Jan 28, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting

[1. Executive Session]

[00:00:21]

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I WILL NOW OPEN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK FOR JANUARY 28TH, 2025, AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL NOW RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071, TO CONSULT WITH AND SEEK ADVICE OF OUR CITY'S LEGAL COUNSEL.

SECTION 551.072 TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND SECTION 551.074 TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS.

THE CITY COUNCIL IS NOW RECESSING AT 12:27 P.M..

[1. Invocation]

ORDER. AND WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OUR CEREMONIAL ITEMS TODAY.

AND THEN WE WILL GO INTO OUR WORK SESSION. SO WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THAT AROUND.

AND NOW I'M GOING TO CALL UP REVEREND PAUL CARPENTER FROM FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCH TO LEAD US IN OUR INVOCATION, AFTER WHICH YOU'LL REMAIN STANDING. AND OUR MAYOR PRO TEM WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGES.

THANK YOU. IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT.

HEAVENLY FATHER, TODAY WE ASK YOUR GRACE AND YOUR BLESSING OVER OUR WHOLE CITY AS OUR LEADERS ARE HERE, DISCERNING, SEEKING WISDOM. SOLVING PROBLEMS. WE TRUST YOUR HAND IS AT WORK IN OUR CITY STREETS, WITH OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, WITH OUR SMALL BUSINESSES AND ALL THE CITIZENS.

YOUR PROVIDENCE FATHER IS YOUR LOVE TO US. AND WE TRUST AND REMEMBER THAT YOU ARE A GOD OF DETAILS.

WE PRAY, DEAR LORD, THAT YOU WOULD ALLOW THIS MEETING TO BE PRODUCTIVE.

WE PRAY THAT EACH PERSON HERE, WHETHER SITTING IN A POSITION OF POWER OR BRINGING QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THAT EACH PERSON HERE WOULD KNOW HOW VALUABLE THEY ARE TO YOU. WE PRAY, FATHER, THAT YOU KEEP OUT ANY UNNECESSARY FIRES TO DEAL WITH ANY TECHNOLOGICAL ISSUES, AND WE PRAY THAT WE COULD FOCUS AS A CITY ON THE ISSUES THAT MATTER MOST.

AND LORD, WE PRAY THAT YOU WOULD CONTINUE TO PROSPER OUR TOWN BY GIVING GOOD LEADERSHIP, BY LIFTING HIGH THE STANDARDS OF WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A CITIZEN, THAT OUR MORAL COMPASS WOULD BE FIXED ON YOU, AND THAT FOR ONE MORE YEAR WE COULD EXPERIENCE THE GIFT OF YOUR PROVIDENCE AND GRACE,

[2. Pledges of Allegiance]

AT THIS TIME, WILL YOU PLEASE JOIN ME IN HONORING OUR AMERICAN AND TEXAS FLAG? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

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

[1. City of Lubbock Impact Fee Program]

WELCOME. THIS WILL BE A WORK SESSION TODAY ALL ABOUT THE CITY OF LUBBOCK'S IMPACT FEE PROGRAM.

MR. JOHN TURPIN. REMEMBER, JOHN HAS RECENTLY MOVED OVER TO BE OUR NEW CITY ENGINEER.

I KEEP ADDING TO HIS TENURE, BUT WHAT ARE WE NOW? JOHN 60 DAYS, AM I CLOSER? NOT QUITE. YOU'RE GETTING CLOSER AND CLOSER.

BUT ANYWAY JOHN AND HE'S GOT MEMBERS OF HIS TEAM.

Y'ALL HAVE ABOUT NINE CONTENT SLIDES. WE INTEND TO LEAVE TIME FOR YOU TO ASK ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE REGARDING IMPACT FEES.

SO JOHN, IF YOU WOULD. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME TODAY.

SO I'LL JUST GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW TODAY. JUST REALLY HIGHLIGHT REALLY HIGH LEVEL HOW THIS ALL WORKS.

[00:05:06]

SO EVERY FIVE YEARS WE DO CAPACITY PLANS, WE DO A MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, WE DO A WATER MASTER PLAN AND A WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN.

THIS ALL DIVES INTO HOW WE CALCULATE THESE IMPACT FEES.

AND I'LL EXPLAIN THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DEPTH IN A LATER SLIDE.

SERVICE AREAS. SERVICE AREAS LOOK DIFFERENT BETWEEN ROADWAYS AND WATER.

I'LL GO INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DEPTH, BUT AND THEN IMPACT FEES COLLECTED BY LUBBOCK I'LL HAVE A SLIDE SHOWING WHAT HAVE WE COLLECTED SO FAR. AND THEN FINALLY, HOW IS LUBBOCK UTILIZING THE IMPACT FEES THAT WE'RE COLLECTING TODAY.

SO WITH THAT IMPACT FEES WERE ESTABLISHED BY CHAPTER 395 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE IN 1987.

TEXAS LAW ALLOWS FOR ROADWAY, WATER, WASTEWATER AND DRAINAGE, IMPACT FEES, IN LUBBOCK.

WE HAVE ROADWAY. WE HAVE CALCULATED WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEES, BUT THOSE ARE SET AT ZERO AS OF TODAY.

IMPACT FEES ARE A FEE COLLECTED FOR EACH DEVELOPMENT.

AN EXISTING BUSINESS OR HOME DOES NOT HAVE IMPACT FEES APPLICABLE TO THEM.

WE WILL NOT. YOU CANNOT COLLECT AGAINST EXISTING BUSINESSES OR HOMES.

SO FOR ANY OF OUR CITIZENS WATCHING THIS, THESE DO NOT AFFECT YOU.

IMPACT FEES PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL MECHANISM FOR FUNDING FOR THE CITY TO RECOVER PROPORTIONAL COSTS.

SO BASICALLY, AS WE GROW AND WE HAVE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE.

WHAT IS THAT PROPORTIONATE COST THAT BASICALLY HOW IS IT ADDED ADDITIONAL NEED FOR WATER, ADDITIONAL NEED FOR WASTEWATER CAPACITY OR ADDITIONAL NEED FOR ROADS. IMPACT. SO GOING INTO THAT IMPACT FEES.

BASICALLY THE WAY IT WORKS IS YOU HAVE 50% THAT CAN BE CAPTURED OF THE TOTALITY OF OUR.

