[1. Citizen Comments - According to Lubbock City Council Rules, any citizen wishing to appear in-person before a regular meeting of the City Council, regarding Item 2.1. in the Consent Agenda below, shall complete the sign-up form provided at the meeting, no later than 2:00 p.m. on September 5, 2023. Citizen Comments provide an opportunity for citizens to make comments and express a position on agenda items.]

AS A REMINDER, ACCORDING TO THE LUBBOCK CITY COUNCIL RULES, ANY CITIZEN WISHING TO APPEAR IN PERSON BEFORE A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AN AGENDA ITEM, THEY WILL COMPLETE A SIGN UP FORM NO LATER THAN 2 P.M, AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM.

AS A REMINDER, IF YOU HAVE SIGNED UP FOR A CITIZEN COMMENT, AS YOU STEP FORWARD WHEN YOUR NAME IS CALLED, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AS WELL AS YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE A STATEMENT.

AT 2.5 MINUTES, MR. JIMMY OVER HERE WILL GIVE YOU A NICE LITTLE BELL, AND THEN AT THREE MINUTES, HE WILL GIVE YOU A DOUBLE BELL.

ALL RIGHT, SO WE'LL JUST WAIT SHORTLY UNTIL I HAVE THOSE COMMENTS IN FRONT OF ME.

OKAY. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THERE ARE NO CITIZEN COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.

BEFORE WE BEGIN WITH OUR REGULAR AGENDA AND OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO MS. SHEILA PATTERSON HARRIS, MAYOR PRO TEM.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR.

I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SAY PUBLICLY, AND PARTICULARLY TO THE STAFF OF THE GREAT CITY OF LUBBOCK, TEXAS, USA, TO THE MAYOR AND MR. ATKINSON CITY MANAGER, EVERYBODY, AND YOUR PART IN AND RECOGNITION OF THE TJ PATTERSON MEMORIAL PLAZA FROM THE PATTERSON CLAN, WE ARE DEEPLY APPRECIATIVE OF WHAT YOU'VE DONE, AND PLEASE KNOW THAT IT WILL NEVER GO UNNOTICED BECAUSE IT MEANS SO MUCH TO US THAT IT WILL START ENOUGH OF MY DAD AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT OUT LOUD SO THAT EVERYBODY COULD HEAR JUST HOW SPECIAL THAT WAS AND HAS BEEN TO US.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH AND APPRECIATE IT FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE PATTERSON CLAN HEARTS, WE SAY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. PATTERSON HARRIS.

ALL RIGHT. NOW WE WILL MOVE TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

[2. 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.]

TODAY WE HAVE ITEM 2.1.

THAT'S AN ORDINANCE ON AMENDMENT 34 AMENDING THE 2023 BUDGET FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES, RESPECTING THE PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, PROVIDING FOR FILING AND PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE. DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. THANK YOU, MISS MARTINEZ-GARCIA.

THANK YOU, DR.

WILSON, AND JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, WE DO HAVE MISS JOY.

SHE IS AVAILABLE FROM THE EYE IN THE SKY, SO EVERYONE WILL KNOW WHEN THEY HEAR HER.

SHE IS WITH US TODAY.

ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. MISS JOY, DID WE GET A RESPONSE? AYE. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. 2.1 CARRIES SEVEN ZERO.

ALL RIGHT. NOW WE WILL MOVE TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.

THIS IS ITEMS 3.1 THROUGH 3.6, AND BEFORE WE BEGIN INTO THE AGENDA, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU, MR. ATKINSON. THANK YOU, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL.

[1. Public Hearing - Finance: Hold a public hearing on the Proposed FY 2023-24 Operating Budget and Capital Program.]

A DAY I THINK WE'VE LONG AWAITED.

WE'RE ALMOST TO THE END OF YOUR BUDGET PROCESS.

SO YOUR ACTION TODAY WILL BE TO CONDUCT THREE SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARINGS, FOLLOWED BY APPROPRIATE ACTION ITEMS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

TO BEGIN, I WILL WALK US THROUGH A SUMMARY VERSION OF WHERE WE STAND.

THIS IS COMPLETELY UPDATED BASED ON EVERY COMMENT THAT WE'VE HAD AND EVERY CHANGE THAT WE HAVE MADE TO DATE.

SO STARTING WITH THE OVERVIEW, OF COURSE, PROPERTY TAX, THE TAX RATE WILL CAPTURE THE NEW GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT.

THE CHANGE IN MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION ALLOWS 2.98%.

SO WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT'S THE RATE NUMBER AND THE PENNY NUMBER AND THE PERCENTS, 2.98% IS REALLY YOUR CHANGE THERE, YOUR

[00:05:07]

DEBT PORTION OF THE RATE.

IT DOES HAVE A SLIGHT INCREASE.

THAT, OF COURSE, IS WE HAVE DRAWN DOWN NOW YEAR ONE OF THE 2022 STREET BOND.

I THINK FOR SALES TAX, PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT LINE ON THERE IS TO LOOK AT THE VERY LAST BULLET POINT, THE ONE THAT SAYS YOUR FISCAL 24 COLLECTIONS ARE BUDGETED AT 98.1 MILLION.

THAT'S 8.2% OVER YOUR BUDGET FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, BUT THE OPERATIVE NUMBER THERE IS IT'S 2.5% OVER WHAT WE CALL THE END OF YEAR FORECAST. AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FROM THE BEGINNING, SALES TAX IN LUBBOCK IS FINE.

IT'S GOOD. IT IS NO LONGER INCREASING THE WAY IT HAS, BUT RATHER IT IS COMING DOWN PRETTY FLAT.

IT IS FLAT ABOVE THE LINE.

SO AS LONG AS WE STAY ABOVE THAT LINE, WE'RE GOOD, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE VERY LARGE INCREASES FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR THAT WE'VE ENJOYED FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS. SO FOR GENERAL FUND, THAT IS YOUR BIG REVENUE CHANGE.

MOVING OVER, TALK ABOUT RATE CHANGES THAT ARE PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET BEGINNING WITH STORMWATER.

STORMWATER IS RECOMMENDED TO HAVE A 60 CENT REDUCTION ON THE TIER ONE AND THEN THAT PRO RATES UP AS THE STORMWATER CHARGES GO UP.

THERE IS NO CHANGE PROPOSED TO WASTEWATER.

THERE IS A 25 CENT OR ONE QUARTER PER MONTH CHANGE TO THE BASE RATE IN WATER AND THEN THAT PRO RATES AGAIN BASED ON THE LARGER METERS AS WELL AS A SLIGHT CHANGE IN THE VOLUMETRIC COMPONENT OF WATER, AND WE HAVE NOT MADE A VOLUMETRIC CHANGE TO WATER IN A NUMBER OF YEARS.

SOLID WASTE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING $1 PER MONTH CHANGE ON RESIDENTIAL $0.25 PER TON AT WEST TEXAS REGIONAL DISPOSAL FACILITY.

THE LARGE LANDFILL AT ABERNATHY, AND NOTE THAT IS NOT A CHARGE THAT OUR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS PAY, THAT IS FOR OTHER HAULERS OR COMMERCIAL WASTE THAT IS COMING IN ACROSS OUR SCALES.

FOR CALICHE CANYON, OUR SMALLER LANDFILL, THE ONE THAT'S CLOSER TO TOWN, THE ONE THAT IS WHAT WE CALL CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS.

$1 CHANGE WE HAVE MADE TO METHODOLOGY CHANGES TO THE BUDGET AND JUST WANT TO BE SURE WE HAVE THOSE ON THE TABLE.

THE TRANSFER TO MARKET LUBBOCK INC IS NOW SET TO TRANSFER A BUDGETED DOLLAR AMOUNT RATHER THAN SO MANY PENNIES OR PORTIONS OF PENNIES OFF OF YOUR TAX RATE.

THAT NUMBER IS MOVED UP AND DOWN OVER THE YEARS.

THIS YEAR WE BRING TO YOU A BUDGET AT A DOLLAR AMOUNT.

SO YOU SEE THAT AS CHANGE NUMBER ONE, AND METHODOLOGY NUMBER TWO, HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX THAT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN ALLOCATED ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS. IT IS ALSO WHAT PRODUCES ALL OF THE TRUE UPS THAT YOU ARE USED TO SEEING.

WE DID SOME JULY 1ST IN AUGUST.

THERE WILL BE MORE COMING TO FINISH THIS YEAR AS WE GET LATE INTO THE FALL.

STAFF HAS PREPARED THIS BUDGET TO WHERE YOUR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX ALLOCATION IS A BUDGETED DOLLAR AMOUNT RATHER THAN A PERCENTAGE.

SO WHAT THAT WILL DO, WE'LL TRANSFER COLLECTIONS OR COLLECTIONS WILL BE TRANSFERRED BASED ON THE ACTUALS.

ANY COLLECTIONS OVER BUDGET WILL GO INTO A HOT HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.

THEY'LL GO INTO A HOT RESERVE FUND.

THAT RESERVE FUND IS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR APPROPRIATION BY THIS CITY COUNCIL.

SO THAT WILL BE THERE FOR FUTURE PROJECTS.

IT COULD BE ANY ONE OF THE GROUPS THAT WE FUND.

IT COULD BE A CITY PROJECT, BUT IT HAS TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE HOT RULES AND IT HAS TO COME OUT ONLY ON THIS COUNCIL'S APPROVAL.

SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE? OH, OKAY. I'LL MOVE ON.

TALK ABOUT SOME STAFFING CHANGES ON THE LEFT SIDE, YOU SEE WHERE WE ARE, STAFFING CHANGES TO MEET DEMAND.

SO THESE ARE ADDITIONS.

A COUPLE THAT I'LL CALL OUT, YOU SEE 18 NEW FOR LUBBOCK FIRE RESCUE.

15 OF THOSE ARE FIRE STATION 20, AND OF COURSE, FIRE STATION 20 WAS STEP ONE OF THE BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT YOU JUST CONSIDERED.

THREE ARE TO REDUCE OVERTIME CALLBACK, SIX LUBBOCK POLICE OFFICERS, FOUR MORE PUBLIC HEALTH PEOPLE EIGHT LUBBOCK POWER AND LIGHT, BUT IF YOU GO OVER TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PAGE, YOU SEE OUR OFFSETS.

SO ELIMINATED POSITIONS, POSITIONS MOVED.

SO SEVEN OF THE METER TECHNICIANS THAT TODAY ARE UNDER LPL'S PAYROLL WILL MOVE TO WATER AND WASTEWATER.

THAT IS WHAT THOSE INDIVIDUALS DO.

NET CHANGE YEAR OVER YEAR IS PLUS 14.

SO THAT IS THE TOTAL CHANGE TO YOUR CITY STAFFING OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR.

[00:10:01]

A COUPLE OF OTHER HIGHLIGHTS.

WE'RE MOVING INTO CAPITAL.

COUNCIL WE'RE PROPOSING $13.5 MILLION FOR YOUR STREET MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 24.

THAT'S A MILLION AND A HALF MORE THAN IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

WE'VE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL EACH YEAR IN STEPPING THAT UP.

1 MILLION OF THAT IS GENERAL FUND CAPITAL.

SO IT IS TRUE. GENERAL FUND, CASH CAPITAL.

500,000 OF THAT IS COMING FROM YOUR GATEWAY FUND SPECIFICALLY TO ADD ON TOP OF MONEY TO BE SPENT INSIDE LOOP 289.

THAT MONEY WILL BE IN A SEPARATE CAPITAL ACCOUNT.

IT WILL HAVE SEPARATE ACCOUNTING SO THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO SHOW WHERE AND HOW THOSE DOLLARS WERE USED.

MOVING DOWN TO YOUR VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT, OTHER CAPITAL PROGRAMS. WE HAVE JUST UNDER 92 MILLION IN TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 24.

23 PROJECTS, 14 ARE CASH FUNDED.

THE LARGEST PART OF THE CAPITAL FOR NEXT YEAR ARE THE 2022 BOND ELECTION PROJECTS, AND YOU SEE THE LIST OF THOSE.

SO THAT'LL BE STEP TWO IN THE BOND.

