[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:01:28]
>> WOULD YOU ALL JOIN ME IN PRAYER?
>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> NOW HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG; I PLEDGE THE TEXAS. ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
>> IF YOU WANT TO COME UP. TO GET A PICTURE, YOU CAN. YOU CAN BRING COFFEE FOR THE REST OF US.
>> LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU ARE GOING TO DO IT.
[PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]
>> WE HAVE SOME SERVICE AWARDS FIRST. AND SOME PRESENTATIONS.
>> WHEN THIS STATION WAS BUILT, THIS AREA WAS CONVERTED INTO INDIVIDUAL AREAS. WE DID THE SAME THING AT STATION SIX . I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS. ME AND ANOTHER GUY BUILT THAT TABLE OUT FRONT AND HAD DECALS MADE AND COVERED IT IN EPOXY AND WE THOUGHT IT TURNED OUT PRETTY GOOD. I ALSO MOVED ONE OF THE POLES FROM OLD STATION ONE TO STATION FIVE . IT IS FUNCTIONING . WE HAVE USED THAT SEVERAL TIMES WITH KIDS DEMONSTRATIONS . WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE BETTER WERE PEOPLE COULD SEE IT. I REALLY GLEAN A LOT SELF BENEFIT FROM THE SERVICE, NOT ONLY TO THE CITIZENS BUT TO THE PEOPLE I WORK WITH. I LIKE TO DO WHAT I CAN FOR THE GUYS THAT I WORK WITH. IF IT DEALS WITH MAKING LIFE BETTER FOR MY GUYS HERE I AM WILLING TO DO AS MUCH AS I CAN TO MAKE IT BETTER AND FEEL LIKE MORE LIKE HOME.
>> I STARTED AS A DISPATCHER WHEN I GOT OUT OF THE AIR FORCE. I HANDLE INTEL AND HIGH-RISK OFFENDERS . WHEN THEY NEED SOMEONE LOCATED AND BROUGHT IN, I FIND THEM. I
[00:05:01]
THINK IT IS JUST GO GO GO IN ANY POLICE OFFICER COMES IN. IT IS AN ADRENALINE RUSH. I HAVE LEARNED TO BALANCE MY WORK LIFE AND PERSONAL LIFE. I LIKE TO GARDEN AND WATCH BIRDS AND WORK IN MY YARD. I LOVE TO READ. THE JOB CAN GET DANGEROUS , BUT I DON'T THINK APPEAL RISE -- PEOPLE REALIZE HOW DANGEROUS IT IS. WE JUST OPERATE. MY HUSBAND DOERUN, IS ALSO A POLICE OFFICER. HE HAS BEEN DOING IT FOR 20 YEARS AND HE WORKS PATROL. I SWORE I WOULD NEVER DATE A COWORKER, YET WE HAVE BEEN MARRIED FOR SIX YEARS. IT HAS BEEN SUCH A BLESSING. I REALLY LIKE THE FACT THAT WE BOTH UNDERSTAND THE JOB . WE CAN TALK TO EACH OTHER ABOUT WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO PREP EVERYTHING WITH THE BACK STORY. I JUST ENJOY THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY . THEY ARE LIKE FAMILY. IT HAS BEEN GREAT.>> DO YOU WANT A STORY? OKAY, THIS HAPPENED SOMETIME BACK. A LONG TIME AGO. TWO PEOPLE WILL --WERE ARGUING IN THE ALLEY ABOUT THE TRASH CAN. I WAS SURPRISED HOW PASSIONATE PEOPLE ARE ABOUT THEIR TRASH. THESE TWO LADIES WERE ARGUING ABOUT WHO PUT WHAT IN THE TRASH CANS. I WENT OUT AND GAVE EACH ONE THEIR OWN TRASH CAN. NEITHER ONE OF THEM USE THEIR OWN CANS I GOT THEM BUT WANTED TO CONTINUE TO FIGHT. I GET A PHONE CALL AND ONE LADY'S HUSBAND ASKED IF I COULD COME OUT THERE. I GO OUT AND ONE LADY ESCORTED THE OTHER LADY WITH A WATER HOSE. THEY WERE ARGUING OVER THE FENCE AND HE WAS TELLING ME THE STORY AND HE WAS LAUGHING. SHE JUST SIT THERE AND LET THE OTHER LADY ESCORTED HER DOWN. PEOPLE ARE VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THEIR TRASH. I OPERATE A HUGE WORKING MACHINE. WE HAVE SO MANY PARTS AND THINGS GOING ON AT ONE TIME. WE PROBABLY TOUCH MORE PEOPLE IN THE CITY , OUR DIVISION DOES THAN ANYBODY ELSE. MORE THAN YOUR SCHOOLS, YOUR HOSPITALS, YOUR RESTAURANTS, AND WE HAVE 45 THOUSAND CANS. WE HAVE FOUR FACILITIES WE OPERATE. IT CAN BE STRESSFUL WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH EVERYTHING AND KEEP THE CITIZENS HAPPY. I AM A PEOPLE PERSON AND THAT IS WHAT KEEPS ME GOING. I LOVE THE INTERACTION AND TRY TO KEEP IT AS LIGHT AS YOU CAN BECAUSE IT CAN BE A VERY STRESSFUL JOB. OUR GUYS DO A VERY GOOD JOB. I AM PROUD OF THEM. THEY DO FANTASTIC. WE HAVE A FANTASTIC CREW AND FANTASTIC SUPERVISORS HERE.
>> THE LAND OFFICE HANDLES EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING TO DO WITH CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AND ALSO, ACQUISITION FOR STREET PROJECTS AND UTILITIES. WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF RECORDS THAT GO BACK TO THE FOUNDING OF ABILENE. WE OPERATE THE ANIMAL SHELTERS AND THE PURCHASE OF THAT PROPERTY OR BUILDING THAT IS BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW WILL BE GOOD. ANOTHER ONE THAT IS ABOUT TO GET UNDERWAY IS THE CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE EXTENSION NUMBER NINE. WHEN YOU DO LAND WORK LIKE WE DO , MOST PEOPLE ARE HISTORY FANS AND YOU GET INTO THIS LINE OF WORK AND YOU LEARN A LOT ABOUT ABILENE. PART OF THE DUDILIGENCE WE DO BEFORE WE BUY A PIECE OF PROPERTY IS WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT WAS THAT PROPERTY USED FOR LAST? THERE ARE CERTAIN BUSINESSES OR INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE POTENTIAL CONTAMINANTS TO A PIECE OF PROPERTY. THERE ARE PLACES IN TOWN AND I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LEARN WHAT WAS THERE BACK IN THE BEGINNING.
[00:10:07]
BAKER, COME ON UP. >> YOU STUCK THAT LANDING, BY
THE WAY. >> I THINK STATION 9 WILL HAVE TWO POLLS. ARE YOU GOING TO MOVE STATIONS?
>> HOPEFULLY, NOT. >> BAKER , I HAVE GOTTEN TO KNOW YOU IN THE NINE OR 10 YEARS I HAVE BEEN HERE AND EVEN WORKING ON THE PENSION AND JUST AS A FELLOW PUBLIC SERVANT AND I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR YOU. I THINK YOU CARE DEEPLY FOR THIS COMMUNITY. EVERYTHING I HAVE SEEN YOU DO SHOWS THAT.
I WANTED TO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR 35 YEARS OF SERVICE AND I WOULD LIKE TO THINK WE WOULD HAVE YOU FOR 35 YEARS MORE, BUT
I DON'T KNOW. >> BAKER, WE ARE SO APPRECIATIVE FOR 35 YEARS AND WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. BEING ABLE TO WORK WITH YOU, PERSONALLY ON SOME BOARDS AND NOTICING WHAT YOU DO AND WHAT YOU DO FOR THE REST OF THE FELLOW FIREFIGHTERS IS COMMENDABLE TO YOUR PERSONALITY AND NATURE. ANYONE
YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE? >> MY SECOND FAMILY IS HERE AND MY REGULAR FAMILY HAD TO WORK. THE GUYS WE WORK WITH KEEP US GOING EVERY DAY. FOR THE CITIZENS, I HOPE YOU ALL REALIZE THAT WHEN WE CLIMB ON THOSE FIRE TRUCKS, I MEAN IT IS OUR GOAL TO DO THIS SERVICE THAT WE CAN FOR WHATEVER YOU
MIGHT NEED. >> AGAIN, WE THANK YOU. WE HAVE A PLAQUE HERE FOR YOUR 35 YEARS. I AM SURE YOU WILL FIND
SOMETHING . THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
>> COURTNEY , WHERE DID YOU RUN OFF TWO? HOW ARE YOU? GOOD TO
SEE YOU. >> 25 YEARS OF HARD SERVICE . I AM HOPING YOU HAVE 25 MORE IN YOU. SOME DAY SOMEONE WILL SAY, YES I HAVE 25 MORE YEARS TO SERVE. IT GOES BY FAST. YOU HAVE SEEN A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE DEPARTMENT FROM THE OLD CLOTHING STORE THAT BECAME THE PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER TO THE POLICE STATION TO SEVERAL CHIEFS AND ALL THE TURMOIL AND THINGS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE GROWTH OF THE COMMUNITY.
WHAT IS YOUR MOST FAVORITE THING YOU HAVE SEEN HAPPEN OVER
THE LAST 25 YEARS? >> I THINK THE GROWTH, IN GENERAL. IT HAS GROWN SO MUCH AND THAT MAKES TRAFFIC A LITTLE CRAZY. OUR NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT IS ABSOLUTELY AMAZING. PUBLIC SPEAKING IS NOT MY THING. I AM SWEATING AND SHIVERING. OUR NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT IS FANTASTIC.
>> WE ARE THANKFUL FOR YOUR SERVICE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> 25 YEARS AND WE ARE SO GRATEFUL FOR THAT. AS MANY MORE AS YOU CAN GIVE US WOULD BE GREAT. YOU DO A FANTASTIC JOB.
ANYONE YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE?
>> MY UNIT CAME TO SUPPORT ME TODAY AND MY HUSBAND, ALSO.
>> WE ARE APPRECIATIVE AND WE HAVE YOUR PLAQUE FOR YOUR 25 YEARS. THERE WILL BE SOMETHING TO SHOW OUR APPRECIATION. THANK
>> YOU DON'T WANT TO DO SEVERAL MORE QUESTIONS,
COURTNEY? >> RANDY BAILEY? THE LIVING
>> RANDY KNOWS ME WELL AND I KNOW HIM WELL. WHENEVER THERE IS A PROBLEM, I WILL SAY THIS, I DON'T GET A LOT OF CALLS ABOUT OUR SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT. I GET SOME, NORMALLY, IT IS BECAUSE SOMETHING WEIRD IS HAPPENING.
BUT, THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT GET US FIRED UP , TRASH DOESN'T GET PICKED UP AND WATER DOESN'T GET DELIVERED.
WE HAD THAT HAPPEN A COUPLE YEARS AGO AND THANKFULLY, IT WASN'T MY FAULT. IT WAS A STORM. IF IT WAS MY FAULT, I WOULDN'T BE HERE. RANDY GETS EVERYTHING DONE AND HIS TEAM WORKS REALLY HARD. THEY ARE UP BEFORE ANYBODY ELSE IS ON THE PLANET AND THEY WORK HARD AND OFTEN TIMES, THEY LEAVE LATE.
JUST A GOOD GROUP OF PEOPLE, RANDY AND YOU ARE A GOOD LEADER. I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE AND THE GOOD WORK YOU
DO. >> RANDY, YOU ARE A PEOPLE PERSON. THAT DOES HELP. I THINK PEOPLE YOU WORK WITH ENJOY WORKING WITH YOU AND WE DEFINITELY, APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU DO FOR THIS CITY. ANYONE YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE? MY WIFE IS HERE, DONNA AND MY DAUGHTER, KATIE , SOME OF YOU ALL KNOW HER. AND, MY HUSBAND STUART. AND A COUPLE
[00:15:04]
PEOPLE FROM PUBLIC WORKS. I SEE A LOT OF THEM. WHO IS WORKINGON MY TRUCKS? >> WE APPRECIATE ALL YOU DO.
>> THANK YOU. HERE IS A PLAQUE FOR YOUR 20 YEARS OF SERVICE AND WE WILL HAVE A TOKEN OF OUR APPRECIATION FROM THE CITY
>> LAST, BUT NOT LEAST, TRAVIS MCCLURE . HOW ARE YOU, SIR? WHEN I FIRST CAME TO ABILENE 2015, TRAVIS SAID, I'M GOING TO NEW BRAUNFELS AND I TOLD HIM HE COULDN'T BECAUSE WE JUST STARTED THIS MAJOR BOND PROGRAM AND HE WAS THE ONLY ONE IN THE DEPARTMENT THAT HAD ANY IDEA WHERE ALL THE LAND WAS. SO, WE MADE SOME DEALS AND TALKED A LITTLE BIT AND HE DECIDED TO STAY AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. TRAVIS, YOU HAVE BEEN AN EXCEPTIONAL COWORKER AND SOMEONE WHO I RELY UPON ON A REGULAR BASIS. IF I EVER NEED AN OPINION I KNOW TRAVIS WILL GIVE ME ONE. IT WILL BE TRUTHFUL AND FACT FILLED AND THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT IN PEOPLE. I APPRECIATE YOU SO
MUCH. I REALLY DO. >> TRAVIS , YOU ARE ONE OF OUR PERSONAL FRIENDS, IT SEEMS LIKE. YOU WORK WITH THE COUNCIL AND THE QUESTIONS WE HAVE AND YOU HAVE SUCH A PHENOMENAL WAY OF GETTING THINGS DONE. YOU ARE THAT TYPE OF PERSON THAT CAN DO THAT AND WE ARE VERY APPRECIATIVE. ANYONE YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE? PAYMENT YES, MY WIFE, LIZ IS HERE. SHE HAS TO PUT UP WITH ME WHEN I'M NOT HERE AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THE ENTIRE LAND OFFICE STAFF IS HERE, TODAY. PLEASE STAND.
