[00:00:03]
>> BUT IT'S NOT THE MR. STARBUCK THAT MANY OF YOU ARE USED TO SEEING AT OUR CITY COUNCIL PODIUM, IT'S ACTUALLY KEVIN STARBUCK'S SON, JACK.
>> ALL RIGHT. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
[INVOCATION]
PLEASE JOIN ME IN PRAYER.MOST GRACIOUS HEAVENLY FATHER, WE THANK YOU FOR ALL THE BLESSINGS YOU GIVE US EACH AND EVERY DAY.
WE THANK YOU ESPECIALLY FOR ALL THE LEADERS YOU HAVE PLACED IN AUTHORITY OVER US.
BLESS AND KEEP THEM AS THEY WORK TO PROTECT THOSE THEY SERVE.
GUARD OUR NATION'S MILITARY AND FIRST RESPONDERS AS THEY CONTINUE TO SERVE OUR COUNTRY WITH COURAGE AND HONOR.
WE ASK YOU TO KEEP US SAFE FROM ALL HARM AND DANGER, AND TO HELP US TO LOVE, RESPECT, AND LIVE PEACEFULLY WITH OUR NEIGHBOR.
BE WITH ALL THOSE WHO ARE SUFFERING.
BLESS OUR CITY'S COUNCIL MEETING TODAY.
HELP ALL THINGS ACCOMPLISHED BE TO YOUR WILL AND GLORY.
WE ASK ALL THESE THINGS IN JESUS' NAME. AMEN.
>> AMEN. JACK, THAT WAS WONDERFUL.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME BACK ANYTIME. THANK YOU FOR BLESSING US TODAY.
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> NOW IT DOES MEAN YOU HAVE TO PUT ON A TIE, WHICH LOOKS VERY NICE BY THE WAY.
I'M GUESSING THAT'S NOT YOUR NORMAL SUMMER ATTIRE.
>> OKAY. WELL, IT LOOKS VERY NICE.
YOU DID A GREAT JOB ON THE PRAYER. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. TODAY IS A WORK SESSION AGENDA.
WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC ADDRESS, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY ITEMS THAT WE'RE TAKING A VOTE ON.
IF YOU'RE A CITIZEN, AND YOU'RE WATCHING AND YOU WANT TO GIVE FEEDBACK ON ANYTHING THAT'S ON THE AGENDA TODAY, A GOOD WAY TO DO THAT IS THROUGH E-MAIL.
REACH OUT TO US BY TELEPHONE, WHICH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IS 378-3014.
WE ALL HAVE FACEBOOK PAGES, SO WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU.
AND PUBLIC ADDRESS WILL BE ON NEXT WEEK'S AGENDA.
STARTING WITH ITEM 1A ON OUR AGENDA TODAY,
[A. Coronavirus Update; (Part 1 of 2)]
IS A CORONAVIRUS UPDATE. MR. CITY MANAGER.>> I'M HERE. WE HAVE CASIE STOUGHTON, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH, HERE TO GIVE US THE UPDATE, AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL.
>> GOOD MORNING, OR GOOD AFTERNOON.
AS OF TODAY, THERE'S A TOTAL OF 4,618 CASES OF COVID-19 IN POTTER AND RANDALL COUNTIES.
3,263 CASES IN POTTER COUNTY AND 1,355 CASES IN RANDALL COUNTY.
WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 3,866 RECOVERIES AND 56 DEATHS REPORTED IN POTTER AND RANDALL COUNTIES.
THAT LEAVES US WITH A TOTAL OF 696 ACTIVE CASES.
EACH OF THE CASES DO REPRESENT A UNIQUE INDIVIDUAL.
YESTERDAY AND TODAY, A NUMBER OF DEATHS WERE REPORTED, INCREASING THE TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATHS FROM COVID-19 BY TEN THIS WEEK.
THESE DEATHS WERE RELATED TO A COUPLE OF ISSUES.
THE FIRST ISSUE WAS RELATED TO A DELAY IN REPORTING BY A LOCAL FACILITY.
THE SECOND ISSUE WAS A CLUSTER OF DEATHS RELATED TO A FACILITY.
AND WE DID ALSO HAVE SEVERAL UNRELATED DEATHS.
WE'RE HEARTBROKEN FOR EACH OF THE FAMILIES AND THE FRIENDS REPRESENTED BY THE 56 DEATHS, AND PUBLIC HEALTH IS HONORED TO WORK WITH THE FAMILIES DURING CONTACT INVESTIGATION.
THE PUBLIC HEALTH TEAM REMAINS DILIGENT IN WORKING WITH PATIENTS ON CONTACT INVESTIGATION.
AGAIN, JUST THE SAME AS LAST WEEK, INSTEAD OF ONE OR TWO LARGE OUTBREAKS, WE CONTINUE TO SEE MANY SMALL CLUSTERS, INDICATING LOTS OF COMMUNITY SPREAD AND LOTS OF MOVEMENT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY.
CLUSTERS RELATING FROM FAMILY GATHERINGS, WORKPLACES, YOUTH AND ADULT SPORTS, RELIGIOUS EVENTS, AND CHILDCARE ARE CURRENTLY THE TRENDS THAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW.
CURRENTLY WE ARE SEEING WIDESPREAD CLUSTERING.
WE'RE STILL IN THE SEASON WHERE PREVENTION IS KEY.
WEARING A MASK, STAYING SIX FEET FROM OTHERS, GOOD HAND WASHING, AND LIMITING SOCIAL GROUPS REMAINS CRITICAL IN PREVENTING COVID-19 FOR YOURSELVES AND OTHERS.
HOSPITALIZATION INFORMATION CONTINUES TO RISE.
RIGHT NOW THERE'S A TOTAL OF 69 COVID-19 PATIENTS IN OUR TWO LOCAL HOSPITALS, FOR A HOSPITALIZATION RATE OF 6.9 PERCENT.
TOTAL ADULT BED UTILIZATION IS AT 71 PERCENT.
VENTILATOR UTILIZATION IS AT 45 PERCENT, AND TOTAL ICU UTILIZATION IS AT 71.5 PERCENT.
THE TOTAL NUMBER OF HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS INCREASED BY 25 PATIENTS SINCE LAST WEEK.
[00:05:06]
THE PUBLIC HEALTH DRIVE-THRU DOES REMAIN OPERATIONAL.YOU CALL THE PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT AT 378-6300, AND WE'LL DIRECT YOU FOR TESTING.
THE TEST SITE HAS MOVED TO A DOWNTOWN BUILDING.
THAT BUILDING IS IN BETWEEN THE POST OFFICE AND THE SOD POODLES IN A BUILDING THERE.
I BELIEVE IT WAS THE OLD COCA-COLA WAREHOUSE.
YOU CAN SEE CONES SET UP FOR THE DRIVE-THRU THERE.
SINCE WE STARTED DRIVE-THRU TESTING ON MARCH 27TH, 6,343 TESTS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED.
SO THAT'S A SUCCESS RIGHT THERE.
WE HAVE RECEIVED THE LABS THAT WERE DELAYED FROM OUR PUBLIC HEALTH LAB, WELL, THE LAB THAT PUBLIC HEALTH WAS USING.
THEY HAVE SINCE BEEN RESTOCKED, AND WE HAVE RECEIVED THAT BACKLOG OF LABS.
AND A LOCAL FACILITY, WE HAVE RECEIVED THE LABS THAT HAD BEEN DELAYED THERE.
WITH THIS AND AN INCREASE IN POSITIVE TESTS, TODAY WE HAD AN INCREASE IN 99 TESTS, AND YESTERDAY 100 POSITIVE TESTS.
WE CERTAINLY STILL WANT TO ENCOURAGE PROVIDERS IN OUR COMMUNITY TO CONTINUE TO REPORT ALL POSITIVE COVID TESTS, AND TO COUNSEL THEIR PATIENTS TO STAY HOME WHILE THEY'RE AWAITING THEIR TEST RESULTS, AND TO STAY HOME IF THEY RECEIVE A POSITIVE TEST RESULT.
>> COUNCIL, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR CASIE?
>> CASIE, OUT OF THOSE 69 PATIENTS IN THE HOSPITAL, ARE SOME OF THOSE FROM OUT OF TOWN? I THINK I'VE BEEN READING THAT OUR HOSPITAL HAS BEEN TAKING IN SOME INDIVIDUALS FROM OTHER PLACES IN THE STATE.
ARE THEY INCLUDED IN THAT NUMBER?
>> YES, MA'AM. WE DID RECEIVE ONE PATIENT FROM SOUTH TEXAS.
I BELIEVE IT WAS THE HIDALGO, HARLINGEN AREA.
AMARILLO WAS THE FIRST ICU THAT HAD AN AVAILABLE BED, AND SO I THINK THAT IT'S VERY SIGNIFICANT THAT THAT PATIENT IS CERTAINLY INCLUDED IN THE COUNTS.
BUT ALSO, AMARILLO REMAINS A REGIONAL FACILITY FOR PATIENTS WHO NEED A HIGHER LEVEL OF CARE.
AND SO IN THAT COUNT, THERE ARE PATIENTS WHO MAY BE FROM OTHER LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
>> I WAS TRYING TO TRACK THAT HOSPITALIZATION RATE.
ONE INDIVIDUAL ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE THAT PERCENTAGE THAT MUCH.
IF WE HAVE A LOT OF ADDITIONAL PATIENTS COMING FROM THE REGION, BUT NOT PART OF OUR ACTIVE CASES, THEN OUR HOSPITALIZATION RATE WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN THAT.
BUT THE ONE ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE OUR STATISTICS THAT MUCH.
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE TEN DEATHS THAT WE REPORTED? WE HAD BEEN IN THE MID-FORTIES FOR QUITE A WHILE.
DO YOU KNOW THE AVERAGE AGES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS, OF THE NEW CASES, OR THE NEW DEATHS, I'M SORRY.
>> MOST OF THE PATIENTS WERE ABOVE THE AGE OF SIXTY.
WE HAD ONE THAT WAS YOUNGER, IN THE AGE-GROUP OF THE 20S.
BUT MOST OF THOSE PATIENTS WERE OVER 60.
>> CASIE, CAN YOU JUST GIVE US THE WHOLE PROCESS ABOUT HOW PUBLIC HEALTH RECEIVES THIS DATA, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE WE'RE HAVING A CATCH-UP DAY OR WE'RE RECEIVING A DUMP OF DATA.
I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR ALL OF US JUST TO HEAR AGAIN FROM START TO FINISH, HOW DOES PUBLIC HEALTH TYPICALLY RECEIVE THEIR DATA? I GO INTO MY DOCTOR'S OFFICE.
HOW DOES MY INFORMATION LAND AT PUBLIC HEALTH FROM THERE?
>>SURE. WE TAKE DATA ANY NUMBER OF WAYS THAT PROVIDERS REPORT TO US.
I KNOW IT'S SHOCKING, BUT WE STILL USE OUR FAX MACHINE A LOT.
PROVIDERS CAN FAX US THEIR DATA, PROVIDERS EMAIL IT TO US.
WE'RE WORKING ON A SECURE FTP SITE FOR ONE PROVIDER TO SEND DATA TO US.
AND SO WHEN A PATIENT GOES INTO THEIR PROVIDER'S OFFICE, WHEN THEY'RE TESTED, THEN THEIR TEST RESULTS AND THEIR DEMOGRAPHICS IS SENT TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
THAT PROCESS DOES TAKE SOME TIME,
[00:10:06]
AND THEN ADDING ON THE LAB TIME.IF IT TAKE TWO OR THREE DAYS FOR THE LAB TO GET THE INFORMATION BACK TO THE PROVIDER, AND THEN THE PROVIDER SENDS THAT INFORMATION OVER TO PUBLIC HEALTH AGAIN, EMAIL, FAX, ELECTRONICALLY, HOWEVER IT'S SENT OVER TO US.
THEN OUR TEAM STARTS CALLING THE PATIENT TO DO THE CONTACT INVESTIGATION.
WE WORK VERY HARD TO RECEIVE DATA ANY WAY THAT A PROVIDER WANTS TO SEND IT TO US.
>>WHAT'S THE LAW SAY AS FAR AS HOW THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO REPORT THAT DATA TO YOU? IS THERE A TIME-FRAME?
>> RIGHT NOW. YES. THE NOTIFIABLE CONDITIONS LISTS OUT TIME-FRAMES THAT SPECIFIC DISEASES ARE REPORTED TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
SOME OF THOSE DISEASES ARE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY, SOME ARE BY THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY, AND SOME ARE WITHIN A WEEK.
COVID-19 IS REPORTED IMMEDIATELY TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
>> BY PROVIDERS, YOU MEAN ANYBODY WHO'S OFFERING TESTING OR MEDICAL SERVICES.
SO IT COULD BE A CLINIC, IT COULD BE ONE OF THESE WALK-IN MINOR EMERGENCY CENTERS, IT COULD BE THE BIG HOSPITAL, IT COULD BE A DOCTOR'S OFFICE.
THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY PROVIDERS?
THE LABORATORIES ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT TO PUBLIC HEALTH, PHYSICIANS, OFFICES, HOSPITALS, THE WALMART TESTING, CVS, ALL OF THOSE WE HAVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH, EVEN THE WALK-IN TESTING THERE AT WALMART AND CVS.
SO ALL OF THE DIFFERENT MECHANISMS FOR TESTING, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO REPORT TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
>>NOW I'VE HEARD SOME PEOPLE EXPRESSING FRUSTRATION ABOUT THE TURNAROUND TIME ON THEIR TESTS.
THEY MAY HAVE GOTTEN THEIR TEST AT THE DRIVE-THROUGH CLINIC, IF THE CITY WOULD HAVE STEERED THEM, WOULD HAVE TAKEN THAT TEST IN THE CITY AND CHOSE WHICH LAB IT WENT TO.
BUT MANY OF THE TESTS THE CITY DOESN'T CHOOSE, IT'S THE PROVIDER THAT'S CHOOSING WHAT LAB IT GOES TO; IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MA'AM. IF A PATIENT GOES TO THEIR PRIVATE PHYSICIAN, OR TO THE HOSPITAL, OR TO WALMART, OR TO A PRIVATE PROVIDER, THEN THAT PROVIDER HAS A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LAB OF THEIR CHOICE.
SO THAT SPECIMEN WOULD GO TO THAT LABORATORY, AND THE RESULT WOULD COME AS SOON AS THE LAB PROCESSES THAT SPECIMEN.
PUBLIC HEALTH HAS A CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP WITH TWO LABORATORIES.
WE ARE WORKING ON A THIRD LABORATORY.
WE DID HAVE A DELAY IN PROCESSING OF SAMPLES AT ONE OF THE LABORATORIES THAT WE WERE USING.
THEY HAD MO HISTORICALLY HAD A VERY QUICK TURN AROUND, GENERALLY 24 HOURS, BUT THEY RAN OUT OF THE REAGENT THAT WAS REQUIRED TO PROCESS THE SAMPLES.
WHEN THEY GOT THE NEW SHIPMENT OF REAGENT, IT WASN'T PACKED APPROPRIATELY AND WAS ABOVE TEMPERATURE.
AND SO THEY COULDN'T USE THAT REAGENT.
SO THEY HAD TO REORDER, AND SO THEY FROZE THE SAMPLES SO THAT THEY COULD TEST THEM AS SOON AS THEY GOT NEW REAGENT.
BUT FORTUNATELY, WE WERE ABLE TO SWITCH BACK OVER TO THE LAB THAT WE HAD USED PREVIOUSLY.
SO WE'RE KIND OF JUST SWITCHING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN LABS, DEPENDING ON WHO HAS THE QUICKEST TURNAROUND, BECAUSE WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT THAT IS IMPORTANT BOTH TO OUR PATIENTS AND TO PUBLIC HEALTH FOLLOW-UP.
>>ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR CASIE?
>>YEAH, I'VE GOT ONE ON HOSPITALIZATION.
IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, DON'T WE HAVE A BACKUP PLAN FOR IF WE HAVE A SURGE OF HOSPITALIZATION PATIENTS, AND WE NEED A BACKUP.
THE NUMBERS THAT ARE BEING SAID ARE WHAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE, BUT WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE PLAN IF THINGS BEGIN TO GET OUT OF HAND, SO TO SPEAK; CORRECT?
>>YES, SIR. WE DO HAVE PLANS FOR WHAT'S CALLED AN ALTERNATE CARE SITE.
RIGHT NOW, THOSE PLANS WOULD INCLUDE AN ALTERNATE CARE SITE FOR CONVALESCING PATIENTS, SO PATIENTS WHO ARE RECOVERING BUT NOT NECESSARILY READY TO BE DISCHARGED.
THAT WOULD SAVE THE HOSPITAL STAYS FOR PATIENTS WHO NEEDED HOSPITAL CARE.
AND THEN IN THE EVENT THAT WE NEEDED ADDITIONAL ACTUAL HOSPITAL CARE,
[00:15:03]
WE COULD MOVE TO THAT STAGE OF THE PLAN AS WELL.>>OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT LOCKED IN NECESSARILY AT THIS NUMBER RIGHT HERE.
IT IS IN PLACE, AND SO THERE IS MORE AVAILABLE IF WE NEED IT.
>>AND A FOLLOW-UP ON THAT QUESTION.
BEFORE, WE AS A CITY HAD A PLAN THAT WE HAD BEEN WORKING ON PREPARING FOR THAT ALTERNATE SITE AND THEN AT ONE POINT, THAT WAS GOING TO SHIFT TO THE STATE.
WHERE ARE WE NOW? IF WE HAD TO INITIATE AN ALTERNATE CARE SITE WOULD WE BE DOING THAT THROUGH OUR OWN STAFF, OR IS THAT GOING TO BE FACILITATED THROUGH THE STATE?
>>I BELIEVE WE'RE STILL WORKING TOGETHER ON THAT.
THE PLANS ARE STILL IN PLACE FOR THE STATE TO HELP FACILITATE THE BIG PIECES OF THAT.
THE FACILITY AND SOME OF THE STAFFING, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO UTILIZE SOME OF THE CONTRACT THAT THE STATE HAS IN PLACE FOR STAFFING.
BUT WE ALSO WANT TO HAVE SOME PIECES OF THAT TOO, BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CITY AND LOCAL PARTNERS HAVE PIECES OF THAT AS WELL.
SO YES TO BOTH PIECES OF THE QUESTION.
WE ALWAYS WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THE STATE ON ANY OF THOSE PLANS.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? FOR CASIE. ALL RIGHT.
>> I DO HAVE JUST ONE GENERAL QUESTION.
SO WE'RE DEFINITELY SEEING THE NUMBERS TICK UP, I'VE BEEN WATCHING THAT WE WERE DOWN IN THE 300S AND NOW WE'RE, YOU SAID 696, WE'RE ALMOST BACK UP TO THAT 700.
SO JUST LESS STATISTICAL, JUST YOUR PERCEPTION, CASIE, WHERE ARE WE SPREADING THIS MORE? WOULD YOU JUST ADDRESS THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT'S FROM PEOPLE SHOPPING, AT RESTAURANTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT'S A DIFFERENT SEGMENT SO IF YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT, AND THEN MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AS A COUNCIL AFTER HEARING THAT FROM CASIE, AND MY CONCERN IS, I FEEL LIKE OUR COMMUNITY IS JUST GETTING A LITTLE COVID-19 FATIGUE.
THEY'RE TIRED OF A LOT OF IT AND DEALING WITH IT.
SO WE'RE JUST MAYBE NOT BEING AS CONSCIOUS OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING, BUT CASIE, I'D LIKE TO.
>> AS OPPOSED TO ONE OR TWO LARGE OUTBREAKS LIKE WE SAW AT THE BEGINNING - MARCH, APRIL, EVEN INTO MAY.
WE'RE STARTING TO SEE QUITE A FEW SMALLER CLUSTERS.