SO WE GATHER ALL THE PROJECTS TOGETHER AND THERE'S A TOTAL PROJECT COST, RIGHT? ONLY 50% OF THAT OF A TEN YEAR LOOK OF THAT PLAN CAN BE CAPTURED AND USED TOWARDS OUR MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE. SO THIS SETS THE 50% MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE AND THEN THE OTHER 50% IS ASSUMED TO BE CAPTURED WITHIN EITHER YOUR TAXES.

SO YOUR GENERAL FUND OR YOUR RATES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

ONE THING THAT'S I'VE ALREADY SAID IT, BUT TODAY THE CITY IS USING 25% FOR ROADWAYS AND WE HAVE ZERO FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER. FEES ARE DIRECTLY PROPORTIONATE TO THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

SO WHAT DO I MEAN BY THAT? TRIP GENERATION. SO WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT TRIP GENERATION, BASICALLY WHAT I'M SAYING IS HOW MANY TRIPS DOES THIS BUSINESS PRODUCE. OKAY. SO THAT'S MUCH DIFFERENT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IF, SAY, SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE A NEW MALL IN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, OR I'M GOING TO PROPOSE A LAW OFFICE.

THERE'S MUCH MORE OF AN IMPACT ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THAT AREA.

AND SO THAT'S HOW THAT'S DETERMINED AS TO WHAT TYPE OF COST GOES INTO THAT.

SO IT REALLY IT HAS TO DO WITH WHAT ARE THEY USING THE PROPERTY FOR.

AND AND THEN ON THE WATER SIDE IT IS METER SIZE, ALTHOUGH WE DON'T HAVE THAT TODAY.

BUT IF YOU HAVE A LARGE WATER USER, THEY WOULD GET A HIGHER IMPACT FEE.

SO FEES CAN ONLY BE COLLECTED FOR CAPACITY FOR SURVEY, ENGINEERING, DESIGN AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

IN ADDITION, THEY CAN ONLY BE USED FOR CAPACITY PROJECTS.

SO FEES CANNOT BE COLLECTED TO BE USED FOR MAINTENANCE OR EXISTING NEEDS.

SO LET'S SAY WE HAD A A PUMP STATION AS AN EXAMPLE.

ALTHOUGH WE MAY HAVE A PUMP STATION, WE MAY HAVE A NEED TO UPGRADE THAT PUMP STATION AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY TO HELP THE REST OF THE CITY.

THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE CAPTURED FROM THAT IS THE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY THAT IT PROVIDES.

SO IF WE HAVE TO ADD A COUPLE OF PUMPS, ONLY THOSE FEW THINGS THAT WE'VE ADDED THAT COST TO ADD THOSE EXTRA PUMPS COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO THAT, BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY ASSUMED THE EXISTING PIECE IS ALREADY THERE, SO WE CAN'T CHARGE THAT.

SO FEES FEES ARE ASSESSED AT THE TIME OF PLATTING.

SO BASICALLY WE LET THE DEVELOPER KNOW, HEY WE HAVE IMPACT FEES AND THEN THEY'RE ACTUALLY COLLECTED AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT.

[00:10:03]

THERE IS NO WAY FOR US TO WAIVE THOSE FEES, BUT THIS IS ALL BY CHAPTER 395.

SO CAPACITY PLANS, AS I SAID, WE LIKE TO DO THESE ON ABOUT A FIVE YEAR CYCLE.

WE HAVE A ROADWAY CAPACITY PLAN. WE HAVE THE WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN AND THE WATER MASTER PLAN.

WHAT DO THESE LOOK LIKE? THESE ARE A 5, 10 AND 15 YEAR WINDOW LOOK AT THE CITY.

HOW ARE WE PLANNING? HOW ARE WE PROVIDING FOR OUR CITIZENS AND GROWING AS A CITY? HOW ARE WE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT ALL HAPPENS CORRECTLY? THESE INFORM US AND THESE ALSO INFORM WHAT PROJECTS ARE ULTIMATELY VIABLE FOR USE ON IMPACT FEES.

SO THAT'S WHY I SAY ULTIMATE BUILD OUT. AND THEN WE FINALLY HAVE TO COME DOWN TO THE REAL IMPACT FEE WHERE I SAID THAT 50% COST, YOU HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT DOES OUR GROWTH LOOK LIKE AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO ASSUME, WHAT WE COULD BUILD OR THE NEEDS ARE IN A 10 YEAR PERIOD.

THAT'S SETS YOUR ULTIMATE OR YOUR YOUR FINAL IMPACT FEE.

AND THAT BASICALLY WHY YOU WANT TO HAVE AN ULTIMATE BUILD OUT IS THOSE IDENTIFY PROJECTS, ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.

SO ALTHOUGH IT MAY NOT BE LOOKED AT WITHIN YOUR 10 YEAR, IF SOMEBODY BUILDS SOMEWHERE ELSE WITHIN THE CITY AND IT WASN'T ASSUMED WITH THAT 10 YEAR, AS LONG AS IT WAS IDENTIFIED IN THE ULTIMATE BUILD OUT, IT IS ELIGIBLE.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO CONTINUING ON... SERVICE AREAS, I'LL TACKLE THE EASIEST ONE FIRST.

WATER AND WATER AND WASTEWATER ARE CITYWIDE. ROADWAYS ARE A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED, AND IT'S MORE OF AN ART THAN IT IS A SCIENCE.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT ALL OF OUR AREAS, WE HAVE EIGHT AREAS A THROUGH G, I BELIEVE, AND OR H I'M SORRY.

THOSE AREAS ARE NOT SIX MILES IN ONE AREA, BUT IT'S MORE OF AN ART THAN A SCIENCE, AS I SAID.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL, SOME ARE SHORTER, SO SOME ARE A LITTLE BIT LONGER.

BUT THERE IS THE ABILITY TO IT'S NOT JUST A DIAMETER, YOU DON'T JUST GET TO SAY IT'S SIX MILES AND THIS IS ALL IT IS.

SO AGAIN, ART MORE THAN SCIENCE. AND THEN FINALLY FUNDS ARE ONLY ELIGIBLE FOR PROJECTS AGAIN IN THOSE CAPACITY PLANS FOR ROADWAYS AND THEN WATER AND WASTEWATER. SO IMPACT FEES COLLECTED BY AREA.

YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE THIS IS SINCE, I BELIEVE, 2021.

IS THAT CORRECT, JARED? YES. 2021 IS WHEN WE FINALLY IMPLEMENTED THESE.

AND REALLY WHAT I THINK THIS GIVES IS A REAL GOOD LOOK AT WHERE SINCE 2021 HAVE WE HAD A VAST MAJORITY OF GROWTH.

AND I CAN BACK UP THAT MAP IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT THOSE DIFFERENT AREAS.

BUT YOU CAN SEE WE'VE COLLECTED QUITE A FEW FEES IN E AND THEN AN F THOSE ARE REALLY WHERE WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF GROWTH.

IN ADDITION, WHAT YOU HAVE TO REALIZE IS THAT IN THOSE AREAS THAT ARE YOU'RE SEEING A LARGER NUMBER, THERE MAY BE A LARGER NEED FOR PROJECTS. SO LESS ROADS ARE BUILT OUT IN THOSE AREAS.

SO AGAIN, THERE'S A HIGHER TOTAL COST IN THOSE AREAS.

I WILL CONTINUE ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE. BUT SO HOW ARE WE UTILIZING IMPACT FEES WITHIN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK? WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE HAVE TO UTILIZE? SO ONE OF OUR PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY GOING THAT OUR CITIZENS AND MOST ALL OF YOU KNOW ABOUT IS UPLAND 66 TO 82 ND STREET. WE UTILIZED $2.87 MILLION OF IMPACT FEES FROM AREA F TOWARDS OUR PROJECT TO FUND THAT PROJECT. ON EAST 19TH STREET, THAT'S A $3 MILLION PROJECT.

WE USED $1 MILLION THAT WERE DIRECTLY AND THIS ROAD IS GOING TO BE DIRECTLY USED BY LEPRINO.

AND THEN THAT WAS DIRECTLY COLLECTED FROM LEPRINO.

SO IT IS REALLY TRULY GROWTH IS PAYING FOR GROWTH.

IT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF WHAT THESE CAN DO. QUAKER 146 TO WOODROW ROAD.

THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. IT IS IMPACT FEE CREDITS.

SO WHAT DO I MEAN BY THAT? SO ONE OF OUR DEVELOPERS CHOSE TO ACTUALLY BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH MEANS HE GETS DIRECT IMPACT FEE CREDITS FROM BUILDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL PROJECT VALUE OF $4.3 MILLION.

AND WITH THOSE IMPACT FEE CREDITS, HE CAN USE THAT TO GET OFFSETS FROM IMPACT FEES IN ANY OF THAT AREA.

[00:15:05]

SO WHAT ARE THE THINGS WE GAINED? SO IMPACT FEES HAVE LEVERAGE.

WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO LEVERAGE IMPACT FEES TO GAIN BASICALLY SEVEN TIMES CONSTRUCTION COSTS VERSUS IMPACT FEES.

IMPACT FEES. THEY CREATE OPPORTUNITIES TO UTILIZE FUNDING THROUGHOUT OUR SERVICE AREAS FOR DEVELOPERS SO WE CAN GO AND ENTER INTO DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS. WE CAN BUILD DIRT. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A LOT OF DIRT ROADS FOR ARTERIALS.

IT CREATES OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO USE IT, UTILIZE THE IMPACT FEES AND CONVINCE OUR DEVELOPERS TO PARTICIPATE.

SO NOT ONLY CAN WE GIVE THEM CREDITS FOR BUILDING THAT 70%, BUT WE CAN ALSO PARTICIPATE WITH THE OTHER 30% FROM OUR IMPACT FEES AS WELL. SO I THINK THIS IS THIS IS THE PRIMARY WAYS WE'VE BEEN UTILIZING THESE TODAY.

AND WITH THAT, I WILL LET YOU ALL ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS.

MR. MAYOR, MAY I ADD SOMETHING TO THAT? YES, SIR.

JOHN, BACK UP ONE SLIDE FOR ME, PLEASE. YES, SIR.

SO A LITTLE BIT A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY OF IMPACT FEES.

MULTIYEAR PROJECT TO GET THEM IN FRONT OF THE FRONT OF THE COUNCIL ULTIMATELY, FOR THE COUNCIL TO MAKE A BIG SUBSTANTIVE DECISION.

YOU'RE ALLOWED TO TAKE, AND I'M GOING TO USE $0.50, $0.50 ON THE DOLLAR OF THAT ESTIMATED FUTURE COST.

YOU CAN GET $0.50 OF THAT BACK FOR ROADWAY, FOR WATER, OR FOR WASTEWATER.

SO THAT FIRST SERIES OF QUESTIONS, COUNCIL, WHAT WHAT DO YOU CHOOSE TO DO.

OBVIOUSLY WATER AND WASTEWATER ARE SET AT ZERO.

THERE ARE NO IMPACT FEES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER.

THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, THROUGH COORDINATING WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

ULTIMATELY, THE COUNCIL SETTLED ON $0.25 ON THE DOLLAR FOR ROADWAYS.

SO I'VE BEEN ASKED, HOW DID WE DO THIS BEFORE? AND THE ANSWER IS WE DIDN'T. SO PRIOR TO IMPACT FEES, WE PAID A FULL DOLLAR OF EVERY DOLLAR OF THE COST TO DO THESE ROADWAY CAPACITY PROJECTS THAT JOHN'S TALKING ABOUT.

WITH THE IMPACT FEES WE NOW PAY $0.75 ON THE DOLLAR RATHER THAN THE DOLLAR, SO ABSOLUTE BENEFIT TO THE CITY.

AS WE WERE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS, A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION WAS OKAY, WE BEGAN TO ACCUMULATE THESE DOLLARS.

WE PUT THEM TOGETHER. WHAT DO WE DO? WELL, WE REALLY TALKED, AND THIS IS ALL ON THE PUBLIC RECORD ABOUT THE IMPACT FEES BECOMING KIND OF A DEBT SERVICE FUND, NOT DISSIMILAR TO HOW GATEWAY WORKS.

SO WE WOULD ACCUMULATE ENOUGH FEES, HAVE A TRACK RECORD IF WE NEEDED TO WE COULD ISSUE MAYBE SHORT TERM DEBT, BUILD A MILE OF ROAD SERVICE THAT DEBT OUT OF THE IMPACT FEES.

