[5. Consent Agenda - Items considered to be routine are enacted by one motion without separate discussion. If the City Council desires to discuss an item, the item is removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.]

AND I WILL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 5.23.

IS THERE SUCH A MOTION? MOTION, A SECOND BEEN MADE? ANY DISCUSSION? ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THAT? IF NOT, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. I HEAR NONE.

ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION IS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

SO NOW LET'S TAKE UP ITEM 5.23.

[23. Resolution - Human Resources Health Benefits: Consider a resolution authorizing the City Manager, for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock, to purchase and renew a reduced premium for specific stop loss insurance coverage, renegotiated increased prescription rebates, and an administration credit from BlueCrossBlueShield of Texas, to reduce health benefit costs while maintaining essential services.]

AND I'M GOING TO CALL ON OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR TO COME FORWARD AND PROVIDE THE STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM.

GOOD AFTERNOON MAYOR. GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS.

WE ARE PROPOSING THE APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION TO CONSIDER AUTHORIZING OUR RENEGOTIATION OF OUR STOP LOSS CONTRACT WITH BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD.

AND THE RENEGOTIATION OF THIS CONTRACT HAS AFFORDED US A SAVINGS OF OVER $800,000.

I WILL TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.

I THINK, DO YOU HAVE A SOMETHING TO SHOW US AS FAR AS HOW WE'RE GETTING THESE SAVINGS? BECAUSE THAT'S THE REASON I PULLED THIS, IS JUST TO LET OUR CITIZENS KNOW THAT WE HAVE FOUND, AND WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO TRY TO SAVE TAXPAYER MONEY.

AND ONE OF THOSE WAYS THAT WE FOUND THIS YEAR IS IN OUR HEALTH CARE BENEFIT COSTS.

AND IT'S A SIZABLE SAVINGS THIS YEAR.

SO FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE WHO ARE WATCHING, I WANT THEM TO KNOW THAT WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THOSE WAYS TO BE AS PRODUCTIVE AS POSSIBLE WITH THEIR TAXPAYERS MONEY.

SO IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST SORT OF WALKING THROUGH THIS WITH US QUICKLY.

CERTAINLY. SO THE RENEGOTIATION WITH BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD IS FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR, JANUARY THROUGH DECEMBER OF 2025.

AND PART OF THAT RENEGOTIATION ALLOWED US TO FIND SOME REBATES WHERE WE COULD CHANGE THE REBATE AND INCREASE THE REBATE AMOUNT FOR EACH EMPLOYEE.

THE REBATE THAT WE ARE RECEIVING IN JANUARY FOR FROM BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE REBATE OF $100,000, AND THAT IS A ONE TIME REBATE THAT WE WILL RECEIVE AS WELL.

THE PER EMPLOYEE PER MONTH REBATE IMPROVEMENT AMOUNT WENT FROM $114 PER EMPLOYEE TO 137.

AND THE MAJORITY OF THE REBATE IMPROVEMENTS WERE THROUGH OUR PRESCRIPTION PLAN.

AND THOSE WERE THE TWO THAT WERE RENEGOTIATED THIS YEAR.

ON THE RENEWAL PROCESS YOU WILL SEE ON HERE.

THE TOTAL AMOUNT IS 827,571, WHICH INCLUDES ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT I HAVE JUST TOUCHED ON.

ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION.

CERTAINLY. I THINK MY ONLY QUESTION IS WHAT? FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATIONS.

THAT'S A BIG SAVINGS.

IT IS. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS NOT GOING TO IMPACT OUR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS AT ALL.

SO THE STOP LOSS IS ACTUALLY WHERE WE HAVE A CLAIM THAT IS OVER $700,000.

WE PAY UP TO THAT $700,000, AND ANYTHING OVER THAT WILL BE COVERED THROUGH THE STOP LOSS.

AND SO RENEGOTIATING THIS CONTRACT ACTUALLY IS A SAVINGS FOR US.