AND SO WE'RE SEEING WORKPLACE SETTINGS, WE'RE SEEING FAMILY GATHERINGS, WE'RE SEEING YOUR BIRTHDAY PARTIES, WE'RE SEEING DIFFERENT TYPES OF SPORTING GROUPS OR EVENTS.
WE HAVE CHILDCARE FACILITY, WE'RE SEEING SEVERAL CHURCHES.
SO JUST DIFFERENT PLACES WHERE PEOPLE GATHER AND SPEND TIME WITH ONE ANOTHER AND THOSE THINGS ARE VERY DIFFICULT.
AS A SOCIETY, WE WANT TO GATHER.
WE WANT TO BE WITH OUR FRIENDS, WE WANT TO BE WITH OUR FAMILY.
VERY DIFFICULT TO DO THAT IN A SOCIALLY DISTANT MANNER.
WE'RE SEEING TRAVEL AND TRAVELING TO DO THINGS IN GROUPS.
SO PLACES WHERE PEOPLE GATHER IS WHAT WE'RE SEEING.
>> [OVERLAPPING] IT'S JUST VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE DEALT WITH WHEN WE KNEW REALLY THE SOURCE OF THOSE LARGE NUMBERS AND COULD FOCUS ON THAT.
IT JUST SOUNDS MUCH MORE, SAY IN SOCIAL SETTINGS.
AND NOT EVEN NECESSARILY BIG, BIG GROUPS, EVEN MID SIZE GROUPS, SMALLER, FAMILY GATHERINGS.
>> YEAH. THIS IS MORE COMMUNITY SPREAD AS OPPOSED TO ONE OR TWO LARGE OUTBREAKS,
[00:20:01]
THIS IS MUCH MORE COMMUNITY SPREAD.THIS IS FRIENDS AND FAMILY GIVING IT TO ONE ANOTHER AT BIRTHDAY PARTIES OR AT DIFFERENT GATHERINGS AT WORK, SITTING AT LUNCH WITH ONE ANOTHER.
WE DO A GOOD JOB SOMETIMES OF WEARING MASKS IN THE OFFICE BUT THEN WHEN WE SIT DOWN TO HAVE LUNCH WITH EACH OTHER FOR AN HOUR, THOSE ARE TIMES WHEN THAT TRANSMISSION CAN OCCUR.
LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S JUST HARD TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT ALL THE TIME, AND THOUGH IT'S WHEN WE DON'T, THAT'S WHEN IT SPREADS.
>> EVEN JUST WITH MY OTHER FRIENDS WHO ARE MAYORS IN THE BIG CITY MAYOR'S GROUP [NOISE] [INAUDIBLE].
THEY'RE ALL TELLING ME THE SAME THING BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN SPIKING FOR THE LAST THREE TO FOUR WEEKS, AND IT'S TRUE, OUR FIRST ROUND OF SPIKE WAS MUCH EASIER TO CONTAIN BECAUSE WE KNEW WHERE IT WAS COMING FROM, AND THE SECOND ROUND IN ALL OF THESE CITIES WHERE I'M TALKING TO THE MAYORS, THEY CAN'T POINT TO WHERE IT'S COMING FROM.
SO THIS SECOND RAMP IS TRULY COMMUNITY SPREAD, AND IT'S GOING TO JUST TAKE DILIGENCE ON AN INDIVIDUAL LEVEL, DAY IN, DAY OUT, HOUR BY HOUR, MINUTE BY MINUTE, PEOPLE BEING DILIGENT TO SLOW THE SPREAD.
AND I DO HAVE CONCERN THAT WE'RE COMING UP ON STARTING SCHOOL.
I DO THINK WE SHOULD START SCHOOL, AND I'VE SIGNED UP FOR MY KID TO START IN PERSON.
SO I WOULD LIKE FOR US AS A COMMUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD IN-PERSON SCHOOL, BUT I ABSOLUTELY RESPECT THE DECISION MAKERS THAT ARE WORKING ON THAT RIGHT NOW, AND WE WILL SUPPORT AND ABIDE WHATEVER PLAN THEY'RE PUTTING IN PLACE, BOTH ALL FIVE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT TOUCH THE CITY LIMITS.
BUT IT WILL CONTINUE THIS COMMUNITY SPREAD THROUGH THE END OF AUGUST ALL THROUGH SEPTEMBER BECAUSE PROBABLY IN SOME FORM OR FASHION, IN-PERSON SCHOOL IS STARTING AGAIN.
SO I THINK WE'RE IN THIS ONE FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME WATCHING OUR NUMBERS GO UP, AND MY HOPE IS THAT PEOPLE WOULD INDIVIDUALLY TAKE AS MUCH RESPONSIBILITY AS THEY COULD TO BE EXTRA CAREFUL SO THAT OUR KIDS CAN GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND OUR BUSINESSES CAN STAY OPEN.
>> I THINK IT'S A GOOD REMINDER IN THAT, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE OUTBREAK, THE GOAL WAS TO BE FLATTENING THE CURVE, SPREADING THAT OUT SO THAT OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM WAS NOT OVERWHELMED, AND SO WE GRIEVE EACH OF THOSE DEATHS THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN OUR COMMUNITY BUT THAT IT HASN'T BEEN BECAUSE WE WERE UNABLE TO REVIVE THEM MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.
IT WAS IN SPITE OF OUR PROVIDING THEM MEDICAL CARE THAT WE STILL LOST LIVES, AND THAT IS THE REALITY OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS, THAT IT IS GOING TO BE SPREAD, IT'S THAT WE STILL HAVE TO KEEP AN EYE ON OUR HOSPITALIZATIONS.
OUR ABILITY TO STILL PROVIDE MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TO THOSE WHO ARE ILL ENOUGH TO NOT BE ABLE TO JUST RECOVER AT HOME.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, ONE ONE PERSON AT A TIME WATCHING WHAT WE'RE DOING.
>> ANY FINAL [NOISE] WORDS ON THAT FROM THE COUNCIL? OKAY, WE'RE READY TO MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM, THEN. EVERYBODY READY? ITEM 1-B IS A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION
[B. Presentation and Discussion on Recommended Changes to the Public and Environmental Health Code to address Peace Officer Enforcement of Certain Health and Safety Regulations, and Minor Revisions to Chapter 14-3 Alcoholic Beverages;]
ON RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CODE, AND I'LL LET JARED AND STAFF TALK ABOUT THE REST OF THAT.WE'VE GOT ANTHONY SPANEL, DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH TO PRESENT THE ITEM. ANTHONY, GO AHEAD.
>> WELL, THANKS, JARED. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
LET ME SHARE MY SCREEN HERE REAL QUICK, PLEASE.
SO IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY IS TWO MINOR REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CODE.
I'LL GO OVER THESE ONE AT A TIME, BUT IT SHOULD BE A VERY SHORT PRESENTATION.
THE FIRST ONE WOULD BE A SMALL REVISION TO 8-5-23 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CODE, OTHER ENFORCEMENT.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REVISION IS TO PROVIDE ANY LICENSED PEACE OFFICER THE ABILITY TO HELP REINFORCE JUST A COUPLE MINOR PIECES OF MY CODE.
PRIMARILY, FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS WITH THEIR DOORS AND MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS PARKING ON CITY RIGHT-OF-WAYS OR RIGHT-OF-WAYS.
THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS IS TO REDUCE THE NECESSITY, DELAY, AND COSTS OF SUMMONING ONE OF MY STAFF OUTSIDE OF NORMALLY SCHEDULED BUSINESS HOURS,
[00:25:03]
WHEN BOTH OF THESE VIOLATIONS ARE VERY, VERY TYPICAL.SO TRULY WOULD HELP ME IN MANAGING THESE THINGS AFTER HOURS, AND THIS WOULD JUST BE A CLEANUP OF THAT ORDINANCE.
THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE A SMALL REVISION TO 14-3-3 OF CITY ORDINANCE, RELATED TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THIS IS IN RELATION TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND HOW WE PROCESS THOSE THROUGH IN OUR DEPARTMENT.
AND AGAIN, THE OBJECTIVE IS TO REDUCE THE REGULATORY BURDEN ON BUSINESSES TRYING TO ACHIEVE AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE ISSUED BY TABC.
THIS REVISION WOULD BRING US MORE INTO LINE OF WHAT WE PRACTICE TODAY IN OUR OFFICE, AND IT'S TRULY JUST A CLEANUP OF THAT ORDINANCE.
AND THAT IS IT FOR TODAY, UNLESS YOU GUYS HAVE SOME QUESTIONS I MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER FOR YOU.
>> WE'LL OPEN IT TO QUESTIONS, COUNCIL.
>> CAN'T SEE EVERYBODY, BUT I THINK THAT, YEAH.
OKAY. NO QUESTIONS FOR ANTHONY, THEN?
>> [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU ALL.
>>ITEM 1-C IS TO DISCUSS PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. JARED?
>> WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE CORONAVIRUS RELIEF FUNDING GRANT UPDATE.
[A. Coronavirus Update (Part 2 of 2)]
>> ARE YOU SAYING GO BACK TO ITEM 1-A, UNDER CORONAVIRUS, AND TALK ABOUT RELIEF FUNDS?
>> [OVERLAPPING] YES, MA'AM. [NOISE]
>> YES, MA'AM. I APOLOGIZE, I STEPPED AWAY FROM MY COMPUTER FOR JUST ONE SECOND, BUT WE ALSO IN ADDITION TO THE UPDATE FROM CASIE, AND THIS IS MY OVERSIGHT, I FORGOT TO GO BACK TO ANDREW TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE CORONAVIRUS-RELATED FUNDING THAT WE HAVE OUT FOR BUSINESS ASSISTANCE. ANDREW?
>> YES, SIR. SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE ON THE PROGRESS SO FAR FOR THE REIMBURSEMENTS.
WE'VE GOT 54 APPLICATIONS AND ALMOST A 100,000 REQUESTED SO FAR, AND WE'VE PAID OUT ABOUT 50,000 OF THAT.
AND WE CONTINUE TO PROCESS THEM ON A DAILY BASIS.
WE'RE GETTING ABOUT TWO OR SO EACH WEEK, SO THE APPLICATIONS ARE STILL COMING IN.
WE HAVE REVISED OUR PROCESS A LITTLE BIT, WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE DIFFERENT ROUNDS, BECAUSE WE HAVE RECEIVED QUESTIONS ON, CAN THEY RESUBMIT IF THEY HAVEN'T HIT THEIR 5,000 LIMIT? SO WE'VE GOTTEN CERTAIN ROUNDS, SO WE DON'T GET CONSTANT RECEIPTS WHO WANT TO PULL THEM TOGETHER FOR THAT NEXT ROUND OF FUNDING.
SO WE EXPECT TO SEE SOME MORE SUBMISSIONS FROM THOSE THAT HAVEN'T MET THAT 5,000 AT THIS POINT, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE GENERAL GRANT PROGRAM THAT WE'RE WORKING ON FINALIZING.
LET ME SHARE MY SCREEN REAL QUICK.
[BACKGROUND] SO JUST TO REMIND COUNCIL, WE WERE WORKING ON THE REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM FOR PP&E.
CDBG'S ALSO GOT DEDICATED FUNDING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO USE FOR GRANTS AND ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR LOW TO MODERATE INCOME.
THIS PROGRAM IS ALSO A GRANT PROGRAM FOR SMALL BUSINESSES, LESS THAN 50 EMPLOYEES, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE AS MUCH AS THE HUD REQUIREMENTS IN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT HAS TO BE PROVIDED.
THIS PROGRAM WOULD PROVIDE GRANTS UP TO $10,000 TO ELIGIBLE BUSINESSES, AND WHAT THEY HAVE TO DESCRIBE ON THE APPLICATION, WE HAVE CERTAIN QUESTIONS THAT HELP GET THEM TO THAT POINT.
WHAT IMPACT HAVE THEY SEEN WITH THE CLOSURES, OR ANY BUSINESS INTERRUPTION RELATED TO COVID? SO THEY'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A NARRATIVE OF, HAVE THEY HAD TO LAY PEOPLE OFF, HAVE THEY HAD TO CLOSE THEIR DOORS FOR EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME, HAVE THEY HAD TO REDUCE THEIR HOURS OR THEIR SHIFTS DUE TO COVID? SO THAT'LL BE PART OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY'VE SEEN A DECLINE IN REVENUE, TELL US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THE FUNDS WOULD BE USED AND HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THEIR OPERATIONS.
AND RIGHT NOW, AND THIS CAN BE SOME FEEDBACK WE'D LIKE TO SEE FROM COUNCIL AS WE'VE GOT IT LISTED, SIMILAR TO THE CDBG PROGRAM, THAT IT WOULD EXCLUDE PUBLICLY-TRADED BUSINESSES, NON-PROFITS, RELIGIOUS, OR HOME-BASED BUSINESSES.
COMPARED TO THE PPE, WE DID ALLOW NON-PROFITS TO SUBMIT FOR THE PPE REIMBURSEMENT, BUT WE WERE DOING A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY WITH THIS APPLICATION.
THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE CERTAIN CERTIFICATIONS THAT THEY WOULD FILL OUT, SUCH AS NOT HAVING OTHER FEDERAL FUNDS LIKE THE PPP LOANS AND OTHERS, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO AVOID AS FAR AS THE SUPPLANTING OF FUNDS.
FROM WHAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO RESEARCH, THERE'S BEEN ALMOST 4,000 PPP LOANS.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEWHERE OVER 8,200 BUSINESSES IN THE CITY LIMIT, BASED ON THE RESEARCH I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND, SO THERE ARE STILL QUITE A FEW OUT THERE THAT HAVEN'T RECEIVED FEDERAL FUNDING THAT SHOULD QUALIFY FOR THIS PROGRAM, BUT IT WOULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE WITH THAT REQUIREMENT.
[00:30:03]
IT WOULD BE A ONE-TIME GRANT THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE REPAYMENT.AND THEN OUR GOAL, WE'VE CONTINUED TO WORK ON THE APPLICATION AND FINE TUNE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANTS, AS WELL AS WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THEM TO TURN IN, LIKE THEIR MOST RECENT AUDIT, PAYROLL REPORTS, THOSE THINGS, JUST TO SHOW THE IMPACT.
OUR GOAL IS TO HOPEFULLY LAUNCH THIS PROGRAM NEXT WEEK.
AND AS WE GET APPLICATIONS, WE DO HAVE A COMMITTEE OF STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED WITH THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND OTHERS THAT WE CAN TOUCH ON.
WE'LL BE ABLE TO REVIEW THOSE APPLICATIONS, THE NARRATIVES THAT ARE PROVIDED, AND REALLY DETERMINE HOW MUCH ASSISTANCE IS NEEDED TO HELP THESE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY COVID.
WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON GETTING THAT READY TO LAUNCH, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE OR TAKE ANY FEEDBACK THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGE.
>> OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS, [OVERLAPPING] ANDREW.
>> ANDREW, DID THE GRANTS INCREASE FROM 5,000 TO 10,000?
>> YES. THE PPE WAS UP TO 5,000 REIMBURSEMENT, AND WE'RE PROPOSING UP TO 10,000 FOR THIS PARTICULAR GRANT.
>> [NOISE] OKAY. I KNOW THAT THERE WERE QUITE A FEW NON-PROFITS THAT WERE HOPING TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS APPLICATION PROCESS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS WOULD RECONSIDER?
>> I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A POSSIBILITY.
WE'LL HAVE TO RESEARCH A LITTLE BIT MORE, JUST TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT ANY RESTRICTIONS.
THE PPE REIMBURSEMENT WAS MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD.
BUT WE CAN RESEARCH THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND SEE IF THAT'S AN OPTION. ABSOLUTELY.
>> OKAY, [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU.
>> WE HAVE SEEN SOME NON-PROFITS SUBMIT FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM SO FAR.
>> ANDREW, IF YOU WOULD JUST RESTATE AGAIN WHERE THESE FUNDS ARE COMING FROM.
WHO IS THE SOURCE FOR THESE DOLLARS?
>> THESE ARE OUR STATE ALLOCATION OF FEDERAL CARES ACT FUNDING, WHICH ALLOWS FOR UP TO 25 PERCENT TO BE SPENT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
AND IT'S VERY BROAD, BUT IT'S SPECIFIC.
THAT SECOND BULLET POINT THERE, THAT TALKS ABOUT COST ASSOCIATED WITH BUSINESS INTERRUPTION CAUSED BY REQUIRED CLOSURES, COMES STRAIGHT FROM THE FAQS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, SO THAT'S VERY SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE INCLUDED THAT THEY NEED TO SHOW HOW THEY'RE IMPACTED.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [NOISE] ANDREW, WE APPRECIATE THE LEVEL OF DETAIL YOU GUYS CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS PROGRAM, EVERY BUSINESS THAT'S RECEIVED HELP APPRECIATES IT AND THAT MAKES OUR CITY STRONGER, SO WE APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU ALL ARE PUTTING INTO IT.
>> CLEARLY, WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH DR. SAUER TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAM AND BE AT LAUNCH WITH THE COMMITTEE THAT'S GOING TO HELP REVEAL, AS THEY START COMING IN.
>> EDDY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK TOO.
WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO ITEM 1C.
[C. Discuss proposed changes to the Community Development Advisory Committee;]
>> YOU'VE ALREADY READ THE ITEMS, SO WE'VE GOT JULIANA KITTEN TO TALK ABOUT IT.
THIS HAS BEEN A VERY COMPLICATED PROCESS.
LOOKS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD ON PAPER, BUT I KNOW FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, EVERY TIME WE'VE TRIED TO FULLY CONSTITUTE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, IT'S BEEN A CHALLENGE.
WHILE NOT TECHNICALLY COMPLICATED, IT'S VERY COMPLICATED IN EXECUTION.
JULIANA, WALK US THROUGH IT AND TELL US WHAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE.
>> ABSOLUTELY. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CITY MANAGER, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
STEPHANIE IS GOING TO RUN MY SLIDES FOR ME, I APPRECIATE IT.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE DUTIES OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS TO BE AN ADVISORY BOARD, BOTH TO MY DEPARTMENT AND THEN ALSO PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.
BUT IT ALSO COULD HAVE A MUCH BROADER ROLE IN TERMS OF PROVIDING COUNSEL AND GUIDANCE ABOUT OUR SEVERAL DIFFERENT HUD PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE IN MY DEPARTMENT.
I GUESS I JUMPED AHEAD, LET'S GO ONTO THE NEXT ONE.
ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS THE EXAMPLE,
[00:35:06]
WHAT WE DID BECAUSE WE'D MET SEVERAL MONTHS AGO AND WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO'S IN WHAT ZIP CODE, HOW MANY DO WE NEED FROM EACH ZIP CODE? JUST LIKE MR. MILLER SAID, IT TURNED OUT TO BE A BIT ONEROUS AND WE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN ABLE TO HAVE FULL MEMBERSHIP AND/OR FULL ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP.MYSELF AND MY TEAM HAVE BEEN DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH ABOUT WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE UTILIZING AND WE FOUND THAT MOST PLACES WERE MUCH LESS SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS.
AND HERE IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE, THIS IS FROM THE CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS.
IT JUST VERY SIMPLY TALKS ABOUT SEVEN MEMBERS, HOW OFTEN THEY MEET AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF WHERE PEOPLE ARE LIVING AND THOSE KIND OF RECOMMENDATIONS.
WHAT HUD TELLS US, WHICH IS OUR GOVERNING BODY WITH ALL OF THIS, IS THEY'RE VERY OPEN.
WHAT THEY SAY IS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN, BUT IT'S UP TO EACH AREA, JURISDICTION, LOCALITY TO DECIDE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THEM.
THIS IS WHAT WE'RE HAD IN TERMS OF CURRENT REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND WHAT WE'RE OBVIOUSLY BRINGING HERE TODAY FOR DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS AND FEEDBACK.
