[00:00:03]
>> AT THE WHARVES BOARD, THE CITY CHARTER AND WHAT IT
[3.A. Discussion Of The City Charter As It Relates To The Port Of Galveston]
SAYS ABOUT OUR RELATIONSHIP AT THE CITY WITH THE WHARVES BOARD IN THE PORT OF GALVESTON.I'M GOING TO PASS THIS OUT TO EVERYONE.
ALL OF THE ITEMS IN OUR CHARTER TO DO WITH THE WHARVES BOARD OR THE PORT.
YOU COULD LOOK AT THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
IS DAN HERE OR BRIAN? THERE WE ARE, BRIAN.
VERY GOOD. DID EVERYBODY GET A COPY OF THIS? RYLEY, DID YOU GET A COPY?
>> THIS IS ALL OF THE AREAS THAT OUR CHARTER INVOLVES WITH THE WHARVES BOARD.
OF COURSE, WE APPOINT THE WHARVES BOARD MEMBERS THROUGH CITY COUNCIL HERE AND WE APPROVE THE PORTS.
IF THEY HAVE ANY DEBT SERVICE OR BOND, I SHOULD SAY THAT THEY NEED TO GO OUT FOR IT.
THIS COMES THROUGH CITY COUNCIL, AS YOU KNOW, FOR APPROVAL AT CITY COUNCIL.
WHEN THE FOREFATHERS SET THIS UP WITH THE WHARVES BOARD ARRANGEMENT, THEY MADE THE WHARVES BOARD FAIRLY AUTONOMOUS IN THEIR OPERATIONS.
AS YOU KNOW, IS DIFFERENT FROM THE PARK BOARD, WE DO NOT APPROVE THEIR BUDGET AND WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME OVERSIGHT OVER THE WHARVES BOARD AND THE PORT AS WE DO THE PARK BOARD.
I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION NOW FOR ANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I KNOW SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT OUR RELATIONSHIP SO LET'S OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION. YES.
>> WHEN I WAS DOING MY RESEARCH ON CHARTER AND SINCE BEING ELECTED, THAT WAS THE BIGGEST DRIVER WE TALKED ABOUT THROUGH THE ORIENTATIONS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED.
LOOKING AT THE CHARTER, THERE ARE SOME ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT ASPECTS OF THE CHARTER THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS OVER THE WHARVES BOARD.
TWO OF THOSE WOULD BE SECTION 6, THE RECORDS, WHICH I MIGHT AS WELL READ IT FOR THE RECORD.
ALL BOOKS, DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS OF THE GALVESTON AWARDS, INCLUDING THE MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES SHALL BE AT ALL REASONABLE TIMES BE OPEN TO INSPECTION BY THE COUNCIL OR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHER RECORDS SHALL BE KEPT AS NEARLY AS PRACTICABLE ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION OR OTHER REGULATORY AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE GALVESTON WHARVES, AND SHALL ADEQUATELY SHOW ALL MATTERS NECESSARY TO CORRECTLY PRESENT THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE INCOME AND EXPENSES OF ITS OPERATION.
ANNUAL AUDIT SHALL BE MADE BY A CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT, AND A COPY OF THIS AUDIT SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CITY SECRETARY AS A PUBLIC RECORD.
THE SECOND SECTION THAT PERTAINS TO SOME OVERSIGHT IS SECTION 11.
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES SHALL FILE WITH THE COUNCIL AT THE END OF EACH FISCAL YEAR AN ANNUAL REPORT SHOWING IN DETAIL THE OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR PASSED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT BEING LIMITED TO THE VOLUME OF BUSINESS, THE GROSS RECEIPTS, AND THE OPERATING EXPENSES.
THE COUNCIL SHALL BE ENTITLED AT ANY TIME TO REQUIRE AND THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES SHALL THEREUPON FURNISH ANY INFORMATION THAT THE COUNCIL MAY DEEM PROPER IN ORDER TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL CONDITION OF THE GALVESTON WHARVES AND THE RESULTS OF ITS OPERATIONS.
THE REPORT SO FILED SHALL BE RETAINED BY THE CITY SECRETARY AS PUBLIC RECORDS, PROVIDED THAT ONLY THE COUNCIL MAY ORDER PARTS OF ANY REPORT OR OTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED TO BE A CLOSED RECORD WHEN THAT MAY BE DEEMED NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE COMPETITIVE POSITION OF THE GALVESTON WHARVES AS A PORT FACILITY.
THE LANGUAGE IN THERE SAYS THAT THE REPORTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FILED WITH COUNCIL, AND THE CITY SECRETARY HAS THEM FOR PUBLIC RECORD.
NATURALLY, READING THE BOOK, I GO TO THE CITY SECRETARY AND I ASK, MAY I SEE THE MOST RECENT REPORT BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FINANCING AND PAYMENTS AND EVERYTHING, AND THERE HASN'T BEEN A REPORT FILED SINCE 2014.
THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN WHEN TRUSTEE YARBROUGH WAS MAYOR AND STILL CURRENTLY THERE'S BEEN NO REPORT FILED, AND WE HAVE THE CURRENT MAYOR AND EX OFFICIO.
THAT ALONE IS A PROBLEM, I BELIEVE, EVEN THOUGH YOU MIGHT HAVE CUFFERS, IT HAS NOT BEEN FILED WITH COUNCIL SINCE 2014.
THAT'S OVER A DECADE THAT THERE'S BEEN NO REPORTS FILED.
WHEN I'M TRYING TO FIND INFORMATION,
[00:05:03]
ON THE BOOK, IT SAYS, CITY SECRETARY HAS IT.WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION.
AGAIN, ALL OF THIS STUFF, THIS ENTIRE AGENDA WASN'T PUT TOGETHER THROUGH A KNEE JERK REACTION.
ALL OF THIS WAS ACCORDING TO THE COLOR OF THE LAW UNDER THE CHARTER.
WE JUST DISCUSSED THAT, WHAT OVERSIGHT IS THERE? BEYOND THOSE TWO PARTS OF THE CHARTER, WHAT OVERSIGHT DOES COUNCIL HAVE?
>> THAT'S THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
IS THE TWO ITEMS THAT I MENTIONED ALREADY THAT WE HAVE OVERSIGHT ON.
LET'S FOLLOW UP AGAIN THOUGH ON COUNCILMEMBER PORRETTO'S THOUGHTS ON THESE TWO TOPICS.
>> MAYOR AND COUNCIL, CERTAINLY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT TO OUR ATTENTION.
WE'LL CERTAINLY GET THAT RECTIFIED.
BRING IT UP TO DATE. WE'LL GET THAT CORRECTED.
ONE OTHER POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS IN THE APPROVAL OF THE BONDS, IT'S NOT JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
I THINK THAT THE CITIZENS KNOW THERE ARE SEVEN VOTES, WE NEED SIX TO APPROVE ANY BOND ISSUE.
I THINK THAT'S A CRITICAL PIECE OF INFORMATION.
>> VERY MUCH SO AND I APPRECIATE COUNCILMAN PORRETTO BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
JANELLE, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE FROM THIS POINT FORWARD THAT WE WORK WITH ANGIE AND THE PORT AND I KNOW VICK YOU WILL FOLLOW UP ON THAT TO GET US UP TO DATE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW THESE TWO SECTIONS TO THE LATTER OF THE LAW THAT WE COULD.
>> ANOTHER SECTION THAT WE'VE TOUCHED ON OR DISCUSSED SINCE COUNCIL HAD A SUPER MAJORITY OF A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR PARTICULAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT FROM THE CITY WAS THE PAYMENTS TO THE CITY, AND I'M NOT GOING TO READ THE BEGINNING PART BECAUSE IT JUST OUTLINES $160,000 OF WHICH WE UNDERSTAND 120 COMES TO THE CITY AND ABOUT 40,000 GOES TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
>> NO, IT'S 160 TO THE CITY AND THEN FORTY SOMETHING [INAUDIBLE]
>> WHILE WE'RE ON THAT SUBJECT, LET ME PASS THIS OUT.
EXCUSE ME, IF YOU DON'T MIND, ALEX, LET ME GET THIS OUT TO EVERYONE HERE.
WE HAD A PACKET MATERIAL, BY THE WAY, COUNCIL THAT WAS SENT TO YOU AND THEN JANELLE SENT SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION TO YOU, AND IT COVERS, I THINK MOST OF OUR QUESTIONS HERE.
THIS IS A REPORT I JUST PASSED OUT THAT WAS IN THE CFO'S REPORT FOR THE PARK BOARD AND WHARVES BOARD.
THIS IS AS OF THE END OF NOVEMBER, AS YOU KNOW, THE BOARD IS ON A CALENDAR YEAR FOR THEIR FISCAL YEAR RATHER THAN THE SAME FISCAL YEARS SITUATION WE ARE IN THE CITY.
THIS IS MINUS ONE MONTH, BUT IT GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT THEY HAVE PAID TO THE CITY TODAY.
>> BEYOND THAT, THE LATER PORTION OF THIS SECTION 9 PAYMENTS TO THE CITY SAYS, ALL OTHER NET REVENUES UNDER GALVESTON WHARVES SHALL BE RETAINED THEREBY FOR THE BETTERMENT AND EXTENSION OF THIS UTILITY TO THE BENEFIT AND ADVANTAGE OF THE CITY, PROVIDED THIS SHALL NOT PREVENT THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM AGREEING AND CONTRACTING TO PAY THE CITY AT A REASONABLE AND PROPER RATE FOR SUCH SPECIAL SERVICES FURNISHED BY THE CITY TO THE GALVESTON WHARVES AS WOULD NOT BE CUSTOMARILY FURNISHED TO OTHER BUSINESSES OR UTILITIES OR IF SO FURNISHED, WOULD NOT BE FURNISHED WITHOUT A CHARGE BEING MADE THEREFORE.
THE WAY I INTERPRET THAT IS IF THERE'S ANY SPECIAL SERVICES THAT THE CITY, LIKE IF THE PORT ASK US OR YOU SAY SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR BULKHEADS, AND THE CITY COMES IN AND DOES BULKHEAD WORK, WHICH USUALLY WOULDN'T BE DONE FOR OTHER UTILITIES OR BUSINESSES BY A MUNICIPALITY.
WE CAN'T GO AND MAKE AN ARBITRARY AMOUNT AGAINST THE WHARVES BOARD TO OFFSET THE COST OR I THINK IT WOULD BE A MONEY GRAB, SO TO SPEAK.
NOW, WHEN I ASKED OUR CITY ATTORNEY, TO SEE WHAT THE LIMITATIONS ARE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE PREVIOUS COUNCIL TALKED ABOUT THE PAYMENTS TO THE CITY FOR THE USER FEE FOR THE LONG TERM PARKING, THE DOLLAR PER CAR PER DAY, SO TO SPEAK.
SECTION 15 WAS WHAT HE POINTED TO, WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS SETTING FORTH THE PROVISIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT, CONTROL, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATION OF THE WHARVES, AND THE INCOME AND REVENUES THEREFROM SHALL CONSTITUTE EXCEPTIONS TO THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER IN THESE RESPECTS.
NOW, JUST OFF OF OUR QUESTION,
[00:10:05]
DOES THE PORT PAY WATER? DO THEY PAY UTILITIES? I WOULD ASSUME IF THAT'S NOT A SPECIAL SERVICE OR SOMETHING FURNISHED, THAT I THINK WOULD CONSTITUTE A FEE THAT'S ASSESSED TO PRIVATE LOTS.I DO APPRECIATE THE WHARVES BOARD FOR AGREEING TO IT, BUT I THINK BEYOND THAT, AGREEING TO IT, IT SHOULD BE JUST A BASIC FACT OF COMPLIANCE TO OUR CODES, BECAUSE THE OATH THAT THE TRUSTEES TAKE HAS IN THERE, THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT OURS DOES TO PROTECT DEFEND CONSTITUTION, THE STATE, CONSTITUTION, THE CHARTER, AND THE CODES AND ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I'VE LOOKED AT AND RESEARCHED AND BEEN PICKING A PART OF THIS TO GO INTO THE CONVERSATION BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING WHAT'S THE ADVANTAGE TO THE CITY AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUS HISTORY OF THE PAYMENTS, AND I FOUND ALL THE WAY BACK 60 YEARS PAYMENTS TO THE PORT, THAT EVEN THE TAXPAYERS HAD TO SUBSIDIZE SOME OF THE PORT OPERATIONS IN THE PAST.
THAT'S GOING TO BE IN ANOTHER DISCUSSION, BUT I DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS GO INTO A US VERSUS THEM MENTALITY.
I THINK WE'RE ALL WORKING TOGETHER AND THE GOAL OF ALL OF THIS, AND I APPRECIATE THE ENTIRETY OF THE WHARVES BOARD FOR SHOWING UP IS TO BE GOOD MUNICIPAL PARTNERS TO ALLEVIATE THE BURDENS THAT THE TAXPAYERS FACE AND TO MAKE GOOD ON THE PROMISES OF THE CHARTER OF THE SMARTER MEN THAN ME IN THE 40S WHEN THEY ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY, COULD SEE THAT INTO FRUITION, AND IT JUST HASN'T HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND I'M LOOKING AT THE FUTURE MOVING FORWARD AND SEEING HOW THAT DOES WORK AND HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
>> LET ME ASK THIS, ALEX SO WE CAN OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON YOU FEEL THINGS NEED TO BE CHANGED IN SOME MANNER?
>> NO. I'M JUST SUGGESTING IF THERE'S A POSITIONAL JOCKEYING INSTEAD OF WORKING TOGETHER, MAYBE THE TAXPAYERS WOULD APPRECIATE SOME MORE OVERSIGHT.
I'M NOT TRYING TO RUN THE PORT.
I THINK THEY SET IT UP IN A WAY SO THAT COUNCIL PEOPLE DON'T RUN THE PORT.
BUT IF THERE NEEDS TO BE ADDITIONAL OVERSIGHT OR NEEDS TO BE ADDITIONAL THINGS.
THIS WAS TALKED ABOUT 25 YEARS PRIOR TO 1990 OF THIS PAYMENT AND I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS MOVING FORWARD IN THAT DIRECTION.
I'M NOT SAYING WE CAN TELL THE WHARVES BOARD WHAT TO DO, BUT THERE'S A CERTAIN LEVEL OF WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE THIS A BETTER PROCESS FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I THINK WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER BETTER THAN IT HAS EVER HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND I THINK WE'RE MOVING IN A TOTAL POSITIVE DIRECTION.
I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE THE CITY GET INVOLVED IN THE OPERATIONS OF THE PORT.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL BECAUSE LORDY, WE STILL HAVE ISSUES WITH THEIR OWN OPERATION.
BUT WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN IN AGREEMENT AS TO ADDITIONAL MONEY COMING TO THE CITY THAT WE COULD USE FOR PROJECTS NOT TO GO INTO THE GENERAL FUND, BUT TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS THAT BENEFIT THE BOARD SUCH AS THE 14TH STREET PUMP STATION.
>> IT BENEFITS THE RESIDENTS, AND FITS THE WHOLE GAMBIT OF IT.
I THINK THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE WITH THE PURCHASING OF THE WHARVES BOARD AND FORESEEABLE FUTURE OF HOW THEY WANTED THE PORT TO BENEFIT THE CITY AS WELL.
PERSONALLY, I THINK WE HAVE THE BEST RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PORT AND THE WHARVES BOARD THAN WE'VE HAD SINCE I'VE BEEN ON COUNCIL, WHICH WAS 11 YEARS AGO.
I'M GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT. I THINK WE'VE HAD THE SAME INCREASED RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARK BOARD AND I THINK ALL OF US WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WORK TOGETHER AND TO HAVE THE OPERATIONS OF THE PORT BENEFIT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE WHARVES BOARD, BUT I THINK THEY HAVE THAT SAME GOVERNMENT INTEREST.
>> OUR TRUSTEES HERE, WE SHARE THAT SAME COMMITMENT.
>> EXACTLY. I'D LIKE TO GET INTO
[00:15:01]
THE SPECIFICS OF THIS BECAUSE I THINK COUNCILMAN PORRETTO BRINGS UP GOOD IDEAS THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFICS.WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT FUNDING HERE COMING UP HERE SHORTLY.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT PAYMENTS IN THE PAST THAT THE CITY HAS MADE TO THE BOARD.
I THINK WE NEED TO GET REAL DEFINITE ON THOSE IN DETAIL BECAUSE IT'S EASY TO MISUNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S ALL SET UP, SO I THINK WE NEED TO GET INTO THAT.
YOU'RE COMING UP HERE VERY SHORTLY.
COUNCIL, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS CHARTER AND THE INVOLVEMENT WITH THE PORT AND THE WHARVES BOARD?
>> I HAD A QUESTION JUST BECAUSE IT'S CURRENT STATE, SECTION 8, COMPETITIVE BIDDING.
>> BESIDES WHAT'S ARBITRARILY AND ITS BASIC SENSE LINED OUT HERE FOR SECTION 8, COMPETITIVE BIDDING, AS FAR AS COMPARED WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING, IS THERE AN EXACT DEFINITION THAT WON'T LEAD TO WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST MEETING WITH YOU-ALL AS FAR AS CHOICE OF CONTRACTORS?
>> I WOULD SAY THAT THE WHARVES BOARD DOES HAVE A POLICY THAT IS ESTABLISHED FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF ITEMS OF BIDDING AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE POLICY MANUAL [INAUDIBLE]
>> THE GUYS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE TABLE YOU CAN'T HEAR THEM AT ALL. THEY'RE NOT EVEN TALKING. [INAUDIBLE]
>> IF I'M WRONG, AND BRIAN MIGHT BE ABLE TO TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE CITY COUNCIL, WE HAVE A LIMITED HANDS OFF APPROACH TO THE BID PROCESS.
THEN THE WHARVES BOARD IS MORE HANDS ON.
>> [INAUDIBLE] BASICALLY WE SEE THE SUMMARY AND THEN STAFF MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO US.
>> YOU-ALL GET TO SEE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, A MENU, BECAUSE WE DON'T GET A MENU OF THE WORK. IT GETS [INAUDIBLE]
>> HOWEVER THEY'VE SET THE COMMITTEE UP TO GO THROUGH AND DO THE EVALUATION AND THEN WE SEE BASICALLY THE SUMMARY AND THE STAFF TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF SELECTING THIS BIDDER BASED ON THESE CRITERIA.
>> I'D LIKE TO GIVE OUR FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIR, SHEILA, A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.
>> SHEILA, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND FOR THE COMMUNITY, JUST OUTLINE YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES [OVERLAPPING]
>> SURE. I CHAIR THE FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE WHARVES BOARD. WE OVERSEE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUDGET.
WE OVERSEE EXPENDITURES, ANYTHING RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL WHEREWITHAL OF THE PORT.
ALL OF THAT COMES OUT OF OUR COMMITTEE AND THEN GOES TO THE FULL BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
I CAN'T REPRESENT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE WERE THINKING.
BUT THE QUESTION AT HAND WITH THE PARTICULAR BID, THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE TO ME THAT IS AMBIGUOUS AT BEST, CONFUSING, THAT SAYS THE BEST VALUE.
IT TALKS ABOUT LOWEST BIDDER, OR BEST VALUE.
[00:20:01]
THAT'S A VERY BROAD TERM.>> YOU COULD HAVE A GUY THAT BIDS TWO BUCKS ON THE PROJECT.
>> ALSO, WHAT DOES BEST VALUE LOOK LIKE FOR THE COMMUNITY OF GALVESTON? DOES IT LOOK LIKE WE HAVE EMPLOYEES WITH THIS VENDOR.
DO THEY TURNOVER MONEY AT THE GROCERY STORES? DO THEY PAY SCHOOL TAXES? ALL THAT STUFF.
I VOTED FOR NOT THE LOWEST BIDDER, ALTHOUGH THE DELTA WAS PRETTY SMALL.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE FACETS THAT WE WERE WRESTLING WITH IS YOU HAVE A BIDDER THAT'S FROM A FAR THAT SAYS THEY HAVE OPERATIONS IN GALVESTON COUNTY.
THEY MAY VERY WELL, BUT I WASN'T ABLE TO FIND IT ON THE WEBSITE.
OR YOU HAVE A VENDOR WHO IS VERY MUCH A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY, WHO WE KNOW THEIR EMPLOYEES WORK HERE, LIVE HERE, PAY SCHOOL TAXES, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
BECAUSE THE DELTA WAS SMALL, WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD AWARD IT IN THAT REGARD.
BEST VALUE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DO ABOUT THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT, IN THE FIRST QUARTER AS JEFF SAID, TIGHTENING UP THE LANGUAGE, PERHAPS ADDING AN AMENDMENT THAT SPEAKS TO A PERCENTAGE DELTA THAT WE CAN LIVE WITH WHERE A PROJECT, IF IT COMES IN WITHIN 2, 3, 5%, COULD BE AWARDED LOCALLY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THE LOWEST BID.
THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE'RE WRESTLING WITH.
>> WE HAVE COUNCILMAN RAWLINS, AND THEN FINKLEA, AND THEN BROWN.
[LAUGHTER] THEN WE HAVE [INAUDIBLE]
>> BEFORE WE GET AHEAD TO DISCUSSION 3(F), I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE STICKING TO THE FIRST PART BEFORE WE GET INITIATED WITH THE CHARTERS.
>> TONY, BROWN, AND I WORKED TOGETHER FOR MANY YEARS ON SCHOOL BOARD HERE AND WE DEALT WITH MULTIPLE CONTRACTS.
IT WAS ALWAYS PREFERRED THAT WE WERE ABLE TO GET LOCAL CONTRACTORS TO WORK.
THE MATRIX THAT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT WAS VERY PRECISE, BASICALLY GAVE A PRE-AWARD TO THOSE LOCAL CONTRACTORS THAT COMPETED IN THE BIDDING PROCESS.
WHEREAS EVERYBODY KNEW AHEAD OF TIME, THOSE CONTRACTORS THAT WERE OUT OF TOWN, WHETHER IT'S 5%, 2%, WHATEVER IS ESTABLISHED, THEY'VE ALREADY GOT THE BONUS POINTS GOING IN.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IF IT WAS COVERED BY A PERCENTAGE, THEN THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO QUESTION.
IN READING THAT AND GOING BACK, IT ENDS UP AMOUNTING TO LAWSUITS THAT WE DON'T NEED, ANY OF US.
AS LONG AS SOMETHING LIKE THAT'S ESTABLISHED, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE TO REINVENT THE WHEEL.
TONY AND I DEALT WITH THAT MULTIPLE TIMES WITH BEING ABLE TO AWARD LOCAL CONTRACTORS BECAUSE IT WAS WITHIN THAT 5% WINDOW.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SIMILAR [INAUDIBLE]
>> BUT THAT MATRIX IS IMPORTANT.
THAT WAY, THAT ARBITRARY STATEMENT IT JUST GOES AWAY.
NOBODY BETTER THAN TONY TO BE ABLE TO DO IT BECAUSE WE'VE DONE IT MULTIPLE TIMES.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO TWEAK.
IT STARTS WITH THE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE BOND.
IT'S FROM THE VERY BEGINNING TO THE END, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO INCORPORATE IN OUR PROCUREMENT POLICY.
>> LET ME MENTION TO COUNCIL, WE'RE ON THE CHARTER DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT.
WE WILL HAVE THIS SUBJECT SPECIFICALLY ON OUR AGENDA COMING UP.
BUT GO AHEAD, COUNCILMAN RAWLINS.
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SHARE?
>> NO. I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE WERE WITH THAT, BEING THAT IT WAS PART OF THE CHARTER.
I THINK IT'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT JUST OPENS EVERYONE'S EYES AS TO WHAT WE CAN DO TO MAKE IT BETTER.
>> I'LL BE BRIEF. WILLY GONZALES, I'M VICE CHAIR OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.
GOOD POINTS ABOUT THE BIDDING PROCESS AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE CHARTER.
I KNOW WE HAVE A WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE ON THIS TABLE TO BE ABLE TO FIND A GOOD RESPONSIBLE WAY OF DOING THIS.
WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THE WORD "BEST VALUE" CAN MEAN A LOT OF THINGS.
[00:25:03]
YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE CHANGE ORDERS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE.LIKE YOU SAID, YOU CAN BID FOR TWO DOLLARS AND IS THAT THE BEST DEAL? BUT IF YOU HAVE THESE CHANGE ORDERS KEEP COMING UP, IS THERE A HISTORY OF THAT WITH THAT COMPANY, THEIR WORK BEING DONE? I HOPE ALL THAT IS ALSO DISCUSSED WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> VERY GOOD. WE HAVE COUNCILMAN FINKLEA, THEN BROWN.
WE HAVE MARIE ROBB, AND I THINK JEFF PATTERSON.
>> I'M GOING TO WITHHOLD MY COMMENTS FOR LATER UNTIL WE GET TO 3(F) SECTION 3.
>> THE WHARVES BOARD HAS TO CONFORM FOR THIS DISCUSSION TO STATE LAW.
STATE LAW IS NOT SPECIFIC IN THIS AREA OF BEST VALUE, BUT I DO RECALL WHEN LOOKING AT UTMB FACILITIES, WE DID HAVE A MATRIX EXACTLY LIKE MR. [INAUDIBLE] WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT ADDRESSED WHAT BEST VALUE MEANS.
A MATRIX OF A BUNCH OF QUALIFICATIONS OF THESE BIDDERS THAT WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT AND REQUIRED TO FILL OUT, AND THAT'S WHAT DEFINES BEST VALUE.
I THINK BEAU IS ONTO SOMETHING THERE.
ONE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT THE PROCUREMENT PRACTICE.
IS IT PART OF ANY AUDIT THAT THE BOARD CONDUCTS OR ANYBODY CONDUCTS?
>> THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. THAT'S ANOTHER LITTLE SAFEGUARD.
THAT'S ALL I HAD ON THIS TOPIC.
I HAD ANOTHER QUESTION ON ANOTHER PART OF THE CHARTER WHEN WE GET DONE WITH THIS ONE.