JAMIE IS HERE. WE HAVE A STAFF OF ONE. WHEN PEOPLE ASK ME SOMETIMES, HOW LONG HAVE BEEN AT THE CITY I ALWAYS LIKE TO SAY, I HAVE BEEN HERE SO LONG I REMEMBER WHEN CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WERE DULL. THEY KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
>> THAT IS A LONG TIME. >> THAT IS A LONG TIME. IT IS A COOL PLACE TO WORK AND WOULD YOU DO MY KIND OF WORK IT IS SPECIAL. YOU LEARN A TON ABOUT ABILENE HISTORY. IT IS REALLY GREAT. I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU.
>> HERE IS YOUR PLAQUE AND COIN AND YOU WILL HAVE SOME
APPRECIATION IN YOUR ACCOUNT. >>
>> WHO ARE REPRESENTATIVES FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MCALISTER AND COUNCILMEMEBER PRICE WERE PINK FOR ME, TODAY. WHO COORDINATED OUR COLORS? NATIONAL PHYSICAL THERAPY MONTH. WHERE IS THE NATIONAL PHYSICAL THERAPY ASSOCIATION HAS DESIGNATED THE MONTH OF OCTOBER IS NATIONAL PHYSICAL THERAPY MONTH TO RECOGNIZE IMPACT PHYSICAL THERAPISTS MAKE AND RESTORING AND IMPROVING MOTION IN PEOPLE'S LIVES. AND, WHEREAS THROUGH ONGOING EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND PHYSICAL THERAPY PRACTICE, PHYSICAL THERAPISTS ARE ABLE TO PROMOTE GOOD HEALTH, REDUCE PAIN AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF COUNTLESS INDIVIDUALS. AND, WHEREAS, WE ARE HONORED TO RECOGNIZE THE MANY PHYSICAL THERAPISTS WHO ON A DAILY BASIS CARE FOR THE PHYSICAL HEALTH OF THE CITIZENS OF ABILENE. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, AS MAYOR AND BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL , I AM PLEASED TO PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2024 IN THE CITY OF ABILENE IS NATIONAL PHYSICAL THERAPY MONTH.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> I AM DR. JILL JUMPER AND THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICAL THERAPY.
WITH ME TODAY IS DR. MARSHA RUTLAND AND TWO OF OUR MEETING STUDENTS, CODY AND MAX. WE ARE JUST A PART OF THE TEAM OF PEOPLE ACROSS THE COMMUNITY THAT ARE SERVING. FOR EXAMPLE, LAST WEEK WE DID BALANCED SCREENS AND SERVED 87 ADULTS AND TESTED THEIR BALANCE AND RECOMMENDED PT OR OTHER REHABILITATION. WE ARE HONORED TO SERVE THIS COMMUNITY AND OUR IS TO HELP PEOPLE MOVE WELL AND MOVE BETTER. THANK YOU FOR LETTING US HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE A PART OF THIS. WE
APPRECIATE YOU. >> WE ARE SO APPRECIATIVE OF EVERYTHING YOU DO AND PROUD OF THE STUDENTS THAT COME HERE TO ABILENE. YOU ARE VERY WELCOME TO STAY.
>> FIRE PREVENTION WEEK. WE HAVE ALL THESE GUYS IN HERE.
[00:20:09]
FIRE PREVENTION WEEK. WHEREAS, THE CITY OF ABILENE, THE ABILENE FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND THE ABILENE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE IS COMMITTED TO ENSURING THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF ALL THOSE LIVING IN AND VISITING OUR CITY. AND, WHEREAS, RESIDENTS SHOULD INSTALL SMOKE ALARMS IN EVERY SLEEPING ROOM AND OUTSIDE EVERY SEPARATE AREA AND ON EVERY LEVEL OF THE HOME AND WHEREAS, ABILENE RESIDENTS SHOULD MAKE SURE THEIR SMOKE ALARMS MEET THE NEEDS OF ALL THE FAMILY MEMBERS, INCLUDING THOSE WITH SENSORY OR PHYSICAL DISABILITIES SHOULD TEST SMOKE ALARMS AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH AND PLAN AND PRACTICE HOME FIRE ESCAPE PLANS. AND, WHEREAS, ABILENE'S FIRST RESPONDERS ARE DEDICATED TO REDUCING THE OCCURRENCE OF HOME FIRES AND HOME FIRE INJURIES, THE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION AND EDUCATION AND RESIDENTS SHOULD TAKE PERSONAL STEPS TO INCREASE THEIR SAFETY FROM FIRE, ESPECIALLY IN THEIR HOMES. AND , WHEREAS, THE 2024 FIRE PREVENTION THEME SERVES TO RECOMMEND WE HAVE SMOKE ALARMS IN THE HOME. AS MAYOR, AND BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL, IT IS MY HONOR TO PROCLAIM OCTOBER 6-12, 2024 IS FIRE PREVENTION WEEK AND URGE CITIZENS OF ABILENE'S TO ENSURE THEIR HOMES HAVE WORKING SMOKE ALARMS AND TO SUPPORT THE MANY PUBLIC ACTIVITIES AND EFFORTS OF ABILENE'S FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I AM CHAIRMAN WILLIAMS AND THEM THE FIRE MARSHAL FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE. WE WANTED TO SHARE THE MESSAGE OF SMOKE ALARMS THIS MONTH. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE A WORKING SMOKE ALARM INSIDE YOUR HOME. I FIRE BUILT IN SIZE EVERY MINUTE MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE , SOMETIMES ONLY GIVING THEM TWO MINUTES TO GET OUT OF THEIR HOME. HAVING A WORKING SMOKE ALARM IN THE HOME INCREASES YOUR ABILITY TO GET OUT BY 50%. REMEMBER TO HAVE THOSE IN YOUR HOME AND TEST THEM MONTHLY AND CHANGE THE BATTERIES TWICE A YEAR. WE HAVE A TIME CHANGE COMING UP IN NOVEMBER, JUST A REMINDER TO DO THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
>> YOU ALL CAN STAY. >> AS THEY EXIT.
>> IT IS ALWAYS GOOD TO RECOGNIZE OUR EMPLOYEES AND THE
[CONSENT AGENDA AND PUBLIC COMMENTS]
PEOPLE DOING GREAT WORK IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA WHICH CONSISTS OF ITEMS 4-9. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION UNLESS A COUNCILMEMBER REQUEST SEPARATE DISCUSSION. DOES ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL WHICH TO CONSIDER ANY INDIVIDUALLY? WE WILL NOW MOVE TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT AREA. THERE WILL BE NO VOTES OR FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE SUBJECTS PRESENTED DURING LOCAL-- PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE WILL ONLY ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PRESENT IDEAS AND INFORMATION TO CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND THE CITY RESIDE IN.THERE WILL BE A THREE MINUTE TIMELINE.
>> WE HAVE FOUR TOTAL SPEAKERS. THREE OF THEM ON NUMBER 14 AND WE WILL GET TO THAT IN THE INDIVIDUAL ITEM FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> GOOD MORNING. I STARTED PREPARING FOR WHAT I NEEDED TO SAY THIS MORNING LAST WEEK, BUT OVER THE WEEKEND HURRICANE HIT AND DESTROYED SO MANY LIVES ON SO MANY LEVELS. I ALSO HAVE MANY FRIENDS HAVING TO SIT IN BOMB SHELTERS BECAUSE OF THE BALLISTIC MISSILE ATTACK OVER ISRAEL. IT FELT LIKE A LOT OF THINGS SHIFTED IN TERMS OF WHAT MATTERS. BUT I THINK IS RIDICULOUS IS THAT WE HAVE GROWN MEN STRESSING IN CHARACTERIZED VERSIONS OF WOMEN PARTICIPATING IN PARADES AND PERFORMANCES WITH FAMILY AND CHILDREN AROUND. THESE PEOPLE SEEM REALLY SMALL AND UNIMPORTANT IN LIGHT OF WHAT IS
[00:25:04]
HAPPENED THIS WEEK. HOWEVER, I TRY TO START TO GET YOU A VISUAL TO SEE THAT WHEN I SPEAK OF THESE THINGS I AM NOT ALONE.NOT EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO YOU AS A COUNCIL CAN ATTEND THESE MEETINGS ON THE MORNING WEEKDAY. YOU COULD REMEDY THAT BY MOVING ONE MEETING TO THE EVENING. I AM ASKING COUNSEL TO RECOGNIZE THAT CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE AT DRAG SHOWS. EVERY FACE HERE WAS ASKED IF THEY WERE OKAY WITH KIDS BEING AT DRAG SHOWS AND THEY ALL SAID, NO. YOU CAN PROTECT OUR CHILDREN FROM THIS FETISH IF YOU WANTED TO, BUT IT TAKES MEN OF COURAGE WHO ARE WILLING TO SAY NO TO DO THAT. BECAUSE OF ALL THAT IS HAPPENED LOCALLY, I CANNOT SPEND MUCH MORE TIME ON THIS TOPIC. I NEED TO ADDRESS THE 2022 ZOO BOND. I WOULD LIKE TO THINK I AM INFORMED IN PAYING ATTENTION TO THINGS. I LOOK FORWARD TO COMING TO THESE MEETINGS AND BEING IN THE RHYTHM OF WHAT HAPPENS IN OUR SITTING. I DON'T LIKE OPENING AN AGENDA PACKET AND SING SOMETHING I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE IT CAME FROM. THE BOND WAS ABOUT APPROVING THE ZOO. THE CITIZENS APPROVE THE ZOO UP TO $15 MILLION FOR PHASE I. I AM LEARNING THAT BONDS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE CAN KNOW HOW MANY WILL HAVE MANY SPEND. THESE LIST THE BIG PROJECTS, THE MILLION-DOLLAR PROJECTS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN PHASE I. PARKING LOTS WERE NOT MENTIONED TO THE PUBLIC, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL. I SEE $2 MILLION OF THE BOND WILL GO TO FIX THE PARKING LOT. WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR YOU TO RECOGNIZE THE DAMAGE IT DOES TO OUR TRUST IF YOU DON'T LET US KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON. IT WILL CONTINUE TO CAUSE FRUSTRATION AND ANGST ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE WE ARE NOT PART OF THE CONVERSATION. YOU CAN'T HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS BEHIND CLOSED-DOOR. AT SOME POINT THE DECISION WAS MADE TO USE $2 MILLION OF THE 15 MILLION TO IMPROVE THE PARKING LOT. I AM ANNOYED WITH HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS AND HOW MANY MILLIONS WE SPENT WHILE TRYING TO REDUCE SPENDING. I AM READY TO OPEN UP A PACKET AND SAY, I REMEMBER THEY TALKED ABOUT THIS. THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD WORK. IT IS NOT WORKING THIS WAY. I AM NOT SURE HOW WE FIX IT. I AM NOT SENSING IT IS A PROBLEM TO ANYONE SITTING IN FRONT OF ME. I TRY TO BE UPBEAT AND POSITIVE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO COME ACROSS RUDE OR DESPICABLE-- DISRESPECTFUL, BUT I AM STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND HOW OUR VOICE MATTERS IN THIS CITY.
THANK YOU. >> THAT IS ALL THE NONREGULAR
AGENDA ITEMS. >> MAY I JUST SAY THAT IN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS AND COMMENTS AND TALKING ABOUT THE ZOO, I PARTICIPATED IN THEM AND WAS A SPEAKER AND WE TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WERE IN THE BALLOT LANGUAGE FOR THIS PROJECT. PART OF THAT WAS A PARKING LOT. THERE ARE ALSO WATER LINES AND SIDEWALKS THAT ARE PART OF THE PROJECT. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS , BUT I ALSO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE TRY TO BE TRANSPARENT AND I DO BELIEVE WE TRY TO EDUCATE
OUR COMMUNITY. >> SEEING NO ONE ELSE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. NOW I ASK FOR A MOTION
FOR AGENDA ITEMS 4-9 . >> SO MOVED.
>> I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER YATES.
>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CRAVER. ARE WE READY TO VOTE? PAYMENT I NEED TO ABSTAIN ON 6.
[10. 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)]
>> ALL GUESSES, MOTION CARRIES. >> NOW WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 10 AND I WILL ASK THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.
