[00:00:02]
>> CITY COUNCIL IS NOW RECONVENING IN OPEN SESSION,
[1. Executive Session]
AND WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP A VERY INTERESTING WORK SESSION HERE ON SALES TAX AND OUR BUDGET UPDATE FROM OUR CITY MANAGER.I'M GOING TO CALL ON HIM NOW, MR. ATKINSON, TO LEAD US IN THIS DISCUSSION.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL. I'M WITH YOU.
THIS WILL BE SO EXCITING, AND I'M VERY PLEASED TO SEE THE CROWD THAT HAS TURNED OUT JUST TO TALK ABOUT SALES TAX AND BUDGETS.
BUT WE'LL ATTEMPT TO WORK RIGHT THROUGH THIS AND GET US BACK ON TO THE DAY'S COURSE.
COUNCIL, CHART THAT SHOULD BE FAMILIAR.
WE'VE SHOWN THIS NOW TWO TIMES PREVIOUSLY.
WHAT WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU TODAY IS THE MOST RECENT UPDATES,
[1. Sales Tax and Budget Update]
SO THE UPDATES YOU GET IN JULY THAT THEN REPRESENTS DOLLARS THAT WERE SPENT IN THE MONTH OF MAY.SHORT VERSION, IF YOU COME ACROSS THAT LOWEST ROW THAT HAS THE BLACK NUMBERS ALL THE WAY ACROSS, WE WERE STILL ABOUT $313,000 SHY OF THE BUDGET PROJECTIONS OR JUST UNDER 4%.
COME ALL THE WAY TO THE VERY BOTTOM ROW.
YOU LOOK AT THE SALES TAX PROJECTIONS HERE.
OUR BUDGET WAS $105.6 MILLION IN REVENUE, AND OUR FORECASTED RECEIPTS ARE 100,664,000.
CERTAINLY, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM FOR THAT TO CHANGE.
I'LL SHOW YOU SOME STUFF HERE IN A MINUTE THAT MIGHT GIVE US AN IDEA.
BUT WE'RE REALLY PRETTY CLOSE TO WHERE WE PREDICTED WE WOULD BE IN OUR LAST TWO TIMES, AND THAT LOCATION BEING JUST UNDER $5,000,000 OF OUR BUDGET.
IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE THAT TO YEAR-OVER-YEAR COLLECTIONS, IT'S PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT WE COLLECTED IN THE PRIOR YEAR.
IT'S JUST NOT A GAIN THAT WAS PREDICTED TO BE ON TOP OF IT.
THIS IS A NEW CHART. WE HAVEN'T SHOWN THIS IN THE PAST.
THIS COMES OFF OF THE TEXAS CONTROLLERS WEBSITE.
WE'VE SORTED THE TOP 20 CITIES, AND WHEN THE CONTROLLER SAYS TOP 20, THEY REFER TO THE 20 LARGEST COLLECTORS OR RECIPIENTS OF SALES TAX.
WE'VE SORTED THEM BY PERCENT CHANGE.
THIS DOESN'T EXCLUDE THE PORTION OF SALES TAX, IT IS COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF YOUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, IF YOU HAVE THEM, AND I BELIEVE IN ALL CASES THESE 20 DO.
IT DOES NOT INCLUDE IN THE CASE OF LUBBOCK WHAT'S CALLED UTILITY RETAINING.
SALES TAX IS COLLECTED ON UTILITIES ACTUALLY STAYS HERE.
IT DOESN'T GO TO THE CONTROLLER, AND THEN IT COMES BACK ON.
IF YOU'RE REALLY WATCHING THE NUMBERS, THESE DON'T EXACTLY MATCH WHAT WAS ON THE PRIOR SLIDES, BUT THAT IS WHY.
THE POINT OF THIS CHART, WHAT'S GOING ON IN LUBBOCK IS NOT UNIQUE.
THIS IS PRETTY MUCH STATEWIDE.
IN FACT, IF YOU GET BELOW THE TOP FOUR, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE EVERYBODY'S REALLY TAILED DOWN ON A YEAR-OVER-YEAR BASIS.
BLOW THIS UP FOR JUST A SECOND.
THIS IS THE NEWS RELEASE THAT THE CONTROLLER PUTS OUT ONCE A MONTH, AND UNDERSTAND THAT ALL OF THE CONTROLLER'S COMMENTS ARE IN REGARDS TO THE STATE'S PORTION, WHICH IS SIX AND A QUARTER PERCENT.
YOU SEE THE FIRST HIGHLIGHTED SECTION SAYS RECEIPTS FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SECTOR HAD POSITIVE GROWTH FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE FEBRUARY.
WITHIN RETAIL TRADE, THE LARGEST SECTOR, ELECTRONIC SHOPPING HAD THE LARGEST GAIN SHOWING DOUBLE-DIGIT GROWTH COMPARED WITH THE SAME MONTH ONE YEAR AGO.
RECEIPTS FROM FURNITURE STORES AND HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTERS DECLINED SIGNIFICANTLY.
WHEN WE LOOK AT SALES TAX BY SECTOR FOR JUST LUBBOCK, NOT STATEWIDE, WE SEE THE EXACT SAME THING.
THEN GENERAL MERCHANDISE DECLINING SLIGHTLY.
THIS IS STATEWIDE, AND IT ABSOLUTELY TRACKS WITH WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE AT HOME.
HIGHLIGHTED JUST ONE MORE LINE ON THERE FOR YOU HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX.
STATEWIDE $68 MILLION IN COLLECTION, DOWN 5% FROM THE PRIOR YEAR.
WE ARE SEEING HOT TAX HERE ALSO AT ABOUT A SIMILAR, NOT QUITE FIVE, BUT REALLY CLOSE TO IT.
THE FAMOUS EKG CHART THAT WE'VE HAD BEFORE, LUBBOCK IS BACK ON THAT ZERO LINE.
WE'RE THE BRIGHT RED LINE ON THIS PARTICULAR CHART.
WE'RE RIGHT BACK TO THE CENTER.
I'M GOING TO PRESUME THAT THE VARIATIONS UP AND DOWN, THEY LOOK TO ME LIKE THEY'RE STARTING TO CALM DOWN.
BUT THEY'RE CALMING DO RIGHT THERE AROUND WHAT WOULD BE A FLAT LINE WHEN YOU GET THROUGH THERE.
REMEMBER, THAT'S FLAT LINE COMPARED TO LAST YEAR, NOT FLAT LINE COMPARED TO BUDGET.
[00:05:03]
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? I'LL STOP AND GO BACK AT ANY POINT IF YOU WOULD LIKE.FOR THE CITY, TURN SOME OF THOSE THINGS BACK INTO OTHER NUMBERS.
OUR SALES TAX BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR, FISCAL 25, WAS BUDGETED TO GROW AT 6.6%.
THROUGH THE FIRST EIGHT MONTHS, YOU SEE THAT THAT'S NOT THERE.
WE'RE ACTUALLY RIGHT AT $3 MILLION BELOW COLLECTIONS CASH IN HAND.
AGAIN, WE PREDICT WE'LL BE RIGHT AT 5 MILLION BELOW ON THAT ONE.
BACK INTO THE STATE COMMENTS, EVEN THOUGH THE MONTH OF MAY WAS UP FOR THE STATE 2.5%.
BIGGEST PART OF THAT CAME OUT OF MOTOR VEHICLE SALES AND RENTAL TAXES, NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION.
WE DON'T GET AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, EITHER OF THOSE TWO.
THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE STATES DIFFERENCE IS COMPARED TO THE LOCAL DIFFERENCE.
DOWNWARD DRIVERS WERE OIL PRODUCTION TAX.
WE DON'T GET THAT, BUT THEN HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX, AND AGAIN, YOUR LOCAL HOT TAX IS PRETTY CLOSE TO 5% ON THAT ONE AS WELL.
WE'RE NOT SHOWING TO BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN REALLY WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE STATE LEVEL.
COUNCIL, I WON'T BOTHER READING THIS ONE.
WE'VE SEEN IT BEFORE. THESE ARE THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE TO BE SURE THAT WE COME IN BALANCED AND NOT SPENDING OUT OF OUR POCKETS TO GO THROUGH THE END OF THIS YEAR.
EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE SEEING, WE'RE ON TRACK TO MAKE THAT WORK.
WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHERE THAT'S HEADING US INTO THE NEXT BUDGET.
COUNCIL, JUST QUICK REMINDER, MONDAY, AUGUST 4TH, IS WHEN WE START BUDGET WORKSHOPS FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE FISCAL YEAR 26, THE NEW YEAR.
WE'VE GOT SALES TAX PROJECTED AT 103.5.
THAT'S 2 MILLION LESS THAN WHAT WE HAD IN THIS BUDGET.
I WANT TO CALL OUT THE TAXABLE VALUE OF NEW PROPERTY, AND I'M SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS PORTION, WHAT WE CALL THE M&O, MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS.
PRELIMINARY VALUES FROM LUBBOCK CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT SHOW THAT WE'LL NET ABOUT 2.1 MILLION OFF OF THE VALUE OF NEW PROPERTY.
THAT'S ACTUALLY 25% DOWN JUST IN TWO YEARS, AND IT'S THE SLOWING OF THE CONSTRUCTION MARKET.
BUT WITH 2.1 UP THERE IN 2 MILLION DOWN OR 2 MILLION LESS PREDICTED FOR SALES TAX, YOU SEE THAT YOUR NET IS ABOUT $100,000.
PRIOR YEARS HAVE BEEN MUCH DIFFERENT AND MUCH BETTER.
IF I EXCLUDED FISCAL YEAR 25, THE YEAR WE'RE IN TODAY, WITH THE SHORTFALL, YOU'LL SEE THAT OUR SALES TAX HAS BEEN GROWING ANNUALIZED AT ABOUT $6 MILLION A YEAR.
NEW PROPERTY PEAKED A YEAR AGO AT 2.8 MILLION.
WE GENERALLY COME INTO BUDGETS BEFORE WE EVER GET INTO THE TAX RATE DISCUSSIONS OR ANYTHING OF THAT SORT, AT A PLUS EIGHT OR EVEN BETTER THAN A PLUS $8 MILLION USING THOSE SAME EXACT FUNDING SOURCES, WE'RE AT ABOUT PLUS 100,000.
BIG CAVEAT. THESE NUMBERS WILL CHANGE WHEN WE GET OUR CERTIFIED VALUES.
WE DON'T EXPECT THEM TO CHANGE DRAMATICALLY, BUT THEY'LL CHANGE.
WHEN DO WE GET THOSE BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK IS THE STATUTORY DEADLINE, WE MIGHT GET THEM A LITTLE EARLIER THAN THAT.
CONTINUING ON, AGAIN, JUST TALKING ABOUT THE GENERAL FUND, AND REMINDER AGAIN THAT ALL OF THIS STUFF CAN CHANGE.
WE ARE BRINGING THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET FORWARD, TRYING TO BALANCE IT OUT WHERE WE CAN FLAT LINE IT EVERYWHERE IT'S FEASIBLE TO DO SO.
THERE ARE A FEW PLACES THAT WE CANNOT, AND THOSE ARE GOING TO BE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS TO YOUR BIGGEST OR THE AXON VIDEO SYSTEM FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND VARIOUS THINGS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COMPUTER-AIDED DISPATCH.
THOSE ARE ON MULTI-YEAR CONTRACTS, AND OF COURSE, WE WILL HONOR AND COVER THOSE.
WE'RE ELIMINATING AT THE MOMENT.
I'VE GOT FIVE FULL-TIME POSITIONS ELIMINATED OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND.
OF COURSE, WE STILL HAVE THE FREEZE ON AND THAT FREEZE WON'T RELEASE UNTIL WE KNOW THAT IT'S THE RIGHT TIME TO DO THAT.
ALL ACROSS THE GENERAL FUND, OUR DIRECTORS TOOK THE BUDGETS BACK THAT THEY HAD SUBMITTED, REWORKED THOSE, AND WE'VE COME IN AT ABOUT A 2.1 MILLION SAVINGS ON THAT.
WE ARE STARTING TO SEE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN SEVERAL YEARS SOME SIGNIFICANT POTENTIAL SAVINGS RELATED TO THE HEALTH PLAN AND RELATED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION.
COUNCIL, REMEMBER YOU'VE RECENTLY APPROVED ALLOWING US TO BRING THAT WORKERS' COMPENSATION IN-HOUSE.
JUST GOT A REALLY SHORT TRACK RECORD ON IT AT THE MOMENT,
[00:10:03]
BUT WE THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE ALL THAT.ALL OF THE VARIOUS LINE ITEMS WITHIN THE BUDGETS THAT WE CAN, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, SUPPLIES, FUEL, TRAINING, TRAVEL.
WE'VE GOT ALL THOSE EITHER FLATTENED OUT OR PULLED DOWN.
WE THINK ABOUT 1,000,001 THAT WE'VE GOT THERE, POTENTIALLY REDUCE TRANSFERS, COME OUT OF HERE.
WE WILL, OF COURSE, MAINTAIN PUBLIC SAFETY AS PRIORITY ONE.
WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF MEET AND CONFER, AND I'LL HAVE SOME UPDATES FOR YOU ALL ON THAT, CERTAINLY NO LATER THAN THE DAY WE START BUDGET.
WE DO NEED TO CONTINUE FUNDRAISES TO MAINTAIN HIRING AND STAFFING IN PUBLIC SAFETY.
WE ARE TRYING TO MAINTAIN FUNDING, AND IT'S REALLY COMING BECAUSE OF SAVINGS IN OTHER PLACES TO BE ABLE TO ENHANCE ANIMAL SERVICES AND GET MORE PEOPLE ON THE STREET, AND CONTINUE TO DO THAT.
FOR STAFF SUPPORT, I'VE GOT SMALLER NUMBER OF STAFF TRYING TO DO THE SAME AMOUNT OF WORK, AND I CERTAINLY WANT TO DO WHAT I CAN TO HELP TAKE CARE OF THEM.
WE'LL MAINTAIN OUR CASH-FUNDED CAPITAL PROJECTS AT THE NECESSARY LEVEL, MEANING TO ME, IF I CAN PUT OFF A CAPITAL PROJECT WITHOUT IT COSTING ME MORE IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE WE MADE SOMETHING WORSE.
WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT THROUGH THE GENERAL FUND.
FLEET REPLACEMENTS WILL ALWAYS BE A BIG DEAL FOR US.
SOLID WASTE AND PUBLIC SAFETY ARE THE TWO PRIMARIES, AND THEY'RE ALSO THE TWO LARGEST EXPENSES WHEN WE LOOK AT REPLACING OUR VEHICLES. WE'LL HAVE THAT.
THESE ARE HEADLINES THAT HAVE SHOWN UP OVER THE LAST 30 DAYS FROM AROUND THE STATE.
THIS IS HERE FOR NOTHING MORE THAN JUST TO TRY TO REASSURE EVERYBODY.
WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS NOT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS HAPPENING ON A STATEWIDE BASIS.
WE ARE CERTAINLY SEEING A LOT OF THINGS THAT WILL AT LEAST LEAD YOU DOWN THE PATH, THAT MUCH OF THIS IS INTEREST RELATED.
NOW, I'LL END ON A POSITIVE NOTE.
BECAUSE THE INTEREST RATES HAVE STAYED UP AS LONG AS THEY HAVE STAYED UP, AND THEY WERE NOT PREDICTED TO DO SO WHEN WE WROTE YOUR BUDGET THIS TIME LAST YEAR.
BUT BECAUSE THOSE HAVE STAYED UP FOR SO LONG, THAT HAS BECOME THE NUMBER ONE BASICALLY REVENUE GROWTH THAT WE HAVE, AND IT'S A POSITIVE $3 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND.
NOT USING THAT TO OFFSET WHAT WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN ON EXPENSES, BUT THAT'S MONEY THAT WILL GO IN FOR NEXT YEAR.
MAYOR, WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, OR I'LL TURN THIS OFF, AND WE CAN GO TO YOUR COUNCIL MEETING.
ALSO THE BAD SIDE OF EVERYBODY WANTING THOSE RATES TO COME DOWN IS THE RATES HAVE STAYED UP AND THAT'S REBOUNDED TO OUR BENEFIT HERE, AT LEAST, BY THE TIME CAN BEING.
>> IT HAS, IN THAT IN OUR CASE TODAY, AND I WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY, WOULD I RATHER SEE THAT CONTINUE AND CONTINUE THOSE EARNINGS? NO. I WOULD LOVE TO GO BACK TO THE HIGH-GROWTH ECONOMY THAT HAS BEEN FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND TO WHICH I KNOW IT WILL RETURN.
>> AT THE MOMENT IT'S A BAND-AID ON US, THOUGH THAT'S HELPING US.
ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. IS WELL DONE.
YEAH, I WAS READING WHERE AUSTIN IS FACING A $33 MILLION DEFICIT.
THAT'S A BIG ONE. ANY QUESTIONS? I SEE NONE. GOING TO GO RIGHT ON INTO OUR MEETING.
