Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:05]

ABILENE CITY COUNCIL TO ORDER. 8:30 A.M., ON THIS BEAUTIFUL THURSDAY MORNING.

[INVOCATION]

ASK TRAVIS CRAVER TO PROVIDE BOTH THE INVOCATION AND THEN LEAD US IN THE PLEDGES.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOST GRACIOUS AND HEAVENLY FATHER, GOD WE COME TO YOU THIS MORNING, ASKING YOU TO DIRECT OUR STEPS THIS DAY. GOD, DIRECT OUR STEPS IN THE WAY OF PEACE. GOD STRENGTHEN OUR HEARTS TO OBEY YOUR COMMANDMENTS.

GOD, MAY THIS DAY, YOUR DAY, VISIT US GOD, INVITING US TO GIVE LIGHT TO THOSE IN DARKNESS. INVITING US TO LIVE IN A WAY THAT SHOWS YOUR GRACE AND YOUR MERCY. FATHER GOD, WE PRAY AND ASK THAT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US TAKE IT UPON OURSELVES, GOD, TO TRULY KNOW YOU. AND TO TRULY KNOW YOU, INVITES US, CHALLENGES US, TO LIVE A LIFE FOR YOU. GOD, WE'RE GRATEFUL YOU LOVE US. WE'RE GRATEFUL YOU SEE US. MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE'RE GRATEFUL THAT YOU WILL NEVER LEAVE US NOR FORESAKE. IN YOUR MOST HOLY AND PRECIOUS AND BEAUTIFUL NAME, AMEN. AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, 1 NATION,

[PLEDGE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG AND THE TEXAS FLAG]

UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. NOW THE TEXAS FLAG.

HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE TEXAS, ONE STATE, UNDER GOD, ONE AND

INDIVISIBLE. >> ON THIS DAY, WE DO HAVE A SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT TO MAKE

[PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]

THAT WE HAVE ONE OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS, HER BIRTHDAY IS TODAY. I THINK IT'S IN THE PROXIMITY OF 48, 49 YEARS, NOT CERTAIN ON THE EXACT DATE. BUT WE WANT TO HONOR DONNA AND I WILL SAY SINGING HAPPY BIRTHDAY, BUT TOO MUCH PRESSURE ON ME TO SING, SO I WILL NOT DO THAT. LET'S WISH HER A VERY HAPPY BIRTHDAY.

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. THAT IS ITEMS 2 THROUGH ITEM

[CONSENT AGENDA]

NUMBER 8. WE WILL PULL ITEM 8 AND HAVE A PRESENTATION ON ITEM NUMBER 8.

DOES THE COUNCIL, ITEMS 2 THROUGH 7, ANY ITEM ON THAT PORTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR CONSIDERATION? ON ITEMS 2 THROUGH 7.

IS THERE A CITIZEN THAT WOULD LIKE TO PULLEY TEAMS 2 THROUGH 7 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR

SEPARATE CONSIDERATION? >> DAVID IS PULLING 3, 4 AND 7. >> ALL RIGHT.

SO WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 3, 4 AND 7. IS THERE ANOTHER EITHER IN THE AUDIENCE, CITIZENRY OR THE COUNCIL OF ANY OTHER ITEMS YOU WANT TO PULL OUT OF THE CONSENT AGENDA? IF NOT, I WILL ACCEPT THE MOTION FOR ITEMS 1, 2, 5, AND

6. >> SO MOVED. >> HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN HURT. AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN RENTZ.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? READY TO VOTE. >> ROLL CALL.

[3. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on Awarding Bid No. 2057 to Bontke Brothers Construction for Sayles Blvd Pavement Rehabilitation (Greg McCaffery)]

MOTION CARRIES. >> MR. WARTZ, COME TO THE PODIUM, GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. Ô> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. DAVID SCHWARTZ, ITEM THREE, ONE OF THE LONG NEEDED ITEMS. I WANT TO PUT SOME PRAISE OUT FOR THE STREET COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, GREG AND THE CITY MANAGER, IDENTIFYING FUNDS LEFT FROM THE 15 BOND TO USE THEM TOWARD THIS MAJOR INTERSECTION, OR MAJOR STREET RATHER, THOROU THOROUGH-FARE. IT GOES ALL THE WAY FROM THE POST OFFICE ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE RESTAURANT OR HOTEL OUT THERE ON THAT END.

IT'S GOING TO BE WONDERFUL. AND THEY SAID THAT THEY HOPE THEY START THE PROJECT IN ABOUT

[00:05:04]

7 TO 10 DAYS. THAT WILL BE GOOD BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, AS WE KNOW, SCHOOL IS NOT IN SESSION. SINCE THIS DOES GO RIGHT BY COOPER, I'M SURE THEY WILL PROBABLY PLAN SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY DID WITH ABILENE HIGH ON NORTH 6.

AND WHOEVER DID THAT ONE, THAT CONTRACTOR DID A GREAT JOB. ESPECIALLY THERE BY THE FIELD HOUSE, THAT INTERSECTION HAS NEVER BEEN THAT GOOD AT 12TH AND SHELTON AND 6TH THERE.

WHAT IS SO ODD IS, ALL OF THE YEARS ON EAST FROM THE FIELD HOUSE, IT'S NEVER BEEN STRIPED.

SO THIS MUST BE SOMETHING NEW THAT THE CITY IS DOING. BECAUSE IT LOOKS NICE.

BUT IT JUST IS WEIRD SEEING A STRIPE THERE. I CAN ATTEST TO THAT.

I USED TO LIVE ABOUT FOUR HOUSES DOWN. ALSO I WALKED THAT FOR THREE YEARS DURING HIGH SCHOOL. BUT I JUST WANTED TO PUT A LITTLE PRAISE OUT TO OUR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. AND THE GOOD JOB HE'S DOING, IDENTIFYING STREETS WITH THE LEFTOVER FUNDS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY MANAGER. THAT IS ALL I HAVE ON THAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL. >> PUBLIC HEARINGS. ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? ITEM NUMBER 3.

I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCIL HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS IN

REGARDS TO ITEM NUMBER 3. >> I WANT TO DITTO THAT THEY AT LEAST START ON THE SOUTHERN END

TO GET THAT DONE BY COOPER ON AN EXPEDITED MANNER. >> THESE ARE FUNDS FROM 2015 THAT WERE SAVED FROM SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECTS, THE STREET MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE MADE THE RECOMMENDATION, THE PARK THAT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF COOPER WILL BE CONCRETE.

LONGER LIFE WITH ALL OF THE PEOPLE TURNING IN AND OUT OF THE SCHOOL.

WATER RUNOFF IN THE AREA AND EXTRA SIDEWALKS IN THE AREA. GOOD PROJECT.

>> PASSING THROUGH HERE, MINDFUL, I BELIEVE MR. MCCAFFREY, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOCATE ABOUT $30 MILLION IN REGARDS TO STREET CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE THIS YEAR, STREET MAINTENANCE, LEFTOVER MONEY FROM PREVIOUS BONDS IN THE FIVE-YEAR TERM, I BELIEVE THAT AMOUNT WHEN YOU COUPLE IT WITH TXDOT AND OTHER FUNDING IS $180 MILLION.

ABILENE HAS NEVER INVESTED MORE IN STREETS THAN WE'LL DO IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.

SLIDE THAT IN THERE AS WE PASS THROUGH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL

BEFORE THE VOTE. >> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN PRICE.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE'RE READY TO VOTE. >> ROLL CALL

[4. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on Awarding Bid No. 2058 to Epic Construction for South 23rd Street and Barrow Street Reconstruction (Greg McCaffery)]

>> ITEM NUMBER 4, MR. SCHWARTZ, INVITE YOU TO THE PODIUM AGAIN. >> THANK YOU AGAIN, MAYOR WILLIAMS. THIS IS THE 23RD AND BARREL INTERSECTION.

I'M SURE THIS WAS IDENTIFIED IN ONE OF THE STREET MAINTENANCE MEETINGS.

THAT IS WELL NEEDED. I'M GLAD IT'S FINALLY COMING UP TO BE FIXED BECAUSE I DO NAVIGATE THE INTERSECTION QUITE FREQUENTLY. IF YOU'RE ON THE INSIDE LANE, GOING NORTH, MAN, IT'S ROUGH. YOU REALLY NEED SOMETHING LIKE AN HUM-V OR BRADLEY FIGHTING VEHICLE TO GET THROUGH THERE. I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN PATCHWORK.

IT WILL BE GOOD TO SEE IT. I'M SURE THE STREET MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE PROBABLY RECOMMENDED CONCRETE AS THEY DID WITH SOME OF THE OTHER INTERSECTIONS, BECAUSE IT WILL BE WELL DESERVED WHEN THIS GETS FINISHED. I APPRECIATE THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR AND HIS DILIGENCE ON IDENTIFYING INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE REALLY NEEDED AND WITH THE STREET MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE AND MOVING IT FORWARD. AND I DID FAIL TO MENTION ON THE PREVIOUS ITEM THAT TXDOT WILL BE STARTING ON DENVILLE FROM 14TH AFTER THE LOOP.

LOTS OF CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE, ON DANVILLE SIDE. SO THAT WILL BE GREAT WHEN THEY GET IT ALL DONE. PEOPLE WILL START GOING BACK TO WORK AND MAYBE SCHOOL WILL BE OPEN AGAIN. WE'LL HAVE ALL OF THIS BEHIND US.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNCIL. >> THANK YOU. WE ARE IN A PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WANT TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER 4? IF NOT, I ACCEPT A MOTION AND A

SECOND. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> WE HAVE MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CRAVER. SECOND, THE BIRTHDAY GIRL, COUNCILWOMAN ALBUS.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSS? WE'RE READY TO VOTE. >> ROLL CALL.

[00:10:11]

>> MOTION CARRIES. >> DAVID SCHWARTZ, ONCE AGAIN TO THE PODIUM.

[7. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action Authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Texas Department of Transportation for the Bridge Replacement on N. 18th Street at Catclaw Creek (Greg McCaffery) ]

LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 7, WE ARE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> DAVID SCHWARTZ, THANK YOU COUNCIL. THIS IS THE 18TH STREET BRIDGE BETWEEN I BELIEVE THAT IS KIRKWOOD AND GRAHAM MAYBE. ANYONE, ONE THERE. AND I'M GLAD THAT THE CITY IS ONLY GOING TO HAVE TO PUT OUT TEN PERCENT TOWARDS IT. THAT IS A WONDERFUL DEAL.

AND TO THINK PEOPLE NOW CAN SEE WHERE THAT TEN DOLLAR ROAD AND BRIDGE TAX GOES ON YOUR LICENSE PLATE, IT GOES RIGHT HERE INSIDE THE MUNICIPALITY. YOU WOULD THINK ORDINARILY, YOU WOULD THINK WELL, THE MUNICIPALITY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.

BUT I AM GUESSING SINCE IT'S A BRIDGE, IT FALLS UNDER THE STATE.

IT'S A WONDERFUL THING. BUT THE MEDIA REPORTED THOUGH IT MIGHT NOT BE UNTIL 2024 BEFORE THEY CAN DO THE PROJECT. OF COURSE, MY FRIEND LIVES IN THE AREA, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND HE HAS ALREADY GOT IT IN HIS BRAIN TO AVOID 18TH. BUT I GOT CAUGHT ABOUT THREE TIMES SO FAR THE LAST FEW MONTHS. START DOWN 18TH AND REALIZE, UH-OH, YOU CAN'T GET THROUGH. I GUESS SINCE IT'S TO DO WITH THE STATE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ON THEIR OWN SCHEDULE. WHILE THE CITIZENS I'M SURE WOULD LIKE IT DONE QUICKER, THE STATE YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHAT THEIR TIMETABLE IS THAT WAS STATED THROUGH THE MEDIA OUTLETS. PROBABLY BE 2024. BUT IT'S A GREAT BARGAIN FOR THE CITIZENS. ONLY HAVING TO PUT OUT TEN PERCENT COSTS WHILE THE STATE PICKS UP THE OTHER 90 PERCENT. AND IT'S THROUGH YOUR LICENSE PLATE FEE, LIKE IT SAYS ON THERE, BRIDGE AND ROAD TAX. WELL, WE CAN SEE ACTUALLY IN OUR CITY WHERE IT'S DOING SOME GOOD FOR US. THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THAT. THANK YOU COUNCIL THIS MORNING.

>> THANK YOU MR. SCHWARTZ. WE ARE IN A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER 7?

>> GREG, CAN YOU GIVE US AN ACCURATE TIMELINE, 2024 WHEN WE CAN EXPECT IT TO BE DONE.

WANT TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT IT'S OPEN, IT'S LIMITED TO FIVE THOUSAND POUND VEHICLES.

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. THAT'S CORRECT.

WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT. IT'S BASICALLY THROUGH THE TXDOT SYSTEM BRIDGE PROGRAM. AND WE HAD SOME EARLY DISCUSSIONS WITH TXDOT ON THIS PROJECT. SO THE LATEST THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT FOR A RECONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTING THE ENTIRE BRIDGE, WOULD BE IN 2024, HOWEVER, IF WE GET OUR PROJECT INTO THE SYSTEM AND OTHER PROJECTS AROUND THE STATE ARE NOT READY TO GO, WE COULD VERY WELL AT THE SOONEST SEE THIS BRIDGE CONSTRUCTED IN 2022.

AS FAR AS TIME FRAME. AND THAT IS CORRECT, WE WORKED WITH TXDOT ON EVALUATING AS FAR AS THIS STRUCTURE, COMING UP WITH A TENTATIVE REPAIR. THERE IS A STEEL PLATE RIGHT NOW THAT IT CROSSES OVER AN OPEN HOLE. AS FAR AS THE STRUCTURE IS BOLTED TO THE BRIDGE ITSELF. THAT PLATE IS NOT GOING TO BE MOVING.

WE DO HAVE LOAD LIMITS ON THAT BRIDGE RIGHT NOW, 5,000 POUNDS. BUT IT IS PASSABLE AS FAR AS USABLE BY VEHICLES AS FAR AS CARS AND THOSE TRUCKS THAT ARE LESS THAN FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS.

>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL OR STAFF? THANK YOU. I'LL ACCEPT A MOTION AND SECOND.

>> SO MOVED. >> ROLL CALL. >> MOTION CARRIES.

[8. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on approving the FY 2020/2021 Action Plan and proposed use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds (Zack Rainbow)]

ITEM 8, PRESENTATION ONLY. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON TODAY.

GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. ZACK RAINBOW PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. DISTRICT IS WORKING CONCURRENTLY WITH A CONSULTANT FOR THE FIVE-YEAR PLAN. TWO FUNDING SOURCES THAT WE GET MONEY FROM THE FEDS FOR, CDBG

[00:15:15]

FUNDS, HOME FUND INCREASING THE QUALITY OF LOW INCOME HOUSING STOCK.

THEIR NEW RECONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION. SO HERE IS THE COMPONENTS OF THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN, WHICH IS A FIVE-YEAR PLAN, WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU JULY 12TH.

HERE IS THE PROJECT FUNDING GUIDELINES. 70 PERCENT OR GREATER TO BE SPENT ON LOW TO MODERATE INCOME BENEFIT. AND CONSOLIDATED PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. HERE IS THE CDBG REVENUE, MONEY TO BE SPENT ON THE PROJECTS.

HOUSING ADMINISTRATION, NOT TO EXCEED 20 PERCENT. CDBG PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION, TOTAL EXPENDITURES, 294,850. HERE ARE THE APPLICATIONS WE SENT OUT AND RECEIVED AND O&S STAFF HAS DECIDED TO DISPERSE THE FUNDS, ALLOCATE THE FUNDS, PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL. TOTAL NUMBER OF 1 APPROXIMATELY $2 MILLION.

THERE IS THE COMMUNITY SERVICES PROJECTS THAT IT SHOULD BE SPENT ON, WE'RE PROPOSING TO BE SPENT ON. HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF THOSE. THESE ARE IN YOUR PACKET.

THAT WAS THE ADMIN COST. HERE IS THE TOTAL. CRITICAL LIMITED REPAIR.

25 TO 35 LOW TO MODERATE INCOME CLIENTS. WILL BE ASSISTED WITH SYSTEM FAILURES PER CALENDAR YEAR, SEWER, WATER, GAS, ET CETERA. NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAMS, 15 LOW TO MODERATE INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS, PAINTING THOSE HOMES AND ALSO CONDEMNATION DEMOLITION OF APPROXIMATELY 4 LMI NEIGHBORHOODS, $80,000 TOTAL.

MORE BREAKDOWNS, MEALS ON WHEELS, SALVATION ARMY, ABILENE HOPE HAVEN TO ASSIST WITH THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS. TOTAL EXPENDITURES BEING $486,942.

A BREAKDOWN OF THOSE, SINGLE FAMILY REHAB, THREE TO FOUR HOMES AT A COST OF APPROXIMATELY $350,000, AGAIN, FIRST TIME BUYER PROGRAM, $5,000.

5 HOME BUYERS WITHIN ABILENE. AND THE COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION.

PROPOSED TO RECEIVE $67,000, 170 PROVIDED TO HABITAT TO HMANITY TO AID IN CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND SO AFTER THIS, PENDING COUNCIL'S APPROVAL THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN WILL BE PUT ONLINE AND HAVE A 30-DAY PERIOD FOR CITIZENS TO INPUT ANY CONCERNS OR COMMENTS THAT THEY MAY HAVE.

WITH THAT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> ZACK, I KNOW THAT USUALLY THIS IS PRECEDED BY COMMUNITY INPUT GATHERING OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SPRING.

BECAUSE OF COVID-19, WHAT DID THAT LOOK LIKE THIS SPRING? >> USUALLY THIS IS PRESENTED TO THE OFFICE, DUE TO THE COVID CRISIS, WE COULDN'T GET A QUORUM.

