[00:00:03]
[1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
>> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL MEMBERS. [NOISE]
>> YEAH, YOU'RE TRYING TO CALL.
>> I LEFT IT IN THE OTHER ROOM.
>> GOOD MORNING, ALEX. GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.
IT IS 9:01 AM AND I AM OFFICIALLY CALLING THE WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF GALVESTON TO ORDER FOR APRIL 24TH 2025.
GLAD TO HAVE EVERYBODY HERE THIS MORNING, THOSE THAT ARE IN THE AUDIENCE STAFF.
COUNCIL, NICE TO SEE EVERYONE HERE.
I THINK WE HAVE COUNCILMAN BROWN IS STILL NOT WITH US THIS MORNING.
JANELLE, I THINK HE IS VERY GOOD.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM HERE, AND I WANT TO WELCOME EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE MAY HAVE A LOT IN THE COMMUNITY WATCHING THIS THIS MORNING, SO WELCOME GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING.
COULD WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER BOB BROWN IS OUT TODAY.
>> VERY GOOD. WE HAVE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE, BUT FOR ONE TODAY, WE HAVE A VERY LENGTHY DISCUSSION TODAY IN OUR WORKSHOP, AND THEN WE HAVE SOME VERY IMPORTANT ITEMS ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON.
I'M GOING TO DO SOME HOUSEKEEPING CHORES, IF I COULD, PLEASE BEFORE WE START.
FIRST OF ALL, COUNCILMEMBER FINKLEA WILL BE LEAVING THE GROUP AROUND NOON.
>> HAS A COMMITMENT HE HAS TO TAKE CARE OF, AND THEN WE'LL BE BACK.
>> MAYOR, I HAVE TO STEP OUT AT 11:15 FOR A 15 MINUTE PHONE INTERVIEW ON OUR SEAWALL PROJECT, PLEASE.
>> THANK YOU, BRIAN. OUR CITY MANAGER WILL STEP OUT FOR ABOUT 15 MINUTES AT 11:15.
COUNCILMAN FINKLEA, WILL BE LEAVING AROUND NOON.
HOPEFULLY, WE'LL BE BACK VERY SHORTLY AFTER.
>> I'LL BE BACK AS SOON AS I CAN.
>> SOUNDS GOOD. I WANT TO CLARIFY SOME OTHER THINGS.
[3.D. Discussion of Updated Development Policies/Incentives and Expanded 380/TIRZ Agreement Structures ( M Hay - 40 min )]
ONE OTHER THING, I TAKE THAT BACK.WE HAVE AN ITEM, DISCUSSION, AND UPDATE.
DEVELOPMENT POLICIES, INCENTIVES, EXPANDED 380 INTERNS AGREEMENTS WITH OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR MICHELLE HAY, THAT HAS BEEN PULLED.
THAT WILL BE MOVED TO OUR NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING COMING UP IN MAY. EXCUSE ME.
>> THAT HAS BEEN DEFERRED AND BEEN PULLED AND MOVE TO OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
VERY GOOD. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3A, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[3.A. Clarification Of Consent And Regular City Council Agenda Items - This Is An Opportunity For City Council To Ask Questions Of Staff On Consent And Regular Agenda Items (1 Hour)]
>> ITEM 3A, CLARIFICATION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS.
>> VERY GOOD. BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS COUNCIL, WE HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA THAT WE DO HAVE A SEPARATE HEADING FOR DISCUSSION ON THE WORKSHOP THIS MORNING.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION POINTS ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, WE WILL BE GETTING TO THOSE SPECIFICALLY IN OUR WORKSHOP AGENDA.
THOSE ARE ITEM 11P AS IN PAUL, CONCERNING THE STEWART BEACH AND THAT OUR MANAGEMENT OF THAT.
DUDLEY ANDERSON WILL BE WITH US ON THAT.
ITEM 12A, SEAWOLF PARK IN DELLANERA TRANSFER TO THE CITY THAT IS HAVE A SEPARATE ITEM ON OUR WORKSHOP AGENDA, AND ITEM 10C, NOURISHMENT APPROVAL THAT IS ON OUR REGULAR AGENDA.
WE HAVE A SPECIFIC ITEM OF THAT ON OUR WORKSHOP ALSO.
SAYING THAT, COUNCILMAN FINKLEA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAVE US OFF, SIR?
>> I ACTUALLY GOT ALL MY QUESTIONS ANSWERED PREVIOUSLY.
>> I HAVE NONE EITHER FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER.
>> WAIT A MINUTE, I CAN'T TAKE THIS.
>> I'M A GOOD JUDGE. [LAUGHTER]
>> WELL, THANK YOU. WE ALREADY HAVE TWO OF OUR COUNCILMEMBERS WHO MOVED ON. COUNCILMAN.
[00:05:05]
>> RAWLINS. COME BACK TO ME, PLEASE.
>> YES, SIR. COUNCILMAN PORRETTO.
>> THAT'S THREE, SO IT WAS LIKE AGENDA LIGHT ON THIS ONE.
>> VERY GOOD. COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS.
>> WELL, I WANTED TO LOOK AT 10A.
IT'S JUST REALLY TO UPDATED TO SAY, THANK YOU TO BARBARA AND FOR THE STANDARD OF CARE.
>> BARBARA DOES A GREAT JOB. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING BARBARA DOES.
>> THIS IS OUR BASIC YOUTH AND STANDARDS.
>> BARBARA, COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE.
>> BARBARA SANDERSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH.
>> EACH YEAR WE RENEW THIS, IT'S OUR YOUTH STANDARDS OF CARE.
WE'RE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED AS A RECREATION FACILITY AND NOT A DAYCARE CENTER OR A SCHOOL OR BABYSITTER.
WE STRICTLY RUN PROGRAMS, AND WE PROVIDE A SERVICE THAT'S SAFE.
ONE THING THAT WE HAVE IN STILL WHICH IS NOT IN THIS USE STANDARDS, BUT WE MOVED ALL CHILDREN OVER TO RIGHT FOR SUMMER RECREATION PROGRAM AND OUR AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM, AND WE HAVE SECURED LIKE THE SCHOOL.
YOU HAVE TO BE BUZZED TO COME IN AS AN ADULT.
THAT WAY, OUR CHILDREN ARE SAFE AND I HAVE TO SAY THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE HAVE NOT HAD ONE CHILD THAT WANTED TO GO HOME EARLY.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO STAY PAST TIME.
>> NOT ONLY THAT, TOO, BUT WE WERE HAVING SOME CONFLICTS WITH THE KIDS AND SOME OF THE ADULTS THAT ARE MAYBE LESS PATIENT WITH KIDS THAT USE MAGUIRE DANCING.
THIS HAS WORKED OUT REALLY WELL.
BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO SERIOUSLY WORK OUT UP THERE AND SO THE KIDS.
>> BUT IT HAS WORKED OUT WONDERFULLY.
>> THE WAY WHEN KIDS GET IN FRONT OF ME AT A BUFFET. [LAUGHTER]
>> HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE OUR SUMMER FEEDING PROGRAM THROUGH GISD.
THEY ALWAYS INCLUDE THIS IN THEIR GRANT.
THIS IS JUST OUTSIDE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND THIS ALSO HELPS WITH OUR POOL FACILITY.
WE DO ONCE A YEAR, BUT OUR PARKS FOR GALVESTON AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT ALL CHIME IN, AND WE DO A BACK TO SCHOOL POOL PARTY FOR ALL THE CHILDREN AT THE TEM.
IT'S LIKE A REWARD AT THE END OF THE SUMMER.
>> VERY NICE. THE AFTER SCHOOL, THEY ARE BUSED IN.
>> SOME ARE BUS, SUMMER DROPPED OFF.
SOME CHILDREN WALK FROM THEIR HOME.
>> I DON'T THINK SO. ANYTHING ELSE, COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS?
>> I HAVE PEOPLE TEXTING ME, AND I HAVE TO SAY I HAD THE SAME CONFUSION WHEN I PULLED THE AGENDA.
WHEN YOU HIT COUNCIL, IT WOULD GO DIRECTLY TO OUR AGENDA.
NOW IT GOES TO SOME OTHER COMMITTEE AND PEOPLE DON'T KNOW TO SCROLL DOWN TO GET TO OUR AGENDA.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY WAY BUT TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING AND TEXTING ME, YOU CAN GET TO THE COUNCIL AGENDA BY JUST SCROLLING DOWN THAT LIST.
>> YOU CAN SORT, YOU COULD CHOOSE CITY COUNCIL FOR A SPECIFIC TIME FRAME IF YOU WANT TO, AND IT'LL BRING UP ONLY THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS.
>> JUST FOR THE COMMUNITY TOO, WHAT I'VE NOTICED, BY THE WAY, WE HAVE A NEW SOFTWARE PROGRAM WHERE OUR AGENDA IS BEING PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT.
BUT THEY'RE LISTED CHRONOLOGICALLY BY DATE.
>> THAT'S WHY THEY COME UP LIKE THAT.
IF YOU WILL GO DOWN TO APRIL 24TH, YOU WILL SEE THE MEETINGS THAT ARE FOR APRIL 24TH AND COUNCIL WORKSHOP IN.
>> JUST FOR ANOTHER ISSUE THAT IT'S HAS BEEN POINTED TO ME BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, IF YOU GOOGLE AGENDA CENTER, LIKE WE ALL USED TO DO, IT'LL BRING YOU TO WHERE THE OLD AGENDA CENTER STOPPED.
THERE'S NO WAY TO, I GUESS, REDIRECT THAT PAGE BECAUSE IT'S A NEW CIVIC PLUS SYSTEM.
YOU DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE CITY WEBSITE AND SELECT AGENDA CENTER.
I TALKED TO MELISSA THIS MORNING AND THEY'RE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM, CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE THEY'RE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AS WELL.
[00:10:04]
THAT SHOULD BE FIXED BY THE END OF THE WEEK OR BY NEXT WEEK, SO CIVIC PLUS IS AWARE, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY HOW TO REDIRECT IT OR RID OF THAT OLD.>> THERE IS ONE MORE ISSUE TOO, IF YOU GO TO THE SIDE AND YOU JUST HIT PRINT, IT PRINTS THE SCREEN, NOT THE AGENDA.
YOU HAVE TO DOWNLOAD THE AGENDA AND THEN PRINT IT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. BUT THAT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR OUR CITIZENS.
IF THERE WAS SOME WAY WHEN YOU HAVE THE AGENDA UP, YOU SHOULD BE OF WHAT IT JUST PRINT THE AGENDA, NOT THE SCREEN.
MAYBE YOU CAN TALK TO THEM OR I'D BE GLAD TO SHARE THE ISSUE.
>> I GET IT WITH YOU AFTER TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE AND WILBUR GET IT FIXED.
>> BECAUSE I ENDED UP LIKE PRINTING FIRST LAST MONTH'S EXTREMELY LONG AGENDA.
>> YOU HAVE TO PRINT IT PAGE BY PAGE.
>> BUT I'M LIKE, WAIT, WHAT DOES THIS SEEM.
>> THEN I WAS READING. I'M LIKE, WHY IS THIS DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN?
>> THAT'S TRUE. THERE IS A WORK AROUND.
I MEAN, I FIGURED OUT WHEN YOU PULL THESE PAGES UP, IF YOUR SOFTWARE PACKAGE THAT'S ON YOUR COMPUTER, YOU CAN PRINT IT OFF OF THAT.
AT LEAST I CAN IN APPLE'S OS SYSTEM, SO WHATEVER.
>> YOU CAN PULL IT HAVE TO EDIT IT, I'M SORRY.
>> WHEN YOU PULL IT UP AND YOU'RE ON THE AGENDA THAT IS ON OUR WEBSITE. YOU'RE RIGHT.
IF YOU PRESS PRINT THERE, IT ONLY PRINTS ONE PAGE AT A TIME.
BUT I CAN PRINT IT OFF OF THE IOS SYSTEM AND IT ALLOWS ME TO PRINT ALSO.
>> LOT OF IT, LIKE I TRIED DOING IT MULTIPLE WAYS BY MY PHONE.
YOU WERE PROBABLY ON A COMPUTER?
>> IT'S PRETTY WONKY THOUGH, YOUR WAY ON THAT.
>> WONKY, IS THAT A TECHNICAL TERM?
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TEST ON WHAT IT IS.
>> I FEEL THAT'S A PRETTY COMMON TERM.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. [LAUGHTER]
>> I KNOW I HAVE COMMENTS THAT ALL RELATED TO YESTERDAY, SO I THOUGHT I'D LEAVE THEM OUT.
>> I THOUGHT YOU ALL WERE PAPERLESS, WHY ARE YOU PRINTING THE AGENDA?
>> BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO READ MY AGENDA AND MAKE MY NOTES, EVEN THOUGH I GO IN.
>> HAPPY TO PRINT IT FOR YOU ALL IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE SOMETHING.
YOU HAVE TO CLICK ON THAT, DON'T YOU?
>> DOWNLOAD IT FIRST BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY PRINT.
WHICH IS DIFFICULT FOR CITIZENS.
THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER WAY TO DO THAT.
>> WE CAN PRINT OUT SOME AND PASS THEM OUT. TAKE THEM. THERE YOU GO.
WHILE WE'RE DISCUSSING THE PRINTING ISSUE, I'VE GOT THREE ITEMS I JUST WANT TO BRING UP.
I WISH I COULD MAKE THIS WHERE I DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING 10B, BRIAN.
ON THIS AMENDED BUDGET AND SO FORTH.
THE 25TH STREET LIGHTING PROJECT, WAS THAT HOT MONEY?
>> WE WERE PAYING IT OUT OUT OF TRICKLE DOWN.
>> OUT OF THE TRICKLE DOWN POT.
>> GOOD. I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
>> MAY I ASK ONE QUICK QUESTION, AND I DID HAVE ONE AND I KNEW YOU WOULD BRING IT UP.
ON THE BUDGET FOR THE LIGHTS, IT'S COMPLETED, THOUGH.
>> THAT'S JUST THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF THE LIGHTS.
>> JUST THE MAINTENANCE OF IT. THAT'S ALL.
THIS IS ANOTHER STEP FORWARD IN FINALIZING OUR COMMITMENTS TO THE PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE.
THIS IS COMING FROM THE COUNTY.
DON THANKS FOR THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON GETTING THAT WORKED OUT.
BRIAN, I UNDERSTAND IT, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC, WOULD YOU JUST EXPLAIN WHAT THAT IS? WE HAD A BID THAT WAS NOT ACCEPTED THAT THEY PULLED OUT?
>> IT GOES TO THE NEXT HIGHEST BIDDER AND WE HAD TO RETURN THEIR FEE.
THAT'S THEIR MONEY WE'RE RETURNING TO THEM, NOT MUNICIPAL MONEY.
>> IF THEY PULLED OUT, WHY DO WE HAVE THE RETURN IT?
>> THERE WAS TWO FEES. THERE WAS A $10,000 FEE THAT I THINK WE KEPT. MOVE ON.
>> WHAT HAPPENS IS DURING THE AUCTION PROCESS, THEY'LL BID AND THEY BID.
IN THE DOCUMENT, IT SAYS, IF YOU BID THE HIGHEST BID, YOU HAVE TO PAY A 5% ADDITIONAL OF THAT.
[00:15:02]
THAT'S THE GOVDEALS FEE.THEREFORE, THEY PAY US A CHECK, SHALL WE SAY, AND WE ARE REFUNDING THEIR 5% TO GOVDEALS.
>> BUT THEY DID PAY A FEE TO BID AND WE KEPT THAT.
>> WHERE DOES THAT GO IN THE BUDGET?
>> WELL, IT DEPENDS ON THE PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THE FIRST PIECE, I THINK IT AS A.
>> THE AIRPORT IS THE LARGEST PIECE OF LAND.
>> TO CLARIFY FOR THE PUBLIC, DAVID, FIRST OF ALL COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
>> MOVE A LITTLE CLOSER, MAYBE.
JUST SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW BOTH TRACKS OF LAND WENT TO THE SAME PERSON?
>> DID WE GET CLEAR TO RELEASE TODAY?
>> THE FIRST ONE WENT TO A LOCAL REST AND DOWN AT THE CRASH BASE AND IN THE SECOND, WE HAVEN'T CLOSED YET.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS EVEN THOUGH THAT FIRST BID, THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT, THE SECOND BID IS STILL FOR THE SAME AMOUNT.
>> NO, IT'S A SLIGHTLY LESS, BUT IT'S STILL WELL ABOVE THE APPRAISED VALUE.
>> TELL ME SO I UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH LESS WHAT WERE WE TALKING ABOUT ON THAT?
>> HE'S A SECOND HIGHEST BIDDER.
IF THE TOP ONE BACKS OUT, THE SECOND GETS IT.
>> FIGHTS A KEY BID AT. ADD TO THAT 5% FOR THE PREMIUM THAT GOES BACK TO GOVDEALS.
>> VERY GOOD. THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR BOTH PROPERTIES IS HOW MUCH?
>> WE'VE ALREADY CLOSED ON THE ONE THE CITY OWNED, AND THE OTHER WE'RE WAITING TO CLOSE ON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, APPRECIATE IT.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH OUR CLARIFICATION ITEMS. I GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3 [OVERLAPPING] I DID CALL ALEX HE SAID IT IS FINE.
>> BEAU, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING?
>> NO. I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO HIM.
[3.B. Pelican Island Bridge Update (D Buckley - 20 min)]
>> DID WE JUST BREAK THE RECORD, BY THE WAY.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TO DO THE REST OF MY DAY. I'LL BE RIGHT BACK.
>> I THINK COUNCIL IS PRETTY WELL UP TO SPEED ON WHERE WE ARE, BUT I MENTIONED TO COUNCIL, WE WOULD HAVE AN UPDATE EACH MEETING UNTIL WE GET THIS FINALIZED.
YOU SAID AN HOUR FOR THE COUNCIL AND 15 MINUTES IN.
>> WHEN I SET WHAT I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE, IT ALWAYS GOES OVER, SO I WENT OVER THIS TIME THINKING.
>> WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL YIELD SOME TIME BACK TO BECAUSE YOU GAVE ME 20 MINUTES WE THINK.
>> I KNOW YOU MADE ME NERVOUS WHEN I READ HIS [OVERLAPPING] I'M LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THAT I DON'T KNOW.
>> DID WANT TO GET BACK AND PUT OUT THERE THAT THE MAYOR IS GOING TO BE THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR IT ISSUES RELATED TO ACCESS TO THE WEBSITE BECAUSE I URGE YOU DOING YOUR PRESENTATION.
BEFORE I STARTED, I WANTED TO THANK THE ROAD WARRIORS AND MADE THE TRIP UP TO AUSTIN TO TESTIFY ON THE SENATE BILL.
I KNOW THAT'S A TOUGH TRIP TO DOING TODAY, AND IT'S GREATLY APPRECIATED ON STAFF TO RESPECT THAT ALL WENT UP THERE AND DEFENDED THE CITY ON THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THANK YOU.
>> I WANT TO SAY TOO, THAT'S A HARD THING TO DO.
YOU HAVE TO STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
GET UP THERE AT A DROP OF A HAT.
WE HAD THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS, COUNCIL MEMBER RAWLINS, PORRETTO AND ROBB THAT WENT UP THERE AND TESTIFIED ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. APPRECIATE THAT.
>> THESE DAYS. I GOT TO FROM ONE PLANE TO ANOTHER AT MY OWN EXPENSE.
AND THESE DAYS HAD TO LEAVE UP 4:30. GOD BLESS THEM.
>> WE WERE HONORED AND THANK ALL Y'ALL.
I THINK IT WAS A WELL WELL WORTH A TRIP.
>> ALSO, THANKS TO SALLY BACO.
COUNCIL, THE UPDATE WILL BE VERY QUICK.
TXDOT CONTINUES TO ADVANCE THEIR EFFORTS TOWARD ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE, DETAILED DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMITS.
SOMETHING THAT COUNCILMEMBER ROBB CAN TALK ABOUT IS THE MPO IS WORKING TO FORM A WORKING GROUP.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE IN APPOINTED TOMORROW RELATED TO THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING.
FROM AN OUTSIDE PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S ALL.
INTERNALLY, WE'RE WORKING ON THE LOCAL AGREEMENTS FOR RIGHT AWAY AND FUNDING FROM OUR OTHER LOCAL PARTICIPANTS.
WE ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH ALL OF THE PARTICIPANTS, AND COUNTIES ON THE AGENDA TODAY.
THE COUNTY NEEDS THE CITY TO APPROVE IT FIRST, AND THEN THEY'LL PUT IT ON THE NEXT COMMISSIONERS COURT MEETING.
YES. PORT OF GALVESTON, IT IS BEEN SENT,
[00:20:02]
AND WE'RE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM, A&M.WE RECEIVED THEIR COMMENTS ON THE 16TH.
WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THEIR COMMENTS.
THERE ARE SOME RELATIVELY MINOR ONES, THEN THERE ARE SOME RELATED TO THE RIGHT OF WAY THE OLD SEAWAY PARKWAY.
WE'RE GOING TO ABANDON AT THE END OF THE PROJECT TO TEX A&M, BUT TEX A&M, IS GOING TO BUY IT FROM US IN ADVANCE.
THERE'S A RIGHT AWAY AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE MAINTENANCE, AND WE'RE IN NEGOTIATIONS ON HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE WORDED AND WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE ROLES ARE GOING TO BE OF THE TWO PARTIES.
CLEARLY, WE MAINTAIN AT LEAST CONTINUE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THAT ROAD UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.
IT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD DO ANYWAY, IF WE WEREN'T ABANDONING IT, SO.
>> ACTUALLY, WE'RE GOING TO CONVEY IT NOW, AND THEY'RE GOING TO ALLOW US TO HAVE ACCESS FROM MAINTENANCE VERSUS MAINTENANCE AND UTILITIES.
>> PORT HOUSTON, WE RECEIVED THEIR COMMENTS LATE TUESDAY.
THERE'S NOTHING EARTH SHATTERING IN THERE, BUT WHEN LAWYERS GET WITH LAWYERS, THERE'S A LOT OF LAWYER-ESQUE ACTIONS RELATED TO THE [OVERLAPPING]. THERE ARE A LOT OF-
>> THEY GET PAID BY THE WORD, SO THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT.
NAVIGATION DISTRICT, THEIR ATTORNEYS COMING OVER FRIDAY.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THAT DISCUSSION, BUT THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE ACTIVE AND ONGOING.
REALLY, THAT'S IT FOR AN UPDATE ON THE PUBLIC BRIDGE.
WE'RE MOVING AS FAST AS WE CAN.
WE'RE INVOLVED AND ACTIVE WITH EACH OF THE LOCAL PARTICIPANTS, AND TXDOT IS STILL MOVING AND HASN'T SLOWED DOWN.
THE ONLY OPEN ITEM WOULD BE COUNCILMEMBER ROBB ABOUT WHAT THE MPO IS DOING.
>> WITH THE WORKING GROUP, I HAVE IDENTIFIED 167 MILLION THAT COULD BE TRANSFERRED OVER FROM A TRANSIT PROJECT ON THE RKD GROUP, WHICH WOULD STILL LEAVE THEM OVER A HALF A BILLION DOLLARS.
BUT I'M ALSO WORKING WITH BOTH TXDOT AND WITH AUSTIN TO STILL LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF MAKING IT ON SYSTEM BRIDGE.
WE WOULD STILL HAVE OUR COMMITMENT FOR THE MONEY, BUT IT REALLY DOES MAKE SENSE.
WHEN THEY IDENTIFIED THE PROJECT WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR? THE PROJECT MAP OR WHERE THE PROJECT BEGINS FROM.
THEY START THE PROJECT FROM PORT INDUSTRIAL.
WELL, TECHNICALLY, THE PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE CAUSEWAY NEVER TOUCHES PORT INDUSTRIAL.
MY ARGUMENT TO THEM IS STARTED AT HIGHWAY 275, WHICH IS A STATE HIGHWAY, WHICH WOULD THEN JUSTIFY MAKING IT AN ON SYSTEM BRIDGE.
THE HDAC IS SO MUCH COMMITTED TO THAT BECAUSE EVERYONE AGREES THAT IT SHOULD BE AN ON SYSTEM BRIDGE.
I EVEN HAD A MEETING DOWN HERE WITH WIMBLE AND HE DROVE IT.
WE ALSO HAVE THE HDAC BOARD WILL BE HAVING A RETREAT DOWN HERE.
I'VE ARRANGED WITH THE PORT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO DO A BOAT TOUR SO PEOPLE CAN SEE HOW BAD IT IS FROM UNDERNEATH JUST TO REINFORCE OUR COMMITMENT.
I FEEL GOOD THAT IT'S GOING TO MOVE FORWARD.
NOT THRILLED THAT MY TPC MEETING TOMORROW STARTS AT 8:00 AM.
WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN DOING THIS WEEK? [LAUGHTER]
>> I NEED TO GO UP THIS AFTERNOON.
IT'S PART OF THE DAYS BEFORE THE SUN COMES UP.
>> I KNOW. THAT MEANS I HAVE TO LEAVE AT 6:00, 06:30 BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC AND YOU CAN'T GET ON THE HOV LANE.
THESE GUYS ARE MAKING FUN OF ME BECAUSE I CALL HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE LANE.
>> I MADE SHORT CIRCUIT BY SAYING HOV LANE.
>> WE'RE GOING RIGHT THERE. LOOK ON THE MAP.
I THOUGHT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE TOLLWAY.
SHE'S LIKE, THAT'S NOT THE HOV AND IT'S LIKE WHAT THE HELL'S THE HOV. [LAUGHTER]
>> PEOPLE WHO DON'T, THAT'S A HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE. [OVERLAPPING].
[OVERLAPPING] EVERYONE AT THE TVC LOOKED AT ME, SO ANYWAY THINGS ARE MOVING FORWARD, AND IT IS EVERYTHING'S POSITIVE, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET IT DONE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
>> IT'S MOVING VERY POSITIVELY, AND WHAT I'M HAPPY ABOUT, THE CITY OF GALVESTON IS STEP FORWARD.
WE'RE THE FIRST TO MAKE A COMMITMENT TO THIS.
SOON AS WE GET ALL OF OUR PARTICIPANT FUNDING IN, THEN BRIAN WILL GO AHEAD AND SIGN EXECUTE THAT DOCUMENT AND MOVE FORWARD ON THIS.
THEY'RE APPOINTING A COMMITTEE TOMORROW AT HGAC.
COUNCILWOMAN ROBB WILL BE ON THAT COMMITTEE,
[00:25:02]
AND I THINK THEY HAVE SOME OTHER BIG PLAYERS ON TPC ON THAT COMMITTEE.>> I MADE A REQUEST TO THE CHAIR OF THE PEOPLE, I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE GOOD.
I'M WORKING TOGETHER WITH MARY ZIMMERMAN.
HE WILL BE LEAVING THE TPC IN MAY BECAUSE HE HAS TERMED OUT.
I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO HAVE IT ON IT WHEN AND WE'RE MAKING IT A FOUR WEEK WORKING COMMITTEE.
>> BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DRAG RF AT ALL.
JUST SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WITH THE AFA SO WE HAVE TO HAVE THE MONEY TO SIGN.
WAIT CHECK TXDOT NEEDED OUR RESOLUTION THAT WE ALREADY SAID AND OUR RESOLUTION REQUIRED US TO HAVE THE MONEY, BUT TXDOT [NOISE] CANNOT SIGN IT UNTIL THEY HAVE THE RESOLUTION FROM THE TPC.
IT'S A MULTI SIDE ON HAVING THAT FINAL CUE.
>> DAN. NEXT TIME, WHEN YOU COME BACK, I KNOW WE'LL BE CLOSER OBVIOUSLY TO GETTING THING SIGNED AND EXECUTED.
COULD YOU JUST BRING FORWARD SOME MILESTONE DATES, ANTICIPATED FUTURE MILESTONE DATES RELATED TO THE BRIDGE? I THINK THE PUBLIC COULD BE INFORMED NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THIS THING'S GOING, WHAT WHAT SHOULD WE BE SEEING NEXT?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE EXACT PHRASE.
>> NO NOT EXACT. I UNDERSTAND.
BUT JUST I CAN GIVE YOU NOW THAT THAT DATE IS LOOKING NOW AT 29.
WHAT THE GOAL IS TO MOVE THAT TO 28.
>> WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE TXDOT'S SCHEDULE.
I'D CERTAINLY BE GLAD TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU. SO I COULD GET UPDATED.
I GET UPDATES FROM TXDOT'S BEFORE I COME EACH MEETING.
>> SOME DAYS THOSE SCHEDULES LOOKS UGLIER THAN THE OTHER DAYS.
>> DAN, IF YOU COULD SEND THAT TO ALL OF COUNCIL THAT SCHEDULES THAT.
>> I THINK YOU HAVE THE LATEST.
WE JOINTLY BEEN PROVIDED TO COUNCIL.
>> I THINK AS THEIR WORK CONTINUES AS MILESTONES ARE ACHIEVED.
I CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE YOU UPDATES ON HOURS, ALTHOUGH, WE'RE SUBJECT TO WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE OTHER THIRD PARTIES.
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT SCHEDULES ARE VERY FLEXIBLE.
THAT'S RIGHT. I'D BE GLAD TO DO THAT.
>> MAYOR, I WANT YOU TO KNOW I'M YIELDING ABOUT 53 MINUTES.
>> I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU GAVE HIM 20 MINUTES.
>> NO, I WAS THROUGH IN ABOUT THREE.
>> THEN MARIA HAD A QUESTION RELATED TO PLACEMENT ON THE ON BRIDGE SYSTEM ON SYSTEM BRIDGE WORK.
IS THAT A DECISION THAT A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS MADE BY TPC TO TXDOT OR IS THAT SOLELY TXDOT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] COMMISSIONERS. IT'S OUTSIDE COMMISSIONERS DECISION.
IF I'M WORKING WHEN MAYOR'S TO GO SURE THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL GOVERNOR.
>> IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE AN OFF SYSTEM BRIDGE FUND AND THEY END UP PAYING FOR 90% OF THE STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE OF THIS BRIDGE ANYWAY, AND THE TOP SIDE MAINTENANCE, STRIPING AND RAILING REPAIRS AND STUFF.
WE END UP DOING MOST OF THAT NOW EVEN ON THE CAUSEWAY.
WE HAVE TO DO ALL THE LIGHTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE UP THERE.
I'M NOT SEEING WHERE THIS IS A GIANT STRETCH FOR IT.
>> I DON'T EITHER. I UNDERSTAND IT'S THEIR DECISION.
>> HERE THAT THEY STARTED IT AT FOR INDUSTRIAL.
>> BUT TXDOT, AND THE COMMISSIONERS, I'M SURE WE'LL LOOK TO TPCS, OBVIOUSLY RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> THE MONEY IS GOT TO COME FROM THE TPC WHETHER ON SYSTEM OR OFFICE.
>> IN THE ON SYSTEM THE TOPIC OF ON SYSTEM BRIDGE, WE BROACHED THAT MANY TIMES WITH TXDOT.
BUT AS THIS HAS EVOLVED, THEY HAVE MADE CHANGES IN A DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHY AND PERSPECTIVE THAT HAS BEEN IN MY OPINION, BENEFICIAL TO THE CITY.
AND NOW WE'RE COMING BACK AGAIN AND ASKING FOR THIS ON SYSTEM BRIDGE.
WE MAY HAVE MORE FRIENDLY THOUGHTS OVER THERE THAN WE THINK AT THIS POINT.
>> THAT'S VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER THINGS, COUNCIL. THANK YOU, DAN.
>> LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3C, PLEASE?
[3.C. Update and Discussion of the Stewart Beach Park’s Master Plan/Developer Status ( D Anderson - 40 Min )]
>> ITEM 3C. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF THE STEWART BEACH PARKS MASTER PLAN DEVELOPER STATUS.
>> THIS IS ITEM 11P ON YOUR AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON.
WE HAVE DUDLEY ANDERSON, OUR ARCHITECT, CITY ARCHITECT, AND MASTER PLANNER DEVELOPER COORDINATOR.
>> I'M IN ALL OF THIS, COUNCIL AT THE MOMENT FOR BREVITY.
[00:30:04]
>> [OVERLAPPING] DUDLEY ON THAT.
BY THE WAY, DUDLEY, BEFORE YOU START, COUNCIL, I'M SURE YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET MATERIAL AT 11P, IT OUTLINES ALL THE DETAILS OF WHAT DUDLEY IS GOING TO MENTION.
I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S A VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT AND WELL ORGANIZED PLAN.