EVERYBODY READY TO GO RIGHT ONTO OUR MEETING? WE'RE NOW CONVENING.
IS IT 2:00 YET? DO WE HAVE TO WAIT TILL 2:00? WE POSTED FOR 2:00.
>> BE POSTED FOR 2:00, AND WE USUALLY GET PEOPLE TILL 2:00 TO SIGN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
>> WE'LL WAIT TILL 2:00, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, ONE OF OUR GUESTS HERE TODAY, OUR VISITORS HERE TODAY IS MAGGIE TREJO, WHO WAS, I BELIEVE, THE FIRST REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISTRICT ONE, IS THAT CORRECT, MISS TREJO? YES. WE'RE REALLY HAPPY TO HAVE YOU HERE TODAY.
[APPLAUSE] STAND UP SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHO YOU ARE.
OUR MAYOR PRO-TEM WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING, BECAUSE IT'S HER DISTRICT.
>> IT'S ALSO HER BIRTHDAY. [APPLAUSE]
>> HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MISS REY HOPE. WELL, AS LONG AS WE'RE TAKING A LITTLE TIME HERE FOR PERSONAL PRIVILEGE AND ALL, I'LL JUST ANNOUNCE THAT TODAY IS MY WIFE AND MY 42ND WEDDING ANNIVERSARY.
[APPLAUSE] BELIEVE IT OR NOT, SHE ALWAYS WATCHES THESE MEETINGS.
I SUPPOSE SHE'S WATCHING, ALTHOUGH SHE'S HAD A KNEE REPLACEMENT, SO I SUSPECT SHE'S IN A CHAIR WATCHING THIS MEETING.
[00:15:02]
HAPPY BIRTHDAY THERE AND 42 YEARS.PRETTY GOOD. NOBODY SAID WE WOULDN'T MAKE IT.
I THINK EVERYBODY THOUGHT WE'D MAKE IT, AND I'M HAPPY TO DO SO.
ANYBODY ELSE GOT ANY PERSONAL PRIVILEGES THEY WANT TO TAKE HERE AT THE MOMENT? [OVERLAPPING]
>> MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] SPANISH, [SPANISH].
>> WE'RE NOT GOING TO SUBJECT YOU TO SINGING HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU TODAY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD PLAY OUT, BUT HAPPY BIRTHDAY.
AT 2:00. [BACKGROUND] I CAN GET THIS CLOCK INSTEAD OF.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, NONE OF OUR COMPUTERS UP HERE SAY THE SAME TIME. ALL OF THEM ARE WRONG.
WE NEVER KNOW QUITE WHAT TIME IT IS, BUT WE'LL GET DAVID BACK OUT HERE AND WE'LL BEGIN.
ARE YOU DANIEL? I'LL CALL YOU IN A MINUTE.
>> CITY COUNCIL IS NOW RECONVENING IN OPEN SESSION AND OUR REGULAR SESSION HERE, AND WE WILL TAKE UP OUR CEREMONIAL ITEMS FIRST.
I'M GOING TO CALL ON THE MISSION DIRECTOR, DANIEL HUGHES WITH THE RENEW LIFE.
DID I SAY THAT RIGHT, DANIEL? I USUALLY GET DOWN IN TIME TO MAKE SURE I SAY IT RIGHT.
DANIEL HUGHES WITH RENEW LIFE CHURCH, TO LEAD US IN OUR INVOCATION, FOLLOWING WHICH OUR MAYOR PRO-TEM WILL LEAD US IN OUR PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STAND AS YOU ARE ABLE.
>> THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME HERE TODAY.
LET'S PRAY. GOD, WE THANK YOU.
GOD, I THANK YOU FOR ALL THESE GREAT LEADERS THAT ARE STANDING IN FRONT OF ME, WHO ARE LEADING US IN REALLY GOOD TIMES AND ALSO NOT SO GOOD TIMES.
[1. Invocation]
GOD, I THANK YOU THAT THROUGH THEIR WORK, THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STEWARD A COMMUNITY THAT IS PEACEFUL, THAT IS STABLE, THAT IS SAFE, THAT IS FULL OF OPPORTUNITIES, BUT ALSO A PLACE WHERE WE CAN FREELY WORSHIP YOU, LORD.GOD, I PRAY THAT YOU COME TODAY WITH WISDOM FOR DIFFICULT DECISIONS, WITH WISDOM TO NAVIGATE THROUGH OFTEN SO COMPLEX SITUATIONS, AND GOD, LIKE SAMUEL ASKED, THAT IF THERE IS ONE THING WE ASK FROM YOU, THEN IT IS WISDOM TO LEAD OUR PEOPLE.
GOD, I PRAY THAT YOU GIVE THEM TODAY THE BOLDNESS TO SPEAK UP, TO SPEAK WHAT IS RIGHT, AND TO SPEAK WHAT IS JUST.
GOD, I PRAY THAT YOU GIVE THEM THE CONFIDENCE THAT YOU PUT THEM IN THIS PLACE FOR A REASON, THAT YOU PUT THEM IN THIS POSITION FOR A TIME LIKE THIS.
GOD, WE PRAY THAT YOU COME AND YOU FILL THIS ROOM WITH YOUR PRESENCE, THAT YOU FILL THIS ROOM WITH YOUR LOVE.
GOD, I PRAY FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK THAT THE CITY OF LUBBOCK MAY BECOME A PLACE, A COMMUNITY, A TESTIMONY TO THE REST OF THE STATE, TO THE REST OF THE NATION, WHAT YOU CAN DO THROUGH PEOPLE WHOSE HEARTS ARE FULLY COMMITTED TO YOU.
I THANK YOU JESUS FOR TODAY, AND I PRAY ALL THIS IN YOUR PRECIOUS NAME.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE VERY NICE PRAYER.
NOW I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU ALL TO JOIN ME AND THE COUNCIL IN HONORING OUR AND THE TEXAS PLEDGE
[2. Pledges of Allegiance]
>> THIS IS THE TIME DURING OUR MEETING IN WHICH WE USUALLY TAKE UP CITIZEN COMMENTS.
WE WILL DO THAT TODAY, 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 AGENDA COMPLETES A SIGN UP FORM AT THE MEETING NO LATER THAN 2:00 PM ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING.
WE HAVE A LIST OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO'VE SIGNED UP. WE'VE GOTTEN THOSE YET?
[00:20:01]
WHEN YOU COME FORWARD, WHEN I CALL YOU TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE A LUBBOCK CITIZEN.
IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GIVE US YOUR FULL ADDRESS,
[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 July 22, 2025. Citizen Comments provide an opportunity for citizens to make comments and express a position on agenda items. ]
JUST TELL US WHAT STREET YOU LIVE ON OR WHATEVER.YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES THEN TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS.
A WARNING BELL WILL SOUND WHEN YOU HAVE 30 SECONDS LEFT TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND A FINAL BELL AT THE END THAT OUR CITY SECRETARY WILL RING.
FIRST PERSON I WANT TO CALL UP IS, AND I WANT TO GIVE THE FIRST PERSON THEN I'M GOING TO TELL THE SECOND PERSON SO YOU GET READY TO COME UP AFTER THE FIRST PERSON FINISHES WITH THEIR COMMENTS.
KRISTEN PARISH, IF YOU WILL PLEASE COME FORWARD. KRISTEN, YOU HERE?
>> OKAY. AFTER KRISTEN, IT'LL BE HELEN DUNCAN.
>> I PROVIDED A SHEET TO YOU, DID YOU ALL GET THAT?
>> I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT TO MAKE.
IT'S LATER ON. DO YOU NEED ME TO WAIT?
>> DO YOU WANT TO READ WHAT OR DO YOU WANT ME TO READ WHAT'S ON YOUR SHEET? I CAN BECAUSE YOU FILLED OUT YOUR COMMENT ON YOUR SHEET.
>> I HAVE A COMMENT. I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS CATEGORIZED UNTIL THE 7.8.
>> YOUR COMMENT HERE IS ON 6.24.
>> I HAVE ANOTHER ONE IN ADDITION TO THAT.
>> DO YOU WANT ME TO READ 6.24 OR YOU'RE PREPARED TO SPEAK ON IT NOW?
>> YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH 6.24.
>> WHAT SHE SAYS, PLEASE CONSIDER LOWERING THE SMALL BUSINESS TAXES IN SMALL WAYS TO SHOW HOW MUCH THESE PEOPLE MEAN TO THE LOCAL LEVEL COMMUNITY.
DON'T IMPOSE HIGHER TAXES BECAUSE THIS COMMUNITY USED TO BE MORE KIND TO EACH OTHER AND HAVE LITTLE TO NO CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS TO DEAL WITH EVERY DAY DURING COMMUTES.
I'VE SEEN SO MANY NEW SMALL BUSINESSES THAT THE LOCAL ECONOMY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN THE COST OF RISING TAXES SO THAT THEY GO ANYWHERE TO SUPPORT OTHER BUSINESSES OR LEISURE ACTIVITIES.
THANK YOU FOR LENDING US YOUR EARS, LUBBOCK.
DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT ON SOMETHING ELSE?
IT'S ON THE 7.8, THE PUBLIC HEARING ENGINEERING.
>> MAYOR, THAT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME AND SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING TIME FOR THAT ONE.
>> YOU CAN SPEAK NOW OR YOU CAN WAIT TIL WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS OTHER ISSUE YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO.
YOU'RE ONLY LIMITED ON YOUR TIME OTHERWISE.
>> RIGHT. YOU ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES DURING THE CITIZEN COMMENT.
USUALLY FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR COMMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE RESERVE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> IF YOU WANT TO WAIT AND COME UP FOR THAT ONE.
>> HELEN DUNCAN. AFTER HELEN, PAUL BULLOCK.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS HELEN DUNCAN.
I AM A RESIDENT ON 96TH STREET IN DISTRICT 5, AND I'M ALSO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF BALLET LUBBOCK, AND IT'S NOT VERY OFTEN THAT WE GET TO, AS ARTS PROFESSIONALS, COME BEFORE THE CITY, JUST TO SAY THANK YOU.
I REALLY WANT TO USE MY TIME JUST TO SAY THANK YOU FOR FUNDING CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS.
BALLET LUBBOCK HAS BEEN APPLYING FOR CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS FOR PROBABLY THE LAST 25 YEARS, AND PRIMARILY WHAT THOSE HELP US FUND ARE OUR PERFORMANCES.
I'M SURE HOPEFULLY EVERYONE ON CITY COUNCIL HAS HEARD OF THE NUTCRACKER BEFORE.
REALLY WHAT WE FIND IS THAT THE CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS AND THE NUTCRACKER HELP US CONTRIBUTE TO THE CULTURAL VIBRANCY OF OUR CITY.
WE REALLY WANT TO SHOW VISITORS TO OUR CITY THAT LUBBOCK IS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE, WORK, AND VISIT SOMETHING WE ALL KNOW.
IF YOU DON'T KNOW, THE NUTCRACKER BRINGS ABOUT 15,000 PEOPLE DOWNTOWN IN ONE WEEKEND.
THAT'S ABOUT FROM WEDNESDAY TO SUNDAY.
WE TRACK ALL OF OUR VISITOR ZIP CODES AND ALL OF OUR TICKET PURCHASER ZIP CODES, AND SO I CAN ACTUALLY TELL YOU WITHOUT A DOUBT, THAT IN 2023, THE NUTCRACKER BROUGHT IN 855 NATIONAL TOURISTS FROM 28 DIFFERENT STATES.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE BROUGHT IN 1,317 STATE TOURISTS, WHICH, AS DEFINED BY CITY OF LUBBOCK IS FROM A DISTANCE GREATER THAN 50 MILES AWAY.
AGAIN, WHEN YOU CONSIDER 15,000 PEOPLE IN A WEEKEND AND 855 OF THEM ARE FLYING HERE, THAT'S A REALLY BIG DEAL.
WE JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR HELPING MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
THE CULTURAL ARTS GRANT ALSO HELPS REINVEST DIRECTLY INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
ACCORDING TO THE AMERICANS FOR THE ARTS, THEY HAVE A CALCULATOR CALLED THE ARTS IN ECONOMIC PROSPERITY CALCULATOR.
BASED UPON OUR CITY SIZE AND WHAT WE AS AN ORGANIZATION SPEND ON THE NUTCRACKER,
[00:25:05]
THEY ESTIMATE THAT AUDIENCES COMING TO THE NUTCRACKER SPENT AN ESTIMATED $356,970 IN LUBBOCK DURING THE NUTCRACKER.THAT IS ANYWHERE FROM HOTELS TO SHOPPING TO EATING OUT ANYTHING, REALLY.
REALLY, ALL OF THIS TOGETHER GENERATES ABOUT THE EQUIVALENT OF 26 FULL TIME JOBS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH. OH, 30 SECONDS.
AWESOME. MUSIC PLAYING ME OUT.
THAT'S ABOUT $630,000 IN HOUSEHOLD INCOME, ANYWHERE FROM SALARIES TO WAGES, THAT IS OVER $37,000 IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT INCOME, AND OVER $47,000 IN STATE GOVERNMENT INCOME.
THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE MADE POSSIBLE FOR BALLET LUBBOCK.
I JUST SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING A PART OF IT AND FOR ALLOWING US TO GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
>> THANK YOU, HELEN. MR. BULLOCK.
AFTER MR. BULLOCK IS LINDSEY MAESTRI.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
I LIVE AT 2215 32ND STREET IN THE HEART OF LUBBOCK.
I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE ARTS COMMUNITY NOW FOR ALMOST 40 YEARS AS A ACTOR IN THE LUBBOCK COMMUNITY THEATER, AS A POET, AND ALSO NOW AS CHILDREN'S BOOK AUTHOR.
I CANNOT REMEMBER A TIME IN MY LIFE WHEN LUBBOCK DID NOT PRIDE ITSELF ON ITS ARTS AND THE ART COMMUNITY WHICH IT SUPPORTED.
I CANNOT REMEMBER A TIME WHEN THE CITY GOVERNMENT DID NOT USE THIS AS A SELLING POINT FOR THE CITY. I'LL MAKE THIS SHORT.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN TOUT OUR ARTIST AND ART COMMUNITY AND AT THE SAME TIME, WHITTLE AWAY THE FUNDS THAT MAKE IT A GREAT PLACE TO PERFORM ART, TO CREATE ART, AND TO PROMOTE ART AS A SELLING POINT FOR OUR FINE CITY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BULLOCK. MS. MAESTRI, AND AFTER MS. MAESTRI, DYLAN BLACKWELL. OKAY.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS LINDSEY MAESTRI.
I AM ALSO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LOUISE HOPKINS UNDERWOOD CENTER FOR THE ARTS OR LHUCA, AS YOU MAY KNOW IT.
I JUST WANTED TO COME TODAY TO SAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH TO CIVIC LUBBOCK, INC., AND THE CITY OF LUBBOCK FOR THEIR CONTINUED SUPPORT IN FUNDING THE CULTURAL ARTS GRANTS.
LHUCA, 67% OF OUR PROGRAMMING IS COMPLETELY FREE.
THAT INCLUDES PROGRAMS LIKE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL AND FIREHOUSE PRESENTS.
THE REST OF OUR PROGRAMMING FROM FLATLAND FILM FESTIVAL TO HUB CITY RENAISSANCE FAIR ARE PROVIDED WITH A VERY LOW COST ADMISSION FEE.
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO KEEP THESE PROGRAMS SO ACCESSIBLE FOR EVERYONE IN OUR COMMUNITY AND TO OUR VISITORS TO OUR COMMUNITY ALIKE THROUGH SUPPORT FROM CIVIC LUBBOCK, INC., AND THE CULTURAL ARTS GRANT FUNDS.
WE WOULD JUST REALLY LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE THAT SUPPORT THAT YOU'VE GIVEN IN THE PAST.
OUR HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FUNDS THAT COME INTO LUBBOCK ARE NOT ONLY USED IN THE ARTS THROUGH THESE GRANTS, BUT THOSE VISITORS THAT COME TO OUR DISTRICT ALSO USE THOSE AT RESTAURANTS AND SHOPS AND HOTELS, AND IT REALLY JUST FEEDS BACK INTO IT.
THE ARTS HAVE BEEN SUCH A BIG PART OF OUR COMMUNITY FOR SO LONG AND WE'D LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE THAT SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MS. MAESTRI. DYLAN BLACKWELL.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS DYLAN BLACKWELL.
I LIVE ON 2321, 34TH STREET HERE IN LUBBOCK, TEXAS, AND I AM AN EDUCATOR AT ONE OF THE LOCAL HIGH SCHOOLS HERE.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T GET TO MAKE MANY OF THESE BECAUSE USUALLY I'M KNEE DEEP IN BALANCING CHEMICAL EQUATIONS OR DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS. I GUESS I'M AT THE FUN ONE.
I WANT TO SPEAK ON RESOLUTION 6.19, WHICH IS THE CIVIC LUBBOCK GRANTS.
I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT HOTEL TAXES.
I DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT HOW CITY GOVERNMENT WORKS, OTHER THAN WHAT I'VE OBSERVED IN MY GOVERNMENT CLASS IN HIGH SCHOOL.
