Jul 02, 2026 City Council

[I. CALL TO ORDER, CALL OF ROLL]

[00:00:11]

SESSION OF THE LAGO VISTA CITY COUNCIL. THE TIME IS 303. I HAVE A QUORUM OF THE COUNCIL. I HAVE COUNCILOR PRINCE MYSELF, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCILOR HALL. I HAVE MR. BENEFIELD IS JOINING ONLINE AND COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA WILL BE HERE SHORTLY. COUNCILOR EVANS HAS AN EXCUSED

[II. EXECUTIVE SESSION]

[III. ACTION ON EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS]

THERE WERE LEGAL QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RELATED TO ITEM TWO. EXECUTIVE SESSION 2-2 REGARDING DISSOLUTION OF TURNBACK RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. AN AMENDMENT TO THAT AGREEMENT.

THERE WAS ALSO AN UPDATE REGARDING PROPERTY AND DIRECTION TO STAFF. AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO A REPORT. THERE WAS LEGAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO WHAT IS ITEM 12 B LIAISON REPORT FROM MR. PRINCE. AND THERE WERE LEGAL QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY ACTION FOR ITEM ONE? NO ACTION. THANK YOU. ITEM TWO CONSULTATION WITH CITY ATTORNEY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 REGARDING RECEIPT OF LEGAL ADVICE FROM CITY ATTORNEY CONCERNING REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO DISSOLUTION OF TURNBACK RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO INTEND TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS. AND SO BEFORE WE GO INTO THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER. ARE THERE ANY CITIZENS WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM TO.

OF EXECUTIVE SESSION? JEFFREY. SEEING NONE, I ALSO HAVE THE ATTORNEY HERE FROM TURNBACK. IF YOU HAD ANY WORDS YOU'D WANT TO GIVE MAYOR JEFF HOWARD, ATTORNEY FOR TURNBACK DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. WE'RE HERE AND AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVE OF TURN BACK HERE AS WELL ON LINE AND ALSO OUR OUR CONSULTANT HERE AS WELL. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I THINK WE HAVE MADE THE REQUEST.

IT'S IN CORRESPONDENCE TO YOU. AND OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, JUST HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. THANKS. I THINK THE QUICKEST I COULD ASK FOR IS BRAD. CAN YOU GIVE A RUNDOWN OF THE REQUEST WE RECEIVED? AND IF COUNCIL'S OKAY, CAN YOU KIND OF GIVE A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF OUR DISCUSSION ON IT? YEAH. SO WHEN THE TOURNAMENT RANCH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS ENTERED, ONE OF THE ANCILLARY AGREEMENTS TO THAT WAS A PIT DISSOLUTION AGREEMENT. PIT WAS CREATED PIT CREATION. AND THOSE ARE TYPICAL IN THAT CONTEXT. AND BASICALLY WHAT THEY SAY IS THAT A PIT WILL BE DISSOLVED IF IF DEVELOPMENT IS NOT BEGUN WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. THE REQUEST WAS FROM TURNBACK. TO EXTEND THE AMENDMENT IS TO EXTEND THAT DISSOLUTION PERIOD FROM THE ORIGINAL THREE YEARS

[00:05:03]

AND I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION AS WELL. WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT FOR THE DISSOLUTION TO EXTEND THE DISSOLUTION OF TURN BACK RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR HALL. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MISS? I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS IT JUST FOR PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT'S GOING ON. MANY, MANY AND ARE PROBABLY WELL AWARE OF HOW MUCH WENT INTO GETTING THIS THIS PIT APPROVED AND HOW HOW LONG IT TOOK. UNFORTUNATELY, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MAKE THE HEADWAY THAT THEY NEEDED TO.

AND SOME OF THESE APPLICATIONS THAT THEY'VE PUT IN WITH THE CITY ARE WELL OVER 200 DAYS OLD.

THAT IS THE ONLY REASON THAT WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT ■WAS REALLY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD REALLY, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY COULDN'T SAY NO AT THIS POINT.

I'M NOT, NOT NOT IN GOOD FAITH WITHOUT CAUSING A BIG PROBLEM, A LIABILITY FOR THE CITY. SO WE DISCUSSED GOING TO THAT TO A FIVE YEAR. SOME PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE DEBATING BETWEEN A FOUR AND FIVE. AND I THINK THAT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UDC AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE ROLLED OUT, AND IT COULD POTENTIALLY PUT ANOTHER BURDEN ON STAFF. SO TO PREVENT THAT, WE WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND EXTEND THAT TIMELINE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. SO, YEAH, I'LL BE HAPPY TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS. OKAY. COUNCIL, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. BENNEFIELD? WE CAN'T HEAR YOU YET, MR. BENNEFIELD. THANK YOU. THOSE ARE GREAT COMMENTS, MARIA. THE THE ONLY THING I THINK I WOULD ADD IS THAT EVEN THOUGH IT'S MY ANTICIPATION OF VOTING FOR THE AFFIRMATIVE TODAY, I WOULD JUST WANT TO PUT THE DEVELOPER ON NOTICE THAT I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF ANY FURTHER EXTENSIONS BEYOND THIS, SO THAT ANY OUTSTANDING ITEMS THAT THEY NEED TO FINISH, THEY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF WITHIN THIS EXTENSION TIME PERIOD. BUT THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. I WILL NOT SUPPORT AN EXTENSION BEYOND THIS IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I'LL JUST SAY THAT I THINK BECAUSE I WAS HERE WHEN THIS UNLIKE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE ON THE ON THE DAIS, I WAS HERE ON COUNCIL WHEN WHEN ALL OF THIS WAS FIRST AGREED TO. AND THE WHOLE POINT OF THE THREE YEAR TIME FRAME WAS TO GET THINGS MOVING, NOT JUST HAVE IT HANGING OUT THERE. AND, AND I WOULD AGREE THAT THINGS HAVE HAPPENED THAT REALLY ARE ON THE CITY BEYOND THE DEVELOPER, NOT UNDER THE DEVELOPER'S CONTROL, THAT THAT MADE IT MORE IT WAS ESSENTIALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO GET DONE WITHIN THE THREE YEAR TIME FRAME. SO THE, THE, THE URGENCY THAT MR. BENEFIELD SHARED, I THINK IS APPROPRIATE. AND THAT WOULD BE THE HISTORICAL POSITION OF COUNCIL IS WE DON'T WANT DEVELOPERS JUST, YOU KNOW, GETTING SOME AGREEMENTS AND JUST HANGING OUT THERE TAKING FOREVER TO GET IT DONE. SO IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF A ONE TIME, ONE TIME EXTENSION IN MY VIEW AS WELL. OKAY. NOT HEARING ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO ON TO ITEM THREE DELIBERATION REGARDING THE PURCHASE EXCHANGE LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.072 AND CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE SAME. PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.071 PURCHASE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2406 EARNHARDT LANE, LAGO VISTA, TEXAS. 78645 PARCELS ONE

[00:10:05]

ON. I, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT CONSISTENT WITH REAL ESTATE PURCHASE PRACTICE AND CITIES, THIS HAS BEEN TO DATE, THIS HAS BEEN DONE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. AND WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHY WE'RE INTERESTED IN THIS PROPERTY AND FOR THE FOR THE PUBLIC. IT'S, I THINK, APPROPRIATE AND AND I WOULD SUPPORT US NOT MAKING A DECISION TONIGHT, BUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, FULL DISCLOSURE IN TWO WEEKS BEFORE THAT DECISION IS MADE. BUT I DO WANT TO KIND OF LAY OUT THERE THE REASON THE CITY IS INTERESTED IN THIS PROPERTY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CREATING A GOLF COURSE. THIS IS ALL ABOUT EFFLUENT DISTRIBUTION. AND SO, SO, YOU KNOW, IF IF WE WERE TO GO THROUGH WITH THIS IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS, IT WOULD BE ABOUT SHORING UP OUR PLANS FOR DISTRIBUTING EFFLUENT OVER THE NEXT 30 YEARS OR MORE. AND, AND WE CERTAINLY HAVE NO INTENTION TO INVEST IN CREATING A SECOND GOLF COURSE IN THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. BUT BEFORE WE MAKE A DECISION, I DO THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR US TO GET ALL THE DETAILS OUT AND ALLOW FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND PUBLIC FEEDBACK, AND THEN WE'LL MAKE MAKE OUR DECISION. AT THAT POINT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ITEM FOUR CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENT. EMPLOYMENT. I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING, BUT GIVEN THE DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE, IF IT IS APPROPRIATE TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT ITEM AT THIS TIME BEFORE YOU MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM THREE. OKAY.

NOT SEEING ANY MOVE ON ITEM FOR CONSULTATION WITH LEGAL COUNSEL CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENT, APPOINTMENT EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT DUTIES, DISCIPLINE OR DISMISSAL OF AN EMPLOYEE PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 5551.07 FOR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER. ANY ACTION, MAYOR? NO ACTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE. I KNOW IT SOUNDS LIKE I'M TELLING YOU. ONE NATION. WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. AND SO THE TEXAS HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE.

TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. PLEASE STAY STANDING. WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE TO DO THE INVOCATION. WE HAVE MR. GLENN MOLLER. LET'S PRAY. OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN, WE COME BEFORE YOU WITH THANKFUL HEARTS. WE THANK YOU FOR THE MANY BLESSINGS YOU HAVE POURED OUT ON THIS COMMUNITY FOR OUR FAMILIES, NEIGHBORS, SCHOOLS AND BUSINESSES, THOSE WHO PROTECT AND SERVE US, AND FOR THE FREEDOMS AND OPPORTUNITIES WE OFTEN ENJOY EACH DAY. HELP US TO NOT OVERLOOK THESE GIFTS, BUT TO BE ABLE TO SEE THEM WITH GRATEFUL HEARTS. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ACCEPTED THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SERVING THIS CITY. WE KNOW THAT LEADERSHIP BRINGS BOTH PRIVILEGE AND RESPONSIBILITY, AND WE ASK YOUR BLESSING UPON EACH MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL, THE CITY STAFF, AND ALL WHO WORK FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMMUNITY. GRANT THEM TRUE WISDOM, NOT MERELY KNOWLEDGE OR HUMAN UNDERSTANDING, BUT THE WISDOM THAT COMES FROM YOU. GIVE THEM DISCERNMENT TO SEE CLEARLY, INTEGRITY TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT, HUMILITY TO LISTEN CAREFULLY, AND COURAGE TO MAKE DIFFICULT DECISIONS WHEN THEY ARE REQUIRED. AS MATTERS ARE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING, MAY EVERY PERSON SPEAK WITH RESPECT AND LISTEN WITH CARE. WHERE THERE ARE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION, LET THOSE DIFFERENCES BE EXPRESSED WITH KINDNESS AND CONSIDERED THOUGHTFUL. HELP EVERYONE PRESENT TO REMEMBER THAT WHILE WE MAY NOT ALWAYS AGREE, WE ALL SHARE A DESIRE FOR A SAFE, THRIVING, AND CARING COMMUNITY. MAY THE DECISIONS MADE TONIGHT PROMOTE JUSTICE, ENCOURAGE PEACE, AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE WELL-BEING OF ALL WHO CALL THIS CITY HOME. WE OFFER THIS PRAYER WITH GRATITUDE AND HUMILITY. IN JESUS NAME, AMEN. ALL RIGHT. FOR TIMING PURPOSES, I DO WANT

[VII. PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS (Part 1 of 2)]

[00:15:02]

THANK YOU. SO WE'RE GOING TO DO ITEM SEVEN ONE RECOGNITION OF CHARLIE NORRIS FOR OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT, EARNING A SCHOLARSHIP TO ATTEND MENLO COLLEGE IN ATHERTON AND COMPETE ON HIS OLYMPIC STYLE TAEKWONDO SPARRING TEAM. I HAVE A CERTIFICATE HERE FOR CHARLIE.

THIS IS IN RECOGNITION. THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA PRESENT A CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION TO CHARLIE NORRIS IN HONOR OF HIS EXEMPLARY ACCOMPLISHMENTS, DEDICATION AND POSITIVE REPRESENTATION OF THE LAGO VISTA COMMUNITY. CHARLIE IS BEING RECOGNIZED FOR HIS OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENTS IN TAEKWONDO, INCLUDING HIS RECRUITMENT SCHOLARSHIP TO MENLO COLLEGE IN ATHERTON, CALIFORNIA, WHERE HE WILL COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE'S OLYMPIC SPARRING TEAM. MENLO COLLEGE IS AMONG THE FIRST INSTITUTIONS IN THE COUNTRY TO ESTABLISH A COLLEGIATE SPARRING TEAM, AND CHARLIE SELECTION REFLECTS HIS DISCIPLINE, HARD WORK AND ATHLETIC EXCELLENCE. IN ADDITION TO HIS ATHLETIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS, CHARLIE IS ALSO RECOGNIZED FOR HIS COMMITMENT TO INSPIRING OTHERS THROUGH HIS MOTIVATIONAL AND INSPIRATIONAL CONTENT SHARED ON SOCIAL MEDIA. HIS CHARACTER, PERSEVERANCE, AND LEADERSHIP SERVE AS STRONG EXAMPLES FOR YOUTH IN THE LAGO VISTA COMMUNITY. THERE IS DEDICATION, ACHIEVEMENTS, AND POSITIVE INFLUENCE. CHARLIE NORRIS EXEMPLIFIES THE VALUE OF HARD WORK, PERSEVERANCE AND COMMUNITY PRIDE. THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA PROUDLY ACKNOWLEDGES HIS SUCCESS AND CELEBRATES HIM AS AN ASTOUNDING. AS AN ASTOUNDING REPRESENTATIVE OF ITS YOUTH. LET'S. PLEASE DO A ROUND OF APPLAUSE. DO YOU HAVE ANY WORDS? DID YOU WANT TO SAY YES? YES. I'D JUST LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE HERE, ALL MY FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND MOSTLY GOD, JUST FOR HELP SHAPING ME THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, BECAUSE I NEVER THOUGHT I'D BE RECOGNIZED BY A CITY OR FROM PRETTY MUCH ANYONE. AT ONE POINT, INSTEAD OF EVEN BEING RECOGNIZED BY LAGO VISTA, AND THAT IT'S JUST STILL CRAZY TO ME. THAT'S SOMETHING I NEVER WOULD HAVE THOUGHT HAVE HAPPENED. WELL, YOU EARNED IT. SO THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. WE WILL COME BACK TO CITIZEN COMMENTS. I THINK I ONLY HAVE ONE. IT'S ON

[VI. CITIZEN COMMENTS]

[XII. STAFF AND COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS]

THANK YOU, MAYOR AND ESTEEMED COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M GOING TO BE A SPOKESPERSON FOR OUR LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD AND TALK TO YOU. AND WE HAVEN'T GIVEN YOU ANY INFORMATION SINCE ABOUT THIS TIME LAST YEAR. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. SINCE THIS TIME LAST YEAR, WE GOT AN ESTEEMED MEMBER, JOE DAHLSTROM, PHD. HE WAS APPOINTED TO THE BOARD TO REPLACE AN OUTGOING MEMBER, AND HE HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE TEXAS LIBRARY ASSOCIATION FOR HIS EXCEPTIONAL LEADERSHIP ROLES. AND WITH THE TLA AND THE THE AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND THE

[00:20:05]

YOU COULD LOOK ON THE WEBSITE AND SEE WHAT A GREAT JOB THAT JANET AND HER STAFF ARE DOING

[00:25:05]

AND THEN TRYING TO KEEP THE LIBRARY AS BEING AN ATTRACTIVE, WHOLESOME PLACE TO COME. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF A HIGHLIGHTS OF WHAT WE'RE THINKING WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING IN, IN THE NEXT YEAR. AND JUST WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE'RE ACTIVE AND WELL, COME ON AND JOIN US OVER AT THE LIBRARY. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS FOR YOU. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL. ANY QUESTIONS FOR. MR. I DO HAVE ONE CITIZEN SIGNED UP FOR THIS, MR. PRINCE, SO I HAVEN'T BEEN THE LIAISON FOR THE LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD FOR ALMOST A YEAR. AND YOU GUYS MANAGED TO KEEP GETTING GOOD THINGS DONE. SO GOOD, GOOD WORK, MIKE AND AND CREW. BUT A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT ARE ON YOUR ACCOMPLISHMENT LIST WERE ON YOUR TO DO LIST WHEN I WAS LIAISON. SO GREAT TO SEE THAT I'VE OFTEN CALLED OUT TO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT I THINK THE LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD MAY BE THE BEST EXAMPLE OF A STRONGLY FUNCTIONING ADVISORY BOARD IN THE CITY. AND I ALWAYS SAY THERE'S KIND OF THREE LEGS TO THE STOOL. THERE'S THE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD ITSELF, THERE'S STAFF AND THE COOPERATIVE ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE ADVISORY BOARD AND STAFF. AND THEN THE THIRD LEG OF THE STOOL IS ANOTHER BODY THAT KIND OF GETS WORK DONE. AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY. SO I THINK GOOD WORK, FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY WHO, YOU KNOW, WERE IN THE MIDST OF A LOT OF THESE THINGS. I KNOW THE LAST THING I'LL SAY IS ON THE THE INSULATION AND HVAC FOR THE STORAGE ROOM. I PERSONALLY HAVE HEARD THE STORY BEHIND THAT, THE NEED FOR IT. I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. I THINK, MAYOR, CONSISTENT WITH WHERE YOU'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET US GOING ON, ON, ON OUR APPROACH TO, TO BUDGET RATHER THAN THAT JUST BEING BURIED IN THE LIBRARY BUDGET OR IN OR IN THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUDGET? I DON'T KNOW, MR. WEST, WHERE YOU WOULD PUT IT. IT'S PROBABLY BETTER TO MAKE THAT A STANDALONE ITEM AND SAY, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, NOT RELATED TO THINGS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT AS PART OF OUR, YOU KNOW, FIRST PASS BUDGET IN THE LIBRARY. BUT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WE STAFF WITH SUPPORT FROM THE ADVISORY BOARD THINK IS AN IMPORTANT THING TO DO, AND HERE'S HOW MUCH IT COSTS. SO ANYWAY, THAT'D BE MY FEEDBACK ON, ON THE APPROACH FOR, FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERING WHETHER TO, TO FUND THAT ACTIVITY. I JUST WANTED TO THANK JANET AND MIKE FOR THE PRESENTATION. AND BEING THE LIAISON HAS BEEN A BIG JOY. I'M REALLY GLAD THAT COUNCILOR PRINCE HAD ACTUALLY MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO ME. I WILL SAY THAT I'M IN LARGE SUPPORT OF GETTING THAT BUILDING SHORED UP. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT REALLY COULD GO IN THERE AND BE UTILIZED A LOT BETTER.

IF IT WAS WEATHERPROOFED HUMIDITY PROOFED AND IT WAS JUST CLIMATE CONTROLLED AND JUST WASN'T SUCKING THE AIR OUT OF EVERYTHING AND DETERIORATING HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS PEOPLE THAT WERE WANTING TO STEP FORWARD WITH OLD YEARBOOKS AND OLD, OLD NEWSPAPERS, AND THEY JUST DON'T. THE LIBRARY JUST REALLY DOESN'T HAVE THE SPACE WITHOUT JUST MAKING A HUGE MESS. AND THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS. SO THANK YOU. AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEXT YEAR. ALL RIGHT, MAYOR PRO TEM, THANK YOU. I AM NOT GOING TO SAY A LOT, OTHER THAN I HAPPEN TO KNOW SEVERAL OF THE MEMBERS ON THE LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. AND IF Y'ALL COULD JUST BOTTLE UP THAT 24 OVER SEVEN ENERGY THAT I KNOW Y'ALL WORK SO HARD IN THIS COMMUNITY, I CONTINUE TO SAY IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO TALK ABOUT IT WITHOUT ALMOST CRYING, BECAUSE MANY OF THOSE MEMBERS, I KNOW WHAT THEY DO AND I KNOW WHAT THEY'VE DONE FOR ME PERSONALLY. SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH AND CONGRATULATIONS ON A GREAT YEAR. OKAY. WELL THANK YOU. IT'S EASY TO WORK WITH THE CITY OF LAGO VISTA. THE PEOPLE HERE ARE VERY GENEROUS. AND SO I PERSONALLY JUST LOVE LIVING HERE IN THE CITY. AND I WANT TO SAY ONE THING. WHEN I DROVE IN DOWN DON DRIVE TODAY, I THOUGHT, WOW, WHAT A GREAT JOB. WHAT A WELCOMING DRIVE. ALL THE FLAGS, ALL THE NICE LANDSCAPING AND STUFF. MY HAT. I'LL TAKE MY HAT OFF TO THOSE THAT DID THAT. IT'S REALLY GREAT, YOU KNOW,

[00:30:05]

AND THEY PUT UP THAT METAL FRAME THING BEHIND THE BUILDING, AND WE NEVER THOUGHT WE'D BE IN THAT LIKE 15 OR 16 YEARS LATER BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THERE WOULD BE MORE EXPANSION OF THE LIBRARY FROM FOR THE MANY YEARS AFTER THAT. AND IN FACT, IT'S BEEN ON THE AGENDA FOR MULTIPLE CITY COUNCILS TO EXPAND THROUGH THIS PROPERTY BACK HERE, BOTH THE LIBRARY AND THE CITY HALL.

AND IT NEVER HAS COME ABOUT. SO I'M UP HERE JUST TO SAY, I THINK THE LIBRARY SERVES AS PERHAPS THE COMMUNITY CENTER FOR THE CITY AT THIS STAGE OF THE GAME. AND I HOPE YOU'RE WORKING ON THE BUDGET FOR THE FUTURE OF HOW THE CITY GETS EXPANDED AND HOW THE CITY HALL GETS EXPANDED AND CAN TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDS OF THE OF THE CITIZENS MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE GOT, BECAUSE THE MAKER SPACE IS NOT IN THE LIBRARY AT THIS TIME. WE NEED ALL THOSE KIND OF ACTIVITIES AND A BIGGER COMMUNITY CENTER IN TOTAL. BUT THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'RE DOING. AND PLEASE RAISE AS MUCH MONEY THROUGH THE TAX SYSTEM AS YOU CAN. I'M I RECOMMEND THAT YOU GO RIGHT UP TO THE LIMIT OF WHERE YOU CAN GO WITHOUT HAVING THE CITIZENS ELECTION AND THE TAX RATE. AND I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY BEEN IN THE PAST CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOU'VE NOT DONE THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THOUSANDS OR MILLIONS YOU'VE AVOIDED RAISING, BUT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WANT MORE SERVICES HERE. JUST LOOK AT HOW THE SCHOOL HAS DONE THEIR BOND ISSUES EVERY TIME AND PASSED THEM AND PUT IN FACILITIES THERE. WE SHOULD BE DOING THE SAME THING IN THE CITY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? MR. ONE OTHER COMMENT. THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD THAT ARE HERE TODAY, JOE DAHLSTROM, ARE YOU ALREADY RECOGNIZED? WE'VE GOT DON JOHNDRO, MARLENE PLEWA, WHO SHE SPOKE ON ANOTHER SUBJECT. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF OUR OUR BOARD. WELL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR WORK. AND FOR THE RECORD, THAT WAS AGENDA ITEM 12, A ONE. OKAY. WE WILL GO BACK TO. ITEM SEVEN

[VII. PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS (Part 2 of 2)]

[00:35:01]

THEY USE ALL KINDS OF CAMERAS, BUSINESS SECURITY CAMERAS. WE'VE USED THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITIES. MOST OF OUR BUSINESSES HAVE A SECURITY CAMERA. AND SO IT'S VERY HARD TO GO ANYWHERE THAT YOU'RE NOT RECORDED ON CAMERA. AND SO JUST TO SET THE THE STAGE THERE IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS LICENSE PLATE READERS. THEY'RE INSTALLED ALONG ROADWAYS, PUBLIC ROADWAYS, AND THE COURTS HAVE RULED THAT THERE IS NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY REGARDING YOUR LICENSE PLATE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IN TEXAS, WE ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE A TWO LICENSE PLATE STATE WHERE WE REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE A PLATE ON YOUR FRONT BUMPER AND ON YOUR BACK BUMPER SO THAT WE CAN BE EASILY IDENTIFIED IF YOUR VEHICLE HAPPENS TO BE INVOLVED IN A CRIME. AND SO THERE'S NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY, I THINK YOU'LL PROBABLY HEAR TONIGHT A LOT OF MISINFORMATION THAT'S OUT THERE ON THE WEB ABOUT WHAT THESE THINGS CAN AND CAN'T DO. I'VE PERSONALLY MET WITH THREE DIFFERENT CITIZENS ON THIS SUBJECT AND HEARD A LOT OF THIS MISINFORMATION FACE TO FACE. TODAY, MY PRESENTATION IS GOING TO BE BASED ON FACTS AND WHAT WE ACTUALLY USE THESE THINGS FOR. SO FIRST OF ALL, WHEN YOU LOG INTO THE FLOCK SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT WE OWN OR WHAT WE WE HAVE ACCESS TO LICENSE PLATE READER SYSTEM. IT HAS. THE VERY FIRST WARNING IS THAT YOU CAN'T ACCESS OR USE THIS SYSTEM FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE PURPOSES. OUR. WE HAVE POLICIES, INTERNAL POLICIES WITHIN THE LAGO VISTA PD, LIKE EVERY AGENCY THAT USES LICENSE PLATE READERS THAT SAY ROUGHLY THE SAME THING, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CRIMINAL JUSTICE PURPOSE TO ACCESS THESE TOOLS AND USE THESE TOOLS. WHENEVER YOU ACCESS THE SYSTEM, IT'S GOING TO ASK YOU TO ENTER IN CERTAIN INFORMATION. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE TO ENTER IN IS THE OFFENSIVE TYPE. THAT'S A REQUIRED FIELD, SO YOU CAN'T JUST GO IN THERE AND SEARCH ANYONE YOU WANT. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION ABOUT THAT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN OFFENSE THAT YOU'RE FOLLOWING.

FOR EXAMPLE, AM I LOOKING FOR SOMEONE THAT'S A A SUSPECT OF AN ASSAULT, A BURGLARY, A HIT AND RUN ACCIDENT, A HOMICIDE, KIDNAPING, STOLEN VEHICLE, TERRORISM, WANTED PERSON. THOSE ARE ALL JUST SOME OF THE CATEGORIES THAT YOU CAN ENTER. YOU'RE ALSO REQUESTED FOR MORE INFORMATION IF YOU HAVE IT, A CASE NUMBER, THE REASON FOR THE SEARCH AND THEN THOSE VEHICLE IDENTIFIERS. LICENSE PLATE READERS DON'T JUST READ LICENSE PLATES. THEY CAN ALSO READ VEHICLE IDENTIFIERS. COLOR MAKE MODEL OF VEHICLES. YOU ENTER IN A A SEARCH PARAMETER. SO AM I LOOKING FOR A CRIME THAT'S OCCURRED IN THE LAST FOUR HOURS? AM I LOOKING SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED TWO WEEKS AGO? SO YOU ENTER IN THE START AND END DATE OF YOUR SEARCH, AND THEN YOU CAN ENTER IN THE TIME YOU CAN ENTER IN AS SMALL A PARAMETER AS 15 MINUTES. IF YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHEN THE CRIME OCCURRED, ALL THE WAY UP TO 30 DAYS WHEN THOSE ENTER, WHEN THOSE VEHICLES ARE ENTERED IN THERE AS A SEARCH, IT CAN CREATE. YOU CAN CREATE AN ALERT. SO THE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCESS TO THE FLOCK CAMERAS HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE AN APP ON THEIR PHONE, AND THAT'LL GIVE THEM AN ALERT, A REAL TIME ALERT THAT SOMEONE HAS JUST COME THROUGH THERE. SO THE ALERTS ARE ONLY FOR THE VEHICLES THAT YOU'VE ENTERED, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, OR IF A VEHICLE IS STOLEN, THAT'S THE ONLY THINGS THAT THEY GIVE YOU AN ALERT FOR. IF YOU'RE IF YOU HAVEN'T PUT A VEHICLE IN THERE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY ALERTS WHEN YOU GET THOSE ALERTS. THE THE SYSTEM IS NOT FOOLPROOF. SOMETIMES THE LICENSE PLATE COULD BE OFF.

THEY COULD MISREAD A. THE SYSTEM COULD MISREAD A B AS AN EIGHT. AND SO THE OFFICER MUST VERIFY THAT INFORMATION AS ACCURACY. SO A LITTLE OVER THREE YEARS AGO, FLOCKS WERE PURCHASED IN THIS COMMUNITY AND THEY WERE PLACED ON THOSE LOCATIONS. CHIEF FRANCO AND I HAVE DONE AN EVALUATION OF OUR CURRENT FLOCK LOCATIONS, AND WE HAVE REQUESTED THAT THEY BE MOVED. OUR NEW LOCATIONS WILL BE MOVED ON EACH END OF 1431, SO WE CAN CAPTURE WHO COMES IN AND OUT OF OUR CITIES. AND THEN THE ONE LOCATION THAT'S NORTHBOUND ON LOHMAN CAPTURES

[00:40:04]

THEY'VE BEEN USED TO APPREHEND ONE PERSON FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT, TO APPREHEND A PERSON WHO IS WANTED FOR A VIOLATION OF THEIR PROTECTIVE ORDER, TO IDENTIFY POTENTIAL VEHICLES IN AUTO BURGLARY INVESTIGATIONS, IDENTIFY POTENTIAL VEHICLES IN BUSINESS BURGLARY INVESTIGATIONS. AND JUST IN THE LAST 30 DAYS, ONE OF OUR DETECTIVES USED IT TO SUCCESSFULLY IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT IN HIT AND RUN COLLISION OCCURRED IN OUR COMMUNITY. SO THEY ARE THEY HAVE BEEN VALUABLE TO US. THEY ARE BEING USED AS A GOOD LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOL HERE. SO LET'S LOOK AT SOME RECENT EVENTS JUST IN IN MAY. THIS HAPPENED IN AUSTIN FOR MOST OF US. WE WE SAW THE NEWS. BUT JUST TO REMIND YOU THAT ON MAY 16TH, 1130, A SHOOTING SPREE BEGAN IN OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY OF AUSTIN, TEXAS. 12 SEPARATE SHOOTINGS INCIDENTS, 21 CRIMINAL INCIDENTS, INCLUDING THEFT OF FIVE VEHICLES AND A FIREARM, AND THE FIRING OF OVER 105 ROUNDS. IN THAT EVENT, FOUR PEOPLE WERE INJURED. ONE OF THEM WAS SERIOUSLY INJURED, HAD LIFE THREATENING INJURIES. FIVE CARS WERE HIT BY GUNFIRE, FOUR HOMES WERE HIT BY GUNFIRE. TWO AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENTS WERE HIT BY GUNFIRE AND THREE AUSTIN FIRE DEPARTMENT TRUCKS WERE HIT BY GUNFIRE. THE SUSPECTS WERE APPREHENDED 27 HOURS AND 53 MINUTES LATER, ON MAY 17TH. SO AS WE EVALUATE THAT INCIDENT THAT HAPPENED VERY, VERY CLOSE TO US, WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM IT? IN THE AFTERMATH OF THAT, WE'VE SEEN THE LICENSE PLATE READER DISCUSSION. SO AUSTIN POLICE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.

THEIR CITY COUNCIL TOOK THAT AWAY FROM THEM LAST YEAR AFTER SOME CITIZENS EXPRESSED PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES CONCERNS. ONCE THE SUSPECTS LEFT THE AUSTIN AREA, THEY ENTERED THE

[00:45:04]

I'LL OPEN TO THE COUNCIL TO ASK QUESTIONS OF CHIEF. I'LL REMIND YOU I'VE OVER 17 CITIZEN COMMENTS TO READ IN ON THIS, SO I ASK THAT YOU KEEP THESE QUESTIONS HONEST PRESENTATION AND NOT GO INTO DEEPER DISCUSSION. COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA, THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION.