THIS IS BROKEN DOWN BY STAFF OF HOW WE PROPOSE TO SPEND THE MONEY THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO US BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PENDING YOUR APPROVAL. THESE ARE BASED ON APPLICATIONS WE RECEIVED. YEAH. THE COVID CRISIS DID HAVE THE EFFECT OF NOT GATHERING THE BOARD TOGETHER. NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES STAFF AND MYSELF, CAME UP WITH BASED ON APPLICATIONS RECEIVED, HOW TO BREAK IT DOWN

[00:20:01]

>> QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> YOU MADE THE COMMENT PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL, HAVE THE 30-DAY WINDOW STARTED. WE'RE NOT APPROVING ANYTHING.

>> NOTHING IS BEING APPROVED TODAY. IT WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD AS A COMPONENT AND TOGETHER WITH THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN, WHICH CONSULTANT WILL BE HERE TO PRESENT THE FINDINGS OF ALL FEEDBACK, COMMUNITY OUTREACH ET CETERA.

>> DURING THOSE 30 DAYS ARE WE GOING TO TRY AND BE INTENTIONAL ON REACHING OUT TO SOME OF THOSE GROUPS THAT NORMALLY PARTICIPATE IN THE SPRING NOW THAT SOME OF THE RESTRICTIONS

HAVE BEEN RELAXED. >> WE'LL CONTINUE TO REACH OUT. THESE NUMBERS ARE BASED ON APPLICATIONS WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE FOUNDATIONS, ET CETERA.

THE 30-DAY PERIOD WILL BASICALLY BE A COMMENT, A CHANCE FOR CITIZENS TO COMMENT ON THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN ASPECT, WHICH INVOLVES THIS, ONE YEAR ACTION PLAN IS DONE EVERY YEAR. HOWEVER, THIS YEAR IT COINCIDES WITH THE FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN. THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE OF THIS YEAR AND LAST YEAR.

>> WITH REGARD TO THE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS? >> CORRECT.

30 DAYS FROM EITHER TODAY OR TOMORROW. >> IT'S UP TO THEM TO COME TO

US. >> WE WILL REACH OUT TO THEM. CONSULTANTS WILL HOLD MULTIPLE GATHERINGS AND HEARINGS AND RECEIVE INPUT FROM THE CITIZENS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? JUST FOR INPUT TODAY. BUT WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM?

IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD, GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> GOOD MORNING.

THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT PROGRAM PROVIDES ANNUAL GRANTS TO DEVELOP VIABLE URBAN COMMUNITIES BY PROVIDING DECENT HOUSING AND BY EXPANDING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS. THE PROGRAM IS AUTHORIZED UNDER TITLE 1 OF HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974. 209,427 IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT MONIES ARE BEING GIVEN TO NON-PROFITS INSTEAD OF BEING UTILIZED TO DEVELOP VIABLE URBAN COMMUNITIES. BY EXPANDING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS. IT CREATES AN ENVIRONMENT OF DEPENDENCY.

ABILENE CITIZENS ARE REQUESTING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL NOT APPROVE THE PLAN AND INSTEAD CONSIDER THE REALLOCATION OF THE FUNDS. ABILENE CITIZENS ARE REQUESTING THE FOLLOWING, REALLOCATION OF THE OF THE $69,000 ALLOCATED TO THE ABILENE HOPE HAVEN.

PROVIDE DECENT HOUSING, ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES THAT PROMOTE SELF-SUFFICIENCY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM?

PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> GOOD MORNING.

I WOULD LIKE TO STATE MY NAME, CHLOE ROBERTS. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING THE URGENT NEED FOR TRANSPARENCY AND EXPANSION OF THE FAIR HOUSING HERE IN ABILENE. I'M A THREE-YEAR ABILENAN BUT A THIRD GENERATION TEXANS.

I MOVED TO ABILENE WITH A HOUSING VOUCHER ISSUED THROUGH ABILENE HOUSING AUTHORITY.

AFTER A SHORT TIME BEING A RESIDENT IN ABILENE, IT DID NOT TAKE LONG TO NOTICE THE INEQUITIES THAT EXIST IN FAIR HOUSING MARKETS. DATA COLLECTED HAS SHOWN YEAR TO YEAR FLUCTUATION. INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED ON RESIDENTS SUCH AS MYSELF SHOWS INSUFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC HOUSING AND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING IN THE CITY.

AFTER CONDUCTING MY OWN RESEARCH, SPEAKING WITH LOCAL RESIDENTS ABOUT HOW THE LACK OF

[00:25:02]

SUPPORT AND COMMUNICATION ON BEHALF OF ABILENE HOUSING AUTHORITY, I AM ADVOCATING RESIDENT HOUSING COMMITTEE, WHICH WOULD GIVE TENANTS A VOICE AND CONTROL OF OUR FUTURE AND LIVELIHOODS FOR OUR CHILDREN. THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCIL HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? >> SO THIS WILL COME BACK TO US AT WHAT POINT?

>> 30-DAY WINDOW TO ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC'S INPUT. WHAT DAY WOULD THAT BE, ROBERT?

>> HE SAID JULY 12TH DURING HIS PRESENTATION. >> THAT'S ACCURATE, YES.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTION OF THE COUNCIL? THIS WAS FOR PRESENTATION ONLY. AND SO WE WILL LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS ON THE MATTER ON JULY 12TH. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.

WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 9. AND WE'LL ASK MICHAEL RICE, CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THIS

[9. Presentation: Receive a Presentation, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing on the concept of a Public Improvement District (Michael Rice)]

ITEM. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. THIS IS AN ITEM FOR PRESENTATION, DISCUSSION AND PUBLIC HEARING ONLY. TODAY WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE THAT WOULD LIKE TO DO A PRESENTATION ON A PID, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. TOOL USED IN SOME COMMUNITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT. AT THIS TIME, WITH YOUR APPROVAL, I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE ROBERT RIVERA, HE HAS A SHORT TEN SLIDE PRESENTATION HE WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE TO YOU

IF THAT IS OKAY. OKAY. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ROBERT RIVERA, AN HONOR TO BE HERE IN ABILENE.

CITY MANAGER, CITY STAFF AND CITIZENS OF ABILENE. I AM WITH FMS BONDS.

WE ARE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT UNDERWRITERS. MYSELF AND MY ASSOCIATE WILL SPEAK BRIEFLY TO YOU THIS MORNING REGARDING THE TOOL, THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, WE'RE NOT HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR OR AGAINST ANY PARTICULAR PROJECT.

JUST INFORM THE CITY OF ABILENE REGARDING THE TOOL THAT EXISTS FOR ALL MUNICIPALITIES HERE ACROSS THE STATE. BEFORE I INTRODUCE TRIP, I'LL GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF US AND OUR FIRM. WE HAVE BEEN IN BUSINESS HERE IN THE STATE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, WE ARE THE TOP UNDERWRITING FIRM IN THE STATE. WE ARE THE ONES WHO WILL TAKE THE BONDS TO MARKET. SINCE THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE LITERALLY HAVE UNDER-WRITTEN EVERY TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL APPROVED PID IN THE STATE. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE EXCITED TO SHARE WITH YOU. THE CITY OF ABILENE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME, PROFESSIONALLY AS WELL. MY FATHER GRADUATED FROM MURRAY AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THAT OUR FAMILY AND FOUNDATION BEGAN HERE IN THE CITY OF ABILENE. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME TO BE HERE. I RECENTLY ALSO CAME OFF OF THE ARLINGTON CITY COUNCIL, WHERE I SERVED FOR 12 YEARS AND AM MOST GRATEFUL FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THE CITY OF ABILENE.

SO TRIP DAVENPORT WILL COME UP AND WE'LL BEGIN THE PRESENTATION.

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'LL TRY TO MAKE THIS RELATIVELY QUICK. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE STOP ME, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU ALL MAY HAVE. SO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IS A GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY WHERE THE LANDOWNER OF THE PROPERTY WILL PETITION THE CITY COUNCIL AND ASK TO BE ASSESSED SOME LEVEL OF ASSESSMENT TO USE FOR ELIGIBLE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ITEMS. CITIES ACROSS THE STATE UTILIZE THIS TOOL AND WE'RE SEEING PARTICULARLY WITH COVID AND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS DONE TO CITIES, WE'RE SEEING MORE AND MORE COMMUNITIES UTILIZE THIS TOOL IN LIEU OF 380 AGREEMENTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. IT TRULY PUTS THE BURDEN OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE RISK ON THE LANDOWNER WHO OWNS PROPERTY INSTEAD OF SUBSIDIZING DEVELOPMENT FROM THE GENERAL TAX BASE. PIDS CAN FUN A MYRIAD OF ITEMS, LANDSCAPE, WATER SEWAGE, STREET, EXPANSIVE, FLEXIBLE TOOL WHEN YOU LOOK AT ELIGIBLE ITEMS UNDER THE PID STATUTE.

THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT TYPES OF P IDS, CASH FLOW PID, WHICH SOME COMMUNITIES REQUIRE AND ANY SUBDIVISIONS. HOA ON STEROIDS BECAUSE OF THE LIEN, ASSESSMENT LIEN IS A

[00:30:11]

GOVERNMENTAL CHARGE. DEBT P IDS. TAKE THE ASSESSMENT AND YOU MONETIZE THE ASSESSMENT THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS. DOESN'T IMPACT THE GENERAL TAX BASE. BEING AN AA PLUS CITY, I KNOW THAT YOU'RE VERY SENSITIVE TO YOUR RATING. THESE ARE LAND SECURED FINANCING NON-RECOURSE TO THE CITY AND NON-RECOURSE TO THE DEVELOPER. HERE IS JUST A VERY SMALL SAMPLE OF COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE UTILIZED P IDS FOR THE FUNDING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.

MOST OF THESE ARE EITHER MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES THAT ARE HIGHLY AMENITY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, MIXED USE, RETAIL TYPE PROJECTS. AGAIN, ALL THE WAY FROM THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY UP THE I-34 CORRIDOR, TO NORTH OF DALLAS. AND ACROSS THE STATE.

ALL THE WAY TO EL PASO. TWO COMMUNITIES ARE USING THIS TOOL TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT.

IF BONDS ARE ISSUED, THERE IS A LOT OF SAFEGUARDS PUT IN PLACE. THESE ARE GENERALLY NON-RATED BONDS. WHEN AND IF THEY GET ISSUED. THEY'RE ONLY SOLD TO LARGE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS. SO THE GOLDMAN SACHS, THE LARGE INSTITUTIONS BUY THESE.

WHEN WE LEVY THE ASSESSMENT AND ISSUE THE BONDS, IT'S BASICALLY LENDING $0.33 ON THE DOLLAR BASED ON WHATEVER VALUE IS CREATED OUT THERE. SO IF THE VALUE IS $12 MILLION, WE'RE ONLY ISSUING $4 MILLION. THERE ARE DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUNDS CREATED TO HELP PROTECT INVESTORS AND CITIES IF THERE IS EVER ANY KIND OF SLOWDOWN ISSUES.

ALL OF THE PRIVATE SOURCES OF CAPITAL THAT NEED TO BE UTILIZED TO DELIVER A FINISHED PRODUCT ARE SECURED. EQUITY BANK, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

WE ALSO LOOK AT THIRD PARTY DEMAND. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS THIRD PARTY DEMAND FOR THE PROJECT. WE TYPICALLY WILL SEE IN A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY BUILDER CONTRACTS. ON A COMMERCIAL MIXED USE TYPE PROJECTS, WE WILL WANT TO SEE LOIS OR LEASES SIGNED UP. ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ON THE BOND ISSUE WILL BE SUMMARIZED IN AN OFFERING DOCUMENT. AND TAKEN TO THE MARKET.

THE TYPICALLY BUILD IN A COUPLE OF YEARS OF CAPITALIZED INTEREST, WHICH IS COMMON.

ASSESSMENT AGAIN IS ATTACHED TO THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND SO IF THERE IS EVER AN ISSUE, THE INVESTORS ARE LOOKING TO THAT PROPERTY FOR REPAYMENT.

THEY'RE NOT LOOKING FOR THE GENERAL TAX BASE TO BE IMPACTED.

SO THESE TYPES OF TRANSACTIONS ARE NOT RISK-LESS. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT CITIES UNDERSTAND THAT. A LOT OF DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER TEAMS WILL SAY THAT THESE ARE RISK-LESS TRANSACTIONS. THAT IS JUST NOT THE CASE. YOU KNOW, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE PROJECT DOESN'T TAKE OFF. AND IF THAT IS THE CASE, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL HAVE PROCEEDS WITH A THIRD-PARTY TRUSTEE THAT CAN PAY DOWN THOSE BONDS.

AGAIN, I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WE HAVE SUITABILITY TO THE BOND INVESTORS.

WE'RE ONLY SELLING THESE TO VERY HIGH NET WORTH OR LARGE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS THAT UNDERSTAND THE RISK. THERE IS ADMINISTRATIVE RISK FOR THE CITIES.

TYPICALLY THE CITIES WILL HIRE A THIRD-PARTY PID ADMINISTRATOR THAT MANAGES ALL OF THIS.

NEVERTHELESS, YOUR FINANCE DIRECTOR AND OTHERS WILL INVEST THEIR TIME AND ENERGY INTO THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS. IF FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU HAD A DECLINING HOME VALUE OR A DEFAULT BY INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER, THE CITY WILL COVENANT THAT YOU WILL COLLECT THE ASSESSMENT JUST LIKE YOU DO TAXES. AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS AN ISSUE AS TO DETERMINING UNDERLYING VALUE. TYPICALLY THERE IS A THIRD-PARTY APPRAISAL THAT GETS PUT IN PLACE TO HELP MITIGATE THAT ISSUE.

SO THIS IS A GROUP OF PROFESSIONALS THAT WORK ON THESE TYPES OF TRANSACTIONS.

AS YOU'LL SEE, ON THAT FIRST LINE THIS IS THE FOLKS THAT REPRESENT THE CITY ON THESE TYPES OF TRANSACTIONS. YOU'LL HAVE YOUR STAFF, YOU'LL HAVE YOUR CITY ATTORNEY.

MCCALL PARKER IS YOUR BOND COUNSEL. HILLTOP SECURITIES IS YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR. THE CITY HAS AN APPRAISER AND PID ADMINISTRATOR, WE'RE IN THE

[00:35:01]

CENTER BOX WHERE OUR INTERESTS ARE ALIGNED WITH THE CITY, BUT ULTIMATELY BOND INVESTORS ARE WHO WE REPRESENT. AND THEN THE DEVELOPER WILL BRING IN A TEAM OF ATTORNEYS AND ENGINEERS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. THEN ON THE RIGHT IS A TIMELINE OF PROCESSING A PID.

VERY SIMILAR WHEN YOU ISSUE GO BONDS, YOU HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SO FORTH.

THIS IS MECHANICALLY HOW THE ASSESSMENTS WORK. ONCE THE BONDS ARE ISSUED, THE FUNDS GO TO A THIRD-PARTY TRUSTEE PICKED BY THE CITY. THE DEVELOPER OR WHOEVER IS DOING THE PROJECT PUTS IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE CITY COMES AND INSPECTS THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THEIR REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN THE CITY TELLS THE TRUSTEE THIS IMPROVEMENTS IN THE GROUND, YOU CAN PAY THE DEVELOPER FOR THE COST, THE AUTHORIZED COSTS. ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE THERE, YOU HAVE A LANDOWNER, THE HOMEOWNER WHO PAYS THEIR ASSESSMENT TO THE COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR, JUST LIKE THEY WOULD A TAX. AND THEN THAT GOES THROUGH THE CITY TO THE TRUSTEE FOR REPAYMENT OF THE BONDS. SO A HOMEOWNER OR LANDOWNER THAT HAS PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT WILL RECEIVE THEIR TAX BILL AND IT WILL SAY THE COUNTY, THE CITY, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THEN THE PID ASSESSMENT. ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE PID, IS THAT THE ASSESSMENT IS FIXED AND CAN NEVER GO UP. ONCE THAT LIEN IS PUT IN PLACE, IT'S FIXED. IF IT'S A THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR FOR A HOMEOWNER, IT NEVER INCREASES.

AS THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY GOES UP. WITH AN AD VALOREM, THE MUD TAX WILL CONTINUE TO GO UP AS THE VALUE GOES UP ON THE PROPERTY. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE THAT A NATIONAL HOMEOWNER USED. THEY PURCHASED A PROPERTY WITH A PID ON IT, RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET WITH A PROPERTY WITH AN AD VALOREM. IF YOU COME AND BUY A HOUSE IN MY PID, OVER THE 30 YEARS OF THE PID, YOU'LL SAVE APPROXIMATELY $54,000.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I KNOW THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR

PRESENTATION. >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. COULD YOU CLARIFY SOMETHING.

YOU TALK ABOUT THE RISK EXPOSURE TO THE CITY AND ULTIMATELY THE TAXPAYER.

IN A SITUATION WHERE THE ECONOMY GOES SOUTH AND THE LANDOWNERS EITHER CANNOT OR REFUSE TO PAY THE PID ASSESSMENT, THERE IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY IN THE DEBT RESERVE FUNDS, CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS, ALL PID FUNDS ARE DEPLETED, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE

DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PID BONDS? >> IF IT'S A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, THE HOMEOWNER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT.

IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO, IT IS FORECLOSED UPON, THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY IS FORECLOSED UPON.

FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE IS NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY THE BONDS BASED ON THAT, IT'S A BOND HOLDER RISK. SO P IDS ARE PURPOSELY STRUCTURED, THIS IS ONE OF THE REASON CITIES LIKE THIS, IT TRANSFERS THE RISK FROM THE CITY'S GENERAL TAX BASE TO THE BOND HOLDER. THE INTEREST RATES ARE GOING TO BE HIGHER THAN YOUR GO BONDS.

INVESTORSER ARE BEING COMPENSATED FOR THAT RISK. >> TO STATE IT A DIFFERENT WAY.

WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THAT THROUGH THE USE OF A PID AT NO TIME WILL THE CITY OF ABILENE

FULL FAITH AND CREDIT BE ASKED TO BE APPLIED >> 100 PERCENT CORRECT.

>> PERFECT. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD, RIGHT NOW THE MUNICIPAL MARKETS FOR BOND ISSUANCE, THEY'VE IMPROVED A LITTLE BIT, BUT THEY ARE NOT ROBUST.

WHAT IS THE MARKET CONDITIONS FOR PID BONDS TODAY? >> PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT LAST WEEK, WE PRICED A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FINANCING. MIXED USE PROJECT IN SAN MARCUS, TEXAS, WE WERE ABLE TO SECURE FIVE AND A HALF PERCENT AVERAGE COUPON.

WE WERE PLEASED WITH IT. FIRST COMMERCIAL PID TO GO INTO MARKET NATIONALLY SINCE COVID.

AND WE WERE FIVE TIMES OVER-SUBSCRIBED. WE ACTUALLY WENT INTO THE MARKET AT FIVE AND THREE QUARTERS. BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH

[00:40:02]

DEMAND FOR IT, WE WERE ABLE TO LOWER THE INTEREST RATE TO FIVE AND A HALF PERCENT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL? >> SO THE BOUNDARIES BASED ON THE PROPERTY OWNER COMING TO YOU AND SAYING THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO PUT IN. IT'S COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY?

>> YES, SIR. >> WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT EXPIRES?

THE BOND IS PAID OFF. DOES THE PID DISAPPEAR? >> THE ASSESSMENT GOES AWAY.

AND THEN THAT'S PAID AS PART OF THE PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT. >> YES, SIR.

>> COLLECTION ITSELF OF THE MONEY. >> YES, SIR.

SO THE ASSESSMENT IS PUT ON THAT PROPERTY, SO THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR TO IT IS NOT GOING TO HAVE THE ASSESSMENT ON IT. SO IT'S GOING TO HAVE A HIGHER TAX BURDEN, IF YOU WILL, VIA THE ASSESSMENT ON THAT PROPERTY. AND THE REVENUE, THAT

ASSESSMENT GOES TO PAY THE BOND. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

SO I GUESS MORE SO AROUND THE INFORMATION BEING TRANSLATED TO THE NEW BUYER.

SO WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THAT? AGENT, TITLE COMPANY, TAXING ENTITIES?

>> ALL OF THE ABOVE. GREAT ONE OF THE BEST POINTS THAT WE GET FROM A COUNCIL MEMBER, AS IT RELATES TO THE QUESTIONS, BECAUSE THE DISCLOSURE OF THAT ASSESSMENT IS IMPORTANT. AND REALLY WHAT WE SEE IS IT'S NOT THE FIRST HOME BUYER THAT YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH. IT'S USUALLY THE SECOND OR THIRD HOME BUYER.

WHEN THEY SEE THAT ASSESSMENT, THEY'RE KNOCKING ON YOUR DOOR. NOT KNOCKING ON THE DEVELOPER WHO IS NOW GONE. WE HAVE A DISCLOSURE PROCESS. TYPICALLY TITLE COMPANY, THERE IS PAPERWORK WHENEVER YOU DO YOUR LOANS. THERE IS ALSO A PUBLIC RECORD.

SO WE'LL FILE A NOTICE THAT THERE IS AN ASSESSMENT ON THIS PROPERTY.

SO WHEN THERE IS A TITLE SURGE, THAT SHOWS UP. AND WE SHOW LANDOWNER CONSENT, LITERALLY ANYBODY WITH A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY HAS TO CONSENT TO THIS ASSESSMENT.

EVEN BY FUNCTION OF LAW IT IS A SUPERIOR LIEN. WE WANT THE BANKS TO ACKNOWLEDGE US THAT THEY'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THE LIEN AND THEN THE END USER HAS TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT THROUGH MULTIPLE STEPS IN THE PROCESS. WE ACTUALLY WORKED WITH THE LEGISLATURE TML, THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION TO ADD MORE STRINGENT LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE TO REQUIRE MORE DISCLOSURE. IT UNFORTUNATELY DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH FOR VARIOUS REASONS. BUT WE RECOMMEND, BECAUSE THERE IS NO REASON WHY THE CITY COULDN'T REQUIRE EVEN ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

SO WE WOULD BE OPEN AND WELCOME TO SUPPORT YOU AND ANY ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES THAT YOU

WOULD LIKE TO INSERT ABOVE AND BEYOND THE PROCESS. >> MORE SO MY CONCERN, JUST THE

TRANSPARENCY PIECE. >> 100 PERCENT. >> PEOPLE MAY NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE INHERITING. AND I THINK TO LEAVE THAT TO THE GUISE OF AN AGENT OR A NEW

WORKER FOR A TAXING COMPANY, THAT IS ONE OF MY CONCERNS. >> SO WE RECOMMEND SIGNAGE, IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO INTO THIS PROPERTY, THAT THERE IS SIGNAGE THAT YOU'RE IN A PID.

YOU'LL HAVE A THIRD PARTY PID ADMINISTRATOR THAT MANAGES THESE ASSESSMENTS.

A COUPLE OF FIRMS OUT THERE THAT HAVE A WEBSITE. SO YOU CAN CLICK ON THE LINK AND IT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR ANNUAL INSTALLMENT IS, WHAT IT'S IMPORTANT, WHICH IS IMPORTANT. BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND, WHEN YOU DO A PID, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME BENEFIT FOR THAT ASSESSMENT.

WHY AM I PAYING THIS EXTRA ASSESSMENT TO LIVE OR WORK HERE.

SO THOSE TYPES OF THINGS NEED TO BE DISCLOSED TO THE HOMEOWNERS, FROM A POLITICAL STANDPOINT, IT HELPS NOT ONLY THE CURRENT COUNCIL BUT FUTURE COUNCILS.

AGAIN, YOU CAN MAKE IT AS STRINGENT AS YOU FEEL NECESSARY.

WE HAVE A CERTAIN BASELINE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF ANGRY FOLKS IN THE THE FUTURE TO SAY WHY IS THIS AN ASSESSMENT, AND THEY REFUSE TO PAY IT.

IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND IT'S A SENSITIVE TOPIC THAT WE ALL TRY TO STAY AHEAD OF.

>> FOLLOW-UP FROM YOUR ANSWER. SO IF A DEVELOPER DOES AN AREA WITH 50 HOMES, HE BUILDS THE FIRST HOME AND THERE IS A PID AMOUNT, SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH HOMES GET BUILT, TEN YEARS TO BUILD OUT ALL OF THE HOMES, ARE THEY ALL PAYING THE SAME AMOUNT?

ACCELERATES REPAYMENT OR DOES THE PAYMENT AMOUNT SHRINK? >> THEY ALL MAKE THE SAME PAYMENT. ASSESSMENT IS BASED ON BENEFIT. 50 FOOT LOT VERSUS A 70 FOOT LOT. 70 FOOT LOT HAS A HIGHER BENEFIT THAN THE 50 FOOT LOT.

SO THEIR ASSESSMENT WILL BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER. BUT ALL THE 50S WILL HAVE THE SAME ASSESSMENT ON IT. EVEN IF IT'S DONE TEN YEARS LATER, ALL OF THE 50S WILL HAVE

THE SAME ASSESSMENT ON IT. >> SO THE DEVELOPER IS PAYING PART OF THE PID UNTIL HE

[00:45:05]

ACTUALLY DEVELOPS AND BUILDS THE HOUSE AND SELLS. >> YES, SIR.

THE ONLY DISCLOSURE WE HAVE ON THE CITY IS KIND OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TYPE STUFF, LOCATION, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOUR MAKE-UP OF THE CITIZENRY LOOKS LIKE, BULK OF THE DISCLOSURE IS ON THE DEVELOP, DEVELOPER FINANCIAL INFORMATION, BANK LOAN, EQUITY. WE DO CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS. WE DO LITIGATION SEARCHS. WE DO, WE HAVE A THOROUGH DUE DILIGENCE PROCESS, MORE STRINGENT THAN A BANK DOES. ALL THAT INFORMATION WE SUMMARIZE INTO THE OFFERING DOCUMENT. SO WE WANT TO KNOW THAT ONE, THAT THE DEVELOPER KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING. AND TWO, CAN THEY FUND THIS PROJECT AND ARE THERE SAFEGUARDS PUT IN PLACE IF HE HITS A HICCUP, OR SHE HITS A HICCUP. AND THEN CAN THEY HOLD ON TO THOSE ASSESSMENTS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AND MAKE THOSE ASSESSMENTS, HAVE THE LIQUIDITY TO MAKE THE ASSESSMENTS

PAYMENTS. >> THANK YOU. >> ONE FINAL QUESTION, MAYOR, IF I MAY. FROM A STANDPOINT OF A RATING AGENCY, HOW DO RATING AGENCIES LOOK AT BONDS IN COMPARISON TO THE CITY'S DEBT PORTFOLIO, DO THEY COUNT AGAINST THEM OR

TOWARDS THEM? >> GREAT QUESTION. ULTIMATELY DEFER TO YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND YOUR BOND COUNSEL. BUT MY EXPERIENCE IS RATING AGENCIES DO VIEW THE OVERLAPPING ASPECTS OF IT IMPORTANT.

BECAUSE THIS WILL BE A DEBT ON TOP OF OTHER CITY DEBT. SO THEY DON'T, IF YOU GO IN AND ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPER TO DO $3 PER 100 ASSESSMENT, THAT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE FROWNED UPON. MANAGEMENT ISSUE, HOW COULD YOU LET THAT HAPPEN.

40, 50, WE SEE IT AS HIGH AS A BUCK 50 IN SOME PARTS OF THE STATE.

SO THE BEST INDICATION FOR US AS UNDER-WRITERS IS THIRD PARTY DEMAND.

BECAUSE ALL OF THIS HAS TO BE DISCLOSED TO END USERS. NATIONAL HOME BUILDER OR A COMMERCIAL USER, THEY HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THOSE ASSESSMENTS. IF I HAVE THIRD PARTY DEMANDS SAYING YEAH, THIS ASSESSMENT MAKES SENSE, IT'S THE BEST INDICATION FOR ME.

BUT THE RATING AGENCY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU AS A COUNCIL DIDN'T OVER SHOOT OR OVER ALLOW FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. GREAT QUESTION. BUT AS IT GOES TO YOUR GO, THE ONLY THING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IS MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF IT.

DID YOU ALLOW A DEVELOPER TO OVER SHOOT. SO THERE IS LOTS OF SAFEGUARDS TO HELP PROTECT THE CITY FROM NOT GETTING TO THAT POINT. I'VE NEVER SEEN IT HAPPEN IN THE STATE. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, WE HAD ABOUT A BILLION OF THIS TYPE OF BOND ISSUED AND WE NEVER HAD A DEFAULT BECAUSE OF THE SAFEGUARDS PUT IN PLACE.

NOT SAYING THAT IT CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT IT HASN'T HAPPENED. >> SO THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION TODAY. IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO APPROVE AT SOME POINT TO ALLOW P IDS. WHENEVER ONE IS BEING CONSIDERED, IS THAT THEN BROUGHT TO US AND WE HAVE TO PROVIDE FINAL APPROVAL? SO WE WOULD HAVE INPUT FROM

COUNCIL AND A BODY LIKE YOU NOT -- >> LET ME WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THAT STUFF. PID, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PETITION.

PETITION RECEIVED. THERE IS A DEVELOPER INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT THIS, THIS IS WHY WE ASKED TO COME AND HELP UNDERSTAND WHAT A PID IS. WE WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THIS ON EXECUTIVE SESSION. I'LL GIVE YOU MY OWN PERSONAL OPINIONS ON P IDS FROM AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT. AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE PETITION. I DO ANTICIPATE ONE BEING RECEIVED, ESPECIALLY IF THE COUNCIL DETERMINES THIS IS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOL THEY'RE INTERESTED IN PURSUING.

THE DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT GOING INTO DETAILS, IS A SOLID DEVELOPMENT ON PAPER.

WE STILL HAVE SOME WORK TO DO FROM AN INFRASTRUCTURE STANDPOINT.

E STILL HAVE WORK TO DO FROM AN ANALYSIS STANDPOINT. BUT I KNOW THE DEVELOPER IS INTERESTED IN USING THIS AS A MECHANISM TO HELP FUND THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS.

SO THE PROCESS WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY THE PETITION COMES IN, THE COUNCIL LOOKS AT IT, THEY DETERMINE IT'S ELIGIBLE. THEY CREATE THE PID DISTRICT. THERE IS A WHOLE PROCESS THEN FOR DETERMINING THE PROJECTS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THAT. YOU LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF VALUE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECTS VERSUS THE AMOUNT OF VALUE THAT WILL BE BUILT WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE END OF THE PROJECT, SO YOU GET YOUR LOAN TO VALUE RATIOS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEBT THAT MAY BE ISSUED. THIS IS WHERE FSM COMES INTO

[00:50:03]

PLAY. HELP MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS NOT AN OVERREACH AS THEY'VE INDICATED AND THEN WE'LL WORK WITH THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT TO MAKE SURE THE ASSESSMENTS ARE MADE AND LIKELY ENTER INTO A THIRD-PARTY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT.

BECAUSE THIS IS A SPECIALIZED AREA. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T MISSTEP. SO I THINK HAVING A THIRD-PARTY ADMINISTRATOR OF THE PID DISTRICT AND THE BONDS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT WOULD BE A WISE AND PRUDENT THING IF THAT IS WHAT COUNCIL WANTED TO DO. YOU GUYS CAN ADD WHAT YOU WANT TO THAT.

>> HE IS EXACTLY RIGHT. THIS DIRECTS YOU BACK TO THIS SLIDE.

I WOULDN'T CONSIDER THIS THE INITIAL WORK GROUP MEETING. BUT YOU'LL ENTER A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER. A LOT OF THESE THINGS WE KIND OF PUT INTO THAT DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT. YOU'RE GOING TO DO AN ASSESSMENT NOT TO EXCEED A CERTAIN TAX RATE EQUIVALENT. AND THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET A CERTAIN THRESHOLD.

SO THERE IS A LOT OF THINGS THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT WILL GO INTO A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT AND THEN THE DEVELOPER WILL ULTIMATELY SUBMIT A PETITION AND SAY PLEASE, WILL YOU CREATE A PID AND LEVY THIS ASSESSMENT AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

THERE IS A LOT OF KIND OF BEHIND THE SCENES WORK THAT GETS DONE BEFORE ALL THAT TAKES PLACE. AND THEN AS IT RELATES TO THE THIRD-PARTY PID ADMINISTRATOR, I'VE ONLY SEEN ONE CITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS TRY TO TAKE THIS ON AND IT DIDN'T WORK OUT SO WELL. JUST LIKE YOU HAVE A FINANCIAL ADVISOR, BOND COUNSEL, IT'S PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA TO CONSIDER A THIRD-PARTY PID ADMINISTRATOR.

>> QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AGAIN, THIS IS FOR CONSIDERATION ONLY.

NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN TODAY. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD TO GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO FURTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT THE

[10. Resolution: Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on Adding Additional Liability Coverage with Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TMLIRP) (Brenda Alexander)]

OPPORTUNITY. WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER 10 AND WE'LL INVITE BRENDA

ALEXANDER, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES TO PRESENT THIS ITEM. >> GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. BRENDA ALEXANDER, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES.

TODAY WE WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT TO YOU A RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT SOME LIABILITY COVERAGES THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE THROUGH THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL LEAGUE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL RISK TOOL, WHICH I KNOW YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH.

OKAY. SO JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, BRIEF OVERVIEW AND AFTER THAT, I'VE GOT ALSO RODNEY PETERS HERE WITH THE TEXAS MUNICIPAL, TMLIRP TO ANSWER ANY COVERAGE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, AND THEN STANLEY ALSO WILL BE ABLE TO ADDRESS LEGAL QUESTIONS. WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING SOME OF THESE COVERAGES OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS. BACKGROUND, THE COUNCIL RESOLUTION, THERE WAS A RESOLUTION ADOPTED IN 1979, THAT ESTABLISHED THE SELF-INSURANCE PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE. AT THAT TIME THERE WAS 500,000 APPROPRIATED FOR THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND. THE CITY IS SELF-INSURED AS YOU KNOW, FOR MOST EXPOSURES.

GENERAL LIABILITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY, AUTOMOBILE, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS AND CYBER LIABILITY. BEING SELF-INSURED, THE CITY LITIGATES AND SETTLES ITS OWN LIABILITY CLAIMS. THE CITY ALSO ALREADY HAS LIABILITY COVERAGES IN PLACE, HOWEVER. WE DO HAVE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY COVERAGE FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH DISTRICT, AS WELL AS OUR COACH EMPLOYEE CLINIC. WE HAVE EVENTS LIABILITY COVERAGE FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER AND WE HAVE AVIATION LIABILITY FOR THE AIRPORT.

AND AT THIS TIME THE CITY IS DESIRING TO STAY SELF-INSURED FOR AUTOMOBILE LIABILITIES.

SO THAT IS NOT PART OF TODAY'S RECOMMENDATION. STANLEY'S OFFICE DID A SURVEY OF SISTER SITS THAT INDICATED ONLY THREE OF THE NINE WHO RESPONDED ARE STILL SELF-INSURED. THE MAJORITY HAVE MOVED TO BEING FULLY INSURED.