SOUNDED GOOD, MADE A LOT OF SENSE. ULTIMATELY, THOUGH, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SEEING.

WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS WHAT WE HAVE UP ON THIS SLIDE HERE.

SO THE UPLAND PROJECT, PROJECT LONG IN THE MAKING, PROJECT THAT DOES HAVE SOME MPO FUNDS, A PROJECT THAT FOR MANY DIFFERENT REASONS ENDED UP BEING DRAMATICALLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IT WAS PROGRAMED TO BE.

WHEN WE HAVE MPO FUNDS AND THEY SAY, OKAY, WE'LL GIVE YOU X $7 MILLION, THAT'S ALL YOU GET NO MATTER WHAT.

ULTIMATELY, THAT PROJECT COSTS. WE GOT TOWARDS THE POINT OF NEEDING TO BID THIS PROJECT, NOT WANTING TO LOSE THE MPO MONEY.

AND WE WERE SHORT. THAT PROJECT CROSSES TWO SERVICE AREAS, SO THE $2.87 MILLION ACTUALLY CAME PART FROM ONE PART FROM ANOTHER. BUT WHAT YOU DID WAS CAUSE THAT PROJECT TO HAPPEN BECAUSE WE HAD IMPACT FEES IN THE BANK, RATHER THAN EITHER NOT GETTING TO DO IT OR HAVING TO COME ENTIRELY OUT OF YOUR GENERAL FUND RESERVE.

SO IT BECAME LEVERAGE IS REALLY WHAT IT DID. EAST 19TH, THIS COUNCIL IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT RELATIVELY SHORT STRETCH.

IT'S JUST FROM THE INSIDE OF THE EAST LOOP RIGHT UP TO THE EAST LOOP.

WE HAD A PARTNERSHIP ON THAT PROGRAM BETWEEN THE LUBBOCK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE AND LUBBOCK COUNTY.

NOT QUITE ENOUGH TO GET IT DONE, BUT WITH THE IMPACT FEES COLLECTED IN THAT ZONE WE LEVERAGED THAT PROJECT AND WE MADE IT HAPPEN.

NEITHER OF THOSE PROJECTS HAD TO TOUCH THE GENERAL FUND BECAUSE YOU HAD THOSE IMPACT FEES AVAILABLE.

[00:20:03]

THE DEVELOPER IN THAT CASE SAID, I WILL PUT MY PART OF IT FORWARD.

EXCUSE ME. IT IS A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT PROGRAM.

THEY PAID THAT CASH TO THAT PROJECT. THEY WROTE THE CHECK FOR THAT.

ULTIMATELY, AS THAT DEVELOPER CONTINUES TO DEVELOP ONLY WITHIN THAT SERVICE AREA, NOT OTHER SERVICE AREAS.

THEY'RE PAYING THEMSELVES BACK. IT DID NOT LOSE A DOLLAR OUT OF YOUR IMPACT FEE PROGRAM.

RATHER, IT ALLOWED A DEVELOPER BECAUSE THEY CHOSE TO TAKE THAT RISK TO TAKE THAT MONEY OUT OF POCKET.

THEY HELPED DIRECT WHERE THOSE DOLLARS GO. IF THEY DON'T, WHERE THE MONEY GOES WITHIN A PARTICULAR SERVICE AREA IS ENTIRELY UP TO THIS COUNCIL.

YOU DO MAKE THAT DECISION. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THAT AND LOOK HOW IT'S LEVERAGED UP, THIS HAS REALLY BECOME WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THE FUTURE OF THE IMPACT FEE PROGRAM. IT CAN STILL BE USED IF NEED BE IN THE FUTURE AS A DEBT SERVICE FUND, IT COULD. BUT WE'RE STARTING TO SEE MORE SUCCESS GOING THIS WAY.

IN ALL THOSE CASES, WE ENDED UP WITH OVER $26 MILLION WORTH OF ROADWAYS BUILT, AND WE DID NOT SPEND $26 MILLION EITHER FROM THE GENERAL FUND OR FROM THE IMPACT FEE PROGRAMS. I'VE BEEN ASKED, WHY WOULD THE DEVELOPERS CHOOSE TO DO THIS TO FRONT THOSE DOLLARS? AND I'VE KIND OF ALREADY ANSWERED IT. THEY GET TO KIND OF HELP PICK WHERE THOSE IMPACT FEE MONEYS GO.

BUT THEY HAVE TO REACH INTO THEIR POCKET AND TAKE THEIR RISK IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT WORK.

SO IS IT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE THOUGHT WHEN WE SAT IN THIS ROOM A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO? IT IS. IS IT WORKING AND BUILDING ROADS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY? IT IS. THERE'S AT LEAST TWO MORE POTENTIAL DEVELOPER AGREEMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE IMPACT FEE ELIGIBLE THAT I KNOW OF TODAY.

HOPEFULLY BOTH OF THOSE HAPPEN AND THERE'S MORE THAT COMES BEHIND THAT.

THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF THIS WAS TO GET SOME LEVEL OF ASSISTANCE FOR OUR TAXPAYERS WHEN WE BUILD THESE ARTERIAL LEVEL STREETS, AND WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT'S DOING THAT FOR US.

SO, MAYOR, WITH THAT, I'LL STOP AND EITHER MR. TURPIN OR I WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

YOU TALKED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER. FIRST OF ALL, CAPACITY PROJECTS AGAIN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, IT'S ONLY WHEN YOU ADD CAPACITY IT COULD BE A NEW ROAD WHERE THERE ISN'T ONE AT ALL, BUT IT COULD BE ADDING LANES TO A ROAD AS WELL.

YEAH, THAT IS 100% CORRECT. COULD BE ADDING LANES TO THE ROAD.

GOING FROM A DIRT ROAD TO JUST THE PAVED ROAD INCREASES THE CAPACITY OF THE ROAD.

THEY CAN MOVE MORE TRAFFIC BY HAVING PAVING THAN A DIRT ROAD.

YEAH. AND THESE FUNDS CAN ONLY BE USED ON CERTAIN ROADS.

ARTERIALS ONLY ARTERIALS, ONLY BIG THOROUGHFARES.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT. IS THAT ARE THOSE TWO TERMS PRETTY MUCH SIMILAR? A THOROUGHFARE AND A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE AND AN ARTERIAL? YEAH.

