3. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion, and Take Action to Approve a Contract with KFH Group, Inc for Strategic Evaluation of Fixed Route to Microtransit System Conversion Consulting Services (Don Green)

[3. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion, and Take Action to Approve a Contract with KFH Group, Inc for Strategic Evaluation of Fixed Route to Microtransit System Conversion Consulting Services (Don Green)]

>> ITEM 3, AND COUNCILMAN REGAN PULLED THIS DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR DO YOU NEED TO REPORT ON THIS?

>> YES, THIS WAS FOR DAWN, SMOKED ON IS NOT WITH US TODAY SO I WILL FIELD YOUR QUESTIONS.

>> THIS IS JUST ONE, OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS WE HAVE HAD SOME EMAILS WITH QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. SO IN ONE OR TWO MINUTES I WANTED TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE ROLLOUT OF THIS PLAN WE HAVE HAD IN THE NORTHWEST AND A FEW QUESTIONS ON THE POTENTIAL FOR THIS PROGRAM. IF YOU DON'T MIND,

WHAT IS THIS ABOUT? >> THIS IS ABOUT EXPLORING A TRANSITION FROM A FULLY FIXED ROUTE BUS SYSTEM TO A HYBRID MODEL WHERE WE LEVERAGE NEW TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR TO PROVIDE A MORE ON-DEMAND EXPERIENCE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO USE PUBLIC TRANSIT. RIGHT NOW IF YOU NEED TO TAKE A BUS YOU HAVE TO WAIT AT THE BUS STOP AND GO TO THE DESTINATION WHICH YOU GET DROPPED OFF AT THE BUS STOP CLOSEST SO YOU HAVE TO WALK A COUPLE BLOCKS OR MORE AND THIS MODEL WOULD BE ONE IN WHICH IF YOU NEED A RIDE GET ON YOUR PHONE OR CALL DISPATCH AND SCHEDULE THE APP ON THE PHONE.

COME PICK ME UP AT THIS TIME AND THE VEHICLE COMES AND PICKS YOU UP AND DROPS YOU OFF AND IT IS SUBSIDIZED FOR THE PROCESS.

[00:20:03]

>> HOW WE ALREADY ROLLED OUT THE PILOT PROGRAM IN THE

NORTHWEST? >> THAT'S THE ZIP ZONE, YES

OR. >> CAN YOU SPEAK ON THAT. HAS THAT BEEN A SUCCESS AND IF SO WHAT PROBLEMS HAVE ENCOUNTERED?

>> I BELIEVE IT HAS BEEN A SUCCESS. RIDING HAS INCREASED, CONCERNS HAVE DIMINISHED. WHENEVER THERE'S CHANGE THERE ARE PEOPLE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, WHEN SUPPLEMENTED THE APPRECIATE THE FREEDOM. I DO NOT RIDE THE ZIP ZONE AREA SO I CANNOT FULLY EXPRESS HOW THEY MAY FEEL BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS TO MY OFFICE ON THE ZIP ZONE OUTSIDE OF THE FIRST INITIAL MONTH OF IMPLEMENTATION WHEN THERE WAS A

PERIOD OF CHANGE. >> SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE GOT TO HAVE BEEN IN REGARDS TO PARATRANSIT SO THOSE THAT ARE IN A WHEELCHAIR OR SOME TYPE OF HANDICAP SITUATION. SO ARE THE CARS , YOU CALL THE CAR IS IT A CAR THAT COMES WITH YOUR HANDICAPPED OR IN NEED OF A WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE VEHICLE DO THEY SEND A SPECIAL VEHICLE HOW DOES THAT WORK?

