>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG TO OUR CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING,
[DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:05]
TUESDAY, AUGUST THE 24TH.OUR AGENDA SAYS SIX O'CLOCK, BUT WE'RE GOING TO SAY 6:11.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT WITH ONE COUNCILMEMBER RUNNING A LITTLE BEHIND SCHEDULE TODAY.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, SO I'LL CALL THIS TO ORDER AT 6:11.
[NOISE] WE'VE ALREADY DID OUR PLEDGE AND PRAYER EARLIER,
[CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS]
SO WE'LL GO RIGHT ON INTO OUR CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS.NUMBER 1, PRESENTATION OF ANGLETON 2021, KEEP ANGLETON BEAUTIFUL, YARD OF THE MONTH AND BUSINESS OF THE MONTH.
>> I'M TRACY, REPRESENTING KEEP ANGLETON BEAUTIFUL.
THE BOARD AND A LOT OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS COULDN'T BE HERE THIS EVENING.
FIRST, WE'RE GOING TO INTRODUCE CHARLOTTE AND HER DAUGHTER, REAGAN. PLEASE COME UP HERE.
CHARLOTTE OPENED THE MONARCH STUDIO, WHICH IS DOWN ON 288 B.
FROM KEEP ANGLETON BEAUTIFUL, CITY COUNCIL, AND THE CITIZENS OF ANGLETON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> [INAUDIBLE] FOR A PHOTO. WE'LL STAND BACK HERE.
>> THANK Y'ALL. I'LL SEND YOU THE PICTURE SHORTLY.
>> NEXT, WE HAVE YARD OF THE MONTH.
FRED AND GRACE FLORES, COME UP HERE PLEASE.
THEY HAVE A BEAUTIFUL HOME ON VINE [INAUDIBLE] ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TOWN.
YOU DON'T NEED TO KNOW THE ADDRESS.
[LAUGHTER] DRIVE BY AND YOU'LL KNOW IT.
ON BEHALF OF KEEP ANGLETON BEAUTIFUL, AND THE CITIZENS OF ANGLETON, AND THE MAYOR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE]
>> PASSED BY THE YARD TODAY, I SAW IT TODAY. IT LOOKS BEAUTIFUL EVERYDAY.
>> TO GET MORE OF THESE. [LAUGHTER]
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG; CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS.
[CONSENT AGENDA]
NUMBER 2, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PRELIMINARY REPLAT OF THE CENTURY COALE ROAD BUSINESS PARK.NUMBER 3, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR YEAR TO DATE JUNE 2021.
NUMBER 4, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REPORT FOR MAY AND JUNE 2021. COUNCIL.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THE ADOPTION [INAUDIBLE]
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO-TEM WRIGHT.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND.
I DON'T WANT TO PULL US OFF, BUT THEY'RE REVIEWING THE PLAT OF THE COALE BUSINESS PARK.
THERE IS A FEW IRREGULARITIES ASSOCIATED WITH EASEMENTS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY GO BACK OVER THOSE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO SATISFY THE PROPERTY WHICH IS BOTH A SANITARY AND WATER EASEMENT.
IT'S NOT ONE EXCLUSIVE OR THE OTHER.
THERE'S SOME OTHER ODDITIES, BUT JUST GO OVER WITH THE PLAT TO COMPLETE.
[OVERLAPPING] YOU PUT SOMETHING NEW ON A PLAT THAT DOESN'T CONFORM WITH WHAT THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL EASEMENT WAS, IT JUST MAKES THINGS HARD.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS.
[5. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on the Lot 16 Cannan Heights Subdivision Replat with a variance of Section 23.11.C.2 prohibiting new residential lots fronting on major collector or arterial streets.]
NUMBER 5, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON LOT 16 CANNAN HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION REPLAT WITH A VARIANCE OF SECTION 23.11.C.2, PROHIBITING NEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS FRONTING ON MAJOR COLLECTOR IN ARTERIAL STREETS. MR. WALTER.>> THANK YOU MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
BEFORE I GET INTO THIS, I GOT A WRITTEN PROTEST AT ABOUT FIVE O'CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON.
[00:05:08]
>> THIS IS A REQUEST TO REPLAT LOT 16 OF THE CANNAN HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION INTO TWO LOTS.
THERE'LL BE A LOT THAT WILL TAKE ACCESS OFF OF PINEY WAY, AND THEN A SECOND LOT THAT WILL TAKE ACCESS OFF OF VALDERAS.
VALDERAS IS CLASSIFIED AS A MAJOR COLLECTOR ON THE CITY'S MOBILITY PLAN.
SO BY SECTION 23.11.C.2, VARIANCE IS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE PLAT.
[NOISE] YOU HAVE IN THE BACKUP, THE ANALYSIS OF THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
YOU ALSO HAVE THE PROTEST IN FRONT OF YOU.
BECAUSE OF THE WAY STATE LAWS ARE WRITTEN, IF THERE IS A WRITTEN PROTEST, IF 20 PERCENT OF THE LAND AREA IN THE 200- FOOT NOTICE AROUND THE PROPERTY IS PROTESTING THE VARIANCE, THEN THAT REQUIRES A SUPER-MAJORITY VOTE IN ORDER TO APPROVE THE PLAT.
THE LAND AREA INVOLVED HERE ONLY ACCOUNTS FOR 13 PERCENT OF THE 200-FOOT NOTICE AREAS, SO THE 20 PERCENT RULE IS NOT IN EFFECT.
IT'S JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE BY THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE ON THE PLAT.
A PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON AUGUST THE 5TH.
STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCILS, WE HAVE TO GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING FIRST, THEN WE CAN GO INTO DISCUSSION POST-ELECTION. COUNCIL.
>> MOTION OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. WE'RE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING.
I DID GET ONE ITEM, ONE SLIP FOR SOMEONE TO SPEAK, MR. BOYD SCHILLER.
MR. SCHILLER, PLEASE COME ON UP.
>> DO I COME UP THERE OR HERE?
ABOUT 100 YARDS, I WAS BORN IN ANGLETON CLINIC BACK IN 1958.
I PROBABLY PUT THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF MILES ON MY BICYCLE IN THIS CITY.
ANY WAY, I GREW UP ON CHEVY CHASE AS A REALLY YOUNG KID, AND THEN MY PARENTS BOUGHT SOME LAND, WHICH IS ON PINEY WAY.
BUILT A HOUSE, AND THEY BOUGHT THE LOT 16.
I WANT TO DIVIDE IT UP AND BUILD A HOUSE THERE.
HOPEFULLY, ONE DAY IF THAT HAPPENS, I CAN SIT UP THERE AND GET YARD OF THE MONTH.
[LAUGHTER] I JUST HOPE Y'ALL DO IT BECAUSE I WANT TO MOVE BACK HERE.
I'VE BEEN AT LAKE JACKSON NOW FOR ABOUT 35 YEARS, AND I MISS ANGLETON.
I WANT TO COME BACK BECAUSE I HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS HERE.
>> ANYBODY ELSE WANTED TO SPEAK ON, FOR, OR AGAINST.
EVEN IF YOU DID NOT FILL OUT A SLIP, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME. COME ON UP.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS LAURA HASO.
I LIVE ON 2611 NORTH VALDERAS RIGHT NEXT TO THIS LOT, THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO REPLATS.
SINCE I'VE BEEN THERE, I'VE NOTICED THE TRAFFIC OFF OF VALDERAS AND NOW A BIG CONCERN OF MINE IS THE NEW SUBDIVISION.
AT FIRST, IT WASN'T A CONCERN UP UNTIL NOW, THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO REPLAT.
I LOOKED INTO IT AND I'VE FOUND THAT YOU GUYS APPROVED A VARIANCE, [NOISE] AND THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T DO A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
THEY WERE GRANTED A VARIANCE FOR THAT.
>> IT'S UNKNOWN WHAT THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE LIKE, I MEAN, AT THIS POINT, IT'S UNKNOWN AND THAT'S A BIG CONCERN FOR ME.
IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE, THAT I FORESEE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT WALK ON THAT SIDE, THE SUBDIVISION BECAUSE THERE ARE SIDEWALKS THERE.
ALSO, THAT'S GOING TO A TEA AND THE ONLY WAY TO GO AROUND, THAT WOULD BE PINEY WAY, BUT YOU'VE STILL GOT TO GO RIGHT IN FRONT OF THESE REPLATS.
AS YOU CAN SEE, I HAVE PICTURES IN MY PROTEST.
THERE'S ONE WAY IN ONE WAY OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION, AND THE OTHER ACCESS POINT IS FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS, AND IT'S LOCKED AT THIS POINT.
IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S GOING TO BE THE PLAN.
THIS SUBDIVISIONS GOING TO HAVE 111 LOTS.
[00:10:03]
>> THAT'S A BIG CONCERN. I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OVER PROBABLY 200 CARS COMING IN AND OUT OF THERE, EACH HOUSE HAS TWO CARS.
I'M ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THIS, AND I WOULD LIKE FOR NOT YOU TO APPROVE THIS PLAT, FOR THAT REASON FOR SAFETY PURPOSES.
>> ARE YOU REFERENCING THE SUBDIVISION?
>> I'M REFERENCING THE REPLATS.
THAT'S RIGHT [OVERLAPPING] ACROSS ON THE SUBDIVISION.
BECAUSE THE DRIVEWAY [OVERLAPPING]
>> TWO HOUSES IF IT'S SUBDIVIDED INTO TWO LOTS, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> YEAH. RIGHT NOW IT'S A ONE ACRE LOT, IT'S GOT ONE HOUSE.
THE REPLAT WOULD ALLOW A SECOND HOUSE, THAT WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT, OF THIS SUBDIVISION WITH THE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SUBDIVISION.
>> YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE PICTURE HERE.
>> I UNDERSTAND. I'M JUST MAKING SURE, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE PROTESTING THE SUBDIVISION.
>> NO, I'M PROTESTING THE [OVERLAPPING] TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THERE AND THEN THIS NEW REPLATS.
>> MRS. HASO, WHAT DO YOU LIVE AT ON THIS VALDERAS?
>> I OWN THE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO PINEY WAY.
>> IS THIS WHERE THE RED STARS AT?
>> ON THE OTHER SIDE. THANK YOU.
>> THAT AREA IN THE PERISCOPE NEXT TO THE REPLAT.
THERE IS A DRIVEWAY RIGHT NEXT TO THAT EASEMENT.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
>> MA'AM, THANK YOU SO MUCH. SOMEBODY ELSE WANT TO SPEAK? GO AHEAD, SIR.
>> MY NAME IS DUSTIN WINANS, I LIVE ON 14 PINEY WAY.
I JUST PURCHASED THIS HOUSE ABOUT A MONTH AGO.
THE ONLY REASON I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE IS BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL BACKYARD.
I MEAN, IT WAS WELL TAKEN CARE OF AND I WOULD HATE TO WALK OUT IN MY BACKYARD TO HAVE TO SEE ANOTHER HOUSE RIGHT THERE, IN MY BACKYARD.
I'M PROTESTING FOR NOT TO RE-PLOT IT AS WELL. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
>> [NOISE] ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR, OR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 5? GOING TWICE, THREE TIMES, COUNCIL.
>> THIS WHY I'M MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR POIRIER, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN.
BOTH REFRENCE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE OTHERS IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED "SAME SIGN".
THAT MOTION CARRIES, WE HAVE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
NOW, IT'S TIME FOR COUNCIL TO DISCUSS, COUNCIL.
>> DOES LOTS 16 HAVE ANY PROPERTY BEHIND 14 PINEY WAY?
>> WALTER CAN YOU EXPLAIN [OVERLAPPING].
>> DOES THAT EVEN GO ON BEHIND HIS PROPERTY?
>> [NOISE] NO. IT'S DIRECTLY TO THE EAST OF BLOCK 14.
>> I NEED UNDERSTANDING. WHERE WOULD THE ENTRANCE BE TO 16TH LOT? THE ADDITIONAL HOME.
>> THEN THE PART OF 16 IS ALREADY ZONED, WHERE IT ENTERS FROM PINEY WAY?
>> THE ACCESS SO [OVERLAPPING] TO THE EXISTING HOUSE IS OF PINEY WAY.
>> IN THE PROPOSED NEW SITE, WHAT IS ON THAT PROPERTY RIGHT NOW?
>> IT'S JUST PART OF LOT 16, THERE'S NOTHING ON IT.
>> IT APPEARS TO BE A BARN OR SOMETHING, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.
>> THERE'S A BARN. IS WITH THE HOUSE GO, WHERE THE BARN IS PRESENTLY SITUATED?
I WOULD TEAR THAT BARN DOWN, AND BUILD A REALLY NICE GARAGE.
>> [OVERLAPPING] YOU'LL HAVE TO COME TO THE PODIUM.
>> WOULD YOU LEAVE THE ENTRANCE, WHERE IT IS PRESENTLY?
>> YES, I WOULD, AND FOR THE LAST 40 OR 50 YEARS, MY DAD, MYSELF, AND MY BROTHER.
WE PARK OUR TRUCKS IN THERE, AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE USED THAT FOREVER.
I DON'T KNOW WHY NOW IT'S A PROBLEM.
THERE'S FIVE MORE DRIVE WAYS SOUTH THERE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE TO GET ON THE MAJOR ROAD, VALDERAS.
WE'VE USED THAT FOR 50 YEARS AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE AN ISSUE, EVEN WITH THAT NEW ADDITION.
[00:15:02]
YOU WOULD PUT YOUR HOUSE TO THE SOUTH OF WHERE THE PRESENT BARN IS?>> YOU WILL NOT BE BEHIND 14 PINEY WAY?
>> WE'RE NOT ADDING AN ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY, WE'RE LEAVING THE ONE DRIVEWAY, THAT'S PRESENT?
>> I GUESS TO ADDRESS, MS. HASO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ON GRAVESTONE, THE REASON WHY WAS BECAUSE, THERE WAS ALREADY A CURB CUT THERE, SO ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD ALREADY HAVE THAT ENTRANCE THERE.
IT WAS ALREADY TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY ENGINEERING, IF THEY EVER PUT A HOUSE THERE, BECAUSE IT'S STILL A SINGLE LOT.
IT'S ASSUMED THAT THE CURB CUT THERE IS FOR ANYTHING THAT DEVELOPS THERE, [NOISE] AND WE ALREADY HAVE A CENTER TURN LANE GOING DOWN VALDERS.
ANY IMPACT ANALYSIS WOULD HAVE INCLUDED PROBABLY A SAFE TURN, WHICH THEY ALREADY HAVE EXISTING.
THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE ON THE GRAVESTONE.
MR. WINANS, PINEY WAY, YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY PAST THE BACK OF THIS PROPERTY, CORRECT? [NOISE] THE PROPERTY IS ADDRESSED RIGHT HERE.
>> I THINK YOU GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK.
I WAS LOOKING UP THAT SHOWS YOU AS THE OWNER ALL THE WAY BEHIND THEM, [OVERLAPPING] SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THEM IN YOUR BACKYARD, YOU WOULDN'T SEE HIM?
>> YOU'D SEE HIM FROM [INAUDIBLE] MY BACKYARD.
>> YOU'D BE CORRECT, BUT HE CAN.
THAT CAN BE FAST OR SOMETHING.
>> YOU'RE LOOKING INTO THE BACKYARD PRESENTLY, THE OTHER NEIGHBORS [OVERLAPPING]
>> COUNCIL, ANYMORE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? [NOISE]
>> PLANNING AND ZONING RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, CORRECT?
>> YES. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF BOTH THE VARIANCE, AND THE REPLARE.
>> [NOISE] DOES THE CITY OF ABLETON, DO THEY LOOK INTO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, FOR THE SUBDIVISION? THERE'S A SOMETHING FILED AT THE DISTRICT, CLERK PROPERTY RECORDS IN REGARDS TO YOUR THIS AREA, THE SUBDIVISION.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS LOOK INTO YOU DURING THESE PROCESSES?
>> WILL LET STAFF ADDRESS THAT.
>> THE CITY DOESN'T ENFORCE DEED RESTRICTIONS, THAT THOSE ARE PRIVATE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE SUBDIVISION, CITY AND FORCES THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ANGLICAN.
>> I'M LOOKING AT, JUDITH IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?
>> THAT'S FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY AS WELL.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE [INAUDIBLE] SUBDIVISION REPLAT, WITH A VARIANCE OF SECTION 23.11.C.2 PROHIBITING NEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS RUNNING ON MAJOR, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> BARELY SKIPPED ONE. THAT'S RIGHT.
>> PROHIBITING NEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS RUNNING ON MAJOR COLLECTOR FOR ARTERIAL STREETS.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I MADE MY MOTION CORRECTLY.
>> DID HE SAY [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M READING THE AGENDA THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE WAY IT SHOULD BE.
>> MR. MAYOR, I REMOVE MY MOTION AND I WILL CREATE A NEW MOTION [LAUGHTER].
I MOVE WE APPROVE THE VARIANCE SECTION 23-11.C.2A, AND APPROVE THE PROPOSED LOT 16 HANCOCK SUBDIVISION CONSOLIDATION REPLAT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT ALL CORRECTIONS ARE MADE PRIOR TO RECORDING.
[00:20:02]
>> HAVE I AMENDED MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
>> YEAH. JUST WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT HERE COUNCIL IS THAT THIS IS A MEETING ALL THE SPECIFICATION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT CURB CUT WAS ALREADY THERE ON VALDEZ AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS STILL GOING TO ABIDE BY THAT.
IN THIS CASE, THE MAJOR COLLECTOR IS STILL THE SAME AS IT WAS BEFORE.
HE'S JUST GOING TO BUILD A HOUSE ON THERE.
NOW, MY COUSINS BUILT A HOUSE BEHIND ME.
I USED TO HAVE PASTURE BEHIND ME AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN THERE MR. [INAUDIBLE], IT NEVER GET DONE WHEN YOU LOSE YOUR OPEN SPACES, BUT HE DOES MEET ALL THE CONDITIONS OF THIS SO THAT'S HOW I TAKE IT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT SIR. ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
ITEM NUMBER 6 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION AND
[6. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on Ordinance No. 20210824-006 rezoning Angleton Block 27, Lots 7 through 20 and portion of a closed alley located at 237 E. Locust Street, Angleton, TX 77515 from Commercial-General (C-G) to Central Business District (CBD).]
POSSIBLE ACTION ORDINATES NUMBER 20210824-006 REZONING ANGLETON BLOCK 27 LOT 7-20 AND PORTION OF A CLOSED ALLY LOCATED ON 237 EAST LOCUST STREET AND ANGLETON, TEXAS 77515 FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL ALSO KNOWN AS CG TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ALSO KNOWN AS CBD. YES LINDSEY.>> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
AS YOU READ, THIS IS A REZONING REQUEST FOR THE PORTION OF THAT BLOCK WHERE THE CHURCH IS RIGHT NOW AS YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN WHEN YOU DRIVE BY HAS CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND IT BECAUSE THAT IS PART OF THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE EXPANSION PROJECT.
WHAT IS NEEDED IS LOT 7-20 AND A PORTION OF AN ALLEY TO REZONE SO THAT THERE IS CONSISTENT ZONING REGULATIONS APPLIED TO THE TOTALITY OF THE PROJECT CAMPUS.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
COUNCIL WE NEED TO GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MAKE A MOTION TO ENTER A PUBLIC AGAIN.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND.
[LAUGHTER] SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. WE'RE NOW IN A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYBODY WHO WANT TO SPEAK [INAUDIBLE] ITEM NUMBER 6.
NOW EVERYBODY'S [INAUDIBLE] COUNCIL.
>> MR. MAYOR I MOVE WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THAT MOTION GOES.
NOW WE'RE IN THE DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION PHASE.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE HERE FROM THE COUNTY, SHOULD THERE BE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> WHAT DOES THIS DO? GOING TO COMMERCIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.
>> [INAUDIBLE].IT'S A GOOD ADMINISTRATIVE THING.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
>> THIS PORTION OF [INAUDIBLE] COUNTY PROJECT [INAUDIBLE] CONSULTING.
IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY [LAUGHTER].
>> BUT THIS PART IS THE NEW ADMIN BUILDING AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TO ZONING DISTRICTS.
TWO DIFFERENT SETBACKS, DIFFERENT HEIGHTS, DIFFERENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND IT'S REALLY HARD TO PLAN FOR SOMETHING WHEN YOU HAVE JUST THE ZONING FIGHTING AGAINST EACH OTHER.
THE GOAL OF THIS WOULD BE CHANGING THE CBD AND GET IT ALL IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH.
THIS PART OF THE PROJECT IS A 140,000 SQUARE FOOT NEW ADMIN BUILDING FOR THE COUNTY WHICH WILL HANDLE ACCOUNTING SERVICES.
THE OTHER PARTS OF THE PROJECT THAT ARE NOT REALLY PART OF THIS REZONING, BUT ARE PART OF A BIGGER PROJECT ARE A 140,000 EXPANSION OF THE MAIN COURTHOUSE AREA, 14,000 SQUARE FOOT EOC BUILDING AND THEN COMPLETE REMODEL THE ANNEX BUILDING.
THAT'S JUST THE OVERALL, BUT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO GET SO WE HAVE A SANE WORLD OR YOU JUST DON'T HAVE ZONING DISTRICT FIGHTING AGAINST EACH OTHER. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
>> COUNCIL MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> OKAY. SO COMMERCIAL GENERAL WOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF STORIES THAN CAN GO UP PROBABLY.
>> YES, COUNCILMAN BOOTH YOU ARE CORRECT.
THAT WILL REQUIRE A VARIANCE WHICH WILL BE HEARD AT THE AUGUST 26TH MEETING THIS WEEK.
THAT VARIANCE IS FOR A FIVE STORY BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO THE LIMITATION OF FOUR.
>> THAT THE BOA THAT'S WORTH GOING TO? BOARD OF ASSESSMENT? [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE REZONING ANGLETON BLOCK 27 LOT 7-20 IN A PORTION OF A CLOSE ALLY LOCATED AT 237 EAST LOCUS STREET ANGLETON
[00:25:02]
FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO COMMERCIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
>> ITEM NUMBER 7 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION.
[7. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action Ordinance No. 20210824-007 rezoning approximately 20.00 acres from the Commercial-General (C-G) District to the Single Family 6.3 (SF-6.3) District.]
ORDINANCE NUMBER 20210824-007 REZONING APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL ALSO KNOWN AS CG DISTRICT TO SINGLE-FAMILY 6.3 ALSO KNOWN AS SF-6.3 DISTRICT. MS. LINDSEY.>> THANK YOU MAYOR. THIS ITEM IS A PROPOSED REZONING FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL TO SINGLE-FAMILY, 6.3 DISTRICT OVER 20 ACRES.
THIS AREA IS THE PORTION OF LAND THAT IS UNDEVELOPED AND IT IS TO THE EAST OF ANGLETON BOULEVARD AND TO THE NORTH OF [INAUDIBLE].
THEY'RE PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> YES. IS ANGLETON BOULEVARD EVER BEEN BUILT OUT?
>> I ONLY BOTHERED ABOUT IT A YEAR AGO AND QUITE HONESTLY I FIND A LITTLE EMBARRASSING, BUT [OVERLAPPING] IS GOING TO BE DONE.
I MEAN, WHETHER YOU DO IT [LAUGHTER], I MEAN SOMETIME WE GET BITE BULLET AND COMPLETE THE JOB.
I CANNOT BELIEVE THE RESIDENTS ARE UP EVERY OTHER MONTH TELLING US HOW DO WE HAVE AN UNCOMPLETED ROAD.
>> IT'S EMBARRASSING THAT'S ALL SAY.
>> PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY THE PEOPLE IN AUSTIN BECAUSE THAT WAS THEIR ONLY WAY IN AND OUT FOR THE LONGEST TIME.
>> COUNCIL ARE WE HAVE GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING?
>> MR. MAYOR I MOVE WE OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
WE'RE NOW AT A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ON [INAUDIBLE] ITEM NUMBER 7.
ITEM NUMBER 7, ONCE, TWICE, THREE TIMES. COUNCIL.
>> MR. MAYOR I MOVE WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM, WRIGHT?
>> HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN.
NOW WE'RE IN TO THE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION PHASE.
>> A COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS I'VE MADE.
JUST TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THERE'S A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
ANGLETON COUNTRY OR STATE SAYS, TAKE ALL THAT ZONE 7.2.
THESE LOTS JUST IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THOSE ARE LIKE TOWN HOME LOTS.
THOSE WERE A COUPLE OF LITTLE CUL-DE-SAC, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, PLATTED, THAT'S WHAT'S ADJACENT TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER.
THE PORTION OF ANGLETON COUNTRIES STATES, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO ZONE 7.2, BUT THOSE LOTS ARE 61 FEET WIDE.
IT COMES UP WITH LITTLE [INAUDIBLE] THE AREA OF THE LOTS ARE ALREADY 200 FEET WHILE IT'S ZONED FOR 7.2.
THOSE LOTS ARE AT A MINIMUM OF 70 FEET WIDE.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THEY BUSTED THE ORDINATES IN DEVELOPING THAT.
THERE WERE [INAUDIBLE] IN AUSTIN STREETS.
COMING IN AND ASKING FOR A 6.3, I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S A DETRIMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE A PLAN OR IS THIS JUST A HOPE?
>> SOMEWHERE TO WHAT'S THERE OR?
>> WE DO HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE DEVELOPER IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK THEM SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
THIS IS THE ONLINE GROUP BEACON LAND SERVICES.
>> THANK YOU MAM. THANK YOU MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MY NAME IS ANDREW ALLEMAND FROM BEACON LAND SERVICES.
[00:30:01]
I'M THE APPLICANT FOR THE ZONING CASE, AND WE DO HAVE THE DEVELOPER HERE, TOMAHAWK DEVELOPMENT SO FIRE AWAY.[LAUGHTER] IT'S PRETTY STANDARD 60-FOOT RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
I THINK THE DEVELOPER CAN GET INTO THE QUALITY AND AESTHETICS OF THE HOME, BUT I THINK YOUR POINT WAS RIGHT ON THE LOTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA ARE ANYWHERE FROM 50 TO 65 AVERAGE WIDTH.
WE ORIGINALLY CAME IN WITH A 50-FOOT APPLICATION, OUR FIRST APPLICATION.
WE TALKED WITH STAFF AND WE REALIZE THAT IT JUST WASN'T IN CHARACTER WITH AREA, AND SO WE WENT UP TO THE 6.3 APPLICATION.
WE WORKED WITH THE COMMUNITY, HAD SOME HEADS OF COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WORKED WITH THE STAFF AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE REVISED OUR REQUEST FOR 6.3 AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT HERE TO YOU TODAY.
NOW, I'LL LET THE DEVELOPER TALK ABOUT THE STANDARD OF THE HOME, THE TYPE OF PRODUCT HE'S GOING TO DELIVER.
>> WELL, ACTUALLY, I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD ANY HOMES.
YEAH. WE DON'T HAVE A BUILDER YET SO THAT'S STILL IN PLAY.
WE HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE INTERESTED SO I CAN'T SPEAK TO REALLY EXACTLY THE TYPE OF HOME OR ANYTHING TO THAT EXTENT.
BUT INITIALLY I WANTED TO DO 50-FOOT LOTS, I WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS ON GREEN TRAILS, WHICH TECHNICALLY THEY WEREN'T TOWN HOMES, THEY WERE 44 LOTS.
BUT I THINK IT WAS A ZONE TOWN HOME.
IN ANY CASE, I WANT TO DO 50-FOOT LOTS, AND HAD A GOOD MEETING WITH STAFF, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THE CITY DOESN'T WANT 50-FOOT LOTS, WHICH IS FAIR.
THEN I WENT BACK AND LOOKED, ANGLETON HAS LOT OF 50-FOOT LOTS OR LESS COMING.
I THINK FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT FOR ME I THINK ANGLETON IS IN NEED OF 64 LOTS, AND SO I THINK IT WILL PLAY INTO MY FAVOR OR THE HOME BUILDERS FAVOR IN THE FUTURE.
>> DO YOU HAVE LIKE A CONCEPTUAL WHETHER IT IS GOING TO BE A ONE STREET, TWO STREET OR LOOP STREET BASED ON 60 FOOT LOTS?
>> WE SHALL LOOK WHAT THAT PIECE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE?
>> YES. WE'RE JUST GOING TO EXTEND DALLAS AND HOUSTON AND JUST LOOP IT AROUND.
>> WITH THE DETENTION RESERVED IN THE BACK.
>> I'M NOT SURE, THIS WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER, BUT THAT AREA IS ALREADY PLATTED, HOUSTON AND DALLAS GO ALL THE WAY TO THE FAR EAST EXTENT OF OUR PROPERTY, AND I THINK THE LOTS ARE OBVIOUSLY A LOT MORE THAN WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING ON THE PROPERTY, BUT OF COURSE, DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THEN, AND THE ANGLETON DRAINAGE DISTRICT HAS CHANGED THEIR REQUIREMENTS, AND SO WE'LL BE USING QUITE A BIT OF THAT EASTERN PORTION FOR OUR NEW DETENTION POND, MEDATIZED DETENTION POND.
>> WHAT YOUR PRICE POINT ON HOUSES THAT YOU ARE TARGETING?
>> TO BE DETERMINED. I GUESS OUR PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE IS TO CLOSE ON THE PROPERTY AT SOME POINT THIS YEAR, AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO DEVELOP IT.
WE'RE TALKING MID '22 BEFORE WE START BUILDING ANY HOMES.
WHAT'S LUMBER DOING AT THAT POINT IN TIME? AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE BUILDING HOMES.
MY GUESS WOULD BE IF THINGS STAY THE WAY THEY ARE IN THE MID 200S TO HIGH 200S.
WE CAN'T GO MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT.
>> ARE YOU PREPARED TO IMPROVE ANGLETON BOULEVARD TO THE EXTENT THAT IT'S REQUIRED FOR YOUR SUBDIVISION?
>> I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THAT, BUT THAT CAN BE UP FOR DISCUSSION.
I CAN'T SAY YES OR NO TO THAT, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED.
>> IN COUNCILMAN WRIGHT, WE DID BRING THAT UP IN OUR DEVELOPMENT ANGLETON WORKING GROUP MEETING, AND DID STATE THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO SEE ON THEIR PLANS.
>> OKAY. THEN YOU TOUCHED ON DRAINAGE, YOU'RE PUTTING DETENTION ON THE FAR EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, BUT ANGLETON BOULEVARD RIGHT THERE, THAT BIG DITCH IS THERE.
ARE YOU GOING TO TRY DRAIN YOUR WHOLE PROPERTY EAST?
>> I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A MIXTURE.
ODYSSEY ENGINEERS IS OUR ENGINEERING FIRM, AND SO I THINK A PORTION OF OUR PROPERTY WILL PROBABLY DRAIN TO THE DITCH THAT'S IN ANGLETON GOING NORTH-SOUTH.
BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE THE CAPACITY, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GRADE OUR LOTS PUSH THEM TO THE EAST.
[00:35:04]
BUT A LOT OF THAT IS IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE DRAINAGE DISTRICT RIGHT NOW.>> I WISH CRC ENGINEERING WERE,
>> WE DO HAVE A PLAN THAT'S COMING IN THIS WEEK JUST TO LET YOU KNOW.
A LOT OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS WILL BE DEALT WITH WITH STAFF AS WE GO THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS.
>> COUNCIL BOOTH, DO YOU REMEMBER HOW THE FLOW GOES OVER THERE?
>> IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE HOSPITAL DRIVE BACK TO ROAD, [INAUDIBLE] ROAD PROJECTS, THE CITY ACQUIRED PROPERTY FOR A MAJOR DRAINAGE PATH THAT CAME OFF OF HOSPITAL, WENT BEHIND TEXT AND TRIAL, CAME DOWN THE SOUTH SIDE OF TEXT AND SOUTH DIVISION ACROSS, UNDER THE HIGHWAY.
