3.B. PUBLIC HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026 BUDGET: This Budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year’s budget by $8,475,975 which is an 11.77% increase from last year’s budget. The property tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year is $1,245,224.

[3.B. PUBLIC HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026 BUDGET: This Budget will raise more revenue from property taxes than last year’s budget by $8,475,975 which is an 11.77% increase from last year’s budget. The property tax revenue to be raised from new property added to the tax roll this year is $1,245,224. ]

STORRS. IF YOU'D COME UP AND RUN THAT ONE AND WE'LL PICK UP 3.A AT THE END.

MS. CITY SECRETARY, IF YOU'LL REMIND ME NOT TO SKIP OVER 3.A WHEN WE FINISH.

YES, SIR. AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR CALLING THIS SPECIAL MEETING FOR US TO WRAP UP KIND OF THE END OF OUR, BUDGET SEASON, AND TO DO KIND OF THE FINAL STEPS IN APPROVING THE BUDGET FOR OUR FISCAL YEAR 2025 AND 2026 AND TO APPROVE OUR PROPERTY TAX RATE FOR 2025. SO ITEM 3.B IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 BUDGET AND FOR COUNCIL'S AWARENESS. STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO CONDUCT ONE PUBLIC HEARING.

[00:15:04]

IF COUNCIL IS LOOKING TO APPROVE A TAX RATE THAT IS HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE.

AND SO THE TAX RATE THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED TO SUPPORT THE BUDGET THAT'S IN PLACE IS HIGHER THAN THAT.

AND WE ALSO ARE REQUIRED TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET.

WE HAVE POSTED NOTICE IN THE AMARILLO GLOBE NEWSPAPER THAT WE ARE HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS TODAY.

SO THIS FIRST ONE HERE IS FOR THE BUDGET. AND I DO HAVE A VERY BRIEF PRESENTATION.

IT'S THE SAME PRESENTATION FROM LAST WEEK. IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE ME TO RUN THROUGH IT QUICKLY, WE CAN. AND THEN I WOULD ASK MAYOR IF YOU COULD CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET AND THEN TWO ITEMS AFTER THIS, THEN WE'LL START ON THE VOTING PORTIONS FOR APPROVING THE BUDGET.

SO REAL QUICK, I'VE GOT A PRESENTATION GOING OVER THE HIGHLIGHTS RELATED TO THE PROPOSED 25-26 BUDGET.

SO WE DO HAVE FUNDING FOR A NEW POLICE OFFICER AND A NEW FIREFIGHTER.

WE HAVE RAISES FOR OUR POLICE AND OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT, 4% FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, 3% FOR FIRE.

WE HAVE OVER $30 MILLION IN STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET.

WE DO HAVE A NEW DANGEROUS STRUCTURE REMOVAL TEAM INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN OUR COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE CONTINUED ANNUAL ANNUAL FUNDING FOR PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS.

WE ALSO HAVE $36 MILLION DOLLARS IN WATER AND SEWER PROJECTS, WITH $25 MILLION OF THAT COMING FOR AS GRANT FUNDING TO START BEGINNING THE DESIGN PROCESS OF OUR WASTEWATER FACILITIES.

WE HAVE CONTINUED FUNDING FOR THE NEW WOMEN'S CLINIC AT OUR PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF ABOUT $1.4 MILLION.

THERE'S ALSO 2% MERIT RAISES INCLUDED FOR OUR CIVILIANS, AND A PARTIAL IMPLEMENTATION OF A PAY STUDY FOR OUR CIVILIANS.

AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE INCLUDED A 70% TMRS COLA FOR RETIREES.

SO HIGH LEVEL ON OUR EXPENDITURES, OUR CURRENT 24-25 APPROVED BUDGET IS JUST OVER $499 MILLION.

THAT HAS INCREASED BY $57.7 MILLION TO $557 MILLION IN OUR PROPOSED BUDGET.

NOW, I JUST TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE OF BIG THINGS THAT DO MAKE UP THAT DIFFERENCE.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST ITEMS IS THAT $25 MILLION IN GRANT FUNDING THAT WE'RE GETTING TO START THE DESIGN OF THE WASTEWATER FACILITY.

SO THAT'S A HUGE WIN. THAT'S NOT COMING OUT OF OUR LOCAL TAX DOLLARS.

THAT'S GRANT FUNDING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO RECEIVE.

WE ALSO HAVE $5 MILLION IN GRANT FUNDING THAT'S COMING FOR A NEW EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER.

SO ANOTHER GREAT THING THAT'S IN ADDITION TO OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR, BUT NOT COMING OUT OF OUR LOCAL TAX DOLLARS.

A COUPLE OF OTHER ITEMS ON HERE. WE DO HAVE THE ONGOING PARAMEDIC TRAINING INCLUDED FOR OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT.

AND WE DO HAVE THE CONTINUED DEDICATED FUNDING FOR THE DUMPSTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM THAT WAS STARTED LAST YEAR.

AND THAT'S CONTINUING ON JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET THOSE DUMPSTERS REPLACED ON A TIMELY FASHION.

SO ON THE REVENUE SIDE, IF YOU LOOK AT OUR CURRENT YEAR APPROVED BUDGET OF $468 MILLION, WE INCREASED IT BY $70.6 MILLION TO GET TO THE $538.7 MILLION. SO THE BIGGEST COMPONENTS OF THAT, AGAIN, I TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE $30 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDING THAT WE'RE GETTING FOR THE WASTEWATER DESIGN AND FOR THE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER.

WE ALSO ARE SEEING SOME GROWTH IN SALES TAX. SO WE'VE GOT OUR SALES TAX UP ABOUT $2.7 MILLION PROPERTY TAXES.

WE'RE LOOKING TO GET ABOUT $3.8 MILLION ADDITIONAL FOR OPERATIONS.

THEN WE DO HAVE INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH.

THEIR RATES ARE GOING UP BY THE, BY CPI, WHICH WE HAVE IN 3% FOR THIS UPCOMING YEAR.

AND THEN OUR BUILDING SAFETY FEES WILL BE GROWING BY THAT SAME 3% JUST TO KEEP UP WITH CPI AS WELL.

WE DO HAVE INCLUDED A $2 INCREASE TO OUR GREEN FEES OUT AT OUR GOLF COURSES, AND THEN ON SOLID WASTE, I MENTIONED THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THE DEDICATED DUMPSTER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM, AND WE'RE ALSO DOING THE NEW DANGEROUS STRUCTURE REMOVAL TEAM.

AND THOSE ARE GOING TO BE FUNDED WITH A SLIGHT INCREASE TO OUR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES.

THEY'RE GOING UP ABOUT $0.92 PER MONTH, AND THEN OUR COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS ARE GOING TO SEE A 26.1% INCREASE.

ON WATER AND SEWER, WE'RE LOOKING AT INCREASING ALL RATES BY THE 5% TO HELP WITH SOME CAPITAL PROJECTS.

AND THEN ON DRAINAGE. WE ARE NOT LOOKING TO DO ANY KIND OF CHANGES TO THOSE USER FEES THIS YEAR.

SO WHAT COMES NEXT? AS MENTIONED WE ARE ASKING THAT YOU ALL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY RELATED TO THIS BUDGET TO HEAR FROM

[00:20:03]

OUR CITIZENS. AND THEN AFTER THAT WE WILL DO ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPERTY TAXES, AND THEN WE WILL START WITH THE FINAL APPROVALS FOR BOTH OF THESE ITEMS TO BE IN PLACE BY OCTOBER 1ST.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER? AND I CERTAINLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE ANYONE THAT WANTS MORE INFORMATION. THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT INFORMATION. OUR ENTIRE CITY BUDGET IS POSTED OUT AT AMARILLO.GOV QUESTIONS COUNCIL? AND THE EASY LINK ON AMARILLO.GOV. WHERE'S THE EASIEST WAY TO NAVIGATE TO GET TO THAT BUDGET? YES, SIR. SO IF YOU GO TO AMARILLO.GOV, IF YOU SCROLL DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, THERE'S A SECTION THAT SAYS PUBLIC NOTICES.

IF YOU CLICK ON PUBLIC NOTICES, IT'S ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS THAT POPS UP.

THERE'S ALSO SOME INFORMATION ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES AND HOW TO CALCULATE THEM.

AND SOME OF THE IMPACT RELATED TO IT. OKAY REALLY GOOD.

ANYTHING FURTHER FOR MRS. STORRS GUYS? NO? OKAY THANK YOU MA'AM.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 3.B TO HAVE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 3.B.

YES, SIR. MR. FISHER, IF YOU COME FORWARD. I'M REALLY NOT DON'T HAVE AN OPINION FOR OR AGAINST, BUT, LIKE, I JUST SAW ONE ITEM THAT CAME UP ON THE SCREEN WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE A SOME KIND OF UNSAFE STRUCTURE REMOVAL.

WAS THAT ABOUT $5 MILLION? IS THAT HOW MUCH THAT WAS? YEAH LET'S GET YOU A LITTLE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

IT'S JUST A FUND THAT GOES INTO I BELIEVE IT'S HELD IN THE CITY MARSHAL'S OFFICE SO THAT THEY CAN REMOVE HAZARDOUS STRUCTURES. SO WE ONCE WE CONDEMN A STRUCTURE, IT BECOMES THE TAXPAYER'S OBLIGATION TO GO AND TEAR THAT STRUCTURE DOWN.