>> THIS IS WHAT WILL HELP US TO IDENTIFY HOW TO STRUCTURE THAT MY HOPE AND VISION IS WE CAN DO THIS SO FOR THOSE WHO DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY CONCERN THEY MAY HAVE OTHER, SOME OTHER TRAIT OR STATUS THAT QUALIFIES THEM FOR PARATRANSIT BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A CHAIR OR SCOOTER OR SOMETHING. THEY COULD USE THIS TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY CONCEPT AND FREE UP THE PARATRANSIT BUSES THAT REQUIRE THOSE TO CARRY A CHAIR OR SCOOTER SO WE CAN CREATE HIGHER LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR EVERYBODY AS WE TRY TO PUT PEOPLE WITH THE RIGHT ASSETS TO GET THEM WHERE THEY NEED TO BE. WE HAVE MADE SOME CHANGES TO THE PARATRANSIT SERVICE OVER TIME, THE REALITY IS IT'S HARD TO KEEP DRIVERS IN THIS ECONOMY IT'S GETTING BETTER, BUT IT IS STILL VERY DIFFICULT AND IT'S NOT ABOUT THE PAY SO MUCH AS IT

IS IT'S A DIFFICULT JOB. >> I KNOW THIS IS PART OF THE STUDY BUT INITIALLY WHERE WE STAND NOW PAYING FOR THE STUDY AND IF THINGS GO WELL WE ROLL IT OUT ON THE ROAD TO THE FULL CITY IS THIS SOMETHING WHERE DOWN THE ROAD WE ARE EXPECTING SAVINGS FOR THIS IS GOING TO BE A REVENUE NEUTRAL IMPLEMENTATION JUST MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE RESIDENTS?

>> IT IS TOO SOON TO TELL. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SAVINGS, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE COST OF THE FIXED ROUTE SYSTEM THOSE BUSES ARE PAID FOR BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WE PAY TO MAINTAIN IN THE FIELD, BUT THE COST OF MILE PER RIDERSHIP IS SO LOW BECAUSE WE DON'T PAY FOR THE ASSET TO PROCURE IT. WE NEED TO GET TO THE STUDY AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FEDS WILL PAY FOR AND WHAT THEY WON'T SO WE CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS.

>> ANYONE ELSE WITH QUESTIONS? WE'RE TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN

HAVE A BETTER SYSTEM. >> I LIKE THE INNOVATION AND WHERE THE THINKING IS. THIS IS A GOOD THING IN MY OPINION.

>> I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 3. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS IF NOT I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION. MOTION BY COUNCILMAN REGAN. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CRAVER. WE ARE READY TO VOTE .

[4. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion, and Take Action to Approve a Contract with Schindler Elevator Corporation to Rebuild the Interior Escalators in the Airport Terminal (Don Green)]

>> ALL YES, THE MOTION CARRIES.

>> ITEM 4. YOU AND I HAD QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM.

>> THIS ONE IS ABOUT THE AIRPORT ESCALATOR AND I THINK THE PRICE TAG IS 350,000, TO FIX THE INDOOR ESCALATORS NOT THE OUTSIDE, BUT THE INDOOR ONES AND ROBERT WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT. I DID NOT NECESSARILY HAVE ISSUE WITH 350,000 ON THE ESCALATOR, I THINK THAT'S FAIRLY REASONABLE. SOUNDS CRAZY, BUT ESCALATORS ARE EXPENSIVE TO MAINTAIN AND UPKEEP AND REPAIR SO THAT IS NOT A CRAZY PRICE IN

[00:25:04]