CURRENTLY, WE HAVE 11 MEMBER COMMITTEE, CHAIR SELECTED AT LARGE, TWO OTHER MEMBERS AT LARGE, AND THEN TWO MEMBERS FROM EACH OF THE FOUR GEOGRAPHIC CDBG TARGET AREAS, AND THAT MEMBERS WERE ELECTED TO TWO-YEAR TERMS, EXEMPT FROM TERM LIMITS.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT WE HAVE INSTEAD A SEVEN MEMBER COMMITTEE AND THAT WE HAVE THREE MEMBERS AT LARGE AND A MINIMUM OF FOUR MEMBERS FROM CDBG TARGET AREA.
CERTAINLY, ALL SEVEN MEMBERS COULD BE FROM CDBG TARGET AREA AND NOT NECESSARILY A SPECIFIC ZIP CODE.
SO MINIMUM, FOUR MEMBERS FROM CDBG TARGET AREA.
ALSO, WE'RE PUTTING IN A PREFERENCE THAT FOLKS HAVE EITHER PROFESSIONAL OR VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SUPPORTING OR WORKING WITH HOMELESS AND LOW TO MODERATE INCOME INDIVIDUALS.
THEN MAKING THE TERMS THE SAME AS OTHER COMMITTEES, AND THAT MEMBERS ELECTED TO THREE-YEAR TERMS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IN TERMS OF CHANGING THE ORDINANCE.
>> JULIANA, WHEN YOU MENTION THE TARGET AREAS, YOU'RE JUST TALKING NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, AND WEST RIGHT? WITHIN OUR CITY.
>> THE TARGET AREA IS DEFINED BY THE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME AREAS AND [BACKGROUND] THAT'S WHAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT FOR TARGET AREAS.
>> COUNCIL WOMAN POWELL, THIS IS KEVIN STARBUCK, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THE PREVIOUS MODEL BROKE THE CDBG TARGET AREA INTO FOUR QUADRANTS.
[BACKGROUND] THAT DID NOT MATCH THE FOUR QUADRANTS OF THE CITY AS A WHOLE, IT WAS BASED ON THE FOUR QUADRANTS OF THOSE SPECIFIC CDBG TARGET AREAS.
IT WAS BASED ON THAT THAT THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE CALLED FOR TWO MEMBERS FROM EACH OF THOSE QUADRANTS TO MAKE UP EIGHT MEMBERS FROM THE TARGET AREA.
THAT WAS NEVER A MANDATE OR REQUIREMENT FROM HUD, THAT WAS SIMPLY A PRACTICE THAT WAS PUT INTO PLACE WHEN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE WAS ORIGINALLY FORMULATED, MANY, MANY YEARS AGO.
IN WORKING WITH JULIANA AND OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT AND IN REVIEWING THE REQUIREMENTS FROM HUD, IT WAS WHERE WE LOOKED TO SIMPLIFY IT AS SIMPLY FOUR MEMBERS FROM THE TARGET AREA AS A WHOLE.
>> TRYING TO GET PEOPLE FROM EACH OF THE GEOGRAPHIC QUADRANTS, WHICH DON'T NECESSARILY APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD, IT WAS NOT NECESSARILY A REQUIREMENT, WE STILL FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE GOOD REPRESENTATION, THE MAJORITY OF REPRESENTATION, FROM THE TARGET AREAS THAT WERE DESIGNED TO GET THE MAXIMUM BENEFIT FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS. BUT IT WAS BASED ON THAT THAT WE FOCUSED ON,
[00:40:02]
WE NEED FOUR REPRESENTATIVES FROM THAT TARGET AREA AS A WHOLE VERSUS GEOGRAPHICALLY SPLITTING THAT AREA FURTHER AND MAKING IT MUCH MORE COMPLICATED TO FILL THAT BOARD OUT.>> WHAT WILL BE THE MECHANICS IN CHANGING FROM WHOEVER [INAUDIBLE]? YOU ELIMINATE FOUR OF THE HEAD MEN ATTENDING OR WHAT DO YOU DO?
>> STEPHANIE, IF YOU COULD ADVANCE TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH, TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION, THE BOARD CONSISTS OF 11 MEMBERS.
KEEPING IN MIND THAT IN THE FALL, COUNCIL DID NOT TAKE ACTION TO FILL A NUMBER OF VACANCIES THAT WERE FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE COMING UP WHOSE TERM HAD EXPIRED, BECAUSE WE BASICALLY TABLED THE FILLING OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AT THAT TIME BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE CONFUSION RELATED TO THE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO MEMBERSHIP AND THE LIKE.
AS IT TURNS OUT, FOUR OF THOSE MEMBERS' TERM EXPIRED AT THE END OF 2019 AND THAT LEFT US WITH ONLY SEVEN MEMBERS REMAINING ON THE BOARD.
SUBSEQUENT TO THE REFORMATION OF THAT, FOUR OF THOSE MEMBERS THAT REMAINED HAVE RESIGNED OR MOVED OUT OF THE AREA OR HAVE JUST NOT EXPRESSED INTEREST IN SERVING ON THE BOARD.
AT THIS POINT, WE HONESTLY ONLY HAVE THREE ACTIVE MEMBERS WHOSE TERM EXPIRES AT THE END OF 2020.
WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ON THIS SLIDE IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING AS AN ADJUSTED TIMELINE TO IMPLEMENT THIS CHANGE.
WE'RE REVIEWING THE INFORMATION WITH THE COUNCIL TODAY TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK ON HOW WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD.
WE WILL DO A FIRST READING OF A AMENDED ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THIS CHANGE ON NEXT WEEK'S MEETING ON JULY 28TH, AND THEN ON AUGUST 11TH, WE WOULD HAVE THE SECOND READING THAT WOULD FULLY ADOPT THE CHANGE AND MAKE THIS OFFICIAL TO WHERE WE WOULD IMPLEMENT THESE CHANGE AND REQUIREMENTS.
THEN WE WOULD LOOK AT THE MEETING ON AUGUST 25TH AS BEING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO BASICALLY APPOINT ADDITIONAL MEMBERS TO FILL OUT THE COMMITTEE.
AS I INDICATED, AT THIS POINT, WE ONLY HAVE THREE ACTIVE MEMBERS WHO STILL HAVE A REMAINING PORTION OF THEIR TERM IN PLACE FOR THE CDAC COMMITTEE.
IT'S FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE THAT WE WILL NEED TO LOOK TO COUNCIL TO FILL AT LEAST FOUR VACANCIES.
AS WE GET TO THE FALL OF THIS YEAR AND WE GO THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS FOR ASSIGNING PEOPLE TO COMMITTEES OR THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS [NOISE] AND THE LIKE, THREE OF THOSE PERSONNEL OR FOUR PERSONS ON THE COMMITTEE, THEIR TERMS WILL BE EXPIRING AT THE END OF THE YEAR.
WE WILL THEN HAVE TO LOOK TO FILL THOSE POSITIONS MOVING FORWARD, WHETHER THAT'S A REAPPOINTMENT OR APPOINTING SOMEBODY NEW.
WE REACHED A CROSSROADS WITH THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE AND THE WAY IT WAS FORMED TO ADDRESS AND TO [NOISE] FIX SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES THAT WE WERE HAVING.
HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION SPECIFIC TO HOW DO WE HANDLE THE TRANSITION.
>> IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, ISN'T THIS BEEN NOTORIOUSLY A USER [INAUDIBLE] RECORD THE HARDEST COMMITTEE EVERY YEAR THAT WE'VE HAD TO TRY AND WORK OUR WAY THROUGH [INAUDIBLE] BILLS? [NOISE]
>> IN EVERY YEAR, EDDY, WE HAVE A LIST.
EVERY YEAR OUR LIST OF WILLING CITIZENS TO SERVE ON COMMITTEES IS GETTING BIGGER, BECAUSE WE'VE REVAMPED THE PROCESS, AND IT'S HAPPENED ANNUALLY INSTEAD OF AD HOC THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
WE HAVE THIS BIG LIST OF PEOPLE WILLING TO SERVE, BUT BECAUSE WE'VE SELF-INFLICTED THESE ZIP CODE RESTRICTIONS ON THEM, WE CAN'T PLUG IN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO SERVE ON THIS PARTICULAR COMMITTEE.
SO I THINK YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.
THIS ONE'S CHALLENGING, AND THAT INDICATES WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
>>IF WE DO AGREE TO THE CHANGES OCCURRING ON THIS, AND WE MAKE [NOISE] AND WE, AS WE POPULATE THIS [NOISE] POTENTIALLY AT LEAST FOUR [INAUDIBLE] I DON'T KNOW IF THE OTHER THREE ARE GOING TO COME BACK FOR ANOTHER TERM OR NOT.
[INAUDIBLE] THAT WE DON'T SEE MORE THAN TWO OF THESE IN ANY GIVEN YEAR.
[INAUDIBLE] SO WE HAVE TO RECALCULATE AT ALL [NOISE] MAYBE, ONE ONE YEAR WE HAVE TERM THREE.
BECAUSE IF THESE THREE ARE CHOOSING TO STAY, COULD WE PUT THEM UP FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM? TWO OF THEM WE APPOINT WHERE [NOISE] A ONE-YEAR TERM
[00:45:07]
SO THAT WE'RE CONSTANTLY TRYING TO POPULATE AN ENTIRE BOARD AGAIN.>>DR. SAL, YOU'RE EXACTLY CORRECT.
THAT IS THE HOPE TO GO FORWARD.
[NOISE] IF YOU LOOK AT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS BOARD PREVIOUSLY, THEY WERE BASED ON TWO-YEAR TERMS, WHICH WAS DIFFERENTIATED FROM WHAT WE DO WITH THE MAJORITY OF OUR COMMITTEES AND BOARDS.
SO WE ARE LOOKING TO ADVOCATE TO GO TO THE THREE-YEAR TERM, AND TO DO BASICALLY A SEGMENTATION [INAUDIBLE] PER THE ORDINANCE, WHERE THESE ARE STAGGERED TERMS. WE ONLY ARE LOOKING AT TWO TO THREE PEOPLE EVERY YEAR TO FILL OUT THE BOARD, SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE A 100% TURNOVER AS THE BOARD MOVES FORWARD.
>>OUR ULTIMATE GOAL, AS A BOARD, IS TO HAVE IT BECOME MUCH MORE ACTIVE THAN JUST APPROVING AND LOOKING OVER THE ANNUAL CDP [INAUDIBLE] APPLICATION.
I'D LIKE TO GET MORE INVOLVED IN THE [NOISE] OUR OTHER EMERGENCY SOLUTION GRANTS.
WE WANT CITIZENS ENGAGED, DEFINITELY FROM THE TARGET AREA WHERE OUR GRANTS ARE THEIR FOCUS.
BUT ALSO, I WANT PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE CITY TO BE INTERESTED IN THOSE AREAS.
I THINK THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, BECAUSE THAT'S A VERY VALUABLE AREA FOR OUR CITY, AND EVERYONE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND THAT AND BE PART OF SUPPORTING OUR LOW TO MODERATE INCOME PEOPLE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] ARE YOU BRINGING THAT IN THROUGH YOUR THREE AT LARGE PLACES? IS THAT WHERE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO PULL PEOPLE IN FROM OUTSIDE THOSE FOUR QUADRANTS?
>>CERTAINLY, THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT, AND A LOT OF IT DEPENDS ON THE APPLICATIONS WE HAVE.
JUST LIKE KEVIN SAID, I CERTAINLY NEED YOU-ALL'S HELP IN SEEKING OUT PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED, AND HOLD THOSE VALUES, AND BE WILLING TO PUT THE NOSE TO THE GRINDSTONE.
AS YOU ALL KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE FIVE YEARS, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT MANY PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY LIVING OUT IN VEGA.
SO I WILL BE ABSOLUTELY CALLING ON YOU-ALL TO ALSO PROVIDE SOME ASSISTANCE WITH THAT.
>>THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS.
BEFORE WE GET TO APPOINTMENTS, IT WAS ALWAYS SUCH A CHALLENGE TO FIGURE OUT THE MAP, AND WE THINK WE HAVE ALL OF THE SLOTS FILLED, AND THEN IT DIDN'T FIT THE CRITERIA.
I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS QUITE A BIT.
I NOTICED, ON ONE OF THE OTHER CITIES THAT YOU HAD REVIEWED, ONE OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS WAS FOR TERM LIMITS.
WHAT WAS YOUR THINKING ON THAT? YOU'RE NOT PUTTING TERM LIMITS ON OUR REQUIREMENTS.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT?
>>COUNCILMAN HAYES, I'LL JUMP IN ON THIS.
THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE THAT FORMED THE CDAC SAID THAT EACH MEMBER SERVES TWO-YEAR TERMS, AND THERE ARE NO TERM LIMITS APPLIED TO THIS BOARD.
WE'RE TAKING ALL OF THAT OUT AND ADOPTING THE SAME GUIDANCE THAT WE USE FOR EVERY COMMITTEE OR BOARD THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPOINTS, AND GOING TO THREE-YEAR TERMS WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR SERVING ONLY TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS AS A BASIC TERM LIMIT AS PART OF THAT.
BASICALLY THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'RE ADOPTING THE SAME RULES THAT WE USE FOR ALL BOARDS AND COMMITTEES, RATHER THAN A DIFFERENTIATED PROCESS FOR THIS SPECIFIC BOARD.
I THINK WITH THE LONGER TERMS, THAT WILL GIVE PEOPLE A MUCH BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN THE BOARD, LEARN THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, AND BE IN A BETTER POSITION THAN THE TWO-YEAR TERMS WE HAD PREVIOUSLY USED.
THAT MAY HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE LOGIC TO REMOVING THE TERM LIMITS RELATED TO IT.
I THINK THIS STRIKES A BETTER BALANCE THAT WILL ADDRESS THE DESIRES OF COUNCIL THAT HAS BEEN EXPRESSED IN THE PAST, AND MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS MOVING FORWARD.
>> SOUNDS GOOD. SO IT'S A RECOMMENDATION, LIKE THE OTHERS.
[00:50:01]
BUT IT IS MEETING THE DIRECTION TOWARDS TRYING TO GET NEW FACES, VOICES, AND THOUGHTS ON ALL OF OUR BOARDS, BUT HAVING ENOUGH TIME PERIOD ON THERE TO ACTUALLY HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE AND A LITTLE BIT OF LONGEVITY.I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE SPECIFICS OF THIS BOARD.
THAT IS, PEOPLE THAT ARE APPLYING, TO BE SURE THAT IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT PEOPLE SERVING ON THAT COMMITTEE CANNOT BE AFFILIATED WITH AN ORGANIZATION THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLY RECEIVING FRONT FUNDS FROM THEIR COMMITTEE.
THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY CLEAR IN ONE OF OUR APPOINTMENTS, AND THAT CAUSED A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION. THIS ONE IS DIFFERENT.
IT'S GIVING RECOMMENDATIONS AND ALLOCATING MONEY.
IT'S NOT JUST IDEAS AND POLICIES.
FOR APPLYING, THEY NEED TO KNOW THAT IT WOULD ELIMINATE THEIR ORGANIZATION FROM RECEIVING FUNDS.
>> WE HAVE ADDRESSED THAT IN THE PAST.
THERE HAVE BEEN SITUATIONS WHERE A MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAS HAD AN INTEREST IN PURSUING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS, AND DUE TO THAT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS, EITHER THEIR ORGANIZATION WAS NOT ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, OR HAD TO STEP OFF OF THE BOARD AND NOT BE PART OF THE BOARD MOVING FORWARD.
SO WE KEEP VERY CLOSE TABS ON THAT, AND EVERY COMMITTEE MEMBER HAS TO WORK THROUGH THOSE ISSUES OF THE CONFLICT OF INTERESTS RELATED TO MAKING DECISIONS, AND IN THIS CASE, RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL RELATED TO THE USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS.
>> SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY A BIG THANK YOU TO KEVIN AND TO LESLIE SMITH, ONE OF OUR CITY ATTORNEYS.
THEY WERE TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL IN THIS PROCESS.
THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH, A LOT OF GOOD QUESTIONS TO REALLY THINK ABOUT.
THEY'RE LOOKING BACK AT THE ORIGINAL AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AND HOW THIS IS RELATED TO IT AND, ARE WE MAINTAINING THOSE VALUES AND PRIORITIES? AND SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO BOTH OF THEM.
>> OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU ALL, WE MOVE ON THEN TO ITEM 1-D,
[D. Presentation and Discussion on the TIRZ #1 Downtown Wayfinding Project;]
WHICH IS A PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION ON THE TIRZ #1 DOWNTOWN WAYFINDING PROJECT.>> AND HERE WE'VE GOT EMILY KOLLER TO TALK ABOUT THE ITEM, SHE'S OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION MANAGER.
THE WAYFINDING PROJECT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT THAT EMILY IS GOING TO GO INTO SOME DETAIL ON, SO EMILY TAKE IT AWAY.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU, SIR, AND GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR AND COUNCIL, IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN.
SO YES, AS CITY MANAGER SAID, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN UNDERWAY FOR OVER A YEAR NOW.
THE GOAL IS TO CREATE A SYSTEM OF SIGNAGE THAT WILL SHOW PEOPLE LANDMARKS AND ATTRACTIONS IN DOWNTOWN, NOT MAKE THEM FIND THEIR WAY.
SO WE'VE BEEN USING THOSE TWO PROJECT NAMES INTERCHANGEABLY, WAYSHOWING AND WAYFINDING.
BUT THE SIGNS, WILL BE A FAMILY.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE SIGN TYPES, SOME BETTER DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE IN CARS AND SOME THAT ARE DESIGNED FOR PEDESTRIANS.
AND THE PROJECT IS INTENDED TO ENHANCE ALL THE WORK THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE ON THE STREETSCAPE IN DOWNTOWN.
SO THIS COMMITTEE HAS MEMBERS FROM CENTER CITY MAIN STREET, TIRZ #1, THE CONVENTION AND VISITORS COUNCIL, DAI, AND A NUMBER OF CITY STAFF.
THE PROJECT WAS SPURRED BY CENTER CITY MAIN STREET ACHIEVING A $75,000 GRANT FROM THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON THE ARTS AND TIRZ #1 ONE WILL ALSO CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY, AND RIGHT NOW, THE TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST IS $600,000, AND THAT INCLUDES 31 SIGN LOCATIONS.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH TURNER LANDARCHITECTURE, CLEVE TURNER IS THE PRINCIPLE AND PROJECT MANAGER, HE IS HERE, HE'S ON THE CALL TODAY SO HE CAN ASSIST WITH ANSWERING ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING THAT YOU HAVE, AND HE ALSO HAS A SUB-CONSULTANT, STEVE NEWMAN, WHO'S AN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNER FROM HOUSTON THAT'S BEEN ASSISTING WITH THIS PROJECT AS WELL.
WE HAVE RECENTLY COMPLETED OUR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
IT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE CHALLENGING,
[00:55:01]
AND WE HAD TO ALTER IT A BIT FROM WHAT WE WOULD HAVE DONE IN A NORMAL YEAR, BUT WE DID MEET WITH ALL FOUR OF THE DOWNTOWN'S STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, CENTER CITY MAIN STREET, TIRZ #1, THE BOARD OF REVIEW FOR LANDMARKS, HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND DOWNTOWN DESIGN, AND DAI AND PRESENT THEM WITH THE FINAL FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE AND ASKED FOR THEIR GENERAL FEEDBACK.AND THEN WE ALSO POSTED ON THE CITY'S FACEBOOK PAGE TO TRY AND GET JUST SOME GENERAL FEEDBACK FROM THE AVERAGE CITIZEN.
AND I HAVE A MAP HERE THAT WILL HELP ILLUSTRATE THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT AND THE LOCATIONS.