>> GOOD MORNING COUNCIL. BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF OBLIGATION. ON AUGUST 22ND, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE A MICROWAVE PROJECT AND AN AIRPORT RAMP PROJECT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2.7 MILLION. SINCE THEN , BIDS HAVE COME IN ON BOTH PROJECTS WITH THE AMOUNT NEEDED FOR THE RAMP PROJECT COMING IN HIGHER BY ABOUT 5.84 MILLION IN THE MICROWAVE PROJECT LOWER BY ABOUT $260,000. THIS NET COMBINED INCREASE IS APPROXIMATELY $5.6 MILLION , BRINGING THE ISSUANCE AMOUNT NEEDED TO $8.3 MILLION. THE CITY IS PROPOSING THAT WE ISSUE A NEW NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE SEOS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $8.3 MILLION. STATE LAW REQUIRES WE PUBLISH A NOTICE OF INTENT AT LEAST 45 DAYS PRIOR
[00:30:01]
TO APPROVING THE BOND ISSUANCE. THIS RESOLUTION WILL DIRECT STAFF TO PUBLISH THIS NOTICE. THE RESOLUTION ALSO INCLUDES REIMBURSEMENT OF PROJECT THOSE O THE DATE OF ISSUANCE. THE BONDS WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR THE NOVEMBER 21ST COUNCIL MEETING.>> THIS IS MORE FOR ROBERT THAN MARJORIE, BUT WITH THE PROJECT VALUE INCREASING SO DRAMATICALLY, WHEN WE LOOK AT OTHER THINGS WE START VALUE ENGINEERING AND LOOK AT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO GO BACK TO THE STATE TO ASK FOR MORE FUNDING FOR THIS PROJECT SINCE IT IS HIGHER THAN ANTICIPATED OR TO REDUCE SOME OF THE SCOPE SO WE DON'T HAVE TO INCREASE WHAT WE
WERE ANTICIPATING TO SPEND. >> TWO VERY GOOD QUESTIONS. THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN AND I THINK WE SHOULD GO BACK AND ASK FOR MORE MONEY. NUMBER TWO, TXDOT AVIATION , WHICH IS THE ENTITY ADMINISTERING THIS STATE GRANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF ABILENE REGIONAL AIRPORT WILL NOT LET US NEGOTIATE OR VALUE ENGINEER THE PROJECT AT THIS TIME. SO, WEBER HAS AGREED TO HOLD THAT BID FOR 90 DAYS WHILE WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO HIS --ISSUE MORE MONEY AT WHICH TIME, THE COUNCIL CAN AWARD THE BID . WE WILL WORK WITH WEBER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE BRING THE PROJECT DOWN TO THE EXTENT WE CAN. THE OTHER BID WAS A $36 MILLION BID AND WAS A LOCAL CONTRACTOR , BUT THEY WERE THE HIGH BID. THE PROJECT IS MORE EXPENSIVE THEN WAS ANTICIPATED. THE PROCESS USED TO COST ESTIMATE IT WAS SOUND AND INVOLVE THIRD-PARTY ENGINEERING WITH EXPERIENCE IN THESE PROJECTS BUT IT JUST CAME BACK
HIGHER. >> IS THE RISK IN SAYING LET'S WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION LIKE
>> YES, OUR CURRENT GRANT EXPIRES AT THE END OF THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION. WE EITHER SPEND IT OR RUN THE RISK OF NOT GETTING IT AGAIN. I HAVE NEVER KNOWN THE STATE OF TEXAS TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY $22 MILLION FOR PURPOSES LIKE THIS BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT WE TRY TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS. THIS IS A HUGE JOB , $5.8 MILLION.
WE HAD A VERY LONG MEETING OVER THE LATE SUMMER ABOUT SAVING $1 MILLION BY DOING THE REC CENTER. HERE, WE ARE LOOKING AT ISSUING $5.6 MILLION, ROUGHLY 4 MILLION 5 MILLION EXTRA. IF THIS PROJECT WAS 2.7 AND NOW, WE ARE A LITTLE OVER 8 MILLION, IT IS LIKE SHOPPING FOR A $300,000 HOUSE AND NOW IT IS $1 MILLION. THAT IS A HUGE JUMP. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. THIS ISN'T JUST AN EXTRA 100,000 OR INFLATION OF 2% OR 5%, THIS IS A MASSIVE INCREASE. WHERE WITH THE BALL DROPPED? WAS IT ON US? WAS IT JUST THE BID CAME IN AND WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS ? WAS AT THE AIRPORT OR THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT HAD TOO MUCH IN THEIR SCOPE? WHERE DID
WE DROP THE BALL? >> I DON'T THINK WE'VE DROPPED THE BALL, FIRST. WE RELY UPON OPINIONS AND PROBABLE COSTS THAT ARE DEVELOPED BY EXPERTS, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS WHO LOOK AT THE CONCRETE, STEEL AND ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND DETERMINE WHAT THE COST IS BASED ON PREVALENT CONTRACT PRICING. THIS PRICING WAS SET LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND IT IS ALREADY TWO YEARS OLD. THERE HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT INFLATIONARY PRESSURES OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS IN CONSTRUCTION.
IT HAS DESTABILIZED. THE PRICING HAS NOT COME DOWN, IT IS JUST INCREASING RAPIDLY. THAT IS PART OF IT. I ALSO THINK THEY JUST MISSED IT. A SIMPLE AS THAT. THIS HAPPENS FROM TIME TO TIME. WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN VE THIS PROJECT PRIOR TO THE BID BEING AWARDED. BUT, MR. GREENE AND I HAVE EVERY INTENTION OF VISITING THE CONTRACTOR IF THE AWARD IS EVENTUALLY AWARDED BY CITY COUNCIL TO WEBER TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE PERMANENTLY SPENDING THE MONEY. THEY HAVE
[00:35:03]
SOME LINE ITEMS IN THE COST PROPOSAL WE THINK OUR HIGH, UNNECESSARILY AND WE THINK THEY'RE OURS --IS OPPORTUNITY NOT TO SPEND THAT MONEY AND THAT IS WHAT WE WILL TRY TO DO.WE ARE NOT DONE TRYING TO SAVE A DOLLAR, BUT I AM AT A POINT WHERE WE EITHER REJECT ALL BIDS AND START OVER , WHICH CERTAINLY COUNCIL COULD DO AND DENY THIS . THAT IS AN OPTION FOR YOU ALL. IF YOU DO THAT, I DO NOT BELIEVE WE WILL GET A CHEAPER PRODUCT. WE THINK WE WILL LIKELY END UP PAYING MORE THAN WE ARE NOW. BUT , THAT ALSO IS NOT A GUARANTEE, BUT JUST MY EXPERIENCE WHEN THIS HAPPENS. WHEN YOU START OVER YOU END UP PAYING MORE. SO, I AM NOT HAPPY WE ARE HERE, COUNCILMEMBER, I WISH WE WEREN'T. BUT, I AM TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO DO THIS STILL. IT IS A NEEDED PROJECT AND ONE THE COUNCIL HAS SUPPORTED AND ONE THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS SUPPORTED AND I DO THINK WE CAN GO BACK AND ASK FOR MONEY. I THINK IT WAS EXCEPTIONAL WE GOT IT TO BEGIN WITH . OUR REPRESENTATIVE WORKED VERY HARD TO DO THIS.
>> WHAT WOULD WE DO DIFFERENTLY KNOWING WHAT WE KNOW NOW SO THAT WHEN THIS IS CLOSE TO TRIPLE THE PROPOSED COST, WHAT WOULD WE DO DIFFERENTLY ON OUR END? SOME OF THESE ARE OUTSIDE OUR CONTROL , BUT AGAIN THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND NOT JUST SAY, WE HAVE TO ISSUE 5 MILLION. WHAT WOULD WE
DO DIFFERENTLY? >> IT IS TRIPLE OUR MATCH. WE HAVE A 10% MATCH. IT IS A $22 MILLION PROJECT. YES, IT IS CLOSE TO TRIPLE OUR MATCH. I DON'T KNOW . I DON'T HAVE A CRYSTAL BALL THAT FORECAST THAT FAR IN THE FUTURE. I COULD HAVE ADDED 40% CONTINGENCY FOR CONSTRUCTION INFLATION BUT THAT
SEEMED AWFUL AGGRESSIVE. >> WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT, AND I AM NOT LOOKING FOR YOU TO FALL ON YOUR SWORD ARE LOOKING FOR A SCAPEGOAT. I AM NOT LOOKING TO POINT FINGERS, HOWEVER MY CONCERN HERE IS THIS IS A NEEDED PROJECT SO WE JUST PAY WHATEVER WE NEED TO PAY. IF WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS AMOUNT OF INCREASE AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY INSIGHT OR PLAN AS TO PREVENTING IT IN THE FUTURE, IF THIS IS NEEDING TO DO A BETTER JOB ABOUT TELLING THE CONTRACTORS EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED AND WORKING THAT OUT BEFORE HAND, SO THE CONTRACTORS CAN MORE ACCURATELY BID, THEN THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT. REGARDLESS OF HOW THE COUNCIL VOTES TODAY, THIS IS AN ISSUE. I DON'T THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE JUST SIGNOFF ON.
>> COUNCILMEMBER, THIS IS THE DESIGNED BID BUILT AND BEFORE THE PLANS ARE COMPLETE THE CONTRACTORS WHO BID HAVE A FULL SET OF DESIGNS. THERE IS NO SPECULATION ON THAT. THIS IS WHAT THEY BELIEVE THE COST IS. HISTORICALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE WAY, CONTRACTORS TELL YOU THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE WAYS. CONTRACTORS TO BUILD IN UNKNOWNS. THE AIRPORT COMMUNITY IS A UNIQUE WORKING ENVIRONMENT AND THAT IS WHY THE OTHER HIGH BID WAS SO HIGH. WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL CONTINGENCIES FOR FUTURE PROOF IN PRICING AND ADD MORE TO THE BUDGET. THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO. TWO YEARS AGO NOBODY THOUGHT WE WOULD BE THROUGH THE INFLATIONARY PRESSURES WE FACE AS A COUNTRY. SO, PART OF THAT IS THE REALITY OF THE TIME. WHEN THE BUDGET WAS ORIGINALLY SET TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY, MUCH HAS CHANGED. WE ARE NOT ALONE. WE HAVE GOTTEN PRELIMINARY PRICING ON THE ZOO PROJECT AND IT IS 36 MILLION.
WE CUT $10 MILLION OF THAT IN A MEETING YESTERDAY AFTERNOON.
WHERE WE CAN WE CERTAINLY TRY TO CUT THE PROJECT BACK FROM ORIGINAL PRICING. WE MADE EVERY EFFORT TO DO THAT. BUT WE CANNOT DO THIS IN THIS SITUATION. THE GRANTOR WILL NOT ALLOW IT. COUNCIL HAS THE OPTION OF DOING THIS SO THAT IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE ORIGINAL BID WE WILL HAVE THE FUNDS TO FUND THE PROJECT. COUNCIL COULD SAY THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS AND WE WOULD NOT AWARD A BID AND WOULD CANCEL THE BIDS AND REDESIGN THE PROJECT FOR SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT MEET THE ACTUAL NEEDS. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE WOULD LOSE THE WINDOW OF THE STATE FUNDS . WE ARE UNDER A LITTLE BIT OF TIME CONSTRAINT WITH THIS AND THAT IS THE REASON WHERE THEY ARE PUTTING SOME SENSE OF URGENCY ON IT. TO THE
[00:40:01]
BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE FUNDS ARE NOT THERE NEXT YEAR.>> ON THE BID PROESS , ON OUR MATCH , IT IS ROUGHLY TRIPLED.
>> YES, SIR. >> MOVING FORWARD INTO FUTURE PROJECTS, IT IS TOUGH FOR THE COUNCIL, I WOULD SAY TO BE PITCHED A PLAN AND NO WHAT IT WILL COST, SAY 1 MILLION AND THEN, THE CONTRACTORS PUT THEIR BIDS IN AND NOW WE ARE TRIPLE.
I DON'T THINK IT IS FAIR TO BLAME IT ON INFLATION ENTIRELY BECAUSE IN TWO YEARS THINGS HAVE NOT TRIPLED IN PRICE .
THEY MAY HAVE INCREASED BY 20% , 10% EACH YEAR ON INFLATION RATE. BUT, TO TRIPLE A BID IS VERY EXTREME. SO, EVEN IF WE COULD SAY, 100% OF THIS WAS INFLATION AND IS JUST THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS NOW , OKAY. THAT IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADDRESS NOW SO THAT FUTURE PROJECTS CAN BE EXPECTED TO BE UNKNOWN PERCENTAGE HIGHER. WE HAVE TO FACTOR THAT IN. IT IS VERY TOUGH AND FOR ME , WHENEVER WE ARE BEING PROPOSED A BIG PROJECT LIKE THIS, IT IS LIKE, HOPEFULLY THAT IS THE NUMBER BUT IT COULD BE DOUBLE OR TRIPLE. THAT IS A ROUGH WAY, I THINK FOR US TO MAKE DECISIONS. I WOULD LIKE , REGARDLESS OF HOW THE COUNCIL VOTES TODAY, I WOULD LIKE US TO REALLY LOOK AT HOW THIS WAS HANDLED AND WHAT WE CAN DO DIFFERENTLY. IT MAY HAVE BEEN ENTIRELY OUT OF OUR HANDS, BUT MOVING FORWARD IT IS NOT OUT OF OUR HANDS AND THAT IS HOW I
LOOK AT IT. >> I WILL TAKE THAT AS DIRECTION TO INFLATE THE COST WE ARE REFLECTING NOW BY 33%.
>> THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING.
>> THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE ASKING ME TO DO.
>> NO, I AM NOT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MAY BECOME OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS WE CAN COME UP WITH--FIRST, WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT HAPPENED. WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT FROM THE TIME WE APPROVE WITH IT , WE NEED TO INFLATE THE COST DOUBLE. I DON'T WANT YOU TO JUST INFLATE ALL THE NUMBERS. MAYBE, WE NEED TO HAVE MORE COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONTRACTOR SO WE KNOW WITH THE BID IS. OR, WE NEED TO PUT A CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT THAT THEY WILL BE HELD TO THE BID THEY PUT IN, REGARDLESS OF XYZ.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO GO AWAY WITH JUST INFLATING THE PRICE.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. I REALLY DO. I CAN'T ENGAGE CONTRACTORS AND NEGOTIATE DEALS PRIOR TO BIDDING THE INFORMATION OUT. WE CAN GET PRICING . WE WORK WITH CONTRACTORS WHO DEVELOP PRICING AND WE CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO PUT BIDS IN. THE DESIGN ENGINEERS ON THIS PROJECT , I AM NOT SURE WHO THEY ARE BUT WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION , WE CAN'T HOLD PRE-NEGOTIATIONS ON THESE SORTS OF THINGS. WE HAVE TO BID IT OUT. THAT IS THE LAW.
SOMETIMES , BEST ESTIMATES ARE WRONG. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ESTIMATES. IT MAY NOT BE 100% INFLATION , BUT INFLATIONARY PRICES OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS HAVE BEEN ABOVE 33%. THIS IS ABOUT A 20% TO 25% INCREASE. I HEAR WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND MY COMMITMENT TO YOU IS WE WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF PRICING THESE THINGS OUT. I DON'T THINK THERE IS A SMOKING GUN. OTHER THAN THE FACT IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE. I DON'T BUILD AND DESIGN AIRPORT RENTS AND NEITHER DOES DON GREEN. THAT IS WHY WE GET OTHER OPINIONS AND IT WAS WRONG. THAT IS THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND I RESPECTED. WE WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF TRYING TO ESTIMATE SOME
OF WHAT WE CAN. >> WHEN WE SAY TRIPLE, IT IS OUR MATCH. THE PROJECT IS NOT TRIPLE. IT IS ABOUT A 19% INCREASE. OUR MATCH IS TRIPLE, BUT THE PROJECT IS NOT TRIPLE.