MY OPINION. HOWEVER ONE THING THAT OPENED MY EYES OR MAYBE DO A DOUBLE TAKE WHEN WE WERE SPEAKING WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS MOVING FORWARD I KNOW WE HAVE PLANNED OVER THE NEXT 2 TO 4 YEARS OF EXPANDING THE AIRPORT TERMINAL AND WE DON'T KNOW QUITE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. WE HAVE DONE SOME DESIGN PROPOSALS. MY CONCERN WAS WE SPENT 350,000 ON THE ESCALATOR AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE OKAY WE CAN USE THIS FIVE, 10, 20 YEARS. APPARENTLY NONE OF THE DESIGNS FOR THE NEW TERMINAL NOTHING NEW TERMINAL, THE EXPANSION OF TERMINAL DESIGNS INCLUDE ESCALATORS SO THAT WAS A BIT SURPRISING BECAUSE I KNOW WE ARE LOOKING AT 2 TO 4 YEARS OUT, BUT IF NONE OF THE DESIGNS INCLUDE THE ESCALATOR, BEST CASE SCENARIO THE DESIGN AND RENOVATION STARTS HAPPENING IN TWO YEARS, COULD BE FOUR LET'S A TWO WE SPENT 350,000 ON ESCALATORS DOWN TO BAGGAGE CLAIM AND THEN WE ARE REMOVING OR CLOSING OFF FOR RENOVATION BECAUSE OF THE DUST OR WE NO LONGER NEED THEM. THAT WAS A CONCERN BECAUSE IT SHOWS WE DO NOT NEED THESE, THESE ARE NOT REQUIRED OR A NECESSITY IF IN ALL THE PROPOSALS WE DON'T EVEN HAVE ESCALATORS ANYWAY IN THE FUTURE DESIGN SO THAT MADE ME RETHINK , DO WE WANT TO SPEND 350,000 FOR POTENTIALLY TWO YEARS OR WHATEVER IT IS 175,000 PER YEAR FOR ESCALATORS WE KIND OF DON'T NEED? I UNDERSTAND THE VISUAL AND I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP ON THAT, BUT AM I CORRECT SO FAR IN THE TIMELINE AND POTENTIAL BREAKDOWN OF HOW THE ESCALATORS WOULD WORK IN THE FUTURE DESIGN?

>> AT PRESENT THE CONCEPTS BEING TALKED ABOUT DO NOT HAVE ESCALATORS IN THEM, THEY COULD IS JUST A MATTER OF SAYING THAT INSTEAD OF THIS. THE REASON WHY DAWN WANTED TO MOVE AWAY FROM ESCALATORS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE CRANKY AND TEMPERAMENTAL AND COST A LOT OF MONEY TO MAINTAIN. FIRST FINANCIAL BANK USED TO HAVE TWO ESCALATORS, THEY CONVERTED THEM TO A STAIRCASE BECAUSE THEY GOT TIRED OF MAINTAINING THEM. I HAVE TALKED ABOUT DOING THAT WITH DON, TOO IN THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AS MUCH AS THIS. SO YOU ARE CORRECT WE RUN THE RISK OF ONLY HAVING THESE FOR A COUPLE YEARS AND IN MY OPINION TWO THINGS HAVE TO HAPPEN IN ORDER FOR THE AIRPORT TERMINAL IMPROVEMENT TO TAKE PLACE. ONE , WE HAVE TO RECEIVE A FEDERAL GRANT, TWO THE COUNCIL HAS TO SPEND 9 MILLION IN MATCH MANY MINIMUM 9 MILLION IN MATCH MONEY FOR THE GRANT AND THE ONLY SOURCE OF THE FUNDS WOULD BE YET. IF WE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PAST COUPLE ISSUANCES OF DEBT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE PROJECTS WE GO FOR VOTER APPROVAL AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THE VOTERS WOULD APPROVE THIS OR NOT. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE REALLY CRITICAL AND ESSENTIAL THAT I DON'T THINK ANY CRYSTAL BALL CAN SAY WHAT THE OUTCOME MIGHT BE. BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A FUNCTIONING AIRPORT I HAVE ASKED TO BRING THIS FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION.

I WILL ALSO SAY IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M PREPARED TO DIE ON A HILL FOR IF COUNCIL WANTS TO NOT SPEND THE MONEY. WE COULD WAIT AND SEE IF WE GOT THE GRANT WE COULD WAIT TO SEE IF THE PUBLIC WANTED TO PROVE THE DEBT TO MATCH, THERE'S A LOT OF STEPS IN BETWEEN BUT I THINK WE ARE AT LEAST TWO YEARS AWAY FROM EVEN KNOWING THOSE ANSWERS, SO TWO YEARS IS A LONG TIME AND WE CAN ALWAYS INCORPORATE THE DESIGN OF THE ESCALATORS INTO THE FACILITY IF WE CHOSE TO.

>> THE SOURCE OF THE FUNDING 350 WITH THE COME FROM GENERAL

OPERATING? >> THAT WOULD COME OUT OF AIRPORT FUNDS. THEIR 2019 GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND ISSUED FOR AIRPORT PROJECTS AND THOSE FUNDS NEED TO BE SPENT, THIS IS ELIGIBLE FOR THAT AND THERE'S AIRPORT CAPITAL FUNDS SET ASIDE AS WELL. THOSE ARE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THE AIRPORT.