AWESOME. OKAY.

YEAH. TO YOUR POINT, THE SAVINGS ACCRUED TO THE CITY, AND WE'RE NOT PASSING ANY COSTS ON TO ANY OF OUR EMPLOYEES.

THIS IS JUST WE ARE ACTUALLY GETTING A BETTER REBATE ON OUR PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION.

IS THAT HOW I UNDERSTAND ABOUT A 20% INCREASE IN THAT AMOUNT?

[00:10:04]

AND THAT'S THE LARGEST PART OF THIS, A $100,000 ADMINISTRATIVE ONE TIME.

WE WON'T SEE THAT AGAIN, BUT NO.

OKAY. THAT'S JUST PART OF THE RENEGOTIATION PROCESS.

AND THANK YOU FOR LOOKING FOR THAT MONEY.

YOU KNOW, WE'LL LOOK FOR THE CHANGE IN THE SEAT CUSHIONS ANY WAY WE CAN.

AND I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR WORK HARD WORK ON DOING THAT.

AND JUST AGAIN, FOR THE PURPOSES OF OUR VOTERS AND TAXPAYERS WHO ARE WATCHING, WE ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO BE MORE EFFICIENT WITH YOUR TAX DOLLARS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. I'LL NOW TAKE UP A MOTION THEN TO APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION.

5.23. SECOND.

SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? IF NOT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. I HEAR NONE, SO IT'S PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

[1. Board Appointments - City Secretary: Consider appointments to the Planning & Zoning Commission.]

WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

WE'LL START WITH ITEM 6.1.

CONSIDER BOARD APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

I'M NOW GOING TO CALL ON OUR CITY SECRETARY TO PROVIDE THE STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU MAYOR. I WILL JUST REVIEW WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TODAY.

THERE ARE FOUR POSITIONS.

CURRENTLY, THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE TO REAPPOINT BRANDON HARDAWAY.

THE APPOINTMENT OF TAREK RADWAN TO REPLACE ZACK SAWYER.

ROBERT WOOD TO REPLACE JORDAN WHEATLEY AND DREW GRAY TO REPLACE SUSAN TOMLINSON.

AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION? SECOND. I'M LOOKING FOR.

THANK YOU, MR. GLASHEEN.

MR. MAYOR, I MOVE TO ADOPT THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO REAPPOINT MR. BRANDON HADAWAY AND TO APPOINT TAREK REDWAN, ROBERT WOOD AND DREW GRAY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND.

DOCTOR WILSON, ANY DISCUSSION? YES. COUNCILMAN MARTINEZ-GARCIA.

MAYOR, I HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND SOME OF THOSE INCLUDE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE SOME DEFICIENCIES IN OTHER AREAS OF, WELL, IN SEVERAL AREAS OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. ONE IS THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A BOARDS AND ADVISORIES THAT REFLECT ALL OF OUR DISTRICTS.

I HAVE A LOT OF DEFICIENCIES WHEN IT COMES TO HAVING DISTRICT ONE REPRESENTATION.

SECOND IS THAT OVERALL OUR WE HAVE A MALE POPULATION OR FOLKS THAT HAVE SIGNED OR THAT ARE SERVING AT A RATE OF 63.5% AND ONLY 36.5 OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HAVE BEEN APPOINTED ARE WOMEN.

NEXT, I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE ETHNIC MAKEUP OF THAT.

ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF EFFORT BY THE BOARDS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT WAS APPOINTED AND HAS REALLY MADE A LOT OF EFFORT TO PUT SOME NAMES OUT THERE.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN IT COMES TIME TO THEM BEING RECOMMENDED, THE COUNCIL DOES NOT ALWAYS ACCEPT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND RIGHT NOW, I DO NOT HAVE, I BELIEVE, ENOUGH FOLKS THAT REPRESENT DISTRICT ONE, AND JUST BASED ON HISTORICAL ISSUES THAT WE HAVE FACED, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE HAD, WE DO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR BOARDS, ESPECIALLY PLANNING AND ZONING, HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE AND REFLECT THE NEEDS OF ALL OF THE CITY AND NOT CERTAIN SEGMENTS. THE OTHER PART IS, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT FOLKS NEED TO BE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS THAT ONLY REFLECT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PLANNING AND ZONING, THAT ONLY REFLECT AREAS OF EXPERTISE AND PLANNING AND ZONING, IT SHOULD BE A COMMITTEE THAT IS MADE UP OF CITIZENS FROM ALL DISTRICTS, FROM ALL OVER THE CITY.

DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO MAKE OR AN AMENDMENT TO MAKE? I DO HAVE AN AMENDMENT.

OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE FOLLOWING FOLKS APPOINTED ABIGAIL FLESHMAN FROM DISTRICT ONE TAREK REDWAN AND ROBERT WOOD.

THOSE ARE MY RECOMMENDATIONS.

I BELIEVE THAT THESE FOLKS WOULD REPRESENT AND PROVIDE DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, AND WOULD ALSO REFLECT ALL OF THE AREAS OF

[00:15:07]

CONCERN THAT I HANDLE THAT INAPPROPRIATELY.

YOU WOULD JUST NEED.

YOU'RE DOING FINE, YOU JUST NEED TO SIT THERE AND EVENTUALLY MAKE IT AS A MOTION TO AMEND AND THEN GET THAT SECONDED.

AND THEN YOU WOULD VOTE ON THE MOTION TO AMEND.

DO YOU WISH TO MAKE THAT AS A MOTION TO AMEND WITH THOSE THREE NAMES? YES. IS THAT DOES SHE NEED TO MENTION THE NAMES OR ARE WE FINE? YOU ALREADY MENTIONED THE NAMES THAT YOU WANTED ON YOUR SLATE.

YES. ONCE AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND AND TO PUT FORWARD ABIGAIL FLESHMAN OF DISTRICT ONE.

TARIK REDWAN ONE OF DISTRICT TWO AND ROBERT WOOD OF DISTRICT FOUR.

AND WOULD YOU ALSO WANT TO REAPPOINT THE BECAUSE THERE'S FOUR THAT ARE UP FOR THE APPOINTMENT.

YES. REAPPOINT THE CURRENT ONE.

WHO'S ELIGIBLE FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

YES. OKAY.

SORRY ABOUT THAT. AND SO REAPPOINT BRANDON.

HADAWAY. HADAWAY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO THAT'S YOUR MOTION TO AMEND.

IS THERE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? YES. ONCE AGAIN, MAYOR, THE CONCERN ABOUT HAVING SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN THESE AREAS.

I'D LIKE TO ASK COURTNEY, HAS OUR CITY SECRETARY TO REMIND ME, DO PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN ANY OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.

I'M SURE THERE ARE SOME, BUT FOR THIS PARTICULAR BOARD, THE ONLY REQUIREMENT IS THAT YOU'RE A CITIZEN OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK.

BUT YES, THERE ARE THOSE BOARDS SUCH AS BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS MODEL CODES, WHERE YOUR SPECIFIC EXPERTISE MATTER IS NECESSARY, SUCH AS A PLUMBER, ELECTRICIAN, ETC..

THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE, COURTNEY, WE'VE HAD SO MANY DEFICIENCIES IN THESE AREAS AND SOMEHOW WE KEEP GETTING TO THIS POINT WHERE COUNCIL IS I MEAN, WE HAVE PEOPLE SITTING IN THESE DATABASES FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND THEN WE TURN AROUND AND WE'RE APPOINTING FOLKS THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVEN'T BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD, THE ADVISORY BOARD.

AND SOMETIMES WE'RE PICKING PEOPLE AT THE LAST MINUTE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE OTHERS AREN'T, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE WOULDN'T BE GOOD REPRESENTATIVES.