THERE ARE TWO PROJECTS FOR SOLID WASTE THAT WILL BE FEE SUPPORTED DEBT, THE SECOND AND LAST INSTALLMENT AT THE TRANSFER STATION, AND IT IS TIME TO START ON THE NEW CELL AT YOUR LARGE LANDFILL AT ABERNATHY, AND THEN 428,000 FROM THE REMAINING ARPA GOING TO PARKS AND RECREATION FOR PLAYGROUNDS.

CONTINUING ON.

WE HAVE 57 VEHICLES PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET.

93% OF THOSE ARE CASH.

YOU DO HAVE TAX NOTES ON TWO OF THOSE VEHICLES.

FIRE SUPPRESSION, SOLID WASTE.

TWO OF OUR ONE GRADER, ONE LOADER FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE, A LARGE SCRAPER MACHINE TO GO TO THE LANDFILL AND A ROLL OFF TRUCK NOTE DOWN BELOW. THE 57 VEHICLES WE HAVE IN THIS BUDGET DOES NOT INCLUDE THE 42 VEHICLES THAT WE PRE-PURCHASED BACK IN JUNE, AND OF COURSE, THOSE ALSO WERE ALL CASH FUNDED VEHICLES.

TALKING ABOUT INVESTING IN OUR CITY EMPLOYEES.

WE DO HAVE A 4% COLA PROPOSED BOTH FOR CIVIL SERVICE AND FOR NON CIVIL SERVICE AND STAFF.

VERY MUCH APPRECIATES DISCUSSION THAT THE COUNCIL HAD.

WHEN YOU CHALLENGED US TO GO BACK AND TO FIND THAT HEALTH BENEFITS, THE CITY IS ABSORBING THE MAJORITY AGAIN OF THE HEALTH CARE COST INCREASE.

SO THE CITY'S ALLOCATION CHANGES BY PLUS 10%, THE EMPLOYEE RETIREE ALLOCATION BY PLUS 2%.

IF YOU LOOK DOWN ON THAT CHART ON THERE, I THINK YOU CAN SEE THIS IS STILL A VERY GOOD DEAL FOR OUR EMPLOYEES COUNCIL.

WE HAVE HEARD YOU AS FAR AS WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO EVALUATE SOME CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, NOT FOR THIS, BUT IN THE FUTURE, AND YOU'LL HEAR MORE FROM ME ON THAT WHEN WE GET OUT OF BUDGET SEASON.

EMPLOYEE EDUCATION ASSISTANCE.

REMEMBER, YOU FUNDED FOR US IN THE CURRENT YEAR.

THE FIRST PART OF THAT, WE ARE ASKING TO ALLOCATE 500,000 ALSO OF ARPA AGAIN, TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT, THE PROGRAM IS STARTING TO GAIN INTEREST QUITE RAPIDLY.

I HOPE THAT WE SPEND OUT EVERY ONE OF THESE DOLLARS ON BEHALF OF OUR EMPLOYEES.

A FEW OTHER THINGS ON THE NEXT PAGE CDL APPRENTICE PROGRAM.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT MANY TIMES.

IT HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.

WE WANT TO CONTINUE DOING THAT.

OUR SUMMER FIELD APPRENTICE PROGRAM ALSO WAS SUCCESSFUL.

THAT WAS BRAND NEW. WE WEREN'T EXACTLY SURE WHERE IT WOULD LAND.

IT LANDED IN A GOOD SPOT.

WE WANT TO KEEP DOING THAT COUNCIL WITH THE PROPOSED BUDGET, WE'RE GOING TO TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN PARKS AND RECREATION.

SO WE ARE TAKING A NUMBER OF THE FULL TIME POSITIONS THAT ARE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO FILL AND CONVERTING THOSE ON A DOLLAR BASIS INTO PART TIME HOURS THAT WE CAN SPEND.

MR. VAN GUNDY AND HIS TEAM PUT THIS TOGETHER.

I THINK THEY'VE COME UP WITH A PRETTY INTERESTING WAY TO TRY TO GET GET THIS WORK DONE AND GET PEOPLE PAID.

IN THE MIDDLE, YOU SEE THE EDUCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, CDL TRAINING, THAT'S FOR AN EXISTING EMPLOYEE THAT IS IN A POSITION WHERE THEY CAN PROMOTE OR ADVANCE IF THEY GET A CDL AND WE'LL MAKE THAT POSSIBLE OFF TO THE RIGHT.

SOME NEW PROGRAMS WE'RE WORKING ON MODELED AFTER SUMMER FIELD WOULD BE SUMMER OFFICE APPRENTICE PROGRAM FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

SOME FLEXIBLE WORK SCHEDULES FOR OFFICE WORKERS AND MOVING OUR VACATION ACCRUAL OR ANNUAL LEAVE TO A PROPORTIONAL BASIS INSTEAD OF A ONCE A YEAR LUMP BASIS, AND THIS IS ACTUALLY THE NUMBER ONE REQUEST I GET FROM NEW EMPLOYEES.

IF THEY'RE HIRED IN JANUARY, THEY DON'T GET THEIR VACATION UNTIL THE NEXT JANUARY.

THIS BASICALLY WILL ALLOW THEM TO ACCRUE THOSE HOURS THE SAME WAY THEY DO SICK LEAVE.

SO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD DEAL TO DO THAT.

OKAY. MOVING NOW TO GREAT BIG NUMBERS COMING ACROSS HERE.

WE LOOK AT THE TOP. THAT IS YOUR GENERAL FUND.

YOU SEE THAT THE CURRENT YEAR'S GENERAL FUND TOTAL BUDGET, THE COLUMN THAT SAYS FY 22-23 COME ACROSS THAT IT'S

[00:15:09]

$278,667,000. THE NEW YEAR BUDGET IS PROPOSED AT $287,009,000. COUNCIL THIS IS ON THE REVENUE SIDE, SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THAT IS.

WE'LL DO THE EXPENSE IN JUST A MOMENT, BUT THE REVENUE CHANGE IS 8.3 ENTERPRISE FUNDS CHANGE OF 5.1 AND THEN I'M SORRY, THAT WAS INTERNAL SERVICE, AND THEN YOUR ENTERPRISE FUNDS AT THE BOTTOM, ALL IN YOUR CITY BUDGET IS PROPOSED TO GO DOWN FROM $1,036,946,000 IN THE CURRENT YEAR TO $968,919,000. SO IT'S ABOUT A 6.6 REDUCTION AND COUNCIL.

THE LARGEST PART OF THAT REDUCTION IS WITH LUBBOCK POWER, AND REMEMBER, THEY RAN UP SOME CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR THE FOLLOWING FOR THE PRIOR YEAR THAT THEY DON'T NEED NEXT YEAR.

PLUS IT RESPECTS THE TRANSITION TO COMPETITION.

MOVING OVER THIS IS JUST A GRAPHICAL LOOK AT ALL OF YOUR FUNDING SOURCES AND MOVE NOW TO THE EXPENSE SUMMARY. SO AGAIN, BACK AT THE TOP ON THE GENERAL FUND, AGAIN YOU SEE THE $8.342 MILLION CHANGE COUNSEL NOTE THAT OF THAT, $10.6 MILLION IS ACTUALLY AN INCREASE TO PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO FOR NON PUBLIC SAFETY GENERAL FUND, WE ARE ACTUALLY COMING DOWN YEAR OVER YEAR AND WE'RE INVESTING MORE INTO PUBLIC SAFETY THEN AS YOU LOOK ACROSS HERE, YOU CAN SEE HOW THE REST OF IT BALANCES OUT, TAKING US BACK TO THAT NUMBER.

THE SAME INFORMATION IN THE PRETTY PICTURES.

HERE'S ANOTHER CHART.

WE PUT THIS IN WHEN WE DID THE VERY LAST OF OUR BUDGET WORKSHOPS, BUT THIS IS THE COST PER CAPITA ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION ON YOUR GENERAL FUND.

SO THIS ACTUALLY TAKES DOWN THE COST TO OPERATE YOUR GENERAL FUND TO A PER PERSON LEVEL FOR FISCAL YEAR 24.

THAT'S $907 PER PERSON.

NOTE THAT IS LESS FOR FISCAL YEAR 17, FISCAL YEAR 16 AND ONLY SLIGHTLY ABOVE FISCAL YEAR 15.

SO I THINK WE'VE WORKED HARD TO TRY TO BE A GOOD VALUE TO OUR PUBLIC.

ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THIS.

AGAIN, WE'RE STRICTLY ON THE GENERAL FUND.

THE BLUE BARS IS OUR NON-PUBLIC SAFETY PART OF THE GENERAL FUND, AGAIN, ADJUSTED PER CAPITA FOR INFLATION.

THE GREEN IS YOUR INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC SAFETY PER CAPITA ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION.

SO YOU SEE HERE WE'RE ACTUALLY $3 PER PERSON LESS ON NON PUBLIC SAFETY AND WE'RE SLIGHTLY MORE ABOUT $22 FOR OUR PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO WHEN WE TALK AGAIN ABOUT THAT CHANGE, THE NET CHANGE IN THE GENERAL FUND, HERE'S WHERE IT IS.

CAN YOU SEE THAT? PROPERTY TAX.

NOW WE GET INTO ALL THE FUN LANGUAGE WE HAVE TO SAY AND THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER LATER TODAY.

SO THE STATE REQUIRED LANGUAGE SAYS THIS BUDGET WILL RAISE MORE TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES THAN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET BY $11.825 MILLION OR 11.33%.

OF THAT AMOUNT, 3.794 MILLION IS TAX REVENUE FROM NEW PROPERTY ADDED TO THE ROLL.

SO VALUE THAT WAS NOT ON YOUR TAX ROLL IN THE PRIOR YEAR AND YOU HAVE TO SUBTRACT THOSE NUMBERS TO GET BACK TO WHERE WE'VE BEEN TALKING.

SO THIS PROPOSED RATE IS A TAX INCREASE.

THE RATES WORK THIS WAY.

TOTAL TAX RATE OR TAX YEAR 2023.

NO NEW REVENUE RATE IS 46.5391 CENTS PER HUNDRED.

THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE.

SO THIS IS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER YOU CAN GO TO WITHOUT GOING TO AN ELECTION WOULD BE 48.26 CENTS.

WE DO HAVE WHAT'S CALLED AN UNUSED INCREMENT.

SO THESE ARE PRIOR YEARS TO WHERE WE DID NOT GO TO THE VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE, BUT RATHER DID NO NEW REVENUE LAST YEAR, LESS THAN THREE AND A HALF BEFORE THAT.

THAT IS BUILT AN INCREMENT IN THE EQUIVALENT AMOUNT OF 2.3 CENTS, AND SO IF YOU ADD THOSE TOGETHER, IT'S 50.57.

WE ARE NOWHERE NEAR THAT NUMBER.

YOUR PROPOSED TAX RATE IS IN BOLD IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE, 48.0164 CENTS PER HUNDRED.

YOU SEE THE VALUES DOWN BELOW THAT.

YOU ALSO SEE THE CHANGE IN THE OVER 65 EXEMPTION, AND THE SHORT VERSION OF THIS IS FOR THE SECOND YEAR IN A ROW WE HAD A DOUBLE DIGIT PERCENT INCREASE IN THE VALUE OF WHAT'S ON THE TAX ROLLS.

[00:20:01]

COUNCIL, I KNOW YOU'RE AWARE, BUT FOR ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S LISTENING, THIS GOVERNING BODY HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE VALUES ARE.

THAT IS SET BY THE LUBBOCK CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

BREAK ALL THIS OUT INTO THE PIECES THAT WE HAVE SHOWN YOU BEFORE.

COUNCIL, IF YOU DO ADOPT THE BUDGET THE WAY WE HAVE PROPOSED CHANGING THE METHODOLOGIES, YOU'LL NO LONGER SEE THAT PIECE IN THE MIDDLE.

THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PIECE THAT WE STARTED THAT WAY.

SO WE WANT TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.

YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE $11.8 MILLION ENDS UP GOING.

LARGEST PIECE, OF COURSE, TO THE GENERAL FUND, NEXT LARGEST TO YOUR DEBT SERVICE AND A BIT IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE HOME? SO THE AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME IN LUBBOCK WOULD SEE A $103.