AND SO IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONIES, THEN THOSE STRUCTURES JUST SIT AND THEY BECOME.

SURE. CRIME, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALS AND FURTHER HAZARDS.

SO, STAFF MR. CITY MANAGER, DO YOU KNOW OFFHAND WHAT THAT WHAT THAT AMOUNT WAS THAT FUNDED THAT DANGEROUS STRUCTURES? DONNY, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT? YEAH I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE EXACT AMOUNT WAS WITHOUT GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT NOTES, BUT I CAN TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PROGRAM. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE TO GET THE EQUIPMENT THAT IT TAKES TO DO THAT IN-HOUSE INSTEAD OF HIRING OUT CONTRACTORS TO DO THAT.

THIS WOULD BE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS WHERE WE HAVE A PRETTY LARGE BACKLOG OF DANGEROUS STRUCTURES THAT ARE OUT WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO THAT'S THE EQUIPMENT, TWO PERSONNEL AND SOLID WASTE TO RUN THAT PROGRAM, PLUS A PERSON IN THE MARSHAL'S OFFICE AS WELL TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE WORK FOR THAT.

IT'S A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO GET US OUT THERE AND GETTING SOME OF THESE DANGEROUS STRUCTURES REMOVED FROM.

OF COURSE, THAT HELPS WITH THE BLIGHT AND OTHER THINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY. YEAH SO I MEAN, I'LL JUST ASK IF YOU GOT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON MAYBE WHAT THAT MONEY'S GOING TOWARDS AND THEN WE CAN GET YOU THAT EXACT AMOUNT. I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT AMOUNT.

I WANT TO SAY IT WAS $500,000 OR $600,000 IS WHAT IT EQUATED TO, BUT MAYBE I'M WRONG.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S CORRECT. NO. YEAH. WE WON'T GUESS THEN.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT WAS ON OUR POWERPOINT.

MS. STORRS. I THINK IT WAS ON THE POWERPOINT.

LET'S GO BACK THEN. MS. CITY SECRETARY, CAN YOU SCROLL BACK TO THAT PRESENTATION? THERE'S A BUNCH OF BOXES ON THE SCREEN. I THINK IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THERE'S NO AMOUNT. IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THAT ONE. THERE'S NO AMOUNT. IT JUST SAYS NEW DANGER, STRUCTURAL REMOVAL TEAM GET THE AMOUNT FOR MR. FISHER. WE'LL GET THAT. I WAS JUST THE ONE THING THAT I WAS THINKING OF IS LET'S GIVE THESE FIRST RESPONDERS.

THAT RAISES. LET'S GIVE THE CITY EMPLOYEES THEIR RAISES.

AND I FEEL LIKE THOSE UNSAFE STRUCTURES, THAT STUFF WOULD PAY FOR ITSELF BECAUSE YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO IMPOUND THAT LAND AND YOU'RE GOING TO SELL IT.

SO AND IT SEEMS LIKE YOU COULD KEEP THAT ALL IN ONE GL ENTRY WHERE YOU COULD YOU SELL THE LAND AND THEN IT PAYS FOR EQUIPMENT.

BUT I FEEL LIKE GETTING FIRST RESPONDERS THERE RAISES THAT YOU GUYS HAD STARTED WITH.

AND CITY EMPLOYEES ARE RAISES WHICH THE AMOUNT YOU STARTED WITH IS PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANT THAN CREATING SOMETHING THAT'S INVASIVE.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO RUN OVER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY.

BUT IF WE DO, I FEEL LIKE THAT PAYS FOR ITSELF BY TAKING THEIR PROPERTY AND SELLING IT TO MAKE UP FOR, BECAUSE THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAVE THE MONEY. SO WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO PUT A LIEN ON IT. AND WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS CALL IT WHEN YOU TAKE SOMEBODY'S LAND FROM THEM TO PAY FOR WHATEVER THEY OWE.

BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT SHOULD PAY FOR ITSELF. YES, SIR.

SO I THINK WE MAY HAVE A LITTLE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

YES, IT WAS ABOUT $1.8 MILLION IN TOTAL, WITH ALL OF THE EQUIPMENT THAT IS NEEDED FOR IT, AS WELL AS IT IS THREE ADDITIONAL SOLID WASTE EMPLOYEES. WE HAVE ONE NEW CITY MARSHAL EMPLOYEE THAT'S GOING TO BE HELPING KIND OF MANAGE THE PROJECT IS OR I'M SORRY, THE PROPERTIES AS THEY COME IN, THEY WILL ALL GO THROUGH A FORMAL PROCESS.

AND AS A REMINDER TO COUNCIL AS WELL THESE ARE BEING FUNDED OUT OF AN INCREASE TO THE SOLID WASTE FEES TO COVER THIS.

[00:25:04]

YEAH SO IT IS I SAID TAXPAYER, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY RATEPAYER YOU KNOW, THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT, BUT THERE ARE OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT DO AFFECT CONDEMNATION AND BLIGHT AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH OUR TAX RATES AND SO. MR. HOOPER, YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ADD? WELL, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING THIS PROGRAM NOW, BUT WE'RE HIRING CONTRACTORS TO DO THE WORK.

THIS IS THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY TO DO THIS AS FAR AS MONEY IS CONCERNED. I CREATED A PROGRAM LIKE THIS BEFORE WHEN I WAS IN PAMPA, AND IT WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL. WE WERE ABLE TO TAKE DOWN WAY MORE STRUCTURES THIS WAY AND GET THEM IN A SAFE POSITION BY USING AN INTERNAL PROGRAM WITH INTERNAL STAFF RATHER THAN HIRING CONTRACTORS.

RIGHT. AND GO TO PAMPA AND LOOK AT PAMPA. I'VE BEEN BACK THERE.

I GRADUATED FROM PAMPA AND THAT TOWN IS IN TERRIBLE SHAPE.

COUNCILMAN TIPPS YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? NO, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, MR. FISHER, MOST OF THESE PROPERTIES, WHEN THEY ARE TAKEN DOWN, THE PROPERTY VALUE IS NOT THAT HIGH TO RECOUP THE COST FOR THIS.

SO WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL THESE NUMBERS. I AGREE, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO BE EFFICIENT ON THIS.

BUT THE HAZARD THAT IT INCREASES WITH OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, THE FIRES THAT ALSO ARE A HAZARD TO THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS.

AND IT'S SPREADING. THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST REASONS.

SO I MEAN, TEARING THESE STRUCTURES DOWN IS NOT JUST THAT COST OR TRYING TO RECOUP THAT COST BY THE SALE OF THAT LAND, BUT IT'S ALSO REDUCING, MINIMIZING THE HAZARD TO SURROUNDING CITIZENS.

SO THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO THIS. IT'S NOT JUST COST AND COST RECOVERY.

THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER IN THERE. BUT TO YOUR POINT, THESE THE VALUES OF THIS PROPERTY, OF THESE, OF THESE, IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO COVER THAT TYPICALLY.

YEAH AND I WOULD ADD TO THAT, I THINK THAT WE DO SEE SOME BENEFITS WHEN WE'RE TAKING THESE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THESE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS WHERE THEY ARE COORDINATED, THEY'RE FUNDRAISING, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IMPROVING EVERYTHING FROM PARKS, STREET LIGHTS, SIDEWALKS, THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON.

AND WHEN YOU LEAVE A STRUCTURE THAT SOMEBODY HAS ABANDONED, IT JUST BECOMES A SQUATTER'S HAVEN.

AND THEY THEY DO INHABIT. IT BECOMES A CRIMINAL ELEMENT IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT CAUSES PEOPLE NOT TO WANT TO MOVE INTO THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS OR TO MOVE A LOT MORE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ADDING MORE GOVERNMENT IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

AND WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT IS WE'RE. WHAT I'M SAYING.

SO IF WE COULD THAT MONEY KEEPS THAT MORALE UP, KEEPS PEOPLE HERE, KEEPS OUR EMPLOYEES HERE, CREATES CONSISTENCY. 1.5%, I THINK WAS ONE OF THE RAISES.

I MEAN, THAT'S TERRIBLE. WE WILL WE WILL DEFINITELY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU WE'LL DEFINITELY AGREE ON YOUR WILLINGNESS TO PAY SOME OF OUR EMPLOYEES AND STAFF AND TRY TO CREATE THE BEST ORGANIZATION WE CAN.

SO WE'LL BE WORKING ON THAT THROUGHOUT THIS NEXT YEAR ON THE BUDGET THANK YOU SIR.

DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK HERE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY. SEEING NO ONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 3.B AND INVITE MRS. STORRS BACK UP FOR ITEM 3.C. THANK YOU MAYOR.

[3.C. PUBLIC HEARING ON TAX INCREASE: THE CITY OF AMARILLO IS CONSIDERING A TAX RATE OF $0.43070, WHICH IS GREATER THAN THE CURRENT RATE. THIS TAX RATE WILL RAISE MORE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS THAN LAST YEAR’S TAX RATE. THE TAX RATE WILL EFFECTIVELY BE RAISED BY 15.30 PERCENT AND WILL RAISE TAXES FOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS ON A $100,000 HOME BY APPROXIMATELY $12.47.]