FEDS USE ARTERIAL. RIGHT. AND CAN YOU GIVE A DEFINITION OF AN ARTERIAL SO PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE MEAN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ARTERIALS? BASICALLY, ARTERIALS ARE YOUR MAIN ROAD THAT'S GOING TO COLLECT ANY TRAFFIC THAT IS COMING FROM ALL YOUR RESIDENCES THAT SURROUND IT. SO FOR US, IT OCCURS ON WHAT WE CALL OUR SECTION LINE OR EVERY MILE IT IS GOING TO BE BETWEEN A FIVE AND SEVEN LANE ROAD IDENTIFIED ON OUR MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

SO EVERY ONE OF THESE ROADS ARE IDENTIFIED WITHIN OUR MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN, AND THAT IT JUST CREATES AN AVENUE TO GAIN MORE SPEED AND GET TO PLACES QUICKER AND AVOID IT HAS MORE ACCESS CONTROL THAN HAVING DRIVEWAYS EVERY 60 FOOT WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL ROAD. YOU CAN'T GO DOWN THAT ROAD VERY FAST, BUT THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT OUR ARTERIAL IS.

IT JUST PROVIDES AN AVENUE TO MOVE TRAFFIC IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.

ALL RIGHT. NOW, I NOTICED WE HAD EIGHT SERVICE AREAS, BUT SECTION E HAD NO FEES DISTRIBUTED.

WHAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT? SECTION EIGHT. YOU GO BACK TO ONE.

I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH SLIDE THAT WAS ON. YES.

YES, SIR. SO WE HAVE SOME POTENTIAL IDENTIFIED PROJECTS ACTUALLY COMING UP THAT WE BELIEVE WE COULD LEVERAGE THESE FEES ON TODAY.

CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE MAP TO SHOW WHERE SECTION E IS? YES, SIR, I CAN. IT'S WAY FAR SOUTH. RIGHT? SOUTH LUBBOCK.

[00:25:08]

IS THAT I MEAN, WE IT'S DEVELOPING AND WE'RE DEVELOPING.

WE'RE PLANNING. WE'VE GOT A TEN YEAR PLAN FOR IT AND.

OKAY. IT IS DEVELOPING SWIFTLY AND THE COSTS ARE HIGHER BECAUSE IN THOSE AREAS WE HAVE A LOT OF DIRT ARTERIALS AND WE HAVE A LOT OF NEED AS WELL AS GROWTH. BUT NONE OF THIS MONEY IS USED ON YOUR RESIDENTIAL STREETS OR YOUR SECOND, YOUR COLLECTORS OR ANY OF THAT. RIGHT? NO, SIR. THE RESIDENTIAL YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. BY ORDINANCE, THAT IS ON THE DEVELOPER.

AND SO WHERE DO WE GET THE 70/30 SPLIT FROM? SO THE 70/30 SPLIT IS ACTUALLY SEPARATE FROM THE IMPACT FEES, THAT'S CALLED A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. IT'S DEFINED IN STATE LAW.

THAT'S WHERE IF A DEVELOPER WISHES TO DO A PARTICULAR PROJECT, WE'RE NOT AT THE POINT OF FUNDING IT.

THEY CAN CHOOSE TO ASK US TO PARTNER. WE PAY 30% OF THE COST IF WE CHOOSE TO DO IT.

THEY PAY 70% OF THE COST. OUR 30% PRIOR TO IMPACT FEES ALWAYS CAME OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND, ALWAYS CAME OUT OF YOUR BASE TAX MONEY. THE 30% WE CAN GET NOW FROM EITHER THE GENERAL FUND OR FROM IMPACT FEES IN THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE AREA, AS APPROPRIATE. SO IT'S AN EXISTING PROGRAM PREDATES IMPACT FEES.

NOW WE HAVE A SECOND AVENUE TO POTENTIALLY FUND THOSE DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS.

AND DO THOSE DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS HAVE TO COME WITHIN THAT TEN YEAR PLAN PERIOD? I MEAN, DO THEY HAVE TO FALL WITHIN WHAT WE'VE SAID IS A TEN YEAR PLAN? NO, SIR. SO IDENTIFIED PROJECTS ARE DIFFERENT THAN YOUR.

OKAY. SO WITHIN TEN YEARS YOU HAVEN'T ASSUMED BUILD OUT OF ROADS HOWEVER, MANY ROADS WITHIN THAT AREA THAT YOU BELIEVE ARE GOING TO NEED TO BE BUILT OUT WITHIN THE NEXT TEN YEARS. THAT'S HOW YOU SET THAT MAXIMUM IMPACT FEE.

BUT WHAT THE ULTIMATE BUILD OUT DOES OR THE TOTALITY IT LETS YOU, IT MAY NOT BE ASSUMED WITHIN THAT TEN YEAR, IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ONE OF THOSE IDENTIFIED PROJECTS.

BUT BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE ULTIMATE, YOU CAN STILL LEVERAGE IT THERE, IT'S AN IDENTIFIED PROJECT WITHIN THE PLAN.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO IT JUST PROVIDES FLEXIBILITY WITHIN YOUR GROWING AREA.

ALL RIGHT. AND WOULD YOU GO BACK TO YOUR SLIDE THAT SHOWED THE TOTAL OF WHAT WE HAVE SPENT AND THEN WHAT WAS COLLECTED OR CREDITED.

NOT THAT ONE. I THINK IT WAS YOUR LAST OR NEXT TO YOUR LAST SLIDE RIGHT THERE.

ALL RIGHT. SO ON THIS LIKE WE HAD THESE PROJECTS HERE TOTALING $26 MILLION.

WE USED $3.8 MILLION FROM IMPACT FEES, THE $4.3 MILLION WAS PAID FOR BY THE DEVELOPER, GOT CREDIT FOR THAT. HOW WAS THE REST OF THAT PAID FOR? SO IN THE CASE OF THE UPLAND PROJECT.

THE REMAINING PART OF THAT WAS LARGELY PAID BY THE MPO MONEY THAT ONE STRETCHED OUT SO LONG, THERE WAS ALSO SOME STORMWATER MONEY IN IT. WE WERE ABLE TO GET ITS THROUGH MPO, BUT IT'S DIFFERENT MONEY TO HELP US WITH ALL THE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, THE LIGHTING AND ALL THAT. THAT ONE, WE CALLED IT THE COUCH CUSHION PROJECT.

