[00:00:01]
          ALL RIGHT. I WILL NOW OPEN THE 
          [1. Executive Session]
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR LUBBOCK CITY COUNCIL FOR AUGUST 25, 2026. CITY COUNCIL WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 551.071 TO CONSULT WITH AND SEEK THE ADVICE OF THE CITY'S LEGAL COUNSEL AND 551.074 TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS. 
          THE CITY COUNCIL IS RECESSING AT 12:05 PM. CALL THIS MEETING BACK INTO SESSION AFTER OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND WE ARE GOING TO TAKE UP A WORK SESSION. AND HOW LONG DO YOU THINK OUR WORK SESSION WILL GO TODAY, MR. MANAGER? MAYOR? THAT'LL BE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ON. 
          THAT'LL BE UP TO THE COUNCIL. 
          PROBABLY 25 MINUTES OR SO. 
          ALL RIGHT. WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE IF WE GO AHEAD AND GET OUR CEREMONIAL ITEMS OUT OF THE WAY TODAY? BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE HERE. ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO, WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED TO OUR CEREMONIAL ITEMS AT THIS TIME. AND I'M GOING 
          [1. Invocation]
TO CALL ON CHAPLAIN LANCE TAMPLIN WITH GENTIVA HOSPICE TO LEAD US IN OUR INVOCATION, AFTER WHICH OUR MAYOR PRO TEM WILL LEAD US IN OUR PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE. SO PLEASE STAND AS YOU ARE ABLE. ALL RIGHT, SO I KNOW WE'RE PRAYING FOR A COUPLE OF. WE HAVE THE BUDGET MEETING, RIGHT? AND BOY, THAT'S NOT FUN. READ A JOKE THAT SAID, WHAT DOES POLITICS AND RELIGION HAVE IN COMMON? PEOPLE WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH FOR BOTH OF THEM AND NOBODY REALLY KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE TOP. SO, IN ANY WAYS. 
          AND OF COURSE, FOR THE MORATORIUM REGARDING DATA CENTERS. SO, I DOWNLOADED A PRAYER FROM CHATGPT. I'M KIDDING. JUST SORRY, GUYS. 
          LORD, WE JUST THANK YOU FOR THIS CITY, FOR THE PEOPLE WHO CALL IT HOME, FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ACCEPTED THIS RESPONSIBILITY OF SERVING AND LEADING OUR COMMUNITY. LORD, AS THE COUNCIL CONSIDERS THE ANNUAL BUDGET AND THE IMPORTANT MATTERS BEFORE THEM, I JUST ASK THAT YOU WOULD GRANT EACH MEMBER WISDOM AND DISCERNMENT, PATIENCE AND COURAGE. AND TO REMIND US THAT EVERY NUMBER, PROPOSAL, DECISION, THAT THERE IS A PERSON, A FAMILY, A BUSINESS, A NEIGHBORHOOD BEHIND IT, GENERATIONS ARE AFFECTED BY THE CHOICES THAT ARE MADE HERE. 
          SO, LORD, IF THERE'S DISAGREEMENT, GRANT US RESPECT WHERE THERE IS TENSION. GIVE US PEACE WHERE THERE IS COMPETING INTERESTS. LET US LISTEN CAREFULLY TO ONE ANOTHER AND SEEK UNDERSTANDING BEFORE JUDGMENT. GIVE OUR LEADERS WISDOM TO LOOK BEYOND THE PRESSURE AND THE MOMENTS AND CONSIDER BOTH THE IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND THE LONG-TERM WELL-BEING OF THIS GREAT COMMUNITY. HELP THEM TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE RESOURCES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ENTRUSTED TO THEM. MAY TODAY'S DECISIONS BE GUIDED NOT BY ANGER, FEAR OR PERSONAL INTERESTS, BUT BY WISDOM, INTEGRITY, COMPASSION AND A SINCERE DESIRE TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY. BLESS THIS COUNCIL, BLESS ALL THOSE WHO SERVE IN THIS COMMUNITY AND BLESS EVERY CITIZEN WHO IS REPRESENTED HERE IN JESUS NAME. AMEN. THANK YOU. 
          [2. Pledges of Allegiance]
NOW, IF YOU'LL JOIN ME IN OUR PLEDGES OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES AND TEXAS FLAG. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG; I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, CHAPLAIN. JUST YESTERDAY I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CUT A RIBBON FOR A NEW BUSINESS IN TOWN, GECU, A CREDIT UNION. THEY HAD A TENT, NICE TIME THERE, PREPARED FOR THAT. AND THEY STARTED OFF WITH THE MILITARY, BROUGHT IN THE COLORS AND WE ALL PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG THERE. 
          AND THEN THEIR PRESIDENT, CEO, I GUESS IT WAS, GOT UP AND THEY SAID, AS WE ALWAYS DO ON THESE OCCASIONS, WE ALWAYS BEGIN WITH A PRAYER. AND SO, HE LED OFF WITH A PRAYER. AND I WAS SITTING THERE WHEN WE WERE DOING THE PLEDGES, I SAID, MAN, ALL WE NEED NOW IS JUST A PRAYER. AND HE GOT UP AND LED THE PRAYER. AND I TOLD HIM, I SAID, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THIS TOWN IS JUST A GREAT PLACE. 
          [00:05:02]
YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO FIT IN WELL HERE IN LUBBOCK, AND THIS IS A GREAT COMMUNITY. AND I APPRECIATED THAT PRAYER. IT REALLY SPOKE TO WHAT WE ARE ALL TRYING TO DO HERE. AND YOU KNOW, WE DON'T SAY THIS OFTEN FROM UP HERE, BUT WE DO APPRECIATE THE PRAYERS OF PEOPLE, NOT JUST THOSE WHO AGREE WITH US, BUT THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH US AS WELL. IT MEANS A LOT TO US. SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          WE HAVE A NEW SYSTEM WE ARE WORKING WITH TODAY AND SO SOMETIMES THERE MAY BE SOME CONFUSION ON MY FACE OR OTHERS AS WE TRY TO MAKE SURE HOW WE ARE OPERATING IT. THEY'VE GONE THROUGH EVERYTHING WITH ME AND TRIED TO TEACH ME, BUT I'M AN OLD GUY AND I DON'T LEARN AS WELL AS I USED TO. SO, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING OPERATES AS IT AS IT CAN. BUT BE PATIENT WITH US AT TIMES IF WE DO HAVE A LITTLE DIFFICULTY GETTING THINGS TO WORK. BUT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE UP OUR WORK SESSION NOW. 
          WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS ON OUR WORK SESSION AGENDA. 
          [1. Presentation and discussion of the Proposed FY 2026-27 Operating Budget and Capital Program, and discuss all funds of the City, including but not limited to General Fund, Debt Service Fund, Internal Services, Enterprise Funds, Special Revenue Funds, Component Units, Related Entities, Debt and Debt Obligations, and Capital Improvement Program, and provide direction to the City Manager to make changes to said Budget.]
AND SO, LET'S START OFF WITH ITEM 2.1, MR. CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL. THE FIRST TWO WILL GO VERY QUICKLY AND I WILL NOTE YOU HAVE HARD COPIES OF THESE AT YOUR PLACE. IN ADDITION, THEY HAVE ALL BEEN EMAILED TO YOU. BUT JUST REAL QUICK, WE'VE HANDED OUT AN UPDATED RESERVE SHEET. I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE ONE CHANGE THAT'S ON THAT FROM WHAT YOU SAW IN YOUR WORK SESSIONS. WE NOW HAVE LUBBOCK POWER AND LIGHT AS AN ENTERPRISE FUND OF THE CITY, REPORTED WITH THE ENTERPRISES. THEY PRESENTED YOU THESE NUMBERS, BUT THEY WERE INSIDE OF THEIR OPERATING BUDGETS AND THEIR CASH FLOWS. BUT THEY'RE NOW, ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. SO THAT IS ONE. WE'LL MOVE OVER TO THE SECOND. YOU ALSO HAVE COPIES OF THIS. THIS IS YOUR MOST RECENT SALES TAX REPORT. I WOULD NOTE THAT IT ACTUALLY CAME OUT THE DAY AFTER YOUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCIL MEETING WAS THE 11TH. THIS CAME OUT THE 12TH. DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE ROW THAT STARTS WITH JUNE. SO, MONEY THAT WAS SPENT IN JUNE IS REPORTED OR PAID BACK TO THE CITY IN AUGUST. 
          YOU SEE, OUR ACTUAL NUMBER WAS 10.2 MILLION, WHICH WAS COMPARED TO A BUDGET NUMBER OF 9.7. SO VERY GOOD THERE. ONE OF THE THINGS I ALWAYS TRY TO DO IF WE'RE TRYING TO SORT OUT A TREND IS LOOK AT THE PRIOR SAME MONTH IN THE PRIOR YEAR, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT WAS 8.7 MILLION VERSUS 10.2 IN THE CURRENT. SO THAT'S GOING TO LEAD RIGHT INTO THE NEXT SET OF SLIDES THAT I HAVE. BECAUSE OF THAT AND US UPDATING THE SALES TAX MODEL, WE'RE GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE INCREASE THE SALES TAX REVENUE BUDGET BY JUST SLIGHTLY OVER $1 MILLION. I WOULD NOTE EVEN WHEN WE DO THAT, IT ACTUALLY REDUCES THE PERCENT OVER BUDGET THAT WE HAVE TO ACHIEVE TO GET THERE. SO, THIS YEAR HAS BEEN VERY POSITIVE AND IT'S LOOKING VERY GOOD. JOE AND HIS TEAM, MYSELF, WERE VERY COMFORTABLE WITH BEING ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          SO, WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE OVER INTO THESE. SO, AND I WANT TO GIVE A MOMENT TO THANK EVERYONE OF Y'ALL THAT HAVE CONTACTED ME THAT HAS WORKED WITH US. THIS NEXT SET THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE. 
          WE'VE TRIED TO PUT TOGETHER FOUR POTENTIAL COMBINATIONS OF WHAT YOUR BUDGET AND YOUR TAX RATES WOULD LOOK LIKE, REALLY BASED ON THE BIG DECISIONS. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL CAN CHANGE ANY ONE OF THEM, BUT WITH THAT, I'LL GO TO THE FIRST. SO, THIS SLIDE IS BASED ON THE BUDGET AS I PRESENTED, PLUS THE TWO POTENTIAL MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENTS. SO, YOUR NOTES. AGAIN, WE'VE INCREASED THE SALES TAX REVENUE BUDGET BY $1,001,999. THAT'S A DIRECT REDUCTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX. WE HAVE REMOVED THE ONE ADDITIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST THAT WAS IN THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY ITEMS. THAT'S JUST UNDER $79,000. TAKE THOSE TWO TOGETHER, IT'S A MILLION AND EIGHTY THOUSAND. 
          WITH THAT, FOR THE BASE BUDGET, THIS BRINGS YOUR BASE BUDGET TO ABOUT 4/10 OF 1% OVER THE NO NEW REVENUE RATE, OR APPROXIMATELY $388,000. THE NUMBERS THAT MAKE THAT HAPPEN ARE LISTED BELOW. SO, THE BASE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS WOULD BE 0.369160. THE MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENTS, IF BOTH OF THOSE ARE APPROVED, THAT'S 0.03220. AND I PUT THE DOLLAR EQUIVALENT OUT TO THE SIDE OF THAT SO THAT YOU CAN SEE IT. 
          [00:10:02]
TOTAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, THE INS RATE, THE DEBT SERVICE RATE. AND REMEMBER, WE'VE HELD THAT RATE FLAT FROM LAST YEAR. SO, THIS NUMBER DOESN'T CHANGE THROUGH THE FOUR OPTIONS THAT I HAVE UP HERE TODAY. FOR A TOTAL TAX RATE, 0.508946. COMPARE THAT WITH WHERE WE WERE WHEN WE DID THE WORKSHOPS, WHICH WAS 0.513421. 
          THE BOTTOM. I'VE SUMMED THOSE TWO NUMBERS. THE 388,000. 
          THAT'S OVER NO NEW REVENUE. 
          THE DOLLARS FOR MEET AND CONFER, THAT'S WHAT YOUR ACTUAL CHANGE IS IN DOLLARS. OKAY, WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THIS WILL SHOW YOU THE IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE HOME. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE $107.06 OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO THOSE TWO GO TOGETHER. I'LL JUMP RIGHT INTO THE NEXT. THIS IS THE BASE BUDGET AS PROPOSED WITHOUT EITHER OF THE TWO MEET AND CONFERS. 
          SAME DEDUCTS AND ADDS THAT I HAD ON THE FIRST PAGE. 
          BUT WE NOW HAVE TO ADD BACK THE 3% REQUIRED RAISE FOR BOTH THE LUBBOCK POLICE DEPARTMENT, LUBBOCK FIRE RESCUE, AS WELL AS THE STEP PAY. REMEMBER THAT THERE'S AN $800,000 SAVINGS FIRST YEAR. 
          THAT'S INSIDE THE LPFFA AGREEMENT. SO THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK AS EXPENSE. CARRY THAT FORWARD. HERE'S WHAT YOU GET. SAME BASE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. STILL THE SAME 4/10 OF 1% TAX RATE THAT SUPPORTS THE 3% RAISED STEP THE EXPENSE, TOTAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION INS. NOW YOU HAVE 0.497364. 
          AND TO THE RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE WHAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN OTHERWISE. DOLLARS ARE TOTALED ON THE BOTTOM LEFT. OKAY, MOVE THAT OVER. THIS IS THE IMPACT OF WHAT YOU JUST SAW ON THE AVERAGE HOME. AND IT'S $80.49 OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR. $80.49 OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR. 
          START ON THE THIRD. THIS ONE IS THE BASE BUDGET WITH THE FIRE MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENT. 
          SO, THE POLICE MEET AND CONFER IS NOT IN HERE. SO, YOU STILL HAVE TO COME BACK WITH THE 3% FOR LPD PLUS THE STEP PAY. 
          CARRY IT DOWN HERE. AND YOU CAN SEE NOW THERE'S THREE COMPONENTS ON YOUR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. THOSE TOTAL TO 0.394321. BOTTOM LINE, TOTAL TAX RATE 0.501907. AND HERE'S THE IMPACT ON THE AVERAGE HOME. IT IS $90.91 ACROSS THE 12 MONTHS. 
          AND THEN THE FOURTH, THIS IS THE BASE BUDGET WITH THE POLICE MEET AND CONFER, BUT NOT FIRE. SO THOSE SAME NOTES PICK BACK UP AT THE TOP AGAIN THREE COMPONENTS OF WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TOTAL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS. ADD BACK THE SAME INS RATE AND YOUR TOTAL TAX RATE UNDER THIS 0.508037. 
          CONVERT THAT TO THE AVERAGE HOME AND IT'S $104.98. SO NOW I'M GOING TO ATTEMPT TO MAKE ALL OF THAT NUMERICAL SPAGHETTI A LITTLE BIT SIMPLER. THERE'S THE FOUR SIDE BY SIDE. SO, MAYOR, FOR TODAY'S BUDGET WORKSHOP, THAT IS MY PRESENTATION. I TURN IT OVER TO YOU AND TO THE COUNCIL. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, MR. ATKINSON. ARE THERE QUESTIONS? OKAY. OKAY, THAT CHANGED A LITTLE BIT. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE TO WATCH THIS STUFF AND SEE IF ANYBODY'S ASKING QUESTIONS. ANYBODY ASKING QUESTIONS TODAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, HANG ON JUST ONE SECOND. I'M LOOKING TO SEE. MR. GREEN HAS COME UP. 
          I'M GOING TO DEFER MY TIME TO TIM FIRST, MR. COLLINS FIRST. 
          AND THEN BECAUSE I'M GOING TO BE LONG WINDED. OKAY. 
          OKAY, MR. COLLINS. SO VERY SIMPLE QUESTION, MR. ATKINSON. THE REMOVAL OF ONE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST. WE HAD NOT HEARD ABOUT THAT. CAN YOU GIVE US A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THAT CHANGE? IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, BACK DURING THE BUDGET WORKSHOP, 
          [00:15:02]
I HAD A LITTLE OVER $1.55 MILLION THAT WE HAD ADDED TO THE BASE BUDGET. THAT WERE ALL PUBLIC SAFETY. THOSE INCLUDED CIVILIAN POSITIONS AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, LARGE NUMBER OF POSITIONS AT LUBBOCK ANIMAL SERVICES, A RECLASSIFICATION FOR OUR FIRE EMERGENCY VEHICLE TECHNICIANS, THEIR MECHANICS AND LIGHT DUTY EQUIPMENT FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, PLUS THE ONE ADDITIONAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST. I STILL THINK THAT'S A WORTHY ADDITION. 
          I DON'T FEEL LIKE I NEED TO DO IT NOW. AND YOU'LL SEE WHEN WE GET TO THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. I EXPECT THE LEGISLATURE TO HAVE A LOT TO DO WITH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DURING THEIR NEXT SESSION. I THINK MOST APPROPRIATELY I SHOULD BRING THAT BACK FOR YOUR FOLLOWING YEAR'S BUDGET. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. GREEN. IS IT? OKAY, POINT OF ORDER, I GUESS. IS THIS WHERE WE ARE GONNA. WE'RE NOT GONNA AMEND ANYTHING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. WE ARE. THIS IS JUST DISCUSSION TODAY WITH THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE BUDGET. OKAY. AND IT'S A FREE FOR ALL DISCUSSION TODAY. 
          NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON ANYTHING. SO OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS, I WANT TO THANK MR. ATKINSON AND HIS STAFF FOR WORKING DILIGENTLY WITH ME AND TO TRY TO KIND OF WRAP MY HEAD AROUND THIS BUDGET. AND WE'VE JUST WANT TO GIVE A CONTEXT OF WHERE I AM ON THIS BUDGET AND WHAT I BELIEVE WHAT WE SHOULD DO MOVING FORWARD AND WHAT I'M GOING TO ASK OF THIS COUNCIL MOVING FORWARD. 
          YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN UNPRECEDENTED TIMES WHERE LAST MEETING WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE REASON WE'RE IN A SO CALLED BUDGET CRUNCH IS BECAUSE OF OUR NEW REVENUE WAS WIPED OUT FROM A TAX EXEMPTION VOTED ON PROPOSITION 9 LAST YEAR AND IMPLEMENTED IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. SO WE HAD $453 MILLION IN NEW REVENUE AND 436 MILLION OF THAT WAS WIPED AWAY BY THE EXEMPTION TO SMALL BUSINESSES. AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS FOR CITIZENS IS WHEN SOMEONE GETS AN EXEMPTION, THEN EVERYBODY ELSE HAS TO PAY MORE. IT'S KIND OF THE BASIS FOR AN EXEMPTION. WHEN YOUR NEIGHBOR TURNS 65 AND THEY GET A FREEZE ON THEIR TAX RATE OR THEIR TAX, THEY GET A FREEZE ON THEIR TAX AMOUNT THAT THEY WILL BE PAYING. FOR INSTANCE, I'LL USE MY DAD, WHEN HE TURNED 65 IN 1998, HE PAYS $754 A MONTH OR A YEAR IN PROPERTY TAXES. HE'S 93 NOW AND HE PAYS $754 IN PROPERTY TAXES. BEEN DOING IT FOREVER. THAT SPREADS, THAT'S GOOD FOR THE ELDERLY, AND I AGREE WITH IT, BUT IT SPREADS THE TAX BURDEN ONTO US. 
          SAME THING WITH EXEMPTIONS. SO IF YOU BELIEVE THAT, WHAT MY POINT IS, WHEN WE GET, WHEN WE HAVE NO NEW GROWTH, WHICH THIS IS LIKE NO NEW GROWTH, THEN OUR TAX RATE GOES UP ON EVERY CITIZEN. SO IF YOU'RE, IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEORY, THIS IS PROOF THAT THAT'S THE WAY IT HAPPENS. SO WITH THAT, I WANT. LET ME MAKE ONE POINT BECAUSE I SAW THE CITY MANAGER, OKAY, IT'S NOT NEW REVENUE THAT WAS WIPED OUT. IT WAS NEW PROPERTY VALUATION THAT WAS WIPED OUT. 