ON ITEM 3.C THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON A TAX INCREASE.

AND SO AS MENTIONED IF COUNCIL APPROVES A RATE HIGHER THAN THE NO NEW REVENUE TAX RATE, WHICH WOULD PRODUCE THE EXACT SAME REVENUE AS THE PRIOR YEAR THEN COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE.

AND SO WE WOULD ASK THAT COUNCIL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

WE HAVE PUT NOTICE OUT IN THE NEWSPAPER TO ALERT CITIZENS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY.

IT'S ALSO POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, AS MENTIONED JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO.

WE ALSO HAVE SOME REALLY GOOD INFORMATION OUT ON AMARILLO.GOV RELATED TO PROPERTY TAXES THAT WE WOULD ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO LOOK AT. SO I HAVE A REAL BRIEF PRESENTATION HERE ON PROPERTY TAXES.

AGAIN, THIS STATES THE SAME THING A VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, THOUGH, IS THE HIGHEST TAX RATE THAT A COUNCIL CAN APPROVE WITHOUT GOING TO AN ELECTION.

OTHERWISE, A MANDATORY ELECTION IS REQUIRED. WE'RE ALREADY PAST THOSE TIME POINTS AND COUNCIL IS NOT LOOKING TO CONSIDER THAT.

AND AGAIN WE MUST PROVIDE NOTICE TO OUR PROPERTY OWNERS AND HOLD ONE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND AGAIN, THIS SLIDE IS NOT WORKING OUT GREAT, SO I APOLOGIZE.

IT WORKS OUT GREAT ON A COMPUTER, BUT APPARENTLY NOT ON THESE SCREENS.

SO WHAT THIS SLIDE SHOWS IS THAT OUR CURRENT PROPERTY TAX RATE IS $38.723 AND OUR PROPOSED TAX RATE IS SET AT THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE OF $43.070.

WHAT THAT GETS US IS OUR CURRENT SERVICE LEVELS HERE AT THE CITY, AND ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICER AND FIREFIGHTER CONTINUED FUNDING OF FIRE FOR FIRE APPARATUS

[00:30:05]

HELPING TO FUND A 4% RAISE FOR POLICE, A 3% RAISE FOR FIRE AND A 2% MERIT RAISE FOR CIVILIANS.

THIS IS ALSO GOING TO HELP PAY FOR STREET PROJECTS AND FOR THE TMRS 20%, I'M SORRY, 70% COLA FOR RETIREES.

WHAT THIS MEANS ON OUR FOR OUR TAXPAYERS. IF A CITIZEN HAD A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT WAS $100,000 LAST YEAR OR IN THE CURRENT YEAR, AND IT'S GOING AND IT WAS APPRAISED AT THE SAME $100,000 AGAIN, THEY WOULD BE LOOKING AT A $4 PER MONTH INCREASE.

AND THAT'S JUST ON THE CITY'S PORTION OF THE TAX BILL.

ON AN AVERAGE HOME THOUGH. HOWEVER AVERAGE HOMES ARE ABOUT $278,000 OR SO.

HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY ACROSS POTTER AND RANDALL THEY WOULD SEE AN $11 PER MONTH INCREASE ON AN AVERAGE HOME.

THE REASON FOR THAT IS AS A CITIZEN MENTIONED EARLIER, POTTER-RANDALL APPRAISAL DISTRICT IS IN CHARGE OF DOING THE APPRAISALS ON ALL OF OUR PROPERTIES IN POTTER AND RANDALL. THAT'S A SEPARATE THIRD PARTY GROUP THAT DOES THOSE.

THE CITY HAS NO AUTHORITY OVER THEM OR ABILITY TO TO INFLUENCE ANY OF THEIR DECISIONS.

THEY DO A SEPARATE APPRAISAL AND APPRAISAL VALUES HAVE GONE UP OVERALL BY ABOUT 3% YEAR OVER YEAR.

I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME PROPERTIES IN AMARILLO THAT DID SEE A DECREASE IN THOSE APPRAISED VALUES.

SO IT'S KIND OF A MIXTURE ACROSS THE COMMUNITY THIS YEAR.

BUT IF AN AVERAGE OR I'M SORRY, AN AVERAGE HOME DID SEE WILL SEE ABOUT AN $11 PER MONTH INCREASE.

AGAIN WE DO HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT ON AMARILLO.GOV.

IF CITIZENS HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR PROPERTY TAXES.

SO WHAT WE ARE ASKING COUNCIL TO DO TODAY IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THEN HERE IN JUST A MINUTE, WE WILL HAVE COUNCIL TAKE A SECOND AND FINAL VOTE ON THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, AND THEN WE WILL HAVE A FINAL ITEM TO ACTUALLY RATIFY THE TAX RATE.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN ANSWER ON PROPERTY TAXES? NO, MA'AM THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I'M GOING TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 3.C.

DO I HAVE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 3.C? MR. FISHER, COME BACK UP. WE COULD GET YOU A MICROPHONE.

YEAH REALLY, IT'S JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. THE LAST TIME WE HAD A MEETING, WE WERE ASKING ABOUT THE PUBLIC NOTICE, AND WE LOOKED IT UP, AND WE CAN'T FIND A PUBLIC NOTICE ANYWHERE ON THE GLOBE AMARILLO.COM.

SPECIFICALLY, YOU'RE ASKING WHETHER WE ISSUED A PUBLIC NOTICE IN THE AMARILLO GLOBE-NEWS? SHE SAID IN THE NEWSPAPER, I SUSPECT IT'S THE GLOBE-NEWS, BUT.

OKAY YEAH. MRS. STORRS DO YOU MIND TO ADDRESS THAT? YES I BELIEVE THE PROPERTY TAX NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, AND THE BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 4TH. AND I HAVE COPIES OF BOTH OF THOSE NEWSPAPERS.

IF. IS IT ONLY IN PRINT OR IS IT ONLINE? I WOULD IMAGINE IT'S ONLINE, BUT WE DON'T FIND IT ONLINE ANYWHERE.

I HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE LOOK, HAD CHAD LOOK AND.

DO YOU MIND? JUST BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT, I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THAT.

SO LIKE BE GOOD TO PULL THAT PAPER THAT YOU HAVE THAT SHOWS THE NOTICE.

WE CAN WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT. AND IF IT'S ONLINE BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE I THINK THEY'RE MOVING THEIR PRINTING TO MEXICO OR SOMETHING.

I MEAN THAT THAT NEWSPAPER, THERE'S PROBABLY TEN COPIES WHEN YOU LOOK, WHEN YOU WALK BY AT A, AT A STORE. SO I'M WONDERING IF WE'RE AVOIDING TECHNICALITIES HERE BY SAYING IT'S IN THE PAPER.

SURE STORRS CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE LEGAL REQUIREMENT OF HOW WE HAVE TO NOTICE THAT, AND WHY IT'S ONLY ALLOWED TO BE NOTICED IN A NEWSPAPER? YES AND SO THE OTHER PART OF THAT REQUIREMENT IS THAT IT IS IT HAS TO BE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

SO IT'S POSTED DOWN ON OUR PUBLIC NOTICE SECTION ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

BUT THERE I THINK THEY HAVE SEVERAL GROUPS HAVE TRIED TO GET THE REQUIREMENT CHANGED WHERE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO POST IN THE NEWSPAPER ANYMORE.

I THINK TO YOUR POINT, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF NEWSPAPERS MAYBE IN, YOU KNOW, CIRCULATING AROUND AS MUCH, BUT IT IS STILL A REQUIREMENT. AND SO WE DID MEET THE REQUIREMENT TO POST IN THE NEWSPAPER AND ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

BUT I CAN CERTAINLY RESEARCH THE. I THINK MY QUESTION SORRY TO INTERRUPT. NO I'M SORRY GO AHEAD. MY QUESTION IS, IS IT REQUIRED TO BE ONLINE ALSO? BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE EVERYBODY'S READING THE NEWSPAPER IS WHAT I'M CURIOUS, DOES THAT INCLUDE BEING ONLINE? I'D HAVE TO ASK OUR LEGAL COUNSEL ON THE NEWSPAPER SIDE.

IT IS ON THE CITY'S

[00:35:03]

YEAH. OKAY. WE'LL LOOK INTO IT. THE WAY, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT, AND YOU CAN SPEAK TO IT IF YOU WANT TO, BUT THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO POST IT AND TO PUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPER.

NOW, THE FORM THAT THE NEWSPAPER USES TO CIRCULATE IN ANY COMMUNITY IS ONLINE NOW, AS WELL AS AN ACTUAL HARD COPY NEWSPAPER.

WE'VE GOT THAT HERE. SO, MS. CITY SECRETARY, IS THAT WHAT WENT INTO THE PAPER ITSELF? YES. YES, THIS IS ONE OF THE TWO AND THIS ONE LET ME SCROLL UP.

YEAH IS THAT AN ONLINE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT? OR IS THAT THE? THIS IS THE AMARILLO GLOBE-NEWS ONLINE WEBSITE YES SIR.

