAVE IT.
>> TACTICALLY NOW YOU CAN REGISTER THAT ON SHORT TERM.
>> WELL, TECHNICALLY, YOU CAN REGISTER IT, BUT YOU'RE STILL NOT GETTING COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE.
IF YOU WANTED TO RENT OUT AN RV AND IT'S IN AN RV PARK WHERE IT'S LEGALLY PARKED, COULD YOU DO THAT?
>> THERE'S ALL KINDS OF REGULATIONS.
THE CITY HAS REGULATIONS ON THE PARK TO PROVIDE ALL THE SERVICES LIKE WATER AND SEWER AND GARBAGE AND ALL THAT STUFF.
>> THIS JUST DOESN'T EXCLUDE RVS COMPLETELY?
>> CORRECT, IN THE LANGUAGE AND MY PROPOSAL SAYS THAT RVS ARE NOT PART OF THIS PROHIBITION.
>> WE'RE JUST ENFORCING, EXISTING [OVERLAPPING]
>> CORRECT. WE'RE JUST PULLING IT INTO INTO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL DEFINITION SO THAT IT IS VERY CLEAR.
IT'S ALREADY EXISTED IN OTHER PLACES. THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SOCHEE.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
>> NICE TO PUT A FACE WITH A NAME.
I KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE THE NAME.
>> EVERYBODY TRY THE RESTAURANT.
>> TRY THE RESTAURANT. IT IS GOOD.
>> 3C, PLEASE. IS CHANEL THERE?
>> [INAUDIBLE] ON MASTER PLAN.
>> CAN YOU TAKE IT? [LAUGHTER]
COME ON UP, BRANDON. I COULD GET READY. GOOD,
[3.C. Update Of The City’s Stormwater Master Plan (B. Cook -20 Min)]
WE'RE BACK FROM OUR MORNING BREAK.I'M STILL IN OUR WORKSHOP FOR OCTOBER 26TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3C. PLEASE DO NOW.
>> ITEM 3C, UPDATE ON THE CITY STORM WATER MASTER PLAN.
>> WE HAVE BRANDON COOK WITH THIS, AND BRANDON, COULD YOU INTRODUCE OUR GUESTS WITH THIS SAW ALSO?
>> YES, THIS IS OUR GUESTS, HERE IS MATT MANGAS.
HE IS OUR CONSULTANT, CITY'S CONSULTANT ON THIS PROJECT WITH LAN ENGINEERING.
I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS.
THE LAST TIME THE CITY EMBARKED ON A STORM WATER MASTER PLAN WAS IN 2003, AND THAT STUDY ESSENTIALLY JUST SAT ON THE SHELF FOR 15 YEARS.
WE ACCOMPLISHED ONE PROJECT OUT OF THAT ENTIRE PLAN, WHICH WAS THE 18TH STREET PROJECT THAT WAS ULTIMATELY FUNDED WITH THE 2017 GO BONDS.
A PORTION OF IT, AT LEAST A VERY LARGE PORTION OF IT WAS FUNDED WITH THOSE BONDS.
WHENEVER I CHOSE THIS CAREER, IT WAS TO HELP REBUILD MY HOMETOWN.
I DIDN'T MESS THAT IN COLLEGE.
WHENEVER I DECIDED TO GO THIS ROUTE, AND NOW THAT WE'VE RECOVERED FROM THE DISASTER AND EVERYTHING, I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON RESILIENCY GOING FORWARD AND ALL THE REBUILDING EFFORTS NEED TO BE FOCUSED ON RESILIENCY.
I BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT HERE, IF WE IMPLEMENT IT, AND IT DOESN'T JUST SIT ON THE SHELF, THEN IT WILL BE THE CITY'S FIRST STEP TOWARD RESILIENCY AND EMBARKING ON THAT.
OF COURSE, I'M JUST ONE OPINION OUT OF OPINION AND 50,000 SOME ODD PEOPLE ON THIS ISLAND.
BUT I JUST FELT IT WAS INCUMBENT UPON ME TO SHARE MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS ENTIRE PROJECT AND EVERYTHING BEFORE WE DIVE INTO
[01:35:01]
THE DETAILS ON SOME HADN'T SAID THAT. MATT.>> THANK YOU, BRANDON. THIS MORNING, I'M GOING TO GIVE A BRIEF HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE STORM-WATER MASTER PLAN.
WE ALSO HAVE A SECOND FOLLOW-UP PRESENTATION, DISCUSS SOME OF THE INITIAL JOURNEYS UTILITY FEE INFORMATION.
WE'LL PAUSE AFTER THE STORM-WATER MASTER PLANNING PART BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT.
IF YOU'VE COME TO OUR PREVIOUS PUBLIC MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD OVER THE LAST 18 MONTHS OR SO.
YOU WILL SEE ELEMENTS THAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE.
AGAIN THIS MORNING IS JUST TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF THE STORM-WATER MASTER PLAN WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
GOING BACK TO SIMPLY THE PROJECT PURPOSE.
WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? STUDY PERFORMED OVER 20 YEARS AGO, AND THE PURPOSE RIGHT NOW IS TO TAKE AN UPDATED AND COMPREHENSIVE LOOK THE CURRENT DRAINAGE CONDITIONS IN THE CITY, PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES AND DEVELOP UPGRADES TO THE EXISTING STORM WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
ESSENTIALLY IT IS FIND OUT WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE DEVELOPED, SOME POTENTIAL RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS TO SOLVE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.
AGAIN, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS? THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS INFLUENCING STORM-WATER DRAINAGE, CERTAINLY ON THE GULF COAST, BUT DEFINITELY IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
THERE ARE CONCERNS FOR RISING SEA LEVEL OVER TIME.
GALVESTON WAS NOT BUILT YESTERDAY OR LAST YEAR.
THERE ARE SYSTEMS THAT HAVE REACHED THE END OF THEIR LIFE, AND MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT RELATIVE TO CURRENT DESIGN CRITERIA.
STORM INTENSITY, CERTAINLY WE'RE SEEING MORE SEVERE RAINFALL EVENTS OVER THE SEMI RECENT HISTORY.
THERE'S ALSO UPDATED REGULATIONS.
SEVERAL YEARS AGO, THE NOAA RELEASED NEW RAINFALL INFORMATION SO THAT WE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT EVENTS ARE WE REALLY GOING TO SEE? THEN FINALLY, THIS STUDY IS BEING DONE USING A MORE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY THAN IT WAS DONE BEFORE.
WE'RE UNDERSTANDING BOTH THE OVERLAND FLOW, HOW IT FLOWS THROUGH THE STREETS, AND ALSO HOW IT'S FLOWING IN YOUR SUBSURFACE STORM SEWER SYSTEMS, YOUR DITCHES, OPEN CHANNELS, BASICALLY A COLLECTIVE LOOK AT EVERYTHING WITHIN THE CITY.
THE GOAL, AGAIN, IS TO GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF OUR EXISTING CONDITIONS, FIGURE OUT WHERE OUR PROBLEMS ARE AND RECOMMEND POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE OUR OVERALL FLOOD RISKS.
LOOKING AT THE CURRENT PROJECT TIME-FRAME, JUST ALLOW WHERE WE ARE AND HOW WE'VE GOTTEN THERE.
THIS PROJECT STARTED IN FEBRUARY OF 2022, WENT INTO A HEAVY DATA COLLECTION PHASE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DOES THE CITY HAVE IN THE GROUND? WHERE DOES IT CONNECT, WHERE DOES IT CONVEY? WE WENT THROUGH AN EXHAUSTIVE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING AN EXISTING CONDITIONS MODEL.
THAT IS JUST A COMPUTER MODEL THAT DEPICTS HOW FLOODING OCCURS WITHIN THE CITY.
THERE WAS PUBLIC MEETING AND WINTER OF 22.
FROM THERE WE WENT INTO PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.
WHAT PROJECTS CAN SOLVE THOSE EXISTING CONDITIONS? WE HOLD ANOTHER PUBLIC MEETING THIS SUMMER, AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THAT IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS PHASE FROM JULY TO OCTOBER WITH A DRAFT REPORT FOR NEXT MONTH.
JUST A SUMMARY OF THOSE MEETINGS.
WE'VE HELD THREE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS IN DECEMBER 22, MARCH OF 23, JULY OF 23, SOME STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS WITH VARIOUS AGENCIES IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY TEXT.ARMY CORPS INTERESTS.
THOSE WERE IN MAY OF 22, IN DECEMBER OF 22.
THEN THIS WOULD BE THE THIRD TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN HERE AT CITY COUNCIL TO DISCUSS THIS PROJECT.
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT ABOUT REACH OVER THE LAST YEAR-AND-A-HALF.
WHAT DO OUR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS LOOK LIKE? AGAIN, IF YOU'VE COME TO THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, WE HAVE MORE DETAILED INFORMATION THAN WE'RE SUMMARIZING TODAY.
I'D HAVE SOME EXHIBITS I'LL HAND OUT AT THE END THAT JUST SUMMARIZE THE OVERALL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.
BUT ALTERNATIVES THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING, THEY ARE THINGS LIKE INCREASING STORM SEWER CAPACITY.
WE MAY TAKE A SMALLER SYSTEM UP SIZE.
IT MAY OFFER A DIFFERENT ROUTE OR CONNECTIVITY.
IT MAY GO TO A DIFFERENT BLOCK, INTERCONNECT WITH AN ADJACENT SYSTEM.
WE'RE ALSO LOOKING TO IMPROVE ALCOHOL CONDITIONS VIA A SYSTEM OF PUMPS OR POTENTIALLY FLAP GATES TO PREVENT THE SEA LEVEL FROM PROPAGATING BACK INTO OUR STORM SEWER SYSTEM.
THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT REGRADING OPEN DITCHES AND OPEN CHANNELS IN SOME CASES.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS WILL NOT COMPLETELY MAKE EVERYTHING WITHIN THE CITY DRY.
THERE WILL STILL BE TIDALLY INFLUENCED AREAS.
YOU WILL STILL SEE WATER IN CERTAIN DITCHES AND CERTAIN STORM SEWER SYSTEMS DURING SOME PORTIONS OF THE EVENT, PORTIONS OF THE CITY.
BUT IT IS OFFERING A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT FOR DRAINAGE CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY.
18 PROJECTS, 18 MAJOR HIGH-LEVEL PROJECTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ACROSS THE CITY TO TARGET HISTORIC AND FLOOD DAMAGE CENTERS WHEREVER THEY'RE BEING COMPLAINTS IN THE PAST.
[01:40:01]
WHERE WE'VE SEEN DEEP OR LONG-DURATION PONDING IS TO REDUCE STRUCTURAL FLOOD RISK, SO KEEP WATER OUT OF BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES AND TO IMPROVE STREET DRAINAGE.CLEARLY, TRANSPORTATION RELATED IMPACTS WHEN YOU'RE ROADWAYS ARE INUNDATED UPON IT STREET PARKING.
THE GOAL IS TO IMPROVE STREET DRAINAGE IN TERMS OF OVERALL DEPTH AND DURATION, AND THEN TO HELP REGAIN SOME STORM SEWER STORAGE CAPACITY.
LOW TIDAL CONDITIONS BE A PUMP STATIONS OR FLOODGATES.
ALL THESE 18 PROJECTS ARE THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND AN APPROXIMATE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE ON THESE 18 PROJECTS IS ABOUT $300 MILLION, WERE A MAGNITUDE FOR CONSTRUCTION COST.
AGAIN, THESE ARE SIMILAR FOOTPRINTS BUT THESE ARE THE FOOTPRINTS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWN AT PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
IN RED YOU SEE PROPOSED STORM SEWER UPGRADES.
A GREEN DOTS ARE PROPOSED PUMP STATIONS, AND THEN IN BLUE THOSE ARE IMPROVED DITCH OR SEWER PROJECTS. I DO HAVE SOME EXHIBITS.
I'LL HAND THOSE OUT AFTER AFTER OUR PRESENTATION.
THESE ARE THE LARGE-SCALE PROJECTS.
BEYOND JUST LARGE-SCALE PROJECTS, WE'RE ALSO CONSIDERING WHAT WE'RE CALLING LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DEVELOPMENTS.
THESE ARE SMALLER PROJECTS THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED BY CITY STAFF THAT ARE TARGETING AREAS FOR LOCALIZED IMPROVEMENTS? WHERE THERE'S BEEN A HISTORY OF WORK ORDER HOTSPOTS.
WHERE TREENESS CREWS FREQUENTLY GETTING CALLED OUT TO YOU FOR INLAY CLEAN OUTS, OR ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT THEY'RE OUT THERE OUT THERE SOLVING.
WHERE ARE WE GETTING SIGNIFICANT RESIDENT FEEDBACK? WHERE ARE YOU GETTING RESONANCE CALLING ABOUT OVER AND OVER? WE ALSO USED OUR COMPUTER MODELS TO HELP INFLUENCE AND UNDERSTAND SOME OF THESE AREAS WHERE WE SEE LONG-DURATION PONDING.
IT DOESN'T DRAIN OUT RIGHT AFTER THE STORM EVENT.
WHEREAS IN CONTINUING TO SET, THESE IMPROVEMENTS ARE A LITTLE MORE VARIED.
THEY ARE, AGAIN, SMALLER SCALE MAY BE THINGS LIKE INCREASING THE COUNT OR SIZE OF INLETS AND AN INTERSECTION.
OR MAYBE THE PIPES THAT ARE CONNECTING THOSE INLETS TO THE REST OF THE SYSTEM, MAY INVOLVE REPLACING BRIDGE BLOCKS WITH TRENCH TRAINS.
WERE IMPROVED CAPACITY AND ALSO DECREASED MAINTENANCE.
THERE MAY BE ALSO DRAIN DOWN PUMPS, WHICH WOULD DRAIN ITS LONGSTANDING WATER FROM ONE SYSTEM INTO ANOTHER SYSTEM.
LOOKING AT POTENTIAL PARKING, GREEN SPACE, MULTI-USE DETENTION.
AS PARKS ARE REDEVELOPED OR EXPANDED OR IMPROVED UPON IN THE FUTURE, THERE'S THE POTENTIAL TO INCLUDE SOME STRONG MARK CAPACITY WITHIN THOSE PARKS.
FINALLY, THERE'S SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DITCH AND CULVERT IN INLAND MAINTENANCE ROUTINE WHERE SEDIMENT ITSELF BE REMOVED FROM SOME OF THOSE.
THEN CERTAINLY AS PROJECTS ARE CONSIDERED, INCLUDING GRASSLANDS, SWALES OR PERMEABLE PAVEMENT.
RIGHT NOW THE APPROXIMATE COST OF THE IDENTIFIED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IS AROUND $40 MILLION.
AGAIN, THEY ARE SCATTERED ACROSS THE CITY.
HANDOUT AND EXHIBIT WITH THIS, BUT YOU'VE GOT THE LEGEND THERE ON THE RIGHT.
BRIDGE BLOCK IMPROVEMENTS OR UPGRADES ARE IN THE BLUE SQUARES.
INLET AND PIPE, LATERAL UPGRADES ARE IN THE ORANGE DOTS.
POTENTIAL BYPASS OR DRAIN DOWN PUMPS WOULD BE IN THE PINK ARROWS, DITCH AND COLBERT CLEAN OUTS IN YELLOW AND THEN POTENTIAL SITES FOR PARKER MULTI-USE DETENTIONS ARE IN THE GREEN SQUARES.
AGAIN, SCATTERED ACROSS THE CITY.
WHERE ARE WE? WHAT'S THE NEXT STEPS? AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS ANALYSIS.
YOU'VE DONE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS A DRAFT REPORT NEXT MONTH.
THAT IS THE NEXT MAJOR STEP. THE REPORT.
AS WE START TALKING ABOUT FUNDING FOR THESE PROJECTS IN THE FUTURE.
AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE TWO CATEGORIES OF PROJECTS.
WE HAD THE LARGE HIGH LEVEL OF SERVICE, CIP LEVEL TYPE PROJECTS.
THOSE CAN BE FUNDED THROUGH GRANTS AND POTENTIAL PARTNERSHIPS, OR POSSIBLY A BOND ISSUE FOR THE LOCAL MATCH, DEPENDING ON WHAT FUNDING OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE.
THOSE LOWER LEVEL OF SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS, LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH ONGOING CAPITAL PROJECTS OR POTENTIALLY EXISTING BOND CAPACITY AS SOME OF THAT MAY BECOME AVAILABLE IN THE FUTURE.
THERE WILL PAUSE FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MASTER PLAN BEFORE WE GO ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
>> BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS, COUNCIL BRIAN, WHERE DO WE STAND WITH IMPLEMENTATION, AS BRANDON MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING, THE KEYS MOVING FORWARD WITH ALL THIS.
HAVE WE ALREADY INCLUDED IT IN OUR 24 BUDGET TO BEGIN SOME OF THESE PROJECTS.
[01:45:03]
>> WE HAVE ONGOING DRAINAGE PROJECTS AND EVERY BUDGET IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL $340 MILLION, MOST OF THAT IS NOT BUDGET.
>> WHAT'S YOUR PLAN ON THIS IMPLEMENTATION THOUGH OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS?
>> I'LL CIRCLE THE WAGONS WITH THE TEAM AND WE CAN BRING BACK SOME FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS.
I THINK WHENEVER WE LOOKED AT OUR DEBT SERVICE CAPACITY LAST YEAR, WE HAD LOOKED AT HAVING ABOUT.
BECAUSE WE HAVE BONDS THAT ARE RETIRING THIS YEAR, WE HAVE CAPACITY AND THE DEBT SERVICE FUND FOR ABOUT 60 MILLION WITHOUT ASKING THE VOTERS FOR A TAX RATE INCREASE.
BUT THAT WAS LAST YEAR'S NUMBERS, AND INTEREST RATES WERE A LOT LOWER BACK THEN, SO I'M SURE THAT THAT AMOUNT HAS NOW COME DOWN FROM THAT AMOUNT.
BUT IT WOULD JUST BE, I GUESS, FEEDBACK FROM THE COUNCIL ON WHAT TYPE OF OXYGENS YOU ALL WANT US TO BRING BACK AND HOW WE PRIORITIZE THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOW PRESENTED.
BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF THE LARGER SCALE PROJECTS, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BIND THOSE OUT.
YOU WOULDN'T EVEN FOR ONE PROJECT PROBABLY ON THAT WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF GRANT FUNDING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
WE WOULD JUST NEED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE LOCAL MATCH AVAILABLE FOR THAT.
BUT AS FAR AS THE $40 MILLION OF THE LOCAL PROJECTS, NUMBER ONE, WE HAVEN'T EVEN SCRUBBED THEIR NUMBERS YET, ROB HADN'T HAD A CHANCE.
TO REALLY EVEN SCRUB THEM YET TO FIND OUT WHETHER THOSE ARE REASONABLE GIVEN OUR CURRENT STATE OF COST.
THAT'S A SNAPSHOT IN TIME, THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO ROLL OUT ALL THESE PROJECTS NEXT YEAR, GIVEN THE RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE.
WE WOULD HAVE TO THROW INFLATIONARY FACTORS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND PUT IT OUT OVER MORE MANAGEABLE TYPE OF WORKLOAD, WHICH IS OF COURSE IS GOING TO INCREASE YOUR COSTS.
>> IN DRAINAGE IS FUNDED THROUGH DRAINAGE FEES, SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT YOUR FEE STRUCTURE TO SEE EXACTLY HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO TOLERATE.
>> WELL, THIS IS MY QUESTION I WOULDN'T PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A FLOWCHART ON MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE LOCAL AND ON THE HIGH LEVEL PROJECTS.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT FLOWCHART INCLUDE OF COURSE, A TIMELINE ON THAT AND I'D LIKE TO SEE ALSO THE SUGGESTIONS ON EACH PHASE OF THIS ON WHAT YOUR FUNDING WOULD BE AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO ON A LOCAL LEVEL TO SUPPORT THAT FUNDING AND HOW WE NEED TO PUT THAT IN OUR BUDGET.
I'D LIKE TO SAY WE NEED TO GET THIS MOVING FORWARD WITH A TOTAL PLAN FOR NOW AND IN THE FUTURE ON THAT.
>> WE ALSO HAVE TO BE SENSITIVE TO BURDENING OUR CITIZENS WITH UNENDING FEES.
>> BUT THERE'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BURDENING YOUR CITIZENS WITH FEES AND BURDEN WITH WATER.
BECAUSE THIS THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROBLEM I THINK THE QUESTION REALLY BEFORE US IS, WHAT'S IT GOING TO TAKE TO KEEP UP WITH THIS? NOT TO LOSE GROUND.
>> THAT WE'VE LOST CONSIDERABLE GROUND.
>> AS WE'LL SEE IN THE NEXT PRESENTATION REALLY ARE OUR DRAINAGE FEES ARE ONLY PAYING FOR EXISTING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS.
THERE'S NO CAPITAL THAT REALLY GOES AWAY.
THE ONLY CAPITAL THAT'S IN THERE OR YOUR VACUUM TRUCKS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S WHICH WE WE'VE MORE THAN QUADRUPLED THE NUMBER OF VACUUM TRUCKS AND SOUTH BEND HERE BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH MAINTENANCE, BUT AS LONG AS HE'S DRAINS OR SILTING UP WITH TIDAL WATER IN THEM.
WE WERE JUST GOING TO KEEP SPENDING MONEY ON BACK TRUCKS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> WE HAVE TWO OF THEM AT THE END OF LIFE RIGHT NOW THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED. THERE'S FRANKLY.
>> BECAUSE WE'RE SUCKING SALT WATER THROUGH THESE TRUCKS.
>> THIS SUBJECT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT SUBJECTS, IS NOT A REAL FLASHY SUBJECT, BUT IT'S A SUBJECT THAT PROBABLY IT'S.
>> A FLASHY FLOOD SUDDENLY [LAUGHTER], FROM A SUSTAINABILITY STANDPOINT FOR OUR COMMUNITY, IT'S PROBABLY THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY WE'VE HAD GOT TO MOVE FORWARD AND HAVE A PLAN AS WE MOVE FORWARD FOR THIS.
BRANDON, AND BRIAN, YOU CAN BRING SOMETHING BACK TO US WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME ON THIS TIMELINE IN THE FLOWCHART.
WANT TO SEE HOW WE CAN IMPLEMENT THIS.
>> BECAUSE, ANY TYPE OF BOND ISSUANCE THAT WE'D BE LOOKING AT, WE WE'D HAVE TO LOOK TO GO TO THE VOTERS FOR NEXT YEAR.
IT'S PROBABLY AROSE THAT CAPACITY IS NO LONGER THERE.
>> WE ALSO WENT AND LOOKED AT THOUGH AND SOME BREAKDOWN SINCE IT IS ACROSS THE CITY WHERE WE COULD GET CDBG FUNDS OR OTHER GRANTS VERSUS [OVERLAPPING] LET'S THAT.
>> WE ACTIVELY PURSUE THE GRANTS AS THEY BECOME AVAILABLE AS A COMPETITIVE PROCESS.
>> CDBG FUNDS, IT REGULARLY OCCUR IN THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS SO THEY'RE NOT RECURRING, SO YOU CAN'T USE THEM TO READ FOR DEPTH.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT LOOKING AT WHAT THINGS ARE THERE BEFORE,.
[01:50:03]
>> WE CAN CERTAINLY TURN OUR ATTENTION TO USING IT.
WE'VE BEEN USING A LOT OF WORK FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN THE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME AREAS, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY TURN OUR ATTENTION TO DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WITH IT IF IT'S ALLOWED.
>> THAT BRINGS UP THE POINT IS COUNCILWOMAN ROBBINS SAYING IS.
>> WHICH IS NOT THAT MUCH MONEY THERE.
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT, BUT WHEN YOU MOVE MONEY INTO DRAINAGE OR CDBG, YOU'RE GOING TO IT AWAY FROM SOMETHING ELSE, SO WE NEED.
>> IT'S A SHRINKING NUMBER EVERY YEAR.
>> IT IS, SO WE NEED TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT, JOHN.
>> ACCORDING TO THE PUMP STATIONS THAT WE HAVE PLANNED, WHAT DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE FUNDED?
>> WE CURRENTLY HAVE FULLY FUNDED THE SOUTH SHORE DRIVE PUMP STATION.
THERE'S A FUNDING GAP RIGHT NOW FOR THE ONE THAT'S ON 15TH, THAT'S PROPOSED ON 15TH TO HAVE ONE WAY BY INFLATION.
WE HAVE REPROACHED FEMA TO INCREASE THE BUDGET, AND WE HAVE YET TO HEAR FROM THEM FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS I BELIEVE.
>> WE'RE HOPEFUL AND COSTS HAVE GONE UP, OF COURSE.
>> THE 15TH STREET PUMP STATION WAS FUNDED AT 32 MILLION.
>> WE'RE SHORT A COUPLE OF 2 MILLION DOLLARS.
>> WE RE-APPROACH THEM AND THEN OF COURSE, AS WE RE-APPROACH THEM AND WAITING ON A DECISION, COSTS ARE STILL.
>> KEEP IN MIND TOO. THE OTHER THING TOO IS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THESE PUMPS STATIONS FIT.
THEY ARE GOOD ABOUT FUNDING PUMP STATIONS, MAKING THEM FIT INTO NEIGHBORHOODS, MAKING THEM AESTHETICALLY APPEALING, MAKING THEM QUIETER, AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT TYPICALLY COMES ON OUR DOD.