          AND THE REVENUE DOES COME OFF OF THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. AND THAT'S ONLY $1.5 BILLION IN NEW REVENUE WAS WIPED OUT. I'M SORRY, THAT TAX VALUATION, $456 MILLION IN TAX VALUATION WAS IN NEW GROWTH, 453 MILLION IN TAX VALUATION. THANK YOU FOR CORRECTING ME. WAS WIPED OUT. SO I SHOULD READ MY NOTES INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MEMORIZE. SO THE CITY HAS PUT TOGETHER A BUDGET THAT I THINK WAS VERY FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE. THEY DECREASED, WE DECREASED THE ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES 2.4% ONE OF THE ONLY AREAS THAT THE GENERAL FUND WENT UP WAS 4.1 IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND 0.5% IN CULTURAL AND RECREATIONAL SERVICES. PUBLIC WORKS WENT DOWN. PUBLIC SAFETY WENT UP 1.6 WITHOUT MEET AND CONFER. SO WHEN WE GET TO MEET AND CONFER, IT'S LIKE SIMILAR TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, JUST FOR THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT THE 
          [00:20:01]
FIREFIGHTERS AND THE POLICE BRING US A PROPOSAL THAT WE ACCEPT OR DENY. WE CAN EITHER ACCEPT IT OR WE CAN DENY IT AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER INPUT IN IT. SO WHEN WE, WHEN I GOT THESE PROPOSALS, WE ALL, ALL SEVEN OF US LOOKED AT IT AND YOU KNOW, ONE FOR, ONE FOR THE POLICE AND ONE FOR THE FIREFIGHTERS. THE FIREFIGHTERS PROPOSALS BASED ON CHANGING A 56 HOUR WORKWEEK TO A 42 HOUR WORK WEEK OVER SIX YEARS. IT WAS A VERY EXTENSIVE, DELIBERATE, STRATEGICALLY WELL PLANNED PROPOSAL. AND IT ONLY COST THE FIRST YEAR A LITTLE OVER ONE AND A HALF MILLION. 
          IT'S THREE MILLION. BUT ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IT WOULD NORMALLY BE IS ABOUT A ONE AND A HALF. IS THAT CORRECT? WHEN COMPARED TO A THREE PERCENT RAISE. WHEN COMPARED TO A THREE PERCENT RAISE, IT'S ONLY ONE. OKAY, ONLY ONE AND A HALF. SO I'M GOING TO ACCEPT, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT. I'M GOING TO ACCEPT THAT PROPOSAL. IT'S A REALLY WELL THOUGHT OUT PROPOSAL. AND UNFORTUNATELY ON THE OTHER SIDE WE HAVE A PROPOSAL FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT'S JUST A ONE YEAR PROPOSAL THAT INCREASES $4.8 MILLION. AND THAT'S ABOUT 3 MILLION ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT A 3% PROPOSAL OR 3% RAISE WOULD BE. SO I'VE GOT A ALTERNATIVE IF YOU WILL INDULGE. I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY NEEDS THOSE OR NOT. 
          SO I'VE GOT A SCENARIO WHERE I DON'T. WE NEED, WE NEED NEW POLICE OFFICERS. I WANT TO IMPLEMENT A FIVE YEAR PLAN FOR MANY REASONS. ONE, I MEAN, THE MAIN THING IS THAT WE WILL HAVE A DIRECTION FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO SIX YEARS FOR THE FIREFIGHTERS AND THE POLICE OFFICERS. THE FIREFIGHTERS. WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO BE SPENDING NEXT YEAR, THE NEXT YEAR, THE NEXT YEAR, ALL THE WAY TO THE YEAR SIX. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THAT IN THE, WITH THE, WITH THE POLICE OFFICERS TOO. 
          AND I'VE PRESENTED A PLAN THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR THE POLICE TO LOOK AT AND EVERYBODY ELSE FOR NEXT YEAR TO BRING AS A PROPOSAL THAT WILL INCREASE SALARIES 25% OVER FIVE YEARS BECAUSE THEY'RE WANTING OR. I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT THAT IT'S 23% OVER FIVE YEARS AND 30 NEW OFFICERS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. 
          AFTER THIS YEAR, I JUST FEEL LIKE THE 4.8 MILLION RIGHT NOW FOR THIS BUDGET AND WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW IS NOT DOABLE. 
          AND I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE ACCEPT PROPOSAL NUMBER THREE. YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE SCREEN ON OUR PROPOSALS OF I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE A $90 INCREASE TO OUR CITIZENS AND A. WE'RE PULLING IT UP. EITHER ONE. I GUESS THE, THE FOUR PROPOSALS. WE'LL JUST LOOK AT THE RATE FIRST. IT'S ON PAGE SIX. MAKE THE SWITCH LACEY. AND WE'RE WORKING WITH A NEW SYSTEM HERE. SO THE RATE WOULD BE 50.1 AS OPPOSED TO 50.8. THERE IT IS. SO PROPOSAL THREE. THERE WE GO. 
          SO PROPOSAL THREE WOULD BE A 50.1 TOTAL TAX RATE. AND I BELIEVE AGAIN THAT THIS GIVES US MORE OF A STRATEGIC PLAN AND CLARITY FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS AND THE FIREFIGHTERS GOING FORWARD. 
          [00:25:03]
IT'S THE POLICE AND FIRE IS PROBABLY 2/3 OF OUR BUDGET, MAYBE CLOSE TO A LITTLE BETTER THAN LITTLE BETTER THAN 2/3 OF OUR BUDGET. THIS GIVES US CLARITY AND STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE FUTURE FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO SIX YEARS THAT WE COULD IMPLEMENT AND GET THE THINGS WE NEED WITHOUT AS LARGE OF AN EXPENSE THIS YEAR AND MOVING FORWARD WITH HOPEFULLY SOME STRATEGIC GROWTH PLANS IN THE WORKS THAT WE MIGHT CAN LOWER THE TAX RATE FOR THE CITIZENS IN THE FUTURE. BUT THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THAT AMOUNT OF TIME. I'M GLAD JAIL DIDN'T GIVE ME THE THREE MINUTE. NO, WE GOT A NEW CLOCK. THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT ON THAT. AND I'M OPEN FOR QUESTIONS ON THAT PROPOSAL. THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING THAT. THANKS FOR BRINGING STUFF WITH YOU FOR US TO LOOK AT. AND SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOUR, YOUR THOUGHT ON THIS WAS JUST THE 3% RAISE FOR THE. AND NO NEW OFFICERS THIS YEAR, THIS WOULD BEGIN NEXT YEAR. 
          THAT'S CORRECT. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS NOT THE YEAR TO IMPLEMENT BOTH OF THESE PROGRAMS AT ONCE. THE FIREFIGHTERS IS A SIX YEAR AND THIS ONE IS A FIVE YEAR. SO THEY'LL RUN CONSECUTIVELY. BUT THE FIREFIGHTERS WILL START THIS YEAR AND THE POLICE WILL START NEXT YEAR. IS YOUR IDEA TO SUBMIT THIS TO THE POLICE OFFICERS OR THEIR ASSOCIATION? YES. TO CONSIDER AS A MEET AND CONFER AGREEMENT THAT THAT'S CORRECT AND NOT NECESSARILY TO ADOPT IT AS IS, BUT TO GIVE THEM A BLUEPRINT OF SOMETHING THAT I FEEL LIKE IS A GOOD STARTING POINT, A GOOD STRATEGIC PLAN. AND IF THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S ONE OTHER CAVEAT WE DIDN'T PUT IN THESE NUMBERS THAT I BELIEVE WE CAN DO IS OVER TIME THIS WILL SAVE US A LITTLE BIT OF OVERTIME. SO SOME OF THOSE NUMBERS WILL START, WILL DECREASE A LITTLE BIT BASED ON MAYBE BRINGING IN SOME MORE OVERTIME OR REDUCING OVERTIME. WHEN WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE FORCE. THAT'S. THAT'S FORCE BEING THE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED OFFICERS. THAT'S POSSIBLE. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD OCCUR TILL VERY LATE. 
          OKAY. OR POSSIBLY IN THE NEXT ITERATION. 
          BUT YEAH. OKAY. AND LET ME JUST ASK MR. ATKINSON. I'M LOOKING AT HIS TOTAL VEHICLE, EQUIPMENT COST FOR SIX NEW OFFICERS. 670. MY THOUGHT IS THAT'S PROBABLY UNDERESTIMATING THE COST OF SIX OFFICERS AND EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES. 
          TO GET THESE NUMBERS RUN. THE VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT COST IS THE CURRENT COST, SO IT WILL CHANGE OVER TIME. 
          WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH. HIS COMPENSATION NUMBERS DO ACCOUNT FOR THE COMPOUNDING, BUT NOT ON THE VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT. 
          WE TOOK THE CURRENT NUMBER, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 111,000, AND MULTIPLIED IT OUT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, I GOTCHA. ALL RIGHT. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. GREEN? AND I'M LOOKING TO SEE HOW I KNOW. OKAY, MAYOR PRO TEM. OH, LET'S SEE. OKAY, THANK YOU, MAYOR. I THINK MY QUESTION IS MORE TOWARDS JARRETT. IN THE CURRENT POLICE MEET AND CONFER, SINCE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE AGREEMENT, THE 10 NEW OFFICER POSITIONS, WERE THEY GOING TO BE PATROL POSITIONS? I MEAN, STARTING FROM THE BOTTOM AND LIKE, WERE THEY GOING TO STAY. SO I THINK MY QUESTION IS, WERE WE GOING TO ADD 10 NEW PATROL THAT WERE EVERYBODY WAS GOING TO STAY COLLECTIVELY ON PATROL OR IS IT GOING TO SHIFT WHO IS CURRENTLY ON PATROL INTO HIGHER LEVEL POSITIONS AND THE PATROL NUMBER WILL STAY THE SAME? THE 10 POSITIONS ARE DESIGNED TO BE PATROL. IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY. 
          IN ADDITION TO WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE. 
          THE CHIEF, OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR, ALLOCATES PERSONNEL INTO UNITS AS MOST, YOU KNOW, HIT WHATEVER THE NEED HAPPENS TO BE. THE MEET AND CONFER PROPOSAL IS BASED ON TIN PATROL. ALL RIGHT. I'M STILL LOOKING FOR INFORMATION. I'VE GOT THREE OUT OF FOUR. OKAY. YOURS IS STILL GREEN. SORRY ABOUT THIS. ANYBODY ELSE UP? ALL RIGHT. I GUESS AGAIN, MY THOUGHT ON THIS WOULD BE WE WOULD BE ADDING 22 NEW FIREMEN THIS YEAR AND NO NEW POLICE OFFICERS. THAT'S KIND OF MY CONCERN WITH YOUR PROPOSAL I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING 
          [00:30:01]
AND I RAN ON ADDING NEW POLICE OFFICERS. 
          SO I REALLY, IN MY MIND, I HAVE TO SEE A PLAN THAT ADDS POLICE OFFICERS THIS YEAR AS A PRIORITY. I THINK PUBLICLY THAT IS A PRIORITY. I UNDERSTAND THE MEET AND CONFER THAT THE FIREMEN ARE BRINGING TO US. 
          AND I THINK I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT IT A LONG TIME. I THINK IT IS. 
          I'VE HAD MY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LENGTH OF IT. SIX YEARS SEEMS VERY LONG. 
          BUT I THINK IT DOES WORK OUT OVER TIME TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY AND THE FIREMEN. 
          SO I'VE KIND OF COME AROUND ON IT. IT'S TAKEN ME A LITTLE WHILE, BUT I AGAIN FEEL LIKE WE CANNOT POSTPONE OR PUT OFF DOING WHAT WE NEED TO DO FOR OUR POLICE. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST. I APPRECIATE THIS AND MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN WORK WITH OFF OF WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED AND I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON IT. 
          AND DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CONVERSATIONS? COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ-GARCIA. THANK YOU. 
          MAYOR. THANK YOU, TIM. I APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT. I THINK THE WHOLE POINT FOR ME WITH MEET AND CONFER IS THAT WE WORK WITH THESE DEPARTMENTS, WE GET THEIR INPUT ON WHAT THEY NEED, AND THIS CITY IS GROWING AND WHETHER WE WANT TO FACE THAT GROWTH OR NOT, WE ARE LIKE GEARING TOWARDS 300,000 PEOPLE VERY SOON. WE HAVE OFFICERS THAT ARE DOING A LOT TO COVER A LOT OF CITIZENS. AND I THINK THAT WE WORKED WITH THEM AND MAYBE THEY NEED SOME TWEAKING, BUT WE ASKED FOR THEIR INPUT. 
          WE SAT AT A TABLE WITH THEM AND WE ASKED FOR THEIR INPUT AND WE NEED TO LET THEM DO WHAT OR THEY'VE OFFERED IT AND WE NEED TO CONSIDER IT. THAT'S WHAT. 
          AND YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, I APPRECIATE BOTH OF THEM, BUT WE CAN'T ADD FIREFIGHTERS AND NO POLICE OFFICERS WHEN IT'S EVIDENT THERE IS A GROWING NEED BASED ON POPULATION GROWTH. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT INPUT, BUT I JUST DON'T FEEL LIKE WE CAN'T CONSIDER INCLUDING WHAT THE OFFICERS ARE WANTING. 
          THANK YOU. I WISH I KNEW WHO WAS NEXT IN THE QUEUE, BUT I THINK IT WAS YOU, MR. GREEN. OR WAS IT YOU? I THINK IT'S ME. OKAY. DR. WILSON. 
          MAYOR, I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO ECHO WHAT YOU SAID, KIND OF. COUNCILMAN GREEN, I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE ONE OF THE, KIND OF THE FORESIGHTS THAT YOU'RE HAVING ON MORE OF A LONG TERM AGREEMENT. AND I WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE OUR POLICE ASSOCIATION NEXT YEAR POTENTIALLY TO BRING A LONGER AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT DOES HELP WITH FUTURE PLANNING FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND FOR OUR CFO TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF PLAN THESE OUT VERSUS A YEAR OVER YEAR AGREEMENT. SO I DO THINK MORE THAN ONE YEAR IS, IS REASONABLE AND A BETTER PLANNING STRATEGY. I DO AGREE WITH THE MAYOR THAT ADDING ZERO OFFICERS THIS YEAR RAISES SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS. AND SO, BUT I LIKE THE STRUCTURE OF THE COMPENSATION PLAN, TIM. 
          A LOT. LIKE THINKING OUT THAT FORESIGHT OF MULTIPLE YEARS TO COME VERSUS LET'S JUST, YOU KNOW, HACK THIS OUT EVERY SINGLE YEAR. 
          BUT I DO HAVE SOME WORRIES WITH NOT ADDING OFFICERS THIS YEAR AS WELL. MR. GREEN. OKAY. SO HERE'S, HERE'S THE DEAL. 
          THEY, THEY DID GIVE US, THEY WENT AND THEY DID GIVE US A PLAN AND A PROPOSAL. IT WAS A BAD ONE, IT WAS NOT A GOOD ONE. AND WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT IT. WE CAN MOD, WE, WE CAN'T MODIFY IT, BUT WE CAN SUGGEST SOMETHING ELSE. AND I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS FOR THIS YEAR, BUT ACCEPTING THIS ONE YEAR PLAN FOR MY JOB IS TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF LUBBOCK, POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS AND ESPECIALLY THEIR POCKETBOOK. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS A GOOD PLAN FOR MY OR MY CONSTITUENTS AND OUR CITIZENS THAT WE ACCEPT A 10, 10 OFFICER AND 5% RAISE FOR 4.8 MILLION THIS YEAR. I REALLY, THAT'S WHY WE PUT IT IN A FIVE YEAR PLAN TO INCREASE. I THINK IT'S BETTER, I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S BETTER FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS. THE POLICE OFFICERS. WE GET 30 NEW OFFICERS OVER THE NEXT SIX YEARS BECAUSE THE FIRST YEAR WE GET NONE AGAIN. I'M WILLING TO ENTERTAIN TWO OR THREE NEW 
          [00:35:01]
SPOTS THIS YEAR MAYBE, BUT NOT ENTERTAIN THE 5% RAISE. 
          THE 5% RAISE WILL START NEXT YEAR AND THEN AS THE PUBLIC HASN'T SEEN MY PROJECTIONS, BUT IT GOES 5%, 4%, 5%, 4%, 5% OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. AND EACH YEAR WE'LL ADD SIX OFFICERS TO THE FORCE TO GET A 30 YEAR OR 30 OFFICERS IN THE NEXT SIX YEARS. SO I REALLY FEEL LIKE I'M TRYING TO PUT A BETTER DEAL OUT THERE FOR YOU GUYS AND YOUR POCKETBOOK BECAUSE A ONE YEAR DEAL. AS A BUSINESS OWNER, I'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO DO CONTRACTS WITH MY EMPLOYEES. IT'S ALWAYS A BETTER DEAL THAN TO DO A ONE YEAR DEAL EVERY YEAR BECAUSE. 
          AND IT'S GOOD FOR THE EMPLOYEE TOO. THE EMPLOYEES KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE. THEY CAN PLAN, THEY CAN PLAN THEIR LIVES AROUND KNOWING WHAT KIND OF RAISE THEY'RE GOING TO GET NEXT YEAR. WE COULD GO ZERO, SAY LET'S HAVE A BAD YEAR. WE COULD GO ZERO PERCENT FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS, 5% THIS YEAR, ZERO PERCENT NEXT YEAR. THEY DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS COMING, BUT IT COULD BECAUSE WE, WE COULD DO THAT IF WE HAVE A BAD YEAR. THIS GIVES STABILITY, IT'S STRATEGIC AND IT GIVES ESPECIALLY OUR STAFF THE ABILITY TO PLAN AHEAD AND WE CAN SEE WHAT'S COMING AS OPPOSED TO GUESSING WHAT'S COMING. AND I COMPLETELY AGREE, DR. WILSON AND COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ-GARCIA THAT WE NEED POLICE OFFICERS ON THE GRAND MAYOR. 
          WE NEED POLICE OFFICERS ON THE GROUND AS SOON AS WE CAN. AND I WOULD HAVE LOVED BECAUSE WE HAVE TO ACCEPT OR DENY THIS PROPOSAL OF MEET AND CONFER. THAT'S WHY I HAVE TO DENY BECAUSE I WISH THEY WOULD HAVE COME BACK WITH A BETTER PLAN. AND I THINK YOU ALL PROBABLY AGREE THAT YOU WISH THEY WOULD HAVE A BETTER. 
          THEY WOULD HAVE COME WITH A BETTER PLAN. 
          BUT THIS IS, THIS PLAN IS NOT GOOD FOR THE CITIZENS. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE POLICE OFFICERS. I FEEL LIKE MY PLAN IS BETTER AND I THINK WE CAN IMPLEMENT IT. WE CAN BE STRATEGIC OF HOW WE IMPLEMENT IT. AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACTLY LIKE THIS. THIS IS JUST A FORMAT AND WE CAN TWEAK IT OR THE MEET AND CONFER. THE CITY, CITY MANAGER AND HIS STAFF AND THE POLICE OFFICERS WILL AT LEAST HAVE A BASELINE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AND WHERE WE WANT TO GO. 
          AND JUST REALLY LIKE FOR YOU GUYS TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT OVER THIS NEXT WEEK BECAUSE SINCE WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS TODAY AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO HOLLER AT ME, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU'D LIKE TO, ALONG THE NEXT WEEK. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. I'M SURE YOU WILL HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS THIS WEEK. ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON. LET ME ASK YOU, MR. ATKINSON, WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BASE BUDGET? WE'D ORIGINALLY TALKED ABOUT A BASE BUDGET AND THEN THERE WAS AN ADDITION ABOUT 1.4 MILLION. A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT FOR SOME PUBLIC SAFETY. SO WHEN YOU SAY BASE BUDGET NOW, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THOSE TWO THINGS COMBINED? THAT'S A NEW BASE BUDGET NOW? CORRECT. IT WAS 1.5. IT WAS AN ADDITION OF 1.55 MILLION. YOU'VE TAKEN OR I HAVE SUGGESTED YOU TAKE THAT 78, 000 OFF. SO WE'RE HIGH 1.4. OKAY. AGAIN, THOSE ARE. 
          THERE'S A PRETTY SUBSTANTIVE CAREER LADDER STRUCTURE FOR OUR POLICE CALL TAKERS. I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THAT. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S A GROUP THAT WE'VE, WE'VE WORKED ON PUSHING WAGES AND WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS. BUT I REALLY THINK THIS IS THE THING THAT THEY DEVELOPED INTERNALLY THAT WILL HELP THEM. ALSO SOME POLICE CIVILIANS, WHICH AS YOU DO THAT, THE BIGGEST THING YOU DO IS FREE UP SWORN OFFICERS TO GO AND DO THEIR PARTICULAR WORK. 