38 INCREASE IN THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL.

THAT IS MOST LARGELY INFLUENCED BY THE FACT THAT THE VALUE OF THE AVERAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN LUBBOCK WENT UP BY $20,000 YEAR OVER YEAR. SO YOU SEE THOSE NUMBERS BELOW YOU THERE.

ALMOST TO THE END.

SO WE WERE ASKED SEVERAL TIMES, WHERE DOES THE CHANGE IN THE PROPERTY TAX RATE, THE INCREASE, WHERE DOES THAT GO? YOU HAVE MATHEMATICALLY A 1.48 CENT PROPOSED TAX RATE INCREASE.

THE VALUE OF THE CHANGE TO THE GENERAL FUND AND AGAIN, PRETTY MUCH ALL BUT THE STREET MAINTENANCE IS PUBLIC SAFETY.

THE VALUE OF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING IS 3.2 CENTS PER $100.

SO THE RIGHT YOU SEE THE 1% CIVIL SERVICE RAISE THAT TO GET IT TO THE FOR STREET MAINTENANCE AT A MILLION.

THE SIX LUBBOCK POLICE OFFICERS WERE ADDING THE 20 LUBBOCK FIRE RESCUE THAT WE'RE ADDING, PLUS THE BODY CAMERA PROJECT FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THOSE WILL ADD UP TO THE 3.2 CENTS OF INCREASE, BUT WE'RE ASKING YOU RATHER, TO APPROVE A 1.48 CENT INCREASE.

HOPE THAT MADE SOME SENSE.

COMPARABLE CITY RATES AND HOW THOSE ARE CHANGING WITH THEIR UNUSED INCREMENTS.

YOU SEE LUBBOCK JUST BARELY TO THE LEFT OF LAREDO.

THERE YOU SEE QUITE A DIFFERENCE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COMPETITIVE SET OF CITIES, AND I THINK MAYBE THAT THIS ONE WILL HELP.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO NORMALIZE GENERAL FUND REVENUE.

YOU ALWAYS HEAR COMMENTS ABOUT, WELL, BUT WE HAVE A SALES TAX THAT BUYS DOWN PROPERTY TAX.

THAT IS TRUE.

MANY OTHER CITIES DO AS WELL.

WE ALSO TALK ABOUT WHAT DOES SALES TAX GENERATE BECAUSE BOTH SALES AND PROPERTY WILL FUND YOUR GENERAL FUND, WHETHER THAT SALES TAX GOES TO BUY DOWN PROPERTY TAX OR IT IS REVENUE. IT STILL ALL IS PART OF YOUR GENERAL FUND AND IT'S WHAT FUNDS YOU.

SO IF YOU LOOK, WE'RE JUST ONE TO THE RIGHT OF ARLINGTON, SO WE'RE JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THE MIDDLE ON THIS CHART, THE BLUE, THE LIGHT BLUE BAR, THAT IS HOW MUCH SALES TAX PER PENNY PER CAPITA GENERATES TO A CITY, AND THEN THE GREEN IS THAT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX.

TO ILLUSTRATE, LOOK AT FRISCO ON THE FAR LEFT.

FRISCO GENERATES $20.70 FOR EVERY PENNY PER CAPITA OFF OF THEIR SALES TAX.

THEIR ECONOMY IS SOLELY BUILT AND DESIGNED TO DO THAT, AND THAT'S THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THAT LOOK ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT AT EL PASO, AND YOU SEE THAT SALES TAX THERE IS GENERATING $3.4 TO COME BACK TO THEM.

LUBBOCK $9.35, $8.14 ON THE TAX RATE, BUT AS YOU COMPARE LEFT AND RIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THAT I'VE SHOWN THIS TO SOME PLACES I'VE BEEN ASKED, WELL, WHY IS AMARILLO'S NUMBER $15.38 AND LUBBOCK IS $9.35.

IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S A LARGER ECONOMY IN AMARILLO.

IT IS THAT LUBBOCK DOES NOT GET THE FULL 2% THAT'S AVAILABLE LOCALLY.

REMEMBER, IN LUBBOCK COUNTY, THEY RECEIVE A PORTION OF THE SALES TAX.

THAT IS A PORTION THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE CITY.

THAT IS NOT THE CASE IN AMARILLO AND IN SEVERAL OTHER OF THE CITIES THAT WE SEE ON HERE, BUT HOPE THIS KIND OF NORMALIZES IT.

IT'S STILL A LOT OF NUMBERS.

YOU KNOW, THAT STACK UP THE DARK COLORED BAR TO THE RIGHT OF EACH OF THOSE TWO SHOWS YOU THE EQUIVALENT TAX RATE FOR THE VARIOUS CITIES.

MAYOR, WITH THAT, I WILL STOP AND TAKE QUESTIONS OR BE QUIET.

COUNCIL, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE JUST GO AHEAD AND DO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND THEN AS WE GET INTO DISCUSSION, WE HAVE JARED AVAILABLE WITH THE PRESENTATION. IS THAT ALL RIGHT?

[00:25:01]

ALL RIGHT. WELL, THEN WE WILL MOVE TO 3.1.

THIS WILL BE THE HOLD OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

SO AT THIS TIME, WE WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED 23-24.

I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M ALREADY SAYING 2024 OPERATING BUDGET AND CAPITAL PROGRAM.

AGAIN, WHEN YOU STEP FORWARD, JUST LIKE CITIZEN COMMENTS, IF YOU STEP FORWARD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND THEN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON THE OPERATING BUDGET PROPOSED.

SO AT THIS TIME, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.

IF ANYONE WISHES WISHES TO SPEAK, YOU MAY STEP FORWARD NOW.

MICAH WARD, 5417 8TH STREET.

I'M GLAD YOU WENT OVER ALL OF THE DETAILS BECAUSE RATHER THAN REPEATING A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT, I WANT TO DEAL SOME MORE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS THAT MIGHT HELP IN THE FUTURE.

I SORT OF DO A HELICOPTER LOOK AT THINGS SOMETIMES.

OF COURSE, WE HAVE INCREASED REVENUE OF $11.8 MILLION WITH NEW PROPERTY AT $3.8 MILLION AND A TOTAL BUDGET JUST UNDER THE MILLION, AND I UNDERSTAND THE PART.

WHAT I WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON, THOUGH, ARE MY CONCERNS ABOUT ACTIONS AND CONSEQUENCES.

MOST DEPARTMENT FUNCTIONS WELL AND EMPLOYEES DESERVE PAY INCREASES.

I DO SUGGEST A LITTLE LESS THAN 4% FOR THOSE MAKING OVER $100,000.

INFLATION IS HURTING EVERYONE, BUT IT DEFINITELY HITS THE LOWER PAID FOLKS AND THAT'S IMPORTANT AS WELL, ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US ON FIXED INCOMES.

HAVE TROUBLE WITH A LOT OF THIS, BUT I WANT TO DEAL, THOUGH, MORE WITH MY FAVORITE TOPIC FOR THE LAST 35 OR 40 YEARS, AND THAT'S THIS MANTRA IF WE'RE NOT GROWING, WE'RE DYING IS SAID OVER AND OVER WITHOUT THINKING THROUGH IT VERY WELL. IT'S USED TO RATIONALIZE ALL THE QUESTIONABLE ACTIONS THAT ARE TAKEN AND, OF COURSE, ARTIFICIALLY STIMULATED GROWTH FOR QUOTE UNQUOTE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

SOUNDS GREAT, AND THESE THINGS ARE ROLLED OUT ALL THE TIME WITH ALL OF THE POSITIVES AND ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING AND HOW MUCH THEY'RE INVESTING AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS BUT WE'RE NEVER REALLY LOOKING AT THE REST OF THE STORY OF WHAT WE'RE PAYING TO DO THAT, AND I WANT TO ALSO TIE THAT TOGETHER SOMEWHAT BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVE A LOT OF ADDITIONAL COST TO TAXPAYERS FOR A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

OF COURSE, THE STREET BONDS, PUBLIC SAFETY, WATER AND SO FORTH.

THE BIGGER WE GET, THE MORE COST IT IS, AND IT'S HARD TO DO A COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS, BUT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND IS WE'RE SUBSIDIZING A LOT MORE PEOPLE TO COME HERE AND PUT IN BIG BUSINESSES THIS YEAR IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, LEDA, LUBBOCK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OR ASSOCIATE IS 25 MILLION.

THE MARKET LUBBOCK PART IS ESTIMATED TO BE 7 MILLION, AND AS I'VE SAID EVERY YEAR FOR THE LAST 31 OR SO YEARS, WE VOTED THE PROPERTY TAX PART GOING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMPLETELY OUT OF OUR CITY BUDGET IN JANUARY OF 1992 BY 84%, AND THAT INCLUDED IN THE BALLOT THE APPROPRIATIONS.

IT'S NEVER BEEN REMOVED AND I'M GLAD IT'S NOT GOING TO PENNIES AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN SAVE SOME IN THAT AREA.

SO THAT'S A PLUS I HADN'T SEEN.

IT STARTED OUT WITH $0.03 AND HAS BEEN THAT WAY A LONG TIME.

THERE'S BEEN DECREASES OVER THE YEARS, BUT I THINK WE'RE REACHING A POINT WHERE, PARTICULARLY WITH WHAT I'M FIXING TO TALK ABOUT AS FAR AS THE BORROWING BY LEDA AND I KNOW THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PURPOSES.

THERE'S THINGS THAT YOU CAN'T DO UNDER THE LEDA PART THAT WE ADOPTED.

I WOULD NEVER GO FOR THE OTHER ONE BECAUSE IT WOULD INCLUDE ALL KINDS OF FUN VENUES.

IT COULD ALSO HAVE BEEN USED FOR STREETS AND SAVED US SOME MONEY, BUT YOU CAN'T RISK IT IF THERE'S FUN TOYS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THAT, BUT THE BASICALLY THEY'VE ADDED A LOT MORE.

[00:30:06]

I WAS SO DISTRESSED, I GUESS BECAUSE I FOUGHT ALL THESE YEARS.

MY WORST NIGHTMARE WAS THAT THEY COULD BORROW MONEY AND IT WAS ONE OF THE MOST OBJECTIONABLE POLICIES THAT WAS ALLOWED IN THE ARTICLE 5190.6, AND OF COURSE THAT HELPS MULTIPLY FUNDS AND LEVERAGES REVENUE WITH DEBT.

OF COURSE, THE DEBT'S BEING PAID BACK OUT OF THE EIGHT CENT SALES TAX FOR 22 YEARS WHEN I WILL BE 100 YEARS OLD AND PROBABLY SHAKING MY FIST FROM THE CLOUDS SOMEWHERE, BUT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THAT BECAUSE THIS HAS OPENED IT UP AND TO A LOT MORE THINGS.

BY THE WAY, VOTERS ABSOLUTELY NEVER APPROVE OPEN ENDED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

IT WAS ALWAYS TIED TO THE TAX RELIEF OR TAX BUYDOWN AND OR TO A SPECIFIC PROJECT, AND IMMEDIATELY, WITHIN SIX MONTHS, WE COLLECTED SIGNATURES AND REPEALED THAT ONE.

SO WE WENT THROUGH SIX SALES TAX COLLECTIONS FOR THAT SAME HALF CENT, AND SO WHEN THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BORROW $30 MILLION OR OVER 30, I THINK IT WAS CAPPED AT 32.5, BUT THEY BORROWED A LITTLE OVER 30 MILLION, WHICH WITH INTEREST FOR THE NEXT 22 YEARS TILL 2043, WILL BE $47 MILLION, WHICH IS UNBELIEVABLE BUT ANYWAY, OF COURSE I'LL GET INTO THE TAX TRADE PART LATER, BUT A FEW OF THE RECENT PROJECTS THAT SOUND REALLY GOOD AND THEY'RE A GOOD FIT.