IF WE END UP ACCEPTING THESE COVERAGES, THE CASES WOULD BE LITIGATED BY OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS, NOT IN-HOUSE. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF LIABILITY SETTLEMENTS OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS THAT HAVE EXCEEDED $50,000 AND THOSE DO INCLUDE ATTORNEY FEES AND OTHER COSTS TO SETTLE THE CLAIMS. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE

[00:55:03]

AREA OF ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, THE CITY HAD SETTLED 1.4 MILLION IN ERRORS AND OMISSIONS CLAIMS. PRIMARILY FROM DISCRIMINATION OR WRONGFUL TERMINATION SUITS.

SO THE LIABILITY COVERAGES AS WE DISCUSSED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY HERE SHOW A RECOMMENDED COVERAGE LEVEL OF $2 MILLION FOR EACH OCCURRENCE AND FOUR MILLION IN THE AGGREGATE. WITH $50,000 DEDUCTIBLES FOR EACH OCCURRENCE.

YOU CAN SEE THERE THE PRORATED CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT WOULD TOTAL $82,371, SHOULD YOU DECIDE TO ACCEPT THIS WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF JUNE 1ST, THAT WOULD RUN THROUGH OCTOBER 1ST, THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR AND THEN STARTING UP WITH FISCAL YEAR 21, THAT WOULD ANNUALIZE TO $220,016. AT THIS TIME WE ARE RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE OF THESE PROPOSALS FROM TML. AND IN YOUR PACKETS, YOU HAD DOCUMENTS THAT SHOWED THE COVERAGES, THE COVERAGE DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS WHAT IS EXCLUDED, WHAT IS INCLUDED AND THAT CAN GET PRETTY DETAILED. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO OPEN IT UP

FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> QUESTIONS OF MS. ALEXANDER

FROM COUNCIL. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE PAST FIVE YEARS.

ON PAGE 27 OF 35, IT SAYS LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, THE SECOND ITEM, 458,417 IN ATTORNEY FEES.

AND THIS IT SAYS THAT THE LIMITED LIABILITY FUND FOR PROCEEDINGS WITH REGARDS TO THE ATTORNEY'S COVERAGE IS ONLY TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS PER OCCURRENCE.

THAT WAS PRIMARILY FROM ONE OCCURRENCE. SO WHAT AM I MISSING THERE?

>> OKAY. I'M GOING TO LET RODNEY ANSWER THOSE.

>> MY NAME IS RODNEY PETERS, I KNOW THAT IS IN THERE. BUT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT FROM THE WHOLE LIABILITY. WHEN WE GO IN FOR LIABILITY CASES, ON ALL OF THEM.

WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE A DEFENSE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS DIFFERENT IS OUR DEFENSE COSTS ARE NOT BUILT INSIDE THAT TWO MILLION, FOUR MILLION THAT SHE SHOWED UP THERE. SO IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE, I CAN'T SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT ALL THAT WAS IN THERE. BUT WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS, UNLESS WE'RE NOT COVERING THE CLAIM, WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE YOU DEFENSE COSTS OUTSIDE THAT LIMIT.

SO IF A LOT OF THESE CASES ACTUALLY WHEN THEY GO, WHEN THEY GO TO TRIAL, THERE MAY NOT BE A CLAIM PAYMENT MADE TO THE CLAIMANT. BUT WE MIGHT SPEND $750,000 IN DEFENSE COSTS. THE ACTUAL DEFENSE COST, WHEN IT COMES TO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS, THAT IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF INTENT, WAS THERE AN INTENTIONAL ACT THAT HAS OCCURRED. IF THERE IS AN INTENTIONAL ACT THAT HAS OCCURRED, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A RESERVATION OF RIGHTS ON ANY LIABILITY CLAIM THAT WE FILED, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A RESERVATION OF RIGHTS LETTER. THAT IS SORT OF STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO DEFEND THIS UNTIL THERE IS SOMETHING THAT SAYS IT MEETS ONE OF THE EXCLUSIONS. WHICH NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN, THAT IS GOING TO BE BECAUSE OF AN INTENTIONAL ACT. SO IF THERE IS NOT AN INTENTIONAL ACT, IF IT WAS -- I MEAN, THINGS HAPPEN AND TO PROVE INTENTIONAL ACT IS A TOUGH THING TO PROVE.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WHAT WAS THAT PERSON'S MOTIVATION? >> OKAY.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT WE PAID THREE TIMES OVER WHAT WE PAID IN SETTLEMENTS?

>> WE HAVE NO GUARANTEES AS TO WHAT TOMORROW HOLDS. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THAT FIVE-YEAR LOOK BACK, YOU'RE CORRECT, IT DOES NOT PAY FOR ITSELF.

BUT SOMETIMES YOU NEED INSURANCE AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW YOU NEEDED IT.

MAYBE A SILLY WAY OF PUTTING IT. BUT WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT

[01:00:01]

WHAT OUR POTENTIAL EXPOSURE IS AND IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND OTHER AREAS, CLAIMS ARE CONTINUING TO INCREASE AND THE RISK OF LIABILITY IS INCREASING AS WELL IN SOCIETY.

WE BELIEVE IT'S A PRUDENT TIME TO CONSIDER THIS COVERAGE. >> IF I CAN ADD TO THAT TOO, INSURANCE IS JUST THE ART OF RISK TOLERANCE. HOW MUCH RISK DO YOU TOLERATE AND HOW MUCH COVERAGE DO YOU HAVE. AS WE MOVE INTO THE FUTURE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. I KNOW WHAT OUR CURRENT SELF-INSURANCE FUND BALANCE IS. I KNOW THAT IT'S TIED HEAVILY TO OUR MEDICAL INSURANCE COSTS.

AND EACH YEAR WE STRUGGLE WITH FUNDING THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND BECAUSE OUR MEDICAL INSURANCE COSTS. SO MY PARTICULAR COMFORT LEVEL WITH OUR ABILITY TO TOLERATE RISK IS LOWER NOW THAN IT'S BEEN IN THE PAST BECAUSE OF THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS TO COVER IT. SO ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE BRINGING THESE OPTIONS FORWARD IS SO COUNCIL CAN HAVE THIS TYPE OF DISCUSSION, WHAT IS YOUR RISK TOLERANCE AND WHAT

ARE YOU WILLING TO HAVE EXPOSED OR NOT EXPOSED. >> AND THEN ON YOUR FIRST SLIDE YOU TALKED ABOUT HOW WHEN WE FIRST WENT TO A SELF-INSURANCE APPROACH, WE SET ASIDE FUNDS.

SO SINCE WE'RE GOING TO BE, PART OF THAT WAS WE WERE NOT PAYING PREMIUMS. SO JUST FROM MY RECOLLECTION, AND THE AUDIENCE BENEFIT AS WELL, SELF-INSURANCE FUND DESIGNATED THIS IS FOR HEALTH, THIS IS FOR AUTOMOBILE, THIS IS FOR POLICE, OR ERRORS,

OMISSIONS, OR IS IT JUST A POOL THAT WE PULL FROM. >> MIKE, ARE YOU HERE? MINDY IS HERE. I'M GOING TO GO OFF MEMORY, BUT MINDY WILL CORRECT ME I'M SURE.

WE HAVE OUR FUNDS POOLED IN ONE FUND. HOWEVER, WE HAVE ACCOUNT CODES THAT HELP IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE PROPORTIONAL AMOUNTS ARE. BUT WE USE ALL SOURCES IN THAT FUND TO COVER RISK. AND TO COVER PAYMENTS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED.

IS THAT CORRECT OR AM I WRONG? >> THAT IS CORRECT. WHEN WE BUDGET, WE'LL BUDGET IT FOR HEALTH CLAIMS FOR INSURANCE PREMIUMS, WHATEVER. IF SOMETHING THAT COMES IN, THAT IS NOT BUDGETED, IT COMES OUT OF THE ACTUAL FUND BALANCE, WHICH IS JUST A BALANCE.

WE BUDGET IT. DETAILED, WHATEVER THE FUND BALANCE IS WOULD BE WHAT, IT'S NOT SEPARATED INTO THIS IS FOR PRESCRIPTION, THIS IS FOR HEALTH, THIS IS FOR WHATEVER.

>> SO IF WE ADOPT THIS TODAY, FOR THE BUDGET CYCLE, IS IT TO SHIFT WHAT WE'RE DESIGNATING FOR ERRORS AND OMISSIONS FOR HEALTH OR ARE YOU REDUCING THE SELF-INSURANCE? WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT WITH THAT IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS TODAY?

>> WE STILL HAVE DEDUCTIBLES TO MEET IF THERE IS A RISK. MOST OF OUR CLAIMS ARE GOING TO BE OVER THE DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNT. THEREFORE, WE WILL BE MAKING AND WORKING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE LOCALLY TO COVER THOSE CLAIMS, I WOULD IMAGINE.

WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE DOLLARS IN THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND TO COVER THIS. THIS WOULD HELP US IN THE EVENT OF A LARGER EXPOSURE.

SO I DON'T ANTICIPATE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE SET ASIDE FOR ANY OF THESE.

WE DO NOT ACTIVELY SET ASIDE MONEY FOR THESE TYPES OF RISKS. WE SIMPLY HAVE MONEY IN A SELF-INSURANCE FUND. WHEN WE GET TO A POINT WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT IT, WE TRY TO PUT MORE IN IT. WE DON'T HAVE A BUDGETED ITEM FOR ANTICIPATED CLAIMS PER YEAR. WE SIMPLY TRIED TO KEEP A HEALTHY BALANCE IN THE SELF-INSURANCE FUND. WHICH AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, TYPICA

TYPICALLY GETS DELETED BECAUSE OF OUR HEALTH CLAIMS. >> IF IT'S SOMETHING UNDER SELF INSURANCE, THAT HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED, DOES THAT MEAN THAT WE HAVE A

REPRESENTATIVE FROM THEM AS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION NOW? >> SO I'VE ALWAYS HAD TMLIRP FROM EVERY CITY I'VE BEEN IN, LIABILITY STANDPOINT, POLICE COVERAGE, ALL OF THE THINGS LISTED HERE. TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS, TML WILL ASSIGN AN ATTORNEY.

THAT ATTORNEY WILL WORK WITH THE CITY'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND COUNCIL WILL BE KEPT INFORMED AND IN THE LOOP JUST LIKE WE NORMALLY DO. IS THAT FAIR?

>> DID I UNDERSTAND YOU TO SAY OTHER CITIES YOU WORKED AT HAVE ALWAYS HAD THIS?

>> CITY OF DENTON WAS SELF INSURED. EVERY CITY I'VE BEEN CITY

MANAGER OF, I'VE WORKED WITH TMLIRP. >> OF OUR PEER CITIES

>> HE MENTIONED ONLY THREE DID NOT, IF MY RECOLLECTION IS ACCURATE.

[01:05:01]

>> EVERYBODY ELSE HAS LIABILITY COVERAGE. >> QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL

PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING? >> STANLEY, WOULD THIS AFFECT THE AMOUNT OF STAFF THAT YOU

STILL NEED? >> IT WOULD NOT. I MEAN, WE WOULD STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT OF IN-HOUSE LITIGATION, AUTOMOBILES BEING ONE AND YOU KNOW, THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF EXCLUSIONS. THIS DOESN'T COVER EVERYTHING. TO SAY THAT YOU KNOW, ALL THE LITIGATION AND ALL OF THAT STUFF WILL SHIFT TO TMLIRP AND THEIR CONTRACT ATTORNEYS, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE. WE WOULD STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT OF IN-HOUSE STUFF.

OF COURSE, THERE IS OTHER ISSUES AS FAR AS SHIFTING, AS FAR AS ATTORNEY'S NEEDS IN OUR

OFFICE. IT WOULD NOT REDUCE MY STAFF. >> THANK YOU.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING ROBERT THAT YOU MENTIONED, JUST SO I CAN GET THIS. THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY A SAVINGS RIGHT NOW.

I THINK THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF THE

SELF-INSURANCE FUND TO PAY THIS, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YEAH.

THIS ISN'T GOING TO REDUCE OUR CURRENT SPEND. THIS WILL INCREASE OUR CURRENT

SPEND. >> WHAT IT'S DESIGNED TO DO IS TO HELP IN CASE WE DO HAVE SOMETHING BIG DOWN THE LINE TO HELP IN THE FUTURE. IS THAT AN EASY WAY TO SAY IT?

>> I'LL PUT IT THIS WAY. UNLESS WE ARE PREPARED TO DRAMATICALLY INCREASE THE FUNDING IN OUR SELF-INSURANCE FUND, I THINK WE NEED SOME SORT OF GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE AND THE COVERAGES, ERRORS, OMISSION, LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY, CYBER LIABILITY, THOSE SORTS OF ITEMS TO SERVE AS A SAFETY NET TO PROTECT THE TAXPAYER.

>> QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? STANLEY, YOU ARE SUPPORTIVE?

>> YEAH. I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S A FISCAL QUESTION.

I THINK WITHOUT THESE BIG HICCUPS, MAYBE WE'RE SPENDING MORE MONEY.

BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A BIG CASE LIKE WE HAD, WHICH IS GOING TO COME AROUND EVERY DECADE OR SO,

THEN IT MAKES FISCAL SENSE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF COVERAGE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF

COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD TO GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> ONCE AGAIN, DAVID SCHWARTZ. THANK YOU, COUNCIL. IT WAS A VERY ENLIGHTENING PRESENTATION. BUT YOU KNOW ON A PERSONAL LEVEL, A LOT OF TIMES YOU PAY INSURANCE, YOU PAY INSURANCE AND I'VE HAD A FEW FRIENDS MAKE AN OFFHAND COMMENT, ALL I DO IS PAY AND PAY AND PAY. AND THEY NEVER DO ANYTHING FOR ME.

IT WOULD BE THE SAME WITH THE CITY. THEY SAID THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE FUND. AND LIKE COUNCILMAN PRICE BROUGHT UP, THAT IS AN ADDITIONAL ON TOP OF THAT. SURE, YOU MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE, AND SURE YOU MIGHT NOT. THERE IS ALWAYS THE UNKNOWN OF THE FUTURE.

BUT IT'S JUST LIKE ON A PERSONAL LEVEL, OR IF YOU OWN A BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN PAY INSURANCE, YOU CAN PAY INSURANCE. LIKE I SAID, SOME FRIENDS SAID I PAY INSURANCE I MAY WANT TO GET IN A WRECK BECAUSE I PAY IT ALL OF THE TIME AND THEY DON'T EVER DO ANYTHING FOR ME. SO I WOULD THINK THERE SHOULD BE MORE CONSIDERATION, MAYBE BEFORE WE JUST JUMP INTO THIS. I KNOW THEY SAY MAYBE THERE WILL BE SOME BIG CASE ONCE A DECADE OR SOMETHING. BUT AGAIN, IT'S LIKE YOU SAID, WHETHER YOU ARE ON A BUSINESS OR PERSONAL LEVEL, THE PAYING OUT EVERY YEAR FOR HOPING THAT SOMETHING DOESN'T HAPPEN AND THEN YOU LOOK AT DOWN THE ROAD, X AMOUNT OF YEARS LATER, YOU REALIZE YOU KNOW, I PAID ALL OF THIS AND IF I WOULD HAVE PUT THIS INTO SOME TYPE OF INTEREST BEARING ACCOUNT, WHAT I WOULD ACHIEVE MAYBE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR SELF-INSURANCE FUND HAS ANY TYPE OF WAY, OR IF YOU COULD PUT SOMETHING IN SOMETHING THAT WOULD EARN INTEREST.

BUT IT'S SOMETHING I THOUGHT I WOULD THROW OUT THERE TO SEE IF IT'S A POSSIBILITY.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS. BUT YOU LOOK AT THE PAST, LIKE SINCE 1979, AND THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL.

>> THANK YOU. WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> ROBERT, TML WAS VERY SLOW TO PAY WHEN WE HAD A CLAIM ON OUR BUILDINGS.

[01:10:05]

AND THEN WE GOT A REDUCED AMOUNT ONCE THEY DID PAY. WHAT KIND OF GUARANTEE DO WE

HAVE THAT THEY WOULD STAND BEHIND THIS POLICY? >> SO I THINK TML HAS A PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF PAYING CLAIMS. I THINK IN REGARDING OUR HILL CLAIM, WE DISAGREED ON THE VALUE OF THE CLAIM. AND WE AVAILED OURSELVES OF OUR RIGHTS.

AND TML DEFENDED THEMSELVES. AND WE ENDED UP SETTLING ON A SOLUTION THAT WAS MUTUALLY AGREEABLE TO BOTH PARTIES. IT RESULTED IN A HIGHER PAYMENT THAN WHAT WE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN OTHERWISE. SO YOU COULD CALL THAT A WIN. BUT TML MAY ALSO SAY WELL, WE LIMITED OUR RISK FROM WHAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR, BECAUSE WE WERE ASKING FOR A MUCH LARGER AMOUNT THAN WHAT WE RECEIVED. THEY MAY CALL THAT A WIN. I HAVE NEVER BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE TML HASN'T HONORED THEIR POLICIES. APPRAISAL PROCESS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HILL CLAIM, THEY HAVE REMOVED FROM THE POLICY. I CALL IT THE ABILENE AMENDMENT. THEY HAVE AMENDED THE POLICY DOCUMENT SO IT'S CLEAR THAT CITIES DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE THAT ANYMORE. BUT I HAVE ALL OF THE TRUST, FAITH AND CONFIDENCE IN TML. ULTIMATELY TML IS AN ASSOCIATION OF CITIES WHO POOL TOGETHER THEIR FUNDS TO SHARE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT.

