[00:00:02] >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. [1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER] IT IS 9:00 A.M. I WOULD LIKE TO OFFICIALLY CALL THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON TO ORDER. IT'S THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27. THANK YOU FOR ALL THOSE THAT ARE OUT THERE FOR BEING HERE. STAFF, THANKS FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING. COUNCIL, WE GOT A BUSY DAY AHEAD OF US, SO WE'LL GET RIGHT INTO IT. ALSO, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MAY BE LISTENING TO THIS BROADCAST. WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO HAVE YOU WITH US TODAY. JANELLE, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, BUT LET'S HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> MAYOR BROWN? >> PRESENT. >> MAYOR PRO TEM ROBB? >> HERE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER LEWIS? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER FINKLEA? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN? >> PRESENT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER PORRETTO? >> HERE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS? >> HE'S HERE. >> I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS IS HERE. >> THERE HE GOES. >> HERE'S COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS. >> SAY HERE OR PRESENT. >> I WAS IN A BUILDING. PRESENT. HERE. >> WE HEARD YOU ANSWER TWO MILES OVER THERE, SO GOOD. VERY GOOD. WE HAVE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT THIS MORNING. COUNCIL, WE HAVE A VERY BUSY WORKSHOP, A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING CHORES. I KNOW WE ALWAYS DO, LET'S TRY TO STAY ON AGENDA ITEMS. KEEP OUR DISCUSSION REALLY CONCENTRATED ON THOSE ITEMS. ON THE CLARIFICATION SECTION COUNCIL, AS I KNOW WE ALL TRY TO DO, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE STAY WITH CLARIFICATION JUST TO THOSE AGENDA ITEMS ON THAT. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE ITEM 3L. COUNCIL, THAT IS THE DISCUSSION ON THE ROSENBERG PROPERTY AND SO FORTH AND OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH GISD ON THAT. I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT UP TO OUR FIRST ITEM AFTER THE CLARIFICATION ITEMS. WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THAT BOARD AND OUR SUPERINTENDENT WITH US THIS MORNING. GLAD TO HAVE THEM. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THOSE ITEMS UP AS SOON AS WE FINISH OUR CLARIFICATION. VERY GOOD. IF WE COULD READ ITEM 3A, PLEASE, JANELLE. >> ITEM 3A, CLARIFICATION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. [3.A. Clarification Of Consent And Regular City Council Agenda Items - This Is An Opportunity For City Council To Ask Questions Of Staff On Consent And Regular Agenda Items (1 Hour)] THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. >> VERY GOOD. SHARON, WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE KICKING US OFF ON THAT? >> SURE. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR BARBARA. IT IS 11-I, AS I? >> 11-I. >> BARBARA, COME FORWARD. IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE. >> BARBARA SANDERSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH. >> COUNCIL BEFORE WE START, WE HAVE HAD SOME COMPLAINTS FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY COULD NOT HEAR US PROPERLY. AS WE TALK, IF EVERYONE COULD PROJECT AND SPEAK UP, THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. >> I THINK THEY FIXED THE SOUND SYSTEM. >> THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT, SO HOPEFULLY THAT'LL TAKE CARE OF IT ON THAT. YES, GO RIGHT AHEAD, SHARON. >> YES, MA'AM. >> JUST IF YOU COULD SHARE WITH US THE DEAL ON THE RAISING MEMBERSHIP. >> WE'RE INCREASING THE MEMBERSHIP AT MCGUIRE-DENT. >> IS IT JUST AT MCGUIRE? >> NO, MA'AM. NOT JUST A MCGUIRE-DENT, BUT SOME OF OUR OTHER RENTAL FACILITIES, AND WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED OUR TENNIS COURTS BECAUSE WE ARE NOW BEING APPROACHED BY OUTSIDE GROUPS TO RENT THE TENNIS COURTS. WHEN I SAY OUTSIDE, SOME ARE OUTSIDE OF THE STATE AND ARE COMING IN FOR OUR CONVENTIONS AND WOULD LIKE TO THROW TENNIS TOURNAMENTS. WE STARTED OUT WITH A MODERATE FEE THERE. WE RAISED THE RATE AT MCGUIRE-DENT FROM 30 TO 50 BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT SUPPORTS CHANGING OUT ALL THE EQUIPMENT IN THERE AND DOING SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RECREATION CENTER, LIKE WE'VE PUT OUT A NEW FLOOR IN THE EXERCISE ROOM, A DANCE FLOOR. WE'VE ALSO DONE SOME UPGRADING, CHANGING OUT THE TILE AND NEW FLOORING UNDERNEATH ALL THE WORKOUT EQUIPMENT THAT WE JUST RESET AND PLACED. WE'RE CONSTANTLY REPLACING THE EQUIPMENT. OUR EQUIPMENT IS USED PROBABLY 20 TIMES MORE THAN JUST THE REGULAR GYM BECAUSE OF OUR RATE. WHEN YOU COME IN THE REC CENTER, AFTER YOU COME IN, EVERYTHING'S FREE. YOU DON'T PAY FOR ANY WORKOUT CLASSES, YOU DON'T PAY FOR ANY OF THE EXTRA ART CLASSES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. OF COURSE, RUN WILL STILL REMAIN FREE OF CHARGE. THAT'S WHERE OUR YOUTH GO OUT OF TOWN AND WE DO HAVE SOME SENIOR PROGRAMS OUT THERE. [00:05:01] >> WHEN WE HAVE OUR MEMBERSHIP AT MCGUIRE, IT DOES NOT COVER GOING TO RIGHT COUNTY? >> YES. >> IT DOES? >> ANYONE CAN GO TO RIGHT COUNTY FOR FREE. JUST REGISTER. >> MA'AM. 11 J IS JUST KUDOS. THANK YOU. >> THAT'S A WONDERFUL GIFT FROM THAT ORGANIZATION. >> YES. >> COULD I ASK ON 11-I, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, SHARON? >> NO. >> I WAS READING THROUGH THAT AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THAT, BARBARA. WOULD YOU GUIDE ME? IT SEEMED LIKE THE FEES FOR THE SOCCER FIELDS WERE A LITTLE LOW TO ME. BUT THAT'S JUST BASED ON NOTHING, BUT JUST KNOWING HOW THINGS RENT AND SO FORTH. THIS IS FOR AN ENTIRE SOCCER FIELD FOR $95 A DAY OR SOMETHING? >> FOR A SOCCER FIELD, NOT FOR THE COMPLEX. YOU MIGHT BE THINKING OF THE COMPLEX. IT'S JUST A PARTICULAR FIELD. YES, SIR. BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE MORE DESIGNATED FIELDS NOW WITH THE LIGHTS THAT ARE SET UP. >> THAT'S $95 FOR THE ENTIRE DAY. >> WE FOLLOW OTHER PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENTS AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE CHARGING. WE'RE STILL A LITTLE BIT LESS ON OUR BOSS FACILITY RENTAL, BUT WE ALSO HAVE CONCESSIONAIRES INTO THE CONCESSION AREA WHERE THEY RENT OUT THE CONCESSION AREA SOMETIMES. YOU MIGHT PAY $2,500 FOR THE WEEKEND TO RENT A HUGE COMPLEX IN TEXAS CITY THAT HAVE MAYBE FIVE FIELDS AND A CONCESSION AREA, BUT YOU HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER GOING IN AND MAKING YOUR OWN MONEY IN THE CONCESSION STAND. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY HERE. WE HAVE A CONCESSION AREA IN OURS, WHICH HELPS THE LEAGUES AND THE CITY. >> WELL, YOU WOULD KNOW BEST ON THAT. I JUST SEEM LIKE THAT THAT WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT I HAD A QUESTION ON. >> I WANT TO REVISIT IT AFTER AFTER WE SET IT IN MOTION. IF IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE'RE NOT RECOUPING OUR COSTS, THEN WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND ADD TO IT, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT USER FRIENDLY. >> SURE. >> IT'S A WONDERFUL COMPLEX. IT WILL BE. >> THAT'D BE MARVELOUS. SHARON, GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> ON THAT 11-J, JUST A BIG THANK YOU TO THE ORGANIZATION. >> IT'S AN ORGANIZATION, YES. THEY USE OUR PARK EVERY YEAR TO DO THEIR WALK. THIS FOUNDATION IS TO HOPEFULLY ADD MORE BENCHES TO OTHER PARKS ABOUT SUICIDE AWARENESS, AND THAT THE NUMBER WILL BE ON THERE SO ANYONE CAN CALL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> 11-W. >> 11-W. >> GOOD MORNING. I'M DUSTIN BENDER, THE DIRECTOR OF SOLID WASTE. >> GOOD MORNING TO YOU. >> LATE LAST FALL EARLY LAST WINTER, WE HAD A FAILURE AT THE TRANSFER STATION THAT FEEDS THE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING WHERE ALL THE GARBAGE IS DUMPED AND THEN TRANSPORTED FAILED. UNDERGROUND SOMEWHERE IT SHORTED OUT, EITHER FROM CORROSION OR VERMIN OR BOTH. THAT PROBLEM WAS IDENTIFIED, AND THAT'S WHAT THAT PROJECT REPRESENTS, IT'S THE REPAIR AND RESTORATION OF THAT. RIGHT NOW, IT'S RUNNING OFF A GENERATOR. >> I'M NOT BY ANY MEANS AN ELECTRICIAN OR? >> NOT AT ALL. >> BUT THE REPAIR LEAK, IS IT GOING TO BE COVERED? ARE YOU ABLE TO GO AND SEE UNDER THERE WHAT OTHER EXTENSION OF THE MINE ARE DAMAGED? >> MY SUSPICION IS, AND I'M AGAIN NOT AN ELECTRICIAN, IT'S IN CONDUIT. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THEY'RE GOING TO PULL THE WIRE THAT HAS FAILED THROUGH THAT CONDUIT, RESTORE THE CONNECTION OF THE BUILDING, AND THEN UPGRADE THE PANEL THAT FEEDS THE BUILDING BECAUSE IT'S NOT UP TO CURRENT STANDARD. >> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION. >> VERY GOOD. COUNCILMAN PORRETTO, SIR. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. >> COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. >> MY FIRST ONE IS 8B. >> 8B. >> PLANNING. ANYONE? TIM? THERE YOU ARE. I DIDN'T SEE YOU, SORRY. >> IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> CATHERINE GORMAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT. >> WHEN YOU JUST SAID IDENTIFY YOURSELF, ONE OF THE OTHER COMPLAINT THAT PEOPLE HAVE IS WHEN OUR ATTORNEY DOESN'T COME TO THE TABLE, THEY CAN'T HEAR WHAT DONNA IS SAYING AT ALL. YOU SHOULD PROBABLY COME TO THE TABLE WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING OR TURN YOUR MIC. [00:10:03] BUT I DON'T THINK YOUR BIKE IS ON. I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY THEY HAVE TO HAVE PUD. >> THE CONVENIENCE STORE USED TO SELL GAS, BUT THEY CEASED OPERATION IN 2020. WE CHANGED THE REGULATIONS. NOW, GASOLINE SALES HAVE TO BE 200 FEET FROM A RESIDENTIAL ZONING BOUNDARY. THE AREA RIGHT BEHIND THE STORE IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL. THEY DON'T HAVE THAT DISTANCE BOUNDARY AND THE ONLY SOLUTION IS TO GET A PUD. >> ARE THEY GOING TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE UPDATING OF THE TANKS AND SO FORTH? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> THAT'S IT. I KNEW THEY HAD HAD ONE BEFORE, SO THAT'S WHY I WAS SURPRISED THAT THEY HAD TO A [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'S BEEN CLOSED FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. >> YEAH. >> THEY'VE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME, TOO. >> SINCE I GOT THINK, IF NOT BEFORE. THEN I HAD 11-H. >> 11-H. >> JUST BECAUSE I LOVE TO TALK TO TESA. SHE'S SO WONDERFUL. THIS IS ADDITIONAL MONEY GOING TOWARDS THE SOUTH SHORE PROJECT? >> TESA WROBLESKI, DIRECTOR DISASTER RECOVERY AND GRANTS. THIS IS OUT OF THE ADMINISTRATION BUDGET THAT WE GET REIMBURSED FROM GLO ON. THIS IS THE FINAL PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION WHICH GETS US THROUGH CONSTRUCTION FOR ALL THE COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING. >> THAT'S SOLELY ADMINISTRATIVE FEE? >> YES. >> WHERE ARE WE ON THE ACTUAL FUNDING OF THAT PROJECT? >> THAT PROJECT IS READY FOR NOTICE TO PROCEED. THAT PROJECT HAS BEEN AWARDED. >> IT'S NOW WAY AHEAD OF THE 14TH STREET PUB STATION? >> IT IS CURRENTLY AHEAD OF 14TH STREET. WE'RE WAITING TO GET THAT ONE OUT TO BUILD. >> WHICH WE STARTED HOW MANY YEARS AGO? >> 2018. >> YEAH, I JUST FIND THAT UNUSUAL. BUT THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. >> SURE. >> SORRY, I PUT MY NOTES WHEN I'M READING ON MY PHONE. >> I'M SORRY. >> OH, MY. >> 11-O? >> IT'S REALLY LIKE OPQ. WELL, WE'RE BUYING EQUIPMENT FOR MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS, BUT IT ALL GOES THROUGH YOUR DEPARTMENT. WE'RE BUYING A FIRE TRUCK. THAT DOESN'T GO THROUGH THAT. >> YES, MA'AM. THAT'S PART ROLLING STOCK. >> THEN WHOSE BUDGET DOES IT GET CHARGED TO? >> ARE WE TALKING IN REFERENCE TO THE FIRE PUMPER? >> ANY OF THEM, BECAUSE YOU'RE BUYING MULTIPLE DIFFERENT. >> THERE'S TWO ITEMS ON THERE. ONE OF THEM IS A CO-OP. BUT WHAT THAT IS FOR IS FOR THE REPAIRS OF THE EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT ON THE POLICE VEHICLES, ALSO THE VIDEO SYSTEMS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THE CITY GARAGE WILL HANDLE THOSE COSTS. THE OTHER ITEM IS A BRAND NEW PUMPER. THAT FUNDING WILL BE PROVIDED UP SOME WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND THEN THE FOLLOWING YEARS, WE'LL HAVE TO LOCATE FUNDING TO COVER THE REST OF THAT PUMPER. >> IF MIKE WANTS IT, IT'S FINE. [OVERLAPPING] I'M KIDDING, SORRY. YOU'LL ALWAYS BE MIKEY TO ME. [LAUGHTER] ANYWAY, THAT WAS MY QUESTION. ON THE CO-OP ONE, YOU BID THAT OUT OR IT'S JUST THROUGH THAT? >> THAT IS PART OF A CO-OP. THEY'VE ALREADY BID THAT OUT FORMALLY FOR ANYBODY USE. WE ARE A MEMBER OF THAT CO-OP SO WE'RE ABLE TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> YES, MA'AM. >> THEN 11-U. A PROJECT THAT ROBB AND I TALK ABOUT [OVERLAPPING] HAS SO MANY ISSUES. >> ROBERT WINIECKE, DIRECTOR OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENGINEERING. GOOD MORNING. >> GOOD MORNING. >> WHAT IS THE TIMELINE ON THIS? >> WE'VE GOT ABOUT A 12-MONTH DESIGN PERIOD, AND THEN WE'LL BE GETTING GOING. >> WHY IS IT TAKING SO LONG TO DESIGN IT? >> WE HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND DO SURVEY AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND PROCESS ALL THAT. THERE'S ANTICIPATED TO BE SOME POSSIBLE CORE PERMITTING ISSUES WITH THE OUTFALL AS WE GO PAST INDIAN BEACH OUT TO THE BAY. [00:15:04] THEN SOME OF THE OTHER PIECES OF JUST GIVE ME A TXDOT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE LENGTHY PROCESS OF PERMITTING TOO BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO DO STUFF IN THERE RIGHT AWAY. >> HOPEFULLY, I CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT, AND WE CAN SPEED THIS UP BECAUSE KNOWING THESE POOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN UNDERWATER FOR SO LONG THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER YEAR IS NOT MY FAVORITE THING TO DO. WHEN YOU MENTIONED OUTFALL, DID YOU CHECK THAT ONE TO SEE IF THERE WAS A DAM LEFT FROM THAT TXDOT? >> THAT'S ON THE CRUISE LIST TO GO AHEAD. >> IS THERE A DAM THERE? >> I'M NOT SURE. >> I REALLY NEED TO HIT TXDOT FOR THAT. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN. >> I HAVE A FEW. FIRST OFF IS 11-A, THE HOT AUDIT. >> 11-A. YES. >> IT WOULD BE A QUICK QUESTION FOR GLENN. >> FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW HOW MANY STRS WERE AUDITED AND WHAT IS THE SAMPLE SIZE AND WHAT IS THE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL? >> IS GLENN OR CARRIE OR MASHA HERE? BOB, WHAT WE COULD DO, JANELLE, WOULD YOU CONTACT HIM? HAVE HIM COME OVER, AND IF YOU'LL HOLD THAT, WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT, SIR. >> LET'S SEE. THE OTHER ONE WAS 11D. THIS IS ABOUT THE DETAILS ON THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION. I WAS JUST WONDERING IS WHAT WERE THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE REASON FOR DENIAL? WHAT WAS THE BACKGROUND ON THAT? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I'M SORRY? >> WHO FROM YOUR OFFICE HANDLED THAT? >> MAMROW? >> PROBABLY. >> I WAS IN THOSE EXHIBITION OF CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION. >> HE'S IN COURT RIGHT NOW. >> ZERO OVER ZERO. >> I WILL GIVE YOU THE NON LEGAL OPINION. THIS WAS A SUBMISSION BY A RESIDENT FOR CONSIDERATION FOR PUBLIC ART TO BE PUT DOWN ON A SIDEWALK. THE COMMISSION'S POSITION WAS THAT THE APPLICATION WAS INCOMPLETE, DID NOT HAVE A FULL DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS TO BE USED OR DEFINE THE ACTUAL LOCATION OTHER THAN SIMPLY STATING SIDEWALK. THE COMMISSION DENIED IT. THE APPLICANT WAS AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO EITHER AMEND THE SUBMISSION OR AS MAMROW HAD DESCRIBED TO US, THAT SINCE THE COMMISSION WAS AN ADVISING BODY, THAT CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY HAD THE DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY OF WHETHER TO ACCEPT OR DENY, SO APPLICANT CHOSE TO MOVE IT FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT'S WHERE IT IS. >> WHAT IS SHE WANTING TO DRAW? >> IT'S INCLUDED IN AN EMAIL THAT WAS SENT. >> IT'S IN THE PACKETS IN THERE. >> WE GOT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. ORIGINALLY IN OUR PACKET, PER THE AGENDA, WAS JUST A NARRATIVE FROM THE APPLICANT. THEN LATER WE RECEIVED A DRAWING VIA EMAIL AS WELL AS I THINK THAT WAS JUST THE DRAWING, BUT ALSO A COPY OF THE APPLICATION, WHICH I HAD ACTUALLY NEEDED TO SEE AS WELL. WE HAVE THOSE. >> DO YOU HAVE AN EX OFFICIO OPINION? >> I STAND WITH THE POSITION OF THE COMMISSION AND RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF IT, ON THE BASIS THAT IT WAS AN INCOMPLETE SUBMISSION. IT DID NOT MEET THE ULTIMATE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMISSION. >> I NOTICED THAT THE LOCATION WAS JUST ANY SIDEWALK ANYWHERE. >> IT WOULD NEED SOME MORE REVISION IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED A COMPLETE APPLICATION. >> SHARON. >> DOES THE COMMITTEE OFTEN GIVE YOU OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AGAIN ON YOUR APPLICATION? IS THAT PROTOCOL? >> YES. >> IF AN APPLICANT COMPLETED AN APPLICATION AND IT WAS NOT ALL COMPLETED BEFORE THE DEADLINE OR AFTER THE DEADLINE? >> IT WAS SUBMITTED AS INCOMPLETE. THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM STAFF FOR THE COMMISSION WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO HELP TO OFFER THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO REVISE AND RESUBMIT. >> THAT REVISION OPPORTUNITY IS PROTOCOL? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER. >> WILL THE COMMISSION REVIEW HER ADDITIONAL SUBMITTALS AT ANOTHER MEETING? [00:20:03] >> IT DEPENDS UPON THE DECISION OF COUNCIL WHETHER TO ACCEPT OR TO DENY. >> BRIAN, WHO'S THE STAFF REPRESENTATIVE? >> ANTOINETTE AND MAMROW. >> IS MAMROW OR ANTOINETTE HERE? >> MAMROW'S IN COURT. >> YOU THINK BARBARA COULD HANDLE IT? >> IF WE APPROVE THIS, THAT MEANS WE'RE OVERRIDING THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION? >> YES. >> BUT IF WE DENY IT, THEN THEY CAN STILL RE-APPLY TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION? >> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT. >> THEY PROBABLY CAN. >> THEY PROBABLY CAN. I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF TIMES THAT YOU CAN APPLY TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSIONS. >> THEY DON'T HAVE DEADLINES THEN LIKE THE OTHERS? >> THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION RECEIVES NOT SEVERAL APPLICATIONS, I SUPPOSE, SO THE PROCESS IS, IN SOME SENSE, COMPETITIVE? >> YES. >> KATHLEEN AND I [INAUDIBLE]. >> COME FORWARD IF YOU COULD. >> DID I ADEQUATELY REPRESENT US? >> YES, YOU DID. THANK YOU. >> KATHLEEN, IF YOU COULD, FOR THE CAMERA AND THE COMMUNITY, IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE. >> KATHLEEN DINATALE, I'M THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION. ACTUALLY, YOU CAN REAPPLY AT ANY TIME TO ANSWER COUNCILMAN PORRETTO'S QUESTION. SHE HAS NOT RE-APPLIED. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING. WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY AS STAFF TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO HAVE IT REVISITED. >> [OVERLAPPING] SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. MY QUESTION IS, HOW WAS THIS PLACED HERE? WAS IT THROUGH HER REQUEST THROUGH LEGAL? >> I KNOW MAMROW BROUGHT IT FORWARD. I THINK SHE DID REQUEST FOR IT TO MOVE FORWARD. AM I NOT CORRECT, DON? >> I DO NOT KNOW HOW IT GOT FROM CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION TO THE AGENDA. >> DON, COULD YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE, SIR? >> PERFECT EXAMPLE. >> I KNOW, RIGHT? I DO NOT KNOW HOW IT MOVED FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION TO THE AGENDA. >> SHE MUST HAVE BROUGHT IT FORWARD ANYWAY. >> DO YOU KNOW HOW IT GOT MOVED? >> LEGAL SUGGESTED THAT, GOING FORWARD AS A REGULAR PROCEDURE, EVEN IF WE LOOK AT THE APPLICATIONS AND IF WE DECIDE TO SET THEM FORWARD WITH OUR APPROVAL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR YOUR APPROVAL OR IF WE DECIDE TO SEND THEM FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL BECAUSE WE FIND THAT IT HAS NOT MET THE APPLICATION STANDARDS OR STANDARDS IN THE CITY, THEN WE WOULD SEND IT FORWARD TO YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE ULTIMATELY THE BODY TO MAKE THE DECISION. BUT WE GIVE YOU OUR REFERENCE OR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS FOR DENIAL OF THIS. SHE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RE-APPLY AND SUSCEPTED TO MAKE THE APPLICATION CORRECT. >> HADN'T SHE DONE THIS BEFORE? >> NO. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS CASE. BOTTOM LINE, IF WE APPROVE THE DENIAL WHICH WAS RECOMMENDED FROM THE COACH WARDS COMMISSION, SHE CAN REAPPLY AND MAKE HER APPLICATION WHOLE. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> YES. IF NOT, IF FOR SOME REASON, COUNCIL APPROVES THIS ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION, THERE'S NO OUTLINE WHERE SHE CAN DO THIS. SHE JUST COULD GO ANYWHERE IN THE CITY. >> JUST FROM VIEWING IT FROM A COUNCIL PERSPECTIVE, MAYBE IT WOULD BE PRUDENT IDEA TO HAVE, A FORM FROM CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION ABOUT, THEY RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SAYING THAT IT WASN'T COMPLETE WITH MAMROW'S ASSESSMENT, BUT IT WOULD BE LIKE A FORM. >> SOME STAFF REPORT. >> YEAH, A STAFF REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION, I GUESS. >> WE COULD CERTAINLY DO THAT IN THE FUTURE. >> THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> I HAVE TO BE HONEST. I HAVEN'T SEEN THE ACTUAL ARTWORK. DOES ANYBODY HAVE IT ON THERE? >> SPEAK UP AGAIN. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN THE ACTUAL ARTWORK. >> [OVERLAPPING] HOLD ON A SECOND. >> HERE, I'LL PULL IT. >> A LOT GOING ON THIS WEEK. >> YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, I SENT IT. I'LL SEND IT AGAIN. >> I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE FOR YOU. >> MAYOR, I HAVE A CLARIFICATION ON 11D. AS WRITTEN, IT STATES CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL AND APPLICATION. YOU MADE A STATEMENT OF APPROVING THE DENIAL, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE, IF COUNCIL ELECTS TO NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, THEN THE MOTION WOULD BE FOR DENIAL. >> IT WOULD BE FOR DENIAL. YES, SIR. [00:25:03] ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? BOB, LET'S GO BACK TO YOU. WE HAVE OUR CITY AUDITOR HERE. >> YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO 11A? >> YOU HAD A QUESTION ON THAT? >> YES. THIS IS IN REGARD TO THE HOT AUDIT THAT WE GOT A [INAUDIBLE] REPORT. >> THIS IS THE AUDIT, GLENN, THAT YOU'VE FINISHED ON THE HOT FOR THE STRS IN HOTEL. >> THANK YOU. >> GLENN BULGHERINI, CITY AUDITOR. >> MY QUESTION WAS JUST SOME CLARIFICATION ON THE PROCESS. HOW MANY SHORT TERM RENTALS WERE ACTUALLY AUDITED, WHAT THE SAMPLE WAS AND WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL WOULD THAT BE? >> DO YOU HAVE THAT INFORMATION, CARRIE. >> YEAH. >> WE'VE GOT EXACT INFORMATION. >> WHILE SHE'S DOING THAT, ANOTHER QUESTION WAS, IT APPEARED BY THE REPORT THAT THE AUDIT IDENTIFIED $363,540 AN ADDITIONAL HOT THAT COULD BE COLLECTED AS A RESULT OF THE AUDIT. MY OTHER QUESTION IS, WHAT DID THE AUDIT COST AND I'M GETTING AT WHAT WAS THE NET GAIN, I GUESS, FROM ALL THIS, IN A THEORETICAL WAY? >> I THOUGHT IT WAS 377, BUT THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH, 363. WELL, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE HAVE A COT CONTRACT WITH PARK BOARD TO RECEIVE $1,000 PER HOTEL. WE HAVE DONE ACCOUNTING IN THE OFFICE TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH IT'S COSTING FOR US TO DO THESE HOTELS. IT'S ACTUALLY COSTING US ABOUT $5,000. OH, MY. >> THAT'S PER HOTEL OR PER STR? >> NO. PER HOTEL. STRS, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT $1,600. IT WAS AT $600,000 OVER WHAT WE WERE CHARGING. IT'S ABOUT 1,600 IS WHAT IT WAS COSTING US TO DO THE STRS. >> I'M SORRY, BOB. >> GO AHEAD. I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO ASK. >> DOES THE PARK BOARD PROVIDE ANY REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE AUDITS OF THE STRS? >> YES, SIR. THEY WERE PROVIDED. NOW, IN ALL FAIRNESS TO THE PARK BOARD THAT WE MADE THIS CONTRACT. WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE THE INFORMATION AT THAT TIME TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH IT WAS GOING TO COST OUR OFFICE. IT WAS AN ESTIMATE. >> SORRY, GLENN. WHAT DOES THE PARK BOARD SEND YOU PER STR FOR AN AUDIT? >> WHAT THEY SEND US? >> PER THE HOT CONTRACT, YOU SAID IF THEY SENT YOU $1,000 PER HOTEL. >> THAT'S 600. >> SIX HUNDRED. VERY GOOD. >> WELL, I GUESS NOW THAT WE'VE DONE THIS, AND WE UNDERSTAND THE PROSPECTS OF HOW MUCH TIME THIS ALL TAKES, I WOULD GUESS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO START CHARGING THESE STRS AND HOTELS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN WHATEVER FASHION IT IS, WHETHER IT'S A LICENSE OR REGISTRATION OR SOMETHING TO BE ABLE TO COVER OUR COST. >> YES, SIR. I DO BELIEVE WE ARE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE AUDITING STRS THAT MUCH ANYMORE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY GO THROUGH THE AIRBNB TO COLLECT THE TAX. THERE'S REALLY NOT A WHOLE LOT THAT WE CAN AUDIT THERE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION TO AUDIT. AIRBNB WILL NOT GIVE US THE INFORMATION UNLESS WE SUBPOENA IT. >> HOW DID YOU AUDIT THE STRS THIS TIME? >> OUR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WENT BACK FOUR YEARS, SO BEFORE THEY WERE ON AIRBNB. WE FOUND QUITE A LOT OF TAX [INAUDIBLE]. >> YOU SHOULD ALSO NOTE AT THIS POINT, GLENN, THAT WHEN WE WENT TO COLLECT AND GET THROUGH THE STATE, OUR PERCENTAGE WENT WAY UP ON COLLECTIONS. >> YES, MA'AM, IT DID. >> THIS IS A LITTLE BIT TROUBLING, I GUESS, IS THAT WE HAVE NO WAY OF AUDITING SHORT TERM RENTALS. >> CORRECT. YES, SIR. >> WE SHOULD PROBABLY WORK ON THAT. >> WE TRIED. >> I WANT TO BE CLEAR, AND WE'RE GETTING OFF ON A TANGENT A LITTLE BIT, [NOISE] BUT THE AUDITING OF THE SHORT TERM RENTALS, [NOISE] EXCUSE ME, HAS TO DO WITH THE CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE WITH THE PLATFORMS, AND AIRBNB, HOMEAWAY, THOSE VRBO. I THOUGHT IN THAT CONTRACT THERE WAS A PARAGRAPH THAT IF WE HAD CERTAIN SHORT TERM RENTALS WE WANTED INFORMATION ON, WE COULD REQUEST THAT. >> WHAT I'M BEING TOLD NOW IS IT WOULD PRACTICALLY TAKE A SUBPOENA TO DO IT. >> WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT CONTRACT, IF YOU WOULD. [00:30:03] >> ALSO, I THINK THAT WE HAVE STRS THAT ARE PROBABLY NOT ON THE PLATFORM. THOSE WOULD COST CONSIDERABLY MORE. I WOULD JUST ESTIMATING TO DO THOSE WHERE THEY'RE NOT COMPLIANT AT ALL, THE STR IS NOT COMPLIANT AT ALL, I WOULD SAY, ANYWHERE TO DO THE TRACKING AND FIND IT, $3,000-4,000 PER AUDIT. >> PER AUDIT? >> YEAH, BECAUSE IT TAKES A LOT OF TIME TO TRACK THEM DOWN. >> ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE NOT REGISTERED. >> YES, MA'AM. I DO THE DRIVING AROUND, BUT WE HAVE TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE RENTING IT OUT. >> COUNCIL, ON THE AGENDA IS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AUDIT REPORT, BUT I WOULD SAY IF WE WANT TO DISCUSS ALL THE INTRICACIES OF THE AUDIT AND WHAT WE'RE CHARGED AND HOW WE'RE PAID, WE COULD GET THAT AS A SEPARATE ITEM. >> YEAH. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO ELIMINATE, IF THERE WAS SOME OTHER ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS FURTHER ON. BUT BACK TO MY FIRST QUESTION, I GUESS, HOW MANY STRS WERE AUDIT, SAMPLE SIZE AND PERCENTAGE IN TOTAL? DO WE HAVE THAT YET? >> SHE'S GOT IT NOW. >> CARRIE SUMRALL, ASSISTANT CITY AUDITOR. WE AUDITED 45 SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND THE REVENUE WITH PENALTIES AND INTEREST SHOULD BE ABOUT 250,000. THEN WE ALSO AUDITED SIX HOTELS, AND THE TOTAL WITH HOT TAX PENALTIES AND INTEREST SHOULD BE ABOUT 115,000. [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S JUST FOR THIS YEAR >> DO WE KNOW THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SHORT TERM RENTALS? IN OTHER WORDS, I WAS LOOKING AT TRYING TO GET TO A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL THAT WE ACTUALLY AUDITED, THE SAMPLE SIZE MADE. >> WE HAVE 4,500, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY 5,000. >> I THINK IT'S UNDER THAT, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 45. >> SO MANY EVERY YEAR. >> IT WAS A RANDOM SAMPLE, RIGHT? >> YES. >> PROBABLY RUNS ABOUT 6%. >> THE NEXT TIME WE DO A SHORT TERM RENTAL AUDIT UNTIL WE ADDRESS THIS, WE'D ONLY BE ABLE TO AUDIT THOSE NOT ON A PLATFORM AT HIGHER COST? >> YES. >> WE NEED TO CHECK THAT CONTRACT, THOUGH, WITH THE PLATFORMS, IF YOU WOULD, GLENN. I THINK THERE'S EXCEPTION IN THERE. >> THERE IS. THAT'S JUST WHAT WE ARE BEING TOLD. YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A SUBPOENA. >> LET'S LOOK AT THAT CONTRACT AND SEE WHERE WE STAND. AS YOU REMEMBER, COUNCIL, WHEN WE APPROVED GLENN'S 25 AUDIT PLAN, WE REQUESTED 100 AUDITS, I THINK IT WAS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT WAS WHAT I WAS AIMING FOR. WE DID HAVE A LOT OF THESE HOTELS TOOK UP A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TIME BECAUSE WE ARE GOING THROUGH IT. THE EXEMPTIONS FOR THE LOCAL HOTELS, WE'RE GOING THROUGH IT ONE BY ONE, EXEMPTION BY EXEMPTION, TO DETERMINE IF IT'S VALID BECAUSE THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EXEMPTIONS BETWEEN YOUR STATE HOTEL TAX RULES AND YOUR MUNICIPAL HOTEL TAX RULES. WHAT IS EXEMPT? UNFORTUNATELY, A LOT OF HOTELS WILL SAY IT'S ONE OF THE SAME. THEREFORE, THE CITY SUFFERS, THEY DON'T GET ALL THEIR HOT TAX MONEY. >> DAVID, YOU HAD A QUESTION? >> I DID. THE GOAL PER YOUR AUDIT PLAN WAS TO AUDIT 100 STRS, YOU AUDITED 45. WHAT'S INTERESTING THAT'S IN YOUR REPORT IS THOSE 45 WERE THE ONES THAT WERE NOT REGISTERED OR PAYING TAXES, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> BECAUSE PER THE REPORT, IT SAYS CITY AUDITOR HAS IDENTIFIED 45 NEW SHORT TERM PROPERTIES NOT REGISTERED AND PAYING TAXES. ARE THOSE THE 45 THAT YOU AUDITED? HOLD ON, SO FOLLOW-UP. THAT MEANS THAT, CONGRATULATIONS, FIRST OFF, THAT YOU IDENTIFIED 45 THAT WERE NOT ON THE PLATFORM. [OVERLAPPING] >> THANK GOD FOR CITIZENS WHO REPORT THAT AND KEEP DOING THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY. THE SYSTEM WORKS, BUT WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT WE HAVEN'T AUDITED ANY OF THE EXISTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS. FOLLOW-UP IS, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE THE RESOURCES YOU NEED IN ORDER TO MEET THE OBJECTIVES OF THE COUNCIL-APPROVED AUDIT PLAN? >> BEFORE STAFF? >> IN THE AUDIT PLAN, COUNCIL, THE WAY I INTERPRETED IT, WE DID NOT SAY HE HAD TO DO 100 SHORT-TERM RENTALS. >> THAT WAS MY GOAL. >> THE AUDIT PLAN WAS HE HAD TO DO 100 HOT AUDITS OF HOTELS OR SHORT TERM. [00:35:12] >> FIRST OFF, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE MEETING YOUR GOALS, IF THAT IS A RESOURCE ISSUE THAT YOU COME BEFORE COUNCIL AND MAKE SURE TO ASK FOR HELP BECAUSE THAT'S A PERFORMANCE ISSUE ON YOUR ENTIRE DEPARTMENT, AND YOU'RE GOING TO BE REVIEWED UPON THAT. JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT IT'S OUT HERE IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. >> WHERE I CAME UP WITH 100? WE ESTIMATED THAT WE HAD APPROXIMATELY 300 NOT REPORTING, AND THERE WAS ADDITIONAL HOT TAX DUE ON THEM. SO I WANTED TO ACCOMPLISH THAT IN THREE YEARS. THAT'S WHERE I WAS COMING FROM TO DO 100 PER YEAR. IT'S PROBABLY MY FAULT THAT THE GOAL WAS JUST TOO HIGH. >> THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF OUR CITY AUDITORS DEPARTMENT. WE'LL GET A SEPARATE ITEM. LET'S DELVE INTO THIS WHEN WE GET THAT DONE. >> BECAUSE THIS REALLY GOES TO THE HEART OF WHAT THIS COUNCIL ADDRESSES ALMOST EVERY TIME WE SIT DOWN AND TALK, IS HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S EQUITABLE BUY-IN FROM OUR TOURIST INDUSTRY? HOW DO WE GET MORE MONEY FOR THE RESIDENTS OUT OF THE TOURIST ACTIVITY AND SO ON? THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU. I GOT A COUPLE OF MORE, ACTUALLY. >> YES, SIR. FOR ME? >> NO. [OVERLAPPING] 11-G, THAT'S THE REVOCATION OF 27,000 FOR THE [INAUDIBLE] I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS BECAUSE THIS WAS IN DISTRICT 3. DISTRICT 3, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, WE'VE HAD AT LEAST THREE CATASTROPHIC HOUSE FIRES, AND ONE OF THEM WAS DESTROYED. THEN PRACTICALLY THE VERY NEXT DAY, THEY WERE OUT THERE DEMOLISHING IT. WHEN THIS NEXT ONE HAD BURNED DOWN AND WAS COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED, IT STOOD THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND ACTUALLY WAS A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LAG IN THERE, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO THROW ANYBODY UNDER THE BUS OR ANYTHING. I JUST WANT TO DESCRIBE OR UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS IS WHEN STUFF LIKE THIS HAPPENS, THAT IS WHEN THE STRUCTURE IS UNSAFE, WHAT'S THE PROCESS TO GET RID OF IT OR DEMOLISH IT? DO WE DO WE HAVE TO GO TO COURT? DOES THE OWNER HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS? HOW DID WE RECOVER OUR $27,000? >> WELL, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO FIRES WAS THE OWNERS WERE ON SITE WHEN THE OTHER OCCURRED. THERE WERE OBVIOUSLY FATALITIES IN THAT FIRE, IT WAS VERY TRAUMATIC. THEY IMMEDIATELY GRANTED US PERMISSION TO TEAR DOWN THE HOUSE, WHICH WE DID. IN THE CASE OF THIS OTHER, THIS HOME ALREADY HAD A BACKLOG OF CODE ENFORCEMENT CASES AGAINST IT, AND GETTING THE OWNER TO COOPERATE WAS NOT IN THE CARDS PER SE. WE HAD TO GO THE OTHER ROUTE, WHICH IS THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM AND THE NOTICE SYSTEM, AND ALL THOSE THINGS WHICH LEGAL THEN TICKS UP AND RUNS WITH. IT'S A MUCH MORE COMPLEX SYSTEM. IT'S ALWAYS EASIER IF THE OWNER WILL COOPERATE WITH US IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE. I BELIEVE AT THE END, THEY DID COOPERATE WITH US OR WE GOT A COURT ORDER, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE. >> WE GOT A COURT ORDER. >> WE GOT A COURT ORDER. THE WAY WE GET REIMBURSED IS THAT WE FOLLOW A LIEN ON THE LOT. IF THAT LOT EVER SELLS, WE'LL GET THAT MONEY. THAT COULD HAPPEN NEXT WEEK OR IN 50 YEARS. >> IF THE OWNER CHOOSES TO SELL IT, IF THERE'S NOTHING COMPELLING THEM TO SELL THAT? >> BUT WE HELD A LIEN ON THEIR PROPERTY. >> WE HAD A LIEN. >> IF IT DOES SELL, WE GET THE MONEY BACK. >> THE UNFORTUNATE THING ABOUT THE SYSTEM IS WHEN YOU HAVE A DILAPIDATED HOUSE, IT'S MOST IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO DO ANYTHING, AND THE BLESSING IS WHEN THERE'S A FIRE. BUT ODDLY ENOUGH, BECAUSE I CAN THINK OF AT LEAST TWO OR THREE THAT HAVE BEEN DILAPIDATED SINCE AG, AND IF IT WASN'T FOR THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A FIRE, THAT WOULD STILL BE STANDING. >> WELL, WE DO HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT ADDRESSES UNOCCUPIED HOMES AND DILAPIDATED CONDITIONS. >> IT REQUIRES THEM TO SECURE THEM AND ALL THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. IT DOESN'T GIVE US THE RIGHT TO GO TEAR THEM DOWN, RIGHT? >> NO, BUT IT GIVES US THE RIGHT TO INSPECT THOSE HOMES. IF THEY ARE IN A CONDITION THAT IS DETRIMENTALLY AFFECTING PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY, THEN WE CAN REQUEST THAT THEY REPAIR THAT HOME. I KNOW THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING AROUND THE CITY. >> COME TAKE A RIDE WITH ME, [OVERLAPPING] AND I'LL SHOW YOU A NUMBER OF HOUSES THAT WE'VE BEEN GOING FOR 13 YEARS. >> IF THIS DILAPIDATED CONDITION CAUSES SOME DAMAGE, SAY, [00:40:01] TO AN ADJACENT PROPERTY, THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY OWNER, NOT THE CITY? >> CORRECT. >> WE DO HAVE A DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE. WOULD THAT APPLY TO ANY OF THIS? >> IT TAKES AN ACT TO GOD FOR US TO ENFORCE IT, TRULY. >> IN CASE OF THE ONE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, I GUESS, THE UNFORTUNATE EVENT, BUT THE FIRE, DO WE POST PLACE A LIEN ON THEIR PROPERTY OR IS IT MORE OF LIKE A SERVICE CHARGE? >> I BELIEVE ON THAT ONE, THEY REIMBURSED US, BUT I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE ON THAT, ALEX. WE DID ONE OR THE OTHER ON THAT, BUT I'M ALMOST POSITIVE, I BELIEVE THAT FAMILY REIMBURSED US. >> I THINK BELUCHE HAD ACTUALLY SOLD, THE ONE ON BELUCHE? >> I BELIEVE THE LOT HAS NOW SOLD, HOPEFULLY. [OVERLAPPING] NOW, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE WILL GET A LOT OF PRESSURE WHEN THESE LOTS SELL FROM EITHER THE REALTORS OR THE PURCHASER OR THE SELLER TO RELEASE ALL THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY MONEY ON IT, AND I WILL TELL YOU SINCE I'VE BEEN CITY MANAGER, I DON'T DO THAT. >> GOOD FOR YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE? >> I GOT ONE,11-S. THIS IS THE BLANKET LIFE FIGHTING MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. >> IT SAYS IN THERE THAT THIS IS FOR STATE ROADS ONLY, AND IT ALSO SAYS IT'S CAUSEWAY ONLY. >> THIS IS BASICALLY EVERY LIGHT FROM 59TH AND BROADWAY GOING OUTBOUND TO THE FOOT OF THE CAUSEWAY. THIS IS IN THE STATE LAW THAT CITIES OVER 50,000 MUST MAINTAIN THESE LIGHTS. IT'S ONE OF THOSE CATCH-22S. THE MINUTE WE DROPPED BELOW 50,000, WE LOST OUR TRANSIT FUNDING BECAUSE THEY WERE STRICT ON IT. THE MINUTE WE DROPPED BELOW 50,000, THEY GAVE US AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO GET ABOVE 50,000 BEFORE THEY WOULD TAKE OVER OUR STREET LIGHTS. BUT WE HAVE MAINTAINED IN THE CITY IS ACTUALLY THE LIGHTS THAT ARE THERE. WE HAVE RELAMPED, WE'VE CONVERTED THEM TO LED. WE'RE HAVING SOME POLE FAILURES ON THE CAUSEWAY DUE TO A DEFECT IN THE LIGHT POLES. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF THEM KICK OVER IN THE WIND. TXDOT HAVE GONE TO REPLACE THOSE LIGHT POLES AS PART OF THE I-45 PROJECT. HOWEVER, THE CITY WILL BE ON THE HOOK FOR MAINTAINING, AND WE HAVE ASKED THEM TO INSTALL SOMETHING THAT WE CAN MORE EASILY MAINTAIN BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE EQUIPMENT TO MAINTAIN LIGHTS AT HIGH, SO WE ALWAYS HAVE TO CONTRACT THAT OUT. IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE, THAT'S WHY WE LET A COUPLE DOZEN GET OUT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY CONTRACT BECAUSE ON BROADWAY, WE CAN GET A TRUCK OUT AND OUR TRUCKS WILL REACH THEM ON THE CAUSEWAY, OUR TRUCKS DON'T REACH THEM. >> TRAINING WHEELS FOR BRIDGE MAINTENANCE. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT WAS PART OF MY OTHER QUESTION THAT SAYS THAT THEY'LL INSTALL ALL NEW LIGHTING, BUT CITY MAINTAINS THEM. MY QUESTION WAS, IS THERE SOME LIFE EXPECTANCY OF THESE LIGHT POLES BEYOND WHICH THE TXDOT WOULDN'T REPLACE. I THINK HE PARTIALLY ANSWERED IT AND SAID THAT WHEN THEY FAIL, TXDOT WILL REPLACE. >> WELL, THAT IS IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THEY'VE AGREED TO REPLACE THEM. THIS GOES BACK TO WHEN ALYZA WAS THERE, SHE AGREED TO IT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S A STATE HIGHWAY, AND I BELIEVE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE FACT ACROSS THE BOARD. IN THE PAST, WE HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE POLES OURSELVES, THAT HAVE EITHER TIPPED OVER OR BEEN HIT. >> THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS THIS POLE IS GOING TO LAST 20 YEARS. >> WE HAVE SOME OF THOSE POLES THAT ARE 50-YEARS-OLD, AND WE HAVE THE ONES ON THE CAUSEWAY THAT WERE PUT IN IN 2007 AND THEY FAILED. >> THE TXDOT DIDN'T PAY FOR THOSE? >> THEY ARE, THEY'RE GOING TO REPLACE THE ONES ON THE CAUSEWAY BECAUSE THEY REALIZED THEY'RE FAILING AT THE WELD AT THE BASE JOINT. >> BUT NOT BECAUSE THERE'S SIMPLY HOLD AND WE'RE OUT? >> NO. THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK THERE'S A DEFECT IN THIS. >> [INAUDIBLE] DOWN HERE. >> PLASTIC RUST HERE. >> EXACTLY. THERE'S ONE MORE, LAST REAL QUICK ON 11-V. I HAVE A PICTURE. I HAVE THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IN SEAWOLF. >> YES, SIR. >> JUST A CLARIFICATION, THAT PLANT, IT SAID, IS DESIGNED TO BE RELOCATED IN CASE THERE'S A STORM COMING. BUT PART OF YOUR STORM READINESS PROGRAM WOULD GO OVER THERE AND PICK IT UP? >> YES, SIR. IT WOULD TAKE IT PROBABLY TO THE MAIN TREATMENT PLANT. >> WOW. >> WHICH AIN'T A WHOLE LOT HIGHER. [LAUGHTER]. >> IT'S LIKE A COUPLE OF FEET. >> THEN I GUESS YOU HAVE A LOCATION ALREADY IN MIND FOR THAT PLANT ON SEAWOLF PARK, RIGHT? >> YEAH. >> WE'RE LOOKING WHERE THE OLD PLANT USED TO BE, JUST OFF TO THE EAST SIDE OF THAT IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. >> WE'RE TRYING NOT TO INCUR A BUNCH OF COST OF REPIPING AND ALL THAT STUFF. >> THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANKS. >> THANK YOU, ROBB. DAVID? >> I GOT ALL MINE ANSWERED. >> THANK YOU. >> THEN WE GO TO I DON'T 11-V AS IN VICTOR. LINK, YOU'RE STILL HERE? [00:45:03] >> ROBB? >> BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME PUBLIC PRESENTATION OF POSSIBLY HAVING AN RV PARK THERE, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WON'T HAVE A DELAY IN THIS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN INCORPORATED IN THE DESIGN? >> THE PLANT ITSELF IS DESIGNED FOR 15,000 GALLON PER DAY, WHICH IS ENOUGH TO WATER TO ABOUT 100 RESIDENTIAL HOUSES ON CONSERVATIVE FLOW. THIS IS ACTUALLY A SCALABLE PROJECT SO WE CAN BRING IN A SECONDARY PIECE IF WE NEED MORE FLOW TREATMENT CAPACITY. RIGHT NOW WE'RE SIZING IT FOR WHAT HAS BEEN THERE HISTORICALLY AND TO MAINTAIN THAT SIZE. >> IF THERE WAS AN RV PARK THAT PASSED AND PUT IN THERE, THERE WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE? >> DEPENDING ON HOW LARGE IT IS. IF WE'RE TALKING 100 ACRES, PROBABLY NOT. >> [OVERLAPPING] I THINK IT'S JUST SITE-DEPENDENT AND SITE OF THE PARK. >> ARE WE GOING TO DO A DUMP STATION OR ARE WE GOING TO DO INDIVIDUAL PAD SITE CONNECTIONS? ROBB'S BEING VERY ENGINEERY. I WOULD TELL YOU THAT I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY ENOUGH CAPACITY WITH THIS, BUT THAT'S THE COWBOY ESTIMATION OF IT. BUT OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE WAS A NEED TO EXPAND IT, THIS IS AN EXPANDABLE OR MODULAR-TYPE SYSTEM THAT WE CAN EXPAND IF WE NEED TO. [OVERLAPPING] NOW THERE'S COST WITH THAT. >> JUST SO WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE IN CASE IT DOES HAPPEN. >> THE GOAL WOULD BE IS THAT IT SIZE FOR WHAT IT CAN TAKE TODAY. BUT IF SOME GRAND USE PLAN COMES UP THAT IS LARGER THAN IT IS, IT CAN BE ADDED ONTO IF YOU GO AHEAD AND HANDLE THAT. >> IT'S DESIGNED ONLY FOR SEAWOLF PARK, NO OTHER PELICAN ISLAND? >> HUNDRED PERCENT, JUST TO SERVICE OUR PROPERTY. >> WHAT'S THE TIMELINE ON THE ENGINEERING? >> THE ENGINEERING, I THINK THEY'VE GOT A SCHEDULE IN THERE OF ABOUT SIX MONTHS TO GET THAT WRAPPED UP. I MIGHT BE COMING BACK TO YOU AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT DESIGN TO TALK ABOUT MAYBE AN ADVANCED PROCUREMENT OF THE ACTUAL PACKAGE PLAN ITSELF SO WE CAN GET THAT GOING WHILE WE'RE FINISHING DESIGN. >> WE AREN'T DESIGNING SOMETHING THAT'LL BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY AS WE GET THE BRIDGE COMPLETED? >> NO. THAT'S WHAT PART OF THE OTHER PROPERTY DISCUSSIONS ON PELICAN ISLAND REVOLVED BECAUSE ANYTHING LIKE THAT WOULD INVOLVE A MUCH LARGER DIFFERENT TYPE OF PLANT THAN WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, AND IT WOULD INVOLVE LIFT STATIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. IT WOULD PROBABLY ACTUALLY DISCHARGE AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DISCHARGING THIS. >> WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO DISCHARGE THIS? >> THAT DEPEND ON ULTIMATELY WHAT PROPERTY WE END UP WITH AS PART OF THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT ARE ONGOING ON THAT, BUT I SUSPECT THEY WOULD PROBABLY DISCHARGE IN THE DEEPER WATERS OF THE CHANNEL. >> MY UNDERSTANDING WAS WE ALREADY HAVE A DILAPIDATED WASTEWATER PLANT THERE. >> WELL, THE ONLY PLANT THE CITY HAS ON PELICAN ISLAND, AND IT'S NOT REALLY A PLANT, IT'S AT PELICAN ISLAND SEAWOLF PARK, IS THAT THE PLANT WAS DAMAGED DURING HURRICANE IKE. WE ARE MANUALLY OPERATING THIS NOW WITH A TRUCK. BASICALLY, IT STILL GOES TO A SYSTEM AND WE HAND PUMP IT, SO THERE'S REALLY A PLAN. >> THERE WAS A FEMA PW. WHAT WAS THAT MONEY USED FOR? >> THAT PW, WE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL DESIGN UNDULATIONS, AND AT THE ULTIMATE POINT, WE COULDN'T GET IT DONE IN TIME. I THINK WE ENDED UP USING IT TO BUY A FIRE TRUCK. WE DID AN ALTERNATE PROJECT BECAUSE WE COULDN'T GET COME TO AGREEMENT ON WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE PLANT OVER THERE. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS A PART BOARD PW THOUGH, NOT US. >> IT'S OURS BECAUSE WE OWN THE PLANT. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> NO, SIR. THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE, SIR. >> NO, SIR. >> VERY GOOD. LAST THING, I HAVE 11-C. DON, THIS IS A QUESTION, POSSIBLY, FOR YOU. >> TURN YOUR MIC ON PLEASE. >> EXCUSE ME? >> I'M TELLING DON TO TURN HIS MIC ON. >> WE WANT YOU TO SPEAK INTO THE MIC, THEY SAID, DON. WE ARE SEEING ABOUT APPROVING HIRING POSSIBLY UP TO $30,000 THIS COMPANY TO DO THE SURVEYS FOR US TO GET ACCURATE SURVEYS OF THE LANDS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH THE PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE CONTRACT. I'M ALL UP FOR THAT. MY QUESTION IS, CAN WE GET REIMBURSED FROM THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT IS SET ASIDE IN THAT CONTRACT WITH TXDOT FOR THIS 30,000 AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE? >> NO WORK DONE BEFORE THE SIGNING OF THE AFA IS REIMBURSABLE. >> BECAUSE WE'RE NOT SIGNING THE AFA, THAT WORK IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN GET REIMBURSED ON? >> RIGHT. [00:50:04] >> EXCUSE ME. JUST A MINUTE, MAYOR. IS IT CRITICAL THAT WE HAVE THIS DONE NOW INSTEAD OF WAITING BEFORE THEY HAVE A? WELL, I WAS. >> YES. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK DON THAT. GO AHEAD, DON. >> THE TARGET IS TO HAVE ALL THESE THINGS BUTTONED UP IN MAY. TXDOT WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS DONE. I THINK WE ALL DO. WE HAVE THE DESCRIPTION OF THE ROUTE FROM TXDOT. THE DIFFICULTY I HAVE IS FIXING THOSE COORDINATES TO SPECIFIC OWNERS OF PARCELS, AND THAT IS WHAT SAPIO IS GOING TO DO FOR US. >> OKAY. >> I COULD DO IT MYSELF AND PROBABLY SCREW IT UP. OR WE CAN HIRE PETE AND MAKE SURE HE GETS IT DONE RIGHT, BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT HE'S DONE FOR WHAT? 35 YEARS. >> IT IS ESSENTIAL TO GET IT DONE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT'S ALSO TIED IN WITH SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL. SO THE FASTER WE GET THE ENVIRONMENTAL DONE, WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN ADVANCED LEAD DATE AND GET THE BRIDGE DONE. >> WE NEVER KNOW WITH RIGHT AWAY IF THERE'S ANY CHALLENGES TO IT. WE DON'T WANT TO SLOW THE PROJECT DOWN. THE ONLY THING I WOULD MENTION ON THIS IS THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU FEEL IT'S NON REIMBURSABLE BECAUSE WE'RE DOING IT BEFORE THE CONTRACT. WOULD YOU KEEP A LIST OF ALL OF THESE COSTS THAT WE'RE SPENDING ON THIS? I STILL FEEL THAT WE NOT NEED TO TALK TO TXDOT ABOUT THAT. >> THAT'LL BE FINE. >> ALL RIGHT. SOUNDS GOOD. YES, SIR. >> I HAVE ONE ITEM WHEN YOU'RE THROUGH. >> I AM THROUGH. YES, SIR. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> 12 A. >> WELL. >> IT'S THE LA MORGAN SCHOOL. >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT GROUPS HAVE WE IDENTIFIED IN THE CASE OF ROSENBERG, FOR THE BETTER PARKS FOR THE REPOSITORY OF DONATIONS? THAT'S ONE OF MY QUESTIONS. BECAUSE IN THAT ONE IT SAID THE CITY WAS GOING TO SPEND NO MONEY. IN THIS ONE, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT FINANCIAL RISK OR LIABILITY WE'RE BEING PUT UNDER HERE FOR THIS RESOLUTION. >> A GOOD QUESTION. SHARON WAS SPONSORING. SHARON, DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT? >> WHAT THIS RESOLUTION STATES IS IT DOES NOT HOLD THE CITY IN ANY WAY FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE. IT SIMPLY IS A DOCUMENT THAT ASKS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER PROPOSALS FROM THE COMMUNITY. THERE'S BEEN TWO NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WHO HAVE COME FORWARD. THERE'S BEEN TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AND IT'S JUST DUE RESPECT THAT THEY LISTEN TO THE COMMUNITY, AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS. IT'S A PROPOSAL WITH SUGGESTIONS FROM THE COMMUNITY WITH NO MONEY FROM THE CITY ATTACHED TO IT. >> I'M GOING TO OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION ON THAT, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT WE'VE GOT AN ITEM WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING INTO ROSENBERG. IF WE'RE GOING TO MORPH OVER TO THAT, LET'S HOLD THAT. YES, MA'AM. >> THIS IS ON LA MORGAN. BECAUSE ONE, I'M JUST GOING TO STATE I THINK THE CITY NEEDS TO GET OUT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD'S BUSINESS AND LET THEM PROCEED WITHOUT US INTERJECTING. TWO, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SENATOR MAYES MIDDLETON ON A BUILDING IN THE STRAND THAT HE IS ALREADY WORKING ON GETTING FUNDING. WHY WOULD YOU SWITCH DOWN TO ANOTHER BUILDING? THAT'S NOT THE IDEA OF JUST A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM. THERE'S BEEN SO MANY SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THAT. EVEN CONGRESSMAN WEBER HAS, WELL, HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY TAKE IT BEFORE THE LAST CONGRESS, SO HE HAS TO COME BACK THIS TIME AND PRESENT AN IDEA FOR THE SMITHSONIAN TO HAVE ANNEX A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE. THEY DID TALK ABOUT THE OLD CENTRAL CULTURAL CENTER BECAUSE IT IS A HISTORICAL MARKER. YOU HAVE MAYBE FEDERAL FUNDS AND THE MAYES MIDDLETON, THE STATE FUNDS, BUT THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SPECIFIC BUILDING IDENTIFIED. >> WELL, HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS THERE IS A BUILDING IN THE STRAND AREA THAT WAS IDENTIFIED. [00:55:04] I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION WHEN I TALKED TO HIM ABOUT THIS, BUT I'M ALSO MAKING THE STATEMENT, I THINK THE CITY NEEDS TO GET OUT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD'S BUSINESS. >> I ALSO TALKED TO BREA AND HIS OFFICE. AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY HAS COMMUNICATED WITH MAYES MIDDLETON AS WELL. BUT THIS IS JUST THE COMMUNITY SAYING, "HEY, THIS COULD BE A POSSIBILITY. JUST CONSIDER THE BUILDING BEING USED FOR THE COMMUNITY, SHOWING ITS HERITAGE, ITS CULTURE." OF COURSE, WE KNOW DR. LA MORGAN IS TO BE THE ONLY BUILDING LEFT HERE THAT REPRESENTS AN AFRO AMERICAN WITHIN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. SO IT IS JUST A SIMPLE REQUEST TO CONSIDER IT TO JUST LISTEN, AND THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS. >> BOB, YOU HAD IS IT ON THIS TOPIC HERE. >> TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION THAT WAS POSED ABOUT WHAT CAN THIS CITY DO. I WENT THROUGH AND I LOOKED AT EVERY ACTION VERB IN THIS THING AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IT MEANS. FIRST ONE, IT SAYS CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZES, THAT'S THE ACTION VERB, THE IMPORTANCE OF UTILIZING THE SITE TO BENEFIT CURRENT FUTURE GENERATIONS. THAT SAYS, IT DOESN'T OBLIGATE ANYBODY TO ANYTHING. IT JUST RECOGNIZES THAT THERE'S A GROUP OUT THERE THAT THINKS THIS IS BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY. I CAN'T DISAGREE WITH THAT. IT ALSO SAYS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL EXPRESSES, THAT'S THE ACTION VERB, TO SUPPORT THE CONCEPT THAT THE GALVESTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TRUSTEES CONSIDER PROPOSALS FROM THE COMMUNITY. TO ME, THAT DOESN'T, AGAIN, COMMIT THE CITY TO ANYTHING, BUT IT DOES EXPRESS THE DESIRES OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AROUND THERE, OF THE RESIDENTS. I THINK WE SHOULD ALWAYS ENCOURAGE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND CITY PROCESSES FROM RESIDENTS. THE OTHER ONE SAYS, THE CITY COUNCIL ENCOURAGES, THAT'S THE ACTION VERB, COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS TO PRESENT THEIR THOUGHTS ON DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, IT DOESN'T COMMIT THE CITY TO ANYTHING. THEN IT ALSO SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMS, THAT'S ANOTHER FOR ACTION VERB, ITS COMMITMENT THAT THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE PART OF THE PUBLIC DECISION MAKING THROUGH HEARINGS. HOW COULD YOU DISAGREE WITH THAT? I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE INCUMBENT ON US IS TO ENCOURAGE AS MUCH CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AS POSSIBLE IN THEIR CITY GOVERNMENT. WE'RE NOT COMMITTING ANY MONEY OR ANY OBLIGATIONS, BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO LISTEN TO THE RESIDENTS WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN AND ALSO ACTUALLY GISD SHOULD ALSO BECAUSE THESE RESIDENTS ARE WHAT PAID THEIR TAXES THAT KEPT GISD GOING ALL THESE YEARS AND PASS THE BOND ISSUES. >> GO AHEAD. >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID AS FAR AS LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS, AND I'M ECHOING THE AT LEAST 1,000 EMAILS, TEXT, AND PHONE CALLS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED FROM CITIZENS. I HAVE TO SAY I'M GOING TO SIDE WITH THE STUDENTS AND THE TEACHERS. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALEX, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? YES. >> I'M SORRY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS GOING TO CONTINUE ON WHEN WE ACTUALLY GET TO THE WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEM. DISCUSSION WITH MORGAN AND ROSENBERG? >> MORGAN WILL NOT, BUT ROSENBERG WILL. YES, SIR. >> IT'S AN ACTION ITEM THOUGH. >> EXCUSE ME? >> THIS THE APPROVAL OF THE LA MORGAN IS AN ACTION ITEM IN OUR AGENDA. >> CORRECT. I THINK BEAU'S QUESTION WAS WHEN WE GET ON THE WORKSHOP HERE. MAYBE I WAS MISUNDERSTOOD, BEAU. WHEN WE GO TO 3L, WERE YOU ASKING COULD WE TALK ABOUT MORGAN THEN TOO? >> WELL, YEAH, I MIGHT SEGUE INTO IT, SO IT MIGHT SOMEHOW ASSOCIATE IT, SO I WAS JUST MAKING SURE. >> THE AGENDA ITEM IS GEARED TO THE ROSENBERG PROPERTY, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD GET INTO THAT TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. YES, SIR, IF YOU'D LIKE. VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER CLARIFICATION? STAFF? >> I HAVE ONE CLARIFICATION. >> YES. >> THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL TO THE DISTRICT. AGAIN, IT IS NOT JUST SPECIFIC TO A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM. THAT WAS JUST ONE THING THAT THEY MENTIONED. >> I KNOW MY OPINION AND I AM ACTUALLY REGRET THE FIRST ONE WE DID WITH ROSENBERG. I THINK THE CITY IS INTERFERING WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD BUSINESS, AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE ANY RIGHT. THEY ARE A SEPARATE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY. I'M JUST SAYING I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE ROSENBERG OR THE LA MORGAN. I HAVE HEARD FROM SO MANY OF OUR CITIZENS. [01:00:03] THEY'RE THE ONES WHO PUT US HERE, AND I'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR DISTRICTS, TEXT, EMAIL, PHONE CALLS. I HAVE RECEIVED MORE THAN I DID ON GOLF CARTS, I'M JUST SAYING, AND GOLF CARTS WERE HUGE. I'M JUST MAKING THAT COMMENT. >> CAN I SHARE A COMMENT FROM AN EDUCATOR. >> WELL, IT'S A VERY WELL KNOWN FACT THAT OUR TEACHERS ARE PAID LESS THAN OTHER TEACHERS IN THE AREA, HENCE WHY WE LOSE SOME OF THE GREAT TEACHERS, AND THE MONEY THAT COMES IN THROUGH TAXES IS SUBJECT TO ROBIN HOOD. THE MONEY WHO COMES IN TO THE SALE OF THESE PROPERTIES DOES NOT GO INTO TO ROBIN HOOD, SO IT CAN BE USED DIRECTLY TO INCREASE SALARIES AND TO BENEFIT OUR CHILDREN. >> COUNCIL, WE'RE GETTING OFF. >> WHAT YOU ANSWER A QUESTION. I WAS JUST WONDERING COMMENTS DID EDUCATORS MAKE REGARDING THIS RESOLUTION. >> BOTH RESOLUTIONS. >> THIS ONE. >> THE AREA TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS OF THIS WOULD BE AT OUR REGULAR MEETING. THIS IS MORE CLARIFICATION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? LET'S MOVE TO 3L, [3.L. Discussion Of Conditions To Be Met Before The City May Accept Any Conveyance Of Any GISD Owned Property (Porretto/C. Brown/B. Maxwell/D. Glywasky - 20 Min)] COULD WE PLEASE, JANELLE? >> 3L, DISCUSSION OF CONDITIONS TO BE MET BEFORE THE CITY MAY ACCEPT ANY CONVEYANCE OF ANY GISD-OWNED PROPERTY. >> I'M GOING TO INVITE UP TO THE TABLE OUR SUPERINTENDENT, MATTHEW NEIGHBORS. STAFF, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. APPRECIATE IT. MATTHEW TONY, DID YOU WANT TO COME UP ALSO? >> YOU'VE BEEN A WORLD TRAVELER LATELY. I'VE BEEN LIVING VICARIOUSLY THROUGH YOU. >> IT'S BEEN A BUSY FEW MONTHS, IN A GOOD WAY. >> COULD THE ROOM SETTLE DOWN. >> I KNOW. WHO PLAYED A TRICK ON US OF PUTTING NON SUGAR MINT IN OUR CANDY BOWL AND TAKING OUT CANDY? >> THAT WAS THE ENDOCRINOLOGIST FROM UNIVERSITY OF TAMPA. VERY GOOD. COULD YOU READ 3 WELL? WHERE DID JANELLE GO? WE'RE IN ITEM 3L. >> SHE THOUGHT SHE COULD LEAVE TOO. >> I THINK SHE DID. >> A DISCUSSION OF CONDITIONS TO BE MET BEFORE THE CITY MAY ACCEPT ANY CONVEYANCE OF ANY GISD-OWNED PROPERTY. THERE'S NO ACTION ITEM ON THIS TODAY. THIS IS A DISCUSSION. I THINK, BRIAN, YOU'RE GOING TO LEAD IT OFF ON YOUR STAFF RECORD ISSUES. >> I'VE SHARED MOST OF THIS WITH, I THINK, BOARD CHAIRMAN BROWN, AND I'VE ALSO SPOKEN WITH MATT ABOUT THIS, SUPERINTENDENT NEIGHBORS. THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS, WE HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR IN THAT BEFORE THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT ANY CONVEYANCE, THAT THE BUILDING MUST BE REMOVED, THE FOUNDATION REMOVED, THE WHOLE FIELD CREPT AND SITTER SIDE OR WHATEVER. BUT THAT ALL ENVIRONMENTAL MUST BE DONE, AND IF THERE'S ANY ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS, THAT IT MUST BE REMEDIATED BEFORE THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT IT. THE SECOND WAS THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT AGREE TO TAKE PROPERTY WITH ANY RESTRICTIONS ON IT IN TERMS OF WHAT PARK RESTRICTIONS WE PUT ON IT. IT MAY BE GREEN SPACE, IT COULD BE A SOFTBALL FIELD. IT COULD BE A DRIVING RINK. YOU NAME IT. WHATEVER FITS THERE IS NEEDED OR CALLED FOR IN OUR MASTER PARKS PLAN OR COMES UP, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT IT THERE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR THROUGH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO PROJECT ROSENBERG EARLY ON IS THAT WE HAVE NAMING PROCEDURES FOR OUR PARKS IN PLACE. WE DON'T JUST AUCTION OUR PARK NAMES OFF TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER. THERE'S A LOT OF VERY WORTHY PEOPLE. >> IF WE DID, WE SHOULD USE THAT GO GOV BED BECAUSE THAT WORKED REALLY WELL. >> IT WORKED REALLY WELL. BUT THAT THE CITY HAS A PROCESS FOR THAT AND THAT THERE'S NO AUTOMATIC NAMING OR ATTACHMENT RIGHTS. >> YOU MIGHT RECALL, THERE WAS AN INSTANCE WITH A BASEBALL FIELD AND NAMING WHERE THE PROCEDURE WASN'T FOLLOWED. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE TO FOLLOW THESE PROCEDURES BECAUSE THEY GIVE EVERYBODY THE PROTECTION AND CERTAINTY THAT THEY NEED. [01:05:05] >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS NEVER DISCUSSED PRIOR TO THIS, BUT THAT CAME UP, I BELIEVE WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WAS THAT THEY REQUIRED A REVERTER. DON AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS, AND WE DO NOT BELIEVE THE CITY SHOULD ACCEPT LAND WITH A REVERTER IN IT, BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR OWN PROVISIONS IN OUR CODES AND ORDINANCES AND CHARTER AS IT RELATES TO PARK LAND AND ITS FUTURE USE AND HOW THE VOTERS ARE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. >> I SAW A MEMO OUT ON THAT YESTERDAY. >> YES, SIR. >> TO GET RID OF PARK LAND, WE HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE. I ALSO NOTED IN THAT MEMO THAT IN THE CITY CODE, BEFORE WE ACCEPT THE DONATION OF A PARK, WE HAVE TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATION BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD. WE'VE ENTIRELY SKIPPED THAT PROCEDURAL STEP. >> THERE HAS BEEN OTHER DISCUSSION WITH STAFF. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDED IN MY RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT IT CAME UP AFTER THE IDC MEETING THE OTHER DAY THAT MOVING FORWARD WITH ANY NEW PARKS UNTIL EXISTING PARKS ARE FUNDED COULD BE A CRITERIA AS WELL, BUT THAT IS STRICTLY A POLICY ISSUE AND NOT ONE STAFF WILL BE WEIGHING IN ON. >> ANYTHING ELSE, BRIAN, THAT YOU HAD? >> NO, THOSE WERE MY MAIN THINGS, AND I THINK THEY'RE VERY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I'VE SHARED WITH MATT AND WITH CHAIRMAN BROWN, EITHER VIA TEXT OR IN OUR FRONT YARD. >> SUPERINTENDENT NEIGHBORS, ANY COMMENTS, SIR, THAT YOU HAVE? >> SURE. NONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT ARE RAISED BY THE CITY TROUBLE US. WE KNOW THAT THE REVERTER INTEREST WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PROPOSED BY PROJECT ROSENBERG AND NOT BY THE CITY. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE NEXT STEP WAS FOR US TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY HOW THIS CONVEYANCE POSSIBLY WOULD WORK, AND THAT THAT PROPOSAL NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO OUR BOARD. THIS IS PART OF THE PROCESS IS WE'VE GOT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS ARE BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE GROUP THAT WAS PROPOSING THIS PROJECT ROSENBERG, THEY WEREN'T THE CITY. THEY'RE INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION. NOW, WE HAVE TO WORK WITH YOU TO SEE HOW THIS POTENTIALLY WORKS. THEN IF THE REVERTER INTEREST IS NOT ON THE TABLE, THEN THAT POSSIBLY HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO OUR BOARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL. ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE'VE THOUGHT ABOUT AGAIN IS JUST HOW THIS CONVEYANCE HAPPENS IS REALLY WHAT LEGAL NEEDS TO WORK OUT BETWEEN THEMSELVES, BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE WAY WE CONVERTED THE LAND OVER AT THE DOG PARK ON THE WEST END IS AN INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT INSTEAD OF A TRUE CONVEYANCE. WE FEEL LIKE THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT WE NEED TO EXPLORE AND WE NEED TO HAVE ALL THOSE LAID OUT ON THE TABLE FOR BOTH ORGANIZATIONS BEFORE WE MAKE A FINAL DECISION. >> YES, SIR. >> A TRUE CONVEYANCE BETWEEN TWO GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, THAT HAS TO STICK WITH THE REVERTER CLAUSE, IS THAT CORRECT? IS IT STATE LAW? AM I CORRECT? >> NO, THAT WAS JUST A PROPOSED. >> DON EXPAND ON THAT, IF YOU WANT, SIR. >> THERE IS A SECTION IN 27-2001, I THINK IT'S L11. THAT REQUIRES THAT IF SURPLUS LAND IS GOING TO BE GIVEN TO ANOTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION FOR LESS THAN MARKET VALUE, THERE HAS TO BE A REVERTER CLAUSE. IN THIS INSTANCE, PROJECT ROSENBERG CAME AND SAID, YEAH, WE HAVE MORE PLEDGES THAN WHAT SEELY SMITH HAS OFFERED. THEY ARE COMING IN AT FULL PRICE. THEREFORE, THIS IS NOT A CONVEYANCE AT LESS THAN MARKET VALUE. NEXT, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER STATUTES RELATED TO THE CONVEYANCE OF REAL ESTATE, SOME IN THE EDUCATION CODE, THAT DO NOT MENTION A REVERSIONARY INTEREST AT ALL. I HAVE TO SAY THE EDUCATION CODE IS NOT A MODEL OF CLARITY ON CERTAIN THINGS INCLUDING THIS. IN FACT, THERE'S CONFLICTS WITHIN THE STATUTE. I THINK I POINTED THAT OUT IN MY MEMO. >> YEAH. BRIAN, I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO BACK TO THE COMMENTS YOU MADE ON THE CONDITIONS AND YOU SAID IT WAS A POLICY DECISION WHICH ALL OF THESE REALLY ARE. BUT MENTIONED ABOUT OUR PARK SYSTEMS AND NOT MOVING FORWARD UNTIL WE. >> THAT HINGES FROM DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD AT IDC THE OTHER DAY? >> CORRECT. >> WHERE I JOKED THAT YOU GUYS HAD ABOUT 15 NUMBER ONE PRIORITIES. BUT WE HAVE GONE OUT AND WE PUT TO A VOTE DISPOSAL OF TWO PARKS AND THE VOTER SAID, NO, WE WANT THOSE PARKS FIXED AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY GROUPS TO FUND AND IMPROVE JONES PARK AND SHIELD PARK. WE'VE IDENTIFIED THOSE AS CRITICAL PARTS NEEDED IN OUR SYSTEM AND WE ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH GRANT PROJECTS AND. >> TO INTERRUPT, IT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE MEETING THAT TO GET THE GRANTS, [01:10:01] WE HAVE TO ALLOCATE MONEY TOWARDS SHIELDS AND JONES. RIGHT NOW, WE ONLY HAVE 100,000 ALLOCATED PROBABLY TO ONE OR MAYBE BOTH OF THE PARKS EACH. >> YEAH. I THINK JONES HAS MOST OF THE MONEY ALLOCATED TO IT AND IT'S LIGHTING AND SOME THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WE AGREED TO DO BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE FURTHER AHEAD THAN SHIELD BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENT. >> BUT TO BE ABLE TO APPLY OR GET MORE GRANT MONEY FOR MATCH. WE HAVE TO HAVE MORE ALLOCATED TOWARDS. >> EVERY GRANT REQUIRES SKIN IN THE GAME. WE'RE WAYS OFF ON THOSE IN TERMS OF GETTING THE FUNDING, BUT WE'RE WORKING DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO GET THOSE DONE. >> THE IDC, WE DON'T VOTE. THIS WAS A DISCUSSION ITEM, BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT IDC WAS FAIRLY UNANIMOUS IN THEIR FEELING THAT WE HAVE PARKS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE QUEUE FOR A LONG TIME HERE IN THE CITY. SHIELD PARK, JONES PARK, WE HAVE BRIAN HAS SHARED, I THINK WITH THE LASSE LEAGUE FIELDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT NEED TO BE UPGRADED. WE HAVE PARKS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE QUEUE HERE. THE IDC FELT, I THINK, VERY COMFORTABLE IN SAYING THAT WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THIS PARK BECAUSE WE'VE GOT OTHER PARKS THAT ARE BEEN IN MUCH NEED FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. >> THE RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED SAID NO MUNICIPAL FUNDS WERE TO BE USED. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> I KNOW WE'RE JUST NOW FINISHING, MAYBE BARBER CAN. WE'RE JUST NOW FINISHING PHASE FIVE FOR THE PARKS, AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED WHERE PHASE 6 IS GOING TO GO ACCORDING TO OUR MASTER PLAN WITH IDC. I WOULD GUESS, IF ANYTHING DID CONVEY, IT WOULD BE IN THE NEXT PHASE OF OUR NEW MASTER PLAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DECIDING TODAY FOR FOR ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR ETC FOR A POTENTIAL ROSENBERG PARK? >> CORRECT. WE HAVE BOB AND DAVID. >> FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST BACK UP A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS REVERTER AND SOME OTHER THINGS. SOMEBODY MENTIONED AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN THE PROJECT ROSENBERG, BETTER PARKS AND THE CITY AND GISD TO BE ABLE TO HAMMER OUT THIS REVERTER CLAUSE FOR ONE THING. THAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE THE BEST WAY TO GO, SINCE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL NEED TO AGREE ON SOME FASHION OR ANOTHER AND THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THAT. THE OTHER ONE IS THAT IS THE REVIEW BY THE CITY PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD, IT SAYS THEY WILL MAKE AN INVESTIGATION DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THEY WILL APPROVE OR RECOMMEND OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. INVESTIGATION AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY EXPECTATION THAT THE PARK IS GOING TO REQUIRE A BUNCH OF MONEY FOR IMPROVEMENTS RIGHT OFF THE BAT. WHAT I THINK THE EXPECTATION WAS IS, FIRST OF ALL, THAT THE SITE WOULD BE DEMOLISHED AND BE REMEDIATED IF [NOISE] NEEDED AND GRADED AND I GUESS SEATED AND THEN WE'RE DONE. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S EXPECTING TO HAVE THAT NEW PARK JUMP AHEAD OF ANY OTHER PRIORITIES IN THE PARK PLAN. THAT'S NOT REASONABLE. ALL THE EXISTING PRIORITIES SHOULD REMAIN RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE. THEN THIS SIMPLY BE ADDED. NOBODY'S EXPECTING ANYTHING TO BE BUILT OUT THERE RIGHT AWAY. IT'S EXPECTED THAT THE PARK WOULD GET IN LINE WITH ALL THE OTHER ONES IN PRIORITY AND JUST FOLLOW THE EXACT SAME PROCESS. MAYBE YOU GOT TO MOW IT. THAT'S ABOUT IT. THEN THE OTHER THING IS LET ME SEE HERE. WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE THESE THINGS ARE FLEXIBLE ENOUGH THAT WE CAN WORK THEM OUT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT. I THINK THE ARGUMENT THAT WE SHOULDN'T DO THIS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE MONEY AWAY FROM THE OTHER PRIORITIES IS NOT VERY FORWARD THINKING. IS NOT YOU'RE NOT THINKING AHEAD VERY. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADD TO THE PARKS. OUR CURRENT PARKS PLAN SAYS WE HAVE A PARK DEFICIT. WE SHOULDN'T PASS UP AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN IT SHOWS UP LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY ONE WITH A DEADLINE AND AS LONG AS WE INCORPORATE THIS INTO OUR STANDARD PROCESSES AND PRIORITIES, I REALLY DON'T SEE A PROBLEM DO IT. I SEE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY. THIS IS NOT GOING TO COST THE CITY ANYTHING IN ACQUISITION. THIS IS GOING TO BE A FREE CHUNK OF LAND FOR THE CITY AND IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE THEIR PARKS INVENTORY AND THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE RESIDENTS. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE GOING TO BE MEASURING THE COMP PLAN, BY THE WAY. QUALITY OF LIFE. I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE SHOULDN'T PASS BY. AGAIN, THERE'S NO EXPECTATIONS THAT THIS JUMP AHEAD OF ANY OTHER PART PRIORITY. >> DAVID AND THEN MARIE. >> YEAH, YOU STOLE MY WORDING. I AM NOT OBJECTING TO THIS AT ALL. I WOULD JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR AND YOU SAID IT THAT THERE ARE NO CITY FUNDS INVOLVED IN THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY. WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION BACK BEFORE. [01:15:01] WE VOTED AND SUPPORTED THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTION. THE EXTENT OF ANY OPERATIONAL EXPENSE, BRIAN HAS EXPLAINED IS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO SEND THEM OVER TWICE A MONTH. I APPLAUD IDC FOR STANDING FIRM AND SUPPORTING THE APPROVAL AND THE CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT OF THOSE PARKS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PROGRAMMED. I AM CONCERNED THAT ULTIMATELY, IF WE DO END UP TAKING ACQUISITION OF THIS THAT THERE IS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN IMPACT THAT WE WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHICH INCREASES OUR OBLIGATION, AND IT HAS AN INCREASE IN COST OF OUR OVERALL BUDGET UNLESS WE MAKE CUTS SOMEWHERE ELSE. I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND AND MAYBE MATTHEW, YOU CAN HELP ME UNDERSTAND THIS, THE TIMELINE FOR GOING THROUGH AND HAVING THESE NEGOTIATIONS EITHER WITH PROJECT ROSENBERG AND OR THE CITY TO GET CLARIFICATION AND GET A FINAL PROPOSAL ON THE TABLE. >> SURE. OUR BOARD JUST VOTED LAST WEDNESDAY AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE ALREADY DISCUSSING HERE WE ARE A WEEK LATER. WE KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MOVE WITH ALL DELIBERATE HASTE AND WORK THIS OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE LIKE DON WAS SAYING, THERE ARE DIFFERENT STATUTES THAT COME INTO PLAY, WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A DONATION OR WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A FULL PURCHASE PRICE CONVEYANCE OR IF WE DECIDE TO DO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, IS IN THAT CASE, WE RETAIN THE PROPERTY. THERE IS NO REVERSIONARY INTEREST LIKE WE DO AT THE DOG PARK WHERE WE ACTUALLY RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S SOME TYPE OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR YOU GUYS TO HAVE IT AS A PARK. >> BY THE WAY, THAT IS A DOG RECREATION AREA, AND OUR SYSTEM IS NOT CLASSIFIED AS A PARK. LIKE I SAID, THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENT AVENUES OF POSSIBLY DOING THIS AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT SO THAT BOTH YOU GUYS CAN DECIDE AND SO THAT OUR BOARD CAN ALSO DECIDE WHAT'S THE BEST PATH FORWARD FOR BOTH ORGANIZATIONS. >> YOU DIDN'T QUITE ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION WAS TIMELINE. IS IT 30 DAYS, 60 DAYS, 90 DAYS. HOW LONG DOES THE OFFER FROM THE BIDDER STAND, HOW LONG IS THAT BID HELD FOR? THEN DURING YOUR PROCUREMENT PROCESS, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT FOR YOU TO THEN IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO RESOLVE THAT, TO GO BACK AND EITHER REBID OR RENEGOTIATE IT? >> THE BOARD GAVE PROJECT ROSENBERG UNTIL JULY 1 TO COME UP WITH THE 2.2 MILLION DOLLAR. >> TONY, WE HAD OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO SAY SOMETHING. WOULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF PLEASE, SIR? >> I HAVE MY MIKE DOWN. >> DUDE COME UP HERE. >> THANKS. TONY BROWN. I'M ON THE SCHOOL BOARD. TRUSTEE, ELIZABETH BEATON IS ALSO HERE TODAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE MY NAME WAS MENTIONED AFTER THE MORNING AFTER OUR BOARD VOTED LAST WEEK, TALKING TO THE SUPERINTENDENT WHO WAS VERY BUSY ON SOME BALL HIGH STUFF THAT DAY. I VOLUNTEERED TO SEND AN EMAIL TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER SAYING THIS IS OUR BOARD VOTED AND WE NEED A CHECKLIST OF CONDITIONS. MY DAY JOB SEEPING IN. THIS IS A TRANSACTION THAT'S SUPPOSED TO CLOSE BY JULY 1, WHICH IS NOT A VERY LONG TIME IN THESE THINGS. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT. THAT'S WHERE THIS STARTED AND I DID HAVE A CALL. THE CITY ATTORNEY AND MANAGER CALLED ME AND DID MENTION WHICH WE ALREADY KNEW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO REQUIRE THE BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED BEFORE IT COULD BE TRANSFERRED TO THE CITY. THEN YOU ALSO MENTIONED THE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENT AND I WAS SURPRISED BY THAT. BUT I THINK WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THAT BEFOREHAND, BUT IT ISN'T. >> HAVING DUG A FUEL HOLES AROUND TOWN ON STREET PEOPLE WILL TELL YOU IT'S PROBABLY A BURIED FUEL TANK EVERY THREE YARDS. >> WE HAVE MARIE AND THEN BO MARIE. >> YOU MADE THE STATEMENT, BOB THAT IT ISN'T GOING TO COST THE CITY ANYTHING. >> IN ACQUISITION. >> WELL, BUT IT IS GOING TO COST THE CITY A LOT. ONE, JUST LOOK AT THE POSED THE OTHER BID THAT WAS RECEIVED, THE SEELY SMITH BID, IT'S GOING TO COST THE CITY PROPERTY TAXES BECAUSE THOSE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE WENT ON THE ROLE. IT'S ALSO WHICH MYSTIFIED BY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SO MANY OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TALKING IN FAVOR OF THIS ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO SAY WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH WORKFORCE HOUSING. YET HERE WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING AND IT GOT SLAPPED IN THE FACE. PART OF THAT WAS A RESULT OF SOMETHING WE DID WHICH AGAIN I REGRET THAT WE DID THE INITIAL. [01:20:01] >> RESOLUTION. >> RESOLUTION. THANK YOU, THERE. BUT JUST TO UNDERSTAND YOUR COMMENT THAT WE'LL PUT IT IN THE QUEUE AND IT'S RIGHT. WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH JONES AND SHIELDS PARK SINCE I WAS ON COUNCIL LAST. THAT WAS 13 YEARS AGO AND THEY'RE STILL NOT FINISHED. THE ENVIRONMENTAL PIECE, ASIDE FROM THE MULTIPLE KEROSENE TANKS THAT WE FIND ALL OVER THE CITY, THAT COST US SO MUCH WITH INFRASTRUCTURE AND SO FORTH [NOISE]. I BELIEVE THAT IT'S ALSO BEEN FOUND. THERE'S AN ASBESTOS ISSUE IN THE BUILDING? >>WE KNOW THERE'S ASBESTOS IN THE BUILDING. YOU GUYS INDICATED THAT YES. >> WELL, YEAH. >> PART OF THE DEMO SCOPE OF WORK. >> YES SIR. >> JUST SAYING THERE ARE COSTS TO THE CITY BEYOND JUST THE ACQUISITION AND I THINK WE HAVE TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT THAT. >> THERE'S A TIME AND PLACE FOR ANY OF THIS. >> FINISH, PLEASE. SITTING ON THE IDC AND LOOKING AT THE FUNDS THAT OUR PARK DEPARTMENT THAT I'M SURE BARBARA WOULD ECHO, WE HAVE TREMENDOUS PARKS SUCH AS THE POOL THAT COST US MONEY EVERY YEAR AND WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING OUR CITIZENS LOVE. IT WAS INTRIGUING TO ME AS I WATCHED THE SCHOOL BOARD MEETING, HOW PEOPLE KEPT SAYING A PARK WAS GOING AWAY. ADO PARK ISN'T GOING AWAY. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE THERE. THIS WOULD BE ADDING ON TO A PARK. THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, WHERE WOULD WE PLAY BALL? THEY'LL PLAY BALL WITH THEIR CHILDREN AT THE SAME ADO PARK THAT THEY PLAYED IN. I JUST WANT TO SAY AGAIN THAT I WISH WE HAD NOT DONE THE INITIAL DOCUMENT. >> BO. >> I'VE GOT SOME STATEMENTS, QUESTIONS. BACKGROUND, I SPENT 9.5 YEARS ON THE SCHOOL BOARD. DURING THAT TENURE, THERE WAS ALWAYS DISCUSSION ABOUT OUR SURPLUS PROPERTY AT GISD. THERE WAS ALWAYS INTENT AND DISCUSSION AT THAT TIME THAT THAT PROPERTY EVENTUALLY NEEDED TO BE CONVEYED. MOST OF THE MAJORITY OF ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS, TONY WAS THERE WITH ME, WAS ALWAYS FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY TO INFLATE OUR TAX ROLLS THROUGH SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES. GO BACK HISTORICALLY WITH THAT PROPERTY. THAT PROPERTY WAS INITIALLY THE CITY'S, STARTING IN 1845. THAT ENTIRE PROPERTY WAS THE CITY OF GALVESTON. IN 1965, THAT PROPERTY WAS CONVEYED TO GISD AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING TO TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE CITY. ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS I HAVE WITH THE CITY'S POSITION WHICH I'D REALLY LOVE TO GET OUT OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S POSITION AT THIS TIME, BUT WITH THE CITY'S POSITION IS THAT A BIDDING PROCESS WAS DONE, TWO BIDDERS BID COMPETITIVELY LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE. THEN THIS OUTSIDE BIDDER, PROJECT ROSENBERG WAS BASICALLY ALLOWED TO SEE WHERE THEY'RE AT, THE WAIT AND SEE BIDDING PROCESS, AND THEN THEY WERE ABLE TO MATCH IT, WHICH TO ME IS A LITTLE RIDICULOUS, BUT IS WHAT IT IS THAT THAT WAS SET UP THROUGH GISD NOT US. THEY COME UP WITH A $2.2 MILLION BY JULY 1ST. BUT WHAT IF WE AS A CITY DON'T WANT TO FALL IN LINE WITH THE RISKS THAT WE ARE BEGINNING TO CONSIDER SUCH AS START WITH ENVIRONMENTAL AND DEMOLITION. YOU ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY AT 2.2 MILLION AND THEN, ARE WE WAITING AGAIN AND ARE WE GOING TO ESTABLISH A TIMELINE WITHIN THAT RESOLUTION THAT SAYS BUILDING MUST BE DEMOLISHED BY A CERTAIN TIMELINE AND WITHIN THAT TIMELINE, IT'S CONFIRMED THAT THERE'S MUCH MORE ON THAT PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTALLY THAN WE HAD SUPPOSED. MOST OF THE TIME IN MY LINE OF WORK, IF SOMETHING COMES BACK AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE, IT GOES BACK TO THE ORIGINATION, THE PERSON THAT OWNED THE PROPERTY FROM THE BEGINNING WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN THE CITY OF GALVESTON. THAT IS A RISK THAT'S UNKNOWN AND THAT'S THE RISK THAT WE'RE TAKING NOT GISD. [01:25:03] AS FAR AS IDC AND THE CONVEYANCE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS, I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN PRESENTED MANY TIMES THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO COST US A DIME, THAT THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY BY JULY 1ST IS THROUGH PROJECT ROSENBERG. BUT WHAT ABOUT WHEN IT IS ACQUIRED AND PROJECT ROSENBERG IS NOT ABLE TO FUND OPERATING COSTS? DOES THAT COME BACK ON US COMPLETELY? >> AGAIN, THAT'S ANOTHER SUPPOSED UNKNOWN COST. IF IN FACT, THIS RESOLUTION TURNS TO US AS A CITY COUNCIL ASKING FOR I GUESS MORE TO TAKE LESS RISK, BOTH ENVIRONMENTALLY, OPERATING COSTS, DIFFERENT THINGS I'VE MENTIONED, WOULD THAT THEN IN TURN CHANGE THE RESOLUTION TO A POINT TO WHERE THE SCHOOL BOARD NEEDS TO GO BACK AND VOTE TO CONSIDER THE AMOUNTS THAT WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO UNDERSTAND AND HAVE KNOWN BEFORE WE BASICALLY GET IN BED WITH WITH PROJECT ROSENBERG? THOSE ARE THINGS I'M CONCERNED WITH BOTH QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS. THE HISTORY OF KNOWING, LIKE WHAT INTENT WAS ALL ALONG IN THE PAST WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD, AND WHAT I KNEW WHILE I WAS THERE I KNOW THAT THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS BEING A PARK SINCE 2021 ACCORDING TO THEIR MINUTES. IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED ALL ALONG? THOSE ARE THINGS I'M CONCERNED WITH, AND I THINK IT'S THOSE ARE VALID CONCERNS THAT WE AS A COUNCIL ARE FIXING TO SHOULDER IF WE JUST ALLOW THIS TO MOVE ON. >> TONY, DID YOU WANT TO RESPOND? THEN WE HAVE ALEX. >> MAYBE AS TO WHAT OUR BOARD NEEDS, WHAT OUR ATTORNEYS WILL NEED IN ORDER TO GET THIS TRANSACTION DONE IS WHAT TERMS DOES COUNCIL AGREE TO TO COMPLETE THIS TRANSACTION. IF YOU ALL DON'T AGREE ON THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE, FRANKLY. BUT AS FAR AS THE PARTIES, PROJECT ROSENBERG, AS FAR AS I KNOW, IT'S LIKE AN ASSUMED NAME OF JOE JAWORSKI THERE MAY BE OTHERS IN THE GROUP, BUT I LOOKED IT UP IT'S NOT A CORPORATION OR ANYTHING. IT'S A GROUP. THEN BETTER PARKS OF GALVESTON, THE WAY I READ THE RESOLUTION, THEY'RE BASICALLY SERVING AS LIKE AN ESCROW, WHERE DONATIONS THAT ARE COLLECTED WILL BE COLLECTED, AND THEN WHEN THEY GET TO THE REQUISITE AMOUNT, THEY'LL BE FUNDED TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. IF THEY DON'T GET THAT AMOUNT, THE DISTRICT THIS DEAL FALLS APART. >> MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION. WE'RE ASKING THE CITY IS ASKING THAT THE SCHOOLS BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO THE CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY. WHO COVERS THAT COST? >> I THINK WE'RE ASSUMING THAT PROJECT ROSENBERG IS GOING TO BE RAISING THAT IN ADDITION TO THE 2.2 MILLION. >> I CAN ANSWER THAT. >> WELL, HOLD ON. HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO ABOLISH THE SCHOOL? >> I DON'T HAVE A CURRENT NUMBER. >> I SAID THAT LIKE [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING]. >> I THINK 250 WAS THE LAST ESTIMATE. >> YEAH. WELL, WHEN WE WERE FIRST TALKING ABOUT THIS AND THIS WAS PROBABLY SUMMER 2024. ONE OF OUR FORMER TRUSTEES SHAE JOBE WAS ON THE SEALY & SMITH FOUNDATION, AND THEY WERE TEARING DOWN LIPTON T, AND HE JUST MADE AN INQUIRY FROM THEM, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MORGAN ROSENBERG AND ALAMO, BUT THEY SAID 250, I THINK, WAS WAS THE NUMBER. >> THAT WAS NOT A BID. >> IT WASN'T A BID. IT'S NOT A FIRM. >> WITHOUT [OVERLAPPING] WITHOUT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS. THAT'S JUST THE BUILDING WITHOUT ANY ISSUES. >> J. P. BRYAN. IT HAS AGREED [NOISE] TO PAY THE COSTS OF DEMOLISHING THE BUILDING AND ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION THAT'S REQUIRED. >> [OVERLAPPING] ABOVE AND BEYOND THE 400,000 THAT HE PUT INTO-. >> HE DIDN'T PUT. THAT WASN'T HIS. >> YEAH, I DON'T THINK. >> HE HAS MADE ANOTHER DONATION, BUT YES. [01:30:01] ON TOP OF THE 2.2 MILLION THAT THE GROUP WOULD RAISE AND I DISAGREE WITH TONY'S ASSESSMENT THAT THE ROSENBERG PARK PROJECT EQUALS JOE JAWORSKI. I TAKE EXCEPTION TO THAT. BUT IN ADDITION TO THE 2.2 MILLION TO BE RAISED, THE J. P. BRYAN SAYS THAT HE WILL ON TOP OF THAT, DEMOLISH THE BUILDING AND DO ANY ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PARTIES. THEY'VE ALSO MENTIONED COVERING THE CARRYING COST RIGHT BETWEEN WHEN THAT BOAT WAS MADE AND WHEN THE CONVEYANCE IS MADE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, ELIZABETH IDENTIFY YOURSELF. >> I'M SORRY. I'M ELIZABETH BEATON. I'M A TRUSTEE ON THE GALVESTON ISD BOARD. >> ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THAT PROJECT ROSENBERG GROUP THEN? >> WELL, I'M A MEMBER I'M ON THE BOARD OF THE EAST END HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATION, BUT NO, I HAVE NOT DONATED TO THE ROSENBERG GROUP. I'M NOT A MEMBER OF THAT GROUP. >> I KNOW MY POINT WAS, NO ONE ELSE IDENTIFIED THEM AS A MEMBER OF THE GROUP. >> ACTUALLY THEY DID, IF YOU'LL RECALL, THAT THE GROUP DID DISTRIBUTE TO THE SCHOOL BOARD AT OUR LAST MEETING A LIST OF EVERY DONOR THEIR ADDRESS AND THE AMOUNT OF THEIR DONATIONS. YES, THEY DID IDENTIFY >> THOSE WERE PEOPLE WHO ALLEGED. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES MEMBERS OF THE GROUP. >> FIRST OF ALL, LET BEAU FINISH HIS THOUGHTS. THEN WE'LL GO TO ALEX AND THEN MARIE. >> DON THAT CLARIFICATION, SO THERE IS A NAMED DONOR IN DEMOLITION AND INCURRING ANY ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS THAT OCCUR? >> I HAVE ALEXANDER PUTIN PROMISE TO DONATE MONEY TO THIS. >> THAT'S WHERE [OVERLAPPING] I'M HEADING. >> I THINK THE TEAM WATCH IS CERTAINTY THAT THE MONEY IS GOING TO BE THERE. IS IT A CONDITION? >> CAN THAT CONDITION OR A CONTRACT FROM J. P. BRYAN THE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT AND RESOLUTION THAT HE PUTS HIS NAME ON PAPER AND SAYS I'M COMMITTED TO THAT? >> THEY'RE RAISING THE MONEY IS THEIR PROBLEM. I DON'T WANT THEIR PROBLEMS TO BE OUR PROBLEMS. >> YEAH, BUT OUR PROBLEM IS ON THE TABLE IS ACCEPTING THIS DEAL, SO THEY CAN FOLLOW THROUGH. THAT'S WHERE OUR PROBLEM IS. >> I AGREE. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU WANT TO SEE THE MONEY IN A BANK ACCOUNT ON A DATE CERTAIN, SO YOU KNOW THE MONEY IS ACTUALLY THERE. WHEREVER IT COMES FROM. >> I THINK THAT'S PRETTY COMMON TO EXPECT THAT. >> I THINK ALL THAT'S IMPORTANT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT I'VE DESCRIBED TO YOU IS THE CITY WOULD NOT EVEN ENTERTAIN CONVEYANCE UNTIL ALL OF THIS IS DONE REGARDLESS OF WHO PAYS FOR IT. >> THAT'S BEEN GOING UP FRONT FOR A LONG TIME. >> WE'RE NOT HAVING BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO RECEIVE CLEAN, REMEDIATED, FILLED, READY TO GO PROPERTY. OR NOT. THAT'S WHERE THE CITY'S AT IN ALL THIS. MY STAFF HAS NOT BEEN INVOLVED AND WHO'S GIVING MONEY, HOW MUCH, WHEN THEY'RE GETTING IT, WHEN ALL THIS HAPPENS, THIS TRANSITION MAY NOT HAPPEN FOR FOUR YEARS, I HAVE NO IDEA. BUT IF YOU WANT TO DONATE LAND TO THE CITY, THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD REQUIRE. >> NO. I UNDERSTAND. DON'S RIGHT, THIS IS NOT THE FUNDING OF THAT. THAT'S UP TO THE PROJECT, ROSENBERG GROUP. GO AHEAD, BEAU, ANYTHING ELSE, SIR? >> NO. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH FINAL. I JUST THINK THAT IF WE'RE LOOKING OR IF YOU ALL ARE LOOKING AT A JULY 1 TIMELINE, WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED REALLY. IS THAT JUST A CONVEYANCE, ARE YOU GOING TO CONVEY WHILE THE BUILDINGS STILL THERE? NO, I KNOW IT'S NONE OF OUR BUSINESS. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT IT'S EVEN HERE TODAY UNTIL ALL THAT WORKED OUT, BUT SO [OVERLAPPING] >> PART OF THAT'S ON ME. THE REASON THIS IS HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE I HAVE RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM MATT TO BEGIN NEGOTIATIONS OF THE TRANSFER BECAUSE HE WAS DIRECTED BY HIS BOARD. I'VE HAD COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN ASKED ME TO BEGIN WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT OF THE EAST END AND HIS DISTRICT. I DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE DOING THAT UNTIL I HAD COUNCIL WEIGH IN ON WHERE YOU WANTED ME TO GO WITH THIS GUYS. >> JUST FOR INSTANCE, BY THE WAY, THAT COSTS SOMETHING. COST WE ARE AND CARRYING GOSS, BY THE WAY. >> WE HAVE COUNCILMAN PORRETTO THEN ROBB, AND THEN WE HAVE FINKLEA. >> THIS WHOLE ISSUE HAS BEEN VERY POLARIZING FOR EVERYBODY. I KNOW OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OUTLINES OUR NEED FOR PARKS. IT ALSO OUTLINES OUR NEED FOR INCREASING OUR TAX BASE. [01:35:03] IT ALSO OUTLINES THE NEED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING. THREE THINGS CAN BE TRUE AT ONCE. NOT TO SAY THAT COUNCILMAN BROWN'S STATEMENT ABOUT LOOKING FORWARD. MY OPINION OF LOOKING FORWARD IS, I REALLY WANT TO SEE WORKFORCE HOUSING COMPONENTS AND TAX REVENUE. THAT'S PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN PARKS AND FOR YOU IT MIGHT BE PARKS MORE THAN THE OTHER TWO. THREE THINGS CAN BE TRUE AT ONCE, AND THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF THE ISLAND. AGAIN, POLARIZING ISSUE. THE MOST OF THE CALLS I'VE GOTTEN ARE ABOUT THE SCHOOL BOARD'S DECISION. IT HURTS THE TAX BASE AND ALL THESE THINGS AND AT THE OTHER HAND, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF COMMUNITY [NOISE] LED INITIATIVES. BUT IF WE CONTINUE TO DO THIS, I'M FULLY EXPECTING THE GROUP TO COME UP WITH THE MONEY, BUT IF THEY DON'T, AND THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT, BUT WHERE DOES IT FALL SHORT? THAT'S THE THAT'S THE BIG IF, I GUESS, IN THE ROOM. IF IT FALLS SHORT, THEN WHERE DO WE GO FROM THERE. IT'S A FISCAL ISSUE, BUT, WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT WE WANT. I DO LIKE THE IDEAS OF IT'S READY FOR ITS FIRST MOW, AND THEN WE CAN TAKE THE CONVEYANCE OF THE PARK. NOW, I HEARD THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE CARRYING COSTS. THE $17,000 [NOISE] A MONTH FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD. THAT'S NICE TO HEAR, BUT THE ONE THING I DIDN'T HEAR, IS THE REPOSITORY OF THE FUNDING BECAUSE OUR RESOLUTION CALLED FOR BETTER PARKS TO BE THE REPOSITORY OF THE FUNDING. SO WHERE IS BETTER PARKS IN, I GUESS, THE ACCEPTING OF THE DONATIONS TO GET TO THAT AMOUNT? >> THEY MET. BARBARA, ARE YOU HERE? >> MARY ROSS [BACKGROUND]. >> YEAH. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON. I'M MARY ROSS. WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED COLLECTING FUNDS. WE'VE ALREADY SET UP A SEPARATE BANK ACCOUNT CALLED BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON, PROJECT ROSENBERG, DEDICATED STRICTLY FOR THE FUNDS THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE PLEDGES. THAT ACCOUNT IS GROWING AS WE SPEAK. >> YOU KNOW THE AMOUNT AS OF MAYBE NOW? >> WELL, AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE COLLECTED OVER $100,000. >> BARBARA, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? BARBARA SAID NO. NOT AT ALL. >> I'M WITH COUNCILMAN RAWLINS ON THIS FOR, YOU KNOW, SHOW ME THE MONEY. BUT MOVING FORWARD IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SUPPORTING COMMUNITY INITIATIVES, I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR, THEY'RE ELECTED OFFICIALS TOO. WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN DECISIONS TO MAKE AND THEY LIVE WITH THE DECISIONS THEY MAKE. BUT SMECCA MADE THE COMMENT, WE ASK FOR BUY IN FROM LARGE PROPERTY OWNERS. WE ASK TO BUY IN FOR THE PUBLIC TO DO THESE SCHOOL BOARD INITIATIVES. AND WHEN WE TAKE PROPERTY TAX OFF THE PROPERTY OFF THE TAX ROLLS, THEY COME UP A LITTLE BIT MORE WITH WHAT THEY'RE COMING FORWARD WITH IN TERMS OF THEIR TAXES THEY PAY. I JUST DON'T WANT TO BE EXPECTED TO SAY, WE'RE GOING TO SHOULDER THIS AT THE COST OF THE OTHER TAXPAYERS. THAT'S MY OPINION. IF THEY COME UP WITH THE MONEY, MY BALLPARK ESTIMATE TOTALS PROBABLY ABOUT THREE MILLION WITH THE CARRYING COSTS AND EVERYTHING AND MORE POWER TO THEM, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BE SHOULDERING THE ADDITIONAL COSTS AND DON'T EXPECT ME TO SHOULDER THAT COST IN THE FUTURE ON TAXPAYERS WHO, LIKE I SAID, A VISUAL ISSUE, THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS HAPPEN BECAUSE THEY WANT THE WORKFORCE HOUSING COMPONENT AND THE TAX REVENUE COMPONENT. THEN THERE'S PEOPLE WHO WANT THE COMMUNITY LED INITIATIVE. WE IN BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE, BUT I CAN'T JUSTIFY TO MY TAX BASE TO THE ENTIRE ISLAND AS A TAX BASE TO COME UP WITH FUNDING OR ADDITIONAL COST ON THEM BECAUSE OF A COMMUNITY LED INITIATIVE. I'M ALL FOR THE COMMUNITY LED INITIATIVES. I THINK LIKE I SAID, FIVE THINGS CAN BE TRUE AT ONCE, AND SOMETIMES THEY DO CONFLICT, BUT WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND MOVING FORWARD WHAT THAT COST IS GOING TO BE, [01:40:02] AND WE CAN'T SHOULDER ON THE REST OF THE TAXPAYERS. IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE COMMUNITY LED INITIATIVES, THEY HAVE TO BE PAID FOR BY OUTSIDE SOURCES RATHER THAN THE CITY, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PARKS THAT WE HAVE. ON IDC, WE HAVE SHIELDS AND JONES, AND WE HAVE TO ALLOCATE MONEY TO THAT. THE POOL, THE TENNIS COURTS [OVERLAPPING] ALL THESE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS FINANCIALLY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT FALLING ON ANY BURDEN FINANCIALLY ON OUR TAXPAYERS THAT DIDN'T ASK FOR OR DIDN'T WANT THIS INITIATIVE AS WELL. >> WE HAVE MARIE, THEN WE HAVE DAVID, AND THEN WE HAVE BOB. COUNCIL, THIS IS NOT AN ACTION ITEM TODAY, BUT LET'S WIND OUR THOUGHTS UP IF WE COULD. GO AHEAD, MARIE. >> LET'S SAY THE CONVEYANCE GOES THROUGH ALL THE GOALS, WHATNOT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CITIZEN INPUT, WHICH I RESPECT 100%. >> HUNDRED PERCENT. THAT'S WHO HIRED US, EACH OF US, AND THE SCHOOL BOARD AS WELL. LET'S SAY IT DID GO THROUGH AND THEN THERE'S PROJECT, NEW SKATE PARK THAT COMES TO US AND SAYS, WE'RE RAISING THE MONEY, AND WE WILL PAY TO PUT A SKATE PARK THERE. THAT COULD HAPPEN. >> THAT WAS ONE OF OUR CONDITIONS IS THAT IT WOULD BE ANY PARK TYPE USE CAN GO THERE AT THE DISCRETION OF COUNCIL. IT'S NOT DEDICATED TO FOREVER BEING GREEN SPACE OR A GARDEN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THERE'S NO COMMITMENT TO THE CITY UP ON THAT PART. IT COULD BE USED FOR ANY PARK PURPOSE. >> WELL, IF I MIGHT. >> PLEASE. >> ONE COMPONENT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO OUR BOARD THAT WAS PART OF THE PLAN WAS THAT THERE'S A GROUP, YOU'RE PROBABLY FAMILIAR WITH GALVESTON OWN FARMER'S MARKET, AND PART OF THIS PLAN IS THAT THEY WILL HAVE A VEGETABLE GARDEN ON THE PARK. >> THEY WON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT. >> IT WOULD BE UP TO COUNCIL. WE'VE DONE THAT WITH A DIFFERENT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THEM OR A DIFFERENT GROUP, BARBARA, AT MENARD PARK. >> YES, MENARD PARK. >> BUT THAT'S ENTIRELY UP TO YOU GUYS. >> IF THE GREEN SPACE PARK, IT'S CONVEYED TO US, IT'S UP TO US WHAT GOES THERE. IT ISN'T A PLAN OR A POSSIBILITY. >> I WOULD TELL YOU THIS. SINCE I'VE BEEN CITY MANAGER, YOU HAVE EMPTY SPACE AND PEOPLE SAY, LOOK, SPACE IS EMPTY. CAN WE DO IT UNTIL YOU FIGURE SOMETHING ELSE OUT. BUT ONCE YOU DO IT, IT'S REALLY HARD TO COME BACK AND SAY, NOW, WE HAVE THIS HIGH DEMAND FOR A DOG PARK. WE HAVE THIS HIGH DEMAND FOR A PICKLEBALLS. IT'S VERY HARD. I WOULD ASK COUNCIL TO BE VERY DELIBERATE AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR PARKS AS TO WHAT WE PUT THERE BECAUSE ONCE YOU PUT IT THERE, IT BECOMES THE EXPECTATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN IT AND KEEP IT AND MAKE VERY DELIBERATE DECISIONS IN THAT POINT. BUT WHAT YOU PUT THERE IS ENTIRELY UP TO COUNCIL.. >> MARIE, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? >> NO. >> LET'S GO TO DAVID AND THEN BOB. SHARON, ONCE WE FINISH THAT, TO WIND THIS UP. I'M GOING TO GO TO YOU SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, YOU MAY NOT. DAVID. >> BRIAN, YOU'VE MADE MENTION OF THE WHOLE NEGOTIATION WITH JIST FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DON BROUGHT UP WAS THE FACT THAT WE JUST SKIP THIS STEP OF INVESTIGATING WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. I WOULD ASK THAT AS A PART OF YOUR CHECKLIST, YOU GO BACK AND CHECK THAT BOX WITH PARKS AND REC. AS IT RELATES TO THE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE CIP OR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND MAINTENANCE, I THINK THAT'S AT THE HEART OF WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER MARIE ROBB AND PORRETTO WERE TALKING ABOUT AND MYSELF WHEN I MADE THE STATEMENT ORIGINALLY. I THINK Y'ALL DIDN'T HAVE TO NOODLE REALLY HARD ON WHAT IS PROJECT ROSENBERG'S OBLIGATION FOR FUTURE CIP IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT AREA, AND THEN WHAT IS THE IMPLICATION ASSOCIATED WITH OUR RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE IF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE OVER IN CONJUNCTION WITH OUR OVERALL PARKS MASTER PLAN SO I WOULD URGE YOU TO GO CHECK THAT BOX. I THINK THAT'S A BOX THAT NEEDS TO BE CHECKED, HOWEVER, I BELIEVE IT'S A SUBSEQUENT BOX TO BE CHECKED. I BELIEVE THAT THE STEPS TO CONVEYANCE ARE ONE BOX TO BE CHECKED AND I BELIEVE ONCE THE CITY IS IN POSSESSION OF IT, IF THE CITY IS IN POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY, THEN FUTURE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES ARE ENTIRELY UP TO SEATED COUNCIL AT THAT TIME. >> CORRECT. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. HOWEVER, YOU'RE ASKING US TO MAKE A DECISION ON CONVEYANCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPERTY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE FUTURE INTENDED USE IS, [01:45:04] NOT JUST A GREENFIELD. I GET THAT CONVEYANCE MEANS IT'S A GREENFIELD, YOU CAN GO DO STUFF. BUT ABSENT OF ANY PLAN, WHAT ARE WE DOING? >> THAT'S GOING TO PLAN TO BE DEVELOPED WITHOUT VOTING ON IT. >> WELL, SO YOU RAISED THE SECOND QUESTION, WHICH WAS IN THE REVERTER CLAUSE. IT SAYS, WE CAN'T SELL A PARK WITHOUT A PUBLIC VOTE. BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT, AS I UNDERSTAND, IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO ACCEPT LAND FROM GISD WITHOUT A PUBLIC VOTE. REALLY GOOD POINT. DON, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT OF THAT? >> JUST WHAT'S IN THE CITY CODE ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION OF PARKS AND REC. >> THAT GIVES US A BIG LIABILITY. WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN. I DON'T THINK IT. I THINK GISD AND THE GROUPS THAT THEY'RE WORKING WITH HAVE A LOT TO WORK ON BEFORE IT COMES TO US. >> BUT I WANT TO TAG ON WHAT ALEX WAS SAYING A LITTLE BIT EARLIER ABOUT IT HAS TO DO WITH COMPETING PRIORITIES, I GUESS, REALLY AND THAT'S WHAT OUR JOB IS HERE IS TO MANAGE COMPETING PRIORITIES BECAUSE YOU CAN'T HAVE EVERYTHING. WORKFORCE HOUSING IS IMPORTANT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME, I'M THE LIAISON TO THE GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION THAT WE'VE BEEN MEETING AND WE'RE GEARING UP TO DO A STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION. IT'S IMPORTANT TO THEM TOO. IT'S ONE OF MY PRIORITIES. I THINK IT'S STILL A PRIORITY TO HAVE SOME WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THE EAST END BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMITY [INAUDIBLE] THE LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE COUNTY AND WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THAT. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING IN THE EAST END, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON, LOOKING ON THAT. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS IS MORE ABOUT SEIZING AN OPPORTUNITY. THE PRIORITIES ARE STILL THERE. I STILL THINK WORKFORCE HOUSING IS IMPORTANT. BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET THIS MUCH LAND FOR PARK, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED AS NEEDING PARK OPEN SPACE AND ON THE ISLAND. WE SHOULDN'T PASS UP THESE OPPORTUNITIES. THERE'S A LOT TO WORK THERE, ABSOLUTELY. I'M GLAD WE'RE HERE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT IT BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO LEAD TO THAT WORK THAT WE GOT TO DO IN ORDER TO DEADLINE AS WELL. BUT IT IS STILL A PRIORITY FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING. IT'S A MATTER OF WHERE IS THE BEST LOCATION, WHAT IS THE BEST TIME, WHAT'S THE BEST FINANCING AND HOW'S IT GOING TO WORK? IN THE MEANTIME, WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE, THIS OPPORTUNITY, WILL NOT COME ALONG AGAIN ANYTIME SOON IN MY LIFETIME WHEN THE CITY HAS OFFERED A WHOLE BLOCK OF PROPERTY FOR A CITY PARK TO ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE RESIDENTS AND THE ATTRACTION TO THE TOURISTS. I THINK IT'S ABOUT MANAGING PRIORITIES, AND THAT'S REALLY MY TAKE ON IT IS WE'RE NOT NEGLECTING WORKFORCE HOUSING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING FROM THE GHFC, AND I THINK ONE OF THE PRIORITIES IS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT THERE. >> JUST QUICK QUESTION. COULD I? >> YES, YOU GO AHEAD. >> I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO. >> LET ME GET SHARON'S THOUGHTS. SHARON, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE YOU SAY SOMETHING. >> I MADE A FEW NOTES AS EVERYBODY WAS SPEAKING AND GIVING THEIR POINTS. I NEED TO BE CLEAR IN MY MIND. WE HAVE THE ROSENBERG BUILDING THERE, AND THE PROJECT ROSENBERG HAS PROPOSED TO BID IT ON OR WHATEVER AND THERE'S A CHANCE THAT THEY RAISE THE MONEY, THEN THEY WILL GET THE BUILDING. IS THAT CORRECT? >> PROJECT ROSENBERG DOES NOT WANT THE BUILDING. THEIR WHOLE PLAN OR PROPOSAL WAS THAT THE DISTRICT WOULD SOMEHOW CONVEY THE PROPERTY TO THE CITY. >> TO THE CITY, I GUESS. >> THEY DON'T WANT TO OWN THE BUILDING. >> THEY DON'T WANT TO OWN IT. >> CORRECT. >> IT HAS TO BE CONVEYED TO THE CITY, BUT IT WILL BE PART OF THEIR PROJECT ONCE THE CITY, ONCE EVERYTHING ELSE HERE IS DECIDED. THEN THE BUILDING IS DEMOLISHED ACCORDING TO SOMEONE WHO WILL DONATE SOME MONEY AND EVERYTHING RECTIFIED FOR THE BUILDING. FROM THERE, THEY WILL PLAN INTENDED USES FOR THE PROPERTY. >> NO, THEY DON'T PLAN USES. >> WE DO. >> THEY SUGGEST THEM. THEY CAN SUGGEST THEM, AND THEN THEY CAN COME TO CITY COUNCIL OR WE CAN SUGGEST. >> THERE'S A PROCESS. >> CORRECT. >> THERE'S A PROCESS. I'M LOOKING AT THIS LIKE I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE ALL SAYING, BUT IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY AND I THINK THAT EVERYBODY WANTS TO SEE THE MONEY, EVEN GISD WANTS THE MONEY, SUPPOSEDLY TO GIVE TEACHER RAISES. NOW, THAT PART, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT IT'S NOT ENOUGH.. [01:50:03] >> IT WOULD BE ONE RACE. >> IT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY. >> DOESN'T COME EVERY YEAR. [LAUGHTER]. >> IT DOES NOT. EVEN THOUGH THAT'S THE GISDS GOLD MISSION FOR SELLING, SINCE GISD IS WANTING TO GET RID OF THIS PROPERTY, AND THERE IS A PROJECT THAT HAS RAISED MONEY FOR IT, I JUST DON'T SEE WHY THE RESOLUTION IS SO HORRIBLE FOR IT OR NOT BEFITTING, MAYBE I SHOULD SAY NOT BEFITTING OF WHAT RESIDENTS THINK THAT SHOULD HAPPEN ON THAT EAST END. GALVESTON IS LIKE THAT. IF YOU'RE LOUD HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO GET IT. IF YOU'RE NOT LOUD ON THIS END, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT. RIGHT NOW, THEY'VE BEEN LOUD, AND THEY HAVE RAISED MONEY, AND I THINK IT COULD BE A GREAT FUTURE USE FOR THE COMMUNITY ON THE EAST END AND FOR GALVESTON, AND MAYBE FOR DRAWING MORE FAMILIES. NOW, THE CITY ATTORNEY AND I HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION, AND I'VE ASKED HIM, DOES GISD NOT PLANNED FOR FAMILIES TO MOVE BACK HERE? THE HONEST ANSWER WAS, WHAT YOU ANSWER ME? >> WELL, ARE PEOPLE SAYING THERE'S NO PLAN FOR GROWTH. >> NO. >> BECAUSE OF SOME STATISTICS, SOME DATA OR WHATEVER, SO WE HAVE GOT TO. >> CONSULTANT THAT PROVIDED THAT TO US? >> YES. BECAUSE EVEN LOOKING AT BUILDINGS, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO TELL GISD WHAT TO DO, BECAUSE I WOULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN RID OF LA MORGAN, I WOULD NOT. IT'S SET IN THE CENTER OF THE COMMUNITY OF THE CITY. I HAVE MY PERSONAL THOUGHTS AND EVERYBODY, AND THEIR CONSTITUENTS OUT THERE. WE'VE ALL HEARD FROM THEM. BUT I THINK IT'S JUST THAT WE NEED TO RIDE THIS HORSE. [LAUGHTER] >> COUNCIL, WE NEED TO WRAP THIS DISCUSSION. >> LET ME FINISH. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO ENCAPSULATE EXACTLY. I'M GOING WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO HERE. >> LET ME ENCAPSULATE WHERE WE ARE AT THIS, COUNCIL, BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET OUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER ON THIS. I WANT TO CLARIFY SOME THINGS FIRST OF ALL. FROM THE COMMUNITY, I'VE GET A LOT OF CALLS ABOUT THIS. THE CITY IS NOT REQUESTING THAT THIS BE PARK MATERIAL. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR. THE CITY IS NOT REQUESTING THIS. NOW, WHAT THE CITY HAS SAID AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THE RESOLUTIONS THAT ARE ON FOR LA MORGAN AND/OR THE ONE THAT WE APPROVED FOR ROSENBERG, IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUY THIS PROPERTY AND GET IT PREPARED PROPERLY AND GIVE IT TO THE CITY, THE CITY WOULD BE OPEN TO CONSIDER TAKING IT. THAT'S WHAT THESE RESOLUTIONS ARE SAYING. >> MAY I ADD TO THAT THAT BETTER PARKS IS WILLING TO BE THE MIDDLE GROUP TO DO THAT. THE PROPERTY COULD BE CONVEYED TO BETTER PARKS AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK. >> THEY CAN'T, I DON'T THINK THEY CAN LEGALLY DO THAT, UNFORTUNATELY. >> IT HAS TO BE A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY. >> EVEN IF IT'S MARKET VALUE NOW BECAUSE THE BID PRICE WAS MARKET VALUE. >> IT WASN'T A BID. >> THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. >> THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MAY WANT TO HAVE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION AFTER THIS MEETING WITH TONY. THE SECOND LAW ON THIS, WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THIS SCHOOL BOARD'S BUSINESS. THIS IS NONE OF OUR BUSINESS OVER THERE. I DON'T WANT THE CITY TO BE DRAGGED INTO THIS, THAT WE'RE PART OF THIS, THAT WE'RE PART OF THE REQUEST, THAT WE WANT THESE THINGS TO HAPPEN. THAT'S NOT THE ROLE OF THE CITY, NOR DO I WANT THE SCHOOL BOARD IN OUR BUSINESS AND THEY ARE NOT. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT WE UNDERSTAND. ALSO, WE TALKED ABOUT SHIELD PARK, WE TALKED ABOUT JONES PARK NEEDING FUNDS. WE'RE NOT TALKING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, WE'RE TALKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THESE PROJECTS NEED. THIS COUNCIL NEEDS TO I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A BIG COMMITMENT TO THESE OTHER PARKS. I'M GOING TO JONES PARK AND SHIELD PARK, HAVE BEEN SITTING FOR YEARS IN DISREPAIR AND SO THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE PUT OUR ATTENTION I THINK TO OUR EXISTING PARKS. ALSO I'M GOING TO ASK COUNCIL, DO WE WANT AN ACTION ITEM ON THIS AT OUR NEXT MEETING, COUNCIL? >> YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, AND I'M SURE BRIAN WANTS THIS TO BE VERY CLEAR. THE CONVEYANCE OF THE BUILDING OR CONVEYANCE WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS, HOW WE WANT. WE VOTED FOR IT, WE'RE A PARTY TO IT. >> WE COULD RESCIND THE ORIGINAL. [01:55:01] >> WE COULD DO THAT. WE COULD PUT THAT UP THERE, TOO, BUT THERE'S CONVEYANCE OF THE PROPERTY. NO BUILDING, CLEAN ENVIRONMENTAL, IT'S SODDED, READY FOR DEMO. I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH FINANCIAL DETAILS WITH LIKE WHAT BOTH SAID. MR. BYNES GOING TO FORK THE MONEY OVER FOR DEMO OF THE BUILDING. I'D LIKE THAT IN THERE. I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CARRYING COSTS. THIS WAS NO COST TO THE CITY SO BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON, Y'ALL ARE THE REPOSITORY AS WELL. I THINK AN ACTION ITEM ONCE WE SEE EVERYTHING, ALL THE DETAILS WITH ALL PARTIES SIGNED ONTO IT, THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE, EVEN THOUGH, PROBABLY IN HINDSIGHT, THIS IS A MESSAGE TO EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM AND THE PUBLIC WITH THESE INITIATIVES, WE NEED THIS STUFF BECAUSE WE CAN'T GET CAUGHT SUPPORTING SOMETHING. LET'S SAY THEY DO GET THE MONEY. LET'S SAY THEY COME UP WITH THE THREE MILLION AND THEY GET EVERYTHING DONE. IT'S NO SKIN OFF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S BACK, BUT IT'S GOING TO COST US. WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT AND THE PUBLIC AND THE COMMUNITY GROUPS WHO BRING THESE FORWARD HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL. IT ALL HAS TO BE UPFRONT, ON PAPER SO WE CAN ALL SEE, UNDERSTAND FROM A TO Z, WHAT THAT WHOLE INITIATIVE IS GOING TO BE, BECAUSE WHAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE IS, LET'S SAY THEY DO GET THE MONEY AND THEN WE BRING IT UP. IF THEY HAVE IT ALL, WE UNFORTUNATELY, SUPPORTED IT. IF WE PULL THE RUG OUT IF THEY MEET THE GOAL, THAT'S ANOTHER PROBLEM. >> PULLING THE RUG OUT IS BEYOND US, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT ON OUR SHOULDERS AND THE RISK FACTOR IS MINIMIZED. >> EXACTLY. >> CORRECT. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING Y'ALL ARE SAYING. ALL YOUR CONDITION POINTS, I THINK, ARE ALL VALID AND ALL VERY GOOD POINTS TO ADDRESS. THAT'S A GOOD DIRECTION I THINK FOR WHAT THIS PROJECT ROSENBERG GROUP AND GISD NEEDS TO WORK ON BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT MONTH. I THINK THOSE CONDITIONS ARE NAILED OUT. >> SPEAK UP, COUNCIL, IF YOU HAVE AN OPPOSING VIEW ON THIS. WE NEED TO GET THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT MONTH. THIS NEEDS TO BE FOR OUR SAKE, FOR THE SCHOOL BOARDS SAKE, AND FOR PROJECT ROSENBERG'S SAKE. WE NEED TO GET THIS ON OUR AGENDA. BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE FROM THIS DISCUSSION SOME GUIDANCE ON HOW YOU COULD PUT THIS TOGETHER. DON. >> HOLD ON. DO YOU HAVE A DATE BY WHICH THEY NEED TO HAVE THE MONEY ON DEPOSIT, CASH. >> WHAT WAS THE MOTION? WAS THAT JUST THE 420 AND ESCROW? WAS THAT THE 2.2? >> ALL THE MONEY. I GUESS, SINCE WE ARE THE PARTY TO IT, BY THE DRAFTING, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT 420 THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THE SCHOOL BOARD MEETING IN ESCROW, AND IT WOULD BE UNDER BETTER PARKS, IN MY OPINION FOR THE NEXT MEETINGS AND SO WE CAN SEE THE MONIES THERE, THE MONIES ON PAPER, AND I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH SUPPORTING. >> I DON'T WANT TO PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE HERE. YES, WE SHOULD PRESSURE THIS, BUT THAT'S ON OUR STAFF. IT'S LIKE, NOW WE'RE GETTING THEM ON THIS TO CREATE THINGS FOR US. >> WE'RE JUST CREATING THE CONDITIONS. THIS IS GOING TO BE ON MOSTLY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. >> WE DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO INTERJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THAT THE SCHOOL BOARD. >> THAT WAS IN THE RESOLUTION. WE SAID WE'RE A PARTY TO THE NEGOTIATIONS IN THE RESOLUTION. >> WHAT THEY DID WITH THEIR ESCROW AND SO FORTH, WE DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT, IN MY OPINION. >> LET ME FINISH. IF YOU'RE PUTTING THIS TOGETHER FOR A PRESENTATION FOR THE NEXT AGENDA? >> YES, SIR. >> THEN THE SCHOOL BOARD IS GOING TO NEED TO TAKE WHATEVER WE DECIDE, WHATEVER WE VOTE ON AS A FULL COUNCIL. THERE MIGHT BE ITEMS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING AND THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE LESS, WHATEVER THOSE ITEMS AND HOW THEY'RE DESCRIBED AND HOW THEY'RE CONVEYED. WELL, WOULDN'T THE SCHOOL BOARD HAVE TO TAKE THAT BACK TO VOTE ON THOSE ADDED? >> IF IT'S OKAY, PLEASE. I CAN SAY THAT. I EXPLAINED THAT TO OUR BOARD, AND I EXPLAINED THAT LAST WEDNESDAY WHEN THEY WERE VOTING THAT THEY REJECTED THE FORMAL BIDS THAT I WOULD HAVE TO MEET WITH CITY STAFF AND BRING BACK THE DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL BACK TO THE BOARD. IT HAS BEEN TOLD TO OUR BOARD EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID. YOU GUYS HAVE TO MAKE YOUR DECISION, DECIDE WHAT THE CONDITIONS ARE FOR THE CONVEYANCE OF THE PROPERTY. WE WORKED THAT OUT BETWEEN OURSELVES. IN THOSE DETAILS, BECAUSE AGAIN, SOME OF THE DETAILS HAVEN'T BEEN CLARIFIED BEFORE, THAT HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO OUR BOARD. >> YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT. >> I WOULD ECHO I THINK WHAT COUNCILMEMBER ROBB SAYS, IT'S TOTALLY UP TO COUNCIL AS TO WHAT REQUIREMENT YOU WANT TO PUT IN HERE AND WE'RE READY TO LIST TWO OR 100, [02:00:01] WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT TO DO. BUT I WOULD SAY TO KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL HERE THAT WE'RE NOT CONVEYING THIS PROPERTY. THE CITY'S NAME WILL NOT GO ON THIS OWNERSHIP OF THIS PROPERTY UNTIL EVERY ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA IS MET. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> IF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD DECIDE TOMORROW UNDER THIS CONVEYANCE PROCESS, IF THEY WANTED TO CONVEY IT TO HIM FOR $1, THEY COULD DO THAT. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ANY OF OUR CONCERN. >> WELL, IT'S NONE OF OUR BUSINESS. BEFORE I LEAVE THIS DISCUSSION, I NEED TO LOOK AT DON AND BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE THE INFORMATION TO BRING BACK TO COUNCIL SOME FORM OF AN ACTION ITEM CONCERNING. >> I HAVE THE ITEMS THAT I PRESENTED TO YOU. >> I'M IN FAVOR OF THOSE. I UNDERSTAND THEM. >> I REPEAT MY QUESTION. DO YOU NEED A DATE CERTAIN BY WHICH THEY NEED TO HAVE THE MONEY IN ESCROW? THE ONLY REASON WE WOULD DO THAT IS SO THAT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE A BONA FIDE BIDDER IN PLAY. I HATE TO SEE US EXPEND A LOT OF EFFORT, AND THEN SUDDENLY THE FUNDING FAIL. >> THAT THAT WAS MY POINT. >> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE FULL AMOUNT IN ESCROW. >> THE MOTION WAS 420. [OVERLAPPING] >> I DON'T THINK SO. >> UNFORTUNATELY, WE MADE THE DECISION TO BE IN THAT NEGOTIATION PROCESS. THAT WAS OUR DECISION, AND WE KNEW FULL WELL THAT IT WAS A POSSIBILITY, AND HERE WE ARE. >> LET ME CLARIFY TOO, AND THIS MIGHT HELP ON THAT, ALEX. DON, THE RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED CONCERNING THIS, I UNDERSTAND IT HAD STIPULATIONS. ARE WE LEGALLY BOUND BY THAT RESOLUTION? >> OH, A RESOLUTION IS MERELY AN EXPRESSION OF THE ASPIRATIONS OF COUNCIL, AND YOU ARE FREE TO CHANGE YOUR MIND ON IT IMMEDIATELY AFTER IT DULY POSTED. [LAUGHTER] >> DON, WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND AS A DATE FOR HAVING THE 420,000 IN ESCROW? >> WELL, IS IT 420 OR TWO 420 PLUS TWO AND A QUARTER. >> HOLD ON. TO DON'S POINT, TO KNOW THAT WE HAVE A QUALIFIED BIDDER. A QUALIFIED BIDDER DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU HAVE ALL THE MONEY, BUT YOU HAVE ESCROWED A PORTION OF IT TO DEMONSTRATE GOOD FAITH IN YOUR ATTEMPT TO COMPLETE THE TRANSACTION. THAT'S WHY I STOOD WITH THE 420. THE 420 IS NOT ON JULY 1ST. THAT'S THE DATE THAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR ALL THE FUNDS. I WAS ASKING DON'S RECOMMENDATION FOR WHAT MIGHT BE THE DATE IN ORDER TO HAVE THE $420,000 DEPOSITED WITH BETTER PARKS IN ORDER TO DEMONSTRATE A QUALIFIED BIDDER. >> I THINK AND I WATCHED THE MEETING. ELIZABETH BEATON MADE THE MOTION FOR 420 IN ESCROW. SHE DIDN'T GIVE A DATE, BUT THE MOTION WAS TO INSTRUCT THE NEIGHBORS TO COME OUT AND START THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS. >> [OVERLAPPING] TO HAVE THAT MONEY BY JULY 1? >> NO. >> THE FINAL MOTION PASSED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR GISD WAS THAT THE 2.2 MILLION HAS TO BE DEPOSITED BY JULY 1. >> 2.2 PLUS THE 400,000? [OVERLAPPING] >> REMEMBER, THE MONEY THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ACCEPTING FOR THE PROPERTY IS THE 2.2 MILLION. THERE'S A SEPARATE DONATION OUTSIDE OF THAT 2.2 MILLION THAT HAS BEEN PROMISED TO COVER THE DEMOLITION. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU GUYS DO IN THE DEMOLITION THOUGH, RIGHT? >> WE WILL BE DONATED PROBABLY TO THEM TO GIVE THEM THE DEMOLITION. THE 2.2 IS 100 IS JULY 1. THERE WAS A NUMBER THROWN OUT FOR 420 TO BE PUT IN ESCROW, AND I WOULD EXPECT SINCE THE RESOLUTION, AND I WANT TO STICK TO WHAT COUNCILS SAID AT THE TIME. WAS BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON WOULD BE THE REPOSITORY FOR THE DONATIONS. MY OPINION IT WOULD BE, BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON AS THE ESCROW AGENT TO HAVE THE MONEY, AND I WOULD THINK IF WE'RE ALL GOING TO NOT GIVE BRIAN ANY CLARITY, WHICH HE ALWAYS COMPLAINS ABOUT, WE NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR NEGOTIATIONS OR BRIAN'S NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS. I'VE GIVEN WHAT I THINK, AND I THINK THAT IN THAT NEXT TIME PERIOD BY NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IN MARCH, THAT'S WHEN THE MONEY SHOULD BE IN AN ESCROW. >> CAN I CORRECT THAT? BECAUSE THAT WASN'T PART OF THE FINAL MOTION. THE 420 WAS BROUGHT UP DURING THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS AMONG THE TRUSTEES. BUT THE FINAL MOTION DID NOT INCLUDE THE 420. >> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THOUGH, THE FINAL MOTION LEFT IT IN THE DECISION-MAKING IN THE SUPERINTENDENT'S HANDS [OVERLAPPING] TO NEGOTIATE. IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT FOR AN ESCROW, [02:05:04] AND THERE WAS EVEN A QUESTION THAT THAT WOULD BE NON-REFUNDABLE OR REFUNDABLE. BUT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO DO THAT WITHOUT US GIVING WHAT THE TOTAL WILL BE. >> YOU'RE RIGHT THAT WAS NOT IN THE MOTION AT THE GISD BOARD. >> CORRECT. >> BUT WE MAY APPLY THAT HERE AT GALVESTON. >> RIGHT. WHY DO Y'ALL CARE? BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING] THE GISD IS GOING TO CONVEY TO THE CITY IF THIS IS SUCCESSFUL, IS A GREENFIELD. THE CONDITIONS THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS PROPOSED ARE THAT THE DEMOLITION BE COMPLETE BEFORE THE CITY TAKES POSSESSION AND THAT ANY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES HAVE BEEN REMEDIATED. THAT'S THE COMMITMENT OF THE SCHOOL BOARD TO THE CITY. THAT BY JULY 1ST, THE FUNDING WILL BE IN PLACE, AND THEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WILL STILL OWN THE PROPERTY UNTIL THOSE CONDITIONS ARE MET. WHAT THE CITY IS GOING TO RECEIVE IS JUST THE GREENFIELD. THE FUNDING AND THE MACHINATIONS OF THE FUNDING ARE ESSENTIALLY BETWEEN THE ROSENBERG PROJECT, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON. YES, THAT'S THE WAY IT'S GOING TO WORK. >> WHAT DOES YOUR CALENDAR SAY IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU COULD DEMOLISH THE SCHOOL? >> WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO DO AN ASBESTOS ABATEMENT STUDY AND THEN ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AND THEN DEMOLITION. IT WOULD TAKE, I'M JUST GUESSING BASED ON OUR OTHER PROJECTS, PROBABLY 60-90 DAYS. BUT WE POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE THE BUILDING DEMOLISHED BY JULY 1, IF WE MOVED EXPEDIENTLY. >> BUT [OVERLAPPING] YOU DON'T HAVE THE FUNDS. >> YOU WOULD DO THAT BEFORE CLOSING OR BEFORE YOUR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. >> [OVERLAPPING] THE FUNDS TO DO SO. >> BECAUSE REMEMBER, FOR US, LIKE MR. BROWN JUST SAID THE CARRYING COSTS. I'VE SAID FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, I DIDN'T REALLY CARE WHO WE SOLD IT TO. HAVING THAT BUILDING DEMOLISHED IMMEDIATELY STARTS TO SAVE US MONEY ON INSURANCE AND HEATING AND ELECTRICAL BILLS. [OVERLAPPING] EVERY PROPOSAL AND EVERY BID FOR THAT PROJECT INCLUDED DEMOLISHING THAT BUILDING. SO NOBODY WANTED TO SAVE THE BUILDING. >> WE'VE BEEN ON TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME. I WANT TO FINAL COMMENT ON THIS. I'M GOING TO MOVE IN THE DIRECTION OF WHAT ALEX PORRETTO HERE HAS OUTLINED FOR HAVING AT THE NEXT MEETING. I DON'T HEAR ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW, AND I EVEN HEAR BOB AND SOME OTHER SAYING WE SUPPORT WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE. >> ANY COUNCIL MEMBER HAS A THOUGHT OF A CONDITION THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE PLACED ON THIS, IF THEY WOULD LET US KNOW, WE WILL INCORPORATE THAT IN OUR LIST THAT WE WILL BRING TO COUNCIL IN MARCH. I'M GOING TO BRING YOU THE COMPLETE LIST, AND YOU GUYS CAN PICK AND CHOOSE, PICK THEM ALL, PICK NONE. THAT'S ENTIRELY UP TO YOU. >> CAN LINE ITEM STRIKE THEM. >> YES, YOU BET. WE'RE GOING TO BRING THEM TO YOU IN THAT ORDER. THEY MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER BECAUSE I'M GOING TO TAKE THEM ALL FROM EACH OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THAT'LL BE FOR YOU ALL TO DECIDE. [INAUDIBLE]. >> I JUST HAVE ONE CON. >> WE'RE TALKING 120 DAYS. THIS IS NOT VERY MUCH TIME TO FIND OUT IN 30 DAYS, WHAT OTHER TERMS THERE MIGHT BE. THAT'S MY CONCERN. >> I GOT ONE COMMENT. YES, HINDSIGHT 2020 WITH THE RESOLUTION THAT WE PASSED. >> THE NON-BINDING RESOLUTION. >> THE NON-BINDING RESOLUTION, HOWEVER, WHEN I MAKE A VOTE, I THINK ABOUT ALL POSSIBILITIES DOWN THE LINE IN THE FUTURE. THIS WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT I THOUGHT WAS POSSIBLY GOING TO HAPPEN. WE HAVE TO EITHER DECIDE ALSO IF WE'RE GOING TO DROP IT OR NOT. BUT WHEN I VOTE FOR SOMETHING, I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE AND IT'S ABOUT WORKING THROUGH THAT. IF I DON'T VOTE FOR SOMETHING, BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S NOT WORTH THE TIME AND THE LIST DOWN THE LINE. >> EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER WILL HAVE THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE INFORMATION, I THINK. >> DR. NEIGHBORS, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE GOOD. >> WE DIDN'T FOLLOW UP WITH EACH COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THEIR LIST OF SUGGESTIONS. >> I THINK SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN TALKED ABOUT OR DISCUSSED CAN BE UNDERWAY WITH A SUPERINTENDENT. >> WAIT A MINUTE. I LOVE MEETING WITH MATT. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM, BUT I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE NEGOTIATING ANYTHING UNTIL I HAVE ALL OF COUNCIL'S [OVERLAPPING] >> DO NOT NEGOTIATE ANYTHING UNTIL THIS COUNCIL VOTES ON. >> CAN WE PUT ON THEIR 420 UNTIL APRIL 1ST OR ON APRIL 1ST? [02:10:05] >> THERE'S A JOKE IN THAT, BUT OKAY, YES. [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE FOOL. [LAUGHTER] >> WE NEED IT PRIOR TO THE NEXT COUNCIL. >> ON THE VOTE SO WE CAN SEE IT ON THE VOTE. >> WE WILL NEED TO EDUCATE COUNCIL BEFORE WE START OUR MARCH MEETING THEN. ONCE YOU GET YOUR BID, SENDING THAT OUT. JUST ONE SECOND ON THAT. THERE WE ARE. >> HOW MUCH IN ADVANCE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE COMPLETED LIST? THAT'S MY NEXT QUESTION FOR YOU. >> I WOULD SAY 7-10 DAYS. >> TEN DAYS. NORMAL AGENDA TIME. >> COUNCIL, IT IS 11:10 AM. WE HAVE NOW GONE THROUGH ONE ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. [LAUGHTER] I'M GOING TO MENTION TO THE COMMUNITY, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW EVERYTHING THERE IS ABOUT COYOTES, STAY TUNED. [LAUGHTER] WE HAVE A 10-MINUTE BREAK AND WE'LL START BACK. IT IS 11:20. WE WILL START. [BACKGROUND] IT IS 11:20. WE ARE NOW OUT OF OUR BREAK FOR OUR CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR FEBRUARY 27TH. EXCUSE ME. WE'RE STARTING OUR MEETING. IT'S 11:20. WE DO HAVE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT, BUT FOR COUNCIL MEMBER PORRETTO AND ROBB, WHO WILL BE HERE VERY, VERY QUICKLY. [3.B. Discussion of Coyotes/Wildlife and Related Proposed Programs (J Henderson/ Animal Control - 15min)] LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3B, IF WE COULD, PLEASE, MA'AM. >> ITEM 3B. DISCUSSION OF COYOTES, WILDLIFE, AND RELATED PROPOSED PROGRAMS. >> AS YOU KNOW, COUNCIL, THIS HAS BEEN A TOPIC FROM THE COMMUNITY AND WAS BROUGHT TO US ALSO BY PUBLIC COMMENT AT OUR COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO. WE HAVE WITH US TODAY, WOULD YOU BOTH INTRODUCE YOURSELF, PLEASE? >> YES, SIR. I'M JOSH HENDERSON. I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR THE GALVESTON ISLAND HUMANE SOCIETY. >> I'M KRISTEN THOMPSON. I AM THE SUPERVISOR FOR THE ANIMAL SERVICES UNIT FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON. >> WE HAVE BOTH THESE INDIVIDUALS HERE. I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN TALK AND I KNOW YOU WERE FOLLOWING ALL THE CONCERNS WITH THE CITIZENS ABOUT COYOTES AND SO FORTH. I'M GOING TO TURN YOUR THOUGHTS OVER TO YOU AND LET YOU MOVE FROM HERE. >> COYOTES HAVE BEEN A HOT TOPIC. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST MONTH, DEFINITELY NOT THE FIRST YEAR. THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE, NOT ONLY HERE ON OUR LOVELY ISLAND, BUT THROUGHOUT THE NATION AS COYOTES ARE ABSOLUTELY WIDESPREAD THROUGHOUT THE NATION. GALVESTON DOES HAVE A UNIQUE TWIST. THE COYOTES THAT INHABIT OUR ISLAND HAVE BEEN FOUND TO BE SCIENTIFICALLY ENAMORING. THEY ARE UNIQUE WITH THE GENETICS THAT THEY CARRY. THE FACT THAT WE HAVE THAT SCIENTIFIC NEATNESS HAS ALLOWED US TO CONTINUE AND EMBARK UPON SOME REALLY ASTOUNDING RESEARCH. WHILE THAT IS ADMIRABLE, AND THESE ANIMALS HAVE GARNERED GREAT NATIONAL ATTENTION, THEY'VE GARNERED THE ADMIRATION AND RESPECT OF MANY LOCALS, WE ALSO HAVE TO LIVE WITH THESE ANIMALS IN OUR BACKYARDS. THERE ARE DEFINITELY THOSE THAT DO NOT WANT TO EMBRACE THESE ANIMALS. THERE ARE THOSE THAT FEAR THEM AS THE WILD ANIMALS THAT THEY ARE. AT THE BASE, THEY ARE WILD ANIMALS. WE HAVE A DUTY TO SAFEGUARD OUR PUBLIC AND ENSURE THAT ANY COYOTE MANAGEMENT PLAN DOES TAKE THE FACT THAT WE'RE SPEAKING ABOUT A WILD ANIMAL INTO PLAY. NOW, A FEW YEARS AGO, THE ONLY WAY YOU GOT INFORMATION TO ANIMAL SERVICES WAS A PHONE CALL THROUGH DISPATCH. THERE'S BEEN A TIME DELAY WAITING FOR VERY BUSY UNIT FIND TIME TO CALL YOU BACK AND GET THAT INFORMATION. A FEW YEARS AGO, WE DID LAUNCH A GIS-BASED REPORTING TOOL THAT NOW ALLOWS THE PUBLIC IN NO TIME FLAT TO LOG ON, EXACTLY PIN THEIR LOCATION OR THEIR LOCATION OF WHATEVER THEIR ENCOUNTER WAS, AND DESCRIBE THE BEHAVIOR THAT WAS REPORTED THAT FALLS INTO THE CATEGORY OF PAPER. WE UTILIZE THAT INFORMATION TO GAUGE WHERE THERE IS OR IS NOT A THREAT TO THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. HOW MUCH ARE THESE ANIMAL MOVING? THE MOMENT WE RELEASE THIS ARE AVAILABLE DATA TO MAKE DECISIONS. [02:15:02] >> NUMBER ONE WAS CONSISTENT. EVERYBODY WAS ASKED AND ANSWERING THE SAME SET OF QUESTIONS, WHICH WE COULD NOT DO UTILIZING DISPATCH AND THAT TIME DELAY. WE'VE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF TECHNOLOGY AND NOW HAVE A GREAT DATASET THAT IS GIVEN TO US BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. WAYS TO QUANTIFY THAT. ONE OF THE UNIQUE QUESTIONS THAT IS ANSWERED HERE IS WAS THE COYOTE HAZED? >> COULD YOU DEFINE HAZE? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> YES, SIR. >> SPEAKING OF THE PUBLIC EDUCATION COMPONENT, AS I SAY, WAS THE COYOTE HAZED, WAS THIS ANIMAL ASKED TO LEAVE IN ANY FASHION? ARE YOU HOLLERING AND SCREAMING, TRYING TO CHASE AWAY THE BEAR? WERE YOU THROWING ROCKS AT IT, TRYING TO SHOOT IT WITH A WATER GUN, THROWING A TENNIS BALL AT IT. THAT'S OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN ONE WAY TO GO ABOUT HAZING A COYOTE. HAZING A COYOTE IS AN ACTION TAKEN BY A PERSON MEANT TO RESHAPE THAT ANIMAL'S BEHAVIOR. WE DEFINITELY NEED TO INVEST IN HAZING, BOTH AS A COMMUNITY AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND PROVIDING AN APPROPRIATE TOOL AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES THAT [INAUDIBLE] PROPERLY SO THAT WHEN ANY JOHN Q MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WERE TO RUN ACROSS A COYOTE IN A PLACE IT SHOULD NOT BE, THEY SHOULD HAVE THE TOOLS READILY AVAILABLE TO APPROPRIATELY RESPOND. AT THE SAME TIME, WHAT IS THE CITY'S RESPONSE? SADLY, ANIMAL SERVICES IS A SMALL UNIT WITHIN THE CITY. THERE'S ONLY JUST SO MANY. >> ONE RIGHT NOW. >> ABSOLUTELY. SO MANY TRUCKS RUNNING AROUND THIS ISLAND. >> G, DID YOU USE TO WORK FOR THEM? >> I DID WORK FOR THEM FOR YEARS. I PROMISE IT'S A VERY, VERY BUSY POSITION. ANIMAL SERVICES DOES FAR MORE THAN RESPOND TO WILDLIFE. THEY ARE ALSO VERY BUSY DEALING WITH THE DOMESTIC ANIMAL POPULATION AND DOG BITES AND CAT BITES AND TRAPPED ANIMALS. >> PELICANS ON THE BEACH. >> PELICANS ON THE BEACH, AND SURPRISINGLY, THAT TAKES UP A LARGE AMOUNT OF TIME. WHEN IT COMES TO HAZING, AND HAZING AN ENHANCED PROGRAM IS WHAT I'M REQUESTING TODAY, IS A PROPOSAL FOR MORE RESOURCES, BOTH PERSONNEL AS WELL AS THE TOOLS THEY NEED. ONE OF THE TOOLS THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY ON HER BELT IS A BYRNA LAUNCHER. IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF WHAT A BYRNA LAUNCHER IS, THESE DEVICES ARE NOW AND HAVE BEEN FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, CARRIED BY GALVESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT AS A LESS LETHAL OPTION. IT'S MORE EFFECTIVE THAN TASER AND CERTAINLY WHEN IT COMES TO DOGS, YOU'RE LIMITED. WHEN IT COMES TO COYOTES, UTILIZING A TASER VERSUS A COYOTE IS GOING TO BE WILDLY INEFFECTIVE. THESE ANIMALS ARE NICE AND QUICK. YOU'D HAVE TO GET BOTH OF THOSE TASER PRONGS INTO A VERY QUICKLY MOVING ANIMAL. BYRNA, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS AN INCREASED RANGE, FIRES A 17-MILLIMETER PROJECTILE, SIMILAR TO A PAINTBALL, BUT FORMULATED DIFFERENTLY. THIS LESS LETHAL OPTION HAS PROVEN TO BE A REMARKABLE TOOL FOR THE GALVESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT. I ASKED SEAN MIGUEZ TO COME AND BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON THAT. UNFORTUNATELY, HE'S NOT ABLE TO BE HERE. MY HOPE IS TO GET A SMALL SQUAD TO SUPPLEMENT THE EFFORTS OF ANIMAL SERVICES, SIX OR EIGHT GPD PATROL OFFICERS THAT ALREADY HAVE BEEN UTILIZING THIS BYRNA LAUNCHER, PROVIDE THEM WITH THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES TO UNDERSTAND, NUMBER ONE, WHAT IS HAZING? HOW CAN HAZING WITH A BYRNA LAUNCHER BE AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO MOVE A COYOTE THAT HAS DECIDED HE WANTS TO INHABIT A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE HE SHOULD NOT? HOW DO WE ENTICE THAT ANIMAL TO ACTUALLY LEAVE? HOW CAN WE SAFELY EMPLOY THE USE OF ADDITIONAL TOOLS AND ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL? THE USE OF THIS ENHANCED HAZING TEAM, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY'RE CALLED, WOULD PROVIDE MORE TRAINED PERSONNEL TO RESPOND WHEN THE REPORTS THAT [02:20:06] COME DISPATCH OR COME THROUGH THAT REPORTING WEBSITE INDICATE THE NEED FOR A CITY RESPONSE, WOULDN'T IT BE NICE IF WE HAD MORE TOOLS AVAILABLE THAN ONE ANIMAL SERVICES TRUCK? EVEN IF FULLY STAFFED, IF THEY HEAVEN FORBID, HAVE THREE OR FOUR TRUCKS IN OPERATION, BEING ABLE TO SUPPLEMENT THAT WITH SIX OR EIGHT OFFICERS THAT HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE APPROPRIATE TRAINING BOTH TO UNDERSTAND OUR COYOTE REPORTING DATA, UNDERSTANDING THE RESEARCH AND THE BEHAVIOR SURROUNDING THESE ANIMALS, AS WELL AS APPROPRIATE TACTICAL DEPLOYMENT OF A BYRNA LAUNCHER OR THE MANY OTHER STEPS THAT CAN BE TAKEN, WHETHER IT'S INVESTIGATING THE PROPERTY TO FIND OUT THAT THERE'S A MILLION THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE THAT ARE ATTRACTING THESE ANIMALS INTO THAT LOCATION. WHAT CAN WE DO TO REDUCE THE ATTRACTANTS IN THAT AREA? WHAT COULD WE DO TO DETER THEM PRIOR TO THE NEED FOR A BYRNA LAUNCHER. RIGHT NOW, WHILE WE HAVE ENHANCED HAZING IS A LINE ITEM ALREADY PART OF OUR COYOTE MANAGEMENT PLAN. ONE TRUCK IS NOT MAKING IT HAPPEN. THE NEED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, SOME ADDITIONAL TRAINING TO ENABLE A MUCH MORE COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE TO FILL THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH OUT OF JUST THE ANIMAL SERVICES UNIT, JUST PUBLIC EDUCATION, AND OFFERING A BETTER SOLUTION THAN RECOMMENDING THE USE OF FIREARMS. EVEN ON THE MAPS THAT ARE HERE, LOOK HOW CLOSE OUR HOUSES ARE. THE USE OF FIREARMS, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE LAW SAYS, CAN BE REMARKABLY DANGEROUS DISCHARGING FIREARM WITHIN THE CONFINES OF OUR CITY LIMITS MUCH LESS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. WE'VE GOT SOME NICE, BIG SPREAD OUT GREEN SPACES. I'M SURE YOU CAN GO AND FIND A BIG ENOUGH GREEN SPACE WHERE DISCHARGING A FIREARM MIGHT NOT BE THE END OF THE WORLD. THOSE PLACES ARE COMING FEW AND FAR BETWEEN. AND SO THIS PROGRAM WOULD ENABLE THE TRAINING AND APPROPRIATE USE OF PERSONNEL WITH A QUALIFIED RESPONSE WHEN IT'S DEEMED APPROPRIATE. >> OFFICER THOMPSON, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ALSO? >> YES I DO. OBVIOUSLY, JOSH WAS THE SUPERVISOR FOR ANIMAL CONTROL FOR A VERY LONG TIME. THAT IS NOW MY DUTY. I'M STEPPING IN AND TAKING OVER THIS REALM. IT'S A SMALL UNIT, OBVIOUSLY. WE DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO BE FROM THE EAST END TO THE WEST END, ESPECIALLY IF IT COMES TO, I HAVE AN OPTION TO BE AT A BITE CASE OR I HAVE AN OPTION TO GO CHECK OUT COYOTES UNDER A HOUSE THAT'S DILAPIDATED. I UNDERSTAND EVERYONE WANTS US EVERYWHERE, BUT WE HAVE TO PICK AND CHOOSE OUR PRIORITIES. BRINGING ON TRAINED OFFICERS TO ASSIST US IN THIS IS HUGE. LESS LETHAL FORCE IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT ON FOR MANY YEARS. WHY WOULD WE NOT UTILIZE THAT AS ANIMAL SERVICES? THE PUBLIC, TO MY UNDERSTANDING IS UP IN ARMS WITH THE COYOTES. THEY DON'T WANT THEM. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T JUST GET RID OF THEM. WELL, JUST LIKE A BAD NEIGHBOR, YOU CAN'T JUST DECIDE, HEY, YOU CAN'T LIVE HERE ANYMORE. THEY HAVE TRAVELED AS FAR AS CORPUS CHRISTI. THOSE ARE OUR COYOTES THAT WE'RE TRACKING HERE. THEY'RE NOT JUST GOING TO GO AWAY SO WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT DIFFERENT MEANS. I'M GOING TO STAND DIRECTLY NEXT TO JOSH. THERE'S A BIT OF A HEIGHT DIFFERENCE. A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE THERE. I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME OF OUR COMMUNITY IS SCARED TO HAZE THESE ANIMALS. AGAIN, JOSH AND I WORKED TOGETHER BEFORE. THERE ARE PLENTY OF PICTURES OF US HANDLING COYOTES. THERE ARE PLENTY OF TIMES THAT, YES, I GOT OUT OF MY TRUCK, AND I RAN AROUND AND I OPENED MY JACKET AND SCREAMED LIKE A ZOMBIE. THIS IS HAZING AT ITS FINEST. THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT KEEP OUR COYOTES AWAY FROM OUR CITIZENS. YES, I LOOK LIKE A CRAZY WOMAN, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? IF THAT MAKES THE COYOTES DON'T GO BOTHER HIM LATER ON IN THE EVENING, I'M GOING TO DO IT. I'M ALSO GOING TO SIT THERE AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT FIVE MILLION OTHER THINGS THAT AREN'T BYRNA, THAT AREN'T LESS LETHAL OR LETHAL WAYS OF HAZING OUR COYOTES. [02:25:02] IT'S GOING TO START WITH WHAT'S IN YOUR YARD? WHAT'S IN YOUR TRASH? IT'S GOING TO START MANY OTHER DIRECTIONS BESIDES LET'S BURN THEM AT THE STAKE AND LET'S GET OUR FIREARMS OUT AND PLAY BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. THE WHOLE TOWN IS UPSET ABOUT THEM. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT LET'S TAKE A LOOK IN OUR BACKYARDS FIRST. DO YOU HAVE FOOD OUT THERE? DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING? GO AHEAD. >> NO. I WAS GOING TO SAY WHAT CONCERNS ME. I DO AGREE THERE ARE STILL PEOPLE FEEDING CATS AND WHATNOT, AND THAT HELPS CAUSE THE PROBLEM? >> RACOONS ON THE EAST. >> YEAH. BUT WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THEY'RE NOW COMING OVER SIX FOOT FENCES. THEY'RE NOW GOING UP ON PEOPLE'S DECKS. THEY'RE GOING AFTER LARGER ANIMALS, WHERE IT USED TO BE JUST SMALL DOGS AND CATS, WHICH IS STILL UNACCEPTABLE. >> CAN I ASK WHERE YOU GOT THIS INFORMATION? >> GOT IT FROM CITIZENS ACROSS THE ISLAND. BUT I'D SAY YOU HAVE A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY USING THIS. ANYTIME SOMEONE CONTACTS ME OR EVEN IF I SEE A POST ON SOCIAL MEDIA, I SAY, HAVE YOU REPORTED IT? I'D SAY YOU'D BE LUCKY IF YOU HAVE A 50% COMPLIANCE. >> BUT THEY DO KNOW HOW TO CONTACT DISPATCH AT THE DROP OF A HAT, AND I WILL TELL YOU, ANY OF THOSE CALLS THAT COME THROUGH DISPATCH ARE NOT JUST TAKE ON THE WEBSITE. >> BUT BELIEVE ME, WE HAVE ISSUES ON THE BEACH THAT COME NOT FROM PEOPLE FROM COYOTES, AND PEOPLE WILL MAKE CALLS AND THEY'RE NOT GETTING A RESPONSE FAST ENOUGH. WE HAVE A LIMITED NUMBER OF POLICE. ALTHOUGH I WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO CROSS TRAINING, I THINK WE HAVE A SHORTAGE NOW. WE'RE DOWN TOO, LIKE 19 PEOPLE. TO TAKE OFFICERS OFF PEOPLE ISSUES FOR A PRIORITY OF A COYOTE I WOULD HAVE AN ISSUE WITH. >> I'M GOING TO JUST RAISE ONE PRETTY VALID POINT AT THIS MOMENT. THAT MAY BE A SORE SUBJECT. MA'AM, THIS IS MY 26TH DAY IN A ROW WITHOUT A DAY OFF. >> OH, DON'T. I AGREE YOU SHOULD. >> THERE'S A HUGE SHORTAGE FOR US, AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR MYSELF BECAUSE I AM TAKING OVER JOSH'S BIG SHOES. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR UNIT COMES AT EVERYTHING WE CAN WITH FULL FORCE. GO AHEAD, SIR. >> YOUR BUDGET, IS IT DEVELOPED TO HAVE MORE PERSONNEL OR? >> YES SIR. IT'S A MATTER OF TRAINING. >> A MATTER OF TRAINING. ARE THEY RECRUITING AT THIS POINT? >> YES, SIR. WE HAVE ONE THAT OFFICIALLY WENT ON HER OWN TODAY. INNES COULD COME JOIN YOU FOR THIS MEETING, ONE MORE THAT IS ONBOARDING SHORTLY, AND THEN WE HAVE BEEN GIFTED A FOURTH OFFICER FINALLY AFTER ALMOST A DECADE OF REQUESTING. >> FANTASTIC. JUST MY COMMENTS REAL QUICKLY ON THIS. I EITHER FORTUNATELY OR UNFORTUNATELY HAD HAD THE EXPERIENCE OF DEALING WITH COYOTES FOR ABOUT TWO MONTHS UNDERNEATH MY HOUSE. BUT I WOULD SAY THIS, I THINK EDUCATION IS GOING TO BE IMPORTANT HERE. I DON'T MEAN EDUCATION ON THE NUMBER OF COYOTES AND SO FORTH. I'M TALKING ABOUT EDUCATION ON WHAT THE CITIZENS CAN DO TO PREVENT THE INFLUX OF COYOTES AND THERE'S YARDS OR WHATEVER. AS AN EXAMPLE, MY HOUSE DIDN'T HAVE SCREENING UNDERNEATH IT. AS SOON AS IT STARTED WITH THE COYOTES, WE GOT THAT HANDLED. I'VE GOT IT ALL SCREENED IN. BUT WHEN THE NEIGHBORS CALLED WITH THE COYOTES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY DIDN'T GET ANY GUIDANCE ON THAT. THE DISPATCHER DIDN'T SAY, WELL, WE HAVE A HANDOUT OR WE HAVE INFORMATION WE CAN SEND YOU TO HELP CONTROL THIS IN YOUR AREA. THEY BASICALLY SAID, THESE COYOTES ARE UNIQUE TO THE ISLAND AND WE NEED TO LIVE WITH THEM. >> I'VE HEARD THAT TOO FROM OTHER PEOPLE. >> THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I AM WELL AWARE OF. IN BETWEEN JOSH AND I, WE HAVE HAD EITHER A LACK OF SUPERVISORS OR A DIFFERENT SUPERVISOR FOR THIS UNIT THAT HAD A LACK OF INTEREST IN OUR COYOTES. >> WE'RE RECTIFYING THOSE ISSUES NOW. ON THE PUBLIC EDUCATION SIDE, [02:30:01] WE'VE ALSO ADDED A COYOTE INFORMATION WEBSITE PAGE ONTO THE HUMANE SOCIETY'S PAGE WHERE WE'VE LINKED THE CITY'S REPORTING TOOL. WE'VE GOT HAZING GUIDELINES THERE. WE HAVE YARD AUDIT. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE SKIRTING THAT'S NOT THERE, WE TALK ABOUT THE FRUIT TREES, THE UNSECURED GARBAGE, THE BARBECUE PIT THAT, OH, MY GOODNESS, IT SMELLS DELICIOUS, BUT YOU HADN'T CLEANED IT IN A MONTH AND A HALF, AND YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT SMELLS IT'S DELICIOUS. ALL OF THAT INFORMATION WE ARE PUTTING AT THE FOREFRONT. EDUCATION IS DEFINITELY A PART OF THIS, BECAUSE MAKING THE PUBLIC AWARE AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC ON THIS ISLAND HAS THOSE TOOLS READILY AT THEIR DISPOSAL. I DO THINK THAT'S A BIG PART TO PLAY. >> I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, BASED ON THE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T REPORT. THAT'S NOT SAYING THAT THERE ISN'T UNCAPTURED POPULATION, AND I LIKE THE DATA AND EVERYTHING. BUT WHAT STUCK OUT TO ME THE MOST WAS WAS THE COYOTE HAZE. >> ONLY 80 PEOPLE THAT SUBMITTED ANYTHING THROUGH THE WEBSITE. IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, WE'VE HAD 80 PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY REPORTED THAT. THAT'S RIGHT AT ABOUT 15%. >> THAT TELLS YOU ONE OF TWO THINGS. IF ONLY 15% OF PEOPLE, AND OBVIOUSLY, THIS REPORT, WE HAVE A SERVING SIZE OF THE POPULATION. THERE'S NO WAY IN THE WORLD THIS IS GOING TO CAPTURE EVERY COYOTE ACTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE ISLAND. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY PEOPLE THAT HAVE SEEN THEM THAT HAVE FAILED TO REPORT THEM, WHETHER THOSE OBSERVATIONS OR INTERACTIONS WERE A GOOD OR A NEGATIVE INTERACTION. I'LL TELL YOU FROM THE YEARS PRIOR, BEING A GUY ANSWERING THE PHONE CALLS, WE'RE GETTING MUCH MORE AND BETTER QUALITY DATA NOW THAN WE EVER HAD. ANYBODY WITH QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS, HAVING AN OBSERVATION, PLEASE REPORT THAT. INCREASE OUR SERVING SIZE OF THAT DATA. >> I AGREE. TO MY POINT, THIS IS REPEATABLE IN THE WESTERN STATES. THIS IS REPEATABLE IN BEAR COUNTRY IN JERSEY. MAYBE IT'S A NOVEL CONCEPT DOWN THE COAST WITH COYOTES. I TALKED TO LIEUTENANT MEEGS. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ATTEMPT AT LISTENING TO THE RESIDENTS' CONCERNS, AND I'M VERY GLAD IT CAME FROM ANIMAL CONTROL IN THE PD FOR, I THINK, A VIABLE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM. >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR BOTH OF YOU BECAUSE, AGAIN, EDUCATION IS A PRIORITY FOR MY UNIT, ESPECIALLY, AND THAT IS SOMETHING WHEN I APPLIED THAT I SAID I WANT TO BRING MORE OF. DO YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS, BECAUSE I'M ALWAYS OPEN? DO YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS OF HOW I GET THIS MORE OUT INTO THE PUBLIC? IF THE INTERNET ISN'T THE SUREFIRE WAY, AND I DON'T WANT IT TO BE A BANTER OR DEBATE ON WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH THE COYOTES. I WANT THE EDUCATION PORTION. IF YOU-ALL HAVE SUGGESTIONS ON HOW I CAN GET THIS OUT THERE, WHETHER IT'S A MEETING. >> NO. I THINK WE CAN UTILIZE OUR RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE WITH OUR PUBLIC INFORMATION. WE CAN OUTPUT THAT INFORMATION PUBLICLY. THE CITY DOES HAVE A GOOD PUBLIC OUTREACH IN TERMS OF. >> PUT IT IN THE WATER. >> I AGREE THAT, HEY, AND WE HAVE TO DECIDE AT COUNCIL, WHETHER WE DECIDE ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THEM IN THE URBAN CORE? I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK THIS IS CIVICS 101. THEY PAY TAXES. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I AGREE WITH A LOT OF THE STUFF, AND THIS IS JUST THE DEFINITION OF A NATURAL RESOURCE COMP. >> I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY PORTION OF THIS PLAN THAT IS GOING TO COMPLETELY REMOVE THEM FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S NOT. >> NO. I SPOKE WITH GREG WEST, AND HE'S SITTING IN THE BACK, I THINK, STILL. HIS THING WAS, I'M PROVING A POINT. AND YEAH, EMPHASIS IS ON COUNCIL, AND PREVIOUS COUNCILS DIDN'T PICK IT UP. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO PICK IT UP AND SAY, HEY, LET'S LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS AND HOW DO WE DO THIS. COLORADO HAS A ROBUST, ON EVERYTHING THEY PUT OUT THERE. IN THE CORNER OF THE LITTLE PAGE IT SAYS, ARE YOU HAZING COYOTES? GO TO OUR WEBSITE. THIS IS HOW YOU HAZE, YELL, SHOUT, THROW A ROCK, DO WHAT YOU CAN TO DETER THEM FROM BEING IN UNDERNEATH PEOPLE'S HOUSES. THE OTHER THING, THE ITEM I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WAS ON THERE WAS WILDLIFE BECAUSE THERE IS OTHER INSTANCES WHERE THE WILD PACK OF RACCOONS ON THE EAST END THAT I'M HEARING ABOUT, [02:35:04] BUT WE CAN'T ALLOW OR INCENTIVIZE THEM. WE CAN'T JUSTIFY PEOPLE FEEDING THEM BECAUSE IT SHOULD BE EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED, IT SHOULD BE A CITABLE OFFENSE BECAUSE THE MOMENT ONE OF THOSE RACCOONS OUT THERE GOES AND BITES SOMEBODY. >> WE PLACE TRAPS OUT THERE. >> SOMEBODY NEEDS TO HEAR. WHAT HAPPENS TO SOMEBODY? >> WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ONE OF THOSE CUTE LITTLE TRASH PANDAS GOES AND BITES SOMEBODY THAT'S NICE ENOUGH TO GO OUT THERE AND OFFER THEM FOOD? THE TRUTH IS WE MUST THEN START A TRAPPING CAMPAIGN AS A MATTER OF PUBLIC HEALTH TO EUTHANIZE AND SEND THE ANIMALS FOR RABIES TESTING. FED WILDLIFE IS DEAD WILDLIFE. >> WOULD THAT BE THE SAME INSTANCE IF WE STARTED HAVING BITES WITH COYOTES? >> THE MOMENT THIS ISLAND ENCOUNTERS A BITE FROM A COYOTE, I CAN GUARANTEE RIGHT NOW, I'LL BET MY LUNCH, I'LL BUY ANYBODY HERE A STEAK DINNER, IT WILL BE BECAUSE SOMEBODY HAS BEEN FEEDING THAT ANIMAL. >> BUT THEN WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A TRAPPING PROCESS. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> AS TO WHAT YOU HAD MENTIONED, THERE'S A WAY WE CAN IMPLEMENT THIS WITHOUT A BIG COST OR DRAIN ON OUR BUDGET. THE FIRST THING I WOULD SAY IS, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS BEING A HOT ITEM NATIONALLY FOR PEOPLE TO RECOGNIZE THE GENETIC VARIANCE THAT WE HAVE HERE. I WOULD DEFINITELY TO START A SOCIAL MEDIA PAGE. IT JUST SAYS REPORTING GALVESTON COYOTES BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOW PUTTING IN GALVESTON COYOTES. IT SHOULD BRING A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE SO THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S A PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT THAT'S FREE AND PASTE ALL OVER IT, AND HOW TO REPORT SIGHTINGS. >> THERE IS A GALVESTON GHOST WOLVES FACEBOOK PAGE, AND THE REPORTING LINK IS ROUTINELY THROWN IN THERE. >> BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL ADMINISTRATIVE, I'M NOT MISTAKEN. >> TRUE. >> YOU CAN'T REALLY GO TO SEE, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T REALLY CAPTURE HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE GONE THERE, LIKES, VISITS, WHATEVER. THEY'RE GOING TO SHARE SOMETHING THAT THEY KNOW IT'S BASICALLY SUPPORTED BY THE CITY OF GALVESTON AS COMPARED TO A GROUP THAT'S TRYING TO PUSH THE ISSUE. >> PROBLEM CITY. >> SECONDLY, I THINK THAT WITH THE FACT THAT THERE'S PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING ALL THEY CAN TO SAVE THE COYOTE VARIANCE, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO PEOPLE THAT ARE SICK OF THEM LIKE MYSELF. IF THEY'VE COME INTO CONNING PARK, I LOST MY BOSTON TERRIER AND MY CAT. CAT WAS TAKEN RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF A BRICKLET. THERE'S PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT SAY THAT'S NOT OKAY. BUT BECAUSE OF THAT, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD VOLUNTEER IF THERE WAS A TRAINING SERVICE OR A TRAINING PROGRAM, I PROMISE YOU, JUST LIKE GPD HAD FOR A WHILE WITH THE CITIZENS MONITORING, THERE'S QUITE A FEW VOLUNTEERS WITH THAT. THAT COST US NOTHING. THAT COST US ONLY THE TRAINING FOR THOSE VOLUNTEERS, THAT MANY TIMES WILL VOLUNTEER THEIR OWN VEHICLE, THEIR OWN TIME. >> POLICE. >> AS LONG AS IT'S ORGANIZED, IT CAN BE, CALL IT COYOTE POLICE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, BUT THAT COSTS US NEAR NOTHING. INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE TRAINED, WE CAN HAVE 10-20 PEOPLE TRAINING BECAUSE THERE'S MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT WOULD VOLUNTEER JUST TO ACTUALLY HELP SO THAT THEY CAN TRY TO CREATE THINGS. >> A COMMUNITY BASED HAZING PROGRAM HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE IN MULTIPLE CITIES ALL OVER THE PLACE. I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND COMMUNITY-BASED HAZING FOR THE BURNER LAUNCHER AND THIS ENHANCED HAZING PROTOCOL. [LAUGHTER] THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING. >> NO. THAT A LICENSED PERSON JUST LIKE GPD. CITIZENS DON'T CARRY GUNS. IT'S JUST THEY PATROL. >> A NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH COMMUNITY-BASED HAZING PROGRAM IS ABSOLUTELY DOABLE, INCLUDING THAT TRAINING TOGETHER AND BEING ABLE TO GO AND SPEAK AT A HOA MEETING OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT IS ABSOLUTELY DOABLE. >> AGAIN, ON A WEBSITE OR ON A SOCIAL MEDIA PAGE THAT YOU ADMINISTER AND CONTROL, PUT IT OUT THERE. HEY, WE ARE TAKING VOLUNTEERS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO TRAIN ON OUR HAZING PROGRAM TO HELP CONTROL THE POPULATION OR CONTROL THE ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEMS. >> THE WAVE WATCHER PROGRAM THAT THE BEACH PATROL HAS, THEY HAVE VOLUNTEERS THAT SIMPLY ARE TRAINED, FIRST OF ALL, AND SIMPLY JUST WALK DOWN THE BEACHES WATCHING, IF THERE'S ANYTHING, THEY CALL THE BEACH PATROL. [02:40:02] >> OR TURTLE WATCHERS. IT'S THE SAME THING. >> VERY MUCH SO. >> BUT IF WE HAZE THEM FROM EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO GO SOMEWHERE. >> YES. >> JUST LIKE THEY TRAP RACCOONS ALL THE TIME ON THE ISLAND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY BRING THEM DOWN, BUT FOR THE LONGEST TIME, THEY WERE BRINGING THEM TO AN INCORPORATED BIZORIA COUNTY. IT WAS NOT UNCOMMON TO BE GOING OVER THE SAN LUIS BRIDGE. I SAW THIS MYSELF ONE NIGHT, THERE'S ALL THESE WHITE DOTS COMING TOWARDS US. I WISH I WOULD HAVE TAKEN MY CAMERA OUT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE WENT VIRAL. IT WAS 100 RACCOONS COMING BACK. THE GUY WHO COLLECTS THE TOLLS SAID, THIS HAPPENS EVERY NIGHT. >> THAT WAS DUE TO THE PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES OF THE PARK BOARD BRINGING THOSE [LAUGHTER] TOURISTS BACK TO THE ISLAND. >> THAT WAS FUNNY. [LAUGHTER] THAT WAS GOOD. >> BRIAN WOULD HAVE BEEN PROUD OF THAT. >> I'M GOING TO WRAP UP OUR THOUGHTS, BUT BOB, GO AHEAD. DAVID, YOU NEED TO DO SOME. >> FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO COMMEND YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO DO THE RESEARCH, GET THE DATA, AND THEN LISTEN TO EVERYBODY ABOUT ALL THIS AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. TOO MANY TIMES WE'RE JUST GIVEN PROBLEMS, NOT SOLUTIONS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, AND I THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD THING YOU'RE DOING THERE. IT'S FOR A GOOD CAUSE. MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, CHARLYN AND ALEX TOUCHED ON THIS. SURELY, THERE'S OTHER PLACES THAT HAVE WILD ANIMAL ISSUES, INCORPORATING WILD ANIMALS INTO THEIR COMMUNITIES. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHERE THIS FALLS ALONG THE LINES OF BEST PRACTICES OR BENCHMARKS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. OTHER PEOPLE USING THIS HAZING DEVICE? >> NOT THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND. THAT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO BE US SETTING THE STANDARD. AS FAR AS UTILIZING THIS AS A TOOL, THE GOAL THERE WOULD BE TO DEVELOP IT ALONGSIDE, GALVESTON HAS THE BENEFIT OF A RESEARCH AND CONSERVATION TEAM OF EXPERTS THAT I CAN RELY ON. I'VE ALREADY BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE TEAM OF RESEARCHERS THAT I SPEAK WITH REGULARLY WITH THE GOAL OF ASSISTING IN DEVELOPING A PROPERLY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT TOUCHES ON THINGS LIKE THE EDUCATION, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPONENT. IF WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND AND EMPLOY BERNA LAUNCHERS, I WANT TO BE ABLE TO BE PROUD THAT THAT STANDARD WAS SET IN GALVESTON, AND DEVELOP IT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT COULD ALSO BE USED AS TCO CREDITS. IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK ANY OF OUR OFFICERS TO SPEND ANY OF THEIR VALUABLE TIME ON SUCH A PROJECT, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST GET THEIR TRAINING HOURS FOR IT, ENHANCING THEIR SKILL SET AND THEIR ABILITY TO RESPOND TO EVEN SOMETHING AS CRAZY AS COYOTES, BECAUSE THAT THEN MAKES IT MUCH MORE SCALABLE AS ANOTHER PIECE OF OUR PROGRAM THAT CAN BE STOLEN BY OTHER CITIES AS SO MUCH OF OUR MANAGEMENT PLAN ALREADY HAS. >> YEAH. SOMEBODY ALSO TOUCHED ON THE POINT THAT THESE PARTICULAR COYOTES HERE BROUGHT A LOT OF ATTENTION TO GALVESTON. I KNOW IT'S BEEN IN THE NEW YORK TIMES. IT'S BEEN IN TEXAS MONTHLY. IT'S BEEN ALL AROUND THE WORLD. THERE'S A LOT OF HITS ON THE WEBSITE. IT'S REALLY DRAWN A LOT OF ATTENTION TO GALVESTON BECAUSE OF ITS UNIQUE NATURE OF THE COYOTES. BUT ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, IF I HEARD CORRECTLY, YOU'RE GOING TO BE HIRING FOUR PEOPLE VERY SOON? >> THERE IS MYSELF, AND THEN THERE WILL BE THREE OTHER OFFICERS. >> SOON WE'LL HAVE A TOTAL OF FOUR IN THE DEPARTMENT. >> YES, SIR. THAT WILL BE A FIRST FOR US. >> THEN YOU GUYS WILL HAVE ALL THIS HAZING TRAINING AND BE ABLE TO PRIORITIZE YOUR CALLS, I GUESS. >> ULTIMATELY, THE GAME PLAN IS WE'RE GOING TO SWITCH ANIMAL CONTROLS HOURS SLIGHTLY. I'M JUMPING THE GUN A LITTLE BIT ON THIS, BUT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH ROBERT SIMMONS, AND ONCE WE HAVE FOUR OFFICERS IN PLAY, OBVIOUSLY, OUR UNIT IS SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, 24 HOURS A DAY. THERE'S NO SLEEPING ON THIS JOB. ONCE THAT HAPPENS AND WE HAVE FOUR OFFICERS, I AM HOPING TO HAVE A MORNING AND AN EVENING SHIFT, NOT AN ALL NIGHT SHIFT. WE ARE NOT THERE YET WITH FOUR PEOPLE. THAT'S A STRETCH. BUT I'M HOPING THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE EVENINGS TO RELIEVE THE POLICE OFFICERS FROM DOING SOME OF OUR WORK AS WELL SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO CALL US OR INTERRUPT THEIR EVENING SHIFTS. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT RELIEVES MANY HOURS IN THE DAY. MY ONLY CONCERN WITH HAVING FOUR OFFICERS AND A MORNING SHIFT AND EVENING SHIFT IS THERE'S JUST ONE OF YOU. THERE'S ONE OF YOU TO DO A HAZING, [02:45:02] WHICH WORKS OUT FINE UNLESS IT DOES COME TO THE POINT WHERE WE IMPLEMENT THIS LESS LETHAL PLAN. WE WILL NEED MORE THAN JUST ONE OFFICER. IF I AM DISCHARGING THIS BURNER, I NEED FOR THE NEIGHBORS BECAUSE PERHAPS I'VE BEEN TO YOUR HOUSE LATELY THAT THEIR FLOOR IS MISSING. THE WALLS ARE MISSING. I'VE BEEN GOING OVER THERE BECAUSE I KEEP GETTING REPORTS FROM THE NEIGHBOR, AND I HAZE THEM. THE SECOND I WALK UP, THEY'RE RUNNING OFF. BUT IF I WAS GOING TO TAKE THIS TO THE NEXT LEVEL, I DON'T WANT MRS. GEORGIA OVER HERE AND HER DOG OUTSIDE. I DON'T WANT MR. JONES OVER THERE OUTSIDE WITH HIS CHILDREN WHILE I'M HAZING THESE COYOTES AND TAKING IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL. I'M GOING TO NEED TO HAVE SOME MORE SUPPORT. IF IT'S 10 O'CLOCK IN THE EVENING WHEN I'M DOING THIS, WHO'S COMING WITH ME? I'M GOING TO NEED SOME BACKUP, AND THAT'S WHERE. >> CALL ME OUT AND MY HUSBAND. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'S PERFECT. BUT THAT'S WHERE I DO NEED THE SUPPORT OF GPD. THAT'S WHERE HAVING SOME OF THEIR DAYTIME OFFICERS, SOME OF THEIR EVENING OFFICERS. I DON'T WANT TO WASTE THEIR TIME. THEY DON'T WANT TO WASTE MY TIME. THEY HAD TO CALL ME LAST NIGHT, AND THEY WERE APOLOGIZING UP AND DOWN. I WAS LIKE, I'M HERE, MAN. THAT'S MY JOB. WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER AS A CITY, AS A COUNCIL, AS A COMMUNITY. WE'RE ALL HERE TO DO THE SAME THINGS. I GOT A CALL THE OTHER DAY, Y'ALL. THIS IS JUST WILDLIFE IN GENERAL. THERE WAS AN OTTER ON THE BEACH. WELL, MY RESPONSE IS, DID YOU WANT ME TO GO SWIM WITH IT? I WAS ASKED TO GO REMOVE SOME WILD RABBITS OUT OF SOMEONE'S YARD BECAUSE IT'S INTERFERING WITH THEIR GARDEN. I UNDERSTAND THAT WILD LIFE CAN BE A PAIN. I REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH I CAN DO. AGAIN, EAST END, WEST END WITH 1-4 OFFICERS ON A DAY, THERE'S A LOT, AND I NEED A LITTLE BIT OF HELP. THAT'S WHY WE'RE PROPOSING THAT GPD STEPS IN AND HELPS US WITH THIS BURNER. >> I'M GOING TO SUMMARIZE. DAVID, YOU HAD SOME TO SAY. >> I HAD A CLARIFICATION AND THEN I WAS GOING TO SUMMARIZE, BUT I WILL ABSOLUTELY ALLOW YOU THAT ARM. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THREE NEW OFFICERS, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THREE NEW FTES OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE COLLABORATION WITH EXISTING STAFF? >> THERE'S NO EXISTING STAFF. >> YOU UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU SAID YOU NEED THE ENGAGEMENT OF GPD, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, ARE WE HIRING THREE NEW OFFICERS TO SUPPORT YOUR TEAM? >> NOT GPD OFFICERS, ANIMAL CONTROL. >> ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS. GOOD. HAVE THOSE ALREADY BEEN BUDGETED AND THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO THE HIRING FREEZE? >> WHAT I DID WAS IS THAT SHE HAD THREE FULL TIME POSITIONS, AND I'M ALLOWED TO OVER HIRE BECAUSE THESE ARE SUCH VITAL POSITIONS, AND THERE'S ALSO UNFORTUNATELY TURNOVER IN THESE POSITIONS BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES ANIMAL LOVERS ARE DRAWN TO THESE POSITIONS, AND SOME OF THE JOBS THEY HAVE TO DO DON'T LEND THEMSELVES TO BEING AN ANIMAL LOVER. WHAT I'VE DONE IS, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE'VE ALSO DONE WITH PD IN THE PAST IS WE'VE ALLOWED OVER HIRE. THAT WAY, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE IN A POSITION LIKE WE WERE WHEN WE INHERITED THE DEPARTMENT OVER IN THE MARSHAL'S OFFICE OF JUST BEING ONE PERSON. >> JUST A QUICK CLARIFICATION, I WANT TO MAKE SURE. >> RIGHT NOW, WE'VE OVER HIRED ONE. IF SOMEBODY COMES TO ME AND THEY FOUND A JAM UP PERSON, WE'LL OVER HIRE TWO. BUT, NO, THIS IS NOT SUBJECT BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY UNIT. WE'RE NOT SUBJECTING THOSE TO THE HIRE. >> GREAT. FANTASTIC. MAYOR, IF YOU'D ALLOW ME TO SUMMARIZE AND THEN PLEASE FILL OUT. >> WHAT I HEAR VERY CLEARLY, AND I THINK YOU HEAR VERY CLEAR SUPPORT OF THE OPERATION PATH. I THINK. >> GOOD NAME. >> YEAH. IT'S A GREAT NAME. >> THERE ARE KEY COMPONENTS TO THIS THAT I WOULD ASK THAT Y'ALL EITHER HAVE BEEN MENTIONED FROM VARIOUS COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M GOING TO TRY TO SUMMARIZE THOSE FOR YOU, PLEASE. ONE, THAT EDUCATION IS A PRIORITY FOR THE ANIMAL CONTROL UNIT. TO THAT END, I WOULD ASK A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE, GET WITH PUBLIC INFORMATION, AND DEVELOP AN EDUCATION CAMPAIGN, EITHER IT BE STATIC INFORMATION OR REPEATABLE INFORMATION TOUCHES WITH OUR CITIZENS. LOOK INTO DEVELOPING A COMMUNITY-BASED HAZING PROGRAM AND TRAINING VOLUNTEERS SO THAT WE CAN DISSEMINATE THIS INFORMATION DOWN INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND HAVE VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE WILLING TO HELP WITH HAZING AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. TO COUNCILMEMBER ROBB'S RECOMMENDATION, PUT THINGS IN THE WATER BILL. TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WE COMMUNICATE THIS INFORMATION TO OUR RESIDENTS. >> THAT'S AN IMMEDIATE ONE. >> THEN I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DEVELOP BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT OPERATION PAVLO. I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO START OUR BUDGETING PROCESS HERE IN APRIL, MAY OR SO. WE NEED TO KNOW FROM YOUR TEAM IN ORDER TO ENSURE SUCCESS OF THIS OR HOPE TO MAXIMIZE SUCCESS, WHAT DO WE NEED TO BE CONSIDERING FROM COUNSEL IN TERMS OF OUR CAPITAL EXPENDITURES? [02:50:02] THAT INCLUDES BOTH CAPEX FOR PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT AND/OR STAFF AND/OR TRAINING COSTS. THEN FINALLY, HELP US LOOK AT DRAFTING A WILDLIFE ORDINANCE. IN THE VERY LAST SENTENCE OF THE FIRST PAGE, YOU VERY CLEARLY SAY, THIS ACT OF FEEDING WILDLIFE SHOULD BE INCLUDED AS A PROHIBITIVE ACT IN OUR ORDINANCES. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> Y'ALL KNOW OUR ORDINANCE IS RELATED TO THIS BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS. IF THERE ARE ORDINANCE CHANGES THAT YOU FEEL ARE COMPLIMENTARY WITH THE EXECUTION OF OPERATION PAVLO, PLEASE DRAFT THEM UP AND SEND THEM TO US FOR CONSIDERATION. >> DO YOU SPEAK TO THE VETS? DO THEY REPORT ANY BITES? >> YES. THEY ARE INSTRUCTED TO REPORT ANY KIND OF BITE TO US. >> REGARDLESS. >> YES. >> I'LL CLARIFY THAT. BITES TO A PERSON. >> NOT TO AN ANIMAL. >> NO. DOG VERSUS DOG, DOG VERSUS CAT, THERE'S NOT A LEGAL REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR THOSE. WE FIND OUT ABOUT THEM NONETHELESS. >> THAT COULD BE A ILLEGAL REPORTING REQUIREMENT IN A WILDLIFE ORDINANCE FOR VETERINARIANS TO REPORT EITHER WILDLIFE VERSUS PET OR SOMETHING OF THAT. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD WANT TO SEE. >> EXTRA LAYER DATA COLLECTION. >> I DO AGREE. YOU SUMMARIZE THINGS BEAUTIFULLY, DAVID, THANK YOU. I'D ADD JUST A FEW LITTLE THINGS ON THAT. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO GET A REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL HERE. LET'S GET YOUR PERSONNEL HIRED. LET'S GET YOUR EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGN TOGETHER. WOULD YOU SEND THE INFORMATION INDIVIDUALLY TO EACH COUNCIL MEMBER ON YOUR EDUCATIONAL MATERIAL? I'D LIKE TO GET THAT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY. EACH ONE OF US AS NEWSLETTERS, HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS. WE CAN TAKE THAT MESSAGE FORWARD FOR YOU. I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO ALSO. I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS WORKS. THIS IS OUT WITHOUT NOT UNDER OUR PURVIEW. BUT IF YOU COULD WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER, AS I KNOW YOU WILL TO SEE ABOUT THE SUPPORT OF GPD IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER. I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THAT LOOKED AT IF WE COULD. BUT THIS REPORT BACK, LET'S GIVE IT, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY IN THREE MONTHS, YOU COULD GIVE US A REPORT BACK WHERE YOU STAND WITH ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MENTIONED BY COUNCILMAN? >> I WOULD SAY THAT WE CAN DEFINITELY PUT THAT TOGETHER WITHIN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS. >> IF YOU WOULD, WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED A WORKSHOP ITEM ON THAT, BUT WHAT WE COULD, I WANT THE COUNCIL TO RECEIVE THAT INFORMATION SO THAT WE CAN STAY UP TO DATE ON THAT, SO THAT WE CAN GUIDE OUR CONSTITUENTS ON THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY. I WOULD ADD THAT IN BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THAT PACKET IS ULTIMATELY DELIVERED, IF ANY COUNCIL MEMBER HAS QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS, SOMETHING THAT, OH, YEAH, I WANT TO MAKE SURE IS INCLUDED, PLEASE REACH OUT SO THAT WE CAN ADD WHATEVER THAT ADDITIONAL ACTION ITEM MAY BE. >> WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO GET AHOLD OF YOU? IN YOUR EMAIL IS YOUR NUMBER. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO GIVE IT OUT. >> WHY WOULD YOU EMAIL RIGHT NOW? BECAUSE THAT IS JUST CHECKED IT LIKE THREE OR FOUR IN THE MORNING. WHEN I JUST WAKE UP AND GO, BING, I HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF ALL OF THESE THINGS. >> IF YOU WORK WITH CITY STAFF, WITH BRIAN AND GET THAT INFORMATION, HOW WE CAN CONTACT YOU AND GET IT TO COUNSEL ON THIS, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. >> THANK Y'ALL. >> INFORMATION IS ON OUR WEBSITE. WE TALK ABOUT UNSUNG HEROES HERE AND THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE WORKING IN ANIMAL CONTROL ARE JUST THAT. THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU DO. APPRECIATE IT. >> I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR SOME MORE FROM YOU. >> FROM ME? >> NO, FROM FRUPO AT A LATER TIME REGARDING YOUR INCIDENCES YOU JUST SPOKE OF. >> I DO. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, JOSH. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. >> APPRECIATE THAT. >> THANK YOU, GUYS. >> COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO THROW OUT THE IDEA. IT'S FIVE AFTER 12, WE'RE IN OUR THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA. WE'RE MOVING RIGHT ALONG. I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND TO GET OUR REPORT ON THE PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE. I ALSO RECOMMEND THAT WE GET THROUGH ITEM 3D. I THINK THESE WILL BE FAIRLY QUICK. THEN LET'S BREAK FOR LUNCH. LET'S TAKE ABOUT A 15, 20-MINUTE BREAK FOR LUNCH, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK. [3.C. Pelican Island Bridge Update ( D Buckley/C Brown/M Robb - 15 min )] WOULD YOU READ ITEM 3C, PLEASE, JANELLE? >> 3C. PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE UPDATE. >> DAN, I KNOW YOU HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THIS. YOU'VE BEEN TALKING WITH MYSELF AND COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. [02:55:01] GO AHEAD AND START OFF, DAN, GIVE US AN UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE ON THAT. >> I'LL BE GLAD TO MAYOR. SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, WE'VE CONTINUED DOWN THE ROAD ON THE AFA. WE BELIEVE WE HAVE AN INSTRUMENT THAT THE CITY IS READY TO SIGN, ASSUMING CERTAIN CONDITIONS ARE MET. TEXTDOT'S AGREED TO IT, WE'VE AGREED TO IT, SO WE THINK WE'RE THERE. I'LL LET COUNCILMEMBER ROBB SPEAK TO THE FUNDING REQUEST. SHE'S GOING TOMORROW TO HGAC TO MAKE A PRESENTATION FOR A REQUEST FOR SOME BACKUP FUNDING THAT WE'RE SHORT TO BUILD THE BRIDGE AND TO MAKE THE WHOLE PROCESS WORK, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A SUCCESSFUL. TASK TO MARS, I'LL LET COUNCILMEMBER ROBB SPOKE TO THAT. THE ONLY OTHER ISSUE THAT HAS TRANSPIRED SINCE WE LAST MET WAS COUNCILMEMBER ROBB ASKED ME TO GET FROM DON WHY? >> IN THE COUNTY. >> I THINK I'D PRAISE THAT LASTED, BUT I'LL BRING YOU BACK. WHY THE FUNDING THE LOCAL FUNDING IS REQUIRED. I THINK YOU ALL GOT THIS MEMORANDUM YESTERDAY. AGAIN, THAT'S DON'S OPINION. I GOT IT TO COUNCILMEMBER ROBB, AND THAT IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN OPERATING UNDER FROM THE STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE IS THAT'S REQUIRED. WE DON'T HAVE ANY LATITUDE OUTSIDE OF THIS, AND WE FOLLOW THE GUIDANCE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. THE OTHER ISSUE BRIAN ASKED ME TO BRING UP, AND I THINK I ALLUDED TO IT LAST TIME WAS $7 MILLION THAT'S SHOWING COMING FROM GALVESTON COUNTY IS $5 MILLION COMING FROM GALVESTON COUNTY BECAUSE THERE WAS 2 MILLION THAT WAS FOR ANOTHER PROJECT THEY WERE GIVING CREDIT FOR IF THEY SIGNED THE AFA. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE SIGNING THE AFA SO THAT IS GOING TO FALL BACK TO LOCAL FUNDING, AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR ALTERNATIVES FOR THAT 2 MILLION. >> COUNCILMEMBER ROBB HAD ASKED ME TO REACH OUT TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME INTIMATION THAT POSSIBLY THIS COULD BE COVERED IN THE FUTURE COUNTY BOND ISSUE AS AN AD. THE COUNTY ENGINEER, AND I'M LOSING TRACK OF TIME, IT WAS YESTERDAY THAT THEY HAD ALREADY APPROVED THE AMOUNTS AND SENT THAT THE COMMISSIONERS COURT HAD, DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE CITY FROM USING ITS PORTION OF THE COUNTY'S BOND ISSUE TOWARDS THE BRIDGE FOR THE $2 MILLION, BUT IT WOULD SET ASIDE THE OTHER PROJECTS THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE DONE WITH THE COUNTY BOND ISSUE. THAT'S POLICY DECISION BY COUNCIL. >> THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MAY COME TO COUNCIL ON THIS. ALSO, I'M NOT SURE ON THIS, BUT THIS FUNDING SHORTFALL OF THE 2 MILLION WE MAY BE COMING IDC TO DISCUSS THAT COMING UP HERE VERY SHORTLY. I THINK THERE'S POSSIBLY WAYS THAT IDC POSSIBLY COULD ASSIST WITH THIS ALSO. BUT WE'RE GOING TO HIT THAT. WE'LL MAKE UP THAT. TOMORROW, AS DAN MENTIONED, MARIE IS GOING TO TALK TO US IN A SECOND ABOUT HDAC, THE TRANSPORTATION POLICY COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO GO UP AND AT THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AND REPRESENT THE CITY AND MAKE A STATEMENT IN MARIE'S PRESENTING WITH TEXTDOT. GO AHEAD, MARIE. >> YES. AFTER OUR MARATHON MEETING THAT IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SINCE WE'VE COVERED FOUR ITEMS AND IT'S NOON AND HOPEFULLY, I'LL GET TO ACTUALLY DRIVE HOME BETWEEN COUNCIL AND WORKSHOP. I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF DRIVING BACK UP TO HOUSTON TOMORROW TO BE THERE AT 9:34. THE TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE. WE ARE ON THE AGENDA. IT'S SIMPLY A PRESENTATION. IT'S NOT A VOTE TOMORROW. I AM DOING THE OPENING PART OF THE PRESENTATION AND VERONA FROM TEXTDOT IS DOING THE SECONDARY PART, GOING THROUGH THE DETAILS AND THE ENGINEERING AND SO FORTH. OF COURSE, AS ANY GOOD ELECTED PERSON WOULD DO, I HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS PROJECT WITH THE FOLKS AROUND THE TABLE WHEN WE NEED THEIR SUPPORT AND PEOPLE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT. THEY UNDERSTAND THE NEED AND SO FORTH. EVERYBODY SHOULD STILL PRAY BECAUSE IT IS A CONSIDERABLE ASK THAT WE ARE ASKING FOR. >> PRESENTATION ON, DOES THAT MEAN THAT WOULD BE NEXT MONTH? >> EITHER NEXT MONTH OR THE FOLLOWING MONTH. >> I BELIEVE SO. >> WE HAVE A LOT OF LOCAL SUPPORT LETTERS FROM LEGISLATORS. >> YEAH. WE HAVE NOT ONLY LOCAL, WE HAVE REGIONAL, WE HAVE NATIONALLY, WE HAVE RANDY WEBBER, STATE SENATE-WISE WE HAVE CREIGHTON AND MIDDLETON AND ALSO ALVARADO. HOUSE-WISE WE HAVE TERRY, [03:00:02] PAUL, BARRY, WHO AM I FORGETTING? BEYNON, WHICH IS KEY BECAUSE IF WE SHOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE STATE FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS, HE IS THE CHAIR OF APPROPRIATIONS. THEN WE ALSO HAVE A JOINT RESOLUTION STARTING FROM THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, BATRIM, BAYHUP, WHICH IS THE BARRY HOUSTON PARTNERSHIP, THE HOUSTON PORTS REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP. AS WELL AS I THINK THERE'S ONE OR TWO OTHER PEOPLE, WHICH IS KEY THAT IT IS SO WIDELY SUPPORTED. THERE ARE 32 PEOPLE THAT MAKE UP THE TPC, AND WOULD BE NICE FOR US TO HAVE A UNANIMOUS VOTE, BUT WE NEED AT LEAST 50 FLUS WIDE. >> I THINK MICHELLE AND I ARE GOING TO BE DRIVING UP TOGETHER. MICHELLE, THE SUPPORT LETTER YOU WANTED ME TO SIGN, HAS THAT BEEN FINISHED AS YET? >> [INAUDIBLE] >> SOUNDS GOOD. VERY GOOD. WE'LL HAVE A REPORT BACK TO YOU, OF COURSE, JANELLE. WE NEED TO PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT MONTH'S WORKSHOP. GREATLY APPRECIATE. THIS TAKES A VILLAGE TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN, AND IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE INVOLVED HERE. WE'LL GET A GOOD READ OF THE ROOM, I THINK TOMORROW. WON'T WE, MARIE? >> YEAH. >> ON THAT AT THE HCAC LEVEL. I THINK YOUR ASK IS WHAT? A HUNDRED AND THIRTY-NINE MILLION? >> YEAH. >> IT'S NOT A SMALL AMOUNT, BUT FROM HDAC TERMS, SOMETIMES THAT IS A SMALLER AMOUNT. ANY QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? ITEM 3D, [3.D. Discussion of the City of Galveston Comprehensive Plan Update – Plan Framework and Timeline (T. Tietjens/ P. Milburn - 10 min)] PLEASE. THANK YOU, DAN. >> ITEM 3D. DISCUSSION OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, PLAN FRAMEWORK AND TIMELINE. >> WHILE THEY'RE COMING COMING FORWARD, COUNCIL, HAVE YOU SENT IN YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR YOUR APPOINTMENTS? >> YES. WE'VE RECEIVED ALL OF THEM. >> GOOD. >> BEFORE I GET STARTED, TIM PAGINS, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND PETE MILBURN ALSO IS HERE. >> COME ON UP. I HAVE TO SEE. YOU'RE NOT GETTING AWAY FROM US, PETE. >> BUT IN REVIEWING WHAT EVERYBODY SENT IN, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY DUPLICATIONS IN YOUR PRIMARIES SO YOU SHOULD BE GOOD TO GO TONIGHT. >> VERY GOOD. >> YEAH. I DIDN'T KNOW HOW. >> I KNOW. I'M AMAZED. >> I AM TOO. >> HUNDRED PERCENT COMPLIANT. >> YES, ABSOLUTELY. AT THE LAST REGULAR MEETING, WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW WE'RE PROGRESSING THROUGH THIS PROJECT AND THE TIMELINE OF GLO, THE CONTENT OF THE SCOPE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHICH WE REALLY CAN'T HIT YET UNTIL THE SCOPE IS BEFORE YOU. I WANTED TO GO OVER WHERE WE ARE ON THAT TIMELINE. THIS WON'T BE AS DEEP A SESSION AS I'M SURE WE'LL GET INTO NEXT MONTH. >> THE TIMELINE IS STILL MURKY WITH THE GLO FUNDING? >> IT IS A LITTLE MURKY. YES, SIR. LET ME PASS A FEW OF THESE OUT. >> SURPRISE, SURPRISE. >> WE HAVE THAT BID AWARD PENDING FROM RFP 2406, WHICH AT THAT POINT, WE RECOMMENDED THE CONSULTANT HOLD THEIR PRICE FOR UP TO A YEAR, AND THEY AGREED TO THAT. OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO AWARD OF THE GLO RESILIENT COMMUNITIES PROGRAM. THE LAST CONVERSATION I HAD WITH REGINA EARLS WITH THE GLO, SHE SAID THAT WE ARE SENDING OUT RFIS TO EVERYBODY THAT APPLIED FOR THAT FUNDING. WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET. BUT SHE SAID, LIKELY, THE AWARD CONTRACT WITH YOU ALL AT THE CITY LEVEL WOULD BE PROBABLY THREE TO FOUR MONTHS LATER. THAT LETS US KNOW WHEN OUR TIME FRAME IS TO KICK OFF THE PROJECT IF THAT TIME FRAME THAT SHE TOLD US HOLDS. OBVIOUSLY IN THE INTERIM, WE'RE TRYING TO GET AS MUCH DONE AS WE CAN. >> WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS WHAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA THIS MEETING, BUT THE NEXT MEETING, WE WOULD PROPOSE TO BRING BACK THAT DISCUSSION OF THE SCOPE [03:05:02] AND THEN HAVE THAT AS AN AWARD FOR ACTION THAT EVENING, IF YOU ALL DEEM THAT IT'S UP TO SPEED. >> THAT WILL BE THE CONSULTANT'S PROPOSAL? >> YES, SIR. THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION ABOUT OBVIOUSLY ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT BEYOND THE SCOPE IF THAT BECOMES AN ITEM THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER. THEN WE HAD A FAIRLY LENGTHY MEETING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT THAT, HOW THAT WOULD OCCUR. MICHAEL WAS VERY GOOD WITH US ABOUT TELLING US OUR PARAMETERS, WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO. IF THERE WERE ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT BEYOND THE SCOPE THAT WAS NEEDED OR RECOMMENDED BY YOU ALL, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO A CHANGE ORDER UP TO 25% THEREAFTER. OF COURSE, THE OTHER OPTION TO THAT IS WE COULD REBID THE ENTIRE THING IF IT GOT TO MORE THAN THAT. THAT WOULD REALLY BE OUR ONLY TWO OPTIONS. AM I PRETTY MUCH CORRECT IN THAT MICHAEL? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> TWENTY FIVE PERCENT OF WHAT AMOUNT? DO WE KNOW THAT YET? >> OF THE ENTIRE BID AMOUNT. THE $300,000 PROJECT. >> WAIT, HE'S COMING UP. >> LET ME GIVE YOU CLARIFICATION ON IT. >> COME. >> HELLO, CITY MANAGER. I GET A CHANCE TO SIT AT THE TABLE. WELL, STANDING AS IT IS. [LAUGHTER] THERE IS A RULE OF 25%. IT'S DOLLAR VALUE OR IF YOU CHANGE THE SCOPE MORE THAN 25%. IF YOU CHANGE THE DRASTIC SCOPE OF WHAT YOU CURRENTLY ADVERTISE, THEN TECHNICALLY, YOU SHOULD PUT IT BACK DOWN THE STREET. BUT WHAT WE USUALLY LOOK AT IS, YOU'RE CHANGING THE DOLLAR VALUE BY MOVING 25% CONTRACT DOLLAR VALUE. THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONTRACT DOLLAR VALUE AND THE SCOPE IN THE RFP PROCESS. IF YOU'RE CHANGING THE SCOPE IN THE RFP PROCESS MORE THAN 25%, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO, OR YOU SHOULD PUT IT OUT TO RE-ADVERTISE. IF YOU'RE CHANGING THE CONTRACT VALUE OF MORE THAN 25% BY LAW, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT IT IN THERE. >> THAT'S 25% OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE CONSULTANT? >> WHATEVER CONTRACT YOU SIGNED WITH THE VENDOR OF CHOICE, WHO'S AWARDED. IF THAT CONTRACT'S $100,000 AND YOU CHANGE IT MORE THAN 25,000, YOU DON'T DO IT. >> WHAT I'M GETTING AROUND TO IS, WE HAVE A $300,000 GRANT PROJECT, BUT SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO PAY FOR CITY STAFF, ISN'T IT OR SOME OTHER THINGS? [OVERLAPPING] >> IT IS. JUST REMEMBER, IT'S IMMATERIAL WHERE THE MONEY'S COMING FROM IS THE CONTRACT VALUE. >> OKAY. >> BUT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY WAS, I GUESS, REALLY, IF ALL THAT 300,000 WAS GOING TO THE CONSULTANT. >> MARIE, YOU HAD A QUESTION? >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY, HOW ABOUT THEM EAGLES, BABY? >> [LAUGHTER] I WAS GOING TO WEAR GREEN FOR YOU, BY THE WAY. >> [OVERLAPPING] WHEN I WENT FOR THE WEEKEND TO PHILLY, I WAS GOING TO BUY YOU A SHIRT IN THE AIRPORT, BUT THEY WANTED $167. >> I'LL TAKE THE CHEESE CAKE. FORGET THAT. I'LL JUST TAKE THE CHEESE CAKE. >> YOU GOT IT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> APPRECIATE THAT, MICHAEL. IN THAT, WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR THE TIMING OF WHEN THE GLO AWARD WOULD LIKELY COME. IF WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT AT THE NEXT MEETING WITH THE SCOPE, AND THEN IN APRIL, IF ANY ADJUSTMENT IS NECESSARY, WE COULD WORK THROUGH THAT. MAY, AN OPEN MONTH TO DO WHATEVER ELSE WE MIGHT WANT TO DO, IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IN ADVANCE THAT CAN BE DONE. I IMAGINE TALKING ABOUT THE SCOPE IS PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE MORE TIME, CERTAINLY THAN THIS DISCUSSION TODAY. THEN BEYOND THAT, OF COURSE, RECALL THAT THIS PROGRAM IS SET UP FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PORTION AND THEN THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PORTION, AND THE ENTIRE THING IS 24 MONTHS. WE ALLOCATED 12 MONTHS FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 12 MONTHS TO GET THE ORDINANCES UP TO SPEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHATEVER RESILIENCE MEASURES ARE PUT OUT THERE, AND THEN GET THOSE THROUGH ALL THE COMMITTEES THAT NEED TO SEE THEM, COMMISSIONS, ETC., AND BACK TO YOU, AND THEN ADOPTED WITHIN THAT SECOND 12 MONTH PERIOD. >> TIM, I HAVE A QUESTION. I GOT THAT FROM PETE ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GLO ON THIS. IT MENTIONED 24 MONTHS. DOES THAT INCLUDE THE IMPLEMENTATION ALSO? >> IT DOES. >> IT'S GOING TO FOLLOW WHAT YOU MENTIONED? [03:10:02] >> YES. >> THAT WOULD MEET ALL THEIR REQUIREMENTS? >> IT WOULD. RECALL ALSO THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS DONE WITHIN THAT 24 MONTHS OR IT'S A PAYBACK SITUATION. THAT'S THE PLAN AND TIME FRAME IN GENERAL. WE'RE CERTAINLY HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT PETE SENT OR ANY OTHER ISSUES ALONG THOSE LINES. I KNOW THAT THE SCOPE THAT GLO SETS OUT IS BASICALLY 5% FOR YOUR PRE-CONDITIONS, AND THEN THERE'S THREE SEGMENTS THERE THAT ARE 30% AND THE 5% WRAP UP. THAT'S HOW IT'S DIVIDED OUT AS A PERCENTAGE BASIS. >> QUESTIONS, COMMENTS ON THIS? YES, BOB. >> I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE APPOINTING 14TH STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS NOW. I KNOW THE LAST TWO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISIONS WE'VE DONE, WE HAD ONE AT 37 STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS AT 2011 AND 29 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AT THE ONE OF 2001. WELL, I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHERE THE 14 CAME FROM AND WE DON'T REALLY KNOW THE SCOPE YET OF THE CONSULTANT, SO WE REALLY REALLY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT CAPACITY THERE IS TO HANDLE A LARGER COMMITTEE THAT WOULD HAVE MORE REPRESENTATION. BUT I GUESS WE'LL FIND THAT OUT IN MARCH, WHAT THEIR SCOPE IS? >> YES, SIR. AS SOON AS WE CAN GET THAT LEGALLY DELIVERED TO YOU FOR THAT CONSIDERATION. >> THEN IN MARCH THEN, WE COULD ACTUALLY MORE CLOSELY SCRUTINIZE THE SCOPE AND WHAT PUBLIC REPRESENTATION WE HAVE. MY WHOLE GOAL IN THIS IS TO HAVE THE BEST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WE CAN HAVE. I THOUGHT THE LAST ONE WAS A REALLY GOOD ONE. THAT TAKES A LOT OF BROAD RANGE OF REPRESENTATION. AS IT IS, RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON 14 MEMBERS AND PETE SENT OUT A SUGGESTED LIST OF REPRESENTATION, THAT THING. IT HAD, I DON'T KNOW, 17 OR 18 PEOPLE, AND I DID MY OWN LIST, IT HAD ABOUT 23 OR 24 DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE CRITICAL TO THE SUCCESS OF THE ISLAND. THOSE ARE ALL GREAT. I THINK THEY ALL NEED REPRESENTATION. BUT WHAT THAT DOES IS IT LEAVES OUT THE ORDINARY CITIZEN, THE ORDINARY RESIDENT THAT SHOULD HAVE A SPACE ON THAT COMMITTEE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO ADDRESS IT RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO DESCRIBE MY THINKING PROCESS ON THIS, HOW TO GET THE BEST ONE POSSIBLE. IF WE UNDERSTAND THAT SCOPE, IF WE WANT TO INCREASE THAT REPRESENTATION, WE CAN DO SO FOR NOT MORE THAN $75,000 WITHOUT GOING BACK TO THE BID PROCESS? >> CORRECT. THAT'S ACCURATE. >> GOOD. THANKS. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? >> ONE MORE THING I FORGOT. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T REALLY REALIZE THIS PROJECT WASN'T GOING TO KICK OFF UNTIL JULY 2025. I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHAT'S THE URGENCY IN APPOINTING THIS COMMITTEE TODAY IF WHEN WE GET MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCOPE, WE MAY HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THIS COMMITTEE THE SIZE OF THE COMMITTEE? >> WELL, IT WAS A RECOMMENDATION BY OUR INTENDED CONSULTANT. THEY ACTUALLY SAT WITH US ON THOSE NUMBERS AND THE SEQUENCE. AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT PREVIOUSLY, YOU GET FOLKS LINED UP FOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S COMING TO THEM AND GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF THAT PRE-ADVANCED NOTICE, THEN THEY CAN START DELVING INTO BACKGROUND AND THINGS ON THIS WHOLE PROCESS. THERE'S GOING TO BE SEVERAL COMPONENTS OF THIS PLAN THAT WILL BE VERY PUBLIC. THERE WILL BE A NUMBER OF FULL ON TOWN HALL MEETINGS, THERE WILL BE STEERING COMMITTEE MEETINGS, THERE ARE GOING TO BE INDIVIDUAL ONE ON ONE MEETINGS WITH YOU ALL AND SOME ORGANIZATIONS. I THINK IN THE SCOPE, THERE'S SOME POP UP THINGS. I DON'T MEAN TO GET INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL ON SCOPE BECAUSE I SHOULDN'T, BUT THERE IS A NUMBER OF INTERACTION POINTS OR ENGAGEMENT POINTS THROUGH VARIOUS FORMS THAT WILL BE IN THIS. NOW, I THINK TO YOUR POINT, THE EXPANSION OF THOSE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO ENGAGE IS GOING TO BE A COMPONENT OF THIS ADDITIONAL MEETINGS, THAT THING. [03:15:02] THAT'S NOT AN INCREASE IN SCOPE OF COSTS OR ANYTHING. THAT'S JUST WHAT YOU ALL DETERMINE IT IS. >> LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT I REALLY DON'T QUITE YET UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE SCOPE IS IN THE PAST THE LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I WAS INVOLVED IN, IN ADDITION TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE, THERE WAS A SUBCOMMITTEE FOR EACH OF THE 10 ELEMENTS, AND THAT COULD HAVE BEEN UP TO 80 PEOPLE OR SOMETHING TOTAL INVOLVED IN THAT, WHEN YOU ADD ALL THAT UP. I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT ALLOWS A SPECIFIC FOCUS ON EACH ELEMENT AND THEN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS DO THE WORK AND MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS UP TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE INSTEAD OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE HAVING TO FOCUS THAT CLOSELY ON ALL OF THESE SEPARATE ELEMENTS AND TRY TO MANAGE THE WHOLE PROGRAM AT THE SAME TIME. BUT I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO BE INCLUDED OR NOT. THE OTHER THING I WAS WONDERING ABOUT IS WHAT PART OF THEIR SCOPE OF ENGAGEMENT REALLY COVERS ALL OF THESE REALLY CRITICAL CITY COMMITTEES LIKE PLANNING COMMISSION, PARK BOARD, WORST BOARD, PLANNING COMMISSION, LANDMARK COMMISSION, THAT GOES ON AND ON, GALVESTON HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, AND SO ON? >> BY LAW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS TO BE INVOLVED. OF COURSE, WE WANT THEM TO BE INVOLVED. THE OTHER COMMITTEES, I THINK, PERHAPS WHAT THIS WOULD BE WAS MORE PRESENTATIONS TO THEM AT THEIR MEETINGS AND UPDATING THEM ON WHERE WE ARE. OBVIOUSLY, THEY WOULD BE VERY MUCH ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL THE TOWN HALLS, EVERY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT THAT'S IN THE SCOPE NOW, AND IF ANYTHING IS ADDED AS WELL. I WILL SAY THAT, WE HAD A LOT MORE TIME IN THAT LAST COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING EFFORT, AND A LOT MORE MONEY CONTRIBUTED TOWARD IT. THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE NARROW FOCUSED, BUT WE'RE CONFIDENT THIS GROUP IS VERY GOOD AT THIS. THIS IS WHAT THEY DO AND WE HOPE YOU SEE IT THE SAME WAY. >> MIKE, COME FORWARD. I KNOW YOU WANT TO SPEAK. >> [INAUDIBLE] CLARIFY. WE HAVE NOT MADE IT AN OFFICIAL AWARD. I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THE RFP. WE'RE REFERENCING OTHER THINGS WE SHOULDN'T BE REFERENCING BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT MADE AN AWARD. WE CAN ONLY REFERENCE TO WHAT WE ADVERTISED AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT MADE AN OFFICIAL AWARD. WE'RE GOING DOWN A TRIAL HERE THAT WE SHOULD JUST PROBABLY AVOID UNTIL WE MAKE AN AWARD AND THEN DISCUSS WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THAT POINT. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? THANK YOU, TIM. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU CAN SEND ME THIS? >> SURE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ELECTRONICALLY? >> YEAH. >> I'LL SEND THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> COUNCIL, IT IS 12:30 ALMOST, 12:26 PM. FOR THE COMMUNITY, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A BREAK UNTIL 12:50. A 20 MINUTE BREAK FOR LUNCH, AND WE WILL BE RECONVENING AT 12:50 PM. THANK YOU. [BACKGROUND] IT IS 12:50 PM. WE ARE BACK OUT OF OUR LUNCH BREAK, AND WE ARE BACK INTO THE WORKSHOP AGENDA FOR FEBRUARY 27TH, [3.E. Discuss a draft Request for Proposal for a Master Developer for Stewart Beach Park. This draft is for a definition of Master Planner and a scope of services/work the City is requesting ( D Anderson - 20 min )] AND WE ARE NOW AT ITEM 3E, JANELLE. >> ITEM 3E. DISCUSS A DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR A MASTER DEVELOPER FOR STEWART BEACH PARK. THIS DRAFT IS FOR A DEFINITION OF MASTER PLANNER AND A SCOPE OF SERVICES WORK THE CITY IS REQUESTING. >> THIS WAS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL AT ONE OF OUR PAST MEETINGS. WE HAVE DUDLEY ANDERSON HERE. DUDLEY, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE OUR PRESENTATION. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> THANK YOU. DUDLEY ANDERSON, ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS MANAGER FOR THE RECORD. APPRECIATE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU GUYS ARE SPENDING TODAY IN COUNCIL WORKSHOP AND COUNCIL MEETING. I'M GOING TO TRY TO BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. I'VE PUT TOGETHER A FEW LITTLE POINTS AND I HANDED THAT OUT TO EACH ONE OF YOU. IF WE COULD LOOK AT THOSE, AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL WITH THE DRAFT REQUEST AND THEN GET YOUR FEEDBACK. YOUR FEEDBACK IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO THE PROCESS. YOU'VE TOLD US YOU WANT TO DO THIS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, GET THIS OUT ON THE STREET, GET SOME RESPONSES. THE FIRST THING THAT WE TRIED TO DO WAS DETERMINE WHAT A MASTER DEVELOPER WAS. IF EVERYBODY I TALKED TO HAS A SLIGHT ON WHAT THAT IS. THAT'S THE FIRST PART OF THE MASTER DEVELOPER DESCRIPTION. [03:20:03] >> BUT LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO? WE WANT TO PARTNER WITH SOMEBODY AS NEAR AS I CAN UNDERSTAND. IT'S A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, WHICH IS NOT UNHEARD OF TODAY. WE WANT TO BRING OUT WHAT THE CITY BRINGS TO THE TABLE. WHAT THE CITY BRINGS TO THE TABLE IS A MAGNIFICENT PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT'S VERY VALUABLE. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT HISTORICALLY TO US. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR A LOT OF WAYS. WE AS A CITY, MOST OF US UNDERSTAND THE CONSTRAINTS THAT ARE ON THAT PROPERTY. IT'S A VERY HARSH ENVIRONMENT. IT'S SUBJECT TO ALL THE DAMAGES FROM THE STORMS IMMEDIATELY WHEN THEY COME IN. WE HAVE TO PROTECT THAT. IT'S ALSO IN A LOCATION THAT'S AT THE END OF I 45 IN BROADWAY. WHEN SOMEBODY DRIVES IN TOWN, IF THEY DRIVE ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF BROADWAY, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY SEE. IF THERE'S NO PARTICULAR REASON THEY KNOW TO TURN OFF ANYWHERE ELSE, THAT'S WHAT THEY COME TO. WE WANT AS NEAR AS I CAN TELL, EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT. WE WANT WHAT WE SEE AT THE END OF BROADWAY TO BE THE MOST ATTRACTIVE THING THAT WE CAN SHOW. IT WANTS TO SHOW THE CITY IN ITS BEST LIGHT AND WE WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE WANT TO COME TO AND SEE. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT GETTING TO THE END OF BROADWAY, THAT'S ACTUALLY MOSTLY THEME FROM A TOURIST PERSPECTIVE. AS THE TOURIST GETS AROUND TOWN, THAT'S THEY COME TO THE END OF BROADWAY. PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE DON'T SPEND SO MUCH TIME RIGHT THERE, BUT WE STILL WANT TO PARK THAT SERVICES CITIZENS OF GALVESTON, OUR TAXPAYERS, CITIZENS, PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE. >> I WOULD SAY, JUST TO ADD TO THAT. I THINK PEOPLE SPENT A LOT MORE TIME THERE BEFORE I THAN AFTER I BECAUSE THERE WERE DIFFERENT THINGS AVAILABLE. >> NOT SO LONG AGO. 20 YEARS AGO. THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH TRUE. THERE WERE DIFFERENT THINGS TO DO THERE. IT WASN'T JUST A BEACH. WE HAVE THAT. WHAT I BELIEVE THAT YOU OUT OF A PARTNER. THIS IS ME PUTTING THESE WORDS DOWN IS I THINK YOU WANT SOMEBODY TO DETERMINE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. YOU WANT SOMEBODY WHO CAN MAXIMIZE A FINANCIAL RETURN ON WHATEVER INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT IS DONE OUT THERE. TO RETURN SOMETHING TO THE CITY, TO GENERATE SOME REVENUE FOR THE CITY. WE WANT THEM TO CREATE AN ATTRACTIVE DESTINATION FOR BOTH LOCALS AND THE TOURISTS. THIS IS AN ASSUMPTION ON MY PART. ASSUME THAT YOU WANT THEM TO TAKE THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAKING THIS HAPPEN. I DON'T HEAR ANY NAMES. >> WELL THIS IS IN PARTNERSHIP RIGHT AT PUBLIC. THERE WOULD BE SOME RISK INVOLVED ON BOTH SIDES. WHAT FORM THAT RISK TAKES I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT, I GUESS, BUT IF A CITY, FOR INSTANCE, CAN GET SOME GRANTS TO DO SOMETHING TOWARDS THIS THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN'T, WELL, MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING. >> EXCUSE ME, WE ARE ALREADY CONTRIBUTING VERY EXPENSIVE PIECE OF PROPERTY. >> IT LOOKS LIKE THE BEACH USER FEES WOULD BE LOCKED UP ANYWAY, AND THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TO SOMETHING OF THE SORT TO THAT. >> YEAH. >> THERE ARE WAYS TO BEGIN TO SHARE THE REVENUES TO PAY THE EXPENSES. BUT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH THE CITY WANTS TO PUT OUT OF ITS OWN POCKET. >> YOU MEAN LIKE A BOND OR SOMETHING. >> A BOND CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF TAXES, WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY SPARE CHANGE LAYING AROUND AT THE MOMENT. WE WANT OUR PARTNER TO HAVE SOME LOCAL PARTICIPATION. THAT'S WHAT I'VE HEARD. >> THAT WAS THE LOCAL DEVELOPER PARTICIPATION. I'VE HEARD THAT. I NEED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF OUR LOCAL PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAVE DEVELOPED THINGS LIKE THIS ON THE BEACHES. >> WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE LOCAL CONSULTANTS BE UTILIZED IN THE RESPONSE OF RFP. I'M ASKING THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. [OVERLAPPING] >> NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WILL FIND A DEVELOPER OF THE MAGNITUDE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THAT HAS AN ADDRESS ON THE ISLAND. HOWEVER, THEY CAN PUT TOGETHER AND MAYBE ONE OF THE GOALS WOULD BE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF PARTICIPATION, JUST LIKE YOU HAVE FOR HUB PROGRAMS OR OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT. NOW, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> HE'S RIGHT. I THINK TO FIND THE BEST PERSON, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CAST OUR NET JUST AS WIDE AS POSSIBLE. [03:25:03] WORLDWIDE AND POSSIBLE. TO GET THE BEST PERSON HERE. BUT THAT CONSULTANT, WHOEVER HE IS, WHO WOULD BE DOING HIMSELF A FAVOR IF HE GOT SOME LOCAL PROFESSIONALS TO HELP HIM DO THIS. >> YEAH. SOME OF THE LARGER PROJECTS I'VE DONE ON THE ISLAND WERE WITH THE LOCAL PARTNERING WITH A LARGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. >> CORRECT. >> TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE THING TOGETHER. >> THERE COULD BE SOMETHING, I THINK AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T PUT OUT THERE. I THINK WHEN WE PUT IT OUT FORBID. THEY COME BACK TO PROPOSAL. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE NEVER USE THAT OTHER WORD. >> I GOT YOU. LET ME PUT IT OUT FOR PROPOSAL. WE WILL GET THOSE THINGS. WE WILL GET THE FINANCIALS. THEY'LL HAVE DUE DILIGENCE TIME TO LOOK AT THE FINANCIALS TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY CAN DO TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS TO, I GUESS AND EVEN IN A PROPOSAL, THEY'LL SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE THINK WOULD BE THE BEST SITUATION NEGOTIATION WITH THE CITY AND A DEAL THAT THEY WOULD OBVIOUSLY SEE FAVORABLE TO THEMSELVES. YOU KNOW THERE'S GIVE AND TAKE THERE. THAT WOULD BE IN THE PROPOSAL, TOO. >> I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU THERE. [INAUDIBLE] YOU ISSUE MAY BE A FORWARD A SLIGHT. QUANDARY, HOW WE TAKE THE PROPOSALS AND COMPARE THEM TO EACH OTHER. WE HAVE TO BEGIN TO DEFINE THOSE THINGS WHEN WE ASK FOR A PROPOSAL SO THAT WE ARE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES. >> THAT BRINGS UP ANOTHER SUBJECT OF THE CRITERIA AND THAT BUT ALEX POINT THE MORE EXPERIENCE THIS RESPONDENT HAS WITH PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, THE MORE HE'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO BRING TO THE TABLE SYSTEMS CITY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THAT WE MIGHT NOT KNOW ABOUT AND TALKING ABOUT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO SCORE THAT, I'M ASSUMING PURCHASING HAS THE PROCEDURES ON SCORING. HOW DO YOU SCORE THIS AND HOW DO YOU FABRICATE THE SCORING CRITERIA? HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH THAT? >> THAT'S THE NEXT STEP. THAT FOLLOWS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO TODAY. THAT'S THE NEXT THING, WE NEED TO DEVELOP A SCORING CRITERIA, A PROPOSAL FORM, AN EVALUATION FORM, ALL OF THOSE THINGS BASED UPON SOMETHING THAT'S FAIRLY CONCRETE. NOW, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE FINAL SOLUTION THAT WE HAVE TO BE SLAVISH TO THAT? WE CAN TAKE THAT PROPOSAL BECAUSE IT IS A PROPOSAL AND NOT A BID, AND WE MAY MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS. SO LONG AS WE'RE FAIR AND EQUITABLE WITH EVERYONE AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE SCOPE OF WORK. >> THE WAY THOSE CRITERIA ARE CRAFTED HAS GOT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND THAT THIS HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S FAIR TO ALL THE RESPONDENTS. >> WE DON'T HAVE ANY CHOICE WE'RE USING PUBLIC MONEY. WE HAVE TO BE FAIR, WE HAVE TO BE OPEN, AND WE HAVE TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVERYBODY. >> NO. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IS IF IT'S A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. YOU STILL WOULD HAVE THE CRITERIA? YOU WOULD HAVE TO SELECT AND PRESENT US WITH THE BEST. >> WE GET A TEAM TOGETHER THAT EVALUATES THE PROPOSALS. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE MAKEUP OF THAT TEAM AT A LATER DATE. IT'S USUALLY SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE WITH THAT PARTICULAR THING. WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY AT THE CITY WHO'S ACTUALLY EVALUATED A MASTER DEVELOPER. THAT'S PART OF OUR LUNAR. WE'RE WORKING ON THAT. >> THAT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WE GET I MEAN, MY MIND. A MENU OF OPTIONS, WE GET TO SELECT IT. IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH. I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE. [OVERLAPPING] >> BECAUSE OF THE BID PROCESS, TYPICALLY, SINCE YOU GUYS ARE THE FINAL ARBITER OF THIS, TYPICALLY WE BRING YOU OUR RECOMMENDATION OR THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS GROUP. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE ALL. >> I'D SAY GROUP B IS THE CLEAR WINNER IN THE ABC. >> BUT YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE ALL THE PROPOSALS. >> THAT WOULD CORRECT ON THAT MIKE? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THEIR RANKINGS. >> YES. CORRECT. >> WELL IT'S DONE IN MATRIX [OVERLAPPING] >> IF A DOESN'T WORK OUT, THEN YOU SET THEM ASIDE AND YOU GO TO B. SET THEM ASIDE AND GO TO C. >> SORRY. GO AHEAD. >> THE MOST IMPORTANT ANDREW AND I HAD SPEAKING ABOUT THIS FOR SOMETIME. FOR THIS PROCESS TO WORK PROPERLY, SOMEONE'S GOING TO NEED TO TELL US WHAT NEEDS TO BE BUILT OUT THERE. BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO RELY ON SAY A DEVELOPER TO DO IT. DEVELOPER IS GOING TO COME BACK WITH THE FIRST QUESTION, WHAT DO YOU WANT OUT THERE? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT WE WANT BECAUSE GOING BACK TO THE POINT THAT WE MADE ABOUT APPLES TO APPLES RELATIONSHIP AND SETTING UP A CRITERIA TO EVALUATE. IF I'M GOING TO BUILD A HOTEL OUT THERE, THE CRITERIA IS GOING BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT THAN SAY BUILDING A GOLF COURSE. >> DO YOU WANT TO GO UP? DO YOU WANT TO GO OUT? DO YOU WANT TO. >> WELL SO TO SPEAK, FOR WHICH YOU'RE. >> VERSUS A MINIATURE GOLF COURSE? WHAT DO YOU WANT. [03:30:04] TO BE ABLE TO DO AN APPLES APPLES RELATIONSHIP, YOU GOT TO KNOW WHAT? NOW, YOU CAN GIVE THEM OPTIONS. WE WANT THREE OPTIONS, HOTEL, WE WANT BLAH BLAH BLAH. >> EQUIPMENT [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S A BAD OPTION. >> [INAUDIBLE] AS AN EXAMPLE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GIVE THEM SOMETHING TO WORK WITH. THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK. THEIR FUNDING IS GOING TO BE BASED UPON WHAT YOU WANT OUT THERE. IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD A $50 MILLION PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO A $5 PROJECT, YOU'VE GOT CERTAIN DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS WHO CAN ONLY BOND FOR SO MUCH, AND THEY CAN ONLY FUND SO MUCH MONEY FOR THE PROJECT. >> IN THE REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT RESTAURANT RETAIL, ENTERTAINMENT OPTIONS, RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, BEACH AMENITIES, BEACH PATROL, ETC, RESTRICTIONS ON STEWART NO HOTEL. WOULDN'T THAT JUST GIVE THEM AND MAYBE YOU EXPAND IT TO A LONGER PROCESS SO THEY HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO START FROM A I MEAN, I KNOW IT COSTS THEM MONEY, BUT, [OVERLAPPING] >> NO THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IT ALL GOES BACK TO HOW CLEAR OF THE SCOPE YOU'RE GOING TO GET. BECAUSE THE LESS CLEAR YOU ARE WITH THE SCOPE, THE MORE QUESTIONS YOU'RE GOING TO GET. IS GOING TO EXTEND YOUR TIMELINE. THEN IT'S GOING TO DEVELOP OTHER PROBLEMS WITH WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET OUT THERE. THE MORE NOW, THE MORE THE DEFINITIVE YOU GET WITH YOUR SCOPE, THE BETTER OFF YOU'RE GOING TO BE. >> HERE'S THE PROBLEM I THINK THAT WE'RE RUNNING UP AGAINST IS WE'RE REALLY ASKING THIS PERSON TO DO THREE THINGS OR TESTS THAT ARE USUALLY BROKEN INTO THREE SEPARATE PARTS. ONE IS A MASTER PLAN. WE'RE NOT DOING THAT SEPARATE. TO YOUR POINT, IF WE DID HAVE A MASTER PLAN, WE JUST GIVE THAT TO THAT. THE OTHER THING IS YOU TYPICALLY ALSO BEFORE YOU ASKED FOR A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, YOU GO THROUGH REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATION. WE'RE GOING TO BE COMBINING THAT. WE HAVE TO GET THEIR QUALIFICATIONS. THIS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE LIKE AN RFQ. BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO ASKING THEM FOR A PROPOSAL TO BEGIN NEGOTIATING WITH US ON. THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT THINGS, AND REALLY THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THERE, I THINK, IN THIS PROCESS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE MASTER PLANNER BEING THE SAME ON DOING THE PROPOSAL FOR DEVELOPMENT. >> LET ME JUST INTERJECT FOR THAT. BOB AND I WORKED AT UTMB. WE'VE GOT THIS PROCESSES DOWN PRETTY GOOD. THERE'S THREE PHASE AND WE'RE GOING TO ELABORATE ON THREE PHASES. THE FIRST PHASE IS THE PROGRESS PHASE, YOU HAVE TO PROGRAM AND YOU HAVE TO DESIGN IT. THEN YOU HAVE TO CONSTRUCT IT, AND THEN THE LAST PART IS YOU GOT TO CLOSE IT OUT. YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE CONSTRUCTION PART OF IT, THAT'S CORRECT. BOB, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. BUT THEN WHAT ELABORATE MAN BOB SAID YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR A DESIGN BILL. IS AN ACCEPTABLE PARTNER UNDER OUR CHAPTER IS YOU HAVE SOMEONE DESIGN IT AND THEY BUILD IT. THEY PARTNER UP WITH A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY OR A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY HAS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT ARE PART OF THE RFQ PROCESS. YOU CAN DO IT THAT WAY, A DESIGN BOAT OR YOU OUT BY HIRE THE ARCHITECT ENGINEER AND THEN GET THEIR SPECS AND THEN PUT IT DOWN THE STREET AND THEN HIRE THE CONTRACTOR. THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS OF DOING IT, BUT WE'LL ALWAYS GO BACK TO IT AND I ALWAYS CHALLENGE D, AND WE ALWAYS HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS TO FIND THAT SCOPE OF WORK. >> I THINK WE'VE, I DON'T KNOW IF WE VOTE ON WHAT WE WANTED BECAUSE I THINK I WANTED AND IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA. >> NO. >> WELL, THAT'S WHERE TODAY WHERE WE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. >> LET'S VIEW THIS ON. [OVERLAPPING] >> MY VIEW IS A DESIGN BUILD. THERE ARE GROUPS OUT THERE INTERNATIONALLY, I LIKE BOB'S IDEA, CAST THE NET WIDE. THERE ARE GROUPS THERE THAT WOULD UPFRONT THE COST AND HEY, IT'S A COST OF NEW BUSINESS SOMETIMES OF CREATING SOME ROUGH PLAN WHERE THEY CAN PRESENT IT AND THEN GO INTO THE. >> THE PROBLEM WITH THE DESIGN BILLS. NOT MAJOR DESIGN BILLS THAT WE TALK ABOUT ARE NOT FUNDED BY THE, >> OF THE INDIVIDUAL. >> IT'S USUALLY A DESIGN BUILD OF WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING IT, BUT WE'RE FUNDING IT. AS OPPOSED TO THERE'S A CONTRIBUTION HERE AND THERE. THAT'S A DI THAT'S A DIFFERENT MONSTER IN ITSELF. >> DEFINE DESIGN BUILD. >> DESIGNS BUILD IS A PROCESS THAT'S ONE OF THE ALLOWED PROCESSES UNDER THE STATE STATUTES FOR GETTING A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. THERE'S GENERAL CONTRACTORS, THERE'S CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AGENTS, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK. THERE'S THE ONE THAT WE HAVE FORBIDDEN HERE, WHICH IS THE JOB ORDER CONTRACT. DESIGN BUILD IS ONE WHERE YOU HIRE A COMPANY TO COME OUT AND DESIGN IT AND BUILD IT. NOW, THE FALLACY FOR DESIGN BUILD IS THAT SOME PEOPLE THINK YOU HAVE NO FRONT END IN ALL AND THAT IS AN OWNER AND THAT COULDN'T BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. THE OWNER NEEDS TO DO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT TO SET THE CRITERIA EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT, THE QUANTITY YOU WANT AND LET THEM FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT THE BEST WAY. [03:35:06] >> ENOUGH FOR YOU TO NEGOTIATE AT MAXIMUM PER. >> WELL, THAT'S UNDER. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PRE DESIGN WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BEFORE WE GO OUT FOR ASSIGN. IT IS A GOOD WAY TO DO IT, AND IT SETS A COST THAT YOU CAN LIVE WITH. BUT THE BUILDER HAS AN INCENTIVE TO GET IT BUILT UNDER THAT BUDGET. >> THE WAY HE DOES THAT USUALLY IS TO SKIM OVER THE QUALITY. >> THE SHELL GAME WITH MONEY. >> I MEAN, BEEN THERE DONE THAT. >> I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE DOWNSIDES, AND I APPRECIATE THE DOWNSIDE BECAUSE YOU GOT TO LOOK AT THAT. BUT I THINK WE'RE SELLING THE MARKET SHORT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE SUCH THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, ESPECIALLY FOR I MEAN, HOW MANY ACRES IS IT? I MEAN, IT'S. >> 69. >> 60, 70 ACRES OF GALVESTON. >> REAL ESTATE. >> THE BIG C BEACH HORRIBLE. >> LET ME JUST CLARIFY SOMETHING WHAT DEL SAID HERE TO BE CLEAR ON THE DESIGN BILL. USUALLY, DESIGN BILLS ARE FOR HIGHLY SPECIALIZED THINGS. OUR EXAMPLE WOULD BE LIKE YOU'RE AT THE HOSPITAL AND YOU'RE DEVELOPING AN X-RAY ROOM THAT HAS LEAD FILLED ROOMS, DESIGNING BUILDING. THAT'S USUALLY WHAT IT'S GOOD FOR. WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A CONSTRUCTION, USUALLY YOU GET THE ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS INVOLVED, AND THEN AT THAT POINT, YOU HIRE THE CM AT RISK. EITHER WAY YOU GO WITH THE DESIGN BILL OR CM AT RISK, YOU'RE PAYING A PREMIUM FOR THEIR SERVICES. YOU'LL ALWAYS PAY MORE THAN WHAT THE MARKET IS GOING TO ALLOW YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING THAT PREMIUM BECAUSE THEY TAKE ALL THE RISK, AND THEY BUILD THEIR DOLLAR AND THEIR COST INTO A RISK, PASS IT ON TO US, AND WE'RE PAYING A HIGHER PREMIUM. WITH WHAT MY EXPERIENCE OF 30 YEARS IN THE CONSTRUCTION FIELD AND WHAT I'VE DONE FOR A LIVING, IN MY MIND, THE BEST THING TO DO IS YOU GO BACK TO THE MASTER PLAN, DO YOU DEVELOP WHAT YOU WANT OUT THERE, THAT ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, THEY COME TOGETHER WITH THE PLANS. THEN WHAT THEY DO IS THEY PUT IT ON THE STREET AND YOU CAN HIRE A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WHO'S QUALIFIED. YOU DO CAST THE NET, BUT YOU BRING TO THE TABLE FOLKS WHO ARE QUALIFIED FOR COASTAL BECAUSE YOU'RE DEALING WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT ELEMENTS ON THE COAST SO. >> THAT'S A KEY POINT. >> THAT'S A KEY POINT PERCENT. BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT EQUIPMENT, THE RIGHT MINDSET, AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THE LIFE CYCLE OF A BUILDING TYPICALLY IS 75 YEARS, BUT YOUR LIFE CYCLE OUT THERE MAYBE 35 YEARS DEPENDING UPON WHAT THE SHELL GAME, AS I INDICATED EARLIER WITH THIS MONEY. IT'S A DIFFICULT TASK FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO BUILD SOMETHING OUT THERE IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WANT. >> THE MASTER PLAN IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE THAT SPECIFICITY FOR THE NEXT STEP IS WHAT IT WAS INTENDED. THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED WAS THIS DISCUSSION A LONG TIME AGO. IT WAS FELT BY THE COUNCIL THAT WE NEED TO GO FASTER THAN THAT INSTEAD OF MASTER PLAN AND THEN MASTER DEVELOPER DO IT ALL AT ONCE. BUT THAT'S THE PROBLEM AS THOUGH IS BEING CLEAR AND SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT WE WANT. THAT'S WHAT THE MASTER PLAN WOULD PROVIDE. ANOTHER THING, I DISCUSSED THIS WITH A JOSH OWENS, WHO IS THE GETP DIRECTOR OVER THERE BECAUSE HE'S AN EXPERT IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ALSO A PLANNER. HE'S GOT A LOT OF EXPERTISE IN THIS. HE SAID REALLY PRETTY MUCH THE SAME THING. I'LL JUST TELL YOU WHAT HE SAYS, THE PRIMARY ISSUE I SEE WITH THE RFP IS THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS IT'S FOLDED INTO THE RFP IN AN AMBIGUOUS WAY. THE DEVELOPER'S GOAL IS TO MAXIMIZE FINANCIAL RETURNS, NOT INCORPORATE PUBLIC FEEDBACK. GALVESTON SHOULD SPECIFY WHAT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS YOU WANT FOR THE SITE, HOW THE PUBLIC INPUT WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO DEVELOPMENT. THE AMBIGUITY OF THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS FOR WILL BE AN UNKNOWN FACTOR AND THE SITE'S POTENTIAL PROFITABILITY, THEREFORE, A LIABILITY. CITY SHOULD CONTRACT FOR THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS AND BUILD IN REIMBURSEMENT INTO THE ARTIST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> I THOUGHT WE DISCUSSED THAT AT LENGTH, LAST TIME WAS WHICH WAS, THEY WOULD BE A PART OF THAT. IT WOULD BE A DESIGN. THEY WOULD DO THE THINGS WE'RE ASKING THEM TO DO PUBLIC OUTREACH, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, AND ALSO REVIEW EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE. I MEAN, I GET THAT WE WANT TO DO A PLAN, AND I DON'T WANT TO DO A PLAN BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY OF THEM. WE COULD PRESENT ALL THE MATERIALS. THERE'S PLENTY OF MATERIALS. HERE'S ALL WE GOT. SOMETHING THIS MINUS HOTEL COMPARTMENT. THEN IT'S THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO SHINE, SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE CAN DO. MAYBE WHAT WE DO IS WE SELECT ONE BASED ON QUALIFICATIONS, AND THEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH CONTRACTS, AND THEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, WE DO HAVE SOME EXPENDITURE HERE, BUT IN THE LONG RUN, IT'LL PAY OFF BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE DEAL IS STRUCTURED WITH THAT SAID COMPANY B. [03:40:05] >> LET ME DEFINE THE QUALIFICATIONS PART. TYPICALLY, CHAPTER 2254 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE DEFINES WHAT A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE IS, AND HOW YOU SHOULD ADVERTISE IT. IF YOU'RE ADVERTISING THE DEFINITION OF 2254, WHICH IS ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, DOCTORS, THAT IS A QUALIFICATION. YOU ASK FOR QUALIFICATION AND THEN NEGOTIATE PRICE ON THE OTHER END. BUT IF MIKE CARUSO CAN PROVIDE A SERVICE. I CAN CALL MYSELF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE. BUT IF IT'S NOT DEFINED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS, THEN I TECHNICALLY SHOULDN'T ADVERTISE MIKE CARUSO AS A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE BECAUSE THAT COULD BE IN VIOLATION OF STATE LAW. WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHEN WE'RE SAYING I'M GOING TO QUALIFY SOMEONE FIRST. WE QUALIFY THEM IF THEY ARE IN MY MIND, DEFINED BY THE STATE STATUTE. IF THEY'RE NOT DEFINED BY THE STATE STATUTE, THEN IT'S A TOUGH ROAD TO PUT AN RFP OUT OF STREET AND SAY, I WANT TO QUALIFY YOU FIRST, AND THEN I WANT TO LOOK AT YOUR QUALIFICATIONS AND BASED UPON THE QUALIFICATIONS IN YOUR PROPOSAL, THEN I'LL SELECT YOU. THAT BECOMES A SLIPPERY SLOPE. IT COULD BECOME A SLIPPERY SLOPE BECAUSE THAT'S HOW AN RFP WORKS. GOES BACK TO WHAT DUDLEY SAID. DO THE RFP, NOT A BID, GIVES US ROOM FOR THE ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE INDIVIDUAL THE PROSPECTIVE AWARD. >> ONE OF THE FIRST CRITERIA YOU CAN USE IN EVALUATING AN RFP IS THEIR QUALIFICATIONS, THEIR EXPERIENCE. >> BUT THE OTHER THING WITH THE RFP PASS PERFORMANCE, IS CALLED A BEST VALUE PROCUREMENT. BEST VALUE IS BASED UPON A NUMBER OF THINGS YOU CAN DEFINE IT. USUALLY PRICING IS ONE OF THEM, THEIR EXPERIENCE, WHICH WILL TIE IN THE QUALIFICATIONS. TYPICALLY, BY THE LAW OF CONSTRUCTION, OUR STATE LAW SAYS, YOU CAN GIVE IT LESS THAN 40%. THE MORE COMPLEX YOUR PROJECT IS, THE MORE YOU WANT TO GIVE IT THE WEIGHT, NOW, FOR EXAMPLE, BY COMPLEX, IF I'M JUST BUILDING A CONCRETE STRUCTURED PARKING LOT. I PROBABLY WOULD SAY, I WANT TO GIVE THAT 70 80% BECAUSE IT'S JUST CONSTRUCTION OF LABOR. BUT NOW IF I'M GOING TO COME BACK AND SAY I'M WANT TO BUILD A HOSPITAL, I MAY PUT THE COST AT 50% BECAUSE I WANT TO GO BACK TO QUALIFICATIONS. BUT I INITIALLY SAID I MET THE REVERSE OF THAT. THE MORE COMPLEX YOU DRIVE THE PERCENTAGE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY. THE LESS COMPLEX, IT'S REAL SIMPLE, CONCRETE LABOR. GIVE IT 70%, I'LL WORRY ABOUT THE OTHER STUFF LATER. THAT'S A MINDSET. THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO BE CAREFUL WITH THE QUALIFYING SOON UP FRONT AS OPPOSED TO BEST VALUE. >> DUDLEY, YOU AND MY BRIAN, WHAT ARE YOU RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL ON HOW TO APPROACH THIS? >> WELL, REALLY WHAT I COME TO ASK FOR IS TO HELP FINISH WHAT YOU'VE ASKED ME TO PUT TOGETHER, WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE SERVICE. >> RFP. >> TO DO THAT, I NEED INPUT FROM YOU ON WHAT THAT MASTER SCOPE IS. WHAT IS THE OVERALL SCOPE? WHAT WORK DO YOU WANT THEM TO DO? IN HERE, WE'VE LISTED SEVERAL THINGS. >> YOU GOT THAT UNDER REQUIREMENTS, IS THAT RIGHT? >> UNDER REQUIREMENTS. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS I WANTED TO DEFINE WHAT MASTER DEVELOPER WAS. THEN WE BEGIN TO SAY WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO. I THINK THE THIRD ITEM IS HERE, IS CREATE A MASTER PLAN. NOW, WE DO SAY IN HERE THAT WE HAVE PREVIOUS MASTER PLANS AND TWO OF THEM ARE VERY GOOD. I MEAN, NO PARTICULAR ISSUES WITH THEM. WE COULD ACTUALLY TAKE ONE OF THOSE AND PLUNK IT DOWN AND SAY, WE WANT YOU TO BUILD SOMETHING ACCORDING TO THIS MASTER PLAN. THAT'S COUNCIL DECISION. >> THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING. I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE HEADED, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, YOU'RE TRYING TO GET US TO WHAT DOES THE SELECTION MATRIX LOOK LIKE? >> YES. >> WHAT SET OF QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE METRICS ARE WE LOOKING FOR IN A MASTER DEVELOPER AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO CREATE THAT MATRIX ASSOCIATED WITH. >> WE HAVE TO EVALUATE. WE HAVE TO DO IT OPENLY AND FAIR. >> CORRECT. BUT IT'S UP TO. >> ALL OF US. >> ALL OF US TO HELP DEFINE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. YOU VERY CLEARLY LAID OUT SOME THINGS THAT WE MIGHT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SAID, WHAT I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT IN A PARTNER IS TO MINIMAL COST TO THE CITY UP FRONT. THAT COULD BE A FINANCIAL METRIC THAT SAYS, THIS DEVELOPER HAS SAID, I NEED $0 FROM YOU, OR I NEED $100,000 FROM YOU, OR I NEED 1 MILLION. THERE ARE A HOST OF BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE METRICS THAT. READING THIS THAT I CAN GET YOU SOME RESPONSES TO THAT TO HELP YOU GET YOU THERE. [03:45:03] IN TERMS OF THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, I GET IT. THE CLEARER YOU CAN DEFINE THE SCOPE, THE LESS RISK YOU HAVE. HOWEVER WHAT THIS THIS IS REALLY INTENDED, NOT EVEN A DEVELOP, NOT EVEN A DESIGN BUILD. YOURS, IS TRULY A DEVELOPMENT RFP, BECAUSE YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE PERSON WHO RESPONDS TO TAKE A FINANCIAL INTEREST IN IT, BUT LIKELY OPERATING AND THEN RETURNING X, WHATEVER THAT LOOKS LIKE TO THE CITY AND SOME COST SHARE AGREEMENT. THE CITY'S EQUITY HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID, IS THE LAND AND THE DEAL. THIS IS NOT JUST HENSEL PHELPS PUTTING TOGETHER A PROPOSAL. YOU'VE GOT TO GO AND GET THE FINANCING AND THE OPERATOR IN ORDER TO GO IMPLEMENT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE THAT IS IT'S NOT DESIGN BUILD, IT'S NOT CMR, AND IT'S NOT THIS SEPARATION OF MASTER PLANNING AND DOING THE DEVELOPMENT. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN. I LIKE DUDLEY'S POINT WHERE HE SAID, TAKE THE EXISTING MASTER PLANS AND USE THOSE AS A GUIDE IN DEFINING WHAT THE REQUIRED ELEMENTS ARE AND THEN MAKING A LIST OF SUGGESTED ELEMENTS. I THINK THAT IS ABSOLUTELY APPROPRIATE. >> THAT WOULD ADDRESS MIKE CONCERN ABOUT BEING SPECIFIC. >> CORRECT. >> I THINK. THEN I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY HERE HAS SEEN THE MOST CURRENT MASTER PLAN OR NOT, BUT EVERY WE CAN DO IS SEND THAT OUT TO EVERYBODY. EVERY LOOK AT IT, COMMENT ON IT. >> IT'S BIG. >> IT'S BIG. IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT'S GOOD TO GO, THEN WE CAN USE THAT TO HELP TO FIND THE SCOPE AND COST. >> AT THE END OF THE DAY, GUYS TO SIMPLIFY WHAT THESE GUYS ARE SAYING, YOU'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF THIS, WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT. THE LESS YOU PUT INTO IT, THE LESS YOU'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF IT. >> WE ALREADY KNOW THAT IF THEY DO ASSUME CONTROL, THERE WILL BE A COMPONENT OF THE BEACH USER FEE THAT WILL HAVE TO ULTIMATELY BE FACTORED INTO, THAT WOULD BE PART OF OUR. >> DUDLEY AND I'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ALREADY THAT YOU THE USE OF THE PARKING REVENUE IN TERMS OF FINANCING THE PROJECT IS VERY LIMITED. >> HERE ARE THE THINGS I TRY TO GET FOLKS LIKE DUDLEY OR TIN WHEN THEY'RE ASKING ME TO PUT THIS STUFF TOGETHER IS I TRY TO MINIMIZE THE QUESTIONS, I ANTICIPATE QUESTIONS, THEY'RE GOING TO SEE YOU. IF I SEE YOU WANT TO BUILD THE BUILDING, BUT YOU DON'T TELL THEM HOW MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS POINT FOR CONSTRUCTION GUYS. YOU DON'T TELL THEM HOW MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE YOU WANT TO BUILD OUT THERE. THEY CAN'T GIVE YOU $1 FIGURE. REMEMBER, WHEN YOU DEAL ON CONSTRUCTION, THEY HAVE SUBCONTRACTORS, AND THEY LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK. THEY WAIT TO THE VERY LAST MINUTE THAT. >> I WOULD PAY MONEY TO HEAR HIM AT THAT ACCENT TALK TO CONTRACTORS. I REALLY WOULD. >> GO AHEAD, DAVID. >> ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT AS A PART OF THE REQUIRED ELEMENTS THAT WE ACTUALLY TAKE A STAB AT MAYBE JUST IN REVIEW OF THE MASTER PLANS, SUGGEST SOME ROUGH RANGE OF SQUARE FOOTAGES BY. >> WE'RE GOING TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> MINIMUM OF, MAXIMUM OF. >> BY LAND USE TYPE. >> YOU COULD. BUT JUST REMEMBER, IT GOES BACK TO WHAT DUDLEY SAID, DUDLEY SAID. >> RECREATION, RESTAURANT RETAIL. >> THAT WILL BE IN THE MASTER PLAN ALREADY. >> IT'S ALREADY. >> BUT YOU KNOW WHAT MIGHT ALSO BE IN THE MASTER PLAN, I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE I'M NOT QUITE SURE. THEY MAY HAVE A HOTEL IN THAT MASTER PLAN THAT WE DON'T WANT. >> WE DON'T WANT THE HOTEL. >> COUNCIL HAS A CHANCE TO LOOK AT. >> ALREADY CLEAR. NO HOTEL. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> YOU CAN PUT THAT IN BOLD ON EVERY PAGE. >> THAT'S NOT A BAD IDEA. >> I DON'T THINK THE OTHER PLANS ASIDE THE LAST TWO. THE OTHER PLANS THAT WERE OUT THERE, NONE OF THEM HAD A HOTEL, DID YOU? >> DUDLEY, YOU GAVE A DEVELOPER THREE DIFFERENT PLANS. >> DO WE STILL HAVE PLANS FROM WHEN LITAN WAS HERE? DO WE STILL HAVE THOSE SOMEWHERE HIDDEN THERE? >> THAT I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE BACK. >> I THINK SO. JERRY CAN HEAR THAT. >> I'M AWARE OF THE OTHER ONE. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN THE OTHER ONE. >> SHE DID ONE. >> MAYOR, MAYBE DID ONE. >> DUDLEY YOU HAVE PRESENTED TO US AN RFP APPROACH, YOU'VE OUTLINED REQUIREMENTS HERE. NOW, COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU WANT TO. >> SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS. >> I'VE GOT QUESTIONS ON THE REQUIREMENTS. LET ME MENTION THOSE TO YOU. IN REQUIREMENT 1, WE WANT THEM TO MANAGE THE LEASE OF INDIVIDUAL PARCELS TO OTHER ENTITIES. EXPLAIN THAT TO ME. >> I WOULD ASSUME THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD COME IN AND THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE THE INFRASTRUCTURE, UTILITIES, ROADS, WHATEVER. MAYBE THIS ONE INCLUDES A BOARDWALK, AND THEN PROVIDE PARTICULAR SITES. ON THAT SITE, SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO COME IN A RESTAURANT. >> OR A BAR. >> OR A BAR AND BUILD THAT. THAT WOULD BE THE OTHER ENTITY THAT THEY'RE BRINGING IN TO DO. >> THEY WOULD MANAGE THAT LEASE AND ALL OF THAT. >> THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COLLECTING ALL OF [03:50:02] THOSE THINGS SO THAT THE MANAGEMENT IS NOT ON THE CITY OR THE PARK BOARD, IT IS ON THEM IF THAT'S EVEN POSSIBLE. >> OTHER ITEMS ALONG THAT WAY, SPEAKING OF WHICH YOU CAN LEAVE THIS AS GENERAL AS YOU CAN, OR YOU CAN SAY THESE ITEMS EXCLUDING ALCOHOL SALES. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SOMETHING EITHER WE SEE WHAT WE GET OR WE RULE IT OUT. YOU COULD LIMIT THE ALCOHOL SALES TO A SPECIFIC. >> RESTAURANT OR SOMETHING. >> NOT TO. >> EXCEED 51% OF SALES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> PRIOR TO ZONE. >> I THINK HISTORICALLY THE REASON WE DON'T LIKE MUCH ALCOHOL ON THE BEACH IS BECAUSE PEOPLE DROWN WITH IT. IT USED TO BE BEER BOTTLES, AND THAT WAS THE GLASS. >> IN ITEM 7 ON THE REQUIREMENTS, MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THEY SHOULD HAVE A ABC AND THE C WOULD BE THE BUSINESS PLAN. >> I HOPE I DID NOT LEAVE THAT OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION. >> I DIDN'T SEE IT, BUT I MAY HAVE OVERLOOKED. >> WHAT PAGE? >> THAT'S ON PAGE 4 OF 5. >> 4 OF 5. >> PAGES SINCE THAT. >> SAY THAT AGAIN. >> 4 OF 5. >> YES, SIR. >> THE OLD DOCUMENT OR THE ONE YOU JUST GAVE US. >> WELL, THE ONE I JUST GAVE YOU HAS SEVEN PAGES, BUT TWO PAGES ARE ADDED ON TOP OF THE OFF ON YOUR AGENDA. >> IS BUSINESS PLAN OUTLINED IN THIS? >> SOMEWHERE IF I HAVEN'T SPELLED IT OUT. >> I MEAN, I GUESS NUMBER 6 SHALL PROVIDE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS. >> THAT IS YOUR BUSINESS PLAN? >> JUST SO LONG AS WE GOT WE NEED TO SEE THEIR BUSINESS PLAN ON THIS. >> WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE ANTICIPATE GETTING OUT OF THIS BEFORE WE GET INTO IT? >> YES. >> WE'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING OUT OF IT ANY MORE THAN WE GET THE PARKING REVENUE. >> THE OTHER THING IN HERE, IT SAYS THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THOSE ASPECTS OF BEACH PATROL THAT ARE ON THE SAND. >> BEACH PATROL HAS TWO COMPONENTS, THE ADMINISTRATION AND SAND-BASED. >> THAT WAS ONE OF THE DIRECTIONS FROM COUNCIL EARLIER WAS TO GO BACK TO THAT PROGRAM AND TRY TO IDENTIFY THE SQUARE FOOT INVOLVED IN EACH ONE OF THOSE TWO LOCATIONS. >> HAS THAT BEEN DETERMINED? >> NOT BEEN COMPLETED. I'VE TALKED VINCE, AND WE'RE GETTING WITH BEACH PATROL AND TRY TO WORK THAT OUT. WE HAVE A LOWERED PROGRAM FROM THE LAST DESIGN THAT WAS DONE, IT WAS A LOWER PROGRAM THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, THIS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE ON THE BEACH, THIS HAS TO BE. >> ROGERS PARTNER'S PLAN. >> YEAH. >> BECAUSE UNLIKE WHAT WAS SAID IN OUR JOINT MEETING, THE MAJORITY OF BEACH PATROL OFFICERS AREN'T ON THE BEACH. SOMEONE HAD MADE A STATEMENT THAT THEY ARE, AND I HAVE DONE RESEARCH AROUND THE ENTIRE COUNTRY AND THE MAJORITY OF THEM AREN'T. >> IT DEPENDS UPON YOUR PERSPECTIVE. IF YOU'RE A MEMBER OF BEACH PATROL AND MANAGING IT, YOU WANT TO BE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. >> THERE ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE LAND SIDE. >> RIGHT. BUT THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE GET THE DISCUSSION THAT EXISTS AT ALL, IS WHAT HAS TO BE THERE AND WHAT DOESN'T. >> I DON'T WANT ANYTHING PERSONALLY. BEACH PARK PATROL ACTIVITIES THAT COULD BE AFFECTED BY WHERE THEY CAN'T GET TO TO THE STRUCTURE AFTER A STORM. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES SHOULD NOT BE THERE. IN MY OPINION, THE STORAGE OF THE EQUIPMENT AND EVERYTHING, IF IT CAN'T BE MOVED, THEN I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD THERE. >> WE DON'T LEAVE EQUIPMENT ON THE BEACH IN THE STORE. >> WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING LIKE DOWN THERE. I SEE AN OPEN AIR PAVILION, I SEE SOME OTHER ACTIVITIES WHERE THEY CAN HOLD CLASSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> A MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY >> A MULTIPURPOSE FACILITY, BUT I DON'T SEE A LOT OF BEACH PATROL ACTIVITIES NEEDING ON THE BEACH. NOW THAT'S JUST ME. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'VE MENTIONED TO ME, AND THIS IS SLIGHTLY OFF THE TOPIC, BUT IT'S PART OF THE WHOLE STEWART BEACH, IS THEIR BEACH PROGRAM THAT RUN THE JUNIOR GARDEN THINGS. THAT IS RUN OFF OF THE BEACH. THEY NEED SHADE. I CAN GET UNDER BUILDINGS THAT WE BUILD AND HAVE SHADE. THEY NEED SOME PROTECTION, AND NEED TRAFFIC CONTROL. THAT'S THE BIGGEST SINGLE COMPONENT OF THEM THAT I THINK YOU COULD SAY HAS TO BE DOWN AT THE BEACH. THAT WE'RE NOT TRUCKING THOSE KIDS BACK AND FORTH ACROSS SEAWALL. [03:55:02] >> DUDLEY, YOU NEED INPUT FROM COUNSEL ON THIS TO BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THINGS. >> I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. >> WE CAN GO AROUND WE CAN GIVE INPUT NOW, BUT WE NEED A TIMELINE WHERE COUNSEL CAN GET WITH YOU. >> THIS IS JUST A LOT TO DIGEST, AND IT'S GREAT TO GO AROUND THE TABLE. BUT IF YOU GUYS WOULD PREFER TO RESPOND TO DUDLEY IN WRITING, I'D PREFER THAT TO WE'LL HAVE THAT WAY WHEN DUDLEY PRESENTS IT BACK TO YOU GUYS, THEY CAN DO SO AND YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHO SUBMITTED WHAT, AND YOU ALL CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION. >> THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. ONE OTHER THING THAT I THINK WE CAN DO AS A COUNSEL, I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL. I REALLY AGREE WITH WHAT THE TWO EXPERTS HERE OR THREE EXPERTS ARE SAYING. THAT WE NEED A LITTLE BIGGER HIGHER DEGREE OF SPECIFICITY. I LIKE ALEX'S IDEA ABOUT USING AN EXISTING MASTER PLAN AS A PLACE TO START. I WOULD REALLY PERSONALLY LIKE TO REVIEW THAT MASTER PLAN MYSELF, MAKE SOME COMMENTS ON IT, WHAT DOESN'T WORK TODAY, WHAT DOES WORK, YOU KNOW, AND ALL THAT THING. IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT'S ALREADY SITTING ON THE SHELF. USED IN THIS RP PROCESS. >> I WOULD HIGHLY AGREE WITH THAT. THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT I THINK WHEN BRIAN MENTIONED I WOULD LIKE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER TO GET CONTACT DUDLEY AND GIVE HIM YOUR INPUT. ALEX, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER YOU GIVING INPUT TO DUDLEY HIMSELF. >> WHAT DUDLEY WILL DO IS HE'S GOING TO ARRANGE TO HAVE A DROP BOX SET UP SO HE CAN PUT BOTH MASTER PLANS OUT IN IT SO YOU GUYS CAN. >> GREAT. >> USE THAT IN THE FUTURE IF WE'RE GOING TO INCLUDE THOSE AS PART OF SO. >> WELL, I THINK THAT WILL HELP ALL OF US. FIRST OF ALL, SEE WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE AND JUST STIR OUR THOUGHT PROCESSES ABOUT WHAT WE THINK MIGHT WORK OUT THERE AND WHAT MIGHT NOT WORK. >> WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS NOT FOR YOU GUYS TO REDRAW THE MASTER PLANS OBVIOUSLY, BUT JUST SAY, LOOK AT THEM AND TELL US WHAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT, AND WHAT IS HOW ABOUT THIS AS WELL? >> IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT SOME GOOD EXAMPLE OF SOMEBODY WHO TOTALLY REDESIGN THEIR AREA, AND THEY ACTUALLY TOOK PARKING OFF THEIR SEAWALL IS CLEAR-WATER FLORIDA. WHAT THEY DID IS AMAZING. THAT'S A GOOD ONE TO LOOK AT. WHAT DID THEY DO WITH THEIR PARKING? THEY ACTUALLY DID PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE BUSINESSES ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND THEY SPLIT PARKING WITH THE BUSINESSES. THEY RAISED, THEY DID MASTERFUL JOB ON LOWERING THEIR FLOOD INSURANCE. BECAUSE THEY RAISED BUILDINGS LIKE THE HIGH IT THERE, YOUR FLOOR START ON THE EIGHTH FLOOR. PART OF THE PARKING LOT BELOW IS PUBLIC USE. THE OTHER PART IS THE HOTEL. THEY PUT IN AMENITIES FOR TOURISTS AND CITIZENS, ALIKE, A LOT FOR CHILDREN. IT'S JUST A GOOD EXAMPLE OF SOMEBODY WHO WENT THROUGH DOING WHAT TURNED OUT TO BE A HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL PLANS. >> LOOK A GOOD FIELD TRIP. [LAUGHTER]. >> THE OTHER THING I WOULD JUST INTERJECT IN THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS THAT THE MORE ELABORATE WE GET, THE MORE COSTLY IT GETS, THE MORE MAINTENANCE IT GETS, THE POSSIBILITY OF DEFAULT BY YOUR DEVELOPER. IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WHO'S ON THE HOOK FOR THE REMAINDER OF THAT PROJECT. I JUST CAUTION IT BECAUSE. >> WELL, I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD. >> NO, IT'S NOT THAT WAY JEAN. >> I DID WHAT THEY ENDED UP ON THEIR BEACH WAS ACTUALLY RATHER SIMPLE, VERY DURABLE, AND THE CITIZENS LOVE IT AS WELL AS THE TOURIST. >> DUDLEY, LET'S GO BACK. WE'RE GETTING INPUT INDIVIDUALLY FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS. WHAT'S YOUR TIMELINE YOU NEED THAT? >>. IT IS ALL POSSIBLE FOR TWO WEEKS. >> TWO WEEKS. >> REMEMBERING I WORK HALF TIME GUYS. MY RESPONSES TO YOU MAY BE A LITTLE SLOWER, BUT YOUR RESPONSES TO US NEED TO BE REAL QUICK. >> COULD BECAUSE AMANDA IS HERE FULL TIME, AND SHE CAN SHE CAN ASSIMILATE HIM. >> EXCUSE ME, BOB, JUST A SECOND. COULD WE GET THAT INFORMATION TO DUDLEY AND SO YOU COULD MAKE A REPORT IN MARCH ON THIS, DUDLEY? >> ABSOLUTELY. THAT WOULD MOVE THINGS FORWARD AND IT'S A PIECE THAT HAS TO BE DONE BEFORE WE FINALIZE. >> TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, MARIE, IF WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS RP ON THE STREET, IT NEEDS TO BE ON EVERY AGENDA UNTIL WE DO. >> YES, SIR. I AGREE. COUNSEL, IF YOU COULD GET YOUR INPUT ON THIS TO DUDLEY SO THAT HE CAN BRING ALL THAT BACK AND PUT IT TOGETHER AND CORE-LATE IT SO AS FOR US FOR MARCH MEETING. >> ONE FINAL COMMENT HERE, JUST TO REMIND US I THINK SOMETHING THAT WE MAY HAVE FORGOTTEN ABOUT. THE LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS, THE DIRECTION WAS FOR A MASTER DEVELOPER PLAN FOR STEWART BEACH AND EAST BEACH. [04:00:02] THE REASON EAST BEACH WAS INCLUDED IN THAT IS BECAUSE DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL THIS, SOME PROGRAMS MAY HAVE TO MOVE TO EAST BEACH, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE USING BOTH BEACHES TO KEEP OPERATIONS GOING. THAT DEVELOPER NEEDS TO HAVE AT LEAST SOME WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF THIS BEACH. >> I THOUGHT I THOUGHT WE JUST SAID JEFF STEWART BECAUSE TIMING. >> YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT ON EAST BEACH. YOU'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL SHIFT OF EITHER OPERATIONS PROGRAM. >> NO DEVELOPMENT OF EAST BEACH, BUT WORKING KNOWLEDGE OF EAST BEACH IS PART OF LET'S SAY MOBILIZATION OR SCHEDULING OR PHASING. >> THERE MAY BE PIECES OF EAT BEACH THAT NEED TO BE USED TO LAY DOWN WORK OR FOR TEMPORARY PARKING OR TO KEEP ALL THAT TYPE OF DESIGN. >> THAT'S EASY. WE CAN INCLUDE THAT IN THE DESIGN. >> I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE AN RFP THOUGH. >> MR. TRICK IT NEEDS TO BE. >> I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE AN AGREEMENT, LIKE WE'RE TALKING AS FAR AS RFP TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE IN THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS OF, LIKE, LATE THE EAST BEACH INVOLVEMENT OF THAT. I'M NOT SURE. >> I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT THE RFP IN TERMS OF ITS CONTENT THAT WE DESCRIBE THE PROJECT AS STEWART BEACH, WE DRAW BOUNDARY AROUND IT. THEN WE SAY, AND DOWN HERE, YOU HAVE EAST BEACH THAT IS ALSO OWNED BY THE CITY AND OPERATED. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANY DESIGN WORK THERE, BUT YOU DO HAVE THAT OPTION IN TERMS OF IF YOU NEED SPACE TO MOBILIZATION TO LAY DOWN SPACE OR IF YOU NEED TO FACE FAST PA WORK WITH SOMEBODY TAKE SOMETHING OFF OF STEWART BACH. YOU CAN GO OVER THERE. >> LOOK HOW LONG START BEACH WAS CLOSED. >> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE NOTHING ON STEWART BACH TO CLOSE THAT. BUT WE DO NEED TO GET TRADE. >> THAT, WOULD BE AN INFORMATIONAL THING FOR THE DEVELOPER. IT'LL HELP ANSWER. IF HE'S GOT ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT CARRYING OUT THIS OPERATION, JUST LET HIM KNOW. THE CITY STILL OWNS ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THE BEACH DOWN THERE. >> WE CAN SEND THAT TO DUDLEY. WE'LL GET THAT INTO HIS PACKET OF MATERIAL FOR MARCH. NOW, IF WE GET ALL YOUR INPUT BY MARCH, YOU'LL BRING BACK TO US THEN A MORE DETAILED RFP. >> WE WILL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THIS PIECE. YES, SIR. WITH SOME BLANKS IN IT. TO BRING THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THIS BACK TO YOU ALONG WITH THE RESPONSES WE GET FROM YOU IN THIS. >> IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN WHAT YOU RECEIVED TODAY THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE NO, LET US KNOW. >> ALSO, I'D LIKE TO HEAR AN UPDATE ON THE BEACH PATROL FACILITY PROGRAMMING. >> I HAVEN'T SCHEDULED THAT WITH VINCE YET. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. WE JUST NEED TO ACTUALLY SIT DOWN AND DO IT. >> WILL YOU HAVE THAT BY MARCH? >> THANK YOU. >> YES. >> HE SAYS, YES. >> THERE'S ALREADY A LOT OF WORK'S BEEN DONE. >> WE HAVE SEVERAL PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN. THE LATEST ONE IS ACTUALLY SMALLER THAN EARLIER ONES. >> DUDLEY, I CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR LAND BASED LAND BASED OPERATIONS. WE'VE GOT SOME IDEAS THAT WE MET ON THE OTHER DAY. >> SOUNDS GOOD. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, COUNSEL? >> NO. I APPRECIATE YOUR HELP. IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS WHOLE THING. AND I APPRECIATE ALL TIME. YOU'RE PUTTING IN A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF TIME TODAY. >> YOU NEED TO START LABELING THESE ITEMS. I DON'T HAVE MANY 3:00 A. M. AND 3:00 P.M. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, DUDLEY MUCH MIKE. [3.F. Discussion of Parks owned and or Managed by the City ( C Brown/B Brown/City Staff - 40 min )] >> THANK YOU. >> JANELLE, LET'S READ THREE, PLEASE. >> DISCUSSION OF PARKS OWNED AND ARE MANAGED BY THE CITY ON FUTURE STATUS OF COMMUNITY REVENUE PRODUCING AND TOURIST ORIENTED PARKS. TWO. STEWART PARK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A BUSINESS PLAN, RB PARK, SEWER TREATMENT, BOAT RAMP, AND NAVAL MUSEUM. >> VERY GOOD. DAN, THIS ITEM 1, I KNOW IS NEAR AND DEAR TO YOUR PARK. >> PARK FAST. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. LET'S SEE IF WE CAN. >> YOU SAID GOOD MORNING LAST TIME. >> YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT. I DID. GOOD AFTERNOON. OFTENTIMES, AND I HATE TO SAY THAT WE RUSH THROUGH THESE VERY TOPICS, AND I HATE THE FACT THAT I'M LATE IN THE AFTERNOON OR LATER IN THE AFTERNOON. I THINK I'M AGAIN GETTING A SIGNAL, WE NEED TO RUSH THROUGH THEM. I WILL DO MY BEST TO GO THROUGH THEM AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. WOULD YOU KNOW PUT UP ON THE SCREEN? I HANDED YOU ALL OUT SO THAT YOU HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU IN CASE YOUR EYES ARE AS GOOD AS MINE OR WORSE THAN MINE. WE TALKED LAST TIME I WAS HERE ABOUT TRYING TO DELINEATE OUR PARK SYSTEM AND TO REALLY SEE WHAT LOGICAL BREAKDOWN YOU COULD DO TO COME UP WITH THE TYPES OF PARKS WE HAVE AND CATEGORIZE THEM ACCORDINGLY. [04:05:04] BUT IN WORKING WITH BARBARA, I CAME UP WITH REALLY FOUR DISTINCT TYPES OF PARKS. WE HAVE COMMUNITY PARKS THAT INCLUDE RECREATIONAL, SPECIAL USE, POOL, DOG, ETC. WE HAVE BEACH PARKS THAT ARE APFEL PARK BEACH, STEWART BEACHES, AND WEST END BEACHES. HAVE SPORTS PARKS, WHICH ARE THE LITTLE LEAGUE FIELDS, LISI LEAGUE FIELDS, ADULT MULTIPURPOSE FIELDS, AND SOCCER COMPLEX. NOW WE HAVE REVENUE SLASH ENTERPRISE BOARDS THAT ARE THE COUNTY PARKS THAT WE MANAGE FOR GALVESTON COUNTY AND SEAWOLF AND DELLANERA. JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND. THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE IS BIFURCATED. SOME CITY PARKS ARE OPERATED INTERNALLY BY THE CITY, SOME ARE MANAGED, OPERATED BY THE PARK BOARD FOR THE CITY. THIS DESCRIPTION IS NOT NECESSARILY REFLECTIVE OF OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY OR INEFFICIENCY, BUT IT'S REFLECTIVE OF HOW OUR PARK SYSTEM HAS BEEN MANAGED DUE TO THE FUNDING, AND BE OFTEN A SECONDARY PRIORITY WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND. THE CITY'S DELEGATED MANAGEMENT OF SEVERAL ENTERPRISE PARKS FOR THE PARK BOARD, NON COMPETITIVE AGREEMENT, LET'S JUST CALL IT THE INTER LOCAL, BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARDS GUIDED THE RELATIONSHIP IN THE DIRECTION THAT THE CITY OTHERWISE MAY NOT HAVE TAKEN. THE AGREEMENT DID NOT IDENTIFY KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS, AND THE CITY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN ANY ASPECTS OF THE OPERATION OF THESE PARKS. ONE COMPONENT OF THE PARK OPERATIONS OR TO FOCUS ON GENERATING REVENUE. REALLY WASN'T ANY REAL GUIDANCE FROM THE CITY ON THAT. IN ADDITION TO THE ENTERPRISE PARK, CLEARLY ALL ALL KNOW THE PARK BOARD MANAGES CITY PARKS UNDER SIMILAR OPERATIONAL AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS. JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME INSIGHT. PARK BOARD'S MISSION STATEMENT IS TO PROMOTE AND SUPPORT TOURISM ON GALVESTON ISLAND IN ORDER TO FOSTER AN ENVIRONMENT THAT ESTABLISHES A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE, WORK, AND VISIT. MANY OF THE ACTIVITIES CURRENTLY ASSIGNED TO THE PARK BOARD BY THE CITY REPRESENT ACTIVITIES THAT ARE UNRELATED TO STATE AD MISSION AND HAVE LIKELY RESULTED IN A LACK OF FOCUS ON ITS PRIMARY DUTIES OR RESPONSIBILITY. BY EXAMPLE, I THINK THESE ARE GOING TO BE FAMILIAR TO ALIA. STEWART PARKING AND COLLECTIONS AND CALL CENTER, HOT COLLECTIONS, SHORT TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION AND COLLECTIONS, AND THE MANAGEMENT OF NON BEACH ASSETS, ALL FALL MORE APPROPRIATELY INTO THE CITY. MUCH OF THE FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THESE ACTIVITIES ALREADY EXISTS AT THE CITY AND THE DUPLICATIVE NATURE OF THESE ACTIVITIES BY THE PARK-PAR JUST INCREASES OPERATIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. WHAT STAFF WOULD LIKE TO DO GOING FORWARD IS WE WANT TO GET COUNSEL'S INPUT AND UNDERSTANDING OF HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED. THERE'S A NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT WE FEEL ARE NECESSARY FOR STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY COHESIVE NATURE. NUMBER 1, WE LOOK FOR COUNSEL SUPPORT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES THAT DEFINE AND DELINEATE THE PARK SYSTEM INTO THE FOUR CATEGORIES THAT I SHARED WITH YOU INITIALLY. WE LOOK FOR COUNSEL SUPPORT OF STAFF NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE PARK BOARD FOCUSING ON THEIR OPERATION, THE BEACH PARKS AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES. WE WANT TO UPDATE THE MISSION STATEMENT OF CITY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO REFLECT THE ROLE OF PROVIDING FIRST CLASS FACILITIES TO OUR CITIZENS AND OUR VISITORS. WE WANT TO IDENTIFY INTERNAL FUNDING BE IT ENTERPRISE OR OTHERWISE, TO BE DESIGNATED IN SUPPORT OF THE MISSION OF THE CITY PARKS DEPARTMENT. THAT WOULD BE IN COMBINATION WITH THE GENERAL FUND. I SAID EARLIER THAT IT'S OFTEN A SECOND THOUGHT. PARKS DEPARTMENT IS IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND OFTEN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BUDGET RESTRAINTS OR CONSTRAINTS, WE TALK ABOUT WHERE WOULD WE HAVE TO MAKE CUTS, IT WOULD BE IN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO CHANGE THAT, MONITOR IN THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BRING FORWARD TO COUNSEL FOR ALL TO CONSIDER. THAT'S WHERE THAT'S COMING FROM. >> ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT KEEPS COMING UP AS WE TALK THROUGH, AND YOU'RE GETTING A PRESENTATION IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING ME IS WE NEED COUNCIL'S DETERMINATION TO WHETHER IT'S THE CITY'S ROLE TO COMPETE WITH LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT PAY TAXES. THE OPERATIVE QUESTION BEING, CAN CITY PARKS BE UTILIZED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE ANCILLARY BUSINESS VENTURES OR ENTERPRISES THAT COMPETE DIRECTLY WITH LOCAL TAXPAYERS? THAT'S KEY. THAT'S REALLY NEVER BEEN DISCUSSED. WE THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT ITEM THAT HAS TO BE DISCUSSED. EXAMPLES OF THIS WILL BE [INAUDIBLE] PARK, BOAT RAMPS, CONVENIENCE STORES, AND SO ON. ADDITIONALLY, CAN CITY TAX DOLLARS LEGALLY BE USED TO THIS END? CAN WE TAKE CITY TAX DOLLARS OR CITY TAX PROPERTY AND COMPETE DIRECTLY WITH TAXPAYERS? WE'RE LOOKING FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR AN ORDERLY TRANSITION TO SEAWALL PARK AND COLLECTIONS AND CALL CENTER, HOT COLLECTIONS, STR REGISTRATION AND COLLECTIONS, AND OTHER CITY FINANCIAL OPERATIONAL DUTIES BACK TO THE CITY. WE FEEL THAT'S MOST APPROPRIATE. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR AN ORDERLY TRANSITION OF BOTH SEAWOLF AND DELLANERA PARK TO THE MANAGEMENT TO CITY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. TO DO THIS IN A TIMELY MANNER, [04:10:01] YOU CAN'T DO IT HAPHAZARDLY. THERE'S CONTRACTS THAT ARE IN PLACE, THERE'S AGREEMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE. YOU HAVE TO TAKE YOUR TIME, BE ANYWHERE FROM 12-24 MONTHS TO FACILITATE THAT. WE'VE WORKED WITH OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR AND OUR PARKS DIRECTOR AND THEY ALL FEEL THAT IT'S QUITE REASONABLE TO ASSUME WE CAN DO IT WITHIN 12-24 MONTHS. DISCUSSING ALL OF THESE RESULTED IN RAISING POTENTIAL LEGAL QUESTIONS. IS THE CITY'S DELEGATION TO THE PARK BOARD FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF CITY PARKS AND SERVICES CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARTER? QUESTION BEING, THROUGH THE DELEGATION TO THE PARK BOARD, IS THE CITY ALLOWING THE PARK BOARD TO TAKE CONTROL OF A CITY PARK WHICH THE CHARTER PROHIBITS THE SALE OF WITHOUT A VOTE TO THE PEOPLE? CAN WE CONVERT A CITY PARK TO SOMETHING ELSE WHEN IT EQUATES TO THE SALE OF A PARK? IT'S NO LONGER A PARK TO THE PEOPLE. THAT'S SOMETHING WE THINK THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO TAKE A LOOK AT. IS THE PARK BOARD ABLE TO UTILIZE PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND ITS MANAGEMENT OF THE PARKS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO DO? THAT'S SOMETHING WE FIGURE LEGAL NEEDS TO LOOK AT. CAN COUNCIL OR THE PARK BOARD CONVERT CITY PARK ASSETS FOR PROPRIETARY NON-PUBLIC USES THAT COMPETE WITH OTHER LOCAL BUSINESSES? IT GETS BACK TO THAT BIG QUESTION ON, CAN WE COMPETE? THEN CAN CITY TAX DOLLARS BE USED TO OPERATE BUSINESSES THAT COMPETE DIRECTLY WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR? IT'S LIKE EVERY TIME WE TURN A STONE, IT RAISES OTHER QUESTIONS AND WE FEEL THAT THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, WE'VE IDENTIFIED OUR PARK STRUCTURE. NOW WE THINK THE NEXT STEP IS TO TRY TO GET SOME GUIDANCE FROM YOU GUYS, GIVE YOU OUR VISION, AND SEE WHAT PATH YOU WANT US TO GO DOWN TOWARD ACHIEVING THE OBJECTIVES OF CONTROLLING OUR PARKS, MANAGING THEM FOR OUR RESIDENTS, AND UTILIZING THEM AS EFFECTIVELY AS WE CAN. >> WHERE IS OSTERMAYER BAYOU? >> PARDON ME, MA'AM. >> OSTERMAYER BAYOU. >> [LAUGHTER] WELL, OSTERMAYER, IT'S A WEST BAY PARK. IT'S A COUNTY PARK THAT WE MANAGE. IT'S REALLY INACCESSIBLE. >> WHERE IS IT? >> IT'S OFF OSTERMAYER ROAD. YOU GOT TO MARCH THROUGH THE SWAMPS, MUCH LIKE MICHAELIS PARK TO GET TO THEM. THEY WERE DEEDED TO THE COUNTY. AT SOME POINT, WE'D LOVE TO SEE IF HOW WE COULD UTILIZE THOSE PARTS WHETHER THEY'RE FOR KAYAK LAUNCHES OR SOMETHING TO GO TO WEST BAY, BUT THEY'RE RELATIVELY SMALL AND THEY'RE ON THE GALVESTON BAY. >> IT'S THE FAR NORTHEAST CORNER OF WHAT WOULD BE SPANISH GRANT. >> THERE'S NO, IMPROVEMENTS, NO TRAILS. >> THERE'S NO NOTHING. >> THERE'S NOT EVEN ACCESS. >> YOU CAN, BUT IT'S NOT PLEASANT. >> [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] NO, COST US NOTHING. [LAUGHTER] >> FUNDING FROM THE COUNTY PARKS CAN PAY TO IMPROVE. >> MICHAELIS POINT THAT ONE AND POCKET. >> NO, IT'S MICHAELIS. THE MICHAELIS FAMILY DONATED THAT TO THE COUNTY. >> IT'S SUPPOSED TO THE POCKET PARK. >> YEAH ON THE BASE BASIC. >> THIS IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TOPIC. BECAUSE IT GUIDES US ON MANY OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO WRESTLE WITH RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE IT TODAY. WE NEED TO GIVE SOME INPUT TO DAN AND TO STAFF TODAY. THEN WE NEED TO BRING THIS BACK AND CONTINUE TO MASSAGE THIS SO THAT WE DEVELOP A PHILOSOPHY ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE PARKS. THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. >> WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED AND ARE WORKING ON STR MANAGEMENT, AREN'T WE TRANSFERRING THAT OVER THE CITY? >> YES. SOLVING STR REGISTRATION HERE. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THAT? MOVING HOT COLLECTIONS OVER HERE? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT. STR REGISTRATION WILL MOVE BY THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR. >> THE HOPE WOULD BE TO DO THAT. THEY HAVE A OPERATING CONTRACT. THAT WOULD BE OUR OBJECTIVE BECAUSE THEY ALL REGISTER IN DECEMBER. >> THE THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX COLLECTIONS. I'LL BE HONEST. I DON'T THINK COUNCIL'S REALLY WEIGHED IN ON THAT PARTICULAR SUBJECT ON HOW WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER ON THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE DID SDR REGISTRATIONS. >> IT WAS MENTIONED IN THE LAST JOINT MEETING. >> IT WAS MENTIONED, BUT WE DIDN'T GIVE. >> ALL OF THESE CAME UP THROUGH DISCUSSIONS EITHER DIRECTLY WITH COUNCIL OR RAISED BY COUNCIL AT VARIOUS MEETINGS. I SIT IN MY OFFICE, NOT IN THIS ROOM. I TAKE NOTES OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AND THAT'S HOW THESE GOT THERE BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN RAISED. THE ISSUES RELATE TO IT GETS BACK TO FUNDAMENTALS. THESE ARE CITY TAX DOLLARS, AND SHOULD WE DELEGATE THEM TO SOMEBODY ELSE. I THINK THE IDEA IS THAT CONTROL OF CITY TAX DOLLARS OUGHT TO BE WITH THE CITY. [04:15:01] THEN WE WOULD FUND THEM FROM THERE AT THE DIRECTION OF COUNCIL, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. >> DAN, I APPLAUD YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND FOR THE NARRATIVE BECAUSE OVER THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF, TWO YEARS, WE'VE HEARD SNIPPETS HERE AND THERE. BUT THIS IS THE FIRST VERY COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT A POTENTIAL DIRECTION THAT FOCUSES ON OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT. I THINK ALSO THE LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT YOU BRING UP, I THINK ARE ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE FOR US TO HAVE OUR CITY ATTORNEY TAKE A LOOK AT. THANK YOU. >> DAN, YOU HAD I THINK A SCRIPT YOU'RE READING FROM? COULD YOU SEND THAT TO COUNCIL? >> YEAH. I'LL SEND THAT OUT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT BECAUSE I COULDN'T KEEP UP WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES. >> I WAS TYPING AS FAST AS I CAN. >> I WOULD BE GLAD TO SEND IT OUT TO YOU. >> WOULD YOU SEND THAT OUT? >> COUNCIL, HOW DO YOU WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS? >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, I GUESS ANY PARK THAT COLLECTS A FEE OF ANY KIND, OR PROVIDES MORE OF A TOURIST AND NATURE DESTINATION TYPE THING LIKE JAMAIL PARK WE DON'T REALLY COLLECT A FEE OFF OF. BUT IT'S PROBABLY MORE USED BY TOURISM THAN OTHER PEOPLE. >> I'VE DIVIDED THEM UP INTO TWO CATEGORIES REVENUE AND ENTERPRISE. WE HAVE USER FEES AT SOME OF OUR PARKS. POOL HAS A USER AGREE. MCGUIRE-DENT HAS A USER FEE. SOME OF THE ENTERPRISE PARKS ARE STRUCTURED SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY. THERE'S BEACH USER FEES. >> AND THE PURPOSE OF THE FEE? >> WELL, THE PURPOSE OF THE FEE, SOMETIME TO OFFSET A COST OF A SERVICE YOU WANT TO PROVIDE. MANY OF THE RECREATIONAL OFFERINGS THAT WE PROVIDE THE PARKS ARE FREE, AND WE TOOK OVER THE COUNTY PARKS. THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS WE MADE POCKET PARK TOO, FREE. IT USED TO BE PAID PARKING. THE IDEA IS TO MAKE THESE AVAILABLE TO OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE. THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY ARE OUR PARKS. >> I GUESS PART OF MY CONFUSION, EARLIER WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SOCCER FIELDS AND SOME OF THE FIELDS, AN EXERCISE PLACE, THE FEES GOING UP FOR THAT. I GUESS ARE WE COMPETING WITH OTHER PEOPLE WHO MIGHT WANT TO DO SOCCER FIELDS OR EXERCISE, WE ALREADY HAD A LOT OF EXERCISE PLACES IN TOWN? >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE MORE LIKE THE INFRASTRUCTURE USE FEE? >> NO LIKE A REVENUE PROJECTION. >> I WOULD TELL YOU THOUGH WE TECHNICALLY PROBABLY ARE WITH THE FITNESS EQUIPMENT WITH STEPHANE MCGUIRE-DENT. ACTUALLY, WE RAMPED UP AT MCGUIRE-DENT IN RESPONSE TO WHEN THE RACQUET CLUB GOT BOUGHT BY SCHLITTERBAHN, THAT LEFT A VOID, AND WE RAMPED UP A LOT AT AT MCGUIRE-DENT. BUT SINCE THEN THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT GYMS THAT HAVE OPENED IN THINGS, AND TECHNICALLY, I GUESS WE ARE COMPETING. >> THE COMPETITION IS $40 YEAR. >> [INAUDIBLE] DOLLAR A YEAR IS DIFFERENT. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. THAT'S WAY BELOW ANY OTHER EXERCISE. >> YES. >> BUT THAT IS IN SUPPORT OF ALL THE THREE ACTIVITIES THAT HAPPENED UP THERE. >> WELL I THINK, I'M JUST NOT GETTING ALSO THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT'S A TOURIST FACILITY AND WHAT'S A FACILITY FOR LOCAL BECAUSE IN MY MIND, IF IT'S GOOD FOR TOURIST, IT'S GOOD FOR LOCALS. >> HANG OUT IN DELLANERA. >> I THINK THERE'S A COMBINATION OF TWO. DELLANERA IS NOT A CITY PARK ANYMORE. >> IT'S GOT A GREAT PORCH, THOUGH. >> BUT IT'S NOT A CITY PARK. IT WAS GIVEN TO THE CITY AS A PARK, AND NOW IT'S AN RV PARK, NOT FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON. >> BUT I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT JUST ABOUT ANYTHING WE DO AT A PARK, IS GOING TO BENEFIT THE RESIDENTS AS WELL AS TOURISTS. >> ABSOLUTELY, IT DOES. THERE'S NO QUESTION. THAT'S WHY I THINK EARLY IN MY PRESENTATION THAT I WENT THROUGH VERY FAST BECAUSE YOU ALL WANTED TO GET THROUGH THE AGENDA. IT ADDRESSED THE FACT THAT FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND VISITORS, IS WHAT WE DO IS FOR BOTH BECAUSE WHEN PEOPLE COME TO US, SAY, MAN, THERE'S THIS GREAT PARK, YOU CAN GO SIT OVER THERE AND HAVE LUNCH OR THERE'S THIS, AND IT'S GREAT, AND YOU CAN GO THERE. THE DELLANERA OF THE WORLD AND THE SEAWALL OF THE WORLD. THEY'RE STRUCTURED DIFFERENTLY. THAT'S NOT A MAKING OF THE CITY. THAT HAPPENED UNDER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE PARK BOARD, UNDER THE CITY'S WATCHFUL EYE, OR POTENTIALLY NOT WATCHFUL EYE. AND WHERE THEY GO FROM HERE NEEDS TO BE AT THE DIRECTION OF COUNCIL. >> WELL, I THINK THOSE THREE THINGS YOU MENTIONED SEAWALL PARKING, HOT COLLECTION, AND STR MANAGEMENT. THOSE ARE PRETTY POINTS, I THINK THAT NEEDS SOME MORE ANALYSIS. >> THERE'S NO DOUBT BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA FOR SEAWALL PARK COMING UP, AND THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC BECAUSE IF WE WANT TO EXPLORE THIS, LET'S TAKE SEAWALL PARK. IF WE WANT TO EXPLORE THE STATUS OF THESE PARKS FURTHER, ANY MOVEMENT ON SEAWALL PARK WOULD PROBABLY BE WE WANT TO PUT THAT ON PAUSE. IT'S AT LEAST IN MY MIND. [04:20:02] THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT CONCEPT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, AND IT HAS A BEARING ON DECISIONS FOR YEARS TO COME. >> SEAWALL PARK DISCUSSIONS AT THE PARK BOARD HAS BROUGHT FORWARD A COUPLE OF TIMES NOW RELATE TO THE INSTALLATION OF A BOAT RAMP, INSTALLATION OF AN RV PARK AT THE COST OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND WITH NO FUNDING AND POTENTIAL LOANS, SO YOU'RE LEVERAGING CITY PARKS, LOANS TO COMPETE WITH OTHER LOCAL BUSINESSES. THERE'S A BOAT RAMP ACROSS THE CHANNEL FROM SEAWALL PARK. ALSO, WE DON'T HAVE PROPERTY FOR A BOAT RAMP AT SEAWALL PARK. YOU'RE GOING TO GO INTO PORT OF HOUSTON PROPERTY. >> IF THE CITY WERE TO PUT A BOAT RAMP AT SEAWALL PARK, WE WOULD WANT TO PUT A PUBLIC BOAT RAMP. >> THAT'S FREE. >> BECAUSE WE WOULD GET TO TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE GRANT AND PUT A PUBLIC BOAT RAMP IN AND IT WOULD BE FREE FOR THE USE OF THE CITIZENS. >> TAKE UP SO MUCH ROOM OF TRAILER SITTING THERE. >> BUT THAT'S THE DRAWBACK. >> BUT SAME THING IS TRUE. WHY WOULD YOU DO IT AS A REVENUE SOURCE WHEN WE WANT TO MAKE PARKS AVAILABLE FOR FREE. >> WELL, I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS PARK A LITTLE BIT, BUT JUST IN THE CASE OF SEAWALL PARK, I THINK THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OR INFORMATION OR SOMETHING FOR AN RV PARK DEVELOPER AND THEY DIDN'T GET ONE THAT WAS SATISFACTORY. >> I THINK THEY ACCEPTED ONE. >> THEY HAD ONE, BUT THEY DIDN'T ACCEPT IT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T PRODUCE REVENUE FOR THE CITY. >> THERE WAS NO EVEN DISCUSSION OF REVENUE AT THE CITY AT THAT POINT. MY RECOLLECTION. >> THERE WAS AN ACCEPTANCE OF A DEVELOPER OUT THERE. >> IT WAS NEVER AWARDED, I DON'T THINK. >> IF IT HAD TO DO WITH THE WASTEWATER SITUATIONS. IF THE WASTEWATER SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN RESOLVED, THEY COULD NOT RESOLVE IT AT THE TIME, AND THAT'S WHY IT DIDN'T GO FORWARD. >> ALL THESE ARE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS FOR YOU GUYS. WE'RE FINE WITH WHATEVER DIRECTION YOU WANT TO POINT US IN, BUT WE'VE NEVER REALLY GOTTEN TO THE POINT WHERE WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DELINEATE ANYTHING TO YOU ALL. GIVE YOU A WHOLE PICTURE. I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD HAVE WALKED IN HERE EARLIER AND TOLD YOU ALL THESE DIFFERENT PARK FACILITIES WE HAVE, IF EVERYBODY WAS EVEN AWARE OF THEM WHETHER WHAT PART OF THE ISLAND YOU LIVED ON, YOU'RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE ONES AROUND YOU THERE, BUT BEYOND THAT, WHEN WE ASKED, WHERE'S MICHAELIS? WHERE'S OSTERMAYER? >> THIS IS REALLY USEFUL. COUNCIL, HOW DO WE WANT TO PROCEED WITH THIS? [OVERLAPPING] >> IF WE CAN RAISE OUR HAND FASTER. >> DAVID YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS. >> I WOULD SUGGEST, MAYOR, THE FIRST STEP BE TO HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN POSED BY MR. BUCKLEY. >> THE LEGALITY AND CHARTER? >> ABOUT THE LEGALITY IN THE CHARTER AND THE USE AND PURPOSE OF PARKS FOR THE CITIZENS? >> THAT'S MORE POLICY DECISION, I WOULD THINK. >> THERE'S LEGAL DISCUSSION NUMBER 1 ON IS IT LEGAL? BUT BEYOND THAT, IT'S PHILOSOPHICAL. DO YOU THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE USING TAX DOLLARS AND TAX TO PAY OUR OWN PROPERTY TO COMPETE WITH LOCAL BUSINESSES? >> I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A POLICY COMPONENT TO IT. I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF THERE IS A LEGAL COMPONENT TO IT. >> I AGREE. THAT'S WHY THE QUESTION IS [OVERLAPPING]. >> I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT IF THERE IS A SERVICE THAT'S GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL, BUT THERE IS NO COMMERCIAL INTEREST TO DEVELOP THAT. >> I THINK THERE'S A FINE LINE BETWEEN OPERATING A COMMERCIAL VENTURE OURSELVES AND LEASING OUT A PARK OR SOMETHING TO GENERATE REVENUE AND THINGS. THAT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE. >> WE'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD BEFORE IN GALVESTON WITH THE EAST BEACH. >> BUT WE DO THAT ANYWAY. WE DO IT AT THE AIRPORT. WE DO IT IN OTHER PLACES, AND IT'S PROVEN TO BE PRETTY SUCCESSFUL. SO DIFFERENT AREAS. >> THAT BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT, WHAT I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE IN THESE THREE POINTS THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS A COMPARISON OF MANAGEMENT TYPES FOR INSTANCE, IF THE CITY WERE TO MANAGE THESE THINGS, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? WHAT WOULD BE OUR RETURN ON INVESTMENT? IF THE PARK BOARD WERE TO MANAGE IT, WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE? WHAT IS THEIR RETURN ON TO US? WHAT ARE THE COST? IF WE LEASED IT OR SOMETHING, WHAT DOES THAT BUSINESS MODEL LOOK LIKE? >> I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST VALUABLE COMPARATIVE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT AND I DON'T THINK ANYBODY COULD ARGUE LOGICALLY THAT IT'S NOT DUPLICATIVE. THEY HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, THEY HAVE THIS, THEY HAVE THAT, WE ALREADY HAVE ALL THAT. BY US HAVING THEM DO IT, THERE'S ADDING ALL THOSE DIFFERENT COSTS THAT DON'T EXIST. WE HAVE A PARKS DEPARTMENT. THEY CUT GRASS, THEY MAINTAIN PARKS. THEY DO THAT ALREADY. EVERYTHING THEY'RE DOING, WE ALREADY DO. YOU'RE DOUBLING DOWN AND YOU'RE INCREASING YOUR COST. THAT'S VERY EASY FOR US TO IDENTIFY. WHAT ISN'T, AND I'VE TALKED ABOUT IT FOR YEARS IS, SHOULD WE PUT THEM OUT TO BID, THE OPERATION. >> LIKE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OPERATION OF STEWART BEACH. Y'ALL JUST HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT STEWART BEACH. THAT'S A VERY DISCUSSION YOU'RE HAVING, AND THEN HOW DO YOU DO THAT? BUT FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS ARE, CAN WE DO IT? CAN YOU CONVERT THE USE OF A PARK? STEWART BEACH, IT'S MORE OF A YOU'RE NOT REALLY CONVERTING THE USE OF A PARK, IT'S STILL GOING TO BE A PARK. [04:25:01] >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING THINGS TO IT? >> YEAH. >> SOME OF OUR PARKS, WE'RE TAKING AWAY THE FUNCTIONAL USE OF THE PARK FROM THE CITIZENS AND CONVERTING IT TO SOMETHING ELSE. THAT'S WHERE THE LEGAL QUESTION COMES IN. >> DAN BROUGHT FORWARD A GREAT TOPIC, AND IT'S A VERY OVERARCHING TOPIC HERE. AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHUNK THIS DOWN BECAUSE TRYING TO GET IN AND MANAGE ALL THIS AT ONE TIME CAN BE DIFFICULT. FIRST OF ALL, LET'S GET LEGAL TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS THAT YOU PUT TOGETHER, DAN, IF LEGAL COULD RESPOND AND GET THAT INFORMATION TO COUNCIL. IF YOU COULD SEND THIS OUT. >> SHALL BE WRITTEN. >> SCRIPT THAT YOU JUST DID SO THAT WE CAN REVIEW THAT. ALSO, BRIAN AND DAN. YOU COME BACK AT COMING UP HERE AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING AND GIVE US AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE STAND WITH THE HOT TAX CORRECTION, AND THE SHORT TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS YOU HAVE. >> YES, MA'AM. >> WE'RE GOING TO GET AN OPINION OF LEGAL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUTSIDE LEGAL. BECAUSE GOING BACK TO THAT QUESTION OF THE AFA, MULTIPLE PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED CITIES, COUNTIES HAVE SIGNED AFA WITHOUT HAVING THE FUNDING PRIOR. THAT'S NOT A STATE LAW. AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, IT'S ON A CHARTER. MAYBE IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO GET OUTSIDE OPINION. >> MY TWO CENTS, GO AHEAD, DON. >> IT'S IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION. IT ISN'T A CHARGER. I DIDN'T MENTION CHARGERS, THE CONSTITUTION IS MORE IMPORTANT [OVERLAPPING]. TYPICALLY, IN AN AFA, YOU HAVE ONE SINGLE LOCAL SPONSOR. WE HAVE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENT IN THAT WE'RE CASTING ABOUT WITH FIVE OTHER PARTICIPANTS TO GIVE US MONEY, AND WE DON'T WANT TO BE HANGING OUT BECAUSE SOMEBODY DIDN'T MAKE THEIR CONTRIBUTION. >> IT'S AN ISSUE. WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO IT BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING OFF-TARGET. >> THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA. >> WE'RE WAY OFF THE PRICE HERE. ANYWAY, THOSE THINGS THAT WE'VE OUTLINED, IF YOU COULD GET THAT TO US, WE'LL GET IT BACK ON THE AGENDA HERE, AND LET'S CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION. THIS IS A GREAT ONE. >> THE RESULTS OF THIS DISCUSSION, I THINK WILL IMPACT THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AS WELL. >> ABSOLUTELY. IT'LL DRIVE THE INTERLOCAL DISCUSSION. >> THAT'S COMING UP, TOO. >> THAT'S ABSOLUTELY COMING UP, AND WE NEED GUIDANCE ON HOW TO PROCEED. ABSENT THAT GUIDANCE, WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN A PATH OF TRYING TO ENSURE THAT THE CITY PARKS ARE MANAGED RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN PERFORMANCE MEASURES BECAUSE ALL THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO TAKE TIME, EVEN IF WE DO IT. ANY INTERLOCAL WE HAVE JUST HAS TO BE, PROBABLY A LITTLE MORE DEFINITIVE IN WHAT OUR EXPECTATIONS ARE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF CITY PARKS AND THEN THE DIRECTION YOU GUYS GET ON WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO START BUSINESS VENTURES. THAT'S GOING TO BE A BIG DRIVING FORCE BEHIND IT. >> THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS WONDERING ABOUT OR WANTING INFORMATION ON IS THE IMPACT OF THE CITY MANAGING ALL THE PARKS. WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THE CITY'S BUDGET FOR MANAGING? DO THEY HAVE TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE? WHAT'S THE COST GOING TO BE TO MANAGE THAT? HOW ARE WE GOING TO ABSORB THAT BUSINESS PLAN OF MANAGING IT? >> I PROMISE YOU IT'S GOING TO BE NO MORE THAN WHAT IS THERE NOW, AND THAT'S THOSE PARTS ARE GENERATING REVENUE TO PAY FOR THOSE SERVICES NOW. WHAT WE'D INITIALLY DO IS ELIMINATE ALL THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OR ALL THE DUPLICATIVE COSTS. >> WHAT I MEAN IS RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A GROUP, PARK BOARD PEOPLE THAT MANAGE THESE THINGS. THEY HAVE RESOURCES THAT THEY PUT INTO IT. IT COSTS SOME RESOURCES TO MANAGE THEM. WHAT IS THE EQUIVALENCY AT THE CITY IF THE CITY MANAGES THEM? >> THEORETICALLY, WHAT THEY'VE TOLD ME IS ALL OF THOSE COSTS COME OUT OF THE PARK. THAT WOULD JUST GO TO THE BOTTOM LINE. YOU WOULDN'T NEED THOSE. YOU STILL NEED A PARK MANAGER, BUT IT COMES OUT OF THE PARK. BUT WHAT YOU DON'T NEED IS THE BACKGROUND ACCOUNTING. YOU DON'T NEED THE MULTIPLE. WE ALREADY HAVE A PARKS DIRECTOR, SO YOU DON'T NEED A DIRECTOR TO DO THAT. IT REDUCES OPERATIONAL COSTS. >> THAT'S THE ANALYSIS I'M LOOKING FOR. WHAT DOES THE DETAIL OF THAT ANALYSIS LOOK LIKE? IT'S GOING TO TAKE FOUR PEOPLE TO MANAGE THIS, ONE SUPERVISOR AT THIS SALARY AND THAT SALARY. THIS IS THE MAINTENANCE WE HAVE TO DO, THE DEFERRED MAINTENANCE WE HAVE TO DO, THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE, AND ALL THAT. >> WE FOUND THAT, AND WE'VE TAKEN OVER PARKS BEFORE THAT WE'VE HAD TO ADDRESS DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, AND SO THOSE RAMP UP YOUR INITIAL COSTS, AND ONCE YOU GET THAT DONE, ENDURE. WE HAVE A FACILITIES TEAM. THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THE CITY HAS THAT JUST WE DO THIS. I MEAN, WE HAVE A PARKS DEPARTMENT. >> I GUESS MY ONLY CONCERN IS I DON'T WANT TO BURDEN THE CITY WITH ANY MORE RESPONSIBILITY. >> NOR DO I. >> DULY NOTED. >> WE WOULD NEVER BRING ANYTHING TO COUNCIL WE THOUGHT WOULD BE A BURDEN OR WE DIDN'T THINK WE COULD ASSUME. WE JUST WOULDN'T DO THAT. >> THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO BE SURE WE'RE DOING. >> WE'RE NOT TO DO ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T PLUS THE BOTTOM LINE. WE'RE NOT DOING ANY MINUSES. >> RIGHT. >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT PROVIDED TO YOU. [04:30:01] >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING. WE'LL HAVE THAT INFORMATION TO US, AND WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. >> GREAT. THANK YOU ALL. >> THANK YOU. THE SEAWOLF PARK DISCUSSION, JANELLE, READ THAT AGAIN, PLEASE. >> SEAWOLF PARK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A BUSINESS PLAN, RV PARK, SEWER TREATMENT, BOAT RAMP, AND NAVAL MUSEUM. >> COUNCIL, WE RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE PARK BOARD ON THEIR PLAN. WE HAD REQUESTED A BUSINESS PLAN FROM THEM. THEY SENT THAT OVER TO US. READ THROUGH THAT. IT WAS A VERY GOOD PLAN THAT THEY PRESENTED TO US VERY SUCCINCT. LET'S ASK THEM TO COME FORWARD. VINCE AND WHOMEVER ELSE THAT THE PARK BOARD WANTS TO SIT AT THE TABLE. >> I'LL GET OUT OF YOUR WAY. >> ALL RIGHT. VINCE, HAVE A SEAT. >> I'M USED TO A BIGGER ENTOURAGE, VINCE. I'M SORRY. [LAUGHTER] >> VINCE, YOU HEARD OUR DISCUSSIONS ON LOOKING AT THE OVERARCHING PHILOSOPHY OF OUR PARK MANAGEMENT. THAT PROBABLY WILL, FOR SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS PLAY A ROLE IN THIS. BUT DID YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD IN WITH YOUR THOUGHTS, SIR? >> YES. ABSOLUTELY, MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. FROM THE LAST PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION, WE FEEL THAT'S PROBABLY BEST TO PUT THIS ON PAUSE UNLESS YOU ALL WANT TO DISCUSS WHAT WE'VE PRESENTED. WE DID PUT THE PLAN TOGETHER. WE SENT THAT OUT LAST WEEK. I BELIEVE YOU GOT A COPY OF IT TWO DAYS AGO. YES, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO REVIEW THIS. ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. ANY FEEDBACK? >> CAN I HAVE A HANDOUT ON THAT? >> IT'S THE SAME PRESENTATION, BUT YES. >> THANK YOU. >> NOW, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, COUNCIL, SINCE OF OUR DISCUSSION WITH DAN BUCKLEY, THAT WE MAY WANT TO PUT THIS DISCUSSION ON THE SEAWOLF PARK ON HOLD FOR A LITTLE WHILE UNTIL WE GET OUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER ON THAT OTHER. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COUNTER FEELING ON THAT? >> NO, I AGREE WITH THIS. >> I MEAN, IT'S JUST IT'S INTERESTING. I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF ALL AROUND THE PLACE ON THIS OVER THE PAST YEARS. I AGAIN, I'LL TELL DAN THANK YOU FOR AT LEAST PUTTING DOWN TOGETHER ALL THESE THOUGHTS THAT HAVE COME UP OVER THE YEARS. THIS IS WHAT WE JUST HAD HIM DO IS YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT IS THEY'RE NOT IN CONFLICT, BUT IT POTENTIALLY IS IN CONFLICT WITH DEVELOPING FURTHER CONCESSIONS OUT AT THAT PARK. I THINK THE ANSWER IS THAT YOU'RE RIGHT IT'S PROBABLY BEST TO PUT IT ON HOLD. BUT I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT YOU'LL PUT FORWARD BECAUSE THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ASKED YOU FOR PREVIOUSLY. >> THE TIMELINE ON HERE REALLY TELLS THE STORY. IN VINCE'S REPORT, THE TIMELINE TELLING THE STORY. THEY REALLY WERE WORKING TOWARDS WHAT THAT TASK FORCE THAT HAD CITY PEOPLE AND PARK BOARD PEOPLE ON IT WE HAD ASKED FOR. I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD JOB OF A GOOD OVERVIEW, JUST DETAILED ENOUGH THAT WE CAN EVALUATE. >> THE NICE THING I WILL SAY THAT YOU DID ON THIS ON THE BOAT RAMP THING WAS THE MARKET ANALYSIS SO IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SOME SORT OF DEVELOPMENT OUT THERE, IF IT'S NOT CHARGING A FEE, AT LEAST WE KNOW WHAT THE MARKET IS LOOKING FOR FOR THE USE OF THAT AREA. >> ABSOLUTELY. JUST FOR EVERYONE'S KNOWLEDGE, THE BOAT RAMP WAS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT CITY MANAGER MAXWELL ACTUALLY BROUGHT FORWARD AS A CONCEPT THROUGH THE TASK FORCE AS A POSSIBLE USE FOR THAT FACILITY. >> BUT YOU COULDN'T HAVE BOTH AN RV AND A BOAT RAMP. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM. >> IT'S AN EITHER OR. >> IT'S AN EITHER-OR BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE [INAUDIBLE] UNLESS YOU CAN ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL LAND FROM PORT HOUSTON OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT FASHION. BUT AGAIN, WE HAD TO LOOK AT THE COST OF IT. WHAT WE WERE CHARGED WITH AT THAT TIME FROM COUNCIL WAS HOW WAS IT SELF-SUFFICIENT AND FRANKLY, NOT EVEN SELF-SUFFICIENT. HOW COULD IT MAKE SURPLUS REVENUE SO WE COULD SEND ADDITIONAL FUNDS OVER TO THE CITY? I FEEL THAT WE DID ACCOMPLISH THAT. WE BROUGHT FORWARD DIFFERENT PLANS TO BE ABLE TO BRING ADDITIONAL REVENUES TO THE CITY. WE STAND WAITING FOR DIRECTION, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO BRING OTHER IDEAS THAT CAN ALSO YIELD SUPPORT. >> DURING THIS VERY LONG MEETING, IT'S PROBABLY IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO DEFER TO ANOTHER DAY. >> WHEN THE COUNCIL SAYS WE'RE LOOKING FOR A PARK BAR TO DELIVER MORE MONEY TO THE COUNCIL MAYBE WE NEED TO BE A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT ABOUT HOW. I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S WHAT KEEPS COMING UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM DAN BECAUSE THEIR APPROACH WAS, WELL, IF WE PUT OUR [INAUDIBLE], WE'RE GOING TO BRING MORE MONEY TO THE CITY. WELL, MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO MAKE THAT MONEY. I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE NEED TO BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE SAY THAT. >> YEAH, I WOULD AGREE. WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THOSE DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR BUDGET COMING UP HERE SHORTLY. START UP AGAIN. VINCE, I WANT TO SAY AND TO KIMBERLY AND BRYSON, WE ASKED FOR BUSINESS PLANS FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE. [04:35:01] THIS IS PROBABLY THE BEST BUSINESS PLAN I'VE EVER SEEN PRESENTED COMING FROM THE PARK BOARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS. DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT THAT'S DEAD. WE MAY COME BACK AROUND TO THAT. >> WELL, WE APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. AGAIN THIS IS THE QUALITY WORK THAT WE DO. >> THANKS THEN. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET'S GO TO ITEM 3G, PLEASE. [3.G. Discussion of the Findings of the Park Board Conflict of Interest Audit and Expansion of the City Auditor’s Audit Plan for 2025 ( G Bulgherini - 20 min )] >> ITEM 3G. DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS OF THE PARK BOARD, CONFLICT OF INTEREST AUDIT, AND EXPANSION OF THE CITY AUDITOR'S AUDIT PLAN FOR 2025. >> MR. BULGHERINI, YOU ARE THE TOPIC OF THE DAY, SIR. HAPPY TO HAVE YOU WITH US. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOOD OR BAD. >> MR. BULGHERINI HAS BROUGHT INFORMATION TO US. COUNCIL, AS YOU MAY KNOW, ITEM 12C, 12C(I), 12C(II), 12C(III) IS ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT THAT HAS A BEARING ON WHAT COUNCIL MR. BULGHERINI IS GOING TO BE TELLING US TODAY. THAT WILL HELP GUIDE US ON THESE MOTIONS AS WE MOVE FORWARD. GLENN, WE STARTED OUT WITH YOUR CURRENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THAT'S ITEM 12C. WOULD YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THAT, SIR? >> WE'RE NOT FINISHED WITH THE REPORT. WE DON'T HAVE IT WRITTEN. WE HAVEN'T BEGUN TO WRITE IT. WE DID HAVE A MEETING LAST THURSDAY WITH THE PARK BOARD, WHERE WE REQUESTED SOME INFORMATION. WE RECEIVED SOME OF THAT INFORMATION ON TUESDAY THE 25TH PERTAINING TO CONTRACTS. WE RECEIVED SOME MORE INFORMATION ON WEDNESDAY THE 26TH PERTAINING TO A LEGAL OPINION FROM THEIR ATTORNEY. AS OF TODAY, WE'RE STILL WAITING ON SOME INFORMATION CONCERNING A COMPLAINT THAT WAS MADE AT THE PARK BOARD CONCERNING ONE OF THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. WE WANTED TO INTERVIEW THAT PERSON. WE DO WANT TO VERIFY EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE NEED TIME TO DO THAT AND TO ANALYZE IT AND TO WRITE IT UP. I'M PROPOSING THAT WE BRING A WRITTEN REPORT TO YOU IN MARCH THAT SHOULD GIVE US AMPLE TIME TO REVIEW AND ANALYZE, AND VERIFY EVERYTHING AND GET THE REST OF THE INFORMATION IN. >> BEFORE WE MOVE TO THE OTHER ITEMS, ANY QUESTIONS, MR. BULGHERINI, AT THIS POINT? YES. >> I JUST WANT TO BASICALLY REMIND ALL OF US THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS WE WERE CONCERNED WITH. WE REALLY COULDN'T HOLD MR. BULGHERINI AND STAFF ACCOUNTABLE UPON NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION HE HAD REQUESTED, AND SO THAT'S STILL NOT FULLY RECEIVED YET. >> CORRECT. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE AND PUT THAT ON RECORD THAT IT WAS REQUESTED. YOU KNOW, WE GAVE HIM A LOT OF PRESSURE TO BRING THAT REPORT BACK TODAY, AND HE CAN'T REALLY BRING IT BACK BECAUSE IT'D STILL BE INCOMPLETE. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, GLENN, AND I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. I'M ASKING THE INFORMATION TO FINALIZE YOUR AUDIT DO YOU FEEL THAT THERE'S BEEN A MOVEMENT ON THE PARK BOARD TO SLOW THIS DOWN, OR ARE THEY? >> NO, SIR. >> THEY'RE WORKING WITH YOU? >> YES, SIR. THE INFORMATION THAT WE REQUESTED, I DO NOT FEEL IS READILY AVAILABLE. THEY HAVE TO, IN ALL HONESTY, THEY DO HAVE TO LOOK FOR IT, AND THEY HAVE STAYED IN TOUCH WITH US IN DOING SO. TO GET THIS BACK IN ENOUGH TIME TO DO THE AUDIT REPORT WAS QUITE A GOAL. BUT NO, THEY ARE NOT IN THIS PARTICULARLY THEY ARE NOT SLOWING THE INFORMATION DOWN. >> THIS AN INTERVIEW THAT YOU'RE MISSING RIGHT NOW. >> YES, THERE IS AN INTERVIEW. THERE COULD BE MORE INTERVIEWS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO VERIFY. THERE WERE SOME POSSIBLE MISCOMMUNICATIONS DURING THE THURSDAY MEETING THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY CERTAIN POLICIES ARE DESIGNED LIKE THEY ARE. RIGHT NOW, LIKE I SAID, THERE'S POSSIBLE MISCOMMUNICATIONS, IT COULD BE ON OUR PART, OR WE JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY CERTAIN POLICIES ARE STRUCTURED LIKE THEY ARE AND THAT WHAT'S ON SPECIAL EVENTS ON PUBLIC AND PRIVATE EVENTS. WE'LL TALK WITH THEM AND CLEAR IT UP AND REPORT ON IT. >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE A STATEMENT THAT WE ALL STAY AWARE THAT IS IT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER TO BE PRESENT DURING INTERVIEWS IN AN AUDIT. [04:40:07] IT ACTUALLY TAINTS THE AUDIT. I DON'T THINK GLENN, YOU SHOULD MAKE US AWARE OF WHEN INTERVIEWS ARE. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEST CONFIDENTIAL. IF YOU WANT TO SEND SUMMARIES OUT OR WHATEVER, THEN THAT'S FINE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT. >> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON YOUR FINDINGS OF THE CURRENT AUDIT THEN? >> NO, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT. 12C(I), GLENN IS MOVING FORWARD WITH EXPANDING YOUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST AUDIT. COULD YOU UPDATE US ON THAT AND WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE ON THAT? >> WELL, IN THIS CASE, I FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO DO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT MORE OF VERIFICATION THAN A REGULAR AUDIT. I JUST WANT TO GET COUNCIL'S PERMISSION TO DO AND EXPAND THE AUDIT TO DO A MORE DETAILED AUDIT PERFORMING THE INTERVIEWS, LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION, AND PRIMARILY EXPANDING THE INTERVIEWS OR ASKING MORE QUESTIONS. IT IS A SIZABLE AMOUNT OF MORE OF DETAIL THAT YOU WOULD DO IN A REGULAR AUDIT SO I THOUGHT THAT I SHOULD GET COUNCIL'S PERMISSION. >> SORRY. >> WHAT DOES THAT DO TO YOUR EXISTING WORKLOAD? I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER RELATED TO YOUR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THAT WE PUT FORWARD IN THE AUDIT PLAN. WHAT IMPACT DOES EXPANSION OF THAT AUDIT HAVE ON YOUR REMAINING WORK PLAN? >> ON THIS PARTICULAR PART, I DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING ON THIS. ASKING FOR PERMISSION TO DO A MORE DETAILED AUDIT IN THE AREA OF THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AUDIT, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I'M SORRY. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS. IF YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND ENERGY YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND ON THIS, THEN MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE YOU DECREASING OR NOT DOING ON THE REMAINDER OF YOUR WORK? >> I'M SORRY. I MISUNDERSTOOD. >> YOUR OVERALL AUDIT PLAN. >> I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION. >> IT GOES BACK TO THE RESOURCE ALLOCATION. IS THAT IF YOU'RE EXPANDING THIS, THAT MEANS THAT'S TELLING ME THAT YOU'RE NOT DOING SOMETHING ELSE. MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE YOU NOT DOING, OR DO YOU NEED ADDITIONAL RESOURCES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES OF YOUR OVERALL AUDIT PLAN? >> WE'VE CHECKED OFF FOUR AUDITS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DELAYED UNTIL NEXT YEAR. >> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, DAVID. >> HOLD ON A MOMENT. >> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. >> WELL, LET ME CLARIFY HERE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EXPANSION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AUDIT, AND THEN ALSO ON OUR AGENDA IS THE ADDITIONAL AUDIT OF HOT FUNDS THAT WE WOULD POSSIBLY BE APPROVING NOW. >> WE'RE APPROACHING THIS A LITTLE BIT TOO EARLY BECAUSE I DO NOT KNOW HOW MUCH MORE ADDITIONAL TESTING COUNCIL WISHES ME TO DO IN THE HOT FUNDS AND THE REQUEST FOR THE HOT FUNDS EXPANSION. IF YOU ALL WANT ME TO JUST DO TESTING ON A CURRENT YEAR AND A PREVIOUS YEAR, OR DO YOU WANT TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK SEVEN YEARS, 100%? >> THAT'LL HAVE A BEARING ON PERSONNEL, HAVE A BEARING ON HOW MANY SUBJECTS YOU'LL NEED TO TAKE OFF THE AUDIT? >> IS THAT SOME ITEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING TONIGHT OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW? >> WELL, WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW. >> HERE WE GO. EXPANSION OF THE HOT AUDIT, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE CREATION OF YOUR OVERALL AUDIT PLAN, AS WELL AS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE TRYING TO DO A HOT AUDIT UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, FIND OUT IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE WAY THIS OCCURS UNDER THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION AND UNDER THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION. I DON'T KNOW THAT A SAMPLING FROM SEVEN YEARS, I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE EXCESSIVE. I THINK THAT IF YOU TOOK A SAMPLE YEAR FROM WHATEVER YOU'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE, IF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES WERE FOLLOWED, IF THEY'RE DIFFERENT FROM ONE ADMINISTRATION TO THE NEXT, I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR. I JUST SAY TAKE A YEAR IN EACH AND SAMPLE IT FROM THAT. >> ONE YEAR, ONE YEAR, TWO YEARS, SO TWO YEARS TOTAL? >> I'M LOOKING AT, HE'S ALREADY LOOKING AT THE PAST FOUR YEARS, AND I GUESS WE'VE SEEN EVEN INCONSISTENCIES WITH WHAT'S BEEN. >> SIX PERCENT. [04:45:03] >> IT'S IN THE PAPER. MASSAGES AND THEN THE AMARILLO AND LUBBOCK PARTY TRANSPORTATION STUFF. CLEARLY, THERE WAS STILL A GAP OF WE'RE VISIT GALVESTON STAFF GOING TO THOSE THINGS. FIRST, IT WAS NO, AND IT WAS NEWS TO ME THAT THEY EVEN DID GO, THAT WASN'T EVEN SOMETHING THAT WAS A FACTOR. I THINK KEEPING TO FOUR YEARS WOULD STILL BE A PRUDENT THING. IT JUST APPEARS TO ME THAT BASIC GUIDELINES AND POLICIES WEREN'T FOLLOWED FROM AT LEAST FOUR YEARS AGO TO A MONTH AFTER BARREL, WHICH IS WHEN THE MASSAGES AND FACIALS WAS CONDUCTED. I WANT TO KEEP IT WITHIN THE FOUR YEARS. >> ARE YOU SPEAKING OF THE EXPANSION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THE HOT AUDIT SPAN? >> I GUESS IT WOULD BE A SEPARATE AUDIT. THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ONE WOULD BE COMPLETE, AND THEN IT WOULD BE ABOUT HOT EXPENDITURES. >> FOR THE HOT EXPENDITURES FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS? >> I THINK I SHOULD CLARIFY WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE. WE'VE LOOKED AT THE PAST FOUR YEARS AND WE PICKED 6% OF THOSE EXPENDITURES. WHAT WE'RE ASKING COUNCIL, AND WE'RE JUST GIVING EXAMPLES, DO YOU WANT US TO DO 100% OF ONE YEAR AND IN THE CURRENT ONE YEAR AND THE PAST OR 100% OF TWO YEARS? DO YOU WANT US TO DO 100% FOR FOUR YEARS? DO YOU WANT US TO DO JUST 6% ON TWO MORE YEARS GOING BACK? WHAT IS IT THAT COUNCIL WANTS? >> THIS IS ABOUT RESOURCE ALLOCATION. [OVERLAPPING] >> I WAS NEXT. >> SORRY, GO AHEAD. >> WHAT AUDITS WILL YOU BE DELAYING IF WE EXPAND? >> GOOD QUESTION. >> WAS THAT TOTAL? IT IS THE TRAVEL AND A TRAINING EXPENDITURE POLICY AND PROCEDURES REVIEW AT THE COURT. IT WOULD BE, LET ME PUT THIS DOWN, THE OVERTIME AND RELATED APPROVAL AND TRACKING FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. >> I THOUGHT YOU FINISHED THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ON THAT. >> WE DID A CREDIT CARD OVER THERE ON THEM, BUT THIS WOULD BE ON THE TRACKING OF THE OVERTIME AT THE PUBLIC WORKS THIS WOULD ALSO BE THE TRACKING OF POLICE SEIZED FUNDS. >> TRACKING OF WHAT FUNDS? >> POLICE SEIZED FUNDS. THEN THE FOURTH ONE WOULD BE, I COMBINED THEM. IT WOULD BE THE REMAINING 55 HOT TAX AUDITS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO AND WE SET OUT AS A GOAL TO DO 45 SALES TAX AUDITS THIS YEAR. WE'VE ONLY COMPLETED 15. >> THAT'S MONEY BACK TO YOU? >> IT IS. >> I THINK YOU COULD HAVE USUALLY GAUGE IT AT EVERY 15 WE DO, WE BRING IN 200 GRAND. >> LET ME ASK THE QUESTION ANOTHER WAY THAT COUNCILWOMAN ROBB MENTIONED. WHAT AUDITS OF THE HOT TAX AUDIT AND THE EXPANSION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, HOW SHOULD THAT BE DONE WHERE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO CUT ANY OF THESE AUDITS OUT? >> ADDITIONAL STAFF? >> NO, NOT NECESSARILY. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, HOW WOULD YOU STRUCTURE YOUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXPANSION IN YOUR HOT TAX AUDITS IF COUNCIL APPROVES THAT? HOW WOULD THAT BE STRUCTURED? >> [OVERLAPPING] I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU HAVE TO SUSPEND THE FIVE OR FOUR AUDITS TRAVEL TO PORT OVERTIME FOR PUBLIC WORKS? >> WELL, NO. WHAT I'M ASKING IS, HOW WOULD YOU STRUCTURE YOUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST? WOULD IT BE ONE YEAR AND THREE YEARS BACK? [OVERLAPPING] >> HE'S ASKING US HOW WE WOULD LIKE TO [INAUDIBLE]. >> I UNDERSTAND. I'M ASKING HIM. I'M JUST SAYING, WHAT COULD YOU HANDLE? >> I WOULD RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THAT WE DO 100% OF TWO YEARS AND THAT BE CURRENT. >> TWO YEARS OF WHICH ONE? >> 100% OF TWO YEARS OF THE HOT TAX EXPENDITURES, WHICH WILL HELP US TO IDENTIFY ANY MORE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. [04:50:03] >> IF THAT WAS STRUCTURED THAT WAY, WOULD YOU HAVE TO CUT THOSE FOUR OUT? >> IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO HIT 100 HOT TAX AUDITS BECAUSE THEY'RE TAKING CONSIDERABLY LONGER. >> AS I HEARD GLENN EARLIER, WE'RE LOSING MONEY ON THESE HOT TAX AUDITS, SO THAT'S A DRAIN ON YOUR GENERAL FUND. >> WE WOULD HAVE TO RESHAPE THE POLICY AGREEMENT WITH PARK BOARD IF THEY'RE WILLING TO DO SO. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE LOSING MONEY ON SHORT-TERM RENTAL. >> WILLING TO WHAT? [OVERLAPPING] HE SAID WE'RE LOSING MONEY ON THE HOTELS. >> YES, SIR. >> WE ARE, HOTEL. >> IT'S COSTING US ABOUT $5,000 PER HOTEL TO AUDIT. >> PAYING YOU 1000. >> THEY'RE PAYING US 1,000. >> WHAT ABOUT THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS? WE LINKS 100 ESTIMATED. >> 1,600. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'RE LOSING MONEY ALL THE WAY AROUND? >> WE'RE NOT LOSING IT. >> I THINK THE RECOVERY OF TAXES IS MUCH GREATER THAN THE [INAUDIBLE]. >> IT IS, BUT WE DON'T GET THAT. THEN THE PROBLEM IS THAT YOU CAN'T, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, DON, BUT YOU CAN'T USE HOT TO AUDIT HOT, SO WHAT HAPPENS IS, OUR GENERAL FUND AND OUR LOCAL TAXPAYERS ARE SUBSIDIZING ALL OF THESE AUDITS, AND MOST OF THAT REVENUE IS GOING INTO NOT HERE. >> THEN WHOEVER THE PARK BOARD BENEFITS, THEY SHOULD BE PAID FOR THE AUDITS. >> THAT'S THE ALL'S DECISION, BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IN A TIGHT YEAR, ESPECIALLY IF GLENN WANTS TO HIRE MORE STAFF, THAT'S ALL GENERAL FUND EXPENSE. I DON'T ARGUE THAT HE DOESN'T NEED MORE, BUT IT'S JUST GENERAL FUND EXPENSE. >> THAT'S ANOTHER CONSIDERATION IS WHAT ALL THESE AUDITS COST, I GUESS. >> ALL THESE AUDITS, WHICH ONES? >> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO PRIORITIZE THESE AUDITS, SO WE COVER AS MUCH GROUND AS POSSIBLE WITH THE RESOURCES WE HAVE. >> WELL, THE AUDITS THAT I OUTLINED, WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED YET. >> THE FOUR? >> YEAH. BUT THE PORT TRAVEL, WE HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED THAT, AND THE OVERTIME FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND THE POLICE SEIZED FUNDS, WE HAVE NOT STARTED THOSE AT ALL. >> BUT THESE ARE ALL SUPPOSED TO GET DONE WITHIN THIS YEAR? >> YES, SIR. WE WERE TRYING TO DO OUR BEST TO GET DONE. >> THE APPROVED AUDIT PLAN? >> YEAH. WE DID RUN INTO TROUBLE WITH THE HOT TAX AUDITS TAKING CONSIDERABLY LONGER, ABOUT FIVE TIMES LONGER THAN WE ESTIMATED THESE HOTELS. THAT'S WHERE THE MAIN HOLD UP IS AS FAR AS US COMPLETING OUR AUDIT PLAN. >> I WOULD RATHER CUT BACK ON THE HOT TAX AUDITS THAN THE SALES TAX AUDITS. >> THEY BOTH GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE EVENTUALLY. >> BUT SALES TAX COMES DIRECTLY INTO US. HOT IS A LITTLE MORE RESTRICTIVE. >> VERY SUCCESSFUL WITH THE SALES TAX. >> WE CAN USE THE SALES TAX TO PAY FOR AUDIT SALES TAX? >> YES. IT'S GENERAL FUNDS MONEY. >> IT'S GENERAL FUND MONEY, AND WE ESTABLISHED A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH STATE COMPTROLLER RECEIVING THESE FUNDS. >> THE OTHER THING I DON'T WANT TO DEFER IS THE AUDIT FOR THE PORT TRAVEL EXPENDITURES, BECAUSE WE'VE GONE THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE AUDIT HERE RELATED TO TRAVEL, AND PARK BOARD, AND ALL THAT. WE'VE HAD THAT ON THERE FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW, AND WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. >> WE COULD. THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED AT THE WARS BOARD. THEY'VE CHANGED ALL THEIR POLICIES AND THEY HAVE A NEW POLICY MANAGING ALL OF THAT. I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T DO THE AUDIT. I'M JUST SAYING WHERE WE ARE. THE PORT CHANGED THEIR POLICY MANUAL IN HOW THEY OPERATE FROM THAT STANDPOINT. >> WE SEE THEIR CHECK LETTER EVERY MONTH. >> EXCUSE ME. >> WE GET TO SEE THEIR CHECK LETTER EVERY MONTH. [OVERLAPPING] >> THE PARK BOARD HAS CHANGED A LOT OF THEIR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IN LIGHT, I GUESS OF THAT BEACH PATROL THING THAT CAME UP. THEY'VE ALREADY CHANGED A LOT OF POLICIES AND IN TURN ACCOUNTS PAYABLE, CREDIT CARD USE, BEACH PATROL REPORTING STRUCTURE, A LOT OF EVERYTHING. >> BUT WE ALSO GOT HERE WITH THE PARK BOARD CONFLICT OF INTEREST AUDIT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT UNDER PETER DAVIS, IT WAS TOLD TO OUR CHIEF NOT TO TELL MANAGEMENT, AND SIX MONTHS WENT BY BEFORE A CARD WAS COMPROMISED AT ANYTHING 6-9 MONTHS BEFORE ANYTHING WAS DONE. THEN THIS IT'S SNOWBALLS, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT BASED ON THE THINGS I SAW, POLICIES CAN CHANGE, BUT EVEN IF THEY'RE CHANGED, IF THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FOLLOWED PREVIOUSLY, YOU STILL HAVE TO DRIVE IT HOME. IT MIGHT CHANGE, BUT DRIVE IT HOME AND SEE, [04:55:04] HEY, WE HAVE TO OFFER OVERSIGHT. WE HAVE TO HAVE THE OVERSIGHT. UNDER 351 OF THE TAX CODE, THERE IS OVERSIGHT THAT'S REQUIRED BY A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY THAT GIVES ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY OR A GROUP OR ORGANIZATION THE USE OF THE HOT TAX. SOME OF THAT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE. QUESTION MY JUDGMENT OR NOT, IT'S SOMETHING I FELT STRONGLY ABOUT. I'M NOT GOING TO APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT, BUT THERE WAS ESTABLISHED PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES THAT WERE BROKEN. I THINK THERE WAS OTHER INAPPROPRIATE USES OF HOT TAX. THE DATA THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE PAPER ABOUT THE HOTEL STAYS, YOU CAN'T MEASURE THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET IN TERMS OF MASSAGES. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. IT'S THE TOTALITY OF EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO THAT CREATES THAT TOURISM ASPECT, THAT CREATES THE HEADS AND BEDS. BUT LOOKING AT THAT, AND JUST THE INCONSISTENCIES OF NO PARK BOARD STAFF WENT, PARK BOARD STAFF DID GO OR CVB STAFF OR VISIT GALVESTON. I THINK WE DESERVE AND AWE THE TAXPAYERS A CLEAR PICTURE OF WHAT IS THE ISSUES? HOW IS IT BEING SPENT? IT MIGHT FEEL LIKE OVER MANAGEMENT, BUT I THINK IT'S JUST BASIC OVERSIGHT. I DON'T WANT PUSH BACK FROM BASIC OVERSIGHT. >> I AGREE WITH YOU THAT WE AWE THE PUBLIC A COMPLETE EXPLANATION. RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THAT. >> EXACTLY. >> WHAT THE PAPER HAS BEEN PUTTING OUT THERE IS INCOMPLETE INFORMATION AND WE SHOULDN'T BE MAKING JUDGMENTS ON IT. JUST TO REMIND EVERYBODY WHAT REALLY THE PURPOSE OF AN AUDIT IS, IT'S TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY AND IMPROVE PROCESSES AND POLICIES. IN OTHER WORDS, WE'RE HERE TO SOLVE PROBLEMS. WE SEE A PROBLEM, LET'S SOLVE IT. WE DON'T NEED TO DRAG ANYBODY THROUGH THE MUD OR POINT FINGERS OR THROW ANYBODY ON THE BUS. THE PURPOSE OF THE AUDIT IS TO MAKE OUR WHOLE OPERATION RUN MORE EFFICIENTLY AND SERVE THE PEOPLE OF GALVESTON BETTER. NO ORGANIZATION IS PERFECT. ANY ORGANIZATION IS GOING TO HAVE ROOM FOR POLICY AND PROCEDURES IMPROVEMENTS, AND THAT'S REALLY THE PURPOSE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. >> FOR ME, IT'S HOW BIG OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT, AGAIN, THE TOTALITY, THE SCALE OF IS IT JUST POOR CONTROLS? IS IT JUST INHERENT IN THE WAY THINGS HAVE BEEN BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN NO OVERSIGHT? THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM WITH ME SINCE [INAUDIBLE]. >> WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE YET. BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WE DON'T HAVE A COMPLETE DATA YET, BUT WHEN WE DO, IF THAT IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS, WE'LL GET IT FIXED. >> BUT AGAIN, PART OF THE REASON WHY, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT APOLOGIZING FOR IT BECAUSE I FELT STRONGLY JUST BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND THE VISUAL EVIDENCE FROM A 6% SAMPLE SIZE WAS GREAT ENOUGH TO CAUSE ME CONCERN. TO SAY WE SHOULD AT LEAST HAVE OVERSIGHT OF EXPENDITURE REPORTS. THAT'S THEIR CHECK LEDGERS, THEIR CHECK REGISTERS. I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT. I'M NOT THROWING ANYBODY UNDER THE BUS. I HAVEN'T NAMED NAMES, I'M NOT POINTING THE FINGER. IT'S JUST POLICY, IT'S TAX DOLLARS, AND WE HAVE A DUTY AND UNDER STATE LAW FOR TAX CODE FOR OVERSIGHT. LET'S LET'S HAVE BO AND THEN SHARON. BO. >> THE THING I'LL LOOK AT, I'VE GOT FRIENDS THAT ARE VERY INVOLVED WITH PARKS BOARD. I'VE GOT FRIENDS THAT ARE VERY AGAINST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY FEEL THAT FEEL THAT'S GONE ON THERE AND WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME ISLAND IN THE SAME COMMUNITY, ALL TRYING TO ACQUIRE AND ATTAINING THE SAME THING. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH QUESTIONING EXPENSES THAT THE TAXPAYER FUNDS. ABSOLUTELY. AT NO TIME. OUR BIGGEST JOB AND DUTY AND CALL TO HONOR IS FIDUCIARY OVERSIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE AS PUBLIC FIGURES. FOR ANYONE TO TAKE PERSONAL, WHAT WE'VE ACTUALLY JUST QUESTIONED FOR KNOWLEDGE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT LIKE THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US FREELY AND SAY, LOOK WHAT WE'VE GOTTEN THE TAXPAYER ON THEIR RETURN ON INVESTMENT. LOOK WHAT THEY PUT TOWARDS THIS AND LOOK WHAT WE'VE GOT IN RETURN. WE'VE NEVER RECEIVED A PRESENTATION LIKE THAT. IT'S MORE OF WE ASKED QUESTIONS IT WAS SEEN AS IT WAS TAKEN PERSONAL AND A VENDETTA, [05:00:04] WHICH I DIDN'T TAKE TOO KINDLY ABOUT. I JUST WAS ACTING ON WHAT PUBLIC PEOPLE HAVE ASKED ME TO DO BECAUSE THEY WERE UPSET AND CONCERNED ABOUT IT. ESPECIALLY WHEN ANGELA BARDEN GETS SLAPPED ON THE HAND AND DOESN'T PAY ANYTHING BACK. REGARDLESS, IT'S PUBLIC SENTIMENT THAT IT ALL COMES TOGETHER. IN THREE WORKSHOP AGENDA ITEMS TODAY, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT STEWART BEACH PAVILION. HOW MUCH ARE WE AT THERE? WHAT IS A GRAND BIG PROJECT COSTS LIKE THAT? MAYBE 40, 60. I KNOW WHAT I'VE SEEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SPEND. WE'RE TALKING 40, 60 MILLION. WE JUST WERE TALKING ABOUT ALL THE PARKS AND THE REVENUE PARKS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IMPLEMENTING AND REDOING. WE BROUGHT IN THE FACT THAT WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON PROJECT ROSENBERG WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND A PARK. ALL OF THAT TO SAY IS THERE'S MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FICTIONALLY POURED INTO THESE PARKS AND THE BEACH, AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH HAVING POLICY AND HAVING OVERSIGHT TO SAY THAT WE'RE CAN GO INTO SOMETHING CLEANLY AND HAVE NO QUESTION OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT WHEN WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SIMPLE CREDIT CARD USAGE AND HAVE 44,000 TAKEN HERE AND 11,000 TAKEN HERE, I THINK IT'S PRETTY IMPORTANT. I THINK IT'S A GREAT INVESTMENT AND A VERY COMPLETE AUDIT OF AT LEAST TWO YEARS OF 100% IT HAS NOTHING MORE TO DO THAN JUST TO SAY, HEY, LOOK, WE'RE CHECKING ON POLICY. IT'S NOTHING THAT PARK SPORTS DOING WRONG. IT'S NOTHING THAT WE'RE DOING WRONG FOR ASKING IT FOR IT. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE IS A COST, BUT THERE'S ALSO A BIG COST IF WE DON'T DO IT. BECAUSE THAT BIG COST IF WE DON'T DO IT IS HABITS THAT WERE NOT GOOD HABITS CONTINUE BECAUSE THEY WERE NEVER CORRECTED. SO THERE'S A COST EITHER WAY. DO YOU WANT TO SPEND THE MONEY TO CLEAR THINGS UP AND TO SET POLICY AND PROCEDURES THAT CAN TAKE US INTO THIS NEXT STAGE OF A BETTER IN GALVESTON WITH A HUGE PAVILION OR BETTER IN GALVESTON WITH ALL THAT THEY DO TO BRING TOURISM TO GALVESTON. I JUST DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN SEE IT AS A COST. I SEE IT AS A MUST AND DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WOULD BE ANY QUESTION OR ANY PROBLEM WITH US DOING SO. >> SHARON. >> I THOUGHT BOB JUST BROUGHT IT OUT. THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF ALL OF IT TO IMPROVE, TO FIND OUT WHERE THERE WERE MISTAKES AND TO SEE IF PEOPLE CAN IMPROVE POLICY. ISN'T THAT NOT THE SAME THING? >> THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ME STATING THAT. HE STATED IT HIS WAY. I STATED IT MY WAY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME. >> YEAH, BUT WE KEEP ON WITH THE SAME. IS THAT NOT WHAT WE'RE ALL TRYING TO DO? IS THAT THE GOAL? >> WELL, I GUESS IT'S IMPORTANT SO WE CAN JUST SAY, LOOK, WE STARTED IT. LET'S GET IT DONE. GLENN NEEDS SOME HELP. GLENN WANTS TO DO TWO YEARS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S OUT OF QUESTION. >> I DON'T EITHER. IF WE DO TWO YEARS, GLENN, 100%. WHAT YEARS WOULD YOU DO? >> I WOULD DO A CURRENT AND A PREVIOUS YEAR. I WOULD SUGGEST COUNCIL DIRECT ME TO DO ONE YEAR UNDER CURRENT THEN ONE YEAR UNDER THE PREVIOUS YEAR. YES, SIR. >> IF THAT WAS A MOTION, THEN BE TWO YEARS OF 100% AUDITS, CURRENT YEAR AND PREVIOUS YEAR, IS THAT RIGHT, GLENN? >> CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION. >> NO. HE DIDN'T. HE SAID YEAR NOW. >> ONE YEAR, THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD. >> ONE YEAR OF EACH TENURE. >> THANK YOU. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR? >> YES. >> JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, THIS IS REGARDING THE EXPANSION OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR THE PARK BOARD AS WELL AS AN EXPANSION OF THE HOT AUDIT? >> YES. >> THOSE TWO ITEMS. >> WHAT DO YOU MEAN HOT AUDIT? DO YOU MEAN THE HOT TAX AUDIT OR THE HOT TAX EXPENDITURES AUDIT? >> YOU WERE DOING EXPENDITURES, WEREN'T YOU? >> TAX EXPENDITURES. [05:05:01] >> IT WAS TAX EXPENDITURES. YEAH. HOT TAX EXPENDITURES. >> IT'S CERTAINLY PUT TOGETHER. >> THE WHOLE TEXT. MAYOR, I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO DELAY SALES TAX AUDITS. I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO POSTPONE SOME THINGS. GLENN, I KNOW YOU HAVE THE STR AUDITS THAT WE DID 45, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANOTHER 55 OR AT LEAST I THINK YOU'RE SAYING MAYBE WE PUSH THAT INTO NEXT YEAR. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE'RE SEEING MORE COMPLIANCE. EVERY TIME YOU DO THIS YOU'RE GETTING MORE COMPLIANCE. I'M WILLING TO CONCEDE THAT AND TO MOVE THAT INTO THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. I REALLY DO WANT TO KEEP THE PORT TRAVEL EXPENDITURES ON THERE. I KNOW THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. BUT IF WE NEED TO TREAT BOTH ENTITIES THE SAME. >> TWELVE INCHES IS 12 INCHES. >> THAT'S IT. >> WHAT DID YOU SAY? >> TWELVE INCHES IS 12 INCHES FOR EVERYBODY. I'D LIKE TO KEEP THE COURT AUDIT ON THERE FOR TRAVEL EXPENDITURES THEN I REALLY DON'T HAVE STRONG FEELINGS UNLESS YOU HAVE OTHER INDICATORS THAT YOU HAVE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS OVERTIME TRACK AND GPD TRACKING, POLICE THESE FUNDS AS AN IMMEDIATE NEED OR IF THAT CAN BE PUSHED TO NEXT YEAR. UNLESS HE'S GOT SOME EVIDENCE THAT POINTS TO THE FACT THAT THAT'S AN IMMEDIATE. >> I MENTIONED TO GLENN. I THINK YOU TRUST GLENN ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT IF HE GETS INTO THIS AND FIND SOMETHING, YOU CAN ALWAYS EXPAND IT THEN. >> SURE. >> CONSIDER WE'RE GOING NOW WE'RE GOING TO A WHOLE NEW TIMING PROGRAM. >> THANK YOU. ANY MORE COMMENTS ON THAT ITEM? >> I AGREE WITH WHAT DAVID JUST SAID. >> LET ME MAKE SURE THAT I'M GETTING THIS. >> BEFORE WE LEAVE IT, WOULD YOU REPEAT THIS BACK TO US SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND WITH YOU WHAT'S DOING? >> THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND IT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANY MORE HOT TAX AUDITS REMAINDER OF THIS FISCAL YEAR ON SHORT TERM RENTALS. YOU WANT HOTELS. IF YOU CAN, >> WELL, BUT IT'S COSTING US MONEY. >> I WOULDN'T DO EITHER. >> I WOULDN'T DO EITHER. >> HOW MANY SALES TAX AUDITS DO YOU WANT? >> EXCUSE ME. >> HOW MANY SALES TAX AUDITS DO YOU WANT? >> THE BIG ONES. >> IDENTIFY THEM. >> WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO ATTEMPT TO DO 30. >> THEN MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU STILL WANT THE TRAVEL AND TRAINING AT THE PORT? YES. THAT LEAVES THE QUESTION THE LAST TWO. I THINK THAT AS FAR AS THE LAST TWO, WE WOULD HAVE TROUBLE COMPLETED. >> WHICH ONES? >> THAT WOULD BE THE OVERTIME IN PUBLIC WORKS AND THE POLICE SEIZED FUNDS. >> PUSH THAT TO NEXT. >> I THINK WE SHOULD PUSH THAT TO YEAR. >> THAT'S FINE. BY DOING THAT, WHICH YOU'VE OUTLINED, GLENN, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DO THE HOT AND THE EXPANDED CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR THIS CURRENT YEAR AND THEN FOR THE YEAR BACK TO THE PAST ADMINISTRATIONS. >> THAT'S TWO YEARS OF 100% TESTING CURRENT AND PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION. >> WOULD YOU NEED ANY ADDITIONAL STAFFING TO ASSIST YOU TO MAKE THIS TIMELY? >> BECAUSE OF INJURIES TO MY AUDIT STAFF TO ENTER THINGS IN THE COMPUTER. WE HAD ONE. CARRIE'S HAD A LOT OF SURGERY I'M GETTING STIFF NOW MYSELF. S WE COULD UTILIZE A PART TIME TO SAVE OUR HANDS BECAUSE WE ENTER THINGS VERY FAST. >> WELL, WHY DON'T YOU LOOK AT THAT, GLENN? IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD AN EMPLOYEE FOR THAT, BRING THAT BACK. >> IT WOULD BE A PART TIME DATA ENTRY CLERK. >> I NEVER FINISHED MY OTHER POINT AND THAT'S WHAT IT WAS BECAUSE WE'VE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED GETTING EXTRA FUNDING AND EVERY SINCE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE AUDITS. THAT'S NOT REALLY A SURPRISE. WE JUST NEED TO MOVE TOWARDS WHAT HE NEEDS. >> I WANT TO REMIND US THAT YOU'RE AUDITING HOT AND YOU'RE AUDITING A DIFFERENT GROUP THAT YOU'RE FILLING THE TAXPAYERS AT GALVESTON TO DO THAT. WE'RE INCREASING SALES TAX TOO. WE DID TAKE HOTEL OUT. >> I'M SORRY. >> WE DID TAKE HOTEL OUT. >> YES. >> YEAH. >> UNDER SALES TAX AUDITS, THEY HAVE EVERY 15, $200,000 NO GUARANTEE THAT WE'RE GOING TO FIND THIS MONEY, AND IT TAKES A WHILE TO GET IT THROUGH THE COMPTROLLER. [05:10:01] I HAVE TO CALL THEM QUITE FREQUENTLY AND THROUGH. AVERAGE BEEN SUCCESSFUL. ON AVERAGE, YES, SIR. IT'S WORKED OUT. EVERY 15, WE GET $200,000. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT IS. >> GLENN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [3.H. Discussion of Joint Meeting Dates for the Wharves and Park Boards ( C Brown - 10 min ) ( Action )] APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S GO TO 3H, PLEASE. >> 3H. DISCUSSION OF JOINT MEETING DATES FOR THE AWARDS AND PARKS BOARDS. >> COUNCIL, I SENT AN EMAIL OUT TO YOU, SENT THE DATES TO YOU. THIS IS TO PICK A SEPARATE DAY FOR JOINT MEETINGS, NOT HAVING IT ON THE DAY OF OUR WORKSHOP MEETINGS. THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA FOR ITEM 10A. ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM? YES. >> ON THOSE JOINT MEETINGS, WE'RE GOING TO START AT NINE O'CLOCK? >> THAT'S MY GOAL. >> I JUST DIDN'T SEE IT ON RESOLUTION. >> YEAH, THAT'S FINE. >> I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE ON APRIL 30 FOR THE WORK BOARD-CITY COUNCIL JOINT MEETING. I CAN'T MAKE THAT PARTICULAR DATE. >> COULD YOU COME VIRTUAL ON THAT? >> I DON'T HAVE THE DATES IN FRONT OF ME. CAN YOU PRINT IT OR THROW IT UP ON THE BOARD? >> I SENT THEM TO YOU IN AN EMAIL. BUT I DON'T HAVE IT WITH ME. >> HERE, MARIE. >> IT'S IN TO MARIE, BOB. >> IT'S IN THE PACKET MATERIAL. >> THE 29TH AND 28TH IS OKAY, BUT NOT THE 30TH. THAT'S WHEN. >> YOU COULD NOT ATTEND VIRTUALLY BOB. >> I DON'T THINK SO. >> THIS IS GOING TO BE A SEMINAR AND I'M GOING TO BE IN CLASSES AND TRAINING. >> LET'S SEE WHAT TAKE THOSE. COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO SUPPORT THOSE. WHAT ABOUT THE 28TH OR 29TH? ONCE WE START CHANGING THESE AROUND, IT GETS VERY DIFFICULT. >> HAVE THESE ALREADY BEEN VETTED WITH PARK BOARD AND WORK BOARD? >> I HAVE VETTED THESE WITH CHAIRMAN PEARSON. YES, SIR. THAT'S THE ONE I THINK IN QUESTION RIGHT NOW. LET'S SEE. >> WE TALKED ABOUT OUR PARK BOARD YESTERDAY. >> GOOD. THANKS. >> KEEP THEM ON THE SEPARATE DAY. >> A SEPARATE DAY? >> THE SCHEDULING IS BUT IT'S A SEPARATE DAY. >> IT'S AT 3:00 AND WE HAD NO JOIN MEETING TODAY. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING. >> I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE WORK BOARD. I CAN'T MAKE IT. THAT'S ON THE 30TH. >> WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS AGENDA COMING UP HERE. I THINK, COUNCILMAN PORRETTO HAS HERE. I GOT SOME COMMENTS ON THIS. BUT ANYWAY, BOB, IT'LL BE ON OUR AGENDA. THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS WE CAN HANDLE THAT. WE COULD APPROVE THE OTHER DATES AND SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO CHANGE THE APRIL 30TH. >> THAT'D PRETTY GOOD. >> I'M NOT SURE WE COULD, BUT WE'LL SEE ABOUT THAT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? [3.I. City Topics ( Robb/Rawlins - 20 min )] GOOD. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3I NOW. >> ITEM 3I, CITY TOPICS. ONE, POSSIBLE BOND FOR MILL AND OVERLAY OF ALL STREETS WITHOUT RAISING PRICES OR TAXES. >> THESE ARE TOPICS PUT ON BY COUNCILWOMAN ROBB. >> WELL, BRIAN AND I WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CONDITION OF OUR STREETS. >> ON SUNDAY DURING CHURCH. >> WE WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CONDITION OF STREETS. >> WHAT WE HAVE IS AND THIS IS SHOULDN'T BE A SURPRISE, MICHAEL OFTEN SHOWED YOU AND CSILLA SHOWED YOU. WE'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING DOWN ON YOUR DEBT AND MOST CITIES THEIR GOAL IS TO KEEP THEIR DEBT LEVEL. AS WE SPEND DOWN ON DEBT, WE CAN INCREASE DEBT THROUGH FOR STREET PROJECTS. IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE MILL AND OVERLAY PROJECTS. THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL NEEDS AS WELL THAT WE CAN THROW INTO SUCH AN ISSUE. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FIRE STATION 2, WHICH WE'RE MOVING RAPIDLY TOWARDS, BUT THIS WOULD KEEP YOU CLEAR. THIS DETAILS INTO SOME OF THE OTHER DISCUSSIONS, BUT WHAT'S HAPPENED TO US IS THIS PAST YEAR WITH ALBERTO AND THEN BERYL, WE HAVE COMMITTED SO MUCH, OVER 50% OR NEAR 50% OF ALL OF OUR RESOURCE TIME JUST TO KEEP UP WITH THESE STORMS AND TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR HOMES AND TO MAKE SURE [05:15:02] THAT THE ROADS THAT ARE WASHED OUT ARE AT LEAST FILLED BACK IN IN SOME WAY. WE'VE SPENT GOD KNOWS HOW MUCH IN BERMUDA BEACH DRIVE, JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT PASSABLE TILL WE CAN GET THIS PERMANENT SOLUTION IN. GIVEN THAT PLUS THE HIRING FREEZE, WE'RE FALLING FURTHER AND FURTHER BEHIND IN OUR STREET PAVING PROJECTS. IN A PERFECT WORLD, WE'RE PAVING A BLOCK A WEEK WITH OUR PAVING CREW. WE ARE WAY BEHIND ON THAT RIGHT NOW, JUST BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN COMMITTING RESOURCES WHERE THEY'RE MOST NEEDED. THIS IS A WAY THAT YOU CAN CATCH UP. >> WE COULD DO A BOND, IT WOULDN'T INCREASE TAXES, AND WE COULD MILL AND OVERLAY ALL THE TAX RATE THAT NEEDED. >> WAIT A MINUTE. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A BOND? >> THIS WOULD BE A COUNTIES BOND WE ADD SOMETHING ONTO IT? >> NO. THIS WOULD BE THE CITY ISSUE BOND. THE COUNTY'S BOND, YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME DECISIONS TO MAKE ON THAT. THE STAFF HAS PROPOSED. >> MILL AND OVERLAY? >> WELL, WE HAVE, BUT UP THE SEAWALL, [LAUGHTER] WHICH NEEDS IT PRETTY BAD IN SOME SPOTS. BUT THIS WOULD BE FOR OUR GENERAL MILL AND OVERLAY, WE WOULD BID IT OUT AND HAVE OUTSIDE CREWS DOING IT VERSUS US OUR IN HOUSE CREWS CONTINUE TO DO THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING, BUT THIS WOULD ACTUALLY PUT THESE ON THE STREETS. KEEP IN MIND, IT DOESN'T GO AS FAST BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PROVIDE A BIT SPEC AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO A CONTRACTOR. WE JUST CAN'T SAY, GO FORTH AND DO THIS. >> BUT BRIAN ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A BOND PAID FOR BY A PORTION OF THIS 8%? >> WELL, NO, IT DEPENDS. YOU HAVE A DEBT TAX RATE THAT YOU'RE PAYING NOW THAT IS PARTIALLY BEING PAID FOR WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE. >> CORRECT. >> AS IT GOES DOWN, IF YOU WANTED TO MAINTAIN THAT I THINK WHAT IS IT? WE SPENT ABOUT 4% OF IT OF INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE ON DEBT? >> RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT SPENDING ANYTHING. >> YES. WE ACTUALLY HAVE SOME ROOM IN THERE. >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A BOND THOUGH? >> YES. >> THAT WOULD BE PAID FOR BY THAT INFRASTRUCTURE. >> INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE, YES. NOW, KEEP IN MIND, WE USE THAT FUND FOR BIG THINGS. NOTHING IS WITHOUT EXCEPTION. BUT, WE COULD THEN IN THEORY DO THAT, I WOULD GET YOU CAUGHT UP ON YOUR STREET PROJECT. >> BUT HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THAT WOULD TAKE? >> WELL, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF YOU TOOK THESE BONDS OUT THAT YOU WOULD DO IT ON A SHORT TERM BASIS BECAUSE YOU'RE DOING ASPHALT STREETS. [OVERLAPPING] >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHERE THOSE STREETS ARE. >> WE WOULD USE OUR STREET STUDY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT. >> WE HAVE A SCHEDULE OF ALL OF THAT. FRANNY CAN PROVIDE THAT TO EVERYBODY. >> IT DOESN'T JEOPARDIZE ANYTHING ELSE WE WANT TO DO WITH THAT BOND? >> THE ONLY THINGS I WORRY ABOUT IS ONE OF THE THINGS YOU GUYS CAME UP IS WE DO USE THAT SET ASIDE FUND FOR BIG THINGS LIKE FIRE TRUCKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND WE ARE IN NEED OF A PUMPER NEXT YEAR AND PROBABLY MIKE LEFT, BUT IT'S PROBABLY ANOTHER ONE IN 28 THAT WE'LL HAVE TO COME UP WITH IN THESE PUMPERS NOW WHO HAVE ECLIPSED THE MILLION DOLLAR MARK FOR US. >> IS THAT ONE ON OUR AGENDA TODAY? >> THAT'S THE ONE THAT WE NEED RIGHT NOW. THE PROBLEM IS YOU JUST DON'T SAY GO BUY A PUMPER. WE'RE PUTTING A DEPOSIT ON A PUMPER TODAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A YEAR FROM NOW IF WE'RE LUCKY, SO WE NEED TO PLAN THOSE OUT. BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S A LITTLE ROOM. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO EVERY STREET IN GALVESTON, BUT THERE'S A LITTLE ROOM TO HELP GET US CAUGHT UP IN THERE WITH THIS DEBT. >> WITHOUT JEOPARDIZING. >> MY THING WOULD BE YOU WOULD DO IT SHORT TERM SO THAT THE FUTURE COUNCILS WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO CONTINUE THAT PROGRAM IF THEY WANTED TO. >> THE DEVILS IN THE DETAILS ON THAT. >> A HUNDRED PERCENT. LIKE I SAID, JUST LIKE EVERY PILL YOU TAKE, THERE'S A SIDE EFFECT. BUT YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE TO WEIGH THE BENEFIT OF THAT OUT. BUT I THINK RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL WORKING ON STREETS OUT THERE OUT WEST. >> BUT EVEN IN TOWN. >> A HUNDRED PERCENT. >> I'VE BEEN TO ANY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I THINK MY GOD, THESE ARE THE WORST STREETS I'VE EVER SEEN AND THAT ON DRIVE 12TH STREET, I'M LIKE, NO, THIS IS EQUALLY BETTER. [OVERLAPPING] >> AS YOU RECALL, YOUR STREET SURVEY THAT WE DID WAS BASED ON A CERTAIN TIMELINE IN OUR USUAL PRODUCTION SCHEDULE. WE'RE FALLING BEHIND THAT. WHAT THAT DOES IS IT ACTUALLY BRINGS ABOUT INADEQUACY IN YOUR STREET STUDY BECAUSE THE STREETS ARE AGING CONSISTENTLY. WE'RE JUST NOT PAVING CONSISTENTLY BECAUSE WE'RE FALLING BEHIND. >> THEY'RE AGING AND THEN WE'VE HAD THESE ONSET OF STORMS AND HIGH TIDE. [OVERLAPPING] >> I WOULD TELL YOU THE THING WE'VE LEARNED IS THAT HURRICANES ARE ROUGH ON ROADS ON THE WEST END. FREEZES ARE ROUGH ON ROADS EVERYWHERE. [OVERLAPPING] THIS WOULD POSSIBLY NOT BE A BAD THING. I'M FAR FROM THE EXPERT ON HOW THE BONDS WOULD WORK. THAT'D BE A QUESTION FOR CSILLA, BUT I DO KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN THE PAST THAT IT WOULD BE OUR GOAL TO KEEP YOUR DEBT RATE CONSTANT. [05:20:01] THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN BEGIN TALKING ABOUT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO BE ALSO BRINGING YOU A FIRE STATION PROJECT IN THE NEAR FUTURE AS WELL. >> I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THAT. FIRST OFF, I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE THIS LIMITED AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT YOU CAN COVER IN A BOND AND KEEPING THE SAME DEBT TAX. I UNDERSTAND THAT. IT WOULD BE GOOD TO START TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT IS. WE'RE ALREADY TALKING ABOUT SOME OTHER SIGNIFICANT THINGS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CHARTER AMENDMENT IN NOVEMBER, WHICH WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH. THEN IF WE GO FORWARD WITH THE IDEA OF PUTTING TOGETHER A BOND, I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT WE TAKE ALSO A HOLISTIC VIEW, LIKE YOU SAID, ON ITEMS THAT WE HAVE BEEN CONTINUALLY DEFERRING IN OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, I.E., FIRE STATION NUMBER 2, I.E., MAYBE TAKING BACK CONTROL OF OUR EMS SERVICES SO THAT WE'RE NOT SUBJECT JUST TO THE REALM OF GALVESTON COUNTY, WHICH ON THE FIRST COST, THERE WOULD BE A FIRST COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT THAT WE KNOW WE CAN'T STOMACH WITHIN THE EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, BUT YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO WITH IT A BOND. I THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT OPENING SALVO FOR A DISCUSSION OF IT. I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT LIMIT IS. >> FIRE STATION 2 IS RISING IN PRIORITY, NOT BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS FAILING, BUT EVERY TIME I PUT A NEW FIRE TRUCK ON THE AGENDA, YOU'RE GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER TO NOT HAVING A FIRE TRUCKS GO TO FIT IN THAT STATION. [LAUGHTER] I CAN ONLY SHUFFLE SO MANY OF THE OLD ONES IN THEREFORE WE RUN OUT OLD ONES. >> DEFERRING THAT COST, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO SEE CONTINUED INCREASES IN CONSTRUCTION. IF WE'RE OUTSTRIPPING THE GARAGE CAPACITY FIRE STATION 2 AS WELL AS JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, IT MIGHT BE GOOD. >> TO BE VERY CLEAR, I'M TALKING ABOUT KEEPING THE DEBT SERVICE RATE CONSISTENT. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> THAT IS NOT YOUR ADOPTED TAX RATE. THAT IS PART AND PARCEL OF YOUR ADOPTED TAX RATE. >> THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STREET INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE, SO HOW DOES THAT COME FROM FIRETRUCKS? >> WE USE A PART OF THAT IN THE DEBT SERVICE FUND. THAT'S ALREADY PART PART. THIS YEAR, WE THROTTLED IT ALL OUT TO MEET THE BUDGET. >> THAT'S MY WHOLE CONCERN. THERE'S A LOT OF NEEDS OUT OF THAT FUND. >> CSILLA CAN MODEL IT ALL FOR YOU AND WE CAN TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. >> IF WE DON'T START TO DISCUSSION ONE. >> THAT'S 100% CORRECT. IT MAY BE THAT WE GO DOWN THIS ROAD AND YOU GUYS SAY, NO, IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK, BUT I THINK IT'S TIME WE HAVE THAT DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE IT FOR THE FIRE STATION REGARDLESS. >> YEAH. SOUNDS GOOD. ITEM 2, JANELLE. >> ITEM 2. DISCUSSION OF INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE BUILDING LARGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO DRAINAGE. >> I THINK WE COULD ADD INTO THIS THE NFIP BECAUSE I KNOW THAT TIES INTO THE DRAINAGE. >> YEAH. THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS GOING TO SAY IT COULD BE PUT UNDERNEATH THIS ONE TOO. >> JANELLE, READ 3K1, PLEASE. >> 3K1, DISCUSSION OF NFIP REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> THE DRAINAGE CHARGE AND THE DRAINAGE PLANS IS DEFINITELY CAUSING A BURDEN ON PEOPLE WHO ARE DEVELOPING. I'D SAY ONE OF THE THINGS RIGHT NOW, THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENT IS WHAT STANDS BETWEEN THE CITY GETTING AN HB OR NOT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COME FROM DEVELOPERS IS WE HAD AN ENGINEERING PROJECT TO DEVELOP THE DRAINAGE NEEDS, AND YET EACH PERSON WHO IS DEVELOPING AND WE RUN INTO THIS WITH TR, WHERE WE RUN INTO IT WITH OTHER IS REQUIRED TO DUPLICATE AND DO A WHOLE ENGINEERING, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE DONE IT, WHICH IS A SUBSTANTIAL COST THAT SETS US APART FROM OTHER CITIES. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT DOING REALLY ANY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE THE SILO FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITH 4B SALES TAX. I KNOW WE'VE DONE SOME 380S AND THIS COULD BE DONE WITH A 380, AND THIS IS REALLY NOT SPECIFIC TO ANY BECAUSE I'M HEARING IT CROSS-BOARD, IS DEAR LORD, THAT WHOLE HAVING TO DO ENGINEERING TO COME UP WITH DRAINAGE WHEN IT WAS ALL DRIVEN BY YOUR ENGINEER DRAINAGE PLAN IS AN EXTENSIVE COST TO ADD TO A PROJECT. BUT ASIDE FROM DRAINAGE, COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES, WE'RE NOT DOING ANY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE HERE. AGAIN, THIS IS TO OPEN THE DISCUSSION. BUT THE ONE I GET CALLS ABOUT MOST ACROSS THE ISLAND [05:25:05] IS THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE IT NEEDS SUCH A LARGE PORTION OF THE LAND. >> WE HAVE DAVID IN THEN. >> I'D LIKE YOU TO CLARIFY. YOU CAN HAVE AN OVERALL MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN FOR THE CITY, BUT EACH PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO MEET CERTAIN DETENTION REQUIREMENTS, AND THE ENGINEERING ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE DONE FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL PROJECT. WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY YOU SAID, OTHER CITIES ARE NOT CHARGED OR OFFSETTING THOSE FEES FOR THAT ENGINEERING FOR THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL? >> OTHER CITIES ARE DOING INCENTIVES IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT FORMS. BUT LET ME PUT IT WHAT I'M TRYING TO EXPRESS, LET'S SAY YOU'RE BUYING A 20-ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND YOU'RE HAVING TO TAKE FIVE OF THOSE ACRES TO ACCOMMODATE OUR DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS. NOW THAT'S A 15-ACRE AND NOT THAT I'M SAYING WE NEED TO NOT DO DRAINAGE BECAUSE CITIES OF DANA WHEN I WAS IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORLD, WOULD REQUIRE A DRAINAGE POND. WE'RE NOT DOING ANY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES RIGHT NOW TO SPEAK OF. WE HAVE DONE A FEW LIKE YEARS AGO AT THE PORT, BMW WAS ONE. BUT WE'RE COMPETING WITH OTHER LOCATIONS, AND MORE SO WE'RE AN ISLAND. TO TIE THE NFIP, PART OF IT IS SAID THAT'S WHAT ALLOWS US TO KEEP OUR RATING, SO MAYBE WE WOULD LIKE MORE CLARITY ON THAT. BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS AFFECTING GOOD DEVELOPMENT ON THE ISLAND. >> SURE. NO, I UNDERSTAND THAT. OUR CRS ABSOLUTELY IS TIED TO OUR BUILDING CODES AND ADOPTING BUILDING CODES THAT ARE HIGHER THAN WHAT THE NFIP REQUIRES HELPS IMPROVE HR. >> I'M FULLY AWARE OF. >> WHAT I HEAR, THIS IS MORE OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUE OF TRYING TO FIND OUT IF THERE ARE WAYS TO INCENTIVIZE [BACKGROUND] EITHER ON JUST DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL OR SPECIFICALLY, YOU'RE SAYING THE DRAINAGE ISSUE. >> I HATE TO INTERRUPT BUT MY POINT WAS KIND OF SIMILAR. HOWEVER, [NOISE] I KNOW WE HAVE OUR CRS UNDER THE NFIP. IS OUR FLOODPLAIN MANAGER HERE? NICE. LOOKING AT THE CRS AND IT KEEPS OUR EVERYBODY'S FLOOD INSURANCE FROM THE FIP PROGRAM LOWER. OTHER THINGS WE'RE NOT DOING THAT WE CAN SUBSTITUTE THAT WOULD MAKE IT CHEAPER FOR ENGINEERING, TAKE SOME OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS OUT, MAYBE PUT SOME OTHER REQUIREMENTS IN THAT AREN'T SO ENGINEER HEAVY, SO UPFRONT COST HEAVY. I KNOW OF AT LEAST FOUR, HOW WE BENTLEY'S BEEN BOISTEROUS ABOUT IT BECAUSE HE CAN'T EVEN PUT IN A CAR WASH WITHOUT THE TENSION REQUIREMENTS, TIERRA, I WATCHED IT COUNCIL AND IT ALSO ADDED ALL THIS TIME THAT WE HAD TO GO WITH GLO AND BACK AND FORTH. >> GRANTED, IT WAS NECESSARY. >> BUT WE'RE IN A WORLD RIGHT NOW WHERE WE'RE FIGHTING FOR PEOPLE TO COME HERE AND IMPROVEMENTS, TAXABLE VALUE, AND IT'S MAKING IT TO WHERE IT'S ALMOST NEAR IMPOSSIBLE. NOW, I KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME CHANGE IN THESE PROGRAMS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, AND MAYBE YOU CAN ENLIGHTEN US ON SOME OF THAT OR SALLY COULD PROBABLY ENLIGHTEN US ON THE NEXT MEETING. BUT WITH THOSE THINGS HAPPENING, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT, AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN TELL US ABOUT, WHERE WE STAND ON OUR CRS RATING. WHAT REQUIREMENTS CAN WE REMOVE OR ADD TO CHANGE TO KEEP IT THE SAME? THEN MAYBE EVEN IF WE REMOVE SOME, IS THE GROWTH FACTOR THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET GOING TO OFFSET THOSE COSTS VIA TAXES. >> I THINK YOUR FIRST QUESTION IS, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO INCREASE THE DISCOUNT FOR YOUR RESIDENT OR ARE YOU HAPPY LEAVING WHERE IT'S AT? BECAUSE YOU'RE 20% NOW, AND OUR MARCHING ORDERS GOING BACK TO GOOD GOD, I THINK YOU WERE ON COUNCIL THE FIRST TIME, WAS THAT YOU KEEP GOING UNTIL YOU GET THE MAXIMUM. EVERY YEAR, WE'RE TRYING BECAUSE THIS IS SAVINGS TO EVERY HOMEOWNER. >> NO, IT IS. >> I DON'T THINK WE LEARN LESSON REQUIREMENT. >> BUT IF YOU WANT TO TELL US, WE'RE GOOD WHERE WE'RE AT. [05:30:03] DON'T KEEP GOING FOR MORE DISCOUNTS, THAT MAKES A LOT EASIER. >> GO AHEAD. [LAUGHTER] >> MY POINT. >> GO AHEAD. >> [NOISE] I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO JUST START WITH A LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE. THERE'S FOUR PROJECTS THAT I WAS MADE AWARE OF. AGB THERE BY THE OLD COURTHOUSE. >> WE DON'T GO TO TEST CARE. >> IT COULD BE ANY BIG BOY STORE. >>THERE PROSPECTS THAT WERE. >> AGB A PROSPECT THAT COULD BE TURNED AWAY DUE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF A DETENTION. THERE IS A PROJECT NEAR THE POLICE STATION THAT'S ON BROADWAY THAT CURRENTLY IS BASICALLY GOING TO TABLE THE PROJECT BECAUSE OF OUR SAME REQUIREMENTS WITH A DETENTION POND. HOW AUDIT CLASSIC. SAME THING. HE HAD QUITE A BIT OF EXPANSION THAT IS NOW TRASH BECAUSE OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, AND, OF COURSE, THE EXAMPLE OF TRA. >> KATIE'S ON SEAWALL. >> KATIE'S ON THE SEAWALL, NO MORE. THAT'S FIVE, ACTUALLY. FIVE PROJECTS THAT COULD BE ONGOING RIGHT NOW. TWO THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IS SO WHAT IS THE COST OF NOT DOING THAT? WE'VE GOT A 20% CRS THAT WE'RE CURRENTLY AT. [OVERLAPPING] I'M GOING TO GET THERE. SOMETHING THAT ALEX SAID, A IS THERE THINGS THAT CAN OFFSET THAT. THEY TAKE A RATIO OF WHAT WE ARE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND, WHAT WE'RE AT A MEDIAN WITH, AND WHAT WE'RE DEFICIENT AT TO COME UP WITH THAT 20%. WHAT IS THE COST OF BACKING OFF THE DETENTION POND REQUIREMENTS, A? B. >> A SIMPLE PERSPECTIVE, OUR WATER TABLE, ESPECIALLY AT SOME OF THESE LOCATIONS, WE'RE DIGGING FOUR OR FIVE FEET AND WE'RE HITTING THE WATER TABLE. I PUT THAT IN AS WATER IS GOING TO FLOW DOWNHILL OR WATER IS GOING TO RISE DEPENDING ON WHAT OUR TIDE LEVEL IS AT TIMES. AT WHAT POINT IN TIME DO WE HAVE A COMMON SENSE APPROACH OF DIGGING A HOLE IS GOING TO FILL UP WITH WATER WITHOUT US DRAINING INTO IT? THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. THEN FINALLY, THE BIGGEST THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT, IF WE'RE TELLING PEOPLE THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE REQUIRED, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE STICKING WITH, WE WANT TO STICK TO OUR 20% CRS AND THERE'S NO OTHER OPTIONS, I COULD ONLY SEE NOT ONLY HAVE WE LOST THESE FIVE, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE FIVE MORE. AT WHAT POINT IN TIME DO WE DEVELOP A PROGRAM TO SAY, LISTEN, WE REQUIRE THIS, BUT WE HAVE TAX INCENTIVES TO OFFSET IT OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS THAT WE HAVE OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS? >> THAT WOULD BE YOUR APPROACH BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO LESSEN YOUR CRO. >> THAT AT LEAST IF THERE IS A REQUIREMENT AND WE DON'T WANT TO HURT OUR FLOOD INSURANCE RATES, THEN WE HAVE A SOLUTION THAT'S RIGHT AFTER WHAT WE PRESENT AS A REQUIREMENT. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE MISSING THE BOAT ON THAT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T PRESENTED ANY PROGRAM LIKE THAT. IT'S JUST WE SAY, NO, BUT THIS IS THE WAY IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER SOLUTION. MAYBE YOU NEED TO GO UP THE ROAD AND WE'RE GOING TO LOSE YOU AS A BUSINESS. >> THIS IS REALLY TIMELY BECAUSE MICHELLE AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT MAKING POTENTIAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UPDATES TO 380 AGREEMENTS OR OTHER INCENTIVES. I DIDN'T KNOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT TODAY. >> IT'S A VERY HOT TOPIC. >> IT IS. I WANTED TO PUT IT ON THE NEXT WORKSHOP AGENDA BECAUSE-. >> THAT'S WHY I PUT IT ON THIS. [LAUGHTER] NO, IT'S UNCANNY. >> IT IS. >> I'M GETTING CALLS ON A DAILY BASIS. >> MICHELLE, DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT SOME OF THE THINGS? >> IT'S PART OF THE NFIP. >> IT'S PART OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS WHAT WE WANT. THIS IS SEEING THE FUTURE DEVELOP TAXABLE VALUE SO WE CAN LOWER. >> EVERYTHING IS A BALANCE. >> IT IS A BALANCE. I'M GLAD THAT YOU ALL PUT IT ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE I'VE SEEN, IN MY EXPERIENCE, IN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES, THE SUCCESS THAT YOU CAN HAVE WITH SPECIAL USE DISTRICTS, OVERLAND DISTRICTS WITH TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONES, WITH TAX DEFERRAL. >> [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'S A NO-NO. [05:35:04] >> BUT IT ISN'T THAT NO. >> IT'S NOT A NO-NO. I'M TALKING FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WHERE I WORKED FOR A TAX INCREMENT REINVESTMENT ZONE IN HOUSTON, THAT WE HAD A $210 MILLION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BECAUSE WE WERE VERY TARGETED AND PURPOSEFUL ABOUT HOW WE CREATED IT, AND IT SPURRED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA, WHICH HELPED TO FUND THOSE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. >> I'LL TELL YOU, WE WOULD NOT HAVE A TARGET, A HOME DEPOT, IF IT WASN'T FOR TIRZ. OTHER ONE IS WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE STRAND IF IT WAS FOR TIRZ. WE WOULDN'T HAVE PIRATES BEACH, PIRATES COVE, IF IT WASN'T FOR TIRZ. >> THESE ALTERNATE FORMS OF FINANCING THAT CAN BE UTILIZED EVEN TO THE EXTENT OF MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING [OVERLAPPING]. >> BELIEVE ME, I'M GOING TO HAVE THAT ON THE NEXT AGENDA. >> I THINK THAT'S A VERY TIMELY DISCUSSION, AND I'M GLAD YOU JUST WANT TO HAVE THEM PROVE IT OUT THERE. >> I AGREE, TIRZ GOT TO BE A BAD WORD AND THEY NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN. THE PURPOSE OF TIRZ IS THAT YOU DON'T LOSE ANY MONEY BECAUSE THE TAX VALUE IS FROZEN WHERE YOU ARE TODAY. IT'S JUST THE INCREMENT. IF THEY DON'T DO WHAT THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO DO, THEN THERE'S NO INCREMENT TO BE HAD. YOU CAN DO A TAX REINVESTMENT ZONE. YOU GUYS HAVE A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY HERE. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GIVE THEM ALL OF IT. YOU CAN GIVE THEM HALF OF THE INCREMENT. YOU CAN GIVE THEM A THIRD OF THE INCREMENT. OR YOU COULD TAKE NORMAL GROWTH THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD NORMALLY HAVE UNDER THE CURRENT RATE AND THEN GIVE THEM THE INCREMENT ON TOP OF THAT. >> OR WE COULD DO WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, WHICH IS NOTHING, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO CHANGE. >> WE'RE VERY GOOD AT THAT. >> WE SIT AT THE IDC ALL THE TIME, AND WE TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SILO, WHICH HAS BEEN USED TO BENEFIT PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE, BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF MONEY. WE DID USE IT FOR BMW. WHEN WE DID THE LANGUAGE IN THE LAST ELECTION, WE EVEN CHANGED SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT STYMIED THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. BUT TRULY, IT FALLS INTO INFRASTRUCTURE OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DRAINAGE. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE US FOCUS MORE. WE KNOW WHAT WILL ALLOW US TO LOWER TAXES, AND IT'S HAVING MORE PROPERTY VALUE. WE WERE VERY FORTUNATE THAT A TIER STAYED WITH US AND WENT THROUGH WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH WHEN WE HAVEN'T HAD A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THAT SINCE TIRZ BECAME A DIRTY WORD, AND THAT WAS HOW MANY YEARS AGO, TIM? A LOT OF YEARS. WE WERE VERY FORTUNATE THAT THEY WERE THAT DETERMINED THAT THEY STAYED WITH US, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EVERY TIME I DRIVE BY, IT'S LIKE, TAX DOLLARS, TAX DOLLARS, AND THEY ARE WORKING HARD. YOU CAN CHIME IN. >> IF YOU DON'T MIND, I HAVE A PERSPECTIVE ON THIS THAT MAY NOT BE A LOSE-LOSE SITUATION, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE MIDST OF OUR CRS PROGRAM CYCLE VISIT, WHICH IS OUR ONCE EVERY THREE-YEAR VISIT, NOT THE ANNUAL, IN WHICH WE CAN GO UP AND DOWN CLASSES. WE ARE AT SIX. WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET SOLIDLY TO A FIVE LATER THIS YEAR. THAT'S WHERE THE NUMBERS ARE TURNING OUT RIGHT NOW. YOU COULD CERTAINLY LEAVE IT ALONE, AND STAY AT A SIX. [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'D BE GREAT. >> THE CLAUSE ON THE DETENTION ISN'T EVEN GETTING US POINTS RIGHT NOW. NONE. >> ON TOP? >> YES. >> EXPLAIN THAT. WHY WOULD WE REQUIRE IT? >> WELL, YOU REQUIRE IT BECAUSE IT OFFSETS DRAINAGE PROBLEMS THAT HAPPEN DOWNSTREAM OR UPSTREAM. THERE IS A LEGITIMATE REASON FOR DETENTION BECAUSE IT REDUCES THE FLOODING, THAT ASPECT OF IT. BUT FROM THE FINANCIAL SIDE, IF WE WERE TO STAY AT A SIX, [OVERLAPPING] WE COULD STILL ANALYZE WHAT OUR REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO FIND THAT SWEET SPOT THAT ISN'T BASED UPON A 25-YEAR STORM, BUT MAYBE PERHAPS IT'S BASED ON A 15-YEAR STORM. WE COULD BACK INTO THOSE NUMBERS. WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THAT RIGHT NOW. BRANDON AND I JUST HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. IT'S NOT OFF THE TABLE YET THAT WE COULD STILL POSSIBLY EVEN GET TO A FIVE AND BE ABLE TO ADJUST OUR REGULATIONS SLIGHTLY. THE OTHER THING ABOUT DETENTION IS, [OVERLAPPING] IF YOU'RE NEAR THE COAST OR A WATER BODY, [05:40:03] YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO FLUSH OUT WATER OUT, SO YOU DON'T WANT TO DETAIN. >> YOU DON'T WANT TO HOLD THAT. >> I THINK OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS DOING THAT NOW ON MOST CASES. THERE'S THAT, AND I JUST THINK THAT WE HAVE A POSSIBILITY HERE OF DOING THIS WITHOUT EVEN HAVING TO GET IN THE INCENTIVE GAME. WE CERTAINLY GET IN THE INCENTIVE GAME FOR ANY PURPOSE AT ANY TIME. BUT WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO THIS WITHOUT EVEN GETTING THERE. >> YOU'RE SUGGESTING IF WE DECREASE THAT AMOUNT OF FLOOD DETENTION IN SOME WAY, FIRST OF ALL, THAT WOULD FREE UP MORE OF THE SITE FOR DEVELOPMENT. SECONDLY, IT'LL COST LESS FOR THE DEVELOP. >> YES. PLUS, YOU CAN DO THINGS LIKE DETAINING YOUR PARKING LOT, FOR EXAMPLE. YOU DO A CURB AROUND IT, AND THAT'S GOING TO GET SIX INCHES, AND THEN AND THEN YOU GET DOWN TO WHERE YOUR INLETS ARE. >> WILL SCOTTIE DID THAT OVER HIS PROJECT OVER ON 41ST IN UTAH. >> YEAH, THOSE ARE ABSOLUTELY LEGITIMATE. IT DOESN'T EVEN TAKE UP REAL ESTATE. >> I WANT. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE CRS RIGHT NOW. MAYBE JANICE CAN ADDRESS THE TIMELINE BETTER. BUT WE'RE GOING THROUGH IT RIGHT NOW, SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET THE RESULTS OF THAT IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS, AND WE'LL KNOW AT THAT POINT IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SOLIDLY A FIVE OR NOT. OUR THOUGHT ON THE CRS WITH THE RATING PROGRAM REALLY IS WE DON'T WANT TO GET JUST BARELY OVER A FIVE AND THEN LOSE IT AND HAVE TO TELL THE TAXPAYERS, SORRY, GUYS, WE GOT YOU, BUT WE'RE GOING TO LOSE IT AGAIN. WE WANT TO GET TO A SOLID FIVE. >> ALSO ALSO KEEP IN MIND WITH THE NEW FLOOD RATING SYSTEM THAT THEY USE, JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY IS GOING TO END UP SEEING UP TO AN 18% INCREASE EVERY YEAR BECAUSE THEY REALLY MOVED AWAY FROM ELEVATIONS, IT WENT MORE TO PROXIMITY TO WATER, WHICH WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU IN GALVESTON THAT YOU'RE NOT IN PROXIMITY TO WATER? PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY THE EVER INCREASING FLOOD INSURANCE RATE, SO WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO TRY TO KEEP THAT. >> BUT THEN THERE'S THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WILDCARD THAT COULD CHANGE EVERYTHING. >> YES. >> IF THEY REMOVE THAT PROGRAM, THAT'S GOING TO HURT EVERYBODY. >> IF THEY JUST WENT BACK TO ELEVATION, THAT WOULD BE A BIG PLUS. >> A COUPLE OF MONTHS AS FAR AS RESULTS OF THAT RATING. WHAT YOU HAD SAID EARLIER WAS THAT THAT'S THE DETENTION REQUIREMENT OR THAT DETENTION PART OF IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT THAT NUMBER. WHAT IS IT THAT WE COULD DO NOW TO DECREASE THAT REQUIREMENT? >> I THINK THAT'S GOING TO VARY BY LOCATION. I THINK THAT IF YOU'RE CLOSE TO A BIG OUTFALL, IT'S PROBABLY NOT THAT BIG A DEAL TO ELIMINATE IT. IF YOU'RE DUMPING INTO THE 45TH STREET WATERSHED SYSTEM, YEAH, THAT'S A BIGGER DEAL. I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE DEPENDENT ON PROXIMITY. >> I'M GOING TO GO WITH KATIE'S. KATIE'S IS PROBABLY, OF COURSE, ONE OF THE HIGHEST POINTS OF THE SEAWALL, WHICH MEANS WE AT WHAT, 15-17 FEET IN THAT AREA? I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD REQUIRE ANY DETENTION. >> IT'S WHERE THE WATER GOES IS THE BIGGER ISSUE. >> YEAH, WHICH DIRECTION FLOWS. SINCE GLO DOESN'T ALLOW US TO GET THE BACKUP, >> BUT I'M SAYING, CAN'T THEY FLOW THROUGH PARKING LOT INSTEAD OF FLOW THROUGH DETENTION? >> THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING. THEY COULD RETAIN IN THEIR PARKING LOT. >> [OVERLAPPING] COULD WE ASK, I GUESS, IN 30 DAYS WITHOUT. >> WE GOING TO GET RID OF IT. >> I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE THE CRS THING IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS. BUT IN 30 DAYS, CAN YOU ALL BRING BACK A, I HATE TO KEEP SAYING IT, BUT A MENU OF OPTIONS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THINGS THAT WE CAN DO. THEN FOR REGULATIONS THAT WE CAN CUT OR ALTER THAT DON'T HURT OUR CRS THAT WE CAN DO TO ESSENTIALLY, AND I THINK WE ALL WANT TO SEE IT. I THINK WE ALL HAVE BEEN TIRED OF IT, WE'RE SEEING BUILDINGS GO DOWN. BUT TO SPUR A NEW AGE OF DEVELOPMENT IN GALVESTON THAT IS GOING TO GROW OUR TAX BASE. >> A 25-YEAR STORM IS FRANKLY ALL THAT MUCH ON A PER INCHES BASIS IN A 24-HOUR PERIOD. IT'S NOT ALL THAT MUCH LESS THAN A 50 OR 100-YEAR STORM. IT RAMPS UP EXPONENTIALLY. IF YOU GO SAY FROM A 25 TO A 15, THERE MAY BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF VOLUME SAVINGS. THE OTHER SIDE TO THAT THOUGH IS, WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW STORES THAT WATER AND KEEPS IT, AND YOU MIGHT LOSE SOME OF THAT BENEFIT. BUT IN CERTAIN SPOTS, IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU'RE FLUSHING IT OUT OR IF YOU'RE ABLE TO DO A DESIGN THAT INCORPORATES IT INTO THE DRAINAGE. [05:45:02] >> [OVERLAPPING] NO, BUT YOU'RE DRAINING INTO A PRETTY IN-EQUATED PIPE SYSTEM THAT MAY NOT. >> IT'S A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD, BECAUSE IF WE'RE SPURRING DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE MORE MONEY FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS WHERE WE CAN UPGRADE. >> IN THEORY, THAT'S THE CASE. IF THAT'S WHERE THE MONEY GOES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> IF YOU NEED THE DEVELOPER TO UPSIZE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. [OVERLAPPING] >> IF THEY'RE GOING TO UPGRADE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, HEY, LOOK AT THESE TAX INCENTIVES THAT WE CAN OFFER YOU BECAUSE IT'S ALL GOING BACK INTO THE SAME SYSTEM. WE CAN HAVE A STANDARD FOR THAT, AND IT'S LIKE, HEY, OVER A 10-YEAR PERIOD, YEAH, WE MIGHT NOT SEE THAT MUCH BENEFIT, BUT WHEN WE'RE ALL GONE FROM THIS ROOM, IT'S GOING TO BE HIGHER WHEN I'VE GOT FAMILY AND KIDS AND STUFF. IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT TIME FOR GALVESTON. >> SOME PUBLIC INFORMATION TO SAY, HEY, WE'RE WORKING ON THIS. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US. >> I'M SORRY. >> IT'S OKAY. I TOLD MICHELLE. I TOLD HER THIS MORNING THAT I WANTED THIS ON THE AGENDA FOR MARCH. [BACKGROUND]. >> I'M PUTTING IT ON THIS. >> BUT YOU GOT IT ON THE AGENDA FIRST OFF. >> ROBB AND I. >> SEND ME THE WORDING ON THAT, WOULD YOU, PLEASE? >> I WILL. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET WITH MICHELLE AND GO OVER EVERYTHING AND THEN WE'LL GET YOU WORDING. >> WE'LL OPEN WITH THIS. THAT'S A BIG DEAL. >> YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD DISCUSSION. >> THERE GOING TO BE OTHER TOPICS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO ADDRESS BECAUSE IT WON'T BE JUST THE DRAINAGE THAT THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO IS LOOKING FOR. >> WE SHOULD LOOK INTO EVERYTHING. >> WITH THE TIMELINESS OF IT, WE KNOW THAT [OVERLAPPING]. >> A PRESENTATION OF TYPES OF TIRZ. >> I HAVE TIRZ. >> THE BONES OF A MENU, WE'LL PUT SOME MORE MEAT BEHIND IT, AND THEN WE'VE LOOKED AT SOME OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT ARE DOING SOME GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. BUT IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A MATTER OF WHAT YOU'RE WILLING TO GIVE UP TO GET. >> VERY GOOD. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> YES, MA'AM. >> [OVERLAPPING] THAT WAS MANY YEARS AGO, BUT IT ACTUALLY MATURED OUT BEFORE IT EVER GOT DEVELOPED. >> IF THE BUILDING WAS SOLD, COULD SOMEONE COME BACK WITH AN INCENTIVE? >> IT WOULD BE A PROCESS THAT THEY [OVERLAPPING]. >> WAS THERE A PORTION OF THAT WAS 380? >> THERE WERE TWO 380 AGREEMENTS THAT WERE DOLLED FOR THAT STORAGE FACILITY AND THE HOTEL, BUT THEY HAVE EXPIRED BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT COMPLETED IN THE TIME FRAME. >> LET'S READ ITEM 3, PLEASE, JANELLE. >> ITEM 3, DISCUSSION OF CITIZEN COMPLAINTS CONCERNING THE CITY MARSHALL PROGRAM. >> I THINK THIS IS A MULTI-FACETED TOPIC. I THINK WE HAVE SOME STAFF MEMBERS THAT HAVE BEEN KNOWN THAT ARE FULL LEASE, THAT THE ANSWER WHEN THEY WERE IN ONE DISTRICT, THEY SHIFT THEM TO ANOTHER PORTION. >> THEN WE HAVE ISSUES WITH MULTIPLE DIFFERENT MARSHALS WHEN IT COMES TO FOLLOWING ORDINANCES. THIS ONE ACTUALLY COMES FROM BOB'S DISTRICT, BUT THERE WAS A PERSON THAT WENT IN TO MEET WITH BUTCH WHILE HE WAS STILL THERE AND ASKED HIM FOR THE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE THAT HE WAS BEING HARASSED WITH. HE WAS TOLD, WE DON'T LOOK AT ORDINANCE. THIS IS THE MARSHAL'S LAW VERSUS WHAT OUR ACTUAL CITY. >> CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN THAT WAS, BECAUSE THAT ENCOUNTER WOULD HAVE BEEN RECORDED. >> WELL, IT WAS A MEETING WITH BUTCH RIGHT BEFORE HE RETIRED. >> I'LL BE LOOKING ON THAT. >> ONE PARTICULAR MARSHAL THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE THAT THERE'S BEEN ISSUES WITH, WHO IS NOW, I THINK, IN DAVID'S DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD FALL ALONG WITH THE MANUAL AS WELL, WENT INTO A SENIOR CITIZEN'S BACKYARD REFERRING TO GRASS AND ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS SAID, WELL, YOU CAN'T JUST WALK IN ON PROPERTY THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW. THEY STATED, "I AM THE LAW. [05:50:02] WE'RE THE MARSHAL LAW." I WOULD LIKE SOME CLARITY AS I'M SURE ALL THAT COUNCIL PEOPLE WOULD. IS THERE A MARSHAL'S ORDINANCE? >> ENFORCE THE CODES AND ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON, BUT WHAT'S IMPERATIVE WHEN YOU GET THOSE CALLS IS THAT YOU REPORT THEM TO ME SO I CAN PULL EVERY ENCOUNTER AND REPORT IT. >> BOTH OF THESE HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO YOU. >> TO ME? >> YEAH. >> WITH A DATE AND A TIME? >> YEAH. >> YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO RESEND THEM TO ME BECAUSE I'M ON TOP OF THOSE. >> THEY'LL EVEN BRING THEM TO YOU ALL THOSE. I'M GOING TO SAY ONE THING ABOUT THE MARSHALS, IT'S ON CAMERA USUALLY. BRIAN WILL REVIEW THOSE. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'LL TAKE ACTION IMMEDIATELY. >> BUT WE KNOW THE ONE PARTICULAR, AND I'M NOT GOING TO SAY OUT LOUD, BUT I'LL BE GLAD TO TALK UP TO AFTERWARDS. WE KNOW THERE WAS AN ISSUE IN THE STRAND AREA, SO THE ANSWER WAS TO TRANSFER THEM ANOTHER PART OF TOWN WHERE THEY'RE NOW HAVING THE SAME ISSUES. >> I HAVE NOT GOTTEN ANY COMPLAINTS IN THAT AREA WHERE HE'S AT NOW, SO IF YOU'RE GETTING THEM, I NEED TO GET THEM. >> I HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT. >> THAT MAKES IT EASIER FOR ME TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM IF I GET THE COMPLAINTS. >> WHY WAS HE MOVED FROM THE STRAND? >> THERE WAS A CONFLICT WITH ONE OF THE DOWNTOWN PEOPLE. >> PUT HIM IN ANOTHER AREA WHERE BULLYING IS HAPPENING. >> IT WASN'T NECESSARILY BULLYING. >> THAT'S NOT AN ANSWER TO A PROBLEM. >> SOME PEOPLE HAVE BETTER PEOPLE SKILLS THAN OTHERS, AND THERE'S A LOT MORE PEOPLE INTERACTION THAN THAT. BUT IF THERE'S AN ISSUE, I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT IT, AND I PROMISE YOU I'LL TAKE ACTION IMMEDIATELY. I PROMISE YOU YOUR NEW INTERIM MARSHAL WILL DO TOO. >> YES, SIR. >> IT'S SIMILAR TO THE ITEM, IT'S MARSHALS-RELATED. I'VE YIELDED SEVERAL COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE ANONYMOUS REPORTING. WHEN YOU FILE A POLICE REPORT, UNLESS YOU'RE A CONCERNED CITIZEN SAYING, THIS IS A CONCERNED CITIZEN FILING A REPORT, I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO STAND BEHIND IT BECAUSE WHAT TENDS TO HAPPEN IS IT'S YOUR NEIGHBOR PICKING ON SOMEBODY, OR IT'S A COMPETITOR, SO TO SPEAK. >> THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. >> I'D LIKE TO SEE ABOUT CHANGING, AND MAYBE COUNSEL CAN WEIGH IT ON AND MAYBE IT'S A REGULATION POLICY. >> THAT'S NOT A QUESTION. >> I CAN ANSWER. >> WE HAVE AN ANONYMOUS RECORDED LINES, WE WELCOME IT. >> THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT CONTAINS WHAT'S CALLED THE INFORMER'S PRIVILEGE. IF SOMEONE IS REPORTING A POSSIBLE CRIME, THEN THEIR IDENTITY CAN BE PROTECTED UNDER STATE LAW. >> YEAH, THEIR IDENTITY CAN BE PROTECTED, BUT FOR MANAGEMENT PURPOSES. IF IT'S A REPEAT SOMEONE AND LET'S JUST SAY IT'S TOM'S LUMBER AND JIM'S LUMBER, AND JIM'S LUMBER IS CALLING ON TOM LUMBER 10 TIMES AND YOU SAY, WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? JIM JUST HATES TOM. >> [OVERLAPPING] THAT HAPPENS MORE THAN YOU EVER KNOW. >> THAT HAPPENS, I KNOW IT DOES. >> THAT'S HAPPENED. >> I UNDERSTAND KEEPING THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OF INDIVIDUALS SAFE AND PRIVATE, BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOME PROBLEM WITH THAT. I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD APPRECIATE AT LEAST KNOWING THAT THERE IS SOMEONE BEHIND A COMPLAINT AND THEN FROM A MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE. [OVERLAPPING] >> INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, MOST PEOPLE PRETTY MUCH KNOW WHO'S COMPLAINED ON AND THEY TELL YOU THAT WHEN YOU GO, I KNOW WHO COMPLAINED. BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> BUT TO YOUR POINT ON WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING ANONYMOUS, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE AFRAID TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE MARSHALS, AND PERHAPS THAT'S WHY PEOPLE FROM YOUR DISTRICTS ARE CALLING ME BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET EVEN MORE HARASSED. >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT, BUT IF THEY ARE, THEY NEED TO LET ME KNOW. BUT I WILL TELL YOU IF THE MARSHAL GOES OUT AND ON A COMPLAINT AND THEY LOOK ACROSS THE STREET AND THERE'S THE SAME ISSUE GOING ON. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUR POLICY IS TO TRY TO ENFORCE EQUALLY AND NOT JUST BE SELECTIVE, BUT WE ACTUALLY DON'T GO OUT LOOKING FOR A LOT. WE'RE ALMOST 100% COMPLAINT-DRIVEN. >> TO COUNCIL MEMBER PORRETTO'S QUESTION IN RELATION- >> THAT'S IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. >> TO PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT OR WHATEVER, IS IT POSSIBLE WITHIN THE PROCEDURE TO COLLECT THE INFORMATION TO KEEP IT RESTRICTED OR CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVATE? >> IF THE CALLER WANTS TO PROVIDE THEIR NAME, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. BUT IF THEY WANT TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS, THEY CAN DO THAT AS WELL. >> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. >> THANK YOU. >> BOB'S GOT THIS GOING ON IN HIS DISTRICT RIGHT NOW, HE'S GOT A RANGE WAR GOING ON IN HIS DISTRICT. >> I'VE GOT MAYBE 5-10 PEOPLE THAT COMPLAIN [05:55:02] EVERYDAY TO ME ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS AND I PASS THEM ON TO STAFF. >> WE ADDRESS EVERY ONE OF THEM. >> THAT'S WHY A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THE MARSHALS ARE HARASSING THEM WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY WE'RE RESPONDING TO COMPLAINTS AND CONSISTENT COMPLAINTS. >> BUT IF YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME LINE IF YOU'RE GETTING THE BATTLE OF WHATEVER. >> IT'S ALWAYS BEEN OUR POLICY THAT EVERY CITIZEN, WHETHER THEY'RE REPETITIVE OR NOT, DESERVES TO HAVE RESPONSE. >> YOU'VE GOT TO ERR ON THAT SIDE. >> YOU MAKE UP FOR IT. >> IT'S JUST LIKE OUR COAST TEAM, WE HAVE ONE ADDRESS THAT WE RESPOND TO ALMOST EVERYDAY. >> BUT IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT OR LET'S JUST SAY IN TERMS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT POLICE, IF YOU MAKE A POLICE REPORT, YOU'RE PUTTING YOUR NAME ON THE POLICE REPORT, SO TO SPEAK. IF YOU'RE CALLING FOR A TIP OR THAT COMPLAINT, I'M NOT SAYING WE NOT PRIORITIZE THAT, BUT WE HAVE THAT ONLINE SYSTEM WHERE YOU'RE FILLING OUT A FORM TO DO THAT. IN TERMS OF THE ONLINE, WE COULD STILL REDACT AND PROTECT THAT. BUT IF WE CHANGE THAT FROM JUST ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT TO THE ONLINE SYSTEM, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO DETER PEOPLE FROM COMPLAINING ABOUT NON-COMPLIANCE, IT'S JUST IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE TIME TO GO ONLINE AND DO THESE THINGS AND FOR THE MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE. IF IT'S THE SAME TOM VERSUS JIM, I THINK JUST A LITTLE BIT, MAYBE I'M STEPPING ON SOME TOES. >> IT'S A DIFFICULT SITUATION. >> A LOT OF THE COMPLAINTS, IF THEY DID IT THAT WAY, THEY PROBABLY HAVE MY NAME ON THEM BECAUSE PEOPLE CALL OUR OFFICE, AND I JUST SEND THEM STRAIGHT. IF COUNCILMEMBER ROBB SENDS ME A COMPLAINT, I DON'T FORWARD MARIE ROBB'S EMAIL. I JUST TYPE IT AND SEND IT, SO WE DO THAT. >> IT'S A DIFFICULT SITUATION. >> SANDRA, SHE'S PROBABLY OUR BIGGEST COMPLAINER. [LAUGHTER] >> WHEN I'M COMPLAINING ABOUT YOU, WHO DO YOU SEND IT TO? >> MY WIFE. [LAUGHTER] >> LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 4, PLEASE. >> ITEM 4, UPDATE OF THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PILOT PROJECT. >> WE'VE GOT ONE TOPIC LEFT AFTER THAT. THIS IS DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PILOT PROJECT. >> MY QUESTION IS, WHERE ARE WE ON THIS? WE FUNDED IT THROUGH IDC IN EITHER MAY OR JUNE. MOST OF THE EQUIPMENT WAS BOUGHT FOR THE PROJECTS IN JULY, IT WAS ON OUR AGENDA LAST YEAR. HOW MANY OF THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE 100% FUNDED HAVE STARTED? >> GOING BACK, YOU'RE CORRECT, IT WAS INITIALLY APPROVED BY THE IDC IN MAY OF LAST YEAR. THEN IF YOU RECALL JUNE, WE GOT HIT BY A TROPICAL STORM ALBERTO. JULY, WE GET HIT BY HURRICANE BERYL. >> BUT WE HAD COUNCIL, WE ACTUALLY APPROVED THEM EVEN DURING THOSE STORMS. WE APPROVED THE EQUIPMENT PURCHASE IN JULY. [OVERLAPPING] >> ACTUALLY RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE MOSTLY PERSONNEL AND RECOVERING FROM THE HURRICANES OUT THERE. [OVERLAPPING] >> THIS IS [INAUDIBLE] PROJECTS ACROSS THE PILOT PROJECT, WASN'T IT? >> FIFTY PERCENT OF OUR TIME RIGHT NOW IS BEING SPENT FOR HURRICANE RECOVERY, MOSTLY OUT ON THE WEST END OUT THERE. JUST THIS WEEK, THEY'RE IN SAN DOMINGO AND PIRATES BEACH, FIXING OUTFALLS THAT ARE STILL DAMAGED THAT WE'RE SEEKING FEMA REIMBURSEMENT ON. YOU'VE GOT TO FOCUS ON RECOVERY FIRST BEFORE YOU CAN START IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S A DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. FIRST, WE'VE GOT TO FIX THE OUTFALLS. YOU DON'T WANT TO GO DIG A LOT OF DISHES IF YOUR OUTFALLS AREN'T CORRECTLY WORKING, IT'S JUST GOING TO BACK UP STORM-WATER IN THERE. IT'S A PROCESS ON THERE. >> IT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE STREETS. WE HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES, AND WHEN WE HAVE ONE OF THESE TROPICAL EVENTS, AND YOU, WHY DID WE GET A BIG ONE? NO, ACTUALLY, A BIG ONE WOULD BE BETTER, BUT IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR US BECAUSE THESE SMALLER, LITTLE STORMS, THEY'RE KILLING US. IT'S NOT EVEN JUST THE SMALLER STORMS, IT'S THESE SMALL TITLE EVENTS THAT AREN'T EVEN CATEGORIZED AS ANYTHING. THEY'RE KILLING US, WHICH MAKES SOME OF THE NOURISHMENT PROJECTS THAT COUNCILMEMBER ROBB HAS BEEN SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S GETTING TO BE WHERE EVERY TITLE EVENT RIGHT NOW, I'M LOSING AN END OF A STREET, I'M LOSING- >> HOUSES. >> THE BIGGEST THING IS WE HAVE THESE CULVERT SYSTEMS OUT THERE, IT BLOWS OUT THE DAMN CULVERTS. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE SET NEW CULVERTS ON SOME OF THESE STREETS? ARE THEY SYNCED? [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S ALWAYS, WELL, THE GLO WON'T LET US, AND THEN THE GLO CAME BACK AND SAID, YOU HAVEN'T ASKED US. I JUST THINK MY CONCERN IS THE THINGS CONTINUE TO WORSEN. [06:00:01] AGAIN, THIS AFFECTS THE WHOLE ISLAND, NOT JUST DISTRICT 6. BUT HOW SHORT OF PERSONNEL ARE YOU? WE HAVE PERSONNEL LEVELS AND WE HAVE A FREEZE. WELL, IF PEOPLE HAVE LEFT, HAVE YOU REPLACED THEM? THERE'S A NUMBER [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THINGS AREN'T HAPPENING. >> WE ARE WE ARE DOWN 30 PEOPLE RIGHT NOW, AND PUBLIC WORKS ACROSS THE BOARD. THANKFULLY, WE HAD FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS APPROVED THE COLA DURING THE LAST BUDGET OR WE'D PROBABLY BE DOWN EVEN MORE. WE'D PROBABLY BE LOOKING AT DOUBLE IF WE'RE NOT KEEPING UP WITH THE MARKET. THAT WAS GOOD, BUT WE'RE MARCHING FORWARD. JUST FOCUS ON RECOVERY, AND THEN WE'LL START WITH IMPROVEMENTS. BUT I HAVE TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH THEIR PLAN AS WELL BECAUSE THERE'S AN ORDER OF OPERATIONS THAT GO ON, AND I DON'T WANT THEM DIGGING OUT DITCHES WITH OUTFALLS STILL NOT FIXED, AND EVERYBODY NEEDS TO BE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT'S ALSO IDC REIMBURSABLE GRANT PROGRAM, SO WE HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT. >> WE CAN'T COMMIT 100% OF THE CREWS TO THE DIP BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE OUR DAILY STUFF. IF SOMEBODY CALLS AND SAYS, HEY, I'VE GOT A FOOT OF STANDING WATER IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE, THE DRAIN STOPPED. I STILL GOT TO HAVE THE VAC TRUCKS RUNNING AND EVERYTHING FOR OUR DAILY OPERATION. IT'S NOT LIKE I CAN TAKE THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE CREW AND COMMIT THEM TO THE DIP. WE'VE BASICALLY TAKEN OUR EXCESS CAPACITY OF THE DRAINAGE CREW AND COMMITTED THEM TO RECOVERY AT THIS POINT. HOPEFULLY, WE'RE COMING OFF OF THAT. >> I THINK WEATHER, EQUIPMENT, AND ALL THE OTHER VARIABLES THAT GO INTO IT WITHIN MARCH. [OVERLAPPING] >> HOPEFULLY NO BAD SPRING TIDES, THAT WOULD BE THE BIG THING. >> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. HOPEFULLY IN MARCH, WE'LL FINISH WITH THE FEMA RECOVERY, AND THEN WE COULD START ON A LOT OF THE IMPROVEMENT. >> WE SPENT A TON OF TIME ON THE 45TH STREET SYSTEM, CLEANING OUT THOSE SYSTEMS DOWN BY THE PORT. I GUARANTEE YOU WITH THE TIDES WE'VE HAD, THEY'RE SILTED BACK UP AGAIN AND IT'S A LOT. >> HAVE WE REPLACED THE UNDERGROUND PIPELINE OPERATOR? >> I HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DON'T HAVE ONE ANYMORE. >> FOR THE NEW LINER SYSTEM? >> YEAH, WE SHOULD. >> I'VE CHECKED ON THAT. >> I'VE BEEN TRAINED EVERYBODY UP. THE TRUCK'S BEEN RUNNING, I KNOW THAT. >> THAT WAS A BRAND NEW. [OVERLAPPING] >> LAST WEEK, THERE WAS A PARTICULAR PROJECT THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY DIGGING UP. >> IT'S THE USE OF THE LINER. >> I QUESTIONED, HEY, BY THE WAY, WE'RE ALL GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE THE LINERS. MAN, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE AN OPERATOR FOR THAT TRUCK RIGHT NOW. >> LET ME KNOW. >> I'M HEARING THAT FROM A NUMBER OF DEVELOPERS. >> THAT WOULD BE A CRITICAL POSITION THAT WE WOULD NOT LET STAY EMPTY. >> I WOULD HOPE SO, BUT I'VE BEEN HEARING IT FOR A MONTH. >> JUST LIKE THE ANIMAL CONTROL AND OTHERS. [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT CAME FROM THE GUYS ON THE GROUND. >> I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT SOME OF THESE PROS IN POSITIONS ARE GOING TO BE ELIMINATED BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GOING TO BALANCE WITHOUT IT. >> VERY GOOD. >> I'M TAKING A BREAK. [3.J. City Topics (Rawlins/Porretto - 10 min)] >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. ITEM 3J, PLEASE. >> IT'S BEEN FOUR HOURS NOW. >> ITEM 3J. >> WE GOT ABOUT FIVE MINUTES TO GO OR 10. YES, MA'AM, 3J. >> 3J, ONE, DISCUSSION OF WORK DAY SYSTEM AND UPDATES AND, TWO, DISCUSSION OF PROCESS OF CREATION OF THE COUNCIL AGENDA. >> THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, ITEM 1, WE HAD RECEIVED NOTICE FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY SUGGESTING THIS RESCHEDULE. MY RESPONSE WAS, THIS IS COUNCILMAN RAWLINS' ISSUE. YOU GUIDE US ON THAT, COUNCILMAN RAWLINS. >> WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE IT ON, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE AN EASY FIX. >> BASICALLY, SAME THING, JUST DISCUSSION ON THE STREETS. I WAS HOPEFUL TO GET HR AND IT TOGETHER BECAUSE UPON DOING RESEARCH ON MY OWN, IT'S BEEN A PROBLEM IN MULTIPLE AREAS TO IMPLEMENT. WE'RE NOT AN ANOMALY THAT IT'S BEEN AN ISSUE AND TALKING WITH YOU BRIAN, YOU ALREADY GOTTEN ON IT? >> YEAH. >> I KNOW THAT CHECKS WERE CUT TODAY, AND SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE IF SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WERE A PROBLEM. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE HERE, BOB. >> WE'RE FIXED AS OF TODAY. THAT'S JUST WHAT I'M HOPEFUL FOR, AND IF NOT WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER AS A FAMILY. >> [OVERLAPPING] I HAVE MADE MY COMMITMENT TO ALL THOSE INVOLVED PERSONALLY, THAT IN BEVERLY CAN ATTEST TO THIS. I HAVE SAID, ABSOLUTE PRIORITY, EVERYTHING GETS HANDLED IMMEDIATELY. IT HAS GOT TO GET HANDLED. EVERYBODY GETS PAID. YOU DON'T MESS AROUND WITH PEOPLE'S PAY, GET IT FIXED RIGHT. FIRST OF ALL, IF THERE'S A DISCREPANCY, YOU GET THE DISCREPANCY TO TAKE CARE OF IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED THEIR MONEY, [06:05:02] AND SECONDLY, GET IT FIXED SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN. IT'S A NEW SYSTEM. IT'S A ROLLOUT. FEW WEIGHS AGAINST OTHER CITIES, WE'VE DONE MUCH BETTER THAN OTHERS, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? >> SHERIFF FOULIS HAVE AN EXACT SAME PROBLEM. THE THING THAT IS, IT WAS JUST IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WHEN GUYS BRING UP A PROBLEM AND I'M OUT ON THE STREETS EVERY DAY. THAT I BRING IT TO Y'ALLS ATTENTION, AND IT WAS MORE OF I WANTED TO GET IT OUT THERE PUBLICLY THAT, HEY, LOOK, WE'RE WORKING ON THIS GUYS, AND I THINK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN. >> PLEASE STRESS, WHEN GUYS HAVE ISSUES, TAKE IT TO THEIR DEPARTMENT HEAD, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THE TRAINING WAS DONE IS THAT THEY NEED TO GO TO THEIR DEPARTMENT HEAD. BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS IF IT STARTS FLYING FROM 50 DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, WE MAYBE FOCUSED IN FIVE WAYS ON ONE PROBLEM. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN INITIAL ROLL OUT CONFIGURATION ISSUE, WHICH I THINK IS HAPPENING IN MULTIPLE MUNICIPALITIES THAT ARE USING THIS. THE OTHER THING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS THERE'S TONS OF DIFFERENT CODES. >> CODES. >> CODES AND STRATIFYING BETWEEN OVERTIME OR WEEKEND ASSIGNMENTS OR CRASH ASSIGNMENTS OR WESTON ASSIGNMENTS OR MARDI GRAS ASSIGNMENTS THERE'S MULTIPLE DIFFERENT CODING ON THAT, AND SO I UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S AN ISSUE. AGAIN, I'M JUST HOPEFUL THAT TODAY HAS GOTTEN BETTER. >> ME TOO. >> IF THERE'S STILL SOME PROBLEMS BY THE NEXT PAY PERIOD, IT'LL BE WORKED OUT EVEN MORE. >> WE'RE ON IT. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR THAT. >> BEVERLY, BASICALLY, MOST OF THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN HOPEFULLY, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN TECHNICAL. MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN RESOURCE ISSUES, SO SHE'S TAKEN CARE OF IT. THEY'VE BEEN CODING ISSUES AND THINGS LIKE THAT? >> YES, MA'AM. >> IS IT ONLY THE PLACE THAT ARE UNDER THIS [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE ENTIRE CITY WENT UNDER THIS SYSTEM. WE'VE EXPERIENCED MORE PROBLEMS IN PD THAN OTHERS. WE'VE EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS ACROSS THE BOARD, BUT WE'VE EXPERIENCED MORE PROBLEMS IN PD THAN OTHERS, BUT THEY HAVE THE MOST COMPLEX SYSTEM, SO THAT ONLY MAKES SENSE. >> IS THIS JUST FOR HOURLY EMPLOYEES OR. >>EVERYBODY'S USING THE SYSTEM, BUT IT'S THE CLOCK IN CLOCK OUT ISSUE IS MAINLY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ENTITLED TO OVERTIME. >> OR SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS OR CALLED OUT ON A CRASH AND HAVE TO STAY. >> YEAH, AND THEN THE BIGGEST ISSUES, I THINK WE HAD INVOLVED STANDBY PAY BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION BECAUSE OUR CONTRACTS ARE OLD AND BECAUSE THEY GET CARRIED FORWARD, AND THERE WAS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WHAT IS STANDBY PAY AND WHAT IS ON CALL PAY, AND WE'VE HAD TO CLEAR THAT UP AND THEN PEOPLE GOT MOVED FROM DIVISIONS, AND THEN THE CONTRACT, CERTAIN DIVISIONS WERE ALLOWED TO GET THAT PAY. WHEN WE MOVED IT OUT, THEY WEREN'T ALLOWED TO GET IT, WE'VE MADE THOSE CORRECTIONS. I'VE MADE IT A NUMBER 1 PRIORITY TO GET THIS DONE. I GAVE MY COMMITMENT TO MR. ROGERS WHEN THIS OCCURRED, THAT I WOULD DO THAT AND I HAVE NOT WAVERED ON THAT. WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO STAY ON TOP OF IT. >> WE'VE MET WITH HIM SEVERAL TIMES? >> YES. >> THE FIXED ALL ISSUE? >> YEAH. >> WE'VE DONE A LOT OF TRAINING. >> I THINK YOUR POLICE CHIEF WILL TELL YOU, I ASK HIM DAILY, IF ARE WE HAVING ANY ISSUES? WHAT ARE THE ISSUES? MAKE SURE WE KNOW THEM SO WE CAN TAKE CARE OF IT, AND HE AND HIS LEADERSHIP STAFF HAVE TOLD ME THEY ARE ON TOP OF IT. >> THAT'S ALL I HAD SAID IT WAS THAT SIMPLE. >> I CAN'T SAY THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ISSUES. THEY'RE GOING TO BE ISSUES, AND WE'RE GOING TO FIX THEM AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. >> BUT UNFORTUNATELY, SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, THERE'S BEEN ISSUES, EVERY SINGLE PAY ROLL SINCE [LAUGHTER] I'VE BEEN HERE UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM. >> PRIOR TO WORK DAY? >> YEAH. >> THERE'S JUST ALWAYS AN ISSUE, AND THE PRIORITY IS ALWAYS TO GET THEM PAID. >> YEAH, AND WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT LATER FOR YOU. >> [OVERLAPPING] THAT IT'S SO POPULAR AND IF YOU DO RESEARCH ONLINE, IT'S A BIG ONE. THEY'RE IN PRETTY MUCH THE MAJORITY OF MUNICIPALITIES COUNTIES. >> ABSOLUTELY, THEY ARE. >> IT'S VERY USER FRIENDLY. THEY ARE [OVERLAPPING]. I FIGURED IT OUT WAYS TO DO EVERYTHING. SORRY, I LOCKED OUT OF WORK DAY AT A&M. IT WAS. I MEAN, IT'S KIND OF LIKE GOING FROM TWO EC TO MAC IS THE WAY I LOOK AT IT BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CREATIVE AND YOU CAN FIND DIFFERENT WAYS AROUND. IT'S GOING FROM SYMBOLS OR FROM WRITING TO SYMBOLS. YEAH. I'M EXCITED ABOUT IT. THIS WAS VERY DISAPPOINTING TO ME IN MY POOR DEPARTMENT OF FOUR THAT ARE TRYING TO DO ALL OF THIS FOR EVERYONE. BUT I DO WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WE DID THE TRAIN THE TRAINER. WE ROLLED THAT OUT. I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU HOW MANY EMAILS THAT WENT OUT. EXPLAINING WHAT THE PROCESS WAS GOING TO BE, TELLING THE EMPLOYEES WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, TRAINING THE INDIVIDUALS AND THE DEPARTMENTS. THIS IS HOW ALL TRAINING IS DONE NOW. IT'S TRAIN THE TRAINER. I THINK BECAUSE THIS WENT OUT DURING THE HOLIDAYS, THAT KIND OF INTERFERED WITH IT. >> YEAH. I THINK IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT IT WAS A CONFIGURATION ISSUE. LIKE I SAID, WE'RE A FAMILY. WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. WIN ISLAND AND WHETHER IT'S I'M SORRY, I WAS DISAPPOINTING TO YOU, BUT IT WAS THIS POINT THE GUYS DIDN'T GET PAID. NO. EVERYBODY HAS GOT A WHEN THEY GOT PAID, THEY GOT PAID. [06:10:07] >> JUST ISSUES ON THURSDAY AND OUR PAY DAY WAS FRIDAY AND THEY WOULD BE GIVEN A CHECK ON FRIDAY. >> OKAY. >> NO ONE HAS BEEN SHORTED ANY PAY. NOW, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN THERE WANTING COMP TIME, WHICH IS REALLY JUST A NUMBER ON THEIR PAYSLIP OF WHAT THEY COULD GET PAID OUT YEARS FROM NOW VERSUS OVERTIME. THAT ISSUE? THEY WERE PAID OVER TIME. THEY RECEIVED PAY THEY DIDN'T WANT. THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES. >> THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE WHEN YOU DO RESEARCH THAT HAPPENS THERE'S. LOTS OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE GETTING OVERPAID. AGAIN, IT'S IT'S NOT JUST YOUR FAULT. IT'S NOT IT'S WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT AND YOU ALL ARE WORKING ON IT, AND THAT'S ALL. >> ABSOLUTELY. WE KNOW THAT'S OUR NUMBER 1 PRIORITY. TAKE CARE OF THE EMPLOYEES. >> WHAT'S YOUR NAME NOW, BEVERLY? >> MY NAME? >> WHAT'S YOUR NAME WHEN YOU COME IN MY OFFICE? >> OH, THAT'S NOT FAIR. >> OR DAY. >> BAD NEWS. EVERY DAY AT 4:30, I GET THE BAD NEWS BEVERLY. >> WE TAKE CARE OF STUFF PER DAY BEVERLY. >> BAD NEWS BEVERLY IS PROBABLY NICER. >> COUNCIL, THIS IS OUR LAST AGENDA ITEM. GO AHEAD. >> MAYBE YOU READ REALLY FAST I CAN GO. >> THE PROCESS OF CREATION OF THE COUNCIL AGENDA. >> PLEASE, EXCUSE ME. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR BRINGING THIS UP AND FOR TAKING CARE OF THIS PROBLEM. THERE ARE ALWAYS GLITCHES IN CODING THINGS, BUT THERE WAS A COMMENT IN THERE ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO LOG IN ON THEIR PHONE TO LOG IN THE TIME. >> GEOFENCING. >> IS THAT GEO FENCING>. >> [INAUDIBLE] IN PROXIMITY OF A CITY OF YOUR LOCATION TO USE THAT. >> THAT WAS THE ONLY ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE TO BE? >> NO. I THINK THAT WE HAD A COUPLE OF OUR GIS GUY IF EQUIPPED WITH THE COORDINATES WERE WRONG. INSTEAD OF IT BEING A SQUARE, IT ENDED UP BEING A PARABOLA. IF YOU WERE IN THIS CORNER OF THE PARKING LOT, IT DIDN'T WORK, AND THAT WAS THAT WAS JUST A GAS. >> IS THERE AN OFFICER THAT DAY THAT WAS FIXED THAT DAY. IS THERE AN OFFICER ON THE MAINLAND THAT HAS THE GEO FENCING, WOULDN'T YOU COULDN'T DO IT UP THERE. IT WAS SOMEBODY ON THE MAINLAND. >> I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY WOULD BE CLOCKING IN AND OUT ON THE MAINLAND. >> OKAY. >> IF IT'S AN OFFICER, THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN, THEY'RE GOING TO DO SHOW UP SHOW DOWN SO THEY HAVE TO COME IN TO PICK UP THE CARS,. >> I'M GOING TO SEND YOU SOME INFORMATION ON THAT. >> PLEASE IF YOU CAN. >> LIKE I SAID, THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPERATIVE THAT IT GO THROUGH THE SUPERVISOR BECAUSE I RELY ON DOUG TO GET ME ALL THIS INFORMATION AND HE'S BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB WITH IT. BUT IF HE DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, WE CAN'T GET IT FIXED. IT'S GOT TO GO THROUGH HIS TIME KEEPER AND EVERYBODY ELSE. IT'S GOT TO GO THROUGH THE HAS WE CAN TRACK IT. >> I THINK IT WAS IN HISD IF SOMEBODY GOT A COUPLE OF CHECKS. REMEMBER THOSE TEACHERS GOT EXTRA. >> THERE WAS AN IN HARRIS COUNTY. >> WE'RE ACTUALLY A LATE ADOPTER OF WORKDAY. IT'S BEEN IN THE AREA A LOT LONGER THAN LATER ADOPTERS OF IT. >> ALL RIGHT. JANELLE, READ ITEM 2, PLEASE. >> DISCUSSION OF THE PROCESS OF THE CREATION OF THE COUNCIL AGENDA. >> COUNCILMAN RAWLINS, I THINK YOU HAVE THIS ON THERE. THIS IS MORE OF WAS THAT? >> YES, SIR. >> SAFETY ISSUE. >> THIS IS MORE OF JUST ME MORE OR LESS BEING EDUCATED AND UNDERSTANDING. IF THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM AND WE ARE DEAD SET AS COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE'D LIKE IT WORDED THIS WAY AND PRESENTED THIS WAY, THAT THAT'S ACKNOWLEDGED. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. >> YES OR NO? >> I MEAN, OF COURSE, IF I'M SAYING SOMETHING ILLEGAL, I WOULDN'T WANT TO DO THAT. >> OH, NO. 99% OF THE THINGS THAT I RECEIVED PUT ON THE AGENDA THEY GO IN IN THE FORM THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS THEM. OKAY. NOW, THERE WAS A ONE COUNCILWOMAN ROBB SENT ME THE OTHER DAY THAT I FELT THAT WAS A LITTLE BROAD. THE ITEM WAS MARSHALL ISSUES. I MENTIONED TO JANELLE. I SAID, COULD YOU GET SOME MORE SPECIFICS FROM COUNCILWOMAN ROBB? SPECIFICALLY WHAT THIS IS, BECAUSE FOR THE PUBLIC STANDPOINT, AND FOR STAFF PREPARING, THOSE ARE A LITTLE BROAD. MARIE WORKED WITH JANELLE AND GO GOT THAT ISOLATED. >> PLEASE KNOW IT HELPS US TOO IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA. IF YOU'LL LET US KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, IT'S OUR GOAL TO GET YOU WHAT YOU NEED. IF YOU PUT IF YOU JUST THROW SOMETHING ON AGENDA, WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT, WE GET I CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF THAT. >> I'M NOT SAYING THAT. >> BUT I'M SAYING LIKE I CAN PUT THINGS OUT THERE AND GET BUSY AND THEN I DON'T YOU DON'T WANT TO LET US KNOW AND THAT'S FINE TOO, [06:15:01] BUT I JUST KNOW WE'RE BETTER PREPARED AND CAN BETTER GET YOU WHAT YOU NEED IF YOU TELL US. >> WHO HAS ACCESS TO OUR DRAFT AGENDAS BECAUSE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP. >> WHO HAS ACCESS TO? >> I GUESS IT WAS I THINK GO AHEAD JANELLE I CAN ANSWER GO AHEAD. >> THE DRAFT. WHEN THE DRAFT AGENDA GOES OUT ON THURSDAY, IT GOES OUT TO THE ENTIRE PUBLIC. IT'S ON THE WEBSITE. >> OKAY. THAT'S NEED TO CHANGE. >> THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE. IT'S GOING TO CHANGE. >> THAT DRAFT AGENDA IS MISLEADING AT TIMES TO THE PUBLIC. THEN WHEN IT GOES OUT FRIDAY, BECAUSE OF DON CHANGING SOME THINGS HERE AND THERE. >> I RECEIVED A COMPLAINT YESTERDAY THAT THEIR AGENDA DIDN'T HAVE AN ITEM THAT WAS ON TODAY'S AGENDA, AND I HAD. >> IT WAS ON THERE. I CHECKED THAT. >> GOOD. >> I WERE MISTAKEN. >> HOW THAT REALLY DEAL WITH THAT? >> WE NORMALLY DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING ONCE THE DRAFT IS PUBLISHED. THAT'S WHAT GETS PUBLISHED AS THE FINAL. >> IT'S ON THERE. >> WE DON'T CHANGE THINGS. >> BETTER TO DEFER OR PULL IT AT THE MEETING THAN TO TAKE IT OFF THE DRAFT AND NOT HAVE IT BECAUSE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE SENDING OUT THE DRAFTING. PEOPLE PRINT IT ONCE, AND MAKE IT PRINT IT AGAIN. >> WHAT HAPPENS IS THE PUBLIC AND RIGHTLY SO, THEY'LL PICK UP ON THIS SOME WAY OR ANOTHER, THE THURSDAY NIGHT AGENDA, AND THEY PRINT IT AND SAID, THIS IS THE FINAL AGENDA, AND THEN IT GETS TO THE MEETING AND IT'S CHANGED A LITTLE BIT. BUT JANELLE, WE'RE GOING TO STOP THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> WITH THE NEW SYSTEM THAT YOU ALL APPROVED AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE CONVERSION, WHEN WE ROLL THAT OUT, HOPEFULLY IN APRIL, THE DRAFT AGENDA WILL ONLY GO OUT TO COUNCIL AND ANY OTHER STAFF MEMBERS THAT WE GIVE ACCESS TO. STILL ON THURSDAY, BUT THE PUBLIC WON'T SEE IT UNTIL THE FINAL GOES OUT. FRIDAY. >> THAT WILL ALLEVIATE A LOT. >> ITEMS ALWAYS BEING AT THE END OF THE AGENDA. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY THAT SENDS ME THEY GO ON IN DISTRICT ORDERS. >> WHAT I DO USUALLY, I SIT DOWN WITH JANELLE, BUT I USUALLY I TAKE THEM IN ORDER THEY'RE RECEIVED. UNLESS THEY WERE ITEMS LIKE TODAY, WE HAD THE SUPERINTENDENT NEIGHBORS HERE AND WE MOVED HIM UP AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> I GOT A QUESTION. IT'S A RELEVANT QUESTION HERE. JUST TO CLARIFY, I GUESS, THE DEADLINE FOR GETTING EITHER AGENDA ITEMS AND OR SUPPORT MATERIAL FOR EXISTING AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISTRIBUTION TO COUNCIL, THE DEADLINE. >> THURSDAY. >> NOT WEDNESDAY, THURSDAY DAF IS WENDY DAF DEADLINE IS WEDNESDAY AT NOON. >> STAFF DEADLINE IS WEDNESDAY COUNCIL'S IS THURSDAY AT NOON. I USUALLY START AND WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AGENDA, COUNCIL. I MAKE NOTES THROUGHOUT OUR MEETINGS. I'M JUST AS MUCH AT FAULT AT THIS. I SAY, LET'S PUT THIS ON THE APRIL AGENDA. LET'S PUT THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA. I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THE MARCH AGENDA IS OVER FILLED ALREADY. WE HAD WE HADN'T EVEN RECEIVED ANYTHING. THEN WHAT HAPPENS AND THIS IS THE WAY IT SHOULD BE, COUNCIL THEN COMES IN WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY MORNING AND ADDS ALL THESE OTHER THINGS TO IT. >> [INAUDIBLE] HERE IN A MONTH IN ADVANCE AND MY ITEMS ARE STILL ALWAYS LAST, JUST SAY IT. >> THAT YOU WHAT IS? >> I SAID I S I GIVE IT TO HER ITEMS STILL THAT IS. >> I KNOW THAT'S TRUE. >> YOU GET BACK AND LOOKING PAST THE TRUE. >> I KNOW, THAT'S NOT TRUE. BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS, FOR MARCH NOW, COUNCIL, WE'RE FULL WE'RE WAY OVER FULL, AND WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYBODY. I'LL START GETTING INPUT FROM COUNCIL THE WEDNESDAY OR WE HAD ONE TODAY. I KNOW ONE. IT'S ALREADY. I CAN TELL YOU WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING AGAIN. >> NO, WE'RE PUTTING THAT ON THERE. OH. WE'RE DOING IT. >> WE'RE PUTTING. >> THESE ARE OUR WORK DAY CLOCK IN. THESE ARE GREAT THESE ARE GREAT ITEMS. I'M HAPPY TO PUT THEM IN. >> IT'S LONG, BUT IT'S BETTER TO GET THEM AND GET THEM DONE IN A DAY THAN HAVING THESE THINGS OUT OF TIMES. OH, I'M HAPPY. >> I DID HAVE A COLA EARLIER, BUT IT WAS OH. SEE WHEN WE START MAKING BRIAN. >> SOMEBODY TODAY BECAUSE I TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE PUT THESE ON THE AGENDA, THEY'RE STACKING UP. I KEEP A LIST OF THEM. I'VE GOT ITEMS THAT WERE REQUESTED TO BE ON THE APRIL. >> WHY IN THIS CHARTER, IT SAYS, COUNCIL MEETS TWICE A MONTH. >> UNLESS WE KNOW, COUNCIL CAN CHANGE THAT. >> BUT WE USED TO BE TWICE A MONTH AND YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THAT ISSUE. JUST SAYING. >> IT'S IT GIVES US A LOT OF PROBLEMS FOR STAFF. >> IF WE WERE 100% STAFFED AND GOING CRAZY, THAT HELPS, BUT BOY, [06:20:01] IT HELPS US TO JUST GET ONE DAY DONE AND GET IT OVER WITH AND HAVING TO BE PREPPING FOR MEETINGS TWICE A MONTH. >> PREJUDICE. BUT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BOTH JAR, 99% OF THEM GO ON THE WAY YOU IF THERE'S A QUESTION. IT'S LIKE COUNCILMAN PORRETTO IS ON THE SPECIAL MEETING, DON CHANGED THAT. >> YEAH. I JUST WAS A LITTLE WORRIED CONFUSED AS TO HOW THE PAPER HAD IT, AND I GUESS THEY GET OUR DRAFT AGENDA. >> I HAVE NO I HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THAT. >> AT LEAST WE'RE GETTING A LOT DONE. WE ARE. >> IT'S 3:52 P.M. WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU. >> MEETING ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.