BUT I THINK MY BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF DEFICIENCIES IN DISTRICT ONE AND NOT HAVING ENOUGH FOLKS FROM OUR GROUP SERVING OR FROM OUR DISTRICT SERVING, AND I KEEP PUTTING NAMES UP, AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANOTHER NAME THAT I HAD RECOMMENDED, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT ISSUE, HE WAS NOT RECOMMENDED.

SO I JUST TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT SETS OF RULES AND I DON'T APPRECIATE IT.

I THINK THAT WE'VE GOTTEN OUT OF CONTROL WITH THIS.

IT SEEMS TO CONTINUE TO BE A PROBLEM.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE FOLKS REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR CITY.

THE OTHER PART IS THAT I HAVE BEEN VERY COMMITTED TO RECRUITING PEOPLE FROM EVERY DISTRICT, ESPECIALLY MY OWN.

AND NOW TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHERE, YOU KNOW, I HAVE REQUESTED ORIGINALLY, I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A DISTRICT ONE REPRESENTATIVE ADDED TO THIS SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE BALANCE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT OFTEN GET TARGETED AND DON'T HAVE ENOUGH FOLKS THAT ARE SPEAKING ON THEIR BEHALF.

BUT THEN IT BECAME A LITTLE BIT MORE DEMOGRAPHIC AS FAR AS ETHNICITY AND GENDER, AND THAT REALLY BOTHERED ME AND INSULTED ME.

AND SO FOR THAT REASON, THIS IS WHY I'M BRINGING IT TO THE DAIS, BECAUSE I HAVE ALWAYS STRIVED FOR US TO WORK COLLECTIVELY.

BUT WHEN OUR POPULATION IS NOT REPRESENTED IN DIFFERENT AREAS, THEN I TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT.

AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT I FELT A LITTLE ATTACKED.

AND ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE THAT UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T BRING TO THE DAIS BECAUSE OF THE DISCUSSION AND WHERE WE DISCUSSED IT.

BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, I JUST WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT WE DO NOT HAVE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT REFLECT OUR CITY, MUCH LIKE WE DO NOT HAVE A CITY COUNCIL THAT DOES NOT REFLECT OUR CITY.

WE ARE NOW ABOUT 40% HISPANIC AND CURRENTLY WE ONLY HAVE 14.3% AND I BRING THAT UP BECAUSE THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON THAT I WAS BERATED. AND SO I THINK FOR ME, IT WASN'T ORIGINALLY ABOUT THIS.

[00:20:04]

I JUST WANTED SOMEBODY FROM MY DISTRICT TO BE REPRESENTED.

AND NOW I'M DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE AND IT REALLY BOTHERS ME.

AND THAT'S WHY I AM A LITTLE BIT EMOTIONAL ABOUT IT, BECAUSE IN THIS DAY AND TIME, IT DISGUSTS ME TO SEE THAT WE HAVE THAT TYPE OF ATTITUDE IN THIS COMMUNITY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'LL JUST PUT MY OPINION IN OUR $0.02 ON THIS.

MY CONCERN IS THAT OUR DISTRICTS ARE NOT YOU CAN'T HAVE PERFECT REPRESENTATION ACROSS DISTRICTS.

BUT IF TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN ONE DISTRICT ON A BOARD OR COMMISSION AND NOT ENOUGH ON ANOTHER ONE, WHEN ISSUES COME UP AFFECTING THAT PARTICULAR DISTRICT, YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE THERE TO SPEAK UP FOR HOW A DECISION MIGHT AFFECT PEOPLE IN THAT DISTRICT.

IF YOU DON'T LIVE THERE AND YOU DON'T KNOW HOW IT AFFECTS YOU.

AND SO THAT'S EVEN ON SOMETHING LIKE PLANNING AND ZONING, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT OUR DISTRICTS IN LUBBOCK ARE REPRESENTED. SO THOSE VOICES ARE HEARD WITH REGARD TO ISSUES THAT COME UP SO THAT PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THOSE DISTRICTS CAN RESPOND AND CAN GIVE INPUT ON THOSE.