I HAVE HAD VERY MIXED OPINIONS WITH FLOCK, AND SO THANK YOU FOR THIS. I DO LIKE THAT Y'ALL ARE DECIDING LIKE TO MOVE TO MOVE THE LOCATIONS OF THEM. I'M NOT A FAN OF FLOCK IN GENERAL JUST BECAUSE I HAVE. I HAVE HISTORY WITH FLOCK AND BEING HACKED. SO AND THAT WAS IN AND THAT IS BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY DIDN'T HAVE THE PRIVACY PRACTICES IN PLACE LIKE THAT LAGO VISTA DOES. AND I ALSO AM CONCERNED ABOUT YOU SAID THAT THERE'S ONLY CERTAIN FEW PEOPLE OF STAFF THAT CAN ACTUALLY ACCESS THIS. BUT WHAT IS OUR SHARING PRACTICES WITH FLOCK AND ABOUT THIRD PARTY ACCESS? SO IF IT'S NOT JUST I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SAID IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOUR DETECTIVES AND IT'S ONLY KEPT FOR 30 DAYS, BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT'S NOT REALLY TRUE BECAUSE THERE'S THESE BACKGROUNDS OF YOU MAY ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO IT FOR 30 DAYS, BUT THERE'S A HARD DRIVE OUT THERE OR A CLOUD OUT THERE THAT'S GOT THIS DATA. AND IF IT'S NOT, IF IT REALLY IS BEING EXPOSED OR BEING GETTING RID OF AFTER EVERY 30 DAYS, ARE WE GETTING REPORTS THAT, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT THESE DATES ARE BEING ELIMINATED? AND WHO HAS, IS THERE LIKE AN ACCESS REPORT TO SEE WHO IS ACTUALLY VIEWING THESE? I MEAN, ARE YOU GETTING LIKE A WEEKLY REPORT SAYING DETECTIVE SO-AND-SO LOOKED UP THIS, THIS, THIS AND THIS AND THIS, AND THEN IF ANY ACTION WAS FOLLOWED UP ON THOSE, IS THERE IS THERE A REPORTING MECHANISM FOR THAT? SO THE AUDIT IS SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TO MANUALLY DO AND GO IN THERE AND SEE WHO HAS BEEN LOOKING AND USING IT. AND I'VE DONE THAT THREE TIMES SINCE I'VE BEEN YOUR CHIEF AS RECENT AS TODAY, TO SEE WHO IS USING IT AND WHY. THE THE 30 DAYS IS SOMETHING THAT FLOCK MAINTAINS. YOU CANNOT KEEP IT LONGER. COMMUNITIES HAVE DECIDED TO KEEP DATA FOR SHORTER PERIODS OF TIME, BUT YOU CAN'T EXTEND IT BEYOND 30. AND THIS IS JUST SIMPLY A MATTER OF COST. THE FLOCK HAS PROBABLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CAMERAS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES BY NOW. AND AS YOU KNOW, STORING DATA IN THE CLOUD IS EXPENSIVE, AND SO THEY CAN'T RETAIN IT ANY FURTHER. IT AUTOMATICALLY DELETES JUST FOR A COST SAVING MEASURE. SO I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY OF THE MISINFORMATION THAT'S OUT THERE ON THE WEB THAT THAT STUFF IS

[00:50:05]

IT'S NOT YOU CAN'T DO THAT ANYMORE. THERE'S NOT EVEN A PORT ON THE BACK OF A FLOCK CAMERA TO DO THAT ANYMORE. FLOCKS DATABASE, ACCORDING TO FLOCK, HAS NEVER BEEN HACKED, NEVER BEEN BREACHED. BUT I WILL TELL YOU THIS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MOST EXPENSIVE COMPANIES IN THE WORLD, NVIDIA, TESLA, ALL OF THEM HAVE BEEN HACKED THIS YEAR. AND SO HACKING IS A PROBLEM THAT EVERYONE HAS ABOUT DATA. THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE HACKING. THEY'RE HACKING A LICENSE PLATE. IF YOU'RE NOT A CRIMINAL, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULD WORRY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY ON A PUBLIC ROADWAY ANYWAY. SO SOMEONE CAN STAND OUT ON THE ROADWAY AND TAKE A PICTURE OF YOUR LICENSE PLATE EVERY DAY AS YOU GO BY. AND THEY HAVE THAT DATA, IT'S IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO ME. IT'S NOT IMPORTANT. IT DOESN'T CAPTURE FACES. SO THERE'S NOT A, NOT A REAL CONCERN FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. MR. BENEFIELD SO, OFFICER CHIEF JOE, I APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION. AS YOU HAVE STATED, THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT THERE AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU DID A GREAT JOB CLARIFYING THAT. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT THE FLOCK SYSTEM, BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT MR. WEST NOMINATED YOU TO BE OUR POLICE CHIEF. I VOTED IN FAVOR OF THAT. IF YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT IS NEEDED IN OUR TOWN TO HELP SUPPORT YOUR EFFORTS TO KEEP OUR CRIME LOW, I SUPPORT YOU 100% ON THAT. AND WHATEVER YOU NEED FOR ME TO KEEP OUR PUBLIC AND CITIZENS SAFE, I'LL SUPPORT YOU COMPLETELY. SO IF YOU THINK IT'S A GOOD THING, I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING. THANK YOU, MR. MAYFIELD. OKAY, WITH THAT, I'LL OPEN UP CITIZEN COMMENTS AND WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE YOU BACK, CHIEF. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. FIRST ONE I HAVE HERE IS EBS VON WORKING. AS A REMINDER.

EVERYBODY HAS THREE MINUTES. I'VE DONATED TIME. YOU HAVE DONE ONE AT A TIME. YOU HAVE SIX MINUTES. IT IS ALMOST THE 4TH OF JULY. THIS IS THE WEEK WHERE WE HANG FLAGS, LIGHT FIREWORKS, TALK ABOUT FREEDOM, AND CELEBRATE THE BIRTH OF A COUNTRY THAT WAS BUILT ON THE IDEA THAT GOVERNMENT POWER MUST HAVE LIMITS. SO BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT CAMERAS AND CONTRACTS, I WANT TO START WITH THE THING THAT SHOULD MATTER MOST IN THIS ROOM TONIGHT THE CONSTITUTION, THE FOURTH AMENDMENT SAYS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO BE SECURE IN THEIR PERSONS, HOUSES, PAPERS AND EFFECTS AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED AND NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, SUPPORTED BY THE OATH OR AFFIRMATION, AND PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED AND THE PERSON OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED. THE FOURTH AMENDMENT PROVIDES IN RELEVANT PART THAT THE RIGHT OF THE

[00:55:02]

FLOCK IS NOT SOME SMALL LOCAL SAFETY PROGRAM. FLOCK IS NOW A 100 000 PLUS CAMERA. NATIONAL SURVEILLANCE NETWORK OVER 50 CITIES AND COUNTIES ACROSS 20 STATES HAVE ALREADY REJECTED, CANCELED OR DEACTIVATED FLOCK TO BROADER REPORTS SHOWING 82 TERMINATED CONTRACTS. I HOPE LAGO VISTA HAS THE COURAGE TO JOIN THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE TAKING A STEP BACK AND SAYING, WAIT A MINUTE, AND EVERY TIME CITIZENS RAISE CONCERNS, THEY ARE TOLD THE SAME THING. DON'T WORRY, IT'S ONLY FOR THE BAD GUYS. BUT HISTORY HAS NEVER WORKED THAT WAY. EVERY SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM IS SOLD TO THE PUBLIC AS PROTECTION. EVERY LOSS OF LIBERTY IS FIRST MARKETED AS SAFETY. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE WE NORMALIZE THE SURVEILLANCE IN OUR CITY. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE VULNERABILITIES.

THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST 51 FOUND VULNERABLE VULNERABILITIES IN FLOCK SYSTEMS THAT ARE EASILY ACCESSIBLE. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES, CAN WE HAVE FIREWALLS THAT PROTECT AGAINST ALL 51 VULNERABILITIES? NO, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE MOST OF THE VULNERABILITIES ARE PHYSICAL. YOU CANNOT YOU CANNOT FIREWALL A CAMERA SITTING ON A POLE. YOU CANNOT FIREWALL EVERY PERSON WHO TOUCHES THE SYSTEM. AND YOU ABSOLUTELY CANNOT FIREWALL HUMAN NATURE. THE VULNERABILITIES ARE BEYOND JUST THE HARDWARE. THERE HAVE BEEN AT LEAST 25 REPORTED CASES DOCUMENTED SO FAR. POLICE OFFICERS USING THESE KINDS OF SYSTEMS TO STALK WOMEN. AND BEFORE ANYONE SAYS, WELL, THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN HERE, I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT HAS ALREADY HAPPENED HERE IN LARGO. WITHOUT THE USE OF THESE CAMERAS. THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN DOCUMENTED CASES OF FLOCK MISREADING PLATES, WHICH HAS RESULTED IN INNOCENT PEOPLE BEING STOPPED, DETAINED AND EVEN BRUTALIZED BY POLICE. FLOCK LIKES TO ADVERTISE HIGH ACCURACY. THEY CLAIM AROUND 93%. BUT LET'S SIT WITH THAT FOR A SECOND. 93% SOUNDS GOOD IN A SALES PRESENTATION, BUT 93% IS STILL 1 BILLION WRONG READS A MONTH. NOW, ONE OF THE CLAIMS THAT WE HEAR OFTEN ABOUT FLOCK IS THAT THEY DO NOT SELL THE ORIGINAL COLLECTED DATA, AND TECHNICALLY THAT IS ACCURATE. THAT'S FINALLY SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE NOT LIED ABOUT. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK DEEPER AND REALIZE THAT YOU CAN SEE THE GAME THAT IS BEING PLAYED, THEY CLAIM BROAD, FREE, PERPETUAL RIGHTS TO THE DATA THEY COLLECT AND PROCESS, WHICH HAPPENS TO INCLUDE COPIES, DERIVATIVES, METADATA, ANALYTICAL OUTPUTS, AND ANYTHING ELSE GENERATED FROM THE ORIGINAL INFORMATION. SO YES, THEY MAYBE DON'T SELL THE ORIGINAL. AND THAT BRINGS ME TO ANOTHER QUESTION. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE DATA COLLECTED HERE IN LAGO VISTA? IS IT PUBLIC RECORD? CAN ANYONE REQUEST IT? SOME CITIES HAVE TRIED TO SAY THAT THE INFORMATION IS TOO PRIVATE TO HAND OVER, WHICH IS IRONIC. AND WHEN CITIES MAKE THE ARGUMENT, THEY LOST LAWSUITS. NOW SOME CITIES ARE BEING FORCED TO RETROACTIVELY DOWNLOAD AND STORE THE DATA BEFORE THE 30 DAY DELETION WINDOW, JUST SO THEY CAN COMPLY WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS. THAT MEANS THAT THE CITY MAY BE COLLECTING DEEPLY SENSITIVE MOVEMENT DATA ON RESIDENTS, VISITORS, WORKERS, FAMILIES, CHURCHGOERS, POLITICAL ATTENDEES, BUSINESS OWNERS, AND EVERYONE ELSE WHO DRIVES THROUGH TOWN WHILE ALSO OPENING THE DOOR TO LEGAL FIGHTS OVER WHO GETS TO SEE IT. SO WHICH IS IT? IS THIS INFORMATION SO PRIVATE THAT IT MUST BE PROTECTED FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE? OR IS IT SO HARMLESS THAT WE SHOULD NOT WORRY ABOUT COLLECTING IT IN THE FIRST PLACE? TONIGHT I WILL BE REQUESTING ACCESS TO THE COPIES AND FOLLOWING PUBLIC RECORDS RE RELATING TO THE LBPD SURVEILLANCE CAMERA NETWORK THROUGHOUT THE CITY. THE FOLLOWING WILL BE SENT TO THE CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS. PLEASE PROVIDE RECORDS COVERING THE PERIOD JANUARY 2021 THROUGH PRESENT. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. ALL POLICIES, PROCEDURES, MEMORANDA, DIRECTIVES OR LEGAL ANALYSIS GOVERNING THE DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATION OF SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS. ANY LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROGRAM UNDER FEDERAL OR STATE CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS. POLICIES GOVERNING FOURTH AMENDMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND PRIVACY PROTECTIONS. ANY CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS AUTHORIZING THE CAMERA NETWORK. ALL CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS, MEMORANDA AND UNDERSTANDING PURCHASE ORDERS OR AMENDMENTS WITH THE VENDORS OR SERVICE PROVIDERS RELATED TO SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS. ALPERS REAL TIME CRIME CENTERS, VIDEO ANALYTICS, FACIAL RECOGNITION OR AI, DATA STORAGE, OR CLOUD SERVICES USED FOR THE CAMERA FOOTAGE. PLEASE INCLUDE VENDOR PROPOSALS, RFP RESPONSES AND BID DOCUMENTS, CAMERA LOCATIONS, AND PROPOSED NEW LOCATIONS. RECORDS IDENTIFYING THE NUMBER AND LOCATIONS OF CAMERAS DEPLOYED OR TO BE DEPLOYED OR MOVED TO MAPS, GIS DATA SETS OR INVENTORIES OF SURVEILLANCE

[01:00:06]

ALL RIGHT. HE HAS SIX MINUTES. WHAT SHE WAS SAYING COMMUNICATIONS, EMAILS, MEMORANDUMS, INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN LVPD PERSONNEL AND CITY OFFICIALS OR VENDORS REFERENCING. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW IF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY OFFERED A GRANT TO INSTALL THESE, OR IF THE CITY DECIDED TO USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS WITHOUT CONSULTATION. PLEASE PROVIDE THOSE RECORDS IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT VIA EMAIL OR DOWNLOAD LINK. NOW, SPEAKING ON THE DATA COLLECTED BY THESE CAMERAS, DATA THAT FLOCK CLAIMS BROAD RIGHTS TO. IN THE CONTRACT YOU HAD TO SIGN, THEY HAVE PERPETUAL. THEY HAVE PERPETUAL RIGHTS TO IT. THIS IS NOT COMPLICATED. WE NEED TO STOP PRETENDING THAT IT'S ONLY ABOUT LICENSE PLATES. A VIDEO CAMERA TAKES A VIDEO. YES, THE FRONT END USE THAT WE GET PD CAN GO SEE THE SCREENSHOT THAT THE PROGRAM GIVES YOU. THE VIDEO WAS COLLECTED AND SENT TO FLOCK.

SO WHEN YOU GO GET THE VIDEO, YOU CAN GET THE WHOLE IMAGE. I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS WOULD BE OBVIOUS FROM THE FACT THAT THESE ARE, OH, I'M MESSED UP HER SPEECH, BUT I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING. I WOULD HOPE THIS WOULD BE OBVIOUS FROM THE FACT THAT THESE ARE POINTED AT THINGS OTHER THAN ROADS AND CARS. FLOCK HAS AN INTEGRATED OSIT SEARCH TOOL FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW OR HAVE COMPUTER BACKGROUND. THAT STANDS FOR OPEN SOURCE NETWORK INTELLIGENCE TOOL. I DON'T KNOW IF LVPD SPECIFICALLY USES THE FLOCK NOVA PART OF THEIR OS, BUT ALL THE DATA GOES TO IT. SO JUST BECAUSE YOU MIGHT NOT USE IT DOESN'T MEAN FLOCK DOESN'T HAVE THE DATA. IT ALLOWS FOR A SMALL PIECE OF DATA, LIKE A LICENSE PLATE OR PHONE NUMBER, TO LOOP THROUGH THAT DATABASE OVER AND OVER UNTIL THEY BUILD OUT A FULL PROFILE THAT FURTHER LOOPS. AND YOU CAN ALSO TRACK THE PEOPLE THAT COME TO YOUR HOUSE AND VISIT. THEY BRAG ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEY'VE CAUGHT CRIMINALS, BECAUSE THEY'VE VISITED OTHER PEOPLE, AND THEY HAD CERTAIN POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS. 2470, SO YEAH, THEY'LL FOLLOW OTHER POLITICAL THINGS, RELIGIOUS, RELIGIOUS, HABITUAL, OTHER ASPECTS OF YOUR LIFE, PLACES YOU VISIT, ANYTHING YOU COULD DERIVE FROM FOLLOWING SOMEONE AROUND 247 AND OBSERVING YOUR EVERY ACTION.

THIS TOOL ALSO ALLOWS THIS TO BE DONE WITHOUT EXTRA STEPS. FLOCK CLAIMS THIS AS A TECHNOLOGY WILL SOON BE USED TO PREVENT FUTURE CRIME. IF ANYONE'S WATCHED MINORITY REPORT. IF YOU HAVE BEEN WATCHING THE NEWS, YOU'VE BEEN SEEING PEOPLE GETTING ARRESTED OVERSEAS FOR DISAGREEMENTS WITH POLITICIANS OR EVEN DISAGREEING WITH OTHER FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

IT ISN'T AN ISSUE OF IS LOGO GOING TO MISUSE THIS FLOCK WILL MISUSE THIS. ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY. SO IT'S NOT JUST A LICENSE PLATE READER ISSUE. THE FLOCK ECOSYSTEM ITSELF IS THE ISSUE. EVEN IF LVPD IS UNDER THE BELIEF THAT IT'S JUST A LICENSE PLATE READER, THAT'S NOT WHAT FLOCK IS USING THE INFORMATION FOR. MOST OF US HERE AREN'T HERE TO COME TAKE AFTER AND TAKE DOWN LVPD. IT'S RAISING THE ALARM OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS WITHIN THEIR ECOSYSTEM. FLOCK IS ALSO INTEGRATED WITH THE PREDICTIVE POLICING SOFTWARE. PALANTIR PETER THIEL, A HEAD MEMBER OF PALANTIR, DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY ARE COMPATIBLE. THAT DOESN'T REALLY PUT YOU IN THE MOOD FOR CELEBRATING THE 4TH OF JULY. IN FICTION, PALANTIR IS A TOOL FROM THE LORD OF THE RINGS UNIVERSE THAT'S USED TO SPY ON PEOPLE, AND THE TOOL CORRUPTED THE PEOPLE WHO USED IT. I HAVE THE DONATED TIME. OKAY. SEE IT.

IN REALITY, PALANTIR IS A TOOL, IN FACT, USED TO SPY ON PEOPLE AND IT IS BEING ABUSED. IT'S CRAZY THAT ACLU, THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, JAY STANLEY, WROTE THE PALANTIR SOFTWARE COULD ENABLE A TOTALITARIAN NIGHTMARE, MONITORING THE ACTIVITIES OF INNOCENT AMERICANS ON A MASS SCALE. YOU HAVE PEOPLE FROM EVERY SIDE OF EVERY POLITICAL FIELD, EVERY RELIGIOUS BELIEF, EVERY WALK OF LIFE COMING TOGETHER SAYING, HEY, MAYBE WHAT THE PARENT COMPANY DOES IS KIND OF SKETCHY IN BED. AND THAT'S SOMETHING YOU SHOULD CONSIDER. I NEED PRIVACY, NOT BECAUSE MY ACTIONS ARE QUESTIONABLE, BUT BECAUSE THE JUDGMENTS AND INTENTIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE ARE LICENSE PLATES. YEAH. UNTIL 2025, THE LICENSE PLATE READERS WERE JUST LICENSE PLATE READERS. AND IN 2025, THEY ROLLED OUT A FREE UPGRADE.

EVERY VIDEO IS NOW A FULL TIME VIDEO SURVEILLANCE. YOU CAN OPT OUT OF IT, THOUGH I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE OPTED IN. SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT. THAT'S GOOD. FLOCK STILL HAS IT. IT'S A VIDEO CAMERA. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE'S WEARING PANTS UP THERE. YES, I DO. YEAH. THE TAGLINE OF FLOCK NOVA AND THEIR PATENTED FREE FORM SEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU CAN JUST TAKE ONE PIECE OF DATA LIKE SOCIAL SECURITY OR A TAG OR LICENSE PLATE, AND THEIR TAGLINE IS SEARCH ONE, SEE

[01:05:05]

THANK YOU. I HAVE VIRGIL ROGERS. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS VIRGIL ROGERS. I LIVE AT 20303 SUNSET LANE HERE IN LARGO. THANK YOU FOR HEARING FROM ME AND THE RESIDENTS TONIGHT AS YOU DISCUSS FLOCK SAFETY CAMERAS. THIS IS ONLY THE BEGINNING OF OUR EFFORT, BUT I'M ALREADY ALREADY HEARING STRONG CONCERNS FROM NEIGHBORS. WE ALL WANT LAGO VISTA TO REMAIN SAFE, AND IT ALREADY IS. OUR CITY HAS ONE OF THE LOWEST CRIME RATES IN THE AREA. WE DO NOT NEED TO TRADE OUR PRIVACY FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY. AFTER NINE OVER 11, WE RUSHED INTO A MASSIVE SURVEILLANCE STATE IN THE NAME OF SAFETY. MANY OF THOSE MEASURES MEASURES DELIVERED LITTLE REAL TO REAL, NO PROTECTION WHILE PERMANENTLY ERODING OUR FREEDOMS. WE SHOULD LEARN FROM THIS HISTORY INSTEAD OF REPEATING IT HERE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. THESE FLOCK CAMERAS DO MORE THAN READ LICENSE PLATES. THEY PHOTOGRAPH EVERY PASSING VEHICLE, RECORD, RECORD, MAKE MODEL COLOR, BUMPER STICKERS, AND OFTEN A SHORT VIDEO CLIPS THAT INCLUDE OCCUPANTS. THE DATA IS STORED FOR UP TO 30 DAYS AND UPLOADED TO A NATIONWIDE DATABASE AT. LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY CAN SEARCH, USUALLY WITHOUT A WARRANT. THIS CREATES A CONSTANT DIGITAL TRAIL OF WHERE RESIDENTS DRIVE EVERY DAY.

NEWER FLOCK SYSTEMS ARE EVEN EXPANDING INTO AI TRACKING OF PEOPLE, LOCATION TO LOCATION.

BECAUSE OF THIS DISCUSSION IS HAPPENING TONIGHT, I AM LAUNCHING A FORMAL PETITION

[01:10:03]

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. AS A SURVIVOR OF STALKING, ASSAULT AND VIOLENT RAPE IN MY LIFE, NOT EVEN I APPROVE OF SUPPORT OR CONSENT TO THE USE OF FLOCK CAMERAS. DUE TO THE IMPLICATIONS OF PRIVACY AND RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. I AM NOT OKAY WITH OCCURRENCES LIKE MINE BEING USED AS JUSTIFICATION UNDER THE GUISE OF SAFETY AS TO WHY WE SHOULD ALL BE SURVEILLED BY FLOCK IN THIS MANNER, ESPECIALLY HERE IN OUR LAGO. AND I'M HERE AS A VOICE AGAINST IT. PLEASE PUT A STOP TO THE FLOCK. SURVEILLANCE. THE PEOPLE DID NOT REQUEST IT. WE MUST BE VERY, VERY MINDFUL OF WHAT WE NORMALIZE. THIS TOPIC DESERVES GREAT DISCERNMENT AND EVEN GREATER WISDOM. WE'RE DEPENDING ON YOU TO USE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE NAN NESMITH.

HELLO. SORRY, I WAS REWRITING MY NOTES BECAUSE EVERYBODY SAID A LOT OF THINGS ALREADY. SO I DO APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE PRESENTATION. IT WAS VERY HELPFUL. ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS I KNOW WE HAVE TO WAIT ON THE CAMERAS TO BE MOVED FOR 1431, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE ONE ON BAQUET? THAT IS A BIG CONCERN TO ME THAT THAT GET MOVED AWAY FROM THE MIDDLE SCHOOL SHOULD BE FIRST, TOP PRIORITY TO GET IT AWAY FROM THE KIDS. I ALSO AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DATA NOW THAT WE HAVE AGAIN KEPT FOR 30 DAYS. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT DOES THE CITY RECEIVE ANY TYPE OF REPORTS OR DOCUMENTATION SAYING THAT THIS DATA IS NOW HERE AND WILL NEVER BE USED? THAT IS A BIT CONCERNING. IF YOU'VE EVER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GET REPORTS FROM FLOCK OR NOT THAT SAYS, THIS IS WHAT WE DO WITH OUR DATA. I DO BELIEVE IN SECTION FOUR, AND AGAIN, I'LL LET BRAD KIND OF LOOK AT THAT ON 4.5 OF THE CONTRACT THE CITY HAS SIGNED WITH FLOCK, THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE OUR DATA TO GENERATE AND PERFORM UPDATES FOR THEIR SYSTEMS SO THEY CAN TAKE OUR DATA, DUMP IT IN THEIR SYSTEMS, AND THEN THEY CAN SAY, WE'RE GOING TO TEST OUR SYSTEM BASED ON THIS. WE'RE GOING TO UPGRADE THIS TO GET A CLEAR SHOT OF THIS OR THAT. I MEAN, DO WE FULLY KNOW WHAT THEY USE OUR DATA FOR? THAT'S JUST MY QUESTIONS. AND I'M REALLY MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE KID PART. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE EILEEN WOLFORD. THANK YOU MAYOR. I'M EILEEN WOLFORD FROM LAGO VISTA COUNCIL MEMBERS. I MIGHT I MIGHT BE REDUNDANT, BUT I'M GOING TO SAY IT AGAIN. THE SURVEILLANCE COMPANY FLOCK SAFETY IS BLANKETING AMERICAN CITIES WITH DANGEROUSLY POWERFUL AND UNREGULATED AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION CAMERAS USING A WHILE LICENSE PLATE READERS HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR SOME TIME, FLOCK IS THE FIRST TO CREATE A NATIONWIDE MASS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM OUT OF ITS CUSTOMERS CAMERAS. UNLIKE A TARGETED ALPR CAMERA SYSTEM THAT IS DESIGNED TO TAKE PICTURES OF LICENSE PLATES, CHECK THE PLATES AGAINST LOCAL HOT LISTS, AND THEN FLUSH THE DATA IF THERE'S NO HIT. FLOCK IS BUILDING A GIANT CAMERA NETWORK THAT RECORDS PEOPLE'S COMINGS AND GOINGS ACROSS THE NATION, AND THEN MAKES THE DATA AVAILABLE FOR SEARCH BY ANY OF ITS LAW ENFORCEMENT CUSTOMERS. SUCH A SYSTEM PROVIDES SMALL TOWN SHERIFFS ACCESS TO A SWEEPING AND POWERFUL SURVEILLANCE TOOL, AND ALLOWS BIG ACTORS LIKE FEDERAL AGENCIES AND LARGE URBAN POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO ACCESS THE COMINGS AND GOINGS OF VEHICLES AND EVEN THE SMALLEST OF TOWNS LIKE OURS.

[01:15:02]

OKAY. SORRY. THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE HERE, TOO, FOR MR. GENE HARRIS. I DON'T SEE HIM. OKAY. AHEAD. NOW, THE REST OF THESE ARE EITHER I READ THEM OR I. THEY SAID THEY WOULD TRY TO BE HERE. ALISON FREER. OKAY. WELL, SHE SENT ME HERS TO READ. HELLO. MY NAME IS ALISON FREER AND I'M A RESIDENT HERE IN LAGO VISTA. I'M ASKING THE COUNCIL NOT TO APPROVE THIS FLOCK CAMERA CONTRACT AND MORE THAN THAT, TO ASK WHY IT'S EVEN ON THE AGENDA. WE ARE A TOWN OF ABOUT 13,000 PEOPLE THAT CAN RELIABLY KEEP CLEAN WATER IN THE PIPES. WE JUST SUBMITTED TO WATER QUALITY VIOLATIONS AND WRITING. WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF UNPAVED ROADS. WE ARE $86 MILLION UNDERWATER ON INFRASTRUCTURE. WE'RE BEGGING WASHINGTON HELP FUND FOR. AND THIS MASS SURVEILLANCE OF EVERY RESIDENT IS WHAT ROSE TO THE TOP OF THE LIST. NOBODY ASKED FOR THIS. NO CRISIS DEMANDED IT. MORE THAN 50 CITIES HAVE ALREADY TORN THESE SYSTEMS OUT, SOME PAYING TO REMOVE CAMERAS THEY JUST INSTALLED. WE'D BE SIGNING UP FOR WHAT OTHER TOWNS ARE PAYING TO ESCAPE. AND IT CAME FROM A POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT CAN'T KEEP A CHIEF. SO THE QUESTION ISN'T HOW WE PAY FOR IT, IT'S WHY IT'S EVEN BEING CONSIDERED WHEN EVERYTHING THAT ACTUALLY AFFECTS DAILY LIFE HERE IS BEING NEGLECTED. BECAUSE UNDERSTAND WHAT IT DOES.

THESE CAMERAS AREN'T JUST WATCHING CRIMINALS. THEY LOG EVERY RESIDENT'S MOVEMENTS WHERE YOU WORSHIP, WHERE YOU SEE YOUR DOCTOR, THE GUN RANGE, WHO YOU VISIT. IT'S A PERMANENT GOVERNMENT RECORD OF LAW ABIDING PEOPLE WHO'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG. AND IT DOESN'T STAY HERE. THE DATA FLOWS INTO A NATIONAL NETWORK SEARCHABLE BY THOUSANDS OF OUTSIDE AGENCIES. WE DIDN'T ELECT AND CAN'T HOLD ACCOUNTABLE. OFFICERS ELSEWHERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN CAUGHT USING THESE SYSTEMS TO TRACK EX-PARTNERS AND PRIVATE CITIZENS. WE DON'T NEED THIS. A TOWN THIS SMALL, TOO STRETCHED AND THIS FAR BEHIND ON THE BASICS HAS NO BUSINESS SPENDING A DOLLAR OR A MINUTE WATCHING ITS OWN RESIDENTS FIX THE WATER, FIX THE ROADS, VOTE NO. NEXT ONE I HAVE IS DEBORAH NATHANSON. SHE WROTE. AND SHE CAN MAKE IT FLAT. CAMERAS. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT I'M AGAINST INSTALLING ANY MORE OF THESE, AND THEY CANNOT FULLY SATISFY OUR PRIVACY RIGHTS. AND WHO GETS THE DATA AND WHAT THE DATA IS. NEXT, I HAD AARON TULLIS.