>> DUDLEY ANDERSON CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT MANAGER.
WE'VE TRIED TO PUT SOME ORDER TO IT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN SO HIT OR MISS AND CHAOTIC FOR SO MANY YEARS.
WE WANTED TO BRING IT BACK TO YOU IN SOME METHOD THAT YOU COULD LOOK AT AND SAY, YES, THIS IS HOW WE WANT TO PROCEED.
THERE'S NO MONEY ASSOCIATED WITH IT AT THIS MOMENT.
BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING AT THE MOMENT IS CONSULTING WITH A COUPLE OF DESIGN FIRMS ABOUT HOW TO GET THE NEXT PIECE DONE, WHICH IS THE UPDATED MASTER PLAN.
IF YOU APPROVE THIS METHODOLOGY THIS EVENING, IT WILL BE THE ROGERS PLAN THAT IS UPDATED.
THROUGH PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND THROUGH THE DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNCIL.
THERE ARE THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND WE WANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT.
BUT THAT IS THE FASTEST WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET COME TO AN AGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT WE WANT ON THE BEACH AND HOW TO GET THERE.
AT THE SAME TIME, WANT TO DEVELOP THE FINANCIAL PROSPECTUS AND DEVELOP PROSPECTUS IN THIS EFFORT THAT ALLOWS US TO GO OUT AND FIND A DEVELOPER TO EXPLAIN TO THE DEVELOPER WHAT THE OPPORTUNITY IS AND WHAT THEY CAN GAIN OUT OF IT AND WHAT WE CAN GAIN OUT OF IT.
THE WHOLE PROCESS I PUT A TIMELINE ON THE BACK PART OF THIS.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE CITY'S TIMELINE OR THE DESIGN FIRMS TIMELINES.
THAT WILL BE ADJUSTED AS THINGS PROGRESS.
SOME THINGS WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO SLIGHTLY QUICKER, BUT MOST LIKELY NOT.
ESPECIALLY THE LAST PART OF THE DESIGN FROM THE DEVELOPER MAY TAKE A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
WHAT WE'RE DOING IN HOUSE AT THE MOMENT IS CONTINUING TO RESEARCH THE ISSUES THAT ARE ON THE BEACH.
WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW FAR AWAY WE HAVE TO STAY FROM THE SEAWALL, WHY WE HAVE TO STAY THAT.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S A 50 FOOT EASEMENT WITH THE SEAWALL AND THE COUNTY.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS.
>> THE EASEMENT IS ONE THING WHERE THEY HAVE STRUCTURE UNDERNEATH THAT IS THE OTHERS.
>> WE ARE THEY RIM WRAP AND THINGS LIKE THIS.
WE HAVE TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW CLOSE WE CAN GET, HOW FAR AWAY WE HAVE TO BE, THAT THING.
WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY THE ABILITY TO MOVE THE ROAD THAT WE HAVE ON THE BEACH.
RIGHT NOW, IT MAKES SORT OF AN ODD SHAPE FOR THE DEVELOPER.
>> IT MAKES IT LESS OPTIMAL FOR PLANNING.
>> RIGHT. I KNOW IF WE DO DEVELOPMENT IN THAT LOCATION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO UPGRADE THE UTILITIES ANYWAY, WHICH MEANS WE DIG STUFF UP ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
WE'RE TRYING TO RESEARCH AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO MOVE THAT ROAD A LITTLE BIT, REPLAT IT, WHATEVER IS REQUIRED FOR IT.
THEY GENERALLY DON'T LIKE US TO PUT CONCRETE DOWN.
WE'RE RESEARCHING THAT IN ADDITION, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO MAYBE THE MAIN ROAD.
IT MAY NOT BE SOME OTHER SURFACE PAVING.
THAT'S A RESEARCH TOPIC WE'VE GOT.
I MENTIONED THE UTILITIES, MA'AM?
>> PAVERS, IN SOME CASES ARE VERY NICE.
I LOVE THEM ON MARKET STREET, 23RD STREET AT THE INTERSECTION.
>> I'LL BE UP ON THE SEAWALL THE FIRST TURCAN.
>> THEY TEND TO BE UP ON THE SEAWALL AFTER THE FIRST TURCAN.
>> PEOPLE AT THE EMERALD CAN KEEP THEM FOR US.
>> WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET PEOPLE AROUND ON THE BEACH WITH BOARDWALKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THERE'S VERY LIMITED THINGS YOU CAN DO TO MOVE PEOPLE ON A SURFACE.
IT'S EASY FOR PEDESTRIANS TO MOVE.
IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN IN A STROLLER, ROLLING COOLER, GETTING FROM ANY DISTANCE TO THE BEACH IS A TRAUMA.
WE'RE LOOKING AT SYSTEMS, WE CAN DO THAT, WHETHER IT'S MOBILE SYSTEMS OR WHETHER THERE'S AN ABILITY TO PUT A BOARDWALK IN.
WE'RE WORKING ON SETTING UP THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
[00:35:03]
I KNOW I'VE MENTIONED IT TO YOU THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, BUT I NEED SOME INPUT FROM YOU GUYS ABOUT WHO YOU MIGHT WANT TO BE MAKE SURE IT GETS A SPECIAL NOTICE ABOUT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.LAST TIME JOHNS BEACH SERVICE WAS HERE AND THAT COMPANY HAS LIVED ON THE BEACH FOR 40 SOME ODD YEARS.
>> OH, SINCE THE 40S. THEY KNOW A LOT ABOUT THAT BEACH AND HOW THINGS REALLY OPERATE, WHAT THINGS NEED TO BE DONE.
PEOPLE LIKE THAT NEED TO BE BROUGHT IN TO COME TO THE MEETING.
>> IT NEEDS TO BE FUNCTIONAL, NOT JUST.
>> IF I CAN GIVE MY TWO CENTS. I KNOW THAT I LOVE TO GIVE IT.
>> IF YOU SIT AND YOU'RE LOOKING AND YOU STAND RIGHT WHERE THE ENTRANCES OF STEWART, AND YOU LOOK EAST WHERE THE SEA WALL IS.
WE HAVE THIS BIG AREA WHERE THEY USED TO HAVE THE OR WHERE THE SURFACE WAS, THERE'S STILL HELIPAD THERE AND IF YOU LOOK, THAT'S CITY PROPERTY, BUT IT'S NOT CONSIDERED PART OF PARKING FOR STEWART BEACH.
>> SO IN TERMS OF GLO, WHAT I AND JUST LOOKING AT IT AND SEEING HOW IT PARALLELS TO OTHER CITIES AND IDEAS.
THE IDEA OF NOT HAVING PARKING ON THE BEACH IS STRANGE TO ME BECAUSE IT'S BEEN THAT WAY FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
BUT SPEAKING OF THE ROAD, I HAD THE IDEA IF YOU MADE A STRAIGHT ROAD RIGHT ON DOWN THE WAY, AND YOU HAD A PARKING GARAGE WHERE THE FREE PARKING AREA WAS.
THERE'S GOOD PARKING SOLUTIONS FOR BOARDWALKS AND RACE STRUCTURES WHERE YOU CAN [OVERLAPPING] AND WELL, THE TR HAS THE SAME THING WHERE THEY CAN PARK ON THERE.
IN TERMS OF BEACH USER FEES, AND WE'RE ALWAYS SEARCHING FOR ALTERNATIVE REVENUE, THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY TO DIFFERENTIATE THOSE TWO, SO IT'S NOT ALL LIMPED INTO A BEACH USER FEE, WHICH TERMS FOR A DEVELOPER WOULD BE MORE INCENTIVIZING.
IF WE HAD WHERE THE FREE PARKING AREA IS AND WE PUT A PARKING GARAGE THERE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, IF IT WAS FREE PARKING, YOU COULD STILL MAINTAIN THE SAME REQUIREMENT WITH GLO FOR FREE PARKING.
YOU COULD STILL HAVE AMENITIES SOUTHWARD, A BOARDWALK THAT GOES ACROSS, BUT I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT IN TERMS OF HOW WE DEVELOP AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE OLD PICTURES OF STEWART BEACH FROM THE 40S, 50S AND 60S, THERE WAS A PAVILION BOARDWALK ON THE NORTH SIDE WERE THAT ROAD.
IF WE HAD THAT AND IF YOU JUST GO DOWN THERE, SIT THERE AND LOOK AT IT, AND YOU SAY, IF WE HAVE A NICE BOARDWALK AREA WITH PARKING UNDERNEATH, AND YOU CAN SEPARATE IT TO WHERE ON THE LEFT, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO THE BEACH AND LET'S SAY YOU'RE JUST A RESIDENT AND WANTS TO GO TO RESTAURANTS OR SHOPS, OBVIOUSLY, THIS RATE FOR RESIDENTS WOULD BE IDEAL FOR A STEWART BEACH BOARDWALK OR IT IS CALLED THE STEWART BOARDWALK, SO TO SPEAK.
ANY REVENUES GENERATED FROM THAT AND FROM THE UPPER LEVELS OF A PARKING GARAGE ABOVE THE FREE PARKING WITH A BOARDWALK THAT WENT AROUND AND YOU COULD ACCESS THE SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS AND YOU DIDN'T WANT TO NECESSARILY GO TO THE BEACH, THOSE FEES, IN MY OPINION, COULD BE CONSIDERED NON RESTRICTIVE.
>> PART OF THE PARKING, THE OTHER PART WOULD HAVE TO GO TO BEACH MAINTENANCE.
>> WELL, THEN THIS IS JUST MY IDEA, IF YOU SEPARATE THE TWO OR STEWART BEACH IS STILL, IF I WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH?
>> COMPARED TO WHAT THEY DO IN CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, THEY DO PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, WHERE PART IS THE FREE.
IF I DON'T WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH BECAUSE THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT PEOPLE.
SOME PEOPLE WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH, SOME PEOPLE WANT TO JUST LOOK AT THE BEACH.
THAT'S FINE, AND WE SHOULD ACCOMMODATE BOTH OF THAT.
IF WE HAVE A BOARDWALK STRUCTURE ALONG THE WHOLE NORTH SIDE OF THE CURRENT PARKING AREA AND THE FREE PARKING ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE CAN HAVE THAT PARKING GARAGE, WE CAN HAVE AN AREA WHERE IT'S BOARDWALK ONLY.
WE CAN HAVE A BOARDWALK THAT EXTENDS TO THE BEACH AND PEOPLE COULD PARK ON THE SAND, AND THAT WOULD BE THE BEACH USER FEES IN THAT SAME PRINCIPLE OF THE BEACH USER FEES SEPARATING THAT OUT SO THAT YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT AGAIN, SILOS WHERE BEACH USER FEES ARE ON THE BEACH AND
[00:40:02]
THE BOARDWALK IS ON THE BOARDWALK AND THEN WHEN YOU GET CLOSER, IF WE DO HAVE A BIG BOARDWALK THAT GOES DOWN, YOU CAN HAVE A STRUCTURE, PAVILION DESK STRUCTURE AT THE LINE.YOU STILL HAVE PARKING ON THE BEACH.
YOU STILL HAVE THE ACCOMMODATIONS THAT I THINK WOULD BE JOHNS BEACH SERVICE FOR HOWEVER LONG HAD A SHOP.
YOU CAN HAVE WORKSHOPS, STORAGE FOR MAINTENANCE VEHICLES.
THERE'S YOUR BEACH PATROL HEADQUARTERS, SO TO SPEAK.
WE CAN I THINK IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT WISE, SEPARATING THE TWO TO WHERE THIS IS UNRESTRICTED REVENUE AND THIS IS BEACH USER FEE, AND IT WORKS TOGETHER AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE GLO APPROVAL AS WELL.
>> YOU HAVE GIVEN THIS INPUT ALREADY TO DUDLEY.
>> I'M HEARING SOME OF IT FOR FIRST TIME, BUT IT'S THESE ARE NOT IDEAS WE HAVEN'T HEARD.
WE HEAR THEM FROM THE COUNCIL, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> YEAH. JUST WALKING DOWN THERE AND LOOKING AND SAYING ALL THIS AREA, IF WE INCORPORATE IT INTO BEACH PARKING, WE LOSE IT TO A BEACH USER FEE.
MAYBE IF IT'S A PERCENTAGE, BUT IF I'M NOT GOING TO THE BEACH AND I JUST WANT TO PARK UNDERNEATH AND GO TO A RESTAURANT, I DON'T SEE WHY THAT SHOULD BE A BEACH USER FEE IF IT'S ON THE STEWART BEACH OR STEWART BOARDWALK, SO TO SPEAK.
>> YEAH. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I KNOW, DUDLEY, YOU'LL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF THOUGHTS ON THAT.
PERSONALLY, I COME FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT FIRST OF ALL, I THOUGHT THAT ROGERS PARTNER PLAN, WHICH WE'RE SUPPORTING AND EVOLVING FROM IS A GOOD PLAN.
IN MY OPINION, NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO DOWN THERE, IF YOU'RE PARKING ON THE SAND, IT'S A CONSTANT PROBLEM ON THAT SAND.
PERSONALLY, I THINK A PARKING GARAGE UP AGAINST THE SEA WALL IS THE WAY TO GO.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> IF ESPECIALLY SINCE YOU CAN PUT OTHER OPTIONS IN THAT LANE.
>> YEAH. AGAIN, I COME FROM EXPERIENCE.
I'M A LITTLE BIT SYMPATHETIC TO PARKING ON THE BEACH, NO ONE LIKES SAND IN THEIR CAR, BUT THERE IS THAT NOSTALGIC, I WANT TO PARK ON THE BEACH.
I WANT TO WALK RIGHT ACROSS AND IF YOU DO A PARKING GARAGE AND THE SETBACK HAS TO BE SO FAR AND YOU HAVE THIS I MEAN, THAT'S AN ACCRETING BEACH SO IN 10, 20 YEARS, THAT WALK FROM THE PARKING GARAGE TO SHORELINE IS GOING TO BE VERY LONG AND YET THE GOLF CARTS, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT COULD HELP FERRY PEOPLE ARE A GOOD IDEA, AND IT'S A SERVICE.
>> ALSO A CONCESSION COULD PRODUCE SOME INCOME.
>> YEAH IT COULD PRODUCE SOME INCOME AND SO JUST LOOKING AT THOSE OPTIONS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE NEEDS TO BE SAID THAT THERE SHOULD BE A COMPONENT TO PARKING ON THE BEACH.
IT IS NOSTALGIC, WE DID IT SINCE THE 30S.
[OVERLAPPING] YEAH, THEY USED TO RACE CARS ON THE BEACH IN THE 20S AND 30S.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE HAVE A RACE TRACK ON THE BEACH.
>> BUT WE HAVE TO FACTOR IN THE RESTRICTED USE AREA AND HOW WE GET TO THAT. ALL OF THESE THINGS.
WE'RE WORKING WITH KYLE AND COASTAL RESOURCES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OUR LIMITS ARE AND WHAT OUR RESTRICTIONS ARE.
MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE IS LIMITED SOMEWHAT.
MOVEMENT OF CAR SEEMS TO BE JUST FINE.
I'M NOT SURE WHY WE CAN'T MOVE PEOPLE LIKE THAT.
BUT WE WANT TO MAKE THE EXPERIENCE FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND PEOPLE WHO COME TO VISIT HERE PLEASANT.
IN MY MIND, STEWART BEACH DOES EVENTUALLY REVERT BACK TO THE PREMIER BEACH OF THE ISLAND.
>> IT IS AN ACCRETING BEACH, AS YOU MENTIONED.
NEXT BIG STORM, WE MAY NOT HAVE HALF OF THE BEACH ON THE WEST END THAT WE HAVE TODAY AND WE HAVE TO REBUILD IT.
WE NEED THAT STEWART BEACH TO BE SUSTAINABLE AS AN ANCHOR FOR EVERYTHING?
>> DUDLEY, ON PAGE 2 OF YOUR REPORT, YOU STATE THAT THE SELECTED FIRM SHALL PREPARE A DEVELOPER PERSPECTIVE TO SUPPORT THE SOLICITATION OF QUALIFIED PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERS.
BUT THEN ON PAGE 4, WHEN YOU OUTLINED THE TIME FRAME, YOU SAY DEVELOPMENT OF PROSPECTUS IS THE SELECTION AND AWARD FOR SERVICE BY COUNSEL.
ARE YOU INTENDING THAT THE FIRM THAT'S DOING THE UPDATE TO THE MASTER PLAN ALSO DEVELOP A PROSPECTUS, OR ARE THOSE TWO SEPARATE CONSULTANTS?
[00:45:03]
>> WE'VE ASKED THEM TO TRY TO DO IT ALL IN ONE SWOOP.
NOW, MASTER PLAN, WE'LL COME THE FIRST PART THERE, AND THAT IS THE SECOND PART.
>> WE EXPECT THAT IF THEY CAN'T PERFORM IT IN HOUSE THAT THEY'LL BRING IN EXPERTISE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST IS I THINK YOU'LL FIND PROBABLY BETTER EFFICIENCY AND COORDINATION BY HAVING IT UNDER INFLUENCE IN THE FIRM BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROSPECTUS IS A VERY NICHE MARKET AND A VERY SMALL.
>> THE PARK BOARD FOUND OUT THOSE PRICES RANGE I THINK SOMEWHERE IN THE 50 TO ALMOST $500,000 FOR THAT PIECE OF IT.
>> BUT THE POINT THAT YOU'RE SAYING AND MY FRIEND IN THE AUDIENCE CAN BACK ME UP ON THIS, MR. CARUSO IS A FIRST EXAMPLE OF A BEACH THAT CONTINUES TO CREEP, WHICH WOULD BE WILDWOOD, NEW JERSEY.
WILDWOOD, NEW JERSEY WOULD GET TO A POINT WHERE IT BECAME TWO MILES THAT THEY HAD TO PUT IN LITTLE CARTS TO TRANSFER AND THE BOARDWALK, WHICH ALWAYS HAD THE WATER LAPPING UNDER IT, YOU COULDN'T EVEN SEE THE WATER FROM BECAUSE THEY WOULD DO ALL THEIR NOURISHMENT TO THE NORTH AND ALL THAT SAND WOULD COME DOWN WHERE THEY ACTUALLY STARTED BACK PASS AGAIN.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO STAY CONSCIOUS.
>> GOOD EXAMPLE IS, IF YOU GO DOWN TO POINT WEST, LOOK HOW MANY TIMES THEY'VE HAD TO EXTEND THEIR BOARDWALK UP THERE.
>> WELL, YOU CAN SEE THAT DOWN THERE AT BEACH TOWN.
THEY ENDED THAT BOARDWALK INITIALLY RIGHT UP THERE, CLOSE TO THE WATER.
NOW, LOOK HOW FAR IT'S GONE BACK.
>> LET ME ASK THIS TO DUDLEY, GETTING INTO THE WEEDS ON THIS FINANCIALLY.
BRIAN, HOW WILL WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CONSULTING GROUP AND ALL THIS?
>> ARE WE DOING IT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THAT COULD HAVE SOME IMPACT ON HOW THINGS GO IN AUSTIN, BUT OUR PLAN WAS TO USE THE MONEY THE PARK BOARD HAD SET ASIDE FOR THIS PROJECT THAT WE'RE HOLDING.
>> ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR WITH COUNCIL THAT'S WHAT WE NEED, AND YOU'RE RIGHT.
THERE'S SOME ACTIONS IN AUSTIN RIGHT NOW THAT MAY HAVE A BEARING.
>> WE'RE HOPING TO GET THE PROPOSAL WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
I WOULD LIKE TO BRING IT BACK TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING.
I DOUBT WE CAN ACTUALLY DO THAT BUT IF WE CAN, AND THAT WOULD GIVE US NOTION OF WHAT THIS EFFORT IS GOING TO COST US.
>> BECAUSE IT'S ALSO PUTTING US ON HOLD WITH THE BEACH PATROL ADMINISTRATIVE HEADQUARTERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WHICH WE'VE STARTED SOME WORK ON AND WE HAVE SOME GOOD THOUGHTS, BUT UNTIL THIS CLEARS AUSTIN, I CAN'T.
OF COURSE, IF THAT CLEARS AUSTIN, I'M NOT EVEN SURE THAT THE MONEY THAT'S THERE COULD BE USED FOR THAT ANYWAY.
>> THERE'S SOME THINGS GOING ON IN AUSTIN.
I'M GOING TO HAVE A BEARING ON THIS AND IT'S VERY DISTURBING.
DUDLEY, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT?
>> DEMOLITION OF THE PAVILION IS COMPLETE.
IN NO WAY HELPS THE DRAINAGE WHATSOEVER, BUT I GUESS WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT ANYMORE.
THE RFQ WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT'S THE ORIGINAL RFQ FOR JUST GETTING A PROSPECTIVE.
WHEN WE GOT THOSE NUMBERS I WAS ASTONISHED AND I NOW UNDERSTAND WHY THE PARK BOARD DID IT THEMSELVES, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHO QUALIFIED ACTUALLY TO DO THE PROSPECTUS OURSELVES.
THEN JUST SETTING UP THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
>> ALL RIGHT. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
YOU MAY BE BRINGING A PROPOSAL BACK TO US IN MAY, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> IF IT COMES BACK AND IT'S THIS EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH AMOUNT, WELL, WE MAY LOOK AT ANOTHER OPTION.
>> THE INPUT ON THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND WHO'S INVOLVED WITH THAT, YOU NEED TO GET THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
>> COUNCIL, I WOULD GUIDE YOU, LET'S DO THIS.
PLEASE GET WITH DUDLEY, SEND YOUR THOUGHTS ON WHO WOULD BE INVOLVED WITH THE PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS HERE AND YOUR SUGGESTIONS ON THAT, AND IF YOU COULD SEND THOSE TO DUDLEY, TO MAKE SURE HE GETS THOSE.
>> OUR PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER JUST STARTED
[00:50:03]
THE NEWSLETTER AND THAT'S ONE METHOD I THINK WE CAN DO THAT.WE CAN TALK TO THE NEWSPAPER, TRY TO GET THEM FOR JUST A BROADCAST.
BUT I THINK IF WE CAN ACTUALLY GET SOME POINTED REQUEST PEOPLE.
>> YEAH, AND I THINK WE SHOULD LIMIT IT TO LIKE TWO PEOPLE, AND COUNCIL AND PERSON OR WE'LL END UP WITH 7,000 PEOPLE.
>> WE CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE MEETING.
WE CAN HAVE A SERIES OF THAT SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BE HEARD WHO DO SHOW UP.
>> IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A COMMITTEE AT ALL, IT'LL BE A MEETING.
>> WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER COMMITTEE.
>> DUDLEY ON THE PUBLIC INPUT THEN, YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS MORE DEFINITIVELY ON THAT WHEN YOU BRING THE PROPOSAL BACK TO US?
>> RIGHT. WE'RE DEVELOPING WHAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT AT THAT MEETING IS HOW WAS THAT STRAIGHT SOME EASY AS WELL.
YOU DON'T WANT TO JUST COMMENCE TELL ME ABOUT STEWART BEACH AND ALL OF YOUR FANTASIES WHEN YOU HAVE SOME STRUCTURE AND SOME REALITY TO IT.
>> IT'S LIKE GOING HOME AND ASKING WHAT'S EVERYBODY WANT FOR DINNER? YOU DON'T DO THAT. YOU COME OUT OF SOME FRAMEWORK.
>> ANY OF YOU IN PARTICULAR WANT HERE FROM THE PUBLIC, IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO ASK, WE'LL ASK.
>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS CONCERNING THE STEWART BEACH. I APPRECIATE THIS.
>> I'M JUST TOTALLY IMPRESSED WITH YOU GUYS TODAY.
>> LISTEN, AFTER LAST MEETING, WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MOVE EXPEDITIOUSLY.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID VERY MUCH.
[3.E. Discussion of Charter Amendments ( C Brown -20 min )]
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3E, PLEASE.>> ITEM 3E, DISCUSSION OF CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
WE DISCUSSED THIS MANY MEETINGS AGO.
WE DISCUSSED HAVING CHARTER AMENDMENTS ELECTION, POSSIBLY IN NOVEMBER.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, WE WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS IN AUGUST.
THIS WILL BE HONEST BEFORE WE KNOW IT.
DON SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO YOU NOT TOO LONG AGO TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT SO THAT HE CAN START WORKING ON THIS.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, COUNCIL, AND WE CAN OPEN DISCUSSION UP IN JUST A SECOND HERE, BUT GOT NOTES TO MYSELF ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED ON CHARTER AMENDMENTS LAST TIME WE TALKED ABOUT THIS.
I'D LIKE TO GET COUNCIL'S IDEAS ON THIS, AND THEN WE NEED TO GET THIS ON OUR AGENDA AND MOVE FORWARD HERE EXPEDITIOUSLY ON VOTING ON WHICH ONES WE WANT ON THE CHART.
>> CAN I ADD TO MAKE OUR MEETING EVEN BEST, CAN WE MOVE 3O UP? IF WE'RE DOING A CHART OR WE COULD DO THE BOND AT THE SAME TIME.
>> WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT. SURE.
>> YOU COULD COMBINE THE TWO TOGETHER.
[3.O. Update of Bond for Streets Mill and Overlay ( Robb/Rawlins - 15 min )]
>> ITEM 30, UPDATED BOND FOR STREETS, MILL AND OVERLAY.
>> WALK ME THROUGH HOW THIS IS TIED INTO OUR CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
>> IT WILL BE ON THE SAME ELECTION.
>> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ELECTION.
LET'S WALK AROUND ON THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS HERE.
COUNCIL, AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE TALKED ABOUT CHANGING OUR TERMS FROM THREE, TWO YEAR TO TWO, THREE YEAR TERMS, STAGGERING THE TERMS. WE TALKED ABOUT A 4, 2, 1 SETUP FOR COUNCIL POSITIONS.
WE TALKED ABOUT A STIPEND FOR COUNCIL.
WE TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLY LOOKING AT THE CHARTER LANGUAGE CONCERNING THE LIBRARY.
WE TALKED ABOUT CHARTER LANGUAGE CONCERNING TRASH COLLECTIONS.
THERE WAS A SMALL DISCUSSION OR A BRIEF DISCUSSION ON EVEN INCREASING THE AMOUNT THAT THE CITY MANAGER HAS TO COME TO COUNCIL FOR FOR APPROVAL ON PARTICULAR ITEMS. LET'S OPEN THIS UP.
I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO IS IF YOU HAVE CHARTER ITEMS ON THERE, LET'S BRING THOSE FORWARD.
IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU ONLY HAVE ONE, THAT'S FINE IF YOU FEEL WE NEED TO WAIT ON THIS BECAUSE ONCE WE HAVE THAT ELECTION, WE HAVE TO WAIT HOW MANY YEARS, DON?
>> YES. TWO YEARS BEFORE WE COME AGAIN.
LET'S GO AROUND THE TABLE. MARIE?
[00:55:01]
>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD INPUT, AND WE GOT A LOT ON OUR PLATE AS WE'VE BEEN EXISTING IN THIS PLANE AT THESE THURSDAY MEETINGS FOR 12-14 HOURS AT A TIME.
THE LIBRARY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I WOULD HAVE AN ACTUAL WANT TO PUT ON NOVEMBER.
I THINK WE'VE GOT A LOT ON OUR PLATE AND AS MUCH AS I'D LIKE TO GET SOMETHING DONE, I THINK MAYBE THE MAY ELECTION BECAUSE THAT'S THE NEXT COUNCIL ELECTION AS WELL.
I DON'T WANT TO RUSH ANYTHING.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET PUBLIC INPUT FOR THESE THINGS AND THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW. I'VE PUT THOUGHT INTO IT.
>> YOU'RE SAYING WE MAY OUGHT TO TABLE THIS DISCUSSION AND PUT IT INTO THE FLOW FOR A MAY 26 ELECTION?
>> THE ONLY NOVEMBER ELECTIONS WOULD BE FEDERAL.
>> BUT IF WE'RE DOING A MAY ELECTION ANYWAY.
>> BUT MORE PEOPLE VOTE IN NOVEMBER.
>> THERE ARE TWO STANDARD ELECTION DAYS, NOVEMBER AND MAY.
>> SHARON. ANY THOUGHTS YOU HAVE?
>> CAN THAT HAPPEN? CAN IT BE DEFERRED UNTIL MAY?
>> YES, MA'AM. WE CAN DECIDE WHEN WE WANT THOSE ON THERE.
BUT ONCE WE HAVE A CHARTER ELECTION, IF IT'S ONE OR TEN ITEMS, WE'VE GOT TO WAIT THEN TWO YEARS BEFORE WE HAVE ANOTHER ELECTION ON THAT.
>> I NEED MORE INFORMATION ON THE LIBRARY ONE.
I WOULDN'T WANT THAT TO BE ON THERE.
I'VE KIND OF SURVEYED SOME PEOPLE AS TO WHETHER COUNCIL SHOULD RECEIVE A STIPEND AND IT'S IT'S HERE AND THERE.
I THINK COUNSEL BECAUSE OF ALL THE EXTRA OUTSIDE FUNDS, WE HAVE TO PUT IN THINGS THAT WE DO.
BUT THAT'S WHERE I AM WITH THAT.
>> VERY GOOD. MARIE, I'M COMING BACK TO YOU. ANYTHING?
>> NO. I TRULY HAVE HAD SO MANY OTHER THINGS ON MY PLATE.
I HAVEN'T EVEN LOOKED AT THE CHARTER LATELY.
>> I'VE BEEN IN THE SAME SITUATION.
WE'VE HAD SO MANY THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESSING ON OUR AGENDA HERE THAT WAITING ON THE CHARTER ELECTION IS FINE WITH ME.
MAYBE EVEN YOU PUT IT ON THE ELECTION DATE.
I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS GOOD OR BAD, BUT YOU PUT IT ON, SAY, MAY 26, A LOT OF YOUR ELECTION, YOUR CAMPAIGNING WILL CENTER AROUND WHERE YOU STAND ON CHARTER AMENDMENTS.
THAT'S SOMETIMES GOOD OR BAD, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL OCCUR.
IF WE PUT IT UP THE ELECTIONS WILL SOMETIMES, TAKE THE LIBRARIES FOR INSTANCE.
THE CAMPAIGN START CENTERING AROUND WHAT'S YOUR FEELINGS ON CHANGING THE CHARTER FOR THE LIBRARY.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT GOOD OR BAD, BUT IT DOES PUT A LITTLE DIFFERENT SLANT ON THE CAMPAIGNING. BOB?
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE ONE COMMENT THOUGH ON THE STAGGERED TERM.
I THINK THE CITY MISSED ITS BIG OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE STAGGERED TERMS WHEN IT WAS THE COVID ELECTION BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE IDEAL AND THE FACT THAT THAT WASN'T DONE, I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE.
>> YEAH. I THINK THE 421 PERSONALLY, I MADE A COMPLETE DECISION, BUT I LEAN IN THE DIRECTION OF COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS ON THIS ON THE 4, 2, 1.
PERSONALLY, I WOULDN'T LIKE TO GET INVOLVED WITH THAT.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S A NEED FOR CHANGE ON THAT.
THE LIBRARY, MY THOUGHTS ON THAT, WE REDID THEIR CONTRACT NOT TOO LONG AGO.
WHAT ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, BRIAN?
>> YEAH. SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE.
>> TRYING TO KEEP UP NOTE WISE. [LAUGHTER]
WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.
THE LIBRARY WAS VERY ACCOMMODATING, THEIR BOARD WHEN WE TALKED WITH THEM ABOUT A CHANGE IN THE FINANCIAL SETUP ON THIS WITH NEW INTERLOCAL CONTRACT.
I'D HAVE TO THINK LONG AND HARD ABOUT IF WE WANT TO ADDRESS THAT, PERSONALLY.
IF YOU PUT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS SPEND,
[01:00:06]
IT'S AMAZING ON THE TIME THAT IS SPENT.PERSONALLY, I'D LIKE TO SEE A STIPEND.
BUT IF WE APPROVE THAT, IT WON'T AFFECT ME.
THIS IS MORE STANDING AND WHO'S GOING TO BE HERE IN THE FUTURE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BOW TO THE DISCRETION OF THE COUNCIL ON.
>> TO THIS BOB, AND IF I COULD COMMENT.
IT WOULD PROBABLY BE MINIMUM, BUT IT MIGHT GET YOUNGER PEOPLE, LIKE OUR BUDDY ALEX HERE TO RUN FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE WITH A FULL TIME JOB TO PUT THE HOURS IN.