>> IN THE SOUTH SHORE PULSATION IS FUNDED CURRENTLY?
>> WITH HURRICANE HARVEY MONEY TO THE CDBG MITIGATION FUNDING THAT WE'VE RECEIVED 4 MILLION JOIN ON THAT.
>> ARE WE GETTING TO A POINT WHERE THAT COULD GO OVER BUDGET BECAUSE OF TIMING?
>> WELL, WHAT WE'LL SEE WHEN WE BID IT OUT, WE HAVE ENGINEERS ESTIMATES ON 60% DESIGN RIGHT NOW, AND THEY FALL IN LINE WITH EXISTING DOLLARS.
HOWEVER, WHEN YOU GO OUT TO THE MARKET NEXT YEAR ON IT, IT'S AN ESTIMATE.
>> THAT'S TWO OF THE [OVERLAPPING] ITEM 6.
>> WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
>> I HATE TO SAY THIS, BUT ANOTHER EVENT TRIGGERS MORE FUNDING.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS COUNCIL, ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? I THINK YOU, BRANDON, ABOUT BRINGING BACK THE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM FOR THESE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO A FLOWCHART AND ALL THAT, THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT.
VERY GOOD, LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3D, PLEASE NOW.
[3.D. Discussion Of Drainage Fees (Robb/Brown - 15 Min)]
>> ITEM 3D, DISCUSSION OF DRAINAGE FEES.
>> BEFORE I KNOW COUNCILWOMAN ROBB HAD THIS WAS AN ITEM THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO HER AND BRANDON.
YOU HAD A SHORT PRESENTATION OR YOU HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT?
>> AGAIN, ANOTHER BRIEF PRESENTATION AS PART OF THE STORM WATER MASTER PLAN.
WE HAVE REVIEWED THE STORM WATER FEE IN ITS CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION AND THE GOAL ON THIS IS TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THE EXISTING ORDINANCE SO NO CHANGES AS WRITTEN, NO ADJUSTMENTS TO THAT.
RELATED TO DRAINAGE FEES FOR ALL REAL ESTATE WITHIN CITY LIMITS, CLEANING PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT RECEIVE CITY OR SANITARY UTILITY SERVICES BEGINNING OF LATE 2023.
AGAIN, THIS IMPLEMENTATION FOLLOWS A REVIEW AND REASSESSMENT OF THE ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL UTILITY ACCOUNTS BASED ON THE CITY'S CURRENT CODE PROVISIONS.
WE WANTED TO GO THROUGH VALIDATE WHAT INFORMATION WAS IN THERE, ENSURE THAT RESIDENTIAL USERS RECLASSIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL WERE CLASSIFIED AS NON-RESIDENTIAL AND ADJUST ANY ACREAGES OR RATES ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE.
SIMPLY, I'M NOT GOING TO READ EVERY ORDINANCE.
IT'S UP HERE, BUT VERY SIMPLY, THE EXISTING ORDINANCE IS EFFECTIVELY SEVEN DOLLARS A MONTH FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS, FOR ALL OTHERS, $58.80 PER ACRE WITH $107 MONTH MINIMUM CHARGE SO RESIDENTS FLAT FEE SEVEN DOLLARS A MONTH.
COMMERCIAL IT IS BASED ON THE ACREAGE WITH A POTENTIAL FLAT FEE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU'RE LOOKING TO IMPLEMENT THIS IN 2005?
>> IT'S BEEN IMPLEMENTED, WE'RE BROADENING IT, WERE FULLY IMPLEMENTING IT WHENEVER IT WAS INITIALLY ROLLED OUT.
>> BUT IT'S NOT FULLY IMPLEMENTED.
YOU SAID YOU'RE FULLY IMPLEMENTED, AS I SAY, WAS ERRONEOUSLY ROLLED OUT THERE.
WHEN WE AUDITED THE CURRENT RATES, WE FOUND THAT THERE WAS A LARGE PORTION OF CUSTOMERS THAT WERE NOT BEING ACCURATELY BUILT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEM.
[01:55:04]
>> THE WAY YOU'RE BUILDING CUSTOMERS NOW IS BASED ON WATER BILL?
>> YOU HAVE NOT BUILD ANY CUSTOMER THAT DOES NOT HAVE A WATER BILL?
>> WELL, AND THAT'S PART OF THE NEXT.
>> WHAT YOUR STATEMENT WASN'T ACTUALLY TRUE BECAUSE IT'S BASED NOT ON THEIR WATER BILL, IT'S BASED ON THEIR ACREAGE.
>> THE WATER BILL IS THE IS THE MECHANISM WITH WHICH WE HAVE BUILT IT.
>> I THINK EVERYTHING I SAID WAS CORRECT.
THERE ARE FEW EXEMPTIONS IN THE CITY CODE.
WATER METERS FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES, YOUR GEISHA METERS FOR PARKING LOTS FOR THAT'S THE ONLY MEANS OF CHARGING TO DEVELOP PARKING LOT FEE OR NOT EXEMPT.
DETERMINATION OF WHERE A WATER METER IS USED FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES SHALL BE BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ARE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE.
THEN NUMBER 4 IS ANY OTHER PURPOSE AS OUTLINED IN STATE LAW DETERMINATION FOR THE CITY OF WHETHER A CUSTOMER IS EXEMPT FROM THIS PROVISION.
REFERENCING THE STATE LAW, THERE'S THREE PRIMARY PROVISIONS THAT ARE EXEMPT.
IT IS A PROPERTY WITH PROPER CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF A HOLY SUFFICIENT AND PRIVATELY OWN DRAINAGE SYSTEM SO THAT WOULD MEAN YOU DON'T INTERACT WITH THE CITY SYSTEM AT ALL IN ANY WAY.
TWO AND THREE ARE VERY CLOSELY RELATED TO HIS PROPERTY HELD, MAINTAINING ITS NATURAL STATE UNTIL SUCH A TIME THAT THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED AND ALL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTED, IT'S BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE MUNICIPALITY IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED FOR MAINTENANCE AND THEN FINALLY, NUMBER THREE, SUBDIVIDED LOT UNTIL A STRUCTURE HAS BEEN BUILT ON THE LAT AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE MUNICIPALITY WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
>> ITEM NUMBER 2 ADDRESSED HARDEST BOATS CONCERN?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE ARTISTS BOAT OR IS NOT ALLOWING US TO USE DRAINAGE EASEMENT.
THEY'RE CAUSING FLOODING IN ANOTHER AREA AND YET THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM PAYING ANY DRAINAGE, BUT THEY'RE CAUSING?
>> THE ISSUE IS IS THAT ON THE WEST END, THERE ARE PRESUMPTIVE EASEMENTS OUT THERE.
BEFORE THE CITY ANNEXED IT, THAT'S HOW IT DRAINED AND IT DRAINED THROUGH THESE WETLAND AREAS ARE THESE BIG SWATHS OF AREAS.
TECHNICALLY, WE PROBABLY NEED TO GET IN THERE AND DEEPEN THOSE AND GET THEM OPENED UP, BUT THE PROPERTIES PRIVATELY HELD.
>> NOT ALL OF THEM ARE PRESUMPTIVE.
HE'S BEEN SOME ARE ACTUALLY REGISTERED EASEMENTS THAT WERE DONE THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY RAISED 355 AFTER ALL AND HE HAD LAND HAS CHANGED HANDS TO DIFFERENT GROUPS.
THEY ARE NO LONGER ALLOWING THE CITY TO ACCESS THE EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE AND YET THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM A DRAINAGE FEE AND THEY'RE SUFFERING FROM FLOODING.
>> WE CAN DEFINITELY HAVE LEGAL LOOK INTO THE NUANCES OF THE MATTER.
>> BUT I CAN TELL YOU WHEN TEXTS THAT WANTED TO ACCESS THOSE THERE WAS ISSUES THERE AND THAT'S WHAT TEXTS NOT BACKED OFF.
>> I KNOW EXACTLY BECAUSE WE EVEN HAD CITY CREWS UNDER OUR FORMER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS WENT OUT THERE AND THEY WOULDN'T THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO SERVICE THE EXISTING DITCHES.
>> BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE ONE PERSON IS TOTALLY EXEMPT AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD FLOODING.
WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MONEY TO FIX THAT DRAINAGE, WHICH I DIDN'T SEE THE ONE I'M THINKING I'M BUILDING ON TOP OF MY HAND HAD ON THAT PLAN.
BUT BECAUSE SOMEBODY WHO IS EXEMPT FROM DRAINAGE AND THEN I'VE ALSO HEARD FROM COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS WHO HAVE DRAINAGE DITCHES AND HANDLE ALL THEIR OWN DRAINAGE ARE NOW BEING CHARGED.
>> NOW WHAT WE ARE DOING THOSE WE'RE WE'RE ASKING THEM IF THAT IS THE CASE THEY NEED TO SHOW IS THAT THEY'RE NOT AT ALL IMPACTING THE CITY'S DRAINAGE SYSTEM, BUT WE HAVEN'T CHARGED ANYBODY YET.
>> NOW WHEN WE'RE HAVING DEVELOPERS DEVELOP, WE HAVE THEM DO A RETENTION POND SO THEY'RE HAVING LESS IMPACT AND THEY'RE BEING CHARGED THE SAME AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE FEE EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE PUTTING [OVERLAPPING].
>> DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRING DETENTION RETENTION, BUT WE ARE RECORDING PERMEABLE SURFACES IN CERTAIN ABSORPTIVE AREAS.
[02:00:01]
>> WHERE WE'RE REQUIRING RETENTION.
>> BUT THE DRAINAGE HE'S STILL APPLIES TO THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE STILL ULTIMATELY JUST BECAUSE YOU RETAIN IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU KEEP IT FOREVER.
IT'S STILL ULTIMATELY ENDS UP IN OUR DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
>> THEN THERE'S A QUESTION AND I KNOW I'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CALLS ON THIS ON CHURCH PROPERTIES THAT HAVE LARGE PARKING LOTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE GROWING CONGREGATIONS AND THEY'RE BEING CHARGED AS IF THEY WERE COMMERCIAL FOR PROFIT AND THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE A NON-PROFIT.
>> WATER DOESN'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S COMING FROM A FULL-PROFIT PARKING LOT OR A NON-PROFIT PARKING LOT.
IT'S STILL WATER. WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
ENLARGED PARKING LOTS ARE GENERALLY COMMERCIAL BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOUR HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE A RESIDENTIAL IS YOU DON'T HAVE A LARGE PARKING LOT AT YOUR HOUSE.
IF YOU HAVE A LARGE PARKING LOT, ITS COMMERCIAL.
>> I DID IT BEFORE WE BOUGHT THIS.
ONE NOT FOR PROFIT IS EXEMPT BUT ANOTHER IS BASED.
>> IT'S NOT SO MUCH THAT IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THEIR FULL PROFIT OR NOT-FOR-PROFIT STATUS.
IT HAS TO DO WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PHASE OF THE PROPERTY.
IF THE ARTIST'S BOAT WERE TO GO OUT THERE AND PAVE THEIR ACREAGE THEN THEY WOULD BE CHARGED.
BUT BY STATE LAW, AS LONG AS IT IS UNDEVELOPED, WE CAN NOT CHARGE THEM.
>> BUT WE DO NEED TO GET AN ANSWER TO THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU'RE ALSO NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE A PROPERTY THAT CAUSES FLOODING ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY AND YET THAT IS HAPPENING BECAUSE THE RESTRICTING THAT DRAINAGES.
>> THINGS MAY HAVE CHANGED NOW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND NO LONGER HAS JURISDICTION OVER CERTAIN TYPES OF WETLANDS THAT ARE NOT TOTALLY INFLUENCED SO THAT MAY WEIGH INTO THE EQUATION.
I'M NOT SURE THE NATURE OF THE ONES THAT ARE THERE ON THEIR PROPERTY.
BUT IF THEY'RE NOT HIGHLY INFLUENCED, THEN I MAY NOT BE SUBJECT TO THE CORPS REGULATIONS.
WELL, I'M GOING TO LET HIM FINISH.
>> MORE SLIDES AND THEN WE'LL BE COMPLETE WITH THE PRECEDENT.
TALKING ABOUT THE IMPACT TO TOTAL COLLECTIONS.
TODAY, THE EXISTING DRAINAGE UTILITY FEET COLLECTS ABOUT THREE BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
BASED ON THE REVISED AND FULLY IMPLEMENTED NUMBERS, WE'D COLLECT CLOSER TO ABOUT $3.62 MILLION PER YEAR.
OF THAT, 3.56 IS MADE UP OF ADJUSTING THE FULLY IMPLEMENTATION FOR CUSTOMERS ALREADY SAVING A BILL.
ADJUSTING THAT INFORMATION THEN MORE RECENTLY REFLECT ACREAGES OF LAND USE TYPES AND THEN SOME OF THOSE NEW CUSTOMER COLLECTIONS ARE AREAS NOT CURRENTLY BEING BUILD THAT DO FALL UNDER COULD BE BUILT EXPECTING ABOUT $60,000 A YEAR OUT OF THOSE.
YOU SEE SOME COLLECTION RATES ADJACENT TO THOSE NUMBERS.
CURRENT, UTILITY COLLECTION RATE IS WE UNDERSTAND IS AROUND 94% SO EXISTING CUSTOMERS DO VERY GOOD JOB WITH PAYING THEIR BILLS.
FOR NEW BILLS WHERE WE'RE EXPECTING ARE ANTICIPATING A LOWER COLLECTION RIGHT ON THAT.
OBVIOUSLY, WE WOULD HOPE FOR HIRE VERY SIMILAR TO THE NON ISSUES [OVERLAPPING].
IN TALKING TALKING TO BRANDON AND STAFF, THE MAINTENANCE OF JUST CURRENT OPERATIONAL LEVELS IS GOING TO VERY RAPIDLY EXCEED CURRENT FUNDING BASED ON THE EXISTING DRAINAGE UTILITY FEE.
THE REST OF THIS PUT IT OVER FOUR MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR SO RELATIVE TO DEBT IN TODAY'S DOLLARS, PUT TWO MILLION DOLLARS SHORT RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE TO TRY TO MAINTAIN EXISTING OPERATIONS.
>> KEEP IN MIND, GUYS, I KNOW YOU'VE SEEN THIS.
WHEN WE HAVE A RAIN EVENT WE DON'T WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT DAY.
OUR CREWS ARE OUT WORKING THESE RAIN EVENTS.
THEY'RE OUT THERE OUT SUCKING THESE DRAINS, YOU'RE PUSHING WATER, THEY'RE DOING ALL THOSE THINGS.
WHEN WE HAVE A RAIN EVENT AND PRETTY MUCH ANY RAIN EVENT AND TRINA HAS 100% OF HIS GUYS OUT WORKING AND WE DON'T GO HOME UNTIL WE GET THE STREETS CLEARED.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT THAT'S A SWITCH FROM WAY WE USED TO DO THE DRAINAGE CREWS USED TO JUST WORK MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 8:00-5:00 AND IF IT RAINED ON A WEEKEND AND IT WAS STANDING WATER WELL, WE'D GET TO IT ON MONDAY.
THAT'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE DID NOT PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED THAT WE'RE PROVIDING NOW.
AS I MENTIONED, WE HAVE GREATLY INCREASED THE SIZE OF OUR BACKDROP FLEETS AND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT WE USE TO MAINTAIN DRAINAGE AND PUMPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE CONSTANTLY DOING THAT AND WE ARE SEEING MARKED IMPROVEMENT AS A RESULT OF IT.
BUT WE CANNOT SUSTAIN THE COST OF THAT GIVEN OUR CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE.
THE FOCUS OF THIS WAS IMPLEMENTING THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FEE AS WRITTEN.
IN GENERAL, THE PROCESS WAS ASSESSING THE ACCOUNT DESIGNATION.
[02:05:03]
DURING RESIDENTIAL OR NON-RESIDENTIAL, REASSESSING THE ACREAGE INFORMATION THAT'S KEY FOR THE COMMERCIAL, BASING THAT ON THE LATEST JIEKUN PARCEL INFORMATION AND THEN EXEMPTING ACREAGE THAT'S UNDERWATER, THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] DOESN'T DRAIN WELL.THAT'S RIGHT. IT DOESN'T DRAIN WELL.
DOES PRESENT A QUESTION, EXEMPTING PROPERTY THAT'S UNDERWATER.
IF WE'RE HAVING SOMEBODY PUT IN WATER RETENTION AREA, IS THAT PROPERTY CONSIDERED UNDERWATER THEN? THEN THAT'S EXAM.
DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF RETENTION THEY PUT IN.
BUT KEEP IN MIND, WE'RE NOT ASKING THEM TO RETAIN THE WATER PERMANENTLY.
WHAT THAT DOES IS IT HOLDS WATER IN AN EVENT AND THEN MATRICULATED OUT INTO OUR SYSTEM.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE RETAINING WATER, THAT THEY'RE NOT DRAINING THAT WATER IN OUR SYSTEM.
IT JUST MEANS THEY ARE HOLDING IT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME UNTIL IT HITS OUR SYSTEM.
WE STILL HAVE TO HANDLE ALL THE WATER COMING FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT.
WE ALL GET A DISCOUNT ON OUR FLOOD INSURANCE FOR HAVING THOSE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN PLACE THROUGH THE COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM PROGRAM ON FEMA.
WE'RE NOT CREATING PERMANENT LAKES.
WHAT ARE THE THINGS WE DID CONSIDER WAS SWITCHING THIS MORE TO AN IMPERVIOUS BASED ACREAGE CALCULATION.
GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, THERE WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EFFORT REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT THAT, MAINTAIN IT, INTEGRATED WITHIN CITY SYSTEMS, AND THEN AS PEOPLE GO OUT AND REDEVELOP OR CHANGE WHAT'S ON THEIR PROPERTY.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE UPDATED THEM.
THAT WAS THAT WAS SOMETHING WE DID NOT PURSUE IN A HEAVY AMOUNT OF DETAIL.
THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THERE IS INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE GALVESTON DRAINAGE FEE WEBSITE.
THERE'S A SCREENSHOT OF THE WEBSITE RIGHT THERE ON THE RIGHT.
YES. A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER].
I'M GOING TO PAINT A PICTURE WITH MY WORDS.
[LAUGHTER] THIS WEBSITE, WHAT IT HAS IS SOME BACKGROUND TO REVIEW YOUR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY INFORMATION.
WHAT'S BEING ASSUMED TO GO WITH YOUR WEBSITE OR YOUR PARCEL? THE ORIGIN AND BACKGROUND OF THE DRAINAGE FEE.
IT'S GOT ALL THE VERBIAGE THAT GOES WITH IT.
ALSO INCLUDES AN ONLINE APPEAL FORM.
IF YOU THINK THAT YOU HAVE BEEN MISCHARACTERIZED IN SOME WAY, YOU CAN FILL THAT FORM OUT.
ALSO INCLUDES A NUMBER OF DRAINAGE FEE FACT SHEETS ABOUT THE BACKGROUND OF THIS, WHY AND INCLUDES EXISTING CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING DRAINAGE AND OPERATIONS.
SO WHAT IS THIS B BEING USED FOR? AGAIN, I'M GOING TO PAINT ANOTHER PICTURE WITH MY WORDS HERE, THE APPEAL PROCESS.
ON THE LEFT, YOU ARE GOING TO SEE A SCREENSHOT OF A PAPER DOCUMENT THAT SOMEBODY COULD FILL OUT AN APPEAL, THAT INFORMATION THEN ON THE RIGHT, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THAT, NOTICING HAS BEEN MAILED TO CUSTOMERS THAT ARE EXPECTING TO SEE A GREATER THAN $250 A YEAR ANNUALLY INCREASES.
PRIMARILY, CLEARLY COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS, RESIDENCES CAN GET TO THAT FEE BECAUSE IT'S FLAT SEVEN DOLLARS A MONTH THAT'S GIVING THEM INFORMATION ON HOW TO APPEAL THAT.
THE APPEAL FOR THAT INITIAL INTENT IS THAT THE DEADLINE WILL BE 90 DAYS FOLLOWING THE FIRST BILL WITH THAT REVISED FEE TALKING ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION TIME-FRAME.
NOTICING HAS BEEN SENT TO CUSTOMERS ON HOW AND WHERE TO DISPUTE THE REASSESSED ACCOUNT INFORMATION. IF SO DESIRED.
DEADLINE IS GOING TO BE 90 DAYS FOLLOWING THAT FIRST BILL WOULD WITH IT WITH THE REVISED FEE.
THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THOSE NEWLY SOLIDIFIED FEES IN PLACE BY LATE 2023 OR EARLY 2024.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF KEY STEPS AHEAD OF THAT FINAL IMPLEMENTATION.
IN WORKING WITH BRANDON AND CITY STAFF, THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AN EXTERNAL VENDOR TO HELP WITH SOME OF THOSE UPDATES WITHIN THE SYSTEM.
DO THEM IN MASS. THAT VENDOR WILL CREATE SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIRED ACCOUNTS AND REQUIRED INFORMATION IN YOUR UTILITY BILLING SYSTEM.
THEN THE CITY BILLING DEPARTMENT WILL TEST, UPDATE THE UTILITY BILLING INFORMATION, AND THEN THE CUSTOMERS WILL RECEIVE THEIR FIRST BILL WITH THE REASSESSED DRAINAGE FEES.
I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE WE BEING PREMATURE AND I'M PROVING THAT EXTENDED CONTRACT WITH OUR UTILITY BELLY ONE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES ON THIS? NO, BECAUSE THAT'S SEPARATE ISSUES.
ONE HAS TO DO WITH WATER, BUT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
[OVERLAPPING] THE DATE OF ENTRY THAT AND PUT IT INTO THE SYSTEM AND WE HAVE TO PAY FOR EXTRA ACCOUNTS THAT MAY GO IN THERE.
BUT IT'S JUST REALLY DOING MANUALLY ENTER IT AT ALL, AND THEN SUBJECT THAT TO MORE ERRORS AND PROBABLY THE REASON IT IS FOULED UP IN THE FIRST PLACE? OR DO WE AUTOMATE IT AND THEN GO LIKE THAT.
HOW TO DO THINGS ON THE CHEAP AND THEN WE END UP REGRETTING IT.
IF WE HAVE SOMEONE THEN WHO HAS A LARGE PARKING LOT,
[02:10:01]
AND SO THEY COULD IMPLEMENT A OR THEY COULD ADD LAKE IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR PARKING LOT TOO FOR GREEN SPACE AND TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THEIR COST.I WOULD SUGGEST TO THEM AT THAT POINT IF THE FEE IS CAUSING THEM A BURDEN AND THEY HAVE ENOUGH ROOM IN THEIR PARKING LOT TO PUT IN A LAKE THAT SHOULD REDUCE THE SIZE OF THEIR PARKING LOT.
BUT IT WOULD BE MUCH CHEAPER THAN PUTTING IN A LAKE.
YOU SAYING THAT THERE'S A LAKE OR AS GREEN SPACE IN THEIR PARKING LOT? [OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE] BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE INCREASING FEES WHICH ARE ALREADY A BURDEN ON SOME NOT FOR PROFIT.
WHAT WOULD BE SOME CREATIVE WAYS WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP THEM? YOU ALWAYS SEEN WHAT THE COST ARE AND THAT'S A POLICY DECISION BY COUNSEL.
YOU COULD ALWAYS EXEMPT THE NOT-FOR-PROFITS, BUT THEN YOU'D HAVE TO RAISE THE FEES ON THE OTHER PEOPLE.
YOU GUYS CAN DO IT HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT.
ARE WE INCREASING ANY FEES RIGHT NOW? NO.
BUT THE FIRST THING WAS LET'S PLOT IT.
THE EXISTING CUSTOMER DATABASE BEFORE WE JUST PROPOSED TO RAISE FEES ON EVERYBODY.
IT'S LIKE LET'S AUDIT, MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE.
THEN WE'LL MAKE IT A DETERMINATION ON HOW WE SLICE AND DICE IT.
WHETHER WE WANT TO GO UP ON THE RESIDENTS AND GO DOWN ON THE COMMERCIAL OR VICE VERSA.
IT'S 1,000 DIFFERENT WAYS TO SKIN A CAT.
CURRENTLY WE CHARGE $56 AN ACRE, 5,880.
REGARDLESS OF THE ACREAGE, YOU CAN USE A SMALLER ACREAGES.
IN THEORY IF YOU HAD A VERY SMALL SITE THAT COULD DO THE MATH ON NUMBERS, $7 WOULD BE YOUR MINIMUM.
WHAT ABOUT ON COMMERCIAL [INAUDIBLE]? THAT'S THE EXAMPLE THAT WAS ON A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
IF YOU'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN AND YOU HAVE BASICALLY A LOT SIZE COMMERCIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU PAY SEVEN BUCKS.
OR LET'S SAY YOU HAVE A QUARTER OF AN ACRE. [INAUDIBLE] 25% OF 5,880.
>> THIS IS IMPLEMENTED RIGHT NOW, PEOPLE ARE PAYING THE $58 PER ACRE FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
>> THEY ARE NOW, BUT THEY WEREN'T. ONCE AGAIN.