THEY'RE 35 AT [INAUDIBLE] CONTINUES ALL WAY ACROSS TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS.
A BIG DRAINAGE DITCH THROUGH THERE TO HELP ALLEVIATE FLOODING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THOSE PROPERTIES.
THAT BIG DITCH LIES ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THEY'LL HAVE A LONGER CONVERSATION WITH ANGLETON DRAINAGE DISTRICT ON HOW TO MITIGATE THE DETENTION AND SUCH AS THAT?
>> YEAH. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T THAT FLOW RIGHT BACK INTO THE DITCH AT 170.
THEN THE FAR RIGHT BACK IN THERE OR THAT, WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT CHANGE [INAUDIBLE] THE BIG DITCH THAT GOES DOWN PAST [INAUDIBLE].
>> NO, THAT'S FURTHER DOWN TO THE WEST, ON SOUTH WEST.
>> THERE'S A PLATTED ROAD ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF THIS PROPERTY.
IT GOES ALL THE WAY FROM HOSPITAL DRIVE DOWN TO THE RAILROAD.
THERE'S A SANITARY SEWER LINE IN THAT [INAUDIBLE] THERE'S ALSO SOMEWHAT OF A DITCH IN THERE, BUT IT DRAINS TO THIS BIG CHANNEL THAT WAS DUG AND EXTENDED EAST TO THE RAILROAD AND IN THE NORTHEAST UP ALONG THE RAILROAD TO [INAUDIBLE]
>> OKAY. YOU KIND OF SEE THE LIGHT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] DETENTION CUTS ACROSS AND INTO THE,.
>> BECAUSE ONE OF MY CONCERNS WAS MAKING SURE THAT IT DIDN'T FLOW BACK INTO THAT DITCH RIGHT BACK TO THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD PROBLEMS WITH THAT TYPE, THAT 210.
>> BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE CAN AFFORD PUTTING MORE FLOW IN THAT.
MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS IF YOU'RE BUILDING, BUILD THE SAME STANDARDS THAT'S ALREADY THERE, NOT CHANGING THE COMPLEXION OF THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE THERE.
SO IF YOU'RE EXTENDING DALLAS, DALLAS SHOULD LOOK SIMILAR WIDTH.
MY CONCERN IS HAVING TWO DALLAS STREETS THAT DON'T LOOK ANYTHING LIKE EACH OTHER.
ONE'S GOT A BIGGER LOT THAN THE OTHER.
WE WOULD BE CHANGING ZONING ON FOR EVERY STREET, BUT THAT'S MY CONCERN HERE.
>> THE LOTS ON DALLAS STREET AND HOUSTON STREET WEST OF ANGLETON BOULEVARD, I THINK ARE APPROXIMATELY 73 FEET WIDE.
THEN YOUR CROSSOVER ANGLETON BOULEVARD AND HIS DEVELOPMENT IS A 60 FOOT LOT.
THE LOTS ALONG BASTROP AND AUSTIN STREETS, THEY ARE ALSO 60 OR 61 FEET WIDE.
>> WELL, BUT THEN YOU LOOK AT GREEN TRAILS IN THE SAME AREA.
IT'S ENTIRELY INCONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER THAT ARE ALREADY PRESENT AND BEING PROPOSED.
[NOISE] I MEAN, I'M JUST SAYING IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE AND THEY'RE MUCH SMALLER THAN WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, SO AND THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE GROUND.
>> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO OWN THE PROPERTY BETWEEN THE HOSPITAL AND THE SUBDIVISION?
>> THE HOSPITAL STILL OWNS IT? >. YES, SIR.
>> BUT JOHN, IT'S ALSO LIKELY THE OTHER AREA THAT WE'RE DEVELOPING,
[00:40:01]
THEY DON'T MATCH UP, SO TO SPEAK.MAY LOOK IN SIMILARITY, BUT THEY DON'T QUITE MATCH BUT IT IS DISTRACTING.
>>THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DRIVE DOWN DALLAS TO GET TO THE REST OF THEIR SUBDIVISION. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?
>> THEY'RE GOING TO DRIVE DOWN HOUSTON AND GET TO IT, SO THAT'S WHAT I'M REFERRING TO.
>>WELL, I HAVE A APPRECIATION FOR STAFF FOR THE MESSAGE OF WHAT THE GUIDANCE, I BELIEVE, CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING.
I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING IN THOSE IDEAS AND INCORPORATING IT INTO A LARGER LOTS, LARGER THAN 50 ANYWAY.
>> LINDSEY, DID THIS GO TO PLANNING AND ZONING?
>> YES. THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, SIX IN FAVOR, ONE ABSENT, ZERO OPPOSED.
JUST TO SPEAK ON THE DRAINAGE, THERE IS A SIGNATURE FOR ADD ON THE PLAT SO OF COURSE, THIS WOULD NEED TO BE VETTED THROUGH THEM TOO.
I BELIEVE JEFF HAD TOLD ME, I COULDN'T REALLY HEAR THAT WELL, THAT THERE'S A DRAINAGE DITCH THAT RUNS ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS WILL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION DURING THE PLANNING PROCESS.
>> RIGHT. I JUST ALSO APPRECIATE THESE GENTLEMEN.
JUST COMING AT LEAST FORWARD AND LOOKING AT ANOTHER PART OF OUR COMMUNITY.
WE'VE UPGRADED SOMEWHAT THE AUSTIN AREA, SO DEVELOPMENTS CAN SPREAD OUT FROM NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, AND WEST.
JUST ANOTHER PIECE. WHEREVER THIS GOES AT LEAST IT'S A TRACK ON THE EAST SIDE OF TOWN THAT'S COMING UP AND HAVING SOME IMPROVEMENT ON SOME OF THE AREA.
>> HECK, THEY COULD WALK TO THE HOSPITAL, RIGHT THERE.
>> I THINK THEY DON'T NEED TO. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MAKE LIGHT OF IT. COUNCIL, WITH YOUR PLEASURE.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REZONING FROM GEC TO THE SF6.3 SINGLE-FAMILY.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, I'LL CALL FOR VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAY THE SAME. THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE'VE RUN LONG. NUMBER 8,
[8. Conduct a public hearing to consider the advisability of the creation of PID No. 5; Austin Colony Public Improvement District (the “PID”) in accordance with Local Government Code (LGC) Chapter 372.005.]
CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE ADVISABILITY OF THE CREATION OF PID NUMBER 5, AUSTIN COLONY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, ALSO KNOWN AS P-I-D, PID, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, ALSO KNOWN AS LGC CHAPTER 372.005.ANYBODY GOING TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THAT? [INAUDIBLE] WE GOT TO GO TO A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> [INAUDIBLE]. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND AND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN, SVOBODA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAY THE SAME.
WE'RE NOW AT A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ON FOR AND AGAINST ITEM NUMBER 8? ITEM NUMBER 8, GOING ONCE.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING THIS.
THERE'S BEEN TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO CHANGE.
WE'RE WORKING VERY WELL WITH STAFF AND WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY IS WHAT WE'RE DOING. THANK YOU.
>> I'M HERE READY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> MY APOLOGIES, MR. RAY. I'M SORRY, I WAS CALLING BY YOUR FIRST NAME, MR. RAY.
>> NO WORRIES. I'VE BEEN CALLED WORSE. [LAUGHTER]
>> ALL RIGHT, ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR AND AGAINST NUMBER 8? NUMBER 8. LAST CALL, COUNCIL.
>> WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAY THE SAME. THAT MOTION CARRIES.
THAT'S ALL WE NEED FOR NUMBER 8, CHRIS? THAT BRINGS US TO THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM.
GENTLEMEN PLEASE, IF I COULD, I'D LIKE TO START OFF IN THE MIDDLE.
[00:45:03]
I DO HAVE TO GO TO WORK TONIGHT, SO I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE FOR SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS.I'D LIKE TO START WITH NUMBER 17 AND THEN WORK THAT AWAY AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AROUND IF WE GET THROUGH SOME OF THIS.
I FEEL THAT THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING WHERE WE HAVE A LOT OF POSITIVE ENERGY AND WE'RE NOT GETTING BOGGED DOWN BECAUSE IT GETS LATE IN THE DAY.
[BACKGROUND] I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THROUGH THIS.
AUDIENCE, I DO APOLOGIZE, BUT I DO WANT TO BE HERE FOR SOME OF THIS DISCUSSION.
>> MAYOR, I DO HAVE ONE [INAUDIBLE]
>> THIS IS THE FIRST TIME [INAUDIBLE] FIRST. [LAUGHTER]
>> ONLY BECAUSE IT'S BEEN [INAUDIBLE].
HE'S BEEN SO GRACIOUS THAT HE ENDS UP STAYING HERE TILL MIDNIGHT, AND THEN HE'S HERE THE NEXT MORNING.
I WILL GO AHEAD AND DO NUMBER 9 [LAUGHTER].
FIRST WE DO HAVE POTENTIALLY MAYBE HE MAY HAVE SOME INFORMATION FOR US IN REGARDS TO COVID BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING AN ISSUE WITH THE CAUSE OF RISE.
[9. Discussion and possible action on any of Governor Abbott’s latest executive orders, Brazoria County’s emergency declarations and impacts on the City of Angleton and how to proceed with city business in the future.]
>> IS THIS AN HONORARY THING OR SOMETHING [OVERLAPPING]
>> NUMBER 9 DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE GOVERNOR ABBOT'S LATEST EXECUTIVE ORDERS RESORT KENNEDY'S EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS THAT IMPACT ON THE CITY OF ANGLETON AND HOW TO PROCEED WITH CITY BUSINESS IN THE FUTURE [OVERLAPPING].
THERE I [INAUDIBLE] THE NUMBERS HAVE BEEN RISING EXPONENTIALLY.
THE LAST FEW WEEKS, WE'VE REACHED THE POINT WHERE ANGLETON IS AVERAGING ABOUT 25 NEW CASES A DAY WHICH IS COMMENSURATE WITH THE COUNTY AS SEEING A LOT AS WELL.
THEY HAD ANOTHER BIG DAY TODAY.
MONDAYS, OF COURSE, THEY'VE GOT THE AVERAGE.
WE AVERAGED ALL WE HAD 99 SINCE FRIDAY.
THAT'S HOW WE GET THAT THE 25, BUT BEFORE THAT WE WERE SEEING 23, 28 NEW CASES DAY.
WE'RE STILL SEEING SOME RECOVERIES.
WE HAVEN'T EXPERIENCED A DEATH IN THE MUNICIPALITY IN ALMOST A WEEK NOW, THAT'S GOOD.
SOME CHANGES THAT ARE COMING ON WITH THE JAIL AS YOU PROBABLY HEARD THE COUNTY JAIL HAS HAD TO LIMIT THEIR INTAKE.
THEY'RE NOT CLOSING DOWN, BUT THEY'RE NOT TAKING THEIR TAKING FELONIES AND ABOVE AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SIMILAR TO WHERE WE WERE LAST SPRING.
WE'RE ALSO SEEING SOME NUMBERS BACK UP TO WHERE WE WERE LAST SPRING.
OUR AVERAGE DAILY NEW CASE COUNT PER 100,000 RESIDENTS IS 83.5.
THAT'S MEASURED TO WHAT WE SAW BACK IN JANUARY AND IN THE EARLIER BOOM BACK IN JULY AND AUGUST.
THE GOVERNOR HAD POINTED OUT SOMETHING YESTERDAY.
THERE'S A NATIONAL TREND THAT SEEING A SMALL BREAK THAT WE MAY HAVE REACHED THE PEAK, BUT THAT'S NATIONWIDE.
YOU JUST LIKE RECESSIONS AND OTHER THINGS, YOU DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'VE PEAKED AND YOU'RE ON THE DOWNSIDE UNTIL YOU'RE ON THE DOWNSIDE.
THAT'S SOME OF THE STUFF WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT HASN'T BEEN OTHER THAN THE FEW LOCAL THINGS AND THE COUNTY JAIL THING THAT I'D MENTIONED, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY NEW CHANGES.
NO NEW LEGISLATION AS FAR AS THE CITY, WE'RE ENCOURAGING MASKS IN PUBLIC MEETINGS.
AS MUCH AS WE CAN REMOTE MEETINGS AND SPACING OUT AS WE HAVE MEETINGS IN PLACE.
A LOT OF RESIDENTS HAVE BEEN COMING INTO CITY HALL AND THEY BEEN WEARING MASKS AND THEY BEEN SOCIAL DISTANCING WILLINGLY.
WE'RE SEEING THAT SOME OF THE OTHER FACILITIES AS WELL, OUR RESIDENTS ARE REALLY BEHIND THIS.
THE BIGGEST OTHER NEWS IS THE PFIZER HAS REACHED FDA APPROVAL.
NOW IT IS A FULLY ENDORSED AND WHAT WE SHOULD BE SEEING NEXT MONTH IS THE MADONNA REACHING THE SAME LEVEL OF BEING APPROVED BY THE FDA FINAL.
ALSO ANOTHER DIRECTION IN THE BOOSTER SHOT.
LAST WEEK, THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WERE RECOMMENDING BOOSTER SHOT FOR FOLKS WHO ARE IMMUNOCOMPROMISED AND THEY WILL BE EXAMINING NEXT MONTH AND MAY MAKE A DECISION ON BOOSTER SHOTS MOVING FORWARD ON THAT.
THE MORE THAT WILL KEEP FOLKS COME INTO OUR HOSPITALS AND KEEP COMING TO OUR VOLUNTEER VACCINATION SPOTS TO GET VACCINATED.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE'VE BEEN ACCOMMODATING THE CALL FOR THAT WITH NOTHING TO HERCULEAN LIKE NOT WE EVER SEEN IN THE SPRING AND WE KEEP MOVING FORWARD.
WE'RE KEEPING AN EYE ON THAT AREA OF DISTURBED WEATHER IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL CARIBBEAN.
AGAIN, THERE'S JUST SO MUCH UNKNOWN ON IT.
THEY'VE GOT CLEAR MODELS ON THE TWO OTHER STORMS THAT ARE OUT IN THE ATLANTIC ABOUT THIS ONE HAS THEY GOT.
YOU PROBABLY SEEN MODELS THAT GO ANYWHERE FROM NORTHERN MEXICO TO NEW ORLEANS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GLENN?
>> I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO START WITH 23 AND 24 SINCE
[23. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-023 making findings in connection with the proposed Austin Colony Public Improvement District No. 5 related to the advisability of the improvements, the nature of the improvements, the estimated cost of the improvements, the boundaries of the proposed district, the method of assessment and the apportionment of cost between the district and the city as a whole; and making other findings related to the district. (Part 1 of 2)]
THAT FALLS IN LINE WITH THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER 8 [OVERLAPPING].>> OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND JUMP TO NUMBER 2,3
[00:50:01]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 2, 0, 2, 1, 0, 8, 2,4-0, 2, 3 MAKING FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED AUSTIN COLONY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 RELATE TO THE ADVISABILITY OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED DISTRICT, THE METHOD OF THE ASSESSMENT, AND THE PROPORTIONATE OF COST BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE AND MAKING OTHER FINDINGS RELATED TO THE DISTRICT.>> DOES ANYBODY WANT TO SPEAK ON THAT NUMBER 23? KRISTI HAVE.
>> I THINK WE HAVE JOHN SCHNEIDER FROM P3 ONLINE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR JOHN? THIS IS REALLY UNDER THE PID POLICY, PHASE 1 WHICH IS THE FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT AND SHOULD YOU AGREE TO MOVE ON, THEN WE WOULD MOVE ON TO PHASE 2 AND PHASE 3.
>> GOT YOU. THIS IS JUST THE PROGRESSION OF GETTING TO ANY, SHOULD WE GET THERE.
YOU SAID WE HAVE MR. SCHNEIDER IS ON THE PHONE OR IN HERE?
>> HE'S ON ZOOM. CAN YOU HEAR US MR. SCHNEIDER?
>> PLEASE BEAR WITH US WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO CONNECT WITH MR. SCHNEIDER.
IN THE EVENT COUNCIL HAS THE QUESTIONS.
HE MAY HAVE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO BE AT THE VERY END [LAUGHTER].
DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> THERE HE IS. YOU THERE, MR. SCHNEIDER?
>> YES, SIR. THERE'S A LITTLE FEEDBACK.
>> THAT'S RIGHT. YOU WOULD THINK 18 MONTHS INTO THIS.
>> CAN WE TABLE 23 AND MOVE ON TO A DIFFERENT SUBJECT?
>> JUST SIT HERE. WE'LL GET LINED UP.
>> WHILE YOU'RE TRYING TO RECONNECT WITH HIM, VERSUS 23 AND 24 GO HAND IN HAND.
[17. Discussion and possible action on a waiver of the preliminary acceptance of public improvements and public improvements acceptance of the Heritage Oaks Section 7 subdivision public improvements.]
WHILE HE'S TRYING TO RECONNECT.DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A WAIVER OF THE PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ACCEPTANCE OF THE HERITAGE OAKS SECTION 7 SUBDIVISION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. MS. LINDSAY?
>> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WE HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ACCEPTANCE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, MEANS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO HAVE HOUSES ALL OVER THE GROUND. PRETTY COOL.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, THIS IS ALSO A PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE WAIVER REQUEST, JUST LIKE WE'VE DONE FOR THE LAST COUPLE, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ACCEPTANCE DISCUSSIONS, AND THAT COMES WITH A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
THIS IS FOR THE HERITAGE OAKS SECTION 7, WHICH STAFF WORKED LAST MONTH.
PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THERE WAS VERY SHORT PUNCH LIST OF ITEMS THAT WAS [NOISE] FIXED IN A VERY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> WE'VE GOT ONE HERE IF YOU WANT I CAN PUT THEM ON TO MY MIC.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FOR ITEM NUMBER 17 FOR MS. LINDSAY OR STAFF?
[00:55:03]
>> STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT YOU GRANT THE PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE WAIVER AND ACCEPT THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITH A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM WRIGHT.
SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN THE ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE BOND FOR HERITAGE OAKS NUMBER 7.
>> FOR THE RECORD, THAT'S A THUMBS UP.
>> FOR THOSE THAT COULDN'T SEE ON CAMERA, THE DEVELOPER IS IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM AND HE GAVE US A THUMBS UP. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> [OVERLAPPING] THIS IS WHY THE FIRST SIX SECTIONS WERE DONE ALSO, SO NOT CHANGING ANYTHING.
>> ALL RIGHT. IF THERE'S NO MORE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE, SAME SIGN.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.
[23. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-023 making findings in connection with the proposed Austin Colony Public Improvement District No. 5 related to the advisability of the improvements, the nature of the improvements, the estimated cost of the improvements, the boundaries of the proposed district, the method of assessment and the apportionment of cost between the district and the city as a whole; and making other findings related to the district. (Part 2 of 2)]
WE'RE BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 23.I WON'T READ IT AGAIN, BUT I BELIEVE MR. CHRIS, MR. SNYDER'S ON THE PHONE, RIGHT?
>> OKAY. MR. SNYDER, CAN YOU HEAR US?
>> YEAH SIR, I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.
>> AWESOME. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR MR. SNYDER DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU WANT TO REFER TO OUR ITEM NUMBER 23?
>> NO, IT'S REALLY FOR ITEM 24, WHERE YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE CREATION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.
WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU'RE NOT LETTING ANY ASSESSMENTS.
THERE'S NO DEBT THAT'S BEING ISSUED.
IT'S SIMPLY DRAWING THE LINE AROUND THE PROPERTY.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS GIVING US DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN AND INDICATING THAT YOU ALREADY DONE, AS CHRIS SAID, MOVE INTO PHASE 2, AND MOVE FORWARD WITH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT, IT'S THE FIRST STEP OF MANY, BUT IT IS THE FIRST STEP THAT LEADS YOU DOWN TO THAT PATH.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT.
COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> YEAH. MY FIRST QUESTION IS, IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, YOU STATE THAT THE PID HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY P3 CITY STAFF AND CITY ATTORNEY AND FOUND TO BE FEASIBLE.
THEN THE EMAIL I SEE THAT CAME THROUGH SAYS, P3, WELL, PREPAREDNESS AP THAT IS FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE AND COMPLIES WITH THE PID ACT.
IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S BEEN SATISFIED THERE.
>> LISTEN JOHN, I CAN CHIME IN A LITTLE BIT.
WE HAVE DONE SOME PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY WORK AND WE'VE RUN NUMBERS ALONG WITH THE FMS WHO'S THE BOND UNDERWRITER, SHARED THOSE WITH MR. RAY.
I THINK ALL OF US ARE IN AGREEMENT RIGHT NOW ON THE SET OF NUMBERS, BUT WE HAVEN'T FULLY ADOPTED OR DRAFTED THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN YET FOR ALL TO CONSIDER.
BUT, BASED ON THE NUMBERS WE'VE SEEN AND THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT HAVE GONE IN, I THINK WE'RE FEELING GOOD ABOUT WHERE WE ARE, BUT OBVIOUSLY, ONCE WE GET INTO DRAFTING THE ACTUAL DOCUMENTS THERE'S PROBABLY DILIGENCE, BUT WE'RE NOT STARTING FROM SCRATCH IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
WE HAVE RUN FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND EVERYTHING IS CHECKING OUT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE TOTAL EQUIVALENT TAX RATE IS AND BOND STRUCTURE.
AGAIN, WE'LL START THERE, WE'LL FIND THAT AS WE MOVE DOWN THE LINE, BUT WHATEVER WE DO PRESENT TO YOU WILL BE VETTED BY JOE MORROW, YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR WHO I KNOW IS ON THE LINE, AS WELL AS MYSELF AND BOND COUNSEL.
>> OKAY. IT IS JUST CONCERNING BECAUSE I SAW THAT EMAIL FROM YOU AND I SAW IT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE OR YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE, BUT ASSUMES TO BE.
THEN I SAW THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FROM THE STAFF AND SAYS IT IS SO I WAS WONDERING WHICH ONE IS IT?
>> MAYOR PRO TEM, I JUST WANT TO ADD ON TO WHAT JOHN JUST SAID.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE RESOLUTION THAT'S ATTACHED, THE PURPOSE OF THIS MATTER TODAY ARE TO MAKE THOSE FINDINGS THERE, SO IT'S TWO DISTINCT THINGS, DEFINING IS OKAY.
THESE ARE THE EXPENSES WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DISTRICT VERSUS WHAT COMES LATER ON WHEN YOUR BOND COUNSEL AND EVERYBODY WEIGHS IN ABOUT, LIKE THESE ARE HOW THE NUMBERS ARE GOING TO WORK.
>> YEAH. BECAUSE I SAW THAT MY EMAIL ON THE OTHER TWO DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ASKING.
I SAW THOSE. I SAW AUSTIN COLLINS JUST TWO LINES. I FEEL BETTER ABOUT THAT.
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FOR MR. SNYDER? ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL, ITEM NUMBER 23.
>> WHAT'S THE TIME FRAME AFTER WE TAKE ACTION ON THIS, MR. SNYDER?
>> THE TIME FRAME ON THE OVERALL PID?
>> IF YOU DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT ON CREATING THE PID, I THINK MR. RAY IS READY TO GET GOING ON CONSTRUCTION,
[01:00:03]
BUT I THINK CONVERSATIONS WITH THE UNDERWRITER AND THEN, I BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE SUGGESTING THAT THEY TRY TO GET MOST OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INSTALLED AND ISSUE BONDS ON A REIMBURSEMENT BASIS.I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE AT THE EARLY SPRING OF NEXT YEAR AND POSSIBLY EARLIER IF YOU CAN STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, IN TERMS OF WHAT'S IN THE ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION BONDS.
>> OKAY. TELL ME IF I'M GETTING TOO AHEAD OF MYSELF, BUT THE BONDS, HAVE WE DECIDED WHO'S ISSUING THE BONDS? THE CITY'S GOING TO ISSUE BONDS? I THINK IT WAS YOU THAT CAME AND TALKED TO US ABOUT THE CITIBANK PID OR THE DEVELOPERS ABOUT THE PID, RIGHT?
>> THERE'S WHAT PEOPLE REFER TO OFTEN AS CASHFLOW PIDS AND THERE'S ONE OF THOSE ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT AS WELL, WHERE THE DEVELOPER JUST RECEIVES THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS OVER A PERIOD OF, IT'S TYPICALLY 30 YEARS AND THERE'S NO DEBT ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
MORE COMMON OR REALLY, THE MOST COMMON STRUCTURE IS A BONDED PID WHERE THE CITY'S ACTING AS A CONDUIT AND SO THE CITY IS ISSUING THE DEBT, BUT IT'S NOT PLEDGING ITS GENERAL CREDIT TO THE DEBT.
IT'S A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE BONDS.
IT'S SECURED SOLELY BY THE ASSESSMENTS LIVING WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
>> OKAY. IN THE CASE OF BANKRUPTCY OF A DEVELOPMENT WHO'S ON THE HOOK FOR THE PID.
>> THE WAY THAT IT WORKS IS THE ASSESSMENTS ARE THE SECURITY, WHOEVER OWNS THE LAND, SO THE DEVELOPER OR HOME BUILDER OR A HOMEOWNER, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSMENTS, SO THEY DON'T PAY, THEN IT'S JUST LIKE PROPERTIES TAXES.
THE COUNTY WOULD COMMENCE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS AND THOSE PROCEEDS WOULD BE USED TO PAY THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENT.
THERE'S NO ACCELERATION, SO IF THERE'S A TOTAL ASSESSMENT OF $10,000 THAT'S PAID OVER 30 YEARS, THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS PROBABLY $750.
ALL THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAY WOULD BE THAT $750 TO BRING IT OUT OF THE BANKRUPTCY OR TO SECURE THE FORECLOSURE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAY OFF THE FULL $10,000.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE ADMINISTER A WHOLE LOT OF THESE THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND I'VE YET TO SEE A PROPERTY GO THROUGH FORECLOSURE.
THAT BEING SAID, IT HAS BEEN A PRETTY GOOD ECONOMY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
I'M SURE THAT'LL CHANGE TO SOME EXTENT, BUT IT'S FAR FROM COMMON.
WE HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS COMMENCE YET.
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FOR MR. SNYDER? ALL RIGHT.
COUNCIL, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? [NOISE] [BACKGROUND]
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE. WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-023, MAKING FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED AUSTIN COLONY, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 RELATED TO THE ADVISABILITY OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE ESTIMATED COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED DISTRICT, THE METHOD OF THE ASSESSMENT AND THE APPORTIONMENT COST BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE, AND MAKING OTHER FINDINGS RELATED TO THE DISTRICT.
>> MOTION BY MAYOR PORTE WRIGHT, SECOND BY [BACKGROUND] COUNCILMAN TALSON.
>> OH, I'M SORRY. I WAS LOOKING AT YOU, I THOUGHT I SAW YOUR LIPS MOVE. [LAUGHTER]
>> SORRY. A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN [BACKGROUND].
>> SECOND BY [BACKGROUND] MAN, AND I GOT TO GO TO WORK TONIGHT. I HOPE YOU STAY UP ALL NIGHT.
>> I KNOW. ANYWAY, WE HAVE A MOTION, SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAME SIGN.
[24. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-024 authorizing the establishment of the Austin Colony Public Improvement District in the City of Angleton, Texas; authorizing publication of this resolution, providing for the preparation of a service and assessment plan; and making other provisions related to the subject.]
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-024, AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE AUSTIN COLONY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF THIS RESOLUTION, PROVIDING FOR THE PREPARATION OF A SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.MR. SNYDER, YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT?
>> NO, SIR. THIS IS REALLY JUST CONTINUATION OF THE DISCUSSION.
THIS ACTION, IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE CREATED IN THE DISTRICT IF YOU CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS?
>> WHEN WILL WE KNOW THE NUMBERS?
>> I CAN GIVE YOU SOME GENERAL NUMBERS NOW.
[01:05:01]
IN TERMS OF WHAT THE TOTAL ASSESSMENT WOULD BE AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE $11.5 MILLION, THE AVERAGE ASSESSMENT PER LOT WOULD BE IN THE ROUGHLY $22,000 RANGE AND THAT WOULD EQUATE TO ABOUT A 16 TO $1700 ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS.WE'VE GONE THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF THE FEASIBILITY.
WHAT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO IS WORKING WITH YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR, JIM MORROW, AND FMSBONDS TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE STRUCTURE IT BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT OF UNDERWRITING CRITERIA THAT THEY GOING TO HAVE TO WEIGH INTO IN TERMS OF VALUE BETWEEN REQUIREMENTS AND HOLD BACK PROVISIONS OR IF YOU SPLIT IT UP INTO MULTIPLE BONDS.
ALL THAT SORT OF STUFF HAS TO BE WORKED OUT.
IN ANY CASE, WHAT THE ASSESSMENT IS AND THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENT TYPICALLY REMAINS THE SAME.
IT'S MORE A FUNCTION OF WHEN THE BONDS ARE SOLD OR HOW THE BONDS ARE BROKEN UP.
BUT THE ASSESSMENT IS GENERALLY GOING TO BE THOSE DOLLAR AMOUNTS THAT I DESCRIBED.
I BELIEVE MR. MORRIS'S ON THE PHONE IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT.
>> YES. AGAIN, THAT'S A DISCUSSION OF COUNCIL.
I'VE SEEN SOME THAT HAVE BEEN AS LOW AS 20 YEARS, 30 YEARS BY FAR THE MOST COMMON WITH A FEW THAT HAS GONE UP TO 35 YEARS.
>> USUALLY GOING ALONG WITH THE MORTGAGE 30 YEARS IS PROBABLY.
>> I THINK THAT'S THE RATIONALE, BUT YEAH, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 90-95 PERCENT OF THE PIT BONDS I'VE SEEN HAD BEEN 30 YEARS.
>> OKAY. I HATE TO ASK THIS QUESTION, I'M GOING TO THROW A WRENCH IN THIS WHOLE THING BUT, MR. RAY, THAT SECTION THAT'S A COMMERCIAL, IS THAT PART OF THE PIT AS WELL THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ASSESS THAT PROPERTY IF YOU SELL IT AS A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.
DOES IT GET ASSESSED A PIT AS WELL?
>> TOO LATE TO DETERMINE THAT THING, JOHN, YOU WANT TO HELP ME.
HOPEFULLY, WE HAD IN THE AGREEMENTS AND WE HAVE SUBMITTED OR WILL SUBMIT TO THE CITY IS THAT SECTION 5, THAT'S THE LAST SECTION.
IF IT IS COMMERCIAL, I THINK IT'S TO BE DETERMINE WHETHER IT STAYS IN THE PIT OR THE CITY CUTS OUT OF THE PIT.
THERE'S SOME OTHER FINANCING AGREEMENT.
COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, IT CAN BE, THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH IT.
BUT IF IT'S RESIDENTIAL, IT STAYS IN THE PIT.
WE COMBINE SECTIONS 1 AND 2, WE COMBINE SECTIONS 3 AND 4.
WE DON'T COMBINE FIVE WITH ANYTHING.
IT'S ALL BY ITSELF, [BACKGROUND] IT LEAVES IT THE FLEXIBILITY TO BE COMMERCIAL.
>> OKAY. HOW DOES THAT WORK, MR. SNYDER, FOR YOU ON THE PIT?
SANDY, I BELIEVE THAT SECTION 5 IS NEXT TO SECTION 3 AND 4; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> NO. SECTION 5 IS IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF SECTION 2.
IT'S THE NORTH EASTERN 50 ACRES OR PLUS OR MINUS OF 164 ACRE TRACT.
>> RIGHT. ESSENTIALLY, TO SAY IT SIMPLY, WE'VE KICKED THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD?