>> LET'S GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY ON CHARTER DISCUSSIONS OF THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC.
>> MY QUESTION WILL BE ON RECORDS OR OPEN MEETINGS.
MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME OPEN MEETINGS THAT WE DO.
WHEN WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, WE HAVE TO COME OUT AND SUMMARIZE.
I DON'T ALWAYS FIND THAT THAT HAPPENS [INAUDIBLE]
>> YOU ALL HAVE HAD SOME RECORD BREAKING EXECUTIVE SESSIONS.
WE ALWAYS HAVE TO GIVE SOME OUTCOME.
>> I THINK THAT'S OPTIONAL, AND THE WAY WE WANT TO CONDUCT OUR MEETINGS, AND THE WAY THE CITY WANTS TO CONDUCT THEIR MEETINGS.
WE CERTAINLY COMPLY WITH THE LAW.
BUT WE'LL TAKE A LOOK. INTERNALLY, WE WILL PROBABLY NEED TO DISCUSS IT.
>> IF WE'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO COME OUT AND GO THROUGH EVERYTHING [INAUDIBLE]
>> I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH, BUT I THINK IT IS MAYBE NOT A GOOD ANSWER [INAUDIBLE] THINK YOU HAVE TO GIVE SOME STATEMENT.
>> I DON'T THINK SO BUT TONY'S GOT HIS HAND UP.
TONY, COME FORWARD, SPEAK UP, AND IF YOU'LL IDENTIFY YOURSELF, IF YOU WANT.
>> TONY BROWN, ATTORNEY FOR THE WHARVES BOARD.
UNDER STATE LAW, YOU HAVE TO POST AND GIVE NOTICE OF THE ITEMS YOU'RE GOING TO DISCUSS, AND THE TOPICS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
THERE'S NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO COME OUT AND SUMMARIZE WHAT'S DISCUSSED.
ALTHOUGH THAT CAN BE A POLICY DECISION, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES THAT AS WELL.
BUT IT'S THE PREROGATIVE OF WHICHEVER GOVERNING BODY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> I JUST THINK IT MAKES FOR GOOD TRANSPARENCY.
>> JEFF, YOU WANTED TO SAY [INAUDIBLE]
>> I DON'T MEAN TO BEAT THE BEST VALUE, LOWEST, TO DEATH THERE.
BUT THERE IS BEST VALUE, THAT IMPLIES THAT THERE IS AS BEAU SAID, AND BOB, THERE IS A DEFINED CRITERIA.
THE PORT CERTAINLY DOES THINGS LIKE PASSENGER BOARDING BRIDGE.
I MENTIONED, THERE'S CERTAINLY A CRITERIA THAT'S GIVEN OUT IN THE BID, SO THE BIDDERS KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER IS JUST BASICALLY ANY BIDDER THAT'S FINANCIALLY INCAPABLE.
WHOEVER GETS THE LOWEST COST, BASICALLY THAT GETS THE WIN.
I THINK THE THING WITH THE LOCAL PREFERENCE WE DIDN'T SPECIFY ANYTHING IN THAT PARTICULAR CONTRACT.
THAT WAS WHY I VOTED AGAINST GIVING IT TO THE NEXT HIGHEST BIDDER BECAUSE WE DIDN'T SPECIFY, AND THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS.
I BROUGHT UP THE POINT ABOUT HAVING TO WORK FOR DOW IN FREEPORT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A BIG OPERATION.
WE WANTED TO TAKE CARE OF AND HAVE GOOD, WITH THE LOCAL BIDDERS, AND GOOD PARTICIPATION, BUT WE ALSO STRUGGLED TO GET OUTSIDE CONTRACTORS TO COME PARTICIPATE.
WE'RE OBLIGATED TO MAINTAIN A GOOD COMPETITIVE SITUATION, AS WELL AS HELP THE LOCAL ECONOMY.
BUT WE WILL CERTAINLY DISCUSS THAT.
IF WE QUANTIFIED A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE, THEN IT'S OKAY TO AWARD IT TO THE LOCAL CONTRACTOR TO WIN THAT PERCENTAGE,
[00:30:01]
BUT IN THIS CASE, WE DIDN'T DO THAT.IT WAS BASICALLY WHOEVER HAD THE BEST PRICE WAS THE ONE THAT SHOULD HAVE GOT THE BID AND EVENTUALLY DID.
>> ARE WE GOING TO BE LEAVING THE CHARTER?
>> [LAUGHTER] I WAS THINKING WE WOULD BE LEAVING THIS [OVERLAPPING]
>> I HAD ONE MORE. I WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING.
>> YES. BOB DID TOO BUT GO RIGHT AHEAD.
>> FIRST OF ALL, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT DOING AT ALL.
I THINK THE PORT PROVIDING SOME FINANCES TO THE CITY IS A GOOD THING IN THE LONG RUN FOR THE COMMUNITY.
I DO THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO DO UNDER THE CHARTER THE WAY I READ IT.
THE WAY I READ IT IS IT WAS THE LAST CLAUSE THAT MR. PORRETTO MENTIONED THAT IF THE PORT ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED SOME SERVICES FROM THE CITY THAT MOST PEOPLE PAY FOR, THEN THE PORT CAN PAY FOR THAT.
THAT'S ALL THAT I THINK THAT SAYS.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WOULD SUPPORT PAYING FOR SOMETHING AFTER THE FACT.
>> BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN AN AGREEMENT.
WHERE YOU DO THIS FOR US AND WE'LL PAY YOU FOR IT.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD SUPPORT PAYMENT RETROSPECTIVELY AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF OTHER PROBLEMS I THINK THERE MIGHT BE WITH IT.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST IS THE CITY SIMPLY, AND IT MAY TAKE A LITTLE WHILE, BUT SIMPLY REQUEST AN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION ON UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MAY THE WHARVES BOARD PAY THE CITY.
NOW, THEY DON'T POP THOSE OUT INSTANTANEOUSLY BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD SAFE BET FOR ALL OF US UNLESS ALL OF US ARE SURE THAT IT SAYS WE CAN DO THAT.
>> OKAY. I'VE MADE A NOTE OF THAT.
>> THANK YOU. BOB, YOU WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD IN ANOTHER CHARTER ISSUE.
>> THIS IS SECTION 9 AS THE CITY.
THAT'S SPECIFIED $150,000 AND IT WAS A FITNESS COMPARED TO WHAT THE CITY IS TAKING IN NOW JUST BASED ON CONTRACT.
BUT A PART OF THAT IS 25.39% SHALL GO TO GISD.
I ASSUME WHEN THIS WAS WRITTEN A LONG TIME AGO THAT THAT $160,000 IS PROBABLY A LOT MORE MONEY [INAUDIBLE].
THAT'S WHY IT APPEARS TO BE A FITNESS COMPARED TO WHAT WE'RE OPERATION WE'RE DOING NOW.
BUT IF THE IDEA WAS BACK THEN TO HAVE THE CITY AND THE GISD PARTICIPATE SOMEHOW IN THE PROSPERITY OF THE PORT.
THAT AMOUNT THAT THE GISD IS GETTING RIGHT NOW HAS NOT CHANGED FROM THAT FITNESS $160,000.
THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN SUCCESS OF THE COURT IN ANY WAY LIKE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT APPEARS THE WAY I READ IT THAT THAT WAS THE INTENT.
SINCE THE CITY IS NOT GETTING TAXES FROM THE PORT, NEITHER IS GISD GETTING TAXES FROM THE PORT.
I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAYBE HAVE TONY COME UP AGAIN BECAUSE THIS NUMBER HAS INCREASED.
SO THAT THE CITY IS NOW RECEIVING ABOUT 160 AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UNFORTUNATELY, IS GETTING ABOUT THE SAME AS THEY HAD ORIGINALLY.
BECAUSE WE'RE PAYING ABOUT 198,000 TO THE CITY IN THE PILOT.
>> AFTER THE NUMBERS WAS FIXED IN THE CHARTER.
THERE WAS THE OLD TODD SHIPYARD PROPERTY, WHICH IS NOW LEASED TO GULF COPPER AND SOME OTHERS THAT THE CITY ACQUIRED ON PELICAN ISLAND.
BY ORDINANCE, THOSE WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF THE WHARVES.
PART OF THAT ORDINANCE PROVIDED THAT THE PILOT AMOUNT INCREASED FROM 160 AND IT'S ACTUALLY FLUCTUATES A LITTLE BIT, I THINK FROM HERE BUT IT'S 195,000 AND 200,000.
>> IT'S ABOUT 198 THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
>> WE'LL BE GETTING INTO THIS A LITTLE FURTHER BUT CURRENTLY THIS PORT SENDING OVER AT
[00:35:01]
THE END OF THEIR FISCAL YEAR PROBABLY $3,000,000 TO THE CITY.>> OF THAT 195 TO 200 STILL 25.39% [INAUDIBLE]
>> AS THE CHAIRMAN OR PRESIDENT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD, YES.
>> WELL, MY POINT STILL REMAINS THAT'S NOT QUITE RIGHT THERE.
>> BASED ON THE HISTORY I'VE LOOKED AT AND READ IN THE PAST, THE ONE THE 200,000, THE 160 AND THE 40.
THAT AT THE TIME BACK IN 1940 WAS THE PAYMENT OF TAXES AT THAT TAX RATE AT THAT VALUE, THAT'S HOW IT WAS ORIGINALLY SET UP.
TO ANSWER RICHARD'S QUESTION AND THESE QUESTIONS.
WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO IT BY CONTRACT, WHICH IS HOW YOU'RE GETTING A DOLLAR ON THE PARK AND THE $0.25 A TURN.
YOU CAN CHANGE A CHART AND PUT IT IN THERE.
NO, THAT'S ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE.
>> WELL, IT MAKES A CITIZEN VOTE.
>> YOU CAN JUST CHANGE IT. I'M NOT SURE YOU CHANGE IT WITH AN ORDINANCE.
>> THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THIS OPINION HAS 10 LAWYERS IN A ROOM AND YOU'LL HAVE 10 DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
>> I'M OF THE OPINION IF WE GET AN AG IF THE PORT GOES AND GETS AN AG OPINION.
IT SHOULD JUST BE BASIC COMPLIANCE WITH CODES AND ORDINANCES THAT BENEFIT BOTH.
A COMPETITIVE NATURE OF THE PORT MAKING YOU NOT AS COMPETITIVE.
NOT AS NOT AS COMPETITIVE BUT ON PAR WITH THE COMPETITION OF THE PRIVATE LOTS.
ALSO BENEFITING THE CITY FOR A USER FEE THAT'S PAID FOR BY THE END USER, WHICH GOES TOWARDS OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN USE.
HEY, LET'S SAY IT COMES BACK NEGATIVE IN THE CITY'S FAVOR.
I THINK THE TAXPAYERS WOULD JUMP AT AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING AND I'D RATHER NOT GO DOWN THAT ROUTE.
>> I THINK THAT IMPLIES THAT WE'RE NOT WORKING TOGETHER AS WE ALL JUST AGREED AT THE BEGINNING.
WE ARE WORKING TOGETHER BETTER THAN WE HAVE EVER, IN MY OPINION.
>> LET ME JUST EMPHASIZE THAT I DIDN'T SUGGEST THAT IN AN OPPOSITIONAL FRAME.
I JUST THINK WE ALL HAVE LEGAL AND FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES AND IF WE DON'T FEEL OR I DON'T FEEL, FOR INSTANCE, THAT EVEN NO MATTER WHAT OUR LAWYERS TELL US.
IF THE CHARTER SAYS WE CAN DO THIS OR WE CAN'T DO THAT, I WON'T SUPPORT IT.
BUT THAT'S NOT TO BE OPPOSITIONAL BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD WORK OUT.
WE SHOULD FIND A WAY TO HELP GET SOME FUNDS OVER TO THE CITY BUT I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE LEGALLY.
>> YES, 1.5 JUST TO CLARIFY WHERE I WOULD BE ON IT. I'M OF.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE CHARTER CHANGES AND THERE'S SOME OTHER LITTLE [INAUDIBLE] THINGS THAT I WOULD SUGGEST, BUT CLARIFICATION WAS GOOD.
I WOULD STRAY AWAY FROM PUTTING A DOLLAR AMOUNT OR A PROCESS IN THE CHARTER BECAUSE IT'S BE FLEXIBLE.
>> WE'LL BE IN THE SAME SITUATION.
>> YEAH, WE MAY DO $3,000,000 IN THE CHARTER AND 10 YEARS FROM NOW WE'RE BANKRUPT.
SO I LIKE THE AGREEMENT, I THINK IT FORCES US TO DISCUSS IT AND NEGOTIATE IT.
I THINK THAT'S A MORE FLEXIBLE AND BETTER WAY TO COVER IT.
>> THE WAY THAT THE CITY HAS HANDLED THE ISSUE WITH ROSENBERG LIBRARY.
I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED IT AND WE PROBABLY HAVE A LOT LONGER TO DISCUSS OTHER CHARTER AMENDMENTS TOO BECAUSE THE VOTERS DESERVE A STAKE AT IT.
WE SHOULD HEAR THEIR SAY AND GET AS MUCH TIME AS POSSIBLE TO GET THAT DONE.
AGAIN, THIS MIGHT BE IN THE FUTURE CURRENTLY, IT IS RELATED TO THE CHARTER.
INSTEAD OF DOING A CHARTER CHANGE FOR THAT, I THINK COUNSELS HAD EXPRESSED THE WANTING TO WORK TOWARDS AN AGREEMENT BEFORE JUMPING AHEAD AND DOING ANY CHARTER CHANGES.
>> ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THE CHARTER JUST RELATION TO IT.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3B, PLEASE.
>> ITEM 3B. DISCUSSION OF A ONE TIME AND
[3.B. Discussion Of A One Time And Annual, Long Term, Recurring Funding Stream From The Port To The City (C Brown/Pierson)]
ANNUAL LONG TERM RECURRING FUNDING STREAM FROM THE PORT TO THE CITY.THREE, FUNDING FROM THE CITY TO THE PORT OF GALVESTON.
FIVE, PAYMENT REQUEST OF A ONE TIME SPECIAL DIVIDEND TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON IN THE CITY'S 2024-2025 FISCAL YEAR.
SIX, FUTURE FUNDING MECHANISM AND SEVEN, CREATION OF AN AD HOC COMMITTEE TO DETERMINE A DIVIDEND PAYMENT STRUCTURE.
>> WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY MIX THESE SUBJECTS THROUGH [INAUDIBLE].
[00:40:05]
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE FUNDING TO THE CITY AND WE PASSED OUT THAT INFORMATION TO YOU.AS I MENTIONED, IT'S AROUND THREE MILLION, I THINK, DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT'LL BE?
>> THREE MILLION THAT THE PORT WILL BE SENDING OVER.
BY THE WAY THAT'S AS OF NOVEMBER 25, THAT'S GOING TO GO UP QUITE A BIT.
>> YES, SIR. AND VICK, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT?
>> NO. TO SEE THE DRAMATIC INCREASES FROM THE PORT TO THE CITY FROM 2020, I THINK WE'RE ENCOURAGED BY THAT, AND WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT, AS YOU JUST MENTIONED WHEN CRUISE TERMINAL 16 COMES ONLINE, THAT NUMBER IS GOING TO JUMP DRAMATICALLY AGAIN.
>> IT SHOULD ALSO BE MENTIONED, YOU GAVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTNER IN THE GARAGE AND MANAGEMENT DECIDED AGAINST IT WHICH WAS A MISS THERE OPPORTUNITY.
>> THERE COULD BE FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES OF THAT AND THAT WAS THE 20% OF THE PARKING GARAGE OR OUR CRUISE TERMINAL 16 AND THE RETURN ON THAT IS A ROUND OF 10 OR 11%, PROBABLY BETTER THAN 10 STAR OR WHATEVER FROST BANK WAS PAYING US.
WELL, WE'RE NOT THE DEPOSITORY OF THE CITY.
>> I WANT TO EMPHASIZE ALSO ON THE PAYMENT, I SHOULDN'T SAY PAYMENT.
BUT MONIES THAT COME TO THE CITY THAT ARE ORIGINATING AT THE PORT IS THE SALES TAX ON ALL THE PARKING HERE.
NOT ONLY DO WE GET THE ONE DOLLAR PER DAY PER CAR, BUT WE GET THE SALES TAX ON ALL OF THAT REVENUE THAT'S PRODUCED OVER THERE.
THAT IS THE CITY'S PORTION OF THAT THAT'S COMING TO THE CITY.
>> AS THAT, IT SHOULD BE MENTIONED SINCE SALES TAX WAS DOWN.
IT WAS NOT DOWN ON THE PARKING.
>> IT'S A MUCH MORE CONSISTENT, RELIABLE EVEN THOUGH I THINK YOU GET SOME HOT TAX.
NOW YOU HAVEN'T EVER GOTTEN HOT TAX, EVEN THOUGH YOU WERE PUTTING 30 TO 40% OF PEOPLE INTO HOTELS.
>> I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT THAT REPORT FROM EITHER THE PORT BOARD OR THE WHARVES BOARD THAT WAS IN THE PAPER RECENTLY THAT SURPRISED ME.
THAT THE NUMBER OF GUESTS STAYING EITHER PRE OR POST CRUISE IS IN THE 30 TO 40%.
THAT WAS A MUCH HIGHER NUMBER AND I WAS VERY PLEASED WITH THAT.
>> IT ALWAYS AMAZES ME A FEW TIMES WHEN WE'VE BEEN TRAVELING WE'LL RUN INTO PEOPLE AND THEY'LL SAY, "GOD, THEY DIDN'T TELL US GALVESTON WAS SO GREAT, WE WOULD HAVE STAYED MORE DAYS," AND I'M GLAD THAT'S FINALLY HAPPENING.
>> SPEAKING TO THE HOTEL LODGING ASSOCIATION, THEY THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE AS WE GO ALONG.
I WOULD SAY FROM THAT STANDPOINT THAT MSC AND ROYAL CARIBBEAN, ESPECIALLY MSC HAS BEEN OVER BACKWARDS TO WORK WITH THE PORT BOARD.
TO TRY TO DEVELOP MORE INDIVIDUALS AWARENESS OF WHAT GALVESTON HAS TO OFFER AND INCREASE THIS OVER DOWN TO STATE.
>> YEAH. AND THEY'VE JUST STARTED THEIR NATIONAL TV BROADCAST OF THE MSC SHIP SAILING FROM GALVESTON.
I'VE SEEN IT NUMEROUS TIMES AND HAVE HAD EMAILS FROM PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE OF GALVESTON, OUTSIDE OF TEXAS THAT HAVE VIEWED THE NEW SHIP.
THAT'S FANTASTIC. THIS FUNDING AS I MENTIONED RIGHT NOW, IT'S $0.25 THAT IS MENTIONED PER TURN PER PASSENGER COMES TO THE CITY.
BY THE WAY, THAT'S UNRESTRICTED MONEY.
IT'S NOT LIKE HOT THAT COMES OVER AND WE CAN USE IT TO PAVE STREETS AND PAY POLICE AND WHATEVER ON THAT.
WE GOT THE $1 PER DAY PER CAR THAT COMES OVER TO THE CITY ON THAT.
THAT'S WHERE WE STAND AND THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER BY COUNSEL IN THAT MANNER A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.
WE FELT THAT THE PORT NOW IS COMING INTO THEIR OWN.
THEY ARE DEVELOPING A POSITIVE CASH FLOW THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT CONCENTRATING THAT NOW ON CARGO AND IMPROVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT AND THAT HAS HAPPENED TAKING THAT REVENUE, THE EXCESS REVENUE FROM PORT AND CRUISE AND PUTTING IT TOWARDS THE CARGO INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.
>> BUT THIS ISN'T COMING OUT OF THEIR POCKET SO TO SPEAK.
THESE ARE USER FEES THAT ARE PAID FOR BY THE USER IN RESPECT.
>> WE PURPOSELY AS COUNCILMAN PRETA MENTIONED,
[00:45:01]
WE PURPOSELY AT COUNCIL DID NOT WANT TO HAMSTRING THE PORT AND PUT MONEY INTO THE PORT.HAVE THE PORT SEND US MONEY WHEN THEY WERE REALLY STARTING TO GET THEIR FEET ON THE GROUND AND MOVING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION.
SO WE WANTED THESE FUNDS TO NOT COME FROM THE DIRECT REVENUE OF THE PORT.
>> JUST A CLARIFICATION ON COUNCILMAN PRETA.
MOST OF WHAT WE DO ARE USER FEES THAT ARE PASSED ON, I MAY BE MISTAKEN, BUT I THINK THE CARGO $0.25 A TURN.
THAT COMES OUT OF THE PORTS PORTION THAT WE GET FROM CARGO.
IT'S NOT CARGO ADDING THAT TO THE PASSENGER BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A CONTRACTUAL OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT.
>> IT BEEN HERE SINCE WHAT 2006 OR PRIOR TO?
>> YEAH. BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT FUTURE NEGOTIATIONS WITH OTHER CRUISE TERMINALS.
WITHOUT CRUISE LINES ABSOLUTELY THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN OUR CONTRACT.
>> FIRST OPPORTUNITY I'M SURE WHEN WE GET AT CARGO WE WILL GET THAT AS AN ADD ON NOT COMING THROUGH THE PORT.
>> SO YOU'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THAT ONE IS CARGO AND THEN PROBABLY ONE [INAUDIBLE] CARGO AS WELL?
>> I THINK IT'S JUST CARGO, AINT IT?
>> IT'S JUST CARGO. THE $0.25 TURN.
>> IT'S IN EVERY ONE OF THE CONTRACTS. OKAY.
>> IT'S IN EVERY ONE BUT THE CARGO COMES OUT OF THE PORTS PORTION IT'S NOT ADDED ON.
>> ALL OF OUR FEES TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. IT IS CONTRACTUAL.
>> IT'S CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATED.
>> BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S ON THE RADAR SCREEN AND EVERY OPPORTUNITY IT WILL BE.
>> BY THE WAY, THAT FEE ESCALATES AS THE WHARFAGE FEES AND ALL THAT IN THE CONTRACTS WITH THE CRUISE LINES, AT 25 CENTS, ESCALATES, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, THE SAME PERCENTAGE, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S GOOD. SPEAKING OF THE REPORT WITH THE PORT WHARVES BOARD, THIS WAS A REQUEST FROM THE COUNCIL.
IT WAS NOT ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
COUNCIL, THREE YEARS BACK, ASKED THE WHARVES BOARD, IN ANY FUTURE CONTRACTS WITH THOSE CRUISE LINES, WE PUT THIS PASSENGER FEE IN THERE, AND THEY HAVE DONE THAT ON ALL THEIR CONTRACTS THERE, SO MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> I THINK WE'D BE REMISS AT THIS POINT TO NOT SAY BRAVO TO ROGER REES FOR DOING SUCH A PHENOMENAL JOB AND GROWING OUR PORT WITH ITS CRUISE BUSINESS, AND I HOPE WE ALL COME TO THE SMART DECISION NOT TO HAMSTRING IT.
>> I KNOW THAT TRUSTEES ARE FIDUCIARIES OF THE PORT, AND THE WAY I SEE AT LEAST THE CITY COUNCIL'S POSITION, WE ARE FIDUCIARIES OF EVERY ARM OR UTILITY OF THE CITY AS WELL.
WE ARE ALSO FIDUCIARIES OF THE PORT OF THE CITY, AND I THINK ANYTHING UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF THE CITY, ANYBODY ON CITY PROPERTY, I BELIEVE, THAT WE ARE FIDUCIARIES OF AS WELL.
I WOULDN'T WANT TO HAMSTRING, OR HURT, OR PILLAGE, OR PULL THE RUG OUT FROM UNDERNEATH ANYBODY.
>> VERY GOOD. ALSO, ALONG WITH THIS, THERE WAS ON OUR AGENDA ABOUT PAYMENTS FROM THE CITY TO THE PORT.
THIS WAS SENT OUT TO THE COUNCIL, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY HAS THIS.
I WANT TO GO OVER THIS SO THAT WE'RE VERY CLEAR ON WHERE WE ARE WITH ALL THIS.
>> I MADE THE REQUEST [OVERLAPPING] WHEN WE ORIGINALLY DISCUSSED, THIS IT WAS BUDGET, TIME AND IT WAS SAID THAT [INAUDIBLE] AND I WANTED TO TAKE MONEY FROM THE PORT, AND THAT WAS OUR ONLY INTENTION.
I THOUGHT IT PRUDENT TO GO AND CLEAR UP THAT RUMOR BECAUSE THAT'S NOT MY INTENTION.
MY INTENTION IS TO BE GOOD MUNICIPAL PARTNERS WITH EACH OTHER.
WE CAME UP TO THE WHARVES BOARD FOR THEIR DISCUSSION, SHULA LISTONE AND VIC PEARSON WERE INTERVIEWING, I BELIEVE AROUND THAT SAME TIME, AND A DIVIDEND PAYMENT STRUCTURE WORKING OUT WITH THE WHARVES BOARD WAS DISCUSSED AS WELL.
THERE WAS A GOOD HEARTY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
BUT WHEN THE FIRST REQUEST CAME UP, IT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND THE WHARVES BOARD WAS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A FORMAL REQUEST FROM THE COUNCIL.
WE SPENT THE ARDUOUS THREE MONTHS MAKING A FORMAL REQUEST FROM THE COUNCIL, WHICH PASSED WITH THE SUPER-MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL TO GO OVER THERE AND REQUEST A MILLION DOLLARS OR AS THE MOTION WAS MADE IN THE CITY'S FISCAL YEAR,
[00:50:03]
THE AMOUNT THAT WOULD BE DECIDED UPON BY THE WHARVES BOARD FOR A PUMP STATION ON 14TH STREET, WHICH BENEFITS THE PORT AS WELL OR FIRE APPARATUS, SO CITY INFRASTRUCTURE.IT WAS VAGUE, BUT WE HAD DISCUSSED THOSE TWO ITEMS THAT WE NEEDED.