>> YOU HAD MOST OF YOUR COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES HAD BEEN PAYING AND YOU'D HAVE SOME THAT WERE NOT AND THAT'S WHAT THIS AUDIT IS CAUGHT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE WASN'T THERE INCONSISTENCY WITH COMMERCIAL THAT WAS STILL IN SEPTIC TANK.
>> SEPTIC TANKS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.
>> WHY? I KNOW I POINTED OUT ONE THING THAT WAS TO THE DETRIMENT OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY WE HAVE WHERE THEY WEREN'T BEING CHARGED THE DRAINAGE, WHICH WE ARE NOW.
BUT I THINK THERE WERE QUITE A FEW PROPERTIES THAT WERE FOUND AT THAT TIME.
>> IS THERE ANY PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE CHARGED THAT WOULDN'T HAVE A WATER METER?
>> NOT AFTER THE DISCOVERY, ARE THERE? WHICH ONES?
>> UNLESS YOU HAVE A CRUISE PARKING LOT OR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY IRRIGATION OR WATER METER TO IT.
>> HOW DO YOU BUILD THOSE PEOPLE?
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO IN AND MANUALLY BUILT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
>> THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
>> THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS?
>> YEAH. INSTEAD OF MONTHLY IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE CHARGED.
>> WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT? THAT'S HUGE?
>> THAT'S A HUGE BILL AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
>> YEAH, IT IS A TAX [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT'S A FACE. [OVERLAPPING] IT'S AN ASSESSMENT ON PROPERTY.
>> GOVERNMENTALLY AND REALLY MAKES IT TWO DIFFERENT WAYS, FEES OR TAXES.
[OVERLAPPING] TAXES ARE FOR THE FORELIMBS, VERY DIRTY WORD.
>> PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE COMMERCIAL ARE CONSIDERING IT.
>> IS THAT WHERE YOU'RE MAKING UP THE $500,000 DIFFERENCE IN THE THREE MILLION AND THE 3.6, $600,000.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE COLLECT ABOUT THREE MILLION, AND WE ESTIMATE TO COLLECT ABOUT 3.6.
IS THAT WHERE YOU'RE MAKING UP THE DIFFERENCE OR IS THERE JUST THAT MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT [OVERLAPPING] WE DO NOT CHARGE THIS FEE TO, THAT ARE HAVING WATER BILL OR NOT HAVE A WATER BILL?
>> THE NEW ACCOUNTS WERE ONLY ESTIMATED $60,000 OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE FROM THAT.
THE OTHER ONE, IT'S 600,000, IT'S CORRECT IN THE ACREAGE AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT.
>> SOME OF IT'S MISCALCULATED ACREAGE, SOME OF IT THEY HAVEN'T PAID AT ALL, SOME OF IT IS MISCLASSIFICATION FROM RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL, THAT'S WHAT THE AUDIT REVEALED.
>> OKAY. THIS IS THIS IS BIG MONEY,
[02:15:02]
ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAD ANNUALLY.THIS COULD BE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS [OVERLAPPING]
>> I WOULD PROBABLY LEAN MORE AND TRY TO DO A QUARTERLY JUST SO IT'S NOT AS MUCH OF A BURDEN ON A BUSINESS.
>> WE'RE NOT JUST GOING TO SEND THEM A BILL, THEY'RE GOING TO GET PLENTY OF NOTICE AND KNOW THIS IS COMING AND ALL THAT STUFF.
>> WE'VE ALREADY SENT THAT OUT.
>> WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING.
I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SAY ALL THREE OF THEM.
ONE OF THEM IS IF IT'S UNDEVELOPED.
>> WELL, PIECE OF PROPERTY, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A WATER METER UNDEVELOPED.
>> NATURAL STATE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> TO PUT IMPROVEMENTS ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT'S GOING TO GET THE FEE.
>> UNLESS YOU HAVE YOUR OWN INTERNAL DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
>> YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DOCUMENT THAT WITH SOME TYPE OF [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S A SECOND EXEMPTION. WHAT'S THE THIRD?
>> IS A SUBDIVIDED LOT, JUST AN UNDEVELOPED LOT SITTING IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN THAT RECEIVES NO SERVICE.
ONE IS A WETLANDS EXEMPTION, THE OTHER ONE IS UNDEVELOPED LOT, AND THE THIRD IS A PRIVATE DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T DRAIN INTO THE CITIES.
BUT AT THAT POINT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE US STAMPED ENGINEERED PLANS THAT SHOW THAT THAT IS THE CASE.
>> SAY YOU HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND YOU'VE GOT A BUNCH OF WETLANDS ON.
WE'VE GOT THE WESTERNS LIKE THIS ALL OVER THE PLACE AND SAY, IT'S PART OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND MAYBE THAT DEVELOPMENT IS COMMERCIAL, BUT YOU GOT 50 ACRES OF WETLANDS OUT THERE.
ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY, HEY, I GOT THIS 50 ACRE WETLANDS OUT HERE, I SHOULDN'T BE PAYING FOR THIS?
>> THOSE WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, WE'RE SETTING UP.
>> IF YOU CAN SHOW THAT 100% OF YOUR DRAINAGE IS GOING INTO YOUR OWN AREA AND YOU'RE HOLDING IT AND IT'S NEVER GOING TO COME INTO THE CITY SYSTEM, I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD QUALIFY UNDER ONE OF THE ENGINEERED SYSTEMS.
>> WE'RE ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE THAT WILL REVIEW THESE AND THEN HAVE AN APPEAL PROCESS.
>> REMEMBER, THAT'S NOT RETENTION DETENTION, THAT WOULD BE PERMANENT.
YOU'D BE CREATING PERMANENT WETLANDS FOR THAT WATER.
>> WE'RE ALSO GOING TO ADDRESS THE AREAS THAT ARE CAUSING THAT ARE EXAMINED.
>> I WOULDN'T SAY THEY'RE CAUSING IT BUT THEY ARE DEFINITELY INHIBITING IT.
>> I SEE THE BIGGEST CHANGE HERE ARE THOSE PEOPLE THAT DON'T EVER WANT A BARREL.
THEY'RE NOT GETTING THIS VSS TO HIM RIGHT NOW AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET A BIG SHOCK WHEN THEY SEE THIS COMING THEIR WAY.
>> [OVERLAPPING] IN MOST OF IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE RECENT BECAUSE IT'S MORE OF, THE WAY I SEE IT ISN'T THIS MAY BE JUST MY SUPPOSITION, BUT WE HAVE ADDED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF SURFACE PARKING ON THIS ISLAND FOR VARIOUS REASONS OF LIGHT.
MUCH OF THAT SURFACE PARKING MAY NOT EVEN BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY ORDINANCE, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION.
>> ANNUAL PROPERTY TAXES ARE LOW ON THOSE TWO IMPROVEMENTS?
>> THE BOTTOM LINE ON THIS, WE'RE KEEPING OUR RAGE AS IS.
WE'RE GOING TO FIRST STEP WILL BE GOING IN AND AUDITING AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE IS BEING CHARGED APPROPRIATELY, AND THEN ONCE YOU EVALUATE THAT AND SEE WHERE WE STAND FINANCIALLY, YOU'LL COME BACK TO COUNCIL IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS ANY CHANGES IN THE RATE.
>> ONE HUNDRED PERCENT. BUT BRANDON KNOWS HE'LL TELL YOU, I'M THE ONE WHO READ BLANK UNTIL WE KNOW WE ARE 100% IN ORDER AND EVERYBODY'S PAYING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE PAYING, I'M NOT ABOUT TALKING ABOUT ANY RATE CHANGES UNTIL WE KNOW THAT FOR A FACT.
>> CAN YOU THEN CLARIFY YOUR STATEMENT AFTER WE BOTH READ THE ARTICLE AND THEN PAPER AND YOU SAID THEY GOT THAT ALL WRONG.
>> I'M SORRY, WHICH ARTICLE WAS THAT?
>> SHE SENT A REQUEST FOR CORRECTION IN THERE.
>> CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR THE PUBLIC?
>> WE'LL DO A PRESS RELEASE ON IT.
>> TELL HIM NOW. [OVERLAPPING]
>> FOR THE UNDEVELOPED LOTS? UNDEVELOPED LOTS WILL NOT RECEIVE, THERE AN EXEMPT BY STATE LAW, AS WE SAW.
THE CITY HAS NO ABILITY TO ASSESS THOSE.
THE WETLANDS AND PRIVATE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS THAT DO NOT FILTER INTO THE CITIES, BUT THOSE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE PROVEN.
TO THE CITY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME UP WITH ENGINEERED DRAWINGS AND SHOW US THAT THAT IS IN FACT THE CASE.
>> I'M SORRY, ONE MORE QUESTION.
WHAT WAS MY QUESTION? [LAUGHTER]
>> ARE YOU ALL LIKE HAVING TO GO IN THERE AND LOOK AT THESE PROPERTIES ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE PROPERTIES HAVE MULTIPLE METERS.
ONE OF MY CONSTITUENTS BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION, HE'S GOT ONE METER THAT GETS THIS FULL ASSESSMENT.
IT'S ON A SMALLER, ATTRACTIVE PROPERTY, BUT HIS OTHER METERS DON'T GET THE ASSESSMENT.
[02:20:03]
BUT HE'S GETTING BILLED CORRECTLY.BUT I THINK I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS.
YOU'RE ALL HAVING TO GO IN THERE AND MANUALLY GO THROUGH THIS STUFF?
>> IT'S A COMBINATION OF MACHINE LEARNING, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, USING LIDAR AND THEN ANALYZING EVERYTHING TO FIND OUT WHAT PROPERTIES ARE SUBMERGED AND EVERYTHING AND EXTRAPOLATING OUT THAT DATA REALLY. THAT'S WHAT [OVERLAPPING].
>> GOOD TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
IS THERE GOING TO BE A MANUAL COMPONENT TO THIS AT SOME POINT ESPECIALLY FROM THERE?
>> THERE'S BEEN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE USING INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO US TO MAKE THOSE CLASSIFICATIONS, GCAT INFORMATION, CITY UTILITY INFORMATION, SOME CASES YOU'RE EVEN LOOKING AT THE OWNERSHIP INFORMATION OF, IS IT AN LLC OR A BUSINESS OR A PERSON? THERE'S SOME THINGS TO CLASSIFY VERY EASILY BASED ON THEIR OWNERSHIP INFORMATION AND THEN OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE THAT SHOWED THROUGH.
>> THERE'S GOING BE ABOUT THAT ONE OR 2% WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TOUCH IT.
>> THAT'S WHY WE SET UP THE WHOLE PROCESS WHERE THEY CAN DISPUTE THE PAYMENTS AND THEN SEND IT TO THE COMMITTEE AND THEY CAN APPEAL IT AND HAVE US DO A DEEPER DIVE INTO THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATION BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT EVERY LIGHT IS DIFFERENT.
>> THIS IS NOT AN EASY PROCESS.
>> NO, IT'S NOT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WORKING ON THIS NOW?
>> I CAN TELL YOU ON WHAT WE CAN SEE FROM OUR RESEARCH WHEN THEY DID IT IN 2005, IT WAS A VERY QUICK BLANKET ADOPTION AND IT SOUNDED GOOD AND IT RAISED SOME MONEY FOR THAT TIME THAT WORKED.
BUT AS SEA RISE AND OTHER THINGS HAVE IMPACTED OUR DRAINAGE HERE, WE'VE GOT TO SHARPEN OUR PENCILS ON IT IN THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT OUR RESIDENTS WANT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE.
I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, BRANDON.
>> VERY GOOD. LET'S SEE, I DON'T WANT TO LOSE A QUORUM HERE.
WE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4 OF US [OVERLAPPING]. VERY GOOD.
>> ERIC, DID YOU WANT TO PASS THOSE OUT?
>> NOW, WE'RE GOING TO THE [INAUDIBLE]
>> WE'RE GOING TO SWITCH. [OVERLAPPING]
>> OVER THE YEARS. THEY DIDN'T NEED TO BE HERE FOR THAT LABOR MY HOUSE.
THEY SAID DATE FOR THE YEAR STEWART BEAT PERFECT.
WE'LL SWITCH THAT AROUND THEN.
>> YOU MIGHT WONDER WHAT ELSE WE'RE DOING?
>> I'M GOING TO GO TO THE PARK OF THE [NOISE] ART BOARD BUDGET NEXT.
>> WE'RE GOING TO REQUEST TO SWITCH AND WE'RE GOING TO USE THE PARCEL WORD BUDGET AND IT WILL COME.
>> ALTHOUGH [INAUDIBLE] THE LAST TIME. THAT'S FAIR
>> [INAUDIBLE] NO, SORRY [LAUGHTER].
>> [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] STREETS SAY THEIR LORD JESUS.
>> WE'LL BEGIN IN JUST A SECOND SO LET ME KNOW.
COUNSEL, I HAVE HAD A REQUEST FROM COUNCILMAN BOUVIER,
[3.F. Discussion And Possible Recommendations As It Relates To The Park Boards Budget For 2024 And Subsequent Years, Including Special Projects And Capital Improvement Items (Brown/Bouvier - 30 Min)]
OUR LIAISON FOR THE PARK BOARD, TO MOVE UP OUR ITEM 3F AS OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, AND WE HAVE PART BOARD REPRESENTATIVES HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS GNELL COULD YOU READ 3F PLEASE?>> 3F, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET FOR FY 2024 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS, INCLUDING SPECIAL PROJECTS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ITEMS.
>> COUNCIL, [OVERLAPPING] I HAVE SOME GUIDANCE ON THIS AS WE MOVE FORWARD HERE.
FIRST OF ALL, JUST CURRENTLY, WE'RE CONSIDERING OUR DISCUSSIONS TODAY CONCERNING THE CIP SPECIAL PROJECTS AND THE BUDGETS OF THE PARK BOARD.
WE HAVE DOWN TENTATIVELY TO APPROVE THESE ITEMS ON OUR NOVEMBER 16TH COUNCIL AGENDA.
THAT'S COURSE, COUNCIL CAN CHANGE THAT IF THEY WOULD LIKE, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE ARE THOUGHTS AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME.
ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO START THIS DISCUSSION, I HAD TO SEE.. LET'S DISCUSS THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS IN THE SPECIAL PROJECTS.
I'D LIKE TO JUST START WITH THAT, SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR CLARIFICATION THAT ANYONE HAS ON THAT.
I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS CONCERNING THAT MYSELF,
[02:25:04]
BUT LET'S START WITH CIP AND SPECIAL PROJECTS AND THEN WE CAN MOVE INTO THE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS.I'VE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE INTEREST IN THAT, OF COURSE.
LET'S START WITH CIP AND SPECIAL PROJECTS COUNCIL ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? SHEILA, DO YOU HAVE ANY INPUT ON THAT JUST ON THOSE TWO ITEMS?
>> WELL, I WENT AHEAD AND PRINTED THESE OUT IN CASE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE A HARD COPY TO WRITE OUT BECAUSE THE CIP IS A LITTLE BIT HARDER TO SEE IN THE DIGITAL FORMAT, I THINK.
COUNCIL, I BELIEVE YOU ALL RECEIVED IT OVER THE WEEKEND.
[NOISE] I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TIME EVERYONE'S HAPPY TO LOOK AT IT.
JUST GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE PARK BOARD HAS DONE A NARRATIVE AS WELL AS A [NOISE] THERE ARE VARIOUS PROJECT CATEGORIES.
YOU'LL SEE THE TOTALS IN THE VARIOUS AREAS ON THE FRONT PAGE.
THEY PROVIDE NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION OF MOST OF THEIR LARGER PROJECTS.
THEY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO WHETHER THIS HAS BEEN REQUESTED PREVIOUSLY AND APPROVED AND IT'S AN ONGOING PROJECT, OR WHETHER THIS IS A NEW REQUEST AND WHAT PURPOSE IT SERVES FOR THEIR OPERATIONS.
WITHIN THE CATEGORIES, I THINK THE GRANT ITEMS AND THE FEMUR ITEMS IN MY READING OF IT ARE PRETTY MUCH NON-NEGOTIABLES, THEIR IN-PROGRESS OR THEY'RE REQUESTING THEM AND THEY'RE IN SOME PROCESS ON THOSE ITEMS. THEY WILL PROBABLY BE APPROVED AS A PART OF THE BUDGET WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AS THEY ARE IN PROGRESS PROJECTS.
>> WHAT IF SOME OF THEM HAVEN'T BEEN COMPLETED?
>> IF THEY'D BEEN COMPLETED, THEN THEY WOULD BE DONE AND THEY WOULDN'T REQUIRE ANY MORE FUNDING OR THEY'RE RECEIVING THE REIMBURSEMENTS YET.
THAT MIGHT BE THE PORTION THAT THEY'RE STILL WAITING ON.
BUT AS FAR AS COUNSEL REVIEW OF THE FEMUR AND THE GRAND PROJECTS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK IT'S A DECISION POINT MORE THAN JUST APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET AS THAT'S PRESENTED.
>> WELL, DOES THE BUTM PROJECT FALL UNDER THAT?
>> IT DOES. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S STILL TENTATIVELY ON THE TABLE, BUT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR OTHER SAND OPTIONS.
DID I SAY THAT CORRECTLY? [LAUGHTER]
>> KIMBERLY, WON'T YOU COME UP AND HAVE A SEAT? I'M SURE QUESTIONS WILL COME UP THAT WILL NEED TO DISCUSS.
KIMBERLY, IF YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE, MA'AM?
>> YES. HELLO. KIMBERLY [INAUDIBLE] I'M THE INTERIM CEO AND CURRENT ACTING CEO FOR GAUSSIAN AND LYNNE PURPORTS.
>> BACK TO THE BDM PROJECT AND WAITING FOR BETTER SAND OR OTHER SAND ALTERNATIVES?
>> THE BDM PROJECT WITH SOMETHING THAT'S FUNDED THROUGH RESTORE.
THE RESTORE GRANT, AS YOU KNOW, IS SOMETHING THAT THE PARK BOARD RECEIVED AND PART OF THE RESTORE GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED WAS TO PLAY SAND ON BEACH SPEECH IN 2023, THE YEAR THAT WE'RE IN NOW.
THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WHEN THEY WENT TO DO THE DREDGE, THEY DISCOVERED THAT THERE WASN'T A GREAT DEAL OF BEACH QUALITY SAND AVAILABLE.
THERE'S ABOUT 15,000 CUBIC YARDS, AND THE PRICE TO PLACE THAT SAND ON THE BEACH AT BABES JUST DOESN'T ECONOMICALLY MAKE SENSE.
WE'VE LET THEM KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT THIS YEAR, AND WE STILL HAVE A COUPLE OF YEARS LEFT IN THE GRANT.
THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO LOOK AT ALTERNATE PROJECTS.
THAT SAID 2025 HAS ALREADY BEEN DESIGNATED FOR THE CAP TO OUR FORE STEADY THAT THE CITY OF GALVESTON IS WORKING ON.
SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PROCEEDING WHETHER TRYING TO INTERFERE WITH.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE 2025, THE NEXT CYCLE WOULD BE FOR THAT PURPOSE.
WE DON'T HAVE A GREAT IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO JUST YET.
>> SO WHAT IS THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY?
>> THE AMOUNT OF MONEY, CHERYL'S AT 4.5?
>> SIX MILLION, SAID CAN I [INAUDIBLE] I DO SEE MONEY.
>> THAT'S JUST THE RESTORED MONEY.
WE HAVE IN OUR REPORT HERE FROM OCTOBER 19TH.
SOME OF THESE WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED.
MANY OF THEM WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED [OVERLAPPING]
>> SOME LAND AREA IS STILL FINISHED.
WE HAVE IT IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME LINGERING INS AND OUTS THAT NEED TO OCCUR WITH THE PROJECT EVEN THOUGH THE PROJECT'S COMPLETED.
CHERYL, WOULD YOU MIND COMING UP AND PROVIDE.
DO YOU MIND IF I HAVE CHERYL [OVERLAPPING]
>> NOT AT ALL. BY ALL MEANS? MORNING, CHERYL?
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CHERYL ROSIER ON THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE GALVESTON.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE DELAWARE PROJECT.
[02:30:03]
THE REASON WHY YOU'RE SEEING THAT IN OUR BUDGET IS BECAUSE SIMPLY THE FUNDING THAT YELLOW GREAT PARTNER PAID FOR THAT PROJECT IN TOTAL UPFRONT AND NOW WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESSES OF REIMBURSING THE GLO IN TURN, THEN TURNING AROUND AND BRINGING FORWARD THAT REIMBURSEMENT TO FEMA TO GET THE 90% SHARE BACK FROM FEMA.SO IT'S JUST A MECHANISM OF PAYING OUT THE CONTRACT BUT ABSOLUTELY AT FEBRUARY 2023, THAT PROJECT WAS COMPLETED.
>> AND SO I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD ON THE FINANCE AND IS IN FUTURE YEARS WE'D LIKE TO SEE A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN APPROVED AND WHAT THAT FINDING LOOKS LIKE MOVING FORWARD AND TO SEE IT ENCUMBERED DIFFERENTLY SO THAT IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A NEW REQUEST AND THE BUDGET, BUT IT SHOWS THE ONGOING WORK THAT'S GOING ON AND I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT FUTURE PRESENTATIONS ON THAT BECAUSE IT IS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING WHETHER YOU'RE REQUESTING THE SAME PROJECT AGAIN, HAS ANY EVER BEEN COMPLETED, THAT SORT OF THING [OVERLAPPING]
>> AND THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAD.
THESE THESE PROJECTS THAT THE CIP PROJECTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, DO WE NEED TO RE-APPROVE THOSE IN THIS BUDGET?
>> AS I HAVE REVIEWED THIS DOCUMENT, I THINK THE ITEMS THAT COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER SEPARATELY ARE THE ONES RELATED TO ANYTHING COMING OUT OF CASHFLOW FUND BALANCE.
SO THERE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE A PART OF THEIR CURRENT REVENUE AND IT'S FUNDED OUT OF CURRENT REVENUE AND THEN THERE ARE THESE FEMA AND GRANT ITEMS THAT ARE ALSO PRETTY MUCH IN PROGRESS AND HAVE DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES.
BUT I THINK AS COUNSEL LOOKS AT WHAT THEY'RE APPROVING AT THE NOVEMBER MEETING, THAT $6 MILLION THAT'S COMING OUT OF FUND BALANCE IS THE PORTION THAT COUNCIL WOULD PROBABLY HAVE THE MOST DISCRETION ON WHETHER THEY THINK THE PROJECT IS HIGH PRIORITY OR NOT.
I THINK THE ONLY EXCEPTION TO THAT IS MAYBE THE RV PARK FOR 1.2 MILLION AND THAT IS NOT AN APPROVED PRODUCT AT THIS POINT, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IS NOT A HOT FUNDED PROJECT.
THAT'S A PARK PROJECT AND SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT IMPACTS THE HOT FUNDING BUT IT'S A PROJECT THAT WILL NEED TO BE APPROVED SEPARATELY IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO APPROVE THAT PROJECT.
>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT.
I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS RV PARK QUITE A LONG TIME AT SEAWORLD PART BOARD, JUST WE NEED TO MAKE SURE BEFORE WE PROCEED WITH THAT, THAT WE COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND GET APPROVAL FOR THAT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. WE'RE VERY CLEAR ON THAT.
LOOKING AT YOUR FINANCIALS HERE, SOME OF THESE CIP PROJECTS IS A COMBINATION OF ACTUAL BUDGETED FUNDS AND ALSO TAPPING INTO YOUR CASH RESERVES.
IT'S A COMBINATION AND MANY OF THEM SEEMED TO BE THAT WAY.
THESE ARE CASH RESERVES THAT YOU CURRENTLY HOLD AT THE PARK BOARD, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I WOULD LIKE BRYSON TO COME UP AND HELP WITH THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND. HE'S OUR NUMBERS GUY.
>> WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF CHAIRS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BEFORE WE DO THOSE QUESTIONS CAN WE HAVE CHERYL DO THAT OVERVIEW? I MEAN, I THINK WE ALWAYS GET THE TRACK.
>> I'M FINE WITH THAT, BUT I WANTED TO STAY WITH CIP AND SPECIAL PROJECTS RIGHT NOW ON THAT.
>> WELL, NO. I MEAN, FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE ON THE SPEND DOWN A FUND BALANCE, I THINK ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD IS THERE'S ABSOLUTELY A REASON TO USE FUND BALANCE TO PAY FOR IMPORTANT PROJECTS.
HOWEVER, IT SHOULD PROBABLY BE THE PARK BOARD TRUSTEES THAT DETERMINE WHAT THE LEVEL OF FUND BALANCE IS.
THAT IS A POLICY CHOICE FOR THE PARK BOARD, FOR THE PARK BOARD TO MAINTAIN THAT LEVEL OF FUND BALANCE.
THE CITY'S FUND BALANCE IS DETERMINED BY CHARTER.
IT'S A MINIMUM OF 90 DAYS AND MANAGEMENT HAS MADE IT A PRIORITY TO DO 120 DAYS FOR OUR DEBT ISSUANCE PURPOSES, BUT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE TO DETERMINE THAT NECESSARY FUND BALANCE FOR PARK BOARD NOR IS IT NECESSARILY COUNSELS PREROGATIVE TO MAINTAIN THAT AND SO AS PARK BOARD DETERMINES ITS PRIORITIES AND ITS SPEND DOWN OF CASH, IT MAY NOT BE A COUNCIL PRIORITY TO TO MANAGE THAT FUND BALANCE ON BEHALF OF THE PARK BOARD AND THE PARK BOARD, ONCE THEY SET THAT POLICY, CAN ADHERE TO THAT POLICY.