>> WHAT HE WOULD BE DOING IS STARTING TO COME IN AND WE'D CALL IT THE PROVEN AREAS, THAT WOULD BE SECTION 1 AND SECTION 2.
THE ASSESSMENTS THAT WOULD BE LEVIED AND THE BONDS THAT WOULD BE ISSUED WOULD BE SOLELY SECURED BY SECTION 1 AND SECTION 2.
>> THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE WOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT.
THEN WHEN HE CAME BACK AND SAID, OKAY, I'M READY TO MOVE INTO IMPROVEMENT AREA 2, AT THAT TIME A DECISION WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE ABOUT IS IT COMMERCIAL OR IS IT RESIDENTIAL.
IF IT'S COMMERCIAL, DOES IT WANT TO BE INCLUDED OR IS IT CARVED OUT? I THINK THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT DECISION WILL BE MADE.
WHEN I SAY THE DECISION WILL BE MADE BOTH AT THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST, BUT THE CITY ULTIMATELY IS THE ONE MAKING THE DECISION IN TERMS OF APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE AND DECIDING WHAT THE ASSESSMENT IS, IF ANY, ON COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL.
>> ALSO, I'D LIKE TO REMIND COUNCIL THAT WE WILL BE DOING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
THERE'S ALSO A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT NEGOTIATED.
WE HAVE OTHER THINGS COMING DOWN THE PIPE THAT MAY ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES.
>> I JUST WANT TO ASK THAT QUESTION, MAKE SURE EVERYONE HEARS IT BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE THAT I WAS CONCERNED.
WE'VE NEVER HAD A COMMERCIAL PIECE IN A PIT, SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW THAT WORKS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. RAY. THANK YOU. MR. SCHNEIDER.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FOR THE TWO GENTLEMEN THAT HAVE PRESENTED SO FAR? COUNCIL, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE?
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-24, AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
[01:10:01]
THE AUSTIN COLONY PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF ANGLETON, AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF THE RESOLUTION, PROVIDING FOR THEIR PREPARATION OF A SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN, AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE SUBJECT.>> THAT'S YOU. THAT'S ALL YOU.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
MR. [INAUDIBLE] LOOK THIS WAY.
I HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM [INAUDIBLE] SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> YES, THERE IS AGAIN AN INCORRECT DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTAL OF PROPERTY [OVERLAPPING] IN THIS RESOLUTION.
IT'S AN INCOMPLETE DESCRIPTION.
MAYBE WE SHOULD JUST TYPE THAT PIECE WITH PDF AND DELETE IT [LAUGHTER].
>> WHICH PORTION? [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION, MEETS AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION ENDS RIGHT BEHIND A PLAT LEADER.
>> CAN YOU TELL ME WHICH PAGE OF THE RESOLUTION IT'S ON?
>> LET ME GET DOWN THERE TO IT.
[OVERLAPPING] PAGE 517, 518. [OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE]
>> FIVE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN [INAUDIBLE]
I WANT AT LEAST ONE MORE PAGE OR TWO MORE PAGES TO THE DESCRIPTION HERE.
IF YOU TRY TO DESCRIPTION, IT'S NOT I'M 23 AND PUT IT IN HERE IN 24, YOU'VE GOT THE RIGHT THING.
>> OKAY. I THINK [INAUDIBLE] IN HIS HERE, SO THEY JUST HEARD YOU SAY THAT [LAUGHTER].
>> YOU HAVE THE RIGHT DESCRIPTION IN THE PACKET. [INAUDIBLE] 23.
>> I JUST DIDN'T GET TRANSMITTED.
>> WE WILL MAKE SURE IT GETS CORRECTED.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE THE MOTION WITH A NOTED CORRECTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE SAME SIGN.
NOW WE'LL WORK OUR WAY BACKWARDS.
[18. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-018 determining costs of the proposed public improvements in the Riverwood Ranch Public Improvement District, approving a proposed assessment roll, and making related findings and determinations, in accordance with chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code.]
NUMBER 18, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-018 DETERMINING COST OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE RIVERWOOD RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT APPROVING A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLE AND MAKING RELATED FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. CHRIS GO AHEAD.>> THIS STARTED A LONG TIME AGO.
>> WE'VE MADE MANY ADVANCES ON IT.
WE ADOPTED THE PID POLICY RECENTLY REALLY THIS IS PRE THAT.
THEY'RE REALLY NEED TO GO WHEN THE PHASE 2 AND MOVE THE PIT ON.
>> THIS IS THE CATCH-UP PIECE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT MOVING TO THIS POINT, BUT NOW BECAUSE THE PID POLICY WE'RE PUTTING IT IN THE MOTION.
>> I THINK IT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2020?
>> YES. [INAUDIBLE] I THINK NOVEMBER I THINK SOMEBODY'S IN NOVEMBER 2020 STANDS OUT.
>> AGAIN, WE'VE ALREADY MOVE THIS FORWARD.
WE'RE JUST DOING THE CATCH-UP TO MOVE THIS ALL.
>> THE MORE FORMALIZATION PIECES.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE.
>> I THINK I DO SEE A REPRESENTATIVE OF RIVERWOOD RANCH IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT IF WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM.
COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? WE LOST SOMEBODY.
>> WHERE IS THE DEVELOPER'S TAKE ON THIS? HE CAME ALL THIS WAY [LAUGHTER]. GIVE HIM TIME.
>> MICHAEL, WE JUST WANT TO HEAR YOU SPEAK [INAUDIBLE]
>> SIR, MICHAEL [INAUDIBLE] DID A LOT OF THE WORK ON THE PID, SO I HAD TO PLAY A LOT OF CATCH-UP.
THIS MIGHT LOOK A LITTLE BIT LIKE DEJA VU.
WE ALREADY APPROVED THE SERVICE AND ASSESSMENT PLAN BACK IN 2020.
BUT ONCE JOHN GOT VAULT OF THE PROCESS, HE SAID HE DOESN'T THINK OUR ORIGINAL PLAN WOULD GET THROUGH THE AG'S OFFICE.
WE THOUGHT WE SHOULD REVISE AND DO A NEW DRAFT OF IT.
HE JUST POPPED IT UP AND ADDED A LOT MORE EXHIBITS AND MADE IT JUST A LOT MORE CLEAR, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES GOING FORWARD WITH THE HOMEOWNERS.
>> MR. SCHNEIDER, YOU'RE THERE?
>> OKAY. WE'RE ON THE RESOLUTIONS FOR PID FOR RIVERWOOD RANCH.
JOHN, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR HIM?
>> CAN YOU WALK US THROUGH YOUR EMAIL ON THE SAP ON RIVERWOOD RANCH?
>> SORRY, YOU CUT OUT THERE. YOU SAID THE EMAIL ON RIVERWOOD RANCH ON THE ONE THAT I SENT ON MONDAY MORNING?
[01:15:03]
>> SURE. AGAIN, THERE'S TWO IMPROVEMENT AREAS.
YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT IN A PRIVATE AREA LIKE A PHASE.
THE FIRST, IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE FIRST HALF OF THE PROJECT IS THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE ASSESSING RIGHT NOW.
IT'D BE A $5,180,000 ASSESSMENT.
YOU CAN SEE THE RANGE OF THE ASSESSMENTS FOR A 45, 50 YEARS 60 [INAUDIBLE] IS RANGING FROM 24,000, 330 UP TO 28,842.
THE PROJECT DOES ANTICIPATE ISSUING [INAUDIBLE] BONDS.
RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL HOMES.
IN ORDER TO SELL HOMES, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE ASSESSMENT LEVIED, OR ELSE THE HOMESTEAD ATTACHES BEFORE THE ASSESSMENT AND WE GET INTO ISSUES ON SECURITY FOR THE PRE-ASSESSMENT AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE BONDS.
SINCE WE DON'T HAVE ANY BONDS, IT'LL BE SECURED BY A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS.
THE STATE LAW OUTLINES WHAT INTEREST RATE YOU'RE ALLOWED TO CHARGE IN A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT IT IN SIMPLE TERMS IT'S TWO PERCENT ABOVE A MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX, TYPICALLY THE INDEX IS USED AS THE 20 BOND INDEX AND THAT'S CURRENTLY SITTING RIGHT AROUND TWO PERCENT OR JUST ABOVE.
WE'VE ASSUMED FOUR PERCENT AS THE INTEREST RATE WHICH SHOULD BE ABOVE THE ASSESSMENTS IN TWO WEEKS.
THAT PUTS THE OVERALL PROJECT AT A TOTAL TAX RATE WHEN YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION CITY COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE THIRD [INAUDIBLE] $3.50.
THAT NUMBER IS HIGH ELSEWHERE IN TEXAS.
IT'S COMPLETELY NORMAL DOWN IN THE HOUSTON MARKET, JUST GIVEN THAT MY [INAUDIBLE] CHARGE WELL ABOVE A DOLLAR.
THE 3.50 FROM THE MARGIN VARIANTS SEEMS TO BE NOT UNCOMMON THAT WE'VE HAD SOME DEVELOPERS WAS THAT THEY THINK THEY CAN MARKET FOUR DOLLARS AND NOT GETTING A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM HOME BUILDERS.
ON TOP OF THAT THERE WAS A PRELIMINARY PROJECT FINANCE PLAN AND THAT'LL BE COMING BACK.
WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WILL GET THE TERMS BOARD TO MEET.
THE TERMS IS GOING TO BE USED RATHER THAN FUNDING IMPROVEMENTS DIRECTLY.
IT'LL BE USED TO FIND THAT ASSESSMENT DOWN.
THE PROPERTY OWNERS, INSTEAD OF HAVING A $3.52 EQUIVALENT TAX RATE.
THE [INAUDIBLE] WILL HELP OFFSET THAT A LITTLE BIT AND BRING IT DOWN TO ABOUT $3.33.
ULTIMATELY ONCE BONDS ARE ISSUED, THEN HIS SAP WILL BE UPDATED AND THE INTEREST RATE WILL MATCH THE INTEREST RATE ON THE BONDS AND THE DEBT SERVICE AND ALL THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS WILL MATCH THAT OF THE BONDS.
THERE IS A DISCUSSION OF THE BANK QUALIFIED THAT.
JOE, IF YOU ARE ON, IF YOU WANT TO HOP ON YOU CAN DISCUSS HOW THAT WORKS AND THE REMEDY THAT YOU'VE BEEN DISCUSSING WITH [INAUDIBLE].
>> [NOISE] YEAH. THANK YOU, JOHN.
BANK QUALIFIED DEBT IS A DESIGNATION UNDER FEDERAL TAX LAW THAT ALLOWS PURCHASERS OF THE DEBT TO TAKE A CREDIT.
IF YOU'RE A BANK, YOU CAN TAKE A CREDIT.
WE'RE BUYING BANK QUALIFIED DEBT, SO IT MAKES IT ATTRACTIVE TO THE INSTITUTIONAL.
THAT TRANSLATES INTO A LOWER COST OF BORROWING.
WE SEE ANYWHERE IT CHANGES OVER TIME BASED ON DEMAND BUT WE'VE SEEN SPREADS AS WIDE AS 35, 40 BASIS POINTS ON THE LONG IN.
USUALLY IT'S AN AVERAGE OF ANYWHERE FROM 20, 25, MAYBE 30 BASIS POINTS ACROSS A 20-YEAR SPREAD.
YOU DON'T SEE SPREADS GET TOO MUCH WIDER BETWEEN 20 AND 30 YEARS IF THE YEAR OCCURS USUALLY PRETTY FLAT OUT THERE ON THE BANK QUALIFIED SPREAD.
THE BENEFIT OF BANK QUALIFIED IS TO THE CITY.
WHENEVER YOU SELL 10 MILLION IN ISSUE PRICE, WHICH ISN'T EXACTLY PAR, IT'S A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN 10 MILLION PAR.
BUT AS LONG AS YOU'RE SELLING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OF DEBT, YOU CAN TAKE THIS DESIGNATION AND YOU'RE ABLE TO SELL YOUR DEBT AT A LOWER INTEREST COST.
NOW, IN SOME YEARS IT WON'T MATTER.
LIKE IN 2022, IT MIGHT BE THAT BECAUSE THE CITY MAY SELL EIGHT MILLION,
[01:20:02]
MAYBE MORE THAN EIGHT MILLION, MAYBE LESS, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE IN THAT VICINITY THAT IF A PID COMES ALONG OR TWO PIDS COME ALONG AND ALSO SELL DEBT, THEIR ISSUANCE IS GOING TO COUNT AGAINST YOUR $10 MILLION LIMIT.YOU COULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE BECAUSE YOU NEED TO BORROW MONEY AND THE PIDS WOULD LIKE TO BORROW MONEY, THAT IT MIGHT COST YOU AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT IN INTEREST OVER THE LIFE OF YOUR BONDS WHEN YOUR PID POLICY THAT YOU PASSED ADDRESSES THIS.
I THINK IT DOES AN EXCELLENT JOB.
IT SPELLS IT OUT BEAUTIFULLY OF HOW THAT SHOULD BE HANDLED.
THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE FOR SOME OF THESE PIDS THAT WERE APPROVED AND GOT GOING BEFORE YOU PASSED YOUR PID POLICY THAT THEY WOULD ADOPT THIS BANK QUALIFIED INTO THEIR AGREEMENT.
THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT I WILL LEAVE TO OTHERS WITH MORE EDUCATION AND DEGREES TO WORK OUT HOW THAT WOULD BE DONE, BASICALLY THE LAWYERS.
BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.
THAT'S THE ONLY REAL HESITATION THAT I WOULD HAVE AT THIS MOMENT IS, CAN WE AT LEAST PURSUE GETTING SOME TYPE OF AN AGREEMENT IN THE EVENT THAT THERE MIGHT BE A SITUATION WHERE IT WOULD COST YOU MONEY TO ALLOW THE PIDS TO ISSUE THEIR DEBT BECAUSE IT WOULD IMPACT THE ABILITY OF YOU TO TAKE THE BANK QUALIFIED DESIGNATION, THAT THERE'S A WAY FOR YOU TO RECOUP THAT COST.
I GUESS THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE YOU JUST SAY, SORRY PID, WE'RE SELLING AN F DEBT THAT WE CAN'T ALLOW YOU TO GO FORWARD THIS YEAR, WE THINK THERE WILL BE SPACE FOR YOU IN THE NEXT YEAR.
BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY A GOOD LONG-TERM SOLUTION BECAUSE YOU ARE A GROWING CITY.
THERE WILL COME A TIME IN THE VERY NEAR TERM WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO BE ACCESSING THE MARKETS MORE FREQUENTLY AND FOR LARGER AMOUNTS AS YOU FIND YOURSELF TURNING INTO A RAPID GROWTH CITY.
THAT'S THE ISSUE I WANTED TO SET UP FOR DISCUSSION.
I'D BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE RELATIVE TO THAT.
>> MR. MARA, WE DO PLAN TO ISSUE DEBT WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS FOR SURE IF NOT MULTIPLE TIMES ISSUE DEBT.
THE SCENARIO YOU'RE LAYING OUT ACTUALLY WILL HAPPEN AND THAT WILL CAUSE US [OVERLAPPING]
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S HIGHLY LIKELY WHICH IS WHY I THINK IT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.
>> JOE DID ADDRESS THAT AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIAL FUTURE SCENARIOS FOR BONDS AND STUFF.
WE DID REACH OUT TO MR. FOLEY, AND HE INDICATED THAT HE WAS WILLING TO PAY THOSE FEES.
>> TO PAY THE ADDITIONAL INTEREST THAT WE CATCH?
>> THAT'S IN THE CONTRACT SOMEWHERE?
>> WELL, THIS IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT.
BECAUSE OF THE DISCOVERY OF THE UNDERWRITING ISSUES, THIS WAS NOT A THING THAT WE NEEDED TO BE AWARE OF PREVIOUSLY, BUT WE KNOW NOW.
WE'VE KNOWN FOR ABOUT A WEEK AND WE'VE ALREADY REACHED OUT TO THE DEVELOPERS AND WE WILL DO SOMETHING.
WE DO HAVE A WRITING, BUT IT'S JUST EMAIL RIGHT NOW, BUT WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING ELSE AS WELL.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE COVERED.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MARA FOR THAT EXPLANATION IN THAT BRIEF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
>> YES. THE $ 5.18 MILLION TOTAL ASSESSMENT, THAT'S FOR THE TOTAL AREA OF ONE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE ASSOCIATED COSTS FOR THAT AREA 1?
>> THAT IS ONLY FOR IMPROVEMENT AREA 1.
THERE WILL BE A SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT AREA 2 AND I GET IT.
>> THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION IS YES?
[01:25:02]
I ASKED IF IT IS $5.18 MILLION WAS JUST FOR IMPROVEMENT AREA 1?>> HE'S FINISHED CONSTRUCTION ON SECTION 1.
THOSE WERE HARD NUMBERS WE KNOW WHAT THAT COST IS.
SECTION 2, ARE THOSE NUMBERS FROM A CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL OR IS THIS A PRETTY CLOSE APPROXIMATION, THIS 5.18, OR HOW DO WE COME UP WITH THIS $5.18 MILLION?
>> WE HAVE AN ENGINEER'S OPINION ON PROBABLE COSTS ON THE TOTAL COST OF THE IMPROVEMENTS, SO THAT'S PART OF WHAT WENT INTO IT.
THEN IT'S ALSO JUST LOOKING AT WHAT IS THE TOTAL EQUIVALENT TAX RATES AND WHAT'S THE MOST ULTIMATE BONDING CAPACITY AND DISCUSSIONS WITH THE UNDERWRITER.
THESE NUMBERS IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN HERE HAVE BEEN RUN BY FMS BONDS.
THEY'VE RUN THEIR FMS MODEL IN TERMS OF WHAT THE BONDING CAPACITY COULD LOOK LIKE.
THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THIS PROJECT REQUIRES THAT 25 PERCENT OF THE HOME MUST BE ON THE GROUND BEFORE THE BONDS ARE SOLD.
THAT'S WHY OFTENTIMES WE'LL BE REALLY ISSUING BONDS AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDING AN ASSESSMENT.
THIS CASE WE WILL COME BACK IN PROBABLY FIRST-QUARTER AND MAYBE IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR, ONCE THEY HAVE 25 PERCENT OF THOSE ROOFTOPS, THEN THEY CAN SELL BONDS [INAUDIBLE] REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT AND COMPLY WITH THAT.
>> WHAT HAPPENS IN IMPROVEMENT AREA 2? DO WE HAVE A WHOLE ANOTHER SET OF NUMBERS THAT WILL RUN OR DOES IT ALL BECOME A BIG COMPOSITE?
>> IMPROVEMENT AREA 2, WE BASICALLY COME BACK AND WE'LL DO AN AMENDED AND RESTATED SAP.
IT WON'T PROBABLY DOUBLE IN PAGES, BUT ITS PRETTY CLOSE.
IF WE JUST COME BACK AND DESCRIBE EVERYTHING, WE'RE DOING IN IMPROVEMENT AREA 2.
THE REASON WE DO THAT IS IT KEEPS US FROM HAVING TO COME BACK WHERE WE FORM A PID FOR JUST IMPROVEMENT AREA 1 AND THIS IS A SIMILAR PID OF IMPROVEMENT AREA 2 IS THE SAME LOAN OF PID.
GET TO CALL PUBLIC HEARINGS AND A LOT OF MAILING NOTICES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT AT LEAST SIMPLIFIES THE PROCESS QUITE A BIT WHEN YOU CAN HAVE ONE PID AND THEN BREAK IT INTO MULTIPLE AGREEMENT AREAS.
>> COUNCIL, ANYMORE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?
THE STANDARD THERE, 3.339 TAX RATE YOU'RE MENTIONING IS NORMAL FOR THE HOUSTON AREA BUT KIND OF HIGH.
DID YOU DO ANY COMPARISONS TO THE TAX RATES IN BRAZORIA COUNTY SPECIFICALLY? BECAUSE 3.339 IS PRETTY HIGH IN BRAZORIA COUNTY STANDARDS.
I THINK WE ARE JUST UNDER 3.1 NOW, MAYBE THREE HERE IN ANGLETON.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMPARISONS BASICALLY FOR THAT RATE?
>> I CAN DEFINITELY GET SOME BY GATHERING.
WHEN I'M REFERENCING THAT, I'M REALLY MAKING REFERENCE TO THE MEDS.
WHENEVER MEDS ARE IN THE AREA, THEY'RE GENERALLY GOING TO BE IN THAT BALLPARK.
TYPICALLY THE [INAUDIBLE] THAN I CAME BUT OFTENTIMES THEY'RE IN A $1.30 OR $1.50 BUT THEY ARE ADDING ONTO THOSE EQUIVALENT TAX RATES.
HERE WE'D BE ADDING THAT 77 CENTS BUT THEN THAT GETS BROUGHT DOWN BY THE CURVES TO BRING IT REALLY DOWN TO ABOUT THAT 3.30 LEVEL.
JOE, I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN YOU WORK WITH MEDS IN BRAZORIA COUNTY, BUT YOU MIGHT ASK THEM INFORMATION ON WHAT THE TAX RATES ARE SPECIFIC IN THAT AREA.
>> SORRY, IT TOOK ME A MINUTE TO FIND MY UNMUTE BUTTON AGAIN.
MUDS TYPICALLY DO HAVE A HIGHER RATE, THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN PIDS IN THAT A TAX RATE WILL TEND TO DECREASE OVER TIME FOR A MUD AS THEY BUILD ON MORE VALUE.
THERE'S DIFFERENT ADVANTAGES TO EACH BUT THE BIG ADVANTAGE THAT I SEE WITH A PID, IS YOU DON'T HAVE ANOTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION WITHIN YOUR CITY.
HOMEOWNER HAS A SET ENDPOINT RIGHT THERE,
[01:30:05]
THEY HAVE AN ASSESSMENT AND IT'S FOR 30 YEARS AND THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION TO PREPAY THAT.IF I GOT 15 YEARS INTO IT AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, DECIDED I WANTED TO PAY OFF MY PID, I COULD DO IT.
IN A MUD, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
I ALWAYS LOOK AT A MUD AND GO, THE WORST THING TO DO IS BE ONE OF THE FIRST BUYERS OF A HOME IN A MUD BECAUSE THEY TYPICALLY DON'T END, THE MUD JUST STAYS.
YOU ALL HAVE PROBABLY SEEN THAT IN HEARD OF MUDS THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR 40 YEARS PLUS, THEY TEND TO JUST STAY THERE IN YOUR TAX.
IF YOU'RE THAT FIRST HOMEOWNER, YOU GET TO PAY FOR EVERYBODY'S IMPROVEMENTS AND THEN CONTINUE ON.
THAT'S ONE OF THE DISTINCT ADVANTAGES THAT I SEE WITH PIDS AND YES, THEY MAY LOOK LIKE A BRAND NEW MUD INITIALLY.
BUT I TELL YOU WHAT, I COULDN'T LOOK AND PULL SOME TOPS YOU.
THAT'S INFORMATION THAT I HAVE FAIRLY READILY AVAILABLE AND I'LL LOOK AT SOME NEARBY MUDS THAT ARE JUST GETTING THEIR LEGS UNDERNEATH THEM AND THAT'S A FAIRCOP.
IF YOU LIKE, I CAN ALSO PULL SOME THAT ARE [NOISE] VERY MATURE. [OVERLAPPING]
>>THEY MAY HAVE FINISHED THEIR DEVELOPMENT, BUT THEY'RE STILL IN EXISTENCE AND THEY'RE STILL TAXING AND THAT INITIAL HOMEOWNER HAS NEVER STOPPED PAYING.
>> THAT'D BE GREAT. THANK YOU.
>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS? COUNSEL, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE?
>> YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THE SEVERAL BACK ON THE [OVERLAPPING].
>> IS THAT IN THE MOTION WHERE IT SAYS, I'M MAKING RELATED FINDINGS IN THE TERMINATIONS THAT COVER YOU?
>> YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S IN THE AGENDA SUMMARY, SO WE HAVE IT IN THE PACKET.
SO YES, THAT IS A SUBJECT THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT GETS CLARIFIED IN RESULT.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON.
THIS IS REALLY MAKING A DETERMINATION OF COST AND THE NEXT ITEM WOULD BE SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
RIGHT NOW, NEITHER OF THESE ITEMS, 18 OR 19, WOULD BE LOVING ANY ASSESSMENTS.
WE'LL BE COMING BACK AT A SUBSEQUENT COUNCIL MEETING, I BELIEVES DOES SEPTEMBER 14TH, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, AND THAT IS WHEN WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE PROPOSING TO LEVY THE ASSESSMENTS.
WE'D HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME HERE TO WORK THROUGH AND MEDIA SHEETS AND DO THE RESEARCH YOU'VE ASKED FOR.
>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-018, DETERMINING COSTS OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE RIVER WOOD RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, APPROVING PROPOSAL ASSESSMENT ROLE, MAKING RELATED FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS AND ACCORDING TO THE CHAPTERS 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY MAYOR PRO [INAUDIBLE] RIGHT, DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING OUT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE?
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN? THAT MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM NUMBER 19, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-019,
[19. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-019 calling a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for the Riverwood Ranch Public Improvement District and authorizing required notice thereof.]
CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR THE RIVER WOOD RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING REQUIRED NOTICE THEREOF.>> MR. MAYOR, I MOVE WE APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-019, CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS OF THE RIVER WOOD RANCH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZING REQUIRED NOTICE THEREOF.
>> I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> MOTION BY [INAUDIBLE], SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN? [BACKGROUND] THAT MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM NUMBER 20, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION AND RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-020,
[20. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-020 determining costs of the proposed public improvements in the Kiber Reserve Public Improvement District, approving a proposed assessment roll, and making related findings and determinations, in accordance with chapter 372 of the Texas Local Government Code.]
DETERMINING COST OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT IN THE KHYBER RESERVED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, APPROVING A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLE AND MAKING RELATED FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. CHRIS, YOU WANT TO?>> SHERIFF. AGAIN, ITEMS 20 AND 21 ARE VERY SIMILAR TO RIVER WOOD.
[01:35:04]
THE BIG DIFFERENCE IS THAT RIVER WOOD IS PROPOSING TO ISSUE BONDS, KHYBER RESERVE IS NOT.THIS WOULD SIMPLY BE A CASH FLOW BED WHERE THE ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS ARE COLLECTED AND PAINTED THE DEVELOPER OVER THAT 30-YEAR PERIOD TO REIMBURSE THEM FOR THE COST OF THE INCREMENTS.
THE TOTAL ASSESSMENTS ABOUT 1,780,000 AND AGAIN, THAT EQUATES TO ABOUT 1,200 AND IT ESCALATES SLIGHTLY OVER TIME.
BUT WITHOUT THE COST, IT IS BASICALLY $1,275 A YEAR.
[NOISE] I THINK I SAW THE PACKET, IT SAID $1,000 A YEAR, THAT WOULD BE ORIGINAL PIXEL THE INTEREST COMPONENTS THAT THE DEVELOPER ASKED TO INCREASE THAT SLIGHTLY BECAUSE THEY WERE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE PID POLICY, THAT 10 PERCENT OF THE ASSESSMENT AMOUNT WILL BE PAID TO THE CITY AND SO THEY REQUESTED THAT THEY COULD FUND MORE OF THEIR COSTS SO THAT THEY COULD CLAIM SOME OF THAT PAYMENT THEY WOULD GET IT.
OUTSIDE THE PID THAT WAS THE IDEA BEHIND THIS, SO THAT ALL POINT DID GO UP A LITTLE BIT TO ABOUT, AS I SAID, $1,200 AND SOME DOLLARS PER UNIT PER YEAR.
>> THAT'S THE PHASE 3 OF THE PID POLICY THEY TALKED ABOUT.
>> IN THIS CASE, THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T GET PAID UNTIL WE GET PAID, RIGHT?
>> [NOISE] IF YOU'RE LOOKING FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, A LITTLE BETTER READING THE MATH BECAUSE THE IDEA HERE IS THAT THE ASSESSMENTS ARE LEVIED, THAT 10 PERCENT FEE IS PAID UPFRONT, AND THEN THEY'RE REPAID OVER 30 YEARS.
THEY'D BE GETTING THEIR PAYMENTS OVER 30 YEARS IN THE CITY TO GET AN FB UPFRONT.
>> OKAY, JOHN. WE HAVE MR. KANE HERE, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD, [OVERLAPPING] TO STAIRCASE? THANK YOU. MR. SNYDER, WE HAVE KANE HERE WITH THE KHYBER RESERVE.
>> DOES THIS PID COVER BOTH SECTIONS OF THE SUBDIVISION?
>> YES, SIR. IT DOES ALL 93 LOTS.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [NOISE] WE'LL BE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD, THIS WINS, SOUNDS LIKE [OVERLAPPING] IT.
THAT WAS MANY HURDLES. COUNCIL, WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE?
>> I ACTUALLY COMING FROM THIS ITEM.
>> LAST CALL, ANY ACTION COMING OUT OF HERE.
>> MAY I MAKE A REQUEST TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 20210824-020?
>> YOU'D HAVE TO READ ALL THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS DETERMINING COST OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE KHYBER RESERVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, APPROVING A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLE IN MAKING RELATED FINDINGS INTO DETERMINATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 372 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
>> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GAN GORE SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SABOTA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSING SAME SIGN.
>> OKAY, 4-2, THAT MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM NUMBER 21, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-021,
[21. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-021 calling a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for the Kiber Reserve Public Improvement District and authorizing required notice thereof.]
CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR THE KHYBER RESERVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND AUTHORIZER REQUIRED NOTICE THEREOF.IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS JUST THE STANDARD FORMALITY TO [OVERLAPPING] CALL THE HEARING.
COUNCIL, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR MOTION?
[01:40:10]
>> MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-021, A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE CITY OF ANGLETON CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE KHYBER RESERVE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN AUTHORIZING REQUIRED NOTICE THEREOF.
>> HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN GAN GORE SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SABOTA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSING SAME SIGN.
WE ARE TACKLING ITEM NUMBER 22, CORRECT? FROM CITY STAFF.
>> IT'S BEING PULLED FOR THE AGENDA.
>> PULL FOR THE AGENDA. THANK YOU.
LET'S FLIP BACK UP TO THE TOP.
PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR LETTING US BOUNCE AROUND AND WE APPRECIATE THAT.
WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NUMBER 10 PRESENTATION ON A COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT FOR
[10. Presentation on the Community Assessment for Site Selection by Mike Barnes of Mike Barnes Group, Inc.]
SITE SELECTION BY MICHAEL BARDS OF THE MIKE BARNES GROUP, INC. MS. MARTHA.>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
I'M HERE TONIGHT TO INTRODUCE MIKE BARNES, WHO WILL PRESENT THE FINDINGS FROM HIS COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT, INCISAL EDGE AND SITE SELECTION.
>> BY THE WAY, WE BUDGET OF RAM TO DO OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR INDUSTRY AND COMMERCIAL, SO ASSUMING THE BUDGET PASSES, YOU'LL BE SEEING AS BASE AGAIN IN HIS PRESENCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> I WAS IN HOPES THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO THE PRESENTATION IN THAT HOW SHE STARTED HER COMMENTS.
THAT WAS WHAT I WAS IN HOPES OF THEREOF. LET'S SEE.
MY BEST FRIEND IN HERE WILL NOT BE THAT CHRIS, BUT THE CHRIS OVER HERE BECAUSE WHEN THE CONSTANT [LAUGHTER] TECHNOLOGY ON ABOUT A ROADKILL ON THAT HIGHWAY, I'M GIVING YOU THAT OBSERVATION UP FRONT, PLEASE ADVISE ME COUNCIL MEMBERS AS TO THE DEGREE OF TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IN THEIR PACKETS, DO THEY HAVE THE FULL REPORT OR THE POWERPOINT OR BOTH? [BACKGROUND] THEY HAVE THIS.