>> AND THEN FINALLY, I AM HAPPY WITH STAFF PRESENTING THIS, I UNDERSTAND THIS IS WITH HER JOB IS, NOW IT FALLS ON THE COUNCIL TO SAY POLICY WISE IS THIS WHAT WE WANT TO DO OR IF THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS. I UNDERSTAND NOT A BIG PROPONENT OF THE AIRPORT

[00:30:03]

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

IS THAT SOMETHING WORTH ENTERTAINING?

>> IF THAT IS COUNCIL DIRECTION.

>> I AM ON THE SAME LINE HERE. I KNOW SOME OF THE CONCEPTS MAKE THE PASSENGER AREA QUITE A BIT LARGER AND TO ME THAT'S NEEDED FLOORSPACE, FOR THE POTENTIAL , EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. IF WE DON'T FIX OR REPLACE THE ESCALATORS WE DEFINITELY NEED TO TAKE THEM OUT OR THE SUGGESTION , BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S WORKING AND WE HAVE WORKING ELEVATORS, WE HAVE ACCESS FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED THAT. I HAVE FLOWN OUT, THE STAIRS ARE FINE. IF WE DON'T DECIDE TO REPLACE THEM IN MY OPINION WE NEED TO LOOK AT A CONCEPT OF MAKING IT LOOK BETTER.

>> SURE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE FLOWN OUT OF THERE PROBABLY FOUR TIMES OUT OF THE LAST SIX WEEKENDS AND THIS IS THE PART WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT HAVING TO TAKE THE BIG CHECK IN LUGGAGE UPSTAIRS. THIS IS TYPICALLY USED AFTER THEY DISEMBARKED FROM THE PLANE GOING TO THE LUGGAGE AND BAGGAGE CLAIM SO THEY PICK UP THE BAGGAGE THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO UP, THEY GO OUT THE WALKWAY SO FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO TAKE LUGGAGE UP THE STAIRS. SO FOR ME THAT MADE AND SAY OKAY THIS IS A CONVENIENCE NOT A NECESSITY.

>> THAT IS A FAIR STATEMENT, YES SIR. SUCK FOR THE QUESTIONS? I WILL OPEN OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 4 PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD?

>> TAMMY VOGEL. I APPRECIATE THIS DISCUSSION BECAUSE I SAW THIS AS A GOOD THING BECAUSE THIS HAS BEEN A EYESORE FOR YOU WHILE. THEY BEEN DOING WITH THIS FOR A WHILE AND THEY FIXED IT, AND IT'S BREAKING, THIS IS A OLD PROBLEM AND I UNDERSTAND THE DELAY IN GETTING THE NEW TERMINAL. WE ARE IN THE SITUATION BUT I NEVER THOUGHT OF COVERING IT UP AS BEING THE BEST SOLUTION AND THAT MAKE SENSE. I DON'T KNOW THE BALANCE OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION FUND AND HOW MUCH OF THAT IS SITTING AROUND, IF IT'S ONLY 350 AND THERE'S NOTHING TO DO I UNDERSTAND SPENDING, AND IF WE CAN PUT THAT TO WERE DOING A MATCHING GRANT FOR THE $9 MILLION WE NEED TO FIX IT THAT MAKES SENSE. I THINK DISSOLUTION, I APPRECIATE THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX SO I AGREE LET'S FIX THE PROBLEM, BUT NOT WITH A TEMPORARY FIX. EVEN FOR TWO YEARS THAT'S 150 OR $175,000 A YEAR TO USE AND IT WILL BE USED AGAIN SO THAT'S NOT THE BEST USE OF RESOURCE. I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION AND I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW HOW MUCH IS LEFT IN THE GEO TO KNOW WHAT CAN BE SPENT TO WORK THINGS WE LOOK FORWARD IN THE FUTURE RATHER THAN TEMPORARY FOR NOW. SO THANK

YOU. >> STILL IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 4 ? SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AND IF NOT I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION AND SECOND.