WE HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THESE PROJECT ENGINEERS AND
[00:45:01]
COUNCILMEMBERS . I AM A LITTLE FLUSTERED WITH OUR DESIGN ENGINEERS FOR MISSING THIS MUCH. EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT A PERCENT OR 9% INFLATION A YEAR OVER TWO YEARS FROM WHEN THE BIDS WERE FIRST SECURED, PART OF IT IS INFLATION, BUT I AM WITH YOU, I AM FLUSTERED THAT THESE NUMBERS CAME IN THIS WAY.I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, THE MATCH IS TRIPLE THAT THE JOB, ITSELF CAME IN AT ABOUT 90% HIGHER. --CAME IN AT ABOUT 19%
HIGHER. >> I HAVE SEVERE RESERVATIONS ABOUT THIS, EVEN IF IT IS PUSHING IT TO THE NEXT MEETING WHERE WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME. WE DISCUSSED THE REC CENTER'S BOND MULTIPLE TIMES AND THIS IS MUCH MORE. SO , MY LAST QUESTION TO EDUCATE US ON IF THIS IS APPROVED, NOW OR LATER, WHAT IS THE REPERCUSSIONS TO OUR DEBT
SERVICING? >> WHAT YOU ARE APPROVING IS A NOTICE TO ATTEND. YOU DON'T HAVE TO ISSUE DEBT. HAD A NOTICE OF INTENT SOME TIME AGO FOR THE ORIGINAL ISSUANCE AND THE REASON WE DIDN'T DO IT AT THAT TIME WAS BECAUSE IT WASN'T ENOUGH TO COVER THE COST OF THE PROJECT AND THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY. THE PLAN I ARTICULATED TO COUNCIL IN EMAIL IS THAT WE WOULD ISSUE THIS DEBT AND TECH THAT SMACK --TAKE THE NEXT 90 DAYS TO FIND ANOTHER WAY TO BRING IT DOWN FURTHER. TXDOT SAID WE COULDN'T DO THAT. THERE IS TIME TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS AND CONVERSATIONS.
NO ONE IS ASKING COUNSEL TO APPROVE THE PROJECT TODAY. NO ONE IS ASKING COUNSEL TO GIVE US A NOTICE TO PROCEED TO CONSTRUCTION. WE ARE JUST ASKING COUNSEL TO AUTHORIZE PUBLIC NOTICE TO ISSUE DEBT. IF WE GET 90 DAYS OUT IN THE PROJECT IS $4 MILLION LESS BECAUSE WE DECIDED TO DO OTHER THINGS AND TXDOT GATHERED OTHER OPPORTUNITIES, WE DON'T HAVE TO ISSUE THE FULL AMOUNT. THIS IS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT WE THINK
WE MIGHT NEED. >> SO, IF WE APPROVE NOW AND WE ISSUE IT IN 90 DAYS, HOW -- WHEN THIS TRAIN GETS ROLLING IT WILL BE HARD TO STOP. IF THE DEBT IS ISSUED, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT OUR DEBT SERVICING AND OUR BUDGET MOVING FORWARD?
>> IT WOULDN'T HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE BUDGET UNTIL FISCAL YEAR 26 AND WOULD BE PART OF THE TAX RATE FOR FY 26. IT COULD HAVE A NUMERICAL INCREASE BASED ON EVALUATIONS. IT MAY NOT CHANGE.
WE HAVEN'T DONE THE MATH TO FIGURE THAT OUT YET.
>> BUT, WE DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT WHAT THE EFFECT IS ON OUR
BUDGET WITH THIS ISSUANCE. >> FOR THIS BUDGET, FY 25 IT HAS ZERO EFFECT. FOR FY 26 WE HAVE NOT YET FIGURED OUT THE
TAX RATE. >> I HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS.
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE MADE AN INTENTIONAL DECISION TO ISSUE CERTIFICATES OF QUALIFICATION FOR THIS DEBT AND THE MICROWAVE PLANS. RATHER THAN SPEND THE CASH WE HAVE IN OUR ACCOUNTS IN ORDER TO ALLOW US TO DEAL WITH AN UNCERTAIN ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT, SPECIFICALLY THE LOWER-THAN-EXPECTED TAX REVENUES , WE COULD JUST PAY CASH FOR THIS, BUT THAT WOULD NOT BE A RESPONSIBLE APPROACH FOR US . WE DON'T HAVE TO ISSUE THIS DEBT. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THE PROJECT. WE CAN GIVE $20 MILLION BACK TO THE STATE AND SAY, THANKS , WE DON'T NEED IT AND THEY WILL GO BUILD IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. BUT, I THINK YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT PROCESS ARE VALID. I AM SATISFIED OUR PROCESS, IS IN FACT SOUND . IT IS NOT A PERFECT PREDICTOR OF THE FUTURE BUT WE CERTAINLY DON'T ASK ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE PROCESS IF WE ARE UNDER BID. TO ME, WE ARE PROCEEDING IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER AND PROVIDING AUTHORIZATION TO GIVE THE NOTICE AND HOPEFULLY, WE CAN GET THE COST DOWN. THIS COMES DOWN TO , DO WE WANT ABILENE TO BE THIS STATE-FUNDED FACILITY FOR FIREFIGHTING STATEWIDE , OR NOT. IT IS UNFORTUNATE THE COSTS WENT UP ,
[00:50:01]
BUT I AM SATISFIED OUR PROCESS IS SOUND AND RESPONSIBLE AND WEARE DOING EVERYTHING WE SHOULD. >> SO, THE $20 MILLION IN THE GRANT GOES AWAY AT THE END OF THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION ,
WHICH IS TECHNICALLY WHEN? >> MY UNDERSTANDING IT IS PART OF THE BIENNIAL BUDGET APPROVED LAST SESSION AND IT EXPIRES .
WHEN THAT HAPPENS THE MONEY IS NOT THERE. WE CAN VERIFY THAT, BUT THAT IS THE ASSUMPTION WE WERE TOLD WHEN THE MONEY WAS FUNDED. IT IS POSSIBLE YOU GET THE STATE TO EXTEND THAT, BUT AGAIN WE HAVE NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS. THE INTENT WAS TO HAVE 90 DAYS TO DO THAT.
>> IF, FOR SOME REASON WE DECIDED NOT TO MOVE FORWARD, IT WOULD NOT ONLY BE THAT WE NEED 5.8 MILLION BUT AN ADDITIONAL 20 MILLION. SO, WE ARE GETTING A $20 MILLION GRANT FROM THE STATE, SO I ECHO WHAT BRIAN SAID . I DON'T THINK ANYBODY COULD'VE EXPECTED THESE INFLATIONARY PRESSURES TO COME INTO PLACE. I AM OKAY WITH THIS 45 DAY NOTICE TO GET THE PROCESS GOING TO INSURE THAT INSTEAD OF HAVING TO COME UP WITH $25.8 MILLION AS OPPOSED TO JUST THE 5.8 MILLION.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE ON THIS. I WANTED TO MAKE IT CLEAR FOR ME AND FOR THOSE LISTENING . WHAT IS THE LONG-TERM FINANCIAL OBLIGATION IN REGARDS TO THIS PROJECT OR THE POTENTIAL STRAIN ? I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW IT WOULDN'T IMPACT THIS BUDGET PERHAPS, 26. WHEN WOULD BE AN EXPECTED UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT WOULD , POTENTIALLY LOOK LIKE FOR US? PAYMENT WE CAN HAVE THAT ANSWER THIS AFTERNOON. IT IS NOT A DIFFICULT THING. WE WILL JUST HAVE IT DONE. I WILL SAY THAT $5 MILLION IS GOING TO BE LESS THEN A PENNY , BUT WE WILL DO THE MATH AND AT CURRENT VALUATIONS , SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE IN WORSE CASE SCENARIO FOR FY 26 AND HAVE THAT AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION WHEN WE COME BACK IN 90 DAYS. WE WILL HAVE THAT AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION SO YOU CAN MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. THE INTENT TODAY IS TO JUST ISSUE THE NOTICE OF INTENT.
>> TO ME, I THINK THAT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE AND HEALTHY AND TRANSPARENT FOR OTHERS TO KNOW, AS WELL. I APPRECIATE THAT .
LASTLY, IF WE THINK IN TERMS OF WHO WE ARE AND HOW WE ARE ALIGNED AND DIFFERENT PRIORITIES , TO WHAT COUNCILMEMBER YATES SAID, THIS ALIGNS WITH THAT. I AM IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTIONS .
>> AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU MARJORIE. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE
YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> TAMMY VOGEL, RESIDENTS OF ABILENE . I WAS TOLD I DON'T HAVE TO SAY, GOOD MORNING AGAIN BECAUSE I ALREADY SAID IT AGAIN. MY HUSBAND SAID I'M A LITTLE TO DIRECT. THAT IS OKAY. MY FRIENDS GET ME AND THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS AND I THINK IT IS A PHENOMENAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ABILENE. IT SEEMS WE WEREN'T QUITE READY. I APPRECIATE YOU MENTIONING THE THIRD OPTION IS NOT TAKING THE MONEY. WHILE THAT IS NOT THE IDEAL OPTION, WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS FOR TWO YEARS AND WE ARE HAVING TO TAKE OUT DEBT ON THIS. WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A GOOD, SOUND POSITION MOVING FORWARD.
I MAY NOT UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING, BUT YOU CAN AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE I AM TRYING. IF I DON'T UNDERSTAND AND SEE THINGS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, IT IS PROBABLY BECAUSE IT MAY NOT BE COMMUNICATED AS CLEARLY AS YOU ARE WANTING IT TO BE. I AM NOT WANT TO CATCH EVERYTHING, BUT I AM TRYING TO LET YOU KNOW THAT AS A PERSON ACTIVELY TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON, WHEN I SEE WE ARE RAISING THE CERTIFICATE OF OBLIGATION FOR ANOTHER $5.8 MILLION, I HAVE BEEN SEEING INFLATION COMING FOR YEARS. THIS IS SOMETHING WE KNEW WAS GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE GOVERNMENT.
IT IS NOT A SHOCK THINGS ARE COSTING MORE BUT I KNOW THAT I DON'T REGISTER FOR A HOME IN FLORIDA BECAUSE I DON'T WANT
[00:55:07]
TO PAY THE TAXES. JUST BECAUSE THE STATE IS OFFERING MONEY FOR US TO DO SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO TAKE IT. IT WON'T PRODUCE REVENUE . IT DOES HELP IN THE CASE OF EMERGENCY FOR FIRES AND THAT IS IMPORTANT. WE WERE NOT PREPARED IN THIS TWO YEARS TO MOVE FORWARD. I APPRECIATE ROBERT NOT PUTTING THAT HUGE CONTINGENCY . WHEN ISSUE BONDS THAT HAVE A HUGE CONTINGENCY THERE WOULD BE LEFT OVER MONEY AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT LEFTOVER MONEY. I UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION WE ARE IN, BUT IT IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND SITTING AS A CITIZEN WONDERING HOW WE WILL MOVE FORWARD. THE DISCUSSION HELPS ME UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT A DECISION TODAY BUT IS 90 DAYS DOWN THE ROAD. MY CONCERN IS, EVERYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED TYPICALLY GOES THROUGH. THERE HAS TYPICALLY, NOT HAVE BEEN ANYONE TO SAY, LET'S NOT ISSUE THE DEBT. THE LIKELIHOOD IT WILL BE DONE IS PRETTY MUCH GUARANTEED. MAYBE, THAT WILL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT JUST BECAUSE WE GET FREE MONEY FROM THE STATE DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO DO THE THINGS THEY ARE OFFERING. WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF OUR CITY AND SHORE IT UP FINANCIALLY AND TAKE CARE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO. I AM JUST A CITIZEN TRYING TO UNDERSTAND AND IF I AM CONFUSED I AM SURE I AM NOT ALONE IN THAT. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE COULD BE MORE TRANSPARENT . THANK YOU.>> STILL IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE
TO SPEAK ON ITEM 10? >> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS ERIC AND I'M A TAXPAYING RESIDENT OF ABILENE. HEARING THAT NUMBER THIS MORNING SHOCKED ME AND I AM GRATEFUL THAT MR. REAGAN AND MR. YATES BROUGHT THAT UP, THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS GOING ON. MY GASOLINE IS UP , MY GROCERIES ARE UP, MY INSURANCE IS UP, MY LAND TAX IS UP , MY CITY TAXES ARE UP AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ACO FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY AND NOT KNOWING HOW WE WILL PAY FOR IT FOR ANOTHER YEAR , IN 2026 IS CONCERNING TO ME. IF I TAKE ON DEBT I LIKE TO KNOW HOW I WILL PAY IT BACK AND I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT WILL COST ME AS A PERSON THAT LIVES ON A FIXED INCOME. I DON'T NEED SURPRISES AND I DON'T NEED TO BE WONDERING WHAT IT WILL COST ME IN THE LONG RUN. THAT IS A LEGITIMATE CONCERN FOR THE CITIZENS OF ABILENE TO NO. HOW WILL THIS BE PAID BACK? WHAT WILL IT COST ME INDIVIDUALLY AND PERSONALLY TO PAY FOR THIS? AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY, WE PULL THE PLUG. AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY , THIS WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE , FOR TAYLOR COUNTY IN THOSE PLACES AROUND HERE FOR FIREFIGHTING, ABSOLUTELY. BUT, AT WHAT POINT DO WE SAY, WE CAN'T ASK THE MONEY IS NOT THERE .