WE WERE REALLY DIGGING FOR THAT. WE REALLY DID, BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN THAT PROGRAM WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN THAT PROJECT WAS ESTABLISHED, ITS PRESUMED COST WAS WAY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IT ENDED UP BEING.

THE SECOND ONE, EAST 19TH, THE $3 MILLION TOTAL WAS A MILLION FROM IMPACT FEES IN OUR SERVICE AREA, $1 MILLION FROM LUBBOCK COUNTY, AND $1 MILLION FROM LEDA.

THE THIRD PROJECT, THE SOUTH QUAKER PROJECT, THE $2.975 THAT WAS CASH PAID BY THE DEVELOPER THAT THEY CAN GET BACK THROUGH THEIR IMPACT FEES OVER TIME. THE REMAINDER BETWEEN, I'LL CALL IT THE $3 MILLION AND THE $4.3, AND THE $1.3 MILLION. THAT ONE WAS ACTUALLY CITY GENERAL FUND.

THIS PROJECT WAS INITIALLY SET UP BEFORE THAT ZONE WAS GOING TO BE ABLE TO CARRY IT WITH IMPACT FEES.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. COLLINS? JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT. AND I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN I THINK THIS HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT CONTROVERSIAL IN ITS INCEPTION AND EVEN EVEN TODAY.

THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS THAT WE HEAR. BUT IF YOU GO BACK, JOHN, AND AND SHOW US AREA H.

[00:30:03]

THIS IS WHAT'S INSIDE THE LOOP. AND THEN TO THE NEXT SLIDE YOU CAN AGAIN, YOU KNOW, REEMPHASIZE THAT NO DOLLARS HAVE BEEN COLLECTED INSIDE THE LOOP. YES, SIR. AND SO OFTENTIMES WE HEAR THAT THE FOLKS INSIDE THE LOOP, THE, THE THE LONG TERM RESIDENTS ARE PAYING FOR GROWTH OUTSIDE THE LOOP.

AND TO SOME DEGREE THAT'S TRUE. BUT THIS PROGRAM HELPS ALLEVIATE THAT WHERE THE END USER, THE FOLKS WHO ARE BUILDING NEW HOMES, BUILDING NEW BUSINESSES ON THE EDGE OF DEVELOPMENT, ON THE EDGE OF TOWN, OUTSIDE THE LOOP ARE PAYING THEIR OWN WAY.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? THAT. YES, SIR. THAT WOULD BE A FAIR STATEMENT.

OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO I WANT TO BRING THAT TO THE ATTENTION OF, OF, YOU KNOW, OUR AUDIENCE AND MAYBE THOSE ON TELEVISION TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE INSIDE THE LOOP, WE DO STILL PAY A BURDEN TO SOME OF THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT, BUT THEY PAY A GREATER SHARE THROUGH THIS PROCESS, AND IT ALLOWS US TO GROW OUR CITY. AND SO AND IT AND IT ALLOWS US TO KEEP OUR TAX RATES LOW INSIDE THE LOOP.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE. AND THAT'S THAT'S MY COMMENT.

THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, MR. COLLINS. THOSE ARE EXCELLENT COMMENTS.

AND AGAIN THAT GOES BACK TO THE CAPACITY ARGUMENT.

I MEAN, THERE IS NO WE'RE NOT ADDING CAPACITY WITHIN THE LOOP THOSE THOSE ROADS ARE BUILT OUT.

YES. G AND H ARE COMPLETELY BUILT OUT. SO THERE ARE NO MATERIAL NEEDS.

BY STATUTE, WE CANNOT SPEND THAT MONEY UNLESS IT'S CAPACITY AND WE DON'T NEED THAT THERE.

SO THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. IT HELPS TO ANSWER THAT FOR PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT'S NOT FAIR.

THE MONEY IS GOING WHERE IT'S NEEDED IS REALLY AND WHERE THE STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO SPEND IT.

ABSOLUTELY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? [INAUDIBLE] THANK YOU JOHN.

[4. Citizen Comments - According to Lubbock City Council Rules, any citizen wishing to appear in-person before a regular meeting of the City Council, regarding any matter posted on the City Council Agenda below, shall complete the sign-up form provided at the meeting, no later than 2:00 p.m. on January 28, 2025. Citizen Comments provide an opportunity for citizens to make comments and express a position on agenda items. ]

YEAH. THEY WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU ALL TODAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO TAKE UP CITIZEN COMMENTS.

AND ACCORDING TO OUR CITY COUNCIL RULES, ANY CITIZEN WISHING TO APPEAR IN PERSON BEFORE A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ANY MATTER THAT'S POSTED ON OUR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA, COMPLETES A SIGN UP FORM NO LATER THAN 2:00 THE DAY OF THE MEETING.

AND WE ASK THAT YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR COMMENT.

A WARNING BELL WILL SOUND WHEN YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS, AND A FINAL WARNING BELL AT THE END.

AND WE HAVE GAYLE MODRALL COMING FORWARD TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM 6.26.

IF YOU'LL COME FORWARD. YES. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS GAYLE MODRALL.

I LIVE AT 5233 16TH STREET. I CONTINUE TO OBJECT TO HAVING TO GIVE MY ADDRESS IN ORDER TO SPEAK FOR CITY COUNCIL.

I WOULD LIKE TO COMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPOINTING AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM FOR THE NEW LIBRARY BRANCH AND THE APPROVAL OF MIDWEST TAPE.

HOW MANY LIBRARIES HAS PARK HILL DESIGNED? I'D LIKE TO BE ON THE NEW LIBRARY COMMITTEE.

I'VE DESIGNED A FEW LIBRARIES, AND AS AN ARCHITECT, I CAN DECIPHER SIMPLE BLUEPRINTS AND I UNDERSTAND ARCHITECT'S PERSPECTIVES.

I ALSO LIKE TO INTERVIEW THE LIBRARY STAFF TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IN THE NEW LIBRARY, AND REPORT MY FINDINGS ANONYMOUSLY TO THE ARCHITECTS.

I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO HELP THE CITY CREATE A NEW SURVEY WHERE CITIZENS COULD SAY WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE, AS AT THE NEW CITY LIBRARY BRANCH. THE PEOPLE I HAVE TALKED TO ASKED ME WHERE THE NEW LIBRARY BRANCH WILL BE LOCATED.