HAVE THEY SEEN THE FULL REPORT? [BACKGROUND] THEY HAVE? [OVERLAPPING] THIS IS A SYNOPSIS OF THE 35 PLUS PAGE OR A REPORT THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED.
FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE BACK HERE AGAIN.
IN SPITE OF SOME OF THE VERY CONCERNING COMMENTS COMING FROM SOME OF YOUR STAFF, I UNDERSTAND THEY'VE TAKEN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDS AND DISTRIBUTE THEM WITH AND AMONG CERTAIN THINGS AS PARK IMPROVEMENTS.
[LAUGHTER] BUT SINCE THAT'S A STATUTORY MATTER, THAT'S WELL ABOVE MY PAY GRADE, AND I WILL TRY NOT TO BE TOO DIFFICULT.
BASICALLY, IN TERMS OF DOING A COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS GET A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WHERE YOU ARE IN THE WORLD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
I WOULDN'T BE A CONSULTANT WITHOUT A BRIEFCASE 50 MILES, PLUS I'M ACTUALLY ABOUT FOUR HOURS FROM HOME, IF I DIDN'T AT LEAST DISCUSS SOME STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, AND THREATS.
WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS SLIDE, AND PLEASE, I WELCOME YOUR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AT ANY TIME, WHEN SITES SELECTORS, COMPANY'S CORPORATE REAL ESTATE FOLKS EVALUATED COMMUNITY, THEY TYPICALLY LOOK AT THOSE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE HERE, SIDED SITE SELECTION FACTORS.
IT VARIES FROM PROJECT TO PROJECT, AND IN THE FULL REPORT WHICH YOU'VE SEEN, WE TRIED TO DEMONSTRATE HOW SOME OF THIS TYPE OF PROJECT WOULD MAYBE ELEVATE LABOR.
THE OTHER TYPE OF PROJECT MAY ELEVATE THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
THE REAL CONCERN TODAY, IF YOU PUT A KNIFE TO MY THROAT AND PLEASE DON'T AND MADE ME RESPOND TO A QUESTION, I THINK PROBABLY ON BALANCE, THE NUMBER 1 CRITERIA TODAY IS WORKFORCE AND EDUCATION UNIFORMLY.
THAT'S NOT TO SUGGEST THAT SOME PROJECTS, IT'S NOT AS HIGH A PRIORITY.
BUT ARE THERE ANY, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU ARE IN REAL ESTATE IN THIS WORLD WITH THE REAL ESTATE MANTRA USED TO BE WHAT, LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION.
THE NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANTRA IS EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION.
THIS IS PART OF OUR VISION TEST, AND SINCE I BROKE MY CURRENT PRESCRIPTION,
[01:45:02]
EVEN I CAN'T READ THE CONTENTS.BASICALLY, WHAT WE WANTED TO DO WAS WE WERE VERY FORTUNATE IN DOING SO.
I WANT TO REACH OUT AND THANK THIS CHRIS AND MARTHA FOR PUTTING TOGETHER SOME VERY IMPORTANT BROAD-BASED COMMUNITY FOLKS, SO WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET IN FRONT THEREOF AND SEEK THEIR INPUT.
WHAT THOSE CIRCLES WITH THAT MICROSCOPIC FONT BASICALLY SAYS IS THAT'S WHAT WE DID.
WE HAD SOME VERY GOOD MEETINGS.
WE HAD SOME GOOD ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEWS WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS.
I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH A NUMBER OF YOU.
WE TRIED TO CAST AS WIDE A NET AS TIME IN WHATEVER ALLOWED.
I WANT TO JUST GET STRAIGHT INTO, IF YOU WILL, THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF IT.
IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR BUSINESS CLIMATE, ONE OF THE BEST THINGS ABOUT ANGLETON IS THAT ANGLETON IS IN TEXAS. WHY DO I SAY THAT? WELL, THE TEXAS BUSINESS CLIMATE IS CONSISTENTLY RANKED IN THE TOP THREE, TYPICALLY ONE OR TWO, BY ALMOST EVERY RANKING ENTITY OUT THERE.
IT'S NOT LIKE, AND I WORKED BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, AND I DON'T MEAN TO OFFEND MY ATTORNEY FRIEND, NOT SIMULTANEOUSLY THOUGH.
WE WORK FOR COMPANIES IN THEIR RELOCATION PROJECTS AS WELL AS WE WORKED WITH A TON OF COMMUNITY-BASED GROUPS.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS CAN YOU IMAGINE, WE TRIED TO LOCATE A $400 MILLION PROJECT IN A CERTAIN COMMUNITY IN CONNECTICUT.
I WAS WORKING FOR A CLIENT AFTER ONE WEEK ON THE GROUND, WE HUDDLED BACK AND THEY WERE ACTUALLY A DALLAS METRO BASED CLIENT.
THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER BROUGHT ALL THE TEAM IN AND HE SAID, "WHAT'S YOUR CONSENSUS?" I SAID, "HEDGE YOUR BET AND GET OUT OF HERE AS FAST AS YOU CAN." THUS MEANING THE CONNECTICUT BUSINESS CLIMATE WAS NOT PARTICULARLY USER-FRIENDLY.
BUT YOU'VE GOT A FAIR AMOUNT OF STRENGTHS.
MOST OF THOSE YOU'RE WELL-AWARE OF, YOUR LOCATION IS A GOOD STRENGTH.
HOUSTON METRO RIGHT NOW CONTINUES TO BE ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING METROS IN THE UNITED STATES.
THIS IS AN ODD FACT, IT'S NOT UP THERE.
BUT HISTORICALLY, EVEN THOUGH DALLAS-FORT WORTH METROPLEX IS SMALLER IN TERMS OF POPULATION, IT HAS HISTORICALLY OUTPACED THE HOUSTON METRO FOR LOGISTICS, WAREHOUSING, AND DISTRIBUTION.
POST HARVEY. GREATER HOUSTON, THAT INCLUDES THE WHOLE MSA, HAS FAR OUTPACED DFW.
NOW, IF I'M SITTING IN A CORPORATE OFFICE AND MY CORPORATE REAL ESTATE OR MY OUTSOURCE SITE SELECTOR COMES TO ME AND SAID, "WE'RE GOING TO LOCATE YOU IN THE GREATER HOUSTON AREA," AND I'M LOOKING AT A WEATHER REPORT, AND I SEE THOSE FILMS, DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN THE WATER WAS UP AT THEIR FLY OVERS? I MIGHT HAVE SCRATCHED MY HEAD.
BUT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE DATA PIECES THAT IS AMAZING.
IN SPITE OF ALL THAT, THEN ACTUALLY IT'S GROWING AT THE ENDS, WHICH GIVES YOU AN ADDED BUSINESS CLIMATE COMPETITION, WHAT I CONSIDER A PLUS.
WEAKNESSES. BOY, HOW DO WE TELL THE FOLKS THAT I'M WAITING TO GET A FINAL CHECK FROM, THAT THEY HAVE WEAKNESSES? YOUR WEAKNESSES, YOU'RE NOT KNOWN.
YOU DON'T HAVE A RECOGNIZABLE IDENTITY.
I DON'T THINK IN THE WORLD OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, SITE LOCATION, WHATEVER THAT ANGLETON IS KNOWN, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A WEAKNESS, BUT IT'S FAR BETTER THAN BEING KNOWN IN THE NEGATIVE.
YOU'VE GOT A VERY SOLID FOUNDATION TO BUILD.
YOU'VE GOT A CLEAN SLATE, IN ESSENCE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES, I THINK YOU'D HAVE A TON OF OPPORTUNITIES.
I WAS DISCUSSING WITH ONE OF THE DEVELOPERS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
HE SAID, "WELL, GIVE ME THE SUMMARY." I SAID THE SUMMARY THAT I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU IS THE BONES ARE GOOD.
THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT WOULD ENVY YOUR ASSETS AND PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO THE BUSINESS CLIMATE.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD AND I HAVE TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT'S THE QUICKEST DOOR TO GET TO THAT SADLY, AT TIMES, THE PROCESS IS PERCEIVED AS CUMBERSOME IN TERMS OF FROM A TO Z WITH PERMITTING, WITH GOING THROUGH THE ISSUES AND WE'VE HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
I MANAGED TO ESCAPE THAT DAY WITH ONLY A BLOODY NOSE AS OPPOSED TO A BROKEN ONE.
[01:50:04]
BUT IF WE WERE TO GO INTO ANY COMMUNITY AND I BROUGHT 20 DEVELOPERS IN, GUESS WHAT, 19 OF THEM WOULD TELL ME WHAT I JUST SAID.HOWEVER, I HEARD IT ENOUGH AND I THINK REALISTIC SUPPORT THAT IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT IF I WERE WEARING YOUR COLLECTIVE HATS AS POLICYMAKERS, I WOULD BE SENSITIVE TO.
KEEP IN MIND THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE IN THE POLICY-MAKING AND IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE OF THIS, YOU'VE GOT 10,000 COMPETITORS, WHOSE GOAL IS TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOUR GOAL IS WITH REGARD TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
AGAIN, YOU'VE GOT SOME REALLY GOOD STRENGTHS.
I DIDN'T HEAR ANY HORROR STORIES ABOUT PRE-K THROUGH 12. I HEARD NO HORRORS.
YOU'VE GOT ACCESS TO JOB TRAINING.
I KNOW THOSE PROGRAMS ARE AVAILABLE.
YOU'VE GOT COMMUNITY COLLEGES.
I'M NOT A GOLFER, BUT I SOMETIMES USE GOLF ANALOGIES.
YOU'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A THREE WOOD FROM SOME OF THE FINEST UNIVERSITIES [LAUGHTER] IN THE COUNTRY IF YOU CAN POACH FROM HOUSTON.
THE GOOD THING ABOUT IT IS IN TODAY'S GLOBAL ECONOMY, YOU CAN POACH ALL YOU WANT.
IN FACT, IF YOU'RE IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'RE NOT POACHING, YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT DOING A VERY EFFECTIVE JOB.
YOU DIMINISH YOUR WEAKNESSES AND YOU HIGHLIGHT EVERYBODY WITHIN MORTAR FIRE, SO TO SPEAK, OF YOUR ASSETS.
I THINK YOU'RE IN REALLY GOOD SHAPE ON BALANCE.
WHAT I DON'T KNOW AND THAT'S BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN TRIED TO DATE IS YOU'VE NOT LOCATED AN XYZ COMPANY.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW WELL THAT TRAINING WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, HOW QUICKLY IT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED.
THAT'S ONE OF THOSE LOOMING THREATS.
BUT UNTIL PROVEN THAT IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE, I HAVE NO REASON TO THINK THAT IT COULDN'T BE DONE.
I WORKED WITH WORKFORCE SKILLS FOLKS ACROSS THE STATE IN A VARIETY OF MARKETS.
I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT WOULD HINDER YOUR ABILITY AS A COMMUNITY TO USE ALL OF THOSE ASSETS.
WHAT DO WE GOT HERE? INFRASTRUCTURE SITES, YOUR HIGHWAY ACCESS IS GREAT.
I MEAN PEOPLE FORGET, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOUR LEADS ARE BEING GENERATED.
I SUSPECT THE STATE IN TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN TEXAS, YOU'LL GET LEADS FROM THE STATE, YOU'LL GET LEADS FROM YOUR UTILITY COMPANIES, YOU'LL GET LEADS, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE QUASI PUBLIC LEADS, YOU'LL GET LEADS PRESUMABLY FROM YOUR FRIENDS, I HOPE AT BRAZORIA COUNTY.
I MENTIONED [LAUGHTER] THAT A LITTLE LATER.
THEY'RE INTEGRATED, THEY DO TEAM TEXAS THERE OUT THERE MARKETING ALL THE TIME.
BUT WHAT ELSE YOU SHOULD BE GETTING LEADS ARE FROM THE BIG-TIME COMMERCIAL BROKERS AND INDUSTRIAL BROKERS.
I'M CONVINCED THAT IF WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE THOSE FOLKS AWARE, PARTICULARLY OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE, OUR SURFACE TRANSPORTATION, WERE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY, YEAH, WE CAN POACH.
TO SOME INTERNATIONAL AIRPORTS.
WE'VE GOT PORTS BY THE DOZEN, IF YOU WILL, IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
ON BALANCE, I THINK YOU'RE IN REALLY PRETTY GOOD SHAPE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
LET ME STEP BACK AND SAY, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOUR SITES.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE GOT A 400, WELL, I DO KNOW I'M BEING HYPOTHETICAL.
DO YOU HAVE A 400-ACRE SITE BUSINESS PARK THAT'S FULLY INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT YOU COULD MARKET TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORLD TODAY? NOW, I SAW A PIECE ON YOUR AGENDA EARLIER AND I WAS UNFAMILIAR, IT WAS SOMETHING ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE SOMETHING IN ONE OF YOUR BUSINESS PARKS.
TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, ONE OF OUR CLIENTS, WE'RE VERY FORTUNATE A DEVELOPER CAME IN AND DID A 300-ACRE BUSINESS PART.
WITHIN FOUR MONTHS OF CONSTRUCTION, IT'S IN THE HOUSTON MARKET.
IT WAS 1,027,000 SQUARE FEET TO BE SPECIFIC, WAS LEASED OR OCCUPIED IN A TOWN THAT'S ROUGHLY ONE-THIRD YOUR SIZE? IT CAN BE DONE. NOW THEY'VE GOT ITN.
BUT YOU'VE GOT, IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME THERE'S SOME FOUR-LANE MEDIUM HIGHWAYS THAT ARE PRETTY WELL HERE.
[01:55:01]
BUT I THINK IF I WERE GIVING YOU A NEGATIVE HIT, I'D PROBABLY GIVE IT AT YOUR AVAILABLE SITES THAT ARE SHOVELED, THE OLD CLICHE SHOVEL-READY, AND CAN BE TURNED OVER.ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WILL COMMENT, MANY OF YOUR COMPETITORS HAVE 300-ACRE BUSINESS PARKS.
THE ONE THAT I CITED IS NOT AMONG THOSE, BUT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENTITY OR THE CITY OR SOME FOUNDATION OWNS, AND THEY CAN NEGOTIATE THE SALE OF LAND ANYWHERE FROM ZERO OR A DOLLAR TO MARKET VALUE.
THEY INCORPORATE THAT IN THEIR INCENTIVE POLICIES.
QUALITY OF LIFE. WELL, THAT'S THE POACHER'S POACH RIGHT THERE.
I MEAN, YOU ALL HAVE THE BALLET.
YOU CLEAR YOUR THROAT, SAY WE CERTAINLY DO.
PRO SPORTS, COLLEGE SPORTS, AND THEN AS MUCH AS I LIKE TO GIVE THIS YOUNG LADY THAT TAKES YOUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, HALF SENT STATIC.
[LAUGHTER] YOU'VE GOT SOME PRETTY GOOD QUALITY OF LIFE PIECES WITH REGARD TO YOUR PARKS.
AS I DRIVE IN, I MEAN, AND MY GIS EVERY TIME I COME HERE, TAKES ME A DIFFERENT WAY WHICH I ENJOY IT.
YOU'VE GOT SOME VERY NICE PARKS.
YOU CAN POACH FOR THE OTHER LARGER QUALITY OF LIFE.
I MEAN, I LIVE ROUGHLY DEPENDING ON RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC BETWEEN 45 MINUTES IN AN HOUR FROM AUSTIN.
I GO TO AUSTIN CONCERTS AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AUSTIN UT SPORTS.
I DON'T HAVE A HORSE IN THE RACE.
I'M JUST A GUY THAT LIKES SPORTS.
I'M FROM THE REAL INDIANA UNIVERSITY, LARRY BIRD, AS A MATTER OF FACT.
BUT WE DON'T THINK ANYTHING OF GOING INTO AUSTIN.
I LIVE MIDWAY BETWEEN AUSTIN AND SAN ANTONIO.
IF I WANT TO SEE THE SPURS, I CAN GO TO SAN ANTONIO, IF I WANT TO GO WATCH UT FOOTBALL.
THAT'S THE CLOSEST THING TO PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL WE HAVE.
FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE A&M, YOU'LL APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT.
BUT YOU CAN DO THE SAME THING WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF LIFE AS IT RELATES TO YOUR PROXY WITH HOUSTON.
YOU CAN AVOID THE PITFALLS OF HOUSTON.
DON'T GET TIED UP IN THE, "INCREASING CRIME RATE" IF THAT'S IN FACT THE CASE OR SOME OF THOSE ISSUES OR THE TRAFFIC, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO PUT THAT YOUR BROCHURE, BUT YOU CAN TALK ABOUT PROXIMITY FOR ALL OF THIS QUALITY OF LIFE THINGS.
WELL, THIS IS REALLY TOUGH WITHOUT MY CURRENT PRESCRIPTION.
THE COMMUTING PATTERNS DON'T REFLECT AN ECONOMY THAT'S DRAWING WORKERS, AND IN THE REPORT I'LL PULL UP SOME DATA TO SHOW YOU YOUR BEDROOM.
I KNOW THESE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS OVER HERE GIVE ME GLARES, IS YOU'RE POLICE HERE? THERE'S A POLICEMEN HERE.
IT PROBABLY COST AS MUCH TO SERVE A SUBDIVISION OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, THAN IT DOES A BUSINESS PARK, WHO DO YOU THINK IS PAYING YOU MORE IN TAXES? THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT'S A KEEN OBSERVATION.
YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE AS POLICYMAKERS, YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE DECISION FRANKLY.
DO YOU WANT TO BE A BEDROOM COMMUNITY? THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT, [NOISE] AND INHERENTLY WRONG WITH THAT.
OR DO YOU WANT TO BE A COMMUNITY THAT STEPS UP AND WANTS TO GET IN THE GAME.
NOW, EASY FOR ME TO SAY I'VE GOT MY BRIEFCASE OR AS ONE OF MY CLIENTS CALLS IT, IT CARRIES MY LITTLE APPLE IPADS.
BUT AT THIS POINT IN MY LIFE, I'M CONFIDENT ENOUGH IN MY OLD MASCULINITY THAT SHE CAN CALL IT A MERCE IF SHE'D LIKE TO, I CALL IT A BRIEFCASE, JUST A SMALL ONE.
BUT YOU'VE GOT TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
BECAUSE GUESS WHAT? IT'S GOING TO TAKE TIME AND MONEY.
YOU GOT 10,000 COMPETITORS AND I'M NOT EXAGGERATING BECAUSE YOU'RE COMPETING IN A GLOBAL MARKET, PARTICULARLY WITH YOUR PROXIMITY HOUSTON. IT'S GLOBAL.
I JUST PUT A 161,000 SQUARE FEET FROM A COMBINATION BRAZILIAN, ITALIAN COMPANY INTO A FACILITY, WORKING WITH IT I DIDN'T PERSONALLY NEGOTIATED ALL THE INCENTIVES IN THE FRONT END.
[02:00:01]
THAT'S THE THING THAT YOU'VE GOT AS AN ASSET IN YOUR PROXIMITY TO HOUSTON.THERE'S TONS OF INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES CHASING AROUND HERE.
YOU WANT TO GET UP AND PLAY AND CHASE THEM, COSTS MONEY.
THAT MONEY IS GOING TO THE PARKS.
[LAUGHTER] YOU CAN READ THOSE AT YOUR OWN LEISURE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE TOP TWO OR THREE THINGS.
ONE OF THE THINGS I WILL SAY, AND THIS IS PROBABLY WOULD SUGGEST I MAY NOT GET APPROPRIATE GREETING CARD AT THE PERIODS OF NOEL.
I COULD NOT DETERMINE HOW INTEGRATED YOU ALL ARE WITH THE BRAZORIA COUNTY ALLIANCE.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT AND GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THERE, AND I CERTAINLY CAN'T SEE HIM, BUT I JUST WANT YOU TO BE ABLE, HOW WE CONCLUDED AND MADE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT YOUR BONES ARE, IF YOU WILL.
WE TRY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE FASTEST GROWING INDUSTRIES OUT THERE.
WE TAKE A LOOK AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS THAT ARE UNDERWAY, NOT ONLY NATIONALLY BUT SPECIFIC TO TEXAS.
BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE GREAT AT BRAGGING AND WE'RE REALLY GREAT AT BRAGGING AS IT RELATES TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
I THINK MOST COMPANIES BELIEVE THAT IF THEY LOCATE IN TEXAS, THE STATE OF TEXAS IS GOING TO GIVE THEM MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
GUESS WHAT, IF YOU'RE NOT APPLE, SAMSUNG, DELL, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
GUESS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE GETTING TO LOOK FOR THEIR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
YOU FOLKS, THE BACKBONE OF THE TEXAS ECONOMY, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION IS BASED ON THE WHITE HAIR THAT I POSSESS.
AN EMPIRICAL OBSERVATION IS THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.
SURE. TEXAS IS GOING TO WRITE A BIG CHECK FOR TESLA.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THOSE 20 MILLION DOLLAR PROJECTS? 10 MILLION DOLLAR PROJECTS, 15 MILLION DOLLAR? CHANCES ARE THEY'RE NOT GETTING IN A COMPETITIVE MODE ENTERPRISE FUND MONEY.
THEY'RE LOOKING TO YOU FOLKS, WHAT KIND OF TAX INCENTIVES ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE US? YOU'RE GOING TO GET REAL CREATIVE IN THE 380 AND MAYBE GIVE US SOME UPFRONT MONEY.
BUT THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF DECISIONS AND IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE FASTEST GROWING INDUSTRIES, THEY'VE GOT FOLKS A WHOLE LOT SMARTER THAN ME OUT FRONT, NEGOTIATING ON THEIR BEHALF.
MOST OF THE MALES FOLKS I KNOW AND CONSIDER THEM FRIENDS.
THEY'RE NOT NEARLY AS NICE AS I AM THOUGH.
BUT I SAY STARTING OFF HOUSTON IS RUNNING IN GUN AND IN DISTRIBUTION, GUESS WHAT, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT.
YOU'RE IDEALLY SITUATED FOR THAT.
YOU DON'T HAVE I-10 OR YOU'VE GOT THE BONES THAT YOU CAN DO THAT IT'S A MATTER HOW YOU SELL IT.
PROXIMITY TO THE PORTS, PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORTS, SURFACE TRANSPORTATION.
I COULD DEFEND DISTRIBUTION TILL THE COWS COME HOME.
METAL PROCESSES I TOOK A LOOK AT, WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE KIM'S? THERE'S A GOOD WINNER, KIM INDUSTRY IN THIS PART OF THE WORLD.
NOT ONLY JUST IN BRAZORIA COUNTY, BUT WE DO A TON OF WORK AND HAVE FOR LONGER THAN THEY PROBABLY CARE TO REMEMBER.
THE BEAUMONT, PORT ARTHUR, IN SOME OF THE OTHER HOUSTON COMMUNITIES, THERE OUGHT TO BE TRANSFERABLE SKILL SETS AND I JUST DIDN'T GIVE YOU ONE, I GAVE YOU A HALF A DOZEN THERE OF SPECIFIC SIO, WELL, THAT SHOWED MY AGE.
NAICS CODES THAT ARE VERY VIABLE TARGETS.
THERE'S TRANSFERABLE SKILL SETS.
WHY CAN'T YOU GET SOME SUPPLIERS? WE FOUND THAT WE DO A TON OF WORK IN THE ALL PATCH AND WE FOUND, THE ALL PATCHES A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN KIM.
ALL PATCH LOOKS LIKE IF YOU GRAPH IT, IT LOOKS LIKE AN OCEAN WAVE.
MAN IS HUMMING 100 BUCKS A BARREL.
IT'S PRETTY LEAN WHEN IT'S 1299 A BARREL.
SO WE WERE HIRED OUT THERE YEARS AGO.
WE'VE WORKED ON BOTH SIDES OF NEW MEXICO AND OF TEXAS AND THE PERMIAN AND WE TRIED TO HELP THEM DIVERSIFY AND WE DID THE SAME KIND OF DEEP DIG, IF YOU WILL, AND SAID WHAT KINDS OF SKILL SETS TO THESE FOLKS HAD.
THAT YOU COULD USE AS A MARKETING TOOL TO GO OUT FOR INDUSTRY AND BUSINESS THAT NEED THOSE KINDS OF [INAUDIBLE] AND THAT'S HOW WE SORT OF CONCLUDED HERE.
HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE.
GUESS WHAT IS GROWING IN EVERY DIRECTION.
[02:05:01]
FROM ASSISTED LIVING CENTERS TO SENIOR LIVING TO HOSPITALS AND I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH YOUR HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATOR.I DON'T THINK IT'S PRIVATE INFORMATION, IT'S PUBLICLY KNOWN THAT THEY'VE TAKEN DOWN SOME PROPERTY TO DO A MAJOR EXPANSION.
WHAT'S YOUR NICHE? IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY OUT IN WEST TEXAS WE JUST DID A SIMILAR PROJECT AND WE ALSO WORKED OURSELVES OUT OF A JOB THE HARDEST TO DO THE EXECUTIVE SEARCH WHILE WE DID THE INTERIM CEO FORM.
BUT THEY'VE GOT A GREAT HOSPITAL OUT THERE FOR A COMMUNITY THAT SIZE.
WELL, THEY'RE IN DIRE NEED OF DIALYSIS. GUESS WHAT? OTHER HEALTH CARE TARGETS THEIR NEW EXECUTIVE IS CHASING THAT NICHE. RETAIL.
ONE OF THE OBSERVATIONS THAT I DIDN'T MENTION, BUT I'LL MENTION IT NOW, IF I'M ALLOWED THE SCATTER SHOOT, IF YOU DRIVE THROUGH BRAZORIA COUNTY, I DON'T THINK AND I DON'T MEAN THIS IN AN OFFENSIVE WAY AT ALL, MORE REALISTIC ASSESSMENT, YOU'LL SEE THAT OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE COUNTY HAVE MORE AMENITIES AS IT RELATES TO RESTAURANT, RETAIL, ETC.
NO REASON YOU CAN'T CHASE THAT STUFF DOWN.
ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE DOING ALL THESE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
THE OLD DEAL WAS TRAFFIC COUNT AND ROOFTOPS. GUESS WHAT? YOU GOT BOTH, YOU COULD LOWER RETAIL.
I THINK YOU MAY HAVE ENGAGED, HELP ME, WITH THE RETAIL GROUP THAT'S HELPING YOU IN THAT REGARD.
BUT THEY GOT SMART TOO [NOISE] YOU'RE CHASING HEB, THEY'RE GOING TO WANT INCENTIVES.
ALL OF THOSE FOLKS, THEY'VE LEARNED THE GAME AND YOU CAN OFFER INCENTIVES, SALES TAX KICKBACKS.
REBATES. [LAUGHTER] YOUR ATTORNEY HAD THEIR HEADPHONES ON, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN I SAID THAT.
BUT I MEAN, YOU CAN GET VERY CREATIVE IN THAT REGARD.
FOR RESTAURANTS, I MEAN, WE GAVE YOU HALF A DOZEN OR WHATEVER 2, 4, OR 5, DIFFERENT NAICS CODES THAT YOU CAN CHASE AFTER.
SOME OF THOSE YOU CAN GROW FROM WITHIN.
I MEAN, I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME OF YOU THAT NOW YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT THING.
THAT'S JUST A DIAGRAM SHOWING YOU YOUR TARGETS.
THAT'S WHY I SLAP THAT SLIDE ON THERE, IT'S PAYCHECK. IT'S WHY YOU DO IT.
I WAS LISTENING TO THE AGENDA AND THE INTERACTION THIS EVENING.
YOU'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR THEM.
I'M SENSITIVE. I'VE NEVER BEEN ENGAGED WITH THE ALPHABET SOUPS AS I CALL THEM.
THE TIFFS, THE PERIODS, THE TOSSES, AS IT RELATES TO RESIDENTIAL.
I'VE ALWAYS BEEN INVOLVED WITH THEM ON THE OTHER SIDE AS IT RELATED TO COMMERCIAL.
I NOTICED SOME HESITANCY AND RELUCTANCE THERE IN SOME OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT EXTENDING ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.
MY IDEOLOGY AND IT GOES BECAUSE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 1,000 YEARS, IS THAT THOSE TEND TO BE MORE SECURE THAN THE RESIDENTIAL ONES IN MY EXPERIENCE, BUT THAT'S AN OCCUPATIONAL HAZARD, TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT.
YOU'VE TOLERATED ME FOR PROBABLY FAR LONGER THAN YOU SHOULD HAVE.
I WANT TO ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOUR OUTSTANDING FOLKS, CHRIS AND MARTHA, FOR THEIR HOSPITALITY, THAT I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH YOUR STAFF.
I'M STILL A LITTLE MIFFED AT YOUR PARKS PEOPLE, BECAUSE GUYS LIKE ME LOOK AT THAT HAVE SEEN EXODUS, AND WE GO MAN, CAN WE GET A HOLD OF THAT.
THINK WHAT WE COULD DO WITH THAT MILLION BUCKS.
ANY QUESTIONS COMING? I LOVE TO PICK ON HER. SHE'S GOT [OVERLAPPING].
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY TYPE A AND TYPE B? I DON'T SEE A DEFINITION IN THIS STUFF. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN.
[02:10:01]
>> THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS AS CREATED BY THE STATUTE.
TYPE A FOR CLIFF'S NOTES PURPOSES IS MORE OF AN INDUSTRIAL APPROACH.
TYPE B ALLOWS THE CHASING OF RETAIL [NOISE].
WHAT HAPPENS IN ESSENCE IS, YOU GO TO YOUR VOTERS AND IF YOU MEET THE CERTAIN CRITERIA, AND I PRESUME YOU DON'T MEET THEM NOW BECAUSE YOU'RE DEDICATED TO HAVE SEEN IS NOT AVAILABLE.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE COVERAGE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE ROOM.
BUT THE TYPE A AND TYPE B, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, IS THE BEST THING THAT TEXAS DID YEARS AGO IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THAT THEY DEDICATE UP TO A HALF A SET OF LOCAL SALES TAX TO GO INTO A PURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND, IT'S PHENOMENAL.
PUT IT PERSPECTIVE, FRISCO, NORTH DALLAS, YOU KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE AT ANY GIVEN TIME, SITTING IN AN ACCOUNT UP THERE, BETWEEN 25 AND 30 MILLION DOLLARS? YOU CAN MAKE A LOT OF IT. JASON FORD WHO'S THE NEWLY NAMED PRESIDENT OF THE FRISCO ED, IS A GOOD GUY AND A SHARP GUY.
BUT JASON AND HIS STAFF CAN MAKE A LOT OF MISTAKES, PLAYING WITH $20 OR $30 MILLION.
I DON'T KNOW IF I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION, IT'S A DEDICATED REVENUE STREAM, RIGHT INTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
>> WE HAVE A SEA, WHICH GO AND JUST TO PARK SOME DRAINAGE.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BARNES? IT WAS A PLEASURE SPEAKING TO YOU ON THE PHONE AND WE DID OUR PHONE INTERVIEW. THANK YOU, SIR.
>> I HOPE IT SHOWS, I LOVE DOING WHAT I DO.
WE'D BEEN DOING QUITE A WHILE, BUT I CAN'T SAY ENOUGH ABOUT YOUR STAFF TOP TO BOTTOM.
EVEN THIS LADY AT THE PARK, WE HAD A COUPLE OF SIDEBAR CONVERSATIONS.
I MADE HER FEEL GUILTY [LAUGHTER] AND SHE SAID, "WHAT CAN WE DO TO." YOU'RE DOING FINE. THANKS AGAIN.
IF YOU HAVING THOUGHTS GO, WE SHOULDN'T TALK TO THAT GUY, CALL ME.