>> I HAVE A MOTION. I WAS DON WERE HERE BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS. WHAT ARE HIS FEELINGS? HE MORE THAN ANYBODY KNOWS WHAT GOES ON AT THE AIRPORT AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW FROM HIM WHAT HE HEARS FROM THE CUSTOMERS AT THE AIRPORT, WHAT HE HEARS FROM THOSE FLYING. IS THERE ANY WAY?

DO YOU HAVE A FEELING? >> I DO. THIS IS ON THE AGENDA

[00:35:01]

BECAUSE I ASKED DON TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA SO COUNCIL WOULD MAKE A DECISION. I'M TIRED ABOUT TALKING ABOUT ESCALATORS EVERY MONTH ABOUT WHY THEY'RE NOT WORKING EVERY MONTH SO LET'S LET THE POLICYMAKERS MAKE THE DECISION DO WE WANT THEM FIXED OR NOT? COUNCIL HAS GIVEN ME DIRECTION TO MAKE SURE WE MAINTAIN FACILITIES SO HAVING THE ESCALATOR DOWN OVER 12 MONTHS NOW , I THINK 12 MONTHS. DECEMBER 23 COMING UP ON 12 MONTHS. SEEMS TO QUALIFY WE NEED TO MAINTAIN FACILITIES.

SO I'M TRYING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL DIRECTION I HAVE RECEIVED AND THIS IS 100% THE COUNCILS CALL. I THINK SCREENING IT IS A GOOD SOLUTION IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL DECIDES TO DO. I AM NOT CONVINCED WE WILL HAVE A NEW AIRPORT TERMINAL. THERE'S A LOT OF STEPS IN BETWEEN THAT I DON'T KNOW. A LOT OF YESES HAVE TO HAPPEN THAT I'M NOT SURE WILL TAKE PLACE, BUT IT MIGHT. SO THERE IS VALUE IN THE CONCEPT OF NOT SPENDING THOSE DOLLARS. DON HIS PREFERENCE IS TO BUILD A NEW TERMINAL NOT FROM SCRATCH, BUT MAKE THE IMPROVEMENT AS WE HAVE A WIDER PASSENGER SPACE, A WIDER SECURITY AREA SO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. SO HIS PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO NOT IMPROVE THE ESCALATORS. I THINK THAT, AGAIN THIS IS ON HERE BECAUSE I AM FOLLOWING COUNCIL DIRECTION TO MAINTAIN FACILITIES. AS I SAID, TO COUNCILMAN REGAN IN THE EMAIL, THIS IS NOT A HILL I WILL DIE ON. I HAVE DONE MY JOB

I HAVE BROUGHT IT TO YOUR. >> DO YOU THINK THAT IF WE SCREEN THEM OFF THAT WE STILL SERVE THE PATRONS OF THE

AIRPORT? >> KNOW WHEN IS A G.I. CANNOT USE ESCALATOR SO I'M UPSET. WE HAVE ALL KIND OF GOTTEN USED TO IT . I TROUBLE THE AIRPORT AS WELL AND IN FACT YOU DON'T SEE THE DON'T GO NEAR HERE BARRIERS ANYMORE, YOU JUST KEEP WALKING. I THINK YOU CAN SCREEN IT AND THAT WOULD BE FINE. A BETTER LOOK CERTAINLY THAN HAVING BROKEN ESCALATORS TO THE

TRAVELING PUBLIC. >> IT IS A NEGATIVE LOOK AT THIS TIME. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> I THINK WE SHOULD FIX THEM BECAUSE TWO YEARS IS REALLY OPTIMISTIC AS FAR AS GETTING THE AIRPORT DONE. IT IS MORE LIKELY TO BE 5 TO 10 AND IN THAT TIME PERIOD THE ESCALATORS CAN'T JUST BE WASTED SPACE AND ABANDONED. IF WE HAVE THEM THERE , WE HAVE THE MONEY IN THE AIRPORT BUT IT TO FIX IT I THINK WE NEED TO FIX IT. I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT THE FUTURE PLAN SHOULD NOT INCLUDE ESCALATORS.

>> IS THAT EMOTION? >> I MOVED TO PROVE THIS AS

LISTED. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN YATES.