>> I CAN TOUCH ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.
>> DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION, CHERYL?
IT'S BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD [OVERLAPPING].
>> LET'S GET THROUGH THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND BRYSON?
>> SO ESSENTIALLY ONE OF THE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD THIS WEEK IS PARK BOARDS PLAN TO ADDRESS THE DEFICITS THAT THE BUDGET AS PRESENTED HAD IN IT,
[02:35:06]
THOSE DEBTS BETWEEN VARIOUS FUNDS AND THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT AT THE PARK BOARD HAS COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT INCLUDES A COMBINATION OF TRANSFERS AND WRITE-OFFS AND THEY WANT TO DO THAT AS PART OF THEIR YEAR-END CLOSE SO THAT HEADING INTO NEXT YEAR, MOST OF THAT WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF.THE EXCEPTIONS TO THAT SPECIFIC AREA IS RELATED TO DELAWARE PARK AND THAT'S GOING TO BE HANDLED IN 24 AS A RESULT OF THE FEMA REIMBURSEMENT AND ALSO THE GENERAL FUND WILL BE HANDLED SEPARATELY.
THE PLAN THAT I RECEIVED ARE REVIEWED IS THAT IT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THEIR AUDITORS AND THEN THEY HAVE A FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING ON THE 7TH AND A BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING ON THE 14TH.
SO AT THE TIME THAT COUNSEL REVIEWS THE BUDGET ON THE 16TH, WE WILL BE RECEIVING ADDITIONAL DETAILED INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WAS APPROVED ON HOW THEY PLAN TO HANDLE ALL THESE DEFICITS.
BUT MOST OF IT SHOULD BE HANDLED THROUGH THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 23 BASED ON THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT FOUR WEEKS.
WHEN COUNSEL RECEIVES THAT INFORMATION ON THE 16TH, THEN THEY CAN ACKNOWLEDGE THOSE CHANGES TO THE FUND BALANCE AS THE PARK BOARD OF PLANS TO ADDRESS IT.
SO WE JUST DISCUSSED THE CIP A LITTLE BIT AND JUST TO REITERATE, I THINK THE FEMA AND THE GRAND PROJECTS ARE KIND OF WHAT THEY ARE.
THERE'S NOT MUCH ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO DO WITH THOSE EXCEPT FOLLOW THE COURSE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SET.
THE AREA THAT COUNCIL PROBABLY SEES AS SOMEWHAT DISCRETIONARY MAY BE FUND BALANCE RELATED BUT OTHER WISE MOST OF IT IS DETERMINED ALREADY OR HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
>> MANY OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT COMING OUT OF THE CASHFLOW HAVE BEEN APPROVED PREVIOUSLY AND SO THERE WOULD BE NO REASON TO INTERRUPT THOSE AT THIS POINT.
AND OTHERS ARE BEING FUNDED OUT OF CURRENT REVENUE AND SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH OF A FUND BALANCE QUESTION.
IT'S THEIR FUNDING THE PROJECTS OUT OF CURRENT REVENUES.
IT WOULD BE COUNCIL'S DISCRETION TO COMMENT ON THOSE.
BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SO MUCH AS THE STRUCTURAL ISSUE, PERHAPS.
>> THE NARRATIVE, YOU ALL HAVE IT NOW IN HARD COPY AS WELL.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED THE STAFF IS, CITY STAFF CAN REVIEW IT ALL AND MAKE SOME ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE DOING, BUT AS FAR AS THE PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS OF THE PARK BOARD, THE MOST ABLE TO DISCUSS THAT.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE POSITIONED TO DO ON THE CITY SIDE.
REGARDING THE FUND BALANCE CONSIDERATIONS, AS I DISCUSSED, 90 DAYS IS WHAT THE CHARTER SAYS FOR THE CITY, BUT THAT'S FOR THE PROVISION OF BASIC SERVICES THAT MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE TO THE PARK BOARD SPECIFICALLY AND SO THAT'S A POLICY DECISION.
THE PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES MAY WANT TO SET SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BUT THEN IT WOULD BE THE PARK BOARD FINANCE TEAM THAT WOULD MAKE SURE TO IMPLEMENT THAT FUND BALANCE POLICY AND ADHERE TO IT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS A PART OF THIS BUDGET APPROVAL IS THE HOT ALLOCATION AND THE CURRENT BUDGET AS PRESENTED, BUT IT'S THE WHOLE INCREASE IN HOT REVENUE YEAR OVER YEAR IT'S 22%.
>> THAT'S INCLUDES CIP AND SPECIAL PROJECT ACHIEVEMENT?
>> THAT IS JUST THE HOT ALLOCATION.
THE REVENUE IN HOT FUNDS IS GOING TO INCREASE AS 22%, AND ALL OF THAT IS BUDGETED TO BE RECEIVED AND ALLOCATED BY THE PARK BOARD.
THAT'S JUST ON THE HOT SIDE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT DOES INCLUDE SPECIAL PROJECTS AND CAPITALIZE?
>> YES. THAT'S WHY [INAUDIBLE].
>> I THINK NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE FUNDING LEVELS ARE CONTINGENT ON HOT REVENUE AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AND THAT THE YEAR TO YEAR ALLOCATIONS MIGHT FLUCTUATE BASED ON REVENUE TRENDS.
IF THE BUDGET IS FUNDED AT CURRENT LEVELS FOR 2024 AS REQUESTED, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT FUTURE YEARS WILL HAVE THE SAME FUNDING LEVELS.
FROM THE PARK BOARD PERSPECTIVE, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ANY MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS THAT USES UP THAT FULL ALLOCATION COULD BE IMPACTED IN FUTURE YEARS, LET'S SAY STRS FALL OFF OR WHATEVER, THEN THERE WOULD BE A DECREASE IN THOSE ALLOCATIONS.
THOSE ARE JUST SOME THOUGHTS ON OUR END AS WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.
COUNCIL HAS A SENSE OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE EXPECTED AT THE NOVEMBER 16TH MEETING.
WE'RE REQUESTING THAT PARK BOARD AND YOU ALL DON'T KNOW THIS YET, BUT WE RECEIVE WHATEVER THAT FINAL MAJORITY PRESENTATION IS BY NOVEMBER 3RD SO THAT WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME SINCE OUR MEETING IS EARLIER IN THE MONTH IN NOVEMBER.
THE EXPLANATION RELATED TO THE DEFICIT CORRECTION WILL ONLY BE RECEIVED THE 15TH, THE DAY BEFOREHAND BECAUSE OF THEIR MEETING SCHEDULE.
[02:40:03]
COUNCIL SHOULD BE ON THE LOOKOUT FOR THAT.WE'RE REQUESTING TO RECEIVE IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND THEN WE'LL HAVE IT AT THE MEETING.
WE'LL REVIEW THE PROJECTS THAT ARE DEFINITELY DRAWING DOWN FUND BALANCE AND HAVE PARK BOARD PROVIDE US WITH SOME PLAN ON WHAT THEIR POLICY IN PLACE FOR REBUILDING THAT FUND BALANCE, SHOULD THEY DRAW IT PASSED THEIR POLICY LEVELS.
THE REVIEW OF THE TOTAL ALLOCATION REQUEST, WHICH AT THIS POINT IS THE FULL INCREASE, THE FULL 3.3 MILLION PER PENNY, AND ALL THOSE ALLOCATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH AND THERE WILL BE ACTION REQUESTED AT THAT NOVEMBER 16TH MEETING TO APPROVE THAT AND THAT WOULD ALSO PROVIDE THE FUNDING WHICH AS OF RIGHT NOW PARK BOARD HASN'T RECEIVED BECAUSE THERE'S NO AGREEMENT SIGNED.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE, I WAS TRYING TO KEEP IT.
>> LET ME TOSS A COUPLE OF THINGS IN HERE.
>> FIRST OF ALL, THE 90 VERSUS 100 DAYS, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, WHEN I WAS A TRUSTEE, WE SET IT AT 120 AND THAT IS IN YOUR POLICIES TODAY.
>> I WOULD ASK YOU TO JUST REVIEW THAT.
YOU NEED 120 DAYS BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS TO LOSE EMPLOYEES BECAUSE WE HAVE A STORM OR LOSE THE CENTRAL OPERATIONS, BUT IT'S QUESTIONABLE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING IN THAT LAST MONTH AFTER A STORM OR WHATEVER, SO I JUST QUESTION THAT.
SECOND UPON ALL THIS OF COURSE IS CONTINGENT ON HAVING ASSIGNED HOT AGREEMENT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, WHICH AS I UNDERSTAND, THERE'S STILL SOME ROAD BUMPS GOING ON THERE.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CONCERNS ME THE WAY YOU PICTURE THIS IS, IS THERE OR THERE SHOULD BE IN THAT HOT CONTRACT SOME UNDERSTANDING OF A PRO-RATA REDUCTIONS IN THESE ALLOCATIONS.
IF HOTEL TAX RECEIPTS FAILED TO MEET THOSE MINIMUMS BECAUSE WE SET IT AT 3.3.
EVERY YEAR WE'VE SET IT FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, WE'VE EXCEEDED IT.
WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN PLEASANTLY SURPRISED AS IS MORE REVENUE THAN WE ANTICIPATED.
THAT MAY NOT ALWAYS BE THE CASE.
WE HAVEN'T HAD A SIGNIFICANT STORM IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO CUT INTO THAT.
AS I UNDERSTAND, THAT IS A POINT OF CONTENTION.
>> THERE'S A MECHANISM IN THERE TO REDUCE ALLOCATION SHOULD ACTUALS COME IN LOWER THAN BUDGET.
NOT TOO MANY HANG-UPS IN THAT REGARD, THAT'S COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDABLE.
WHAT WE DID WHEN WE BUILT THE BUDGET THIS YEAR IS THE PENNY WAS SET AT 3.3.
WE DIDN'T BUDGET OPERATIONS AT 3.3.
WE BUDGETED OPERATIONS LOWER AT 3 MILLION, WHICH IS WHY WHEN YOU SEE THAT 22% INCREASE, IT INCLUDES A PORTION OF THESE PROJECTS.
OPERATIONS INCREASED ABOUT 12% ON THE HOT SIDE AND THE REST OF THE SPECIAL PROJECTS.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT DAVID, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO MONITOR AS WE GO TO IMPLEMENT THESE THINGS IS CASH.
ONCE WE GET TO THAT 120 DAY PERIOD, AT THAT POINT, WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO DIP INTO THAT 120 DAYS OR SEEK APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL TO DIP INTO THE CASH RESERVES BEING HELD BY COUNCIL.
THAT'LL BE SOMETHING THAT WE'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT BEFORE WE EXECUTE CERTAIN PROJECTS.
>> WELL, THAT BRINGS A QUESTION, SO THIS BUDGET DOES NOT ANTICIPATE LOOKING TO COUNCIL TO FUND ANY OF THESE PROJECTS?
>> ABSENT EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES.
>> WE WOULD USE OUR FUND BALANCE THAT IS IN OUR BANK ACCOUNT BEFORE WE'D ASK ANYTHING FROM [INAUDIBLE].
>>THAT WAS MY QUESTION, HOW MUCH IS IN YOUR FUND BALANCE CURRENTLY EXCLUDING YOUR 120 DAYS?
>> I WOULD SAY WE PROBABLY HAVE ABOUT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS EXCLUDING THE 120 DAYS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> IN THIS CURRENT BUDGET, YOU ARE USING YOUR FUND BALANCE.
THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS COMING OUT OF YOUR FUND BALANCE, THIS FIVE MILLION OR SO. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> ARE YOU GOING TO BE TAPPING INTO ANY OF THE FUND BALANCES OR THE RESERVES THAT WERE SENT TO THE CITY HERE?
BUT BEFORE WE WOULD EVEN MOVE OR TRY TO EXECUTE ON A PROJECT LIKE THAT, WE BRING IT BACK BEFORE THIS BODY.
>> WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.
>> WE'D COME BACK TO COUNCIL FOR THAT IF YOU WERE WANTING TO UTILIZE THE 14 MILLION THAT WE CURRENTLY HOLD.
THIS IS HOPEFULLY GETTING THIS COVERED WITH YOUR FUND BALANCE IN YOUR 24 BUDGET?
>> DID WE JUST GET THE SAME ANSWER BECAUSE I THINK WE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION TOO?
>> AGAIN TWO DIFFERENT ANSWERS.
>> SOUND LIKE WE GOT TWO DIFFERENT ANSWERS.
THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU ANTICIPATE BEING ABLE TO FUND EVERYTHING IN THIS ANDREW OPERATIONS WITH REVENUES THAT YOU EXPECT THIS YEAR OR BALANCES YOU CURRENTLY HOLD VERSUS BALANCES THE CITY HOLDS? THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
[02:45:05]
>> BUT THERE'S A PORTION IN HERE.
[LAUGHTER] IT'S HARD FOR ME TO TELL YOU EXACTLY A NUMBER BECAUSE IT'S NOT STAGNANT RIGHT?
>> THERE'S AN EBB AND FLOW TO IT.
WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT IT WOULD BE THE PARK BOARD'S FUND BALANCE AND OUR CURRENT DEPOSITORIES THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED FIRST BEFORE WE WOULD EVER EXECUTE A PROJECT WHERE WE THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE TO DIP INTO THAT 14 MILLION, IT WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THIS BODY BEFORE WE WOULD EVEN START THAT PROJECT.
>> AS KIMBERLY SAID, OF COURSE AS WE KNOW, IF THEY COME IN TO UTILIZE THE FUND BALANCE, IT'S CURRENTLY HELD BY THE CITY THAT WILL COME TO COUNCIL.
>> BUT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THESE PROJECTS ONE AT A TIME OR A FEW AT A TIME AS WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
AS WE GET DOWN TOWARDS THE END OF THAT PROCESS, THERE MAY BE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, MAN NEEDS TO BE DEFERRED, THAT KIND OF THING BECAUSE YOU FIRED ALL THE GUYS IN THIS PROCESSES, THESE THINGS.
>> BACK TO YOUR COMMENT TOO DAVID, ON THE REDUCTION OF THE PENNY AS WE GO THROUGH THE YEAR, IT'S BEEN MY EXPERIENCE, PARK BOARD HAS BEEN VERY GOOD ABOUT MONITORING THAT AND CUTTING BACK THEIR BUDGET AS NEEDED.
I REMEMBER MANY YEARS THEY HAVE HAD TO DO THAT. MARIE.
>> WELL, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT THIS BUDGET SHOWS WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
I GUESS THE ISSUE I HAVE BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT THE 18TH MILLION TIME WE'VE SAT AT THIS TABLE TO DISCUSS YOUR BUDGET AND YET WE STILL DON'T HAVE DETAIL.
YOU MAY NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL THE EXACT RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT A CITY HAS TO, BUT YOU ARE A PUBLIC ENTITY WHO IS SPENDING PUBLIC FUNDS.
I'LL JUST PULL OUT SOME THINGS THAT JUMPED OUT TO ME UNDER YOUR MNO BUDGET.
PERSONNEL, BEACH CLEANING, YOU HAVE 45 EMPLOYEES AND YOUR BUDGET IS 3.2 MILLION.
IF YOU JUST TAKE 45 AND DIVIDE THEM INTO THAT, YOU'RE PAYING PEOPLE 71,000.
>> NO. IS THE 3.2 MILLION THAT YOU QUOTED JUST SALARIES OR IS THAT THE ENTIRE [INAUDIBLE]?
>> WELL, THEN THERE'S A COUPLE OF POSITIONS IN THERE LIKE THE DIRECTOR?
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING LIKE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
>> THERE'S AN EMPLOYEE LISTENING ABSOLUTELY, AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE A MORE DETAILED ONE BY POSITION, THAT'S EASY ENOUGH TO PROVIDE AND WE DID ACTUALLY PROVIDE THAT DETAIL WHEN IT WAS REQUESTED LAST MONTH, I THINK. THERE WAS A BREAK.
>> I NEVER RECEIVED THAT DETAIL.
>> I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I THINK AT THAT POINT WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE BELOW WHAT WE NEED TO BE.
>> WELL, IT ISN'T. THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S MONEY.
>> I KNOW IT'S THE PEOPLE'S MONEY AND WE'VE APPOINTED SEVERAL PEOPLE TO.
>> NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS.
>> WELL, CAN I FINISH WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
>> LET'S GET MAURICE THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT.
>> I'M EXPRESSING MY CONCERNS AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, NOR HAVE WE RECEIVED THE DETAIL THAT EXPLAINS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE TRANSFERS IN AND TRANSFERS OUT OF FUNDS SUCH AS LIKE BEACH NOURISHMENT OR THE AMOUNT OF THE MONEY THAT COMES FROM HOT AND YET YOU'RE TRANSFERRING IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE OR THE IDEAS OF, IT KILLS ME THAT THE MONEY YOU PAID TO YOUR PAST DIRECTOR CAME OUT OF HARD TAX AND NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE OTHER BIG SUFFRAGE PACKAGES THAT COMBAT A HARD TAX.
THIS BUDGET WHEN I LOOK AT IT AND WHEN I LOOK AT ALL THE ITEMS THAT ARE IN BOTH THE CAPITAL AS WELL AS JUST THE ITEMS IN THE BUDGET, IT'S LIKE A KID IN A CANDY STORE.
WITHOUT DETAIL, IT'S LIKE WE HAVE THIS MONEY, SO WE'RE GOING TO SPEND IT.
WE'RE GOING TO BUY EVERYTHING WE WANT BECAUSE IT'S THERE WHETHER WE NEED IT OR NOT.
I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE FACT THAT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL DETAIL.
>> I'VE PROVIDED PROBABLY ABOUT 40 OR 50 PAGES OF ADDITIONAL DETAIL, INCLUDING A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF EVERY SINGLE TRANSFER THAT'S COMING IN AND OUT OF THAT BUDGET.
IT'S IN ALL THE DOCUMENTS THAT I PROVIDED.
THERE WAS ALSO A BREAKDOWN OF POSITION BY FUND COMPARATIVE TO PREVIOUS YEARS THAT WAS ALSO PROVIDED.
I DO DISAGREE WITH THE CHARACTERIZATION THAT IT'S A CANDY IN A CANDY STORE.
THE BUDGET WAS CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT AND PREPARED, VETTED BY MULTIPLE COMMITTEES.
WE DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB, I THINK OF TRYING TO LIMIT OUR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES AS MUCH AS WE CAN, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE PARKS.
[02:50:01]
I THINK WE DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF THAT THIS YEAR AS WELL.THERE'S A NUMBER OF CAPITAL ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN DELAYED AS A RESULT OF COVID AND JUST MATERIALS AND STUFF NOT BEING AVAILABLE THAT YOU'LL SEE INCLUDED IN THIS BUDGET.
BUT ALL THOSE DETAILS THAT HAVE BEEN REQUESTED, EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN REQUESTED AT MY OFFICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
>> I HAVEN'T SEEN THE PERSONNEL LEVEL DETAIL AND THE POSITION BY FINE LEVEL OF DETAIL AND IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WAS ONE THAT CAN BE CANCELED AND IT DIDN'T COME TO ME.
BUT I WOULD SAY THEY'VE PROVIDED NARRATIVES RELATED TO A LOT OF THE REQUESTS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S THE LEVEL THAT THE CITY PROVIDES A NARRATIVE SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY MAYBE WHAT WE'RE USED TO SEEING, AND SO THERE MAY BE SOME DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT AND WHAT WE'RE RECEIVING, BUT THEY CERTAINLY HAVE, I THINK, MADE AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE MOST OF THOSE NARRATIVES.
A LOT OF IT HAS BEEN GENERAL BUT THERE IS, I THINK, A QUESTION TO ASK, WHAT LEVEL OF DETAIL DO WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT OPERATIONS TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS ON THE COUNCIL END? IT IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE HOW FAR YOU GET IN THERE.
BUT I DO THINK AS FAR AS PERSONNEL, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU RECEIVED THAT.
THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT WE HAVE.
>> WE'VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB SO FAR AS SAYING OUT OF THE LINE ITEM BUSINESS.
I LOOKED AT THE BEACH, THE BEACHES ARE BEING CLEANED.
AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO DO AN AUDIT AND WHAT KIND OF WHAT WE'RE DOING THE PORT? WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER THE PART.
>> YOUR BEACHES ARE BEING CLEANED AND MY BEACHES ARE BEING CLEANED.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW THEY WERE YOUR BEACHES?
>> NO, BUT NOT ALL THE BEACHES ON THE ISLAND ARE BEING CLEANED. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MY BEACH WAS CLEANED WHEN I LIVED RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO YOU.
>> THE BEACH CLEANING ARE SUBDIVISIONS PAY FOR SEAWEED, AND THE ONLY BEACH CLEANING IS LARGE DEBRIS AND TRASH CANS.
THERE WASN'T ANY TRASH PICKING [INAUDIBLE]
>> IF WE ARE DISSATISFIED WITH THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WE'RE GETTING FROM THE PARK BOARD, I'M [INAUDIBLE] THAT IS A SEPARATE CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE.
IT'S A SEPARATE CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, YOU GUYS HAVE TOO MANY EMPLOYEES DOING THIS JOB.
IF WE DON'T FEEL LIKE THE JOB IS BEING DONE, LET'S SAY WE DON'T FEEL LIKE THE JOB IS BEING DONE.
I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT, BUT IF YOU DO, THEN WE SHOULD PUT THAT ON AN AGENDA THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
BUT ASKING HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO YOU HAVE? HOW MANY PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TRUCK? THAT'S A QUESTION THAT IS APPARENTLY EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
>> I JUST ASKED HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY HAVE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK 32 MILES AT THE BEACH AT FOUR O'CLOCK EVERY MORNING, NO, I DON'T THINK THAT'S EXCESSIVE ALL.
>> THEY DON'T CLEAN 32 MILES OF THE BEACH.
>> OKAY. THEN I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL TO DISCUSS WHERE YOU THINK THE FAILURE IN THIS IS BECAUSE WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S A BUDGET DISCUSSION.
THAT'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE DISCUSSION AND YES, I HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH IT GOING UP AT 22%, BUT THEY'RE AND WE HAVE APPOINTED NINE VERY COMPETENT INDIVIDUALS TO OVERSEE THIS AT THAT LEVEL.
IF THAT'S A CONCERN WE HAVE, THAT'S SOMETHING COUNCIL NEEDS TO PUSH DOWN TO THE TRUSTEES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE WERE JUST TOLD BY THE TRUSTEES AT THE LAST MINUTE THEY SAW IT ONCE BEFORE THEY APPROVED IT.
>> FIVE OF THE TRUSTEE SAW IT ONCE.
>> I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE.
IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH THE LEVEL OF SERVICE YOU RECEIVE, WHEN YOU THINK WE'RE RECEIVING FROM THE PARK BOARD THAT IS NOT A CONVERSATION FOR KIMBERLY AND BRYSON, THAT'S A CONVERSATION FOR DUSTIN AND [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE BUDGET AND THE DETAIL IS WHAT I'M TALKING AND I'M NOT WANTING TO MICROMANAGE THE PARK.
>> THAT'S WHAT LINE ITEM DECENT CONSTRUCTION OF THIS BUDGET IS, IS MICROMANAGING.
>> LET ME SAY THIS COUNCIL, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH MANY DISCUSSIONS AS COUNSELOR ROBB HAS MENTIONED ABOUT THE BUDGET.
IT'S BEEN MY FEELING FROM THIS THE CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL THAT WE DON'T WANT TO GET IN TO LINE ITEM DISCUSSIONS BUDGET.
I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THAT.
PERSONALLY I FEEL THAT'S MICRO-MANAGING THE PART BOARD, BUT THAT'S MY PERSONAL FEELING.
IF A COUNCIL MEMBER WANTS MORE DETAIL IN THIS BUDGET AND HAS NOT RECEIVED IT, PLEASE LET SHEILA KNOW AND SHE'LL WORK WITH GETTING THAT INFORMATION AND GETTING ALL OF THAT DETAILS THAT YOU MAY WANT OR ANY COUNSEL MAY WANT THAT IF YOU WANT TO SEE MORE DETAILS.
>> I THINK SHE SUMMED THAT I'M VERY WELL.
WE HAVE RECEIVED NARRATIVES, BUT IT'S NOT NARRATIVES AND THE WAY WE'RE USED TO SEEING THEY'RE VAGUE NARRATIVES.
I THINK OUR CITIZENS DESERVE MORE TRANSPARENCY THAN WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY RECEIVING.
>> THAT'S WHAT'S NICE ABOUT COUNSEL.
PERSONALLY, THE NARRATIVES THAT I'VE RECEIVED IN THE INFORMATION I'VE RECEIVED HAS BEEN APPROPRIATE FOR ME.
[02:55:03]
I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THEY'VE GIVEN US.IF A COUNCIL MEMBER HAS THAT THEY FEEL THEY WANT MORE INPUT ON THIS, THAT'S THEIR PREROGATIVE.