YOU CAN GET A HOLD OF ME THROUGH-
>> DO I NEED TO DO SOMETHING THERE.
>> THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER 11,
[11. Presentation, discussion and possible action on the provision of City water and wastewater utility service to the proposed Windmill Ridge project with the extension of utilities at the expense of the developer.]
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE PROVISION OF CITY WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY SERVICE TO PROPOSED WINDMILL RIDGE PROJECT WITH THE EXTENSION OF UTILITIES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DEVELOPER, MS.LINDSEY.>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THIS IS THE ITEM THAT YOU [NOISE] HEARD TWO WEEKS AGO THAT I PRESENTED ON BEHALF OF MR. GALLO, CONCERNING, I GUESS, A RIGHT ANGLE TRIANGLE-SHAPED PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE THE APEX DOESN'T QUITE TOUCH THE CITY'S LIMITS.
HE WAS PROPOSING A MOBILE HOME PARK AND HE'S HERE TONIGHT.
HE WANTS TO TALK TO YOU GUYS AND GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON YOUR FEELINGS CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF UTILITIES, WATER, AND WASTEWATER SERVICE.
I BRIEFED HIM ON THE QUESTIONS THAT EVERYBODY HAD POSED TWO WEEKS AGO, SO HE'S HERE AND PREPARED TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. COME ON UP.
IT'S HARD TO FOLLOW TONY ROBBINS AND HIS POWERPOINT.
I WANTED TO THANK LINDSAY FOR PRESENTING FOR ME A COUPLE WEEKS AGO MY DAD HAD HEART SURGERY, SO I COULDN'T BE HERE AND I APPRECIATE IT. THANKS A LOT.
I GIVE YOU A HANDOUT THERE AND BASICALLY SPELLS OUT WHAT WE GOT AND WHAT WE'RE DOING.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY WE'RE LOOKING TO SEEK CITY SERVICES.
THE PROPERTY IS JUST RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD FROM LOVE'S.
IT'S VERY CLOSE TO YOUR SERVICES ALREADY.
MY PARTNER CAN'T BE HERE TONIGHT, HE'S IN A BUSINESS TRIP, BUT I'M A LOCAL DEVELOPER.
I'VE LIVED IN MISSOURI COUNTY FOR 60 YEARS.
I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE KIND OF PRODUCT THAT WE PUT OUT IS GOING TO BE GOOD BECAUSE, I MEAN, I GO TO RESTAURANTS HERE AND I SHOP HERE.
WHATEVER I PUT OUT IN THIS BIGGER PRODUCT, SO AM VERY CONCERNED WITH THAT.
WE'VE GOT A 199 LOTS THAT'LL BE GOING IN THERE,
[02:15:01]
AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE DRAWING HOW THEY'VE BEEN LAID OUT.WHEN I FIRST CAME TO WORK WITH CITY THAT WERE GOING TO DO SMALLER LOTS, AND FIRST THING HE TOLD ME IS YOU NEED TO GO TO 64 LOTS SO THE CITY COUNCIL WON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT.
WE INSTANTLY CHANGED OUR DRAWINGS.
ENGINEERS CAME IN AND WE WENT STRAIGHT 64 LOTS.
WE HAVE A GREEN SPACE YOU CAN SEE THROUGHOUT, SO WE'LL HAVE PARKS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN OFFICE IN THE FRONT WITH SWIMMING POOL, AND THEN WHAT YOU CAN SEE, THE GREEN SPACE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE AREA.
WE'RE GOING TO DO IN OVER 55 SECTION.
I DON'T KNOW THE HOW MANY LIGHTS YET, BUT PROBABLY SOMEWHERE, MAYBE IN THE 10 PERCENT RANGE IF IT TAKES OFF, WE COULD REALLY GROW THAT BECAUSE LINDSAY HAD SAID THAT SHE'S WORKING WITH SOME SENIOR DEVELOPMENTS AND I WAS LIKE, OKAY, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS A NEED FOR THAT BIG SO WE PLAN ON DOING AT LEAST PROBABLY 10 PERCENT OF OVER 55 LIVING.
HOA WE'RE GOING TO MAKE AN HOA.
IT'LL BE ENFORCED BY OUR OWN SITE MANAGEMENT IN THE OFFICE UP IN THE FRONT, WE'LL HAVE A SWIMMING POOL IT THERE TOO, AND SAY THAT ALSO IN THE FRONT, WE WANT TO DO LIKE A BIG WINDMILL FENCING AND STUFF LIKE THAT BECAUSE WINDMILL RAGE IS GOING TO BE OUR NAME.
WE GET THE RIDGE FROM THE BERM THAT GOES AROUND.
THAT'S HOW WE COME UP WITH THEIR NAME.
BUT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE A VERY BIG WINDMILL AT THE VERY FRONT, [NOISE] AND THEN LIKE I SAID, WE'VE GOT THE HOA [NOISE] THAT WILL HELP REINFORCE EVERYTHING.
MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S LOOKING GOOD AND HOPE KEEP DOWN THE ISSUES.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWING, THE LAND PLAN, YOU'LL SEE FROM THE POINT, THE RIGHT SIDE WILL BE THE MANUFACTURER HOME PART.
ON THE LEFT SIDE WILL BE THE BOAT RV AND MINI STORAGE GOING DOWN THE LEFT SIDE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PROPERTY COUNTER BROKEN UP.
WE'VE GOT FIVE LINES THAT GO DOWN THROUGH THE MIDDLE.
WE'VE GOT HIGH LINES IN THE BACK, SO WE GOT EVERYTHING KIND OF FIT IN THERE PRETTY NICELY FOR US.
THIS PROBABLY CAN BE USED FOR A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER STUFF.
IT'S I MEAN, WITH ALL THE PIPELINES AND RESTRICTION AND STUFF THAT IT HAS ON IT, BUT WE FIT ALL THAT IN THERE NICE.
WE HAVE ROUGHLY ABOUT 26 ACRES OF BOAT RV STORAGE, AND THEN IF YOU SEE, WE HAD LINDSAY TALKED ABOUT THE TAX REVENUE AND STUFF AND I KNOW THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS AROUND THAT.
I TRIED TO BREAK THAT OUT TO WHERE IT'S A LITTLE MORE CLEAR.
IF YOU'LL SEE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE ABOUT A 42-$100 AG EVALUATION ON THERE.
WE PLAN ON PUTTING A 199 HOMES ON THERE, ROUGHLY AT ABOUT $80,000 A HOME.
SO THAT WOULD COME OUT THE 15,920,000.
WE'VE GOT A LAND VALUE ESTIMATE AROUND 800,000, AND WHEN I'VE MADE THIS SHEET RIGHT HERE, I THOUGHT ONLY HAD LIKE ABOUT SEVEN ACRES OF BOAT RV STORAGE BUT COME OUT I HAD ALMOST 27 ACRES [LAUGHTER].
MY BOAT RV STORAGE OF 500,000, IS EXTREMELY LOW.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE RIGHT NOW, THE GUYS WERE PAYING ABOUT $90 A YEAR ON TAXES ON THIS PROPERTY, AND ONCE IT'S FILLED UP, 150,000, PROBABLY A LOT MORE THAN THAT BECAUSE WE WERE WAY LOW VALUE OF ABOUT LEVEE STORAGE.
I HAVE I KNOW THREE OF THE MANUFACTURER HOME REPS AND THEY WANT TO PUT IN NEW HOMES.
THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN AS MANY NEW HOMES WHOSE ACCOUNT BECAUSE THEY'RE HAVING A HARD TIME.
THEY CAN SELL THE HOMES, BUT THEY HAD NO PLACE TO PUT THEM.
THERE'S MANY NEW HOMES IS WE CAN PUT IN THERE, THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
THEY'VE ALREADY SAID THEY'LL PLACE NEW HOMES FOR US.
THAT'S WHAT WE TRIED TO FILL IT UP WITH AS MUCH OF THAT.
YEAH, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT GOING UNDERNEATH THE LEVEE.
MY ENGINEERS TALKED WITH I BELIEVE IT WAS STEVE RESSLER, BAKER AWESOME, AND CONFIRMED THAT WE CAN'T GO UNDER THE LEVEE I BELIEVE THAT WAS YOUR QUESTION, MR. BOO.
[BACKGROUND] THAT WAS CONFIRMED THAT WE COULD THERE'S CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS AND STUFF THAT WE HAVE TO MEET TO GO UNDER THAT.
IT'S DOABLE, SO THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THAT, AND THEN ANOTHER ONE WAS, I BELIEVE, ON THE CONTIGUITY OF THE PROPERTY, AND I SPOKE WITH MY LAWYER IN BASICALLY HIS THOUGHTS
[02:20:04]
ARE IS THE ROAD EASEMENT IS CONGRUENT TO 523, WE TOUCH OUR EASEMENT.THEREFORE WE HAVE THE CONTIGUITY.
BUT IF WE TURN IT INTO A CITY STREET OR SOMETHING, THEN IT GOES RIGHT TO THE PROPERTY.
I'M ALL OPEN IT UP TO QUESTIONS.
WHAT I KNOW YOU MAY SOME MORE QUESTION.
>> WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN AND I LIKE TO SEE YOU TO INCLUDE THIS.
WILL THE MANUFACTURER HOME INCLUDE A CONCRETE PAD? THAT IT SITS ON A CONCRETE PAD?
>> I BELIEVE IT'LL SIT ON RUNNERS PROBABLY.
PROBABLY WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME TYPE OF RUNNERS.
THAT'S WHAT MOST OF THE FHA AND STUFF REQUIRES RUNNERS.
>> OKAY WILL IT HAVE A SKIRTING?
>> WILL THERE BE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT?
>> WE WILL PLACE TREES OUT THERE.
PROBABLY, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE A 100 TREES OR SOME AMOUNT LIKE THAT SO THAT WE HAD TREES [OVERLAPPING].
>>I UNDERSTAND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN EVERY LOT. I MEAN, I GET THAT.
>> WE WOULD LIKE TO PLACE SOME MORE TREES OUT THERE.
WE WOULD PROBABLY NOT REQUIRE THE PEOPLE TO DO ANY LANDSCAPING OF THEIR OWN.
WE WOULD MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY. WE WOULDN'T [OVERLAPPING]. [NOISE]
>>WHAT ABOUT [OVERLAPPING] STREET PARKING VERSUS YARD PARKING?
>> WILL HAVE PROBABLY LIKE A TWO CAR SPOT GOING THEIR LOT TO WHERE THEIR MANUFACTURED HOUSE IS.
>> I GUESS I'M GETTING WILL YOU ALLOW PEOPLE TO PARK IN THEIR YARDS?
>> NO THEY NEED TO PARK IN THE CEMENT.
WILL HAVE CEMENT STREETS THROUGHOUT.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU CONSIDER THAT AFTER, I DON'T KNOW, A DESIGNATED TIME PERIOD, 10 TO 15 YEARS, IF SOMEBODY MOVES AND NEW OCCUPANT HAS TO PUT A NEWER MODEL HOME ON THERE.
I'VE SEEN THIS DONE IN OTHER [OVERLAPPING] IT KEEPS IT UP TO DATE AND SO IT DOESN'T DILAPIDATE OVER TIME.
>> WHAT WE WOULD DO IS PUT A AGE RESTRICTION.
LET'S JUST SAY WE COULDN'T FILL IT UP WITH ALL NEW HOMES.
WE WOULD HAVE AN AGE RESTRICTION OF MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, 10 TO 12 YEARS OLD MOBILE HOMES THAT THAT WOULD BE THE OLDEST THEY COULD COME IN THERE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I MEAN, I GUESS AFTER A PERIOD NEW HOME-OWNERSHIP [OVERLAPPING]
>> YEAH, I WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT.
I MEAN, THAT WAY YOU KEEP NEWER HOMES IN THERE.
>> YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO BECAUSE I THINK WHEN YOU THING GET OLD THAT JUST KIND OF [OVERLAPPING].
>> YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. YEAH. I'M SURE WE COULD WRITE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THERE I DON'T THINK WOULD BE AN ISSUE.
>> YOU SAID YOU WEREN'T GOING TO HAVE THEM PUT LANDSCAPING IN, BUT YOU WOULD ALLOW IT IF THEY WANTED TO?
>> YEAH, WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO SOMEHOW MANAGE THAT TO WHERE.
I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY DIDN'T GO CRAZY WITH STUFF EVERYWHERE, IF THEY KEEP A LITTLE FLOWER GARDEN OR SOMETHING AROUND THE PLACE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A PROBLEM AS LONG AS IT'S KEPT UP.
>> PORCHES AND THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD BE UNRESTRICTED?
>> PORCHES, YES. YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT.
>> DO YOU PLAN ON RENTING THESE SPACES OR SELLING THE LOT?
>> THE SPACES WOULD BE RENTED.
THEY WOULD OWN THE MOBILE HOMES, AND WE WOULD OWN THE SPACE.
>> WE WOULD HAVE ONE INCOMING WATER METER FROM THE CITY, AND THEN WE DO INDIVIDUAL METER TO EACH HOUSE.
WE'LL PAY FOR THE UTILITIES, THE WATER AND THE SEWER, OVER TO THE PROPERTY.
>> WHAT ABOUT UNIFORMED GARAGES AND/OR CARPORTS?
>> WE WOULDN'T DO ANY GARAGES OR CARPORTS.
>> THE UNIFORMED THOUGH, AND THAT THERE WOULD BE NONE.
>> THAT'S FINE. IT'S JUST UNIFORM BY THE WAY.
>> BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU GET INTO THAT, THEN YOU GET INTO UPKEEP.
WHAT IF THEY STARTED LOOKING BAD AFTER A FEW YEARS?
>> THAT'S FINE. I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE IT UNIFORM ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A PREMANUFACTURED HOME OR MOBILE HOME IS TAXED AT THE TIME IT IS PURCHASED, AND THEN THERE'S NO MORE AD VALOREM TAXES ASSESSED AGAINST THAT HOME. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> BASICALLY, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS AS SOON AS WE GET ALL THE SPACES PUT IN AND PEOPLE STARTED MOVING IN, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A PLACEMENT PERMIT, AND ONCE THEY GET A PLACEMENT PERMIT, THAT CUES THE COUNTY TO PUT THEM ON THE TAX ROLLS FOR TAXES.
[02:25:02]
IF THEY'RE GOING ENTER AFTER THE 1ST OF JANUARY, THEN IT ROLLS TO THE NEXT YEAR, BUT THEN THE NEXT YEAR, THEY WOULD BE VALUED AT WHATEVER THE COUNTY VALUES THEIR MOBILE HOME AT.THEY WOULD BE PAYING TAX ON OUT, YEAR-IN.
>> DOES THE INDIVIDUAL PAY THE TAX, OR DO YOU PAY THE TAX?
IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN A REGULAR HOUSE, SO IT GETS TAXED JUST LIKE A REGULAR HOUSE.
>> THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY TAX ON WHATEVER THE COUNTY SAYS THEIR VALUE IS.
>> DO YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE OF THESE TYPE OF BUSINESSES?
>> I'VE HAD SEVERAL SMALLER ONES.
>> ALVIN. I'VE LIVED MOST OF MY LIFE IN ALVIN.
I MOVED TO ANGLETON ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO, I'VE BEEN HERE. [BACKGROUND]
>> YES, SIR. [LAUGHTER] IT WAS. I LOVE IT.
>> [LAUGHTER] MOVING ON UP. [OVERLAPPING]
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO INTERJECT THERE BECAUSE YOU WERE JUST GIVEN SOME INCORRECT INFORMATION.
>> I'VE MADE A BAD ASSUMPTION.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY OWNER. OH, FROM HIM?
A MANUFACTURED HOME IS CONSIDERED PERSONAL PROPERTY, SO YOU GET TAXED AS THOUGH IT'S PERSONAL PROPERTY.
YOU DO NOT PAY AD VALOREM TAXES ON MANUFACTURED HOMES.
>> NOW, IF THEY OWN THE LOT, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO PAY TAXES ON THE LOT THAT THEY OWN, BUT IF THE MANUFACTURED HOME OWNER OWN THAT LITTLE PIECE OF LAND, THEN THEY'RE JUST PAYING PERSONAL TAXES ON THE MANUFACTURED HOME.
IT'S NOT THE SAME AS WHEN YOU HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S BUILT.
>> BUT THEY'RE PAYING TAX ON THE VALUE OF THE MOBILE HOME.
>> I THINK WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO AGREE TO DISAGREE ON THIS.
>> THEN WHEN YOU MOVE FROM BRAZORIA COUNTY TO MATAGORDA COUNTY [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY GOES WITH YOU.
>> YOU TELL SOMEONE IN MATAGORDA COUNTY THAT, "I LIVE AT YOUR COUNTY NOW, SO SEND ME A TAX BILL."
>> RIGHT. USUALLY A MANUFACTURED HOME, THEY'RE CALLED MANUFACTURED NOW, THEY USED TO BE MOBILE FOR A REASON BECAUSE THEY'RE MOBILE.
>> IT'S YOUR PERSONAL PROPERTY.
MOST PEOPLE MOVE THEM. THEY TAKE IT.
THEY CAN TAKE IT FROM BRAZORIA COUNTY TO ANOTHER COUNTY, AND THEY PAY TAX ON THAT PERSONAL PROPERTY IN WHATEVER COUNTY THEY PUT IT.
>> IS THAT PAID YEARLY LIKE A CAR REGISTRATION, OR IS IT [OVERLAPPING]
>> OH, I'M PRETTY SURE IT IS PAID ANNUALLY, YEAH.
>> BUT IT'S JUST A TOTALLY DIFFERENT TAX.
>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RATES ARE IN YOUR COUNTY, BUT GENERALLY, THE ANSWER IS NO.
>> THEN IF IT'S NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS, THEN THE CITY OF ANGLETON IS NOT GOING TO REAP ANY REWARD FROM THAT.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO CORRECT THE PATH HERE, AND THERE WAS ANOTHER THING THAT THE DEVELOPER SAID THAT I'M NOT REALLY SURE WITHOUT THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY ENGINEER WEIGHING IN ON, IS WHETHER OR NOT THAT PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THE EXACT LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY UNTIL THIS PACKET CAME OUT, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR CITY ENGINEER HAS LOOKED AT IT, BUT JUST EYEBALLING THE MAP THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS PROVIDED, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S CONTIGUOUS.
>> I THINK THE CITY LIMITS STOP FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY, I THINK.
>> I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A CURRENT CITY LIMITS MAP.
>> I THINK LINDSAY HAS A COMMENT.
>> AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY LINES, THAT APEX OF THE RIGHT TRIANGLE, THE SOUTH-FACING APEX, DOES NOT LINE UP TO THE CITY'S LIMITS.
>> THERE'S ANOTHER TRIANGLE WHICH HAS AN APEX WHICH TOUCHES THE SOUTH-FACING APEX, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
THERE SHOULD BE A MAP IN THE PACKET, BUT THERE IS NO CONTIGUITY, AND CONTIGUITY IS NOT CONSTITUTED BY A ROADWAY EASEMENT, SO THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE IS CONTIGUITY IN JUST LOOKING AT IT INTERNALLY.
WE BELIEVE THAT HE WOULD MAYBE HAVE TO PURCHASE PROPERTY OR DO SOMETHING TO ESTABLISH THAT CONTIGUITY, WHICH WE DO NOT BELIEVE EXISTS PRESENTLY.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAYBE CLARIFY.
THE PEOPLE WILL NOT BE PAYING PROPERTY TAX ON THE LOT.
I'M PAYING PROPERTY TAX ON ALL THE LAND.
>> WHICH WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT LAMPLIGHT HOUSE, WHICH IS SET UP AS A MOBILE HOME.
>> IT HAS A MOBILE HOME PARK DESIGNATION THAT THEY PAY TAXES ON.
>> I'LL PAY TAXES [OVERLAPPING] ON ALL THE LAND, THEY WOULD PAY TAXES ON THEIR MOBILE HOMES.
[02:30:01]
>> MICROPHONE. MICROPHONE SINCE IT'S RECORDED.
>> OKAY. I'VE JUST PULLED UP A TAX ACCOUNT, AND I CAN GIVE IT TO YOU IF YOU'VE GOT BCAD UP. 635198.
THAT IS AN ACTUAL MOBILE HOME PERSONAL PROPERTY ACCOUNT.
THEY VALUE THIS, AND IT'S JUST THE FIRST ONE THAT CAME UP.
IT'S NOT A HIGH-DOLLAR ONE, BUT IT'S TAXED AT THE SAME BREAKDOWN AS, SAY, A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME.
THEY PAY TO EVERYBODY. THEY PAY TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THE EMERGENCIES, ON THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, ROAD AND BRIDGE.
EVERYTHING IS GIVEN THE SAME VALUE JUST LIKE A STANDARD SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WOULD EXCEPT THEY'RE ONLY PAYING ON IMPROVEMENT, THEY'RE NOT PAYING ON THE ACTUAL LAND.
>> THE LAND, YEAH. WE'RE PAYING ON THE LAND.
>> GOT YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> WE'RE ALSO, I DON'T KNOW IF I SAID, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ANNEXED ALSO, ALONG WITH THE CITY SERVICES.
FOR OUR DISCUSSION FOR TONIGHT, Y'ALL ARE LOOKING FOR POTENTIAL WATER AND WASTEWATER UTILITY SERVICES
>> YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT. [NOISE]
>> I'M GOING TO START TO CIRCUMSTANCES THAT I TOOK WITH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OWNERS OUT IN TOWN.
IF THEY'RE NOT IN OUR CITY LIMITS, THEN I DON'T SUPPORT COMMITTING THE NUMBER OF CONNECTIONS THAT ARE NEEDED.
WE HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF WATER CONNECTIONS AVAILABLE TODAY, WITH THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT WE HAVE HAVE AVAILABLE.
THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT BOARDED 800 AND SOME ODD CONNECTIONS WHICH WAS GOING TO TOTALLY DEPLETE, WELL NOT TOTALING, BUT SUBSTANTIALLY DEPLETE THE NUMBER OF CONNECTIONS WE HAD AVAILABLE IN TOWN.
THAT DIDN'T BODE WELL WITH ME.
THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE ANNEXED.
WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING INTO TOWN CONVERTING PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL, BEING ANNEXED RIGHT HERE AND WANT TO DEVELOP THEIR LAWS LIKE THE CELL DIVISION DEVELOPERS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
THOSE ARE MY FIRST PRIORITY WHO GETS WATER AND SEWER ENTAIL.
>> THANK YOU MR. BOOTH. ANYBODY ELSE?
>> DAVID, YOU'RE ASKING FOR ANNEXATION, RIGHT?
>> RIGHT. I'M ASKING TO BE ANNEXED.
EVERYTHING THEY'VE ASKED US TO DO, WE'VE CHANGED OUR PLANS DONE.
I MEAN, I WANT TO BE ANNEXED, ADD THE UTILITIES AND PUT OUT A GOOD PRODUCT FOR THE CITY.
>> THE QUESTION IS, CAN YOU GET ANNEXED? I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE BIG QUESTION STILL LIES.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I'VE ASKED THAT QUESTION, I GUESS TO THE CITY.
MY LAWYER SAYS IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE DONE.
IT'S CONTINGENT TO THE PROPERTY.
IT GOES STRAIGHT TO OUR PROPERTY.
WE PUT A CITY ROAD THERE THAT TIES IN OUR PROPERTY.
I DON'T SEE THE ISSUE OF THAT.
>> SOMETHING RAISED TWO WEEKS AGO AND YOU HAVE TO FORGIVE MY IGNORANCE, BUT YOUR PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE THE LEVY THAT SITUATES AROUND THE TOWN?
>> IT WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME WE'VE ANNEXED OUTSIDE THE LEVY.
JUDITH, LET ME ASK YOU THIS, HOW DID WE ANNEX WELSH PARK? [BACKGROUND] I KNOW IT'S A LOADED QUESTION BECAUSE [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE ANNEXED AND I THINK IF YOU LOOK [LAUGHTER] AT THE DRAWINGS, WE ANNEXED RIGHT ALONG THE STREET, DOWN KHYBER TO GET OVER TO WELSH PARK.
>> IT APPEARS THAT THE ROAD AWAY OF KHYBER WAS ANNEXED DOWN TO WELSH PARK SO THEY TOOK IT ANNEXED.
[02:35:01]
>> THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION.
JUST PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE.
>> HERE'S THE THING. I DON'T KNOW WHO OWNS THE STREET ON THIS ANNEXATION THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS OFFERING.
I DON'T KNOW WHO OWNS THAT STREET.
I'M GOING TO SAY THAT IT'S PROBABLY NOT A CITY STREET.
I THINK THAT'S A STATE. RIGHT AWAY.
I DON'T KNOW. THE COUNTY RIGHT A WAY. I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THOSE.
I DON'T KNOW ANY DETAIL OF THE WELSH PARK.
>> I THINK A LOT OF THE REGULATIONS AND RULES AND ALL THINGS OR PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THAT TO KEEP FROM BEING ANNEXED.
I THINK WHAT YOUR ATTORNEY IS TELLING YOU THAT BECAUSE NOW ANNEXATION CAN ONLY BE ACHIEVED WHEN IT'S VOLUNTARY, THAT THE ODDS IF SOMEBODY OBJECTING TO IT ARE SLIM.
BECAUSE IT CAN ONLY BE DONE ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS.
YOUR CITY IS NOT GOING TO FORCE SOMEBODY TO ANNEXATION.
BECAUSE THE COMPLEXION HAS CHANGED AND IT WOULD ONLY BE UPON AUTHORIZATION, I THINK WHAT HIS ATTORNEY IS SAYING THAT NO ONE'S GOING TO ARGUE ABOUT IT.
THAT IF WE SOMEHOW WORK AWAY WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT HE SAYS THAT HE HAS, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY.
RIGHT AWAY IS ON A POSSESSORY INTEREST.
IT JUST MEANS YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO GO ON THAT.
YOU DID A POSSESSORY INTEREST TO MAKE THE PROPERTY CONTIGUOUS.
THAT'S WHY ON THE OTHER ONE THAT YOU'RE ASKING ME ABOUT, THERE COULD'VE BEEN SOME POSSESSORY INTERESTS THAT WAS CONVEYED BY THE CITY SO THAT PROPERTY DEVELOPER HAD A POSSESSORY INTEREST.
THERE'S ABOUT 20 QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED BEFORE WE CAN GET THERE.
PART OF THE HUGE COMPONENT IS I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE UPDATED CITY LIMIT MAP LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE WE'RE A LITTLE BIT BEHIND I THINK ON THAT, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT THE LAST CITY LIMIT MAP THAT I HAVE ACCESS TO IS FROM 2017.
[BACKGROUND] THAT'S THE FIRST INITIAL THRESHOLD ANALYSIS AND THAT'S AN ANALYSIS THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE NEEDED TO BE DONE ON A LEGAL STANDPOINT FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT AS WELL.
>> THEN WE CAN MOVE FROM THERE.
IF HE'S WILLING TO DO A VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION AND THERE MAY BE A WAY TO GET THERE.
BUT BASED ON THE FACTS ON THE GROUND THAT I SEE RIGHT NOW, LIKE LINDSEY SAID, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO GET THERE.
>> LET ME ASK THIS, IS THERE A POTENTIAL THAT WE COULD TABLE THIS ITEM TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS SO WE CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION.
HOW DO WE GET TO THAT POINT TO REKINDLE [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE LEGAL RECOMMENDATION IS ABSOLUTELY.
JUST SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION TO ILLITERATE LATER DENG, TILL YOU GET SOME OF YOUR ANSWERS.
I ABSOLUTELY MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
>> I MISSED PART OF THE DISCUSSION, BUT THE LAWYER QUESTIONS BACK WHEN WE HAVE DOG MEETINGS WAS, CAN YOU GET THROUGH THE LOBBY WITH THE UTILITIES? CAN YOU ANNEX ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS, THOSE NEED TO BE ANSWERED IN MY MIND BEFORE WE SAY YES.
WE CAN SAY YES, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING IF THEY CAN'T ANNEX.
>> IN DAVID'S DEFENSE, HE TRIED TO GET ANSWERS FOR THAT, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE'RE PREPARED FOR HIM TONIGHT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER.
BECAUSE THIS CAME UP LAST TIME.
HE WENT TALKED TO HIS LAWYER, BUT WE NEVER DID ANYTHING ON OUR SIDE.
>> I KNOW WE DO HAVE OUR EASEMENT.
IT'S CALLED A FOREVER EASEMENT.
THE EASEMENT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THE LAND OWNERS WHENEVER 523 CAME THROUGH THERE TO, I GUESS THEIR ROAD FRONTAGE.
THAT'S WHEN THAT EASEMENT CAME ABOUT.
I'VE HAD THE ATTORNEY GO THROUGH THE EASEMENT. THE EASEMENT IS GOOD.
I'VE EVEN SHOWED IT TO THE COUNTY IN CASE THE COUNTY HAD ISSUES WITH IT.
THE EASEMENT IS SOLID, THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH THE EASEMENT.
>> THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT US NOT BEING READY, IF THAT'S WHAT WE NEED.
HE HAS AN ATTORNEY, THEY HAVE DOCUMENTS, THEN YOUR CITY ATTORNEY NEEDS TO SEE THOSE DOCUMENTS AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE DOCUMENTS, YET.
>> HOW DO YOU ENTER THE PROPERTY? LOOKS LIKE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER?
>> YOU GO PASSED LOVES, AND YOU KIND OF GO UP ON A BRIDGE, BUILD UP ON A HIGH-RISE AND AS SOON AS YOU COME DOWN, YOU TURN RIGHT, RIGHT INTO THE PROPERTY.
[BACKGROUND] THEN IT COMES RIGHT BACK INTO THE PROJECT,.
>> JOHN, THAT'S PART OF THIS PROCESS IS GETTING FROM Y'ALL WHETHER WE MAY SPEND CITY TIME AND SPEND CITY MONEY PURSUING THIS.
OTHER THINGS IN LIMITED BUDGETS, DO WE WANT TO EXPEND MONEY TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANNEX?
>> I MEAN, IT'S JUST THAT WAS THE QUESTION WE ASKED AT THE LAST MEETING.
THAT'S ONE POINT THAT I WAS LOOKING AT AS WELL.
WE DID ASK THAT QUESTION LAST TIME.
THE FIRST QUESTION WE HAVE TO ANSWER IS CAN WE ANNEX?
[02:40:03]
BECAUSE I THINK AS COUNCIL MEMBERS STATED, IF WE CAN'T ANNEX, THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE IN THE CITY THAT NEED THE SERVICES.THAT IS THE NUMBER1 QUESTION THAT HAS TO BE ANSWERED.
>> [OVERLAPPING] ALREADY PERIOD AT THIS POINT.
THAT'S MY MAIN ISSUE FOR WANTING TO ADDRESS THE ABILITY TO EVEN HAVE YOUR OFFER OR WILLING TO GIVE US THE UTILITIES.
WHILE WE'RE STILL IN OUR FEASIBILITY, WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THAT'S EVEN AN OPTION.
IF WE KNOW THAT THAT'S AN OPTION, THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OTHER ISSUES AND ADDRESS THE EASEMENT FIGURING OUT HOW TO MAKE IT WORK AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO BE ANNEXED.
WE JUST WANT TO KNOW IF WE DO FIGURE THAT OUT, WE DON'T WANT TO GET TO THAT POINT AND THEN YOU ALL SAY, ""OH, WAIT, NO.
SORRY WE'RE NOT GIVING YOU THOSE UTILITIES.
MAINLY ALL WE'RE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT IS A YES, WE WOULD GIVE YOU THE UTILITY, OR WE WON'T GIVE YOU THE UTILITIES AND YOU'LL STOP REAL OR ACT.