BUT WHAT I DO KNOW IS HOW THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL IMPACTS MY STUDENTS.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES. I HAVE TWO STUDENTS.
THEY'RE BUSINESS OWNERS, TEENAGE BUSINESS OWNERS.
THEIR BUSINESS IS VERY SUCCESSFUL, SO SUCCESSFUL, THEY HAVE TO FILE QUARTERLY TAXES, WHICH I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM KNOW HOW CRAPPY THAT IS.
[LAUGHTER] BUT THEY ARE SUCCESSFUL TEENAGE BUSINESS OWNERS.
THE BIGGEST DAY OF BUSINESS EVERY MONTH IS THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL.
WE HAD THIS FUNDING ISSUE, I GUESS LAST YEAR AT THE SAME TIME.
[00:30:01]
TOWARDS THE BEGINNING OF SCHOOL YEAR, MY STUDENTS, WE HAD A SHARE TIME OF ROSEBUD-LOTT, SOMETHING YOU'RE HAPPY ABOUT, SOMETHING YOU'RE SAD ABOUT, AND SOMETHING YOU LOOK FORWARD TO.BOTH THESE STUDENTS, THEY'RE IN TWO SEPARATE CLASSES.
THEIR THORN ON BOTH OCCASIONS WAS THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL DWINDLING, AND THEREFORE, THEIR BUSINESS DWINDLING.
LUCKILY, WE'VE ALREADY HAD TWO ART TRAILS SINCE THAT DEBACLES.
THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN HAD SOME SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES DAYS, BUT IT WAS STILL ON THEIR MINDS.
ANOTHER ONE, A GROUP OF STUDENTS, THEY'RE IN A STUDENT ORGANIZATION THAT DEALS WITH BUSINESS PROPOSALS.
PART OF THEIR BUSINESS PROPOSAL WAS TO RAISE ADVOCACY FOR SPAIN AND NEUTERING OF PETS.
SOMETHING I THINK WE ALL GET BEHIND IN LUBBOCK, TEXAS WITH OUR STRAY ANIMAL ISSUE.
THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL WAS THE ONLY PLACE THAT COULD GET THE DATA THEY NEEDED TO SUPPORT THEIR PROPOSAL.
THERE'S NO OTHER PLACE FOR THEM TO TALK TO THIS MANY PEOPLE WITH THIS MANY BACKGROUNDS AND GET THE WORD OUT ABOUT SPAIN AND NEUTERING PETS SO THEY COULD GO FURTHER.
AFTER THE PROPOSAL WAS WRITTEN AND THEIR PRESENTATION WAS MADE, THEY ACTUALLY WENT PRETTY FAR INTO THE COMPETITION, AND IT WAS ONLY A COUPLE OF SPOTS AWAY FROM NATIONALS, REPRESENTING LUBBOCK AT A NATIONAL BUSINESS COMPETITION.
I HAVE ANOTHER STUDENT. HE'S IN A BAND.
HE WANTS TO BE PART OF THE RICH MUSIC HISTORY THAT LUBBOCK HAS, AND I DON'T THINK I NEED TO NAME NAMES WHEN I COME TO THAT HISTORY.
HE WANTS HIS BAND BIG ENOUGH TO PERFORM IN THE BATTLE OF THE BANDS AT LHUCA.
HE HAS TO HAVE A CROWD TO PLAY TO.
MY STUDENTS HAVE TO HAVE PEOPLE TO SELL TO FOR THEIR BUSINESS, AND MY OTHER STUDENTS NEED PEOPLE TO TALK TO FOR THEIR BUSINESS PROPOSALS.
I ENCOURAGE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR TO VOTE, YES, RESOLUTION 6.19. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BLACKWELL. RACHEL SHIPLEY.
>> HI. MY NAME IS RACHEL SHIPLEY, AND I LIVE AT 2321, 54TH STREET.
TODAY, I'M REPRESENTING THE CHARLES ADAMS STUDIO PROJECT AND MY OFFICIAL ROLE AS THE PROGRAMS AND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR.
I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU JUST A FEW OF THE WORDS FROM OUR ARTISTS WHO LIVE AND WORK HERE IN DOWNTOWN LUBBOCK AND ARE A VITAL PART OF WHAT CASP IS DOING AND THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL AND HOW IT'S IMPACTED THEIR LIVES.
FROM ONE OF OUR ARTISTS, HE SAID CASP IS AN IMPORTANT ORGANIZATION BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN THE LINCHPIN IN REVIVING DOWNTOWN LUBBOCK AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF HUNDREDS OF SMALL BUSINESSES FROM HANDICRAFTS AND FOOD TRUCKS TO LOCALLY ROASTED COFFEE AND CUISINE.
I REMEMBER THE DAYS OF FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL BEFORE CASP.
THERE WERE TWO DOZEN ARTISTS THAT WOULD MALINGER IN QUIET GALLERIES, BEFORE THEY WOULD EVENTUALLY FLEE LUBBOCK FOR ANOTHER REGION FOR STUDIO SPACES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH.
TODAY, WITH THE SUPPORT OF ITS COMMUNITY AND PROGRAMS LIKE CIVIC LUBBOCK, CASP HAS ESTABLISHED A REMARKABLE OPPORTUNITY FOR RESIDENT ARTISTS TO PURSUE THEIR ARTISTIC AND COMMERCIAL ENDEAVORS AS THEY TRANSITION FROM CIVILIAN OR STUDENT LIFE AND MAKE THEIR SPLASH IN THE LOCAL IDEA IN FISCAL ECONOMY.
ANOTHER ARTIST SAID CASP IS AN IMPORTANT ORGANIZATION BECAUSE IT PROVIDES AFFORDABLE LIVING AND STUDIO SPACE FOR ARTISTS IN LUBBOCK.
THE ARTS ARE THE HEARTBEAT OF THE CITY'S CULTURE.
HAVING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ARTISTS IN THE PUBLIC TO ENGAGE WITH ONE ANOTHER AND CREATE COMMUNITY AND ART HELPS EVERYONE.
FINALLY, ONE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OF ONE OF OUR RESIDENT ORGANIZATIONS SAID, "ENGAGING WITH THE LOVETT COMMUNITY DOWNTOWN HAS ALLOWED ME TO BUILD MEANINGFUL RELATIONSHIPS, GAIN EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT FORMS OF ART, AND CONTRIBUTE TO A VIBRANT CULTURAL SCENE.
IT HAS ALSO HELPED ME APPRECIATE THE VALUE OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ARTISTIC COLLABORATION.
CASP IS AN IMPORTANT ORGANIZATION BECAUSE IT FOSTERS CREATIVITY, PROVIDES RESOURCES FOR ARTISTS AND BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER THROUGH THE ARTS." THIS IS JUST A SMALL SAMPLING OF THE ARTISTS WHO ARE SUPPORTED AND SUSTAINED BY CASP, THE FIRST FRIDAY ART TRAIL AND CIVIC LUBBOCK.
AS WE LOOK INTO THE FUTURE OF CASP IMPACT, IT WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO GROW.
CASP PLANS TO BREAK GROUND ON SIX ADDITIONAL LIVE WORK STUDIOS IN 2026, AND THIS WILL ONLY INCREASE THE SCOPE OF THE FREE ART PROGRAMMING OFFERED TO OUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS HERE IN LUBBOCK. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MISS SHIPLEY, MR. PLUNKETT, AND AFTER MR. PLUNKETT, GALEN WIXSON.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M CHAD PLUNKETT, AND I LIVE AT 17:15 30TH STREET.
TODAY, I'M IN MY OFFICIAL ROLE AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CHARLES ADAM STUDIO PROJECT.
CASP IS LOCATED JUST TO THE NORTH OF US HERE IN DOWNTOWN LUBBOCK, TEXAS.
ON THE AGENDA TODAY IS RESOLUTION 6.19, AND I'M ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS GRANT SUBCOMMITTEE AND THE CIVIC LUBBOCK INC BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
[00:35:03]
TO APPROVE USING HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX FUNDS, WHICH HAVE BEEN COLLECTED FROM FISCAL YEAR '23 '24.I'M NO EXPERT ON HOTEL OCCUPANCY FUNDS, BUT THEY WERE CREATED IN THE 1970S, ALTHOUGH THEY'VE BEEN AMENDED OVER THE YEARS FOR SUCH REASONS AS THE PERCENTAGE YOU CAN COLLECT, HOW FUNDS CAN BE SPENT, THE BASIC CONCEPT IS THAT TRAVELERS TO YOUR CITY PAY A TAX ON THEIR HOTEL BILL, AND THOSE FUNDS ARE THEN USED BY THE CITY TO IMPROVE THE CITY, WHICH IN TURN INCREASES VISITORS.
THIS YEAR, APPLICANTS TO THESE FUNDS INCLUDE THE LUBBOCK ARTS ALLIANCE, BALLET LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, BALLET FOLK LORICO, TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, LUCA, LUBBOCK ROOTS HISTORICAL ARTS COUNCIL, THE LUBBOCK CORRAL, AND, YES, THE CHARLES ADAMS STUDIO PROJECT, NOT TO NAME ALL OF THEM, BUT JUST TO NAME SOME OF THEM.
LAST YEAR ALONE, PROGRAMMING AT CAST BROUGHT OVER 80,000 VISITORS TO DOWNTOWN.
WE EXHIBITED OVER 500 DIFFERENT ARTISTS.
THE MAJORITY OF OUR PROGRAMMING HAS NO COST TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
DURING FIRST FRIDAY, WE HOST ON AVERAGE 30 FOOD TRUCKS EACH MONTH.
THESE LOCAL SMALL BUSINESSES DEPEND UPON CULTURAL EVENTS TO MAKE A LIVING.
THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED FOR ARE NOT FUNDS THAT HAVE TO BE COLLECTED FROM LOCAL TAXPAYERS.
THEY ARE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE CREATED AND WE HAVE EARNED BASED UPON WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY DONE.
VISITORS TO OUR CITY HAVE PAID THESE TAXES AS THEY HAVE TRAVELED TO ATTEND OUR EVENTS.
I ASK YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT OUR FUTURE PLANS, PROGRAMMING, EVENTS, FESTIVALS, PERFORMANCES, CONCERTS, AND MARKETING CAMPAIGNS TO MAKE LUBBOCK A CREATIVE COMMUNITY BY VOTING YES FOR RESOLUTION 6.19.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BUNGE. MR. WIXSON.
AFTER MR. WIXSON, MISS GUERO REYES.
>> MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US ALL HERE TODAY.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND LISTENING TO OUR CONCERNS.
I'M PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE LUBBOCK SYMPHONY.
I LIVE AT 5202 ALBERT STREET HERE IN TOWN AT ZIP CODE 79416.
I'M HERE TODAY TO TALK AGAIN ABOUT CIVIC LUBBOCK INC FUNDING.
THE LSO HAS BEEN A RECIPIENT OF CIVIC LUBBOCK INC FUNDING FOR MANY YEARS.
THE LSO IS SO GRATEFUL FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK CLI AND VICKY KEY FOR THEIR SUPPORT OF THE ARTS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SO MANY INCREDIBLE PROGRAMS OVER THE YEARS.
CIVIC LUBBOCK INC'S FUNDING IS DERIVED FROM HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAXES, AS YOU HAVE HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN NOW.
LOCAL LUBBOCK CITIZENS BENEFIT FROM THE HOTEL STAYS FROM OUR MINI VISITORS TO LUBBOCK WITH THE RESULT BEING ALL OF THESE GREAT PROGRAMS THAT HAVE COME OUT OF THE FUNDING FROM CLI WITHOUT LUBBOCKITES SHOULDERING ANY ADDITIONAL TAX BURDEN OVER THE LAST SEVERAL SEASONS, THE LUBBOCK SYMPHONY HAS USED CIVIC LUBBOCK FUNDS TO ASSIST WITH REHEARSAL AND STAGE HAND COSTS AT THE CIVIC CENTER, AN UNFORGETTABLE CONCERT BY THE INTERNATIONALLY RENOWNED CHALLIS YOYO MAP, ARTISTIC COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR MASTERWORKS CONCERTS AND SO MANY EDUCATIONAL CONCERTS IN THE COMMUNITY, MANY OF THEM AT FREE OR NO COST.
I ALSO WANT TO STRESS THAT SO MANY OF OUR MUSICIANS ARE LOCAL AND DIRECTLY BENEFIT FROM THE USE OF THESE FUNDS AND FROM ALL OF OUR ACTIVITIES.
ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE SO APPRECIATIVE OF THE SUPPORT OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK AND CIVIC LUBBOCK INC.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. WIXSON. NOW, ZENAITA.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS ZENAITA [INAUDIBLE].
I HAD TWO EVENTS, VIVA SAN FESTIVAL AND FIESTAS PATRIAS THAT ARE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY THROUGH YOUR APPROVAL AND RECOMMENDATION FROM CIVIC LUBBOCK.
WE APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW US TO BRING THE LATINO CULTURE TO WHO ATTEND.
FIESTAS PATRIAS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ATTEND THE ANCESTRY FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE.
ENTERTAINMENT VARIES OF ALL GENRES.
IT PROVIDES ALL MUSICIANS THE ABILITY TO SHOW THEIR ARTISTRY. THEY'RE ALL LOCAL.
THE VIVA SAN FESTIVAL WAS CREATED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EDUCATION FOR ALL WHO ATTEND.
[00:40:06]
IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR 30 YEARS.IT'S A CULTURAL PRESERVATION, YOUTH ENGAGEMENT, AND COMMUNITY CELEBRATION.
WE WELCOME POCLORICO AND MARIACHI PERFORMERS FROM ACROSS TEXAS AND SURROUNDING STATES.
WE ARE THE LONGEST RUNNING COMPETITION IN THE STATE OF TEXAS.
WE BRING IN QUITE A BIT OF TOURISM, LOCAL BUSINESS ENGAGEMENT, A SENSE OF PRIDE THAT RADIATES THROUGHOUT LUBBOCK.
THE WORKSHOPS ARE PRESENTED FROM MASTERS FROM THEIR ABILITY TO SHOW THE DIVERSITY AND THE RICHNESS OF WHAT THEY LEARN.
ANYONE THAT ATTENDS IS ABLE TO FEEL THAT PRIDE.
OUR PARTNERSHIPS ARE WITH SCHOOLS, NON PROFITS, AND CONTINUE TO MAKE A SAFE EVENT SAFE, INCLUSIVE, AND IMPACTFUL.
WE BELIEVE THE POWER OF ARTS AND CULTURE TO UNITE COMMUNITIES, FOSTER UNDERSTANDING AND STIMULATE THE LOCAL ECONOMY.
SUPPORTING THIS FESTIVAL IS INVESTMENT IN OUR CHILDREN, AND OUR HERITAGE, AND IN LUBBOCK'S REPUTATION AS A HUB FOR CULTURAL EXCELLENCE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
>>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.
APPRECIATE EVERYONE FOR COMING TODAY TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS, AND WE ALWAYS ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY.
I WILL NOT TAKE UP AGENDA 5.1, THE MINUTES FROM OUR JUNE 24, 2025, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 5.1? IS THERE A SECOND? ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES? I SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
PLEASE LET IT BE KNOW BY SAYING AYE.
ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY? I SEE NONE.
THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
NOW TAKE UP ITEM SIX OR CONSENT AGENDA.
THERE'S BEEN A REQUEST TO PULL ITEM 6.19 AND 6.24.
I'LL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH
[1. June 24, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting]
THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 6.19 AND 6.24.IS THERE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? I SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. I HEAR NONE.
THIS MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, EXCEPT FOR ITEM 6.19 AND 6.24 IS APPROVED.
[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.]
AND I WILL CALL ON OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, BROOKE, WITCHER, HE'S HERE TO PROVIDE A STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS MATTER.>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
TODAY IS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CULTURAL ARTS REVIEW COMMITTEE AND CIVIC LUBBOCK INC.
THIS PROGRAM IS FUNDED, AS EVERYONE HAS MENTIONED, FROM THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX YEAR END FISCAL YEAR END '23 '24.
[19. Resolution - Civic Centers: Consider a resolution approving the recommendation from the Cultural Arts Grant Review Sub-Committee and the Civic Lubbock, Inc. Board of Directors, for the 2025 Cultural Arts Grant Program, using Hotel Occupancy Tax funds collected at the end of Fiscal Year 2023-24.]
WE DO HAVE KATHE WOLF WITH CIVIC LUBBOCK AND VICKY KEY, WHO IS THE GRANTS ADMINISTRATOR FOR CIVIC LUBBOCK AND THEY WOULD BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR I CAN ATTEMPT TO.>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MISS MAYOR.
>> THANK YOU. NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION.
IT'S SO GREAT TO GET TO SEE ALL THESE FOLKS THAT CAME HERE TODAY.
I HAVE IN SOME WAY OR OTHER, I'M INVOLVED IN A LOT OF THEM, IT'S JUST APPRECIATED THE WORK THAT THEY DO YEAR ROUND, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ECONOMY IS NOT ITS BEST.