AND I KNOW SHEILA AND BRYSON AND KIMBERLY WILL GO OUT OF THEIR WAY AND PRIORITIZE TO GET THAT DETAILED INFORMATION TO YOU.
THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT GOOD ABOUT THIS COUNCIL.
YOU HAVE MORE DETAILS THAT YOU WANT IN PARTICULAR AREAS AND I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR YOU TO GET THAT INFORMATION, MARIE.
>> WELL, AND I THINK SHEILA WAS SAYING SHE LIKED TO SEE MORE DETAIL AS WELL.
>> IF SHEILA DOES, I KNOW SHE WILL RELAY THAT AND SHEILA I FEEL YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE THAT PREROGATIVE TO DO THAT?
>> ABSOLUTELY, AND WE'VE DEFINITELY DISCUSSED WHATEVER WE NEEDED TO ON OUR END IS QUESTIONS HAVE COME UP.
>> I'VE ENJOYED WORKING WITH SHEILA QUITE A BIT.
I WAS LIKE, MIKE WAS GREAT TO YOU, BUT I REALLY LIKED SHEILA.
>> THAT WASN'T ABOUT THAT MIKE.
>> [LAUGHTER] THERE'S A NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN.
>> MIKE IS WATCHING THIS SOMEWHERE ON A CRUISE LINES.
>> I HOPE THAT IS NOT THE CASE. [LAUGHTER]
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT BRYSON HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK WITH HIS TEAM BEHIND THE SCENES AND OUR TEAM IS HERE AS WELL TO PULL TOGETHER.
WE'VE ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD FROM CITY STAFF.
IF COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE CLARITY, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US IF THEY DIRECTED TO CITY STAFF SPECIFICALLY WHAT IT WAS THAT YOU WANT TO SEE.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH BRIAN AND DAN AND SHEILA TO PROVIDE THOSE DETAILS AS THEY'RE REQUESTED OF US.
BUT THAT WE WOULD LOOK TO THAT DIRECTION FROM YOU TO GIVE TO YOUR STAFF TO DIRECT TO US.
>> MARIE, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW THEY'LL GET ALL YOUR ANSWERS FOR YOU AND WE'LL MOVE FORWARD THEN.
ANYTHING ELSE, SHEILA, THAT YOU WANTED TO MENTION?
>> NO. THAT'S ALL THAT I WAS PRESENTING TODAY JUST IN PREPARATION FOR THE 16TH.
I DO WANT TO ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO GET ANY QUESTIONS TO ME AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE CAN REQUEST IT AND HAVE IT TO YOU ALL IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING ON THE 16TH BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE ESSENTIAL FOR THAT VOTE TO GO SMOOTHLY FOR EVERYBODY.
>> I'D LIKE TO SAY, THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE FIRST MEETINGS WHERE I'VE ACTUALLY THOUGHT THAT CITY STAFF AND PARK BOARD STAFF HAVE WORKED GOOD TOGETHER.
I JUST WANTED TO CONGRATULATE YOU ALL AND HOPEFULLY THAT CONTINUES AND IT'S SO MUCH BETTER TO HAVE YOU ALL WORKING TOGETHER AND I THINK WE GET SO MUCH MORE DONE.
THIS ISSUE ABOUT THE NEGATIVE FUND BALANCE CONTINUED TO BE IN OUR CONVERSATIONS AS WE'VE GONE FORWARD.
APPARENTLY, THERE WAS SOME DISCONNECT ON BOTH SIDES ON UNDERSTANDING THAT.
BUT SINCE WE MET LAST THROUGH BY BRIAN'S DIRECTION, SHEILA HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH BRYSON AND OTHERS TO GET THAT WORKED OUT.
>> I THINK THE CREDIT FOR ALL OF THAT IS ON THE PARK BOARD AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT THEY'RE TAKING FOR THEIR TRUSTEES.
>> THANKS TO STEWART SMITH TOO, HE WAS A BIG HELP BRINGING HIM OUT OF THE DAY.
>> THAT'S THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR.
YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE PLAN THAT THEY HAVE COME UP WITH, SHEILA?
>> I'VE SEEN A VERY HIGH-LEVEL VERSION OF IT.
MY KNOWLEDGE OF IT IS LIMITED TO WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AT A HIGH LEVEL.
I THINK UNTIL IT'S PRESENTED TO THE AUDITORS IN THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND THE TRUSTEES, IT'S NOT REALLY PUBLIC AT THAT LEVEL.
>> THERE WILL BE SUBSEQUENT ITERATIONS OF IT BEFORE YOU SEE IT.
I THINK SHEILA IS SATISFIED WITH THE DIRECTION IT'S GOING BUT UNTIL WE SEE THE FINAL PRODUCT.
BUT I THINK SHE'S GENERALLY HAPPY WITH THE WAY IT'S GOING.
>> IT'S GOOD TO HEAR. I NOTICED I HAD A QUESTION IN YOUR SPREADSHEET HERE FOR YOU.
YOU HAVE AN ITEM DOWN THERE FOR LOAN OR LINE OF CREDIT.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? HOW DOES THIS COME INTO PLAY?
>> IT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. WE HAVE A LINE OF CREDIT WITH MOODY NATIONAL BANK THAT SOMETIMES WE USE TO FINANCE EQUIPMENT PURCHASES.
IT'S A 1.9% INTEREST RATE, SO IT'S REALLY LOW.
WE UTILIZE THAT SOMETIMES WHEN WE PURCHASE EQUIPMENT.
WHEN IT COMES SPECIFICALLY TO YOUR LOAN, IF COUNCIL DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RV PARK AT SEAWOLF, THAT WE WOULD CONSIDER GOING OUT FOR A LOAN TO FINANCE THAT PROJECT.
>> [INAUDIBLE], WHEN YOU DO THAT, IS THAT THAT LINE OF CREDIT BARRED AGAINST FUNDS YOU HAVE ON DEPOSIT WITH MOODY NATIONAL BANK?
>> PART OF IT WOULD BE BUT PART OF IT TOO WOULD ALSO BE PLEDGED REVENUES.
RV PARK WOULD GENERATE A REVENUE STREAM.
WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO PLEDGE OR DEDICATE A PORTION OF THAT REVENUE.
>> BUT THE LINE OF CREDIT TO USE FOR EQUIPMENT STUFF IS JUST BASICALLY YOU'RE BORROWING AGAINST YOUR [OVERLAPPING].
BECAUSE I WAS THINKING OTHERWISE, I THINK AT 1.9%, I WANT IN.
>> ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD, BRYSON AND KIMBERLY, AND ON THAT, LET ME SEE, WHERE WAS THAT?
[03:00:02]
YOUR 120 DAYS RESERVES, HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? WHAT IS THAT DOLLAR-WISE?>> THAT'S GOING TO FLUCTUATE DEPENDING ON WHAT THEIR OPERATIONAL BUDGET IS.
>> PARK BOYS HAD A BURN RATE OF ABOUT A MILLION AND A HALF A MONTH. PROBABLY GOING UP A LITTLE.
>> A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE SUMMER.
>> ABOUT ONE POINT. VERY GOOD.
I'VE GOT MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
COUNCIL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME? MAUREEN, YOU'LL BE GETTING YOURS TO SHEILA AND TO BRIAN IN THEM.
GOOD. COUNCIL, I WANTED TO THANK YOU.
GOODNESS, THIS WENT A LOT SHORTER AND I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE.
>> I WANT TO SAY, I AGREE WITH WHAT JOHN SAID EXCEPT I'M GOING TO CHANGE THAT POINT A LITTLE.
I LOVE THE IDEA THAT ALL OF US ARE ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND COLLABORATE AND GET THINGS DONE.
>> COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, WE'LL GET YOU WHAT YOU NEED. ABSOLUTELY.
>> FOLLOWING THE MEETING, WE'RE ALL GOING TO JOIN HANDS AND SING [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> I WANT YOU GUYS, ESPECIALLY IF TONY'S HERE, TO BE QUITE.
NOW WE'RE MOVING HERE SHORTLY INTO ITEM 3E IF WE COULD.
>> 3E, DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED USE OF STEWART BEACH.
>> BRYSON, THANK YOU. IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU.
[BACKGROUND] COUNCIL, LET'S GET BACK TOGETHER.
LET'S READ ITEM 3E, PLEASE. JUNEL.
[3.E. Discussion Of The Proposed Use Of Stewart Beach (D. Anderson - 30 Min)]
>> ITEM 3E, DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED USE OF STEWART BEACH.
>> DUDLEY WILL GIVE THE OVERVIEW OF EVERYTHING, BUT I WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS HARD WORK ON THIS.
WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO TRY TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE THINK IS A HIGH LEVEL CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
ALSO, WE HAVE, WE HAVE IN GENERAL TERMS TALKED ABOUT STEWART BEACH FOR A LONG TIME.
I STILL THINK TO THIS DATE THAT NOT EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY WHAT WAS INVOLVED AND WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT AND WHERE IT IS.
YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A GOOD LOOK AT THIS.
THERE ARE A FEW THINGS, NUANCES THAT WE WANT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO SPECIFICALLY INVOLVING BEACH PATROL THAT ARE PROBABLY CHANGED SINCE OUR LAST DISCUSSION.
BUT THAT LIGHT CAN GO THROUGH ALL THAT AS WELL.
THAT THIS DOES PROVIDE WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER TO BE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ULTIMATE DECISIONS WHERE WE GO WITH STUART, THIS DOES PROVIDE WORLD-CLASS HANDICAP ACCESS TO OUR BEACH.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I REALLY STRIVE TO.
IT ALSO ADDS SOME SUGGESTIONS THAT I STILL WERE NOT 100% SURE HOW WE WOULD GET IT TO WORK.
BUT AS THE FATHER OF A TWO-YEAR-OLD CANINE DELINQUENT, ADDING A DOG PARK COMPONENT TO THIS WAS ALSO SOMETHING THAT WE WORKED HARD TO DO.
>> BEFORE WE START WITH MR. ANDERSEN'S PRESENTATION HERE, COUNCIL, I WANT AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.
WE WILL HAVE IN IT, WE'LL PRESENT WHAT THEY'VE COME UP WITH.
WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS, WHERE DO WE GO? DO WE MOVE FORWARD WITH AN RFP? WHO'S INVOLVED WITH MANAGING THIS PROJECT AS WE MOVE FORWARD? IS IT THE CITY OR THE PARK BOARD? FROM A FUNDING STANDPOINT, WHAT'S THE THOUGHTS OF COUNSEL AND FUNDING OF THIS AND SO FORTH? WHAT ARE THE PRIORITIES OF THIS AND HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD FROM A PRIORITY STANDPOINT? AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OUR PRESENTATION.
DUDLEY, COULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE CAMERAS HERE?
I'M THE CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT MANAGER.
>> FIRST SLIDE THAT WAS UP THERE IS JUST A COVER SHEET.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE IT ON PAPER IN FRONT OF THEM SO YOU CAN FLIP THROUGH IT AND NOT WASTE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME.
SOME PEOPLE LIKE TO SEE IT UP HERE.
WANTED TO START OFF SAYING THIS IS A DISCUSSION.
[03:05:02]
CITY STAFF HAS SAT DOWN AND VISITED WITH HISTORICAL INFORMATION AND COME UP WITH SOME SUGGESTED USES.THIS IS THE FIRST TIME COUNCIL HAS SEEN IT AND WE NEED SOME DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.
HOW DO YOU WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS? IS THERE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT YOU WANT TO SEE? THE FIRST THING THAT SURPRISED ME WHEN I GOT THE SURVEY FROM THE PARK BOARD, THE BOUNDARY ACTUALLY OBSCURED OF EACH PART.
WE START OVER HERE ON THE WEST END.
THIS LITTLE PIECE OF PROPERTY RIGHT HERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S BEEN SINCE IT'S BEEN USED.
IT DOES HAVE TWO RAMPS OFF OF THE SEAWOLF, WHETHER THEY'RE SAFE OR NOT AS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.
BUT WE BASICALLY DON'T USE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY HARDLY AT ALL.
THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY UP HERE RIGHT NOW AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I GET THIS WRONG.
THEY'RE USING THIS FOR THE FREE PARKING AT THE MOMENT.
IT LOOKS WHAT YOU SEE IN THIS IMAGE IS WHAT'S OUT THERE.
>> THERE'S SOME FREE PARKING UP THERE.
IT DOESN'T GET ALL THE WAY UP TO GO-KART.
>> NO. IT DIDN'T GET ALL THE WAY TO THE GO-KART TRACK.
>> OUT IN THERE, THERE'S FREE WALL.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 550, THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE HEARD THAT THIS MORNING.
>> THE SECTION ON THE WEST THAT YOU SHOWED.
THERE ARE CARS PARKING OUT IN HERE. LET'S GO DOWN THERE.
>> DO THEY WEAR THEIR SNAKE GAITERS?
>> WELL, THEY MAY BUT IT'S NOT PRESCRIBED.
>> I WENT DOWN THERE ON MY BIKE. NEVER DO THAT AGAIN.
>> LET ME BACKUP. WHERE DID I STOP?
>> UNUSED AREA NORTH OF THE ROAD ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
>> THIS COULD BE FURTHER DEVELOPED IF IT NEEDS TO BE FOR ALL THE PARKING.
IT'S EASILY FIT 500 SO MUCH SPACE.
BASICALLY, WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SAND HERE IS WHERE THEY PARK TODAY.
THIS IS THE ACCESS AT THE MOMENT TO THAT SPECIAL USE AREA.
THEY COME THROUGH THE GATE, COME DOWN HERE, AND COME INTO HERE. DURING A BUSY PERIOD, I DON'T SEE A WHOLE LOT OF ACTIVITY DOWN ON THIS SAME PAGE.
BUT THAT'S THE LAYOUT AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
I THINK COUNCILMAN MASTASKY HAD ASKED ABOUT UTILITIES, THIS IS THE SANITARY SEWER, RUNS OUT THERE AND THIS IS THE WATERLINE.
RIGHT HERE IS THE ELECTRICAL CONNECTION.
THERE'S A WATER STATION RIGHT THERE.
>> THERE'S NO NATURAL GAS ON THE PROPERTY?
>> NO, THERE'S NO NATURAL GAS ON THE PROPERTY.
[NOISE] THAT'S MORE OF THE UTILITY LINE, THAT'S SEWER LINE.
>> WHERE IS THE SEWER LINE LOCATED?
I'VE JUST DONE THE MAINS ON THERE.
THERE'S ONE THAT RUN TO THE PAVILION, AND RIGHT DOWN IN HERE, THEY HAVE MOBILE AMENITIES AT THE MOMENT.
>> WE THOUGHT THAT THE SEWER WENT THROUGH HERE.
APPARENTLY IT GOES AROUND ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER.
WE GET THE SEWER DOWN THE ROAD.
BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING PAVILION.
FROM DISCUSSING THINGS, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND WANTED TO USE THE BACKGROUND AND SOLVE IT SO THAT YOU CAN GET THE RELATIONSHIP.
WE HAVE ANOTHER IMAGE THAT'S JUST THE NEW WORK THAT WE CAN LOOK AT FOR A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.
[NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] WITH SOME OF THE DRAINAGE THAT GOES AROUND.
IT'S A BIT LESS PONDING IN THE PARKING AND LESS PONDING OVER THE BUILDING. IS THAT ACCURATE?
>> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU.
>> THERE'S A LOT ON THE CROSS HERE.
IT'S CALLED A CONSTRUCTION LINE.
THAT IS THE LINE THAT'S BEEN AGREED TO WITH GLO, THAT WE WON'T BUILD BELOW THAT.
ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE NEEDS TO BE MOBILE.
THE PARK BOARD HAS PUT OUT A MOBILE MILITARY-LIKE SAY RIGHT IN HERE THAT FINDING IS VERY SUCCESSFUL.
[03:10:08]
THE PARKING RIGHT HERE AND HERE.WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS A SUGGESTION IS THAT WE USE PART OF THIS AREA FOR THE 500 FEET OF THE RESTRICTED USE AREA.
WE ACCESS IT THROUGH THIS ENTRANCE POINT AND COME DOWN.
THEN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALLOWED CAN GO DOWN THERE AND PARK.
I THINKS IT'S MOSTLY ACCESSIBLE, AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
IT'S ABOUT THIRD OF THE AREA WE HAVE DOWN HERE.
THAT'S STILL AN ONGOING DISCUSSION WITH GLO AS TO HOW THAT'S USED.
>> BUT WE DO FEEL BY HAVING A GATE ACCESS AT LEAST DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS, THAT IT WILL STOP THE ABUSE OF THE AREA.
IT'LL BE USED FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE.
>> IN THE EVENINGS AND SLACK TIME, ALMOST ANYBODY.
>> WHEN THE GATE'S NOT MANNED, THE WHOLE PLACE IS OPEN.
>> YES, IT'S OPEN. HERE'S THE EXISTING PAVILION RIGHT HERE.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO PUT THE NEW BEACH PATROL FACILITY RIGHT HERE FAIRLY CLOSE TO THE ENTRANCE.
OUR BOARD STATED THAT PREVIOUSLY AND THAT'S BASICALLY THE LOCATION WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
FROM THE BEACH PATROLS BE ABLE TO VIEW THE ENTIRE BEACH.
YOU CAN PROBABLY SEE WITH GOOD SCOPE, PROBABLY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO FLAGSHIP, EXCUSE ME, PLEASE UP HERE, WHATEVER IT'S CALLED NOW.
[LAUGHTER] THEN EASILY ALL THE WAY TO THE END THERE.
>> AS A SIDE NOTE, WE HAVE CONTEMPLATED AND DISCUSSED ABOUT CO-HOUSING BEACH PATROL IN OUR SAFE ROOM PROJECT, IN FIRE STATION PROJECT UP ON THE SEAWALL.
HOWEVER, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT PROJECT, BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR PETER BEFORE THAT.
WE DON'T WANT HIM LIVING IN THOSE TRAILERS THAT LONG.
WE'RE BASICALLY GOING TO INCORPORATE MOST OF HIS NEEDS IN THIS STRUCTURE.
DUDLEY'S BEEN TALKING TO PETER ABOUT THAT.
>> I THINK AS IT WAS, IT WAS FAIRLY SMALL AND THE SMALLER IT GETS, THE MORE COST PER SQUARE FOOT.
PUTTING THAT ALL BACK TOGETHER, WE GET A LITTLE BIT OF ECONOMY OF SCALE AND GETS ALL OF HIS OPERATION UNDER ONE ROOF.
>> IT'S NOT TO SAY THEY STILL CAN'T PARTICIPATE WITH US IN ANY OTHER PROJECT, BUT WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE IMMEDIATE NEEDS.
>> IN THE SAFE AREA, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A SAFE ROOM, BUT WE WILL HAVE SAFE ROOMS UP THERE AND FIRST RESPONDERS WILL BE COMING TO THAT LOCATION IF WE GET FUNDING FOR IT.
>> WE EVEN HAVE A BALLPARK ON WHAT THAT WOULD COST.
>> THE BEACH PATROL FACILITIES.
>> WE'RE PROGRAMMING IT RIGHT NOW.
IT'S SOMEWHERE 5-7 MILLION, SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE.
>> THE WAY IT'S DESIGNED THERE, IT HAS AN INTERESTING DESIRE, WHAT IS IT?
>> WELL, THE SHAPE WAS CHOSEN ON PURPOSE TO BE NOT A SHAPE.
[LAUGHTER] RIGHT NOW WE ALL HAVE THIS IMAGE OF THIS LITTLE SQUARE THING, BUT WANTED TO TRY NOT TO DETERMINE FROM THIS WHAT THE SHAPE OF THAT FACILITY IS.
BUT WE DID WANT OLD THING THAT SITS OUT FRONT SO WE CAN SEE OUT.
>> THAT'S WHERE HIS TURN IT IS.
>> WE'VE ALSO DESIGNATED [LAUGHTER] THIS AREA UP HERE AND PART OF THIS FOR MAYBE THE FUTURE OF THE PLAN.
[NOISE] PROBABILITY THAT THIS WILL NOT BE USED FOR PARKING IN THE INTERIM, BUT THAT COULD BE A FUTURE THAT FORESEE.
>> WE TRIED TO LEAVE THAT AREA OPEN FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR FUTURE PROJECTS THAT TO BE DISCUSSED BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE PARK BOARD.
WE DON'T WANT TO JUST SLAM THE DOOR ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE, BUT WE NEED TO CREATE A USABLE PARK SPACE THAT'S A PARK.
THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE, BUT WE'VE LEFT THAT SPACE IN THE INTERIM.
IT CAN ALWAYS BE USED FOR OVERFLOW PARKING AND EVERYTHING ELSE OR EVENTS OR ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO DO, BUT ULTIMATELY, IT CAN BE USED FOR DEVELOPMENT AS WELL.
>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMING BACK UP HERE IN THIS ZONE UP HERE, THIS FUTURE IS WELL.
>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE DO AS A CITY IN THE PARK BOARD ON STEWART BEACH, WE MAKE MONEY PARKING PEOPLE ON THE SAND.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR MAIN CRITERIA IS RETURN ON INVESTMENT, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'RE EVER GOING TO GET ANY GREATER RETURN ON INVESTMENT THAN PARKING PEOPLE ON THE SAND BECAUSE WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR THAT SAND OTHER THAN MOVING IT AROUND, WE WOULD GET THERE.
WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME HUGE RETURN SOMEWHERE ELSE TO BE ABLE TO HOLD SOMETHING.
>> NOW, THAT BEING SAID, IF THERE WERE OTHER DEVELOPMENT PLANS DOWN THE ROAD AND YOU NEED TO DISPLACE SOME OF THAT PARKING,
[03:15:03]
THAT'S WHEN YOU WOULD START DISCUSSING THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS OF VERTICAL PARKING.>> HOW DID THE NUMBER 500 CARS, THAT'S FROM OUR ACCESS PLAN? BECAUSE IF YOU DIVIDE THAT NUMBERS BY THE REQUIREMENTS, IT'S NOT THAT LARGE.
>> CAR WOULD HAVE INTEREST THAT WE'RE IN THE FREE PARKING.
>> THAT WILL ASSUME. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF PARKING.
>> THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE 2,000 THERE.
THE LARGEST DAY THEY'VE HAD SO FAR IS 1,500 CARS.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE WERE 1,500 CARS THERE AT THAT MOMENT, THEY COME AND GO.
BUT THEY'VE HAD 1,500 PAID CARS COME IN HERE.
>> BUT MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE WE REQUIRED BY ACCESS?
>> THAT WAS IN DISCUSSION WITH GLO.
KYLE TALKED ABOUT THAT EARLIER TODAY.
THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT IN OUR BEACHES, [OVERLAPPING] WE DON'T HAVE ALL OF THOSE NOW.
GLO SAYS WE WANT YOU TO HAVE THIS MANY FREE SPACES.
>> SORRY. MARIE, ARE YOU ASKING HOW MANY SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE STEWART BEACH AREA?
>> IS THERE A NUMBER FOR THE STEWART BEACH?
>> I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A NUMBER FOR STEWART BEACH.
>> IT WAS JUST A LINEAR FOOTAGE OF STEWART BEACH, RIGHT?
>> WELL, THEY ARE PARKING ON THE BEACH, SO WHEREVER THE [OVERLAPPING] PLAN.
>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE SO MANY FREE SPACES, I'M IMAGINING, FOR THAT.
>> THE 500 IN THE UPPER CORNER IS?
>> THAT WAS STILL BEACH RELATED.
>> YES. THEN WE HAD TO ADD 300 BECAUSE THEY WERE MISSING.
>> WELL, THE ORIGINAL NUMBER, WHATEVER WAS [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT WAS LIKE 200 AND WE'VE ADDED 300 TO OFFSET THE SEAWALL.
>> WE STILL ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE WAY MORE CARS AND WE HAVE LINEAR FREE DEBATE.
>> YOUR REPORT, WE HAVE SO MANY PARKING SPACES PER LINEAR FOOT, WE EXCEED THAT EXPONENTIALLY.
THE ISSUE IS HOW MANY CAN THEY GET ON HERE? HOW MANY PAID PARKING CAN THEY GET THERE? THEY GENERATE A LOT OF INCOME WITH THAT.
WE SHOW PARKING BACK UP IN HERE.
IF I WERE HAVING A YOUNG FAMILY AND HAD TO PARK UP HERE AND WALK THE EIGHT MILE DOWN THERE THROUGH THE SAND, I WOULD PREFER TO PARK ALONG HERE.
IT MAY BE BETTER THAT WE STRETCH THAT PARKING OUT AND THEN DEVELOP BACK UP THERE.
THAT'S ONE CONSIDERATION. WE'RE TRYING TO DO AWAY WITH THIS ACCESS ON THIS END.
>> THIS IS FOR THE EXISTING [INAUDIBLE].
>> WELL, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO AWAY WITH IT. WE'RE TRYING TO CONTROL IT.
>> WHAT WE ALSO SHOW IS TO PUT THIS.
I DON'T THINK WE'LL EVER GET AWAY WITHOUT NOT HAVING A PAVILION ON STEWART BEACH.
WHAT'S IN IT IS A BIG QUESTION WHETHER WE WANTED TO ENCLOSE, WHETHER WE WANTED IT CONDITIONED AS A WHOLE OTHER SUBJECT.
BUT SOME COVERAGE SHADED AREA THAT'S FOR PEOPLE HAVE A RESTAURANTS, SHOWER AND GET OUT OF THE SUN.