AARON SAID THE COMMENTS IN I'M WRITING TODAY IN LIEU OF ATTENDING THE PUBLIC MEETING, AS I HAVE A PRIOR OBLIGATION. THIS EVENING AS A HOMEOWNER IN THE HIGHLAND LAKES, PO I GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE USE OF FLOCK CAMERAS WITHIN THE CITY. I'LL ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THE THREE PRIMARY CONCERNS AS SUCCINCTLY AS POSSIBLE. ONE CLAIMS THAT FLOCK CAMERAS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY, SUBSTANTIVELY REDUCING CRIME ARE UNSUBSTANTIATED. BUT ANY REAL WORLD, REAL, ANY REAL WORLD DATA. YET THESE CLAIMS ARE USED TO DEFEND THE USE OF ALPR BY COUNTLESS LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ON ITS OWN WEBSITE. THIS IS A KEY PIECE OF THE MARKETING STRATEGY, AS EVIDENCED BY THE LINK HERE, THE STUDY TO WHICH THIS SUPPOSED 10% REDUCTION IN CRIME IS REFERRING TO WAS, HOWEVER, CONDUCTED BY TWO OF ITS OWN EMPLOYEES WITH THE OVERSIGHT OF TWO ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS IN AN EFFORT TO CREATE LEGITIMACY. SUBSEQUENT STUDIES CONDUCTED BY THE JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CRIMINOLOGY FOUND. WHEN SMALL NUMBERS OF LPR PATROLS ARE USED IN CRIME HOTSPOTS IN THE WAY WE HAVE TESTED THEM HERE, THEY DO NOT SEEM TO GENERATE EITHER GENERAL OR OFFENSE SPECIFIC DETERRENT EFFECT. ADDITIONALLY, A POST-INSTALLATION REPORT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE CITY OF PIEDMONT, CALIFORNIA TO ASSESS THE SUCCESS RATE SPECIFICALLY

[01:20:02]

THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SHARE OUR EXPERIENCE. I HAVE A AT GREENWOOD. PLEASE ACCEPT MY COMMENTS ON THE SUBJECT AS PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FLOCK SYSTEM. SURVEILLANCE ISN'T WHAT I VOTED FOR REGARDING INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. IF THE SERVICE GOES LIVE, IT WON'T TAKE LONG BEFORE THERE ARE SURVEILLANCE CONCERNS AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IN EVENTS WITH THE SYSTEM. THEN IT'S LIKE CAPMETRO WE SPENT TOO MUCH MONEY ON IT TO ABANDON IT. I LIVE IN SINGAPORE. I LIVED IN SINGAPORE FOR THREE YEARS. IT'S A GREAT PLACE, BUT IT'S A SURVEILLANCE STATE. A CONVERSATION WITH A CAB DRIVER STICKS WITH ME AFTER SEEING AN UNUSUALLY RUDE ACTION BY A DRIVER. I MENTIONED THE ROAD RAGE PHENOMENON IN THE US. THE DRIVER SAYS, OH, THAT WOULD NOT BE WISE. THE POLICE WOULD BE AT YOUR FLAT WAITING FOR YOU WHEN YOU GOT HOME. ALSO, WHILE LIVING IN SINGAPORE, A WORK COLLEAGUES WIFE WAS IN A MINOR CAR ACCIDENT. SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTACT HER HUSBAND. MY WORK COLLEAGUE, THE POLICE OFFICER TOLD HER NOT TO WORRY. HE MUST BE IN A MEETING AT THE OFFICE BECAUSE HIS CAR HAD NOT LEFT THE PARKING GARAGE SINCE ARRIVING THAT MORNING. WHILE I RECOGNIZE THERE IS CRIME IN LAGO VISTA, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE OUR CITY HAS THE SAME LEVEL OF CRIME AS MAJOR CITIES THAT SEE THE STATED BENEFITS OF THE FLOCK SYSTEM. I BELIEVE THE LVPD IS CAPABLE OF CONDUCTING APPROPRIATE CRIME PREVENTION OR INVESTIGATION WITHOUT DATA FROM THE FLOCK SYSTEM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS INPUT. THOMAS BLACHA. I'M WRITING TO EXPRESS MY PROFOUND OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED FLOCK SAFETY CAMERA CONTRACT. FRANKLY, MY OBJECTION GOES BEYOND THE CONTRACT ITSELF. I'M DEMANDING TO KNOW WHY A MASTER BALANCE SYSTEM IS EVEN ON THE AGENDA OF THIS TOWN. HOW IS TRACKING THE MOVEMENTS OF EVERY SINGLE RESIDENT SOMEHOW BEEN ELEVATED TO A PRIORITY? NO CITIZEN DEMANDED THIS. NO LOCAL EMERGENCY WARRANTS IT. TO MAKE MATTERS WORSE, WE ARE ACTIVELY TRYING TO BUY INTO A TECHNOLOGY THAT IS PLAGUED BY NATIONAL CONTROVERSY. FLOCKS SAFETY AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS ARE DEEPLY ROOTED IN SURVEILLANCE ARCHITECTURE FUNDED AND CHAMPIONED BY BILLIONAIRE PETER THIEL, A TECH TYCOON NOTORIOUS FOR BUILDING INVASIVE DATA MINING STATE APPARATUSES. MORE THAN 50 MUNICIPALITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE DANGER AND RIP THESE EXACT SYSTEMS OUT, OCCASIONALLY PAYING OUT OF POCKET JUST TO RID THEMSELVES OF THE CAMERAS THEY HAD JUST INSTALLED. WHY IS THIS EVEN BEING CONSIDERED? LET'S BE ENTIRELY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT FLOCK CAMERAS DO. THEY DO NOT TARGET CRIMINALS. THEY LOG THE DAILY LIVES OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. THEY MAP OUT WHERE YOU WORSHIP, WHICH DOCTORS YOU VISIT, WHICH POLITICAL OR PRIVATE ASSOCIATIONS YOU KEEP, AND WHO YOU LOVE. IT IS A PERMANENT DIGITAL PAPER TRAIL TRACKING, LAW ABIDING CITIZENS WHO HAVE COMMITTED NO CRIME. WORSE, THE DATA DOESN'T STAY LOCAL. IT FEEDS DIRECTLY INTO A MASSIVE NATIONAL DATABASE SEARCHABLE BY THOUSANDS OF OUTSIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT ARE TAXPAYERS DID NOT ELECT AND CANNOT HOLD ACCOUNTABLE. WE ALREADY HAVE DOCUMENTED CASES NATIONWIDE OF OFFICERS ABUSING THESE VERY SYSTEMS TO STALK EX-PARTNERS AND TRACK PRIVATE CITIZENS, PULLED ASIDE FROM THE AGENDA IMMEDIATELY AND VOTE NO VOTE.

AN ABSOLUTE NO THANK YOU FOR EVERYTHING. I HAVE, DENISE SELLERS. I'M NOT SURE THAT FLOCK IS A GOOD FIT FOR LAGO VISTA, TEXAS AT THIS TIME. I'M CONCERNED WE WILL END UP IN ANOTHER CAPMETRO SITUATION. I DO NOT BELIEVE OUR TOWN CAN AFFORD THAT. LET'S STEP BACK AND LOOK AT AND SPEAK TO OTHER TOWNS ABOUT THIS AND INVESTIGATE AND TAKE THIS SLOWLY AND BE INFORMED. DON'T JUST MAKE A JUMP AND THEN REGRET IT. ALL RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S ALL THE WRITTEN COMMENTS I HAD. ARE THERE ANY OTHER CITIZEN COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? YES. BUENO. BUENAS TARDES. MI NOMBRE ES MALO. I GREW UP ALONG THE TEXAS MEXICO BORDER, WHICH IS A HIGHLY MILITARIZED AND SURVEILLANCE AREA. AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WE NEED TO IT'S IT'S YOU NEED TO DO BETTER RESEARCH ON THESE TECHNOLOGIES. IT'S NOT ABOUT MISINFORMATION.

THERE'S A REASON WHY THE CITY OF AUSTIN OPTED OUT FROM USING THE SYSTEM. YOU SAID PRIVACY

[01:25:05]

HOW DO WE KNOW HOW OFTEN THAT OCCURS? IS THAT THROUGH THAT MOU PROCESS, IT'S IN THE AUDIT REPORT, AUDIT TRAILS, I CAN SEE WHO'S ACCESSED OUR CAMERAS AND USE THEM. OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE THAT JUST CAME DOWN? I GUESS IT WAS YESTERDAY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, IN REGARD TO CHARTER VERSUS THE UNITED STATES. NO. OKAY. THAT IS SOMETHING MAYBE TO TO LOOK AT. IT IS A COURT CASE THAT THEY EXPECT TO GO IN TERMS OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT AND THE

[01:30:04]

OKAY. AND LASTLY, THERE IS A A POLICY THAT THE ACLU HAS PUT TOGETHER IN REGARD TO BEST PRACTICES FOR CITIES. HAVE YOU HAD EVER SEEN THAT BY CHANCE? NO. OKAY. I'LL JUST STATE THAT OUR POLICY WAS A GOOD ONE, BUT IT DID HAVE SOME MORE CURRENT. I WANTED TO SAY, PROVISIONS IN ORDER TO FURTHER PROTECT RESIDENTS HERE LOCALLY. AND I THOUGHT THEY WERE GOOD, NOT OVER BURDENSOME. SO I JUST WANTED TO. IF THAT'S OKAY, I'LL PASS THAT ALONG TO CHARLES AND HE CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU. OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. MR. BENNEFIELD. OFFICER JOY. I JUST WANTED TO I WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE CITY COUNCIL BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS YOU JUST HEARD THROUGH THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. IS THAT SO? IN YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT BEING VERY FACTUAL AND THEN INFORMATION THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE TRUE. THAT'S ON SOCIAL MEDIA. YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF INFORMATION, A LOT OF COMMENTS THROUGH THESE PUBLIC COMMENTS. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO UPDATE US ON OR CHANGE YOUR PRESENTATION WITH? LIKE, DID SOMEBODY SAY SOMETHING TODAY THAT YOU THOUGHT, YES, THAT'S TRUE OR NO, THAT'S NOT TRUE? LIKE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO OPINE ON ANY OF THE PARTICULAR COMMENTS MADE? THERE ARE MANY THINGS ON THERE. I WOULDN'T I WOULD NOT GO TO THE LENGTH TO SAY SOMETHING IS TRUE OR NOT TRUE. I WOULD SAY THAT A LOT OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'VE HEARD, EITHER IN WRITTEN TESTIMONY OR PUBLIC TESTIMONY, ARE THEIR PERCEPTIONS OF WHAT IS GOING ON AND THEIR VIEW OF THEIR FREEDOMS. AND SO I WOULDN'T SAY ANY OF THEM ARE UNTRUE. I WOULD COMMENT ON A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FLOCK NOVA IS A SEPARATE SYSTEM ALTOGETHER. IT'S NOT PART OF FLOCK CAMERA SYSTEM. FLOCK NOVA IS A BASICALLY A RESEARCH INTELLIGENCE, ANALYTICAL TOOL THAT A LOT OF AGENCIES USE, INCLUDING THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, RATHER VERY SUCCESSFULLY. WE CURRENTLY DON'T USE FLOCK NOVA. SO THAT WAS A QUESTION EARLIER. THAT'S PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE THAT I'D LIKE TO TO ANSWER. THE OTHER QUESTIONS ARE I THINK I ANSWERED IN THE FIRST PRESENTATION. I THINK WHAT'S NOTEWORTHY IS SEVERAL PEOPLE THAT SPOKE SAID, WE'RE WE'RE OKAY WITH LICENSE PLATE READERS, BUT WHAT WE'RE NOT WANTING IS, IS WE'RE NOT WANTING PEOPLE TAPPING INTO OUR CELL PHONES. WE'RE NOT WANTING OUR FACIAL IDENTIFICATION. WE'RE NOT WANTING OUR CHILDREN TO ACT. WE'RE NOT WANTING OUR BUMPER STICKERS THAT THOSE ASSERTIONS GO AGAINST. YOUR PRESENTATION THAT STATED THIS IS ONLY FOR LICENSE PLATES AND ONLY CAN BE TAPPED INTO BY LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT. IS THAT STILL A FACTUAL STATEMENT? YES. LICENSE PLATES AND LICENSE AND VEHICLE VEHICLE DESCRIPTIONS. SO MAKE MODEL COLOR THAT YOU CAN SEARCH FOR THOSE TYPE OF VEHICLE INDICATORS. ONE OF THE SEARCHES THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER THAN IN THE LAST 30 DAYS, WE FOUND A HIT AND RUN SUSPECT. WE DID NOT HAVE A LICENSE PLATE, BUT WE DID HAVE A COLOR AND MAKE A VEHICLE. AND WE WERE ABLE TO FIND IT BASED ON THAT ENTERING IN THERE. SO NO FACES, NO CELL PHONES. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF MISINFORMATION OUT THERE ABOUT WHAT LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE ACCESS TO AND WHAT THEY USE IT FOR. I, I DON'T KNOW, LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE THE TIME OR INCLINATION TO USE IT IN SOME OF THE, THE, THE WAYS THAT PEOPLE ARE ASSUMING THAT WE. DO YOU KNOW, MY LAST COMMENT, I'LL JUST I'LL JUST SHARE MY SUPPORT WITH WHAT THE PASTOR, I, I DIDN'T CATCH HIS NAME, I APOLOGIZE, BUT HE TALKED ABOUT THE THEFT THAT OCCURRED IN JONESTOWN. AND, YOU KNOW, HIS COMMENT WAS THOSE THAT ARE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. AND THOSE THAT ARE BREAKING THE LAW, SHAME ON YOU. AND I SUPPORT THAT. AND I AGAIN, AFFIRM MY COMMITMENT TO THE LAGO VISTA POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE THE TOOLS AT YOUR HANDS TO DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PRIVACY. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT TRACKING PEOPLE. I HAVE THOSE. BUT IF IF THE PROGRAM IS WHAT YOU SAY IT IS, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S AN INVALUABLE TOOL TO HELP CRIMINALS OR EVEN PREVENT CRIMINALS. I LET THEM GO TO AUSTIN WHERE THEY VOTED NOT TO HAVE IT, AND LET'S KEEP LARGA VISTA SAFE. MR. HALL, I QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE STATUS OF MOVING THE CAMERAS. I KNOW

[01:35:02]

WE'VE STARTED THAT PROCESS. AND OF COURSE, WHATEVER Y'ALL DECIDE TODAY WILL CONTINUE OR STOP. BUT IT IS A LONG PROCESS THAT BASED ON I'LL TELL YOU THIS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS CHIEF'S MIND ON WHERE HE PLANTED THE CAMERAS, OTHER THAN HE DIDN'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE TECH STOP PROCESS. MAYBE BECAUSE IT IS LONG AND DIFFICULT AND HE WAS TRYING TO CAPTURE VEHICLES THAT MAY ENTER OUR COMMUNITY. SO HE HAD CAMERAS ON LOHMAN'S, FOR EXAMPLE, NOT ON 1431, BUT ON LOHMAN'S COMING OFF OF 1431 TO CAPTURE PEOPLE THAT CAME INTO OUR COMMUNITY THAT WAY. HE PUT ONE ON DODGE AND HE PUT ONE ON BARQUET FOR MAYBE FOR THE SAME REASON. THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY WAYS INTO OUR COMMUNITY, BUT THOSE ARE THREE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL WAYS. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF IS WHY HE PUT THEM THERE. AGAIN, THE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT CAMERA, I THINK ARE RELATED TO THE SCHOOL. AND SO IF I HAD A KID IN THE SCHOOL, I THINK I'D WANT A CAMERA THERE TO SEE IF ANYONE WAS TRYING TO DO THEM HARM. BUT THAT THAT CAMERA IS SET TO BE MOVED BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED TO CAPTURE THE CRIMINALS THAT ARE COMING INTO OUR COMMUNITY, LEAVING OUR COMMUNITY AND DOING DOING US HARM. MR. PRINCIPAL, SO A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. I THINK THAT A NUMBER OF CITIZENS HAVE SAID, WHY IS THIS EVEN ON THE AGENDA, YOU KNOW, AND WHY? WHY ARE WE YOU KNOW, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF CITY COUNCIL SPENDING ANY OF MY MONEY ON FLOCK CAMERAS. RIGHT. SO TO MY MEMORY, IN ALMOST SIX YEARS I'VE BEEN ON CITY COUNCIL. WE NEVER HAD A DISCUSSION ON FLOCK CAMERAS. THERE WAS A CITIZEN WHO. AND MR. SOLOMON, I EXCHANGED EMAIL ON THIS OR TEXT ON THIS RECENTLY WHERE A CITIZEN SAID, OH, IT WAS A PASSING COMMENT. AND ONE OF THE STRATEGIC DISCUSSIONS, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY'S CITIZEN WHO PAYS AMAZING ATTENTION TO THE CITY. AND SO APPARENTLY WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT WE CERTAINLY NEVER APPROVED A SPECIFIC PROGRAM FOR FLOCK CAMERAS. AND I THINK THE REASON WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT NOW IS THERE'S A NUMBER OF CITIZENS WHO ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IT, AND IT'S BEEN BUBBLING UP ENOUGH THAT THAT IT MADE IT ONTO OUR AGENDA, NOT THAT WE ARE, FOR THE FIRST TIME LOOKING AT FLOCK OR WE'RE TRYING TO ADVANCE IT OR, YOU KNOW, INCREASE IT. I DID WHILE WE WERE SITTING HERE, I POPPED UP THE 2020 324 BUDGET AND WAY DOWN ON LIKE PAGE 59, THERE'S A LINE ITEM IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUDGET THAT SAYS WE'RE SPENDING $15,000 FOR THE ANNUAL SERVICE FEE FOR FIVE FLOCK CAMERAS. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE. AND, YOU KNOW, IN A QUICK SEARCH THROUGH BUDGET THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO SEE IT. SO IN THEORY, THE ANY OF US AND THAT WOULD BE JUST ME, MAYBE THAT WAS ON HERE FOR THE 2023 BUDGET, COULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THAT AND COULD HAVE RAISED A DISCUSSION. BUT WE WE NEVER HAD ANY PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON FLOCK CAMERA PROGRAM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE. SO THIS IS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I THINK A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'M HEARING, CHIEF, ARE NOT HOW YOUR STAFF IS USING IT, BUT IT'S SORT OF AT THE NEXT LEVEL UP. WE DON'T TRUST THE PARENT COMPANY, AND THE PARENT COMPANY HAS DATA, AND THEY COULD DO THINGS WITH IT, OR THEY COULD SELL IT TO SOMEONE ELSE OR MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO SOMEBODY ELSE. AND SO WHAT I'M WHAT I'M SCRATCHING MY HEAD. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M A TECHNOLOGY GUY BY BACKGROUND.

SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M THINKING IS AT WHAT POINT IS THE DATA ENCRYPTED? IS THERE SOME UNENCRYPTED DATA ON A SYSTEM SOMEWHERE THAT SOME BAD ACTOR WITHIN FLOCK OR A SUBDIVISION OF FLOCK OR, YOU KNOW, THE PALANTIR PARENT COMPANY OR WHATEVER? SOMEBODY'S NOT RELATED TO THE USE WE'RE DOING? COULD, COULD SOMEONE ELSE GET ACCESS TO THE DATA AND DO SOME THINGS IN THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GREAT SURVEILLANCE STATE FEAR THAT WE'RE HEARING FROM A NUMBER OF OUR CITIZENS HERE. AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT WHAT SAFEGUARDS FLOCK HAS IN PLACE OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE DATA COMES OFF OF THE CAMERA UNENCRYPTED. WHEN DOES IT GET ENCRYPTED? WHEN DO THINGS LIKE FACES GET WIPED OUT OF THE DATA? IS THERE SOME DATA THAT SOMEWHERE COULD BE STORED? NOW I GET YOUR POINT THAT IT'S EXPENSIVE TO STORE THIS DATA.

[01:40:01]

I'VE VERY CLEARLY HEAR WHAT THE FEARS ARE. AND IT'S NOT ABOUT THE DATA THAT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO. IT'S ABOUT THE DATA THAT SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT HAVE ACCESS TO, WHICH IS MORE THAN WHAT YOU AND YOUR TEAM HAVE ACCESS TO. SO IT COMES DOWN TO, IN MY MIND, COUNCIL COMES DOWN TO THIS BALANCE OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT? WHAT'S THE COST? WHAT'S THE FEAR OF WE'RE CONTRIBUTING, YOU KNOW, OUR DATA TO THIS NATIONWIDE SURVEILLANCE NETWORK. AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT PETER THIEL AND ANY OF HIS MINIONS MAY BE DOING WITH IT. RIGHT. THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING. BUT I DO KNOW AND, YOU KNOW, WITH MR. BENFIELD'S POINT THAT OUR POLICE CHIEF, WHO'S A PROFESSIONAL, HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME, SAYS THEY'VE GOT REAL BENEFIT FROM IT. AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT, IMPORTANT TOOL IN IN THEIR BELT.

IF I COULD COMMENT ON THAT. YES. SO I WOULD I WOULD TELL YOU THIS, MR. PRINCE, IN MY PREVIOUS LIFE, YOU KNOW, I WORKED FOR ONE OF THE BEST LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN THE WORLD, THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY. AND THEY'VE BEEN USING FLOCK SINCE ITS INCEPTION.

AND AS I MENTIONED, THEY JUST RECENTLY BOUGHT IN AND INSTALLED OVER A THOUSAND, AND THEY SPENT MILLIONS TO DO THAT ALL ACROSS THE STATE TO TRY TO MAKE THE STATE SAFER. I'M NOT I WAS NOT IN THE INTELLIGENCE OR THE TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS THERE. I WAS THE HIGHWAY PATROL CHIEF.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU, I KNOW EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE IN THE INTELLIGENCE WORLD IN DPS AND THE TECHNOLOGY WORLD, AND I TRUST THEM. THEY WOULD NOT GET IN BED WITH A COMPANY THAT IS NOT DOING THINGS RIGHT. I TRUST THEM TO DO THE RESEARCH. THEY ARE MUCH LARGER, MORE ROBUST. AND SO LIKE YOU SAID, I KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE DATA. I DON'T KNOW WHAT FLOCK IS DOING WITH IT, BUT I DO TRUST DPS, WHO'S THE LARGEST AGENCY IN TEXAS, TO, TO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH IT. AND I REST MY FAITH ON THEM. IF I COULD JUST FOLLOW ON ON THAT, IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE, THE, THE TECH TECH WIZARDS IN DPS ACTUALLY DO UNDERSTAND THE FLOCK SYSTEM WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT FLOCK MIGHT BE DOING WITH THE DATA OR WHAT THEY CANNOT DO WITH THE DATA. YES, WAY BETTER THAN I DO. AND FLOCK HAS REACHED OUT TO ME AND SAID, HEY, WE UNDERSTAND YOU'RE GOING TO BE TALKING TO THE CITY COUNCIL. DO YOU WANT US TO PRESENT? AND THAT'S UP TO YOU. IF YOU WOULD LIKE A REPRESENTATIVE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY DO WITH IT, THEN FLOCK, I THINK, WOULD BE HAPPY TO COME HERE. THAT'S UP TO YOU. WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, THIS ISN'T AN ACTION ITEM TONIGHT, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GETTING SOME FEEDBACK. CLEARLY IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM AS WELL, BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO US IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET AFFIRMATIVE APPROVAL ON MOVING SOME OF THESE CAMERAS. SO I THINK AS WE GATHER DATA TO MAKE THAT DECISION, WE SHOULD PROBABLY HEAR FROM FLOCK, AND THEN WE SHOULD PROBABLY HEAR ANOTHER ENTITY THAT'S NOT TIED TO FLOCK. IF WE COULD FIND. I THINK I CAN WORK WITH SOME OF THE CITIZENS HERE, AND WE CAN FIND SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT A BUSINESS PARTNER OF THEIRS. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE CONTRACT AT ALL? AGAIN, TO MR. PRINCE'S POINT, I NEVER SAW THE CONTRACT. I HAVE, I HAVE NOT. CHIEF FRANCO CAN. IT'S KIND OF JUST THE HIGH LEVEL. I'D LIKE TO KNOW, HOW LONG ARE WE IN THIS CONTRACT FOR? WHAT DO WE PAY FOR IT AND WHAT IS THE TERMINATION CLAUSE? OKAY, SO THIS THIS CONTRACT WAS SIGNED BACK IN 11222 BY THE CURRENT CITY MANAGER BACK THEN. AND THE

[01:45:05]

OKAY. AND AS WE DID DISCUSS WHILE BACK WHEN SHE STARTED HERE, WE DISCUSSED BECAUSE THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE PROGRAM AND IT WAS GOING TO COST US, I THINK IT WAS 3000 APIECE OR 4000 APIECE TO GET RID OF THE CAMERAS. SO 4000 APIECE FOR THE FIVE CAMERAS? YES, SIR. AND WHAT ABOUT THE SOFTWARE ACCESS OR ANY OF THAT? NO ADDITIONAL COST THERE. YEAH. IT WAS JUST BASICALLY IF WE WANTED TO GET RID OF THE PROGRAM, IT WOULD COME TAKE ALL THE CAMERAS DOWN. AND IT WAS GOING TO BE COSTING AROUND 5000 APIECE. AS FAR AS.

THAT'S IT AS FAR AS THE TERMINATION GOES. IS THERE A 30 DAY, 60 DAY? JUST BASICALLY WE GO 30 DAY, 30 DAYS. OKAY. PIVOTING TO THE LOCATIONS THAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING TO PUT THESE CAMERAS, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THE FORMER CHIEF DIDN'T PUT THEM ON 1431? BECAUSE WE'D HAVE TO GET TEX-DOT APPROVAL DOT APPROVAL? OKAY. FROM WHAT I REMEMBER ALL THAT HE DIDN'T WANT TO GO THROUGH ALL THAT PROCESS. SO FOR US, IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER MOVING THEM THERE, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING APPROVAL. THAT'S RIGHT. YES. OKAY. DO YOU KNOW DOES MARBLE FALLS IN JONESTOWN HAVE FLOCK CAMERAS? JONESTOWN DOES NOT. BUT THERE IS FLOCK CAMERAS THAT BELONG TO JOINT VENTURE IS PART OF IT. SO THERE'S TWO OF THEM GOING DOWN TOWARDS JOINT VENTURE, WHICH BELONGS TO THE COMMUNITY. AND JONESTOWN HAS ONE THAT BELONGS TO THE HOLLOWS. IS THAT WITHIN THE HOLLOWS OR IS IT HOLLOWS IS CONTROLLED BY THE HOLLOWS? IS IT LOCATED ANYWHERE NEAR 1431? IS IT BACK INSIDE? NO, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO AND ONE'S ON DESTINATION WAY AND THE OTHER ONE IS ON THE OLD DESTINATION WAY. OKAY. AND YOU'RE AWARE OF MARBLE FALLS HAVING ANY. I THINK MARBLE FALLS DOES HAVE SOME. YEAH. CEDAR PARK DOES SEVERAL. THEY'RE RECORDING ACCORDING TO THE GOOGLE. IT'S ROUND ROCK BUDA. KYLE.

GEORGETOWN, CEDAR PARK MANOR, BASTROP, ELGIN, MARBLE FALLS AND BELTON, OR THE NEARBY CENTRAL TEXAS CITIES. THEY USE THEM OKAY. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A HOLISTIC PICTURE OF IT, SO I THINK IT'D BE GREAT IF THE CONTRACT COULD BE SHARED WITH COUNCIL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY.

YEAH, I CAN MAYOR. YES, MR. FRANCO, OFFICER FRANCO, YOU MAY OR MAY NOT REMEMBER THIS. WHEN WHEN THE FLOCK CAMERAS FIRST WERE BROUGHT TO TOWN, DID THE CHIEF AT THE TIME, WAS THERE SOME KIND OF GRANT OR SOMETHING? WHAT? WHAT KIND OF INITIATED IT? DID THE CITY JUST PURCHASE THE CAMERAS AND GET INTO A CONTRACT? OR WAS THERE ALSO A GRANT ASSOCIATED WITH IT? NO GRANT ASSOCIATION. IT WAS JUST BASICALLY THE THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE CITY MANAGER. OKAY.

THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU CHIEF. I ASKED YOU TO SHARE THE POLICY WITH THE CITY BECAUSE I WAS AWARE THAT YOU HAVE A POLICY ON THE FLOCK CAMERAS. YOU SHARED THAT WITH COUNCIL TODAY. IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS FROM BACK UNDER CHIEF BESHEARS ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO. HAVE YOU LOOKED THAT OVER AND CONSIDER, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD TIGHTEN UP IN THERE, CONSIDERING WHAT YOU'VE HEARD HERE TONIGHT, OR WHAT YOU KNOW FROM YOUR TIME AT DPS AND DOES AN UPDATE TO THAT POLICY REQUIRE COUNCIL, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALREADY ABLE TO DO AN UPDATE TO? THE POLICY DOES NOT REQUIRE COUNCIL. THE CITY MANAGER OBVIOUSLY CAN WEIGH IN ON ANYTHING HE WANTS TO ON POLICY. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE WHAT MAYOR PRO TEM IS TALKING ABOUT WITH THE ACLU AND SEE IF THERE IS. WHEN I READ IT, I FIRST GOT HERE, I READ IT. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT I WOULD HAVE ADDED TO IT. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THE ACLU PROPOSAL, THE POLICIES THAT CHIEF BRASHER'S ADOPTED, WERE BASICALLY THE TEXAS CHIEF OF POLICE ASSOCIATION STANDARDIZED GENERAL POLICIES. THAT'S WHAT MOST OF THE POLICE CHIEFS IN TEXAS HAVE AGREED TO. SO IT'S PRETTY SAFE THAT IT'S BEEN VETTED BY THAT ASSOCIATION. IT'S A VERY BIG GROUP. WE'RE VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT, BUT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE MAY BE SOME ADDITIONS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO OUR COMMUNITY. WE CAN ADD. WOULD YOU EVER CONSIDER OR WHAT WOULD BE THE NEGATIVE OF YOU? REDUCE THE TIME THAT WE COULD ACCESS IT TO 15 DAYS INSTEAD OF 30 DAYS. WOULD THAT IMPEDE INVESTIGATIONS? SO MOST INVESTIGATIONS, WE KNOW WITHIN JUST A FEW DAYS THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING. THE, THE, THE CHALLENGE I WOULD SEE FOR YOU TO DECIDE BECAUSE THAT IS YOUR DECISION. I KNOW ONE COMMUNITY IN CALIFORNIA DECREASED IT TO 21 DAYS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY. IN OUR COMMUNITY, WE ARE UNIQUE. WE'RE NOT LIKE CEDAR PARK. WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE VACATION HOMES HERE AND THEY LIVE IN HOUSTON OR SOMEWHERE ELSE. AND

[01:50:01]

THEY WERE ON VACATION FOR A FEW WEEKS, AND IF WE SHORTENED THAT TIME, IT JUST CUTS OUR TIME DOWN TO TRY TO TRACK DOWN THE CRIMINAL. SO A VACATIONER COMES HOME AFTER BEING AWAY FOR A WHILE, BEING AWAY FOR 30 DAYS, AND THEY COME CHECK ON THEIR PLACE IN LAGO VISTA AND FIND OUT FROM THE RING CAMERA. SOMEBODY DID SOMETHING AND THEY GIVE US A DESCRIPTION OF THE VEHICLE, AND IF WE SHORTEN THAT TIME FROM 30, WE MAY MISS AN OPPORTUNITY. THAT'D BE THE PROBLEM. INTERNALLY. WE HAVE SOME SOME IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE. THE TIME IT TAKES AN OFFICER TO GET INFORMATION TO A DETECTIVE, BECAUSE NOT ALL OF THEM ARE, ARE HIGH PROFILE CASES. THE TIME IT TAKES TO GET TO A DETECTIVE WOULD NEED TO BE. WE NEED TO REALLY STRUCTURE THAT FAST A LITTLE BIT BETTER TO IF IF WE REDUCED IT ANY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T INTERNALLY MISS AN OPPORTUNITY. BUT TO ME, THAT'S THE, THE CONCERN FOR YOU AS THIS COMMUNITY IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DON'T ACTUALLY LIVE HERE BUT HAVE PROPERTY HERE. AND THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS THAT WE ARE A SMALL FORCE. SO WOULD RESTRICTING THE ACCESS TO GETTING PERMISSION FROM YOU BE AN ISSUE? WOULD THAT SLOW THINGS DOWN DRAMATICALLY IF YOU HAD THE SOLE GRANTING AUTHORITY TO LET ANY OF YOUR OFFICERS OR ANY OF YOUR SERGEANTS AND DETECTIVES, I'M SORRY, YOU SAID, SUPERVISORS AND DETECTIVES, IF YOU MOVE THAT UP TO YOUR LEVEL, WOULD THAT CREATE ISSUES AS FAR AS GETTING THINGS DONE QUICKLY? NO. AS FAR AS LEADERSHIP PRINCIPLES, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT WOULD SEND A MESSAGE THAT I DON'T TRUST THE PEOPLE, THAT I'VE GIVEN AUTHORITY TO MAKE VERY IMPORTANT DECISIONS. AND SO I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THAT PERSONALLY, BECAUSE I DO TRUST MY SERGEANTS AND MY LIEUTENANT AND MY ASSISTANT CHIEF TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS. THERE'S AN ACCOUNTABILITY. IF WE MAKE A BAD DECISION, THERE'S CONSEQUENCES THAT SOME OF THE RUMORS YOU HEARD ABOUT PEOPLE USING THEM NEFARIOUSLY YOU KNOW THAT PEOPLE CAN USE ALL KINDS OF THINGS. NEFARIOUSLY AND THERE'S CONSEQUENCES THAT CAN LOSE THEIR JOB, THEY CAN LOSE THEIR LICENSE. AND SO I WOULD SAY IF I HAVE A SERGEANT THAT I DON'T TRUST, THEN THEY PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE A SERGEANT. SO I WOULD I WOULD WANT TO KEEP IT AND LET THE DETECTIVES DO IT, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IT A LOT FASTER AND QUICKER THAN THAN GETTING AN APPROVAL. I WOULD HATE TO SLOW SOMETHING DOWN AND MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO CATCH A KIDNAPED PERSON OR A VIOLENT OFFENDER. AND EARLIER IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE ARE 51 VULNERABILITIES TO THESE CAMERAS. IS THAT A NUMBER YOU'VE COME ACROSS OR ANYTHING YOU'RE AWARE OF? NO, I THINK THE FLOCK REPRESENTATIVE MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON THAT, BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT. DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS OVER THE PHYSICAL SAFETY OF ANY OF THE CAMERAS WHERE THEY'RE CURRENTLY LOCATED? OBVIOUSLY, CHIEF FRANCO AND I VISITED ALL THE LOCATIONS. WE'VE DONE SOME INSPECTIONS, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD HAVE PUT THEM THERE, BUT THEY ARE PRETTY HIGH.

SO I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY ANYONE CAN DO ANYTHING IF THEY IF THEY IF THEY'RE MOTIVATED. BUT I THINK THEY'RE IN THE THE BEST LOCATION WE CAN GET THEM RIGHT NOW TO HELP GATHER INTELLIGENCE.

I DO THINK THEY SHOULD BE PUT ON. 1431 AND I KNOW IT'S CIRCUMSTANTIAL, BUT YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD IMPEDE YOUR ABILITY. AN INVESTIGATION COULD BE A KIDNAPING, COULD BE A CARJACKING. CAN YOU PUT A NUMBER ON, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG COULD IT TAKE YOU TO TRY AND TRACK SOMEONE DOWN WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THIS TOOL? WE WOULD BE RELYING ON OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTNERS TO HELP US. SO BOTH ENDS OF US, CEDAR PARK AND MARBLE FALLS HAVE CAMERAS.