IN THE MEETING ON THE 27TH OR 17TH, TRUSTEE YARBROUGH MENTIONED A FEW THINGS, AND I JUST MADE SOME NOTES BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE PAYMENTS AND THINGS CAME FROM SOME UNTRUE STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE.
YARBROUGH SAID THE LAST CITY HASN'T INVESTED $0.05 IN THE PORT IN THE LAST 30 YEARS OR $0.10 IN THE LAST 50 TO 60 YEARS, WITH NO IDC, AND NO HOT.
I AGREE WITH THE NO HOT FUNDING BECAUSE WE DIDN'T PASS UP THE LAST COUNCIL.
NOT ME, BUT THE LAST COUNCIL PASSED UP ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PARKING GARAGE, AND I THINK IT WAS A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE IT WOULD LEAD TO THE INVESTMENT OF HOT FUNDS, RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT POTENTIALLY YIELD BACK SOME UNRESTRICTED FUNDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY.
NO IDC FUNDS, AND IT SHOWED THAT THE PORT WAS A LOW PRIORITY.
THIS IS WHY I GENERATED THIS REQUEST BY CITY STAFF, WAS TO SEE EXACTLY HOW MUCH MONEY, AT LEAST IN THE LAST 20 YEARS, CAME FROM THE CITY'S PORTION OR POCKET THAT WENT TO THE PORT.
YOU GET THIS REPORT BACK AND THEY HAD TO PULL DOCUMENTS, AND SO TO SPEAK, FROM COLD STORAGE AND CAME OUT TO ABOUT 10.8 MILLION.
$2.3 MILLION CAME FROM THE IDC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND.
1.6 MILLION ABOUT 1.7 CAME FROM THE INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.
SOME OF IT MEANS $2,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
OKAY, SOME CAPITAL PROJECTS, AND GRANT MONEY, WATER FUNDS AS WELL.
THINGS THAT WERE DONE ON THE PORT FOR BMW OR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REASONS, AND [OVERLAPPING].
>> PRIMARY JOB, SO TO SPEAK, SO SAY THAT WE HAVEN'T INVESTED IN THE PORT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT TO MAKE.
[NOISE] GOING ON, TRUSTEE YARBROUGH TALKED ABOUT THE 90S.
I LIKE TO DO RESEARCH, AND I LIKE THE HISTORY OF GALVESTON, WE ALWAYS CAN FIND SOMETHING TO LEARN FROM GENTLEMEN IN THE PAST, AND I GOT TO THIS ARTICLE IN THE '90S WHEN THE PORT WAS ASKING FOR ABOUT 2.6 MILLION DOLLARS FOR RESIDENTS TO ESSENTIALLY SUBSIDIZE THE PORT'S OPERATIONS.
LOUIS CHICK PAULS, MAYBE PEOPLE HERE MIGHT HAVE KNOWN HIM.
HE WROTE IN THE PAPER, THE WHARVES PLAN QUESTION BY PAULS, SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ FROM IT TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE LAST 60 YEARS.
AS TO THE MATTER OF FUNDING AND FINANCING, THE WHARVES' IMPROVEMENT IN REPAIRS, RESIDENTS SHOULD BE AWARE THAT THERE ARE ALREADY PAYING TAX BONDS ISSUED IN 1970 AND AGAIN IN 1982.
THAT WAS PASSED BY THE VOTERS IN 1970, ABOUT 7.7 MILLION DOLLARS IN OBLIGATIONS.
5.7 WERE SOLD IN 1970, AND 2 MILLION WERE IN 1982.
THEY WERE DUE IN 1981, WHICH AT THE TIME WAS 814,000 CONTINUED UNTIL 95, AND THEN IT REDUCED TO 300,000 UNTIL 1999.
IT WAS ABOUT 5.5 CENTS, AND THEN BEYOND THAT, THE COUNCIL FURTHER PROMISED THE WHARVES BOARD 1.5 MILLION DOLLARS FOR PEER 21 IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT WAS ANOTHER TAX MONEY THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR OTHER THINGS IN THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE ZONE.
TOTALLY, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE 160,000 ANNUAL PAYMENT, IT WAS ABOUT 8.5 CENTS OF THE CITY TAX RATE AT THE TIME OR LIKE 1.2 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
THAT WAS THE TAXPAYERS DIRECTLY CONTRIBUTING TO THE PORT, AND THEN THE WHARVES BOARD, THIS WAS DOLPH TILLOTSON.
YOU READ AN ARTICLE TODAY, WHICH I DISAGREE WITH, BUT WE HAVE PORT SHOULD PRIVATIZE AND LOOK AT OTHER WAYS TO RAISE MONEY AND THAT THE 2.6 MILLION DOLLAR WISH LIST SHOULD BE REJECTED.
EVEN IN THIS ARTICLE, WE TALKED ABOUT, OR CHICKY PAUL TALKED ABOUT THIS PAYMENT BEING DEBATED FOR 25 YEARS PRIOR TO IT, WHICH I PERSONALLY THINK MIGHT HAVE BEEN A SHORT-SIDED DEAL WITH THE COUNCIL, NOT ESCALATING THAT AT SOME POINT FROM THE PAST.
BUT AGAIN, I TAKE ISSUE WHEN YARBROUGH SAYS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PULL OUT THE RUG FROM THE PORT AND VILLAGE IN THE PORT.
THE MAYOR, THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED,
[00:55:02]
AND WE DISCUSSED THIS THOROUGHLY WITH THE COUNCIL, WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL, AND THAT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION.I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS CLEARED UP WITH THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE WHAT YOU SAY.
I MEAN, WE'RE COUNTY JUDGE AND MAYOR, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS NO QUESTION THAT WE WERE TRYING TO PILLAGE THE PORT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO BE GOOD MUNICIPAL PARTNERS WITH EACH OTHER.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE SO FAR, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO WORK TOGETHER TO PAY THIS MILLION DOLLARS OR WHATEVER THE AMOUNT WOULD BE, AND I DON'T MEAN IT AS A CUT-THE-CHECK.
HEY, GIVE US THE MONEY, WE'LL PUT IT IN OUR POCKET.
LET'S FIND OUT SOMETHING THAT BENEFITS NOT ONLY THE UTILITY, AND THE PORT OF THE CITY, BUT HELPS US OUT TOO.
I'M SURE WE WERE ALL GOING TO EXPERIENCE IT, INFLATIONARY COSTS WITH THIS PUMP STATION ON SOUTH SHORE, INFLATIONARY COST OF THE PUMP STATION ON 14TH STREET, AND THIS ISN'T A KNEE-JERK REACTION.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M THINKING ABOUT SINCE WHEN WE WASTE MY OPINION, WASTE THREE MONTHS OF DISCUSSING AND DISCUSSING, IT'S COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MORE MONEY.
THAT'S MY GOAL AND ALL OF THIS IS TO GET THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT MOVING FASTER.
NOT NECESSARILY FLYING OFF THE RAILS, BUT LET'S MOVE IT FASTER SO WE CAN BE MORE EFFICIENT WORK.
>> OKAY. WE HAD SOME POINTS BROUGHT UP BY COUNCIL MEMBER PIERETTE.
I WANT TO SEPARATE THIS OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT.
TRUSTEE YARBROUGH WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT.
FIRST OF ALL, ONCE THOSE COMMENTS ARE FINISHED, I WANT TO GO THROUGH THIS LIST BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT IN MY MIND, WHAT WE THINK IT IS.
I WANT TO GET THAT CLARIFIED IF IT WAS TRUE.
THE CONCEPT OF A ONE-TERM PAYMENT WAS BROUGHT TO THE WHARVES BOARD ON DECEMBER 17TH, WHERE THEY DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF A MILLION-DOLLAR PAYMENT TO THE CITY AND SO FORTH, SO I'LL LET THE CHAIRMAN RESPOND TO THAT.
>> WE DISCUSSED THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN DECEMBER, OR I KNOW WE HAD THE INITIAL DISCUSSION, AND I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS TAKE A LOOK AT OUR OVERALL CAPITAL PLAN AND BRING IT BACK TO THE WHARVES BOARD AT A MEETING IN THE FIRST QUARTER.
>> YES. THAT'S THE RESPONSE, BUT WE'LL GET INTO THAT IN A SECOND.
>> TWO THINGS. I'LL STAND CORRECTED AFTER I DIGEST THIS AND UNDERSTAND WHAT PROJECTS ETC, SO I STAND CORRECTED IF THAT'S THE CASE.
>> MY VOICE IS LEAVING ME, TOO MANY CIGARS.
[LAUGHTER] BUT I WANT TO CLEAR UP.
I HAVE NEVER FELT THAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO PILLAGE MONEY FROM THE PORT.
IF I'VE SAID ANYTHING TO THAT EFFECT, THAT IS NOT MY FEELING.
I HAVE CONTENDED FROM THE BEGINNING IS THERE IS A PROCESS THAT WE'RE DOING TODAY.
I FIND THAT IF WE DO, I USE THE WORD KNEE JERK, BUT WE DO QUICK ACTION, NOT A LOT OF THOUGHT, NOT A LOT OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES INVOLVED, THAT USUALLY DOESN'T END UP WELL.
A LONGER TERM, SYSTEMATIC, FAIR, NEGOTIATED.
I'M IN RICHARD'S CATEGORY, AND I'VE SAID THIS WITH A D WARFORT.
I AM ALL FOR TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO STREAM MONEY OVER HERE.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE CITY AND ALL OF YOUR ENTITIES THE CITY, OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE PORT GALVESTONE.
WE HAVE FOR A MYRIAD OF LEGITIMATE REASONS, A TON, MORE THAN THE CITY, PROBABLY, PROPORTIONATELY, BACKLOG OF CAPITAL PROJECTS AND THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE.
WE WERE FINALLY GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE ROGER REES SAID WHEN HE WAS INTERVIEWED BACK IN 2015 OR WHENEVER IT WAS, AND WE'RE GOING TO USE THE REVENUES FROM THE CRUISE SHIP OPERATIONS TO PROVIDE THE CAPITAL TO DO IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CARGO OPERATION.
WE'LL GET INTO THE DISCUSSION, BUT WE HAVE ISSUED MORE CONTRACTS AND WE HAVE CASH TO PAY.
IF YOU WANT TO PAY 39TH STREET FOR TWO MILLION, YOU HAVE TO PUT TWO MILLION ASIDE TO DO IT.
WE DON'T, SO WE'RE BOOKING ON FUTURE CASH FLOW TO PAY THAT TWO-MILLION-DOLLAR CONTRACT FOR PEER 21 OR WHATEVER.
PLEASE DON'T THINK I'VE EVER THOUGHT THAT CITY WAS TRYING TO PILLAGE THE PORT.
I AM IN FAVOR OF A GOOD, SOLID, REASONABLE, LONG-TERM COMMITMENT TO THE CITY TO GET AS MUCH MONEY AS WE CAN OVER TO YOUR SIDE AND STILL ALLOW US TO DO THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO ON OUR SIDE.
[01:00:03]
I STAND CORRECT TO DIGEST ALL THIS PROBLEM. THANK YOU.>> LET'S GO THROUGH THIS BEFORE, I KNOW BOB HAS A QUESTION.
I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THIS HERE.
IS 10 MILLION SO THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE IN THIS.
THE 6.4 CAPITAL PROJECTS IN MY ESTIMATION, AND BRIAN, IF YOU COULD COME FORWARD YOU WOULD, PLEASE? THE 6.4 CAPITAL PROJECTS, FTA.
IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S FOR THE TRANSIT CENTER, THE MAJORITY OF THAT.
THAT'S CORRECT. CLOSE TO THAT WAS [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT WAS A GRANT, NOT FROM CITY MONEY.
THAT WAS A GRANT COMING FROM THE TRANSFER.
>> IT CAME THROUGH US. THERE WAS SOME LOCAL MATCH ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
>> YES. BUT IT WAS THE MAIN PORTION OF THIS IS FOR THE TRANSIT CENTER, AND IT WAS GRANT MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ON THAT.
>> THAT CERTAINLY WAS, YES SIR.
>> OKAY. I WANT TO GET THAT [OVERLAPPING].
>> IF WE CLOSE THOSE OPERATIONS, IS THERE ANY OBLIGATION FOR US TO PAY THAT BACK?
>> YES, SIR. YOU PAY THAT BACK?
>> MAYOR, TONY BROWN ON THAT. [OVERLAPPING].
>> JUST SPEAK TO THE CEILING [OVERLAPPING]
>> VERY BRIEFLY. THE HISTORY ON THAT WAS THAT THE CITY ORIGINALLY PARTNERED WITH THE MITCHELL GROUP ON THAT TRANSIT TERMINAL.
OF COURSE, SECURED THAT GRANT, AND THEN THE MITCHELL GROUP ELECTED TO CEASE PARTICIPATING.
THE CITY ASKED THE PORT TO TAKE THAT PROJECT OVER, AND THEY DID, AND SO THE CITY OR THE PORT PURCHASED MITCHELL'S INTEREST FOR SOME AMOUNT.
>> YES. [OVERLAPPING] THEN ALSO THIS WILL SHOCK YOU ON A GALVESTON PROJECT WITH THE CMAR, [LAUGHTER] BUT THERE WERE CHANGE ORDERS AND THE PORT OR ALL THOSE.
BUT ULTIMATELY, ALL THE CASH GETS ADDED UP, THE PORT GETS THE MONEY BACK THAT IT PUT IN AND THE CITY AND THE PORT SPLIT THE MONEY.
THE PORT AND THE CITY I THINK THERE'S A NOT VERY LARGE AMOUNT THAT'S COMING INTO THE CITY RIGHT NOW.
BUT ONCE THE REIMBURSEMENT OCCURS, THAT GETS SPLIT, SO THAT'S THE HISTORY OF IT.
>> I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE 6 MILLION, THE MAJORITY OF THIS IS NOT THE CITY FUNDS THAT WERE GIVEN TO, THIS WAS, [OVERLAPPING] [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT WAS GRANT FUNDING THAT WAS RECEIVED AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
IT WAS INITIATED BY GEORGE MITCHELL'S GROUP.
I WAS INVOLVED WITH THAT WHEN IT HAPPENED AND GEORGE MITCHELL WORKED WITH THE CITY ON THAT TO SET UP A RELATIONSHIP.
I WANT TO MOVE TO THE IDC FUNDING THAT'S ABOUT 3.8 MILLION.
THAT WAS BASICALLY FOR THE BMW PROJECT.
TONY, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? THAT WAS FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WAS GIVEN FOR THE MAKE READY AREA FOR THE BMW FACILITY. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. THERE WERE OTHER BENEFIT [LAUGHTER] PROJECT.
IT WAS A PACKAGE DEAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT JUST WHERE VEHICLES COME OUT AND THEN SIT UNTIL THEY GO ON A TRAIN OR A TRUCK.
WHEN A VEHICLE COMES OFF, IT DIDN'T KNOW IF IT'S A FIVE SERIES OR A THREE SERIES OR WHAT, THEY HAVE TO PROGRAM IT AND THAT HAPPENS THERE AT THE VEHICLE PROCESSING CENTER, AND THERE WAS A SPECIFIC PROGRAM WHERE THEY HIRED STUDENTS FROM GALVESTON COLLEGE AND BALL HIGH AND SO THAT WAS A HOLISTIC CONCEPT, WHICH PLAYED OUT VERY WELL.
>> THE FORD CAME AND MADE AN APPLICATION THROUGH IDC.
>> THEN IDC APPROVED THAT AND COUNSEL APPROVED, IT CAME THROUGH COUNSEL.
ON THE WATER FUND, WHY ARE YOU THERE AND PROJECT.
[LAUGHTER] WATER FUND, GUIDE ME ON THIS.
IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THAT THE PORT AND SOME OF THE INDUSTRIAL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS DID SOME WORK FOR THE CITY.
>> THEY MOVED THE WATER LINE AND THE CITY PAID THEM BACK FOR THAT WORK THAT THEY DID FOR THE CITY. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> PARTIALLY. [LAUGHTER] THE FULL STORY, THE PORT DID NEED TO RELOCATE THE CITY WATER LINES AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO UPDATE AND EXPAND PORT INDUSTRIAL TO MAKE IT AN ALTERNATE CRUISE IN CARGO CORRIDOR, BUT AT THE TIME, IT WAS ONE OF THOSE OLDER CLAY PIPES THAT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN OR HEARD ABOUT FROM TIME TO TIME,
[01:05:02]
AND SO PART OF THAT WAS TO REIMBURSE THE PORT TO HELP GET IT TO CURRENT CODE, WHATEVER THE MATERIAL WAS.>> YOU MEAN CLAY ASBESTOS DOESN'T HELP? [LAUGHTER]
>> OTHERWISE, I JUST WANTED TO CF THIS BECAUSE THIS JUST SO WE KNOW WHERE THIS 10.8 EXACTLY HOW IT WAS EXPENDED. YES.
>> I'D JUST LIKE THE CHAIRMAN TO ASK MANAGEMENT TO GET WITH CITY MANAGEMENT.
LET'S UNDERSTAND WHEN THAT THING PLAYS OUT, THERE'D BE NO REIMBURSEMENT WHERE WE HAVE COMPLETE AUTONOMY TO DO WHAT WE WANT WITH IT.
>> IT MAY BE GRAN REPORTS ON THE FTA GRANT.
IF YOU CAN AS A TERMINAL GRANTS HAVE IT AS A ITEM HAVE IT AS AN ITEM EITHER AT THE JANUARY OR FEBRUARY?
>> WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR ROGER PAY.
I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT GRANT, WHAT THE PORT RESPONSIBILITY IS.
WHEN DOES IT TERMINATE? WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY ANYTHING BACK IF WE IMPLODE THE PARKING ROCK?
>> WE DON'T NEED AN ANSWER TODAY.
>> GET IT EITHER ON JANUARY, FEBRUARY.
>> WE NEED TO FIND OUT WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? WHEN THE DEADLINES ARE NATION.
>> JANE STAY IN TOUCH WITH REPORT SO THAT ONCE THAT INFORMATION IS PUT TOGETHER, THAT COULD BE TRANSFERRED.
MY POINT IN REQUESTING AND DOING ALL THIS, AND ALSO THE LAST THREE YEARS, WE PASSED NOT THIS COUNCIL, BUT THE LAST TWO COUNCILS, WE PASSED $200,000,000 IN BONDS.
WE'VE BEEN GOOD MUNICIPAL PARTNERS, AND YES, WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS THAT FUTURE OF BEING GOOD MUNICIPAL PARTNERS WITH EACH OTHER.
I APPRECIATE THE CONCESSION ON THAT, BUT WE'VE AND I DO WANT TO WORK I THINK WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH HOT TECH.
I THINK THAT'S A I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, AND 30% STAY OVER 2034.
IT'S FOUR I THINK THE NUMBER IS 34 THEY USUALLY COME IN THE NIGHT BEFORE TO AVOID ANY TRAVEL PROBLEMS OR STAY OVER.
THAN A COUPLE OF DAYS YOU KNOW AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING AND WE CAN MAYBE THE PORT AND THE PART HAVE JOINT MEETINGS ABOUT SOME OF THAT AND DEVELOPING THAT RELATIONSHIP.
WE ARE HAVING MEETINGS WITH THE PARK.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE CAN ALL GET BEHIND AND, ESPECIALLY LOOKING AT CREATIVE WAYS TO WORK WITH OUR HOT TAX BECAUSE WE ARE LOSING THE TRICKLE DOWN FUNDING FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER IN THE NEXT FIVE, SIX YEARS.
THE EMPHASIS IS ON THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO REPURPOSE OR FOCUS OR BE CREATIVE WITH THAT IN THE FUTURE.
>> THAT'S PERETO I WILL SAY THAT I WAS REALLY A BIG PROPONENT OF THE PARK AND GARAGE REVENUE SHARE.
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A GREAT RETURN. IT JUST MATTER.
BUT WE CAN LOOK AT FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES LIKE THAT.
>> WE GOT A NEW COUNCIL NOW AND I THINK WE'VE MAYBE SOME OF THE OLD ONES AND THE NEW ONES, WE HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER WITH EACH OTHER AND IF THERE'S WAYS TO DO THAT, THAT CAN FREE UP SOME UNRESTRICTED FUNDS.
I THINK WE'RE ALL ALL FORWARD THINKING, SO I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING I WANT WAS IT ON THIS IT WAS.
>> I JUST WANTED TO ASK ALEX OVER WHAT PERIOD OF TIME WAS THIS ACCOUNT JUST 20 YEARS?
>> SAY THAT AGAIN. THIS WAS OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.
THE CHICK PAULS 1 WAS IN 1990, AND THEY THEY WERE DISCUSSING THAT THAT STUFF AND MAYBE YOU ALL GET A KICK OF THIS IN 1996.
I GOT A TO WORK LETTER ABOUT WARS BOARD TRUSTEES TAKING THEIR WIVES TO VANCOUVER, SO IT'S THE CYCLICAL ARGUMENTS LET'S CHANGE THE CYCLICAL ARGUMENTS AND STAY OUT OF THE PAPER.
>> THAT'S VERY SURPRISING TO ME THAT THE WORDS WOULD SEND A LETTER.
>> ROGER MAYOR I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
I STEP UP AND PROJECT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GET CONFUSED. I GOT CONFUSED.
ON OTHER TIME IS THAT WE THE STUDY SHOWED WE BROUGHT IN 34% OF CRUISE PASSENGERS, NOT 34% OF THE TOTAL.
IT'S JUST THE CRUISE PASSENGERS.
>> A HUNDRED MILLION? IT'LL BE 300,000-500 ROUGHLY?
>> WHEN THE NEW CRUISE TERMINAL 16 OPENS UP,
[01:10:03]
IT'S GOING TO BE CLOSE TO TWO MILLION.WE'D LIKE TO SEE THAT 34% NUMBER GO TO 40 OR 45 AS PEOPLE BECOME MORE AWARE OF THE BEAUTY OF THIS ISLAND.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS AREA HERE. GO RIGHT AHEAD, SIR.
>> I WANT TO SUMMARIZE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
BUT MOST OF US A LOT OF US IN AT THE TABLE HAVE BEEN HERE OUR WHOLE LIVES AND SOME LONGER THAN OTHERS, AND SOME LESS THAN OTHERS, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, WE'VE ALL BEEN HERE OUR WHOLE LIVES.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF FAMILY THAT HAVE GONE THROUGH GOOD TIMES AND BAD TIMES ESPECIALLY MY FAMILY AT THE PORT.
CONNECTIONS WITH THE ILA AND WHAT THEY'VE HAD TO DO TO ADAPT TO CONTINUE TO RAISE THEIR FAMILIES HERE AND MANY OTHERS.
THERE'S BEEN TIMES THAT THAT PORT WAS WANTING TO BE WRITTEN OFF THAT THERE WAS SEVERAL YEARS OF DISCUSSION OF SELLING THE PORT OFF OF THE PORT OF HOUSTON CREATED A LOT OF SOME VERY BEST LIFETIME FRIENDS BECAME ENEMIES.
IT'S BEEN A REALLY BIG PART OF OUR COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME.
I THINK THAT IT'S VERY OPPORTUNISTIC IF WE LOOK BACK IN THE HISTORY, THERE'S BEEN TIMES THAT THE CITY HAS SHARED THE BURDEN TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PORT STICKS AROUND.
NOW THAT THE CITY'S HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF GROWING PAINS AND NOT WANTING TO TOSS IT ON THE SHOULDERS OF OF THE TAXPAYERS.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF HELP LIKE WE'VE HELPED IN THE PAST.
HISTORICALLY. IN A NUTSHELL IN A BASIC SENSE, I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR AS A SIMPLE MAN AND MY PART OF THIS COUNCIL.
JUST LOOKING AT THE HISTORY OF THE FACT THAT WE'VE REALLY PARTNERED IN THE PAST.
NOT THAT PEOPLE REMEMBER A LOT OF HISTORY.
THEY TEND TO FORGET QUICKLY, BUT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF SHARING BETWEEN US, AND THERE'S BEEN A PURPOSE BEHIND IT.
THANK GOD, WE DIDN'T SELL THE PORT.
ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO MAYBE SAY I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BACKED BY A LOT OF HISTORIC.
>> I SAID THAT IN AT THE LAST MEETING THAT HISTORICALLY, IT'S BEEN THE PORT.
>> THANK GOD, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN TODAY AT A TABLE AND NOT DISCUSS WITH THE PORT OF HOUSTON SELLING REPORT.
>> MAYOR, BRIEFLY, BOTH YOU NAILED IT. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.
I THINK EVERYBODY AT THIS TABLE.
I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR ALL OUR TRUSTEE, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ALL FEEL THE SAME WAY.
THERE IS HISTORY. WE WANT TO KEEP IT.
LIKE MR. YARBROUGH SAID, IS JUST DO IT THE RIGHT WAY WE MAY BE SELLING IT SHORT.
YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY WHERE IT'S WHEN TIMES ARE GOOD, IT FLOWS, BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE THOSE TIMES.
>> I WANTED TO SEE YOU TO ALL DO WELL.
>> YOU DO ALL HAVE SOME STRUGGLES. WE NEED TO STRUGGLE.
>> THAT'S A PERFECT SEGUE IN TO FINISH SOME OF THESE TOPICS IN THIS 3B.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE ONE TIME MR. PORRETTO MENTIONED ABOUT THE REQUEST FROM THE PORT ABOUT THE ONE TIME PAYMENT THIS YEAR FOR $1,000,000 OR WHATEVER.
WOULD YOU EXPAND ON THAT VEHICLE?
>> I'LL JUST TELL YOU MY PERSPECTIVE, AND IT'S NOT THE PER I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WARS BOARD IS GOING TO DO IS, I WOULD LIKE TO FIND A PROJECT THAT BENEFITS BOTH THE CITY AND THE PORT THAT WE COULD PARTICIPATE SIGNIFICANTLY IN.
I WOULD THINK THE WARS BOARD WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF DOING THAT.