IT'S SET UP ON THIS ONE SO THAT ALL OF THESE PARKING COULD TRY TO WALK THROUGH THERE.
YOU CAN HAVE SOME RETAIL UP IN THERE IF YOU'VE GOT THEM TO USE THAT MAP.
>> WELL, THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION IS, WHEN WE SAY PAVILION, WHAT DO WE MEAN? HOW MANY? BECAUSE WHEN I THINK OF PAVILION, I DON'T THINK THAT THE BUILDING THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE NUMBER EVEN THOUGH WEST, WHAT WE CALL IT.
I'M THINKING OF SOME HARD STRUCTURE, BUT NOT NOT A MASSIVE CONCRETE STRUCTURE THAT DOES PROVIDE SHADE AND A PLACE FOR AMENITIES.
PROBABLY YOU WANT TO PUT A GIFT STORE OR THINGS LIKE THAT IN THERE.
BUT TRYING TO GET ANOTHER 15,000 CONDITIONS FEET OUT THERE, WE'RE JUST RECREATING THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE.
>> WE ENVISIONED MOSTLY OPEN-AIR, BUT WITH SOME ENCLOSURES FOR BATHROOMS AND WHETHER YOU'RE NOT YOU CONDITION YOUR BATHROOMS OR NOT IS DEBATABLE.
>> WHERE WE ARE ANTICIPATING FOR PUTTING PARK MANAGEMENT?
>> WHAT MANAGEMENT, HERE OR JUST THE MANAGEMENT THEMSELVES COULD BE IN THAT BUILDING THERE? BUT WE NEEDED THE EQUIVALENT [OVERLAPPING] SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> I GET THE EQUIVALENT THING, BUT I MEAN, THE PARK MANAGEMENT NEEDS OFFICE JUST LIKE PARK BOARD DOES.
>> YEAH. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT INTERNALLY, ABOUT WHETHER WE INCLUDE THEM IN PETER'S OFFICE.
SO THERE'S SOME EFFICIENCIES WITH SHARED ADMINISTRATION IN THERE OR WHETHER OR NOT WE CREATE SEPARATE SPACE FOR PARKING MANAGEMENT OVER AT WHERE THE EQUIPMENT IS STORED.
BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME GOODNESS THAT COMES OUT OF THAT TOO.
[03:20:05]
>> THERE IS, BUT THE ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS ALWAYS BEEN THAT YOU WANT PETER CLOSER TO THE WATER. WE CAN ONLY GO [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOU CAN ONLY GO SO FAR SOUTH TO DO THAT.
BUT THAT APPLIES TO THE PARK MANAGEMENT AS WELL.
YOU DON'T WANT THEM REMOTE FROM -
>> NO. THEY'RE NOT BEYOND THE BEACH.
IT'S JUST WHETHER THEY'RE WITH PETER OR WHERE THEIR EQUIPMENT IS.
>> WELL, MY CONCERN THE FACE OF THE BEACH PATROL BUILDING IS FROM ME WHEN I'M LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT'S 1,700 FEET FROM THE WATER.
THE EQUIPMENT BUILDINGS CONSIDERABLY FARTHER AWAY FROM THE WATER.
>> ANYWAY, I DON'T WANT NOT TO.
>> THOSE ARE ALL LEGITIMATE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE WOULD HAVE AT THE TIME WE WERE DESIGNING FOR PARK BOARD FOR WITH PETER AND WITH THE PARK BOARD STAFF.
>> I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT MUCH TO ADD A FEW OFFICES TO THE BEACH PATROL FACILITY FOR PARK ADMINISTRATION.
I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A SEPARATE PLACE FOR ALL OF THEIR EQUIPMENT IF THEY WANT TO KEEP IT ON THE PAGE.
>> THAT NEEDS TO BE FURTHER FROM THE WATER.
>> THERE'S SOME BENEFIT TO HAVING SOMEBODY HOUSED WHERE SET EQUIPMENT IS LOCATED OTHERWISE SET EQUIPMENTS SOMETIMES WALKS AWAY.
ROUGH NUMBERS SHOW THREE MOBILE AMENITY AREAS.
HOWEVER MANY THEY GET THIS UP TO WHAT THE MARKET WILL BEAR. RIGHT NOW.
I DON'T THINK THEY TELL ME THAT THE ONE THEY HAVE THERE IS VERY SUCCESSFUL.
THEY DO HAVE SALES IN THERE, IN ADDITION TO RESTAURANTS AND SHOWERS.
SO THEY HAVE TWO SEPARATE PARTS OF IT.
CLOSER YOU CAN GET IT TO THE WATER.
THE MORE YOU USE YOU'RE GOING TO GET AT IT.
THAT'S AS CLOSE AS WHERE YOU CAN GET IT TO THEM IS JUST RIGHT BEHIND.
>> THE ISSUE, THE DOWNSIDE TO MOBILE AND ENTITIES ARE IS THAT YOU GET YOUR MOBILE AND YOU GOT TO GET THEM OUT OF THERE.
IF THERE'S AN EVENT. THE MORE YOU PUT OUT THERE, THERE'S A LOT TO DO WHEN A STORM IS COMING IN THIS.
>> BUT IT'S THE THING THAT WE ESSENTIALLY SELF-INSURE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO. THAT'S NOT A FEMALE BUILDING [OVERLAPPING].
I THINK VINCE HAS HAD A GREAT PLAN FOR GETTING HIM OUT OF THERE AND YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU COULD TRIPLE THAT PROBLEM.
TAKE A FULL CREW ALL DAY TO GET IT OUT OF THERE.
>> YOU ALSO DON'T WANT IT SAILING DOWN UNIVERSITY.
>> YOU DON'T WANT IT FLOATING OUT TO SEA, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN LOSING A TRAILER THAT YOU DO AND A HARD STRUCTURE.
>> THE BIGGEST PROBLEM I SEE IS WHAT BRIAN ALLUDED TO TRAILER SLOPE.
SO WE NEED TO GET IT OFF THE BEACH HOUSE.
TRAILER FLOAT THAT COMES UP HERE.
>> THEY TEND TO NOT BOUNCE OFF THE SEAWALL AS WELL AS THEY PROBABLY SHOULD.
>> LIKE THE 1992 OTHER STRONG FIRST HOUSE AT THE SECOND ONE, THIRD ONE AND THE FOURTH AND SO ON.
YOU DON'T WANT TO CREATE THAT SITUATION.
YOU KNOW THAT IF I'M CORRECT, KIMBERLY?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO REAL QUICKLY SAY ABOUT THE MOBILE AMENITIES, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID WHEN WE CREATED THE MOBILE AMENITIES.
WE WERE ABLE TO REMOVE THEM FROM THE BEACH VERY QUICKLY.
OUR TEST WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO REMOVE THEM IN 90 MINUTES, THE THREE UNITS THAT WE HAVE THERE.
SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE THAT CUMBERSOME TO ADD TWO MORE SETS.
WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH EQUIPMENT AND PEOPLE TO DO IT.
>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE AS BIG AS THIS FIRST.
THERE MAY BE SMALLER VERSIONS, MAYBE EASIER TO MOVE ON.
>> THEN THE THE CAVEAT TO THAT IS WHERE DO YOU TAKE THEM? WE WERE A LITTLE LIMITED ON SPACE, SO WE'D HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN COLLABORATE WITH THIS.
>> YEAH, WE'RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT THAT WITH OUR OTHER LOCATIONS.
>> I DON'T KNOW A LOT OF PLACES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SAFE WHEN YOU HAVE TO WORK THIS.
>> WE'RE JUST GOING FOR, SAY PREFER.[LAUGHTER].
>> WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THAT IMAGE UP HERE.
WE CAN GO TO A LITTLE BIT LARGER ONE.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANY SPECIFICS WITH.
>> KINDLY GO TO THE ONE THAT SHOWS THAT THE BLOW UP OF THE BEACH PATROL RESERVE COVERED THE MAIN ACCESSIBLE PLAY.
I GUESS THE SECOND TO THE LAST, IT'S THE LAST.
>> LAST NAME HERE. YEAH. THAT ONE.
>> NOW YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT THE SHAPES, AND THE SHAPES ARE JUST PURE CLUMSY.
>> IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE GREAT BIG BEACH BALL OUT THERE,
[03:25:02]
BUT THAT'S THE SECURE WEBS AND IT OCCUPIES A SPACE.>> ACTUALLY THERE'S SOME GUYS IN SOUTH CAROLINA MAKING ROUND OR RESISTANT HOUSES, PRE-MANUFACTURED, REALLY ACCOMMODATE.
THIS WAY ENVISIONED AS BEING SOME RENTABLE FACILITY OF PAVILION, CORPORATE EVENTS.
SOME EVENT WOULD HAPPEN THERE, AND IT CAN BE SET UP FOR JUST THOSE PEOPLE.
THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONSIDERED PURELY PUBLIC.
WE REALLY DON'T CLOSE IT OFF. YES, SIR.
>> THE GRID SQUARE FOR THE UPPER-LEFT AT YOUR ENTRANCE FACILITY.
WE NEED TO MAKE TO THAT NICE-LOOKING, THAT NEEDS TO BE AN ATTRACTIVE BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE UNDER THE FREEWAY.
>> THAT'S WHY IT'S SHOWN A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN IT IS RIGHT NOW, RIGHT NOW IT IS RIGHT THERE, AND IT NEEDS TO BE AN ATTRACTIVE, AS A BILLBOARD, IF YOU WILL.
>> RIGHT BEHIND IT IS THE BEACH PATROL AND THAT SHOULD BE FAIRLY TALL.
BY THE TIME WE GET UP TO THE 24 FEET, WHATEVER PLUS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE.
THAT CAN ALSO BE UNATTRACTIVE SIGN BOARD.
THIS WAS WHERE WE'RE SAYING WE'D HAVE A LOT OF THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE SO MUCH ACCESSIBLE PARKING.
THEY HAVE A PLAY AREA NOW THAT IS RIGHT HERE.
COMING IN HERE AND HAVING AN ACCESSIBLE PLAY AREA RIGHT NEXT TO THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING MAKES LOT OF SENSE.
THEN ALL OF THESE ARE TRAFFIC AREAS WHERE THEY'RE ALL ACCESSIBLE OR NOT.
THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE THE MOBILE MATS, SO WE CAN GET PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES.
>> WE'VE LEFT SPACE FOR EVENTS IF YOU WANTED TO DO INFLATABLE OR IF YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING ELSE, WE'VE TRIED TO PROGRAM SOME OF THAT SPACE IN THERE.
>> ANY THOUGHTS ON THE COVERED PAVILION?
>> I HATE TO PUT IMAGES IN PEOPLE'S MINDS, BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN, THAT'S WHAT WE SAID IT'S GOING TO BE.
WE WOULD LIKE PERSONALLY, ON IMAGE THAT REFLECTS GALVESTON, WHICH IS NOT ULTRAMODERN.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY PICTORIAL, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE DROPPED BY THIS.
SO THAT MUST BE ON THE GALVESTON BEACH.
THERE WERE LOTS OF THINGS THAT WERE ON THE BEACH AT ONE TIME. THAT'S TO BE SEEN.
>> A LOT OF IT DETERMINES TOO HOW MUCH OF THAT SPACE YOU WANT OPEN-AIR OR HOW MUCH OF IT YOU WANT TO CLIMATIZE.
I'M HAPPY TO SHARE MY OPINION AS ALWAYS AM.
IT PROVIDES BIG OPEN AIRED PICNIC SPACE FOR` PEOPLE TO USE AND SHARE.
I THINK CLIMATIZED RESTROOMS CAUSE PROBLEMS THAT CLOSE TO THE BEACH BECAUSE THE DOOR STAYS OPEN ALL DAY AND THE HUMIDITY.
HOWEVER, I DO UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR SOME CLIMATIZED SPACE FOR THINGS LIKE CONCESSIONS IN SHOPS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT MADE ME TO BE A PART OF THAT AS WELL.
DON'T UNDERESTIMATE THE ABILITY TO ALSO PROGRAM AND USE THE UNDERSIDE OF THAT PAVILION AS WELL.
>> THAT GOT TO BE CONSIDERABLY RAISED, ISN'T IT?
>> THAT'S ABOUT 15 FOOT OFF THE PAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS PROGRAM.
>> NOW, PEOPLE WILL CAMP UNDER THAT AND HEARTBEAT.
>> IT NEED TO BE SECURED, SO WE NEED TO AVOID THAT.
>> ANY OF THE EVENTS SPACE COULD BE ANYTHING FROM DOING A FIRE PIT TO THINGS LIKE THAT, AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN CODE AND ALL THOSE TYPE THINGS AS WELL AND MANAGED BY THE PARK BOARD.
>> LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION HERE.
WHAT REVENUE STREAM ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE PARK REVENUES, UNRESTRICTED REVENUES, EACH USER FEES, THAT KIND OF THING TO PAY FOR THIS PROJECT? I KNOW WE CAN AFFORD TO FRONT THE COST OF THIS, BUT I'M NOT SURE I SEE OUR BEACH PARK ASSETS PRODUCING A LOT OF UNRESTRICTED REVENUE FOR THE CITY.
I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND WE CAN COOPERATE WITH THE PARK BOARD ON THIS.
I'M HAPPY TO CONTINUE TALKING TO THEM ABOUT MANAGING IT, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE IN THE PAST WE'VE REALLY MONETIZED THESE THINGS NEARLY THE WAY WE COULD.
>> WELL, AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE PROGRAMMED AND SOME ARE OBSERVABLE SPACE AND THINGS LIKE
[03:30:03]
THAT FOR EVENTS SO THAT WAY YOU COULD POSSIBLY BETTER MONETIZE THE PARK.IN ADDITION TO JUST DAY USERS.
THERE'S PROBABLY OPPORTUNITIES TO MONETIZE THIS PART FOR OTHER USERS OUTSIDE OF A SATURDAY IN JUNE.
I WOULD LOVE RIGHT NOW IN OCTOBER, IF YOU CAN HAVE AN EVENT OUT HERE, IT WOULD BE FABULOUS AND YOU HAD SOME COVER AND SHADE FOR IT.
IT WOULD BEEN ON MONDAY, BUT SATURDAY YES.
>> I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT'S ON THIS HAPPENING OTHER THAN THE BEACH PATROL IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.
>> A PAVILION IS SEVERAL YEARS OUT, MINIMAL.
>> WELL, IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY, THAT'S FINE.
>> I THINK WE MAY HAVE THE MONEY.
THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING. [OVERLAPPING].
>> IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY, LETS DO IT, AND LET'S MAKE IT INTO AN ATTRACTION.
>> GUYS, WE WERE TOLD THE PROGRAM BUT WE WEREN'T TOLD TO FINANCE IT. WHEN WE'LL FIGURE THAT OUT [OVERLAPPING].
>> [OVERLAPPING] I JUST SPEND IT, I DON'T GET IT.
>> [LAUGHTER] THIS BRINGS UP THE QUESTION LOGISTICALLY.
NOW, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE WITH THIS?
>> WE HAVE AN RFQ OUT AT THE MOMENT FOR DESIGN OF THAT FACILITY AND WHAT WE BRING TO THE BEACH PATROLS CONTROL FACILITY ITSELF.
WE'LL BE BRINGING THAT TO YOU ON THE NOVEMBER 16TH.
WE'VE RECEIVED PROPER SUBMITTALS AND WE'VE EVALUATED THEM AND WE'LL BE BRINGING THEM TO YOU.
>> AND THE DEMOLITION OF THE CURRENT PAVILLION?
>> THE DEMOLITION WILL FOLLOW AS SOON AS WE GET THE TEMPORARY FACILITIES.
WE ANTICIPATE THOSE TEMPORARY FACILITIES BEING PLACED RIGHT ABOUT HERE.
>> WHAT DO WE THINK IS THE TIMELINE ON THAT?
>> IN OUR MEETING, IF I CAN ELABORATE ON THIS, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS IN THE MEETING AND THE UPDATE WAS THAT THE OFFICE BUILDINGS SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY THE END OF NOVEMBER.
>> THAT'S THE TRAILER MANUFACTURING DELIVERED BY THE END OF NOVEMBER.
>> THE ONLY THING THAT WAS A HANG UP WAS THE RESTROOM FACILITIES AND THEY DIDN'T.
>> WE ACTUALLY GOT A SCHEMATIC HOME THAT HAS BEEN SENT OFF TO THE ENGINEER, AND WE GOT THE SUBMITTAL FOR THE OBSERVATION TRAILER WHICH IS FURTHER DOWN THE LINE, BUT IT'S NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR THEM TO OPERATE.
>> WHAT WE NEED IS PLACE FOR THEM TO GO AND PULL ALL THAT STUFF OUT OF THAT PAVILLION BEFORE YOU DESTROY IT.
>> THIS TEMPORARY FACILITIES GOES RIGHT HERE AND WHEN IT'S DONE AND THEY CAN MOVE INTO IT, THEN WE'LL TAKE THE PAVILLION DOWN.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU'RE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE THE TIMELINE FOR TAKING THE PAVILION DOWN?
>> [INAUDIBLE] I DIDN'T BRING IT WITH ME.
>> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE A SIGNATURE MOMENT IN THE LIFE OF STEWART BEACH IS WATCHING THAT PAVILLION.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THERE YOU GO, [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER].
>> IT MIGHT HAVE MADE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY SEA WOLF PARK IS PRESENTED WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, WHEN THAT PAVILION FINALLY CAME DOWN.
BECAUSE OF THAT, THIS IS JUST ME.
I THINK THAT WE NEED, I DON'T WANT TO RUSH IT, BUT I WANT TO LOOK AT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS COVERED PAVILION THERE.
>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE BECAUSE COUNSEL TO TAKE WHAT WE'VE GIVEN YOU TODAY, GIVE US YOUR FEEDBACK ON IT, AND ONCE WE OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO BE COMING BACK IN NOVEMBER [NOISE] WE CAN TAKE IT THE NEXT STEP FURTHER AND START.
IF GIVEN FEEDBACK, WE CAN THEN GO AFTER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS TO START DOING THE REST OF IT AS WELL.
>> YES, TO DO THE PAVILION AND RESERVED AREA AND EVEN ANYTHING ELSE APART BOARD MAY WANT TO PLACE ON THE SCHEMATIC.
BUT, I'D LIKE TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK FIRST.
IS THIS EVEN WHAT YOU WANT? BECAUSE THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU WANT.
>> IN COOPERATION WITH THE CARPORT ON THAT DISCUSSION.
>> ITS DESIGN HAS BEEN WITH [NOISE] I'M SORRY [INAUDIBLE].
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
>> IS THERE A SET AMOUNT OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE ACCORDANCE WITH? IS THERE A PERCENTAGE?
>> THERE IS A PERCENTAGE, AND WE DON'T ACTUALLY SHOW ANY OF THE AISLE SPACES HERE.
I'M NOT TOO WORRIED ABOUT THE ACTUAL ACCOUNT.
MY SPACES ARE LARGER THAN THE ONES THEY USE NOW.
DRIVE LANES ARE LARGER THAN THE ONES THEY USED.
>> WELL, WHAT I'M CONCERNED WITH IS ALL THAT SPACE IN FRONT OF THAT RESERVED SPOT AND ALL THAT SPACE IN FRONT OF
>> [OVERLAPPING] I'M TALKING PROBABLY THE ACCESSIBLE IS PROBABLY GOES TWO AISLES.
>> IT'S JUST PARKING FOR THE BEACH.
>> I THINK HE'S ASKING ABOUT A HUMAN IN THAT REGARD.
>> BUT YOU'RE GETTING REALLY CONGESTED.
I MEAN, YOU GOT A BEACH PATROL THAT NEEDS TO GET TO THE BEACH AND IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT'S GOING TO BE A VERY GOOD ROUTE.
[03:35:05]
>> BEACH PATROLS NOT GOING TO BE RESPONDING FROM THERE.
>> BEACH PATROL WILL COME RIGHT DOWN HERE OVER THE BRIDGE THAT THEY COME DOWN THERE.
>> THEY CAN'T GET THEIR KIDS SO THEY CAN DRIVE EQUIPMENT ACROSS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] IF YOU'RE A CORPORATE OFFICE OR A CORPORATE PARTY AND YOU'RE IN THAT RESERVE AREA, YOU'RE IN A PARKING LOT.
>> IF YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU CAN BLOCK IT OFF.
>> WELL, I'M JUST SAYING YOU'RE STILL IN A PARKING LOT.
YOU GOT CARS BEHIND YOU, YOU GOT PARKS BEHIND YOU, AND IF YOU'VE GOT KIDS OUT THERE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S FINE. THIS IS PROPOSED PARKING, BUT REMEMBER, THIS IS JUST SAYING SO THAT'S WHY THIS IS ALL OPEN BACK THERE, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE HAVING AN EVENT HERE AND THEY WANT DO THIS, THAT WOULD BE TOTALLY PART OF THE PROGRAMMING WITH THE PARK BOARD AND THE SCHEDULING THAT THEY COULD USE THAT FOR WHATEVER THEY WANT.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SHOW YOU, IF YOU GET 2000 PEOPLE DOWN THERE ON THE 4TH OF JULY, IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE THIS.
>> DULY NOTED. AT NIGHT I AGREE WITH THAT.
>> ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF USING BUILDING ACCESS DOWN HERE TO THIS RESTRICTED USE HERE IS THE ABILITY OF BEACH PATROL TO GET DOWN THIS STAYS OPEN, SO THEY CAN GET STRAIGHT DOWN TO.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH DRIVING FROM YOUR FACILITY YOU ACTUALLY DO DOWN TO STEWART BEACH, CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT PETER?
>> [INAUDIBLE] IT FEELS LIKE WE HAVE TO UNIT ASSIGNED TO THAT AREA.
MOSTLY WHEN WE'RE ROLLING OUT OF THAT PAVILLION TO DO EMERGENCY [OVERLAPPING].
YOU NEED TO GET YOU ON THE MICROPHONE'S.
>> IT'S PETER DAVIS, CHECKING.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BEACH PATROL.
>> NOW, WE TYPICALLY WHEN WE GO AND LEAVE OUR AREA FOR EMERGENCIES, WE'RE GOING TO GO NORTH TO THE SEAWALLS IN THAT WAY.
OCCASIONALLY WE'LL GO DOWN TO THE WATER'S EDGE, BUT WE TYPICALLY HAVE A PATROL UNIT, THEIR RESPONSE TO THAT FROM THE WATER'S EDGE RIGHT THERE.
>> ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE DRAIN AND NOW YOU JUST CAN'T, YOU GOT TO GO AROUND ANYMORE.
>> THIS DESIGN HERE HAS BEEN DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE PARK BOARD?
>> WE'VE TALKED TO HIM YESTERDAY [NOISE].
WE LOOK FORWARD TO THEIR INPUT AS WELL.
>> WE'RE GETTING YOUR DIRECTION BEFORE WE CAN PICK IT TOO MUCH FURTHER, AND THIS DISCUSSION, WE ASSUME THERE ARE GOING TO BE SEVERAL ITERATIONS OF THIS.
>> YOUR NEXT STEP AFTER THIS MEETING, WILL YOU SIT DOWN TO THE PARK BOARD?
>> YOU GUYS WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM UP TO THIS POINT, BUT AS WE KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN DIVERGENT IDEAS ABOUT THE USE OF STEWART BEACH IN GENERAL.
WE HAVE TRIED TO DEVELOP IT AS A PARK.
THE PARK BOARD MAY HAVE OTHER DESIRES FOR THAT.
WE NEED COUNSEL TO TELL US WHAT DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO.
IF PARK DIRECTION IS YOU WANT TO GO, THEN WE'LL SIT DOWN WITH THE BEACH PARK BOARD AND FIND OUT HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO ENHANCE AND REWORK THE PARK SIDE OF IT.
IF THERE'S OTHER USE OF THE PARK THAT YOU WANT TO USE, THEN WE NEED TO HEAR THAT.
>> I HAVE TO REMARK THAT WE'RE HERE BECAUSE OF THAT CONVERSATION IS NOT GOING ALL THAT WELL IN PAST YEARS.
WE DIRECTED BRIAN TO GO BRING US A DESIGN.
I'M NOT OPPOSED TO ACCOMMODATING ARTBOARDS IDEAS, OR REQUIREMENTS HERE, BUT THIS IS A CITY PARK AND WE ARE BUILDING A CITY PARK OUT HERE.
NOW, I APPLAUD THE FACT THAT WE ARE ACCOMMODATING BEACH PATROL HERE WITH THE LARGER FOOTPRINT, BUT THE REST OF THIS IS A PART THAT WE WANT.
I WANT BRIAN'S TEAMS TO DESIGN THIS.
THAT'S I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE.
TRUST ME, I SAT IN THIS ROOM FOR SIX MONTHS TRYING TO COMBINE SOME CONSENSUS ON WHAT WE OUGHT TO PUT OUT THERE AND DIDN'T GET ANYWHERE AND THAT WAS A YEAR-AND-A-HALF AGO.
I THINK BRIAN IS DEFINITELY GOING DOWN THE RIGHT PATH HERE.
>> IF THIS IS THE GENERAL DIRECTION WE'RE TO GO, ABSOLUTELY.