SOME OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT WE HAVE ARE FREE OR VERY AFFORDABLE, THEY'RE SO BEAUTIFUL AND THEY ARE TOP SHELF ACTIVITIES.
I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY.
I'VE GOT TO BE, LIKE I SAID, A PART OF SO MANY BEEN A PART OF THE NUTCRACKER FOR YEARS.
BEEN A PART OF FIESTA ELIANA FOR YEARS.
LOVE GOING TO THE SYMPHONY FOR YEARS, AND I'M ALSO VIOLINIST, WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT I PLAY THE VIOLIN AND THE ART AND EVEN THE INVOLVEMENT WHEN I SEE ELIZABETH WHERE IS ELIZABETH? THERE SHE IS WHEN WE FIRST DID CREATING THE ARTS DISTRICT.
THAT WAS A BIG THING, AND WE PUT A LOT OF TIME AND NOW WE'RE STARTING TO SEE THE FRUITS OF OUR LABOR IN SO MANY WAYS.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND FOR YOUR CONTINUED COMMITMENT. THANK YOU ALL.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 6.19? IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION? MR. GOSHEEN.
[00:45:01]
>> THANKS. I PULLED THIS AGENDA ITEM, JUST TO NOTE THAT CIVIC LUBBOCK UPDATED ITS GRANT APPLICATION GUIDELINES AND SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS, AND I THINK IT APPROPRIATELY ADDRESSES SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THIS COUNCIL'S RAISED PREVIOUSLY.
SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE PROGRAM GOING FORWARD.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? I HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE HERE ON THE COUNCIL.
I THINK MR. COLLINS WORKED WITH THEM TO HELP MAKE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES AND MAYOR PRO-TEM, BOTH WORKED TOGETHER, WE'RE GLAD THAT WE WERE ABLE TO COME TOGETHER WITH A AGREED PROCEDURE FOR FURTHER FUNDING FOR ALL THE PROJECTS, BUT WE APPRECIATE WHAT FIRST FRIDAY DOES AS WELL.
AND FOR THE PEOPLE IT BRINGS INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOWCASE OUR ARTISTS IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE IMPORTANT TO US.
I THANK YOU FOR ALL'S WORK ON THAT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? NO, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING ITEM 6.19.
PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE.
AYE, ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY? I HEAR NONE.
THE MOTION IS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL NOW TAKE UP ITEM 6.24, AND I WILL CALL ON MR. BILL HOWERTON, OUR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
COME ON DOWN, BILL, TO PROVIDE A BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM.
TODAY'S ACTION IS TAKING A LOOK AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT JUST NORTH OF ESCADO HIGH SCHOOL.
WE STARTED THIS PROJECT IN APRIL OF 2022.
WE STARTED THE BASIS BEHIND IT WAS JUST TO PUT IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE WORK, THE GAS, THE ELECTRIC, THE PLUMBING.
[24. Resolution - City Manager: Consider a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute, for and on behalf of the City of Lubbock, Amendment No. 2 to American Rescue Plan Act Funding Agreement 16514, to alter the payout agreement for the previously approved funding for infrastructure to serve an affordable housing development.]
ALL OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE WORK HAS BEEN PUT IN.IT HAS BEEN INSPECTED BY THE CITY AND TURNED OVER AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY.
THE AMOUNT ORIGINALLY WAS 1.25 MILLION, 625,000 WAS PAID OUT WHEN THAT INFRASTRUCTURE WAS ACCEPTED BY US.
THE ONLY THING THAT THIS AMENDMENT TWO DOES, IT ADDS LANGUAGE REQUIRING THAT THE FIRST TIME THIS HOME IS SOLD, THAT IT IS SOLD TO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT.
SO IT CAN'T BE SOLD FOR RENTAL PURPOSES.
THE NEXT ONE IS JUST CHANGING HOW WE PAY OUT ABOUT THE LAST 300,000.
WE'LL PAY THE NEXT 20 HOUSES THAT RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, WE'LL PAY JUST OVER 144 FOR EACH ONE OF THOSE, AND THAT SHOULD EXPEND ALL THE FUNDING THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THIS GRANT.
>> ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. HOWERTON? THANK YOU, BILL. I APPRECIATE IT
>> ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION APPROVE ITEM 6.24? IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. I THINK THIS IS DESIGNED.
I THINK WHAT WE WORKED OUT HERE IS INTENDED TO TRY TO MOVE PEOPLE INTO, HOMEOWNERS, INTO HOMES.
THAT WAS OUR GOAL HERE, THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TRYING TO ACHIEVE THAT.
I THINK WE ALL ARE IN AGREEMENT THIS IS A GOOD RESULT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM? I SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR.
AYE. ANY OPPONENTS SAY NAY? I HEAR NONE. THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ALL RIGHT. WE MOVE ON NOW TO OUR REGULAR AGENDA.
LET'S START WITH ZONING CASES, ITEM 7.1 THROUGH ITEM 7.6.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE COUNCIL WILL CONDUCT A CONSOLIDATED PUBLIC HEARING FOR THESE ZONING CASES.
THE COUNCIL HAS ALREADY RECEIVED IN THEIR PACKETS OF STAFF REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING.
COMMISSION. AS A REMINDER THE PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
THE COUNCIL MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT NO DISCUSSION ON THE MERITS WILL BE CONDUCTED BY THE COUNCIL DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M NOW GOING TO CALL ON OUR DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, KRISTIN SAGER,
[1. Public Hearing - Planning (District 1): Consider a request for Zone Case 3094-D, a request of Jade Honeycutt for Despenas, LLC, for a zone change from Office District (OF) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), at 1001 Tulane Street, located west of Cypress Road and north of North Loop 289, Cypress Grove Addition, Tract A, and consider an ordinance.]
TO PROVIDE A BRIEF SUMMARY OF EACH ZONING CASE SUBJECT TO OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEMS 7.1, GO AHEAD.>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THE APPLICANT IS JADE HONEYCUTT, AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM OFFICE TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
WE SENT OUT 15 NOTIFICATIONS RECEIVING ZERO IN FAVOR AND AN OPPOSITION.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF NORTH LOOP 289 WEST OF I 27, HERE IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
IT IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH AND EAST AND THE NORTH LOOP TO THE SOUTH.
IT IS SURROUNDED BY MEDIUM DENSITY, MDR, AND LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF TWO ZONING.
THERE IS ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL ZONING TO THE SOUTH ACROSS FROM THE LOOP.
[00:50:01]
FEATURE AGES PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES, HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.THE FUTURE LAND USE MAT DESIGNATION FOR COMMERCIAL IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST.
HOWEVER, IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CURRENT LAND USE AND ITS PROXIMITY TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE ZONE CHANGE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION.
IT IS BOUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ALL AROUND IT WITH THE LOOP TO THE SOUTH.
THE LOOP IS CONSIDERED A FREEWAY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG TWO LANE STREET, WHICH IS CONSIDERED A LOCAL STREET.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS MISS SAGER? I SEE NONE. THANK YOU.
>> ITEM 7.2, IS ZONE CASE 3529.
THE APPLICANT IS HUGO READIN ASSOCIATES.
THE REQUEST JUST FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM SF TWO TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL.
WE SENT OUT 38 NOTIFICATIONS RECEIVING FOUR IN FAVOR ONE IN OPPOSITION.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF 130TH STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS LEAVE 88 WEST OF SLIDE ROAD.
HERE'S THE MAP SHOWING THE RESPONSES WE RECEIVED.
HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AND WEST IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS, AND THERE ARE VARIOUS DEVELOPMENTS ALONG SLIDE ROAD WITH VACANT LAND TO THE SOUTH AND ADDITIONAL VACANT LAND TO THE EAST.
[2. Public Hearing - Planning (District 2): Consider a request for Zone Case 3529, a request of Hugo Reed and Associates, Inc. for Red Spike Development, LLC, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Heavy Commercial District (HC), at 12612, 12710, and 12806 Slide Road, and 5220, 5226, and 5302 130th Street, located west of Slide Road and north of 130th Street, on 23.9 acres of unplatted land out of Block E2, Section 24, and consider an ordinance.]
CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY, SF TWO.THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL, AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FURTHER NORTH ALONG SLIDE WITH AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES.
HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
YOU CAN SEE LEAVE 88 UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON THE EAST VIEW.
>> HERE'S A GRAPHIC PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, OUTLINING THE PROPERTIES THEY ARE REQUESTING THE ZONING DRAWN.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.
THE REQUEST DOES CONFORM TO THE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION AND IS APPROPRIATE ALONG THE FUTURE OF LOOP 88.
IT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
SLIDE ROAD IS CONSIDERED A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL, AND LOOP 88 IS CONSIDERED A FREEWAY.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED AN APPROVAL WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON 7.2? I SEE NONE.
>> ITEM 7.3 IS ZONE CASE 3526.
THE APPLICANT IS AMD ENGINEERING, LLC.
REQUEST FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY, SF-2 TO AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AC.
WE SENT OUT 13 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING ONE IN FAVOR.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF 114TH STREET, WEST OF MILWAUKEE AVENUE.
HERE'S THE ONE RESPONSE WE DID RECEIVE IN FAVOR, NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
HERE'S THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL VACANT LAND TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH,
[3. Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 3526, a request of AMD Engineering, LLC, for Christian-Ellis, LLC, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Auto-Urban Commercial District (AC), at 6600 114th Street, located west of Milwaukee Avenue and north of 114th Street, on 14.803 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 22, and consider an ordinance.]
LITTLE BIT OF DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST AND A FULLY DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST.CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY, SF-2.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH, ALONG WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ALONG 114TH AND MILWAUKEE.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES.
HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
HERE'S THE GRAPHIC PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, OUTLINING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION FOR COMMERCIAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUEST.
THE REQUEST IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
MILWAUKEE IS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL, 114TH IS A MINOR ARTERIAL.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BY UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'LL BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I SEE NONE. THANK YOU.
>> ITEM 7.4, ZONE CASE 3524, THE APPLICANT IS CMS PROPERTIES, REQUEST FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM OFFICE AND LOW DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY, SF-2, TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
WE SENT OUT 60 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING ONE IN FAVOR, TWO IN OPPOSITION.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 98TH, EAST OF UPLAND.
HERE'S THE RESPONSE MAP SHOWING THE RESPONSES WE RECEIVED IN FAVOR AND OPPOSITION.
HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
THERE IS EXISTING RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORTH, EAST, AND SOUTH.
[4. Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 3524, a request of CMS Properties for United Sky Capital, LLC, for a zone change from Office District (OF) and Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Neighborhood Commercial District (NC), at 7105 98th Street and 9901 Upland Avenue, located east of Upland Avenue and south of 98th Street, on 2.7 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 22, and consider an ordinance.]
CURRENT ZONING IS OFFICE AND SF-2.[00:55:03]
THERE IS AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL TO THE WEST, HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH, ADDITIONAL OFFICE AND SF-2 TO THE EAST, AND SF-2 AND MDR TO THE NORTH.FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES.
HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
THIS IS A GRAPHIC PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, AGAIN JUST OUTLINING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES, SO THE REQUEST IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION.
IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND WILL NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
98TH STREET IS DESIGNATED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL STREET.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.
I'LL BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. SAGER? I SEE NONE.
>> ITEM 7.5, ZONE CASE 3528, THE APPLICANT IS HUGO REED AND ASSOCIATES, AND THE REQUEST IS FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY, SINGLE FAMILY, SF-2, AND AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, HC.
WE SENT OUT 18 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING NONE BACK.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 130TH STREET, LOOP 88, WEST OF FRANKFORD AVENUE.
HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, PROPERTY TO THE WEST AND A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, AS WELL AS THE EAST IS OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS.
[5. Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 3528, a request of Hugo Reed and Associates, Inc. for SWLLD, LLC, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) and Auto-Urban Commercial District (AC) to Heavy Commercial District (HC), at 5811, 5815, 5901, 5911, 6001 130th Street, and 13810 Frankford Avenue, located west of Frankford Avenue and south of 130th Street, on 15.6 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 9, and consider an ordinance.]
THE MAJORITY OF THE SURROUNDING LAND IS CURRENTLY VACANT.CURRENT ZONING IS SF-2 AND HC.
THERE IS ADDITIONAL AC AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL TO THE NORTH.
FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES, AND HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
HERE'S THE GRAPHIC PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, OUTLINING THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES, SO THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT.
THE PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
130TH STREET, LOOP 88 IS CONSIDERED A FREEWAY.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I SEE NONE.
>> LAST ONE., ZONE CASE 1893-GG.
THE APPLICANT IS SEVENTEEN SERVICES, LLC, REQUEST FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM HEAVY COMMERCIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
WE SENT OUT 27 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING NO RESPONSE.
PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF 4TH, EAST OF MILWAUKEE.
HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE SOUTH, WEST, AND NORTHEAST.
THERE IS A GOLF COURSE FURTHER NORTH.
CURRENT ZONING IS HEAVY COMMERCIAL.
THERE'S ADDITIONAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL, AUTO-URBAN COMMERCIAL,
[6. Public Hearing - Planning (District 6): Consider a request for Zone Case 1893-GG, a request of Seventeen Services, LLC, for Wag 2.0, LLC, for a zone change from Heavy Commercial District (HC) to Neighborhood Commercial District (NC), at 6028 4th Street, located north of 4th Street and west of Homestead Avenue, Shadow Hills Commercial Addition, Tract E, and consider an ordinance.]
AND MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST WITH SF-2 TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH, AND HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE WEST.FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES PROPERTY FOR LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES.
HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA.
HERE IS A PLAT OF THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS A SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR RESIDENTIAL LOW-DENSITY.
ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THIS DESIGNATION, ITS PROXIMITY TO 4TH STREET WILL MAKE THIS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION.
THE ZONE CHANGE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
IT HAS ACCESS TO 4TH STREET, WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS A MINOR ARTERIAL.
STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON 7.6? I SEE NONE. THANK YOU, MS. SAGER.
I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEMS 7.1-7.6.
IF ANYONE IS HERE TODAY, WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF ANY OF THESE ZONE CASES, WOULD YOU PLEASE COME FORWARD AND DO SO NOW? I SEE NO ONE. IS ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THESE AGENDA ITEMS 7.1-7.6? I SEE NONE. I'LL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 2:44 PM.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEMS 7.1-7.6?
>> IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE.
ALL IN FAVOR, LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE.
[01:00:02]
AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY? I HEAR NONE. THOSE AGENDA ITEMS 7.1-7.6 ARE PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.WE'LL NOW TAKE UP ITEM 7.1 ON OUR AGENDA.
AGAIN, MS. SAGER WILL PROVIDE A STAFF READING ON THIS ITEM 7.7.
>> ITEM 7.7 IS A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR 8.82 ACRES TO BE ANNEXED AT 146TH STREET IN FRANKFORD.
THE PROPERTY IS SOUTH OF 146TH, WEST OF FRANKFORD AVENUE.
IF THE AGREEMENT IS APPROVED, WE WILL BRING THE ORDINANCE FOR ANNEXATION TO YOU AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING, AND I'LL BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
[7. Resolution - Planning: Consider a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Municipal Services Agreement with Betenbough Homes, LLC and Starlight Development, LLC, for the requested annexation of an area of land generally described as 8.82 acres, adjacent to and west of Frankford Avenue and south of 146th Street, into the City of Lubbock corporate limits, along with the adjacent right-of-way.]
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. SAGER? I SEE NONE. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.7? IS THERE A SECOND? A MOTION AND A SECOND, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ITEM 7.7? SEEING NONE, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE.
I HEAR NONE, THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
WE'LL TAKE UP ITEM 7.8 NOW AND CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT REGARDING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 41, IMPACT FEES OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK CODE OF ORDINANCES.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
I'M GOING TO CALL ON, WELL, IT SAID CITY ENGINEER, BUT I GUESS THAT'S JOHN TURPIN, BUT I GUESS IT'S GOING TO BE YOU.
>> I'LL START THIS OUT, AND I'LL GIVE IT OVER TO OUR CITY ENGINEER.
>> PROVIDE A SUMMARY FOR US ON THIS.
>> THIS IS A RECAP IN WHERE WE'VE BEEN RELATED TO IMPACT FEES AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
[8. Public Hearing - Engineering: Conduct a public hearing to consider proposed amendments to Chapter 41, Impact Fees, of the City of Lubbock Code of Ordinances.]
THAT PUBLIC HEARING WAS FOCUSED AROUND LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.YOU ALSO TOOK ACTION, AS A COUNCIL, TO RECEIVE THE REPORT RELATED TO IMPACT FEES THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE CIAC COMMITTEE.
TODAY IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ONLY NO ACTION TODAY, BUT TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING IS BASICALLY TO CONSIDER THE IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE AND RATES.
YOU DO HAVE AN IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE IN YOUR PACKET.
KEEP IN MIND THAT IS BASED ON THE CIAC'S RECOMMENDATION.