WE'VE GOT TO FIND THAT SPECIFIC PROJECT.
THEN WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT THE TIMING.
IT SAYS HERE IN THE 24 25 BUDGET, WHICH IS ALREADY PASSED.
IT MAY BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY TO HAVE IT IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET FOR A WAY FOR US TO DO IT SO THAT IT'S LESS OF A BURDEN WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO I KNOW EVERY PENNY COUNTS WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO ADOPT A BUDGET.
THE TIMING, WE MAY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
BUT IF WE COULD FIND A PROJECT THAT BENEFITS BOTH THE CITY AND THE PORT, THAT WOULD BE AN IDEAL SOLUTION TO THIS.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY OUR POINT THAT WE DISCUSSED IN CITY COUNCIL WHEN WE PASSED THIS A MILLION DOLLAR REQUEST.
IS THAT IT GOES TO A PROJECT THAT BENEFITS BOTH OF US.
THAT A PROJECT LIKE THIS OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS GOING TO GOING TO SPAN MANY YEARS.
THERE'S NO NEED TO GET IT RIGHT NOW.
IF IT'S GOING TO HELP A PROJECT LIKE THAT FISCAL YEAR 2026.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER PIERETTE SUGGESTED A PROJECT RIGHT OFF THE BAT, WHICH WAS THE 14TH STREET PUMP STATION.
I THINK THAT IS AN EXCELLENT INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT THAT BENEFITS
[01:15:02]
ALL THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND ALSO BENEFITS THE COURT AS WELL.I'D LIKE TO THROW THAT OUT THERE FOR SUGGESTION, CHAIRMAN JS.
>> THANK YOU. WE'LL TAKE ALL THAT TOGETHER.
THIS IS WHAT COUNCILMAN RAWLINS AND I WERE DISCUSSING WHEN WE WANTED THIS ON THE AGENDA OF AN ADAC COMMITTEE OF SEVERAL TRUSTEES AND COUNCIL PEOPLE TO COME TOGETHER TO PEEL OVER THE DATA, PEEL OVER THE NUMBER, SEE WHAT WE CAN, WHAT WE CAN WORK WITH.
MAYBE THAT COMMITTEE SELECTS THE PROJECTS.
MAYBE WE GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EACH RESPECTIVE BOARD AND COUNSEL THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WANT.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND WE CAN ALL SIT DOWN TOGETHER AND WORK THROUGH IT, COHESIVELY.
I THINK ADC COMMITTEE BETWEEN THE TWO BOARDS WOULD BE COUNCIL AND THE WARS BOARD WOULD BE A PRESCIENT IDEA.
GETTING THAT CREATED WOULD HELP SPEED THINGS ALONG INSTEAD OF HAVING WAITING QUARTERLY FOR THE JOINT MEETINGS.
>> MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T MOVING OFF OF 3B.
I HAVE ONE OTHER ITEM THAT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT, WHICH IS THE FUTURE FUNDING MECHANISMS?
>> YES, SIR. I WANT TO PUT TO BED COUNCIL MEMBER BRETT'S THOUGHTS ABOUT THE ADC COMMITTEE ON THIS.
I'M NOT AGAINST THAT. WE COULD DO THAT.
I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT COUNCIL NEEDS TO BE TOTALLY INVOLVED WITH THE PROCESS.
THAT'S MY PERSONAL THOUGHTS ON IT INSTEAD OF A COMMITTEE, BUT COUNSEL, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT?
>> I'D RATHER WORKSHOP THAT JOINTLY WITH THE WARS BOARD IN A TIMELY MANNER RATHER THAN SENDING OFF SOME FOLKS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH ISSUE RELATED TO THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON, AND THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS ON THEIR TAXES THAT I THINK DOING IT OPENLY, THIS TABLE HERE IS APPROPRIATE.
IT MAY TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, AND THAT'S OKAY.
WE ALL UNDERSTOOD THAT THE REQUEST FOR A ONE TIME PAYMENT WAS JUST THAT.
IT'S NOT OUR INTENT, OR I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S COUNSEL'S INTENT, NOT MY INTENT TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR THAT YEAR AFTER YEAR.
MY HOPE IS THAT DURING THE COURSE OF 2025, THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS WHAT THIS DIVIDEND PAYMENT, WHATEVER THE STRUCTURE LOOKS LIKE, TRUSTEE YARBROUGH, THAT WE TAKE TIME IN AN OPEN FORM THROUGH WAR SHOP.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE THE CITY STAFF COME UP AND RECOMMEND PROJECTS THAT MIGHT FIT THIS DESIRED THIS DESIRED ACTION AND THEN COORDINATE THAT WITH WORKFORCE STAFF.
THEN COME TO A WORKSHOP AND DISCUSS THESE OPTIONS.
>> MY COMMENT WAS GOING TO BE, I THINK WE'RE GETTING AD HOC COMMITTEE OUT OF CONTROL.
I THINK THE MORE COMMITTEE SHOULD CREATE THE LESS YOU WILL ACHIEVE JUST MY STATEMENT.
I AGREE WITH THE WORKSHOPPING.
>> I WANT TO BE THERE ON THE COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF THE COURT MEMBERS.
MAYBE THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD GET WITH BRIAN AND HIS STAFF TO ANY IDEAS YOU HAVE ON FUNDING MECHANISMS, I GET ALL THE OPTIONS ON THE TABLE WE DON'T COME TO A MEETING AND WE JUST GET HIT COLD WITH WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS.
SO LET'S GET MAYBE STAFF TOGETHER TO PUT ALL THE OPTIONS DOWN.
THEN WE CAN QUICKLY DISPOSE OF THOSE THAT MAY NOT MAKE SENSE, BUT THEN FOCUS OUR MEETING ON THE THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE OPTIONS THAT HAVE LEGITIMACY.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST THAT I THINK THE STRUCTURE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MOVING IN IS A GOOD WAY TO GET THINGS DONE.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WE SEGUE WHAT WE'RE CALLING THIS AWAY FROM A ONE-TIME PAYMENT TO THE CITY TOWARDS A A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND THE PORT TO DEVELOP OR DO X.
>> SAYING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FUTURE STRUCTURE MOVING FORWARD WITH A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COURT ON PAYMENTS.
LET'S OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
EVEN COUNSEL I MEAN, TRUSTEE YARBROUGH MENTIONED THAT WE COULD EVEN PUT IN THE CHARTER THE WAY IT'S STRUCTURED NOW WITH THE REVENUE FROM THE TARIFF AND FROM THE PARKING.
[01:20:04]
BUT LET'S OPEN THAT UP.>> I THINK RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE CAN DO IT IN A CONTRACT BECAUSE A CHARTER CHANGE IS NOT GOING TO BE A MINUTE AWAY. YES.
>> I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED. LIKE THE SAME EXACT PRINCIPLE AS WE USED WITH THE ROSENBERG LIBRARY.
SHOULD LOOK AT HOW WE'RE GOING TO STRUCTURE THIS AND, WE CAN DO IT IN A WORKSHOP.
THERE'S JUST A SUGGESTION THAT WE DO IT AT HOW COMMIT YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT IT, HOW WE DO IT WORKSHOP TOGETHER, A FEW IDEAS FOR YOU KNOW MAYBE THERE'S A SECTION ON, OKAY, LET'S DO WORK ON A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT EVERY THREE YEARS, OR ET CETERA AND THEN FIGURING OUT BEYOND THAT, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE I KNOW THE ILA GUYS WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE BUSINESS OF THE CARGO AND DIVERSIFICATION OF THE PORT ON THE WEST END UP AND RUNNING.
AND I THINK THAT BRINGS IN A LITTLE MORE REVENUE THAT WE CAN WORK WITH AS WELL, BUT LET'S THINK ABOUT IT NOW.
THIS REQUEST WASN'T MEANT TO BE KNEE-JERK.
IT WAS LOOKING AT THE FUTURE AND SAYING, WE HAVE A BIT OF AN ISSUE WITH INFLATIONARY PRESSURES, COSTS I MEAN, THIS PUMP STATION THAT WE PASSED AN IDC BOND AND IT GOT CHEWED UP, 15 MILLION OF THAT 20 MILLION IS GONE FOR JUST THE SIMPLE COST OF THIS ONE PUMP STATION.
SO BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER, YOU MIGHT SAY, AND THIS NEXT 14TH STREET PUMP STATION MIGHT COME IN HIGHER, MIGHT COME IN ON PAR, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS EXPECT THE COST OF GOING UP.
>> I WANT TO CUT BEFORE WE LEAVE.
I THINK THIS IS SUCH IMPORTANT TOPIC.
BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS, WE GET A STRUCTURE ON HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
WE TALKED ABOUT INVOLVING STAFFS ON THIS.
>> MAY I SUGGEST THAT WE LET STAFF WORK TOGETHER AND AT OUR NEXT QUARTERLY MEETING, SAY IN APRIL.
LET'S HAVE THEM MAYBE COME BACK AND HAVE THIS DISCUSSION A LITTLE MORE IN-DEPTH.
THAT WAY, WE'LL HAVE A CHANCE FOR STAFF TO WORK WITH CITY COUNCIL AND THE WARS BOARD OUR SEPARATE STAFFS, AND THEN HAVE IT AS AN AGENDA ITEM AGAIN IN APRIL.
>> I THINK THAT THESE REPORTS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN FILED.
>> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD STEP.
SO COUNSEL CAN LIKE THE CHARTER SAYS, FULLY UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE PORT.
IN THIS MIGHT BE FOR OUR CURRENT AGENDA, ANY INFORMATION THAT COUNSEL WANTS TO SEND OVER TO THE WARS BOARD SO THAT THEY CAN PRODUCE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE KIND OF ON THE ONUS OF US TO UNDERSTAND.
SO WE HAVE THE BEST INFORMATION POSSIBLE TO MAKE A GOOD DECISION AND GIVE YOU GUYS A SUGGESTION OR GIVE US SUGGESTIONS BACK AND FORTH FOR GOOD HEARTED DISCUSSION, DETERMINING THIS CONTRACT OR DIVIDEND PAYMENT OR HOWEVER, WE WANT AS LONG AS WE DON'T CALL IT A PILOT PAYMENT. JIM.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE DO THIS OR NOT.
DO WE SEND OUR AGENDA IN OUR FULL PACKET? I DON'T SEE ANGIE. DO WE SEND OUR FULL PACKET WITH ALL THE BACKUP TO THE CITY SECRETARY EVERY MONTH? IT'S THE AGENDA.
>> I MIGHT SUGGEST IT AND WAVE TO HELP FACILITATE COUNSEL FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED IF ANGIE WOULD SEND THE CITY SECRETARY THE SAME PACKET THAT THE BOARD GETS WITH ALL THE PUP ATTACHMENTS.
>> WELL, I MIGHT SAY I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY WANTS TO HOW BIG IS.
>> NO. I TALK ABOUT ELECTRONIC.
>> BUT I MEAN ELECTRONICALLY AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE.
>> I JUST WANT TO SAY BRAVO TO THE PORT BECAUSE IT IS SO EASY TO FIND ANYTHING ON YOUR WEBSITE.
THAT HAS TO DO WITH CONTRACTS, FINANCIALS, VERSUS IF YOU GO TO THE CITY SITE YOU GET THE APPEND FROM.
>> SECRETARY'S OFFICE SENDS COUNSEL A LINK TO THE WORKS BOARD, PACK.
>> ANY BOARD, ANYTHING WE GET.
>> IF WE DO THAT EVERY APRIL WHEN WE GET OUR AUDIT, IT COMES TO THE BOARD AND IT'S RECORDED.
WE DON'T APPROVE IT. ALL YOUR AUDIT.
ALL THOSE AUDITS WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO YOU OUR MASTER PLAN IS ON THERE EVERY MONTH.
SO A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT YOU MAY BE MISSING.
GETTING WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO YOU.
>> YEAH. I FOUND IT, BUT I MEAN, THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE A LETTER, WE'VE GOT THE LETTER, JASON MAR CASTLE AND WE ACCEPTED A COUNCIL MET.
I MEAN THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO.
>> I'M NOT WE NEED TO COMPLY WITH WHAT CHARTER SAYS, GIVE YOU AN ANNUAL REPORT.
[01:25:01]
>> AFTER EACH BOARD MEETING, I ASKED JANELLE TO SEND YOU THE CF REPORT.
A LOT OF TIMES YOU GET THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT, COUNSEL.
IT HAS ALL OF THEIR ACTIVITIES WHERE IT'S BEEN GOING ON IN THE PAST, AND PROJECTED FOR THE FUTURE.
IT'S IN THOSE REPORTS, I SENT IT TO COUNSEL EVERY MONTH.
SO FEEL FREE TO LOOK AT THOSE I'VE SEEN THE BINDER.
>> YOU DO THIS EVERY MONTH. EVERY MONTH, WE PUT OUT EVERY FINANCIAL STATEMENT WE DO, EVERY CHECK WE WRITE, WE SEND EVERYTHING IS OUT THERE FOR ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO LOOK AT.
WE ARE AS TRANSPARENT AS ANYBODY I BELIEVE IN THE CITY.
I WANT TO DEFEND STAFF BECAUSE WE PUT THIS INFORMATION OUT EVERY MONTH.
I THINK THAT IF THERE'S SUCH A BIG INTEREST FROM SEVERAL OF THE MEN FROM SEVERAL OF THE BOARD OF CITY COUNCIL, THE INFORMATION IS THERE.
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THERE, IT WILL ALWAYS BE THERE.
I'M JUST SAYING YOU CAN FIND OUT HERE AGAIN, OUR CHECK BALANCES, HOW MANY CHECKS WE'VE WRITTEN EVERY MONTH.
ALL THIS INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
SO I MEAN, WE NOT MAYBE WE HAVE NOT FORMALLY SENT THE REPORTS.
ALTHOUGH MY CFO TELLS ME WE DO SEND OUR AFFIRS EVERY YEAR.
WE DO SEND IT TO ALL THE COUNCIL PEOPLE.
I DON'T I'M NOT GETTING DEFENSIVE HERE.
I'M JUST SAYING THE INFORMATION IS THERE.
THAT'S ALL THAT WE CAN DO IS PUT IT OUT THERE AND WE WILL MAKE THE EFFORT IN THE FUTURE TO DIRECTLY AND YOU'LL GET, HERE, YOU'LL GET EVERY REPORT YOU MISSED.
I PROMISE YOU THAT. I MEAN, BECAUSE IT'S ALL AVAILABLE, AND IT'S IT'S OUT THERE EVERY YEAR.
>> YES. WE HAD SHARON. GO AHEAD.
WHEN YOU MADE THE SUGGESTION THAT IN APRIL, BOTH STAFFS MEET TOGETHER?
I THOUGHT YOU SAID THE CITY STAFF.
>> NO. WE COME BACK TO THIS TABLE THE 13 OF US.
AFTER WHAT STAFF AFTER WE'VE HAD TIME TO DIGEST WHAT THE STAFFS HAVE WORKED TOGETHER ON.
>> OKAY. SO WILL THE STAFFS BE DIRECTED TO COME UP WITH THE TOP THREE PROJECTS OR WHAT DO YOU DO YOU WHAT ARE WE EXPECTING I WOULD EXPECT THAT'S LIMITED.
WHAT THEY COME BACK WITH THE IMPORTANT THE TOP 3 IMPORTANT THINGS IF THEY THINK THE STAFFS.
>> I THINK THE IDEAL SITUATION IS THEY HAD BRING SEVERAL ALTERNATIVES.
EACH OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE WARS BOARD WILL EVALUATE AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN COME TO A UNDERSTANDING THIS IS THIS PROJECT WE WANT TO DO NOW.
>> I IMAGINE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS WE MAY HAVE TO STAFF AS THEY WORK ON IT AS WELL.
>> SEVERAL JUST SOUND BIG I THOUGHT THINK OF MAJOR PROS.
>> I'M THINKING AND I THINK AND IT'S ON THE AGENDA LATER.
WE GOT THIS ALS STATE COMMITTEE ALSO.
THEY COULD HAVE SOME INPUT INTO THAT.
SO I THINK WE JUST IMPROVING THE COMMUNICATION IS THE DESIRE.
>> THAT GIVES TIME BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING THAT 2026 BUDGET? OHAT WAS YOUR SUGGESTION.
>> IF I WAS A COUNCIL MEMBER AND I KNOW I HAVE TO ADOPT A BUDGET.
I'VE GOT ONE ALREADY FOR THIS YEAR, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE HELP WITH NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET, RIGHT?
>> I UNDERSTAND AND I AGREE WITH THAT.
>> WELL, PERHAPS I TOTALLY MISREAD THIS SITUATION, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE HAS BEEN A SLIGHT INSINUATION THAT THE WARS BOARD TOOK THE POSITION IN WHOLE OR IN PART TO NOT HELP THE CITY, WHICH IS PATENTLY FALSE.
WITH THAT, AND BECAUSE THIS HAS COME UP NOW TWO OR THREE TIMES, DO YOU NEED MONEY NOW? DO YOU NEED IT NOW OR DO WE NEED TO WAIT TILL APRIL? IT SEEMS LIKE. YEAH. I MEAN, DO YOU NEED US TO TRY AND SPEED UP THIS PROCESS?
>> I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE BUDGET.
ENDED IT CUT IT BY 3.6, EIGHT BRYAN UNDER ARE WE ASK YOU TO 3.8,
[01:30:02]
WHICH CUT OUR RESERVES.BUT I MEAN, WE'VE ALREADY MADE THOSE CHANGES FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.
I MEAN, I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND GOING BACK AND AGAIN, I THINK TO THIS POINT THIS IS REALLY LOOKING FORWARDS TOWARDS THE FUTURE.
THIS ONE-TIME PAYMENT IS JUST A STEP IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE'RE TRYING TO ESTABLISH A LONG TERM THAT MAKE SENSE.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I THINK THAT WE COULD STILL USE, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE'RE UNDER OUR RESERVES TO SAY THAT WE DO AND NOT THAT THEY HAVE EXTRA MONEY SENDING OUT THERE.
>> BRIAN, WHEN'S THAT PROJECT GOING OUT FOR BID?
COUNCILMAN PRETA, JUST ONE SECOND.
BRIAN THE COMMUNITY CAN'T HEAR ALL THIS INFORMATION.
>> I THINK IN FEBRUARY IS LAST I SAW A BIT OF WHAT PROJECT YOU TALKED ABOUT STREET?
>> SO IN THE APRIL TIME FRAME ALL OF US COMING BACK TOGETHER AND THEN GOING TO MAYBE A MAY BOARD MEETING OF THE WORKS.
>> THE BID COMES IN 20 MILLION HIGHER THAN PHONE CALL.
>> THAT'S WHO DIFFERENT DECISION.
NO, I HAD JEFF MENTIONED SOMETHING SAY SOMETHING.
I GUESS IN WHAT WE WANT STAFF TO DO.
I MEAN, I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT PROJECT FINDING A SPECIFIC PROJECT TO PAY AN AMOUNT TOWARDS.
I GUESS WHAT WE IS A LITTLE BROADER.
I THINK WE'VE COME TO THAT, BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER WHEN WE ASKED STAFF TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE FUNDING, DO WE WANT THEM TO LOOK AT BROADEN THAT AND LOOK AT A HOLISTIC LOOK AT THE OPTIONS TO GET MONEY? IT'S NOT JUST WE'RE NOT JUST ASKING THEM TO PICK A PROJECT.
WE WANT THEM TO GO BACK AND LOOK HOLISTICALLY AT HOW WE'RE FUNDING NOW AND THEN WHAT COULD BE AN ADDITIONAL I MEAN, WE TALKED ABOUT CHANGES TO CHARTER.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WHAT WE'RE TELLING OUR STAFFS, LET'S GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT AND YOU'VE GOT IT IN YOUR STAFF.
THAT'S A GOOD THING. BUT LOOK HOLISTICALLY AT A LONG-TERM SOLUTION THAT'S VIABLE AND HOW DO WE INSTITUTIONALIZE THAT?
>> YEAH. THESE JOINT MEETINGS MIGHT BE A LITTLE BUMPY AT FIRST, SOME COMFORTABLE CONVERSATION, SOME COMFORTABLE ONES, BUT I THINK OVERALL, WHAT IT DOES IS IT CREATES AN OPEN LINE OF COMMUNICATION SO THE PUBLIC CAN HEAR TAXPAYERS CAN HEAR SO THAT WE'RE I HAVE AN INSTANT FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT OUR POSITIONS ARE, WHAT WE WANT TO DO, AND LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND JUST BE GOOD PARTNERS WITH THIS.
>> YOU GUYS HAVE GREAT BURRITOS. I AGREE THEM.
>> I'M STEPPING BACKWARDS INTO A SUBJECT, BUT I THINK SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO EVERYONE ON COUNCIL TO SEE THAT WHEN YOU'RE SENDING YOUR REPORT TO ADD IN THERE HOW SUCCESSFUL YOU HAVE BEEN IN GETTING GRANTS FROM THE HDAC, FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO EASE TRAFFIC BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN QUITE SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING A NUMBER OF GRANTS AND FOR THE PORT INFRASTRUCTURE WHEN IT COMES TO CARGO.
SO I THINK YOU SHOULD PUT EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE SUCCEEDED IN.
>> WE DO. THERE IS SEVERAL SLIDES IN MY REPORT THAT TALKS ABOUT ALL THE GRANTS THAT WE HAVE IN PROGRESS, WHERE THEY ARE, HOW MUCH THE FUNDING IS.
OUR BOARD HAS AT OUR LAST MEETING, SAID WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT OUR MASTER PLAN.
WE MOVED FORWARD ON OUR MASTER PLAN.
WE'VE MOVED SOME PROJECTS AHEAD OF OUR THE ORIGINAL TIME FRAMES THAT WERE IN THE MASTER PLAN.
WE DO AND YOU MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW IT AND IT'S IN THE IN THE INFORMATION THAT WE ANALYZE THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS EVERY MONTH.
SO WE LOOK AT THIS EVERY MONTH, WHAT WAS IN THE MASTER PLAN? HOW MUCH WE SPENT? WHERE ALL THE FUNDINGS COME FROM? JIM HAS KEPT STRAIGHT ON THAT, AND WE KIND OF LOOK AT THAT EVERY MONTH SO THAT WE KNOW WHERE THE NEXT DOLLARS COME FROM.
NOW, THE MASTER PLAN, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT, THE WEST END HAS BEEN THE FOCUS.
HERE AGAIN, YOU SAY, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, YOU JUST BORROWED $200 MILLION FOR THE CRUISE BUSINESS.
TRUE, BUT WITHOUT THAT MONEY GOING INTO THE CRUISE BUSINESS, WE WOULD NOT HAVE THE CASH FLOW COMING BACK OUT FOR THE WEST END WORK.
WE'RE SPENDING 100 MILLION ON THE WEST END NOW, AND THAT'S ONLY HALF OF IT.
THAT DOESN'T TALK ABOUT FILLING THE THIRD SLIP AND BULKHEADING PARTS OF THAT.
[01:35:07]
WE'RE WELL AHEAD AND I THINK I PUT THIS IMITATION OUT LAST TIME.IF YOU WANT TO SEE IT, PLEASE COME AND SEE IT BECAUSE A PICTURE IS WORTH 1,000 WORDS AND YOU CAN SAY, WE CAN SIT UP HERE AND TELL YOU ALL DAY LONG WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE, BUT PLEASE COME OUT THERE AND LOOK AT IT BECAUSE YOU'LL SEE.
WE'RE HALFWAY THERE AND WE STILL HAVE ANOTHER HALF WAY TO GO.
SO THIS IS MY TREPIDATION ABOUT TRYING TO TALK ABOUT PAYING MONEY IN THE FUTURE.
I'VE SAID IT PUBLICLY, I'M ALL FOR IT.
I'M NOT AGAINST US DOING ANYTHING THAT WE CAN'T HELP THE CITY WITH.
WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE AND WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHEN WE HAVE THESE MEETINGS WITH THE STAFF, AND I'M SURE THAT BRIAN AND HIS STAFF WILL UNDERSTAND IT TOO.
WE STILL HAVE AND YOU TALK ABOUT JOBS, WE STILL HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO ON THE WEST END.
HERE AGAIN, THE GOOD NEWS WILL BE IF IN FACT I SIT ON THE TEXAS PORTS ASSOCIATION, AND AS THAT MOVES FORWARD, WE'VE GOT $900 MILLION IN THE STATE'S BUDGET FOR PORTS.
HERE AGAIN, IF WE DON'T GET THAT MONEY, THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE, BECAUSE THEN THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WHERE WE HAVE BECAUSE THE 50 MILLION WE GOT LAST GO AROUND.
MY POINT HERE IS THAT WE STILL HAVE ANOTHER ROUND TO GO ON THE WEST END BEFORE IT'S FULLY OPERATIONAL.
IF YOU CAN GET OUT THERE AND SEE IT, YOU'LL SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING.
BRETT AND HIS STAFF HAVE LITERALLY MOVING STUFF AROUND EVERY DAY JUST JUST BECAUSE WE'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
I DON'T WANT TO PREACH OR ANYTHING, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY, WE'RE ALMOST THERE, AND FOR US TO COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS, LONG-TERM IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT UNLESS, EVEN APRIL BECAUSE WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT WHAT THE STATE IS WHAT THE GOVERNOR'S GOING TO DO TO THAT MONEY IN THE BUDGET.
IF IT GETS CUT, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP TO HOW MUCH MONEY THE COURT WILL GET OUT OF IT.
I THINK I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT GET THAT ON THE TABLE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT MORE THINGS THAT ARE STILL HAVING TO HAPPEN AND IT'S NOT AN APRIL THING.
UNLESS UNLESS THE STATE LEGISLATURE DOES WHAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE AND MOVE QUICKLY.
THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO, AND YOU REALIZE IF IF WE GOT $100 BILLION, AND WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH 25 MILLION. THANK YOU.