WE'LL GET DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, THE PARK PORTAL VIA THE TABLE AND WHOOP BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO OPERATE THIS.
WE DON'T WANT TO JUST SHARE SOMETHING DOWN THEIR THROAT, THEY HAVE TO OPERATE THIS, BUT WE HAVE TO KNOW THAT THIS IS A DIRECTION THAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO GO.
>> I THINK DAVID BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT, AND IT OPENS IT TO A BROADER QUESTION ON WHAT WE WANT STEWART BEACH TO BE.
IF WE WANT IT TO BE A CITY PARK, OR IF WE WANT IT TO BE A REVENUE STREAM TO PROMOTE TOURISM ON THE ISLANDS.
IF WE WANTED TO BE A CITY PARK, I THINK THERE'S A FINE IDEA.
THIS IS GOING TO GENERATE REVENUE AS IT DOES TODAY IS NOT REALLY, I'LL THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A HUGE INCREASE IN THE REVENUE PRODUCED HERE.
IT OPENS UP TO A COUPLE OF POSSIBILITIES HERE TO BRING IN SOME REVENUE STREAMS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S SIGNIFICANT.
I THINK IT'S IT PAYS FOR WHAT WE PUT OUT THERE.
IT PROBABLY BRINGS THE EXACT SAME PERSON THAT GOES TO THAT PART TODAY.
[03:40:02]
IF THAT'S WHAT WE WANT, I THINK THEY'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.IF YOU WANT A PARK, THAT IS THE BEST THING ON THE TEXAS COAST.
IF YOU WANT TO PARK THAT GENERATES REVENUE.
IF YOU WANT A PARK THAT GENERATES A HIGHER VALUE TOURS, IF YOU WANT TO PARK THAT YOU YOURSELF MIGHT GO AND ENJOY AS A CITIZEN OF GAUSSIAN.
I THINK THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF WHAT MAYBE THEY'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL.
BUT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY FIRST WE NEED TO DECIDE ON WHAT WE WANT.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE FIRST THING I THINK WE NEED TO DO AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE HAVE FAILED ON OUR PART.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE GIVEN THEM CLEAR DIRECTION ON IF WE WANT IT TO BE A CITY PARK OR IF WE WANT IT TO BE THE GYM OR THE TEXAS COAST.
>> I LOOK AT THIS PARK AND I'M GOING TO USE THIS ANALOGY IN IT, PROBABLY WILL GET US OFF ON THINKING SOMETHING.
I LOOK AT THIS LIKE DISCOVERY GREEN UP AND INTRODUCED IT.
TO ME IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE TWO.
I THINK IT HAS A PARK TYPE ON BEYOND TO IT.
NOW, WHEN YOU SAY CITY PARK, IT GETS INTO WHO MANAGES THAT? IS IT A REVENUE PRODUCER AND ALL THAT.
BUT I'M LOOKING AT IT AS A COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO THINGS.
TO ME, IT'S NOT ALL OR NONE, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
I THINK THAT WE CAN COMBINE A PARK TYPESETTING AND STILL HAVE A ICONIC FANTASTIC SETTING THAT MAY NOT BE THE BEST ON THE GULF COAST, BUT WOULD RIVAL THAT.
I THINK THOSE TWO CAN BLEND TOGETHER.
>> I THINK THE DIFFERENCE IN DISCOVERY GREEN AND STEWART BEACH IS YOU HAVEN'T RATE THAT YOU CHARGE IT.
TO GET ON THIS BEACH, YOU HAVE TO PAY A FEE.
>> YET WITH DISCOVERY GREEN YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY A FEE.
I CAN GO WALK THROUGH THAT PARK AND ENJOY IT, AND IT IS AMAZING. [LAUGHTER]
WHAT I USE THAT ANALOGY IS BECAUSE IT'S A PARK SETTING, BUT IT HAS AMENITIES AND IT HAS OTHER THINGS THERE THAT MAKE IT A FANTASTIC TOURISM DRAW.
>> THE RESTAURANTS THERE THAT.
>> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUILDING ON RESTAURANTS OR?
>> I LOVE IT. PUT A RESTAURANT OUT THERE.
>> WELL BUT THAT'S WHAT IT COULD BE, THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THE PARK SETTING THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED.
IT'S IN THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
>> WE TRIED TO GIVE DEFERENCE.
IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHERE YOU WANT IT IN THE PARK, BUT WE TRIED TO PROVIDE PLENTY OF ACREAGE FOR THAT TYPE OF STUFF AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREAS THAT COME ALL THE WAY DOWN AND YOU CAN PAY, I MEAN, IN THIS AREA TO COME ALL THE WAY DOWN AND THEY GO ALL THE WAY ACROSS TO SEE WELL, I'M GLAD YOU POINTED THAT OUT.
I MEAN, WHERE DO YOU GO WITH THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA? I MEAN, DO YOU GO OUT FOR AN RFQ ON THAT.
DO YOU SEND IT BACK OVER TO THE PARK BOARD AND LET THEM THAT'S MY QUESTION.
>> WE'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD A COUPLE OF TIMES, A PARK BOARD.
>> BUT I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE HIM A LITTLE DIRECTION TO AT LEAST FRAME OUT WHAT YOU WANT.
IF YOU DON'T WANT A HOTEL SELLING, YOU DON'T WANT A HOTEL AND TELL HIM TO GO UP OR SOMETHING OR TELL HIM YOU WANT SOMETHING THAT FITS IN THOSE SPACES.
BUT IF YOU WANT A RESTAURANT, TELL THEM YOU WHEN A RESTAURANT, IF YOU WANT SHOPS TELL THEM YOU WHAT SHOPS, I MEAN, YOU GIVE THEM SOME DIRECTION, PARK ORDER, I DON'T CARE WHOEVER YOU WANT TO SEND IT TO.
WHAT WE HAVEN'T DONE IN THE PAST IS REALLY GET A CLEAR PATH ON WHAT YOU WANT OUT THERE AND WHAT YOU DON'T WANT OUT THERE.
I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT WE'VE SET ASIDE THESE SPACES AS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT YOU CAN'T JUST SAY, HEY, THIS FEATURE DEVELOPMENT.
>> WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE OUT THERE? I MEAN, THE WHOLE LONG CONVERSATION WE HAVE IT BLEW UP OVER HOTEL, WHETHER WE WERE GOING TO ALLOW A HOTEL IN THE CITY PARK.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHERE IT ALL FELL APART.
IS IT STILL FALLING APART ON THAT?
>> I'M STILL OPEN TO THAT PERSONALLY.
WE WENT DOWN THIS LEGAL ROAD AND DON SAID WE COULDN'T DO IT.
OF PEOPLE SAID WE COULD WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT MAKES MONEY OUT THERE.
>> YOU HAD THEM TELL THEM DEVELOPERS SAYING YOU COULD.
>> YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT MAKES MONEY OUT THERE FOR A PRIVATE NECESSITY TO COME OUT THERE AND DEVELOP SOMETHING.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT MAKES MONEY.
IF IT'S NOT A HOTEL THAT MAKES MONEY.
[03:45:01]
I MEAN, IF IT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT MAKES MONEY, IT'S NOT A HOTEL. THAT'S GREAT.LET'S DO IT, AND IF IT'S BENEFICIAL WITH ALLISON, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITIZEN TOWARD, IT BRINGS A HIGHER VALUE TOURS TO GALVESTON.
IT PUTS MORE HOPE, MORE VOTES EMBEDS. I'M ALL FOR IT.
>> I DON'T OBJECT, BUT WHEN YOU ASK HOTEL DEVELOPERS, WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS WOULD BE GOOD FOR? THE ANSWER, YOU'RE GOING TO GET HIS HOTEL.
>> THEY DIDN'T ONLY ASK A HOTEL DEVELOPER.
>> BUT THEY ASKED 800 PEOPLE AND THREE HOTELIERS RATHER THAN A RESPONDENT'S, MAYBE THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES MONEY.
THEN IT'S A CITY PARK. I MEAN, YOU GUYS ARE REAL.
I'M WILLING TO HAVE THIS BATTLE ALL OVER AGAIN, BUT.
>> IN A CITY PARK, WE GO TO HAVE AN EVENT LIKE SOME SORT OF, LET'S SAY FOLK CONCERT.
WERE ABLE TO CLOSE IT DOWN, CHARGE MONEY TO GET IN THERE.
>> YEAH. WE ALLOW EVENTS AT OUR CITY PARKS NOW THEY HAVE EVENTS AT MINARD PARK.
THEY HAVE CONCERTS AT MINARD PARK. THEY HAVE PRIVATE.
>> NO, THAT'S CORRECT WHAT I'M SAYING.
WE DON'T ALLOW THEM TO CHARGE.
THEY ARE FREE ACCESS PARKS OUR PARKS ARE FREE ACCESS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SEEING, THAT DISCOVERY GREEN, BUT OUR PARKS ARE ALSO SUPPORTED BY GENERAL FUND TAX DOLLARS. THIS PARK IS NOT.
>> CITY THIS THIS GREEN DISCOVERY GREEN, THESE ALL THESE EVENTS AND EVERYTHING ARE ALL PUT ON BY THE CITY AND THEY ALL PAID FOR BY THE CITY AND ALL THE PEOPLE COME IN FOR FREE TO DO THAT.
>> I DON'T MEAN ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT IT IS, BUT WE ARE VERY LIMITED HERE VERSUS DISCOVERY GREEN.
I CAN'T DIG A HOLE AND PUT IN A POND, AND I HAVE TRIED ICE SKATING.
ICE SKATING. I THINK OUR ICE SKATING TEAM WOULD PROBABLY DROWN.
I THINK THAT WE'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE LIMITED HERE THEN DISCOVERY GREEN.
DISCOVERY GREEN IS MEANT TO COMPLEMENT DEVELOPMENT AROUND IT.
THIS DISCOVERY GREEN IN AND OF ITSELF ISN'T A DRAW YOU'RE DRAWN TO.
WELL, I THINK NO, I THINK YOU'RE DRAWN TO THE GEORGIA BROWN, YOU DRAWN TO THE CONVENTION CENTER HOTELS, YOU'RE DRAWN TO ALL THE RESTAURANTS AND THINGS AROUND THERE, AND THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE THAT USE DISCOVERY GREEN.
NOW, IF THEY HAVE AN EVENT AT DISCOVERY GREEN, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
BUT THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT HERE.
THERE'S NOT A HUGE CONGREGATION OF PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE EVERY DAY ANYWAY.
>> WELL, I USE THAT ANALOGY JUST BECAUSE OF THE CONCEPT.
IF THEY'RE MARRYING A PARK WITH ACTUAL AMENITIES THAT ARE DRAWN TO THEM.
>> DISCOVERY GREEN, AND YOU SAY DISCOVERY GREEN DOESN'T MAKE MONEY.
DISCOVERY GREEN DOES MAKE MONEY BECAUSE THERE'S THOUSANDS OF PARKING SPACES BENEATH DISCOVERY GREEN AND THAT'S HOW THEY MAKE MONEY.
>> WHAT DIRECTION? IT WILL BE CONTROL FACILITY IN MOTION THROUGH THE MOBILE UNITS OUT THERE.
PAVILION DOWN. THE REST OF THIS WE CAN TALK ABOUT.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT. I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT.
>> I THINK THERE'S SOME COMMON GROUND THAT IF THE HOTEL, ISN'T IT? BUT MAYBE I DON'T KNOW IF A PARKING GARAGES IT OR PARKING GARAGES A $40,000,000 INVESTMENT AND THEN WE BATTED THAT AROUND.
IT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD BUILD A PARKING GARAGE, THE RIGHT FACILITIES ON TOP OF IT THAT WE CAN MONETIZE.
BUT THEN YOU GOT 60 ACRES THAT IT'S STILL GOT TO DO SOMETHING WITH, AND IF IT'S RESTAURANTS, IF IT'S I DON'T THINK WE WANT A BAND SHELL, ELECTRONIC CONCERT PAVILION THERE.
MY NEIGHBOR, MY CONSTITUENTS AND SOME OF DAVID'S ARE GOING TO GO NUTS OVER THAT.
>> I THINK WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY.
>> YES, I BELIEVE YOU'RE RIGHT. I BELIEVE.
>> THIS MIGHT BRING UP A WHOLE CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC, BUT [LAUGHTER] YOU HAVE A LOT OF SAND OUT THERE, BUT YOU HAVE THIS BUILDING LINE AND YOU COULD DEVELOP ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT BUILDING LINE NORTH AND BUILDING.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SAND OUT THERE.
>> PLEASE WHAT WE HAVE OUT THERE, WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO SHOW YOU IS THAT YOU HAVE A LOT OF SPACE OUT THERE IN A LOT OF POTENTIAL AREA TO DEVELOP AND USE WHERE THESE PIECES GO DEADLY AND ARE FINE, WE'RE GOOD.
WE'RE TELL US WHERE YOU WANT TO PUT THEM.
WELL, THAT SO I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT.
YOU MAY WANT TO DO EVERYTHING BEHIND THAT BILL LINE AND DO CITY PARK IN FRONT OF THAT BILL LINE, THAT BECOMES A COMPLEMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT BEHIND IT.
>> BUT REMEMBER, IT'S STILL A CITY PARK.
>> IT STILL HAS SUBJECT TO BEACH ACCESS.
>> IT STILL HAS SUBJECT TO BEACH ACCESS.
>> IS STILL SUBJECT TO WHAT WAS GIVEN TO US, AND THE USE.
>> BECAUSE THE CITY PARKS, SO YOU CAN'T BUILD A NEIGHBORHOOD BONDS OF BUILD LIVE A GREAT MAN ONCE SAID, THIS IS LIKE EATING AN ELEPHANT.
YOU GOT TO EAT ONE PIECE AT A TIME, AND SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD FIRST BITE.
>> WHO SAID THAT. [LAUGHTER] [LAUGHTER] I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF POSSIBILITY HERE, BUT I DO THINK WE GOT A MAJOR PART OF IT OUT OF THE WAY.
THE BEACH PATROL IS A GOOD START,
[03:50:02]
AND THE ENTRANCES AND ALL THAT STUFF.I THINK THAT WE MAY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT'S BEEN OUTLINED HERE.
GETTING WITH THE RFQ, WORKING WITH APART BOARD.
I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THE [INAUDIBLE] PAVILION IN THAT AT SOME POINT COMING UP HERE SHORTLY.
THEN, WE HAVE THE FUTURE SITES FOR DEVELOPMENT THERE, AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS FOR IT BE AN ATTRACTION INTO ITSELF AND AMENITIES IN THOSE FUTURE SIDE.
PERSONALLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL BE, BUT I THINK JUST HAVING THIS ALONE OUT THERE, AND THAT'S THE WAY IT STAYS, I DON T THINK THAT DOES JUSTICE FOR THE QUALITY THAT WE WANT TO OFFER OUT THERE. [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S A LOT MORE TO BE DONE.
OF COURSE, I PERSONALLY, I THINK AS LONG AS YOUR PARKING 2,500 CARS ON THE SAND, YOU'RE MISSING OUT ON OUR TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY OUT THERE.
ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS AND COUNCIL? YES, SHARON.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF PUTTING THOSE PIECES IN PLACE THAT ARE IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW, AND THEN DEVELOPING AS YOU GO ALONG.
BUT WITH EVERYBODY KNOWING WHAT THOSE STIPULATIONS ARE FOR DEVELOPING OUT THERE, THERE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A HOTEL.
DON'T GET ANYBODY WHO'S GONE TO DESIGN A HOTEL.
WHAT ARE THE STIPULATIONS FOR DEVELOPING OUT THEIR? ARTERY TO BUILD.
TRUE. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO KEEP GETTING, IF WE DON'T KNOW.
WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT IT THAT WE CAN'T DO.
I THINK HE MENTIONED THAT YOU CAN FLIP FLOP.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE PARKING THERE, YOU CAN MOVE IT THIS WAY. [OVERLAPPING] LET'S DO THIS.
LET'S GET THE AWARD ON THE BEACH PATROL HEADQUARTERS, AND LET'S GET THE DEMOLITION DONE ON THE PAVILION, AND THEN LET'S WORKSHOP THIS AGAIN AFTER WE GET THOSE THINGS IN MOTION ABOUT REARRANGING THE REST OF THE PIECES AND WHERE WE WANT TO GO.
YOU ALL KNOW WHAT WE CANNOT DO OUT THERE.
THAT SHOULD INCLUDE YOU TELLING THE TEAM, WHICH IS MYSELF, AND DUDLEY, AND KIMBERLY, AND JASON ON THEIR BOARD.
JUST TELL US THE NO'S AND WE'LL TRY TO GIVE YOU AS MANY YESES AS WE CAN COME UP WITH.
BRIAN, LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU'RE READY TO PUT IT BACK ON THE WORKSHOP THERE.
2027. [LAUGHTER] IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE JOHN HAD MENTIONED.
WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT CONCEPTS.
WE'VE GOT SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE SAYING THAT THIS IS A CITY PARK.
THEN, WE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE THAT THINK IT COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE A REVENUE THING.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO VOTE ON AS COUNCILS SO WE KNOW WHICH DIRECTION WE'RE GOING? I THINK IT CAN BE BOTH PERSONALLY.
YOU DON'T GET TO SAY IT'S NOT A SUPER CAR, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT.
BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO DESIGNATE THAT.
I THINK YOU NEED TO TELL SOMEONE WHAT DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO IN.
IF YOU WANT TO DO THE SAME THING THAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING OUT THERE, AND JUST IMPROVE THE AMENITIES, THIS WORKS.
BUT IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT SOMETHING AND YOU WANT TO SPEND MONEY OUT THERE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GENERATE ANY MORE MONEY, AND IF YOU DON'T GENERATE ANY MORE MONEY, THERE'S NO REASON TO PUT IMPROVEMENTS OUT THERE.
YOU COULD BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GO AND SPEND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON THINGS OUT THERE IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GENERATE REVENUE.
IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO INCREASE THE QUALITY OF THE TOURISM, THE TOURIST.
IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT MORE BEDS AND BEDS, THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I THINK YOU NEED TO LOOK AT IT THIS PARK.
THIS IS NOT JUST A PARK THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR CITY THAT OUR CITIZENS USE ON A DAILY BASIS.
THERE'S PROBABLY VERY FEW OF OUR CITIZENS THAT PAY TO GO IN THIS PARK.
THEY USED TO USE IT WHEN I HAD TO GO OFF, THEY GO CAR, THE MINIATURE GOLF.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE PAY TO GET IN THE PARK.
IF YOU HAVE THOSE AMENITIES, I PAID TO GO TO THE GOLF CART, THE GO-CART TRACK THEY PAID YOU GO TO THE BUMPER BOATS, THE WATER SLIDE, THOSE ARE PAID AMENITIES.
PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S GOING TO WIND UP.
WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, BUT BRIAN MENTIONED YOU'LL BRING IT BACK.
BUT I DO FOR SEE THIS BEING A REVENUE PRODUCING PARK THAT WILL DRAW HIGHER-QUALITY TO OUR TOURISTS, AND NOW HOW THAT STRUCTURE, BUT I THINK IT'S GOT WORKOUT.
BUT THE HARD PART WITH THIS IS, IT'S A CITY PARK, BUT WITH GLO RESTRICTIONS, I CAN'T TELL THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON COME USE IT FOR FREE.
IF YOU GET TO USE IT FOR FREE WHILE THE PERSON SITTING ON THE BEACH NEXT, HE ASKED TO PAY.
IT'S HARD FOR EVEN THE CITIZENS TO UNDERSTAND THAT I HEAR IT EVEN FROM MY OWN FAMILY.
WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY I LIVE HERE? WELL, THAT'S HOW IT IS.
BUT MAYBE IF WE GET ENOUGH REVENUE PRODUCING ANOTHER PART OF THE PARK, WE COULD DO THAT.
WELL BRIAN, BRING THIS LET US KNOW WHEN YOU GET TO THAT POINT AND BRING IT BACK.
LET US GET THE BEACH PATROL OFF THE GROUND.
[03:55:01]
THAT IS TANTAMOUNT IN MY MIND THE THINGS WE HAVE TO DO AND LET'S GET THAT PAVILION DOWN.WELL, I'M ENVISIONING THIS AS A JANUARYISH DISCUSSION.
THAT SOUNDS GOOD. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? YES.
IF I HAVE TO RIDE MY BIKE UP THERE, DO I HAVE TO PAY THE GATE TO GET IN? NO. ANYBODY CAN WALK OR RIDE ONTO THE BEACH FOR FREE.
I USE IN THE PARKING FACILITY.
I WOULD ASK YOU ALL TO CONSIDER WHEN YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS PARK, THINK ABOUT THE EXTREMITIES.
THINK ABOUT THE FAR WEST CORNER AND THE FAR EAST CORNER.
[OVERLAPPING] IT'S NOT IN THIS PICTURE.
BUT THE THING THAT I THINK THEY GRABBED ME THE MOST IS A GREAT IDEA, WAS THE DOG PARK OUT THERE.
WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A BEACH IN GALVESTON WHERE WE CAN LET OUR DOGS GO.
NOW THAT MY KIDS ARE GROWN, I'M A DOG PERSON, I'M THINKING THAT WAY.
BUT FOR FUTURE PLANS, WE REALLY HAVE TO THINK ABOUT ALL THE UTILITIES UNDERNEATH THIS GROUND.
IF YOU WANTED SOMETHING WAY OUT HERE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE WATER, AND SEWER AND EVERYTHING OVER HERE WITH POWER, AND SAME THING WITH OTHER AREAS.
WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT DONE.
IF IT'S A LARGE ENOUGH DEVELOPMENT, [INAUDIBLE] WILL COME? WE'LL MAKE IT.
NOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS OTHER NEW EAST BEACH DEVELOPMENTS AFFECT OUR UTILITIES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE ALL COMING BACK TO THAT LIFT STATION OR NOT, BUT WE HAVE SOME OUT THERE NOW.
ONE OTHER THING REAL QUICK. I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT HOW DID THESE PATROL AS PART OF THE ENTRY GATE.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT BUT THE ISSUE IS WE WANT WE WANT BEACH PATROL TO BE CLOSER TO THE BEACH, AND PUTTING THE BACK WHERE THE GATE IS TAKES THEM SO FAR OFF THE BEACH IT WOULD ALMOST REQUIRED TWO SEPARATE FACILITIES.
WE HAVE NOTHING THAT SAYS THE GATE HAS TO BE RIGHT THERE.
NO. THAT'S CORRECT. IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION, THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD CHARGE THE DESIGN PROFESSIONALS IS TO INCORPORATE IT, AND THAT'S PART OF IT.
THAT'S ONE THING I WANT YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT TOO, IS THAT DON'T LIMIT YOURSELF ON THINGS THAT ARE THEY ARE NOW.
DON'T LIMIT YOURSELF ON THE ROADS THAT ARE THERE NOW.
[OVERLAPPING] WE KNOW HOW TO USE THOSE ROADS.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE GREAT THING.
[OVERLAPPING] BUT WHAT YOU HAVE DESIGNED RIGHT NOW, IS BASED OFF THOSE ROADS.
WE DID IT TOGETHER AT ONE TIME, WE SEPARATED BECAUSE OF THE STUFF THAT WE NEED TO STORE UNDER THAT BUILDING FOR BEACH PATROLS USE, AND THAT WAS THE BIG.
BUT IT'S NOT AN INSURMOUNTABLE OBSTACLE, THAT IS A GOOD IDEA AND IT'S STILL A GOOD IDEA.
I THINK WE WERE CAPITALIZING ON THE UNDERSIDE OF THE BEACH PATROL PAVILION FOR PETER AS WELL.
JOHN BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT AND I ENTRYWAY TO THAT PARK.
IS THAT HAS TO BE A REALLY CATCHY, THAT HAS TO BE A VERY FOCAL POINT.
IT'S THE GOOD SIGN THAT WE'RE PROUD OF.
BUT THEN AGAIN, TO MIRROR WHAT'S BEHIND THAT ENTRY AS TO LIVE UP TO WHAT WE BUILD THE ENTRY AS.
YOU JUST GOT TO GET THEM INTO GATE. [LAUGHTER] STEADILY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
COUNCIL. LET ME IN FOR THOSE THAT ARE WATCHING, I JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO OUR NEXT ITEM IN JUST SECOND ITEM 8G.
THE ITEM THAT IS THE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN PULLED FROM THE AGENDA.
WE WILL NOT BE GOING THROUGH AND DISCUSSING. [OVERLAPPING] IT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE DEVELOPER.
THE DEVELOPER HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. MARGARITA.
IS RESOURCE THE TABLES TODAY? YES. OFF THE TABLE.
SOMEBODY SENT HER GENERAL EMAIL TO THE CITY.
[OVERLAPPING] IS THERE A WAY OF POSTING THIS IN SOME WAY TO NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY? USE THE EMERGENCY.
[LAUGHTER] WE CAN POST IT ON THE DOORS.
[LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] MARISSA, I'M SORRY.
SAY THAT AGAIN, I WANT KNOW IT.
THEY'RE GOING TO POST IT EVERYWHERE WE SEND OUT TO RIGHT NOW THAT IT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.
JARNEL, WOULD YOU IN ALL THE WAYS YOU HAVE DOING THAT ALSO NOTIFY? SURE THING.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3G, PLEASE.