FROM HERE ON, YOU TAKE THAT AND YOU, AS A COUNCIL, HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE IT, MODIFY IT AS YOU SEE FIT.
BUT AS IT'S WRITTEN TODAY, IT'S BASED ON THE CIAC'S RECOMMENDATION.
I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH SOME DATA, AND THEN I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO JOHN HERE IN A LITTLE BIT.
BUT SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE REQUESTED INFORMATION RELATED TO BUILDING PERMITS AND HOW THOSE HAVE TRENDED PRIOR TO IMPACT FEES, POST IMPACT FEES.
I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH SOME OF THAT DATA.
I'M GOING TO HIT IT ON A HIGH LEVEL WITH RESIDENTIAL, THEN I'M GOING TO TOUCH ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.
IF YOU WANT TO GO INTO DETAILS, I'VE GOT SLIDES FURTHER IN THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU ALL HAVE TO GO INTO FURTHER DETAILS ON THE FURTHER BREAKDOWN ON THE COMMERCIAL AND EVEN ON THE DUPLEXES AND MULTIFAMILY.
BUT SOLELY UP TO THE PURVIEW OF THE COUNCIL IF YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT, I'LL TOUCH ON THE HIGH LEVEL, AND IF YOU WANT ME TO GO FURTHER, I CERTAINLY CAN.
FOR STARTERS, I'VE GOT THE NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PERMITS.
I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT A FEW OF THESE YEARS.
OF COURSE, WE GO BACK 10 YEARS.
KEEP IN MIND, YOUR FIRST IMPACT FEE COLLECTION WAS IN NOVEMBER OF 2021.
HERE, YOU'VE GOT RECORD YEARS IN 2021 AND '22.
THE FAR-RIGHT COLUMN REALLY INDICATES YOUR NEW PERMITS RELATED TO SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEXES.
YOUR PEAK YEAR WAS 2021 WHERE YOU HIT 2,659.
THE NEXT ONE IS VALUATIONS AS RELATED TO THOSE PERMITS.
AGAIN, YOU HIT A PEAK YEAR IN 2021 AT 649 MILLION.
THEN NOW THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WE'VE TRENDED A LITTLE CLOSER, BETTER THAN 2019, BUT NOT QUITE AS GOOD AS WHAT WHEN WE HAD IN OUR PEAK YEARS IN 2021 AND '22.
LOOKING AT COMMERCIAL, JUST IN GENERAL, AND AGAIN, I'VE GOT A BREAKDOWN THAT BREAKS DOWN COMMERCIAL FURTHER IF YOU WANT TO GO INTO THOSE, BUT YOU HAD COMMERCIAL, PRETTY STEADY, ESPECIALLY THE LAST FIVE YEARS RIGHT IN THAT 800 MARK.
COMMERCIAL VALUATIONS, THERE ARE SOME OUTLIERS HERE.
I'LL BET YOU CAN ALL GUESS WHAT 2022 WAS.
THE 2023, THE 780 MILLION, THAT'S WHEN THE PERMIT FOR THE EXPO CENTER WAS ISSUED, SO THAT ALSO SKEWS THAT.
THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF BIG ONES, BUT LAST YEAR, YOU TRENDED AT $339 MILLION.
A COUPLE OF OTHER PIECES OF INFORMATION I'D LIKE TO SHARE, AND THIS CORRELATES MORE TO I THINK SINGLE FAMILY THAN IT DOES COMMERCIAL, BUT WE DO HAVE INFLATION RATES AND FEDERAL INTEREST RATES.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT INFLATION AND INTEREST RATES WERE LOW.
REALLY STARTING IN 2019, 2021, THEY START RISING AND SOMEWHAT CORRELATES WITH WHAT WE SAW ON THE HOUSING SIDE OF IT.
AT THAT, I'M GOING TO STOP BEFORE I HAND IT OVER TO JOHN.
JOHN'S GOING TO VISIT WITH YOU ALL ABOUT THE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND FACTOR AND TRIP GENERATION.
[01:05:01]
THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS THERE THAT WE WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON, BUT BEFORE I HAND IT OVER TO HIM, DO YOU ALL HAVE QUESTIONS ON JUST THE GENERAL DATA I JUST PRESENTED?>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. REJINO? I SEE NONE. THANK YOU.
>> SURE. THEN I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO OUR CITY ENGINEER, MR. TURPIN.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COUNCIL.
JUST WANTED TO GIVE A FOLLOW-UP WITH YOU ALL.
Y'ALL HAD A FEW QUESTIONS THAT I WAS UNABLE TO ANSWER AT THE LAST MEETING.
SPECIFICALLY IN RED, WE SHOW THE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND FACTOR, WHICH IS ALL ABOUT TRIP GENERATION BY EACH UNIT.
THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2020 STUDY AND THE 2025 STUDY? AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE NEW STUDY, IT ACTUALLY GOES DOWN, THE TRIP GENERATION DOES.
BUT ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE OF THINGS OR THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USE, THE BASIC GOES UP SLIGHTLY, AS WELL AS YOUR SERVICE GOES UP SLIGHTLY, AND YOUR RETAIL COMES SLIGHTLY DOWN.
I DID WANT TO GIVE YOU A FOLLOW-UP AND A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO THIS TRANSPORTATION DEMAND FACTOR.
IT COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE TRIP GENERATION MANUAL, WHICH IS PRODUCED BY THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS.
THIS MANUAL WAS STARTED IN 1976.
IT'S ON ITS 11TH EDITION, IT IS CLOSE TO HALF A CENTURY OF UPDATES.
IT GETS UPDATED EVERY FOUR-AND-A-HALF YEARS.
THE LIST OF SOURCES IN THE NEW MANUAL IS WELL OVER 01,000 THAT IS SOURCED FROM NATIONAL ENGINEERING FIRMS, DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, UNIVERSITIES, CITIES, AND COUNTIES ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES.
NOT ONLY IS THIS USED AS A NATIONAL STANDARD FOR TRIP GENERATION TO INFORM IMPACT FEES, BUT THIS IS ALSO DIRECTLY USED IN OUR METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION IN A VERY SIMILAR FASHION FOR LOOKING AT TRIP GENERATION AND INFORMING WHAT IS OUR STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM AND OUR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, WHICH IS OUR SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM LIST OF PROJECTS.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. TURPIN? I SEE NONE.
>> I'M AVAILABLE TO FURTHER INTO THE COMMERCIAL, OR IF YOU ALL WOULD JUST LIKE TO DECIPHER THAT ON YOUR OWN AND YOU OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, SOLELY UP TO THE COUNCIL.
HOW WILL YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE THAT?
>> ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. REJINO? THANK YOU.
>> WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEM 7.8.
[BACKGROUND] IT'S 2:53, I'M OPENING THIS PUBLIC.
IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ON THAT, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW, AND IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON ITEM 7.8.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEN, FOR CONSIDERING MY COMMENTS.
CONSIDERING ALL THE SLIDES THAT WE JUST SAW, THE GROWTH IN DEVELOPMENT IN LUBBOCK, I JUST WANTED TO READ SOMETHING THAT I WROTE JUST FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.
THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE PUBLIC SAFETY-RELATED, AND I READ THIS YESTERDAY.
I THINK RED LIGHT CAMERAS THAT ARE INSTALLED SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEND PEOPLE A TICKET IN THE MAIL TO HELP OFFSET TAXES FOR THE ROADWAYS AND FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS TO BETTER HANDLE PEOPLE WITH TONS OF TICKETS FOR CUSTOMARY PRACTICES, TO CONTROL THE DANGEROUS DRIVING PATTERNS AND PEOPLE WHO POSE THREATS TO OTHERS ON THE ROAD.
>> THAT'S NOT AN AGENDA ITEM TODAY ON OUR AGENDA SO COMMENTS.
>> ANYWAY, THIS COULD HELP THE CITY OPERATE MORE SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY, SLOW OUR ROADS DANGER FROM CRASHES, AND THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS MIGHT CONSIDER THIS TYPE OF IMPOSED TAX TO HELP THE CITY COUNCIL AND OTHER POLICE OFFICIALS DISCUSS AND PROTECT US IN THE CITY.
REMEMBER, NOBODY GETS AHEAD BY RUNNING RED LIGHTS.
I'D LIKE FOR EVERYBODY TO CONSIDER IMPOSING RED LIGHT RUNNING TO HELP FUND SOME MORE TAXES TO HELP GENERATE MORE INCOME FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK WHEN WE'RE STRUGGLING.
>> I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN, BUT LET ME JUST REMIND EVERYBODY WHEN WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS, YOUR COMMENTS HAVE TO BE RELATED TO THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE HEARING, AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT RED LIGHT CAMERAS.
[01:10:01]
BUT ANYBODY HERE TODAY WHO WANTS TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO THE AGENDA ITEM 7.8 AND IMPACT FEES, PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.>> HELLO. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE SMITH.
I LIVE AT 2825 67TH STREET, THAT'S 79413.
I'M SPEAKING ABOUT THE IMPACT FEES TODAY AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE RAISED TO THE MAXIMUM THAT YOU HAVE, WHICH IS 50% AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
PART OF THE REASON I THINK THAT SHOULD HAPPEN IS BECAUSE THOSE IMPACT THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CITY.
IF WE CHANGE THE BUSINESS AS USUAL SO THAT YOU HAVE THIS HOUSE, THIS HOUSE, THIS HOUSE, AND THEN THIS STREET, AND THIS STREET, AND THIS STREET, FOR LACK OF A BETTER BUT MORE OF A VISION, NOT THE SAME SIZE OR ANY OF THAT SORT, BUT IF YOU THINK OF CACTUS ALLEY WHERE THEY HAVE THE BUSINESSES THAT SURROUND AND THEN THEY HAVE A COURTYARD IN THE MIDDLE, THERE IS GREEN SPACE AND THERE'S ROOM FOR SMALL BUSINESSES TO THRIVE, AND THEY HAVE, RATHER THAN HAVING THIS BIG COMMERCIAL STREET THAT THEY HAVE TO DRIVE.
I KNOW YOU HAVE TO HAVE PARKING BUT WE'LL GET TO THAT.
BIG COMMERCIAL AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE A HUGE PARKING LOT AND SIX LANE STREETS, IT NOT ONLY POLLUTES THE AIR, IT POLLUTES THE HEAT, AND IT ALSO IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO HAVING HIGH-DENSITY HOUSING FOR THE LOW WAGE WORKERS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK FOR THE RESTAURANTS, ETC, FOR THE HIGHER INCOME PEOPLE, SO THAT HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
THEY BOTH HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER.
NOW, PART OF THE REASON I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, I DID LIVE IN IN PHOENIX IN THE 1970S, THAT WAS PRETTY NICE.
THE DESERT WAS THERE AND IT WAS PRETTY WARM IN THE DAY, BUT LET ME TELL YOU, COOL DOWN AT NIGHT, IT WAS JUST BEAUTIFUL.
I WAS A MILE FROM SOUTH MOUNTAIN.
THEY HAD ORANGE TREES UP THERE, AND AT THE END OF THE NIGHT, YOU COULD SMELL THOSE ORANGE BLOSSOMS AND IT WAS SO NICE.
FEW YEARS LATER, I LEFT IN 1980, AND YOU KNOW WHY? OH, BOY.
THEY DID THE SAME THING YOU GUYS ARE DOING RIGHT NOW.
SPREAD. PUT THE CONCRETE DOWN.
OH, BOY, WE'RE GOING TO GET GROWTH.
GROWTH DOES NOT NECESSARILY GROW UP TO BENEFITS.
THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE WHEN I LEFT, TWO WEEKS ABOVE 110 UP TO 116, AND IT HAS GONE UP TO 120.
YOU COULDN'T SIT IN YOUR CAR BECAUSE THE HEAT WAS SO IT BURNED YOUR BUTT TO BE HONEST.
MOST PEOPLE HAD GONE BACK TO NATIVE PLANTS, WHICH I SUGGEST, AND THE WORST PART IS THAT THE CITY WAS WORSE THAN THE DESERT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T COOL DOWN AT NIGHT AT ALL.
THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO PAY THE PRICE.
THEY GOT REAL HIGH TEMPERATURES, GOT AIR POLLUTION FROM ALL THE TRAFFIC THAT YOU GENERATED.
YOU HAVE LESS WATER THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO USE FOR A LARGER GROUP, AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE MORE ELECTRICITY DEMAND FOR ALL THE HEAT.
I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO LOOK AT A DIFFERENT WAY OF ORGANIZING HOW YOU'RE STRUCTURING.
MAYBE A LITTLE ALONG THE LINES OF EUROPE WHERE YOU HAVE A SMALL GROUP.
THEY HAVE WALKING PLACES WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE, AND THEY HAVE A LOT OF GREEN SO IT KEEPS THE AREA COOL.
I'M ASKING THAT IN FUTURE PLANNING, YOU'RE GOING DOWN THE WRONG ROAD.
I KNOW I'M GIVING YOU THAT AS MY OPINION, BUT I'M ALSO GIVING YOU THAT AS MY EXPERIENCE.
I THANK YOU AND PLEASE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU. I COULD SMELL THOSE ORANGE TREES AS YOU WERE YOU'RE DESCRIBING THAT.
SOMEONE ELSE COMING FORWARD TO SPEAK TO ITEM 7.8.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL, JOSHUA SCHENKELS.
I LIVE IN THE 2600 BLOCK OF 47TH STREET, AND I AM THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE LUBBOCK COMPACT FOUNDATION.
OUR ORGANIZATION, AS YOU ALL KNOW, BUT FOR EVERYBODY'S EDIFICATION,
[01:15:01]
IS A PUBLIC POLICY ORGANIZATION THAT DOES RESEARCH AND GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT ON THINGS LIKE IMPACT FEES AND IF I DON'T MIND TOOTING OUR OWN HORN, HAVE BEEN A LEADER IN ADVOCACY ON THIS ISSUE, AND IT'S AN ISSUE THAT VERY MUCH NEEDS A PUBLIC ADVOCATE BECAUSE IT'S VERY COMPLICATED, AND THE MAJORITY OF OUR PUBLIC IS NOT AWARE OF IT AT ALL, AND EVEN IF THEY WERE AWARE OF IT, IT HAS SUCH COMPLEXITIES TO IT THAT IT REALLY TAKES SOMEBODY THAT HAS DONE THEIR HOMEWORK ON THIS ISSUE.THAT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN OUR ORGANIZATION ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC, AND ABOUT IT SOME MORE TODAY.
I THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS PUBLIC HEARING BECAUSE IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME MORE PUBLIC EDUCATION.
NOW, I'VE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ALMOST ALL OF YOU SINCE THIS FIRST STARTED TO COME BACK AROUND, EXCEPT FOR YOU, MR. HARRIS, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO US HAVING A CONVERSATION IN THE FUTURE.
BUT THERE'S SO MUCH NECESSARY EDUCATION ON THIS ISSUE, AND I'VE HEARD SO MANY DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL.
I'D LIKE TO TAKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT SOME COUNTERPOINTS TO SOME OF THOSE FOR YOURSELVES AND THE PUBLIC.
FIRST I WANT TO MAKE SOME COMMENT ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S OFTEN TALKED ABOUT BY THIS COUNCIL, WHERE IT'S LIKE, WE DON'T MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE COUNCIL DOES, AND THAT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
COUNCIL DOESN'T MAKE DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS.
BUT WHAT A CITY COUNCIL DOES DO IS THAT IT SETS THE PARAMETERS FOR A FAIR MARKET.
YOU CREATE A MARKET FOR ALL THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS, THE CONSUMERS OF BUILT GOODS, AND THE HOME BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS THAT BRING THOSE TO MARKET, YOU CREATE A MARKET, AND THAT MARKET SHOULD BE SET UP IN A WAY THAT IS FAIR TO ALL THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS, AND BECAUSE THIS IS YOUR PARTICULAR PURVIEW, FAIR BETWEEN THE MARKET PARTICIPANTS AND THE TAXPAYER, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS WHERE IS THE OVERLAP, WHERE IS THAT GRAY AREA WHERE SOMETHING FALLS CLEANLY INTO A BUCKET OF SOMEBODY ELSE'S COST OF DOING BUSINESS, THE PRIVATE MARKET, AND WHERE DOES IT FALL INTO THE BUCKET OF THIS IS A PUBLIC INTEREST, A PUBLIC GOOD, AND WE SHOULD SHARE IN THAT INTEREST? THE COUNCIL SETS UP A FAIR MARKET, AND YOU DO THAT THROUGH WHAT YOU'VE TYPICALLY DONE.
YOU HAVE ANNEXATIONS, YOU HAVE ZONING, YOU HAVE CODES, AND IN 2021, WE ADDED IMPACT FEES TO THAT.
THAT'S HOW YOU WORK ABOUT SETTING UP YOUR FAIR MARKET BECAUSE BEFORE WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO DO, WE HAD A TAIL WAGGING THE DOG SITUATION, WHERE DEVELOPMENT JUST HAPPENED WHEREVER IT HAPPENED.