          FIRE. I TALKED ABOUT THE RECLASSIFICATION FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE TECHNICIANS BRINGING IN. WE REALLY NEED TO CATCH UP ON THEIR LIGHT DUTY FLEET. SO THAT'S IN THERE. AND THEN FOR ANIMAL SERVICES, WE'VE GOT TWO FIELD OFFICERS, ALL THE EQUIPMENT AND SOME ADDITIONS ON TOP OF THAT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT TWO NEW FIELD OFFICERS FOR OUR ANIMAL SERVICES IN THIS BASE BUDGET WHAT IS THE TOTAL 
          [00:40:01]
OF THE BASE BUDGET THEN? 292. 
          DO YOU HAVE THAT FIGURE IN FRONT OF YOU? I'M GONNA HAVE TO. I'M AFRAID TO SWITCH MY SCREEN. IT'LL NEVER COME BACK. THAT WAS THE ONLY THING THAT'S MISSING OFF HERE. I KIND OF WOULD LIKE THE BASE BUDGET NUMBER THAT WE'RE. YEAH, AND I APOLOGIZE. I REPORTED IT AS HOW FAR OVER NO NEW REVENUE IT WAS, WHICH IS 388,000, BUT IT'S ROUGHLY $292 MILLION. 
          RIGHT. AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE LOOKING AT BUDGETS FOR THIS YEAR AS COMPARED TO LAST YEAR, THIS BUDGET DOES NOT INCLUDE FOR THIS YEAR ANYTHING IN OUR SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT THAT'S BEEN TAKEN OUT OF OUR BUDGET AND MOVED INTO ITS OWN ENTERPRISE FUND. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. AND WE'VE ALSO ADJUSTED ALL THE COMPARABLES OUT SO THAT THERE'S NOT AN ARTIFICIAL NUMBER IN THERE. 
          OKAY. SO THAT'S JUST ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE WITH OUR BUDGET THIS YEAR FOR BETTER ACCOUNTING. SO JUST EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC HOW WE'RE DEALING WITH THIS. AND I THINK THIS GIVES EVERYBODY AN IDEA OF HOW MUCH WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH, HOW MUCH INFORMATION WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH. AND EVERYBODY UP HERE HAS THEIR OWN OPINIONS ABOUT WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. 
          AND WE'LL HAVE, UNFORTUNATELY, JUST ABOUT A WEEK TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND COME BACK NEXT TUESDAY TO HAVE OUR FIRST VOTE ON WHAT THAT BUDGET WILL BE. 
          SO IF YOU'RE OUT HERE WATCHING THIS MEETING TODAY AND INTERESTED IN THAT, THIS IS THE TIME FOR YOU TO MAKE YOUR OPINIONS KNOWN TO YOUR COUNCIL PERSON OR TO ME ABOUT THE BUDGET AND DIFFERENT ITEMS IN THE BUDGET. 
          I GUESS EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY IS UP ON THE AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO LOOK AT. IT WILL BE. OKAY. 
          SO THIS IS, THIS IS THE TIME FRAME TO DO THAT. AND THIS WILL BE A VERY CONCENTRATED WEEK FOR US. SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. 
          [2. Legislative Agenda]
ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. 
          OKAY. IN THAT WONDERFUL PILE OF PAPER, COUNSEL, WE'VE PROVIDED FOR YOU, TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. ONE IS YOUR CURRENT ADOPTED LEGISLATIVE AGENDA THAT EXPIRES AT THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR. THE SECOND IS THE REVISED ONE. 
          IT'S THE ONE THAT DOES NOT HAVE THE COVER SHEET ON IT. YOU'LL NOTICE SOME ITALICIZED PLACES, SOME STRIKES. I'M GOING TO PUT JUST THAT PORTION OF IT ON THE SCREEN. SO TO KIND OF SET THE STAGE FOR THIS, THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IS THE CITY'S POSITION FOR THESE ARE ITEMS WE WISH TO INITIATE. WE WANT TO CAUSE SOMETHING TO HAPPEN. 
          THERE'S A SECTION FOR THOSE ITEMS THAT YOU WILL SUPPORT. 
          THOSE ARE MORE GENERAL THINGS THAT YOU WOULD OPPOSE. SO AGAIN, WHAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE SCREEN ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING. YOU HAVE DISCUSSION ON FOR CHANGE. 
          YOU'RE NOT MAKING ACTION TODAY. 
          THIS WILL COME BACK ON YOUR SEPTEMBER 8TH MEETING WHERE WE'LL TRY TO FINALIZE IT. ASK FOR A VOTE ON THE 8TH. WE WILL ALSO ASK FOR THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL TO NAME THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE. REMEMBER THAT, THAT IS THE MAYOR PLUS TWO. WE CAN'T HAVE FOUR AS WE DO THAT. 
          SO LET ME GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE. I HAVE THREE ITEMS ON HERE. COUNCIL, YOU'LL RECALL LAST YEAR, LAST SESSION, WE HAD A VERY LARGE ASK OF OUR LOCAL DELEGATION AND THEY DELIVERED. IT WAS WELL DONE. 
          WE MADE LOTS OF POSITIVE CHANGES, CERTAINLY DIRECTLY FOR LUBBOCK, BUT IN SOME CASES, REALLY MORE AT LARGE. SO HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE TO START THE DISCUSSION ON THINGS WE WILL INITIATE. 
          NUMBER ONE, EXTEND THE EXISTING LEGISLATION OR ALTERNATIVELY INCLUDE US THROUGH NEW LEGISLATION. THE MECHANISM WILL BE UP TO OUR DELEGATION INTO THE STATUTES THAT ARE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE CONVENTION HOTEL REBATE AUTHORITY. THIS IS NOT THE PFC. IT PREDATES THE PFC. IT IS A VERY COMMON MECHANISM THAT IS USED THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS TO SUPPORT GETTING A NEW CONVENTION HOTEL. WE CURRENTLY HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. IT WILL EXPIRE. SO WE NEED TO AGAIN EITHER EXTEND IT OR WRITE IT IN UNDER A NEW SECTION. 
          REPRESENTATIVE TEPPER CARRIED THIS FOR US THE LAST SESSION. 
          IT WAS HOUSE BILL 2408. SO I'M CALLING IT A CARRYOVER. 
          REPRESENTATIVE TEPPER DID A GREAT JOB WITH THIS. WE ULTIMATELY DECIDED GETTING THE PROJECT FINANCE ZONE OR THE PFC WAS THE MORE IMPORTANT OF THE TWO BECAUSE WE HAD TIME TO COME BACK FOR THIS ONE. SO I OFFER THAT ONE. NUMBER TWO, HAVE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE MAYOR PRO TEM. WE HAVE AT LEAST THREE COUNCIL DISTRICTS THAT WERE BEGINNING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH ISLANDS OR WHAT WE USED TO CALL DONUT HOLES, WHERE YOU 
          [00:45:02]
HAVE AN AREA THAT IS COMPLETELY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS BUT ITSELF IS NOT. BECAUSE OF THE CHANGES IN ANNEXATION LAWS BACK IN 2019, THERE'S NOT A CURRENT WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS. SO WE DON'T HAVE RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE AT THIS POINT. WE'LL NEED THE COUNCIL'S WILLING TO DO THIS. 
          WE'LL NEED TO SEEK THE COUNSEL OF OUR OF OUR DELEGATION. SO I WROTE IT AS PROVIDE LIMITED AND RESTRICTED MUNICIPAL AUTHORITY TO ADDRESS ISSUES CREATED BY ISLAND AREAS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS. WE HAVE AREAS THAT ARE NOT IN THE CITY LIMITS, BUT YOU HAVE MORE THAN A QUARTER MILE OF CITY STREET RUNNING DOWN THE MIDDLE TO GET TO ONE HOUSE AT THE END. AND THINK OF THE ISSUES THAT CAUSES WITH SPEED ENFORCEMENT, WITH DISPATCHING A FIRE TRUCK OR A POLICE CAR TO A CALL. AND IN THAT ONE PARTICULAR AREA THAT'S NOT ON THE EDGE NOW OF THE CITY LIMITS, IT'S NEARLY THREE MILES INSIDE THE CITY LIMITS. SO THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE OF MANY. 
          WE'VE MADE SOME MAPS. WE CAN GET INTO THOSE LATER IF WE WANT TO, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR DISCUSSION ON THAT ONE. THE THIRD ONE, ENSURE THAT A MUNICIPALITY HAS AUTHORITY FOR LARGE DEMAND INDUSTRIAL WATER AND WASTEWATER CUSTOMERS TO HAVE THEIR SERVICE THROUGH A CONTRACT BASIS OR A UNIQUE RATE CLASS. THERE'S A LOT OF DEBATE RIGHT NOW. MAYBE THAT AUTHORITY EXISTS, MAYBE IT DOESN'T. IF IT DOES EXIST, I WOULD LOVE TO PULL THIS OFF THE LIST. 
          BUT THINK ABOUT YOUR SINGLE LARGEST WATER USER TODAY. 
          THAT'S LEPRINO. LEPRINO'S WATER USE IS THROUGH ITS DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. SO WE SPECIFIED IN THAT DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT HOW THAT WOULD WORK AND THEY ARE FOLLOWING IT TO A T. THEY ARE THE PERFECT CUSTOMER. THOSE NUMBERS ARE PHENOMENALLY STABLE. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. 
          BUT I THINK AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT OTHER POTENTIAL LARGE UTILITY DEMANDS, DATA CENTERS FOR THE TOPIC OF THE DAY, ENSURING THAT MUNICIPAL UTILITIES CAN MANAGE EITHER BY IF YOU'RE A CUSTOMER OVER A CERTAIN VOLUME, YOU'RE A CUSTOMER BY CONTRACT, OR ENSURE THAT WE HAVE AUTHORITY TO CREATE A RATE CLASS THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO NEGOTIATE. WE'RE GOING TO NEGOTIATE FOR A CERTAIN QUANTITY AND WE'RE GOING TO STAY WITHIN THAT QUANTITY SUBJECT TO NORMAL VARIATION OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ISSUE. SO WE'RE GOING TO KEEP WORKING ON IT. I HIT MR. WADE AND HIS CREW A LITTLE BIT LATE WITH THIS ONE. IF WE FIND OUT WE CAN DO IT GREAT. WE DON'T NEED TO ASK. IF NOT, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER. SO, MAYOR, DO YOU WANT ME TO STOP BEFORE I GO TO THE SUPPORT CATEGORY AND TAKE INPUT YOU MAY HAVE. YES. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY INPUT QUESTIONS ON WHAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT RIGHT AT THE MOMENT CURRENTLY ON THE ISLAND AREAS, WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO ANNEX THOSE UNLESS THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE REQUEST THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          SO WE'RE SEEKING SOME SORT OF LEGISLATION IF IT IS TRULY AN ISLAND AREA, NOT JUST ONE THAT BUTTS UP AGAINST US ON ONE OF OUR EXTREMITIES. A DIFFERENT RULE, I GUESS. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE. 
          ABSOLUTELY. AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT RULE WOULD BE. WE'RE JUST ASKING THEM TO HELP US COME UP WITH ONE. 
          CORRECT. AND I THINK THIS IS A HEAVY LIFT. I SURE UNDERSTAND WHY. BECAUSE IT'S NOT WHAT THE 2019 CHANGES TO ANNEXATION AUTHORITY WERE. RIGHT. AND I WILL SAY PUBLICLY THOSE CHANGES IN 2019, THEY DID NOT HURT THE GROWTH OF THE CITY AT ALL. WE ACTUALLY DID MORE AND LARGER ANNEXATIONS FOLLOWING THAT THAN WE DID WHEN WE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT BECAUSE THE COUNCIL WANTED TO. SO THAT LEGISLATION IS GREAT. HAVE NO CONCERNS BUT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AS THINGS HAVE MOVED AROUND, WE'VE CREATED THOSE ISLANDS AND THEY CAN BE CHALLENGING TO EVEN PROVIDE BASIC LIFE SAFETY SERVICES TO. 
          ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE CITY WILL SUPPORT LIST. 
          OKAY. AND AGAIN, THESE ARE ONLY THE CHANGES THAT I WANT TO CARRY FORWARD THE REMAINDER OF YOUR LIST. 
          BUT I DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED TO GO THROUGH IT. IT'S ALL ON THERE FOR YOUR REVIEW. I MENTIONED, I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN COLLINS ASKED ABOUT THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST FOLLOWING THE JULY 4TH FLOODS IN UVALDE. THE STATE OF TEXAS HAS MADE VERY GOOD CHANGES TO HOW EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT WORKS. 
          THEY HAD A LARGE NUMBER OF CHANGES THAT ULTIMATELY DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH. AND I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO EXPECT THOSE WILL COME BACK. 
          ONE OF THEM THAT WE SUPPORT, WE JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL HOW 
          [00:50:01]
IT WORKS IS LICENSURE OF YOUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALS. AND I WOULD SUGGEST WE DON'T SEEK LEGISLATION, BUT WE SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT KEEPS THAT LICENSURE THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT BODY. 
          SO PRIOR PROPOSALS HAVE CENTRALIZED EVERYTHING IN A SINGLE AGENCY, THE TEXAS DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. THEY DO GREAT WORK, BUT THAT'S A PRETTY LARGE EXPANSION TO DO THAT. THE NEXT ONE. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY UP HERE. WE'D LIKE TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN SUPPORT LEGISLATION THAT MAINTAINS WHAT'S CALLED PUBLIC EDUCATION AND GOVERNMENT OR PEG FUNDING AND DON'T CHANGE THAT ELIGIBILITY. SO EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THIS ROOM THAT'S RELATED TO, TO YOUR AV, TO YOUR BROADCAST, TO YOUR LIVE STREAM, TO YOUR ARCHIVING, THAT IS ALL PAID FOR BY PEG FUNDS. PEG FUNDS ARE ONE OF THOSE STATE MANDATED FEES THAT ARE ON TELECOM AND CABLE UTILITY BILLS. THEY CONTINUE TO DECLINE AND THAT'S OKAY, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE TO THE POINT WE NEED TO LET THEM GO AWAY. SO THAT'S AN ADD IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO IT. 
          IN THE 89TH SESSION, WHICH WAS THE 2025 LEGISLATIVE SESSION, A BILL WAS PASSED MANDATING CERTAIN OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR FIREFIGHTERS. THAT'S GOOD. 
          WE ALREADY ARE BASICALLY DOING ALL OF THAT, BUT IT WASN'T FUNDED. SO IT WAS AN UNFUNDED MANDATE THAT CAME THROUGH. THE SAME RELATES TO WHAT IS NOW CALLED POST RETIREMENT CRITICAL ILLNESS BENEFIT. SO IF THERE'S AN EFFORT TO FIND EITHER COST SHARING OR SOME STATE FUNDING FOR BOTH OF THOSE TWO MANDATES, I'D LIKE FOR THE CITY TO BE IN A POSITION TO SUPPORT IT. 
          THE NEXT ONE, MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR PUBLIC PURCHASING COOPERATIVES FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS AND PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. NOTE THAT I SAID VOLUNTARY. NOBODY REQUIRED TO DO IT, BUT IF IT IS OF BENEFIT. COUNCIL, YOU'RE AWARE FROM YOUR BUDGET DISCUSSIONS JUST HOW EXPENSIVE HEALTH CARE IS. WE WANT TO CONTINUE PROVIDING REALLY GOOD HEALTH CARE WITH A HIGH BENEFIT LEVEL. IF THERE'S A WAY TO PARTNER TO DRIVE THOSE COSTS DOWN, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT. THE NEXT ONE. THIS HAS BEEN A LONG STANDING ITEM THAT WE HAVE FOR SUPPORTING EFFORTS AT TEXAS TECH. I'VE PROPOSED TWO CHANGES. WE NOW HAVE THE REESE NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLEX THROUGH TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY. THAT DIDN'T EXIST WHEN WE DID THE AGENDA LAST SESSION. I WOULD THINK WE MIGHT ADD THAT THE TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY VETERINARY SCHOOL, THAT'S A CARRYOVER FROM TRYING TO ENCOURAGE GETTING THE VET SCHOOL, SO DOES NO HARM WHATSOEVER TO LEAVE IT IN. I JUST WAS REMINDED LOOKING AT MY NOTES, IT WAS A CARRYOVER FROM TRYING TO CREATE IT. SO COMMENTS ON THIS PAGE. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? MR. ATKINSON I NOTICED THAT, YOU KNOW, I TALKED WITH YOU SOME ABOUT SEEKING LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO PERHAPS PURSUE SOME ADDITIONAL REMEDIES WITH CLEANING UP ABANDONED HOUSES. 
          HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT ANY SORT OF LEGISLATIVE OUTREACH THAT WE MIGHT DO FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? APOLOGIZE, MAYOR. I HAVE NOT, BUT I WILL BY THE 8TH. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT ON THERE BECAUSE I'M SPECIFICALLY THINKING OF 66TH STREET NEAR AVENUE P AND THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE. AND IF YOU'VE DRIVEN THERE, YOU NOTICE THAT MANY OF THOSE HOUSES ARE BOARDED UP, PEOPLE ARE SQUATTING IN THEM. 
          AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT OUR HANDS ARE TIED ON HOW WE DEAL WITH PRIVATE PROPERTY. WE CAN'T JUST GO IN AND TAKE PRIVATE PROPERTY FROM PEOPLE BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE THE WAY THEY'RE THE CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY. 
          AND SO ASKED FOR SOME, MAYBE SEEKING SOME LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW US A QUICKER PROCESS FOR COMING TO A JUDICIAL CONCLUSION ON THAT HOUSING THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO EITHER TAKE THE PROPERTY BACK, DEMOLISH IT, OR PUT IT UP FOR SALE SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THESE SITUATIONS THAT EXIST IN OUR CITY THAT CURRENTLY THE PROCESS FOR DOING SO IS VERY, VERY TIME CONSUMING AND ULTIMATELY NOT TOO SUCCESSFUL. 
          SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. 
          MAYOR, I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN BRUEGEL MIGHT HAVE A COMMENT. 
          [00:55:03]
YES, COUNCILMAN BRUEGEL, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT THE REESE NATIONAL SECURITY COMPLEX IS A BIG DEAL FOR OUR REGION. IT'S TURNING A LARGELY UNDERUTILIZED FACILITY INTO WHAT COULD BE A VERY BENEFICIAL ECONOMIC ENGINE FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. SO I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT ON THERE. 
          THAT'S A GOOD INCLUSION. MR. ATKINSON, CONTINUE. OKAY, GOING TO THE NEXT LEGISLATION THAT THE CITY WOULD OPPOSE, LEGISLATION THAT WOULD DIMINISH OR RESTRICT AN ELECTED CITY COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE NECESSARY AND REQUIRED SERVICE THAT'S BEEN IN HERE FOR A NUMBER OF SESSIONS. DO YOU WANT TO CONSIDER ADDING THAT CLAUSE IN THE MIDDLE OR THE FUNDING NECESSARY TO PROVIDE SUCH SERVICES TO ITS RESIDENTS AND COMMUNITIES? SO YOU'RE NOT SEEKING LEGISLATION. 
          YOU'RE MAKING A POLICY STATEMENT THAT YOU WOULD OPPOSE SOMETHING THAT FELL INTO THAT CATEGORY. YOU WANT TO GIVE US AN EXAMPLE OF THAT? YOUR BUDGET. OUR BUDGET. ALL RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IF PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT'S A CONSTANT GIVE AND TAKE WITH THE LEGISLATURE AS HOW THEIR NEW LAWS AFFECT US AS A CITY, AND IT MAKES BUDGETING QUITE DIFFICULT. EVEN IF WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, IT STILL DOES MAKE OUR BUDGET PROCESS QUITE DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE SERVICES. WHEN THEY'RE CAPS ON EVEN WHAT YOU CAN DO TO FUND THE NECESSARY SERVICES THAT YOU AS A COUNCIL BELIEVE YOUR CITY NEEDS. THAT'S A REAL CHALLENGE FOR US. SO I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO MAKE OUR OPINION KNOWN ON. 
          SO, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, MOVE ON. ONE MORE. 
