[00:00:01] >> VERY GOOD. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. [1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER] GLAD TO HAVE YOU HERE THIS MORNING. IT IS 8:00 AM. WE'RE HERE BRIGHTON EARLY THIS MORNING AND I AM OFFICIALLY CALLING THE WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON TO ORDER FOR OCTOBER 24TH. GLAD TO HAVE EVERYBODY HERE IN THE AUDIENCE. NICE TO SEE COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE. >> FAMILY. >> ALSO, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE WATCHING THIS BROADCAST. GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, BUT LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> MAYOR BROWN? >> PRESENT. >> MAYOR PRO TEM ROB IS NOT HERE YET. COUNCIL MEMBER LOUIS. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER FINKLEY IS ABSENT TODAY. COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN. >> PRESENT? >> COUNCIL MEMBER PERETO. >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER ROLLINS. >> HERE. >> VERY GOOD. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT HERE. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3.A, PLEASE, MA'AM. [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 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. >> COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO DO SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT. I USUALLY DON'T DO THIS, BUT I'M GOING TO START OFF WITH AN ITEM THAT I WANT TO BRING FORWARD TO COUNSEL. IT'S ITEM 12A THAT'S ON OUR AGENDA. JUST SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS OF CLARIFICATION ON THIS ITEM. THEN I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO COUNCILWOMAN LOUIS. I'M SURE SHE HAS SOME THINGS TO SAY ABOUT ITEM 12A. THIS ITEM IS A RESOLUTION THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY PROMOTING THE JUNE 10 MUSEUM HERE IN GALVESTON AND WORKING THROUGH OUR NATIONAL CONGRESS TO WORK WITH THE THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION TO CONSIDER WORKING IN DESIGNING AND DEVELOPING A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE IN GALVESTON. AS YOU MAY KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN PUTTING TOGETHER A HERITAGE AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE DISTRICT HERE ON THE ISLAND, AND COUNCILWOMAN LOUIS AND ANTOINETTE LYNCH HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THE CITY SIDE WITH THE O CENTRAL CULTURAL CENTER BOARD TO BRING THIS FORWARD. THE GOAL OF THAT WAS TO BRING TOGETHER INDIVIDUALS TO EVENTUALLY PLAN FOR A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE ON THE ISLAND. ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM REPRESENTATIVE RANDY WEBBER. REPRESENTATIVE WEBBER AND I DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF WORKING WITH CONGRESS TO BRING FORWARD A BILL TO CONGRESS TO REQUEST THAT THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE START A STUDY TO WORK OUT DETAILS ON WORKING TO GIVE GUIDANCE ON A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM AND POSSIBLY CONSIDERING HAVING THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE IN GALVESTON BE AN ANNEX OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION THERE IN WASHINGTON, DC, WHICH IS A GIANT STEP FORWARD FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. WE THEN SCHEDULED A CONFERENCE CALL. COUNCILWOMAN LOUIS AND I WERE ON A CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE WASHINGTON DC SMITHSONIAN AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN WASHINGTON TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A RESOLUTION FROM THIS COUNCIL TO SUPPORT BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION TO START THIS STUDY. REPRESENTATIVE WEBBER MENTIONED TO ME THAT IF WE DO PASS THIS RESOLUTION, HE'S READY TO BRING IT TO CONGRESS PROBABLY WITHIN 30 DAYS, AND HE'LL BRING THIS TO CONGRESS PROBABLY RIGHT AFTER THEIR RECESS. ONCE IF THIS IS APPROVED BY CONGRESS, THEN THIS WILL TAKE APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS TO COMPLETE THIS STUDY. AND THEN FROM THAT POINT FORWARD, DEPENDING ON THE FINDINGS AND THE INVOLVEMENT WITH THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, THEN WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT REPRESENTATIVE WEBBER WILL WORK WITH US TO PUT TOGETHER AN APPROPRIATIONS BILL THERE IN CONGRESS TO HELP FUND THIS. THIS IS A WONDERFUL MOVEMENT FORWARD ON THIS. [00:05:01] I WANTED TO CLARIFY THIS WITH COUNSEL SO EVERYONE WOULD BE AWARE OF THIS. SHARON, DID YOU WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT? >> SURE, MAYOR. I WILL JUST DITTO WHAT YOU JUST SAID. THIS IS AN AWESOME OPPORTUNITY FOR GALVESTON ISLAND PERIOD. IT JUST CEMENTS, THE HISTORY THAT WAS HERE FROM JUNETEENTH AND THAT CELEBRATION. WE WANT TO SAY, THANK YOU. RANDY WEBBER, FOR PUSHING THIS. THIS HAS BEEN A CONVERSATION, NOT JUST WITHIN THE LAST MONTH, BUT IT'S BEEN WITHIN A COUPLE OF YEARS. SO IT'S AWESOME. IT'S GALVESTON'S HISTORY, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALL ABOUT. IT'S HISTORY HERE ON THIS ISLAND. KUDOS, THANK YOU. >> VERY GOOD. IN THE DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVE WEBBER, IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THIS STUDY, THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION WILL BE HELPING SPEARHEAD THIS. BUT THE LOCATION OF THIS PARTICULAR JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE IN GALVESTON WILL BE A GALVESTON DECISION. WE'LL BE WORKING IN SUB MANNER WITH THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE TO PUT THIS ENTIRE PACKAGE TOGETHER. GOOD. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT, COUNSEL? >> I GOT ONE QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. >> BUT WHAT'S THE SCHEDULE ON THIS OR IS THERE A SCHEDULE THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN? >> YES, SIR, HE'LL PRESENT THE BILL FOR THE STUDY PORTION OF IT. THEY'LL BE PRESENTED AS I MENTIONED, HE SAID WITHIN 30 DAYS. THEN IF THAT IS APPROVED BY CONGRESS, THEN IT WILL MOVE FORWARD THE STUDY ITSELF TO DETERMINE ALL THE DETAILS AND THE POSSIBLE INVOLVEMENT WITH THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION AS FAR AS AN ANNEX. THE FIRST TIME IF IT MOVES FORWARD WITH AN ANNEX, IS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE SMITHSONIAN WILL HAVE DONE THAT. IF IT MOVES FORWARD IN THAT DIRECTION, WE WILL BE, OF COURSE, INFORMED. THAT WILL TAKE TWO YEARS. THAT STUDY, HE SAID APPROXIMATELY TO FINISH ALL OF THAT. THEN ONCE THAT'S FINISHED, THEN WE'LL LOOK AT APPROPRIATIONS AND FUNDING AT THAT POINT. YES, SIR. >> MAYOR, I THINK GALVESTON WOULD BE THE THIRD FOR THE ANNEX. YOU MENTIONED PHILADELPHIA. SOMEWHERE [OVERLAPPING]. >> THANK YOU SHARON. >> WE WILL BE THE THIRD ANNEX FOR THE SMITHSONIAN. >> WONDERFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> AN OFF SITE. >> YES, CORRECT. >> OUT OF WASHINGTON. >> THAT WOULD BE A WONDERFUL PARTNER TO HAVE WITH SMITHSONIAN, AND THEN IT GIVES THE IMPORTANCE OF JUNETEENTH. IT SHOWS THE IMPORTANCE OF JUNETEENTH NOT ONLY FOR GALVESTON, BUT THE ENTIRE NATION. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NOW, LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR CLARIFICATION. COUNCILMAN ROBINS, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY ITEMS. >> MAY WE COME BACK. WE SURELY WILL, BOB. I HAVE 3,8B, 8D, AND 11J. >> CAN WE TAKE THOSE ONE OF YOUR TIME BECAUSE YOU'VE JUST EXCEEDED MY MEMORY. [LAUGHTER]. >> SORRY ABOUT THAT BRIAN SO EARLY IN THE MORNING. >> LET ME GET A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THIS COPY AGAIN. >> THIS IS REGARDING FISCAL SECURITY. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WE'RE SOLVING AND WHAT TRIGGERED THIS AND I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT ORIGIN OF THE CHANGE. >> SURE. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL, TIM TECHS DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. THIS IS BASICALLY AN ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS DEVELOPER THAT'S DEVELOPING A SUBDIVISION TO PHASE HIS BOND AND/OR LETTER OF CREDIT THAT HE OR SHE PUTS UP FOR A SUBDIVISION. WE REQUIRE THAT FOR HIM. POINT WHAT THIS DOES IS, AMEND THAT PROCESS IT'S CURRENTLY CALLED OUT IN THE LDRS TO ALLOW FOR A PARTIAL RELEASE OF THAT SECURITY AT SUCH TIME AS THEY'VE COMPLETED SECTIONS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE. IF A DEVELOPER CAN COME IN AND DO ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE COMPLETELY IF THEY WANT, BEFORE THEY RECORD THAT FINAL PLAT, AND THEN THERE'S NO LETTER CREDITOR BOND REQUIRED AT ALL IN THOSE CASES. BUT IF THEY RECORD THAT FINAL PLAT, WE NEED THAT SECURITY TO BE ABLE TO FINISH OFF SUBDIVISION SHOULD SOMETHING HAPPEN. THAT'S WHAT THIS ALLOWS IS FOR A PARTIAL REDUCTION AS THEY PRODUCE THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. [00:10:01] >> RATHER THAN WAIT TILL THE END OF THE WHOLE PROJECT FOR THAT SECURITY, IF IT'S A PHASE PROJECT, FOR INSTANCE, THE COMPLETION OF PHASE ONE, THEY GET THE SECURITY COMMENSURATE WITH PHASE ONE. >> THEY CAN CHOOSE TO GEOGRAPHICALLY PHASE SECTIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION, THEY CAN STILL DO THAT. BUT THIS IS MORE APPLICABLE TO WHERE YOU HAVE A LARGE SUBDIVISION THAT MIGHT BE DONE, TAKE A GREATER AMOUNT OF TIME. AND WHEN THEY'RE CARRYING THAT ON THEIR BOOKS, SUCH, IT'S A FEE THAT, ONCE THAT SECTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE IS DONE, THEY REALLY DON'T NEED TO DO THAT. >> IT TIES UP A LOT OF THEIR CAPITAL AND LENDING ABILITY. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT RIGHT THERE. I NOTICED IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WARRANTIES WON'T START FOR ANY OF THAT PHASE PART, IT'LL BE AT THE END. >> THE WARRANTY'S SEPARATE COMPONENT OF THIS. THAT'S A TWO YEAR WARRANTY PERIOD THAT WE EXECUTE INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE BOND TO ENSURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS COMPLETED AND/OR LETTER OF CREDIT. I'LL ALSO POINT OUT THAT THERE WERE A COUPLE OF TYPOS THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED. I'LL BE GETTING YOU A MEMO TO ADD TO YOUR MOTION. IF YOU COULD AMEND THAT ON THE FLOOR, I SURE WOULD APPRECIATE IT. >> GREAT. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WHAT WAS THE NEXT ONE? [LAUGHTER] 8D. >> WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE HERE. >> YEAH. >> THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE UD OR RESTAURANT, NO DRIVE THROUGH ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION. I WAS WONDERING A FEW THINGS. I KNOW THAT THE PORT HAS RECENTLY COMPLETED A STUDY WITH THEIR TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT ON IMPACT OF TRAFFIC ON LONG HARBOR SIDE, 16TH AND 14TH INTERSECTIONS WHERE TO ACCOMMODATE THE TRAFFIC FOR CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL 16 THAT'S COME IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF CARS COMING RIGHT DOWN THAT STREET AND DOWN HARBORSIDE. AND I'M WONDERING IF THIS APPLICANT DO THEY KNOW ABOUT THAT? AND IF THEY HAVE COORDINATED WITH THAT STUDY. I'M GUESSING THAT THAT STUDY DIDN'T ANTICIPATE A CURB CUT IN 100 FEET FROM INTERSECTION OF 14TH STREET AND IN A SHOP THERE. >> MORNING, COUNSEL. KATHREEN BORMAN, THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. I DON'T KNOW. I SUSPECT THAT YOU'RE CORRECT THAT THEY DIDN'T AND THAT THE PORT'S NOT AWARE OF THE PROJECT. IT WAS FILED WITH US SIX WEEKS AGO. IT'S PROBABLY AT THE END OF THEIR MOBILITY PLANNING PROJECT. >> THAT TRAFFIC REPORT WAS INTENDED TO ALLEVIATE ANY TRAFFIC PROBLEMS OF GETTING TO THE CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A TRAFFIC LIGHT INSTALLED ON 16TH STREET TO HELP WITH THAT IT'S MORE TRAFFIC CONTROLS AT 14TH AND HARBORSIDE. IT SEEMED TO ME TO BE A CRUCIAL THING TO CONSIDER IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR LESS STACKING OR QUEUING, I GUESS, RIGHT THERE AT THAT CURB CUT. ALSO, I GUESS THERE'S A PRETTY IMPORTANT HISTORIC SITE RIGHT NEXT DOOR. THE MAISON ROUGE, I THINK, IS WHAT IT'S CALLED, AND I WAS JUST WONDERING I NOTICED IN STAFF REPORT THERE'S REQUIRING TO MONITOR OR HAVE AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROFESSIONAL MONITOR OF THE SITE OUT THERE DURING CONSTRUCTION. >> BUT THAT'S WHERE GENE LF PLUGGED IN HIS SHIPS. [LAUGHTER]. >> CAN TAKE YOU ANYWHERE. [LAUGHTER]. >> BUT ANYWAY, I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW THAT WORKS AND HOW WE WOULD KNOW THAT THAT WAS HAPPENING OR FOLLOW UP ON THAT OR WHATEVER? >> STAFF WOULD REQUIRE PROOF THAT AN ARCHOLOGIST HAS BEEN RETAINED ON SITE AND THEN WE WOULD ASK FOR A REPORT SUMMARIZING ANY FINDINGS. >> ALSO, WHAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS IF THE OWNER DECIDED AT SOME POINT THAT HE WANTED THE WHOLE THING TO BE A PARKING LOT INSTEAD OF JUST A TEA SHOP THERE WITH A PARKING LOT. WHAT I MEAN IS IF YOU DECIDED TO CONVERT IT, ALL TO PARKING, DEMOLISH THE TEA SHOP AND HAVE IT ALL PARKING. >> COMMERCIAL PARKING IS A SEPARATE LAND USE. WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED HERE IS VEHICLE CHARGING. PARKING IS ANOTHER LAND USE CALLED COMMERCIAL SERVICE PARKING LOT, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. IF THEY WANTED TO CONVERT TO 100% PARKING, THEY WOULD NEED TO COME BACK AND GET A SPECIAL APPROVAL. >> THEN MY LAST QUESTION ON THAT WAS BEING RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM A CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL, I WOULD ASSUME THERE'D BE A LOT OF CRUISE SHIP PARKING THERE. IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, WE COLLECT $1,15 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR CRUISE SHIP PARKING. >> A DOLLAR PER CAR PER DAY. >> A DOLLAR PER CAR PER DAY. >> YOU GET THE 15 BACK ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE. >> YES. THAT'S CORRECT. >> HOW WOULD THAT BE MONITORED OR HOW DO WE DO THAT? >> WE'VE ASKED FROM THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT, IS THIS CRUISE SHIP PARKING, AND THE ANSWER FROM THE APPLICANTS HAS ALWAYS BEEN NO. [00:15:02] IT'S NOT. THAT THIS IS VEHICLE CHARGING. IF ANYBODY STAYS THERE, THEY'RE PAYING TO CHARGE THEIR VEHICLE RATHER THAN PAYING TO PARK THEIR VEHICLE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S A HIGHER FEE. IT WOULDN'T BE ATTRACTIVE TO SOMEBODY FOR CRUISE SHIP PARKING. >> WE HAVE SIMILAR ISSUES WHERE WE HAVE LIKE WE HAVE A PLACE THAT'S RUNNING A CAR WASH INSTEAD OF CRUISE PARKING. >> THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT IF SOMEBODY WERE GOING TO PARK THEIR CAR AND GO WALK ACROSS THE STREET TO GET ON A CRUISE SHIP THAT THEY WOULD NOT LET THEM PARK THERE, IS THAT TRUE? >> THAT'S CERTAINLY A POSSIBILITY AND THEN IT WOULD BECOME A COMPLIANCE ISSUE. >> YES. WE HAVE A LETTER, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT AT [OVERLAPPING]. >> I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GOT THIS LETTER FROM GERTNER THIS MORNING. >> NO. I'M SORRY. >> WELL, HE SAYS THAT CRUISE SHIP PASSENGER OR LONG TERM PARKING WILL BE KEPT AT 30. THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME LONG TERM PARKING. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WHEN I WAS WATCHING THE PLANNING, IT WAS FLEXIBLE AT THE TIME, AND I THINK PLANNING COMMISSION WANTED TO SEE EITHER A SET NUMBER OR NONE AT ALL. I'M GOING TO DEFER TO BOW ON THAT ONE. BUT THERE IS GOING TO BE FROM THE LETTER THAT WE GOT, I GUESS HE DELIVERED AT 4:30 YESTERDAY, IT SAYS THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME ASPECT OF CRUISE PARKING. >> WELL, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I THINK THAT HAS TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS BECAUSE LIKE WE WERE JUST SAYING THAT'S A SEPARATE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING LOT, NOT COVERED UNDER WHAT'S BEING CONSIDERED TODAY. >> AT PLANNING COMMISSION, THE OWNER SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT IF THERE WAS NOT DEMAND TO COVER THE SPACES WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES THAT IT WOULD BE USED FOR LONG TERM PARKING AS HIS BUSINESS MODEL. >> ARE YOU SAYING A I'M SORRY, BOAT ANYTHING ELSE, SIR. ARE YOU SAYING NOW THAT IF THEY USE IT FOR CRUISE PARKING, THEN IT HAS TO GO BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION? >> BECAUSE CRUISE PARKING IS THIS OTHER LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL SURFACE PARKING. NO PERMITTED IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT. IT'S NOT CONTEMPLATED UNDER WHAT WE'VE ADVERTISED THAT WE'VE NOTIFIED. IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ADDED IN AT THIS POINT. IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS. >> THAT WOULD APPLY NO MATTER IF IT'S ELECTRICALLY CHARGED VEHICLES OR GASOLINE POWERED VEHICLES? >> WELL, SURE. BECAUSE YOU DO SEE THAT AT CRUISE SHIP PARKING LOT, YOU DO PROVIDE ALSO CHARGING. YOU CAN HAVE A HYBRID. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ALSO, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT, BOB. BOB, DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. >> NO MORE ON THAT ITEM. I'VE GOT ONE MORE ITEM. I'VE GOT A QUESTION ON THAT ITEM. FOR THE COMMUNITY, AFIN, WOULD YOU OUTLINE THIS PUD IS ASKING FOR FOR LACK OF BETTER DESCRIPTION VARIANCES. WOULD YOU OUTLINE WHAT THOSE VARIANCES ARE? >> SURE. IN THE PUD PROCESS, WE CALL THE DEVIATIONS, AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A SERIES OF DEVIATIONS. LET ME GET MY REPORT, SO I DON'T MISS ANYTHING. THEY'RE ASKING TO ALLOW THE LAND USE OF RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE CENTRAL DISTANCE ZONING DISTRICT. THEY'RE ASKING TO DEVIATE FROM THE MINIMUM DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FOR THE VEHICLE CHARGING STATION, ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION. THAT HAS IT'S ALLOWED THERE, BUT IT HAS A REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE 200 FEET FROM RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S SEVERAL INSTANCES OF RESIDENTIAL LAND USES WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. THEY'RE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF STACKING SPACES 8-7. STACKING SPACES ARE THE SPACES BEHIND THE ORDERING WINDOW IN A DRIVE THROUGH. IT'S TO ENSURE THAT TRAFFIC DOESN'T SPILL OUT ONTO THE STREETS. ELIMINATION OF THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT ALONG HARBORSIDE DRIVE, THOUGH, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MAY BE BEING PROVIDED NOW. THEN ELIMINATION OF THE INTERIOR LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT. >> I WANT TO HONE IN ON THE LANDSCAPING ON THAT. FROM AN EXTERIOR STANDPOINT ON THE BORDERS OF THAT PROPERTY, ARE THEY MEETING THE CITY'S LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FROM WHICH YOU HEAR OF THE CHANGES THEY WANT TO DO? >> FROM THE CHANGES THAT I SAW YESTERDAY THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN THE AFTERNOON. YES. THEY ARE THEY WERE PLANNING ON MEETING THAT. THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATING NUMBER 4 UNDER THESE WEASES. >> THE INTERIOR LANDSCAPING. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN MORE SPECIFICALLY, FROM INTERIOR LANDSCAPING. DO THEY HAVE TO HAVE LANDSCAPES. ISLANDS AND SO FORTH. >> PCR PARKING LOT HERE AT CITY HALL, IT'S BUILT TO THE STANDARDS. EVERY 10 SPACES, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ISLAND WITH LANDSCAPING ENTRY. >> THAT'S TO HELP FOR AESTHETICS AS WELL AS DRAINAGE AS WELL AS DRAINAGE. >> I WANT TO CLARIFY TO A LOGISTICAL, MAYBE LEGAL QUESTION ON THIS. [00:20:01] PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TURNED THIS DOWN. THEY WERE PRESENTED A PROJECT THAT WAS OUTLINED TO THEM AT THE TIME WITH ALL OF THESE DEVIATIONS. IT'S COME TO COUNSEL NOW, AND NOW WE'RE HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MEET SOME THEY'RE GOING TO REMOVE SOME OF THOSE DEVIATIONS. DOES COUNSEL HAVE THE POWER TO SAY WE WILL PASS ON AN ITEM THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, OR IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO IF THEY NOW WANT TO REMOVE DEVIATIONS TO, THEY HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND GO FOR. >> I DON'T HAVE TO BECAUSE THEY'RE REMOVING. IF YOU'RE REMOVING SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN CONSIDERED PREVIOUSLY, THAT'S OKAY. IF THE ADDITION OF SOMETHING NEW WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PROPERTY. >> YES. LIKE FOR INSTANCE, I THINK WHAT KATHERINE SAYING, IF THEY'RE ADDING CRUISE LONG TERM CRUISE SHIP PARKING, THAT'S AN ADDITION VERSUS IF THEY SAY, NO, WE JUST WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK FOR THAT ANYMORE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK FOR A LANDSCAPE DEVIATION OR A FENCING DEVIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. THANK YOU. ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON AD, COUNSEL? >> ONE OF THE DEVIATIONS IS, IS IT A PARKING OR ELECTRIC CHARGING 200 FEET FROM THEM? >> IT'S ELECTRIC CHARGING. >> ELECTRIC CHARGING. WHAT'S THE REASON BEHIND THAT? WHAT NUISANCE DOES ELECTRIC CHARGING ACTUALLY RESULT IN? >> THERE COULD BE A WHOLE SERIES OF NUISANCES. I THINK WE DISCUSSED IT A LITTLE BIT IN THE STAFF REPORT. THINGS LIKE NOISE, TRAFFIC, LIGHTS, AND LIGHTING FROM THE HEAD LIGHTS, ATHETIC IMPACT OF THE CHARGING UNITS, PARKING SPACES, AND SHELTERS. >> JUST TO. >> REVING THEIR ENGINES. >> JUST PIGGY BACK OFF WHAT THE MAYOR SAID, ONE OF THE SO JUST FROM WHAT I WAS THINKING OR, THINK WOULD BE WORKABLE. I GUESS THE REMOVAL OF FOUR WAS FINE, BUT IF WE WANTED TO ADD A LIMITATION TO LONG TERM EV PARKING AT, LET'S SAY 30 SPACES AS OUTLINED IN THE LETTER THAT WAS DELIVERED AT 4:30 YESTERDAY. HOW WOULD THAT WHAT'S THE LEGAL IMPLICATION OF NOT GOING BACK THROUGH PLANNING OR WOULD IT HAVE TO GET IF WE ACCEPT THOSE CHANGES OR PASS IT AS A COUNSEL, DOES IT GO BACK THROUGH PLANNING AND THEN KICKS BACK TO US EVENTUALLY OR. >> HOW IF THEY WANT TO ADD IN SOMETHING NEW, THE USE OF COMMERCIAL PARKING, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REVIEWED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AGAIN AND WE'D HAVE TO NOTIFY AGAIN. >> IT WOULDN'T EVEN MATTER IF WE THREW IT ON THERE, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK ANYWAY REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY WE VOTE TO ADD ANYTHING. >> BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN ADVERTISED. COUNSEL CAN'T APPROVE THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT'S BEEN OUT IN THE PUBLIC? >> YES. COUNSEL. >> MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS PRESENTED AT PLANNING COMMISSION. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THEY ARE GET IT TO ONLY HAVE LONG TERM PARKING FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES AS PER THEIR APPLICATION? >> ONLY SHORT TERM PARKING. >> ONLY SHORT TERM PARKING. >> YOU CAN'T DO LONG TERM PARKING. >> THAT'S DEFINED HOW SHORT TERM. >> MORE THAN 24 HOURS? >> WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY A HARD SIZE DEFINITION OF THAT. >> WE DON'T HAVE THAT DEFINED IN THE REGULATIONS. >> IS IT DIFFERENT? >> I'M SAYING WHAT IS OUR SHORT TERM VERSUS LONG TERM? >> WHEN THE LONG TERM PARKING FEE KICKS IN 24 HOURS. >> WHAT'S OUR 48 HOURS? I THINK. T I DIDN'T DO YOU KNOW? >> HOW CAN WE DEFINE THAT? >> WE HAVE A TIME FRAME IN THAT ORDINANCE. >> WE HAVE ONE SOMEWHERE? >> YES. >> WE ALIGN IT TO WHAT'S IN THE LONG TERM PARKING FEE ORDINANCE. >> BUT I'M SAYING AS FAR AS THE APPLICATION GOES, THEIR APPLICATION STATES THAT IT IS SHORT TERM EV PARKING ONLY WITH EIGHT SPACES PROVIDED. I THINK IT WAS SEVEN OR EIGHT SPACES PROVIDED FOR THE FUTURE T SHOP? >> YES. >> THAT'S CORRECT. THEY HAVE NOT SHOWN THE SHORT TERM PARKING. >> IT'S 48 HOURS. THAT'S WHAT'S DEFINED IN. >> YES. >> I DIDN'T WANT TO SHORT TERM. >> FORTY EIGHT HOURS. LONGER TERM. THAT'S SHORT TERM VERSUS LONG TERM. >> FORTY EIGHT HOURS OR LESS. SHORT TERM, 48 MORE, LONG TERM. THE 78 PARKING WOULD BE IN AND OUT TO THEIR T SHOP. THAT'S ASSIGNED TO THEIR T SHOP. [00:25:01] THE 30 OTHER COULD BE SHORT TERM, NOT LONG TERM. BUT THOSE ARE OBLIGATED ONLY TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES, OR THEY CAN ALSO PUT CRUISE SHIP PARKING GAS VEHICLES. >> UNDER WHAT'S BEEN CON. >> UNDER WHAT THEY'VE APPLIED FOR? >> NO. THEY THEY COULDN'T DO CRUISHIP PARKING FOR GAS VEHICLES. >> WELL, YOU'RE SAYING THEY COULDN'T DO THEY COULDN'T DO LONG TERM CRUISHIP PARKING. >> ANY CRUISE IS GOING TO BE MORE THEY COULDN'T DO LONG TERM PARKING PERIOD BECAUSE IT WAS NOT IN THE APPLICATION. >> IF SOMEBODY THAT WORKED AT THE CRUISE TERMINAL WANTED TO PARK THERE FOR THEIR SHIFT. >> THAT'S FINE. >> THEY COULDN'T DO THAT. OR IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO PARK THERE AND GO OVER AND SEE SOMEBODY GOING OFF ON A SHIFT AND THEN COME BACK? >> CORRECT. >> BUT I'M JUST SAYING LIKE, WHAT THE LETTER WE GOT TODAY, AND WHAT THE OWNER STATED AT PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIFICALLY STATED HIS BUSINESS MODEL. IF THEY WEREN'T FILLED WITH ELECTRIC VEHICLES THAT HE WOULD PARK OTHER VEHICLES TO MEET THE NEEDS OF WHAT HIS BUSINESS PLAN WAS. >> AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH THE APPLICANT AND SAID WHAT YOU SHOULD DO TO BE CLEAN AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS COVERED IS PUT COMMERCIAL PARKING INTO YOUR APPLICATION. BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THIS. >> THAT WAS MY WHOLE CONCEPT FROM THE BEGINNING IS WHY NOT JUST APPLY FOR A COMMERCIAL LONG TERM PARKING. >> I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION TOO BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE SELLER. OTHER PARTY IS IS THE BUYER. I THINK THAT THERE'S A LITTLE MISCOMMUNICATION ON THAT ASPECT AS WELL. >> JUST LET COUNSEL KNOW, WE'VE ASKED FROM THE BEGINNING, IS THIS CRUISHIP PARKING AND WE'VE ENCOURAGED THEM TO INCLUDE IT IN THEIR APPLICATION. >> BECAUSE JUST ADJACENT TO THAT, WAS ANOTHER CRUISESHIP PARKING THAT'S FAIR AND DOING AND DOING WELL, AND THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR A PUD, DID THEY? >> NO. THEY DIDN'T. THEY WERE GRANDFATHER AND THEY WERE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE. >> NOT THE ONE NORTH BUT THE ONE EAST EAST. >> YES. >> ON THE CORNER. >> CAN YOU GET MRS. GORMAN IN THIS LETTER, PLEASE? >> YES. I HAVE A COPY RIGHT HERE. >> I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT COMING THE TRAFFIC THAT'S COMING TO THAT INTERSECTION THERE. IF WE WERE TO MAKE A CONDITION THAT REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO COORDINATE WITH THE PORT'S EXISTING TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, WOULD THAT REQUIRE THEM TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR IS THAT JUST A CONDITION THAT WE WOULD ADD TO THE PUD? >> THAT COULD BE A CONDITION ADDED. THE COUNCIL CAN ADD WHATEVER CONDITIONS THEY FIND APPROPRIATE. IT DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH THE SITE PLAN CHANGES. WE CAN APPROVE SOME MINOR CHANGES ADMINISTRATIVELY. IF IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE, IT MIGHT HAVE. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? BOB YOU GOT ANOTHER WITH? >> ONE MORE. LEVIN J, HAMPTON BATTERY, REPLACEMENTS OF ALL THE PIECES AND PARTS, THAT PARK UP THERE, EXCEPT FOR THE BIG DAMP POLES. THE REASON WE'RE DOING THIS IS BECAUSE A LOT OF THE METAL PARTS OF CORRODED. WE'RE REPLACING THEM IN ADDITION TO THE SALES. MY QUESTION IS, ARE WE GOING BACK WITH STAINLESS STEEL ON THESE CONNECTORS AND METAL PARTS BECAUSE AND CLEAR. I'M TALKING ABOUT 3:16 STAINLESS STEEL, WHICH IS MARINE GRADE, STAINLESS STEEL. WE MAYBE GET A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE ITEM. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CHARLES KENWORTHY DIRECTOR FACILITIES. COUNCIL MEMBER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. YES, SIR. THERE ARE CERTAIN SECTIONS THAT WILL HAVE THE 316 MARINE GRADE. BUT THE OTHER SECTIONS WITH THE CABLE, THE N CABLES, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED WITH THREE COATS OF MARINE PAINT? >> THE CABLES ARE A LITTLE BIT TOO BIG OR SOMETHING TO HAVE STAIN. >> THEY'RE TOUGH ON COATED. THEY'RE ACTUALLY CODED. >> THINGS LIKE THE CONNECTORS AND THE BOLTS WOULD ALL BE 316. >> WHEN WE TOOK IT BACK OVER FOR MAINTENANCE, IT HAD PROBABLY ALREADY GONE FURTHER SHOW. >> NOW WE'RE ALMOST 14 YEARS. >> WE'VE BEEN STAYING ON TOP OF IT, AND I THINK WITH GIVEN THE NEW REPLACEMENTS AND WITH OUR MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE, IT'LL HOLD UP. WITH THE ORIGINAL CONNECTORS 316 STAY OFF. >> WELL, THAT'S GOOD. I'M GLAD WE'RE GOING THAT DIRECTION. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I WANTED. >> IT'S AN EXPENSIVE PROPOSITION, BUT IT'S SO PROPRIETARY AND WE DON'T WANT TO IT'S WE'D HAVE TO REDESIGN IT, NEW SEAWALL PENETRATIONS, NEW, IT WOULD JUST BE A NIGHTMARE. WE'RE GOING TO TRY JUST TO GO BACK WITH LOOK THIS. THE POLES THEMSELVES ARE FINE. >> YES, SIR. >> THANKS. HIGHLY USED. GOTTEN A LOT OF FEEDBACK THAT WITH THE SALE MISSING AND THINGS FROM PEOPLE ALREADY, SO I WAS SHOCKED AT HOW HIGHLY USED IS. IT'S A GOOD FEATURE FOR US TO PUT IT. >> IS A REAL NICE FEATURE I AGREE. >> IT LASTED WAY LONGER THAN I THOUGHT IT WOULD IN THE WINDS UP THERE. >> THERE'S CHURCHES THAT USE THAT AREA AS SERVICE AREA FOR THEIR AS. >> I KNOW EASTER MORNING, THEY DO IT. >> PRETTY MUCH EVERY SUNDAY, LEY. >> REALLY? THAT'S BEEN QUITE A USE OF IT. BOB, ANYTHING ELSE, SHARON. >> EIGHTY EIGHT. [00:30:19] >> YES. >> THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S TO THE EAST OF THAT AUTO SHOP? >> CORRECT. YES. >> THEY'RE WANTING TO QUESTIONS. BRIAN HAD THE. WHAT I READ IT'S A RESTAURANT. WHAT'S THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PARK? >> THIS ZONING DISTRICT, UN DOESN'T CARRY A PARKING REQUIREMENT, BUT THE SITE HAS A LARGE PARKING LOT THAT SERVICES TO THE GETS TO THE EAST, IT'S LOOKS LIKE IT'S ITS OWN LOT, BUT IT'S CONNECTED TO THOSE APARTMENTS. THERE'S A LARGE PARKING LOT IN THE CENTER. IT'LL HAVE SOME SPACES DEDICATED TO THE RESTAURANT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE A BAKERY. >> THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. >> ALSO MINE. >> THERE ARE ONLY TWO RESIDENTS IN THE AREA WHO OPPOSED IT? >> YES. THEY CAME TO PLANNING COMMISSION THEY HAD SOME QUESTIONS. WE WERE ABLE TO MEET WITH THEM AND TALK THEM THROUGH. WE HAVEN'T HEARD THEIR OPPOSITION SINCE THEN. THEY MAY HAVE GOTTEN THE QUESTIONS ANSWERED. >> BECAUSE THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER BUSINESSES, RIGHT IN THE BARBER SHOP SO. >> THERE'S A BAR. >> MOST OF MY LIFE, THAT WAS A LITTLE GROCERY STORE. I REMEMBER RIDING MY BIKE THERE AS A KID, SO IT WAS A GROCERY STORE. >> ALL YOU AND YOUR MEMORIES. >> IN MY GRANDMA'S HOUSE, YES. SHARON, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT, TOO. IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY STATE, BUT IT INFERS THEY'RE CHANGING THEY WANT TO CHANGE IN HOURS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. YES. >> IF WE APPROVE THIS, THEY OPEN IT 7:00 AND THEY CLOSE AT 10:00? >> IT COULD CLOSE AT 10:00. THEY COULD CLOSE ANY TIME UP UNTIL 10:00. THEY DON'T COULD JUMP UNTIL 10:00. >> WE'RE NOT EXTENDING THE CLOSURE HOURS. IT'S JUST OPEN. >> THE REQUIREMENT NOW IS TO OPEN YOU CAN'T OPEN BEFORE 8:00 BECAUSE IT'S A BAKERY, THEY WANT TO SERVE THE MORNING TRAFFIC, SO THEY WANT TO OPEN AT 7:00 AM UNTIL 10:00 PM. >> THEY CAN BE OPEN TO UNTIL THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT THEY BE OPEN THAT. >> BUT THAT WAS A GROCERY STORE. THERE'S BARBERSHOP ROSTER. I THINK THERE'S A BAR. RIGHT BEHIND THE BODY SHOP. >> I HAD A QUESTION. JUST TO CLARIFY FOR ME, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IS RELATIVE TO THE ZONING, NOT THE USE? >> NOT THE USE, IT'S ZONING. THAT'S CORRECT. IF IT'S A PARKING IF IT'S A ZONE THAT CARRIES A PARKING REQUIREMENT, IT'S ONE SPACE FOR 300 SQUARE FEET. >> THANK YOU. >> I THINK I THINK WE PUT ANGLE PARKING BACK IN FRONT THERE AFTER WE DID THE STREET BECAUSE IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN, CORRECT? >> I CAN'T PICTURE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. BUT THERE IS I HAVE A LOT OF TRUCK. >> THERE'S THERE'S AND THERE'S ANGLE PARKING ACROSS THE STREET. I KNOW THAT. >> THERE'S ANGLE PARKING LOOKS LIKE ON 39TH, BUT NOT ON A. >> NOT ON AS. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S WHERE WE TOOK IT UP, BUT THEY DO HAVE THAT PARKING LOT. >> THEY HAVE THIS PARKING LOT AND THEN THERE'S THERE'S ANGLE PARKING. >> PARKING HERE AND THERE. GOT YOU. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, SHARON? >> NOT ON. >> THANKS, KATHERINE. >> I HAVE ANOTHER 8G. EXCITED ABOUT THIS. >> THAT WAS EIGHT WHAT? >> THE EPA 8G. >> IT'S ON SHIELD PARK. >> YES. >> SHIELD PARK, YES. >> EPA BROWNFIELD CLEANUP. >> YES, MA'AM. >> JUST ELATED ABOUT THIS. I JUST WANTED THE PUBLIC TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SHIELD PARK AND THIS PROCESS AND HOW LONG THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON. >> QUITE A WHILE. THANKS TO VISION GALVESTON AND OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THEM. THEY'VE BEEN ABLE OUR GRANT WRITERS TO ENABLE FOR US TO GET THIS CLEANED UP. I WOULD SAY PROBABLY FOUR YEARS, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS AT LEAST. >> AT LEAST. >> YES. THE GRANT FOR FOUR YEARS. THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN LIVING WITH THIS PARK FOR MANY YEARS AS A BROWNFIELD. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I AM JUST ELATED. THANK YOU-ALL AND THANK YOU, VISION GALVESTON. >> IT WAS CONTAMINATED WITH [INAUDIBLE] >> VISION GALVESTON HAS BEEN INTRICAL IN MOVING THIS PROJECT? >> YES. >> THEY'VE DONE A GREAT JOB? >> YES. I'M NOT GOING TO DO THE BUDGET. >> WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT ANYWAY. >> YES. I HAD 10B. >> YES, MA'AM. >> JUST TO MAKE, I GUESS, RESIDENTS MORE AWARE. DECREASING. [00:35:03] GOOD MORNING. IF YOU WILL JUST GIVE US A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN THIS BOARD. >> I'LL INTRODUCE MYSELF SINCE I HAVEN'T BEEN UP YET. DONA FAIRWEATHER, SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON, AND I'LL BARBARA TAKE THE LEAD ON THIS ONE. >> THIS IS A LONGSTANDING COMMITTEE, AND THEY HAVE HAD PROBLEMS, SINCE HURRICANE I, MEETING THEIR QUORUM TO HOLD THE 23 NUMBER. THAT REDUCED IT ONE OTHER TIME. IT WAS UP PAST 30, AND THAT'S 23. WE'RE LUCKY IF WE DO GET NINE FOLKS IN THE ROOM. WITH MUCH MEETINGS, AND I GUESS, YOU'D SAY A LITTLE DISTRESS FROM SOME OF THE MEMBERS, BUT THE BULK OF THE MEMBERS UNDERSTAND WE CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH ANYTHING. THE MISSION OF THE COMMITTEE HAS CHANGED SOMEWHAT. WE WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE THE NUMBERS DOWN TO NINE. COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE 15. ONCE AGAIN, MOST OF THE TIME CAN'T GET 15 FOLKS IN THE ROOM. WE WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE IT DOWN TO NINE AND MAKE IT A MORE WORKABLE GROUP. DONNA HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH ME AND SO HAS DOM TO WORK TOWARDS THAT PROCESS. >> AND TO DO SOME CLEANUP IN THE ORDINANCE AS WELL TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE STRUCTURE, PROVIDE SOME DEFINITIONS OF YOUTH MEMBERSHIP. ALSO, WE CHANGE TERM LIMITATIONS WITH REDUCTION OF THE MEMBERSHIP. WE'D HAVE TO CHANGE TERM LIMITATIONS AND CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO PROVIDE MEMBERS. THAT WILL COME EITHER AT NEXT MONTH'S MEETING OR IN DECEMBER'S MEETING, YOU'D HAVE TO APPOINT MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE. >> IN THE PAST, THEY WOULD BRING FORTH MEMBERS AND IF COUNCIL HAD QUESTION ABOUT THOSE INDIVIDUALS, IT USUALLY WOULD CAUSE SOME ISSUES IF THE ONLY BOARD THAT WOULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AT THE TIME FOLKS APPLY THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE, FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE WITH JANELLE, AND THOSE APPLICATIONS ARE SENT TO COUNCIL. WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR THIS BOARD TO BE THE SAME AS THE REST OF THEM. >> ON THAT SUBJECT, IT'S LISTED HERE, THE BOARD MAY SUBMIT A LIST OF NOMINEES TO THE COUNCIL TO BE CONSIDERED FOR APPOINTMENT, IS STILL IN THERE. >> THAT SHOULD NOT BE IN THERE. >> IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DOCUMENT. I HAD A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ON THAT, BUT ONE OF THEM WAS SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATIONS, IT'S IN SECTION 2670, COMPOSITION AND TERM LIMITS AND IT'S IN THE CENTER PORTION OF THAT. >> IS THAT IN YOUR VERSION? >> NO. IT'S NOT. >> MAYOR, IT'S OBVIOUS, YOU'RE ON A NEED TO KNOW BASIS HERE. >> THAT WAS DOWNLOADED FROM THE AGENDA CENTER. >> THAT'S WHAT SHE HAD? >> WOULD YOU REPEAT WHERE YOU SAID IT WAS LOCATED, PLEASE? >> WELL, MY QUESTION, IN THE AGENDA CENTER, IT'S DOWNLOADED THAT ON SECTION 2670, IT FIRST TALKS ABOUT THE BOARD SHALL BE COMPOSED OF 23 AND WE CAN CHANGE THAT NUMBER. BELOW THAT, IT SAYS, SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATION SET FORTH IN THE CITY CODE, EVERY EFFORT MAY BE MADE TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING AS BOARD MEMBERS. THEN THE FIRST UNDERLINED ONE SAYS THE BOARD MAY SUBMIT A LIST. >> YOU'RE WORKING OFF OF THE WRONG EDITION. >> YOU UPLOADED THE NEW ONE? >> YES. IS THAT WHAT ALL THE COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE /. >> I DOWNLOADED THIS A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO. >> I WAS IN OUR FINAL. >> CAN WE GET THEM AN UPDATED COPY, PLEASE? >> YES. >> THIS LOOKS LIKE IT'S THE CORRECT ONE. >> YOU HAVE THE CORRECT ONE. >> I'VE SEEN WHAT YOU GOT. THIS ONE? >> YES. >> THIS SEEMS LIKE A YOU PROBLEM. >> WELL, HERE IT IS RIGHT HERE. YEAH. IT'S IN THERE. >> I SEE WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING AT. >> IT'S IN THE DOCUMENT, AND MY QUESTION IS, [00:40:01] WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE THAT IN THE DOCUMENT? IT OUTLINES THEY CAN HAVE YOUTH MEMBERS FROM 15-18. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE ALL HAVE THAT IN THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE THAT ALL SHOULD BE REMOVED, THAT WHOLE SECTION. >> I THINK WE'RE RESTORING CHANGES IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. >> YOUTH MEMBER WAS ORIGINALLY IN THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO ENCOURAGE A YOUTH MEMBER TO BE A PARTICIPANT IN THIS COMMITTEE. HOWEVER, YOUTH MEMBERSHIP WAS NEVER DEFINED. THAT'S WHY THERE IS A DEFINITION OF WHAT A YOUTH MEMBER IS BEING 15-18. THAT'S WHY THE ADDITION IS IN THERE. I THINK THE LANGUAGE THE BOARD MAY SUBMIT A LIST OF NOMINEES TO THE COUNCIL TO BE CONSIDERED FOR APPOINTMENT. THAT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE REMOVED. THAT SHOULD BE CROSSED OUT BECAUSE IT SHOULD GO THROUGH THE CITY SECRETARY. >> WELL, LET ME MAKE SURE. THAT THAT YOU'RE REMOVING HAS BEEN MARKED OUT. THAT THAT'S UNDERLINED MEANS WHAT? >> UNDERLINED IS AN ADDITION. >> WELL, YOU PUT ALL THAT IN THERE. >> YOUTH MEMBERSHIP IS AN ADDITION BECAUSE IT'S NOW DEFINING WHAT A YOUTH MEMBER IS. THAT WASN'T ORIGINALLY IN THE ORDINANCE. THAT REMAINS AS YOU HAVE HERE. >> BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO HAVE A YOUTH MEMBER. >> NO. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO HAVE A YOUTH MEMBER. HOWEVER, IT IS FAMILIES, CHILDREN, AND YOUTH BOARD, AND SO THEY FELT HAVING A PARTICIPANT THAT'S A YOUTH MEMBER IS, I WANT TO SAY CRITICAL, BUT IT IS IMPORTANT FOR REPRESENTATION OF THEIR GOALS. >> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE ADDITION OF, THE BOARD MAY SUBMIT A LIST OF NOMINEES, REALLY NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THERE.? >> YEAH. WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT, THAT WAS STILL IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE LAST DISCUSSION WE HAD, IT WAS FELT THAT CITY COUNCIL SHOULD JUST RECEIVE THOSE FOLKS WHO WANT TO BE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND MAKE THAT DECISION. WHEN IT WAS UPLOADED TO AGENDA CENTER, I JUST MISSED THAT PART OF IT. >> THAT'S FINE. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. >> WE'LL REMOVE THAT. >> THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. >> FINISH YOUR THOUGHT. >> WELL, I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION ON THAT REAL QUICKLY. THERE WAS A TOPIC THAT, I KNOW DONNA, YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS AND BARBARA DID, ABOUT HAVING THEM TURN IN A WORK PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR TERMS SO THAT COUNCIL COULD SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND MOVING FORWARD WITH THEIR WORK PLAN. THAT'S NOT COVERED IN HERE. >> WELL, THEY NEED TO COME UP WITH A NEW MISSION. THE MISSION THAT THEY ORIGINALLY STARTED OUT WITH IS CHANGED. BECAUSE AT ONE TIME, THEY HAD FIVE TASK FORCE, AND ONE INCLUDED HOUSING, DIFFERENT AREAS IN GALVESTON. SOMEHOW THAT'S NO LONGER THE IMPORTANCE OF IT. I THINK THEY'RE LOOKING AT MORE OF WHAT WOULD FAMILIES SEE IN GALVESTON AND HOW TO SERVE THE YOUTH BETTER. >> SHOULD WE PUT THIS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A WORK PLAN SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL? >> THE WORK PLAN SUBMISSION IS STILL IN THERE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT BECAUSE THIS BOARD HAS NOT CONSISTENTLY MET IN THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, THEY REALLY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ACTIVELY WORK ON ANYTHING. REDUCING THE MEMBERSHIP IS CRITICAL AT THIS POINT. I'VE ALREADY COMMITTED TO SPENDING TIME WITH THIS BOARD TO WORK ON FOCUSING THEIR GOALS, TO WORK ON FOCUSING THE COMMITTEES THAT WHATEVER THE GOALS ARE, TO NARROWING WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO, AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT. ALSO, THEIR TIMELINES ON GETTING THEIR WORK PLAN, WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST, WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING ON DOING PRESENTLY, AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO IN THE FUTURE, AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE THAT INFORMATION TO THE COUNCIL SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY REMAIN AN ACTIVE AND VIBRANT BOARD TO THE COUNCIL. >> YOU'RE SAYING IT'S IN THE DOCUMENT. >> IT HAS NOT BEEN REMOVED FROM WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT BECAUSE THE BOARD HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO MEET CONSISTENTLY BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MEET QUORUM, WE CANNOT WORK ON THAT PORTION OF FOCUSING THE GOALS AND THE MISSIONS AND GETTING THAT DOCUMENT IN A CONCISE WORKABLE FORM. [00:45:09] WITH NARROWING THE MEMBERSHIP, WITH MEETING REGULARLY, WE'LL BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THAT DOCUMENT TO CITY COUNCIL. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND IT'S MANDATORY THEY HAVE TO BRING THIS TO COUNCIL. >> YES. THAT IS STILL A REQUIREMENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> WE ALSO FELT LIKE THAT NINE COMMITTED INDIVIDUALS WOULD BE A BETTER BOARD TO WORK WITH. >> I WOULD AGREE. THANK YOU. >> WHILE BARBARA IS HERE, IS EVERYBODY ELSE DONE WITH THAT ITEM OR NOT? >> WITH THIS? >> I'M SORRY. YEAH. >> I'M NOT. >> I'LL WAIT. >> YOU'RE FINE. YOU GOT A QUESTION ON THIS? >> NO. THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO WAIT. >> I KNOW IT'S CALLED FAMILY-CHILDREN-YOUTH BOARD. >> YES. >> THE DESCRIPTION ON THE YOUTH, DOES THAT MEAN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE CHILDREN ON THE BOARD TOO AS WELL? >> NO. >> SINCE WE'RE PULLING YOUTH FROM THE TITLE. I'M THINKING THE MISSION OF IT IS TO DO THINGS THAT WOULD BE INCLUSIVE OF FAMILY, CHILDREN, AND YOUTH. HOW WILL THE YOUTH PERSON BE CHOSEN? WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO, I GOT YOU. >> WHEN WE GET DOWN TO WHAT A YOUTH IS, IT'S REALLY JUST AN AGE CRITERIA, AS WELL AS MANY OF THE MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA FOR ADULTS TO BE ON A BOARD, A YOUTH MAY NOT BE ABLE TO FIT. THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO HAVE A HOMESTEAD. THOSE TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS MAY NOT FIT A YOUTH OF 15-YEARS-OLD. HOWEVER, A YOUTH, ESPECIALLY A HIGH SCHOOL YOUTH MAY HAVE SOME VITAL INFORMATION TO BRING TO A BOARD OF ADULTS, SAY, IF THIS AFFECTS ME, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS TYPE OF PROGRAMMING, OR WHATEVER IS A CONCERN OF A YOUNG PERSON IN THE CITY. THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE SOME SORT OF REPRESENTATION FROM THAT GROUP. >> HOW WILL THEY SELECT THAT PARTICULAR YOUTH PERSON? >> I THINK AT THIS POINT, IT'S REALLY JUST TRYING TO REACH OUT TO SOMEONE [INAUDIBLE] ANYONE. RIGHT NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO PULL SOMEONE FROM THE HIGH SCHOOL. THE YOUTH MEMBERSHIP DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS QUORUM, SO THEY STILL NEED THE NINE ADULT MEMBERS AND JUST PULLING TO A YOUTH JUST TO COME IN AND GIVES THEIR INFORMATION AND THEIR VIEWPOINTS IS IMPORTANT. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU HAD A QUESTION, BO, ON THAT ITEM? >> NO. SEPARATE, BUT WHILE BARBARA WAS UP HERE. > GO AHEAD, SHARON. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THE NEW SOFTWARE FOR THE POLICE, I THINK IT'S 11L. >> 11 L. >> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING. >> THAT'S OUR RMS SOFTWARE? >> JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THE SOFTWARE WILL DO, THAT'S ALL. IT'S A UPDATE? >> NO, MA'AM. THIS IS OUR CURRENT [INAUDIBLE] THAT WE'VE BEEN USING. >> THIS IS THE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE THAT WE USE, IT TRACKS ALL THE CALLS, ALL THE CASES, EVERYTHING. IT'S WHAT THE DISPATCHERS USE WHEN THEY'RE ENTERING EVERYTHING IN. RIGHT NOW WE ARE UNDER A CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT WITH LAKE CITY. WE ARE WORKING ON A NEW AGREEMENT ON NEW SOFTWARE WITH THE COUNTY, WHICH WILL SAVE US A LOT OF MONEY AND PROBABLY GIVE US A BETTER PRODUCT, I THINK, LONG-TERM. THAT'LL BE COMING FORTH, HOPEFULLY, PRETTY SOON. >> IT'S IN THE PROJECTS ABOUT 12, 18 MONTH, TOTAL PROJECTS, SO WE ARE CURRENTLY IN THAT PROCESS. >> ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PIECES OF SOFTWARE THAT WE USE, BUT WHEN WE PULL REPORTS FOR YOU GUYS, AND WE PULL STATISTICS AND ALL THAT, THIS IS OUR RECORDS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE FOR POLICE. >> I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE IS SOMETHING NEW. >> NO. THIS IS THE OLD ONE. >> I HAD SOME OTHER THINGS, BUT THEY'RE NOT IMPORTANT. THIS WE WILL DO LATER. THAT BRINGS BARBARA SANDERSON BACK, 11T. >> POCKET PARK 3, BARBARA. >> POCKET PARK 3? >> YES, MA'AM. JUST A FEW BULLET POINTS. [00:50:02] THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS A GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED THROUGH COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGERS BACK AND IT HAS COME TO FRUITION. WE ARE PAVING DOWN AT POCKET PARK 3. WE PLANNED ON OPENING IT IN MARCH OF NEXT YEAR WITH POSSIBLE VENDORS DOWN THERE. SINCE WE GOT SIDETRACKED WITH BERYL, WE ARE HAVING TO USE SOME OF OUR POCKET PARK COUNTY MONEY TO FINISH UP THE PROJECT. KYLE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? [BACKGROUND] >> KYLE CLARK, COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGER. BARBARA SAID WE'RE FINISHING UP, PUTTING DOWN ASPHALT PAVEMENT. WE ACTUALLY PUT IN A ADA ACCESS, MOBI-MAT ALONG 11 MILE ROAD. PEOPLE WHO PARKED THERE, WE ACTUALLY PUT UP SIGNAGE YESTERDAY, IDENTIFYING THAT THAT'S ACCESS 0.13 PARKING LOT. WE'RE PUTTING UP SOME TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS UP. PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO USE IT EVEN BEFORE WE HAVE A VENDOR OUT THERE IN MARCH. PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY USING IT NOW. THE ROAD GOING DOWN TO THE ACCESS POINT IS GETTING VERY SANDY WITH ALL THE DRY SAND. PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY PARKING THERE NOW AND USING THAT PATHWAY DOWN. I CAN SEND SOME REGULAR PHOTOS, DRONE PHOTOS TO THE COUNCIL, SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE, BUT JUST FINISHING UP THIS PROJECT. LIKE I SAID, WE'VE JUST HAD LITTLE BIT OF DELAY WITH TROPICAL STORM ALBERTO AND HURRICANE BERYL. >> I THINK YOU JUST GO THROUGH THE REGULAR CITY PROCESS. >> YES, MA'AM. WE'LL BE GOING OUT FOR BID SHORTLY. FOR POCKET PARK 1 AND POCKET PARK 3, THERE ARE SOME CONCESSIONS DOWN THERE, POSSIBLY SOME UMBRELLAS AND CHAIRS, AND ALSO OUR LITTLE LAKE PARK AND LASTLY, FACILITIES WILL BE GOING OUT FOR BID. >> MARIE HAD A QUESTION. >> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. YOU SAID THAT WE RECEIVED A GRANT. WAS IT A GRANT FROM? [OVERLAPPING] >> GLO. >> I THOUGHT PART OF OUR AGREEMENT WITH TXDOT FOR USING THAT AREA AS THEIR LAID-DOWN AREA THAT THEY WERE GO ON AND PAVE. >> WE THOUGHT SO TOO. >> WELL, THEY LEFT [OVERLAPPING] A LOT OF MATERIALS FOR THE ROAD BASE. >> THEY LEFT A LOT OF MILLINGS. WE SPREAD IT OUT AND EVERYTHING, BUT WE PUT A BETTER SURFACE ON TOP. >> BUT I THOUGHT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO PUT A BRAND NEW. >> THERE WAS A WHOLE LOT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO. [LAUGHTER] WE SHOULD BE HOLDING OUR FEET. [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT THAT AGREEMENT WASN'T WITH US, IT WAS WITH THE COUNTY. REMEMBER THAT? >> WITH THE ADDITION AND THE FIXING OF THIS PARKING LOT, WILL THIS ALLOW US TO GET ANY OTHER CARS OFF THE BEACH? >> YES, MA'AM. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> RIGHT NOW, THE COMPLIANCE, BEFORE I CAME ON BOARD, THAT THE COASTAL RESOURCES WORKED WITH GLO FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS, WE OPENED UP SOME ON-BEACH PARKING THERE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PARKING LOT. BUT NOW THAT WE HAVE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS MADE AND OUR PLAN IS GOING TOWARD [INAUDIBLE]. THAT IS A CONDITION IN OUR PLAN THAT'S BEING FINALIZED RIGHT NOW THAT WE'LL MOVE THOSE BOTTLES BACK SO WE'LL CLOSE OFF PARKING VEHICLES ON ABOUT 350 FEET OF AXIS 0.13. >> THAT'LL BE A NICE AREA OF THE PARK BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY RECEIVED BOTH. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL. >> WELL, YOU JUST TOOK THE NEXT QUESTION. NOW GOING BACK TO BEFORE, THERE WERE ACTUALLY BATHROOMS, THERE ARE SHOWERS. ARE WE WORKING TOWARDS THAT? BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING OUR CITIZENS. >> WE HAVE TO GENERATE SOME REVENUE OUT THERE FIRST SO WE CAN AFFORD TO DO IT, BUT YES. >> THERE WAS A FULL FACILITY OUT THERE. >> CITIZENS LOVED IT BECAUSE EVEN PEOPLE WHO LIVED IN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS COULD BRING THEIR KIDS, HAVE A WASH BEFORE THEY TOOK THEM HOME. >> WE WE WILL BE LOCATING SEWER AND WATER OUT THERE TO SEE IF A POSSIBLE RESTROOM TRAILER WILL GO OUT THERE AND OFFER SOME OF THOSE AMENITIES. [OVERLAPPING] >> PROBABLY COULD EVEN GET SOME PARTNERING IF IT WAS POSSIBLE WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OR MAYBE EVEN THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING IN IN THE EAST AND THEN THAT TWO STREETS IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF THAT, THERE'S STILL ON [INAUDIBLE] AND THEY WOULD LOVE TO PARTICIPATE IN GETTING SEWER. MAYBE THERE'S SOME WAY THAT WE CAN WORK THOSE TOGETHER. >> WE'LL SEE. WE'VE GOT TO GET SOME REVENUE OUT THERE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE [00:55:02] DON'T HAVE ANY WAY TO FUND IT RIGHT NOW, BUT WE'RE GETTING THERE. >> I'M WORKING WITH PARKS. THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TOO FOR GLO GRANTS FOR BETTER IMPROVEMENTS OUT THERE. >> GOOD. >> WE'RE WORKING ON ALL THE POCKET PARKS OUT THERE TO MAKE IT BETTER FOR CITIZENS AND BENEFICIARIES. >> KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. >> SHARON, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> NO. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING] >> YES, SIR. >> THIS IS JUST MAYBE A CLEAN-UP THING FOR US LATER. WE'RE HEARING WHETHER OR NOT TO OPEN UP THE LASKER HOURS AND A DISCUSSION LATER. ONE OF THE ITEMS WAS TO PURCHASE POOL CHEMICALS. >> YES, SIR, FOR ANNUAL CONTRACT. >> WOULD IT CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS IF WE DELAYED THAT UNTIL AFTER WE FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH LASKER? WOULD THAT AFFECT YOU AT ALL? >> YES, IT WILL. I WON'T BE ABLE TO PURCHASE SOME. >> WE DON'T WANT THAT. YES. >> WE'VE GOT LASKER PARK ON OUR WORKSHOP. WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THAT AT LENGTH. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IF WE COULD PULL IT OUT BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WOULD AFFECT YOU NOT BEING ABLE TO BUY. [BACKGROUND] I DON'T WANT THAT, JUST IN CASE IT GETS UTILIZED MORE IF WE GO THAT WAY. >> WE'VE LOST CHEMICALS DURING THE OFF SEASON, MUCH LESS, BUT WE DO NEED THEM. >> BECAUSE WE'RE NOT HEATING IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THERE WOULD BE. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT. >> BUT YOU SAY YOU COULD ALWAYS INCREASE YOUR PURCHASE IF IT WERE DECIDED. >> BUDGET PERMITTING. >> THAT WOULD BE AN IDC DECISION. >> IDC HAS HELD FIRM WITH THE $500,000 CONTRIBUTION. >> I KNOW WE'LL DISCUSS. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THAT IN JUST A LITTLE WHILE HERE ON OUR AGENDA. WE'LL GET INTO THAT DETAIL. SHARON, ANY FURTHER ITEMS? >> NO. >> ALEX. >> I GOT 11A, B, AND C. [BACKGROUND] >> GLENN BULGHERINI, CITY AUDITOR. >> GLENN, HAVE A SEAT. >> THIS IS I GUESS AN AMENDMENT TO THE AUDIT PLAN FOR THE COMPLIANT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS? HOW WAS THIS WORKED INTO THE AMENDMENT FIGURE AUDIT PLAN? >> YES, SIR. IN OUR LAST AUDIT ON THE CREDIT CARDS AND DEBIT CARDS FOR THE BEACH PATROL, WE NOTICED A POSSIBILITY OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF A CHECK, CUT SOMEONE'S FAMILY BUSINESS. SO WE'RE ASKING TO PERFORM AN AUDIT TO LOOK AT ALL POSSIBLE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT THE PARK BOARD. WE'VE TALKED TO BRYSON AND HE'S IN FAVOR OF IT. HE WANTS US TO COME IN AND DO IT. WE'VE TALKED TO HIM ABOUT REIMBURSING THE CITY FOR THIS AUDIT, FOR OUR TIME SPENT. >> IS THIS GOING TO BE MOVED TO A PRIORITY, OR IS IT MOVED TO THE END OF THE LINE? >> NO, SIR. IT'S A PRIORITY. WE'RE GOING TO PLAN ON DOING THIS BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER. >> THEN ANYBODY ELSE? >> THAT'S JUST FOR THE COMMUNITY SAKES. THAT'S 11A, THE COUNCIL MEMBER PORRETTO WAS DISCUSSING ON THIS AGENDA. >> THEN 11B, I GUESS THIS IS AN ADDITION OR MORE FUNDS THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT FOUND? >> YES, SIR. WE GOT MORE INFORMATION IN ON THE DEBIT CARDS. WE DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS $2,000 IN ADDITION TO WHAT I LAST REPORTED TO COUNCIL. IT'S A TOTAL OF $11,000 THAT NEEDS TO BE REIMBURSED TO THE PARK BOARD. IT WAS ILLEGALLY TAKEN OUT OF THE PARK BOARD FUNDS. >> I THINK THERE WAS JUST SOME MISUNDERSTANDING FROM THE PUBLIC. I'VE GOTTEN A HANDFUL OF EMAILS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WHERE THEY DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND IF THIS WAS THE LIFEGUARD ASSOCIATION ACCOUNT OR IF THIS IS THE PARK BOARD ACCOUNT. [01:00:06] JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE, THIS IS ALL PARK BOARD GOVERNMENTAL MONEY, COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE LIFEGUARD ACCOUNT. >> YES, SIR. >> THE LIFEGUARD ACCOUNT WAS, WHAT, AROUND 60 AND IT GOT DRAINED. THIS IS JUST FROM THE PARK BOARD P-CARD PURPOSE. THIS IS GOVERNMENT FUNDS. >> YES, SIR. >> PEOPLE FUNDS. >> PEOPLE'S FUNDS. YES. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> GO AHEAD. >> GLENN, YOU'VE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS P-CARD? >> YES, SIR. >> MY QUESTION IS WHERE ARE WE ON THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS? HAS THE PARK BOARD EMBRACED THESE AND MAKING CHANGES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES HERE? >> YES, SIR. I DO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE PUT IT IN WRITING, THAT BRYSON HAS PUT IT IN WRITING. WHAT WE PLAN TO DO IN SIX MONTHS IS TO COME BACK AND MAKE SURE THAT WHAT'S PUT IN WRITING IS ACTUALLY BEING DONE. >> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, I'D LIKE TO GET A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM THE PARK BOARD ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT YOU HAVE FOUND IN THIS PARTICULAR AUDIT. I'D LIKE TO GET A WRITTEN RESPONSE FROM THE PARK BOARD ON WHAT THEIR STATUS IS OF THAT, A TIMELINE OF WHEN THEY'LL BE BRINGING BACK INFORMATION TO COUNCIL AND TO YOU. BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING FORMAL ON THEIR RESPONSE ON THIS. >> I GUESS JUST MORE TO THAT POINT, I DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. HOW MUCH OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE ALREADY IN PLACE AND JUST NOT FOLLOWED, AND HOW MANY OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE NEW? >> ALL OF MY RECOMMENDATIONS WERE NEW. I JUST PROPOSE THAT THEY IMPLEMENT THEM TO TIGHTEN UP, BUT THE PROCEDURES THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE WERE ADEQUATE. THEY JUST WERE NOT FOLLOWED. >> ON THOSE WRITTEN RESPONSES, JANELLE, WE NEED TO DISTRIBUTE THOSE TO COUNCIL. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THEIR WRITTEN RESPONSE BY NEXT COUNCIL'S MEETING, IF WE COULD. THAT'S NOVEMBER 14. YES, BOB. >> GLENN, WHEN YOU SAY CONFLICT OF INTEREST, HAVE YOU RELEASED THE PARTIES OF WHO WAS INVOLVED? >> NO, SIR, I HAVEN'T. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ACCOUNT WAS WRITTEN FROM THE LIFEGUARD FUND OR FROM THE BEACH PATROL FUND? >> THAT WAS WRITTEN FROM THE BEACH PATROL. >> PARK BOARD FUND. >> PARK BOARD FUND. >> PARK BOARD FUND. >> IS THAT HOT TAX? >> NO. WELL, I'D HAVE TO DO THE AUDIT FIRST TO SEE. I DON'T BELIEVE IT' HOT TAX FUNDS, BUT I COULD BE WRONG BECAUSE SOME OF THE BEACH PATROL IS FUNDED BY HOT TAX, I BELIEVE. >> ALL OF IT, I THOUGHT. >> ALL OF IT? WELL, THEN IT WOULD BE HOT TAX FUNDS. IT'S WRITTEN OUT OF THE BEACH PATROL. I'M SORRY. >> IT'LL BE HOT, PROBABLY. ANY QUESTIONS FURTHER ON 11B? ALEX. >> GLENN WANTS TO BE HERE FOR BEVERLY FOR 11C. >> AM I SUPPOSED TO LEAVE? >> YOU COULD PROBABLY STAY HERE TOO, IT'S YOUR CONTRACTS. >> I'M BEVERLY WEST ON THE HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. >> HAVE A SEAT, BEVERLY, IF YOU LIKE. [LAUGHTER] >> MOST OF THE STUFF IS BLANK FOR THE COMMENCEMENT DATES, AND THE TERMS FOR GLENN'S CONTRACT. WE CAN MOVE IT HOWEVER WE WANT, MAYBE NOT. THIS TERM, I GUESS, THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT, IS THAT SOMETHING? [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR YOU TO APPROVE IT, AND THEN ONCE YOU APPROVE IT, THEN WE'LL JUST FILL IN TODAY'S DATE. THAT SHOULD BE THE ONLY LENGTHS. >> HOW LONG IS THIS CONTRACT FOR? >> IT IS UNTIL HE RETIRES OR TERMINATES. >> HE'S NO LONGER HERE. >> I COULDN'T FIND THAT. >> 1.1 TALKS ABOUT THE TERM. IT SAYS, THE TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO EARLIER TERMINATION BY UNILATERAL SEVERANCE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, SO THAT'S IF YOU UNILATERALLY DO IT. >> IT WOULD HAVE TO COME TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE TERMINATED? >> CORRECT. >> HE'S OUR EMPLOYEE. >> HE'S AN APPOINTEE. [01:05:04] >> BUT THERE WASN'T A SPECIFIC TERM LIKE SIX MONTHS OR 12 MONTHS? >> THAT WAS FOR THE UNILATERAL SEVERANCE PAY, AND THAT IS SIX MONTHS. THAT IS FURTHER IN THE CONTRACT. THAT'S IF HE'S NOT TERMINATED FOR GOOD CAUSE IF YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO LET HIM GO. >> IF WE DON'T LIKE GLENN? >> RIGHT. >> HE GETS SIX MONTHS. >> IF HE DOES AN AUDIT YOU'RE NOT HAPPY ABOUT AND YOU JUST WANT TO LET HIM GO, OR ANY OTHER REASON, THAT'S WHEN THIS WOULD KICK IN. GLENN HAS REVIEWED THE CONTRACT? >> YES. >> GLENN'S REVIEWED IT. LEGAL HAS REVIEWED IT. BEVERLY HAS PUT TOGETHER THIS CONTRACT AND JUST REVIEWED IT. >> WHAT DO YOU SAY, GLENN, YOU LIKE IT? >> YES. I'M FINE WITH ANYTHING THE COUNCIL DECIDES ON. >> THAT DIDN'T LAST VERY LONG. >> I GUESS I GOT YOU GUYS OUT OF THE WAY. THANK YOU-ALL VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, GUYS. >> THIS ONE IS JUST A CLARIFICATION OF 11E. >> TESSA. >> GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING, TESSA. >> TESSA WROBLESKI, DIRECTOR OF DISASTER RECOVERY AND GRANTS. >> GOOD MORNING. >> MORNING. >> THIS IS THE ADOPTING POLICY SPECIFICALLY TO AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER FAIR HOUSING IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON. IF WE DON'T DO THIS, WHAT DOES THIS DO? WE JUST WON'T RECEIVE FUNDING? IT SAYS IT HELPS CONTINUE THAT, BUT I GUESS IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME, IF CURRENTLY, NOTHING IS DONE, DID WE NOT DO SOMETHING IN THE PAST OR DID FEDERAL REGULATIONS CHANGE? >> WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST IS EVERY YEAR, YOU DO A RESOLUTION FOR FAIR HOUSING, ADOPTION OF MAKING IT FAIR HOUSING MONTH OR WHATEVER. FOR ALL OF THESE CDBG PROJECTS LIKE OUR 59TH STREET OR ANY OF THESE OTHER SOUTH SHORE, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS WHEN WE GET TO SOME OF THE MONITORING THAT THE GLO AND HUD ARE DOING, THEY'RE SAYING THAT RESOLUTION DOESN'T NECESSARILY REPRESENT A POLICY. THEY JUST WANT A STANDARD POLICY THAT WE'RE COMPLYING, AND THIS ALSO IS GOING INTO SOME OF THE GRANTS AND HOUSING REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE FOR THAT DEPARTMENT AS WELL. IF YOU'RE NOT MEETING ALL OF THE POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE'VE GOT POLICIES FOR TO COMPLY WITH THE HUD AND THE GLO REGULATIONS, THEN THEY CAN QUESTION YOUR FUNDING. >> NO MORE RESOLUTIONS. THIS WILL BE LIKE AFFIRMATIVE POLICY THAT WE PUT IN PLACE? >> YES, SIR. MY UNDERSTAND IS YOU STILL HAVE THE ONE YEAR RESOLUTION FOR FAIR HOUSING MONTH OR WHATEVER IN ADDITION TO THAT, BUT THEY WOULD NOT ACCEPT JUST THAT AS OUR POLICY. WE'RE CLEANING THAT UP, AND WE'VE RUN INTO IT ON THE END OF THE HURRICANE HARVEY STUFF AS WELL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU, TESSA. ANYTHING ELSE? >> 11F. MIKE. AIRPORT. >> CHARGING STATIONS. >> THERE REALLY ARE ELECTRIC AIRPLANES? >> YEAH. >> MIKE SHAHAN, AIRPORT DIRECTOR. SOMETHING THAT'S COMING, EVENTUALLY. ACCORDING TO THE FIA AND TXDOT AVIATION, THEY'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT IT'S ON ITS WAY. THERE'S ACTUALLY AIRCRAFT OUT THERE FLYING WITH ELECTRICITY, SO THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST CHARGING STATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR COMPANY IN TEXAS. >> THAT WOULD BE SCARY AS HECK. >> ARE THESE LIKE THOSE DRONES THAT HAVE BEEN IN POPULAR SCIENCE AND MECHANICS? >> THESE ARE MORE A CONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT., NOT VERTICAL TAKEOFF. IT'S MORE LIKE A CONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT, JUST ELECTRIC ENGINES. JUST LIKE THE REGULAR ONE, WHEN YOU RUN OUT OF FUEL, THEY LAND. >> FLIGHT TIME, IS IT MORE JUST LIKE A LEISURE CRAFT FOE, LIKE, FLYING AROUND THE ISLAND. >>I THINK IT'S 2-3 HOURS BETWEEN CHARGES. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS [INAUDIBLE] IS NOT OUR [INAUDIBLE]? >> NO. >> THIS WILL KEEP THEM FROM HAVING TO LAND THESE PLANES ON 14TH AND HARBORSIDE TO CHARGE. >> THIS IS REVENUE COMING IN. THIS IS REVENUE IN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S BEING PUT IN. >> THEY WOULD PUT IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE. WE CHARGE THEM WITH GROUND LEASE, [01:10:02] AND WE ALSO GET 5% OF THE NET REVENUE. THERE'S ALSO TWO ELECTRIC CAR CHARGERS. >> OFF THE POWER? >> OFF THE POWER. >> ARE YOU DOING THE INSTANT CHARGERS, THOSE FAST CHARGERS? >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THESE WILL BE FAST CHARGERS, BUT DON'T HOLD ME 100% TO THAT. >> WILL WE BE CHARGING A CHARGE FOR THE FAST CHARGERS? >> WELL, THE COMPANY WOULD CHARGE WHOEVER IS USING IT, AND THEN WE WOULD GET 5%. >> LIKE WE DO WITH FUEL. >> YES. >> THIS WILL BE MORE OF A QUESTION TOWARDS BRIAN, BUT WITH ALL THIS TALK ABOUT ELECTRIC CHARGING AND IT'S GOING TO PUT WEAR AND TEAR ON THE GRID OR NEED IMPROVEMENTS AT CENTERPOINT. ARE YOU GEARING CENTERPOINT UP? >> RIGHT NOW I'M TRYING TO GET CENTERPOINT GEARED UP TO FIX THE STREET LIGHTS THAT ARE OUT SINCE BERYL, BUT I ASSUME CENTERPOINT IS AHEAD OF THIS CURVE. WE'VE BEEN MEETING WITH THEM ON EMERGENCY STUFF AND THEY SEEM TO BE VERY ACTIVE RIGHT NOW GETTING THINGS UPGRADED. >> YOU'RE GOING TO SEE MORE AIRCRAFT THAT WILL BE ELECTRIC MOVING ACROSS THE NATION RIGHT NOW. >> IT'S GOOD. THAT WAY YOU'RE NOT DRAGGING THOSE CORDS WITH THEM EVERYWHERE THEY GO. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. > THEN I GOT TWO MORE. >> CAN I JUST MAKE A MENTION RIGHT NOW SINCE I'VE APOLOGIZED FOR BEING TIED UP WITH MY OWN AGENDA ITEMS AND CONSTRUCTION AT HOME? BUT I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON 11 H. >> 11H. >> YEAH. VERY GOOD. 11V AND Y. HOPE. I THINK SHE'S OUTSIDE. SOMEONE GRABS HER, PLEASE. >> 11V. >> YOU GOT SUMMONED, HOPE. >> GOOD MORNING. WHAT TROUBLE ARE WE ON? SORRY. >> 11V, BARRACUDA, AND THEN I JUST WANT A QUICK QUESTION ON CIVICPLUS. 11V, AND I'M SURE YOU'VE GOTTEN EMAILS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTEN EMAILS TOO OF PEOPLE PRETENDING TO BE CRAIG BROWN ASKING FOR QUICK HELP. >> I GOT T TELL YOU, I [INAUDIBLE]. >> I KNOW IT'S CYBERSECURITY, BUT IS BARRACUDA THE BEST THAT WE CAN DO, IS THAT THROUGH CIVICPLUS OR IS THAT JUST SEPARATE? >> BARRACUDA IS SEPARATE. I WILL TELL YOU THAT THAT SYSTEM BLOCKS A LOT. I CAN GET YOU SOME STEPS ON IT. WE'RE VERY HAPPY WITH THE PRODUCT ITSELF AND WHAT IT DOES BLOCK. >> I'LL BACK YOU UP ON THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND ME. I USE BARRACUDA ON MY OWN SERVER. IT BLOCKS MORE. IT'S SORT OF THE GOLD STANDARD. >> IT BLOCKS WAY MORE THAN WHAT YOU REALIZE. THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE WITH THE MAYOR'S EMAILS IS THAT THEY'RE VALID EMAILS. THEY'RE VALID EMAIL ACCOUNTS. >> CORRECT. THOSE ARE HARD TO CONTROL. YOU CAN'T EVEN STOP THEM. >> IT SAYS WILD WEBSITES. >> YEAH, EXACTLY. ANYWAY. AFTER YOU REPORTED THAT YESTERDAY, I IMMEDIATELY WENT INTO BARRACUDA TO BLOCK IT AND IT HAD ALREADY BEEN BLOCKED. SOMEBODY HAD ALREADY REPORTED IT, BUT NEVER ALWAYS REPORT BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE DOESN'T. WE GO AWAYS WITH THOSE TYPES OF EMAILS. WE'LL GO FOR A GOOD PERIOD OF TIME. >> I NOTICED. >> THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, SOMEBODY TAPS IN AND THEY CREATE FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT EMAIL ADDRESSES AND WHILE YOU BLOCK ONE, YOU GET ANOTHER ONE, BUT WE'RE VERY SATISFIED WITH BARRACUDA. >> THEN FOR THE CIVICPLUS, I GUESS, WE'RE PUTTING MORE INFORMATION IN A. >> YOU WANT TO STAND UP AND TALK ABOUT? >> IT'S YOUR AGENDA. >> [INAUDIBLE] ON THIS ONE? >> YES. THIS IS A NEW AGENDA MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE THAT WILL TAKE THE PLACE OF THE CURRENT AGENDA CENTER. IT IS VERY USER-FRIENDLY TO THE PUBLIC TO THE USERS HERE AND THE STAFF MEMBERS, ALSO, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, A LOT OF ADDITIONAL FEATURES WITH THIS SYSTEM. >> THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING. >> A LOT OF FRUSTRATION. >> WE'RE OVER-UTILIZING WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. >> YOU SAID SOMETHING. WHEN YOU SAY A LOT OF FRUSTRATION FROM THE PUBLIC, CAN YOU EXPAND ON THAT? >> FINDING IT AND ACCESSING IT, IT'S BEEN JUST SOME PLAY ISSUES, NOTHING TOO CRAZY. [01:15:03] >> WE'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS PROJECT WILL HELP THAT. >> THIS PROJECT IS MORE FOR THE AGENDA CENTER, THE WEBSITE, AND ALL THAT FINDING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS. >> THIS IS FOR THE AGENDA ITSELF. >> JUST AGENDA. >> IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE WORKING ON. WE PUT OUT PROBABLY MORE ON OUR AGENDA THAN MOST PEOPLE DO THAT CIVICPLUS SERVES, WHICH THEY SERVE MOST CITIES. WE'RE WORKING ON SOME STREAMLINING THERE AS WELL. >> FROM A WEBSITE PERSPECTIVE, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS PEOPLE HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME FINDING THAT ON OUR WEBSITE. >> CORRECT. >> THAT ISSUE, I THINK, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. >> MORRIS IS BACK THERE AND I THINK SHE'S HEARING. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD SUGGEST BECAUSE I THINK IT'S MORE FRUSTRATING WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO FIND SUB-MEETING NOT OUR MEETINGS, IS YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND CHECK. WELL, IF, THEY START OUT ALL CHECKED, AND THERE WAS A WAY TO JUST PUT PLANNING COMMISSION. >> YEAH, LIKE A SEARCH. >> INSTEAD, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE WHICH IS REALLY ANTIQUATED. >> THE SYSTEM IS FULLY SEARCHABLE, SO YOU'LL HAVE THAT FEATURE. >> GOOD. >> JANELLE HAS BEEN WANTING THIS REPLACEMENT OF OUR AGENDA CENTER FOR A WHILE, AND SO SH'S SUPER EXCITED. I WILL TELL YOU, STAFF FEEL THE SAME WAY. WE HAVE A REAL PERFORMANCE ISSUE WITH OUR CURRENT AGENDA CENTER. WE'VE JUST OUTGROWN IT. IT'S DESIGNED FOR SOMEBODY, WHAT YOU SEE IN THE AGENDA. >>IT'S NOT DESIGNED FOR THIS SIZE OF AGENDA. >> JANELLE, WOULD YOU MENTION I THINK THE PARK BOARD'S USING THIS? >> YES. >> THEY WENT OVER AND THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. >> KELLY AND I VISITED WITH SHEL OVER THE PARK BOARD SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. SHE GAVE US A QUICK DEMO, AND WE IMMEDIATELY FELL IN LOVE WITH IT. GOT WITH HOPE. I THINK YOU GOT A DEMO FROM THE ACTUAL COMPANY. WE'RE READY TO GET STARTED IF THIS IS APPROVED. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYTHING ELSE? >> ONE LAST ONE, 11D. IT SAYS TRINO, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF TRINO'S HERE. >> YEAH. TRINO IS HERE. >> THERE HE IS. >> COME ON DOWN, TRINO. >> SHOULD WE SAY GRANDPA? >> PAPA. >> PAPA PEDROZA. I'VE BEEN CALLING HIM THAT NOW. >> THIS IS, I GUESS, THE LLOYD GOSSELINK AND ROCHELLE FIRM THAT WE USE FOR OUR REGULATORY TCEQ INFORMATION OR LEGAL ISSUES. YOU DON'T SEE THIS BEING ABLE TO BE DONE AT THE CITY LEVEL. I KNOW THIS IS LIKE A CONTRACT WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR A WHILE,. >> LLOYD GOSSELINK IS THE GOLD STANDARD FOR THIS STUFF. >> HE REALLY IS. >> NOT INCLUDED IN THIS CONTRACT, BUT HE'S THE ONE ALSO REPRESENTS US WHEN WE HAVE RATE CASE ISSUES WITH TEXAS GAS OR CENTERPOINT OR THOSE ISSUES AS WELL, IT'S JUST WHAT THEY DO. >> THAT'S A DIFFERENT SECTION OF THE FIRM. >> RIGHT, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEIR FIRM DOES IS DEALS WITH THESE PUBLIC UTILITIES. >> WELL, THAT JUST [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT WAS QUICK. >> IT WAS QUICK. >> FOR US TO HIRE SOMEBODY AND TRAIN HIM UP TO DO THIS WOULD COST A LOT MORE THAN THIS. >> THIS IS REALLY GOOD FOR HIM TO BE ABLE TO PICK UP THE PHONE, GET TO THAT ATTORNEY, AND SAY, I JUST HAD A SPILL OF WHATEVER. >> THAT WAY, THEY CAN GET SOMEBODY OUT. >> TRINO HAS DONE A GOOD JOB WITH WORKING WITH HIM TOO. IT'S GOT IN A GOOD SPOT. >> THAT'S IT, TRINO. THEN THE LAST ONE I HAVE IS 12C. IS THAT GOING TO BE TALKED ABOUT AT OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION? BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE ANY FILE. >> THAT'S PART OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. YES. >> I'M DONE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BO, WE SKIPPED YOU. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING, SIR, YOU WANTED TO BRING FORWARD? >> NO. ACTUALLY, IT WAS DISCUSSED BY OTHER PEOPLE, SO WE'RE GOOD. >> VERY GOOD. COUNCILWOMAN ROB? >> I DO. I HAVE 11NN. I HAVE A COUPLE IN THAT AREA. >> MM. >> NN, NANCY. >> N AS IN NANCY. >> NANCY NANCY. >> OR NANA. >> YES. >> WE HAVE DAVID HERE. >> MORNING, DAVID. >> GOOD MORNING. >> COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, DAVID, FOR THE COUNCIL. >> I'M DAVID SMITH, CITY OF GALVESTON. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE TWO ITEMS ON HERE THAT HAVE TO [01:20:06] DO WITH EQUIPMENT FOR OVERSEEING DOWNTOWN PARKING. >> YES, MA'AM. >> YET, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THE BUDGET TODAY, AND WE'RE LOOKING AT WHERE WE'RE CUTTING THINGS. WHAT IS NECESSITATING HAVING TO BUY NEW VEHICLES FOR THE PARKING DIVISION? >> THE PARKING CONTROL HAS CUSTOMARILY USED HAND DOWN VEHICLES FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> WHICH IS WHAT IT SHOULD TAKE. >> THOSE VEHICLES ARE IN OUR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT LAW, AND SOFTWARE HAS INDICATED THAT THEY SHOULD BE REPLACED. THE PARKING CONTROL BUDGET DOES SUPPORT REPLACING THESE VEHICLES. THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER ONE, WHICH IS A REPLACEMENT. ONE OF THE VEHICLES WAS STRUCK BY A CITIZEN AND TOTALED OUT, AND THAT WILL REPLACE THAT ONE AS WELL. >> MY ONLY QUESTION IS, WE'RE LOOKING IN OUR BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS, TAKING AWAY, I THINK THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD TO DO WITH PARKS AND NOW THEY'RE HAVING TO DO WITH. >> YOU COULD NOT USE THIS MONEY FOR THAT. >> WE COULD NOT USE THIS [INAUDIBLE] >> THIS IS PAID FOR BY THE PARKING [INAUDIBLE] >> WE HAVE POLICEMEN THAT ARE IN OLDER CARS. I'D RATHER SEE MONEY FOR VEHICLES USED. >> OUR POLICEMEN ARE ALL IN BRAND NEW CARS, MARIE. >> WHAT ABOUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS WELL, THEIR REPLACEMENT? >> THEY'RE ON THE SAME SYSTEM AS THESE ARE. >> THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY TO PAY FOR PARKING. HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE THESE? >> SHOULD BE A TOTAL OF THREE. >> IT'S 151. WHAT VEHICLES ARE WE GETTING? >> THESE WILL BE A POLICE PACKAGE VEHICLE, AND THEY WILL BE A FORD EXPLORER. WHY ARE THEY POLICE PACKAGES? BECAUSE OF THEIR SLOW MOVEMENT, THE EXTRA COOLING SYSTEM AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM. THEY RUN ELECTRONICS IN THE VEHICLE AS WELL. QUITE HONESTLY A POLICE PACKAGE VEHICLE WILL LAST A LONG TIME IN THE DEPARTMENT AS WELL. >> IT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE EXCESSIVE. >> IDEALLY, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TO BUY NEW POLICE CARS AND THEN RETIRE SOME EARLY. BUT I CAN'T SPEND PARKING MONEY ON THE POLICE CARS DIRECTLY FOR PD. >> WHY? >> BECAUSE IT'S SET ASIDE WHEN WE CREATED THE PARKING FUND TO NOT SPEND ON THAT. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SPENT DOWNTOWN. > IT WAS SET ASIDE BY OUR IR POLICY. >> I WOULD NOT PUT EXPLORERS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. I WOULD PUT TAHOES, WHICH COST A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THIS. >> I KNOW. BUT THIS STILL JUST SEEMS EXCESSIVE. >> HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO PATROL THE PAID PARKING THAT BUSINESSES HAVE ASKED FOR DOWNTOWN? >> I UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO DO PARKING CONTROL, BUT WE NEED A $50,000 VEHICLE TO DO PARKING CONTROL. >> MAYBE IF WE BOUGHT STRIPPED DOWN TRUCKS, IT COSTS THAT MUCH. >> I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE SHOPPING. I KNOW VEHICLES ARE EXPENSIVE, BUT AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO THINKS THAT'S EXPENSIVE? >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT $50,000 FOR A VEHICLE. >> THAT'S EQUIPPED, ISN'T IT DAVID? >> THEY HAVE SOME EQUIPMENT, YES. >> ALSO, THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO REPLACE THE ONE THAT WAS TOTALED OUT IS ACTUALLY AN OLDER MODEL. WE SCRAPED THE BOTTOM A LITTLE BIT TO BUY OLDER MODEL VEHICLES SO THEY'RE COMING IN A LITTLE CHEAPER. THE OTHER THREE ARE THE NEWER STYLES. THEY SHOULD LAST THEM A LONG TIME. ALSO WHEN WE HAVE IN THE PAST POLICE VEHICLES WITHIN THE PARKING DEPARTMENT, THE MARSHALS DEPARTMENT. WE DID IT CORRECTLY, AND WE MOVED THOSE VEHICLES TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEN THEY NEEDED VEHICLES [INAUDIBLE] WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE THE VEHICLES. >> IF ONE OF THEM WAS WRECKED, WOULDN'T INSURANCE PAY FOR THAT? >> YES. WE DID RECEIVE INSURANCE FROM THAT. POLICY DOESN'T COVER THE ENTIRE VEHICLE SO INSURANCE MONIES ARE PAYING FOR A PORTION OF THAT. >> YOU GET DEPRECIATED VALUE AND SINCE IT WAS AN OLD POLICE CAR IT WASN'T ENOUGH TO REPLACE. >> WHAT ABOUT THE VALUE WE GOT FROM INSURANCE? >> I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE IN THE STAFF REPORT. I THINK IT WAS AROUND $9,000. >> YEAH. >> I HAVE A PROBLEM WHEN WE'RE CUTTING THINGS THAT ARE CITIZEN SERVICES TO BUY EXPENSIVE PARKING VEHICLES. >> IF I HAD ANOTHER WAY TO USE THE MONEY, MOST OF THAT WOULD BE NICE. I'D BE HAPPY IF WE DIDN'T DO PAID PARKING AT ALL DOWNTOWN, BUT THEY WANTED IT. >> I'M STILL AMAZED THAT ELECTRIC AIRPLANE STORY. I DON'T THINK I'D WANT TO FLY IN ONE. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS ON 11(K). THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE ROOFING COMPANY. I JUST WONDERED WHY WE WOULD DO A CONTRACT FOR THAT EXTENDED TIME. [01:25:03] >> GOOD MORNING. >> MORNING. >> [OVERLAPPING] I'M SORRY, COUNCIL MEMBER I DIDN'T HEAR YOU. >> I SAID GOOD MORNING TO YOU. YOU HAVE SUCH A GREAT VOICE. GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. >> [LAUGHTER] HE SHOULD BE ON THE RADIO. >> [INAUDIBLE] ON THE RADIO. [LAUGHTER]. >> I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION? >> I SAID WE'RE AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR A TERM OF THREE YEARS WITH TWO, ONE YEAR RENEWALS. I JUST WONDERED WHY. I'M NOT A CONTRACTOR EVEN THOUGH I'M PLAYING ONE AT HOME, BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A LONG TERM FOR A ROOFING CONTRACT. >> JUST TO HAVE THEM ON STAND BY. >> YEAH, THIS IS STAND BY. >> THERE'S NO MONETARY VALUE TIED TO THIS UNLESS YOU USE THEM. CASE IN POINT IF WE HAVE A STORM. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TWO OF THEM BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGE. IT BENEFITS THE CITY TO HAVE SOMEBODY ON CONTRACT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND REBUILD THIS YEAR, AFTER YEAR, AFTER YEAR, BECAUSE THERE'S ADVERTISEMENT COSTS. >> THIS IS LIKE PRE-QUALIFYING SOME CONTRACTORS, JUST LIKE WE DO WITH ARCHITECTS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT WENT THROUGH PURCHASING AND WE DID A BID PACKAGE. >> DO WE GET A DISCOUNT FOR HAVING A CONTRACTOR? >> THERE'S NO TRAVEL FEES. [LAUGHTER] WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT EXPEDITES OUR SERVICE. WE GET PRIORITY. >> THERE'S A RESPONSE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. >> YES. THERE'S CRITERIA IN THERE THAT THEY HAVE TO RESPOND BY A CERTAIN TIME. >> I'M ASSUMING THAT THERE WAS SOME REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS, AND THESE WERE THE MOST QUALIFIED. >> THESE WERE THE ONLY TWO RESPONSES. >> THE OTHER THING TOO IS THAT [INAUDIBLE] WILL TELL YOU WHEN WE GO FOR REIMBURSEMENT AFTER A HURRICANE AND STUFF, PREPOSITION CONTRACTS ARE A MUST. THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS BID PROCESS AND ALL THAT STUFF. >> THERE'S FEDERAL CLAUSES ATTACHED TO THESE. >> EXACTLY. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT MAKES THE CITY MORE NIMBLE IN RESPONDING. >> IT DOES. IT REALLY HELPS US. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> YES [INAUDIBLE] >> AS PART OF THAT QUALIFICATION, IS THERE A PREDETERMINED PRICING LIKE PER SQUARE? >> WE GIVE THEM A SCENARIO, AND THEN THEY PROVIDED US A COST BASED ON THE SCENARIO. THERE'S UNIT PRICES IN IT. >> THAT UNIT PRICE IS GOOD THROUGHOUT THAT THREE YEARS? >> ABSOLUTELY. THE THREE YEARS, AND THE TWO, ONE YEAR RENEWALS. >> I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. >> GIVEN THE VOLATILITY OF ROOFING MATERIALS, THAT'S A GOOD DEAL. >> THANK YOU BUTCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON 11(Q). >> IS THIS FOR BUTCH TOO? >> NO. WE'RE DOING AN MOU IN REGARDS TO PROVIDING 911 BACKUP FOR BETTER EMERGENCY. HOW DO THEY SEPARATE THAT OUT? >> THEY HAVE TO HAVE A DESIGNATED DISPATCHER IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY, AND THAT WOULD BE US. IT'S US BY DEFAULT ANYWAY. THIS IS FORMALIZING BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO HAVE A CONTRACT WITH SOMEBODY FOR THIS EMERGENCY RESPONSE. >> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE GIVEN THE LATEST STATUTORY CHANGES FOR SCHOOL SECURITY AND HOW THEY HAVE TO MANAGE, AND ALL THAT, I BELIEVE THIS IS PART OF THAT TOO. >> THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CONTRACT. WE WOULD BE DOING IT ANYWAY. ALL THE CALLS ARE GOING TO COME INTO 911, BUT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CONTRACT WITH US TOO. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US EXPLORE THE OPPORTUNITIES, AND MORE MOUS WITH THE MULTIPLE POLICE FORCES, ESPECIALLY WITH THINGS THAT ARE CITY ORDINANCES, WHERE WE COULD HAVE MORE BACKUP WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT ADDITIONAL COST. I'D LIKE TO SEE US EXPLORE THAT ACROSS THE BOARD. I KNOW DOUG HAS STARTED TO DO IT. THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE, MARIE? >> NO. THAT'S IT. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE, 11(H), BRIAN. WOULD YOU EXPAND WHAT THAT IS, PLEASE. >> LET ME FIND IT. >> I READ THROUGH THAT BUT I'M STILL A LITTLE UNCLEAR WHAT 11(H) IS. >> BYRON IS OUT. >> I'LL TAKE IT FOR HIM. >> GOOD. WE HAVE CHIEF VARELA WITH US. CHIEF, IF YOU WILL IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE CAMERAS, PLEASE. [01:30:04] >> [INAUDIBLE] FIRE CHIEF, GALVESTON FIRE DEPARTMENT. >> 11(H) IS BASICALLY A CONTRACT SIMILAR TO WHAT BUTCH HAD AS WELL. WE HAVE SLS THEN WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE] AS OUR SECONDARY. THEY PROVIDE BASE CAMPS, NOT ONLY FOR EMPLOYEES, BUT FOR CIVILIANS AS WELL. BASICALLY A BASE CAMP IS WHAT IT IS. THEY'LL COME IN, THEY'LL PROVIDE SHELTER AND FOOD FOR EMPLOYEES POST DISASTER. >> LET ME MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. SAY WE HAVE A HURRICANE AND SO FORTH. THEY COME IN POST DISASTER AND PROVIDE A BASE CAMP. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? >> BASE CAMP IS BASICALLY GOING TO BE SHELTER. IT'D HAVE TO BE A DISASTER IN TERMS, I ALWAYS BRING IT UP, IKE. >> AS YOU RECALL, REMEMBER WE SET ONE UP AT ALAMO? >> I DO REMEMBER. IN THAT BASE CAMP, THEY PROVIDE SHELTER. DO THEY PROVIDE ANYTHING ELSE IN THIS? >> SECURITY, FOOD, BATHROOMS. SECURITY IS A BIG ONE, TOO. THEY PROVIDE LIGHTING. THERE'S MANY RESOURCES. >> IT'S A FULL OPERATIONAL MINI CITY. >> THAT IS AT OUR REQUEST THAT WE BRING THEM IN. >> CORRECT. >> WE CAN ACTIVATE THAT CONTRACT. >> YES, BOB. >> THAT THOUGH DEPENDS ON US IDENTIFYING A FACILITY LIKE WE DID ALAMO. >> WE HAVE TO FIND IT, YES. >> I WOULD ASSUME THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME PRE-ARRANGED AGREEMENTS WITH FACILITIES LIKE THAT, MAYBE WITH GISD OR SOME OTHER OWNER OF A BUILDING THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE SUCH [OVERLAPPING] >> A LOT OF IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THE NATURE OF THE EVENT, AND WHAT'S DAMAGED, AND WHAT'S FLOODED. OBVIOUSLY, IF ALAMO IS LAID OUT ACROSS THAT FIELD, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE LOCATION WE WOULD USE. IT'S GOT TO BE A LITTLE BIT FLEXIBLE, BUT YES. THE CITY HAS PROBABLY ENOUGH PROPERTY TO HANDLE THIS, BUT WE TRY TO LOCATE IT TOO WHERE THE NEED IS GOING TO BE THE MOST. >> THAT BASE CAMP, THEY PROVIDE POWER GENERATION AND ALL THAT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> ALL WE PROVIDE IS THE LOCATION. >> WE POINT THEM AND THEY GO. >> HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN WE ACCOMMODATE IN THAT? >> IT'S NUMEROUS, AND LIKE I SAID, THE NUMBER IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME. BUT THEY HAVE RESOURCES ALLOCATED THROUGHOUT THE STATE. >> IT'S IN THE HUNDREDS, BUT KEEP IN MIND IF YOU START CREEPING INTO THOSE NUMBERS THEN YOU'RE PROBABLY TAKING OTHER STEPS ABOUT FULL EVACUATION, AND POST DISASTER MOVEMENTS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH YOU'RE SEEING DONE IN NORTH CAROLINA AND OTHER AREAS RIGHT NOW. >> IT ALSO DEPENDS ON THE CAPACITY OF THE LOCATION. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. APPRECIATE IT. >> YES, BOB. >> I HAVE ONE MORE. I JUST FOUND ONE. [LAUGHTER] THIS IS 11(B) [INAUDIBLE] REMEDIATION. AS I UNDERSTAND FROM THE STAFF REPORT, THIS IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE? >> YES, SIR. >> DOES THE COMPLETION OF THIS REMEDIATION ENABLE ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES? >> YES, IT DOES. >> WOULD WE LIKE TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING, OR IS THAT FOR A LATER DATE? >> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIAL RELOCATION OF THE RECYCLING CENTER TO A MORE CONDUCIVE SITE, LESS VISIBLE FROM HIGH TRAFFIC AREAS, BUT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND BETTER SERVICE. THAT WOULD FREE UP EXISTING SPACE RIGHT NOW FOR POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR SALE. >> WHERE THE RECYCLING CENTER IS NOW. >> CORRECT. THAT AND SOME ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT'S PART OF THIS AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> THANK YOU, BOB. WE'VE GONE THROUGH OUR CLARIFICATION. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 3(B) PLEASE, MA'AM. [3.B. Discussion of the City of Galveston’s Legislative Agenda (S. Bakko - 20 min)] >> ITEM 3(B). DISCUSSION OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON'S LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. >> WE HAVE SALLY BAKKO WITH US. [NOISE] LET THE ROOM CLEAR OUT HERE. GOOD MORNING, SALLY. >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. >> GOOD MORNING. >> I'M SALLY BAKKO, DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND GOVERNMENT RELATIONS. >> JUST A SECOND, SALLY. WE'RE GOING TO LET THE ROOM CLEAR OUT. WE GOT A LITTLE NOISE GOING ON. [BACKGROUND] >> BRING UP THE LEGISLATURE AND EVERYONE LEAVES THE ROOM. [LAUGHTER] [01:35:05] >> VERY GOOD. SALLY, YOU'RE BACK AGAIN PRESENTING THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA FOR THIS COMING LEGISLATIVE YEAR AND THIS IS DONE EACH LEGISLATIVE YEAR. THIS WILL COME BACK TO US FOR APPROVAL IN NOVEMBER? >> YES, SIR. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU'RE GIVING ME THIS MORNING. I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE A VERY BUSY AGENDA TODAY, SO I'M GOING TO TRY AND FLY THROUGH THIS QUICKLY FOR YOU. FOR OUR NEW MEMBERS, OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA SERVES THREE PURPOSES. ONE ITEM IDENTIFIES ANY LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS THAT WE WANT TO ASK OUR LEGISLATORS TO FILE ON OUR BEHALF. IT IDENTIFIES POLICY PRIORITIES FOR THE CITY THAT ALLOWS US TO TAKE POSITIONS OR INFORM LEGISLATORS OF IMPACT THAT LEGISLATION MAY HAVE ON THE CITY OF GALVESTON. THAT SECOND ITEM IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE WHEN ACTION REALLY GETS STARTED IN THE LEGISLATURE, THAT IS MY GUIDANCE. THAT IS MY INSTRUCTION IN TERMS OF WHAT I CAN DO. WE TRY TO IDENTIFY PRIORITIES, BUT WE CAN'T ANTICIPATE EVERYTHING, SO THAT IS OUR THIRD PIECE, WHICH IS A CATCH ALL PROVISIONS THAT I CALL IMPACTING HOME RULE OR UNFUNDED MANDATES, THAT TYPE OF THING. >> COUNSEL, EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING. WHAT WE'LL DO IS LET SALLY GO THROUGH HER ENTIRE PRESENTATION, THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS ON THAT. >> THAT'S WHY I'M GOING TO TRY AND BE AS FAST AS POSSIBLE. >> READ A LITTLE BIT. [LAUGHTER] >> THIS SLIDE IS SIMPLY TO INDICATE THE CHALLENGES YOU FACE IN TRYING TO PASS A BILL, MOST BILLS DIE. BUT THE CITY OF GALVESTON WAS SUCCESSFUL. WE WERE ABLE TO GET A VERY IMPORTANT BILL PASSED, WHICH WAS OUR EMERGENCY LINE OF CREDIT FINANCING BILL THAT ELIMINATED THE REQUIREMENT FOR A CREDIT REPORT BEFORE EXERCISING OUR EMERGENCY FINANCING AFTER A STORM. THAT WAS A REALLY CRITICAL PIECE OF LEGISLATION. [OVERLAPPING] >> BEG YOUR PARDON. >> TERRI [INAUDIBLE] >> YES. SHE WAS A MAVERICK FOR US. BOTH SHE AND SENATOR MIDDLETON WERE VERY HELPFUL ON THAT LEGISLATION. THIS GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHEN THINGS START. PRE-FILING STARTS ON NOVEMBER 11TH. ONCE PRE-FILING STARTS, YOU'RE GOING TO NOTICE IN MY WEEKLY REPORTS A SECOND ATTACHMENT WHICH WILL IDENTIFY BILLS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED THAT ARE EITHER OF INTEREST TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON OR HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE CITY. I DO THE BEST I CAN IN IDENTIFYING THINGS SPECIFIC TO GALVESTON, BEING A COASTAL COMMUNITY, BUT I ALSO DRAW UPON BILL SUMMARIES THAT ARE PREPARED BY TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE AS WELL. ALL I CAN SAY THERE IS, IF YOU HAVE TIME TO GO THROUGH THOSE LIST OF BILLS THAT ARE FILED, IF YOU SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING. I CAN ONLY PROTECT WHAT I KNOW AND DEFEND AGAINST WHAT I KNOW, SO THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. >> JUST TO MENTION, YOU COULD ALSO GO IN AND THEN THE STATE SITE, ONCE YOU REGISTER, YOU CAN PUT WHEN AREAS OF INTEREST MIGHT SHOW UP, AND YOU CAN ALSO TRIGGER THAT YOU WOULD BE NOTIFIED OF A BILL. >> BUT BY WEEKLY REPORTS, WE'LL TRACK BILLS AND WE'LL IDENTIFY FOR YOUR COMMITTEE HEARINGS AND WHEN THOSE BILLS OF INTEREST COME UP FOR A HEARING. THE FIRST 60 DAYS OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION LIMITS THE LEGISLATURE AND WHAT THEY CAN DO. IT IS BASICALLY GOING TO BE RESOLUTIONS AND ANY EMERGENCY ITEMS THAT THE GOVERNOR WILL IDENTIFY. FOR OUR LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS, OR OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, IT IS FOR THE MOST PART, THE SAME AGENDA THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN ON PRIOR COUNCILS HAVE SEEN BEFORE, THE CITY IS CONTINUING OUR SUPPORT FOR FUNDING FOR THE COASTAL TEXAS PROJECT, FUNDING FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT, STATE FUNDING INVESTMENT IN OUR PORTS, OUR SCHOOL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAFETY. WE'RE ASKING FOR STATE SUPPORT FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACHES TO CRISIS RESPONSE WITH OUR POLICE TEAMS. WE'RE SUPPORTING OUR PERFORMANCE-BASED COLLEGE FORMULA SYSTEM THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE LAST SESSION, [01:40:02] AND SUPPORTING FUNDING FOR THE STATE FLOOD INFRASTRUCTURE FUND. WE'RE CONTINUING OUR SUPPORT FOR LEGISLATION TO STRENGTHEN LAWS TO REDUCE DRUNK-DRIVING AND REMOVE IMPEDIMENTS TO PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS MOST IMPORTANTLY, PROTECT LOCAL GOVERNANCE OVER SHORT-TERM RENTALS, PREVENT PREEMPTION, AS WELL AS ALLOW USE OF LOCAL HOT REVENUES TO ASSIST WITH CRITICAL SERVICES TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. OUR LEGISLATIVE REQUEST. THIS IS THE LEGISLATIVE REQUEST THAT WE PUT FORWARD LAST SESSION. WE ALMOST GOT THERE. WE DIDN'T MAKE IT TO THE FLOOR BEFORE THE DEADLINE AT THE END OF SESSION, SO THE BILL FAILED. WE HAVE THAT ON OUR DRAFT AGENDA AGAIN. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE TO MEET WITH STAFF. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT COURTESY TO GET THEIR INPUT. THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE CANNOT ADVOCATE OR OPPOSE LEGISLATION. THEY ACT AS RESOURCE WITNESSES FOR LEGISLATORS DURING THE SESSION, SO WE WANT TO ESTABLISH THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM EARLY ON THIS. THEN THE IDEAS, THEY WERE VERY HELPFUL TO US IN DRAFTING THE BILL LANGUAGE THAT WE FINALLY ENDED UP WITH LAST SESSION. WE WANT TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT OUR INTEREST IN REFILING THAT BILL LANGUAGE THAT THEY HELPED US DRAFT. I'M GOING TO IDENTIFY AND READ THE ITEMS THAT ARE NEW TO THE AGENDA AND MAYBE POINT OUT JUST A COUPLE OF CONCERNS. AN ITEM THAT'S NEW TO THE AGENDA IS THE DEFINITION OF DEBT FOR THE PURPOSES OF CALCULATING YOUR VOTER APPROVAL RATE. THIS IS VERY CONCERNING BECAUSE WHAT HAD BEEN FILED LAST SESSION WAS REVISING THAT DEFINITION OF DEBT TO ONLY VOTER APPROVED DEBT. THAT CAUSES A LOT OF PROBLEMS FOR US WITH OUR LINE OF CREDIT THAT WE HAVE TO ESTABLISH FOR OUR EMERGENCY FINANCING. WE HAD $80 MILLION IN DEBRIS REMOVAL AFTER HURRICANE NIGEL. IF YOU PUT THAT IN TODAY'S DOLLARS, THAT WOULD BE $200 MILLION. IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE THAT EMERGENCY FINANCING AVAILABLE TO US TO EXERCISE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AFTER A STORM. SENATOR MIDDLETON WAS VERY HELPFUL LAST SESSION IN DEVELOPING LANGUAGE FOR A COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE IN THAT BILL. BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE HAS MANY SIGNIFICANT PRIORITIES THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THIS COMING SESSION, BUT THE TWO THAT WE'RE HEARING THE MOST ABOUT IS SCHOOL CHOICE AND PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. I FEEL FAIRLY CONFIDENT THAT THIS ISSUE WILL COME UP AS WELL AS CONTINUING OUR PROTECTION OF OUR 3.5% EXCEPTION DUE TO NATURAL DISASTERS. THERE HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE OF FOLKS, CITIES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS USING THAT IN THE WAY IT WAS NOT INTENDED, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE COMMUNICATING THE CRITICAL NEED FOR THAT EXCEPTION FOR GALVESTON. THE OTHER ITEM IS EMERGENCY GENERATOR REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR COMMUNITY FACILITIES. NOW, THIS IS AN INTERESTING ITEM BECAUSE THE LAST TWO SESSIONS, REPRESENTATIVE ED THOMPSON HAS TAKEN THE LEADERSHIP IN FILING A BILL THAT WOULD REQUIRE NURSING HOMES AND ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES TO HAVE EMERGENCY GENERATORS TO KEEP THESE FACILITIES OPERATING. NURSING HOMES OPERATE UNDER MEDICARE, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY REQUIRE FULL OPERATION OF THE FACILITY. IT REQUIRES CERTAIN ELEMENTS THAT ARE MOST ESSENTIAL. THIS WOULD. NOW, IN THE PAST, WE'VE HAD INSTANCES WHERE INDUSTRY FOLKS HAVE RESISTED THIS LEGISLATION DUE TO THE COST. THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THEN, WE HAVE A ENERGY FUND THAT WAS CREATED LAST SESSION. PART OF THAT ENERGY FUND INCLUDES $1.8 BILLION THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE FOR GRANTS AND LOANS, FOR EMERGENCY GENERATOR TYPE PACKAGES. SENATOR MIDDLETON HAS BEEN A PARTICIPANT ON THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT WAS SET UP TO ASSIST THE PUC, THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION, [01:45:01] AND THE RULE MAKING ON THAT FUNDING. I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH HURRICANE BERYL AND THE STATEWIDE, NATIONWIDE ATTENTION THAT THAT DREW, THAT WE HAVE PROBABLY A BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE THIS LEGISLATION, AND WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY TAKE A POSITION ON IT. >> HAVEN'T THE LEGISLATORS ALREADY MANDATED LIKE [INAUDIBLE] AND THE DIFFERENT COMPANIES TO BE DOING THIS ALREADY? >> WHAT IS MANDATED THERE IS THE ORDER IN WHICH POWER IS RESTORED. IT'S CRITICAL SERVICES. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> NO. THERE IS NO STATE LAW THAT REQUIRES EMERGENCY GENERATORS BE IN PLACE FOR ASSISTED LIVING. >> [INAUDIBLE] MEETINGS AFTER BERYL THAT THEY HAVE. >> THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION. THE COMMITTEE DEFINITELY HAS PUT FORWARD RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADD TO THOSE CRITICAL SERVICES, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES, NURSING HOMES, DIALYSIS CENTERS. THERE ARE SEVERAL ADDITIONAL TYPES OF SERVICES THAT WOULD BE ADDED. >> SALLY, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT. GO AHEAD. >> ANOTHER AREA THAT THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING TO BE TAKING A CLOSE LOOK AT HAS BEEN AN ISSUE IN BOTH CHAMBERS DURING THE INTERIM, AND THAT IS THE AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING. THAT PRESENTS TO US BOTH OPPORTUNITY AND CHALLENGE. IT PRESENTS OPPORTUNITY FOR US BECAUSE INSURANCE IS ONE OF THOSE COSTS THAT IMPACTS THE AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING. WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT INSURANCE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY CASUALTY, BUT YOU'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT WINDSTORM. THIS PRESENTS TO US AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURAL CHANGES TO [INAUDIBLE] UNDER THAT UMBRELLA OF TRYING TO ADVANCE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY. I JUST BRING THAT UP. THE OTHER ITEM THAT I WOULD BRING UP OBVIOUSLY, AND HERE'S THE CHALLENGE, IS THE PREEMPTION ON LOCAL REGULATIONS OVER THINGS LIKE LOT SIZE, BUILDING CODES, PERMITTING. THIS IS DEFINITELY COMING UP. WE HAVE BATTLED THIS IN THE PAST, PARTICULARLY MINIMUM LOT SIZES, AND WE HAVE EVERY EXPECTATION TO SEE THAT BACK AGAIN. OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE GOING TO BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. THIS IS THE VIEWPOINT WE TOOK LAST SESSION. IF YOU HAVE DEVELOPERS COMING IN, SLICING AND DICING UP LOT SIZES TO 1,400 SQUARE FEET, AND THEN TURNING AROUND AND PLACING THEM ON AIRBNB, YOU HAVE NOT HELPED WITH THE AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING IN GALVESTON. IN FACT, YOU'VE MADE IT WORSE. THE NEW ITEM THAT YOU SEE HERE IS PROMOTING BEST PRACTICES FOR SUSTAINABLE PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEMS. THIS IS AN AREA THAT THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD HAS SPENT THE LAST YEAR LOOKING AT BEST PRACTICES FOR PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEMS, AND THIS JUST GIVES US A GENERAL OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON THE ISSUE AS WE SEE THINGS. >> WE HAD THIS IN LAST YEAR AND WE REMOVED IT. I KNOW THAT OUR FIREMEN ARE OPPOSED TO THIS BECAUSE THEY FEEL LIKE IT TAKES AWAY SOME OF THEIR ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE. WE HAVE REMOVED THIS BEFORE AS COUNCIL. >> WHAT WE REMOVED WAS OUR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION THAT WE HAD INCLUDED. WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS IN A GENERAL VIEWPOINT. WHAT THE PRB DID THIS LAST YEAR WAS ENGAGE WITH STAKEHOLDERS, AND THAT INCLUDED FIRE. >> SPELL WHAT PRB IS FOR. >> PENSION REVIEW BOARD. THAT IS WHERE THEY ENGAGED WITH STAKEHOLDERS, FIREFIGHTERS, POLICE. WE'VE HAD TREMENDOUS SUCCESS WITH THE POLICE PENSION REFORM LEGISLATION THAT WE HAD ENACTED IN [01:50:02] 2019 IN HELPING TO REDUCE THE UNFUNDED LIABILITY OF THOSE PENSION SYSTEMS. THE LOCAL FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT ACT IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE SOME BEST PRACTICES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT COULD BE USEFUL FOR HELPING THOSE SYSTEMS THAT ARE A BIT UNDER THE WATER, SO TO SPEAK. THIS SIMPLY IS AN ABILITY FOR US TO, LIKE I SAID, WEIGH IN ON GALVESTON'S EXPERIENCES AND WHAT WE HAVE FOUND TO BE BEST PRACTICES. >> WHAT WE HAVE FOUND OR WHAT THE COLLECTIVE TEAM HAS FOUND? >> WELL, THIS WOULD BE IN RESPONSE TO ANY BILLS FILED. LIKE I SAID, THE PRB WILL BE SUBMITTING LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AS PART OF THEIR BIANNUAL REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE. SHOULD ANY BILLS BE FILED FROM THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, THIS JUST GIVES GALVESTON OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON HOW IT IMPACTS US AND WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE. IT IS NOT INTENDED TO ISOLATE. IT IS SIMPLY INTENDED TO GIVE US OPPORTUNITY. WITHOUT IT ON THE AGENDA, WE CAN'T SAY ANYTHING. IF IT'S BAD, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO STAY SOMETHING. [LAUGHTER] >> THIS NEXT NEW ITEM THAT YOU SEE IS MAINTAINING AN EFFECTIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE. SINCE 2019, THIS PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS BEEN APPOINTED BY THREE MEMBERS FROM THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, THREE MEMBERS FROM THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE AND THREE MEMBERS FROM THE GOVERNOR. THIS HAS PROVEN TO BE VERY EFFECTIVE, BOTH IN THE DIVERSITY THAT YOU HAVE ON THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE ABILITY TO ADDRESS UNIQUE CONCERNS LIKE A COASTAL ISLAND LIKE GALVESTON THAT RELIES UPON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION WITH HIGH VOLUME TOURISM. THE CITY OF GALVESTON WE HAVE JAMES OLIVER, WHO SITS ON THIS COMMITTEE AND IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY HAVE SOME INPUT, AND IT GIVES THE LEGISLATURE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE INPUT AS WELL. WE'RE JUST MAKING A STATEMENT THAT WE NEED TO SUSTAIN THAT STRUCTURE. IT HAS WORKED WELL AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE OTHER THAN QUESTIONS. HOW DID I DO? >> YOU DID GREAT. >> PRETTY GOOD BY SALLY STANDARDS. [LAUGHTER] >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SALLY. VERY GOOD. >> I WASN'T SURE IF THAT'S [INAUDIBLE] >> I KNOW. [LAUGHTER] >> USUALLY, SHE CAN DRONE ON. >> COUPLE OF THINGS HERE. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, SALLY. AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT ACCENTUATING THOSE AREAS THAT ARE IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IN THE PAST, DID A GREAT JOB WITH THAT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON THIS. BACK TO THE GENERATOR SITUATION. >> YES, SIR. >> I THINK THIS IS WORDED. WE'LL REQUIRE ALL NURSING FACILITIES AND ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES. [NOISE] WILL THAT DEFINITION COVER GULF BREEZE AND HOLIDAY HOUSE HERE ON THE ISLAND? THEY'RE NOT ASSISTED LIVING, NO? >> NO, SIR. THOSE ARE INDEPENDENT LIVING. >> THAT'S WHERE WE HAD OUR PROBLEMS HERE DURING THE STORM. SO MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY OF INCLUDING INFORMATION, DEFINITIONS IN HERE ARE DESCRIPTIONS THAT WOULD COVER THOSE FACILITIES. >> MY RECOLLECTION IS THOSE ARE HUD INDEPENDENT LIVING SENIOR HOUSING UNITS. >> THEY ARE. >> OKAY. NOW YOU'RE TALKING FEDERAL. WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO CONGRESS TO GET THAT. >> SO THERE'S NO WAY THAT THAT CAN BE COVERED IN THESE [INAUDIBLE]? >> NO. HUD GOVERNS WHAT'S REQUIRED WITH THOSE UNITS. >> OKAY. THIS WOULDN'T BE JUST STRICTLY STATE. OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA WOULD WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH WEBBER. >> WELL, I'VE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THEM, AND OBVIOUSLY WE CAN PURSUE THAT WITH CONGRESSMAN WEBBER, ABSOLUTELY. >> IS THERE SOME WAY OF GETTING WORDING IN HERE? >> THE WORDING WOULD PROBABLY BE LIKE WITHIN THE COASTAL ZONE OR SOMETHING OF THAT STANDARD, I THINK THAT WOULD BE [OVERLAPPING] [01:55:02] >> I CAN ADD INDEPENDENT LIVING AND ALSO INCLUDE STATE AND FEDERAL. >> IF WE COULD, BECAUSE THAT'S THE PROBLEM WE HAD AND IT WAS AN ISSUE THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE WELL AWARE OF. >> I THINK EVERYBODY WAS AT SOME POINT, HAD THAT COME UP TO THEM? >> YES, SIR. >> I'M JUST ADVISING YOU. IT'S A CHALLENGE ONE AND IT IS A HUD PROJECT BECAUSE THAT'S A FINANCED HUD PROJECT, AND THE STATE DOESN'T GOVERN WHAT HAPPENS THERE. JUST AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THAT IN THE BACK OF YOU. >> NO, I UNDERSTAND. AS COUNCILMAN PORRETTO SAID THOUGH, IF WE COULD ANSWER. >> CERTAINLY. ABSOLUTELY. >> EVEN IF WE WANT TO PINPOINT COASTAL COMMUNITIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> I WAS IN THE COASTAL ZONE BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY WE'VE SEEN THE STORMS IN FLORIDA AND THIS YEAR WAS PRETTY [INAUDIBLE] >> AND THIS ISN'T MEANT TO JUST BE EXCLUSIVE TO GALVESTON. >> NO, IT'S LEGISLATIVE ACROSS THE BOARD. I UNDERSTAND. >> FOR EVERYBODY. >> YEAH. BUT IF WE COULD INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT WOULD COVER ALSO, EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE FEDERAL, THOSE OPERATIONS THAT ARE NEAR AND DEAR TO OUR HEART HERE IN GALVESTON WITH THE HOLIDAY HOUSE AND GULF BREEZE. >> IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH YOU, I JUST WILL ADD LANGUAGE RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE FEDERAL PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE INDEPENDENT LIVING THAT WE WOULD SEEK. >> ALSO, I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE LANGUAGES, COUNCILMAN PORRETTO SAID, WE COULD ISOLATE THAT TO COASTAL ZONES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. I DON'T WANT THIS THING TO TRIGGER SOMETHING ALL OVER THE NATION, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING. >> WELL, ACTUALLY, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO LOBBY CONGRESS, YOU DO WANT TO TRIGGER SOMETHING. [LAUGHTER] >> I WOULD BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. I THINK OTHER COASTAL COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE NATION WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT TOO. >> MAY I SAY THOUGH WHEN TRYING TO ADVANCE SOMETHING, YOU WANT TO BUILD AS LARGE A COALITION AS POSSIBLE. SO I WOULD AVOID LIMITING IT TO COASTAL COMMUNITIES. I WOULD OPEN THE NET WIDE AND SAY, NATURAL DISASTERS IMPACT EVERYBODY AND THIS IS A THREAT FOR SENIORS LIVING IN INDEPENDENT LIVING SITUATIONS FUNDED VIA FEDERAL HOUSING PROGRAMS. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT IF COUNCIL IS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE INCLUDE THAT. WE HAVE BOB AND THEN RAWLINS. >> WELL, FLORIDA ALREADY DOES THIS AND THE GENERATORS WE HAVE AT THESE PLACES NOW REALLY ONLY SUPPORT OXYGEN MACHINES OR EQUIPMENT. BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SUPPORTING AIR CONDITIONERS AND ELEVATORS AND HEATERS IF IT'S IN THE WINTER, THINGS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS THAT CAUSE PROBLEMS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> YES. >> AND FLORIDA ALREADY DOES THIS. >> YEAH. >> MAYBE THERE'S A MODEL THERE HOWEVER THEY HANDLED IT THAT WE COULD LOOK AT AND SEE. >> I CAN LOOK AND SEE HOW THEY HANDLE INDEPENDENT LIVING. THEY HAVE ADDED TO WHAT MEDICARE REQUIRES. WHICH IS WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE OXYGEN AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND YES, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, FLORIDA HAS IT FOR BOTH ASSISTED LIVING AND NURSING HOMES. BUT I CAN ALSO LOOK AND SEE WHAT THEY DO WITH INDEPENDENT LIVING. >> YEAH. >> COULD THAT JUST BE A STATE REQUIREMENT BASED ON ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES ACROSS THE BOARD? >> THE GOAL IS ASSISTED LIVING. >> DOES THAT CROSS THE LINE OF THE FEDERAL REGULATION ASPECT? >> I FEEL LIKE I'M CONFUSING HERE. YOU'VE GOT NURSING HOMES, ASSISTED LIVING, WHICH ARE DEFINED IN STATUTE. NURSING HOMES ARE OFTEN RECIPIENTS OF MEDICARE. ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES ARE NOT REGULATED BY MEDICARE AND THEN YOU HAVE INDEPENDENT LIVING, INDEPENDENT LIVING FOR SENIORS THAT IS BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC. >> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. >> INDEPENDENT PROJECTS THAT ARE PUBLIC OR VIA HUD TYPICALLY. >> DO YOU REALLY KNOW WHERE WE WANT TO GO WITH? >> I THINK SO. >> I STILL HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I AGREE WITH YOU. SURELY I DON'T THINK THIS FALLS ON THE STATE SHOULDERS. WHEN DOES THE HOUSING AUTHORITY PICK UP A RESPONSIBILITY? TO ME, I WAS APPALLED BY THE SITUATION THAT HAPPENED THERE AT HOLLAND HOUSE AND YET, GHA WAS NEVER RESPONSIBLE FOR IT AND NOW WE'RE WRITING IT INTO STATE LEGISLATIVE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE COVERED BY FEDERAL AUTHORITY. [02:00:01] >> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE CHANGING. >> BUT MORE SO WE HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION THAT WAS ALLOWED TO EXIST. >> CORRECT. THERE'S TWO ISSUES HERE, BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS AMENDING THAT TO INCLUDE FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS OF INDEPENDENT LIVING OR WHATEVER. AND THAT WOULD BE CARRIED FORWARD WITH OUR FEDERAL ELECTED. >> YEAH. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID THAT THERE IS POSSIBLY GOING TO BE 1.8 BILLION IN GRANTS AND LOANS AVAILABLE, I GUESS THIS APPLICATION OF THIS WOULD APPLY REGULATORY TO NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND TO EXISTING CONSTRUCTION, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS 1.8 BILLION DOLLAR [INAUDIBLE] >> NOT NECESSARILY. PUC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RULE MAKING ON US, AND SO NO, IT'S NOT LIMITED TO NEW CONSTRUCTION. THEY'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS EXISTING FACILITIES OUT THERE. >> EXISTING FACILITIES, AND AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON EXISTING FACILITIES BUDGET, BUT THAT CAN BE MITIGATED BY THAT $1.8 BILLION THAT LOANS GRANT. >> WELL, THAT'S WHY I FEEL A LITTLE MORE HOPEFUL THIS SESSION BECAUSE THEIR MAJOR CONCERN IN THE PAST TWO SESSIONS HAS BEEN THE COST AND WITH THIS IN PLACE THAT MITIGATES SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS AND WE MIGHT HAVE A BETTER OPPORTUNITY. >> IS THAT 1.8 BILLION STATE MONEY OR FEDERAL MONEY? >> IT'S STATE MONEY. >> STATE MONEY. OKAY. >> I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION, CHANGING GEARS A LITTLE BIT. I'M STILL UNCLEAR ON THIS BEST PRACTICES ISSUE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS. BEST PRACTICES THAT TERM APPARENTLY MEANS SOMETHING MORE THAN JUST ADDITIONS TO THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM, WHAT DOES BEST PRACTICES MEAN? >> BEST PRACTICES MEANS, YOU'RE FUNDING DECISION MAKING, ARE YOU FOLLOWING A CLOSED 30 YEAR ACTUARIALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION. >> ARE YOU IN LINE WITH THE OTHER MAJOR PENSION PLANS ACROSS THE STATE? >> THE GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION HAS SEVERAL BEST PRACTICES IN THIS AREA THAT MANY PUBLIC RETIREMENT SYSTEMS FOLLOW. >> WELL, THAT'S MY QUESTION. I GUESS THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD. >> YES, SIR. >> HAS APPROVED CERTAIN CRITERIA FOR PENSION PLANS THAT ARE CONCERNED OR THAT ARE CONSIDERED BEST PRACTICES? >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. SO THAT'S BEST PRACTICES IS REALLY MORE OF APPROVED BY SOME FORMAL ORGANIZATION ON HOW THESE [OVERLAPPING] >> FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS? >> WELL, IT CAN BE INDUSTRY TOO. >> THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. AT ONE POINT, DO YOU SAY BEST PRACTICES WAS IN THERE SO WE CAN RESPOND TO ANYTHING. IT'S REALLY MORE THOSE THAT ARE COMING FROM THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD OR OTHER ORGANIZED ORGANIZATIONS ON THAT. >> LET ME JUST LOOK AT THIS REAL QUICK. >> WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING AT, SALLY, BACK TO COUNCILWOMAN ROB STODDS, WE HAD REMOVED THAT LAST GO ROUND. AND WOULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT WE REMOVED LAST GO? >> LET ME BACK UP. >> LET ME ASK A QUESTION AS SHE ANSWERS THAT. IF YOU READ THE LAST SENTENCE IN THIS, THE CITY OF GALVESTON SUPPORTS THE EFFORT OF THE TEXAS [NOISE] LEGISLATOR TO INCORPORATE BEST PRACTICES IN ITS PUBLIC [NOISE] EMPOWERMENT SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION, WHICH IN A SENSE, THEN IS LETTING THE STATE LAW RULE HOW WE DEAL WITH PENSIONS, WHERE NOW IT'S A NEGOTIATION BETWEEN TWO PARTIES. >> NOT NECESSARILY. WHEN YOU HAVE FIREFIGHTERS PENSION SYSTEMS FOR SOME LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, GALVESTON BEING ONE OF THEM, WE FALL UNDER THE LOCAL FIREFIGHTER RETIREMENT ACT. SEVERAL OTHER CITIES, HOWEVER, FALL UNDER THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT SYSTEM. WE DO NOT BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL CITIES, NOT SEVERAL, I THINK IT'S 18 CITIES OUT THERE THAT FALL UNDER THE FIREFIGHTERS ACT. SO IN THAT REGARD, YES, THE STATE DOES GOVERN. >> BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THE ORGANIZATION THAT YOU SAID THAT GOVERNS OUR FIREFIGHTERS, WHAT IS THAT NAME OF THAT ORGANIZATION? >> IT'S NOT AN ORGANIZATION. [02:05:02] >> WHAT IS IT? >> IT'S AN ACT. >> THE TEXAS LOCAL FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT ACT. >> IS THAT BEST PRACTICES? >> THAT IS STATUTE. >> NO. BUT WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED THERE? >> NO, IT'S NOT. IT'S A VERY ANTIQUATED STATUTE THAT THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD IS TRYING TO IMPROVE UPON WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS. >> THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. >> SO THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE WHAT I HAVE HERE, EDUCATION AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR BOARD MEMBERS SO THAT YOU HAVE SOME EXPERTISE WITH BOARD MEMBERS, A BALANCED BOARD GOVERNANCE SO THAT WE HAVE EQUITY IN THAT DECISION MAKING. >> WELL, BUT THE STATUTE THAT YOU REFERRED TO, THEN BEST PRACTICES, IF WE PUT THIS IN HERE, WE WOULD BE THAT MEANS FOLLOWING THE PENSION REVIEW BOARDS CRITERIA. >> NO, SIR. WE DON'T MENTION PENSION REVIEW BOARDS. >> I UNDERSTAND. BUT WHAT CRITERIA BEST PRACTICES, WHO DETERMINES THAT? >> SIR, ARE YOU TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM FOLLOWING THE ACT? >> WE ARE TRYING TO PARTICIPATE IN A DISCUSSION THAT MAY COME UP DURING SESSION TO IMPROVE UPON THE ACT, TO MODERNIZE THE ACT. >> THERE ARE 42 CITIES. >> I DON'T THINK IT'S 42. I THINK IT'S EIGHT. >> IT'S 42. >> IS IT 42 THAT FALL UNDER TELFRA? >> FALL UNDER THE ACT, YES. >> NOT ALL ARE STRUGGLING, BUT MANY ARE UNDER THE EXISTING ACT. >> OURS ISN'T STRUGGLING. THEY ARE STRUGGLING? >> NOT AS LONG AS YOU CAN PUT MONEY IN IT? >> I THINK ONE WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS IS FROM WHAT I'VE LEARNED FROM THE DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE GONE ON. IT'S CRITICAL THAT YOU HAVE A BOARD THAT HAS THE EXPERTISE AND KNOWLEDGE NEEDED TO MAKE DECISION MAKING THAT IMPACTS NOT JUST YOUR FIREFIGHTERS, BUT THE CITIZENS THAT PAY THE TAXES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THOSE PENSION SYSTEMS. >> CORRECT. >> SECOND, THAT YOU ARE USING ACTUARIALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTION DETERMINATIONS THAT WILL SUSTAIN A HEALTHY SYSTEM. YOU DON'T WANT A SOCIAL SECURITY. >> YOU DON'T WANT TO END UP WITH SOCIAL SECURITY. YOU WANT A SUSTAINABLE PENSION SYSTEM? >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. MARIE. >> I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO CRAIG'S QUESTION ON WHAT LANGUAGE DID WE EXACTLY REMOVE LAST YEAR? BECAUSE FROM WHAT I REMEMBER, IT WAS VERY SIMILAR TO THIS. >> THIS DOES NOT GO INTO DETAIL IN TERMS OF WHAT, THE LET ME BACK UP SOME BECAUSE WHAT WE HAD IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA GOING INTO 2019 WAS VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE WITH REGARDS TO PENSION REFORMS. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS FOCUSED ON OUR POLICE PENSION. WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THAT LEGISLATION ADOPTED. WHAT WE CARRIED FORWARD TO 2021, SINCE POLICE WAS TAKEN CARE OF, WAS THE STRUCTURE OF THAT SUCCESS AND PUTTING IT IN A MORE GENERIC FASHION IN OUR 2021 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. WE MADE THE DECISION TO TAKE THAT OUT FOR THE 2023 AGENDA, RECOGNIZING THAT THE POLICE PENSION SYSTEM WAS TAKEN CARE OF, AND WE JUST REMOVED THAT FROM THE AGENDA. WITH THE ACTIVITY THAT'S BEEN GOING ON AND THE STAKEHOLDER DISCUSSIONS, THERE WAS STAKEHOLDER GROUPS THAT WERE SET UP, AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THIS BECAUSE FIREFIGHTERS FROM OTHER CITIES, THIS WAS OVER A YEAR LONG PROCESS THAT PRB WENT THROUGH. >> BUT THESE WERE FIREFIGHTER GROUPS THAT ARE UNDER THE ACT? >> YES, MA'AM. AS A RESULT, THE TEXAS PENSION REVIEW BOARD FEELS LIKE THEY HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY CAN PUT IN PLACE TO BE HELPFUL TO THE LEGISLATURE AND LOOKING AT THE TEXAS LOCAL FIREFIGHTERS RETIREMENT ACT, BECAUSE MOST LEGISLATORS RECOGNIZE THE STATUTE NEEDS TO BE FIXED. >> LET'S GO TO THE BOTTOM LINE. [02:10:01] IF WE'RE KEEPING THE WORDING AS WE HAVE, IF THE FIREFIGHTERS AND THE ACT HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON THAT, THAT STILL ALLOWS THE CITY TO CONSIDER THAT AS WE SUPPORT CHANGES. >> ABSOLUTELY. ANYTHING ON THIS AGENDA? >> ALSO PUT UNDER ANY STATE LEGISLATIVE. WE'RE SAYING WE'RE SUPPORTING THE DIRECTION OF THE STATE LEGISLATOR. NOT NECESSARILY HOW OUR FIREFIGHTERS MAY FEEL. >> NO. WE'RE SUPPORTING EFFORTS BY THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO IDENTIFY BEST PRACTICES IS WHAT. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> WE'RE SUPPORTING EFFORTS BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE TO INCORPORATE BEST PRACTICES. WE'RE SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO IMPROVE STATUTE GOVERNING THESE PUBLIC RETIREMENT PENSION SYSTEMS SO THAT THEY'RE SUSTAINABLE. >> I KNOW, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SIDE OF WHY I HAVE TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES BECAUSE WHAT BRIAN MIGHT THINKS BEST PRACTICES AND WHAT >> BRIAN DIDN'T SAY BEST PRACTICES. >> I KNOW BUT UNION BOARD OF THE FIREMEN, THEY MAY HAVE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IDEAS. >> LET ME BACK UP A LITTLE BIT. BECAUSE THIS WOULD BE ON OUR AGENDA, ANY BILLS FILED HAVING TO DO WITH PUBLIC PENSION SYSTEMS, ESPECIALLY THE TEXAS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE BILL IS, I WOULD IDENTIFY IT. IT WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED IN MY WEEKLY REPORTS THAT YOU GET ON BILLS FILED THAT WEEK, AND I WOULD BE HIGHLIGHTING IT IN MY TRACKING AS ON COMMITTEE HEARINGS. THIS COUNCIL WOULD BE INFORMED OF ANYTHING FILED, ANY IMPACT THAT IT HAS ON ANY ONE OF OUR PENSION SYSTEMS, NOT JUST FIREFIGHTERS, AND ANY ACTION THAT THE LEGISLATURE MIGHT TAKE WITH REGARDS TO HOLDING A HEARING ON THE BILL. >> THIS BRINGS UP A PROCEDURAL QUESTION AND I NEED GUIDANCE ON THIS. LET'S SAY THE BILLS ARE FIRED FILED AND THAT INVOLVES THIS BEST PRACTICES AND SO FORTH AND THERE'S A RESPONSE FROM THE CITY. DOES THAT RESPONSE COME FROM STAFF OR COME FROM COUNCIL? >> I FOLLOW CITY MANAGEMENT DIRECTION. [LAUGHTER] I DO WHAT THEY TELL. >> THAT'S A QUESTION. >> DEPEND ON THE SITUATION, HERE. WHY WOULDN'T WE SUPPORT THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOLLOWING BEST PRACTICES? >> I'M NOT SAYING WE WOULDN'T. I'M JUST SAYING PROCEDURALLY ON THESE THINGS. WHEN A BILL IS FILED AND SOMETIMES THEY'RE FILED AND IT DOESN'T FIT EXACTLY INTO THESE THINGS, BUT WE HAVE THE LATITUDE THAT WE DO RESPOND TO IT BECAUSE OF THIS. HOW DOES THAT MOVE? DOES STAFF DETERMINE THE RESPONSE FOR THE CITY TO THAT BILL OR DOES THAT COME TO COUNCIL FOR? >> I WILL TELL YOU WHAT MY PRACTICE IS DURING SESSION, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE SOMETHING HAS COME UP. THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, EITHER BY FOLKS IN AUSTIN OR ONE OF YOU MAYBE. I WILL LOOK AT THE AGENDA. IF I CAN FIND AN AREA ON THE AGENDA WHERE WE HAVE TAKEN A POSITION GREAT. IF I CAN, AND I HAVE TO GO TO ONE OF OUR CATCH ALL PROVISIONS, THEN WHAT I DO IS I GO TO CITY MANAGEMENT AND I SAY, THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP. THIS IS A CONCERN. THIS IS THE POSITION I THINK WE CAN TAKE. BUT HOW DO YOU INSTRUCT THAT I GO FORWARD? >> SALLY WILL UPDATE YOU GUYS WEEKLY. >> NO. BUT THE FORMAL GO AHEAD OF THE ACTUAL RESPONSE WAY I UNDERSTAND AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S GOOD OR BAD COMES CURRENTLY FROM STAFF. >> CORRECT. >> WE DON'T MEET OFTEN ENOUGH TO YOU'D HAVE TO BE MEETING EVERY DAY DURING THE STAFF. >> THAT'S A LOGISTICS THING. YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. BUT I THINK COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE IN THE LOOP IN SOME WAY ON THIS. >> YOU ARE. >> WELL, YOU ARE IN THE LOOP. >> RECEIVE THE UPDATE. BUT IF IT COMES DOWN TO A CRITICAL ISSUE, I THINK WE SHOULD BE NOTIFIED. >> IF IT'S QUIET, I DO TWO THINGS DURING SESSION. YOU GET WEEKLY REPORTS EVERY WEEK, IDENTIFYING BILLS THAT ARE FILED, AND IN THOSE WEEKLY REPORTS, YOU GET INFORMATION ON COMMITTEE HEARING SCHEDULED AND COMMITTEE ACTION ON BILLS THAT ARE OF INTEREST AND CONCERN TO US. EVERY WEEK DURING SESSION, YOU GET THAT. IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS A PARTICULAR CONCERN TO GALVES AND, LET'S SAY IT'S OUR BILL THAT WE REQUESTED, OR I KNOW IT'S A SPECIFIC CONCERN TO COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGEMENT, I SEND A SEPARATE EMAIL BECAUSE I KNOW NOT EVERYONE READS MY EMAILS, [02:15:02] [LAUGHTER] BUT I SEND A SEPARATE EMAIL SAYING, THIS IS HAPPENING BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER ONCE THAT 60 DAYS PASSES, THAT'S THE FIRST 60 DAYS OF SESSION AFTER THAT. THAT'S WHEN THE FUR REALLY STARTS TO FLY. THINGS HAPPEN VERY QUICKLY AND AMENDMENTS HAPPEN AND TWISTS AND TURNS CAN HAPPEN. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF ANY SIGNIFICANT ACTION THAT YOU HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. RIGHT NOW, THE STATES ONLY FOCUSES ON THE STATE PENSION SYSTEMS, THE INTERIM CHARGES. THEIR FOCUS HAS ONLY BEEN ON THE STATE PENSION SYSTEM. >> TMRS AND WHATNOT? >> WELL, NO, TMRS IS ACTUALLY VERY HEALTHY, THE EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF TEXAS. DID YOU SAY TMRS OR? YES, I'M SORRY. YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. I WAS THINKING TML THE TEACHERS. >> WELL, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT OBVIOUSLY IS ON EVERYBODY'S MIND, IF SOMETHING DOES COME UP, WE SHOULD BE PREPARED TO TAKE OR HOLD A SPECIAL MEETING, A SPECIAL MEETING. REGARDLESS, IF WE HAVE EVERYBODY HERE OR NOT AND DIRECT BRIAN TO DIRECT SALLY TO WHAT TO DO. >> SOMETIMES YOU DON'T HAVE 72 HOURS. THAT'S PROBLEM. >> WELL, THAT'S THE PROBLEM, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> WE'VE REACTED IN THE PAST TO CERTAIN COUNCIL MEMBERS ASKING US TO GO UP THERE AND TESTIFY ON A MOMENT'S NOTICE. IF THAT'S GOING TO BE THE CASE, THAT'S FOR EVERYBODY THEN. >> WELL, SAY THAT AGAIN. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. >> YOU GUYS HAD PICKED DECISIONS IN THE PAST WHERE LEGISLATION IS MOVING SO FAST AND A COUNCIL MEMBER CATCHES IT AND SAYS, WE NEED TO FILE SOMETHING ON THAT, AND WE'VE DONE THAT. ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. >> I GET IF THAT WOULD BE IN LIKE SOMEBODY CATCHES IT AND IT'S IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. BUT THIS OBVIOUSLY SEEMS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE A RIFT BETWEEN WHAT STAFF WANTS AND WHAT >> WELL, NO. I'M NOT SAYING THAT. I'M JUST SAYING PROCEDURALLY, I WANT EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENS. IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HAVE A SAY, LET'S SAY THAT COUNCIL SAYS, WE'RE FINE WITH THE PROCESS AS IT IS NOW, BUT IF SOMETHING COMES UP CONCERNING BEST PRACTICES FOR RETIREMENT SYSTEM, IF IT'S POSSIBLE, COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN. >> OF COURSE. WELL, OKAY. IF IT'S POSSIBLE, WE'LL HOLD [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU'LL BE INFORMED AS BILLS ARE FILED. YOU'LL BE INFORMED AS COMMITTEE ACTION TAKES PLACE. MAYOR I WANT TO ASSURE COUNCIL [OVERLAPPING] >> HAS THIS HAPPENED IN THE PAST? >> NO. BUT I THINK WHAT I'VE NOTICED AND COUNCIL, YOU CAN WEIGH IN. RIGHT NOW, THE SITUATION IS THAT SALLY GETS THESE BILLS, SHE'LL GET WITH STAFF, AND STAFF ISSUES A RESPONSE TO THOSE BILLS. COUNCIL IS NOT PART OF THAT APPROVAL PROCESS. I'M NOT SAYING IT'S WRONG, BUT I THINK THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS OPERATES. IF WE FEEL WE HAVE CERTAIN AREAS LIKE THIS RETIREMENT SYSTEM, THAT WE WOULD JUST NOTIFY STAFF THAT IF IT'S POSSIBLE, COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO GIVE INPUT. >> MAYOR, I DON'T SAY ANYTHING IN AUSTIN ON ANY BILL, PROVIDE ANY INPUT ON ANY BILL THAT I DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO VIA THIS AGENDA. AND IF IT IS A SPECIFIC ISSUE THAT FALLS UNDER THE UNFUNDED MANDATES OR VIOLATING HOME. >> WE COULD REMOVE EVERYTHING AND THEN SALLY JUST STANDS UP THERE IN TWIDDLES AND DOLLARS. >> NO. BUT I THINK YOU HAVE A BUDGET SAVINGS. >> IT'S APPROVED, BUT I GET WHAT [OVERLAPPING] >> LIKE GLENN'S AUDIT PLAN, YOU DIRECT THE PLAN AND YOU SET HIM LOOSE TO GO. IF THERE'S A TRUST ISSUE. >> WELL, I THINK [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S NOT A TRUST ISSUE. THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THOUGH. THESE RESPONSES SOMETIMES BECOME VERY DETAILED THAT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN THE CATCH ALL PHRASE THAT PICKS IT UP. I JUST THINK COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE AWARE OF THAT ON CERTAIN ITEMS ON THAT. >> MAYOR, CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? >> I THINK THE CONCERN THAT COMES FROM THE FIRE MEN, WHICH IS A CONCERN FOR ME IS EXACTLY WHAT COMES UP [02:20:01] AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE ACTED ON IN 12 HOURS. YOU GET HOW TO COMMENT FROM STAFF. THIS HAS TO DEAL WITH THE FIREMEN'S LIVELIHOOD. THAT'S WHY WE ENDED UP REMOVING IT LAST YEAR WAS BECAUSE OF THEIR CONCERNS AND THAT THEY FELT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE INPUT IN IT. WHEN WE HAVE THE ACT OR THE BOARDS OR THE CITY PENSION BOARDS AND WHATNOT, THEN IT BOTH SIDES REPRESENTED, WHERE WE PUT THIS GENERAL STATEMENT IN OUR LEGISLATIVE PLAN, THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE NO SAY IT AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. >> THEY HAVE PLENTY TO SAY, THE PENSION BOARD REPRESENTS. >> CAN I JUST MAYBE PROPOSE A SOLUTION THAT WE CAN DO. CAN WE GET STAFFS AND SALLY, MAYBE CAN WRITE IT UP. WE CAN GET STAFF TO DO A NARRATIVE WRITE UP OF WHAT BASED ON THE LEGISLATION AND THE TALKS WITH THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD, AND THEN MAYBE WE CAN GET THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING. >> I HAVE AN EVEN BETTER WORKSHOP [OVERLAPPING] AT THE NEXT MEETING, WE PUT IT BACK ON WORKSHOP, BUT WE ALSO HAVE THE FIRE COME WITH THEIR CONCERNS SINCE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE MOST CONCERNED. >> MAY I MAKE AN OBSERVATION, MAYOR. WE HAVE PRE FILING THAT STARTS NOVEMBER 11. WE HAVEN'T EVEN MET WITH SENATOR MIDDLETON ON OUR AGENDA. WE HAVEN'T MET WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE LEO WILSON ON OUR AGENDA. IF WE ARE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. NOT A LOT DIFFERENT IN SECTOR WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A BILL REQUEST. WE'RE GOING TO WANT TO GET WITH THEM EARLY ON. THE LATER YOU WAIT, THE LONGER IT TAKES TO GET THAT BILL DRAFTED THE HIGHER [OVERLAPPING] >> MAYOR, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. LET ME JUST GET BECAUSE THIS IS VERY HELPFUL TO ME. THIS IS TRULY VERY HELPFUL TO ME. YOU ARE THE MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL WHO HAS BEEN HERE THROUGHOUT MY WORK WITH THE LEGISLATURE. THIS IS MY FIFTH LEGISLATIVE AGENDA THAT I'VE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL, AND YOU HAVE BEEN THROUGH ALL FIVE. YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT I HAVE TAKEN IN KEEPING COUNCIL INFORMED AND REPORTING TO COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGEMENT, NOT JUST ON ACTIVITY, BUT ON SPECIFIC BILLS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU HAVE OBSERVED THAT YOU FEEL I COULD DO BETTER? >> NO. I THINK THAT COUNCIL, I THINK THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND I'M SPEAKING FOR BRIAN AND DAN IS PART OF THIS AND DON. I THINK THAT WE'RE VERY, VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE YOU REPRESENTING OUR CITY. YOU'VE DONE A SUPERB JOB WITH THAT. I'M JUST WANTING TO BRING THIS TO COUNCIL THAT WAY THIS FLOWS, AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A PROBLEM, BUT I THINK WHAT YOU'RE HERE, BRIAN, WHICH YOU MAY BE HEARING FROM US AND SALLY AND DAN, ON SOME OF THESE TOPICS, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL IS IN THE LOOP AND IF WE WANT TO GIVE INPUT >> [OVERLAPPING] YOU GET IMMEDIATELY GET COPIES OF IT. >> THAT'S THE ISSUE AS WE GET IT AFTER YOU SEND IT. >> DO WE WANT TO HAVE A COUNCIL MEETING EVERY DAY TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING WE DO, MAYOR? >> FOR THIS ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE MAYBE GIVE SOME AUTHORITY TO A COUNCIL MEMBER OR THE MAYOR TO MAKE A DECISION UNILATERALLY ON THAT. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THIS. THIS IS WASTING TIME. >> [OVERLAPPING] THIS IS THE SUGGESTION THAT I CAN MAKE HERE THAT I WOULD MAKE HERE BECAUSE THIS LANGUAGE IS DRAFTED SO BROADLY. ALL IT SIMPLY DOES IS PROVIDE A PLACEHOLDER FOR IT. WHAT I CAN DO IS IF A BILL IS FILED, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT A BILL IS GOING TO BE FILED. IF A BILL IS GOING TO BE FILED, I CAN FLAG THAT IMMEDIATELY AND WE CAN DETERMINE AT THAT TIME, DOES THE CITY WANT TO TAKE A POSITION? >> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNCIL IS IN THE LOOP ON ALL OF THESE. I'LL BE VERY CANDID. IN THE PAST, THE CONVERSATIONS THAT GO BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN YOU AND STAFF ON [NOISE] WHAT YOUR RESPONSES WILL BE AND ALL OF THAT AND HOW THAT'S WORDED AND SENT TO THE LEGISLATURE. THE MAYOR WAS NOT IN THAT LOOP. THE MAYOR HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. [02:25:03] THE MAYOR'S POSITION HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. I THINK THAT THIS COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE IN THAT LOOK. [OVERLAPPING] THAT WE'RE AWARE OF EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING AND HOW THAT'S BEING PUT OUT. >> I OFFER A PROCESS THAT I THINK WOULD ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS. >> THE PROFESSOR SPEECH. >> [OVERLAPPING] WILL SEND A REPORT SAYING, [INAUDIBLE] >> AGAIN, 5A HAS BEEN FILED. IT COULD DO THIS, THIS AND THIS. CITY'S PLAN RESPONSE IS TO DO THIS. HAPPY COUNCIL ON THAT, IF YOU HAVE SOME PROBLEMS YOU CAN SET UP A MEETING TO DISCUSS THAT. >> I THINK THAT'S VERY APPROPRIATE PERSONALLY. I THINK THAT'S VERY APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IN THE PAST, THE MAYOR'S POSITION, AS WELL AS COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE NOT AWARE OF THE CITY'S RESPONSES UNTIL MANY TIMES, QUITE A BIT AFTER THE FACT SITUATION. >> WELL, ANY RESPONSES, ANY COMMENTS, ANY TESTIMONY THAT I SUBMITTED OR GAVE LAST SESSION WAS ALWAYS ATTACHED IN MY WEEKLY REPORTS OF THAT WEEK THAT IT HAPPENED. >> I THINK COUNCIL DOM [PHONETIC] HAS MENTIONED THAT. BRIAN. >> HOW'S THAT ANY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE DOING? >> IT'S NOT. >> WHAT IS BEING SAID, BRIAN? >> WE'RE NOT GOING TO RESPOND ANYMORE. WE GET REQUESTS FOR RESPONSES ON A QUICK TURN. WE JUST WON'T RESPOND. IT'S FINE. >> WE GET REQUESTS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, MAYOR. IT'S LIKE THE PENSION REVIEW BOARD. THEY WORK THROUGH A PROCESS YEAR ON, AND THEY SEND OUT A THING SAYING, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, PROVIDE COMMENTS. WE ROUTINELY PROVIDE COMMENTS. >> WHAT'S THE COMMENT PERIOD USUALLY? >> WELL, IT'S LENGTHY. THEY USUALLY GIVE 60, 90 DAYS, BUT WE DO THAT ROUTINELY. WE GET INFORMATION, THE GLO, THERE'S COMMENT PERIODS FOR REGULATIONS ALL THE TIME, AND WE TYPICALLY RESPOND AND WE RESPOND CONSISTENT WITH THE POSITION THAT THE CITY'S TAKEN ON SOMETHING. BEST PRACTICES IS SOMETHING WE'VE BEEN PREACHING FOREVER. IF WE'RE NOW GOING TO RETRACT AND NO LONGER BELIEVE THAT PENSIONS COULD BE OPERATED USING BEST PRACTICES, I THINK THAT'S A DRAMATIC CHANGE FOR THE CITY. >> WELL, AND I WOULD AGREE, DAN, WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I'M JUST SAYING, BRIAN, THAT JUST BECAUSE WHAT DOM SAYS IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL MAY EMBRACE DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DON'T WANT STAFF NEVER RESPONDING TO ANYTHING. >> WE WON'T RESPOND UNLESS COUNCIL TELLS US TO. >> MAYOR, WHAT'S CRITICAL IS THE TIME FRAME WITH WHICH WE HAVE TO RESPOND. >> I WOULD AGREE. >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS HERE. COMMENT PERIODS FOR STUFF THAT GOES ON DURING THE YEAR IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT SITUATION. >> EXACTLY. I'M NOT SURE WHY THAT'S IN THIS. >> WHEN SALLY GETS NOTICE OF A HEARING IN HOURS, WE TEND TO RESPOND QUICKER. I'M NOT WORRIED. WHAT DOM IS TALKING ABOUT IS FINE. I DON'T CARE. WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT ANY WAY YOU WANT TO DO IT. THIS IS A TIME ISSUE AND THAT'S FINE. >> I AGREE WITH YOU. IT'S A TIME ISSUE, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE INSTANCES WHERE WHAT DOM MENTIONS WOULDN'T APPLY, BUT DOM, REPEAT AGAIN WHAT YOU SAID. >> I CAN REPEAT IT. HE SAID, I WILL IDENTIFY A BILL. THIS IS WHAT THE BILL DOES. THIS IS THE RESPONSE COMMENT THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ON THIS. PLEASE ADVISE. >> WHY DON'T YOU DO THAT BY TEXT IF IT'S THAT QUICKLY. >> BECAUSE TEXTS ARE NOT RECORDABLE AS OPEN RECORDS. >> IT WOULD BE EASIER TO DO IT BY EMAIL. >> LET'S SAY, LEGISLATIVELY, IT'S VERY QUICKLY, COULD WE HAVE A COMMITTEE OF THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF THAT COULD QUICKLY COME UP WITH A RESPONSE IF THAT SUITS COUNCIL. JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE, LEGISLATIVE. >> PERSONALLY, I DO NOT WANT STAFF HAVING TO CLEAR EVERY DECISION AND RESPONSE THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE QUICKLY TO AN ITEM THAT'S IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M AFTER. >> IF WE HAD A COMMITTEE, WE COULD SELECT SO IF THERE'S 100 THINGS AND THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT COUNCIL REALLY WANTS TO WEIGH IN ON, IS THAT NOT A POSSIBILITY? >> WELL, MAY I OFFER A SUGGESTION? AS WE SAY UP NORTH, YOU GUYS AND A COMMITTEE. I THINK UNDER THE PROCESS I OUTLINED WHERE SHE SAYS, GOT THIS BILL. HE SAYS, CITY'S RESPONSE IS GOING TO BE THIS UNLESS YOU TELL US OTHERWISE, [02:30:03] THAT GIVES YOU GUYS AN OPPORTUNITY HAVE A LITTLE WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS IT FURTHER. >> PERFECT. >> NOW, THERE'S ONE THE PITFALL. SHE HAS TO WORK FOR ME. I'D GET A CALL AND SHE'D SAY, I JUST HEARD ON THE LUNCH LINE IT'S GOING TO BE A COMMITTEE MEETING 1:15 THIS AFTERNOON AND THAT'S 12 MINUTES AWAY. WHAT RESPONSE SHOULD WE DO? >> WE HAVE TO WAIT 72 HOURS TO HAVE THAT MEETING. >> THAT IS WHY, IF I MAY, WAS LOOKING FOR THIS LEGISLATIVE AGENDA PLAN, WHICH IS A GUIDELINE UNDER WHICH SHE ACTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. >> REMEMBER, I DON'T ACT SOLELY IN A REACTIVE MODE. I ALSO AM ALWAYS LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITY. >> I UNDERSTAND. PERSONALLY, I THINK WE OUGHT TO GO WITH WHAT DOM MENTIONED ON THIS. I PERSONALLY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT SOMETIMES WON'T FALL INTO THIS LOGISTICS HERE AND I TRUST YOU EXPLICITLY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY. YOU ALWAYS HAVE. THAT'S PERSONALLY ME. I JUST FEEL WE NEED TO INCREASE OUR INVOLVEMENT, THE COUNCIL'S INVOLVEMENT, AND DOING WHAT DOM SAYS, I THINK WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> IN ADDITION TO THE WEEKLY REPORTS THAT YOU GET WITH THE BILLS FILED THAT WEEK, I NEED SOME PARAMETERS ON HOW YOU WANT THESE INDIVIDUAL BILLS FLAGGED FOR YOU. I KNOW TO FLAG ANYTHING PENSION RELATED. DO YOU WANT INDIVIDUAL BILLS FLAGGED THAT TOUCH UPON ANY OF THESE AGENDA ITEMS? >> PERSONALLY, IF IT WAS ME, I WOULD TAKE JUST THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE NEW AND ADDITIONAL TO OUR AGENDA. >> AGAIN, YOU CAN ALSO GO TO THE STATE SITE. IF YOU HAVE THE BILL NUMBER, IT'S EVEN EASIER AND IT'LL MAKE YOU AWARE OF ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENING ON THAT. OR YOU CAN DO IT BY THE SEARCH TOPIC LIKE PENSION. >> IT'S ACTUALLY VERY USER FRIENDLY. IT IS EXTREMELY USER FRIENDLY. >> ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK SHOULD BE PART OF THE METRIC AND CONTACTING US IS THE TIMELINE. WHAT IS THE URGENCY OF THE TIMELINE? FOR INSTANCE, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES UP THAT WE ALL THINK REALLY REQUIRES A MEETING, THAT ADDS 72 HOURS TO WHATEVER COMMENT PERIOD WE HAVE. I THINK WHEN YOU'RE COMING TO US WITH SOMETHING THAT'S CRITICAL BEYOND THE WEEKLY REPORT, SOMETHING THAT'S INTERIM IN THERE THAT'S CRITICAL, THE TIMELINE SHOULD BE PART OF THAT ANALYSIS. >> WE GET CALLS FROM SALLY AND AUSTIN IN THE MORNING, SAYING, AT 1:15, THERE'S A HEARING ON THIS. >> BUT THAT'S LATER IN THE SESSION. >> THAT'S LATER IN THE SESSION THAT'S CORRECT. NOT AT THE FILING TIME. >> FOR THE NEXT 60 DAY OR AFTER NOVEMBER 11TH, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST IS I WILL CONTINUE DOING MY WEEKLY REPORTS. THAT SECOND ATTACHMENT BECOMES A GOOD REFERENCE POINT FOR YOU BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE SOME USEFUL SUMMARIES FOR YOU, BUT AS I GO THROUGH THAT, AS THE BILLS ARE FILED FOR THE REALLY SENSITIVE STUFF, PENSIONS, HOT, THE TRANSCRIPT. SOME OF THESE NEW ITEMS, LIKE YOU MENTIONED, MAYOR, THE BILL HAS BEEN FILED. I DON'T KNOW THAT I'LL GET A COMMITTEE REFERRAL, BUT I'LL JUST ALERT YOU THAT A BILL HAS BEEN FILED SO THAT YOU KNOW THE BILL NUMBER THAT I'M TRACKING AT. >> WE CAN GO UNDER THE POSITIONS THAT WE WANT TO TAKE. >> ANY SINGULAR BILL THAT I REPORT TO YOU, I WILL BE TRACKING UNLESS YOU TELL ME WE DON'T CARE. >> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. >> YOU WILL GET CONSTANT REPORTS, YES, YOU CAN USE THE SYSTEM. >>THAT SOUNDS GOOD. YES, SHARON. >> THE ONLINE TRACKING WOULD STILL BE AVAILABLE. IF A COMMITTEE WAS GOING TO COME UP, COULDN'T WE TRACK THAT ONLINE? >> YES, MA'AM. THAT SHOULD BE OUR POSITION TO DO THAT AS WELL. THAT WAY, WE CAN KNOW IF IT'S AN URGENT THING OR THE TIME BEHIND THAT. >> WELL, THE THING WITH COMMITTEES, THE FURTHER YOU GET INTO LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEES, THE FURTHER YOU GET INTO SESSION, THEY DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME RULES YOU DO. THEY'VE EXEMPTED THEMSELVES. THEY CAN HAVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS ON THE FLOOR. >> CORRECT. >> THE CHAIRMAN CAN SAY, WE'RE HAVING A MEETING, AND THIS IS WHAT TIME AND IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE FLOOR. >> YOU GET LIKE FIVE MINUTES NOTICE. >> THAT'S WHY I USE WHEN THE FUR STARTS TO FLY BECAUSE IT REALLY DOES GET LIKE THAT, [02:35:05] BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, YOU'RE ALREADY GOING TO KNOW WHICH BILLS WE'RE SENSITIVE ABOUT AND WE'RE GOING TO ALREADY KNOW WHAT OUR POSITION IS ON THOSE SENSITIVE BILLS. >> I GUESS I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. ANY QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? >> MY ONLY QUESTION BECAUSE NOW IT'S PRESENTED ITSELF, IS THERE ANY WAY TO HAVE A COMMITTEE OF LESS THAN A QUORUM THAT COULD POTENTIALLY MEET, ALONG WITH CITY STAFF TO HAVE THAT POSITION WITHIN THE FIVE MINUTES NOTICE, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STILL IS SUBJECT TO OPEN 72 HOURS POSTING OF A MEETING? >> I THINK THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS WITH THAT BECAUSE YOU HAVE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS BEING DELEGATED LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY BY A BOARD OF SEVEN. >> I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT I WOULD HAVE A LITTLE CONCERN. I THINK IT WOULD BE A CUMBERSOME PROCESS. I THINK INVOLVING COUNCIL ON THOSE ISSUES THAT THE TIMELINE ALLOWS US TO BE INVOLVED WITH ON THOSE HOT BUTTON ISSUES IS APPROPRIATE. >> I'M SPEAKING ANYTHING EVEN INTO THE FUTURE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE? >> YES, SHARON. >> SKIRTING LAWS. >> BUT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT SKIRTING LAWS. I'M TALKING ABOUT WITHIN THE COLOR. >> RECALL THAT YOU HAVE WORKSHOPS ON VARIOUS THINGS THROUGHOUT THE SESSION. I THINK AS WE GO ALONG, I THINK YOU'LL BE SATISFIED THAT SUCH A COMMITTEE WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY. >> YEAH. I WOULD AGREE. >> I'M NOT ASKING NECESSARILY. IS IT LEGALLY A POSSIBILITY? >> I DON'T THINK IT'S LEGAL FOR A CITY COUNCIL TO DELEGATE IT'S LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO A MINORITY OF COUNCIL. >> EVEN SPECIFIC ISSUES WITH CLEAR GUIDELINES? >> SHARON. >> WELL, I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT I WAS ABOUT TO SAY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. BECAUSE I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION YOU WERE GOING EITHER WITH THAT. BECAUSE IF WE DO WHAT YOU HAVE SUGGESTED, THEN IT WILL COME TO ALL OF US. IF I RESPOND, IT'S ON ME. IF I DON'T RESPOND, IT'S ALSO ON ME. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. THE MAYOR UNDERSTOOD, BUT I DIDN'T, AND I WAS GOING TO SAY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. >> VERY GOOD. ARE WE, COUNCIL, READY TO MOVE ON THAT? >> IF I MAY, I AM COMING BACK WITH YOU WITH ANOTHER DRAFT IN NOVEMBER FOR ADOPTION THAT WILL INCLUDE LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS FEDERALLY FUNDED INDEPENDENT LIVING SENIOR UNITS. >> YES. >> THAT WAS THE ONLY CHANGE I BELIEVE YOU HAVE. >> IF WE'RE THERE NOW, I HAD SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. UNDER SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND LOCAL LAND USE AUTHORITY, YOU'RE FUNDAMENTALLY ADVOCATING FOR GREATER LOCAL CONTROL. >> WE ARE FUNDAMENTALLY PROTECTING LOCAL CONTROL. WE HAVE LOCAL CONTROL NOW. >> OR MAYBE MORE EXPANDED CONTROL OVER HOW WE REGULATE. >> NOW, WITH REGARDS TO THE HOT USE, YES, WE ARE SEEKING THAT. >> WELL, YOU GOT IN HERE, MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS, [INAUDIBLE] LEGISLATION REQUIRING VERY SMALL MINIMUM LOT SIZE. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE REASON IT'S THERE IS BECAUSE IT'S BEEN TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY SOME DEVELOPERS TO CHOP UP LOTS AND JUST OPEN UP FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS. I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THAT EXACERBATES SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE, BUT THE REASON THAT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES WERE THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS TO MAKE HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE BECAUSE THE SMALLER LOT, SMALLER HOUSE, MORE AFFORDABLE FOR ENTRY. I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE HAVE GREATER LOCAL CONTROL, THEN WE COULD KEEP BOTH OF THEM. WE COULD KEEP THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, AND THEN ALSO, CONTROL OF THE USE OF IT REGARDING SHORT-TERM RENTALS. BECAUSE I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT THE REASON IT WAS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE. IF WE ADVOCATE FOR GETTING AWAY FROM MINIMUM LOT SIZES, ARE WE LOSING A TOOL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING? >> PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND. THAT'S NOT WHAT'S SUGGESTED HERE. WHAT WE'RE OPPOSING IS THIS LEGISLATURE PREEMPTING THIS COUNCIL FROM DETERMINING WHAT IS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE. YOU CAN GO TO 1,400 SQUARE FEET TOMORROW IF YOU WANT TO OR YOU CAN MAINTAIN THE 2,500 SQUARE FEET THAT WE HAVE NOW. >> I THINK TO BETTER ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, ONE, [02:40:01] WE COULD NOT SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A XYZ MINIMUM LOT SIZE, BUT WE WILL NOT ALLOW SHORT-TERM RENTAL. WE LEGALLY COULDN'T DO THAT. >> THAT WAS MY POINT IS WE DO REALLY DIRELY NEED SOME SUPPORT FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE TOOLS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED A LONG TIE AGO. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IT HAS THE EFFECT OF, IS SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. IS THERE ANY OTHER LEGISLATION GOING ON THERE THAT IS GOING TO BE SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, ATTAINABLE HOUSING? >> WELL, THAT'S THE FOCUS OF THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT NOW IS LOOKING AT WAYS TO MAKE HOUSING MORE AFFORDABLE. OUR CONCERN IS THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS GALVESTON MUST HAVE. WE MUST HAVE THE AUTHORITY ON OUR BUILDING CODES SO THAT WE CAN HAVE OUR WIND LOAD STANDARDS AND OUR FLOOD STANDARDS. WE MUST HAVE THE ABILITY TO WEIGH IN ON BUILDING MATERIALS AND ORDINANCES TO REACH THOSE STANDARDS. WE WANT TO AVOID ANY PREEMPTION ON THAT. WITH REGARDS TO LOT SIZES, LIKE I SAID, THE ONLY POSITION WE'RE SAYING HERE IS THAT CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS LOT SIZES TO MEET OUR OWN UNIQUE NEEDS. IF THAT LEGISLATION LAST SESSION HAD PASSED, YOU WOULD HAVE NO DISCRETION. THE STATE WOULD HAVE SAID, THIS IS IT. JUST LIKE WITH 2019 WITH BUILDING MATERIALS, THIS IS IT. WITH REGARDS TO PERMITTING, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE. OTHER CITIES DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT, BUT IF THE STATE DOES A BLANKET PREEMPTION, THIS IS IT. >> IT'S A LOCAL CONTROL. NOT SO MUCH [INAUDIBLE] >> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT BACK TO THESE OTHER TWO TOPICS, SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND LAND USE AUTHORITY, IT SAYS WE OPPOSE PREEMPTIVE LEGISLATION THAT LIMITS OR RADICALLY WEAKENS LOCAL AUTHORITY TO SUSTAIN THE ENDURING HISTORICAL IMAGE, AND UNIQUE NEEDS OF GALVESTON. I WOULD THINK THAT THE WAY WE REGULATE SHORT-TERM RENTALS FITS RIGHT IN THERE, FITS RIGHT IN WITH THAT LOCAL CONTROL BECAUSE CURRENTLY WE HAVE VERY LITTLE THAT WE CAN DO FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS. IF THE CONCEPT OF LOCAL CONTROL IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, ENABLING US TO HAVE MORE CONTROL OVER THE REGULATION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS WOULD BE IMPORTANT. >> THAT'S THERE. >> YEAH. >> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS. >> UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR AT LEAST THE LAST SIX SESSIONS, EIGHT SESSIONS. >> AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN HERE. >> THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMPANIES HAVE BEEN LOBBYING FOR THE STATE TO CONTROL IT, SO THEN WE WOULD HAVE NO SAY. PERIOD. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT. THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY USEFUL FOR LOBBYING OR ADVOCATING FOR. >> OR SOMETHING THAT THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL INDUSTRY AND THE CITY AND MULTIPLE CITIES HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS. >> WHAT I COMMUNICATED LAST SESSION IS SHORT-TERM RENTALS HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON OUR SUPPLY OF LONG-TERM RENTAL AND HOMEOWNER HOUSING. YOU TAKE AWAY OUR ABILITY TO GOVERN SHORT-TERM RENTALS, YOU ADD TO THAT SHORT-TERM RENTAL INVENTORY, YOU ARE EXACERBATING THE UNAFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING. >> I TOTALLY AGREE. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE. THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE AS MUCH LOCAL CONTROL, ZONING CONTROL, AND REGULATORY CONTROL AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S UNIQUE IN TEXAS. ALL THESE TOWNS ARE UNIQUE. WE'RE NOT ANYTHING LIKE ANY OTHER TOWN IN TEXAS, AND SO WE SHOULD HAVE THAT LOCAL CONTROL. I THINK THAT WOULD HELP US TO, NOT ONLY REGULATE IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO, AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING. >> WELL, THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE IS BEYOND, THAT'S VERY DEBATABLE IF WHAT YOU'RE MENTIONING THAT SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE PLAYING A ROLE IN THE UNAFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THE BOTTOM LINE IS IT'S LOCAL CONTROL. WE'RE WANTING TO HAVE LOCAL CONTROL ON THAT. >> I TOTALLY AGREE. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED WITH THAT. I HAD SOME OTHER QUESTIONS HERE. ON THE REVITALIZED SUPPORT OF GALVESTON TOPIC, IT SAYS PAAC OF ALLOCATION OF TEXAS PORTS, [02:45:01] A SHIP CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND IS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT. THAT'S RELATED TO DREDGING SUPPORT. >> NOT NECESSARILY. PARDON ME. WELL, YES, THE STATE BUDGET, BUT THE MOST RECENT LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST SUBMITTED BY TXDOT FOR THIS NEXT BIENNIUM BUDGET, THEY HAVE TWO PROGRAMS: THE PORT ADVISORY, THE PAAC, P-A-A-C. I GET MIXED UP ON MY OWN ACRONYMS. >> IT'S LIKE T-A-C. IT IS JUST LIKE TAC. >> IT'S THE PORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT THE PORTS ALONG THE COAST MAKE UP AND ADVISE TXDOT ON INVESTMENT AND PORTS. THERE IS A PORTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. THIS COMING SESSION OR IN THEIR LAR, THEIR LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST, TXDOT IS REQUESTING $900 MILLION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S WHAT THAT FUND IS FOR. THAT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT IS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR OUR PORTS. THE SECOND PIECE IS THE SHIP CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND. THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE DREDGING. THE FIRST PIECE HAS TO DO WITH CORE INFRASTRUCTURE. >> THEY'RE BOTH CONTAINED IN THIS INITIATIVE. >> YES. THIS WAS ALSO IN OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA LAST YEAR. WE ARE JUST SIMPLY CONTINUING OUR SUPPORT FOR THESE TWO PROGRAMS AND THE LEGISLATURE INVESTING FUNDS. >> ANYTHING ELSE? >> YEAH. ONE MORE. PELICAN ISLAND BRANCH CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORTS LEGISLATION THAT REMOVES IMPEDIMENTS TO PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT AND IT PRODUCES ECONOMIC BENEFITS. WHAT ARE THE IMPEDIMENTS PARTICULARLY? >> THIS IS JUST A BIG CATCH ALL TERM. THERE'S NOT ANY SPECIFIC. ANYTHING THAT POPS UP THAT MIGHT BE TERMED AN IMPEDIMENT, IT GIVES THE CITY THE ABILITY TO RESPOND. >> HERE'S AN EXAMPLE. A COUPLE THREE SESSIONS AGO, THERE WAS SOMEONE TRYING TO PASS LEGISLATION THAT EVEN THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE PUT ON FOR PROPERTY WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY PROPERTY TAXES. THAT WAS ONE THAT WAS SHOT DOWN. IT'S ANY IMPEDIMENT LIKE THAT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR SALLY? SALLY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NICE TO SEE YOU. >> SORRY ABOUT GOING PAST BY 20 MINUTES. >> IT'S A TREND. SALLY, YOU'RE JUST KEEPING WITH THE TREND. WE HAD AN HOUR-AND-A-HALF SUBJECT LAST WEEK, IT ENDED WITH THREE-AND-A-HALF-HOURS. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. COUNCIL, WE HAVE AN ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, ITEM 3F. [3.F. Discussion of the Gulf Coast Water Authority - Projects/Goals (B. Cook/ B. Wade - 15 min)] WE HAVE BRANDON WADE FROM THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY THAT'S BEEN WAITING. WOULD IT MEET COUNCIL'S APPROVAL IF WE MOVE THEM UP? >> YES. >> YES. >> LET'S GET BRANDON. BRANDON, COME ON UP, IF YOU WOULD. I'D BE GLAD TO HAVE YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. MAYOR WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE IF I STOOD DOWN THERE? >> BY ALL MEANS. YES, SIR. >> BRANDON LIKES TO POINT. >> HERE, PULL UP OVER HERE. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH ALL OF YOU. MY NAME IS BRANDON WADE AND I AM THE CEO OF THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY. I'M HERE, ACTUALLY, IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT CAPACITIES. ONE IS, I'M THE CEO OF THE GROUP THAT PROVIDES YOU WATER. THE SECOND THING IS, IS THAT I USED TO BE YOUR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER. WHEN ALL OF THIS STUFF THAT I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT WAS HAPPENING, I ACTUALLY WORKED HERE. IT GIVES ME A LITTLE BIT OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO, FIRST OF ALL, RIGHT SOME WRONGS OF THINGS THAT I HAD BEEN A PART OF, BUT SECONDLY, IT GIVES YOU A FIRSTHAND OPPORTUNITY TO SEE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE GOING ON. I'M A LONG TIME CITIZEN OF GALVESTON. I HAVE BEEN A HOMEOWNER ON THE WEST END FOR OVER 25 YEARS. I RESIDE IN PIRATES BEACH. EVERYTHING THAT I'M ABOUT TO TALK ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO WATER IS IMPORTANT TO ME PERSONALLY AS WELL. I ALSO WANT TO RECOGNIZE DAVE DAVIS. HE'S BACK HERE IN THE BACK. DAVE IS MY ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER WHO IS IN CHARGE OF ESSENTIALLY ALL THINGS BUSINESS. I HAVE APPROXIMATELY, IT'S HARD TO SAY, 40 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE NOW IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. DAVE HAS, I THINK, ABOUT 35 OR MORE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN PRIVATE SECTOR. IT HELPS US BALANCE THAT OUT FROM THE APPROACH OF PUBLIC SECTOR VERSUS PRIVATE SECTOR ACTIVITIES. [02:50:02] OUR MISSION IS TO RELIABLY DELIVER WATER TO OUR CUSTOMERS, AND IT'S THAT SIMPLE, TO BE QUITE HONEST WITH YOU. WHILE I GET TO VISIT WITH BRIAN EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE ABOUT ALL OF THE COMPLEXITIES OF ALL OF THE THINGS THAT YOU-ALL DEAL WITH, I HAVE ONE JOB, AND THAT ONE JOB IS TO SUPPLY YOU WATER. NOW, IT'S A REMARKABLY COMPLEX JOB, BUT I HAVE ONE JOB. TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHO ALL WE SERVE, 600,000 PEOPLE. WE HAVE A WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN TEXAS CITY THAT YOU GET YOUR WATER FROM THAT TREATS THE RAW WATER OUT OF THE BRAZOS RIVER THAT WE TRANSPORT TO IT, AND WE PROVIDE WATER TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF GALVESTON COUNTY. DOESN'T INCLUDE THE CITY OF FRIENDSWOOD AND BOLIVAR PENINSULA, BUT JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY ELSE. SIXTEEN THOUSAND ACRES OF RICE AND THE TEXAS CITY AND CHOCOLATE BAYOU INDUSTRIAL COMPLEXES. JUST TO GIVE YOU A QUICK VIEW, THIS IS THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, AND WE HAVE A WATER LINE THAT RUNS THROUGH THERE. WE PROVIDE ALL OF THEIR WATER FOR ALL OF THE THINGS THAT THEY MANUFACTURE. BY THE WAY, IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW THIS, MARATHON IS, I BELIEVE, THE SECOND LARGEST REFINERY IN THE UNITED STATES, AND RIGHT THERE IS 5% OF THE REFINING CAPACITY OF THE ENTIRE US. WE PROVIDE UP TO 90 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF WATER TO THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. THIS IS THE NEW CHOCOLATE BAYOU PUMPING PLANT. WE ALSO PROVIDE WATER TO THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, INCLUDES INEOS AND ASCEND. HERE'S OUR 16,000 ACRES OF RICE THAT ARE SLOWLY GOING TO TURN INTO SUBDIVISIONS, AND IT IS SLOWLY GOING TO TURN INTO SOLAR FARMS. REPRESENTATIVE WEBBER AND I ACTUALLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO FLY OVER ALL OF THIS, AND I THINK HE AND I BOTH WERE SURPRISED HOW MANY SOLAR FARMS WERE OUT HERE IN THIS AREA NOW. I WANT TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR HISTORY, AND BY THE WAY, I PROVIDED YOU-ALL A HISTORY BOOK OF THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY. IT'S ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS OLD. IT'S FOR THE MOST PART UP TO DATE. DAVE, ACTUALLY, HAS MORE COPIES OF IT BACK THERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF AN IDEA AS TO WHERE WE CAME FROM AND WHY. WE USED TO BE A PRIVATE COMPANY. AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE A PRIVATE COMPANY BECOMES A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, BUT THAT'S, BY GOLLY, WHAT HAPPENED. IN THE 1940S, THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX REALIZED THAT THEY WERE SINKING INTO THE BAY. LONG BEFORE THE SUBSIDENCE DISTRICT AND THAT SORT OF THING, 1940S, THEY REALIZED THEY WERE SINKING INTO THE BAY AND THEY WERE ALSO PULLING SO MUCH WATER THAT THEY WERE STARTING TO PULL SALTWATER INTO THE AQUIFER ITSELF. THEY HAD TO REALLY SERIOUSLY START LOOKING FOR WATER. I'LL SAVE YOU THE ABOUT FOUR-HOUR DISCUSSION AS TO HOW ALL OF THAT CAME ABOUT, BUT I WILL JUST GIVE YOU A BRIEF GLIMPSE, THE SAN JACINTO RIVER AUTHORITY, BY THE WAY, THOUGHT FOR A WHILE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO CONTROL ALL OF THIS AREA. IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR VERY FIRST STRATEGIC PLAN THAT'S STILL ON THEIR WEBSITE, IT SHOWS THAT. WHAT ENDED UP HAPPENING IS THAT THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX ESSENTIALLY STARTED WORKING WITH THE RICE CANALS THAT WERE OUT THERE, AND SO THE AMERICAN CANAL AND THE BRISCOE CANAL PROVIDED WATER TO RICE. WELL, THEY STARTED CONTRACTING WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS TO PROVIDE WATER TO THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. IN 1965, THEY WORKED WITH SENATOR SCHWARTZ TO CONVERT US FROM THE INDUSTRIAL WATER COMPANY, WHICH WAS A PRIVATE ENTITY, INTO THE GALVESTON COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY. I SUSPECT THAT WHAT HAPPENED IS THEY REALIZED THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY TAXES, AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE THINGS ON THE BOOKS, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ALL THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND THAT IT WOULD BE A REALLY GOOD IDEA TO BECOME A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, IT WAS WHOLLY CONTROLLED, STILL, BY THE TEXAS CITY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, ALL OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, FOR THE MOST PART, EXCEPT FOR ONE, WERE PART OF THAT INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX. IF YOU LOOK BACK, AND I CAN PROVIDE YOU-ALL A COPY OF THIS IF YOU WOULD LIKE, THERE IS A JUDGE CHARLES SMITH FROM GALVESTON. WAS A 1961 PRESIDENT OF THE GALVESTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AND HE WROTE UP A HISTORY OF WATER IN GALVESTON COUNTY. IT ADDRESSES ALL OF THESE THINGS AND HOW IT CAME ABOUT. HE ACTUALLY WAS THE PREDECESSOR ON THE BOARD TO JAMES YARBOROUGH, MAYOR YARBROUGH'S DAD, WHO WAS A LONGTIME BOARD MEMBER AS WELL. IN 1972, GALVESTON WAS LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL WATER. USED TO GET ALL OF YOUR WATER FROM A WELL FIELD THAT IS IN THE SANTA FE AREA, AND YOU FOUND THAT THAT WAS NOT SUFFICIENT. YOU DECIDED TO CONTRACT WITH THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY ALONG WITH THE CITY OF LAKE CITY FOR WATER FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON. [02:55:04] THE SOUTHEAST PLANT AT THE CITY OF HOUSTON IS SOMETHING THAT THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY STILL OWNS CAPACITY IN. WE DON'T CONTRACT FOR CAPACITY. WE ACTUALLY OWN CAPACITY IN THE SOUTHEAST PLANT, AND THAT'S WHERE LAKE CITY AND PEARLAND BOTH GET THEIR WATER. IT GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND ON THAT. THEN WE ALSO EXPANDED TO THE POINT WHERE, IN 2006, WE PURCHASED THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU WATER COMPANY, WHICH WE'LL TALK ABOUT HERE IN JUST A SHORT BIT AS WELL. WHAT'S OUR WATER SOURCE? I KEEP READING ABOUT THIS ALL THE TIME ON FACEBOOK AND SO FORTH, AND I ALMOST ANSWER A LOT OF TIMES, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE DEBATE ABOUT IT. YOU GET ALL OF YOUR WATER FROM BRAZOS RIVER, ALL OF IT. I KEEP READING TRINITY RIVER, ETC. WELL, YOU GOT WATER FROM THE TRINITY RIVER PRIOR TO 1999, BUT NOT NOW. IT COMES 100% FROM THE BRAZOS RIVER UNLESS IT'S SOME SORT OF AN EMERGENCY. YOU HAVE 380,000 ACRE FEET IN THAT ARCHAIC TERM, AN ACRE FOOT DEEP, ABOUT 325,000 GALLONS, 380,000 ACRE FEET RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS, AND IT'S QUITE SIMPLY THAT IF IT'S RUNNING IN THE RIVER, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO GET IT. IT'S 380,000 ACRE FEET PER YEAR THAT RUNS DOWN THROUGH THERE. IF ANY OF YOU PAID ANY ATTENTION TO THE BRAZOS RIVER, SOMETIMES IT'S RUNNING IN THE RIVER BIG TIME, AND SOMETIMES IT'S NOT. WHAT DO WE DO WHEN IT'S NOT RUNNING IN THE RIVER QUITE AS WELL? BY THE WAY, IT'S NOT RUNNING IN THE RIVER QUITE AS WELL RIGHT NOW. ABOUT HALF OF IT THAT WE'RE UTILIZING RIGHT NOW IS RUN OF THE RIVER. THE OTHER HALF IS OUR BACKUP SOURCE. WE ARE THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY SECOND LARGEST CUSTOMER. WE CONTRACT VERY LONG-TERM CONTRACTS WITH THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY FOR 80,000 ACRE FEET OF WATER FROM THEIR RESERVOIRS. THIS SHOWS THE RESERVOIRS INTO THE SYSTEM. THEY GET TO PICK WHAT RESERVOIR THEY SEND WATER TO US FROM, BUT WE ALSO GET TO CALL FOR WATER QUITE LITERALLY WHENEVER WE WANT IT. RIGHT NOW, AS I MENTIONED, WE ARE WANTING IT, AND IT IS COMING RIGHT NOW FROM LAKE WHITNEY. LAKE WHITNEY THAT'S NORTH OF WACO. I FORGOT HOW MANY DAYS, I THINK IT TAKES FIVE DAYS, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY. >> EITHER THAT, OR DO THEY STICK IT IN THE RIVER? >> THEY DUMP IN THE RIVER. >> NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT I WENT UP TO POSSUM KINGDOM LAKE TO DO SOME GOLFING FOR A BACHELOR PARTY, AND WE DROVE BY AND WE SAW THE TANKS FULL. WE THOUGHT IT WAS LIKE A FISHERY, BUT IT WAS THE RESERVOIR FOR THE WATER AUTHORITY. IT WAS PRETTY COOL TO SEE. THEN THE DAM IN THE SIDE OF THE CLIFF FACE IS PRETTY COOL TO SEE. >> WE OCCASIONALLY, UNDER EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES, GET WATER FROM POSSUM KINGDOM WHEN THE OTHER RESERVOIRS ARE STARTING TO BECOME A PROBLEM. PROBLEM WITH POSSUM KINGDOM WATER IS IT'S VERY SALTY. IF ANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD OF THE SALT FOLK OF THE BRAZOS RIVER, THEY'RE NOT KIDDING. THAT'S SOME OF THE WATER, AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME, I THINK IT TAKES SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 14 DAYS FOR IT TO GET TO US FROM POSSUM KINGDOM. WE ALSO, AS I MENTIONED, OWN A PART OF THE HOUSTON SOUTHEAST PLANT. WE PROVIDE WATER TO LAKE CITY AND PEARLAND FROM THAT. BY THE WAY, THE CITY USED TO GET ITS WATER FROM THE SOUTHEAST PLANT TO SUPPLEMENT THE WELL WATER THAT YOU GOT. BACK IN THE EARLY 2000S, YOU SOLD YOUR CAPACITY TO THE CITY OF LAKE CITY AND THEN CONTRACTED WITH US TO EXPAND YOUR SYSTEM. >> THIS IS OUR NETWORK OF CANALS. OUR NETWORK OF CANALS IS AROUND 300 MILES OF THEM. THEY ARE MOSTLY JUST DIRT CANALS THAT RUN THROUGH THIS AREA. THE VAST MAJORITY OF ALL OF THIS IS GRAVITY FLOW. ONCE WE PUMP IT AND LIFT IT OUT OF THE BRAZOS RIVER AND DUMP IT INTO THE CANAL SYSTEM, IT RUNS BY GRAVITY ALL THE WAY TO TEXAS CITY. THERE IS ONE EXCEPTION, AND THAT'S IN THE UPPER LEFT PORTION OF THE SCREEN, THAT RED AND PURPLE AREA. THAT'S ACTUALLY A CREEK. THAT'S ACTUALLY JONES CREEK AND OYSTER CREEK. THE PURPLE AREA UP THERE, OYSTER CREEK, IF YOU'VE EVER NOTICED THE CONSTANT LEVEL LAKES IN SUGAR LAND AND WONDERED HOW IN THE WORLD THERE ARE ALWAYS CONSTANT LEVEL LAKES, THAT'S BECAUSE THAT'S THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY'S WATER RUNNING THROUGH THE CITY OF SUGAR LAND IN THAT AREA. THE UPPER AREA, THIS GREEN SECTION AND THE TRIBUTARIES OFF OF IT IS THE AMERICAN CANAL AND THE BRISCOE CANAL, WHICH HAD BEEN AROUND SINCE, I GUESS AROUND 1900. WE HAVE ACTUALLY OWNED THAT AREA SINCE AROUND 1990. THIS OTHER AREA, THE PURPLE AND THE DARK BLUE IN THIS AREA THROUGH HERE, [03:00:02] WAS PURCHASED IN 2006. IT'S THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU SYSTEM OR THE DUAL SYSTEM. WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT HERE SHORTLY AS WELL. THIS IS MY BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THERE'S 10 OF US. THE 10 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS ARE APPOINTED BY COUNTY JUDGES. NOW, USUALLY, IN WATER AUTHORITIES SUCH AS OURSELVES, THEY ARE TYPICALLY APPOINTED BY GOVERNOR. OURS IS NOT. WE'RE ACTUALLY A RELATIVELY UNUSUAL WATER AUTHORITY BECAUSE WE USED TO BE A PRIVATE COMPANY. WE ACTUALLY HAVE OUR OWN VERY SPECIFIC ENABLING LEGISLATION, WHICH HAS CHANGED FROM TIME TO TIME. WE'RE NO LONGER THE GALVESTON COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY AND HAVEN'T BEEN SINCE THE 1990S. WE'RE THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY. BACK PRIOR TO THAT, IT WAS ALL GALVESTON COUNTY BOARD MEMBERS. THIS ACTUALLY IS FIVE MEMBERS FROM GALVESTON COUNTY, THREE MEMBERS FROM BRAZORIA COUNTY, AND TWO FROM FORT BEND. YOU HAVE THREE BOARD MEMBERS THAT REPRESENT YOUR INTEREST. JODY HOOKS HERE IS A MUNICIPAL MEMBER. DUANE COLE AND BRAD MATLOCK ARE AT LARGE MEMBERS, AND BRAD IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT THIS TIME TOO. SOME OF YOU MAY ALSO RECOGNIZE ALLEN BOGARD. ALLEN BOGARD IS THE FORMER CITY MANAGER OF SUGAR LAND. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. TODAY, WE'RE ALL GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THREE ELEMENTS. ONE IS YOUR MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT, WHICH EXPIRES AT THE END OF 2027. ANOTHER ONE IS WHAT IS REFERRED TO FORMALLY AS THE INTERIM WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT OF 2006. WE CALL IT THE JULIFF CONTRACT A LOT OF TIMES TOO. THE NEXT ONE HAS TO DO WITH YOUR GALVESTON WELLS. I'M GOING TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CONFUSION THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE FIRST ONE IS FAIRLY ROUTINE, I THINK, AND THAT IS THAT I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO CONTINUE TO UTILIZE OUR WATER SUPPLY FOR THE NEXT 40 YEARS, ESSENTIALLY IS WHAT IT BOILS DOWN TO. THAT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR YOU TO APPROVE THAT FOR US TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. THE NEXT ONE, THE INTERIM WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT, HAD TO DO WITH WATER CAPACITY THAT YOU ALL PURCHASED BACK IN 2006, AND THEN CIRCUMSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE WELLS. THIS IS THE THOMAS MACKEY WATER TREATMENT PLANT THAT IS IN TEXAS CITY. THIS IS 146 HERE, AND IT'S BETWEEN 1765 AND 1764. IF ANY OF YOU WOULD EVER LIKE TO COME HAVE A LOOK AT THE PLANT, IT'S A 57 MILLION GALLON A DAY WATER TREATMENT PLANT. WE'D LOVE TO SHOW IT OFF TO YOU. IT'S VERY WELL RUN. I HAVE AN EXCELLENT STAFF THAT I'M SO PROUD TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE. THIS IS ACTUALLY THE CANAL THAT RUNS THROUGH HERE WHERE WE HAVE PUMPED WATER OUT OF THE BRAZOS RIVER, AND THIS IS THE INTAKE WHERE THEY DO A BIT OF TREATMENT THAT PRECIPITATES ALL OF THIS OUT AND THEN THEY RUN IT THROUGH THE PROCESSES, GOES INTO THESE TANKS, AND THEN IS PUMPED TO YOU ALL. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TELL YOU, AND I'M SO REMARKABLY PROUD OF THIS, AND MOSTLY THROW THIS UP HERE AS A PLACEHOLDER BECAUSE THE FONT IS TOO SMALL, BUT WE ACTUALLY SELL YOU THE CHEAPEST WHOLESALE WATER IN THE STATE BY FAR. NOW, I READ A FEW YEARS AGO, IT'S LIKE, WE NEED TO CHECK OUT THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY AND ITS RATES. COME ON, BECAUSE WE ARE ABSOLUTELY BY FAR THE CHEAPEST WATER IN THE STATE. WE SELL YOU ACTUALLY DELIVERED WATER FOR $1 PER 1,000 GALLONS. LET ME PUT THAT INTO PERSPECTIVE A LITTLE BIT. DOWN HERE AT THIS END IS THE CITY OF WICHITA FALLS. THEY'RE NOT THE HIGHEST. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME BROAD BASED AREA. THAT'S $5. STATE OF HOUSTON WHOLESALE RATES, $3.72. THIS IS THE NORTH TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT. THEIR WHOLESALE RATE IS $3.69. BY THE WAY, IT'S ABOUT TO GO UP SHARPLY. THEY TELL ME, BY THE WAY, AS WELL, THAT IF YOU'RE DEVELOPING NEW WATER SUPPLY RIGHT NOW, THAT JUST THE PERMITTING COST SPREAD OVER 30 YEARS IS OVER $3 1,000. JUST THE PERMITTING COST. >> HOW DO YOU ACHIEVE THAT? JUST BY THE HISTORY? >> YOU BET. YOU WERE HERE AT THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME. I'M GLAD YOU ASKED ME THAT QUESTION BECAUSE HERE'S THE THING. YOUR WATER COMES TO YOU PUMPED OUT OF THE BRAZOS RIVER INTO RICE CANALS. YOUR RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS DATE BACK TO THE 1920S. THE WATER THAT COMES OUT OF THE RIVER THROUGH THOSE WATER RIGHTS IS FREE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE WATER RIGHTS THAT ARE THAT OLD. DUMPING IT INTO A 300-MILE CANAL SYSTEM, YOU AREN'T PUMPING AND PRESSURIZING THAT WATER THROUGH A PIPING SYSTEM. IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD COST FOR THAT CANAL SYSTEM THAT I'VE SHOWED YOU JUST JUST A SHORT BIT AGO. [03:05:01] WELL, I CAN TELL YOU WHAT IT COSTS. THE CITY OF HOUSTON JUST GOT THROUGH BUILDING A NORTHEAST PLANT IN HOUSTON. IF YOU'RE GOING NORTH ON EASTERN BELTWAY 8 AND GO AROUND THE CURVE LIKE YOU'RE HEADED TOWARD THE AIRPORT, IN THAT CURVE JUST BACK OFF TO THE CORNER IS AN ENORMOUS, I THINK IT'S A BILLION GALLONS A DAY WATER TREATMENT PLANT. THAT BILLION GALLON A DAY WATER TREATMENT PLANT HAS A WATER LINE THAT'S CONNECTED TO IT THAT PUMPS IT ALL THE WAY OVER KATY. WELL, THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST NORTH OF ME. WELL, THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE JUST NORTH OF ME, THAT WATER RATE IS BETWEEN EIGHT AND $10 1,000. JUST A SHOCKING AMOUNT. TO PUT THAT INTO PERSPECTIVE ON YOUR WATER BILL AS WELL. CALLING IT A WATER BILL IS AWKWARD BECAUSE PEOPLE THINK IT'S WATER. MY WATER BILL IS USUALLY ABOUT $100 A MONTH. I DID SOME CALCULATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, AND OF THAT, WHAT I CHARGE ME IS $6 A MONTH. $6 OF YOUR $100 WATER BILL IS ACTUALLY WATER THAT COMES TO YOU AT VIRGINIA POINT. THIS IS THE GALVESTON WELL FIELD. THIS USED TO BE YOUR SOLE SUPPLY OF WATER. IT DATES BACK VERY OLD. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THERE'S A LINE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1890 THAT USED TO BE A PART OF THE SYSTEM, AND THAT 1890 LINE WAS STILL IN SERVICE WHEN I CAME TO WORK HERE IN 1999. YOU USED TO GET ALL OF YOUR WATER FROM THIS GROUPING OF WELLS. YOU FOUND THAT THIS GROUPING OF WELLS WAS NOT SUFFICIENT. THEN AGAIN, YOU'RE ALSO IN A SUBSIDENCE DISTRICT. THERE WAS A RESTRICTION TO HOW MUCH WATER YOU COULD PULL OUT OF THESE WELLS BECAUSE EVERYONE WAS SINKING. UP HERE AT THE NORTHERN END, YOU ATTACHED ONTO IT WITH A PIPELINE AND STARTED GETTING YOUR WATER FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON IN THE 1970S. WELL, HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT. EVERYBODY STARTED CONNECTING ONTO THE LINE AND SO FORTH, AND WE WOULD DO 16 MILLION GALLONS A DAY. WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WORK HERE, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER, WE WERE GETTING EIGHT, AND IT WAS HARD TO GET THAT EIGHT BECAUSE WE WERE AT THE END OF THE LINE. WE WERE HAVING TO BLEND CRAZY WITH THESE WELLS AND SO FORTH. WELL, TURNS OUT CLEAR LAKE CITY WATER AUTHORITY WAS THE ONE THAT WAS TAKING THE WATER AND NOBODY WOULD TELL ME WHILE I WORKED HERE. I HAD TO GO TO WORK THERE BEFORE THEY WOULD TELL ME THAT THAT'S WHAT WAS HAPPENING. CLEAR LAKE CITY WATER AUTHORITY IS ESSENTIALLY PULLING YOUR WATER OFF OF THE SYSTEM. WHAT YOU ENDED UP DOING WAS YOU ENDED UP SELLING THIS LINE TO THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY. YOU ALSO SOLD YOUR CAPACITY AND THE PLANT TO THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY AND USED ALL THAT MONEY TO BUILD A NEW EXPANDED PLANT IN TEXAS CITY AND A PIPELINE THAT WOULD GET THAT WATER TO YOU. YOU ACTUALLY SOLD THE WELLS TO US AS WELL BACK DURING THAT TIME. >> THE COUNTY SELLING? THE CITY. WE OWNED THOSE WELLS. >> THE CITY OWNED THE WELLS, AND THE CITY SOLD THOSE WELLS TO THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY IN AROUND 2000. SEE IF I CAN GET ALL OF THIS RIGHT BECAUSE WHEN I FIRST WENT CAME TO WORK HERE, WE HADN'T QUITE BUILT ALL OF THE NEW PIPELINES. AGAIN, THE NEW PIPELINE WAS 1917, THE OLD PIPELINE WAS 1890 THAT CAME HERE. WHEN THE SALES WERE TAKING PLACE, I FIRST CAME TO WORK HERE '99, AND WHAT I SAID WAS, WELL, YOU'RE GOING TO MAROON THESE WELLS UP HERE TO WHERE THEY'RE COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY USELESS BECAUSE THE WATER FLOWED THIS WAY IN THE LINES. WELL, WITH A NEW SYSTEM, THE WATER FLOWS THIS WAY IN THE LINES. ALL THESE CUSTOMERS, BY THE WAY, SANTA FE, AND HITCHCOCK, AND SO FORTH, THEY USED TO BE YOUR CUSTOMERS. AGAIN, WATER FLOWS THIS WAY. WHAT I WAS TOLD BACK THEN WAS THAT, SORRY, WE JUST HAD TO GET THIS DONE. SOMEONE WILL FIGURE THAT OUT IN 20 OR 30 YEARS. >> HERE WE ARE. >> HERE WE ARE. WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH YOUR STAFF FOR QUITE A WHILE TO WORK THIS OUT BECAUSE ALL OF THESE ISSUES ARE COMPLEX, BUT WE NEED TO GET OURSELVES ALL ON THE RIGHT FOOTING WITH ALL OF THESE THINGS. THIS IS A PICTURE OF ONE OF YOUR WELLS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TELL YOU ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE WELLS IS THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN ODD CIRCUMSTANCE WITH THE WELLS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT UP TO A POTABLE WATER STANDARD. YOU GO, WHAT? THEY USED TO UP TO POTABLE WATER STANDARD. WHY ARE THEY NOT THAT POTABLE WATER STANDARD? WELL, THERE NEEDS TO BE DISINFECTION ON THOSE WELLS. >> IS THAT A JACK STAND THAT'S HOLDING UP THE MIDDLE PART? [03:10:01] >> IT PROBABLY IS. IT WORKS. THERE'S NOT DISINFECTION ON THE SYSTEM. WELL, WHY DIDN'T YOU HAVE DISINFECTION ON THE SYSTEM? WELL, WHAT YOU WOULD DO IS YOU GATHERED ALL OF THE WATER UP AND YOU PUT IT INTO THIS LINE AND YOU PUMPED IT DOWN THROUGH, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THE GALVESTON WATER WORKS BUILDING DOWN HERE. THAT USED TO ACTUALLY BE A FUNCTIONAL PUMP STATION WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WORK HERE IN THE '90S. IT WOULD PUMP THE WATER DOWN INTO GALVESTON AND THEN YOU WOULD COORDINATE IT THERE. YOU GATHERED IT ALL TOGETHER AND YOU COORDINATED IT ALL ON ONE SPOT. IT ACTUALLY MADE A LOT OF SENSE AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING CHLORINE ON EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE. FOR THEM TO BE USEFUL INTO THE SYSTEM NOW, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO PUT CHLORINE ON EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE BECAUSE THIS IS ACTUALLY A FUNCTIONAL PIPELINE THAT PROVIDES POTABLE WATER TO EVERYONE AT THIS POINT. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK OUT THE SITUATIONS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AS WELL. THEN THERE'S THE JULIFF CONTRACT. THE JULIFF CONTRACT IS SOMETHING ALSO KNOWN AS THE INTERIM WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT. THIS IS A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE IN 2006, THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY CAME TO THE CITY MANAGER AT THE TIME AND SAID, THERE'S NO MORE WATER IN THE BRAZOS RIVER. IF YOU WANT MORE WATER, I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUY THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU WATER COMPANY. WHAT I'LL DO IS I'M GOING TO SELL YOU CAPACITY IN OUR SYSTEM, BUT YOU HAVE TO HELP US PURCHASE THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU WATER COMPANY. YOU AND THE CITY OF TEXAS CITY AND THE CITY OF PEARLAND ALL GOT PUT TOGETHER TO DO THIS. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE REALLY QUICK DEALS BECAUSE TO BE QUITE FRANK WITH YOU, YOU NEEDED TO BUY IT BEFORE DAO DID. THAT'S PLAIN AND SIMPLE. BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY CUSTOMERS, WHAT THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY DID WAS THEY LOOKED TO THE BIG GUYS, TEXAS CITY, GALVESTON, AND PEARLAND. WE NEED YOU TO ESSENTIALLY PROVIDE US MONEY SO WE CAN PURCHASE THIS. WE WILL GIVE YOU CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM THAT WILL BE DERIVED FROM WHAT WE GET. BUT ALSO, I NEED YOU TO PURCHASE SOME ADDITIONAL WATER WHILE YOU'RE DOING IT. I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT THAT HERE IN JUST A SECOND. THIS GREEN SECTION HERE AND THIS PURPLE SECTION HERE IS WHAT WAS PURCHASED WITH THE CHOCOLATE BAYOU WATER COMPANY PURCHASE. THIS PUMPING PLANT RIGHT HERE WAS WHAT WAS PURCHASED. BUT WHAT YOU REALLY WANTED WAS THE RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH IT AND THE CAPACITY THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I KNOW YOU CAN'T READ THIS EITHER, BUT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU AN EXCERPT FROM THE JULIFF CONTRACT. THIS IS YOU ON THIS LINE ITEM RIGHT HERE. THIS IS ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE GOING TO PARTICIPATE IN A WATER PLANT EXPANSION THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN SHORTLY AFTER 2006. ALL OF THIS WAS PURCHASED. YOU AND TEXAS CITY NOT ONLY PURCHASED YOUR SHARE, BUT YOU PURCHASED EVERYONE ELSE'S SHARE TOO. THE INTENTION WAS IS FOR US TO TURN AROUND AND SELL ON YOUR BEHALF TO ALL OF THESE LITTLE INDIVIDUAL ONES BECAUSE THEY REALLY FELT LIKE THEY COULDN'T GET ALL OF THESE PEOPLE TO AGREE TO DO ALL OF THIS ALL AT ONE TIME. WELL, 2006 GOES, PASSED, 2007 AND 2008, IN 2008, HURRICANE IKE. WE HAD A RECESSION. WE HAD CHANGES. I LEFT AT THE END OF 2009. YOU CHANGED CITY MANAGER SHORTLY AFTER THAT AS WELL. GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY CHANGED ITS GENERAL MANAGER AS WELL. THE JULIFF CONTRACT JUST SAT. BUT HERE'S A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS WITH THE JULIFF CONTRACT. ONE WAS, IT ASSUMED THAT YOU WERE ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, WITHOUT FAIL GOING TO BUILD THAT WATER TREATMENT PLANT. THERE WAS NO PROVISION IN IT WHATSOEVER IF YOU DIDN'T. I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND THAT I'M A LAWYER TODAY. YOU CAN TALK TO YOUR LAWYER ABOUT THIS. IT DIDN'T HAVE AN EXPIRATION DATE IN THE CONTRACT ANYWHERE. >> THAT MAKES THEM REMARKABLY AWKWARD AS WELL. AGAIN, WE ASSUME THAT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WAS GOING TO BE BUILT, NO EXPIRATION DATE, HURRICANE IKE HITS, AND LET'S SEE. BACK UP. AGAIN, YOU HAVE PURCHASED CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM. WHAT IT SAID, ESSENTIALLY, AND I APOLOGIZE WHEN I DIVE OFF TOO FAR, BUT I FEEL LIKE YOU NEED TO KNOW SOME OF THESE THINGS. WHEN IT COMES TO RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS, THE DIVERSION PERMITS ARE AT A PARTICULAR SPOT ON THE RIVER. YOU CAN'T JUST PULL IT OUT ANYWHERE. [03:15:01] IT'S TIED TO A SPOT ON THE RIVER, AND IT'S TIED TO HOW OLD THE PERMIT IS. WELL, ALL OF THE RIGHTS WERE HERE. WELL, WITH ALL OF THE RIGHTS BEING HERE, WHAT WE SAID WAS, WE WOULD DO OUR VERY BEST TO MOVE THESE RIGHTS UP TO ACTUALLY ANY OF THOSE POINTS FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THEM, OR YOU WOULD BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NECESSARY TO GET THE WATER TO THE SYSTEM THAT WOULD WORK. BECAUSE REMEMBER, THIS IS ALL GRAVITY FLOW, SO IF IT'S GRAVITY FLOWING, IT'S GRAVITY HERE AND NOT HERE, WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO BE HERE AND HERE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY DID WAS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, AND THAT WAS MOVE THESE RIGHTS FROM HERE TO HERE. DOW JUMPED IN THE WAY. BECAUSE DOW, BY THE WAY, RIGHT DOWN HERE, AND THEY HAVE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE HAD AND DOW WENT WAY STOP, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. THERE WAS FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I WAS NOT A PART OF IT. THIS IS FROM DOW, TELLING ME THIS THAT WE WENT TO MEDIATION WITH DOW AND WORKED OUT A DEAL WITH DOW WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO MOVE THE RIGHTS FROM HERE TO HERE. WE WENT THROUGH THE VERY, VERY LENGTHY TCEQ PROCESS THAT'S NECESSARY TO MOVE THOSE RIGHTS, AND WE LEFT ONE PART UNDONE. THAT WAS SOMETHING CALLED THE WATER ACCOUNTING PLAN, AND IT'S JUST LIKE MONEY ACCOUNTING. WHEN YOU PULL WATER OUT OF THE RIVER, YOU HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR IT. THAT ACCOUNTING PLAN NEEDED TO BE APPROVED. WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SAW AS WELL IS THAT NOT ONLY DID WE NEED TO MOVE THIS TO HERE, BUT WE THOUGHT, WHAT THE HECK, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE THE RIGHTS ANYWHERE WE WANT TO. ALL OF OUR RIGHTS, WE HAVE THREE SPOTS, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE THEM ANYWHERE WE WANT ANYTIME WE WANT. WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS TO DO THAT. THAT PROCESS IS STILL ONGOING. JUST TO GET THE PERMIT THROUGH THE TCEQ'S REVIEW PROCESSES TOOK FOUR YEARS. GIVES YOU AN IDEA AS TO HOW LONG ALL OF THAT WORKS. MEANWHILE, THIS THING WE WORKED OUT WITH DOW, WE THOUGHT THAT WE NEEDED TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE OVERALL PROCESS BECAUSE DOW WAS JUMPY ABOUT THE WHOLE THING. WELL, AS IT TURNS OUT, WHEN WE TRIED TO MOVE EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE, OF COURSE, DOW JUMPED IN THE WAY AGAIN, AND THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY SAID, THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK FOR US EITHER. SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE JUST GONE BACK AND DONE WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, AND WE'RE NOW PUTTING THE ACCOUNTING SYSTEM THROUGH IN ORDER TO GET THE TCEQ TO APPROVE IT, AND I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT. WE'RE ALSO GOING TO DO ONE OTHER THING, YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT THIS SPOT IN THE CANAL SYSTEM AND THIS SPOT IN THE CANAL SYSTEM REAL CLOSE TOGETHER. IT'S ONLY A MILE. WE ACTUALLY HAVE MOVED UP IN OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, THE ABILITY TO MOVE WATER ACROSS FROM HERE TO HERE. AGAIN, THIS IS ALL BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THESE THINGS. I WANT TO TAKE JUST A MOMENT IF I MAY TO DIGRESS A LITTLE BIT AND TELL YOU ABOUT SOME THINGS YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN. ONE IS THE SHANNON PUMPING PLANT. RIGHT HERE. SHANNON PUMPING PLANT IS SOUTH OF KATY. YOU HAVE TO PACK A LAUNCH TO EVEN GET THERE. IT'S A LONG, LONG TRIP. SHANNON PUMPING PLANT. THIS IS THE OLD SHANNON PUMPING PLANT. THIS IS THE NEW SHANNON PUMPING PLANT, AND THIS IS THE INTAKE, AND THE INTAKE WAS SEVERELY DAMAGED DURING HURRICANE HARVEY. WE GOT FEMA MONEY TO DEAL WITH THAT. THE FEMA MONEY WAS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF $59 MILLION. THAT WAS TO REBUILD THE INTAKE. BUT YOU CAN IMAGINE FOR A SECOND, YOU CAN'T REBUILD THE INTAKE. IT'S LIKE OPEN HEART SURGERY. I CAN'T REBUILD THE INTAKE WITHOUT KEEPING THE INTAKE RUNNING. WE DECIDED WE WERE GOING TO REBUILD THE WHOLE THING AND SO THIS IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. WE'RE GOING TO BE ADVERTISING THIS THING FOR BIDS EARLY NEXT YEAR, AND THIS IS THE INTAKE, SO INTAKE THERE. THIS IS THE INTAKE. WE'RE JUST ABOUT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. IN ADDITION, I ALWAYS GET THIS QUESTION. WHAT ABOUT DIESEL? I KEEP HEARING THERE'S AN ENDLESS SEA OF WATER OUT THERE. WHAT ABOUT DIESEL? I NOW KNOW MORE ABOUT DIESEL THAN I WOULD EVER HOPE TO KNOW. A FEW THINGS. ONE IS, WE ARE CURRENTLY WE GOT A GRANT FROM THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TO DO A STUDY AS TO WHERE THE BEST LOCATION FOR DIESEL PLANT WOULD BE. WELL, THAT STUDY IS ONGOING AND WE'LL BE FINISHED IN THE SUMMERTIME. WE'LL SEE WHAT THE STUDY ENDS UP WITH. CAN WE BUILD A DIESEL PLANT? YEAH, YOU CAN. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT WHATSOEVER. THERE ARE SOME ISSUES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH IT ARE FIRST OF ALL, OUR RATES. REMEMBER I SAID A DOLLAR THOUSAND? TRY 10, $10 1,000. THAT'S $6 THAT'S ON MY BILL WOULD BECOME 60. YOU'LL PROBABLY WOULDN'T CARE TOO TERRIBLY MUCH FOR THAT AT THIS POINT. NEXT THING IS IS THAT THE ISRAELIS AND I VISITED WITH THEM QUITE A LOT BECAUSE THEY'RE THE DIESEL EXPERTS. [03:20:02] THEY SAID, IF YOU HADN'T FIXED EVERY SINGLE LEAK IN YOUR LINE LINES BEFORE THEN, THEN WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? BY THE WAY, WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WORK HERE, WE LEAKED 60% OF OUR WATER. YOUR STAFF HAS DONE SUCH AN AMAZING JOB IN GETTING IT TO WHERE YOU DON'T. 1999, 60% OF THE WATER IS WHAT WE LEAKED. JUST ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. HERE'S ANOTHER COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM. DIESEL PLANTS GO DOWN. AND WHEN THEY GO DOWN, THEY GO DOWN HARD. THEY DON'T GO DOWN WHERE THEY'RE WORKING, THEY GO OFF LINE STRAIGHT UP OFF LINE. I'VE BEEN TO VISIT THE ONE IN SAN DIEGO. ONE IN SAN DIEGO IS 50 MILLION GALLON A DAY PLANT, CLOSE TO THE SAME SIZE OUR 57 MILLION GALLON A DAY PLANT. BUT IMAGINE FOR A MOMENT IF IT ROWS, IF IT WENT DOWN, SORRY, BRIAN, I CAN'T REALLY PROVIDE YOU WATER FOR THE TWO WEEKS IT'S GOING TO TAKE Y'ALL BE FINE THOUGH. NOW, THAT'S NOT A THING. SAN DIEGO, THOUGH, IT'S 10% OF THEIR WATER SUPPLY. IF THAT THING GOES DOWN FOR THEM, WE'LL BE FINE. NOT FINE FOR US. THE OTHER THING IS THEY'RE NOT SCALABLE. I'VE HAD PEOPLE SAY, WELL, YOU SHOULD BUILD IT A LITTLE BIT, JUST TO GET STARTED AND THAT WORKS. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE INTAKE AND OUTLET. YOU HAVE TO BUILD THE INTAKE AND OUTLET, IF THE SIZE YOU WANT THE ULTIMATE FACILITY IS GOING TO BE, OR EACH INDIVIDUAL TIME, YOU HAVE TO GO BACK OUT AND BUILD A NEW ONE AND GET IT PERMITTED. EVERY TIME. THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE OR RATIONAL, EITHER, YOUR $10 1,000 WATER WOULD BECOME HUGE AND BY THE WAY, BUILDING ONE ON THE ISLAND. YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ELECTRICITY TO EVEN BEGIN THE NOTION OF THAT. AGAIN, THIS IS YOUR MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT. BRIAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH YOU WANT ME TO GET OFF INTO THAT, BUT I'LL JUST LEAVE IN AND THEN YOU ALL CAN HELP ME WITH THIS. MUNICIPAL WATER CONTRACT EXPIRES DECEMBER 31ST, 2027. IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS, WE REALLY NEED YOU TO HAVE THIS MUNICIPAL WATER CONTRACT IN PLACE. IT'S OUR STANDARD FORM CONTRACT, AND SO YOUR STAFF IS GOING TO ASK YOU TO APPROVE THAT. THE NEXT ONE IS THE INTERIM WATER SUPPLY CONTRACT. REMEMBER, THAT'S THE ONE WHERE YOU BOUGHT A BUNCH OF CAPACITY, BUT THEN THERE WERE ALL SORTS OF ASSUMPTIONS AND THE LIKE. WELL, HERE'S THE THING, YOU NEED MORE WATER. THIS IS RAW WATER, BY THE WAY, NOT TREATED WATER. YOU NEED MORE WATER. YOUR STAFF CAN TELL YOU ABOUT ALL OF YOUR NEW WATER NEEDS THAT YOU HAD. THE GOOD NEWS IS YOU ALREADY HAVE SOME. YOU'RE NOT COMING TO ME AND GOING, CAN I HAVE WATER? YOU ALREADY GOT IT. YOU ALREADY HAVE CAPACITY IN THE SYSTEM. THAT'S REMARKABLY COOL. THE OTHER THING IS IS THAT WE HAVE RAW WATER CAPACITY. THANK YOU FOR RECONFIRMING THAT. RAW WATER CAPACITY IN OUR SYSTEM. WHAT THAT MEANS THOUGH IS THAT YOU STILL HAVE TO PURCHASE AND BUILD WATER TREATMENT PLANT IN ORDER TO TREAT THAT WATER, BUT YOU HAVE THE RAW WATER CAPACITY, OTHERWISE YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING. OTHERWISE YOU WOULD COME TO ME AND HERE'S WHAT I WOULD DO, I'D SAY, YEAH I HAVE WATER. HERE'S MY BUY AND FEES. I THINK THEY'RE REAL CLOSE TO $3 MILLION PER MILLION GALLONS BUYING FEES. >> RAW WATER IS 1 MILLION. >> THE RAW WATER PORTION OF IT IS 1 MILLION. THEN YOU GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO PAY ME WHETHER YOU USE THAT WATER OR NOT FOR THE REST OF THE TIME OF YOUR CONTRACT. WHETHER YOU USE A DROP OF IT OR NOT AND THAT'S JUST THE WAY WATER IS. TAKE OR PAY IS JUST THE THING. THAT'S JUST THE WAY WATER WORKS, AND THERE'S REALLY NO SEQUENCE ABOUT THAT. WHAT IT DOES IS IT TAKES OUT ALL OF THE NOTION OF ALL OF THE STUFF THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. IT FIRMS UP THAT YOU HAVE CAPACITY IN OUR SYSTEM. RECOGNIZING THAT YOU PAID A LOT OF MONEY FOR THAT, IT ALSO DELAYS THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO START PAYING ME EVERY SINGLE YEAR FOR THAT WATER. BECAUSE AGAIN, IF YOU COME ASKED ME FOR IT RIGHT NOW, I'D BE SAYING, SURE, YOU BET YOU AND YOU'RE GOING TO BE PAYING ME. NOW, IT HAS PUSHED IT OUT TO A DISTANCE THAT OTHERS CAN TELL YOU ABOUT AS WELL. NEXT THING IS THE GALVESTON WELLS CONTRACT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE FOUND OUT, BY THE WAY, IS WE STARTED DOWNING THE WELLS AGAIN. WE DIDN'T MAINTAIN THEM AND YOU GUYS WERE MAD, AND SO YOU GOT THEM BACK. WELL, WHAT WE FOUND WAS IS THAT WE CAN'T LEGALLY OWN THEM, WELL, CAN OWN THEM, WE JUST CAN'T PUMP ANY WATER OUT OF THEM. BECAUSE OF SUBSIDENCE DISTRICT RULES, YOU'RE THE ONE THAT HAS THE ABILITY TO PUMP THE WATER. WHAT THIS DOES IS IT MAKES IT TO WHERE YOU NOW HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR WELLS, WHICH YOU NEED ACCESS TO YOUR WELLS, BY THE WAY, FOR A FEW REASONS. ONE IS ON PAPER FOR THAT. THE SECOND THING IS THAT WHEN THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE WELLS FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES AND SO FORTH. WHAT THIS DOES IS IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THE WATER FROM THESE WELLS, WE WILL OPERATE THEM. YOU ALL WILL BRING THEM UP AND KEEP THEM UP TO WHATEVER THE STANDARDS ARE NECESSARY. [03:25:03] THEN THE WAY THIS WILL WORK, BECAUSE REMEMBER THE WATER RUNS WRONG DIRECTION IN THE LINE, SO HOW IN THE WORLD ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE WATER? WELL, JUST WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING IS BLENDING THE WATER. LAKE CITY WILL GET THAT WATER. THE WATER THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE GOING TO LAKE CITY WILL COME TO YOU. IT'S ALL ONE BIG SYSTEM ALL WILL BE BLENDED TOGETHER AND SO FORTH. IT NOW PUTS YOUR WELLS TO WHERE ON PAPER, YOU GET A HUGE DEAL. THEN IN REALITY, YOU GET IT, AND THEN IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE WELLS FROM TIME TO TIME WHEN WE THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY HAVE AN EMERGENCY AS WELL. >> IT PUTS WATER IN YOUR SYSTEM. >> IT PUTS WATER IN OUR SYSTEM. IT DOES. IN CLOSING, I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU A COUPLE OF THINGS AND WE CAN GO OFF INTO THE CONTRACTS THEMSELVES. THAT'S A TEXAS CITY RESERVOIR. YOU MAY NOT EVEN KNOW IT EXISTS. BEAUTIFUL THING. ALL YOU SEE WHEN YOU DRIVE BY WITH 46 AND LAVE. HERE'S THE ISSUE THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT. THIS IS A SERIOUS CASE OF TOO MUCH TOO LITTLE, AND I ACTUALLY MADE A PRESENTATION ON THIS AT A NATIONAL CONFERENCE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. TO MUCH TOO LITTLE. THIS IS A TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD MAP. THIS IS ALL OF THE WATER SUPPLY RESERVOIRS IN THE STATE. IF THEY'RE DARK BLUE, THEY'RE FULL. IF THEY'RE RED, THEY'RE EMPTY. WHEN I SAY EMPTY, I'M NOT KIDDING. EMPTY. I DRAW A LINE RIGHT THROUGH HERE. BY THE WAY, THAT LINE IS COLORADO RIVER BASIN JUST RIGHT OVER FROM WHERE WE ARE. TEXAS IS DESPERATE FOR WATER. THE STATE SAYS WE ARE 10-12 MILLION ACRE FEET SHOT OF THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WE NEED. GOOD NEWS IS THAT YOU ALL ARE WELL SET WITH YOUR RUN OF THE RIVER WATER AND YOUR BACKUP WATER AND THAT THING. YOU'RE IN GOOD SHAPE. THESE PEOPLE ARE. THEY'RE ABOUT TO BUILD A DIESEL PLANT DOWN HERE IN SOUTH TEXAS ANOTHER ONE AN EXPANSION OF THE ONE DOWN HERE IN BROWNSVILLE BECAUSE VULCAN AND HEMPSTEAD DON'T HAVE ANY WATER AT ALL. TEN PERCENT FULL, 15% FULL. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THIS AREA HERE AND I'LL SHOW YOU MORE ABOUT THAT HERE IN A MOMENT. THIS IS BEING ROLLED OUT TODAY AT THE TEXAS WATER CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION. I JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE GOTTEN AN ADVANCED COPY OF IT. SENATOR PERRY OF LUBBOCK IS THE SENATOR THAT'S IN CHARGE OF ALL THIS WATER. SENATOR PERRY HAS A PLAN AND HE DEVELOPED IT HIMSELF. IT IS A PLAN TO GET WATER TO TEXAS WHERE TEXAS DOES NOT HAVE WATER, AND I WANT TO SHOW YOU HOW DESPERATE EVERYONE IS. THIS IS A DIESEL PLANT. MIGHT BE IN FREEPORT MIGHT BE HERE. THIS IS A DIESEL PLANT AND CORPUS. THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE CORPUS PLANT BEING MUCH MUCH BIGGER THAN IT CURRENTLY IS AND THIS IS EITHER BROWNSVILLE OR LAGUNA MADRE. AGAIN, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY WATER AT ALL DOWN HERE. THEY'RE LOOKING AT MOVING WATER FROM HERE TO LUBBOCK. DIESEL WATER. THEY'RE LOOKING AT MOVING WATER FROM HERE TO WICHITA FALLS. DIESEL WATER. THEY'RE LOOKING AT MOVING WATER. THESE ARE 220 INCH PIPELINES. TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY INCH PIPELINES, WHERE ARKANSAS WILL SELL WATER, AND THEY WILL PIPE IT ALL THE WAY TO AMARILLO. THIS IS DESPERATE RIGHT HERE. MY JOB IS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE IN YOUR CAPACITY THAT YOU GET AND YOUR BACKUP AND SO FORTH, STAYS IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. I'M TRYING TO POSITION YOU ALL WHERE WE FIX ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD THAT HAPPENED DURING MY TENURE. YOUR STAFF HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY AMAZING AT WORKING THROUGH THIS. IMAGINE HAVING TO HEAR ALL OF THIS WEIRD COMPLEXITY ALL THE TIME AND THE THINGS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. THEY'VE DONE A REMARKABLY GOOD JOB AND SO AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT, THESE CONTRACTS BEING APPROVED WILL MAKE IT WHERE WE ARE ALL COMPLETELY PARTNERS IN ALL OF THIS, AND GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY WILL BE PROTECTING YOUR INTERESTS SO THAT ALL OF THIS DOESN'T END UP BLEEDING OVER INTO YOUR RUN OF THE RIVER RIGHTS BECOMING LESS LESS AVAILABLE. I KNOW I DUMPED AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT ON YOU. IT'S NOT A BIG JUMP FROM THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND THE BRAZOS RIVER BASIN EITHER IN TERMS OF DRAFT. THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE I WASN'T HERE. THANK YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN 2011, 2013. THERE WASN'T ANY WATER RUNNING IN BRAZOS AT ALL. IT WOULD TAKE ME 30 MINUTES TO DESCRIBE FOR YOU THE ISSUES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, BUT THEY'RE INTENSE AND DEEP AND STATEWIDE. >> IT IS EASY ENOUGH FOR THAT DROUGHT LINE TO SHIFT AND INCLUDE THE BRAZOS BASIN AS WELL. WE ARE LOOKING AT ALL OPPORTUNITIES FOR BACKUP, INCLUDING DIESEL, INCLUDING REUSE WATER, INCLUDING AQUIFER STORAGE RECOVERY, ETC. ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION THAT I IMPLEMENTED WHEN I GOT THERE, [03:30:04] WE UTILIZE MUNICIPAL PLANNING STANDARDS NOW ON EVERYTHING THAT WE DO. WE HAVE A FULL STRATEGIC PLAN, WE HAVE A FULL MASTER PLAN. WE HAVE A 10-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE HAVE A 10-YEAR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PERFORMANCE, AND WE HAVE A 10-YEAR RATE PROJECTION FOR YOU ALL. THAT HASN'T HAPPENED IN THE PAST. BRIAN DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY TOO TERRIBLY MUCH ABOUT WHAT I'M GOING TO BE DOING NEXT. ACTUALLY, THAT RATE WILL REMAIN FAIRLY STEADY. THE ONLY TIME YOU'RE GOING TO SEE RATE WAVERING, WHAT'S A TOUGH ONE, IS IF THE BRAZOS RIVER AUTHORITY CHARGES ME MORE MONEY, I CAN'T CONTROL THAT. IF THERE IS SOME REGULATORY SOMETHING THAT POPS UP OUT THERE, SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF SOMETHING CALLED PFAS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO POTENTIALLY START TREATING FOR AND THAT THING, THAT'S NOT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, BUT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO TO CURRENTLY FUNCTION IS WHERE FUNCTIONING WE ARE. WE AREN'T BURDENING YOU WITH BUILDING CAPACITY IN OUR SYSTEM FOR FUTURE FOLKS. WE NOW HAVE THE BUYING FEES THAT ARE NECESSARY TO BE ABLE TO STAGE THAT SO PEOPLE CAN BE ABLE TO DO IT. >> IT'S BRANDON'S FORM OF IMPACT FEES. >> IT IS. WE DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW IMPACT FEE STANDARDS FOR SUCH THINGS. I'M SORRY. I DUMPED ALL OF THAT ON YOU. >> NO, THAT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE. >> BRIAN HAS MY CELL PHONE NUMBER. IF ANY OF YOU NEED TO REFRESH YOUR DISCUSSION OR YOU NEED ME TO COME BACK, I'LL COME BACK AS OFTEN AS YOU WANT ME TO TALK ABOUT WATER AS YOU CAN TELL, I TALK TILL I STOP. >> ENGINEER COULD WE GET BRANDON'S POWERPOINT? >> SURE. I'LL SEND IT TO COUNCIL. >> GUYS, WE'RE PUTTING THESE AGREEMENTS ON THE AGENDA STAFF HAS VETTED THEM. WE'VE WORKED WITH BRANDON ON THEM. I THINK WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON IT. WE ARE GETTING PRESSURE. BRANDON CAN GO THROUGH THIS BECAUSE HE LIVED THERE. OUR WATER USE HERE IS SO CYCLICAL. WE'RE HEAVY IN THE SUMMER, WE'RE LIGHT IN THE WINTER BUT THE WAY TCEQ AND OTHER REGULATORY AGENCIES DETERMINED, WE HAVE PLENTY OF WATER COMING TO US NOW TO MEET OUR NEEDS BUT THERE'S REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE THAT REQUIRES US BASED ON THE NUMBER OF DOORS. DON'T ASK ME HOW WATER TIES TO DOORS, AND THAT COUNTS APARTMENTS AND EVERYTHING THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE ACCESS TO A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF WATER FOR THAT NUMBER OF DOORS ON YOUR SYSTEM. WHILE WE HAVE PLENTY OF WATER AND EVEN HAVE PLENTY OF WATER FOR GROWTH, GIVEN OUR TRENDS AND HOW WE USE IT AND EVERYTHING ELSE, AND GIVEN OUR LEAK WORK THAT BRANDON MENTIONED, WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS EXTRA WATER TO MEET THESE NEW REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE CERTAIN WAIVERS AND THINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON THAT GET US DOWN THE ROAD A LITTLE WAYS, BUT WE'RE JUST KICKING THE CAN. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH BRANDON ON USING WELL CAPACITY, RIGHTS, ALL THESE THINGS. BRANDON FULL WELL KNOWS THAT HE'S NOT GOING TO GET A CALL FROM ME TELLING HIM I NEED 26 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER A DAY ANYTIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, BUT I HAVE TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT TO SHOW THAT I HAVE WITH BRANDON THAT I CAN GET 26 MILLION GALLONS IF I NEED IT. >> GOT YOU. >> DID I SAY THAT TOO? >> YOU ARE 100% ON BOARD. >> HAVE ANYONE ACTUALLY EVER THOUGHT ABOUT ONE? WE HAVE THIS 57 INCHES OF RAIN CAPTURING THAT. >> THERE IS ALWAYS DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE TCEQ WON'T LET ME COUNT ITS ACTUAL CAPACITY BECAUSE IT'S SPORADIC. YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY BUILD A RESERVOIR THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH IT AND THE RESERVOIR HAS TO BE RATED. BY THE WAY, DOW AND BRAZOSPORT WATER AUTHORITY ARE ABOUT TO EXPAND A RESERVOIR DOWN NEAR THEM, AND IT'S MERELY GOING TO COST JUST SHORT OF A BILLION DOLLARS FOR THAT. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT. YES, THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT QUITE A BIT, BUT IT'S AN INTERRUPTIBLE WATER AND CAN'T BE COUNTED ON. >> INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, YOU SAW BRANDON'S SLIDE THAT THE RESERVOIRS ARE ABOUT 72% CAPACITY IN OUR SYSTEM ON WAY UP. WHEN BRANDON AND I FIRST STARTED MEETING ON THIS EARLIER IN THE YEAR, WE WERE AT 100% PRETTY MUCH ACROSS THE BOARD. THAT SHOWS YOU HOW QUICK THINGS CHANGE. >> LET ME INTERJECT IN THAT AS WELL BECAUSE REMEMBER, WE'RE GETTING WATER OUT OF THOSE RESERVOIRS. BY THE WAY, ONLY ABOUT 10% OF WHITNEY IS FOR WATER SUPPLY, BUT WHEN THEY RUN OUT OF WHITNEY, IT'S LIKELY THAT THEY WILL MOVE TO BELTON AND STILLHOUSE HOLLOW. CENTRAL TEXAS DOESN'T HAVE ANY WATER RIGHT NOW AT ALL PERIOD. IMAGINE FOR A MOMENT, YOU'RE A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER IN BELTON, AND YOU SEE THAT GREAT, [03:35:02] BIG OLD LAKE OVER THERE, AND THAT BIG OLD LAKE IS BEING DRAINED AND IT'S GOING TO THOSE MEAN OLD INDUSTRIAL PEOPLE DOWN THERE IN GALVESTON COUNTY. WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THAT WATER? WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE CONTRACTED FOR IT. >> NO. THEY'VE BUILT A RECREATION AND TOURISM ECONOMY AROUND THOSE LAKES IN SOME INSTANCES AND THAT WATER IS ALSO GETTING USED FOR THAT TOO. IT'S A GREAT PARTNERSHIP THAT WE'RE GOING TO STORE THIS WATER. THE RESERVOIR THAT BRANDON POINTS TO ON 146 USED TO BE A COUNTY PARK THERE AND THAT WAS STOCKED WITH FISH. >> WE SEEM TO BE THE ONE PLACE YOU COULD DO DIESEL. IT'S IN THAT OLD CODE GEO PLANT. >> I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP TOO. I'M A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF THE TEXAS DIESEL ASSOCIATION, AND I JUST GOT THROUGH MAKING A PRESENTATION ON THAT. THE PRESENTATION WAS ENTITLED GCW, IT'S COMPLICATED. THE SECONDARY TITLE WAS DON'T NEED IT, DON'T WANT IT, CAN'T AFFORD IT. BEST LOCATION IN THE UNITED STATES TO PUT ONE. WE LIKELY HAVE THE BEST SITE IN THE NATION TO BUILD AN ISRAELI-SIZED DESALINATION PLANT. >> WHAT IS THAT? [OVERLAPPING] >> WHERE IS IT? >> I CAN'T SAY [LAUGHTER] I WILL BE ABLE TO SAY IN A FEW MONTHS. >> YOU CAN'T SAY WHY WE HAVE THE BEST LOCATION? >> I CAN'T. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT IT ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, BY FAR IS THE BEST FOR ALL SORTS OF REASONS, BUT THE THING IS IS THAT I DON'T NEED THE WATER. WHAT WE'VE LOOKED AT DOING IS RATHER THAN SENATOR PERRY DOING ALL THESE PIPELINES, IS ACTUALLY WE COULD POTENTIALLY TRADE WATER ON PAPER UPSTREAM. WE TRADE IT UPSTREAM, BUT THEN WHY WOULD WE DO THAT? WELL, WHY WE WOULD DO THAT IS BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE IN CENTRAL TEXAS WOULD HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE YOUR RATES DOWN HERE BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WE'RE GOOD AND THAT'S THE WAY TEXAS WATER WORKS IS THAT IT'S OUR WATER. >> YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> BRANDON, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT WE, CITY OF GALVESTON, WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE WELLS? >> NO. WE WILL OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE WELLS. YOU WILL BRING THEM UP AND KEEP THEM UP TO STANDARD. >> THE PLAN IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET THEM UP TO OPERATIONAL STANDARDS AND WE'VE GOT THE STUDY ONGOING ON THAT RIGHT NOW TO WHAT THE ENGINEERS SAY WE HAVE TO DO TO BRING THEM UP TO STANDARD. ONCE WE BRING THEM UP TO STANDARD, BRANDON WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM FROM THAT POINT FORWARD. >> HOW FAR ARE WE AWAY FROM STANDARD? >> I THINK IT'S PRIMARILY DISINFECTION. >> MOST OFTEN WE'RE LOOKING ON IT, SOME OF THE PIPING IS AGING SO [INAUDIBLE] >> FOR THEIR INTENDED PURPOSE, THEY'RE NOT AS FAR AWAY AS THEY WOULD LOOK TO BE IN THAT PICTURE. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GAUGING OFF OF. >> I WANTED TO THANK BRANDON. I CAN SAY WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE BRANDON AS THE HEAD OF THE GULF COAST WATER AUTHORITY. HE'S A GALVESTON MAN AT HEART AND HE LIVES DOWN HERE AND SERVED IN OUR CITY GOVERNMENT HERE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO WATER, WE HAVE A GOOD SITUATION HERE. >> BEFORE YOU LEAVE, BRANDON, WE TALKED ABOUT THE WATER BILLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THE RAW WATER IS TRULY THE CHEAPEST THIS WHOLE THING AND BRANDON WILL TELL YOU, FOR HIS OPERATION AND FOR OURS, IT'S THE COST OF DISTRIBUTION. >> YES. >> INFRASTRUCTURE. >> IF I CAN TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THAT, WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WORK HERE, REMEMBER, I SAID WE HAD A 60% WATER LOSS, BUT I ALSO OPERATED THE SECOND OLDEST OPERATIONAL WATER PUMP STATION IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THAT'S THE ONE IN 30TH STREET. YOU MAY WONDER WHY IN THE WORLD I DIDN'T FIX THE LEAKS. THE REASON I DIDN'T FIX THE LEAKS IS BECAUSE I NEEDED TO KEEP THE PUMP STATION RUNNING IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PUMP STATION THAT'S RUNNING, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY LEAKS OR NOT. >> ALSO, THE CAPACITIES THAT WE RUN AT NOW AND THE PRESSURES WE RUN AT NOW. >> YOUR OLD CHARTER PROVISIONS, BY THE WAY, MADE IT WHERE I COULDN'T GATHER UP ENOUGH MONEY EVERY YEAR IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IT QUITE LITERALLY TOOK ME EIGHT YEARS TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE COULD REBUILD 30TH STREET PUMP STATION. >> WHAT'S OUR PERCENTAGE RIGHT NOW, BRIAN? >> FIFTEEN PERCENT. >> FIFTEEN? >> FIFTEEN PERCENT. >> FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOW I UNDERSTAND IT, 15% WHEN IT COMES TO CITIES, THAT IS UNBELIEVABLY GREAT. >> Y'ALL HAD DONE SUCH AN AMAZING JOB SINCE I LEFT [OVERLAPPING] I'M VERY IMPRESSED. >> CREDITS TO BRANDON AND TRINA ON THAT THEY HAVE DONE AND TRINA CONTINUES TO DO THAT, AND NOW THAT WE QUIT SUBSIDIZING OUR DRAINAGE SYSTEM WITH FRESHWATER, WE'RE REALLY BETTER. >> [LAUGHTER] BRANDON, THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN. >> IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU AS WELL. >> THANK YOU, BRANDON. >> THANK YOU. >> VERY GOOD. COUNCIL, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF OTHER ITEMS TO MOVE TO. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A BREAK OR DO YOU WANT TO MOVE ON? >> LET'S TAKE AT LEAST ONE RESTROOM BREAK AT 11:30. >> WE'VE HAD BREAKS THROUGHOUT THAT, BUT SURE. [03:40:02] HOW LONG DO YOU WANT FOR A BREAK? >> EIGHT MINUTES. >> EIGHT MINUTES. WE WILL RECONVENE AT 11:48. >> THANK YOU. >> IT IS 11:48. COUNCIL, WE ARE NOW BACK IN SESSION FOR OUR WORKSHOP HERE. WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM 3C, PLEASE. >> ITEM 3C, DISCUSSION OF THE AMENDED BUDGET FOR FY 2025. [3.C. Discussion of the Amended Budget for FY 2025 (C. Ludanyi - 20 min)] >> VERY GOOD. >> GLAD YOU GOT THE MEMO ABOUT THE PINK AND THE BLACK DAY. >> PINK AND BLACK DAY. WE HAVE OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR CSILLA LUDANYI HERE. COUNCIL, AS YOU KNOW, WE PASSED A BUDGET, BUT WE PASSED A TAX RATE THAT DID NOT SUPPORT THAT BUDGET SO THEREFORE, STAFF HAS PUT TOGETHER AMENDED BUDGET TO SUPPORT THE TAX RATE THAT WE APPROVED. CSILLA, YOU'RE GOING TO MENTION THE BUDGET. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THE MAYOR GOT A GLIMPSE OF MY FIRST SLIDE. ON THE 19TH, WE ADOPTED A BUDGET THAT WAS FUNDED BY A TAX RATE OF 428382. WE ALSO ADOPTED A TAX RATE OF 40885. BASED ON THE CHARTER, WE HAVE TO ALIGN APPROPRIATIONS WITH EXPENDITURES, AND SO A BUDGET AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED AT THIS POINT TO ACCOUNT FOR THE DECREASE IN ANTICIPATED REVENUE. ON THE REVENUE SIDE, I'M JUST GOING TO PROVIDE YOU A SMALL SNAPSHOT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE TO ADJUST FOR THIS. YOU'LL SEE THAT THE DECREASE IN PROPERTY TAX REVENUE BASED ON THE TAX RATE DECREASE IS ABOUT $2.2 MILLION, AND WE'VE MADE SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES ON THE REVENUE SIDE. THE LIBRARY CONTRIBUTION INCREASES BASED ON THE TAX RATE CALCULATION. THE INCREASE IN LONG-TERM PARKING IS CAPTURED, CRUISE PASSENGER FEE IS CAPTURED. THERE'S AN INCREASE IN THE TRANSFER FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER SURPLUS TO OFFSET THE COST OF GENERAL FUND EMPLOYEES ASSISTING WITH SPECIAL EVENTS THAT INCREASE IS $100,000. THEN BASED ON THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE HAD BY COUNCIL, FOR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE WILL BE USING HOT FUND BALANCE FROM CITY FUND BALANCE OF $300,000 TO OFFSET THE COST OF MOWING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND SOME WEEKEND ACTIVITY. OUR HOPE IS THAT IN FUTURE YEARS, THIS WILL BE SOMETHING THAT IS PROVIDED BY THE PARK BOARD OUT OF HOT FUNDS TO OFFSET THESE HOT-RELATED EXPENDITURES. THAT, HOWEVER, STILL NEEDS TO BE SECURED, AND THAT MIGHT GO INTO THE MAYOR'S DISCUSSION LATER ON IN THE WORKSHOP. YES. >> I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS DISCUSSED THAT ISN'T ON THERE, AND THERE CERTAINLY WAS, THE WHARVES BOARD SEEMED TO BE IN AGREEMENT ON DOING THAT ONE-TYPE PAVEMENT. WHATEVER BECAME OF THAT? >> I BELIEVE THEY DID NOT VOTE ON IT ULTIMATELY. >> BECAUSE THEY WERE WAITING FOR A REQUEST FROM US. >> WE DID THAT. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT THAT. >> WHEN BRIAN WAS TASKED WITH BRINGING THIS BUDGET UNDER THE TAX RATE THAT WE APPROVED, I MENTIONED TO MANAGEMENT THAT IF THEY NEEDED TO APPROACH THAT AT THE WHARVES BOARD, THE WHARVES BOARD IS PREPARED TO DISCUSS THAT, AND I LEFT THAT IN BRIAN'S CORE. >> WE'LL CONTINUE TO DISCUSS THAT, BUT THEY WERE INTERESTED IN ONE-TIME STUFF AND THESE ARE RECURRING ISSUES. I THINK THAT'S BEST ADDRESSED BY THE COUNCIL OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT YEAR TO HOW [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'VE PUT THAT ON OUR NEXT AGENDA BECAUSE THAT'S A COUNCIL DECISION. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE HAVE TO FORMALLY ASKED FOR IT. >> TO ASK FOR IT. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> ONE-TIME MONEY TO SOLVE AND THEN FORMALLY ASK FOR IT. >> NO, BUT WE CAN ASK FOR MONEY IN INTERIM WHERE WE'RE NOT CUTTING OUT PROJECTS THAT WILL BE AFFECTING OUR CITIZENS WHEN THEY ARE WILLING TO PARTICIPATE AND, AT THE SAME TIME, LOOK AT HOW WE CAN DO THINGS THAT ARE REOCCURRING [OVERLAPPING] I DISAGREE. WE WON'T BE A FIRST. >> THAT'LL BE 3D. THERE'S SOME THINGS I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IN THERE TO, MARIE. LET ME ABOUT THE THE PORT ON THIS. THE WHARVES BOARD IS OPEN TO DISCUSS THAT. THE WHARVES BOARD HAS HAD SOME CHANGES HERE RECENTLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE WHARVES BOARD'S THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT, BUT THEY HAVE SOME DEMANDS ON THEIR MONEY RIGHT NOW THAT THEY DIDN'T REALIZE THEY HAD DEMANDS ON. THIS WHARVES BOARD ISSUE IS NOT A DONE DEAL. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE WHARVES BOARD IS TOTALLY COMMITTED ON, BUT WE COULD BRING THAT TO THEM AND SEE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, [03:45:01] BUT IT NEEDS TO BE DIRECTED FROM COUNCIL. >> WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA. >> SURE. >> THANKS. >> THE FINAL ITEM IS THE PARK BOARD VOTED TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH $225,000 FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, AND WE'RE HOPING THAT IN FUTURE YEARS AS PART OF THE AGENDA ITEM, COUNCIL HAS LATER, WE WILL BE GETTING SOME OF THIS REVENUE-SHARING FROM REVENUE-PRODUCING PARKS. THE TOTAL CHANGE ON THE REVENUE SIDE IN THE GENERAL FUND IS ABOUT A DECREASE OF $1.1 MILLION. THE ORIGINAL BUDGET SHOWED US AT $82.7 MILLION IN REVENUE, AND THE AMENDED BUDGET WILL HAVE US AT 81.6 IN THE GENERAL FUND. >> TRINA, JUST SO WE UNDERSTAND THIS NUMBER 5, INCREASE IN LONG-TERM PARKING, THAT'S THE PORT AND THE PRIVATE LOTS, BOTH. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> HOW COME WE'RE NOT FACTORING IN HERE THE MONEY THAT WE WILL MAKE FROM THE AIRPORT LAND SALE? I KNOW THE BIG PART OF SCHOLES GOES TO THE AIRPORT, BUT THE TWO SMALLER PART OF [INAUDIBLE] WIN. IT'S REVENUE. >> THAT WOULD BE ONE-TIME REVENUE AND IT IS FACTORED IN BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO USE THAT TO REBUILD OUR FUND BALANCE A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE'RE SO FAR BELOW 120 DAYS. >> WHERE IS EFFECTIVE THEN, WHAT LINE? >> WE'RE ANTICIPATING IT IS TO HELP US TO GET OVER THAT BECAUSE GIVEN THIS BUDGET, YOU ARE NOT REBUILDING ANY FUND BALANCE. YOU'RE ACTUALLY PROBABLY GOING TO FALL FURTHER BEHIND. >> WELL WE'LL SEE. >> WE'LL SEE. >> WHY IT EVER HAPPENED. >> RIGHT SO FAR, THOUGH. [LAUGHTER] >> AS YOU MANIPULATE NUMBERS ANYWAY YOU WANT. >> I DON'T APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT. >> OVERVIEW OF THE EXPENDITURES IN THE GENERAL FUND, WE HAD SOME GOALS AS WE WENT ABOUT THIS PROCESS. THE FIRST WAS TO MINIMIZE SERVICE DISRUPTIONS TO RESIDENTS. THE SECOND WAS TO STRIVE FOR SIMILAR OR EQUITABLE IMPACT AMONG ALL DEPARTMENTS, AND OUR ATTEMPTS TO ALIGN LONG TERM COSTS WITH LONG TERM SOURCES OF REVENUE, WHICH WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT MANY OF OUR MEETINGS. AS WE WENT THROUGH THIS, WE CANNOT COMPLETELY ALLEVIATE RISK TO FISCAL OUTCOMES AS A RESULT OF THESE CHANGES, AND WE DO INCLUDE, AS WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED, SOME ONE TIME BUDGET BALANCING SOLUTIONS, WHICH ARE NOT GUARANTEED AT THIS POINT TO PROVIDE MULTI YEAR RELIEF. AGAIN, ON THIS AND IT IS COVERED UNDER THE AGENDA ITEM. BUT WE'RE BUYING IT WAS CLOSE TO $400,000 OF NEW CARS FOR PARKING CONTROL PEOPLE AND YET TAKING AWAY FROM PROJECT BOTTOM LINE. >> IT WAS 1,000. >> WELL, IT WAS 258, AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER ITEM THAT WAS 100 AND SOMETHING. >> IT'S STILL CARS. THAT'S OKAY. >> THAT'S WHAT IT SAID ON THE AGENDA ITEM BUT ANYWAY, I STILL QUESTION THAT EXPENSE. THE FIRST ITEM WE PUT IN PLACE ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE WAS RELATED TO HEALTH INSURANCE AND WE MADE A DECISION TO FUND HEALTH INSURANCE AT FISCAL YEAR 24 LEVELS INSTEAD OF THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 25 LEVELS. THIS IS ABOUT A $676,000 SAVINGS IN GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES. THE RISK IS THAT JUST GENERALLY ACROSS THE NATION, WE PROJECT AN ANNUAL INCREASE OF 10% IN HEALTH COSTS. PART OF THIS DECISION WAS MADE ON OUR GREAT EXPERIENCE WITH OUR USAGE IN FISCAL YEAR 24, IF THERE WERE TO BE A STEEP INCREASE IN USAGE OR EXPERIENCE, THE DECREASE OF FUNDING WOULD IMPACT THE FUND BALANCE IN THE SELF FUNDED HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN. THE SECOND CHANGE ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE WAS AS A RESULT OF THE DECREASE IN REVENUE, THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC DECREASE IN THE TRANSFER TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT SERVICE FUND. IN THE GENERAL FUND, THIS REPRESENTS ABOUT A $91,000 AMOUNT IN SAVINGS. HOWEVER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THAT'S ABOUT 100,000 LESS AVAILABLE TO SPEND IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT SERVICE FUND AS WELL. LATER ON IN THE AGENDA OR IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THIS EVENING, YOU WILL APPROVE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE GALVESTON ISLAND HUMANE SOCIETY TO INCREASE THEIR FUNDING BY $120,000. THIS IS A COST TO THE GENERAL FUND, AND THIS IS A LONG TERM RECURRING COMMITMENT, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE NECESSARY TO SUSTAIN OPERATIONS AT THE CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS AT THE HUMANE SOCIETY. ISLAND TRANSIT TRANSFER, WE ARE DECREASING BY $150,000. IT'S $150,000 SAVINGS IN THE GENERAL FUND. THIS FUNDING DECREASE AS REQUESTED WILL NOT IMPACT SERVICE LEVELS. HOWEVER, THIS DECREASE WILL IMPACT CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN BUSES AND TROLLEYS IN THE FUTURE. GARAGE CHARGES, LIKE HEALTH INSURANCE, WE ALSO ARE FUNDING AT FISCAL YEAR 24 LEVELS. ONCE AGAIN, THIS APPLIES ACROSS ALL THE FUNDS. THE SAVINGS IN THE GENERAL FUND SPECIFICALLY IS $126,355 AND THE RISK WE'VE IDENTIFIED HERE IS THAT IF FUEL COSTS, [03:50:05] FOR SOME REASON, WERE TO INCREASE EXPONENTIALLY OR LARGELY AS A RESULT OF ACTIVITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST, THEN IT WOULD REQUIRE US TO USE FUND BALANCE TO FUND THE DIFFERENCE. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, ALSO, LIKE HEALTH INSURANCE AND GARAGE AND FLEET WAS GOING TO BE FUNDED AT FISCAL YEAR 24 LEVELS. THIS ALSO APPLIES ACROSS ALL FUNDS. THE GENERAL FUND SAVINGS IS 76,991. ONCE AGAIN, POTENTIAL RISK HERE IS COST INCREASES IN HARDWARE SOFTWARE AND SERVICES THAT WOULD REQUIRE USE OF FUND BALANCE IF WE WEREN'T ABLE TO STAY WITHIN THAT FY24 LEVEL. THEN ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID IS WE LOOKED AT ALL OUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS LINE. THOSE ARE THE NON PERSONNEL RELATED ITEMS THAT SUPPORT OPERATIONS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE FUNDED ALL OF THEM AT THE LOWER OF THE FISCAL YEAR 24 OR 25 LEVELS. WE COMPARE THE TWO YEARS, WHICHEVER WAS LOWER, AND WHEREVER POSSIBLE, IT'S NOT ALL CASES, BECAUSE CONTRACTS INCREASED THAT THING, BUT WHEREVER POSSIBLE, WE DECREASED IT TO THE LOWER OF THE TWO, AND THIS ALSO APPLIES ACROSS ALL FUNDS. IT ALSO INCLUDES OVERTIME, WHICH I WILL SPEAK TO IN JUST A MOMENT. THE SAVINGS RELATED TO THIS ACTIVITY IN THE GENERAL FUND WAS 272,435, AND THE RISK, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, IS THAT IF THERE ARE POTENTIAL YEAR OVER YEAR INCREASES THAT WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE IN OUR CHOOSING, THAT MIGHT REQUIRE THE USE OF FUND BALANCE. OVER TIME. THIS AMOUNT IS INCLUDED IN THE PREVIOUS BULLET. THIS $32,000 IS NOT IN ADDITION TO, IT IS PART OF THAT PREVIOUS CHANGE. HOWEVER, THE REASON WE WANT TO BRING THIS TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION, THIS ALSO APPLIES ACROSS ALL FUNDS. THE RISKS ARE AS FOLLOWS. THE BUDGET NUMBER FOR THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR WAS $300,329 HIGHER THAN THE AMOUNT WE'VE PUT IN THE FISCAL YEAR 25 BUDGET. THE BUDGET TO BUDGET COMPARISON IS REALLY A DECREASE OF 301,000. THE 32,000 IS RELATED TO THE ADOPTED BUDGET TO THE AMENDED BUDGET. MOREOVER, COMPARED TO THE BUDGET ESTIMATE FOR FISCAL YEAR 24, THE AMOUNT THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 IS 822,492 LESS THAN WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SPENT. THIS IS AFTER NORMALIZING FOR ALL OF THE BARREL RELATED OVERTIME. ONE OF THE WAYS THIS HAPPENS IS AS DEPARTMENTS SPENT OVERTIME THIS PAST YEAR, AND THIS IS NOT THAT THIS HAPPENS EVERY YEAR. IF THEY OVERSPENT THEIR BUDGET, THEN THEY'RE USING MONEY FROM ELSEWHERE IN THEIR DEPARTMENT. THEY'RE NOT ENDING UP USING MONEY, LET'S SAY THAT THEY HAD BUDGETED FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES AND IT'S OFFSETTING THOSE INCREASES IN OVERTIME. BUT AS A RESULT OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE TIGHTENING SO MUCH, IT WILL BE INCUMBENT UPON ALL OF STAFF TO MAINTAIN THEIR OVERTIME BUDGETS. I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IS VERY MUCH COMMITTED TO THIS, BUT OVERTIME DIRECTLY CORRELATES WITH EXTRA PROJECTS AND AFTER HOURS ACTIVITIES. MANAGING OVERTIME TO THIS NEW BUDGET NUMBER DEMANDS LESS WORK IN THESE CATEGORIES THAT ARE EXTRA COMPARED TO WHAT STANDARD OPERATIONS ARE AND FROM A BUDGETARY PERSPECTIVE AND FROM A MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE, THIS WILL BE ONE OF THE BIG ASKS OF ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES IN THE COMING FISCAL YEAR. >> WHEN YOU'RE SAYING NORMALIZE FROM BERYL, BECAUSE WE KNOW THE OVERTIME FROM BERYL WELL EVENTUALLY, A MAJORITY OF IT WON'T BE REIMBURSED BY FEMA. >> YEAH. WHAT I MEAN IS, SO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF OVERTIME THAT WAS EXPENDED IN THE GENERAL FUND, WE REMOVED EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH BERYL TO COME TO THIS $822,000, MEANING THAT THIS WAS ALL WORK COMPLETED IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS AND OVERTIME HOURS. IT WAS NOT RELATED TO THE HURRICANE AND SO WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT IF WE WEREN'T MANAGING FOR OVERTIME, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THIS MUCH HIGHER POTENTIALLY. >> RYAN, THIS HAS EFFECT ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. >> SOME, A LOT OF THEIR OVERTIME IS WE HAVE EVENTS THAT COME UP AND WE HAVE TO STAND UP SPECIAL DETAILS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE'RE GOING TO BE VERY PRUDENT ABOUT THAT GOING FORWARD. CHIEF'S ON BOARD. >> FOR A SHORT STAFF, DOESN'T THAT MAKE. >> WELL, THEY'RE MEETING THEIR STAFFING NEEDS, BUT MOST OF THE POLICE OVERTIME INVOLVES, AND THIS IS WHAT CHIEF TELLS ME IF YOU KNOW DIFFERENT, MAYBE HE KNOWS SOMETHING I DON'T, BUT HE TELLS ME MOST OF THIS IS A SPECIAL DETAILS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. OR IF WE HAVE CRITICAL CRIME CASES LIKE WHEN THINGS OCCUR LIKE UNFORTUNATE THINGS OCCURRED YESTERDAY, NOBODY'S GOING HOME UNTIL WE GET THAT RESOLVED AND THAT WON'T CHANGE. [03:55:03] WE'RE NOT GOING TO SACRIFICE ANY SAFETY ISSUES. BUT IT MAY AFFECT SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING, BUT THE CHIEF'S ON BOARD, HE SEEMS TO THINK HE'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. >> WE HAD SHARON AND THEN BOB. >> I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO ASK THE SAME QUESTION. HOW DID THIS AFFECT POLICE OFFICERS? YOU JUST BASICALLY EXPLAINED IT. >> YEAH. WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY THERE TOO WITH HOW THEY STAFF AND THEN CHIEF IS DOING A GREAT JOB OF STAGGERING SHIFTS AND DOING THINGS LIKE THAT. HE'S DOING A REALLY GOOD JOB WITH THAT. BIG CHUNK OF THAT OVERTIME, HONESTLY, SOME OF IT COMES FROM POLICE, BUT A LOT OF IT COMES FROM FIRE TOO, AND THAT'S JUST A RESULT OF MINIMUM STAFFING, AND THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. IT'S IN YOUR CONTRACT. >> THE LAST SENTENCE THAT SAYS IT HAS LESS WORK THAT LESS WORK IS REFERRING TO PHYSICAL WORK OR? >> LESS HOURS SPENT DOING EXTRA PROJECTS AND AFTER HOURS ACTIVITIES. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT MEANS. >> THIS PAST YEAR, WHEN WE GET BEHIND AND WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF BREAKS, IF WE HAVE A DRY SUMMER AND WE'VE GOT A BUNCH OF BREAKS. WE OPEN UP STREETS AND UTILITIES HANDS OUT. WE GET BEHIND ON THE STREET PATCHES. WE WORK OUR CREWS OVERTIME ON THE WEEKENDS AND THINGS TO DO STREET PATCHES AND MAKE REPAIRS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE PROBABLY WILL BE DOING A LITTLE BIT LESS THAT. THINGS WILL JUST STRETCH OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE. WE'LL KEEP THEM DRIVABLE AND SAFE, BUT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO HAVE THE CREWS OUT WORKING ON SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS LIKE WE DID. >> WELL, I APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I DIDN'T REALIZE WE COULD ASK QUESTIONS AS WE GO ALONG. BUT THE ONE THAT SAID THE ISLAND TRANSIT TRANSFER DECREASE, HOW WILL THIS AFFECT THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON FOR TRANSPORTATION? >> THE SERVICE THEY'RE RECEIVING NOW SHOULD NOT CHANGE. >> JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON SHARON'S QUESTION ABOUT THE LESS WORK. I GUESS WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS AND IT TRANSLATES INTO A LEVEL OF SERVICE. >> CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO DO OUR BEST TO MAINTAIN OUR LEVELS. BUT UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO BRING IN WHOLE CREWS LIKE WE USED TO DO ON WEEKENDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> WELL, THAT LEADS ME TO MY NEXT QUESTION, IS HOW DOES THIS IMPACT CODE ENFORCEMENT? I THINK WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HAVING THE MARSHAL WORKING ON WEEKENDS AND AFTER HOUR SOMETIMES. >> IF WE DID THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES FOR THOSE SUCH AS SHORT TERM RENTAL FEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. NOT GENERAL FUND TAX MONEY. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS A HIRING FREEZE FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF FISCAL YEAR 2025. IN THE GENERAL FUND, THAT SAVINGS IS ABOUT $215,100. WE WILL ALSO BE RE EVALUATING ALL POSITIONS WITH ANY NEW ATTRITION. THE PHRASE WILL BE SUSTAINED AFTER THE INITIAL SIX MONTHS IF A DEFICIT IS ANTICIPATED BASED ON REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE TRENDS IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR. ALL EXCEPTIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. ESSENTIALLY, WHAT I'M SAYING WITH THAT IS THERE MAY BE EXCEPTIONS. THERE MAY BE SOMEBODY WHO LEAVES THE ORGANIZATION AND ABSOLUTELY THE POSITION NEEDS TO BE FILLED IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IS GOING TO SAY, IT'S INCUMBENT ON US TO DO SO. >> FIREFIGHTING POSITIONS. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> IF DOUG CAME TO ME AND SAYS, BRIAN, I CAN STAFF EVERYBODY, GOD, I WISH THAT WOULD HAPPEN. BUT OBVIOUSLY, WE WE'RE NOT GOING TO COMPROMISE IN THE PUBLIC SAFETY AREAS. >> CITY MANAGER'S APPROVAL WILL BE REQUIRED FOR FILLING ANY POSITIONS THAT ARE AN EXCEPTION TO THIS HIRING FREEZE. THE RISK HERE IS THAT ASSUMING THAT HIRING DOES OCCUR STARTING AT THE SIX MONTH MARK, THESE COSTS WILL BECOME LONG TERM COMMITMENTS INTO FISCAL YEAR 26 AND BEYOND. FINALLY, THE 5% COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CIVILIANS. THIS APPLIES TO ALL FUNDS AS WELL. THE COST TO THE GENERAL FUND, IN ADDITION TO WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE WAS $182,058, 4% IS WHAT THE ORIGINAL BUDGET CONTAINED. THIS IS THE 1% INCREASE ON TOP OF THAT. THE RISK HERE IS JUST THAT THIS IS A RECURRING SOURCE OF EXPENDITURE, AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO ALIGN THOSE WITH RECURRING SOURCES OF REVENUE. THIS AMOUNT IS VERY CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH THE LONG TERM PARKING AND CRUISE PASSENGER INCREASES, WHICH ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE LONG TERM SOURCES OF REVENUE, BUT IT DOES RELY ON THE CONSISTENT STRENGTH OF THE CRUISE RELATED ACTIVITY. >> CHELA ON THAT THEN THE 5% OF EMPLOYEES IN THE ENTERPRISE FUNDS, THEY'RE PAID OUT OF THOSE FUNDS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THIS 5% IS COMING TO THE 912 IS. >> NO, 912 IS THE GENERAL GENERAL FUND. >> I MEAN, THE 910,268. MAJORITY IS ENTERPRISE. >> YEAH, IT'S GENERAL FUND. >> YES. THE $910,000 IS THE TOTAL COST OF THE 5% IN THE GENERAL FUND. >> JUST THE GENERAL. >> BUT THERE'S ADDITIONAL 5% OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S IN EACH OF THE OTHER FUNDS. I DID NOT PRESENT THAT HERE TODAY. YES. [04:00:03] >> CAN THAT BE BROKEN OUT? I GUESS IT'S BEEN TWO MEETINGS WHEN WE DETERMINED THAT BRANDON'S STAFF WAS NOT TO COME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND. HAS THAT BEEN BROKEN DOWN? >> WE CAN PROVIDE THAT. ABSOLUTELY. WE HAVEN'T SPLIT BY FUND. >> ENTERPRISE FUND STAFF? >> YEAH. >> YEAH, WE CAN BREAK THAT DOWN. >> THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS 910,000, CORRECT? >> NO, BUT IT'S INCLUDED IN THEIR BUDGETS. >> ALL RIGHT. >> YEAH. THIS IS JUST BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THE AMENDMENT IS RELATED TO THE GENERAL FUND AND THE DECREASE IN THE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE. THAT'S WHERE I GOT INTO A LOT OF THE DETAIL, BUT ON THE NEXT SLIDE AFTER THIS, WE'LL LOOK AT WHAT THE IMPACT IS IN THE OTHER DEPARTMENTS OR THE OTHER FUNDS AS WELL. THIS IS JUST THE SUMMATION OF ALL THE THINGS I JUST TALKED ABOUT. YOU'LL SEE THAT THE OVERALL DECREASE IN EXPENDITURES IN THE GENERAL FUND IS ABOUT $1.3 MILLION. THE ORIGINAL ADOPTED BUDGET WAS AT 82.9 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES AND IT GOES DOWN TO 81 POINT ALMOST 6 MILLION IN EXPENDITURES. I'M ANTICIPATING THE NEXT QUESTION IS GOING TO BE FUND BALANCE AND WHERE THIS IS GOING TO LEAVE OUR FUND BALANCE. THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED COLUMN SHOWS YOU WHAT THE CHANGES ARE IN SUMMATION FOR THE GENERAL FUND SPECIFICALLY. YOU'LL SEE THAT THE ENDING FUND BALANCE IS PROJECTED TO BE TWENTY FOUR MILLION, SEVENTY SIX THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND NINETY, WHICH IS AN INCREASE OF ABOUT 162 MILLION OR 162,000 FROM WHERE WE WERE WITH THE ORIGINAL BUDGET, AND THIS REPRESENTS ABOUT 107.7 DAYS OF FUND BALANCE. >> THAT'S BEFORE THE LAST SALES TAX REPORTING, RIGHT? >> YES. >> A HUNDRED AND SEVEN DAYS, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? >> YES, 107 DAYS. >> WE LOST A LITTLE MORE GROUND WITH THE LAST SALES TAX REPORTING. IT'S NOT REFLECTED HERE. >> YEAH. >> BUT AGAIN, IT'S NOT REFLECTING THE MONEY WILL MAKE OFF THE AIRPORT SALE OR WHATNOT, WHICH CAN GO BACK IN TO THE FRONT. OR YOU DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO SELL? >> I HOPE WE CAN GET IT SOLD. >> THEN SO JUST A QUICK LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER FUNDS AND HOW THEY ARE IMPACTED BY THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THIS CASE, THE FAR LEFT COLUMN IS THE AMENDED BUDGET. YOU'LL SEE THE FUND BALANCE AND THEN THE TOTAL BETWEEN THAT AMENDMENT AND THE FUND BALANCE. THE FOURTH COLUMN WHERE IT SAYS ADOPTED BUDGET IS WHAT WAS ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 19, AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE VARIANCE ON THE FAR RIGHT COLUMN. DEBT SERVICE, OBVIOUSLY, WE MADE NO CHANGES. SPECIAL REVENUE FUND, THERE IS A DECREASE OF ABOUT $255,800. >> THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS DRIVEN BY HEALTH INSURANCE, FLEET, AND IT CHARGES BEING DROPPED TO FISCAL YEAR 24 LEVELS. THE COMBINED UTILITY, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE DECREASE IS A LITTLE OVER $2 MILLION. THE REASON THIS NUMBER IS SO HIGH IS BECAUSE IN THE COMBINED UTILITY, WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE CHANGES TO THE SEWER SIDE RATES AND SO BY DOING THAT, WE WERE ABLE TO STOP THE TRANSFER FROM THE WATER SIDE TO THE SEWER SIDE FOR THOSE CAPITAL OUTLAY ITEMS, AND THAT'S WHERE THAT $2 MILLION SHOWS UP, IS IT'S SHOWN IN YOUR BUDGET AS AN EXPENSE, THAT TRANSFER BETWEEN WATER AND SEWER, AND WHEN THAT EXPENSE GOES AWAY, THAT'S WHERE THAT VARIANCE COMES IN. THERE'S ALSO OBVIOUSLY THE IMPACTS OF THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS DECREASES, HEALTH INSURANCE FLEET AND IT. SANITATION FUND, ALMOST ALL OF THAT IS THE HEALTH INSURANCE, THE FLEET, AND THE GARAGE, DRAINAGE AS WELL, AND AIRPORT AS WELL. THERE ARE DECREASES IN ALL THE FUNDS, BUT THE LARGE ONE THAT'S SHOWN IN THE COMBINED UTILITY AS A RESULT OF THE RATE INCREASE THAT WAS ADOPTED. THAT'S ALL I HAVE IN SUMMATION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS ON THE AMENDED BUDGET. THIS ITEM IS ON OUR AGENDA, IT IS GOING TO BE ITEM 10 A ON OUR AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON FOR APPROVAL OF THIS AMENDED BUDGET. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> THE OVERTIME. I KNOW THAT WE PUT IN OUR AUDIT PLAN, SOME OF THE REVIEW OF THE OVERTIME AT PUBLIC WORKS. I THINK THAT PLAYS NICELY AND WELL AND SHOULD AVOID SOME OF THAT RISK. >> WE'RE HOPING SO AND TRINA HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB, TOO. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE NOTICED, BUT WE'VE CREATED MID SHIFT CREWS, SO WE STAGGER OUT FROM THERE. WE HAVE SMALL CREWS THAT WORK AFTER HOURS, NOT ALL NIGHTS, BUT AFTER HOURS, AND ON WEEKENDS NOW THEY'RE SMALL CREWS. THEY CAN'T HANDLE BIG IF WE HAVE A BIG BLOWOUT OR SOMETHING, WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO BRING CREWS IN, BUT WE CAN HANDLE A LOT OF TRAFFIC ISSUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT NOW WITHOUT INCURRING OVERTIME, [04:05:04] SO BIG CREDIT TO THEM ON THAT, SO THAT'S GOING TO HELP A LOT. >> BUT THIS OVERTIME IS ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS FUNDED BY THE GENERAL FUND. >> WE MADE THOSE CHANGES ACROSS ALL DEPARTMENTS IN THE GENERAL FUND, BUT ALSO ALL FUNDS. AS I SAID, PART OF OUR GOAL WAS TO MAKE EQUITABLE CHANGES AND SIMILAR CHANGES THAT IMPACT ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND ALL OUR DEPARTMENTS AND SO THESE CHANGES DO IMPACT YOUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS AS WELL. >> NOW, WITH REGARD TO, I GUESS, YOU'D SAY PUBLIC SAFETY SECTOR, ARE THEY KEEPING TRACK OF WHERE THEY NEED TO SPEND OVERTIME ON THINGS THAT ARE TOURISM RELATED? >> ABSOLUTELY. THE CHIEF HAS BEEN WORKING ON THAT FOR US NOW, AND WE'RE DOING A MUCH BETTER JOB OF TRYING TO TRACK THAT. TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, MOST OF OUR SPECIAL DETAILS THAT I MENTIONED TO YOU WERE TOURIST RELATED. TIMES WE HAD TO STAND UP SPECIAL DETAILS FOR SAN LOUIS PASS, SPECIAL DETAILS FOR SUNNY BEACH, WHICH WE HOPE REMEDIES ITSELF. A LOT OF THINGS LIKE THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY TO THOSE THINGS. THESE POP UP EVENTS THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE TO STAFF UP FOR, WHETHER THEY HAPPEN OR NOT. THOSE ARE TYPE THINGS THAT I THINK IN THE FUTURE YEARS, AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN OUR FUTURE REVENUE. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO ABLE TO HAVE SOME OPTIONS THERE. BUT I'M GOING TO CAUTION YOU ON THAT AND I'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL MEMBER ROB. THOSE ARE RECURRING EXPENSES, AND YOU NEED TO MATCH RECURRING EXPENSES WITH RECALL REVENUE, WHICH MEANS THAT YOUR RECURRING HOT IS GOING TO BE IMPACTED, SO YOU CAN'T GIVE ALL THE RECURRING HOT AWAY AND THEN EXPECT TO USE THAT FOR ISSUES THAT ARE RECURRING WITHIN THE CITY OF GALVESTON THAT WE WANT TO FUND FOR, SO I JUST. >> YOU CAN PUT IT ON FOR A RECURRING USE OF HOT. >> YES. BUT YOU'VE GOT TO GET THE HOT. YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING, YOU CAN'T GIVE IT ALL AWAY AND THEN SPEND IT AGAIN. >> THEN FOR JUST THE OVERTIME WITH PUBLIC WORKS, THAT THOSE SAVINGS THROUGH GLEN'S AUTO ACTUALLY COULD BE GREATER THAN. >> I HOPE ALTHOUGH I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE'RE TRYING TO REALLY TRACK IT HARD. >> OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? >> CHELA, THANK YOU. VERY NICE. >> CAN I THANK CHELA BECAUSE AFTER WE WENT THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, I'VE KIND OF STAYED OUT OF THIS, AND CHELA HAS DONE JUST A GREAT JOB AND UNTIL I GOT WITH HER THIS WEEK, I DID NEED REALLY LOOKED AT THIS. SHE'S DONE A FANTASTIC JOB WITH IT, AND I WANT TO THANK HER AND HER STAFF FOR THE HARD WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE. >> VERY MUCH SO. THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3D, PLEASE, JANELLE. [3.D. Discussion of Potential Alternate Sources of Revenue for the City (Brown - 30 min)] >> ITEM 3D, DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL ALTERNATE SOURCES OF REVENUE FOR THE CITY. >> THIS IS ON OUR DATA, THIS HAS BEEN REQUESTED QUITE A FEW TIMES BY COUNCIL TO LOOK AT OUR ALTERNATE REVENUES. THESE WOULD APPLY TO OUR UPCOMING BUDGET FOR THE 25-26 YEAR. I WANT TO GIVE SOME STRUCTURE FOR THIS DISCUSSION, SO I'M PASSING OUT THIS AS THE, THIS IS NOT A NEW DISCUSSION. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON AT COUNCIL FOR A LITTLE WHILE. IN 2022, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL AND I WANT TO JUST FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE GIVE YOU THE IDEAS THAT THE COUNCIL CAME UP WITH AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. SOME OF THESE WE WENT AHEAD AND CARRIED OUT AND SOME OF THESE STILL NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. TO OPEN UP THAT DISCUSSION ON ALTERNATE REVENUES, I'M GOING TO STARTED OFF WITH THE PORT AND GIVE SOME THOUGHTS ON THE PORTS POTENTIAL FOR THAT AND THEN WE CAN MOVE TO THE PARK BOARD AND ANY OF THESE OTHERS EITHER ON THE LIST OR OTHER ONES THAT YOU WANT TO BRING FORWARD. THE PORT CURRENTLY IS BRINGING MONEY INTO THE CITY WITH PARKING REVENUE, THE $1 PER VEHICLE PER DAY. THEY ALSO ARE BRINGING IT IN WITH SALES TAX ON THE PARKING OVER AT THIS PORT AND THEY ARE ALSO BRINGING THAT IN ON THE TARIFF ON ALL THE CONTRACTS THAT ARE WITH THESE CRUISE LINES OVER THERE. THEY WILL PROBABLY BRING IN THE PORT THIS COMING YEAR, ABOUT 2.8 MILLION SOMEWHERE AROUND THAT, THAT WILL COME INTO THE BUDGET. THAT'S BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR ALREADY, AS CHELA MENTIONED, SO THAT'S COMING IN. THE PORT ALSO PROVIDES A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES. THIS PAYMENT IS $195,000 A YEAR, 25% OF THAT GOES TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. WHAT THE CITY GETS ANNUALLY AS THE PILOT OR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES [04:10:05] IS $154,407 AND THAT IS THE MONIES, YOU PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER AND THAT'S GOING TO COME TO AROUND 2.8 MILLION THAT WILL BE COMING FROM THE PORT THIS YEAR. IF WE WANTED TO CHANGE THE PILOT ON THAT, THAT IS A CHARTER CHANGE AND WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THAT AT OUR NOVEMBER 14 MEETING ON CHARTER CHANGES, BUT WE CAN DISCUSS THAT NOW, OF COURSE, IF WE WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT CHANGING THE PILOT ON THAT. I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED IN JANUARY WITH THE PORT. I'VE TALKED WITH THE PORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND THE CHAIRMAN AND THE PORT AT THAT MEETING IS GOING TO BRING FORWARD A THOUGHT THAT THEY HAVE ON INCREASING REVENUE TO THE CITY ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, A RECURRING BASIS. THEY ARE WORKING ON THAT AND THAT WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD AT OUR JOINT MEETING IN JANUARY. SAYING ALL THAT LET'S OPEN UP THE PORTS DISCUSSION. YES. >> A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES IS NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO ANY OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY. >> NO, SIR. >> IS THE PORT BRINGING SOMETHING THAT IS TIED TO OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY? DO YOU KNOW? >> I DON'T KNOW. THEY ARE USING THE TERM RIGHT NOW WHEN I VISITED WITH THEM IS TO WORKING OUT A DIVIDEND SYSTEM THAT THEY WOULD INCLUDE THE CITY IN SO THAT THE CITY COULD INCREASE THEIR AMOUNT RECEIVING FROM THE PORT. >> THAT'S LIKE SHARING IN PROFITS OR SHARING,[BACKGROUND] THAT IS IN EFFECT, TIED TO OPERATIONAL? >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. >> ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THE PORT FOR ALTERNATE REVENUES. >> I THINK SAME THING, AND I'M JUST GOING OFF OF EXPERIENCE FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN WITH LIKE THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY. I THINK THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THE AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE WITH THEM. I'M OF THE OPINION WE SHOULD PROBABLY PUT IT IN TO A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO SOLIDIFY IT. I THINK MAYBE THERE COULD BE SOME ROOM TO BE DONE WITH THE PORT AS WELL WHERE WE STRUCTURE A PAYMENT HOW IT WORKS TO THE CITY, DIVIDEND PAYMENT, HOWEVER, IT COULD BE FUNCTION TO BE DISCUSSED WITH WARS BOARD IN THE FUTURE. THEN EVENTUALLY WE COULD GET TO A POINT WHERE A CHARTER AMENDMENT WOULD BE A HEALTHIER VIA DISCUSSION TO CHANGE OVERALL. BUT I AM IN SUPPORT OF DISCUSSING HOW A DIVIDEND PAYMENT WOULD WORK OUT. I THINK THAT'S LEADING TO THE BEYOND JUST THAT ONE TIME PAYMENT THAT WE CAN OPEN THE DISCUSSION FOR THE FUTURE REVENUE COMING TO THE CITY, BUT I DO WANT TO FORMALLY ASK AS COUNCIL THE WARS BOARD TO GET US A DIVIDEND [OVERLAPPING] ONE TIME PAYMENT. BUT THEN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S IN GOOD FAITH TO NEGOTIATE A DIVIDEND PAYMENT FOR THE FUTURE. >> I HAVE THAT ON OUR AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING. YES, SIR. >> THE TIMING IS A LITTLE BIT OFF, IF WE DO AGREE TO AN ONGOING DIVIDEND PAYMENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE CHARTER ON NOVEMBER 14, BUT THAT JOINT MEETING DOESN'T HAPPEN UNTIL JANUARY. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> IT GOT BACKWARDS IN THE TIMING A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT WHATEVER RECURRING AGREEMENT WE COME TO WOULD BE CODIFIED IN THE CHARTER. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT. >> NOT NECESSARILY. >> I WAS OF THAT OPINION TOO, AND I JUST REFLECTED ON HOW WE DID THE BECAUSE THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY PAYMENT WAS OR THE CHARTER CHANGE, I FORGET HOW LONG AGO WAS BLEW UP AND I JUST THINK MAYBE NEGOTIATING AN AGREEMENT FIRST LIKE WE DID WITH THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY, BECAUSE I WAS OF THE SAME I WANTED TO GET THAT PILOT PAYMENT CHANGED IN A CHARTER TOO. BUT I THINK NEGOTIATING AT FIRST, HAVING AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT, AND THEN IF IT WORKS FOR BOTH PARTIES WHERE WE CAN EITHER ADJUST HOW WE NEED TO, AND THEN WE CAN PUT IT IN THE CHARTER. >> I WAS JUST CONSIDERING WHAT'S LEGAL OR SUSTAINING COULD WE DO IT IN A I DON'T THINK WE HAVE AN INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE WARS BOARD RIGHT NOW, DO WE? >> WE DO. >> WE HAVE SEVERAL. >>[OVERLAPPING] THIS WOULD BE A INTER LOCAL RIGHT NOW. >> HERE'S THE PROBLEM I SEE THAT IF YOU PUT IT ON [04:15:02] A CHARTER ELECTION IS IF YOU NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT AND YOU HAVE A CONTRACT IN PLACE, AND IT'S NOT ON THE CHARTER, IT'S ALWAYS A CONTRACT THAT CAN BE NEGOTIATED. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING AND YOU PUT IT ON THE CHARTER, IT COULD FAIL AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. >> I WAS ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S LEGAL AND SUSTAINABLE AND IN THE COURT'S CASE, I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS A CHARTER, BUT IT'S WHATEVER IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE MECHANISM. >> WELL, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OVER THE PORT AND LET'S USE THE PARKING FEE AS AN EXAMPLE. WE COUNCIL VOTED TO PUT THAT $1 FEE IN THERE. WE HAVE CONTROL VIA ORDINANCE OVER THE PRIVATE LOTS. WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THE PORT. THE PORT COULD HAVE SAID, WE'RE NOT PARTICIPATING. THEY DID NOT. THE PORT SAID IF YOU WANT US TO PARTICIPATE, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. BUT WE HAD TO SET UP A CONTRACTUAL INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND THEY HAD TO VOTE TO AGREE TO THAT. WE HAVE A PORT THAT'S WARM AND FRIENDLY TO THE CITY, THEY'RE WANTING TO WORK WITH THE CITY IN ANY WAY. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE MENTIONING THE DIVIDEND SYSTEM. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S UP TO THE PORT TO PARTICIPATE. >> WHEN WAS THAT NEGOTIATED? IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I UNDERSTOOD LIKE THE 1940S? >> YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S RIDICULOUS. >> ALWAYS A SWEET DEAL BACK THEN TOO. >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND AS OUR PORT IS UNIQUE IN THE FACT THAT UNLIKE OTHER PORTS, THEY HAVE NO TAXING [INAUDIBLE] THEY HAVE. >> THEY GET NO PUBLIC MONIES. THE THING ABOUT THE PORT, BACK WHEN WE DECIDED TO, WE LOOKED AT A POTENTIAL CHARTER CHANGE TO GET MORE MONEY FROM THE PORT WHEN WE PUT THE $1 AND THE TARIFF FEE IN THERE. BUT THE PORT, AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THEY HAVE JUST STARTED TO BECOME FINANCIALLY STABLE OVER THERE. AS YOU MAY HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE PORT, AND I SEND EVERY MONTH, I SEND COUNCIL THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS TO REPORT SO THAT YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE PORT. THE PORT IS POURING THAT MONEY INTO THE WEST END FOR EXPANDING CARGO OVER THERE. WE GOT QUOTES OF SOMEWHERE AROUND 500 MILLION - $1 BILLION INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE DONE ON THAT WEST END AND SO THEY'RE STARTING TO POUR THIS EXTRA MONEY INTO THAT. >> IT WAS POORLY MISMANAGED. >>IT'S BEEN MISMANAGED FOR EVER SINCE IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE ALMOST FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. THE OTHER ISSUE. EXCUSE ME. >> NOT IN THE PRESENT, IN THE PAST.. >> IN THE PAST. CURRENTLY, THE PORT IS MORE SOLVENT AND FINANCIALLY STABLE THAN IT'S EVER BEEN IN ITS HISTORY. ONE OTHER THING WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PORT, JUST GIVE SOME THOUGHT TO THIS, SO WE MOVE INTO A DIVIDEND SYSTEM, OR WE MOVE INTO A CHANGE OF THE CHARTER AND INCREASING THE PILOT A GREAT DEAL. >> THERE IS TALK IF WE DO THAT, WE'LL DO AWAY WITH THE $1 PARKING FEE OR WE'LL DO AWAY WITH THE TARIFF FEE. MY FEELING WOULD BE THOSE TWO WOULD STAY CONTINUING TO RUN IN ADDITION TO ANYTHING THAT WE HAVE. THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE THOSE FEES DON'T COME FROM THE PORT. >> COME FROM THE PASSENGERS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. COMES FROM THE VISITORS, THAT'S CORRECT. >> BUT THE WHOLE IDEA, THE CONCEPT IS, I THINK IS THAT WE WANT TO SHARE IN THE PROSPERITY AS A PORT. THAT'S THE WAY TO DO IT IS TO TIE IT TO SOME WITH THE OPERATIONAL SUCCESS. >> YES, SIR. >> AS I SAY THE PAYMENT LIEU OF TAXES REALLY DOESN'T REFLECT THAT. >> IT DOES NOT. THOSE ARE SOME THOUGHTS AND I THINK WE WILL HAVE MORE INPUT ON THIS AT OUR JANUARY JOINT MEETING WITH THE PORT. BUT RIGHT NOW, I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A LAY OF THE LAND OF HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE BRINGING OVER CURRENTLY IN THE MANNER THAT WE HAVE A STRUCTURE. >> IT SHOULD ALSO BE UNDERSTOOD. THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT FUNCTION THAT WAY. UTMB PAYS A FEE IN LIEU OF TAXES. NO, THEY DO, SAME THING AND WHO ELSE IS THE DONOR? [04:20:02] >> I WONDER WHERE THAT UTMB DID. >> I DIDN'T THINK UTMB DID. >> THE HOUSING AUTHORITY DID FOR A WHILE ON SOME OF THEIR STUFF. >> I REMEMBER THE COUNTY AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT GET A PIECE OF THAT. WE GO UP ON AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD WE CAN TRY OTHER THINGS OUT WITH THE INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENTS AND TWEAK HIM UNTIL WE WANT TO SOLIDIFY IT, WHICH I THINK. BUT CHARTER-WISE, THAT WAS IT $195,000 IS ALMOST NOMINAL, IT THERE'S NO DOUBT. THE ONLY WAY AND IT USED TO NOT BE THAT MUCH, WHAT HAPPENS, I THINK IN THE 60S IS WHEN PELICAN ISLAND STARTED EXPANDING, THEY MOVED IT UP ABOUT $16,000. [LAUGHTER] IT USED TO NOT EVEN BE THAT MUCH THAT ORIGINAL AMOUNT. >> MY $0.02 IN IT IS THAT I BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COUNSEL TO SHARE IN THE UPS AND DOWNS OF THE PORT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR COUNSEL TO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE PORT AND THE WAY YOU DO THAT IS, THAT WAY YOU IS INCENTIVIZED TO BE TO BE DOING THE RIGHT THING DOWN THERE AS THE WAR PORT MEMBERS ARE. I ALSO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER AS WE TALK ABOUT ANY OF THESE COMPONENT UNITS THAT WE DON'T KILL THE GOOSE THAT LAID THE GOLDEN A, THAT WE SUCK EVERY DOLLAR OUT OF THIS THING AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT TANKS AND THEN WE'RE IN THE WORLD A HURT AND WE'VE KILLED THE GOOSE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT NURTURE THE GOOSE AND WE SHARE IN THE PROSPERITY. >> THE RESPONSIBILITY. >> YES. >> I AGREE. >> GO AHEAD. >> THOSE BONDS DON'T THEY DON'T HURT THE CITY, I DON'T THINK. >> NO, THEY'RE NOT. >> BUT I'M NOT HURTING A PORT. I DON'T WANT THAT ON THE RECORD. >> NO. >> BUT IF IT DOES ALL FALL APART, THERE'S THE CITY DOES NOT BEAR THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THOSE BONDS. >> I WANT TO THROW OUT ANOTHER IDEA ABOUT THIS PILOT AND CHANGING THE CHARTER. I THINK SOMETHING YOU CONSIDER ON THIS. I'VE BEEN THROUGH SOME CHARTER CHANGE ELECTIONS SINCE BEEN ON COUNCIL. SOME OF THESE ISSUES GET VERY STRANGE WHEN IT GETS OUT THERE AND TO THE PUBLIC ON VOTING. CAMPS LINE UP AND YOU SOMETIMES GET INTO QUITE A PUSH AND PULL BETWEEN FACTIONS ON THESE ITEMS. I SURE WOULD NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN WITH THE PORT. I WOULD NOT WANT US TO LOOKS LIKE IT'D BE THE CITY AGAINST THE PORT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT INTO WHO CAN MUSTER UP ENOUGH SUPPORT ON THIS. IT'S JUST SOMETIMES YOU MAY WIN THE BATTLE AND LOSE. >> WELL CITIES END UP AT A DISADVANTAGE IN BOND ISSUES JUST LIKE SCHOOL DISTRICTS DO TOO. IS THAT WE CAN ONLY PUSH OUT FACTUAL INFORMATION, WE CANNOT CAN'T SUPPORT PROP. WELL, COUNSEL CAN, STAFF CAN. IT'S IMPORTANT FROM A CITY PERSPECTIVE. I CAN'T USE THE CITY'S WEB PAGE TO, I CAN ONLY PUT OUT FACTS. THIS MONEY WOULD BE USED FOR THIS AND THIS. THESE ARE THE FACTS, WHEREAS OTHER GROUPS CAN USE ALL MEANS POSSIBLE, AND WE DON'T DO THAT. >> I THINK JUST FOCUSING ON THE GOAL IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT. THE GOAL IS SHARING IN THE PROSPERITY AND WHATEVER MECHANISM IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE TO DO THAT, WHETHER IT'S THE CHARTER OR INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT, THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD DO. IF THE CHARTER DOESN'T GET US THERE, WE'LL LEAVE IT ALONE. >> ONE OF THE AREAS OF THE PORT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT OUR LAST WARS BOARD MEETING THAT HAS JUST POPPED UP, THE NEED FOR DREDGING AT THE PORT IS UNBELIEVABLY EMERGENCY OVER THERE AND THE FUNDING FOR THAT IS DRYING UP. I SHOULDN'T SAY DRYING UP, BUT THE FUNDING FOR THAT IS MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO GET. >> THAT'S WHY IT WAS AN ISSUE WITH IN OUR LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT LIVE FOR THAT WILL HELP US WITH THAT. ANYWAY, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE PORT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE. >> DO YOU DISPLAY WHAT YOU MEAN BY DEMONYMS FEE ON CRUISE PASSENGERS? >> NUMBER OF PER TERM. IS THAT THE PER TERM PAYMENT? >> IT'S THE PER TERM PAYMENT. WE GET $0.25 PER TERM. >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO GO TO THE WARS BOARD AND TELL ROJA ASK FOR MORE OR RENEGOTIATE THEIR CONTRACTS. THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY LIMITING FACTOR I'D SEE. >> WHY SHOULD WE SAY IN FUTURE CONTRACTS, YOU NEED TO DO. >> WE STILL COULDN'T TELL HIM NEED, BUT WE COULD PASS A RESOLUTION TO URGE STRONG SUPPORT OR MEET WITH THE WARS BOARD AND GIVE HIM OUR THOUGHTS ON IT. THAT WOULD BE ON I THINK THE ONLY LIMITING FACTOR BECAUSE WE COULDN'T TELL HIM HOW TO NEGOTIATE, [04:25:01] BUT WE COULD ASK NICELY. >> I APPROACHED THAT COUNSEL HAS BROUGHT THAT SUBJECT UP BEFORE AND I'VE APPROACHED THAT WITH THE PORT. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU INFORMATION THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT ON THIS. THESE CRUISE LINES HAVING A PASSENGER TARIFF THAT COMES TO THE CITY IS UNHEARD OF IN THE CRUISE INDUSTRY. THEY DON'T DO THAT IN ANY OTHER PORT. WHAT HAPPENS IS THEY AGREED TO THAT, THEY AGREED TO 25% BACK WHEN THIS STARTED AND IT SET THE STANDARD $0.25 PER TURN. IT SET THE STANDARD THEN THAT MORAL CARIBBEAN IS GOING, I'M NOT GOING TO PAY MORE THAN $0.25 BECAUSE CARBON CARNIVAL PAID THAT. MSC IS SAYING, HEY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO PAY MORE THAN THE OTHER PEOPLE PAY. WHAT HAPPENS IS, I ASKED THE PORT THE OTHER DAY, I SAID, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT IN THESE CONTRACTS, IF WE SAY WE WANT TO DOUBLE THAT TO $0.50, THAT THAT WOULD SOUR THE CONTRACTS? PROBABLY NOT, OF COURSE. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IF IT DID. >> THERE'S TONS OF THEM. ST. THOMAS, ST. JOHN HAYNES, $0.44 I'M SORRY. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. I'M JUST THEY WERE TELLING ME IN THE UNITED STATES THAT'S UNHEARD OF. BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS, WE COULD POSSIBLY WORK WITH THE PORT TO INCREASING THAT FEE. BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT IF THE PORT AGREED TO THAT, IT WOULD COME OUT PART OF THEIR TARIFF THAT THEY HAVE. THEY WOULD REIMBURSE THE CITY. THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO TALK TO THE PORT ABOUT WHEN THEY'RE OVER HERE IN JANUARY, GET MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. >> ONE MORE THING. I NOTICED THAT THE NEW CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL OPERATOR WAS REALLY KEEN ON PARTICIPATING IN THE COMMUNITY IN A GREATER WAY IN TERMS OF HELPING WITH WHATEVER PROJECTS WE HAVE GOING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS, BUT TO ME IT SOUNDS LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEVERAGE THAT INTO SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THAT MIGHT HELP THE QUALITY OF LIFE HERE. >> COULD VERY WELL. THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO MSC. I GUIDED THEM OVER TO THE PARK BOARD BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT HOW THEY COULD HELP WITH BRINGING, ADVERTISING GALVESTON. THEY HAVE MET WITH THE PARK BOARD OVER THERE AND HAD MAYBE ONE OR TWO MEETINGS ALREADY OVER THERE AT THE PARK BOARD. BUT WE NEED TO EXPLORE THAT TARIFF FEE AND LET'S TALK ABOUT IT AND SEE WHAT CAN BE DONE. NOW, BACK TO THE CONTRACTS ON THAT. THESE CONTRACTS GO UP THAT TARIFF FEE. EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A LOT, THE TARIFF FEE GOES UP IN THE SAME PERCENTAGE EACH YEAR, THAT THE PORTS TARIFF FEES GO UP. I THINK IT'S 3%. IT GOES UP EVERY YEAR BASED ON THE CONTRACT. ALSO, THERE IS A STIPULATION IN THAT IF THE PORT FEELS THAT THERE ARE STRONG REASONS WHY THAT CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CONTRACT NEEDS TO BE TO RENEGOTIATED, THEY CAN BRING THAT FORWARD. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TALK WITH THE PORT, GET MORE DETAILS ON AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO ON THEM. >> I'D LIKE TO DO THAT. LOS ANGELES JUST UP THERE 1612-1925. >> THAT'S THE PORT OF LOS ANGELES OR SO IT GOES TO THE PORT AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR TOTAL IS AT THE PORT, BUT IT'S UP THERE'S AROUND 15/16 SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> IT IS INTRIGUING IN THE LATE PORT REPORT, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T RECEIVE ANY HOT TAX. THEIR LATEST STUDY SHOWS THAT 32% OF THE HOTEL NIGHTS COME FROM CRUISES. >> THAT'S GOING UP EVERY YEAR. I WOULD SAY THIS. I HOPE I'M NOT SPEAKING OUT OF TURN, BUT WHEN THE PORT COMES OVER IN JANUARY, THEY'RE GOING TO POSSIBLY VISIT WITH THE COUNCIL ABOUT INCREASING THE HOT TAX WITH THAT MONEY GOING TO THE PORT. I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A HEADS UP. THE HOT TAX LAWS AT THE STATE, IT ALLOWS FOR HOT TAX TO BE UTILIZED BY PORTS. >> WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS? [04:30:02] >> THE ONLY THING, THE RESTRICTION IT GIVES IT, IT HAS TO BE UTILIZED AND IN SOME INVOLVEMENT WITH THE CRUISE INDUSTRY. [LAUGHTER] WELL, THE CRUISE TERMINALS, PARKING GARAGES FOR CRUISE TERMINALS, THINGS LIKE THAT. >> EXCUSE ME. >> TOWARDS THE TRACTIONS. >> BUT IT'S MORE GEARED TO THE CRUISE BUSINESS AT THE PORT. I TALKED WITH DON ON THIS. DON, I DON'T WANT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT I SAID, CAN WE INCREASE OUR HOT FROM $0.15 AND GO UP AND DON HAS TOLD ME WE CANNOT. >> YOU CAN PUT ME ON THE SPOT, IT'S OKAY. WE'RE FIXED AT WHERE WE'RE AT. ONE OF THE COMPLICATIONS IS THE CATEGORIES UPON WHICH WE CAN EXPAND SET OUT IN CHAPTER 351. IT'S A PI. IF YOU WANT TO GIVE A SLICE TO THE PORT, IT'S GOING TO BE TAKEN AWAY FROM SOMEBODY ELSE. >> CORRECT. >> I THINK THERE WOULD BE MORE I THINK THIS MIGHT BE GETTING OFF THE THE WAGON OF THE AGENDA, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE THE PARK BOARD AND THE COURT COULD WORK TOGETHER TO ESTABLISH THAT BUSINESS MODEL BETTER THAN THE CITY OR THE PORT WOOD STANDALONE FROM HAVING NO HOT TAX MONEY GOING TO IT PERIOD. >> I THINK THEY ALREADY ARE. THEY ARE WORKING MORE CLOSELY TOGETHER WITH THE BOARD AND THE GROUP. >> THEY ARE VERY MUCH. DOESN'T IS IT THE TOTAL TAX IS THE LIMITATION OF ALL THE PIECES OF THE PI OF OUR HOT TAX ALL ADD UP TO A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE RIGHT NOW, 15%. IS THAT THE LIMITATION, THE TOTAL TAX? >> THE ALLOCATION OF THE 7% IS SET OUT IN 351. THE ALLOCATION OF THE 2% FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER IS SET OUT IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THEN THE 2% THAT YOU GET FROM THE STATE IS CHAPTER, I THINK 165 OF THE TAX CODE. >> PART OF OUR HOT IS GOING TO GO AWAY, I GUESS WHEN ALL OF THE BONDS ARE PAID OFF. >> DEPARTMENT BILL MONEY, THE 2% TRICKLE TRICKLE DOWN IS WHEN THE BONDS ARE PAID OFF, THAT WOULD GO AWAY. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AROUND TO SO THAT'S GOING TO DECREASE THE OVERALL HOT FROM 50% TO SOME. >> THE EFFECT ON THE CITY WOULD BE THE ELIMINATION OF TRICKLE DOWN. >> I GUESS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS CAN WE REPLACE THAT RENEGOTIATE. >> IT WOULDN'T LOWER OUR HOTEL TAX RATE. >> SAY THAT AGAIN? >> THAT RATE WOULD STILL STAY AT 15? >> NO. THE PRIME OF BILL MONEY WOULD GO AWAY. THERE'S NO NEED TO TAX 2% TO PAY FOR BONDS THAT ARE PAID OFF. >> I THINK THAT IN MY MIND, THE SALIENT POINT HERE, WE'RE AT 15%. CAN WE GO TO 16? >> NO. IF THE LEGISLATURE SAYS OKAY, YOU'D HAVE TO ASK. >> WE WILL BE LESS THAN 15% AS SOON AS TRICKLE DOWN GOES 2034, WILL BE LESS. WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO FOUR AFTER THAT, RIGHT? AT 10 YEARS. ABOUT 10 YEARS WILL SOMEBODY ELSE HAVE TO DO THAT, NOT ME WHILE WE WERE AT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE PORT? LET'S MOVE THE PARK BOARD ON THIS. CURRENTLY, BRIAN, WHAT ARE WE GETTING FROM THE PARK BOARD FOR THIS YEAR'S COMING BUDGET? >> ABOUT THE [INAUDIBLE] HUNDRED THOUSAND. THREE PLUS UNCOMMITTED 225,000. >> THAT UNCOMMITTED 225, WHERE'S THAT FROM? WHAT IS THEY OFFERED IT. >> IT WAS UNRESTRICTED FUNDS. >> IT WAS IT WAS A PROFIT FROM OPERATIONS OF SEE WHAT PARK AND DO THERE. >> IS THAT AN ONGOING FEE? THAT'S A ONE TIME FEE. THE 300 IS ONGOING, THOUGH, BECAUSE IT'S IN OUR INTERLOPE. >> WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE, AGAIN, DIFFERENT STRUCTURES THAN THE PORT. THE PORT REQUIRES A MUCH MORE GLOBAL DISCUSSION WITH CHARTER AND OTHER THINGS. BUT THE PARK PORT, WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS IN THE INTER-LOCAL AS IT COMES FORWARD? >> VERY GOOD. >> THOSE ARE OUR PARKS. >> I'M GOING TO THROW OUT A PARK BOARD DISCUSSION HERE. STAFF HAS BEEN SAYING THIS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO DO A MASTER PLAN FOR ALL OF OUR PARKS THAT ARE CONTROLLED BY THE PARK BOARD AND THAT WE POSSIBLY NEED TO SEE WHO WOULD BE THE BEST ENTITY TO MANAGE THESE PARKS. I'M NOT SAYING THE PARK BOARD WOULD NOT, BUT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO PUT THAT OUT FOR BIDS AND SEE IF THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE A MONEY SAVER AND SHARE IN MORE PROFITS IN THESE PARKS. I DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT THAT'S JUST A TOPIC. I THINK BRIAN AND DAN, [04:35:01] YOU'VE BEEN BRINGING THAT FORWARD A LONG TIME. >> I GUESS THE PROFIT SHARING THAT HAPPENS RIGHT NOW IS JUST FROM THE OPERATION OF WHERE WE GET UNRESTRICTED PROFITS FROM SEAWOLF PARK AND DELLANERA. >> WE DON'T GET THAT. >> WHATEVER ELSE, WE SHARE A 50/50 WITH THOSE. >> WELL, WE SHARE 50/50 ON THOSE FUNDS THAT ARE GENERATED FROM HOT FUNDS, BUT THE PROFIT THAT COMES FROM THAT PARTICULAR ENTERPRISE THEN IS UNRESTRICTED, BUT WE ALSO GET 300,000 FROM SEAWOLF PARK. THAT'S BEEN IN OUR INTERLOCAL FOR A LONG TIME. >> MAYOR, THEY ALLOCATED IT FROM SEAWOLF PARK, BUT THERE'S A LANGUAGE IN THE INTERLOCAL ABOUT WHERE THAT 300,000 IS SUPPOSED TO COME FROM. >> THERE'S JUST 300,000. >> $300,000 AND A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, THEY ALLOCATED IT AGAINST OUR PARK INSTEAD OF TAKING IT FROM OTHER SOURCES. THERE'S NO LANGUAGE SPECIFIC TO THAT. >> NEXT YEAR IF THEY MAKE $300,000 OFF THEIR CIRCUS AND THEY WANT TO GIVE US THAT 300, WE DON'T CARE WHERE THEY GET THE 300 FROM. >> NO, BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT ON ALL OUR ASSETS WHERE WE SHARE IN UNRESTRICTED FUNDS, AS WELL AS I THINK WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT AND I KNOW THEY'RE RECEPTIVE ON CHARGES, SUCH AS, BEACH BELIEF, THAT COULD BE COVERED BY HOT TAX. >> WE'RE WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT WITH THE CHIEF NOW, EVEN DISCUSSING CREATING A TOURISM DISTRICT OR TOURISM-ORIENTED POLICING, A VERY BROAD DISTRICT, MUCH BROADER THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY DO. >> THAT WOULD MAKE IT ELIGIBLE FOR. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS CREATE A DISTRICT. >> WELL, WE'RE WORKING. >> WE HAVE NOW. >> WE'RE WORKING. >> BUT I DON'T THINK IT COVERS WHERE WE'RE SPENDING OUR TIME. >> [INAUDIBLE] WOULD BE A TOURISM DISTRICT. >> WELL, NO. WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THAT PROCESS. >> BRIAN, AND YOU I TALKED ABOUT IT FOR THOSE THAT ATTENDED THE GHLA DINNER OR LUNCHEON. SCOTT JASLOVE [PHONETIC] WAS THERE AND TALKED ABOUT THE EVENT REIMBURSEMENT TRUST AT THE STATE THAT WE COULD TAP INTO, SAY, FOR OUR MARDI GRAS EXPENSES THAT WE USE HOT FOR, THEY WOULD REIMBURSE US FOR THAT. IF WE DID THAT, THAT WOULD FREE UP HOT TAX THEN. IT'S STILL GOT CONSTRAINTS, BUT IT WOULD FREE UP EXTRA HOT TAX. >> THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR TWO REASONS. ONE, SHORT-TERM, IT DOES FREE UP THE HOT LONG-TERM. MARDI GRAS LIVES IN OUR TRICKLE DOWN, AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT JUST A MOMENT AGO, THAT'S GOING AWAY. THAT COULD ALSO BE A GOOD IDEA FOR US TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. >> WE NEED TO LOOK INTO THAT AND SEE WHAT'S AVAILABLE TO US. >> I'M SORRY, I MISSED THAT LUNCHEON, BUT I WAS WORKING ON THE BIG BUCKS UP AT THE HDAC. >> YOU GO. >> THAT REIMBURSEMENT IS OUTSIDE OF HOT. >> NO, IT'S REIMBURSEMENT OF HOT THAT'S SPENT ON EVENT. >> REIMBURSEMENT OF HOT. >> BUT THE EVENTS HAVE TO MEET A CERTAIN CRITERIA AND WHAT SCOTT WAS OUTLINING, I THINK OUR MARDI GRAS MEETS THAT. >> AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO BE RE CLEARING. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WORKING WITH THE PORT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROSPECTIVE REVENUES, ROLLING REVENUE, ALL THAT TYPE OF STUFF. ALL OF YOUR HOT IS COMMITTED RIGHT NOW. IF YOU'RE GOING TO START SHIFTING THE USE OF HOT, THAT MEANS IT HAS TO COME FROM SOMEPLACE ELSE. I JUST WANT TO KEEP SAYING THAT BECAUSE WE ALL CAN AGREE ON THINGS, BUT THEN WHEN IT COMES TIME TO ACTUALLY SAY, WE'RE GOING TO GET THE HOT, WELL, THAT'S WHERE WE TEND TO COMMENT. >> TOURISM DISTRICT ENABLES US TO GET REIMBURSED? >> YES. >> BUT AGAIN, THAT'S JUST THE FIRST STEP OF IT. THE NEXT STEP IS YOU GOT TO GO OUT AND CLAIM YOUR HOT. RIGHT NOW THAT HOT IS CLAIMED BY SOMEBODY ELSE. IT'S GET IT'S BUDGETED SOMEPLACE ELSE. >> IT'S ALL THE SAME PILE OF MONEY. WE'RE NOT INCREASING THE PILE OF MONEY. >> NO, THAT'S RIGHT. THE PILE IS NOT GROWING. WE'RE JUST CUTTING IT UP DIFFERENT. THAT'S CORRECT. >> JUST KEEP IN MIND OTHER THAN THE HOT FUNDING AT THE PARK BOARD, EVERY SINGLE ASSET THEY MANAGE BELONGS TO THE CITY. THEY'RE ALL OURS. RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT TAKING A REVENUE SHARE ON THOSE, EXCEPT FOR THE 300,000. IT'S ALLOCATED OUT OF SEAWOLF, YOU COULD ARGUE THAT THAT'S COMING FROM ALL THE CITY ASSETS, BUT EVERY SINGLE THING THEY DO FOR US IS FOR US AND WITHOUT A REVENUE SHARE. THAT'S THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR YEARS. HOW DO WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT? >> WE CAN DO THAT WITH THE INTERLOCAL. >> YOU CAN DO THAT, YOU CAN COMPETITIVELY BID IT. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS YOU CAN DO. >> THE WHOLE IDEA, IN MY MIND, IS THAT THEY OPERATE LIKE A NONPROFIT. WE PAY THEM WHAT IT COSTS TO OPERATE AND THEN EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S LEFT OVER, IT COMES BACK TO THAT CITY. THAT'S HOE IT SHOULD OPERATE. >> YOUR EXACTLY RIGHT. >> IT USED TO OPERATE THAT WAY. THEY USED TO SEND MONEY BACK TO THE CITY, BUT IT'S BEEN A WHILE. >> UNFORTUNATELY, FOR THE WHOLE SITUATION, PARK BOARD DOES INCLUDE IT. THEIR MONEY IS VERY SILOED. [04:40:02] WHEREAS THE PORT GETS MONEY AND IT'S PORT MONEY, AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF RESTRAINTS ON IT AND IT CAN BE USED FOR CAPITAL. THE PARKS MONEY IS VERY SILOED. THEY HAVE HOT, THEY HAVE BEACH USER FEES, SO IT GETS VERY SILOED, BUT THEN AGAIN TOO, WE PLAY IN THOSE SAME SANDBOXES. >> NO PUN INTENDED. >> YES. THAT'S RIGHT. THERE'S OPPORTUNITY THERE TO FREE UP MONEY THAT'S BEING USED OVER HERE THAT IS ELIGIBLE OVER HERE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> SUCH AS THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. >> SOME OF THAT, YES. >> YEAH. SURELY COULD. ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THE PARK BOARD AT THIS POINT? BY THE WAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSIONS ON THIS ALTERNATE REVENUE, SO THIS IS NOT OUR ONLY TIME TO DISCUSS THAT. MOVING TO ANY OTHER THOUGHTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALTERNATIVE REVENUE. I'M GOING TO BRING UP THE IMPACT FEE ON NEW DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE APPROVED AN IMPACT FEE PROCESS HERE AT THE CITY. WHEN I FIRST GOT ON CITY COUNCIL, I GUESS IT WAS 2015, 2014, WE APPROVED A ZERO IMPACT FEE, BUT WE HAD THAT PROCESS AVAILABLE TO US. IS THAT RIGHT? >> IT'S EXPIRED, BUT WE DID, YES. >> THE QUESTION IS, DO WE WANT TO EVEN DISCUSS THAT AND HAVE THAT AS A SOURCE OF REVENUE? >> WE'VE HAD A REALLY SLOW START AT NEW DEVELOPMENT, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE COUNTER-INTUITIVE TO RAISE A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT WHEN WE'RE ALREADY ASKING FOR IMPROVEMENTS. >> I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB WITH LARGE SCALE DEVELOPERS. WE STAND PRETTY FIRM. WE DON'T ASK OUR CURRENT RATE PLAYERS AND OUR UTILITIES AND STUFF TO PAY FOR THE COST OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS. WE PUT THAT ON THE DEVELOPER AS DEVELOPER EXPENSES, AND IT HASN'T REALLY IMPACTED OUR ABILITY TO DEVELOP, BUT WE'VE GOT SOME GOOD PLAYERS THERE. I WORRY THAT IF YOU DO IMPACT FEES, IT'S GOING TO IMPACT YOUR INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND YOU START IMPACTING [INAUDIBLE]. >> SMALLER SCALE. >> THE SMALLER SCALE STUFF THAT YOU'RE REALLY TRYING TO ACHIEVE. THAT BEING SAID, THERE'S ALWAYS OPPORTUNITY THERE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING WITH LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT TO WORK WITH THEM ON THINGS, SUCH AS, STORAGE CAPACITY, LIFT STATIONS. >> [INAUDIBLE] PLAN. >> YES, EXACTLY, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. IN THE PAST, IT'S BEEN VERY RECEPTIVE OF THAT. THERE'S ALSO TOOLS AVAILABLE TO DEVELOPERS AS THEY MOVE FORWARD AND PUT THESE THINGS IN AT THE CITY, GALVESTON HAS NEVER REALLY GOTTEN INTO, BUT IF SOMEBODY'S GOING TO DEVELOP, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTIONS OF PIDS AND MUDS AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT TO ACHIEVE THESE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS THAT THE CITY COULD REQUIRE OF THEM, AND WE DO REQUIRE OF THEM. >> I JUST WANT TO BRING IT TO THE TABLE. WE WE HAVE NOT, IN THE PAST, WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE, BUT I WANT TO BRING ANOTHER THING, ADMINISTRATIVE FEES ON ADMINISTERING HOT. ARE WE TAKING THOSE UP? >> ONE OF THE ONES YOU MISSED CROSSED OVER. WHERE I THINK WE'RE NOT COLLECTING WHAT WE SHOULD BE IS INCREASING FINES AND FEES. >> WELL, I WAS JUST JUMPING AROUND, BUT FIRST, WE CAN COME TO FINES AND FEES, BUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, ARE WE TAKING OUR PERCENTAGE OUT? >> WE DON'T TAKE AN ADMINISTRATIVE OF HOT. WE GIVE IT ALL BACK TO THE PARK BOARD. >> SHOULD WE? >> SEND THIS TO THE PARK BOARD. >> SHOULD WE ADMINISTER? >> WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT COST ADMINISTERING OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARK BOARD THAT WE DON'T FUND. IT'S FUNDED OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND RIGHT NOW. >> ACCORDING TO THE DRAFT OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE MANAGING SHORT-TERM RENTALS, WE'RE GOING TO BE PAYING FOR AN ADMINISTRATOR TO DO THAT AT SOME POINT, SOME STAFF PERSON TO DO THAT? >> I THINK THIS IS GENERAL ADMINISTRATION WHEN IT COMES TO NEGOTIATING CONTRACTS. >> IT'S LEGAL, IT'S FINANCE, IT'S OUR ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS, OUR AUDIT. ALL THINGS RELATED TO THE MANAGEMENT OF HOT. >> THE PARK BOARD TAKES 10%, YES. >> WE COULD CHARGE 10%. >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN BOTH TAKE 10%. THAT WOULD BE THE QUESTION. >> MIKE, CHECK IN, AND THEN BRIAN. THE OTHER THING, COUNCILWOMAN, ROB, FINES AND FEES. WE'VE CHANGED OUR FINES AND FEES HERE. IT'S BEEN A LITTLE WHILE BACK. IS THERE ANY ROOM FOR? >> THE AMOUNTS ARE CAPPED STATUTORILY. THEN, OF COURSE, THEY'RE ADJUDICATED. EVEN THOUGH WE ISSUE A FINE, IT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE ADJUDICATION PROCESS, WHICH, IN TEXAS, IS FAIRLY GENEROUS FOR A LOT OF THE THINGS WE FINE FOR. >> FINES ARE INTENDED TO BE A DETERRENT TO CHANGE CONDUCT, TO CHANGE BEHAVIOR. IF YOU INCREASE THEM TO THE POINT WHERE YOU'RE AFFECTING THE CHANGE OF BEHAVIOR, [04:45:03] THEN YOU ELIMINATE YOUR FINDS. A DOG CATCH YOUR PARADOX. >> YES. EXACTLY. >> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, COUNCIL, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT TOPIC? THANK YOU. LET'S MOVE TO 3E. THIS 3E SHOULD, [3.E. Discussion of the City/Park Board HOT Contract (D. Buckley - 30 min)] I'M GOING TO PREDICT, TAKE 5 MINUTES. >> I HOPE SO, MAYOR. >> 3E, DISCUSSION OF THE CITY PARK BOARD HOT CONTRACT. >> GOT LUNCH COMING TO ME. >> GOOD MORNING. WHAT WE'RE BRINGING BACK TO YOU THE HOT CONTRACT THAT WE BROUGHT LAST MEETING WHERE THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ON WHETHER OR NOT WE HAD INTERACTED WITH THE PARK BOARD, AND I WILL TAKE DOWN THIS, AND MATTER OF FACT THAT BECAUSE OF THE DE MINIMIS CHANGES, WE DIDN'T DISCUSS IT WITH THE PARK BEFORE WE BROUGHT TO COUNCIL, BUT WE HAVE DONE THAT NOW. THE DRAFT THAT WAS PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET HAS BEEN SIGNED OFF ON BY THE PARK BOARD. I BELIEVE THE TRUSTEES VOTED ON A TUESDAY AND IT PASSED. WHAT YOU HAVE IN A PACKET IS AN AMENDED HOT CONTRACT. >>THEY HAD GOTTEN THE RED LINE. >> THE RED LINE AND THE FINAL VERSION IS ABSENT. THE RED LINE. THE ONE THING I'LL POINT OUT TO YOU, UNDER SECTION 9, THE PARK BOARD, ONE OF THE CONTENTIOUS ITEMS BEFORE AS WE WERE WORKING TOWARD THE FINAL CONTRACT WAS THE AMOUNT, THE 0.57 THAT COMES FROM THE STATE, AND WHETHER WE TRANSFER THAT TO PARK BOARD. WE AGREED TO DO THAT, BUT WE PUT LANGUAGE IN HERE BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THEY NEEDED THE MONEY TO PAY PERSONNEL COSTS. WELL, WE GOT FROM THEM WHAT THOSE COSTS WERE. YOU'LL SEE IN THE HOT CONTRACT, THE PERSONNEL COSTS ARE 14.7% OF THAT. MATERIAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES ARE 43 AND THEN INTER-FUND TRANSFERS ARE 41%. THE 0.57 THEY GET, THAT'S HOW THEY SPEND THE MONEY. WE GOT THAT FROM THEM AND WE INCORPORATED INTO THE AGREEMENT SO THERE'LL BE NO FURTHER DEBATE ABOUT THAT. >> THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR. THE BOTTOM LINE IS AND THIS IS ITEM 12B ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT, BUT THE HOT CONTRACT HAS BEEN TALKED AND OVER TO THE PARK BOARD AND YOU'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT. EVERYBODY'S ON BOARD. >> EVERYBODY ENDORSED IT ON TUESDAY. >> RELATED TO THAT, IS ALSO THE DOCUMENTS THAT DAN SENT OUT TO US, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO OR A WEEK AGO. THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FROM 2019 AND ALSO THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES THAT ALSO HAVE AN IMPACT ON OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARK BOARD THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REVIEWING. WE'VE ASKED TO REVIEW AND SEND COMMENTS BACK BY A CERTAIN DATE, I THINK IT WAS NOVEMBER OR SOMETHING. >> I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT DATE WE TALKED ABOUT. >> I DON'T TYPICALLY SET DEADLINES FOR COUNCIL, BUT WE LIKE TO GET THE THINGS BACK TIMELY AND SO WE CAN DISCUSS THEM WITH THE PARK BOARD. AGAIN, THE INTERLOCAL AS YOU WILL SEE WHEN YOU READ IT, IT DEALS MOSTLY WITH OPERATIONAL ITEMS. IT'S THE CODE THAT REALLY ESTABLISHES THE RELATIONSHIP. >> I THINK OUR DEADLINE FOR THE INTERLOCAL PREVIOUSLY WAS MARCH. >> I WAS GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO YOU GUYS AND THE PARK BOARD IS GOING TO TAKE IT TO THEIR TRUSTEES IN APRIL, SO WE HOPE TO FINISH IT BY THE END OF MARCH. >> SOUNDS GOOD. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE VERY WELCOME. >> I APPRECIATE THAT, DAN. WE HAVE 3G, AND H, AND I BEFORE WE MOVE ON. LET'S DO 3G, PLEASE. [3.G. Discuss keeping Lasker Pool open beyond regular operating season (Porretto/Rawlins - 10 min)] >> 3G, DISCUSS KEEPING LASKER POOL OPEN BEYOND REGULAR OPERATING SEASON. >> COUNCILMAN PORRETTO AND ROLLINS. >> AND BARBARA. >> HI. >> ONE OF MY CONSTITUENTS SAID THEY CALLED YOU AND YOU SAID REACH ACCOUNTS A PERSON, SO THEY FOUND ME. >> AND CALLED ME. >> WELL, THEY ASKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF KEEPING THE POOL OPEN. I TOLD THEM, ORGANIZE A GROUP AND COME TO ME AND TALK AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT. THEY WENT OUT AND GOT A PETITION SIGNED, LIKE 164. >> SOME OF THEM ARE DUPLICATES. >> WE CAUGHT A GOOD SOLID 120, BUT THEY WENT OUT AND THEY'RE PASSIONATE ABOUT IT. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> NOT NOW. >>WHAT I WAS THINKING IS WHAT WE CAN DO NOW IS LOOK AT OUR EXPENSES OVER WHAT IT COSTS AT A ZERO. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE SAID IT IN THE ALTERNATIVE REVENUE, BUT THERE MIGHT BE SOME RESOURCE SHARING THAT WE CAN DO WITH THE PARK BOARD VIA LIFEGUARDS AND WHATNOT. >> ACTUALLY, THE POOL DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR HOT TAX. WE'VE DONE THE NUMBERS. WE PRESENTED IT TO IDC BOARD. IF BRANDON WAS HERE. SELAM IT DOES NOT QUALIFY. WE DO NOT RECEIVE ENOUGH VISITORS TO THE POOL. IT'S LOCALS. WE'RE STARTING OUT OCTOBER 1 AT A DEFICIT OF -28,000, SELAM? YES. BECAUSE OF THE 5% INCREASE. [04:50:02] WE HAVE MOVED OUR MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN OVER TO THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE SIDE WHERE WE HAD AN OPENING WITH PARKS BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO CUT COSTS. OUR FOUR POOL EMPLOYEES, WHICH TWO WE SHARE WITH THE POCKET PART, THESE ARE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, WILL BE SERVICING AND CLEANING THE POOL ALONG WITH OUR MANAGER AND ASSISTANT MANAGER. WE HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO KEEP OUR COSTS DOWN FOR OUR LOCALS. I THINK WE DO A VERY GOOD JOB AT IT. IDC IS VERY ADAMANT WITH THE $500,000 BUDGET, AND WE MAKE MAYBE 100 AND SOME THOUSAND IN CONCESSIONS. THIS PAST YEAR, WE PROBABLY WILL NOT MAKE 120,000 CONCESSION BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF RAIN IN JULY. >> STORMS. >> WELL, ACTUALLY, THE STORM WE COULD HAVE RECOVERED FROM, EXCEPT FOR THE POWER DIDN'T COME BACK ON. THEN THE NEXT WEEK IT RAINED THE WHOLE WEEK. NOBODY'S GOING TO COME SWIM IN THE RAIN. I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN ARE COMING FROM. TIDEWAY HAS BEEN SHUT DOWN, AND THAT DOES CAUSE A PROBLEM, BUT THIS POOL WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE A YEAR-AROUND POOL. WE HAVE CONTACTED OTHER POOLS IN OUR COUNTY AND MOST OF THEM HAVE SOFT OPENINGS IN MAY, ONLY ON WEEKENDS. THEY DO THEIR FULL OPENING MEMORIAL DAY. WE OPEN EASTER WEEKEND. NO MATTER WHEN EASTER COMES, WE OPEN. THEY HAVE A SOFT CLOSING LABOR DAY WEEKEND AND ONLY SAY OPENING WEEKENDS THROUGH THE END OF SEPTEMBER. WE ARE LONGER THAN ANY OTHER POOL IN OUR AREA. THAT INCLUDES JAMAICA BEACH, TEXAS CITY, OUTDOOR POOL, AVISA ALVIN, LAKE CITY HAS ONE OUTDOOR POOL, FRIENDSWOOD, LAKE JACKSON. WE ARE LIKE THE LONGEST RUNNING AREA. >> IS THAT GISD IS GETTING READY TO BUILD A FIRST CLASS INDOOR NATATORIUM. AND POSSIBLY FOR OFF SEASON, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING TO PARTNER WITH THEM FOR THE USERS THAT WANT TO USE THE POOL IN THE WINTERTIME BECAUSE OUR WEATHER FLUCTUATES RIGHT NOW, IN MY POOL AT HOME 74 DEGREES, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS HEAT THE WAY IT IS. WE WOULD BE HEATING THE POOL RIGHT NOW. >> YEAH. >> BUT THAT POOL IS GOING TO STAY HEATED FOR THEIR USE. THIS COULD ACTUALLY BE AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THEY COLLECT A FEE. IT COULD HELP OFFSET GISD'S COST. BECAUSE WE ALWAYS ALLOW GISD TO USE OUR POOL WHEN THEY NEED IT, AND WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING OUT OF IT. WE WOULD JUST WANT THAT MONEY TO GO TO GISD, BUT THIS COULD BE A GREAT SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM AS WE MOVE FORWARD. NOW THE GISD HAS A POOL NOW, I'M NOT SURE ANYONE WANTS TO GO SWIM THERE. >> NO. >> BUT THAT'S WHY THEY'RE GETTING A NICE NEW ONE. BUT THIS COULD ACTUALLY BE A BIG BENEFIT. >> FUNDING IT, OBVIOUSLY, IS ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS. >> IT'S A VERY BIG CONCERN. ALSO, WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD STAFF. WE WOULD NEED MORE FULL TIME STAFF. THIS IS WHEN OUR STAFF TAKES THEIR VACATION. THEY ROTATE WEEKS [OVERLAPPING]. >> I UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, WE'RE HERE AND IT'S CLOSED RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK IT'S MOVING FORWARD INTO THE FUTURE, AND WE DO OFFER AN INCREDIBLE SERVICE FOR RESIDENTS WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT. I JUST WANT TO EXPLORE, MAYBE WE LOOK AT WHAT IT COSTS A MONTH TO STAFF IT. BECAUSE JUST FROM THE CIVILIAN SIDE, WHAT THEY'VE EXPRESSED WANTING TO DO IS FUND RAISING FOR IT AND GETTING MONEY AND PUTTING IT IN. >> YOU GET A LOT OF MONEY FROM FUND RAISING FOR IT. >> YES [OVERLAPPING]. >> YOU'RE RIGHT. BUT JUST ADDITIONAL DOESN'T HURT. IF WE CAN TELL THEM, OKAY LOOK, LET'S SAY, I'M JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE, IT'S $50,000. THEY CAN GO RAISE $50,000. WE CAN KEEP IT OPEN. >> [LAUGHTER] >> WE PROBABLY NEED A MILLION. >> A MILLION AND FIVE [OVERLAPPING]. >> NOT YEAR ROUND. MONTH TO MONTH, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS. YOU GOT TO GIVE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER SURPRISE YOU OR REALIZE IT'S TOO BIG OF A TASK. >> WE ORIGINALLY LOOKED INTO A BUBBLE WHEN WE FIRST OPENED THE POOL. THOSE ARE SIX TO $8,000. YOU HAVE TO PAY A COMPANY TO SET IT UP. >> THAT'S THE BURST OUR BUBBLE. ALSO, UTMB USED TO HAVE A BUBBLE, BUT OF COURSE, YOU GET A BIG THUNDERSTORM DURING THE WINTER MONTHS AND IT TAKES IT OUT. >> YEAH. BECAUSE WE DIDN'T EVEN TALK ABOUT THAT WITH GISD AT ONE POINT ABOUT PARTNERING ON A BUBBLE. >> THEY COULD HAVE SWIM MEETS AND WATER POLO GAMES. AS A MATTER OF FACT, ONE YEAR WE HOSTED A SWIM MEET FOR BALL HIGH BECAUSE THEIR POOL IS NOT REGULATION RIGHT NOW, [04:55:02] AND IT WAS NOT IN GOOD SHAPE. WE ALLOWED GISD TO BE THE FIRST SWIM MEET EVER AT OUR CITY POOL. >> IF IT'S OKAY WITH COUNCIL, I'M HAPPY TO SIT DOWN WITH MR. NEIGHBORS AND START TALKING ABOUT THAT FOR, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD BE READY FOR NEXT SEASON. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE IN EDITORIAL [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT TWO YEARS. >> ONE OF THE THINGS BARBARA COULD DO TOO IS TO PUT TOGETHER THE COST ON A MONTHLY BASIS, AND IT'S GOING TO BE AN ACCELERATING COST BECAUSE THE FURTHER DOWN THE YEAR YOU GO, THE MORE EXPENSIVE IT'S GOING TO BE. >> RIGHT. >> THAT'S FINE. >> WE COULD MAYBE SELL AN OFF SEASON PASS AND PRICE THE PASS TO OFFSET THE COST. >> THAT'S SOMETHING, I THINK, THAT PEOPLE WANT, AND WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN IS TO RAISE THE COST ACROSS THE BOARD AND SEE THE NUMBERS DROP, BECAUSE IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE FOR [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK WE COULD SELL A SUMMER SEASON PASS AND WE COULD DO AN OFF SEASON PASS AND WE COULD PRE-SELL IT, AND IF WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PRE-SALE FOR IT [OVERLAPPING]. >> YOU KNOW, DAN'S IDEA THAT BROUGHT UP LAST MEETING, WHICH IS FAMILIAR, BUT THE IDEA OF HAVING THE SHORT TERM RENTAL HELP SUPPLEMENT SOME OF THAT FUND. I KNOW IT'S A LOT, BUT I'M JUST, THE RESIDENTS [OVERLAPPING]. >> I WOULD RECOMMEND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT EXTENDING, I'M NOT SAYING YEAR AROUND EXTENDING, I WOULD SAY YOU NEED TO EXTEND TO LOOK AT THE COST THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF NOVEMBER, SHUT DOWN AND DON'T OPEN AGAIN UNTIL MARCH, BECAUSE THE END OF NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, JANUARY, FEBRUARY, ARE PRETTY COLD MONTHS USUALLY. >> YEAH. THOSE WILL BE THE MOST DIFFICULT FOR US TO STAFF. >> WE'RE GOING TO WATCH THE HEAT COME RIGHT OFF THE POOL, EVEN WITH BLANKETS ON. >> UNDERSTAND. >> I WANT BLANKETS. >> I'D LIKE THE MONTHLY BREAKDOWN COST. WE CAN SEE WHAT IT IS GOING TO COST. MAYBE THERE'S SOMEONE WITH A LARGE ENDOWMENT THAT WANTS TO HELP OUT, BUT THEY'RE REALLY PASSIONATE ABOUT IT, AND I THINK IF THEY CAN GET IT DONE, THEN WE HAND MORE POWER TO THEM. NOTHING AGAINST [INAUDIBLE] PARKS. THEY DO A TREMENDOUS JOB. >> THEY DO. >> YOU GOT TO GIVE PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY. >> YOU CAN ONLY RAISE SO MUCH MONEY. THEY ARE ON THE MISSION TO RAISE MONEY. >> I GET WHERE IDC'S COMING FROM, ESPECIALLY GIVEN OUR DECLINE. >> A POOL IS A DRAIN ON [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO LOSE FUNDING. >> TELL ME ABOUT IT. >> WE GOT ANOTHER THOUSAND. >> YEAH. >> THE IDEAL WORLD IT'S LIKE TEXAS CITY, WHERE THEY HAVE AN OUTDOOR POOL THEY OPERATE ONLY IN THE SUMMER, AND THEN THEY HAVE A NATATORIUM THAT'S SUPPORTED BY USER FEES, THAT'S ACCOMMODATING TO THEIR RECREATION CENTER. WE'RE NOT AT THAT POINT HERE. >> WE COULD WE COULD GET CLOSE IF WE HAD A DEAL WITH THE BALL HIGH POOL. >> WITH GISD. >> CORRECT. >> EVEN IF THIS IS JUST A STOP GAP FOR ONE OR TWO SEASONS, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE TOWARDS IT. IF THEY DO WANT TO FUND RAISER OR CONFINED IT, I THINK IT JUST OPENS UP THE POSSIBILITY OF FINDING THE [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE TEMPERATURE STARTED TO GO DOWN. WE HAD THREE LAP SWIMMERS OR A COUPLE OF [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT'S ANOTHER ONE OF MY CONCERNS, WE HAVE IT OPEN AND WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT AND NOBODY SHOWS UP. >> THAT'S WHY PRE-SELLING THE PASSES TO PAY FOR IT. >> THE PASSES COULD BE 5,000 EACH WITHOUT FAIL. >> I LIKE THAT MAYOR. I LIKE THAT. >> THAT'S ONLY SLIGHTLY LESS THAN I CHARGE IN THE HOUSE [LAUGHTER]. >> ALEX, HOWEVER YOU WOULD WANT TO FOLLOW UP. >> I JUST THINK THAT THE MONTH A MONTH [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE WILL DEFINITELY GET A BREAKDOWN. >> I MEAN YEAR ROUND TWO, BUT ALSO JUST EXTENDING IT A MONTH, TWO MONTHS THING. >> OUR THING IS IS THAT WE NEED TO GET THE GAS RATE FOR THE HEATER. OF COURSE THE GAS RATES ALWAYS GO UP IN THE WINTER MONTHS, SO THAT'S OUR CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW. >> IF WE CAN GET THAT, WE CAN DO SOME ESTIMATES. >> LET THE PUBLIC KNOW AND THEN [OVERLAPPING]. >> I DEFINITELY THINK WE WOULD NEED AT LEAST ANOTHER ONE OR TWO FULL TIME STAFF MEMBERS, AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT A HIRING FREEZE. >> THE PROBLEM, AND BARBARA MENTIONED THIS, I APOLOGIZE IF I MISSED IT, BUT THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE A LIMIT NUMBER OF HOURS THAT WE CAN WORK. >> ABSOLUTELY. ONCE YOU OPEN THE POOL LONGER THAN THE SEASON, THEN THE SEASON LIFEGUARDS TURN INTO PART TIMERS. THEY CAN NO LONGER WORK A 40-HOUR WORKWEEK. THEY HAVE TO WORK A 29-HOUR WORK WEEK. WE HAVE A LOT OF COLLEGE STUDENTS THAT WORK AND WE DON'T ALWAYS GET ENOUGH LIFEGUARDS. >> BECAUSE WE COMPETE AGAINST [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES. WELL, WE PATROL [INAUDIBLE]. THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE AS MUCH CRITERIA TO WORK AT [INAUDIBLE]. YOU HAVE TO BE RED CROSS CERTIFIED. >> ARE WE FILLING THE CURRENT SEASON? >> WE ARE FILLING THE CURRENT SEASON. >> WE STRETCH IT? >> WE STRETCH IT AS BEST WE CAN. >> IT MAY BE TOO EARLY. >> ONE OF THE OTHER SOLUTIONS MAY BE THAT MAYBE WE'RE OPENING TOO EARLY. >> MAYBE WE DON'T OPEN UNTIL MAY 1ST. >> THEN WE CAN EXTEND IT AND NOT REALLY HAVE TOO MUCH. [05:00:02] >> THEN IF YOU EXTEND IT, THEN COME APRIL, [INAUDIBLE] LOOKING FOR [OVERLAPPING]. >> YOU GET MORE OF THE KIDS AND STUFF EARLY IN THE SEASON. THEY START IN THE [INAUDIBLE] AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY MORE WILLING TO JUMP INTO A COLD POOL WHEN THE SUN'S OUT IN THE SPRING. IN THE WINTERTIME, IT'S MORE OF THE ROUTINE USERS OF THE POOL, SO YOU'RE TRADING ONE GROUP FOR ANOTHER. >> TO BE HONEST, WHEN YOU SEE THINGS LIKE THE SWIM TEAM, A LOT OF THE SWIM LESSONS, THE SWIM TEAM, BETTER PARK SPONSORS, UTMB SPONSORS, IS A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE TWO. >> YEAH. >> THAT'S NOT COSTING THE CITY MONEY, ONLY STAFF TIME. >> YEAH. >> BATHING SUITS OR T SHIRTS OR BATHING CAPS, THE WHOLE THING. >> DIDN'T WE BUILD THE POOL THOUGH, TO ACCOMMODATE SWIM MEETS? >> YES. >> YES. >> EVEN [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE ARE. OUR SWIM TEAM HAS HAD TWO SWIM MEETS HERE ON SATURDAY MORNINGS. >> WITH OTHER SCHOOLS? >> YEAH. WELL, YOU ROTATE WITH OTHER RECREATION DEPARTMENTS. WE DON'T COMPETE WITH SCHOOLS. IT'S A RECREATIONAL SWIM TEAM. WHEN THEY DO THEIR COMPETITION SWIM DURING THE YEAR, THEY CAN SWIM IN THE RECREATIONAL SWIM MEETS. >> BUT WE DON'T HAVE OTHER SCHOOLS THAT HAVE WATER POLO AND OTHER SWIM MEETS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES? >> NO, WE HAVE NOT, BUT THAT'S MORE OR LESS THE UIL. >> YEAH, AND THEY DO THAT IN BALL HIGH. >> YEAH, THEY DO THAT AT BALL HIGH. >> EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT A REGULATION POOL? >> I THINK WATER POLO, YOU'RE OKAY AT SWIM MEETS. MY YOUNGER SON WAS ON THE SWIM TEAM AT BALL HIGH, GRADUATED IN 2004. THEY COULD NEVER HOLD A SWIM MEET THERE BECAUSE IT WASN'T REGULATION AND THE POOL WAS IN POOR CONDITION THEN. >> ALEX. >> WE ALSO CAN'T HAVE AN ICE HOCKEY TEAM. >> HOWEVER, YOU WANT TO [OVERLAPPING]. >> I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO [OVERLAPPING]. >> THEN BRIAN, I WANT TO START SEEING HOW WE CAN GET WITH GISD FOR THE NATATORIUM. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I AGREE. >> WE HAVE A VERY GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. >> THAT'S FANTASTIC. >> YES. >> GREAT. WHATEVER SHORT TERM THAT WE CAN DO AT AT OUR POOL, I THINK [OVERLAPPING] ESPECIALLY MORE SERIOUS [INAUDIBLE]. >> AT BALL HIGH, IT'S IN VERY BAD SHAPE, AND IT'S NOT [OVERLAPPING]. >> AND THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE AN AFTER HOURS SITUATION WITH THE SECURITY AT THE SCHOOL. >> YEAH. THAT'S THE OTHER THINGS, BUT THERE ARE EARLY ENOUGH IN THEIR PROGRAM THAT WE CAN START TALKING TO THEM ABOUT. >> YES. >> ALEX, ONCE YOU GET YOUR INFORMATION, IF YOU FEEL THAT WE NEED TO BRING THIS BACK TO COUNSEL FOR ANY ACTION, LET ME KNOW, WE'LL DO THAT. >> WE GOT ABOUT A WHOLE YEAR TO GO. >> SOUNDS GOOD. >> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD, ALEX. >> I WAS TRYING TO HAVE A SIT DOWN DISCUSSION WITH THEM AND THEY DID THE [BACKGROUND]. >> SERIOUS WATER AEROBICS. >> YEAH. THE OLD LADIES AND THE WATER AEROBICS, DON'T MESS WITH THEM. THEY REALLY [OVERLAPPING]. >> LIKE I SAID, I KNOW THAT [INAUDIBLE] CLOSED DOWN AND THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A TRICKLE DOWN. >> YEAH. >> I DON'T THINK I WOULD USE THE TERM OLD LADIES. DISTINGUISHED LADIES. >> SOUNDS GOOD. ANYTHING ELSE, ALEX? >> I JUST REALLY THANK THEM TOO, BECAUSE THAT THINGS THAT THE PUBLIC WANTS AND WE SHOULD LOOK AT IN ALL MEANS, ALL THE POSSIBILITIES. >> I'M VERY STRICT ON THEM WITH THEIR BUDGET, WITH EVERY BUDGET. WE MONITOR. >> IDC HAS BEAT THAT INTO US, SO WE ALL [INAUDIBLE]. >> VERY MUCH SO, AND OUR GENERAL FUND BUDGET, BECAUSE WE ARE MAINLY FUNDED OUT OF GENERAL FUND IN THE PARK SIDE. >> EXCUSE ME. >> I GOT YOU. >> I UNDERSTAND. ANYTHING ELSE, ALI? THAT'S IT ON THAT ONE. COUNCILMAN RAWLIN SAYS HE HAS TO EAT. WE HAVE THREE H AND THREE I. WHAT DID YOU WANT TO DO? >> WHAT? [OVERLAPPING] >> WE GOT 3 [INAUDIBLE] >> [INAUDIBLE] I'M HUNGRY. >> WE CAN EAT DURING THESE ITEMS. >> IF YOU WANT TO, YOU SURELY CAN. I WOULD SAY 3H, THAT'S GOING TO TAKE ABOUT A VERY SHORT TIME. BUT IF YOU WANT TO BREAK AND WE CAN EAT, I'M GOING TO WAIT TILL WE EAT AND [INAUDIBLE]. >> I'M GOING TO TAKE A BREAK. >> YOU WANT IT TO BREAK, GO RIGHT AHEAD AND GRAB YOUR FOOD. WE BREAK FOR ABOUT FIVE MINUTES AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE. IT IS 11:00, EXCUSE ME, GOODNESS, 1:12. WE'LL COME BACK AT 1:17. 01:20 A.M. JANELLE ARE WE [OVERLAPPING]. >> PM. >> WE ARE NOT THERE YET. >> WE'RE WORKING ON IT. >> WE'RE WORKING THAT WAY. >> IT IS 1:20 P.M. WE ARE NOW BACK IN SESSION WITH OUR WORKSHOP. WE ARE MOVING TO ITEM 3H, PLEASE. [3.H. Discuss regularly scheduled joint quarterly meetings with Park Board, Wharves Board, and Planning Commission (Porretto/Rawlins - 10 min)] [05:05:03] >> ITEM 3H. DISCUSS REGULARLY SCHEDULED JOINT QUARTERLY MEETINGS WITH PARK BOARD, [INAUDIBLE] BOARD AND PLANNING COMMISSION. >> THIS IS COUNCILMAN PORRETTO AND RAWLINS WHO PUT THIS ON, JUST SOME THOUGHTS. BEFORE I KNEW THIS WAS ON THE AGENDA, JANELLE AND I TALKED ABOUT, IN OUR CALENDAR FOR '25, WE'LL BE SCHEDULING THESE QUARTERLY MEETINGS OR WHATEVER THE MEETINGS WE DETERMINED WE WANT TO BE WITH THE [INAUDIBLE] BOARD AND PARK BOARD. I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO YOU. ALEX, [INAUDIBLE]. >> THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OR I'VE HEARD TALK ABOUT IN THE POLITICAL SCENE IN GALVESTON FOR QUITE A WHILE. I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THAT, AND WE SAW THIS THE LAST JOINT MEETING, WE NEED TO BE VERY GOAL ORIENTED, AND WE NEED TO BE PRECISE IN WHAT WE TALK ABOUT, AND DOESN'T NEED TO BE A HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, HERE'S HOW GREAT WE ARE. IT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT POLICY, IT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT HOW WE GET THINGS DONE. MOVING FORWARD, IT NEEDS TO BE ABOUT REBUILDING TRUST AND COHESIVENESS OR FOSTERING SOME OF THAT. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE THING THAT GETS THIS THE 14TH STREET PUD FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, I THINK IF WE HAD, AND MAYBE BO CAN HELP ME OUT HERE, WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, GIVE OUR GOALS AND PERSPECTIVES OF WHAT WE SEE HOW A PUD SHOULD WORK FROM A COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE SO THAT OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS UNDERSTAND THAT AND CAN MAKE THE PROPER DECISIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO US. >> WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN DOING THAT. >> YEAH. >> THAT'S BEEN A GOAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SINCE I WAS ON IT. >> I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING, I THINK, LONG STANDING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOME ROAD BUMPS AND KINKS ALONG THE WAY, BUT I THINK MEETING REGULARLY IS A POSITIVE STEP AND OPPORTUNITY TO WHERE WE CAN ADJUST AND ADDRESS IT. NOW, THERE HAS BEEN ONE THING THAT STICKS IN MY MIND, IS I DON'T WANT IT TO BE BOTH BOARDS PUTTING ON AN AGENDA THAT'S THE SIDE OF OUR COUNCIL MEETING FOR JUST A JOINT MEETING. I THINK FIGURING OUT WAYS TO STRUCTURE IT, MAYBE WE CAN ALL SEND OUR IDEAS TO JANELLE, AND SHE CAN DISSEMINATE THAT TO US ABOUT HOW WE WANT IT. MAYBE JANELLE'S OFFICE HAS SOME IDEAS ABOUT POLICY THAT THEY THINK WOULD WORK, OR MANAGEMENT, OR WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN THERE HOW THIS WOULD WORK THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY. IT'S NOT A LONG DRAWN OUT CONVERSATION. I CAN SEND IT TO JANELLE TO DISSEMINATE, BUT I HAVE A ROUGH DRAFT OF THE DATES THAT I'D LIKE TO USE OR THAT MAYBE WE COULD USE COINCIDING WITH BUDGETS IN THE REPORTS BUDGETS IN DECEMBER, AND THEN THE PARK BOARD SHARES OUR BUDGETS' TIMELINE OF SEPTEMBER. THAT'S JUST WHERE MY THOUGHTS ARE ABOUT IT. IT'S GETTING SOMETHING DONE THAT'S LONGSTANDING, BETTER COMMUNICATION, AND ULTIMATELY RUN THE CITY BETTER. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK HAVING ROUTINE MEETINGS. THESE ARE MY THOUGHTS JUST ON THAT, IF WE CONSIDER THAT. I THINK HAVING MEETINGS EVERY THREE MONTHS WITH THE PARK BOARD AND [INAUDIBLE] BOARD IS TOO OFTEN, PERSONALLY. >> REALLY? >> YES. I THINK IF WE WERE TO DO IT, I'D DO IT EVERY FOUR MONTHS, IT'D BE THREE TIMES A YEAR ON THAT. I'VE BEEN THROUGH SYSTEMS WHERE WE'VE BEEN MEETING JOINT MEETINGS OFTEN, AND IT GETS TO A POINT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DETAILS, DON'T HAVE A LOT TO TALK ABOUT. >> I WOULD I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW THE POINT OF HAVING IT SCHEDULED IS, AND MAYBE JANELLE COULD STOP ME IF I AM WRONG. IF WE SCHEDULE IT AND WE HAVE NOTHING TO PUT ON THE AGENDA, THE MEETING DOESN'T HAPPEN. >> RIGHT. YOU COULD JUST CANCEL IT. >> THEY'LL HAVE TO BE PLACEHOLDERS ON YOUR CALENDARS. >> EXACTLY. >> THEY'LL HAVE THINGS TO PUT ON THE AGENDA. TRUST ME. THERE'LL BE PRESENTATIONS OF THINGS. >> LIKE I SAID, WE CAN LIMIT IT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PRESENTATIONS ABOUT THE GREAT THINGS. THIS IS STRICTLY A POLICY WORKSHOP DISCUSSION OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, LET'S SAY SOMETHING IN THE HOT CONTRACT THAT OUR STAFFS DON'T AGREE ON OR THE CIRCUS THING, WHATEVER. IT'S ALL A [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER]. >> [LAUGHTER] I SPEAK FOR THE PARK BOARD ANYWAY. THESE MEETINGS, I THINK COULD BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND MILESTONES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO GET CERTAIN THINGS DONE. [05:10:03] YOU MENTIONED THE BUDGET, THAT'S PROBABLY THE BIGGEST DRIVING ONE BECAUSE THAT'S FIXED STATE. BUT IN THE CASE OF THE PARK BOARD, WE ALSO HAVE AGREEMENTS THAT WE GOT TO GET TO. WE ALSO HAVE MAJOR PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL TO GET TO, AND THEN WE ALSO REALLY, I THINK NEED TO HEAR FROM THE PARK BOARD ABOUT THEIR PERFORMANCE. HOW DID THEY DO WHAT WE INSTRUCTED THEM TO DO? RIGHT THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC MILESTONES THAT CAN INFORM AN AGENDA, AND A TIMELINE BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE THINGS HAVE TO HAPPEN IN SEQUENCE. BEFORE WE CAN GET TO A BUDGET, WE GOT TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE GOALS ARE, AND THEN WE ESTABLISH THE GOALS. WE GOT TO ESTABLISH WHAT OUR WORKING RELATIONSHIP IS THROUGH A CONTRACT, AND ALL THOSE THINGS. I THINK IT CAN BE VERY CONCRETE-ORIENTED AND NOT JUST A BUNCH OF FLUFF. >> EXACTLY. >> EXACTLY. HAVE VERY PRECISE MILESTONES AND GOALS FOR EACH MEETING. >> I THINK TO WHAT I'VE JUST FROM OUTSIDE IN AND FROM THE C2, I THINK THAT COUNCIL THE EMPHASIZE IS ON US TOO TO MAKE A DECISION. IF WE DON'T LIKE SOMETHING THAT PARK BOARD IS DOING OR THAT THE WHARVES BOARDS IS DOING, WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT. WE NEED TO GET IT ALL ON THE TABLE, WE NEED TO MOVE ON AND MAKE A DECISION. WE SHOULDN'T LET THE PARK BOARD SPEND MONEY ON SOME PROJECT THAT COUNCIL IS AFRAID TO SAY THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO DO IT. I THINK WE NEED TO ALL PUT OUR OPINIONS OUT THERE AND REALLY START GUIDING THAT DISCUSSION AND CONVERSATION WITH. >> THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT. THEY WANT COUNCIL TO TELL THEM WHAT COUNCIL WANTS TO DO. I THINK THAT THE PARK BOARD WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT AS WELL. >> BUT WHERE THAT COMES TO PLAY IN MY MIND IS THE BUDGET. ONCE WE APPROVE THEIR BUDGET, I DON'T WANT TO MICROMANAGE THE PARK BOARD. I DON'T WANT TO SECOND GUESS ALL THIS STUFF. I HAVE NO INTEREST IN THAT WHATSOEVER. IF WE'VE APPROVED THAT BUDGET, THAT'S WHERE THEIR PROJECTS ARE. THAT'S WHERE THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. THEY'RE SPECIAL EVENT PROJECTS. >> THAT'S WHY I WAS OUTLINING THESE MILESTONES THAT LEAD UP TO THE BUDGET. THE BUDGET IS A MAJOR CONTROLLING FACTOR IN ALL OF THIS BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. YES. EXACTLY WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH ALL OF THAT AND WE DON'T HAVE TO MICROMANAGE ANYBODY. >> YEAH, I DON'T. THIS MICROMANAGING OF THE PARK BOARD. I JUST HAVE NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER IN THAT, BUT WE DO APPROVE THEIR BUDGET. THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD MEET. WE'VE GOT TO COORDINATE IT WITH STAFF. THEY HAVE TO HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THEIR BUDGETS AND ALL OF THAT. I MEAN, WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS TO DO. >> I THINK IT SHOULD BE QUARTERLY AND ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CITY ASSETS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT A PLAN TO SHARE IN THE UNRESTRICTED FUNDS. I THINK THAT WARRANTS A QUARTERLY MEETING, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S MICROMANAGING. >> MAYBE ONE OF THE PRESCRIPTIONS OF IF THE PARK BOARD WANTS TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA IS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PASS IT AT ONE OF THEIR MEETINGS TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA THAT WAY, I JUST I WOULD HATE TO HAVE IT TO WHERE THEY'RE JUST STUFFING THINGS IN THERE OR ANYBODY'S JUST STUFFING THINGS ON THE AGENDA. I DON'T KNOW. I REFER TO OTHER PEOPLE ON THAT, BUT, I'M THINKING THAT THERE'S A WAY TO MAKE IT WHERE IT WON'T GO ON THERE UNLESS IT'S VERY PRUDENT TO TALK ABOUT. >> I THINK WHAT I WAS JUST MENTIONING ABOUT MILESTONE, CONTROL THAT. UNLESS IT'S CONFORMED TO THESE MILESTONES THAT LEAD UP TO A BUDGET LEAD UP TO THE BUDGET, THEN, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T GO ON THE AGENDA UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING EXTREMELY PRESSING. >> I'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT OF WAYS OF DOING THESE JOINT MEETINGS. IF COUNCIL WANTS TO DO QUARTERLY, THAT'S FINE. WHEN YOU PUT THE AGENDA TOGETHER,. >> BLESS YOU. >> BLESS YOU. >> BLESS YOU. PERSONALLY, I'M NOT SURE WE SHOULD BE IN THE ROLE OF TELLING THE PARK BOARD, WHICH SHOULD BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THEIR REQUEST. HOW THEY DO THAT? I'M LEAVING THAT UP TO THE PARK BOARD. I'M NOT TELLING YOU GOT TO HAVE THE BOARD APPROVE THIS OR WHATEVER. HOWEVER THEY WANT TO DO THEIR AGENDA ITEMS, THAT'S, UP TO THEM. BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AGENDA ITEMS THAT'S GOING TO COME FROM THESE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS THAT COUNCIL MAY NOT WANT TO HAVE ON THE AGENDA. YOU GOT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE JOINT MEETINGS IS JUST AS MUCH FOR THEM TO PUT THINGS ON THERE THAT THEY FEEL AS IMPORTANT AS WE DO. THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT IN MY MIND, AND YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF ITEMS THAT WILL BE A PRESENTATION. YOU'RE GOING TO GET A LOT OF ITEMS THAT THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT WORKS OUT. >> FOR A WHOLE YEAR. LET'S SAY WE HAVE THREE MEETINGS. IN THE CASE OF THE PARK BOARD. WE HAVE THE AGENDA ALREADY LAID OUT FOR THE WHOLE YEAR. AND SO THE FIRST MEETING MIGHT BE, HERE'S THE PROJECTS WE ANTICIPATE COMING FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. [05:15:02] WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW ALL THOSE PROJECTS AND SAY UP OR DOWN FROM COUNCIL ON THOSE PROJECTS. THEN THE NEXT MEETING IS, HERE'S THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE WITH OUR CONTRACTS THAT ARE COMING DUE, THE POT CONTRACT, INTER LOCAL CONTRACT, AND ALL THAT. THEN AT THAT SAME MEETING, MAYBE THEN YOU CAN PARK BOARD. YOU CAN PRESENT HOW YOU PROCEEDED WITH A GOAL FROM LAST YEAR, AND OTHERS WILL REPORT BACK ON THEIR PROGRESS. THEN NEXT ONE IS THE BUDGET. THE BUDGET REVIEW. I MEAN, RIGHT THERE, YOU'VE GOT AN AGENDA FOR A WHOLE YEAR. >> WE CAN DO THAT ON IRN. I'M JUST TELLING YOU IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK THAT WAY. WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THE PARK BOARD IS GOING TO SAY, WE'LL COME OVER AND TALK ABOUT SPECIAL PROJECTS, BUT WE WANT TO PRESENT EAST END LAGOON. AND TO TELL YOU WHAT WE'RE DOING AT EAST END LAGOON. WE CAN SET THAT AGENDA HERE. NOW, IF THE COUNCIL FEELS THAT AGENDA WITH THESE JOINT MEETINGS ONLY COMES FROM US. I THINK THAT'S THE WRONG THING TO DO. >> I KNOW, I AGREE. I DON'T WANT TO JUST COME FROM US, BUT I THINK A HIGHER BARRIER TO ENTRY, SO TO SPEAK, WOULD ALLEVIATE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS WHERE IT'S NOT JUST FLUFF THROUGH IT. >> WHAT'S FLUFF TO ONE GROUP IS IMPORTANT TO THE OTHER? >> RIGHT. >> I SEE THIS ALL THE TIME. >> YES, SIR. >> I REMEMBER THAT WE WERE DOING THIS MAINLY TO DEVELOP AND ESTABLISH COMMUNICATION AND TRUST. I DIDN'T SEE IT. SO THAT WE CAN COMMUNICATE TO THE COMMUNITY AND GET OUT WHAT PROJECTS PARKS BOARD ARE DOING OR HOW WE'RE COLLABORATING WITH THE WHARVES BOARD, HOW WE'RE CREATING TEAM EFFORTS. I DIDN'T SEE SOMETHING STRINGENT AND SOMETHING TO THE PUNCH. I THOUGHT, I UNDERSTOOD IT MORE THAT WE WERE DOING THIS TO COMMUNICATE AND TO ESTABLISH MORE OF A WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US AND THE PARKS BOARD AND US AND THE PORT. THEN, I THINK PLANNING WAS ADDED IN THERE. I THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD PLACE TO START, NOT ONLY TO KNOW UPCOMING PROJECTS, POSSIBLE CONFLICTS, POSSIBLE CONTROVERSY OR THINGS THAT WE CAN HAVE A WORKING RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROJECT TO KNOW HOW IT'S COMING ALONG, CONSIDERING HOW WE HAVE THIS ONE ON OUR AGENDA TODAY THAT BESIDES IF YOU WENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND FOLLOWED IT ALL ALONG, WE WOULDN'T REALLY KNOW ANYTHING. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF SITUATIONS LIKE THAT. I THINK ALSO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF HEARING OUT WHAT SOME OF OUR CITIZENS ARE HAVING AGGRAVATION OR FRUSTRATION WITH THAT THEY CONVEY TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I THINK THAT COMMUNICATION WILL HELP US A LOT, ALSO TO ESTABLISH THE ABILITY TO TO MAYBE ADDRESS SOME OF OUR CODES OR OVERLAY ZONES OR WHATEVER ELSE OF THE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS THAT HAPPENED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I MEAN, SO AGAIN, IN SUMMARY, I THOUGHT IT WAS MORE OF A COMMUNICATION, ESTABLISHING TRUST, BUILDING A TEAM PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PORT AND WITH THE PARKS BOARD AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I THINK THAT THE MORE STRINGENT. THE MORE RULES AND PARAMETERS YOU PUT ON THAT INSTEAD OF IT JUST ALLOW IT TO INITIALLY WORK ITSELF OUT FROM THE BEGINNING, I THINK WE'RE DEFEATING THE PURPOSE. >> LIKE A ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION. >> THE ITEMS I WERE MENTIONING ARE REALLY A MEANS TO BUILDING THAT TRUST BECAUSE THEY RESULT IN A MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE'RE ALL HEADED. THERE ARE ALSO THINGS THAT HAVE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO BE DONE BEFORE WE GET TO A BUDGET. I DON'T THINK THE TWO THINGS ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE AS WHAT I'M SAYING. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I GET THAT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK CHANGES THE CULTURE OF HOW WE'VE VIEWED THE THREE, PLANNING COMMISSION A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT THE PARK BOARD AND THE WHARVES BOARD AND HOW IT'S INTERACTIVE WITH CITY COUNCIL. I THINK WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE LAST YEAR OR TWO A BREAKING POINT BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE PARK BOARD, AND WE'VE SEEN, STRESS IN THE PAST BETWEEN COUNCIL AND THE WHARVES BOARD. I THINK WHAT THIS DOES IS IT OPENS UP FOR SHARON'S FAVORITE WORD FOR BETTER COLLABORATION FOR WORKING TOGETHER AND LIKE BOTH SAID, HOW YOU DO IT. IF COUNCIL WANTS IT OPEN AND WANTS IT, MORE FLEXIBLE FOR IDEAS AND ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS. I DO THINK IT'LL WORK ITSELF OUT. HOWEVER, I AM CAUTIOUS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT TO TURN INTO POWER TWO HOURS OF SOMETHING, [05:20:08] I WANT IT TO BE MORE OF THAT ORIGINAL GOAL AND PURPOSE. THAT'S MY ONLY POINT TOWARDS HOW I WAS SAYING, LET'S KEEP A HIGHER BEARING [OVERLAPPING]. >> INITIATE IT AND PUT IT TOGETHER AND LET IT EVOLVE FROM THERE. >> LET THE OTHER PARTY HAVE A SAY ON HOW THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT STRUCTURED, DAVE, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE ENHANCING COMMUNICATION AND TRUST AND WORKING TOGETHER. >> WELL, WE DON'T HAVE TO ASK THEM THAT BECAUSE I'M GOING TO TELL YOU FROM THE PARK BOARD, WHARVES BOARD, THEY'RE GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT THEY WANT ON THAT AGENDA. PERSONALLY, IF THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WANTING THAT ON THAT AGENDA, WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THEM. DON, I NEED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. >> YES DO. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR. THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY'RE A LITTLE DIFFERENT BODY. THEY ARE A BODY AS JUDICIAL AS- >> THEY'RE A STATUTORY CREATION, AND THEY HAVE FINAL AUTHORITY OVER SOME THINGS AS WELL AS OVERSIGHT OF THE LDRS, BUT THEY'RE STATUTORY. >> SO OUR DISCUSSION WITH THEM AND TELLING THEM COUNCIL'S FEELINGS ON HOW WE WANT THEM TO MOVE OUR SUGGESTIONS ON MOVING, IS THAT EVEN SOMETHING WE CAN DO? >> I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU'D START WITH STAFF FIRST, BECAUSE IF THERE ARE DEFICIENCIES IN THE LDRS, YOU WOULD WANT THEM ADDRESSED. >> I'M LOOKING AT PLANNING COMMISSION TO GIVE A FRESH SET OF EYES AND A DIFFERENT SET OF EYES ON THESE ISSUES. >> PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO COME AND DISCUSS THINGS LIKE PUDS OR DISCUSS THINGS LIKE THE BROADWAY SHOPPING DISTRICT OR DISCUSS THINGS AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR COUNCIL. I DON'T THINK WE'RE TELLING THEY WANT TO DISCUSS THESE THINGS SO THAT EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME PAGE AND I THINK PERSONALLY THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. >> I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. I DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS CASES WITH THEM. THAT'S NONE OF OUR BUSINESS. >> I DON'T THINK THEY WANT TO DISCUSS CASES. I THINK THEY WANT TO KNOW WHERE. >> YES. >> SHE WANT TO ADDRESS THE LDR STUFF, AND SHE HAD SOME COMMENTS. >> I ACTUALLY SIT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS THEIR ADVISOR, THEIR LEGAL ADVISOR. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTUALLY HAS AN EX OFFICIO. SO WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THANK YOU. >> COUNCILWOMAN LOUIS, I THINK, IS IT YOU, BEAU. I'M SORRY. >> AGAIN, DONA FAIRWEATHER, SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS ONE OF THOSE SPECIALIZED COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY. THEY ACTUALLY DO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL AND YOU SEE THOSE IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS AN EX OFFICIO. THEY CAN ASK THE EX OFFICIO TO ASK CITY COUNCIL, DO YOU WANT US TO WORK ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE? CITY COUNCIL IN TURN CAN ALSO ASK THE EX OFFICIO OR DIRECT THROUGH THE EX OFFICIO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO WORK ON A PARTICULAR ITEM, AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL CAN DIRECT STAFF THEMSELVES, A TEAM AS THE DIRECTOR, HEY TO WORK ON A PARTICULAR ITEM OR A PARTICULAR ISSUE WITH THE CITY. THERE ARE SOME ITEMS UNDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PURVIEW THAT STOPS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STATUTORILY. IT JUST STOPS WITH THEM. IT DOESN'T GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL, IT DOESN'T GO TO THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR APPEAL. IT WOULD GO STRAIGHT TO DISTRICT COURT TO THAT MAKES THEM A LITTLE BIT OF [OVERLAPPING]. >> BEACH CONSTRUCTION PERMIT. >> BEACH FRONT CONSTRUCTION PERMITS OR THOSE TYPES OF DEALS. PUDS ARE RECOMMENDATIONS. YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF PUDS ON THE AGENDA. THOSE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THEY'RE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL HAS A FINAL AUTHORITY ON WHAT THEY DO WITH THOSE TYPES OF ITEMS THAT COME BEFORE. IN TERMS OF COMMUNICATION, I THINK THAT THERE IS AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO CITY COUNCIL IF THEY WANT AN ITEM TO BE DISCUSSED, AS WELL AS BACK AND FORTH. IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CITY COUNCIL WANTS PLANNING COMMISSION TO TAKE UP, THEY CAN EITHER GO DIRECTLY THROUGH STAFF OR THROUGH THE EX OFFICIO TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF. THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. >> [OVERLAPPING] [05:25:02] >> NO WE CAN AND COUNCIL'S INFINITE WISDOM. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE GONE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN? >> I COULDN'T TELL YOU THE NUMBER, BUT IT ALL DEPENDS. EACH CASE IS INDIVIDUAL. >> IT IS. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, ALEX, WE RAN THAT. NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT CURRENTLY IS, BUT I LOOKED AT SOME PERCENTAGES. IT WAS SOME ROUND 30, 40%. >> THAT'S HIGH, AND IF I THINK MAYBE WE COULD JUST SEND BOTH, BUT I THINK MAYBE IN A YEAR WE CAN SEE WHERE WE'RE AT. BUT THAT RATE SHOULD BE RELATIVELY LOW. ONE OF THESE ITEMS, THERE WAS INFORMATION THAT SHOWED UP TODAY THAT CHANGED MY PERSPECTIVE ON IT. I THINK, NOT SAYING THAT BOTH CAN'T DO IT, BUT, WHERE DO WE START? IT'S LIKE, I WANT TO START SOMEWHERE, AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, THIS IS SOMETHING I RAN BY THEM, AND THEY SEEMED OPEN TO JUST MEETING AND DISCUSSING SOME OF THESE THESE THINGS. >> WHEN I WAS ON PLANNING COMMISSION, ONE OF THE BIG POINTS I THINK THAT WE THOUGHT WE FELT NEEDED SOME IMPROVEMENT OR SOME CLARITY AROUND WAS THE USE OF EXACTLY WHAT ARE THEY. WHY WERE THEY CREATED? WHAT ARE THEY INTENDED TO DO? WHAT ARE THE GUIDING DOCUMENTS OR GUIDING THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO CONSIDER WHEN YOU'RE CONSIDERING. I THINK BECAUSE THERE SEEMED TO BE WHEN I WAS THERE A LITTLE BIT OF LACK OF CLARITY BETWEEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF AND COUNCIL. WE WERE TRYING TO WORK TOWARDS GETTING SOME WORKSHOP OR SOMETHING TO JUST TO PROVIDE CLARITY AROUND THAT ISSUE ALONE. I THINK IT'S VALID TO DO THAT IF NOTHING ELSE. >> I THINK EVEN MORE SO BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH PLANNING THAT, THAT'S EVEN MORE SO A REASON TO HAVE WORKSHOPS. >> HOW DO WE WANT THE LDRS TO LOOK, AND INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION, WE STILL CAN, BUT HAVING THAT DISCUSSION AT THE OPEN TABLE, I THINK IS BENEFICIAL FOR ALL PARTIES INVOLVED. >> IF WE HAVE QUARTERLY MEETINGS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 12 EXTRA MEETINGS A YEAR. >> WE COULD COMBINE THEM. >> I'M OKAY WITH THREE MEETINGS. >> I THINK THREE MEETINGS. >> I MEAN, WE GOT ELECTED TO GOVERN. WE GOT ELECTED TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. >> I THINK THAT CAN BE DONE PERSONALLY EVERY FOUR MONTHS, AND WE CAN ALWAYS MEET WITH THEM SOONER IF WE WANT TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING. BUT I'VE BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD WE'RE MEETING EVERY QUARTER AND I TELL YOU IT GETS FAST. >> BUT WE START WITH THREE MEETINGS AND WE FEEL LIKE THERE'S A NEED FOR MORE. WE CAN HAVE MORE. >> I THINK YOU SHOULD DO THEM ON REGULAR COUNCIL DAYS, START THE MEETING AT EIGHT AND HAVE THAT MEETING AT 8:00 AM. >> I AGREE. >> HAVE IT END AT 09:00. YOU PUT AN END TIME ON IT. THAT WAY, THERE'S NO BIG DEAL. YOU HAVE YOUR MEETING AT 8:00, 09:00 STAFF COMES IN AT 9:00 AND IS READY TO DO THE CITY'S BUSINESS. >> WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THAT BRIAN, IS, I'M TELLING YOU TRYING TO SCHEDULE THESE SPECIAL MEETINGS. IT IS A NIGHTMARE. >> I AGREE. THESE ARE PLACEHOLDERS. >> WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT. WE SHOULD BE DOING IT ON THE SAME DAY. IF WE HAVE A DAY, WE GET ALL THE WAY THROUGH. >> THAT'S THE PART WE DON'T NEED. WE DON'T NEED IT. >> WE CAN START IT ALL NOW. >> YOU'LL FEEL LIKE WE NEED THIS. NOW, WE DON'T NEED IT OR THEY'RE NOT READY OR WHATEVER. THEN TWO, IF IT'S JUST ON YOUR REGULAR AGENDA, IF IT DOESN'T WORK OUT, YOU JUST START YOUR REGULAR MEETING AT 9:00, YOU DON'T START IT AT 8:00. >> I LIKE THAT IDEA. I MEAN, COUNCIL, THAT'S FINE WITH ME. YOU WANT TO DO IT EVERY QUARTER OR YOU WANT TO DO IT THREE TIMES A YEAR? >> QUARTER. >> QUARTERLY. TWO TIMES A YEAR FOR ME. I'M GOOD WITH THAT. >> TWO TIMES A YEAR. >> TWO TIMES. >> MAYOR. >> LET ME MAKE ONE SUGGESTION. PLANNING COMMISSION IS UNLIKE ANOTHER COMMISSION IN THAT THEY WORK ON DIRECTION. IF YOU'RE GIVING THEM A PROJECT TO WORK ON, THAT'S WHEN YOU SHOULD SCHEDULE RECEPTION OR RECEIVING INFORMATION FROM. IF IT'S LET'S SEE WHERE YOU'RE AT EVERY FOUR MONTHS. IT'S A PLAN. >> I WOULD AGREE. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING I WOULD DO THAT AS NEEDED PERSONALLY. >> BUT WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT TO TRY TO ACCOMPLISH AT A MEETING WITH PLANNING COMMISSION WAS ABOUT PROCESS, NOT ABOUT FOLLOW OVER REPORTING. IT WAS ABOUT PROCESS, AND CLARITY AROUND HOW WE BOTH FUNCTION TOGETHER ON CERTAIN THINGS. >> THAT'S DIRECTIONALLY. >> THAT BEING SAID, IF YOU DO QUARTERLY, I JUST DID THE MATH IN MY HEAD, THAT MEANS YOU HAVE EFFECTIVELY CHANGED ALL YOUR WORKSHOPS TO 8:00 AM. >> ALL OF THEM. >> THAT SAME HERE FOR STAFF. >> THAT'S PLEASURE OF THE TAXPAYER. [05:30:02] >> I'M JUST POINTING THAT OUT. WE NEED TO. >> WELL, HEY, I'M HAPPY WHATEVER COUNCIL WANTS TO. BO, YOU'RE THE PLAN YOU'RE THE LIAISON, THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >> I JUST HAVE ONE THING TO SAY ACCORDING TO WHAT WE WERE JUST INSTRUCTED BY THE ATTORNEY THERE. YOU'RE THE EX OFFICIO. SO I THINK WE SHOULD GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO HAPPEN THE WAY IT SHOULD HAPPEN BEING THE EX OFFICIO. THIS MORNINGS WAS DIFFERENT. THAT SITUATION. BUT THAT'S NOT EVERY TIME. SO I THINK WE SHOULD TRY IT THE WAY THAT IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED TO SEE IF IT RUNS THAT WAY AND BOTH SHOULD COME BACK WITH WHAT HE FEELS THAT WAS AT A DISCUSSION THAT MAYBE RAN INTO A WALL. >> OR MAYBE WE CAN DIRECT BOTH TO SEE WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTS TO DO. >> I WON'T BE ABLE TO MISS LIKE I MISSED YESTERDAY. DIRECTED. I'LL TAKE THAT DIRECTION. >> WE FIND OUT WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS? >> YES. BEFORE WE SETTLE. >> I WILL REPORT BACK TO ALL SOON. >> THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S YOUR [OVERLAPPING]. >> PLANNING COMMISSION MAY NEED AS NEEDED. >> BUT SCHEDULE THEM ON YOUR AGENDAS AND THEN THOSE ARE THAT'S PART OF THE ROUTINE. I'M HAPPY TO BRING TO THE NEXT PARK BOARD MEETING DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THEY WOULD WANT TO SEE THESE MEETINGS CONSTRUCTED. >> JANELLE, YOU'LL HAVE OUR 25 CALENDAR FOR DECEMBER? >> YES. FOR DECEMBER, COUNCIL WILL APPROVE AN ORDINANCE FOR SETTING THE 2025 MEETINGS. IF YOU COULD INCLUDE THESE SPECIAL MEETINGS OR SPECIAL WORKSHOPS WITH THE PARK BOARD AND WHARVES BOARD ON THAT SCHEDULE THAT'D BE GREAT. >> WHY DON'T WE DO THIS, COUNCIL BECAUSE WE DON'T VOTE IN THESE MEETINGS. LET'S PUT DOWN AT EIGHT O'CLOCK FOR OUR MEETINGS WITH THE PARK BOARD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE WHARVES BOARD. >> NOT PLANNING. >> NOT PLANNING. WE'VE HAD A REQUEST FOR NOT PLANNING, JUST THE WHARVES BOARD. >> NOT PLANNING JUST YET. HE'S GOT ASK THEM. >> I'M GOING TO COME BACK ON THAT. IT'S JUST PARKS BOARD AND WHARVES BOARD. >> PARKS BOARD AND WHARVES BOARD. YOU WANT TO DO IT ON QUARTERLY OR EVERY THREE. I'LL DO WHATEVER. >> GOING TO STEP OUT AND GET ANOTHER DEAD HORSE. I THINK THIS ONE'S ABOUT DONE. >> OR FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION, LET'S PUT THEM DOWN FOR QUARTERLY. WE'LL DO THEM AT EIGHT O'CLOCK AND THAT WOULD ALTERNATE EVERY QUARTER EVER THE QUARTERS WOULD BE FOR WHARVES BOARD AND PLANNING I MEAN, WHARVES BOARD AND PARK BOARD, AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ROLLINS WILL GIVE US AN UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION COMING FORWARD. YES, MA'AM. >> ARE YOU NOT THE EX OFFICIO FOR THE WHARVES? >> I AM. >> WELL, THEN I THINK WE SHOULD HONOR YOUR SUGGESTION FOR THE WHARVES BOARD DIDN'T. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE SHOULD DO ALL OF THEM. >> NO. WITH ALL SERIOUS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK REALLY THE WARDS BOARD NEED? AND HOW DO YOU SEE THAT AS SOMETHING? >> LET ME TELL YOU MY FEELING. THE BEST REPORT WE'VE HAD WITH THE WHARVES BOARD AND PARK BOARD IS NOW. WE TALK ABOUT SUCH BAD REPORT. YES, THAT CAN GET BETTER, BUT IT IS MUCH BETTER. AND BRIAN, WOULDN'T YOU SAY THAT ON THE PARK BOARD? IT IS OUR REPORT. >> IT'S GREAT TO WORK WITH. >> OUR REPORT AND AT THE WHARVES BOARD AND THE WAY THAT'S EVOLVING OVER THERE. WE HAVE A WONDERFUL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WHARVES BOARD. >> AND I'M JUST ONE, I DON'T LIKE TO CREATE MAYBE THIS SITUATION WILL COME. LIKE I SAID, TODAY WE HAD THAT WITH THE PLANNING, WHICH WAS DIFFERENT. BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK THOSE WHO ARE THE EX OFFICIOS SHOULD DO THEIR WHAT THEY FEEL IS THEIR DUE DILIGENCE IN THEIR COMMUNICATION. >> IF THEY MET THE COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, I'LL PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE WHARVES BOARD AND LET'S TALK ABOUT IT AND CAN BRING BACK SOME INPUT ON IT. >> I'LL DO THE SAME FOR THE PARK BOARD AND NOVEMBER MEETING, WE'LL DISCUSS THIS CONCEPT. >> DOES THAT MEET COUNCIL'S APPROVAL? JANELLE WILL HOLD OFF ON HOW WE'LL PLAN THAT UNTIL WE GET INPUT BACK. VERY GOOD. ITEM 3I [NOISE] [3.I. Discussion of the City's procedures and process for addressing properties in violation of building codes related to property maintenance and construction (Robb/Brown - 10 min)] >> 3I. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S PROCEDURES AND PROCESS FOR ADDRESSING PROPERTIES IN VIOLATION OF BUILDING CODES RELATED TO PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION. >> WELL, MY ITEM. I GUESS WHAT PROMPTED ME TO PUT THIS BACK ON THE AGENDA WAS THE ARTICLE THAT WAS IN THE PAPER FROM ANTIQUA, [05:35:03] WHICH STATED BUILDING INSPECTORS WENT IN AND FOUND HUNDREDS OF CODES. WELL, I HAVE BEEN SUBMITTING ISSUES WITH ANTIQUA SINCE 2012 BECAUSE THOSE APARTMENTS ARE IN HORRIBLE SHAPE. WE ALSO HAVE THE KNOLLS PROPERTY THAT SITS ON THE BEACH. WE HAVE A DILAPIDATED PROPERTY AT SPOON BILL. I COULD GO THROUGH OTHERS. WE'LL TAKE A ACTION AND THEN NOTHING SEEMS TO HAPPEN. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME THE PROCESS AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY SUDDENLY NOW THE ANTIQUAS HAS ALL THESE THINGS WHEN THEY'VE HAD IT FOR YEARS. IT'S REALLY A SIN BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY SENIORS THAT LIVE THERE THAT ARE ON HOUSING SUPPLEMENTS AND THE PLACE IS A DISGRACE. THE KNOLLS PROPERTY IS LITERALLY FALLING APART. THE DOORS NOW GONE. TRANSIENTS ARE MOVING IN. THE PROPERTY WHEN WE HAVE PIT DESTROYS OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AND YET NOTHING EVER SEEMS TO HAPPEN. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT'S DON OR TIM. WELL, THAT'S GREAT. BUT SO THE KNOLLS HOUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS BEEN IN DISREPAIR SINCE 2008. THE SPOON BILL HOUSE HAS BEEN MULTIPLE YEARS. SO NOT ONLY IS IT A HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARD, BUT IT'S ALSO LOWERING ALL THE PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN THREE BLOCKS OF THAT. PEOPLE SAY, WELL, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO FENCE IT. WELL, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THIS. THEN I'LL ASK FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT HAS BEEN DONE AND THEY'LL BE A YEAR THAT NOTHING'S BEEN DONE. WHY AREN'T WE FINDING THESE PEOPLE ON A DAILY BASIS? >> IF YOU WANT TO FILE THEM ON A DAILY BASIS, YOU WOULD HAVE TO FILE A SINGLE CASE EVERY DAY IN MUNICIPAL COURT. >> WELL, NOTHING'S WORKING. NOTHING'S GETTING DONE. IT'S LOWERING THE VALUES OF OTHER PROPERTIES. IT'S CAUSING HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES. THE ANTIQUA IS A DISGRACE. EVERY TIME I DRIVE BY THERE, I FEEL SO BAD FOR ALL THE SENIORS THAT HAVE TO LIVE IN THOSE HORRIBLE SITUATIONS THAT CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE ANYWHERE ELSE. WE FINALLY HAVE A BUILDING INSPECTOR GO IN AND THERE'S 100 THINGS ARE CITED. WE HAVE TO BE ALLOWED TO GO IN. UNLESS WE GO OUT AND TAKE THEM TO COURT AND GET A WARRANT TO ENTER THE PROPERTY. IN THIS PARTICULAR. >> EITHER ONE PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING AND SAY, COME INTO MY INTO MY UNIT. ALMOST ALWAYS WHEN JOE AND THOSE GUYS HAVE GONE OUT THROUGH THE RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN DID NOT WANT TO LET US IN THE APARTMENTS. WE'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN MULTIPLE MULTIPLE TIMES WITH THE COMPLAINTS BECAUSE I'LL SEE THEM ON SOCIAL MEDIA JUST LIKE YOU DO, AND I'LL SEND THEM OUT THERE AND THEY WON'T WANT THEM IN THEIR APARTMENT. PEOPLE CALL ME. I TURN IT OVER. YEAH. AND WE RESPOND TO EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, BUT IF THEY DON'T LET US IN THE APARTMENT. >> NOTHING ABSOLUTELY. NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. >> WHEN IT TURNS WHEN IT COMES TO ANTIQUA APARTMENTS, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE OWNER BECAUSE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IF WE WERE TO GO IN THERE AND TAKE FURTHER ACTION BEYOND THAT, WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND HOUSING, WE THE CITY, FIND HOUSING AND PAY FOR IT FOR ALL THE RESIDENTS. I DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY, I DON'T HAVE THAT BUDGET. I DON'T EVEN HAVE ANYBODY TO DO THAT. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE OWNERS TO DO THAT BECAUSE THE CITY HAS VERY MINIMAL STEPS THAT IT CAN TAKE IN THESE THINGS. I OUTLINED THAT WITH THE REPORTER. WE'RE NOT AN HOA, WE'RE NOT A DEED RESTRICTION. WE HAVE VERY SPECIFIC LEGAL ACTIONS THAT WE CAN TAKE, AND SOME OF THEM ARE QUITE DRACONIAN, AND YOU REALLY DON'T WANT TO PULL THE PIN OUT OF THAT GRENADE UNLESS YOU ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY HAVE TO. >> MOVING FROM THE ANTIGUA. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HOUSES THAT ARE IN COMPLETE DISREPAIR. EVERY TIME I ASK A QUESTION, WHILE THEY'RE SUPPOSED OF FENCING, NEVER HAD FENCING. [05:40:04] THEY'RE SUPPOSED OF HAVE THIS, WE FIND THEM. THEN I PULL WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST YEAR AND IT HASN'T HAPPENED. SO WHERE'S THE BREAKDOWN? HOW DO I ANSWER TO ALL THE TAX PAYING CITIZENS THAT LIVE AROUND ALL THESE DETERIORATING PROPERTY THAT'S DESTROYING THEIR PROPERTY. THEY CAN'T SELL PROPERTIES TO GET AWAY FROM IT. IT'S DAMAGING OTHER PROPERTIES, INCLUDING OUR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, AND NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. >> DON, YOU HAD TALKED ABOUT MOVING FROM THE MUNICIPAL COURTS INTO CRIMINAL COURT. >> COURTS ARE FOR HONEST PEOPLE. THE MAXIMUM FINE THE JUDGE CAN ISSUE IS TYPICALLY $500 IN SOME INSTANCES, 2,000. >> HOW DO WE MOVE THESE PROPERTIES THAT ARE JUST CONSTANT? >> DO WE NEED TO REWRITE OUR ORDINANCE THAT SAYS -. >> NO, THAT'S A STATUTE THAT PROVIDES THAT. THE METHOD I PREFER TO DO IN MORE COMPLICATED CASES IS FILE IN COUNTY COURT WHERE THE JUDGE HAS MONETARY JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY TO ENTER BIGGER JUDGMENTS AND INJUNCTIVE AUTHORITY AS WELL. >> WELL, YOU'RE DOING THAT? IS THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE SOLVING THE? >> I DON'T THINK WE'RE DOING THAT. I DON'T THINK WE'RE DOING ANYTHING. >> ARE YOU MOVING THEM INTO COUNTY COURT? >> YES. >> WHEN? WHAT PROPERTIES? I MEAN, WHEN. >> IT'S KIND OF HARD TO TALK ABOUT THESE IN THE ABSTRACT. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM HOUSE DESCRIBED IN MY MIND. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ONE WHERE WE SUED THEM. THEY MOVED TO THE ENTIRE HOUSE. THE ONLY THING I THINK ABOUT YOU CALL IT THE BLUE HOUSE. >> BEEN THERE. >> ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS PUT A STAIRWAY. >> THEY'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING AND IT JUST CONTINUES TO FALL APART. >> THEN SEND A INSPECTOR OUT AND SEND ME SOME PICTURES BECAUSE I TOLD THEY DID EVERYTHING THAT THEY WERE REQUIRED. >> WELL, THEN WE HAVE A FLAW ON OUR SYSTEM. WHY DON'T YOU DRIVE OUT THERE AND SEE IT? BECAUSE THE PLACE IS FALLING APART. [OVERLAPPING] IT'S A HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARD. >> AS TO THE BEYONCE HOUSE, I DON'T KNOW WHY I DRAG LANGUISHED WITH THE GLO FOR 13 YEARS. IT CAME TO MY OFFICE THIS SUMMER, BUT I ALSO SAID THERE WERE RISKS INVOLVED, AND THE ENTIRE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT. YOU WILL BE DOING THAT IN NOVEMBER. >> BUT IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE SINCE 2008. IT IS AN EXTREME HEALTH AND SAFETY. [OVERLAPPING] THE PIECES OF THE PILINGS FROM THAT HOUSE DAMAGED OTHER HOUSES DURING BERYL. THE PLACE IS FALLING DOWN AND WE DO NOTHING. >> I THINK THIS IS A GOOD ITEM FOR SALLY TO PLACE ON THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA BECAUSE THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS WHERE THE CITY IS VERY LIMITED. I HAD THE SAME PROBLEM WITH A HOUSE IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 20 YEARS THAT I WOULD HAVE GLADLY HAVE TORN DOWN THE FIRST MONTH IF I COULD HAVE BECAUSE I HAD TO DEAL WITH IT. I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT IF WE COULD DO IT, WE WOULD, BUT THE CITIES ARE EXTREMELY LIMITED, AND WHAT WE CAN DO BECAUSE OF WHAT IS NOW CALLED TAKINGS, AND PEOPLE ARE LAYING LOW FOR US ON THESE THINGS. I THINK THAT'S WHAT DON IS TRYING TO CAUTION YOU ON. CERTAINLY IN ONE OF THESE INSTANCES THAT YOU DISCUSSED TODAY, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING. THEY'RE BAITING YOU IN ON THIS. >> A HUNDRED AND TWENTY DAYS AGO, WE GAVE ONE OF THE HOMES A 60-DAY NOTICE, EITHER REPAIR OR TEAR DOWN, A 60-DAY NOTICE. IT'S 120 DAYS NOW. >> I STEPPED IN AND STOPPED IT AND SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS IN MUNICIPAL COURT. IF WE DO IT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE COUNCIL DECIDE AS A WHOLE WHETHER TO PROCEED, [OVERLAPPING] OR THERE WOULD BE EXTREME RISK INVOLVED. [05:45:01] >> WELL, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO COME TO AN HOA MEETING AND EXPLAIN TO ALL THE PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN LIVING WITH THIS FOR OVER 20 SOME YEARS. >> IT'S SAD IN AN OLD COMMUNITY LIKE GALVESTON, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM IN A LOT OF THE NEWER COMMUNITIES BECAUSE THEY HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS. THE HOAS CAN TAKE FAR MORE ACTION THAN THE CITY CAN. WE ARE HAMSTRUNG BY SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS THAT KEEP US FROM ALLOWING US TO DO THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO. DON, HOW LONG DID WE FIGHT THE HOUSE BEHIND RALPH MCMORRIS'S? WE GOT ALL THE WAY TO DEMOLITION, AND IT STILL DIDN'T HAPPEN. >> THEN MARK STOPPED IT. >> WON'T THEY [INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS PRETTY QUICK? >> IF WE GET COOPERATION FROM THE OWNERS, IT GOES MUCH FASTER. IF WE DON'T GET COOPERATION FROM THE OWNERS. [OVERLAPPING] >> I THINK A LOT OF TIMES, WE FILE SOMETHING AND THEN IT JUST GETS FORGOTTEN. A PERIOD OF TIME WILL COME BY AND EITHER CITIZEN WILL COME TO ME AND I'LL REPORT IT AND SOMETHING HAPPENS, AND THEN IT GETS FORGOTTEN. >> WELL, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME KIND OF GO, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO HAVE HAPPENED? [OVERLAPPING] >> I WANT SOMEONE TO COME OUT AND SPEAK TO THE RESIDENTS AND EXPLAIN TO THEM WHY NOTHING HAS HAPPENED OR EVER HAPPENS. >> NOTHING VISIBLE HAS HAPPENED. >> WELL, EVEN WHEN I REQUEST, CAN I GET WHAT HAS HAPPENED ON THIS PROPERTY IN THE LAST TWO OR THREE YEARS? THERE'D BE YEAR PERIOD THAT GOES BY THAT NOTHING HAPPENS. >> WE'RE VERY LIMITED IN WHAT WE CAN DO IN THE FREQUENCY OF THOSE THINGS. >> THAT IS SUCH AN OLD DANCER. >> WELL, MARIE, GO HIRE SOMEBODY TO TEAR IT DOWN. [LAUGHTER] THAT'S COUNCIL'S OPTION. WE JUST TEAR THE DAMN THING DOWN, WORRY ABOUT IT LATER. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW AND NOT EXPOSE COUNCIL TO LIABILITY ON THESE THINGS. >> WHAT CAN STAFF DO? WHAT CAN LEGAL DO TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT COUNCILWOMAN ROB HAS? CAN YOU BRING MORE CASES TO THE COUNTY COURT? WHAT CAN YOU DO TO UPGRADE WHAT WE'RE DOING? >> I HAVE NO EARTHLY IDEA. >> YOU'RE OUR ATTORNEY AND YOU DON'T HAVE AN EARTHLY IDEA? >> NO. THE QUESTION WAS, WHAT CAN I DO TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS? WHILE I THINK WE'VE BEEN DOING IT, YOU HAVE A LEVEL OF DISSATISFACTION THAT I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. >> [OVERLAPPING] WELL, LET'S SEE. 2008, IT'S 2024. [OVERLAPPING] LAURA, BETA, DELTA WAS 2020. >> THE ONLY THING WE REQUIRED THEM TO DO IF IT NEEDS A FENCE, FINE, SEND THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OUT TO PUT A FENCE AROUND. >> WE'RE GOING ROUND AND ROUND. MARIE, DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE GETTING WITH DON AND SALLY AND BRIAN IN TRYING TO ADDRESS THIS AND BRING BACK THOUGHTS? >> I'VE DONE IT 100 TIMES, AND NOTHING HAPPENS. I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO BECAUSE I'M THE ONE WHO HAS THE ANSWER TO THE PEOPLE, AND THEY WANT ANSWERS, AND I CAN'T GIVE THEM ANSWERS. EVERY TIME THE CITY TAKES AN ACTION, THERE IS NO REACTION AND NO FOLLOW-UP. THAT'S A HOLE WE HAVE IN OUR SYSTEM. >> SALLY, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> SORRY. I RAN DOWN HERE. [LAUGHTER] IN 2019, ONE OF THE BILLS THAT WE REQUESTED WAS OWNER REGISTRATION OF VACANT AND DANGEROUS BUILDINGS. IT WAS OUR FIRST STEP IN TRYING TO ADDRESS THESE VACANT BUILDINGS THAT JUST SEEMED TO GO IN PERPETUITY. THIS IS WHEN MICHAEL WAS CITY MARSHAL BACK THEN. HE WORKED THIS BILL WITH ME. WE RAN INTO SIGNIFICANT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHT ISSUES. YOU'VE GOT A STATE LEGISLATURE THAT IS JUST FIRMLY PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. I CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ON OUR BILL, BUT WE DIDN'T EVEN GET OUT OF COMMITTEE. >> I'M ALL ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS, BUT IF I SEND OVER A REQUEST, THEN I'M TOLD THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT A FENCE UP, [05:50:01] THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THIS, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THAT. I GO BACK IN A MONTH, IN TWO MONTHS, IN THREE MONTHS, NOBODY'S DONE ANYTHING AND NOTHING HAPPENS. WE HAVE A BREAKDOWN SOMEWHERE IN OUR SYSTEM. >> I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW-UP SOMEONE HAD SENT ME. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, AND I JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU AND INFORM THE OTHERS. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE HAVE ORDINANCES ON OUR BOOKS THAT WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING. [OVERLAPPING] >> WHAT ORDINANCE ARE WE NOT FOLLOWING? >> IT SUPPOSED TO HAVE A FENCE. >> THEY'VE PUT IT UP THREE TIMES. >> A LITTLE GREEN. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE DIDN'T REQUIRE THEM TO PUT UP A SIX-FOOT WOODEN FENCE AROUND THE BOTTOM OF THE HOUSE. IN FACT, THEY PROBABLY COULDN'T, GIVEN THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE, BUT THEY PUT THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE UP THREE OR FOUR TIMES, IT KEEPS GETTING TORN DOWN. >> I HAVE NEVER SEEN A CONSTRUCTION FENCE, NOR HAVE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE BY THE HOUSES WHOSE PROPERTY VALUES. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE HAVE IT FULLY DOCUMENTED. >> COMPLETELY. EACH TIME WE DO, I'D LOVE TO SEE THAT BECAUSE EVERY TIME I'VE ASKED FOR IT, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT. >> BRIAN, IS THERE ANY RESPONSE TO COUNCILWOMAN ROB? >> I'M WITH DON. WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT THE LAW ALLOWS US TO DO, CRAIG. >> WHAT ABOUT ANTIGUA? THE OWNER IS COOPERATING. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I KNOW IN 2012, WHEN I STARTED THE MISSION ON ANTIGUA, THEY CAME IN TO COUNCIL AND HAD AN ANSWER TO THE PUBLIC, AND YET IT CONTINUED. >> I WASN'T INVOLVED IN 2012, BUT I CAN TELL YOU WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE GONE OUT THERE, WE'VE CITED THEM. WE'VE GIVEN THEM 60 DAYS, JOE, TO BRING US BACK A PLAN FOR REPAIR AND ANOTHER SO MANY DAYS ACTUALLY. >> WHO MONITORS THAT? >> MR. THOMAS. >> BECAUSE OTHER PROPERTIES HAVE HAD 60-DAY THINGS AND NOTHING HAPPENS AND IT NEVER GET FOLLOW-UP. >> THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME EVEN IN MUNICIPAL COURT. IF THE JUDGE ISSUES EXTENSIONS, THERE'S A WHOLE LOT THAT GOES ON THAT. I SAY THIS ALL THE TIME, THE CITIZENS, THEY SEE HIGH GRASS, THEY SAY, WHY DID IT CUT? DIDN'T YOU GO OUT THERE? YEAH, WE WENT OUT THERE. THEY HAD 10 DAYS. WE POST A 10-DAY LETTER, THEN IT GOES TO COURT. [OVERLAPPING] >> PEOPLE WITH GRASS WERE ALL OVER THEIR BUTTS CONSTANTLY, BUT THE MAJOR PROBLEM IS SET OUT OF THERE. >> THAT'S BECAUSE THEY TEND TO COOPERATE AND WE HAVE AN ABILITY TO EASILY GO IN AND MOW THAT I DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO IN AND TEAR DOWN A HOUSE. THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE. >> WITH ANTIGUA IN PARTICULAR, WE'VE GIVEN THEM 60 DAYS, BUT THAT'S NOT 60 DAYS JUST TO RESPOND BACK TO US. THAT'S 60 DAYS TO COME UP WITH A PLAN FOR MECHANICAL IMPROVEMENTS, PLUMBING IMPROVEMENTS, STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS, HEALTH AND MOLD IMPROVEMENTS. JOE AND HIS TEAM WENT OUT AND WENT THROUGH EVERY UNIT. THANK GOD, WE HAD VOLUNTARY AUTHORIZATION FROM THE OWNER TO DO THIS BECAUSE WE'D BE A LOT LESS FURTHER ALONG THAN WE ARE NOW. BUT IN THAT 60-DAY TIME PERIOD, THEY'VE INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS. THEY INTEND TO DO THIS, SO WE'RE BEING TOLD THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A LOT OF CONTRACTOR HIRING. THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE [INAUDIBLE] FROM THAT STANDPOINT, WE ALSO SAID, WE WANT TO DO A 30-DAY MEETING WITH YOU, WHICH WE HAVE SCHEDULED FOR EARLY NOVEMBER. A 30-DAY TIME PERIOD IS TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHERE THEY ARE IN THEIR PROCESS OF GETTING ALL THIS STUFF DONE. SO THERE'S THERE'S SOME STUFF WORKING, AND I WOULD SAY THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT THAT THE CITY IS TAKING A FOLLOW-UP ON ALL THESE. I THINK THERE WILL BE RESULTS. I AGREE WITH DON'S PERSPECTIVE THAT DOING THIS IN HIS REPORT IS ESSENTIALLY INEFFECTIVE. >> WHAT'S THE CONSEQUENCE AFTER THE END OF 60 DAYS, IF THEY HAVEN'T DONE IT? >> THEN WE TAKE THE ACTION THAT DON SUGGESTED. >> COUNTY COURT? >> PROBABLY. I WON'T KNOW. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS? >> IF SHE COMES IN THAT THOUGH, WOULD THAT DECISION COMES A BIG DECISION ON COUNCIL'S PART? BECAUSE THERE'S A BIG TICKET WITH THAT. >> THE BEYONCE HOME WILL BE ON OUR NOVEMBER AGENDA. >> ALREADY ON JANELLE'S BOARD. >> VERY GOOD. ANY MORE THOUGHTS, MARIE? >> NO, JUST FRUSTRATION. >> I HAVE YOUR FRUSTRATION TOO. TRUST ME, I DO. >> WE ALL, I THINK, IN OUR DISTRICTS HAVE PLACES LIKE THIS. [OVERLAPPING] >> BOB'S GOT ONE ACROSS THE ROOM FROM HIS HOUSE.. >> I DO, AND THERE'S AN OLD AMERICAN INDEMNITY. >> OH, MY GOD. YES. [05:55:01] >> I GET COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT ALMOST WEEKLY. >> WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS WHERE WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE NOTIFICATION PROCESS. THEY CHANGE CORPORATE OWNERSHIPS EVERY SINGLE TIME AND YOU HAVE TO REFILE AND ALL THESE THINGS JUST FOR US TO FILE A LIEN TO BE ABLE TO GO. THE LAST TIME IT GET MOWED, I SENT OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT TO GO MOW IT BECAUSE WE FINALLY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE WE TRIPPED IT AND I COULDN'T WAIT FOR A CONTRACTOR TO GET THERE. WE'RE TRYING TO STAY ON TOP OF THIS AS BEST WE CAN, BUT THE STATE DOESN'T HELP US IN THIS INSTANCE. I'M NOT SURE THEY SHOULD HELP US A WHOLE LOT MORE BECAUSE I'M LIKE, YOU GUYS ARE WITH THE PROPERTY RIGHTS. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE DO THAT STRETCH THAT. LIKE I SAID, I LIVED THE ONE ON BELUCHE FOR 20 YEARS. WE FINALLY GOT TO A POINT. >> SHARON, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> JUST THE SAME THING. EVEN WITHIN DISTRICT 1, I REMEMBER WHEN SANDPIPER COVE AND THERE WERE MOLD AND PEOPLE WITH SINKHOLES, WITH RATS, AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS. THE PROCESS IS LONG AND IT DOES PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. ALSO, WE STILL HAVE A BIG FALSTAFF BUILDING THAT'S SITTING THERE. IT HAPPENS AND THE TIME, YOU JUST CAN'T DO IT OVERNIGHT. >> LEGISLATIVELY, SOMETHING ELSE THAT SHOULD BE PURSUED IS IS THAT THESE FOLKS, IN JUST ABOUT EVERY INSTANCE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MS. KNOLLS, I DON'T BELIEVE SHE DOES, THEY RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR VOUCHERS FOR THESE HOUSES, AND THEY'RE LIVING IN THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> THERE SHOULD BE A STANDARD FOR RECEIVING THAT MONEY. >> I TOTALLY AGREE, AND IT FALLS OUTSIDE OUR HOUSING AUTHORITY. >> THERE ARE STANDARDS. >> THERE ARE STANDARDS. >> I THOUGHT SECTION A WAS UNDER HOUSING. >> THERE'S DIFFERENT ONES, AS WE'VE LEARNED. THEY'VE TOLD US, LIKE IN THE CASE OF ANTIGUA, THEY HAVE NO ROLE IN THOSE. I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAVE A ROLE IN SANDPIPER COVE EITHER. >> I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. IT IS 2:13 PM. WE ARE GOING TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION. [4. EXECUTIVE SESSION] WE'LL TAKE A 5, 6, 7, 8-MINUTE BREAK FOR THOSE THAT HAVEN'T EATEN TO GET YOUR FOOD. WE'LL COME BACK. [BACKGROUND] FOR A PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.072, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY, THE COUNCIL MAY CONVENE INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE EXCHANGE LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PARCELS LOCATED AT OR NEAR THE AIRPORT. WE ARE NOW MOVING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 2:13 PM. IT IS 2:34 PM. WE ARE OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL OF OUR AGENDA ITEMS, AND WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.