[3.G. Discussion Of The Use Of Hotel Occupancy Tax For Art In The City (Collins/Brown - 15 Min)]
THREE G. DISCUSSION OF THE USE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FOR ART IN THE CITY.WE'VE BEEN ADDING THIS VALVE FOR A LONGTIME.
MAYOR, IF YOU DON'T MIND. IS TONY STILL WITH US? HE JUST LEFT.
CAN I ASK KIMBERLY TO JOIN US ON THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD WITH TONY.
[04:00:04]
NOW THAT NOW THAT WE HAVE DEDICATED ARTS STAFF ON THE SOME CITIES STAFF? YES, SIR.DEDICATED STAFF TO CULTURAL ARTS AND THE ARCHON HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE.
THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THAT, AND THAT'S ANTOINETTE LANDS, YOU PROBABLY KNOW.
YES I DID. I SAW HER. SHE'S WAS AT SINNER OFFICE THE OTHER DAY.
I WAS HOPING SHE'D BE WITH US HERE TODAY, BUT SHE IS NOT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT TONY AND I TALKED ABOUT WAS GETTING OUR RESPECTIVE ROLES STRAIGHT.
THE CITY STOPS TRYING TO DO PROMOTION, AND APART WORST OFF TRYING TO DO EVENTS.
IT'S ALWAYS GOING BE SOME GRAY AREA BETWEEN THAT.
BUT BUT I THINK WE'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE OUR ROLES HERE, AND THEN WE SHOULD BE FUNDING, AND OPERATING IN OUR OWN LANES.
THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE US FOCUS MORE ON, AND THAT WOULD ALLOW THE CITY TO FOCUS MORE ON CULTURAL ARTS, AND CULTURAL ARTS EVENTS, ON PUBLIC ART. THAT THING. ONE OF THE MAIN WAYS I THINK THE CITY HAS BEEN OUT OF ITS LANE, IS WE HAVE THESE TWO COMMITTEES, ONE IS CALLED ARTS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND ONE IS CALLED CULTURAL ARTS COMMITTEE.
WELL, THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMITTEE, IT'S ONLY REALLY STARTED TO DEVELOP AS WE FUNDED IT IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, WHEREAS FOR 25 YEARS, THE ARTS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE HAS USED A MAJORITY OF THE 6/8 [INAUDIBLE] TAX [NOISE] THAT THE CITY RETAINS TO FUND PROMOTIONS WITH GRANTS THROUGH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.
I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A BETTER MODEL FOR DOING THAT, AND I THINK TONY THINKS THERE'S A BETTER MODEL FOR DOING THAT.
THAT WOULD BE COOPERATIVE ADVERTISING AND THAT KIND OF THING.
I COMPLETELY LEAVE THAT TO YOU GUYS TO WORK OUT HOW THAT WOULD WORK.
>> IN THE MEANTIME, THERE'S SOME EVENTS AND THINGS THAT ON THE CITY SIDE THAT I THINK WE NEED TO BE SURE WE'RE PREPARED TO FUND, SOME ON AN ONGOING BASIS AND SEVERAL ON PROBABLY A ONE-TIME KICKSTART BASIS.
ONE OF WHICH IS DICKENS ON THE STRAND.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE US, BECAUSE THE ARTS & HISTORIC HAS GIVEN A FAIR AMOUNT OF MONEY TO DICKENS FOR ADVERTISING.
BUT LET'S BE REAL, WHEN YOU GIVE SOMEBODY $100,000 FOR A MARKETING BUDGET, THEY'RE JUST GOING TO SHIFT 100,000 SOMEPLACE ELSE OVER INTO OPERATION.
WE SAY IT'S FOR PROMOTION, BUT IN A SENSE, IT'S OPERATIONAL.
I DON'T WANT TO CALL ALL THESE ORGANIZATIONS OFF THE KNEES, FURTHER PROMOTION SO I WANT TO BE SURE WE DO THAT.
I THINK THERE ARE WAYS WE CAN CONTINUE TO ASSIST THE GRANT, AND EVENTS AND [NOISE] SPECIAL EVENTS THAT BRING US A BIG ACT EVERY YEAR THAT WE CO-FUND WITH THEM, THAT KIND OF THING.
BUT DICKENS, I DON'T WANT TO CUT THEM OFF.
WE HAVE FUNDING FOR MARDI GRAS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF.
IT'S KIND OF A MONEY-MAKING OPERATION, SO WE DON'T PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO MARDI GRAS, BUT WE NEED TO TREAT IT AS A SEPARATE EVENT.
NOW WHAT'S UNIQUE ABOUT THOSE TWO IS THEY'RE BOTH IN A CITY ORDINANCE.
A CITY ORDINANCE THAT DIRECTLY ESTABLISHES AS CITY EVENTS, BOTH MARDI GRAS AND DICKENS ON THE STRAND.
THERE ARE TWO MORE THAT I THINK WE NEED TO BRING INTO THAT.
ONLY RECENTLY HAVE WE STARTED TO TREAT 4TH OF JULY AS AN EVENT.
BECAUSE AS WE SAW IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, YOU GET 100,000 PEOPLE CONGREGATED IN ONE PLACE ON THE SEAWALL 37TH STREET, THAT'S NOT JUST AN AVERAGE [LAUGHTER] SUMMER WEEKEND, THAT'S AN EVENT.
THEIR PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, I THINK IT WAS VERY WELL MANAGED THIS YEAR, BUT WE NEED TO ESTABLISH THAT AS A CITY-SPONSORED EVENT, THAT WE'RE GOING TO FUND THE OPERATIONS TO SAFETY, THE TRAFFIC, THE CONTROL, THAT KIND OF THING.
WE CALL UP THE BEACH PATROL INTO HELPING MANAGE ON THE SAND, AND CVB INTO ADVERTISING, PROMOTING THIS KIND OF THING.
NOW I NOTICE IN YOUR BUDGET YOU HAVE $65,000 DEDICATED TO 4TH OF JULY.
I THINK THAT'S A NUMBER I SAW IN THE NASHVILLE PROJECTS.
IS THAT PROMOTION MONEY? THAT'S HOW YOU ENVISION THAT?
>> DO YOU REIMBURSE THE CITY FOR THE 4TH OF JULY?
>> NO. I THINK WHAT'S IN THE CURRENT BUDGET IS $65,000, THAT'S PROMOTION FOR [OVERLAPPING]
>> YES, AND IT DOESN'T COVER THE FIREWORK.
>> NO. IT'S STILL HOT-ELIGIBLE, BUT THAT'S THE CITY SIDE TO FUND.
WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION OF HOTEL [INAUDIBLE] TAX FOR ART.
ARE WE GETTING TO THE ART YET?
>> NO. WHEN YOU SAY ART, I'M TALKING ABOUT CULTURAL ART.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WHOLE SHEBANG HERE.
I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT JUST PUBLIC ART.
>> THAT'S NOT WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
[04:05:02]
>> IS THERE A QUESTION THAT YOU HAVE FOR ME SPECIFICALLY?
>> I JUST WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
>> BECAUSE I THINK THE NEWSPAPER WENT OFF ON A TANGENT.
YOU GUYS JUST WANT TO TALK ABOUT HARD ART IN THE GROUND.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I KNOW YOU WROTE THAT OUT, SO HOWEVER YOU WANT IT, I WAS JUST BRINGING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION.
>> [INAUDIBLE] I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO INCLUDE JUNETEENTH. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT NEXT.
>> MAYBE IF YOU JUST PAINTED US A PICTURE. [LAUGHTER]
>> IF COUNCIL WANTS TO READ ART AS NOTHING BUT PUBLIC ART. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MEDIAN, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION AND WE NEED TO [OVERLAPPING] THIS WITH A LONGER DESCRIPTION.
>> DAVID, I'M TO GO WITH WHATEVER YOUR DEFINITION OF ART IS.
>> NO, NO. [LAUGHTER] RIGHT AHEAD. [LAUGHTER]
>> [OVERLAPPING] I JUST WANT TO SEE THE REGATTA.
>> YOUR DEFINITION OF ART. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT CULTURAL ART. [OVERLAPPING]
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE GOT THAT ESTABLISHED.
>> STOP THAT. [LAUGHTER] JUNETEENTH IS A MAJOR QUESTION ON THE TABLE RIGHT NOW AS WELL BECAUSE [INAUDIBLE] BORDERS PROGRAM, $200,000 FOR JUNETEENTH AND KIMBERLY HAS ASSURED ME IN EARLIER CONVERSATION, THAT'S FOR PROMOTION OF THE EVENT.
BUT IT'S AN EVENT WE DON'T HAVE YET.
>> DO YOU MIND IF I EXPAND A LITTLE BIT? WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PROMOTION, I THINK THERE'S A PERCEPTION OF PROMOTION AND MARKETING TO BE ONLINE ADVERTISEMENTS AND BILLBOARDS.
WHEN WE THINK AS A CVB, AS A DESTINATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ABOUT PROMOTION, THOSE, OF COURSE, WERE THE CUSTOMARY THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MARKET TO FOLKS THAT WE WANT TO BRING THEM HERE.
BUT THE OTHER THING THAT WE DO IS WE WANT TO INCENTIVIZE EVENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING.
WE'RE NOT PRODUCING THE EVENTS, BUT THERE'S INCENTIVE FUNDING THAT'S AVAILABLE TO HELP PRODUCE THOSE EVENTS.
THAT EXTENDS TO JUNETEENTH, THAT EXTENDS TO OTHER TYPES OF GROUPS, STEAM PUNK, FOR EXAMPLE, CHEER GROUPS THAT WANT TO COME TO THE ISLAND, THERE'S INCENTIVES THERE TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE EVENTS AND THOSE FESTIVALS.
>> I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE CONTINUE THIS COLLABORATION BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A GOOD COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BEING UNDERTAKEN HERE BETWEEN ANTOINETTE AND TONY, THE TONY, TONY [OVERLAPPING]
>> TONY, TONY. TONY WITH A NINE, TONY WITH A Y.
>> ABOUT DOING THAT. BECAUSE THERE'S A CONVENTION THAT YOU MENTIONED, IT'S A TOURISM CONVENTION.
IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS MENTIONED ALONG WITH STEAM PUNK IN THAT PARAGRAPH.
>> I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT THE TOPIC WAS.
THAT'S EXACTLY THE KIND OF THING YOU OUGHT TO BE DOING BECAUSE THAT BRINGS A LOT OF PEOPLE HEADS AND BEDS ON THE STREET, THAT KIND OF THING.
BUT THE BIG EVENTS, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THE CITY SHOULD BE SUPPORTING AND FUNDING THESE, AND DECIDING HOW WE GO ABOUT DOING THIS AND ASK YOU TO PROMOTE THESE THINGS.
THAT'S COLLABORATIVE. BUT LET'S DO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC ART BECAUSE WE'VE DEDICATED $100,000 TO PUBLIC ART IN THE CURRENT BUDGET BECAUSE IT'S IN THE ORDINANCE.
BUT WE HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT'S DONE A GOOD JOB OF THAT, AND THE QUESTION BECAME, WHEN YOU SAY PUBLIC ART, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A STATUE IN THE MEDIUM? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A FESTIVAL? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT SHAKESPEARE IN THE PARK? I'M OF THE OPINION THAT IT INCLUDES ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
THERE'S SOME DIVERGENCE OF OPINION ON THIS OF WHAT IS PUBLIC ART, BUT I THINK WHEN WE SAY PUBLIC ART, AS IN THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT CULTURAL ARTS, AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT HARD ART.
BECAUSE FRANKLY, WE HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY TO BUY ART, THERE'S NOT A PLACE TO PUT IT. WE'VE DISCOVERED THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> I CAN THINK OF SOME PLACES.
>> GOOD. I'D LIKE TO SEE THE LIST BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY NOT THAT MANY PUBLIC PLACES.
THERE MAY BE PLACES WHERE YOU CAN PUT IT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO WHAT OTHER CITIES DO IN PUTTING ART IN THE PUBLIC SPACE, WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH PUBLIC SPACE.
WE CAN PUT THINGS IN THE PARKS THEMSELVES, WE COULD DO ART AT STEWART BEACH, THAT KIND OF THING.
>> WELL, WE COULD PUT HIM IN MEDIUMS.
>> THAT'S PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE THEY BECOME TARGETS FOR DRUNKS.
THEY BECOME SOMETHING KIDS CLIMB ON DURING MARDI GRAS.
>> THAT'D BE A BETTER TARGET THAN DEAD PALM TREES.
THE PALM TREES IS A LOT LESS EXPENSIVE.
BUT, THE POINT BEING, IF CVB ADOPTS A GREATER ROLE IN PROMOTING FOR THESE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, WE WIND UP WITH TWO COMMITTEES TRYING TO DO THE SAME THING, ARTS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMITTEE.
MY PROPOSAL IS THAT WE, OVER THE NEXT YEAR, MERGE THOSE COMMITTEES TOGETHER.
WE'VE ALREADY FUNDED WHAT ARTS & HISTORIC HAS BROUGHT US.
[04:10:04]
THIS WAS THAT LONG CONVERSATION WE HAD ABOUT THOSE 25 ENTITIES, REFUNDED THAT FOR TWO YEARS, SO WE HAVE PLENTY OF LEEWAY TO DO THIS.TO CREATE A SINGLE COMMITTEE OUT OF THESE TWO MOVING FORWARD, AND FOCUS MORE ON ART AND CULTURAL ARTS IN THE CITY.
>> WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING, DAVID, IS WHERE ARTS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE CURRENTLY PROVIDES FUNDING FOR MARKETING AND PROMOTION, THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES WOULD BE HANDLED BY THE PARK BOARD, BASICALLY.
>> AND THAT ANY FUNDING FOR CULTURE OR PUBLIC ART, WHICH TAKES INTO THE DEFINITION OF EVENTS, WOULD BE HANDLED BY THE CITY WITH ONE COMMITTEE?
>> THE REASON I SAY NOW IS THE TIME TO DO THIS IS BECAUSE WE'VE FUNDED ARTS & HISTORIC PRESERVATION'S RECOMMENDATION.
TO A TUNE OF $1.8 MILLION A YEAR FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS, SO WE HAVE.
>> THERE IS A LOT OF QUESTIONS. [NOISE]
>> WE DID HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND FRANKLY, I MIGHT MAKE A LOVE THOSE QUESTIONS, TONY ALLOWS PROBLEM, NOT MINE.
BUT BECAUSE WHAT CVP PROMOTES AND HOW THEY PROMOTE IT, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO LEAVE THAT TO THEM, THAT'S WHAT THEY DO.
>> THEN WHERE IT WENT, PUBLIC CART FALL UNDER.
>> THAT'S THE CITIES, THAT'S CULTURAL ARTS.
THAT'S THE MERGED CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION, WHICH DEAL WITH PUBLIC ART, BUT ALSO DEAL WITH THE FESTIVALS, THAT THING.
BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE AN EFFORT LEADING UP TO JUNETEENTH THAT WE NEED TO FUND AND WE NEED TO DO THAT NOW.
WE NEED TO ESTABLISH I'M GOING TO BRING THAT BACK IN NOVEMBER.
I HOPE THE THREE OF US WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE'D COME BACK TO COUNCIL AND JUST DEDICATE A COUPLE OF $100,000 OF EXISTING ELIGIBLE ART FUNDS THAT WE HAVE TO ESTABLISH THESE EVENTS OR SUPPORT THESE EVENTS.
IT'S PARTLY WHAT CBB DID LAST YEAR WHEN THEY WERE GIVING, I BELIEVE IT WAS $96,000 OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS.
WE OUGHT TO BE DOING THAT JOB.
THEY SHOULD BE PROMOTING IT, GOT [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE] TO DO IT.
BUT THE ACTUAL FUNDING THESE EVENTS, HELPING ESTABLISH THESE EVENTS, THE CITY SHOULD BE DOING THAT THROUGH THIS CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION.
>> KIMBERLY, YOUR DEFINITION AT THE PARK BOARD OF PROMOTION IS MARKETING AND ADVERTISING OR WHAT IS THE DEFINITION?
>> THE DMO IS GOING TO LOOK TO MARKET THE ISLAND AND THAT COULD BE THE ISLAND AS A WHOLE, THAT CAN BE SPECIFIC EVENTS ON THE ISLAND, SO IF WE TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT JUNETEENTH, THAT WOULD BE US LOOKING TO THESE EVENTS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED AND COMMUNICATING THOSE OUT INTO THE PUBLIC.
BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE DO IS THAT WE PROVIDE INCENTIVES TO THESE GROUPS TO COME AND TO CREATE AND TO DO THESE THINGS.
WHAT WE DON'T DO IS PUT ON THE EVENT, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR TRASH CANS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO POLICE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY FOR ROADBLOCKS.
>> BUT THE INCENTIVE, THAT'S A FINANCIAL INCENTIVE YOU'RE GIVING THESE GROUPS.
WHAT IS THE CRITERIA ON HOW THAT'S USED?
>> THERE ARE SEVERAL CRITERIA THAT GOES INTO THAT.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR FOR JUNETEENTH, WE HAVE VERY SPECIFIC ROLES OF WHAT THEY HAD TO DO AND THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THAT MONEY THAT HAD TO BE UTILIZED FOR MARKETING OF THE EVENT.
PRIMARILY IT'S MARKETING, THEN WE GO BACK TO THEM AND WE SAY, THESE WERE THE PARAMETERS THAT WE SAID WE WANTED YOU TO MEET.
THESE WERE THE GOALS THAT WE HAD ESTABLISHED.
DID YOU MEET THOSE GOALS OR DID YOU NOT? IF THEY DIDN'T, THEN THERE'S A REFUND PROCESS THAT THEY COME BACK AND THEY REPAY THOSE FUNDS IF THEY DON'T MEET THOSE ESTABLISHED GOALS.
GENERALLY, THE WAY THAT WE'VE DONE THAT IN THE PAST IS THAT IT'S ON A THREE-YEAR SCHEDULE.
THE FIRST-YEAR WILL GIVE YOU 10,000, THEN WE TAKE IT DOWN TO FIVE AND THEN WE SAY $2,500 BECAUSE WE WANT THOSE EVENTS TO BECOME SUCCESSFUL ON THEIR OWN.
>> [INAUDIBLE] PROBABLY NOT A GOOD EVENT.
>> MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE PUT TONY AND ANTOINETTE TOGETHER AND SAY, FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THIS COLLABORATIVELY BECAUSE WE'RE NEVER GOING TO SEPARATE THE TWO.
YOU DON'T HAVE AN EVENT, DON'T PROMOTE AND VICE VERSA. LET'S FIGURE IT OUT.
>> I'LL DO THAT. LET ME GET TONY WITH.
>> I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING FOR YOU.
>> TONY, WE GET THEM TOGETHER AND LET'S BRING BACK A PLAN.
TONY CAN TALK TO TONY WHY CAN TAKE TO HIS BOARD, TONY I CAN BRING TO ANTOINETTE CAN BRING BACK TO YOU GUYS.
>> BECAUSE THESE KIND OF CHANGES, AS WE KNOW, IS GOING TO INVOLVE ORDINANCE CHANGES, EVOLVED MISSION STATEMENT CHANGES FOR THESE GROUPS.
>> IT IS, BUT WE ARE FORTUNATE IN THAT ALL OF THIS ART FUNDING IS UNDER A SINGLE ORDINANCES A DAY.
>> ALL OF THIS IS ALLOWABLE PRETTY MUCH THE WAY THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN, SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF YOU.
>> INTERNET'S WATCHING, SO I'LL GET WITH HER.
[04:15:01]
>> WE NEED TO HAVE A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING REAL QUICK OF WHAT WE WANT TO PROMOTE AND FUND FOR JUNETEENTH NEXT YEAR.
BECAUSE YOU DON'T STAND UP AN EVENT AROUND A HOLIDAY IN JUNE.
>> IF IT'S THE THREE OF US OR WHOEVER IT IS WORKING WITH ANTOINETTE, FIGURE OUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT THIS, LET'S GET THIS ON THE AGENDA NEXT MONTH.
>> I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR AS ANTOINETTE AND TONY WORK ON THIS, THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE GOAL IS HERE.
>> HAVING CONVERSATION WITH BOTH OF THEM, [NOISE] I BELIEVE THEY DO NOW. WHAT'S THE GOAL IS.
>> KIMBERLY, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT OR WOULD YOU?
>> I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS TODAY.
I'D LIKE TO SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH TONY AND BECAUSE HE REPORTS TO THE CEO POSITION AND HE AND I HAVE NOT HAD THAT CONVERSATION JUST YET, BUT THAT'S NOT A KNOCK ON TONY.
IT'S JUST PROBABLY A TIMING ISSUE.
IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL CERTAINLY COME FORWARD THROUGH OUR STANDING MEETING THAT WE HAVE WITH YOU AND BRIAN AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU GUYS ARE AWARE OF IT.
I AGREE THAT WE ACCOMPLISH A LOT MORE WHEN WE WORK TOGETHER ON THESE THINGS.
>> VERY MUCH SO. AND IN THIS ART FUNDS, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING THAT DAVID BRINGS FORWARD BECAUSE THE PARK BOARD IS DOING THINGS WITH THAT, WITH THE COMMUNITY WE'RE DOING THINGS WE'RE PROPERLY OVERLAPPING.
THERE'S PROBABLY SOME DOUBLE-DIPPING.
>> ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO BRING THAT UP, BUT WE WE DON'T NEED TO BE SEPARATELY FUNDING THE SAME EVENT.
WE MAY BE PROMOTING EVENT THAT THE CITY IS FUNDING, PROBABLY THROUGH CVP.
BUT LET'S NOT BE WRITING THE SAME.
>> YOU NEED TO BE COORDINATING THAT COMPETING. WE GOT IT.
>> FOR THE PARK BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE, WE DON'T WANT TO PROMOTE AN INDIVIDUAL BUSINESS OR ENTERPRISE.
WE WANT TO PROMOTE AN ISLAND, WE WANT TO PROMOTE AN EVENT, WE WANT TO PROMOTE VISITATION AND SO HAVING THOSE VERY CLEAR LINES OF SUPPORT.
>> I WANT TO DELAY LUNCH, JUST A FEW MORE MINUTES.
DO WE NEED TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA TO ADD JUNETEENTH TO THE CITY SPOT THIS CITY ORDINANCE AND LONG WITH THE MARDI GRAS AND DICKINSON, THE STRAND.
>> THAT ANDREW PENDULUM FORTH, I THINK WE NEED TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> YEAH. HOW THE CITY INTERFACES WITH JUNETEENTH, THAT'S STILL A DISCUSSION THAT WE WILL HAVE.
>> WHO WE INTERFACE [LAUGHTER] WITH IT'S VIRTUE.
SURE. THANK YOU, KIMBERLY. JOHN.
>> NO, I THINK WE COULD GO TO LUNCH NOW.
>> WE CAN, BUT WE'LL GET THESE ITEMS DONE IN, EACH ITEM IS GOING TO TAKE 60 SECONDS.
WOULD YOU READ 3H, PLEASE, MOM?
[3.H. Report Of City Council's Wharves Board Representative (Brown - 10 Minutes)]
>> 3H, REPORT OF CITY COUNCILS, WOLVES BOARD REPRESENTATIVE.
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMBINED MEETING ON NOVEMBER 2ND.
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT CREWS TO HER, TERMINAL 16, UPDATING THE MASTER PLAN AND THE STATUS OF THE USS TEXAS.
[3.I. Report Of City Council's Park Board Representative (Bouvier/Brown - 10 Minutes)]
>> 3I REPORT OF CITY COUNCILS, PARK BOARD REPRESENTATIVE.
>> WE HAD OUR MEETING ON TUESDAY.
WE DID A TEAM RECOGNITION FOR THE URBAN PARK, WHICH IS A TEAM THAT HAS WORKED WITH THE CITY IN AN EMERGENCIES AND HELP THEM CLEAN UP SOME STUFF.
IT WAS A GREAT RECOGNITION FOR THEM.
WE WENT OVER SOME OF THE EXPENDITURES AND FUNDS THAT WE HAVE COMING UP AND WE ARE SEEING THAT THIS GETTING THE APPROVAL FOR THE BUDGET IS NOT HINDERING, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY REARING ITS HEAD THAT IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED YET OR THE HIGH CONTRACT.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS TALKED ABOUT OFTEN IN THE MEETING.
WENT THROUGH SOME WORK PLANS FOR NEXT YEAR, DID SOME COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS THAT WE NEEDED TO UPDATE AND WE ALSO STARTED THE PERMITTING AND THE ENGINEERING FOR THE EMERGENCY RAMPS ON THE SEAWALL.
WE DISCUSSED THE ALCOHOL SALES ON IN DELAWARE AND WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT SOMETHING COMING BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL HERE.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, MIKE.
[4. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
WE ARE MOVING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071, CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY.[04:20:01]
AN EXECUTIVE SESSION WILL BE CONDUCTED TO DISCUSS AND RECEIVE LEGAL ADVICE CONCERNING PENDING LITIGATION AND/OR SETTLEMENT OFFER OR ON A MATTER IN WHICH THE DUTY OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY UNDER THE TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS, CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER RELATED TO THE FOLLOWING; 481, CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY REGARDING CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION CONCERNING THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND LOCAL 571.WE'RE NOW MOVING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE ARE NOW OUT OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA AND AT 2:08 PM, WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.