>> I WANT TO MENTION TOO TO COUNCIL, COUNCIL, YOU MONTHLY GET THOSE CFO REPORTS, AND AT TIMES EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT, READ THOSE.
IT OUTLINES WHERE THEY ARE, AS ROGER MENTIONED ON THE GRANTS, AND I'LL TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT.
I ASKED THE PORT TO PLEASE SEND OVER.
YOU HAVE RECEIVED A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR NOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, 10 YEARS FROM NOW, WHERE THIS MONEY IS COMING FROM.
IT'S IN YOUR IN BOXES THERE IN YOUR EMAIL, SO READ THROUGH THAT.
IT'LL GIVE YOU ALL THE PLANS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE WITH THE REPORT.
>> MAYOR, I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD, IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN OUT TO THE WEST END CARGO COMPLEX, PLEASE TAKE ROGER UP ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IT WITH YOUR OWN EYES BECAUSE THERE HAS NOT BEEN A MAJOR INVESTMENT IN THE DOCKS IN GALVESTON SINCE THE EARLY '70S UNTIL JUST NOW.
>> AS SOON AS THE WIND DIES DOWN.
>> TODAY MAY NOT BE THE BEST DAY.
>> YOU SEEN WANTING TO SAY A FEW WORDS, JIM.
>> WHEN I DUMB IT DOWN FOR, I CAN UNDERSTAND IT FUNDING MECHANISMS. I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND IF WHATEVER MONEY THE PORT DOESN'T RETAIN FOR ITS OWN USE, WE'LL SLOW THE MASTER PLAN DOWN.
YOU MAKE THOSE CHOICES OVER HERE ALL THE TIME.
THE SECOND THING IS, AS WE LOOK AT THE FUNDING SOURCE, THE SIMPLEST EASY JUST GIVE YOU A PERCENTAGE OF OUR GROSS.
IT'S NOT A DEBATABLE FIGURE IT'S NOT AN AUDIT.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT, SAY WE WE GROSS TO 100 MILLION OR 70 MILLION, WHATEVER YOU GET A PERCENTAGE OF IT.
WE GET OUT OF ALL THESE PARKING FEES AND PASSENGER FEES AND CAN GET RID OF THE PILOT, BUT THE PILOT WILL BE INCLUDED UNTIL WE DO A CHARTER AMENDMENT THAT DOES AWAY WITH THAT OR SUBSTITUTES IT.
AS LONG AS WE REALIZE THAT THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THE MASTER PLAN BECAUSE WE KNEW THIS CONVERSATION WAS COMING UP AND OUR FUNDING ABILITIES MAY CHANGE.
WE GO OUT, JUST DELAY PROJECTS,
[01:40:02]
AND THAT'S THE PRICE.FIRST OFF, I AGREE SIMPLE WAS BETTER.
THE ONE THING I'D LIKE TO LAY OUT THERE FOR WHATEVER OUR FUTURE DISCUSSIONS GO, IS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO COME DOWN TO A PERCENTAGE, THAT PERCENTAGE CANNOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT YOUR DEBT SERVICE RATIO ON YOUR BONDS.
I KNOW THOSE WERE BASED UPON 2023 REVENUES.
THOSE BONDS WERE AND YOUR REVENUES HAVE GONE UP.
BUT NOBODY HERE AT THIS TABLE, WOULD YOU NOT WANT TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT THOSE BONDS.
>> SHOOT YOURSELF IN THE FRONT.
>> I WAS JUST WONDERING IF WE COULD LOOK AT A COMPARISON OF THAT IDEA AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY ON OUR REVENUE STREAM, AND JUST TO HAVE A COMPARISON TO LOOK AT THEM SIDE BY SIDE.
WE KNOW THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT TODAY IS A LOT OF WORK.
IT IS PROPORTIONATE TO THE SUCCESS OF THE PORT, BUT SO IS A PERCENTAGE OF THE GROSS.
WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT BOTH OF THOSE WAYS OF DOING IT AND SEE WHICH ONE LOOKS AT [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S IN THEORY, WHAT WE'RE ASKING STAFF TO DO IS COME BACK WITH PERCENTAGE AND OTHER OPTIONS FOR US TO LOOK AT AND SEE.
>> THAT WAS MY COMMENT, LET'S TAKE A HOLISTIC LOOK AT THAT.
THERE'S DIFFERENT OPTIONS TO DO THAT.
I THINK THAT YOU GOT A BALANCE LIKE JIM SAID IF YOU TAKE DEPENDING WHERE THAT MONEY COMES, THE NICE THING ABOUT THE WAY SOME OF THIS STUFF IS STRUCTURED NOW, IT'S A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED, BUT IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE ON $0.50 A PASSENGER, $1 A CAR PER DAY, THAT MONEY COMES FROM THE USERS.
IF YOU DO AWAY WITH THAT, THEN THAT MEANS MORE MONEY OFF THE PORTS BOTTOM LINE.
I THINK IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED CURRENTLY, BUT I THINK THE POINT IS YOU STEP BACK AND LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE OPTIONS AND HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER ON.
>> ONE THING TO ADD. I REALLY WANT THE PORT TO SUCCEED AND WE'VE TALKED IN THE DISCUSSIONS HERE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT.
IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IN THE FUTURE, IT DOES ALLEVIATE BURDENS ON THE TAXPAYER.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ROGER SAID THAT KIND OF SPARKED AN IDEA IN MY HEAD IS, MAYBE WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH THE [INAUDIBLE] BOARD, AND COUNCIL, IF ROGER NEEDS HELP A LEGISLATURE, HEY, WELL, I THINK A JOINT LETTER, TWO SEPARATE LETTERS BETWEEN BOTH ENTITIES.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR, REPUBLICAN HOUSE.
HEY, THIS IS MONEY THAT'S GOING TO BE WELL SPENT ON THE WEST END OF THE PORT.
IT'S GOING TO HELP ALLEVIATE THE TAX BURDENS ON THE RESIDENTS.
IT'S A NO-BRAINER THAT IF WE WANTED TO HELP, AND AGAIN, THIS IS US BEING GOOD PARTNERS.
IF YOU NEED HELP FROM US TO GO TO LEGISLATURE OR ASK OR GET SALLY OR HAVE US WRITE A REALLY NICE LETTER FOR [OVERLAPPING]
>> PARTICIPATE IN GALVESTON COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DAY WHEN ALL THE ENTITIES GO UP WITH THE CHAMBER AND WE PRESENT EVERYBODY'S LEGISLATIVE AGENDA [OVERLAPPING]
>> FROM WHAT AGAIN, HISTORY, WHEN THE CITY WAS TRYING TO FORM THE PARK BOARD.
THEY HAD THE CHAMBER, THEY HAD THE COUNCILS, THEY HAD THE STEWART BEACH PARK BOARD.
EVERYBODY WAS WORKING TOGETHER.
TO GET THIS THING PASSED WITH BABE SCHWARTZ UP AT LEGISLATURE.
IF WE CAN HELP IN ANY WAY, PLEASE, AGAIN, LET US KNOW.
I THINK EVERYBODY HERE WANTS THE SAME THING AT THE TABLE.
THERE'S A WAY TO GET IT DONE FASTER OR MAKE YOU A LITTLE MORE COMPETITIVE UP AT THE LEGISLATURE OR TO ENSURE WE GET THOSE FUNDS.
I'M 1,000% BEHIND IT, AND I THINK COUNCIL WILL BE AS WELL, NOT SPEAKING FOR THEM, BUT ANYTHING YOU NEED, AGAIN, LET US KNOW.
>> VERY GOOD. I'M GOING TO PUT A BOW ON THIS 3B HERE.
WE'RE GOING TO ASK STAFFS JANELLE.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THIS.
WE'RE GOING TO ASK STAFF TO GET TOGETHER OUR STAFF WITH THE PORT STAFF TO COME UP NOT ONLY LOOKING AT SHORT-TERM PROJECTS, BUT COMING BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS ON A LONG-TERM STRUCTURE OF PAYMENTS AND FUNDING FROM THE PORT TO THE CITY.
THAT COULD INVOLVE A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS, IT COULD INVOLVE CERTAIN PROJECTS.
IT COULD INVOLVE A PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING PROJECTS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
WE WANT TO LOOK AT ALL OF THESE ALTERNATIVES.
OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE APRIL 24TH.
WE'LL HAVE THAT ON THE AGENDA AS ONE OF OUR PRIMARY TOPICS TO HAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM STAFFS ON THIS, JIM.
>> WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING, APRIL 24TH?
>> PERHAPS WE CAN TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
>> COUNCIL YOU WANT TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK, GROUP?
>> YES. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
>> YOU TEND TO FORGET THAT PEOPLE I THINK YOU [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]
[01:45:03]
>> LET ME JUST SAY THAT, COUNCILWOMAN.
WE ARE NOW BACK IN OUR JOINT WORKSHOP WITH THE WARS BOARD.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3C, PLEASE.
[3.C. Update And Discussion Of The Port’s Master Plan And Related Future Plans (C Brown/Pierson)]
>> ITEM 3C. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF THE PORT'S MASTER PLAN AND RELATED TO FUTURE PLANS.
ONE, CRUISE LINES, NUMBER, EXPANSION, TIMING, MORATORIUM OF ADDITIONAL CRUISE TERMINALS, AND OR CRUISE SHIPS.
TWO, CARGO BUSINESS AND THREE PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT.
>> VICK, I'M GOING TO LET YOU START, A LOT OF HEADS UP.
>> MAYOR, CAN I ADDRESS ITEM 3C1.
IT WAS AN AGENDA ITEM AT OUR DECEMBER TRUSTEES MEETING?
>> WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO IS WORK ON REDEVELOPING OUR MASTER PLAN.
WE DID NOT TAKE ANY ACTION ON THIS AGENDA ITEM IN ITSELF.
BUT BECAUSE WE'RE AHEAD OF OUR MASTER PLAN, THANK GOODNESS FOR THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON, IN SOME AREAS, BUT LET'S TAKE A HOLISTIC VIEW OF WHERE WE'RE AT, AND DEVELOPED THAT MASTER PLAN, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE PROBABLY HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE FIRST QUARTER.
THAT WAS OUR ACTION THAT WE HAD ON ADAM UP TO 3C1.
BUT THEN WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION EARLIER.
I'M JUST SO PLEASED OF THE INVESTMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING IN OUR WEST CARGO COMPLEX, CLOSE TO $100 MILLION HADN'T BEEN DONE SINCE SINCE THE '70S.
THEN PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT.
WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO TALKING ABOUT THAT.
OF COURSE, YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT THE BRIDGE.
SO I THINK ALL THREE OF THESE AREAS ARE CRITICAL TO THE PORT, AND THEY'RE CRITICAL TO THE CITY, AND THEY IMPACT EVERYBODY ALL OF IT.
SO WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO DISCUSSING THESE ITEMS.
>> VERY GOOD. AND THANK YOU, VICK.
FOR THE COUNCIL'S KNOWLEDGE ON OUR JANUARY 2013, YOU WILL BE GETTING A PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF OUR AFA CONTRACT ON THE BRIDGE.
THAT'S MOVING FORWARD, JANUARY 24TH.
TEX DOD IS GOING TO HGAC FOR REQUEST OF FUNDS FOR [OVERLAPPING].
>> IN THE CITY TO REQUEST FUNDS TO MAKE UP THE DEFICIT IN THE FUNDING, OUR REPRESENTATIVE AT HGAC, IS OUR MAYOR PRO TEM.
MARIE ROBB WILL BE LEADING THE CHARGE UP THERE.
WE ARE MOVING FORWARD AND WE'RE LOOKING, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE ANYTHING AWAY, BUT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING HOPEFULLY AROUND APRIL TO PUT A FINAL SIGNING TO THESE TYPES OF DOCUMENTS, BUT WE'LL SEE IT.
>> THE COMPLETION DATE IS 2034.
>> HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE THAT UP.
[LAUGHTER] NOW BUT IT IS NOT THE FUNDING THAT'S HOLDING THAT UP, IT'S MORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL.
FROM ONE OF THE CHAMBER PELICAN ISLAND SHIP CHANNEL MEETING, WE WERE ABLE TO CONNECT TEX DOD TOGETHER WITH A CORE REPRESENTATIVE, RHONDA, WHO WE ALL KNOW AS THE BEST OF PERMITS, AND SHE IS WORKING CLOSELY WITH THEM NOW TO HELP THEM SPEED THE PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S THE ENVIRONMENTAL THAT IS SLOWING THINGS DOWN.
>> WE'RE LOOKING WHATEVER IT IS, IT'S A LITTLE WAYS OFF STILL [INAUDIBLE] BUT YES, SIR. I.
>> HOPEFULLY WE CAN SAVE [INAUDIBLE].
>> AS I MENTIONED, WE'LL HAVE SOME DOCUMENTS FOR COUNCIL TO LOOK AT.
HAD BEEN NEGOTIATED OUT EXTREMELY WELL VIA THE CITY'S NEGOTIATION PROCESS.
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO FIX OPENING COMMENT ABOUT [INAUDIBLE].
>> ADDRESSING THAT PROPOSED MORATORIUM, I GUESS, RATHER THAN DO THAT IN THAT LANGUAGE, YOU'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A MASTER PLAN REVISION.
>> BUT I GUESS THE NET RESULT WOULD BE THE SAME THOUGH, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY FURTHER CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT UNTIL AFTER THE MASTER PLAN.
CORRECT. ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE WITH FOUR VOTES AT THE WHARVES BOARD. LET ME JUST SAY THAT.
WE HAVE NOT TAKEN A VOTE ON ANYTHING, BUT I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE REVISED MASTER PLAN, WHICH IS GOING TO TAKE US SOME TIME TO DO.
WELL, TO THE POINT OF THE REASON FOR THAT PROPOSED MOTION ANYWAY WAS TO GIVE TIME FOR THE CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL TO BE OPERATIONAL AND SEE THE IMPACT ON OUR ISLAND.
GENERALLY, HOW MUCH CRUISE SHIP ACTIVITY CAN OUR ISLAND REALLY TAKE? BECAUSE THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF OTHER PLACES THAT HAVE BEEN OVERRUN BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T PLAN LIKE WE'RE PLANNING RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO PLAN AND INCORPORATE IT.
[01:50:03]
BUT I CAN'T PREDICT WHAT THIS WHARVES BOARD IS GOING TO DO OR WHAT FUTURE WHARVES BOARDS ARE GOING TO DO.BUT I THINK WE'VE HAD A REAL SUCCESS STORY WITH THE MASTER PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2019, CORRECT? BUT THE REAL SUCCESS STORY IS WE'RE AHEAD OF THE BALL GAME AND WE WANT TO SEE THE IMPACT OF ALL THIS.
BECAUSE IN THE MASTER PLAN, WE NEVER ENVISIONED THE GRAIN ELEVATORS COMING DOWN AND THAT'S OPENED UP A LOT MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR CARGO.
WE NEVER ENVISIONED TO MAKE THE BATTLESHIP, TEXAS AND WHERE IS THAT GOING? THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO WORK ON.
THE PROBLEM JUST LIKE WITH GALVESTON, THE CHALLENGE WITH THE PORT IS WE HAVE LIMITED SPACE.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH ROOM AND SO WE'VE GOT TO FIND THE BEST USE FOR THE LIMITED RESOURCE OF LAND THAT WE HAVE.
THAT'S ALSO WHY THIS REAL ESTATE COMMITTEES TOGETHER AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER TODAY.
YEAH. I NOTICED ON HERE UNDER 3C, IT SAYS CRUISE LINES, CARGO BUSINESS IN PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT BUT IT REALLY DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE OTHER PART OF THE POTENTIAL PORT DEVELOPMENT OF THAT FRACTION BETWEEN CRUISE SHIP 25 AND CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL 16 OR 10.
I UNDERSTAND AND IT HAVE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL LEVERAGING THE PROFITS FROM CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL 2 TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO CARGO.
AT WHICH TIME WHEN THAT'S ALL HAPPENING, YOU'LL HAVE EVEN MORE PROFITS AVAILABLE.
THAT IDEA THAT YOUR CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL PROFITS HAD BEEN SUPPORTING OR NOW SUPPORTING THE WEST END CARGO OPERATIONS.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT MAYBE THAT OPERATION, THE PROFIT FROM THAT CAN GO TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF THAT ATTRACTION AREA RIGHT THERE.
BECAUSE THAT'S THE FINAL PART OF THE AVAILABLE SPACE UP THERE, PRACTICALLY, THAT HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED AND HASN'T BEEN FOCUSED AND IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY, I THINK AFTER WE GET ALL THESE OTHER PIECES IN PLACES HERE TO BEGIN TO HELP.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE MASTER PLAN.
AGAIN, WE'RE 5, 6, 7 YEARS AHEAD OF WHERE WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO BE AND WE'RE BLESSED WITH THAT.
BUT WE DO HAVE LIMITED SPACE, WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S THE BEST USE OF IT AND HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT.
WE HAVE MARIE AND COUNCIL MAN RAWLINS.
WITH THAT NOTE, I WOULD HOPE THE APPROACH WOULD NEVER BE A MORATORIUM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL TO JUST EVEN THE CURRENT DISCUSSIONS.
I THINK ADDRESSING IT THROUGH THE MASTER PLAN IS A MUCH MORE PROACTIVE WAY TO DO IT.
YOU CAN THINK BACK ON PAST CITY MORATORIUMS SUCH AS ON CONSTRUCTIONS WHAT NOT THAT LIMITED US FOR 15-20 YEARS AND I WOULD HOPE THAT WOULD NEVER BE THE APPROACH OF THE WHARVES BOARD.
I THINK GETTING EVEN THAT TERMINOLOGY OUT THERE IS INAPPROPRIATE.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT MOVING WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND LOOKING AT THAT.
BOB WITH THE MASTER PLAN THAT OUTLINED FOR CRUISE TERMINALS, WE HAVE MET THAT GOAL AND NOW THIS IS WHERE WE'RE PUTTING A PAUSE ON ANY OTHER THOUGHTS UNTIL WE REEVALUATE THIS MASTER PLAN.
YES, SIR. THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
YEAH, THAT WAS THAT WAS JUST THE BIGGEST THING.
I HATE TO GET THAT OUT THERE THAT WERE CLOSED FOR BUSINESS, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT IN A TWO YEAR EFFECT OR A THREE YEAR EFFECT.
THERE'S MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF RESEARCH GOING IN TO THESE CRUISE LINES THAT HAVE SOME LOCATIONS AND SIGHT IN MIND AND WHEN A LOT OF THAT MOMENTUM IS ALREADY MOVING FORWARD THE TRAINS ON THE TRACK, IT WOULD BE UNFORTUNATE IF WE SHOOT OURSELVES ON THE FOOT WITH SO MANY PEOPLE HAVING A PLAN AND STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY.
THAT WORD MORATORIUM IS A BIG ROADBLOCK TO JUST SAY WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE NEXT SPOT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
VERY MUCH. JEFF AND [INAUDIBLE].
I'LL LET GO. SO H BEFORE B. GO AHEAD.
WHEN THIS ITEM WAS ON THE AGENDA.
IF YOU SAID LET'S NOT SAY MORATORIUM BUT LET'S PUT THIS AS MANY WORDS AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT SAYING THE WORD MORATORIUM, THAT'S WHAT I GOT THE IMPRESSION OF SPEAKING OF ANY ADDITIONAL CRUISE TERMINALS.
IN THE MEETING, WHICH WAS IN THE DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY PAYMENTS TO THE CITY BUT SAID THAT THERE WAS $33,000,000 IN UNRESTRICTED RESERVES,
[01:55:05]
$50 MILLION IN CONTRACTS COMMITTED, SAID THAT THE BOTTOM LINE THERE WAS MORE COMMITMENTS THAN REVENUES.WHAT I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE AND I DO GET THOSE REPORTS, I DO GET THE AGENDAS.
I THOUGHT YOU ALL HAD TWO MEETINGS A MONTH BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY ROGER CALLING SPECIAL MEETINGS TO KEEP THE WHARVES BOARD INFORMED OF ANY NEGOTIATIONS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU GUYS ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SAY WHEN THOSE THINGS COME UP.
WITHOUT PUTTING OUT THE MORATORIUM I WOULD HATE TO HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT, SO TO SPEAK, OR TURN OFF THE ENGINE AND THEN TURNING IT BACK ON.
ANOTHER THING IS DID WE SPEAK TO THE LABOR ASPECT OF IT? THERE'S A HUGE COMPONENT.
THIRTY FOUR PERCENT OF PEOPLE STAY OVERNIGHT, THAT OBVIOUSLY TRICKLES INTO THE HOTEL YEARS ASPECT OF THINGS.
BEFORE WE STARTS STOPPING, I THINK MAYBE GETTING THE BUSINESS INVOLVED.
THE RESIDENTS OBVIOUSLY HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC AND SOMETIMES MAYBE IT'S AS SIMPLE AS SOME SORT OF TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WE CAN WORK ON OR IS IT WE NEED TO PUT MORE RESOURCES HERE, ALLOCATE THERE? IT'S KIND OF THE WALKING AND CHEWING GUM AT THE SAME TIME, THE GROWING PAINS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
I THINK BEFORE WE DISCUSS A PAUSE IN THIS REVENUE, WHICH I DON'T PARTICULARLY UNDERSTAND THAT $12,000,000 IT'S RELIED ON FUTURE CASH FLOWS SORT OF DEAL DEFICIT, SO TO SPEAK.
BUT I DON'T WANT TO STOP ANYTHING THAT'S PROVEN TO BE A GOOD CASH COW SO TO SPEAK, I HOPE THE WHARVES BOARD WOULDN'T STOP IT.
IF THERE IS A POTENTIAL OF THE FUTURE THAT HEY, WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH X AMOUNT.
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MEET THIS AMOUNT, AND IF THERE IS SOME INTEREST IN THE CRUISE LINES OR AN ADDITIONAL ONE THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE A BOND OR THEY'RE GOING TO FUND IT COMPLETELY.
WE'RE A HOT TOPIC. WE'RE GOING TO BE THE THIRD LARGEST AFTER THE FOURTH TERMINAL, THE THIRD LARGEST IN THE NATION? I GOT QUOTED WRONG BEFORE SO WE'RE GETTING CLOSE, WE'RE CLOSE.
ALL I'LL SAY IS PORT EVERGLADES DIDN'T PARTICULARLY APPRECIATE THAT QUOTE.
WE HAVE COUNCILMAN RAWLINS AND THEN I THINK VICK YOU HAD SOME MEMBERS WANTED TO SPEAK. GO AHEAD.
I'M NOT SURE WHO CAN ANSWER THIS AND IT'S JUST MORE OF AN INFORMATIVE EDUCATIONAL QUESTION.
LET'S SAY WE HAD A CARGO TERMINAL AND A CRUISE TERMINAL.
WHAT IS POTENTIAL REVENUE THAT WE'VE SEEN AS AN AVERAGE FROM THE CARGO TERMINAL COMPARED TO POTENTIAL REVENUE WITH CRUISE TERMINAL? IF IT WAS JUST A MONETARY ISSUE, YOU WOULDN'T JUST HAVE CRUISE TERMINALS AS LONG AS THE DEMAND WAS THERE.
CAN WE NAME A RANGE? WELL, THAT'S WHAT OUR MASTER PLAN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT.
YEAH, GIVE THE NUMBERS IF IT'S SIGNIFICANT.
IT'S SIGNIFICANT. JUST SO YOU KNOW LAST YEAR, OUR TOTAL CARGO BUSINESS BROUGHT IN ABOUT $5,000,000 AND WE HAD ABOUT $68,000,000 IN REVENUE.
IF YOU DON'T MAKE COMPARISONS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 15 MILLION FOR A TERMINAL AND THAT'S ASSUMING THAT WE OWN THE TERMINAL AND WE OPERATE IT.
NOW, CRUISE TERMINAL 10, WE DON'T, IS A LAND LEASE SO IT IS PROBABLY CLOSER TO 10-12.
YOU CAN'T THERE'S NO COMPARISON AT THIS STAGE.
BUT HERE AGAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING, AS I SAID BEFORE, IS WE'RE TAKING THAT MONEY FROM THE CRUISE BUSINESS, PUTTING IT IN THE WEST END.
FOR DIVERSIFICATION PURPOSES AS WELL AS JOBS AND AS WELL AS INCREASING THE BUSINESS ON THE WEST END.
I THINK THAT IT'S HARD TO COMPARE THE TWO BUT I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY IT'S ABOUT OUR TOTAL CARGO BUSINESS, IT WAS ABOUT FIVE MILLION AND YOU TALK ABOUT THAT COMPARED TO ONE TERMINAL AT 10-15.
THANK YOU, ROGER. IF YOU HAD SOME MEMBERS WANT TO SPEAK AND THEN WE'LL HAVE COUNCILMAN FINKLEA HERE.
YEAH, I THINK JIM HAD HIS HAND.
JIM'S GOING TO HAVE TO DEPART US HERE OR LEAVE THE ROOM.
[02:00:01]
YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO SAY ECHOING, ALEX TOOK MY COMMENT ABOUT WE CAN WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.I THINK TO ME THAT IT TAKES AS WE KNOW, PROBABLY FOUR.
I THINK ROGER CAN COME IN 3, 4, 5 YEARS BETWEEN THE TIME YOU START TO SAY, LET'S TALK ABOUT A CRUISE TERMINAL.
BY THE TIME YOU GET THROUGH ALL THE FEASIBILITY, BY THE TIME YOU GET THROUGH ALL THE STUDIES.
BY TIME IT GETS TO NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CRUISE COMPANY ON WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
YOU'VE GOT A MULTIPLE YEAR PERIOD TO GET TO THAT POINT AND THAT'S TO GET TO A POINT WHERE YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION.
BECAUSE UNTIL YOU GET ALL THAT INFORMATION, THAT'S WHY WE STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT WITH THE BOND.
BECAUSE YOU GOT TO SPEND SOME MONEY TO FIND TO GET TO A DECISION POINT.
