>> TIME HERE. IT'S BEAUTIFUL DAY IN THE BIG CITY OF AMARILLO, TEXAS. [00:00:06] I THINK WE HAVE EVERYBODY HERE. I'M GOING TO CHECK WITH STAFF, SEE IF YOU GUYS NEED ANYTHING BEFORE WE GET ROLLING. GREAT. I WILL OFFICIALLY CALL US TO ORDER HERE THIS TUESDAY. IT'S A GENERAL MEETING, JUST A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING WITH A GOOD WORKING AGENDA. [2. Invocation] I'M GOING TO ASK IF YOU'D RISE. BRAD NEWMAN'S GOING TO OFFER OUR INVOCATION TODAY AND THEN STAY STANDING IF YOU WOULD FOR THE PLEDGES. >> LET'S PRAY. FATHER, I THANK YOU TODAY, FIRST OF ALL, FOR THE GOSPEL, FOR THE GOOD NEWS, GOD, THAT THOUGH WE HAVE SINNED AGAINST YOU, AND OUR SIN RIGHTLY DESERVES DEATH, GOD, YOU SET YOUR LOVE ON SINNERS. THANK YOU THAT YOU SENT JESUS TO TAKE OUR SIN, TO DIE FOR OUR SIN, TO RAISE TO LIFE. JESUS, YOU WERE RESURRECTED SO THAT BY BELIEVING IN YOU, WE MAY HAVE LIFE, THE SURE HOPE OF ETERNAL LIFE. WE'RE JUST SO THANKFUL FOR THE GOOD NEWS TODAY. GOD, WE THANK YOU FOR OUR CITY. WE THANK YOU FOR THIS PLACE THAT WE CALL HOME. GOD, WE'RE THANKFUL FOR AMARILLO. I PRAY TODAY IN OUR CITY WHERE THERE MAY BE BROKENNESS, GOD, THAT YOU WOULD RESTORE. WHERE THERE'S CONFLICT, WOULD YOU BRING PEACE? GOD, WHERE THERE'S EMPTINESS, WHERE THERE'S EXHAUSTION, WHERE THERE'S LACK THAT YOU WOULD FILL THAT YOU WOULD PROVIDE, GOD THAT YOU WOULD SATISFY. WE NEED YOU. GOD, I PRAY FOR THESE COUNCIL MEMBERS TODAY. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THIS COUNCIL AND THE WAY THAT THEY SERVE OUR CITY. GOD, I PRAY YOU GIVE THEM WISDOM. I PRAY FOR DISCERNMENT AS THEY LEAD. GOD, I PRAY FOR COMPASSION. I PRAY THAT YOU WOULD GRANT THEM COMPASSIONATE HEARTS. EVEN GOT ALL THE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TODAY IN SOME WAY, IMPACT A PERSON, AND I JUST PRAY THAT COMPASSION WOULD BE AT THE FOREFRONT OF THE DECISIONS THAT THEY MAKE TODAY. THANK YOU, GOD FOR THEM AGAIN, BRING THEM UNITY. GOD, WE ACKNOWLEDGE TODAY THAT YOU ARE SOVEREIGN, THAT YOU KNOW ALL AND THAT YOU CONTROL ALL AND WE SURRENDER TO THAT. WE SUBMIT TO THAT. WE THANK YOU FOR IT, TOO, GOD, BECAUSE WE CAN REST BECAUSE YOU HAVE A GOOD PURPOSE AND A GOOD PLAN. WE'RE SO THANKFUL FOR WHO YOU ARE AND WHAT YOU'VE DONE FOR US. WE THANK YOU AGAIN FOR JESUS, IT'S IN HIS NAME THAT WE PRAY. AMEN. >> AMEN. >> THANK YOU, PASTOR. APPRECIATE THAT. IF YOU GUYS JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE. >> THE TEXAS PLEDGE. >> THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OFF ROLLING. I DON'T SHOW ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, BUT I'LL CHECK AND SEE. STAFF DO YOU HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE. [6. Public Comment] OKAY. WE'RE MOVING ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT. I BELIEVE MISS CITY SECRETARY WILL READ US INTO THAT, AND SHE'LL RUN THE CLOCK FOR US HERE TODAY. APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO WOULD SHOW UP HERE TO SPEAK TO US TODAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MAYOR STANLEY. THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN TODAY'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING. YOUR INPUT AND YOUR OPINIONS ARE IMPORTANT TO US, AND WE'RE GLAD THAT YOU'RE HERE TO SHARE THEM TODAY. AT EACH POSTED MEETING, WE INVITE OUR FELLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ADDRESS CITY COUNCIL REGARDING POSTED AGENDA ITEMS OR TOPICS RELATED TO CITY POLICY. EVERY SPEAKER TODAY WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO ADDRESS COUNCIL. WE ASK THAT YOU STAY WITHIN THOSE 3 MINUTES ALLOTTED, BOTH DURING PUBLIC COMMENT AND DURING ANY PUBLIC HEARINGS WE HOLD TODAY. IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM WITH A PUBLIC HEARING, WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU MAKE COMMENTS ON THAT ITEM EITHER DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OR DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT NOT BOTH IN ORDER TO HELP KEEP ACCURATE MINUTES. IT'S YOUR DECISION AT WHICH POINT YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE COMMENTS ON ANY PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS. WHEN YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE TODAY, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU LIVE WITHIN THE AMARILLO CITY LIMITS. IF YOU'RE ADDRESSING COUNCIL ON AN AGENDA ITEM, PLEASE STATE YOUR POSITION SO IT CAN BE REFLECTED PROPERLY IN THE MINUTES. IF YOU'RE SPEAKING TO AN ITEM NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA, THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT LIMITS HOW OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS MAY RESPOND. COUNCIL MAY RESPOND WITH A STATEMENT OF FACT. THEY MAY ASK THE TOPIC BE ADDED TO A FUTURE AGENDA, OR THEY MAY REFER THE MATTER TO THE CITY MANAGER WHO CAN HAVE STAFF STEP OUT AND VISIT WITH YOU REGARDING YOUR TOPIC. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. OUR FIRST PUBLIC SPEAKER WILL BE ALAN FEINGOLD AND AFTER MR. FEINGOLD, OUR NEXT PUBLIC SPEAKER WILL BE CHRIS PITTMAN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I HAVE SPOKEN TO YOU BEFORE. [00:05:01] I AM A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF AMARILLO. I HAVE SPOKEN TO YOU BEFORE ABOUT THE SETTING OF WATER RATES IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO. I JUST WANT TO REVIEW A FEW TERMS. WHEN I USE THE TERM PRICE PER UNIT OR COST PER UNIT, THAT MEANS PRICE OR COST PER THOUSAND GALLONS OF PORTABLE WATER. WATER USE MEANS WITHDRAWAL OF PORTABLE WATER FROM A PRESSURIZED SYSTEM BUILT AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY OF AMARILLO. A RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER MEANS THE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF A RESIDENCE, THAT IS THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY PAYS THE UTILITY BILL FOR THAT RESIDENCE. IF I USE AN INTEGER LIKE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, N, WHEN I DESCRIBE A WATER METER LINE, IT REFERS TO THE DIAMETER OF THE PASSAGEWAY FOR WATER THROUGH THE METER FROM THE CITY'S SYSTEM, WHICH IS PRESSURIZED TO THE CUSTOMER'S WATER LINE. THE METER FEE OR ACCESS FEE FOR A RESIDENTS WITH A 5'8 INCH METER LINE IS $18.24 PER MONTH. FOR A 1 " METER LINE, IT'S $24.48 PER MONTH. AS AN APPROXIMATION, YOU COULD USE $18.50 FOR THE 5'8 INCH METER LINE AND 24 50 FOR THE 1 " METER LINE. THOSE ARE THE FEES WHICH MUST BE PAID, WHETHER THE RESIDENTS USES WATER OR NOT. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU COULD USE NO WATER FOR A MONTH OR TWO OR THREE, YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY THOSE FEES EACH MONTH IF YOU WANT TO REMAIN CONNECTED TO THE CITY'S WATER SYSTEM. I CALL THIS METER FEE ESSENTIALLY A METER RENTAL FEE OR ACCESS TO SYSTEM FEE, WHICH MOST FRUGAL WATER USERS HAVE TO PAY AS WELL AS EVERY OTHER WATER USER. METER FEE FOR A COMMERCIAL USER WITH A TWO INCH DIAMETER, THAT IS A METER LINE A METER WITH A TWO INCH DIAMETER DIAMETER LINE IS APPROXIMATELY $4 PER THOUSAND GALLONS OR $4 PER UNIT. THE FEE THAT'S PAID BY A FRUGAL WATER USER WITH A 1 " METER LINE IS $24.50. THE RATIO FOR THE MOST FRUGAL WATER USER TO THE COMMERCIAL WATER USER IS SIX TO ONE THAT IS THE CASE EVEN IF THE COMMERCIAL WATER USER USES A MILLION GALLONS OR MORE OF WATER. I THINK THAT THIS SYSTEM IS UNJUST, AND I THINK THAT THE CITY SHOULD HAVE A MEETING OF AT LEAST 2 HOURS TO DETERMINE HOW THOSE WATER RATES WERE SET. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CHRIS PITTMAN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON TOO. >> I'M HERE TO URGE THE COUNCIL TO MAKE SMART, FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENTS, ESPECIALLY AS WE ARE IN BUDGET DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW, AND TO DO SO BY BUILDING MORE BIKEWAYS AND PLANTING MORE TREES. NOW, I KNOW, EVERYONE'S THINKING, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO BUILD OR MAINTAIN THE STREETS THAT WE'VE ALREADY GOT. WE CERTAINLY CAN'T INVEST ANYMORE IN BIKEWAYS. BUT THIS IS PRECISELY WHY WE NEED TO RETHINK OUR INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGY. CITIES ACROSS TEXAS AND THE NATION ARE LEARNING THE HARD WAY OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE PUT CARS FIRST. WE GET MORE TRAFFIC, MORE POLLUTION, MORE FLOODING, AND WORST OF ALL, UNSUSTAINABLE DEBT. HERE IN AMARILLO, LIKE IN SO MANY CITIES, WE ARE STUCK IN A VICIOUS CYCLE OF BUILDING WIDE ROADS, WHICH BRINGS MORE CARS, WHICH MEANS WE NEED MORE PARKING, WHICH BRINGS MORE CARS, WHICH THEN PUTS EVEN MORE DEMAND ON OUR ALREADY STRAINED STREETS. NOT TO MENTION THAT PARKING LOTS ARE THE LEAST EFFECTIVE USE OF OUR VERY PRECIOUS PROPERTY, SPACE THAT COULD BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL BUSINESSES AND HOMES THAT COULD GENERATE ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE. MEANWHILE, THE COST OF MAINTAINING ROADS KEEPS GROWING, AND WE STRUGGLE TO KEEP UP. WE CANNOT TAX OUR WAY OUT OF THIS PROBLEM. BUT THERE IS A SOLUTION. BIKE FACILITIES COST A FRACTION OF WHAT CAR LANES COST. AS AN EXAMPLE, LOOK AT OUR VERY OWN ROCK ISLAND RAIL TRAIL. IT'S 25-YEARS-OLD AND BARELY REQUIRES MAINTENANCE. MEANWHILE, OUR ROAD LANES REQUIRE CONSTANT MAINTENANCE. ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UP TO TWO THIRDS OF PEOPLE WOULD BE WILLING TO WALK OR BIKE IF THEY HAD SAFE, PROTECTED BIKE LANES. [00:10:04] I AND SO MANY OTHERS WOULD GLADLY GIVE UP THE CAR FOR A HEALTHY, SAFE, AFFORDABLE OPTION. SIMPLY FOR COMPARISON, TODAY'S PROPOSAL FOR 6.5 MILLION DOLLAR IN STREET MAINTENANCE COULD BUILD OVER 100 MILES OF BEST IN CLASS BIKE FACILITIES THAT WOULD REQUIRE MINIMAL MAINTENANCE. WATCH THIS WEEK AS SCHOOL STARTS AND RUSH HOUR BECOMES EVEN MORE UNBEARABLE AS STUDENTS HAVE FEW OPTIONS BUT TO BE DRIVEN TO SCHOOL. IMAGINE IF THOSE STUDENTS COULD WALK OR BIKE TO SCHOOL INSTEAD. NOT ONLY WOULD THERE BE LESS TRAFFIC, LESS WEAR AND TEAR ON OUR STREETS, BUT OUR STUDENTS WOULD BE HEALTHIER, MORE INDEPENDENT, AND WE WOULD ALL SAVE MONEY INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A CITY. WE CAN MAKE SPACE FOR BIKES AND TREES. TREES CAN SOAK UP HUNDREDS OF GALLONS OF STORMWATER, MINIMIZING FLOODING RISK, REDUCING THE STRAIN ON OUR OVERBURDENED DRAINAGE SYSTEM, AND TREE CANOPY SHADING CAN ALSO EXTEND THE LIFE OF OUR STREETS. BY BUILDING BIKE WAYS AND PLANTING TREES, WE CAN INVEST IN A HEALTHIER CITY PHYSICALLY, MENTALLY, AND FINANCIALLY. A CITY THAT'S BETTER CONNECTED, MORE BEAUTIFUL, AND BUILT TO LAST. AGAIN, I URGE THIS COUNCIL AND OUR STAFF AT LARGE TO BE WISE WITH OUR BUDGET. LET'S DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR OUR CITY BOTH TODAY AND FOR GENERATIONS TO COME BY RIDING BIKES AND PLANTING TREES. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> WE HAD ONE OTHER INDIVIDUAL THAT SENT IN A REGISTRATION WITH WRITTEN COMMENTS, AND THOSE ARE IN COUNCIL'S FOLDERS, AND THAT CONCLUDES EVERYBODY THAT SIGNED UP. MAYOR? >> THANK YOU, MR. CITY SECRETARY. AS ALWAYS, I SEE ONE HAND UP ALREADY. LET'S START WITH MR. JIMMY JOE IF YOU COME FORWARD, MR. SKANK, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE DOWN THE LINE. >> BEFORE YOU START MY CLOCK, IS THERE A CHANCE I CAN HAVE A POINT OF ORDER JUST IN RECONCILING IN MY OWN MIND THIS AEDC VOTE THAT WENT DOWN AT THE NOMINATION OF MR. BROCKNER? >> SURE. YEAH. GO AHEAD AND TELL US THE POINT OF ORDER. >> THE POINT ORDER THERE, WE'D HAVE THAT YOU HAD TWO ABSTINATIONS, ABSTAINING. YOU HAD THREE PEOPLE VOTE, AND YOU HAD 2:1. 02:1 WINS. WILL MILLER SHOULD BE THE AEDC NOMINEE. >> YEAH. I APPRECIATE. >> AS SIMPLE AS THAT. >> WELL, I'LL SPEAK TO THAT. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT ON IT. I TOOK A COUPLE COMMENTS ON THAT IN HOW WE ACCEPTED OR I ACCEPTED THAT VOTE. IN LOOKING BACK, I SAW THAT COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT ORIGINALLY HAD VOTED NO, AND THEN WAS ASKING IF HE COULD CHANGE HIS VOTE TO ABSTAIN BASED ON A CONVERSATION THAT I HAD HAD ON THE SIDE WITH HIM. MS. CITY SECRETARY, DO YOU RECALL HOW YOU RECORDED THAT VOTE? WAS IT 2:01:2 OR WAS IT 2:1 WITH TWO ABSTAIN? >> YES, MAYOR. WE HAD THAT RECORDED WITH THREE ABSTENTIONS, AND TWO VOTING FOR. >> YEAH. I JUST ASKED MR. ATTORNEY, I APPRECIATE THE POINT OF ORDER, BUT I KNOW I'VE SPOKEN WITH MR. MILLER AND SO IN MOVING BACKWARDS, I KNOW THE NOMINATION WAS ACCEPTED. >> YEAH. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A POSITIVE VOTE OR AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE THAT REQUIRES THREE. YOU DIDN'T HAVE THAT THERE. >> SEEING IT WITH TWO ABSTAINING, IF WE HAD HAD, LET'S SAY YOU HAD A QUORUM OF THREE, YOU HAD A TWO YES, AND A ONE NO, WOULD THE MOTION HAVE FAILED? >> NO, IT WOULD HAVE PASSED, BUT YOU HAD ABSTAINANCE, PEOPLE ABSTAINING WITHOUT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THAT'S A NO VOTE. >> BUT THEY'RE ABSENT. ABSTAIN MEANS THEY'RE ABSENT FROM THE VOTE. >> YEAH. THE CONCERN, I THINK, WAS JUST IN THE REASON FOR THE ABSTAIN WAS NOT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND SO DID THEY COUNT AS PRESENT THAT DAY? >> THEY WERE RECORDED AS PRESENT. >> MR. SKANK, AS THEY WERE RECORDED AS PRESENT, I TOOK TWO TO ME TO NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF THREE AS A THE QUORUM WAS MET, BUT EVEN THOUGH THEY ABSTAINED. I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS INCORRECT ON IT OR NOT. I DO KNOW THAT IN PLACING THAT POSITION, I DID REACH OUT TO WILL MILLER, AND I UNDERSTAND HIS POSITION. ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO SERVE ON THAT BOARD, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE LARGE SUPPORT OR UNANIMITY. I FELT LIKE IF WE HAD HAVE GIVEN IT BACK TO MR. PRESCOTT OF, THAT WILL PUT MR. MILLER IN OR WE COULD WAIT ON THE OTHER ONE, HE MORE THAN LIKELY WOULD HAVE CHANGED BACK TO THE NO VOTE THAT HE PREVIOUS GAVE. >> THIS VOTE ASIDE, I HATE TO SEE THAT PRECEDENT SET IN A VOTING SITUATION [00:15:04] AMONG YOU FIVE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT RIGHT. 02:1, BUT OKAY. >> WELL, WE APPRECIATE THE POINT OF ORDER, SO WE'LL ROLL THE CLOCK FOR YOU. >> ALL GOOD GOVERNMENT BEGINS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, SO DOES ALL BAD GOVERNMENT. THIS LAST WEEK, I WASN'T NECESSARILY IN THE ROOM, BUT I WATCHED THE BUDGET MEETING AND I WAS WITNESSING THE MOST FRUSTRATING BUDGET, AND I'VE BEEN THROUGH MANY BUDGETS WITH ONLINE, WELL, IN THE ROOM. WE HAVE A $70,000,000 INCREASE FIXING TO HAPPEN OR SUGGESTED PROPOSED. 4.3 CENTS ADDED. JUST TO REMIND YOU BACK IN 2021, WE HAD A PDP COMMITTEE THAT WAS PARTNERS AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRESS OF ORGANIZATION, A COMMITTEE THAT WE PUT TOGETHER, GINGER PUT IT TOGETHER. LOYD BROWN WAS RUNNING IT OF ALL PEOPLE. TEN MONTHS OF MEETINGS THAT WE ATTENDED, $300,000 CONSULTING FEE TO THE GROUP THAT WAS RUNNING IT. IT WAS ALL TO TAKE US DOWN A PRIMROSE PATH TO A STREET FEE. THE STREET FEE WAS NOT JUST BROUGHT UP BY SOMEBODY IN HERE. UNLESS YOU WENT BACK TO THAT THING THERE AND YOU KNEW ABOUT IT, COLE. WE TALKED ABOUT IT. THEN WE HAD SOME POLE THAT WENT ON THAT WHEN YOU START OFF WITH 33 PEOPLE IN A COMMITTEE AND IT BREAKS DOWN TO WHERE ONLY ABOUT 10 OR 12 PEOPLE ARE SHOWING UP AT THE END, AND THEN THEY GO FOR A DOCU SIGN ON WHETHER YOU APPROVE IT OR NOT, AND PEOPLE THAT HADN'T SHOWN UP FOR MAYBE ONE OR TWO MEETINGS, THREE MEETINGS, THEY SIGN OFF ON THE FACT THAT, WE WANT TO HAVE A STREET FEE. THEY WEREN'T EVEN IN THERE LISTENING TO PARTICULARS. ME AND FLOYD SHARED A TABLE OFTEN IN THAT. I'M THINKING OUR TAXES HAVE ALWAYS BEEN COMING FROM OUR STREET. THESE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN COMING FROM OUR TAXES. WE'VE BEEN TAKING CARE OF THOSE THROUGH EITHER A BOND AND OR. THE ROLLING BOND THING THAT YOU PROPOSED WAY BACK, I THOUGHT WAS A MIRACULOUS IDEA OF YEARS OF LOOKING AT THIS TO WHERE YOU TAKE THAT MONEY BY HALF CENT OR WHATEVER. WHEN YOU INCREASE THIS BUDGET THIS YEAR, I'M GETTING DISTRACTED. >> YOU HAD A PENNY IN THERE THAT YOU COULD GET THE $15 MILLION AND YOU COULD ROLL IT INTO THE NEXT YEAR. AND WE WOULD KEEP THIS FROM BEING THE STREET FEE WOULD BE LIKE IN ALL THE OTHER FEES IF WE PUT IT ON THE UTILITY BILL, WHICH IS NOTHING BUT A TAX THAT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OF AS CITIZENS. YOU GOT TO LEAVE TAXPAYERS AND FEE PAYERS OUT OF THE EQUATION BY DOING THAT. THE ENTERPRISE FUND IS ACTUALLY TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. THAT'S BAD GOVERNMENT. ONE MORE THING. WE ALL SAID, LEAVE THE DRAINAGE FEE ALONE. BUT YEAH, GET THAT A BREAK. BUT WE MOVED THE DRAINAGE FEE MONEY. >> MR. SCHANK, WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS THIS MORNING. WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON 8:30 FRIDAY MORNING AS WELL. DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE TODAY? YES, MA'AM, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD. >> I'M HOPE MCCOY, RESIDENT OF AMARILLO, I LIVE OUT IN PLEASANT VALLEY, AND I WANT TO ADD ON TO WHAT HE JUST SPOKE ABOUT ON THE STREET FEE. OUR PROPERTY TAXES AND ALSO SALES TAX ALREADY HELP PAY FOR STREET. AND THEN THERE'S FEDERAL AND STATE GRANTS THAT WE APPLY FOR THAT HELP PAY FOR THE STREETS THROUGH TXDOT AND STATE GRANTS AND OTHER FUNDING. AND THEN THERE'S THAT BOND ISSUANCE THAT PASSED BACK IN 2017 THAT WAS 275 MILLION. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, ALL OF THAT MONEY HAS NOT YET BEEN SPENT. IF THERE'S STILL MONEY IN THE BANK, WHY ARE WE ALREADY ASKING FOR MORE? IN 2023 24, 22 MILLION WAS ALSO ASKED FOR FOR A STREET BOND FOR SLURRING AND CEILING ROADS. THERE'S REVENUE OUT THERE ALREADY FOR THE STREETS. [00:20:02] ARE WE CALLING IT A STREET FEE INSTEAD OF A STREET TAX SO THAT THE VOTERS DON'T GET TO VOTE ON IT? BECAUSE IF IT'S A FEE, WE DON'T HAVE A SAY SO, BUT IF IT WAS A TAX, WE WOULD GET TO VOTE ON THAT. THERE'S TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUNDS OUT THERE? WE GET GASOLINE TAXES. LIKE I SAID, STATE TXDOT FUNDS, EVEN BUILDERS DEVELOPERS HELP IMPROVE THE ROADS AND STREETS. ADDING A STREET FEE TO OUR WATER BILL, THAT'S IN MY OPINION, ILLEGAL. DOES IT FALL IN WITH THE CITY CHARTER? IS IT A STATE LEGAL LAW ACCORDING TO THE TEXAS MUNICIPALITY LAWS? THERE SHOULD BE A PUBLIC VOTE ON THIS FEE IF THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT IS. THERE SHOULD BE EITHER A PROPOSITION OR A REFERENDUM MEETING, WHICH, I THINK, MARY, YOU JUST SAID WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ON FRIDAY. THEN THE FEE TRANSPARENCY. IN THE AGENDA, THERE'S TALKING ABOUT MOVING FUNDS FROM SEWER DRAINAGE FOR SOME OTHER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. WHO'S GOING TO WATCH OVER THESE FEES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT MOVED TO BE USED FOR SOMETHING ELSE? LIKE THE MAYOR SAID, YOU CANNOT KEEP CONTINUED TO NICKEL AND DIMING ITS RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT LIVE ON A FIXED INCOME. WHETHER YOU RAISE THE BILL, EIGHT DOLLARS $15 FOR A SINGLE PARENT, FOR AN OLDER PERSON, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF GAS. THAT'S A GALLON OF MILK OR LOAF OF BREAD FOR THEIR CHILDREN. THE WATER AND SEWER FEES WERE ALREADY RAISED BACK IN OCTOBER 2024, IN PRIOR YEARS TO THAT. AT SOME POINT, WE HAVE TO SET A PRESIDENT AND STOP RAISING THESE FEES AND THEN TURN AROUND AND USING THEM FOR SOMETHING ELSE THAT THEY WERE NOT INTENDED FOR. PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THE STREET FEE ON THE WATER BILL. FIND ANOTHER WAY. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MS. HOPE. [APPLAUSE] MR. FISHER, IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD, PLEASE. >> BEFORE MY TIME STARTS, MATT, ASK FOR A STATEMENT OF FACTS. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> IS THERE A SINGLE INTERSECTION THAT FLOODED PRE DRAINAGE FEE THAT DOES NOT FLOOD TODAY? OR LAST NIGHT? >> YES. I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION AND WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT FOR YOU HERE TODAY. BUT I WILL ASK STAFF TO LOOK INTO THAT QUESTION. >> MY NAME IS MIKE FISHER. I LIVE IN THE CITY OF L LIMITS OF AMARILLO. LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY. WE JUST SAT THROUGH HOURS OF BUDGET DISCUSSIONS WHERE YOU, AS THE COUNCIL CONCLUDED THAT WE NEED TO COVER $15 MILLION SHORTFALL. WE HAVE TO TAKE THE STREETS ASSESSMENT FEE. ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ADMITTED WAS REALLY A TAX. NOT SURE WHO IT WAS, I THINK I REMEMBER, BUT I WON'T PUT IT ON YOU. WE ALSO HAVE TO MOVE DRAINAGE AND WATER REVENUES INTO THE GENERAL FUND. TRANSLATION, WE'RE DIGGING IN THE COUCH, CUSHIONS, ROBBING THE RAINY DAY JAR, AND PAWNING OFF SILVERWARE JUST TO PAY THE BILLS. [NOISE] THEN THE VERY FIRST MEETING TODAY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPENDING $85,000 ON AN AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY. YET WE'VE ALREADY DONE THIS, THE ARC ABOUT 10, 15 YEARS AGO, THE CITIZENS VOTED IT DOWN. WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS THE VERY NEXT MEETING, TRANSLATION SORRY, I WENT TO THE WRONG PLACE. THAT'S RIGHT. WE CAN'T AFFORD A METAPHORICAL MORTGAGE, BUT WE'RE PRICING OUT THE FAMILY VACATION AT DISNEY WORLD. THIS IS LIKE A FAMILY REALIZING THEY CAN'T MAKE THEIR HOUSE PAYMENT. INSTEAD OF CUTTING SPENDING, DAD WALKS IN AND SAYS, LET'S PUT IN A POOL OR BETTER YET. IT'S LIKE THE TITANIC CREW DISCOVERING A HOLE IN THE HOLE AND IMMEDIATELY HOLDING A MEETING, DISCUSSING UPGRADING THE DECK CHAIRS. I MEAN, THIS GUY DONNY HOOPER HERE JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO, WE'RE BUYING BMW MOTORCYCLES, MAN. WE DON'T NEED BMW MOTORCYCLES. WE DIDN'T NEED TO UPGRADE THE BATHROOMS AT THE CIVIC CENTER FOR A MILLION BUCKS. THEN THEY'RE OVER HERE TRYING TO PUT IN A MILLION OVER HERE AT THE PAVILION. MAN, WE'VE GOT TO REEL IN AND EXPENSES, MAN, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS AT YOUR HOUSE. WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, WE'RE NOT GOING ON VACATION. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUY THAT NEW CAR. OUR KID MAY NOT BE GOING TO THE COLLEGE THAT YOU HAD PLANNED. [00:25:01] WE'VE GOT TO BUCKLE. WE'VE GOT TO TIGHTEN OUR BELLS AND CUT THESE COSTS. THEY MAY SAY, THESE GUYS ARE GOING TO COME AT YOU AND SAY, IT'S IN THE BUDGET. WELL, YOU HAVE SIX MONTHS, FIVE MONTHS TO REAL IN SOME EXPENSES? NO I GUARANTEE YOU CAN FIND 15 MILLION. I CAN FIND THEM TODAY. YOU HAVE FIVE MONTHS TO DO THAT. YOU HAVE 25% EXCESS TO COVER RAINY DAY. YOU COULD START CUTTING COST AND MAKE UP FOR THAT 15 MILLION AND HOPE YOU GET IT BY THE END OF THE YEAR BECAUSE IT'S NOT A LAW THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE 25% SLUSH FUND. WE COULD TAP THAT CUT COST, QUIT BUYING BMWS, AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING. WE'RE SPENDING ANOTHER 90,000 TO PUT IN LIGHTING AT THE CIVIC CENTER. THEY'RE GOING TO CONSIDER THAT TODAY. TAKE THAT CREDIT CARD FROM THIS MAN. THANK YOU. >> APPRECIATE YOU, MR. FISHER. MR. FORD, I'LL SEE YOUR HAND ON THE BACK IF YOU COME FORWARD, SIR. >> WELL, WE'RE BEING JUDICIOUS WITH POINTS OF ORDER TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A POINT OF ORDER ON WHAT'S BEEN DISPLAYED. I'M NOT POINTING YOU, MR. PRESCOTT BEHIND YOU. DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN. THE LAST PARAGRAPH THERE IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH 551007 PARAGRAPH E. IT WOULD BE GOOD TO UPDATE. THAT IS WHERE THE CHARTER AND THE STATE LAW CANNOT EXIST IN THE SAME SPACE. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED. THAT'S IN DIRECT CONFLICT. MIKE FORD AMARILLO OF TEXAS, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL. THE LAST MEETING, THE CITY MANAGER INQUIRED ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS BEING ASSESSED ON AN EMPLOYEE ASSESSMENT, AND I'M HAPPY TO PROVIDE ONE TODAY. FIRST, DURING THE ILLEGAL CANVAS THAT I OPINED ABOUT THE LAST MEETING, I ATTENDED THE CITY MANAGER DECLARED THAT NO ONE FOLLOWS CHAPTER 67 PROCEDURE FOR LOCAL CANVAS. I'M NOW PLEASED TO REPORT THAT RANDALL COUNTY WILL BE DELIVERING TO YOU SEALED RETURNS OF THE SEALED ENVELOPES, AND THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE OBLIGATED TO OPEN THEM OR THE MAYOR IN A PUBLIC MEETING AND FOLLOW THE REST OF THE LAW, PROPERLY QUALIFYING PREVAILING CANDIDATES. SECOND, THE CITY MANAGER CLAIMED THE LAW BOUND HIM TO FOCUS EXCLUSIVELY ON PRODUCING A BUDGET AND PROHIBIT HIM FROM ENTERTAINING INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS. YET DURING THE SAME BUDGET PERIOD, HE HONORED A SINGLE COUNCIL MEMBER'S REQUEST TO SPEND SEVERAL WEEKS DEVELOPING A SEPARATE MAINTENANCE FEE WHILE MR. HOPPER WAS TRYING TO PRODUCE HIS OWN BUDGET INPUTS FOR HERE. DIVERTING THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER FROM BUDGET PREPARATION AND CONTRADICTING HIS OWN EXCUSE. THIRD, MAYOR STANLEY DESCRIBED THIS BUDGET PROCESS AS ONE OF THE MOST CONFUSING IN THE CITY HISTORY WITH A $15 DOLLAR SHORTFALL. NO ONE HAS EXPLAINED, AND KEY FUND BALANCE DATA IS STILL MISSING. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FIRST THING DISCUSSED AT THE FIRST FIVE MINUTES OF THE MEETING. IF THIS IS THE CITY MANAGER'S DEFINITION OF FISCAL STEWARDSHIP, IT EXPLAINS THE CHAOS IN THE BUDGET AND THE DISREGARD FOR THE LAW IN FOLLOWING THE CANVASSING PROCESS. FOURTH, HE FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE $265 MILLION TAX NOTES CASE, A CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD TAXPAYERS THAT COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT OPENLY AND PUBLICLY SUPPORTED, NOR IDENTIFY THOSE RESPONSIBLE, EVEN THOUGH THE DISTRICT AND APPEALS COURT CASES HAVE BEEN ENSHRINED IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPEN MEETINGS HANDBOOKS AS EXAMPLES OF HOW NOT TO POST PUBLIC NOTICES. MEANWHILE, A SCURRILOUS FOOTNOTE IN THE APPEALS COURT DECISION NAMING MR. FREEMAN REMAINS UNANSWERED. FIFTH, HE FAILED TO REFER TO LAW ENFORCEMENT A DOUBLE UNAPPROVED TRANSFER WITHOUT ADC OR CITY APPROVAL OF $750,000 OF TAXPAYER FUNDS INTO A PRIVATE BANK ACCOUNT IN VIOLATION OF BOTH STATE LAW AND THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. SIXTH, HE STOOD BY WELL, HUD EMBEZZLEMENT WHISTLEBLOWER, WHILE THE HUD EMBEZZLEMENT WHISTLEBLOWER WAS HARASSED OUT OF CITY EMPLOYMENT, ALL THE WHILE POSTING AN ILLEGAL MEETING NOTICE TO CREATE A NEW FACILITY FOR THE VERY DEPARTMENT WHERE THE EMBEZZLEMENT OCCURRED. A FACILITY PROVIDING 10 YEARS OF FREE RENT TO A PRIVATE GROUP ALSO IN VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION. I'LL ADD ONE MORE THING, THE PUBLIC POLE OF THE FINGER AND WET FINGER IN THE AIR OF WHO DO YOU WANT FOR YOUR POLICE CHIEF? WE HAVE A MAN BACK HERE WHO'S HIGHLY QUALIFIED. PLEASE SEE THAT HE IS THE NEXT POLICE CHIEF. MR. MAYOR, IF THIS IS LEADERSHIP STANDARD WE ARE TOLERATING. THEN ACCOUNTABILITY IS LONG OVERDUE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. FORD. WE APPRECIATE YOUR WORDS. DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY? >> WELL, MAYOR, AS A MATTER OF FACT, MR. CITY MANAGER, WHAT WAS YOUR FIRST DAY OF EMPLOYMENT HERE? [00:30:02] >> JULY 27 OF 2024. >> AS A MATTER OF FACT, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE, I'M GUESSING ACCUSATIONS AGAINST OUR CITY MANAGER OCCURRED WELL BEFORE HE WAS HERE. JUST AS A MATTER OF FACT, I'D LIKE TO JUST PUT ON THE RECORD HIS START DATE. >> ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO GIVE A REMARK OR OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT HERE BEFORE WE MOVE ON WITH THE AGENDA? AS ALWAYS, I GREATLY APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO IS ATTENDING AND PARTICIPATING. IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PROCESS. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL CLOSE ITEM NUMBER 6, PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL MOVE INTO ITEM NUMBER 7, OUR CONSENT AGENDA. [7. Consent Items] COUNCIL, DO I HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE PULLED OFF BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? I SEE NO ONE, SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES FOR A LARGE PORTION OF OUR WORKING BUDGET. MOVING ON TO OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS. [8.A. Review agenda items for regular meeting and attachments] ITEM 8A. >> REVIEW AGENDA ITEMS FOR REGULAR MEETING. DO I HAVE ANY REVIEWS FROM COUNSEL? >> NO SIR. [8.B. Procurement procedures under city policy and state law] >> ITEM 8B. PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES. MICHAEL LINDLEY'S GOT THIS ONE. HE'S GOING TO COME UP HERE AND WALK US THROUGH COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS AND A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT THEY DO FOR US OVER THERE. >> YES, SIR. I APPRECIATE YOU. >> HOW DOES THIS TURN ON? [BACKGROUND] HEY, GUYS, WHAT YOU GOT? I'M MICHAEL LINDLEY, PURCHASING MANAGER HERE AT THE CITY. I WANT TO COME TO YOU TODAY AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON PROCUREMENT THAT WE DO HERE AT THE CITY. WHAT I GAVE OUT THERE, IT'S A LENGTHY READ, BUT IT'S A REALLY GOOD DEMONSTRATION THAT SHOWS SIDE BY SIDE OF COOPERATIVE TRADITIONAL PROCUREMENTS. I DIDN'T WANT TO PUT ALL THAT IN THE SLIDE DECK, SO I WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT TO READ AT A LATER TIME IF YOU WANT. OUR MISSION STATEMENT, THE PURSING DEPARTMENT IS COMMITTED TO PROCURING ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS, SERVICES, SUPPLIES, AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE CITY. WE OPERATE IN STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE CITY CHARTER AND TEXAS LAW, ENSURING TRANSPARENT AND LEGALLY COMPLIANT TRANSACTIONS. OUR CORE RESPONSIBILITY IS IDENTIFY AND IMPLEMENT THE MOST EFFECTIVE PROCUREMENT METHODS, ALWAYS PRIORITIZING THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY AND ITS TAXPAYERS BY SECURING OPTIMAL VALUE AND EFFICIENCY IN ALL ACQUISITIONS. SO WHAT THIS SLIDES SHOWING, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO COVER TODAY IS THINGS THAT COME TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL, $50,000 AND UP. CURRENTLY, ANYTHING 50 AND UP MUST BE COMPETITIVELY BID OR USE AN APPROVED COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, SENATE BILL 1173 BECOMES LAW, AND THAT THRESHOLD INCREASES TO $100,000. PURCHASES UNDER 100,000 WILL BE PROCURED WITH THREE QUOTES, BE COMPETITIVELY BID, OR THEY CAN USE A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, WHICHEVER FITS THE NEED THE BEST. WE ANTICIPATE BRINGING A FUTURE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO HOPEFULLY UPDATE OUR POLICIES TO ALIGN WITH THE NEW STATE LAW. >> HERE'S WHERE THINGS START, A REQUISITION. DEPARTMENT NEEDS SOMETHING. THEY ENTER A REQUISITION THROUGH WORKDAY. THAT UNDERGOES THE APPROVAL PROCESS TO INCLUDE THE REVIEW BY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE OR ACMS, AND THEN THE MOST EFFECTIVE PROCUREMENT METHOD IS DETERMINED. HERE'S OUR TOOLS HERE. WE'VE GOT COOPERATIVES AND THEN TRADITIONAL PROCUREMENT. TRADITIONAL IS YOUR BEST VALUE BIDS, REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS, REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS, AND INVITATIONS TO BID, AND WE'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE BRIEFLY AS WE GO THROUGH IT. WHAT I DID WAS THERE'S A FEW SLIDES HERE THAT TOUCH ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, TRADITIONAL VERSUS COOPERATIVE. [00:35:01] IN A TRADITIONAL PROCUREMENT, THE CITY MANAGES THE FULL PROCESS, SPACS, BIDS, EVALUATIONS, AND AWARDS. IT PROVIDES FULL CONTROL, BUT REQUIRES SIGNIFICANT TIME AND INTERNAL RESOURCES. WITH A COOPERATIVE, IT USES CONTRACTS THAT ARE ALREADY COMPETITIVELY BID BY AUTHORIZED COOPS, ORGANIZATIONS APPROVED BY THE STATE TO CONDUCT BIDDING ON BEHALF OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. IT MEETS LEGAL REQUIREMENTS WHILE REDUCING ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN. TIME OVERVIEW. FOR A TRADITIONAL, IT CAN RANGE UP TO 3-24 MONTHS TO PUT OUT A PROJECT AND GET IT THROUGH ACROSS THE FINISH LINE. IT INVOLVES ADVERTISING, EVALUATIONS, NEGOTIATIONS, AND MULTIPLE LAYERS OF APPROVAL. WITH A COOPERATIVE, MOST PROCUREMENTS CAN BE COMPLETED WITHIN DAYS TO A FEW WEEKS. IT ELIMINATES DUPLICATIVE STEPS ALREADY FULFILLED BY THE COOP. LET'S SEE. TRADITIONAL REQUIRES DEDICATED STAFF TO MANAGE SPECIFICATIONS, OUTREACH, VENDOR VETTING, AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT. IT MAY BE DIFFICULT FOR DEPARTMENTS WITH LIMITED CAPACITY. THIS IS THE END USER DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NEEDING SOMETHING PUT OUT FOR BID. WITH A COOP, THE RESOURCES AND DUE DILIGENCE ARE SHARED AMONG PARTICIPATING AGENCIES. IT REDUCES INTERNAL WORKLOAD WITHOUT SACRIFICING OVERSIGHT. TRADITIONAL, UNIT PRICING IS BASED ON THE PROJECT SIZE AND NEGOTIATION OUTCOMES. PRICING IS BASED ON SINGLE AGENCY BIDS. WE PUT OUT A BID. THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE US A PRICE FOR THAT, JUST THAT. SMALL VOLUME PURCHASES COULD RESULT IN HIGHER PER UNIT COST. WITH A COOP, YOU GET AGGREGATED PURCHASING POWER, WHICH LEADS TO COMPETITIVE VOLUME BASED PRICING. AGAIN, IT REDUCES THE ADMIN COST, AND THEY'RE STILL REVIEWED TO ENSURE THEY MEET THE CITY STANDARDS FOR BEST VALUE. HOW DO COOPS WORK? I THINK THAT WAS A QUESTION, WHEN WE FIRST WENT DOWN THIS ROAD. VENDORS AND CONTRACTORS REGISTER WITH THE COOPS THAT ARE OUT THERE, AND THEY RECEIVE BID OPPORTUNITIES. VERY SIMILAR TO OUR BONFIRE SYSTEM, WHEN WE PUT OUT A BID, THEY GET NOTIFIED WHEN THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY. THE COOPS ALL OFFER THAT AS WELL. THEY CONDUCT COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS THAT COMPLIES WITH STATE LAW. IF CONTRACTORS WHO PERFORM CONSISTENTLY AND RELIABLY OFTEN BECOME PREFERRED PARTNERS DUE TO PROVEN TRACK RECORD. WITH A COOP, AN AVERAGE TIMELINE FOR A PROCUREMENT IS AROUND A MONTH, AND THERE'S THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AS WELL AS THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE THAT ALLOWS US TO UTILIZE THESE. HERE'S A LIST OF OUR COMMONLY USED COOPERATIVES. I'M SURE EVERYBODY HAS HEARD OF SOME OF THESE. BUYBOARD IS A BIG ONE FOR US. SOURCEWELL. DIR IS HUGE IN THE IT PROCUREMENT WORLD. THAT'S A STATE OF TEXAS COOPERATIVE THAT WE UTILIZE. NOW, WE'LL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT OF THE BIDDING PROCESS. WHAT WE DO A LOT OF IS BEST VALUE BIDS. THAT MEANS WE'RE AWARDING CONTRACTS BASED ON OVERALL BENEFIT, NOT JUST THE LOWEST PRICE. WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE BEST VALUE FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO. BELOW THAT, YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE EVALUATION CRITERIA THAT CAN BE USED, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE PROJECT IS. NOW, BEST VALUE BID. WHEN WE DO ONE OF THOSE, FIRST THING, WE HAVE TO ADVERTISE IT IN THE NEWSPAPER. THE AVERAGE COST FOR EACH ADVERTISING WE DO IS AROUND $300. WE ADVERTISE IT IN THE NEWSPAPER, AS WELL AS OUR ELECTRONIC BID SYSTEM BONFIRE. THERE'S A RISK FOR POTENTIAL OR LIMITED RESPONSES. THERE'S BEEN TIMES WE GOT NO RESPONSES ON BIDS THAT WE'VE PUT OUT, AND THERE'S SIGNIFICANT STAFF INVOLVEMENT. THE PROCESS OVERVIEW. THE REQUESTING DEPARTMENT DRAFTS THE SCOPE AND THE CRITERIA THAT THEY WANT THAT EVALUATED ON. IT'S PUBLICLY ADVERTISED. IT'S EVALUATED AND SCORED. IT COMES BEFORE COUNCIL, AND THEN WE OBTAIN THE CONTRACTS, THE BONDS, EVERYTHING THAT NEEDS TO GO ALONG WITH IT. A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES THAT WE DID RECENT WERE FIRE STATION 14, AS WELL AS THE '24-'25 STREET MAINTENANCE. [00:40:03] REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. IT'S JUST LIKE A BEST VALUE BID THAT WE JUST DISCUSSED, EXCEPT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR BEST AND FINAL OFFERS WITHIN THAT. I WON'T READ THAT TO YOU. BUT AGAIN, YOU SEE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF RECENT RFPS THAT WE DID. THEN WE'VE GOT REQUESTS FOR QUALIFICATIONS, FOLLOW THE SAME THING, ADVERTISING, BONFIRE, A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES ARE FIREFIGHTER MEDICAL AND FITNESS EVO AND THE FINANCIAL AUDIT SERVICES THAT WAS PRESENTED A WHILE BACK TO YOU GUYS. THEN WE'VE GOT INVITATION TO BID. THIS IS A LOW COST. WE WANT YOUR BEST PRICE FOR GOLF BALLS SUPPLIES. IT'S THINGS THAT ARE VERY WELL DEFINED. THERE'S A SCOPE. EMULSIONS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE. THERE'S SPECIFICATIONS, AND WE CAN PUT OUT A BID AND SAY, GIVE ME YOUR BEST COST ON THIS. THAT'S SOMETHING WE DO QUITE OFTEN AS WELL. HERE'S A TIMELINE THAT WE PUT TOGETHER THAT SHOWS STAFF EFFORT COMPARED TO THE WEEKS INVOLVED IN DOING THESE PROCUREMENTS. YOU CAN SEE COOPERATIVE. IT'S USUALLY OUR QUICKEST, MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO GO ABOUT THINGS. THEN THIS IS JUST ANOTHER LOOK AT THE TIMELINES. ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER? >> QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? >> MICHAEL, I THINK WHEN THIS BECAME A BIG DEAL, WAS WHEN WE AWARDED ONE, AND I THINK WHEN YOU CAME ON, YOU REALLY BEGAN TO UTILIZE THESE COOPS BECAUSE THEY WERE MORE EFFICIENT, AND WHICH YOU CLEARLY SHOWED THE NUMBER OF WEEKS IT TAKES IN THE RESOURCES AND THE ADVERTISING, ALL THAT THING. SOME QUESTIONS I GOT WERE, I KNOW YOU SAID THAT THE COOPS THEY NOTIFY CONTRACTORS OF THE ABILITY TO GET ON THEIR LIST, CORRECT? >> THEY DO IF THE CONTRACTORS GO ON AND SIGN ON WITH THAT COOP. >> IT'S UP TO THE CONTRACTORS TO REALIZE THAT THESE LISTS ARE OUT THERE, AND IF THEY WANT TO BE A PART OF THAT, THEY'VE GOT TO PUT IN A REQUEST TO SAY, HEY, LET ME KNOW WHEN THE NEXT SIGN UP IS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. OF COURSE, OUR GOAL WOULD BE FOR EVERY LOCAL CONTRACTOR TO BE ON ONE COOPERATIVE OR ANOTHER TO HELP THAT EFFICIENCY. >> THERE'S MANY COOPS AS YOU JUST LISTED THERE. IF WE HAVE A PROJECT, YOU CAN ACTUALLY PULL FROM TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT COOPS AND SEE, WHAT DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS ARE BIDDING FOR THAT JOB OR THE PRICE FOR THAT JOB. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> ANOTHER QUESTION WE GOT WAS THAT THEY FELT LIKE THAT MAYBE THE COOP WAS OVERPRICED. IT'S LIKE, WELL, IF SOMEBODY GETS ON THERE, WHERE WE HAVE A COMPETITIVE BID ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE'RE LOOKING AT WHATEVER FACTORS HOW WE WEIGHT THAT ON BEST BUY OR WHATEVER. HOW DO YOU COME AGAINST THAT AND SAY, WELL, HEY, WE'RE NOT PAYING TOO MUCH? OR ARE WE PAYING TOO MUCH WHEN WE GO TO A COOP? >> I THINK IN THAT INSTANCE, A LOT OF TIMES WE RELY ON SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS THAT RUN THE DEPARTMENTS THAT CAN LOOK AT THOSE PROPOSALS AND SAY, THIS SEEMS OUT OF LINE. THE COOPS ARE JUST A TOOL. WE CAN GET A QUOTE FROM THEM, AND IF IT FILLS OUT OF LINE, ABSOLUTELY, WE CAN PUT IT OUT TO BED. >> SURE. I KNOW MR. DANFORTH, HE HAD A COOP PROJECT AND WENT THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AND SAID, HEY, BID THIS THING OUT. IT'S A BIG JOB. DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT? >> I'M THINKING OF A COUPLE OF PROJECTS YOU [OVERLAPPING] >> HE DID THAT WITH. WE CHOSE TO GO THE COOP WAY OF CHOOSING THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE PROJECT. BUT THEN WE HAD ANOTHER CONTRACTOR COME IN AND JUST NOT SEEING THAT WITH THE SCOPE, GO AHEAD AND BID IT. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR WAS ACTUALLY MORE THAN WHAT THE COOP CONTRACTOR WAS FOR THE SAME SCOPE, SAME JOB, IS THAT CORRECT? >> IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME PROJECT, I BELIEVE THAT INVOLVED AND NEEDED A GENERAL CONTRACTOR BECAUSE IT WAS MORE THAN JUST JUST LAYING DOWN SOME PAVEMENT. >> SURE. BUT I GUESS MY POINT IS IT CONCERNED ME UP HERE, TOO, WHEN THOSE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED IS, IS THE COOP COMPETITIVE, ARE WE WASTING MONEY? ARE WE BEING A GOOD STEWARD OF OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS, WHICH WE'RE IN BUDGET SEASON. WE'RE DEFINITELY TRYING TO BE TIGHT. [00:45:02] THAT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SPENDING THE MONEY APPROPRIATELY. I HAD MY CONCERNS TO SAY, WELL, GOSH, ARE WE BEING LAZY? IS THE STAFF BEING LAZY? JUST GOING TO THE COOP BECAUSE IT'S EASIER? I THINK WHAT WE CAME TO IS THAT IS NO, WE'RE BEING MORE EFFICIENT AND WE'RE NOT OVERSPENDING. THAT'S THE FINDINGS. >> THAT'S HOW I FEEL, AND I SLEEP WELL AT NIGHT. I PAY TAXES IN THE CITY AS WELL. I THINK WE'RE GETTING A GOOD VALUE. THE BEST VALUE FOR THE CITY. THOSE CONTRACTORS ARE GOING TO HAVE BETTER PRICED AGREEMENTS WITH A COOPERATIVE THAN THEY ARE FOR A SINGLE LINE PROJECT FOR THE CITY. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING STRAIGHT TO A COOP. IT'S JUST A TOOL. WHEN I GOT HERE, I CAME FROM HEALTHCARE BACKGROUND. THINGS MOVED FAST. WHEN I GOT HERE, THEY SAID THINGS TAKE 3-6 MONTHS, AND SO STARTED LOOKING FOR EFFICIENCIES. THE CITY WAS ALREADY USING COOPERATIVES TO SOME EXTENT. BUT ONCE WE DISCOVERED WHAT THEIR POTENTIAL IS, WE WERE REALLY ABLE TO GET MORE EFFICIENT, I FEEL. >> I THINK BEYOND IT, AND YOU'RE BEING VERY GRACIOUS TO SAY, I FEEL LIKE THAT THIS IS A GOOD THING, IT GOES BEYOND HOW YOU FEEL. I THINK THAT THE FACTS HAVE ACTUALLY SUPPORTED THAT THIS IS A BETTER SOMETIMES. NOT ALWAYS. >> SOMETIMES. >> SOMETIMES A BETTER USE OF THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS AND OUR FUNDS THAT WE'RE BEING SO FRUGAL WITH. I APPRECIATE YOU SAYING YOU FEEL THAT WAY, BUT I THINK THE FACTS ACTUALLY SHOW THAT AS WELL. WE CAN ABANDON THAT. IF WE GO TO THE COOP, CAN WE ABANDON THAT AND GO A DIFFERENT ROUTE? >> ABSOLUTELY. JUST BECAUSE YOU GET A COOPERATIVE QUOTE, YOU CAN SCRAP IT AND PUT A BID OUT. IF YOU WANT TO DO IT FOR COMPARISON, IT WOULDN'T BE IDEAL BECAUSE AS YOU SAW, PUTTING BIDS OUT IS A LOT OF EFFORT ON EVERYONE'S PART, NOT JUST OUR DEPARTMENT. >> SURE. AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE THAT LOCAL CONTRACTORS THAT FELT LIKE THIS WAS UNFAIR BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO BE CHOSEN BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ON THE COOP, IT'S UP TO THEM TO BE ON THAT LIST. IT'S NOT UP TO US TO SOLICIT THEM TO SAY, HEY, GO BE ON THIS LIST. IT'S UP TO THEM. IT'S PART OF THEIR BUSINESS. IF THEY WANT TO BID IN THIS OR SWIM IN THIS POOL, THEY'VE GOT TO GET IN IT. IS THAT'S CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. I FEEL LIKE, AGAIN, A LOT OF OUR LOCAL CONTRACTORS ARE ON ONE COOP OR ANOTHER AND WE'RE AGNOSTIC. I DON'T CARE WHAT COOP THEY USE BUT IT'S EFFICIENCY FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO. >> MICHAEL, THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. I KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS WHEN THAT CAME UP. >> I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING AND I'M GLAD TO FINALLY GET UP HERE AND GET TO TALK TO YOU GUYS ABOUT IT. >> WELL, THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> TO GO BACK, TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR BACKGROUND IN PURCHASING. WHAT DID YOU DO BEFORE YOU CAME TO THE CITY, AND HOW DID YOU GET TO THE CITY, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURS. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'LL HELP OR HURT ME, BUT MY BACKGROUND, 30 PLUS YEARS IN HEALTHCARE SUPPLY CHAIN AT HOSPITALS AND CORPORATE OFFICES. I FEEL LIKE WHEN I GOT HERE, I BROUGHT A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. I BROUGHT AN OUTSIDER'S PERSPECTIVE OF HOW TO DO THINGS MORE EFFICIENTLY, EFFECTIVELY, AND IT'S BEEN A GREAT LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR ME. I NEVER GET BORED. I LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVERY DAY IN THIS WORLD. BUT THAT'S MY BACKGROUND. >> IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, DID YOU EVER FACE ANY PRESSURE TO KEEP COSTS DOWN? >> THAT WAS A DAILY OCCUR. [OVERLAPPING] IN THE HOSPITAL WORLD, THINGS ARE BOUGHT THROUGH A GROUP PURCHASING ORGANIZATION, ALL THE ITEMS ARE PRE NEGOTIATED. YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY COST BASED OFF THOSE CONTRACTS, YOU JUST GO BUY. IT'S DIFFERENT IN A LITTLE WAYS TO THIS, BUT ONCE I DISCOVERED A COOPERATIVE IN THIS WORLD, IT FELT SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR, AND IT ENABLED US TO GET THINGS MOVING FASTER AND APPROPRIATELY, MORE IMPORTANT. >> YOU ALSO SAID IN THE COOPERATIVES, IT'S NOT JUST THEY SIGN UP IN THE BUSINESS, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A BIDDING. THERE'S A BIDDING PROCESS INVOLVED IN THE COOPERATIVE SIMILAR TO THE BIDDING THAT WE HAVE. >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THEY PUT OUT RFPS JUST LIKE WE WOULD. THEY VET, THEY SCORE, THEY EVALUATE, THEY AWARD, SAME AS WE WOULD. THE DIFFERENCE IS, THEY'RE SET UP DIFFERENTLY. THEY HAVE AN ENTIRE LARGE STAFF OF PEOPLE TO DO NOTHING BUT THAT. THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO RUN A PURCHASING DEPARTMENT DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS, THEY'RE FOCUSED ONLY ON PUTTING OUT GOOD QUALITY BIDS AND AWARDING GOOD QUALITY CONTRACTORS. I'VE NOT RUN ACROSS ANY YET THAT HAVE BEEN AWARDED THAT DIDN'T NEED TO BE. [00:50:07] >> YOU MENTIONED, I THINK ONE OF THE ADVANTAGES OF THE COOPERATIVES THAT HELPS US IS THE PURCHASING POWER THAT THEY HAVE. TELL ME THE DIFFERENCE OR THE ADVANTAGE OF THE PURCHASING POWER OF A COOPERATIVE VERSUS WHAT THE PURCHASING POWER OF JUST US AS AN INDIVIDUAL CITY WOULD BE. >> I THINK IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE BETTER PRICING TO THE COOPERATIVE THAT MAY COVER THE ENTIRE COUNTRY THAN THEY ARE TO A SINGLE ENTITY BEING THE CITY OF AMARILLO. >> THEN LET'S JUST SAY WE LOOK AT THINGS AND WE SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE DON'T WANT TO USE COOPERATIVES ANYMORE. WE'RE JUST GOING TO BID EVERYTHING OUT. TELL ME THE PROS AND CONS OF THAT. ULTIMATELY WOULD THAT SAVE TAXPAYER MONEY? COULD IT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO COST MORE? TELL ME ABOUT IF WE JUST WENT THAT ROUTE. >> ABSOLUTELY, IT WOULD COST MORE. WE'RE NOT REALLY STAFFED TO DO THAT. BIDDING, WELL, THERE'S STILL A NEED FOR IT. IT'S NOT REALLY THE WAY I FEEL BUSINESS IS CONDUCTED IN THE YEAR 2025. THESE PRODUCTS THAT WE'RE BUYING, THEY'VE ALL BEEN BID. IT'S JUST BEEN DONE FOR US. >> THANK YOU. >> EXCELLENT QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, ALL. >> MR. LINLEY, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I'M SORRY, GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> DO YOU SEE A LOT MORE QUALIFIED VENDORS USING THE BUYBOARD AS OPPOSED TO GOING TO THE TRADITIONAL BIDDING METHODS BECAUSE IT'S SO MUCH FASTER. DO WE GET A BETTER PRODUCT GOING THROUGH THE COOP TYPE THINGS? >> THAT'S A TOUGH ONE. LIKE I SAID, MOST OF OUR BIG CONTRACTORS IN TOWN ARE ON ONE COOP OR ANOTHER. WE HAVE THAT OPTION TO GO CHOOSE. >> AGAIN, THESE COOPS, THEY DON'T MESS AROUND WHEN THEY COME TO AWARD A CONTRACTOR, OR WE COULD BE TALKING ABOUT GOODS AS WELL, JUST GENERAL BUYING WIDGETS. THEY REALLY RUN THEM THROUGH THE RINGER. I FEEL VERY CONFIDENT IN THE FACT THAT THESE ARE ALL VETTED VERY WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. I GOT A FEW QUESTIONS FOR YOU, BUT I HAD ACTUALLY PUSHED IT. I THINK I WAS DRIVING. I WANTED THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS. I WANTED SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AND THEN I LEARNED A LITTLE BIT MORE. I GOT A LITTLE BIT MORE COMFORTABLE, AND THEN WE JUST HAD A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT WE NEEDED TO GET TO. I APPRECIATE YOU WAITING. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE UTILIZING THE COOPERATIVE THE BEST WAY WE CAN ON THE BENEFITS FOR THE CITY. I JUST NEED A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION BECAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE YOU ARE. I JUST DON'T KNOW BETTER. I THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE VENTED TO ME WERE THIS FAIRNESS ISSUE OF, WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THAT PROJECT EXISTED. IT WAS ONLY ON THAT ONE. IT JUST COMES DOWN TO WITH THE PUBLIC POSTING AND THE WAY THAT WE NORMALLY DO IT. ARE WE DOING EVERYTHING ON A COOPERATIVE THE SAME WAY WE WOULD IF WE WERE PUTTING UP JUST A LOW BIDDER AWARD ON PROJECT A? >> NO, BECAUSE WE DON'T POST. THE BIDS ALREADY BEEN DONE. WE JUST SELECT THE BEST QUALIFIED FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT. IT DOES NOT GO THROUGH THE PAPER, THE BONFIRE. >> [OVERLAPPING] COULD WE IMPROVE ON THAT? BECAUSE THE MORE VENDORS THAT YOU HAVE, AND KEEP IN MIND, I'M GOING TO SEPARATE HERE, DIFFERENTIATE A CONSTRUCTION TYPE PROJECT, SOMETHING THAT'S GOT CRITERIA, ENGINEERING, DESIGN, MANY MANY THINGS, LARGER DOLLAR, TYPICALLY, VERSUS SOMETHING OFF THE SHELF THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BUY. MAYBE YOU BUY 1,000 OF THEM. IF YOU NEED TO BUY CODE HANGERS, LIKE THE COOPERATIVE IS GREAT, GET THE LOW BID, PUT YOUR CRITERIA ON IT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A POSTING ISSUE. BUT IN THE FAIRNESS OF TRYING TO KEEP THE LOCAL MONIES LOCAL AND GIVE ALL OF OUR QUALIFIED BIDDERS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSTRUCTION TYPE ITEMS, CAN WE IMPROVE UPON THAT IN THE WAY IN WHICH WE UTILIZE THESE COOPS? >> I WOULD HAVE TO PUT SOME THOUGHT INTO THAT. I DON'T QUITE KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE JUST OUT OF THE GATE. >> THE OTHER THING WOULD BE NOT JUST USING ONE CO-OPERATE. I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW THEY WORK. I DON'T KNOW IF WE PAY THEM OR IF THE CONTRACTOR PAYS THEM. WHO PAYS THE COOPERATIVE? >> THAT'S THE CONTRACTOR. >> THEY'RE PAYING FOR THAT SERVICE. DO THEY HAVE TO PAY WHETHER THEY GET A JOB OR NOT OR THEY PAY BASED ON THE AWARD OF THE JOB? >> I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION, [00:55:02] BUT I DO HAVE A RESOURCE HERE IF YOU GUYS WANT TO GET IN, GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT. >> I WOULD BE CURIOUS BECAUSE IF THERE WAS A WAY FOR US TO PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE TO GO AHEAD AND NOTICE THESE ARE OUR COOPERATIVES, OR DO WE ALREADY DO THAT? DO WE HAVE A COMMONPLACE WHERE, LET'S SAY, I'M A LOCAL CONTRACTOR, AND I'VE JUST NOW GOTTEN TO THAT LEVEL WHERE I'M NOW HIGHLY CRITERIA AND QUALIFIED. I COULD BID YOUR PROJECT BECAUSE I DO GET PEOPLE FROM TIME TO TIME, SAY, HEY, I WANT TO BID CITY WORK. HOW DO I DO THAT? DESCRIBE THAT TO ME AND HOW COULD WE HELP GET MORE QUALIFIED BIDS? >> ULTIMATELY, THAT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THE LOCALS TO RESEARCH THE COOPERATIVES AND MAKE SURE THEY SIGN ON WITH ALL OF THEM. >> IN YOUR OPINION, GOOD TO HAVE AS MANY PEOPLE, THERE'S NO LIMIT TO SOURCE WELL VERSUS BUY BOARD? >> THERE'S NOT. >> YOU CAN HAVE AS MANY VENDORS THAT ARE SELLING WIDGETS AS WELL AS GCS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTRACTORS? >> YES, SIR. >> CAN YOU DRIVE THE CRITERIA? ULTIMATELY, WHAT I WOULD WANT IS TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE A COOPERATIVE, BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MOVED, YOU SEE THE EFFICIENCIES, BUT THEN ALSO BE ABLE TO GET BACK TO THAT HIGH CRITERIA, LOW BIDDER AWARD. CAN YOU CONTROL THAT VALUE BEST BID, WHERE YOU SAY, I WANT 70% OF MY VALUE TO BE ON THE DOLLAR TOTAL? THEN I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THESE OTHER THINGS. YOU CAN'T HAVE A LAWSUIT WITH THE CITY, YOU CAN'T HAVE THESE CERTAIN THINGS VERSUS, WELL, 35% OF OURS IS ON THE COST ANALYSIS, AND THE REST OF IT IS ON MORE SUBJECTIVE MATTERS. IF WE'RE RELEASING THAT CONTROL TO THE COOPERATIVE, HOW CAN YOU DICTATE TO THEM WHAT WE WANT TO SEE? >> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S A THING. THEY'RE PRETTY STANDARD IN WHAT THEY EVALUATE ON FOR THEIR RFPS WHEN THEY PUT THEM OUT. >> DO THEY DRIVE TO THE LOW BID? HAVE YOU SEEN A BID THAT'S HIGHER THAN ANOTHER ONE THAT GOT AWARDED FROM THE COOPERATIVE? >> NO. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE TYPICALLY SEE. THAT'S ALL DONE FOR US. IT'S ALL IT'S NOT HIDDEN, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT A SOURCE, WELL, RFP THAT THEY PUT OUT, THERE'S THOUSANDS OF PAGES OF DOCUMENTS THAT THEY PUT OUT. ALL THE SUBMISSIONS ARE THERE. WE JUST KNOW SOURCE WELL HAS A CO-OP FOR THIS SERVICE, AND WE CAN GET A CO-OP. >> MICHAEL, I LIKE THE WAY THAT IF IT'S NATIONAL, YOU'VE GOT GOOD AVERAGES, AND YOU KNOW MARKET PRICING. BUT THEN WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A PROJECT WHERE LET'S SAY CITY MANAGER PROPOSES PROJECT X, WE BUDGET THREE MILLION, YOU GO OUT TO THE COOPERATIVE. THEY COME BACK. LET'S SAY IT'S FOUR MILLION, A MILLION OVER BUDGET. WE WANT TO VE THAT. DO WE HAVE THAT CONCERN WITH, WELL, NOW CONTRACTOR A HAS GIVEN HIS PRICE FOR PROJECT X, AND HE'S CONCERNED THAT IF WE PULL IT BACK, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ISSUE WE HAD LAST TIME. >> YEAH, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THE CO-OP PRICING BEING SHOWN VERSUS IF WE DID AN INTERNAL BID THAT WE WOULD INCLUDE THOSE PRICES. I JUST DON'T KNOW. >> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ON HOW DO WE VALUE ENGINEER ONE THAT COMES BACK HIGH? BECAUSE I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A PROCEDURE IN PLACE THAT IF WE DO HAVE A BUDGET AWARD OF THREE MILLION, AND THEN IT'S OVER BUDGET, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN A LOT OF REALLY GOOD NEGOTIATION OUT OF MR. DANFORD AND WE'VE BEEN THE BENEFICIARY WITH SOME GOOD LOCAL CONTRACTORS ON SOME PROJECTS. MY CONCERN WAS HANDING THIS OVER TO THIRD PARTY. THEN WE'RE JUST OVER BUDGET, AND THEN COUNCIL IS IN A POSITION WHERE NOW WE'RE ACCEPTING BIDS THAT ARE OVER BUDGET, AND WE DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DRIVE THAT VE DESIGN. >> I UNDERSTAND. YOU MENTIONED, JERRY. I WISH HE WAS HERE TODAY TO HELP ME UP HERE A LITTLE BIT, BUT I DON'T FEEL LIKE ANYBODY'S EVER GOING TO PULL ANYTHING OVER ON HIM WITH HIS EXPERIENCE, HIS KNOWLEDGE. YOU GIVE HIM A BUDGET, HE'S GOING TO KNOW WHEN THAT PROPOSAL COMES BACK IF IT'S OUT OF LINE OR NOT. >> JUST A FEW FINALS, AND YOU'RE DOING FINE. I'M ASKING QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY NOT HAVE THE ANSWERS, BUT I'M SURE WE CAN GET THOSE ANSWERS. THEN I WANT TO TIGHTEN THOSE SHOELACES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. ON BEHALF OF COUNCIL, MOVING FORWARD SO THAT AS WE SEE THESE COOPERATIVES, WE MAY HAVE LESS INVOLVEMENT THAN WHAT WE FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO HAVE. IT WILL TRULY BE MORE EFFICIENT, BUT DESIGN CRITERIA IS STILL GIVEN BY THE CITY? >> YES. >> WE'RE STILL HIRING ARCHITECT. THEY'RE DOING THEIR OWN DESIGNS. [01:00:02] THOSE ARE BEING DRIVEN BY US. >> YES. >> WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH A MINIMUM MAXIMUM? CONSTRUCTION PROJECT OVER A MILLION DOLLARS WE DON'T USE THE CO-OP, OR WE DON'T USE IT ON CERTAIN TYPES OF PROJECTS. I KNOW IT REALLY HELPS YOU TO BUY OFF THE SHELF ITEMS. WE DON'T WANT TO TAKE THAT AWAY FROM YOU AT ALL. PLUS, I THINK WE HAVE WAY MORE PRICING FAIRNESS. >> WE APPRECIATE THAT. >> WHAT WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE IN A DOLLAR FIGURE IF COUNCIL WANTED TO JUST SAY, IF IT'S ABOVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT, WE DO A TRADITIONAL BID PROPOSAL, AND WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO TAKE THREE MONTHS. >> YOU COULD REALLY GET IN A CORNER ON THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO MAKE IT A DOLLAR AMOUNT, OR IF WE JUST HAVE DISCUSSION AMONGST CITY MANAGEMENT TO SEE WHERE THEY WANT TO GO WITH IT BEFORE WE PUT A BID OUT FOR IT. BUT THAT'S UP TO YOU GUYS. >> DO YOU EVER WORK WITHOUT A BID? ARE YOU WORKING ON NUMBERS THAT WE HADN'T SEEN YET? >> THE NUMBERS COME FROM WHOEVER'S REQUESTING THE PROJECT TO BE DONE. >> STAFF IS ALWAYS LOOKING AT THIS IS WHAT WE CAN AFFORD, AND THEN THEY GIVE IT TO YOU BECAUSE I THINK IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A FLOOR RIGHT THERE WHERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW WHAT? OVER THIS AMOUNT, WE'RE GOING TO DO TRADITIONAL BIDS. THAT WAY, WE AS COUNCIL GET TO SAY, LOOK, THERE WERE FIVE BIDDERS, AND THEY TOOK THE LOW BIDDER, SO I'M SORRY IT'S OVER BUDGET, BUT IT IS WHAT IT COST. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO SEE THAT. WE ALSO CAN'T SAY THAT, WELL, WE TOOK THE LOW BID BECAUSE WE'VE RELINQUISHED SOME OF THAT CONTROL. WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY BIDDERS OR HOW MANY PLATFORMS YOU PUT IT ON, I THINK WE LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU MIGHT PUT IT TO FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT PLATFORMS, THAT WAY YOU ENSURE THAT YOU'RE GETTING THE MOST EYES ON IT, THAT'S ALL I'M DRIVING FOR. I'M CURIOUS IF MAYBE STAFF, MR. CITY MANAGER, COULD HELP US IN LOOKING AT A FEW THINGS. IF WE COULD LOOK AT THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF PULLING A PROJECT DOWN, KNOWING THAT IF WE SAID, LOOK, THE BUDGET IS THE BUDGET, WE HAVE TO ASSIGN AN AFFORDABILITY TO IT. ONCE IT GOES OUT FOR THE PLATFORM, THE COOPERATIVE, IF IT COMES IN OVER THE GIVEN BUDGET THAT WE WOULD HAVE APPROVED, THEN IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY COME BACK FOR A VE, OR THEN WE GO TO A LOW BID AND WE KNOW WE HAVE THE DELAY. IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD LOOK AT? >> YEAH, CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, OUR CURRENT STANDING POLICY IN THIS PERIOD RIGHT NOW IS ANYTHING OVER A MILLION AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TRADITIONAL OPTIONS HERE, GIVEN THE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED LAST SUMMER. I THINK PART OF THE GOAL HERE WOULD BE TO GET COUNCIL'S GUIDANCE ON WHAT YOU'D LIKE FOR US TO WORK ON AND WE YOU'D LIKE FOR US TO SET UP A MINIMUM OR MAXIMUM THRESHOLD OR SOME POLICY ALONG THAT. WE DECIDED TO SEEK SOME GUIDANCE ON THAT. >> COUNCIL, YOU'LL HAVE ANY FEEDBACK ON. IF IT'S AN OFF THE SHELF ITEM, I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH JUST GOING WITH MARKET PRICE, NOT TRYING TO DRIVE THAT WITH ANYTHING, BUT IF IT'S A DESIGNED ITEM, ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, CONSTRUCTION TYPE PROJECT, WOULD YOU GUYS WANT TO KEEP THOSE BELOW A MILLION DOLLARS WOULD GO THROUGH THE CO-OPS OR TAKE THAT OFF AND ALLOW DOLLAR AMOUNT DOESN'T MATTER. IT JUST HAS TO HAVE SOME REIGN ON IT AND AFFORDABILITY. SOMEBODY HAD TO HAVE DECIDED WE COULD AFFORD THAT. OTHERWISE, WHAT I'M CONCERNED WITH IS WE'RE PUTTING THIS OUT TO LOCAL BIDDERS, THEY'VE BID IT, THEN WE'RE GOING TO VOLUNTEER THEIR PRICING IN THE PUBLIC, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO PULL THE PROJECT BACK AND PUT IT BACK UP, AND THAT CONTRACTOR MAY HAVE A GRIEVANCE AGAINST THE CITY, THAT THOUGH HE PARTICIPATED FAIRLY IN GOOD FAITH, HE DIDN'T GET THE PROJECT. I WANT TO AVOID THAT AS THE CONCERN. >> DOES THAT EVEN HAPPEN? THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, DOES IT? >> NO, I THINK I THINK WE'RE MISUNDERSTANDING, MAYBE. I DON'T KNOW. >> I DISAGREE. WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GO FOR AN RFP, OPEN THE BIDS, AND THEN GO A CO-OP. WE JUST WOULDN'T DO THAT. ONCE WE'VE DONE [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE OPPOSITE. >> YOU'RE SAYING THAT WE PICK A CO-OP, WHO ARE WE DISCLOSING THEIR PRICING TO? WE DON'T KNOW SEE. >> THE CONCERN WAS THE BID COMES BACK OVER BUDGET AND SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE [INAUDIBLE] >> THEY DON'T GET TO BID IT. WE PUT FORTH WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE. IF THEY DON'T COME IN UNDER THAT, WE DON'T GET ONE. >> THE BIDS AREN'T SPECIFIC FOR A COOP WHEN THEY DO A BID, IT'S NOT SPECIFIC TO A PROJECT WE'RE PUTTING OUT. IT'S THEIR BOOK. WHEN WE TELL THEM WHAT WE NEED DONE, THEY CAN PRICE IT BASED OFF THAT PRE NEGOTIATED PRICE BOOK. [01:05:02] >> THEY'RE NEVER COMING IN OVER AND I'M OKAY. LET'S JUST GO BACK TO THE PRODUCTS. I THINK THAT'S NOT EVEN AN ISSUE WITH US. GET THE BEST DEAL. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PRODUCTS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROJECTS HERE. PRODUCTS, ABSOLUTELY, GET THE BEST PRICE, BUT PROJECTS, AND I DON'T DOUBT HIS TEAM THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE BEST DEAL AND TALKING TO HIM, SAYING, HEY, WE MAY EVEN GET SEVERAL CO-OPS TO BID THIS THING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING THE BEST DEAL. WE'VE EVEN DO WITH DANFORD. WE'RE DOING SOME CHECKS AND BALANCES. EVEN WHEN WE GET ONE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR GO OUT AND BID THE SAME THING. SURE ENOUGH. I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO SEE THESE, IN MY OPINION, JUST MY OPINION. OVER A DOLLAR AMOUNT, UNDER A DOLLAR AMOUNT. NO, DO YOUR JOB, DO IT, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE IT OUT IF IT'S NOT BEING DONE RIGHT. >> MAYOR, IF I COULD WE DO VALUE ENGINEER EVEN THESE PROJECTS BY BOARD OR THESE COOPERATIVES. THOSE NEGOTIATIONS DO TAKE PLACE. THE PROJECT THAT YOU WERE REFERENCING TO EARLIER WAS THE SERVICE CENTER NORTH PROJECT, WHERE WE HAD ONE, AND WE PULLED THAT. WE ACTUALLY DID GO BACK AND GET A SECOND BID ON THAT, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY HIGHER THAN THE ORIGINAL. >> THAT'S THE ONE COOP CAME IN LESS EXPENSIVE THAN THE PRIVATE. >> COUNCIL MEMBER, YOU AGREE WITH THAT? >> I THINK SO BECAUSE I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM HERE THAT NEEDS TO BE SOLVED. I THINK WE ARE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WE'RE WORKING AT IT. WE'RE TRYING TO GET THE BEST PRICE THROUGH THERE. I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, AND YOU MAY NOT BE BECAUSE YOU'VE NOT BEEN IN THIS, BUT FOR LOCAL GROUPS, WHY WOULD A LOCAL CONTRACTOR CHOOSE NOT TO BE IN THERE VERSUS CHOOSING TO BE IN THERE? DO YOU KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? >> THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION. I WOULD ENCOURAGE, IF ANY LOCAL CONTRACTORS REACH OUT TO ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL, SEND THEM MY WAY. I CAN SHARE THEM THE CO-OP LIST. BUT AGAIN, IT'S ULTIMATELY UP TO THEM TO REGISTER ON THOSE COOPERATIVES, SO THEY'RE NOTIFIED WHEN I THINK THEY PUT BIDS OUT EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS AND THEY CYCLE. I CAN LEAD THEM TO WATER, BUT I CAN'T MAKE THEM DRINK. >> IS THERE ANY INVESTMENT TO BECOME PART OF THE COOPERATIVE OR YOU JUST YOU PAY FOR WHEN THE BUSINESS GETS [INAUDIBLE]? >> NOT FOR US. >> GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> I THINK PROBABLY THEN AND SO THE PROBLEM, AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A PROBLEM, I THINK THE ASSURANCE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE IS THAT WALKING FORWARD INTO THIS, WE'VE BUILT SOME GUARD RAILS. ONE GUARD RAIL THAT I'D BE IN FAVOR OF IF COUNCIL IS AND STAFF DOESN'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH. INSTEAD OF DOING YOUR TRADITIONAL BIDS, IF YOU USE THE COOPERATIVES, LET'S DO A MINIMUM OF THREE PLATFORMS. >> THAT'S HAPPENED AND [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'S EASY TO DO. >> THAT WAS A REALLY GOOD EXERCISE. >> I THINK MOVING FORWARD, WHAT WE COULD ASSURE IS THAT WE DIDN'T JUST REACH OUT TO THE ONE COOPERATIVE THAT MAYBE ONLY HAS THE ONE CONTRACTOR ON IT. BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY CONTRACTORS ARE ON THIS. IF WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OUR HANDS IN IT, WE DON'T WANT TO BE FIELDING THE CRITICISM LATER. THE WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN IS WE JUST OFFER IT TO MULTIPLE COOPS. THAT WOULD HELP YOU GET THE MOST EFFECTIVE EFFICIENT PRICING, CORRECT? >> YES. >> THEN IF YOU'RE DOING THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT NECESSARILY MATTERS WHETHER IT'S A $500,000 DEAL OR A FIVE MILLION DOLLAR DEAL. QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK THE SCRUTINY IS ON US, WHETHER IT'S $80,000 TACO TRUCK OR EIGHT MILLION DOLLAR POOL, YOU'RE STILL BEING SCRUTINIZED FOR THE DOLLAR. I WOULD BE GOOD WITH JUST PUTTING IN THAT BLANKET POLICY OF MULTIPLE COOPERATIVES EVERY TIME. WHEN WE DO GET QUESTIONED, WE COULD PULL THAT. MY LAST QUESTION WOULD JUST BE THE CONTRACTS. ARE THE COOPERATIVES DRAWING THE CONTRACTS, OR ARE WE STILL DRAWING THOSE? >> ARE THEY WHAT? >> ARE THE COOPERATIVES DRAWING THE CONTRACTS, OR ARE WE STILL DRAWING THOSE? >> WHEN THEY AWARD THE RFPS THAT ARE PUT OUT, THAT'S THEIR CONTRACT. THEN ON OUR SIDE, WE DO THE STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT WHEN WE'RE OBTAINING THEIR BONDS, AND THEN AFTER THAT, THE NOTICE TO PROCEED. >> WHAT I'M THINKING OF IS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND SOME TEETH IN THE DEAL TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T GET SADDLED WITH CONTRACTOR THAT'S NOT PERFORMING. IS ALL THAT IN THE COOPERATIVES? >> YES. IF IT'S NOT, IT'S BUILT INTO OUR [OVERLAPPING] >> YOUR AGREEMENT? COUNCILMAN. >> DID YOU SAY THE THING THAT THE MAYOR IS RECOMMENDING THAT YOU'VE ALREADY TRIED THAT OR DOING THAT? >> I CAN PROBABLY NOT WELL GIVE AN EXAMPLE, BUT I KNOW FACILITIES DID THAT WITH A RECENT PROJECT. THEY GOT THREE QUOTES FROM THREE DIFFERENT COOPERATIVE CONTRACTORS AND WENT WITH THE LOWEST COST AND THE BEST VALUE. [01:10:03] IT'S A THING. I CAN HAPPEN. FACILITIES IS REALLY GOOD AT FACILITATING STUFF LIKE THAT. >> IS IT COST THAT MUCH MORE TIME, ENERGY OR RESOURCES TO DO MORE THAN ONE OR TO DO THREE? >> I WOULDN'T THINK SO. I WOULDN'T WANT TO DO IT AS A COMMON PRACTICE, BUT I WOULD THINK ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, IF THERE'S A DESIRE FOR THAT, THEN I WOULD THINK THE FACILITIES TEAM COULD PROBABLY HELP PUT EVERYBODY'S MIND AT EASE. >> THE MAYOR THE GOAL OUT OF THAT IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S AWARE OF IT OR JUST PUTTING A FINAL TOUCH OF SCRUTINY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THE LOWEST PRICE. >> COUPLE ACCOMPLISHMENTS THERE. ONE, YOU KNOW YOU HAVE A FIELD OF EYES THAT YOU'RE NOT CONTROLLING. YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING A PROJECT OUT THAT ONLY ONE PERSON IS SEEING. SO YOU WOULD ENSURE THAT YOU ARE AT LEAST HAVE MULTIPLE EYES ON IT, SO YOU SHOULD BE GETTING MULTIPLE BIDS BACK, HOPEFULLY EVERY TIME. TWO, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMPARATIVE, SO IT JUSTIFIES THE COST, MORE SO THAN JUST A NATIONAL COST OF AVERAGES, BECAUSE THESE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AREN'T, LIKE BUYING 1,000 HANGERS. IF WE SEPARATE THAT, I THINK AS A OFF THE SHELF ITEM, NOT ASKING FOR THAT, BUT AS A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU GET OVER IN THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, IT'S A GOOD BUSINESS PRACTICE, AND I BELIEVE, COUNCILMAN, YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T TAKE ANY MORE TIME OR EFFORT ON OUR END, AND WE'RE JUST, UTILIZING THOSE RESOURCES MORE SO. >> THEN ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR CONTRACTORS, SO IF A LOCAL CONTRACTORS NOT IN IT CURRENTLY, THEY BECOME IN IT. NOT ONLY DO THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET CITY BUSINESS, THEN IT OPENS THEM UP ALSO TO BUSINESS ELSEWHERE IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN IT? >> YES. IF THEY SERVICE OUTSIDE OF THE PANHANDLE, LUBBOCK, WHATEVER, IT OPENS THAT WORLD UP FOR THEM. IT COULD DEFINITELY GROW THEIR BUSINESS. >> THANK YOU. >> MICHAEL, IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN PUT, I KNOW ON OUR SIDE, IT LOOKS LIKE WE USE BONFIRE. IS THERE A WAY, AND IT WOULD HAVE BE BENEFICIAL TO LIST THE CO-OPS THAT WE DO USE. THAT WAY, IF A CONTRACTOR DOES WONDER WHICH ONES TO GO TO, THEY CAN JUST MAYBE THEY CAN ASK EMMA AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WHICH ONES DO WE USE? JUST LIKE THAT LIST THAT YOU JUST DID IN YOUR PRESENTATION, I KNOW THAT WAS THE MOST USED OR THE MOST COMMONLY THAT WE USE. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I MEAN, COULD WE LIST THOSE UP THERE SO THAT THE CONTRACTORS COULD FIND IT? >> I WOULD THINK THE BEST PLACE TO PUT THAT WOULDN'T BE BONFIRE, BE ON THE CITY OF AMARO [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. >> YES, SIR. >> IT LOOKS LIKE THE WEBSITE ONLY SHOWS. >> YES. >> BONFIRE, BUT ON THE WEBSITE, IF WE COULD HAVE A PAGE, BASICALLY, JUST LIKE YOU DID IN YOUR PRESENTATION, COMMONLY USED OR WE GO [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION. IT WOULDN'T BE HARD TO HYPERLINK THE LINKS TO EACH OF THOSE CO-OPS, SO THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND GET ON THERE AND SIGN UP FOR NOTIFICATIONS FOR UPCOMING BUSINESS. >> THAT WAY, IT'S OFF US, IT'S OFF YOU. THEY DON'T HAVE TO CALL YOU AND ASK. IT'S JUST RIGHT THERE. I THINK IT'D BE A GREAT IDEA IF WE GET THAT DONE. >> MISS EMMA WOULD BE ABLE TO KICK THAT OUT AS WELL, EMMA RILO. >> PUT HER TO WORK. >> IF WE COULD GET A TAKEAWAY HERE JUST TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE I KNOW WE DRUG THE CONVERSATION. OFF THE SHELF ITEMS, STANDARD PROCEDURE, AS YOU'VE BEEN WORKING, WE'VE BEEN EDUCATED. THANK YOU. ANYTHING THAT REQUIRES ARCHITECT OR AN ENGINEER COULD BE TREATED AS A CONSTRUCTION-TYPE ITEM, THAT TYPE OF ITEM WOULD GO ON MULTIPLE PLATFORMS, THREE MINIMUM. THEN WE'VE SOLVED THE PROBLEM. IS THAT GOOD, MR. CITY MANAGER? THE COUNCIL, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT OR REDIRECT? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO FIND THREE. IF YOU HAVE A PROJECT AND THERE MAY NOT BE THREE LOCAL CANDIDATES THAT ARE ON CO-OPS THAT CAN PROVIDE THAT. I WOULD ASK THAT MAYBE IT'S AT LEAST TWO [OVERLAPPING]. >> OR WHEN WE CAN. >> BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT AVAILABLE, IT'S NOT AVAILABLE. WE CAN SAY IF YOU CAN'T PULL THREE, THEN WE'RE NOT USING A CO-OP. THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. >> MAYBE MY IGNORANCE HERE, SO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. I'M TALKING ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT COOPERATIVES ON THE PLATFORMS. IF THAT COOPERATIVE DOESN'T HAVE A CONTRACTOR OF THAT TYPE, THEN WE WOULD LOOK AT A DIFFERENT COOPERATIVE PLATFORM. WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, YOU MAY HAVE A SPECIALIZED PROJECT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AVAILABILITY WITH THREE DIFFERENT PLATFORMS. >> WITH THREE COOPERATIVE CONTRACTORS. >> THERE MIGHT NOT BE A CONTRACTOR ON THREE DIFFERENT COOPERATIVES THAT WOULD OFFER THE SERVICES THAT WE'RE ASKING. >> THAT WOULD BE A VERY SPECIALIZED PROJECT. >> NOT NECESSARILY. >> I'M NOT SURE. JERRY IS PROBABLY THE RESIDENT EXPERT IN A LOT OF THIS. BUT YEAH, WE CAN DO WHATEVER. [01:15:03] I DON'T WANT TO LIMIT US IF WE CAN HELP IT TO SLOW THINGS DOWN. >> WE CAN PURSUE THREE. BUT IF THERE'S EVER A SITUATION WHEN THREE IS NOT, WE CAN MAKE THE COUNCIL AWARE OF THAT. THAT, HEY, WE TEMPTED TO GET THREE, BUT THERE IS ONLY TWO OR WHATEVER IT IS. WE GO TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT WHEN WE BREAK TWO FOR AGENDA. >> I THINK THAT'D BE GREAT. THAT WAY WHEN IT HITS THE AGENDA, THAT WOULD BE KIND OF PART OF THE BACKUP OF WE SHOPPED THREE, WE ONLY GOT ONE. >> I'M GOOD WITH THAT. >> MR. LINLEY, VERY GOOD PRESENTATION. APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR PATIENCE GIVING TO IT. >> NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. THAT IS OUR ONE ITEM ON DISCUSSION. WE WILL SEE. [8.C. Request future agenda items and reports from City Manager] DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS FROM COUNCIL? YES. >> ONE MAYOR. I'D LIKE TO MAYBE ASK, I KNOW WE'RE ABOUT TO GET UP IN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENTS. IT'LL BE A COUPLE OF MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD. BUT I WOULDN'T MIND ENTERTAINING MAYBE A LOOK AT HOW WE HANDLE THAT PROCESS, AND NOT ONLY HOW WE SELECT THEM, BUT HOW WE'RE COMMUNICATING TO PEOPLE, KEEPING THEM UP TO DATE ON THE STATUS. I DON'T THINK IT'S ANYTHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY THE NEXT MEETING, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE AGENDA FOR MAYBE THE PROCESS OF HOW WE HANDLE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTMENTS, HOW WE GO THROUGH THAT SELECTION PROCESS. HISTORICALLY, IT'S BEEN FIRST TO MAKE A MOTION IS THAT PERSON, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANOTHER WAY TO DO IT OR ANOTHER WAY TO BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, AND THERE MAY NOT BE, BUT ALSO NOT FOCUSING ON THE SELECTION PROCESS. BUT HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP THEM IN THE LOOP ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON? WE MAY ALREADY BE DOING THAT, BUT MAYBE AN OVERVIEW OF THAT AND DISCUSSIONS ON ARE WE FINE WITH THE WAY WE DO IT OR IS THERE ANY REASON FOR IMPROVEMENTS? WELL, MR. PATH CAN REDIRECT IF HE WANTS TO, BUT I THINK CITY SECRETARY WOULD BE ABLE TO EDUCATE US ON HER TYPICAL, AND THEN YOU GUYS COULD WEIGH IN FROM THERE. JUST PUT IT UP FOR A DISCUSSION ITEM, AND THEN WE WOULD GO WALK THAT FORWARD WITH PLENTY OF TIME, HOPEFULLY. >> IF I CAN ADD, COUNCIL MEMBER SIMPSON, WE'RE PLANNING TO COME TO YOU IN SEPTEMBER FOR AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS. AS WE GET READY TO OPEN APPLICATIONS. WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT IT INCLUDES ALL OF THESE TOPICS TO COVER IT WITH COUNCIL. >> COUNCIL, ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM? NO. THAT CLOSES OUT ALL OF SECTION 8. WE WILL NOW MOVE INTO OUR NON-CONSENT. [9.A. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8204] COUNCIL, Y'ALL GOOD TO KEEP CRUISING. NO BRAKES, EVERYBODY, GOOD. WE'LL KEEP GOING. ITEM 9A, OUR FAVORITE PRESENTER, MR. BRADY KENDRICK, ON A PUBLIC HEARING, SIR. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MARY COUNCIL. BRADY KENDRICK, SENIOR PLANNER. THIS FIRST ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 8204. THIS ONE IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE CONSIDERING THE REZONING OF 176.08 ACRES OF UNPLOTTED LAND. THIS IS IN SECTION 32 BLOCK 9 BSF SURVEY LOCATED IN RANDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, IN THE VICINITY OF I-27 AND SUNDOWN LANE. THEY ARE REQUESTING THE REZONE FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND THE APPLICANT IS FIRMAN LAND SURVEYORS INC FOR ADBURY ELEVATORS, LLC. THIS IS A PROPERTY THAT WAS RECENTLY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY LIMITS A COUPLE OF MONTHS BACK, AND A PORTION OF IT, 71 ACRES APPROXIMATELY IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED AT THE KIDS INC SPORTS PARK PROJECT, AND THEN THE REMAINDER OF IT WILL BE FUTURE RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL SITES. REGARDING CITY PLAN 2045, THIS PROPERTY UNTIL RECENTLY WAS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, SO IT DOES NOT HAVE AN ASSIGNED PLACE TYPE AT THIS POINT, SO WE WILL ASSIGN ONE IN A FUTURE PLACE TYPE AMENDMENT THAT'S BROUGHT FORTH. IT DOES CONFORM WITH CITY PLANS, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES OF STRATEGICALLY LOCATING COMMERCIAL USES IN AREAS CLOSE TO HIGHWAYS, AND IS ALSO LOCATED IN A TARGETED GROWTH AREA AS IDENTIFIED BY CITY PLAN. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOUND THAT GIVEN ITS LOCATION ALONG I-27 AND ALONG SEVERAL ARTERIAL ROADWAYS, THIS PROPERTY IS BEST SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL TYPE DEVELOPMENT, AND GIVEN THE EXISTING LAND USES THAT ARE AROUND THIS PROPERTY, IT'S ALREADY DEVELOPING IN A COMMERCIAL NATURE, ESPECIALLY WITH ENTERTAINMENT USES, GIVEN THE MOVIE THEATER DOWN THERE, THE SPORTS WORLD FACILITY AND THE GOLF COURSE. GIVEN THE ANTICIPATED DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THIS AREA, THE P&Z DID FIND THAT THIS WOULD BE A LOGICAL ZONING TO ESTABLISH DOWN HERE, GIVEN THE GROWTH PATTERNS IN THE AREA. THEY DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL THIS REQUEST WITH THE 5,0 VOTE, AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM, EITHER. >> OKAY. MR. KENDRICK. ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU, COUNCIL? YOU HAVE SOMETHING, COUNCILMAN? NO. CAN YOU GO BACK REAL QUICK TO THAT MAT? SURE. THIS IS JUST ME PUTTING SOMETHING OUT INTO THE ETHER HERE, [01:20:04] BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT YOU GET, WHEN YOU JUST PUT IT OUT THERE. BUT WHAT A FANTASTIC PLACE WITH THE KIDS INC. AND EVERYTHING THAT'S GOING THERE. TOP GOLF WOULD BE A FANTASTIC THING TO HAVE RIGHT THERE WITH ALL THE FAMILIES THAT ARE AROUND. I'M SURE WE WOULD WELCOME THAT HERE IN THE CITY. WE APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPER FOR ANNEXING THIS, AND THEN I'LL MOVE ALONG TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE ANYONE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? WE WILL NOW FORMALLY OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WOULD CONSIDER A MOTION. >> MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 8204. >> SECOND. >> SECOND. >> GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM PLACE FOUR. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? ALL IN FAVOR ON ITEM 9A, PLEASE SAY AYE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ITEM 9B BACK TO YOU, MR. KENDRICK. [9.B. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8205] >> 9B IS ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 8205. THIS IS THE CONSIDERED THE REZONING OF LOT 24 BLOCK 48, EAST AMARILLA SUBDIVISION UNIT NUMBER 1, LOCATED IN POTTER COUNTY, TEXAS, IN THE VICINITY OF NORTHEAST TENTH AVENUE IN NORTH GRAND STREET. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE REZONE FROM PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 334 TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT 334A TO ADD MEDICAL CLINIC AS AN ALLOWED LAND USE WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT HAS PERLA GALGOS. LIKE I MENTIONED, THEY'RE PROPOSING THE AT A MEDICAL CLINIC AS AN ALLOWED LAND USE. THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED TO ALLOW FOR MULTI-FAMILY USES IN ADDITION TO A BEAUTY SHOP. THE BEAUTY SHOP DID CLOSE WITHIN THE LAST HANDFUL YEARS. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO MOVE A MEDICAL CLINIC INTO THIS SITE. THE ORIGINAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT WAS WARDED IN A MANNER WHERE IT DID NOT GIVE STAFF THE FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW THE CLINIC WITHOUT AMENDMENT. THAT IS THE REASON WE ARE HERE TODAY. THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY EXTERIOR CHANGES TO THE SITE, SO THEY ARE GOING TO MAINTAIN THE EXTERIOR OF THE SITE AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, AND THEY ARE ONLY DOING INTERIOR WORK ON THE BUILDING. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOUND THAT THE MEDICAL CLINIC IS A VERY SIMILAR IMPACT IN NATURE TO THAT OF A BEAUTY SHOP AND FELT LIKE THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS IF THIS ADDITIONAL USE WAS ALLOWED TO OCCUR WITHIN THIS BUILDING. THEY BELIEVE IT WAS AN APPROPRIATE REQUEST. WE DID SEND NOTICES AS REQUIRED PER STATE LAW AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS AS OF THE MEETING TODAY. THEY DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM AS WELL WITH A 6VOTE. I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS FOR YOU THERE, MR. KENDRICK. APPRECIATE THAT. AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 9B. DO I HAVE ANYONE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 8205. >> SECOND. >> MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. ITEM 9C. I BELIEVE THAT'S YOUR LAST ONE THERE, MR. KENDRICK? [9.C. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8206] >> YES, 9C IS ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 8206. THIS ONE IS A REZONING OF LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, RIGHT ADDITION UNIT 1. THIS IS LOCATED IN POTTER COUNTY, TEXAS AS WELL, AND IS PROPOSING THE REZONE FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 1 TO GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF NORTHEAST 16TH AVENUE IN NORTH MERE STREET, AND THE APPLICANT IS JOSE RODARTE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THIS CHANGE TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH RETAIL LAND USES. THE SOUTH LOT CURRENTLY HAS WHAT STAFF RAISES A LEGAL, NON-CONFORMING RETAIL BUILDING THERE THAT CURRENTLY HAS A FLOWER SHOP. THE NORTH LOT THERE HAS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ON IT CURRENTLY, AND THEY HAVE A DESIRE TO EXPAND RETAIL USES TO THAT LOT AS WELL WHILE ALSO BRINGING THE LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE INTO LEGAL STATUS WITH APPROPRIATE ZONING. THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE REQUEST TODAY. GOING TO THE CITY PLANNED PLACE TYPES. THE SOUTH LOT AND THE PINK THERE IS COMMERCIAL, THIS REQUEST WOULD CONFORM WITH THAT. THE NORTH LOT THERE IN THE YELLOW IS ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES. TECHNICALLY, THIS REQUEST WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH THAT CATEGORY. HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE THIS IS A BIT OF AN OVERSIGHT BY THE CONSULTANT WHENEVER THIS PLACE TYPE MAP WAS ORIGINALLY SET UP. BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE THERE, THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ON THREE SIDES. OR TWO OF THE SIDES BY GENERAL RETAIL, AND THEN THAT COMMERCIAL PLACE TYPE IS ON THREE OF THE SIDES OF THAT NORTH LOT THERE, SO IT REALLY WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE FOR THAT LOT TO BE KEPT RESIDENTIAL, AS IT COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL USES ON THREE SIDES OF IT. YOU COULD RUN INTO A COMPATIBILITY ISSUE THERE. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DID BELIEVE THAT A VARIATION FROM THE MAP FOR THAT LOT WAS APPROPRIATE IN THIS INSTANCE. [01:25:04] THEN, GIVEN THAT THIS IS AT A FAIRLY HIGHLY TRAVELED INTERSECTION THAT ONE OF THEM OF WHICH IS CONSIDERED AN ARTERIAL. THIS INTERSECTION AND THE PROPERTIES ALONG IT WOULD BE MORE SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RATHER THAN SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOUND. THIS ONE, WE DID SEND NOTICES OUT ON AS WELL. WE DID RECEIVE ONE COMMENT THAT WAS IN SUPPORT FROM A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER WHO DID HAVE A DESIRE TO SEE MORE RETAIL USES BROUGHT TO THE AREA. WE ALSO DID FIELD AN ADDITIONAL PHONE CALL THAT WAS JUST A GENERAL INQUIRY, ONCE EXPLAINED IT IN EXPRESS OPPOSITION TO THE REQUEST. WITH THAT, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS ONE AS WELL WITH A 6,0 VOTES. >> REALLY GOOD, MR. KENDRICK, ANYTHING FOR MR. KENDRICK? >> WHAT DID YOU SAY THE TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN THERE? >> THEY DON'T HAVE A PROPOSED USE FOR THE NORTH LOT QUITE YET. THE SOUTH LOT DOES HAVE AN EXISTING FLOWER SHOP THERE. I BELIEVE THEY POTENTIALLY WANT TO BUILD AN ADDITIONAL RETAIL BUILDING PERHAPS ON THAT NORTH LOT SO THAT THEY CAN OFFER A WIDER RANGE OF USES ON THIS PROPERTY. >> THANK YOU. >> AT THIS TIME, WE'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HAVE ANYONE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 9C. SEEING NO ONE WILL CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING, AND WOULD ASK FOR A MOTION? >> MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NUMBER 8207. >> SECOND. >> SIX, I BELIEVE. >> CLARIFY THE MOTION, PLEASE. >> 8206. >> 8206. >> MOTION TO ADOPT 8206 AND A SECOND FROM PLACE 2. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU, MR. KENDRICK. >> NO PROBLEM. [9.D. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8207] >> ITEM 9D IS MR. ANTHONY SPINEL, ON A FEW CHANGES, I BELIEVE, WITH SOME STATE CODES THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND UPDATE HERE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COUNCIL, ANTHONY SPINEL, YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY. THIS AGENDA ITEM IS AN UPDATE TO CHAPTER 8-5 OF THE AMARILLO MUNICIPAL CODE. IT'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CODE. THIS AGENDA ITEM UPDATES BASICALLY TWO THINGS THAT HAD PASSED IN STATE LEGISLATIVE LAST SESSION. ESSENTIALLY IT'LL UPDATE ALL THE CHANGES FOR SENATE BILL 1008, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A STATE-WIDE STANDARD FOR FOOD ESTABLISHMENT PERMANENTING. THAT SENATE BILL DOES SEVERAL THINGS. I'LL HOPEFULLY SUMMARIZE THEM HERE, BUT ESSENTIALLY ASSETS A MAXIMUM FEE CAPS FOR FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS. IT DICTATES HOW WE CAN CHARGE OUR FOOD ESTABLISHMENT FEES HERE LOCALLY. YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO TREAT EVERYONE AS IF THEY WERE IN THE STATE'S JURISDICTION, AND YOU CAN CHOOSE ONE OF TWO METHODS, EITHER ASSESSING FEES BASED UPON GROSS SALES OR ASSESSING FEES BASED UPON RISK. WE ARE CHOOSING TO FOLLOW EXACTLY WHAT THE STATE IS DOING, ASSESSING FEES BASED UPON GROSS SALES, AND THAT'S ALMOST EXACTLY WHAT ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE STATE ARE DOING. ADDITIONALLY, IT SETS LOCAL PERMIT REQUIREMENT LIMITATIONS. YOU HAVE TO HONOR EXEMPTIONS THAT THE STATE OF STATE OF TEXAS ISSUES. FOR EXAMPLE, WE CAN NO LONGER ISSUE FOOD ESTABLISHMENT PERMITS FOR CHILDCARE CENTERS. WE STILL WILL INSPECT THEM ON A DIFFERENT SIDE OF THE HOUSE OR GROUP CARE SIDE, BUT IT'LL BE COMBINED INTO ONE INSPECTION AND WE HAVE TO HONOR NON-PROFIT EXEMPTIONS NOW. NON-PROFITS ARE ALLOWED TO OPT IN, BUT WE CAN'T REQUIRE PERMANENTING. IT ALSO REQUIRES STAKEHOLDER NOTICE FOR REALLY ANY CHANGE THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE HERE LOCALLY, IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR FEES, ANY REGULATORY CHANGE, YOU HAVE TO PUT IT OUT 60 DAYS IN ADVANCE AND ALLOW INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. THIS WAS SIGNED INTO LAW ON MAY 19 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1 OF 2025. SECOND, THIS WILL INCLUDE CHANGES RELATED TO HOUSE BILL 2844, WHICH BECOMES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2026. THIS BILL IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. IT'LL STRIP ALL MOBILE FOOD UNIT PERMITTING FROM ANY COUNTY, CITY OR PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT AND GIVES IT BACK TO THE STATE OF TEXAS. IT'LL BE ONE PERMIT ISSUED THROUGH THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT IS GOOD FOR THE ENTIRE STATE. WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTRACT THROUGH INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE TO DO THEIR INSPECTIONS FOR THEM, AND THEY COULD REIMBURSE US FOR THOSE INSPECTIONS, BUT THAT IS YET TO BE DETERMINED. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WRITE THOSE RULE SETS UNTIL MAY OF 26. WE'RE REALLY IN LIMBO ON THIS ONE, BUT WE DO HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THOSE CHANGES. THEN WHILE WE'RE IN IT, WE THOUGHT WE JUST MIGHT AS WELL CLEAN UP A FEW DEFINITIONS AND REALIGN WITH STATE LAW. SECTION 1, WE REMOVED SEVEN DEFINITIONS. THESE ARE ALL WELL OUTLINED IN STATE LAW. WE UPDATED ONE DEFINITION TO MATCH CURRENT STATE LAW. SECTION 2, WE UPDATED OUR FEE STRUCTURE FOR OUR FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS TO MATCH SENATE BILL 1008, JUST ESSENTIALLY SAID, WE'LL FOLLOW STATE LAW AS IT'S WRITTEN. [01:30:03] WE DID CREATE A UNIVERSAL PERMIT EXPIRATION DATE SO AS A BUSINESS, WE CAN MANAGE DOING GROSS SALES. ESSENTIALLY, OUR PERMITS THEY'LL START ON MAY 1 AND EXPIRE ON APRIL 30, AND THEN YOUR NEXT YEAR'S BILL WILL BE BASED UPON YOUR PREVIOUS YEAR'S GROSS SALES. WE ADDED PERMIT RENEWAL LANGUAGE THAT WAS JUST LACKING WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, AND WE ADDED LANGUAGE FOR PERMIT APPLICATION PRORATION AND EXTENDED TERM, WHICH BASICALLY MEANS, IF YOU APPLY WITHIN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF A PERIOD, WE'LL PRORATE IT. IF YOU APPLY WITHIN THE SECOND SIX MONTHS OF A PERMIT CYCLE, YOU'LL PAY A YEAR PLUS THE PRORATION. WE THINK THAT WOULD BE BEST PRACTICE AND BUSINESS FRIENDLY APPROACH. THEN SECTION 3 IS JUST SOME GENERAL LANGUAGE CLEAN, DEFINITION CLEAN UP, JUST GENERAL STUFF. THEN SECTION 4, WE MOVED ALL MOBILE FOOD UNIT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FROM CHAPTER 8-5-21 TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THIS IS ONE THING THAT 2844 ALLOWS YOU TO DO IS STILL REGULATE TIME, MANNER AND PLACE. WE DID THAT WITHIN 8-5. WE'RE MOVING IT TO THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION WITHIN THE CODE NOW. THERE'S NO ADDITIONS TO IT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S JUST A STRAIGHT CUT AND PASTE. ANY QUESTIONS? >> YEAH, ANTHONY. WITH THE UPDATED FEE SCHEDULE, IF THAT WAS DONE BASED ON WHAT WE DID LAST YEAR, ARE WE GOING TO SEE A NET INCREASE OR NET DECREASE? >> DEFINITELY NET DECREASE. I WOULD SAY JUST THE ROUGH ESTIMATE WE PUT IN BUDGET THIS YEAR. I THINK IT'LL BE A $200,000 LOSS. THIS IS YET TO BE SEEN. WE TAKE SOME BEST GUESS ESTIMATES HERE WHEN WE MOVED EVERYONE OVER TO THE NEW FEE SCHEDULE, BUT IT IS BASED UPON GROSS SALES. IF SOMEBODY COMES BACK AND CHALLENGES IT AND SAYS, HEY, YOU GUESSED WRONG, WE COULD LOSE FURTHER AMOUNTS. EVERYONE THAT I'VE TALKED TO ACROSS THE STATE IS EITHER $150,000 TO $300,000 LOSS. >> YOU MADE SOME GREAT EFFORTS. WE WERE MOVING TOWARDS COST RECOVERY FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT, AND THAT WAS THAT NEW FEE SCHEDULE LAST YEAR. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO? I KNOW OUR HANDS ARE A LITTLE BIT TIED WITH THIS, BUT IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO COST RECOVER? I KNOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT CERTAINLY THE OUT-OF-THE-CITY INSPECTIONS THAT YOU GUYS ARE HAVING TO DO AND NOT REALLY BEING ABLE TO CHARGE FOR THEM ANYMORE. IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO MAKE UP THAT GAP THAT WE'RE NOW LOSING? >> YES, SIR. I THINK A FURTHER CONVERSATION IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT AND COST SHARING FOR LOSSES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. I THINK SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD MOST LIKELY TALK ABOUT AT A LATER POINT IN TIME. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE BEST APPROACH. >> THOSE SCHEDULES, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING? >> I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS. >> YES. I HAD TASKED RICH AND JASON AND ANTHONY TO START WORKING ON THAT. THEY BROUGHT TO ME ABOUT TWO OR THREE WEEKS AGO, AND IS WHEN I BECAME AWARE OF THAT. I SAID TO START EXPLORING THOSE OPTIONS TO WORKING WITH THE PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT AND OUR COUNTY PARTNERS AND LOOK TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE OF A FAIR COST RECOVERY. >> GOT YOU. I'M NOT PROPOSING THIS. DON'T HEAR THIS. DO WE EVEN HAVE THE OPTION NOT TO INSPECT THOSE? MAYBE, WE DO, BUT I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, BUT WE DO NEED TO COST RECOVER. >> SURE. WE HAVE PLENTY OF CHOICES IF WE'D LIKE TO DO THAT. WE'RE IN A PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE I BELIEVE THE EARLY '80S. IF WE CHOSE NOT TO BE THE SERVICE PROVIDER IN THAT PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT. WE DEFINITELY COULD DO THAT. BUT THE ALTERNATIVE IS JUST A BAD CHOICE IN MY OPINION. IT WOULD BE THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME IN AND REGULATE EVERYTHING THAT AMARILLO DIDN'T. THEY HAVE THREE INSPECTORS FOR 26 COUNTIES. YOU WOULD PROBABLY SEE ONE INSPECTION EVERY TWO, MAYBE 3-5 YEARS PER FACILITY. >> NOT GOOD. >> IT'S A BAD CHOICE. I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT. >> GREAT. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? >> YES. THE STATE LEGISLATURE CAME IN AND DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD DETERMINE OUR FEES INSTEAD OF WE DETERMINE IT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. YES. >> THAT LEAVES US WITH A SHORTFALL THAT NOW, AND I'M GUESSING THE STATE IS NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT UP, IT'S UP FOR TAXPAYERS LOCALLY TO BE ABLE TO COME IN AND FIGURE OUT A WAY EITHER THROUGH YOUR DEPARTMENT. HISTORICALLY, YOUR DEPARTMENT, WHEREVER IT FALLS SHORT ON COST RECOVERY IS GOING TO BE SUBSIDIZED BY TAXPAYERS, AND WE JUST ADDED ANOTHER $150,000 TO THEIR BILL, THANKS TO THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE MAKING THIS DECISION. >> I THINK THOSE CONVERSATIONS WERE VERY CLEAR AT THE LEGISLATIVE MEETINGS THAT THAT WAS THE INTENT TO MOVE THE OPERATIONAL COST TO THE TAX DOLLAR. I DO ALSO WANT TO SAY, I FORGOT TO MENTION THIS, THIS IS A TEXAS RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION'S PRIORITY BILL FOR THIS YEAR WAS SETTING A STANDARD ACROSS THE STATE OF TEXAS. THIS WAS THEIR SPONSORED PRIORITY BILL FOR THIS YEAR. >> THANK YOU. [01:35:02] >> THANK YOU, ANTHONY. ON THE TDLR OR HHS, WHO HANDLES THIS? >> THIS WOULD BE THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS DSHS. IT WOULD BE THEIR STANDARD THAT WE ARE MATCHING. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. >> THAT IS. IN THAT, ARE YOU STILL FACILITATING EVERYTHING OR DO OUR RESTAURANTS NEED TO KNOW YOU'VE GOT TO FILE THIS WITH A DIFFERENT ENTITY? >> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. FOR SENATE BILL 1008, WE STILL MANAGE EVERYTHING. WE'RE THE SERVICE PROVIDER FOR THE DISTRICTS, SO EVERYTHING IN THE EIGHT JURISDICTION AREA, THAT WILL BE US. FOR HOUSE BILL 2844, THE MOBILE FOOD UNIT STANDARD AS OF JULY 1 OF 2026, OUR PERMITS WILL BE INACTIVATED, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TO REAPPLY THROUGH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES. HONESTLY, IT'S A SILLY BILL. WE'LL BE REGULATING THE RESTAURANT, AND THEN THEY'LL HAVE TO DEAL WITH ANOTHER ENTITY FOR THEIR FOOD TRUCK IF THEY GET THAT. >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEND OUT NOTICES FOR? >> ABSOLUTELY. WE'LL DEFINITELY COMMUNICATE THAT. >> YOU'LL COMMUNICATE PRETTY WELL THROUGH THAT. THEN AS FAR AS THE PRICING GOES, IS THERE ANY COMMUNICATION THAT NEEDS TO GO ON BETWEEN US AND OUR PARTNERS IN THE COMMUNITY IN THE RESTAURANT BUSINESS? >> THAT'S ALSO A GOOD QUESTION. ONE THING I FAILED TO MENTION, WE KNEW THIS CHANGE WAS COMING. WE JUST HAD TO CATCH UP WITH THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE CHANGES. WE IMPLEMENTED A PRORATION ALREADY IN OUR DEPARTMENT WHERE ALL OF OUR PERMITS WERE PRORATES EXPIRE ON 8/31 WITH THE NEW FEE IS COMING ON 9/1. WE'VE ALREADY SENT OUT I THINK TWO OR THREE LETTERS REGARDING THE CHANGE, EXPLAINING THE STATE LAW CHANGE, EXPLAINING THE PRORATIONS IN YOUR BILLS. ALMOST EVERYONE HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE AWARE OF TWO OR THREE TIMES. >> HEY, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. >> ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR. >> APPRECIATE IT. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM 9D. ANY DISCUSSION ON IT, GENTLEMEN? >> NO. >> I MOVE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 8207 AS PRESENTED IN THE AGENDA. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM 9D. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. MR. KASHUBA, WE SEE YOU IN THE BACK. [9.E. CONSIDER AWARD - AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY] IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD AND TALK TO US ABOUT AQUATIC STUDY, PLEASE. ITEM 9E. >> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. MICHAEL KASHUBA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY, AND REALLY THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY IS TO EVALUATE THE CURRENT CONDITIONS OF OUR AQUATIC FACILITIES. WHEN I SAY THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT OUR FOUR POOLS AND OUR SPLASH PADS. WE WANT TO ESTIMATE WHAT THOSE FUTURE EXPENDITURES ARE, AND WE ALSO WANT TO DEVELOP A STRATEGIC PLAN MOVING FORWARD. A LOT OF THESE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE ARE AT OR NEARING LIFE EXPECTANCY. WHEN I GOT HERE SEVEN YEARS AGO, I WAS FACED WITH THE UNFORTUNATE CHALLENGE OF HAVING TO CLOSE THOMPSON POOL WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF BEING WITH THE CITY. OBVIOUSLY, THAT PUT COUNCIL IN A BAD SPOT BECAUSE IT HADN'T BEEN COMMUNICATED PREVIOUSLY BY STAFF AS TO THE CONDITION OF THAT FACILITY. WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO DO IS PLAN AHEAD. THIS IS A STRATEGIC PLAN TRYING TO IDENTIFY HOW WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR POOLS AND OUR SPLASH PADS. IT LOOKS AT THE CONDITION OF WHAT WE HAVE, IT LOOKS AT THE MARKET AREA, IT LOOKS AT VIABILITY. IT REALLY JUST TAKES A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO OUR AQUATIC FACILITIES ON HOW WE MOVE THEM FORWARD. THAT'S WHAT THIS STUDY IS. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT. >> QUESTIONS, GENTLEMEN. >> WE HAVE THREE AQUATIC FACILITIES NOW. OUTSIDE OF SPLASH PADS, BUT THREE WHERE WE MAINTAIN. WHAT'S THE USAGE TREND? WHAT ARE WE SEEING AS FAR AS JUST USAGE OF THOSE FACILITIES? >> WE'RE WRAPPING UP THE YEAR. WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS IT'S STAYING PRETTY TRUE. THOMPSON MAKES UP ABOUT 65% OF THE OVERALL REVENUE FOR OUR AQUATIC SIDE. SOUTHEAST POOL MAKES UP ABOUT 20% AND SOUTHWEST MAKES UP ABOUT 14%. WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE FACILITIES JUST FOR REFERENCE, SOUTHEAST POOL WAS BUILT IN '74, SOUTHWEST WAS '65. ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE FACED IS WE'VE GOT SOME REPLASTERING THAT HAS TO HAPPEN. USUALLY THAT'S DONE EVERY 10-15 YEARS, AND WE'RE CURRENTLY AT YEAR 19. THAT'S ABOUT $400,000 PER POOL TO REPLASTER THOSE. AGAIN, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MONEY WELL SPENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING LONG TERM WHILE WE ALSO ADDRESS THOSE FACILITY CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE. >> WHAT WILL THIS STUDY BE LOOKING AT? WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE EXPLORING? NOT WHAT THEIR FINDINGS WILL SAY. WE DON'T KNOW THAT. BUT WHAT WILL THEIR FINDINGS INDICATE TO US? [01:40:01] >> OBVIOUSLY, THE EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF THIS ARE WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND THE FACILITY CONDITION AND OPERATIONS, JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THAT WELL. WE WANT TO START LOOKING AT OPTIONS FOR WHETHER IT'S REPAIR, REPLACEMENT OR NEW CONSTRUCTIONS, ARE STARTING TO IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE FACILITIES NEED MOVING FORWARD. POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT FEE STRUCTURES, MAKING SURE THAT OBVIOUSLY OUR FEES LINE UP WITH WHAT MARKET DEMANDS. THEN LOOKING AT THAT LONG TERM PLAN AGAIN, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE THOSE GOOD FACILITIES AT A SUSTAINABLE COST. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, SPECIFICALLY SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST ARE BEING SUBSIDIZED PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY BASED ON ATTENDANCE. OUR GOAL IS REALLY TO LOOK AT SURROUNDING THE OTHER PROVIDERS IN AMARILLO, SEE WHAT THEIR MARKETS ARE DOING. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE BUILT THESE POOLS BACK IN THE '60S AND '70S, A LOT OF THESE OTHER FACILITIES WEREN'T IN PLACE. VERDE WASN'T IN PLACE, THE TOWN CLUBS WEREN'T IN PLACE. THE MARKET HAS CHANGED SINCE A LOT OF OUR FACILITIES WERE FIRST BUILT. AGAIN, WE JUST WANT TO TAKE A STEP BACK, LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE, SEE WHERE THERE ARE NEEDS, MAYBE SEE WHERE GAPS HAVE ALREADY BEEN FILLED BY OTHER PROVIDERS, AND THEN LOOK AT OPTIONS MOVING FORWARD. >> WHAT'S THE TREND IN OTHER CITIES, PARTICULARLY PEER CITIES WITH WHAT THEY DO WITH THESE TYPES OF FACILITIES OR WHAT THEY ARE DOING THESE DAYS? >> A LOT OF AQUATIC FACILITIES. YOU DON'T SEE AS MANY. LUBBOCK, I THINK FINALLY CLOSED THEIR LAST POOL, AND THEY HAVE ONE SPLASH PAD. WE, AS A CITY, HAVE THREE OUTDOOR POOLS, ONE INDOOR POOL, AND 15 SPLASH PADS. WE'VE GOT A PRETTY INTENSIVE NUMBER OF AQUATIC FACILITIES WHEN WE COMPARE TO SAY, LUBBOCK, FOR EXAMPLE. >> THANK YOU. >> A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHAT IS THE COST OF A SPLASH PAD RIGHT NOW? >> I DON'T HAVE THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I WOULD ESTIMATE YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING ANYWHERE $250,000 TO $500,000 FOR A NON-RECIRCULATING SYSTEM. IF YOU'RE DOING A RECIRCULATING SYSTEM, IT'S PROBABLY NORTH OF THAT. >> WHAT IS THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE ON A SPLASH PAD? >> I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER. IT WOULD JUST BE OUR STAFF TIME AND THEN OBVIOUSLY ANY VALVES, FIXTURES, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT NEED TO BE REPLACED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. >> DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON STAFF THAT COULD DO THIS AS PART OF THEIR DUTIES TO GO IN AND DO THIS EVALUATION AS OPPOSED TO HIRING KIMLEY-HORN? >> WE HAVE STAFF THAT COULD COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. I THINK OBVIOUSLY OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO DO A THIRD PARTY. THAT WAY, IT'S NOT BIASED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER BIAS STAFF PERSPECTIVE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S A TRUE THIRD PARTY LOOK AT THE WHOLE MARKET, NOT JUST STAFF DECIDING THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO MOVING FORWARD. THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING A THIRD PARTY TO DO THIS STUDY. >> THIS AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY IS NOT LOOKING AT PUTTING IN AN AQUATIC CENTER IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO? >> NO. IT WOULD BE LOOKING AT OUR CURRENT POOLS AND SPLASH PADS AND THEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. DO WE KEEP THEM IN THE SAME LOCATION? DO WE MOVE THEM? DO WE REPAIR THEM? DO WE REPLACE THEM? DO WE ADD NEW CONSTRUCTION? WHAT DO WE DO? >> WE'RE NOT ADDING ONTO THE HOUSE IN TIMES OF ROUGHNESS. WE'RE TRYING TO CUT COST, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> WITH THIS AQUATIC MARKET VIABILITY STUDY, WE'RE LOOKING TO SAVE MONEY AND TO CONTINUE TO WHITTLE DOWN OUR DEFICIT? THANK YOU. >> GO AHEAD. COUNCIL PRESCOTT, I ASKED THE SAME QUESTION, AND A LITTLE FRUSTRATED THE FACT THAT WE'D BRING IN A THIRD PARTY AND PAY $85,000, BUT WE HAD A GOOD DISCUSSION. ON TOP OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID, YOU SAID THEY'RE EXPERTS AT THIS AS FAR AS THE SPLASH PADS. THEY UNDERSTAND THE MARKET OF ALL THESE THINGS VERSUS IN-HOUSE, WHERE, LIKE YOU SAID, IT MIGHT BE BIASED OR WHATEVER. AGAIN, TO REITERATE. I THINK WE'RE JUST TRYING TO DO A GOOD JOB OF SAVING MONEY. YOU SAID THEY WERE SUBSIDIZED. DO YOU HAVE DOLLAR VALUE ON THAT? BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THE MAJOR REPAIR, I THINK, A SOUTHEAST, IF THERE WAS A VOID UNDERNEATH THE POOL. WE HAD A LEAK, AND WE HAD TO FILL IT. IT'S PROBABLY TEMPORARY-ISH. IT'S WORKING FOR NOW, BUT WE'RE POURING A TON OF MONEY INTO THESE. >> BEFORE THE SEASON OPENED, WE ACTUALLY HAD TO GO IN AND MAKE SOME EMERGENCY REPAIRS AT SOUTHEAST BECAUSE THERE WAS A VOID UNDER THE POOL. WE PUT FLOW FILL IN THERE, GOT IT STABILIZED, BUT WE KNOW THAT THAT PATCH IS PROBABLY FAIRLY SHORT TERM. WE ALSO HAVE THE REPLASTERING THAT'S LOOMING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. >> THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF THIS AND LOOK AROUND CORNERS. WE ESTIMATE SOMEWHERE AROUND $100,000-150,000 SUBSIDY FOR BOTH SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST. THOMPSON COMES IN PRETTY CLOSE TO COST RECOVERY IF YOU EXCLUDE DEBT SERVICE. THE NUMBERS AT THOMPSON CONTINUE TO DO REALLY WELL, THEY'RE ACTUALLY UP OVER LAST YEAR. WE CONTINUE TO SEE MORE AND MORE PEOPLE USE THAT FACILITY. WE SEE MORE AND MORE PARTIES AND RENTALS. WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE HAD ENOUGH LIFEGUARDS. IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS, WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFFING TO OPEN FOR THOSE EXTRA HOURS. THIS YEAR, WE WERE ABLE TO DO THAT. AGAIN, I THINK THOMPSON HAS DONE VERY WELL. THOSE OTHER TWO POOLS JUST HAVE [01:45:01] STRUGGLED ON THE ATTENDANT SIDE AND THE COST RECOVERY SIDE. >> $150,000 SUBSIDY, THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY REPAIRS IF THE REPLASTERING, IF A PUMP GOES OUT, ANY OF THAT. IT'S 150 JUST TO KEEP THAT THING OPEN. >> CORRECT. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL MARIE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL? >> ONE FINAL. YOU MENTIONED THOMPSON IS UP OVER LAST YEAR? WHAT ARE THE HISTORICAL TRENDS FOR THE OTHER TWO? ARE THEY GOING DOWN? IS IT STEADY? IS IT UP? ARE THERE TRENDS THAT YOU'VE SEEN FOR THE USAGE OF THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST? >> I'M LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, AND THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'VE STAYED PRETTY CONSISTENT. JUNE THIS YEAR SEEMED TO BE UP OVER PREVIOUS JUNES. JULY WAS DOWN A LITTLE BIT, SO IT WAS MORE IN LINE AND ACTUALLY LOWER THAN SOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEARS. FOR SOME REASON, JULY WAS A LITTLE BIT DOWN, JUNE WAS UP? >> ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCIL. COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT? >> I WOULD JUST ASK THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THIS AS SEND THIS BACK AND SEE IF WE CAN DO IT INTERNALLY. >> I KNOW, I SPENT FOUR YEARS REALLY PUSHING, CONSULTING FEES AND JUST WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR ALL OF THIS? I THINK I'VE JUST ABOUT GOTTEN PULLED ALL THE WAY OVER TO WHERE THE CONSULTING FEE DOES HAVE SOME VALUE. IN AN ITEM WHERE I KNOW WE COULD GIVE AN OPINION AND STAFF, WHAT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR, AND I'LL LET YOU SPEAK TO THIS, MR. KASHUBA. I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR MORE OF AN OVERALL STUDY IN TRENDS AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO VERSUS IT BEING SOMETHING TO WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE DRIVING ONE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE OTHER OR ONE SIDE OF TOWN VERSUS THE OTHER. AM I PAYING MORE FOR AN INDEPENDENT OPINION VERSUS AN INTERNAL OPINION, MORE SO THAN EXPERTISE? >> THE GOAL OF LOOKING FROM OUTSIDE IS, OBVIOUSLY, THEY WOULD DO MORE THAN MARKET TRENDS TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHO'S SERVING WHAT AREA. A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE COMPANY THAT WE WERE CONSIDERING FOR THIS HAD RECENTLY DONE THE ONE FOR THE CAP. THEY'RE LOOKING AT WHAT THOSE MARKETS SAY AND WHAT THE DEMAND IS BEING DRIVEN. WE CAN GUESS, AND WE CAN LOOK AT WHAT OUR TRENDS ARE, BUT FROM AN ACTUAL MARKET STANDPOINT, WHAT WOULD BE SERVED WELL, WE JUST DON'T KNOW. WE CAN DO OUR BEST TO PROVIDE THE TRENDS, THE INFORMATION OFF OF WHAT WE SEE THE OPERATION SIDE. THE PIECE WE CAN'T SEE IS THE BIGGER MARKET REAL ESTATE SIDE. >> YOUR REQUEST WAS TO PUSH IT. I WOULD ASK YOU TO MAYBE TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER. LET'S EITHER MOVE IT TO INTERNAL AND TASK THEM WITH THAT OR MOVE IT TO THE VOTE FOR THIS AND GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE STUDY. NOW, I GUESS, TO SAY IT THAT WAY, DO YOU HAVE ANY TIME FRAME ISSUES? >> NO, OUR GOAL IS JUST TO TRY TO GET AHEAD OF THIS AS BEST WE CAN. OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT COUNCIL TO BE WELL INFORMED, HAVE GOOD INFORMATION. OBVIOUSLY, IF WE'RE HAVING TO MAKE STRATEGIC DECISIONS. AGAIN, A LOT OF OUR POOLS ARE AGING, THE SPLASH PADS ARE AGING. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAKING GOOD STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS MOVING FORWARD. >> I THINK COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT, IF I WAS HEARING STAFF TELL ME WE CAN DO IT INTERNALLY. WE'LL GO GET THAT DONE FOR YOU. YES, SIR. THEN I'D FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE PULLING THIS OFF. BUT I ALMOST FEEL LIKE WE NEED COUNCIL TO DIRECT IT BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'RE GETTING. MR. KASHUBA, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? >> NO, SIR. >> WE KNOW THE STATE OF THE POOLS AND THE DIFFERENT AQUATIC FACILITIES. WE KNOW WHAT SHAPE THEY'RE IN. IT'S NOT A QUESTION REALLY OF MAYBE WE REALLY NEED TO CLOSE ONE OR TWO OF THEM DOWN AND NOT PUT MONIES INTO THEM ANYMORE. WHAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE EFFECT ON THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS DO RELY ON THOSE PARTICULAR FACILITIES. IS THAT THE MAIN THING THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT FOR A STUDY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE FILL IN GAPS, WHERE GAPS ARE ALREADY BEING COVERED, SO THAT WE AGAIN, WE WANT TO BE STRATEGIC, WE WANT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE TAXPAYER DOLLAR, AND I THINK THE STUDY HELPS US DETERMINE WHERE THAT'S BEST SPENT. >> BUT WAIT. I WOULD SAY, WHERE'S YOUR COMFORT LEVEL? BECAUSE I WAS EXACTLY WHERE DAVID WAS IN OUR MEETING. WHERE'S YOUR COMFORT LEVEL? BECAUSE THEN, LIKE MAYOR JUST SAID, YOU SPED OFF WELL, WE COULD DO IT. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT I GOT. I WAS LIKE, WE COULD, BUT WE'RE JUST NOT MAYBE EQUIPPED IN THE SAME REALM. LIKE TIM'S BRING IT UP IS WHAT PIECE DO THEY BRING AND IS IT WORTH THE 85,000, I GUESS, IS WHAT I WOULD WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU REPRESENTING YOUR STAFF? LIKE, YES, WE CAN DO IT? WE KNOW WHAT YOU JUST SAID. WE KNOW THE AGE. WE KNOW ALL THAT, BUT BEYOND THAT, DO WE HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO MAKE THESE CALLS AND TO BE CONFIDENT ON THEM? >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, LET'S SAY THE $85,000. [01:50:02] IF YOU'RE LIKE, NO, THEY BRING $85,000 WORTH OR SOME VALUE TO IT IF WE OUTSOURCE IT. I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO HEAR TO SAY, DO WE SPEND THIS MONEY OR DO WE NOT? I TRUST YOU TO LEAD YOUR DEPARTMENT. >> FOR STAFF SIDE, WE CAN DO THE OPERATIONS. WE KNOW THE TRANS, WE KNOW WHAT THE GENERAL COSTS ARE. OBVIOUSLY, HAVING BUILT THOMPSON NOT THAT LONG AGO, WE KNOW WHAT THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS WOULD BE FOR REPLACEMENT FACILITIES. I THINK IT BECOMES A QUESTION OF, IF WE DO BUILD, OR IF WE DO REPAIR, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? WHERE IS THAT STRATEGICALLY LOCATED? DO WE KEEP IT IN THE SAME LOCATION? I'LL GIVE YOU THE EXAMPLE, SOUTHEAST POOL IS VERY CONFINED. YOU'VE GOT SOME BUILDINGS AROUND IT ON BASICALLY ALL THE SIDES. IF WE WERE TO MAKE REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS THERE, WE REALLY GEOGRAPHICALLY DON'T HAVE THE SPACE ON THAT SITE. SOUTHWEST, YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE WHERE YOU COULD DO SOME THINGS ON THAT LOCATION. BUT AGAIN, ON THAT SIDE OF TOWN, NOW YOU HAVE TWO TOWN CLUBS AND A VERDURE THAT ARE IN THAT SAME SPACE AND SAME MARKET. AGAIN, PART OF IT IS LOOKING AT WHAT THE MARKET SUPPORTS. THEN LOOK AT IF THE MARKET'S ALREADY COVERED, WHAT DO WE DO THERE? IF SO, WHERE DO WE PUT OTHER FACILITIES MOVING FORWARD? AGAIN, WE CAN DO THE OPERATION SIDE ALL DAY LONG. OUR STAFF IS REALLY GOOD AT THAT, WE'VE GOT THOSE NUMBERS. IT'S THE MARKET VIABILITY TRYING TO SAY, YEAH, WE COULD PUT A POOL THERE AND IT'S GOING TO HIT COST RECOVERY. THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD GUESS AT, BUT THAT STUDY WOULD HELP US BASED OFF A REAL MARKET DATA, SEEING WHAT FACILITIES ARE DOING AND HOW THEY'RE CHARGING, AND SHOULD WE EVEN ENTER THAT REALM? >> ARE THEY DOING A FACILITY ASSESSMENT IN PART OF THIS? >> YEAH, THEY LOOK AT THE EXISTING PART OF IT. >> WHY DON'T WE PULL THAT OUT? IF YOU'RE SAYING, WELL, WE CAN DO THAT. IN FACT, WE ALREADY HAVE IT. I'M ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION ON THAT. IF WE CAN ASSESS THAT, AND WE KNOW THAT, CAN WE PULL THAT FROM THEM AND MAYBE GET THAT BID LOWER AND GET THEIR EXPERTISE OF WHERE THEY'RE REALLY GOOD? I TRUST YOU AND YOUR STAFF TO SAY, WELL, WE'RE REALLY GOOD AT THIS. EITHER YOU ARE, YOU AREN'T AT THAT. IF YOU'RE NOT, LET'S USE THEM. BUT IF YOU'RE LIKE, NO, WE GOT THAT, WE KNOW EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE WITH THE ASSESSMENT OF OUR CURRENT FACILITIES. THESE GUYS, WE NEED THE MARKET EXPERTISE, WHICH MY GUYS, THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THEY'RE HIRED TO DO. >> WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. WE COULD LOOK AT IT, REMOVE THE PIECES THAT ARE MORE OF THE OPERATIONAL AND FOCUS MORE ON THE MARKET DEMAND STUDY. >> I WOULD SAY IF YOU'RE CONFIDENT IN THAT IF YOU'RE LIKE, NO, WE GOT IT. WE CAN DO THAT PIECE, BUT I WOULD LIKE THEM TO DO THAT. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? COUNCIL. >> DOES KIMLEY-HORN, ARE THEY GOING TO LOOK AT THE SAFETY AND THE INTEGRITY? WHEN I HEAR THE WORD VOID UNDERNEATH A SWIMMING POOL, THAT RAISES GREAT CONCERN FOR ME. JUST FROM SAFETY OF THE USERS, WILL KIMLEY-HORN BE LOOKING AT THE SAFETY AND THE ENGINEERING OF THESE POOLS? >> THEY'LL LOOK AT THE OVERALL, BUT I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS FOR THINGS LIKE A POOL. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S UNDERNEATH UNLESS YOU DRILL THROUGH THE SHELL. THE REASON WE WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE THERE WAS A VOID ON THIS ONE WAS BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME LEAKS IN THE POOL, AND WE WENT THROUGH A SYSTEMATIC PROCESS OF PATCHING THOSE LEAKS, SO WE STARTED AT THE TOP SIDE. PATCH THOSE LEAKS. THEY'RE STILL LEAKS. WE CONTINUED AND FOLLOWED IT DOWN TO WHERE WE GOT TO THE BOTTOM DRAINS. WHEN THEY WERE DOING THAT, THEY FOUND THERE WAS A VOID UNDER THE POOL. AGAIN, WE WERE ABLE TO GET IN THERE, FLOW FILL IT, GET IT SAFE FOR THE FACILITY TO BE USED. >> YOU SAID LEVI HAD ONE POOL AND NO SPLASH PADS? >> I THINK THEY JUST CLOSED THEIR LAST POOL, IF I REMEMBER. >> THEY HAVE NO AQUATICS IN THE. >> JUST A SPLASH PAD. >> HOW MANY SPLASH PADS DID THEY HAVE? >> ONE. >> JUST ONE. ONE FINAL THING. WHEN DID THE POOLS CLOSE? HERE IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS? >> THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST ACTUALLY JUST CLOSED THIS WEEKEND. THOMPSON WILL BE OPEN ON WEEKENDS THROUGH LABOR DAY. >> WE HAVE BASICALLY NINE MONTHS THAT THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE SHUT DOWN. IT'S NOT A QUICK TURN AT ALL. WE HAVE SOME. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE'VE GOT SOME TIME, IT'S OKAY. >> I WOULD SAY IF WE DON'T ACT, AND THEN WE PRESSED AGAINST THE SEASON AGAIN, IF THERE'S REPAIRS MAJOR REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE MADE PLASTER, THAT'S IDEAL. AGAIN, NOW WE'RE IN A CROSSS SITUATION. NOW WE GOT TO SHUT THE POOL DOWN AND NOT OPEN OR MAKE THE REPAIRS, WHICH IS A SIGNIFICANT COST. >> WHAT IS THE ANNUAL COST OF ALL THE POOLS AND SPLASH PADS? >> I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU. >> DO WE JUST BALLPARK? IS IT A MILLION DOLLARS? >> IT'S JUST UNDER A MILLION. >> WE HAVE ONE UNIT THAT IS COST RECOVERY RIGHT NOW. THE NEW ONE RIGHT AT THOMPSON. >> THOMPSON'S DOING EXTREMELY WELL. THE OTHER TWO HAVE STRUGGLED. >> [OVERLAPPING] HARD TIMES ARE HARD TIMES. >> WELL, YOU HAVE SOMETHING. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY WARFORD IS THE EXCEPTION TO THOSE FOUR POOLS. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S AN INDOOR PART OF THE YEAR ROUND FACILITY THE OTHER THREE ARE SEASONAL. >> WHY DON'T WE DO THIS? WHY DON'T WE TRY TO REDIRECT? YOU COULD VALUE ENGINEER THE STUDY AND REDUCE THE SCOPE OF WORK OF IT? WE CAN TAKE NO ACTION ON IT TODAY. GIVE YOU TIME TO GO AHEAD AND GO AND DO YOUR EVAL INTERNALLY. BRING THAT BACK TO COUNCIL WITH THE EVALUATION FROM [01:55:03] THE INTERNAL SIDE ALONG WITH THE COST WITH THE REVISED SCOPE. IF THAT MEETS YOUR TIME FRAME. COUNCIL, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING YOU GUYS LEAN TOWARD? COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT? WE'LL TAKE NO ACTION ON ITEM 9E AND ASK YOU TO BRING IT BACK. >> YES SIR. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. I'LL TELL YOU WE'RE PUSHING 5:00 HERE AND WE STILL GOT A FEW MORE. I THINK MOST OF THESE SIT WITH DONNIE HOOPER, AND WE HAVE A FEW WITH MAYBE ONE PRESENTATION. LET'S TAKE A REALLY QUICK. WE'LL JUST DO A 10 MINUTE RECESS. WE'LL COME BACK HERE AND WE'LL WRAP THIS UP SHORTLY. THANK YOU. PROGRESS. WE ARE 9F. [Items 9.F. & 9.G.] MR. HOOPER, IF YOU'RE READY, WE'RE GOING TO TURN YOU LOOSE. >> I'M READY. I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH THESE PRETTY QUICK. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS COMBINE 9F AND 9G TOGETHER IN A CONVERSATION, IF YOU WILL, AND THEN WE'LL ALSO DO H AND I IN A CONVERSATION AS WELL, BECAUSE THEY ALL REALLY TIE TOGETHER. ALL THIS IN THE NAME OF TRANSPARENCY, WHEN MR. PATH GOT HERE, WE STARTED CHANGING A LITTLE BIT OF OUR POLICIES AND PRACTICES, I SHOULD SAY, ON HOW WE WOULD TRANSFER SOMETHING FROM ONE JOB THAT'S EXISTING TO ANOTHER WHEN THAT JOB WAS COMPLETED. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S FULL TRANSPARENCY, WE'RE BRINGING THAT TO COUNCIL, THESE REQUESTS FOR THESE SMALL AMOUNTS THAT WE'RE WANTING TO TAKE OUT OF A JOB THAT WE WERE WORKING PREVIOUSLY THAT HAS SOME FUNDS REMAINING IN IT THAT WE WANT TO MOVE TO SOME OTHER PRESSING JOBS. WE HAVE SOME PRETTY PRESSING PROJECTS THAT ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET COMPLETED. THAT'S THE ONES THAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE REST OF THIS AGENDA, AND ITEMS G AND I. WHAT THEY ARE IS WE HAD A PROJECT THAT WAS AN ASSESSMENT PROJECT FOR THE CARSON COUNTY WELL FIELD. IT ALSO INCLUDED A LITTLE BIT OF REPAIRS AND THINGS THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE OUT THERE ON THAT LINE. WE HAVE FINISHED WITH ANY PART OF THAT PROJECT THAT WE ARE NEEDING TO COMPLETE ON THAT, EXCEPT FOR THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE MAY BE SOME LINE REPAIRS THAT NEED TO BE FLOYD NO V THAT DISCUSSION TODAY. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF FUNDING THAT'S LEFT THERE, BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE'RE WANTING TO TRANSFER THIS TO. THE FIRST ITEM 9F IS ACTUALLY FOR THE REQUEST TO MAKE THOSE TRANSFERS. ONE OF THOSE IS FOR TWO INCH MAIN REPLACEMENT IN NORTH HEIGHTS FOR 46,620. WHAT HAPPENED ON THAT IS THAT BID CAME IN SLIGHTLY ABOVE FOR THAT WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT OVER THERE IN NORTH HEIGHTS, THEN WHAT THE ACTUAL BUDGET WAS FOR THAT WHEN WE SET THAT PROJECT UP ORIGINALLY. WE'D NEED THE 46,620 TO MAKE THAT PROJECT WHOLE PRETTY SIMPLE. THEN THE OTHER WOULD BE THE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT. IT'S CALLED THE SOUTHEAST TENTH STREET PROJECT, BUT THAT'S ACTUALLY FOURTH STREET. THERE'S SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT TOOK PLACE ON TENTH STREET, NINTH STREET, POLK STREET, ALTOGETHER IN ONE PROJECT. IF WE COULD GO BACK AND RENAME THAT FROM THE BEGINNING, IT'D PROBABLY BE A DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TITLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT IT WAS NAMED TENTH IN THE BEGINNING. TO AVOID CONFUSION ON THAT. THIS IS FOR FOURTH STREET. YOU'VE SEEN THE AREA JUST OUTSIDE OF AMARIL NATIONAL BANK THERE. IN FACT, WE'VE TAKEN SOME CALLS ON THAT IN THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS. WE HAD AN ELEVATION BUST ON THAT PROJECT IN THE DESIGN PORTION OF THAT. WE'RE HAVING TO GO BACK AND CORRECT THAT. THIS WOULD BE FOR EXTENDING THAT SEWER MAIN ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A BLOCK FURTHER THAN IT IS NOW SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT TIE IN POINT AND THE ELEVATIONS WORK, AND WE CAN GET THAT SEWER TO DRAIN OUT OF THERE. WE WANT TO GET THAT ONE CLEANED JERRY DANFORTH CAME ON BOARD, IN HIS POSITION, HIS NEW POSITION. THAT'S ONE OF THE PROJECTS WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO TACKLE FIRST IS FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET FOURTH AND GET THAT CLEANED UP AND GET THAT PROJECT FINISHED. AGAIN, IN THE CONSIDERATION, F WOULD BE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE TRANSFER, THEN G IS ACTUALLY THE WORK FOR THE CHANGE ORDER FOR THE FOURTH STREET PROJECT. THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. THOSE TWO ITEMS THERE, YOU COULD PROBABLY ADDRESS FIRST MAYOR, IF YOU'D LIKE TO, AND THEN WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE NEXT TWO ITEMS, AND WE COULD TAKE OVER THERE WHATEVER YOUR DIRECTION MAY BE ON THAT. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK WE'LL TAKE THEM OUT OF ORDER LIKE THAT. ONE, JUST WOULD START OFF WITH, MR. PATH, WE APPRECIATE THE DUE DILIGENCE OF GOING, CLOSING THE PROJECT OUT, BRINGING THE AVAILABLE MONIES BACK SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHERE IT'S GOING VERSUS JUST HANDLING STUFF IN HOUSE, WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN THE PRACTICE BEFORE. COUNCIL, WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM MR. HOOPER ON ITEM 9F. WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM 9F JUST TO APPROVE AND THEN WE'LL GET INTO THE ACTUAL FUNDING. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 9F AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSE? MOTION PASSES? MR. HOOPER, YOU WANTED TO TAKE ITEM H WITH THAT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> WELL, I THINK YOU COULD GO AHEAD NOW AND G IS ACTUALLY WHAT THAT FUNDING IS GOING TO BE USED FOR IN THE CHANGE ORDER FOR THE PROJECT ON FOURTH STREET. [02:00:02] NOW THAT THAT'S BEEN APPROVED TO TRANSFER THE FUNDS THERE, THEN YOU WOULD APPROVE THE ITEM WHERE THAT FUNDING IS GOING. >> YOU DON'T NEED TO GO OUT OF ORDER. YOU'RE GOOD GOING TO G. >> CORRECT. YES. >> COUNCIL, DO I HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS FOR MR. HOOPER ON ITEM 9G? >> THE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 3, THAT IS, AGAIN, FOR SOMETHING THAT WE DID NOT FORESEE, BUT HAS COME UP ONCE WE GOT INTO THE PROJECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. WE ACTUALLY ONCE AND FLOYD WAS MORE INVOLVED IN THIS THAN I WAS, SO HE CAN PROBABLY ANSWER QUESTIONS BETTER THAN I CAN, BUT I'VE STUTED UP ON IT PRETTY WELL. WE HAD IN THE DESIGN PIECE OF THAT. THERE WAS AN ELEVATION BUST OR A MISALIGNMENT OF WHERE THE ELEVATION WOULD TAKE PLACE TO CAUSE FORCE THAT TO DRAIN, IF YOU WOULD, GRAVITY FLOW. ONCE THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT WAS NEAR COMPLETION, THAT'S WHEN THAT WAS REALIZED. IF THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE BEEN DESIGNED DIFFERENTLY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO DO THIS WORK ANYWAY TO GET THAT TO FLOW OUT OF THERE. IF I'M MISSING ANYTHING, FLOYD, FEEL FREE TO JUMP IN, BUT I THINK THAT WE'RE JUST CLEANING THAT UP SO WE CAN FINISH THAT PROJECT. WE HAVE TO TAKE ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A BLOCK OF EXTRA SEWER LINE TO MAKE THOSE GRADES MATCH. >> THE QUESTION EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW, HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE BEFORE WE RESTORING THE BIG HOLE ON FOURTH STREET? >> I THINK THAT ONCE WE START TO SEE SOME MOVEMENT OUT THERE, I THINK THE CALLS WILL STOP, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A SIX MONTH PROJECT. WEATHER DEPENDING. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? >> WAS THAT INTERNAL ENGINEERING THAT DID THIS PROJECT? >> YES. >> HOW DID WE MISS THAT. HOW DID WE MISS IT? >> I COULD TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON ON THE BACK FLOOR. >> HOW THAT TRANSPIRED WAS THAT THROUGH THE SURVEY, WE HAVE A SURVEY TEAM THAT GOES OUT SURVEYS FOR THE ENGINEERING DESIGN AND THE ENGINEER VERIFIES THAT SURVEY DEPTH. WHAT HAPPENED WAS YOU HAVE A GRAVITY FLOW SEWER THAT GOES FROM POINT A TO POINT B. THEY DETERMINED UNDER THE DESIGN THAT THEY COULD STOP AT THIS POINT B BASED OFF THAT SURVEY DATA. THAT SURVEY DATA WOUND UP THAT THAT WAS HIGHER THAN WHAT WAS COMING IN. GRAVITY FLOW SEWER, YOU HAVE TO GO ON. THERE'S ABILITY TO ADJUST THAT AT THE NEXT MANHOLE. IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT FROM THE COMBINATION BETWEEN THOSE SURVEYORS AND THE ENGINEER CONFIRMING THAT IT WOULD WORK. >> THAT WAS ALL OUR FOLKS? ALL INTERNAL? >> THAT TEAM WAS INTERNAL. >> WE'VE DONE A CORRECTIVE ACTION ON THAT, I WOULD ASSUME TO KEEP THAT FROM OCCURRING AGAIN. LESSON IS LEARNED. >> THAT'S ALWAYS REVIEWED WHEN YOU HAVE THIS TYPE OF SCENARIO WITH THE DESIGN ENGINEER. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR FLOYD OR MR. HOOPER? BEFORE YOU IS ITEM 9G. >> I MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 9G AS PRESENTED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES ON 9G. [Items 9.H. & 9.I.] ITEM NINE 9H. >> 9H COMBINED WITH I, IF YOU WILL, THEY'RE BOTH SAME ITEM. IT'S THE SAME PROCESS, BUT THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. THIS IS NOT TAKING SOMETHING. THIS IS ACTUALLY ASKING FOR A TRANSFER OF RESERVES OF $70,000 TO ADD TO THE PROJECT THAT YOU SEE IN THE FINAL ITEM I, WHICH IS CONCERNING THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE IMPROVEMENTS. WHAT THIS TRANSFER REQUEST IS FOR IS WHEN THEY ORIGINALLY STARTED THIS PROJECT, THEY WERE UNSURE OF WHAT THE TOTAL COST WAS GOING TO BE AND WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO CONTRACT OUT FOR TWO DIFFERENT DISTRICTS ON THERE. IT WOULD BE THE OLDEST PORTIONS, AND I THINK I'VE SEEN THIS PRESENTATION BEFORE. WE HAVE A PRESENTATION PREPARED, BUT I THINK YOU'VE SEEN IT BEFORE, MAYOR. I'LL JUST LEAVE IT UP TO YOU AS TO WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE TO VIEW THAT PRESENTATION AGAIN. BUT BASICALLY, WHAT IT IS, THERE'S TWO DISTRICTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HIRE CONSULTANT TO COME IN AND DO ALL THE TESTING TO SEE WHAT LINES ARE GALVANIZED, WHICH ONES HAVE LEAD IN THEM AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IT TAKES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT EXPERTISE THAN WHAT WE HAVE WITHIN OUR INTERNAL STAFF, WHICH IS, BY THE WAY, DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK INTERNALLY IN THE AREAS THAT THEY COULD TO SAVE US SOME MONEY THERE. THIS WOULD BE TO MOVE $70,000 INTO THE BID, WHICH IS IN 9I TO ADD THE FULL AMOUNT TO THAT CONTRACT SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE ENOUGH TO PAY THEM TO DO THE FULL AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WE WANT THEM TO DO. THAT WAS A LOT TO SAY. I THINK I EXPLAINED IT VERY WELL. >> I THINK YOU SAID IT WELL. LET ME ASK YOU REAL QUICK ON THIS SCOPE OF WORK. A WHILE BACK, WE HAD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD EXTEND PAST THE PUBLIC INTO THE PRIVATE SIDE OF THE YARD. DOES THIS REFLECT ANY OF THAT, [02:05:01] OR ARE WE STILL FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIVES FROM THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE THAT KEEP US ALL ON OUR OWN PIPE? >> THIS IS LEAD AND COPPER RULE THAT AFFECT MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNMENT, SEPARATE FROM WHAT THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY WOULD FACE. FLOYD AGAIN IS THE EXPERT ON THAT AS WELL. >> WELL, IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, MAYOR, ARE YOU WE EVALUATING THE CUSTOMER SIDE? >> CORRECT. ON THE CUSTOMER SIDE, ARE WE REPLACING? >> THIS DOESN'T REPLACE. THIS IS AN EVALUATION. YES, WE ARE EVALUATING BOTH SIDES OF THE NEED. >> YES. THIS IS JUST TO DETERMINE. >> THIS ISN'T REPLACEMENT YET. >> CORRECT. BUT I WOULD ASSUME IF YOU PUT OUT THE STUDY, YOU DO THE EVALUATION, IT LEADS TO THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WOULD PRODUCE THE IMPROVEMENT ON THE CUSTOMER LINE AS WELL AS A RECOMMENDATION. IF WE TAKE THAT STEP HERE, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PULL THAT BACK KNOWING THAT THERE'S SOME CONFLICTING LAW THERE? >> THIS IS THE EVALUATION. THE EPA HAS NOT YET HAD A RULE CHANGE THAT TAKES AWAY THE PRIVATE SIDE. THAT COULD BE IN THE WORKS WITH THE ADMINISTRATION IN WASHINGTON, BUT THAT HASN'T OCCURRED YET. THIS IS THE EVALUATION COMPONENT THAT TELLS YOU WHAT THE SCOPE OF THAT WORK WILL BE. THIS ISN'T COMMITTING YOU TO REPLACEMENT. THIS IS SAYING THIS IS WHAT IT IS BASED OFF THAT IDENTIFICATION REQUIRED BY THE EPA. ONCE YOU GET THAT, THEN BY '26 OR '27. >> '27, I BELIEVE. >> BY '27, THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION IN PLACE TO REPLACE. YOU HAVE THIS TIME WINDOW FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO AFFECT THAT CHANGE IF IT'S GOING TO OCCUR. IF THEY DON'T, THEN YOU WILL HAVE A CONTRACT THAT REFLECTS PRIVATE SIDE. >> WHAT WOULD IT DO IF YOU WERE NOT TO SPEND THE SEWER AND WATER MONIES? BECAUSE THESE ARE THE CITY'S MONIES. WHAT IF YOU DIDN'T EXPEND THAT ON THE CUSTOMER SIDE? WHAT WOULD THAT DO TO YOU IN 2027? YOU REVISE THE SCOPE OF WORK, I GUESS. >> THE SECOND PHASE OF IDENTIFICATION IS WHERE WE'RE IN, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS SCOPE COVERS. WE HAD THE FIRST PHASE THAT WAS DUE BY OCTOBER OF '24. OCTOBER OF 2024, YOU WE HAD THE FIRST PHASE. NOW, WE'RE IN THE SECOND PHASE OF IDENTIFICATION TO MAINTAIN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EPA LEAD AND COPPER RULE AS IT IS CURRENTLY APPROVED AT THE EPA LEVEL. IF THE ADMINISTRATION FACILITATES THAT CHANGE, THEN THAT CAN BE ADJUSTED. BUT RIGHT NOW, IF WE DON'T DO THAT BY THE DEADLINE OF PHASE 2, THEN YOU'D BE IN AN EPA VIOLATION OF OPERATION OF YOUR SYSTEM. >> THANK YOU. >> JUST A QUESTION SINCE WE'RE BUDGET SEASON AND ALL THINGS BUDGET, SINCE THIS IS GOING TO BE A TRANSFER OF FUNDING FROM THE WATER AND SEWER RESERVE FUNDS, ARE WE SHORTING THE RESERVE? WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK AND REPLENISH THAT AT SOME POINT? >> NO, SIR. THIS WAS RELATED TO SOME OTHER PROJECTS THAT I BELIEVE THEY HAD CLOSED OUT. NO, WE WOULDN'T BE LOOKING TO HAVE TO REPLENISH THIS. >> IT'S PART OF THE PROJECTS, GRAYSON, THAT WE CLOSED OUT AND HAD ACCESS, AND SO MOVED OVER TO RESERVES, NOW WE'RE PULLING TO FINISH THE PROJECT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S THE IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH ALL OF THIS IS CAPITALIZING, CLOSING OUT THE PROJECTS. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT LEFT IN RESERVES, SO WE CAN INSTEAD OF DOING A TRANSFER LIKE WE DID ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM FROM A PROJECT, THIS IS JUST TRANSFERRING OUT TO RESERVES. >> YES. THANK YOU. >> JUST TO MAKE SURE GOING BACK TO THE HIGHER LEVEL. THIS LEAD AND COPPER RULING THAT WE SEE, I GUESS, WAS A EPA RULING, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS FORCED OR COURTS OR WHATEVER, BUT IT'S BASICALLY REQUIRING ALL MUNICIPALITIES TO LOOK AND SEE IF YOU STILL HAVE WATER TRANSMITTED BY LEAD PIPES, COPPER PIPES, AND OTHERS THAT THE EPA IS SAYING, YOU'VE GOT TO REPLACE THOSE AT SOME POINT, NOT ONLY ON OUR SIDE, BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE METER? >> CORRECT. >> MAYBE IT WAS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, EVERYBODY GOT THESE LETTERS THAT SAID, JUST OUT OF THE BLUE. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR PIPE IS MADE OUT OF, OR MAYBE THEY'RE SOME OTHER WAY, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING THIS IS NOT OUR CHOICE OF DOING, RIGHT NOW, THE EPA IS FORCING EVERYONE TO PREPARE TO SPEND A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MONEY, I'M GUESSING UNLESS THEY'RE GOING TO PAY FOR IT. >> SOMETHING I MIGHT ADD TO THAT TOO, IT WAS AN INTERESTING NUMBER THAT I LEARNED IS THAT, IN-HOUSE, WE'VE ALREADY DONE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SHANNON, BUT I THINK IS AROUND 46,000 THAT WE'VE DONE INTERNALLY WITH OUR STAFF. I THINK OUT OF THAT THERE WAS AROUND 250 THAT MET THAT REQUIREMENT. IS THAT RIGHT? 252 TO BE EXACT. >> TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY-TWO UNITS? THAT'S ALL THAT MET THE REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF BEING COMPLIANT OR OUT OF COMPLIANCE? [02:10:03] >> OUT OF COMPLIANCE. THE MAJORITY OF THEM WERE NOT. NOW, AGAIN, WHAT THIS IS GOING TO DO IS, THIS IS GOING TO BE IN THE THE OLDEST PORTION OF OUR COMMUNITY WHERE WE'RE WORKING ON THE WHAT THIS CONTRACT HERE HAS IN IT. WE EXPECT TO SEE THAT THAT PERCENTAGE OR THAT RATIO WILL PROBABLY CHANGE A LITTLE BIT. >> I UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO COMPLY, BUT TO PUT A FINER POINT ON IT. IT'S DOING EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE WITH PUBLIC FUNDS THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD TO DO. THE PUBLIC DOES NOT PAY FOR PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS SO I CANNOT DIRECT PUBLIC MONEY TO ANYONE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY IN VIOLATION OF LAW. YET THE EPA IS COMING IN AND DIRECTLY COMPELLING US TO VIOLATE THAT LAW IN ORDER TO IMPROVE PRIVATE PROPERTY ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS SIDE OF THE METER. THAT IS ALL CORRECT? >> I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS. >> FOR THE $818,000, HOW MANY UNITS WILL THEY LOOK AT? IF WE'VE DONE 46,000 INTERNALLY, HOW MANY MORE ARE THERE TO DO AND HOW MANY WILL THIS GET DONE? >> I'M GOING TO HAVE SHANNON SPEAK TO THAT. SHE HAS ALL THESE NUMBERS MEMORIZED. >> THE CONSULTANT HAD COMMENTED THAT THE ESTIMATE FOR A SERVICE LINE INVENTORY CONDUCTED BY THEM WOULD BE $100 PER SERVICE LINE INVENTORY. THAT'S 8,189 SERVICE LINES THAT THEY WILL INSPECT. >> WHEN DOES THIS HAVE TO BE DONE? I KNOW THAT IT WAS SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER OF 2024 WHEN THIS RULE WENT INTO EFFECT. WHEN DOES THIS PHASE 2 HAVE TO BE DONE? >> THE FINAL DEADLINE FOR THE FINAL SERVICE LINE INVENTORY IS NOVEMBER 1 OF 2027. WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO GET IT COMPLETED BY THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE NEXT STEP, WHICH IS ALSO CALLED A SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENT PLAN. PART OF THE NOVEMBER 1, 2027 DEADLINE IS THAT IF YOU HAVE ONE SINGLE GALVANIZED REQUIRING REPLACEMENT OR LEAD LINE IN YOUR SERVICE LINE INVENTORY, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLICLY PUBLISHED REPLACEMENT PLAN FOR HOW TO HANDLE THOSE SERVICE LINES. NOT ONLY IS THE FINAL INVENTORY DUE ON NOVEMBER 1, 2027, THAT REPLACEMENT PLAN IS DUE ON NOVEMBER 1, 2027. IF WE CAN COMPLETE THE ENTIRE PHYSICAL INVENTORY BY THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR, THAT GIVES US ONE FULL CIP CYCLE TO ACTUALLY EVALUATE OUR ABILITY TO DETERMINE WHICH SERVICE LINES WILL BE REPLACED. >> WOULD IT NOT BE BETTER IF WE ONLY HAVE 8,000 LEFT TO GO AHEAD AND FINISH THAT OUT INTERNALLY? >> WE DON'T HAVE 8,000 LEFT. WE HAVE 33,000 LEFT. WE'VE DONE 46,000 RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE 33,000 REMAINING. WE HAVE WATER UTILITIES WORKING ON THOSE SERVICE LINE INSPECTIONS CURRENTLY. THE TWO DISTRICTS WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO HAVE A CONSULTANT ASSIST US WITH HAVE THE OLDEST INFRASTRUCTURE. THEY DON'T HAVE A STANDARD METER BOX FOR US TO LOOK INTO AND DO A TWO-MINUTE INSPECTION. THEY NEED DEDICATED STAFF AND DEDICATED EQUIPMENT TO BE ABLE TO DO THOSE SERVICE LINE INVENTORIES. RUNNING IN PARALLEL WITH OUR STAFF WHO ARE GOING TO DO THE REMAINING OF THE 33,000 MINUS THE 8,189 THAT THE CONSULTANT WOULD PERFORM. >> WOULD IT BE BETTER TO TAKE $300,000 OF THE $818,000 AND STAFF UP AND FINISH THIS UP INTERNALLY AND SAVE $500,000? HAVE WE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT? >> ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT THEY HAVE IS THEY'RE ABLE TO DO THIS. I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT THREE MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR IN THE TIMES WHERE WE'RE NOT HAVING ALL OF OUR MAJOR WATER LEAKS, OR WINTER WEATHER, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT. THERE'S A LITTLE PORTION THAT THEY'RE COMPLETING ALL THIS IN IN ABOUT A THREE OR FOUR MONTH PERIOD. TO STAY AHEAD OF THAT SCHEDULE, WE REALLY NEED TO GET A CONSULTANT ON BOARD. I THINK MORE THAN THAT, JUST AS SHE MENTIONED, IT'S THE EXPERTISE AND THE EQUIPMENT THAT THEY HAVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO TEST THE OLDER LINES. >> 33,000 LEFT. >> 33,000 TOTAL. >> THEY'RE DOING $100 A UNIT. THAT'S WHAT IT IS. THANK YOU. >> WELCOME. >> CAN I DRILL DOWN IN ON THAT? WHAT IS THE TIME FRAME THAT'S COMPELLING US? I UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO OPERATE IN GOOD FAITH, TAKE STEPS TOWARDS ALL THIS, BUT YOU'RE SAYING UNTIL 2026, WE HAVE TO COMPLETE THE REMAINING 33,000 UNITS. >> WELL, TO EXPAND ON HER POINT, WHAT WE NEED FOR THIS TO WORK IS THE ABILITY TO BRING YOU THE DEFINED PROJECT IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET FOR THE CAPITAL. IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE CAN EXPEDITE THIS, AND THAT GOES PART TO WHY THE CONSULTANT NEEDS TO DO THAT PART, BECAUSE OVER THE WINTER, IT WOULD COST MORE FOR US TO DO MAIN BREAKS WITH A CONTRACTOR THAN THIS WORK. WE CAN LEAVE STAFF ON MAIN BREAKS AND THOSE TYPES OF FUNCTIONS THAT ARE ESSENTIAL TO KEEP THE SYSTEM OPERATING. [02:15:01] WHAT SHANNON EXPLAINED EARLIER WAS WHAT WE NEED IS A PROJECT BROUGHT FORWARD IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET FOR WHATEVER THE EPA STILL HAS ON THE RULE AT THE TIME FOR OCT FOR THE NOVEMBER 2027 TIME FRAME. THAT'S WHY IT'S ESSENTIAL BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE TIME TO AWARD AND CONSTRUCT THAT PROJECT. DOES THAT HELP? >> YES. BUT THEN THE RESPECTFUL QUESTION OF WHAT IF WE'RE DOING A STUDY ON THE LEGALITIES OF COMPELLING US TO BREAK THE LAW IN PUTTING PUBLIC MONIES INTO PRIVATE PROPERTY? >> THERE ARE STILL ONGOING EFFORTS BY THE PUBLIC ENTITIES, NOT JUST CITY OF AMARILLO, BUT ALL PUBLIC ENTITIES TO DISCERN THE LEGALITIES OF THE PRIVATE PROPERTY ISSUE, AND THAT'S ACROSS THE STATE AND THE NATION. THAT WILL BE ONGOING. WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS THIS GETS US TO GUARANTEE THAT WE CAN MEET THE DEADLINES AS THEY ARE. WHAT WE CAN'T PREDICT IS IF AND WHEN THAT CHANGE WOULD OCCUR IF THAT OCCURS. WE'RE STAYING ON PATH TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE ON THIS WORST CASE SCENARIO, AND IT CAN ALWAYS BE PULLED BACK, AND THAT WILL BE A BUDGET DISCUSSION NEXT YEAR. >> COUNCIL. >> WHAT IS THE PROBABILITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET AN EXTENSION AT THE EPA? WE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT ARE WE SEEING ANY INDICATIONS OR ANY SIGNS FROM AUSTIN OR DC THAT THIS IS GOING TO EXTEND PAST 2027? >> 2027 STARTS THE PHASE BY WHICH YOU HAVE TO START THE REPLACEMENTS. ALL LEAD SERVICE LINES, ALL LEAD IN YOUR SYSTEM THAT'S NOT WITHIN A RESIDENCE OR WITHIN A COMMERCIAL FACILITY, ACTUALLY HAS TO BE REPLACED BY 2037. >> 2037? >> YOU HAVE 10 YEARS TO REPLACE THEM, BUT THE 2027 DEADLINE IS TO HAVE A COMPLETE SERVICE LINE INVENTORY THAT IS PUBLICLY PUBLISHED, AND YOU NOTIFY THE PUBLIC OF THE COMPOSITION OF THE SERVICE LINES. THEN AFTER THAT, BY 2029, YOU HAVE TO HAVE IMPLEMENTED YOUR SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENT PLAN AND SUBSEQUENTLY YOU PROVIDE THE FIRST UPDATE TO THE EPA REGARDING HOW MANY SERVICE LINE TO HAVE REPLACED. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE REVISION, WHICH WAS IN EFFECT THE LAST TIME I PRESENTED THIS IN FRONT OF COUNCIL. IN THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE IMPROVEMENTS WAS THAT THERE HAD TO BE A MANDATORY 10% REPLACEMENT PER YEAR OVER THE COURSE OF THAT 10 YEARS, ANY GALVANIZED THAT'S DOWNSTREAM OF AN UNKNOWN LEAD COMPOSITION. IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT A GALVANIZED LINE WAS EVER DOWNSTREAM OR NOT DOWNSTREAM OF A LEAD SERVICE LINE, IT STILL IS A REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT. AS STATED BEFORE, OF WHAT WE PRESENTED AND REPORTED TO THE TCQ ON OCTOBER 16 OF 2024, OF THE ENTIRE SERVICE LINES WE HAD REVIEWED AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WHICH WAS ONLY 36,000 AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THERE WERE ONLY 252 GALVANIZED LINES AND ZERO LEAD LINES AT THAT POINT. >> COUNCIL MEMBER, IF I COULD ADD TO ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION OR THIS ADMINISTRATION FACILITATING ANY CHANGE IN THIS APPROACH TO THIS SCHEDULE. UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SEE THAT, WE'RE HEADED DOWN A PATH THAT THIS IS A FIRM SCHEDULE. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE WE'RE THROWING A LOT OF NUMBERS HERE, WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS DONE BY 2027, PHASE 2. THE 33,000 THAT ARE LEFT, THOSE HAVE TO BE IDENTIFIED? >> YES. WHAT WAS IN 2027 WHEN? NOVEMBER 1, 2027. >> WE HAVE BASICALLY TWO YEARS, 2.5 YEARS. WHY IS THERE A RUSH ON THE CIP? EXPLAIN THAT TO ME ONE MORE TIME. I'M NOT DOUBTING. I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THE TIMELINE. >> IF WE CAN HAVE THE COMPLETE SERVICE LINE INVENTORY IN FRONT OF YOU BEFORE THE NEXT ROUND OF THE CIP CYCLE, WHICH WOULD BE IN JULY OF 2026, IS THAT CORRECT? IN JULY OF 2026, WE, THE UTILITIES WHO HAVE BEEN CONDUCTING THE PHYSICAL INVENTORY, WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT SERVICE LINE REPLACEMENT DONE BY JULY OF 2026 AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE A CIP CYCLE TO ACTUALLY START PLANNING FOR THAT REPLACEMENT PLAN, WHICH IS, AGAIN, A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT OF THAT NOVEMBER 1, 2027 DEADLINE. >> ANOTHER CLARIFYING QUESTION, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY ONE LAST. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY-OWNED LEAD AND GALVANIZED LINES, NOT GOING INTO THE PRIVATE. >> NO, SIR. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PRIVATE SIDE, TOO. >> IF WE HAD TO REPLACE THOSE, [02:20:01] THE CITY, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE BY 2036? >> 2037. >> 2037. WHY WOULD WE HAVE A CIP ISSUE BY 2027 IF IT'S NOT NEEDED UNTIL 2036? >> WITH THE CAVEAT, THAT 10% OF THOSE HAVE TO BE REPLACED EACH YEAR SO WE HAVE TO START THE PROGRAM. >> I THOUGHT THEY REMOVED THAT 10% METRIC IN THE REVISION. >> THEY MODIFIED THE 10% METRIC. YOU HAVE TO GIVE THE EPA AN ANNUAL REPORT AFTER 2029 STATING WHAT WORK YOU HAVE CONDUCTED IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME, FROM 2029-2037. >> WHAT I THINK I HEAR YOU SAYING? WE'D HAVE THE OPTION. I GUESS THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO BE PREPARED TO GIVE US THE INFORMATION, AND IF THAT'S GONE, EVEN IF WE GET TO THAT POINT. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO BE ADVERSARIAL. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING. I'M JUST SEEING IF WE HAVE MORE RUNWAY TO USE THESE DOLLARS IN A MORE PRESSING MANNER THAN THEY ARE TODAY. I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE IF WE COULD DO IT INTERNALLY, GET THE EQUIPMENT THAT WAS NEEDED AND SEE A PRICE COMPARISON OF THAT BECAUSE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO USE THAT IN OTHER PROJECT. I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT THAT ENTAILS IF IT BECAME PART OF OUR ARSENAL OF TOOLS. IF IT WAS A COUPLE YEAR DEAL WHERE WE BROUGHT FOUR OR FIVE FTES ON TO GET THIS DONE IF WE HAD THAT RUNWAY BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE IF IT IS GOING TO BE ILLEGAL, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT SOME MECHANISM TO IDENTIFY HOW PRIVATE AND PUBLIC MONIES ARE SPENT. THAT IS MY OPINION, IN MY OPINION ONLY, NOT ANYONE ELSE ON THIS COUNCIL, BUT I THINK THERE COULD BE SOME COST SAVINGS HERE. >> YEAH, AND WE WOULD HAVE TO, OF COURSE, GET MORE FTES, WHICH IS PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS AS WELL. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE AS WELL HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS TO GET THOSE COMPLETED THAT THEY'VE DONE SO FAR, AND I BELIEVE IT IS FROM EARLY 2024. >> WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE SUMMER MONTHS IN 2024 AND IN 2025. IN THE SUMMER MONTHS OF 2024, OVER THE COURSE OF TWO MONTHS, WE CONDUCTED 20,000 PHYSICAL LINE INVENTORIES, AND SINCE MAY OF THIS YEAR, WE'VE CONDUCTED ANOTHER 26,000 SERVICE LINE INVENTORIES IN '23, I APOLOGIZE. THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE GO THROUGH THIS, WE HAVE ALL OF WATER UTILITIES ENGAGED IN THIS. WE HAVE OPERATORS PERFORMING THESE INSPECTIONS. WE HAVE MAINTENANCE UTILITY MECHANICS, WE HAVE ELECTRICIANS, CUSTODIANS. THE PROBLEM WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO IS ONCE YOU START GETTING INTO THE WINTER MONTHS, THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE DOWN PARTS OF THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT TO DO THE CRITICAL MAINTENANCE PIECES FOR THOSE FOR THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT. SAME WITH OTHER PARTS, WE WILL ABSOLUTELY START SEEING AN UPTICK IN THINGS LIKE OUR WATER MAIN BREAKS, WHICH BECOMES AN IMMEDIATE CUSTOMER SERVICE NEED. TO PROVIDE THAT TIMELINE, WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH STAFFING AVAILABILITY TO SUPPORT THESE THROUGH THE WINTER MONTHS TO SUPPORT DOING THE CUSTOMER SERVICE INVENTORIES THROUGH THE WINTER MONTHS. AGAIN, IF WE COULD HAVE THIS PROCESS AND PUSH THIS WHOLE PROCESS FORWARD, HAVING THE CONSULTANT CONDUCT 8,000 OF THOSE INSPECTIONS, WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN COMPLETE THE REMAINING OF THE ROUGHLY 23,000 INSPECTIONS OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT SEVEN WEEKS AND HAVE THE WHOLE THING COMPLETED AND HAVE A FULL SERVICE LINE INVENTORY TO HANDOVER ON JANUARY 1 TO START MAKING DECISIONS ON WHAT THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE. >> WE APPRECIATE THAT TIMELINE. HOWEVER, I THINK WHAT COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT'S DRIVING AT IS JANUARY 1 IS EIGHT MONTHS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. WE DO HAVE THE RUNWAY THERE OF MAYBE SALVAGING THE EXTERNAL MONIES I WOULDN'T TELL YOU I UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH IS GOING TO WHAT OR WHAT YOU'RE IN HOUSING OR OR NOT, BUT IF HIS NUMBERS ARE VALID, IT'S A $500,000 CREDIT TO TRY TO INTERNALIZE ALL OF IT. WHAT IF YOU HAD A 75% STUDY BY NEXT BUDGET CYCLE, AND WE CAN IDENTIFY EXISTING RESERVES OR IN THIS CASE, EXCESS RESERVE? THEN WE JUST EARMARK THOSE IN ORDER TO GO AHEAD AND COMPLETE THE INTERNAL, KNOWING THAT THE EPA THING IS NOT FULLY LEGAL IN A LOT OF OPINIONS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF IT. BUT WE ARE IN GOOD FAITH COMPLYING. WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE FULL STUDY COMPLETED, BUT WE DID GO AHEAD AND TAKE ACTION THROUGHOUT YOUR CIP BUDGET IN ORDER TO EARMARK IT? >> I THINK THAT MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW IS JUST THAT I LIKE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE DOING THEIR DILIGENCE NOW TO GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF, BECAUSE THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS COME BEFORE COUNCIL AND SAY, HEY, HERE'S A BUNCH OF FINES WE HAVE OR HERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T GET COMPLETED OR HERE'S SOMETHING. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE PUBLIC OR WITH YOU BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THIS ADVENTURE WE'RE TAKING NOW. [02:25:04] PLUS, IF YOU TAKE AND JUST THINK ABOUT THIS AFTER YOU MADE THOSE COMMENTS, MR. PRESCOTT, IF YOU TAKE THE AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME THAT WE'VE SPENT, THE HOURS, THE EQUIPMENT, AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DO, THERE'S A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, TOO. IT'S TAKING AWAY FROM OUR ABILITIES TO DO OUR OTHER JOBS WITHIN THAT DEPARTMENT, TOO. THERE'S A GIVE AND TAKE THERE AS WELL. I RECOMMEND THAT WE GO WITH THE APPROACH THAT THEY HAVE RECOMMENDED TO KEEP US MOVING DOWN THE TRACK FOR COMPLIANCE WITH EPA. >> ANYTHING FURTHER, COUNCIL? YES, SIR. >> FROM WHAT WE'VE LEARNED SO FAR, WHEN WE GET TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF REPLACING WHAT WE HAVE TO REPLACE, AND I KNOW WE STILL HAVE TO BUT IF THE TRENDS HOLD OUT AS TO WHAT WE'VE FOUND SO FAR, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT CLOSER TO $1 MILLION IN SPENDING OR $100 MILLION IN SPENDING TO REPLACE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REPLACE? >> I DON'T THINK WE'LL KNOW THOSE NUMBERS UNTIL WE HAVE THIS PROJECT COMPLETED. >> WELL, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO PIN YOU DOWN. I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK IN THE FUTURE, BECAUSE WHAT MY CONCERN IS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ALL THESE WOULD HAVE BEEN THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE REPLACED OTHERWISE IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS. WE WOULDN'T HAVE REPLACED THEM ON THE PRIVATE SIDE. THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE PAID FOR OTHER TAXPAYERS. IF IT DOES GET TO THAT, IF IT WINDS UP BEING UPHELD. BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A IDEA BECAUSE MY THING IS JUST GOING BACK TO LIKE THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE PASSES SOMETHING THAT THEY FORCE US TO DO, BUT THEN IT HAS AN IMPACT ON OUR FUNDING. HERE'S THE EPA, AGAIN, FORCING US TO DO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SEE, WE'RE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THIS. EVERYBODY ABOVE US CAN DO ALL THESE THINGS AND THEY CAN TELL US WHAT TO DO, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO PAYING FOR THEM, IT'S THE TAXPAYERS THAT HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM. I THINK THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE MISS OUT. WE HAVE NO I'M NOT GOING TO SAY, LO, WE HAVE VERY LITTLE LOCAL CONTROL ON ALL THESE THINGS TO GET FORCED ON US, BUT THE GOVERNMENTS ARE NOT COMING TO OUR RESCUE. WE'VE GOT TAXPAYERS HAVE TO FIGURE THIS OUT. I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET IT I GUESS THERE'S NO MONEY COMING FROM THE EPA TO SUPPORT THIS. >> I'LL TELL YOU THIS, AND I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE I MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION A MOMENT AGO. WE AGREE WITH YOU GUYS 100%. WE HOPE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CHANGES BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. THAT WOULD BE MY ULTIMATE HOPE THAT THERE'S SOMEONE THAT SEES THAT THEY'RE GIVING US UNFUNDED MANDATES THAT WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SO THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE TO DO THAT ON THE PRIVATE SIDE. BUT STILL, IT IS WHAT IT IS, AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF WHAT'S IN FRONT OF A SCHOOL. GO AHEAD FLOYD. >> COUNCILMEMBER, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS FOR A STAFF MEMBER TO PROJECT JUST ESTIMATE WILD GUESS BASICALLY OF WHAT THE COST WOULD BE. I'LL DO THAT FOR>.. >> I'VE GIVEN YOU TWO VERY EXTREME RANGES BECAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK, DO WE THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE I'M GOING TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT, OR IS IT WHEN WE GET TO CIP BUDGET TO DO THIS, I CAN DO THAT FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU CAN POINT OUT TO ME AFTER I RETIRE AND SAY HE WAS WRONG. >> MAKE ALL THE PROMISES YOU WANT. BUT AT MINIMUM, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE BASED OFF THE RATIO AND GOING INTO THE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS, THAT 252 RATIO IS GOING TO MUCH HIGHER. YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A MINIMUM OF $1 MILLION PROJECT AND YOU COULD SEE AS HIGH AS $10 MILLION PRETTY EASILY. IT'S GOING TO BE IN THAT RANGE FROM THOSE PARAMETERS THAT YOU SAID. WITH THE PRIVATE LINES INCLUDED, IT COULD GO TO THE $20 MILLION, $30 MILLION BASED OFF OF WHAT'S ON THE PRIVATE SIDE BECAUSE WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT'S OVER THERE. >> THE PRIVATE SIDE, WE WOULD HAVE NEVER DONE THAT. THAT'S NOT ON THE PUBLIC SIDE, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE HAD TO BEEN REPLACED IN THIS NEXT TIME PERIOD, OR DO WE HAVE THINGS THAT ARE IN WORSE SHAPE THAN THE LEAD AND COPPER PIPES THAT WE WOULD REPLACE BEFORE THEN? >> FROM MY OPINION ON THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE FROM ALL THE WAY BACK INTO THE '90S. WHAT'S BEEN OMITTED FROM THE LEAD AND COPPER RULE IS THIS INVENTORY. WE'VE NEVER KNOWN FOR SURE WHAT THE SCOPE AND LEVEL OF THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN CHALLENGED. THE ISSUE IN FLINT, MICHIGAN BROUGHT THIS TO LIGHT FOR ALL THE NATION THAT WE NEEDED TO KNOW WHAT THIS IS. I SEE BOTH ADMINISTRATIONS AND ANY FUTURE ADMINISTRATION NEEDING TO KNOW WHAT THIS INVENTORY IS. THEN IT GOES BACK TO HOW THE POLITICIANS DETERMINE WHAT THAT LEAD AND COPPER RULE RESULT IS AT THE END. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A PROJECT BETWEEN $1 MILLION TO $10 MILLION, AND IT'LL REFINE AS WE GET THIS INFORMATION. THANK YOU. >> WHAT PENALTIES AND FINES HAS THE EPA PUT OUT THAT IF YOU DON'T HIT THEIR BENCHMARKS EXACTLY ON THE DATES, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING A 12-YEAR PERIOD. HAVE THEY PUT OUT ANYTHING THAT SAYS YOU''LL FINE PENALIZED IF YOU DON'T HIT OUR BENCHMARKS? >> THE PENALTIES HAVE NOT BEEN DEFINED AS OF YET. [02:30:05] >> IS TCEQ ADMINISTERING THESE OR IS IT CDBA? >> THE INVENTORY IS REPORTED TO THE TCEQ. WE'VE ALREADY REPORTED THE INVENTORY, THE INITIAL INVENTORY TO TCEQ. WE HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY DEFINED AS COMPLIANT ON THE TCEQ'S WEBSITE RIGHT NOW. >> IS THIS IN AUSTIN OR IS THIS LOCAL? >> THAT'S AUSTIN. >> IN WHAT GROUP? >> I WOULD HAVE TO GET YOU THAT INFORMATION. I DON'T KNOW RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >> ARE WE SEEING ANY GUIDANCE AT ALL ON THIS? >> THEY SENT US A FLYER. >> MINIMAL. THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THEIR HANDS AROUND IT, TOO? YES. THEY'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT AMARILLO AS MUCH AS THEY'RE GOING TO BE WORRIED ABOUT AUSTIN, DALLAS, HOUSTON, THOSE BIGGER METROPLEXES. I THINK WE HAVE RUNWAY. >> YOU HAVE A DIRECTION YOU WANT TO LEAD THE COUNCIL, SIR? >> I WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT A LITTLE LONGER. I'D PUT IT ON THE BACK BURNER FOR 60 DAYS AND HAVE SOME MORE CONVERSATION. >> I LIKE IT. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ARE GOING TO DEFINE ANY BETTER THE TERM UNFUNDED ILLEGAL MANDATE, OR MAYBE JUST UNFUNDED MANDATE. WE DON'T KNOW. BUT WE'RE ASKED TO SPEND $800,000 TODAY. COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT IS LEADING TOWARDS TAKING NO ACTION ON THESE TWO ITEMS. DO I HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I'D LIKE TO JUST CLARIFY, I'M NOT AGAINST PEOPLE HAVING SAFE DRINKING WATER ANYTHING. I THINK THE WHOLE COUNCIL WANTS SAFETY. I THINK WE ALL WANT ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE, BUT I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLORE THIS A LITTLE MORE. >> I THINK IN THE DUE DILIGENCE OF THE WATER BEING AS CLEAN AS POSSIBLE AND THE EXISTING LINES REMAINING IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE HOME OR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING WHERE THAT LEAVES PEOPLE THAT NOW WE HAVE REPLACED THEIR SERVICE LINE, AND I GUESS WE STOP AT THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING. BUT THERE'S NO LAW THAT SAYS THAT'S WHERE WE SHOULD STOP BECAUSE THE LAW SAYS WE SHOULD STOP ON OUR SIDE OF THE LINE. >> CAN WE ASK FOR SOME CLARITY ON DIRECTION ON WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE, WHAT OTHER INFORMATION YOU WOULD LIKE US TO EXPLORE IN THAT 60-DAY TIME PERIOD OR WHATEVER THAT TIME PERIOD IS? >> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. >> I THINK IT'D BE MY RECOMMENDATION TO FURTHER LOOK AND SEE WHAT WE WOULD NEED IN TERMS OF FTE. HOW MANY STAFF MEMBERS? I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SAID THAT WE HAD STAFF THAT WORKED ON THIS. WAS IT AN OVERTIME ISSUE? THAT WOULD BE ONE THING I'D WANT TO LOOK AT. DID WE BURN $818,000 IN OVERTIME FROM MISSION DRIFT OR WERE THESE INDIVIDUALS ABLE TO WORK ON IT AND STILL MEET THEIR REQUIREMENTS? I WOULD WANT TO KNOW WHAT ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT IS NEEDED TO PERFORM THIS TASK IN-HOUSE. I WOULD WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY FTES IT WOULD TAKE TO COMPLETE THIS TASK. I WOULD LIKE SOME IDEA ON CIP, BETWEEN $1 MILLION AND $10 MILLION, WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. THEN FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME FURTHER IDEA FROM TCQ AS THIS THING FLESHES ITSELF OUT? >> THIS WILL BE MY REQUEST. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD TO THIS, AND I WOULD GO BACK TO YOUR DIRECTION. BUT REMEMBER, IF WE'RE OUTSOURCING THIS, THIS IS ONLY A TEMPORARY EXPENSE. UNLESS WE'RE PLANNING ON TAKING ON FTES, THEY DO THE WORK AND THEN LETTING THEM GO, THEN WE'VE GOT SOME TYPE OF PERMANENT EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. >> ABSOLUTELY NOT. IT SHOULD BE A CONTRACT POSITION IF WE CAN DO THAT WHERE THEY KNOW WHEN THIS TASK IS DONE. YOU MIGHT FIND SOME INCREDIBLE INDIVIDUALS THAT REPLACE OTHERS THAT ARE LOW PERFORMING, BUT WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY EXPECTATION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO RETIRE DOING THIS JOB. ONCE THE TASK IS DONE, WE'D BE DONE. >> I WOULD OFFER ONE OTHER OPTION THERE. I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE CONTRACTS FOR MAIN BREAK REPLACEMENTS AND DIFFERENT THINGS BECAUSE WE UTILIZE PLUMBING CONTRACTORS BECAUSE WE ARE CHRONICALLY UNDERSTAFFED FOR THE AMOUNT OF MAIN BREAKS THAT WE SEE, PLUS WE HAVE THEM AT DIFFERENT TIMES, WHERE IF YOU HAD MULTIPLE OR YOU HAVE A REAL COLD FREEZE. NOT SAYING WE WANT TO GET AWAY FROM SUBCONTRACTORS, BUT I WOULD HOPE THAT IF THIS TASK WAS COMPLETED, THEN WE WOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL STAFF TO GET TO THE MAIN BREAKS, WHICH I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE CONTINUAL ISSUES THERE AS WE CONTINUE TO AGE. >> TRACKING. GOT IT. I KNOW IT'S A LOT, BUT MR. PATH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO REDIRECT ON THAT? ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO OFFER? AT THIS TIME, WE'VE GIVEN SOME GOOD DIRECTION, MR. PRESCOTT OR COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT. I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE INSIDE EXPERTISE. >> JUST BEFORE WE CLOSE THE DOOR ON IT, AS COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT SAYS, ONE FINAL QUESTION. ANY OVERWHELMING NEGATIVE OF A 60-DAY WAIT PERIOD, ANYTHING THAT'S DETRIMENTAL OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD SAY, BOY, THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY GOING TO DO THIS, THAT OR ARE WE OKAY WITH LOOKING AT IT A LITTLE BIT LONGER? >> I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH THAT. [02:35:05] THIS GIVES US A CHANCE TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE EVALUATION AND BRING YOU BACK SOME MORE INFORMATION. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING. >> THANK YOU. >> WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE NO ACTION ON 9H AND 9I. WOULD ASK FOR MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADJOURN, PLEASE. >> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND A SECOND. YOU'RE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, GUYS. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.