          OKAY. COUNCILMAN COLLINS, I'M SORRY, THIS SYSTEM'S. IT'LL TAKE US A MINUTE. WE'LL GET THERE WITH THE SYSTEM. BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO RECOGNIZE AS A COMMUNITY THE EFFORTS THAT OUR LEGISLATURE MAKES IN TRYING TO PROTECT CITIZENS, IN PARTICULARLY WITH THE TAX RATE. IT'S OFTEN SAID THAT AS A COUNCIL IN A CITY, THIS IS THE QUICKEST WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, GOVERNMENT CAN SPEND YOUR MONEY. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PROTECTIONS THAT THE LEGISLATURE ARE TRYING TO CREATE. I SUPPORT ADDING THIS LANGUAGE INTO OUR PRIORITIES BECAUSE I THINK, AS MR. GREEN POINTED OUT EARLIER, OFTENTIMES THOSE EFFORTS REAP UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WHEN THE LEGISLATURE CREATED A BENEFIT FOR MY SMALL BUSINESS, THEY INTENDED TO TAKE AWAY SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED AT THE CITY BUDGET LEVEL. AND SO I THINK IF WE PUT THIS HERE, WE CAN COMMUNICATE, AND IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN TO OUR LEGISLATORS, LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION, WHO I AM FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF. I BELIEVE THEY ARE DOING A GREAT JOB FOR US, BUT IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW IN REAL DOLLARS, REAL TIME, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU MADE THIS ADJUSTMENT. THIS HAPPENED HERE. AND SO IT GIVES THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, LET US DIG DEEPER AND UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN PROPERLY EFFECTIVELY REDUCE OR LIMIT TAX INCREASE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME NOT HINDER CITY AND COUNTY GOVERNMENTS IN DOING THAT. SO JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT OF ADDING THIS PARTICULAR BIT OF LANGUAGE INTO OUR PROCESS. 
          THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, PROCEED. 
          OKAY, MOVING ON TO THE LAST ONE. THIS IS THE ONE SECTION OF YOUR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA THAT APPLIES TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO THIS IS ALL FEDERAL. THE FIRST AND I HAVE BOLDED THIS. THIS WAS ALREADY IN THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. 
          BUT I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE AND KIND OF PUT A LITTLE MORE EMPHASIS ON THIS ONE. SO WE HAVE COMPLETED NOW BECAUSE THE EPA HAS CERTIFIED AFFF AQUEOUS FILM FOAM FIRE STUFF THAT WE USE FOR AIRPLANE FIRES. APOLOGIZE TO ALL MY FIRE PEOPLE OUT THERE FOR BUTCHERING THAT. WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT CONVERSION WITH ALL OF OUR BIG AIRPORT RESCUE TRUCKS. WHAT IS STILL NOT KNOWN. AND I CAN GO BACK INTO PAST HISTORY WITH THINGS 
          [01:00:01]
LIKE LEAD BASED PAINT, ASBESTOS AND OTHER DEALS. IS THERE GOING TO BE SOME EFFORT TO COME BACK AND PUT LIABILITY UPON A LOCAL GOVERNMENT FOR USING A PRODUCT THAT YOU WERE MANDATED TO USE USING THE FOAM THAT CONTAINED THE PFAS CHEMICALS WAS REQUIRED. WE LITERALLY HAVE JUST FINISHED NOW GETTING A NEW CHEMICAL THAT DOESN'T HAVE IT. AND WE'VE CLEANED ALL OF OUR VEHICLES, WE'VE HAULED OFF EVERYTHING. I JUST, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THIS STAY IN AND THAT WE KEEP A LOT OF FOCUS ON IT. THE SECOND ONE, THIS IS AN ADD NOW TO THE FEDERAL SIDE OF IT AND ITS EFFORTS TO ENSURE THE TIMELY DEVELOPMENT AND PERMITTING OF THE FUTURE. LAKE 07, REMEMBER THAT THAT HAS NOW MOVED OVER INTO THE FEDERAL SPHERE. WOULD SAY VERY PLEASED WITH HOW THAT IS MOVING, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT MIGHT BE NEXT. 
          AND SO IF WE HAVE IT IN HERE, IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO USE THAT AS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL. SO THAT'S GOING TO WRAP UP WHAT I'VE ASKED FOR AS CHANGES OR WHAT I'VE SUGGESTED. PLEASE REMEMBER THIS IS NOT ALL OF THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA. 
          EVERYTHING THAT'S IN YOUR HANDOUT THAT WASN'T ITALICIZED OR BOLDED OR STRUCK OUT, I SUGGEST YOU CARRY IT OVER. 
          SO ANY MORE INPUT I WOULD LOVE TO TAKE. IF NOT, WE'LL PUT THESE INTO THAT FORM THAT YOU COULD CONSIDER FOR ACTION ON THE 8TH. I SEE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT. ALL RIGHT, I GUESS THAT'S THE END OF OUR. ALL RIGHT, LET'S TAKE. BECAUSE THE REST OF THE MEETING MAY TAKE A LITTLE WHILE. LET'S TAKE LIKE ABOUT A EIGHT MINUTE BREAK HERE. I'M GONNA GET ME SOME MORE COFFEE. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYBODY ELSE. TEN MINUTES. OKAY. 
          [1.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 1): Consider a request for Zone Case 0470-A, a request of Robert G. Lines for Hicks Oilfield, LLC, for a Specific Use for a Permanent Batch Plant on property zoned General Industrial District (GI), at 1501 Marshall Street, located north of Grinnell Street and west of North Avenue N, on 4.359 acres of unplatted land out of Block A, Section 15, and consider an ordinance.]
THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. 
          STEPHEN SANDERS, 3404 75TH STREET I'VE BEEN GOING TO THE MEETINGS WITH THE GUADALUPE GROUP AND I'VE BEEN AT THEIR MEETINGS AND I'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT THESE THINGS. 
          AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THOSE PEOPLE FEEL A LITTLE DEFEATED. 
          THEY CONTINUE TO COME BEFORE YOU AND TRY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT IT. AND THEN THE DECISIONS ALWAYS GET MADE AGAINST THEM. AND I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD TIME. AS JOHN SAID, IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT NECESSARILY, BUT IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO TURN THE PAGE AND TURN THE PAGE BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS CHRONIC NEGLECT. AND UNTIL WE CHANGE IT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM. AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A WHITE MAN OR A BLACK MAN OR HISPANIC MAN. 
          I LOVE IT. I THINK OUR DIFFERENCES IS WHAT MAKES US AMAZING. THAT'S WHAT MAKES US AMERICA. THAT'S WHAT MAKES US GOOD. BUT THERE IS A THING THAT'S HAPPENING IN LUBBOCK AND THAT IS WHY ALL OF THE INDUSTRIAL THINGS ARE PUT IN NORTH AND EAST LUBBOCK. BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE, PEOPLE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE WITS TO COME AND TALK ABOUT THIS AND CALL IT OUT AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS RACIST OR THIS IS. 
          THIS IS NOT RIGHT, OR THIS IS SYSTEMIC, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT YOU. 
          THAT YOU. YOU STAND WITH US AND DENY THE 7.1. 
          THANK YOU. HI, MY NAME IS JORDAN CRADDOCK. I RESIDE AT 9301 ROSS AVENUE. I WAS NOT PLANNING ON SPEAKING TODAY, BUT I'LL KEEP IT SHORT AND SWEET. I JUST WANT TO SAY THE MORE CONCRETE YOU POUR IN LUBBOCK, THE HOTTER LUBBOCK WILL GET. LOOK UP THE HEAT ISLAND EFFECT. I IMPLORE YOU TO LISTEN TO YOUR CONSTITUENTS CONCERNS ABOUT POLLUTION, SUSTAINABILITY AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AND INSTEAD OF INDUSTRIALIZING THIS AREA EVEN FURTHER, CONSIDER PLANTING NATIVE TREES AND VEGETATION TO COMBAT RISING TEMPERATURES. 
          DIRT BLOWING. HELP CONTROL THE POLLUTION AND MAKE LUBBOCK BEAUTIFUL. WE NEED MORE NATIVE GREEN SPACES AROUND TOWN, ESPECIALLY IN THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE OF TOWN. WE DO NOT NEED TO DEVELOP EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF THIS CITY. WHY CONTINUE TO MAKE THESE PEOPLE PAY THE PRICE FOR UNFAIR DECISIONS MADE IN THE PAST? THIS CAN CHANGE WITH EACH OF YOU RIGHT NOW, TODAY. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. 
          I WILL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 5:05 PM AND IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 7.1? I SEE NO MOTION TO APPROVE IT. I AM GOING TO. 
          MAY I MAKE A MOTION OF MY OWN? I GOT. OH, WE GOT 
          [01:05:01]
ONE HERE. YEAH, A LITTLE LATE THERE. I'M SORRY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. ALL RIGHT. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A SECOND. OKAY. NOW WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION OF IT. AND I DON'T WANT TO CURTAIL THE DISCUSSION NECESSARILY. I'M GOING TO SUGGEST OR MOVE TO THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO A DATE CERTAIN TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO DISCUSS SOME POSSIBLE. AS MY UNDERSTANDING IS, WE CAN ADD SOME CONDITIONS TODAY. IT'S JUST, IT'S A BATCH PLANT OR IT'S NOT A BATCH PLANT, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY. BUT THERE ARE CONDITIONS WE CAN SET ON THE BATCH PLANT THAT ARE PROVIDED FOR UNDER THE LAW AS WELL THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADDRESS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. 
          I'M NOT PREPARED TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS TODAY, BUT I THINK A FURTHER CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPONENT OF IT AND SOME CONDITIONS HE MIGHT BE WILLING TO ACCEPT ON THE KIND OF OPERATION HE HAS THERE AND OTHER CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT. 
          BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE INDUSTRIAL ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, MY CONCERN IS, IS THE DUST AND THE POLLUTION THAT MIGHT COME OFF OF IT, AND IF THERE'S A WAY TO MITIGATE THAT OR ACTUALLY MAKE THAT NOT A PART OF IT, THAT'S WHAT I'D BE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT. 
          BUT OTHER DISCUSSION. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER FURTHER? MR. GREEN? NO. THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL PARCEL OF LAND AND IT WILL BE USED FOR INDUSTRIAL AT SOME POINT. 
          WITH THE INFORMATION THAT I'VE GAINED IN THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THIS. THE OWNER LOOKS LIKE HE'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HE'S GOT TO FOLLOW THE RULES. 
          AND I THINK THIS WILL ENHANCE ACTUALLY THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW. AND THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE A SYSTEM IN PLACE. PNZ OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTS THIS AND THEY HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION THAN WE DO AS WE GOT THIS TODAY. SO I'M GOING TO TRUST THAT OUR SYSTEM IN PLACE, THAT PNZ HAVE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO DO TO FIND OUT EVERYTHING THEY CAN ABOUT THIS AND TO SUGGEST OR SUGGEST THAT WE APPROVE THIS. 
          COUNCILMAN COLLINS? YEAH. OH, OKAY. COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ- GARCIA. WE DID NOT JUST GET THIS TODAY. JUST, YOU KNOW, FOR CORRECTION, WE HAVE HAD THIS FOR A FEW DAYS. AND, YOU KNOW, AS I'VE MENTIONED, I APPRECIATE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PUT LACE THEIR BUSINESS, BUT I WAS SO GLAD TO HEAR MS. BREWER ANNOUNCE HOW MANY CONCRETE COMPANIES ALREADY EXIST, AND SHE OVERLOOKED A COUPLE. 
          HOW MANY DID YOU SAY? 5. 
          THERE'S ACTUALLY 7. 7. SO I HEARD SOMEBODY DOWN ON THE DAIS SAY, WELL, WE HAVE ONE. YOU HAVE ONE. WE HAVE SEVEN CONCENTRATED IN ONE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S NOT EVEN INCLUDING WHAT'S IN EAST LUBBOCK. WE JUST CANNOT CONTINUE TO THINK. REMEMBER, FIRST YOU SAID IT WAS GRANDFATHERED. WELL, WE'RE NOT. 
          THIS IS NOT A GRANDFATHERED SITUATION. AND AS MUCH AS I WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE BECAUSE IT'S EVIDENT THAT THE GENTLEMAN THAT CAME TO SPEAK WITH US IS COMMITTED, I THINK WE'RE ALWAYS TELLING COMPANIES WHEN YOU COME, YOU NEED TO ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC. YOU NEED TO CONNECT WITH THE COMMUNITY. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND OUR FRUSTRATIONS. 
          THIS IS THE TYPE OF SITUATION YOU HEARD SOME SENSIBLE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE WERE SOME THAT, YOU KNOW, NO MATTER WHAT WE DO, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO CORRECT IT. WE'RE STUCK IN THE MIDDLE. WE WANT TO BE. 
          WE WANT TO BE COOPERATIVE, BUT I HAVE TO THINK ABOUT PEOPLE OVER PROFIT. AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF. 
          IF WE DO DECIDE TO PUT THIS OFF, THEN MAYBE WE CAN COMMUNICATE AND HAVE THE FOLKS THAT PROVIDED INPUT TO BE A PART OF THAT COMMUNICATION. 
          BUT ONE THING IS, I LOOK OUT MY WINDOW HERE AT CITY HALL AND I CAN SEE THE DUST. THE OTHER DAY, I MET WITH SOMEONE, AND SHE WANTED TO SEE MY CONCERNS. SO I DROVE HER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WHAT DO YOU KNOW, THERE WAS THAT CLOUD OF DUST JUST FLYING OVER INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, OVER THE LAKE AND INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS CONCERNING. IT IS A QUALITY 
          [01:10:03]
OF LIFE ISSUE. IT IS A HEALTH ISSUE. IT IS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO AGREE THAT WE HAVE SOME SITUATIONS AND THESE TYPES THINGS WERE POSED IN THE PAST. LET'S NOT RELIVE THE PAST. LET'S STAY FOCUSED ON THE FUTURE. AND PART OF THAT FUTURE, WE HAVE TO GROW. WE HAVE TO COMMUNICATE. AND IF YOU'RE AS COMMITTED AS YOU SAY YOU ARE, THEN YOU'RE WILLING TO WAIT AND YOU'RE WILLING TO TALK WITH THE CITIZENS, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHO DRIVES THIS COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMAN HARRIS. YES, I JUST WANT TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ. I KNOW THE OTHER GUY. YES. FABIAN CAME WITH THE 40S, 1940S AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AND WITH THE SYSTEMIC RACISM, WHICH. WHICH, YES, IT WAS BACK THERE. AIN'T NO DENYING IT. BUT WHAT WE NEED TO FOCUS ON NOW IS MAKING THIS A BETTER PLACE. THE CITIZENS DON'T WANT IT. THE CITIZENS BEEN HERE FOR 40, 50 YEARS. 
          THEIR TAX DOLLARS IS WHAT'S GOT THIS CITY GOING. WE DON'T NEED SOMEBODY COMING IN FROM OUT OF TOWN. JUST WANT TO PUT A BUSINESS IN HERE WHERE THE DOGGONE CITIZENS DON'T WANT IT. WE HAVE TO RESPECT OUR CITIZENS. 
          THAT'S WHY I'M HERE, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A PAYING JOB. I DO THIS BECAUSE MY HEART IS IN IT AND I LOVE PEOPLE AND I WANT TO MAKE THINGS BETTER. SO LIKE I EVEN MADE THE LITTLE JOKING REMARK. IT REALLY WASN'T JOKING. JUST ABOUT THE CONCRETE COMPANY OUT THERE ON 114TH. YEAH, PUT IT OUT THERE. STOP DUMPING STUFF IN EAST AND NORTH LUBBOCK. STOP DOING IT. IT'S TIME OUT FOR THAT. LUBBOCK, TEXAS IS A BIG PLACE. IT'S GOT A LOT OF LAND, COTTON FEED ALL OVER THIS PLACE. WE JUST NEED TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE IT IS STOPPED BEING DUMPED IN NORTH AND EAST LUBBOCK. 
          THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT ON THAT, COUNCILMAN COLLINS. 
          THANK YOU. MAYOR, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR MS. SAGER. 
          THERE YOU ARE. I DIDN'T SEE YOU. SO I NOTICED THAT THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY, THE 4.5 ACRES THAT ARE BEING ADDED OR REQUESTED TO BE A PART OF A BATCH PLANT, THIS IS A PART OF A LARGER PARCEL. HOW DO WE DO A SPECIFIC ZONE ON A PORTION OF THE PARCEL? WE HAVE A MEETS AND DOWNS DESCRIPTION THAT OUR GIS DEPARTMENT WILL DRAW INTO THE MAP AND IT WILL BE LIMITED TO THAT BOUNDARY. AND SO WHEN PORT PORTIONS OF THAT OPERATION EXPAND, IF THEY WERE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IN HOW IT SUPPORTS THE OPERATION THAT'S ON THE SMALL PARCEL. SO WHEN THEY, IF THEY TRIED TO EXPAND ONTO A PORTION THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THIS 4.3 ACRES, WHEN THEY APPLIED FOR THEIR BUILDING PERMITS, WE WOULD SEE THAT THEY'RE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO BE IN AND THEY WOULD BE DENIED. 
          WELL, IF I PUT A BATCH PLANT AND I PUT BUILDINGS, I PUT EVERYTHING AND I'VE CONCENTRATED IT IN THIS 4.3 ACRE, 4.5, WHATEVER. I'VE CONCENTRATED IT IN THIS LOCATION. 
          BUT I NEED STORAGE ADJACENT. 
          IT MAY NOT BE IN A BUILDING, I MAY NOT NEED A BUILDING PERMIT OR MAYBE I BUILD A BUILDING FOR STORING MY EQUIPMENT, MY HEAVY EQUIPMENT. I DO OTHER THINGS THAT REALLY HAVE ARE ANCILLARY AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE BATCH PLANT, BUT NOT THE BATCH PLANT. 
          RIGHT. AND SO A LOT OF THOSE THINGS COME TO PASS THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR THAT SPACE IN SUPPORT OF THE BATCH PLANT. BUT SO THAT CAN BE DONE IF WE HAD DRY STORAGE, IF WE HAD OTHER THINGS THAT ARE OCCURRING ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. AND THANK YOU. ALL OF THOSE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE BATCH PLAN ITSELF ARE ALLOWED THROUGHOUT THIS PROPERTY. SO WE'RE TALKING, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT 4.5 ACRES. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT, 40 OR 30, 20. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY THE SIZE OF THE ENTIRETY, BUT THE PROPERTY IS MUCH, MUCH LARGER THAN WHERE THE BATCH PLANT GOES. YOU'RE CORRECT, YES. SO WAREHOUSING AND STORAGE WOULD BE PERFECT, PERMITTED WITH THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONING OUTSIDE OF THESE SPECIFIC USE. THAT IS A STANDALONE USE IN OUR CODE WHERE IT WOULD BE ALLOWED SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE BATCH PLAN. OKAY, SO MY CONCERN IS, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A SMALL PORTION OF A LARGER PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO HAVE A BATCH PLANT BUT HAVE THE PHYSICAL STRUCTURE ON IT. 
          BUT WE CONCEIVABLY COULD SEE, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MORE ACRES INVOLVED IN 
          [01:15:02]
THE PROCESS THAT DOESN'T HAVE A BATCH PLAN. IS THAT. IS THIS. 
          THIS SEEMS UNUSUAL. 
          IN MY TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF SITTING HERE, IT SEEMS UNUSUAL TO HAVE TO SEGMENT A PORTION OF A LARGER PROPERTY TO ONE ACTIVITY OR TO A SPECIAL USE ACTIVITY. IS THIS UNUSUAL THE WAY IT'S BEING PRESENTED? I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S NOT COMMON, BUT I HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE. 
          THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW TO ME. OKAY, WELL, SO AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS, OR I, YOU KNOW, ASK THESE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, IT'S. THERE IS A BALANCE, FOLKS. THERE'S A BIG BALANCE BETWEEN BUSINESS, RESIDENTIAL USAGE. THERE'S A BIG BALANCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN GROWTH AS A CITY AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE FOLKS, FOR THE FOLKS WHO LIVE IN THESE AREAS. AND WHILE I DON'T, I'M GOING TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO USE THIS PROPERTY FOR SOME TIME. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE ASK TO PLANT A TREES AND DO SOME THINGS THERE. THERE'S NOT A PRIVATE OWNER THAT I THINK WE CERTAINLY CAN'T COMPEL THEM TO DO ANYTHING WITH THAT PROPERTY. IT'LL PROBABLY REMAIN JUST AS IT IS. 
          BUT I ENCOURAGE THIS BUSINESS TO COME TO LUBBOCK. I REALLY DO. I'VE ASKED BATCH PLANT OPERATORS, DO YOU NEED A COMPETITOR? AND THEY ALL SAY NO. BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THEY KNOW THEY DO. AND SO THERE IS A PLACE FOR A NEW CONCRETE COMPANY IN LUBBOCK. MY SENSE IS IT'S NOT THIS PLACE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER REQUEST, COUNCILMAN BRUEGEL. 