SECOND BY COUNCILMAN MCALISTER ? FURTHER DISCUSSION READY TO VOTE.

3-3, THE MOTION FAILS. CAN YOU READ THE VOTE?

>> VOTING NO, COUNCILMAN PRICE, COUNCILMAN REGAN AND MAYOR HURT, VOTING YES IS COUNCILMAN MCALISTER, COUNCILMAN YATES AND

COUNCILMAN CRAVER. >> NOT FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES.

THE MOTION FAILS, THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO THE REGULAR

[17. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a Resolution Directing Publication of Notice of Intention to Issue Combination Tax and Revenue Certificates of Obligation for Public Safety and Airport Projects (Marjorie Knight)]

AGENDA. ITEM 17 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE PRESENT THIS ITEM.

>> ITEM NUMBER 17 BEFORE YOU TODAY NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION WE ARE PROPOSING TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION FOR A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS MICROWAVE PROJECT AND A AND PORT RAMP PROJECT AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2.7 MILLION. STATE LAW REQUIRES THE CITY TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE BONDS AT LEAST 45 DAYS PRIOR TO APPROVING THE BOND ISSUE. THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU TODAY WILL DIRECT STAFF TO PUBLISH THIS NOTICE OF INTENT.

THE RESOLUTION ALSO INCLUDES REIMBURSEMENT OF PROJECT COST THAT WE PLAN WE MIGHT INCUR PRIOR TO THE DATE OF ISSUANCE.

THE FINAL APPROVAL OF THE BOND WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER

[00:40:01]

17 COUNCIL MEETING. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THERE ARE FUNDS LEFT FROM THE 2019 THAT WAS IN THE

PREVIOUS ITEM. I'M ASSUMING >> I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DOLLAR AMOUNT , BUT AT LEAST 350, YES.

>> FOR WHAT WE ARE FUNDING WOULD ALL OF BE FUNDED BY THE NEW CEOS? ARE FROM THE EXISTING OUTSTANDING ?

>> THERE IS ACTUALLY SOME REMAINING CO FUNDS FOR THE PREVIOUS MICROWAVE PROJECT. FOR THE AIRPORT . SORRY.

>> WE DO HAVE SOME MONEY FOR THE MICROWAVE PROJECT STILL, THIS SUPPLEMENTAL IS NECESSARY TO GET IT DONE.

>> WITH THIS GOING IN OCTOBER NOW THAT YOU HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL TO USE THE EXPRESSION POTENTIALLY WHEN WE GET A BETTER DEAL IF THE FEDS LOWER THE RATE IN SEPTEMBER DOES THAT AFFECT US IS THIS GOOD TIMING FOR US OR DOESN'T AFFECT US

>> I AM UNABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION I DO NOT.

>> FOR THE QUESTIONS? >> AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 17? PLEASE COME FORWARD GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE

RECORD. >> TAMMY VOGEL I PLANNED TO COME ASK YOU ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THE PACKET BECAUSE IT GIVES INFORMATION SO I WANT TO CLARIFY. IF WE DO NOT PAY OFF THE LOAN BEFORE THE TERM THAT WILL COST $4 MILLION IS NOT WHAT THE NUMBER WAS THE TOTAL PAYOFF? $4 MILLION?

>> THAT IS IF WE DON'T PAY IT OFF BEFORE 47 OR 46 IS THAT WHAT IT IS? I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY TYPICALLY DO WE PAY OFF BEFORE THEY ARE DUE IN NO SMALL AMOUNT?

>> WE HAVE A HISTORY OF REFINANCING FOR A LOWER RATE WE TYPICALLY TAKE THE FULL TERM TO PAY THEM OFF. THE DECLINING RATE ENVIRONMENT WE WERE ABLE TO REFINANCE AND SAVE. ONE OF THE REFINANCES WE DID WE SAVED TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

THAT ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED SO WE DON'T KNOW, TO THE POINT I

CANNOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >> THAT WAS INTERESTING AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS A TYPO BUT I SAW THE NUMBER 499 MILLION. IS THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF DEBT OWED BY THE CITY OR IS THAT SOMETHING ELSE I MISUNDERSTOOD CURRENTLY? TO PAY OFF.

