>> [BACKGROUND] [NOISE] WE WILL GO AHEAD [DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER ] [00:00:03] AND CALL THIS MEETING OF THE CITY OF SINGLETON CITY COUNCIL, DECEMBER 14TH AT 06:00 PM TO ORDER. WE HAVE A QUORUM, WE'RE MISSING OUR ILLUSTRIOUS MAYOR. WE WILL START WITH PLEDGED ALLEGIANCE AND INVOCATION. COUNCILMAN TOWNSMEN WOULD YOU LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE AND COUNCILMAN BOOTH INDICATION. >> >> BOW WITH ME PLEASE. FATHER AGAIN, WE THANK YOU FOR ANOTHER DAY YOU'VE GIVEN US A DAY THAT YOU MADE. FATHER WE ASK YOU TO LEAD US TONIGHT AS WE GO ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS, THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY. FATHER WE WANT TO PRAY ESPECIALLY TONIGHT FOR THE MANY, MANY CASUALTIES AND FAMILIES OF LOST LOVED ONES IN THE TORNADO OVER THERE. FATHER JUST BE NEAR THEM, COMFORT THEM, BE THEIR NEED. FATHER, GIVE US YOUR WISDOM TONIGHT. GO WITH US INTO THIS CHRISTMAS SEASON. FATHER HELP US TO BE REMINDED OF WHY WE CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS, SUPPORTING YOUR NAME, WE PRAY, AMEN. >> I HAVE ONE REQUEST TO SPEAK. [CITIZENS WISHING TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL ] MR. APLIN, PODIUMS IS YOURS. [NOISE] >> GOOD EVENING [INAUDIBLE] HOPE I DON'T HAVE TO START OVER. >> NO, YOU'RE GOOD. >> OKAY, THANKS. [LAUGHTER] NOW, THEY'VE GOT PAPERWORK ADMINISTRATION, THEY'RE CALLED THE PID ADMINISTRATOR. SO WE'RE AT FIVE PERCENT AGREED UPON, CONTRACTS AND ALL THAT. BLACK HOLE, JOHN SNYDER WITH P3 AND SAY, 'WE'VE GOT A PROBLEM.' WELL, HE UNDERSTANDS THE PROBLEM IN SAYING; WE HAD THE SAME ISSUE WITH GREEN TRAILS AHEAD OF US. THEY'VE RELEASED GREEN TRAILS WHOLESALE IS GOING TO ADMINISTER THAT PIT AT THE RATE THAT WAS AGREED AND THEY'RE GOING TO RELEASE GRAVESTONE. YOU ALL HAVE CONTRACT FOR P3 FOR THEM TO ADMINISTRATE THE PITS. SO, A GREEN TRAILS AND P3 IN GRAVESTONE WILL BE ADMINISTERED WITH WHOLESALE UNDER THE AGREEMENT WE MADE AND P3 IS FINE WITH THAT. WE HAD TO GO THROUGH P3S AND THEN SEND THE STUFF TO CHRIS, CHRIS DID WHAT HE NEEDED TO DO, WHICH MEANT ASSUMING WE'D NEED TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS AND GET APPROVAL THAT HALLS HILL ADMINISTRATORS THAT. SO THAT'S THAT. NEXT TIME WE WILL BE BACK, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE CRITICAL THAT STAFF AND YOUR ATTORNEY AND OUR ATTORNEY DOES GET THIS STUFF TOGETHER BECAUSE WE WERE THINKING TONIGHT I WAS GOING TO BE THE NIGHT. NOW WE'RE PUSHING OFF ONE MORE TIME. NOW, WE NEED STAFF'S COOPERATION AND YOUR ATTORNEYS COOPERATION. SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, NOVEMBER 9TH, WE WERE COMING HERE WITH A FULL COMPLETED REIMBURSEMENT INTEGRATE SAP. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A ROUGH DRAFT YET. NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, WE'RE GOING TO BE BACK HERE WITH NOT ONLY THE COLLECTION, BUT THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT. IT'S ALREADY BEEN AGREED UPON MANY TIMES AND SAP AND WE'RE GOING TO BE READY. WE NEED YOU GUYS READY OVER HERE. OKAY? THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. APLIN. >> OKAY. >> WE'RE GOING TO MIX THINGS UP A LITTLE BIT IN THIS AGENDA. WE HAVE A WHOLE GROUP OF PEOPLE HERE AND WE HAD TO SPEAK ON AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEM, [00:05:04] WHICH MEANS WE WILL HAVE TO CLEAR THE ROOM AND WE WILL ENTER [EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 1 of 2)] INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION CITY COUNCIL NOW CONVENIENTLY EXECUTIVE SESSION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 5 51 TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, ACCORDING TO THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED THERE IN, ON ITEM NUMBER 12, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON SOUTHSIDE PART DEVELOPMENT AND CITY FACILITIES, SECTION 55 1.072 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND ITEM 13, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON RESOLUTION SATISFYING THE PUBLIC WORKS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN AND IMPROVING SUBMITTAL TO THE EPA AS REQUIRED BY THE AMERICAS WATER INFRASTRUCTURE ACT, SECTION 55 1.089 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. WE WILL ENTER IN AT THIS POINT AND DISCUSS THESE TWO ITEMS. SO IF YOU ARE PART OF A ABLC OR PARKS BOARD, YOU ARE TO STAY IN HERE, AND IF YOU ARE NOT PART OF THOSE GROUPS, YOU WILL HAVE TO LEAVE THE ROOM. WE'LL MAKE IT SHORT, I HOPE. [NOISE] >> WE'RE GOOD. >> WE'RE RECONVENED FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 8:17 PM. COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY ACTION ITEMS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION? >> SO IN ITEM NUMBER 12, I MAKE A MOTION TO PURCHASE PROPERTY. THERE'S MULTIPLE PROPERTIES TO PURSUE TO CREATE A SOUTHSIDE PARK WITH THE POTENTIAL EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL OF SELLING THE MUNICIPAL POOL SIDE, THE CURRENT MUNICIPAL POOL SIDE. THEN THE SECOND PART OF ITEM NUMBER [OVERLAPPING] >> LET'S DO THAT FIRST. >> OKAY. [NOISE] >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSMEN AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> AS FOR THE SECOND PART OF IT, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO SUBMIT FOR OPEN UP A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE DESIGN IN NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE CONSOLIDATED ANGLETON PUBLIC SERVICE SLASH PARKS DEPARTMENT SITE SLASH IT [LAUGHTER] AT IT'S CURRENT LOCATION [OVERLAPPING] >> DECORATIVE FOR THAT. >> THAT'S MY MOTION. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> OKAY. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSMEN AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] . I WAS LIKE COUNCILOR MARK. >> YEAH, THAT'S GOOD THOUGH. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. BOTH MOTIONS ARE UNANIMOUS. NEXT ITEM. >> WE HAVE THIRD MOTION. >> YEAH. >> RELATIVE TO ITEM 13 OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION UP, I MAKE MOTION, THE CITY ADOPTS RESOLUTION NUMBER 2021 1214-013, WHICH IS A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, TEXAS, CERTIFYING THE PUBLIC WORKS EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN AND APPROVING SUBMITTAL TO THE EPA, REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS INCLUDING A SEPARABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THOSE ARE THE ITEMS FOR 12 AND 13. NOW LET'S MOVE BACK TO CONSENT AGENDA. [CONSENT AGENDA ] ITEM NUMBER 1, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION EXTENDING DISASTER DECLARATION SIGNED BY THE MAYOR ON MARCH 17TH, 2020 THROUGH JANUARY 13TH, 2022 REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS INCLUDING A SEPARABILITY CLAUSE AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ITEM NUMBER 2, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON A CONTRACT WITH AMERICA FIBER TO CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN DARK FIBER TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. ITEM NUMBER 3, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REPORTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2021. >> MR. MAYOR PRO TEM, MAY I ASK THAT WE REVIEW THAT ON 2 PLEASE. >> NO, THAT'S IT. >> NO, HE'S RIGHT. [BACKGROUND] HE'S GOOD. >> YEAH. >> IT'S THE WAY THAT [OVERLAPPING] WAS DRAFTED. >> YEAH. >> WHAT ABOUT 1 AND 3? >> NO. I'M FINE WITH THAT. >> I THOUGHT YOU MADE A MOTION TO [OVERLAPPING] >> I THOUGHT YOU MADE MOTION TO APPROVE? >> I ASKED TO PULL OUT OF NUMBER 2. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO PASS THROUGH THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 1 AND 3. >> ONE SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA FOR ITEMS 1 AND 3 IN THE CONSENT AGENDA. [00:10:04] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. [2. Discussion and possible action on a contract with Muraca Fiber to construct and maintain dark fiber to the Waste Water Treatment Plant. ] ITEM NUMBER 2. ANYBODY WANT TO TALK ON THAT ONE? >> I'LL START BUT WE'RE GETTING JASON. THIS IS OUR FIBER PROJECT TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT. FROM WITHIN OUR FIBER, WE'VE GOT IT STATED DOWN THERE. I BELIEVE THIS WAS BONDED OUT THROUGH OUR LAST BOND. THIS IS A FUNDED PROJECT AND SO WE'RE AT THE STEPS OF EXECUTION. WE'VE GOT THE CONTRACTOR ALL SET AND WE JUST NEED TO RATIFY THE CONTRACT. >> WELL, HERE'S THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE. THIS IS A PROJECT IN AMOUNT OF ESTIMATED $113,574, WHICH IN MY READING OF THIS, THIS IS A PUBLIC WORK PROJECT. WAS THE PROJECT DESIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS? >> THERE ARE ENGINEERED DRAWINGS, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE STATE OR NOT. >> WAS PROJECT DESIGNED BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF TEXAS? >> I'M GOING TO SAY, I DON'T KNOW. >> THE TEXAS ENGINEERING PRACTICES ACT ESTABLISHES A MONETARY MINIMUM AMOUNT ABOVE WHICH A PUBLIC WORK PROJECT MUST BE DESIGNED AND OVERSEEN BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. THIS PROJECT IS WELL IN EXCESS OF THOSE MINIMUMS. BEFORE WE MAKE ANY MOVEMENT ON THIS TONIGHT, PLEASE, WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT. IF IT NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED BY AN ENGINEER, IT NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED BY AN ENGINEER. THE CONSTRUCTION WOULD NEED TO BE OVERSEEN, APPROVED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER. I DON'T WANT TO GET US IN TROUBLE [OVERLAPPING] BY SPENDING MONEY AND HAVE A BOARD COME BACK ON US OR SO. >> YEAH, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE RFP, BUT I KNOW THAT RFP DOES REQUEST ENGINEERING BE INCLUDED IN THE BID AMOUNT. >> OKAY. SOMETHING HAS TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER? >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> ENGINEERS GO BID LOCKUP, SOMETHING HDR OVERSEES FOR US ALL. >> RIGHT. ON OUR LAST FIBER PROJECT, IT WAS ONLY I THINK AROUND $40,000. WE HAD THAT ENGINEERED AS WELL. >> YEAH. WELL, THE LIMIT IS 20. >> YEAH. >> WE'VE EXCEEDED THAT. LET ME JUST SAY THIS, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO RIGHT NOW JUST TO TABLE THIS OR SOMETHING? COME BACK TO IT LATER, PLEASE. YEAH. >> WE'LL TAKE NO ACTION ON THIS TONIGHT. >> YOU WANT US TO TABLE? MOTION ON THE TABLE OR JUST TAKE NO ACTION? >> WHAT SHOULD WE DO? >> WELL, THEN YOU CAN INITIALLY APPROVE, BUT IT'S AN ENGINEER WHO'LL APPROVE. >> PUT A CONDITIONAL [OVERLAPPING] MOTION? >> I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION THAT PASSES FREE IN ANY CASE UNTIL WE DO LEARN THAT IT'S BEEN DESIGNED BY AN ENGINEER, WE PASS IN THE RULES THAT ARE [OVERLAPPING] STATE STATUTES. >> YEAH. >> LET'S DO THAT. >> GO AND POSTPONE THIS MOTION TO SETTLEMENT UNTIL FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY TO READ THESE QUESTIONS I ASKED. >> YEAH. >> IS THAT A MOTION? >> MOTION, PLEASE. >> I'LL SAY A MOTION. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, TAKEN BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, TO TABLE THIS UNTIL THE JANUARY MEETING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. IT IS TABLED. >> MOVING TO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ACTION ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 4. [4. Conduct a public hearing, discussion, and possible action on an ordinance authorizing a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for Billiard/Pool Facility (Three or more tables) on property more commonly known as 116 E. Mulberry Street. ] CONDUCTED PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR BILLIARD/POOL FACILITY, THREE OR MORE TABLES ON PROPERTY, MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 116 EAST MULBERRY STREET. I'M NOT SURE I'D SAY COMMONLY KNOWN AS BUT [LAUGHTER] GO AHEAD. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR BILLIARDS/POOL FACILITY HAVING THREE OR MORE TABLES OVER HERE AT WHAT WAS THE MULBERRY BAR & GRILL. YOU HAVE THE ANALYSIS AND THE BACKUP. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE SUP AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SUP. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER THE SECOND AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL UNANIMOUSLY, SEVEN IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSE. >> COUNCIL, I NEED A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SAY AGAIN. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. WE ARE NOW ON PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM. [00:15:08] ONE MORE TIME. ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON, FOR, OR AGAINST THIS ITEM, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM. YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD? [LAUGHTER] WELL, GO AHEAD. >> HE TOLD ME JUST [INAUDIBLE] FOR YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> YOU'VE WAITED TWO AND A HALF HOURS. I THINK YOU SHOULD JUST GET UP THERE [OVERLAPPING] AND SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT. [LAUGHTER] >> AUBREY BART. THINK LAST TIME WHEN I SAY MY ADDRESS, 420 PECAN ESTATES. I'M FOR IT. >> GREAT NEWS. >> YEAH. [LAUGHTER] >> EXCELLENT JOB. WELL DONE. [LAUGHTER] >> ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON, FOR, OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? >> [OVERLAPPING] I'LL MAKE A MOTION, WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. COUNCIL. >> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE THE [OVERLAPPING] SUP. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA TO APPROVE THE SUP. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THERE YOU GO. GOOD LUCK. >> GOOD LUCK. >> THANKS. >> [OVERLAPPING] APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE. [APPLAUSE] [5. Discussion and possible action on a development agreement with Tejas – Angleton Development, L.L.C. for the Austin Colony Subdivision. ] >> MOVING TO THE REGULAR AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 5. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH TEJAS-ANGLETON DEVELOPMENT, LLC FOR THE AUSTIN COLONY SUBDIVISION. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, WHAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR BACKUP IS WHAT WAS THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS RECEIVED ON THURSDAY OF LAST WEEK. I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH TO SAY ABOUT IT. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT ALL THE LEGAL EASE GETS CLEARED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. [LAUGHTER] I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT WORDING OF THE RECOMMENDATION RIGHT NOW. YOU HAVE IT ON YOUR SHEET THOUGH. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE ALL COMMENTS BEING CLEARED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> [INAUDIBLE] THE ATTORNEYS ARE STILL WORKING ON IT AND HAS NOT BEEN [INAUDIBLE] BUT WHILE WE'RE HERE, I WOULD LIKE FOR CITY COUNCIL TO ELUCIDATE ON ONE PART OF THE [INAUDIBLE] THAT I'VE RECEIVED [INAUDIBLE] FROM THE DEVELOPERS [INAUDIBLE] IT WILL BE ABLE HELP US WITH THIS. IT'S A FIVE PHASE FELT IN AND I COULD HAVE SWORN THAT I HEARD CITY COUNCIL TODAY [INAUDIBLE] THE DEVELOPMENT WAS JUST ORIGINALLY THAT ON THE FIFTH PHASE THAT YOU WANTED TO HAVE RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT IF THAT WAS IMPOSSIBLE, THEN THE DEVELOPER WHO [INAUDIBLE]. >> IF I REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION IN THERE, I THOUGHT THE PROPOSAL WAS THAT SECTION 5 WOULD BE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS AS FIVE YEARS TO BEGIN JANUARY 1ST, 2022. >> TO CLARIFY, YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM FIVE YEARS TO FIND THE [OVERLAPPING] >> TO EXPLORE. >> TO FIND THE COMMERCIAL? >> DIDN'T WE DISCUSS MORE THAN FIVE ON THAT THOUGH? I THOUGHT WE HAD IT DOWN TO LIKE, SIX OR SEVEN, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> IT WAS, BUT YOU TRADING IN A COUNCIL MEETING. [LAUGHTER] NO, IT'S FIVE YEARS. FIVE YEARS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE. WE AGREE TO IMMEDIATELY DO WHAT WE CAN TO GET IT DONE AND WE'D LIKE TO HONOR YOUR WISHES, BUT WE'D ALSO LIKE THE REVENUE. >> SURE. >> WE'D LIKE TO SELL IT OR DEVELOP IT TO A COMMERCIAL. IF WE OWN IT AT THE END OF FIVE YEARS, THEN WE COULD DO SINGLE-FAMILY. IF THERE'S A MARKET. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. >> I REMEMBER FIVE YEARS AS WELL. >> I REMEMBER WE STARTED AT FIVE AND WE WERE NEGOTIATING. I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WENT BACK DOWN [LAUGHTER] BUT THAT'S FINE. THERE'S HIGHLIGHTED ITEMS ALL THROUGH THIS. I WAS GOING TO ASK FOR A COMMENT ON WHY ARE THEY'RE HIGHLIGHTED AND HOW THEY'VE BEEN RESOLVED. [NOISE] [00:20:02] >> I DID RECEIVE SOME COMMENTS BACK FROM MR. RAY'S ATTORNEY YESTERDAY AND SOME OF THESE HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BUT SOME OF THEM RAISED ADDITIONAL ISSUES, WHICH I WAS ASKING ABOUT THAT [INAUDIBLE] PART. [NOISE] BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK IN THE AGREEMENT NOW, WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT PHASE 5, IT SAYS, "BEGINNING THE 6TH HERE, OR A MINIMUM OF 72 MONTHS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE AND CONTINUING THEREAFTER IF IT ISN'T SOLD FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEN IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED INTO A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE." SO WE CAN CHECK THE MINUTES FOR SURE BUT I ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE GET THAT BECAUSE I KEEP SENDING A MESSAGE TO [OVERLAPPING] >> WELL, EXCUSE ME, I THINK WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING. WE'RE HAVING A VIOLENT AGREEMENT. I'M SAYING WE CAN'T DEVELOP THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNTIL THE END OF FIVE YEARS. >> I'M NOT ARGUING WITH YOU. >> OH. >> I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE BECAUSE I'M MAKING THE REPRESENTATION THAT THEIR PROVISION [INAUDIBLE]. I'M NOT ARGUING, BUT THE LANGUAGE THAT I GOT BACK FROM YOUR ATTORNEY SAYS 72 MONTHS, SO THAT'S ALL. >> WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK IN THE MINUTES AND GET IT RIGHT. >> WE ABSOLUTELY CAN. [OVERLAPPING] BUT TIME HAS PASSED AND BECAUSE I'VE GOTTEN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT IF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION OR IF YOUR MIND IS CHANGED OR IF YOU HAD RECOLLECTION I'M ASKING YOU NOW. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO REMEMBER THE SPECIFICS, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ABSOLUTELY WANTED TO HAVE AN ATTEMPT TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL THERE. >> YES. >> YES, IT'S TRUE. >> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED. >> YEAH. >> THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS, UNTIL BOND COUNSEL LOOKS AT THIS DUE TO THE BOND ISSUANCE, IT IS NOT FINAL. NOW [OVERLAPPING] YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR HAS LOOKED AT IT, I'VE LOOKED AT IT, WE HAVE ANOTHER VERSION BETWEEN THE ATTORNEYS. WE'RE VERY CLOSE, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY BOND COUNSEL. >> IS THERE ANY ACTION THAT COULD BE TAKEN TONIGHT AS A TEMPORARY OR A APPROVAL CONDITION WITH CLEARING OF ANY OPEN ITEMS AND BOND COUNSEL APPROVAL? CAN THAT BE A MOTION OR DOES THAT MEAN IT HAS TO COME BACK TO US? >> BECAUSE IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY THE STAFF AND BY ME, YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT YOU APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO FINAL APPROVAL BY BOND COUNSEL AND COMPLETION OF NEGOTIATION BY THE ATTORNEYS, AND THAT'S PRETTY NARROW. I CAN TELL YOU THIS IS LIKE THE 13TH VERSION OR MAYBE THE 14TH. WE'VE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD, WE'RE VERY CLOSE, BUT THE MOST CRUCIAL MATTER AT THIS JUNCTURE IS BECAUSE OF BOND ISSUANCE, [OVERLAPPING] YOUR BOND COUNSEL HASN'T REVIEWED YET. [NOISE] >> NORMALLY WE WOULDN'T LIKE TO BRING SOMETHING THAT'S NOT COMPLETE TO YOU BUT ON MR. RAY'S REQUEST, WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD AS WE CAN AND SO TO BE DILIGENT ABOUT OUR EFFORTS TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. THAT'S WHY WE PUT ON THE COUNSEL AS WE CONTINUE TO WORK THROUGH THIS AND SO THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WOULD BE APPRECIATED SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO BRING THIS BACK. WE CAN FINALIZE IT BASED ON THE ATTORNEY'S REVIEW. >> WELL, AND I WILL ADD THAT I WILL MAKE THE CALL IF THERE'S SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK A SECOND TIME IF THAT HAPPENS. IF NOTHING IS SUBSTANTIVE, THEN YOUR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL WILL WORK BUT IF IT'S SUBSTANTIVE, I'M DEFINITELY BRINGING IT BACK. [OVERLAPPING]. >> CONDITIONAL HOW? [OVERLAPPING] WHAT CONDITION DO YOU SPECIFICALLY LOOK FOR? >> THE BOND COUNSEL [OVERLAPPING]. >> BOND COUNSEL REVIEW. >> CLEARING OF THE ITEMS. IF THERE'S AN ITEM THAT'S NOT CLEAR, BECAUSE ON THAT ONE IT HAS TO COME BACK TO US. >> RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION WHAT WE'RE MAKING THE MOTION ON EXACTLY I WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR. >> IF WE CAN WORK IT OUT INTERNALLY BETWEEN OUR ATTORNEYS. WE'D LIKE THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> CONDITION ON THE ATTORNEYS AND BOND COUNSEL. >> RIGHT. NOT HAVE TO WAIT FOR ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING. >> RIGHT. >> I AGREE. [00:25:02] >> IS THERE A MOTION? >> YOU'RE A GOOD MOTION MAKER. [OVERLAPPING] >> LET'S FIND THAT. I WILL [LAUGHTER] MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS ITEM. I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER IN FRONT OF ME. >> ITEM NUMBER 5. >> ITEM NUMBER 5. SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THAT WE GET THIS BOND APPROVAL AS WELL AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY DOESN'T SEE ANY MAJOR REASON TO RETURN IT TO CITY COUNCIL. >> THAT WILL WORK. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN SVOBODA FOR APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND BOND COUNSEL APPROVAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MR. RAY, I WANTED US TO TELL YOU THANK YOU FOR STICKING IT OUT TONIGHT. I ALWAYS APPRECIATE THE NEGOTIATIONS AND MAKING SURE THAT YOU'RE DOING WHAT'S BEST FOR A ANGLETON IN THE LONG-TERM. THANK YOU. >> WELL, QUITE FRANKLY, WE ALL HAD A GOOD TIME OUT HERE. [LAUGHTER] WE DID. >> WELL, YOU WERE THERE. I'M SURE THAT YOU WERE A PART OF IT. >> A FEW WAR STORIES, A LITTLE EMBELLISHING, BUT IT REALLY IS AMONGST FRIENDS. >> WELL, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, COUNSEL? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. [OVERLAPPING] >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. RAY. ITEM NUMBER 6, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON [6. Discussion and possible action on the Austin Colony Section 1 final plat and a variance of Section 23-11.(I).3. ] THE AUSTIN COLONY SECTION 1 FINAL PLAT AND A VARIANCE OF SECTION 23-11I3. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF AUSTIN COLONY SECTION 1 WITH A VARIANCE TO SECTION 23-11I. SECTION 23-11I IS A SECTION OF THE CODE THAT YOU ALL HAVE BECOME INCREASINGLY FAMILIAR WITH INVOLVING THE PROVISION OF SECONDARY ACCESS AFTER A CERTAIN NUMBER OF LOTS ARE REACHED AND THAT PROVISION IS TRIGGERED. IN THIS CASE, THE VARIANCE IS ACTUALLY MORE A MATTER INVOLVING THE TIMING OF THE PROVISION OF THE SECONDARY ACCESS AND IT IS ABOUT THE PROVISION OF THE SECONDARY ACCESS. AS YOU RECALL AND FROM THE LAND PLAN THAT'S IN THE BACKUP, WHAT IS NOW BEING REFERRED TO AS AUSTIN COLONY BOULEVARD AND TITCHENER DRIVE, MY APOLOGIES, WAS SHOWN AS BEING A PART OF THE FIRST PHASE OF THIS PROJECT. BUT THE PLAT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU DOESN'T INCLUDE THE ROAD. AFTER A MEETING BETWEEN THE STAFF AND THE DEVELOPER, WE WORKED OUT THIS VARIANCE AS PART OF THE PROCESS TO MAKE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD HAPPEN. BUT STILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BEGIN TO DEVELOP THAT FIRST SECTION OF THE PROPERTY, BUT TO CONSTRUCT THE ROADS BEFORE ANY FURTHER SECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY CAN BE DEVELOPED. THAT ALL BEING SAID, THERE ARE SOME MINOR COMMENTS THAT NEED TO BE CLEARED. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT [NOISE] AND THE VARIANCE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE OUTLINED IN ATTACHMENT 4, WHICH IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONSIDERED DECIDING ON DECEMBER THE 2ND AND VOTED. THREE IN FAVOR, FOUR OPPOSED, ZERO ABSENCE OR ABSTENTIONS ON A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AUSTIN COLONY SECTION 1 FINAL PLAT AND VARIANTS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS DETAILED IN ATTACHMENT 4. >> IT FAILED IN P&Z? >> THREE IN FAVOR AND FOUR AGAINST. >> THOSE FOUR, DID THEY STATE THEIR [OVERLAPPING] >> THE USUAL REASONS. THEY DON'T LIKE THE LOT SIZE. >> OKAY. >> SO IT'S AN OBJECTION TO THE PLAT AND THE [OVERLAPPING] LOT SIZE, BUT NOT TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF TITCHENER ROAD OR [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. IT'S STRICTLY ABOUT THE LOT SIZE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. [NOISE] >> I DON'T KNOW IF RIGHT NOW WOULD BE THE RIGHT TIME TO BRING THIS UP, BUT I'M GOING TO, BEFORE OR AFTER A MOTION UP. WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO APPROVE A FINAL PLAT OF THIS SUBDIVISION, SECTION 1. THERE IS NO SUBDIVISION PLAT ATTACHED TO OUR PACKET. [NOISE] THE DRAWING I SEE IN HERE IS A HERITAGE TREE SURVEY, [00:30:06] WHICH IS DRAWN ON TOP OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE RESEMBLANCE OF THE LOT LAYOUT THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH PHASE 1. THE ENGINEERING COMMENTS ATTACHED TO THIS PACKET ARE COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR SECTION 1. THE INFORMATION PROVIDED TO US DON'T COMPARE. I'D HATE TO HOLD UP MR. RAY'S PROCESS HERE, BUT THE STUFF WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO LOOK AT AND APPROVE TONIGHT IS NOT HERE BEFORE US. [BACKGROUND] I'M JUST STATING A FACT THAT WE WEREN'T PRESENTED THE STUFF WE'RE ASKED TO APPROVE. [NOISE] HAVE ALL OF THE ENGINEERS' COMMENTS BEEN ADDRESSED, RELATIVE TO THIS SUBDIVISION PLAT? >> THERE'S A SHORT LIST OF COMMENTS THAT ARE IN YOUR BACKUP. >> NOT RELATIVE TO THE PLAT. THEY'RE RELATIVE TO THE CONSTRUCTION. [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S TO THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. ALL THE COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE PLAT HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. >> OKAY, GOOD. >> MY APOLOGIES. THE PLAT WAS IN THE ENGINEER'S LETTER. I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT CHOPPED OUT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> I'M JUST STATING A FACT THAT THE PLAT IS NOT HERE FOR US TO LOOK AT. [BACKGROUND] >> IF IT HELPS ANY, THE STAFF'S POSITION IS STILL TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> I APPRECIATE THAT, SIR [BACKGROUND]. I DON'T WANT TO HOLD UP MR. RAY. I DON'T MEAN TO SOUND LIKE I'M CALLING ANYBODY OUT, BUT WE WERE ASKED TO APPROVE STUFF, IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE PACKET. >> [BACKGROUND] THANK YOU. >> [BACKGROUND] IT'S ALL THE SAME COPY? >> YES. >> I FULLY APPRECIATE HDR AND THEIR APPROVAL PROCESS OF GETTING THIS TO A POINT SO WE CAN APPROVE THIS. >> [BACKGROUND] [BACKGROUND] >> WHILE YOU ALL LOOK AT THAT, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THE LOT SIZE ISSUE. [BACKGROUND] WE STARTED WITH 45S HERE, AND THEN WE MOVED OVER TO 50S MINIMUM. WHAT WAS IT AGAIN, THE BREAKDOWN, A LITTLE OVER 40% ARE 60 FOOT LOTS? >> [BACKGROUND] IT'S ALL IN THERE. BREAKDOWN'S IN THERE. >> THERE IT IS. [BACKGROUND] YEAH, 240 60-FOOT, 219 55-FOOT, AND THEN 100 50S. THAT'S SUBJECT TO THE COMMERCIAL NOT TRANSPIRING. MR. RAY, YOU AND I HAVE HAD LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS ON LOT SIZE. [00:35:05] YOU KNOW MY FEELINGS, I'M NOT FOR THE SMALL LOTS. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I UNDERSTAND YOU HAVE TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT SOMETIMES AND GETTING THAT ROAD THROUGH IS, TO ME, THE BIG PIECE OF THIS. YOU'VE BEEN VERY FORTHRIGHT IN YOUR DEALINGS WITH US ON THIS. SECTION 1 IS 50S, SECTION 2 IS I BELIEVE SOME 50S AND 60S. NO, 55S IS WHAT IT SAYS. EIGHTY-SEVEN 55 FOOT AND 21 60. >> RIGHT. >> YOUR FIRST SECTION IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I KNOW OF THAT HAS 50S; IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> I JUST CAME FROM RIVERWOOD RANCH TODAY, WHICH IS ON 45S, AT LEAST YOU'RE GOING WIDER THAN THAT. YOU ARE DEFINITELY BEATING THE MINIMUM. [LAUGHTER] I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'VE DONE ON PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, AND BRING THESE LOT SIZES UP, AND MOVING THE ROAD FOR US TO WHERE WE CAN GET IT ACROSS. I UNDERSTAND PNZ'S POSITION AND I RESPECT IT. TO ME, THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE WORKING TOWARDS. YOUR REQUEST FOR A PID, I BELIEVE, IS BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT THAT WILL BENEFIT THE ENTIRE CITY IN THE LONG RUN. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT GOES ON RECORD ON THIS BECAUSE I DO KNOW IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT WE WOULD VOTE, AND PNZ WOULD VOTE SOMETHING DOWN IF IT WERE TO PASS HERE. BUT I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M COMING FROM. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS SAID. >> AT THE RISK OF IT SOUNDED LIKE PETE AND REPEAT, I ACTUALLY AGREE A LOT WITH JOHN, NOT SURPRISINGLY. BUT, I THINK THAT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BE A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THE GROWTH OF ANGLETON, HONESTLY. I KNOW IT SOUNDS EXTREME, BUT I REALLY BELIEVE THAT THE ABILITY TO TRAVEL AND COMMUTE THROUGH TOWN AND HAVE ALMOST A BYPASS, THE WAY IT'S ALMOST CURRENTLY CONFIGURED IS COMING OFF OF 288 IS ENORMOUS AND CAN NOT BE OVERSTATED. WHILE I HAVE SINCERE CONCERNS ABOUT SMALLER LOTS, MAINLY BECAUSE I TRULY BELIEVE ANGLETON HAS A LOT TO PROVIDE, AND ONE OF IT IS DRY LAND, THAT PUTS US IN A POSITION TO, I BELIEVE, NEGOTIATE. HOWEVER, I DO APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A DIVERSE ABILITY TO PEOPLE TO HOUSE THEMSELVES, AND SO THESE WILL PROVIDE THOSE OPTIONS AS WELL. I APPRECIATE IT. [BACKGROUND] >> MR. BOOTH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? >> NO, I DON'T. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMAN GONGORA OR COUNCILMAN SVOBODA, ANY COMMENTS? ALL GOOD. WE NEED A MOTION. I MOVE WE APPROVE AUSTIN COLONY SECTION ONE FINAL PLAT AND VARIANCE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS DETAILED IN ATTACHMENT 4. I'LL SECOND IT. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GONGORA FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AUSTIN COLONY SECTION 1 FINAL PLAT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? DO WE NEED TO STATE THE VARIANCE? HE PUT IT IN HIS MOTION. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AFTER THAT? I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. AYE. [OVERLAPPING] ALL THOSE OPPOSE. AYE. MOTION CARRIES FOUR TO ONE. THANK YOU. GOT TO HAVE JUST ONE QUICK ONE. [INAUDIBLE] LAWSON, DOUG ROSLER AND THE CITY ENGINEER'S ARE JUST ABOUT READY TO SIGN AND PERMIT. WE'RE READY TO GO. THE CONTRACTORS POSTED A BOND. HE'S READY TO GO. I'VE GOTTEN FINANCIAL PARTNERS, DEBT AND EQUITY, THEY'RE READY TO GO. [LAUGHTER] I'VE GOT A BUILDER, THEY'RE READY TO GO. I NOW HAVE A FINAL PLAT WHICH IS THANK YOU. [00:40:03] I APPRECIATE IT. I KNOW IT'S AN ISSUE BUT WE GOT THROUGH IT. I'M MISSING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND A PID REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, I CAN'T START WORK WITHOUT THEM. IF I DON'T START JANUARY 15TH, I RUN THE RISK OF LOOSING. I KNOW I'M A LOSER CONTRACTOR. HE'S PULLING HIS HAIR OUT. BUT I'VE GOT BUILDERS AND OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE SAYING DO IT OR WE'RE GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE SO WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE BOND COUNSEL AND GET THIS DONE ON JANUARY 14TH, WHICH IS THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, I HOPE WHEN WE'RE BACK HERE AND EVERYTHING SIGNED SEALED AND WE'RE OUT THERE MOVING THERE. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU-ALL HAVE DONE. THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE]. I'M NUMBER 7, [7. Discussion and possible action on the second phase of the Kiber Reserve Subdivision preliminary replat. ] DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE SECOND PHASE OF THE KIBER RESERVES SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY RE-PLAT. YES, LINDSEY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR PRO TEM AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. YES, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY RE-PLAT FOR KIBER RESERVE SECTION 2. THIS SHOULD HAVE 45 LATS IN IT AND WHILE THERE WAS A RATHER LENGTHY LIST OF COMMENTS THERE RATHER IN MATERIAL ALSO THE PAPER COMMENTS, AND WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO P AND Z SUBJECT TO THEM CLEARING UP ALL THE COMMENTS BY TODAY. HOWEVER, IT BEING PRELIMINARY AND THEY'RE STILL BE IN SOME BACK AND FORTH ON CLEARING UP ALL THE COMMENTS. I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO THEM CLEARING IT UP BY THE FINAL RE-PLAT AND WE'RE STILL A LITTLE WAYS OUT FROM THAT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT SPLIT WITH THE P AND Z APPROVAL. THERE WERE SEVEN PRESENT, FOUR WERE IN FAVOR AND THREE WERE OPPOSED AND STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. COUNCIL ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS. I GUESS THE THREE OPPOSED ON P AND Z WAS DUE TO THE LATS SIZE? YES, SIR. MAJORITY OF THESE LATS ARE 50 AND 55 FOOT WIDE LATS. ONE OF THE P AND Z COMMISSIONERS DID MAKE A COMMENT THAT HE FELT THAT THIS PROJECT WAS FITTING FOR THE AREA. I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. YES, LATS SIZE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION WAS THEIR POINT OF CONTENTION FOR THOSE OPPOSED. I GUESS MY QUESTION STILL ON THIS SUBDIVISION IS, HAVE WE SEEN ANYTHING ON EVANS LATELY AND HOW THAT WATER IS FLOWING, BEING THAT THAT AREA IS RAISED UP SO HIGH? I KNOW WE CREATED A BERM BUT STILL RESIDENTS ON EVANS ARE COMPLAINING THAT WATER IS GOING IN THEIR BACKYARDS. I KNOW THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE HAD DURING OUR FINAL WALK-THROUGH ON PHASE 1 AND THAT WAS CLEARED AND OUR ENGINEER'S REVIEWED THAT. I CAN'T REALLY COMMENT ANY FURTHER THAN THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY KNOWLEDGE. HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM WATERSTONE DEVELOPMENT HERE. KEN ARE YOU ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT OR YOUR ENGINEER? WE HAD SILT FENCING IN THE BACK WHICH ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE BACK TO THE WATER OF [INAUDIBLE] THE HOUSES ALONG EVANS, WHICH I BELIEVE ARE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO FLOW TOWARDS THE STREET. HOWEVER, PEOPLE HAVE BUILT UP THINGS ON THE SIDE, THEY'VE BLOCKED THE WATER SO THEY ARE GRADING ONTO OUR PROPERTY. WE ACTUALLY HAD A SWELL APPROXIMATELY IN FEET AND WIDTH THAT RUNS ALONG THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. I BELIEVE THAT SOME OF THOSE LATS THE STILL FENCING THAT WAS ALONG THERE HAS BEEN CLEARED. WE ARE GOING TO DO SOME CLEANUP WORK THERE. WE STARTED AT THE HOME BUILDERS ON THE SIDE TOWARDS SOUTH DOWNING STREET ALONG THE POND HAVE STARTED CONSTRUCTION, WE'LL BE CLOSING SHORTLY WITH THE SECOND HOME BUILDER THERE AND THEY WILL BE CONSTRUCTING ON THAT. THERE'LL BE FRANKLY CLEARING THAT OUT AS WELL TOO. IT SHOULD FURTHER HELP THE DRAINAGE BASICALLY. WHAT'S THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE? I GOT TO TALK TO THE [INAUDIBLE] GUY. NO, YOU GOT TO RAISE IT BACK DOWN. [00:45:02] YEAH. THERE YOU GO. I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER BUT THE LATS, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BACK OF THE LATS THAT FACE TOWARDS EVAN I WOULD SAY IT'S ABOUT A FOOT HIGHER. I KNOW WHEN WE HAD ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBORS MAKING COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE [INAUDIBLE] TWO SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT HADN'T HAPPENED WHEN THAT OCCURRED. THE CONTRACTOR DIDN'T CUT THOSE PERIMETERS SWELLS AT THE START OF CONSTRUCTION WHEN THEY SHOULD'VE. THOSE FALLS HAD BEEN CUT. I DO REMEMBER THERE WAS A MOMENT WHERE THE NEW COAL FOR PUTTING ON ORANGE STREET GOT SILTED UP AND THE CONTRACTOR DATE CLEAN THAT [INAUDIBLE] I KNOW THOSE WERE TWO CONTRIBUTING ISSUES TOWARDS THE FLOODING AT THE TIME THAT THE HOMEOWNERS HAD COMPLAINT ABOUT IT BUT THE PERIMETER SWELLS ARE THERE AND THEY ARE HANDLING THE DRAINAGE FOR THE SUBDIVISION. OKAY. ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION. IS THE HOMES ON BRYAN WAY THAT BACKUP TO THE EVANS ARE THEY DESIGNED TO DRAIN TOWARDS THE STREET RYAN WAY? YES. [OVERLAPPING] NOT TO THE SWELL BUT TO THE STREET? THEY'RE DESIGNED TO DRAIN TOWARDS THE STREET AND IN THE REAR ALL THOSE LATS ARE 15 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND THERE'S AN INTERCEPTOR SWELL ON ALL THOSE LATS ON THE REAR. THEN THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS DESIGNED TO DRAIN TO THAT TENSION RESERVE? CORRECT. YES. OKAY. THE OTHER COMPLAINT I'VE RECEIVED ON THIS PROPERTY IS THE KHYBER SIDE AND FOR THAT MATTER, THE ORANGE SIDE, AS IT WAS STATED, THE CLEANING OF THE DITCHES. WHO'S MAINTAINING THOSE DITCHES? >> THE DITCHES ON? >> ON KHYBER AND ORANGE. WHO'S GOING TO BE MAINTAINING THEM? IS THAT PART OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT OR IS THAT SUBJECT TO THE CITY MAINTAINING THAT? >> THAT'S IN THE CITY RIGHT AWAY. >> THAT'S AN ADD? >> I'LL LOOK AT OUR MAP, BUT WE HAVE DESIGNATED BETWEEN [INAUDIBLE]. >> BECAUSE THE COMPLAINT IS NOBODY'S MAINTAINING THOSE DITCHES. THIS ONE I WAS TOLD. THEY WERE SAYING THE WATER CAN'T DRAIN ANYWHERE BECAUSE NOBODY'S MAINTAINED IT IN YEARS THEY SAID SO NOW, WE'RE GOING TO PUT MORE WATER INTO IT JUST WHAT I'VE BEEN TOLD. WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE DITCHES ALONG KHYBER AND ORANGE. >> OKAY. >> I DON'T WORRY THE LANDOWNER OUT THERE EVER MAINTAIN THE DITCHES ALONG KHYBER AND ORANGE AS IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A CITY OR SOME POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THE DITCHES AS THEY ARE PRETTY WELL ANYWHERE ELSE IN TOWN. SO PROBABILITY THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEHIND THE LOTS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE HANDLED BY THE LOT OWNERS OR HOA OR WHATEVER EMPATHY THERE IS TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. WE'RE GOING PROBABLY CONTINUE TO HEAR COMMENTS THAT THIS SUBDIVISION IS FLOODING LOTS ON EVANS STREET. THE LOTS ON EVANS STREET THERE WATER IS SUPPOSED TO GO TO EVANS STREET. IF IT BUILDS UP IN YOUR BACKYARD, YOU MIGHT HAVE YOUR ACCOMMODATION LITTLE BIT COMING OFF THE VERY EDGE OF THIS SUBDIVISION IS PREDOMINANTLY IT'S WATER TO HIT THEIR ROOFTOPS AND FALLS INTO THEIR YARD. >> SURE. >> THAT DOESN'T NOW FLOW OVERALL TO THIS GUY'S PROPERTY, WHERE PROBABLY DID IN THE PAST. >> I'M ALSO HAPPY TO FIND OUT WHO'S GOT JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S LIKE MR. BOOTH SAID, IT'S GOING TO EITHER BE COUNTY OR ADD OR EVEN POSSIBLY CITY, BUT I'M HAPPY TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND LET THE CITY MANAGER KNOW AND HE CAN COMMUNICATE THAT TO YOU GUYS. >> YEAH. JUST BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT WAS DONE IN THE PAST. WELL, IT'S A DITCH NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED AND IF IT'S RESIDENTS COMPLAINING ABOUT IT, THEN THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. I'M MAKING SURE IT GETS BROUGHT UP HERE THAT WHILE WE'RE ALL IN THIS ROOM, WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE THERE. >> ABSOLUTELY WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT. >> ONE OTHER QUESTION. I DROVE TO YOUR SUBDIVISION AND THE LIGHTING THROUGH THERE, YOU'RE USING THE SOLAR LIGHTING, CORRECT? >> THAT'S LED. >> THAT'S LED. >> [INAUDIBLE] SORRY, SUBDIVISION IS ENERGIZED. >> OKAY. >> I THINK PENROSE DRAIN IS THE ONLY SUBDIVISION. [00:50:04] >> IT IS THE LEDS. >> GOOD. WELL, BRIAN WAY EVER COME OUT ON THE KHYBER? >> YES. >> IT WILL. >> THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS PHASE. >> YEAH. SO I WAS LOOKING, I SAW GONE THROUGH. >> YES IT DOES. >> FANTASTIC. IT HAS TO BE TWO ENTRANCES. >> GOING TO THAT'LL BE THE ONLY TWO ENTRANCES AND EXITS WITH ONE SIDE ON BRIAN ON KHYBER AND ONE SIDE ON ORANGE. WE HAVE THE EMERGENCY TURNAROUND THERE RIGHT NOW AT THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC. >> COUNCIL? >> I RECOMMEND WE APPROVE PHASE 2 OF THE COVER RESERVE BLOOMER SUBDIVISION, PRELIMINARY REPLANT IN PLANS SUBJECT TO THE CITIES RECEIVE RESUBMITTED PLANT AND PLANS WITH COMMENTS CLEARED PART OF THE RIGOR TO THE COUNCIL. WHAT IS THIS? THIS IS TODAY >> COULD WE CORRECT THAT TO SAY IS SUBJECT TO SUCCESSFUL RECEIPT OF ALL COMMENTS BEING CLEARED PRIOR TO THE FINAL PLAT BEING REVIEWED BY CITY COUNCIL. >> OKAY. I'LL START OVER AGAIN. I RECOMMEND WE APPROVE PHASE 2 OF THE KHYBER RESERVES SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLAN SUBJECT TO THE CITIES RECEIPT OF RESUBMITTED PLAT AND PLANS WITH COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF FINAL PLAN. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE APPROVAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. >> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSES THREE, TWO. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER 8, [8. Discussion and possible action on the Brazoria County Courthouse Expansion project final replat. ] DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON BRAZORIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE EXPANSION PROJECT, FINAL REPLAT. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. SO THIS IS THE FINAL REPLAT FOR THE COUNTY EXPANSION CAMPUS. AND VERY SHORTLIST OF COMMENTS WHICH HAS BEEN CLEARED. SO EAGER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, AND IT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED OR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> SO CAN YOU JUST QUICKLY TELL ME THE ORDER? IS THE STREET ON? I ALWAYS FORGET WHAT STREET IT IS. IT'S ARCOLA RIGHT? ARCOLA THAT STUFF OUT. IS THAT GOING TO BE THE LAST THING THAT GETS DONE OR IN THE ORDER OF THE BUILD THE BUILDING FIRST, CLOSING SHINGO BUILDING, AND THEN FIXING THE ROAD ON THAT LITTLE AREA FROM CEDAR TO LOCUST, I GUESS OR LIVE OAK? YEAH, LIVE OAK. >> CLAY LIFELINE. >> YEAH. I REMEMBER THAT. >> I DROVE IT TODAY AND I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS AND I WAS THINKING, OKAY, WHAT'S THE TIMELINE HERE SOMEWHERE WE NEED TO ADDRESS. >> CLAY FOSTER ASSISTANCE ACCOUNT ENGINEER BRAZORIA COUNTY. SO WE HAVE ACTUALLY A SEPARATE NEAR LOCAL AGREEMENT WITH Y'ALL FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF OUR COLA IN THE LIMITS YOU DESCRIBED, THAT'S ACTUALLY SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT FROM THE BUILDING PROJECT. >> OKAY. >> SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT I BELIEVE DESIGN PLANS MAY BE UNDERWAY AND IT'S SOON AS YOU ALL CAN GET THE DESIGN COMPLETE AND EVERYTHING WILL START CONSTRUCTION. YOU ALL ALSO IN ADDITION, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF ARCOLA RECONSTRUCTING A FAIR AMOUNT OF WATER AND SEWER LINES THAT ARE GOING TO SUPPORT OUR BUILDING PROJECT. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A TIMING CATCH THERE THAT WE'RE WORKING OUT, BUT OUR JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT AT THE PROJECT, OUR ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND OUR NEW EMERGENCY OPERATION CENTER ARE THE FIRST TWO BIG PIECES OF THIS PROJECT, THOUGH, SHOULD BE DONE IN THE NEXT, WE'LL CALL IT 18-24 MONTHS. HOPEFULLY, 8-10 MONTHS WILL BE THE EEOC, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE A LONGER FOR THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. [00:55:01] THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BE LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD TO BUILD THE JUSTICE CENTER, WHICH IS AN EXPANSION OF THE 76TH EDITION, THE BIG BROWN TUMOR ON THE 1940S COURTHOUSE AND WILL BE RE-SKINNING THE BIG BROWN TUMOR IN THE 1940S COURTHOUSE HAVE A MORE CONSISTENT LOOK AND FEEL FOR THE ENTIRE CAMPUS. SO OVERALL IT'S A 3.5 TO FOUR YEAR PROJECT. >> THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING BECAUSE I KNEW THERE WAS A LONG PROJECT THERE AND I WAS WONDERING IF WE NEEDED TO DO SOME FAT ROAD FIRST. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S SEPARATE OF IT AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND GET THAT DONE. >> GREAT. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCIL? >> PROBABLY I DON'T THINK I WOKE UP ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE BED, BUT THIS PLAT IS ILLEGIBLE. I CAN'T READ WHAT'S PRESENTED HERE. BUT I DEFER TO OUR ENGINEERS AS I HAVE REVIEWED IT. WHAT I SAW IN OCTOBER WAS LEGIBLE, THIS ISN'T. >> WE HAVE A PLOTTER. I'M HAPPY TO GO BACK THERE. IS IT NOT VISIBLE ON YOUR DEVICE? >> THIS IS TOO FOGGY. IT'S NOT CRISP AND CLEAR LIKE AN IMPORTED PDF WOULD BE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THIS WAS SOME OTHER FILE TYPE JUST FOR FUTURE REFERENCE. >> SHOULD BE ON 11 BY 17 AND THE PDF IS JUST REGULAR 8 BY 11. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE FINAL REPLATTED MISSOURI COUNTY COURTHOUSE CAMPUS EXPANSION, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION OF ALL COMMENTS ARE CLEARED PRIOR TO, I GUESS- >> FINAL APPROVAL. >> FINAL APPROVAL. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTH FOR APPROVAL. [NOISE] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANKS FOR WAITING US OUT TONIGHT. OUR NUMBER 9, DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE RESOLUTION TO ADD [9. Discussion and possible action on a resolution to add new mitigation items to the adopted Brazoria County Hazard Mitigation Action Plan. ] NEW MITIGATION ITEMS TO THE ADOPTED MISSOURI COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. THIS IS A STANDARD, YOU'VE BEEN SEEING THIS SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE LAST YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF. TO KEEP OUR MITIGATION PLAN CURRENT, WE ADD PROJECTS THAT BECOME IDENTIFIED AND IN ORDER TO COMPETE FOR MITIGATION GRANT FUNDING, THEY HAVE TO BE LISTED VERBATIM IN OUR MITIGATION PLANS, SO THIS JUST FILLS THAT GAP. WE GET THIS ADDED BY RESOLUTION. I CAN SEND IT TO TEDAM. IT GETS ADDED TO THE PLAN AND OUR APPLICATION CONTINUES ON. >> GREAT. >> THIS IS FOR PORTABLE GENERATORS FOR OUR LIVES STATIONS, WHICH WILL HELP US MEET COMPLAINTS DOWN THE LINE FOR SENATE BILL 3. >> WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED THOSE LIFT STATIONS? >> YES, SIR. >> HOW WERE THEY IDENTIFIED? ARE THEY CERTAIN SECTIONS OF TOWN WHERE WE HAVE CRUCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR WHERE WE KNOW OF KNOWN POWER OUTAGES THAT HAPPEN OFTEN? >> WE HAVE SEVERAL LIFT STATIONS THAT HAVE INSTALLED PERMANENT GENERATORS AND THEN WE'VE GOT SEVERAL THAT BECAUSE OF THEIR LOCATION, WE COULDN'T GET A PERMANENT ONE INSTALLED OR BECAUSE FUND, IT'S WHATEVER. THIS GIVES US SOME THAT WE CAN BRING OUT TO THESE LIFT STATIONS THAT DON'T HAVE GENERATORS. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH HOW THEY WERE IDENTIFIED, THE ONES THAT DON'T HAVE PERMANENT GENERATIONS INSTALLED. >> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE PERMANENT. THEY'RE GOING TO BE SOME WE TAKE OUT TO THESE LOCATIONS? >> EXACTLY. AS NEEDED. ECONOMICALLY, IT'S A LITTLE MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TO HAVE THIS FLEXIBILITY THAT WE CAN MOVE IT AROUND, VERSUS BUYING A GENERATOR FOR EACH ONE AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT THEY GO OUT AS FREQUENTLY OR INVERSE. >> I WAS GOING TO SAY, DO WE NEED A BAY TO STORE THEM IN? [LAUGHTER] >> HIT THE PUBLIC'S WORKS REALLY. >> BUT THEY CAN ALSO BE MAINTAINED AT THE NEW PUBLIC WORKS. >> PRETTY GOOD. >> WITH THE BAY? >> WHAT YOU FIND IN THE SYSTEM IS THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT CAN MORE AFFORD TO BE OFFLINE THAN THE MAJOR ONES. >> EXACTLY. >> THEN YOU JUST TAKE A COUPLE OF GENERATORS AND RUN AROUND FROM STATION TO STATION THEN PUMP THE SYSTEM DOWN SO AS TO KEEP UP. >> WHAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST WITH THE FREEZE AND EVEN WITH NICHOLAS, [01:00:01] WE'D FIND THIS HALF OF THE CITY IS SHUT OFF BUT THIS HALF OF THE CITY IS STILL GOT POWER. IT GIVES YOU THE FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND TO WHERE WE NEED IT. >> PERMITS, ROMANO. I WASN'T TRYING TO PULL YOU INTO ANOTHER DISCUSSION. [LAUGHTER] >> NO, THAT'S FINE. >> COULDN'T RESIST. >> HE'S RESILIENT. VERY RESILIENT. [LAUGHTER] >> COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY ACTION? ALREADY LOST THE BED ON TIME TONIGHT, BUT WELL, HEY, LET'S KEEP GOING. [LAUGHTER] >> I RECOMMEND THAT WE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> TO THE NEW MITIGATION PROJECTS. >> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND AND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE APPROVAL OF MITIGATION PROJECTS. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, GLENN. >> THANK YOU. >> JOHN, WHO MAKE ME THE SECOND? >> MIKEY. >> I WANT TO KNOW IF THE RECORD THAT HE WAS NOT LAST. [LAUGHTER] >> IT'S TRUE. >> ITEM NUMBER 10 IS DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ITEM ON AGREEMENT WITH [10. Discussion and possible action on an agreement with Kimley-Horn for an ADA Self- Evaluation and Transition Plan and authorize the City Manager to execute the document, upon legal review. ] KIMBERLY HORN FOR AN ADA SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE DOCUMENT UPON LEGAL REVIEW. WE GET TO TALK ABOUT THIS AGAIN. >> YES. GOOD EVENING ALL. WHAT JOHN IS REFERENCING IS THAT WE DID TAKE THIS ITEM TO ABLC YESTERDAY EVENING, AND WE WERE ORIGINALLY GOING TO PRESENT THIS OUT AS A CONSENT ITEM BECAUSE WE DID HAVE IT PLANNED IN THE BUDGET IN BOTH ABLC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, BUT 50,000 WAS REMOVED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUDGET, SO WE WENT BACK TO ABLC FOR THE REMAINING AMOUNT WHICH THEY DID APPROVE LAST NIGHT. WE DO HAVE ERIN EURICH ON THE LINE WITH KIMBERLY HORN, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. [NOISE] BUT JUST AS A BRIEF OVERVIEW, UNDER TITLE II OF THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT, ADA, THE CITY OF ANGLETON IS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN FOR ITS PROGRAM SERVICES, FACILITIES, AND FACILITIES TO IDENTIFY BARRIERS AND IMPROVE ACCESSIBILITY. AS A RESULT, WE, AS A CITY SOUGHT OUT QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED CONSULTANTS WITH PROJECT EXPERIENCE IN ADA SURVEYS, TRANSITION PLAN, DEVELOPMENT, AND IMPLEMENTATION TO BRING THE CITY'S PROGRAMS, SERVICES, AND FACILITIES INTO COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE II OF THE ADA STANDARDS. I WILL NOTE AND BE UP FRONT WITH YOU GUYS, THIS IS THE FIRST OF WHAT WILL BE SEVERAL PHASES. WHAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON HERE IS MAINLY PARKS, THE ANGLETON RECREATION CENTER SINCE THE MAJORITY OF IT WE ARE PAYING FOR IT OUT OF ABLC AND PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY. IN HERE, YOU HAVE THE PROPOSAL AS WELL AS THE TIMELINE. THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS EVENING IS THAT CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH KIMBERLY HORN FOR THE ADA SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSITION PLAN AFTER LEGAL REVIEW. I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, AS WELL AS ERIN EURICH ON THE LINE. >> BASICALLY WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 100,000 TO STUDY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK WITH ACTIONS AFTER THIS. >> WHICH IS A FEDERAL MANDATE. >> RIGHT. >> THINK OF IT CREATING AN ACTION PLAN, JOHN. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'S HOW I'M PREFERRING TO THINK OF IT. [NOISE] HOPEFULLY SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE'VE ALREADY STARTED ON, AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST NIGHT, ARE REALLY GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN LESSENING THE AMOUNT THAT WE HAD TO SPEND LATER ON ALL THE IDENTIFIED AREAS, THE CEDAR STREET, NOW WE'RE REHABBING DOWNING AT THE MOMENT. LOTS OF DIFFERENT AREAS. BY THE WAY, THIS STUDY DOESN'T FIX ANYTHING ALONG TEXT DOT RIGHT AWAY. THIS IS ONLY WHAT WE OWN. >> BECAUSE THEY MAINTAINED THIS TO. >> OR THEY DON'T. >> OR THEY DON'T. [LAUGHTER] >> DEFINITION OF MAINTENANCE AND THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. >> [LAUGHTER] WELL, NOT TO GO TOO FAR OFF, BUT WHAT WAS THE YOUNG LADY WHO PRESENTED TO US FROM TEXTILE? >> [INAUDIBLE], SHE'S A AREA ENGINEER. >> I THOUGHT SHE WAS IMPRESSIVE, BUT HOPEFUL SHE. [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH. >> THAT WAS THE BEST PRESENTATION WE'VE HAD EVER I BEEN ON COUNCIL. >> YEAH. >> THAT'S GOOD. I HOPE WE FALL THROUGH TOO, BUT SHE SEEMED RECEPTIVE AND I WAS LISTENING, SO HOPEFULLY. >> SHE MENTIONED THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON A PLAN FOR A CANNON, SO GETTING A SAFE CROSSING RIGHT THERE WOULD BE VERY INSTRUMENTAL FOR US. [NOISE] BUT AS MEGAN MENTIONED THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE SPENT FROM AVLC'S FUNDS. [01:05:09] >> WELL, THAT MAKES IT EASY. >> YEAH. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN, FOR AN ADA SELF-EVALUATION AND TRANSIT PLAN AFTER LEGAL REVIEW. >> WHAT ABOUT THE LAST PART? >> AND TO PROVE THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 FROM THE MAY. [OVERLAPPING] >> SIR, YOU WON'T NEED TO DO THAT. THAT'S WHY WE PULLED IT OFF FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. AVLC HAS GIVEN YOU THE 50,000 THAT WAS NEEDED, AND SO REALLY WE JUST NEED APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSAL AFTER LEGAL REVIEW. >> OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS MORE AFTER THE A 100,000 THAT MIGHT BE NEEDED. >> STRIKE THE SECOND PART OF MY MOTION, GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN FOR AN ADA SELF-EVALUATION IN TRANSITION PLAN AFTER LEGAL REVIEW. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND'S, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRUCE FOR THE APPROVAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. [OVERLAPPING] >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAY AYE, MOTION CARRIES [OVERLAPPING]. >> THANK YOU. >> ITEM NUMBER 11. [11. Discussion on Charter Review Commission amendments. ] DISCUSSION ON CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION AMENDMENTS. INTER-TEXT HERE. GREAT. [LAUGHTER] >> EVENING COUNCIL. [NOISE] I AM THE VICE CHAIR REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMISSION THAT GOT TOGETHER AND LOOKED AT THE CHARTER REVIEW. IT WAS MYSELF, CHAIR MICHELLE, DR. JACKSON SCOTT, AND RACHEL IS HERE WITH US. THIS IS BASICALLY WE WANTED TO GIVE IT TO YOU GUYS THAT YOU CAN HAVE A FIRST LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING SIX MONTHS ON. WE CAN FEEL IT ANY QUESTION NECESSARILY, BUT I DO KNOW I BELIEVE YOU GUYS WILL BE IN SOME MEETING SOMETIME IN JANUARY TO GO THROUGH ALL OF IT. WHAT I WILL SAY IS, BUT WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT, OUR FIRST INITIAL GOAL WAS TO SAY, THIS IS VERY WORDY AND HOW CAN WE STREAMLINE THIS, MAKE THIS MORE OF A CHARTER THAT MAKES WAY MORE SENSE AND NOT SO WORDY. THAT WAS ONE OF THE PRIMARY GOALS THAT WE HAVE, BECAUSE OFTENTIMES IN THIS CHARTER WITH IT LOOKED LIKE IN THE PAST, WAS IT REPEATED ITSELF IN DIFFERENT WORDS FOR DIFFERENT SECTIONS, FOR NO OTHER REASON OTHER THAN I HAVE NO IDEA. THERE WASN'T REALLY A GOOD REASON FOR IT. SO LIKE I SAID, WE LOOKED AT WHAT WAS TOO MANY WORDS THAT WE DIDN'T NEED TO HAVE. THERE WAS NO NECESSITY FOR THE WORD COUNT, WHY I NEED TO BE SO BIG, SO WE'VE REMOVED A LOT OF THAT. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE WENT BACK AND FORTH ON BUT FOR THE MOST PART, A LOT OF WHAT IS STRIPED, I JUST THINK THAT THE STATE CONSTITUTION TELLS US WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO, SO TO ADD IT TO THE CHARTER FOR THE CITY REALLY DIDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE OR IT WAS JUST REPETITIVE. BUT YEAH, THAT WAS THE BASIS OF WHAT WE WORKED ON FOR SIX MONTHS. AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE TIME TO LOOK AT THIS. LIKE I SAID, YOU ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO MEET UP IN JANUARY TO HAVE MORE OF A LONGER SIT DOWN WITH THIS. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WE CAN TRY TO DO OUR BEST TONIGHT TO ANSWER IT IF YOU'D LIKE. >> I WADED THROUGH SOME OF THIS AND I WAS ELATED. [LAUGHTER] YOU ALL STROKE AND MAKE READER'S DIGEST VERSION I WAS SAYING RATHER THAN HE HAD BRIEF VERSION THAT'S THERE. >> CORRECT. [OVERLAPPING] YEAH. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THE OLD ADAGE WAS TICKERS BUTTER. >> NOT NECESSARILY, [OVERLAPPING] NO. >> HONESTLY, IT REALLY IS A LOT OF IT WAS JUST LIKE WE'RE REPEATING OURSELVES IN THIS. TO BE HONEST, THIS HASN'T BEEN LIKE REALLY LOOKED AT THE UPDATES ON IT, WE'RE BACK FROM LIKE THE 80S, 90S, EARLY 2000S. IT HASN'T REALLY BEEN TOUCHED FOR A WHILE. SO LIKE I SAID, OUR HOPE WAS THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO STREAMLINE THIS AND MAKE THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE PALATABLE TO ACTUALLY LOOK THROUGH. >> I ECHO, SEE, SO I'LL SCROLL THROUGH HERE OF SEEING WHAT'S BEEN STRICKEN. SEE THE RED NEARLY I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH PRECISION IN THE LANGUAGE TO UNDERSTAND THE POINTS IN POWERS THAT ARE BEING BROUGHT FORTH. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, EVEN AS SOMEONE WHO PRACTICES LAW, I PREFER THE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD LANGUAGE THAT'S PRESENTED IN AND WHAT'S PROPOSED HERE. [01:10:05] SO I DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL TAKING A LOT OF TIME. I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE BEEN FOCUSED. I'M NOT SURE YOU ALL GET ENOUGH CREDIT BECAUSE YOU DONATED A LOT OF TIME. >> APPRECIATE IT. >> FOR A VERY LITTLE RECOGNITION AND YOU SERVE THE CITIZENS BY YOUR TIME, SO YOU'RE VOICE FOR THE CITIZENS. I CAN'T THANK YOU GUYS AND LADIES ENOUGH FOR THE COMMITMENT YOU HAVE MADE TO THIS. I REALLY DOES, EVEN JUST SITTING HERE TONIGHT, I'VE EVEN COVER OVER SOME MORE STUFF THAT I DIDN'T SEE LAST NIGHT. ANYWAY. >> YEAH, WE'RE APPRECIATE IT [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE DID SOME PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT FUTURE OF ANGLETON AND FOR EXAMPLE, ONE THING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS TERMS AND TERM LIMITS. I AGREE WITH THE DIRECTION OF WHAT THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE DID. WE DIDN'T CHANGE TERM LIMIT TIME, SO IT'S STILL SIX YEARS. THEY RECOMMENDED CHANGE INTO THREE YEAR TERMS AND I'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH VARIOUS FOLKS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THAT LEARNING CURVE OF, YOU SIGN ON YOU GET ELECTED OR APPOINTED AND THEN YOU GET SLAMMED INTO BUDGET. YOU'RE LIKE, "OH MY GOSH, WHAT'S GOING ON?" THEN YOU HIT YOUR SECOND BUDGET AND THEN YOU MAY NOT DECIDE WHATEVER, AND IN SO NOW THEN AGAIN, NEW PEOPLE ARE COMING IN. WE HAD PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT TERM LIMITS, OR NOT TERM LIMITS OR EXTENDING THEM. AGAIN, I THINK IT WAS JUST SOME GREAT DISCUSSION AND MAYBE INCHING TOWARD FROM 2-3 YEAR TERMS. MAYBE IN THE FUTURE IS LOOKING AT TERM LIMITS OR TERM LIMIT LINKS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. AT THOSE A LOT OF GOOD WORK AND A LOT OF GOOD DISCUSSION AND THANK YOU TO THE FOLKS DID CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE AND ALL THAT. >> YEAH. TO ECHO CHRIS'S POINT I THINK WE WOULD ALL BE FOOLISH IF WE SAID, LET'S JUST DO THIS FOR WHAT WE LOOK LIKE RIGHT NOW. PART OF THIS IS SO THAT WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND DETERMINE WHAT THE FUTURE OF HAMILTON LOOKS LIKE. WE KNOW THAT THIS MIGHT NOT 100% BE SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL ARE FOR, WE UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT EASIER SO THAT WHEN WE START LOOKING AT IT IN THE FUTURE AS WE GROW, WE HAVE SHRUNKEN IT DOWN, SO IT'S WAY MORE MANAGEABLE. I THINK THE NEXT TIME WE HAVE THIS WHICH WE PUT ON THERE WHEN WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE DOING THIS REVIEW FOR THIS COMMISSION. WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT 30 OR 40 PAGES OF THIS, WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CONDENSED AND IT'S WAY EASIER TO MAINTAIN, AND IF WE NEED TO ADD SOMETHING TO IT, WHAT WE STILL NEED TO REMOVE IT WILL MAKE IT WAY EASIER THIS WAY. CHRIS IS RIGHT. WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT TERM LIMITS. THE BIG THING THAT WE KEPT TALKING ABOUT WAS LIKE, WITHIN THE TWO YEARS, YOU HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN ABLE TO GET LIKE UNDERSTANDING. IT TAKES A WHILE TO GET TO UNDERSTAND WHAT COUNCIL REALLY DOES. THEN OUR THOUGHT PROCESS ON THAT WAS IF WE ADDED TO THE THREE YEAR VERSUS THE TWO, YOU'D REALLY BE ABLE TO GET INTO A GROOVE, AND THEN YOU'RE ALSO ABLE TO SHOW AND HIGHLIGHT WHAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO ON COUNCIL WHENEVER IT'S TIME FOR REELECTION VERSUS SAYING, I WAS HERE FOR A LITTLE BIT. NOW WE GOT TO DO THIS AGAIN. >> MY OTHER COMMENT IS, IT SAYS, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO REVIEW THIS EVERY TWO YEARS TO BASS WITH THAT. I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH. I CAN'T WELL, WE SAID FOUR OR [OVERLAPPING] FIVE OR SOMETHING? >> I THINK WE SAID FIVE. >> I THINK IT WAS FIVE. >> IF WE DO THE HEAVY LIFTING ON THIS ONE, THEN REALLY IN FIVE YEARS YOU'RE LOOKING AT STATE LAW AND SOME OTHER PROCEDURAL THINGS. WE DECIDE WE WANTED TO CHANGE TERMS OR CHANGE THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS. >> I'M A FIRM BELIEVER THAT IF WE PUT TOGETHER IN ONE AND I THINK YOU'LL HAVE [NOISE]. >> I NEVER HEARD. >> I'M A FIRM BELIEVER THAT IF WE PUT TOGETHER A GOOD DOCUMENT, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE TOUCHED EVERY YEAR OR EVERY TWO YEARS. >> CORRECT. >> IT SHOULDN'T NEED TO BE TOUCHED EVERY TWO YEARS. I KNOW THERE ARE SOME LEGISLATIVE THINGS THAT COME UP THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO HAPPEN AT LEAST PROBABLY EVERY OTHER SPRING. BUT LIKE I SAID, IF WE HAVE A GOOD QUALITY DOCUMENT IN WHICH I THINK YOU REALLY HAVE, AND I LIKE YOUR IDEA OF CONSOLIDATING IT DOWN BECAUSE AS TIME EXPANDS, IT'S JUST NATURE OF GOVERNMENT TO ADD MORE. SO ANY CHANCE YOU HAVE TO CONSOLIDATE CAN MAKE IT MORE PRECISE, MORE CONCISE. I THINK IS PLAUSIBLE AND I'M WITH CHRIS THAT IF YOU ALL CAN FIND [01:15:03] A WAY NOT TO HAVE TO DO THIS EVERY COUPLE YEARS AND THEN I'M ALL FOR IT, I'M IN. >> WE HAD SOME REALLY GOOD WORDSMITH WORKING ON THIS, OUR ATTORNEYS ARE GREAT. MICHELLE OUR CHAIR WAS REALLY GOOD WITH LIKE MAKING SURE THAT THIS VERBIAGE SOUNDED RIGHT. I THOUGHT OF THINGS THAT WERE JUST BAD SENTENCES, AS WEIRDLY AS THAT SOUNDS BUT IT JUST WASN'T SOUNDING RIGHT. SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GOT IT AS CLOSE TO PERFECT AS WE COULD WHENEVER WE ARE REDOING THIS. THOUGH, KUDOS TO OUR AMAZING ATTORNEYS IN OUR WORDSMITH THAT WE HAD THAT WERE PART OF THAT PROCESS. SHE DID A GREAT JOB. [BACKGROUND] [LAUGHTER] >> I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. >> BRING IT. >> FIRST IS AROUND THE CITY MANAGER AND MAKE SURE THAT WHEN I TALK ABOUT ALL THIS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR CITY MANAGER WE CURRENTLY HAVE. >> RIGHT. >> YOU'RE EVER TRYING TO DO. [LAUGHTER] >> NO. IT HAS NOTHING TO WITH THAT. THERE'S A WORDING IN HERE THAT YOU CHANGED. >> CORRECT. >> YOU KNOW WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS. >> PROBABLY. >> CITY MANAGER SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND YOU TOOK STRUCK OUT WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO APPOINT REMOVE ALL DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DIRECTORS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT CHRIS IS AN ISSUE, BUT WE HAVE HAD THAT SITUATION IN THE PAST. THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME TAKING OUT THE OTHER APPROVAL OF COUNCIL. I KNOW THAT'S BEEN A BONE OF CONTENTION FOR MANY CITY MANAGERS IN THE PAST AND IT'S GOING ON FOREVER, AND BY TAKING THAT OUT, IF WE HAVE A BAD CITY MANAGER AND WE HAVE A RETALIATION OR SOMETHING AND WE CAN'T STOP, THAT REALLY CONCERNS ME. WE HAVE ALMOST USED THAT BEFORE. ONE TIME THERE WAS A THREAT OF FIRING A DEPARTMENT HEAD AND WE STOPPED IT. NOT IN OPEN SESSION, BUT IN PRIVATE SESSION BY STOPPING THAT. THAT DOES CONCERN ME ABOUT STRIKING THAT OUT. LIKE I SAID, NONE OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH CHRIS BECAUSE I THINK CHRIS HAS DONE A GREAT JOB. BUT IT DOES PROTECT THE CITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL FROM A BAD HIRE BASICALLY. THAT PERSON CAN HAVE IRREPARABLE HARM ON THE STAFF AND THE CITY AND THE WHOLE THING. [OVERLAPPING] >> TRYING TO THINK. >> I CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU. >> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. >> NICE TO GET A COMPLIMENT. THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] BUT A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT CAME ABOUT WERE NOT ONLY FOR STREAMLINING AND COMING IN FROM THE 1960S OR '70S, BUT SOME OF THEM CAME FROM GREDDY'S EXPERIENCE. SO GREDDY AND I CAME TO EVERY MEETING. >> SURE. >> SOME OF THEM WERE BASED ON WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER CITIES AS WELL. I THINK THAT WAS A COMPONENT OF SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WITH THE CHARTER COMMISSION MEMBERS ABOUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN OTHER CITIES AND OF COURSE, WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS CITY. I THINK WHAT WE'RE REALLY WANTING TO DO AND WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT IS SO THAT YOU ALL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY START READING IT. YOU KNOW, LIKE TRAVIS SAID, YOU LOOKED AT IT THE SECOND TIME YOU SAW SOME MORE. I MEAN, IT'S A LOT. A LOT OF THE CHANGES WERE PREEMPTED BY STATE LAW, JUST STRAIGHT UP WITH THE CHANGES ON ANNEXATION LAW. [OVERLAPPING] JUST COMPLETELY CHANGED. YOU HAVE ALL THESE PROVISIONS ARE JUST NOT EVEN PARTNERING ANYMORE. THEN YOU HAD OTHER PROVISIONS IN HERE THAT MADE ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE, LIKE YOUR REVISION ON SPECIAL POLICE, WHICH WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THAT CAME FROM. IT WAS A COMBINATION OF PREEMPTION BY STATE LAW STREAMLINING SO THAT THE INTERPRETATION OF YOUR CHARTER IS NOT COMPLICATED BECAUSE WHEN YOU MAKE IT COMPLICATED, THAT'S WHEN YOU HAVE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS BECAUSE NOBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT IT IS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. ALSO A COMBINED EFFORT BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE, GREDDY IS 20 PLUS YEARS AS A CITY ATTORNEY AND JUST [NOISE] THE FACT THAT YOU'RE IN A GROWING CITY. YOU NEED A DOCUMENT THAT IS GOING TO SERVE YOUR PURPOSES NOW. YOU'RE DIFFERENT THAN YOU WERE WHEN WE CAME ON IN 2017. THIS DOCUMENT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, I ACTUALLY TYPED THIS, BUT IN PREPARATION FOR OUR WORKSHOP. I'M ALL EARS ON SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK IS EASIER OR BETTER FOR YOU. WE HAVE OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE ASKED US WHAT CAN YOU DO THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS AND DIFFERENT COLORS, OR CAN YOU DO ALL DIFFERENT? WE'VE GOTTEN SOME STRANGE REQUESTS. WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CLEAN COPY FOR YOU TO REVIEW. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AND THEN IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU THINK WOULD MAKE THIS JOB EASIER, I'LL BE GLAD TO ACCOMMODATE YOU BECAUSE IT IS REALLY A LOT. >> SURE. >> THE CHARTER COMMISSION WORKED REALLY HARD FOR MANY MONTHS AND THEY HAD HOMEWORK. IT WASN'T JUST THE TIME THAT THEY WERE IN CITY HALL. IF THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN MAKE IT USER-FRIENDLY, SO WE COULD HAVE A MORE FRUITFUL CONVERSATION, WE'LL DO THAT. [01:20:03] WE ALSO HAVE A LIST RUNNING, EVERY CHANGE WE'VE MADE WE'VE GOT THE REASON WHY. >> OKAY. >> THAT WILL REALLY BE HELPFUL. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE REALLY DO. GREDDY GAVE US A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT LIKE, HE TRIED REALLY HARD NOT TO BE LIKE WELL IF YOU'RE THIS CITY. BUT HE WOULD ALWAYS LOOK LIKE WE WOULD ASK A QUESTION AND HE WOULD SAY, WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT CITIES THAT ARE COMPARABLE IN SIZE, WHERE THEY'RE AT, WHERE THEY'RE GOING THIS IS WHAT THEY WOULD DO, AND THIS IS HOW IT WOULD LOOK. A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE, WE USE THAT ONE SPECIFIC THAT YOU ASKED ABOUT. IT WAS BECAUSE HE HAD HAD THAT EXPERIENCE OF A CITY SIMILAR SIZED, SIMILAR TYPE OF DEMOGRAPHICS, WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE IN THE GROWTH POTENTIAL, AND THEN THIS IS WHAT THEY WOULD DO ON THAT CONCEPT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> SURE. >> THAT WAS A LOT OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE LIKE REALLY SPECIFIC WHERE THIS IS HOW I'VE SEEN IT AND HE ALSO GAVE US REALLY GOOD EXAMPLES OF JUST ABSOLUTE MESS UP THE CITIES DID. I'M NOT GOING TO NAME NAMES, BUT THERE WERE CITIES TO THE NORTH OF US THAT JUST MESSED UP WITH WHERE A BOUNDARY WERE AND WHO HAD THIS AND WHO HAD THAT. SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT HE SHOWED US BAD EXAMPLES OF IT PLUS, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO LOOK LIKE A GOOD ONE AND HOW CAN WE FIX IT UP. >> THAT ONE JUMPED OUT AT ME AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT GOES NOTED THAT I DO HAVE CONCERN WITH THAT AND ALSO ADDING A CONTRACT. NOW IT'S IN THE CHARTER THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE CITY MANAGER. WHEREAS BEFORE WE COULD HIRE A CITY MANAGER, WE DIDN'T HAVE TO HAVE A CONTRACT. BY PUTTING THIS IN THERE NOW WE DO. >> YEAH. WELL, THAT'S A GOOD LEGAL PROTECTION THOUGH FOR THE CITY. >> JUST POINTING OUT, THAT WAS FUNNY. THE CHIEF OF POLICE SHALL BE APPOINTED BY THE CITY MANAGER AND THEN THE RED IS WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEN STRIKE, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL. IT'S THE SAME THING. >> I KNOW. WELL, IT MIGHT BE THAT WE HAD DEBATES. [LAUGHTER] I CAN FORWARD. >> WE ALWAYS [LAUGHTER] >> LOOKS LIKE IT'S THE SAME WORDING, WE STRUCK IT AND THEN PUT IT BACK IN. >> YEAH. THAT'S A MATTER OF DEBATES. >> YEAH. >> WE WENT BACK AND FORTH FOR SOMETIME. [OVERLAPPING] >> LET ME JUST GO AHEAD AND ALSO ADD. [OVERLAPPING] WE GOT MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF THIS EVERY SINGLE TIME WE MET UP. OUR PACKET WOULD BE LIKE THESE ARE THE LATEST UPDATES TO THE NOTES THAT WE TOOK THE ORIGINAL TIME THAT WE DID IT. YOU'RE NOT EVEN GETTING THE FINAL DRAFT, YOU'RE GETTING THE DRAFT OF THE DRAFT OF THE DRAFT. >> TO SUM IT ALL IT ALSO WE HAD OVER A COUPLE OF MEETINGS, SO WE TALKED ABOUT CHARTER. >> [LAUGHTER] YEAH. >> WE NEVER FINISHED IT THEN THE NEXT MEETING, WE CAME BACK AND SAID, SO WHAT DO WE SAY ABOUT THAT? [LAUGHTER] >> RIGHT. WE WOULD GO BACK TO BEFORE WE WENT TO THE REST OF IT THAT WE WERE DOING. >> IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF THAT. >> WHAT ABOUT ON THAT PARTICULAR AREA 4.82 SECTION 1. WHAT IF THAT CHIEF OF POLICE SHALL BE APPOINTED TO BY THE CITY MANAGER WITH THE CONSULTATION OF CITY COUNCIL, OR IN A DIFFERENT TERM, THE CHIEF OF POLICE SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. CHIEF OF POLICE AGAIN MAY BE REMOVED BY THE OFFICE OF CITY MANAGER AGAIN, WITH THE CONSULTATION OF CITY COUNCIL, IS THAT THE SAME WITH THE APPROVAL? THAT WAY IT'S JUST A MEETING. WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. I DON'T KNOW, JUST AN IDEA. >> ARE YOU TAKING NOTES SO YOU'LL BE READY FOR THE WORKSHOP? >> CONSULTATION [LAUGHTER] >> BELIEVE ME I'M NOT FORGETTING THAT ONE. >> HE ALREADY HAS IT NOTED DOWN. >> THAT ONE IS SEARED IN ONE WORD. >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE GOING THROUGH, I'M JUST POINTING THIS OUT BECAUSE WHENEVER I SAW IT AT THAT, WHAT IS THIS. IF YOU LOOK AT ARTICLE 10 IN THE GENERAL PROVISIONS, THERE'S INFORMATION ABOUT OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER. I DON'T HAVE AN OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER. WHY DO WE STILL HAVE THAT IN THERE? THERE WAS LIKE IT'S A LOT OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE SAW, WE WERE JUST LIKE, WE DON'T EVEN DO THIS ANYMORE OR, THIS HASN'T BEEN UPDATED IN SUCH A LONG TIME, WE JUST GOT IT TO TRIM THIS UP SO THAT IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT PRESENTABLE. >> WE'RE GOING TO SEE THIS AGAIN THAT WOULD BE THE TIME FOR TRUE COMMENTS AND THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING. WE PUT IT ON THE BALLOT [INAUDIBLE] >> IF WE COULD ALL HAVE LITTLE COMMENTS ABOUT BUT ONCE WE GET TO A WORKSHOP, WE COULD DO [OVERLAPPING] >> WHEN IS THE WORKSHOP? >> JANUARY. >> WE'RE STILL WORKING ON ANOTHER THING. >> WE'RE TRYING TO NARROW THAT DOWN. >> JANUARY. >> JANUARY. [INAUDIBLE] >> LET'S GET IT THROUGH. >> OKAY. >>THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE] >> THANK YOU GUYS. >> I APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU TO THE WHOLE CHARTER COMMITTEE FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE PUT IN DEFINITELY [01:25:04] SHOWS ALL THE WORK YOU'VE PUT IN FROM THE DOCUMENT WE JUST GOT AND THANK YOU ALL FOR SERVING. SOMETIMES IT'S HARD TO FIND PEOPLE AND YOU'LL ALL STEPPED UP, SO THANK YOU. WELL, THAT ENDS ALL THE REGULAR AGENDA AND NOW [EXECUTIVE SESSION (Part 2 of 2)] WE GET THAT FUN TIME AGAIN WHERE WE GET BACK INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW CONVENIENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 551 TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. ACCORDING TO THE AUTHORITY CONTAINED THEREIN. ITEM NUMBER 14, DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION AND ORDINATES APPOINTING JEFFREY R. GILBERT AS MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE FOR THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF RECORD OF THE CITY OF ANGLETON, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. SECTION 551.074 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND ITEM NUMBER 15, DISCUSSION POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE CITY MANAGER EVALUATION, SECTION 551.074 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. WE WILL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:37. [NOISE] THANK YOU. >> WE CAN BREAK? >> YEAH, WE WILL TAKE A FEW MINUTE BREAK. [NOISE] >> ALL RIGHT. [NOISE] >> WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK INTO REGULAR SESSION FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 10:03 PM. COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE ANY ACTIONS ON 14? >> YES. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2021-12-14-014 THAT, WE APPROVE THE SALARY OF- >> APPOINTMENT. >> APPOINTMENT OF JUDGE JEFF GILBERT WITH THE SALARY AS IN THE CONTRACT AND TO BE REVISITED ANNUALLY IN JUNE. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BOOTHS. >> CAN YOU AUTHORIZE THE CONTRACT TOO? >> WE AUTHORIZE THE APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT. >> AMEND. >> AMEND. >> AMENDED. >> APPROVED. >> I HAVE AN AMENDMENT. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. COUNSEL ITEM NUMBER 15. >> MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE THAT INTO JANUARY SO WE CAN HAVE HOPEFULLY A FULL BOARD PRESENT. >> OKAY. >> SECOND. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN TOWNSEND, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN ANGORA TO POSTPONE THE CITY MANAGER EVALUATION TO JANUARY. WHEREAS SUCH TIME ALL REVIEWS WILL BE IN AND WE WILL HAVE A FULL QUORUM. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. [LAUGHTER] ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> ALL THOSE OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARIES. [NOISE] THAT LEADS US TO THE LAST PART OF THE MEETING, WHICH IS ADJOURNMENT AT 10:05. [NOISE] >> I'M GLAD THERE WAS NO [OVERLAPPING] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.