          SO, I WOULD TEND TO ECHO MR. COLLINS SENTIMENT LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, BIG FAN OF CONCRETE. WE NEED IT IN OUR COMMUNITY. THIS LOCATION, THE MORE I'VE CONSIDERED IT, DOES CONCERN ME BECAUSE OF THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF PARTICULATE MATTER IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION. 
          SO WITH THAT, I INTEND TO VOTE NO. ALL RIGHT. I SEE NO FURTHER REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION. I'M GOING TO GO BACK, THOUGH, TO MY. 
          WOULD IT BE A PRIVILEGE? WHAT WOULD YOU CALL THIS? JUST A MOTION TO. WE HAVE. YOU HAVE A. 
          YOU HAVE A MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR. AND, AND SO IF YOU WANTED TO DO A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO A DATE CERTAIN, THAT WOULD. IF IT GET. IF IT WAS SECOND. YEAH, YOU GOTTA GET A SECOND. THEN IT WOULD GO TO A VOTE. IT WOULD GO TO A VOTE FOR THAT. OKAY, WELL, THAT IS WHAT I'M GOING TO MOVE AT THIS POINT, THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO A DATE CERTAIN SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE OWNER ABOUT WAYS THAT HE CAN ABATE OR WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OTHER THAN JUST APPROPRIATE APPROVING A BATCH CENTER WITH NO OTHER CONDITIONS ON IT. AND HE SEEMS TO BE OPEN TO THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN GET TO AN AGREEMENT, BUT I WOULD AT LEAST LIKE TO ALLOW FOR THAT POSSIBILITY TO OCCUR AGAIN, TO ENGAGE PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY WITH HIM, AS HE SEEMS WILLING TO DO, TO SEE IF WE MIGHT FIND SOME WAY TO MEET THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE AND THE ABILITY TO USE THIS PROPERTY, WHICH AGAIN, IS SITTING THERE VACANT. 
          I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S POSSIBLE. I JUST DON'T WANT. 
          MY CONCERN IS IF WE DENY IT, HE HAS TO GO AND HE WANTS TO MAKE SOME CHANGES AND CONDITIONS. HE'S GOT TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK THROUGH THE PNZ PROCESS AND THE DELAY THAT THAT WOULD CAUSE HIM. IF THERE IS A WAY FOR US TO WORK THOSE CONDITIONS OUT WITHOUT REQUIRING THAT. SO THAT IS MY MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS TO A DATE CERTAIN. GIVE SOME TIME FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. 
          WHAT, WHAT DATE WOULD THAT BE? MAYOR? THE MEETING. WHAT'S OUR. 
          WE ONLY. DO WE ONLY HAVE TWO MEETINGS OR DO WE HAVE A THIRD MEETING IN SEPTEMBER? OUR NEXT. 
          WE HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING THE FIRST, AND THEN WE HAVE. THEN WE HAVE OUR TWO REGULAR MEETINGS AND THEN WE HAVE THE 8TH AND THE 22ND. SO I WOULD SAY TO THE 22ND. ALL RIGHT. 
          YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH TIME? NO. YOU'RE GONNA MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT QUICK? OCTOBER. 
          TO MEET THE SECOND MEETING. 
          MONTH. SECOND MEETING OF THE MONTH OF OCTOBER. OKAY. 
          I WOULD LIKE THAT COMMITMENT. 
          SECOND MEETING OF OCTOBER. 
          SECOND. I THINK THAT'S THE 27TH. 27TH OF OCTOBER. IS THIS LIKE A REGULAR MEETING IN OCTOBER? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, 
          [01:20:01]
THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? YOU HAVE A SECOND? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? ON JUST THAT MOTION. 
          JUST THAT MOTION NOW. ALL RIGHT. NO DISCUSSION. SO ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE, A DISCUSSION OR A VOTE ON THIS UNTIL THE 2ND OR OCTOBER 27TH, IS THAT CORRECT? OCTOBER 27TH. 
          WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON THE RECORD? ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT, PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. NAY. YOU HAVE TWO NAYS. IS THAT RIGHT? CAN WE DO IT? CAN WE DO A RECORDED VOTE? I'M NOT SURE I CAUGHT EVERYTHING. YES, WE'RE GOING TO PULL THAT UP. IF THERE ARE ANY HICCUPS, WE WILL FIND A DIFFERENT SOLUTION. WE CAN DO A SHOW OF HANDS. IF THERE'S ANY HICCUPS. WELL, WE COULDN'T DO A SHOW. WE CAN DO THAT, CAN'T WE? OKAY, LET'S HAVE A SHOW. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY RAISE YOUR HAND. OKAY. ALL OPPOSED, RAISE YOUR HANDS, PLEASE. THAT'S THREE OPPOSED. 
          OKAY, SO WE WILL POSTPONE THAT UNTIL OCTOBER 27TH. AND WE WILL HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PROPONENT. ALL RIGHT, SO WE STILL HAVE THE. DOES THAT KILL THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, THOUGH? IT MAKES IT MOOT. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I LIKE TO USE THAT WORD MOOT WHENEVER I CAN. 
          DON'T GET TO USE IT TOO OFTEN. ALL RIGHT. 
          [2.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 2538-TT, a request of West Texas Engineering, LLC, for E.C. Hatton, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Neighborhood Commercial District (NC), at 7515 34th Street, located east of Alcove Avenue and south of 34th Street, on 2.957 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 39, and consider an ordinance.]
IT'S ALL RIGHT. AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM 7.2 THROUGH 7.6 AND WE WILL CONDUCT A CONSOLIDATED PUBLIC HEARING FOR THESE ZONING CASES. AND WE'RE GOING TO ASK OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR TO PROVIDE A BRIEF SUMMARY OF EACH ZONING CASE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU, MAYOR. ITEM 7.2, ZONE CASE 2538-TT. THE APPLICANT IS WEST TEXAS TEXAS ENGINEERING AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2 TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. WE SENT OUT 54 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING ONE IN FAVOR. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 34TH EAST OF ALCOVE. HERE'S THE ONE RESPONSE WE RECEIVED IN FAVOR. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH WITH SOME ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AND IS SURROUNDED BY VACANT LAND TO THE SOUTH AND WEST. CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2. THERE IS ADDITIONAL SF2, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AUTO URBAN, COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING TO THE NORTH. FUTURE LAND USE PLAIN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. 
          WHILE THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS DESIGNATION, IT IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION ALONG A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL. 
          THE ZONE CHANGES IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. 34TH STREET IS A PRINCIPAL 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 
          [3.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 5): Consider a request for Zone Case 3557, a request of Seventeen Services, LLC, for PlainsCapital Bank, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Auto-Urban Commercial District (AC), at 6714 104th Street, located north of 104th Street and west of Milwaukee Avenue, on 15.536 acres of unplatted land out of Block AK, Section 22, and consider an ordinance.]
QUESTIONS. I SEE NONE. THANK YOU. PROCEED. ITEM 7 3, ZONE CASE 3557 THE APPLICANT IS 17 SERVICES LLC. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM SINGLE LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2 TO AUTO URBAN COMMERCIAL. WE SENT OUT 17 NOTIFICATIONS, RECEIVING FIVE IN FAVOR. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF 104TH WEST OF MILWAUKEE. 
          HERE IS THE RESPONSE MAP SHOWING THE FIVE PROPERTIES IN FAVOR. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE IS A SUBSTATION TO THE WEST, A DEVELOPED APARTMENT COMPLEX TO THE SOUTHEAST, AND SOME ADDITIONAL HOMES TO THE NORTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST. 
          THE CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2. IT IS SURROUNDED BY SF2 TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTHEAST, AND AUTO URBAN COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH THE EAST. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. AND HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. 
          THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS DESIGNATION. 
          ADDITIONALLY, AUTO URBAN COMMERCIAL WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE AT THE NODE INTERSECTIONS. 
          THEREFORE, THIS REQUEST IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, NOR IS IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. IT HAS LIMITED ACCESS TO A THOROUGHFARE FOR THIS TYPE OF ZONING. IT IS ALONG 104TH, WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS A COLLECTOR. STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ARE 
          [01:25:03]
THERE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. COUNCILMAN BRUEGEL? MS. SAGER, DID THE THE MOVEMENT SUGGEST WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY WHILE THEY'RE SEEKING THIS CHANGE? YES, AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT. BUT IF I RECALL, AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING, HE DISCUSSED DIVIDING IT UP INTO MULTIPLE TRACKS FOR BUSINESSES. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, 
          [4.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 6): Consider a request for Zone Case 1864-J, a request of Tim Khater, for a zone change from Medium Density Residential District (MDR) to Office District (OF), at 3418 La Salle Avenue, located south of 34th Street and west of La Salle Avenue, Park Lorraine Addition, Tract G, and consider an ordinance.]
ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, ITEM 7.4, ZONE CASE 1864J. THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE. WE SENT OUT 72 NOTIFICATIONS RECEIVING FOUR IN FAVOR. THIS PROPERTY IS EAST OF MILWAUKEE, SOUTH OF 34. 
          HERE'S THE RESPONSE MAP SHOWING THE FOUR IN FAVOR. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE IS COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES TO THE NORTH AND WEST AND A DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH AND EAST ALONG WITH A WORSHIP CENTER TO THE EAST AS WELL. CURRENT ZONING IS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. THERE'S HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING TO THE NORTH AND WEST, LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2 TO THE SOUTH, AND ADDITIONAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND MEDIUM DENSITY CITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USES. AND HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. HERE'S A SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWING HOW THEY INTEND TO DEVELOP A PARKING LOT ON THIS PROPERTY. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAT DESIGNATION IS FOR COMMERCIAL. WHILE OFFICE ZONING IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS DESIGNATION, IT IS ACTUALLY MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN OUR COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. IT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE LOCATION IS ALONG LASALLE AVENUE, WHICH IS A LOCAL STREET. STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BY UNANIMOUS VOTE WITH ONE RECUSAL. AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FROM MS. SAGER. 
          MR. BRUEGEL. ONCE AGAIN, DID THE APPLICANT STATE THEIR INTENT FOR WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH THIS PARCEL OF LAND AS WELL? YES. IT WILL BE A PAVED PARKING LOT TO SERVICE THE WORSHIP CENTER TO THE EAST. CAN YOU GET FURTHER COMMENT? NO, THAT'S ALL. CAN YOU GO BACK? YES. SO THE ZONING CHANGE WOULD APPLY TO THE ENTIRE LOT, BUT THEIR INTENTION IS TO JUST PAVE THAT SECTION OF THE LOT. AT THIS TIME. YES. 
          RIGHT. AND WHERE IS THE LOCATION OF THE WORSHIP CENTER? THE MOSQUE IS. IT IS IMMEDIATELY EAST. THE PROPERTY ZONED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. 
          ON THE MAP, THE GREEN. WAIT, IMMEDIATELY EAST. AM I. OKAY, SO IT'S ACROSS THE STREET? YES. OKAY. OKAY. 
          ACROSS THE STREET. I GOT YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          QUESTIONS. OKAY. MR. COLLINS. 
          SO, MS. SAGER, THIS BRINGS ME BACK TO OUR OTHER, YOU KNOW, OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW WE WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A PARKING LOT, BUT WE'VE CREATED AN OFFICE ZONE THERE. AND THAT OFFICE ZONE MAY BE SUPERIOR TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD VERSUS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. I DON'T KNOW. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ZONING TWO ACRES WHEN WE'RE ONLY GOING TO UTILIZE ONE ACRE, AND WE'VE OPENED THE DOOR FOR SOMETHING ON THE OTHER ACRE IN THAT PROCESS. IS IT POSSIBLE TO LIMIT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE PARKING LOT, BUT I'M ALSO NOT IN FAVOR OF SWINGING BOTH DOORS OPEN TO WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY. HOW CAN WE. 
          IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN LIMIT THIS AND SAY THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THIS PROPERTY IS BUILD A PARKING LOT AND NOT SOMETHING ELSE? SO THE LIMITATION YOU COULD PLACE WOULD BE AGAIN, USING A MEETS AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION FROM A SURVEYOR TO OUTLINE THE PORTION OF PROPERTY THEY INTEND TO USE FOR THE PARKING LOT AS IT STANDS TODAY, THEY INTEND TO DEVELOP THE SOUTHERN PORTION, WHICH WOULD LEAVE MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SANDWICHED BETWEEN OFFICE AND HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING, WHICH I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND. 
          AND SO IN OUR MOTION TO APPROVE, WE COULD REQUIRE A MEETS AND BOUNDS AS BEING PROPOSED. OR HOW WOULD WE. HOW WOULD WE. HOW WOULD WE MANAGE THAT TODAY TO GET THIS PROJECT DOWN THE ROAD? I'M AGAIN, I'M OKAY WITH PARKING LOT. I'M JUST NOT OKAY WITH. WE WOULD NEED THE MEETS AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION 
          [01:30:02]
BEFORE YOU TOOK ACTION, SO WE WOULD NEED TO POSTPONE TODAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? 
          [5.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 6): Consider a request for Zone Case 2538-RR, a request of Gary Garza, for a zone change from Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2) to Heavy Commercial District (HC), at 7509 and 7513 19th Street, located south of 19th Street and west of Wausau Avenue, on 2.5 acres of unplatted land out Block AK, Section 42, and consider an ordinance.]
ALL RIGHT. ITEM 7.5, ZONE CASE 2538-RR. THE APPLICANT IS GARY GARZA AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2 TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL. WE SENT OUT 16 NOTIFICATIONS RECEIVING NO RESPONSE. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 19TH WEST OF WAUSAU. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THERE IS A MIX OF VACANT AND COMMERCIAL USES UP AND DOWN 19TH STREET, BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. CURRENT ZONING IS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2. THERE IS ADDITIONAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND ABUTTING THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST. THE FUTURE ISLAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY LAND USES. HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. HERE'S A GRAPHIC PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. JUST ZOOMED IN A LITTLE BIT ON THE AERIAL SHOWING THE PROPERTY ITSELF. 
          IT IS TWO AND A HALF ACRES. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. 
          ALTHOUGH THIS REQUEST DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THAT DESIGNATION, IT IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION ALONG A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL AND ADJACENT TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL ZONING. 
          THE ZONE CHANGES IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. 19TH STREET AGAIN IS DESIGNATED AS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL. STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH THE UNANIMOUS VOTE AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          [6.  Public Hearing - Planning (District 6): Consider a request for Zone Case 3289-B, a request of AMD Engineering, LLC, for Betenbough Homes, LLC, for a zone change from Auto-Urban Commercial District (AC) to Low Density Single-Family District (SF-2), at 8101 4th Street, located south of 4th Street and west of Alcove Avenue, on 40.53 acres of unplatted land out of Block D-6, Section 2, and consider an ordinance.]
PROCEEDED. ITEM 7.6, ZONE CASE 3289B. THE APPLICANT IS AMD ENGINEERING FOR BEATON BOW HOMES. REQUEST IS TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM AUTO URBAN COMMERCIAL DOWN TO LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2. WE RECEIVED 34 OR WE SENT OUT 34 NOTIFICATIONS RECEIVING FOUR IN FAVOR, TWO OF WHICH ARE OUTSIDE THE NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 4TH STREET NEAR ALCOVE AVENUE. HERE ARE THE RESPONSES IN FAVOR WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION BOUNDARY. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE MAJORITY OF THIS AREA IS VACANT WITH A COUPLE OF BUSINESSES IN THE VICINITY. CURRENT ZONING IS AUTO URBAN COMMERCIAL AC. 
          THERE IS ADDITIONAL AC ZONING TO THE EAST AND THE REMAINING ZONING SURROUNDING IS LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY SF2. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USES. HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA. 
          THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUEST FOR THE SF2 ZONING. THE ZONE CHANGE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION. 
          THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ALONG 4TH STREET NEAR ALCOVE. 
          4TH STREET AND ALCOVE ARE BOTH DESIGNATED AS PRINT PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS. STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST, AND THE FUNDING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH UNANIMOUS VOTE, AND I'D BE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I SEE NO QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I WILL NOW OPEN FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AGENDA ITEMS 7.2 THROUGH 7.6. SO IS ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF ANY ONE OF THESE OR ALL OF THESE ZONE CASES. PLEASE LET US KNOW WHICH ONE. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS IS FOR 7.4. 
          OKAY. YES, MY NAME IS MIATA CATER. 4508 93RD DRIVE, 7942. 
          AND I'M IN FAVOR FOR AGENDA 7.4. 
          THE ADDRESS IS ON 3418 LASALLE. IT'S BEEN A DIRT LOT USED FOR PARKING FOR THE PAST 15 YEARS. SO WE'VE BEEN USING IT FOR PARKING FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS. IT'S JUST ON DIRT. 
          WE WOULD LIKE TO PAVE IT TO FACILITATE PARKING FOR THE WORSHIP CENTER ACROSS THE STREET AND TO HELP MAKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD BETTER BY DECREASING DUST. 
          TO PROTECT THE CARS, TO PREVENT CARS FROM PARKING ON THE STREETS, AND TO CONTROL THE DRAINAGE WHEN IT RAINS. 
          IN ADDITION, THE PARKING LOT WILL BE WELL LIT AT NIGHT, WHICH IS RIGHT NOW, IT'S A DARK PARKING LOT AND NOT REALLY SAFE IF YOU PARK CLOSE TO THE MIDDLE OF THE PARKING LOT. THE PLAN IS TO PAVE HALF OF IT AND KEEP THE OTHER HALF LANDSCAPED UNTIL WE ARE READY TO PAVE THE OTHER HALF. SO EVENTUALLY, WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO PAVE THE OTHER HALF AS WE SEE MORE CARS BUILD ON THE STREETS. RIGHT NOW, AS HOMEOWNERS ARE TRYING TO DRIVE TO THEIR STREETS, THEY HAVE TO KIND OF BYPASS THE 
          [01:35:01]
CARS THAT ARE PARKED. PARKED ON THE STREET. THERE IS NO PLAN ON PUTTING A BUILDING ON THE OTHER HALF OF THE LOT, AND IT WOULDN'T BE EVEN LARGE ENOUGH TO PUT A BUILDING ON THE OTHER HALF OF THE LOT. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? OH, SEE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? GOOD EVENING. TYLER GENTRY WITH 17 SERVICES AT 1500 BROADWAY, SUITE 203. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON 7.3. WE ARE THE APPLICANT. I JUST WANTED TO ELABORATE THAT ALTHOUGH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE ZONED SF2, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS A SUBSTATION AND STACKYARD TO THE NORTH IS A FRESHLY CUT PLAYA LAKE, AND TO THE EAST IS ANOTHER AC ZONED PROPERTY. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY. OKAY. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? YES, MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU, TYLER. WHAT, WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY? I'VE HEARD MULTIPLE THINGS. TO SUBDIVIDE INTO A BUSINESS PARK. A BUSINESS PARK? YES. YOU'RE VERY SOFT SPOKEN. 
          YEAH. THE DEVELOPERS LOOKING SITE PLAN FOR THE BUSINESS PARK OR THEY PLAN ON USING FUEL BUILDINGS. I MEAN, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY THEY NEED SUCH A HIGH, HIGH ZONING FOR BACK BY HOMES. SO THE PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN SHOWS IT'S SUBDIVIDED INTO 19 LOTS. SO THESE COULD POTENTIALLY BE OFFICE BUILDINGS, OFFICE WAREHOUSES, THOSE KINDS OF BUILDINGS. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ-GARCIA. I'D LIKE TO ASK KRISTEN A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS REAL QUICKLY ON 7.3. HOW MANY OF THE CITIZENS AROUND THE AREA SPOKE AGAINST THIS PROJECT? WE DID NOT HAVE ANYONE SPEAK AGAINST, BUT THE, THE OFFICE OR THE STAFF DENIED IT AS WELL AS PNZ. 
          CAN YOU KIND OF GIVE ME SOME OF THE REASONS? SURE. AUTO URBAN COMMISSION COMMERCIAL IS, IT'S NOT THE HIGHEST COMMERCIAL ZONE WE HAVE, IT'S NOT THE LOWEST AND IT ALLOWS A VARIETY OF USES AND THE ONLY ACCESS TO IT IS FROM 104TH, A LOCAL STREET. THERE WAS, IF YOU RECALL, STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THE AC ZONING EAST OF THIS PROPERTY. ORIGINALLY THERE WAS DISCUSSION THAT SHOWED THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY WOULD HAVE ACCESS DIRECTLY TO MILWAUKEE, WHICH, WHICH CHANGES THINGS. THIS PROPERTY ONLY HAVING ACCESS OFF OF A LOCAL STREET, FURTHER IN, AWAY FROM THE THOROUGHFARE, WE DID NOT FEEL WAS APPROPRIATE. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN. 