THEIR DNA IS PUBLIC SECTOR. BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS COMPRISED OF MAYORS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, CITY MANAGERS, WE'RE ALL IN THE SAME BUSINESS TOGETHER AND ULTIMATELY ALL TRY TO LOOK OUT FOR ONE ANOTHER'S NEEDS. I'M CONFIDENT THAT IF WE HAD A CLAIM AND IT WAS COVERED THEY

WOULD PAY THE CLAIM. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL? BEFORE US IS REMAINING BALANCE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING I GUESS JUNE 1ST, $82,000 AND THEN I GUESS THE BUDGET PROCESS AND OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE $330,000 FOR THE FISCAL NEXT

YEAR. CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL ACCEPT THE MOTION AND A SECOND.

>> SO MOVED. >> MOTION BY COUNCILMAN MCALISTER.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY COUNCILMAN RENTZ. >> HURT

>> NO. >> COUNCIL MEMBER RENTZ. >> YES.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER CRAVER. >> YES. >> MOTION CARRIES.

[11. Ordinance (Final Reading): Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on Amending Budget Ordinance No. 050-2019 to Include Updated Staffing Levels for the Fire Department (Cande Flores)]

>> ITEM NUMBER 11. WE'LL ASK CANDY FLORES, FIRE CHIEF TO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. CANDE FLORES, FIRE CHIEF. THE FINAL READING OF A PROPOSED BUDGET ORDINANCE AMENDMENT THAT COVERS STAFFING. CONVENIENTLY, MAY 29TH, CHIEF BRIGGS RETIRED. THAT PRESENTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT ALLOWED US TO APPOINT A FIRE MARSHAL, A QUALIFIED PERSON TO THE FIRE MARSHAL OFFICE. DOMINO EFFECT OF STAFFING. IN ORDER TO PUT THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THE RIGHT PLACES, I AM REQUESTING A CHANGE OF JUST OUR STAFFING STRUCTURE, NOT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS. SO I'M ASKING TO REDUCE THE CURRENT NUMBER OF FIRE CAPTAINS BY ONE POSITION AND TO INCREASE OUR CURRENT NUMBER OF FIRE LIEUTENANTS BY ONE POSITION.

SO THE NUMBER OF FIRE OFFICERS WILL REMAIN THE SAME. JUST A BIT OF CHANGE IN STRUCTURE. THIS WILL BE WHAT OUR CURRENT STRUCTURE WILL LOOK LIKE.

SOME OF THESE MOVES HAVE ALREADY TAKEN PLACE. OTHERS WILL TAKE PLACE ON MONDAY. CAPTAIN WILLIAMS IS NOW FIRE MARSHAL WILLIAMS. HE HAS ASSUMED THE ROLE OF BATTALION CHIEF WITH THAT APPOINTMENT.

THE PERSON WHO IS TAKING HIS ROLE IS NOT A CAPTAIN. SO THAT MAKES THE CHANGE

NECESSARY FOR SOME OF OUR STRUCTURE. >> AMENDED ON THE RIGHT.

THIS IS ALSO IN ATTACHMENT A. AND WHAT WILL BE PLACED IN THE ORDINANCE.

THIS CHANGE WILL CREATE A NEW LIEUTENANT POSITION, WHICH WILL HAVE TO BE FILLED THROUGH OUR PROMOTIONAL PROCESS. WE HAVE A CURRENT LIST SO WE WILL PULL THE NEXT PERSON ON THAT LIST TO PROMOTE. THIS WILL NOT TRIGGER A PROMOTIONAL PROCESS.

FUNDING IMPACT, WE'RE GOING TO SAVE THE CITY $11,000 BY MAKING THIS CHANGE.

DUE TO THE DIFFERENCE IN PAY FROM A CAPTAIN ONE TO A LIEUTENANT ONE.

[01:15:06]

ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. ANY QUESTIONS OF CHIEF FLORES FROM COUNCIL. THANK YOU CHIEF. AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD TO GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS MOTION BY COUNCILMAN PRICE. SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CRAVER.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE'RE READY TO VOTE. >> ROLL CALL.

[12. Ordinance (Final Reading): Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on An Ordinance, in Accordance with Texas Local Government Code 143, Section 143.042(b) Authorizing Assignment Pay for Specialized Functions Within the Abilene Fire Department (Cande Flores)]

>> AGAIN, THE FINAL READING FOR ASSIGNMENT PAY, WHICH RELATES DIRECTLY TO THE PREVIOUS ITEM.

SO DUE TO OUR RECENT CHANGES, THE FIRE MARSHAL WHO WAS A CAPTAIN WAS APPOINTED TO THE FIRE MARSHAL POSITION, WHICH IS A BATTALION CHIEF POSITION. WHICH MEANS WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY CAPTAINS WITHIN OUR FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION. IN ORDER TO PUT THE RIGHT PERSON AS DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL, THAT PERSON IS NOT GOING TO BE A CAPTAIN.

THE RANK IS NOT IMPORTANT, BUT SINCE WE DO REQUIRE OUR CAPTAINS AS PART OF THEIR JOB DESCRIPTION TO ACCEPT A PROGRAM AND TO RUN A PROGRAM AS PART OF THEIR NORMAL PAY, PUTTING SOMEONE ELSE IN THAT POSITION REQUIRES THAT WE COMPENSATE THEM ACCORDINGLY.

SO I'M ASKING FOR ASSIGNMENT PAY TO HANDLE THE STRUCTURE THAT IS EFFECTIVE JUNE 8TH.

THIS DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL ROLE HAS SEVERAL REQUIREMENTS. THE BIGGEST REQUIREMENT THAT SEPARATES THEM FROM OTHER PERSONNEL IS THAT PLANS EXAMINER, FIRE PROTECTION AND DETECTION PLANS, VENT HOOD SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS. AND THEY ALSO WILL FILL THE ROLE OF FIRE MARSHAL IN HIS ABSENCE AND SO ALL OF THESE IN OUR MIND QUALIFY HIM FOR ASSIGNMENT PAY. THIS IS AN ACCEPTED PRACTICE, GOVERNMENT CODE 143.

THE REQUEST IS TO ASSIGN $200 PER MONTH, WITH AN ANNUAL IMPACT OF $2,400.

AS I STATED EARLIER, WE ARE SAVING $11,000 BY MOVING THAT ROLE FROM A CAPTAIN.

SO WE STILL WILL BE SAVING APPROXIMATELY $8,600 ANNUALLY. ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU, CHIEF. ANY QUESTIONS OF CHIEF FLORES FROM COUNCIL?

>> THANK YOU FOR TWEAKING THE LANGUAGE FOR ME. >> YES, SIR.

GOOD POINT. >> THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT PAY ONLY HOLDS AS LONG AS THE POSITION IS BELOW A CAPTAIN. SO IF THAT GETS REASSIGNED TO WHERE IT'S CAPTAIN POSITION AGAIN, THEN THIS EXTRA SPECIAL PAY GOES AWAY.

>> THANK YOU, CHIEF. AT THIS TIME I WILL OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNSEL HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?

>> ACCEPT A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN PRICE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

READY TO VOTE. >> ROLL CALL. >> IN REGARDS TO ITEM NUMBER

[13. Ordinance (Final Reading) Z-2020-01: (remove from table) Receive a Report, Hold a Discussion and Public Hearing, and Take Action on a request from Prairie Song LLC, agent Nick Coates, to amend the terms of Planned Development (PD) District Number 144 by expanding its original 14.166 acres to include 0.5 acre of additional now-vacant land at 2660 Garfield Avenue, by changing allowed uses to include all those permissible within Residential Medium-Density (MD) zoning districts and by requiring all access to future development of this property to be from Garfield Avenue; Legal description being 12.004 acres out of T&P Railway Co. Section 84 (and located at least 140 feet north of Garfield Avenue) as well as Lots 4-5 in Block 10 and all of Block 11 in the Hillcrest Addition (on north side of 2600 block of Garfield Avenue) (Mike Warrix)]

13, I AM CONFLICTED, NOT BECAUSE OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS, BUT BECAUSE OF MY EMPLOYMENT WITH ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY. MAYOR PRO TEM HURT WILL OVERSEE THIS ITEM AND I'M GOING TO TAKE A COFFEE BREAK WHILE HE DOES SO.

>> I TOO AM CONFLICTED. >> I HAVE A CONFLICT. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GOING

TO HAVE COFFEE. >> WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM 13. I WILL ASK MIKE TO PRESENT THIS

ITEM. >> >> GOOD MORNING.

MIKE WARRIX, WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THIS MORNING IS AN APPEAL OF AN ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BACK ON APRIL 7TH.

[01:20:04]

THIS IS AN APPEAL OF A REZONING CASE. THE INTENT, JUST RUN THROUGH THE SLIDES AND I'LL GIVE YOU FURTHER BACKGROUND. THIS IS CASE Z 20-01, THE APPLICANT IS NICK COATES, THE QUESTION IS TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THAT OCCURRED ON APRIL 7TH, REGARDING A REQUEST TO AMEND A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF EAST STANFORD DRIVE.

AND GENERALLY NORTH OF GARFIELD AVENUE. NOTIFICATION WAS SENT OUT PURSUANT TO STATE LAW. WE RECEIVED ZERO RESPONSES IN FAVOR AND FOUR IN OPPOSITION.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MET ON APRIL 7TH. STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE PD THAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE THERE.

THERE WAS A MOTION MADE AT THAT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT REQUEST. THAT MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4 IN OPPOSITION AND TWO IN FAVOR. AND THAT DOES CONSTITUTE A DENIAL.

AND THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THE OPTION TO APPEAL THAT ACTION PURSUANT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. ON APRIL 9TH, THE APPLICANT EXERCISED THAT OPTION AND THAT HAS BROUGHT US TO THIS MORNING'S AGENDA ITEM. IN WAY OF BACKGROUND, THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. YOU'LL SEE, I WISH I HAD A POINTER.

MAYBE I'LL GET ONE FOR THE NEXT MEETING. TO THE NORTH, YOU'LL SEE INTERSTATE 20 AND FRONTAGE OF EAST STANFORD. THE PROPERTY IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. TO THE SOUTH, YOU'LL SEE THE GARFIELD AVENUE AND SUBDIVISIONS DOWN THERE IN THAT AREA. TO THE RIGHT, TO THE EAST IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX AND TO THE WEST IS AN RV PARK. ZONING OF THAT GENERAL AREA, SHOWING THE PD, PLAN DEVELOPMENT ON THE PARCEL. COMMERCIAL ZONING ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF EAST STANFORD DRIVE, AS WELL AS RESIDENTIAL ZONING TO THE SOUTH.

EVERY PLAN DEVELOPMENT BY ORDINANCE HAS TO HAVE A GRAPHIC CONCEPT PLAN.

THIS IS THE CURRENT PLAN THAT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE. THIS PD WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN 2014. THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THIS PD WAS TO HAVE ON THE FIVE ACRES SHOWN AS MULTIFAMILY SOME TYPE OF ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY. AND ON THE SOUTHERN PART OF IT TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES, PROBABLY SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF RS-6 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY, AS IT SHOWS ON THE CONCEPT PLAN.

NONE OF THAT HAS HAPPENED. IT'S ALL VACANT OUT THERE. AS A RESULT THE APPLICANT WITH THE REQUEST THAT WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 7TH, SUBMITTED A NEW GRAPHIC CONCEPT PLAN WITH A NEW PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE EXISTING PD.

THIS GRAPHIC HERE SHOWS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL. BASICALLY 14 ACRES.

36 LOTS. ROUGHLY 72 DUPLEX UNITS. ALL ACCESS BEING PROVIDED OUT ON GARFIELD AVENUE. NO ACCESS GOING NORTH TO EAST STANFORD.

THIS IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 7TH.

THIS WAS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION, THE TYPE OF DUPLEX UNITS THAT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE PROPERTIES. AGAIN, THE AREA IS UNDEVELOPED AND VACANT. STAFF REVIEWED THIS. IT'S GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE TRANSITION OF DENSITY AND INTENSITY OF USES COMING DOWN FROM THE INTERSTATE TO THE COMMERCIAL, TO THE MEDIUM DENSITY TYPE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE AND FURTHER DOWN TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE. AGAIN, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HEARD OUR RECOMMENDATION. A MOTION WAS MADE TO APPROVE THAT MOTION FAILED. AND IT WAS ESSENTIALLY EFFECTIVELY DENIED BY THE

[01:25:07]

PLANNING COMMISSION. OUR CONDITIONS OF OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION CONSISTED OF THREE CONDITIONS. NUMBER ONE, THERE WOULD BE NO MORE THAN TWO DWELLING UNITS ON EACH TRACT OF LAND ON EACH PARCEL. FUTURE SUBDIVISION OR REPLATTING OF THE PROPERTY WOULD COMPLY SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE GRAPHIC CONCEPT PLAN THAT WE LOOKED AT EARLIER. ANY DEVIATION FROM THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR FURTHER APPROVAL. AND THAT WHEN IF IT'S APPROVED AND THE PROPERTY IS ULTIMATELY REPLATTED OR RE-SUBDIVIDED THAT THE CITY ABANDON A PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. I THINK IT'S ON THE SOUTHEAST PART OF THE PROPERTY.

WHICH WOULD EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATE ANY POSSIBILITY OF ANY STREET EXTENSIONS NORTH TO EAST STANFORD DRIVE AND INTERSTATE 20. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO FIELD THOSE FOR YOU. AGAIN, HERE IS THE GRAPHIC CONCEPT PLAN. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ALL OF THE TRAFFIC IS FUNNELED TOWARDS GARFIELD AVENUE AND FROM THERE IT WOULD GO ON DOWN TO EAST AMBLER.

>> MAYOR PRO TEM, IF I COULD MAKE A COMMENT. I JUST WANTED THE CITY MANAGER APOLOGIZE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DEVELOPER. THIS WAS SCHEDULED TWICE NOW AND WE WEREN'T ABLE TO DO IT. PART OF IT WAS JUST THE TIMING OF THINGS AND PART OF IT WAS STAFF ERROR. BUT YOU ARE OWED AN APOLOGY AND SO I WANT YOU TO HEAR FROM ME THAT I APOLOGIZE. SOME OF Y'ALL CAME TO THE MEETINGS AND WEREN'T ABLE TO BE HEARD. I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO TAKE OFF FROM WORK AND DO THAT

SOMETIMES. SO PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGY. >> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MIKE? I JUST WANT TO KIND OF REITERATE ON SOMETHING, ABOUT FEASIBILITY OF THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE. THERE IS CURRENTLY NOT ENOUGH FOOTAGE FOR A PUBLIC STREET TO GO NORTH, CORRECT? AND THE OWNER THAT HAS THAT PROPERTY IS REALLY UNWILLING TO SELL FOR ENOUGH FOOTAGE TO GO NORTH.

PLUS THERE IS A LARGE BILL BOARD NOW CONSTRUCTED WHERE THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY WOULD BE.

SO THERE IS REALLY NO FEASIBILITY OF A NORTHERN ENTRANCE.

>> IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICANT HAS REACHED OUT ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS TO THE

PROPERTY OWNERS UP THERE AND THAT IS NOT AN OPTION. >> STANLEY, YOU WOULD HIGHLY BE AGAINST US USING ANY TYPE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO SECURE SOMETHING FOR A PRIVATE

DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? >> MY LEGAL ADVICE WOULD NOT BE GOING DOWN THAT ROUTE.

>> MY MANAGEMENT ADVICE WOULD BE I WOULDN'T SUPPORT IT EITHER, SIR.

>> THESE CONDITIONS IT WOULD ABANDON CAMPUS COURT SO THAT THERE COULD NOT BE AN ACCESS TO

THE NORTHERN ACCESS ROAD? >> THAT IS CORRECT, YES. >> CAN WE STIPULATE ABOUT WHEN THE FENCING IS DONE AND WHEN IT'S COMPLETED ON A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS?

JUST A QUESTION. >> YES. >> YOU COULD.

>> THAT WOULD BE HANDLED, IF IT'S ULTIMATELY APPROVED AND DEVELOPMENT GOES FORWARD, THAT

WOULD BE ADDRESSED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. >> OKAY.

>> WHICH THEY WOULD MEET AND ADDRESS ANY TYPE OF FENCING, BUFFERS, ANY OTHER TYPES OF PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY.

>> ANYMORE QUESTIONS OF MIKE BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING? >> I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT I'M GOING TO START WITH IS IF YOU FILLED OUT A CARD, I WILL CALL YOUR NAME FIRST. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T SPEAK.

BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO BY THE ONES WHO FILLED OUT A CARD FIRST.

I'M GOING TO ASK YOU BE COURTEOUS OF THE THREE-MINUTE TIME LIMIT.

I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE'LL START WITH MR. PHILIP JERGINS.

>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS PHILIP, GLAD TO BE HERE THIS MORNING.

GOOD TO BE ABLE TO SEE Y'ALL IN PERSON. WE'RE NOT AGAINST MR. COATES DEVELOPING THAT AREA. WE WOULD JUST LIKE HIM TO CONSIDER SEVERAL THINGS ENTERING ON THE GARFIELD, PUT TWO ACCESSES COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND RIGHT INTO

[01:30:03]

HOMEOWNERS HOUSES. SO IF THERE WOULD BE ANOTHER WAY TO ENTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD OTHER THAN THAT, THAT WOULD BE GOOD. ACCORDING TO PLANNING AND ZONING, WE'RE PUTTING THIS IN REVERSE, AS THE GENTLEMAN JUST SAID, COMING FROM THE HIGHWAY WE WOULD HAVE INDUSTRIAL AND THEN MULTIFAMILY AND THEN RESIDENTIAL.