IT PROBABLY COST YOU $1,000,000 OR SO.
ENGINEERING STUDY, A MILLION A HALF.
THAT'S ONE IT'S CONTINGENT ON THE BOND PASSING AND IT'S PRIOR TO.
MY POINT IS THAT'S A LONG PROCESS AND SO TO ME WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO DO AND WE'LL HAVE THE DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD IS ONCE YOU STOP THAT THEN YOU'RE NOT GOING TO KNOW ANYTHING FOR FIVE OR SIX OR SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS.
SO TO ME, YOU'VE GOT TO WALK AND CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.
WE'VE GOT IT AND I THINK LOOKING AT THE MASTER PLAN IS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
GO BACK PARTICULARLY ON THE CRUISE SIDE.
BUT TO DO THAT WE NEED INPUT AND WE'VE GOT TO KEEP TALKING TO CRUISE COMPANIES ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE.
WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT LOCATIONS.
THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF MOVING PARTS THERE AND TO ME, WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS STOP THAT PROCESS.
IT TAKES FOUR YEARS TO START THE ENGINE BACK UP AND GET IT RUNNING.
WELL, THAT'S RIGHT. IT ALREADY TAKES TWO OR THREE YEARS TO EVEN GET TO THAT POINT, SPENDING SOME AMOUNT OF MONEY NOT GREAT AMOUNTS TO GET TO A DECISION POINT.
TO ME WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IS STOP THAT PROCESS BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WE DON'T HAVE THE INPUTS TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION AND THE OTHER PART IS, YEAH, IF YOU SAY CLOSE FOR BUSINESS, THE CRUISE COMPANIES THEY'VE GOT A NEW SHIP, THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IT SOMEWHERE AND IF THEY CAN'T DO IT IN GALVESTON IT GOES SOMEWHERE.
LESS COMPETITIVE, SO TO SPEAK AND I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS I APPRECIATE YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT.
THIS WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA BY A COUPLE OF TRUSTEES WHO POSED THE QUESTION SHOULD THIS TAKE PLACE? AFTER CONVERSATION, WE OBVIOUSLY SAID LET'S SHELVE IT BUT NOT UNTIL WE CAN MEET.
LET'S DO IT UNTIL WE ALL CAN MEET.
WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE TABLE IS I'M GLAD THE WORD MORATORIUM IS GOING TO BE THROWN OUT.
I'VE BEEN TO THESE CONFERENCES AND THE WORK THAT ROGER AND THE STAFF HAS DONE TO PROMOTE GALVESTON SUPPORT NOT JUST UNITED STATE WORLDWIDE IS AMAZING.
HE'S TALKING ABOUT A PIPELINE AND THAT PIPELINE NEEDS TO STAY FILLED.
WHAT I'M HEARING ALSO FROM THE TABLE IS LET'S LOOK AT THE IMPACT THAT THE CURRENT SITUATION WE HAD.
AT THAT POINT LET'S DO A TRAFFIC STUDY WHEN SOMETHING COMES UP, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OPTIONS.
WHEN SOMETHING COMES UP, AT THAT POINT, LET'S LOOK AT NOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK.
IF THAT'S THE CASE IT DOESN'T WORK BUT LET'S NOT DO THAT BEFORE.
JIM AND RICHARD? JIM AND WE'VE GOT RICHARD AND THEN WE GOT DAVID.
I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF REVIEWING THE MASTER PLAN OR SPECIFICALLY, WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE FUTURE CRUISE OPERATIONS.
IT'D BE A NO BRAINER IF WE WERE JUST LOOKING AT RETURN ON INVESTMENTS AND WHO WANT BRING DOLLARS IN THE COMMUNITY.
TAKE CRUISE SHIP ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 41ST STREET.
THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S ALL THE EGGS IN ONE BASKET, THAT'S LABOR.
THAT'S OTHER ECONOMIC RAMIFICATIONS TO THE COMMUNITY THAT AT LEAST THIS BOARD HADN'T BEEN WILLING TO SAY, TAKE TAKE CRUISE ALL THE WAY OUT.
MY CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS ARE LIKE FOOTBALL FIELDS.
WE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON KERRVILLE TO USE IT ONE FRIDAY NIGHT FOR SIX TIMES.
WE'VE GOT CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS.
I ADMITTED I DON'T KNOW THE CRUISE SHIP IS.
BUT WE HAVE CRUISE SHIP TERMINALS THAT WE USE PROBABLY 35% OF THE TIME AND IT'S SAY VACANT.
WE'RE SUCH A GOOD MARKET AND CONTRARY TO OUR OWN EGOS, THEY'RE NOT COMING HERE JUST BECAUSE THEY LOVE GALVESTON.
WE'VE GOT 20 MILLION PEOPLE WHO CAN DRIVE FOUR HOURS AND BE HERE.
THAT'S THE MARKET, THAT AIN'T GOING AWAY WHENEVER WE PUT ANOTHER TERMINAL HERE.
THAT MARKET IS STILL GOING TO BE HERE AND GROW.
WHAT I WANT TO DO IS AS PART OF THIS WHOLE EXPLORATION OF WHAT WE DO NEXT.
IF WE'RE SUCH A GOOD MARKET, THOSE CRUISE SHIPS COMING HERE ON WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY INSTEAD OF FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.
LET'S GET OUR USAGE UP TO CLOSE TO PEAK OR JUST GO BUILT ANOTHER ONE IT'S GOING TO SIT THERE VACANT 70% OF THE TIME.
YEAH, BUT IF YOU PUT UP A SIGN THAT SAYS YOU'RE CLOSED WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? NO.
>> WE DO HAVE MEAN BUT MARINER OF THE SEAS IS A FIVE-DAY CRUISE.
[02:05:02]
I COME IN ON WEEKDAYS.I AGREE THAT IT'S NOT A HARD STOP BECAUSE THEN IT TAKES A WHOLE LOT TO REV UP THE ENGINE TO GO FORWARD.
WE'VE GOT THE BATTLESHIP, TEXAS.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYBODY AT THE TABLE WHO DON'T WANT THE BATTLESHIP, TEXAS IN GALVESTON.
IF WE PUT A CRUISE SHIP TERMINAL WHERE THE NEXT ONE WAS BEING DISCUSSED, WELL THAT PRECLUDES ONE OPTION FOR THE BATTLESHIP.
NOW YOU'RE DOWN JUST A COUPLE.
THAT'S PART OF THE MASTER PLAN.
WE CAN CALL IT WHAT WE WANT, USE THE SEMANTICS WE WANT, BUT I WANT TO FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WE CAN DO TO ACCOMMODATE.
I'VE NOT ALWAYS BEEN A BELIEVER IS BETTER. BETTER IS BETTER.
WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED PAYING PRINCIPAL BACK ON THE $200 MILLION BARELY ONE PAYMENT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS OF CT 16.
UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS WE'VE MADE IN ASKING THE CITY TO APPROVE $200 MILLION IN BONDS.
OUR PROJECTIONS HAVE BEEN PRETTY GOOD, BUT TIME WILL TELL.
WE NEED TO DIGEST IT AND MAKE SURE WE PAY THAT BACK. CAN'T PAY THAT BACK.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE MAY BE SENDING MORE MONEY OVER HERE, WHICH IS FINE.
IT'S YOUR ASSET. IT'S THE CITY'S.
MORATORIUM IS PROBABLY INCORRECT PAUSE TO SLOW DOWN TO LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE BEFORE WE MAKE ANY DEFINITIVE LONG-TERM COMMITMENTS, AND WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.
>> AS THE AUTHOR OF THE ITEM THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA, LET ME SAY I DIDN'T ENVISION A MORATORIUM.
THAT WASN'T EVEN IN THE DISCUSSION.
>> I WASN'T ON THE AGENDA EVEN ION.
>> RIGHT. BUT AN ASSESSMENT OF ONCE CT 16 IS OPEN AND OPERATING, I THINK AN ASSESSMENT OF HOW THAT IMPACTS THE COMMUNITY IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING.
SO I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DO.
NOW, I ALSO SAY I BELIEVE THAT UPDATING OUR STRATEGIC PLAN WOULD BE VERY GOOD.
HOWEVER, OUR BOARD VOTED TO DO THAT BACK IN MAY AND WE HAVEN'T DONE IT YET.
SO WE NEED SOMETIMES I PUT THINGS ON THE AGENDA TO HAVE US BE RETROSPECTIVE, SO WE CAN PERHAPS MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE REALLY NEED TO UPDATE THE STRATEGIC PLAN AND GET A SENSE OF WHERE WE WANT TO GO.
BUT THAT LITTLE SPOT THERE WHERE IN THE CURRENT STRATEGIC PLAN IT CALLS FOR COMMERCIAL AND RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS BECOMING THE KEYHOLE.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT VERY CAREFULLY, AND WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE CRUISE OR WHETHER IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING ELSE, I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST TO HAVE THAT DONE THROUGH A GOOD STUDY.
>> I THINK MAYBE A GOOD STUDY WOULD BE GOOD, BUT SOMETHING THAT A WOULD GENERATE SALES TAX, AND IF THERE IS A CHANCE TO PRIVATIZE TO GENERATE PROPERTY TAX, BUT SOMETHING LIKE HOUSING THERE, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON JOBS, THE ECONOMY.
I HATE TO QUOTE THE SOPRANOS HERE, BUT SOMETHING LIKE AN ESPLANADE WOULD BE REALLY SOMETHING COOL DOWN THERE WHERE YOU CAN HAVE A RESTAURANT, STORE FRONT. RIGHT.
>> THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE CURRENT STRATEGIC PLAN. THAT'S WHAT IT CALLED.
>> SO WE HAVE MARIE AND THEN WE HAVE DAVID FAKE ON.
>> THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, FOR WORK TO PARTED.
>> I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON THE COMMENTS ABOUT TRAFFIC STUDIES AND WHATNOT AND SAY THAT.
I THINK ROGER IS ALWAYS LOOKING AT THAT, AND MAYBE I'M JUST BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I AM THE HCAC REPRESENTATIVE.
I KNOW HOW MANY GRANTS HE HAS GOTTEN TO ELEVATE AND ALLEVIATE INNER ROADS AND SO FORTH.
>> IS THAT CONNECTING, I GUESS, 19 TO TERMINAL 10.
WHEN IS THAT GOING TO BE WHEN ARE WE LOOKING AT THAT OPENING UP?
>> WELL, THE INTERNAL ROAD IS OPEN,
[02:10:01]
IS ALREADY OPEN, AND BEING USED.WE ARE TAKING TRAFFIC OFF ARB SIDE USING THAT.
>> NOT ALL THE WAY TO THE WEST PIECE.
THE PIECE CONNECTING THE 14TH THIS.
>> YEAH. THAT WAS WHAT WE HAD MONEY FROM HDAC TO STUDY THAT BECAUSE THERE'S RIGHT AWAY THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PURCHASED THERE.
I WOULD SAY WE DO HAVE A TRAFFIC STUDY OR A TRAFFIC SIMULATION FOR CT 16 ALREADY COMPLETED.
WE SHOWED IT AT OUR OPEN MEET.
WE HAD A OPEN MEETING LAST MONTH WHERE WE PRESENTED THAT TO LET EVERYBODY LOOK AT IT.
THE ONLY TRAFFIC PROBLEM THAT WE SEE WITH 16 IS INSIDE THE TERMINAL ITSELF.
THIS IS WHERE THIS IS NOT IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T BLEED OVER INTO HARBORSIDE DRIVE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE SIMULATION SHOWS.
I WOULD JUST SAY WHEN I LIVE ON THE WEST END AND ALL SUMMER LONG, FALL AND SPRING.
I MEAN, IT'S PACKED UP ALL THE WAY TO 45, AND WE DON'T EVEN DO THAT.
WE MOVE THE TRAFFIC OFF THE HARBOURSIDE DRIVE, AND WE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY DONE THAT IN AT TEN, AND WE BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AGAIN AT 16 BASED ON OUR SIMULATIONS.
I WOULD TELL YOU THAT ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE DOING IN FEBRUARY 18 IS WE'RE HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING IN CRUISE TERMINAL 28, WHERE WE'RE INVITING THE PUBLIC TO COME AND TALK AND SPEAK BECAUSE I HEAR ALL THIS STUFF WHILE THE COMMUNITY IS UPSET ABOUT ALL THE TRAFFIC.
WELL, THEY'RE NOT TELLING ME THAT.
WE DID A SMALL SURVEY AT OUR LAST OPEN MEETING AND 96% OF THE PEOPLE.
WE HAVE WE HAD ABOUT 200 PEOPLE SHOWED UP AND 70 PEOPLE REPLIED TO A SURVEY THAT WE PUT OUT OF THERE.
AT THE LAST MINUTE, WE SAID, HEY, HERE'S A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE CRUISE BUSINESS? AND 96% OF THE PEOPLE SAID THEY LOVED WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE CRUISE BUSINESS.
I WOULD JUST SAY TO YOU THAT THIS IS THE SENTIMENT THAT I HEAR ALL OVER THE ISLAND.
I SPEAK TO EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT I CAN, AND THEY ALL OVERWHELMINGLY COME UP TO ME AND SAY, WE'RE WHAT YOU'RE DOING OVER THERE IS FANTASTIC.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT WE TAKE CALCULATED RISKS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE DO OUT HERE.
WE HAVE STUDIED ALL THIS STUFF EVERY WHICH WAY AND WE'LL STUDY IT MORE.
I THINK THAT IF YOU TALK ABOUT.
HERE AGAIN, I'M OBVIOUSLY A CRUISE PERSON BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S GOING TO TURN THE REST OF THIS PORT AROUND IS ADDITIONAL REVENUES.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEAR IS, THIS IS NOT AFFECTING US MORE THAN TWO HOURS A DAY.
THIS IS SATURDAYS AND SUNDAYS WHERE THE TRAFFIC BACKS UP, MAYBE UP SOME OF THE ROADS FROM COMING DOWN FROM BROADWAY OR ON HARBORSIDE DRIVE.
WE'RE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF BRINGING ON A PACKAGE THAT WILL ALLOW US BECAUSE ALL THIS INFORMATION IS BEING STORED BY WAYS.
IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH WAYS, WHEN YOU GO ON A TRIP, YOU USE WAYS, ALL THIS INFORMATION IS BEING STORED BY WAYS.
AT THIS CURRENT TIME, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO PULL THAT INFORMATION DOWN FROM WAYS AND PUT IT IN READABLE FORM.
WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT IS IT'S 6-8 MINUTES.
THIS IS OUR OWN NUMBERS, 6-8 MINUTES IN TRAFFIC ON HARBORSIDE DRIVE, ON A THREE CRUISE DAY.
THE FACT THAT WE ARE HURTING THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
I'M NOT HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
I'M NOT HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
I MEAN, SAID, WE WILL DO EVERYTHING WE NEED.
AS I SAID ON 18 FEBRUARY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN OPEN MEETING, OPEN MIKE AND WE'LL HAVE A RECORDED MEETING WHERE WE'LL INVITE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO COME UP AND SAY SOMETHING AT THAT MEETING.
>> I JUST WANT THE RECORD TO REFLECT THAT HE'S AN OLD TIME GALVESTONI BECAUSE HE SAID WHERE HE LIVES IS THE WEST END.
>> I THINK THAT'S PRETTY FUNNY.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT.
BECAUSE THE 89 STREET LIGHT SEA WALL, THE TIMING CAN BE OFF, AND IT WILL BACK THE TRAFFIC UP TO DICKINSON.
IT WAS A CONCERN TO, I THINK EVERYBODY ON THIS TRAFFIC.
IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE COMMUNITY AND I KNOW THE WARS BOARD WAS DELIGHTED TO SEE HOW
[02:15:04]
THAT THAT STRUCTURE OF THE MANAGEMENT OF TRACT TRAFFIC AT CRUISE TERMINAL 10 WORKED SO WELL.IT DID SEEMS TO HAVE WORKED HISTORY.
>> ROGER I WOULD JUST SAY FEBRUARY 18 AT WHAT TIME ROGER GO AHEAD 40.
>> COME ON THIS IS ELECTRIFIED.
>>I JUST QUICKLY. I WANT TO SAY HERE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE ARE NOT FORGETTING ABOUT AREAS FOR THE PUBLIC.
I HAVE CHAMPIONED THAT FROM DAY 1.
I'D LOVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE SOMETHING DOWN HERE AT THE PUBLIC.
I KNOW BOB HAS SEEN THE YOU'VE ALL SEEN THE PRESENTATIONS.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY THAT WE CAN TURN THIS INTO MORE OF A WALKWAY BOARDWALK AND CREATE SOMETHING HERE FOR GALSON.
THAT'S NOT GONE AWAY EITHER, I MEAN, POTENTIAL FOR THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, I MEAN, WHAT CAN YOU SAY? I MEAN, IF IT'S NOT REVENUES TO GENERATE FOR THE PORT TO MOVE FORWARD, THEN, YOU KNOW, PUT SOMETHING HERE THAT'S GOING TO NOT GENERATE REVENUES.
I MEAN, THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY, I MEAN, AND I'M A I'M A HIRED HELP, RIGHT? I WORK FOR THE BOARD, AND THE BOARD MAKES THE DECISIONS AND I IMPLEMENT.
SO WHATEVER HAPPENS AND THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THIS IS MY OPINION, AND I THINK THAT WE ARE DOING A GREAT JOB AT BUILDING THIS BUSINESS AND CONTINUING TO BUILD THIS BUSINESS AND HAVE LEAST AMOUNT OF EFFECT ON THE COMMUNITY.
THAT'S WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS TELLING ME.
I THINK THAT HERE AGAIN, WHATEVER OUR BOARD DECIDES, OBVIOUSLY, THAT'S WHAT OUR STAFF DOES.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
I AM VERY HOPEFUL THAT THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CONTINUE TO DO HERE BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THIS AREA RIGHT HERE IS ADJACENT TO SOME CRUISE BUSINESS THAT WANTS TO EXPAND.
WE'RE GOING TO PUSH FORWARD ON THE MASTER PLAN.
THE MASTER PLAN HERE AGAIN, THE COMPONENTS OUTSIDE OF PELICAN ISLAND, THE COMPONENTS FOR THE MASTER PLAN, THERE'S NOTHING NEW.
EVERYTHING RELATES TO BEING ABLE TO GET ALL THREE OF THESE LIFTS FILLED AND USEABLE FOR CARGO.
WE HAVE RECORD HOURS, 600,000 MAN HOURS.
ROGER, ONE THING THAT'S NEW THOUGH IS THE GRAIN ELEVATORS ARE. LOCKS CARGO.
I MEAN, I WOULD TELL YOU, A CRUISE COMPANY WOULD LOVE TO GO RIGHT HERE, 20 ACRES ON THE WATER.
BUT JUST, HERE AGAIN, WHAT LESS TRAFFIC.
I'M THE POINT ACROSS ABOUT THE MAN HOURS.
THEY ARE HAPPY. WE ARE CONTINUING TO BRING IN BUSINESS HERE.
AS I MENTIONED, BRETT'S JOB AND HIS STAFF HAVE CONTINUED TO UTILIZE THIS TRAFFIC.
WHEN YOU CAN'T I COULDN'T WALK FROM HERE TO HERE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE ALL OF ITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
BUT THESE GUYS ARE MANAGING TO CONTINUE TO BRING IN CARGO BUSINESS OVER HERE, WHEREVER WE CAN PUT IT.
THIS IS GOING TO STILL GENERATE AND ONE OF THE THINGS AND HERE AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SAY TOO MUCH.
I GET MYSELF IN TROUBLE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS IS WE UTILIZE EVERY ONE OF THESE CARGO BERTHS WHEN THE SHIPS ON HERE.
I JUST CHALLENGE THEM TO GO OUT THERE AND LOOK. THEY'RE THERE.
OTHER SHIPS HERE SIX, $7,000,000 A YEAR IN BUSINESS.
SO WE'RE UTILIZING EVERY ASSET WE HAVE IN CRUISE.
WE NEED A GOOD PLAN AND I THINK WE FORMULATED THAT HERE.
I THINK WE JUST NEED A GOOD PLAN AND NOT HAVE A KNEE-JERK REACTION TO WRITING CHECKS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT.
WE'RE NOT THREE WRITING CHECKS HERE.
WE STILL GOT $50,000,000 WORTH OF CHECKS RIGHT THERE. MAYBE FEMALE.
EVERY TIME ROGER PRESENTS AT THE WEST GALVESTON PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION MEETING, I GET FLOODED BY CALLS.
THEY'RE PUTTING CARGO ON THE WEST END.
>> DAVID FINKLEY HAS BEEN SITTING PATIENTLY.
DAVID, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP EARLIER.
>> MAYOR. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.
YEAH. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY GOT THEIR DISCUSSION POINTS OUT THERE.
I WANTED TO FIRST OFF, TALK TO TRUSTEE MOORE.
YOU STATED THAT BACK IN MAY THAT THE WARS BOARD APPROVED THE UPDATE OF THE MASTER PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES. NOT APPROVED AN UPDATE.
[02:20:02]
>> THE STATUS OF THAT UPDATED HAS NOT BEGUN YET, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> CHAIRMAN PEARSON, YOU STATED THAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE DONE IN Q1 OF 2025.
>> DO YOU ALREADY HAVE A CONSULTANT ON BOARD TO UPDATE THAT MASTER PLAN?
>> NO, WE'RE DOING IT INTERNALLY.
>> WE'RE DOING IT INTERNALLY. WHO'S YOUR LAND PLANNER THAT'S LEADING THAT CHARGE?
>> YOU KNOW WHAT WE UPDATE THE MASTER PLAN EVERY MONTH.
IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT STATISTICS.
>> NOT ABOUT THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
>> WHAT IS THE SHEET IS THERE THAT WE GIVE OUT EVERY MONTH NOW?
>> NO. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE BOARD WANTS TO LOOK LIKE WHAT WE DID IN 2019.
>> THAT WAS LAST MONTH THAT WE SAID, LET'S REDO THE MATH BECAUSE I WAS VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT IN THE MEETING.
>> LOOKED IT UP THIS MORNING BEFORE I CAME.
>> I DON'T WANT TO ARGUE WITH YOU BECAUSE WHAT WE DID AT MAY MEETING WAS BRING THESE NUMBERS FORWARD EVERY MEETING.
>> WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SAME THING.
>> HERE'S MY POINT. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FIND A BIGGER ADVOCATE FOR MASTER PLANNING OTHER THAN MYSELF.
AS A CIVIL ENGINEER, FOR THE MASTERS IN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AND URBAN PLANNING, THIS IS MY MAJOR FOCUS.
I DROVE IT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FOR COUNCIL, AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW THROUGH WITH IT VERY CAREFULLY AND METHODICALLY AT THE WHARVES BOARD.
YOU ALL MANAGE FOR THE CITY THE MOST VALUABLE LAND IN THE ENTIRE CITY, JUST SO HAPPENS THAT NONE OF THAT IS ON OUR TAX ROLL.
THAT IS A HUGE RESPONSIBILITY BECAUSE WHAT YOU DO HAS A HUGE IMPACT NOT JUST ON THE PORT FACILITIES AND PORT OPERATIONS, BUT ALSO TO THE ENTIRE CITY AND TO OUR RESIDENTS.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD THAT WHEN YOU TAKE FORWARD THE RESPONSIBILITY OF UPDATING YOUR MASTER PLAN THAT YOU'RE DOING IT VERY METHODICALLY AND APPROPRIATELY.
LAND PLANNING IS NOT DONE BY NONLAND PLANNERS.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ALL UNDERSTAND YOUR BUSINESS BETTER THAN WE DO, I GET THAT.
BUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DETERMINING THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THEN ALSO LOOKING AT THE ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT THAT PROVIDES AND BALANCING THAT WITH BOTH JOB CREATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SALES AND SALES TAXES THAT COME BACK EITHER TO THE STATE OR LOCALLY, THAT'S A HUGE RESPONSIBILITY.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL ARE GOING TO TAKE THE TIME TO DO THAT RIGHT.
THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO STATE IS THAT IT CAN'T BE DONE ABSENT OF THE IMPACT TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THE CITY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR, HARBORSIDE AND THE REMAINDER OF OUR NETWORK.
PREVIOUSLY, WHEN WE DID CRUISE TERMINAL 16, YOU ALL WERE WELL AHEAD IN ALREADY CONTRACTING WITH IT AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION BEFORE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY WAS DONE.
I SAT HERE IN SEPTEMBER OF 2023, ALONG WITH FORMER COUNCILMEMBER LISTOWSKI, AND I SAID, WHERE IS A TRAFFIC STUDY? I WAS TOLD THEN THAT IT WOULD BE DONE BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
IT WAS NOT DELIVERED BY THE END OF THE YEAR WHEN IN FACT, IT WAS ONLY STARTED AND DATA COLLECTION STARTED IN FEBRUARY OF 2024, AND IT WAS ISSUED TO US IN MAY OR SO.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR LINES OF COMMUNICATION WITH PORT AND THEN THE THINGS AND THE INTENT THAT WE COMMUNICATE TO YOU IS UNDERSTOOD AND THAT TIMELINES ARE ACCEPTED AND RESPONDED TO APPROPRIATELY AND HELD TO.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S VERY CLEAR BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING READY TO GO FORWARD AND UPDATE A MASTER PLAN.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR LAND USES ARE GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY, BUT I DO KNOW THAT WHATEVER YOU COME BACK WITH HAS TO HAVE DATA, NOT JUST FINANCIAL NUMBERS ON PAGE, BUT DATA THAT TELLS US AS A COMMUNITY HOW WE ARE TO RESPOND TO PROVIDE THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR MASTER PLAN SUCCESSFUL.
>> LET ME EMPHASIZE. THE FOLKS THAT DID OUR MASTER PLAN, I THINK IT'S FOR MAYO.
>> BA, [LAUGHTER] I THINK DID AN EXCELLENT JOB.
>> THAT'S WHO I WOULD ADVOCATE ASSISTING US IN UPDATING THAT.