THERE ARE EIGHT PRIMARY POINTS OF INTERESTS THAT THE LARGER SIGNS WILL INCLUDE, SO THE CIVIC CENTER, THE DOWNTOWN LIBRARY, HODGETOWN CITY HALL, COURT HOUSES, THE GLOBE-NEWS CENTER, HOPE STREET [INAUDIBLE] DISTRICT, AND AMARILLO BOULEVARD AND ROUTE 66 ARE THE KEY DESTINATIONS AND WE'LL ALSO HAVE PUBLIC PARKING SIGNS THAT'LL BE AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE WAYSHOWING PROJECT AS WELL.
AND THESE ARE THE FINAL FOUR CONCEPTS THAT THE COMMITTEE NARROWED DOWN, AND SO THIS IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN ALL THE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND THIS IS ALSO WHAT WAS POSTED ON FACEBOOK.
AND THE GENERAL CONSENSUS FROM OUR OUTREACH THAT SIGN D, SHOWN HERE AS D, WAS THE PREFERRED SIGN.
PEOPLE LIKE THE CLEAN DESIGN AND THE STRAIGHTFORWARD FUNCTIONALITY OF IT.
THEY REALLY LIKE THAT IT HAS A MAP AT THE EYE LEVEL SO IT FUNCTIONS BOTH AS A LARGER SIGN, WAYFINDING SIGN FOR [INAUDIBLE] PURPOSE, BUT THEN ALSO IT'S VERY FUNCTIONAL WHEN YOU'RE ON THE SIDEWALK.
IT ALSO HAS THE ADDED BONUS THAT IT CAN HAVE ARTWORK AND INTERPRETIVE INFORMATION ON THE BACK WHICH [INAUDIBLE] EXCITED ABOUT.
OTHER GENERAL FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED IS THAT PEOPLE DID LIKE THE ART DECO, THEY LIKE THE IDEA OF THERE BEING A HINT OF ART DECO.
THEY NOTED THAT IN ONE ESPECIALLY [INAUDIBLE] BUT THAT SIGN WAS [INAUDIBLE] BIG AND NOT THE RIGHT SCALE.
THERE IS A OBVIOUS PREFERENCE TO USE THE CITY'S EXISTING COLORS OF YELLOW AND GRAY.
WE RECEIVED A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN WITH D THERE WERE QUITE A FEW COMMENTS ABOUT VANDALISM, PEOPLE BEING CONCERNED ABOUT VANDALISM OF THOSE SIGNS BECAUSE THEY'RE DOWN LOWER.
SO THIS IS THE FINAL SIGN THAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND.
SO WE DREW IT AS G, SIGN G BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN PRESENTED BY WORKING WITH THE CONSULTANTS.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING.
IT WAS D ON THE PREVIOUS SCREEN, BUT HERE IT'S G. SO THIS IS THE MONUMENT SIGN, AND WE'RE HERE TODAY TO REALLY GET FEEDBACK FROM THE COUNCIL SO THAT THE COMMITTEE CAN PROCEED WITH FINALIZING G. THERE ARE STILL A FEW [INAUDIBLE] TO WORK OUT, BUT ONCE WE HAVE KIND OF THE OVERALL DIRECTION FOR G, WE CAN REALLY KIND OF DIG INTO THE LOGISTICS WITH PLACEMENT AND THE CONTENT.
SO SOME OF THE UNDECIDED ELEMENTS INCLUDE THE COLOR, BUT REALLY OUR GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE IT ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S BRAND STANDARDS.
AND THEN THE OTHER KIND OF UNDECIDED ELEMENT IS THE AMARILLO SKYLINE ACCURACY OR WHETHER THAT WOULD BE SOME KIND OF EMBLEM THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE DECO.
WE DID RECEIVE FEEDBACK THAT LED TO [INAUDIBLE] THAT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT PREFER JUST NOTHING, NO SKYLINE ON THE SIGN.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS; THE GENERAL FEEDBACK ON G, THE COLOR PALETTE AND THEN THE SKYLINE OR EMBLEM.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAD AN EXAMPLE OF USING OUR TWO COLORS.
AND THEN WE HAVE DONE SOME WORK WITH A LOCAL ARTIST ON TRYING TO ALTER THE SKYLINE TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT MORE UNIQUE, AND THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE.
BUT THIS IS WHERE THE COMMITTEE IS AT NOW, IS MAKING THESE KIND OF FINAL, IMPORTANT DECISIONS SO WE CAN MOVE ON, AND SO I'D LOVE YOUR FEEDBACK AS THE COUNCIL, SO THEY CAN FINALIZE AND KEEP THIS PROJECT ON SCHEDULE,
[01:00:01]
AND I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AND THEN AGAIN, CLEVE TURNER IS HERE WITH TURNER LANDARCHITECTURE TO HELP TOO.>> IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD.
>> CLEVE NEEDS JUST A MINUTE TO GET THIS MICROPHONE TURNED ON.
>> CLEVE, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD?
>> ONE THING THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT UNDERSTAND IS THAT, ONE OF THESE SIGNS, IT WILL HAVE A QR CODE THAT COULD BE SCANNED INTO A PHONE, THAT WILL GO AHEAD AND DRIVE SOMEONE TO A WEBSITE THAT WILL HAVE MORE GRANULAR INFORMATION ABOUT SPECIFIC BUSINESSES, A RESTAURANT'S MENU PERHAPS, EVENTS AT THE GLOBE-NEWS CENTER OR THE CIVIC CENTER.
YOU COULD EVEN RESERVE A TABLE AT A RESTAURANT, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, AND POTENTIALLY COULD BE A SOURCE OF REVENUE TO HELP SUPPORT THE WEBSITE AND MAINTAIN THE SIGNAGE BY MERCHANTS THAT ARE PARTICIPATING IN IT.
THE BASIC SIGN PACKAGE IS DESIGNED TO BE MORE CIVIC IN NATURE AND NOT COMMERCIAL, AND WE'RE NOT BRANDING IT WITH ANY KIND OF ADVERTISING AT ALL.
AND LIKE EMILY SAID, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY ON THE REVERSE SIDES OF A LOT OF THESE SIGNS TO HAVE HISTORICAL FACTS AND OLD PHOTOGRAPHS, AND THINGS ABOUT DOWNTOWN AMARILLO THAT PEOPLE WOULD FIND INTERESTING.
AND THOSE CAN BE CHANGED OUT AND MOVED AROUND FROM SIGN TO SIGN SO THAT IT MAY BE THE SAME INFORMATION OVER A PERIOD OF A YEAR, BUT IT'S IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION, SO IT ALWAYS APPEARS TO BE CHANGING AND REMAIN INTERESTING.
PART OF THE THOUGHT PROCESS IS THAT THESE SIGNS - WE DON'T WANT TO POPULATE THE STREETSCAPE WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF SIGNAGE.
WE DON'T WANT OUR STREETSCAPE TO BECOME VISUALLY NOISY, IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SIGNS THAT WE FOUND THAT ARE VERY INEFFECTIVE AS FAR AS DIRECTING PEOPLE TO ATTRACTIONS DOWNTOWN.
THEIR PLACEMENT IS TOO LATE FOR SOMEONE TO MAKE A TURN OR TO SEE THEM EFFECTIVELY IN TIME TO MAKE AN EFFECTIVE CHANGE IN DIRECTION.
SO A LOT OF THOSE KINDS OF SIGNS WILL GO AWAY.
WITH THE ADVENT OF A MORE CONTEMPORARY, SIMPLIFIED, STYLIZED TYPE OF SIGN, I THINK THAT IT WOULD ADD A LOT TO OUR STREETSCAPE AND GIVE US MORE OF AN URBAN, ECLECTIC LOOK WITH OUR ANTIQUE LIGHT POLES, AND BENCHES, AND WHATNOT.
LIKE EMILY SAID, THEY'RE SCALABLE UP AND DOWN SO THAT THE SAME SIGN CONFIGURATION IN A DIFFERENT SIZE COULD SERVE BOTH PEOPLE WALKING AROUND DOWNTOWN AS WELL AS PEOPLE DRIVING AT 30 MILES AN HOUR DOWN, SAY BUCHANAN STREET.
[OVERLAPPING] I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, ONE OF OUR NEXT STEP IS WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE MAKING A FULL-SIZE MOCK-UP.
THIS IS ALL FOUR-INCH TYPEFACE.
WE NEED TO TEST AND MAKE SURE THAT THE FOUR-INCH TYPEFACE IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL AGREE IS VISIBLE FROM FAR ENOUGH AWAY AT 30 MILES AN HOUR.
WE MAY WIND UP GOING TO SIX-INCH TYPEFACE JUST
[01:05:01]
TO HAVE A LITTLE LESS INFORMATION ON EACH ONE OF THE SIGNS, MAYBE EDIT ONE OR TWO LOCATIONS OUT OR PUT THEM ON ANOTHER SIGN.WHAT WHERE YOU GOING TO SAY, MAYOR?
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK THE COUNCIL FOR THEIR FEEDBACK. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING? DO THEY LIKE THIS TALL, CLEAN LOOKING SIGN?
>> [NOISE] HOWARD, WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> WELL, LET ME ASK A QUESTION.
WHAT I SEE ON MY SCREEN, ON THE RIGHT SIDE THERE'S A MAN STANDING BY A POLE AND HAS DIRECTIONS IS UP AT THE TOP, AND THAT LOOKS GOOD.
THOSE FOUR SIGNS TO THE LEFT, ARE THESE ON THE SIDEWALK OR ARE THESE GOING TO GET IN THE WAY OF TRAFFIC.
>> NO, THEY'RE ALL WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE ZONE, THAT ROUGHLY SEVEN FOOT STRIP FROM THE BACK OF THE CURB TO THE SIDEWALK SO THAT WE'RE NOT OBSTRUCTING PEDESTRIANS AS THEY'RE WALKING BY.
WE'VE STILL GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO TO PLACE EXACTLY WHERE THEY NEED TO GO.
[NOISE] SO WE'RE NOT OBSTRUCTED BY THE NEW TREES THAT ARE BEING PLANTED OR POTENTIALLY WILL BE PLANTED IN THE FUTURE.
>> SO THIS IS [NOISE] FOR PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS TRAFFIC, CARS, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND. COULD YOU SAY AGAIN?
>> THESE SIGNS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS CARS?
>> YES, SIR. AND THE LARGER SIGNS WILL BE FOR CARS SO THAT THE DIRECTIONAL INFORMATION IS ABOVE THE HEIGHT OF A CAR SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THEM FROM DOWN THE STREET, WHEREAS THE SHORTER ONES WOULD BE MORE AT THE PEDESTRIAN EYE LEVEL.
>> THE SIGNS LOOK GOOD, AND I SAW THE MAP OF DOWNTOWN.
BUT I'M HAVING TROUBLE FIGURING OUT WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE, AND I DON'T WANT TO MESS UP TRAFFIC.
>> WELL, WE WALKED THE ENTIRE DOWNTOWN AND PHOTOGRAPHED EVERY INTERSECTION.
AND DID AN INVENTORY OF EXISTING SIGNS.
THESE ARE THE LOCATIONS THAT I THINK THAT WE'VE DETERMINED WHERE WE WOULD GET THE MOST BANG FOR THE BUCKS, SO TO SPEAK.
THESE SIGNS ARE MEANT TO LAST AND LOOK GOOD FOR A LONG TIME, FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
SO CONSEQUENTLY, THEY'RE NOT CHEAP.
WE'RE TRYING TO BE VERY EFFECTIVE WITH THE LOCATIONS, VERY JUDICIOUS ABOUT THE LOCATIONS.
>> I SEE NUMBERS ON THE MAP, NUMBER 23 LOOKS LIKE THE LARGEST NUMBER I SEE.
>> YES, SIR. SOME OF THESE LOCATIONS WILL HAVE SIGNS ON THREE OF THE STREET FACES WHERE WE'VE GOT INTERSECTIONS.
THE LITTLE HANDS INDICATE WHETHER THEY'RE -
>> EDDIE, ELAINE, WHAT DO YOU-ALL THINK?
>> I'M SEEING THE [INAUDIBLE] ON THE SIGNS, THAT MAKES ME NERVOUS [INAUDIBLE] BEFORE I WOULD SAY, THAT'S AWESOME.
[01:10:02]
I MEAN, THEY LOOK GREAT, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE REALLY, REALLY BIG SIGNS.>> SO EDDIE, WHAT MAKES YOU NERVOUS?
>> THEY LOOK BIG. I WANT TO SEE THOSE SIGNS IN PLACE.
I JUST WANT TO SEE THEM IN PLACE.
[OVERLAPPING] I WORRY ABOUT HOW BIG THE SIGNS ARE.
>> WE'RE BUILDING UP A FULL-SIZED MOCK-UP AND UNDERSTAND THAT I DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO LOOK LIKE A BILLBOARD.
BUT THEY HAVE TO BE EFFECTIVE.
PARTICULARLY THE VEHICULAR SIGNS FOR SOMEONE DRIVING DOWN PIERCE STREET OR BUCHANAN OR WHATEVER ONE OF THE MAJOR STREETS ARE.
AND THAT YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO READ THE INFORMATION WHILE TRAVELING WITHOUT IT BEING TOO DIFFICULT TO SEE.
ALL I AM JUST SAYING IS, THEY LOOK BIG, AND I'M GLAD YOU'RE GOING TO MOCK THEM UP SO THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY SEE THEM IN PLACE.
>> WE'LL LET YOU ALL KNOW WHEN WE HAVE THE MOCK-UP UP, AND WHERE THE LOCATION IS.
WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE IT UP FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO MOCK UP ONE OF THE BIG CAR SIGNS, RIGHT?
>> YES. YEAH, AND THOSE SIGNS ARE 13 FEET TALL, AND THEY'RE BETWEEN FIVE AND SIX FEET WIDE.
>> YEAH. SEE, THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. THEY LOOK BIG.
>> I'M NOT SAYING NECESSARILY THAT IT'S ANYTHING BAD.
IT'S JUST THAT HONESTLY, I DON'T HAVE A GRID WITH WHICH TO PUT THIS ON IT.
I SEE THAT GUY STANDING THERE AND SEE THAT OBVIOUSLY, IT'S HIGH AND HOW WIDE THEY ARE, SO I'M JUST CURIOUS TO SEE THEM.
IT'S JUST, I DON'T HAVE ANOTHER WAY TO SAY IT, THEY LOOK BIG.
AND I KNOW THAT PROBABLY HAVE TO BE, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE THEM IN PLACE.
>> ELAINE? AND I SEE THIS SLIDE BEFORE AND AFTER THIS ONE.
OKAY, SO HOLD UP RIGHT THERE FOR A MINUTE.
SO YOU KNOW THE THINGS THAT I LIKE, I DO LOVE THE D STYLE.
I LIKE THE NICE CLEAN, I LOVE THE COLOR COMBINATION, I LIKE THE GRAY BACKGROUND.
AND SO WE LOOK AT, AGAIN COMPARED TO A PERSON WALKING RIGHT THERE, I'M THINKING THAT'S NOT TO SCALE.
THOSE PEOPLE ARE PRETTY SMALL.
BUT WHEN YOU ADD THE MAP AT THE BOTTOM, I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT JUST BECOMES A LOT OF INFORMATION.
SO MY FAVORITES, I DO LOVE THIS STYLE.
I SHARE EDDIE'S CONCERN ON THE SIZE AND THE VISIBILITY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE BEEN IN A CITY WHERE THE SIGN IS ALL THE WAY DOWN.
I ACTUALLY WAS DRIVING IN DENTON THIS LAST WEEK AND THEY HAD WAY-SHOWING SIGNS.
AND I THOUGHT, OKAY, I HAVE AN IDEA A LITTLE BIT WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND THEY WERE HELPFUL IN POINTING THINGS.
BUT THEY WERE JUST IN THE AIR, THEY DIDN'T GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE GROUND AND IT WAS JUST LIKE OUT OF D. IT WOULD JUST BE THE NAMES OF THOSE SPECIFIC THINGS YOU WERE LOOKING FOR.
IT WOULD JUST HAVE: CITY HALL, GLOBE NEWS CENTER AND THAT'S ALL THAT WAS THERE.
THEN CAN WE GO TO THE SLIDE AFTER? SO IS THE QUESTION ON THIS ONE DOING THE GRAY BLUE INSTEAD OF THE GRAY RED SCHEME?
>> YEAH. THIS COLOR SCHEME IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY'S BRANDING EFFORTS WHEREAS THE OTHER ONES WERE COLORS THAT WE HAD COME UP WITH.
[01:15:02]
YOU KNOW HAVING A MEDIUM DARK BACKGROUND WITH A VERY HIGH CONTRAST, WHITE TEXT OR FONT.AND THE TAB ON THE UPPER LEFT HAND SIDE WHERE IT SAYS, THE SEVENTH STREET AVENUE, THAT BEING RED BECAUSE RED HAS THE LONGEST WAVELENGTH COLOR, SO IT COULD BE SEEN THAT'S THE CROSSING STREET THAT YOU'RE APPROACHING.
>> BUT IT WOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER. IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
ALL THE SIGNS WOULD BE RED ON THE SIDE OR ALL OF THEM WOULD BE BLUE.
>> YOU'RE NOT SAYING SOME ARE RED AND SOME ARE BLUE?
>> RIGHT. CORRECT. RIGHT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER.
>> OKAY, AND BASED ON THE SAME ISSUE MADE EARLIER, I WOULD PROBABLY BE LEANING TOWARDS THE SIX-INCH LETTERS TO BE SURE THEY'RE LARGE ENOUGH.
AND I WOULD PROBABLY BE REMOVING THE SKYLINE BEFORE I WOULD TAKE OFF SOME OF THE SITES THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO POINT TO.
OUR MAIN PURPOSE WITH THE SIGNS IS: WHERE ARE THESE THINGS? WHAT DIRECTION ARE THEY? AND THE SKYLINE IS DECORATION.
IT'S INTERESTING, BUT I WANT THE INFORMATION ON THERE.
I DON'T WANT THE TRADE OFF TO BE IF YOU NEED THE LETTERS TO BE LARGER TO SEE THEM AT 30 MILES PER HOUR.
MY VOTE WOULD BE DITCH THE SKYLINE, NOT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ITEMS.
>> IS THAT ELAINE? ELAINE IS THAT YOU SAYING THAT?
>> OKAY I COULDN'T SEE WHO WAS SAYING THAT.
GOOD POINT, AND WHEN WE MAKE THE MARKUP WE'RE GOING TO PUT BOTH FOUR AND SIX INCH FONT SIZES UP THERE JUST TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A COMPARE AND CONTRAST.
>> AND IF WE COULD ALSO SEE A BREAKDOWN OF, YOU SAID THERE WERE 31 SIGNS, I BELIEVE.
HOW MANY ARE GOING TO BE THE LARGER, SOLID, BE TOP TO BOTTOM? HOW MANY OF THOSE WERE JUST ON THE LIGHT POLE? JUST THE SIGNS AT THE TOP? IF WE COULD GET A BREAKDOWN ON THAT.
I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO BE FANTASTIC.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT ONCE IT'S IN IS GOING TO BE LIKE [LAUGHTER] THAT'S REALLY HELPFUL.
TO VISITORS THAT COME TO OUR TOWN AND HAVE NO IDEA WHERE ANYTHING IS, I THINK THIS IS GREAT.
>> CLEVE, I HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND ONE IS: HOW EASY IS IT TO CHANGE THE CONTENT ON THESE SIGNS? YOU KNOW, WE'RE PROMOTING THE CIVIC CENTER CHANGE.
IF THAT PASSES THERE'S A CHANCE THAT CITY HALL MIGHT MOVE.
AND SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT HOW EASY IT IS TO UPDATE AND KEEP THE CONTENT CURRENT?