>> IT IT IS, BUT I REMEMBER IN 2014, I THINK IT WAS, WE DISCUSSED CHARTER CHANGES, AND MY FRIEND NORMAN PAPPOUS WAS ON COUNCIL AT THAT TIME, AND NORMAN TRIED TO FLOW A $60,000 STIPEND FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
BUT I WOULD SAY THIS, I'M NOT SURE HAVING A STIPEND THAT IS $500 A MONTH OR $1,000 A MONTH IS NOT GOING TO IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANYBODY WANTING TO RUN FOR COUNCIL ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
>> WELL, A LOT OF COUNCILS THAT DO HAVE A STIPEND, IT'S LITERALLY LIKE $75 A MEETING.
I THINK SOME OF US SEND OUT NEWSLETTERS.
I KNOW I DID WHEN I WAS IN DISTRICT 2, SENT OUT A NEWSLETTER AND THAT COSTS MONEY.
YOU DO THAT AS A COUNCIL MEMBER BECAUSE YOU WANT TO STAY IN TOUCH WITH YOUR DISTRICT.
IT'D BE NICE TO HAVE SOME STIPEND, BUT WE'LL SEE ON THAT.
I DO THE ONLY ONE THAT JUST RESONATES WITH ME RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M NOT SURE I WOULD EVEN WANT TO TIE UP AN ELECTION FOR THIS ONE WOULD BE TO GO TO TWO, THREE-YEAR TERMS.
THAT WOULD BE ONE THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> YEAH. THAT'S THE ONLY ONE IT'S ME. BEAU?
>> I TOO, I AM AGAINST A 4, 2, 1.
I DON'T SEE A NEED TO CHANGE WHAT THE GALVESTON HAD FOR A LONG TIME.
LIKE SHARON SAID, IT IS MORE CONDUCIVE TO TRULY REPRESENTING THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO.
I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO STAGGER THE TERMS, WE RECYCLE TO A 2-2-3 ELECTION PROCESS SO WE CAN CREATE CONTINUITY THROUGH ALL THE PROJECTS WE'VE INITIATED.
CURRENTLY, IF YOU BREAK IT DOWN 24 MONTHS, WE GET SIX MONTHS TO GET ACCLIMATED, 15 MONTHS TO WORK, AND THREE MONTHS OF WORKING AND CAMPAIGNING.
WE WANT TO WORK SO HARD FOR WHO WE REPRESENT AND THEN WE GET A LOT OF THINGS STARTED, AND HECK, AS WE FOUND OUT WITH THE PAVILION, THAT WAS AN ONGOING PROCESS FOR SIX YEARS.
JUST TO HAVE BASICALLY 21 MONTHS TO GET ANYTHING DONE DOESN'T CREATE ANY CONTINUITY AT ALL.
I WOULD LIKE TO INCREASE THOSE TERMS FOR THREE YEARS.
I KNOW THERE WOULD BE A TRANSFORMATION PROCESS AS FAR AS THERE MIGHT BE TWO OF US THAT ONLY GET TWO YEARS DEPENDING ON ON THE LUCK OF THE DRAW, AND THEN THE REMAINING GET THREE YEARS, AND THEN IT STAGGER TO WHERE WE'RE NOT REPLACING POSSIBLY AN ENTIRE SLATE.
THAT ALSO CREATES CONTINUITY OF PROJECTS TO BE STARTED.
I'LL WORK IF IT'S FOR FREE, AND I'LL WORK IF THERE'S A SMALL STIPEND.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT I'D LIKE, STILL WANT TO DO AND ACCOMPLISH FOR THE CITIZENS.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE, BEAU?
>> DAVID. I'M ONLY GOING TO SPEAK TO THE ONES THAT I WOULD SUPPORT.
ONE, ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT CHANGING OUR TERMS TO THREE YEARS WITH WHATEVER, TWO THREE-YEAR TERM INSTEAD OF THREE TWO-YEAR TERMS, AND STAGGERING THEM ABSOLUTELY FOR THE REASONS THAT COUNCILMEMBER RAWLINS MENTIONED.
ON THE LIBRARY, I WOULD LIKE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.
THE MOU IS WORKING GREAT, AND THAT'S GOOD.
YOU'RE RIGHT, THEY HAVE BEEN VERY ACCOMMODATING TO OUR REQUESTS FINANCIALLY.
BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO STRESS IS THAT THEY RECEIVE TAXES WITHOUT ANY POLICY REPRESENTATION FROM COUNCIL.
COUNCIL DOES NOT MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO THAT BOARD,
[01:05:01]
AND YET WE ARE SENDING OUR RESIDENTS TAX DOLLARS OVER THERE.I THINK THAT IN THE INTEREST OF OUR TAXPAYERS AND THE ACCOUNTABILITY THAT THE LIBRARY HAS TO THEM, THAT IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR US TO CONSIDER CHANGING THAT.
I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION.
>> IT'S A CHARTER AMENDMENT IN SOME FORM.
IS IT THROUGH AN MOU? CAN WE EXTEND THE MOU? CAN WE JUST MAKE A CHANGE TO THAT TO INCLUDE AN EX OFFICIO REPRESENTATION? I WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO THAT.
>> I BELIEVE THAT BY CONTRACT, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO WRITE AN AGREEMENT WHERE IF YOU DECIDED THEY COULD GIVE YOU A SEAT ON THE BOARD.
I SAY THAT WITHOUT HAVING SEEN THEIR BY LAWS, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU NEED A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO DO THAT.
>> I WOULD AGREE. I THINK, DAVID, WE COULD PROBABLY DO THAT IF COUNCIL HAD AN INTEREST IN THAT.
BY THE WAY, I SUPPORT THAT IDEA ALSO AND WE COULD DO THAT WITH A DISCUSSION WITH THEIR BOARD AND POSSIBLY DO THAT THROUGH AMENDING OUR CURRENT AND LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THEM.
>> IT SEEMS TO BE A LOGICAL THING TO DO.
>> CAN I TALK TO DON DIRECTLY AND ASK HIM TO RESEARCH FOR US?
>> TALK TO ME ANYTIME. [LAUGHTER]
>> WOULD YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE BYLAWS AND SEE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE?
>> THANK YOU. THE OTHER ITEM, CHARTER AMENDMENTS ARE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN UP CONFLICTS BETWEEN DOCUMENTS, BETWEEN STATE LAW AND BETWEEN OUR CHARTER.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I BELIEVE, IS A CONFLICT RIGHT NOW HAS TO DO WITH THE 3% OF HOT SENT OVER TO THE PARK BOARD OR SOMETHING TO THIS AND I WENT TO THE CHARTER AND WAS TRYING TO FIND THE STUFF, BUT I THINK THAT STATE STATUTE CONTROLS THE HOT AND THE DISTRIBUTION THEREOF, AND I THINK THAT OUR CHARTER MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH THAT. DON?
>> IT DOES. THE CHARTER SECTION FOR TAXATION PROVIDES THAT AFTER THE COST OF COLLECTION, WE WILL SEND 3% TO THE PARK BOARD TO ADVERTISE ADVANTAGES, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
BUT UNDER CHAPTER 351105, THERE IS A SCHEDULE.
IT SAYS, IF THE CITY ASSESSES HOT AT 4% OR MORE, IT WILL DO THIS.
WHERE AT SEVEN, SO AS SEVEN AT THIS 7% LEVEL, WE HAVE TO SEND 3% TO, WE HAVE TO DEDICATE 3% FOR ADVERTISING.105 SAYS, IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE STATUTE AND A CHARTER, THE STATUTE CONTROLS.
THE CHARTER PROVISION THAT SAYS, AFTER THE COST OF COLLECTION CLEARLY CONFLICTS WITH THE STATUTE AND IS PREEMPTED.
WE SEND THEM HOW MUCH MONEY? 3% PLUS MORE. WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THE STATUTE.
I WOULD THINK THAT YOU HAVE AN ANTIQUATED CHARTER PROVISION THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH STATE STATUTE AND IS THEREFORE PREEMPTED.
THIS IS BASICALLY A CLEANUP ISSUE.
>> NO, THAT'S IT. I WANTED TO GET THAT OUT THERE BECAUSE IN LOOKING AT 3:51 AND THEN LOOKING AT SECTION OR CHAPTER 33 OF OUR CHARTER AND TAXATION, THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME CONFLICT IN LANGUAGE.
>> DON, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND JUST TO SUMMARIZE RIGHT NOW, IF YOU COULD GET TO COUNCIL THE STATUS OF OUR RELATIONSHIP, CURRENTLY THE WAY IT IS IN THE CHARTER WITH THE LIBRARY.
IF YOU COULD POSSIBLY SEND TO COUNCIL THE CURRENT MOU OR INTERLOCAL WE HAVE WITH THE LIBRARY SO WE COULD SEE THAT.
ALSO, RESEARCHING AS COUNCILMAN FINKLEA MENTIONED ABOUT SERVING ON THEIR BOARD AND WHAT WOULD NEED TO TAKE PLACE ON THAT.
IF YOU COULD GET THAT TO COUNCIL, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
THE OTHER IS, IF COUNCIL WANTED TO LOOK AT HAVING TWO THREE-YEAR TERMS,
[01:10:06]
COULD YOU SEND US SOME LANGUAGE ON HOW THAT WOULD BE WORDED AND HOW THAT WOULD BE WORDED TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION STAGGERING TERMS ALSO?>> I WOULD ADD TO THE LIBRARY PART OF IT IF WE CAN GET THEIR INPUT AS WELL, ORDERS INPUT.
IF WE CAN DO THAT AS WELL, I WOULD BE AMENABLE AND APPRECIATIVE OF THAT.
THE LAST THING HERE IS MENTIONED BY COUNCILMAN FINKLEA.
IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME WORDING AND JUST A SHORT SYNOPSIS ON THE BACKGROUND ON CHANGING THE WORDING FOR THE 3%, ON HOW THAT WOULD LOOK ON THE BALLOT AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.
IT'S MORE OF A HOUSEKEEPING CHORE, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE'D NEED TO LOOK AT AND MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND A LITTLE FURTHER.
>> THEN LET US NOT FORGET THE MILL & OVERLAY BOND, WHICH IS WHY I WOULD EXTREMELY SUPPORT A NOVEMBER ELECTION.
>> ACTUALLY, THERE'S TWO THINGS ON THAT, [INAUDIBLE].
>> I WOULD SUPPORT NOVEMBER ELECTION. ABSOLUTELY.
>> BEFORE WE GET TO THE MILL & OVERLAY, IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN NOTICED IN THE PAST ABOUT CLEANING UP THE CODES THAT WE WERE UNAWARE OF OR JUST LET US KNOW IF THERE'S ANY CONFLICTS WITH STATE LAW ON THAT THAT WE CAN CLEAN UP. GO AHEAD.
>> CLAIMS. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE CITY MANAGERS PURCHASING.
>> I THINK THEY'VE SHUT THAT DOWN SO MANY TIMES.
>> WE'RE THE ONLY CITY IN THE STATE, BUT IT'S OKAY.
I WORK AROUND IT AND IT'S FINE.
I CAN SEE IT MAKES IT VERY EASY FOR ME TO TELL PEOPLE NO BECAUSE THAT'S ABOVE MY SPENDING LIMIT.
>> IT GIVES HIM COVER OR THE CITY MANAGER COVER ON SO MANY THINGS.
I DO THINK IT'S RIDICULOUSLY LOW, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO PUSH IT.
>> WHERE IT RUNS INTO IT AND THE WAY WE WORK IT NOW IS AS YOU'LL SEE ON YOUR AGENDA TODAY, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS.
WHEN THEY COME UP, AND THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO ANYTHING, I APPROVE THEM AND THEN THEY COME TO YOU AS EMERGENCY EXPENDITURE, SO YOU STILL GET TO APPROVE THEM ALL.
WE ALWAYS USE THE EXAMPLE, YOU OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO BUY A CAR IF ONE GETS WRECKED.
WELL, A NEW POLICE CAR COST IS ALMOST $100,000 NOW.
THAT'S STILL ABOVE THE STATE PURCHASING LIMIT.
>> STATE PURCHASING LIMIT RIGHT NOW IS WHAT?
>> THERE'S A LEGISLATION THAT MAY TAKE IT TO 100.
>> WHICH MAKES SENSE BECAUSE THEY TYPICALLY, AT LEAST IN ALL MY YEARS OF GOVERNMENT, THEY'VE ALWAYS CIRCULATED AROUND THE COST OF WHAT IF YOU HAVE TO REPLACE A CAR.
FOR SOME REASON, THAT'S HIGH ON EVERYBODY'S LIST.
I CAN TELL YOU A POLICE CAR IS ABOUT A 100 GRAND NOW.
>> A CLARIFICATION. THERE'S STATE LAW THAT GOVERNS THIS AS WELL?
>> THERE'S A STATE LAW THAT SAYS THAT WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNING BODY, THAT YOU HAVE AN EXPENDITURE LIMIT WITHOUT BIDDING IN OF $60,000?
>> STATE LAW ESTABLISHES A THRESHOLD THAT MUST BE MET BEFORE FORMAL BID PROCESS IS INVOKED.
>> YOU CAN ALWAYS GET MORE RESTRICTIVE.
>> FEDERAL AND STATE AND THEN MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY COME THROUGH.
>> I UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T CONFLICT.
WHAT I WAS STATING IS THAT COULD IT APPEAR POSSIBLY MORE AMENABLE ON A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO REFERENCE THAT WE ARE UTILIZING THE STATE LIMITS?
>> BY THE WAY, WE HAVE HAD LAST TIME HAVING TWO THREE-YEAR TERMS ON THERE, PUBLIC DID NOT WANT THAT EITHER.
>> IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHO'S ELECTED AT THIS TIME.
>> IT ALL DEPENDS WHO'S SITTING AT THE TABLE.
>> I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS.
I THINK IT'S ALSO GOOD TO PUT IT ON A NOVEMBER BALLOT BECAUSE THEN, [OVERLAPPING] WELL, IT ALLOWS THE PUBLIC TIME THEN TO THINK ABOUT THE NEXT SLATE OF CANDIDATES THAT WILL BE COMING UP AND ABOUT, WELL, WHAT DO YOU REALLY WANT?
>> NOVEMBER IS WHEN THEY'RE HAVING THE END-STRUCTURE QUARTIERE ELECTION FOR THE COUNTY AS WELL.
>> IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IT GOES TO THE COST OF THE ELECTION.
>> WE HAVE TO PAY FOR THESE ELECTIONS, SO IF THE COUNTY IS ALREADY HAVING ONE.
>> NO, THEY'RE HAVING ONE. IS IT IN MAY OR NOVEMBER?
>> THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE A NOVEMBER ELECTION.
>> I'LL FIND OUT. DID YOU SEE THAT ONE THING, THE INFRASTRUCTURE QUARTIERE?
[01:15:01]
>> I THINK THEY MISSPELLED THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> IT'S EUROPEAN INFRASTRUCTURE.
>> GOD, I ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IT, MAYBE IT NEEDS SOME TRANSLATION, I WISH.
>> DON, I THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE NEED TO GET TO COUNCIL HERE.
[OVERLAPPING] JUST ONE SECOND.
DON, YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT WE NEED TO GET TO COUNCIL WE TALKED ABOUT.
COUNCIL, I'M GOING TO PUT THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS DOWN HERE THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED.
NOW, THE OVERLAY WE'RE GETTING READY TO GO INTO, BUT THE CHARTER AMENDMENT, I'M GOING TO TENTATIVELY PUT IT DOWN FOR THE MAY AGENDA FOR US TO REVISIT.
BUT WE'LL HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
DON, DOES THAT GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO GET IT?
>> WE CAN GET WITH THE LIBRARY.
>> WELL, LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
>> TO SPEAK ON THAT, I THINK THE COUNTY ELECTION IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.
>> THERE IS SOME OVERLAY PROJECTS.
>> THERE'S SOME PROJECTS FOR GALVESTON AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
>> WE'RE GOING TO BE SUBMITTING A LETTER TO THE PAPER THAT OUTLINES WHAT THE CITY'S ACTUAL BENEFIT IS OF THE BOND.
>> DESPITE THE INFRASTRUCTURE MISSPELLING, I THINK IT'S A POSITIVE THING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IT'S A VERY POSITIVE THING.
>> WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH A LOT THROUGH THESE COUNTY BOND ISSUES HERE ON THE ISLAND.
>> BUT IT DOES NOT INCREASE YOUR TAXES.
IT'S BASED ON THE SAME TAX RATE.
>> BECAUSE THERE IS MISINFORMATION [OVERLAPPING] GOING AROUND SAYING THAT IT WILL INCREASE YOUR TAXES.
THE COUNTY BOND WILL NOT INCREASE YOUR TAXES.
IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THEY'RE REDOING THE SEAWALL?
>> YEAH. WE'RE USING IT FOR MATCHES ON SEVERAL THINGS, SEAWALL, STEWART ROAD.
>> IT'S EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS, EIGHT MILLION THAT WOULD BE.
>> PLEASE TELL THE PUBLIC WHAT THIS IS FOR AND HOW THE CITY BENEFITS.
>> WELL, NOT REALLY. IT SAYS UPDATE OF BOND FOR STREETS IN MILL & OVERLAY.
>> WE'RE GETTING READY TO GO INTO THAT. JUST ONE SECOND.
>> WELL, I THOUGHT WE READ THE ITEMS TOGETHER.
>> WE'RE WRAPPING THIS UP ON THE CHARTER AMENDMENTS AND DON WILL GET THAT TO US.
DON, IF YOU CAN'T GET ALL THE INFORMATION BY MAY, THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD ON THAT.
LET'S MOVE TO THE OVERLAY ITEM ON THAT AND GO RIGHT AHEAD, SHEILA.
>> IN RESPONSE TO THE AGENDA ITEM, WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEA OF WHAT THE CITY'S DEBT POSITION IS AND WHAT GENERAL OBLIGATION ELECTION DEBT ISSUANCE WE APPLY FOR THE CITY'S DEBT POSITION.
YOU'LL NOTICE THE BAR GRAPH WHICH SHOWS YOU JUST GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT, THAT'S DEBT THAT IS CURRENTLY PAID FOR WITH OUR PROPERTY TAX REVENUE, OUR DEBT SERVICE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE SPECIFICALLY.
THE MOST RECENT DROP-OFF WAS FISCAL YEAR '24, SO NOT THIS FISCAL YEAR, BUT LAST YEAR.
THERE WAS $700,000 THAT DROPPED OFF IN FISCAL YEAR '24 AND AS A RESULT, THAT DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE DROPPED FROM THE 5.25 CENTS TO THE 4.31 CENTS OUT OF THE TAX RATE.
THAT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WASN'T TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF NECESSARILY.
THE NEXT DROP OFF IS IN 2034, WHICH IS ONLY $340,000, AND THEN THERE'S LARGE DROP-OFFS IN 2033 AND 2040, WHICH IS WAY OUT THERE AND I DON'T THINK THAT ANSWERS OUR QUESTION.
>> BUT ALTHOUGH SHEILA HAS REMINDED ME THAT THERE'S AGAIN, LITIGATION THAT COULD STOP US FROM DOING THIS.
BUT WE DO HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE SET ASIDE FUND.
WE HAVE BEEN USING THAT FOR PAY-AS-YOU-GO PROJECTS.
IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO PEEL SOME OF THAT OFF FOR DEBT.
NOW, IT WOULD REDUCE THE AMOUNT WE'RE PERFORMING IN-HOUSE, BUT WE COULD ACTUALLY USE IT WITH A DEDICATED CONTRACTOR TO DO THAT TYPE OF WORK.
THAT IS AN OPTION THAT WE COULD LOOK AT IT IF THAT'S THE DESIRE OF COUNCIL.
BECAUSE IT WOULD STILL BE A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND, IT JUST WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTED BY YOUR DEBT SERVICE, IT WOULD BE SUPPORTED BY YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE SAVINGS.
>> IT WOULD NOT RAISE PEOPLE'S TAXES.
>> THAT'S A LITTLE TRICKIER QUESTION BECAUSE IT FALLS WITHIN THE 8% OF YOUR TOTAL BUDGET.
IF YOU SHRINK YOUR TOTAL BUDGET, IT BECOMES MUCH LESS, SO YOU MAY NOT HAVE AS MUCH.
IN GENERAL, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT REASONABLY SO WITHIN THAT RATE.
BUT JUST THERE'S TRADE-OFFS WITH DOING IT THAT WAY VERSUS THE BOND WHERE THE DEBT ROLLED OFF.
WE MISSED OUR OPPORTUNITY A YEAR-AND-A-HALF AGO ON THAT.
>> I THINK THE ONE THING THAT EVERYONE CAN AGREE ON IS WE HAVE A LOT OF BAD STREETS EVERYWHERE THAT COULD CERTAINLY USE AN OVERLAY.
EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF STREETS AND I CONSTANTLY GET
[01:20:05]
CALLS FROM ALL OVER THE CITY AND EVERYONE FEELS THEIR ROADS ARE THE WORST.I ALWAYS SAY, WELL, HAVE YOU DRIVEN DOWN 14TH STREET LATELY? IT'S LIKE WE HAVE SO MANY BAD ROADS THAT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING OUR CITIZENS COULD BENEFIT FROM.
I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE EFFORTS THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY DONE RELATED TO THE STUDY OF IT, THEY DID THE WHOLE STUDY, THE PMI. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE DO IT EVERY TWO YEARS, YES, SIR.
>> THEY GAVE US A REPORT ON WHAT THAT WAS, WHICH PRIORITIZED STAFF'S EFFORTS RELATED TO MAKING IMPROVEMENTS ON THE WORST STREET FIRST.
I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PROCESS.
BECAUSE BEFORE WE GO OUT AND WE'RE COMMITTING OURSELVES TO ADDITIONAL DEBT, WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE PLAN IN PLACE [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS THIS AND IF WE'RE GOING TO ACCELERATE THAT WITH A BOND, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, WHICH IS FINE.
>> I DON'T WANT TO FORGET WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY.
>> WRITE IT YOU DOWN, BROWN. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THE CURRENT STATUS OF WHERE WE ARE RELATED TO THAT PROGRAM, WHAT'S GOING TO BE ACCOMPLISHED OVER SAY THE NEXT FIVE YEARS ABSENT OF A BOND, AND THEN WHAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH A BOND TO FURTHER ENHANCE AND ADVANCE THAT PROGRAM.
>> BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT TWO SIDES OF THAT.
BECAUSE EVEN WITH THE STREET STUDY, PART OF IT IS RELATED TO THE VOLUME OF VEHICLES.
THAT'S ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT GOES IN IS THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC.
YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME ROADS IN THE CITY AND I'M GOING TO USE ONE AS AN EXAMPLE, SAY PIRATES COVE.
THERE ARE SOME ROADS IN THERE THAT HAVE NEVER HAD AN OVERLAY SINCE THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE '60S.
WELL, JUST BECAUSE THERE ISN'T 1,000 CARS BECAUSE THERE'S 20 HOUSES ON THE BLOCK, DOES THAT MEAN THAT SHOULD BE OVERLOOKED FOREVER, EVEN THOUGH IT'S IN THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN THAT HIGH LEVEL? THAT'S WHY I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PICTURE AS WHAT POINT.
>> I WROTE IT DOWN, SO I'M NOT GOING TO FORGET.
PART OF THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS IS WE USED TO REMEDY THAT BY NOT DOING WORSE FIRST.
WE TOOK THE WORST STREETS IN EVERY DISTRICT BECAUSE A LOT OF DISTRICTS DON'T HAVE AS MUCH TRAFFIC.
COUNCIL MADE THE DECISION TO GO WORSE FIRST, PERIOD.
WE DON'T DIVIDE IT UP BY DISTRICTS ANYMORE.
WE USED TO TRY TO DIVIDE THE MONEY UP, BUT SOME OF IT [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE'LL DO WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT TO DO.
THE OTHER THING AT PLAY THAT'S DRIVING THIS IS THAT WE HAVE A VERY SMALL STREETS CREW AND THEY WORK HARD, BUT I'M LOSING ALL MY TIME WITH MY STREETS CREW ON THE WEST END.
EVERY TIME WE GET HIGH TIDES OUT THERE, THEY'RE OUT THERE, WE'RE LOSING ASPHALT, WE'RE PUTTING SAND ON STREETS, WE'RE PUTTING SAND IN DITCHES.
WE'RE LOSING BOLLARDS, PEOPLE CAN'T ACCESS THEIR DRIVEWAYS.
IT'S REAL. THEY NEED SERVICE OUT THERE.
I HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF RESOURCES, SO I'M PUTTING ALL MY RESOURCES OUT THERE ALL THE TIME AND WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT, WE CONTINUE TO DELAY PAVING PROJECTS BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME GUYS.
I GOT 100 AND SOMETHING GUYS IN PUBLIC WORKS. THAT'S IT.
ONLY SO MANY OF THEM CAN OPERATE CERTAIN PIECES OF EQUIPMENT, SO WE LOSE A LOT OF TIME IN THERE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'M GOING TO DO THAT WILL REMEDY THIS, I THINK, IS I'M GOING TO BE SPEAKING WITH IDC ABOUT CREATING A OUT-OF-THE-BEACH SILO, A BEACH SERVICE CREW.
THAT WE HAVE HIT THE POINT IN OUR LIVES ON THE WEST END NOW, WHERE THIS ISN'T JUST ABOUT HURRICANES ANYMORE.
THIS IS GETTING TO BE A REGULAR OCCURRENCE.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A STORM HERE AND I'M GETTING COMPLAINTS FOREVER ABOUT SAND ON STREETS, AND I NEED A THREE-MAN CREW WITH A FRONT-END LOAD OR A DUMP TRUCK AND A PICKUP TRUCK OUT THERE THAT CAN HANDLE THESE THINGS ON A DAILY BASIS.
BERMUDA BEACH DRIVE TIES US UP TO NO END.
>> I KNOW, BUT IF YOU CAN'T GET AN AMBULANCE.
>> NO, WE'RE NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T DO IT.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHAT'S PUTTING US FURTHER AND FURTHER BEHIND.
THOSE INSTANCES USED TO BE TWICE A YEAR OR THREE TIMES A YEAR.
NOW, IT'S GETTING TO BE IT'S MONTHLY.
>> THE PROBLEM IS IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO GET WORSE.
>> ONCE WE HAVE THE NOURISHMENT, IT WILL GET BETTER.
>> IT'S GOING TO HELP, BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO GOING TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE SAND TO END UP IN THE STREET. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE BINS ENDS IN THE WEST END DO HELP.
>> HELP CAPTURE SOME OF THAT FOR THE VEGETATION. [OVERLAPPING]
[01:25:01]
>> ALONG WITH THAT IDC CREW, GIVING ME A LITTLE PREVIEW.
I THINK THE QUICKER WE CAN GET ON IT WITH THESE CREWS, THE QUICKER I CAN SALVAGE THAT SAND, GET THAT SAND BACK OUT THERE.
>> MY KNOWLEDGE OF IDC AND HAVING FOCUSED A MAJOR PART OF MY COMPANY, I'M NOT SURE WE COULD LEGALLY DO THAT.
>> PUT THE SAND BACK OUT THERE? BECAUSE WE DID THIS. WE WERE.
>> NO, NOT PUT THE SAND BACK OUT THERE, BUT DO A ROAD CREW UNDER.
>> THEY WOULD ONLY BE DOING BEACH SURFACE. WE'RE NOT, [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE WOULD HAVE TO GET AN OUTSIDE LAWYER TO ADVISE TREVOR ON THAT BECAUSE THAT'S A FINE LINE.
>> THIS ISSUE THAT BRIAN IS BRINGING UP FOR FUTURE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT MAY BE SITTING AROUND THIS TABLE.
THIS IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR ISSUE FOR THIS CITY BECAUSE DON'T GET ME WRONG.
I THINK THE WEST END DESERVES ALL OF THE SUPPORT THEY CAN GET, BUT I TELL YOU, IT'S GOING TO BE CONSTANT MAINTENANCE OUT THERE, AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THE REST OF THE CITY SUFFERS.
WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE IN SOME WAY, AND I DON'T KNOW THE WAY TO DO IT. BUT.
>> I THINK ONE, ONE WE KNOW WE HAVE THE BUDM, THE BENEFICIAL USE OF DREDGE, WHICH IS COMING IN.
ONCE WE HAVE THAT'S GOING IN THE WORST AREAS.
WE WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO LOOK AT A MORE FORTIFIED APPROACH BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE 200 FEET OF BEACH IN FRONT OF IT.
THAT WILL MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I THINK IT IS SOMETHING IN WORKING TOGETHER THAT OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, WHERE WE HAVE TO LOOK AT BEING PROACTIVE, EVEN IF WE DO SOME PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP ON LIKE, BRIAN, WHEN YOU WERE AT THE COUNTY ON GO2 DUNES, WE CAN END THAT PROBLEM WITHIN THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
>> I BET THESE THREE YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO BE A STANDSTILL GUY.
>> BRIAN, HOW MUCH MONEY JUST ROUGHLY HAS PERMUTED BEACH COST.
>> WEEKEND, ESPECIALLY DURING THE SPRING PRICE TAKES GOING UP.
>> BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY WE'RE NOT JUST WING DOWN THE SAND LIKE WE USED TO.
>> LET'S GO BACK TO OUR OVERLAY THING.
>> JUST QUICKLY, AND YOU ALL DON'T NEED ME FOR ANYTHING ELSE, BUT THE LAST BOND ELECTION WAS IN 2017 FOR 62 MILLION, AND THAT WAS ISSUED IN TWO TRANCHES.
THERE'S ARE TWO TRANCHES FALLING OFF IN 37 OR 37 AND 39.
THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR IS THE $0.4.
THE 0.40213. THIS IS BRINGING ABOUT $1.1 MILLION PER PENNY.
VERY HIGH LEVEL ESTIMATE TO ISSUE $25 MILLION WORTH OF BOND IS ABOUT 1.5 PENNIES ON THE TAX RATE. THAT'S AN ESTIMATE.
THAT GIVES YOU SOME GENERAL IDEA.
IF WE ISSUE $25 MILLION WORTH OF DEBT, THEN THE DEBT SERVICE TAX RATE, IN THEORY, WOULD GO UP 1.5%, OR YOU MIGHT BUY IT DOWN WITH THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT SERVICE MONEY, LIKE YOU HAVE IN THE PAST.
BUT THAT IMPACTS YOUR ABILITY TO CASH FLOW PROJECTS.
IT IMPACTS POTENTIALLY WHAT'S AVAILABLE IN MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS IF YOU HOLD TO THE NO-NEW-REVENUE BECAUSE NO-NEW-REVENUE DOES NOT TAKE DEBT SERVICE INTO CONSIDERATION.
THE DEBT SERVICE WILL FLOAT UP ON THE NO NEW REVENUE, PUSHING YOUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION PORTION OF THE TAX RATE DOWN.
THAT'S MY SHORT VERSION, AND IN JUNE I BELIEVE, WE BRING YOU THE LONG RANGE FORECAST, WHICH WILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON THIS, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
>> I'M GOING TO START WELL, YOU HAD A QUESTION.
>> I DID. I JUST WANTED TO COME BACK AND TOUCH ON THE PMI CURRENT STATUS.
I HEARD YOU SAY THAT PREVIOUSLY THOSE FUNDS FOR THE STREET WERE DIVIDED UP PER DISTRICT.
WHEN IT CHANGED, WAS THERE ANY LOG THAT KEPT UP WITH THE STREETS THAT WERE PAVED? WHEN IT WAS UNDER THE OTHER PROGRAM VERSUS WHEN IT WENT TO THE NEW PROGRAM.
>> WELL, WE DO AN ASSESSMENT EVERY TWO YEARS.
WE HAVE A LIST OF ALL THE STREETS WE DID, BUT WE MAINTAIN THEM ON A REGULAR BASIS, BUT NOW WE DO THEM ON WORST FIRST.
IF ALL THE WORST STREETS ARE IN YOUR DISTRICT, OUR CREWS ARE GOING TO SPEND THE ENTIRE YEAR IN YOUR DISTRICT.
>> WELL, THEY'RE OUT THERE ON THE WEST SIDE.
>> THAT'S IT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY, IT'S MORE LIKELY.
>> WELL THAT'S MY QUESTION BECAUSE SOME OF THE STREETS HAVE BEEN WITHIN IN THAT SAME CONDITION FOR SOME YEARS.
THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING IF YOU HAD A LOG OF WHAT WAS REPAIRED BEFORE YOU SWITCHED OUT OF DISTRICTS BEFORE YOU TOOK THAT MONEY OUT OF PER DISTRICT OR IS IT STILL NOW THAT IT'S THE PMI?