>> NO, ACTUALLY. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YES. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, FIRST OF ALL, MET VICK IF YOU'VE MET YOUR APPROVAL ON OUR APRIL 24TH MEETING.
ANOTHER AGENDA ITEM, WE NEED TO GET AN UPDATE ON THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE BOARD WHERE WE ARE.
ALSO, VICK, WILL WE HAVE AN ITEM ON OUR COMING UP JANUARY MEETING FOR THE WHARVES BOARD TO DISCUSS MORE CONCERNING THE MASTER PLAN?
>> THE LOGISTICS OF IT AND MOVING FORWARD, YES.
MAKE SURE THAT'S ON THE AGENDA, ROGER AND ANGIE.
[02:25:03]
>> JUST A CLARIFICATION, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF NOMENCLATURE, BUT I THINK WHAT ROGERS DISCUSSING IS ALL OF THE PROJECTS IN THE MASTER PLAN, WHICH THE MASTER PLAN GENERATED THE CAPITAL PROJECTS, ALL THE WORK THAT WAS DONE.
THAT IS UPDATED, AND THAT'S A REALLY GOOD DOCUMENT, AND I ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE FUNDING SOURCES AND EVERYTHING.
BUT I THINK THE THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS GOING BACK IN AND REVISITING THE WORK THAT BA DID AND PROBABLY WITH BA [OVERLAPPING] TO GO BACK AND RE-LOOK NOW AT THE CRUISE NUMBERS, AT THE CARGO NUMBERS, AND SPECIFICALLY ON THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> THIS AREA SLIPS OVER HERE, WHAT MIGHT BE, WHICH IS WHAT THE REAL ESTATE IS REALLY LOOKING AT AS WELL.
BUT GOING BACK AND REVISITING, AS YOU SAID, DAVID, THOSE DATA SOURCES AND THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WERE MADE AND THE GROWTH NUMBERS AND REFORMULATING THAT AND SEEING WHAT WE DO.
>> I THINK YOU ALL ARE SITTING NOW. DON'T TAKE THIS LIGHTLY.
I THINK WHAT YOU'VE DONE IS YOU'VE DONE EXACTLY WHAT YOU TOLD THAT YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO DO THE MASTER PLAN, AND THEN YOU SAW AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE MARKETPLACE TO GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP PORT CRUISE, WHICH I THINK WAS ABSOLUTELY THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
NOW YOU'VE GOT THAT IN PLACE, AND SO THE CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE IS NOW YOU'RE WORKING WITH MORE LIMITED LAND.
YOU'VE GOT VERY NARROW STRETCH OF LAND BETWEEN WHATEVER, DOWNTOWN, VERY NARROW STRIP OF LAND.
BUT YOU'VE ALSO GOT A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT TO DEVELOP A PRODUCT THAT THEN ENHANCES THE CONNECTION BETWEEN DOWNTOWN AND THE PORT.
HOWEVER YOU GO ABOUT DOING IT, WHETHER YOU GO ABOUT DOING IT INTERNALLY, WHETHER YOU GO OUT TO THE MARKETPLACE IN TERMS OF SEEKING DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, WHETHER YOU PARTNER WITH THE CITY TO AN EXTENT, I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY KEY TO THE FUTURE DIVERSITY AND ECONOMIC SUCCESS OF THE PORT.
>> THE CRITICAL THING IS WE HAD A MASTER PLAN IN 2019, AND THE DEMAND HAS EXCEEDED WHAT WE EXPECTED IN 2019, AND WE'RE AHEAD OF THE BALL GAME.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT A WONDERFUL PROBLEM TO HAVE.
LET'S TIE THIS UP HERE IN THIS PARTICULAR SECTION.
>> FOR MY CLARIFICATION, FIRST OF ALL, I APOLOGIZE FOR THROWING THAT WORD MORATORIUM OUT THERE.
THAT WAS THE WRONG CHOICE OF WORDS, [LAUGHTER] MORATORIUM.
[OVERLAPPING] IN FACT, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID HERE ABOUT THE DIRECTION GOING FORWARD, ESPECIALLY THE MASTER PLAN THAT CAN HAPPEN SOON. THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS SECTION? YES.
>> JUST ONE TINY ONE, I DON'T KNOW.
MAYBE I HAD TO USE THE WORD BITCH.
MAYBE I HEAR PEOPLE THAT BITCH A LITTLE MORE ABOUT TRAFFIC AND WHATNOT, BUT THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH THE HOMELAND SECURITY, I GUESS BORDER PATROL.
>> CUSTOMS AND BORDER PATROL, AND THE CRUISE LINES FOR DISEMBARKATION/EMBARKATION TIMES, IT'S SIX MINUTES, MAYBE SHAVE IT DOWN TO FIVE MINUTES OF TRAFFIC.
JUST ANYTHING THAT YOU COULD WORK WITH YOUR PARTNERS OVER AT THE WHARVES WHO DO BUSINESS WITH YOU GUYS TO ALLEVIATE ANY CONCERNS, THAT'S I THINK WE WOULD ALL APPRECIATE.
>> I THINK I'D SAY TOO, IF YOU GUYS GET SPECIFIC THINGS, LET'S MAKE SURE WE GET LINES OF COMMUNICATION.
WE CAN'T ACT ON IT IF WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
>> JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK DATA POINTS.
WE TALK ABOUT THE WEST END AS IF IT'S A FOOL'S GOLD OR SOMETHING.
WE'RE DEVELOPING THAT, BUT IT'S NEVER GOING TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS CRUISE, AND THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE.
BUT I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER WITH WHAT FACILITIES HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO DO BUSINESS THERE.
THE FACILITIES HAVE BEEN FALLING IN THE WATER FOR DECADES, SO WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE WEST END IS GOING TO CONTRIBUTE WHEN WE GET MORE AND MORE REDEVELOPMENT OUT THERE.
IT'S JUST A POINT THAT WE'VE HAD NOTHING OUT THERE.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A BUSINESS WHEN YOU HAVE NOTHING?
>> A TON OF MY DISTRICT IS UNION ILA GUYS AND SOME OF THEM ARE YOUNG RAISING THEIR FAMILIES.
SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN THERE GENERATIONALLY, AND THIS IS THEIR TURN, SO TO SPEAK, OF THE ILA.
REALLY, THEY'RE EXCITED TO SEE THE GROWTH.
THERE IS A HUGE BENEFIT TO JOBS IN KEEPING PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE AND WORK HERE.
AGAIN, MOST OF THE HISTORY I LOOKED AT WAS UNION STUFF.
IT'S A HUGE PART OF GALVESTON AND THE WHARVES OF GALVESTON, AND THE HISTORY.
[02:30:02]
BEAU, YOU CAN PROBABLY TELL ME MORE STORIES ABOUT THE WATERFRONT THAN ANYBODY HERE, BUT I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE WHERE WE'RE GOING AHEAD OF THAT MASTER PLAN. [OVERLAPPING]>> I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A CLOSING COMMENT ON THIS TOPIC IF WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO BE IN TOUCH WITH OUR LEGISLATORS.
IF WE DON'T GET THE REST OF THE PORT DREDGED, IT'S GOING TO BE A MOOT POINT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE AREN'T CAPABLE OF HANDLING SOME OF THE SHIPS THAT WE SHOULD BE.
>> WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, I GUESS I SKIPPED OVER THAT.
WE HEARD THE GDP TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR NAVY SUB PINS THERE.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVED WITH SUB PINS ARE SOME SORT OF MANUFACTURING.
THAT ALMOST MAKES YOUR DREDGING PROBLEM GO AWAY IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYS, WE'RE GOING TO DREDGE IT ALL.
>> I GUESS WE'VE SKIPPED OVER THE PELICAN ISLAND DEVELOPMENT, SO TO SPEAK.
>> WELL, IT'S STILL IN A WORKING PROGRESS ON THE PELICAN ISLAND.
I THINK ROGER WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT OF WORKING WITH PORT HOUSTON.
>> [OVERLAPPING] I WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT OF VALUE BECAUSE I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND, WE TALK ABOUT FUNDING FROM THE CITY AND FROM THE PORT, WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THE CHANNEL IN TERMS OF OUR OBLIGATIONS.
WHEN IT BEGAN, IT WAS THE CITY'S OBLIGATION FOR THE DREDGING OF THE CHANNEL.
BRETT JUST GOT THE INFORMATION.
HE LIVES THIS EVERY DAY. COME ON.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT HE EXPLAIN TO YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY ON THE DREDGING AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE INVESTING IN THAT.
>> IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE, BRETT.
>> SURE. GOOD MORNING. I'M BRETT MILUTIN, I'M THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR FROM PORT OF GALVESTON.
I'VE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST 24 YEARS, SO IT RAISED ME AND I'M BOY.
BUT WHAT ROGER WAS MENTIONING IS WE ARE STEWARDSHIP TO THE ENTIRE MARITIME INDUSTRY IN THE HARBOR.
BY SAYING THAT, WE ARE THE NONFEDERAL SPONSOR FOR THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
THEREFORE, ANYTIME THERE IS A MAJOR CAPITAL PROJECT, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN IN 2011, THE DEEPENING FROM 41 FT TO 46 FEET, AND THEN ALSO WHEN WE EXTENDED IT FURTHER OUT THIS WAY TO 41 FEET, WE HAD TO PAY THE NONFEDERAL SHARE OF THAT.
IT WAS 35% OF LOW OVER 30 MILLION, SO WE'RE PAYING, I THINK, CLOSE TO 12 MILLION THAT WE'RE PAYING OVER.
IT'S ACTUALLY A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, LOW INTEREST, BUT WE'RE PAYING THAT BACK.
THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER PROJECT THAT WE'RE JUST WAITING FOR THE PELICAN ISLAND PLACEMENT AREA TO BE [INAUDIBLE] BY THE ARMY CORPS.
>> NO. IT'S THE GRAPH. THE FEDERAL PLACEMENT HERE, FOR THE LEVEES TO BE COMPLETED ON THAT BEFORE THEY'LL ACTUALLY DO THE CHANNEL EXTINCTION.
THIS IS WHAT MARIE WAS SPEAKING ON WAS TO GET THAT DREDGED 46 FEET ALL THE WAY TO THE SULFUR DOCK SO THAT TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TERMINALS CAN BRING IN THEIR [INAUDIBLE].
THEY CAN REALLY EXCEL THEIR CARGO AND THEIR REVENUE.
THAT LOOKS TO TAKE PLACE IN ABOUT A YEAR OR TWO, BUT THE PORT IN THE NONFEDERAL SPONSOR, WE ARE SUPPORTING 1.5 MILLION TOWARDS THAT.
IT'S SHARED WITH TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL 66%, 33%.
>> CAN YOU SPEAK TO A STATISTIC THAT'S AN AMAZING ACCOMPLISHMENT FOR THE PORT, AND IT IS BECAUSE OF TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL.
WE WERE NOT IN THE TOP 50 PORTS IN CARGO FOREVER.
>> THEN ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, WE WERE 46, THEN WE WENT TO 42, AND NOW WHERE ARE WE AT?
>> THIRTY-SIX, BUT THAT INCLUDES TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TERMINAL.
>> IF WE EVER GET THE CORRECT DEPTH OF DREDGING, WE WILL ACTUALLY MOVE TO?
WE'LL BE RIGHT THERE WITH THE OTHER PORTS HERE.
>> THE KEY PART OF THAT IS IT BRINGS IN A WHOLE NEW LINE OF FUNDING.
>> THAT IS CORRECT, ESPECIALLY FOR MAINTENANCE.
FOR MAINTENANCE, TO DREDGE AND TO MAINTAIN OUR DIMENSIONS, OUR WIDTH AND OUR DEPTH, EVERY YEAR WE NEED ABOUT $20 MILLION.
WE GET ALLOCATED MAYBE $8-$12 MILLION, AND EVERY OTHER YEAR, THAT FULL AMOUNT, 12 MILLION GOES TO THE ENTRANCE.
THAT ENTRANCE FEEDS INTO TEXAS CITY AND PORT HOUSTON.
FOR INSTANCE, THIS YEAR COMING UP, THIS YEAR, 2025, THERE IS NO MONEY ALLOCATED FOR MAINTENANCE FOR OUR HARBOR.
NOW WE DID GET SOME MERCY FUNDING, IT WASN'T FEMA, BUT THE ARMY CORPS GOT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS TO HELP OUT.
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ROLLOVER THAT'S COMING IN TO HELP MAINTAIN, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO STAY.
WE HAVE A MASSIVE SILTATION PROBLEM HERE IN THE HARBOR,
[02:35:04]
AND IT DOES AFFECT OUR BUSINESS.WE SURVIVE PANDEMICS, WE SURVIVE HURRICANES, BUT WE REALLY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SURVIVE MAINTAINING THE DEPTHS OF OUR HARBOR.
>> HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE HAD FULL DEPTH IN OUR CHANNEL? 2012 WAS THE LAST TIME, RIGHT?
>> THE FIRST TIME THAT THE ARMY CORPS WAS ABLE TO DREDGE, THE FULL DIVISIONS OF THE HARBOR WAS IN 2011.
THE NEXT TIME THEY DID IT WAS IN 2022, AND THAT WAS IT.
SO THAT ALLOWED AN ADDITIONAL 7-8 MILLION CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL TO JUST ACCUMULATE IN OUR HARBOR.
IN 2022, THEY FILLED UP THEIR COMPLETE PLACEMENT AREA ON SAN JACINTO, THIS SIDE IS SAN JACINTO, AND THE PLACEMENT AREA ON PELICAN ISLAND, THEIR PLACE MIRRORS. THEY'RE COMPLETELY FULL.
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THE REVENUE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EACH YEAR FOR MAINTENANCE.
ROGERS DID A GREAT JOB GOING UP TO DC WITH OUR COALITION.
WE HAVE A WATERFRONT COALITION THAT COMES OUT HERE, AND MEETS EVERY MONTH, THE PILOTS, TOWBOAT OPERATIONS, SOME OF OUR TENANTS, TEXAS INTERNATIONAL, US TO GO UP TO DC AND SAY, HEY, SQUEAKY WHEEL, WE NEED THE GREASE, WE NEED THE MONEY OR ELSE, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE BUSINESS LIKE WE DID.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
IF WE WERE DREDGED TO THE PROPER DEPTHS, THAT WOULD QUALIFY US FOR MORE GRANTS.
>> IT WOULD MAINTAIN US TO BE IN WHAT WE CALL THE DEEP-WATER HIGH USAGE PORTS.
WE GET MORE RECOGNITION ON THE BOARD THAT ALLOCATES THE MONEY TO WHERE IT GOES, TO WHAT PORTS GETS FUNDS.
>> WE HAVE LESS LIABILITY PER YEAR IN MAINTAINING THAT.
>> THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE THE LESS LIABILITY BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE MORE MONEY THAT'S GOING TO BE GIVEN FOR THE GALVESTON BECAUSE WE'RE A HIGHER RANK.
>> WE WOULD GET MORE REGULAR DREDGING.
>> AS LONG AS THE ASSETS ARE THERE, THEN YES, WE COULD GET MORE.
>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU, BRETT. APPRECIATE THAT.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE AN ONGOING OBLIGATION.
WHEN THE ORIGINAL DEPTH DREDGING HAPPENED, WE HAD TO COME OUT OF POCKET $12 MILLION, AND WE HAVE TO PAY BACK THAT.
WE'RE PAYING THAT BACK EVERY YEAR, AS BRETT SAID, WITH NO INTEREST, BUT IT'S AN OBLIGATION THAT WE HAVE.
HERE AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MONEY AND ALL THOSE THINGS.
IT'S IMPORTANT, I THINK, FOR EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND IT'S OUR OBLIGATION TO KEEP THAT CHANNEL OPEN.
>> FIFTEEN, MORE SECONDS. WE DO HAVE TWO MAJOR PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING UP AS WELL OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS.
ONE IS GOING TO BE A NEW TURNING BASIN.
WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY DO AT THIS LOCATION HERE.
THE CURRENT 1,500 FOOT REALLY IS JUST BARELY SUFFICIENT TO TURN CRUISE SHIPS AND POTENTIALLY AFRAMAX SPECIALS TO GET THEM TO THE WEST END.
SO WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT DOING THIS WITH THE ARMY CORPS.
THAT COULD BE A $30-40,000,000 PROJECT.
OUR 35% OF THAT, AS WELL AS PROJECT 12 WOULD BE A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN US, TEX CITY, AND PORT HOUSTON FOR THE STUDY AND THEN THE ACTUAL DEEPENING OF A HARBOR PROBABLY BEYOND 51 FEET, 55 FEET.
>> THANK YOU, BRETT. PICK, ANY OTHER ON THIS SUBJECT, SIR.
[3.D. Discussion Of The Port Of Galveston’s Financial Status Resulting In A Detailed Financial Report From The Port Of Galveston Outlining The Current Available Sources And Uses Of Funds For The Next 36 Months (Porretto/Rawlins)]
>> DISCUSSION OF THE PORTE GALVESTON FINANCIAL STATUS RESULTING IN A D FINANCIAL REPORT FROM THE PORTE GALVESON, THE CURRENT AVAILABLE SOURCES TO USE FUNDS FOR THE NEXT 36 MONTHS.
>> MAY, TRUSTEE LIDSTONE HAS AN ENGAGEMENT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LEAVE FOR. WE'RE DOWN TO FIVE.
>> THIS INFORMATION ON THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS WAS SENT TO COUNSEL.
JEFF WAS HOLDING IT UP A MINUTE AGO.
IT'S QUITE AN INFORMATIVE DOCUMENT.
I WOULD REALLY MENTION TO COUNSEL, GO THROUGH THIS.
IT TELLS YOU WHERE THE PORTS GOING, HOW MUCH IS THEIR PROJECTING IS GOING TO BE, AND WHERE THAT MONEY IS GONE.
>> I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED BY VIRTUE OF DISCUSSION WHERE WE'RE SITTING.
GIVE ME SOME TIME TO CHEW ON THIS, BUT I THINK AGAIN, THAT MIGHT GO BACK TO THAT REQUEST OF INFORMATION FROM COUNSEL THAT WE ALL HAVE TO SIT DOWN AND AGREE UPON AND SEE IF WHAT WE DO UNDERSTAND.
I THINK IT'S BEEN PRETTY INFORMATIVE MEETING WITH SOME OF THE COURT STAFF HERE AS WELL.
SO THIS COULD BE PROBABLY TABLED OR MOVED ON AND LET'S YOU KNOW, DISCUSS AMONGST COUNSEL AND SEE WHAT INFORMATION OTHER THAT WE CAN ASK FOR THAT WE CAN BETTER FULLY UNDERSTAND AND I'M HAPPY WITH THAT.
[02:40:04]
>> LET'S GO TO 3D, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[3.E. Update And Discussion Of The Wharves Board’s Real Estate Committee (B Brown/C Brown)]
>> THREE D, ETHIC AND DISCUSSION OF THE WHARF FORCE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE.
>> I'M GOING TO THIS WAS A COMMITTEE PUT TOGETHER.
VICK AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE WHILE BACK ABOUT VICK HAD RECOMMENDED TO PUT THIS COMMITTEE TOGETHER.
WE DO HAVE THE CHAIRPERSON OF THIS COMMITTEE HERE.
JEFF PATTERSON, AREN'T YOU THE CHAIRPERSON OF THIS COMMITTEE?
>> TO INTRODUCE THIS AND I KNOW BOB BROWN WANTS TO SAY A FEW POINTS.
>> BEFORE JEFF GETS STARTED, I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO H WAS THIS COMMITTEE STARTED?
>> FIRST MEETING. WHEN WAS IT DISCUSSED? WHEN DID IT FORM?
>> I GUESS WE OFFICIALLY WENT DECEMBER 5, I THINK WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING.
>> SO I THINK IT WAS FIRST DISCUSSED.
>> I THINK IT WAS TALKED ABOUT I THINK PART OF IT IS, I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN YOU GUYS MOUTH, BUT I THINK IT WAS WE WERE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO HOW DO WE GET COUNSEL AND BOARD TO WORK BETTER TOGETHER.
SO THAT YOU GUYS HAD FLOATED THE IDEA A YEAR OR SO AGO.
AND I THINK WE HAD VARIOUS THINGS ABOUT WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO.
AND I THINK THEN IN THE INTERIM, I THINK WE AGREED TO HAVE THESE JOINT MEETINGS.
AND THEN THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT, WELL, DO WE STILL NEED THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE? AND SO WE WENT THROUGH SOME CHARTER STUFF.
AND SO WE HAD OUR FIRST MEETING WITH BOB AND MARIE RICHARD AND YOU WERE ABSENT, BUT I THINK AS WE TALKED ABOUT IT, I THINK WE SAID THAT THERE IS SOME SPACE FOR US TO WORK IN.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HIGHER-LEVEL ISSUES HERE AND SOME OF THE THINGS, BUT I THINK BOB HAS A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH THE MITCHELL FOUNDATION AND STAFFS AND SO BROUGHT SOME IDEAS FORWARD.
BUT I THINK WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT, WHERE ARE THOSE COLLABORATIVE IDEAS OF HOW WE CAN BETTER CONNECT PHYSICALLY THE PORT AND THE CITY.
AND I THINK SOME OF THE WORK THAT THE STOSS GROUP HAS DONE AND SOME OF THE WORK, THE SAFE STREETS WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY, THE MASTER PLAN OF THE PORT, TRYING TO TAKE THOSE IDEAS AND MAYBE DISTILL THOSE DOWN INTO SOME THINGS THAT WE COULD WORK THROUGH AND THEN MAYBE GET BEHIND AND SAY, THESE ARE SOME OF THE PRIORITY AREAS THAT WE COULD GO WORK ON, BUT IT GIVES US A WORKING GROUP TO BE ABLE TO MAKE SOME OF THOSE.
>> CAN I JUST GET A LITTLE BACKGROUND WHAT I WAS THINKING? I MENTIONED THEM.
SO THIS IDEA HATCHED IN MY HEAD THE DAY WE DID NOT GET OUR CRUISE TERMINAL 25 BOND APPROVED.
IT WAS A FIVE TO TWO VOTE, AND I WANTED TO FIND A MECHANISM TO GET THE COMMUNICATION BETTER BETWEEN THE PORT.
AND SO IT TOOK US IN MY INTERVIEW LAST YEAR, I SAID, WELL, ONE BIG DISAPPOINTMENT IS WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN THIS COMMITTEE ROLLING.
AND I APPOINTED THE COMMITTEE EARLY ON AFTER THAT HAPPENED.
BUT THAT WAS MY BIG DISAPPOINTMENT LAST YEAR WAS WE DIDN'T GET THE BALL ROLLING, BUT THAT WAS BEFORE WE'RE HAVING THESE MEETINGS, AND SO I ASKED JEFF AND THE MAYOR, DO WE REALLY NEED IT BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE THESE MEETINGS COMING AND JEFF AND CASSELAN BROWN DETERMINED THAT, YES, WE DO.
THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GET OUT OF IT.
SO THAT'S HOW THIS THING HAPPENED.
>> THAT WAS THE FIRST THING WE SPOKE ABOUT WHEN JEFF AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT GETTING AGENDA.
FIRST QUESTION WAS, WELL, WHY IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM OUR JOINT OR BOARD AND CITY MEETINGS? WELL, THIS MEETING HERE AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'VE COVERED A WHOLE LOT OF TOPICS, A LOT OF AT A FAIRLY HIGH LEVEL, BUT IN A WAY THAT WE'VE CREATED SOME TRANSPARENCY BETWEEN ALL OF THAT, AND WE'RE WORKING ON BUILDING TRUST SO WE CAN WORK MORE EFFICIENTLY GOING FORWARD.
BUT THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO DRILL DOWN A LITTLE DEEPER ON SOME THINGS THAT ARE SPECIFIC.
SPECIFIC ISSUES AND THEN AND IN FACT, I THINK, BE ABLE TO INFORM YOUR MASTER PLAN A LITTLE BE A LITTLE SHORTCUT TO MASTER PLAN PLANNING, I THINK IT'LL HELP IN THAT REGARD.
AND A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THAT DEVELOPMENT.
THIS AREA I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, THAT IS THE LAST PIECE OF THE DIVERSIFICATION OF THE PART.
SO I GOT ANOTHER QUESTION, AND I'M NOT SET ABOUT THE MAKEUP OF THIS BOARD AT ALL.
I THINK THAT THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE BOARD ARE CAN REPRESENT THE CITY.
HOWEVER, I THINK THERE WAS A CART BEFORE THE HORSE STEP.
BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER, AND I ASKED JANELLE AND NELLY TO LOOK IT UP ABOUT HOW DID THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS GET APPOINTED.
AND WE HAVE A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER, BOB AND I JUST HAVE A LITTLE ISSUE WITH A COMMITTEE
[02:45:01]
THAT WAS FORMED AND COUNCIL PEOPLE WERE APPOINTED WITHOUT I MEAN, PAUL AND I IRRESPECTIVE OF THE AGENDAS THAT WE GOT, AND COUNCILMAN FINKLEA DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THIS BOARD WAS FORMED.WE TALK I MEAN, WE HAD TALKED ABOUT IT I MENTIONED IT BRIEFLY, BUT NOBODY PUT A VOTE UP AND I MEAN, JANELLE CAN'T FIND IT, AND I SENT HER ON A WILD GOOSE CHASE TO FIND IT FOR AN APPOINTMENT FOR THE COUNCIL PEOPLE.
THIS TO ME IS A LITTLE BIT OF EITHER IF THE WARS BOARD APPOINTED THEM, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A TAIL WAGGING THE DOG, BUT EVEN WE SENT MAYOR PRO TEM TO HGAC, IF THERE'S THREE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY GIVING INPUT INTO FOR THE CITY'S INTEREST, WE, AS COUNSEL, SHOULD APPOINT AND VOTE ON THAT.
AND I THINK THAT WE MISSED A STEP HERE.
>> WELL, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED AND WE SURE CAN VOTE ON IT, IF YOU WOULD LIKE.