THEY HAVE AN AGRICULTURE COMPONENT IN SOME CASES, THEY'RE NOT OVERLAPPING BUSINESSES ALREADY HERE FOR THE MOST PART, BUT WE'RE GIVING AWAY AN AWFUL LOT OF INCENTIVES ON TOP OF INCENTIVES FOR THOSE, AND THEY'RE NEVER ROLLED OUT WITH THE COMPLETE STORY.

SO THE PUBLIC THINKS IT'S WONDERFUL AND DADDY WARBUCKS OUT HERE JUST HAS A LOT OF MONEY TO SHARE WITH WHOEVER, BUT WE'VE BOUGHT OVER A THOUSAND ACRES THAT HAVE BEEN DONATED TO 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT.

WELL, GUESS THREE SO FAR.

BIG CORPORATIONS, SOME OF THEM EVEN INTERNATIONAL LEPRINO IS A WONDERFUL THING.

IT'S GOING TO NET SOME EXTRA WATER OUT OF THE MILK.

SO ALL OF THAT, BUT WE DID BUY HUNDREDS OF ACRES AND THE COUNTY ALSO CONTRIBUTED SOME TO THAT FOR AND THEN DEEDED THE PROPERTY OVER TO THEM ALONG WITH PUTTING IN STREETS, PROBABLY EAST 19TH INFRASTRUCTURE, EVEN ALL KINDS, INCLUDING UTILITIES AND EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT THEN WE'RE ON TOP OF THAT.

WHEN THEY FINISH, THERE'S GOING TO BE $10,000 FOR EACH EMPLOYEE, UP TO 674 EMPLOYEES TO BE PAID PLUS, AND I CAN TALK ABOUT IT MORE ON THE TAX SIDE, BUT THERE WILL BE 100% TEN YEAR TAX ABATEMENT FROM THE CITY AND ALSO FROM THE COUNTY WILL.

I DON'T HAVE THEIR NUMBERS.

THEY DON'T KEEP TRACK OF THIS LIKE YOU ALL DO, BUT OVER THE YEARS TILL 2037 APPARENTLY THAT'LL START ABOUT 2027 WILL BE ESTIMATED AT ABOUT A $20 MILLION LOSS OFF OUR TAX BASE, AND THEN ANOTHER ONE THAT SOUNDS GREAT THAT MY OPEN RECORDS REQUEST ON IT WAS SO LARGE JANA JOHNSTON WHO HAS BEEN REALLY HELPFUL THESE THINGS ARE ALL PUBLIC.

YOU JUST HAVE TO ASK FOR THEM, BUT SHE HAD ASCENDED ON A THUMB DRIVE, BUT THE PLANT, WHICH IS THE BIG GREENHOUSE PROJECT, ALSO SOUNDS WONDERFUL.

WE'RE NEEDING IMPROVED PRODUCTION OF OUR PRODUCE AND OTHER THINGS.

SO I'VE SORT OF SAID ON BOTH OF THOSE, IF THE ECONOMY GOES COMPLETELY TO POT, WE CAN EAT LETTUCE AND TOMATOES AND MOZZARELLA CHEESE.

[00:35:02]

SO ANYWAY, ON THE [INAUDIBLE], THOUGH, THERE WERE 700 ACRES BOUGHT AT $1 MILLION PER ACRE FROM TWO DIFFERENT OWNERS FOR $7 MILLION, AND THERE AGAIN, IT WAS DEEDED OVER TO THE COMPANY, AND THEN WE'RE PUTTING IN ALL OF THEIR UTILITIES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THEY NEED IN THAT REGARD, BUT THE OTHER PART AND IT SAYS PROVIDE.

I'M HOPING THEY'RE PAYING FOR IT, BUT APPARENTLY THEY HAVE TO HAVE 600,000 GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY.

SO KEEP THAT IN MIND BECAUSE ALL THESE THINGS CAUSE US TO HAVE TO GO CHASE OUR PLAN BUT NOT PUT IN YET WATER THINGS.

SOME OF THE OTHERS ARE SMALLER.

I'VE LOOKED INTO THE DETAILS ON THEM, BUT PLASTICS IS A HUGE CORPORATION IN 28 COUNTRIES AND THEY WERE GIVEN 25 ACRES AND OF COURSE, OTHER THINGS THAT GO WITH IT.

SOME OF IT'S IN THE BUSINESS PARK, AND THEN ON MAY 23RD, YOU ALL ADDED SOME THINGS FROM YOUR LINE AND COH-METRIX LESSER DEGREE, BUT WHEN WE'RE GIVING OUR LAND OR BUYING AND GIVING AWAY A LOT OF NORTHEAST LUBBOCK, IT'S CONCERNING, AND THAT'S THAT'S PART OF THIS.

AS FAR AS THE BUDGET I'D LIKE TO SEE IT LOWER.

THERE'S WAYS THAT WE CAN SAVE.

I THINK EVERYBODY'S TRIED TO FIND PLACES TO CUT, BUT WE'VE GOT TO KEEP IN MIND IN THE FUTURE, YOU ALL DO HAVE A LOT MORE CONTROL THAN YOU MAYBE EXERCISE OVER MARKET, I MEAN, LEDA, YOU HAVE ALL THE CONTROL OVER MARKET LUBBOCK YOU CAN DO AWAY WITH IT WHENEVER YOU WANT TO, BUT ARTICLE 13 IN THE LEDA BYLAWS AND I HAD SENT THEM TO YOU AND I REALLY FELT BETTER ABOUT THIS COUNCIL, AND YET YOU'RE THE FIRST ONES THAT ALLOWED A LOT OF BORROWING, BUT ARTICLE 13 SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY IN ITS SOLE DISCRETION AND AT ANY TIME ALTER OR CHANGE THE STRUCTURE, ORGANIZATION, PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES OF THE CORPORATION, AND IT MAY TERMINATE OR DISSOLVE THE CORPORATION SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, AND ALL OF THAT GO ON AND ON, AND BUT THAT MEANS THAT YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING TO CHANGE DIRECTION SUFFICIENTLY OR IN ANY GREAT DETAIL OTHER THAN HOPEFULLY YOU CAN GET BETTER CONTROL OF THEIR PAY AND BONUSES.

IT'S A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN COMPARABLE PEOPLE NOT TO GET REAL PERSONAL ABOUT, BUT LOOK INTO IT BECAUSE IT'S THEIR DIRECTOR IN 2022 WITH ALL OF THE BONUSES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

TOTAL COMPENSATION WAS CLOSE TO $475,000, AND THAT'S 100,000 PLUS MORE THAN OUR CITY MANAGER MAKES FOR A WHOLE LOT LESS WORK AND EMPLOYEES UNDER THEM.

SO LOOK INTO THAT.

YOU DO HAVE CONTROL OF THAT.

IT'S A SEPARATE CORPORATION AND OFTEN EVEN PEOPLE AT THE CITY HAVE TO FILE AN OPEN RECORDS REQUEST, AND YET IT'S ALL COMPLETELY TAXPAYER FUNDED. SO KEEP THOSE THINGS IN MIND.

I JUST KNOW IN THE FUTURE THERE'LL BE OTHER THINGS COMING, BUT THERE IS A LIMIT TO HOW MUCH MORE ALL OF THE REST OF US THAT DON'T HAVE A WAY TO GO OUT AND MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY CAN KEEP PAYING FOR THE NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE AND ALL THESE THINGS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO NEED, AND I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THE ABATEMENT LOSS DURING THE TAX PART, BUT DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND SORRY TO BE SO LONG.

I WILL ALWAYS COME ONCE A YEAR BECAUSE I'M NOT LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES AND I HAVE A LOT MORE TO SAY THAN THREE MINUTES.

SO I DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, MISS WARD.

MY NAME IS BURLEY OWEN AT 2734 79TH STREET.

THE PURPOSE OF MY VISIT TODAY HERE IS TO POINT OUT THE PLIGHT OF THE AVERAGE LUBBOCK CITIZENS IN CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES THEY'RE THEY'RE FACING WITH INCREASED INFLATION AND INCREASED COST OF EVERYTHING,

[00:40:06]

INCLUDING INSURANCE ON THEIR HOUSE, INCREASED COSTS OF FOOD AND EATING OUT, WHICH IS ABOUT 20%.

SO I KNOW THAT THESE ARE TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES THAT THE CITY IS FACING.

JUST LIKE THE REST OF US, BUT I SEE NO INDICATION THAT THE CITY IS.

WELL, LET ME PUT IT ANOTHER WAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME THE CITY IS STILL GOING FULL STEAM AHEAD WITH THEIR FOOT ON THE GAS PEDAL WITH NO THOUGHT OF EVEN TAKING THE FOOT OFF THE GAS PEDAL, MUCH LESS TAPPING THE BRAKES A LITTLE BIT, BUT FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN IN LUBBOCK.

MOODY FINANCIAL SERVICES, WHO'S PART OF THE BOND RATING SERVICE, JUST RECENTLY SAID WITHIN THE LAST TWO WEEKS THAT IT COSTS THE AVERAGE AMERICAN HOUSEHOLD $720 MORE PER MONTH THAN IT DID TWO YEARS AGO TO LIVE ON.

THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, AND SO I'M HOPING THAT YOU'LL BE SYMPATHETIC TO THE CAUSES WE SAW IN EARLY SUMMER.

THE NONPROFITS LIKE FOOD BANK, MEALS ON WHEELS, SALVATION ARMY SAYING THEY WERE HAVING FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES, AND, FOR EXAMPLE, THE FOOD BANK SAID AT THAT POINT THEY WERE ONLY GIVING AWAY HALF BOXES OF FOOD WHERE FORMERLY THEY HAD GIVEN OUT FULL BOXES OF FOOD, AND I THINK PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE IN SUCH A FINANCIAL BIND THAT THEY ARE NOT CONTRIBUTING TO THE NONPROFITS LIKE THEY HAVE IN THE PAST.

I SEE A LITTLE AUSTERITY IN THIS BUDGET.

I THINK THE INCREASE IN THE SPENDING IS AN INDICATION OF THAT.

WE SEEM TO BE SATISFIED WITH ALWAYS HAVING AN INCREASE WITHOUT REDUCING THE SIZE OR SPENDING OF GOVERNMENT, AND I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SAY THIS IS A FRUGAL BUDGET.

I THINK OVERALL IT WILL REDUCE PEOPLE'S WILL INCREASE PEOPLE'S COST OF LIVING.

YOU'RE SAYING ON AVERAGE HOUSE ONLY $107, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THEY ALSO HAVE INCREASES FROM SCHOOL TAXES, COUNTY TAXES AND OTHER THINGS, AND OF COURSE, WITH INCREASING PRICES, THEY'RE PAYING MORE IN SALES TAXES.

THE LAST CENSUS SHOWED THAT 19.4% OF THE PEOPLE HOUSEHOLDS IN LUBBOCK LIVE AT OR UNDER THE POVERTY LEVEL. TO ME, THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD CHUNK AS COMPARED TO THE NATIONAL PERCENTAGE, IT'S ONLY A LITTLE OVER 11%. SO YOU COULD SAY WE'RE ALMOST DOUBLE THE PEOPLE LIVING AT OR UNDER THE POVERTY LEVEL AS EVEN THE NATIONAL LEVEL.

12% OF OUR POPULATION IS THE ELDERLY.

THOSE TWO ADDED TOGETHER COME TO 31.5%.

THAT MEANS THE TAX LOAD IS BEING PUT ON ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF THE PEOPLE, AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE WHOLE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE.

YOU QUOTED PER CAPITA COST.

WELL, THAT'S NOT IN MY MIND A ACCURATE REFLECTION.

I RAN ACROSS THIS A WHILE BACK.

LET'S SEE IF I CAN FIND THE DATE.

THIS IS BACK IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.

THERE'S A COMPANY CALLED WALLET HUB WHO DOES DIFFERENT TYPES OF STUDIES.

THEY DID A STUDY OF 182 CITIES IN HOPES OF FINDING OUT WHO WOULD BE THE BEST PLACE TO RETIRE.

IN THAT LIST THEY SAID THEY WERE ABLE TO ONLY FIND ONE CITY IN TEXAS THAT THEY FOUND ONE CITY IN TEXAS THAT WAS NOT A GOOD PLACE TO RETIRE.