PERSONALLY, I DON'T SEE OUR ECONOMY GETTING ANY BETTER ANYTIME SOON. SO ANY DEBT WE TAKE ON IS GOING TO COST US MORE AND MORE IN THE LONG RUN JUST BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE AS MUCH, WHATEVER THE CIRCUMSTANCE MAY BE. THERE IS A TIME WHEN WE SAY, NO AND I THINK THIS IS A GREAT TIME. IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT MAY BE LOSS. MAYBE SOMEBODY ELSE GETS IT, BUT WE WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO THE CITIZENS OF ABILENE TO SAY, NO. WE CAN PUT THIS ON OUR PEOPLE BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM LIKE ONCE THE TRAIN GETS ROLLING THERE IS NO STOPPING.
THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON NUMBER 10 AT THIS TIME? SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER
QUESTIONS? >> I AM A BIG FAN OF THIS PROJECT AND I THINK IT IS A GREAT PROJECT. I THINK THE CALCULUS WE USED, SHOULD WE DO THIS PROJECT ARE NOT WAS THE MATCH. WE PUT IN 2 MILLION AND THE FEDS --OR THE STATE PUTS IN 20 MILLION AND IT IS GREAT MATCHING. WE ARE NOW ROUGHLY UP TO 30% MATCH. THAT IS SOMETHING WE JUST NEED TO RECALCULATE. IS THIS NOW STILL WORTH IT? MY HESITATION WITH APPROVING IT NOW IS , IN REGULAR NEGOTIATION WITH THE STATE IT IS DIFFERENT.
BUT WHEN THE OTHER SIDE KNOWS YOU HAVE THE MONEY YOU ARE LESS
[01:00:06]
LIKELY TO OFFER TO GIVE UP THEIR OWN MONEY. HERE, IF THE STATE KNOWS WE ARE ISSUING BONDS GOING TO COVER THE COST THE STATE IN TYPICAL NEGOTIATIONS WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO GIVE US PART OF OUR PORTION. THAT IS MY BIGGEST HESITATION. HOWEVER, IF IT IS NEEDED I AM FINE JUST TO EXPLAIN MY RATIONALE TO YOU, ROBERT SO YOU KNOW WHERE I AM COMING FROM. IF NECESSARY, I AM FINE WITH APPROVING IT NOW WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WILL BE A MEETING IN NOVEMBER WHERE THERE WILL BE A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AND WHETHER WE APPROVE IT OR NOT AND WHETHER THE NUMBER AND MATCHING STILL WORKS , AND I HESITATE BECAUSE IT IS DIFFICULT TO STOP THE TRAIN. THIS IS A GREAT PROJECTAND I DO WANT IT TO HAPPEN. I JUST THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FUNDING MAKES SENSE. MY OTHER HESITATION IS, I DON'T LIKE, AND THIS IS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE AND I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF, I DON'T LIKE STARTING THE TRAIN TOWARDS APPROVAL ON THIS WITHOUT KNOWING OUR LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES ON THE BUDGET. THIS HAS NO IMPACT ON NATURE BUT THAT IS LIKE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYING, WE WILL KEEP ON TAKING DEBT AND IT IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY. WE WILL KICK THE CAN FOR FUTURE PROJECTS. I KNOW THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF AN EMERGENCY AND IS UNIQUE. BUT, I DON'T LIKE APPROVING THINGS WITHOUT KNOWING LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES ON THE BUDGET. FOR FUTURE REFERENCE AND CERTAINLY, THE NOVEMBER MEETING I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A GOOD DISCUSSION AND WE CAN STILL SAY, YES OR NO. MY VOTE MAY BE DIFFERENT FOR TODAY. RIGHT NOW I AM FINE WITH APPROVING AND HAVING A GOOD, IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION BEFORE FINALIZING IT IN NOVEMBER.>> IS THAT THE MOTION QUICK >> YES.
>> SO MOVED. >> SECONDED. WE ARE READY TO
VOTE. >> FOR CLARIFICATION , YOU MADE THE COMMENT YOU WILL CHANGE HOW YOU ADD ON THE INCREASING VALUE
FOR INFLATION. >> I AM STANDING BEHIND THAT.
THE ENGINEERING FIRM USED INFLATIONARY PRICING FACTORS .
IT WON'T BE 30%. WHEN GARVER PUT TOGETHER THE OPINION AND PROBABLE COST FOR THIS PROJECT THEY HAD AN ESCALATOR IN THEIR FOUR-TIME. IT JUST WASN'T ENOUGH. WE HAVE HAD ALMOST 24 MONTHS OF NEW DATA COMING IN. SO , WE WILL MAKE SURE OUR ESCALATORS ARE REFLECTIVE OF THAT NEW DATA ON PROJECTS MOVING FORWARD. FOR THE PROJECTS THAT OF ALREADY BEEN SOUGHT AND FUNDED, I CAN'T BACK AND CHANGE THAT. BUT, WE WILL MAKE SURE WE ARE USING THE DATA FOR THAT PROCESS. IT IS ONLY AS GOOD AS THE INFORMATION WE HAVE. WE WILL ADJUST THAT TO MAKE SURE IT IS ACCURATE WITH THE NEW DATA WE HAVE EXPERIENCED. I DO PLAN ON CHANGING IT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL BE 33%, BUT IT WILL BE MORE THAN THIS ONE WAS, FOR
SURE. >> WILL YOU LET US KNOW WHEN
YOU DETERMINE WHAT IT IS. >> HE STATED HE WAS CHANGING HIS POLICY BASED ON THE DISCUSSION OF COUNCILMEMBER REGAN AND I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS GOING FORWARD .
HOW WILL IT IMPACT FUTURE PROJECTS QUICK
>> IT WILL DEPEND UPON THE PROJECT. IT WILL BE DEPENDENT UPON THE ENGINEER. I DON'T HAVE A STANDARD FORMULA . WE RELY UPON THE ENGINEER. THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH THE ENGINEERING FIRM IS TO MAKE SURE THE NUMBER IS GOOD BECAUSE NO ONE LIKES TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION WE JUST HAD. IT IS
NOT A FUN PROCESS FOR ANYBODY. >> THANK YOU.
>> ALL GUESSES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCILMEMBER BEARD WHO ABSTAIN. THE MOTION CARRIES.
[11. Ordinance (Final Reading) CUP-2024-07: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a Request from the Owner to Apply a Conditional Use Permit to the Property at 8302 Military Drive, to Allow a Concrete Batch Plant (Tim Littlejohn)]
WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 11 AND ASKED TIM LITTLEJOHN THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.>> UP FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 8302 MILITARY DRIVE TO ALLOW A CONCRETE BATCH PLANT ON 99.27 ACRES. HERE IS THE LOCATION AND THE CURRENT ZONING . HERE IS
[01:05:07]
THE SITE LAYOUT . AS YOU CAN SEE THIS IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE AIR FORCE BASE . THE PURPOSE OF THIS BATCH PLANT IS A CONTRACT WE HAVE WITH THE AIR FORCE BASE WHICH WILL LAST AROUND 7-8 YEARS FOR THAT PROJECT THEY WILL DO. HERE ARE THE CURRENT USES. HERE ARE VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY .NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NOTIFICATIONS BACK. THIS MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. PNC DID HEAR THIS CASE AND ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THIS MORNING SUBJECT TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND PLAN OF OPERATION.
>> TIM, THIS BATCH PLAN IS FOR CONSTRUCTION ON THE AIR FORCE BASE. IT DOES NOT ENCROACH UPON THEM IN ANY WAY BUT IS THERE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE AIR FORCE BASE QUICK
>> YES. THIS SITE WAS USED IN THE PAST FOR PREVIOUS PROJECTS YEARS AGO AND THEY WILL USE THE SITE AGAIN. IT IS ACROSS THE STREET AND IT WILL DO THE LEAST AMOUNT OF DAMAGE TO THE ROADS.
THE INTENT OF THE PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE AS STATED FROM THE APPLICANT IS ONCE THIS IS DONE IT WILL GO AWAY AND THEY WILL DEVELOP IT INTO RESIDENTIAL. QUESTIONS?
>> AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 11? LEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?
>> WE ARE READY TO VOTE. >> ALL GUESSES, MOTION CARRIES.
[12. Ordinance (Final Reading) Z-2024-24: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a Request from the Owner, to Change the Zoning of Approximately 0.91 Acres from Mobile/Manufactured Home (MH) to Residential Multi-Family (MF), Located at 3141 Grape Street (Tim Littlejohn)]
>> WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 12 AND TIM LITTLEJOHN WILL PRESENT
THIS. >> THANK YOU. FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IS THE ZONING REQUEST LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF JAMISON STREET LOOKING TO CHAT --CHANGE THE ZONING FROM MOBILE MANUFACTURED HOMES TO RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY. HERE ARE VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS IS CURRENT USES. AND , ALSO THE REQUESTED USES. NOTIFICATIONS WERE SENT OUT AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY IN RETURN. THIS MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. I CAN
ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST ITEM 12? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL ACCEPT THE MOTION AND A
>> SECONDED. >> WE ARE READY TO VOTE.
[13. Ordinance (Final Reading) Z-2024-25: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a Request from the Owner, to Change the Zoning of Approximately 0.47 Acres from Office (O) to Neighborhood Retail (NR), Located at 317 North Willis Street (Tim Littlejohn)]
>> ALL YESES. THE MOTION CARRIES. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM 13. UP FOR CONSIDERATION IS ZONING CASE 2024-25 AND THE AGENT IS KAREN HITE. THEY ARE LOOKING TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM OFFICE TO NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL. HERE IS THE LOCATION.
THIS IS THE ZONING MAP. HERE ARE VIEWS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREAS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO MAKE THE PROPERTY A LITTLE MORE PRODUCTIVE. THIS MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THIS MORNING. I CAN ANSWER
>> IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST ITEM . I WILL ACCEPT THE MOTION AND A SECOND.
[01:10:08]
>> WE ARE READY TO VOTE. >> COUNCILMEMBER CRAVER QUICK
>> SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> ALL YESES EXCEPT FOR COUNCILMEMBER REGAN WHO IS ABSTAINING. MOTION CARRIES.
>> WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM 14 AND ROBERT, I WANT TO SAY THAT
[14. Discussion: Receive a Report and Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing on Fluoridation of the City's Water Supply (Robert Hanna)]
ROBERT AND I HAVE HAD DISCUSSION ABOUT SOME INFORMATION WE HAD RECEIVED THROUGH STUDIES AND LAWSUITS.UPON MINE AND HIS DISCUSSION WE MADE THE DECISION TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND FLUORIDATION TO OUR WATER SYSTEM. IT WASN'T A MAYOR MANDATE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AND I DON'T WANT ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO BE CONSTRUED BECAUSE THIS NEEDS TO COME FROM COUNSEL AS TO HOW WE PROCEED FROM HERE.
I DIDN'T WANT IT ALL THROWN ON ROBERT THAT HE MADE THIS DECISION. IT WAS A DECISION WE MADE TOGETHER. ROBERT ?
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. IN 2000 THE CITIZENS HAD A REFERENDUM AND COUNSEL PUT THIS ON THE BALLOT ISSUE. CITIZENS CAME BACK WITH A, YES TO HAVE FLUORIDATION IN THE DRINKING WATER. THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATES , THE CPA, THE CDC , WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND YOU CAN LIST A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO SAY THIS IS GOOD FOR US FROM A HEALTH STANDPOINT HAVE RECOMMENDED WE DO THIS. WE TRY TO MAINTAIN THE RECOMMENDED LEVELS. LAST YEAR WE FLUCTUATED AND ARE IN THE MIDDLE.
NATURALLY OCCURRING IN OUR DRINKING WATER BECAUSE FLUORIDE IS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON ELEMENTS ON THE PLANET , IT IS AROUND .3 JUST IN THE WATER SUPPLY. WE DON'T ADD .7 TO GET TO THE RECOMMENDED PPM. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT IN CALIFORNIA RULED THAT COMMUNITY FLUORIDATION ESTABLISHED OPTIMAL LEVELS AT .7 PPM AND POSES AN UNREASONABLE HEALTH RISK TO THE PUBLIC. THE JUDGE SAID THE FINDING DOES NOT CONCLUDE WITH CERTAINTY THAT FLUORIDATED WATER IS INJURIOUS TO PUBLIC HEALTH. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT. WHAT I AM NOT SAYING IS THAT WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WRONG BY FLORIDA IN THE WATER. WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT WE HAVE A FEDERAL COURT THAT HAS RULED IT IS HARMING THE PEOPLE, POTENTIALLY AND IS ASKING THE EPA TO MAKE A RULING. THE RULING REQUIRES GOVERNMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCIES TO MAKE A REGULATORY RESPONSE REQUIRING A LABEL , LIKE WE HAVE ON TOOTHPASTE ALL THE WAY TO BANNING THE CHEMICAL OUT RIGHT. I AM ASKING THE COUNCIL NOW FOR DIRECTION ON WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY SHOULD TEMPORARILY CAUSE FLUORIDATION UNTIL THIS WORKS OUT OR UNTIL THE EPA COMES BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. ARGUMENTS AGAINST DOING THIS ARE CLEARLY ARTICULATED BY THE MEDICAL AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION , THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND THE WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION AND THE EPA. LITERATURE --I WAS READING SOMETHING FROM THE CDC THAT TALKS ABOUT THE COMBINATION OF FLUORIDATED WATER , TOOTHPASTE, MOUTHWASH, TOPICAL FLUORIDE APPLICATIONS ALL WORK TOGETHER TO CREATE THE BENEFITS OF FLUORIDE FOR STRONG AND HEALTHY TEETH. THE ONLY NEGATIVE SIDE EFFECT THE CDC STATED WAS FLORAL SAYS, WHICH IS A STAINING OF THE TEETH. AT THE LEVEL FOUND AND RECOMMENDED BY THESE GROUPS , IT HAPPENED ABOUT 1.3% OF THE POPULATION SURVEYED AND IT WAS VERY MILD. IT IS A COSMETIC IMPACT TO YOUR TEETH. THE CONCLUSION FROM THESE GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
[01:15:10]
SAY IT POSES NO HEALTH RISK. I AM RECOMMENDING WE PAUSE THE ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN THE CITY'S DRINKING WATER UNTIL THE EPA MAKES A RULING ON THIS. THEY HAVE BEEN CLEAR THAT NONE OF THE DATA POINTS THE JUDGE USED IN HIS DECISION ALTER THEIR POSITION. THEY WERE ARGUING IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE THAT THEY DON'T BELIEVE IT CHANGES ANYTHING. SO, THEY MAIL -- MATE WILL SOON. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL DO. WE SPENT ABOUT $73,000 ANNUALLY ON THE CHEMICAL WE USE . RODNEY, I WILL ASK YOU HOW TO PRONOUNCE THIS WORD.>> IT IN A TANK AND IT DISPENSES IT AT A CERTAIN RATE AND WE TEST THE WATER QUALITY TO MEET RECOMMENDED LEVELS. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WE HAVE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF FEMALES FROM PEOPLE ASKING US TO PERMANENTLY STOP FLUORIDATION.