>>THIS IS SUPPORT COMMITTEE, NOT A CITY TO BE CLEAR.
THIS IS SUPPORT COMMITTEE, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE WARDS BOARD HAD MENTIONED TO ME AND THAT HE SAID THAT HE FELT THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM CITY COUNCIL.
WE TALKED AT A CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP.
ABOUT THIS COMMITTEE AND WHO WOULD WANT TO PARTICIPATE WITH THIS COMMITTEE.
AND BOB PUT HIS HAND UP AND SHARON DID.
>> ACTUALLY BOB WASN'T HERE WITH JOHN PAUL.
>> I'VE HEARD BOB TALK ABOUT THIS REAL ESTATE COMMITTE BEFORE.
>> THE DISCUSSION I'VE BEEN WITH THE PREVIOUS COUNSEL.
WELL, WHATEVER THE COUNSEL WAS, THEY PUT THEIR HANDS UP.
SHARON ASKED TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE.
AND I SAID, DOES ANYBODY WANT TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE AND THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS DEVELOPED AN INTEREST IN IT? AND SO I INFORMED CHAIRMAN PEARSON THAT THOSE WERE THE THREE THAT HAD AN INTEREST.
NOW, IF WE WANT TO VOTE ON THAT, WE SURELY CAN SET THAT UP. YES, MA'AM.
>> AND I THOUGHT IT WAS BEFORE THE ELECTION.
THAT'S HERE BECAUSE WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT AND MY INTEREST WAS, HEY, WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING AND GO FURTHER WEST IN DEVELOPMENT AND GOTTEN CONVERSATION.
SO THAT WAS EVEN BEFORE THE ELECTION.
>> YEAH. IT WAS THE DAY OF. IT WAS IMMEDIATELY.
>> SO CHAIRMAN PEARSON ASKED ME AND HE SAID THIS WOULD BE A PORT COMMITTEE.
I PRESENTED IT TO COUNSEL AND THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS SAID, I'D LIKE TO SERVE.
>> JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON HOW I GOT HERE ON THIS COMMITTEE.
WHILE I WAS ATTENDING PORT MEETINGS TO SPEAK ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA I KEEP POINTING TO THERE.
AND SO AT THE END OF THAT MEETING AND THIS HAPPENED TO BE A OSBORN MEETING WHERE THE STATS PRESENTATION WAS FIRST SEEN FIRST PRESENTED.
AND AT THE END OF THAT MEETING, AND EVERYBODY'S GOING, THIS IS GREAT.
THIS IS GREAT AND THEN I HATE TO SPEAK ABOUT JIM AND HE'S NOT HERE BUT I'M GOING TO ANYWAY.
SO JIM HARBOR AT THE END OF THAT, EVERYBODY SAYING THIS IS GREAT SAYS, WELL, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO NOW? ARE WE JUST GOING TO SIT BACK AND FEEL GOOD? AND THEN FORGET ABOUT THIS TOMORROW AND THEN VICK SAID, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT PARAPHRASING HERE, HE SAID, NO, THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE IS GOING TO TAKE THIS ON AND REPORT BACK.
AND I SAID AFTER THAT, I WENT RIGHT STRAIGHT TO CRAIG AND SAID, CRAIG, I UNDERSTAND THESE ARE APPOINTMENTS.
I MEAN, THESE ARE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR AND APPOINTED BY VICK.
AND SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE ON IT.
AND SO THAT'S HOW I GOT ON IT.
>> NO. I UNDERSTAND I'VE FOLLOWED IT, BUT IT'S JUST IF IT'S A PERSONAL CAPACITY, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
I THINK IF IT'S THREE COUNCIL FOR THE BODY AND WE'RE SAYING, WE SHOULD APPOINT THESE INDIVIDUALS TO THIS COMMITTEE.
EVEN IF IT'S HOUSED AT THE PORT.
I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BEHOOVE US TO VOTE ON IT TOGETHER JUST SO WE'RE ALL UNDER THE SAME UNDERSTANDING AND THREE COUNCIL PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW THIS STARTED OR GOING ON AND THAT WE'RE NOT REACHING ANY PROTOCOL.
>> COULD YOU PUT ON CONTROL 23?
>> AN ACTION ITEM APPOINT TO THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE FOR IF WE COULD.
AND I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE STATEMENT.
THESE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS DON'T SPEAK FOR.
SO THAT I KNOW THAT'S NOT A SITUATION.
>> I MEAN, IF IT'S THE CITY'S INTEREST OR IF THEY'RE IN THERE IN OFFICIAL CAPACITY,
[02:50:03]
THAT'S JUST THE ONLY, I WOULD MUCH PREFER A COMMITTEE WHERE THERE'S THREE COUNCIL PEOPLE WITH THE OFFICIAL CAPACITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO US AND DISCUSS WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE MEETING OR WE CAN TUNE IN THE INTENT.>> YEAH. I ASSUME THAT HAPPENED THE INTENT TO REPORT BACK.
>> I JUST FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE VOTING ON IT.
IT'S NOT THAT THING AGAINST THE THREE, I MEAN, I THINK.
VERY GOOD. NOW, THE COMMITTEE ITSELF, DID YOU WANT TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THAT?
>> YEAH. I THINK I DID AND WE WERE I WAS GOING TO SAY WE WERE SUPPOSED TO MEET AT 10:30 TODAY.
>> WE DECIDED THE MEETINGS WOULD FOLLOW 12 BECAUSE EVERYONE WOULD FEED TOGETHER.
>>WE MAY HAVE TO TALK ABOUT PEOPLE'S TIMING IF THEY CAN STAY.
>> JUST TO BE A BRING A LITTLE MORE CLARITY TO THIS.
BEFORE WE MET, I THINK BOTH JEFF AND I ASKED VICK AND CRAIG TO CRAFT A MISSION STATEMENT FOR THIS COMMITTEE.
SO WE'RE NOT OUT THERE JUST THROWING SPITBALLS.
AND SO THEY DID AND I JUST WANT TO READ A LITTLE BIT OF THAT MISSION STATEMENT THAT'S OUR GUIDING DOCUMENT ALONG WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, STRATEGIC PLAN MASTER PLAN AND THOSE OTHER GUIDING DOCUMENTS.
SO IT SAYS AMONG OTHER THINGS.
THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE IS A JOINT COMMITTEE BETWEEN THE GALVESTON CITY COUNCIL AND WARS BOARD, WHICH IS INTENDED TO NOT ONLY AID THE PORT OF GALVESTON AND ACHIEVING OBJECTIVES ABOVE, BUT TO EXPLORE AND IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE CITY, THE PORT, AND THIRD PARTIES THAT CAN DRIVE BETTER CONNECTIVITY, PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICLE TRAFFIC SAFETY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND BEAUTIFICATION IN AREAS ADJACENT TO AND ON PORT CROPPER.
A KEY INTENDED OUTCOME OF THIS COLLABORATION IS TO CREATE AREAS AND ENVIRONMENTS THAT ARE CONDUCIVE AND ATTRACTIVE TO RESIDENTS AND TOURISTS ALIKE THE COMMITTEE SHALL ENSURE CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL LAW, CITY ORDINANCES, PORT POLICIES, AND THE PORT STRATEGIC MASTER PLAN, THE CITY OF GALVESTON'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, EXISTING BOND GRANT OR LOAN COVENANTS AND OTHER DEVELOPMENT PLANS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND OR THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
AND JUST TO REITERATE, WE CLARIFIED THAT WHATEVER WORK WE DO IS GOING TO BE FED BACK.
WE'RE NOT A DECISION-MAKING BODY.
GOING TO BE FED BACK TO THE COUNT CITY COUNCIL AND THE BARS BOARD.
>> ONE THING I SAID EARLIER IS I HOPE THAT OUR WORK WILL BE ABLE TO INFORM THE PROGRESS OF THE MASTER PLAN AS WELL BECAUSE WE'LL BE DEALING WITH SOME OF THOSE.
>> OKAY. VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? LET'S MOVE TO 3F THEN, PLEASE.
[3.F. Port Updates]
>> THE COURT UPDATES, ONE, GALVESTON COUNTY PROPERTY TAX, TWO EPA DISCUSSIONS, AND THREE PROCUREMENT BID PROCESSES AS THEY RELATE TO LOCAL VENDORS.
>> TONY DID PICK, I'M SORRY, HOWEVER YOU WANT.
>> THE TARGET IS READY, YOUR HONOR.
>> SO I WAS HOPING THAT WE COULD GET MAYBE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON THIS FOR JOINT, BUT I GUESS NOT.
BUT MY BASIC I GUESS, TWO, THREE QUESTIONS FOR THE GALVESTON I GUESS THE TAX CASE, SO TO SPEAK.
>> YOU WANT ME TO JUST CONSISTENT WITH OPEN SESSION.
>> YEAH. CONSISTENT WITH OPEN SESSION.
GALVESTON COUNTY HAS SUED THE PORT.
THE OPERATORS IT'S AN ENTITY CALLED GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL, PARTLY OWNED BY ROYAL CARIBBEAN, PARTLY OWNED BY SSA, THE MARINE TERMINAL OPERATOR THAT THEY USE FOR A STEVEDORE.
BUT GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL AND ALSO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THEY HAVE TO BE A PARTY.
BUT THERE'S ONE LAWSUIT THAT CONCERNS TAX YEAR 2022.
>> IT CONCERNS WHETHER OR NOT GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL OWNS THE IMPROVEMENTS.
THE CLAIM IS THAT THEY DID, AND SO THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAXED FOR THAT YEAR.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY LISTED BY THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT IN THE NAME OF ROYAL CARIBBEAN.
IT DIDN'T GET TO THEM FOR A YEAR BUT THEY PROTESTED THAT AND THE APPRAISAL REVIEW BOARD DECIDED, NO, THE GROUND LEASE SAYS THAT AT ALL TIMES IT'S OWNED BY THE PORT WHICH IT SAYS.
THE CAD CHANGED IT SO THAT IT WASN'T OWNED BY GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL.
YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THAT IN 2023, THERE WAS A REFUND OF TAXES BECAUSE UNDER THE RULES THEY HAD TO PAY THE TAXES IN ORDER TO PROTEST AND THEY GOT A REFUND.
THEN THE COUNTY TAXING UNITS CAN FILE CHALLENGES TO CERTAIN THINGS THE WAY
[02:55:05]
PROPERTY OWNERS CAN FILE PROTESTS AND THEN THEY FILED A SUBSEQUENT CHALLENGE ON THE SAME ISSUE CLAIMING, NO, GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL OWNS IT AND IT SHOULD BE TAXED.THE ARB, NOT SURPRISINGLY, DECIDED THE SAME WAY THEY DID THE FIRST TIME AND DENIED IT AND LIKE A PROPERTY OWNER WHO DOESN'T LIKE WHAT THE ARB DOES, THEY CAN FILE A LAWSUIT, THE COUNTY HAS FILED A LAWSUIT.
THE SECOND LAWSUIT IS MORE GENERAL AND IT'S AGAIN AGAINST THE GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL, US, AND THE CAD, ARGUING THAT CRUISE TERMINAL 10 SHOULD NOT BE EXEMPT AS PUBLIC PROPERTY AND THAT IT SHOULD BE ON THE TAX RULES AT FULL MARKET VALUE.
>> WHAT GOES THE DISTANCE AND WHATEVER HAPPENS AND SAY IT'S A WORST CASE SCENARIO, WHO PAYS IT? WHAT'S THE LIABILITY, WHAT'S THE FINANCING?
>> WELL, THE PORT OWNS THE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE LAND.
NOW THEY'RE ALSO ARGUING, AGAIN ALTERNATIVE CLAIMS, JUST LIKE WE'RE SAYING BEFORE, GALVESTON CRUISE TERMINAL OWNS IT.
IF THEY OWN IT THEY PAY IT, BUT THERE IS AN IMPLICATION IN THE GROUND LEASE IF THEY GET TAXED WHAT THE REVENUES ARE TO THE PORT SO THERE'S AN EFFECT ON THE PORT.
THEN THEY'RE ARGUING, FORGET ALL THAT, IT'S NOT PUBLIC PROPERTY BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT USING IT FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE.
IF THAT HAPPENS THE PORT OWES IT AND IT'S OVER TWO MILLION A YEAR AT THE CURRENT VALUE, WHETHER THAT HAPPENS OR NOT.
IF IT'S TAXED, BEAR IN MIND THAT HALF OF THAT TAX IS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD NOT SEE A PENNY OF IT.
IT WOULD GO TO AUSTIN UNDER ROBIN HOOD.
>> COME ON. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? IF YOU COULD TALK ABOUT IF A JUDGMENT WAS MADE NOT FAVORABLE TO US WILL THE PRECEDENT WOULD BE SET AND FOR OTHER PROPERTIES?
>> THE WHOLE REASON THAT DEAL WAS STRUCTURED THE WAY IT WAS IS BECAUSE AT THE TIME, OUR CHAIRMAN CAN TELL YOU THAT BACK YOU MAY RECALL WHEN THE PORT BORROWED 13 MILLION FROM THE LOCAL BANKS TO IMPROVE CRUISE TERMINAL NUMBER 2, THAT WAS THE PORT'S BORROWING CAPACITY AT THE TIME.
>> THAT'S ALL THEY COULD BORROW.
THAT WAS IN 2012 WHEN THE PORT HAD A $5.5 MILLION LOSS THAT YEAR.
>> WHEN CRUISE TERMINAL 10, WHEN THE CONCEPT ARRIVED, ROYAL CARIBBEAN WANTED A TERMINAL HERE, AND IF THE PORT BUILT IT ITSELF, IT WOULD BE OWNED BY THE PORT IN EXEMPT BUT THE PORT DID NOT.
THE BORROWING CAPACITY WAS TOO CHALLENGING, SO THAT'S WHEN WE DID THIS PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP AND THAT'S WHY THE STRUCTURE CAME UP, AND SO THAT'S HOW IT EVOLVED.
BUT IF THIS THEORY WERE TO HOLD ANY PROPERTY ON ANY PORT THAT'S LEASED TO A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS, WHICH ALL PORT PROPERTY IS, WOULD BE TAXABLE.
THAT'S GOING TO CREATE ISSUES STATEWIDE.
IN THESE LAWSUITS WHERE WE FILED A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THAT'S PENDING IN THE 2022 LAWSUIT.
THE 2024 LAWSUIT IS BRAND NEW THAT'S THE STATUS.
>> THE CHAIR WOULD TEND TO TELL YOU ANYTHING THAT GOES TO COURT SHOULD COVER UP [INAUDIBLE]
>> THERE'S SOME INTERNAL POLITICAL THINGS GOING ON THAT'S DRIVING THEM TOO.
>> ON THE EPA MATTER, I APPROACHED THE CITY ATTORNEY PREVIOUSLY.
WE'RE IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH EPA CONCERNING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL, GENERAL TOPIC, AND AT THE TIME THEY WERE TALKING, WELL, THIS IS CITY OWNED PROPERTY SO THE CITY NEEDS TO BE A PARTY.
THE EPA HAS NOW SAID, NO, WE DON'T NEED THE CITY IN IT AT ALL.
>> THEY READ THE CHARTER, I GUESS [LAUGHTER]
>> EXACTLY. WELL, THEY HAD IT BEFORE BUT THE THIRD TIME IT FINALLY TOOK PLACE.
ANYWAY, THE CITY IS NO LONGER A PARTY AT ALL OR EVEN BEING TALKED ABOUT AS A PARTY TO THAT.
I COMMUNICATED THAT TO DON LATE LAST MONTH WHEN THAT CAME DOWN BUT WE HAVEN'T MET YET, SO I'M SURE YOU MAY HEAR ABOUT IT AGAIN. WHAT WAS THE THIRD?
>> WE'VE ALREADY REALLY TALKED ABOUT THAT.
>> YEAH. WELL, THERE ARE SOME LEGAL ISSUES ON PROCUREMENT.
STATE LAW LIMITS AMOUNTS AND WHEN LOCAL PREFERENCES CAN BE OFFERED AND NOT AND THAT'S ALL GOING INTO THE POLICY STUFF.
>> IT'S AMBIGUOUS BUT I GUESS IT PROBABLY HOLDS WATER IF YOUR ORGANIZATION HAS A POLICY TO DEAL WITH IT.
[03:00:01]
>> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? DICK, ANY?
[3.G. Discussion Of A Resolution Or Policy Requiring The Wharves Board Of Trustees Inform The Galveston City Council On Filed, Pending, Or Potential Lawsuits At The Next Regularly Scheduled Galveston City Council Meeting Upon Notification Of Said Lawsuit (Porretto/Rawlins)]
>> 3G. DISCUSSION OF A RESOLUTION OR POLICY REQUIRING THE WHARVES BOARD OF TRUSTEES TO INFORM THE GALVESTON CITY COUNCIL ON FILE PENDING OF POTENTIAL LAWSUITS AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED GALVESTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING UPON NOTIFICATION OF SAID LAWSUIT.
>> THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THAT SAME PORT UPDATE THING AND IF WE COULD DO IT IN A OPEN FORM.
I HAVE RESEARCHED IT, AND MAYBE IT'S A RARE THING THAT HAPPENS, BUT A JOINT EXECUTIVE SESSION OR JUST AN UPDATE FROM TONY.
I THINK IT WOULD FALL UNDER SOME OF THE LANGUAGE UNDER THE REPORTS TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL CONDITION OF THE PORT AND IT GOES TO WHARVES AND THE RESULTS OF ITS OPERATIONS AND I THINK IT'S JUST GOOD TO KEEP COUNCIL INFORMED.
WE'RE ALL ON SAME PAGE UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY TO SAY..
>> I THINK ONE AREA THAT WOULD BE CONCERNING TO ME IS POTENTIAL LAWSUITS BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW.
TO ME, THAT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM I HAD WITH THIS DISCUSSION BUT GO AHEAD DONNA.
>> WHAT I'D SAY IS IF I COULD, I GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH DON OR DONNA AND TALK ABOUT THAT AND COME UP WITH A MECHANISM THAT PROTECTS CONFIDENTIALITY AND THE LIKE.
I WOULD GET YOU THE INFORMATION YOU WANT.
>> I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. COUNCIL AND THE WHARVES BOARD WOULD BE UNDER THE SAME UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
>> IN MY MIND EMPHASIS ON THOSE SUITS FOR THE CITY IS A [INAUDIBLE] IN SOME MANNER THOSE SUITS.
SO THAT'S THAT'S GOING TO BE KEY ALSO.
IT WAS NOT ON EXECUTIVE SESSION AT THE GUIDANCE OF OUR CITY ATTORNEY.
>> PRETTY GOOD, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
>> I THINK IT DOES BUT AGAIN THIS IS JUST COHESIVELY YOU AND I WORKING TOGETHER.
>> ALL RIGHT. 3H, PLEASE MA'AM.
[3.H. Discussion Of The Ports 200 Year Anniversary Celebration (Pierson/C Brown)]
>> 3H. DISCUSSION OF THE PORT'S 200 YEAR ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION. YEAR.
>> WELL, OCTOBER 17TH 1825, THE PORT OF GALVESTON GOT ITS CHARTER FROM THE REPUBLIC OF MEXICO.
ABOUT 200 YEARS, WE'VE GOT SOME EXCITING NEWS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CELEBRATION.
ROGER MAY WANT TO COME UP, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMMUNITY CELEBRATION ON I THINK OCTOBER 17TH.
IT'S THE FRIDAY ON THE DOCK AREA AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A GALA ON THE SATURDAY, WHICH I THINK IS OCTOBER 18TH, NEXT YEAR OR THIS YEAR,OCTOBER 18TH.
NO PORT MONIES ARE GOING TO BE USED FOR THIS, NO TAXPAYER MONEY IS GOING TO BE USED FOR ANY OF THIS.
WE HAVE SPONSORS FOR THE ENTIRE EVENTS SO ROGER IF YOU WANT TO GIVE ORDER OF THIS DAY?.
>> WHAT WE'RE PLAN ON DOING IS IT'S A HISTORICAL EVENT.
SEVERAL OF OF THE CITY'S HISTORICAL VENUES HAVE AGREED TO PUT THIS IN THE FOREFRONT OF THEIR PRESENTATIONS, THEIR EXHIBITS.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF PARTICIPATION FROM THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND IN THE EVENTS HERE.
LIKE VICK SAID, WE HAVE RAISED A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL IS AN EXPENSIVE OPERATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT ON.
BUT WHAT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO BE DOING IS PUBLISHING A BOOK ON THE HISTORY OF THE PORT OF GALVESTON.
IT'S ACTUALLY ALREADY BEEN STARTED.
THE GALVESTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY IS ACTUALLY WRITING THAT BOOK AND PUTTING THAT BOOK TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF ARCHIVES OF THAT INFORMATION.
>> THE FOUNDATION, NOT SOCIETY.
>> IT'S GOING TO REALLY START ON MAY 22 WITH THE OBSERVANCE OF MARITIME DAY, IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE ELABORATE THIS YEAR.
THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A GOLF TOURNAMENT ON OCTOBER 16TH AND THEN ON THE 17TH, AS VICK SAID, WE HAVE A PARTY ON THE PIER WHICH WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
THEN ON THE 18TH WE'LL BE HAVING A GALA AT THE SAN LOUIS, WE BELIEVE.
WE'RE TRYING TO FINALIZE THE NUMBERS ON THAT.
WE HAVE A BAND TO PLAY ONE POINT IN TIME, AND HE'S ON THE COMMITTEE AND HELPING US WITH OTHER BANDS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO OR THREE BANDS THAT WE PLAY IN THIS AND THEN AS I MENTIONED IN OCTOBER, THE BOAT.
[03:05:03]
ALSO, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK IN SOME JUNETEENTH ITEMS IN THIS THING ALSO THIS YEAR, AS WELL AS THE NEW OPENING OF CT 16, WITH MSE.IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF FUN.
A LOT OF YOU SEE OUR NEW LITTLE BADGES HERE THAT'S SAY 200 ON.
WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT IT'S GOING BE A FUN EVENT AND I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY COVERED ACROSS THE WORLD.
I WOULD TELL YOU NOW EVER SINCE OUR PORT HAS DONE WHAT IT'S DONE, WE GOT PICKED UP BY ALL KINDS OF MAGAZINES AND STUFF ALL AROUND THE WORLD.
>> ROGER, CAN YOU GIVE THE COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS OF GALVESTON AN IDEA OF THE BUDGET THAT WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A FIRST RATE DEAL.
>> IT'S SOMEWHERE $500,000-600,000 FOR THIS.
>> NO MONEY, NO PORT REVENUE, NOT TAXPAYER MONEY.
>> IT'S ALL OF OUR CRUISE LINES, OUR LOCAL PARTNERS, PEOPLE THAT SERVICE THE PORT, ILA OR STEVEDORES.
ALL OF THEM HAVE JUMPED IN AND SAID, WE WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS.
>> WE'RE ALSO EXPLORING, DON'T HOLD US TO IT, A POSSIBLE SCHOLARSHIP LEG OF IT.
>> WITH THE FUNDS THAT ARE LEFT OVER, WHICH WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE FUNDS LEFT OVER.
WE'D LIKE TO START FUNDING A SCHOLARSHIP.
I KNOW THAT PORT OF HOUSTON DOES THIS IN HOUSTON.
I THINK IF WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY IN THERE WHERE WE COULD SPONSOR SCHOLARSHIPS TO TEXAS A&M OR WHATEVER TO WHATEVER SCHOOL.
>> WE CAN GIVE BACK TO THOSE COMMUNITY.
YOU HEAR THAT? DO YOU WANT TO CLOSE YOUR MEETING AND THEN I'LL CLOSE MINE?
>> YEAH. WE WILL JUST SAY ON BEHALF OF OUR TRUSTEES, ALL SEVEN, WE'RE HERE TO BEGIN WITH.
THAT IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING, BUT I THINK A VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETING, AND I'M GLAD WE'RE DOING THIS.
THIS WAS REALLY IT STARTED WITH IDEA FOR THE REAL ESTATE COMMITTEE JUST TO IMPROVE THE COMMUNICATION.
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER, WE ALL SHOULD BE ON THE SAME TEAM.
WE'RE ALL FOR THE BETTERMENT OF GALVESTON AND WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE PORT NEEDS TO BE GOOD FOR GALVESTON IN THE SAME WAY.
THIS IS MY GOAL AND MY FELLOW TRUSTEES, I APPRECIATE IT, AND WE WERE GLAD TO BE HERE AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXT ONE.
>> YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT?
>> WE HAVE A MEETING. YEAH, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MEETING. ONE SECOND.
>> CRAIG HAS GOT TO FINISH HIS MEETING.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA.
I WANT TO THANK CHAIRMAN PEARSON AND THE TRUSTEES OF THE WHARVES BOARD.
ROGER, BRETT, JEFF, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
>> AND ANGIE, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
WE DISCUSSED A LOT OF TOPICS TODAY AND AS WE TALKED ABOUT, THESE ARE OPEN FOR DISCUSSION AND SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF HOW WELL THIS BOARD IS DOING.
THIS BOARD, IF YOU THINK BACK 20-25 YEARS AGO.
>> THERE WAS A [INAUDIBLE] OF BORROWING CAPACITY 12 YEARS AGO?
I WANT TO THANK THE TRUSTEES, CHAIRMAN PEARSON, ROGER AND YOUR STAFF AND EVERYBODY.
THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO, THIS AFFECTS NOT ONLY THE CITY BUT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY IN A POSITIVE WAY.
GREATLY APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORTS THAT YOU PUT OUT ON THAT.
APRIL 24TH IS OUR NEXT JOINT MEETING, WE'LL HAVE A GOOD AGENDA.
WE ALREADY START PUTTING THAT TOGETHER.
THOSE THAT ARE FROM A&M HERE I WISH I COULD SAY THIS BUT FRIDAY NIGHT TEXAS PLAYS AND I WANT TO SAY HOOK 'EM HORNS.
WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.