RIGHT. OKAY WE'LL CHECK IT OUT. YEAH, SURE YOU LEAVE THAT UP FOR A SECOND OR WILL YOU GET A PICTURE OF THAT? NOT SURE WHY YOU COULDN'T FIND IT, BUT I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION AND DUE DILIGENCE.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE FOLLOW EVERY RULE. OKAY THANK YOU YES, SIR APPRECIATE IT. DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT? I'M SORRY, NOT PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT TO SPEAK HERE AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING, MR. FEINGOLD, IF YOU'D COME FORWARD. MS. KELSEY, I SAW YOUR HAND.

WE'LL DO YOURS NEXT.

ALAN FEINGOLD AGAIN. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR EITHER OUR CITY MANAGER OR THE LAWYER FOR THE CITY.

IS THERE ANY UPPER LIMIT ON THE PERCENTAGE OF TAXES THAT CAN BE PUT ON PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF AMARILLO? PERCENTAGE OF VALUATION.

SO WE CAN GET YOU AN ANSWER TO THAT. BUT YOU'RE ASKING A PRAD QUESTION IS IN THE WAY THAT THE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES ARE APPRAISED.

WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM INCREASE OF VALUE IN ONE YEAR? WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE AS. A MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY. IS THERE ANY UPPER LIMIT ON THAT PERCENTAGE? I WANTED TO CLARIFY. IT'S AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY VALUE THAT YOU'RE QUESTIONING, NOT THE TAX RATE THAT YOU'RE QUESTIONING? IT'S BOTH. OKAY WELL, LET'S ADDRESS THEM SEPARATELY BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWO SETS OF RULES SO.

OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE ASSESSMENT ON I BELIEVE OUR CHARTER STATES THAT THE MAXIMUM TAX RATE THE CITY CAN LEVY IS $1.50.

AND WE'RE AT $0.4307. AND I'M LOOKING OVER TO BRYAN I BELIEVE THAT'S RIGHT.

SO THE CHARTER ONLY STATE LAW ALLOWS A LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO GO UP TO $2.50.

BUT OUR LOCAL CITY CHARTER CAPS THAT AT $1.50.

AS A TAX RATE? YEAH AS THE CITY'S PORTION OF THE TAX RATE.

NOW WE CAN ONLY MOVE IT 3.5% ON THE M&O MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS SIDE OF THE BUDGET WITHOUT IT GOING FOR AN ELECTION WITHOUT IT BEING PUT TO THE VOTER. BUT WITHIN THAT, IT COULD BE PUT TO THE VOTER ALL THE WAY UP TO $1.50, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES. IN ONE YEAR. THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION TO YOU. YOU LOWER THAT TO NO MORE THAN $0.50 PER $100 OF APPRAISED VALUE. THANKS. WE APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT.

MRS. KELSEY, IF I COULD HAVE YOU COME UP YOU CAN SPEAK NEXT.

I HAD SOME COMMENTS AND ACTUALLY A QUESTION FOR MRS. STORRS. SO WHEN SHE WAS REFERRING TO SOME AREAS IN AMARILLO THAT HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN A DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES I DON'T KNOW WHAT AREAS THOSE WOULD BE, BECAUSE EVEN A PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE IN SAN JACINTO WAS EXCUSE ME, LET ME FIND IT FROM 2020 TO 2025. IT'S SUGGESTED INCREASE IN VALUE WAS A WHOPPING 349%.

SO, LIKE I WAS SAYING EARLIER, AGAIN, THE BURDEN OF PROOF FALLS ON THE HOMEOWNERS.

AND ONLY, YOU KNOW, 7% TO 10% OF PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH THE HASSLE OF PROTESTING THAT.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS MRS. STORRS WAS REFERRING TO OF LOWER VALUES, BUT ON ALL OF THE ONES THAT I HAVE HERE IN MY HAND, THEY RANGE FROM 46% TO 349% INCREASES IN ASSESSED VALUE IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS.

SO MY QUESTION WAS, IS THE CIRCUIT BREAKER. I THINK THE PREVIOUS GENTLEMAN WAS ASKING OR REFERRING TO THIS, THERE'S A 20% CAP ON ANY INVESTMENT PROPERTIES NOT HOMESTEADED PROPERTIES THAT THEY CAN INCREASE BY AND 10% FOR

[00:40:02]

HOMESTEAD. SO MY QUESTION FOR MRS. STORRS IS, IS THE CIRCUIT BREAKER LAW OR CAP THAT'S EXPIRING IN 2027? IS THAT ALSO NOT UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY? IS THAT COMPLETELY CONTROLLED BY PRAD? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND THEY ARE TWO TOTALLY SEPARATE ENTITIES.

SO WE'LL LET MRS. STORRS SPEAK TO THAT. YES, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. YEAH, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT APPRAISAL DISTRICTS ARE AND ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. SO THAT'S WE ARE WE HAVE TO FOLLOW STATE LAW ACCORDING TO SETTING PROPERTY TAX RATES AND THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW STATE LAW FOR DOING THE APPRAISALS OF THE PROPERTIES. SO YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S A PRAD.

SO WHEN THAT EXPIRES THAT'S NOT UNDER THE THE CITY'S JURISDICTION AT ALL? THAT WAS PART OF PRAD? YES. FOR THE CIRCUIT BREAKER? THAT THAT'S THEIR PORTION OF THE STATE LAW THAT THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW YES. IT DOES AFFECT WHAT WE DO BECAUSE THEY GIVE THOSE VALUES TO US BASED ON WHAT STATE LAW WILL ALLOW. AS YOU MENTIONED FOR HOMESTEAD EXEMPTIONS RIGHT NOW, IT CAN'T INCREASE MORE THAN 10%.

I THINK IT IS EACH YEAR. BUT PRAD HAS TO FOLLOW THOSE STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS, AND THEN THEY GIVE US THE VALUES TO ASSESS OUR TAXES OFF OF BASED ON THOSE LIMITS SET OUT IN STATE LAW. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHO CONTROLLED THAT.

THAT WOULD BE THAT LAW. YEAH IN OUR AREA, IT WOULD BE PRAD.

OKAY. YEAH. SO, I MEAN, AS I STATED BEFORE, MY MOTION WAS FOR AGAINST THIS INCREASE JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE IT DOESN'T JUST AFFECT THE HOMEOWNERS, IT IS GOING TO AFFECT THE TENANTS THAT RENT.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF A HOMEOWNER WANTS TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD THE, YOU KNOW, THE MORTGAGE, THE TAXES AND THE INCREASING INSURANCE EVERY YEAR, OF COURSE THEY'RE GOING TO PASS ON THAT COST.

MOST OF THE TIME. AND THEN ALSO AFFECTS, YOU KNOW, SMALL BUSINESSES TOO THAT HAVE TRIPLE NET COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

THEY HAVE TO CONTINUE TO PROTEST THEIR PROPERTY TAX INCREASES AND PAY, YOU KNOW, INVENTORY TAXES AND OTHER TAX ON TAX ON TAX. SO IT'S JUST KIND OF A COMPOUNDING EFFECT WHEN YOU HAVE THE PROPOSED INCREASE FROM THE CITY BUDGET PORTION OF IT.

AND THEN ALSO PRAD IS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, TO MY LIMITED KNOWLEDGE, NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF LOWERING ANY VALUES UNLESS YOU PROTEST IT YOURSELF.

SO IT'S JUST A COMPOUNDED EFFECT OF THE INCREASE MORGAN, I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT PROPERTIES AROUND TOWN, WHAT NEIGHBORHOODS THEY WOULD HAVE BELONGED IN.

BUT SO OVER THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS COUNCIL LOWERED YOUR TAX RATE, BUT STILL INCREASED YOUR TAXES ON THE REVENUES BECAUSE WE SAW VALUES INCREASE SO MUCH SO $350,000 HOUSE BECAME A $450,000 HOUSE ON AVERAGE.

SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, I THINK, TO REITERATE THAT WE ARE A TAXING ENTITY AND THAT YOU NEED THAT SEPARATION FROM THE APPRAISING ENTITIES SO THAT THOSE TWO ARE NOT CONJOINED. AND I THINK THE COMMON PUBLIC PERCEPTION IS THAT WE SET YOUR TAX RATE AND YOUR VALUE.

WE ARE NOT IN THE VALUATION SIDE OF THINGS AT ALL.

IT DOES AFFECT US IN ADJUSTING THAT RATE. BUT THIS YEAR IS THE YEAR THAT YOU SEE.

WELL, NOW THAT, YOU KNOW, APPRAISAL VALUES HAVE STEADIED OR LEVELED, SOME YEARS ARE OBVIOUSLY STILL GOING UP THAT YOU'RE SEEING THAT RATE CONTINUE TO CLIMB ACCORDINGLY WITH THE ADDITIONAL NEEDS THAT EVERY MUNICIPALITY HAS.

BUT VERY GOOD SET OF QUESTIONS. AND IF WE NEED TO ANSWER ANY MORE HERE BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD.

GLAD TO DO IT. YEAH. AND I DO APPRECIATE LEARNING THE DISTINCTION NOW THAT BETWEEN THE THE PRAD BEING A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENTITY.

SO THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE ON ITS OWN. SO THANK YOU.

YES THANK YOU MA'AM. DO I HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY SEEING NOBODY, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 3.C AND WOULD HAVE MRS. STORRS COME BACK UP FOR ITEM 3.D. OKAY. THANK YOU.