>> WELL, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY'S SIGN SHOP AND EACH ONE OF THESE LOCATIONS WILL BE ON AN INDIVIDUAL SLIDE-OUT PANEL.
AND ALL THE FASTENERS AND THE WAY TO CHANGE THEM OUT WILL BE CONCEALED SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE YOUNGSTERS TRYING TO DECORATE THEIR DORM ROOM WITH THEM.
AND SO THE CITY WILL BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THESE PANELS AND STRIPS AND CHANGE OUT THE NAME IF WE NEED TO ADD ONE OR CHANGE THE SPELLING FOR [LAUGHTER] ANY REASON.
>> GREAT. THAT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALL THOUGHT AHEAD ON THAT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAD A PLAN IN PLACE FOR THAT.
AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO COMMENT THAT I TOO HAVE DRIVEN THROUGH TYLER AND WACO.
AND WACO'S DOWNTOWN SIGNS ARE ON THE GROUND.
TYLER'S ARE MORE UP IN THE AIR.
BUT WE PRESENT OURSELVES WITH OUR OWN UNIQUE CHALLENGE HERE; AND IT IS THE WIND.
SO ALL OF THESE SIGNS, I KNOW THAT AS YOU ALL DESIGNED THEM, YOU HAD TO KEEP IN MIND WHAT THE WIND LOAD IS FOR A SIGN IN AMARILLO, TEXAS.
AND THAT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT THAN DENTON OR TYLER OR WACO.
SO IN SOME WAYS IT'S GOING TO LIMIT.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I MIGHT LIKE THE SECURITY OF HAVING IT ATTACHED TO THE GROUND AND NOT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT THE WIND MIGHT DO TO IT.
[01:20:02]
>> I WANT TO SAY I'M NOT A FAN OF THE SKYLINE.
I THINK EITHER WHEN IT'S ON OUR CURRENTS FIVE RIGHT HERE, I JUST DON'T THINK IT ADDS TO THE [INAUDIBLE] OF THE SIGN.
AND I KIND OF FEEL THAT WAY EVEN ABOUT THE ONE THAT'S MORE PLAIN.
MY THOUGHT IS WE'RE ABOUT TO SPEND $600,000 ON THINGS THAT ARE LARGE, NOTICEABLE IN OUR DOWNTOWN.
I WOULD LIKE FOR THEM TO BE IN THE SAME VEIN AS OUR ART DECO DESIGN THAT'S ALREADY HERE.
I MEAN, OUR OLD PARK YOU KNOW HAD $45 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF INVESTMENT AND IT HAS AN ART DECO DESIGN AND ALL OF OUR HISTORIC BUILDINGS HAVE SOME.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US GO WITH THIS E OR G SIGN DESIGN.
GET RID OF THE SKYLINE AND JUST PUT A NOD TO THAT ART DECO LOGO THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIGN.
JUST PULL THAT DOWN INTO THAT BOTTOM SPACE THERE.
IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BE LARGE.
BUT AT LEAST WE'VE DONE SOMETHING ART DECO ON EVERY SIGN SO WE'RE NOT STARTING ANEW.
WE'RE GOING ALONG IN THE SAME THING THAT WHAT OUR DOWNTOWN ALREADY IS.
I JUST HATE TO INVEST $600,000 AND IT NOT BE CONTINUING THE ART DECO STYLE.
>> YEAH AND WHEN WE LOOKED AT, WHEN WE IN RESPONSE TO COMMENTS EARLY ON, WE'VE STARTED STUDYING COMMUNITIES.
ACTUALLY SOUTH BEACH IN MIAMI WAS PROBABLY THE MOST NOTABLE COMMUNITY OF ART DECO ARCHITECTURE AND THAT STYLE.
AND A LOT OF IT HAS TO DO WITH JUST THE FONT TYPE.
AND ALSO THE FACT THAT THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF APPLIQUE OR THREE-DIMENSIONALITY TO ART DECO STRUCTURES.
AND WHAT WE DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE NOTICED THAT THE ART DECO.
>> CAN WE GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE?
>> THE ART DECO IN A [NOISE] NOTICE THAT IT'S [NOISE] UP ON THE POLE AND THE A UP AT THE TOP, THE CROWN UP AT THE TOP IS A THREE-DIMENSIONAL APPLIQUÉ.
>>PLEASE, COULDN'T WE JUST DESIGN IT THOUGH AS A FLAT?
>>I JUST WOULD LIKE IF, AGAIN, TO SPEND $600,000, AND NOT HAVE SOMETHING THAT CONTINUES THE INVESTMENT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN IN THE ART DECO OF OUR DOWNTOWN.
AND IT JUST SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE NOD, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE.
I'M NOT ASKING TO REDESIGN THE WHOLE SIGN.
I REALLY LIKE THAT LOGO, BUT JUST SOME LITTLE NOD TO THE ART DECO ON THESE SIGNS [OVERLAPPING]. I WOULD LIKE THAT.
>>ABSOLUTELY. I'M SURE WE CAN RESPOND TO THAT IN A PRETTY EASY [NOISE] ACTION.
>> ANY FINAL THOUGHTS THERE, COUNCIL?
>> LET ME JUST SEE, WITH THOSE SUGGESTIONS, TO POSSIBLY SEE JUST A GRAPHIC MOCK-UP BEFORE THEY BUILD A FULL BIG ONE? IT'S LIKE YOU'RE JUST TAKING THOSE SUGGESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND APPLYING THEM EVEN TO JUST A GRAPHIC THAT WE COULD SEE.
>> WE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE WORK.
I WAS IN ONE OF THOSE FIRST MEETINGS WITH YOU AND IT'S HARD TO DO A PROJECT LIKE THIS FROM SCRATCH.
YOU ALL HAVE DONE SO MUCH WORK, AND BACKGROUND, YOU SIT DOWN AND YOU BEGIN TO SAY, "WHERE WOULD WE EVEN PUT THESE SIGNS? WHAT WOULD THE SIGNS EVEN HAVE ON THEM?" WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT CONTENT.
THAT'S CLEVE, AND BETH DUKE AND THE PEOPLE ON THE TIRZ COMMITTEE, SITTING DOWN AND SAYING, "WELL, WHAT IS IT THAT WE WOULD WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW? WHAT IS IT PEOPLE COME TO SEE?" THEY'VE DONE ALL OF THAT FROM SCRATCH, AND WE'RE GETTING TO LOOK AT THE END RESULT HERE JUST IN THESE MOCK-UPS.
BUT YOU ALL HAVE DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK ON THIS PROJECT.
>>THANK YOU. WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF VERY RESPONSIVE AND VERY INTERESTED PARTICIPANTS IN ALL THIS.
WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF GOOD INPUT.
>>IT'S EXCITING TO SEE IT COMING TO ALMOST BEING READY TO GO, PULL THE TRIGGER ON.
[01:25:03]
>>ANY FINAL COMMENTS OR DIRECTION? ANYTHING TO EMILY OR TO CLEVE?
>>I DID HAVE A QUESTION, IT WAS MENTIONED THE ROUTE 66, THAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE A HIGHLIGHT.
ARE WE USING THE HISTORIC DESIGN? IF SOMEONE COULD ELABORATE ON HOW WE INTEND TO HIGHLIGHT ROUTE 66 SPECIFICALLY.
>>WELL, I THINK THE ROUTE 66, THE OLD HIGHWAY SIGN MEDALLION IS PROBABLY THE MOST RECOGNIZABLE.
I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT OTHER LOGO THAT WE COULD USE THAT WOULD BE AS EFFECTIVE AS THAT.
CAN ANYBODY ELSE THINK OF ONE?
>>IS THAT WHAT IS ON D? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SHOWING? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? THE AMARILLO BOULEVARD.
>>I THINK IT WAS IDENTIFIED AS ONE OF THE VERY LOCATIONS JUST TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE HISTORICAL ALIGNMENT WENT THROUGH DOWNTOWN, BUT THERE ARE OTHER PLACES IN AMARILLO TO EXPERIENCE IT.
THOSE ARE REALLY THE KEY DESTINATIONS TO EXPERIENCE ROUTE 66.
SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS A DOWNTOWN WAYFINDING, BUT THAT THEY KNEW HOW TO GET TO THOSE OTHER AREAS FROM DOWNTOWN.
>>IS ROUTE 66 MORE RECOGNIZABLE THAN SAYING AMARILLO BOULEVARD? WOULD THAT BE MORE OF A TOURIST ATTRACTION TO KNOW WHERE ROUTE 66 IS RATHER THAN AMARILLO BOULEVARD? BECAUSE THAT'S A HUGE TOURIST DRAW IN THE CVC CONVERSATIONS.
WE WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT ROUTE RUNS THROUGH AMARILLO.
>>HEY, WELL, WE'RE ROOTING FOR YOU GUYS.
WE KNOW IT'S HARD TO CARRY THE DESIGN ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.
[NOISE] WE DO APPRECIATE THAT YOU WOULD COME, AND LISTEN TO OUR FEEDBACK TODAY.
>>WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
THERE HASN'T BEEN A PERFECT PROJECT YET, BUT WE'RE GETTING CLOSER.
>>YEAH. WELL, LET'S SAY WE'RE GOING TO CHEER WHEN YOU GET THERE.
>>OKAY. EMILY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO ITEM 1E,
[E. Discuss possible charter amendments, Charter Review Committee recommendations, and timing of charter amendment election;]
WHICH IS, "DISCUSS POSSIBLE CHARTER AMENDMENTS".THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE TIMING OF THE CHARTER AMENDMENT ELECTION.
MR. CITY MANAGER, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT ON THIS ONE? OR DO YOU ANTICIPATE THE COUNCIL IS JUST GOING TO START GIVING FEEDBACK ON WHAT BOND COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED AS POTENTIAL BALLOT LANGUAGE?
>>I SELF MUTED AND ALMOST STARTED TALKING WHILE I MUTED, BUT I AVOIDED IT.
WE CAN ABSOLUTELY GIVE A SUMMARY OR RECAP.
BUT ASIDE FROM THE THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK, PRIMARILY BEING: THE FREQUENCY OF COUNCIL MEETINGS, THE TERM OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND THE STAGGERING OF ELECTIONS.
THOSE ARE THE THREE RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE CONSIDERED NEXT WEEK ON JULY 28TH, AND AUGUST 11TH FOR SECOND READING.
IT WOULD NOT BE ON THE SAME ORDINANCE AS THE BOND ELECTION.
THE NEXT ITEM YOU'RE GOING TO DISCUSS, THAT WOULD BE ITS OWN RESOLUTION.
BUT JUST MODIFYING THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU'VE ALREADY PASSED, CALLING THE ELECTION, AND THEN MODIFYING THE ELECTION DATE, THAT WOULD JUST BE ITS OWN RESOLUTION.
SO THIS WOULD BE A STAND ALONE ORDINANCE CALLING FOR THESE THREE ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED AND THE SCHEDULE FOR THAT PROCESS WOULD BE NEXT WEEK, JULY 28TH, AND TWO WEEKS AFTER THAT, AUGUST 11TH, FOR SECOND READING FOR THE ORDINANCE.
THEN WE'D BE ON THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.
[01:30:02]
>> [OVERLAPPING] DO WE HAVE A SAMPLE BALLOT LANGUAGE THAT WE COULD LOOK AT?
>>YES, MA'AM. AND I'M GOING TO HAVE TO THROW IT TO BRYAN FOR THAT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME OR POSSIBLY KEVIN.
APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING THAT IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.
>>BRYAN, CAN YOU SHARE YOUR SCREEN WITH IT?
>>AND WOULD WE BE ABLE TO SEE THE FINAL DRAFT BEFORE THE FIRST READING?
>>OH YES, MA'AM. WE'VE GOT THAT READY AND WE CAN PUSH THAT OUT TO YOU ALL RIGHT NOW.
BASED UPON THE FEEDBACK FROM LAST MEETING, WE JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE ANY SUBSEQUENT INPUT TODAY.
>>LET ME SEE IF I CAN DO THAT.
>>AND IF NOT, JUST SHOOT IT TO STEPHANIE, SHE CAN GET IT [OVERLAPPING].
>>YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY I THINK WE CAN FIRE IT TO HER SO LET ME VERIFY.
SO YES, STEPHANIE, IF YOU COULD SHARE WHAT YOU RECEIVED ON WEDNESDAY. I THINK THAT'S IT.
>>THAT'S THE CIVIC CENTER BOND ELECTION.
>>WHEN WE SAW IT LAST WEEK IT WAS MASHED TOGETHER ALL IN ONE ORDINANCE.
NOW YOU'RE TELLING US, JARED, IT'S GOING TO BE IN TWO SEPARATE.
>>YES, MA'AM. WE DO NOT HAVE TO HAVE THE TWO ITEMS ON ONE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THE BOND ELECTION HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN CALLED, AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDINANCE PROCESS AND ALL THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE RIGHT NOW IS RESOLUTION MODIFYING THE ELECTION LOCATIONS.
THE PARTNERSHIP ARRANGEMENT THAT WE HAD WITH POTTER COUNTY IS NOW GOING TO BE EXPANDED TO POTTER COUNTY AND RANDALL COUNTY.
AND ALSO TO BE ABLE TO ADJUST BASED ON CHANGES IN INTEREST RATES, THE IMPACT ON TAX PAYER TAX RATE.
THOSE THREE THINGS ARE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD IF WE'RE KEEPING THE ELECTION EXACTLY THE SAME AS FAR AS CONTENT, THAT'S HOUSEKEEPING.
SO THOSE THINGS CAN BE DONE ON RESOLUTION.
THEN THE CHARTER ELECTION WOULD BE ON ITS OWN ORDINANCE CALLING THE THREE QUESTIONS THROUGH ONE ORDINANCE PROCESS AND A SEPARATE AND UNIQUE ORDINANCE PROCESS TO THE BOND ELECTION. THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS. [OVERLAPPING]
>>I JUST FORWARDED IT TO STEPHANIE.
>>AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFUSION FROM LAST WEEK.
WE HAD THE BOND COUNCIL DISCUSSING THAT WITH OUR LEGAL DEPARTMENT, AND THERE WAS CONSENSUS AFTER THAT CONVERSATION TO MOVE FORWARD AS TWO SEPARATE ITEMS. ONE AS A RESOLUTION BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY CALLED IT THROUGH ORDINANCE PROCESS.
THE CHANGES WE'RE MAKING ARE PROCEDURAL IN NATURE.
AND THEN IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO CALL THE CHARTER ELECTION TROUGH ITS OWN SEPARATE ORDINANCE. AND HERE WE GO RIGHT THERE.
WE WILL SEND THIS TO EVERYONE SEPARATELY TODAY.
IF THERE'S ANY FEEDBACK PRIOR TO NEXT TUESDAY, PLEASE FILL IT.
ASSUMING THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE CHARTER ELECTION PROCESS, FORWARD THEIR COMMENTS TO ME.
I WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE INCORPORATE THOSE IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE.
IF IT'S SOMETHING NOT DISCUSSED TODAY.
>> STEPHANIE, CAN WE JUST SCROLL INTO THAT LENGTH OF TERM OF OFFICE, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN SEE THAT? THERE YOU GO.
SO THIS IS WHAT THE ORDINATES LOOKS LIKE.
IF YOU COULD SCROLL UP JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE SO WE CAN CAPTURE ALL THAT BALLOT TEXT, COULD YOU PLEASE.
LOOKS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD AS FAR AS BALLOT LANGUAGE.
>> THAT'S STRAIGHT FROM TWO-YEAR TERMS TO FOUR-YEAR TERMS. IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE, WE CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE.
>> LET'S WAIT. THERE MIGHT BE QUESTIONS.
>> OKAY, COUNCIL, WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK ABOUT PROPOSITION NUMBER 2?
[01:35:01]
>> SO IS IT GOING TO BE IDENTIFIED FURTHER DOWN ON THE BALLOT, WHICH OFFICES WILL ROTATE FIRST, BE THE SHORTER TERMS FIRST? I KNOW THAT HAD BEEN PART OF THE CONVERSATION FROM THE COMMITTEE THAT THEY WERE RECOMMENDING FOUR YEAR TERMS. SO THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE STAGGERING OF THEM.
SO IS THAT A DIFFERENT POINT THAT WE'RE FIXING TO SEE?
>> YES MA'AM. THAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE STAGGERING OF THE ELECTIONS.
>> I WONDERED IF IT MADE MORE SENSE TO A VOTER TO SEE THE STAGGERED ELECTIONS FIRST AND THEN THE LONGER TERMS NEXT, VERSUS THE LONGER TERMS AND THE STAGGERED.
DO YOU THINK THE ORDER OR THE WAY WE PRESENT THOSE PROPOSITIONS HAS A LOGIC TO IT? IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE TO ME THAT WE WOULD JUST SHIFT TO FOUR-YEAR TERMS. THE ONLY REASON WE'RE SHIFTING TO FOUR-YEAR TERMS IS TO PROVIDE THE STRUCTURE FOR THE STAGGERED TERMS.
>> BRIAN MIGHT HAVE SOME INPUT HERE, IT IS A BIT OF A CHICKEN AND EGG QUESTION, BECAUSE IF DURING THE STAGGERING CONVERSATION OR ON OUR BALLOT LANGUAGE THERE, IF WE SAY THAT TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL BE ELECTED TO A TWO-YEAR TERM IN MAY OF 2020, AND THE MAYOR WILL BE ELECTED TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM IN MAY OF 2020, WE'RE MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT SECTION 2 OR PROPOSITION NUMBER 2 HAS PASSED.
SO WE ALMOST HAVE TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS DEPENDING ON HOW WE WORD IT, BUT WE CAN WORD IT TO WHERE IT DOESN'T SAY WHETHER THOSE TERMS ARE FOR A TWO AND FOUR-YEAR TERMS OR ONE AND TWO YEAR TERMS, JUST STATING THAT THEY WILL BE STAGGERED BEGINNING MAY OF 2020.
CAN WE GO AHEAD TO THAT LANGUAGE SO WE CAN SEE THAT BRIAN?
>> BRIAN, HOW DID YOU GUYS SELECT THAT? I HAD SOMEONE ASK ME AND I DIDN'T KNOW AS FAR AS THE STAGGERING.
HOW DID YOU PICK PLACES ONE AND THREE?
>> THAT WAS JUST A TRANSITION METHOD THAT WE COULD USE.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE METHODS THAT COULD BE USED.
>> YEAH. YOU JUST PICKED THEM, IS WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME?
>> I PICKED THE ONE THAT WAS THE MOST STRAIGHTFORWARD.
[OVERLAPPING] THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO DO IT.
BUT THIS IS A WAY THAT MOST CITIES WOULD STAGGER BASED ON THE PLACES AND BASED ON THE NUMBER OF COUNCIL PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE PLUS A MAYOR.
BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU ARE BEHOLDEN TO IT.
YOU COULD DO IT HOWEVER YOU WANTED TO DO IT AND WE WILL JUST DO IT BY ORDINATES.
>> IN MY BACKGROUND AND THERE'S REALLY NO ART TO IT OR LEGAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE MAYOR TO BE PAIRED WITH ODD-NUMBERED SEATS.
IN MY EXPERIENCE IN THE CITIES THAT I'VE WORKED IN THAT HAD THAT THEY WERE PAIRED WITH OUR ODD-NUMBERED SEATS.
SO THERE'S REALLY NO SCIENCE BEYOND LOOKING AT WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE AND WHAT PRECEDENTS THERE IS.
SO WE CAN DO IT HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO IT OR HOWEVER COUNCIL WANTS TO DO IT.
>> THE IDEA WAS OKAY, ODD PLACES WILL BE ON ODD YEARS.
EVEN PLACES WILL BE ON EVEN YEARS.
JUST FOR A VOTER, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD WAY TO REMEMBER IT, BUT IT REALLY IS FLEXIBLE.