[01:30:06]
IT'S LOOKING AT THE STREETS THAT ARE?>> WELL, WE ALWAYS USED THE PMI.
BUT WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD TAKE THE WORST STREETS IN EVERY DISTRICT.
NOW WE JUST TAKE THE WORST STREETS IN RANK, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT DISTRICT THEY'RE IN.
>> I COULD TELL YOU WHY IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE IS BECAUSE DISTRICT 6 IS 20 MILES LONG VERSUS OTHERS.
YOUR DISTRICT, FOR EXAMPLE, ALSO GET CBDG FUNDS, WHICH CAN DO STREETS, WHERE DISTRICT 5 AND DISTRICT 6 ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR CBDG FUNDS.
YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES FOR YOUR STREETS VERSUS OTHER PARTS OF THE ISLAND.
>> LET ME GET BACK TO MY QUESTION ON THAT.
THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS THE STREETS THAT WERE REPAIRED WITHIN DISTRICT 1 BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE SAME STREETS ARE STILL NOT REPAIRED TODAY.
THAT'S SIMPLY WHAT I WAS ASKING.
NUMBER 2, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, CBDG FUNDS ARE USED FOR NUMEROUS THINGS.
NUMEROUS THINGS IF YOU LOOK AT IT, SO IT IS NOT JUST TO THE STREETS.
FOR THE STREETS IN DISTRICT 1.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. I PERSONALLY, AND I DON'T WANT TO GET OFF ON A TANGENT, BUT WE NEED TO REVISIT WORST STREETS OR THE WORST IN THE DISTRICTS IN MY MIND.
GINA, I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION.
WHAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE HERE? WHAT ARE YOU SAYING?
>> I'M SAYING THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS WE MAY HAVE MISSED OPPORTUNITY THIS PAST.
>> EASY OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS.
BUT THERE'S FUTURE OPPORTUNITY COMING, AND THERE'S OTHER WAYS THERE'S.
>> WHEN WOULD THAT FUTURE OPPORTUNITY COME?
>> WELL, BECAUSE NOTHING DROPS OFF FOR A LONG TIME WHENEVER YOU WANT IT TO COME.
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE TIMING OF THE NEXT BOND ELECTION AND GENERAL OBLIGATION DEBT ISSUANCE IS NOT GOING TO BE DRIVEN BY DEBT ROLLING OFF.
IT'S GOING TO BE DRIVEN BY PROJECTS AND THE NEED FOR THOSE PROJECTS.
IT'S GOING TO BE DETERMINING WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE AND COMMITTING THOSE TO THE PUBLIC TO VOTE ON.
THEN WE'RE GOING TO ADJUST ACCORDINGLY.
WE MAY CHOOSE TO USE SOME INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEBT SERVICE FUND MONEY TO OFFSET THAT, THAT MAY DEPEND ON LEGISLATION THAT IS BEING PROPOSED, HOPEFULLY IT WON'T HAPPEN.
BUT FROM THERE, WE DECIDE WHERE WE ADJUST ON OUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS OR ANYTHING TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THAT INCREASE IN THE DEBT SERVICE PORTION OF IT.
>> ONE MORE THING ON THE BOND TALK.
WE ARE AT A CRITICAL POINT WITH FIRE STATION NUMBER 2.
I AM ONE FIRE TRUCK PURCHASE AWAY FROM NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE STATION THAT THE TRUCK FITS IN.
THAT HAS GOT TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.
WE'VE ALREADY STARTED DOING WORK ON IT.
IT'S GOING TO GO WHERE IT IS. WE CAN DO SOME THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT THAT IS ABOUT A $7 MILLION GIVE OR TAKE ISSUE FOR US THAT NEEDS TO GET ADDRESSED PRETTY QUICK.
I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO PRETEND TO TELL YOU THAT THAT'S GOING TO GET ABSORBED IN YOUR CURRENT TAX RATE.
IF THE VOTERS APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEY'RE GOING TO APPROVE WHATEVER THAT COST IS, IT GOES ALONG WITH IT.
BUT I'M TELLING YOU WE'RE VERY CLOSE ON THAT.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CURRENT FIRE STATION EXCEPT THE TRUCKS DON'T FIT IN IT.
THERE'S NO WAY TO MODIFY IT TO ACCEPT THESE TRUCKS.
THE SECOND ISSUE IS, IS THAT WE REALLY NEED A LADDER APPARATUS OUT THERE AT SOME POINT, MAYBE NOT RIGHT AWAY, BUT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE EAST END NOW, WE'RE GOING TO NEED ANOTHER LADDER APPARATUS OUT THERE.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY A LADDER APPARATUS IS GOING TO FIT IN THE CURRENT STATION.
>> WELL, NO, THEY'VE ALREADY TRIED TO OPEN IT UP WITH THE TRUCK A FEW TIMES.
[LAUGHTER] BUT WE'VE GOT TO GET THAT ADDRESSED.
IT'S ALSO JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
THAT IS OUR ONE FIRE STATION THAT IS AT THE HIGHEST ELEVATION THAT WE HAVE.
>> THAT'S THE ONE FIRE STATION THAT WE COULD PRETTY MUCH, ESPECIALLY IF WE BUILT IT NEW, THAT WE COULD KEEP IN SERVICE THE ENTIRE TIME.
>> ARE YOU GOING TO BUILD IN THAT SAME SPOT?
>> WE LOOKED AT A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT OPTIONS, BUT REALLY THAT'S THE BEST.
MOST OF THE CALLS FOR THAT STATION CENTER AROUND UTMB AND THEIR SERVICES OUT THERE, BUT IT'S GROWING MORE AND MORE AND MORE WITH THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.
REMEMBER, WHEN STATION 2 WAS BUILT, THERE WAS REALLY NOTHING EAST OF THERE.
I'M REALLY CONCERNED ONCE YOU START ADDING THINGS LIKE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S COMING OUT THERE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF GRAND BEACH, BEACH TOWN, WHATEVER WE PUT AT STEWART BEACH.
WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A LADDER APPARATUS OUT THERE AT SOME POINT TO, AND OF COURSE, THAT COMES WITH ITS OWN COST.
BUT THAT STATION HAS GOT TO BE BROUGHT TO THE CITIZENS FOR A VOTE.
>> COULD YOU TIE THEM TOGETHER.
>> ABSOLUTELY. YOU COULD DO THEM SEPARATELY.
THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN GO OUT FOR A BOND ISSUE. THAT'S NOT LIKE A CHARTER.
YOU COULD DO THE FIRE STATION IN MAY AND YOU COULD DO YOURS IN NOVEMBER OR NEXT MAY.
[01:35:03]
THAT'S UP TO YOU ALL. BUT THE FIRE STATION IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO GET MOVING ON PRETTY QUICK.>> ALTHOUGH I WILL CAVEAT TO THAT IS THERE'S ALSO RIGHT NOW, IF YOU TAKE SOMETHING TO THE VOTERS AND THEY VOTED DOWN, YOU CAN'T BRING IT BACK FOR YEARS.
THE LEGISLATURE IS LOOKING AT EXPANDING THAT TO FIVE YEARS.
IT NEEDS TO BE A WELL FLESHED OUT PLAN THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE READY TO TALK ABOUT IN A WAY THAT THE CITIZENS UNDERSTAND.
WE, AS A GROUP, COLLECTIVELY CANNOT ADVOCATE ON THEIR BEHALF.
BUT WHATEVER PLAN IS PUT FORWARD SHOULD BE ONE WHERE THE CITIZENS CAN AVAIL THEMSELVES OF GOOD INFORMATION THEY CAN UNDERSTAND.
>> I THINK LOCAL 571 WOULD BE MORE THAN WILLING TO HELP US WITH THIS.
>> THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOPS ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM DOING THAT, BUT STAFF CAN ONLY EDUCATE WE CANNOT LOBBY FOR.
THE ONLY OTHER OPTION THERE IS IF IT WERE TO FAIL, WE HAVE TO SHRINK THE SIZE OF THE APPARATUS THAT WE'RE BUYING OUT THERE, WHICH IS GOING TO REALLY CUT SERVICES OFF BECAUSE IN YOUR RESPONSE IS COMING FROM CENTRAL.
NOT THE END OF THE WORLD, BUT NOT OPTIMAL GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT THAT'S GOING ON IN EAST END.
>> THIS WAS YOUR ITEM ANY MORE THOUGHTS ON THIS.
>> MARY IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR IDEAS, PLEASE GET WITH US AND WE'LL GO THROUGH BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA.
I THINK BRANDON IS ALREADY WORKING TOWARDS A SOLUTION.
MAYBE THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT IF YOU EVEN IF WE CONTRACTED OUT, NOBODY WANTS TO COMMIT IN A BID LONG TERM WITH ALL THE UNCERTAINTY IN THE MARKET FOR ASPHALT.
BUT IF WE COULD POSSIBLY CONTRACT OUT THE MILLING, WHICH IS JUST REALLY JUST LABORED EQUIPMENT, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT, WHICH WOULD THEN WE COULD FREE UP OUR MILLING CREW TO BE PAVING CREWS.
WE'VE GOT MULTIPLE PAVERS, WE COULD GO OUT AND ACCOMPLISH MORE.
WE'RE WORKING ON SEVERAL SCHEMES TO GET THIS DONE.
>> WE CAN GET ALL OUR PLANS IN TIME.
>> WHEN DO WE NEED TO, IS THERE A TIMING BEST FOR COMING BACK AND RE-EVALUATING THIS POLICY OF [OVERLAPPING]
>> TOTALLY ALL MERIT YOUR POLICY.
I HEAR THE URGENCY OF THE GRAPH.
IS THAT TO START SOME COMMUNITY AWARENESS?
>> I THINK THAT ONCE IT'S DECIDED THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON A BALLOT, THAT IT WOULD BE INCUMBENT UPON COUNSEL TO GET OUT THERE AND DO IT, ESPECIALLY I THINK THAT'S BOB'S DISTRICT.
BUT BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR FIRST ARRIVAL, TOO, PROBABLY ON AN EAST END FIRE.
WE'VE SEEN HOW HISTORIC HOMES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE GOT 245 HOMES POSSIBLY BEING BUILT OUT THERE JUST EAST OF THE GRAND AREA THERE.
>> THE UPSIDE IS, WE HAVE A LOT OF BUILDING GOING ON ALL OVER THE ISLAND, WHICH WILL HELP US WITH PROPERTY TAXES.
WE HAVE A LOT OF BIG DEVELOPMENT GOING IN.
>> THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT IF WE GO BACK ON THE SAME SITE, IT'S A VERY GOOD LOCATION.
IT'S A HIGH LOCATION, AND ACCORDING TO THE FIREFIGHTERS, ITS PROXIMITY TO WATERBURGER IS QUITE ENTICING.
>> VERY GOOD. ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS DISCUSSION?
>> ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.
THANK YOU, GALA. WE'RE MOVING TO ITEM 3F.
[3.F. Juneteenth - 160th Anniversary ( Lewis/C Brown - 20 min )]
>> ITEM 3F. JUNETEENTH, 160TH ANNIVERSARY.
>> THIS IS COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS HAD REQUESTED THIS.
THIS IS AN ITEM THAT I GO OVER THE DETAILS OF THE ACTIVITIES AND SO FORTH OF THIS UPCOMING JUNETEENTH.
>> YES. WELL, I'LL JUST START WITH IT'S 160TH YEAR AND VISIT GALVESTON HAS I THINK ABOUT 19 EVENTS ALREADY ON THAT THEY PUT OUT THERE, AND THEY GET ABOUT 200,000 HITS REGARDING JUNETEENTH, SO THAT'S EXCITING.
IF YOU WANT TO KNOW ANY OF THOSE EVENTS.
THIS YEAR, THE CITY BECAUSE IT'S 160TH YEAR, HAS DECIDED TO PARTNER WITH AN EVENT THAT'S GOING TO BE OUT AT MENARD PARK, AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE FIREWORKS THAT WILL HAPPEN.
THE CITY WILL BEGIN TO ADVERTISE THAT 160TH YEAR ON OUR RUBBER WHEEL TROLLEYS.
SECONDLY, THEY WILL PROVIDE A SLIDE FOR THE KIDS OUT AT MENARD PARK AND BE THE TRASH CANS, PORTA POLIS.
THEY GOT A PORTA. [INAUDIBLE] THEY'RE GOING TO SUPPORT THE EVENT WITH LIGHTING AND EVERYTHING THAT'S NEEDED TO MAKE THE EVENT FUNCTIONAL.
WE WILL BEGIN WITH A SPECIAL SALUTE TO VETERANS AND HONOR THE HISTORICAL MARKER THAT CELEBRATES THE NATIONAL BLACK LIFEGUARDS.
[01:40:04]
WE WILL HAVE AN ENTERTAINMENT.PREVIOUS JUNETEENTH, MS. JUNETEENTH WILL BE THERE, SAXOPHONE PLAYER.
WE'RE BRINGING BACK DOMINI CAMONS WITH THE VIOLINISTS.
>> I HEAR HE DOES HIS BEST PERFORMANCE OUTSIDE. THAT'S EXCITING.
>> THAT'S EXCITING. WE'RE GLAD THAT THE CITY IS ON BOARD AND PUTTING THEIR STAMP OF APPROVAL ON THIS HUNDRED 160TH CELEBRATION.
THERE WILL BE EVENTS GOING ON ALL OVER THE ISLAND FOR THE MONTH.
THE MONTH WILL KICK OFF WITH THE GALA, THE SCHOLARSHIP GALA, WHICH IS THE PAGEANT, THAT WILL KICK OFF, AND YOU'LL HAVE YOUR REGULAR ASHTON VILLA, YOUR BANQUET, THE EDUCATIONAL COMPONENT OF BUSINESS TRAINING.
ALL OF THOSE EVENTS ARE LISTED THE EMANCIPATION CONCERT, WHICH WILL BE ON THE EIGHTH.
JUST EVENTS, A WHOLE TOTAL OF EVENTS.
THIS YEAR WILL BE A SPECIAL REVIVAL, AND THEY WILL SALUTE THE PORTA IS ON BOARD, AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOME SPECIAL REPRESENTATION.
>> WE WILL SALUTE SHEILA JACKSON LEE BECAUSE WE KNOW SHE'S PASSED ON AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO ANYTHING HERE FOR HER, AND AL EDWARDS, THESE GUARDIAN ANGELS WE CALL WHO PAVED THE WAY.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT EVENT WISE.
>> SHARON, IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GO AND GET A LIST OF ALL OF THESE EVENTS, WHERE DO THEY GO? THE PARK BOARD HAS A SITE?
IN THERE YOU CAN PLAY IN JUNETEENTH, AND IT'LL PULL UP ALL THE EVENTS.
BIG FESTIVAL ON THE 14TH, SO LOTS OF EVENTS OUT THERE.
>> SHARON HAS NOT MENTIONED THAT SHARON'S BEEN WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES WITH STAFF AND SO FORTH TO HELP COORDINATE THESE EVENTS, GET THE BUY IN FROM THE CITY TO ASSIST WITH A LOT OF THESE ACTIVITIES.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? ITEM 3G, PLEASE, MA'AM.
[3.G. Discussion of the Concept of a Juneteenth Museum and the Possibility of the City Participating in the Funding ( C Brown/Lewis - 15 min )]
>> ITEM 3G, DISCUSSION OF THE CONCEPT OF THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM AND THE POSSIBILITY OF THE CITY PARTICIPATING IN THE FUNDING.
>> I PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA, COUNCIL.
I'M GOING TO TELL YOU MY PERSONAL FEELING AND I WANT TO GET COUNCIL'S THOUGHTS ON THIS.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM IN SOME FORM, AND THAT STILL HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS HERE ON THE ISLAND.
AS THE JUNETEENTH WAS DECLARED A NATIONAL HOLIDAY, THIS BECAME EVEN MORE IMPORTANT FOR THIS ISLAND.
IT STANDS FOR MORE THAN JUST GENERAL GRANGER READING THE PROCLAMATION.
I THINK PERSONALLY THAT THE CITY OF GALVESTON SHOULD NOT BE IN THE JUNETEENTH BUSINESS OF BUILDING MUSEUM OR MANAGING A MUSEUM, BUT I DO FEEL THAT CITY OF GALVESTON SHOULD HAVE SKIN IN THE GAME WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPING SOME MUSEUM.
I WANT TO THROW THIS OUT TO COUNCIL.
I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TIMING FOR THAT.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME IDEAS FLOATED ABOUT LOCATIONS OF A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM.
AS WE KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OLD CENTRAL FOR A LITTLE WHILE.
AS WE KNOW, HERE RECENTLY, LA MORGAN HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING THE SMITHSONIAN INVOLVED.
I TALKED WITH REPRESENTATIVE WEBER HERE JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ON THAT.
THAT'S STILL GOING TO BE PURSUED AT A NATIONAL LEVEL.
WE'LL SEE HOW THAT MOVES FORWARD NOW WITH THE NEW ADMINISTRATION, BUT WE'LL SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT.
BUT I WOULD SAY THIS THAT I THINK LOCALLY, I FEEL THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER BEING INVOLVED IN SOME MANNER WITH A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM AND CONSIDERING FUNDING IN SOME MANNER TO A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM HERE ON THE ISLAND.
FUNDING THOSE AMOUNTS, PROBABLY, IN MY MIND, POSSIBLY WOULD COME FROM HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FUNDS, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK OUT AND REALLY EXPLORE A LITTLE BIT MORE.
THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT PLAY A ROLE IN THIS AND EVEN SOME OF THE LEGISLATION AT THE STATE LEVEL NOW MAY HAVE AN IMPACT ON SOME OF THIS, TOO.
ANYWAY, SAYING THAT, I WANT TO OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION, MARIE.
>> WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION, SHARON, AND MAYBE YOU CAN UPDATE ME IS BECAUSE THIS ISN'T THERE IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW AT THE STATE.
THERE'S SEVEN BILLION, I THINK.
[01:45:02]
>> WE'RE HOPING THAT THAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS, AND WHAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT HERE IS IF THE CITY BUYS IN, THEY WE'RE GOING TO NEED ADDITIONALLY THAT ORGANIZATION AND THEN CREATE AROUND THAT, ALL THE OTHER DONORS OR PHILANTHROPISTS ON THIS ISLAND WHO ARE VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN THAT.
YES, THIS WOULD BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT.
THAT'S CORRECT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE MEAN BY I'M GLAD, MAYOR, THAT YOU BROUGHT THAT FORTH BECAUSE IT NEEDS A HUGE COLLABORATION SO THAT IT IS PERPETUAL.
>> IN MY ESTIMATION, FROM OUR PHILANTHROPY GROUPS HERE ON THE ISLAND, I THINK THERE IS AN INTEREST IN FUNDING IN SOME MANNER, WORKING WITH AN ORGANIZATION TO PUT TOGETHER A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM, AND IN MY TALKS WITH THEM, THEY LOOK TOWARDS THE CITY TO SAY, ARE YOU INVOLVED IN ANY WAY? THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE HAVING THIS CITY ON BOARD WITH THIS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO THROW THAT OUT.
I WANT TO START TO DISCUSSION, AND IF THERE IS AN INTEREST, WE'LL EXPLORE MORE, WHAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE OUT THIS ON HOW WE COULD APPROACH THIS. ALEX.
>> A FEW THINGS. THE SMITHSONIAN IDEA, I FEEL LIKE IS THE MOST VIABLE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE INSTEAD OF A RESOLUTION PASSED, MAYBE WE COULD COLLECTIVELY AGREE ON LETTERS THAT WE COULD SEND TO SENATOR TED CRUZ, SENATOR JOHN CORNYN, AND OUR REPRESENTATIVE WEBER THAT WE COULD SEND TO DC, WHERE WE WOULD ALL SIGN IT COLLECTIVELY TOGETHER AS A BODY.
I THINK THAT WOULD SHOW BUY IN AS WELL AND MAYBE MOVE FORWARD AND SAY, HEY, THE IMPORTANCE OF GALVESTON, NOT FORT WORTH, OF HAVING A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM IN PRESENCE IS BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE IT HAPPENED.
THERE'S A HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO IT AS WELL.
>> WHY WOULD WE SEND IT TO EVERY SENATOR AND EVERY CONGRESSMAN?
>> WELL, THAT'S NOT A BAD IDEA, BUT SPECIFICALLY MAKING SURE THAT OUR REPRESENTATIVES KNOW OUR FEELING AND SUPPORT FROM THE LOCAL LEVEL TO THEM, BUT WE COULD SEND IT OUT TO EVERYBODY, EVEN PRESIDENT, HOWEVER IT WORKS ON HEAD OF THE SMITHSONIAN.
THAT BEING SAID, THAT'S SOMETHING I WANT TO SEE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
MAYBE WE CAN DO IT FOR THE 160TH ANNIVERSARY FOR OUR JUNE MEETING.
ALSO, IN TERMS OF THE CITY FUNDING IN THE BIRDWELL BILL, ACTUALLY, AND WE WERE THERE FOR THAT.
THERE WAS A PROVISION AND THAT BILL IS MOVING FORWARD THAT WE CAN'T USE BECAUSE SOME CITIES HAVE IT, AND SOME DON'T.
HOUSTON WAS THE ONE THAT WAS POINTED OUT THAT DOESN'T HAVE IT.
WE CANNOT HAVE A CRITERIA BASED ON RACE, RELIGION, CREED, WHAT HAVE YOU, AND SO THAT WAS PART OF THE LEGISLATION.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A CRITERIA FOR GRADING SCALE ON HOT TAX FUNDING BASED ON THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR US, BUT JUST SO THE PUBLIC AND EVERYBODY'S AWARE THAT, THAT IS A CONVERSATION HAPPENING AT THE STATE LEVEL AS WELL.
I WANT TO SEE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR THIS MUSEUM TO THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
I THINK THAT'S THE MOST VIABLE OPTION FOR LONG TERM WITH HOT TAX.
WITH A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM, COMES BLACK HISTORY, COMES BLACK MUSIC HISTORY, THINGS THAT WE CAN USE HOT TAX FOR FOR THE ARTS, FOR MARKETING, FOR OTHER THINGS AS WELL.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VIABLE OPTION FOR THE CITY TO CONTRIBUTE WITH HOT TAX.
IF WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING VISITORS FROM OUT OF OUR MUNICIPALITY COMING TO THIS MUSEUM, THAT IS ALSO, I WOULD THINK, AN ALLOWABLE USE UNDER 351.
ONE THING I DID NOTICE WITH GOING UP TO AUSTIN TWICE WAS THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO WITH HOT TAX BRACKETED TOWARDS SPECIFIC USES, AND MAYBE THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN BRACKET SPECIFIC LANGUAGE FOR A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM IN GALVESTON, SOMEHOW, BUT THAT WOULD FALL UNDER 351.
THIS WOULD BE IN A LEGISLATIVE SESSION IN 2027,
[01:50:01]
BUT IT'S CRAZY WHAT PEOPLE DO WITH HOT TAX IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.>> IT'S CRAZY WITHIN BRACKETS.
>> BUILDING UPON THE IDEA OF USING HOT TAX AND THE IDEA OF DEMONSTRATING SUPPORT FOR THE MUSEUM, MONEY ALWAYS TALKS.
MUCH LIKE WE WOULD GO AND CREATE A SPECIAL FUND TO FUND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE, WE KNOW THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE A FUTURE LIABILITY.
I WOULD THROW OUT THERE THAT COULD WE CREATE A DESIGNATED FUND SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM FUNDED BY A PERCENTAGE OF HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX OR OTHER FUNDS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, AND THEN ADD THAT TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE SUPPORT OF THE CREATION, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW IT'S NOT HERE YET.
BUT THE OTHER THING THAT THAT DOES IS THAT THAT THEN PROVIDES A BUCKET FOR LOCAL MATCH FOR THE RIGHT BUDGET TO YOUR POINT.
IF THEY'RE TRYING TO PUT FORWARD FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS, WE CAN HOLD UP AND SAY, HEY, WE'VE GOT A BUCKET OF FUNDS THAT'S GOING TO BE CONTINUALLY REMOVED.
>> WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO DO THAT THROUGH LEGISLATION.
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE POSSIBLE THIS SESSION.
WHEN YOU'RE EARMARKING HIGH TAX, IT'S GOT TO BE DONE THROUGH THE STATE.
>> THIS IS WHERE WE GET INTO THE EIGHTHS OF THE PENNIES.
>> AT A LOCAL AT A LOCAL LEVEL, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD NEED TO CHANGE THE STATE STATUTES IN ANY WAY TO DONATE TO A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM.
>> NOW, I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT IF WHAT HE WAS SAYING, DOING A DEDICATED HALF CENT, WHICH WE COULD DO IN '27, THAT WOULD REQUIRE LEGISLATION.
>> IS IT LEGISLATION OR WOULD IT REQUIRE JUST A CHANGE OF SECTION 33, YOU'VE HEARD?
>> NO, IT REQUIRES LEGISLATION, AND ACTUALLY, THERE'S WAYS THAT WE COULD EVEN.
>> MAYBE THERE IS A WAY TO STRUCTURE IT WITH PARTICULARS, BUT IF THE STATE HAD BUY IN.
>> THE STATE HAS, WE CAN GIVE YOU A HALF A CENT REBATE BECAUSE WE'RE AN ELIGIBLE COASTAL MUNICIPALITY WITH THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM, THAT'S HOW IT WOULD PROBABLY HAPPEN TO YOU, [LAUGHTER] BUT THAT WOULD BE A WAY THAT WE COULD GET THE A HALF CENT REBATE OFF OF THE SIX CENTS THAT GO TO THE STATE FOR THE STATE HOT TAX.
>> THAT'S THE MOST INTERESTING THING OF SITTING THROUGH THESE MEETINGS AS YOU HEAR WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE DOING.
UNFORTUNATELY, FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE'VE SPENT OUR TIME IN BICKERING AND WE'RE MISSING OPPORTUNITIES LIKE THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM, WHICH WE COULD HAVE ALREADY HAD UP THERE, AND WHEN YOU'RE SITTING THROUGH THE MEETINGS OR EVEN JUST GO IN AND LISTEN TO SOME OF THE THINGS, YOU'RE LIKE, DANG, WE COULD BE GETTING THAT REBATE PUTTING IN TOWARDS THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM.
>> WELL, THE REBATE WAS DISCUSSED IN LENGTH WHEN I WAS UP THERE AND SENATOR BIRDWELL DISCUSSED THAT AT LENGTH, AND THE SITUATION IS AND ALEX, YOU WERE UP THERE WITH ME.
IT WAS MY FEELING THAT IF WE HAD WANTED TO HAVE A MUSEUM AND SO FORTH, I THINK IT MIGHT BE AN EASY SELL TO GET THE REBATE OF A PORTION OF THAT STATE HOT TO HAVE A CONSTANT FUNDING MECHANISM FOR THIS MUSEUM.
>> THEN THERE WAS EVEN ONE WE LEARNED ABOUT YESTERDAY.
>> PADRE ISLAND IS THEY'RE BUILDING A HOTEL.
>> THE WAY PADRE ISLAND HAS IT IS [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S ONLY A FEW MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE A CERTAIN AREA WHERE THEY CAN USE THAT HOT TAX FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND THINGS RELATED TO THE CONVENTION CENTER, AND SO SOME OF THE BUBBLE GOES INTO THE WATER.
THE FUNNY THING THAT THE SENATOR SAID WAS FISH DON'T PAY TAXES.
WHAT THEY ASKED THE SENATE TO DO OR THE LEGISLATURE TO DO WAS TAKE THE AREA IN THE WATER AND APPLY IT TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS, NOT INCREASING THE SIZE, SO TO SAY, BUT JUST, I GUESS, PLAYING WITH AND MOVING AROUND THE SURFACE AREA THAT IS IN THE STATUTE.
>> I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THIS SUBJECT HEARING WHAT COUNCIL IS SAYING.
[01:55:03]
WE CAN'T LET GO OF THIS SUBJECT.WE'VE GOT TO TAKE THIS SUBJECT.
WE'VE GOT TO ORGANIZE IT BETTER.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT A FUNDING STREAM AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS.
>> IF THERE IS A SPECIAL SESSION THAT DOES HAPPEN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD BUILD ON.
>> WE COULD NEVER GET A NEW [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT IT WAS GOOD. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I HEAR THAT WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN BEING PART OF THIS JUNETEENTH MUSEUM MOVEMENT.
NUMBER TWO, I HEAR THAT WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN FUNDING AND HAVING SKIN IN THE GAME FINANCIALLY IN THIS.
>> I THINK THE STATE WOULD, TOO.
>> THE STATE WOULD LOVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
>> WELL, WE MAY VERY WELL GET A BIG TRUNK OF THE FUNDING IN THE SESSION BECAUSE MAYES ALREADY HAS IT IN THE BUDGET.
>> IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT ONE.
>> I AM IN SUPPORT OF ALL THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED.
WE JUST NEED TO KEEP IN MIND TIMELINES AND THE MOVING PARTS TO THIS.
ON THE APRIL 17TH SCHOOL BOARD MEETING, THEY DELAYED ACCEPTING GALVESTON'S $2.8 MILLION BID UNTIL THEIR SPECIAL MEETING ON JUNE 4TH.
THEIR BID IS GOOD UNTIL JUNE 15TH.
PART OF THIS WAS THE SECONDARY BID THAT CAME FROM BETH S' GROUP, I'M PRETTY SURE?
THE BID 4.5 MILLION OBVIOUSLY OVER THE 2.8 MILLION.
IN OTHER WORDS, THESE ARE THINGS THAT ARE OUT OF OUR CONTROL.
WE HAVE THE SUPPORT AT THE TABLE OF WHAT WE CAN DO TO CONTINUE, BUT IT HINGES ON WHAT MOVEMENTS ARE MADE, OF COURSE, AT GISD.
ALL OF THIS DEPENDS ON THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT ENDS ON JUNE 2ND.
THERE'S A LOT OF JUNE DATES IN THERE THAT WE'RE DEPENDING ON.
IF THE JUNE 2ND SENATE BILL 1 IS PASSED, WHICH IS 337 MILLION, SEVEN MILLION OF THAT WOULD BE EARMARKED FOR THE MUSEUM, AND EVERYTHING WOULD BE PERFECT FOR THAT.
IT'S GOOD THAT WE HAVE A BASIS AS TO WHAT WE CAN DO TO SUPPORT AND CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THROUGH PERPETUITY WITH A MUSEUM, BUT A LOT OF THIS ISN'T, OF COURSE, UNDER OUR CONTROL YET.
>> I THINK PART OF THIS IS THE MAIN DISCUSSION THAT I SAW WAS THE POSSIBILITY OF THE CITY PARTICIPATING IN THE FUNDING.
ABSENT OF GISD'S POSITION, IT STILL COMES A POLICY DECISION FOR US TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO SUPPORT A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM, PERIOD.
>> THE CONSENSUS IS YES. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE LOT OF MOVING PARTS THAT WE CAN'T CONTROL, BUT TO BE ABLE TO CONVEY TO OUR DELEGATION AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL, I THINK THE CONSENSUS IS, YES, WE WANT TO DO THIS BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT QUICKLY.
>> MY GOAL IN PUTTING THIS ON HERE.
>> WAS NOT NECESSARILY TYING IT TO WHAT THE GISD BOARD DOES, BUT AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS TO MAKE A COMMITMENT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING OF SAYING THAT WE ARE THERE TO HELP PARTICIPATE AT THE CITY FROM A FINANCIAL LEVEL.
>> SHARON, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP US WITH THIS.
LET'S JUST SAY, AGAIN, WE'RE NOT IN CONTROL OF WHAT GISD DECIDES, AND LA MORGAN GOES TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER THAT'S IN PLACE.
>> IF WE WRITE A LETTER AND SUPPORT AS COUNCIL SO THAT WE SET A FOUNDATION OF KNOWING THAT WE'RE BEHIND IT AS A COUNCIL.
>> BEHIND SUPPORTING A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM.
>> I THINK THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER BOTH LOCATIONS.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE WANT TO SET A FOUNDATION IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT GISD DECIDES.
I STILL WANT US AS A CITY TO BE PART OF A JUNETEENTH MUSEUM SUPPORT, WHETHER IT'S AT LA MORGAN OR THE OLD CENTRAL BUILDING.
>> WELL, I WAS GOING TO ASK OF COUNCIL AND MAYOR TO SEE IF WE COULD SEARCH FOR
[02:00:03]
A GRANT THAT WOULD GIVE US TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND FINDING TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL SITE FOR ONE.NOW WE HAVE [BACKGROUND] FOR THE EPA, THAT SO MAYBE WE CAN LOOK FOR A GRANT THAT COULD START THAT PROCESS AND THEN THAT COULD BE SETTLED.