I TELL THEM SOUTHWEST LUBBOCK AND THEY SEEM DISAPPOINTED I CAN'T GIVE THEM AN ADDRESS.

ONE OF MY FRIENDS HAS TOLD ME TWICE SHE WANTS THE NEW LIBRARY TO HAVE A GENEALOGY SECTION AND THE CHILDREN'S BOOKS.

HER REASON FOR WANTING THE GENEALOGY SECTION TO BE MOVED FROM MAHON IS THAT MOSTLY THE ELDERLY PATRONS WHO USE THE GENEALOGY COLLECTION SO THEY CAN AVOID THE AVOID THE LONG AND SUBSTANTIAL WALK FROM THE MAHON PARKING LOT TO THE GENEALOGY COLLECTION.

I OFFER THIS SUGGESTION AS AN EXAMPLE OF ISSUES THAT THE ARCHITECTS MAY NOT BE AWARE OF.

I AM PUZZLED AS TO HOW I SHOULD PROCEED. SHALL I TALK TO THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR, HANNAH STEWART, ABOUT TALKING TO THE LIBRARY STAFF? SHALL I SET UP A MEETING WITH THE PARK HILL ARCHITECTS? I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO SCHEDULE MY FIRST MEETING WITH THE ARCHITECTS TODAY.

I HOPE PARK HILL ARCHITECTS WILL VISIT THE CENTENNIAL LIBRARY BRANCH IN MIDLAND SINCE THAT LIBRARY BRANCH IS A STATE OF THE ART PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILT IN OUR AREA IN THE LAST TEN

[5. Minutes]

NOW WERE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM AGENDA ITEM 5.1, THE MINUTES FOR THE DECEMBER 10TH, 2024 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

[00:35:05]

[6. 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.]

AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. I HEAR NONE. THE MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIES.

ALL RIGHT. OUR CONSENT AGENDA TODAY WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP THE CONSENT AGENDA.

THERE HASN'T BEEN A REQUEST TO PULL ANY ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

IS THERE A MOTION? ALL RIGHT. DR. WILSON. A SECOND? SECOND. MAYOR PRO TEM. ANY DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE.

[1. Board Appointments - City Secretary: Consider appointments to the Central Business District Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors, Community Development & Services Board/Urban Renewal Agency Board of Commissioners, Libraries Board, Lubbock Business Park Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors, Lubbock Water Advisory Commission, North Overton Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone Board of Directors, Urban Design & Historic Preservation Commission, and the Zoning Board of Adjustment.]

ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. HEARING NONE. THAT MOTION IS APPROVED.

OKAY, NOW WE'LL TAKE UP OUR REGULAR AGENDA AND START WITH ITEM 7.1 TO CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE LIBRARY'S BOARD, THE LUBBOCK BUSINESS PARK TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, LUBBOCK WATER ADVISORY COMMISSION, NORTH OVERTON TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REINVESTMENT ZONE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, URBAN DESIGN AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, AND THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.

I WILL CALL NOW ON OUR CITY SECRETARY, MISS POTTS TO PROVIDE A STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU MAYOR. AND I'M GOING TO READ THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU ALL AT THE DAIS, WE HAVE JEREMY HAMILTON AND DAN WILLIAMS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

TO REPLACE SUZANNE BLAKE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS LAURA VINCENT.

FOR THE LIBRARY'S BOARD AND A DISTRICT FIVE REP POSITION BRUCE WILLOUGHBY, ELIGIBLE FOR ELIGIBLE FOR REAPPOINTMENT IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

IN A DISTRICT FOUR REP POSITION, LAURA HINES TO REPLACE HER WOULD BE GRETCHEN SCOTT.

AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY POSITION, JAMES BEAUCHAMP IS NO LONGER THE PRESIDENT, AND TIM EBELTHITE IS THE NEW PRESIDENT AND IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR THAT POSITION.

LUBBOCK BUSINESS PARK TIF BOARD OF DIRECTORS, SUNNY GARZA, SANDY HENRY, AND TYLER YOUNG ALL BEING RECOMMENDED FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

LUBBOCK WATER ADVISORY COMMISSION AND A CITIZEN POSITION TO REPLACE LORI MANNING, GRACIELA QUINTEROS, NORTH OVERTON TIF BOARD OF DIRECTORS KURT METCALF, PATRICK MURPHY AND LISA WEST ALL BEING RECOMMENDED FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

URBAN DESIGN AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND SOCIOLOGY ANTHROPOLOGY POSITION DEBRA BIGNESS IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

IN A CITIZEN POSITION TO REPLACE DR. DEBORAH LAVENDER BRATCHER, CHAD PLUNKETT.

IN AN ARCHITECT POSITION TO REPLACE LARRY HARVEY, JOHN GARCIA.

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IT IS BEING RECOMMENDED TO REAPPOINT MATTHEW HADLEY IN A MEMBER POSITION AND TRACY THOMPSON IN AN ALTERNATE POSITION.

IT IS BEING RECOMMENDED TO PROMOTE JOSE VALENCIANO FROM AN ALTERNATE POSITION TO A MEMBER POSITION, TO REPLACE MR. VALENCIANO'S ALTERNATE POSITION IT IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR RAFAEL GUTIERREZ TO TAKE THAT SPOT AND TO REPLACE MR. STEPHEN DAVENPORT IN AN ALTERNATE POSITION, MICHAEL GOMEZ.

[2. Ordinance 2nd Reading - Planning (District 5): Consider Ordinance No. 2025-O0018, for Zone Case 3512, a request of Parkhill for Jan Humphries Campbell, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Heavy Commercial District (HC), generally located at the southwest corner of 130th Street and Milwaukee Avenue, on approximately 34.78 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 12.]

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. I HEAR NONE. THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM 7.2 NOW.

AND AN ORDINANCE OF ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING, AND I'M GOING TO CALL ON THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE A BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU MAYOR. MISS SAGER IS MAKING HER WAY TO THE FRONT, AND SHE'LL GIVE US A QUICK RUNDOWN AND REMINDER ON THE CHANGE IN THIS ITEM ON ITS FIRST READ.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, ITEM 7.2 IS CASE 3512.

THE REQUEST IS FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF -2 TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT HC.

WE SENT OUT 30 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING 0 IN FAVOR, 19 IN OPPOSITION.