OUT OF A STUDY OF 46 DIFFERENT FACTORS .

LUBBOCK RATED 173 OUT OF 182 CITIES.

DO WE WANT THE REPUTATION OF NOT BEING A GOOD PLACE TO RETIRE? AND YOU COULD ALSO DRAW CONCLUSIONS FROM THAT IF IT'S NOT A GOOD PLACE FOR RETIRED PEOPLE WHAT ABOUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND THE GENERAL CITIZENS IN THE

[00:45:09]

CITY? SO WE NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

I QUESTION AND I ALWAYS HAVE QUESTIONED THE FIGURES PRESENTED TO THE CITY ABOUT PER CAPITA.

I'M GLAD TO SEE THE CHARTS.

THAT'S AN IMPROVEMENT, BUT THE STATE COMPTROLLER ALWAYS HAS DIFFERENT FIGURES AND THEY RATE LUBBOCK IS ONE OF THE MOST OUT OF THE TEN NINE OTHER CITIES OUR SIZE.

WE'RE SECOND IN THE AMOUNT OF SPENDING.

WHEN YOU GET DOWN BELOW THE TOP THREE, THEY'RE SPENDING LIKE AMARILLO, AND SOME OTHERS ARE ONLY ABOUT HALF OF WHAT OUR SPENDING IS.

SO YOU HAVE TO ASK, WHY IS THEIR SPENDING PER CAPITA HALF OF WHAT OURS IS.

SO THERE'S LOTS OF QUESTIONS HERE, BUT I REALIZE I'M LATE IN THE HORSE IS ALREADY OUT OF THE BARN, BUT KEEP THESE IN MIND AS YOU GO THROUGH SPENDING FOR THIS YEAR.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. OWEN.

ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM 3.1? ALL RIGHT. I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS TO AGENDA ITEM 3.1 AND WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM 3.2.

[2. Public Hearing - Finance: Hold a public hearing on a proposal to increase total tax revenues from properties on the tax roll in the preceding tax year by 3.17% (percentage by which the proposed tax rate exceeds the No-New-Revenue tax rate calculated under Chapter 26, Tax Code).]

THE COUNCIL WILL NOW HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED INCREASE IN TOTAL TAX REVENUES FROM PROPERTIES ON THE TAX ROLL AND THE PRECEDING TAX YEAR BY 3.17%.

PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.

IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING? YOU MAY APPROACH NOW.

FORGOT SOMETHING.

AGAIN, I'M STILL MICAH WARD ON THE TAX RATE.

IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TO GET DOWN TO THE NO NEW REVENUE RIGHT AT 2 MILLION PER EACH PENNY, IT WOULD ONLY TAKE ABOUT $4 MILLION OUT OF AN ALMOST BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET TO GET THERE, AND THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BE HELPFUL, BUT I WANTED TO POINT OUT WHY I WAS I NEEDED THIS OTHER INFORMATION BECAUSE TAX ABATEMENTS, OF COURSE, ARE IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER LEADER DOES, AND WHEN YOU ALL APPROVE OF A TAX ABATEMENT FOR WHATEVER YEARS, WHETHER IT'S 100% OR DECLINING, IT LESSENS THE TAX BASE TO BE TAXED AND SPREADS THAT OUT FOR THE REST OF US TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP UP WITH THAT AS WELL, AND CHERYL BROCK'S BEEN KEEPING UP WITH THAT FOR ME FOR ABOUT 20 SOME ODD YEARS PROBABLY, BUT I DO APPRECIATE IT.

THERE ARE SEVERAL OF THEM RIGHT NOW, AND OF COURSE, SOME OF THEM DON'T START UNTIL THEY FINISH THE PROJECTS BUT OF COURSE, THE ONE THAT BOTHERS ME THE MOST WAS MONSANTO, WHICH DIDN'T NEED ANY HELP, WEREN'T HIRING VERY MANY PEOPLE, BUT IT WAS 100% ON ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING FROM 2019 TO 2028 AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF 5.5 MILLION.

UNITED HAS A DECLINING ONE I THINK FOR TEN YEARS.

THAT FINISHES UP IN 2026 ON A WAREHOUSE.

WE OFTEN MAKE THESE INTO ENTERPRISE ZONES.

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED WITH MONSANTO.

WE BOUGHT 150 ACRES, GAVE IT TO THEM AND TOLD ME THAT THEY WERE GOING TO PAY LOTS OF TAXES AND THEN THEY IMMEDIATELY MADE THEM INTO AN ENTERPRISE ZONE AND GAVE THEM THAT 100% FOR TEN YEARS ON EVERYTHING, AND BUT AT LEAST UNITED'S IS DECLINING, AND IN 2026, IT'S ESTIMATED THAT WILL BE ABOUT 560,000.

IT'S BASED ON THE AMOUNT THAT THEY'RE INVESTING OR WHAT WE'RE ABATING THE TAXES ON, AND THAT'S JUST THE CITY'S PORTION.

[00:50:02]

YOU HAVE TO DOUBLE IT, PLUS A LITTLE FOR THE COUNTY, AND WE GET TO PAY BOTH OF THOSE M OSTLY.

LEPRINO HAS NOT STARTED YET, BUT WHEN IT DOES APPROXIMATELY WHEN THEY FINISH THEIR BUILDING OF THEIR THINGS AND ALL THEIR EQUIPMENT AND EVERYTHING, IT WILL RUN FROM 2027 TO 2037 AT A LOSS TO THE TAX BASE OF ABOUT $20 MILLION, ALL TOTAL ABOUT 2 OR 3 MILLION PER YEAR, AND IT'S ALSO 100%.

THAT'S JUST THE CITY'S PART.

X-FAB IS NOT A BIG PROBLEM.

IT'S A DECLINING FIVE YEAR IN STARTING IN 2027 AND IT'S ONLY ABOUT 2.8 MILLION BUT JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE ARE ALWAYS SHIFTED TO THE REST OF THE TAXPAYERS IN THE COUNTY AND HOSPITAL DISTRICT.

EVERYTHING BUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT PUTS MONEY INTO THAT.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT, THE TAXES.

I DIDN'T COMMENT ON IT EARLIER, BUT OF COURSE I CALL THE FUNDING SOURCE SUMMARY, GENERAL FUND PAGE, THE MAGIC PAGE, AND OVER THE YEARS SINCE HE'S BEEN HERE, HE'S GOT IT ALL OUTLINED ON ONE PAGE ALL OF THE WHAT I CALL THE HIDDEN UTILITY TAXES.

SO THERE'S THE IN-LIEU OF FRANCHISE FEES ON THE UTILITIES IS ABOUT $21.5 MILLION PROJECTED.

THE PILOT, WHICH IS IN LIEU OF PROPERTY TAXES ON OUR UTILITIES, IS ABOUT 11 MILLION TRANSFERS, WHICH IS ONE MORE WAY OF TAXING IT ALL IS 5.4 MILLION, AND THEN THE CITIZENS TOWER DEBT IS NOT ON THIS PAGE, BUT THERE'S ANOTHER PAGE OUTLINING THAT, AND THE UTILITIES MOSTLY ARE BASED ON HOW MUCH ROOM THEY TAKE UP IN CITIZENS TOWER, BUT IT'S ABOUT 1.4 MILLION FOR THE DEBT SERVICE THAT COMES OUT OF OUR UTILITIES.

SO ALTOGETHER IT'S ABOUT $39.3 MILLION AND MAKES UP A PRETTY GOOD CHUNK, PROBABLY CLOSE TO 15% OF THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET.

ALSO WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SALES TAX.

IT'S AMAZING HOW MUCH MONEY IT GENERATES AND AN EIGHTH OF A CENT WHICH IS 9 MILLION CURRENTLY, AND IT'S ALWAYS SORT OF UNDER PROJECTED.

SO I DOUBT IF IT'LL STAY FLAT UNLESS PEOPLE JUST CAN'T PAY FOR A LOT OF THINGS WITH THE INTEREST RATES, WHAT THEY ARE AND EVERYTHING ELSE BUT PROJECTED FOR 23-24, THE SALES TAX IS GENERATING A LITTLE OVER $98 MILLION WHERE PROPERTY TAX IS GENERATING ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 85 MILLION.

SO IT'S A 11.3 MILLION MORE IN SALES TAX AND PROPERTY TAX.

SO WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY TAX END OF THINGS, BUT THAT SALES TAX IS REALLY IMPORTANT, AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT A LOT OF US FOUGHT REALLY HARD TO GET THE THREE EIGHTS CENTS OF THE HALF CENT THAT WAS AVAILABLE FOR PROPERTY TAX REDUCTION, AND I THINK WE ARE UNIQUE. SOME OF THEM HAVE TRADED IT OTHER WAYS, BUT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SALES TAX ALLOWED US TO BUY DOWN AND WE DID IT IN TWO DIFFERENT ELECTIONS IN 95 AND 2003, ALL BUT AN EIGHTH OF IT, AND THAT ON THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, OF COURSE, WE DON'T REALLY SEEM TO GET OUR WHOLE $9 MILLION.

IT RUNS THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF A DIVISION PROCESS, BUT RIGHT NOW IT IS 12.4 CENTS LESS ON OUR TAX RATE, AND THAT'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCE AND ONE OF THE THINGS I'M THE PROUDEST OF KEEPING ON FIGHTING FOR FOR ALL THOSE THINGS, AND I WANTED TO JUST COMMENT BRIEFLY.

I DIDN'T EVEN TURN MY PAPER OVER A WHILE AGO, SO I WON'T MAKE ANOTHER SPEECH, BUT WE'RE ALWAYS EVERYBODY'S ALWAYS INTERESTED IN OUR IMAGE AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS, AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON A AN IMAGE CAMPAIGN AND, AND LOGO AND ALL THIS STUFF SINCE 2020.

I REMEMBER TELLING HIM RIGHT AFTER THE PRO-LIFE VOTE THAT WE'D ALREADY CREATED A GOOD IMAGE FOR LUBBOCK OF THE LARGEST PRO-LIFE CITY IN THE COUNTRY, AND I THINK THAT STILL HOLDS. IT'S COMPLETELY THE WAY IT NEEDS TO BE, BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS LOGO AND IMAGE FROM 2020 TO 23, AND I THOUGHT THE CHAMBER AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE WERE PUTTING MONEY INTO, BUT THERE WAS AN ARTICLE THE OTHER DAY THAT SAID, NOW WE'VE

[00:55:09]

TWEAKED IT AND ALL IT IS, IS THEY'LL BE HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DESIGN IT, BUT TO TAKE THREE YEARS TO FIGURE OUT A SYMBOL OR LOGO FOR US AT A COST OF SAID 4000.

SO I'M STILL WAITING ON SOME OPEN RECORDS REQUEST ON SOME OF THESE OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS AND HOPEFULLY YOU ALL WON'T GET DEEPER INTO SOME OF THOSE OR SOME THAT ARE ONGOING, AND A LOT OF THEM WAS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, BUT HOPEFULLY THAT'S SLOWING DOWN AND MAYBE NOT CONTINUING, BUT WE NEED TO WORK ON OUR THINGS LOCALLY AND NOT WORRY ABOUT PEOPLE COMING IN AND GRAND PLANNING THINGS THAT THEN WE CAN'T AFFORD TO DO AND THEY GO BACK.

THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT LUBBOCK AND ONE OF THEM IN PARTICULAR THAT'S IMPORTANT WAS THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAND PARTNERS.

WE SPENT ABOUT 440,000 AND THEN TBG PARTNERS, WHICH IS ALSO IN SAN ANTONIO, CAME IN AND DESIGNED THE FOUR LITTLE GREEN SQUARES FOR THE ACTUALLY IT WAS THREE AND THEN THEY ADDED A BLACK SLIMY ONE IF YOU DIDN'T WANT IT FOR THE CIVIC PARK, AND ALTOGETHER WE PAID ON THAT ONE DOWNTOWN THING, MOSTLY PAID OUT OF THE CBD TIF ABOUT 670 SOMETHING THOUSAND DOLLARS, AND THAT'S RATHER INSANE WE HAVE LOTS OF TALENT HERE.