[3.D. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8218 ADOPTING THE CITY OF AMARILLO BUDGET FOR THE 2025/2026 FISCAL YEAR]

MAYOR. ITEM 3 IS CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO.

8218 ADOPTING THE CITY OF AMARILLO BUDGET FOR THE 2025/2026 FISCAL YEAR.

THIS IS THE SECOND AND FINAL READING OF THIS ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY BUDGET.

AND THIS BUDGET ALLOWS THE CITY TO CONTINUE PROVIDING EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SERVICES, PROGRAMS, AND ASSISTANCE TO AMARILLO RESIDENTS IN THE UPCOMING TAX YEAR.

AND I WOULD RECOMMEND THERE'S THERE SHOULD BE MOTION LANGUAGE AT YOUR SPOTS.

STATE LAW OUTLINES MOTION LANGUAGE TO USE FOR AN ITEM LIKE THIS AND THAT IT BE A RECORD VOTE AS WELL.

ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER? ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL? WE APPRECIATE THE REMINDER. SO IT'S A FORMAL LEGAL ACTION THAT WILL TAKE HERE ON ITEM 3.D.

[00:45:05]

COUNCIL DO I HAVE ANY DISCUSSION ON ITEM 3.D? OKAY. WOULD REQUEST A MOTION. I MOVED ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO.

8218, ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR OCTOBER 1ST, 2025 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2026 FOR THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES WITH A 5-0 VOTE.

MRS. STORRS. ITEM 3.E PLEASE. THANK YOU, MAYOR ITEM 3 IS CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO.

[3.E. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 8219 APPROVING THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX ROLL, SETTING AN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATE AND LEVYING A TAX ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE 2025 TAX YEAR: ]

8219 APPROVING THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX ROLL.

SETTING AN AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX RATE AND LEVYING A TAX ON ALL PROPERTY SUBJECT TO TAXATION WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE 2025 TAX YEAR.

SO THIS IS A SECOND AND FINAL READING ON THE TAX RATE.

AND AS A REMINDER IT IS PROPOSED AT THE $0.43070 RATE.

AND AGAIN, THERE SHOULD BE MOTION LANGUAGE AT YOUR SPOTS.

THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT STATE LAW OUTLINES. KIND OF A FORMALITY ON THE MOTION LANGUAGE.

AND IF YOU WILL ALSO TAKE A RECORD VOTE ON THIS, WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU MA'AM. QUESTIONS COUNCIL FOR ITEM 3.E? ANY DISCUSSION? WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE THAT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY THE ADOPTION OF A TAX RATE OF $0.4307 WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY A 15.30% INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE.

SECOND. HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM 3.E.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES WITH A 5-0 VOTE.

ITEM 3.F MRS. STORRS. YES, SIR. SO THIS IS THE LAST ITEM I'M GOING TO ASK YOU ALL TO ACT UPON,

[3.F. RATIFICATION – CITY OF AMARILLO TAX RATE AND BUDGET: Pursuant to the terms of Tex. Loc. Gov. Code, Sec. 102.007(c), the City Council is required to take a separate ratification vote on the tax rate when the adopted budget requires more property tax revenue than did the previous year’s budget. ]

THIS IS THE RATIFICATION OF THE CITY OF AMARILLO TAX RATE AND BUDGET.

SO PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 102.007(C) THE CITY COUNCIL IS REQUIRED TO TAKE A SEPARATE RATIFICATION VOTE ON THE TAX RATE WHEN THE ADOPTED BUDGET REQUIRES MORE PROPERTY TAX REVENUE THAN THE PREVIOUS YEAR'S BUDGET DID.

SO AGAIN, THERE IS MOTION LANGUAGE AT YOUR SPOTS.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE USE THAT AND DO A RECORD VOTE ON THIS ONE.

AND THEN Y'ALL CAN CELEBRATE BEING DONE WITH BUDGET.

THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. STORRS ON THE RATIFICATION PROCESS? NO, SIR. OKAY. WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION, PLEASE.

I MOVE THAT WE RATIFY THE BUDGET AND TAX RATE AS ADOPTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025 THROUGH 2026.

RECOGNIZING SUCH BUDGET WILL REQUIRE MORE REVENUE FROM PROPERTY TAXES THAN DID THE BUDGET ADOPTED LAST YEAR.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON ITEM 3.F.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES WITH A 5-0 VOTE.

COUNCIL I WOULD GIVE A REMARK HERE. THAT IS JUST MY OPINION AND NO ONE ELSE'S.

BUT UNLESS WE ABOLISH PROPERTY TAXES, WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO GO IN THIS DIRECTION.

AND SO FOR THE, YOU KNOW, PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GROWING GOVERNMENT, WE'RE CONTINUING, WE'RE GROWING A CITY. AND AS YOU GROW, CITY AND FAMILY AND BUSINESS BUDGETS DO INCREASE.

BUT WE AS A STATE OF TEXAS ARE GROWING FASTER THAN ANY OTHER STATE.

AND WE DO SO WITHOUT A STATE INCOME TAX, WHICH IF YOU ASK ANY OTHER STATE THAT'S CHARGING AN INCOME TAX, MAYBE CALIFORNIA, THEY WOULD TELL YOU THERE'S NO WAY TO EVER RUN THE GOVERNMENT WITHOUT THAT.

BUT WE DO IT YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT. AND SO IF WE HAD A TRUE CONSUMPTION TAX HERE, WE WOULD BE THE STATE TO COMPETE WITH IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.

SO LIKE, I THINK THAT PROPERTY TAXES ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GET MORE AND MORE CONSTRICTED AND MORE AND MORE LIMITED IN THEIR ACTUAL ABILITIES TO BE THAT STEADY FORM OF REVENUE. AND IT SEVERELY LIMITS OUR ABILITIES TO PROVIDE SERVICES THAT YOU REQUEST AND TELL US TO.

AND THEN I WOULD JUST REMIND EVERYBODY, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION TO REMOVE CITY SERVICES.

SO IT'S NOT GROWING GOVERNMENT AS MUCH AS IT IS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, REMOVING CITY SERVICES.

AND SO YOU GUYS FEEL FREE TO CONTINUE TO LET US KNOW WHICH CITY SERVICES YOU'D LIKE TO REMOVE, AND THEN SHOW US THAT THERE IS NOT A NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCE TO THAT.

SO LIKE AN EXAMPLE OF LEAVING STRUCTURES UP THAT NEED TO BE CONDEMNED, WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT, BUT WE DO HAVE TO PAY FOR THE FIRE TRUCK ROLLOUTS AND THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT AND THE SQUATTING HAZARDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT COME WITH THAT.

[00:50:01]

SO FOR EVERYTHING, THERE'S A CAUSE AND AN EFFECT.

AND THAT'S OUR JOB IS TO SPEAK WITH YOU, COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, LISTEN AND UNDERSTAND WHAT CAUSE AND WHAT EFFECT DO YOU GUYS WANT US TO DRIVE? AND THEN IF WE'RE DOING OUR JOB, WE'RE REPRESENTING YOUR WILL UP HERE.

BUT THERE, THERE MIGHT NOT BE ANYTHING MORE UNCONSTITUTIONAL THAN THE GOOD OLD AMERICAN DREAM THAN A TRUE PROPERTY TAX.

AFTER YOU'VE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR THAT PROPERTY YOURSELF, YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY FOR IT TO NO END.

RIGHT? AND SO THERE'S OTHER WAYS FOR US TO RUN THIS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND AT THE STATE LEVEL.

I JUST ENCOURAGE THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A WISE ONE.

COUNCIL ANY REMARKS HERE BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO ITEM 3.G? OKAY THANK YOU GUYS. ITEM 3.G MR. HOOPER, WOULD YOU MIND TAKING US INTO THAT ONE, SIR?

[3.G. CONSIDER DONATION – "THE AMARILLO COWBOY" STATUE ]

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY MAYOR AND COUNCIL. AND THERE'S NO PRESENTATION TO LOOK AT ON YOUR SCREEN.

THIS IS NOT BUDGET RELATED. THIS ITEM IS IN CONSIDERATION OF A DONATION TO THE CITY OF AMARILLO.

KING AND DIANNE HILL ARE GENEROUSLY WANTING TO DONATE A BRONZE BUST TITLED THE AMARILLO COWBOY.

THE PIECE WAS CREATED BY JACK HILL, WHO IS A RENOWNED PANHANDLE ARTIST AND SCULPTOR WHO'S REALLY DEDICATED A LOT OF HIS CAREER TO CELEBRATING THE HISTORY AND HERITAGE OF THE TEXAS PANHANDLE AND THE PEOPLE FROM THE TEXAS PANHANDLE.

SO HIS WORK IS PRETTY WELL KNOWN. YOU RECOGNIZE THE WHITE BUFFALO STATUE AT WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY IS SET UP ON THE HILL.

HE CREATED THAT STATUE OF THE FOUNDERS MUSICAL DRAMA, TEXAS, AS WELL AS MANY NATIVE AMERICAN SCULPTURES THROUGHOUT THE SOUTHWEST.