SO IF THEY LEFT THE COMMUNITY AND WENT THAT FAR AWAY, THEN WE WOULD BE RELYING UPON THEM TO HELP US. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR YOU. I HAD A QUESTION I WAS GOING TO ASK BRAD. OKAY, SO I KNOW I HEAR A LOT ABOUT FLOCK CAMERAS AND THE STATE LEGISLATURE. I THINK IT WAS ALLUDED TO THERE WAS A SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING MAY EVENTUALLY INCLUDE OR INVOLVE FUTURE LITIGATION WITH FLOCK CAMERAS, BUT IT HASN'T YET. IT'S TWO BRAND NEW.

ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OTHER RECENT LEGISLATION, ANYTHING TO DO WITH FLOCK CAMERAS, ANYTHING THAT OTHER CITIES ARE LEGALLY HAVING TO DEAL WITH RELATED TO THE PLACEMENT OR USE OF FLOCK CAMERAS? NOT NOT SPECIFICALLY THE THERE ARE THERE ARE LOWER COURT DECISIONS, NOT FIFTH CIRCUIT OR TEXAS COURTS THAT HAVE ADDRESSED THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FLOCK CAMERAS. THE US SUPREME COURT CASE THAT'S THAT'S REFERENCED DEALS, DEALS WITH THE GEOLOCATION DATA IN CELL PHONES. AND SO IT IT AND THE COURT. AND WHAT'S NEW ABOUT THAT CASE IS THAT THE COURT SAID THAT THAT THE. THAT THAT THERE IS AN EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY, LARGELY SPEAKING TO THAT KIND OF LOCATIONAL DATA, AND THAT IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITY IS GOING TO OBTAIN IT, THEN THEY NEED A WARRANT THAT PROPERLY A PROPER WARRANT THAT'S THERE'S A LOT

[01:55:04]

SOME CITIES, AS YOU NOTED, HAVE HAVE REJECTED THEM. LOCKHART LAST YEAR REJECTED THEM. AND AT THIS POINT IT'S A POLICY DECISION. SO I DON'T I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC CASES THAT I CAN POINT YOU TO THAT GIVE US ANY FURTHER CLARITY ON THE GATHERING OF THAT KIND OF DATA.

BUT BUT THE THE SUPREME COURT CASE SUGGESTS THAT THERE IS SOME PRIVACY RIGHT, TO THAT LOCATIONAL DATA, HOW THAT PLAYS IN THIS, BECAUSE THAT'S THAT WAS ON AN INDIVIDUAL CELL PHONE, WHICH IS SPECIFIC TO THAT INDIVIDUAL. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME OBVIOUSLY SOME DIFFERENCES. SO IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL HOW THAT WOULD REALLY IMPACT THESE DECISIONS. I THINK FOR NOW, WE CAN SAY THAT THE DATA COLLECTION AND EVERYTHING IS LEGAL. IT HASN'T BEEN CHALLENGED AND THEY'VE NOT BEEN OVERTURNED. BUT BUT THE LOCATIONAL DATA THERE IS A PRIVACY INTEREST IN IT. SO THERE COULD I MEAN, I SUSPECT CHALLENGES WILL COME, BUT THAT WILL BE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD BEFORE WE GET ANSWERS. AND THEN I ASKED IF WE COULD HAVE THE CONTRACT SHARE WITH COUNSEL AND YOURSELF, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO REVIEW THAT FOR US? KIND OF GIVE US AN OVERVIEW? I WILL ABSOLUTELY LOOK, THIS IS THE FIRST I'M HEARING OF IT MYSELF.

SO ABSOLUTELY, WE'LL LOOK AT IT AND REVIEW ANY TERMINATION PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN IT. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO USE THIS AS A TIME TO DO A SETUP FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM. BUT MR. PRINCE BROUGHT IT UP. YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS SOMEHOW CAME INTO OUR BUDGET AT SOME POINT. THIS IS EXACTLY WHY I'M PUSHING FOR THE MODEL THAT WE HAVE A BASE BUDGET THAT HAS JUST WHAT WE'RE DOING TO OPERATE TODAY, AND THAT WE DON'T HAVE DEPARTMENTS PUTTING EXTRA THINGS IN THERE AS THE FIRST BUDGET THAT WE SEE, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THINGS LIKE THIS SNEAK IN THERE. SO THOSE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THINGS THAT COME ON AN EXCEPTIONAL ITEMS LIST. STAFF AND DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO ASK COUNCIL'S APPROVAL TO ADD THINGS ONTO THE BUDGET. THAT'S HOW YOU PREVENT THESE THINGS FROM OCCURRING. IT WAS PUT INTO WHAT I ALWAYS CALL A WISH LIST BUDGET. THE DEPARTMENT SENDS YOU WHAT IT IS THEY WANT, AND IT'S UP TO COUNCIL TO GO BACKWARDS AND HAVE TO TRY TO PULL THINGS OUT OF IT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE. AND I THINK THAT'S HOW YOU END UP WITH THINGS LIKE THIS. SO THIS IS A GOOD REMINDER WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET LATER AS TO WHY I'M PUSHING SO HARD TO DO THAT DIFFERENT FORMAT. YEAH, I'M NOT READY TO GIVE AN OPINION ON THE FLOCK CAMERAS. IT'S BEEN HOTLY DEBATED FOR YEARS, YOU KNOW, TO EXPOSE MY BIASES. YOU KNOW, I'M A STATE DELEGATE TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. IT WAS A HOT TOPIC THERE.

I DON'T THINK PEOPLE WERE IN AGREEMENT ON WHERE TO GO WITH IT. YOU HAVE LEADERS OF THE STATE WHO ARE HIGHLY IN SUPPORT OF IT, AND YOU HAVE OTHERS WHO ARE NOT. I HAVE A LITTLE LIBERTARIAN STREAK IN ME AT TIMES THAT SAYS, IF YOU TELL THE CITIZENS LIKE, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT'S BEST FOR YOU AND THIS IS WHAT'S GOOD, AND THEY STILL TELL YOU, DON'T DO IT. YOU KNOW, THEY MADE THAT DECISION AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT FEELS THAT THEY CAN HAVE THE TOOLS TO PROTECT US. I HAVE SEEN INSTANCES AT THE ISLAND ON LAKE TRAVIS THAT WE HAVE CRIMINAL ELEMENTS THAT COME IN FROM THE CITY OF AUSTIN. THEY SPEND TIME THERE BEING ABLE TO SEE HOW THEY'RE COMING AND GOING WOULD BE A HUGE HELP. SO I THINK I HEARD FROM COUNCIL, WE NEED TO HEAR THIS COME BACK. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE FLOCK REPRESENTATIVE. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM A DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIVE. YOU ALREADY NEED OUR APPROVAL TO MOVE THESE CAMERAS. SO IS THE 16TH TOO SOON TO BRING THIS UP AGAIN? I WOULD NEED TO TALK TO THE FLOCK REPRESENTATIVE AND SEE IF HE'S AVAILABLE. BUT I DID NOT REALLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. YOU SAID IF WE TOOK THIS TOOL AWAY FROM YOU, WHAT WOULD IT BE? THE IMPACT ON US CATCHING CRIMINALS? IF WE LOOK AT THE MAY INCIDENT IN AUSTIN, 27 HOURS IS WHAT THEY LOOKED FOR THIS INDIVIDUAL AND THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS, AND THEY COULDN'T FIND THEM MAYNER FOUND THEM IN ONE HOUR. SO I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT A REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE THAT JUST HAPPENED RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO US. AND WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN THAT 27 HOURS TO OUR COMMUNITY? YEAH. OR TO OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY IF WE DON'T FIND THESE PEOPLE. YEAH. I THINK THAT WAS AN ACTUAL CASE STUDY. I'LL REACH OUT TO THE FLOCK REPRESENTATIVE TODAY AND SEE WHEN HE'S AVAILABLE, AND ASK HIM IF HE CAN BE HERE ON THE 16TH. OKAY. BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT THE 16TH, THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT AUGUST 6TH, AUGUST 6TH, OR AUGUST 20TH, JUST SO YOU HAVE THE DATES FOR THEM. YOU REMINDED ME TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION. IF NOT FLOCK, ARE THERE LOWER TECH COMPANIES THAT DO SOMETHING SIMILAR, THAT DON'T HAVE SOME OF THE OTHER CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE ARE HAVING AROUND THE COUNTRY WITH THIS

[02:00:01]

MAYOR PRO TEM YEAH, JUST REAL QUICK AGAIN, CHIEF AND BRIGHAM FRANCO, YOU KNOW, HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN YOU GUYS AND SUPPORT YOU. AND Y'ALL ARE NOT THE WORRY. YOU KNOW, DATA THESE DAYS ONCE IT LEAVES. THAT'S PART OF WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT WHERE IS IT STORED. YOU KNOW, ONCE IT LEAVES OUR SPHERE HERE, THEN IT'S DATA TENDS TO PROPAGATE, IT TENDS TO DUPLICATE, IT TENDS TO, YOU KNOW, IT CONTINUES TO PERPETUATE OUT INTO THE SPHERE.

AND SO I THINK THAT I, I'M ONLY SAYING THIS SO THAT WHEN YOU TALKED WITH THE FLOCK REPRESENTATIVES AND ANYONE ELSE THAT WE BRING THAT THEY KNOW REALLY THAT IS THAT'S A CONCERN.

THANK YOU. TO ADD ON TO THAT, THAT'S SORT OF WHAT I WANT YOU TO LOOK AT IN THE CONTRACT IS WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT THE USE OF THE DATA? AND WHAT SAY DO WE HAVE AT ALL, IF ANY? OKAY.

THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. I'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. IF I CAN FIND MY AGENDA ON ALL THIS. I THINK I'LL GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM EIGHT. ALL MATTERS LISTED

[VIII. CONSENT AGENDA]

ITEM FIVE CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND TAKE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-2214. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF VISTA AND SEEKING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. ITEM SIX CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND TAKE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 26-2215. NOMINATING A PERSON FOR THE TML INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK POOL BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND ITEM SEVEN. CONSIDER, DISCUSS AND TAKE ACTION REGARDING PARTICIPATION IN THE TRAVIS COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY AGREEMENTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS. COUNCIL. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS YOU WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? MAYOR NUMBER SIX, I THINK. OKAY, WE'LL REMOVE NUMBER SIX. THAT'S A TML RISK POOL. ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY WITH THAT THEN I AM OPEN TO ACTION ON APPROVAL OF THE REST OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. MAYOR, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE ITEMS, THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM, THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AS READ INTO THE RECORD. EXCEPT FOR ITEM SIX. EXCEPT FOR ITEM SIX. I HAVE A MOTION FROM MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR PRINCE.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. FIVE. FIVE ZERO. ALL RIGHT. AND WE

[VIII.6. Consider, discuss, and take action on Resolution No. 26-2215 nominating a person for the TML Intergovernmental Risk Pool Board of Trustees.]

[02:05:05]

OKAY. I HAVE A MOTION FROM COUNCILOR CHAVARRIA. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND FROM COUNCILOR PRINCE. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE, AYE. ALL OPPOSED? SAY NAY. IT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. FIVE ZERO.

AND BEFORE WE LEAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, I'LL JUST NOTE THERE WERE A COUPLE, I THINK, IMPORTANT ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. JUST THERE WASN'T A NO ONE TO SAY NO. BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'VE DECLARED AUGUST AS VETERANS APPRECIATION MONTH. SO PLEASE SPREAD THAT NEWS.

BUSINESSES, PEOPLE, COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT EVERYONE TO BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE OUR VETERANS. I KNOW THE VFW INTENDS TO DO A WHOLE SERIES OF ANNOUNCING LOCAL VETERANS DURING THAT MONTH, AND THEN WE'VE CONTINUED TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD FUNDING. THIS IS THE A DIFFERENT FUND, NOT THE STATE REVOLVING FUNDS.

THIS IS THE BIG BILLION DOLLAR FUND THAT THE STATE PUT FORWARD. THIS IS JUST A PART OF THAT PROCESS. YOU HAVE TO PASS THIS RESOLUTION TO CONTINUE TO GO FORWARD. BUT STAFF DID IDENTIFY $10 MILLION THAT WERE GOING OUT TO SEEK FOR OUR DRINKING WATER, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS. TRAVIS COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM. WE HAVEN'T REALLY QUALIFIED FOR ANY OF THESE, BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO PASS THIS RESOLUTION IF YOU EVEN WANT TO BE CONSIDERED. SO JUST KEEPS US ALIVE TO BE ABLE TO BE CONSIDERED. CHARLES, I WILL MAKE A STATEMENT ON THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS. WE DO HAVE RESIDENTS THAT WOULD QUALIFY FOR THAT IF THEY WILL ATTEND SOME OF THE MEETINGS AND ACTUALLY APPLY. YOU JUST HAVE TO BE A HOMEOWNER AND BELOW A CERTAIN INCOME LEVEL, AND IT'S A REALLY GREAT PROGRAM. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH IT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. IT'S, IT'S REALLY GOOD. IT'D BE GREAT IF WE COULD QUALIFY. OKAY,

[IX.1. Consider, discuss, and take action authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with MVBA for the collection of delinquent utility accounts.]

I'LL GO TO CHARLES. OUR STAFF ACTUALLY COME UP WITH THIS OR ONE OF MY UTILITY BILLING CLERKS, TAVIA. I DO NOT KNOW HER LAST NAME LONG. SHE'S THE ONE THAT CAME UP WITH THIS. SHE SAW THAT THERE'S A BACKLOG OF PAST DUE ACCOUNTS. ARE DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS OR ABANDONED ACCOUNTS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CORRECT WORDING FOR IT IS AND IS. AN OPPORTUNITY IN VBA WOULD CHARGE A. WE ALREADY USE MVA FOR OUR COURT COLLECTIONS, BUT THEY ALSO DO UTILITY BILLING COLLECTIONS AND WHAT IT WOULD DO. I THINK THE FINAL REPORTS A LITTLE OVER $400,000 THAT WE'VE GOT OUTSTANDING AND OUTSTANDING. I'M SORRY. I'LL LET NICOLE SPEAK. SHE CAN SPEAK ON IT BETTER THAN I CAN. WHEN IT COMES TO UTILITY BILLING. THE REPORT THAT WAS RAN COMPLETE OUTSTANDING IS CONSIDERING WHAT IS CURRENTLY DUE AND WHO'S NOT PAST DUE IS $1.1 MILLION. OF THAT, $433,000 IS ACCOUNTS THAT ARE FOUR MONTHS PAST DUE OR MORE, WHICH WOULD NOT BE ANYBODY THAT IS CURRENTLY A. UTILITY ACCOUNT HOLDER. WE ONLY HAVE. WE ALLOW YOUR CURRENT BILL PLUS ONE PAST DUE BILL. SO NONE OF IT WOULD BE ANY OF OUR CURRENT RESIDENTS. IT'S PEOPLE THAT HAVE MOVED ON LEFT AND LEFT FOOTED, LEFT US WITH THE BILL. MISS AUBREY, THAT'S THAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE MY CONCERN. SO NONE OF THESE ARE ABOVE THIS 400,000. THESE ARE NOT ACTIVE ACCOUNTS CURRENTLY. THEY COULDN'T BE ACTIVE

[02:10:01]

AND I WASN'T SURE WHEN I ASKED YOU FOR THAT REPORT EARLIER, IF YOU SHARED IT WITH ALL COUNSEL OR NOT, I DID. OKAY. I GUESS MY QUESTIONS ARE ONE, THE AGREEMENT THAT YOU PUT BEFORE US IS FOR FIVE YEARS. THAT'S KIND OF LONG. IF IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF IT'S ALL GOING TO BE BUSY WORK IN THE FIRST YEAR, TRYING TO LOG THROUGH THESE $433,000 WORTH OF THEM. I MEAN, WOULD THEY BE ACCEPTING OF A SHORTER TERM? I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE SIGNED WITH FOR FOR COURT.

AND I WAS NOT THE ONE WHO NECESSARILY PREPARED THE AGREEMENT. BUT I MEAN, THEY THEIR REPS ARE REALLY, REALLY NICE. SO I'M SURE THEY'D BE WILLING TO TALK. AND SIMILARLY, IN THE CONTRACT IN SECTION ONE, I THINK YOU SAID THAT WE'RE ONLY INTENDING TO GO AFTER THE UTILITY CUSTOMERS, BUT THE SCOPE OF WORK GOES INTO CODE COMPLIANCE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND A COUPLE OTHER THINGS. ANYTHING THAT SAID THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO STAY WITHIN OUR CODE, ANYTHING THAT I'M SORRY, IT WAS EXPANDED, JUST EXPANDED WELL BEYOND JUST UTILITIES. IT WENT INTO CODE ENFORCEMENT. ANYTHING TO ENFORCE CITY CODE THAT ARE FEE RELATED. CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD BE THROUGH COURT ALREADY IF ANYBODY HAD ANY OUTSTANDING DEBT THAT HAS NOT BEEN COLLECTED, THAT WOULD ALREADY THEY WOULD HAVE RECEIVED A COURT. FINE. SO DO THEY VIEW THIS AS A COMBINING OF THE TWO CONTRACTS, OR IS THIS A SEPARATE CONTRACT FROM WHAT THE COURT THIS WOULD BE A SEPARATE CONTRACT FROM COURT HAS WHAT WHAT YOUR READING IS, IS SIMPLE BOILERPLATE CONTRACT THEY. IT'S A GENERIC CONTRACT THEY PUT TO EVERYBODY BECAUSE THEY DO COLLECT FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT AGENCIES AND MUNICIPALITIES AND STUFF ACROSS THE STATE. I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THEIR THINGS.

IT'S LIKE MEDICAL BILL COLLECTORS. THERE'S A BUNCH OF THEM OUT. THERE MAY BE A IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MORE REPUTABLE ONES IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. THEY DO A LOT. I KNOW I'VE DEALT WITH THEM WITH A LOT OF CITIES I'VE DEALT WITH. AND THEN THE OTHER BIG ONE WAS LINEBARGER. SO THEY DO A LOT OF DELINQUENT TAX COLLECTIONS ALSO. SO I THINK I'D STILL LIKE TO SEE THE LANGUAGE TIGHTENED, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HIRING THEM TO DO, BECAUSE THAT KIND OF EXPANDS THE SCOPE TO ALMOST ANYTHING IN THE CITY. AND I'M SURE THEY'LL BE OPEN TO THAT.

THEY'RE REALLY GOOD TO WORK. THE ONES I'VE WORKED WITH, THEY'VE BEEN REALLY GOOD TO WORK WITH, SO WE CAN TIGHTEN THAT CONTRACT LANGUAGE UP. OKAY. THE OTHER THING, THE OTHER SECTION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF YOU GUYS COULD LOOK AT IS THE TERMINATION CLAUSE. WE CAN ONLY TERMINATE WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE ANNUAL RENEWAL. SO WE'D HAVE TO WAIT A LITTLE BIT. I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A POSSIBILITY TO TERMINATE FOR CAUSE. OR IF WE DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY'RE LIVING UP TO THE EXPECTATIONS AND THERE'S NO REPORTING REQUIREMENT, IT'D BE GOOD TO GET SOME ADDITIONAL REPORTING THAT THEY COULD SEND TO COUNCIL TO GIVE US AN IDEA OF HOW COLLECTIONS ARE GOING. AND THEN MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS, WHAT ARE WE CURRENTLY DOING? WHAT IS OUR PROCESS CURRENTLY TO WORK ON DELINQUENCIES? NOTHING. I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 2010 AND NOT ONE TIME. THEY USED TO ACTUALLY EVEN JUST WRITE IT OFF THE BOOKS AND TAKE IT OFF AS POTENTIAL REVENUE. YEAH, YEAH. MY INITIAL CONCERN WAS THIS WAS SORT OF LIKE OUR REGULAR DELINQUENCIES, JUST THE ONE MONTH, THE ACTIVE CUSTOMERS. AND I WAS THINKING, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE TAKING 30%, WE MAY LOSE MONEY IF THEY ONLY NET ANOTHER 20 GRAND OR SOMETHING.

SO I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT'S NOT THE CASE. SO THAT'S A POSITIVE. SO THIS IS MONEY THAT WE'VE ESSENTIALLY GIVEN UP ON. AND THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT THERE AND COLLECT IT FOR US.

AND THEN WE'LL PAY A LITTLE FOR IT. GOOD. I'M GLAD BRAD WALKED BY. MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION WAS FOR BRAD'S FIRM. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS HELP CITIES WITH ON COLLECTING DELINQUENCIES? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. I CAN CERTAINLY ASK, THOUGH, BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EVER RUN ACROSS MY EMAIL THAT I CAN THINK OF. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO, BUT I'LL CERTAINLY ASK THAT WE MIGHT HAVE WE MAY NOT DO IT, BUT WE MAY KNOW. I SUSPECT THAT SOMEONE IN MY FIRM, PROBABLY ONE OF OUR CITIES, WE'VE HELPED NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH AN OUTSIDE THIRD PARTY. WHO DOES? LET ME ASK THAT. OKAY. WELL, IF

[02:15:01]

BUT YEAH, JUST SHORING UP THE LANGUAGE. YEAH, I KNOW YOU WOULD JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, BUT I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO LIKE DIG, DIVE DEEP WHEN WE ALREADY ALREADY UNDER A CONTRACT WITH SOMEBODY THAT'S BEEN WORKING OUT FOR US, I WOULD TURN DOWN THAT, THAT WORK. YEAH, YEAH. I DO KNOW ABOUT SOME SOME AND IT'S A LONG, IT'S LIKE A, IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE A THREE PART LAW FIRM OUT OF HOUSTON. THEY ARE ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD TOO. BUT I THINK THAT THEIR, THEIR REVENUE IS, IS REVENUE STREAM IS BASICALLY SIMILAR OR STRUCTURE.

I THINK IT'S 30, 35% AS WELL. I WILL SAY THAT I LIKE MAY BE A BETTER LINEBERGER IS GOT SOME PRETTY, PRETTY NASTY REPUTATION WITH THEM. BUT, BUT YEAH, I THINK JUST COMING BACK, JUST CLEANING UP THE LANGUAGE ON THE CONTRACT AND COMING BACK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WOULD BE THE NEXT BEST BET. MAYOR PRO TEM WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY DONE THEIR HOMEWORK. I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME. I WOULD NOTE THAT IN THE BAY IS HEADQUARTERED OUT OF ROUND ROCK, SO THEY'RE JUST RIGHT DOWN THE STREET IN CASE WE DECIDE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A FACE TO FACE WITH THEM. BUT BEYOND THAT, I AGREE WITH ALL THE CLAUSES THAT YOU MENTIONED, MAYOR, HAVING THAT LOOKED AT AND BRINGING IT BACK ON CONSENT AGENDA. THANK YOU. OKAY, THEN THERE WILL BE

[X.1. Discussion on the lower ball field lease with the Lago Vista Independent School District (LVISD.)]

THEY DO ALL THE USAGE. THERE'S A DOLLAR LEASE MESSAGE. THE SUPERINTENDENT ABOUT THIS, SHE SAID SHE DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUE. IF WE WERE TO WANT TO TRANSFER OR CANCEL OUR LEASE, AND THEY CAN GO AND NEGOTIATE WITH THE YOUTH LEAGUES. SO JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO COUNCIL FOR YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT. I DON'T THINK WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE FROM THE YOUTH LEAGUE HERE. RIGHT. NO.

OKAY. MR. YEAH. I MEAN, WHEN THE YOUTH LEAGUE REPRESENTATIVE BROUGHT THIS FORWARD, IT WAS KIND OF A NO BRAINER FOR ME THEN TO, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY'S WILLING TO STEP FORWARD AND TAKE CARE OF SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A LEASE ON, BUT WE'RE NOT REALLY TAKING CARE OF, AND WE HAVEN'T EVEN PAID THE THE. I THINK THAT THIS, THIS ACTUALLY COULD BE AN ACTION ITEM REALLY QUICKLY OR EVEN PUT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR NEXT TIME AS WELL FOR JUST TO EASILY GET RID OF THAT LEASE. OKAY. MAYOR PRO TEM YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I DID GO AHEAD AND REACH OUT TO CHARLES AND COPY DAVID ON IT, JUST IN CASE TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY.

MY MAIN THOUGHT WAS, DO WE HAVE ANY RESERVATIONS ON THAT FIELD THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR? RIGHT. AND SO, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE IS NONE OF THOSE OBLIGATIONS AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME. AND SO THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO MOVE IT FORWARD. AND AGAIN, I AGREE, IT SHOULD JUST SHOULD COME BACK ON A CONSENT AGENDA TO GO AHEAD AND SEE ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO GO AHEAD AND DISSOLVE THE CONTRACT. MR. PRINCIPAL. SO, DAVID, MY QUESTION IS FOR YOU. WHEN I WAS LIAISON TO PRCAC, ONE OF THE PRCAC MEMBERS WHO FORMERLY HAD A PIZZA BUSINESS IN TOWN, THIS WAS HIS FAVORITE TOPIC. AND THERE WERE KIND OF TWO THINGS GOING ON IN THAT DISCUSSION.

THERE WAS THE MAINTENANCE AND THE CONTRACT WITH THIS BALL FIELD, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY OF L, V, I, S, D, AND THE MAINTENANCE ON THE BALL FIELD THAT BELONGS TO THE CITY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF BACH. RIGHT. AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING, IS, IS THERE ANY IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE ON THE OVERALL RELATIONSHIP OF HOW THOSE BALL FIELDS GET TAKEN CARE OF? IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADING, THAT THE YOUTH LEAGUES WOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE BALL FIELDS BELONGING TO THE SCHOOL? AND IN THE PAST, THEY'VE BEEN DOING MAINTENANCE ON THE BALL FIELDS BELONGING TO THE CITY AS WELL, RIGHT? CORRECT. YES. IT IS THAT EXPECTED TO CONTINUE, OR WOULD THE CITY TAKE OVER MAINTENANCE

[02:20:04]

THEY ALSO WANT TO GAIN CONTROL OF LOWER FIELD SO THAT THEY CAN DO SIMILAR ACTIVITIES OVER THERE. AND IT'S LARGELY BECAUSE THE EXPENSES RELATED TO MAINTENANCE BEGIN TO RUN A BIT HIGH. AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT, YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A SIGNIFICANT CONTROLLING INFLUENCE OVER THAT. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. AND JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR IN TERMS OF THE CONTRACT, ALL THE CITY HAS TO DO IS NOTIFY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT WE'RE GOOD AND WE WANT OUT. THAT'S THAT'S ALL THAT'S NECESSARY. SO DOES THAT EVEN BRAD, WOULD THAT EVEN NEED TO COME BACK FOR AN ITEM IF THERE'S CONSENSUS UP HERE TO END THAT? OR IS THAT THE CLEANER WAY YOU'D RATHER SEE HIM? I'D RATHER SEE ACTION IN A, IN A THAT WAY WE CAN POINT TO IT IN THE MINUTES AND IT DOESN'T GET LOST TO THE MISTS OF TIME. OKAY, OKAY. I THINK WE GOT GOOD DIRECTION THERE. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE TWO MORE WORK SESSION ITEMS. I'M GOING TO I, I'M NOT GOING TO INTEND TO KEEP US HERE SUPER LATE. SO THE CHARTER WILL HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE AN HOUR CAP ON IT, AN HOUR AND A HALF. AND SO

[X.2. Budget Work session.]

CHARLES. WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE TO START? WELL, SORT OF, I GUESS. I SENT YOU AN EMAIL. I SENT THE SUB, THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE, AN EMAIL TODAY AFTER GOING THROUGH WHAT'S ALREADY IN AND BUDGET ON DEPARTMENTS. AND I THINK IT PROBABLY BE A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR YOU TO TELL US EXACTLY WHERE DO YOU VIEW THOSE DRAFTS TO BE? BECAUSE MY INITIAL RESPONSE WAS, I THOUGHT WE MADE SOME PROGRESS LAST YEAR OF HOW WE DID THE BUDGET, AND WE HAD THIS PROCESS OF EACH DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET HAD TO START AT A BASELINE OF THE LOWER OF EITHER WHAT WAS BUDGETED OR WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SPENT, AND THAT WAS EXCLUDING PERSONNEL, AND THEY HAD TO LOWER THEY HAD TO LOWER 5%, AND THAT WAS EXCLUDING PERSONNEL.

AND THEN THAT WAS JUST A STARTING POINT. BUT YOU HAD TO COME IN FOR EXCEPTIONAL ITEMS TO ADD ON TO IT. WE DIDN'T REALLY FULLY GET TO THAT POINT LAST YEAR, BUT WE GOT CLOSE AND WE WERE AROUND THAT MODEL. I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE US ACTUALLY DO THAT THIS YEAR, BECAUSE THE BUDGET DRAFTS THAT I SAW IN HERE WERE SORT OF BACK TO THE THE SAME WAY OUR BUDGET LOOKED TWO YEARS AGO, WHERE THERE'S A LOT IN THERE THAT I HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THAT HAS BEEN PUT INTO EACH DEPARTMENT, AND I'D HAVE TO RELY ON COUNCIL TO GO AND DEBATE STAFF TO PULL THINGS BACK AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY ARE. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD STARTING POINT. SO MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS, CAN WE STILL GO BACK TO THIS FORMAT THAT I THINK WE WERE IN AGREEMENT TO USE? AND WHAT IS THE THE STATUS OF WHAT YOU SEE IN BUDGET NOW AND TELL THE CITIZENS WHAT IS IN BUDGET AND WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO SEE A DRAFT BUDGET? I WILL HAVE A DRAFT BUDGET IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS FOR SURE. NOW THAT WE'VE GOTTEN SOME NUMBERS AND WE'VE GOTTEN A LITTLE MORE DIRECTION IN BUDGET IS JUST A BUDGETING SOFTWARE. SOMEBODY NEEDS TO MUTE THEIR MIC, PLEASE. IT IS A BUDGETING SOFTWARE THAT LETS US GO IN THERE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS AFTER THE MAYOR'S EMAIL TODAY, I STARTED GOING BACK AND LOOKING. AND I DON'T THINK THE DECISION PACKAGES THAT'S A FUNCTION OF BUDGET WAS USED CORRECTLY. SO WE'RE GOING TO PROBABLY GO BACK AND MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS. I JUST NOW STARTED MEETING WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS AND. THIS PAST WEEK, AND ME AND NICOLE HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH IT, STREAMLINING IT, BECAUSE WHAT I WANT THEM TO DO IS $0 IS WHERE YOU START. YOU GIVE ME YOUR LIST OF ITEMS IN THERE AND THAT'S WHAT IT ADDS UP TO. BUT EACH ITEM NEEDS TO TELL ME, WHAT IS THAT ITEM? WHAT IS IT FOR? I'LL USE ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE I KNOW IT EASILY AND I HADN'T EVEN PUT MY STUFF IN THERE IS LIKE ON MY TRAINING BUDGET. I SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIST OUT MY TRAINING FOR WHAT I EXPECT TO GO TO FOR THE YEAR, AND ON THE AVERAGE OF WHAT THOSE COST, SOME OF MY CLASSES, I KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO COST. SOME OF THEM I GOT AN IDEA ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO COST. SO THAT WAY YOU'VE GOT THAT NUMBER AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES UP MY TRAINING BUDGET.

[02:25:04]

SELF-SUSTAINING, WHICH I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW. WE JUST HAD A SIGNED CONTRACTS OR SIGNED SOME. WE DID A RESOLUTION AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING ON THE AIRPORT. WE ARE GOING WE DID EARMARK THAT $650,000 OF OUR CURRENT RESERVES IS GOING TO BE EARMARKED FOR FUTURE EXPENSES AT THE AIRPORT, BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING $6.5 MILLION GRANT, WHICH IS A 9010 GRANT. SO, YOU KNOW, GET $6.5 MILLION FOR IS A BIG DEAL BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO COMPLETELY WIND UP REDOING OUR RUNWAY AND ALL OF THE LIGHTING SYSTEM UP THERE. SO THAT'S HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT IT.

SO BUDGET, WE'RE WE'RE JUST NOW GETTING INTO THE EARLY STAGES OF IT, OF GOING THROUGH IT.