WE DON'T NEED TO PAY PEOPLE TO COME IN AND TELL US WHAT WE NEED TO DO, AND YET THE SITE THAT I THOUGHT WAS RIDICULOUS TO TEAR DOWN THE VERY USABLE AND PROBABLY A GOOD THING TO GET BACK ON THE TAX ROLL.

65,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND PARKING GARAGES DEMOLISHED TO THE GROUND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'LL HAVE THE PRIVATE MONEY RAISED TO DO THAT, BUT THAT'S JUST ANOTHER COMMENTARY.

SO BE CAREFUL WITH HIRING OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS.

WE HAVE LOTS OF TALENT IN LUBBOCK AND WE DON'T NEED THEM COMING IN AND TELLING US WHAT TO DO.

DO APPRECIATE YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, MISS WARD.

ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM 3.2.

RIGHT. [INAUDIBLE] MICHAEL. [INAUDIBLE] SUBJECT.

IT'S A BURR UNDER MY BLANKET, AND THAT IS TAX ABATEMENTS IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

UP UNTIL MONSANTO, TAX ABATEMENTS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FOR A TEN YEAR DECLINING PERIOD.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY GO DOWN, THEY WOULDN'T PAY ANYTHING.

THE FIRST YEAR THEY WOULD PAY 10%, THE SECOND YEAR, 20%.

THE THINKING BEING THAT AS THEY GREW, THEY COULD AFFORD TO PAY MORE MONEY, AND SINCE THAT TIME, ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY, WE'VE GIVEN 100% TAX ABATEMENTS AND IN MY OPINION, AND I'LL BE BLUNT, I CONSIDER THAT CHEATING THAT THE CITIZENS OF LUBBOCK, BY NOT MAKING THEM PAY SOMETHING, AND IN LINE WITH THAT, IF YOU GIVE THEM TEN YEARS OF STRAIGHT ABATEMENTS AT THE 11TH YEAR, THEY HAVE GREATLY DEPRECIATE THE VALUE OF THAT EQUIPMENT.

SO WE WILL NOT GET NEAR AS MUCH MONEY AS WE WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE FIRST, SECOND OR THIRD OR FOURTH YEAR, AND I URGE YOU NOT TO GIVE TEN YEAR ABATEMENTS TO THESE COMPANIES COMING IN HERE.

YOU MAY SAY IT HAS TO BE BECAUSE WE NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE.

WELL, I'D SAY IF WE'RE NOT COMPETITIVE IN A DECLINING TAX ABATEMENT RATE, THEN WE LET THEM GO.

WE CAN DO WITHOUT THEM, BUT WHEN YOU'RE NOT LETTING THAT MONEY COME IN TO HELP THE TAXPAYERS PAY THE CITY'S BILLS, I THINK THAT'S CHEATING THEM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. OWEN. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM 3.2.

PUBLIC HEARING AS TO AGENDA ITEM 3.2, WE WILL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 3.3.

[3. Public Hearing - Finance: Hold a public hearing on the proposed reduction in Storm Water Drainage Charges for the City of Lubbock.]

THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING BE CONDUCTED BY THE CITY IN REGARD TO THE PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE DECREASE.

SO AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM ON THE PROPOSED RATE FOR STORMWATER, YOU MAY APPROACH AT THIS TIME.

DON'T EVER GET TO SPEAK THREE TIMES.

[01:00:02]

DO APPRECIATE IT.

I'M REALLY GLAD THAT YOU'RE FINALLY LOWERING THOSE SLIGHTLY $0.60, I THINK, ON THE BASE AMOUNT BUT AGAIN, THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY.

THIS WAS STARTED IN 92-93 TO TEST THE RUNOFF FOR THE EPA, AND I HAD A GOOD FRIEND IN MY TAXPAYER GROUP THAT WAS ON THE COMMITTEE AND THEY SAID AT THE TIME SHE COULD DO IT FOR $0.50, BUT IF WE MADE IT $1.50, WE'D NEVER HAVE TO GO UP ON IT AT ALL.

OF COURSE, IN THE INTERIM, THEN WE FOUND THAT A LOT OF BAD PLANNING HAD HAPPENED.

WE'RE NOT DOING THAT ANYMORE.

THANKS TO MIKE KEENAN AND SOME OF THE OTHER GUYS WERE NOT BUILDING BIG STRUCTURES IN THE MIDDLE OF PLAYA LAKES, BUT WE'VE HAD A LOT OF COST INCURRED TO DO THAT, AND THE PART THAT HAS ROLLED OFF WAS REALLY NOT SUPPOSED TO EVER BE THERE.

THERE WAS A LAWSUIT OVER IT, NEVER DEALT WITH IT, EXCEPT THAT THEY SAID EVERY STEP OF THE WAY THAT HOME RULE CITIES DIDN'T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE DICTATES OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE THAT WAS SUBCHAPTER C AND ARTICLE 5552, I THINK, AND BUT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE STRICTLY FOR DRAINAGE, AND OVER FOUR YEARS, FROM 2008 TO 12, THERE WAS $10 MILLION A YEAR BORROWED FOR STREET REPAIR, AND THANK YOU JARRETT THAT WE'RE NOT DOING THAT ANYMORE. WE'RE PAYING CASH, WHICH MAKES A WHOLE LOT MORE SENSE, BUT THAT WAS BORROWED BY A COUNCIL, AND GUESS WHY? I DON'T. I DON'T FAULT EVERY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY INHERIT SOME STRANGE PREVIOUS DECISIONS, BUT I WANT TO CAUTION THEM ABOUT DOING ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THE FUTURE.

SO DON'T MEAN TO SOUND MOTHER HEANEY BUT THAT'S WHAT I DO ANYWAY.

THAT'S STREET REPAIR DEBT ADDED UP TO 40 MILLION AND IT WAS A TEN YEAR CO; WE DON'T DO AS MANY OF THOSE EITHER ANYMORE.

SO THAT'S A GOOD THING, LIMITED, BUT OVER THAT TIME WE HAD TO PAY ALL OF THAT OFF.

PLUS ABOUT '04-05 THEY STARTED ADDING THE FRANCHISE FEES AND PILOT, WHICH IS ALSO NOT REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, BUT THEY ADDED INTO THAT BUDGET IN '04-05 TO ADD THE 5% FRANCHISE FEE, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DETERMINE WHAT WHAT PROPERTY THEY'RE RELYING ON TO FIGURE OUT THE PROPERTY TAX PART OF THAT'S ANOTHER WHOLE STRANGE ISSUE, BUT IN ABOUT 2015, WHILE IT WAS ACTUALLY LOOKED AT ABOUT 2012 BY A CITIZEN COMMITTEE, WHICH INCLUDED TWO OF THE COUNCIL WOMEN THAT WERE ON IT IN THAT COMMITTEE, BUT IT WAS IMPLEMENTED IN JANUARY OF 2015 BASED ON IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, WHICH TOOK A HUGE JUMP.

THE BUDGET THAT YEAR WENT FROM ABOUT A LITTLE OVER 19 MILLION TO 25 MILLION AND LARGER HOUSES, WENT FROM ABOUT 14 MILLION TO ALMOST 26 OR 7, AND BUSINESSES, OF COURSE WENT UP CONSIDERABLY. EVERYTHING THAT'S NON HOMES, I GUESS, INCLUDING CHURCHES AND NONPROFITS AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT HAD LARGE IMPERVIOUS AREAS, TOOK A HUGE HIT AND EVERY TIME YOU TAX SOMETHING TREMENDOUSLY ARE CHARGED FOR THINGS, IT JUST LEAVES LESS MONEY IN OUR POCKETS TO CREATE OUR OWN BUSINESSES AND DO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO IN THAT ONE YEAR WHEN IT STARTED IN 2015 AND IT'S BEEN THAT WAY EVER SINCE, IT WENT FROM $93 PER METER FOR COMMERCIAL AND LARGEST AREA FOLKS, AND THE TOP RIGHT WENT UP TO $695, WHICH WAS ALMOST COST PROHIBITIVE THERE.

CREATED A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE AROUND ME AT THE TIME THAT WERE FIGHTING THAT AND SEEING HOW THEY COULDN'T EVEN KEEP THEIR CHURCHES OPEN WITH WHAT THEY WERE BEING CHARGED. SO I APPRECIATE ANY LITTLE BIT OFF OF THAT, BUT IN THE FUTURE CONSIDER LESSENING THE FRANCHISE FEES

[01:05:04]

BECAUSE THE THREE OTHER THAN LP&L THAT PAYS INTO GATEWAY, 2% OF IT.

THE OTHERS ARE ALL CHARGED 5% ALSO, AND THEY DON'T CONTRIBUTE TO GATEWAY, AND THE 3% WOULD BE A LOT MORE EQUITABLE ON THE REST OF THEM IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAX THOSE, BUT I JUST THOUGHT I'D MENTION A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY ON THAT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LOT OF DEBT STILL LEFT GOING OUT QUITE A WAYS, PROBABLY INTO 37 OR 38 ON THESE OTHER DRAINAGE PROJECTS, BUT WE'RE DOING MUCH BETTER NOT BUILDING IN THE MIDDLE OF PLAYA LAKES, AND WE'VE GOT TO BE CAREFUL THOUGH.

EVERYTHING THAT WE COVER UP, ALL THE FARMLAND AS WE GROW SOUTH, EVEN WE GOT TO BE REALLY AWARE OF THE DRAINAGE BEFORE THINGS ARE PUT IN.

SO WE WE'RE NOT HAVING TO RETROFIT AND BRING IN SEVERAL HUNDRED OR COST SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS TO REDO IT AND PAY FOR IT FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.

DO THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOU.

THANK YOU. MISS WARD, ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON 3.3? ALL RIGHT. I'LL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS TO AGENDA ITEM 3.3.

WE WILL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM 3.4.

[4. Ordinance 1st Reading - Finance: Consider an ordinance approving and adopting a budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24; approving summary of estimated and forecasted revenues, appropriations, and use of excess reserves for all funds of the city; providing for necessary transfers of funds between accounts and departments, if required; authorizing reduction of spending by City Manager if necessary; re-appropriation of balances which support authorized obligations or encumbrances; providing for filing of Adopted Budget; establishing civil service classifications and positions; appropriating funds for the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating Budget and Capital Program of the City of Lubbock; approving all permit, license, fees, and charges for service recommended to be adjusted; approving the pay plan and positions; approving personnel; amending section 4.02.041 of the Code of Ordinances amending animal service fees as contained therein; amending section 22.03.084 of the Code of Ordinances amending the water base charge as contained therein; amending section 22.03.085 of the Code of Ordinances amending the water volume rate as contained therein; amending section 22.03.095 of the Code of Ordinances by revising the water utility reconnect and disconnect fees as contained therein; amending section 22.04.133(A) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock by revising the significant industrial user permit fee as contained therein; amending section 22.04.174 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock by adding a weekend dumping fee as contained therein; amending section 22.06.051 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock by revising the solid waste landfill service fees as contained therein; amending section 22.06.185(A) of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lubbock by revising the solid waste collections service fees as contained therein; providing for the reconciliation of the transfer of funds from the General Fund to Enterprise Funds; accepting the budgets for Lubbock Economic Development Alliance, Market Lubbock, Inc., Civic Lubbock, Inc., and Vintage Township Public Facilities Corporation; finding that proper notice of meeting provided by law and ratifying such; providing a penalty; providing for publication; and providing for a savings clause.]

THE COUNCIL WILL NOW VOTE ON AGENDA ON ITEM 3.4, WHICH IS THE PROPOSED 23-24 OPERATING BUDGET AND CAPITAL PROGRAM.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE 23-24 BUDGET? THANK YOU, MISS MARTINEZ-GARCIA.

THANK YOU, DR. WILSON.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, MISS PATTERSON HARRIS.

MR. MAYOR, JUST NUMBER ONE TO LET MISS WARD KNOW.

I WAS THINKING, LISTENING TO HER AND JUST WANTED TO STRIKE UP A CONVERSATION AS TO COMMENTS SHE MADE REGARDING 4% FOR SOME OF THE LOWER PAID OR ENTRY LEVEL STAFF AND A LOWER RATE FOR THE FOR THOSE MAKING THE HIGHER MARKS, WHICH I BELIEVE WE DID SIMILARLY ON LAST YEAR.