IF YOU ARE WILLING TO, AND THEN WE CAN'T GIVE YOU THE REST OF IT, THEN THAT'S FINE.
WE JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT THAT'S OUR OPTION AND THAT WHAT WE STAND TO GO.
>> WE'RE ON THE TIMELINE NOW, THAT'S WHY WE WERE TRYING TO GET IN THROUGH THE OTHER MEETING SOON AS WE COULD SO THAT WE COULD GET SOME ANSWERS FOR THAT.
>> I CAN GET YOU THE EASEMENT INFORMATION IN THE MORNING, FIRST THING.
>> I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT IF THEY CAN SHOW US HOW THEY THINK THEY CAN CONNECT, THEN WE CAN REVIEW THAT THROUGH OUR ATTORNEY AND THROUGH OUR ENGINEERS AND ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS.
>> IF OUR ANNEX IN THAT ROAD IS DEVELOPED, AND THAT THE EASEMENT IT'S BROUGHT TO.
IT EVEN SAYS IN THE EASEMENT THAT IT HAD TO BE BROUGHT TO COUNTY OR CITY STANDARD, IT SAYS COUNTY ON THERE BECAUSE WE AREN'T CITY.
IT SAYS TO COUNTY STANDARD, BROUGHT IT UP TO BE DEVELOPED TO THEIR[OVERLAPPING] RULES AND EVERYTHING.
THEN AT [NOISE] THAT POINT IT'S DEVELOPED OUT AND IT GOES RIGHT INTO THE PROPERTY.
AT THAT POINT, I DON'T SEE WHY THAT WOULDN'T TOUCH US.
>> I'M NOT GETTING A VIBE FROM THE COUNCIL JUST YET, BUT DO WE WANT TO PRESS FORWARD, AND DO WE WANT TO DO THE RESEARCH AND THE HOMEWORK TO SEE CAN WE GET TO THEIR ANSWER?
>> IF YOU WANT US TO DO THE WORK, WE'LL SPEND THE MONEY AND SPEND THE TIME AND DO THE WORK AND PROVIDE AN ANSWER BACK.
>> ARE YOU ALL AMENDABLE TO THAT, GUYS? OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO HELP WHAT WE CAN BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE RIGHT INFORMATION TO GIVE A GOOD YES OR NO, THAT'S THE POINT.
I DO SEE COUNCILMAN BOOTH ISSUE ABOUT CITY SERVICES. WE'RE LIMITED RIGHT NOW.
I'M ALL FOR IF WE WANT TO ALLOW YOUR STAFF TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO SEE IF IT'S FEASIBLE.
>> IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME, WE WANT TO MAKE A DECISION AND WE WANT TO FIGURE IT OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
WE DON'T WANT TO PUT TOO MUCH ON IT.
>> I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE PUT IN AND I APPRECIATE YOUR FLEXIBILITY AGAIN ON EXPANDING YOUR LOT SIZES.
FOR ME TO MOVE FORWARD, OBVIOUSLY, IT HAVE TO BE AT LEAST FIRST IN THE CITY.
BUT ANYTIME YOU TAKE PRECEDENCE AND WE ARE GOING TO MAKE PRECEDENCE IF YOU WERE TO ANNEX OUTSIDE THE LEVY.
SEEMS LIKE A BIG DECISION TO MAKE ON A SMALL TRACK OF LAND.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE YOU COULD BE OPENING A GATE YOU MAY NOT WANT TO.
ANYBODY WHO COMES TO YOU IN THE FUTURE, YOU HAVE NOW SAID, WE'RE WILLING TO DO THIS.
YOU CAN GO CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, AND THAT'S HOW PROBABLY YOU SHOULD ALWAYS LOOK AT THINGS ON CASE-BY-CASE.
BUT ONCE YOU SET THE GENERALIZED STANDARD, AND WE'VE SEEN IT DONE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY ONCE WHEN HE STARTED SAYING 45 FOR LOTS, EVERYBODY AND THEIR MOTHER CAME SCREAMING FOR 45 FOR LOTS.
THE SHARK SMELL THE CHAIRMAN IN THE WATER.
I'M JUST SAYING, IT'S A SIMILAR CONCEPT ANYWAY.
>> THE ISSUE WITH ANNEXING OUTSIDE OF THE LEVY WAS THE ISSUE OF PUTTING PEOPLE'S DEVELOPMENT IN A RECOGNIZED FLOODPLAIN.
>> FARTHER SOUTH, DOWN THE LEVY, IT GETS WORSE THAN IT IS THERE.
IT IS IN A FLOODPLAIN [OVERLAPPING] AND CONSEQUENTLY THE FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR DON'T TELL THEM HOW HIGH THEY HAVE TO BUILD OR FINISH FLOOR UP AT.
HOW HIGH TO FINISHED SLAB OF A MOBILE HOME'S GOING TO BE?
>> YEAH. IT'S IN A X FLOOD ZONE, SO THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
THE MANUFACTURED HOMES ARE GOING TO BE UP THREE FEET OR WHATEVER SO THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE.
[02:45:01]
>> THEN AGAIN, IT'S ONE OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL ANALYSTS OR WHATEVER THEY'RE SAYING THAT, WE ANALYZE SOMETHING INDIVIDUALLY.
BUT HE DOES STILL SET THE PRECEDENCE.
I'M JUST SAYING ONCE YOU'VE DONE THAT THE DOOR HAS BEEN OPENED.
>> THE THING THAT GOT MY ATTENTION AND DAVID POINTED OUT WAS THE PIPELINES, THE ELECTRICAL LINES, THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY IS VERY, VERY LIMITED.
THERE'S NOT MUCH THAT CAN BE DONE WITH IT.
THAT'S WHY, IF IT CAN BE ANNEXED I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS LOCATION FOR THIS.
THERE'S NOT MUCH ELSE THAT CAN BE DONE WITH IT.
YOU CAN CRAM SOME THINGS IN THERE, BUT NOT MUCH.
BUT THE QUESTION IS ACCESS AND GIVING IT ANNEXED TO ME.
>> WE CAN DEFINITELY GET THE THING TO THE ATTORNEY IN THE MORNING OR WHATEVER, LET HER LOOK AT IT, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
>> THE OTHER INTERESTED BUYER IN THIS PROPERTY WAS GOING TO RUN CATTLE ON IT.
SO YOU WERE GOING TO CONTINUE [INAUDIBLE] A YEAR OFF OF IT.
>> RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT GET ANYTHING OFF OF IT BECAUSE IT'S A COUNTY'S [LAUGHTER] PROPERTY.
>> THE COUNTY'S GOING TO GET $50 OFF OF IT.
>> I'M OKAY WITH PROBABLY GET THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION BEFORE I MAKE A DECISION, LIKE JOHN, IF IT ALL HINGES ON CAN WE GET ANNEXATION? THAT WOULD BE IT. DO YOU ALL HAVE A TWO-WEEK WINDOW THAT YOU COULD SPARE?
>> WE DON'T MEET AGAIN TILL THE SECOND TUESDAY.
>> WE HAVE UNTIL THE 2ND OF SEPTEMBER TO END UP THIS [INAUDIBLE] AND MAKE A DECISION.
>> WE CAN NOT GET AN EXTENSION?
>> WE HAVE EXTENDED. [LAUGHTER]
>> DO YOU HAVE A CURRENT BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY?
>> DOES IT PHYSICALLY TOUCH THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LOT OF FM 523?
>> NO, IT DOES NOT TOUCH 523, IT TOUCHES THE EASEMENT.
>> YES, BUT IT TOUCHES FM 523 [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE OUR CITY LIMIT'S LINE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT MIGHT BE AN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION RIGHT THERE.
I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE AN EASEMENT THAT TOOK YOU.
THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY HAD THEIR ACCESS REMOVED WHEN 523 WENT THROUGH, SO THEY GAVE ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY.
>> BUT THE QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED IS, WHERE IS THE CITY LIMIT'S LINE AT THAT YOU COULD GO HERE? IF IT DOESN'T TOUCH YOUR PROPERTY, THEN WE GOT TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER ROUTE TO ABLE TO ANNEX A PROPERTY.
>> WE GO BACK HOME. I WASN'T DENYING YOUR PROJECT OR YOUR IDEA OF PUTTING THAT OUT THERE.
I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE THE STANCE THAT CITY DOESN'T GIVE.
I DON'T AGREE IN GIVING OUR WATER AND SEWERS TO SOMEONE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY.
>> DO YOU ALL AGREE THAT IF THE ROAD WAS DEVELOPED UP TO, AND I'M JUST ASKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THIS, IF THE ROAD IS DEVELOPED TO CITY STANDARDS THEN WOULD YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE US THE [INAUDIBLE], THAT WORD.
>> IT'S THE PHYSICAL LOCATION OF THE BOUNDARY OF THIS CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON.
>> LET ME EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU.
THEIR TRIANGULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY HAS NO CONTIGUITY TO THE CITY LIMITS.
THE CITY LIMITS LINE ENDS JUST TO THE WEST OF WHERE LOVE'S IS AT.
THERE'S AN INTERVENING PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY DON'T OWN BETWEEN THE BOTTOM END OF THEIR TRIANGLE OUT TO 523.
IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK AT ALL, IT'S GOING TO INVOLVE ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER.
AN EASEMENT IS NOT OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY.
IT DOESN'T GRANT ANYBODY, EXCEPT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY THE RIGHT TO REQUEST ANNEXATION, AND THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO ANNEX AT LEAST PART OF 523 IN ORDER TO GET TO THE DRIVEWAY LOCATION THAT EXISTS THERE.
WITHOUT THEIR EASEMENT DOCUMENT, WE CAN'T REALLY SAY WHETHER OR NOT THAT EASEMENT CONSTITUTES ANYTHING OTHER THAN A RIGHT FOR PEOPLE TO DRIVE ACROSS THIS INTERVENING PIECE OF PROPERTY TO GET TO THE PROPERTY THAT DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS TO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW.
WHETHER AN ANNEXATION CAN BE DONE OR NOT IS DEPENDENT, A, ON WHAT DOCUMENTATION THEY HAVE AND B, WHETHER THAT DOCUMENTATION ACTUALLY GRANTS SOME OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY ACROSS THE INTERVENING PIECE OF PROPERTY AND IF IT DOESN'T,
[02:50:02]
THAT IT MEANS THE INTERVENING PROPERTY OWNER HAS TO AGREE TO HAVE AT LEAST PART OF THEIR PROPERTY ANNEXED IN ORDER TO GET TO 523 WHERE THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO ANNEX PART OF 523 TO GET TO THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY TO HAVE CONTIGUITY WITH IT SO THAT IT WOULD HAVE CONTIGUITY WITH THEIR PROPERTY.YES, IT MAY BE DOABLE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING RIGHT NOW THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US THAT SAYS THIS IS EVEN POSSIBLE TO DO.
PARTICULARLY SINCE THERE'S AN INTERVENING PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY DON'T OWN.
>> THANK YOU, WAYNE. WALTER. UNDERVALUING. [LAUGHTER] WELCOME.
WE'RE AT A CROSSROAD [BACKGROUND].
>> IF YOU COME BACK THE 14TH, IF YOU HAVE GET TOGETHER, TALK TO JUDITH, FIGURE OUT YOUR YOUR LANDOWNER.
>> WE'LL TRY TO MAKE IT WORK, YES, SIR.
>> IT SOUNDS LIKE THE FIRST PIECES IT'S GOT TO BE WE'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH SAYING THE SAME THING I THINK OF, FOR THIS TO GO FORWARD, IT HAS TO BE ANNEXED, THE SECOND PART IS GOING TO BE ANNEXED.
I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHERE WE'RE AT.
>> WE'LL GET THE ATTORNEY ALL THE INFORMATION YOU' WANT.
>> THAT I DON'T WANT TO BE TABLED FOR THE NEXT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
>> I HAVE TO STEP AWAY, SO IF YOU WANT TO, TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AND THEN JOHN WILL TAKE ME THE REST OF THE WAY.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A RECESS AT 9:03.
>> WE'RE BACK AND WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO ITEM NUMBER 12.
[12. Discussion and possible action on the Heritage Tree Survey/Tree Preservation Plan (TPP) for Anderson Place.]
THE MAYOR HAS STEPPED OUT AND WE'RE MAYOR LESS.NOW IT'S FOR THE FUN. ITEM NUMBER 12, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE HERITAGE TREE SURVEY TREE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR ANDERSON PLACE.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TERM, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE HERITAGE TREE SURVEY, AND TREE PRESERVATION PLAN FOR THE ANDERSON PLACE.
SECTION 2360 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS THE CITY'S HERITAGE TREE REQUIREMENTS.
IT IDENTIFIES LIVE OAKS AND PECAN TREES AS BEING THE TWO HERITAGE TREES.
AS PART OF BEING HERITAGE TREES, THERE'S NO PROHIBITION TO REMOVING THEM, BUT THERE IS A REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT OF THREE CALIPER INCHES FOR EVERY ONE INCH OF HERITAGE TREES THAT ARE REMOVED FROM A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE IS NO DISTINCTION MADE ON THE SIZE OF THE TREES.
THERE IS NO ABILITY TO PAY A FEE IN LIEU OF PROVIDING THE REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES.
THE ORIGINAL PLAN ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES THAT WOULD NEED TO BE PROVIDED AS A REPLACEMENT FOR ALL THE HERITAGE TREES.
IT WOULD BE LOST AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.
THAT TOTAL TO OVER 3000 CALIPER INCHES OF REPLACEMENT TREES.
THE SECOND REVISED PLAN CREATES A SERIES OF CRITERIA THAT DON'T EXIST IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO DIFFERENTIATE THE TREES AND RESULTS IN NO REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES BEING PROVIDED FOR THE LOSS OF THE HERITAGE TREES.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DISCUSSED THIS ITEM ON THEIR AUGUST 5TH AGENDA, AND THEY DECIDED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REVISED PLAN BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ONE.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> I DO HAVE A REQUEST TO SPEAK.
MS. BONNIE MCDANIEL, CAN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR ISSUE?
>> COUNSEL, YOU KNOW WHO I AM.
BONNIE MCDANIEL AND I DO SERVE ON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION.
FULL DISCLOSURE THERE, SPEAKING ON MY PERSONAL BEHALF, NOT FOR P&Z.
I'M THE ONE WHO VOTED AGAINST THIS ITEM.
IT'S NOT A FEEL REAL STRONGLY THAT I NEED TO SPEAK UP BECAUSE I WAS SURPRISED AT OUR P&Z COMMISSION WHO VOTED SO QUICKLY WITH VERY LITTLE DELIBERATION IN FAVOR OF BASICALLY CLEAR CUTTING DECADES OLD TREES WITHOUT ANY COMPENSATION OF ANY SORT AS REQUIRED BY OUR CITY ORDINATES.
TREES IN OUR CANOPIES ARE IMPORTANT FOR OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AND BENEFIT OUR ENVIRONMENT, WHICH I'M SURE IS WHY THEY WERE INCLUDED IN OUR ORDINANCES.
[02:55:04]
I THINK SIX PAGES OF THAT ORDINATES IS IN YOUR PACKET, WHICH APPLIES IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE.I PRAY THAT COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER AN ALTERNATE PATH OTHER THAN THE DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL FOR THIS ITEM THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY WHILE NOT BEING AN UNDUE BURDEN TO THE DEVELOPER.
IN OTHER WORDS, CAN WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THIS AGAIN IN SOME FORM OR FASHION?
>> STAY THERE. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU AS IT RELATES TO P&Z.
I THINK I REMEMBER WATCHING THE VIDEO AND THE DISCUSSION, YOU CAN TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IT WAS AROUND THE PECAN TREES.
I THINK SOMEBODY MAY HAVE MENTIONED THAT.
WHY IS PECAN TREE A HERITAGE TREE OR THAT MANY PECAN TREES? I KNOW THERE WAS VERY LITTLE DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM, BUT I THINK THAT DID COME UP [NOISE] IS THE PECAN TREE SHOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED AS A GROVE OR SOME LIKE THAT.
>> I THINK BASICALLY THE THOUGHT WAS THAT POSSIBLY, PROBABLY IS BEFORE MY TIME HERE IN ANGLETON.
AT LEAST SOME OF THE TREES WERE PROBABLY PLANTED AS A PECAN GROVES, PROBABLY INTENDED FOR SOME PRODUCTION.
I'VE LIVED AND DRIVEN DOWN THAT STREET FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS AND I HAVE NOT SEEN MUCH ACTIVITY IF ANY FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS.
IT'S A STRANGE PIECE OF A STRETCH OF PROPERTY WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
THOSE TREES HAD BEEN THERE FOR SO LONG, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPER CANNOT BUILD HOUSES WITH THAT MANY TREES.
IT'S SUCH A LOSS BECAUSE THAT IS A PLEASANT DRIVE, SEEING THOSE TREES THERE.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE DEVELOPER AT LEAST OFFER TO PROVIDE SOME TREES THAT CAN BE PLACED SOMEWHERE IN OUR PUBLIC ROADWAYS OR PARKS OR SOMETHING SO THAT THEY COULD GROW UP.
WE HAVE VERY FEW TREES, VERY FEW AREAS IN THE CITY THAT HAVE REALLY NICE TREES.
AGAIN, THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION.
>> SURE. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU.
[NOISE] MAYBE THIS IS DIRECTED TO A WALTER.
I SEE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN A SUGGESTED MOTION.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS PLEASE?
>> THAT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS TO DENY BOTH OF THE PROPOSED PLANS BECAUSE NEITHER ONE OF THEM PROVIDED ANY REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 2360.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OBVIOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE REVISED PLAN.
THE SUGGESTED MOTION, I THINK BECAUSE AFTER PNZ MAKES A RECOMMENDATION, IT'S MY JOB TO REPRESENT PNZ'S RECOMMENDATIONS, SO I BELIEVE THAT THE SUGGESTED MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE REVISED PLAN, BUT THAT'S BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE PNZ RECOMMENDATION IS.
MY JOB AFTER PNZ MAKES A RECOMMENDATION IS TO REPRESENT THE PNZ'S RECOMMENDATION, THEN THE MOTION SHOULD BE REPRESENTING THAT RECOMMENDATION.
>> I'M JUST MAKING SURE I'M CLEAR. YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS SUGGESTED MOTION BECAUSE THE SUGGESTED MOTION IS BROUGHT FORTH THROUGH THE PLANNING AND ZONING'S VOTING?
>> I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED READING THIS.
DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE ALIGNED.
>> YES, I DIDN'T CHANGE MY RECOMMENDATION.
THAT'S THE STAFF WORK RECOMMENDATION.
>> THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. THE REASON YOUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION IS BECAUSE, YOU GOT TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT TO ME A LITTLE CLEARER. I'M SORRY.
>> THERE'S NOTHING IN SECTION 2360 THAT PREVENTS PEOPLE FROM CUTTING DOWN HERITAGE TREES.
BUT IT HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR TO MITIGATE THOSE LOSS OF TREES AT A REPLACEMENT RATE OF THREE CALIPER INCHES FOR EVERY CALIPER INCH OF HERITAGE TREES THAT ARE REMOVED.
IN THIS CASE, ON THE ORIGINAL PLAN, THAT WAS OVER 1,000 CALIPER INCHES OF HERITAGE TREES THAT WERE BEING REMOVED, WHICH RESULT IS IN A REQUIREMENT TO MITIGATE THAT BY REPLACING THAT WITH 3,000 CALIBER INCHES OF TREES.
[03:00:04]
THAT ORIGINAL PLAN, SIMPLY PROVIDED AS A PLAN AS IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT, AND THAT WAS IT.THE REVISED PLAN, AS I SAID, CREATED THESE CRITERIA THAT DON'T EXIST IN THE HERITAGE TREE SECTION TO ESSENTIALLY RESULT IN NO MITIGATION OF THE LOSS OF THE HERITAGE TREES.
IS THREE CALIPER INCHES AS REPLACEMENT FOR EACH CALIPER INCH OF HERITAGE TREES? IS 3,000 CALIPER INCHES TOO MUCH? THAT I CAN'T ANSWER FOR YOU.
THERE'S CERTAINLY GOING TO BE A COST TO DO THAT, AND IT CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO BE POSSIBLE TO DO IT ALL ON THE ANDERSON PLACE PROJECT, SO THAT IS WHY IN THE BACKUP THERE, I HAD SUGGESTED THAT THERE WERE LOCATIONS IN CITY PARKS THAT TREES COULD BE PLANTED.
THERE'S LOCATIONS IN CITY RIDE WAYS THAT TREES COULD BE PLANTED, THERE WERE ANY NUMBER OF OPTIONS HERE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PROPOSED.
HERE'S A COST ANALYSIS OF WHAT IT WOULD TAKE, WE'RE WILLING TO DO X AMOUNT, OVER X NUMBER OF YEARS, WE'LL DELIVER THE TREES, YOU PLANT THEM.
ANOTHER OPTION WOULD HAVE BEEN TO TURN THE LOT THAT HAS THE MOST NUMBER OF TREES ON IT INTO JUST A RESERVE LINE.
DON'T CUT IT DOWN, JUST LEAVE THEM THERE AS AN HOA, HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION MAINTAINED OPEN SPACE AMENITY FOR THE SUBDIVISION BUT THAT WOULD CAUSE THE LOSS OF A LOT FOR A HOUSE.
[NOISE] BUT NONE OF THAT WAS BEING OFFERED HERE.
IT'S BASICALLY, ONE PLAN IT'S IMPOSSIBLE, THE OTHER PLAN IT CREATES CATEGORIES OF HERITAGE TREES THAT DON'T EXIST IN THE ORDINANCE TO END UP WITH ZERO MITIGATION OF THE LOST TREES.
>> MY NAME IS MIGUEL WITH BAKER & LAWSON, AND I PREPARED BOTH TREE PRESERVATION PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY.
FOR MY IMPRESSION, I THINK THE BIGGEST ISSUE WITH THIS PROPERTY IS THAT THE LDC HAS SOME ISSUES WHAT CRITERIA OF TREES, BUT THEN AS WALTER STATED THERE IS AN ISSUE WHERE THERE'S NOT AN EASY OUT.
FOR WHEN YOU HAVE A SITUATION LIKE ANDERSON PLACE WHERE PARTS OF IT WAS [NOISE] PECAN ORCHARD, OR TREES THAT WERE PHYSICALLY PLANTED BY SOMEONE, AND THEY WEREN'T NATURALLY PUT THERE.
THE FIRST PLAN THAT WE PRESENTED, I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT WAS AN INDISCRIMINATE CLEARING, BUT WE'RE PROPOSING TAKING OUT MOST OF THE TREES WITHIN A CERTAIN BUFFER IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AND TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE TREES IN THE BACK.
I WOULD TAKE THAT IN AND GO WELL WITH THE CITY.
THEY TOLD US TO PUT SOME MORE CREATIVITY INTO IT AND SEE IF YOU COULD TRY TO PROTECT CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TREES, SO I DON'T MEAN THE OWNER.
AFTER THAT FIRST MEETING, AFTER OUR FIRST PLAN, WE ACTUALLY WENT OUT AND WE LOOKED AT WHICH TREES LOOK THE BEST? WHICH TREE SHOULD STAY THERE? THERE ARE SOME TREES THAT THEY GROW INTO EACH OTHER, NOT VERY SIGHTLY.
BUT WE CAME UP WITH THIS SECOND PLAN THAT ACTUALLY PRESERVES MORE TREES COMPARED TO THE FIRST PLAN, AND I ACTUALLY DO THINK IT'S OUR BEST EFFORT INTO CREATING SOMETHING THAT WILL LOOK NICE OUT THERE.
THERE ARE A FEW TREES IN THAT PECAN ORCHARD THAT ARE STILL GOING TO STAY AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER TREES ON THAT PROPERTY ARE GOING TO STAY.
WE ARE PROPOSING TO PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE LOTS TO KEEP IT WHERE EACH ONE OF THOSE LOTS CAN STILL DO THEIR BEST EFFORT TO PROTECT THE TREE EVEN IF IT'S SOLD TO ONE ANOTHER LAND OWNER.
WHAT THAT INCLUDES IS, WE'RE ENFORCING LARGER FRONT SETBACKS ON THE PROPERTY, CITY STANDARDS 25, SOME OF THESE LAWS WERE PROPOSING, I THINK 40, 50, AND 75 FOOT SETBACKS JUST TO PROTECT CERTAIN TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S ALSO A RESTRICTION ON PUTTING FENCING IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, AND THERE IS ALSO ANOTHER RESTRICTION WHERE WE'RE INCREASING
[03:05:02]
THE REAR SETBACK TO I THINK 40 AND 60 FEET AS COMPARED TO JUST 20.I DON'T THINK THERE'S A SITUATION WHERE WE [NOISE] CAN BUILD HOUSES ON THERE AND NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LDC.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CITY STAFF AND MS. BONNIE DO RECOMMEND PUTTING TREES OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT I THINK THE BEST SOLUTION IS THIS, IF YOU'VE GOT A PIECE OF TRACK AND IF THERE'S A PROBLEM THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE ON THAT TRACK, YOUR SOLUTION NEEDS TO STAY ON THAT TRACK TOO.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF UNKNOWNS WHEN YOU GET A THIRD PARTY CONTRACTOR TO GO AND PLANT TREES AND MAINTAIN TREES ON CITY PROPERTY. GO AHEAD.
>> YOU SAY YOU HAVE NO INTEREST IN ANY MITIGATION BY GIVING THE CITY TREES AS SUGGESTED BY WALTER OR MAYBE BONNIE, THAT WOULD BE THEN PLACED INTO THE HANDS OF THE CITY NOT THIRD PARTY? WE HAVE OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT.
>> I'LL LET JOHN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
IT'S JUST WITH ME, MY CONCERN IS, PLANTING A TREE SOMEWHERE ANYWHERE.
IF IT FITS IN THE RIDE WAY YOU GOT TO MAKE SURE YOU GOT SOME APPROPRIATE TRAFFIC CONTROL.
YOU'VE GOT TO PUT THE TREE THERE [OVERLAPPING].
THAT'S THE [INAUDIBLE] SIDE, RIGHT? CORRECT. THAT'S STUFF THAT'S GOT TO BE [OVERLAPPING] TALKED ABOUT.
>> YOU GIVE IT TO THE CITY AND YOU WASH YOUR HANDS.
>> WHY WOULD YOU CARE IF IT GOES INTO A RIDE WAY AND HE'S GOT TO DO CITY CONTROL WITH IT?
>> YEAH. I BUILT AN APARTMENT COMPLEX ONE TIME IN HOUSTON, AND WE BASICALLY BOUGHT 150, FIVE INCH TREES AND JUST GAVE IT TO THE CITY, AND THEY DID WHAT THEY WANT AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO DANCE THROUGH ALL THE HOOPS [NOISE] ON THE REST OF THE PROPERTY.
>> CORRECT. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NOT IN THE LDC THERE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF [NOISE] PLANT TREES ELSEWHERE.
>> WELL, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME FORMULA.
>> WHAT I WANTED TO PROPOSE WAS JUST, WE HAVE THIS ISSUE ON THIS SIDE, I WANT TO KEEP THE SOLUTION ON THE SITE.
ALL THE HOUSES WILL FACE OR THEIR ENTRANCES WILL BE OFF OF ANDERSON, RIGHT? YEAH.
THE ONE HOUSE SOUTH OF MAXINE LANE WOULD STAY OR WOULD IT GO AWAY? THERE'S TWO HOUSES THERE THAT ARE STILL THERE.
THEY WILL STAY THERE? CORRECT.
THERE'S A LOT OF TREES AROUND THOSE PROPERTIES.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SOME OAKS.
GOING BACK HERE, I WAS LOOKING AT THE LIST, AND YOU ARE TAKING SOME OF THE OAKS OUT? CORRECT. THEY'RE NOT LEAVING MUCH.
I MEAN, I'D TAKE OUT ALL TALLOWS, I UNDERSTAND.
IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU WANT BOTH.
YOU WANT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUT THESE TREES.
YOU WANT TO GIVE THE EXCEPTION THAT THEY ARE PLANTED SO NOT NATURAL.
THEN WHEN THE LDC SAYS THERE'S SOME SORT OF TRADE OFF FOR EVERY INCH MOVED, YOU NEED THREE INCHES HERE, YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, SO BASICALLY YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO DO IT.
[INAUDIBLE] OUR HERITAGE TREES, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING, THERE'S NOT ANY ONE THAT'S DOING THREE PER ONE, AND WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE DOING IN OUR COMMUNITY, MEANING THE BROADER SUPPORT AREA, THE ANGLETON DOWN HERE IS MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE TWO TREES ON A LOT.
MY QUESTION IS, HOW MANY TREES ARE THERE ON THIS THAT ARE HERITAGE TREES? SEVENTY FIVE.
I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT AND THERE'S ONLY 16 LOTS.
IF WE WERE GOING TO REPLACE 3000 WITH THE ORIGINAL COUNT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT $500,000.
[03:10:01]
I'M SORRY. THAT'S WHAT THE COST IS TO REPLACE 3,000.I THINK WE WOULD BE WILLING TO DISCUSS THAT.
BUT WHAT WE DID WAS WE'VE SAVED MORE TREES AND WE TRIED TO SAVE THE HERITAGE TREES AS DEFINED IN THE, WHAT AM I TRYING TO SAY? THE LDC.
IN AN ESSENCE PICKED UP COST BECAUSE WE'RE PUSHING THE HOUSES FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET.
WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS, IN ESSENCE, WE DID SAVE MORE TREES WITH THE SECOND GO AROUND AND ADDED COST IN REGARDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF WHERE THE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE BUILT.
THAT WAS JUST IN REGARDS TO DEALING WITH THE LDC ORDINANCE ON HERITAGE TREES.
I AGREE WITH BONNIE AND I AGREE WITH WALTER THAT THEY SHOULD PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE.
JUST LIKE MIKE, YOU SAID, GIVE THE TREES THE CITY.
WE'VE GOT PLENTY PLACES LIKE THE FAR TRAINING CENTER, [OVERLAPPING] FREEDOM PARK, ALL KINDS OF PLACES THAT THEY CAN BE PLANTED.
MAYBE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 3000 CALIPER INCHES BECAUSE IT WAS A PECAN GROVE.
BUT IT'S THE SPIRIT OF THE INTENT, AND AS OTHER DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE, MADE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY AND SO I GUESS I WOULD RECOMMEND DENYING OR DISAPPROVING THIS AND ASKING THE DEVELOPER TO COME BACK WITH A COMPROMISE PROPOSAL.
MAYBE IT'S HALF OF THAT OR A THIRD OR SOMETHING AND IT'S A DONATION TO THE CITY TO BE PLANNING THE DISCRETION OF THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, WHICH HAS LOTS OF MONEY TO PLANT THINGS [LAUGHTER].
I MEAN EVEN IF IT WAS AT 1300 INCHES.
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING SAY A THIRD OF WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, THREE INCH TREES ARE JUST THE TREES THEMSELVES ARE $150 A POP FOR A THREE INCH TREE.
THE LITTLE SUBDIVISION DOESN'T SUPPORT MUCH.
WE'RE ALREADY HELPING THE CITY BY REPLACING A SEWER LINE THAT WE SAID THAT WE WOULD DO.
IN ESSENCE, WE'RE REVITALIZING THE SEWER LINE THAT WE WILL BE INSTALLING FOR THE PECAN, THE SUBDIVISION THAT WE BACKED UP TO, BECAUSE THERE'S PROBLEMS THERE.
WE ALREADY PICKED UP A COST FOR PUTTING, IN ESSENCE, AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION THAT'S ALREADY THERE THAT WASN'T BUILT.
I MEAN, IT WAS IN ESSENCE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1962.