AND A LITTLE BIT OF A CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS WE ALREADY HAVE CURRENTLY A SERVING MEMBER ON FROM DISTRICT FOUR, AND WE WOULD BE ADDING TWO MORE FROM DISTRICT FOUR.

SO THAT WOULD BE THREE PEOPLE FROM DISTRICT FOUR.

AND SO THAT DOES CONCERN ME SOMEWHAT.

THESE ARE ALL GOOD NAMES.

ALL GOOD PEOPLE.

I WANT EXPERTISE ON IT, BUT I ALSO WANT PEOPLE THAT REPRESENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND I WANT THOSE VOICES FROM THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS TO BE HEARD.

SO THAT'S MY CONCERN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW WE'VE HANDLED THIS AND WHERE WE MIGHT GO.

AND SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE MORE THING.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HAD TO HAVE FOLKS THAT BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS OR SOMETIMES HAVE A CONFLICTING ISSUE, HAVE HAD TO RECUSE THEMSELVES. SO EVEN IF THEY'RE IN ATTENDANCE, IT DOESN'T ALWAYS THE DECISION ISN'T REFLECTED BASED ON THAT.

SO I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT.

AND THEN WE'RE DEALING WITH ISSUES WITH SOME OF THESE FOLKS THAT HAVE HAD ATTENDANCE ISSUES.

SO AGAIN, I THINK IT'S JUST IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE SOME EQUITY IN OUR DECISIONS.

I'M DISAPPOINTED IF WITH SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT WON'T BE SUPPORTING BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THE CITY IS CHANGING IN SO MANY REGARDS, AND WHEN WE RESIST CHANGE LIKE THIS, IT IS A POOR REFLECTION ON OUR ENTIRE CITY.

SO WITH THAT, I GUESS WE CAN CALL THE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT, SO THE MOTION BEFORE US IS ON THE AMENDMENT TO AMEND AND PRESENT THE NAMES OF BRANDON HARDAWAY FOR REAPPOINTMENT, TAREK REDWAN, ROBERT WOOD AND ABIGAIL FLEISHMAN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT, PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ALL OPPOSED.

SAY NAY. NAY.

IT FAILS. I BELIEVE 4 TO 2.

IS THAT RIGHT? 4 TO 2.

OKAY. SO THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CREATION.

MAYOR, YOU STILL HAVE TO TAKE THE MOTION.

OH THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S FINE.

YEAH. THANK YOU. I'M GLAD EVERYBODY ELSE PAYS ATTENTION HERE.

SO. SO NOW WE GO BACK TO THE AMENDMENT.

THE ORIGINAL THAT'S ON THE FLOOR, WHICH IS THE THREE NAMES ARE ACTUALLY THE FOUR NAMES.

BRANDON HARDAWAY TO BE REAPPOINTED.

TAREK REDWAN, ROBERT WOOD AND DREW GRAY.

TWO NEW APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

SO AND WE ALREADY HAVE THE MOTION IN THE SECOND ON THAT.

SO ALL WE DO IS ANY DISCUSSION, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR? LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING I.

I. ANY OPPOSED? LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING NO.

SO MOVE ON TO ITEM 6.2.

[2. Public Hearing - Business Development: Hold a public hearing to consider the creation of a Public Improvement District for Highland Oaks, which covers a portion of an area in Lubbock County, Texas, generally bounded by 146th Street to the north, Slide Road to the east, Woodrow Road to the south, and Frankford Avenue to the west. ]

WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CREATION OF A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR HIGHLAND OAKS.

AND AS A REMINDER HERE, THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REGARDING THIS AGENDA ITEM.