AM I CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, MA'AM.

WE DID IT TWO YEARS IN A ROW TO WHERE THE LOWER WAGE EMPLOYEES GOT A MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE AND THE HIGHER PAID EMPLOYEES GOT A LESSER PERCENTAGE.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP FOR MAYBE CONVERSATION WITH THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS AND SOME CONSIDERATION ABOUT THAT.

IF THEY'D LIKE TO HAVE SOME SAY OR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

YEAH, I STILL THINK THAT'S A VALID CONSIDERATION GIVEN THE STATUS OF TAXPAYERS, CITIZENS IN OUR CITY THAT ARE FACING DIFFICULT SITUATIONS, DIFFICULT MANY OF THEM ARE NOT GETTING THOSE KINDS OF RAISES, AND OF COURSE THE LOWER END OF THE PAY SCALE, THAT KIND OF AN INCREASE DOES A WHOLE LOT FOR THOSE PEOPLE.

IT MAKES UP FOR A LOT OF THE PRESSURE THAT IS PUT ON THEM BY THE RISING COSTS, AS MR. OWENS SAID I THINK I SAW THAT SAME FIGURE HE DID.

THE AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS HAS INFLATION HAS INCREASED THEIR COST ABOUT $709 A MONTH.

THAT'S ABOUT $8,500 A YEAR.

THE AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN LUBBOCK IS ABOUT $75,000.

SO THAT'S MORE THAN A 10% HIT THAT THEY'VE TAKEN BECAUSE OF INFLATION, EVEN THOUGH THEIR INCOMES HAVE GONE UP LESS THAN 5%.

SO I THINK WE ALWAYS HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT NOT JUST OUR CITIZENS, BUT PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR OUR CITY WHO MAYBE MAKE LESS THAN $100,000.

THAT INCREASE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THEM, BUT I DO FEEL LIKE WE PAY AT THE UPPER LEVELS OF OUR CITY VERY WELL AND WE GET WHAT WE PAY FOR AT THE UPPER LEVEL.

I AM NOT ABOUT HERE.

EVERY EMPLOYEE OF THIS CITY THAT I HAVE MET WITH AND WORKED WITH DOES A FANTASTIC JOB.

SO THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANYTHING.

THEY'RE NOT DOING THEIR JOB.

THEY'RE NOT WORTH IT, BUT WE'RE IN TOUGH TIMES AND A BUDGET DOESN'T EXIST IN A VACUUM.

IT EXISTS IN AN ECONOMIC REALITY, THE REALITY OUR CITIZENS FACE AND SO I WOULD ALSO BE IN FAVOR OF CAPPING ABOVE 100,000.

THE INCREASE IS AT $4,000, WHICH WOULD BE 4%, BUT ANYBODY MAKING MORE THAN $100,000 A YEAR, THEIR INCREASE WOULD BE CAPPED AT $4,000.

SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE AS WE NEED TO LOOK AT IN OUR BUDGET.

[01:10:02]

I'M ALSO A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED.

LET ME ASK A QUESTION. ARE YOU PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME? LET ME SEE IF I CAN TRY TO NUTSHELL THAT.

ARE YOU PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT WHERE ALL EMPLOYEES THAT MAKE LESS THAN $100,000 A YEAR WOULD RECEIVE A 4% PAY INCREASE, COST OF LIVING INCREASE, WHATEVER YOU WOULD CALL IT, AND ANYONE MAKING OVER $100,000 WOULD RECEIVE NONE.

ANYONE OVER 100,000 WOULD RECEIVE A $4,000 PAY INCREASE, WHICH IS 4%, NOTHING ABOVE THAT.

SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE, BUT I'M NOT PROPOSING IT AS AN AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE I THINK I'LL WAIT AND SEE HOW THE BUDGET VOTE GOES.

ALL RIGHT, MISS JOY, I JUST DON'T HAVE A BUTTON THERE.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M NOT MISSING YOU UP THERE.

ANY DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT? I'M HERE, MAYOR.

MUCH THAT I'VE HEARD TODAY AGREE WITH COMING FROM THE CITIZENS, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PICTURE AS A WHOLE.

IT'S HARD TO MAKE A DECISION ON ONE ASPECT WITHOUT AFFECTING ANOTHER.

I'M NOT SURE ON THE ISSUE OF CAPPING THE 4%.

I'M NOT REAL SURE WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN EVEN DO THAT, AND I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER THAT TO LEGAL.

ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE BROUGHT UP BY MISS PATTERSON HARRIS AND MR. MCBRAYER? MISS MARTINEZ GARCIA, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT IF I'M NOT IF I'M CORRECT, JARRETT DID YOU SAY THAT FOR TWO YEARS ANYONE ABOVE 100,000 DID NOT GET AN INCREASE? I THOUGHT. LET ME RESTATE THAT, AND IT WAS NOT THERE WASN'T A CUT LINE.

THE WAY THAT WORKED IS WE TOOK THE PAY SCALES AND THEN WE TURNED THE PERCENTAGE PART OF IT UPSIDE DOWN.

SO IF YOU TOOK YOUR LOWER BELIEVE IT WAS FIVE.

IF WE TAKE A BREAK, I CAN LOOK IT UP AND TELL YOU EXACTLY, BUT THINK OF THE LOWER 5 OR 6 PAY GRADES GOT 8% OR BETTER, AND AT THE TOP END, THE HIGHER PAY GRADES, WHICH CERTAINLY WOULD BE EVERYBODY THAT'S OVER 100,000, BUT IT WAS BROKEN INTO TWO DIFFERENT TIERS.

I THINK ONE YEAR AS LOW AS 3.75 ON THAT.

SO THE LOWER SCALE DOUBLED THE HIGHER SCALE.

I THINK THIS YEAR IT'S BEEN TOUGH FOR EVERYBODY, NO MATTER WHAT LEVEL OF INCOME THAT YOU'RE MAKING.

WELL, PROBABLY FOR SOME MORE THAN OTHERS LIKE STEVE, BUT OUR EMPLOYEES DESERVE A LITTLE BIT OF OF AN INCREASE ACROSS THE BOARD.

SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD HOLD ANYBODY ACCOUNTABLE FOR MAKING A LITTLE BIT MORE.

I THINK EVERYBODY IS DESERVING, AND THIS YEAR WITH NO DOUBT IS ONE OF THE YEARS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE STEP UP FOR ALL OF OUR EMPLOYEES.

THANK YOU, MS. MARTINEZ-GARCIA.

DR. WILSON.

I AGREE WITH COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ-GARCIA YOU KNOW, BEING WHERE WE SIT TODAY, A LOT OF THINGS HAPPEN BEHIND THE SCENES AT THE CITY THAT CITIZENS DON'T SEE, AND OUR UPPER LEVEL STAFF WORK TIRELESSLY HOURS OUTSIDE OF 8 TO 5, AND SO DO OUR LOWER LEVEL STAFF, AND EVERYBODY DESERVES TO FEEL LIKE THEY WERE COMPENSATED FAIRLY FOR THAT EXTRA TIME, AND ALL OF THE EFFORT THAT THE CITY STAFF PUTS IN, WHETHER THEY ARE NEW ENTRY EMPLOYEES ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP, AND SO I ALSO AGREE, I THINK IT SHOULD BE A FAIR PERCENT ACROSS THE BOARD.

MR. MASSENGALE.

THANKS, MAYOR.

I AGREE WITH THE EQUITABLE RAISE.

FIRST, I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN AN AMENDMENT PUT FORTH ON THE DIOCESE IS JUST DISCUSSION.

SECOND, I WOULD HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, SPECIFICALLY HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT OUR FIRST RESPONDERS.

I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD WORK WITH THAT.

YOU KNOW, THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THERE'S THE COMMENT WAS MADE ABOUT THE 4%, AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF BUSINESSES IN THIS COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ONLY HAD TO DEAL WITH 4% INFLATION ON THEIR PAYROLL THIS YEAR AND SO I THINK YOU HAVE TO KEEP ALL THAT IN MIND, YOU KNOW, AS EVERYONE'S TRYING TO MAKE PAYROLL AND EVERYONE WANTS TO

[01:15:03]

BE IN THE POSITION TO, YOU KNOW, EXPRESS GRATIFICATION, YOU KNOW, EXPRESS APPRECIATION RATHER TO STAFF.

I MEAN, 4%, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT OUT OF THE REALM OF REASONABLE.

ALL RIGHT. IS SEEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT SPECIFIC TOPIC BROUGHT UP BY MISS PATTERSON HARRIS.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS OF MR. ATKINSON ON AGENDA ITEM 3.1.

MR. MCBRAYER.

I HAVE A FURTHER QUESTION ABOUT THE SALES TAX THAT WE PROPOSED TO HAVE COME INTO OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR.

I KNOW IT'S I THINK YOU SAID IT WAS 2.5% ABOVE THE END OF YEAR OR 23 OR THE ESTIMATED END OF YEAR 23.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, SIR.

THE PROPOSED BUDGET IS THE END OF THIS FISCAL YEAR.

SO IT'D BE THE END OF SEPTEMBER, PLUS 2.5%, AND COULD YOU JUST GO THROUGH AGAIN HOW YOU ARRIVED AT THAT SINCE IT'S SO MUCH LOWER THAN THE YEARS BEFORE? WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING AT TO COME UP WITH THAT FIGURE? YEAH, THE WE GET A MONTHLY REPORT FOR NOT JUST US, BUT FOR THE TOP 20 CITIES IN TEXAS.

SO EVERYBODY KNOWS SALES TAX IS PAID WHEN YOU PURCHASE AN ITEM, IT ACTUALLY ALL GOES TO THE STATE AND THEN THE STATE TURNS AROUND AND REMITS BACK TO THE LOCALITY THEIR PORTION OF IT. SO IT'S A GREAT ECONOMIC BAROMETER THAT DATA IS NEVER MORE THAN A MONTH OLD, WHEREAS IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT TAX VALUES, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH GOING TO BE A YEAR OLD.

WE BEGIN TO SEE THAT COMING DOWN IN OUR JANUARY COLLECTIONS.

SO OUR RATE OF INCREASE WAS SOMEWHAT STEEP AND WE SAW IT COMING DOWN THE LAST THREE MONTHS OF OUR ACTUAL COLLECTIONS.

NET OF INFLATION IS FLAT, THE 0.3% ACTUAL CHANGE, THAT'S THREE MONTHS FLAT.

FOR THE LAST THREE MONTHS IT'S BEEN RIGHT THERE.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT IT HAS BEEN FOR THE YEAR? I MEAN, IS THERE A FIGURE, A PERCENTAGE OVER THE YEAR? OVERALL, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT AN 8% YEAR OVER YEAR CHANGE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS JUST MY QUESTION WAS I THINK WE'VE TAKEN A VERY CONSERVATIVE VIEW TOWARDS ESTIMATING OUR SALES TAX, BUT OF COURSE, WHAT THAT ESTIMATE IS CAN AFFECT THE TAX RATE THAT WE IMPOSE ON PEOPLE.

IT CAN, YES, AND SO THAT WAS JUST ONE OF THE OTHER AREAS I THOUGHT MIGHT BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO LOOK AT ADJUSTING OUR BUDGET, MAYBE NOT TO GET DOWN TO THE NO NET REVENUE RATE, BUT TO LOWER IT TO LOWER THE EFFECT ON PEOPLE.

IF WE MIGHT CONSIDER THAT.

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD FOR YOU HAD TO DO WITH OUR RESERVES AND HOW WE HANDLE OUR RESERVES, AND I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A THEORY THAT MAY NOT BE SHARED BY EVERYBODY, BUT YOU BUILD UP YOUR RESERVES DURING GOOD TIMES, BUT SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO USE THEM DURING TOUGH TIMES AND AGAIN, THAT'S MY POSITION.

WE'RE IN A RATHER TOUGH TIME FOR OUR CITIZENS, AND AGAIN, THE CITIZENS OF LUBBOCK DON'T WORK FOR THE CITY.