LOOKING AT SOME TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE THAT COULD COME IN AND JUST ASSESS ALL THE LOCATIONS.
>> WE DO IT FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. WE SHOULD DO IT FOR THAT.
>> THERE'S NO DOUBT. BEAU, I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD IDEA THAT WE COULD SAY AT OUR NEXT MEETING, HAVE A RESOLUTION THAT COUNCIL COULD VOTE ON THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF FINANCIALLY.
>> UNILATERAL SUPPORT REGARDLESS OF LOCATION?
ALSO IN THAT MOTION, WE COULD THEN GIVE GUIDANCE TO STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RESEARCHING GRANTS OR WHATEVER THAT WOULD MOVE AS FAR AS FINANCIALLY.
>> I WOULD I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A LETTER THAT WE COULD WRITE TO OUR REPRESENTATIVE.
>> HEY, TARA. YEAH, CALL. I'VE BEEN BUSY BUDDY.
>> KEEPING THAT COMMUNICATION OPEN REGARDING THE SMITHSONIAN.
>> JUST ONE SECOND. EXCUSE ME. GO AHEAD.
>> OUR MUSEUM IN MEMPHIS IS AN ANNEX SMITHSONIAN.
THE CIVIL RIGHTS MUSEUM THERE IN NATIONAL, WHICH IS AN AWESOME MUSEUM.
IT ACTUALLY CONNECTS TO THE LORRAINE HOTEL AT THE VERY END.
THAT IS ONE THAT I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN TO.
THAT IS CONSIDERED THE SMITHSONIAN ANNEX MUSEUM.
>> DID THEY RECEIVE FUNDING FROM SMITHSONIAN?
>> YEAH. SHARON, TO MOVE US FORWARD HERE, IF COUNCIL HAD A CONSENSUS ON THIS, COULD YOU CONTACT REPRESENTATIVE RUBBER? I TALKED TO HIM. HE WAS GOING TO HAVE HIS STAFF MEMBERS CONTACT THEM SMITHSONIAN AND WORK OUT THE DETAILS ON MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS.
BUT COULD YOU MENTION TO HIM ABOUT THE RESOLUTION?
>> GET SOME THOUGHTS FROM HIM ON WHO AND HOW AND WHAT INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE IN THIS RESOLUTION.
IF YOU COULD GET WITH THEN DON AFTER THAT TO SEE ABOUT PUTTING TOGETHER A RESOLUTION THAT WE COULD BRING FORWARD AT OUR NEXT MEETING ON THIS.
ALSO, COUNCIL, IF IT MET YOUR APPROVAL, I'LL WORK WITH STAFF HERE TO SPECIFICALLY THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO PUT TOGETHER A RESOLUTION UNILATERALLY TO SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE JUNETEENTH MUSEUM AND FUNDING THAT WE CAN PUT ON THE MENTION THEN.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS? VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3H, PLEASE.
[Items 3H & 3I]
>> ITEM 3H, UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF THE FINANCIAL NEEDS FOR EXISTING CITY PARKS.
>> VERY GOOD. THIS WAS PUT ON COUNCILMAN RAWLINS.
>> YES. THIS ONE ACTUALLY WILL BRIDGE OVER TO 3I AS I'LL BRING IN LATER.
>> LET'S GO AHEAD AND READ THAT THEN AND WE CAN PUT THEM TOGETHER.
IF YOU READ 3I, PLEASE, MA'AM.
>> THREE I: [OVERLAPPING] OF MOVING THE MANAGEMENT OF SEAWOLF AND DELLANERA PARKS TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
>> OF COURSE, WE HAVE A HUGE NEED FOR OUR CITIZENS OF GALVESTON.
THEY DESERVE THE BEST PARKS POSSIBLE.
BUT IN DESERVING THE BEST PARKS POSSIBLE, WE NEED A FUNDING SOURCE THAT UPDATES AND REPAIRS THOSE PARKS.
I SAW A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ENABLE US TO UTILIZE THE CITY OWNED ASSETS TO HELP AS A FUNDING SOURCE TO CREATE BETTER PARKS THROUGHOUT GALVESTON THROUGH NET REVENUE THAT IS CREATED BY THE INCOME OF SEAWOLF PARK, DELLANERA PARK, AND SEAWOLF PARK.
THAT IS WHAT I'M HOPING TO ACCOMPLISH TODAY.
I FIRST NEEDED TO GET AN IDEA STATED PUBLICLY.
[02:05:01]
WE HAD AN IDEA OF WHAT OUR PARKS NEEDED AS FAR AS DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND PHYSICALLY NEEDED AS FAR AS WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED AT EACH LOCATION.MIGHT NOT HAVE AT ALL. MORE THAN ANYTHING, JUST FINANCIAL.
>> I HAVE A FEW FINANCIAL NUMBERS FOR YOU.
AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON JONES PARK WITH [INAUDIBLE], AND OUR COST ESTIMATE FOR COMPLETION OF THE PARK IN 2023 WAS $5,382,655.
AS CHRISTINE CAN TELL YOU, THE BIGGEST BULK OF THE MONEY IS FOR THE DRAINAGE.
WE WILL HAVE AN UPDATED NUMBER WITHIN A WEEK OR TWO, I BELIEVE, AND THAT'S WHERE THAT PARK STANDS.
I WILL GO TO SHIELD PARK NEXT.
THE CLEAN UP ESTIMATED COST IS 650,000.
WE ARE IN A GRANT OPPORTUNITY WITH THE EPA TO HAVE IT CLEANED UP FREE OF CHARGE.
THE PARK IS PERFECTLY SAFE RIGHT NOW, IF ANYBODY'S OUT ON THAT PARK PLAYING BASKETBALL OR HOPSCOTCH OR WHATEVER.
IT'S ONLY IF YOU DIG DOWN, YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THAT DIRT IN A CERTAIN WAY.
WE'RE HOPING TO REMOVE THE TANK SO THAT WAY WE CAN DO WHATEVER WE WANT THROUGHOUT OUT THERE IN A TOTAL CLEANUP.
>> IT'S MORE ABOUT GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION?
>> YES. OUR LASSIE LEAGUE COMPLEX, WHICH IS ONE THAT'S HEAVILY USED FOR TOURNAMENTS IN GALVESTON COLLEGE, HOLY FAMILY, O'CONNELL, SOMETIMES BALL HIGH USES, AND OF COURSE, OUR GIRLS HERE IN GALVESTON.
IT NEEDS A TOTAL NEW FENCING, NEW LIGHTING, THE WHOLE WORKS.
IF WE KEEP THE BUILDING AND JUST REFURBISH THE RESTROOM.
>> LASSIE LEAGUE COMPLEX ON 83RD.
>> NOW, WHAT WAS THE TOTAL BEFORE WE LEAVE? YOU HAD 5.3 FOR JONES?
>> 650,000. NOW, THAT'S JUST CLEANING IT UP.
>> WE SHOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT.
THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT IF WE ARE APPROVED.
>> WE HAVE NO PROJECTIONS THOUGH FOR TRANSFORMING?
>> ACTUALLY, WE'RE HAVING A COMMUNITY MEETING ON JUNE 5TH IN THE WATER BUILDING AND WE'RE GOING TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CHRISTINE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD ABOUT THAT MEETING? SURE. BECAUSE WE'RE HOPING TO GET GREAT PARTICIPATION.
>> FOR THE RECORD, CHRISTINE BRYANT, VISION GALVESTON.
EPA, WE HAVE A BROWNFIELDS CLEANUP GRANT PENDING FOR SHIELD PARK.
EPA HAS BEEN VERY INSTRUMENTAL IN THAT.
THEY'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY BRING A TEAM DOWN JUNE 5TH TO TALK ABOUT THE REMEDIATION PROCESS IN THE PARK AND WHY THINGS DON'T LOOK LIKE THEY'RE HAPPENING, BUT THINGS ARE HAPPENING. IT JUST TAKES A WHILE.
THEN WE'LL START THE VISIONING PROCESS.
BECAUSE IT'S A BROWNFIELD SITE, EPA CAN DO VISIONING AT NO COST TO THE CITY, WHICH IS REALLY COOL.
WE'RE GOING TO UTILIZE THAT AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
I WOULD ANTICIPATE REDEVELOPMENT PARK, WE DON'T HAVE THE WATER MITIGATION PROBLEMS THAT WE HAVE IN JONES.
DEPENDS ON WHAT WE [OVERLAPPING].
>> DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE WANTING IT.
DEPENDS ON WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOODS WANTING.
>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE ON JONES, THE REMEDIATION IS COVERED THREE GRANTS THUS FAR.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT TWO GRANTS PENDING FOR THAT REMEDIATION FOR THE WATER.
>> AT THAT PARTICULAR MEETING, THERE WILL BE VISION WHERE PEOPLE CAN SIT AND SAY WHAT THEY WANT.
>> PRETTY COOL. KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY HAS A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT WITH EPA, SO THEY BRING DOWN AND DO THAT AS WELL. GOOD STUFF.
>> THINGS ARE HAPPENING. IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S HAPPENING.
>> WAS THERE JUST ONE TANK IN THE GROUND AT SHIELD?
>> REMEMBER, THAT WAS A GAS COMPANY'S PROPERTY.
>> YOU'RE DYING TO SAY IT'S A TANKLESS JOB.
>> I'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT THAT TANK FOR A LONG TIME.
>> WE'RE TALKING LIGHTING, MUSCO LIGHTING, WE'RE TALKING UPGRADES, NETTING FOR THE BACK, STOP THE WHOLE THING. REFURBISH THE RESTROOMS. THE PORTABLE RESTROOM BUILDING THAT WE HAVE OUT THERE, JUST REFRESH IT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT $2.5-$3,000,000 BECAUSE EVERY YEAR, THE COST GOES UP AND THAT IS A HEAVILY USED COMPLEX.
>> [INAUDIBLE] HEADS AND BEDS.
>> IT ALSO IS USED FOR BOYS TOURNAMENTS.
WE'VE COME IN AND PUT A BUILD A BOUND ON THE FIELD SO WE CAN RUN LARGE BOYS TOURNAMENTS.
[02:10:06]
IT IS HEAVILY USED.SOMETHING THAT WE FACE THAT OTHER CITIES IN NORTH DON'T FACES, THE SOLITAIRE.
TO REPLACE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT, YOU'RE GOING TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOU CAN SEE HALF THE LIFE, RIGHT?
>> YOU MIGHT GET FIVE YEARS LESS, IF YOU'RE LUCKY.
>> STEP OUT TO TAKE THIS CALL. I'LL BE RIGHT BACK.
>> BUT FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT RANGES, AND THIS IS JUST TO HAVE MULTI AGE GROUPS BETWEEN TWO AND 12 YEARS OLD, AND WE HAVE THAT FORM PLAY SURFACE, WHICH IS MORE COST EFFECTIVE.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT 400-600,000 A YEAR, A REPLACEMENT FOR A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.
>> PER PARK. HOW MUCH IS THAT AGAIN, I'M SORRY?
>> THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE BETWEEN 12 AND 14 YEARS.
THIS SHOULD HAPPEN. THAT'S JUST TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE.
>> THAT'S A BLANKET ACROSS EACH OF OUR PARKS?
>> YES. UNLESS YOU WANT TO GO EVEN BIGGER OR IF YOU WANT TO PUT A SPLASH PAY IN, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT THE SAME COSTS BECAUSE MOST SPLASH PAY COMPANIES ARE NOT IN THE UNITED STATES.
THEY START OUT THAT WAY, BUT THEN ALL THE REPAIRS AND ALL THE REPLACEMENT COMES OUT OF CANADA, WHICH IS A LITTLE TOUGH.
ALL THOSE BRAINS THAT ARE IN THERE WORKING HAS COME FROM CANADA. PICNIC TABLE.
ONE PICNIC TABLE PUT ON A CONCRETE SLAB WITH A SHADE STRUCTURE IS APPROXIMATELY BETWEEN 20 AND 23 THOUSAND EACH AND YOU GET ABOUT THE SAME USAGE.
WE HAD SOME INSTALLED AT THE WESTON DOG PARK, HAVE SOME BEING INSTALLED IN MENARD PARK AND WRIGHT CUNEY PARK.
>> WHAT'S THE LIFESPAN ON THOSE?
>> ABOUT THE SAME, 10-12 YEARS.
>> I WOULD SAY THIS, WHEN I WAS IN DISTRICT 2, WE PUT IN THOSE DOWN THERE AT SAN JACINTO PARK.
>> THEY MUST HAVE SOME NICE HOMES BLOCKING THAT SOLITAIRE.
I WAS BY THERE YESTERDAY CHECKING THEM, THEY LOOK NICE.
>> PARK BENCHES RUN 2,500-3,000 EACH.
THOSE LAST A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
SOMEONE SHOULD GET 15, 18 YEARS OUT OF THEM.
IT JUST DEPENDS ON THE PRODUCT AT THE TIME.
TRASH RECEPTACLES TO REPLACE THE NICE ONES BETWEEN 800,000 EACH.
WE TRY TO PUT AS MANY AS WE CAN OUT THERE AND GRILLS, IF WE WANT GRILLS IN PARKS.
>> SURE. THE METAL TRASH CANS?
>> NO. THESE ARE LIKE THE PLASTIC CONTAINER ONES.
THEY'RE METAL, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'RE METAL, BUT THEY FIT OVER.
BUT YOU HAVE DIFFERENT ONES AT KEMPNER.
THERE'S DIFFERENT PARKS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE ONES AT MENARD, WE HAVE PLASTIC ONES AND THEN WE HAVE THE REGULAR PLASTIC COVERS.
>> ACTUALLY COVERS THE COVER. YEAH.
>> IT COVERS, MAKES IT LOOK NICER.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE THE BLUE BINS ARE ABOUT 100 BUCKS A PARK?
>> YEAH. WE DO HAVE SOME OF THOSE, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF THOSE AT THE BALL FIELDS BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF TRASH AT NIGHT OR FOR TOURNAMENTS.
GRILLS ARE ABOUT 1,200 EACH AND THAT'S WITH A SMALL SLAB UNDERNEATH THEM.
WE DON'T HAVE THOSE IN EVERY PARK, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE.
WATER FOUNTAINS RUN FROM 2500-3500 DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WANT BECAUSE YOU WANT ONE THE DOG CAN DRINK OUT OF, ONE THE CHILD CAN DRINK OUT OF.
NOW THE BIG THING IS TO PUT A COUPLE HUNDRED A REFILL.
>> THAT'S WHERE THE PARK WORLD IS GOING WITH EQUIPMENT [OVERLAPPING].
>> JUST THE THREE PARKS IS AROUND 10 MILLION TO BRING THEM UP?
>> FOR JONES, SHIELD AND LASSIE LEAGUE.
THEN YOU HAVE THE ONGOING COST THAT IS THE MAINTENANCE COST THAT YOU'RE COMING TO IDC A LOT FOR.
THEN WE HAVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
>> IT'S ALL THE OTHER PARKS THAT CAN RUN QUITE A BIT OF MONEY [OVERLAPPING].
OF COURSE, THIS DOESN'T EVEN CONSIDER THE POOL AND THEIR COST BECAUSE, WELL, THEY'RE IN THE SAME SECTION OF IDC, BUT THEY HAVE A SEPARATE BUDGET.
WE DO TRY TO FUND RAISE FOR THEM.
BETTER PARKS FOR GALVESTON HAS A SEPARATE ACCOUNT THAT THEY COLLECT FUNDS THAT PEOPLE DONATE JUST FOR THE POOL.
[02:15:01]
I WILL BE COMING WITH A DONATION FROM THEM TO REPAINT AND REDO THE PLAY STRUCTURE INSIDE THE SPLASH PAD AT LASKER.>> $9,800. YOUR THOUGHT WAS WITH THE TRANSFER OF THE PARKS DELLANERA AND SEAWOLF, THAT NET PROFIT THEN COULD GO INTO THE SUPPORT.
>> IT COULD GIVE A SUPPORT FUNDING SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY FOLLOW THROUGH.
ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS THAT I HAD JUST OVER THE LAST SEVERAL COUNCIL MEETINGS WAS COUNCILWOMAN LEWIS MENTIONING THE CONDITION OF HER PARK AND JUST THE FACT THAT IT'S ABOUT MONEY.
I DON'T SEE WHY WE COULDN'T CAPITALIZE ON THIS OPPORTUNITY AS A SUPPORT FUNDING OPTION.
WE'VE PROVEN IN THE PAST THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO IT, AND THERE'S NO REASON THAT THAT NET SHOULD NOT COME TO THE CITY AS A FUNDING SOURCE AND NOT INCREASE ANY BURDEN ON OUR TAXPAYERS.
>> SHARON, I PUT ON AN AGENDA ITEM AT IDC ABOUT ALLOCATING MONEY TOWARDS SHIELD PARK.
WELL, THAT'S DIFFERENT, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE CAN ALLOCATE MONEY TOWARD SHIELD PARK SO THAT WE BECOME MORE APPEALING TO FOR GRANT OPPORTUNITIES.
>> NOW THAT WE'RE TALKING DELLANERA, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT?
>> DAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRANSFER OF DELLANERA AND SEAWOLF.
I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T RUN REALLY A BUSINESS PLAN ON THAT, HAVE YOU?
>> WE'VE DONE SOME ROUGH NUMBERS BASED ON PARK BOARD'S NUMBERS.
ABSOLUTELY. WE HAVE THEM FOR YOU TODAY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS.
>> WONDERFUL. CAN YOU PASS THOSE OUT?
>> WE'RE GOING TO SKIP TO THAT AGENDA ITEM?
>> WE'VE ALREADY READ BOTH OF THEM.
>> LET'S START IF YOU WON'T BE READY FOR ME TO GET INTO IT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BEFORE HE GETS INTO THAT, CAN WE TAKE A BREAK? IT'S 11:18.
11:30 WE'LL RECONVENE. IT IS 11:30.
WE ARE BACK IN OUR WORKSHOP SESSION.
IT IS APRIL 24, 2025 IN THE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
MORE ON ITEM I THINK IT'S 3I AT THIS POINT ON OUR WORKSHOP AGENDA.
WE HAVE OUR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER DAN BUCKLEY. DAN.
I'M BACK, AND I'LL TRY TO GET US BACK ON SCHEDULE HERE.
I HANDED YOU ALL OUT JUST A BASIC OUTLINE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG.
WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS GO THROUGH SOME OF THE ASSUMPTIONS WE TOOK IN PREPARING SOME FINANCIAL ESTIMATES.
COUNCILMEMBER BROWN IS NOT HERE, HAD BEEN REQUESTING THIS.
I THINK SOME OF YOU ALL WANTED TO.
IT'S SPECULATIVE BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON ESTIMATES, BUT WE'RE BASING EVERYTHING ON THE ESTIMATES OF THE PARK BOARD.
THIS IS BASED ON THEIR BUDGET, THEIR NUMBERS AND WE'RE APPLYING HOW THE PARKS WOULD TRANSITION TO THE CITY AND HOW WE SEE OPERATIONALLY.
SOME ASSUMPTIONS WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IS THAT NUMBER ONE, ALL THE REVENUES BASED ON THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET, WE DIDN'T ADJUST NUMBERS UP DOWN SIDEWAYS.
THE REVENUE SHARE, IT'S BASED WITH THE CITY.
IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET, THEY CALL THESE THINGS TRANSFERS TO THE CITY.
THEY'RE REALLY NOT TRANSFERS TO THE CITY.
THERE WAS ONE, WHICH WAS A $300,000, WHICH THEY TOOK OUT OF SEAWOLF, WHICH WAS JUST A DECISION ON THEIR PART TO TAKE OUT OF SEAWOLF.
BUT TRANSFERS TO THE CITY OR WHERE WE BY ORDINANCE OR BY RULE SAY THAT A PERCENTAGE OF SEAWALL PARKING IS GOING TO COME TO THE CITY.
THEY CONSIDER THAT A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY IN THEIR BUDGET AND TAKE CREDIT FOR IT AS SOMETHING PAID TO THE CITY.
WELL, IT'S REALLY JUST THE DOLLARS THAT ARE ALLOCATED TO BE SET ASIDE FOR CERTAIN THINGS.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S PRESENTED DIFFERENTLY IN THEIR BUDGET.
>> BUT THE SEAWALL PARKING IS THE CITY'S.
>> SEAWALL PARKING IT'S A CITY BY ORDINANCE.
[02:20:04]
THE PARK BOARD BUDGETS AS THEY HAVE PRESENTED REPRESENT HAVE FUND BALANCES IN EACH PARK.THOSE ARE OPERATED AS ENTERPRISE FUNDS, SO WE'RE ASSUMING THAT THOSE FUND BALANCES WOULD FLOW TO THE CITY AND STAY WITH THE PARK.
>> DO WE KNOW HOW MUCH THOSE ARE AT THIS POINT?
>> WE'LL GET TO THAT, MAYOR. I'LL MOVE AHEAD.
[LAUGHTER] REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS FOR DELLANERA AND SEAWOLF, WE'RE ESTIMATING JUST INCREMENTAL 1% INCREASES, SO IT'S NOTHING ABSURD OR OUT OF LINE.
THERE'S VARIOUS FEMA PROJECTS THAT ARE STILL ON THE BOOKS.
WE'RE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION ON THOSE.
WE'RE LEAVING THOSE BECAUSE AS WE WORK THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE TRANSITION OF THE PARKS, WE'D SEE HOW THOSE PLAY OUT.
THE PARK BOARD STILL DOESN'T BUDGET INTEREST INCOME BY FUND.
IF WE HAVE A FUND BALANCE IN AN ACCOUNT AND THAT FUND BALANCE EARNS MONEY EVERY YEAR, THAT MONEY GOES TO THAT ACCOUNT.
YOU CAN GET A TRUE PICTURE OF THE FINANCIAL RESULTS OF THAT PARK.
ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, THERE'S REALLY NO CHANGES IN EMPLOYEES.
WE'RE LOOKING AT IT BECAUSE UNTIL YOU'RE IN THERE, YOU DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S EFFICIENCIES, INEFFICIENCIES.
TO MAKE A FAIR BUDGET, WE'RE JUST SAYING, WE'RE BRINGING EVERYBODY OVER AND PER POSITION AT THEIR SAME PAY.
WE DID MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE PENSION BECAUSE OUR PENSION IS A DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN, WHICH THEY CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE.
WE INCREASED THE BENEFIT COST SLIGHTLY TO COVER THE COST OF OUR PENSION.
THEY'RE UNDER THE SAME HEALTH PLAN.
ON SEAWALL URBAN PARK, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE PARK BOARD DOES FOR US AS A SERVICE.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE, WE ANTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE INTERLOCAL, BASED ON GUIDANCE WE RECEIVED FROM COUNSEL, A LOT OF THOSE THINGS WILL STILL RESIDE WITH THE PARK BOARD AND WE PAY THEM ON A FEE BASIS TO DO THEM LIKE WE DO NOW, EXCEPT THE CITY IS GOING TO CONTROL THE MONEY INSTEAD OF THE MONEY BEING THERE AND THEN COMING BACK HERE.
>> CLEAN CLEANING THE STATE, THE BUS STOPS AND ON THE SEAWALL, PICKING UP TRASH, THOSE THINGS, THEY DO IT AS A SERVICE, AND WE WOULD PAY FOR THAT.
IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, OUR INITIATIVE WAS THAT THEY SHOULDN'T LOSE MONEY ON IT.
WHAT ARE YOUR COSTS AND LET'S MAKE SURE YOU DON'T LOSE MONEY ON IT.
BUT THE 10% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE., I WAS GOING TO GET TO THAT, ALEX. NOW, YOU'RE MOVING AHEAD.
>> [LAUGHTER] THOSE ARE A LITTLE BIT OF THINGS.
THE REVENUE SHARE THAT CAME OUT OF SEAWOLF, THAT WENT TO THE GENERAL FUND.
IT DIDN'T STAY IN THE PARK SYSTEM.
WHEN WE PREPARED THIS BUDGET, WE'RE SORT OF CHANGING THAT TO LEAVE THAT MONEY IN THE PARK INSTEAD OF COMING OUT AND GOING TO THE GENERAL FUND.
THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT WE'LL HAVE TO ADDRESS AS WE MOVE INTO THIS TRANSITION PERIOD, ASSUMING WE DO ADJUST THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET BECAUSE THERE'S ABOUT $300,000.
IT WON'T BE GOING TO THE GENERAL FUND, IT COMES OUT OF THOSE PARKS NOW TO THE GENERAL FUND.
CSILLA IS GOING TO GO OVER THE FINANCIALS WITH YOU IN A MINUTE I THINK ON A SPREADSHEET THAT WILL HELP HIGHLIGHT WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
BUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES THAT CAME OUT THE PARK BOARD AT 10%.
WE ALREADY CHARGE AN ADMINISTRATIVE FEE ON SEAWALL, BUT THE REVENUE PRODUCING PARTS WE DON'T, AND THAT LOWERS TO 2.6%, WHICH IS A GENERAL ADMINISTRATION FEE THAT CITY CHARGES ACROSS ALL FUNDS.
>> YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> CAN YOU ENLARGE THAT, JANELLE? GET RID OF THAT SPREADSHEET.
I'M GOING TO MOVE IT UP A LITTLE BIT.
NOW I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO CSILLA AND LET HER TALK ABOUT THE NUMBERS.
KEEP GOING UP IF YOU CAN, JANELLE. NOT ALL GOING TO FIT.
WE'LL START AT THE TOP, WALK YOU THROUGH IT, AND THEN WE'LL WORK OUR WAY IN AND THEN WE'LL ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL HAVE AS WE GO ALONG.
>> WE LOOKED AT ALL THREE PARKS, DELLANERA, SEAWOLF AND URBAN SEAWOLF PARK.
WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THE WHITE COLUMN, THE LEFT HAND COLUMN IS THE PARK BOARD BUDGET FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR.
THEN THE GREEN COLUMNS RELATE TO WHAT THE CITY'S PROPOSALS WOULD BE AND WHAT THE CHANGES.
YOU'LL SEE UNDER EMPLOYEES, THESE ARE THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ATTRIBUTED TO THESE PARKS.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES TO THAT.
WE BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE PROBABLY STAFFED PROPERLY.
HOWEVER, WE DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF INSIGHT INTO WHO ALL IS BEING ATTRIBUTED TO EACH PARK.
WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FULL INVENTORY OF THAT TO REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS.
YOU'LL SEE THE BEGINNING FUND BALANCE IS LISTED THERE UNDER THE GRAY LINE FOR DELLANERA AND SEAWOLF.
[02:25:03]
PARK BOARD DOES NOT MAINTAIN A FUND BALANCE IN SEAWALL PARKING BECAUSE THAT ALL COMES BACK TO THE CITY.YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE CITY COLUMN AT THE ALMOST $1.4 MILLION.
>> YEAH. ON THE REVENUE SIDE, WE MADE AN ASSUMPTION OF JUST A 1% INCREASE YEAR OVER YEAR EXCEPT IN SEAWALL URBAN, WHICH THE '25 BUDGET FOR SEAWALL URBAN ON THE PARK BOARD SIDE WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN WHAT THE '24 ACTUALS WERE.
I PROJECTED IT COMING IN A LITTLE LOWER.
THIS IS A SYMPTOM OF SEVERAL THINGS.
IT COULD BE SOMEWHAT ON OUR END TO HELP WITH ENFORCEMENT, BUT WE ADJUSTED THAT BUDGET DOWNWARD JUST A LITTLE BIT.
ON THE OTHER REVENUE SOURCES, THE ONLY ASSUMPTION IS A SLIGHT INCREASE OF 1%.
THE FEMA LINE WHICH IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE REVENUE, YOU'LL NOTE IN SEAWOLF PARK THEY SHOW REVENUE OF $773,000 AND THEN IN EXPENDITURES, THEY SHOW EXPENDITURES OF $527,00.
TESSA IS WORKING WITH CHERYL AT THE PARK BOARD, AND THEY'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH A FULL REPORT ON WHERE ALL THEIR FEMA PROJECT WORKSHEETS CURRENTLY STAND.
THIS IS SOMETHING THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST TOGETHER.
THERE WILL BE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT FORTHCOMING.
OTHERWISE, THE ONLY OTHER BIG REVENUE ITEM THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT IS THAT OTHER DEBT PROCEEDS IN THEIR FISCAL YEAR '25 BUDGET IN SEAWOLF, THEY BUDGETED BOTH THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR PROPOSED RV PARK THAT IS COMING OUT ON THE CITY SIDE.
YOU SEE THAT LARGE DECREASE BOTH ON THE REVENUE AND THE EXPENSE SIDE FOR SEAWOLF, AND IT IS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY TIED TO THAT RV PARK PROGRAM THAT THEY HAD.
ON THE EXPENDITURE SIDE, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S AN INCREASE IN PERSONNEL AS DAN STATED THAT'S PREDOMINANTLY RELATED TO PENSION ITEMS. THEIR PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS ARE VERY SMALL.
THEY HAVE A 401(K) PROGRAM WITH THE CITY'S FULL PENSION, THESE EMPLOYEES WOULD BE GETTING THAT, AND SO THAT WOULD BE AN ADDED BENEFIT FOR THE EMPLOYEES, BUT IT IS SLIGHTLY MORE EXPENSIVE FOR THE CITY.
MATERIAL SERVICES AND SUPPLIES.
WE ARE BUDGETING BASED EXACTLY ON WHAT THEY'VE BUDGETED HISTORICALLY.
THAT IS SOMETHING WE WOULD EVALUATE AS WE TOOK OVER SERVICES TO DETERMINE.
HOWEVER, HISTORICALLY, I THINK, BARBARA AND HER GROUP HAVE FOUND SAVINGS OVER THESE NUMBERS JUST FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
THERE COULD BE SAVINGS IN THAT CATEGORY.
YOU WILL NOTICE THE PINK BOXES IN EACH CATEGORY RELATED TO CAPITAL.
THEIR CAPITAL BUDGETS ARE BASED ON WHAT THEY REQUESTED THIS YEAR.
WE WOULD STILL NEED TO COMPLETE A FULL INVENTORY OF THE PARKS AND DETERMINE WHAT CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE VIEWED AS NECESSARY AND HIGHEST PRIORITY ON OUR END.
THEN YOU'LL SEE THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE CHARGE AT THE 2.6%.
YOU'LL SEE THAT UNDER THE EXPENDITURES, THERE'S A TRANSFER TO PARK BOARD GENERAL FUND AND TRANSFER TO PARK BOARD BEACH PATROL FUND.
THAT'S RELATED TO THEIR TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS, AND SO THOSE ARE ALL COMING OUT.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN DELLANERA, THEIR TRANSFER TO GENERAL FUND IS THAT 10% AT $115,000, AND THE CITY'S PROPOSAL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS IS AT $31,000 BASED ON THAT 2.6%.
THERE'S DEFINITELY DECREASES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
IN DELLANERA, THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES ARE EXPECTED TO DECREASE BY $255,000.
ONCE AGAIN, IN SEAWOLF, IT SKEWS A LITTLE.
IT LOOKS LIKE A MUCH LARGER DECREASE, AND THAT'S RELATED TO THAT RV PARK.
THEN IN URBAN SEAWALL, THE EXPENDITURE DECREASE IS ABOUT $402,000.
ONE OF THE THINGS TO CONSIDER HERE IS THE REVENUE SHARE WITH CITY, WHEN YOU FOLLOW THAT ACROSS TO URBAN SEAWALL, THEY HAD A BUDGET IS $458,000 AND THIS IS TIED TO THE 15% THAT THEY HAVE TO SEND US FOR THE CAPITAL RESERVE FUND AS WELL AS THERE'S 75% OF NET ALSO COMES BACK TO US.
THE LINE BELOW THAT, I HAVE LISTED AS CAPITAL RESERVE 15%.
THAT WOULD BE ABOUT $240,000 BASED ON THAT $1.6 MILLION IN PROJECTED REVENUE.
IN OUR CASE, THAT WILL JUST FLOW BACK INTO THAT FUND BALANCE, WHICH STARTED AT THAT $1.397 MILLION AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE.
THAT ADDITIONAL $240,000 WOULD ACCUMULATE THERE TO HELP WITH CAPITAL ITEMS ON THE SEAWALL.
>> REMEMBER, THAT'S A BEACH USER FEE.
>> IF YOU SCROLL DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT, JANELLE.