I AM SEEKING DIRECTION FROM ALL OF YOU. THE FACT THAT A FEDERAL COURT FOUND IT IS HARMFUL AND AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH AT THE .7 PPM BEGS THE QUESTION , WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO DO? THIS INFORMATION AND JUDGMENT IS BRAND-NEW. SHOULD WE TEMPORARILY PAUSE AND ALLOW THIS PROCESS TO PLAY OUT AND HAVE MORE INFORMATION OR SHOULD WE CONTINUE FLOOR DATING OUR WATER AND SEE WHAT THE EPA SAYS? MAYOR?
>> QUESTIONS FOR ROBERT AT THIS TIME?
>> ROBERT, IF WE WERE TO STOP AND WE ARE SPENDING $73,000 A YEAR , IS THAT THE CHEMICAL WE BUY IN BULK? OKAY. OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD DO YOU KNOW WHEN WE BUY IT IN BULK, IF WE WERE TO STOP IT ARE RARELY OR PERMANENTLY, DOWN THE ROAD WHAT KINDS OF SAVINGS ARE LOOKING AT QUICK
>> IT IS $73,000 PER YEAR. >> AND, THE EQUIPMENT ? I HAVE BEEN LOOKING INTO THIS SINCE THIS CAME UP. SOME CITIES --THERE ARE ARTICLES ABOUT THEM HAVING TO GO BACK IN AND RETROFIT THEIR SYSTEMS TO ALLOW THEM TO PUT THE FLUORIDE BACK IN THIS MAY HAVE BEEN DECADES AGO. IF WE WERE TO STOP IT HERE OR SEMI-PERMANENTLY STOP FOR TWO YEARS HERE UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE EPA, CAN WE JUST RESTART IT? WITHOUT A PROBLEM
QUICK >> YES. I AM OVERSIMPLIFYING IT BY SAYING IT IS A VALVE, BUT ESSENTIALLY, IT IS A VALVE.
>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ROBERT AT THIS
>> WHAT ARE SOME OF THE OPTIONS IF WE WANTED TO PERMANENTLY REMOVE THIS PROCESS? CANDACE COUNCIL VOTE TO RESCIND THAT ORDINANCE , OR WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE VOTERS?
>> UNDER OUR CHARTER THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY THE VOTERS --AND THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THEN AN INITIATIVE POSITION WHERE THE VOTERS CAME UP WITH THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IN A PREVIOUS MATTER, BUT UNDER OUR CHARTER AND UNDER STATE LAW THE COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REPEAL AN ORDINANCE EVEN IF IT WAS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS.
THE COUNCIL CAN DO THIS. >> THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING TODAY, BUT IN THE FUTURE. WITH A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION , USING THE WORD, TEMPORARY ARE WE, AS A COUNCIL ABLE TO TEMPORARILY DO THIS QUICK
>> YES, I THINK SO. THIS WAS AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY THE COUNCIL IN 2000 AND THE BEST WAY MAY BE TO HAVE THIS COUNCIL ISSUE A NEW ORDINANCE THAT TEMPORARILY SUSPENDS THIS ORDINANCE AND HAVE IT BE A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION. THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE TYPICALLY DO, BUT IT IS ALLOWED BY LAW AND THAT WOULD BE THE TYPICAL ORDINANCE PROCESS. WE COULD DO THIS IN ONE READING IF THE COUNCIL FOUND THERE WAS A NEED TO DO IT. THE COUNCIL CAN DO IT, YES, SIR.
>> I HAVE ONE OR TWO QUESTIONS. WE HAVE BEEN GETTING A LOT OF
[01:20:01]
EMAILS ON THIS ISSUE . THIS WAS A COURT RULING IN CALIFORNIA , A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT RULING. NOT BINDING ON US, CORRECT? IT IS BINDING ON THE EPA, BUT AS FAR AS US, WE DON'T HAVE TO STOP, CORRECT QUICK>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> SO, THIS WAS A NONBINDING RULING BY A FEDERAL COURT IN CALIFORNIA SAYING , WE HAVE CONCERNS AND THAT JUDGES DIRECTION WAS TO THE EPA TO COME BACK AND DO SOMETHING, WHETHER PUTTING A LABEL ON THE CONTAINERS WITH FLUORIDE IN IT OR ALL THE WAY TO STOPPING IT.
BUT, THERE NEEDS TO BE A RESPONSE BACK FROM THE EPA .
AND THIS IS WHERE I'M LOOKING FOR VERIFICATION IS THE JUDGE WAS JUST SAYING, RESPOND IN SOME WAY , EPA. BUT, IT IS NOT
BINDING ON US. >> MY READING OF THE CASE HAD A LOT OF SCIENCE IN IT THAT I WAS NOT CONCERNED WITH. BUT, THE CASE IS REALLY THE FIRST TIME THAT A FEDERAL JUDGE , UNDER THIS PARTICULAR STATUTE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE A FINDING REGARDING FLUORIDATION OF THE WATER AND WHETHER IT IS A HEALTH RISK UNDER THE STATUTES. HE HAS DONE THAT. IT IS A LEGAL OPINION THAT THE JUDGE HAS FOUND THERE IS UNREASONABLE RISK OF INJURY TO THE PUBLIC , MOST LIKELY IN CHILDREN. THE PARTIES TO THAT WHERE THE PLAINTIFF IN THE EPA AND THE STATUTE REQUIRES THE EPA TO COME BACK AND MAKE A REGULATION WITH WHAT THEY DECIDE TO DO. IF THE APPEAL GOES TO THE NINTH CIRCUIT IT IS OVER TEXAS AND IT CAN BE APPEALED TO THE SUPREME COURT IF IT WENT THAT FAR. IT IS NOT DIRECTLY BINDING ON THE STATE OF TEXAS, BUT IT IS THE FIRST PUBLISHED OPINION BY A FEDERAL JUDGE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DECLARE THAT FLUORIDATION IS AN UNREASONABLE RISK. IN THAT SENSE IT IS A
VALID LEGAL JUDGMENT. >> SO, AS FAR AS IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THIS ORDINANCE THAT WAS ENACTED IN 2000 , FROM A PRACTICAL LEVEL , DO WE HAVE TO TIE IT TO A TIMELINE? DO WE HAVE TO TIE IT TO A RESPONSE FROM THE EPA? WHAT IS THE TEMPORARY STATUS FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT?
>> YOU COULD SET THE PARAMETERS. YOU COULD SET IT FOR A LENGTH OF TIME OR TO AN EVENT THAT MAY HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. WHEN DOES TEMPORARY BECOME PERMANENT? THAT IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION. IF YOU ARE TYING IT TO SOMETHING OCCURRING IN THE FUTURE THERE IS SOME SENSE OF A TEMPORARY NATURE TO THE FINDING. YOU COULD EVEN MAKE IT TEMPORARY UNTIL YOU SET
IT FOR SOME OTHER PROCESS. >> DO YOU --IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THIS, DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON WHAT WE SHOULD TIE IT TO? OR JUST DO AN
ARBITRARY TIMELINE? >> AN ARBITRARY TIMELINE IS PROBABLY NOT THE BEST ROUTE TO GO BECAUSE IF YOU SET IT FOR ONE YEAR THERE MAY BE A RULING BY THE EPA WITHIN SIX MONTHS.
OR, IF YOU SET IT FOR A YEAR THERE MAY NOT BE ANY PROGRESS WITHIN THAT YEAR. YOU COULD TIE IT TO EITHER THE EPA MAKING A REGULATION, OR YOU COULD TIE IT TO SOME SORT OF FURTHER ACTION BY THE MEDICAL COURT OF APPEALS IF IT GETS APPEALED. YOU COULD TYPE IT TO WHETHER OR NOT THE VOTERS WANT THIS BROUGHT BACK BEFORE THEM AND THEY FILE A PETITION. YOU COULD DO IT TO SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS. I WOULD AT LEAST TIE IT TO EITHER THE COURTS OVERRULING THIS JUDGE , WHICH WILL TAKE A YEAR OR 1 1/2 YEARS AT BEST. OR, YOU COULD TIE IT TO FURTHER REGULATION BY THE EPA THAT SATISFIES THIS COUNCIL , WHICH
MAY HAPPEN QUICKER. >> FINALLY, ROBERT , FROM A PRACTICAL VIEWPOINT , ANY INSIGHT ON WHAT YOU WOULD WANT US TO TIE IT TO THE COUNCIL DECIDES TO TEMPORARILY SUSPEND
IT QUICK >> MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE CITY PAUSE THE ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN THE CITY'S DRINKING WATER UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE EPA MAKES A RULING ON THIS MATTER. IF THEY APPEAL THIS WE WOULD START FLUORIDE AGAIN IF THAT WAS COUNSEL'S WISH.
[01:25:02]
>> I AM NOT A LAWYER OR LEGAL PERSON, BUT IT SAYS THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT HAS RULED COMMUNITY WATER FLUORIDATION POSES AN UNREASONABLE RISK AND THE NEXT SENTENCE SAYS, THE JUDGE FURTHER KNOWS THIS FINDING DOES NOT CONCLUDE WITH CERTAINTY THAT FLUORIDATED WATER IS INJURIOUS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH. IS THAT JUST LEGAL TALK? ON THE ONE HAND HE IS SAYING IT IS AN UNREASONABLE RISK BUT THEN HE SAYS IT IS NOT
CERTAIN. >> WITH THE JUDGE WAS DOING WAS FOLLOWING THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE. THE STATUTE SAYS THE JUDGE HAS TO FIND THERE IS A REASONABLE RISK OF INJURY IN ORDER TO ORDER THE EPA TO REGULATE IT. HE WAS KEEPING IT CONFINED TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE , WHICH WAS WHAT HE WAS
ALLOWED TO DO. >> OKAY. IT IS REALLY CONTRADICTORY. IT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NO EVIDENCE OF HARM AND NO EVIDENCE OF HARM.
>> I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. THANK YOU.
>> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE --AND THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION ITEM. PERHAPS, WE SHOULD GET GUIDANCE FROM STAFF AS TO HOW TO MOVE FORWARD. IF WE CONTINUE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION I WOULD SUGGEST YOU HAVE TWO TRIGGERS.
WANNABE A DECISION BY THE EPA OR A FIXED DATE IN TIME. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THE VOTERS SAID THEY WANTED THIS. IT HAS BEEN 24 YEARS AND THERE HAS BEEN SCIENCE COME OUT SINCE THEN ABOUT WHETHER FLUORIDE IS HARMFUL OR NOT. WE ARE NOT HERE TO SETTLE ON THAT TODAY, BUT I DO AGREE THAT THERE IS SOME CONCERN ABOUT IT. I THINK IT IS PRUDENT TO PAUSE IT UNTIL WE GATHER MORE INFORMATION. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO KEEP DOING IT WITH QUESTIONS OUT THERE ABOUT WHETHER IT IS INJURIOUS OR NOT. SO, IT DOESN'T HARM THE WATER SUPPLY.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE PAUSE THIS UNTIL WE GATHER MORE INFORMATION. I THINK THAT IS A PRUDENT AND SMART THING TO DO. MY OWN PERSONAL FEELING IS, IF WE DECIDE WE WANT TO PASS AN ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS THIS , I THINK THE VOTERS PUT THIS IN AND THEY WILL HAVE TO UNDO IT.
THAT IS MY OPINION. FOR US TO PUT IT BACK ON THE BALLOT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO. IN THE SHORT TERM , I AGREE TO PAUSING IT AND RECOMMEND STAFF TO COME UP WITH THE LEGAL LANGUAGE OF THE SUSPENSION AND TIE IT DIRECTLY TO A FIXED POINT IN TIME AND/OR THE EPA DECISION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. WE CAN ALWAYS RENEW IT. IF THE EPA TAKES A LONG TIME WE CAN EXTEND IT. WE HAVE DONE IT FOR OTHER THINGS.
>> YOU MENTIONED THAT THE TRIGGER NUMBER IS .07 PARTS PER MILLION. I AM SORRY, .7 PARTS PER MILLION. AND YOU THINK NATURALLY OCCURRING HERE, IT IS ALREADY AT .3 OR .4? OKAY, SO REALLY IF WE PAUSE THIS WE ARE NOT REMOVING ALL OF THE FLUORIDE FROM THE WATER SUPPLY, WE ARE JUST REMOVING THE PORTION WE PUT IN AND THE PORTION GOD PUTS IN STAYS THE
SAME. >> YES, FLUORIDE IS IN PROCESSED FOOD THAT IS MADE WITH FLUORIDATED WATER. SODAS ARE MADE WITH FLUORIDATED WATER. YOU WILL HAVE THE PRESENCE OF FLUORIDE IN ANYTHING YOU DRINK. IF IT IS PRODUCED IN A COMMUNITY THAT FLOOR DATES THE WATER OR IF THE SOURCE OF WATER IS NATURALLY OCCURRING FLUORIDATED. IT IS A COMMON ELEMENT AND IS PRESENT IN A LOT OF THINGS.