AS A REMINDER, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF FUTURE LOOP 88 WEST OF MILWAUKEE AVENUE.

THIS WAS THE RESPONSE MAP THAT WE RECEIVED ALONG WITH AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

[00:40:01]

ALTHOUGH THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGNATION, IT IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION ALONG A MAJOR FREEWAY.

STAFF RECOMMENDED. STAFF HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0, WITH ONE RECUSAL, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE TYPE C BUFFER YARD BE REQUIRED ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.

HOWEVER, COUNCIL APPROVED THE FIRST READING BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 1 WITH NO CONDITIONS, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS SAGER? I SEE NONE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. SAGER. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION NOW TO APPROVE ITEM 7.2.

[3. Ordinance 2nd Reading - Lubbock Animal Services: Consider Ordinance No. 2025-O0020, amending Chapter 4 "Animals" of the City of Lubbock Code of Ordinances Article 4.01.006, by adding Article 4.01.06 requiring a breeding permit for breeding of dogs or cats; modifying Article 4.01.06 pertaining to the amount of Liability Insurance Required to keep a dangerous dog; providing a penalty clause; providing a savings clause; and providing for publication. ]

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

ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY, I HEAR NONE. THE MOTION IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

THESE ARE ALL SIX ZERO VOTES TODAY. UNANIMOUSLY BECAUSE MR. ROSE IS NOT HERE. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TAKE UP ITEM 7.3 NOW, AND AGAIN I'LL CALL ON THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE A BRIEFING ON THIS.

THANK YOU MAYOR. IF IT PLEASES THE COUNCIL, I'LL JUST GIVE A QUICK RUNDOWN.

THIS IS THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS FIRST CONSIDERED AT YOUR MOST RECENT MEETING.

THESE ARE TWO AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER FOUR, THE SECTION OF YOUR CITY CODE THAT DEALS WITH ANIMALS.

SPECIFICALLY, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD MAKE TWO CHANGES.

THE FIRST IS TO REQUIRE A PERMIT FOR BREEDERS OF DOGS OR CATS, AND THE SECOND IS TO INCREASE WHAT IS CURRENTLY A $250,000 LIABILITY POLICY REQUIRED FOR AN ANIMAL; A DOG THAT HAS BEEN JUDGED TO BE A DANGEROUS DOG, TO BE KEPT IN THE CITY, AND TO MOVE THAT UPWARDS TO $1 MILLION.

COUNCIL IF YOU SAW THE EMAILS FROM EARLIER TODAY, THE CORRECT COPY OF THIS IS AT YOUR SEAT TODAY.

THE OLD COPY FROM THE PRIOR MEETING WAS INADVERTENTLY PUT IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET, BUT YOU HAVE THE CORRECT ONE HERE.

SO WITH THAT WOULD TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MAYOR PRO TEM. MY QUESTION IS FOR THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT OR THE DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL SERVICES.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO TO HIM? MR. GREEN, MR. GREEN, PLEASE COME FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

I KNOW THE LAST, AT THE LAST MEETING YOU EXPRESS SOME CONCERNS.

AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

YOU HAD SOME ISSUE WITH THE INSURANCE AMOUNT.

ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH? YES, MA'AM. I'M COMFORTABLE.

DO YOU FEEL LIKE THERE WILL BE ANY ISSUES THAT.

NOT REALLY. WE'VE TALKED IT OVER AND WE THINK IT'S GOING TO HELP.

IT'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER TOOL WE CAN USE. OKAY.

AND HOW ABOUT THE BREEDING PERMIT. AGAIN THAT'S GOING TO BE A TOOL THAT WE CAN UTILIZE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO STOP BACKYARD BREEDERS IS GOING TO BE A BENEFIT.

DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS GOING TO STOP BACKYARD BREEDERS? I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WOULD STOP IT COMPLETELY.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD FIRST STEP INTO GETTING THE PROBLEM UNDER CONTROL.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INPUT. YES, MA'AM. I THINK THE MOST WE CAN DO IS HOPE TO HAVE TOOLS THAT WILL REDUCE THE PROBLEMS. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANY OF US LIVE IN EXPECTATION THAT ALL PROBLEMS WILL GO AWAY, BUT WE'RE TRYING.

AND I BELIEVE OUR ANIMAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT IS TRYING VERY HARD TO HELP US ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM.

SO I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK. I KNOW IT'S GOTTEN A LOT OF ATTENTION, AND SOMETIMES THAT ATTENTION IS UNCOMFORTABLE.

BUT APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON IT AND APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH US TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE.

ALL RIGHT. NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP OH WE'VE GOT TO TAKE A VOTE ON IT, DON'T WE? YES. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.3.

OR DID WE? OKAY. THANK YOU. I NEED A SECOND. ALL RIGHT.

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

AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. NAY. OKAY. IS THAT.

[4. Resolution - City Secretary: Consider a resolution appointing six members to the Board of Directors for the Reinvestment Zone Number Four, City of Lubbock (North Park Tax Increment Financing Reinvestment Zone), and appointing one member as Chair of the Board.]

IT DOESN'T PASS. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 7.3 DOES NOT PASS.

WE'LL NOW TAKE UP ITEM 7.4, AND COUNCILMAN GLASHEENS' RECUSED HIMSELF FROM THIS ITEM.

[00:45:09]

THANK YOU MAYOR. THIS ITEM IS FOR THE NORTH PARK TIF BOARD.

THIS IS A NEWLY CREATED TIF. JUST A REMINDER, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD, YOU MUST BE 18 YEARS OF AGE AND EITHER OWN PROPERTY IN THE TIF ZONE OR BE AN AGENT. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING SIX INDIVIDUALS FOR THE POSITIONS ON THIS BOARD; RANDY ALLEN, DAVID WILKERSON, KEVIN GLASHEEN, PAUL TERRELL, LAUREN PAZMINO, CHRIS NGUYEN.

AND ALSO BECAUSE IT'S A TIF BOARD, THE CITY COUNCIL GETS TO ELECT CHAIR KEVIN GLASHEEN IS BEING RECOMMENDED FOR BOARD CHAIR BY STAFF.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I SEE NO QUESTIONS, SO I'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY.

I HEAR NONE. THE MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

SO, HAVING EXHAUSTED ALL ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA.

THIS MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.