>> THAT COULD GO BACK TOWARDS, I GUESS, MORE IMPROVEMENTS ON SEAWALL.
>> ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S WHAT THAT'S USED.
>> THESE LAST TWO LINES, THE ENDING FUND BALANCE WOULD INCREASE $411,000 TO $740,000 IN DELLANERA, $393,000 TO $754,000 AND SEAWOLF,
[02:30:03]
AND THEN IT WOULD INCREASE TO THE ALMOST $1.7 MILLION IN URBAN SEAWALL.OBVIOUSLY, THOSE FUNDS WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR PARK RELATED IMPROVEMENTS IN THOSE AREAS IF WE RUN THESE AS ENTERPRISE FUNDS, OR AS COUNCILMEMBER RAWLINS SUGGESTED EARLIER, POTENTIALLY, THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE POLICIES ON HOW THIS COULD SUPPORT OTHER PARKS IN THE SYSTEM.
THIS DRAFT BASED ON INITIAL SMALL CHANGES, WE BELIEVE THE GAINS AS FAR AS REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES IS ABOUT $329,000 IN DELLANERA, $361,000 IN SEAWOLF AND ABOUT $297,000 IN SEAWALL URBAN.
ONE LAST THING IS IN SEAWALL URBAN, YOU'LL NOTICE THERE ARE THREE PINKISH LINES, THE $626,000, THE $455,000, AND THE $15,000.
THEN ON THE RIGHT, THERE'S A $1,097,000.
THAT'S TIED TO THE FUNCTIONS DAN WAS TALKING ABOUT THAT WE THINK PARK BOARD WOULD CONTINUE DOING.
MAINTENANCE ITEMS ON THE SEAWALL OR WHATEVER SERVICES THAT WE WOULD WANT THEM TO CONTINUE.
THAT 1,097,000 IS ASSOCIATED WITH PAYMENT FOR THOSE.
THAT'S REALLY A GENERAL ESTIMATE WITHOUT HAVING ANY NUANCED DISCUSSION ABOUT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE INTERLOCAL, WHAT WE'LL STAY WITH THE CITY AND WHAT WILL GO TO THE PARK BOARD.
IT'S SIMPLY BASED ON WHAT THEY HAD IN THEIR BUDGET FOR '25.
I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
>> WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY CLOSE TO A MILLION DOLLARS IN EFFICIENCIES.
>> I WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS COULD BE A STARTING POINT.
WE DON'T KNOW THE STAFFING NUMBERS.
WE DON'T KNOW THE MATERIALS AND SUPPLY NUMBERS.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW THINGS ARE DONE INTERNALLY WHEN THEY MOVE AND THE PEOPLE ARE ALLOCATED.
BUT WE WOULD SEE ALL OF THAT WHEN YOU GET INTO IT.
I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD BASIS TO START FROM.
>> COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S SEAWOLF.
[NOISE] WE HAVE THAT CONTRACT WITH THE CAVALLA FOUNDATION OVER THERE.
>> THE PARK BOARD HAS A CONTRACT WITH [INAUDIBLE].
>> THOSE SHIPS, I THINK THE STEWART IS OWNED BY THE NAVY STILL OVER THERE.
>> BUT HOW DOES THAT INTERPLAY WITH THE CITY IF WE TOOK OVER?
>> I THINK THOSE WOULD BE THE DISCUSSIONS WE'D HAVE TO HAVE WITH CAVALLA FOUNDATION.
I THINK THE PARK BOARD HAS INSERTED ITSELF INTO THAT OWNERSHIP RELATIONSHIP SOMEHOW.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D HAVE TO ADDRESS, MAYOR.
>> I THINK THERE'S A SHARING OF [OVERLAPPING].
>> THERE IS A REVENUE SHARE ON PARKING.
WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE THINGS, BUT THOSE ARE IN THESE NUMBERS.
>> YOU MEAN THOSE ARE IN THESE NUMBERS?
>> WELL, THE PARK BOARD SHOWS A REVENUE SHARE THAT'S ALREADY IN THEIR BUDGET ESTIMATES.
>> AGAIN, THIS COULD BE EXCEEDINGLY EASY.
I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT, BUT IT COULD BE.
AS LONG AS THERE'S A GOOD, SOLID WORK RELATIONSHIP AND THE PARK BOARD WORKS WITH US, THE TRANSITION COULD BE RELATIVELY EASY AND SMOOTH.
WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TALKING.
BEVERLY IS GOING TO WORK, IF COUNCIL MOVES FORWARD ON THIS PROJECT, TO GO AHEAD AND GET APPLICATIONS FOR THE EMPLOYEES.
BECAUSE THESE ARE PARK'S EMPLOYEES.
THEY DO HAVE CERTAIN STANDARDS THAT THEY HAVE TO PASS.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN BE AROUND CHILDREN.
BUT THOSE ARE THE REALLY THINGS.
OUR EXPECTATION WILL BE THAT WE RETAIN THE EMPLOYEES, JUST MOVE, AND BECOME CITY EMPLOYEES.
>> THAT WOULD BE AN EXPECTATION THAT I WOULD APPRECIATE AS WELL.
>> ABSOLUTELY. WE DON'T WANT THOSE PEOPLE THINKING THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN AND LOSE THEIR JOBS AND BE DISPLACED BY CITY EMPLOYEES.
OUR CITY EMPLOYEES ARE BUSY NOW.
THEY KNOW WHAT THEIR JOBS ARE.
THEY WOULD JUST COME UNDER A DIFFERENT SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY.
>> I'M GUESSING THE PERSONNEL 6 AND 7 WOULD BE FULL-TIME AND PART-TIME?
>> WELL, I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR FOR THE PUBLIC THAT THESE ARE ALL ASSETS THAT THE CITY ALREADY OWNS.
>> THESE ARE CALLED BOARD ASSETS. THESE ARE CITY ASSETS.
THE SEAWALL PROPERTY AND THE MONEY THAT'S COLLECTED UP THERE IS A BEACH USER FEE IMPOSED BY THIS COUNCIL AFTER A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE.
>> THAT WAS WHEN I WAS ON COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY.
>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION RELATED TO OUR CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES.
PARKS UNDER SECTION 26, FOR PARKS UNDER CONTROL OF PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES.
IT'S CALLED PELICAN ISLAND PARK IS THE WAY THAT IT'S REFERENCED.
>> AS A RESULT, IF WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS, I'M ASSUMING THAT THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A CODE OF ORDINANCE CHANGE THAT REMOVES THAT.
[02:35:04]
NOW, THERE IS NOT AN LANGUAGE THAT I FOUND THAT STATES ABOUT DELERA.>> IT'S CALLED WEST ISLAND PARK.
>> THERE'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE CLEANUP THAT WOULD NEED TO HAPPEN ON THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. THAT'S ALL I HAD, MAYOR.
>> DAN, WE HAD, I THINK, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE PARK BOARD, GILBERT.
MR. WILSON BROUGHT FORWARD TO US AT HER JOINT MEETING. DID YOU SEE THAT?
I APPRECIATE THE NUMBERS, AND THEY REFERENCE THOSE NUMBERS, SAYING THAT THEY'RE THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
I KNOW MEASURES THAT THE WAY YOU CALCULATE A RETURN ON INVESTMENT OR RETURN ON INVESTMENT REQUIRES AN INVESTMENT, AND THEY'VE MADE NO INVESTMENT.
THESE ARE CITY ASSETS GIVEN TO THEM AT NO COST.
IT'S PRETTY EASY TO MAKE A RETURN WHEN YOU HAVE NO COSTS.
THERE REALLY ISN'T A RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
THE CALCULATION FOR RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS NOT PROFIT OVER THE COST OF THE INVESTMENT.
IF THERE'S ZERO COST OF THE INVESTMENT, I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU CALCULATE THAT.
BUT IT'S CERTAINLY NOT EQUATED TO REVENUES AND SALARIES.
THAT'S A VERY UNUSUAL METHODOLOGY TO CALCULATE IT.
I THINK THAT THERE'S A GOOD MEASURES TO LOOK AT PERFORMANCE, BUT REMEMBER, WHAT WE DO IN PARKS ISN'T ABOUT MAKING A PROFIT.
IT'S ABOUT PROVIDING THINGS FOR OUR PUBLIC, AND IN THESE PARKS, IT'S PUBLIC AND IT'S A TOURIST.
>> IT'S NOT ABOUT NECESSARILY MAKING A PROFIT, BUT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THESE PARKS TO USE THAT REVENUE TO OFFSET OTHER CITY COSTS.
I HEARD YOU ALL TALK ABOUT SHIELD PARK, I HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT JONES PARK.
THE PARK DEPARTMENT ALSO TAKES CARE OF THE CEMETERY.
IT'S BEEN ONE OF MY PET PEEVES SINCE I GOT HERE, AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE A FUNDING SOURCE FOR THE CEMETERY.
>> BECAUSE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT [OVERLAPPING].
>> PARKS DEPARTMENT STRUGGLED, AND IT'S ALWAYS THE LAST FROM A GENERAL FUND PURPOSE. THEY GET CUT SHORT.
IT'S VERY OPPORTUNISTIC OF US TO PROVIDE SOME PERMANENT FUNDING FOR PARKS THAT HELPS ALLEVIATE THE BURDEN ON THE GENERAL FUND.
NOT TO NECESSARILY THINK YOU'RE GOING TO REPLACE A GENERAL FUND.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO REPLACE A GENERAL FUNDING COST BECAUSE THAT IS A PART AND PARCEL OF WHAT WE DO IS WE PROVIDE THESE PARTS FOR THE PUBLIC.
IT IS 11:49 A.M. COUNCILMEMBER FINKLEA HAS LEFT THE COUNCIL-WORK.
>> I HOPE IT'S NOTHING I SAID.
>> NO. ANOTHER THOUGHT, DAN, I WANT TO GET THIS OUT FOR EVERYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING.
CURRENTLY, WE GET 300,000 FROM THE SEAWOLF PARK FROM THE PARK BOARD; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT IS UNRESTRICTED FUNDS.
THAT APPARENTLY IS NOT HOT MONEY.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PARK BOARD FUNDS THAT, QUITE HONESTLY.
THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT YEARS AGO THAT BRIAN WORKED OUT WITH THEN CEO KELLY DE [INAUDIBLE] THAT THEY WOULD KICK MONEY BACK FROM THE PARKS TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
THE PARK BOARD UNILATERALLY ASSIGNED THAT ALLOCATION TO SEAWOLF PARK.
BUT IF IT'S REVENUE OUT OF SEAWOLF PARK, THAT'S OUR PARK.
IT COMES BACK TO THE CITY AS UNRESTRICTED DOLLARS.
>> MY CONCERN IS WHO KNOWS HOW THIS IS GOING TO WORK OUT, BUT THE BILL BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE FROM SENATOR MIDDLETON, THAT UNRESTRICTED MONEY, IF WE RECEIVE THAT OR EVEN IF THAT GOES UP, OF COURSE, THAT GOES AGAINST OUR TAX CAP; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN, YES, SIR.
>> THAT'S BOTH HOT AND NOT HOT.
THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN IS ANY TRANSFER TO THE CITY.
>> I DON'T THINK THEY UNDERSTOOD THE RELATIONSHIP ON HOW DIFFERENT WITH THE PARK BOARD IN DRAFTING THE LANGUAGE; THEY MAY, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE PARK BOARD WORK WITH THEM TO DRAFT THIS LANGUAGE.
THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, SECTION A DEALS WITH HOT FOR MISSPENT.
THEN IT SAYS, OTHER REVENUE PAID BY THE PARK BOARD TO THE CITY WOULD BE MISSPENT FUNDS WHEN IT HAD TO COME OFF THE TAX GAP. THAT'S EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> CORRECT. BUT IT STATED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS IT SAYS THAT IS NOT COVERED IN A OR [INAUDIBLE].
>> WELL, IT SAYS THAT IT'S MISSPENT IF IT'S NOT SPENT ACCORDING TO THE HOT LOSS.
>> ANYTHING THAT'S HOT WOULD BE DESCRIBED UNDER A, AND THEN B IS ANYTHING ELSE.
>> MISUSE OF HOT UNDER 351, AND THEN B WAS ANYTHING ELSE.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT WILL BE HOT AND NOT HOT.
LET'S SAY WE HAVE A STORM, AND WE OVERFUND, AND THERE'S A TRANSFER TO COME BACK.
[02:40:03]
THAT TRANSFER AND THIS 300,000.THEN THE WAY I READ IT, IF I'M INTERPRETING IT BASED ON WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS.
READING IT BASED ON THE LANGUAGE ITSELF.
NOT INTERPRETING IT BEYOND THE LANGUAGE.
WE HAVE THE KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS OF THE SHEET OF ALL THE MONEY THAT IS CONSIDERED A REVENUE SHARE, THAT MONEY WOULD COUNT TOWARDS OUR OVERALL GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO OUR TAX CAP.
>> IT TAKES THAT OUT. THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT.
>> WE TRANSFER THE PARKS NOW, IT'S A MOVE POINT.
>> BUT I GUESS I INTERPRET IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS, THE 300,000, IF THAT'S UNRESTRICTED FUNDS, SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE THAT WOULD GO AGAINST THE TAX CAP?
>> IN THE STRICTEST LANGUAGE, AS ALEX SAID HE DID, JUST THE LANGUAGE OF THE RULE AS PROPOSED.
ACCEPT THIS, TOO, AS WE DIDN'T GET THAT UNTIL AFTER 5:00 [OVERLAPPING] ON WEDNESDAY.
WE, AS IN THREE OF THE COUNCILMEMBERS, TESTIFIED ON IT AT 9:00 THE NEXT MORNING.
I THINK WE WERE 10 O'CLOCK-ISH BEFORE THEY GOT TO IT.
>> JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S SAKE, WHO DIDN'T SEE THE MEETING, I'M NOT GOING TO READ MY TESTIMONY AGAIN BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE RECORD, BUT ONE OF THE POINTS WAS, WHEN THE ORIGINATION OF THE PARK BOARD WAS CREATED TO PROMOTE TOURISM TO ALLEVIATE TAX BURDENS AGAINST THE CITIZENS.
THAT, TO ME, WELL, IT WAS STEWART BEACH PARK ORIGINALLY.
WE'VE GROWN AND GROWN, AND I THINK THERE'S BEEN A BIT OF MISSION CREEP.
THAT TO ME DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF, EVEN, LIKE, A REVENUE SHARE IF WE GET REVENUE, AND IT COUNTS TOWARDS OUR TAX CAP BECAUSE THEY MANAGE IT FOR US.
THAT TO ME DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF WHY WE WOULD TO TAKE THE BURDEN OFF OF US.
ANOTHER ENTITY CAN MANAGE IT, SO WE COULD RECEIVE SOMETHING BACK FOR IT.
IF WE RECEIVE SOMETHING BACK FOR IT, AND IT BURDENS AND HURTS THE TAXPAYER, [OVERLAPPING] THE NUMBERS ARE GOOD TO SEE, AND $1,000,000 OF EFFICIENCIES IS REALLY GOOD, AND THAT'S THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF ALL OF THIS IS HOW DO WE BE MORE EFFICIENT? I THINK WE NEED TO, UNFORTUNATELY, STOP LOOKING AT WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET AND LOOK AT WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR TAXPAYERS WRIT LARGE.
IF THERE'S STATE LAW THAT HURTS OUR TAXPAYERS, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE AND MY FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY, I COULDN'T SLEEP AT NIGHT KNOWING THAT OFF OF OUR OWN ASSETS, WE'RE NOT MAXIMIZING THE RETURN TO OUR TAXPAYERS FOR SERVICES, OUR TAXPAYERS FOR PARKS, OUR TAXPAYERS FOR GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN GO, NO NEW REVENUE.
THAT'S A STICKING POINT THAT SOME OF US AT THE TABLE HAVE, AND I THINK THIS IS A REALLY GOOD STEP IN THAT DIRECTION.
>> WELL, THIS COUNCIL HAS SELECTED ALTERNATIVE REVENUES, AND BEFORE THIS COUNCIL, WE PUT A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THAT.
IF THIS BILL PASSES IN THE FORM THAT IT WAS PRESENTED YESTERDAY, THEN THAT WOULD GO AGAINST AND PUT MORE BURDEN ON THESE TAXPAYERS HERE IN THE CITY.
>> THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY CONCERN WITH THAT BILL BECAUSE WE NEED TO SPEAK UP, AS ALEX SAID, AND I THINK ALL THE COUNCIL FEELS THIS WAY.
WE NEED TO SPEAK UP FOR WHAT IS FIDUCIARY THE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS CITY.
>> AT THE COUNCIL, WE HAD FOUR PEOPLE THAT SPOKE OF OPPOSITION, ALL FROM THE CITY, AND TWO PEOPLE SPOKE IN FAVOR OF THE BILL.
ONE WAS A PAID LOBBYIST, AND THE OTHER WAS A FORMER PARK BOARD TRUSTEE WHO ASSERTED THAT HE HAD LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM NUMEROUS LOCAL PEOPLE.
IT HAS COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT, POTENTIALLY, AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE DIDN'T SIGN A LETTER OF SUPPORT, BUT IT WAS TOLD TO THE SENATE THAT THEY DID.
IT WAS CLEAR THAT, FOR WHATEVER REASON, OUR COMPONENT UNIT, AN ENTITY THAT THIS CITY CREATED, IS WORKING AGAINST THE BENEFIT OF THE TAXPAYERS.
>> LET'S MOVE BACK INTO THE DETAILS OF THE THING.
WE'RE SHOWING CLOSE TO $1,000,000.
[02:45:01]
IF THIS IS APPROVED, THAT YOU'RE PROJECTING, WE STILL WON'T KNOW FOR SURE TIL WE LOOK INTO THIS FURTHER.>> USE THE COUNTY PARKS AS AN EXAMPLE, MAYOR.
THEY LOST MONEY EVERY YEAR, AND THAT'S WHY THE COUNTY WANTED TO DIVEST THEMSELVES OF THEM.
SINCE WE TOOK OVER THE PARKS, WE BUILT A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE, AND WE'RE IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW TO TRANSFER SOME OF THAT FUND BALANCE BACK TO THEM SO THEY CAN USE IT IN THEIR PARK SYSTEM.
THOSE PARKS WERE A CONSTANT DRAIN ON THEM, AND THROUGH EFFICIENCY, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO CREATE A FUND BALANCE ON THOSE AND PAY FOR THE OPERATIONS OF THE PARKS, PAY FOR HURRICANE REPAIRS.
WE HAVE A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE IN THOSE PARKS AND SOME IMPROVEMENTS.
>> I WOULD USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE, WHAT WE KNOW WE CAN DO.
BUT YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW TO GET IN THERE.
WE HAD TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY UP FRONT ON THOSE PARKS BECAUSE OF DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, AND WE DID THAT, AND WE RECOUPED THAT OVER TIME.
WE KNOW IT'S POSSIBLE. BUT, MAYOR, REMEMBER THAT $361,000 OUT OF SEAWOLF PARK.
THAT'S THEN WE TOOK THE 300 OUT.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AS A ROUGH ESTIMATE, THERE'S A $61,000 GAIN, AND BUT YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE IS TO BE IN CHARGE OF THAT PARK.
YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU GET IN AND SEE IT.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, SHARON?
>> I WASN'T HERE AT THE LAST JOINT MEETING.
ONE THAT GERALD WILSON TURNED IN, CAN I GET A COPY? DID IT LOOK LIKE [OVERLAPPING]?
>> IT'S INTERESTING. THEY JUST SENT OVER A REVISED VERSION OF THAT.
>> I THINK JANELLE SENT ALL THE COUNCILMEMBERS.
>> THE NUMBERS AGAIN ARE DIFFERENT.
>> DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE GOT TUESDAY?
>> LET'S BE CLEAR. WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO YOU?
>> [INAUDIBLE] JUST REFERRED TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS JUST MENTIONED.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE KPIS?
>> THE DELERA, RV, THE ACTUALS, THE REVENUE SALARIES, AND OVERTIME?
>> IT'S NOT A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT THEY ACTUALLY.
>> BUT THEY DISCUSSED THAT AND CALL IT A RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
THEY HAD SUCH A HIGH RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
BUT THE CALCULATION OF RETURN ON INVESTMENT ISN'T CALCULATED THAT WAY, SO I DON'T KNOW.
>> BESIDES, LOOKING AT THIS WAS A QUESTION I HAD SENT TO JANELLE THE PREVIOUS WEEK, AND PART OF THE REVENUE SHARE FROM SEAWOLF COMES OUT OF A FUND.
IT COMES OUT OF A FUND THAT IS LARGELY A HOT ADMIN FUND.
THAT ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WAS TO CLARIFY THAT PARTICULAR FUND TO SEE IF HOW THAT'S CALCULATED AND WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT HOT IN THE FUND AND HOW THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED.
THE OTHER TWO QUESTIONS WERE SALARIES, NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, BREAKING DAN'S BIGGER ARCING DISCUSSION OF HOW WE IDENTIFY WHAT IS A REVENUE PARK, FAMILY PARK, RECREATION PARK, THE FOUR SPORTS PARKS.
THAT GUIDED MY QUESTIONS, AND I NEVER REALLY GOT A RESPONSE.
I DON'T THINK I STILL HAVE A RESPONSE FOR IT, BUT THIS IS TO ME, JUST IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR CITIZENS AND THE TAXPAYERS.
>> LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE FROM COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN OPEN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PARK BOARD AT THE STAFF LEVEL.
FIRST, INTO 3J, IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS?
>> ARE WE STILL TALKING ABOUT 3H OR IS OF MELD TOGETHER?
>> IT'S STILL OPEN TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> WE HAVE THE CITY PARKS TALKING ABOUT THE TIPSY TURTLE.
I DROVE BY YESTERDAY, AND WHERE ARE WE CLOSE TO THAT?
WE ARE HOPING TO HAVE THAT ON THE NEXT AGENDA, THE CONTRACT.
WE'RE WAITING ON THE SAND TO BE DELIVERED.
WE'RE HAVING TO SEEK ANOTHER COUPLE OF COSTS FROM VENDORS PURCHASING IS REQUIRING, AND WE'RE FINISHING UP ON THE INSIDE.
WE'RE GOING TO DO A WALK-THROUGH.
>> IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THE BIDDER, WHO'S GOING TO BE OPERATING IT FOR THE TIME LOST, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, ARE THEY GOING TO BE READY TO GO BY MEMORIAL DAY? THAT'S A BIG WEEKEND. IF THEY'RE NOT READY TO GO BY THEN, THEN I HATE TO HURT.
>> IF YOU'RE THERE NEGOTIATION, BUT WE CAN MOVE AS FAST AS WE CAN, AND WE'RE WAITING FOR A SAND MIX TO PUT UNDERNEATH THE STRUCTURE.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE'VE REPAIRED ALL THE BARREL DAMAGE.
>> IF THERE IS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN, IF [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE CAN HE COULD EXTEND HIS LEASE LONGER.
>> OH, YEAH. PLUS, HE WOULDN'T PAY FOR WHEN HE WASN'T IN THERE. IT WOULD START.
[02:50:01]
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE.
>> THEY'RE AS ANXIOUS AS WE ARE TOGETHER.
>> A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE ANXIOUS FOR THAT.
>> THERE'S A VERY A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE THAT.
>> IF WE COULD GET A TARGET GOAL BEFORE MEMORIAL DAY WEEKENDS, BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE BEAUTY OF IT IS FREE. NOT HIS PRODUCTS.
YOU GO OUT THERE AND YOU PARK FOR FREE, [INAUDIBLE] ON THE BEACH.
THAT'S THE IDEA. YOU MAKE THESE THINGS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR FREE.
>> I SEE NICE, LARGE PARKING AREAS.
>> THEY DO HAVE A GOOD RUB PUNCH, THAT [LAUGHTER].
>> ENTERTAINMENT, WHICH IS A BIG DRAW.
>> GOOD. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON 3H AND 3I, COUNCIL? THIS IS ON OUR AGENDA FOR 12A, 3I IS THIS AFTERNOON AT OUR MEETING.
LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3J, PLEASE.
[3.J. Update and Discussion of the City/Park Board Inter Local Agreement and Moving the Management of HOT Collections to the City of Galveston ( D Buckley/C Brown- 40 min )]
>> ITEM 3J. UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF THE CITY PARK BOARD INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT, AND MOVING THE MANAGEMENT OF HOT COLLECTIONS TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
>> I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY ON THE INTER-LOCAL, NOW THAT YOU'RE GETTING GUIDANCE AND SEE WHERE WE STAND TONIGHT ON MOVING FORWARD TO INTER-LOCAL.
DEPENDING ON THE MOVEMENT OF COUNCIL TONIGHT, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT TIMELINE ON THIS INTER-LOCAL, DON?
>> AS SOON AS WE GET DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL, WE'LL OPEN NEGOTIATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PARK BOARD ABOUT HOW QUICKLY WE CAN ADVANCE AND MODIFY THE CURRENT INTER-LOCAL.
WE SHOULD HAVE IT DONE FOR THE BEGINNING OF THE FISCAL YEAR WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
>> MAYOR, HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SECOND PART OF 3J OF TAKING THAT ITEM AND MOVING IT TO THE NEXT?
>> THAT'S WHY IT'S ON THE AGENDA NOW.
COUNCIL ASKED FOR IT TO BE MOVED TO THIS AGENDA TO SEE WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO AS FAR AS THE COUNCIL TO MOVE FORWARD.
IF IT IS A CONSENSUS THAT WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, THEN DON WILL BRING BACK THE ACTION ITEM FOR US.
>> BASICALLY, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE INTER-LOCAL DISCUSSION, BUT THE MANAGEMENT OF THE HOT COLLECTIONS IS TODAY.
>> IT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO.
>> THAT IS NOT ON THE AFTERNOON AGENDA.
>> IT'S NOT ON THE AFTERNOON, BUT IF COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW.
LET'S OPEN IT UP FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF HOT COLLECTIONS.
ANY DISCUSSION? LET'S START THAT OFF.
>> I'D LIKE TO GET THIS DISCUSSION OF THE INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT.
BUT AS FAR AS MOVING MANAGEMENT OF THE HOT COLLECTIONS, I'D LIKE TO DEFER.
>> THE DISTRICT WANTS THIS ITEM DEFERRED, AND I WOULD, TOO, BUT I THINK THE NEXT ITEM TALKS ABOUT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE, BUT IT HAS THE SAME DISCUSSION.
LOOKING AT AGAIN, THE BILL IT SAYS RECEIVED.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE USE IT AS A SERVICE AND WE'RE THE ONES THAT SET TAX AND COLLECT IT.
[OVERLAPPING] IT SAYS RECEIVED.
>> NO, UNDERSTAND THAT'S ONLY REFERRING TO THE 2 CENTS.
>> NO, THIS IS THE ONE FROM YESTERDAY.
IT SAYS RECEIVED, AND I'M BEING A PURIST BUT WE RECEIVE IT, AND I THINK IT'S WORTH THE DISCUSSION LATER, BUT WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND, TOO.
>> PERSONALLY, IT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA FOR ACTION TODAY.
YOU'RE REQUESTING BOB THAT WE-.
>> THERE'S NO DEFERRAL BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN ACTION ITEM.
YOU HAD MENTIONED YOU TALK TOO MUCH.
WHEN YOU SAY DEFER, PERSONALLY, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME OF THIS OTHER BEHIND US BEFORE WE GET INTO THOSE TYPES OF DECISIONS.
>> I'M TALKING ABOUT A DEFERRED DISCUSSION.
>> PUT IT ON OUR NEXT MEETING.
>> PUT IT ON OUR NEXT MEETING. SURE.
>> IF NEED BE, WE CAN PUT IT ON FOR DISCUSSION AND BOTH.
>> WELL, I'LL GET IT ON THE AGENDA.
>> BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT IF TWO COUNCIL PEOPLE DECIDE TO PUT IT ON FOR DISCUSSION AND VOTE, WE CAN.
>> IF IT'LL BE ON THE WORKSHOP. I'VE MADE A NOTE.
I'LL PUT IT DOWN WITH OUR OTHER 50 ITEMS, BUT IT'LL BE ON OUR WORKSHOP FOR NEXT MEETING THEN.
[3.K. Discussion of Alternate Revenue Sources ( C Brown/ B Maxwell - 20 min ) 1. Port of Galveston/Park Board 2. Legislative Implications 3. Other Sources]
>> THREE K, DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATE REVENUE SOURCES.
ONE, PORT OF GALVESTON PARK BOARD, TWO, LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS, AND THREE OTHER SOURCES.
>> COUNCIL, AS YOU MAY REMEMBER AT ONE OF OUR MEETINGS,
[02:55:01]
BEEN A LITTLE WHILE BACK WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT ALTERNATIVE REVENUE SOURCES, WE GAVE DIRECTION TO THE CITY MANAGER TO GET WITH THE PORT AND LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY OF ENTERTAINING CHANGING THE AMOUNT THAT WE GET PER CHARTER FOR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES.BRIAN HAD THAT DISCUSSION, SO BRIAN GO AHEAD.
>> DON AND I HAVE GONE DOWN TO THE PORT NOW A COUPLE OF TIMES TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT THIS.
MY TAKE ON IT WAS IS THAT TWO THINGS.
ONE, TO HAVE A STEADY REVENUE SHARE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU PROBABLY ALL HAVE QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD.
>> HAVE A STEADY REVENUE SHARE FROM THE PORT THAT'S CONSISTENT AND TO CLEAN UP WHAT WE'RE DOING.
WE'RE THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT PLACES.
WE TALKED ABOUT DOING A CHARTER AMENDMENT OR A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT WITH THE MOU WHERE WE WOULD GET A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS REVENUE.
FIRST MEETING, I COULD TELL AND ROGERS TOLD US THAT HE WASN'T SURE ABOUT IT, HE WAS GOING TO THINK ABOUT IT THAT WE GET BACK TOGETHER AND HE WAS GOING TO BRING US AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL FOR MORE OF A DIVIDEND-TYPE SHARE THING IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE'RE DOING.
JUST IN MY HEART, I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW THE PORT HAS GOT THEIR PLATE PRETTY FULL.
I THINK THEIR CASH IS FAIRLY COMMITTED, SO I DON'T THINK THEY WERE NECESSARILY THINKING ALONG THE LINES OF SENDING US ADDITIONAL MONEY OR HOW THEY WANTED TO CHANGE OR RESTRUCTURE.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT BACK TO OUR SUGGESTION AND OUR RECOMMENDATION IS STILL DO A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS REVENUE.
>> I THINK GROSS IS WRONG COUNCIL BRIAN.
>> THIS WAS TALKED ABOUT AT THE WHARVES BOARD, AND IT WAS THE SAME SENTIMENT.
>> IT HAS. IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT QUITE A BIT AT THE WHARVES BOARD.
THE WHARVES BOARD AND STAFF AT THE PORT FEELS THAT RIGHT NOW IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TIMING TO CONSIDER INCREASED FUNDING FROM THE PORT, OTHER THAN THE TARIFF AND THE $1 PER VEHICLES PER DAY.
THAT IS GOING TO BE INCREASING.
I THINK WE SAW SOME PROJECTIONS, IT'S GOING TO MOVE INTO THE 4.5 MILLION HERE SHORTLY COMING FROM THE PORT.
THE PORT FEELS AND THEY HAVE EXTENDED THEMSELVES LOOKING AT THE CASH RESERVES THAT THEY NEED TO SUPPORT ALL THAT'S GOING ON OVER AT THE PORT.
AS BRIAN MENTIONED, THEY FEEL THAT THE TIMING IS JUST NOT AS SUPPORTIVE.
NEIGHBORS CAME OVER AND WAS LOOKING FOR A SIMILAR TYPE OF AMENDMENT TO BENEFIT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FROM THE PORT.
IT GOT MET WITH THE SAME RESPONSE THAT WE RECEIVED.
I'M NOT HERE TO SAY THE PORT HAS PLENTY OF MONEY AND THEY'RE NOT SHARING IT. THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING.
>> I HAVE SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN PUTTING A LOT OF THOUGHT AND RESOURCES INTO ABOUT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COULD DO IF WE HAVE BUYING AND PARTICIPATION FROM THE PORT AND SOME OF THE CORPORATE PARTNERS THAT WE HAVE ON THE WATERFRONT, WHERE IT WOULD BENEFIT BOTH THE CITY AND THE PORT AS WELL FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS.
BEFORE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE, I'D LIKE TO GET SOME MORE INFORMATION, AND I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING SOMETHING LIKE THIS AT THE CITY AND PORT WHARVES BOARD JOINT MEETING, AND I'D LIKE TO HAVE A PLAN AND SOMETHING IN PLACE TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE BUYING FROM YOU.