>> I WANT TO ADD SOMETHING FOR THE PUBLIC'S BENEFIT. WE CANNOT PERMANENTLY SUSPEND FLUORIDATION WITHOUT 60 DAYS NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC. HAVE TO MAIL EVERY SINGLE WATER USER AND LET THEM KNOW WE ARE GOING TO TAKE IT OUT IN TWO MONTHS.
SO, THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN BEFORE PERMANENT SUSPENSION COULD TAKE LACE ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. IT IS AT LEAST TWO MONTHS BEFORE WE CAN EVEN DO
IT. >> I SPENT A LOT OF TIME YESTERDAY, LAST NIGHT, AND THIS MORNING READING THE COURT CASE YESTERDAY AND THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT IT WAS REFERENCING.
[01:30:08]
ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THE EPA GUIDELINES PROVIDE A MAXIMUM AMOUNT ALLOWED. THESE ENTITIES WERE MENTIONED EARLIER THAT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. THAT IS NOT BINDING ON US. ONE COMMENT YOU MADE EARLIER BEFORE WE WALKED IN WITH REGARD TO TEMPORARY SUSPENSION , THERE ARE TIMES WE HAVE TEMPORARY SUSPENSIONS AND IT IS NOT IN THE NEWS BECAUSE IT IS NOT A BIG DEAL. IF EVERYBODY HAS A BIAS AND EVERYBODY HAS A PERSPECTIVE AND EVEN THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION HAS A SUMMARY OF THE DECISION AND IT CAME ACROSS A LITTLE BIASED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE THAT THEY SAID ALL OF THE REFERENCES WERE MADE TO THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES WHO HAVE MUCH HIGHER NATURALLY OCCURRING FLUORIDE IN THEIR WATER SYSTEMS. YES, THERE WAS IRAN AND CHINA AND INDIA AND MEXICO WHO WERE INCLUDED THAT HAVE HIGHER LEVELS. THERE WERE 19 HIGH QUALITY STUDIES AND OF THOSE, 18 ALL AGREED IN THE OUTCOME TWO OF THOSE WERE CANADA. THE NUMBERS THAT WERE USED, THEY USED THE SAME TARGET, 0.7 AND CANADA EVEN USES THE SAME PROCESS TO ADD FLUORIDE AND THEY COMPARED IT TO COMMUNITIES. ONE THAT WAS ADDING IT TO GET 2.7 AND THE OTHER WAS NATURAL AND IT WAS .13. SO, IT WAS VERY LOW AND THEY WERE STILL SEEING THE IQ IMPACT, THE NEGATIVE IMPACT AS ONE WENT UP AND THE OTHER WENT DOWN. THE FLUORIDATION INCREASED IN CANADA AND THE STUDIES OF THE 18, THE IQ LEVEL WENT DOWN. IT WAS NOT LIMITED TO JUST NATIONS THAT HAVE HIGHER FLUORIDE NATURALLY OCCURRING. I AM VERY COMFORTABLE WITH US PAUSING AND DOING IT WITH THE ORDINATES. I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS AN EMERGENCY WHERE WE HAVE TO DO IT IN A SINGLE READING, AND I KNOW THAT IS UP TO THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AS TO HOW TO PROCEED. THAT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET MORE FEEDBACK . I HEARD FROM MY OWN PERSONAL DENTIST YESTERDAY AND I RECEIVED EMAILS FROM A DOCTOR ON THE ADVISORY BOARD WHO IS A DENTIST WHO HAS BEEN SERVING AND WAS EXPRESSING CONCERNS ABOUT PAUSING. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE ASKED TO MY DENTIST , AND HE DIDN'T HAVE ANNOUNCER, BUT IS THERE A MEASURE OF THE DENTAL BENEFITS ? HOW MUCH REDUCES THAT AT .4 WHERE IT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING VERSUS .7 WHICH IS THE TARGET? HE SAID THEY HAVE NOT LOOKED AT IT. THERE IS STILL A PARTIAL BENEFIT. THERE IS THE HALO EFFECT, WHICH IS WHERE THE WATER WE FLOOR A DATE IN THE NATURAL FLUORIDE THAT IS IN THE WATER GETS USED TO MAKE COCA-COLA DRINKS OR GATORADE OR WHATEVER AND IT IS USED TO COOK PASTA . SO, IT EXPANDS OUT IN ITS IMPACT BEYOND JUST DRINKING A GLASS OF WATER. SO, STANLEY ALLUDED TO THE SCIENCE AND THE 80 PAGE DOCUMENT FROM THE JUDGE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF SCIENCE. I THINK THERE IS MORE TO LEARN , BUT I DON'T THINK THERE IS ENOUGH THERE THAT GIVES ME PAUSE OR MAKES ME HESITANT TO SUPPORT A TEMPORARY PAUSE .THANK YOU. >> I HAVE JUST A LITTLE BIT. I AM COMFORTABLE TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING IT AND I THINK KYLE MAKES A GREAT POINT OF IT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING AT .4. IF THERE IS BENEFIT, WE WILL STILL GET IT. IF IT IS HURTING AT A CERTAIN LEVEL WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ADDING TO THAT ISSUE. I
[01:35:01]
AM GOOD WITH SUSPENDING IT. STANLEY, ON A PRACTICAL LEVEL THOUGH, GLENN MADE A GREAT POINT THAT THERE IS A PROCESS WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO EVEN , LONG-TERM TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THIS. WHERE WE ARE AT NOW, AND WE ARE NOT TAKING A VOTE BUT IT IS JUST FOR DISCUSSION--RIGHT NOW , IT IS SUSPENDED AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS BASED ON AN EMERGENCY SITUATION WITH THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT PUTTING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER OUT THERE UNNECESSARILY , MAKING SURE THEY HAVE SOLID GROUND TO STAND ON FROM A COUNCIL LEVEL. IF THAT IS THE AGREEMENT OF THE COUNCIL, DO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ? MY QUESTION IS, CAN THEY TEMPORARILY SUSPEND THIS AND DOES IT COUNT AS AN EMERGENCY SO THEY ARE GOOD? AND , WE DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING UNTIL WE START THE PROCESS OF THE NOTICE PERIOD? HOW COMFORTABLE ARE YOU WITH THE STATUS QUO RIGHT NOW, AS IS?>> THERE ARE TWO OTHER PROVISIONS IN THE CHARTER THAT WOULD SPEAK TO YOUR QUESTION. THERE IS A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER THAT TALKS ABOUT THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL DECLARING A STATE OF EMERGENCY, WHICH WOULD BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN A DECLARATION OF DISASTER. ESTATE OF EMERGENCY WITHIN THE CITY HAS NOT HAPPENED BUT THAT IS AN OPTION THE COUNCIL OR MAYOR HAS BY THE CHARTER TO ISSUE A STATE OF EMERGENCY FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THERE IS ALSO A PROVISION IN THE CHARTER THAT TALKS ABOUT THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER REGARDING--IT DOESN'T USE THE WORD, DISCRETION IN ENFORCING ORDINANCES, BUT SUBJECT TO HIS ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCE. HE HAS THE REQUIREMENT TO ENFORCE ORDINANCES SUBJECT TO HIS DISCRETION IS WHAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE CHARTER SAYS. I THINK THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THE CHARTER THAT GIVES THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO PAUSE CITY ORDINANCES . IT FALLS WITHIN THAT. THERE IS, AT LEAST ON A QUICK LEVEL THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY MANAGER TO PAUSE THE ENFORCEMENT OF AN ORDINANCE, WHICH WOULD BE ADDING THE FLUORIDE INTO THE WATER. I THINK THAT IS A SHORT-TERM THING. I THINK THE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE ACTION FORMALLY IN A FORMAL ORDINANCE
TO SUSPEND THIS ORDINANCE. >> THANK YOU.
>> I WOULD CONCUR WITH STANLEY. MY PRACTICE HAS NEVER BEEN TO DISREGARD THE ORDINANCES COUNCIL PASSES. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS THIS IS ON THE AGENDA. WE INCLUDED IT BECAUSE STANLEY AND I BOTH AGREE THIS NEEDS COUNCIL'S DIRECTION AND
ACTION. >> AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK,
EITHER FOR OR AGAINST ITEM ? >> MR. HURLEY WANTS TO END FLUORIDATION. CHRISTOPHER TURNER?
>> I WANTED TO THANK YOU ALL FOR DOING IT TEMPORARILY SO YOU CAN FIGURE IT OUT MORE. I WAS GOING TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THAT AND SEE IF CITY COUNCIL WOULD TAKE IT OUT TEMPORARILY UNTIL YOU CAN FIGURE OUT MORE ABOUT IT. IT IS A FORCIBLY MANDATED THING. IT IS IN THE WATER AND THERE IS NO GETTING AROUND IT. EVEN IF YOU DON'T DRINK IT , THEY DO ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT THINGS. IF YOU DO IT TEMPORARILY , AT LEAST WE WILL GO FROM THERE. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT.
>> WOULD YOU SAY YOUR NAME AND CITY ?
>> JENNIFER BELL? >> MY NAME IS JENNIFER BELL . I AM A 30+ RESIDENT OF ABILENE AND I WANT TO FOLLOW UP. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING ACTION TO PAUSE THE FLUORIDATION . IT SHOWS YOU DO CARE AND ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO THINGS GOING ON OUTSIDE THAT AFFECT OUR CITY. I AM APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. I WROTE YOU AN EMAIL AND I WANT TO SAY IN THE JUDGE'S RULING HE SAID THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL AND SIGNIFICANT SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT LINKS FLUORIDE AS BEING HARMFUL TO HUMAN HEALTH AND I KNOW THAT THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT IS. THE EPA SAID IT IS SAFE
[01:40:05]
BUT THE FDA SAYS IT IS POISON AND CLASSIFIES IT AS SUCH. IF YOU ADJUST MORE THAN ONE QUARTER OF A MILLIGRAM OF FLUORIDE, PER THE FDA YOU NEED TO CALL THE POISON CONTROL CENTER. THE EPA SAYS IT IS ALL GOOD AND THIS IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND BUREAUCRACY DISAGREEING WITH EACH OTHER. SO , I AM ALWAYS GOING TO BE A PROPONENT OF ACTING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF SAFETY, WHICH IS, WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE. I FEEL THAT I KNOW BUT MAYBE, YOU DON'T KNOW AND THAT IS GREAT. IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION, WE SHOULD TOTALLY STOP THE PRACTICE. I KNOW YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT TEMPORARY, BUT I AM IN FAVOR OF PERMANENTLY ENDING THE PRACTICE. IT IS A POISON, EVEN IF IT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING IN THE WATER. ADDING MORE POISON IS NOT LOGICAL . IT IS NONSENSICAL. IT IS A NEUROTOXIN , SO IT IS LINKED TO LOWERING IQ AND A.D.D. , AUTISM , CANCER . IN MY OPINION IT IS SETTLED.THERE ARE 1500 EPA SCIENTISTS WHO SAY IT IS TOXIC AND THEY HAVE CONCERNS IN ADDING IT TO THE WATER. SO, KNOWING WHAT WE NOW KNOW ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE IS CREDIBLE EVIDENCE TO LINKING FLUORIDE WITH LOWER IQ WE NEED TO STOP IT PERMANENTLY.
AT LEAST TEMPORARILY, WE NEED TO STOP. IT IS UNETHICAL AND IMMORAL . IT IS FORCED MEDICATION AND SOME PEOPLE WILL DISAGREE. WE DO NEED TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE CITIZENS. I STRONGLY FEEL YOU DON'T NEED THE CITIZENS VOTE TO STOP POISONING US. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES WHEN GOVERNMENT SHOULD JUMP IN AND SAY, WE ARE DOING THIS WRONG. I KNOW YOU VOTED ON IT BUT THE MAJORITY DOESN'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO POISON EACH OTHER. THAT IS NONSENSICAL TO ME. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IMMORAL, AND UNETHICAL AND I HOPE YOU DEFINITELY TEMPORARILY PAUSE IT BUT I'M GLAD THE DISCUSSION HAS OPENED UP THAT WE CAN MAYBE COME OPEN THE DOOR TO PERMANENTLY REMOVING FLUORIDE --ADDITIONAL FLUORIDE FROM OUR
WATER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, JENNIFER. WENDY?
>> MY NAME IS WENDY HARTSHORN . I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR TEMPORARILY DISCONTINUING IT. I AM A MENTAL HEALTH COACH WORKING ON HOLISTIC NUTRITIONISTS LICENSE AND I WANTED TO COME UP AND MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT IS HARMFUL TO OUR MENTAL HEALTH. IT IS A DEVELOPMENTAL NEUROTOXIN WHICH IS A SUBSTANCE THAT IS POISONOUS AND DESTROYS TISSUES IN THE BRAIN, SPINAL CORD, AND NERVOUS SYSTEM. IT LOWERS IQ IN CHILDREN AND ADULTS. MORE THAN 70 HUMAN STUDIES HAVE LINKED FLUORIDE TO REDUCED IQ. IT DISTILLS NITROGEN INTO THE BRAIN AND CAUSES DEGENERATION AND IMPAIRS GLAND FUNCTION. AND IT LEACHES LED FROM PIPES AND FAUCETS.
ALSO LINKED TO ATTENTION DEFICIT. HOW DOES FLUORIDE AFFECT OUR GLANCE? WE HAVE A GLAND LOCATED BETWEEN THE TWO HEMISPHERES OF THE BRAIN OUTSIDE THE BRAIN BARRIER. THE MAIN FUNCTION OF THIS IS TO RELEASE MORE MELATONIN.