>> THAT LOGIC WOULDN'T BE APPLICABLE HERE THOUGH, BECAUSE ALL OF OUR ELECTIONS ARE GOING TO BE IN ODD NUMBERED YEARS.
SO THAT'S THE RATIONALE THAT WE'VE SEEN FROM OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE STAGGERED ELECTIONS AND ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR.
SO THIS WOULD RETAIN OUR ABILITY TO NOT HAVE AN ELECTION EVERY YEAR, BUT ALSO ALLOW US TO STAGGER THOSE ELECTIONS.
AS FAR AS WHICH SEATS WERE PLACED WITH THE MAYOR, WE JUST USED SOME OF WHAT WE'D SEEN PREVIOUSLY AND WHAT WE'VE DONE PREVIOUSLY.
QUITE HONESTLY, IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HAVE THE MAYOR TIED TO EVEN SEAT ELECTIONS AND DO ODDS FOR A TWO-YEAR ELECTION AND EVENS FOR A FOUR-YEAR ELECTION IN THAT 2021 ELECTION, WE CAN WRITE IT THAT WAY TOO.
THERE'S NO LEGAL TIE FOR THE MAYOR TO BE TIED TO EVEN OR ODD SEATS.
>> THIS IS THE WAY THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD RECOMMENDED IT.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WERE SPECIFIC CONVERSATIONS OF WHY BUT THAT WAS HOW I THINK THAT MR. BRIAN PRESENTED IT LAST WEEK.
THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY FROM OUR STAFF, THAT CAME FROM THE COMMITTEE.
>> YES. THEY WERE INFORMED BY PRECEDENCE OF OTHER THINGS TOO.
[01:40:01]
SO IT WAS REALLY JUST A LOGICAL CONVERSATION.WE DID NOT SAY, "OKAY, WELL, THAT'S GOING TO HAVE THIS COUNCIL MEMBER HAVING A TWO-YEAR TERM AND THIS COUNCIL MEMBER HAVING A FOUR-YEAR TERM." WE REALLY TALKED ABOUT IT ONLY IN SEATS.
>> I THINK IT'S LOGICAL FOR THE MAYOR TO BE ON A SHORTER TERM IN THE STAGGER, THAT'S MY OPINION.
>> YEAH. TWO SEATS HAVE TO GO TO THE FOUR-YEAR TERMS IN THE INITIAL ROUND.
I THINK IT MAKES SENSE DURING THE TRANSITION FOR THE MAYOR TO BE ONE OF THE PLACES THAT STAYS ON A TWO-YEAR TERM.
I LIKED THE OPTICS OF THAT FROM A TRANSITION POINT OF VIEW.
I THINK IF PEOPLE ARE NERVOUS ABOUT SWITCHING TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM, THIS GIVES THEM ONE MORE ROUND OF THE MERIT, A TWO-YEAR TERM.
IT HELPS WITH SOMEONE WHO MIGHT BE CONCERNED THAT THIS IS A POWER GRAB OF SOME SORT BY SOMEONE WHO'S CURRENTLY IN OFFICE AND MIGHT CHOOSE TO RUN AGAIN FOR THAT OFFICE.
I THINK THERE'S SOME BENEFITS TO IT BEEN TWO YEARS.
SO WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK ABOUT WHAT'S CURRENTLY PROPOSITIONED NUMBER 4? I WANT TO TALK ABOUT REORDERING THEM.
I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT WHAT ORDER THEY SHOULD APPEAR IN, BUT JUST LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE OF PROPOSITION 4 TO AMEND IT.
PROVIDE FOR STAGGERED TERMS IS NECESSARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE ELECTION LAWS.
>> IT PROVIDES FOR FLEXIBILITY IF PROPOSITION NUMBER 2 DOES NOT PASS.
THAT'S WHY IT DOESN'T SAY WHETHER IT'S EVERY TWO-YEAR ELECTIONS OR EVERY YEAR ELECTIONS.
>> BRIAN, WE CAN'T SAY THAT WE DON'T WANT THE ENTIRE COUNCIL UP AT THE SAME TIME.
>> NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN.
>> WELL, IF I'M A VOTER WHO'S JUST READING THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME, I MIGHT NOT FROM THE LANGUAGE PROVIDE FOR STAGGERED TERMS UNDERSTAND THE BENEFITS OF STAGGERED TERMS.
>> TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT SAYS TO AVOID THE POSSIBILITY OF REPLACING ALL MEMBERS AT ONE TIME.
THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR STAGGERED TERMS.
>> WE CAN ABSOLUTELY ADD THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE.
>> IT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO AVOID BECAUSE IT WON'T PREVENT COMPLETELY.
BUT IT WILL AVOID HAVING ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS UP FOR ELECTION IN ANY ONE ELECTION.
BECAUSE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT UP FOR ELECTION, BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON RELINQUISH THEIR SEAT IN A WINDOW IN WHICH THEY WOULD THEN FALL INTO THIS BALLOT.
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT ALL FIVE WOULD BE UP, IT'S JUST VERY UNLIKELY SINCE WE'RE SCHEDULED FOR STAGGERED ELECTIONS AFTERWARDS.
>> COUNCIL, DO YOU THINK WE NEED SOMETHING IN THAT LANGUAGE THAT INDICATES WE'RE DOING THIS TO PROMOTE STABILITY OR WE'RE DOING THIS TO PREVENT FIVE NEW MEMBERS WITH NO EXPERIENCE AT THE SAME TIME OR SOMETHING THAT JUST GIVES A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT FOR WHAT STAGGERED TERMS WILL DO TO THE COUNCIL?
>> I THINK THERE WAS SOMETHING IN PROPOSITION 2, THAT REFERENCED THAT A LITTLE BIT, IF WE CAN SCROLL BACK UP.
I KNOW I HAD RELATED TO JUST EXPERIENCE ON THE COUNCIL.
>> I'D LIKE TO SEE YOU GUYS JUST TAKE A STAB RIGHT AT IT TO ADD STABILITY TO THE COUNCIL AND PREVENT FIVE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS BEING ELECTED AT ONE TIME.
I DON'T KNOW. I HAVEN'T PLAYED [OVERLAPPING] WITH THE LANGUAGE.
>> COUNCIL, DO YOU-ALL THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA OR?
>> YES. I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, AND IT'S MORE ABOUT THE LEARNING CURVE, THE STABILITY.
[01:45:06]
THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON.>> I THINK, MAYOR, WHAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING IN THE ONE PROPOSITION IS, WE'RE STATING THAT THE LANGUAGE STATES THE PURPOSE FOR IT.
IT'S LIKE IT IS ASKING, IT'S CALLING FOR A RESPONSE, A VOTE.
BUT THERE'S A PURPOSE TO IT AND THE PURPOSE IS MISSING IN THE OTHER ONES.
THE PURPOSE OF STANDARD ELECTIONS.
>> WE COULD INCLUDE LANGUAGES THAT SAYS TO PREVENT OR TO-
>> OKAY, I WAS GOING TO SAY TO VENT THE INHERENT INSTABILITY THAT COMES WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY BEING UP FOR ELECTION AT ONE TIME.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF PROMOTING STABILITY, PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEAN TOO.
>> YEAH, THE LIKELIHOOD AGAIN SUGGESTING IS CAPTURED IN THE WHEREAS CLAUSES OF THAT PARTICULAR PROPOSITION WHERE WE EXPLAIN WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.
WE CAN ADD SOME LANGUAGE THERE THAT FLUSHES THAT OUT EVEN MORE.
>> YEAH. SO THAT WOULD BE OUR RATIONALE FOR THE ORDINATES, RIGHT?
>> YEAH, AS THE WHEREAS CLAUSES.
THE WHEREAS CLAUSES GIVES YOU THE IDEA OF WHY ARE WE DOING THIS, AND THAT'S ON THE BALLOT.
THAT'S WHAT SETS THE STAGE FOR WHY YOU'RE DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
>> IT SEEMS LOGICAL TO ME THAT THAT WOULD COME FIRST, THE STAGGERED TERMS, AND THEN IN THE NEXT ONE IT WOULD BE THE FOUR-YEAR TERMS.
>> [OVERLAPPING] IF STAGGERED PASSES, BUT A LONGER TERM DOES NOT, IT MEANS WE HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR.
COUNSEL, DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE THAT BALLOT LANGUAGE ON FOUR-YEAR TERMS TO REFERENCE THE STAGGER? IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR COUNCIL ELECTIONS EVERY TWO YEARS, WE WOULD AMEND THE CHARTER FOR FOUR-YEAR COUNCIL MEMBER TERMS. SO IT TIES THAT BACK.
>> I'LL JUST SAY STAGGERED ELECTIONS EVERY TWO YEARS IN EXACTLY WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.
>> YEAH. IT TIES IT BACK TO MAKING THE VOTER THINK THAT THE REASON THEY'RE ASKING FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERMS IS BECAUSE THEY'RE STAGGERING THE CITY ELECTIONS.
>> BECAUSE IT WOULD BECOME EXPENSIVE.
RIGHT NOW WHAT WE ARE DISCUSSING DOES NOT MAKE IT ANY MORE COSTLY.
WE HAD BEEN HAVING ELECTIONS EVERY TWO YEARS.
WE'RE NOT INCREASING OUR COMPANIES, BUT ONE PASSING IN THE OTHER DOESN'T.
WE JUST DOUBLED WHAT IT COSTS AS FAR AS ELECTION COSTS TO ELECT OUR LOCAL OFFICIALS.
>> IS THERE THE OPTION OF PUTTING THEM TOGETHER WHERE THEY WOULD NOT PASS SEPARATELY? I MEAN, THAT DOES CONCERN ME A LITTLE BIT IF PEOPLE SAID YES, STAGGER BUT NOT TO MEAN THAT, THE COST OF IT DOES CONCERN ME.
>> WE DISCUSSED THAT IN THE COMMITTEE TO AN EXTENT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT AND BRIAN WILL NEED TO TOUCH ON THIS.
IT WAS DETERMINED THEY WERE TWO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. BRIAN, CAN YOU?
>> YES, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
THEY ARE DISTINCT QUESTIONS BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, TERMS ARE DIFFERENT THAN STAGGERED.
SOME CITIES HAVE STAGGERS, SOME ELECT ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
BUT THEIR TERMS ARE DIFFERENT.
THEY ELECT THEM ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
>> THERE'S VERY FEW CITIES STATEWIDE THAT HAVE EVERYONE UP FOR ELECTION ALL AT ONCE.
YOU CAN COUNT THEM ON ONE OR TWO HANDS.
>> THEORETICALLY YOU COULD HAVE THE FOUR-YEAR TERM PASS AND NOT THE STAGGER.
IT WOULD JUST MEAN THAT WE HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY FOUR YEARS.
>> SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE OPTIONS, I GUESS.
IF THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE QUESTIONS,
[01:50:01]
SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE OUTCOMES THAT CAN HAPPEN WITH WHAT THEY ASK.>> BRIAN, YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE QUESTIONS, LEGALLY, THEY CANNOT BE PROVIDED ON THE BALLOT.
I JUST WANT TO FLUSH THAT OUT, THAT ONE FACT.
>> THAT WAS MY INTERPRETATION, YES.
>> OKAY. THEN EDDIE, YOU HAD A COMMENT RIGHT BEFORE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THAT.
>> BUT I'M HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THEM BEING SEPARATE.
I WOULD NOT WANT TO GO STAGGERED TERMS AND HAVE TWO-YEAR TERMS.
>> YEAH. BUT BRIAN IS SAYING THAT WE CAN'T COMBINE THEM NOW, WHERE ARE YOU HEADING? WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD LANGUAGE THAT SAYS, TO YOU ADDRESS STAGGERED TERMS WE'D LIKE TO DO FOUR-YEAR COUNCIL TERMS?
>> YOU'RE ASKING A DIFFICULT QUESTION.
I'M JUST HAVING A REAL HARD TIME SEPARATING THE TWO OF THEM.
BASICALLY IT'S JUST GOING TO COME DOWN, I GUESS I'M GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE FAITH THAT IF THE PUBLIC DECIDES TO DO FOUR-YEAR TERMS, THEY'RE GOING TO DO STAGGERED TERMS ALSO.
IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO STAGGERED TERMS, THEY'RE GOING TO DO FOUR-YEAR TERMS. BASED UPON THAT, I WOULD WANT STAGGERED TERMS ADDRESSED FIRST, AND THEN I WOULD WANT FOUR-YEAR TERMS ADDRESSED SECOND.
I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT.
I REALLY DON'T LIKE THE IDEA AT ALL OF TWO-YEAR TERMS AND STAGGERING.
URGING PEOPLE TO COME OUT, VOTER TURNOUT HAS NOT BEEN THE GREATEST ANYWAY, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO ASK THEM TO COME OUT EVERY YEAR.
>> BASED UPON THAT, AS WE TALK OUR WAY THROUGH IT, THE PEOPLE HAVE TO AGREE, "YEAH, I WANT STAGGERED TERMS. I DON'T WANT TO TURN OVER THE ENTIRE COUNCIL AT ANY GIVEN TIME AND HAVE A WHOLE NEW SLEIGHT.
I AM FOR STAGGERED TERMS NOW THAT WE NEED." FOR STAGGERED TERMS TO WORK, THEY NEED TO BE FOUR-YEAR TERMS. OTHERWISE, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME TO THE BALLOT EVERY MAY.
WHICH MEANS IN A NATIONAL ELECTION, YOU'RE GOING TO BE GOING TO THE BALLOT IN MAY, YOU'RE GOING TO TURN RIGHT AROUND AND GO TO THE BALLOT AGAIN.
YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO THE BALLOT IN MAY, YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO THE BALLOT SOMETIME IN MAY FOR PRIMARY ELECTION AND THEN YOU'VE GOT TO TURN AROUND AND GO BACK TO THE BALLOT AGAIN IN NOVEMBER FOR THE GENERAL ONE.
THAT WOULD BE NOT A LOT OF FUN.
LOGISTICALLY, ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
>> EVERY MAY IS SO, AND THEN EVERY OTHER NOVEMBER WOULD BE A FEDERAL OR STATE ELECTION TOO.
>> BRIAN, THERE'S NO WAY TO ADD THE TWO TOGETHER.
>> WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT.
THERE'S A SPECIFIC STATUTE THAT CONTROLS THE ELECTION CODE.
HOW YOU CAN, IN A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT A CHARTER AND WHAT CAN BE ON AN ELECTION, AND HOW THAT BALLOT LANGUAGE HAS TO BE.
THEY HAVE TO BE SEPARATE. THERE MAY BE SOME AREAS WHERE WE COULD LOOK AT IT TO SEE WHAT THE OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE.
IN TERMS OF BEING CREATIVE, IN TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL THAT I'M HEARING.
STAGGERED TERMS AND THE LENGTH OF TERMS ARE DIFFERENT.
THAT DIFFERENCE IS HIGHLIGHTED WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT THE CHARTER CURRENTLY SAYS.
THAT'S WHY WE DID IT THE WAY THAT WE DID IT.
THIS WAS TO BE AS CLEAR AS WE COULD BE ABOUT THOSE TWO ITEMS, CONSIDERING THE CONTEXT IN WHICH OUR CHARTER CURRENTLY IS, IT'S CURRENT FORM.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WE'LL REVIEW IT BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY FLEXIBILITY TO CONSIDER THAT.
WE HAVE DONE REVIEW PRIOR TO THIS POINT.
>> BECAUSE THEY WERE, DURING THE CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMITTEE, THAT WAS ONE OF THE OBSERVATIONS THAT EVERYONE MADE.
THESE THINGS ARE ONE, CONCEPTUALLY.
[01:55:01]
FUNCTIONALLY THEY ARE TWO, BECAUSE THEY'RE TWO DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT THINGS.HOWEVER, THE COMMITTEE ONLY RECOMMENDED ONE IF WE COULD HAVE THE OTHER.
WE WILL REVIEW TO MAKE SURE IF THERE'S ANY OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THEM TOGETHER, WE WILL PRESENT IT THAT WAY, AND I WILL COMMUNICATE TO YOU PRIOR TO NEXT TUESDAY WHAT THE RESULT OF THAT IS.
I ANTICIPATE THAT IT WILL BE LIKE IT IS NOW, BUT I DON'T WANT TO PREDISPOSE.
I DON'T WANT TO DRAW ANY CONCLUSIONS.
FOR ONE, I'M NOT THE ATTORNEY, TWO, WE WANT TO BE AS FLEXIBLE AND OPEN-MINDED AS WE CAN BE AND IN THE APPROPRIATE APPLICATION OF THE STATE STATUTE AND THE INTENT OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE COUNCIL.
>> BRIAN, IF IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE YOU CAN COMBINE THEM, I THINK YOU PROBABLY WOULD ALL HEAR FROM ALL OF US THE CONSENSUS TOWARD COMBINING THEM, BECAUSE THAT IS THE CONCEPT THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN AND WANT TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED.
IF YOU CANNOT COMBINE THEM, I DO HAVE A STRONG PREFERENCE FOR STAGGERED TERMS TO APPEAR FIRST WITH A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT LANGUAGE, FOLLOWED BY FOUR-YEAR TERMS WITH A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT LANGUAGE.
SO THAT IF WE CAN'T TIE THEM INTO ONE PROPOSITION, AT LEAST WE CAN CREATE CONTEXT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPOSITIONS TO SHOW THEY'RE ONE CONCEPT.
>> IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE ABLE TO REQUEST A RULING FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, JUST TO BE SURE, CLARIFYING THAT WE COULD PUT THEM TOGETHER.
>> NO, IT REALLY DOESN'T LEND ITSELF TO THAT.
THIS IS REALLY A FUNCTION OF MUNICIPAL LAW, IF YOU WILL, AND THE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THE STATUTE ALLOWS FOR, BUT I HAVE SOME GREAT RESOURCES AROUND THE STATE AND WE'LL SEE WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE IN THIS REGARD.
>> WE'LL GIVE YOU THAT FEEDBACK BEFORE THE END OF THE WEEK, AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.
>> DID WE WANT TO LOOK AT THE OTHER BALLOT [OVERLAPPING]?
>> I FORGOT ABOUT THE WEEK, WE DO WANT TO WITH THAT LANGUAGE [OVERLAPPING].
>> I HAVE A BELIEF, PROP THREE I BELIEVE, AT LEAST AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN.
>> THAT'S WHAT THE COMMITTEE SAID, LET'S PUT IT ON THERE.
AND THIS LOOKS LIKE, WOW, THERE WAS A WORD QUOTA AND SOMEBODY GOT ALL THEIR WORDS CUT DOWN, [LAUGHTER], LIKE 50 WORDS ON THAT.
>> FOR SURE. YOU DON'T WANT THIS SITTING BETWEEN TERM, YOU DON'T WANT THIS SITTING BETWEEN LENGTH, AND THEY'VE GOT TO FOLLOW THE LENGTH AND THE ALTERNATING [OVERLAPPING] RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
>> YOU CAN'T, OTHERWISE WHATEVER CONTEXT YOU PUT IN THEM, YOU'RE GOING TO COMPLETELY LOSE THEM.
NO PROBLEM THEN WITH THAT LANGUAGE.
>>SO THEN WHAT BRIAN WILL DO IS WORK ON THAT, VISIT ONE MORE TIME, WHETHER OR NOT THAT TERMS AND STAGGERED CAN BE COMBINED INTO ONE PROPOSITION.
IF WE SEE TWO PROPOSITIONS, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE MORE CONTEXT ON THEM, AND THIS WILL BE ON OUR AGENDA NEXT WEEK. [OVERLAPPING].
>>FIRST MEETING OF THIS ORDINATES, CORRECT?