THERE'S ANOTHER COMPONENT HERE.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S A FINALIZED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON THIS PROPERTY YET.
THERE IS STILL TIME FOR YOU TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU WANT IN THAT AGREEMENT, IF THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE HEADED.
HAS A PLAN FOR THIS SUBDIVISION BEEN FILED FOR RECORD? YES, IT HAS.
OKAY. WE'VE BEEN DOWN THE ROAD WITH THIS SUBDIVISION ALREADY.
THE ISSUE OF PRE-PRESERVATION NEVER WAS BROUGHT UP AT ANYTIME PRIOR TO EVEN YOU COMING ON BOARD? RIGHT.
WAS IT IN THE CODE WHEN HE CAME ON BOARD? YES. IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE FIRST GYRATION OF THIS SUBDIVISION FROM LATE 2019? YES. THE LDC WAS IN EFFECT IN [OVERLAPPING] LATE 2019.
[OVERLAPPING] WHERE DOES THE THREE PER ONE WITHOUT READING THROUGH THIS WHOLE SECTION, WHERE DOES THREE PER ONE REPLACEMENT STATED? IS IT STATED IN OUR LDC? I JUST ASK WHERE IT IS.
WELL, IT'S NOT IN THIS STUFF THAT WAS IN OUR PACKET HERE.
EXCUSE ME. I BEG YOUR FORGIVENESS. I'M WRONG THEN.
[03:15:01]
YES, IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.>> 2099 IS THE REFRESHMENT FROM THE LDC.
>> YOU SAID THAT THE STANDARD LOCALLY IS TO PUT TWO TREES.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON DOING? IT'S PLANTING TWO TREES IN THIS LOT?
>> IF THERE'S A LOT THAT DOES NOT HAVE TREES ON IT OR JUST ONE TREE, WE'RE GOING TO ADD ANOTHER TREE TO THAT LOT AFTER THE HOUSE IS CONSTRUCTED.
>> WE WOULDN'T DO IT BEFORE, BUT AFTER, I UNDERSTAND.
>> WE WOULD BE GOING AGAINST P&Z RECOMMENDATION IF WE DO DENY THIS, JUST FYI.
>> WELL, I DON'T KNOW. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A CONTINUING GIVE-AND-TAKE WHERE WE'RE ARGUING BETWEEN NOT JUST P&Z, BUT WHAT STANDARDS ARE WE ACTUALLY GOING TO ENFORCE? WHAT STANDARDS ARE WE JUST GOING TO LET PEOPLE NOT [NOISE] ENFORCE.
IT JUST SEEMS THAT'S PROBABLY PART OF BEING JUST ON CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY UPHOLD YOUR CODE OR NOT.
>> I GUESS. HERE'S MY QUESTION IS IF THERE'S NOT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN YET, WHY ARE WE GOING THROUGH THIS BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT COMES THROUGH, WHICH WOULD HOPEFULLY OUTLINE EVERYTHING, RIGHT JUDITH?
>> I FEEL LIKE WE'RE BACK WHERE WE WERE A YEAR AGO, WHERE WE WERE TRYING TO DO THINGS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT AND THEN WE CAME BACK TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT.
THERE SHOULD BE A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THAT OUTLINES EVERYTHING.
AS YOU SAID, YOU'RE PUTTING IN WHAT CITY? YOU'RE FIXING CITY SEWER AND EVERYTHING.
THERE SHOULD BE SOME GIVE-AND-TAKE THERE.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULD TAKE AND SAY YOU SHOULD DO A THREE FOR ONE TREE SWAP RIGHT NOW AND THEN GO FIX THIS SEWER LINE.
BUT I'M THINKING IT SHOULD ALL BE OUTLINED TOGETHER.
YOU MIGHT HAVE TO DO A THREE TO ONE TREE.
>> WE HAVE SUBMITTED A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND IT HASN'T HAD A CHANCE TO BE REVIEWED WITH ALL.
>> CAN I RECOMMEND WE POSTPONE THIS UNTIL A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT'S DONE?
>> I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST ROUTE TO GO AT THIS POINT.
>> BUT ALSO THEY'RE TAKING OUT 65 BIG TREES, THERE NEED TO BE SOME REPLACEMENT, I THINK.
>> THAT CAN BE IN THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT.
>> I'M OKAY WITH I THINK TOO WHEN YOU LOOK IN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN NEGOTIATE AT CERTAIN POINTS, AND THEN, I UNDERSTAND THERE SHOULD BE SOME VALUE GIVEN FOR FIXING DRAINAGE ISSUES.
I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO BE REASONABLE AND WORK WITH YOU, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I DON'T WANT US TO IGNORE THE CODE THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED AND ALWAYS TAKE THE VARIANCE.
THAT'S JUST MY PERSPECTIVE FROM THAT.
BUT THERE CERTAINLY SHOULD BE VALUE GIVEN.
THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME UNDERSTANDING OF VALUE THAT FOR WHAT YOU'RE PLACING IN, WHAT THE STATE IS GAINING.
BUT IT ALSO WE FEEL IT'S FOR THE STANDARD OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON THAT WE PROVIDE TREES.
I THINK IN THE DEVELOPMENT GROUP, HOPEFULLY, WE CAN COME TO A MEETING FOR MOSTLY THAT IRON OUT TO WHERE WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> I THINK FOR MY UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS THE PIECE THAT IS POTENTIALLY IN DISAGREEMENT OTHER THAN THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE DID PRESS FORWARD WITH THIS OR MADE RECOMMENDATION.
WHILE WE'RE UNDER THE IMPRESSION ONCE WE HAD TO GET THIS PIECE COMPLETED.
THEN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHICH HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WHICH THIS HEDGES TREE RECOMMENDATION OR THIS HERITAGE TREE PLAN WAS A PART OF.
[03:20:03]
MAYBE WE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT WE NEEDED IT ALL AT ONCE.BUT BECAUSE THIS IS THE PIECE THAT IS [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT, BUT YOU'RE ASKING FOR SOME SORT OF RELIEF, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF PUTTING IN SEWAGE.
I'M SAYING YOU COME TOGETHER IN A COMPREHENSIVE NEGOTIATION THAT WOULD ENCOMPASS WHAT YOU BELIEVE YOU SHOULD BE JUSTIFIED.
WHEREAS THE CITY WILL OBVIOUSLY TAKE ITS POSITION AND THEN MAYBE HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET TO A WORKING PLACE ON THIS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PRODUCT GET DONE.
I ALSO, LIKE I SAID EARLIER, I DON'T WANT TO GO WAY OFF COURSE ON THESE VARIANCES.
>> THE GUIDANCE THAT I THINK I'M GETTING IS THAT THE STAFF GO BACK AND WORK WITH OUR ATTORNEY AND THE DEVELOPER FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH WILL GIVE CREDIT FOR SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE CITY SUCH AS SEWER, CONSIDER THAT.
>> THEN ALSO LOOK AT TREE, NUMBER OF SIZES, WHATEVER, AND REACH A COMPROMISE WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT POTENTIAL DONATIONS TO THE CITY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT SAME GOAL.
>> RIGHT. AS FAR AS TREES ARE CONCERNED, I'D RATHER SEE REPLACEMENTS SO THAT I UNDERSTAND.
THE THREE TO ONE RATIO IS A LITTLE [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE AMOUNT OF TREES IN HERE, CLEARING OUT.
BUT FINDING NEW TREES SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE CITY, I'D RATHER HAVE THAT.
BUT I WOULDN'T WANT IT TO BE CREDITED ON THIS, AS FAR AS THE COST OF GETTING THE TREES IN, I'D RATHER, CREDITS AND DEBITS BE TAKEN FOR CAR FEES OR WHATEVER ON THAT END FOR PUTTING IN THE NEW SEWAGE LINES.
>> I'D RATHER NOT [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] IN THE TREES.
>> YEAH. WE CAN TAKE ALL THAT IN CONSIDERATION AND COME BACK TO Y'ALL AND SAY, "HERE'S WHAT WE THINK THE WAY FORWARD IS."
>> LET'S IRON EVERYTHING OUT AT ONE TIME ON THIS.
OTHERWISE, WE'LL BE GOING BACK AND FORTH.
>> I FOUND A PARAGRAPH THAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT.
IT'S IN OUR PACKET, IT'S ON PAGE 211.
IT'S UNDER ITEM 8, REPLACEMENT AND PROTECTION OF HERITAGE TREES AND IT'S UNDER PARAGRAPH FOUR OF THAT.
"IF THE DESIGN SOLUTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO PRESERVE HERITAGE TREES, THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO DETERMINE THE COLLECTIVE CALIPER OF THE HERITAGE TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AND MULTIPLY THAT FIGURE BY THREE TO DETERMINE THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF TREE CALIPER THAT MUST BE PROVIDED TO REPLACE/REMOVE THE HERITAGE TREES." DOES OUR LDC TELL THE DEVELOPER WHERE THE REPLACEMENT TREES ARE TO BE PLACED? I REALIZE IT SAYS THERE MUST BE AT LEAST TWO TREES ON A LOT.
BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO REPLACE THESE TREES, DOES THE CITY HAVE ANYTHING?
>> THERE'S NOTHING IN THE HERITAGE TREE SECTION THAT REQUIRES THAT THE REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES HAVE TO BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY.
>> IT DOESN'T TELL BUT THEN IT DOESN'T TELL THEM WHERE THEY HAD TO PUT THE TREES AT PERIOD.
>> SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, I GUESS. I DON'T KNOW.
>> WHO HAS TO PUT THEM AT THESE PLACES.
>> WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY IF HE PUTS WHATEVER HE DECIDES TO PUT ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF, BECAUSE IF HE WANTS A STATICS OR WHATEVER HE WANTS TO SELL HIS VALUE, WE'D BE GIVEN CREDIT FOR ALL THAT HE'S PUT IN, TOO.
THEN WE GO TOWARDS THE TREE COUNTINGS.
>> I BELIEVE THERE'S A SECTION BELOW THAT THAT THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO PLANT TWO TREES ON NEW RESIDENTIAL LOTS, BUT IT ALLOWS FOR THE COUNTING OF ANY PRESERVED HERITAGE TREES TO COUNT TOWARDS THOSE TWO TREES.
THEY'VE DONE SOME OF THAT WITH THE REVISED TREE PRESERVATION PLAN.
BUT AS YOU'LL NOTE, NOT ALL OF THE LOTS HAVE TREES ON THEM.
THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PLANT TWO TREES ON THE LOTS THAT DON'T HAVE TWO TREES AND/OR PLANT ADDITIONAL TREES ON A LOT THAT MAY ONLY HAVE ONE TREE THAT'S BEING PRESERVED.
THAT REQUIREMENT WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE MET BUT AS COUNCIL MEMBER [INAUDIBLE] ASKED, I DON'T READ ANYTHING IN THAT SECTION THAT REQUIRES THAT ALL THE REPLACEMENT CALIPER INCHES HAVE TO BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY PLANTED THOSE TREES,
[03:25:03]
BUT THE OLDEST PICTURE THAT I CAN SEE ON GOOGLE EARTH, THAT THEY WERE THERE PRIOR TO 1995.THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE LIVED IN ANGLETON.
THEY HAD TO BE BECAUSE THEY'RE WAY OLDER THAN I AM, AND PLANNING THEM UNDER CONFIGURATION THAT THEY WERE PLANTED IS OBVIOUSLY NEW TO ME OBVIOUS.
IT MAY NOT BE TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
IT WAS INTENDED AS AN ORCHARD.
CONSEQUENTLY, AN ORCHARD WOULD FALL UNDER AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES.
WE CAN'T ASK HIM WHAT HIS INTENTION WAS WHEN THEY PLANTED THE TREES, BUT THERE'S A CAVEAT IN THE LDC ABOUT TREES THAT WERE USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES.
>> IT SEEMS WE'LL JUST WORK OFF BUT WE'RE SAYING, IN THE SECOND PLAN THAT I HAVE PROVIDED YOU-ALL, WE'RE NOT DISCOUNTING ALL THE TREES THAT ARE NOT HERITAGE TREES AS DEFINED IN THE LDC.
WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DO WAS PROVIDE A BETTER DEFINITION FOR WHAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A HERITAGE TREE.
WE CONSIDER THEM ANYTHING OVER 12 INCHES IN CALIPERS.
WE KNOW THAT CRITERIA IS NOT IN THE LDC.
THE TREES THAT ARE SPACED OUT THERE AT 30-FOOT SPACING THAT'S CLOSER TO THE HOUSE ON THE SOUTH END, I MEAN, THOSE ARE MAN PLANTED TREES.
WE DIDN'T WANT TO COUNT THOSE AGAINST THE OWNER.
WE'D LIKE TO GET THIS APPROVED TODAY, BUT IF THIS DOES GET PUSHED, THE THING I REALLY WANT TO STRESS IS WE NEED A BETTER DEFINITION FOR WHAT A HERITAGE TREE IS.
PRIOR TO THE P&Z, I HAD DONE SOME RESEARCH OF OTHER CITIES ON WHAT THEY DO.
CITY OF LAKE JACKSON, ANYTHING GREATER THAN 12 INCHES AND THEY HAVE A LIST OF TREES, IT'S NOT JUST PECAN AND LIVE OAK, THEY CONSIDER THOSE PROTECTED TREES.
THEY DO REQUIRE THAT IF IT'S A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM THE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN THAT THEY PROVIDE.
IF IT'S A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEY CAN TAKE OUT WHAT TREES THEY WANT, BUT THEY GET CREDIT FOR THE TREES THEY STAY, AND THEY ACTUALLY WORK ON A ONE CALIPER INCH TO ONE CALIPER INCH REMOVE AND REPLACEMENT RATIO.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE, THE CITY OF ALVIN THEY DO A ONE-INCH TO ONE-INCH REPLACEMENT RATIO.
THEY ALSO HAVE AN ADDITION IN THEIR CODE WHERE IF THEY KNOW THAT SOMETHING'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE IN THE PRESERVATION, THEY DO A COST FOR REMOVING A TREE IN THE CITY ALIGNMENTS.
I WILL SAY THIS, IN THE LDC, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOESN'T REALLY GIVE A LOT ABOUT, SO IT'S NOT CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THE OUTS CAN BE FOR THEIR PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE AT THIS POINT RIGHT HERE.
>> I THINK IF YOU WANT US TO REVIEW THAT, WE CAN AT SOME POINT, BUT I FEEL LIKE I'VE GOTTEN GUIDANCE FROM YOU-ALL THAT WE NEED TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
WE'LL TAKE IN CONSIDERATION SOME NUMBER LESS THAN 3,000 INCHES AND WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER ON THAT?
>> ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THAT'S THE BEST DIRECTION TO GO.
ANYBODY GOT ANYTHING ELSE ON THE SAME? MIGUEL, THANK YOU.
>> NUMBER 13, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER
[13. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-013 authorizing publication of Notice of Intent to issue Certificates of Obligation.]
20210824-013 AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.>> I'M JUST GOING TO INTRODUCE THIS ONE.
JOE MORROW, ARE YOU STILL WITH US, JOE?
I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS COMMUNICATED DIRECTLY TO JOE AND TOM, BUT WE DID BREAK UP THE NOTICE OF INTENT AND THE RESOLUTION FOR REIMBURSEMENT INTO THE TWO ITEMS THAT'S GOING TO BE NUMBER 13 AND 14.
THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP TO OUR EMERGENCY PROJECT IN UTILITY, THE WATER TOWER AND ISSUE A NOTICE OF INTENT AND THEN THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM WILL BE THE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION RELATED TO THAT.
[03:30:04]
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TOM SAGE WITH HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH.
I'M HERE WITH CELESTE KELLY WHO'S WORKING ON THIS TRANSACTION WITH ME, AND JOE'S ALREADY SPEAKING TO US IN A VERY DIVINE FASHION RIGHT NOW.
IT'S INTERESTING. [LAUGHTER] BUT IT'S A PLEASURE TO SEE ALL OF YOU THIS EVENING.
CLEARLY A LOT IS GOING ON IN TOWN.
ONE THING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITHIN A VERY SHORT ORDER, IS TO MAKE SOME REPAIRS TO THE WATER PLANT.
I'M SURE YOU-ALL KNOW ALL ABOUT THE ENGINEERING.
I WON'T TRY TO GET INTO THAT SINCE I'M A LAWYER AND I'LL GET IT WRONG, BUT IN ORDER TO FINANCE THAT, WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.
THESE ARE DEBT INSTRUMENTS OF THE CITY.
THEY'RE ISSUED AFTER PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE IN THE PAPER FOR 45 DAYS.
WE'LL WORK THROUGH THE MARKETING AND OFFERING OF THESE IN THE CAPITAL MARKETS AND THEN BRING AN ORDINANCE BACK TO YOU IN APPROXIMATELY 45 DAYS, TWO MONTHS, TO HAVE YOU APPROVE OR HOPEFULLY APPROVE THE FINANCING ITSELF.
AT THAT POINT IT'LL TAKE ABOUT 30 DAYS TO CLOSE AND FUNDS WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE CITY.
JOE USUALLY IS LEADING THESE, SO JOE IS THERE ANYTHING I'VE LEFT OUT OR SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH IN SO FAR AS EXPECTATIONS ON THE DEBT OR THE MARKETING OF THE DEBT?
THIS IS THE OFFICIAL KICK-OFF FOR US TO START OUR LEGAL TIMELINE AND WE'LL BE WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES TO BRING THE ISSUE TO MARKET, SO ASIDE FROM THAT, THE MARKET STILL SURPRISINGLY I JUST SCRATCH MY HEAD ABOUT EVERY DAY.
IT'S A GOOD TIME TO BE GETTING READY TO SELL.
>> EXACTLY. WE PREPARED A RESOLUTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THIS IS THE FIRST STEP THAT AUTHORIZES US TO PLACE THAT NOTICE IN THE PAPER AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROCESS.
>> JOE, ARE YOU STILL SEEING INTEREST RATES AROUND TWO?
>> WE ARE. I JUST SAW A SALE A SHADE UNDER TWO.
THAT WOULD BE A COMPARABLE CITY TO YOU-ALL THAT SOLD ABOUT A WEEK AGO AND RATES ARE STILL DOWN THERE.
I THINK WHAT WE PUT IN YOUR PACKET ARE THE RATES AT PLUS 15 BASIS POINTS, AND THAT'S CURRENTLY WHERE WE ARE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT AT TWO.
I THINK WHAT I HAD IN YOUR PACKET IS ABOUT A 215.
>> WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME? I SAW THE SCHEDULE DOWN HERE.
DOES IT AFFECT US IF WE GO OUT FOR THE BIDS ON THE 26TH OF OCTOBER SO WE'RE IN THE NEXT FISCAL PERIOD SO THAT THAT MEANS WE WON'T MAKE THE FIRST PAYMENT TO THE FOLLOWING PERIOD?
>> WE WILL HAVE THE FIRST PAYMENT PROBABLY IN FEBRUARY.
THESE ARE GOING TO BE CASH FLOWS FROM WATER AND SEWER REVENUE, SO WE DON'T HAVE THE ISSUE THAT WE DO ON TAX DEBT WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR TAX RATE ALREADY PRETTY MUCH WORKED OUT, YOU GO WITH YOUR PUBLICATION PROCESS.
BECAUSE THESE ARE WATER AND SEWER, WE'RE ABLE TO CASH FLOW THESE MUCH SOONER.
IT'LL BE JUST LIKE A NORMAL BOND.
YOU'LL HAVE JUST INTEREST PAYMENT IN 215.
I DON'T THINK WE AMORTIZE PRINCIPLE ON THIS ONE QUITE AS FAST.
WE HAVE OUR FIRST PRINCIPLE, AUGUST 15 OF 2022, SO IT'S A 20-YEAR SCHEDULE.
WE ALREADY HAVE IN THE BUDGET THE SEVEN DOLLAR INCREASE, AND THAT INCLUDES THE $2.4 MILLION OF CAPITAL PROJECTS.
THIS WILL FIT IN THE CURRENT BUDGET ON UTILITY SIDE, SO WE CAN DO IT NOW.
>> WELL, WHERE WILL FIRST PAYMENT BE IN? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FOLLOW OUR FISCAL YEAR, IT'S FOLLOWING THE CALENDAR YEAR, CORRECT?
[03:35:02]
BECAUSE WE'D GET THE DEBT ISSUED IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER OF '21, WE HAVE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT IN 2022.>> THAT'S CORRECT. YOUR NORMAL PAYMENTS ARE 2/15, 8/15, AND SO THIS JUST SYNCS IT UP WITH THE REST OF YOUR DEBT.
>> I RECOMMEND WE MAKE A MOTION.
WE APPROVE REVOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-001.
IS THAT THE RIGHT NUMBER? ANYHOW, THAT'S HOW IT'S NUMBERED IN HERE.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, THE SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA.
MR. SEIJI, YOU CAME ALL THIS WAY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO LEAVE US WITH, ANY PARTING WORDS OF WISDOM ON THE ASYLUM?
>> I AM VERY SHORT ON WORDS OF WISDOM BUT I APPRECIATE SEEING YOU.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE ITEM, SO YOU'LL HEAR FROM ME IN ITEM 14.
>> CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM NUMBER 14, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION NUMBER 20210824-014,
[14. Discussion and possible action on Resolution No. 20210824-014 expressing intent to finance expenditures to be incurred.]
EXPRESSING INTENT TO FINANCE EXPENDITURES TO BE INCURRED.>> THIS IS A VERY LONG TERM FOR WHAT'S CALLED A REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION IN OUR BUSINESS.
UNDER THE TAX CODE, ISSUERS ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS THEIR PRESENT INTENT TO REIMBURSE THEMSELVES FROM A FUTURE DEBT ISSUANCE, BUT THEY HAVE TO DO IT NO LATER THAN 60 DAYS FOLLOWING AN EXPENDITURE.
BUT WE CAN DO IT IN ADVANCE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
THIS RESOLUTION ANTICIPATES BOTH THE WATER PLANT CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, APPROXIMATELY $3 MILLION.
THEN THERE'S A SERVICE CENTER PROJECT THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING AT PURSUING, AND IT WOULD CAPTURE ANY OF THOSE EXPENDITURES AS WELL.
WHEN YOU ISSUE THE DEBT, YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPTION, NOT THE REQUIREMENT BUT THE OPTION TO REIMBURSE THE CITY'S GENERAL FUND FOR ANY EXPENDITURES FOR THOSE PROGRAMS. AT THE TIME, SOMETIMES PEOPLE DECIDE, LOOK, WE'RE FINE ON CASH.
WE DON'T NEED TO FINANCE THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT, AND WE JUST LEAVE THEM AS CASH EXPENDITURES.
BUT IF WE DON'T TIMELY APPROVE THIS, YOU FOREGO THAT OPTION FOREVER.
WE READ THAT FOR YOU THIS EVENING.
>> WE'RE ABOUT TO BE OFF AND RUNNING.
[INAUDIBLE] FOR SURVEYS, WE HAD REBOUGHT THE LAND.
WE'RE DOING THE SOL TESTING AND ALL THOSE THINGS.
PROJECT IS ROLLING, THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION WHICH WILL ENABLE US TO KEEP ROLLING SO THAT BY THE TIME WE HAVE FUNDS, WE HAVE CONTRACT LINED UP AND PLANS, AND CAN KEEP MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD.
>> CHRIS HILL, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD?
>> NO, JUST LIKE I SAID, I'D RECKON THAT WE WOULD GO AND IMPROVE IT.
EVEN IF LATER WE DECIDED THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO REIMBURSE OURSELVES, AT LEAST WE HAVE THE OPTION TO DO THAT.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE'RE TRYING TO GO OUT AND WE'RE SPENDING THE MONEY ON THE ENGINEERING AND EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW, WHERE DOES THAT COME FROM? FROM RESERVE ON THE WATER AND SEWER FUND?
>> WE ALREADY APPROVED THOSE FUNDS FOR THOSE ASSESSMENTS.
THAT'S ALREADY BEEN ALLOCATED.
>> RIGHT. WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION IN THE UTILITY SIDE, $4 MILLION ON THE GENERAL SIDE.
AS WE GO ALONG, WE'LL HAVE MORE FUNDS.
DEFINITELY, WE WOULD WANT TO REIMBURSE OURSELVES UNLESS SOMETHING BIG CHANGES AT A LATER TIME.
>> WOULD YOUR PROPOSAL BE TO REIMBURSE OURSELVES DOLLAR PER DOLLAR? [OVERLAPPING]
IT DOES INCLUDE THAT THE SERVER CENTERPIECE, WHICH IF WE DECIDE NOT TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT OR IF WE GO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEN I WOULD SUGGEST WE DON'T SPEND ANY MONEY OR MUCH MONEY UNTIL WE'VE DECIDED WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THERE.
>> RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT SPENDING ANY MONEY ON
[03:40:01]
THE AOC UNTIL WE GET FURTHER DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL.>> WANTED TO CHANGE AT NINE, BUT I'LL GO AHEAD. THAT'S ANOTHER ITEM.
>> I'VE ALREADY GOTTEN [INAUDIBLE] BEATEN OVER A COUPLE TIMES.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO NEED [INAUDIBLE] MORE.
>> QUESTION, THE ENGINEERING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN SPENT, YOU SAID 60 DAYS MR. STAGE. WHEN WE MAKE THIS MOTION, IT'S THE 24TH OF AUGUST.
ANYTHING THAT WAS SPENT PRIOR TO THIS BECAUSE IF THE COMPETITIVE BIDS DO GO OUT ON OCTOBER 26TH, DOES THAT MEAN ANYTHING PRIOR TO THE 24TH OF AUGUST IS NOT REIMBURSABLE?
>> NO. WE'RE ABLE TO LOOK BACK 60 DAYS FROM TODAY.
>> TO LOOK RELATIVELY INFINITELY. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I CAN GET INTO ALL THE NEW NUANCES OF THE TAX CODE OF IT.
THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO TELL YOU WHAT TIME IT IS AND NOT HAVE TO BUILD A WATCH.
>> THAT'S WHY THEY KEEP A BIG CLOCK [NOISE] SO YOU CAN SEE THE TIME. [NOISE]
>> HOW TO WORD THIS? [LAUGHTER].
>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION IN RESERVE FUNDING FOR EXPENSES INCURRED TO CLOSING AND DELIVERY OF FUNDS.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH FOR APPROVAL.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ANY LAST WORDS FOR THIS ONE?
>> NO, SIR. WE'RE READY TO GO ON THESE PROJECTS.
>> CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE.
>> YOU GOT TO SLEEP NOW. [LAUGHTER]
>> ITEM NUMBER 15, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON NEWGEN STRATEGIES AND SOLUTIONS,
[15. Discussion and possible action on NewGen Strategies & Solutions Water and Wastewater Financial Plan.]
WATER AND WASTEWATER FINANCIAL PLAN. MR. HILL?>> YES. BACK IN MARCH, WE HIRED NEWGEN TO DO WATER WASTE, WATER FINANCIAL, A FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN.
THEY CAME AND PRESENTED A PRELIMINARY REPORT.
TODAY, THEY WANT TO PRESENT THE FINAL REPORT.
STAFF IS ASKING THAT WE GO AHEAD AND PROVE THAT FIVE-YEAR PLAN.
HOPEFULLY, WE STILL HAVE THEM WITH US.
MEGHAN KIRKLAND FROM NEWGEN WAS GOING TO PRESENT TONIGHT.
>> I CAN HEAR Y'ALL. CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> ARE YOU GOING TO TRY TO SHARE YOUR SCREEN?
[BACKGROUND] ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE MY SCREEN NOW?
AS CHRIS SAID, WE HAVE TALKED BACK IN JULY, BUT I THINK JUNE MAYBE.
I'M JUST GOING TO GO AND DO A RECAP OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE AND WHERE WE HAVE LANDED ON OUR FINAL RECOMMENDATION.
WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH SOME INTRODUCTIONS AND JUST A SUMMARY HIGH-LEVEL, ONCE AGAIN, HAVE ALL OF OUR ASSUMPTIONS AND THE KEY ISSUES.
THEN WE'LL GO THROUGH AND SHOW YOU THE FINAL RULE PLAN THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING.
THE PROJECT MANAGER ON THIS PROJECT IS MACKEY GARRETT.
HE'S ONE OF OUR DIRECTORS AT NEWGEN.
I'M MEGHAN KIRKLAND AND I'M THE LEAD ANALYST ON THIS PROJECT.
WE'RE LOOKING AT HOPEFULLY 2022 FOR THE UTILITY FUND.
WE HAVE ABOUT $8.6 MILLION IN EXPENSES.
THEN WE BACK OUT ABOUT ANOTHER $375,000 OF NON RATE REVENUE WITHOUT ANY OF YOUR PENALTIES, CAP FEES, ANY OF THOSE OTHER MISCELLANEOUS TYPE REVENUES SO WE CAN GET A REVENUE REQUIREMENT OF ABOUT $8.3 MILLION.
THIS HELPS INDICATE TO US WHAT WE NEED TO RECOVER FROM OUR RATE.
>> MEGHAN, ARE YOU MOVING ALONG WITH THE SLIDES?
>> I AM. ARE THEY NOT SHOWING?
>> NO. WE DO HAVE THE ATTACHMENT IN OUR PACKET THOUGH.
THERE IT GOES. IS THAT YOU CHRIS, DOING THAT?
>> NOW, IT'S MOVING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE ABLE TO FOLLOW ALONG.
>> ARE YOU ALL ON SLIDE 7 NOW?
>> PERFECT. HERE, WE HAVE OUR KEY ISSUES.
GROWTH IS ONE OF OUR BIG ONES.
WE'RE EXPECTING ABOUT 3,000 NEW CONNECTIONS FROM 21 [INAUDIBLE].
THE NEXT BIG ONE IS [INAUDIBLE] OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND OVER OUR FIVE-YEAR FORECAST, WE'VE ESTIMATED ABOUT $21 MILLION IN FORECASTS AND IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
[03:45:01]
THE NEXT BIG ITEM IS INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND COST SHARING.FOR THIS, WE HAVE TRANSFERS FROM THE UTILITY FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND FOR FRANCHISEE, AND THEN ALSO ANY GENERAL AND INITIATIVE COST.
THEN BECAUSE UTILITY FUND IS PAYING ITS SHARE BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND, WE'LL ALSO HAVE THE CITY START PAYING FOR WATER.
THEN GOING INTO OUR RATE PLAN, I JUST WANT TO SHOW Y'ALL YOUR CURRENT RATES AGAIN.
IT'S ALWAYS NICE I FINALLY SHOW YOU ALL THE PRESSURE OF YOUR RATES.
I PERSONALLY DON'T EVEN KNOW THE RATES I PAY BECAUSE I DON'T LOOK AT IT EVERY DAY.
WE LIKE TO GIVE A REFRESHER OF WHAT YOUR RATES AND YOUR RATE STRUCTURES LOOK LIKE.
THE LAST TIME WE TALKED, WE SHOWED FOUR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
WE HAVE LANDED ON THE FINAL SCENARIO WHERE WE ARE FULLY-FUNDING CAPITAL, FULLY FUNDING OUR TRANSFERS.
THEN FOR OUR RATE, WE'RE MAKING THE COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLIER A 1.15 UNIFORM MULTIPLIER.
ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE CITY PAY FOR WATER AND WE'RE ALSO GOING TO CONTINUE THE TWO-DOLLAR DIFFERENTIAL FOR THE IMPACT FEE AREAS.
HERE, WE HAVE YOUR PROPOSED RATE AND THESE OTHER RATES THAT WE ARE PROPOSING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022.
>> DO YOU WANT US TO STOP YOU UNTIL IT'S OVER OR STOP YOU FOR QUESTIONS?
>> WHICHEVER YOU WOULD PREFER.
I AM OKAY WITH YOU STOPPING ME ALONG OR IF YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE END.