I'VE MET WITH THE LIBRARY AND OVERALL THE DEPARTMENTS I HAVE MET WITH, THEIR BUDGET COUNTS WERE DOWN. DAVID CAME IN TO ME. I DID MEET WITH DAVID WITH PARKS. HIS BUDGET NUMBERS WERE DOWN FROM THE PRIOR YEAR ON REQUEST, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I HAD TO GO BACK AND REMIND HIM THAT WE'RE ADDING TO SARAH'S POOL IN THERE FOR NEXT YEAR. SO THAT BUDGET FOR AQUATICS IS GOING TO PROBABLY DOUBLE, IF NOT GO UP MORE. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT KIND OF LOOKING AT THINGS. BUT YES, I AGREE. LET'S LET'S OUR EVERYDAY ITEMS THAT'S GOING TO BE SET THERE AND SET. YES, NEW PERSONNEL WILL BE A DECISION PACKAGE. SO IT'LL BE A SEPARATE ITEM FOR YOU TO. YEAH. SO BUT I'M, I'M OPEN FOR SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE'RE DOING THIS AND GET THROUGH IT. AND ALSO KEEP IN MIND, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK THROUGH OUR ENCODE UPGRADE OR HOWEVER YOU WANT TO GO TO IT TRANSITION AND ALSO CORRECTING OUR CHART OF ACCOUNTS TO MAKE OUR, OUR ACCOUNTING SYSTEM MORE TRANSPARENT AND EASIER TO FOLLOW. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY ONE THING BECAUSE I KNOW COUNCILOR PRINCE, I SEE YOUR FINGER HOVERING. I THINK WHAT YOU SAID HOW TO START THE BUDGET IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT I SAID. YOU SAID START AT ZERO AND BUILD UP FROM THERE. AND I THAT'S NOT THE WAY I WAS THINKING. I WOULD RATHER GO FROM WHAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR AND THE LOWER OF WHAT WAS APPROVED OR WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SPENT. AND YOU'RE GOING FROM THAT PART BECAUSE IF YOU START AT ZERO, AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE WISHLIST ITEMS THAT GET BUILT INTO DEPARTMENTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH AND TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE HECK THEY ARE. AND I'LL GO TO MR. PRINCE AFTER THAT. I KNOW MR. CHAVARRIA HAS HER HAND UP AS WELL. I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS TO SAY, SO LET ME JUST SAY SOME BRIEF THINGS AND THEN RESERVE THAT I COULD. I'LL HAVE MORE TO SAY. WHAT I HEARD CHARLES SAYING IS HE'S WORKING ON A BOTTOMS UP BUDGET FOR THE CITY, WHICH IS VERY VALUABLE.

RIGHT. YOU WANT TO I THINK, MR. WEST, I'M I'M 100% WITH YOU THAT YOU WANT PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY EXPLAIN WHAT THEY NEED THE MONEY FOR, WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING. AND I, I ALSO SUPPORT IS CITY COUNCIL HAS GIVEN YOU A TOP DOWN BUDGET, RIGHT? WHICH IS THAT IS TO SAY, DEPARTMENTS CANNOT SPEND MORE THAN THEY SPENT LAST YEAR. BUT IF YOU'RE BOTTOMS UP, EFFORTS COME UP AND YOU SAY, I HAVE, YOU KNOW, AND SARAH PULLS A PERFECT EXAMPLE, RIGHT? THE THE AQUATICS IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIT WITHIN THAT TOPS DOWN BUDGET, BUT THAT THAT EXPENSE, ADDITIONAL EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THE POOL NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT IN AS A SEPARATE LINE ITEM SO THAT WE CAN DISCUSS THAT SEPARATELY AS AN AD, AS OPPOSED TO JUST GETTING BURIED IN THE BUDGET, WHICH WAS KIND OF THE TOP DOWN DRIVEN. SO I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE, WHAT THE, WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING. AND, AND I WANT TO SPEND SOME MORE TIME THINKING ABOUT MY COMMENTS AND OFFER THE MIC BACK TO SOMEONE ELSE. MR. I GOT I'M GOING TO BE BRINGING THIS UP UNDER LIAISON REPORTS, BUT I'VE ALSO HANDED EVERYONE A PACKET AS WELL. BUILDINGS AND

[02:30:02]

THEY KIND OF WANTED TO GET AWAY FROM THAT, BECAUSE IT LEAVES A LOT OF WORK ON COUNCIL TO COME IN AND MAKE BUDGET AMENDMENTS FREQUENTLY TO DO THAT. THEY HAVE PUT OFF THIS WORK FOR A LONG TIME. AND OF COURSE, THERE'S GROWING CONCERN AMONG CITIZENS THAT THESE THESE CONDEMNED BUILDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO BUDGET. WELL, THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY TRUE. THE BUDGET HAS THE THE FUNDS TO DO IT, BUT THEY JUST WANT KIND OF LIKE A LINE ITEM FOR THAT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT WE'VE DONE BUDGET DISCUSSIONS PREVIOUSLY WHERE WE WERE SAYING, WELL, JUST PUT IT UNDER A DEPARTMENT. WELL, SOME OF THESE ARE GOING TO COST A LOT. THEY'RE THEY'RE ASKING FOR A BIG SPEND OF 250, 000 AS A STARTING POINT. SO I'VE BEEN THAT'S WHY I'VE GIVEN YOU A SIGNIFICANT PACKET. I, I KNOW THAT THIS IS KIND OF A LAST MINUTE THING, BUT THIS WAS ALSO JUST SOMETHING THAT THEY DISCUSSED YESTERDAY. JORDAN CAN PROBABLY ANSWER SOME MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY AGENDIZED FOR THAT. IT'S KIND OF JUST WHAT I GAVE ON MY LIAISON REPORT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD AS WELL. SO JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND. WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW, CHARLES, YOU WANT TO PUT THIS IN ON THE BUDGET OR EVEN HOW TO COME TO COUNCIL AND ASK FOR THIS, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD ON. JUST TO CHIME IN ON THAT, AGAIN, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN ASKING FOR WHAT ROLLING, ROLLING WOULD DID. AND THERE'S A SPREADSHEET OF EXCEPTIONAL ITEM REQUESTS, AND THAT WOULD BE A PRIME EXAMPLE OF AN EXCEPTIONAL ITEM REQUEST. IT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE ASKING US TO ADD ON TOP OF THE BASE BUDGET. OKAY, I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AND THAT'S IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR BUDGET, I'LL TRY TO PUT THIS UP ON THE SCREEN FOR CITIZENS TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. MAYBE IT'S GONNA ALLOW ME. BUT YOU'LL LOOK HERE AT THE TOP AND IT SHOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE YOUR BASE BUDGET, WHICH TO ME IS YOUR NON-DISCRETIONARY ITEMS THAT WE, WE KNOW ARE GOING TO BE THERE. WE ADD THOSE IN AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR DECISION PACKAGES, WHICH IS THE DISCRETIONARY ITEMS, WHICH WOULD BE THE ADDITION OF A NEW PERSONNEL REQUEST AND STUFF LIKE THAT. I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, IS YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE, THE REQUEST FOR NEW ITEMS SEPARATELY, BUT LIKE YOUR OFFICE SUPPLIES, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SPELL OUT OFFICE SUPPLIES, BUT IF YOU SPEND $100 LAST YEAR, WE WANT TO TRY TO SPEND 90 THIS YEAR. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? WE CAN DO THAT. THAT, THAT IT'LL TAKE ME SOME TIME. BUT ACTUALLY I'M AT THAT POINT NOW WHERE I THINK I CAN ACTUALLY SIT DOWN. NICOLE'S BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH AND GET MY NUMBERS SO I CAN ACTUALLY SIT DOWN AND DO THAT. SO I BELIEVE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, IF WE CAN SCHEDULE A BUDGET WORKSHOP FOR THAT ONE TOO, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO REALLY GO INTO MORE DETAIL ON THAT. AND THEN WE NEED TO HAVE A FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING TOO. SO AND THE TRICKIER ONE THAT MR. PRINCE BRINGS UP EVERY YEAR IS HOW TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE OF OVER BUDGETING FOR THE PERSONNEL PART OF IT. I'M SURE THAT'S SOMETHING HE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT. YEAH, A COUPLE OF THINGS, SIR CHARLES, YOU JUST USED AN EXAMPLE OF, YOU KNOW, WE SPENT $100 ON OFFICE SUPPLIES. WE SHOULD BE 10% LESS. THAT IS NOT AT ALL THE DIRECTION THAT I HAVE BEEN PROPOSING. AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT THE MAYOR IS SAYING. WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WHAT I'VE SAID AND THIS IS IN IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION THAT I DID A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, AND I'VE SHARED WITH YOU A COUPLE OF TIMES AT LEAST. RIGHT.

I SAID, LET'S LET YOU DO YOUR JOB RIGHT. AND IF YOU NEED TO SPEND MORE ON OFFICE SUPPLIES, THAT'S FINE, BUT YOU GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO SPEND LESS IN ORDER TO BALANCE. SO MY PROPOSAL HAD BEEN AT A DEPARTMENT LEVEL. THE DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO SPEND, YOU KNOW, NOT MORE THAN THEY DID LAST YEAR OR THE MAYOR HAS OFTEN SAID, YOU KNOW, 5% REDUCTION, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, AS A STARTING POINT. AND THEN IF THE DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO SPEND MORE THAN THAT, BECAUSE ALL OF A SUDDEN WE NEED TO SPEND MORE ON OFFICE SUPPLIES OR STAMPS, OR WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO HAVE TO BUY A NEW BACKHOE OR SOMETHING, I DON'T KNOW. RIGHT. DON'T BURY THAT IN THE BUDGET. IT'S IT'S THOSE THOSE THINGS. IF YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING IN THERE AND SAY, OH, PUBLIC WORKS IS GOING TO BUY A BACKHOE. BUT THE REASON WE CAN GET AWAY WITH BACKHOE AT 5% LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET IS BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO SPEND OVER HERE ON SOMETHING ELSE. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW AND YOUR DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR'S PURVIEW TO FIGURE THAT OUT. BUT IF YOU'VE GOT IF YOU CAN'T STAY WITHIN THAT BUDGET OF A DEPARTMENT, CAN'T STAY WITHIN THAT BUDGET, THEN YOU NEED TO CALL OUT IN MR. SOAMES LIST. RIGHT. WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT

[02:35:06]

RIGHT. AND I'M NOT INTERESTED IN IN YOU HAVING TO JUSTIFY YOUR TRAINING AND THE COST OF YOUR HOTEL FOR THAT. BUT, YOU KNOW, JUST AT A WHOLE DEPARTMENT LEVEL. AND MY MOTIVATION IS, CHARLES, THAT WHEN WE GET UP TO THE MACRO LEVEL, THE TOTAL BUDGET WILL BE LESS THAN WHAT WE SPENT ACTUALLY SPENT LAST YEAR, WHICH I KNOW IS A LOT LESS THAN WHAT WE ACTUALLY BUDGETED TO SPEND LAST YEAR. AND AS MR. SOAMES POINTED OUT, THAT ONE OF THE DRIVERS, NOT ACTUALLY IN THIS MOST PREVIOUS PREVIOUS YEAR'S BUDGET, WHEN I ANALYZED IT, PERSONNEL WAS NOT A DRIVER IN PUBLIC WORKS. IT WAS A DRIVER IN ALL OF THE GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENTS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, GETTING ACCURACY AND PERSONNEL EXPENSES. AND I THINK, MAYOR, IN YOUR EMAIL TO THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE, YOU WERE SUGGESTING SOMETHING WHAT TO DO AROUND PERSONNEL. AND I THINK I WOULD INVITE THE CITY MANAGER TO, TO THINK ABOUT THIS.

THERE'S THERE'S PERSONNEL YOU HAVE ON HAND AND WHAT YOU ACTUALLY SPENT LAST YEAR, THERE'S PERSONNEL THAT YOU REALISTICALLY THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HIRE IN THE NEXT MONTH OR 2 OR 6 MONTHS, THAT REALLY YOU NEED TO HAVE BUDGET IN ORDER TO PAY THOSE PEOPLE. AND THEN THERE'S PERSONNEL THAT MAYBE YOU, YOU HAVE BEEN APPROVED TO HIRE, BUT REALISTICALLY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO FILL THEM THIS YEAR AND YOU DON'T NEED A BUDGET FOR I THINK WHAT'S HAPPENED OVER THE PAST FOUR YEARS IS THE BUDGETING HAS BEEN DONE AGAINST PEOPLE THAT WE THINK WE MIGHT HIRE AT THE EXTREME BEST HIRING SCENARIO, AND WE NEVER HIRE ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE. AND SO WE'VE BEEN UNDERSPENDING ON PERSONNEL BY A LOT. SO I SAID A LOT OF STUFF, BUT HOPEFULLY THAT'S ALL. THAT'S ALL HELPFUL. YEAH, I THINK, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'LL DO HERE IS TAKE THE BUDGET, TAKE OUR LAST YEAR'S EXPENDITURES FOR THE DEPARTMENTS, TAKE THE PERSONNEL SECTION OUT OF IT, SAY, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT YOU SPENT LAST YEAR. WE NEED TO TRY TO REDUCE FROM THAT AND GO ABOUT THAT THROUGH MY DEPARTMENTS. I THINK THAT WILL GET US WHERE WE'RE WANTING. I THINK THAT'S GREAT. AND THEN ONE THING THAT I WANT TO ALSO MENTION IS WHILE PERSONNEL IS NOT A DRIVER IN PUBLIC WORKS, WHAT WAS A DRIVER WAS CAPITAL EXPENSES, RIGHT? AND SO WHEN I LOOKED, WHEN ACTUALLY WHEN I DID MY OWN PERSONAL POSTMORTEM ON LAST YEAR'S BUDGET, I, I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENED IN PUBLIC WORKS, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST. YOU GUYS HAD A BUNCH OF BUDGET FOR CAPITAL EXPENSES THAT YOU DIDN'T SPEND. AND HOW MUCH OF THAT WAS YOU DIDN'T SPEND IT BECAUSE YOU DECIDED WE COULD GET AWAY WITH NOT DOING IT, OR IT WAS NOT A GOOD PLAN, YOU KNOW, AND YOU, YOU'RE THE NEW DIRECTOR. AND SO, YEAH, I'LL INVITE YOU TO COME LET ME FINISH THE TEEING IT UP. HOW MUCH OF THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T YOU DECIDED IT WAS NOT THE RIGHT PLAN. AND WE'LL NEVER HAVE TO SPEND THAT MONEY. OR HOW MUCH OF IT WAS YOU SAID, I NEED TO STAY WITHIN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, AND THEREFORE I'M GOING TO DEFER BUYING THAT BACK LOADER OR WHATEVER IT WAS TO NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET. RIGHT. AND SO I THINK, CHARLES, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, THOSE BIG TICKET LINE ITEMS SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE THE BUDGET RULE OF DON'T SPEND MORE THAN YOU DID LAST YEAR, BECAUSE THAT JUST THAT JUST HIDES THE REALITY OF WHAT'S GOING ON. BUT THEY SHOULD GET THEIR OWN SHEET OF, YOU KNOW, WHY, WHY WE NEED TO SPEND $600,000 ON THIS. YEAH.

EACH DEPARTMENT WILL HAVE A CAPITAL LINE ITEM OR CAPITAL EXPENDITURE SECTION OF THEIR

[02:40:01]

WELL THAT'S WHERE WE GOT IT IS ENTERPRISES WANTING TO TAKE OVER ALL OF OUR FLEET. SO WE LET THEM COME MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION, WE LISTEN TO IT AND WE JUST WEREN'T, WE WEREN'T THAT IMPRESSED AFTER WE GOT IT. THEY SOUND GREAT. I'M SURE THEY COULD COME UP HERE AND GIVE YOU A GREAT PRESENTATION AND SAY, LOOK, WE CAN SAVE YOU THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY OVER A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS. YEAH, THEY'RE GOING TO SAVE ME THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD OF TEN YEARS. BUT HOW MUCH INTEREST AM I GOING TO PAY BECAUSE I'M BASICALLY FINANCING ALL OF THESE CARS, AND I JUST DON'T THINK THE COST SAVINGS IS GOING TO OFFSET THERE. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE LOOKING AT. BUT YEAH, THIS IS THE DIRECTION STAFF NEEDED. AND THEY'VE ALL BEEN SHARPENING THEIR PENCILS. SO I THINK WE CAN GET YOU A DRAFT BUDGET FAIRLY QUICKLY OF WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE WANTING, BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY GOT A LOT OF NUMBERS IN THERE. SO LET US JUST GO IN THERE AND SHARPEN OUR PENCIL A LITTLE BIT. AND MY LAST QUESTION JUST YOU SAID THE CAPITAL BUDGET IS, IS ONE YOU NEED FEEDBACK ON. ARE YOU IS ARE YOU ALMOST TO THE POINT OF WHERE YOU CAN SHARE THE REQUEST BUDGET? YOU KNOW, WHEN CAN WE ACTUALLY SEE SOMETHING SO THAT WE CAN START DISCUSSING IT? VICTOR, WHERE ARE WE AT ON THE CAPITAL RIGHT NOW? CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, NOT JUST CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, THE ONES YOU'RE IN CHARGE OF, RIGHT? YES, CIP. SO CURRENTLY I'M STILL WORKING WITH ENGINEERS TO GET PROPOSALS WRITTEN THAT WAY. IT'S NOT STICKER SHOCK AND THEY'RE NOT JUST PLACEHOLDER NUMBERS FOR NEXT YEAR. FOR THE MOST PART, I'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF THOSE. AND NEXT COUNCIL MEETING IS WHEN I WILL BE GOING INTO A LOT OF THE CEO FUNDS AND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING WITH THE DRAINAGE STUDY AND KIND OF ALL THOSE. SO I KIND OF WANT TO BREAK IT UP INTO PORTIONS. AND FOR TODAY, I WAS ACTUALLY HOPING TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE CAPACITY AND KIND OF GO THROUGH PROJECTS THAT I'M LOOKING TO TAKE OFF FROM LAST YEAR AND PROJECTS THAT I'M LOOKING TO ADD. SO IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. SO IF YOU ARE OPEN, I WOULD LIKE FOR VICTOR TO ASK HIS QUESTIONS AND GO THROUGH THERE. I MEAN, I'D SAY IT'D BE GOOD TO SHOW IT TO US, BUT YOU DIDN'T GIVE US ANY TIME TO RESEARCH IT. SO I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH COUNCIL IS GOING TO BE ABLE ON THE CUFF, GIVE YOU YEAS AND NAYS ON THAT. WELL, I MEAN, THIS IS JUST A WORKSHOP. I'M NOT LOOKING FOR APPROVAL FOR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, JUST MORE OF DIRECTION OF WHY I'M PUTTING THESE PROJECTS, WHY THE PROJECTS ARE COMING FORWARD AND WHAT PROJECTS I'M LOOKING TO TAKE OFF. OKAY. AND IF I MAY, THE IPADS COMMITTEE HAS HAD A NUMBER OF THESE DISCUSSIONS. SO I'M ASSUMING, VICTOR, YOU'RE GOING TO SHARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN THAT CONTEXT. AND I HAD PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED WHAT I THOUGHT WAS THIS SUMMARY FROM IPASS, WHICH WAS THE DATA IS TELLING US THAT WE'RE WE PROBABLY DON'T NEED TO DO THE MAJOR. GIGANTIC WATER EXPANSION. AND YOU'RE GOING TO HELP IN A MINUTE HERE. I'M TELLING YOU, THIS IS THE WASTEWATER. WELL, ON THE WATER SIDE, THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU HAD GIVEN US PREVIOUSLY WAS. AND THAT I SHARED WITH COUNCIL, WAS THAT WE NEED TO GET OUR PLANTS DELIVERING CLOSER TO WHAT, ON PAPER THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CAPABLE OF. AND THERE SHOULD BE SOME PROJECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. SO WE GET CLOSER TO THE 4 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY OF WATER THAT IN THAT T-C-E-Q THINKS OUR PLANTS CAN DO. BUT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW THERE'S SOME REASONS WHY WE CAN'T GET THAT HIGH. THAT WAS OF TOP PRIORITY.

BUT GETTING BEYOND 4 MILLION GALLONS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE SOME TIME TO GET TO. THAT I THINK IS RIGHT, AND YOU CAN CORRECT THAT OR CHANGE THAT. YOU WERE NOT THE LAST ONE. SO I

[02:45:02]

BUT BY THAT BY THAT TIMING, WE COULD OR IT COMES DOWN THE COST. WHAT IS THE COST GOING TO BE TO GET UP TO 600 MGD. AND WHAT DOES THAT COST CORRELATE TO ACTUALLY EXPANDING. SO SO WHAT I WOULD FIND HELPFUL, AND HOPEFULLY THIS WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL FOR ALL COUNCIL.

WHENEVER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PROJECT ON THE CIP LIST THAT IT'S CLEAR WHETHER THAT PROJECT IS ABOUT INCREASING THE CAPACITY OF OUR EXISTING PLANTS TO WHAT TCDC THINKS THEY ALREADY SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF DOING, RIGHT? WHETHER THAT'S A A PROJECT ASSOCIATED WITH SHORING UP OUR EXISTING PLANT CAPACITY IS THE WAY I WOULD CALL IT, OR IT'S A PROJECT THAT IS A MACRO EXPANSION TO GET US BEYOND THE 4 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY THAT'S ON THAT'S ON THE WATER SIDE. SO IN MY MIND, IT'S KIND OF TWO BUCKETS. AND, AND I THINK WHILE THE NUMBERS MAY HAVE CHANGED SLIGHTLY, THE SOUND LIKE THE MACRO MESSAGE IS, IS STILL THE SAME THAT WE'VE GOT TO, WE GOT TO DO SOME NEAR-TERM THINGS IN ORDER TO GET ABOVE THE REALISTIC LIMIT TODAY OF 3 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY. YES, BUT IT COMES DOWN TO COST. WHAT IS IT GOING TO ACTUALLY COST TO GET THESE CHANGES IMPLEMENTED FOR WATER PLANT ONE? AND DOES THAT COST CORRELATE TO ACTUALLY EXPANDING WATER PLANT THREE AND UTILIZING WATER PLANT THREE TO ITS FULL POTENTIAL? BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO THAT'S FAIR. SO IF THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT, THAT'S AN EXPANSION OF THREE RATHER THAN SHORING UP PLANT ONE. PERFECT. AND THEN WE'RE ALREADY KIND OF GOING THROUGH AND WITHIN PUBLIC WORKS BUDGET TO ACTUALLY GET WITH THE ENGINEERING COMPANY TO COME ASSESS THE, ASSESS BASICALLY OUR WHOLE ENTIRE PLANT AND FIGURE OUT WHERE WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THOSE CHANGES. GOTCHA. BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, WATER PLANT ONE IS IT'S AN OLDER SYSTEM. IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME INTAKE SCREEN OR THE SAME LEVEL AT THE SAME ELEVATION THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO PULL WATER FROM AS WATER. PLANT THREE. SO IF YOU'RE ABLE, IF WE GO THROUGH DROUGHT AND WE'RE BELOW THAT LEVEL AT WATER PLANT ONE, THEN WE JUST IMPROVE THAT SYSTEM FOR NO BENEFIT REASONS. AND WHEN WE COULD HAVE WENT FOR WATER PLANT THREE, WHERE IT HAS A MUCH DEEPER INTAKE, EXPANDING THAT PLANT MAKES MORE SENSE DURING DROUGHT CONDITIONS. OKAY. SO IT'S KIND OF WEIGHING THOSE OPTIONS. AND THEN AS PART OF THAT CONVERSATION, WATER PLANT THREE CAN'T PROVIDE WATER TO THE ENTIRE CITY. SO YOU HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL PROJECTS YOU HAVE TO DO TO MAKE IT GET THERE. AND THAT PART WAS PRETTY EXPENSIVE. SO FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ALL THAT, IT'S MORE OF SEQUENCING CONNECTING 3 TO 1. WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO FEED WATER, BUT IT'S USUALLY DONE MANUALLY AND WE HAVE TO MONITOR THE SYSTEM. AND IT'S, IT'S A LOT LENGTHIER PROCESS VERSUS HAVING A SHARED SYSTEM TO WHERE IT JUST FEEDS WHATEVER TANK NEEDS TO BE FED IN A SHORT MACRO SENSE. WELL, WE MAY HAVE THE SEQUENCE OF WHAT YOU WANTED TO PRESENT HERE TODAY. SO IF YOU WANT TO GO INTO EXACTLY WHAT YOUR PLAN WAS, AND DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE ANYTHING TO PASS OUT TO US OR PROJECT? YES, I DID WANT TO GIVE OUT THE ACTUAL CAPACITIES. SO THIS IS FROM THE IPASS MEETING TODAY. I WANTED TO DISCUSS KIND OF. THE. TAKE TWO. DON'T MAKE ANOTHER COPY. ONE OF EACH. SO BEFORE YOU JUMP

[02:50:10]

WELL, IN THE. SO I WAS RIGHT. SO GOING BACK TO PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORS, TO ERIC, HE PUT IT ON THERE BECAUSE HE SAID HE NEEDED A NEW BUILDING SPACE FOR ALL THE PUBLIC WORKS OFFICES, AND IT NEVER GOT SPENT. OR AT LEAST THAT'S MY MEMORY. IT NEVER GOT SPENT, NEVER HAPPENED.

AND SO IT JUST KIND OF PERCOLATED FORWARD. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK TAYLOR KEPT IT ON THERE. WHEN WE ACQUIRED THE LAND OFF OF ALFALFA, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COUNCIL AT THE TIME SAID, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO A BUILDING, IT NEEDS TO BE ON THAT LAND. AND, AND WE KIND OF GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A BAIT AND SWITCH, TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST. AND IT'S GOING BACK TO PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORS AGO WHERE HE SAID, YEAH, OKAY, SO BUY THE LAND. AND THEN AFTER THE FACT, HE SAID, IT'S TOO HARD TO BUILD ON THAT LAND. SO WE CAN'T DO IT THERE. BUT IT NEVER HAPPENED.

AND THEN TAYLOR NEVER PULLED THE TRIGGER ON, YOU KNOW, REALLY ASKING FOR IT. SO IF YOU GUYS ARE SAYING WE DON'T NEED TO DO IT, I THINK IT WAS THE WHOLE JUSTIFICATION CAME FROM PUBLIC WORKS, NOT NOT FROM ANYTHING THAT THAT I SAW FROM COUNCIL. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT LAND IS NOT REALLY USABLE. SO THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. SO YOU CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BUILD ON THAT ALFALFA LAND. NO. AND THEN THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU NEED SOME KIND OF A LINE ITEM FOR PUBLIC WORKS FACILITIES AND OFFICES OR SOMETHING. AND I'M NOT YOU KNOW, TO MR. SAM'S POINT, THIS IS NOT ABOUT A WISH LIST. IT'S ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS CREATING A REAL PROBLEM.

WE CAN'T GET OUR WORK DONE AND WE NEED TO SPEND SOME MONEY DOING SOMETHING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOMETHING IS, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS LINE ITEM IS REALLY ABOUT. IT REALLY IS. WE NEED MORE SPACE. WE RUN OUT OF SPACE AT PLANT ONE, BUT I MEAN, WE THERE'S OUR PRIORITIES. SO THIS IS NOT REALLY ONE OF THE PRIORITIES RIGHT NOW. BUT WE DO NEED MORE LAND, MORE SPACE DURING THE EVENT. I MEAN, WE PUT ALL, MOST OF OUR EQUIPMENT OUT IN THE EVENT WE HAD. AND IT WAS VERY VISIBLE THAT WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF SPACE. YEAH. WELL, I MEAN, CERTAINLY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, OFFICE SPACE IS A LOWER PRIORITY THAN WATER AND WASTEWATER AND ROADS. RIGHT. OFFICE SPACE IS IMPORTANT. WE NEED TO HAVE THE RIGHT THING FOR OUR EMPLOYEES. BUT IF IT IF IT CAN BE DEFERRED, I THINK IT CERTAINLY SHOULD BE. AND WE ALREADY USED THE ALFALFA PROPERTY FOR MAINTENANCE FOR OUR EQUIPMENT. I MEAN, IT'S NOT PAVED. IT'S NOT IN THE YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO GO OUT AND MOW AND DO MAINTENANCE THERE. BUT FOR OFFICE SPACE, I THINK, I MEAN, WE EVEN HAVE AN EXTRA DESK THAT THE OLD PUBLIC WORKS GIS WAS IN.

SO WE DO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE. IT'S JUST FOR RIGHT NOW. I THINK THEY WERE ANTICIPATING US GROWING MORE THAN WE NEEDED TO. AND THAT JUST HASN'T BEEN THE CASE FOR US RIGHT NOW. DO WE NEED TO LIKE VOTE ON CAN I GET YAY OR NAY TO REMOVE IT? OR THERE'S A WORK SESSION ITEM. SO. OH, WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, I MEAN, WE WOULDN'T VOTE ON IT, BUT YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO ULTIMATELY YOU'RE GOING TO BRING US YOUR LIST OF CIP PROJECTS. AND IF IT'S NOT ON YOUR LIST, IT'S, IT'S NOT ON THE LIST. I WASN'T SURE HOW IN THE PAST THE CIP, IF YOU IF IT WAS LIKE A, A DECISION THING TO WHERE THEY GOT PUT ON THERE OR THEY GOT REMOVED. SO. WELL, I'LL JUST SAY IN MY HISTORY, MOST OF THE CITY MANAGERS IN THE PAST HAVE DONE A PRETTY POOR JOB OF DEALING WITH THE CIP. AND IT'S KIND OF AS WE GET THROUGH THE BUDGET, THEY SAID, OH, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE CIP TWO? WELL, YES, BECAUSE THAT'S MOST OF THE MONEY WE'RE SPENDING. SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS FOCUSING ON IT. BUT THIS IS REALLY WE HAVEN'T DONE IT RIGHT IN THE PAST. AND JUST TO THAT POINT, YEAH, IT'S BEEN A NIGHTMARE GOING BACK FIVE SEVEN YEARS TO FIGURING OUT WHAT PROJECTS WERE ON THERE, WHAT PROJECTS FELL OFF, WHY THEY WERE ON THERE, WHY THEY FELL OFF. THERE'S JUST POOR DOCUMENTATION OF IT. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M HERE TODAY TO KIND OF BRING THAT FORWARD AND SAY, THIS, THIS PROJECT WAS ON THERE, BUT WE ARE REMOVING IT. SO THAT'S ONE. THE OTHER ONE IS GOING TO BE THE LOWMAN AND DON

[02:55:05]

[03:00:04]

YOU DON'T WANT TO PUT NUMBERS IN FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE WILD GUESSES WHEN YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE AN ENGINEERING JUDGMENT, BUT FOR FOR ANY OF US, MISS OWEN IS THE ONE WHO HAS DONE MOST OF IT TO TO DO A KIND OF A TEN YEAR PLAN OF WHAT, WHAT CAN WE REALLY DO AROUND FINDINGS? WHAT DO WE HAVE TO DO AROUND FINANCING? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR TAX RATES OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS? I THINK WE NEED SOMETHING, RIGHT? SO WE NEED, WE NEED WE NEED A COMPLETE LIST OF PROJECTS. AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO YOU SAID I'M GOING TO PUT IN COST OF ENGINEERING, BUT NOT COST OF IMPLEMENTATION. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WANT TO CAPTURE, BUT I THINK FOR MY PURPOSES, I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST HAVE SOME IDEA IS THAT PROBABLY GOING TO BE A $2 MILLION PROJECT OR A $20 MILLION PROJECT? RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN DO THE THE LONG RANGE PLANNING. SO IN TO TOUCH ON THAT, THE PROJECTS THAT WE ARE IMPLEMENTING TODAY, AND WE ARE REQUESTING FUNDS FOR OUR PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT WANTS, NEEDS THERE, SOMETHING IS TRIGGERING FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. SO WHEN WE DO THE ENGINEERING WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR, WE'LL HAVE THE THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS WITHIN THAT PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT. SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, TWO YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, OH, HERE'S THE CONSTRUCTION COST. IT'S GOING TO BE WITHIN THAT REPORT. YOU'LL YOU'LL PAY FOR ENGINEERING ONE YEAR AND THEN YOU'LL KNOW WHEN TO EXECUTE THE, THE CONSTRUCTION AND WHAT NEEDS TO BE ALLOCATED YEARS IN ADVANCE BECAUSE HOW EVERYTHING'S BEEN MOVING WITH THE CIP. IT'S BEEN GO STRAIGHT INTO DESIGN, GO STRAIGHT INTO CONSTRUCTION. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WITHIN YOUR DESIGN PHASE, THEY SHOOT UP CONSTRUCTION COSTS TENFOLD AND IT BECOMES STICKER SHOCK. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID NOW IS GET US TO A VERY GOOD, HEALTHY SYSTEM OF YOU HAVE A PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT. YOU KNOW WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

YOU THEN GO INTO ENGINEERING. AND THEN BETWEEN THE TIME THAT YOU'RE GOING FROM ENGINEERING TO CONSTRUCTION, YOU HAVE AN INTERMITTENT INTERMITTENT PHASE OF PROBABLY AROUND TWO YEARS OF WHERE YOU'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR FUNDING INSTEAD OF JUMPING FROM ENGINEERING, STRAIGHT DESIGN TO CONSTRUCTION. THERE'S TWO ADDITIONAL STEPS BEFORE THOSE HAPPEN. AND YES, BUT AND I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT IF YOU DON'T MAKE UP A NUMBER, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE UP A NUMBER FOR THOSE PROJECTS. I'D RATHER YOU MAKE UP A NUMBER THAN WE MAKE UP A NUMBER BECAUSE WE GOT TO KNOW WHAT'S, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR BEST GUESS AT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. RIGHT. AND, AND YES, A YEAR FROM NOW OR TWO YEARS FROM NOW, THAT FIVE YEAR SPEND IS

[03:05:01]

ESPECIALLY WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO TAKE BONDS TO THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO APPROVE. SO WE NEED A MINIMUM, IN MY ESTIMATION, TWO YEARS NOTICE AHEAD OF TIME. AND SO THAT'S WHAT VICTOR HAD RELAYED IS THAT FROM THE TIME YOU GO TO ENGINEERING, IT'S TWO YEARS.