HE ALSO DESIGNED THE CITY OF AMARILLO 75TH ANNIVERSARY SEAL AND IS RECOGNIZED IN THE AMARILLO HIGH SCHOOL HALL OF FAME.

THE HILL FAMILY HAS A HISTORY OF SHARING THEIR ART WITH THE COMMUNITY.

THEY PREVIOUSLY GIFTED A BUST OF QUANAH PARKER THAT'S DISPLAYED AT THE RICK HUSBAND AMARILLO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.

THE IDEA BEHIND THIS NEW DONATION IS TO CONTINUE WITH THAT LEGACY, HONORING THE RUGGED SPIRIT AND WESTERN HERITAGE THAT HELPED US SHAPE AMARILLO FROM THE BEGINNING. SO THE AMARILLO COWBOY, IF APPROVED, WOULD BE PLACED ON A PERMANENT DISPLAY HERE AT CITY HALL WITH A CUSTOM BASIN PLAQUE TO WELCOME CITIZENS AND VISITORS WITH A TRIBUTE TO THE COMMUNITY'S HISTORY AND CULTURE.

THERE'S NO COST TO THE CITY FOR THIS DONATION.

THE LOCATION THAT WE'VE AGREED UPON. IF COUNCIL APPROVES, IT WOULD BE IN THE FOYER JUST OUTSIDE OF THE ELEVATORS, IN THE THIRD FLOOR, RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS.

AND I DO BELIEVE IN YOUR PACKET. ALONG WITH THE AGREEMENT FOR THE DONATION, THERE'S ALSO A PHOTO OF THAT.

THE REASON WE'RE NOT SHARING THAT PHOTO ON THE SCREEN IS IF THERE IS AN UNVEILING, OF COURSE, THAT'S THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE A SURPRISE FOR THOSE THAT ARE LOOKING ON.

SO IT'S DIFFICULT TO SHARE ALL THIS. BUT IF APPROVED TODAY, THAT UNVEILING CEREMONY WOULD BE HELD HERE AT CITY HALL ON SEPTEMBER 23RD AT 2:30 P.M.

WE'RE OF COURSE, GRATEFUL FOR THE HILL FAMILY AND THEIR GENEROSITY TO WANT TO DONATE THIS TO THE CITY.

I WILL NOTE THAT WHEN WE DID THE QUANAH PARKER DONATION, WE JUST REALLY ACCEPTED AN AGREEMENT DONATION FORM FOR THAT AND PROCEEDED WITH THAT ACTIVITY. MOVING FORWARD, ANY THIS ANY OFFERS FOR SIGNIFICANT ARTWORK OR DONATIONS BASED ON THIS PRECEDENCE TODAY.

THOSE ITEMS WOULD ALWAYS COME BEFORE COUNCIL FOR YOUR APPROVAL. SO YOU COULD LOOK AT IT FIRST AS WELL, TO ENSURE OUR CONSISTENCY WITH THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS A SAY SO IN WHAT IS PLACED AS FAR AS ARTWORK IS CONCERNED IN OUR CITY HALL OR ANY OTHER BUILDINGS THAT THE CITY AND THE CITIZENS OWN.

SO WITH THAT MAYOR, I'LL JUST TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION. YES, SIR AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT YOU SAID A FEW THINGS THAT ARE KEY IN THERE.

PRECEDENT. SO WE ARE SETTING A PRECEDENT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY THAT WE'RE PULLING FORWARD TO SAY THIS IS EXACTLY THE WAY THAT EVERYTHING FITS IN THIS NICE, NEAT LITTLE BOX. WE'VE BUILT A NEW CITY HALL.

MR. DANFORTH HAS OVERSEEN A TREMENDOUS CONSTRUCTION PROJECT THAT TURNED OUT ABOVE AND BEYOND.

I THINK WHAT ANYBODY THOUGHT THIS OLD BUILDING COULD BECOME.

IT INVITES PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DONATE SOMETHING OF VALUE TO HELP DECORATE THE HALLS.

BUT YOU SPOKE TO TRADITION, VALUES AND CULTURE.

AND SO I THINK THE PRECEDENT THAT WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO SET HERE TODAY, THAT OTHER COUNCILS CAN WORK ON AND UNDER IS THAT THIS IS NOT SOME ARBITRARY THING OF ANY PERSON THAT HAS SOMETHING THAT THEY THINK IS PRETTY, OR THAT THEY THINK SHOWS A CAUSE THAT THEY, THEY HAVE A PASSION FOR THIS ALWAYS NEEDS TO SPEAK TO OUR TRADITION TO OUR CORE VALUES AND TO OUR CULTURE.

THIS IS OUR WESTERN HERITAGE. IT'S OUR COWBOY CULTURE.

AND IT'S HONORING WHEN WE CAN DO THINGS LIKE THIS, WHEN WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS IN IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT ARE WILLING TO GIVE.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK PREVIOUSLY, JUST MAYBE A CONVERSATION WITH THE MAYOR AND THE MAYOR MIGHT HAVE FELT COMFORTABLE PUTTING IT IN OR TAKING AN ADDITIONAL STEP TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT JUST ONE PARTY UP HERE ON THIS SIDE OF THE DAIS, BUT THAT THE COUNCIL THEN IN AND OF THEMSELVES, WHICH ARE YOUR TRUEST REPRESENTATION OF EVERYBODY THAT THAT ELECTED TO VOTE ONE OR THE OTHER.

[00:55:01]

AND SO WITH THAT, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO LET COUNCIL HAVE A VOICE ON BEHALF OF OUR CITIZENS AND COMMUNITY.

BUT TO STATE, ONCE AGAIN, IT ALWAYS HAS TO SPEAK TO AND POINT TO OUR TRADITIONS, OUR VALUES, OUR CORE VALUES, AND OUR CULTURE. AND SO I'LL OPEN THAT UP FOR DISCUSSION IF COUNCIL HAS ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO ADD.

COUNCILMAN? WELL, I WOULD SAY AND MY CONCERN IS SO WE DON'T WE DON'T HAVE ANY POLICY.

THERE'S NO DIRECTION. IT'S JUST KIND OF IF COUNCIL SAYS IT'S OKAY OR NOT OKAY.

THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CITY HALL.

I JUST WONDER IF, I MEAN, BEFORE MAYBE WE GO DOWN THAT ROUTE.

MAYBE WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT A MORE FORMAL WRITTEN POLICY ABOUT WHAT'S ACCEPTED OR NOT ACCEPTED.

NOT THAT I HAVE ANYTHING. I'M PERFECTLY FINE WITH THIS, BUT I JUST WONDER IF IT, YOU KNOW, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, HAVE THINGS HAPPEN IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.

DOES THIS BY ACCEPTING THIS? DO WE DO WE POTENTIALLY UNKNOWINGLY SET OURSELVES AT RISK AT HAVING TO FIGHT ANOTHER BATTLE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO FIGHT? THESE DAYS IN TIME I MEAN, PROBABLY I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE QUANAH PARKER WAS, YOU KNOW, 30 YEARS AGO, 20 YEARS AGO, 10 YEARS AGO, MAYBE SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS.

BUT IN THESE DAYS AND TIMES, PEOPLE ARE LOOKING TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

POLITICAL STATEMENTS OF ALL TYPE EVERY TIME. AND I WOULD JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE THAT IF WE, IF WE GO DOWN THIS PATH, THAT MAYBE WE'VE GOT SOME TYPE OF POLICY THAT'S IN PLACE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER CITIES OR COMMUNITIES DO.

AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOT SOME TYPE OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF A LEGAL ISSUE THAT WOULD COME UP IN THE, IN THE FUTURE ON THIS. SO, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST THIS PERSONALLY, BUT I JUST WONDER IF BEFORE WE START ACCEPTING THINGS, THAT WE GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A PARAMETER ON IF WE ARE GOING TO ACCEPT THINGS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE CITY HALL, THAT THERE ARE SOME PARAMETERS ON THAT THAT COULD SERVE TO NOT ONLY PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO US IN FUTURE COUNCILS AND THE COMMUNITY, BUT TO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WE'RE PROTECTED.

YES. YES I'LL SAY I THINK TO THAT POINT I KNOW WE'VE LEARNED A LOT THROUGH THIS PROCESS AS WELL AS A PREVIOUS ONE THE COUNCIL'S ENTERTAINED EARLIER THIS YEAR.

AND SO I KNOW BRYAN AND STAFF AND I HAVE LEARNED A LOT THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I DO THINK.

I THINK ESTABLISHING A POLICY GOING FORWARD WOULD BE A WISE THING FOR THE COUNCIL.

SO WE IF THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE THAT, WE CAN WORK TOWARDS THAT.

I THINK I THINK SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE HERE TODAY, WE PRESENTED HERE TODAY IS SOME GOOD GROUNDWORK FOR THAT. I THINK SOME THINGS THAT THAT MR. HOOPER HAS LAID OUT AS MAYOR STANLEY HAS LAID OUT HERE IS SOME GOOD GROUNDWORK THAT WE CAN BASE INTO THAT POLICY.

AND SO I THINK WE HAVE I THINK WE HAVE A GOOD START TOWARDS THAT.

BUT I DO THINK A POLICY GOING FORWARD WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO DO.

SO I WOULD ASK, THOUGH, THAT WE JUST MAXIMIZE THE USE OF THIS, THIS BRIEF MOMENT WITH THE MEETING.