THE CITY HAD TO CHASE AROUND BEHIND THAT ACTIVITY INSTALLING UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE, INSTALLING DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, INSTALLING ROADS FOR THAT ACTIVITY TO CONTINUE.
IN 2021, FOR A LONG TIME BEFORE THAT, WE HAD SEEN THE WRITING ON THE WALL.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MR. PAYNE HAS TALKED ABOUT MOST RECENTLY AND I EXPECT WE'LL GET UP AND DO SOME MORE TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT THE WRITING HAS BEEN ON THE WALL FOR A LONG TIME PRIOR TO 2021.
IS THAT THIS ECONOMIC MODEL WAS NO LONGER VIABLE IN OUR CITY.
WE BUILD TOO MUCH ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE, AND IT'S VERY COSTLY.
WE WEREN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THAT WITH NEW GROWTH ANYMORE.
THE IMPACT FEES WERE MEANT TO DO TWO THINGS.
ONE, IT'S MEANT TO GENERATE SOME REVENUE ON THE FRONT INSIDE, MUCH LIKE A SALES TAX IS MEANT TO DO SO THAT WE CAN PAY FOR NECESSARY DEVELOPMENT TO CONNECT NEW DEVELOPMENTS TO OUR CITY, AND IT'S MEANT TO DO THE SECOND THING, WHICH IS WORK ON YOUR MARKET AND CREATE MARKET INCENTIVE STRUCTURE SO THAT THERE IS MORE PRESSURE TO BRING DEVELOPMENT INWARD WHERE THE INFRASTRUCTURE ALREADY EXISTS.
BECAUSE OTHERWISE, LUBBOCK, LIKE EVERY OTHER CITY SINCE THE DAWN OF CIVILIZATION KNOWS THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN ENGINE TO REINVEST IN THE INTERIOR ALREADY DEVELOPED PARTS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, HUMANS WILL TAKE THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE, AND THEY WILL ENDLESSLY DEVELOP OUTWARD, AND YOU CAN'T MAINTAIN A SOCIETY, A CITY, A BUILT ENVIRONMENT LIKE THAT, AND SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE ENGINES TO BRING THAT REDEVELOPMENT BACK INTO THE INTERIOR OF THE CITY.
NOW, THAT GOING TO LOOK A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT IN A CITY LIKE LUBBOCK, IN A LOT OF WESTERN CITIES, IMPACT FEES ARE ONE WAY THAT THEY DO IT.
NOW, I'VE HEARD A LOT OF TALK OUT OF MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WHERE THEY'RE LIKE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESS OWNER? WHAT ABOUT THE HOME BUILDER?
[01:20:02]
WHAT ABOUT THEM? YOUR PRINCIPAL DUTY, COUNCIL, IS TO THE VOTERS WHO ELECTED YOU AND NOT TO A PRIVATE BUSINESS ENTITY, A DEVELOPER, NONE OF THAT.IT WAS THE TAXPAYERS THAT BROUGHT, WELL, MOST OF YOU, TO YOUR SEATS, AND YOUR PRIMARY DUTY IS TO THE VOTERS.
THAT IS YOUR PRINCIPAL FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY.
DEVELOPERS RESPONSIBILITY ARE TO THEIR CONSUMERS, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY ARE TO THE PUBLIC.
THAT'S WHERE YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS OUGHT TO BE CENTERED.
NOW, I'M GOING TO SHIFT GEARS HERE A LOT.
I THOUGHT, I'M GOING TO TRY TO PUT THIS INTO SOME SORT OF RATIONAL ORDER BUT I RAN OUT OF TIME, COUNCIL.
I HAVE A JOB THAT ISN'T EDUCATING Y'ALL NORMALLY.
HEARD MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL SAY, WE WANT TO LOWER TAXES.
WE GOT TO LOWER TAXES ON EVERYBODY.
REPEALING OR LOWERING IMPACT FEES WOULD IN FACT BE A TAX RAISE ON EVERY PERSON.
IF THIS COUNCIL WANTS TO KEEP ITS PROMISES TO LOWER TAXES, THEN THE LAST THING YOU SHOULD BE CONSIDERING IS REPEALING IMPACT FEES, THAT IS IN FACT A TAX RAISE.
BECAUSE ALL THE THINGS THAT IMPACT FEE COVER, THOSE AREN'T WANT TOS AND OFTEN TOSSED AROUND ITEM ON THIS DIAS, THE WANT TOS OF THIS CITY.
WHAT IMPACT FEES COVERS ARE THE HAVE TOS.
WE WILL HAVE TO CONNECT THOSE NEW DEVELOPMENTS, AND STREETS, AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
THOSE ARE THINGS WE HAVE TO DO.
AS IT STANDS, THE REVENUE THAT YOU'VE COLLECTED FROM IMPACT FEES AND THE MUCH MORE REVENUE THAT YOU WILL COLLECT IN THE FUTURE, YOU DON'T HAVE THE WANT TOS TO BE ABLE TO CUT OUT OF YOUR BUDGET.
THERE JUST ISN'T THAT MUCH MONEY.
I'VE LOOKED AT THE LAST THREE FISCAL YEARS, AND THE LAST ONE WAS THE WHOLE PARKS DEPARTMENT, AND LIBRARIES, AND ALL THE THINGS THAT I DON'T THINK OF AS WANT TOS BUT SOME PEOPLE MIGHT.
ALL THE REVENUE IN THAT BUDGET CATEGORY IS LESS THAN YOU HAVE COLLECTED IN IMPACT FEES SO FAR.
YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY FOR THAT, COUNCIL.
UNLESS YOU'RE CONTEMPLATING A TAX RAISE OF SOME OTHER KIND ON, THEN YOU DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE MONEY TO REPEAL IMPACT FEES.
NOW, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW I'VE SENSED A LOT OF THE COUNCIL BALKING AT WHAT THE OLD IMPACT FEES WERE VERSUS THE NEW IMPACT FEES.
IMPACT FEE PER UNIT IN SERVICE AREA F, IT USED TO BE 11,064, NOW IT'S JUMPING TO 31,049.
A LOT OF MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL ARE LIKE, OH, GOBSMACKED.
THAT'S A LOT. THAT'S A BIG JUMP.
WELL, IF WHAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT JUMP, THEN, COUNCIL, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ARE THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT HAVE STACKED UP ON YOUR TO DO LIST PER SERVICE AREA.
THE REASON THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS HAVE STACKED UP ON YOUR TO DO LIST PER SERVICE AREA IS THE UNCHECKED SPRAWL, AND THE UNCHECKED SPRAWL IS MEANT TO BE CHECKED BY SOMETHING LIKE AN IMPACT FEE.
IF WHAT YOU DO IS REPEAL THE IMPACT FEE, THEN YOU ACCELERATE THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL PROJECTS ON YOUR TO DO LIST, AND YOUR LAUNDRY LIST JUST GETS LONGER.
IF YOU'RE MAD ABOUT HOW MUCH THAT'S JUMPED, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY MAD ABOUT IS HOW MUCH CAPITAL PROJECTS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO YOUR LIST, AND THAT IS A FUNCTION OF HOW MUCH SPRAWL HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO GO UNCHECKED.
NOW, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY MAD AT THERE IS PREVIOUS COUNCILS, MANY OF WHOM WERE WARNED THAT THE UNCHECKED SPRAWL WOULD ULTIMATELY COME, THE PIPER IS GOING TO GET PAID.
THERE'S SOME COSTS THAT JUST ULTIMATELY COME TO BE.
PREVIOUS COUNCILS WERE WARNED FOR DECADES, THIS IS COMING DOWN THE PIPES.
LUBBOCK ISN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD THIS.
WE CANNOT KEEP DOING THIS UNCHECKED SPRAWL.
WE CANNOT KEEP DOING THIS INFINITE LOW-DENSITY DEVELOPMENT.
BUT PREVIOUS COUNCILS HAVE LEFT YOU HOLDING THE BAG NOW, AND NOW YOU'RE SEEING IT REALLY COME TO PASS.
WHEN IMPACT FEES WERE FIRST IMPLEMENTED, OUR ORGANIZATION ARGUED WE SHOULD DO 50:50.
THAT WOULD BE FAIR, 50:50 BETWEEN THE SOON TO BE TAXPAYERS AND THE RIGHT NOW TAXPAYERS.
THAT WOULD BE FAIR. BUT WE DIDN'T IMPLEMENT THAT.
WE IMPLEMENTED IT THE WAY THAT YOU CURRENTLY SEE IT AND KNOW IT TO BE.
WE SAID AT THE TIME THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH, THAT THIS IS GOING TO COME BACK TO BITE US.
WELL, NOW HERE WE ARE SOME SEVERAL YEARS LATER, AND YOU'RE SEEING SOME OF THE RESULTS OF THAT.
WHAT YOU'RE REALLY MAD AT, COUNCIL, IS PREVIOUS COUNCILS WHO HAVEN'T ATTENDED TO BUSINESS.
IF YOU UNDO IMPACT FEES, YOU WILL IN FACT BE HEADED DOWN THAT SAME ROAD THAT WE WERE ON BEFORE.
COUNCIL, WHAT YOU'D REALLY BE MAD AT IS
[01:25:03]
THAT THE WAY WE BUILD ROADS IS OVERBUILT, AND WE'VE ALREADY STARTED TO WORK ON THAT.I KNOW LAST YEAR WE MOVED FROM SEVEN LANES TO FIVE LANES AS A COURSE, BECAUSE WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD.
BY THE CITY'S OWN ADMISSION, THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL IN ALL THESE OTHER WAYS THAT WE'RE ALREADY STARTING TO PAIR BACK FROM.
THE REASON WHY WE HAVE SOME DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS IN OUR UDC THAT WE INCENTIVIZE IS TO CUT DOWN ON THE AMOUNT OF ROADS THAT WE HAVE TO BUILD AND MAINTENANCE, AND SO WE INCENTIVIZE THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
NOW WE'VE ROLLED BACK FROM THE SEVEN LANES TO THE FIVE LANE ROADS.
THE WRITINGS ON THE WALL AND ALL THESE OTHER WAYS.
THE IMPACT FEES ARE MEANT TO COMPLIMENT ALL THESE OTHER SAVINGS IN WHICH THE CITY IS ACKNOWLEDGING, WE CAN'T AFFORD TO KEEP DOING BUSINESSES THE WAY WE'VE DONE IT.
COUNCIL, KEEP IN MIND THAT THE IMPACT FEES ARE ON A FIVE-YEAR CYCLE.
WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE 11,064 NUMBER IS THE BACK END OF A CYCLE THAT FIVE YEARS BEFORE THAT, THEY THOUGHT WAS GOB SMACKING, BUT NOW ISN'T ENOUGH TO COVER WHAT INFLATION HAS INFLATED OUR ROADS TO.
IF YOU IMPLEMENT THE NEW IMPACT FEE STRUCTURE, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE LIKE, OH, MY GOD, THIS IS SO EXPENSIVE.
IN FIVE YEARS, THAT WILL NOT BE SO EXPENSIVE.
WE GET THE BENEFIT ON THE FRONT END PART OF THIS CYCLE, WHERE THE IMPACT FEES ARE CALCULATED TO MATCH WHAT COSTS ACTUALLY ARE AND HOW MANY CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE ON THERE, AND THAT SEEMS LIKE A LOT.
ON THE END OF THAT FIVE YEAR CYCLE, THE DEVELOPERS, THE HOMEBUILDERS, ULTIMATELY, THE END USERS ARE SEEING THE BENEFIT OF THAT BECAUSE INFLATION HAS HAPPENED AND OTHER THINGS HAVE HAPPENED.
THEY'RE EXPENSIVE ON THE FRONT END OF THE FIVE YEAR CYCLE, AFTER INFLATION, THEY HAVE FALLEN IN EXPENSE.
>> NOW I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE COUNTERPROPOSALS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
LET'S JUST CREATE A BOND COMMISSION AND HAVE A STANDING BOND COMMISSION.
WHAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE SUGGESTING IS THAT THIS COUNCIL COMMIT TO MORE DEBT FINANCING.
AND AS WE ALL KNOW, DEBT FINANCING.
IF THE CITY WANTS TO BUILD A ROAD, IF THE CITY WANTS TO BUILD A FIREHOUSE, IF THE CITY WANTS TO BUILD A BOX OF PETUNIAS, THEN IT HAS TO PAY TO HAVE THAT THING, AND THEN IT HAS TO PAY TO MAINTENANCE THAT THING FOREVER, OR IT HAS TO LET IT FALL INTO DISREPAIR OR DECOMMISSION IT.
ANY CAPITAL PROJECT IS LIKE THAT.
IF WE'RE GOING TO COVER THIS COST ON MORE BONDS, THEN WHAT WE'RE REALLY SAYING IS, WE'RE GOING TO COVER IT ON TAX MONEY PLUS INTEREST.
THAT, PRINCIPALLY, IT'S THE DEVELOPERS AND THE HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION THAT HAVE BEEN ADVANCING THIS PROPOSAL.
THEY SAY, LET'S JUST GO ALL TO BONDS.
WELL, I WONDER HOW THAT'S GOING TO GO OVER WITH THE PUBLIC WHEN THEY SAY, LET'S JUST TAKE THIS THING THAT WAS MY COST OF DOING BUSINESS AND LET'S SHIFT IT OVER TO YOU ON TAX MONEY PLUS INTEREST.
I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO BE VERY HAPPY WITH THAT.
THAT IS AGAIN, A THING THAT NUMBER MEMBER PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL HAVE COMMITTED NOT TO DO IS RAISE THE COST OF THE CITY.
SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SAID, ALL THAT WOULD BE MORE FAIR TO LET THE TAXPAYERS VOTE ON IT.
LET'S JUST DO IT ALL ON BONDS, AND THAT'S MORE FAIR.
LET'S GO TO THE TAXPAYERS AND SAY, HEY, LET'S VOTE ON THIS BOND PROPOSAL TO CONNECT THESE NEW NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE CITY.
IF YOU DON'T, WE CAN'T GET A FIRE TRUCK OUT TO THEM.
I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW. I'M SORRY. THAT'S SARCASM.
YOU ARE THE AGENTS OF THE CITY.
IT IS NOT INCUMBENT UPON YOU TO COME TO THE TAXPAYER FOR EVERY LITTLE NIGGLING ROAD AND SAY, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE SOME MORE MONEY? YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE ADULTS WHO CAN CONDUCT THE CITY'S BUSINESS, AND THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE COMING TO THEM EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS FOR A NEW ROAD BOND BECAUSE WE WANTED TO DO A GIVEAWAY TO SOME OF THE MOST CAPABLE PEOPLE IN THE CITY.
IT IS NOT MORE FAIR TO JUST PUT THIS IN THE TAXPAYER'S HANDS.
WHAT SHOULD BE PUT IN THE TAXPAYER'S HANDS FOR BOND VOTES OR WHEN YOU GUYS HAVE DONE YOUR FULL DUTY AND COME UP WITH A PACKAGE OF ITEMS THAT ARE SUFFICIENTLY LARGE THAT YOU NEED TO GO TO THE VOTER AND ASK FOR THE PERMISSION FOR THE RAISE, NOT FOR A CONTINUOUS CYCLE OF NEIGHBORHOOD ROADS.
[01:30:02]
THAT'S A RIDICULOUS USE OF THE TAXPAYER'S TIME.ADDITIONALLY, IT'S BEEN OFTEN SAID AROUND HERE THAT TO EVEN CALCULATE AND DO ALL THE WORK FOR THE IMPACT FEES EATS UP SO MUCH RESOURCE.
IT'S NOT EVEN WORTH IT. WELL, WE DON'T THINK TO DO ALL THIS WORK, TO DO AN ENDLESS SUCCESSION OF BONDS IS GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF ADMINISTRATIVE WORK AND CITY TIME AND PLANNING AND PILES AND PILES OF ADMINISTRATIVE WORK.
NOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ESCAPE ADMINISTRATIVE WORK.
THAT'S JUST THE CITY'S BUSINESS.
THE ARGUMENT THAT THE IMPACT FEES ARE TOO MUCH ADMINISTRATIVE WORK AND NOT WORTH IT, I FIND NOT COMPELLING.
MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL, I LISTEN TO THE LOCAL RADIO, THEY GO ON WADE WILK SHOW DURING THE BUDGET TALKS, AND THEY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? SALES TAX, I THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD WAY THAT WE DO THINGS.
SALES TAX IS THE MORE FAIR SIDE.
PROPERTY TAX THAT'S HIGHWAY ROBBERY. BUT WE'RE STUCK.
BUT SALES TAX, THAT'S FAIR BECAUSE PEOPLE WHEN THEY USE STUFF, THEY PAY SALES TAX, AND WHEN THEY DON'T USE STUFF, THEY DON'T PAY SALES TAX.
WELL, I STILL AM WAITING FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER TO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW AN IMPACT FEE IS NOT A SALES TAX.