>>YES, MA'AM. PRIOR TO THE END OF THIS WEEK, WE WILL HAVE FINAL RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE THAT DOESN'T CORPORATE THE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT THAT DOES REFLECT THE NUMBER OF PROPOSITIONS, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING STAGGERED AND FOUR YEARS WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN BE COMBINED.
IF THEY CANNOT, IT WILL BE THREE PROPOSITIONS FOR CHARTER ELECTION, FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS RATHER, IF THEY CAN, THEN IT WILL BE TWO.
IF THEY CANNOT, AND WE HAVE THREE CHARTER ELECTION TOPICS.
[02:00:04]
OUR CHARTER REVISION TOPICS.IT WILL BE STAGGERED FIRST FOR YOUR SECOND AND FREQUENCY OF MEETING THIRD.
WE WILL HAVE THAT FINAL LANGUAGE TO YOU AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE THIS WEEK.
I WOULD LOOK FOR IT THURSDAY, BUT CERTAINLY BEFORE THE END OF FRIDAY.
I LIKE WRITING CHECKS WITH LEGALS TIME.
>> ONLY ONE OTHER QUESTION ON THE ONE ABOUT THE 24 MEETINGS PER YEAR.
I KNOW THAT A COMMITTEE MEMBER HAD COMMENTED TO ME THAT THEY HAD NO IDEA THAT WE MET EVERY WEEK, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT CONTEXT NEEDS TO BE IN THERE, SOMETHING AS OPPOSED TO CURRENTLY HOW MANY WEEKS WE ARE REQUIRED.
>> WE CAN ADD SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT ON THERE.
IT IS USEFUL TO NOTE AND POSSIBLY EVEN IN THE PREAMBLE THAT WE ARE THE ONLY CITY OUR SIZE THAT MEETS ONCE A WEEK.
THERE ARE SOME MUCH, MUCH BIGGER THAN US THAT MEET ONCE A WEEK, BUT EVEN FORT WORTH, FOR EXAMPLE, MEETS A SET MINIMUM NUMBER OF TIMES A YEAR.
I THINK IT'S 30 AS OPPOSED TO OUR 24, BUT THE LOGIC THERE FROM THE COMMITTEE WAS THAT EQUALS TWICE A MONTH.
IT'S GOING TO PUSH AND PULL A LITTLE BIT BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE'RE GOING TO BE MEETING TWICE A MONTH, EVERY OTHER WEEK.
>> SOME INDIVIDUALS MAY THINK THAT'S AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF MEETINGS FOR, AGAIN, JUST UNAWARE OF HOW MANY MEETINGS WE CURRENTLY HAVE.
>> WE WILL WORK WITH TEAM TO STAFF TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT AND THAT PREAMBLE.
WORK WITH LEGAL AND ALL THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY ASSISTANT, CITY MANAGERS AND THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, ALONG WITH OUR TEAMS. WE'LL PUT TOGETHER SOME REVISED LANGUAGE THERE AND PUT IT THROUGH THE GRINDER BEFORE YOU SEND IT OUT TO YOU ALL, TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GOT AS MUCH CONTEXT AS WE CAN APPROPRIATELY PUT INTO THAT PREAMBLE ON THE BOARD.
>>THANK YOU FOR THAT. WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO ITEM ONE F?
>> FOR WHAT IS WORTH, WHICH MAY NOT PASS AND SEE AN ATTORNEY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE TWO ITEMS REGARDING THE CHARTER, ON THE BALLOT.
FIRST ITEM BEING THAT WE CHANGED THE FOUR-YEAR TERMS [BACKGROUND] HERE.
THEN, IT'S AN EXPLANATION TO IMPLEMENT THAT RATIO IS ONE AND THREE, OR FOR TWO YEARS IN TWO AND FOUR, ARE FOR FOUR YEARS OR VICE TORQUES THAT MATTER TO ME, BUT IT HAD TO BE PART OF THAT FIRST CHARTER AMENDMENT.
THEN THE SECOND ONE READS IT 24 MEETINGS A YEAR, AND NOW WE ARE WAITING ABOUT THE CLAIMS TO STUDYING TO SEE IF THAT CAN BE DONE, BUT THAT WAY WE WOULDN'T BE MEETING EVERY YEAR.
IF THIS DIDN'T PASS, WOULD BE WHERE WE ARE NOW, WOULD BE EVERY TWO YEARS.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIX SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED FROM FIRST TIME IN OVER 50 YEARS.
THAT AREA RIGHT CHANGED ALL AT ONCE.
I THOUGHT WE DID PRETTY GOOD IN GETTING ON BOARD AND DO WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO.
SO WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT FIXING SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED 50 YEARS AGO, APPROXIMATELY.
>> SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, HOWARD, IS YOU WOULD PREFER NOT TO EMPHASIZE STABILITY.
WHAT WOULD YOU EMPHASIZE? AS FAR AS CONTEXT?
>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION?
>> I WAS JUST TRYING TO REPEAT BACK WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAYING WAS, YOU THINK STAGGERED TERMS ARE A GOOD IDEA, BUT YOU'RE NOT TYING THAT TO THE FACT THAT IN 2017, THIS COUNCIL TURNED OVER WITH FIVE NEW PEOPLE WHO HAD NEVER HAD ANY COUNSEL EXPERIENCE.
>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO EMPHASIZE THAT.
WE ALL FIVE WERE ELECTED THE SAME TIME, AND WE WENT THROUGH TRAINING ONE ON ONE, AND LEARNED EVERYTHING WE COULD, AS FAST AS WE COULD AND WE KEPT FUNCTIONING AND WE'VE GOT ALL OUR DECISIONS MADE WHEN NEEDED TO.
>> WHAT CONTEXT WOULD YOU GIVE TO A VOTER FOR WHY WE SHOULD DO STAGGERED TERMS?
[02:05:05]
THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED FOUR-YEAR TERMS. WE'RE NOT GOING AGAINST THAT, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO IMPLEMENT THAT TO THE COUNCIL, POSITIONS WOULD BE FOR FOUR YEARS AND TWO WOULD BE FOR TWO YEARS.SO IT ACCOMPLISHES IS WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS AFTER, BUT IT'S PUTTING IT ALL IN ONE MOTION.
>> IN OTHER WORDS, TO MAKE YOU'RE KIND OF SKIPPING, MAKING IT VOTING ON STAGGERED TERMS, IN A WAY?
>> IN A WAY, BECAUSE IF IT DIDN'T PASS TO FOUR YEARS, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ELECTIONS EVERY YEAR.
>> IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO FIND OUT.
>> WHAT I'M [BACKGROUND] [NOISE]. YOU FIND.
[NOISE] WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS BIT ROUNDABOUT, WHILE YOU'RE WRAPPING ALL OF THEM INTO ONE, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS FOUR-YEAR TERMS AND PLACE ONE AND PLACE THREE WILL ADDITIONALLY SERVE TWO, AND TWO AND FOUR, WILL SERVE FOUR.
IN ESSENCE, YOU'RE BASICALLY COUCHING THE FACT THAT IT'S AUTOMATICALLY GOING TO STAGGERED TERM.
>> IT'S WHAT I THOUGHT YOU SAID[OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT WOULD BE IN WHAT, IT WOULDN'T BE HIDDEN.
IT WOULD BE IN BALANCED LANGUAGE.
>> I SEE THE WHEELS TURNING IN BRYAN'S (PHONETIC) HEAD RIGHT NOW.
>> IS THE QUESTION ABOUT DIFFERENT PLACES HAVING DIFFERENT TERMS?
>> ONLY IN THE 2021 ELECTION THOUGH.
>> SO IT'S JUST A TRANSITIONAL IDEA?
>> WE JUST INITIALIZED GETTING INTO THE FOUR YEAR TERMS.
>> THAT MIGHT BE BRILLIANT IF ITS
>> I SAID THAT MIGHT BE BRILLIANT, HOWARD.
>> I THINK HOWARD SAID, COULD YOU SAY THAT ALOUD, A LITTLE LOUDER, AND AGAIN? [LAUGHTER]
>> I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT THAT COUNCILMAN SMITH IS TALKING ABOUT, AND WE'LL NEED TO REVIEW THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER.
I THINK IT ACTUALLY MIGHT BE, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S SPECIFICALLY WHAT EXACTLY IS CALLED OUT.
WE KNOW THAT ALL FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS, YOU'RE UP FOR ELECTION EVERY OTHER YEAR.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THAT AND THAT'S STAGGERING THAT WE'RE TAUGHT. I'M SORRY.
WE MAY HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT BOTH OF THOSE THINGS SEPARATELY, INSTEAD OF LETTING ONE BE CHANGED, BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE OTHER THING.
BEFORE WE PUT BRYAN IN A BOX, WE NEED TO DO SOME REAL HARD LOOKING, BECAUSE THAT'S A DIFFERENT VIEW PERSPECTIVE AND POSSIBLY A MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE PERSPECTIVE, THAN WHAT THE COMMITTEE BROUGHT THROUGH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT, AND I DON'T THINK THAT WILL SLOW US DOWN IN THE REVIEW AT ALL.
BUT IT REALLY IS GOING TO DEPEND ON THE EXACT LANGUAGE, AND I DON'T WANT TO DO A LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE CHARTER, SPECIFIC TO THAT QUESTION.
WHILE WE'RE SITTING HERE LOOKING AT BRYAN, THINKING BRYAN GAVE US A LEGAL DETERMINATION NOW.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO GIVE HIM A LITTLE AT A TIME, BUT I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, COUNCILMAN SMITH.
>> I DON'T THINK THE CONVERSATION IS EXACTLY WHAT THE COMMITTEE SAID?
>> YEAH. WELL, IT'S AN ELEGANT WAY OF DOING IT AND A MUCH MORE EFFICIENT WAY OF DOING IT.
IT'S JUST DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THEIR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION WAS.
SO WE CAN DEFINITELY TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, AND GIVE YOU A RESPONSE REAL QUICK.
>> OKAY. THAT'S GOOD DISCUSSION.
I REALLY LIKE IT WHEN ALL OF YOU-ALL WEIGH IN, I KNOW IT TAKES LONGER TO WORK THROUGH OUR AGENDA.
BUT [INAUDIBLE] THESE ARE WEIGHTY THINGS, AND CHANGING THE CHARTER NEEDS THIS KIND OF CONVERSATION AROUND IT, I THINK.
SO, I'M GLAD TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS.
NOW WE'RE READY TO GO ONTO 1F? OKAY, 1F: "DISCUSS THE CIVIC CENTER GENERAL BOND,
[F. Discuss Civic Center General Obligation Bond Election;]
GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ELECTION". WE STARTED LAST WEEK.WE HAD GOOD CONVERSATION ABOUT WHERE WE WERE HEADED ON THIS ONE, BUT THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT IT BACK UP ON THE AGENDA, JUST TO GIVE US THE FLEXIBILITY IF THERE WERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, OR ANYTHING YOU-ALL WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS WEEK.
[02:10:03]
LAST WEEK, WE KIND OF ARRIVED AT THE CONSENSUS THAT WE WOULD LEAVE IT ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.SOUNDS LIKE LEGAL HAS HAMMERED OUT THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE ONE RESOLUTION FOR US TO DO THAT, TO CHANGE THE POLLING PLACES.
JUST TO LINE UP WITH WHERE POTTER-RANDALL COUNTY HAVE ALREADY SECURED FOR THEIR NOVEMBER ELECTION SITES.
ANY OTHER NEW INFORMATION JARED (PHONETIC), THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT?
>> NO, MAM. THE ONLY CHANGE FOR THIS WEEK, IS THAT WE HAVE CONFIRMED THAT WE CAN USE THE RESOLUTION.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS GOING TO BE THE HOUSEKEEPING THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING, AND EARLIER IN THIS MEETING, WHICH WOULD BE CHANGING THE POLLING PLACES, CHANGING THE DATES AND OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED SINCE MAY.
AND THEN ALSO UPDATING THE TAX RATE IMPACT THAT THE PROJECT WILL HAVE FOR VOTERS, BECAUSE THAT INFORMATION IS ON THE BALLOT AS WELL.
SO IT WILL UPDATE THOSE THINGS.
BRYAN, IS THERE ANYTHING I'VE MISSED THAT WE'D BE UPDATING AS WE GO THROUGH THAT OR KEVIN? FEEL FREE TO JUMP IN EITHER ONE OF YOU.
>> YOU HAVEN'T MISSED ANYTHING FROM LEGAL STANDPOINT.
>> NO, SIR. YOU COVERED EVERYTHING.
>> IT WILL BE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND FROM A PROJECT STANDPOINT DO EXACTLY WHAT COUNCIL CALLED, BACK AT THE START OF THE YEAR FOR THE MAY ELECTION THAT WAS LATER POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER [INAUDIBLE].
>> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OR FOLLOW-UP COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL?
>> THE MAYOR WILL HAVE THE UPDATED MEMBERS BEFORE WE PUT IT ON OUR AGENDA, AND WE'RE ONLY PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA ON THE 11TH. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> YES, MAM. THIS CAN BE CALLED VIA RESOLUTION WHICH ONLY REQUIRES ONE READING.
AND BASICALLY, WE ARE WORKING WITH BOND COUNCIL THAT WILL UPDATE THE VOTER INFORMATION SHEET, WHICH INCLUDES THE TAX RATE IMPACTS RELATED TO THE DEBT ISSUANCE.
>> AND WE HAVE THAT FINALLY. WE HAVE THAT DATA.
WE CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOU AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE PROVIDE THE CHARTER ELECTION INFORMATION, LATER ON THIS WEEK.
JUST AS FAR AS THE RESOLUTION GOES, WE'RE NOT CALLING AN ELECTION.
WE'RE JUST MODIFYING THE ELECTIONS.
WE'RE MODIFYING THE LANGUAGE FOR THE BALLOT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN CALLED, OR MODIFYING THE INSTRUMENT BY WHICH THE ELECTION IS CALLED TO CLARIFY THE LOCATIONS, THE DATES, THE TAX RATE IMPACT, ETC.
>> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. WE WOULD BE GETTING THAT INFORMATION PRIOR TO IT BEING ON THE AGENDA ON AUGUST 11TH.
>> YES, MAM. AND IF COUNCIL WANTED, WE COULD PUT WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS AUGUST 11TH.
HOWEVER, IF COUNCIL WANTED THAT RESOLUTION ON JULY 28TH, WE COULD DO THAT ALSO.
BUT WE'RE MOVING TOWARDS AUGUST 11TH BECAUSE THAT WILL CONCUR WITH SECOND READING ON THE CHARTER ELECTIONS AS WELL, OR COINCIDE RATHER.
>> SOME OF THAT WILL GIVE US A LITTLE MORE TIME TO ENSURE WE HAVE ALL THE POLLING LOCATIONS FROM THE TWO COUNTY ELECTION OFFICES, AND THEY'RE JUST A FLEETING ELECTIONS.
SO THEY ARE QUITE BUSY GETTING THE CANVASSING DONE, AND THE ELECTIONS DONE FROM THE RUNOFF ELECTIONS THAT WERE CONDUCTED LAST WEEK.
SO IT'S A MATTER OF [INAUDIBLE] THEM A LITTLE TIME TO FINALIZE POLLING LOCATIONS SO THAT THAT INFORMATION IS ACCURATE IN THE AMENDED RESOLUTION THAT CONTINUES TO CALLING OF THIS ELECTION.
>> SO IT APPEARED FROM KEVIN IS THAT AUGUST 11TH OTHER THAN THE 28TH.
ANY HESITATION ON THE COUNCIL FROM THAT? [NOISE] OKAY.
>> SO I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE ON THE BALLOT, BUT DETERMINING HOW WE SELL THE BOND, THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS.
BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND BOND COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED WE SELL ALL THE BONDS ALL AT ONCE OR WE TALKED ABOUT DOING IT IN THREE PORTIONS.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO DECIDE LATER, NOT NOW?
>> CORRECT. THAT IS NOT A DECISION THAT IS MADE VIA THE ELECTION.
THAT DECISION IS MADE AT THE TIME THAT THOSE BONDS ARE ISSUED.
>> I'M THINKING OUT LOUD, KEVIN.
IT WOULDN'T REALLY BE WISE OF US TO LOCK IN AND SAY THAT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT.
FIRST OF AUGUST, AND THEN IT PASSES IN NOVEMBER.
[02:15:02]
WE GET READY TO ISSUE SOME OF THE BONDS COME JANUARY, AND IF THINGS HAVE CHANGED, I THINK IT WOULD BE UNWISE FOR US TO HAVE LOCKED IN, COMMITTED TO DOING IT A CERTAIN WAY GIVEN THE VOLATILITY OF WHERE THINGS ARE IN THE WORLD FINANCIALLY.I SEE THAT IT WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO VOTERS TO KNOW THIS IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT.
BUT IT MIGHT, IN THE LONG RUN, FINANCIALLY COST VOTERS IF WE HAD THE FIVE OF US SAID WE'RE GOING TO LOCK IN AND GUARANTEE TO VOTERS WE'RE GOING TO DO IT IN THREE SEPARATE ISSUANCES.
I GUESS I'M JUST SAYING ALL OF THAT OUT LOUD, COUNCIL, MAINLY FOR OUR BENEFIT.
IF ANYBODY FEELS DIFFERENTLY, NOW IS THE TIME TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.
>> I THINK THE FLEXIBILITY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION IS WHAT I WOULD PREFER, NOT HAVING A LOCKED STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THERE ARE PROS AND CONS OF EACH OF THOSE, AND I THINK THAT DECISION WILL BE BEST MADE AT THE TIME WHEN WE KNOW EXACTLY THE RATES, WE KNOW THE TIMING, AND WE HAVE ALL THOSE CALCULATIONS OF SHORT- AND LONG-TERM BENEFITS OF EACH OF THOSE OPTIONS.
>> ANYBODY HAVE A DIFFERENT APPROACH? THAT WAS VERY WELL SAID.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE CIVIC CENTER BOND PROPOSITION FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION? OKAY, HEARING NOTHING.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS 1G, A REPORT ON STATUTES IN ELLWOOD PARK.
[G. Report on statutes in Ellwood Park; and]
>> MAYOR, I WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THE TYPO THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT STATUTES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STATUES, SO WE HAVE AN EXTRA T IN THERE.
BUT IN ELLWOOD PARK, WE HAVE THREE STATUES ALONG WITH A NUMBER OF MARKERS.
WE HAVE A STATUE OF JUAN DE PADILLA, OR FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA, AND THAT WAS PLACED THERE A LONG TIME AGO.
I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT TIME AND MICHAEL MAY GO INTO SOME DETAIL ON THAT, BUT IT'S ACROSS THE STREET.
IT'S IN ELLWOOD PARK, WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM ST. MARY'S CATHOLIC CHURCH, AND IT WAS PLACED THERE BY THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF AMARILLO AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST.
THEY HAVE GIVEN US A REQUEST. I WON'T GO INTO DETAIL THERE.
I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU WHICH STATUES WE HAVE THERE, AND GIVE IT TO MICHAEL TO GO OVER IT IN DETAIL.
WE ALSO HAVE A DOUGHBOYS STATUE, IT'S CALLED THE PANHANDLE BOYS, WHICH WAS PLACED IN THE LATE TWENTIES.
IT ORIGINALLY WAS OVER BY WHERE THE CIVIC CENTER IS NOW, AND IT WAS MOVED IN THE SIXTIES AS PART OF THE CIVIC CENTER PROJECT TO ELLWOOD PARK.
AND THAT'S COMMEMORATING SOLDIERS FROM THE PANHANDLE THAT FOUGHT IN WORLD WAR ONE.
AND WE ALSO HAVE THE CONFEDERATE STATUE, WHICH DEPICTS CONFEDERATE SOLDIER WILLIAM.