SO THE ONE HINDRANCE THAT I SEE IS, IS THERE THERE NEEDS TO BE A RIGHT AND THERE NEEDS TO BE.

AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXERCISE A CERTAIN LEVEL OF AUTHORITY AS AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE.

MEANING, I THINK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO CALL AND TALK TO THE MAYOR AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THIS GIFT. AND NOW WE HAVE THIS PRECEDENT OF WOULD LOVE TO ACCEPT YOUR GIFT.

I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I NEED COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WALK THIS OUT THE RIGHT WAY.

WHAT WE WOULD PREVENT IN PUTTING THIS POLICY IN PLACE WOULD BE ANYTHING BROUGHT BY A CITIZEN TO THE CITY OF AMARILLO THAT DIDN'T COME THROUGH AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE, MEANING STAFF WOULD NOT BRING IN AN ITEM OR A CITIZEN WHICH ARE EQUAL IN VALUE.

NOBODY IS LESSER THAN. BUT WE HAVE A FORMALITY AND A PROCESS HERE THAT WE GO THROUGH PAINSTAKING PROCEDURES FOR ELECTIONS AND WHATNOT.

AND THIS COULD BE WORDED TO WHERE THE POLICY COULD SAY THAT THE CITIZEN NEEDS TO GO TO A COUNCIL MEMBER OR TO THE COUNCIL ITSELF, AND SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO RUN THROUGH STAFF SO WE CAN CHANGE THE POLICY TO THAT EFFECT.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S THE SAME AS GETTING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

SO LIKE A CITIZEN CANNOT JUST PUT AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE THEY FEEL LIKE IT'S IMPORTANT BUSINESS FOR THE CITY TO ATTEND TO.

CITIZEN CAN BRING THAT REQUEST TO ANY COUNCIL MEMBER AND THAT COUNCIL MEMBER, ALONG WITH CITY MANAGER OR MAYOR CAN GET THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

SAME WAY THAT IF YOU HAD A GIFT, A PAINTING, A PORTRAIT, A STATUE, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ORIGINATED THROUGH A COUNCIL MEMBER. COUNCIL ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS AS WE TRY TO WALK THIS OUT? BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE GOING TO DO A GOOD JOB HERE OF GIVING A GOOD TEMPLATE FOR THIS POLICY.

YEAH NO, I WOULD AGREE WITH PAUL, SUPER GRATEFUL THAT THE FAMILY WOULD OFFER THIS.

I THINK IT'S GREAT. AND AGAIN, I, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST IT AT ALL.

BUT I THINK FOR TO PROTECT FUTURE COUNCIL TO REDUCE EXPOSURE AND EVEN POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW,

[01:00:05]

POLITICAL STUNTS TO DEVELOP THAT POLICY, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THIS DIRECTION THAT THAT WE CAN AGREE ON AND THEN HOPEFULLY ACCEPT THIS.

THAT'D BE MY OPINION. ANYTHING FURTHER COUNCIL? ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IS, IS THAT WE HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY ON POLICY.

I'VE VISITED WITH MR. HILL LETTING HIM KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF WE PUT THIS POLICY IN PLACE, IT MAY TAKE A COUPLE MONTHS.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT UNDER AN URGENCY TO GET THE POLICY IN PLACE.

YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, SETTING THE POLICY AND GOING IN IT AS A PRECEDENT.

NOT NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO HOLD THIS ITEM UP AND BE ABLE TO ACCEPT.

SO I CAN DO THAT WITH A DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY REASON THAT WE COULDN'T ACCEPT THIS RIGHT NOW AND STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH A POLICY INITIATIVE AT THE SAME TIME? I PERSONALLY I'D RATHER LET'S HAVE THE POLICY IN PLACE BEFORE WE ACCEPT ANYTHING.

SO I WOULD JUST ASK. I'M NOT GOING TO ASK FOR A VOTE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE DIRECTION.

AND SO I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE MR. SIMPSON IS COMING FROM ON THIS ONE.

I PERSONALLY WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF MOVING IT FORWARD AND ACCEPTING IT, KNOWING THAT THE POLICY COULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO WORK ITSELF OUT.

AND I THINK WE'VE SET A GOOD PRECEDENT HERE. SO I WOULD ASK FOR COUNCIL TO PUSH US TO ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD OR THE OTHER.

SO I DO HAVE A KIND OF A THOUGHT ON THIS. SO BY ACCEPTING IT, I MEAN, WE'RE JUST ACCEPTING IT FOR THE CITY.

WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE PERMANENTLY PLACED AND SHOWN.

RIGHT? SO I REALLY DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM ACCEPTING THE PIECE OF ARTWORK ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.

WE'RE JUST NOT SAYING. AND THAT'S WHERE THE POLICY THEN COMES IN THAT IF ANY, ANY ARTWORK THAT'S GOING TO BE DISPLAYED IN CITY HALL HAS TO MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS SO WE COULD ACCEPT IT. HOLD HOLD OFF PUTTING IT IN CITY HALL TILL THE POLICY IS CREATED.

AND THEN DO THAT UNVEILING. OKAY, I DEFINITELY SEE KIND OF A, YOU KNOW, A NOW, A LATER AND A AND A, A MARRIAGE IN THE MIDDLE THERE, SO WOULD ASK IF THE OTHER TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS WANT TO MOVE FORWARD NOW OR LATER OR BOTH.

I THINK IS KIND OF WHAT I'M GETTING FROM PLACE ONE.

I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUES MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. COUNCILMAN? I WOULD AGREE. I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE MOVING FORWARD AS LONG AS WE HAVE POLICY.

AS LONG AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE POLICY. WHAT TIME FRAME ARE YOU THINKING? IS THAT FAIR? WE COULD HAVE SOMETHING BACK TO.

WELL I HATE TO OVERPROMISE, BUT I THINK IN OCTOBER WE COULD HAVE SOME BACK TO IN OCTOBER.

I WOULD SAY MAYBE. MAYBE I TRY TO AIM FOR THE FIRST MEETING, BUT MAYBE THE SECOND MEETING AT THE LATEST. OKAY, THANKS. AND WHAT, MR. HILL SAY ABOUT AS FAR AS ACCEPTING THE? WHAT DID HE SAY SPECIFICALLY TO WHAT? YEAH, AS FAR AS DONATING IT, YOU YOU MADE A COMMENT, YOU. WELL, HIS DONATION WAS HE HAD HE HAD BROUGHT IT TO ME AND ASKED IF I WOULD ACCEPT IT, YOU KNOW, AND BRING IT TO STAFF AND THAT WE WOULD PUT IT IN.

AND STAFF SAID, WELL, WE PROBABLY NEED TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF COUNCIL AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY FORMAL POLICIES. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS COUNCIL I THINK, IS STILL CONTINUING TO DO A GOOD JOB OF TENDING THE BUSINESS OUT IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC EYE AND MAKING SURE WE ARE ALL WEIGHING IN ON IT.

SO I THINK IN THE PAST, THROUGH THE AIRPORT IT WENT DIRECTLY TO THE MAYOR AND I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, MAYOR OR STAFF SAID YES, NEVER REALLY CAME BEFORE THE COUNCIL, BUT IT WAS THE AIRPORT.

AND, AND IT WASN'T CITY HALL BUILDING. AND I THINK THIS BUILDING DOES REPRESENT A GREATER SIGNIFICANCE.

YEAH. THAN ANY OTHER FACILITY. WHEN YOU RESPONDED TO HIM WITH, YOU KNOW, POLICY, HOW WAS HIS WHAT WAS HIS REACTION? OH, HE'S BEEN GREAT THE WHOLE TIME. I THINK HE'S, YOU KNOW, JUST EAGER TO TO DONATE THIS.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS VALUE FOR HIM AND HIS FAMILY.

AND I THINK IT'S AN HONOR FOR HIM TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT HERE.

HE DID RESPOND AND SAY, HEY, IF IF THIS NEEDS TO GO TO COUNCIL, FOR COUNCIL TO TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IT LIKE, I HOPE THEY DEFINITELY WILL ACCEPT IT. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY THEY WOULDN'T, BUT HE UNDERSTOOD THE PROCESS, SO I DIDN'T GET ANY NEGATIVE PUSHBACK FROM HIM.

AND YOU KNOW, IF HE NEEDS TO WAIT, I'M SURE HE WOULD BE THE TYPE OF PERSON THAT COULD SEE YOU KNOW, THE PATIENCE IN THAT. BUT THEN AGAIN RIGHT NOW I HAVE FOUR OF US THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, FEEL FINE ABOUT DOING AN UNVEILING ON THE 23RD, MOVING FORWARD WITH POLICY. THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IF WE ACCEPT IT HERE WE HAVE THE UNVEILING ON THE 23RD, ACCORDING TO DONNY'S I THINK COUNCILMAN REID SAID WE ACCEPT IT, BUT WE DON'T.

[01:05:04]

I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU WERE UNDERSTANDING. WE'RE NOT GOING TO PLACE IT ANYWHERE UNTIL WE DETERMINE THE POLICY.

YEAH.