WHEN YOU BUILD A DEVELOPMENT IN SOME PLACE THAT DOES NOT HAVE A ROAD, YOU HAVE USED A RESOURCE AND THEREFORE, YOU SHOULD PAY THE SALES TAX.
WHEN YOU DEVELOP A PROPERTY SOMEWHERE THAT IS ALREADY DEVELOPED, YOU HAVE NOT USED A RESOURCE, AND THEREFORE, YOU SHOULDN'T BE CHARGED THAT TAX.
I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY COMPELLING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SALES TAX THAT MANY PEOPLE ON THIS COUNCIL SAY, HEY, WE'RE FOR THAT, THAT'S A GOOD WAY TO FUND THINGS AND AN IMPACT FEE.
AN IMPACT FEE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A SALES TAX.
EARLIER IN THE WEEK, I HAD A CONVERSATION ON THE RADIO WITH A DIFFERENT COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THEY DIDN'T LIKE MY ANALOGY HERE, BUT PEOPLE HAVE SAT ON THIS DAIS.
AND, TO ME, BEEN LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T LIKE SOCIALISM.
THESE THINGS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT SOCIALISM, I DON'T LIKE IT, EVEN THOUGH I'VE NEVER PROPOSED SOCIALISM IN MY LIFE.
BUT IN FACT, IF WE REMOVE IMPACT FEES, AND A BUSINESS HAS TO HAVE A ROAD TO IT TO BE A BUSINESS.
YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE AND DO YOUR BUSINESS, OR YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE YOUR CUSTOMERS.
YOU CAN'T HAVE A BUSINESS WITHOUT A ROAD TO IT.
IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A BUSINESS WHERE THERE IS NO ROAD, THAT ROAD IS ONE OF YOUR COSTS OF DOING BUSINESS.
BECAUSE IF YOU WANTED TO BUILD A BUSINESS SOMEWHERE ELSE, IF YOU'RE BUILDING IT FROM SCRATCH, FROM THE FLOOR UP, LET'S JUST TAKE IT THROUGH.
YOU'RE BUILDING IT FROM SCRATCH FROM THE FLOOR UP.
YOU CAN HAVE EVERY SINGLE THING THE WAY YOU WANT IT, SO LONG AS YOU CAN AFFORD IT.
IF YOU'RE TAKING OVER SOMEPLACE, THEN YOU MAYBE CAN'T HAVE EVERY SINGLE THING YOU WANT.
YOU MIGHT LIKE TO HAVE MORE PARKING LOT, BUT YOU CAN'T.
MAYBE YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME COMPROMISES THERE.
IF WE REMOVE IMPACT FEES, AND ABSORB THE ROADS ENTIRELY AGAIN, AS THE TAXPAYERS' COST.
FOR ALL THOSE NEW BUSINESSES THAT WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT, OH, I DON'T WANT TO DAMAGE THE NEW BUSINESSES.
I DON'T WANT TO IMPACT THE NEW BUSINESSES, THE SMALL BUSINESSES, THE SMALL COFFEE SHOP.
IF WE ABSORB THEIR COST OF ROADS, THAT IS SOCIALISM.
THAT IS SOCIALIZING THEIR COST OF DOING BUSINESS TO ALL THE TAXPAYERS.
NOW, PEOPLE WERE ARGUING WITH ME ABOUT IT, AND THEY SAY, RHODES, THAT'S NOT HOW WE TREAT THAT.
WELL, I'M SORRY, THAT'S NOT HOW YOU THINK OF IT, BUT THAT IS THE TEXTBOOK DEFINITION.
IF WE REMOVE IMPACT FEES, WE ARE IN FACT PRACTICING THE SOCIALISM THAT IS OFTEN DECRIED FROM THAT DAIS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.
OFTEN WHEN I'M TALKING TO YOU, AGAIN, I HEAR, WHAT ABOUT THE NEW BUSINESSES? WE DON'T WANT TO STOP SOME NEW BUSINESS FROM OPEN.
COUNCIL, WHAT I HAVEN'T HEARD A SINGLE PERSON BRING FORWARD YET IS, WHAT ABOUT THE INTERESTS OF THE EXISTING BUSINESSES IN THE CENTER OF TOWN TO NOT BE SITTING NEXT TO A CLOSED-UP STOREFRONT, AND ROTTED-OUT ROADS AND BURNT-OUT STREET LIGHTS.
WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE EXISTING BUSINESSES' INTEREST TO HAVE AN ENGINE INVESTING IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN? WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS INTERESTS TO INSTEAD OF HAVE A VACANT LOT, HAVE A NEW HOMEOWNER ON THEIR BLOCK AND NEW FAMILIES? I'VE HEARD LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS FROM THIS COUNCIL CONCERNED
[01:35:03]
ABOUT IMPACTING NEW HOMES, IMPACTING NEW BUSINESSES.I HAVEN'T HEARD ONE SYLLABLE OUT OF ANY COUNCIL MEMBER ABOUT THE INTERESTS OF THE EXISTING BUSINESSES AND THE INTERESTS OF THE EXISTING HOMEOWNERS, AND THEIR INTEREST TO HAVE THAT NEW COFFEE SHOP NEXT TO THEM.
THAT NEW COFFEE SHOP IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY CAN GO TO. NOBODY'S BROUGHT THAT UP.
LAST IMPACT FEE PRESENTATION, THE HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION GOT UP HERE, AND THEY GAVE A VERY SWANKY PRESENTATION ABOUT ALL THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM ONE NEW DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS COMPELLING. IT WAS A LOT OF NUMBERS IN THERE.
I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THEIR ANALYSIS.
I IMAGINE IT'S PROBABLY PRETTY GOOD.
PROBLEM WITH THEIR ANALYSIS, THOUGH, IS THAT ALL THAT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IS ALREADY SPOKEN FOR.
THIS IS THE THING WITH THE IMPACT FEES IS THAT YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ZOOM FORWARD AND BACKWARD IN TIME AND TAKE SOME SNAPSHOTS AS YOU GO.
LET'S JUST START THIS BOROUGHS RIGHT THERE IN THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT.
THE ROAD'S UP. THE STUFF IS UP.
IT'S GENERATING THIS ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.
ALL THAT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IS ALREADY SPENT.
IT PAYS FOR NOW THE POLICE TO NOW COVER THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT, THE FIRE TO NOW COVER THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT? THE SCHOOLS TO NOW SCHOOL ALL THOSE NEW SCHOOL CHILDREN IN THE HOMES, THE ROADS TO BE MAINTAINED, THE COUNTY JAIL TO BE OPEN AND ACCEPTING PRISONERS, THE STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO DO THEIR JOB, THE FEDERAL FBI, ALL THAT ECONOMIC REVENUE IT'S ALREADY SPENT.
WHO BUILDS THE NEW ROADS, OUTSIDE OF THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT? WHO PAYS FOR THAT? NOBODY PAYS FOR THAT, COUNCIL, AND YOU KNOW THIS.
THE ONLY THING THAT PAYS FOR A NEW ROAD, A NEW PIECE OF INFRASTRUCTURE, IS TAX MONEY, OUTRIGHT, CASH, A BOND, WHICH IS TAX MONEY PLUS INTEREST OR AN IMPACT FEE.
THERE IS NOBODY TO BUILD THAT NEW ROAD.
THAT'S THE WHOLE PROBLEM, IS THAT, AND THIS IS RIGHT BACK TO THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG SCENARIO.
THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION IS GOOD.
IT DOESN'T TAKE THEM OFF THE HOOK FOR THE COST THAT IS ONLY GENERATED BY THEIR BUSINESS.
AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, AND I'LL SAY AGAIN, THERE IS NO BUSINESS IN THE CITY THAT COSTS THE CITY MONEY UP FRONT, EXCEPT FOR DEVELOPMENT.
EVERY SINGLE OTHER ECONOMIC ACTIVITY IN THE CITY BRINGS REVENUE TO THE CITY IMMEDIATELY.
DEVELOPMENT IS THE ONLY THING THAT COSTS REVENUE UPFRONT AND THAT'S WHY IT IS APPROPRIATE.
NOW, I'VE HEARD A LOT OF NOW WE'RE TRYING TO SHIFT AND BEING LIKE, OH, STOP BLAMING THE POOR DEVELOPER.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WHAT WOULD BE FAIR IS THE CURRENT TAXPAYERS PAY 50% OF THIS AND THESE SOON TO BE TAXPAYERS, THE NEW BUSINESSES, THE NEW HOMES, PAY 50% OF THIS.
THAT WOULD BE FAIR. BUT I THINK IT'S REASONABLE.
I CAN SEE AN ARGUMENT FOR WHAT THE CA COMMITTEE HAS ADVANCED, WHICH IS THE CURRENT TAXPAYERS PAY 75% OF THE ROADS, AND THESE SOON-TO-BE TAXPAYERS PAY 25% OF THE ROADS.
THE CURRENT TAXPAYERS PAY 100% OF THE WATER AND WASTEWATER.
IT'S NOT FAIR, BUT I THINK IT'S JUSTIFIABLE.
I THINK THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE.
I THINK THERE'S A REASONABLE ARGUMENT TO BE MADE IN, HEY, LET'S CARRY AND SOCIALIZE SOME OF THAT COST SO THAT WE'RE ALSO CREATING A LITTLE BIT OF AN ENGINE AND NOT MAKING THESE NEW HOMEOWNERS AND NEW BUSINESSES PAY THE FULL TRUE COST.
NOW, I WANT TO REMIND YOU SOME OTHER THINGS, COUNCIL, BECAUSE ONE COUNCIL MEMBER WAS LIKE, OH, I'D ACTUALLY BE COOL WITH THE HOMES PART.
IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A NEW HOME IN A NEW PART OF TOWN, YOU WANT TO PAY A PREMIUM ON THAT, BE MY GUEST.
WHAT I WORRY ABOUT IS THE BUSINESS PART, THE COMMERCIAL PART.
COUNCIL. A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS CAUSES MORE IMPACT.
A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS HAS LESS PERMEABLE SPACE ON IT.
A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS CAUSES MORE RUNOFF IMPACT, SOMETHING THAT THE TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING 100% OF.
A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS CAUSES MORE ROAD TRIPS.
[01:40:02]
MY HOUSE GETS TWO TRIPS DAILY.THAT'S HOW MANY ROAD MILES HAPPEN ON MY HOME.
UNITED HAS PROBABLY THOUSANDS OF DAILY ROAD TRIPS ON IT.
THAT'S WHY YOUR IMPACT FEE CALCULUS ON YOUR BUSINESSES IS WHAT IT IS.
IT'S THAT YOUR BUSINESSES CAUSE MORE IMPACT.
THEY ALSO BRING IN REVENUE, UNLIKE, FOR THE WHOEVER STARTS THE BUSINESS VENTURE.
I FIND IT HARD TO PUT A LOT OF WEIGHT BEHIND THIS ARGUMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE CODDLING THE BUSINESSES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT OPEN.
I'M A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER MYSELF AND I GREW AND SOLD VEGETABLES, AND I TOOK THOSE TO THE FARMER'S MARKET, AND I GOT A PREMIUM FOR IT.
PANDEMIC HAPPENED? MY BUSINESS HAD TO CHANGE.
SUDDENLY, I WAS DELIVERING A LOT OF VEGETABLES TO PEOPLE'S HOMES.
SUDDENLY, I WAS DELIVERING A LOT TO RESTAURANTS.
DO WE THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE TO PUT OUR CITY AND OUR MARKET IN SUCH A CONDITION THAT DEVELOPERS AND HOMEBUILDERS NEVER HAVE TO THINK? HOW MIGHT I PIVOT MY BUSINESS? HOW MIGHT I, IN THIS NEW LANDSCAPE, SELL HOMES TO PEOPLE ON THE INTERIOR OF THE CITY? HOW MIGHT I CREATE A MORE BROAD PROFILE OF OFFERINGS FOR THE BROAD MARKET? I'LL TELL YOU THIS, COUNCIL, IF IT WERE A RESTAURANT OWNER THAT HAD CALLED UP ANY OF YOU AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT? THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A COMMERCIAL KITCHEN MAKE IT SO I CAN'T OPEN A RESTAURANT.
I CAN TELL YOU WHAT YOU WOULDN'T DO IS YOU WOULDN'T START REMAKING THE CODES SO THAT THAT RESTAURANT COULD GO INTO BUSINESS AND JUST REVAMPING ALL THE CODES AND BEING LIKE, HEY, LET'S JUST CHANGE HOW THE WHOLE CITY DOES RESTAURANTS SO THAT THAT ONE RESTAURANT OWNER COULD GO INTO BUSINESS WHEN THEY OTHERWISE COULDN'T HAVE.
COUNCIL, THIS ARGUMENT THAT WE SHOULD BE CODDLING THE BUSINESSES, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT DOESN'T HOLD WATER.
IT SOUNDS LIKE A GIVEAWAY TO THE PEOPLE WHO, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, ARE THE PRIMARY AND PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS TO ALMOST ALL OF YOUR CAMPAIGN FINANCE ACCOUNTS, WHO ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WINE AND DINE AND VET OUR COUNSEL, WHO ARE THE FOLKS THAT PUT ON NUMEROUS BENEFITS THAT YOU GUYS ATTEND.
I WOULD ASK YOU, IF YOU WOULDN'T REVAMP THE WHOLE STRUCTURE OF HOW OUR CITY CONDUCTS ITS CODES, ITS OVERSIGHT FOR A RESTAURANT OWNER, BECAUSE A RESTAURANT OWNER SAID, OH, WELL, YOUR REGULATORY BURDEN HAS MADE IT SO THAT I CAN'T OPEN MY BUSINESS.
THEN HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY DOING SO FOR THIS OTHER BUSINESS? THIS COUNCIL HAS REPEATEDLY SAID WE DON'T PICK WINNERS AND LOSERS.
>> MR. SHANKS, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK, AND YOU CAN RESUME WHEN WE COME BACK.
TAKE ABOUT 10 MINUTES [OVERLAPPING]
>> BUT YOU CAN COME BACK UP. WHEN WE'RE DONE. TEN MINUTES.
>> WHERE I LEFT OFF, I WAS SAYING THAT THE COUNCIL WOULDN'T UNDO ITS REGULATORY IMPOSITION AND ITS FEE STRUCTURE FOR ANY OTHER BUSINESS IN TOWN.
I POINT OUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE COUNCIL AND DEVELOPERS AND HOME BUILDERS AND HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATIONS, NOT TO SUGGEST SOME MALEFICENT, BUT TO JUST MAKE THE PUBLIC AWARE THAT THIS ISN'T THE TYPE OF GRANT THAT WOULD BE GIVEN TO ANY OTHER BUSINESS ENDEAVOR IN TOWN.
EVERY OTHER BUSINESS ENDEAVOR WE EXPECT TO PAY THEIR WAY, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHO THEIR END CLIENTS ARE, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT IT WILL ULTIMATELY COST THEIR END CLIENTS TO DO.
WE DON'T UNDO THINGS FOR ANY OTHER BUSINESS IN TOWN.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD BE CONTEMPLATING UNDOING A REGULATORY AND FEE STRUCTURE ENVIRONMENT FOR THIS BUSINESS, EXCEPT THE VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS ENDEAVOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
I WANT TO ADDRESS THE DEVELOPER PAYS FOR EVERYTHING MYTH, BECAUSE THIS GETS KICKED AROUND SO MUCH.
PLEASE, WE ARE ALL AWARE THAT THE DEVELOPER BUILDS AND PAYS FOR EVERYTHING,
[01:45:07]
INTERIOR TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT.IF THEY PAID FOR EVERYTHING THAT WAS A COST OF THEIR DEVELOPMENTS, THERE WOULD BE NO IMPACT FEES TO CALCULATE.
PLEASE KNOCK IT OFF WITH THE DEVELOPER PAYS FOR EVERYTHING.
IT IS NOT TRUE. THE DEVELOPER PAYS FOR PLENTY.
IT DOES NOT PAY FOR EVERYTHING.
MANY PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF RECENT EVENTS, HAVE POINTED OUT THAT IMPACT FEES COULD CREATE A DRAG ON OUR SALES TAX REVENUE.
RIGHT NOW, WE'RE VERY WORRIED ABOUT WHAT'S DRAGGING DOWN SALES TAX REVENUE.
BUT I WOULD REMIND THE COUNCIL THE SLIDES THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT VERY CLEARLY INDICATE THAT WHEN WE IMPLEMENTED IMPACT FEES, IT DID NOT CAUSE A DRAG ON OUR SALES TAX REVENUE.
IT NEVER DID. IT WON'T IN THE FUTURE. IT CAN'T.
OUR SALES TAX REVENUE IS GOVERNED BY THINGS LARGER THAN US.
NOW WE'RE SEEING THE IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE WHEN THE NATIONAL ECONOMIC PROFILE DOES WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO.
BUT IT IS NOT OUR IMPACT FEES THAT ARE CREATING A SALES TAX STRAIN.
OUR SALES TAX REVENUE GREW EVERY YEAR, YEAR OVER YEAR, WITH OR WITHOUT THE IMPACT FEES.