A. MILLER, AND WAS PLACED THERE BY THE DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY IN 1931.
SO WITH THAT SAID, MICHAEL, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION, MICHAEL KASHUBA WILL TAKE US THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY MANAGER, MAYOR, AND COUNCIL.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TO SHARE SOME INFORMATION AND THE PROCESS RELATED TO THE RELOCATION OF MONUMENTS.
SO THE FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS IS THAT THE DONOR OR THE OWNER WOULD SUBMIT A FORMAL REQUEST TO THE CITY.
STEPHANIE, DO YOU MIND GOING TO THE NEXT SLIDE? THE FIRST STEP IS THAT THE DONOR OR OWNER WOULD SUBMIT A FORMAL REQUEST TO THE CITY.
THE SECOND STEP IS THAT THE CITY WOULD REVIEW THE OWNERSHIP AND THE HISTORY OF THAT MONUMENT.
AND THEN THIRD, WE WOULD ENTER INTO AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS, AND REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE FORMULATING AN AGREEMENT TO FACILITATE ANY KIND OF RELOCATION.
SO THAT'S THE PROCESS WE USE WHEN RELOCATING MONUMENTS.
STEPHANIE, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, THE FIRST MONUMENT IS FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA, A FRANCISCAN MISSIONARY.
THE PRIMARY DONOR OF THAT MONUMENT WAS THE TEXAS KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, WHICH IS A CATHOLIC FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION.
THE CURRENT STATUS OF THAT PARTICULAR MONUMENT, THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION HAS BASICALLY RELEASED THEIR INTEREST TO RELOCATE THE MONUMENT TO CHURCH PROPERTY, AND SO THE CITY HAS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH ST. MARY'S CATHEDRAL CHURCH IN ORDER TO RELOCATE THAT MONUMENT TO CHURCH PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S THE STATUS OF THE FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA MONUMENT.
STEPHANIE, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SECOND ONE.
AS MENTIONED BEFORE, WE ALSO HAVE THE CONFEDERATE SOLDIER MONUMENT, AND THE DONOR OF THAT WAS THE UNITED DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY.
[02:20:01]
THE CURRENT STATUS IS THAT STAFF HAS RECEIVED A LETTER FROM THE UNITED DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY REQUESTING TO RELOCATE THAT MONUMENT TO PRIVATE PROPERTY IN SHAMROCK.SO THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD REVIEW THE OWNERSHIP AND THE HISTORY.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF THE HISTORY, BUT REVIEWING THE OWNERSHIP.
AND THEN WE WOULD BE GOING INTO THAT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING AN AGREEMENT FOR RELOCATION OF THAT MONUMENT.
IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO THE OTHER LARGE MONUMENT THAT WE HAVE IS, AS THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, FOR THE DOUGHBOYS OR THE PANHANDLE BOYS OF THE WORLD WAR.
THIS WAS PROVIDED AS A GIFT BY THE LLANO ESTACADO CHAPTER OF THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
AS MENTIONED, THE FIRST STEP IS RECEIVING A FORMAL REQUEST.
IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED A FORMAL REQUEST FROM THE DONOR.
WE DID HAVE AN INQUIRY FROM THE TEXAS PANHANDLE WAR MEMORIAL ABOUT THE STATUS OF THIS MONUMENT, AND LIKE THE CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, THIS MONUMENT WAS ORIGINALLY INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THE OLD MUNICIPAL AUDITORIUM IN 1928, AND WAS LATER MOVED TO ELLWOOD PARK IN 1966 TO MAKE WAY FOR THE CIVIC CENTER.
WITH THAT, THAT'S THE STATUS OF THE THREE MONUMENTS, THE PROCESS THAT WE WALKED THROUGH IN TERMS OF RELOCATING, AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO IT.
>> MICHAEL, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT FATHER PADILLA MONUMENT.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE OWNERS OF THE MONUMENT RELATED TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, THEY APPROACHED THE CITY TO MOVE IT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. SO THEY SENT US A LETTER BASICALLY INITIATING THE PROCESS THAT THEY WOULD RELOCATE IT FROM CITY PROPERTY TO PRIVATE PROPERTY.
>> SO VERY SIMILAR TO THAT CONFEDERATE STATUE.
>> AND THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THE STATUE HAS CONTACTED THE CITY AND ASKED FOR THE STATUTE TO BE RETURNED.
>> OKAY. BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE DOUGHBOY STATUE, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT AN INQUIRY FROM A NON-PROFIT ABOUT IT, THE WAR MEMORIAL, BUT NOT THE ORIGINAL DONOR OF THE STATUE?
>> OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD ALL OF THAT.
>> SO HAVE THERE BEEN ANY OTHER STATUES IN ANY OTHER PROPERTY OF AMARILLO THAT THIS HAS ALREADY TAKEN PLACE BEFORE? IS THERE ANY PRECEDENCE FOR THIS PREVIOUS TO THE FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA?
>> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. IF IT DID, IT WOULD HAVE PREDATED MYSELF.
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY EITHER.
>> BUT THIS MEANS OF MOVING THE STATUE, THIS HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME?
>> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? YOU BROKE UP ON ME.
>> SO THIS WAY OF GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF MOVING A STATUE OR A MONUMENT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED PREVIOUSLY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
>> YES. THIS WOULD BE THE PROCESS THAT WE UTILIZE, OBVIOUSLY FIRST WITH JUAN DE PADILLA AND THEN IT'S THE SAME PROCESS THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO USE FOR THEIR STATUE AS WELL.
>> DR. SAUER, I THINK TO FURTHER ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION, THE BEST WAY FORWARD TO EXPLAIN THIS IS THAT THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE HAD REACHED OUT TO US WITH INTEREST IN RELOCATING FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA'S MONUMENT BASED ON IT SUFFERING SOME DAMAGE IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION IN THE PARK.
AND IT WAS BASED ON THAT THAT WE CREATED THIS PROCESS IN WORKING WITH PARKS AND WITH CITY MANAGEMENT ON HOW BEST TO FACILITATE THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS, AND SO THIS HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR AT LEAST THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, RELATED TO HOW WE WOULD HANDLE THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS.
AND I THINK THE KEY HERE IS WE FOCUS THESE EFFORTS TO THE OWNERSHIP OR WHO DONATED OR OFFERED THESE TYPES OF MEMORIALS TO THE CITY AND USE THEM AS THE BASIS FOR INITIATING THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF RELOCATION OF ANY MONUMENT THAT THE CITY HAS IN ITS POSSESSION ON CITY PROPERTY.
>> SO ALSO [OVERLAPPING] IF WE WERE TO LEAVE THE DOUGHBOY STATUE,
[02:25:02]
WE WOULD NEED FOR THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION TO BE IN CONTACT WITH THE [INAUDIBLE]>> SO THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE A FORMAL REQUEST FROM THE DONOR OR OWNER.
>> AND IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, I WAS CONTACTED BY THE TEXAS PANHANDLE WAR MEMORIAL REPRESENTATIVES FROM THEM WITH INTEREST IN RELOCATING THAT STATUE TO THE WAR MEMORIAL, AND WE'VE EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATED THIS PROCESS TO THEM AND ADVISED THEM TO REACH OUT AND MAKE CONTACT WITH THE ORIGINAL GROUP OF THE MONUMENT TO INQUIRE AS TO THEIR WILLINGNESS TO MAKE THAT REQUEST FORMALLY ON THEIR BEHALF.
>> SO I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY A FEW COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE CONFEDERATE STATUE.
I KNOW THAT THROUGHOUT OUR COUNTRY, THERE'S BEEN LOTS OF CONTROVERSY OVER CONFEDERATE STATUES, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE UNITED DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY FOR COMING FORWARD AND OFFERING TO HELP RESOLVE THE SITUATION THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
I KNOW THAT THE STATUE HAS A DIFFERENT MEANING TO DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS OR DIFFERENT GROUPS, BUT I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THIS IS A BETTER WAY OF RESOLVING THE ISSUE, AND SINCE THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE STATUE BACK AND RELOCATE IT, I THINK THAT IS GREAT.
SO I JUST WANT TO EXTEND A THANK YOU TO THEM FOR COMING FORWARD TO HELP RESOLVE AN ISSUE, AND HOPEFULLY, WE'LL HAVE MAYBE 99.9 PERCENT OF THE CITIZENS WOULD BE HAPPY ABOUT IT BECAUSE I CERTAINLY AM, AND I'VE CERTAINLY BEEN PRAYING ABOUT IT AND DID NOT WANT TO SEE OUR CITY GO THROUGH A PROCESS THAT OTHER CITIES HAVE GONE THROUGH THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE STAFF AND THEIR WORK THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DOING TO WORK WITH THESE DIFFERENT ENTITIES.
AND GOING FORWARD, I HOPE THAT OUR CITY AGAIN WILL COME TOGETHER AND UNITE, AND HELP TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE GOING ON.
>> ANY OTHER THOUGHTS FROM COUNCIL?
>> CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THE UNITED DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY WANT TO MOVE IT?
>> DID THEY SAY WHY, KEVIN? OR DOES THEIR LETTER SAY WHY, MICHAEL?
>> CAN YOU RESTATE IT? IT CUT OUT THERE AT THE VERY END OF THAT QUESTION.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SMITH, I THINK THE BEST THAT WE COULD OFFER IS, BASICALLY IN THE WORDS THAT THEY HAVE USED IN THE LETTER, "WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THIS MONUMENT TO SHAMROCK, TEXAS.
IT WILL SIT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY CLOSE TO OUR BUSINESS AREA.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAVE ONE OF OUR MONUMENTS".
THAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE REASONING THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS COUNCIL?
>> NOT A QUESTION, BUT I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT.
THAT, CERTAINLY WHEN INDIVIDUALS HAVE DONATED SOMETHING TO OUR CITY, THEN I WANT TO RESPECT THEIR REQUEST TO HAVE IT BACK FOR WHATEVER THEIR REASONS ARE AND TO FACILITATE THAT.
SO I CERTAINLY AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS TO ACCEPT THEIR REQUEST.
I APPRECIATE THE PROCESS THE CITY'S PUT TOGETHER FOR THAT COMMUNICATION.
I HAVE NO HESITATION ABOUT THAT.
AND AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, I JUST WANT, AS A CITY, TO REMEMBER, FOR ME PERSONALLY, IT'S THAT HISTORY HAS A PURPOSE AND THAT WE HAVE THINGS TO LEARN FROM IT, AND WE CAN LOOK BACK AND TAKE LESSONS OF JUST WHAT PURPOSE WAS REVEALED IN THEIR HISTORY.
SO WHAT CAN BE LEARNED AND APPLIED TODAY, RIGHTS OR WRONGS.
AND I AM CONCERNED, JUST THE MOVEMENT ACROSS THE CITY, JUST TO CANCEL OUR HISTORY ON THE PARTS THAT WE WOULD
[02:30:02]
RATHER MAYBE NOT TALK ABOUT AND LEARN FROM.SO I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE RECOGNIZE THERE IS A VALUE IN OUR HISTORY, AND A NEED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AND NOT JUST REMOVAL OF OUR HISTORY, DESTRUCTION OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS, AND THE VALUES THAT SURROUND ALL THOSE CONVERSATIONS.
>> YEAH. I WANT TO READ FROM A LETTER THAT CAME FROM UNITED DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY, THREE YEARS AGO.
THE LETTER CONCLUDES BY, "JOIN US IN DENOUNCING HATE GROUPS AND AFFIRMING THAT CONFEDERATE REMOVAL OF STATUES AND MONUMENTS ARE PART OF OUR SHARED AMERICAN HISTORY AND SHOULD REMAIN IN PLACE." SO I THINK IT OUGHT TO REMAIN IN PLACE.
THEY CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND PUT IT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, I THINK IT'S AN ASSET TO THE CITY.
I UNDERSTAND THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE PEOPLE PUTTING PAINT ON IT AND STUFF AND THAT'S, I THINK, BREAKING THE LAW AND WE NEED TO STOP THAT.
>>THEN I GUESS WITH THE PROCESS [INAUDIBLE] THAT THIS WOULD APPEAR ON AN AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL TO VOTE ON, WE HAVE TO APPROVE THAT GETTING THAT FUNDED BACK.
>>NOT THAT WE USE THE SAME PROCESS WE USED FOR, [INAUDIBLE] FROM THE CATHOLIC DIOCESE.
OBVIOUSLY, IF MY COUNCIL IS DIVIDED ON THAT, THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CONSIDERATION ON MY PART.
>>SOUNDS LIKE WE DON'T HAVE A CONSENSUS WITHOUT TAKING THE VOTE.
>>I WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH COUNCIL ON THAT AND IF IT'S APPARENT TO ME THAT THE APPROPRIATE STEP IS TO COME TO COUNCIL TO GET SOME GUIDANCE ON WHAT I SHOULD DO, I WILL DO THAT.
>>I THINK IT'S A GOOD STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE CITY STAFF CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE DAUGHTERS OF THE CONFEDERACY TO MOVE THE STATUE THAT BELONGS TO THEM.
THEY WANT IT BACK, THEY WANT TO DISPLAY IT IN A PLACE WHERE IT CAN BE PRESERVED BUT YET PROTECTED FROM SOME OF THE DAMAGE THAT IT HAS BEEN RECEIVING.
>>YES, I DEFINITELY THINK IT'S A GREAT MOVE AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT SOLUTION TO AN ISSUE THAT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAVE GOING FORWARD.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO HANDLE THE SITUATION NOW THAT WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS IN THE COMMUNITY STEPPING UP AND OFFERING TO DO SO.
>>ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THAT? THAT WE WANT TO GIVE GUIDANCE TO STAFF?
>> THE CONVERSATION ON THE STATUE FROM WORLD WAR ONE, CAN YOU AGAIN EXPLAIN WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE, IT CERTAINLY SEEMS TO ME, A GREAT DEAL OF SENSE TO MOVE THAT AND CONSOLIDATE IT.
AT THE TIME IT WAS PLACED IN THERE WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE A CITY WAR MEMORIAL LOCATION.
CAN YOU JUST BRIEFLY RESTATE AGAIN WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PROCESS, WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN FOR THAT TO TAKE PLACE?
>>YES, MA'AM. THE VERY FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS WOULD BE A FORMAL REQUEST FROM THE DONOR OR OWNER.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ONE RELATED TO THAT MONUMENT.
SO THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE A FORMAL REQUEST.
ONCE THAT FORMAL REQUEST IS MADE, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE REVIEW THE HISTORY AND THE OWNERSHIP.
THE THIRD STEP WOULD BE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS WHERE WE LOOK AT A FORMAL AGREEMENT TO RELOCATE THAT MONUMENT.
>>ARE WE GOING TO INITIATE? ARE WE GOING TO REACH OUT TO THE DONOR, OR THE ORIGINAL DONOR? ARE WE SAYING WE ARE THE OWNER NOW, SO THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND INITIATE THAT AS OPPOSED TO JUST SITTING BACK AND WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO REACH OUT TO US?
>>WE WOULD HAVE THE PANEL PLANES WAR MEMORIAL WORK
[02:35:03]
WITH THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, THAT'S WHO IT WAS, TO SEND US A LETTER FROM THE DAR REQUESTING RELOCATION OF THE STATUE TO THE WAR MEMORIAL LOCATION FOR CONTEXTUAL REASONS TO BE LOCATED WITH OTHER WAR MEMORIALS.AS IT IS WITH THE CONFEDERATE STATUE, WHAT WE WOULD BE IF WE WERE TO DENY THEIR REQUEST, WE'RE NOT CHOOSING TO KEEP THE STATUTE.
WE ARE INSTEAD CHOOSING TO DENY THEIR REQUEST TO MOVE THE STATUTE.
THEY HAVE STATED IT IN THEIR LETTER THAT THEY WANT TO SAVE ONE OF THEIR MONUMENTS.
I DON'T THINK THEY'RE WANTING TO SAVE IT FROM GRAFFITI, I THINK THEY HAVE A CONCERN THAT THE MONUMENT WILL RECEIVE MORE SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE THAN GRAFFITI.
SO THEY'RE WANTING TO MOVE FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS.
IT'S NOT REALLY A QUESTION OF DO WE WANT TO CHANGE HISTORY OR ANYTHING OR TO [INAUDIBLE] , BUT RATHER, DO WE WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND ALLOW THEIR REQUEST THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE MEANS LIKE WE DID WITH FATHER JUAN DE PADILLA'S MEMORIAL OR STATUE OR A MONUMENT RATHER.
WE HAVE A PROCESS TO WORK THROUGH THAT, I WILL WORK WITH COUNCIL TO ASSESS WHAT MY DIRECTION NEEDS TO BE GOING FORWARD.
I PETERED OFF THERE WITH MY COMMENT, BUT THAT IS WHERE I WILL STOP.
>>I WOULD JUST ADD THAT BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED, JUST A THOUGHT OF THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR IF SOMETHING DID HAPPEN TO THAT STATUE, WE CERTAINLY ARE WORKING TO PROTECT IT AS IS.
BUT IF THEY HAD REQUESTED IT OUT OF CONCERNS THAT IT WOULD BE DESTROYED AND THEY WOULD LOSE SOMETHING THAT WAS PART OF THEIR COLLECTION, THEN I THINK IT'S SOMETHING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, THAT WE DENY THEIR REQUEST FOR RETURNING IT AND THEY WANTING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THAT STATUE.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY DESTRUCTION WOULD BE ON US.
>>LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION, THERE'S A, I'M GOING TO CALL IT A MINI POLICE STATION, A VERY FEW FEET FROM ONE OF THESE MONUMENTS; IS IT EVER USED?
>>YOU MEAN LIKE A NEIGHBORHOOD POLICING STATION? THEY ARE USING ALL OF OUR CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD POLICE.
>>POLICE STATION IN ELLWOOD PARK.
JUST A VERY FEW FEET FROM THE CONFEDERATE MONUMENT.
>>I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A COMPONENT OF OUR RECENT NEIGHBORHOOD POLICING INITIATIVE WHERE WE HAVE PLACED SMALL POLICE OFFICES THROUGHOUT THE CITY IN DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ONE OF THEM.
IF IT IS, THEN WE ARE USING IT.
IF IT IS NOT, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NO LONGER BEING USED, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE LOCATION [INAUDIBLE].
I CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT AND GET BACK TO YOU.
MY POINT IS, IT COULD BE USED TO HELP PROTECT THE STATUES.
>>WE'LL DEFINITELY LOOK INTO WHAT IT IS, WHAT WE HAVE THERE, AND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF IT WAS AND WHAT ITS UTILITY WOULD BE FOR THIS.
>>ANYTHING ELSE ON ITEM 1G OR ARE WE READY TO MOVE ON TO 1H? REQUESTING FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS OR REPORTS FROM THE CITY MANAGER.
[H. Request future agenda items and reports from City Manager.]
NOTHING? OKAY NOT SEEING ANYTHING.WITH THAT, THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF OUR NON-EXECUTIVE SESSION, FORTUNATELY [INAUDIBLE].
SO MR. CITY ATTORNEY DO YOU MIND READING OUR DISMISSAL LANGUAGE.
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
>>I'M GLAD TO, SUB TEXTS OR MEANS THAT CLOSED SESSION THAT ANNUAL CITY COUNCIL WAS ANNOUNCED ON JULY THE 21ST, 2020 AT 03:40 PM, UNDER THE FOLLOWING AUTHORITY IN SECTION 551.071, CONSULTED ATTORNEY ON THE MANNER IN WHICH THE ATTORNEY'S DUTY TO THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE TEXT DISPLAY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT CONFLICTS WITH THIS CHAPTER, SECTION 551.072, TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE EXCHANGE,
[02:40:01]
RE-SALE OF VALUABLE PROPERTY, PUBLIC DISCUSSION, SUCH WOULD NOT BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY'S BARGAINING POSITION.GOING TO TAKE A QUICK BATHROOM BREAK AND WE'LL MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.