AND WHILE THE COUNCIL MAY ASK QUESTIONS DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE COUNCIL WILL NOT DISCUSS THE MERITS OF THE AGENDA ITEM DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SO I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEM 6.2 AT 4:35 P.M., AND I WILL FIRST CALL ON BRIANNA

[00:25:06]

BROWN TO PROVIDE OUR STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS ISSUE.

BRIANNA. THANK YOU.

MAYOR. COUNCIL. NICE TO BE WITH YOU THIS AFTERNOON.

AS THE MAYOR STATED, WE WILL BE HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CREATION OF THE HIGHLAND OAKS PID.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS DISTRICT A COUPLE OF TIMES IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, BUT JUST AS A QUICK REMINDER, I'VE GOT A MAP OF THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

AND BEFORE I GO ANY FURTHER, I JUST WANT TO MAKE A NOTE THAT WE ARE HANDLING THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WE WOULD IN THE PAST.

TYPICALLY, YOU WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERING A RESOLUTION FOR CREATION OF THIS DISTRICT TODAY.

BUT BECAUSE OF SOME THINGS WE'LL TALK ABOUT LATER IN THE PRESENTATION, THIS IS ONLY A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY.

SO YOU ARE NOT TAKING ANY ACTION.

I'M JUST HEARING FROM CITIZENS FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROPOSED DISTRICT.

I'VE LISTED HERE A COUPLE OF NOTES FROM STATE LAW REGARDING THE CREATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS.

JUST AS A REMINDER, THE AREA HAS TO MEET TWO REQUIREMENTS IN THE STATE LAW TO BE ABLE TO QUALIFY FOR CREATION.

ONE OF THOSE IS THAT THE PETITION MUST REPRESENT 50% OF THE TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY.

SO ESSENTIALLY 50% OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE DISTRICT, WITHIN THE DISTRICT, ONCE THEY MEET THAT REQUIREMENT, THEN THEY CAN HAVE ONE OR BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING TWO REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS 50% OF PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE DISTRICT, OR 50% OF THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

TYPICALLY, WE RECEIVE THESE PETITIONS FROM DEVELOPERS BEFORE THEY'VE STARTED CONSTRUCTION, SO WE REALLY DON'T GO INTO THESE DETAILS.

HIGHLAND OAKS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, AS YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO WE DID APPROVE THEIR PETITION AT A PREVIOUS MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 24TH.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THEIR PETITION WAS SIGNED BY 58.04% OF THE RECORD TAXABLE PROPERTY OWNERS.

SO THAT MEETS REQUIREMENT NUMBER ONE, AND THEN 62.48% OF THE OWNERS OF TOTAL APPRAISED VALUE, WHICH MEETS REQUIREMENT TWO.

AND I DID NOT INCLUDE IT ON THIS SLIDE, BUT THEY ALSO HAD OVER 50% OF ITEM THREE REPRESENTATION FROM OVER 50% OF THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA.

SO THEY ACTUALLY MET ALL THREE REQUIREMENTS, BUT ONLY TWO ARE REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.

WE DID PUBLISH NOTIFICATION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING IN BOTH THE AVALANCHE JOURNAL, AND THEN ALL OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS RECEIVED NOTIFICATION AS WELL.

I'M NOT GOING TO READ THIS LIST TO YOU.

I'LL PUT THIS BACK UP WHEN WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, OR WE INVITE CITIZENS TO SPEAK JUST SO THEY KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

BUT REALLY, THE THING TO NOTE HERE IS WE ARE STRICTLY DISCUSSING CREATION OF A PID TODAY.

WE'RE NOT REALLY LOOKING AT THE FINANCES OR THE PROJECTS THAT ARE ANTICIPATED TO BE DONE IN THIS DISTRICT.

YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND ALSO CONSIDERATION OF THOSE THINGS AT A LATER DATE.

A COUPLE OF NOTES ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISTRICT.

AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE, THE PRIMARY REASON FOR CREATION OF THIS PIT IS TO BRING CITY OF LUBBOCK INFRASTRUCTURE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO WATER OUT TO THE HOMEOWNERS OF THIS DISTRICT.