>> ALEX HAS BRIEFLY TALKED TO ME ABOUT IT AND LET US KNOW IF WE CAN HELP YOU GENERATE DATA OR ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT.
IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR BOTH ENTITIES.
>> OUR JOINT MEETING WILL BE MAY 21ST AT 9:00 AM.
JANELLE WILL BE SENDING OUT INFORMATION ON THAT FOR YOU.
ALEX, BE SURE TO GET WITH JANELLE OR ME BUT SEND OVER YOUR WORDING FOR YOUR [OVERLAPPING]
>> I THINK YOU POSTED THE END TIME OF THAT MEETING IS THE BEGINNING OF OUR NEXT MEETING.
THE PORT RIGHT NOW ONLY HAS TWO ITEMS THEY WANT ON THE AGENDA.
THEY'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THEIR 200TH ANNIVERSARY ACTIVITIES, WHICH IS FANTASTIC AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO ALSO TALK ABOUT UPDATING THEIR MASTER PLAN.
>> ROGER IS RUNNING AND GUNNING RIGHT NOW, AND I THINK THEIR MAIN OBJECTIVE RIGHT NOW IS THAT NOT TO OUTRUN THEIR MONEY.
THAT'S WHY I THINK SOME OF THESE DISCUSSIONS ARE BEST AND THAT'S WHY I THINK WHAT ALEX HAS TALKED TO ME, AT LEAST GAVE ME A FRAMEWORK THAT SOUNDS REALLY GOOD.
>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY I WOULD NEVER SUPPORT GOING FOR GROSS REVENUES.
I JUST THINK THAT'S AN APPALLING APPROACH.
>> THE AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW, I THINK THAT I WOULD DEFINITELY AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT ONE.
[03:00:01]
>> PLUS, THEY STILL HAVE A LOT OF COMMITMENTS OVER THERE.
THEY'RE PUTTING A LOT OF ATTENTION NOW TO THE CARGO AREA OF THE PORT.
THAT IS WE GOT OUR CASH, WHEN I WENT ON THE WHARVES BOARD, WE GOT A QUOTE OF AT LEAST A HALF BILLION DOLLARS TO GET THAT CARGO AREA BACK UP WHERE IT SHOULD BE.
>> WE BOTH HAVE HEAVY INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS.
>> WE BOTH HAVE OLD CITY PROBLEMS.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING I BRING UP OFTEN.
TPC THAT WE WERE THE SECOND CITY IN TEXAS AND YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT US DIFFERENTLY.
>> SOME FIRE INFRASTRUCTURE PREDATES IT.
>> BRIAN, I PUT DOWN LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS.
YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS.
>> WE WERE MARCHING DOWN SOME OTHER PATHS, OBVIOUSLY.
THERE'S MORE THAN JUST GENERATING ADDITIONAL REVENUE SOURCES.
THERE'S THE FACT THAT THE CITY GETS BURDENED WITH A LOT OF EXPENSE AS A RESULT OF TOURISM.
IT'S NOT JUST THE EXPENSE THE RESIDENTS GET.
BURDEN IS NOT MAYBE THE BEST WORD, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO ENDURE.
IT'S LIKE I LOVE TO HAVE HOUSE GUESTS, BUT AFTER A WHILE, THEY'RE ROUGH ON THE HOUSE.
[LAUGHTER] IT'S ALONG THOSE LINES THAT WE WERE TALKING.
OF COURSE, NOW, I THINK ALL THOSE DISCUSSIONS ARE PREMATURE UNTIL THINGS SHAKE OUT IN AUSTIN AND OF COURSE, ONCE COUNCIL VOTES THIS EVENING ON SOME THINGS, THAT WILL ALSO SHAPE THAT FUTURE AS WELL.
>> ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS SUBJECT?
>> THE OTHER SOURCES, I THINK WHEN WE PUT THE ITEM ON ABOUT THE PARKING, I THINK MARIE POINTED OUT A GREAT IDEA THAT SPARKED SOMETHING THAT I THOUGHT ABOUT WHY HAVE PARKING ENFORCEMENT IF WE'RE NOT BEGINNING TO GO AFTER THE CONTINUOUS BAD ACTORS? I DON'T MEAN PREEMPTIVELY GO BACK, I THINK IF WE HAVE RULES, WE SHOULD ENFORCE THEM PRETTY STRICTLY.
THE PARKING, I GET PEOPLE HAVE STACKS OF PARKING TICKETS THAT BIG AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE GO BACK BUT MOVING FORWARD WITH A NICE PR CAMPAIGN REACHING OUT TO THE PAPER, SO TO SPEAK.
MAYBE STARTING IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE'LL COME UP WITH A FRAMEWORK WITH THE MARSHALS DEPARTMENT ON WHEN WE HAVE REPEAT OFFENDERS FOR PARKING BECAUSE IT'S A SERIOUS PROBLEM.
>> BUT IT'S NOT JUST PARKING, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER ORDINANCES AND FINES THAT WE ARE NOT FOLLOWING UP ON.
>> IF WE HAVE AN ESCALATING PENALTY WHERE AFTER THE THIRD OR FOURTH TIME, THEN IT ESCALATES AND THEN WOULD ESCALATE.
>> I'VE BEEN PROPOSING THAT SINCE I'VE BEEN CITY MANAGER THAT WE KEEP MOWING YARDS AND ASSESSING FINES, AND IT'S THE SAME FINE WE'VE BECOME THE DEFACTO MOWING COMPANY FOR ALL THESE PROPERTIES IN GALVESTON AND IT OUGHT TO BE AN ESCALATED FINE.
>> THERE'S BIGGER ISSUES THAN THAT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE THE SAME NUMBER OF CODE ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE WE HAD WHEN IT WAS IN CODE ENFORCEMENT.
THEN WE JUST SHIFTED IT OVER TO THE MARSHALL'S OFFICE AND [OVERLAPPING] IT'S A LOT MORE THAN THEY USED TO HAVE WITH PARKING AND WITH GOLF CARTS AND WITH EVERYTHING ELSE.
DON AND I ARE WORKING ON A PLAN RIGHT NOW TO RESHAPE THE MARSHAL'S OFFICE A LITTLE BIT.
WE'VE VISITED WITH COUNCILMEMBER PORRETTO AND SOME OTHER THINGS, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, GUYS, WE'RE COLLECTING THESE FEES FOR SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND THINGS AND WE'RE DESIRING THAT ENFORCEMENT.
>> YOU'RE NOT LETTING US TAP THE FEET.
>> WE NEED TO GET THAT BACK ON THE AGENDA AND WE DISCUSS IT. I'M TALKING ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTAL FEES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE BACK TO TAXING RESIDENTS' SHORT-TERM RENTALS WHO ARE OUT DOWN HERE JUST TO MAKE MONEY.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT THE FEE WAS FOR, CORRECT?
>> IN TERMS OF THE PARKING, I DON'T WANT THE GHOST OF FLETCHER HARRIS TO COME HUNT ME AT NIGHT.
>> THE ISSUE WITH THE PARKING, WE BROUGHT TO YOU GUYS THE BARNACLE DISCUSSIONS AND ALL THOSE THINGS AND THE PORT USES IT, BUT THERE HAS TO BE A WAY A CLEAR WAY TO ADJUDICATE.
>> I GET A CLUE THERE WAS SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> THAT WAS MET WITH MIXED REACTION, BUT IF COUNCIL'S BEHIND IT, WE'LL GET IT DONE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I KNOW WE ALREADY HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS BOOTING.
>> WELL, PERSONALLY, I THINK WE SHOULDN'T BE PREEMPTIVE.
NOT PREEMPTIVE. WE SHOULDN'T GO BACK.
>> I WOULD DISAGREE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IF THEY HAD PARKING TICKETS AND THEY GOT 10 PARKING TICKETS AND THEY'VE NOT PAID THESE, I THINK WE NEED TO SUE.
>> THAT'S FAIR, BUT I THINK MOVING FORWARD, BEING UPFRONT AND SAYING, HEY, ESSENTIALLY WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE.
WE UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE THESE PROBLEMS FROM THIS CASE.
>> GIVE THEM AN INDEMNITY DAY, LIKE THEY DO IN HOUSTON TWICE A YEAR THAT YOU COULD COME IN AND PAY YOUR FINE [OVERLAPPING] WITHOUT ANY FEE.
>> IF WE PURSUE THE PARKING FEES DOES LINEBARGER DO THAT FOR US?
>> WE HAVE A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
>> THEY PURSUE THOSE. YOU PROBABLY TALKED TO LINEBARGER REPRESENTATIVE, MARK CHEVALIER.
[03:05:04]
THEY PUSHED ON THOSE THINGS QUITE OFTEN.>> WE DO EVERYTHING BUT BOOT THE CAR RIGHT NOW. [OVERLAPPING]
>> COULD WE DO AN AMNESTY TO WHERE THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO COME IN?
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
>> YOU HAVE TWO WEEKS TO PAY THE ORIGINAL FINE AND DROP THE FEES.
>> THAT'D BE AN EASY ONE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE FINE DOESN'T INCREASE FOR X NUMBER OF DAYS, AND THEN IT GOES UP AFTER THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M JUST SAYING ONES THAT ARE LIKE YEAR, 2, 3 YEARS OLD.
>> IF WE DID THAT, AND I GUESS WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO WORK WITH LINEBARGER ON IT.
>> WE'VE GOT THAT VERY THING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> INDEMNITY OR PAYMENT PLAN IF LINEBARGER IS SENDING PACKETS.
BECAUSE I SOLD THE VEHICLE BECAUSE ONE GUY I GUESS JUST DECIDED TO PARK IT ON THE STRAND BUT I HAVE THE RECORDS OF SELLING THE VEHICLE.
THAT HAPPENS TOO. PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE PULLED MY PLATES OUT.
WELL, I THINK WE NEED TO ENFORCE IT, AND IF WE ESCALATE IT AND START PUTTING BARNACLES OR BOOTS ON VEHICLES, WHICH WE DO HAVE ORDINANCES, AGAIN, DON'S POINT.
WE NEED TO ENFORCE THAT, AND WE NEED TO BE CLEAR WITH EVERYBODY HOW WE'RE MOVING FORWARD BY ENFORCING.
>> THAT'S WHAT'S GREAT ABOUT AMNESTY, GIVE AN AMNESTY OF WHATEVER 30 OR 60 DAYS.
VERY PUBLIC. PEOPLE HAVE ABILITY TO MAKE IT RIGHT.
>> BUT I THINK IF YOU TIE THE EMBASSY TO STRICTER ENFORCEMENT I THINK YOU CAN GET THEM COMING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> HERE'S WHAT'S COMING. BARNACLE IS THE MODERN-DAY BOOT.
THAT'S A TRADE GAME OF A COMPANY.
BUT THERE'S NEW WAYS TO DO IT WITHOUT PUTTING A MECHANICAL DEVICE ON A WHEEL WHICH POTENTIALLY DAMAGES A WHEEL AND THINGS LIKE THAT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> IS THIS FOR PROCUREMENT ISSUES?
>> IS THIS FOR PROCUREMENT ISSUES?
>> [OVERLAPPING] BARNACLE-LIKE OR SOMETHING OF THE SORT.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. USING MODERN TECHNOLOGY, THERE'S WAYS TO DO IT.
>> WE HAD A PRESENTATION WITH COUNCIL IN THE PAST A COMPANY THAT THEY PUT SOMETHING OVER THE WINDSHIELD.
>> WELL, JUST READ GALVESTON'S TALK.
THEY BOOT AND THEY BARNACLE A LOT?
>> I GET EMAILS FROM PEOPLE AT THE PORT THEY GOT A BARNACLE.
>> AS MUCH AS IT HURTS ME TO IMPOSE A FEE ON RESIDENTS, TO MY CORE IT HURTS.
BUT WE HAVE ORDINANCES, AND IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO ENFORCE THEM, WE SHOULD EITHER GET RID OF THE ORDINANCE OR ENFORCE THEM.
>> BUT I'M GOING TO BRING UP ANOTHER SIDE TOO BECAUSE AFTER I DID A SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT LAST WEEK, ONE OF THE HOSPITALITY STAFF MEMBERS CAME UP TO ME AND HE'S LIKE, I'D LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT THIS, AND IT IS SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.
WHEN WE WANT OUR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK HERE.
HERE'S A YOUNG GUY WHO WORKS 10:00 - 10:00.
HE HAS TO SET HIS CLOCK, AND IT MAY BE HE WORKS 12:00 - 10:00.
BUT HE'S GOT TO SET HIS CLOCK, WAKE UP IN HIS SHORT-TERM SLEEPING TO PAY HIS PARKING IN THE MORNING BECAUSE HE CAN'T PAY IT ADVANCE UNTIL AFTER 7:00 PM.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DOWNTOWN OR SEAWALL?
>> DOWNTOWN. HE'S LIKE IF THERE WAS SOME WAY THAT WE COULD LOOK AT RESIDENTS.
>> I'VE BEEN DOWN THAT PATH. [OVERLAPPING]. AS SOMEBODY WHOSE FAMILY OWNS A BUSINESS DOWNTOWN, AND WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL THIS.
>> BUT THIS GENTLEMAN DOESN'T WORK DOWNTOWN.
SAME DIFFERENCE. TRUST ME, MY WIFE WILL TELL YOU SHE LIVES AT HER OFFICE.
THE THING IS THAT IF YOU DO THAT, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF DOWNTOWN PARKING IS NOT TO GENERATE MONEY.
THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF DOWNTOWN PARKING IS TO CREATE TURNOVER.
IF WE GAVE HIM THE ABILITY TO PAY UNTIL 10:00 IN THE MORNING AT 2:00 AM.
>> THAT'S A PROGRAMMING ISSUE, DAN.
THIS IS A PROGRAMMING ISSUE [OVERLAPPING] AND HE WOULD HAVE TO WAKE UP.
>> I'LL TELL YOU THE REASON IT CUTS OFF NOW IS BECAUSE PEOPLE PULL UP, SEE A METER, SEE THE SIGN AND WE DIDN'T WANT PEOPLE PAYING AFTER OUR EXPIRED HOURS. THAT WAS THE BIG THING.
>> DOES ANYONE REMEMBER THE CHAMBER BREAKFAST FOR THE 2022 ELECTION? REMEMBER THE ANNOUNCEMENT; IT'S 8:00, MAKE SURE YOU PULL YOUR PHONE OUT AND PAY YOUR PARKING.
>> I JUST GOT A TICKET YESTERDAY ON THIS.
I WOULD PAY MY PARKING AT 7:00 AM.
IT WOULDN'T START UNTIL 10:00 AM.
[03:10:01]
YOU'D GET BASICALLY TWO HOURS FREE.BUT I DO THINK ON BOTH SEAWALL AND DOWNTOWN, WE NEED TO LOOK AT, AND MAYBE IN THE PROGRAMMING CODE, THERE IS A WAY WE CAN DO THAT.
WHEN WE SAY WE WANT OUR WORKERS TO LIVE HERE, I'M NOT SAYING TO GIVE THEM ANY BREAK OR A PARKING PASS THAT WOULD TAKE SOMEONE ELSE'S, BUT A PROGRAMMING ABILITY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAKE UP IN THE SIX HOURS THAT YOU GET TO SLEEP, YOU HAVE TO WAKE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF IT TO PAY FOR YOUR PARKING TO I GET EVICTION.
>> JUST A THOUGHT FOR THAT GENTLEMAN, IF HE WOULD JUST GO AND GET IT CONTRACTED, ONE OF THE LOTS THERE IS GOING TO COST HIM A LOT LESS MONEY.
>> ONCE AGAIN, HE'S A [OVERLAPPING] CATERING HOSPITALITY WORKER.
>> HE'S PAYING A FORTUNE IF HE'S PARKING ON THE STREET FOR ALL THAT TIME.
>> WELL, IN ANY WHICH WAY, I JUST THINK WE WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK HERE, AND IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK AT.
>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS?
>> [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE THAT'S A PAY-BY-PHONE THING WE CAN CAN'T [INAUDIBLE]
>> I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS AND WE'RE CUTTING TO REVENUE.
BUT IN ANY OTHER CITY WHERE I PAY BY PHONE, YOU CAN PAY IN 30-MINUTE INTERVALS.
>> CORRECT. THAT DECISION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO READDRESS THAT.
>> REMEMBER THERE WAS A BIG COMMITTEE.
IT WAS CHAIRED BY EDDIE WALSH.
>> I DON'T CARE, I WOULD LIKE TO READDRESS THAT.
THAT IS A PERSONAL [INAUDIBLE]
>> THAT'S WHY WE GOT TO THE MINIMUM CHARGE TIME.
>> YOU MIGHT NOT WANT TO HEAR THIS, BUT I'M ALWAYS FOR THE RESIDENTS, SO I'M SAYING TWO-HOUR FREE PARKING FOR THE RESIDENTS ON THE STRAND. BUT THAT'S JUST ME.
>> NOBODY WOULD EVER GO DOWNTOWN TO SHOP BECAUSE THERE'D BE NO PARKING.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO, AND THIS AGAIN, IS DONE IN OTHER CITIES.
>> YOU TRIED ALL THESE THINGS BEFORE?
>> NO. BUT YOU HAVEN'T TRIED THIS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] HOW OTHER CITIES DO IT, THEY DO A LOCAL CREDIT OF THREE DOLLARS A MONTH, WHICH, IN ESSENCE, IS TWO HOURS FREE THAT YOU CAN CHOOSE TO USE ANY TIME YOU'D LIKE TO.
IT'S JUST THREE DOLLARS A MONTH.
IF YOU'RE PARKING, AND SOME CITIES HAVE MORE EXPENSIVE TIMES THAN OTHERS.
>> WHICH CITY? CAN YOU GIVE US THE CITY?
>> [INAUDIBLE] THEY USE THE SAME COMPANY.
>> IN THE LAST 11 YEARS ON COUNCIL, I'VE BEEN THROUGH EVERY PARKING PLAN KNOWN TO MAN.
PERSONALLY, I THINK WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD PARKING PLAN THAT WE'RE DOING.
>> I WOULD TELL YOU THAT WE NOW USE THAT TO PROVIDE ALL THE AMENITIES DOWNTOWN TOO.
>> THREE DOLLARS, A MONTH CREDIT FOR LOCALS.
>> [INAUDIBLE] WHETHER WE COLLECTED PARKING.
>> LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM 3L, PLEASE.
[3.L. Discussion of Golf Cart Inspections ( Robb/Rawlins - 15 min )]
>> ITEM 3L: DISCUSSION OF GOLF CART INSPECTIONS.
>> WE'VE HAD THAT FROM LAST MEETING. YOU WANTED THIS.
>> A NUMBER OF CITIZENS HAVE APPROACHED ME, AND THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO RESIDENTIAL GOLF CARTS THAT NOW THE STATE PROGRAM DOES NOT REQUIRE ANNUAL INSPECTIONS UNLESS YOU'RE IN CERTAIN COUNTIES AND THEN AT [INAUDIBLE] MISSIONS.
THEY WERE WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY WAY ON RESIDENTIAL AGAIN, THAT WE CAN GO TO INSPECTIONS EVERY 2-3 YEARS.
>> IT'S IN THE ORDINANCE. IT WILL BE UP TO Y'ALL.
BUT I DON'T THINK YOU'D WANT RED-TAG GOLF CARTS ON THE STREETS.
INSPECTIONS ARE REALLY JUST PRIMARILY SAFETY ISSUES, HEADLIGHTS, SEAT BELTS. IT'S ONE OF THE SAFETY NETS.
>> THAT'S A LOT EASIER IN TOWN BECAUSE YOU CAN JUST DRIVE TO A COMPANY.
LET'S SAY YOU'RE IN SEA ISLE OR YOU'RE IN BAY HARBOR, YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR A COMPANY TO COME OUT TO INSPECT YOUR VEHICLE WHEN YOU'RE ONLY DRIVING TO AND FROM THE BEACH BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DRIVE ON A CITY STREET.
>> ONLY IN THE SUBDIVISION, YOU DON'T NEED A CITY PERMIT.
ONCE YOU CROSS THAT CITY STREET, [OVERLAPPING] THEN YOU ARE.
>> MARSHAL OR TAKE IT IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
>> I THOUGHT THEY WERE [OVERLAPPING] A MASTER PLAN.
>> SOMEBODY NEEDS TO TELL THE MARSHALS BECAUSE THEY'RE TAKING IT.
[03:15:05]
>> BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF THE SUBDIVISIONS OUT WEST ACTUALLY APPLIED TO BE A DEFINED MASTER COMMUNITY FOR THAT EXACT REASON.
BUT ONCE THEY GO OUTSIDE OF THAT COMMUNITY BOUNDARY AND CROSS 3005 TO GO TO THE BEACH, THEN YOU'RE NO LONGER PROTECTED BY THAT.
>> NOT ACCORDING TO THE STATE LAW. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M FINE WITH WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITH GOLF CARTS.
>> MARIE, WHY DON'T YOU DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, COME UP [INAUDIBLE]
>> I NEVER EVER THOUGHT I'D BRING UP GOLF CARTS.
>> I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO RIDE AROUND A GOLF CART WITHOUT A SEAT BELT, THEN THAT'S ON YOU. [LAUGHTER].
>> BUT IT WAS AN INTRIGUING QUESTION, SO I TOLD THEM I WOULD PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
WHAT I'LL DO, I'LL THROW IT OUT AT SOME HOMEOWNERS, BECAUSE LIKE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU CAN'T DRIVE TO A STREET.
BUT I STILL TRY TO AT LEAST ANNUALLY TO GET MY OWN.
WE'LL HAVE MR. GOLF CART OUT TO DO INSPECTIONS ON THE SECOND SATURDAY OF THE MONTH.
BUT IT'S MUCH HARDER IN A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE SEATTLE THAT HAS 1,700 HOMES, TO FIGURE OUT ONE WEEKEND.
>> RIGHT NOW, THERE WAS 11 REGISTERED IN GOLF CART INSPECTIONS.
WE HAVE 12 THAT ARE SUPPLYING RIGHT NOW.
OF COURSE, THE PRICES ARE INDEPENDENT. [OVERLAPPING].
>> IF YOU DRIVE IN TOWN UP TO A GOLF CART, IT COST YOU $25.
IF YOU HAVE TO HAVE A GUY COME OUT TO THE HOUSE OR TOW YOUR GOLF CART TO A COMPANY, THAT COST THE HELL OF A LOT MORE.
>> IT'S SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THERE AND THERE, DEPENDING UPON THE COMPANY.
>> GUYS, THAT'S A POLICY DECISION.
IF YOU WANT TO MOVE IT TO TWO YEARS OR FIVE YEARS FOR RESIDENTIAL, THAT'S FINE.
I WOULD NOT SUGGEST YOU DO THAT FOR RENTALS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> NO, I AGREE. I'M TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL.
>> WELL, BRING SOMETHING FORWARD IF YOU WANT TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL.
>> [OVERLAPPING]. WELL, ESPECIALLY, YOU SAID THE STATE DID AWAY WITH STATE INSPECTIONS.
>> EVEN LOW IN FEE, YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE YOUR CAR EMISSIONS CHECKED.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS. [OVERLAPPING].
>> GOLF CART EMISSIONS ARE PRETTY EASY. ELECTRIC ONES EVEN.
>> ROBBY, WOULD YOU MIND IDENTIFYING YOURSELF?
>> ROBERT SIMMONS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WITH CITY OF GALVESTON. SORRY ABOUT THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? WE ARE MOVING UP, GETTING TOWARDS THE END OF OUR THING.
>> ITEM 3M: UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF
[3.M. Update and Discussion on the Findings of the Park Board Audit as it Relates to Lobbying ( Robb/Porretto/Rawlins - 15 min )]
THE FINDINGS OF THE PARK BOARD AUDIT AS IT RELATES TO LOBBYING.>> COUNCILWOMAN ROBB, YOU WOULD PUT THIS ON.
>> PROBABLY WANTED TO GET AN UPDATE ON THE AUDIT AS IT RELATES TO LOBBYISTS.
>> [OVERLAPPING]. THEY'VE HAD FINDINGS THAT ARE RELATED TO HOT TAX DOLLARS BEING USED FOR LOBBYISTS, AND I WOULD LIKE HIM TO UPDATE US ON THAT.
>> WELL, LET ME BE CLEAR HERE.
THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN HERE, THIS APPLIES TO INFORMATION HE'S GLEANED FROM THE AUDIT THAT HE'S FINISHED.
>> IT'S THE AUDIT THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
>> HAVE YOU COME UP WITH ALL THE FINDINGS OF THE CURRENT AUDIT?
>> NO. THIS REFERS TO AN UPDATE AND DISCUSSIONS ON THE FINDING OF THE PARK BOARD AUDIT AS IT RELATES TO LOBBYING ONLY.
THEY HAVE COMPLETED THAT SECTION, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> GO AHEAD, GLENN. DO YOU HAVE FINDINGS ON DEFINITELY WHAT THE PARK BOARD IS DOING WITH LOBBYING AND WHERE THAT MONEY'S COMING FROM?
>> WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE INVOICES YET TO DETERMINE THAT.
>> YOU HAVE RECEIVED SOME OF THE INVOICES TO DATE.
>> NO, MA'AM. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY INVOICES.
WE'VE RECEIVED THE GENERAL LEDGER, AND WE KNOW HOW MUCH WAS SPENT ON LOBBYING.
>> HOW MUCH WAS THAT? WE WOULD LIKE AN UPDATE.
>> IN 2022, THE LOBBYING FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT WAS $72,000.
[03:20:01]
>> IT CAME OUT OF BEACH NOURISHMENT, BUT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THE INVOICES, AND WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE LOBBYING WAS FOR, IF IT WAS IN CONNECTION WITH BEACH NOURISHMENT OR NOT.
IN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN 2022, WE HAVE $60,000 BEING SPENT ON LOBBYING.
IN 2024 OUT OF BEACH NOURISHMENT, WE HAVE 68,000.
THEN IN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT, WE HAVE 67,000 IN 2024.
>> GLENN, IS THIS HOT MONEY THAT THEY'RE SPENDING OR DO YOU KNOW AT THIS POINT?
I ASKED DON TO DO AN ANALYSIS IF HOT COULD BE SPENT FOR LOBBYING.
I KNOW GLENN, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT AN ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION HAD BEEN RENDERED ON THIS.
>> THAT WAS ON SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
I WENT AND ASKED DON ABOUT THIS.
>> OUR COURTS WHERE I ASK THEM ABOUT AG OPINION.
>> DON, IF YOU CAN SPEAK UP SO THE PUBLIC CAN HEAR YOU.
>> JUST DON'T YELL LIKE, ALEX.
>> DON, LET'S HEAR. WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO THE END OF OUR [INAUDIBLE] LET'S MOVE ON.
>> I ASKED [INAUDIBLE] HE SAYS, NO, I'VE NEVER HEARD OF SUCH AN OPINION.
I TOLD YOU [INAUDIBLE] WRITE THIS UP.
I'M REALLY [INAUDIBLE] ACTUALLY RELATED TO THE SEVEN CATEGORIES, WE CAN EXPEND HOT MONIES ON.
>> [OVERLAPPING]. GOOD TO KNOW. MARIE.
>> ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF THE BEACH MONEY, THAT IS RESTRICTED TO NOURISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE.
I'VE READ THE LAWS, AND IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT YOU CAN NOT USE HOT TAX MONEY FOR LOBBYING.
IN THE CASE OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE MORE.
IF YOU'RE PURSUING A LARGE CONVENTION CENTER OR SOMETHING, THERE IS SOME EXCEPTIONS THAT YOU COULD USE A LOBBYIST FOR.
>> I READ IT. I FORGET WHERE I PUT IT.
BUT ACCORDING TO OUR GREAT SENATOR MAYES MIDDLETON, YOU CANNOT USE ANY HOT TAX OR STATE MONEY FOR LOBBYISTS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THIS CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC WHAT HAS BEEN FOUND.
AGAIN, THE OTHER THING YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IS WE'RE LOOKING AT '22 AND '24, WHICH WOULD BE OFF LEGISLATIVE YEARS, WHICH IS EVEN MORE CONCERNING HOW MUCH WAS SPENT IN '21, '23, '25, AND WE MAY WANT TO LOOK AT THAT OR ADJUST YOUR AUDIT SO THAT WE CAN FIND OUT HOW MUCH WAS SPENT ON THAT IN THE LEGISLATIVE YEARS BECAUSE IT'S, I WOULD SAY, PROBABLY DOUBLE.
>> IN TERMS OF CROSS-REFERENCING WHERE LOBBYING GOES, THEY HAVE TO BE REGISTERED WITH THE TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION FOR THE STATE.
THEN THEY ALSO HAVE TO BE REGISTERED, I THINK IT'S HOUSED AT THE US SENATE FOR THE LOBBYING REPORTS.
>> IF YOU CAN GO BACK AND DO THE SEARCHES, THE ETHICS COMMISSION ONE IS UNDER 99,000, WHICH THAT NUMBER WOULD STATE AND IT DOESN'T SHOW IF IT'S UNDER 99,000 JUST SAYS UNDER 99,000.
BUT IF YOU HAVE THE GENERAL LEDGER, THAT ANSWERS THAT.
[03:25:03]
BUT IN THE BUDGETS THAT COUNSEL HAS BEEN APPROVING, IT SAYS FEDERAL AND STATE ADVOCATE IN BOTH OF THOSE.THE AG OPINION THAT I CITED THE JOINT MEETING WAS GA 0124, THE GREG ABBOTT OPINION.
I ALSO FOUND ANOTHER KEN PAXTON OPINION.
NOTHING HAS CHANGED AND I FORGET THAT NUMBER ELUDES ME, TOO MUCH INFORMATION IN MY BRAIN RIGHT NOW, BUT IT HAD ALMOST THE SAME EXACT VERBIAGE ABOUT IT'S UP TO THE GOVERNING MUNICIPAL BODY TO DETERMINE.
I THINK THIS WAS PART OF THE BIGGER OVERALL WISH WE COULD HAVE GOT TO THAT WEDNESDAY, BUT THIS IS A BIGGER OVERALL COUNCIL DETERMINATION ON LOOKING AT THE PARK BOARD AND THE CITY SPINS OF HOT, AND WE CAN PUT IT IN MAYBE IT'S A FIVE YEAR 10 YEAR REVIEW PROCESS.
WE SAY, YES, NO, MAYBE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
THAT'S BEEN PUSHED OFF FOR QUITE SOME TIME ABOUT WHAT IS AND WHAT IS NOT AN ALLOWABLE USE OF HOT.
IN THE AG OPINIONS, IT'S UP TO THE MUNICIPAL ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, GLENN.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER, BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU TOLD ME.
>> YES, SIR. WE FOUND THAT AS WELL.
>> I WOULD SAY THAT THE CITY, YOU HAVE A OF UNITS OUT THERE, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT NOWHERE THE STATE CONSTITUTION IS CREATED GOVERNMENT ENTITIES, IS CREATED BY YOU.
THEREFORE, IF THERE'S RULES THAT APPLY TO THE CITY OF GALVESTON, THEY SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO THE COMPONENT UNITS IN THE CITY.
THE CITY CANNOT HAVE A PAID LOBBYIST.
I THINK THAT MEANS ALL PARTS OF THE CITY.
THAT WOULD BE LIKE SAYING CITY CAN'T HAVE A PAID LOBBYIST, BUT PUBLIC BUT THE WATER DEPARTMENT CAN BECAUSE THEY'RE SEPARATE.
THEY'RE NOT FUNDED BY TAXES, THEY'RE FUNDED BY FEES.
>> THERE IS A BILL TO GET RID OF TAXPAYER FUNDED LOBBYING, WHICH I'VE ENFORCED.
BUT THERE WAS ALSO ANOTHER POTENTIAL ISSUE WITH AND BEFORE I HAVE MORE INFORMATION, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR IT'S STILL UNDER RESEARCH.
THIS IS WITH THE TRAVEL ALLIANCE.
>> TRAVEL ALLIANCE, WHICH HAS TESTIFIED ON ALL THE BILLS THAT THE PARK BOARD IS PUSHING IS A REGISTERED LOBBYIST.
ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT SHOWING, AND THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE STATE SITE, BECAUSE YOU CAN PULL DOWN EVERY BECAUSE IT WAS INTRIGUING WHY YOU WOULD SEE THEM WHY YOU WOULD SEE BECAUSE WHEN THE LADY, IT WAS A SAME WOMAN IN BOTH CASES.