>> THE CURRENT COMBINED PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST REQUIRED TO PAY ALL OUTSTANDING DEBT IS 499 MILLION, PRINCIPAL AND

INTEREST. >> I WAS THINKING THAT A TYPO BUT THAT'S A LOT, THAT'S IF WE CAN REFINANCE. OKAY VERY INTERESTING. I DO THINK THIS PROJECT HAD TO BE PAID WITH TWO CEOS, THE MICROWAVE RADIO AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN PREPARE FOR AND PLAN AND WE HAVE TO BE MORE INTENTIONAL. I KNOW MONEY GOES FURTHER WHEN YOU SAVE AND SPEND RATHER THAN FINANCE SO I KNOW CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE DONE DIFFERENTLY IN THE CITY BUT I AM A PROPONENT OF THAT AND NOT SPENDING $1 MILLION ON ONE DOG PARK BECAUSE I KNOW THE CITY ASKED FOR TWO AND WE ONLY GOT ONE AND IT WAS REALLY EXPENSIVE. I THINK THERE IS SOME FINANCING DECISIONS WE CAN MAKE TO SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF THE CITY BETTER THAN JUST SOME OF THE OPTIONAL THINGS WE CAN HAVE IN THE CITY SO THAT'S GREAT, THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS.

>> THE 499 MILLION IS A COMBINATION

>> THE WHOLE ENCHILADA, YES OR. THE VAST MAJORITY IS WATER FROM

THE DROUGHT CONTINGENCY. >> STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 17? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. FOR THEIR COMMENTS IF NOT I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION AND SECOND. A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MCALISTER AND SECOND BY COUNCILMAN PRICE. FURTHER DISCUSSION, READY TO VOTE.

[18. Ordinance (Final Reading) Z-2024-14: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on A Request From The Owner, To Amend The Terms And Conditions Of A Planned Development District (PDD-61). Specifically, To Amend The Boundaries Of The Planned Development To Add A ‘Tract 3’ With The Base Zoning Of Agricultural Open (AO) With A Permitted Use Of Carpentry Services. Located At 450 South 25th Street (Tim Littlejohn)]

>> ALL YESES COME THE MOTION CARRIES.

>> MOTION CARRIES, ITEM 18, TIM LITTLEJOHN DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

>> THANK YOU MAYOR AND COUNCIL. OF THE CONSIDERATIONS ON A CASE TO FOR A -14 APPLICANT IS AMEND PD 61 TO ADD TRACK THREE LOCATED AT 450 SOUTH, 25TH ST.

HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP. HERE IS THE CURRENT ZONING, THIS

[00:45:06]

PORTION ALREADY PD 61 TRACKED THREE TO BE CONSIDERED. HERE IS THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN AND THEN A PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN ADDING TRACKED THREE. HERE'S THE USE WITHIN AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE. VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. NOTIFICATION AREA MAP , WE DO NOT RECEIVE NOTIFICATIONS IN RETURN. THIS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL WITHIN THE LDC, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THIS MORNING AND WITH THAT, HAPPY TO ANSWER

QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS FOR TIM, THANK YOU TIM. AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 18, PLEASE COME FORWARD GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, IF NOT I WILL ACCEPT A MOTION AND A SECOND. MOTION BY COUNCILMAN REGAN, SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CRAVER. WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION WE ARE READY TO VOTE .

>> ALL YESES, THE MOTION CARRIES.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

>> THE MOTION CARRIES. WELL, IT IS NOW 9:16 A.M. AND WE WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT SECTION 551.071 CONSULTATION WITH ATTORNEY SECTION 551.072 DELIBERATION ABOUT REAL PROPERTY, SECTION 551.073 DELIBERATION ABOUT GIFTS AND DONATIONS, SECTION 551.074 PERSONAL MATTERS, SECTION 551.06 DELIBERATIONS ABOUT SECURITY DEVICES, SECTION 551.087 BUSINESS PROSPECTS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SEE YOU

[RECONVENE]

>>> IT IS NOW 10:00 A.M. AND WE HAVE RECONVENED TO OPEN