AND SO IF THE PIT IS CREATED, IT WILL BE USED TO FUND THAT CAPITAL PROJECT TO EXTEND WATER INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND THEN THE PID WILL ALSO COVER THE COST OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE DISTRICT OVER THE LIFE OF THE PID.

AGAIN, I'LL MAKE THE NOTE HERE THAT WE ARE ONLY DOING A PUBLIC HEARING TODAY.

SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CREATION OF THIS PID? THAT WILL BE DONE AFTER THE ELECTION FOR ANNEXATION ON NOVEMBER 5TH.

SO SHOULD THAT ANNEXATION PASS, THEN WE'LL BRING BACK A RESOLUTION FOR CREATION AT A LATER DATE.

ESTIMATED COST OF SERVICES FOR THAT WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT IS APPROXIMATELY $7.3 MILLION.

AGAIN, THIS IS A VERY PRELIMINARY NUMBER, AS WE WON'T HAVE TRUE OPINION OF COST UNTIL THE ANNEXATION IS APPROVED AND THE PIT IS ACTUALLY CREATED.

SO THAT NUMBER IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON THAT NUMBER.

EACH PROPERTY OWNER CAN ANTICIPATE AN ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT PER HOME OF $38,353.

SO THIS IS ALSO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'VE DONE PREVIOUSLY.

WE TYPICALLY HAVE AN ASSESSMENT RATE THAT'S BASED ON PROPERTY VALUE THAT GETS CHARGED TO EACH PROPERTY.

IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE ESSENTIALLY TAKEN THE TOTAL, DIVIDED IT BY THE NUMBER OF HOMES WITHIN THE AREA, AND EVERYBODY WILL PAY THE SAME COST.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO YOUR PUBLIC HEARING SLIDE.

THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS BROWN AT THIS POINT? I SEE NONE. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS BROWN.

IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK NOW ON THE CREATION OF THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT? WE KEEP USING THE WORD PID, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT STANDS FOR.

[00:30:02]

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW IF YOU OPPOSE THE CREATION OF THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.

I SEE NONE IF ANYONE IS HERE TO COME FORWARD TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS RESOLUTION CREATING THIS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

YES, SIR. MY NAME IS TIM GOEBEL.

I'M I LIVE AT AH 5308 COUNTY ROAD 7550.

I'M THE HOA BOARD SECRETARY FOR HIGHLAND OAKS, AND WE'RE HERE TO BE IN FAVOR OF THE FORMATION OF THE PID.

SO SOME OF THE RESIDENTS ARE IN FAVOR AS WELL.

I WANTED TO THANK THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR TIME AND ATTENTION ON OUR PETITION.

WE REALLY DO APPRECIATE THAT AND ALL THE WORK FROM THE CITY MANAGEMENT.

AND BUT REALLY, I JUST WANTED TO BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MAY HAVE ABOUT ALL OF THIS THAT'S GOING ON.

THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS, BUT TO SEE IF YOU GUYS HAD ANY QUESTIONS.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE HARD WORK THAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE? IT HAS BEEN A GREAT EXAMPLE.

I THINK MOVING FORWARD, IT GIVES US AN IDEA OF WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO.

SO I THINK IT WAS IT WAS SOME GOOD WORK AND IT'S APPRECIATED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THEY DID A LOT OF THE WORK TOO THERE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL.

WELL, MAYBE IN A LITTLE WHILE, WE'LL BE WELCOMING YOU AS CITIZENS TO LUBBOCK.

WHO KNOWS? WE'LL SEE HOW THAT VOTE GOES.

AND THAT ELECTION IS IN NOVEMBER.

IT'S ON THE BALLOT RIGHT NOW AS PROPOSITION A, WHICH IS REALLY CONFUSING TO A LOT OF PEOPLE BECAUSE WE HAVE A PROPOSITION A FOR OUR ROAD BOND.