          COUNCILMAN COLLINS. YES, THANK YOU, KRISTEN. IF YOU DON'T MIND, AGAIN, WE LOOK BACK AT 7.4 AND I'D MENTIONED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT MY ELSE MIGHT ALSO BE ON THAT LOT. DO YOU HAVE APPROXIMATE SIZE OF THAT LOT? I DO NOT. THE APPLICANT MAY KNOW. I'M SORRY, I DO NOT. NO. MS. CATER, DO YOU KNOW HOW LARGE OF A LOT THAT IS THAT WE'RE. 
          YOU'RE WORKING WITH? IT IS LESS THAN TWO ACRES. LESS THAN TWO ACRES, BUT GREATER THAN ONE AND A HALF OR, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE. WELL, BIGGER THAN A BREAD BOX. IT'S BIGGER THAN A BREAD BOX, AS THE MAYOR JUST SAID. YEAH. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT'S ABOUT AN ACRE. ALL RIGHT. AND SO YOUR PLAN AS IT IS PROPOSED IS ABOUT A HALF ACRE OF PAVING AT THIS TIME. I THINK IT'S ABOUT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN HALF AN ACRE. IT'S FOR 100 PARKING SPOTS. THAT IS ON THE PLAN. IT'S 100 PARKING SPOTS. SO. BUT YES, THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY, AND WHAT IS, MS. SAGER, WHAT'S THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF THIS? IT'S THE WORSHIP CENTER ACROSS THE STREET. OKAY, SO I'M SORRY, TO THE WEST. WHAT'S TO THE WEST. IT IS ZONED HEAVY COMMERCIAL. THERE ARE EXISTING BUSINESSES THERE TODAY. I COULD NOT TELL YOU SPECIFICALLY WHAT THAT BUSINESS IS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. A GAS STATION LOOKS LIKE A SWIMMING POOL, BUT I'M NOT SURE. I DON'T KNOW. 
          MS. CATER, DO YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE BUSINESSES ARE TO THE EAST OR TO THE WEST? I MEAN, IF YOU CAN SEE IT UP HERE. IS THAT. IS THAT THE ELKS LODGE? AH, THAT ELK LODGE IS THERE. 
          [01:40:07]
THAT'S IT. OKAY. AND THEN THERE'S NAILS. OKAY. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND SO I STILL HAVE THE MICROPHONE. HERE WE GO. 
          HOW ABOUT THAT, MS. CATER? IF ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE IS NOT THE PARKING LOT, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE PARKING LOT. NO PROBLEM. 
          I WOULD LIKE THE DEFINITION OF THE SIZE OF THE PARKING LOT TODAY SO THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, APPROVE THIS. IF WE POSTPONE THIS FOR. I MEAN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A SURVEY. IT'S GOING TO TAKE A COUPLE OF WEEKS. WOULD YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION TO POSTPONING THIS UNTIL THE SECOND MEETING IN SEPTEMBER? DO YOU HAVE A CONSTRUCTION PLAN THAT'S IMMEDIATE? WE DO. WE ACTUALLY ALREADY. I MEAN, WE DO HAVE A CONSTRUCTION PLAN THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY. I THOUGHT THAT WAS ALREADY SPENT. AS FAR AS THE. I HAVE IT HERE. I CAN SHOW IT TO YOU. WELL, I MEAN, THE PLAN IS ON HERE. DO YOU HAVE A CONTRACTOR HIRED AND. 
          AND ARE THEY READY TO MOVE FORWARD? WE HAVE IT OUT FOR BID, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE FORWARD ONCE WE GET AN APPROVAL. 
          BUT THE ISSUE IS THE CARS ARE IN THE WAY OF THE, OF THE BUILDING AND CAUSING A LOT OF CONGESTION IN THAT AREA. 
          YES. SO THE SOONER THE BETTER. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE. AS FAR AS THE. 
          COME TO THE PODIUM. OH, I'M SORRY. YEAH, I'M SORRY. IF YOU'LL COME TO THE PODIUM AGAIN, BECAUSE THIS IS ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND WE'RE NOT RECORDING. NOT GETTING RECORDED. PEOPLE CAN HEAR MR. COLLINS TALKING, BUT THEY HAVE NO IDEA I'M THE LAST ONE THEY WANT TO HEAR. SO. SO I'M NOT LYING ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE LAND. JUST GIVE ME A SECOND. I'LL GET YOU THE EXACT. 
          BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO ESTIMATE AND SAY SOMETHING THAT IS INCORRECT AND THEN Y' ALL HOLD IT AGAINST ME, BUT. SO, YES, THIS. THIS NEEDED TO BE DONE FOR THE LONGEST TIME, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE THAT WE RAISED MONEY FOR AND NEEDED TO HAVE DONE. 
          AND WHAT'S THE BEST WAY OF UTILIZING THIS MONEY IS TO, IS TO PAVE THAT DIRT LAND THAT WHEN IT RAINS, IT GETS MUDDY AND ADD ELECTRICITY TO IT AND JUST LIKE YOU SAID SO. BUT LET ME GET YOU THAT EXACT MEASUREMENT, PLEASE. I'M AGAIN, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PARKING LOT. GRATEFUL THAT YOU'RE WILLING AS YOUR CHURCH IS WILLING TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THE AREA AND ASSIST THE NEIGHBORS. I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS DEFINITION THOUGH, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT HARD AND I APOLOGIZE. BUT IF WE COULD HAVE THAT DEFINITION, IF YOU THOUGHT WE COULD HAVE IT BY SEPTEMBER 8TH, WE COULD POSTPONE THIS DATE SPECIFIC UNTIL THE 8TH. I JUST DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GET A CERTAIN SURVEY THAT FAST. SO WHEN YOU SAY DEFINITION, YOU SAY DEFINITION OF THE MEATS. THE MEETS AND BOUNDS. OKAY. PARKING LOT TODAY. OKAY. AND, AND, AND WE'RE ONLY. I'M ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT NOT WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE NOT. BUT WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE IF WE DON'T PUT SOME RESTRICTION ON THE PROCESS. AND THAT'S ALL. 
          AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. AND IT'S ONLY MEANT TO USE FOR PARKING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER FACILITY OR A BUILDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. LET ME, LET ME GET MORE INFORMATION FOR YOU THOUGH. SO IF, IF IT'S ACCEPTABLE TO YOU, I WILL IN A MOMENT MOVE TO POSTPONE THIS UNTIL THE 8TH AND WE CAN PICK IT UP AND, AND YOU COULD HAVE THOSE MEETS AND BOUNDS ESTABLISHED BY THEN. DO YOU THINK? I REALLY THINK IT'S ALREADY SURVEYED. IT'S ALREADY SURVEYED? YEAH. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY PLATTED. 
          BUT IF WE ARE DISCUSSING ONLY ZONING A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, THAT'S WHAT WOULD REQUIRE A NEW SURVEY WITH THE MEETS AND BOUNDS OF ONLY THE PORTION THAT COUNCIL WANTS TO REZONE. AND IT WILL DEPEND ON THE SURVEYOR AND HOW, HOW MANY THEY HAVE IN QUEUE. I MEAN, I, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE. 
          WE COULD. OKAY, SO YOU'RE, I MEAN YOU'RE JUST. YOU'RE TELLING ME THIS COULD TAKE A MINUTE AND COST THESE FOLKS MONEY? YES, SIR. OKAY. I'M ALL GOOD. I'M ALL GOOD. LET'S BUILD A PARKING LOT. ALL RIGHT. 
          TURN ME OFF. THANK YOU. I THINK OUR CITY MANAGER WANTS TO WEIGH IN HERE. I SEE THAT GREEN LIGHT DOWN THERE. COME MY LIGHT DOESN'T FLASH RED LIKE Y'ALLS DOES. THAT'S KIND OF COOL. 
          JUST FOR THE COUNCIL'S INFORMATION, THE PARCEL IN TOTAL, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO THE GIS SYSTEMS, 82,046 SQUARE FEET. SO IT'S JUST A BIT UNDER TWO ACRES. ROUGH SCALING OFF OF THE DRAWINGS THAT ARE IN YOUR PACKET. SO THIS IS ROUGH SCALING. IT'S ABOUT 40, 41,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE PARKING LOT JUST UNDER. 
          [01:45:03]
MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING THE CITY MANAGER SAID. I LOOKED IT UP ON THE GIS, WHICH JUST MEANS IT'S LESS THAN 2 ACRES. BUT I THINK WE HAVE GOTTEN WHERE WE HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO UP HERE, WHICH IS ZONE LAND, NOT DECIDE WHAT THEY PUT ON HALF OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN. AND SO OFFICE ZONING FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS THE CORRECT BUFFER TO GO BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND THE MORE HEAVY COMMERCIAL THAT IS ON THAT CORNER. IT IS NOT UP TO THIS COUNCIL TO DECIDE IF THEY SHOULD PAY HALF OF A TWO ACRE PARCEL AS A PARKING LOT OR IF THEY ADD AN OFFICE BUILDING IN THE FUTURE. IT IS TO DECIDE A ZONING THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA. ALL RIGHT, NOBODY ELSE IS IN THE QUEUE, BUT YES, I WAS JUST MAKING SURE NOBODY ELSE HERE WAS TALKING. 
          COME ON FORWARD AND. 
          THANK YOU, MAYOR MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, MY NAME IS GARY GARZA. I OWN THE TWO PROPERTIES ON WEST 19TH STREET. I THINK IT'S SIMPLE. 
          EVERYTHING'S GOING HEAVY COMMERCIAL. THE THE FUTURE OF THE CITY, IT ALIGNS WITH THE, WITH THE PLANNERS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE CITY. SO EVERYTHING'S GOING HEAVY COMMERCIAL. I'M JUST CHANGING TWO OLD LOCKS. THAT WAS XANAX YEARS AGO TO HEAVY COMMERCIAL. 
          I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GARZA? DON'T SEE ANY. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? HELLO EVERYONE, I'M LENA KARAT. I LIVE AT 1121 NORFOLK AVENUE, UNIT 10. I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF AGENDA ITEM 7.4. AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING TO CORRECT A DESIGNATION THAT DOESN'T MATCH CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND. 
          RIGHT NOW, CARS ARE PARKED ALONG SIDES OF THE ROAD, NARROWING THE STREET, LIMITING ACCESS, WHICH IS A SAFETY HAZARD. 
          AT THIS POINT, VEHICLES ARE TRACKING DIRT OFF OF THE DIRT LOT ONTO THE ROAD THAT'S LEADING TO DUST AND DRY WEATHER AND MUD IN THE RAIN. WE'RE ASKING TO FIX A DUST PROBLEM AND A PARKING PROBLEM AT OUR OWN EXPENSE ON OUR OWN LAND. THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF ANY OF THESE ITEMS? HI, GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS USAM KURAT. I LIVE IN 11201 NORFOLK AVENUE, UNIT 10. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THE DR. WILSON INPUT ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE ARE ASKING FOR THE APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THIS LOT. YES, OUR INTENTION IS TO PUT A PARKING LOT. I'M INVOLVED WITH THAT PROCESS. THE ONLY REASON WE CANNOT PUT A FULL THING IS MONEY ISSUE. WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY AS IS. IT'S VERY EXPENSIVE PROJECT BECAUSE WE ARE NOT DOING HALF WORK, YOU KNOW, JUST THROW SOME CEMENT THERE OR SOMETHING. 
          NO, I MEAN IT'S GOING TO BE LIT. THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE LANDSCAPING IS GOING TO BE BEAUTIFUL IMPROVEMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS IS. IT'S JUST DIRT RIGHT NOW. 
          AT NIGHT IT'S VERY DARK. IT'S KIND OF SCARY. WE THOUGHT ABOUT PUTTING PROJECT PROJECTOR LIGHT FROM OUR SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO, TO LIGHT UP THE STREET, BUT THAT WAS NOT FEASIBLE. SO WE DID LOOK TO, TO LIGHT UP THAT PARKING LOT BECAUSE PEOPLE AT NIGHT CANNOT WALK SAFELY. 
          WE DO HAVE POLICE THAT'S COME ON A REGULAR BASIS TO HELP PEOPLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT PLACE IS SAFE. 
          THAT'S ALL WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN UPGRADE TO THE CURRENT SITUATION WE ARE IN. 
          THIS IS NOT A JUST REZONING AREA. THIS WHOLE AREA GOING TO BE UPGRADED BY HAVING APPROPRIATE LIGHT, APPROPRIATE LANDSCAPING, CONTROLLING THE DUST AND CONTROLLING THE TRAFFIC. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS NAMED ROQUEL ANISE. I'M WITH BIDAMBO HOMES AND I'M HERE TO TALK IN FAVOR OF 7.6. 
          ACTUALLY HAVE SOME SLIDES. 
          YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'LL BE, I'LL BE BRIEF. JUST WANTED TO COME UP HERE AND SHARE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR THIS PROJECT AND PROVIDE SOME KIND OF OUR VISION FOR THIS COMMUNITY. SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS WHERE IT'S LOCATED. 
          THE PROJECT IS IN THE CORNER OF 4TH STREET AND ALCOVE. AND AS YOU CAN SEE UP THERE, JUST SOUTH OF OUR LOGO, WE HAVE THE FRIENDSHIP INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT LOGO. SO WE'VE ACTUALLY PARTNERED WITH FRIENDSHIP ON THIS PROJECT AND WE'VE 
          [01:50:01]
INSTALLED THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION ON THAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS WE SPEAK. 
          THIS IS A PRELIMINARY CONCEPT FOR THE COMMUNITY. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT SURROUNDS THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT IS GOING IN THERE. RIGHT NOW, THIS SITE, WE ARE PROPOSING AROUND 411 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          THESE ARE HIGH QUALITY, AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR NEW HOMEOWNERS. AND WE'RE HOPING THAT Y' ALL CAN JUST SEE OUR EXCITEMENT FOR THIS NEW COMMUNITY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. 
          I DON'T SEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE A QUESTION. I LOOK TOO QUICKLY. SORRY. GO BACK TO THE PHOTOS OF THE HOUSES. 
          LOVELY HOMES. I NOTICED THESE TWO HOMES ON THE BOTTOM PICTURE. IS THAT A HOUSE NEXT TO A HOUSE THAT CLOSE? YEP. SO WITH THIS ZONING SF2, THE SITE SETBACKS FOR HOMES ARE FIVE FOOT OFF OF SIDE. SO THESE HOMES ARE TYPICALLY 10FT APART FROM EACH OTHER. SO THEY ARE 10FT. NOT LIKE THE PICTURE. 
          YEAH, SO, SO THERE'D BE 10FT. 
          IT'S PART OF JUST THE ANGLE OF THIS IMAGE. BUT YEAH. AND THESE HOMES AND LOT SIZES ARE ALL STANDARD TO THIS ZONING. 
          AND THEN OBVIOUSLY AS WE, AS THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD, WE WILL COLLABORATE WITH CITY STAFF, PLANNING AND ENGINEERING FOR TO MEET CITY STANDARDS. THANK YOU. YEAH. ALL RIGHT, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF ANY OF THESE ZONING CASES? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS VICTOR RODEN TO JESSE JAMES DRIVE. I'M WITH WEST TEXAS ENGINEERING AND, AND WE'RE THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM 7.2. AND IT'S, IT'S TO THE REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM SF2 TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO WHAT WAS SAID EARLIER THAT THE SURROUNDING ZONING TO THE SOUTH IS, IS SF2 AND TO THE EAST AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT TO THE NORTH AS WELL. 
          BUT LAST YEAR OTTO URBAN WAS APPROVED ON, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF, OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND OF COURSE WE'RE GOING FOR A LOWER DESIGNATION ACROSS THE 110 FOOT THOROUGHFARE. AND THEN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF US WE GOT 150 FOOT RAILROAD RIGHT AWAY AND THEN PLAYA LAKE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT. SO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. DID YOU SAY YOU LIVE ON JESSE JAMES DRIVE? YEAH, YEAH. DO WE HAVE A JESSE JAMES DRIVE? BUFFALO SPRINGS? LIKE, OH, BUFFALO. 
          OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW WE WERE THAT MUCH OUTLAW IN THIS CITY. OKAY, ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK A LITTLE HUMOR IN FAVOR OF ANY OF THESE ITEMS? ALL RIGHT, ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO ANY OF THESE ITEMS, PLEASE COME FORWARD. I'M SUSAN PETTIS, 4625 30TH LUBBOCK, AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST 7.4. 
          FIRST OF ALL, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING LIGHTS TO A NEIGHBORHOOD IN WOOLFORTH. WHEN THEY ADDED LIGHTS TO THE LIBRARY, THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA WERE VERY IRRITATED BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T SLEEP AT NIGHT. AND IT HAS ALSO LOWERED THE PROPERTY VALUE IN SOME CASES. SO THAT'S VERY CONCERNING. I ALSO WOULD ASK IF YOU COULD JUST SLOW DOWN AND POSTPONE THIS AND COME UP WITH A LINE ITEM FOR PAVING. 
          BECAUSE THE UNKNOWN FOR THE FUTURE. I'VE HEARD IT EXPRESSED AND I'VE HAD THE SAME CONCERN. 
          IS IT GOING TO BE PAVING, IS IT GOING TO BE OFFICES AND IS IT GOING TO BE OTHER THINGS? SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO HAVE A DIFFERENT ZONING THAT JUST SAYS PAVING? SO THOSE ARE MY MAIN CONCERNS. 
          THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. 
          ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? MY NAME IS LESLIE RHODES. I RESIDE AT 10807 RICHMOND AVENUE HERE IN LUBBOCK. I WOULD NOT SAY PARTICULARLY THAT I'M IN OPPOSITION OF 7.4, WHICH IS WHAT I SPECIFICALLY WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT, BUT. AND I DIDN'T ACTUALLY EVEN COME HERE TODAY FOR THAT, BUT SAT THROUGH THIS. 
          BUT I GUESS WHAT I'M KIND OF UNDERSTANDING, IT SEEMS 
          [01:55:01]
LIKE TO ME THAT THAT AREA IS ZONED APPROPRIATELY. 
          BUT I ALSO KNOW, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY LUBBOCK HAS CHURCHES AND FACILITIES AND STUFF IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. I'M JUST WONDERING WHY IT CAN'T JUST BE GET A, JUST A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND LEAVE THE ZONING AS IT IS. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THEY WANTED IT FOR THE PAVEMENT OR WHATEVER, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF IT WOULD JUST BE ABLE TO. 
          MY CONCERN IS YOU TAKE IT TO A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY ZONE, YOU'VE GOT KIDS CARE THERE WITH THEIR, YOU KNOW, PLAYGROUND BACKED UP RIGHT TO THAT FACILITY. SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHY YOU'RE HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING OF CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION WHEN IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THAT A, YOU KNOW, THAT A SPECIFIC. JUST A CONSUMER PERMIT, JUST CONDITIONAL PERMIT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR IT. GOOD EVENING AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          MY NAME IS LAURA REAGAN. I AM A 30 YEAR RESIDENT OF LUBBOCK, AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE REZONING OF THAT LOT ON LA SALLE. THAT IS A PART OF A MUCH BIGGER ISSUE, AND EVERY ONE OF US NEEDS TO GET EDUCATED. ALL OF THIS IS SO NEW TO US. AND SO I, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE REASONS WOMEN LOVE MEN IS BECAUSE MEN HAVE MANY THINGS THAT WE DON'T. AND ONE OF OUR FAVORITE THINGS ABOUT MEN IS YOUR MUSCLES. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WOMEN HAVE THAT MEN DON'T IS WOMEN'S INTUITION. LUCKILY, YOU DO HAVE THE HOLY SPIRIT, I HOPE, AND HE SPEAKS TO ALL OF OUR HEARTS WHEN WE ARE OPEN TO HIM. BUT WOMEN HAVE A SENSE WHEN SOMETHING DANGEROUS IS HAPPENING, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR CHILDREN'S SAFETY IS AT RISK. AND THAT'S WHEN OUR MAMA BEAR COMES OUT. AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE. WE HAVE A WAY BIGGER ISSUE THAN JUST A PARKING LOT. IF YOU HEAR ANGER IN MY VOICE, PLEASE KNOW IT'S NOT ANGER. 
          IT'S FEAR. IT'S WOMEN'S INTUITION. YOU CAN'T IMAGINE HOW MANY LUBBOCK MOTHERS AND FATHERS I'M SPEAKING FOR WHEN I BEG YOU TO SAY NO. 