>> BECAUSE ALONG THE PROJECTED REVENUE REQUIREMENT, AND I SEE THAT THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT IS MORE IN 2022 AND 2023 THAN OUR PROPOSED RATES, AND THEN I SEE 2024-2026 OUTPACING THE REVENUE REQUIREMENT.
IS THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE STAGGERING IT THROUGH THE FIVE PERIODS SO YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT BACK ON A FIVE-YEAR PLAN BASICALLY?
>> YEAH. WE DO DRAW DOWN THE FUND BALANCE FIRM AND THEN WE DO OUR COVER IN THE LATER YEARS SO THAT WE CAN BUILD BACK UP OUR FUND BALANCE IF YOU HAD 90 DAYS CASH ON HAND TO MEET TARGET.
>> OKAY, AND THEN THESE RATES, THEY'RE ASSUMING THAT YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THE CITY IS PAYING BACK IN THE WATER.
DO WE HAVE THAT NOW? DO WE KNOW THAT?
>> WE DO HAVE THE CITY'S USAGE.
THEY'RE NOT PAYING, BUT WE DO HAVE THEIR VOLUME.
WE ARE ABLE TO SEE HOW TO USE THE VOLUME AND PROJECT THAT WAY.
>> WE KNOW THE ESTIMATES AND THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET RIGHT NOW.
>> NOW, I'M SURE YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT IS A SPLASH PAD EVEN MAKING SENSE BECAUSE NOW, BY THE WAY, YOU'RE DOING THIS, I'VE SAID IT BEFORE.
NOW THE CITY IS PAYING FOR WATER, SO NOW YOU'RE BASICALLY TRANSFERRING MONEY FROM PROPERTY TAXPAYERS TO WATER PAYERS.
THE [OVERLAPPING] MORE WATER WE USE AS A CITY NOW, WE'RE HAVING TO PAY BACK.
>> RIGHT BUT REMEMBER, WE TALKED ABOUT ALL THOSE COSTS THAT ARE IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT AREN'T BEING ALLOCATED.
>> [OVERLAPPING] BUT THEY'RE ALREADY FIXED COST.
I WOULD STILL ARGUE THAT POINT. THEY'RE FIXED COSTS.
>> FROM AN ACCOUNTING PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF ACCOUNTING.
THE GENERAL FUND IS A MODIFIED ACCRUAL ACCOUNTING, WHICH MEANS IT'S DIFFERENT THAN ACCRUAL ACCOUNTS.
THE FEES THAT ARE CHARGED SHOULD COVER THE COST.
WE SHOULDN'T BE SUBSIDIZING THEM WITH GENERAL FUND REVENUES.
>> I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT I'M SAYING THAT IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A COST, IT SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE ALLOCATED TO AN ENTERPRISE FUND THAT YOU WOULD HAVE NO MATTER IF YOU HAD THE ENTERPRISE OR NOT.
IT ALSO BEGS THE QUESTION OF, DO YOU START GOING OUT AND LOOKING AT OTHER COMPANIES TO PRIVATIZE YOUR ENTERPRISE BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE IN SOME CASES AT A LOWER COST? BECAUSE AS YOU CONTINUE TO ADD MORE FIXED COSTS INSIDE YOUR CITY, AS YOUR CITY GROWS AND YOU'RE ALLOCATING MORE FUNDS TO THE WATER SURFACE, AT SOME POINT, THAT WOULD OUTPACE THE THIRD-PARTY SERVICES IF YOU'RE DOING IT BASICALLY THE WAY YOU'RE TALKING [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT IS AN ACCEPTABLE WAY, BUT [OVERLAPPING] I'M NOT TO SAYING THEY'RE BAD, IT'S JUST RIGHT, AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE IT BALANCED IN THIS METHOD RIGHT HERE.
IF WE WERE TO SAY, "OKAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THIS ALLOCATION TO THE WATER FUND", WHICH WOULD ALLOW YOU TO HAVE LOWER WATER AND SEWER RATES, THAT WOULD MEAN WHAT REVENUE ARE WE GOING TO RAISE ON THE GENERAL SIDE, AND WE ALREADY SAID WE DON'T WANT TO RAISE ANYTHING ELSE THERE.
THAT WOULD PUT THAT OUT OF BALANCE,
[03:50:01]
THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CUT EXPENSES ON THE GENERAL SIDE OR SOMETHING TO MAKE IT BALANCE.>> THIS WORKS FOR THIS YEAR, AND IF WE GET TO NEXT YEAR AND WE HAVE MORE REVENUE IN THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE WE'VE GROWN FASTER THAN WE THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO GROW OR FASTER THAN THE PLAN HERE, THEN WE COULD CUT BACK ON THE WATER RATES SO THAT IT ALL BALANCES AT THAT POINT.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THERE, WE GOT TO GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B.
WHAT I'VE SEEN FROM THE CITY IN THE 13,14 YEARS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE CITY IS EVERY TIME WE START DOING ALLOCATIONS, THINGS GO HAYWIRE.
THAT'S JUST ME FROM MY EXPERIENCE FROM HERE. I'M HOPING IT'S DIFFERENT.
>> WELL, IT'S GOING TO BE SIMPLE [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE I ALREADY CALCULATED IT AND I'M GOING TO DO A TRANSFER, A NOMINAL.
IT'S GOING TO BE AUTOMATIC, SO EVERY YEAR WE'RE GOING TO LOCK IT IN.
>> HOPEFULLY, YOU'RE HERE THE NEXT 10 YEARS. [LAUGHTER]
>> SORRY, MEGAN, I HIJACKED. GO AHEAD.
>> NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE HERE.
I DO SHOW THAT DAY'S CASH ON HAND WHERE WE DO SHOW WE ARE DRAWING DOWN THE DAY'S CASH ON HAND AND THEN BUILDING A BACKUP, WHICH IS WHY OUR REVENUES ARE OVER OUR REVENUE APARTMENT IN THE LATER YEARS.
HERE I SHOW YOUR RESIDENTIAL WATER AND WASTEWATER BILL AT EIGHT WITH A 5,000-GALLON USAGE.
YOU CAN SEE WE PROGRAMMED IT SO THAT IN 2022, THERE'S A $7 INCREASE, AND THEN THE OTHER YEARS ARE AROUND $6-$5 AND WE DO, I'D LIKE TO SHOW COMPARISONS.
I DO THIS, I ALWAYS LIKE TO REMIND YOU ALL OF THESE ARE NOT APPLES TO APPLES.
THEY BUY THEIR WATER FROM DIFFERENT PLACES.
THEY MIGHT TREAT THEIR WATER DIFFERENTLY.
THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE IS DIFFERENT AND THEIR AGING CAN BE DIFFERENT, AND SO IT'S NOT QUITE APPLES TO APPLES BUT IT'S THAT COMPARISON THAT WE HAVE.
[NOISE] HERE YOU CAN SEE WHERE YOU STAND WITH A 2,000-GALLON MONTHLY WATER BILL, AND SO YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT IN THE MIDDLE AND YOU'LL GO UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT STILL, STAY RELATIVELY IN THE MIDDLE COMPARED TO YOUR COMPARED CITIES, AND HERE'S THAT 5,000-GALLON BILL WHERE YOU WILL GO UP BUT YOU STILL ARE IN THE MIDDLE TO THE HIGHEST POINT.
THE PATH FORWARD IS JUST AS CHRIS MENTIONED EARLIER, IS REACTION OR THE RATE PLAN FOR THE BUDGET ADOPTION.
IF YOU'LL HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HERE TO ANSWER THEM.
>> I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE 5,000 RATE COMPARISON TO THE OTHER CITIES, LAKE JACKSON AND CLUTE, AND PEARLAND AND MANVEL ARE GOING TO BE LOWER THAN US, INCLUDING LAKE JACKSON AND PART OF VWA.
WHY ARE THEY SO MUCH CHEAPER THAN US? HAS ANYBODY EVER ASKED THAT QUESTION OR INVESTIGATED?
>> JUST SO YOU'RE CLEAR THOUGH, THE 2,000 MANVEL'S GREATER THAN US, SO IT'S JUST SAYING IT.
>> THE AVERAGE PERSON'S 5,000.
>> BUT I'LL MAKE AN EDITORIAL COMMENT.
COLLEAGUE MEGAN SAID THIS IS NOT APPLES TO APPLES PER SE.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR PROBLEMS ARE, WHAT THEIR FORTUNES ARE.
>> WE CAN'T SAY THEY HAVE LESS DEBT THAN US, SO THEY DON'T NEED TO RAISE THEIR WATER BILL TO FIX IT.
IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO MY FELLOW CITY MANAGERS THERE, WE ALL FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN THE SAME BOAT OF AGED INFRASTRUCTURE.
SOME OF US HAVE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS AND WE'RE TRYING TO ADJUST THAT TO FIX THINGS.
>> I KNOW THE LAKE JACKSON ANSWER.
THEY HAVE TWICE AS MUCH SALES TAX AND THEY HAVE $5 MILLION OF INDUSTRIAL REVENUE.
THEY HAVE $7 MORE MILLION THAN US IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT THEY USE AS SUBSIDIZED.
WE HAVE $15 MILLION, THEY HAVE $22 MILLION.
[03:55:02]
OF COURSE, THEY CAN HAVE LOWER RATES.THEY'RE DOING THE SAME THING THAT WE WERE DOING PARTIALLY BEFORE, SUBSIDIZING THIS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS AFTER. THANK YOU.
THEY HAVE THE SAME SETUP AND INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE DO, WHERE THEY USE BOTH BWA AND THE WELL SERVICE.
>> BUT WE [INAUDIBLE] 9-10, SO WE USE A LOT MORE WATER, WE BUY A LOT MORE WATER COMPARED TO THE POPULATION.
>> THEN [INAUDIBLE] ARE THEY STRICTLY BWA?
>> ABOUT THE SAME WAY, I THINK. [INAUDIBLE] TOO.
[OVERLAPPING] I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RATIO IS, BUT I THINK [INAUDIBLE] IS ASKING TO GO UP ON THE WATER USES TO GET AWAY FROM THE WELL WATER.
>> THEN WHEN IT COMES TO WATER TREATMENT PLANTS, COUNCILMAN YOU PROBABLY KNOW THIS BETTER THAN ANYBODY, THE AGE OF OUR WASTEWATER PLANT, IN COMPARISON TO OTHERS, DO WE HAVE A MUCH OLDER ONE? OR THAT NEEDS MORE WORK AND MORE SERVICE THAN OUR AREA'S SISTERS?
>> YES, WE MAKE [INAUDIBLE] AND OTHER SEWER PLANTS AND WE ARE BEHIND, THEY HAVE UP-TO-DATE PLANTS [INAUDIBLE].
>> WE HAVE A CAPITAL PLAN HERE, MEGHAN CAN YOU MOVE FORWARD TO SHOW THE $21 MILLION THAT'S IN HERE ON THE CAPITAL PROJECT, SO WE CAN SEE WHAT WE WOULD BE SPENDING THAT ON?
>> BUT FOR PLANT COMPARISON, WE'RE DOING THE HEADWORKS IMPROVEMENTS, WE'RE DOING THE SKATE UPGRADE.
WE'RE DOING SOME THINGS, BUT WHAT'S REALLY KILLING US IS THE INIP'S.
THAT'S PUTTING A LOT OF STRESS ON OUR PLANT.
SO WE'RE GOING TO INCUR A HIGHER MAINTENANCE COST OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO WEAR THINGS OUT FASTER.
>> $12 MILLION THAT'S IN THE PLAN IS TO CREATE THE PLANT IMPROVEMENTS.
THAT'S HALF OF IT RIGHT THERE.
THERE IS OTHER PROJECTS RELATED TO OUR WATER AND WASTEWATER LINE THAT'S EVEN A BIGGER NUMBER THAT'S NOT IN THIS PLAN BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT OTHER FINANCING SOURCES LIKE THE TEXAS WATER BOARD.
I WILL SAY THIS IS A FIVE-YEAR PLAN.
[BACKGROUND] THIS WORKS FOR NEXT YEAR, WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE ONE YEAR AT A TIME AND EVERY YEAR WE CAN LOOK AT "HOW DO WE MAKE THIS BALANCE BOTH SIDES." BUT WE NEED TO COMMIT TO THESE PROJECTS THAT ARE COSTING US MORE MONEY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT FIXING IT.
CUSTOMER SERVICES USES POTENTIAL FUTURE FINES WITH TCEQ AND SO ON.
I KNOW AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH GROWTH THAT'S GOING TO COVER THIS.
THAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT UNTIL WE GET THERE, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME PLAN TO GET US FROM POINT A TO POINT B.
>> ISN'T THE GROWTH ALREADY ASSUMED IN HERE THOUGH? SO EVEN IF WE GROW [OVERLAPPING] IT JUST COVERS US.
>> WELL, [OVERLAPPING] IT IS ASSUMED IN HERE, BUT IT'S OVER THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD.
IF IT HAPPENS FASTER, OR IF WE HAVE MORE GROWTH OR MORE VALUE THAN WHAT'S IN HERE, THEN WE'LL HAVE MORE MONEY RELATED TO THAT.
IF OTHER THINGS OCCUR LIKE THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAPPEN ON THE OTHER SIDE, IF THERE'S MORE REVENUE THAN WHATEVER CASE, WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE SALES TAX NEXT YEAR WITH THE LAW CHANGE, WE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH.
A LOT OF THINGS COULD BE DIFFERENT NEXT YEAR WHERE WE HAD MORE REVENUE.
[BACKGROUND] THE CHOICE AT THAT POINT IS WE CAN DO A LESSER RATE INCREASE ON THE WASTE WATER SIDE, OR NOT DO THESE CAPITAL PROJECTS.
THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE. THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE A PLAN OR ELSE WE HAVE NO PLAN, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
>> WE NEED TO DO THESE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS. IT IS IMPERATIVE.
WE STILL HAVE A BUCKET WITH HOLES IN IT WE KEEP TRYING TO FILL UP.
AS LONG AS THERE'S HOLES IN THAT BUCKET, YOU JUST CAN'T FILL IT UP, YOU CAN'T EVEN CATCH UP SOMEDAY, SO YES, SIR.
>> THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN THE BUDGET, WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING WITH THE BUDGET.
WE'D ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE $7 INCREASE NEXT YEAR.
EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS IN THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING,
[04:00:01]
[NOISE] WE STICK WITH OUR CURRENT PLAN.THIS WOULD BE THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN.
IF WE GET THERE A YEAR FROM NOW, IT'S OKAY, THINGS HAVE CHANGED, THEN WE CAN TWEAK THE PLAN, BUT WE NEED A PLAN.
>> HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THE $700,000?
>> THE COSTS THAT ARE IN THE GENERAL? I WENT DEPARTMENT BY DEPARTMENT, I DID AN ALLOCATION BASED ON EXACTLY WHAT COSTS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED.
CERTAIN THINGS, LIKE ADMIN, CHRIS, IT'S HALF HIS WORK, IS FOR THE UTILITY.
SO THAT'S A 50-50, BUT HR, I DID IT BY EMPLOYEE COUNT, SO ONLY 22 PERCENT OF THAT IS GOING TO THE WATER SIDE.
GLEN, EMS, ABOUT 20 PERCENT OF HIS PROJECTS.
SO I DID AN ALLOCATION ON EVERY DEPARTMENT THAT'S IN THE GENERAL FUND THAT SERVICES UTILITY FUND BASED ON THE PROPER ALLOCATION METHOD. THAT MADE MOST SENSE.
>> BUT EVERY DEPARTMENT IS A DIFFERENT ALLOCATION METHOD?
>> RIGHT. YES. [OVERLAPPING] THE ONES THAT ARE 50-50 ARE FINANCE AND ADMIN BECAUSE THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT IT IS.
>> I'M GOOD. WE CAN TALK LATER.
>> [LAUGHTER] SURE, COME BY AND SEE ME, WE PROBABLY SHOULD TAKE THIS OFFLINE. [LAUGHTER]
>> WELL, WE'D HAVE TO GO AT EACH CITY IN THE COUNTY THAT ARE LISTED HERE, AND INTERROGATE THEM OR ASK THEM FOR WATER RIGHTS FOR THE WAY THEY ARE, SO WE CAN COME UP WITH A DECENT ANSWER FOR WHY THE WATER RATES' DIFFERENT.
>> I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR BEST PRACTICES METHOD.
[LAUGHTER] IF SOMEBODY'S DOIN.
G SOMETHING TO LOWER THEIR COST OR TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, WHY NOT ASK? THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING FOR, NOT REALLY LIKE, [OVERLAPPING] WHAT KIND OF RATING ARE YOU GETTING OVER HERE BECAUSE WHAT DEAL DO YOU HAVE?
>> BUT I THINK ONE OF THEM, IT'S MAYBE CLUED OR SOMETHING, THEY DO A CPI INDEX.
SO EVERY YEAR THEY DO TWO PERCENT NO MATTER GOOD, BAD, OR UGLY, AND THEIR WATER BILL GOES UP.
>> WELL. [LAUGHTER] IT DOES MAKE YOU WONDER WHAT TO DO [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER].
>> I GET NOW. A BASELINE OR BEST PRACTICE.
>> I'LL MAKE THAT CLOSE 2.0S NEXT PROJECT [LAUGHTER].
>> WE NEED A MOLE IN THE TWENTIES [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER].
>> MOVE, WE ADOPT A PLAN, WE CAN USE IT SHORT AND SWEET LIKE THAT.
>> SURE. ADOPT THE FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN TALSON TO PROVE THE FIVE-YEAR WASTEWATER AND WATER PLAN.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I.
>> ALL THOSE OPPOSE, SAME SIGN, MOTION CARRIES.
ITEM NUMBER 16, DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED LAKESIDE PARK CONSTRUCTION CUTS
[16. Discussion and possible action on proposed Lakeside Park construction cuts and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract upon legal review.]
AND AUTHORIZED AS A SCENE MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT CALMLY GO REVIEW BEFORE YOU GET STARTED.MEGHAN FROM NEWGEN STRATEGIES.
THANK YOU FOR STAYING UP LATE AND HELPING US.
>> PLEASE THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
THIS ITEM IS BEING BROUGHT BACK TO YOU ALL WE'VE MET TO DISCUSS PROPOSED VALUE ENGINEERING CUTS FOR LAKESIDE PARK CONSTRUCTION ON JULY 13TH.
CITY COUNCIL REQUESTED THAT THE CONTRACTOR FIND ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO COVER FOR AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT.
STAFF DID MEET WITH DL MEACHAM AND CLARK CONDON ON AUGUST 5TH AND AUGUST 12TH TO DISCUSS OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADDITIONAL CUTS INCLUDING CONVERTING THE PARKING TO ASPHALT, EXCLUDING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON, AND CURBING, ASSESSING FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS WITH THE ENGINEER.
REPLACING THE KAYAK DOCK WITH AN EZ DOCK SYSTEM, VALUE ENGINEERING LIGHT FIXTURES, [BACKGROUND] AND CONSIDERING HEARTY CITING RATHER THAN WHAT ON THE PAVILION STRUCTURE.
WE DID MEET WITH THEM, THOSE WERE THE INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE WANTED TO RESEARCH A LITTLE BIT MORE.
WHEN WE MET ON AUGUST 12TH, WE HAD SOME ACTUAL NUMBERS TO DISCUSS WITH THE GROUP, BOTH CLARK CONDON AND DL MEACHAM.
THEY DETERMINED THAT CHANGING THE PARKING TO ASPHALT EXCLUDING THE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON, CURB AND GUTTER COULD REDUCE COST BY ABOUT 70,000.
FOUNDATION ALTERNATIVES WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DESIGN PROVIDING VERY LITTLE SAVINGS,
[04:05:06]
REPLACING THE KAYAK LAUNCH WITH AN EZ DOCK SYSTEM.ALSO DID NOT PROVIDE AMPLE SAVINGS.
WE ARE ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE DESIGN OF THE LAUNCH AND HOW THE EZ DOCK SYSTEM, BECAUSE IT IS ANCHORED BY FOUR POLES, HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT THE PIVOT IN STRUCTURE THAT IS OVERHANGING BECAUSE AS THE WATER RISES AND FALLS.
IF IT DOES RISE UP TO THAT CANTILEVER DECK, WE WEREN'T SURE HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT THE OVERALL STRUCTURE LONG-TERM.
WE DID ALSO DISCUSS OR WE HAD HOPED TO FIND SOME ADDITIONAL SAVINGS WITH VALUE ENGINEER LIGHTING.
I KNOW IN YOUR AGENDA SUMMARY IT SAID THAT WE DID FIND SOME, WE DID TRY TO PUT THIS AGENDA ITEM TOGETHER IN ADVANCE.
THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT HAS COME OUT JUST SINCE WE SUBMITTED THIS 'TILL TODAY.
SOME OF WHICH I TRIED TO UPDATE CHRIS AND HE MAY HAVE SENT YOU ALL AN UPDATE REGARDING SOME ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES FOR THE PLAYGROUND.
WE THOUGHT THAT WE COULD PULL THE PLAYGROUND AND PUT IN PLACE STRUCTURE FROM THE CONTRACT COMPLETELY AND TRY TO GO WITH AND CONSIDER OTHER PLAYGROUND VENDORS WHO HAVE ANNUAL MATCHING GRANTS.
ONE OF WHICH YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH.
WE'RE INSTALLING DICKEY PARK BUT [BACKGROUND] WAS INITIATED THIS WEEK.
WE DID FIND OUT TODAY THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO FIND MANY SAVINGS.
A LOT OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH STILL THE INCREASED PRICING OF STEEL.
WHAT THE CONTRACTOR HE HAD PLANNED ON BEING HERE TONIGHT, ANDREW WALTON, AND WAS NOT ABLE TO JOIN US, BUT HE DID WANT TO NOTE THAT SINCE WE HAVE RECEIVED OUR BID TABULATION, PRICES HAVE FLUCTUATED, WHETHER IT'S LUMBER, STEEL, WHATEVER IT IS.
THEY ARE HONORING THE PRICES THAT ARE ON HERE THAT THEY'RE ABSORBING 20-30000 AND STILL ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME ALTERNATIVES HERE FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER.
BUT WE DID FIND THAT THE PLAYGROUND, TAKING THAT OUT OF THE CONTRACT IS NOT IN OUR BEST INTERESTS.
THE VENDOR, EVEN WITH THE GRANT THAT WE HAD HOPED WE COULD OBTAIN, REALLY WOULDN'T GET US TO THE PRICE POINT THAT CITY COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR.
WHEN WE TALKED LAST, THAT WAS AROUND $50,000.
WE ARE RECOMMENDING OR STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE APPROVE THE HEARTY SIDE AND WE DO THINK THAT WOULD BE A BETTER LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE ALTERNATIVE TO THIS CEDAR THAT WE WOULD LIKELY HAVE TO.
WE'LL JUST HAVE MORE MAINTENANCE AS IT RELATES TO TREATMENT AND CEILING.
THAT, BEING THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE THAT WE ACCEPT TO REDUCE LAKESIDE PARK CONSTRUCTION COST.
OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO ALSO COVER THE EXCESS COST WITH GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AFTER LEGAL REVIEW, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING.
I WILL NOTE THAT WE HAD AT THE LAST MEETING ALSO DISCUSS SOME CORPORATE SPONSORS.
WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING TO DATE ON IF THAT HAS COME TO FRUITION.
THAT IS STILL SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER AS WE MOVE INTO CONSTRUCTION.
I JUST WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO YOU ALL.
I SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT CLARK CONDON COMPLETED REVISIONS REQUESTED BY RANDALL LAW OFFICE TO THE AAA CONTRACT.
AIA CONTRACTS ARE PRETTY STANDARD AND GENERALLY THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS NO OBJECTION, BUT WE'LL COMPLETE THE LEGAL REVIEW PRIOR TO EXECUTION.
BUT AGAIN, THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET.
>> MY COMMENT ON THE 70,000 AND SAVINGS FOR THE MOVING FROM CONCRETE ASPHALT.
WE SHOULD FIND FROM SOME AMERICAN RECOVERY OR SOMETHING BECAUSE LONG-TERM, IF WE SWITCHED TO ASPHALT WILL HAVE THE SAME POSITION WE HAVE AT [INAUDIBLE] PARK WELL.
>> WE HAVE TO OVERLAY IT ALL THE TIME.
>> THAT'S WHY THAT'S NOT A RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF.
>> I THINK WE STICK WITH THE CONCRETE THERE FOR SURE.
>> I'M GOING TO BRING THAT TO YOU'LL HERE TO TALK ABOUT AND ADD SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AND ARE HAPPY YOU DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT AS A OPTION. BUT YOU'LL.
>> SEEMS LIKE A WORTHY OPTION TO, BECAUSE WE STILL WANT THIS TO BE OUR ONE OF OUR PREMIER FOOTPRINTS, IF YOU WILL.
CERTAINLY ON THE ONE OF THE MAIN THOROUGHFARES INTO TOWN AND SOON TO BE ANOTHER THOROUGHFARE PASSING THROUGH THAT AREA, RIGHT JOHN?
[04:10:01]
>> BUT NO, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A WISE INVESTMENT AND A LONG-TERM TOO.
[OVERLAPPING] I'M FOR THE ARRA [INAUDIBLE].
>> RIGHT. THAT WOULD BRING US TO AROUND, I'M NOT LOOKING EXACTLY AT THE NUMBERS, BUT AROUND A 112,000 OVER IF WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE TAKE 70,000 OF THAT FROM THE ARRA.
THAT WILL OBVIOUSLY REDUCE THE COST AS WELL, REDUCING THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD PROPOSE BE TAKEN OUT OF GENERAL FUND RESERVES.
WE HAVE THE MONEY IN THE ACCOUNT, IS JUST A MATTER OF COMING BACK TO STAFF OR COME BACK TO COUNCIL WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHATEVER GUIDANCE WE'LL PENCIL THAT IN THERE WE'LL COME BACK AND WE'VE [NOISE] GOT SOME WASTEWATER PROJECTS AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE NEED TO PROBABLY STREETS, SOLAR LIGHTS. THAT'S WORK.
THAT'S ABOUT 43,000 AND IT WOULD BE COMING FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVE, WHICH IS BELOW THE THRESHOLD THAT YOU REQUESTED.
NOW ASK EVERYONE, BEFORE THINGS GO WRONG.
WHERE DO THE FUNDS IN THE GENERAL FUND COME FROM? PROBABLY TAX.
HOW DO WE DECIDE WHO GETS TO TAP INTO, IS THERE PROTOCOL? YOU ALL DO THAT.
JUST WHATEVER, YOU WANT TO COUPLE OF DOLLAR, THEY WANT 3,4 DOLLARS, SOMEBODY WANTS 5 OR6.
IT LARGELY DEPENDS ON US MAKING THAT OR SOMETIMES STAFF WILL COME TO US WITH AN EXPENDITURE THAT THEY FEEL THAT THEY NEED THAT WASN'T IN THE BUDGET, THAT WE NEED TO PULL FROM RESERVE FUND.
ULTIMATELY, THE ANSWER IS WE ADOPT IN THE BUDGET, EVERYTHING FROM THE GENERAL FUND.
BUT WE HAVE A 90 DAY RESERVE THAT WE SAY WE MAINTAIN AS A MINIMUM AND WE DON'T WANT TO GO BLOW THAT VIRTUAL UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY.
BUT IT'S ALWAYS HAS BEEN IT'S DISCRETIONARY.
THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL IS ALWAYS ASKING ABOUT, GETTING AWAY FROM THAT [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING].
RAILING AGAINST THE TRANSFER BECAUSE IT'S TO MAKE THE WATER FUNDING INCREASINGLY CAN REDUCE THE COSTS ON GENERAL FUND.
BUT IT'S ULTIMATELY OUR DISCRETION.
WHAT HAPPENS IN VERIFICATION ON MY PART LIKE TO ASK FOR MONEY FROM GENERAL FUND [LAUGHTER] WELL, WHAT HAPPENS? [OVERLAPPING] WHAT ABOUT THE FUND RESERVE ON AVLC? WHAT DO WE HAVE THERE? THAT'S AROUND LITTLE LESS THAN 800,000.
THAT'S THE HALF SINCE THOSE STUDIES.
BUT YOU HAVE TO FIGHT CHARLENE FOR THAT MONEY.
I WILL SAY THAT THEY ARE PUTTING THEIR FOOTING THE BILL FOR A FAIRLY LARGE PROJECT THIS NEXT SHARE, WHICH IS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FOR FREEDOM PARK.
ON THE AGENDA WAS FOR LIGHTING OR FIELD PIPE AND SOME OTHER STUFF.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, SEASONAL WE'RE WELL OVER THE 90 DAYS IN GENERAL FUND.
WE'RE OUT OF RESOURCE AND NOT HAVE TO LOOK BACK AND SAY, "DAMN WHICH WE'VE DONE IT." ALTHOUGH HERE LATELY EVERYTHING IS THE CROWN JEWEL WHO ARE HERE.
IT'S JUST THAT IT'S SITUATED ALONG WAY AWAY FROM SOME PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS TOWN.
IF YOU LIVED DOWN ON PHILIP ROAD, YOU GOT TO HIKE TO GET TO LIKES THAT PARK.
IF YOU DON'T DRIVE, YOU DON'T WANT TO GET THERE, YOU MIGHT NOT GET THERE.
YEAH. WE COULD HAVE THAT, I MEAN, WHERE'S THE HIGH SCHOOL [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] THAT'S A LONG WAYS.
YOU GOT TO MENTIONED MR. [INAUDIBLE] I KNOW YOU'RE LISTENING.
NO, I'LL READ THIS STUFF [INAUDIBLE] GOOD POINT. WHAT ACTION WOULD LIKE US TO TAKE, MEGAN? STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE ALTERNATE OF HARDY CITING AND THAT BE THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE THAT WE APPROVE AND THAT WE COVERED THE EXCESS COST FOR THE GENERAL FUND RESERVES.
IN ADDITION TO I'M ASSUMING THAT ARRA NEED TO ADDRESS THAT RECOMMENDATION TO REFLECT
[04:15:05]
THAT DIRECTION AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AFTER A LEGAL REVIEW.I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE HARDY CITING.
I'M SORRY, I'M BLANKED OUT THERE.
TO IMPROVE THE HARDY CITING, AS WELL AS TO HAVE EXCESS COSTS POTENTIALLY FUNDED FROM THE GENERAL RESERVE WITH THE INCLUSION OF POSSIBLY RECEIVING FUNDS FROM THE ARRA TO COVER THAT EXPENSE AND THEN TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AFTER LEGAL REVIEW. IS THAT CLEAR? YEAH.
HOW ABOUT WE BRING THAT BACK IN SEPTEMBER FOR THE FUNDING PIECE, WE CAN FINALIZE WHICH ONE WE'LL FUND OUT OF ARP AND GENERAL FUND AND WHATEVER THE MIX IS? DO YOU WANT TO MODIFY MY MOTION THERE? NO. I'M JUST CLARIFYING THAT YOU ALL GET A SAY IN WHAT WE FUND OUT OR WHAT IF THERE'S DIRECTION, THAT'S ALL.
I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MACKENZIE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MARK GONGORA.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO GET TO CONTRACT TO GO AND FIX A GATE INTO THE RAINY SEASON.
I THOUGHT THAT JULY AND AUGUST WERE RAINY, BUT IT'S NOT HERE.
[OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE] IT'S NOT RAINY SEASON, IT'S PEAK HURRICANES. THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS AGENDA? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.
THE MAYOR WENT THROUGH A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT ITEMS, SO I'M NOT SURE IF WE [OVERLAPPING] I THINK THIS BRINGS US TO ADJOURNMENT AT 10:50.
[NOISE]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.