WELL, IF YOU COME THROUGH GARFIELD, YOU'RE COMING THERE RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY AND THEN COMMERCIAL. SO IT'S SORT OF A REVERSE TRAFFIC.

THERE IS 72 APARTMENT POSSIBILITIES. AND WE ALL HAVE DRIVEN THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT WE'VE HAD COVID, ALL OF OUR COLLEGE STUDENTS USUALLY RESIDING THERE ARE NOT THERE. WE PUT 72 UNITS THERE, YOU FIGURE TWO VEHICLES PER UNIT, WE WOULD HAVE 144 VEHICLES. BUT THIS IS A COLLEGE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND FOUR IN EACH RESIDENCE, WE COULD HAVE 288 VEHICLES COMING THROUGH CAMPUS COURT AND GARFIELD. SO I'VE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 27 YEARS.

WE'VE RAISED FOUR KIDS AND NOW HAVE TEN GRAND KIDS THAT RIDE THEIR BIKES AND PLAY IN THESE STREETS. WE REALLY ENJOY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT THE INFLUX OF COLLEGE STUDENTS AND RENTALS THERE HAS REALLY MADE IT A BUSY AREA.

AND WE FEEL THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT, IF WE COULD CONSIDER ANY OTHER OPTIONS, WE

WOULD SURELY APPRECIATE IT. >> NEXT IS DARRYL SLOANE. >> I'M DARRYL SLOANE.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO BE HERE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR MAYOR, MR. HANNA, OUR CITY COUNCIL, FOR HELPING KEEP OUR SAFE CITY THROUGH THIS CORONAVIRUS.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN A REAL CHALLENGE. BUT WE APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WANTED TO SPEAK AGAINST THESE PROJECTS AFFECTING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR MANY REASONS. I'VE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WORKING ON 50 YEARS. I'VE SEEN MANY CHANGES COME TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST 12 YEARS. THOSE CHANGES HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BACK INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF ZONING CHANGES. AND SINCE THOSE HAVE COME, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEGAN TO DETERIORATE. I MOVED TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FROM WHERE I LIVE BECAUSE OF A ZONING CHANGE. THAT ZONING CHANGE BROUGHT APARTMENT COMPLEXES, DUPLEXES, MY CHILDREN WALKED TO SCHOOL EVERY MORNING UNTIL THOSE CHANGES CAME. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAME UNSAFE. AND AS A RESULT, I STARTED LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO MOVE. AND I CHOSE THE HILLCREST NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A SAFEST NEIGHBORHOOD IN ABILENE. A LOT OF OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS MOVED ALSO. AND THE SCHOOL IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CLOSED BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES THAT MOVED AWAY FROM THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

BECAUSE OF PROBLEMS CREATED BY THE ZONING CHANGE. WE'VE HAD THREE ZONING CHANGES.

WELL, NOT THREE ZONING CHANGES. WE'VE HAD THREE PROJECTS MOVE IN TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE REALLY CAUSED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO DETERIORATE. TRAFFIC HAS BEEN ONE OF THE MAIN PROBLEMS. THEFT HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS PROBLEM SINCE THEY HAVE COME IN. DRUGS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM SINCE THEY CAME IN.

AND WE'VE HAD MURDERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THEY CAME IN.

THE FIRST 38 YEARS THAT I LIVED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WE EXPERIENCED NONE OF THAT.

NONE OF IT. OUR NEIGHBORS WALKED EVERY NIGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERY EVENING WITHOUT FEAR OF ANYTHING. THAT HAS COME TO A STOP BECAUSE

[01:35:03]

OF PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE HAVING. THE TRAFFIC HAS INCREASED TREMENDOUSLY.

AND YOU CAN'T GET UP AND DOWN THE STREET. MONDAY I WENT TO THE GROCERY STORE. I DO NOT GO DOWN MADISON STREET NOW.

THE STREET ON WHICH I LIVE. BECAUSE IT TAKES ME TEN MINUTES TO GET ON AMBER.

I GO AROUND TO WHERE THERE IS A TRAFFIC LIGHT ON CAMPUS COURT. AT 10 O'CLOCK, I HAD TO STOP TWICE ON CAMPUS COURT JUST TO GO DOWN THE STREET. CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDE OF THE STREET. TWO CARS COULD NOT PASS. THAT IS NOT A BUSY TIME OF THE DAY. WHEN THE COLLEGE STUDENTS ARE THERE, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET UP AND DOWN THE STREETS. I MOVED THERE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.

WE HAD A LOT OF WILDLIFE THERE WHEN I MOVED THERE. OVER 50 TURKEYS THAT WOULD ROOST IN THE TREES BEHIND MY HOUSE EVERY NIGHT UNTIL THESE THREE FACILITIES CAME IN, AND THEIR HABITAT WAS REMOVED. I NO LONGER HAVE ANY TURKEYS COMING ON MY PROPERTY.

THERE WERE A LOT OF QUAIL THERE WHEN I MOVED THERE. >> MR. SLOANE, I'M GOING TO ASK

YOU TO FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION. >> THANK YOU.

I JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BEING DETERIORATED AND BEING AFFECTED TREMENDOUSLY AND PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY'RE MOVING TO THE WILY DISTRICT.

IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF OUR SCHOOLS. IT'S BECAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE OF ZONING CHANGES.

AND THIS IS THE REASON I'M AGAINST THIS. I'VE SEEN THESE CHANGES COME ABOUT IN THE YEARS THAT I HAVE LIVED THERE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. JAMES EDWARD EARLS. >> 200 ADDITIONAL VEHICLES TRAVELLING UP AND DOWN CAMPUS COURT. YOU GET ALL OF THE STUDENTS HERE AND THEY PARK ON THE STREETS. FIRE TRUCKS 100 INCHES WIDE, STANDARD CHEVY PICK-UPS, 81 INCHES WIDE. YOU TRY TO GET A FIRE ENGINE AND ANOTHER VEHICLE DOWN THERE, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. SO THAT IS THE CONCERN ABOUT SAFETY. WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT OUR PROPERTY VALUES.

OUR COMMUNITY. I MOVED HERE TWO YEARS AGO. AND I PICKED THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, ONE, BECAUSE IT WAS AFFORDABLE FOR ME. AND TWO, IT WAS A GOOD LOCATION FOR WHERE MY WIFE WAS GOING TO WORK. BUT WE SEE MORE AND MORE OF THE HOUSES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD BEING TURNED INTO RENTAL PROPERTIES.

SO IF WE BRING IN ADDITIONAL 72 UNITS OF RENTAL PROPERTIES, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO DO TO THE OVERALL PROPERTY VALUES? THE EXISTING PROPERTIES ARE GOING TO GO DOWN IN VALUE AND THE RENT ON THOSE IS GOING TO GO DOWN IN VALUE. SO WE'RE GOING TO PERPETUATE THE CONTINUING CYCLE OF DECREASING THE PROPERTY VALUES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE DON'T WANT THAT. WE WANT A STRONG COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO BUILD A COMMUNITY OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND NOT LANDLORDS. YOU DRIVE DOWN GARFIELD RIGHT NOW, YOU DRIVE DOWN CAMPUS COURT AND YOU CAN PICK OUT THE RENTAL PROPERTIES VERY VERY EASILY. WE DON'T WANT THAT. WE WANT TO INCREASE OUR COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS.

WE WANT TO INCREASE PEOPLE RETIREES MOVING HERE. YOU LOOK AT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND I'M PROBABLY ONE OF THE YOUNGEST PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND I'M NOT THAT YOUNG. OKAY. SO WE WANT MORE YOUNG PEOPLE TO MOVE INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IF WE HAVE RENTAL PROPERTY, RENTAL UNITS DOWN THE STREET, AND THEY'VE GOT KIDS, I GUARANTEE YOU THEY WILL NOT BE COMING TO THAT AREA.

[01:40:03]

OKAY. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. CAN'T RIDE YOUR BIKES ON THE STREET. YOU CAN'T PLAY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

YOU'RE GOING TO GET RUN OVER. AND THAT IS JUST A FACT. SO AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE DO HAVE MORE CRIME IN THE AREA. I WAS SURPRISED WHEN I MOVED HERE THE LEVEL OF CRIME THAT WE DO HAVE. IN DECEMBER OF 2019, THERE WAS A MURDER ON ROUND TREE.

DRUG RELATED. IN A RENTAL UNIT. OKAY.

2018, THERE WERE DRIVE-BY SHOOTINGS IN A RENTAL UNIT. I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS AND LET'S SEND IT BACK AND LET'S FIGURE OUT A WAY TO KEEP THIS TRAFFIC OFF THE CAMPUS COURT AND OFF OF GARFIELD AVENUE. THANK YOU.

JUDD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL APPRECIATE YOU HEARING THE CONCERNS OVER THIS ISSUE. FIRST OF ALL, I LIVE AT 2541 JOHN C STEVENS, JUST OUTSIDE THE NOTIFICATION ZONE. BUT IS IN THE HILLCREST NEIGHBORHOOD AREA.

I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT COULD WORK FOR THIS AREA.

I THINK IT HAS A LOT OF POTENTIAL. I THINK IT HAS, IT COMPLIMENTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN A NUMBER OF WAYS. WHAT I DON'T THINK IT DOES IS I DON'T THINK IT COMPLIMENTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC FLOW.

MY MAIN CONCERN WITH THIS PROPOSAL IS THE SOUTH ENTRANCE AND EXIT TO THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. I THINK THAT PUTS PEOPLE AND PROPERTY AT RISK IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO MR. COATES DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY.

I WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL TO THINK ABOUT OTHER IDEAS. I UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES TO A NORTH ENTRANCE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM. I ACKNOWLEDGE THEM.

I JUST WOULD LIKE THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER OTHER IDEAS AND OPTIONS FOR A NORTH ENTRANCE TO

THIS PROPERTY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> CHRIS BRANNON.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CHRIS BRANNON AND I HAVE LIVED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR A VERY LONG TIME. AND AM NOW ACTUALLY PURCHASING MY CHILDHOOD HOME BECAUSE WE REALLY APPRECIATE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. I BELIEVE I DROPPED THE AGE QUITE A BIT. NO OFFENSE. BUT THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO SPEAK TODAY ON THIS PROJECT. WE KNOW THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING PROJECT WITH MANY TRIPS TO THE DRAWING BOARD. ON BEHALF OF MY IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH, DR.

CURTIS AND KEN LEE AND HIS WIFE, WE ASK THAT THE COUNCIL CONTINUE TO HELP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS RESIDENTS ENJOY STREETS FREE OF EXCESS TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE CAN CONTINUE TO RAISE OUR FAMILIES IN A QUIET AND SAFE AREA.

AS YOU KNOW, EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT SENSE OF SECURITY WAS RATTLED BY A MURDER OF A FORMER STUDENT OF MY OWN, DAVID DAVORA THAT OCCURRED ON ROUND TREE STREET JUST OFF OF GARFIELD.

WHILE I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A RANDOM TRAGIC OCCURRENCE, THE WORRY OF THE FUTURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ON THE FOREFRONT OF MY MIND. HAVING GROWN UP IN THIS STREET, NOW LIVING AND RAISING MY OWN FAMILY HERE, I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT KEEPING OUR FAMILY FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD SAFE. A POINT OF CONCERN THAT HAS COME UP IN MANY DISCUSSIONS WITH MY NEIGHBORS IS THE INCREASED TRAFFIC ON OUR STREETS. AS BEEN NOTED WITH SO MANY UNITS BEING ADDED AND THE ONLY ENTRANCE AND EXIT BEING PROPOSED ON GARFIELD, WE'RE FACING UPWARDS OF 200 PLUS EXTRA CARS TRAVELLING ON AND THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, MAINLY CAMPUS COURT AND GARFIELD. MEMBER OF OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE ARTICULATED THAT UNITS OF THIS SIZE ARE NORMALLY SEEN AT THE FRONT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, QUICK ACCESS TO MAIN THOROUGH FARES OR OFF OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD OF I 20. HE SAID THAT IT'S UNUSUAL TO SEE THESE TYPES OF UNITS IN THE BACK OF ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS, WHERE THEY HAVE TO TRAVEL THROUGH THE NEIGHBORING STREETS. SEVERAL NEW IDEAS WERE PRESENTED TO HELP RELOCATE THE PRESENTED TRAFFIC MODEL. AND WHILE STILL KEEPING THE PORTION OF CAMPUS COURT THAT RUNS THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD DISCONNECTED FROM THE FRONTAGE ROAD AS HAS BEEN CONTINUALLY DISCUSSED. INCLUDING DROPPING A SECTION OF CAMPUS COURT FROM THE FRONTAGE ROAD BUT NOT CONNECTING TO THE CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH

[01:45:01]

WOULD ALLOW ACCESS TO THESE UNITS, BUT AGAIN, KEEP TRAFFIC OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THESE NEW WAYS OF HOW MR. COATES CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN, BY AVOIDING PUTTING 200 PLUS EXTRA CARS THROUGH OUR STREETS.

THANK YOU ALL. >> LINDA LIGHT. >> MY NAME IS LINDA LIGHT.

I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DO FOR OUR CITY. MY CONCERNS HAVE PARTIALLY BEEN ADDRESSED ALREADY.

I THINK THAT THE TRAFFIC IS SIGNIFICANT. I'VE LIVED ON CAMPUS COURT FOR 29 YEARS. AND IN THE LAST TEN TO 15 YEARS, WITH MORE RENTAL PROPERTY AND COLLEGE HOMES, COLLEGE PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR, IT IS DEFINITELY A BIG DEAL WITH THE TRAFFIC. EVEN LAST NIGHT, ALMOST EVERY EVENING LATER WHEN PEOPLE GET HOME, THERE IS NOT ROOM TO GO THROUGH.

WHEN THE COLLEGE STUDENTS ARE TH THERE, IT IS ALL THROUGH THE DAY. ONE PERSON PASSAGE. AND IT DOES LIMIT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I WONDER IF THE NEW HOUSING UNITS COULD BE SIMILAR TO THE ONES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, LIKE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, MAYBE BIGGER LOT. WHERE IT WOULD REDUCE THE TRAFFIC ABOUT HALF, I WONDER IF THAT MIGHT BE THE POSSIBILITY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ANSWER IS.

BUT I'M HIGHLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THROUGH THE AREA. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU

CONSIDERING THAT CAREFULLY. >> THAT'S ALL THE CARDS I HAVE. WE ARE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THIS

ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

DAVID SCHWARTZ. WELL, AFTER SEEING SOME OF THE PRESENTATION, I DID NOT, I CAN SAY I DID NOT GO OUT THERE. I WANTED TO GO OUT THERE AND DRIVE THE AREA BEFORE I ACTUALLY CAME UP FOR A PUBLIC HEARING OR PRESENTED FOR THE COUNCIL AGAIN.

THE MAIN THING THAT I SAW WAS NO ACCESS TO INTERSTATE 20 AND THERE WERE SEVERAL REASONS GIVEN AGAIN THIS MORNING ABOUT WELL, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WE CAN'T GET IT.

WHAT THEY'VE SAID REPEATEDLY IS TRAFFIC. AND ALSO THE ACCESS, IF THAT IS GOING TO BE AN ADDITIONAL HOUSING, WHETHER IT'S APARTMENTS OR HOMES, YOU NEED TO THINK ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY. IF YOU CAN ONLY ACCESS THAT FROM ONE WAY, YOU HAVE RESPONSE FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, STATION FIVE, SURE, THEY CAN COME UP FROM THE SOUTH, BUT STATION FOUR IS GOING TO COME ON THE INTERSTATE, IF THERE IS NO EASY ACCESS FROM THE INTERSTATE WHEN ENGINE FOUR OR STATION FOUR RESPONDS, THERE WON'T BE ABLE TO GET TO YOU.

I THINK THEY NEED TO GO BACK AND SEE IF THERE IS SOME WAY THEY CAN MAKE SOME ACCESS OR ADDITIONAL WAY LIKE SOME OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS SAID. BECAUSE THE NEW EQUIPMENT LIKE LADDER FIVE, LIKE THE GENTLEMAN SAID, WITH VEHICLES ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADS, YOU CAN'T GET THROUGH. AND IF THERE IS AN EMERGENCY, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A FIRE OR SOME TYPE, THEY'RE GOING TO NEED THE ACCESS TO GET THROUGH THERE.

LIKE I SAID, THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE STATIONS RESPONDING AND YOU WOULD NEED MORE THAN ONE ACCESS TO GET THROUGH THERE. I MEAN, JUST SIMPLE RULES.

THERE SHOULD BE MORE THAN ONE ANYWAY, IF THERE WAS SOME REASON WE HAD TO EVACUATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND YOU COULD ONLY GO OUT ONE WAY, THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING.

I THINK THE RESIDENTS ARE RIGHT, THERE WILL BE INCREASED TRAFFIC.

BUT I THINK THE MAIN ISSUE IS ONLY ONE ACCESS IN AND OUT I THINK THEY SHOULD TRY TO FIGURE OUT ANOTHER METHOD. FIGURE OUT A WAY, EITHER A DIFFERENT ROUTE TO WHERE THEY COULD GET ACCESS ON ONE OF THE SIDES OR SOMEHOW BY ANOTHER RIGHT-OF-WAY, IF THERE IS ANY WAY THAT THEY CAN. BUT I DON'T THINK THE IDEA OF ABANDONING CAMPUS COURT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET ALL THE WAY ACCESS IS NOT AN ISSUE EITHER AND THE PUBLIC DOMAIN IS NOT AN ISSUE. BUT THE MAIN THING I THINK IS SAFETY.

YOU GOT TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE WAY IN AND OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OR ANYTHING ELSE HAS OCCURRED, THEY NEED ACCESS.