MELATONIN MAINTAINS THE START OF PUBERTY AND HELPS PROTECT THE BODY FROM CELL DAMAGE. WHEN THAT LAND IS NOT PRODUCING ENOUGH MELATONIN THE BODY CANNOT PERFORM THESE VITAL ROLES PROPERLY. WHAT ARE THE HEALTH EFFECTS OF CALCIFICATION? POOR SLEEP, EARLY PUBERTY, HEIGHTENED RISK FOR BREAST CANCER, NERO DEGENERATIVE DISEASE AND ALZHEIMER'S. THE LEAD BETWEEN THIS GLAND AND ALZHEIMER'S IS VERY CLEAR AND IS CAUSING THE BODY TO NOT RECOVER DURING SLEEP. LASTLY, FOR ME LOSS OF SPIRITUALITY WAS THE MAIN THING WITH THIS DECALCIFIED GLAND . IT IS IMPORTANT. WITH AN UNHEALTHY GLAND , IT PRODUCES LACK OF PERSON WHEREAS A HEALTHY PLAN IS ASSOCIATED WITH CLARITY, IMAGINATION, YOU --INTUITION , AND OVERALL UNIVERSAL HAPPINESS. THAT WAS
[01:45:02]
BIG FOR ME AND ALL OF THIS IS JUST THE INFORMATION I HAVE GATHERED AND MY OPINION. I WAS EXCITED ARE TEMPORARILY DOING THIS AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE EPA RULES, I HOPE WE CAN PERMANENTLY DISCONTINUE IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE AMAZING. IF THERE IS A SLIGHT CHANCE CUTTING OUT FLUORIDE COULD RAISE CONSCIOUSNESS LEVELS, INCREASING OUR ABILITY TO CONNECT WITH OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, THAT IS REASON ENOUGH FOR ME. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING.>> THAT IS ALL THE CARDS. WE ARE STILL ON ITEM 14. WITH ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM?
>> I AM SUSAN PERRY FROM ABILENE. I WANTED TO SAY I'M APPRECIATIVE OF THE TEMPORARY PAUSE OF FLUORIDE IN THE WATER.
I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT CHEMISTRY BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT CHLORINE IS IS WHAT IS NATURALLY IN THE WATER , NOT THE FLUORIDE AND IT CHANGES SOMEHOW. NOT EVERYTHING THAT IS NATURAL IS GOOD FOR US TO PUT INTO OUR BODIES. YOU DON'T HAVE TO THINK LONG ABOUT THINGS THAT WOULD BE IN THAT POSITION.
IT ALSO CAN BE USED AS A BYPRODUCT OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE AND IS A NEUROTOXIN , AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE, AFFECTING BRAIN HEALTH , THE NERVOUS SYSTEM AND THAT AFFECTS EVERY PART OF OUR BODIES. IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR DENTAL HEALTH , BUT CLEAN, PURE WATER IS NECESSARY. THE CDC AND THE EPA HAVE NOT SHOWN THEMSELVES TO BE VERY PRO-HEALTH TO THE AMERICANS , ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS. SO , THEY HAVE A LOT OF OTHER AGENDAS AND I DON'T THINK PUBLIC HEALTH IS ONE OF THEM. IT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE, ANYWAY. SO, I URGE PERMANENT REMOVAL , HOWEVER WE WANT TO DO IT.
EITHER VOTING OR YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION. PERMANENT REMOVAL OF FLUORIDE FROM OUR WATER WILL MAKE IT AS CLEAN AS POSSIBLE. I REALLY URGE YOU TO BE STRONG AND COURAGEOUS LEADERS . DON'T JUST PASS WHATEVER AND DON'T JUST DO WHATEVER. BUT, BE STRONG AND COURAGEOUS AND DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE CITIZENS , YOUNG AND OLD OF ABILENE.
>> STILL IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. WITH ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK
ON ITEM 14? >> HELLO, MY NAME IS CAROLINE AND I LIVE IN ABILENE. I WASN'T PLANNING ON SPEAKING BUT THE SUBJECT IS IMPORTANT TO ME. I WANT TO REITERATE SOME OF THESE THINGS THIS PERSON SAID ABOUT POISON AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FLUORIDE BEING ADDED TO THE WATER AND THE FLUORIDE THAT IS NATURALLY OCCURRING. NATURALLY OCCURRING IS CALCIUM FLUORIDE, WHICH IS A NATURAL SUBSTANCE. WHAT IS BEING ADDED IS SODIUM FLUORIDE, WHICH IS TOXIC WASTE. WE ALL KNOW THE CDC, THE W.H.O, NONE OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE HEALTH OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FIRST AND FOREMOST ON THEIR MINDS. WE HAVE FOUND THAT OUT EVEN MORE SO IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS AGO.
WHEN IT WAS VOTED FOR 24 YEARS AGO I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE OF ABILENE RECOGNIZE THE GOVERNMENT WAS NOT DOING WHAT WAS GOOD FOR THEM. OUR EYES HAVE BEEN OPENED IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS BUT --THAT TRUST IN THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT KEEPING US SAFE. I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE IT PERMANENTLY REMOVED. I SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON FILTERS TRYING TO GET THE STUFF OUT OF THE WATER YOU GUYS PUT IT IN. IN TEXAS , REVERSE OSMOSIS MEANS YOU HAVE TO MAKE 10 GALLONS TO GET FIVE GALLONS WITHOUT FLUORIDE. THE PERMANENT REMOVAL WOULD BE MY HOPE. I DON'T THINK PEOPLE WERE GIVEN CORRECT INFORMATION WHEN THEY VOTED ON IT 24 YEARS AGO TO RECOGNIZE THE DAMAGES IT DOES
TO OUR HEALTH. THANK YOU. >> TAMMY VOGEL, RESIDENT OF ABILENE. I AM SHOCKED . I HAVE NEVER SEEN SUCH A QUICK RESPONSE TO A FEDERAL RULING IN THIS CITY IN A LONG TIME. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE EVER SEEN IT. KUDOS TO ALL OF YOU FOR HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AND RECOGNIZING THE DANGER THAT HAS BEEN VERIFIED BY A COURT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK VERY HARD
[01:50:04]
TO SEE THERE ARE TWO CAMPS. ONE SAID WE HAVE TO DO IT FOR THE SAFETY OF THE LOWER INCOME PEOPLE WHICH TO ME SEEMS NOT TO BE THE RIGHT PURPOSE TO DO THINGS. TO FORCEFULLY DO SOMETHING TO PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW BETTER. THAT IS NOT THE WAY AMERICA IS. THE OTHER CAMP IS, HOW DID THIS START? WHY ARE THEY SELLING IT TO CITIES? WHY IS THIS A PROFITABLE BUSINESS? I AM GRATEFUL FOR THE PAUSE AND GRATEFUL FOR THE RECOGNITION THAT, WHILE YOU DO HAVE THE POWER TO OVERTURN THIS THERE HAS TO BE MORE DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE PEOPLE. I DO THINK IT IS OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE WE REEDUCATE PEOPLE ON WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT THE FACTS ARE. I AM GRATEFUL TO KNOW THERE IS A PROCESS TO HAVE TWO START TO THE PERMANENT REMOVAL, BUT THERE IS NOTHING GOOD ABOUT FLUORIDE. I WAS SHOCKED. I DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO TRY TO REMOVE FLUORIDE. BUT, I BATHED IN IT. I DON'T DRINK IT. IT IS GOING TO MY BLOODSTREAM. I AM GRATEFUL FOR THIS CONVERSATION. I KNOW THE SUPPORT IS THERE FOR IT. MANY PEOPLE CAN'T COME BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO COME IN THE MORNING.IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE AN EVENING MEETING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME AND VOCALIZE AND HAVE CONVERSATIONS. THE MORE WE TALK ABOUT THIS STUFF THE MORE YOU REALIZE HOW IMPORTANT REEVALUATING THINGS ARE, RATHER THAN JUST FOLLOWING THE PAST. I DON'T RECALL THE EPA OR FDA BEING CONSTITUTIONAL. THOSE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE CREATED. AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, IT IS NOT CONSISTENT IN THEIR MENTIONING--MESSAGING. WE HALF TO REALIZE THAT SOMETIMES MEDICINE GETS IT WRONG AND WE DON'T NEED TO FOLLOW THE COURSE BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY SAY TO DO , BUT WE DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND EDUCATE OURSELVES AND THE PUBLIC SO WE CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS WITH OUR CONSENT. THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS. I AM EXCITED TO SEE THE DIRECTION OUR IQS WILL TAKE AFTER WE START IMPLEMENTING
THIS IN THE WATER. THANK YOU. >> STILL ON THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 14 AT THIS TIME? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I WANT TO SAY AGAIN THAT THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM THAT WE GIVE GUIDANCE TO THE CITY MANAGER ON HOW WE WANT TO
CONTINUE. >> WE NEED TO CLARIFY IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE THE PAUSE, WHICH I SUPPORT. THE OTHER THING IS DO WE WANT TO HAVE AN ORDINANCE BROUGHT TO US SO WE CAN FORMALIZE THE PAUSE WITH THE CONSTRAINTS YOU MENTIONED? IF WE DO THAT ARE WE DOING IT IS AN URGENCY OR ARE WE FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE OF THE CHARTER?
>> BECAUSE WE PAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS AN EMERGENT NEED . WE CAN DO IT THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS WITH THE ORDINANCE BEING A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION UNTIL WE GET TO THE TRIGGERS. WE DO NEED A FIXED POINT OUT THERE AND THE LANGUAGE IS TO SAY, WHICHEVER COMES EARLIER.
>> WHAT IS A FIXED POINT IN TIME? ONE YEAR FROM NOW QUICK
>> I DON'T KNOW. TO ME, THAT IS TOO LONG. I WOULD SUGGEST 90 DAYS TO REEVALUATE . WE CAN ALWAYS EXTEND IF WE NEED TO. IF WE GET THE INFORMATION THAT SAYS WE NEED TO PERMANENTLY SUSPEND THIS THAT TRIGGERS THE WHOLE PROCESS WE HAVE TO FOLLOW AND IT WILL TAKE AT LEAST TWO MONTHS. THE EPA MIGHT RULE ON THIS QUICKLY AND WE CAN ALLOW SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME, SAY 90 DAYS TO REEVALUATE . THEN , WE CAN TRIGGER THE PERMANENCY.
>> WHAT IS THE TIMEFRAME? THIS RULING JUST CAME OUT LAST WEEK.
WHAT IS THE STANDARD TIMELINE FOR APPEALS QUICK
>> AT LEAST 30 DAYS. WE WOULD KNOW IF THE EPA IS GOING TO DEAL WITH THIS IN 30 DAYS. 90 DAYS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
>> OKAY. GOOD. >> I AGREE WITH A TWO-TIERED TIMEFRAME , BUT I WOULD LIKE TO CRAFT THE ORDINANCE SO THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION IS FOR ONE YEAR . I DON'T REALLY WANT TO
[01:55:03]
TALK ABOUT THIS EVERY 90 DAYS. ESPECIALLY, IF NOTHING HAS CHANGED. BUT , GOING PAST ONE YEAR BEGS THE QUESTION OF IS IT ACTUALLY TEMPORARY? I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE RENEWED ANNUALLY BY US IF IT IS TEMPORARY. IF THE EPA MAKES A RULING SHORT OF THAT , THAT WILL BE THE TRIGGER.>> IF THEY COME BACK NEXT WEEK AND SAY, HERE IS THE RULING, NOW WE HAVE THE RULING. AND WE WOULD TAKE IT UP AGAIN IN LIGHT OF THE NEW INFORMATION. IF WE DO THIS EVERY 90 DAYS THAT IS TWO READINGS TO EXTEND IT. WE'RE TALKING ONE MONTH OUT OF EVERY THREE WILL TALK ABOUT THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM WITH NO NEW INFORMATION. MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONTINUE THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION AND PUT AN OUTER LIMIT OF ONE YEAR FOR US TO TAKE IT UP AND RENEW THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION, SUBJECT TO IF THERE IS AN EPA RULING PRIOR TO THAT.
>> SO, I CAN DRAFT THE FIRST READING ORDINANCE THAT HAS DIFFERENT OPTIONS SINCE THIS IS REALLY NOT AN ORDINANCE DISCUSSION TODAY. WE SHOULDN'T REALLY GET INTO THE WEEDS IS TO WHAT IT SAYS, BUT I CAN DRAFT A READING THAT HAS OPTIONS AND YOU CAN GIVE DIRECTION DURING THAT FIRST MEETING AS TO HOW YOU WANT THE SECOND READING TO LOOK. I CAN DO THAT.
>> MY CONCERN ABOUT ONE YEAR IS THAT WILL BE PASSED A CITY
ELECTION. >> CAN WE NOT COME BACK WITH A SUGGESTION TO PUT IT ON THE BALLOT?
>> WE COULD. >> OR, RIGHT NOWWE ARE TALKING
ABOUT A TEMPORARY SUSPENSION. >> I CAN PUT LOTS OF OPTIONS THAT YOU ALL CAN CHOOSE AND PICK WHATEVER.
>> IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, POTENTIALLY CONSIDERING THE MAY ELECTION , IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHAT THE CUT OFF IS.
>> FEBRUARY. PROBABLY, THE END OF FEBRUARY.
>> THEN, WE HAVE SOME TIME. >> I THINK WE ARE IN CONTENTION THAT WE ARE ASKING OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TO CONTINUE THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION . OKAY. THANK YOU
ROBERT AND MAYOR. >> THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR THE CONVERSATION. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY WE HAD EMAILS FOR AND AGAINST, BUT UPWARDS OF 90 EMAILS AND I WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THEIR VOICES ARE HEARD ON EMAIL, TOO. WE ALSO HAD EMAILS FROM PEOPLE WHO HAD CONCERN. WE DO ALWAYS APPRECIATE THE INPUT
[EXECUTIVE SESSION]
FROM OUR CITIZENS, EVEN IN EMAIL. THANK YOU SO MUCH.>>> NOW, IT IS 10:28 A.M. AND WE WILL RECESS INTO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE OPEN MEETING SECTION 551.071 CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY. SECTION 551.087 , DELIBERATIONS ABOUT BUSINESS PROSPECT
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.