          THE ANSWER TO ANYTHING THAT THE ISLAMISTS WANT FROM US IS NO. THE DECEPTION THAT I HAVE HEARD IN THE LAST 20 MINUTES IS UPSETTING TO ME. THAT BUILDING IS NOT A CHURCH. IT IS A MOSQUE. IT'S NOT A WORSHIP CENTER. IT'S A MOSQUE. JUST SAY NO. GUYS. IT'S TIME FOR US TO FACE THE FACTS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING IN LUBBOCK. NO MORE PUSSY FOOTING AROUND. NO MORE TIPTOEING. NO MORE DENIAL. LIKE SILENT RATS. 
          LIKE SNAKES. THE ISLAMISTS ARE SNEAKING INTO OUR COUNTRY, INTO OUR STATE, INTO LUBBOCK. HOW MANY OF YOU KNOW ABOUT CORE3 CAPITAL? THEY ARE A MULTI BILLION DOLLAR ISLAMIC SHARIA LAW PRIVATE EQUITY FIRM. 
          MS. REAGAN, PLEASE JUST STAY THOUGH FOCUSED REALLY ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. 
          YES, SIR, BUT I, I NEED TO EXPLAIN THIS AND THEN I WILL MOVE ON. THIS IS HUGE. 
          THEY ARE AN ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT, REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BROKERS. 
          THEY HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE BILLIONS FROM OVERSEAS ISLAMIC ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE TARGETED MIDDLE AMERICA, FLORIDA, GREAT LAKE STATES, TEXAS AND LUBBOCK. ALL OF THEIR PROPERTIES ARE SHARIA COMPLIANT. WHY? THIS IS AMERICA. WE DON'T COMPLY WITH SHARIA LAW. SO SO FAR IN LUBBOCK IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, THEY HAVE QUIETLY BOUGHT HAYDENS PARK, A 52 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY BUILD TO RENT DEVELOPMENT. THEY BOUGHT OAK FOREST, TOWNHOMES, A 65 UNIT COMMUNITY ACQUIRED IN PHASES. THEY BOUGHT SALT CREEK RANCH, AN 80 UNIT PROPERTY NEAR TECH VILLAGE CREST AT COOPER, 127 UNIT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. 
          CYPRESS GROVE, A 75 UNIT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. IT'S TIME TO SAY NO. THAT IS 400 UNITS. ARE THEY FILLING THOSE UNITS WITH INVADERS? IT'S ALSO SECRET. ONE THING WE DO KNOW. 
          THEY ARE DESTROYING THE VALUES 
          [02:00:02]
OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. 
          OR THEY WILL PLEASE OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. I'M ALMOST FINISHED. WILL PAY FOR OUR IGNORANCE AND OUR DENIAL IN THIS CITY. THE ANSWER TO ANYTHING THESE INVADERS WANT FROM US IS NO. IT'S BEST FOR ALL OF US IF THEY JUST GO HOME. 
          YOUR JOB IS TO CARE FOR OUR CITY. DON'T HELP THEM BUY UP AND TAKE OVER OUR CITY. DO YOU OPEN YOUR DOOR TO APPROACHING ROBBERS AND INVITE THEM INSIDE? DO YOU ASK THEM IF THEY'D LIKE TO KNOW WHERE YOU KEEP YOUR JEWELRY, YOUR GUNS? NO. THE MOSQUE ON LA SALLE ALREADY HAS A PARKING LOT. PLEASE DON'T GIVE THEM ONE MORE INCH OF OUR SAFETY CITY. 
          THE MUSLIMS ALREADY STARTED A NEW MOSQUE ON THE NORTHEAST LOOP FROM THAT OLD ARNETT ELEMENTARY. WHY? WHY? THEY SNUCK INTO LUBBOCK AND WERE DUPING THEIR GUESTS, THEIR NEIGHBORS, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN 40 DAYS. I NEED TO REMIND YOU THEY COME OVER FOR FREE STUFF. I PROMISE YOU. 
          GIVE ME 30 MORE SECONDS, I'M DONE. ALL RIGHT. PLUS THEY'RE CURRENTLY BUYING. THE MUSLIMS ARE BUYING ACREAGE IN FOUR OTHER AREAS AROUND LUBBOCK RIGHT NOW. WE KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OUR STATE. 50 NEW MOSQUES IN DFW IN 24 MONTHS. NOT TO MENTION HOUSTON, AUSTIN, SAN ANTONIO. DO YOUR JOB. YOU GUYS, PLEASE PROTECT LUBBOCK. SAY NO TO ANYTHING THE INVADERS WANT. 
          PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. 
          FLEX YOUR MUSCLES. STOP THE ISLAMIFICATION OF LUBBOCK. 
          EYES WIDE OPEN, GUYS. PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT'S HAPPENING. GOD BLESS. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT, ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, I WILL CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:03 PM, AND. YOU'VE HAD YOUR. THIS IS. THIS IS NOT REALLY A BACK AND FORTH PUBLIC COMMENTS. THAT'S JUST NOT HOW IT WORKS. I'M SORRY, BUT DO WE NEED. WE NEED TO TAKE A BRIEF RECESSION. I'M SORRY. 
          OKAY. I'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING THOUGH. I'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE'LL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS. OKAY? OH, YEAH, WE'RE NOT DONE. NO, WE'LL BE BACK. WE'LL BE BACK. I GOTTA BE PATIENT. I JUST GOTTA BE PATIENT. YOU'RE LAST ON THE AGENDA. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE BACK AND NOW WE'VE. I'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO NOW WE NEED A MOTION TO TAKE UP AND APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 7.2 THROUGH 7.6. DO I HAVE A MOTION? WE HAVE A REQUEST THAT 7.3 BE REMOVED FROM THIS GROUPED AGENDA AND VOTED ON SEPARATELY. IS THERE A CONSENSUS? I JUST. YOU DON'T. 
          YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE TO DO IT. YOU COULD JUST RIGHT NOW DO MOVE TO APPROVE ITEM 7.3, SECOND DISCUSS, VOTE, AND THEN TAKE UP THE OTHER ITEMS AFTER THAT. OKAY, LET'S DO IT THAT WAY. THAT'S THE CONVENIENT WAY TO DO IT. SO LET'S TAKE UP ITEM 7.3 THEN, WITHOUT OBJECTION FROM THE COUNCIL, DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.3? DO I HAVE A SECOND A MOTION AND A SECOND A DISCUSSION ON ITEM 7.3? DOCTOR WILSON. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I THINK WITH THIS ONE, MS. SAGER SAID IT CORRECTLY, AS WELL AS PLANNING AND ZONING, THAT I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION TUCKED BACK IN BEHIND AN ALREADY COMMERCIAL LOT WITHOUT PROPER ACCESS FROM A MAJOR ROAD. SO I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF BUILDING WAREHOUSE TYPE BUSINESS FACILITIES THAT FAR INTO WHERE SINGLE FAMILY SHOULD BE. COUNCILMAN COLLINS, CONCUR WITH DR. 
          WILSON. I PUSH MY BUTTON. 
          DIDN'T MEAN TO. YOUR LIGHT IS. 
          YOUR LIGHT IS GREEN. IS THAT ALL YOU WISH TO SAY? OH, OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I SEE NONE. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          ALL IN FAVOR OF ITEM 7.3, PLEASE LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE. 2. ANY 
          [02:05:06]
DOWN THIS WAY? ALL OPPOSED SAY NAY. NAY. SO THAT MOTION FAILS 05, 2 OR 2 TO 5, I GUESS, IS HOW I SHOULD SAY THAT. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. NOW, WE WOULD BE TAKING UP ITEM 7.2, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6. UNLESS THERE'S A FURTHER REQUEST TO PULL AN ITEM. NO, THAT'S SEPARATE. 7.2, 7.4, 5, AND 6. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE. WE HAVE A MOTION. A SECOND ON THAT MOTION. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS? COUNCILWOMAN MARTINEZ -GARCIA. I'D LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE FOLKS THAT HAD TO ENDURE THE RACIST REMARKS. I'M SORRY THAT YOU HAD TO ENDURE THAT. 
          WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT ZONING CASES, AND I PROBABLY AM OUT OF, OUT OF LINE TO EVEN ADDRESS THAT. 
          BUT NONE OF OUR CITIZENS DESERVE TO BE MISTREATED LIKE THAT. 
          THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. I THINK ALL OF YOU ARE DOCTORS. WE QUICKLY FORGET ABOUT THAT UNTIL WE NEED THEM. YEAH. I WOULD JUST SAY WITHOUT. EVERY CITIZEN HAS A RIGHT TO COME UP AND MAKE THEIR STATEMENTS, AND STATEMENTS THAT ARE MADE IN FRONT OF US BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK DON'T NECESSARILY IMPLY AN ENDORSEMENT OR AN OBJECTION TO ANYTHING. THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF FREE SPEECH IN OUR COUNTRY. AND I'M A VERY STRONG BELIEVER IN THAT. AND THAT'S WHY YOU WILL VERY RARELY SEE ME CUT ANYBODY'S MIC OFF. 
          YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY TEMPTATION. MUCH OF A TEMPTATION TO DO IT. NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, BUT MORE FOR STEVEN. YEAH, MORE FOR STEVEN. YEAH, I WANT TO CUT HIM OFF. NO, BUT JUST THAT'S. THAT'S THE NATURE OF A DEMOCRACY, AND WE HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT AND PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO SPEAK AND ISSUES SOMETIMES BECOME QUITE HEATED. SO I KNOW PEOPLE SAY, WHY DON'T YOU PUNCH A BUTTON? WHY DON'T YOU CUT THEM OFF? THAT'S JUST NOT. AND SINCE I PRESIDE AT THE MEETING, I GET TO DO WHAT I WANT, SO. AND I REMINDED HER, AND THAT'S USUALLY WHAT I WILL DO. AND TO STAY FOCUSED, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO DO. WE WANT TO TRY TO STAY FOCUSED ON THE ISSUE. 
          AN ISSUE BEING THIS ZONING CHANGE HERE. SO, AND I ASKED SOME QUESTIONS OF MS. SAGER MYSELF BECAUSE I NEEDED TO CONFIRM, IF YOU'LL STEP FORWARD, A FEW THINGS. SO THE GROUP THAT IS ASKING FOR THIS CHANGE, THE ZONING CHANGE, IS THE MOSQUE THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET AND A SEPARATE PIECE OF PROPERTY. 
          RIGHT. OKAY. AND SO IF THIS WAS JUST PART OF THEIR OWN PROPERTY AND THEY WANTED TO PUT A PARKING LOT ON IT, AN EXISTING PROPERTY, IF THEY HAD ROOM, THEY COULD DO SO WITHOUT COMING TO US AT ALL FOR APPROVAL. THEY JUST HAD TO MAKE THE PERMITS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. RIGHT. 
          BECAUSE THIS IS A SEPARATE PIECE OF PROPERTY ZONED, MEDIUM DENSITY OR ESSENTIAL. 
          THEY HAVE TO COME TO US IN ORDER TO DO THIS. NOW, IF THEY WERE GOING TO WANT TO PUT A MOSQUE ON THAT PROPERTY, THEY COULD DO SO. IS THAT. 
          YES, AS CURRENTLY TODAY, WORSHIP CENTERS ARE ALLOWED ON ANY ZONING IN OUR CITY, EXCEPT YOU TOLD ME, IN A COUPLE OF INDUSTRIAL PLACES, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS REALLY SURPRISING TO ME, YOU KNOW, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, BUT I THOUGHT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE LOWER ZONING, MORE RESTRICTIVE WOULD BE WHERE THEY WEREN'T. MAYBE NOT ALLOWED, BUT THEY'RE ALLOWED IN ANY ZONE IN OUR CITY EXCEPT FOR INDUSTRIAL, AS LONG AS THEY GET THEIR PERMITS AND FOLLOW ALL OUR BUILDING. BUT WE CAN'T RESTRICT A WORSHIP CENTER FROM LOCATING. BUT THIS IS NOT THE WORSHIP CENTER. IT'S THE PARKING LOT THAT SERVICES THE WORSHIP CENTER. MY OTHER UNDERSTANDING FROM YOU IS THAT THEY'VE BEEN USING THIS PARKING LOT OR THIS LOT FOR PARKING FOR 15 YEARS, IS THAT RIGHT? I THINK THAT STATEMENT WAS MADE AND OF COURSE I HAD THE QUESTION ORIGINALLY AND YOU ANSWERED IT IS, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS CAN'T PARK ON THEIR LAWNS, YOU KNOW, SO WHY ARE THEY ALLOWED TO PARK ON A LOT? AND THEY WERE GIVEN A VARIANCE AT FIVE YEAR INCREMENTS WITH THE INTENTION THAT EVENTUALLY THEY WOULD PAVE THAT LOT. AND WE KEPT EXTENDING IT FOR. I SAY WE, YOU KNOW, BOARD OF VARIANCES KEPT EXTENDING THAT IN FIVE YEAR PERIODS. SO NOW THE 15 YEAR, THAT FIVE YEAR HAS RUN OUT AND THERE'S A QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT THAT VARIANCE WOULD BE ALLOWED AGAIN, WHICH WOULD. IT WOULD NOT. IT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED. NOT UNDER OUR CURRENT CODE. NOT. 
          AND SO IN THAT CASE THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED THE PARK ON IT ANYMORE, IN WHICH CASE THEY'D BE FORCED TO PARK ALL UP AND DOWN THE STREETS. YEAH. ALL 
          [02:10:01]
RIGHT. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT THAT FURTHER UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION I THINK IS WHAT IS NEEDED HERE IS TO HOW OUR VOTE TODAY, YOU KNOW, AFFECTS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND I THINK MR. COLLINS HAD SUGGESTED A MEETS AND BOUNDS. 
          THE TIMEFRAME OF THAT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO MEET. WE'VE ALWAYS WANTED THEM TO PARK, TO PAVE THE PARKING LOT. I THINK HAS BEEN THE CASE FOR 15 YEARS. SO NOW THEY'RE GOING TO PAVE THE PARKING LOT ALONG WITH THAT REQUIRE IT COMES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, SHIELDED LIGHTING AND EVERYTHING ELSE, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. 
          OKAY. SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON AND WHAT, WHAT THE BACKGROUND FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IS AND DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO GIVE A BACKGROUND ON? ALL THE OTHERS? NO, I GAVE THE BACKGROUND I WANTED TO GIVE. 
          OKAY. SO BECAUSE THIS IS. THIS IS RAISED A LOT. ALL RIGHT. 
          OKAY. THIS IS A DISCUSSION AND THAT'S ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE DURING A DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. 
          ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, LET IT BE KNOWN BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ANY 
          [7.  Ordinance 1st Reading - Business Development: Consider an ordinance establishing Project Financing Zone No. 1, City of Lubbock, Texas, pursuant to Chapter 351 of the Texas Tax Code; designating the zone boundaries and base year; and establishing an expiration date for the zone.]
OPPOSED, SAY NAY. THERE IS NONE. ALL RIGHT, NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE UP ITEM 7.7, AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISHING OUR PFC. 
          FINALLY, WE'RE GETTING TO THIS POINT. DANIELLE IS COMING FORWARD TO GIVE US. 
          SHE'S OUR NEW CITY BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AND SHE'S GOING TO TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS. LET'S DO THIS REAL QUICKLY BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. 
          GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO TRY TO PULL UP MY PRESENTATION IF YOU GIVE ME JUST A MOMENT. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE NOT MET ME YET, MY NAME IS DANIELLE WILLIAMS. I AM THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK. THIS IS MY FIRST PRESENTATION TO THIS COUNCIL, BUT NOT MY FIRST TO A COUNCIL, BUT WHAT I HAVE FOR YOU AND, SORRY, I JUST PUT A MINT IN RIGHT BEFORE I CAME UP HERE. WHAT I HAVE FOR YOU TODAY IS AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE PROJECT FINANCING ZONE NUMBER ONE FOR THE CITY OF LUBBOCK. 
          AND I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH SOME DIFFERENT THINGS. 
          FIRST, WHAT IS A PROJECT FINANCING ZONE? IT IS A GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY AND IS DEFINED AREA CENTERED ON A PINPOINT LOCATION WITH A THREE MILE RADIUS FOR LUBBOCK. AND WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT PINPOINT LOCATION TO BE THE CIVIC CENTER. IT IS ALSO AN INCREMENTAL HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE THAT IS COLLECTED BY THE STATE WITHIN THE ZONE AND CAN BE REDIRECTED BACK TO THE MUNICIPALITY TO FUND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          AND IN THIS CASE, THE INTENTION IS TO USE IT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE LUBBOCK MEMORIAL CIVIC CENTER. 
          I WANT TO REITERATE THAT THIS IS NOT A NEW TAX. THE PFC DOES NOT CREATE A NEW TAX. IT REALLOCATES EXISTING STATE COLLECTED HOT REVENUE TAX INCREMENT TO LOCAL USE. WHY ESTABLISH A PFC? SO THIS IS A LONG TERM 30 YEAR REVENUE MECHANISM DEDICATED TO THE CIVIC CENTER. AND IT DOESN'T RELY ON ONE TIME APPROPRIATIONS. IT LEVERAGES STATE GROWTH. SO AS TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY ACTIVITY INCREASES, SO DOES YOUR HOT HOT REVENUE HEADS AND BEDS. YOUR HOT TAX REVENUE INCREASES AS YOUR TOURISM INCREASES AND THE PFC CAPTURES THAT GROWTH AND REINVEST IT LOCALLY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT ALSO SUPPORTS DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT. IT STRENGTHENS THE COMMUTE, THE CONVENTION AND TOURISM CORRIDOR, ENCOURAGING COMPLIMENTARY PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION. SO TO GIVE YOU AN IMAGE OF WHAT THE 3 MILE RADIUS WILL LOOK LIKE. YOU CAN SEE WITH THE PINPOINT THERE BEING AT CIVIC CENTER WITH THE LITTLE BLUE BUILDING THERE. AND THERE'S ALSO A SERIES OF YELLOW CIRCLES THAT IDENTIFY THE HOTELS IN THE THREE MILE RADIUS. AND THERE'S ABOUT 31 HOTEL OR ACCOMMODATIONS THAT WE WOULD BE DRAWING DOWN THAT STATE TAX HOT TAX REVENUE TO PAY FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE CIVIC CENTER. ONE OF THE KEY PRINCIPLES IS THE PFC IS BASED ON THE INCREMENT ABOVE THE BASE YEAR. IT'S NOT A NEW TAX. AGAIN, ONLY REVENUE GROWTH GENERATED FROM THE 2026 AFTER 2026 IS ELIGIBLE FOR REDIRECTION TO THE CITY. 
          SO, WITH MY LITTLE DIAGRAM HERE, WE FIRST ESTABLISH THE BASE 
          [02:15:01]
YEAR AT 2026. THE STATE RETAINS THE BASE. SO WHATEVER THEY ARE DOING GENERATING NOW IN HOT REVENUE WILL REMAIN THE SAME OVER THE COURSE OF THE TERM. 
          AND THEN ANYTHING IN ADDITION TO THAT, FOR INSTANCE, IF WE HAVE GEORGE STRAIT COME BACK THREE MORE TIMES AND IT INCREASES THAT REVENUE, WE GET TO DRAW BACK THAT REVENUE FROM THE STATE. AND IT ONLY IS THE GROWTH BASED OFF OF THAT BASE YEAR. AND THEN OF COURSE THE INCREMENT GETS REALLOCATED TO THE ZONE FOR THE PROJECT. SO FOR THE TERM AND THE ADMINISTRATION AGAIN THE BASE YEAR IS SET AT 2026. IT'S THE BENCHMARK YEAR AGAINST WHICH ALL FUTURE HOT REVENUE GROWTH IS MEASURED. 
          THE TERM IS 30 YEARS AND THAT IT SETS YOUR EXPIRATION AT 2056. THE 30 YEAR TERM PROVIDES SUFFICIENT DURATION TO SUPPORT CAPITAL FINANCING, ATTRACT PRIVATE INVESTMENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT AND GENERATE MEANINGFUL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE LIFE OF THE CIVIC CENTER REDEVELOPMENT. WHAT COULD A PFC REVENUE SUPPORT? SO IN ADDITION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT THIS REVENUE CAN SUPPORT. FIRST OF COURSE MODERNIZATION, RENOVATION AND EXPANSION OF THE CIVIC CENTER. 