PLACE? I MEAN, WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE RIGHT NOW? YEAH. I THINK THE ONLY RIGHT NOW HAS BEEN THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE WORKED IN YOU KNOW, UP UNTIL NOW WAS WE JUST NEED TO GET IT ACCEPTED TO COUNCIL ON THE 16TH, AND THEN WE COULD UNVEIL IT ON THE 23RD.

BUT IT'S ALL DEPENDING ON WHAT COUNCIL CHOOSES TO DO HERE TODAY.

YEAH. I WOULD ENCOURAGE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WAITING UNTIL WE HAVE A POLICY IN PLACE.

JUST NOT AGAIN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS, THIS SCULPTURE.

I THINK IT JUST HAS A CHANCE TO LET'S LET'S WALK THIS OUT SLOWLY, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABSOLUTELY SURE.

AGAIN, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING YOU KNOW, FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, HOW WE NEED TO MOVE THIS FORWARD.

SO, I MEAN, IF THERE'S SOME URGENT REASON WHY IT HAS TO BE DONE RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M GOOD BUT I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT. THE GOOD NEWS IS THE STATUE IS NON MOBILE, SO IT'S NOT RUNNING OFF ON US.

LIKE WE DON'T HAVE TO GO TIE IT DOWN. RIGHT? LIKE LET ME ASK THIS.

I KNOW COUNCILMAN SIMPSON IS HIGHLY ESTEEMED, AND YOU GUYS WORK REALLY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT HE'S TOTALLY SATISFIED IN PLACE 4 [LAUGHTER]. CAN YOU DO? SIMPSON AND AND GET THIS POLICY DRAFTED IN FRONT OF US ON THE 23RD, AND WE DO THE UNVEILING? WE HAVE TO HAVE THE AGENDA POSTED TOMORROW MORNING.

SO I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL HAVE TIME TO DRAFT IT BEFORE THEN.

OH THAT'S TRUE. YEAH. THESE POSTING DATES. OKAY.

WELL COUNCIL. GO AHEAD. WHAT'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE 23RD? IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO PUT ON THE SCHEDULE BASED ON AN ACCEPTANCE ON THE 16TH.

AND THEN THE FOLLOWING MEETING, IT WOULD BE UNVEILED.

WHY COULDN'T? WE IS THAT THE NEXT MEETING? YEAH. SO WE DEFINITELY HAVE THE LATITUDE OCTOBER 14TH.

AND YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, I THINK WE'RE SETTING A GREAT PRECEDENT.

WE WANT TO HONOR THE GIFT GIVER AS MUCH AS THE GIFT.

AND SO LIKE, I'M NOT TRYING TO PUSH THIS ON ANYBODY, AND I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT ANYBODY TO TAKE A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PUSH SOMETHING OUT THAT THAT ISN'T FULLY ACCEPTED.

I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A POLICY AND WE'RE LOOKING AT PUSHING IT BACK TO THE 14TH? THAT'S DOABLE? YOU SAID YOU'D HAVE SOME TO US. WE WOULD AIM FOR THAT, YES.

I MEAN, IF THERE'S NO RUSH, I DON'T. OKAY. I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT BIG OF A DEAL.

BUT IF THERE'S NO RUSH, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO A POLICY, THERE'S A REASON WE'RE DOING THE POLICY.

IF THERE'S NO RUSH TO GET THIS THING DONE, IF HE UNDERSTANDS, THEN WE GET POLICY.

WE ACCEPT IT. MOVE ON. UNVEILING. YEAH. MR. PATH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D WANT TO ADD? OKAY. COUNCILMAN PRESCOTT, I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING WOULD JUST BE, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN YOU AND I ON ON THIS ISSUE, I'M GREAT TO MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY NEGATIVE CONNOTATION AND SOMEBODY FEELING LIKE WE'VE RUSHED SOMETHING.

IF IT'S A GOOD DEAL TODAY, IT'LL BE A GOOD DEAL TOMORROW AND WE'LL HAVE IT ON OCTOBER 14TH.

ANY CONCERNS ON YOUR END? I JUST IF WE PIVOT WE'RE SPENDING THIS MUCH TIME AND ENERGY ON A COWBOY STATUE [LAUGHTER].

[APPLAUSE] YEAH, I MEAN, IT'S A COWBOY STATUE.

IT'S REALLY NICE. AND WE SHOULD PUT IT OUT THERE AND BE DONE WITH IT.

YES, [APPLAUSE] AND I CONTINUE, THANK YOU. I CONTINUE TO APPRECIATE MR. PRESCOTT OR COUNCILMAN AND THE DIRECTNESS. AND SO LET'S MOVE ON.

SO LET'S GET IT ON THE AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 14TH.

YOU GUYS GET US A POLICY PUT TOGETHER IN LINE WITH TRADITION, CORE VALUE CULTURE, AND I THINK WE'RE GOOD.

I JUST WANT TO REITERATE, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SCULPTURE AND THE COWBOY AND WHAT IT IS.

WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS NECESSARILY UNINTENTIONALLY SET OURSELVES UP FOR SOMETHING THAT WE SAY IN HINDSIGHT, WAIT A MINUTE, WE SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT THAT. BECAUSE IF IT OPENS IT UP TO SOMEBODY EITHER SUING US OR FORCING US OR DOING SOMETHING AND MAYBE ALL THIS IS FOR NAUGHT, BUT I'D RATHER I'D RATHER JUST MAKE SURE AND GET GOOD, CONCRETE LEGAL ADVICE AND LOOK AT HOW THIS IS HANDLED, RATHER THAN DO SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WHY DIDN'T WE THINK OF THAT AT THAT POINT IN TIME? AND THERE COULD BE NO REASON AT ALL. AGAIN, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COWBOY, THE SCULPTURE, THE FAMILY. I THINK EVERYBODY'S APPRECIATIVE OF IT.

BUT LET'S JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE SET IT UP IN A WAY WHERE IT CAN WORK IN THE FUTURE, AND THAT ONCE WE PUT SOMETHING IN HERE, IT CAN STAY AND ACHIEVE WHAT WE WANT TO ACHIEVE WITH IT.

YEAH, AND I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT YOU'RE PUSHING BACK ON THE THE GIFT AT ALL.

[01:10:02]

SO I THINK AT THIS TIME WE'LL TAKE NO ACTION ON ITEM 3.G AND MOVE FORWARD.

OKAY. ITEM 3.H. MITCHELL NORMAND, IF HE'S AVAILABLE AND IN HERE, DO WE HAVE MITCH?

[3.H. Discussion of "Request for Proposal (RFP) # 211-25 RNG for Major Medical — All Benefits" for Third Party Administration for Employer Sponsored Medical, Dental, Vision, Pharmacy benefits and related services. ]

YEP THERE HE IS. MITCH, IF YOU'LL WALK US INTO THIS ONE, PLEASE, SIR THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY TO PRESENT.

CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT TO YOU ALL INFORMATION ON THE MAJOR MEDICAL AND PRESCRIPTION AND ANCILLARY BENEFITS RFP.

I KNOW YOU ALL HAVE HEARD ABOUT THIS RFP FOR A WHILE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN UNDERWAY. AND TODAY I WILL BE GOING THROUGH THE RFP PROCESS, AS WELL AS WHAT STAFF IS PREPARING TO RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL AT THE UPCOMING COUNCIL MEETING. DO I USE THIS OKAY. SO AS YOU ALL HAVE HEARD, RFP FREQUENTLY, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I INCLUDED A DEFINITION OF WHAT RFP STAFF MARKETED A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR VENDORS INTERESTED IN SUBMITTING BIDS FOR VARIOUS BENEFIT SERVICES.

AN RFP IS A FORMAL BUSINESS DOCUMENT ISSUED BY AN ORGANIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS FROM POTENTIAL VENDORS OR CONTRACTORS FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS OR SERVICES.

IN THIS CASE, THE SERVICES THAT WERE MARKETED WERE THE MEDICAL THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, PHARMACY, BENEFIT ADMINISTRATION, DENTAL, VISION BASIC AND EXCUSE ME, BASIC AND ADDITIONAL LIFE INSURANCE.

LONG TERM DISABILITY. SHORT TERM DISABILITY. SECTION 125 ADMINISTRATION, WHICH IS HSA AND FSA ADMINISTRATION, COBRA ADMINISTRATION, ACA ADMINISTRATION, EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, FMLA ADMINISTRATION, AND STOP LOSS INSURANCE. SO THE TIMELINE FOR THIS RFP, THIS IS A VERY STREAMLINED TIMELINE [LAUGHTER]. BETWEEN EACH OF THESE DATES THERE AND DURING EACH OF THE DATE RANGE, THERE WERE VARIOUS ACTIVITIES THAT TOOK PLACE TO COMPLETE DIFFERENT TASKS IN ORDER TO CONTINUE MOVING THIS RFP FORWARD.

BUT WE DID ADVERTISE THIS RFP AT THE BEGINNING OF APRIL FOR APPROXIMATELY A MONTH.

THAT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR VENDORS INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE BUSINESS TO PROPOSE ANY QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE HAD ABOUT THE CITY'S SPECIFICATIONS THAT WERE OUTLINED IN THE RFP DOCUMENT FROM MAY 13TH THROUGH JULY 7TH.

THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE WORKED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR BENEFITS CONSULTANT TO EVALUATE THE BIDS THAT WERE PROPOSED.