ALL RIGHT. SO THAT BEING SAID, WHAT I AM ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR ARE THAT IS THAT LIST OF PROJECTS OVER TIME, UNDERSTAND REALLY WHERE NUMBERS COME FROM ARE THOSE ENGINEERS. AND SO QUITE FRANKLY, WITHOUT AN ENGINEER ON STAFF OR AN ENGINEER OR ENGINEERING ALREADY RUNNING, I DO LOOK BACK TO OUR CURRENT ADOPTED WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN. SO WHAT I DIDN'T HAVE A FAITH IN WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE TRULY FELT LIKE THE PROJECTS THAT THEY LISTED, YOU KNOW, WERE NEEDED. NOW, THE OTHER ITEM THAT I'M GOING TO BRING TO BEAR IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THE THREE BUCKETS THE FINANCE TEAM HAS BEEN LOOKING AT, WHICH IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO RECAPITALIZE, YOU KNOW, MAJOR PROJECTS? WHAT IS ONGOING MAINTENANCE? YOU KNOW, LIKE WE HAVE WINTER EVENTS AND STUFF THAT WE'VE GOT TO DO. AND SO WE'RE WANTING TO HAVE SOME KIND OF BUDGET THERE FOR THAT PLUS OR MINUS COUPLE OF HUNDRED THOUSAND A YEAR FOR THOSE KIND OF EMERGENCIES. SO KIND OF TO COUNCILOR CHAVARRIAS POINT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE NEEDING RESERVE MONEY BASICALLY. AND LASTLY, THE REST OF IT IS, IS HOPEFULLY COMING OUT OF TO VICTOR'S POINT, IMPACT FEES ARE FORWARD MONIES AS DEVELOPMENT OCCURS, RIGHT? SO EXPANSION IS DUE TO ACTUAL EXPANSION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. AND SO THEREFORE IT SHOULD BE PAID FOR BY DEVELOPMENT. SO IN THAT REGARD WE DON'T IT'S GOOD TO KNOW WHAT THE TRIGGER POINTS ARE ON THOSE. BUT THEY DON'T REALLY AFFECT US IN TERMS OF OUR BUDGET. BUT THE RECAPITALIZATION, THESE PROJECTS WHERE WE'VE GOT TO FEED ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE FROM ONE TANK TO ANOTHER, ETC. THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT. AND THEN OVER THE NEXT, WHAT ELSE ARE WE GOING TO NEED TO RECAPITALIZE? BASICALLY REDO, RIGHT? WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH IN TERMS OF OUR WASTEWATER PLANT. IT'S FALLING DOWN. NO IT'S NOT. IT'S FALLING DOWN. NO IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT THAT BAD. BY THE WAY, EVERYBODY. BUT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ASSESS WHEN DO WE NEED TO REPLACE IT EFFECTIVELY. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY, REALLY RELYING ON HERE. SO THAT'S A THAT'S PRETTY SOPHISTICATED LAYERING WHEN I'M TALKING. BUT BELIEVE ME, VICTOR HAS BEEN MORE THAN PATIENT WITH ME AS I HAVE ASKED HIM THESE QUESTIONS. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TEEING THAT OFF, COUNCILOR PRINCE. AND I JUST THINK THAT'S WHERE THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING COMES IN. IF WE DO PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND THEY CAN LOOK AT THOSE TRIGGER POINTS AND WHERE YOU ARE INSUFFICIENT WITH WITH WITH CAPACITY OR VOLUME OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, THEN YES, THAT WOULD BE A PROJECT THAT WOULD GET FUNDS ALLOCATED TOWARDS IT, AND THEN YOU'D BE ABLE TO HAVE IT IN THAT CIP. BUT AS MISS OWEN SAID, YES, IF A DEVELOPMENT IS COMING IN AND THEY'RE INCREASING CAPACITY, NOT BASED OFF OF LIKE OUR ALREADY DESIGNATED AREAS WITH OUR DESIGNATED PRESSURE PLANES, AND THEY'RE REQUIRING MORE WATER TO BE STORED OR DELIVERED, THEN YES, THEY WOULD NEED TO PAY THOSE IMPACT FEES, AND THOSE IMPACT FEES WOULD ALLOCATE TOWARDS YOUR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE. SO BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THE PLANTS, I KNOW WE JUMPED INTO THE JUST KIND OF GOING DOWN THE LIST FROM THE LAST YEAR, CIP PLAN, LIFT STATION REHAB, THAT ONE WILL CONTINUE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE TO 1.5, WHICH WE'LL DISCUSS MORE WHY IT'S

[03:10:02]

WE'RE AHEAD OF THE BALL GAME. AND WHEN WE WANT TO EXECUTE THAT CONSTRUCTION IS WHEN WE ACTUALLY KNOW THE UPFRONT COST. BUT GETTING AHEAD OF THAT AND KNOWING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO EXPAND, HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO EXPAND. AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE ONE THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER TO EXPAND FROM TO EXPAND OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANT THREE FROM 2 TO 6. THAT'S NOT REALLY NEEDED. I WOULD SAY 2 TO 4 TO ACTUALLY MAKE UP FOR WHAT WE NEED TO SUPPLY OUR CITIZENS TODAY. BUT GOING ALL THE WAY TO SIX IS PAYING FOR ALL THE FUTURE DEVELOPERS AND ALL OF THAT AHEAD OF TIME, ALLOWING BASICALLY SAYING WE HAVE THE CAPACITY. COME IN AND, AND NOT ALLOWING THE, THAT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOCATE PROPER BUDGETING TOWARDS OUR EXPANSIONS WHEN THEY'RE NEEDED. BUT WOULD YOU STILL EXPAND THE BUILDING TO THE POINT OF WHERE YOU COULD PUT THE UP TO SIX? I'M NOT GOING TO COME IN AGAIN. I'M NOT LOOKING TO SPEND ANY MORE THAN WHAT WE NEED TO SUPPLY OUR CITIZENS THAT ARE HERE TODAY. OKAY. I THINK FOLLOWING ON THAT, THE MAYOR'S COMMENT, RIGHT, THE THE ORIGINAL, AS I UNDERSTAND FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS WAY BEFORE ME, RIGHT. THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT THREE WAS TO BUILD IT SO THAT IT WAS RELATIVELY EASY TO EXPAND. AND SO TO DATE, WE HAVEN'T BENEFITED FROM THE, FROM THE FORETHOUGHT THAT THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE PUTTING IN WITH THAT. SO DO WE NEVER, IN YOUR ESTIMATION, WE JUST WE NEVER BENEFIT FROM IT. AND WE JUST IT'S GOING TO BE A PAY AS YOU GO AND OR TO MAYOR SAM'S POINT. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT IS IT IS IT A MUCH BETTER USE OF MONEY OVER THE NEXT 10 OR 20 YEARS TO DO SOMETHING NOW VERSUS WAIT FIVE YEARS OR TEN YEARS TO DO STEP TWO? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES. AND I MEAN, DON'T GET ME WRONG, WE'RE GOING TO PLAN FOR MAXIMIZING THE AREA AND FIGURING OUT WHERE EVERYTHING NEEDS TO GO AHEAD OF TIME. THAT'S WHY YOU WOULD LOOK AT WHAT THE WHOLE SITE IS. AND WHAT IS THAT FUTURE PLAN FOR MAX EXPANSION. AND THEN YOU DO YOUR EXPANSIONS AND PHASES. BUT YES, WHEREVER YOU CAN INSTALL, YOU KNOW, T'S INSTEAD OF HAVING TO CORE IN AND CUT YOUR PLAN OFF FOR MONTHS OR WEEKS AT A TIME. YES, WE'LL TAKE THOSE STEPS NOW WITHIN DESIGN, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT ADDITIONAL PIPE IN THE GROUND JUST TO FEED A FUTURE BUILDING THAT MAY NOT BE ONLINE FOR ANOTHER TEN, 15 YEARS. AND THAT WAS WHAT I WAS THINKING. I WAS THINKING JUST THE SHELL BUILDING. IF YOU'RE ALREADY GOING TO TEAR DOWN THAT OUTER WALL AND YOU'RE GOING TO EXTEND IT FOR THE NEXT, IS IT A TRITON? I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME. WHY NOT JUST BUILD THE BUILDING OUT AND LEAVE THAT EXTRA SPACE EMPTY? IF WE THINK FOR SURE WE'RE GOING TO BE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, WHY CLOSE OFF THE BUILDING AND THEN KNOW THAT IN TEN YEARS, 20 YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN IT BACK UP AND EXTEND OUT. IF THAT'S A CHEAP PART OF THE PROJECT, AND IT MIGHT COME DOWN TO SPACE TO WHERE WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO USE UTILIZE THAT SPACE YET BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY STORING EQUIPMENT THERE. SO I MEAN, IT'S I MEAN, DON'T GET ME WRONG, WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT ALL OF THAT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT CAN WE DO TODAY TO SAVE US FROM PROBLEMS DOWN THE ROAD, AND WHAT ALTERNATIVES DO WE HAVE TO WHAT'S GOING TO SAVE? WHAT'S GOING TO GIVE US THE BIGGEST BANG FOR OUR BUCK RIGHT NOW? BUT YES, REDUCING THAT FROM 6 TO 2 IS GOING TO BE THE. DIRECTION I WANT TO TAKE TO THE DESIGNER. THE THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION TRANSMISSION LINE. THAT ONE'S JUST GOING TO BE SIMPLY RENAMED TO FINISH WASH FINISH WATER TRANSMISSION IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH THAT'LL NEED TO GO THROUGH DESIGN. THE OTHER ONE THAT WE'RE ADDING ON TO THAT IS GOING TO BE A EXPANSION DOWN LOWMAN, AND THAT'S CONNECTING THE TWO PRESSURE PLANES. AND THOSE THREE PROJECTS WILL KIND OF GO TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY ALL NEED TO PLAY NICE WITH EACH OTHER, FIGURING OUT HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO EXPAND OUR PLANT, HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PULL FROM THE LAKE? HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEND TO OUR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, AND HOW MUCH ARE WE GOING TO SHARE BETWEEN EACH PLANT? SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE BIG THREE. THIS IS OUR RANDOM COMMENT RELATED TO THE PRESSURE POINTS. BUT I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT, CHARLES, WE SHOULD HAVE A ZONING MAP IN HERE. AND I THOUGHT WE SHOULD HAVE A PRESSURE PLANE MAP BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO VISUALIZE AND SEE IT. AND, AND YEAH, WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING SOME MAPS DONE. AND THAT'S ONE THING ABOUT THE, WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS, WHEN WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS, I REALLY DO WANT TO REDO THE PRESSURE PLANE MAP BECAUSE IF YOU, IF YOU FOLLOW THE LINES ON THE PRESSURE PLANE, THEY THE ELEVATION CHANGES 100FT, WHICH THAT'S NOT REALISTIC IN A PRESSURE PLANE MAP. YEAH. AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S TERRAIN.

[03:15:03]

TREATED. YEAH, IT IT DEFINITELY CAN BE. IT'S JUST GOING TO TACK ON A LITTLE BIT. I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THAT PROJECT SEPARATED JUST BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY THAT IS DESIGNING PLANTS, DESIGNING TRANSMISSION LINES IS A WHOLE NOTHER COORDINATION ITEM. COORDINATING WITH JONESTOWN IS ANOTHER ITEM. AND I DON'T WANT TO TACK ON THIS LARGE ENGINEERING FEE JUST TO EXPAND OUR PLANT, BUT I DIDN'T WANT A LARGE FEE TO HAVE A SEPARATE PROJECT WHEN IT'S TIED TO THAT PROJECT AS WELL. I MEAN, EVERYTHING'S TIED TOGETHER. BUT YEAH, BUT IT COMES DOWN TO, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, CAN IT JUST BE A QUESTION TO THE ENGINEER? YEAH.

WHAT ADDITIONAL WOULD IT COST? IF WE'RE ASKING YOU TO PUT THIS LINE, YOU KNOW, FORMER STAFF HAVE CLAIMED THAT IT'S NOT A GREAT DISTANCE AND NOT A MAJOR PROJECT, BUT AND IT MIGHT NOT BE. YEAH. BUT THAT COMES INTO PRESSURE PLANES. WHAT KIND OF THE WHOLE. HOW DO WE SEND WATER? HOW ARE WE GOING TO. YEAH, IT'S IT'S MORE OF A MODELING SYSTEM. AND YOU'RE INTEGRATING TWO COMPLETELY SEPARATE SYSTEMS. I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE IT ACKNOWLEDGED ON THE CIP SOMEWHERE, EVEN IF IT'S JUST A SIDE NOTE IN A DESCRIPTION OF WE'RE GOING TO ASK THIS QUESTION ABOUT AN EMERGENCY INTERCONNECT WITH JOHNSTOWN WATER SUPPLY. HOW FAR AWAY IS THEIR PLANT? I DON'T KNOW, I MEAN, I CAN SEE IT FROM PLANT THREE, BUT I'LL HAVE TO MEASURE IT. YEAH, I MEAN, THAT'S GOOD. YOU CAN SEE IT. SO. OKAY. SO VICTOR, JUST TO CLARIFY, ARE YOU YOU ARE NOT PROPOSING THAT WE SPEND MONEY ON PROJECTS TO INCREASE PLANT ONE FROM ITS CURRENT 1.2 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY CAPABILITY. I'M SAYING WE GO THROUGH WITH ENGINEERING ON BOTH. OKAY. AND THEN EXECUTION OF CONSTRUCTION WILL BE DEPENDENT ON WHICH ONE ACTUALLY PLAYS MORE SUFFICIENCY BECAUSE LATER, EITHER WAY, BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. IT'S JUST TIMES OF EXECUTION. AND RIGHT NOW, WHAT CAN WE DO TODAY TO EXPAND THE CAPACITY? WHAT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO ACTUALLY IMPROVE? THE OTHER THREE PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE ADDING IN? SOME OF THESE ARE JUST PLACEHOLDERS FOR THE FUTURE. NOTHING FOR NEXT YEAR, BUT THE ONE THAT IS GOING TO BE ADDED FOR NEXT YEAR IS GOING TO BE ALLEGIANCE TANK AND THE GOLF BALL. IT'S A GROUND STORAGE AND ELEVATED STORAGE TANK. THOSE ARE KIND OF REPLACEMENTS, AND I AM LOOKING TO INCORPORATE A LITTLE BIT OF AC LINES. AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE $10 MILLION GRANT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACQUIRE FOR THAT PROJECT. BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, I'M ONLY PUTTING THE ENGINEERING COST OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO. JUST TO DESIGN IT BECAUSE THEY MIGHT REIMBURSE US FOR DESIGN. BUT AT THE END, IF THE GRANT IS SUCCESSFUL, THEN WE CAN JUST EXECUTE CONSTRUCTION AND HAVE THAT PAID FOR. BUT IT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT'S NEEDED. IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE ALLEGIANCE TANK IS LEAKING, THE INSIDE IS BEING IS RUSTED AND WHERE IT'S BEEN A FIGHTING BATTLE. SO THAT ONE'S BEEN ADDED. THE OTHER ONE IS GOING TO BE THE CEDAR BREAKS IRRIGATION EXPANSION. THIS IS JUST TO GET US IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR T LABS. AND IT'S NOT JUST BASICALLY EXPANDING US FROM 0.75 TO 1 MGD. IT'S GETTING US PHASED OUT TO 1.5. JUST TO HAVE THE DESIGN ON HAND

[03:20:03]

AND THE THE THOUGHT PROCESS, THE CALCULATIONS, THEY'RE ALL THE SAME. IT'S JUST THE INPUTS.

AND WITH THE DATA THAT THEY WERE GIVEN WHEN THEY DID THIS IN 2025, I'M ASSUMING THEY MIGHT NOT HAD THE 2024 DATA USAGE. SO THEY USE 2023. AND FROM 2023, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GALLONS PER CONNECTIONS OR GPM PER CONNECTION WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER. AND THROUGH THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, IF THEY USE A SEVEN YEAR AVERAGE, AND I THINK THEY DID, WHICH THAT GPM TURNS OUT TO 0.333 IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH GALLONS PER CONNECTION IS THAT? THAT'S EQUATES TO AROUND 480 GALLONS PER HOUSE, IS WHAT THEY WERE USING TO SAY WHEN YOU NEEDED TO GO THROUGH EXPANSION, WHEN YOU NEEDED TO GO THROUGH DESIGN. SO THAT INCREASES NUMBERS. THE NUMBERS THAT I USED WERE BASICALLY THE LAST THREE YEARS. AND THE REASON WHY THESE NUMBERS AREN'T INFLATED IS BECAUSE OF WATER LOSS. WHAT WE'VE REDUCED FROM 2019, WE'VE THE WATER LOSS HAS GONE DOWN FROM 3,030% TO AN AVERAGE OF TEN. SO THAT WATER LOSS HAS LOWERED OUR GALLONS PER MINUTE PER CONNECTION. THE OTHER ITEM IS THE PROJECTION OF GROWTH.

THESE TWO INPUTS ALONE CAN CHANGE YOUR PROJECTIONS SIGNIFICANTLY. AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING THIS YEAR IS THAT A 1.5% GROWTH. BUT FOR CONSERVATIVE PURPOSES, I DID A 3% AND A 5%.

AND THIS COMES BACK DOWN TO CAPACITY VERSUS PERMITTED. IF WE ARE JUST LOOKING AT PERMITTED CAPACITY AND WE GET ALL THE PLANTS RUNNING UP TO FOUR MGD, WE MAY NOT NEED TO BEGIN DESIGN UNTIL 2033, BUT THAT'S ASSUMING THAT WE GET BOTH PLANTS, WHICH IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY FOR WATER PLANT ONE. FOR OPERATIONAL ISSUES, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO STAY AT A 1.8 PLANT ONE. IF WE CAN GET THAT OUT OF 1.8. THAT BRINGS US TO 3.6. AND THEN THAT TRIGGER COMES A LITTLE BIT LATER. BUT AS OF TODAY, USING A THREE MGD PER DAY, THAT BRINGS US TO 2.25 OF A 75% CAPACITY, MEANING WE HAVE A 25% BUFFER. THAT PUTS US AT 2.25. AND WE'RE ALREADY SEEING DEMANDS WAY OVER THAT. 2023 WAS A DROUGHT CONDITION. OUR MAX DEMAND DAY WAS A 2.7, A 2.7, AND THAT'S 90% OF OUR CAPACITY. AND THAT'S WHY I WANT TO TRIGGER DESIGN NEXT YEAR AND HAVE THAT MOVE FORWARD. SO IT'S ON THE SHELF READY TO GO WHEN WE HIT THAT DESIGN CRITERIA,

[03:25:01]

THAT GETS US TO YEAR 2039 BEFORE WE HIT THAT 75% CAPACITY. SO I GUESS IT'S WELL OVER TEN YEARS BY THE TIME WE INITIATE DESIGN AND GO THROUGH IT. BEFORE WE WOULD, WE WOULDN'T EVEN LOOK AT EXPANSION AGAIN. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS ALL 3%. THIS IS EVERYTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE. AND PART OF THE REPORTING FOR THE Q2. REPORTS WILL BE BASICALLY AN UPDATE OF THIS EVERY YEAR, AN UPDATE OF WHERE WE'RE STANDING AT, WHERE WE'RE AT CAPACITY, WHAT'S THE HIGHEST USAGE, AND GETTING REFRESH NUMBERS FOR YOU. THAT WAY, WHENEVER WE'RE ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS, YOU KNOW, AHEAD OF TIME BEFORE WE EVEN DO IT, BEFORE WE EVEN DO BUDGET, YOU'LL KNOW THAT IT'S COMING UP THAT WE NEED TO BE WITHIN DESIGN OR WE NEED TO BE WITHIN CONSTRUCTION. FOR WASTEWATER EXPANSION. SAME KIND OF SCENARIO. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WITH WASTEWATER, WE ARE PERMANENT CAPACITY IS OUR OPERATIONAL CAPACITY. SO IT'S A LITTLE LESS COMPLICATED, A LITTLE EASIER TO MAINTAIN. THE AVERAGE PEAK FLOWS ARE PRETTY IF YOU LOOK AT THE LAST ONES. IF YOU'RE USING A SEVEN, FIVE, THREE, TWO YEAR AVERAGE, THEY'RE ALL RELATIVELY WITHIN THE SAME BALLPARK NUMBER. SO THIS WAS A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO KIND OF MODEL AND SHOW WHAT PROJECTIONS LOOK LIKE. THE AND CURRENTLY OUR HIGHEST THREE MONTH AVERAGE FLOW FOR 2025 IS BASICALLY 66% OF OUR CAPACITY. SO WE'RE NOT AT THAT 75% MARKER TO WHERE WE NEED TO BE IN DESIGN. AND THAT'S WHY THE EXPANSION OR THE EXPANSION PROJECT HAS MOVED FROM EXPANSION TO IMPROVEMENTS. SO QUESTION AND MAYBE YOU ANSWERED THIS IN THE I PASS MEETING I MISSED. BUT MY MEMORY OF WHERE WHERE I LAST HEARD WAS ON THE WASTEWATER SIDE. WE HAD CONFLICTING MEASUREMENTS WITH DISTRIBUTION OF THE EFFLUENT AND WHAT THE WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS COMING OUT OF THE PLANT. SO HAVE YOU RESOLVED THAT? AND IF NOT, WHICH, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE? IS THIS WHAT'S COMING OUT OF THE PLANT OR WHAT? WE'RE DISTRIBUTING EFFLUENT. WHAT, WHAT WHAT'S ON THE PAPER IN FRONT OF US. SO THE METER AT THE PLANT OR THE NUMBERS USED HERE HAS BEEN VERIFIED. IT IS CORRECT. EVERYTHING EXITING THE PLANT IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE. OKAY. EFFLUENT. WE ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH ON GETTING A METERING SYSTEM THERE. AND PART OF IT IS WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND UPFRONT COSTS RIGHT NOW ON PUTTING A NEW METER IN WHEN WE'RE DOING AN ALREADY IMPROVEMENTS TO IT THAT COME WITH A METER. SO THE OTHER ITEM THAT CAME OUT OF THE LAST MEETING WAS, YES, THERE'S A BIG DISCREPANCY. HOWEVER, WE HAVE PONDS THAT ARE LEAKING. IF PONDS CAN LEAK, WATER CAN GET INTO THOSE PONDS AND THE NUMBERS ALL MIGHT BE CORRECT. AND WE'RE JUST GETTING THAT MUCH GROUNDWATER INTO OUR PONDS THAT WE'RE HAVING TO SEND BACK OUT. AND THAT COULD BE A IT COULD IT COULD BE NOT A METERING ISSUE. IT JUST COULD BE A GROUNDWATER ISSUE TO WHERE WE'RE HAVING TO DISPERSE MORE WATER THAN WE ACTUALLY NEED TO. AND PART OF THAT IS FIXING THE PONDS AND MAKING SURE THAT ALL OF THEM ARE LEAK FREE OUT OF VIOLATIONS AND MOVING THAT FORWARD. BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE DATA THAT YOU'RE SHOWING US HERE IN THE TABLE YOU HAVE CONFIDENCE IN AT THIS POINT. YES. SO I'M USING THE SEVEN YEAR AVERAGE AT A 3% GROWTH RATE. WE'RE NOT SEEING THE NEED FOR GOING THROUGH WITH DESIGN UNTIL 2030 FOR WASTEWATER. IF ANYTHING ELSE CHANGES AND WE FIND NEW DATA OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE, OF COURSE THESE WILL BE UPDATED. ANY LAST QUESTIONS ON PLANT CAPACITY BEFORE I JUMP INTO EFFLUENT DISPOSAL? ALL RIGHT. SO EFFLUENT DISPOSAL, WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE IS BASICALLY YOUR EXISTING WHICH SHOWS THE PLANT WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW AT 0.75. AND THAT'S 140 ACRES AT THE GOLF COURSE. THE LOG OF THE GOLF COURSE AND 60 ACRES AT CEDAR BREAKS TO GET JUST TO ONE MGD, WHICH AGAIN, WE'RE AT 0.6. BUT GETTING AHEAD OF THAT CURVE NOW BECAUSE ONCE WE GO OVER THAT 0.75, THAT'S WHEN WE ALREADY NEED TO BE THROUGH DESIGN. IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT

[03:30:03]

WHAT ARE THE EXPANSIONS? SO AT THE VERY TOP, YOU'LL SEE THAT PERMITTED CAPACITY YOU'RE 0.6.

THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED DOWN BELOW. AND THEN YOUR DISCHARGE IS ACTUALLY. SO THE REASON WHY YOU'RE SEEING NUMBERS CHANGE IS BECAUSE OF HOW WHAT THEY GAVE US IN THE PERMITS, AND THEY SET THOSE DISCHARGE LEVELS AT, AT BASICALLY WHAT THE SOIL IS ABLE TO CONSUME AND THE TEMPERATURE EVAPORATION, THOSE NUMBERS ARE NOT SET BY ME. THOSE ARE BASICALLY SET WITHIN A PERMIT. SO. JUST GOING BETWEEN THE FIRST TWO COLUMNS, BETWEEN 0.169 AND 0.319, THOSE TWO COLUMNS, ARE WE INCREASING THE AREA AT CEDAR BREAKS IN ORDER FOR THOSE NUMBERS TO INCREASE? YES. IT'S DISCHARGE. SO AS LONG AS YOU INCREASE THE AREA, YOUR DISCHARGE LIMIT IS GOING TO BE THE SAME. AND SO EACH OF THOSE INCREASES IN CEDAR BREAKS IS ASSOCIATED WITH EXPANSION AND EXPANSION OF DISCHARGE AREA. THE DIFFERENCE IN THE DISCHARGE AREA WILL INCREASE THOSE NUMBERS. OKAY. THANKS. JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID THAT IF I'M GOING BACK ON THIS CORRECTLY, AN ADDITIONAL 40 ACRES AT CEDAR BREAKS. IS THAT IS THAT EXPLAINED THE THE INCREASE OVER TIME? SO JUST TO GO FROM 0.75 TO 1 MGD, 40 ADDITIONAL ACRES ARE INCREASED. AND THAT'S THE. THAT'S WHY YOUR CEDAR TREE DISCHARGE GOES FROM 0.319 TO 0.569. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT, BUT I DEFINITELY WANTED TO GET THIS OUT AHEAD OF YOU. I DO PLAN TO SPEAK WITH THE IPASS MEETING AND OR THE IPASS COMMITTEE, AND KIND OF NAIL DOWN ON SOME OF THESE PROJECTS AND KIND OF GET MORE CLARIFICATION ON WHICH PROJECTS REALLY NEED TO COME FIRST, KIND OF DIG DOWN DEEP INTO TYPE ONE DISCUSSION AND KIND OF WHERE WE'VE GONE. I KNOW ME AND THE MAYOR HAVE DISCUSSED, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS ON THAT NOW OR KIND OF AT THE NEXT MEETING, KIND OF LEAVE THAT.

YEAH, I KIND OF WANT TO KEEP MOVING RIGHT NOW. THAT'LL WORK. BUT YEAH, THE IPASS MEETING, THE NEXT ONE IS ON THE 13TH. I THINK WE MOVED IT. 1414 OKAY. SO. 14 ALL RIGHT. WE'LL COME BACK TO CHARLES FOR ADDITIONAL BUDGET DISCUSSION. WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS? I MEAN, THE ONLY Y'ALL GAVE US SOME DIRECTION THERE. SO I, I THINK I KNOW WHERE I NEED TO HEAD WITH SOME STUFF. THE ONLY THING IS I KNOW I SENT YOU AN EMAIL. I CAN'T REMEMBER IF THE SUB FINANCE COMMITTEE WAS ON IT, BUT THERE'S ALWAYS THIS AMBIGUITY AND VAGUE AREA AROUND EMPLOYEE RAISES EVERY YEAR. AND I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE THIS SHORED UP. AND SO I SENT YOU A PROPOSAL OF THE NEW EMPLOYEE MANUAL MENTIONS IN ARTICLE 13 THAT THERE IS A PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL, BUT IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY SPELL OUT HOW THAT'S DONE. AND SO I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING UNIFORM. AND TO ME, I THINK I PUT IN THE EMAIL, THERE'S FOUR BUCKETS OF WHERE

[03:35:04]

AND ULTIMATELY THAT IS AT THE DISCRETION OF COUNCIL TOO. BUT AT LEAST THERE'S METRICS TO IT.

AND THEN THE FOURTH IS PROMOTIONS, WHICH REQUIRES A JOB TITLE CHANGE AND JOB DESCRIPTION. AND SO I JUST, I THINK IT'S BEEN OVER COMPLICATED OVER THE LAST 3 TO 4 YEARS. AND WE HAVE CHANGES AT CITY MANAGER'S. I'D LOVE TO SEE IT SIMPLIFIED, SHORED UP EMPLOYEES SHOULD JUST KNOW THESE ARE THE BENCHMARKS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HIT IF YOU HIT THESE. YOU'RE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS. AND THIS SHOULDN'T BE SECOND GUESSING. AND MATTER OF FACT, WE'VE GOT AN RFQ OUT NOW, OUR RFP OUT FOR PROPOSALS, WHICH I BELIEVE I INCLUDED A COUPLE OF Y'ALL ON TO GRADE THE 21 OR 22 APPLICANTS OR PROPOSALS THAT WE RECEIVED ON DOING A MARKET COMPENSATION STUDY, BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE REALLY NEED IS A, A TRUE COMPENSATION SLASH BENEFIT STUDY TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT, BECAUSE I HONESTLY THINK WE'VE GOT SOME AREAS THAT WE'RE OVER AND I'VE GOT SOME AREAS THAT WERE UNDER. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHERE WE'RE AT. I CAN'T COMPETE WITH CEDAR PARK CITY OF AUSTIN, BUT LIKE RIGHT NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THE BASE PAY IN JONESTOWN FOR OUR POLICE OFFICERS, IT'S HIGHER THAN WHAT WE PAY, WHICH I YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT A POPULATION OF 3000. WE'VE GOT A POPULATION OF 13,000. SO IF A POPULATION OF 3000 CAN PAY THEIR OFFICERS A LITTLE MORE, WE MIGHT NEED TO BE REALLY CONSIDERING WHERE WE'RE AT. THAT'S WHERE I WANT THE COMPENSATION STUDY IN THERE.