IN THE END, THIS IS WHAT I TALKED TO COUNCILMAN COLLINS ABOUT.
I THINK MR. PAYNE SAID SOMETHING TO THIS EFFECT.
IN THE END, WHATEVER IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
WHATEVER IS GOING TO DEVELOP IS GOING TO DEVELOP.
WHATEVER IS GOING TO GET BUILT IS GOING TO GET BUILT OR NOT, AND THAT'S ALL A WASH.
THE QUESTION FOR YOU IS IT MORE FAIR AND EQUITABLE AND PREDICTABLE TO HAVE A FEE STRUCTURE THAT CREATES A MARKET THAT BOTH PUTS MONEY IN THE KITTY TO ALLOW THE GROWTH TO PAY FOR THE GROWTH, SOMETHING THAT'S ALWAYS PROMISED AND NEVER HAPPENED UNTIL WE DID SOME IMPACT FEES, AND EVEN THEN IT'S A MILD EXAMPLE, OR IS IT MORE FAIR FOR US TO SHIFT THE ENTIRE COST OF THAT BACK ONTO THE TAXPAYER? ARE YOU GUYS GOING TO GO OUT AND SELL THAT TO THE TAXPAYER? BECAUSE IN THE END, THIS IS SQUEEZING A BALLOON.
ALL OF THESE THINGS, WHATEVER HAS TO GET BUILT TO CONNECT WHATEVER DEVELOPED TO THE THING, IS GOING TO GET PAID ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
IS IT MOST FAIR THAT WE TRANSFER ALL OF THAT ONTO THE TAXPAYER AND LET THE TAIL WAG THE DOG AND HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THIS THING AND JUST LET THE THING RUN AWAY WITH ITSELF, OR IS IT MORE FAIR, MORE PREDICTABLE, TO HAVE AN IMPACT FEE STRUCTURE AND AT LEAST HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A GRASP AROUND THIS THING, AND KEEP IN MIND AN IMPACT FEE STRUCTURE THAT THE TAXPAYER STILL COVERS 100% OF WATER AND WASTEWATER AND INCENTIVIZES THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND NEW BUSINESS GROWTH THROUGH ONLY A 25% COLLECTION ON THE OTHER SIDE? COUNCIL, IN THE END, AS MYSELF AND MY ORGANIZATION HAS EVER SAID, YOU CAN ONLY DO US FAVORS.
YOU WILL EITHER IMPLEMENT WISE PUBLIC POLICY, AND THEN YOU'LL NEVER HEAR FROM US.
THERE'S NOTHING TO COME TELL YOU OR YOU WILL IMPLEMENT UNWISE PUBLIC POLICY, AND THEN IT BECOMES EASIER TO MAYBE HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE IN THOSE CHAIRS.
I HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER THIS WITH ALL DUE DILIGENCE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU, MR. SCHENKELS. WE CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
SOMEONE ELSE COME FORWARD TO SPEAK?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL. ADAM HERNANDEZ.
I AM THE COMMUNICATIONS CHAIR FOR LUBBOCK COMPACT, 820 MAIN STREET RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER.
I'M NOT GOING TO KEEP YOU AS LONG AS MY COLLEAGUE DID.
I'M GLAD THAT HE FILLED YOU IN ON ALL THE DETAILS AND I DON'T HAVE TO BECAUSE I ACTUALLY HAVE TO GET OUT OF HERE, SO PLEASE DON'T TAKE IT ANY WAY.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RUN RIGHT OUT.
BUT AS JOSH SAID, THIS ISSUE IS SO IMPORTANT, AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO COME UP HERE AND SPEAK TO YOU ALL.
THAT'S WHY I'VE BEEN POSTING ABOUT THIS.
WHY IT IS SO IMPORTANT TO LUBBOCK COMPACT AND SO IMPORTANT TO ME IS NOT BECAUSE OF ME.
I DON'T GET ANYTHING FROM IMPACT FEES.
I'M NOT A DEVELOPER. I DON'T GET ANY OF THAT.
IT'S REALLY TO ME, NOT EVEN ABOUT DEVELOPERS PER SE.
IT'S ABOUT THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY.
WHAT IS THE EXPERIENCE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE, NUMBER 1? NUMBER 2, WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE TO BE PAYING FOR THAT EXPERIENCE? WHETHER YOU'RE A DEVELOPER OR YOU'RE A TEACHER OR YOU'RE A COUNCIL PERSON OR WHETHER YOU WORK AT A RESTAURANT,
[01:50:01]
WHATEVER YOU DO IN YOUR DAILY LIFE, YOU GOT TO TAKE YOUR KIDS TO SCHOOL ON THE ROADS THAT WE GOT.YOU GOT TO GO TO THE GROCERY STORE AND DO ALL THE THINGS YOU GOT TO DO IN YOUR LIFE ON THE ROADS THAT WE GOT.
ANOTHER ASPECT OF OUR COMMUNITY IS THAT THERE'S DIFFERENT GROUPS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
ANY ONE OF THOSE GROUPS ISN'T JUST BAD JUST BECAUSE THEY EXIST.
DEVELOPERS AREN'T BAD BECAUSE THEY EXIST.
IT'S A BUSINESS THAT SOMEBODY ENGAGES IN.
I HAPPEN TO KNOW SOME OF THE DEVELOPERS, AND WE GET ALONG JUST FINE.
THEY'RE JUST REGULAR PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND I AT THE END OF THE DAY, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY DO IN THEIR BUSINESS LIFE.
BUT DIFFERENT GROUPS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY HAVE A DIFFERENT IMPACT, AND DEVELOPERS ARE ONE OF THOSE GROUPS THAT HAVE A HEAVY IMPACT.
WHAT ARE THEY IMPACTING? WHAT IS IMPACT FEES PAYING FOR IN A VERY SIMPLE TERM? WHEN YOU SIT DOWN A DEVELOPMENT THERE, WHETHER IT'S HOUSING, WHETHER IT'S COMMERCIAL, THE IMPACT IS THE INCREASED TRAFFIC.
THE INCREASED TRAFFIC WHERE'S THE ROADS DOWN FASTER.
I DON'T HAVE TO TELL THE COUNCIL PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN FOUR OR FIVE AND SIX WHAT IT'S LIKE TO DRIVE ON SOME OF THE ROADS THAT ARE UNFINISHED, WHERE ALL OF THAT DEVELOPMENT HAS POPPED UP WHEN IT'S 07:45 IN THE MORNING AND YOU'RE TAKING KIDS TO COOPER OR FRIENDSHIP, OR IF IT'S IN THE AFTERNOON, YOU'RE PICKING THEM UP OR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT? JOSH HAS ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE THREE WAYS.
YOU EITHER DO A BOND, YOU RAISE YOUR TAXES, OR YOU SPLIT THE COST BETWEEN DEVELOPERS AND THE PUBLIC.
NOW, I'M OF THE MIND FRAME THAT 50, 50 IS FAIR.
I THINK THAT MOST PEOPLE, IF YOU HAD A ROOMMATE, YOU WOULDN'T WANT YOUR ROOMMATE TO PAY 25% RENT AND YOU PAY 75% RENT.
THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS. I THINK THAT EVERYBODY CAN UNDERSTAND THAT 50, 50 IS FAIR.
WHETHER YOU'RE A DEVELOPER OR WHATEVER YOU CALL YOURSELF, FOR DEVELOPERS TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST JUST PITCH IN 50, 50.
IF THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE, FOR WHATEVER REASON, I'VE HEARD ALL THE ARGUMENTS, WE'VE HEARD MANY OF THEM REPEATED BACK TO YOU.
IF THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE, I WOULD SAY THAT THE ABSOLUTE FLOOR IS TO LEAVE THEM WHERE THEY'RE AT, WHICH IS THE CIAC RECOMMENDATION, TO LEAVE THEM AT 25%.
IF YOU ELIMINATE IMPACT FEES ALTOGETHER, YOU'RE COMMITTING YOUR PUBLIC AND YOURSELVES THAT LIVE IN 4, 5 AND 6, PARTICULARLY TO WORSE ROADS THAT TAKE LONGER TO FIX AND MORE DEBT MORE FREQUENTLY, WHICH IS MORE INTEREST, WHICH IS MORE TAX MONEY.
YOU'RE COMMITTING THEM TO THAT.
THAT'S LITERALLY WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I'LL JUST END WITH ONE ARGUMENT THAT I HAVE THAT'S BOTHERING ME ABOUT THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION, WHICH IS, BUSINESSES HAVE MADE A DECISION TO NOT OPEN A BUSINESS OR NOT BUILD A BUSINESS BECAUSE OF AN IMPACT FEE.
LET ME GIVE YOU A REAL SIMPLE ANALOGY OF WHAT YOU'RE ARGUING THERE.
LET'S SAY YOU HAVE THE MONEY TO BUILD A HOUSE.
YOU GOT $250,000 YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE.
SOMEBODY COMES AND TELLS YOU, HOLD UP, YOUR WATER BILL IS GOING TO BE $300 A MONTH.
I CAN'T BUILD MY HOUSE IF I HAVE TO PAY THIS $300.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING WHEN YOU SAY THAT THE IMPACT FEE IS STOPPING SOMEBODY WHO'S INVESTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SOME CASES TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO THEN GENERATE HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS OR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PER YEAR.
THAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. THEY'RE NOT JUST PAYING OUT AND NOT GETTING ANYTHING BACK FROM IT.
PLEASE, NOT FOR ME AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT FOR YOUR LEGACY.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, IN EVERY PART OF LUBBOCK, PLEASE DO NOT ELIMINATE IMPACT FEES, AND IF YOU CAN RAISE IT TO THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT, WHICH IS 50, 50.
THANKS. SEE YOU ALL NEXT TIME.
>> THANK YOU, MR. HERNANDEZ. SOMEONE ELSE COME FORWARD NOW WANTS TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TOM LANEY.
I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LUBBOCK MOONLIGHT MUSICALS.
NOT SPEAKING ABOUT 619, BUT INSTEAD, COMING UP TO JUST SAY JUST A FEW QUICK WORDS.
FIRST OFF TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK AND DEDICATION AND TIME.
THE NECESSARY AMOUNT OF TIME WHEN DEALING WITH ANY SUBJECT THAT HAS TO DO WITH TAXES, THAT HAS TO DO WITH FEES, THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE IMPACT OF THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE ALL OF THAT WORK.
I KNOW NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT ECONOMICS.
I DO NOT KNOW WHETHER ELIMINATING IMPACT FEES COMPLETELY OR RAISING THEM UP TO 50%,
[01:55:04]
WHICH ONE WOULD BE THE BEST ECONOMICALLY.I DO KNOW THAT LUBBOCK IS GROWING.
IT IS AN AMAZINGLY WONDERFUL THING TO SEE HOW FAST LUBBOCK IS GROWING.
I AM EXTREMELY HOPEFUL AND OPTIMISTIC THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS LOOKING AT THAT GROWTH, THINKING FORWARD FOR THE FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN, AND THAT TAKING ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT IS COMING FROM THESE DIFFERENT COUNCILS, THESE DIFFERENT GROUPS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE THE BEST DECISION POSSIBLE FOR OUR KIDS, FOR OUR FUTURE, AS LUBBOCK CONTINUES TO GROW.
I JUST WANTED TO COME UP REALLY QUICK AND SAY, THANK YOU FOR THAT TIME AND THAT THOUGHTFULNESS.
>> THANK YOU. THAT'S NICE TO HEAR EVERY NOW AND THEN.
SOMEONE ELSE, PLEASE. ANYONE ELSE BEFORE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? I WANT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:53 PM.
WE'LL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A PROPOSAL BY THE LUBBOCK HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE SERIES OF TAX EXEMPT MULTI FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN AN AMOUNT OF NOT MORE THAN $25 MILLION FOR THE BENEFIT OF EC HILLCREST MANOR LLC IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACQUISITION REHABILITATION AND EQUIPPING OF APPROXIMATELY 220 MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING UNITS LOCATED AT 1102 NORTH MEMPHIS AVENUE, LUBBOCK, TEXAS 79415 KNOWN AS HILLCREST MANOR APARTMENTS.
THE PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS TO HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
I'LL NOW CALL ON OUR CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER,
[9. Public Hearing - Finance: Conduct a public hearing in accordance with Section 394.9025 of the Texas Local Government Code, regarding a proposal by the Lubbock Housing Finance Corporation to issue one or more series of tax-exempt multifamily housing revenue bonds in an amount of not more than $25,000,000, for the benefit of EC Hillcrest Manor, LLC, in connection with the acquisition, rehabilitation, and equipping of approximately 220 multifamily rental housing units located at 1102 North Memphis Avenue, Lubbock, Texas, 79415, known as Hillcrest Manor Apartments.]
JOE JIMENEZ TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF THE SUBJECT FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING.>> WELL, THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
I THINK HE ADDRESSED EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO SAY ON THAT, BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR THEM TO ISSUE TAXES AND BONDS FOR APPROXIMATELY 220 HOUSES OR APARTMENTS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE USUALLY ALWAYS HAD ON CONSENT, BUT IT'S BEEN CHANGED WHERE WE NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE HAVE SHERRY HERE FROM THE PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY IF YOU NEED TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS.
>> I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS. MR. ATKINSON? YOUR NAME UP THERE.
>> I KNOW JOE MEANT TO SAY SHERRY IS WITH THE LUBBOCK HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
MAYOR, COUNCIL, I THINK MAYBE TWO OF YOU HAVE SEEN THESE IN THE PAST.
THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR WHAT'S CALLED CONDUIT DEBT.
PREVIOUSLY, WE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON IT.
IT JUST WAS AN ACTION ITEM FOR YOU.
YOU DO HAVE AN ACTION ITEM HERE IN A MOMENT.
BUT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DO THE PUBLIC HEARING, TAKE COMMENTS BOTH SIDES, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM 7.10, WHICH WOULD BE ACTUALLY THE RESOLUTION THAT APPROVES THE REQUEST.
AS NOTED IN YOUR BACKUP, AT NO POINT IS THIS A REQUEST FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK TO ISSUE THE $25 MILLION RATHER IT'S THE APPROVAL THROUGH THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FOR TAX EXEMPT DEBT RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR APARTMENT COMPLEX.
>> THANK FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. IT'S PASSED THROUGH OR PASSED BY FINANCING AND WE JUST HAVE TO BLESS IT.
>> YOU JUST ARE BEING ASKED UNDER ITEM 7.10 FOLLOWING THE HEARING TO SAY, YES, WE APPROVE THE REQUEST TO ISSUE THIS.
THE DEBT NEVER ATTACHES TO THE CITY.
IT IS NEVER BACKED BY THE CITY.
IT DOES NOT COME ONTO YOUR BOOKS IN ANY FASHION, BUT YES, SIR.
>> WE'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:56 PM.
ANYONE WISHING TO MAKE A COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM 7.9, IF YOU WOULD COME FORWARD NOW TO SPEAK ON THAT.
I SEE NONE, SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:56 PM.
WE'LL NOW TAKE UP AGENDA ITEM 7.10.
THIS IS A RESOLUTION APPROVING THIS REQUEST FROM THE LUBBOCK HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION.
SINCE WE'VE ALREADY RECEIVED THE STAFF BRIEFING, I WILL ASK IF THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.10.
IS THERE A SECOND? [NOISE] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE LET ME KNOW BY SAYING AYE.
ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY? I HEAR NONE.
THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
>> MY APOLOGIES FOR THE INTERRUPTION.
I SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS EARLIER IN OUR MEETING WHEN WE HAD THE GIANT CROWD.
[02:00:04]
THIS IS OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING AT WHICH MR. WOOD FRANKLIN WILL BE PRESENT AS A CITY EMPLOYEE.[10. Resolution - Finance: Consider a resolution approving the request by the Lubbock Housing Finance Corporation to issue one or more series of tax-exempt multifamily housing revenue bonds, in an amount of not more than $25,000,000, for the benefit of EC Hillcrest Manor, LLC, in connection with the acquisition, rehabilitation, and equipping of approximately 220 multifamily rental housing units located at 1102 North Memphis Avenue, Lubbock, Texas 79415 known as Hillcrest Manor Apartments.]
WE'VE GOT A RETIREMENT PARTY COMING UP FOR HIM I GUESS IT'S THE END OF NEXT WEEK.RIGHT WOOD? IT'S ON THE CALENDAR.
I JUST CAN'T GET TO IT, JUST YET.
THAT'LL ALL BE ON Y'ALL AS WELL.
JUST FROM ME AND ON BEHALF OF THE STAFF OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, WOOD, WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE, WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR US.
COUNCIL, YOU'VE SEEN THE WORK THAT HE'S DONE JUST OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, BUT HE HAS DONE THAT FOR US FOR THE PAST 25 YEARS.
WOOD, THANK YOU SO MUCH. WE APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU, WOOD. [APPLAUSE]
WE'VE EXHAUSTED ALL OUR ITEMS IN OUR AGENDA, SO THIS MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.