          BUT THEN ALSO YOU CAN USE IT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS DIRECTLY SUPPORTING CONVENTION TOURISM AND EVENT ACTIVITY WITHIN THE ZONE. AND THEN FINALLY YOU CAN ALSO USE IT FOR PROJECT FINANCING WHICH COULD BE FOR DEBT SERVICE AND RELATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE AUTHORIZED CAP CAPITAL PROJECT. 
          SO FOR MY LAST SLIDE, WHAT I HAVE HERE IS WHAT WE ARE ASKING OF YOU TODAY AND THAT IS TO ESTABLISH THE PFC ZONE NUMBER ONE, APPROVE THE CREATION OF THE PROJECT FINANCING ZONE, CONFIRM THE GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY AND SET THE CENTER OR THE GEOGRAPHIC CENTER FOR THE LUBBOCK MEMORIAL CENTER CIVIC CENTER. WE ALSO SET THE EXPIRATION DATE AT 2056, WHICH IS THAT 30 YEAR TERM. AND THEN OF COURSE AUTHORIZE NEXT STEPS FOR ME AND STAFF WITH ADMINISTRATING FILINGS WITH THE TEXAS COMPTROLLER AT PUBLIC ACCOUNTS. AND ONE FINAL NOTE I WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT ALL THESE ITEMS AND FILINGS ARE REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE TO ESTABLISH THE ZONE. SO IF YOU DO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE TODAY, THAT WILL SET A 30 DAY WINDOW FOR ME TO SUBMIT ALL THESE DOCUMENTS TO THE STATE COMPTROLLER. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE ONE, MR. GREEN. MINE IS FIRST. OH, I CAN'T SEE YOURS. THE COUNCIL. 
          MARTINEZ-GARCIA. I WANTED TO THANK YOU BECAUSE YOU. 
          YOU'VE COME IN, HITTING THE GROUND, YOU'VE DONE SO MUCH, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR STAFF. Y' ALL HAVE REALLY DONE A GOOD JOB ON ALL OF THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I COULD NOT DO IT WITHOUT MOLLY. YOU AND MOLLY ARE A GREAT TEAM. I DON'T KNOW WHERE SHE'S AT, BUT THANK YOU. SHE HAD TO GO HOME EARLY. THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN DOING. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN GREEN. 
          OKAY, SO NOW HOW DID Y' ALL COME UP WITH THE EXACT PINPOINT? DID IT HAVE TO BE AT THE CIVIC CENTER OR IS IT. 
          IS THAT OKAY? I'LL LET THE CITY MANAGER ANSWER THAT. THANK YOU, MAYOR. MS. WILLIAMS WASN'T HERE WHEN WE DID THIS. PART OF THE PROCESS, IN SEEKING THE LEGISLATION TO ALLOW US TO DO THIS, DESIGNATED THAT WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH NOW IS THE MINISTERIAL OR REGULATORY SIDE. 
          OKAY. IN OTHER WORDS, THE STATUTE THAT WAS PASSED. 
          CORRECT. ESTABLISHED THIS. 
          THAT WAS THE REQUEST. SO WE'VE ALWAYS KNOWN THAT THIS. THAT'S WHERE THE PIN IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE SAID. OKAY, ABSOLUTELY. 
          AND THAT WAS THE INTENT THAT WE CONVEYED TO OUR DELEGATION WHEN WE ASKED FOR IT. THAT'S WHAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE BILL THAT WAS ULTIMATELY PASSED. I WASN'T HERE EITHER, SO CATCHING UP MYSELF. YOU WEREN'T WATCHING ALL OF OUR MEETINGS ONLINE? I WAS NOT WATCHING EVERY ONE OF THEM. 
          AND MY UNDERSTANDING ALSO IS THEN ONCE WE HAVE, IS IT FIVE YEARS FROM TODAY, WE HAVE TO INITIATE THE PROJECT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          SO WITH TODAY'S ACTION, ASSUMING APPROVAL, DANIELLE WILL TURN ALL OF THIS IN 2026 BECOMES THE BASE YEAR. SO FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR, WHATEVER INCREMENTAL INCREASE FROM THE STATE'S HOT TAXES IN OUR THREE MILE ZONE, IT GOES INTO AN ACCOUNT THAT STAYS WITH THE STATE. A BUCKET. A BUCKET. 
          RIGHT. WE HAVE THEN FIVE YEARS AND WE CAN DO IT DAY TWO IF WE WANT, BUT WE HAVE FIVE YEARS TO INITIATE THE PROJECT. WHEN WE DO THAT, THE DOLLARS THAT ARE IN THE BUCKET WILL BE HANDED TO US. AND ALL THE FUTURE PAYMENTS COME DIRECT. MR. GREEN, HOW OFTEN DO THE 
          [02:20:01]
PAYMENTS COME. YEAH, HOW OFTEN? I'VE BEEN TOLD QUARTERLY. 
          THERE'S ONLY NOW TWO OF THESE IN THE STATE THAT ARE ACTUALLY RUNNING. SO STATE DOESN'T HOLD THEM FOR MANY YEARS OR. OH, NO, NO, NO. WE GET THEM REGULARLY. 
          IT'S VERY QUICK. THE STATE COLLECTS. COLLECTS THEIR PORTION OF THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX MONTHLY. OKAY. AND THAT'S THE PART UPON WHICH THERE'S AN EXTRA AND THEY'LL PAY IT TO US. DEBT FUNDING. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THOSE PAYMENTS. YEAH. 
          SO YOU CAN MAKE THOSE PAYMENTS. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I SEE NONE. THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME GETTING US TO THIS POINT. BIG, HEAVY LEGISLATIVE LIST AND AGAIN, IT NEVER. WE NEED TO ALWAYS THANK OUR LEGISLATORS FOR WORKING SO HARD FOR US TO GET THIS DONE. WE WERE THE ONLY CITY THAT ACTUALLY GOT A NEW ONE LAST YEAR. I THINK CORPUS CHRISTI GOT THEIRS MODIFIED BECAUSE THERE ARE THREE MILES FALLS OUT IN THE BAY. SO THERE'S NO HOTELS OUT THERE, STRANGELY ENOUGH. BUT YES, WE GET TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS. WE WANT TO THANK AGAIN OUR LEGISLATORS FOR MAKING THIS POSSIBLE. AND WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. AND WE ARE WORKING ON IT. HOPEFULLY THE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE CONTINUING TO WORK ON THIS. 
          ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.7? IS THERE A SECOND? MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE. 
          [8.  Resolution - City Secretary: Consider a resolution to receive, from the City Secretary, all papers received on August 3, 2026, pertaining to a citizen initiative petition seeking an amendment to the City of Lubbock Code of Ordinances with regard to an 18-month moratorium on high-energy-use and high-water-use data centers in the City of Lubbock; and a certificate attesting to the number of verified signatures on said petition.]
ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. HEAR NONE. 
          THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY AND WE NOW COME TO 7.8. 
          RESOLUTION TO RECEIVE FROM THE CITY SECRETARY ALL PAPERS RECEIVED ON AUGUST 3 PERTAINING TO CITIZEN INITIATIVE PETITION SEEKING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF LUBBOCK CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR AN 18 MONTH MORATORIUM ON HIGH ENERGY USE AND HIGH WATER USE DATA CENTERS. SO I'LL ASK COURTNEY PAZ, OUR CITY SECRETARY TO PROVIDE A STAFF BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM, IF YOU WOULD. 
          THANK YOU, MAYOR. ON JUNE 3, THE COMMITTEE FILED WITH MY OFFICE THEIR INITIATING STATEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE INITIATIVE REGARDING THE 18 MONTH MORATORIUM ON HIGH WATER USE AND HIGH ENERGY DATA USE CENTERS IN THE CITY OF LUBBOCK. THIS TRIGGERED A 60 DAY MARK FOR THEM TO COLLECT SIGNATURES. ON AUGUST 3RD AT 1:10 PM, THEY SUBMITTED 3910 SIGNATURES TO MY OFFICE, WHICH WE BEGAN VERIFYING. THEY DID CONTAIN AN EXCESS OF 2,410 VALID SIGNATURES. ON AUGUST 17, WE DID COMPLETE THAT PROCESS. AND FOLLOWING THE CHARTER PROCESS, I AM TO SUBMIT TO YOU ALL CERTIFICATION THAT THEY DID SUBMIT THE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF SIGNATURES. 
          AFTER OUR REVIEW AND AT THE ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL, I RECOMMEND YOU ACCEPT THE PETITION AS VALID AND SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 8TH AND TO CONSIDER THE DOCUMENT THEY SUBMITTED WITH THEIR PETITION. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? THE DATE YOU COMPLETED YOUR COUNT AGAIN, WHAT DATE WAS THAT? AUGUST 17TH. AUGUST 17TH. ALL RIGHT. 
          AND CAN YOU THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD FROM HERE. WE WILL HAVE A HEARING ON THE SCHEDULE FOR THE 8TH. DO THERE HAVE TO BE TWO HEARINGS ON THIS MATTER? NO, JUST ONE PUBLIC HEARING. AND THEN AFTER THAT, YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO CONSIDER THE DOCUMENT BEFORE YOU. ALL RIGHT, Y' ALL CAN EITHER ACCEPT IT OR VOTE IT DOWN. AND BASED ON THE TIMELINE WE'VE GOT HERE, WHEN IS THE EARLIEST WE COULD HAVE AN ELECTION? THE ELECTION HAS TO BE ON A GENERAL ELECTION. THAT IS CORRECT. EITHER A MAY OR A NOVEMBER ELECTION. YES, THE EARLIEST COULD BE MAY. THE DEADLINE TO CALL A NOVEMBER ELECTION WAS AUGUST 17TH. SO UNFORTUNATELY, GIVEN THE TIME IT WAS TURNED IN AND WITH OUR DEADLINE CONSTRAINTS, THE EARLIEST THIS COULD HAVE BEEN PLACED ON AN AGENDA, EVEN FOR Y' ALL TO ACCEPT MY WORK, IS AUGUST 11TH, AND THEN FURTHER ACTION AND STEPS WOULD HAVE HAD TO FOLLOW THAT. SO THE EARLIEST THIS COULD BE PLACED ON AN ELECTION WOULD BE IN MAY. IT HAS TO BE ON A REGULAR AGENDA. YES, I KNOW. OUR REGULAR MEETING. 
          YES, SIR. AND SO THE EARLIEST WE COULD HAVE CONSIDERED IT WAS THE 11TH. AND WE HAVE TO PROVIDE 72 HOURS OR THREE BUSINESS DAYS BEFORE THAT, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN THE. WE PUBLISHED FOR THE 11TH AGENDA ON AUGUST 5, WHICH IS THAT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, JUST TWO DAYS AFTER THEY WERE DELIVERING THAT AFTERNOON. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, I SEE NONE. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 7.8? SECOND. 
          AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION, MR. COLLINS? THANK YOU, MAYOR. AND I DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS EVENING ANY LATER THAN IT ALREADY IS FOR, FOR ALL OF YOU, BUT I WANT TO EXPRESS A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS. THE ROOM HAS SHRUNK CONSIDERABLY SINCE WE STARTED AT 2 O' CLOCK THIS AFTERNOON. BUT AS THE 
          [02:25:03]
MAYOR HAS OFTEN SAID, WE TALK ABOUT THE RULES THAT WE HAVE AS PEOPLE MAKE PRESENTATIONS IN PUBLIC HEARINGS. I THINK WE CAN SEE FROM TODAY THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT DIALOGUE NOT GO BACK AND FORTH. IT BECOMES VERY CHALLENGING WHEN IT DOES. IT CREATES ILL FEELING, ILL WILL. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR WHAT IT IS CALLED A PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TO COME AND FOR US TO HEAR. 
          BUT WHAT I DON'T WANT YOU TO TAKE FROM OUR SILENCE IS THAT WE DISAGREE OR THAT WE DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, OR THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF YOUR IDEAS. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT I EXPRESS THAT TODAY, EVEN THOUGH I'M READY TO GO HOME, TOO. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT I SAY THAT TO YOU GUYS. 
          WE HAVE HAD 100 YEARS OF COUNCILS AND STAFF WHO HAVE SPENT INCREDIBLY NUMBER OF HOURS, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO PROTECT OUR WATER SUPPLY. 
          THERE'S NO ONE SITTING HERE WHO WANTS TO RUIN THAT IN ONE FELL SWOOP. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WATER SUPPLY, WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ENSURING THAT OUR WATER SUPPLY IS SAFE. 
          THAT'S IMPORTANT TO US. EACH ONE OF US PAYS AN ELECTRIC BILL OR MULTIPLE ELECTRIC BILLS. 
          AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COST THAT MIGHT COME FROM, FROM A GROUP COMING IN AND USING A GREAT DEAL OF POWER, IT CONCERNS US TOO. 
          AND SO THE VERY THINGS THAT YOU GUYS ARE PRESENTING ARE THINGS THAT WE TAKE GREAT CARE TO CONSIDER AS WELL. AND SO I SAY THOSE THINGS JUST SO THAT YOU HOPEFULLY RECOGNIZE. THERE ARE SEVEN PEOPLE ON THIS DAIS. THERE ARE COUNTLESS PEOPLE IN THE ROOM WHO WORK FOR THE CITY WHO ARE AS EQUALLY AS CONCERNED AS YOU GUYS ARE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY AND HOW WE MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT INDUSTRIES COME. 
          AND SO I WANT YOU TO HOPEFULLY YOU'LL TAKE THAT AWAY AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THESE GUYS DO CARE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT TO US AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO US AS WELL. AND SO AS WE GO FORWARD WITH THIS, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN PRESERVE THE VERY THINGS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE IN YOUR PETITION, THAT WE CAN PROTECT OUR WATER SUPPLY, WE CAN PROTECT OUR POWER GRID, WE CAN PROTECT OUR PROPERTIES, WE CAN PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORS. 
          WE DON'T ALWAYS AGREE ABOUT THE THINGS WE'RE PROTECTING THEM FROM NECESSARILY, I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          BUT WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED WITH. SO I HOPE YOU CAN TAKE THAT AWAY AND THEN UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES AND I WANT TO SHARE THEM WITH YOU. AN 18 MONTH MORATORIUM, IT SOUNDS APPROPRIATE. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE SHOULD DELAY, BUT MR. WADE IS GOING TO TELL US THERE IS A STATE STATUTE THAT PREVENTS CITIES FROM ENGAGING IN A MORATORIUM OF THAT DURATION. 18 MONTHS IS AGAINST THE STATE LAW, AND I HATE THAT. BUT I DIDN'T WRITE THE STATE LAW. ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY, AND I'LL JUST SPEAK FOR ME, WE GO AND STAND IN FRONT OF THIS GROUP WHEN WE ARE SWORN IN, WE PUT OUR HAND ON A BIBLE. I'VE BEEN TOLD I WAS UNGODLY JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO, BUT WE PUT A HAND ON A BIBLE AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO UPHOLD THE LAWS OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THE STATE OF TEXAS. HOW DO WE RECONCILE THAT WHEN WE HAVE TO VOTE FOR OR AGAINST AN ORDINANCE THAT IS CONTRARY TO THAT STATE CONSTITUTION? THE STATE CONSTITUTION? I CANNOT. I CANNOT. WE'RE NOT AGAIN. BUT I CANNOT. 
          BUT I CANNOT AMEND YOUR, YOUR PETITION. BUT OKAY, WAIT, JUST WELL, HERE'S. LET ME. 
          HEAR ME OUT, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT. YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE TALKED EARLIER ABOUT YOU AND I NOT HAVING GREAT CONVERSATION, HAVING HAD CONVERSATION IN THE PAST. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF HANDSHAKES AND CORDIAL HELLOS, BUT YOU AND I HAVE NOT TALKED ABOUT THIS IN DEPTH, MR. MASIAS AND I HAVE. SO THE 18 MONTH IS AN ISSUE. BUT I WANT TO TELL YOU THAT IN MY BACKPACK, WHEN I SMILED AT YOU EARLIER TODAY, IN MY BACKPACK IS TWO DIFFERENT PROPOSALS THAT DO FIT THE LAW, TWO DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WE CAN APPROACH THIS THAT DO FIT THE LAW. AND SO WHEN YOU MENTIONED CONSERVATISM AND I SMILED 
          [02:30:02]
AT YOU, MR. SANDERS, IT WAS ABOUT, I HAVE THIS, YOU KNOW, I'M, FOR THE MOST PART, I'M ON YOUR SIDE. I THINK FOR THE MOST PART, THIS GROUP IS GOING TO BE ON YOUR SIDE. WE WANT TO PROTECT OUR CITY. WE'VE GOT TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT ACTUALLY WORKS, THAT HAS. THAT WE CAN ENFORCE. 
          AND SO WE'LL BE COMING BACK WITH THAT, OR AT LEAST I WILL BE COMING BACK WITH THAT. BUT OUR SILENCE AS WE SIT HERE IS NOT TO SAY WE DISAGREE. IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO TAKE FROM THAT. WE SIT IN SILENCE, BUT IT'S NOT TO SAY WE DISAGREE. IT'S BECAUSE OF THE RULES THAT WE NEED TO FOLLOW TO ENSURE THE PROPER PROCESS OF CITY GOVERNMENT. THANK YOU. 
          I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. I MEAN THAT SINCERELY. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY, JUST AS WE ARE COMMITTED TO THE FUTURE OF OUR COMMITTEE, OUR COMMUNITY. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          BUT I JUST WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM THIS THIS EVENING TO SAY, YES, I'M GOING TO VOTE TO ACCEPT THIS PETITION. AND THAT'S WHAT THAT IS, IS TO ACCEPT THE PETITION. IT'S NOT AN UP OR DOWN ON TAKING IT FORWARD OR BACKWARDS, BUT THERE'S MUCH MORE TO THIS THAN HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, MUCH MORE TO THIS THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS GOING FORWARD. BUT THIS IS WHERE I AM TODAY AND I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. 
          THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER, AND IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE PEOPLE. I'M SORRY, ARE WE NOT ONLINE AT THE MOMENT? THEY USUALLY, THEY USUALLY TELL US WHEN WE'RE NOT ONLINE. THIS IS A NEW COMMUNICATION. WE HAVE A WHOLE NEW COMMUNICATION SYSTEM TODAY. YOU OUGHT TO SEE THE BACK ROOM. SO PLEASE REPEAT EVERYTHING YOU SAID. I THINK MS. GANTT RECORDED IT SO. 
          OR SOMEBODY DID. SO YOU CAN POST IT ONLINE IF YOU. IF YOU WANT TO, BUT WE APOLOGIZE. 
          WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF GLITCHES TODAY, BUT IT'S. 
          THIS IS A WHOLE NEW SYSTEM, AS YOU'VE SEEN. I'VE TRIED TO GET USED TO IT, TOO, BUT HOPEFULLY WE'LL AVOID THOSE PROBLEMS. IT'S CUTTING IN AND OUT FOR SOME REASON, SO WE APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 
          FOR EVERYBODY, THIS, THE WHOLE MEETING, ONCE IT ENDS, WILL ALSO UPLOAD ONTO YOUTUBE, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ON A DIFFERENT PIECE OF TECHNOLOGY THAN WHAT. AND SO WHATEVER IS GOING ON WITH THIS ONE, THE WHOLE MEETING CAN BE SEEN WITHOUT GLITCHES AND INTERRUPTIONS ON YOUTUBE, I GUESS, IS WHERE THAT IS UPLOADED, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. IT SHOULD WORK. ALL RIGHT. WE DO OUR BEST, BUT TECHNOLOGY IS SOMETIMES INFECTED BY DEMONS, I THINK, AND NEEDS EXORCISMS, SO. ALL RIGHT. AND ALSO, JUST, YOU KNOW, TO LET PEOPLE KNOW, WE ARE ALSO WORKING ON ORDINANCES AS WELL, WHICH WE WILL BE BRINGING FORWARD IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO VOTE ON AS WELL. SO THERE'S, THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT TRACKS THAT THIS PROCESS WILL MOVE FORWARD ON THE PETITION. 
          ANYTHING THAT WE, ANY ACTION WE MIGHT WANT TO TAKE AS A COUNCIL WITHIN THE AUTHORITY, LEGAL AUTHORITY, WE HAVE BY STATUTE, AND ALSO THE ABILITY TO PASS ORDINANCES, WHICH WE ARE CONTINUING TO WORK ON AS WELL. AND SO THAT WILL GO FORWARD IN THE FUTURE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. ALL RIGHT, SO THAT MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          WE'VE EXHAUSTED ALL ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA AND EXHAUSTED EVERYBODY ELSE UP HERE, SO THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. 
          PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR MICROPHONE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.