BUT NO, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH WHAT YOU PROPOSED EARLIER. I'M NOT A BIG FAN OF COLAS, BUT I DO KNOW THAT COLAS ARE A NECESSITY EVERY SO OFTEN. BUT I DO LIKE THE MERIT BASED. AND IF THEY KNOW WHERE THEY HIT ON THEIR MERIT AND THEY KNOW WHAT KIND OF RAISE THEY CAN GET, WHETHER IT BE 1% UP TO. HOWEVER, WHATEVER THE PERCENTAGE IS WE ARE ABLE TO BUDGET FOR, I'M, I'M GOOD WITH THAT BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THAT LETS THE EMPLOYEES KNOW WHERE THEY STAND AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TO EARN THAT EXTRA MONEY. AND THAT THAT'S, THAT'S BEEN MY PHILOSOPHY ALL ALONG ON THAT. SO. OKAY. MR. PRINCE, YEAH, A COUPLE THINGS AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT, I REMEMBERED THAT I HAD FORGOTTEN TO MENTION. ONE WAS, AND CHARLES, I THINK I MENTIONED THIS TO YOU IN PAST BUDGETS. IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO THAT FOR SOME DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE SIGNIFICANT REVENUE, THAT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT WAS ASSIGNING REVENUE IN THE BUDGET, AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT WAS ASSIGNING EXPENSES. AND I DON'T KNOW, THAT HAPPENED WITH GOLF COURSE AND IT HAPPENED WITH AVIATION, MAY HAVE MAY HAVE BEEN IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. I DON'T KNOW. BUT WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT, WHILE MAYBE IT MAKES SENSE FOR THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO, YOU KNOW, BE THE STARTING POINT FOR REVENUE, I DON'T KNOW, FIGURE IT OUT. BUT WHOEVER DOES REVENUE AND WHOEVER DOES EXPENSES, THEY BOTH NEED TO TALK TO EACH OTHER, MAKE SURE THEY'RE USING THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS. AND THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED, EVEN THOUGH THAT SEEMS LIKE COMMON SENSE, THAT DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAPPEN IN PAST YEARS. SO THAT'S ONE. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE, AND THIS IS MAYBE MORE FOR THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE, BUT I WANT TO THROW IT OUT HERE. I HAD PROPOSED, ACTUALLY, EVEN BEFORE I WAS ELECTED TO COUNCIL, I DID A PRESENTATION DURING THE BUDGET CYCLE THE YEAR BEFORE I WAS ELECTED, AND I PROPOSED THAT IT SEEMS RIGHT TO ME FOR CITY COUNCIL TO PROPOSE TOPS DOWN CIP BUDGETS. AND WHAT I SAID AT THE TIME IN THAT PRESENTATION ABOUT 6 OR 7 YEARS AGO NOW WAS CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY, WE CAN'T AFFORD MORE THAN $50 MILLION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. AND SO THE ABSOLUTE MAX THAT OUR CIP BUDGET FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS CAN COME IN AT IS $50 MILLION FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. AND OH, BY THE WAY, WE DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, SPEND ALL OF THAT IN ONE YEAR. SO IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING LIKE A MAX OF $15 MILLION PER YEAR AND 50. SO I THINK THAT'S A DISCUSSION I'D LIKE FOR THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE TO HAVE. AND THAT GETS US MAYBE OUT OF THE MODE WHERE I'M TRYING TO DRAG A NUMBER OUT OF VICTOR, RIGHT. AND WHERE WE SAY, WHAT CAN WE ACTUALLY FINANCE? RIGHT. AND SO IF WE KNOW WE CAN'T FINANCE MORE THAN 50 MILLION OVER THE NEXT 7 OR 8 YEARS, THEN, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE SOME CIP THINGS THAT WE REALLY THINK WE WANT TO DO, BUT YOU CAN'T FIT. AND SO WE MAY HAVE TO MAKE SOME HARD TRADE OFFS. BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE A TOPS DOWN BUDGET BY NOT HAVING TOP DOWN BUDGET, THAT TO ME WAS ONE OF THE ROOT CAUSES FOR WHY I SAW GOING BACK SEVEN, EIGHT YEARS AGO, CITY OF LAGO VISTA, HAVING A FIVE YEAR

[03:40:04]

AND SO AS I'M GOING THROUGH, I'M FLIPPING BETWEEN THE TWO, YOU KNOW, TO SEE THOSE. BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD BE NICE IF THERE WAS A WAY TO, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO DO REPORTING RIGHT BEYOND JUST A, WHAT THEY CALL AN ORG UNIT HERE. SO WE CAN SEE QUITE A BIT OF DETAIL FOR EACH OF THESE DEPARTMENTS BASED ON. EACH ORG UNIT. BUT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT LARGER, YOU KNOW, UNITS AND I'M TALKING, YOU KNOW, GENERAL FUND AND I'M. I'M GOING TO STOP FOR A MINUTE WHEN I'M THINKING ABOUT A BASE BUDGET. SO WHAT ARE WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE IN ORDER TO DELIVER SERVICES TO OUR CONSTITUENTS? RIGHT? WHAT DO WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE? AND THEN THEN WE GO FROM, OKAY, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON REVENUES, ETC. WHAT ARE THE PROJECTS THAT WOULD REALLY, YOU KNOW, BUMP THAT UP? ET CETERA. AND THEN GOING BACK TO CIP PROJECTS, ETC. WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DOING BONDING, ETC. IF WE, IF WE FIND OUT THAT OUR PROJECTS ARE UNDER 20 MILLION, LET'S SAY IN NEEDED, WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH BONDS, ETCETERA, AND WE MAY THEN AT THAT POINT MAKE A DECISION. DO WE WANT TO LOOK AT OUR FACILITIES AND CONSIDER. A BOND PACKAGE FOR UPGRADING FACILITIES? BUT RIGHT NOW WE'VE BEEN FLYING IN THE DARK. AND SO AGAIN, IT'S BEEN VERY MUCH APPRECIATED THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THESE.

WHAT DO WE ACTUALLY NEED TO DO? YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHERE IS THE MONEY COMING FROM, ETC. BECAUSE THEN THAT OPENS UP. IF WE DO HAVE CAPACITY, WHETHER IT BE IN RESERVES OR IN BONDING CAPACITY, WE CAN THEN MAKE THOSE DECISIONS OUTSIDE OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. RIGHT NOW, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, WE REALLY HAVE FELT LIKE WE REALLY CAN'T MOVE, RIGHT? WE'VE GOT TO KEEP PARKS TO A MINIMUM. WE'VE GOT A NOT EXPAND THE LIBRARY. WE'VE GOT A, YOU KNOW, NOT EXPAND CITY HALL SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL OFFICES, ETC. AND SO HENCE, I'M JUST TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THIS IN CONTEXT FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR YOU GUYS AS WELL. SO AS WE GO THROUGH THIS, A LIMITATION THAT I SAW EVEN UNDER THE ORG UNIT WAS WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING SOME OF THESE, LIKE, YOU KNOW, PERSONNEL THAT ARE CURRENTLY HERE, PERSONNEL THAT ARE BUDGETED OR WHATEVER, THESE SEPARATE LINE ITEMS ARE CHART OF ACCOUNT NUMBERS, RIGHT? IF WE'RE ASKING FOR THOSE TO BE PUT IN, AM I GETTING THAT RIGHT? OKAY. SO THERE'S ADDITIONAL PROGRAMING OR ADDITION OF NUMBERS THAT HAVE TO BE PUT IN IN ORDER FOR US TO DO THOSE KIND OF CALCULATIONS. ALTHOUGH, AS I RECALL, CHARLES DIDN'T YOU DIDN'T IN BUDGET SHOW THAT THEY HAD SOME ANCILLARY WAYS TO DO SOME PROJECTIONS OR ADD PROJECTION NUMBERS. YES, THEY ACTUALLY DO. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON. WE ACTUALLY HAVE OUR NICOLE HAS A MEETING SCHEDULED WITH OUR VENDOR

[03:45:06]

THANK YOU, MR. HALL. WE'VE DISCUSSED THE EXPENSES AND A LOT AND THE CARE THAT NEEDS TO BE PUT INTO INTO PROJECTING THOSE AND DETERMINING HOW TO KEEP THOSE COSTS DOWN. I ALSO THINK WE NEED EQUAL AMOUNT OF CARE IN PROJECTING REVENUES, BECAUSE WE KNOW WITH PROPERTY TAXES BEING LIKELY BEING DOWN PRETTY FAR, THE ALL THE WET WEATHER AND HOW THAT MAY AFFECT OUR WATER FEES. SO THERE'S LOTS OF, OF ANY, ANY REVENUE THAT THE CITY IS DEPENDENT UPON, YOU KNOW, KEEPING KEEPING TRACK OF THOSE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER A GROWTH IN THE CITY, HOW THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT ANY OF OUR REVENUE PLUS OR MINUS. SO ULTIMATELY, THE BUDGET HAS TO BE BALANCED AGAINST WHAT WE THE MONEY WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO, TO PAY FOR THE EXPENSES. THANK YOU.

OKAY. I THINK WE'VE HAD A SOLID WORK SESSION THERE ON THE BUDGET, AND WE'VE GOT ONE MORE

[X.3. Charter Review Work session.]

BUT AS WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR A FEW HOURS, I JUST NEED A REMINDER FROM OTHERS. MY MEMORY WAS I THINK WE GOT THROUGH ARTICLE SIX AND WE HAVE I WAS GOING TO TAKE US INTO ARTICLE SEVEN, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY BRIEFLY TALKED ABOUT, BECAUSE IT'S THE REFERENDUMS AND THOSE PERCENTAGES, AND WE WERE ALREADY IN AGREEMENT ON THOSE. SO MY HOPE WAS THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE A QUICK CHAPTER. IS THAT WHERE YOU GUYS REMEMBER WE LEFT OFF? OKAY. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO. GO. JUST FOR ME. YEAH. WE'RE TRYING TO SAVE COST ON PAPER IN PDF FORMAT. JUST KNOW

[03:50:13]

IT WOULD ARGUABLY PRECLUDE CITIZEN INITIATIVES ON ANY ZONING MATTER, INCLUDING OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGES. SOME TEXAS CHARTERS LIMIT THIS ONLY TO SPECIFIC PARCEL REZONINGS. SO I WAS NOT SURE. BRAD, DID WE EVER GIVE YOU ANY RESPONSE TO THAT? I'M NOT NOT THAT I'M RECALL. IS THE SOLUTION POSSIBLY SIMPLE THAT WE CHANGE THAT ZONING LAND AND MAKE IT PARCEL REZONINGS THAT WOULD I MEAN. THAT WOULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE THE CLARITY RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, THAT I THINK I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERN OF, OF IS JUST HOW BROADLY IT IS STATED. AND SO I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THE I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE INTENT IS. AND, AND SO BECAUSE OF ITS BROAD LANGUAGE WITH REGARD TO THAT, THEN I MEAN, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT, THAT'S FINE. BUT YEAH, IT I THINK I THINK YOU ALL NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT IS IT YOU WANT AND WHAT'S THE CLARITY LEVEL? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S VERY BROAD AND I'M AWARE. ROBERT OWEN IS AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR CRC RELATED STUFF. MY THOUGHT ON IT, ON SOME OF THESE ONES WHERE YOU'RE BRINGING UP A LEGAL CONCERN IS KIND OF TO DEFER TO YOU TO GIVE US THE SOLUTION, BUT I'LL TAKE IT BACK TO COUNCIL. WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ON IT? AND I CAN ASK, ROBERT, DO YOU WANT TO EXPOUND UPON THIS? ONE OF WHAT WAS THE INTENT WITH INCLUDING THE ZONING LAND LANGUAGE? MAYOR, I, I DON'T RECALL A SPECIFIC DISCUSSION AROUND THAT, BUT I DO NOTE THAT THAT IS THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN OUR 6.01 CURRENT CHARTER. AND I DON'T RECALL ANY DISCUSSION OR NEED. FROM THE CRC POINT OF VIEW TO.

CHANGE OUR LEGISLATION. OKAY. IF IT'S PROBLEMATIC TO OF COURSE, AS YOU SUGGEST, WE DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT. I WOULD DEFER TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ON THIS ONE IF COUNCIL IS OKAY WITH THAT. I SEE HEADS NODDING. NO STRONG FEELINGS ON IT. OKAY, I'LL NOTE THAT ONE YOU HAD NOTED. I THINK WE ALREADY HANDLED YOUR ONE HERE.

YOU HAD A NOTE ON THE PERCENT THRESHOLD MISMATCH. WE'VE ALREADY COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON THAT. I THINK 7.05 D YOU HAD MENTIONED 12 MONTHS FREQUENCY LIMIT. SPECIAL ELECTIONS ON ANY INITIATED ORDINANCE SHALL NOT BE HELD MORE FREQUENTLY THAN ONCE EVERY 12 MONTHS. THIS MAY CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS FOR PROMPT ELECTION AFTER PETITION CERTIFICATION. MINOR WAS. IF YOU VIEW THAT AS A STATE LAW ISSUE, THEN WE SHOULD STRIKE IT.

26. WHILE HE'S LOOKING FOR THAT, HIS NEXT COMMENT WAS BACK TO RECALL THRESHOLD INCONSISTENCY.

WE'VE ALREADY CORRECTED THAT. SO. CAN WE ALSO ASK ROBERT ROBERT, MR. OWEN ON ON THIS 12 MONTHS FREQUENCY LIMIT? IS THAT SOMETHING THE CRC, THE THE COMMITTEE DISCUSSED, OR IS THAT JUST A CARRYOVER FROM THE EXISTING ARTICLE SIX LANGUAGE? DO YOU REMEMBER. COUNCILOR? YES, THAT'S THE SAME LANGUAGE IS IN OUR CURRENT CHARTER. OKAY. THANK YOU. IT'S JUST

[03:55:01]

AND I GUESS I WOULD SUGGEST THIS. THIS IS SOLVING A PROBLEM I DON'T THINK WE HAVE. RIGHT.

WHICH DO WE NEED TO PUT ANY KIND OF LIMIT. SO IN SOME SENSE I'D BE IN FAVOR OF JUST DELETING THIS LANGUAGE. UNLESS THE CITY ATTORNEY THINKS WE NEED SOME LANGUAGE IN LIEU OF THAT WAS MY SUGGESTION. I WOULD JUST DELETE IT. AND MAYBE THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS. SO LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT HERE. IS THE. OR IS EVERYONE ELSE UNDERSTAND IT? IS THAT. YOU MAY NOT HAVE AN INITIATION ELECTION MORE OFTEN THAN ONCE A YEAR, RIGHT? IS THAT THE. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE LANGUAGE. BUT WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT. AND THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE IS NOT PROPOSING IT. WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, WHAT ROBERT IS SAYING IS THAT'S IN OUR EXISTING CHARTER, THAT LANGUAGE IS IN OUR EXISTING CHARTER. SO. AND JUST TO ADD TO IT, I DO NOW RECALL SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THE IDEA BEING, WELL, IF YOU HAVE AN ORDINANCE AND IT GETS SHOT DOWN, THEN YOU NEED TO COME UP HERE AND YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE A HIGHLY PASSIONATE GROUP OF PEOPLE CONTINUOUSLY ASKING FOR SPECIAL ELECTIONS OR INITIATIVE ORDINANCE. SO THEN PERHAPS THE IDEA THEN THEN I SUGGEST THAT MAKES SENSE. I SUGGEST KEEPING IT. BUT THEN I MEAN TO ADD CLARITY TO, SAY, SPECIAL ELECTIONS ON ANY INITIATED ORDINANCE REGARDING THE SAME SUBJECT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, YOU MIGHT HAVE TWO ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ONES, BUT IF ONE OF THEM IS TAKEN, YOU KNOW, BROADLY INTERPRETED, THEN YOU GET ONE SHOT A YEAR AND THAT'S IT. AND SO IF THERE BY INITIATION, THEN THAT CLARIFIES ATTORNEY ROBERT. THE SAME SUBJECT WAS HAD A LAYOUT OF TWO YEARS AND THEN OTHER ORDINANCES WAS FOR EVERY 12 MONTHS. AGAIN, JUST SO WE'RE, WE'RE CAUGHT IN A, EVEN IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TOPIC OR SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT OR ANY OTHER FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE, WE FEEL LIKE THIS SHOULD STILL BE A MONTHLY. WHETHER IT'S A 12 MONTH OR. I MEAN, THE LENGTH OF TIME IS A, IT'S REALLY, THAT'S A, THAT'S A LEGISLATIVE OR POLICY DECISION OF THE CITIZENS. BUT I JUST FOR CLARITY, FOR, FOR CLARITY PURPOSES, I, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, WHATEVER THAT NUMBER IS, IS, IS DIFFERENT IS A SEPARATE ISSUE. BUT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT IT'S, IF THE INTENT IS TO KEEP THE SAME ITEM FROM THE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, VERY PASSIONATE GROUP OF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, BRING BEING BROUGHT UP MORE THAN ONCE EVERY WHATEVER, 12 MONTHS, 24 MONTHS.

I WOULD ADD THAT LANGUAGE ON THE SAME TOPIC WORDS TO THAT EFFECT. BUT BUT MR. BULLOCK, I THINK WHAT I HEARD MR. OWEN SAYING IS IN OUR EXISTING CHARTER, THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS ALREADY IN THERE, ONE FOR BRINGING THE SAME ITEM BACK MULTIPLE TIMES, AND THAT HAS A TWO YEAR LIMIT. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD HIM JUST SAY. AND THEN THIS ONE IS ALSO IN THERE, WHICH IS NOT TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SUBJECT. SO THERE'S A ONE YEAR, THERE'S A 12, ONLY 1 IN 12 MONTHS. REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT THEY'RE DIFFERENT. AND THEN THE SAME SUBJECT CAN'T BE BROUGHT BACK WITHIN 24 MONTHS. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD HIM TO SAY. NOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THE RIGHT THING IS PICK A NUMBER WITH 24 MONTHS IS PROBABLY FINE FOR THE SAME SUBJECT WITH THE LIMITATION ON THAT, BUT NO LIMIT ON DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. BUT THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE. YEAH. I'M. I, IT'S A, THERE'S THERE'S THE LAW DOESN'T REQUIRE A LIMIT. IF YOU WANT TO PLACE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HAVE ONE INITIATION. OR ELECTION RATHER A YEAR. AND THAT'S WHAT THE CITIZENS VOTE ON. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY APPROVED. AND THAT'S FINE. THERE'S NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS THAT. IT'S NOT.

THIS IS A PECULIAR OR SOMETHING LIMITED TO TO STATE CHARTERS. I MEAN, I'M HOME RULE CHARTERS.

IT'S NOT GOVERNED BY STATE LAW, IN OTHER WORDS. THAT'S I UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION NOW.

THAT'S. DO YOU WANT TO LIMIT THE CITIZENS ABILITY TO BRING AN INITIATION TO CHANGE AN ORDINANCE ONLY TO ONCE A YEAR? GOT IT. THEN MY PROPOSAL, COUNSEL, IS WE'RE WE'RE TRENDING TOWARDS HAVING QUITE A FEW BALLOT MEASURES AND SO ON. THIS ONE, I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS LEAVING IT THE WAY IT IS. AND, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE CAPTURED UNDER THIS WHOLESALE. WE CREATED CHAPTER OR SECTION SEVEN FROM WHAT HAD BEEN SECTION SIX. BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE. WHEREAS I THINK IF WE IF WE CHANGE THE LANGUAGE ON THIS, THIS PROBABLY BECOMES ITS

[04:00:04]

I'M FINE WITH THAT. YEAH, WE GOT CONSENSUS ON THAT. BARRING ANYONE ELSE. THE ONLY OTHER ONE THAT I JUST RECENTLY ADDED TO PUT AS A NEW SECTION HERE AS A PLACEHOLDER FOR A TAX RATE REFERENDUM THAT THE GOVERNOR IS CURRENTLY PROPOSING. AND SO THIS WOULD BE A PLACEHOLDER IF THIS GOES AHEAD AND GETS APPROVED THIS SESSION. WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT COVERS IT IN THE CHARTER. IT READS, IF AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, THE REGISTERED VOTERS OF THE CITY RESERVE THE POWER TO PETITION FOR AN ELECTION ON THE ADOPTION OF A PROPERTY TAX RATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW. A TAX RATE REFERENDUM PETITION SHALL BE SIGNED BY REGISTERED VOTERS OF THE CITY, EQUAL IN NUMBER TO THE GREATER OF 115% OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS OF THE CITY AT THE TIME PRESCRIBED BY STATE LAW, OR TO THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR SUCH A PETITION. AND THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THERE BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSING A 15% THRESHOLD, THE LEGISLATURE COULD CHANGE THAT. SO THE WAY I WROTE IT WAS IT'LL COVER WHICHEVER ONE THE LEGISLATURE PASSES. BUT CURRENTLY THE GOVERNOR IS SHOWING HE HAS OVER 90 VOTES IN THE HOUSE TO GET HIS FIVE PROPERTY TAX PROPOSALS APPROVED. AND THE ASSUMPTION IS HE'S POSSIBLY GOT THE SENATE. SO I'M JUST MAKING SURE THIS IS ALREADY CAPTURED IN OUR CHARTER, SINCE IT WILL BE A COUPLE YEARS BEFORE THEY CAN COME BACK. JUST A QUESTION ON THIS. IS THERE SOME LANGUAGE IN HERE THAT WILL NOT BE COVERED BY THE STATE LAW IF IT'S PASSED? I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT THAT WOULD BE A REVIEW. IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN WHY DO WE NEED IT. IF IT'S GOING TO BE STATE LAW AND. WELL AND IT COULD BE WORDED THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE IT IN THE CHARTER. I'M NOT SURE. IT LOOKS LIKE THE OTHER REFERENDUMS, YOU KNOW, WHY ARE THEY IN OUR CHARTER IF THE STATE LAW IS ALREADY ALLOWED FOR THEM? I THINK IT COULD BE BECAUSE YOU COULD CHANGE THE PERCENTAGES. THIS WOULD MAKE SURE THAT IT WOULD BE AT WHATEVER THE MINIMUM THRESHOLD THAT THE STATE APPROVES. THIS IS WHY Y'ALL GET PAID THE BIG BUCKS. YEAH, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF COME DOWN TO IF THE STATE'S GOING TO DO THIS AND THIS IS THE SAME, SAME AS THE STATE, I, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THE ONLY I'M TRYING TO STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, MAYOR, WHAT WOULD BE WHAT PROTECTION WOULD CITIZENS BE GETTING WITH THIS LANGUAGE IN OUR CHARTER THAT THEY WILL NOT BE GETTING UNDER THE STATE, THE STATE PLAN RIGHT NOW, I'LL BE LOCKING IN THAT IT'LL BE THE MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF WHATEVER THE STATE PASSES. BUT IN THE FUTURE, FUTURE COUNCILS, IF THEY GET TO BE THE ONES THAT PUT THIS LANGUAGE IN THERE, THEY CAN BE THE ONES THAT DECIDE. BUT RIGHT NOW, THE VOTERS WOULD ALREADY GET TO VOTE AND SAY, WE WANT IT LOCKED IN AT THE MINIMUM. THAT'S WHAT THE STATE DECIDES TO DO. SORRY TO BE DENSE, BUT SO IF THE STATE SAYS THIS IS THE MINIMUM, DON'T WE HAVE TO DO THAT? WE CAN'T CALL A FUTURE COUNCIL COULDN'T GO LOWER THAN WHAT THE STATE SAID. THE MINIMUM. YEAH.

MUST BE. YEAH. I WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE IT'S CAPTURED IN HERE WITH THE OTHER REFERENDUMS. I THINK IT'S GOING TO PASS. SO I WANTED IT INCLUDED. BUT I LEAVE IT TO COUNCIL WHETHER YOU CARE TO INCLUDE IT AT THIS TIME OR WAIT FOR A FUTURE CHARTER. MAYOR PRO TEM ALL RIGHT. SO MAYOR'S JUST FOR CLARITY. SO YOU'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WITH THE SHOULD THE STATE PASS THIS LAW, THAT THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE CHARTER THIS LANGUAGE BE ADDED TO THE.

MY ASSUMPTION IS IT'S LIKE THE OTHER REFERENDUMS. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE. BUT TO MR. PRINCE'S POINT, I DON'T KNOW THAT 100%. JUST TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY.

WE'RE HERE WORKING ON IT NOW. I WAS GOING TO INCLUDE IT, BUT FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, I'M HAPPY TO MOVE ON. YEAH, I GUESS I'D SUGGEST MOVING ON TO. SO WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE. WE HAVE TO REVISIT THE CHARTER ON A CERTAIN FREQUENCY. BUT I THINK, MR. BULLOCK, YOU'VE SAID IN THE PAST THAT, YOU KNOW, IF IF A YEAR FROM IF NOVEMBER OF 2027, THE COUNCIL SITTING AT THAT TIME DECIDED THEY WANTED TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT, THEY COULD

[04:05:02]

8.01 NUMBER FOUR, CODIFYING THAT WAS ADJUSTMENTS AND BUILDING STANDARDS SHOULD, SHALL NOT BE SHALL BE DONE BY THE CITY. AND THEN THE THE LAW. FIVE 0.2 RECORD FOR THE CREATION OF BODIES. THOSE ARE THINGS I THINK THE COUNCIL FORMALLY ADOPTED AS A PRACTICE.

AND THERE IS A PROCEDURE. I'M SURE THEY'RE STILL IN THERE OR NOT, BUT THE CHARTER REVIEW FELT STRONGLY THAT CODIFIES A FUTURE COUNCIL STANDARDS REVERSE COURSE ON THOSE ISSUES.

OKAY. MR. HALL, WELL, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BOARD OF ETHICS, YOU KNOW, I, I ALSO HAVE CONCERNS. I THINK THAT YOU EXPRESSED, MAYOR, ABOUT OUR. ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE MISUSE OF THAT THE THE COMPLICATIONS THAT COULD ADD THE TO CLARIFY, I THINK WE ALREADY NIXED THE THAT PART. YEAH. SO YEAH, SO I AGREE. OKAY. MR. PRINCE, SO THE LAST POINT THAT MR. OWEN RAISED AND I OPENED UP MY FULL DOCUMENT HERE. IT'S NOT I WAS LOOKING ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. YOU HADN'T PUT THIS, SO I HAD TO GO LOOK AT THIS NOTE. BUT I WANT TO REITERATE THAT. SO HE JUST RAISED THE 8.01 NUMBER FOR WHICH IN HIS DOCUMENT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE OR RED.

AND. AND WHAT IT SAYS IS MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION SHALL BE JOINTLY NOMINATED BY A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL LIAISONS FOR THOSE BODIES. WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT AS A GOOD PROCEDURE. I'LL POINT OUT THAT WHEN WE WENT THROUGH OUR RECENT DISCUSSION OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE GREATLY SIMPLIFIED RULES OF PROCEDURE, WE DID NOT CODIFY THIS IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE DOESN'T MEAN THAT COME NOVEMBER, CITY COUNCIL CAN'T DO THAT, BUT IT'S NOT CODIFIED IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. MY QUESTION FOR YOU ALL IS, IS THIS SOMETHING THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL, SOMETHING THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE CHARTER, OR SHOULD IT JUST BE LEFT TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE? AND I THINK MR. OWEN IS REPRESENTING, WELL, THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION, WHERE THEY HAD THE APPROACH OF IF IT'S IF IT'S EASY FOR COUNCIL TO GIVE AND TAKE COUNCIL, YOU KNOW, ONE COUNCIL WILL SAY IT'S A GOOD IDEA AND THE NEXT COUNCIL WILL RIP IT AWAY. SO, SO THEIR THEIR OPINION, I BELIEVE, WAS THIS IS THIS IS A GOOD ENOUGH IDEA. IT SHOULD BE IN THE CHARTER. IT SHOULDN'T BE LEFT IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. I PERSONALLY TEND TO THINK THAT'S PROBABLY GOOD ENOUGH TO CAPTURE IT IN THE RULES OF PROCEDURE, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DIDN'T GLOSS OVER THAT. THAT'S THE POINT HE'S RAISING. I AGREE

[04:10:01]

YOU'RE PROPOSING STRIKING BOTH FOUR AND FIVE? YES. AND FIVE IS THE ONE IS IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT SUBJECT, WHICH IS YOU CAN'T SERVE ON MORE THAN ONE OF THOSE THREE BODIES BECAUSE WE ALREADY PASSED AN ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THAT. YEAH. SO LEAVE IT AT THE ORDINANCE LEVEL IS YOUR PROPOSAL. AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. YEAH. I LIKE THAT TOO. I REALLY THINK THAT PROCEDURE SHOULD BE. OKAY. SEE? MR. HALL NODDING HIS HEAD. YES. OKAY. YOU HAVE FOR I AM YOU SEE ME HESITATING BECAUSE. THERE WAS ENOUGH OF A CONCERN AROUND HOW THE. HOW PUTTING MEMBERS ON THE VARIOUS BOARDS AND HOW THAT ALL CAME TOGETHER THAT. ENSURING THAT IT DOES GET CODIFIED. I THINK YOU SAID WE HAVE THIS IN OUR ORDINANCES. CORRECT. WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE FOR NUMBER FIVE. THE MAYOR IS POINTING OUT WE DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING FOR ITEM NUMBER FOUR CURRENTLY, BECAUSE WHEN WE WHEN WE RECENTLY WENT THROUGH OUR RULES OF PROCEDURE, WE HAD THE DISCUSSION OF THAT AT ONE POINT, BUT IT DID NOT END UP IN THE FINAL DOCUMENT. NOW, THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE COULDN'T DO AN ORDINANCE IN OUR NEXT COUNCIL SESSION, OR SIX MONTHS FROM NOW TO TO CODIFY THAT. WOULD IT BE OKAY IF WE GET THAT AT LEAST INTO ORDINANCE? YES. THANK YOU.

SOUNDS LIKE A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM FOR YOU. MAYOR DOES. ALL RIGHT. WELL, SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE ENOUGH TO SAY WE'RE TO REMOVE FOUR AND FIVE FROM 8.01. AND I WILL BRING THAT ITEM FORWARD ON A FUTURE AGENDA DISCUSSION. UNLESS THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IN EIGHT WE CAN MOVE TO. NINE JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE COMPLETELY STRIKING. SECTION 8.06 BOARD OF ETHICS.

THAT'S WHAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN. YEAH. OKAY. THAT SEEMS TO BE CONSENSUS. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO ARTICLE NINE, FINANCIAL PROCEDURES. I'LL OPEN UP AND SEE IF BRAD HAD WRITTEN ANYTHING FOR THIS ONE. ON MY COMMENTS FROM THE MAY MEMO I HAD, THERE WAS A SECTION 910 TWO READINGS. OH, YES. YEAH, YEAH. I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE TWO READINGS, YOU CAN CERTAINLY HAVE TWO READINGS. BUT BUT AS WRITTEN, THEY COULD BE AT THE SAME MEETING. AND SO THEN WHAT'S THE POINT. YEAH. SO AND SOME COUNCILS HAVE, I MEAN I'VE SAT THROUGH COUNCIL MEETINGS WHERE THAT HAPPENED, WHERE THAT WAS THE TWO MEETING, TWO READING REQUIREMENT WAS IN THE CHARTER AND THEY WOULD ANNOUNCE IT, GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS, ONE READING AND THEN CALL IT FOR THE SECOND, YOU KNOW, SO CAN WE JUST ADD TWO SEPARATE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THEN THAT ADDRESS THAT IF THAT'S YOUR YOU EITHER YOU EITHER HAVE IT AT TWO SEPARATE COUNCIL MEETINGS OR YOU TAKE AWAY THE TWO READING REQUIREMENTS. YEAH. YOU KNOW, I MEAN, MR. ALLEN, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE CCRC'S INTENTION? NO. THE INTENTION WAS TO HAVE TWO MEETINGS ON SEPARATE DAYS. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER IF WE PUT THAT IN THE MAYBE THE MEETING DEFINITION. YEAH. LET ME CHECK THAT. THERE WAS SOME BACK AND FORTH ABOUT. THE DEFINITION OF READING. YEAH. READING MEANS THE READING ALOUD OF AN ORDINANCE IN ITS ENTIRETY IN A PUBLICLY. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, THE READING OF THE TITLE DESCRIPTIVE CAPTION OF AN ORDINANCE SHALL SUFFICE. SO NO, WE DID NOT INCLUDE SEPARATE DAYS IN THE DEFINITION OF A READING. IT JUST DEFINES READING, SO I THINK THE ATTORNEY IS CORRECT. WE

[04:15:05]

[04:20:06]

CITIES ACROSS THE STATE OF ABUSE CEOS. I HATE HOW THAT CEO IS WRITTEN THAT WE DID. IT'S EVERYTHING THAT WE DO HERE AT THE CITY BASICALLY QUALIFIES UNDER THAT CEO. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M I THINK I HEAR FROM THE CITIZENS THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE ANYMORE. MR. I'LL AGREE AS WELL, BUT I ALSO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN. IT SAYS VOTER APPROVAL ONLY IN THE EVENT OF A DECLARED EMERGENCY, DECLARED EMERGENCIES ARE ONLY, YOU KNOW, ON A STATE LEVEL. SO HOW COULD WE DECLARE AN EMERGENCY ON FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE AND MARKET TIMING? I DON'T KNOW THAT THE STATE HAS EVER DECLARED US DECLARED AN EMERGENCY THAT FOR FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE OR MARKET TIMING. SO THOSE TWO DO NOT FALL WITH WITHIN UNDER THAT GUIDELINE, IN MY OPINION. MAYOR, CAN I CAN I ASK IF IF WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON NUMBER ONE, VOTER APPROVAL FOR CEOS OR NOT? BECAUSE IF WE IF IF YOU KNOW, MY PREFERENCE IS TO REMOVE ITEM NUMBER ONE, THEN ITEM NUMBER TWO IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. SO YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF ITEM NUMBER ONE. I'M OPPOSED TO ITEM NUMBER ONE. DO WE HAVE A CONSENSUS AMONG THE OTHER THREE? I'LL SAY I'M ALSO IN FAVOR OF NUMBER ONE. BUT THIS IS ONLY FOR FOR I MEAN I THINK I'M RUNNING AGAINST WHERE WE'VE SEEN THIS DONE PREVIOUSLY IN A VERY BAD WAY. BUT I UNDERSTAND IN GENERAL, MOST CITIES DON'T NEED THIS. SO I'M THINKING I'M JUST LOOKING ON THIS, THIS, THIS ONE WITH MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE JUST WATCHING WHAT HAPPENED YEAR BEFORE LAST, I THINK IT WAS, OR WHEN THE LAST CEO WAS APPROVED AND 2024. YEAH. SO THAT ONE KIND OF WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A SHOCKER. AND I THINK THAT MANY PEOPLE FELT LIKE THAT SHOULD HAVE WENT TO A VOTE. BUT ULTIMATELY, WE DO NEED TO BE ABLE TO I MEAN, WE WERE APPOINTED FOR A REASON. YOU KNOW, WE WERE APPOINTED AS A BY OUR CONSTITUENTS TO MAKE THESE TYPES OF DECISIONS. AND CEOS SHOULD BE COVERED UNDER THAT. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF ACTUALLY STRIKING THAT NOW THAT I'VE DISCUSSED IT A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IN MY HEAD. SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU. OKAY. I'M SORRY. I DON'T MEAN TO BE WISHY WASHY, BUT I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT THAT ONE EXAMPLE, BUT THEN LOOKING AT THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, PAST HISTORY AND OTHER CITIES THAT I'VE LOOKED AT AND I'M LIKE, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BRINGING IT FOR APPROVAL AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A VOTE FOR IT ANYWAY, WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO BRING IT IN FRONT OF COUNCIL. WE'RE

[04:25:03]

IT'S EXTREMELY POPULAR AMONGST THE CITIZENS. IF YOU PUT IT ON THE BALLOT, IT'LL OVERWHELMINGLY WIN. AND IF YOU'RE DOING A GOOD JOB AS A COUNCIL PERSON, THEN YOU GO OUT THERE AND MAKE THE CASE FOR WHAT IS THIS PROJECT THAT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED AND WHY DOES IT NEED TO BE FUNDED AND THE VOTERS WILL APPROVE IT? SO LOOK AT TRAVIS COUNTY AND AUSTIN.