[01:50:03]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH COUNCIL. >> CLINT ROSENBAUM. I'M A COMMISSIONER ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. SEVERAL OF THESE RESIDENTS HAVE QUOTED SOMETHING THAT I PROBABLY SAID TO THEM. MOST OF THESE RESIDENTS HAVE CALLED ME AND VISITED WITH ME A BIT AND ASKED ME TO COME UP AND TALK. AS WELL AS WHEN WE HAD OUR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. FIRST OFF I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

BECAUSE I'VE LIVED WITH THIS THING ALSO. I WAS ON THE COMMISSION IN 2014, WHEN WE MOVED FORWARD WITH THE PDD THAT WE DID. I WAS ON THE COMMISSION BACK IN APRIL WHEN WE DENIED MR. COATES'S CLAIM BACK THEN. THIS IS A DIFFICULT CASE.

MAYBE ONE OF THE HARDEST CASES WE DEALT WITH ON THE COMMISSION AND THAT I'VE HAD TO DEAL WITH.

SO WHAT MR. WARRIX SAID IS CORRECT, IN PLANNING WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME KIND OF MEDIUM DENSITY OR TRANSITION INTO A RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS WHEN IT'S COMING THE OTHER WAY. WE WOULD EXPECT TRAFFIC TO BE ABLE TO FLOW OUT AND GET OUT ON A THOROUGH FARE QUICKLY. FROM ADDING THIS MULTI-DENSITY TO THE BACK OF THE SUBDIVISION, HAVE TO DRIVE A HALF A MILE THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION. THE STREETS ARE 36 FOOT WIDE.

SUB COLLECTORS. WE WOULD HAVE A COLLECTOR OR WE WOULD GET ANOTHER THOROUGH FARE BACK DOWN THERE. I GUESS WHAT I'M HERE FOR ONE IS TO SAY WE WORKED HARD IN 2014, AS WELL AS YOU DID TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. THAT SOLUTION HAD THIS PDD TAKING THE TRAFFIC OUT TO THE NORTH. THERE WAS A THOROUGH FARE, RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT I UNDERSTOOD TO BE FOR CAMPUS COURT TO GO OUT TO THE NORTH OR GO ON THROUGH THE THOROUGH FARE PLAN. HAD CAMPUS COURT GOING OUT TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD.

WE ABANDONED A PIECE OF THAT THOROUGH FARE TO FORCE THE PDD TO SEND THE TRAFFIC OUT TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND NOW WE'VE TURNED AND ACTUALLY, IN MY OPINION, ACTUALLY TAKEN MORE TRAFFIC AND TRYING TO PUSH IT ON TO GARFIELD AND CAMPUS COURT THAT ARE NOT I WOULD SAY DESIGNED IN THAT MANNER. SO WE STRUGGLED OBVIOUSLY, I STRUGGLE NOW.

WE CERTAINLY WANT MR. COATES TO DEVELOP PROPERTY. WE WANT TO BE DEVELOPMENT FRIENDLY HERE IN THE CITY OF ABILENE. THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT CASE.

I'M HERE TO ADD HISTORY FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ANSWER ANY

FURTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

DO APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE.

>> MY NAME IS EDWARD WALKER. I LIVE AT 2665 GARFIELD AVENUE. THANK Y'ALL FOR LETTING US SPEAK BY THE WAY. WONDERFUL THING THAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME HERE AND SPEAK. I'M AMAZED AT HOW EVERYTHING I WANTED TO SAY TO YOU GUYS THEY'VE SAID IT. EVERYTHING. I THOUGHT I KIND OF HAD A WEIRD WIRING BECAUSE I HAD SO MANY IDEAS BUT EVERYBODY HAS THOUGHT THE SAME THING.

AND YOU KNOW, MR. COATES WANTING TO BUILD SOMETHING, FINE AND GOOD.

WE'RE ALL FOR IT. BUT I DON'T THINK DUPLEXES WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT AREA. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS. BUT IF YOU PUT SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS THERE, YOU'VE GOT THIS ISSUE OF ENTRANCE AND EXITS ON GARFIELD COMING IN AND OUTGOING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THAT IS A BAD IDEA.

IF IT COULD BE ON CAMPUS COURT, TO STANFORD, THAT WOULD BE THE BEST SOLUTION.

I REALIZE THERE IS PROBLEMS THERE. BUT DURING THE PHONE MEETING THAT WE HAD THAT WE COULDN'T GET IN BECAUSE OF ELECTRONICS OR WHATEVER, I HEARD A LADY MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF WIDENING GARFIELD.

I THOUGHT THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE PROPERTY AWAY FROM ALL OF THE HOMEOWNERS ON GARFIELD.

IS THERE ANYTHING TO THAT? WOULD THERE BE WIDENING GARFIELD TO ACCOMMODATE THE TRAFFIC? WOULDN'T THAT REQUIRE EMINENT DOMAIN? BECAUSE I WOULDN'T GIVE PERMISSION TO DOT. IT WOULDN'T BE MORE FAIRER TO USE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR GARFIELD. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE, FURTHER CONSIDERATION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN TO SEE IF WE CAN FIND A SOLUTION FROM CAMPUS COURT TO STANFORD THAT WOULD GIVE THE ACCESS TO THAT AREA. AND IT WOULD BE BETTER NOT

[01:55:02]

GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH CAMPUS COURT, YOU KNOW, KEEPING IT DEAD THERE AT GARFIELD.

BUT OPENING IT UP AT STANFORD AND WIDENING TO WHATEVER WIDTH IT NEEDS TO BE WIDENED.

I REALIZE NOBODY LIKES TO HAVE THAT EMINENT DOMAIN THING IMPOSED, BUT IF THAT WOULD BE THE BEST SOLUTION, MAYBE THAT IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED. I HAVE A DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT THAT I HAVE TO GO TO. AND THAT IS THE REASON I GOT UP AS QUICK AS I DID.

THANK Y'ALL FOR LISTENING TO US. AND I'M IN OPPOSITION, BY THE WAY IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T FIGURED. OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING.

AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO US. >>

>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO BE HERE TODAY.

MY NAME IS MARY ANN MARTIN AND I DRIVE DOWN CAMPUS COURT EVERY DAY.

WE ARE HERE BECAUSE MR. COATES WANTS TO BUILD A 72 UNIT DUPLEXES ON THE 36 LOTS HE OWNS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THESE DUPLEXES WILL PROCEED APPROXIMATELY 145 TO 200 POSSIBLY MORE VEHICLES. TRAFFIC FROM THESE DUPLEXES WILL FEED DIRECTLY ON TO GARFIELD STREET. BUT THEY WILL ALSO HAVE THE OPTION TO DRIVE DOWN CAMPUS COURT. THE RESIDENTS CHOOSE CAMPUS COURT, THEY MUST FOUR ADDITIONAL STREETS, 40 HOUSES AND MANY PEDESTRIANS ALONG THE WAY BEFORE REACHING AMBLER.

AN ENTIRE HALF MILE. BECAUSE I'VE DRIVEN IT. IF RESIDENTS CHOOSE GARFIELD STREET, THEY MUST PASS THREE ADDITIONAL STREETS, 60 HOUSES, A CHURCH PARKING LOT, A LAUNDRY MAT AND A DAYCARE CENTER. ANOTHER HALF MILE JUST TO GET TO AMBLER.

IT'S FREEZING IN HERE. NOWHERE IN ABILENE DO WE HAVE AN EXCESSIVE NUMBER OF DUPLEXES SITUATED IN THE DEEPEST PART OF ANY NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S JUST NOT SAFE.

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS WEREN'T DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE 36 DUPLEXES WITH 72 TWO TO THREE BEDROOM HOMES. IT'S DANGEROUS AND THE VEHICLE CAPACITY ALONE WILL SUFFOCATE OUR STREETS AND DEEM THEM UNSAFE FOR EVERYONE. OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AT LEAST FROM OUR CIRCLE, IT'S PEACEFUL AND SAFE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF COVID.

WE USE OUR STREETS TO WALK TO CHURCH, CHILDREN PLAY ON THEM AND EVERY YEAR WE GATHER FOR OUR ANNUAL 4TH OF JULY PARADE. I SEE IT ALL. BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A PARK IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, WE USE OUR STREETS. AND THEY ARE STILL RELATIVELY SAFE. HOWEVER, ALL THIS WILL CHANGE IF MR. COATES IS ALLOWED TO ESTABLISH A BUSINESS OF THIS MAGNITUDE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS A BUSINESS.

HE DOESN'T HAVE TO CARE ABOUT THE ISSUES THIS BUSINESS WILL CREATE BECAUSE HE DOESN'T LIVE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MR. COATES HAS GIVEN ZERO THOUGHTS TO OUR STREETS, FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. THIS IS A LUCRATIVE INVESTMENT FOR HIM AND WE WILL PAY THE PRICE. WHY SO MANY? 72 HOMES ON 36 LOTS WITH 200 PLUS VEHICLES WOULD DEVASTATE ANY NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE VOTE NO AND SUPPORT THE

PLANNING COMMISSION WHO VOTED STRONGLY FOR THIS >> HELLO.

MY NAME IS CARMEN PRICE. I LIVE ON GARFIELD JUST OUTSIDE THE NOTIFICATION.

AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE YOU MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. WITH DIFFERENT ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS.

IN EACH OF THESE PREVIOUS CASES, THERE HAS BEEN STRONG OPPOSITION WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING TWO ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSED USE. THE FIRST WAS THE ADDITION OF MULTIFAMILY AT THE BACK OF AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD WITH NARROW WINDING STREETS AND THE OTHER AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED HAS BEEN THE ACCESS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO I-20.

IN 2013, BOTH PLANNING AND ZONING AND CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZED THE NEGATIVE IMPACT THESE WOULD HAVE ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS DENIED. IN 2014, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WAS FORMED THAT SEPARATED THE MULTIFAMILY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE FIVE ACRE BUFFER, WHICH Y'ALL SAW

[02:00:01]

EARLIER. PROHIBITING ANY CONNECTION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE I-20 ACCESS ROAD. PLANNING AND ZONING AND CITY COUNCIL THEN MODIFIED THE MASTER THOROUGH FARE PLAN TO REMOVE THE POTENTIAL CONNECTION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO I-20, AT THAT TIME THE CITY ABANDONED PART OF CAMPUS COURT ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2004, ON PAGE 61, UNDER NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING IT SAYS, DURING THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING PROCESS, THE CITY SHOULD DIRECT MEDIUM TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS APARTMENTS, DUPLEXES, TOWN HOMES TO AREAS IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THE MORE INTENSE ACTIVITY CENTERS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT IS AMBLER AVENUE. MANY OF THE NEIGHBORS HAVE STATED AND MENTIONED IN PAST OF THEIR CONCERNS. SINCE MARCH OF 2020, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN VACANT OF COLLEGE KIDS. COME AUGUST THAT WILL BE A DIFFERENT STORY. THE STUDENTS WILL BE RETURNING FILLING OUR STREETS AND MAKING THE TRAVEL ON CAMPUS COURT AND GARFIELD MORE CONGESTED. I HAD A PICTURE PRINTED OUT TO HAND TO THE FOUR OF YOU, REFLECTIVE OF WHAT OUR TRAFFIC WILL BE.

SO THAT IS THE TRUE NATURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, FROM AUGUST TO MAY.

SO WE LIVE WITH THAT. SO WITH THIS BACKGROUND, I HAVE A COUPLE OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS REQUESTED ZONE CHANGE. FIRST, MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS THAT YOU DO NOT REMOVE THE PROTECTIONS PUT IN PLACE BY PRIOR CITY COUNCIL DECISIONS THAT ISOLATE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A DIRECT CONNECTION TO I-20 ACCESS ROAD. WHATEVER ELSE YOU DECIDE, PLEASE KEEP THOSE RESTRICTIONS AND THE SEPARATION INTACT THAT EXIST IN THE CURRENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT. IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS NOT SHOWN TODAY, BUT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU WILL APPROVE OR IS UP FOR DISCUSSION, PART 7B STATES ALL VEHICULAR ACCESS TO AND FROM THIS PROPERTY SHALL BE AVAILABLE BY WAY OF GARFIELD AVENUE. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU ADD THE WORD ONLY BETWEEN THE WORDS SHALL AND THE WORD BE. SO WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR MOTION TO EMPHASIZE THE INTENT THAT IT IS NOT ALLOWING CONNECTIONS FROM THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST AND THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. SECOND, I BELIEVE THAT THIS MEDIUM DENSITY IS STILL TOO INTENSIVE TO USE TO ADD TO THE REAR OF AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD.

AS REFERENCED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ABOVE. A BASE ZONING FOR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WOULD MATCH THE EXISTING ZONING AND USE IN THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT WILL BE MOST APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS PROPERTY SINCE ALL OF THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE DEVELOPED AND COMING THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ON OUR WINDING STREETS. WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

>> GOOD MORNING. I DO NOT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I LIVE IN THE COLLEGE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD. IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD HAPPEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, MY NEIGHBORS WOULDN'T KNOW HOW TO COME TO PETITION, THEY WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEE SOMETHING BRAND NEW IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THREE, THEY WOULD BE JEALOUS THAT THEY WEREN'T LIVING IN SOMETHING THAT LOOKS SO NICE. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS SHOULD HAPPEN IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. MR. COATES, IF YOU WANTED TO COME BUILD SOME DUPLEXES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO YOU.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. I WOULD LOVE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR BUSINESS AS WELL.

>> WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO

SPEAK? >> MY NAME IS CHRIS, I WANT THE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

ONE THING THAT IS REMARKABLE TO ME IN SIX, SEVEN YEARS OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMING TOGETHER, WE HAVE CONSENSUS. WHEN DOES THAT HAPPEN THAT THIS MANY OPINIONS ARE THE SAME AS

[02:05:02]

EACH OTHER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE AGREE THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE GOOD FOR US.

WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT DEVELOPED. WE WOULD LIKE THE DENSITY A LITTLE BIT LESS. I AM HERE FOR 15 DIFFERENT NEIGHBORS.

AS THEY WALK BY, WE TALK ABOUT THIS. I TRY TO COME TO THE MEETINGS AND SPEAK FOR THEM. ONE IS CURRENTLY IN THE HOSPITAL.

MOST OF THEM ARE OVER 90 YEARS OLD AND THEY HAVE CONCERNS. WE WERE TALKING HOW CAN WE MAKE THE FOUR PEOPLE VOTING HERE SEE HOW INTENSE THIS IS TO US. WE DISCUSSED WHAT IF WE PUT TOGETHER AN APPRECIATION PARADE WITH BALLOONS, 280 CARS AND DROVE BY YOUR HOUSE FOR AN ILLUSTRATION. THEY SAID THAT SOUNDS LIKE A THREAT.

OH, NO. BUT IF THAT IS LIKE A THREAT, WHY SHOULD THAT BE HAPPENING TO THE NEIGHBORS ON GARFIELD. I'M A LITTLE FURTHER AWAY ON MADISON.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO BE DIRECTLY AFFECTED AS MUCH. PROBABLY FILTER DOWN A BIT.

EXCEPT THEY WILL BE GOING PRETTY FAST BY THE TIME THEY GET TO MY HOUSE.

I GUARANTEE YOU WHERE I AM ON MADISON NOW WE HAVE RENTERS COMING 55 MILES AN HOUR.

WE HAVE TWO BLOCKS I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS. BUT WITH ALL OF US SEEING IT THIS WAY, WE DON'T KNOW HOW OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS COULD VOTE AGAINST EVERY ONE OF US WHO LIVED THERE. IT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE SENSE THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY SUPPORT WHEN WE'RE COMING TOGETHER WITH THE SAME VOICE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NICK, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

WE ARE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> I THANK THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERING THIS ITEM. I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ALREADY TODAY.

THIS IS AN EXCITING DAY TO BE HERE. I DO WANT TO TELL YOU THE REASONS WHY I THINK THAT THIS IS A GREAT GREAT IDEA FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF THIS YOUNG MAN JUST A FEW MOMENTS AGO ABOUT THE EXCITEMENT HIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD ENJOY IF THIS TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION IS IN HIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT IS TRUE IN MOST NEIGHBORHOODS IN THIS CITY.

THEY WOULD LOVE THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. BUT THE FIRST REASON THAT I HAVE FOR DEVELOPING IS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY OF ABILENE PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF. THEY SEEM TO KNOW A LOT ABOUT THIS, A LOT MORE THAN I DO.

THEY KNOW THE CODE AND THEY KNOW THE RULES AND THEY HAVE A GOOD IDEA, HAVING BEEN EDUCATED IN THIS DISCIPLINE THAT THEY THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA THAT THEY HAVE APPROVED IT. NUMBER TWO, THIS IS AN IN-FIELD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.

A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE. THIS PROPERTY HAS NEVER BEEN DEVELOPED. OUR TOWN HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE 1881.

IT'S TIME TO PUT IT ON THE TAX ROLLS. THIS IS ALSO AN INTERSTATE 20 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE CITY OF ABILENE.

THE NEXT REASON I THINK THAT NEW HOMES AT CHARLOTTE PLACE ARE A GOOD REASON IS BECAUSE OUR CITY NEEDS NEW NORTH SIDE HOUSING TO ATTRACT MORE NEW FAMILIES AND STUDENTS TO OUR ABILENE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. WE DON'T HAVE MANY NEW

[02:10:05]

ROOFTOPS. THAT IS THE KEY TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

WE'RE DEVELOPING NEW ROOFTOPS ON THE NORTH SIDE TO SUPPORT OUR CITY.

I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT. MAY I GO AHEAD JUST A FEW MORE MOMENTS?