THE CITY WORKS FOR THE CITIZENS OF LUBBOCK.

IT'S THEIR ECONOMIC REALITY WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO EFFECT.

IS THERE ANY ROOM, DO YOU THINK, IN WE'RE IN PRETTY GOOD SHAPE WITH OUR RESERVES, ARE WE NOT? WE ARE.

I WOULD WE ARE SPENDING SIGNIFICANTLY OUT OF THE RESERVES FOR THE PROPOSED BUDGET.

YES, WE ARE.

WE'RE GOING TO END AND I'M TRYING TO FLIP WHILE I TALK AND I'M NOT THAT GOOD AT DOING THAT.

IF YOU GIVE ME A MOMENT, I'LL GIVE YOU THE ACTUAL NUMBERS THAT ARE RELATED TO THAT.

YOU HAVE TWO COMPONENTS ALWAYS OF A RESERVE BLUE.

I MAY HAVE TO GET YOU TO PLUG IN AND PULL UP OUR RESERVE SHEET TWO COMPONENTS TO YOUR RESERVE.

YOU HAVE A REQUIRED RESERVE, A MINIMUM THAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP, AND THAT OF COURSE, VARIES BY YOUR DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS OR DIFFERENT FUNDS.

SECOND, THEN YOU PUT DOLLARS AVAILABLE TO DO THINGS.

THE NUMBER ONE THING WE DO WITH RESERVES OVER WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE IS FUND THE FOLLOWING YEARS STREET MAINTENANCE IN CASH.

THAT'S HOW WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GO FROM BORROWED MONEY TO CASH MONEY AND STILL INCREASE IT.

SO IF YOU USE THIS YEAR'S NUMBER, WE NEED TO HAVE $13 MILLION OF WHAT WE CALL EXCESS RESERVES IN PLACE TO FUND STREET MAINTENANCE NEXT YEAR.

NUMBER TWO, ANYTHING THAT COMES UP IN THE YEAR THAT WE'VE RUN ACROSS, WE DIDN'T HAVE IT THIS YEAR, YEAR BEFORE.

IT WAS VEHICLES.

WE HAD TO BUY EXTRA AND BOUGHT THOSE WITH CASH.

YOU ALSO THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF A YEAR ARE GOING TO HAVE MANY OF YOUR CAPITAL PROJECTS.

UPLAND AND 66 WAS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT ACTUALLY ESCALATED BEYOND THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, EVEN WITH THE RESERVES WE HELD.

[01:20:02]

SO THAT'S WHAT'S PUSHED FORWARD INTO YOUR NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE, TWO MEETINGS AGO WE STARTED APPROVING THE PROJECT THAT ALLOW US TO GET PARTS OF SOUTH QUAKER PAVED.

THE CITY WILL ONLY BE ON THE HOOK FOR $0.30 ON THE DOLLAR TO DO THAT, BUT WE HAD THE CASH IS ROUGHLY $2 MILLION TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT FROM THOSE EXCESS RESERVES. SO WE DO HAVE HEALTHY NUMBERS, BUT DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE OUT OF LINE, AND CERTAINLY IF WE PULL THEM DOWN TOO FAR, MY BIGGEST FEAR IS BEING ABLE TO FUND WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. ATKINSON? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON 3.4? MS. PATTERSON HARRIS. NOT SO MUCH A DISCUSSION, BUT I DID WANT TO THANK OUR CITIZENS FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING AND VOICING THEIR CONCERNS.

I NEVER WANT THEM TO THINK THAT WE'RE NOT AT LEAST TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY PRESENT TO US AND MS. WARD, IT WAS GOOD TO SEE YOU TODAY AND TO HEAR FROM YOU AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DID INDICATE THAT WE WERE LISTENING AND I WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS IN REGARD TO THAT CONSIDERATION, AND THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. MS. PATTERSON HARRIS.

YES, AND MICAH SAYS SHE WON'T BE HERE IN ANOTHER 22 YEARS.

I DISAGREE.

I THINK YOU WILL BE.

AS TO THE BUDGET, I WANT TO TAKE INTO THAT CONSIDERATION AS WELL, AND I AGREE WITH MANY OF THOSE THINGS BROUGHT UP BY BURLEY AND BY MICAH.

ONE THING I WILL POINT OUT, WE DID A PRETTY LENGTHY STUDY AS FAR AS OUR ISO ONE RATING.

THIS NEW FIRE STATION IS GOING TO HELP US WITH OUR ISO ONE RATING.

THIS WILL, IN FACT DECREASE INSURANCE COSTS FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN.

I THINK IN TOTAL, WE LOOK AT A 6.6% DECREASE ON THE BUDGET.

I DON'T THINK YOU SEE THAT MOST OF THE TIME WE'RE SEEING A DECREASE IN THE BUDGET.

REGARDLESS IF YOU LOOK AT THE PENNIES THAT IT GOES UP, WE'RE STILL DECREASING THE BUDGET.

WE'RE PAYING CASH.

WE'VE SEEN A GOOD PRECEDENT BY FORMER COUNCIL SETTING THAT CASH PAYMENTS.

WE'RE REDUCING THE STORMWATER RATE.

I THINK PEOPLE GLOSS OVER THAT.

THIS IS A REDUCTION AS DEBT SERVICE ROLLS OFF.

WE'RE DOING WHAT WE SAID WE WOULD DO, AND THIS BUDGET CALLS FOR 18 NEW FIREFIGHTERS, SIX NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE ENTIRE $2.6 MILLION BODY CAM SYSTEM.

JARRETT, IF YOU'D PULL UP SLIDE 19, AND I THINK THIS IS WHAT THE FOCUS IS FOR MANY OF US IS THIS IS WHERE IT'S GOING.

$2.6 MILLION FOR BODY WORN CAMERAS, 20 NEW FIREFIGHTERS, THE LAPD OFFICERS.

THAT'S WHERE THIS INCREASE COMES, AND WE'VE SAID AS A COUNCIL MANY TIMES THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS GOING TO BE OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY, AND THIS IS WHERE THIS INCREASE IS GOING, INCLUDING A DECREASED BUDGET WITH THE INCENTIVES AND THE NEW ADDITIONAL INCREASE IN OFFICERS AND PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS.

LUBBOCK SUPPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY.

THEY ALWAYS HAVE, AND I BELIEVE THEY ALWAYS WILL, AND THAT'S AND I THINK THE CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY SUPPORT WHEN YOU SHOW THEM WHERE IT'S GOING AND WHERE IT'S GOING DIRECTLY TO OUR PUBLIC SAFETY COMPONENT OF OUR OF OUR CITY.

I THINK THE OLD SAYING WAS YOU CAN'T HAVE GOOD TALENT ON THE FOOTBALL FIELD.

YOU CAN'T HAVE GOOD X'S AND O'S WITHOUT JIMMYS AND JOES, AND I THINK THAT COMES TO MY POSITION ON OUR INCREASE IN SALARIES AT 4% ACROSS THE BOARD AND AN INCREASE IN SALARIES FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRST RESPONDERS.

IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE MAINTAIN GOOD TALENT.

I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN PEOPLE THAT HAVE LOOKED TO LEAVE.

WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THEM, AND WE NEED THAT GOOD TALENT IN OUR CITY BECAUSE IT MAKES US MORE EFFICIENT IN CORE SERVICES AND ACROSS THE BOARD.

I DON'T LOOK AT THIS BUDGET AND SEE THERE'S A LOT OF FLUFF.

I THINK THIS FOCUSES ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORE SERVICES, AND I WILL VOTE TO APPROVE THIS BUDGET.

SO WITH THAT, I GUESS, SEEING NO OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON AGENDA ITEM, MR. MAYOR, I'M TRYING TO GET ON.

OKAY. I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER.

OKAY. THE CHANGES THAT YOU HAVE IN THE BUDGET THAT YOU PROPOSED AS IT AFFECTS LUBBOCK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE. CAN YOU GIVE US AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THAT WOULD WORK OR SOME SPECIFICS ABOUT HOW IT WOULD CHANGE FROM DOLLARS THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY COMMITTING?

[01:25:05]

YES, MA'AM. GLAD TO DO THAT.

TODAY OR PRIOR.

PRIOR TO TODAY'S NEW BUDGET, THERE WAS A SENSE PER $100 COMPONENT THAT WAS PULLED OUT OF YOUR TAX RATE.

THAT IS NOT A STATE REQUIREMENT.

THERE'S NOT ACTUALLY A STATE COMPONENT FOR THAT.

IT WAS A LOCAL WAY OF SAYING EACH YEAR THAT MARKET LUBBOCK WOULD GET WHATEVER THE EQUIVALENT DOLLARS WAS.

AT ONE TIME IT WAS $0.03 AND IT SLOWLY COME DOWN AND THAT'S WHAT THEY GOT.

THEREFORE, THAT NUMBER THAT THE DOLLARS REPRESENTED BY THAT NUMBER WENT UP JUST AS YOUR VALUATIONS GO UP EACH AND EVERY YEAR.

THAT WAS NOT GOING UP IN RELATION TO WHAT THE PROGRAMED EXPENSES WERE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND THE DIVISIONS OF THE CITY, WE DON'T BUDGET BY SAYING, OKAY, NEXT YEAR THERE'S GOING TO BE A PLUS 13% NEW REVENUE, BRING ME A BUDGET.

WE INSTEAD SIT AND WORK THROUGH AN EXPENSE BUDGET, A PLAN OF SERVICE AND SAY, HERE'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST FOR THAT DEPARTMENT, AND THEN WE ALLOCATE OUR REVENUE TOWARDS THAT. THIS WILL PUT THE MARKET LUBBOCK BUDGET ON THAT EXACT SAME BASIS AS THE OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS.

I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS IN TERMS OF A DOLLAR AMOUNT, IF YOU COMPARE WHAT WAS RECEIVED BY LEDA FOR THIS YEAR COMPARED TO WHAT YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE WOULD BE RECEIVED IN THE NEXT BUDGET YEAR.

SO AND WE'RE FOCUSED ON MARKET LUBBOCK WE DON'T CHANGE ANY OF THE LEDA DOLLARS YEAR OVER YEAR.

SO CURRENT YEAR TO THE NEW YEAR, THE MARKET LUBBOCK CHANGE WENT UP BY JUST A HAIR UNDER 3%, WHEREAS IF IT HAD BEEN PEGGED STRICTLY ON THOSE TAX RATE CALCULATIONS, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANYTHING ELSE, MISS JOY? NO, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

ALL RIGHT. HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON 3.4.

DO WE WANT TO MOVE THIS JIMMY TO THE VOTE? MISS JOY, I'LL PROBABLY JUST HAVE YOU INDICATE YOUR VOTE VERBALLY SINCE WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON 3.4 WITH OUR BUTTONS. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF 3.4.

PLEASE INDICATE YES.

ALL NOT IN FAVOR INDICATE NO.

ALL RIGHT.

MOTION CARRIES SIX ONE.

WE'LL NEXT MOVE TO 3.5 COUNCIL NOW VOTE ON AGENDA ITEM 3.5.

[5. Ordinance 1st Reading - Finance: Consider an ordinance setting the tax rate and levying a tax upon all property subject to taxation within the City of Lubbock for 2023; apportioning said levy among the various funds and items for which revenue must be raised; fixing the times in which said taxes shall be paid and assessing penalty and interest for nonpayment of such taxes within the time provided.]

THE TAX RATE ORDINANCE.

IS THERE A MOTION, MR. MASSENGALE? THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE PROPERTY TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY THE ADOPTION OF A TAX RATE OF 0.480164, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY A 3.17% INCREASE IN THE TAX RATE.

THANK YOU, MR. MASSENGALE. I HAVE A MOTION.

I HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? THANK YOU, DR. WILSON.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON AGENDA ITEM 3.5? ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF 3.5, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES SIX ONE.

WE'LL NOW MOVE. I'M VOTING FOR.

I'M JUST A LITTLE BEHIND YOU GUYS.

YES, MA'AM. I GOT THAT, MISS JOY.

THAT CARRIED 6 TO 1.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL NOW MOVE TO 3.6.