THEY'RE ABLE TO GET THINGS APPROVED. MR. HALL. WELL, I YOU KNOW, MY I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IF IT'S TRULY AN EMERGENCY TYPE SITUATION, HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO TO GET THAT ON THE BALLOT AND EVEN MOVE FORWARD ON? SO THAT WOULD BE ONE ARGUMENT FOR CO, ALTHOUGH I, I AGREE, WE, WE'D HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL NOT TO NOT TO ABUSE IT. AND THE TEMPTATION IS THERE. MAYOR PRO TEM. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF PUTTING THIS OUT OUT THERE OR PUTTING CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATIONS OUT TO THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THEY FEEL LIKE THERE IS A LOT OF STUFF ALREADY IN THE BACK. BUT I WILL TELL YOU, I'M GOING ON, ON MY CAUTION SIDE IS EITHER WE NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR MAJOR.

INFRASTRUCTURE FAILURES. SO HEALTH AND SAFETY TYPES OF ITEMS IN OUR RESERVES. SO THERE'S A RESERVE COMPONENT TO ME IN ORDER TO GIVE THE LEEWAY FOR SOMETHING TO GO ON TO A BALLOT. AND WE'VE GOT TO. FOR BUDGETING PURPOSES, UNDERSTANDING IMPLICATIONS OF THE TWO YEARS. I MEAN, TO ME, IT WAS A TWO YEAR PROCESS. IT COULD BE BETWEEN THE TIME THAT WE IDENTIFIED NEEDS AND THEN PUTTING IT OUT FOR THE PUBLIC. SO I UNDERSTOOD WHY THEY WERE PUTTING IN TRYING TO PUT IN A COUPLE OF CONTINGENCIES. I THINK IMMINENT FAILURE WAS ONE OF THOSE. CERTAINLY FOR FOR NUMBER ONE, I AM FOR IT. I JUST THINK THINKING I UNDERSTAND GOING THROUGH IT AND THINKING THROUGH THE IMPLICATIONS OF IT, AS LONG AS WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, WE HAVE GOT THAT FLEXIBILITY. WILL THE FUTURE COUNCILS HAVE THAT? I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON CIRCUMSTANCES, HOW MUCH MONEY WE'VE GOT TO DRAW ON RESERVES TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE CARE OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AT THIS CURRENT TIME. JUST TO CIRCLE BACK, IF WE'RE GOING TO IF WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO WITH KEEPING ONE, I DEFINITELY THINK THAT WE NEED TO TRIM UP WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE EMERGENCY CERTIFICATIONS OF OBLIGATION, BECAUSE WE'RE UNDER DECLARED DISASTER. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FIVE AND SIX SHOULD BE ON THERE, BECAUSE THAT WOULD ALLOW, I THINK, TOO MUCH LEEWAY ON THERE. AND THAT WOULDN'T I MEAN, THAT COULD ACTUALLY BE REALLY CONTESTED, CONSIDERING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DECLARED EMERGENCY. YEAH. TO YOUR POINT, I HADN'T THOUGHT OF THAT. I THINK LIKE YOU SAID, IF IT HAS TO BE DECLARED EMERGENCY, THEY DON'T CALL DECLARED EMERGENCIES FOR MARKET TIMING OR FINANCIAL CONVENIENCE. SO THOSE WOULDN'T BE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE USED ANYWAYS. SO THIS IS. I GUESS THE QUESTION THAT THIS RAISES THAT I DON'T I DON'T IT'S RHETORICAL AT THIS POINT, BUT BUT A VOTER APPROVAL REQUIREMENT ON A CO. HOW DOES I GUESS, HOW DOES THAT NOT MAKE IT A BOND. THEN YOU HAVE TO REQUIRE. THEN YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL. YOU MIGHT AS WELL, YOU KNOW, BOND. THEN YOU'RE REQUIRING BOND OR REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR A BOND. THEN YOU DON'T HAVE COS. AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE COS THEN I SUPPOSE YOU CAN DO THAT. BUT BY CRAFTING A ELECTION REQUIREMENT FOR COS. YOU, YOU'RE MAKING IT A BOND OR IT'S NOT A CO ANYMORE BECAUSE CO IS BY DEFINITION UNDER STATE LAW ARE NOT YOU KNOW THEY DON'T REQUIRE A VOTE. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO THIS OTHER ROUTE THEN THAT'S A BOND AND THAT'S VOTER APPROVAL. SO I GUESS I'M I DON'T KNOW HOW I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU YOU CAN'T DO SOMETHING. YOU CAN'T CALL IT A CO BUT REQUIRE A VOTE, BUT THEN NOT MEET ALL OF THE BOND REQUIREMENTS. I THINK SO. I DON'T ON THAT THOUGH, BECAUSE I

[04:30:04]

NOW THE, THE, WHETHER YOU LIKE THAT I'M NOT ARGUING IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THE POLICY, BUT THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF IT. AS OPPOSED TO BOND REQUIREMENTS. I, I THINK I THINK THIS IS I'VE GOTTEN, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT I'M. THE COMMENTS THAT I'M GETTING IN RIGHT NOW ARE NUMBER ONE, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO TREAT THIS LIKE A BOND AND REQUIRE AND COMPLY WITH ALL BONDING REQUIREMENTS. NUMBER TWO, AND THIS IS FROM ONE OF THESE IS FROM JULIE FORT, MY PARTNER, JULIE, WHO'S, YOU KNOW, A MUNICIPAL FINANCE IS WHAT SHE DOES. AND HER SHE SAYS, MY INSTINCT IS, NO, YOU CAN'T DO IT. BUT THIS IS REALLY PERHAPS MORE SPECIFICALLY A QUESTION TO BOND COUNCIL. AND SO THIS, THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING WHERE YOU NEED BART TO WEIGH IN AND, AND HAVE HIM LOOK AT IT BECAUSE IT GETS INTO AN AREA THAT'S IT'S AN UNKNOWN.

RIGHT? OTHER CITIES, YOU KNOW, NOBODY'S AWARE OF OTHER CITIES THAT DO IT THAT WAY. AND SO YOU'D BE POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, PLOWING, EXCUSE ME, PLOWING NEW GROUND. AND THAT'S GREAT. BUT BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO IT MIGHT HAVE IT MIGHT HAVE UNFORESEEN CONSEQUENCES. AND I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT THOSE ARE. YOU MIGHT WANT TO GET BART AND, AND IF BART BLESSES IT, THEN I CERTAINLY IN ISSUES OF FINANCE AND BONDING AND CEOS, I WILL OBVIOUSLY DEFER TO BART. I'D SAY CONTINUE IN BECAUSE IT'S ONE OF THE CRC RECOMMENDATIONS. AND DO I HAVE PERMISSION TO TALK TO BART, SINCE IT'S MY IDEA. YEAH, I CERTAINLY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH YOU TALKING TO BART MAYOR, I. JUST FROM A TERMINOLOGY. BRAD. SO CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATIONS IS A BOND. GENERAL OBLIGATIONS IS A BOND. THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES THAT APPLY TO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS VERSUS CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION BONDS. RIGHT. AND SO AND REALLY WHAT I'M INFERRING IS YOUR CONCERN IS THAT WE MAY BE TURNING ALL CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION BONDS INTO GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS IF WE REQUIRE A VOTE ON THEM. AND THEN WHAT ARE THE WHAT ARE THE MAYBE THE EXPECTED CONSEQUENCES OF THAT? AND MY LACK OF PRECISION IN THE TERMINOLOGY EXPLAINS TO YOU PRECISELY WHY YOU NEED TO HAVE. BART. YEAH, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT.

YES. I MEAN, YES, THE YOU SAID IT BETTER THAN I DID, BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT YOU ARE TURNING THE CEO VERSION INTO THE GENERAL VERSION. AND THERE ARE POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, JUST MAYBE SOME UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. I DON'T I DON'T, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT I CAN GIVE YOU A DEFINITIVE OPINION ON. AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE BART WEIGH IN ON IT. SO WE NEED TO COME BACK TO THIS FOR SURE. I JUST WANT TO THROW OUT THIS ONE LAST THING THAT I THINK THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SOME MUNICIPALITIES WHO HAVE BEEN DOING THINGS WITH CEOS THAT THAT SOME PEOPLE, AT LEAST AT THE STATE LEVEL, THINK THEY SHOULDN'T BE DOING THE STATE'S GOING TO TIGHTEN UP WHAT YOU CAN DO UNDER A CEO. AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I, I'M NOT I'M NOT SURE THIS IS A PROBLEM WE NEED TO SOLVE. I THINK IT CREATES MORE PROBLEMS THAN IT SOLVES. BUT ANYWAY, WE'LL COME BACK TO IT. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS ONE. MR. STRAWBERRY. YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT NORMALLY YOU CAN FOR EVEN FOR CEOS, AS LONG AS A 5% PETITION COMES THROUGH, OUR REGISTERED VOTERS COMES BACK.

THEY CAN WE CAN THEY CAN ACTUALLY REQUIRE IT TO GO ONTO BALLOT. SO, SO EVEN IF WE WERE TO APPROVE A CEO, IF IF WE GET A GROUP OF PEOPLE PETITION, JUST ONLY 5% OF THE POPULATION, THAT MEANS THAT WE CAN'T, THEY CAN ACTUALLY LIKE PUT A STAY ON IT AND IT HAS TO GO TO BALLOT.

SO I THINK THERE'S ALREADY SOME METHODS IN PLACE FOR FOR WHAT THE MAYOR IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. BUT I DO KNOW THAT THEY ARE ALSO WORKING ON STRONGER REGULATIONS WITHIN THE LEGISLATURE TO WHICH WE WILL ULTIMATELY HAVE TO. DID WE CHANGE THE 5% ON BOND RECALL TO 10%, OR IS THAT STILL AT 5% IN THE. IT'S TEN. I THINK WE MAY. IT'S IT'S A STATE STATUTE FOR 5%. FIVE. OKAY. WHAT'S THE ONE THAT WE MADE UNIFORM AT 10%. YEAH. WELL, EVERYTHING ELSE.

[04:35:02]

MAYBE THE POLLS ARE NOT THE SAME. YEAH. OKAY. WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS ONE, THEN I'LL HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH BART. DID ANYONE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE IN ARTICLE NINE? I HAD SOME STUFF AT THE END. MR. WEST UNDER 918, UNDER FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY. I BELIEVE MOST OF THAT'S ALREADY REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. I KNOW THE PROPOSED IN THE ADOPTED ANNUAL BUDGET HAS TO BE ON THE WEBSITE. CURRENT RESERVE BALANCES. THAT'S THIS IS ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD ON MY COMMENTS. YES. I'M SORRY. YEAH. THAT'S THAT WAS THE ONLY THING I SAW THAT REALLY STUCK OUT TO ME WAS THAT IS, I BELIEVE PART OF THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE IS ALREADY PART OF STATE LAW. SO IF YOU WANT TO KEEP IT IN THERE, THAT'S FINE. I JUST IF IT'S PART OF STATE LAW, I JUST DON'T SEE WHY YOU NEED TO PUT IT IN THE CHARTER. NOW I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE HAVING IT IN THERE. BUT IF IT'S IN THE STATE LAW, I KNOW THAT THE ADOPTED BUDGET AND THE PROPOSED BUDGET, I DON'T KNOW THAT QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORTS ARE.

CURRENT RESERVE BALANCES. I DON'T KNOW THAT THOSE RESERVE BALANCES IS NOT. I DO KNOW THAT I BELIEVE DEBT NOW HAS TO BE POSTED. QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORTS SHOULD BE POSTED, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT GOES INTO THE DETAIL ON ACTUAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES. AND THEN I DO KNOW THAT THE TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENTS HAVE TO BE PART OF YOUR STUFF. NOW THAT GETS POSTED. SO I MEAN, I'M GOOD EITHER WAY. I JUST WAS POINTING THAT OUT. OKAY. YEAH, I'LL BE FINE WITH CROSS CHECKING THIS WITH WHAT STATE REQUIREMENTS ARE AND LEAVING IN WHAT IS IN A STATE REQUIREMENT. AND THEN THE RESERVE POLICY WAS THE NEXT ONE. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HAD BROUGHT FORWARD BEFORE HAVING A RESERVE POLICY. I WAS JUST PUTTING IT INTO THE CHARTER.

YEAH. MR. SORRY, MR. OWEN. AND HIS MARKUP HIGHLIGHTS IN SECTION 913 FOR ITEM D, AS IN DOG SECOND. SECOND SENTENCE SAYS IT MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET. QUOTE, NO FEWER THAN A SPECIFIED NUMBER OF DAYS, AND HE HIGHLIGHTS THAT THAT WAS A PLACEHOLDER. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A NUMBER, BUT THEY THOUGHT IT SHOULD BE. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF IT'S MUST BE PUBLICLY POSTED AND INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET PRIOR TO ANY COUNCIL, I WOULD JUST STRIKE ALL THAT LANGUAGE BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY RULES ABOUT WHEN PACKETS, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO BE DONE AND WHEN THE WHEN THE AGENDA HAS TO BE POSTED THE PACKET BEFORE THE MEETING. SO I WOULD JUST SUGGEST IT'S INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET PRIOR TO ANY COUNCIL VOTE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE. SO STRIKE THE SENTENCE OF SPECIFYING THE NUMBER OF DAYS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO SPECIFY THE NUMBER OF DAYS FOR A SPECIFIC TOPIC IN OUR IN OUR PACKET, I WOULD SAY, OKAY. MR. OWEN, WAS THERE A STRONG CRC BELIEF OF HAVING TO PUT A SET NUMBER OF DAYS? SO I FIND MY UNMUTE BUTTON. THERE WAS A STRONG OPINION THAT IT SHOULD BE SPECIFIED SO THAT WE DON'T GET INTO THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE. THIS IS NOT THE DAY OF THE MEETING WITH AN AMENDED PACKET. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WASN'T A STRONG CONSENSUS.

SHOULD THERE BE SEVEN DAYS WITH THE AGENDA STATED SHOULD BE THREE DAYS. BUT THAT'S WHY WE LEFT IT. VAGUE FOR YOU GUYS TO FILL IN THE BLANK. CHAVARRIA MAYOR, I NOTICED THAT YOU HAD PROPOSED TEN DAYS, AND WHILE I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT LENGTHY, I DO LIKE THE DIRECTION OF THAT. SO I WOULD THINK FIVE BUSINESS DAYS OR JUST TEN DAYS WOULD WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR THAT. BUT THAT IS UP TO COUNCIL TO DISCUSS. I WAS GOING TO POINT SOMETHING OUT CHARLES. SO SO HERE. SO I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT BEHIND HAVING A REQUIREMENT FOR PACKET MATERIAL TO BE X NUMBER OF DAYS IN ADVANCE. I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT. THE PROBLEM IS

[04:40:01]

SO I I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU SHOULD OR YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A DEADLINE. I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT YOU MAY PUT YOURSELVES IN. ONE OF THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IS THAT YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO ACT ON AN ITEM BECAUSE THE PACKET WAS UPDATED, YOU KNOW, 72 HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING. AND THIS IS THE VERSION YOU NEED TO ACT ON. SO JUST BEAR THAT, JUST BEAR THAT IN MIND. THAT COULD BE A CONSEQUENCE OF IT. AND HAVING TO PUT OFF AND HOLD OFF ON ITEMS THAT COME IN LATE THROUGH NO FAULT OF ANYBODY'S. SO. CHARLES. YEAH, THIS IS GOING TO BE IN REFERENCE TO ANY TYPE OF DEBT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT HAS SPECIFIED DAYS OF NOTICE ON PUBLIC HEARINGS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAS TO BE DONE. I WOULD NOT TIE IT TO THE PACKET BECAUSE PACKETS ARE NOT REGULATED BY THE STATE OF TEXAS. THEY'RE NOT EVEN REQUIRED. SO I WOULD LEAVE THE WORD PACKETS OUT OF THAT, AND IT JUST STRICTLY BE THAT YOU MEET THE THE NOTIFICATION DEADLINES AND ALL, BECAUSE THAT'S SOME CONFUSION THAT'S HAPPENING WITH SOME OF OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS IS THEY'RE THINKING, WELL, IT'S GOT TO BE NOTICED. YEAH, IT'S GOT TO BE NOTICED IN THE PAPER AND ON THE WEBSITE. BUT THAT JUST BECAUSE IT HAS TO MEET THOSE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS DOESN'T MEAN THE WHOLE PACKET HAS TO BE READY OR THE AGENDA HAS TO BE READY AT THAT TIME. SO THAT'S JUST MY SO YOU'RE SAYING IT SHOULD JUST SAY THAT TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENT MUST BE PUBLICLY POSTED AND INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA WITH THE AGENDA? NO, THE TAXPAYER STATEMENT HAS TO BE PART OF NOT IN THE PACKET. BUT THAT HAS TO BE PART OF YOUR WHOLE DEAL. WHEN YOU DO YOUR. PUBLIC NOTICES AND STUFF ON THE TAXPAYER IMPACT AND AND PROBABLY YOUR AGENDAS. RIGHT. WE WENT THROUGH THIS LAST YEAR ON THE AGENDA. YEAH. BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU'LL EVEN LOOK AT OUR CURRENT AGENDA, THERE'S A LINK AT THE BOTTOM OF OUR AGENDA NOW THAT SHOWS THE BUDGET, BECAUSE ANYTIME YOU TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET ON THE AGENDA FROM NOW ON, THANKS TO THE LEGISLATURE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT'S LINKED TO THE AGENDA, WHICH INCLUDES THE TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENT. RIGHT. SO YOU'RE SAYING THIS HAS TO BE REMOVED ENTIRELY. IT'S ALREADY REQUIRED. IT'S ALREADY A REQUIREMENT. THE REQUIREMENTS ARE RELATE TO YOUR AGENDA AND YOUR NOTICE, RIGHT? PUBLIC NOTICES AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT BY IF IF YOUR INTENT IS TO ADD ALL OF THAT TO THE PACKET MATERIAL, AS CHARLES STATED IT CORRECTLY, THE AGENDA PACKETS ARE NOT REQUIRED BY TOMA. THEY'RE NOT ADDRESSED BY STATE LAW. YOU CERTAINLY, AS A HOME RULE, CITY CAN PLACE REQUIREMENTS. HOWEVER, IF IT'S IN YOUR CHARTER, YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO EASILY ALTER THAT. I AM AWARE OF. THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER CITIES I DO WORK FOR SAN MARCOS. SAN MARCOS HAS A TWO WEEK PACKET AND AGENDA NOTICE, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY'RE TWO WEEKS OUT. AND SO AND IF YOU DON'T GET IT IN, YOU'RE NOT ON THAT MEETING. RIGHT. SO BUT THAT'S THAT'S BY POLICY OR ORDINANCE. AND SO IT, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO, IN AN EMERGENCY, YOU KNOW, IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO, TO CHANGE THAT. IF IT IS A HARD DEADLINE IN YOUR CHARTER, YOU DON'T. SO JUST BEAR IN MIND, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU WANT TO PLACE A LIMITS OR REQUIREMENTS ON A PACKET PROVISION TO THE PUBLIC, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT DOING IT BY ORDINANCE IS PROBABLY THE BETTER WAY TO DO IT, BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN ADJUST IT AS NEEDED. BUT, BUT ULTIMATELY THAT'S A POLICY DECISION. AS I SAID, THOUGH, IF IT'S IN YOUR CHARTER, THAT MAY PROHIBIT YOU FROM ACTING ON CERTAIN ITEMS. IF THE PACKET IS NOT UP TO DATE.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? IF YOU HAVE TO MOVE SUDDENLY OR QUICKLY, WHAT DOES THAT DO FOR AN EMERGENCY MEETING? IT DOESN'T ADDRESS EMERGENCIES OR SPECIALS. SO CONSIDERING WHERE THIS IS LOCATED IN DE AND WHERE THIS FALLS ON HERE, IT'S VERY SPECIFIC THAT IT'S LIKE REFERRING TO THE TAXPAYER IMPACT STATEMENT. SO I THINK WE COULD PROBABLY JUST LEAN THIS

[04:45:02]

BECAUSE ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE RAN INTO IN CHARLES, YOU MAY RECALL US TALKING ABOUT IT LAST YEAR WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO DO THE. TAXPAYER RATE STATEMENT AGENDA. NOTICE THE STATE SAID YOU NEED TO PROVIDE WHAT WAS IT? ONE WAS THE MEDIAN AND ONE WAS THE AVERAGE, THE MEDIAN AND THE

[04:50:03]

SO JUST A REAL SIMPLE ESTIMATE. AND WHAT THIS REALLY MEANS FOR US BEFORE THE VOTERS AND WHAT THEIR TAX RATES WILL LOOK LIKE, OBVIOUSLY, MAYBE WE NEEDED TO FIND AN ESTIMATED BETTER OR MAYBE THAT CONVOLUTES IT SO MUCH THAT YOU'RE BETTER JUST TO TAKE IT OUT, BUT YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE MAKING IT SO CRAZY THAT YOU'RE HAVING TO DO ALL THESE LETTERS OF SCHEDULE LOOK LIKE FOR HOUSEHOLDS. HOW WILL THAT IMPACT IF WE SPREAD OVER MORE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE FUTURE AND SO FORTH? MAYOR. YES, MR. PRINCE, MR. OWENS, A QUESTION FOR YOU. I, I DON'T HAVE IN FRONT OF ME, OUR EXISTING CHARTER IS IS THERE AN EQUIVALENT? I GUESS IT WOULD BE AN ARTICLE EIGHT IN THE EXISTING CHARTER RATHER THAN ARTICLE NINE. BUT IS THERE AN EXISTING PARAGRAPH OR SECTION ON CEOS THAT THIS 9.13 IS TAKEN FROM, OR IS IT A BRAND NEW SECTION THAT DOES NOT EXIST IN THE EXISTING CHARTER? OH NO. COUNCIL. MY RECOLLECTION IS 9.13, PRETTY MUCH IN ITS ENTIRETY IS NOT CONTENT, BUT CHARTER. YEAH, I YEAH, SO THIS, THIS SECTION, I THINK WE WE NEED TO COME BACK TO A DECISION TREE, RIGHT. AND DOES THIS SECTION BELONG. IT'S EXTREMELY COMPLICATED. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE AS A COUNCIL COME TO CONSENSUS ON. YES, VOTER APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR CEOS AFTER DISCUSSION WITH BOND COUNCIL AND CONSIDERING ALL THE FACTORS. AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE CAPTURE WHAT ARE THE EMERGENCY OUTS? WHAT IS THE REPORTING THAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED? RIGHT? RIGHT NOW, THIS IS A IS A REALLY, REALLY COMPLICATED SECTION, WHICH IS REALLY ABOUT ONE TOPIC. IT'S ABOUT WHETHER CEOS ARE GOING TO REQUIRE A PUBLIC VOTE OR NOT. AND, AND TO THAT POINT, MR. PRINCE, I THINK I MEAN, THIS COULD BE MULTIPLE PROPOSITIONS, FRANKLY, BECAUSE IT IS SO COMPLEX. AND IF YOU ARE ADDING NEW REPORTING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED BY STATE LAW, I I'M NOT SURE THAT ONE PROPOSITION, ONE BALLOT PROPOSITION CAN CAPTURE ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT THINGS BECAUSE MAYBE VOTERS DO WANT ELECTION, BUT ARE THEY DON'T WANT ELECTION, BUT WE DO WANT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. I DON'T YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, BUT THIS IS VERY THIS IS VERY, VERY DENSE. AND IT MAY IT MAY THIS JUST 9.1 3RD MAY REQUIRE A COUPLE OF BALLOT PROPOSITIONS ON ITS OWN. YEAH. AND MY I'VE ALREADY STATED MY PREFERENCE FOR LETTING CITY COUNCIL HOLD THE AUTHORITY FOR CEOS AND LET THE STATE CONTRACT WHAT CAN OR CAN'T BE IN CEOS. BUT IF THE WILL OF COUNCIL IS TO PUT IT TO A VOTE FOR VOTERS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THAT THIS BE SIMPLIFIED TO 10% OF ITS CURRENT CONTENT, RIGHT? IT'S LIKE, LET'S JUST LET'S GET RID OF ALL OF THIS. SPECIFYING HOW REPORTING IS TO BE DONE AND JUST SAY VOTERS ARE GOING TO VOTE ON CEOS, EXCEPT FOR THESE VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF OUTS.

[04:55:08]

LET ME TALK TO BART ABOUT THIS SECTION AND THEN COME BACK THE NEXT TIME WE TALK ABOUT THE CHARTER. AND THAT MAY BE IN A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING OR THAT MAY BE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. WE'LL HAVE TO TALK WITH CHARLES ABOUT THAT. BUT WE'RE GOOD. I'M GOOD TO END THE WORK SESSION AND DO THE LAST ITEMS OF THE AGENDA. THERE. JUST ANSWER COUNCILOR FRANCIS, QUESTION THE ENTIRETY OF 9.13 CONTENT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THE LAST ITEMS WE HAVE, I'M

[Items XI & XII]

OUR BUILDING OFFICIAL, DWAYNE, I BELIEVE JORDAN'S ALREADY LEFT, PRESENTED QUITE A BIT OF A LIST LAST NIGHT, ALONG WITH PHOTOS IN REGARDS TO THE PROPERTIES. SOME OF THESE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE ACTUALLY NOW MOVING. NOW THAT THEY FOUND OUT THAT WE WERE OUT THERE LOOKING AT IT.

SO THEY'RE TRYING TO GET ACTIVE PERMITS. SO WE'RE NOT REALLY IN PURSUIT OF TRYING TO CONDEMN THOSE PROPERTIES AT THIS TIME. BUT THERE'S SOME THAT ARE JUST YOU CAN'T CONTACT THE OWNERS.

THEY'VE MOVED OUT OF THE COUNTRY. THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE EVEN IN DEFAULT ON TAXES. SO WHAT DWAYNE DID WAS VERY WONDERFUL. HE PUT IN A MASTER PROPERTY INVENTORY ROW, PUT IN SUMMARIES, IDENTIFICATIONS, CASE STATUSES, LIENS, TITLES, INTERESTED PARTIES. I MEAN, HE WENT BETWEEN HIM AND JORDAN. THEY WENT MADE A VERY EXHAUSTIVE LIST FOR EACH OF

[05:00:03]

SO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS WILL HAVE THEIR OFFICIAL MEETING. I'VE GOTTEN. NEWS ON THIS NEXT MONDAY. SO THAT'S BEEN THE FIRST ONE SINCE JANUARY ACTUALLY. THAT WILL BE UP AND RUNNING. AND FROM THAT, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME DISCUSSION THAT WILL BE WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THESE EXCEPTIONS AND VARIANCES. SO THEN AFTER THAT, I'VE GOT, OF COURSE, THE IPASS MEETING ON THE 14TH AT 2 P.M. THE EDC MEETING ON THE 14TH AT 4 P.M. AND WE'VE GOT OUR GRANT WRITER IS COMING IN TO DO A PRESENTATION FOR COUNCIL. I'LL GO BACK TO THE IPASS AND JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, THE THE MAJOR THEMES THERE, AND WE'VE HEARD A LOT TONIGHT WERE THAT. WE'RE REALLY LOOKING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS PLANNED AS AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM. SO YOU'VE GOT THE THE SYSTEM SIDE OF IT, BUT YOU'VE ALSO GOT THE PROJECT SIDE OF IT. AND IF WE DO SOMETHING ON A PROJECT HERE, HOW DOES THAT LOOK WITH THE SYSTEM OVER HERE? SO THERE'S SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS. ENGINEERING WAS AT THE FRONT IN TERMS OF ALSO HELPING TO GUIDE OUR PLANNING, OUR CAPITAL DECISIONS, BUT ALSO IN THAT WE'RE HOPING THAT IF WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE SOME OF THIS ENGINEERING, THAT IT WILL HELP US TOWARDS OUR GRANT APPLICATIONS. SO THAT WAS A BIG ONE. AND OUR LONG RANGE PLANNING CONTINUES TO BE A PRIMARY FOCUS IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, LOOKING OUT SEVERAL YEARS ON THE EDC. I LOOK FORWARD AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THE THE GRANT. BUT THERE'S ALSO, I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE. ERIC, DO WE HAVE THE, THE SIGNAGE PERSON COMING BACK? TO THE LIBRARY? WE HAVE OF LINE ONE, LINE ONE OF MY HOBBY, BESIDES HOW TO BE A.

YEAH. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. YEAH. NOTHING FOR ME. BUT ON THE STAFF REPORTS I WAS JUST ASKED A QUESTION ONLINE FOR THE PARADE AND FOR THE AIRPORT EVENT. ARE THERE GOING TO BE PUBLIC RESTROOMS? I THINK THE AIRPORT, THE PILOTS, LOUNGE RESTROOMS WILL BE USED. BUT I THINK THE PARADE NO PORTA JOHNS, NO NOTHING. RIGHT. IT'S A SHORT. OKAY. THE PARADE STATION THERE

[05:05:05]

OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. JENNIFER. YEAH. OTHER THAN THAT, EVERYBODY HAVE A HAPPY AND SAFE.

FOURTH, IF YOU'RE OUT ON THE LAKE, WEAR YOUR LIFE VEST. THAT'S IT FOR ME, MR. WEST, AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, Y'ALL WILL HAVE A NAME PRESENTED TO YOU FOR MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE.

WE HAD THREE CANDIDATES. WE HAD THREE CANDIDATES. TWO ROSE TO THE TOP. I'M CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS TO TALK TO THOSE TWO TOP ONES, AND I'LL HAVE A NAME FOR YOU AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. THE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORT WENT OUT ON THE WATER DEAL.

THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS ON IT OR COME UP WITH A STATEMENT PUT OUT THERE. I THINK THAT CLARIFIED SOME OF THE QUESTIONS BECAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN BOMBARDED WITH QUESTIONS AGAIN, AND WE'VE GIVEN THEM THE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR ERNEST DOE AND CURTIS, OUR PLANT OPERATOR. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'VE HAD ANY ANYBODY REACH OUT SINCE THEN. SO I THINK THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB OVER THERE. THAT'S ALL I GOT. MR. PRINCE, THE ONLY THING I HAVE IS MEETING WILL BE ONE WEEK FROM TONIGHT. SO PRESUMABLY OUT FROM THAT NEXT TIME. ALL RIGHT. NO OBJECTIONS. THE TIME IS

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.