WHEN SHE WAS TESTIFYING, SHE WOULD MORE TALK ABOUT THE WHOLE STATE.
BUT I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN DOLLARS IDENTIFIED IN THE BUDGET.
IN THEIR BUDGET FOR THE TEXAS ALLIANCE OF TRAVEL, WHICH IS A REGISTERED LOBBYIST.
BUT THEY ARE NOT SHOWING THE PART IF YOU GO TO THE STATE SITE, IT GOES ALL THE WAY DOWN TO LIKE 1,000.
IT'S LIKE, IT SHOWS EVERY THEY ARE NOT CHEWING A CONTRIBUTION FROM THE WAY WE TALK.
>> IT WAS YOU'RE GETTING PICKED UP BY THE.
>> THAT'S LIKE WHEN YOU SEE THAT PERSON RUNNING ACROSS THE STAGE AND YOU'RE WATCHING TV.
>> BUT ANYWAY, THAT IS SOMETHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT AS WELL.
I UNDERSTAND NOT TO USE PUBLIC MONEY NECESSARILY FOR LOBBYING.
IT'S FUNNY THOUGH, THE ENTIRE LEGISLATURE IS INGRAINED WITH LOBBING THAT ENTIRE GALVESTON.
>> WITH LEGISLATIVE TROSS DOESN'T JUSTIFY IT.
>> NO, I CERTAINLY DOESN'T JUSTIFY USING MONEY THAT IS DEFINED THAT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR MAINTENANCE AND NOURISHMENT OF THE BE.
THAT'S WHERE I TALKED TO DON BECAUSE IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE MUNICIPALITY, ACCORDING TO AG'S OPINION CAN RENDER A DECISION ON, I THINK WE NEED TO DO THAT.
>> BUT I THINK YOU ALREADY DID. DIDN'T YOU? DON'T HAVE A HOT CONTRACT THAT'S BEEN EXECUTED BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD.
DOES DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE USE OF MONEY THAT WE SEND THEM TO BE USED FOR A LOBBYIST.
[03:30:08]
>> DOES IT SAY THAT IN THE HOT? DOES IT SAY YOU CANNOT BE USED FOR LOBBYIST IN THE HOT CONTRACT?
>> NO. WE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY WAIT.
YOU CANNOT USE THIS MONEY FOR COPS.
YOU CAN'T USE IT FOR COCA COLA.
WHEN YOU CAN'T USE IT FOR LOBBYIST.
CAN YOU USE IT FOR LOBBIES, DRINKING, COCA COLA AND EATING LOLLIPOP.
CAN YOU DO IT ON A TRAIN OR ON A PLANE.
>> GLAD YOU'RE PICKING UP MY SLACK TODAY. THANK YOU.
>> WELL, THE BETTER OF THE FACT IS IF WE NEED TO BE CLEAR, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO WEIGH IN ON, WE NEED TO DO THAT.
>> I THINK THIS IS PART OF THE OVERALL IN MY THOUGHT INTO THE OVERALL EXPENDITURES OF THE OF 100% HOOT AUDIT. LET'S JUST CALL IT THAT.
>> HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN HOW LONG DID YOU INITIATE ASKING FOR THOSE RECEIPTS OR INVOICES? HOW LONG AGO DID THAT HAPPEN? AND HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN SINCE YOU'VE ASKED AND STILL NOT GOTTEN THEM BACK?
>> WE SENT AN E MAIL APRIL 9TH, AND THEN WE SENT ANOTHER REMINDER, APRIL 17TH.
IT'S BEEN ABOUT TODAY'S 23RD, ABOUT TWO WEEKS, I GUESS.
>> HAS THERE BEEN ANY FOLLOW UP TO SAY WE'RE WORKING ON IT OR>.
>> YES, SIR. THIS WEEK WE RECEIVED AN E MAIL THAT SAID WE'RE FOLLOWING UP ON IT AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LONG TIME.
I BELIEVE THAT THE PARK BOARD WANTS TO GIVE INFORMATION ON JUSTIFICATION OF SOME OF THESE THINGS?
WHY WOULD WE NOT LET YOU DO YOUR JOB TO RECEIVE EVERYTHING YOU'VE REQUESTED SO THAT YOU CAN BASICALLY PUT IT ON YOUR REPORT.
I'M NOT SURE. WHY WOULD WE NEED TO JUSTIFY IT UNTIL YOU GET THAT DONE?
>> THIS IS WHAT THE PARK BOARD HAS TOLD US, WE'RE WAITING ON INVOICES.
WE ASKED FOR INVOICES AND WE'RE WAITING ON IT.
>> MAYOR, CAN YOU ACTUALLY FOLLOW UP TO ASK BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS LITERALLY TO SAY IT'S NOT GLENN NOT DOING HIS JOB OR PUSHING THE STAFF TO GET THIS AUDIT REPORT OUT.
IT'S ALL CONTINGENT ON PARKS BOARD BASICALLY SENDING THE INFORMATION THAT HE'S REQUESTED?
>> I UNDERSTAND. AN AUDIT, IN MY MIND, IS AN OBJECTIVE TYPE PROCESS.
THAT MEANS IF GLYNN ASKED FOR OBJECTIVE DATA FROM WHATEVER, THAT IS SENT OVER.
THERE'S NO NEED NECESSARILY TO DO JUSTIFICATION ON THAT.
HE'S REQUESTING CERTAIN DATA NEEDS TO BE SENT OVER.
>> MORE THAN ANYTHING, WE'D LOVE TO SHUT THE DOOR ON THIS, TO GET THE INFORMATION TO CALL A SPADE OF SPADE AND GET PAST THIS AND DO THINGS BETTER, BUT THAT WAS MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THEY'RE SLOW PLAYING GETTING GLENN THE INFORMATION.
>> YOUR JUSTIFICATION DOESN'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN LEGALITY.
I'D LIKE TO SAY, SEE A COMPANY GO TO THE SEC AND SAY, BUT OBJECTIVELY, WE JUSTIFY THIS BY THAT. IS LIKE A WAR.
>> BUT ALSO, TOO, AND IT'S COST SAVING.
YOU HAVE A I GUESS IT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE PARK BOARD IN THE PAPER THAT THEY SPENT 134,000 AND THE BUDGET IS UP TO 144,000 AND IF YOU'RE NOT SPENDING THAT ON MY BEING, WELL, THAT GOES DIRECTLY TO THE MAINTENANCE AND BEACH NOURISHMENT, SILO, WHAT IT'S DESIGNED TO BE USED FOR.
THAT'S A TRUCK, THAT'S ONE FULL TIME, TWO PART TIME. THIS IS ABOUT.
>> BUT SAND, TOO, BUT IT'S EFFICIENCY THAT IS JUST MY GOAL IS EFFICIENCY, HOW WE COULD BE MORE EFFICIENT WITH THE FUNDS WE HAVE?
>> EFFICIENCY AND TRANSPARENCY.
>> THIS HAS BEEN MY THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WRIT LARGE, COUNSEL HAS NOT TAKEN UP THE INITIATIVE TO LOOK AT THE PARK BOARD'S BUDGET HOLISTICALLY, LOOK AT THE EXPENDITURES HOLISTICALLY, AND THIS IS PART OF THAT PROCESS OF AS SIMPLE AS IT IS IN MY MIND, PUTTING EVERYTHING OUT THERE, WE CAN MOVE TO ABSOLUTE YES, ABSOLUTE, NO, AND MAYBE, AND MOVE ON.
>> GLYNN, THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS,
[03:35:03]
HOW SHOULD I SAY THIS? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE DELAY IN GETTING THE INFORMATION IS APPROPRIATE OR DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD THAT INFORMATION A LOT SOONER?>> MY FEELING, SHE HAD THE INFORMATION SUITOR.
>> I WOULD LOVE TO GET KERRY AND MASHA.
SEE IF I REMEMBER YOUR NAME, RAY.
>> AUDIT THE APARTMENT, LET'S GET HIM ON CAMERA.
>> THE MATTER OF THE FACT IS IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION APPROPRIATELY, THEN WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TELLING YOU MAYOR.
>> I THINK THAT'S WHAT HE'S TELLING I THINK HE IS.
>> THIS IS WHY WE DOCUMENT WHEN WE REQUESTED AND THE REMINDERS AND WHAT WE RECEIVED.
>> WE'RE NOT IN THE AGE WHERE THEY GO DOWN TEN STORIES DOWN TO THE BASEMENT WHERE ALL THE FILE ROOM IS AND LOCATE.
>> ALTHOUGH THAT IS REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW AND OUR CHART I'M JUST SAYING THAT THEY GENERALLY HAVE COPIES THAT ARE ELECTRONIC, AND THEN MAYBE.
THERE IS A IT EVEN SAYS, LIKE FILAMENT COPIES OR SOMETHING IN THE LANGUAGE, WHICH I WOULD NEVER SEE A LOBBYIST BEING PAID WITHOUT AN INVOICE ELECTRONICALLY, BUT MAYBE I'M WRONG.
>> THEY WOULD. THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS THAT?
>> I WOULD SAY SOMEONE FROM COUNCIL CALLED BRYSON AND I ADDRESS IT TO 61 TREMONT.
>> I'M CURIOUS I ASSISTANT CITY AUDITOR.
I HAVE A E MAIL GOING BACK TO BRYSON, AND IF YOU GUYS WOULD BE OKAY WITH IT, I CAN SEND HIM THAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR JUSTIFICATION.
YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR THE INVOICES FIRST.
>> THAT WOULD BE FINE. IF THAT'S OKAY WITH ALL.
>> THAT WOULD BE FINE. LET'S BUT I WANT YOU TO I WANT YOU TO KEEP COUNSEL UPDATED ON THAT.
>> MAYBE COPY, COUNSEL ON THAT INVOICE.
>> IF YOU GUYS WANT ME TO INCLUDE YOU I WILL.
>> THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE, BUT I DON'T WANT TO LET THIS GO TILL THE NEXT MEETING.
I WANT TO SEE WHERE WE STAND WITH THIS REAL QUICKLY. PERFECT.
>> WHILE YOU'RE UP THERE, MONSIEUR, YOU WANT TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO MASHA SOVA THE INTERNAL AUDITOR. AS KERRY SAID.
>> AS KERRY SAID, WE'RE JUST GOING TO FOLLOW UP ON THE E MAIL.
WE ASK ALSO IF THEY HAVE SOME OF THEM READY, WE'LL TAKE A PIECEMEAL.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME.
WE'LL TAKE LITTLE BY LITTLE BECAUSE THEY'LL TAKE SIGNS TO LOOK INTO IT.
>> IT ALLOWS US TO DO THE AUDIT MUCH FASTER.
>> VERY GOOD. BUT SOMETIMES THEY'LL REPLY BACK.
IT'LL BE BACK TO YOU, BUT THIS COUNSEL NEEDS TO KNOW WHERE YOU STAND WITH THIS.
GLYNN, I'D LIKE FOR YOU IN THE NEXT 10-14 DAYS, GIVE US AN UPDATE TO COUNSEL WHERE WE ARE ON THIS, WOULD YOU? ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MA'AM.
IT'S PROBABLY A RHETORICAL QUESTION.
>> I HAVE NOT BY ANY MEANS, CAN DO WHAT YOU DO.
SO WITHIN THE BUDGET, I HEARD SOMEBODY SAY, WELL, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THEIR BUDGET CLEARLY.
THERE'S NO WAY TO TELL IF THEY ARE PAYING A LOBBYIST.
IF I LOOKED AT THEIR BUDGET, IT'S NOT ANYWHERE LABELED CLEARLY.
>> IT'S IT SAYS FEDERAL AND STATE ADVOCATED.
>> THAT'S OKAY. BECAUSE I HEARD SO I WANT TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE BUDGET AT THEIR BUDGET.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO. MAYBE THE FIRMS THAT THEY PAID OR THORN RUN THAT'S THE FEDERAL BRANDON BRANDON'S THE STATE, THORN RUNS THE FEDERAL.
IT STATES THAT, AS YOU INSTRUCTED ME.
>> THEY BOTH HAVE MADE PAYMENTS TO TRAVEL ALLIANCE IN THEIR BUDGET, WHO IS A REGISTERED FURTHER LOOK THAT UP IN THE GL AND RUN WITH THAT AS WELL.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ESPECIALLY IN THE AREA OF LOBBYIST, EXPAND TO 201-20-3205.
>> WELL, THAT'S WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO COME BACK ON BY.
>> RIGHT TO ME, AND I'M NOT A FAN OF TAXPAYER FUNDED LOBBYING BECAUSE IT COULD GO AGAINST.
THAT'S THE REASONING WHY THAT MIDDLETON'S BILL IS UP IS IT GOES AGAINST THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYERS.
[03:40:05]
THE PORT AND I DON'T THINK THEY'RE PUTTING ANYTHING THAT THEY HAVE A LOBBYIST AS WELL, WHICH WOULD GO AWAY WITH MIDDLETON'S BILL.BUT TO ME, THE FACT OF IT NOT BEING A HOT HOT ALLOWABLE EXPENSE IS THE BIGGER ISSUE RATHER THAN A TO ME, IT'S A GENERAL OPERATION, IF I'M GOING TO PAYING A LOBBYIST TO DO SOMETHING.
THE PORT I WOULD THEY NEED THE FEDERAL MONEY FOR DREDGING.
THAT'S A HUGE THING FOR OUR ECONOMY.
THAT IS FOR THE PORTS LONG TERM CYCLE.
UNDER MIDDLETON'S BILL, JUST SO WE'RE EVERYONE'S AWARE, PEOPLE LIKE SALLY THAT THE GOVERNMENT AND LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS ARE NOT INCORPORATED IN THAT BILL, OR THEY ARE IT'S IT'S SO WE CAN HAVE REPRESENTATION UP THERE.
>> A DIFFERENCE WITH THE PORT WE MET HOUSTON'S LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, AND IT WAS THE SAME A DIFFERENCE WITH THE PORT IS TOO, IS THAT WE ARE A PORT THAT DOES NOT THAT.
THERE ARE PRIVATE PORTS OUT THERE THAT PAY TAXES AND THAT ARE PRIVATE ENTITIES, AND THEY YOU'RE COMPETING AGAINST THEM FOR THESE FUNDS.
>> OUR PORT DOESN'T RECEIVE A STREAM OF PUBLIC FUNDS?
>> NO, BUT THEY GET TO OPERATE TAX FREE.
>> BUT STILL, THEY'RE COMPETING AGAINST THOSE.
THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT PORT STRUCTURES.
THAT'S JUST A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
>> IF MIDDLETON'S BILL PASSES, I MEAN, COUNCILMAN FINKLEA AND I SPOKE ABOUT THESE THINGS AND BOB DID TOO, IF THERE'S GOING TO BE OVERLAP, SALLY, AND THE PORTS KNEW, BUT IT WOULD BE A NEW LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS PERSON.
WE COULD ALL WORK IN CONJUNCTION TOGETHER TO HAVE MORE MOUTHS, SO TO SPEAK, WHICH LOBBYING IS PAYING FOR A MOUTH FOR YOU.
YOU'D HAVE MORE MOUTHS UP THERE BENDING THE EARS OF LEGISLATORS TO DO THINGS THAT BENEFITED BOTH THE CITY AND THE PORT, AND IT WOULD HELP MERGE THOSE FUNCTIONS TOGETHER.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT FOR COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON ITEM 3? GLENN, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, KERRY. THANK YOU.
[3.N. Discussion of Enforcement of Ordinances as it Relates to Short Term Rentals ( Robb/Porretto - 15 min )]
>> 3N, DISCUSSION OF ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCES AS IT RELATES TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
>> VERY GOOD. COUNCIL MEMBER, ROB, YOU WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ENFORCEMENT.
>> I DID. AGAIN, THIS GOES ALONG WITH THE MARSHALS.
I ACTUALLY READ PART OF BRIAN'S MONTHLY REPORT.
IF YOU GO TO IT ON THE FIRST PAGE, I HAD COPIES, BUT I LEFT THEM AT HOME, IT TALKS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ISSUES.
COULD YOU PRINT THAT DANIELLE?
>> THE MARSHAL SHEET FROM BRIAN'S REPORT.
THE WHOLE THING IS WE TALKED ABOUT HOW MARSHALS CAN TAKE THE BURDEN OFF THE POLICE, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS, AND IT'S NOT HAPPENING.
MATTER OF FACT, OUR ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCES, A LOT OF TIMES AREN'T EVEN HAPPENING.
>> ARE THEY BEING REPORTED TO THE MARSHAL, THOUGH? THAT'S THE PROBLEM, THEY'RE REPORTED.
>> NO. AREN'T PEOPLE SUPPOSED TO CALL THE CALL CENTER?
>> THE CALL CENTER IS NOT GETTING TO US.
>> WE DON'T HAVE ANY INVOLVING OF THE CALL CENTER.
>> NO. THEY CALL NON-EMERGENCY POLICE, WHICH THAT GOES TO MARSHALS?
>> NO. IT GOES TO THE DISPATCH CENTER AND THEY DECIDE WHERE TO SEND IT.
>> I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO DISPATCH.
>> NO. THIS IS ASIDE FROM THE SYSTEM THAT EXISTS AT THE PARK BOARD.
WE HAVE A LOT OF ORDINANCES THAT ARE BROKEN THAT ARE CITY ORDINANCES THAT NOBODY EVER FOLLOWS-UP ON.
LET'S SAY THERE'S A BONFIRE ON THE BEACH CAUSED BY SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND THERE'S UNDERAGE DRINKING.
>> WHAT TIME DOES THAT HAPPEN? USUALLY AT NIGHT WHEN THE MARSHALS AREN'T WORKING.
>> BUT 10 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT AND IT GOES THE DISPATCH, AND THEY SEND OUT FIRE.
WELL, THAT'S NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING
[03:45:01]
ABOUT THE UNDERAGE DRINKING ON THE BEACH BECAUSE FIRE DOESN'T.THEN FIRE CAN'T SPEND THEIR TIME WAITING THERE TO MAKE SURE THE FIRE GOES OUT.
[OVERLAPPING] WELL, THEY MAKE THEM GET WATER FROM THE OCEAN AND POUR IT ON IT.
>> MY CONCERN IS WE NEED TO MOVE FASTER.
OUR OWN ORDINANCES AREN'T BEING FOLLOWED BY THE CITY.
IF THAT TAKES ON WEEKENDS, ADDING MARSHALS IN THE EVENING, SINCE MARSHALS ARE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, TO TAKE THE BURDEN OFF THE POLICE, WE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THE AD HOC COMMITTEE IS FINISHED.
BUT EVEN WHEN IT COMES TO HOUSES LIKE BIG BLUE.
WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING UP ON OUR ORDINANCES, WHICH COULD BE EXTRA RESOURCES.
WE HAVE HOW MANY MARSHALS NOW?
>> YOU'RE ASKING ME OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
COMBINED WITH CODE? YOU TALKING ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT MARSHALS OR CODE ENFORCEMENT?
>> ALL OF THEM. I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> I DON'T THINK IT'S 12, I THINK IT'S NINE.
>> EVEN NINE, IF YOU TAKE NINE AND YOU DIVIDE IT BY 565, AND I THINK THEIR BUDGET LINE ITEM HAS MORE THAN DOUBLED OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS.
WE HAVE VERY FRUSTRATED CITIZENS.
WE GOT TO ADDRESS THIS SOONER THAN LATER.
THERE'S MULTIPLE ISSUES PLAY A ROLE HERE.
ONE OF THEM IS GPD ON AN EVENING AT 10 O'CLOCK ON A SATURDAY NIGHT, THAT MAY NOT BE A HIGH PRIORITY CALL FOR THEM.
THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES THERE TO ENFORCE THAT.
IT'S A MANPOWER ISSUE FROM THAT STANDPOINT.
>> WELL, BUT IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT EXPANDING THE MARSHALS HOURS, THE MARSHALS COULD ADDRESS THAT.
>> IT'S A TIME ISSUE FOR THE MARSHALS, IT'S ALSO A GEOGRAPHIC ISSUE.
I'VE GOT TWO MARSHALS WORKING ON THE WEEKEND COVERING 32 MILES OF ISSUES, AND THEY'RE NOT PROACTIVELY PATROLLING.
THEY'RE GOING FROM CALL TO CALL TO CALL TO CALL TO CALL.
REMEMBER, ON A WEEKEND, THEY'RE DEALING NOT JUST WITH SHORT-TERM RENTAL ISSUES.
THEY'RE DEALING WITH EVERYBODY THAT'S TAKEN ON A WEEKEND PROJECT WITHOUT GETTING A PERMIT, EVERYBODY THAT'S BLOCKING A DRIVEWAY.
>> I ONLY GOT TWO, AND WE'RE EVEN SHORT NOW. I THINK WE'RE DOWN WHAT? TWO OR THREE MARSHALS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN FILLING THEM BECAUSE OF THE HIRING REASONS.
>> THIS TO ME AND AND I SPOKE TO BRIAN ABOUT IT AS WELL, FROM THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THE THINGS THAT I MEAN, HOUSTON'S DONE IT.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY A LICENSE OF SOME SORT, IF THERE'S [OVERLAPPING]
>> YEAH, I BROUGHT THAT, AND ADOPTED IN HOUSTON.
>> IT DID. WE HAVE THESE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON, AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD AND SEEN, IT'S BEEN FRUSTRATING FOR THESE OPERATORS BECAUSE IT'S ALL ABOUT ENFORCEMENT.
EVEN THE FOLKS THAT GIVE TESTIMONY, IT IS 95% ENFORCEMENT, ENFORCEMENT, ENFORCEMENT.
>> IT'S GENERALLY THE SAME PLAYER.
>> IT IS. WE HAVE THE MONEY FROM THE STR COLLECTIONS.
I'M AGREEING WITH MARIE, WE NEED TO DO IT EXPEDITIOUSLY, AND I THINK IF WE HAVE TO DO A RESOLUTION, BUT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO.
I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND I WANT TO SEE A FLEXING, HIRE THE MARSHALS. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT FUNDING.
WE KNOW IN THE FUTURE, AND MAYBE WE CAN EXPEDITIOUSLY GET THAT CALL CENTER FROM THE PARK BOARD TRANSFER IT TO THE CITY NOW.
>> FOLLOWING ABOUT OUR ORDINANCE, PEOPLE WOULD BE PAYING AND IT WOULD BE MORE THAN COVERS THAT.
>> THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE TOO WHERE PEOPLE DO CALL THE PARK BOARD NUMBER STILL BECAUSE IT STILL EXISTS OUT THERE.
>> IF WE CAN GET THAT MOVED OVER, WELL, THAT'S A RESOURCE SHARING PROBLEM FROM ANOTHER END.
BUT IF WE CAN GET THAT MOVED OVER IMMEDIATELY, AND GET IT DONE, AND FLEX THE MARSHALS HOURS.
I WANT TO SEE SOMEONE, AND WHILE THEY'RE SITTING AROUND WAITING FOR A CALL, WHICH UNLESS IT'S 4TH OF JULY WEEKEND, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A TON OF CALLS AT NIGHT,
[03:50:01]
BUT THEY CAN DO THINGS ON SEAWALL CALL, TOW TRUCKS AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING.THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT THEY CAN DO, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THAT COMPONENT, EVEN IF IT'S JUST THURSDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY AT NIGHT.
YES, I THINK WEEKEND WARRIORS WHO SAY BUILD ON SUNDAY AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS ON MONDAY, THAT EXISTS.
THE GRASS PROBLEM EXISTS, BUT IF WE PULL BACK SOME OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OFF OF THAT, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
I THINK THE PUBLIC WILL BE, I THINK SHORT-TERM [OVERLAPPING].
>> WHAT HAPPEN, IS PEOPLE COME TO GALVESTON AND THEY DON'T LIVE HERE, THEY COME DOWN ON THE WEEKENDS, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY FIND THEIR NEIGHBORS CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY WANT TO RESPONSE.
>> AGAIN, I WANT TO MOVE QUICKLY.
>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
>> WITH FLEXING THE MARSHALS HOURS, AND I'D LIKE TO GET A FRAMEWORK DONE SO WE CAN PRESENT IT TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE SO THAT WE CAN STOP HEARING AND ACTUALLY SHOW THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS NOW OVER A YEAR.
>> HE HAD BROUGHT YOU SEVERAL PROPOSALS, BUT NOBODY WANTS TO SPEND ON THE SHORT-TERM [OVERLAPPING]
>> I MADE A NOTE, ALEX. WE'LL GET IT ON THE [OVERLAPPING]
>> I WANT TO SHARE SOMETHING BEFORE I BURST.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I NEVER SAW A PERSON BURST.
>> SHORT-TERM RENTAL OPERATOR LIST A PHONE NUMBER TO BE CONTACTED.
YOU CALL THEM AND SUPPOSEDLY AN HOUR LATER IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE IT RESOLVED.
>> AS YOU KNOW THAT DOES NOT WORK.
>> WHO HAS THAT NUMBER? IS IT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE? NO. WE'RE SITTING ON HERE TRYING [OVERLAPPING] EASTER SUNDAY, AND THERE'S A PROBLEM, LET'S SAY, MAYBE NEXT DOOR, AND YOU WANT TO DROP A DIME TO THE OPERATOR AND SAY, I WANT YOU CLEAN THIS UP? YOU CAN'T FIND, BUT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO LOOK UP, WHO IS THE SHORT-TERM OPERATOR ON A GIVEN HOUSE AND HAVE THE CITIZEN BE ABLE TO CALL THEM DIRECTLY. DON?
>> I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN, BUT IF THE MARSHAL WAS IN CHARGE OF THAT AND WE HAD SOMEONE RESPONDING TO IT BECAUSE IT COULD HAVE [OVERLAPPING]
>> COULD TURN INTO IF WE HAD ACCESS TO THE DATABASE.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT DOXXING IS WHERE SOMEBODY FLOODS A PHONE LINE BECAUSE THAT ONE OPERATOR, THEY DON'T LIKE THEM PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THEY SAID SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY DIDN'T LIKE.
I DON'T WANT TO START THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WHICH IS WHAT THE PLAN WAS TO START THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR, I WANT TO SEE IT STARTED NOW.
>> WE BROUGHT IT BEFORE YOU [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE EXACT NUMBER OF MARSHALS.
MAY NOTES WILL HAVE AN ACTION ITEM, DON, IF YOU CAN BRING YOUR ORDINANCE FORWARD INTO THAT.
>> I NEED AN ACTION ITEM TO DO IT [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE NUMBER OF MARSHALS.
>> JUST A MINUTE, WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I UNDERSTAND. WE'VE GOT TO ASSIGN THIS SHORT-TERM RENTAL REVENUE TO PAY FOR THESE EXTRA MARSHALS ON THE WEEKENDS.
>> IT JUST DEPENDS. RIGHT NOW, I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MARSHALS TO EVEN DO IT. I'M SHORT.
BUT LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN COME UP WITH.
WE'RE DOWN 30 POLICE OFFICERS HIRING MARSHALS AT HALF THE PRICE IS GETTING HARD. LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN DO.
>> WELL, IT'LL BE ON THE MAY AGENDA, AND DON, CAN YOU BRING YOUR ORDINANCE THAT YOU HAD BROUGHT TO US EARLIER BACK IN MAY TO US?
>> SURE. FOR WORKSHOP ONLY OR WORKSHOP AND ACTION?
>> I WOULD LIKE WORKSHOP AND ACTION.
>> MY GOAL FOR THIS WAS TO ALLEVIATE THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEAR OVERWHELMINGLY AT THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE BECAUSE THAT IS TAKING UP A TON OF TIME WITH THAT COMMITTEE FOR ENFORCEMENT.
WE HAVE THE RESOURCES, LET BRIAN USE THOSE RESOURCES.
LET'S EXPEDITIOUSLY GET THOSE SYSTEMS OVER FROM THE PARK BOARD TO THE CITY SO WE CAN GET THEM UP AND RUNNING.
THROUGH THE SUMMER, WE'LL HAVE KINKS AND WORK THROUGH THAT.
THEN THROUGH THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS. WE CAN MOVE ON.
WHAT I WANT TO SEE WITH THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE NOT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ENFORCEMENT, BUT THAT IS A PROBLEM.
LET'S HANDLE THAT AND SHOW THEM WE HEAR THEIR CONCERNS.
BUT THE SECOND THING IS, LET'S HEAR THAT CONCERN AND HAVE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE FOCUS ON POLICIES AND THINGS
[03:55:03]
LIKE A LICENSING AGREEMENT OR SOMETHING OF THE SORT WHERE YOU CANNOT REGISTER IF YOU ARE A BAD ACTOR.WE ALL KNOW BEACHBOX HAS BEEN.
>> BUT THAT'S IN HIS ORDINANCE.
>> BUT I'LL TELL YOU, ONE OF THE THINGS WITH BEACHBOX BECAUSE I TALKED TO THEIR SECURITY GUY.
THEY EVICT MULTIPLE HOUSES, I THINK, IN LIKE THE SUMMER MONTHS, THEY DO 6-12 EVICTIONS A MONTH OR I'LL GET THE EXACT NUMBERS.
BUT THEY'RE DOING A HELL OF A LOT MORE WITH A HECK OF A LOT OF PEOPLE A HECK OF LESS PEOPLE ON STAFF WHEN THEY'RE NOW DOING MAYBE 1,000 HOMES, WHICH GRANTED, OURS WOULD BE A LARGER NUMBER.
I WAS AT THE LAST SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND NOW THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A CONSULTANT.
LET'S ADDRESS THE ISSUES AT HAND.
>> I HAVE A COPY OF THAT LAST ORDINANCE THAT DON GAVE TO US, AND IT IS RELATIVELY COMPREHENSIVE IN NATURE.
IT HAS SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE RELATED TO POLICY, RELATED TO LICENSING, RELATED TO THIS WHOLE THREE STRIKE THROUGHOUT THING.
WHAT YOU'RE FOCUSED ON IS JUST THE ENFORCEMENT ARM.
>> THAT COULD BE AN ITEM THAT YOU GIVE TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU DID PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO, AND IF THEY CAN REVIEW IT AND SAY, HERE'S AN ORDINANCE, CHOP IT UP.
>> THE MAIN IMPORTANTLY NOW FOR OUR CITIZENS, WE HAVE ORDINANCE ON THE BOOKS, AND NOBODY IS ENFORCING THEM, AND THAT'S VERY FRUSTRATING.
>> IT'S A MANPOWER ISSUE ON THE ENFORCEMENT.
WE'LL HAVE IT ON THE MAIN AGENDA.
>> I DON'T KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MARSHALS WE HAVE OR NOT.
THE FIRST THING IS RESOURCES, AND SO HE DOESN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES YET, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
[OVERLAPPING] WE'RE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE.
>> WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL OVER TO THE CITY FOR AT LEAST A YEAR.
>> IF WE CAN GET THAT PHONE NUMBER OR THE SYSTEM DONE NOW, IT'S SITTING OVER THERE, DOING NOTHING.
LET'S GET IT MOVED OVER NOW SO WE HAVE A FRAMEWORK TO WORK WITH OVER THE SUMMER.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OBVIOUSLY BUMPS AND BRUISES ALONG THE WAY.
>> IT'S ON YOUR AGENDA, THE VOTE ON YES OR NO.
DON, WE'RE GOING TO BRING YOUR ORDINANCE FORWARD IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT IN MAY?
>> I THINK YOU HAD THAT COPYRIGHTED, SO YOU'RE GETTING RESIDUALS FROM HOUSTON.
>> GETTING RESIDUALS FROM CITY OF HOUSTON?
>> YEAH. LET'S GO TO ITEM 3C, PLEASE.
[3.P. Discussion of City Council's authority to determine sand placement on the beach (Robb/C. Brown - 15 min)]
>> ITEM 3C. DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL'S AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE SAND PLACEMENT ON THE BEACH.
>> WE HAVE AN ITEM 10C ON OUR AGENDA, BUT MARIE.
>> WELL, I MEAN, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WE DISCUSSED AND DECIDED AND WE HAD CONSENSUS ON, BUT WE NEVER MADE IT AN ORDINANCE.
>> BUT WE DISCUSSED IT EIGHT MONTHS AGO AND NEVER DID AN ORDINANCE, AND NOW IS A TIME TO DO AN ORDINANCE.
>> YOUR WISH IS ON THE AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON.
>> I WAS CERTAINLY GOING WITH THAT, EASY.
>> VERY GOOD. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA.
[OVERLAPPING] JUST ONE SECOND.
WE WILL RECONVENE AT 5:00 PM THIS AFTERNOON.
ADJOURNED AT 11:00 PM.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.