>> JUST A FEW MORE MOMENTS, PLEASE. >> THE NEXT REASON I HAVE IS THAT OUR CITY, THE CITY OF ABILENE, NEEDS NEW SALES TAX DOLLARS TO MAKE UP FOR PROJECTED SHORTFALL DURING THIS UNUSUAL TIME IN OUR CITY AND CITY'S HISTORY, IN OUR OWN NATION'S HISTORY, WE NEED SALES TAX DOLLARS. THIS PROJECT PROVIDES SALES TAX DOLLARS. THIS PROJECT ALSO WILL PROVIDE NEW PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS.

AND OUR CITY NEEDS NEW PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS. AGAIN, THIS PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE HISTORY OF OUR TOWN SINCE 1881. CHARLOTTE PLACE WILL BRING WELL DESIGNED NEW ATTRACTIVE HOUSING TO THE GARFIELD NEIGHBORHOOD. TO GARFIELD STREET.

AND WILL CREATE ENERGY AND EXCITEMENT FOR THE FAMILIES WHO WANT TO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THERE ARE MANY MANY FAMILIES THAT WILL WANT TO LIVE THERE. LET'S TALK ABOUT WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE.

>> LET'S WIND IT UP. >> THESE PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN COMING TO THIS PROJECT.

ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FOR ME TODAY. >> ANY QUESTIONS MR. COATES.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE ARE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS?

>> HELLO. THANK YOU. CHLOE ROBERTS.

ONCE AGAIN, I AM A RESIDENT OF ABILENE. I DO LIVE ON THE NORTH SIDE.

I KNOW THE COMMUNITY SPEAKING ON THIS PROJECT. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT.

I'M JUST HEARING IT. I DO KNOW THAT THERE IS A DEMAND FOR HOUSING ON THE NORTH SIDE, WHERE I LIVE. I RODE AROUND ABILENE YESTERDAY LOOKING AT SOME OF THE PUBLIC HOUSING DWELLINGS HERE IN ABILENE. I CAN SAY THEY'RE BLIGHT FOR COMMUNITIES. BOARDED UP. THINGS LIKE THAT. I'M FROM CHICAGO.

AND I LIVED IN NEIGHBORHOODS ALL MY LIFE. COMING HERE, I THOUGHT I WOULD HAVE, JUST LIKE A DIFFERENT PACE OR JUST A BETTER QUALITY OF LIVING.

BUT I DRIVE PAST THESE COMMUNITIES AND I SEE THE SAME THING THAT I TRIED TO ESCAPE FROM BACK HOME. AND THAT IS VERY DISHEARTENING, NOT ONLY TO ME BUT TO MY CHILDREN. BECAUSE TO THEM, THEY SEE THAT AND IT REMINDS THEM OF WHERE WE CAME FROM AND WHERE WE DON'T WANT TO BE AGAIN. I HOPE YOU ALL CAN PUT THESE FUNDS TO GOOD USE FOR THE COMMUNITIES BECAUSE WE NEED IT. WHAT IS HAPPENING ACROSS THIS NATION SHOULD WAKE PEOPLE UP. BECAUSE THAT IS GOING TO SPILL OUT INTO COMMUNITIES SUCH AS ABILENE. IT ALREADY HAS. BECAUSE WE'RE HEARING IT FROM PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE. SO I DON'T WANT TO COMPARE IT TO, I DON'T WANT TO COMPARE THIS TO THE LEVEES IN LOUISIANA. IT STARTED OUT AS A SMALL CRACK, IT CREATED A CATASTROPHE. AND I WOULD HATE TO SEE ABILENE GO DOWN THAT COURSE. AND PUT PEOPLE IN THESE PREDICAMENTS OR SITUATIONS WHERE THEY'RE HOMELESS OR THEIR CHILDREN DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE HOUSING.

OR THERE IS NO RESOURCES IN THE COMMUNITIES. AND JUST FOCUSING ATTENTION ON ONE AREA OR SPECIFIC AREAS, TARGET AREAS, LET'S FOCUS ON ALL COMMUNITIES AND GIVE EVERYBODY OPPORTUNITIES TO LIVE WHERE THEY CHOOSE. OR TO THRIVE WHERE THEY CHOOSE.

WHEN YOU POUR INTO THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY WILL POUR BACK INTO THE ABILENE.

BUT IF YOU STARVE THE PEOPLE YOU'RE GOING TO MAJOR PROBLEMS IN THE FUTURE.

THAT IS COMING FROM A MAJOR CITY LIKE CHICAGO. I'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN.

AND IT'S HORRIBLE. AND WHAT IS GOING ON THERE NOW IS HORRIBLE.

AND YOU KNOW I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN TO ABILENE. SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, IT'S CHANGED MY LIFE. POSITIVELY, IN NO WAYS I CAN'T DESCRIBE RIGHT NOW.

BUT I'VE CHANGED FOR THE BETTER. MY LIFE HAS CHANGED AROUND TREMENDOUSLY. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE MORE OF THESE FUNDS ALLOCATED INTO THE COMMUNITIES. AND PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF BEING BROUGHT TO THE TABLE.

WHEN THESE MEETINGS HAPPEN, PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF SHOULD BE AT THE TABLE TO DISCUSS HOW THESE

[02:15:04]

FUNDS ARE GOING TO BE USED. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH >> THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY COMMENTS? >> THE QUESTION ONE CITIZEN BROUGHT UP ABOUT EMINENT DOMAIN AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GARFIELD AND WHAT MAY BE REQUESTED WITH THIS PROPERLY. GARFIELD IS A ROAD, PUBLIC STREET.

AND THERE IS WIDE WIDENING ACTIVITIES GOING ON. WE'RE WORKING ON A UTILITY EASEMENT AND WORKING WITH THEM TO WIDEN GARFIELD WHERE WE CAN. GARFIELD, ANYBODY WHO HAS DRIVEN DOWN THIS ROAD KNOWS THAT IT IS A PROBLEM. AND MICHAEL, I'M FEARFUL THAT I MAY BE SAYING THE NAME OF THE WRONG WRONG. IT'S GARFIELD? IT'S NOT. WHICH ROAD IS THIS? NO. IT'S THE ONE THAT GOES BY AUP EASEMENT. WE PUT MONEY FOR IT. GRIFFITH, THANK YOU.

GRIFFITH ROAD. WE ARE WORKING WITH AEP TO WIDEN GRIFFITH ROAD.

THE DIFFERENCE IS, IT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHERE EMINENT DOMAIN COULD BE USED BECAUSE IT'S AN ACTUAL PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. IT'S A CURRENT PUBLIC STREET. IN THIS INSTANCE, WHAT THE COMMUNITY HAS TO DO IS JUST NOT NECESSARILY A GOOD USE. CITY ATTORNEY HAS INDICATED HE HAS LEGAL CONCERNS WITH IT. I HAVE PHILOSOPHICAL CONCERNS ABOUT IT.

TAKING PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE DEVELOPER THAT WASN'T INTENDED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE.

IT'S PROBLEMATIC. >> THAT IS ADDRESSING THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE.

I THINK WE HAVE ADDRESSED THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE. >> CORRECT.

>> ANYMORE COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? >> I WOULD LIKE FOR OUR CHIEF TO ADDRESS THE FIRE ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY MR. SCHWARTZ, ACCESS TO LADDER TRUCKS AND

THAT SORT OF THING. >> SO I HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH MY FIRE MARSHAL.

AND A FIRE ENGINE AT MAX IS 102 INCHES WIDE, NINE AND A HALF FEET.

AVERAGE VEHICLE IS ABOUT SIX AND A HALF TO SEVEN FOOT WIDE. THOSE ROADS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'RE 36 FEET WIDE. SO I MEAN, YOU'VE GOT PLENTY OF ROOM EVEN IN THE CUL-DE-SAC AREAS TO MANEUVER FIRE TRUCKS THROUGH THERE. WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT PLACING THE HYDRANTS IN THE RIGHT LOCATION SO THAT WE'RE NOT STUCK GOING IN AND ONLY ACCESSING THEM THROUGH ONE WAY. WE WOULD WANT THEM AT THE ENTRANCES.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT MANEUVERING THAT AREA.

>> THAT WAS WHAT I NEEDED TO HEAR. THANK YOU.

>> I DO APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO HAS COME OUT TODAY. A LOT OF THE E-MAILS THAT WE RECEIVED I UNDERSTAND ABOUT TRAFFIC, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE MAIN ISSUE IS WANTING TO CUT OFF THAT ACCESS FROM THAT, TO THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THE ACCESS ROAD OF I-20.

WITH THIS, WE COULD ABANDON THAT AREA OF CAMPUS COURT SO THAT COULD NOT HAPPEN.

CORRECT? >> THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY COMMENT.

THAT IS WHAT MOST OF MY E-MAILS HAVE BEEN, CONCERN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ON TO STANFORD.

ALSO WE PROMOTE IN FIELD DEVELOPMENT. I THINK THAT WE AS A CITY CAN'T BE THE ROADBLOCK THAT STANDS IN THE WAY OF THAT HAPPENING. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'VE HAD THIS FANTASTIC NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 50, 60 YEARS. BUT THIS IS THE CITY OF ABILENE. AND WE'VE GOT TO MOVE FORWARD AND I'VE SEEN HOUSES THAT MR. COATES HAS BUILT. AND THEY ADD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

INSTEAD OF TAKING AWAY. AND IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.

[02:20:02]

SO I THINK IT WILL BE A GRADUAL PROCESS OF YOU LEARNING A NEW WAY OF LIFE.

>> MY OTHER COMMENT IS I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND THAT THERE BE AN HOA.

I KNOW WE CAN'T PUT THAT IN THE MOTION. I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND THERE BE AN HOA. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE A COMMENT ABOUT THESE MEETINGS ARE THE REASON A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO RUN FOR COUNCIL BECAUSE IT'S NOT FUN BEING OVER HERE.

IN MY TWO YEARS ON THE COUNCIL, WE'VE APPROVED A ZONING CHANGE THAT WE HAD A LARGE PETITION FROM NEIGHBORS ABOUT. AND IT SEEMED LIKE THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

AND WE'VE DONE SOME OTHER THINGS. AND AFTER ONE OF THOSE THINGS WE DID, WITHIN A FEW DAYS, I GOT A CALL FROM THE SECOND BUSINESS PERSON WHO LOOKED AT WHAT WE DID, THE FIRST BUSINESS PERSON WHO LOOKED AT WHAT WE DID FOR THE SECOND BUSINESS PERSON AND ACCUSED US OF PLAYING FAVORITES. IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ME THAT WE CAN PICK WINNERS AND LOSERS. THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M ABOUT. GOT TO BE ABOUT WHAT IS FAIR.

PLANNING AND ZONING CHANGES HAVE BEEN GOING ON ABOUT 100 YEARS OR SO, SINCE WE MOVED OUT OF DOWNTOWN AND IT'S NOT FUN TO BE ON THIS SIDE. IT'S NOT FUN TO HAVE IT HAPPEN.

FAIR IS FAIR. AFTER I GOT THAT PHONE CALL, I FOCUS ON TRYING TO BE FAIR.

THAT IS MY COMMENT. >> I'M GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THIS WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS FROM STAFF, AND WITH THE PART 7B THAT WE ADD ONLY, ALL VEHICULAR ACCESS TO AND FROM THIS PROPERTY SHALL ONLY BE

AVAILABLE BY WAY OF GARFIELD. >> SECOND. >> AND A MOTION AND A SECOND BY

COUNCILMAN ALBUS. >> IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

READY TO VOTE. >> HURT >> YES.

>> ALBUS. >> YES. >> PRICE IS ABSTAINING.

>> RENTZ >> YES. >> MCALISTER IS ABSTAINING.

>> COUNCIL MEMBER CRAVER. >> NO. >> MAYOR WILLIAMS IS

ABSTAINING. >> MOTION CARRIES. >> NO IT DOESN'T.

>> NO. IT DOES NOT. >> MUST HAVE FOUR POSITIVE VOTES FOR A MOTION TO CARRY.

>> IS THAT CORRECT, STANLEY? >> WE HAD THREE. >> IT TAKES FOUR.

>> IT DID NOT PASS. >> IT DID NOT PASS. >> APOLOGIES.

>> MOTION FAILS. WE'LL NOW MOVE TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

[PUBLIC COMMENTS]

THERE NO VOTES OR ANY FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WILL ONLY ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PRESENT IDEAS AND INFORMATION TO CITY OFFICIALS AND STAFF. THERE WILL BE A THREE MINUTE LIMIT ON EACH SPEAKER. JUST GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. DAVID SCHWARTZ AGAIN. WELL, I KNOW YEARS AGO WHEN I WORKED AT THE PIZZA PLACE IN THE EVENINGS, IT WOULD BE TWO GENTLEMEN COME IN FROM THE CITY IN THE EARLY EVENINGS, AROUND SEVEN SOMETHING AND THEY SAID ONE OF THEIR JOBS WAS AMONG OTHERS, THEY WOULD GO AROUND AND SEE WHAT TRAFFIC LIGHTS WERE OUT AND WHAT STREETLIGHTS WERE OUT. SO I KNOW THAT WAS LIKE I SAID, AT LEAST OVER 30 SOMETHING YEARS AGO, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS ANY POSITION THAT IS STILL LIKE THAT TODAY.

BUT YOU DRIVE AROUND TOWN, YOU SEE ALL OF THESE AEP OWNED STREETLIGHTS THAT WE'RE PAYING 135 BUCKS FOR A YEAR. AND THEY'RE NOT LIVING UP ON THEIR BARGAIN.

YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT GETTING REPORTED OR THEY'RE NOT WORKING ON THEM.

I KNOW THE CITY HAS THE APP CALLED SEE IT, CLICK IT, FIX IT.

I KNOW YOU INTERNET GURUS OR APP GURUS COULD PUT A LINK ON THERE TO WHERE REPORT A STREETLIGHT, IT WOULD LINK OUT TO AEP'S REPORTED STREETLIGHT. MAYBE WE CAN GET MORE PUBLIC

[02:25:04]

PEOPLE REPORTING THESE TO TRY TO GET THESE FIXED. BUT IF YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH LIKE I HAVE, YOU CALL OHIO FIRST OFF, YOU'RE CALLING SOMEBODY IN OHIO, THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE GRAPE STREET IS. THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE BEACH IS. THEY DON'T KNOW ANY OF THESE STREETS AND THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS THAT CLOSE TO? WHAT IS THE ADDRESS AND EVERYTHING. AND IF YOU COULD HAVE THAT WHERE YOUR APP WOULD LINK OUT TO THAT AND GO RIGHT STRAIGHT TO REPORTED STREETLIGHT OUTAGE, THAT MIGHT HELP.

BECAUSE JUST LIKE DRIVING DOWN MOCKINGBIRD UNDERPASS THE LAST SEVERAL NIGHTS, THERE IS LIGHTS UNDER THERE. PROBABLY MAINTAINED BY AEP. I THROW UP MY HANDS AND I THOUGHT I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO REPORT THOSE. IT'S ONLY ABOUT MAYBE 60 PERCENT OR 66 PERCENT OF THEM WORKING. AND THE LIGHTS UNDERNEATH THE UNDERPASS, SEVERAL OF THOSE ARE OUT. IT GETS FRUSTRATING WHEN YOU CALL THEM AND THE 800 NUMBER, USED TO CALL THEM ON THE DIRECT LINE HERE.

AND THAT HAD SOME EFFECT. BUT NOT REALLY. BUT THE BEST I HAD IS WHERE YOU GO TO THE WEBSITE, WHERE IT SAYS REPORT A STREETLIGHT OUT. THE PROBLEM IS AGAIN, IT'S THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY BECAUSE IF YOU CALL THAT 800 NUMBER, YOU ARE TALKING TO SOMEBODY IN OHIO AND THEY WANT TO KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU. AND THEN THEY WANT TO GIVE YOU A CODE. WELL, THIS IS YOUR CODE FOR REPORTING THIS.

THAT IS MY SUGGESTION. AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, FOR YOUR APP GURUS ON THE CLICK IT FIX IT APP TO MAKE IT WHERE IT LINKS OUT TO THAT EXACT AEP PAGE, OR AT LEAST MAYBE WE CAN GET SOME MORE PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC REPORTING SOME OF THESE STREETLIGHTS THAT THEY'RE NOT

MAINTAINING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO

PARTICIPATE THIS MORNING? >> GOOD MORNING AGAIN. MY COMMENTS ARE MOSTLY AROUND THE FIVE-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN CONVERSATION. MR. PRICE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING WITH THE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS. I LIVE IN ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND SO ANY TIME I SEE ANYONE WITH ANY POWER ADVOCATING FOR MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, I'M THANKFUL. MY SECOND COMMENT WAS IN MR. RAINBOW, WHO HAS LEFT, IN HIS COMMENTS ABOUT THE NEXT 30 DAYS MOVING FORWARD, HE SAID THAT THERE WOULD BE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING WITH THE CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE BEEN HIRED. I HAVE BEEN TEXTING WITH THE CONSULTANTS.

THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE PLAN. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE PLAN, IT DOES HAPPEN. I'M AWARE THAT HE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT HAD HAPPENED AT OTHER TIMES. HAVING SAID THAT, I'M CONNECTED WITH MANY OF THE HELPING ORGANIZATIONS IN TIME, IF ANY MORE OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS NEEDS TO HAPPEN, I'M WILLING TO HELP FACILITATE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. THANK YOU.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. IT IS 10:59 A.M.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

AND AT THIS TIME, WE RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO THE OPEN MEETING ACT, SECTION 551.071, CONVERSATION WITH OUR ATTORNEY, SECTION 551.072, REAL PROPERTY, SECTION 55.076, SECURITY DEVICES, BUSINESS PROSPECTS AND

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.