BUT SINCE YOU DON'T LIVE IN THE CITY, YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON THAT PROPOSITION A, YOU'RE VOTING ON THE OTHER PROPOSITION A I'VE ALREADY HAD SOME PEOPLE ASK THAT QUESTION OF ME AND CONFUSED ME.

SO, YOU THINK THEY'D GIVE THEM DIFFERENT NUMBERS? ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THAT? AND I DO WANT TO AGAIN COMMEND OUR CITY STAFF FOR DOING A LOT OF WORK ON THIS AND MAKING SURE THAT THIS IF IT HAPPENS, IT HAPPENS IN THE RIGHT WAY AND WITHOUT COST TO OUR TAXPAYERS. SO BUT A BENEFIT TO THESE PEOPLE IN THIS DISTRICT.

SO THANK YOU FOR ALL Y'ALL'S WORK ON IT AND PRESENTING IT IN THE WAY THAT YOU DID.

NO ONE ELSE.

ALRIGHT. I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 6.2.

AND I DON'T BELIEVE.

LET'S SEE, WE GOT NEXT.

THAT'S IT ON THAT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[3. Public Hearing - Planning (District 1): Consider a request for Zone Case 3508, a request of 1585 & Frankford/Discount RV, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Light Industrial District (LI), at 12109 Frankford Avenue, located north of 122nd Street and east of Frankford Avenue, Abbe Addition, Lot 1, and consider an ordinance.]

[4. Public Hearing - Planning (District 1): Consider a request for Zone Case 3487, a request of DLC Designs, LLC for Children's Home of Lubbock, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Residential Estates District (RE), at 4602 Idalou Road, located north of East Erskine Street and east of Idalou Road, on 170.98 acres of unplatted land out of Block A, Section 25, and consider an ordinance.]

[5. Public Hearing - Planning (District 2): Consider a request for Zone Case 2565-H, a request of Indira and Vipul Patel, for a zone change from Heavy Commercial District (HC) to Medium Density Residential District (MDR), at 5930 Avenue Q South Drive and 5903 Avenue L, located east of Avenue L and south of 58th Street, Carlton Heights Addition, Block A and approximately 8.16 acres of unplatted land out of Block E, Section 2, and consider an ordinance.]

[6. Public Hearing - Planning (District 4): Consider a request for Zone Case 1542-V, a request of Lubbock Smoke Shop, LLC for Lubbock Commercial Buildings, Inc., for a zone change from Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) to Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) Specific Use for a smoke shop, at 7310 Quaker Avenue located west of Quaker Avenue and north of 74th Street, Furr Wolf Addition, Block 2, Lot 2-A-1-B, and consider an ordinance.]

[7. Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 2651-B, a request of Westar Commercial Realty for SPSM, LTD, for a zone change from Industrial Park District (IP) to Heavy Commercial District (HC), at 5044 Frankford Avenue, located west of Frankford Avenue and north of 57th Street, Frankford Business Park Addition, Lot 6-B, and consider an ordinance.]

NOW, WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE'RE GOING TO CONDUCT A CONSOLIDATED PUBLIC HEARING ON ZONING CASES.

AND THE COUNCIL HAS ALREADY RECEIVED IN THEIR PACKETS THE STAFF REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

EXCUSE ME, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

AND AS A REMINDER, THE PURPOSE OF A PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

THE COUNCIL MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR STAFF DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT NO DISCUSSION ON THE MERITS WILL BE CONDUCTED BY THE COUNCIL DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEM 6.3 THROUGH 6.7, AND WE WILL HEAR FROM MISS SAGER.

FIRST, THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

ITEM 6.3 IS ZONED CASE 3508.

THE APPLICANT IS 1585 AND FRANKFORD DISCOUNT RV.

THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF TWO TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LI.

WE SENT OUT 36 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING THREE IN FAVOR, ZERO IN OPPOSITION.